[discuss] CI case in itself was Re: [] [] Representative Multistakeholder model validity

[michael gurstein]

There are several other associated lists but this is the main one.

M

-----Original Message-----
From: michael gurstein [mailto:gurstein at gmail.com] 
Sent: Saturday, January 18, 2014 7:47 PM
To: 'Adam Peake'; discuss at 1net.org
Subject: RE: [discuss] CI case in itself was Re: [] [] Representative
Multistakeholder model validity

Yes, and I've pointed to it several times on this list and on others.

M

-----Original Message-----
From: Adam Peake [mailto:ajp at glocom.ac.jp]
Sent: Saturday, January 18, 2014 7:40 PM
To: discuss at 1net.org; michael gurstein
Subject: Re: [discuss] CI case in itself was Re: [] [] Representative
Multistakeholder model validity

A related question.  Michael, about the community informatics group, is this
the archive of the group's mailing list
<http://vancouvercommunity.net/lists/arc/ciresearchers>? 

Thanks,

Adam



On Jan 19, 2014, at 6:32 AM, Avri Doria wrote:

> 
> > I hope that this answers your questions.
> >
> 
> It does answer the question I asled.
> Thank you.
> 
> So, I conclude that
> 
> a. /1net has already given you the pre-disposition you should expect 
> with
the list of nominees you just submitted an appeal on.  As you know I am
among those who think the /1net leadership, pre-SC and now the /1net-sc, do
have the responsibility for dealing with your appeal.  But the prior notice
that they were only going to accept nomination from certain sources was
probably a clue as to how they would react to a slate presented directly to
them once they gave it appropriate consideration.
> 
> b. the names were not submitted to any other process.
> 
> While other processes may not have sent the request for nominees far 
> and
wide, a statement that i think needs to be proven yet, I wonder did you and
the other Ig experienced people mentoring the CI through this process know
about the opportunities for getting CI members into the mix while there was
still time.
> 
> Thanks again for your reply.
> 
> avri
> 
> 
> 
> On 18-Jan-14 16:14, michael gurstein wrote:
>> CI submitted its nominations to the br.cgi folks who told us to 
>> submit these to 1net.
>> 
>> We submitted these nominations to 1net and were told that they were 
>> only accepting nominations that were forwarded through CS: CC and
GigaNet.
>> 
>> Our approach to CS: CC concerning involvement with their processes 
>> including nominations was rebuffed. No request for nominations was 
>> circulated outside of the 4 organizations which constitute the CS: CC.
>> 
>> The GigaNet process was evidently exclusive to GigaNet as no 
>> information or request for nominations was, to my knowledge 
>> circulated outside of the closed GigaNet list.
>> 
>> I hope that this answers your questions.
>> 
>> M
>> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: discuss-bounces at 1net.org [mailto:discuss-bounces at 1net.org] On 
>> Behalf Of Avri Doria
>> Sent: Saturday, January 18, 2014 12:49 PM
>> To: discuss at 1net.org
>> Subject: [discuss] CI case in itself was Re: [] [] Representative 
>> Multistakeholder model validity
>> 
>> (all cc dropped)
>> 
>> Hi,
>> 
>> I have one question on all of this, did CI present its candidate list 
>> to any other processes?  I have noticed in these processes that 
>> various people and groups submitted the same names to different 
>> processes.  So even if CI was holding out for either doing it own 
>> thing to establish its footprint in the /1net movement or for the 
>> invitation it did not get to be on the joint CS selection process, 
>> did they make sure, given the uncertainty of their appeals, that 
>> their candidates were also considered by Academia and the  CS4 processes?
>> 
>> avri
>> 
>> On 18-Jan-14 14 @gmail.com>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> I understand how an _open_ multistakeholder approach allows for 
>>> everyone (who wishes) to present their views on a given topic, have 
>>> those views considered based on their merits, and allow all to 
>>> ponder and revise their understanding based on the information
exchanged.
>>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> discuss mailing list
>> discuss at 1net.org
>> http://1net.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>> 
>> 
>> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> discuss mailing list
> discuss at 1net.org
> http://1net.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss