[ga] Organization/Communication

[DannyYounger@cs.com]

Reposted from the @Large forum:  
http://www.atlargestudy.org/forum_archive/msg00130.shtml

On Tue, 5 Jun 2001, Cade,Marilyn S - LGA wrote:

> Karl, can you give all of some useful and concrete suggestions about how to 
organize and communicate with individuals. I think that part is still missing 
from your suggestions.<


You are raising a very critical issue.

Let me try to begin my attempt to answer by suggesting that there is a 
difference between an election and between the communications that occur 
among electors and between electors and candidates.

As for elections - they can be regional or global or whatever; that's a 
matter for another discussion.

The issue here is how we can allow individual electors to organize and 
communicate.

First off - my own experience tells me that a global Hyde Park - i.e. an open 
forum - is necessary but hardly sufficient.  My experience is that a global 
forum is merely an entry vehicle for ideas, but that the maturation of 
discussion and evolution of ideas won't happen except in smaller fora that 
have evolved fora-based notions of who has credibility, who is a demagog or 
fifth columnist, or who is simply singing off key.

My sense is that most of us who have watched ICANN or who have participated 
in large discussion spaces have some lesser or greater degree of skepticism 
of such spaces.

So, what's the means by which these more focused fora arise?

There are probably an infinite number of means, but I've had experience with 
only a few.

Self-organized clusters of roughly similar-minded people are a very valuable 
mechanism.

My experience with the Boston Working Group (BWG) is illustrative.  When the 
final IFWP "wrap up meeting" was cancelled several of us were left with 
non-refundable air tickets to Boston.  So we simply went and gathered - 
physically gathered - face to face - and worked.  The result was mutual trust 
and understanding.  We've built on that foundation and expanded the group so 
that it serves as a pretty solid vehicle for the evolution of ideas.  We 
don't depend entirely on electronic communications - there are frequent face 
to face interactions among the members; I consider that a
valuable characteristic.  Yes, it is a closed group - that's one of its 
strengths.  And since it has no intrinsic voting power except insofar people 
might be convinced of the value of ideas, I have no trouble rejecting those 
who attack it as a closed group.

It takes a great deal of work to form and maintain this kind of ad hoc group. 
 One should not expect others to do the work for them - ICANN should not be 
expected to facilitate such formations.  But equally, ICANN should not do 
things that impede such formations - for instance, ICANN should avoid things 
like anonymous public mailing lists that make it
difficult for people to identify one another for purposes of initiating those 
critical off-list contacts that serve as the nuclei about which coalitions or 
fora may coalesce.

As you know, I'm a strong opponent of censorship in public spaces. However, 
in private spaces, the ability to impose a degree of etiquitte is essential 
to the long-term survival of the group and the maturation of its thought 
processes and the growth of its political strength.  In the Boston Working 
Group we have a rule that requires mutual respect and another that demands 
that nothing be leaked without permission.  Of course we aren't perfect in 
this, far from it, but we've survived and grown since before the era of ICANN.

Another very important mechanism is an active press - Journalists build their 
own visibility and credibility and that, in turn, serves as a sieve that 
helps us identify those in the global forum who are simply oddballs from 
those who are modern day Aristotles in the rough.

Just as it takes time for interest-coalitions to forum out of the inchaote 
cloud of global-forum partipants, it takes a great deal of time for 
journalists to realize the importance of issues, much more to comprehend them 
sufficiently to write about coherently.  The press is not simply an observer; 
it is a partner, in the evolution of a mature body politic - we have to give 
them the time, materials, and patience so that over time they can do their 
job well.

You ask how people can remain engaged in this process without burning out...

Lord knows. ;-)

In my own case I look at ICANN as an historical event - It is my sense that 
we are creating a new kind of sovereign governmental institution - something 
that hasn't really happened since the nation-state reached modern form in the 
years following the Napoleonic Wars.

This is simply too interesting (to me) to miss.

(I don't see treaty-based entities or NGO's as being independent sovreign 
entities and thus really not the same kind of thing as is being created with 
ICANN.)

As for getting work done - That's a hard one.  In the global forum it simply 
isn't possible to depend that organized work efforts will reach fruition.  In 
the smaller fora it is important that there develop a kind of management 
structure - nothing formal, but rather a sense that members can ask others to 
help and that once a committment is made, it is
important that the committment be honored.  Again drawing on the BWG 
experience - we had the luck of starting life in a compressed weekend in 
which we had to essentially review the entire initial ICANN proposal, agree 
upon limited changes, and put those into writing.  We litterally gathered 
around a dining room table and pounded out our ideas until we were exhausted. 
 That kind of thing builds a lot of strength in a group.

As for resources, it is my sense that a viable ad-hoc forum requires some 
degree of network support - A mailing list and archive are important, as is 
easy access to private and public web servers so that drafts can be floated 
and final documents published.  This kind of thing is not particularly hard 
or expensive to establish - in the BWG case it was
particularly easy because several of us have strong technical backgrounds and 
were already running 24x7 e-mail and web-server systems with decent 
constant-on connectivity.

My own experience tells me that the process of maturation of an electorate 
involves a lot of unrecognized work, a lot of ego, piles of frustration, a 
strong dose of hyperbole, and the catalyst of face-to-face contact.

I'm kind of running off at the keyboard here... I hope I've made some useful 
suggestions.

        --karl--

--
This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html