[seedig] Letter to the SEEDIG community

[hvale vale - APC WRP]

Dear SEEDIG,

I am thankful for the changed tones of the discussion while issues and
content of it remain heavy and give a lot to reflect and think.

This is what it is, when a part of a community resolve to ask voting
someone out and, when stories and recollections of events are so
polarized, content cannot be anything else than heavy.

I want just to make a personal disclosure and share that I will not
register to vote. I read all the exchanges, the mentioned blog, the
responses in support to the petition, the short one as well as the
longer one and the statement or, better to say, the resignation provided
by Dusan.

As a remote and lately dormant member of this community I find this
process difficult to follow and understand. I see two sides and no
mediation or facilitation.

The SEEDIG community is made of 221 people, 64 are until now registered
voting members <https://seedig.net/elections-2019/#voting>, at least
publicly (quoting from the website) and 30 or so expressed their support
to the petition.

My reflection is about the silent majority. Are they considering
themselves as part of the community? Are they tired, busy, uninterested?
I do not know and can only speak for myself.

I have disengaged slowly and I am not sure how I feel about the entire
situation, I just wonder if there is a plan or will be a space, open to
everyone who might be interested, online or face to face to reflect and
learn, or if the petition and its execution is the conversation itself.

Respectfully, hv


On 12/18/19 10:08 PM, Dušan Caf via seedig wrote:
> Dear members of the SEEDIG community,
>
> I would like to express my deepest disappointment that everything I
> wrote in myblog post
> <https://blog.caf.si/2019/11/reflections-on-my-two-years-in-seedig.html>and
> in my letter to the supporting organisations has been proven true once
> again. 
>
> My observations have been shown to be true by all of you involved,
> especially those who orchestrated the unprecedented action for the
> petition and its support. I have received calls by members of the
> community who have been contacted to support the petition, and many of
> you responded, even without knowing what it is all about and
> understanding the SEEDIG Terms of Reference
> <https://seedig.net/terms-of-reference-tor/>(the SEEDIG bylaws).
>
> It wouldn’t surprise me if some emails sent to the list in the past
> few days were also orchestrated and prepared by others. In fact, there
> were clear indications in emails — from coloured copy-pasting to
> stylistic similarities — indicating that those emails could have been
> written or coordinated by others. There were also other “obvious”
> indications and it was very likely — based on my previous observations
> in SEEDIG, not only on the mailing list, but also in certain groups
> and online calls — that emails were sent to the list in a well
> orchestrated fashion.
>
> It is truly sad to see how young SEEDIG fellows and members of the
> community who work as researchers or human rights advocates, or others
> whose job is simply to take a look at issues from all perspectives,
> are so easily manipulated and persuaded to participate in disgraceful
> defamatory actions.
>
> Have you ever wondered how come such an unresponsive mailing list
> received such a number of feedbacks in the span of an hour? Have you
> googled when was the last time this many emails arrived to “any”
> subject? When was the last time you knew we had this many members on
> the list? Try searching your emails. And above all, several supporters
> of the petition I have never seen to contribute to any SEEDIG
> community work since I was elected to the Executive Committee.
>
> It is also sad to see how my female Executive Committee colleagues
> manipulated the truth in their emails sent to the list, for example
> Sonia who has never explained to me the reasons why she did not intend
> to run for the second term, but only sent me a short message stating
> that she was “just not running for re-election”and the rest was her
> imagination, not based on any facts; not even mentioning other
> unfounded accusations by Lianna and Sorina that require a separate
> response.
>
> Mynomination <https://seedig.net/nominations-2017/#1.1>as a candidate
> for the SEEDIG executive committee was filed by a respected member of
> the Slovenian Ministry of Education, Science and Sport. Iaccepted
> <https://seedig.net/nominations-2017/#1.2>the nomination because I
> believed that SEEDIG had a potential that could be further developed
> for the benefit of the whole region. Apart from my academic background
> related to internet governance and extensive experience in policy and
> regulation, I have brought to the executive committee leadership and
> governance experience, gained throughout my career spanning across
> different stakeholder groups and different roles (including corporate
> and not-for-profit roles).
>
> I joined SEEDIG with enthusiasm and have spent a great time with many
> of you. In two years, I have devoted several months of my time to
> SEEDIG projects, by organising SEEDIG 2018 in Ljubljana, leading the
> Programme Committee for SEEDIG 6 (2019) in Bucharest, and by
> significantly contributing to the Terms of Reference
> <https://seedig.net/terms-of-reference-tor/>, strategic work plan
> <http://seedig.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/SEEDIG-Strategic-Plan-2018-2020-Draft-Jan2018.pdf>,
> and to many other activities (see also myblog post
> <https://blog.caf.si/2019/11/reflections-on-my-two-years-in-seedig.html>)
