[discuss] BR meeting site launched

[Avri Doria]

Hi,

I agree with this.  But perhaps go further.

I am rather shocked at the inaction of the /1net-sc.  They were chosen 
and with very few dissenting voices (there are always a very few 
dissenting voices - often I am one of them) charged with working with 
CGI.etc on the rest of the issues.

Issues like determining how to handle CI's request; e.g. judging the 
degree to which this was a valid claim and if valid doing something to 
ameliorate.  And yes, that amelioration would require consultation with 
the discuss list and with those who made the original recommendations. 
They need to clarify issues of inclusiveness.  And they need to at least 
respond to a request indicating the process they intend to follow.  It 
is what steering committees do.

Issues like organizing the efforts moving forward.  For example, I 
thought there was a rough consensus that they were going to be the 
responsible ones in terms of non-governmental particpation for the 
Brazil meeting.  Yes they were going to discuss these issues with this 
discuss list but they were going to steer and get things done.

Yet now one of their number writes and say: Oh no, it is not us.  Sure 
they should be upset if the site was changed without consulting them, 
but not because it says they are now the point of contact.  If they 
aren't, then what does it mean to be a steering committee.

Please don't dither this opportunity away!

avri



On 15-Jan-14 09:00, Milton L Mueller wrote:
>     >The website has just changed - I'm not sure exactly when, but Google
>     cache is still showing the old version –
>
>     >and the new version now claims that "The meeting is a partnership
>     between CGI.br and /1net."
>     >Under whose authority was this change made?  Why was it not even
>     discussed on the 1net list?
>
>     Same question to you as to Parminder: where have you been? The
>     Brazil meeting has ALWAYS been an initiative that arose out of an
>     agreement between the President of Brazil and the President of
>     ICANN. ICANN and the signatories of the Montevideo Statement then
>     attempted to broaden their engagement with the nonstate actors by
>     forming 1net, and the Brazilian govt delegated most of the work to
>     CGI, because they are actually capable of doing it.
>
>     I am not so much disagreeing with your point as I am puzzled by the
>     irrelevance of your question.
>
>     Please explain to me what purpose you think you are serving by
>     trying to provoke a wrangle over the “authority” for such things? Do
>     you really want every word on the web site to be based on a
>     negotiated consensus, or are your tring to make some more important
>     point that is not evident in your message?
>
>     In the absence of universally applicable institutionalized
>     mechanisms for representation, all “authority” in this space is
>     self-initiated and based voluntary associated and networked
>     relations. It’s kind a like the Internet. Deal with it.
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> discuss mailing list
> discuss at 1net.org
> http://1net.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>