[seedig] Letter to the SEEDIG community

[Vladimir Radunovic]

Dear colleagues, 

 

I have been following the exchanges on the situation at SEEDIG to the extent possible. SEEDIG is undergoing a crisis, that's evident. Its community is polarised, and hard words are being exchanged. 

 

Diplo, as an organisation that supported and cooperated with SEEDIG, didn't interfere. While a number of our associates and alumni personally contributed a lot to SEEDIG activities, Diplo has not participated in, or endorsed, any decisions. It is a legitimate concern why. The role of supporting organisation is strategic and political - to provide context, contacts, visibility, substance and funding. Their role is not to interfere with internal dynamics: this could be counterproductive, contribute to polarisation, and hurt the organisation. We hope that internal problems will be resolved through professional dialogue and, where necessary, applying rules and procedures. Respecting this, Diplo did not, and will not, interfere with internal processes.

 

In spite of the heated atmosphere, I hope that SEEDIG will prevail, and that all of us will take lessons. I appeal on handling this process further based on procedures, and respect of each other's opinions. Ultimately, we are all professionals with true belief in the value of a multistakeholder IG process in SEE, that SEEDIG should be. 

 

Best, 

 

  Vlada

 

 

 

 

From: seedig [mailto:seedig-bounces at lists.rnids.rs] On Behalf Of Nenad Marinkovic
Sent: 19 December 2019 18:31
To: hvale at apcwomen.org; seedig at lists.rnids.rs
Subject: Re: [seedig] Letter to the SEEDIG community

 

Dear all,

In some way I felt invited by hv as I am on the list of publicly announced voter, (although accidently did not vote last time)  who did not comment turbulence in SEEDIG.

 

I feel SEEDIG like place for young and new forces to prepare themselves for IG, my role in this process passed.

 

If I want to make short comment, I would agree with Roberto and add that this is proof that every governance is similar, luckily weapon here are words not guns. On the other hand, one bullet hit one person, words targeting and hitting all of us and damage can be more furious and destructive. Take care how much words we use in daily life, do not throw them for nothing.

 

As my participation in SEEDIG is minimized because my daily job is now pretty different, my view is view of internet end user and member of ALS EURALO. I am afraid that lot of people in IG forgot that all of us or all of them are internet end-user. Internet like technology is multi-communication media, everybody is author, player and spectator and all our activities should include all these roles. Unfortunately, IG people cut off end-user like participants in multi-stakeholder dialogue, in the same way like from other governance of public services. I made a question of one of ICANN meeting in discussion about ICANN incomes, how many income is coming from registrant. In spite of rule that every question must get answer in ICANN conference, this answer was escaped by ICANN staff and moderator. They see only formally incomes from registrars and registries. In my opinion everything begin from this issue, nobody take real care about end users only about personal interests (or most of us). Most of people do not serve to community  but to themselves in spite of plenty of  words expressing  something quite different.

 

It is clear that interest of all institution, registries, registrars is to communicate with end-user and to finance processes like SEEDIG is and to enable professional and permanent dialogue. I am not sure  that in SEE region is this case and I am afraid that on global level it is not  the case also. So, bring them on scene and build your position having in mind that we are all end-users and should serve to all of us (end-useers)

 

Pozdrav/Regards

Nenad

 

From: seedig [mailto:seedig-bounces at lists.rnids.rs] On Behalf Of hvale vale - APC WRP
Sent: četvrtak, 19. decembar 2019 16:01
To: seedig at lists.rnids.rs <mailto:seedig at lists.rnids.rs> 
Subject: Re: [seedig] Letter to the SEEDIG community

 

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 my <https://blog.caf.si/2019/11/reflections-on-my-two-years-in-seedig.html>  blog post 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  <https://seedig.net/terms-of-reference-tor/> Terms of Reference (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.

 

My <https://seedig.net/nominations-2017/#1.1>  nomination as a candidate for the SEEDIG executive committee was filed by a respected member of the Slovenian Ministry of Education, Science and Sport. I <https://seedig.net/nominations-2017/#1.2>  accepted 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  <https://seedig.net/terms-of-reference-tor/> Terms of Reference,  <http://seedig.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/SEEDIG-Strategic-Plan-2018-2020-Draft-Jan2018.pdf> strategic work plan, and to many other activities (see also my <https://blog.caf.si/2019/11/reflections-on-my-two-years-in-seedig.html>  blog post) — 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-hominem attacks 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 a <https://blog.caf.si/2019/11/reflections-on-my-two-years-in-seedig.html>  blog post 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-hominem attacks, 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-hominem if 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-hominem attack 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://www.apc.org>  | http://erotics.apc.org | www.feministinternet.net <http://www.feministinternet.net>  | www.genderit.org <http://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/20191224/a8d6fead/attachment.htm>