[discuss] cgi.br release regarding Brazil Global MSM on Internet Governance
roland at internetpolicyagency.com
Sun Jan 12 10:24:24 UTC 2014
In message <B6A6E656-9317-4FE8-8188-9F7046D9A2B0 at gmail.com>, at 10:35:12
on Sun, 12 Jan 2014, William Drake <wjdrake at gmail.com> writes
>There’s clearly a potential tension here that may not be resolved to
>everyone’s satisfaction. For the 1Net SC to only act as a conduit
>to LOG per Seun, there’d have to be agreement on which peak
>associations/networks can nominate. But we see not only with CS but
>also business that there are folks saying who decided that only
>xyz peak association/network can nominate? So if the SC simply
>passes along those nominations, it may get accused of deciding to
>exclude others, thereby demonstrating that 1Net is a grand design of
>dark unaccountable forces to control the universe, etc.
If the SC passes them all on, how does an exclusion arise?
>If instead we say ok anyone can nominate and the 1Net SC should do due
>diligence and select to ensure diversity and inclusion per Avri, then
>the SC has to pick among contending nominations. In which case it may
>get accused of deciding to exclude others, thereby demonstrating that
>1Net is a grand design of dark unaccountable forces to control the
>As a member of the SC, I’m not excited about the prospect of us being
>put in position where we will stand accused no matter what we do.
You (the SC) have two options, as you describe above.
Which of the two tasks did LOC ask you to perform?
More information about the discuss