[discuss] List announcement "robust governance in the digital age"

[Mike Roberts]

Yes.  This is really a new low for a forum that is supposed to responsible discourse on future directions for IG.

We would do better with this: 

<http://nathab-email.com/pub/sf/FormLink?_ri_=X0Gzc2X%3DWQpglLjHJlTQGrbeEkzfsKMzgf1E3lWm0vzfk4JDkDXarjMVXMtX%3DWQpglLjHJlTQGn3sPkjRtWd331LhCoOP3LJYutdDNKSY&_ei_=EmKw7b8wc39AGbHzXbi74rGhDnzzHRpkHif8kA9OMeS7fOisqCOOKscdSRd8reygqb4s3xPlm0yX0oPoV3VSovCqO0O5x8e9LbAfsR9s.>

- M.


On Feb 12, 2014, at 10:10 AM, Jorge Amodio <jmamodio at gmail.com> wrote:

> 
> You expect a reasonable and credible answer to these questions ?
> 
> ROFL
> 
> -Jorge
> 
>> On Feb 12, 2014, at 4:03 AM, "michael gurstein" <gurstein at gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>> Sounds good to me... Perhaps we could begin our exploration through some transparency on the part of 1Net as per the set of questions that I posed on the Governance/BB lists but I'll post here as well, since none of 1Net CS appointees to their Steering Committee seem willing to do so as I requested.
>> 
>> 1.    Where did 1Net come from?  Did it arise spontaneously one day from Adiel’s brow or was there background discussion, review, confirmation? If so who was involved in those discussions? Is there a trail of any sort linking 1Net to earlier discussions, authorizations, decision making processes. (Here one wouldn’t necessarily expect a formal process but an indication of the informal process and who was involved in that process would provide something of an “audit trail”.)
>> 
>> 2.    When 1Net selected certain groupings to act as its surrogate in identifying candidates for various positions including it’s Steering Committee who determined which organizations were selected, what criteria were used, what other organizations were selected and discarded and again what criteria were used for discarding these?  Who were parties to these decisions and on what basis were these parties selected to be involved in these decisions?  What formal processes for doing this authorization were followed. Is the documentation concerning this part of the public record? If not why not? (Again there might not necessarily be a formal process but again “transparency” and “accountability” would require some form of response to these questions.
>> 
>> 3.    Concerning the “Summaries” of the discussions presented by 1Net.  Who prepared these summaries? Who paid for these summaries to be prepared? Who developed the terms of reference guiding these summaries? If contracts were involved who authorized the contracts and under what budgetary authority? Who supervised the work of preparing this Summary? Who signed off on the Summary before it was distributed? Under what authority were those who did the sign-off operating? (Note that the response by Adiel to the first of these questions which was to side-step and stonewall i.e. to give no response, would to me as an auditor begin fiercely ringing bells and I would then begin to look for whatever leverage I had to insist on an answer. (In this instance there was an expenditure of resources, certainly time but very likely money so some documentation should be available and if not that is a red flag in itself.
>> 
>> 4.    Concerning the creation of the “forums” website and overall conceptual and web based formats and architecture. .  Who prepared this format and designed and developed the web site? Who paid for this to be designed and developed? Who developed the terms of reference guiding this design? If contracts were involved who authorized the contracts and under what budgetary authority? Who supervised the work of preparing this site? Who signed off on the site before it was made public? Under what authority were those who did the sign-off operating?
>> 
>> Mike
>> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> discuss mailing list
> discuss at 1net.org
> http://1net-mail.1net.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss