[NCUC-DISCUSS] Scope creep and renegade was Re: NCUC Statement on PRISM?

Mon Oct 28 17:24:45 CET 2013

Jurisdiction or not, there is lots to chew on in this morning's Democracy
Now:
 interview with Glen Greenwald and excerpts from the weekend's anti-NSA Spy
rally in DC.
http://www.democracynow.org/2013/10/28

xx
dd

On Mon, Oct 28, 2013 at 10:57 AM, Avri Doria <avri at acm.org> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> We will have to agree to disagree on this because I think that
> multistakeholdersim builds on the other forms of democracy and is itself a
> form of participatory democracy - we participate by voting in some parts,
> by stakeholder participation in other parts, direct democracy (voting on
> each and every issue) in yet other parts and rough consensus of individuals
> in still other parts.  The multistakeholder system itself is formed of many
> democratic forms and leads to a larger more inclusive democracy.
>
> I see representational democracy as just one part of democracy, a critical
> one, but not the entire story.  And not one that works very will in the
> absence of some other forms of participatory democracy.
>
> For me a big part of ICANN is figuring out how to make this form of
> participatory democracy work as well as possible to represent our diversity
> of interests.
>
> avri
>
> On 28 Oct 2013, at 09:13, Avri Doria wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > Not all democracy involves direct representational democracy in choosing
> each person.
> >
> > The people in the Board who picked Fadi, were selected in various ways -
> all of which are arguably forms of democratic (se)election.  Include one of
> which who was elected by representatives we had elected. (yes in that case
> 3 of them had been selected by the Board)
> >
> > Participatory democracy involves many forms, some of which a
> representational voting events, some of which are nominating committee
> events and some of which require someone who was elected, appointing
> someone, who  appoints someone else.
> >
> > I did not elect the Supreme court justices or the Fed Chairman and yet
> they are part of democracy.
> >
> > For better or worse, Fadi was selected by people the community put in
> the role to do such things.
> >
> > As fat as I am concerned that is how representational democracty works
> >
> > avri
> >
> >
> >
> > On 28 Oct 2013, at 06:54, Jorge Amodio wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> What democracy ? I didn't vote for Fadi ... Or any of the board members
> >>
> >> -Jorge
> >>
> >>> On Oct 28, 2013, at 1:11 AM, Avri Doria <avri at ella.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Hi,
> >>>
> >>> In my view there is no better alternative to these experiments with
> ever improving MSism at all level of the governance architecture.  Sure the
> ICANN implementation, as well as the other implementations in other I* and
> IGF as well as in other subject areas, need great improvement,  But for
> now, in my opinion, the are the best approaches there are on participatory
> democracy governance.
> >>>
> >>> Of course we have to be careful what we are asking for.  And we have
> to be involved every step of the way.
> >>>
> >>> Obviously we have a different view of scope.
> >>>
> >>> avri
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> On 28 Oct 2013, at 02:01, Dan Krimm wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> To the extent that Fadi is trying to address Internet Governance
> generally
> >>>> (forgive me if I am reading too much into his actions?), that would
> seem to
> >>>> be out of scope, regardless of whether ICANN/IANA and general-IG both
> would
> >>>> benefit from internationalization.
> >>>>
> >>>> As for multistakeholderism, in principle this all sounds great, but in
> >>>> practice it seems to have fallen far short of its intended potential.
>  In
> >>>> practice is where the rubber hits the road, and in practice MSism at
> ICANN
> >>>> has recently fallen prey to ad hoc action when some "more equal than
> >>>> others" stakeholders decide the outcome is not to their liking.  They
> >>>> apparently start to think along the lines of "God is not Mocked."
> >>>>
> >>>> I see MSism as still an experimental work-in-progress, hardly with
> all the
> >>>> bugs worked out, and not necessarily "ready for prime time" in terms
> of
> >>>> overall world governance.  The only reason it has worked as free from
> >>>> collapse at ICANN as it has up to now, I think, is that the big
> Powers That
> >>>> Be in the world (nations and big corporations) hadn't really seen
> ICANN as
> >>>> all that meaningful in their general scheme of things.  The more
> important
> >>>> ICANN's actions become, the more the big powers will pound on it to
> shape
> >>>> it to their desires.  I think you've only seen the bare beginning of
> this
> >>>> in the ad hoc shenanigans of the last few years.  Just beginning to
> rev up
> >>>> the engines.  MSism has not reached up out of the play-pen to play
> with the
> >>>> Big Boys yet, as far as I can tell, and it remains to be seen how it
> will
> >>>> fare if it is brought up to the Big Time.
> >>>>
> >>>> That's a big risk, IMHO.  Be careful what you ask for, you might get
> it.
> >>>> And if it doesn't turn out how you expected, what then?  This whole
> MSism
> >>>> experiment is a huge exercise in unintended consequences (in the gap
> >>>> between theory and practice), if you ask me.  It's worth doing the
> >>>> experiment, but I'd be more comfortable if the experiment were closer
> to
> >>>> completion before trying it out on anything *really* important.  I
> don't
> >>>> see it anywhere near that point, yet.
> >>>>
> >>>> Dan
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> --
> >>>> Any opinions expressed in this message are those of the author alone
> and do
> >>>> not necessarily reflect any position of the author's employer.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> At 12:59 AM -0400 10/28/13, avri doria wrote:
> >>>>> Hi,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> In terms of legitimacy, isn't one of the topics that needs to be
> explored
> >>>>> internationalisation of ICANN, and IANA? Isn't that a topic at the
> top of
> >>>>> the list? That seems to be in scope.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> And the ICANN Board seems to be on-board as Fadi was meeting with a
> subset
> >>>>> of them (including the Chair) and AC/SO leadership every morning. I
> wasn't
> >>>>> in the meetings, and don't know who the rep from gnso was since
> Jonathan
> >>>>> wasn't there, so don't know what the level of buy in was, but I
> heard no
> >>>>> complaints on the ground.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> So whatever we might say about scope creep Fadi is not being
> renegade.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> As for scope creep Fadi and the leaders of the other I* seem to be
> acting
> >>>>> in coordinated faction, so it is within their scope, and would seem
> to be
> >>>>> in scope for any one of them to act on I*'s behalf in organizational
> >>>>> talks with governments on a meeting planning.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> So, in this case at least, I see no fundamental problem of overreach
> by
> >>>>> Fadi.  And, whether he fully understand what it means, he seems to be
> >>>>> carrying the banner of multistakeholderism into these discussions.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> So, at least this once, I am not ready to join in Fadi-attack.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> avri
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Sent from a T-Mobile 4G LTE Device
> >>>>>
> >>>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>>> Ncuc-discuss mailing list
> >>>>> Ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org
> >>>>> http://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-discuss
> >>>>
> >>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>> Ncuc-discuss mailing list
> >>>> Ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org
> >>>> http://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-discuss
> >>>
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> Ncuc-discuss mailing list
> >>> Ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org
> >>> http://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-discuss
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Ncuc-discuss mailing list
> >> Ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org
> >> http://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-discuss
> >>
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Ncuc-discuss mailing list
> > Ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org
> > http://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-discuss
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ncuc-discuss mailing list
> Ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org
> http://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-discuss
>
>

-- 
http://www.deepdishwavesofchange.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-discuss/attachments/20131028/25c98f57/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
Ncuc-discuss mailing list
Ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org
http://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-discuss