[Lac] [Fwd: [governance] notes of IG caucus meeting in Geneva]

[Beatriz Busaniche]

-----Mensaje reenviado-----
From: jeanette at wz-berlin.de
To: Governance <governance at lists.cpsr.org>
Subject: [governance] notes of IG caucus meeting in Geneva
Date: Wed, 22 Sep 2004 22:14:11 +0200

Hi, the following is based on the notes I took during the IG caucus
meeting yesterday.


Internet Governance Caucus lunch break meeting, Geneva, 21.9.04

Participants at the outset:

Frannie Wellings, Karen Banks, Izumi Aizu, Thomas Ruddy, Renata Bloem,
Wolfgang Kleinwächter, Adam Peake, Vittoria Bertola, Bertrand de la
Chapelle, Milton Mueller, Jeanette Hofmann, occasionally a peacock and two
people whose names I don't know and who disappeared after some time.

Central topics of the meeting were (1) feasible selection procedures for
the final slate of candidates for WGIG, (2) the IG caucus' candidates for
the WSIS civil society's list of candidates for WGIG.

(1) For those who hadn't followed in detail the recent discussions on the
caucus list, a brief summary was given on the controversy regarding the
right framework for doing the ultimate selection of civil society
candidates.

Karen and Adam proposed what they called a "dual approach". According to
the dual approach the IG caucus assumes responsibility for producing a
slate on behalf of the WSIS civil society plenary/content & themes group.
The IG caucus asks all other caucuses who are interested in participating
to join the IG caucus list. Final slate of candidates will be sent to the
plenary list (for information or for approval?). Caucuses who feel not
sufficiently represented are invited to send directly to the WGIG
secretariat their own list of candidates.

Adam points out that we should make as transparent as possible to both
WSIS civil society and the WGIG secretariat the procedure we apply to
produce our slate of candidates. The next step would thus be to publish
all names on the web that have been suggested by the caucuses or through
self nomination. In addition we should describe how we intend to cut down
the list to the 10 to 20 names we want to send to the WGIG secretariat.

There was no clear opinion on how to proceed with the big list of names.
It was again suggested to delegate the final choice to a nomcom consisting
of a few people (4 perhaps?) who did not apply. (Could others please
comment on this option?)

(2) We then discussed the candidates of the IG caucus. Adam suggested that
all of us ("us" was already shrinking a bit by that time) write down the
names of those who had been proposed or who had self-nominated for the
caucus list. Taken together we were dealing with a list of 17 candidates,
which had to be winnowed down to 2 to 3 candidates.

We produced a short list by excluding all those who are not actively
participating on the caucus mailing list. The underlying assumption of
this (difficult) decision was that the caucus members under consideration
meet the caucus' selection criteria as well as those who are not members
of the caucus. In other words, assuming that the caucus members are not
less qualified as external candidates we prefer those who feel committed
to the caucus and are known for being accessible.

The shortlist consisted of 5 names: Vittorio Bertola, Karen Banks, Avri
Doria, Wolfgang Kleinwächter and Bill Drake.

Vittorio and Wolfgang excused themselves from the following discussion.
Karen, Renata and Izumi had other business to take care of. This left
Frannie, Adam, Bertrand, Milton and Jeanette for making the final
decision. We felt that all 5 people would be a good choice and are equally
qualified. We decided to pick Avri, Karen and Vittorio because some of us
felt that Bill and Wolfgang will most likely make it without our support
into the working group and because Wolfgang has been nominated as the only
candidate by another caucus. Wolfgang thus has another chance to get on
the slate when we make the final decision.

I explain our decision in so much detail to make it plain that none of us
doubts the qualification of any of the candidates under discussion.

It was also suggested that we propose names (from the caucus) for an
academic advisory group that would support the WGIG.

We briefly considered also whether or not the caucus should take regional
and cultural diversity into account in its selection process. We decided
that regional and other balances would be the job for the final selection.
After all, there are regional caucuses who proposed candidates based on
regional criteria.

So, a rather small number of caucus members was bold enough to select
Avri, Karen and Vittorio as suggested candidates of the IG caucus. I would
therefore like to ask those who who did _not_ attend the meeting to either
endorse these candidates or express as soon as possible their discomfort
with procedures and results. It is about time that we complete our
selection

Furthermore, most welcome are comments on Karen's and Adam's dual approach
that would help to fine tune it so that we can as soon as possible carry
on and send suggestions to the plenary list.

Finally, those who did attend the meeting may ill in missing points or
correct mistakes I made.


Thanks, Jeanette





_______________________________________________
governance mailing list
governance at lists.cpsr.org
https://ssl.cpsr.org/mailman/listinfo/governance