> — for which I have received extremely positive feedback and
> appreciation, not just from participants but also from fellow
> colleagues from the Executive Committee, Programme Committee,
> institutional partners, and from supporting organisations. 
>
> At no point has anyone objected to my work, dedication, or the way
> each and every part of my work has been conducted since my election to
> the Executive Committee. Moreover, I promoted SEEDIG in the network of
> national parliaments in South-Eastern Europe, through the support of
> respected members of the European Parliament, and also through my
> contacts in the private sector across the European Union and
> regionally. When exploring possibilities for the establishment of the
> SEEDIG legal entity, I also got written support from the Slovenian
> Ministry of Public Administration.
>
> In recent months, unfortunately, there have been several
> ad-hominemattacks towards me (in relation to my proposals, especially
> regarding the legal entity, or just for writing to the mailing list or
> expressing concerns about SEEDIG’s governance, lack of transparency,
> or the way its operations have been conducted). Such attacks always
> tell you more about the attacker than the attacked. I do not want to
> speculate about the motives and personalities of those involved.
> However, I decided, following a professional advice, to write ablog
> post
> <https://blog.caf.si/2019/11/reflections-on-my-two-years-in-seedig.html>and
> to bring this matter to the attention of the SEEDIG supporting
> organisations. I called upon them to help in stopping targeted
> character assassinations and “community members cleansing” that are
> destroying SEEDIG’s core principles, such as openness, inclusiveness
> and transparency. They could also be used as a mechanism for
> establishing a personality cult.
>
> Are we a community which attacks people for speaking or writing
> publically, or are we the community which defends the right to freedom
> of expression? Have you ever taken a moment to think about why I had
> decided to publish a blog post? Have you read it and tried to
> understand the messages? Important issues on SEEDIG governance,
> leadership, and even on the legal entity that were presented at the
> Executive Committee meetings have been disregarded or silenced through
> attacks. Everything I wanted to bring in front of all of you, dear
> SEEDIG members, would receive immediate coordinated attacks if sent to
> the mailing list. My blog was the last option where you could also
> enjoy your right to know what was happening behind your backs and what
> you and the supporting organisations (such as ICANN, RIPE NCC, the
> Internet Society, the Council of Europe, the Diplo Foundation,
> EuroDIG, and others) were endorsing without basic knowledge and
> understanding of how things really were in SEEDIG. Admit it to
> yourself, as harsh as it sounds, but many of you have been heavily
> manipulated. 
>
> Under Sorina’s leadership, SEEDIG has turned into a highly
> manipulative entity, where freedom of speech is persistently
> suppressed, even with brutal ad-hominemattacks, whose aim is to
> discredit an argument by attacking the qualities of the arguer, rather
> than the merits of the argument. And well orchestrated actions in
> relation to the petition have only confirmed all my observations.
>
> SEEDIG as an internet governance initiative should promote principles
> such as openness, inclusiveness and transparency. More importantly,
> however, it should promote human rights and human dignity, both
> internally and externally. Freedom of speech is one of the most
> important human rights, which sadly has no place in SEEDIG. Instead,
> many members of the community are openly promoting Sorina’s
> personality cult, which is truly sad, especially in the region that
> used to be oppressed by totalitarian régimes.
>
> I have been attacked for speaking up in SEEDIG several times, and
> other members of the community experienced similar attacks. Members of
> the community have contacted me, expressing support for my blog post
> and speaking up, but also telling me their sad experiences in SEEDIG.
> Without exception, all have mentioned fear of expressing their opinion
> on the mailing list, where they would always be attacked by the same
> people. Some were even directly threatened, so I was told, to be
> attacked ad-hominemif they would write to the mailing list. The
> so-called “killing the mockingbird” game has been played for years by
> the very few and same members of the SEEDIG community, and many of you
> were just manipulated to be active players in the game.
>
> It is also worrying that members who have contacted me recently
> expressed fear of losing the financial support of the supporting
> organisations for themselves or for their national (internet
> governance) initiatives, especially from ICANN, if they publicly
> expressed their disagreement with the way SEEDIG has been led. This
> unfortunately leads to another important question: are these the
> values our supporting organisations — ICANN, RIPE NCC, the Internet
> Society, the Council of Europe, the Diplo Foundation, EuroDIG, etc. —
> and their representatives being involved with the SEEDIG community are
> promoting and supporting?
>
> As far as me “working against SEEDIG” goes…
> Several times, when the Executive Committee was attacked for bad
> decisions (on or off the list) I volunteered to respond in order to
> preserve the dignity of community members. I knew from first hand
> experience how these attacks were handled. I also knew how public
> discourse was influenced by Sorina through SEEDIG fellows (i.e.
