<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2900.2722" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY
style="WORD-WRAP: break-word; khtml-nbsp-mode: space; khtml-line-break: after-white-space">
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=849465101-06102005><FONT face=Arial
color=#0000ff size=2>Dear Rik,</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=849465101-06102005><FONT face=Arial
color=#0000ff size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=849465101-06102005><FONT face=Arial
color=#0000ff size=2>Perhaps we have not considered how to use this mailing list
as a means of notice, in the working methods guidelines. Take for example, that
notice be given to people that a decision is to be made at a Plenary is given at
least 24 hours before, AND people have an option to vote online instead of only
being physically present, more people will not feel left out. Besides Vittorio,
I too feel that once removed physically from Geneva, many decisions were taken
and I did not have achance to input or cast a vote.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=849465101-06102005><FONT face=Arial
color=#0000ff size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=849465101-06102005><FONT face=Arial
color=#0000ff size=2>I am glad to hear therefore that it is still not cast in
stone, and I know you will keep working to ensure that CS feels included and we
have an effective method of universal participation.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=849465101-06102005><FONT face=Arial
color=#0000ff size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=849465101-06102005><FONT face=Arial
color=#0000ff size=2>Regards,</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=849465101-06102005><FONT face=Arial
color=#0000ff size=2>Laina</FONT></SPAN></DIV><BR>
<DIV class=OutlookMessageHeader lang=en-us dir=ltr align=left>
<HR tabIndex=-1>
<FONT face=Tahoma size=2><B>From:</B> plenary-admin@wsis-cs.org
[mailto:plenary-admin@wsis-cs.org] <B>On Behalf Of </B>Rik
Panganiban<BR><B>Sent:</B> Wednesday, October 05, 2005 9:54 PM<BR><B>To:</B>
workingmethods@wsis-cs.org; plenary@wsis-cs.org<BR><B>Subject:</B> Re: [WSIS
CS-Plenary] Re: [Working Methods] Re: who is pleanry?<BR></FONT><BR></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>Vittorio et al,
<DIV><BR class=khtml-block-placeholder></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV>The question of what is plenary is really another way of saying " what is
civil society." We are not going to resolve it any time soon. But it doesn't
mean we should stop from discussing it. It should always be on our agenda.</DIV>
<DIV><BR class=khtml-block-placeholder></DIV>
<DIV>On the other hand, we need to get work done, and organize ourselves.
Vittorio, I'm sorry that you feel divorced from our processes because we you
don't feel included as an individual. I don't think any of us want to be
excluding you, or anyone else who wishes to take part in our
deliberations.</DIV>
<DIV><BR class=khtml-block-placeholder></DIV>
<DIV>At the same time, when it is time for decision-making, we need to have
procedures in place when rough consensus is not enough. In our discussions in
the WGWM there has always been this tension between those who wish to give
individuals the ultimate authority in decision-making and those who wish to
restrict decision-making to accredited WSIS NGOs. </DIV>
<DIV><BR class=khtml-block-placeholder></DIV>
<DIV>Behind all of this is a larger tension between the NGO world of the United
Nations and the "internet community" composed of individuals and various loose
organizations and networks. </DIV>
<DIV><BR class=khtml-block-placeholder></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=Apple-style-span>The <B>proposed </B>guidelines from the WGWM
should not be considered as the final word on this debate by a long shot. They
only represent the conclusions (for now) of the WGWM on how civil society's
various entities can work together most effectively and democratically, within
our diversity and differences in views. In whatever happens after Tunis, we will
have to re-visit all of these decisions and guidelines anyway. </SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><BR class=khtml-block-placeholder></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=Apple-style-span>So let's keep the discussion
going...</SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><BR class=khtml-block-placeholder></DIV>
<DIV>Respectfully,</DIV>
<DIV><BR class=khtml-block-placeholder></DIV>
