Re: [ICANN-EU] Horizontal organization

["Jeanette Hofmann" <jeanette@medea.wz-berlin.de>]

Hi, all,

> (I'm answering to both Iliya and Roberto)
> 
> >>Very true. The concept you discuss here reminds me of that, too.
> >>However, the possible greater influence of the AtLarge members will be
> >>part of the election study and the discussion thereafter. So carry it
> >>there.

Whoever said this: I think it would be a mistake to wait for the outcome 
of the election study. The at-large members (and all those who would 
like to join but are presently unable) should come up with a separate 
proposal. Why should the authors of this study enjoy more authority  
than the members themselves? 
Should the at-large membership manage to develop a solid concept of 
self-organization, the election study will be forced to make reference 
to this very concept. This, I think would improve the position of the at-
large membership with regard to the forthcoming discussions. 

> I'd agree if we wished to established some official At Large European
> council. However, it seems to me that some way to structure the At Large
> community should be ready since the very first day of the At Large
> Director's mandate, since it is a key element to make the bottom-up
> process work. The risk is that otherwise the Director will not have a
> clear way to detect and promote consensus in the community, which should
> be his main role - especially for environments with which he is not
> directly in touch. We are not electing a person to *rule* us for two
> years. 

The role and the authority of the at-large director is a critical issue. All 
those who have ever been part of social movements or political parties 
might be familiar with this topic. The German Greens, for example, 
dealt with the question of the so called "imperative mandate" more than 
a decade. I've changed my mind on this topic at least twice ;-)
Today, I think that is not ok to confine a director's or representative's 
role to "execute" the community's will. 
First of all, we don't elect a dummy or a machine but a human being 
with a distinct history, with political opinions and, hopefully, some 
brains. Otherwise, we could just hire some sort of administrator. 

Furthermore, by electing this person we delegate a certain amount of 
responsibility. It is the director who has to bear this responsibility, 
which is why this person cannot just obey to instructions.  

HOWEVER: To do justice to this job, the director must intensively 
consult with the at-large membership. Not only for democratic reasons 
but also to tap other members' brains and to constantly update the 
"opinion poll". 
To keep a balance between representing the at-large membership and
 bearing a personal responsibility is on the most important skills the director
 will have to develop - I think.


jeanette