My DNSO review comment (Re: [ga] DNSO Review Committee)

[Harald Alvestrand <Harald@Alvestrand.no>]

To the point of the review comittee deliberations that says:

>-  Does the current constituency division minimize the effectiveness
>     of the DNSO and NC?

Just for the record, I think that the constituency structure of the DNSO is 
a fundamental reason for the DNSO's problems.

The constituency structure has led to:

- Polarization, as those who are in the DNSO to represent a constituency 
feel obliged to serve that constituency's interests whether that makes 
sense in a global context or not

- Underrepresentation, since many interested voices have trouble fitting 
into one or another of the constituencies

- Overrepresentation, since many interested voices (Business and IP are the 
most obvious) find themselves natural parts of several constituencies

- Misrepresentation, since the selection of a few people to act as 
spokesmen for a constituency obscures the sometimes significant differences 
of opinion within a constituency

I believe part of the problems the DNSO has had in reaching anything like a 
consensus position on *anything* is rooted in the constituency structure.
(It is also rooted in the presence of a number of very loud voices that 
should, on the basis of democratic process, be heard, but where the owners 
of the voices have neither the inclination nor the temperament to reach for 
consensus. Reaching consensus in a loud environment will always be hard.)

The constituency structure is a failure and should be abandoned.

              Harald

--
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