<DIV>Rik Panganiban</DIV>
<DIV><BR class=khtml-block-placeholder></DIV>
<DIV>On Oct 5, 2005, at 4:48 AM, Vittorio Bertola wrote:</DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite">
<DIV style="MIN-HEIGHT: 14px; MARGIN: 0px"><BR></DIV>
<DIV style="MARGIN: 0px">west ha scritto:</DIV><BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite">
<DIV style="MARGIN: 0px">Dear All, Vitorio</DIV>
<DIV style="MARGIN: 0px">Thanks for following the issue, Francis suggestion
is very wise. I have also requested you to attend the working group meetings
and share your points, which hasn't happen during the 2 weeks of prepcom
3.<SPAN class=Apple-converted-space> </SPAN>We</DIV>
<DIV style="MARGIN: 0px">discussed whatever you could think of in details,
who is plenary, who is CS, how we could vote, what is consensus, what if and
if and if ....<SPAN class=Apple-converted-space>
</SPAN></DIV><BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
<DIV style="MIN-HEIGHT: 14px; MARGIN: 0px"><BR></DIV>
<DIV style="MARGIN: 0px">This is good, but I have some objections: first,
perhaps someone should report these discussions to the mailing list, to allow
everyone to make up their mind. Then, I still did not understand the need to
push this charter so abruptly (you release a first draft on Friday afternoon,
collect comments until Monday morning, and put the document to votes from
Tuesday...) even if this is causing divisions and if people did not have
sufficient time to make up their mind, or even to come to meetings. We are all
volunteers, but this does not mean that we have to renounce to inclusiveness
for the sake of business-like effectiveness. There is no hurry.</DIV>
<DIV style="MIN-HEIGHT: 14px; MARGIN: 0px"><BR></DIV><BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite">
<DIV style="MARGIN: 0px">Frankly a major part of my personal time and group
members, was spent in the WGWM and we missed many govt plenaries and other
CS meetings, in order to prepare something for work, on a voluntary basis,
so I need all of you to understand this point and compromise if some
sections of the guidelines are not perfect, it could be changed
systematically in future, no problem.</DIV><BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
<DIV style="MIN-HEIGHT: 14px; MARGIN: 0px"><BR></DIV>
<DIV style="MARGIN: 0px">Fine. So can we change the section that excludes
individuals from voting in the Plenary?</DIV>
<DIV style="MIN-HEIGHT: 14px; MARGIN: 0px"><BR></DIV><BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite">
<DIV style="MARGIN: 0px">But regarding the accreditation, I am personally
very much against any sort of changes in this process. UN process is a UN
process, we couldn't change it, all CS people should register through an
accredited entity.<SPAN class=Apple-converted-space> </SPAN>I</DIV>
<DIV style="MARGIN: 0px">am personally against any person using govt badge
and sit in our plenaries and vote!!<SPAN class=Apple-converted-space>
</SPAN></DIV><BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
<DIV style="MIN-HEIGHT: 14px; MARGIN: 0px"><BR></DIV>
<DIV style="MARGIN: 0px">I don't see the logical connection between the two
arguments you are making. The second is a minor problem, we might decide that
people who get double badges or move from CS badges to governmental badges
lose their status as plenary members, it's an acceptable decision, even if I
disagree. The real issue, however, is the first one.</DIV>
<DIV style="MIN-HEIGHT: 14px; MARGIN: 0px"><BR></DIV>
<DIV style="MARGIN: 0px">I don't understand why you are so strongly defending
a system that requires extensive bureaucracy just to get the right to speak,
and that excludes or hampers not just individuals, but also informal
coalitions, unfunded and smaller NGOs, and organizations that get strongly
objected by governments. It is clear from the "Human Rights in China" case
that in some cases the accreditation process is used to silence the most
critical voices and only allow the "polite" civil society groups in. Even if I
am everything but an extremist, I think this is simply unacceptable.</DIV>
<DIV style="MIN-HEIGHT: 14px; MARGIN: 0px"><BR></DIV>
<DIV style="MARGIN: 0px">Now that we agree to disagree, what I don't
understand is why we don't take the time to make a proper consultation of
everyone about this fundamental issue, and find a solution that is acceptable
to everyone and lets all those who want to participate walk into the room with
equal rights. I am here, I want to participate, I am a human being like you.