> interns, fellows, ambassadors, monthly summary editors, ...), most of
> them also being involved or affiliated with other internet governance
> stakeholders, especially ICANN or the Diplo Foundation.
>
> It should also be mentioned that some members of the Executive
> Committee have felt uncomfortable as Sorina — as a SEEDIG chair — was
> invited to meeting(s) with the national intelligence service. During
> the SEEDIG 6 meeting in Bucharest, members of the Executive Committee
> were wondering who in the audience were from the intelligence service
> and what was their role. Frankly speaking, it was extremely
> uncomfortable. These circumstances have never been openly discussed
> but the sense of unease has been trickling into our relationships.
>
> Will you understand the above as an ad-hominemattack or as your right
> to finally know? I am speaking up about “a person in a position” who
> is doing things which do not benefit this community — and this could
> be any person in that position. However, it has been presented to you
> as an “ad hominem attack” — because it is easier for all of you to
> relate to it this way.
>
> After failed elections that have been compromised at several stages,
> for example by publishing information, still in the midst of the
> election process, in favour of a specific candidate running for the
> position of a member of the Executive Committee, or by the Election
> Committee failing to abide with the Terms of Reference and to provide
> appropriate replies to objections filed by a rejected candidate,
> Sorina and her inner circle just continue their business as usual.
>
> Even with all current unfunded acquisitions against me, the key
> question is, who is the conductor behind the well orchestrated
> manipulations and attacks, with the aim of silencing members and
> allowing one only truth to be spread in the SEEDIG community and about
> SEEDIG. Is it only Sorina or are there more influential persons and/or
> organisations who support her?
>
> This letter is not a response to the petition. I will handle that
> after consulting with my legal representatives. It should be noted
> however, that any further defamatory attacks and character
> assassinations will be handled with legal actions both against
> attackers and SEEDIG.
>
> While you are calling for my expulsion, I am telling you that the
> SEEDIG core team has been contaminated for six years now. Moreover,
> the very same people who caused the leadership crisis in 2017 have
> been involved in the same manipulations and attacks two years later.
> In 2017, Aida Mahmutović left and has never been seen on the mailing
> list nor on SEEDIG events. Iliya Bazlyankov left the Executive
> Committee earlier as well. 
>
> SEEDIG is no longer a space where community really decides even on
> relevant subjects to be discussed. Those are smartly being rejected.
> SEEDIG is now a space of stolen democratic values, manipulative
> interpretations, and imposed fear of losing “benefits” if not done as
> told. The same goes with working bodies, all well orchestrated. 
>
> Things in SEEDIG have gone terribly wrong, the Executive Committee has
> been bypassed and the Terms of References have been neglected even
> regarding important provisions (e.g. on the equality, rights and
> duties of members of the executive committee (Art. 3.3), election of
> chair (Art. 3.4), cooperation with supporting organisations (Art.
> 3.5(e)), core principles of SEEDIG processes, including inclusiveness
> and transparency (Art. 4.1 (h)), accountability of members of the
> executive committee (Art. 5.1 (a)), the ‘four eyes’ principle (Art.
> 5.1 (d)), internal rules of operation (Art.5.3), elections (Art.
> 6.10), etc.). 
>
> Sasho Dimitrijoski and I were the only members of the Executive
> Committee that strived for more transparency and better governance. We
> warned back in January 2019 that the way SEEDIG has been functioning
> for the past years was not sustainable. We proposed several steps to
> (i) improve the operation of the Executive Committee and reconsider
> the governance model as defined by the Terms of Reference, (ii) avoid
> over-dependence on any member of the leadership team, (iii) broaden
> the stakeholder involvement and reduce over-dependence on (a few)
> international stakeholders, and (iv) improve financial sustainability.
> We have also warned that the current voting rules allow the inner
> circle to manipulate the election and voting processes. We have been
> ignored by the rest of the Executive Committee, but the time showed
> that we were right — also with regard to election and voting processes.
>
> It is time for an entirely new team to take over the leadership of
> SEEDIG and bring it back to its community — a team that has not been
> contaminated with current manipulations and defamatory attacks, and
> that also has true leadership potential.
>
> I don’t regret my time spent in SEEDIG. However, as SEEDIG under
> current leadership is no longer a place where I would like to
> participate anymore, I am resigning from the position of member of the
> SEEDIG Executive Committee, effective from today's date.
>
> With kind regards,
> Dušan Caf
>
-- 
hvale vale
Women's Rights Programme Coordinator
EROTICS and Networks Capacity Strategy Team
Association for Progressive Communications

www.apc.org | http://erotics.apc.org | www.feministinternet.net | www.genderit.org 

Twitter: @froatosebe

Fingerprint 30AA 9445 D878 A6C9 FE41 E90D 52A5 36A6 B249 EDA9

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.rnids.rs/pipermail/seedig/attachments/20191219/ac53c5b1/attachment.htm>