[discuss] [governance] [bestbits] Fwd: Heads up on Brazil meeting preparation
Shatan, Gregory S.
GShatan at ReedSmith.com
Thu Jan 30 04:40:00 UTC 2014
It seems to me that /1net is two things, which at this point seem fairly disconnected:
1. This discussion forum, which is essentially an online marketplace of ideas.
2. The Steering Committee and the delegates to Brazil, etc. – many of whom do not participate in the discussion forum at all (kudos to those who do, and a couple of aspirin as well).
No. 2 is the /1net that is involved with the Brazil meeting.
No. 1 (all of us) seems to be primarily for the amusement of the crowds (again, us), and perhaps a place where we can all run around and get tired – as one would allow a toddler to run around the house so they will get tired for their nap. Of course, there are some interesting discussions here, and some functional discussions, and some enlightening discussions -- and some that are inane or weird or semi-unintelligible. But I’m not sure to what end these discussions take place, other than to inform one another of our thoughts. George Sadowsky did try to get a focused discussion problem/solution thread going, and it may still go, but that seems to be the exception. I’m not dismissing many of the other discussions, which have value (or at least the value of seeing what others are thinking, even if one is slackjawed while reading some posts), but the value may be wasted if all these discussions do is bounce around the [discuss] echo chamber.
Just my thoughts, having watched much and posted little lately.
(my thoughts alone)
From: discuss-bounces at 1net.org [mailto:discuss-bounces at 1net.org] On Behalf Of Jeremy Malcolm
Sent: Wednesday, January 29, 2014 11:04 PM
To: discuss at 1net.org
Subject: Re: [discuss] [governance] [bestbits] Fwd: Heads up on Brazil meeting preparation
On 30/01/14 03:34, John Curran wrote:
On Jan 29, 2014, at 2:10 PM, michael gurstein <gurstein at gmail.com><mailto:gurstein at gmail.com> wrote:
What this, combined with your words concerning the (relative lack of
substantive) significance of 1net, suggests to me is that in your perception
the Brazil meeting seems now to have become nothing more than a "topical
seminar" of no more significance than a passing debate on the BB or
Governance e-list or a rather compressed and unanchored version of the IGF.
Is this correct?
As stated before, I have no view of the Brazil meeting; I was referring
solely to the role of 1net as a discussion forum, which is equivalent to
any other topical seminar in terms of its legitimacy in that role.
Although I have received pressure (even by a civil society colleague) to drop this issue for my own good, it seems to me that 1net stands on an untenable footing until it has cleared up the disconnect between its framing as just a "discussion forum" or "topical seminar", with its actions as a "movement", including those purportedly taken on its behalf in relation to the Brazil meeting and the website without the endorsement of the list or a resolution of the steering committee.
Is 1net really of and for its participants, or is it still being controlled by the same technical community representatives (presumably Adiel) who negotiated the addition of 1net's name and logo to the Brazil website, and its role in the meeting? Even if that is water under the bridge now, what if other actions are taken in 1net's name in future? Might we soon see 1net endorsing other initiatives or issuing statements out of the blue?
These concerns can't just be dismissed as unimportant. It is a simple matter of internal governance that needs to be clarified one way or the other.
Dr Jeremy Malcolm
Senior Policy Officer
Consumers International | the global campaigning voice for consumers
Office for Asia-Pacific and the Middle East
Lot 5-1 Wisma WIM, 7 Jalan Abang Haji Openg, TTDI, 60000 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
Tel: +60 3 7726 1599
WCRD 2014 - Fix Our Phone Rights! | http://consint.info/fix-our-phone-rights
@Consumers_Int | www.consumersinternational.org<http://www.consumersinternational.org> | www.facebook.com/consumersinternational<http://www.facebook.com/consumersinternational>
Read our email confidentiality notice<http://www.consumersinternational.org/email-confidentiality>. Don't print this email unless necessary.
WARNING: This email has not been encrypted. You are strongly recommended to enable PGP or S/MIME encryption at your end. For instructions, see http://jere.my/l/8m.
* * *
This E-mail, along with any attachments, is considered confidential and may well be legally privileged. If you have received it in error, you are on notice of its status. Please notify us immediately by reply e-mail and then delete this message from your system. Please do not copy it or use it for any purposes, or disclose its contents to any other person. Thank you for your cooperation.
* * *
To ensure compliance with Treasury Department regulations, we inform you that, unless otherwise indicated in writing, any U.S. Federal tax advice contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (1) avoiding penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or applicable state and local provisions or (2) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any tax-related matters addressed herein.
Disclaimer Version RS.US.20.10.00
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the discuss