Why are you trying to exclude me?</DIV>
<DIV style="MIN-HEIGHT: 14px; MARGIN: 0px"><BR></DIV>
<DIV style="MARGIN: 0px">To conclude, I have a nasty question: given your
strong criticism of possible overlaps between governments and civil society, I
imagine you totally oppose the nomination of Mr. Samassekou as lead speaker
for civil society, correct?</DIV>
<DIV style="MIN-HEIGHT: 14px; MARGIN: 0px"><BR></DIV><BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite">
<DIV style="MARGIN: 0px">Regarding individuals being CS members, that is
even worse.Civil society in UN process are societies, not persons, we are
all representing something and some groups as a whole, not ourselves, it is
not acceptable at all to open UN system to individuals, absolutely not
possible due to practical and political reasons. Then these independent
people are accountable to whom and which group, who are
they?</DIV><BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
<DIV style="MIN-HEIGHT: 14px; MARGIN: 0px"><BR></DIV>
<DIV style="MARGIN: 0px">In practice, you are saying that citizens do not know
what is good for them and should not have a voice, as we have these wonderful
organizations that know what's best for them. And if someone happens to
disagree with the organizations, then the answer is "who are you? who let you
into the room? are you a provoker?".</DIV>
<DIV style="MIN-HEIGHT: 14px; MARGIN: 0px"><BR></DIV>
<DIV style="MARGIN: 0px">I was taught that, in democracy, people are the
ultimate and supreme source of power, that gets then delegated to other
entities, including their free associations. It is indirect structures such as
associations and governments that have to be accountable to citizens, not the
opposite! Certainly, your vision goes against any basic principle of democracy
I've ever heard of. Is this the agreed vision of civil society at WSIS?</DIV>
<DIV style="MIN-HEIGHT: 14px; MARGIN: 0px"><BR></DIV><BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite">
<DIV style="MARGIN: 0px">imagine if you let individuals to get into these
processes, then terrorists(as an example!) will come also and many other
people.<SPAN class=Apple-converted-space> </SPAN></DIV><BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
<DIV style="MIN-HEIGHT: 14px; MARGIN: 0px"><BR></DIV>
<DIV style="MARGIN: 0px">Yes, a random example: if we open our walls and let
other people in the room, then terrorists will come. Can't wait to see Bin
Laden addressing the plenary. Are you sure that you're not George W. Bush?
:-)</DIV>
<DIV style="MIN-HEIGHT: 14px; MARGIN: 0px"><BR></DIV>
<DIV style="MARGIN: 0px">But the nicest part of your sentence is "if you let
individuals to get into these processes, then many other people will come". As
if it was a negative thing.</DIV>
<DIV style="MIN-HEIGHT: 14px; MARGIN: 0px"><BR></DIV><BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite">
<DIV style="MARGIN: 0px">Who will control them , how you would work and
align yourself? imagine again the above scenario, the CSP is trying to issue
a statement regarding country X misbehavior, then we may have 10000
individuals from country X sitting there and claming to be CS
members!!!</DIV><BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
<DIV style="MIN-HEIGHT: 14px; MARGIN: 0px"><BR></DIV>
<DIV style="MARGIN: 0px">I would be happy to have 10000 people attending the
plenary. That would be a huge success. However, it doesn't seem realistically
possible to me, at all.</DIV>
<DIV style="MIN-HEIGHT: 14px; MARGIN: 0px"><BR></DIV>
<DIV style="MARGIN: 0px">I think that your example could make some sense only
in one particular case, that is, if country X = Tunisia and we are in Tunis.
So you mean (I hope), what do we do if in Tunis we get floods of unknown
people that try to capture the Plenary? To that effect, there are lots of
institutional mechanisms that don't require to exclude anyone, such as weighed
voting, or a Council elected in advance, or extraordinary mechanisms to
suspend participation, or plenty of others which were in my past
proposals.</DIV>
<DIV style="MIN-HEIGHT: 14px; MARGIN: 0px"><BR></DIV>
<DIV style="MARGIN: 0px">But in any case, and to be even nastier, I have to
point out that the only strong statement against Tunisia that I heard at this
PrepCom came from the governments of the Western world. Civil society's
official take on this was to criticize the Human Rights Caucus for being
unfriendly to our new Tunisian friends. Perhaps, if 10'000 people would come,
they would make our positions better.</DIV>
<DIV style="MIN-HEIGHT: 14px; MARGIN: 0px"><BR></DIV><BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite">
<DIV style="MARGIN: 0px">we are participating in this process according to
rules and procedures and we are all responsible for what we said and do
during this time to our constituencies and organizations, whom these people
are responsible to? how you could give the same voting weight (consensus in
CSP is a voting method) of a huge CS organization and one individual sitting
there?</DIV><BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
<DIV style="MIN-HEIGHT: 14px; MARGIN: 0px"><BR></DIV>
<DIV style="MARGIN: 0px">Well, there have been years of discussions on these
problems in all Internet governance assemblies. Various methods were proposed
to deal with that. The point, however, is that you need to have this
discussion, rather than just exclude individuals because you (not acting as an
individual) think that they should be excluded. I did this mistake in the
past, and I can tell you, it is a mistake.</DIV>
<DIV style="MIN-HEIGHT: 14px; MARGIN: 0px"><BR></DIV>
<DIV style="MARGIN: 0px">The Internet works by rough consensus. It means that
when two people disagree, they work out to find a solution that makes both of
them reasonably happy. They don't try to exclude each other or to outvote the
other position unless this is the only possible way to proceed.</DIV>
<DIV style="MIN-HEIGHT: 14px; MARGIN: 0px"><BR></DIV>
<DIV style="MARGIN: 0px">The environment I found here, instead, is unfriendly.
