RE: [gnso-consensus-wg] Nom Comm appointee roles

["Milton L Mueller" <mueller@xxxxxxx>]

Chuck,

 

________________________________

From: Gomes, Chuck [mailto:cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx] 



Regarding 1), the nomcom reps add excellent value in providing
perspectives that may be unique from constituency views 

 

MM replies: 

There is simply no evidence of this "uniqueness". I agree that
individual Nomcom appointees may, at different times, add expertise and
important perspectives. What I am saying - and it's a subtle point so I
hope you catch the distinction - is that quality individuals who enter
the GNSO via the Nomcom could and would be able to enter it via the
Stakeholder Groups (SGs) of a reformed GNSO. And in fact it would be
better if they did.

 

Avri, for example, is a member of two or three organizations that have
NCUC membership. She could, in the future, also join it as an
individual. If there are 5 or 6 Council representatives from a NCSG, I
have no doubt that she could get herself elected onto the Council via
the NCSG, if she wanted to. And knowing as I do the diversity of the
Noncommercial community, which includes people who want to censor the
internet as well as hard-core civil libertarians, churches and large
NGOs with trademark lawyers and critics of strong IPR, I think if you
provide us with 6 representatives there is no way they are all going to
vote or think the same. The different factions and coalitions will elect
a diverse crew. (But at least they will be accountable and elected, not
vetted)

 

If you fear bloc voting among the SGs, a simple solution to that is to
adopt a voting method within SGs that allows substantial minorites to
elect councilors, such as the single, transferable vote. 

 

It seems to me that Nomcom appointees are either a) associated with the
noncommercial/public interest community primarily or b) associated with
the commercial interest community. The range of variation in their views
is not much different from the range of variation in other GNSO
participants' views. 

 

With regard to 2), if the nomcom reps are indeed independent as I
believe the NomCom intends when they select them, I would expect that it
would not be at all uncommon for them to diverge rather than converge in
their views, and the fact that they have not in some cases is a good
sign.

 

MM replies: 

But that is what I was saying. We are in violent agreement here. If
Nomcom selects three people one of them is likely to side with NCUC a
lot, the other is likely to side with Rys and Rrs, the third may side
more often with BC et al. You might get the same result if you select
three people randomly off the street! 

I don't see any principled difference between this situation and adding
another NC and C representative to the Council. But as I told Avri, I'm
willing to be convinced otherwise. Let's hear some explanation and not
mystical appeals to the magical properties of Nomcom appointees.