[Chapter-delegates] Is Gonzalo right we are not multi-stakeholder?

[Dave Burstein]

Joly

Thank you for the transcripts. They correspond to what I remember.

It doesn't matter who said what when, or even if the PIR was a breach of
multi-stakeholderism in the exceptional case of a $billion offer.

What matters is how ISOC will be run going forward.

Gonzalo made several comments that *I interpreted *implied we were not
multistakeholder, in this and other contexts.

Reading some more, I discovered he also said, "what we have is a strong
multistakeholder system"

I said that if I had it wrong, "I will be very glad and will apologize."

I sent a note immediately to him, and I apologize, publicly, for missing
his other comment.

I had written here a bit about the other things he said, to explain what I
saw as a contradiction. But that doesn't matter, only what we do from now
on.

I am glad we all agree that multi-stakeholder is our principle and goal,
whatever we may argue in the court.
---------------------------

Once we agree to that, we have to define multistakeholder and work together
to make it so. Andrew, Kathy, Sally, and almost everyone else has spoken,
sometimes eloquently, about how important multi-stakeholder is in Internet
Governance.

Fortunately, ISOC itself has given us guidance.


https://www.internetsociety.org/resources/doc/2016/internet-governance-why-the-multistakeholder-approach-works/


Multistakeholder processes with meaningful and accountable participation,
and roles and responsibilities of stakeholders flexible to the issue at hand

Open, participative, with consensus-driven decision-making where possible

Transparent, accountable, inclusive and equitable with bottom-up
decision-making that doesn’t disadvantage any category of stakeholder

Distributed and collaborative, a decentralized and multistakeholder
ecosystem that encourages collaborative and cooperative approaches

Enabling meaningful participation where anyone affected by an issue can
take part in decision-making, with capacity-building support if needed
https://www.internetsociety.org/news/speeches/2018/a-call-to-action-get-involved-with-multistakeholder-internet-policy-efforts/



One, it must be stakeholder driven in that stakeholders determine the
process, scope and direction of work.

Two, it must be open and inclusive, both in terms of allowing broad
participation and ensuring that all issues are addressed.

Three, the process must be transparent and accountable to all stakeholders
and the public.

Four, outcomes must be consensus-based, delivering positive value to the
greatest number of stakeholders.

https://www.internetsociety.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/Feasibility-Study-Final-Report-Oct-2017.pdf


Stakeholder-driven: Stakeholders determine the process and decisions, from
agenda setting to workflow, rather than simply fulfilling an advisory role;
• Open: Any stakeholder may participate and the process includes and
integrates the viewpoints of a diverse range of stakeholders; •
Transparent: All stakeholders and the public have access to deliberations,
creating an environment of trust, legitimacy, and accountability; and •
Consensus-based: Outcomes are consensus-based, arrived at by compromise,
and are a win-win for the greatest number or diversity of stakeholders.

There is a great deal more to say about what is multi-stakeholder and how
we implement it for ISOC. But it's 4 a.m. and I'm calling it a night.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/private/chapter-delegates/attachments/20191201/0f238ea1/attachment.htm>