People constantly try to reject other people's arguments or find ways to
ignore them. They try to set rules, rules and more rules to over-regulate
everything and then use the rules, rather than the strength of their
arguments, to support their positions. If someone disagrees, then accusations
of blackmailing and hidden agendas, or of process violations, start quite
easily. This is not constructive and is making people more and more
disillusioned.</DIV>
<DIV style="MIN-HEIGHT: 14px; MARGIN: 0px"><BR></DIV><BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite">
<DIV style="MARGIN: 0px">Dear Vitorio, I understand your point very well,
but think of the consequences.</DIV><BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
<DIV style="MIN-HEIGHT: 14px; MARGIN: 0px"><BR></DIV>
<DIV style="MARGIN: 0px">Yes, think of the consequences: we might even have
statements and speakers that make everyone happy! :-)</DIV>
<DIV style="MIN-HEIGHT: 14px; MARGIN: 0px"><BR></DIV><BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite">
<DIV style="MARGIN: 0px">So my final observations are: 1- We should have
strict separation between govt and CS people is CSP, persons wearing govt
badges should not be able to vote or even be a part of a consensus making
process.</DIV><BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
<DIV style="MIN-HEIGHT: 14px; MARGIN: 0px"><BR></DIV>
<DIV style="MARGIN: 0px">Samassekou! Samassekou! :-D (Who, by the way, happens
to be a rather exceptional person. It's just that representatives at the
topmost level should be symbolically representative of who they
represent.)</DIV>
<DIV style="MIN-HEIGHT: 14px; MARGIN: 0px"><BR></DIV><BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite">
<DIV style="MARGIN: 0px">2-all individuals should be accredited through a CS
entity and could not vote against the wish of that entity in the CSP or
other CS sessions.</DIV><BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
<DIV style="MIN-HEIGHT: 14px; MARGIN: 0px"><BR></DIV>
<DIV style="MARGIN: 0px">Pardon me, I thought that people made the opinions of
their organizations, not that civil society activists had to take orders from
their "capitals".</DIV>
<DIV style="MIN-HEIGHT: 14px; MARGIN: 0px"><BR></DIV><BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite">
<DIV style="MARGIN: 0px">3-UN badge holders are just observers. 4- People
could have two badges, in worst case scenario.</DIV>
<DIV style="MARGIN: 0px">But these are points that we should discuss during
the summit in the WGWM and its email list, I suggest to take this discussion
to the WGWM listserv, as plenary email list is really overloaded with
emails.</DIV><BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
<DIV style="MIN-HEIGHT: 14px; MARGIN: 0px"><BR></DIV>
<DIV style="MARGIN: 0px">No, I am sorry, this is definitely a discussion for
the Plenary and I will not bury it in the WGWM mailing list.</DIV>
<DIV style="MIN-HEIGHT: 14px; MARGIN: 0px"><BR></DIV>
<DIV style="MARGIN: 0px">I am starting to think that we should have a Charter
that speaks of basic common values such as tolerance and inclusiveness, rather
than about rules.</DIV>
<DIV style="MIN-HEIGHT: 14px; MARGIN: 0px"><BR></DIV>
<DIV style="MARGIN: 0px">Regards,</DIV>
<DIV style="MARGIN: 0px">--<SPAN class=Apple-converted-space> </SPAN></DIV>
<DIV style="MARGIN: 0px">vb. <SPAN
class=Apple-converted-space></SPAN>[Vittorio Bertola - v.bertola [a]
bertola.eu.org]<-----</DIV>
<DIV style="MARGIN: 0px"><A
href="http://bertola.eu.org">http://bertola.eu.org</A>/<SPAN
class=Apple-converted-space> </SPAN><- Prima o
poi...</DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV><FONT class=Apple-style-span
color=#0000dd></FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>