Best Bits procedures

English:
Best Bits procedures

Français:
Best Bits procedures

Español:
Best Bits procedures

한국어:
Best Bits procedures

English:
<h2>1. Editing these procedures</h2>
<ol>
<li>These procedures should be agreed by consensus. &nbsp;Edits are treated as requests for comment only until they have been agreed by consensus, and this is denoted by the [RFC] tag. Remove [RFC] from a proposed procedure that has been agreed, or change to [Failed] if it fails.</li>
<li>You must have an account registered here to edit, and edits are not anonymous. To register an account, email [email protected].</li>
<li>Editing of these procedures is only open to civil society participants who are subscribed to the main Best Bits mailing list.</li>
<li><a style="text-decoration: none;" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Consensus">Consensus</a> for guidelines and policies should be reasonably strong, though unanimity is not required.</li>
<li>There must be exposure to the community beyond just the authors of the proposal.</li>
<li>Consider the strength of the proposed guideline or policy:</li>
<ul>
<li>Have major concerns raised during the community discussion been addressed?</li>
<li>Does the proposal contradict any existing guidelines or policies?</li>
<li>Can the new proposed guideline or policy be merged into an existing one?</li>
<li>Is the proposed guideline or policy, or some part of it, redundant with an existing guideline or policy?</li>
</ul>
<li>A proposal&rsquo;s status is not determined by counting votes.<a style="text-decoration: none;" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Polling_is_not_a_substitute_for_discussion">Polling is not a substitute for discussion</a>, nor is a poll&rsquo;s numerical outcome tantamount to consensus.</li>
<li>If consensus for broad community support has not developed after a reasonable time period, the proposal is considered failed. If consensus is neutral or unclear on the issue and unlikely to improve, the proposal has likewise failed.</li>
</ol>
<h2>2. Best Bits membership and guiding principles</h2>
<ol>
<li>Best Bits is a civil society platform, which although open, is built upon a foundation of basic principles on which its participants broadly share agreement, including:</li>
<ul>
<li>That the Internet is a global resource which should be managed in the public interest.</li>
<li>That rights that people have offline must also be protected online, in accordance with international human rights legal obligations.</li>
<li>That Internet governance should be multi-stakeholder, open, participative and consensus driven, democratic, transparent, accountable, inclusive and equitable, distributed, collaborative and should enable meaningful participation.</li>
<li>The ideal of multi-stakeholder governance towards which we strive is a form of participatory democracy that allows all those affected to participate as stakeholders in the deliberation of issues and the recommendation of solutions. This need not preclude final decisions and implementation being assigned to a single stakeholder group&mdash;however decision makers are always accountable to all of the stakeholders for their decisions and the implementations.</li>
</ul>
<li>By participating in this network you should understand and agree with the above principles and with<a style="text-decoration: none;" href="../../../organizer/best-bits/">our objectives</a>:</li>
<ul>
<li>To broaden and diversify participation in the initiatives that participants are undertaking individually or in smaller networks (in particular dissolving North-South divides), by allowing participants to report on those initiatives to their peers and thereby discover opportunities for collaboration or even merger of similar initiatives.</li>
<li>To amplify the voice of civil society at upcoming Internet governance events, by sharing knowledge and empowering participants to effectively represent the public interest.</li>
<li>To produce tangible shared outputs addressing pressing current issues that can be used in advocacy at such upcoming Internet governance events.</li>
<li>To raise the level of shared understanding about related groups, initiatives and issues and their political contexts, and thereby increase the quality of advocacy work conducted by individual groups and networks on Internet governance issues, and reduce duplication.</li>
</ul>
<li>There is no membership of Best Bits.</li>
<li>However Best Bits participants should be:</li>
<ul>
<li>action oriented</li>
<li>willing to compromise</li>
<li>realistic</li>
<li>committed to a plurality of representative voices</li>
<li>conservative in their contributions (so no one person should flood the platform)</li>
</ul>
<li>The main mailing list of Best Bits is open to all, although the steering committee may resolve to bar contributors from posting to the list for abusive behaviour. The steering committee may use <a style="text-decoration: none;" href="http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3683">RFC 3683</a>, with necessary modifications, as a guide to the process for suspending participants from posting to Best Bits mailing lists.</li>
<li>Subsidiary mailing lists may have different policies, which will be specified on the list membership page.</li>
<li>Face to face meetings of Best Bits are only open to civil society participants unless otherwise agreed by the meeting. Meetings will not be webcast unless agreed by the meeting.</li>
<li>Consensus decisions will only be taken on the basis of the views of civil society participants.</li>
<li>Any civil society organisation that has participated in the work of the Best Bits network, and whose representative/s remain in good standing on the network&rsquo;s mailing lists, may have its logo featured on the front page of the Best Bits website on request.</li>
</ol>
<h2>3. Producing Best Bits statements</h2>
<ol>
<li>Statements are not issued by Best Bits but by individual endorsers, and public statements about the statement should be worded with care to avoid suggesting otherwise.</li>
<li>In exceptional cases where a large proportion of participants are physically present or otherwise actively express their views about a statement, and it appears that it enjoys full consensus of those participants, they may resolve that it be issued as a statement &ldquo;of the Best Bits network.</li>
<li>Anyone may propose posting a statement (eg. joint letter, submission) be posted to the Best Bits website. Any such proposal should be accompanied by either:</li>
<ul>
<li>a proposed text, accompanied by a description of the process by which it was drafted and a proposed process and timetable for finalising and posting it for endorsement; or</li>
<li>a proposed process and timetable for drafting, finalising and posting the text for endorsement.</li>
</ul>
<li>The process and timetable may vary depending on context and urgency, but in general:</li>
<ul>
<li>the text should be finalised by a fluid working group that is open to civil society participants from the main Best Bits mailing list (but which might work on a separate mailing list, which could be closed);</li>
<li>the timescale for drafting the text should normally be at least 48 hours;</li>
<li>the draft text should normally be posted to the main Best Bits mailing list for comment at least another 48 hours before being posted to the website;</li>
<li>there should be an adequate balance between inclusiveness of the initial drafting process, and the finality of the text. (In other words, we would seldom agree to post a text that is final and that only a few groups from one part of the world drafted.)</li>
</ul>
<li>Objections to the posting of a text for endorsement may be made at the stage of its initial proposal, or at a later stage when the draft text is posted for comment, and can be made both on strategic and on substantive grounds. Possible grounds for opposition include:</li>
<ul>
<li>The statement is not on-topic for Best Bits.</li>
<li>Any proposed statement should not go against the Best Bits principles and goals but should in fact further those.</li>
<li>The process and timetable are not realistic, or are not inclusive enough.</li>
<li>The process and timetable have not been complied with.</li>
</ul>
<li>However, consensus is not required in order for a text to be posted. If significant opposition to the posting of the text has been voiced on the main list and cannot be resolved, the steering committee may make a final decision about whether or not to post the statement, in consultation with at least one proponent of the text and at least one opponent.</li>
</ol>
<h2>4. Selecting the steering committee</h2>
<ol>
<li>Anyone can claim voting rights if they:</li>
<ul>
<li>have been subscribed to the list for 2 months prior to the election being called; and</li>
<li>agree to the existing statements of principles and objectives (see above and at http://bestbits.net/organizer/best-bits/).</li>
</ul>
<li>Voting is for each of 7 regional positions (voting for each separately) and 3 non-geographical positions (voting together):</li>
<ul>
<li>Regions are Sub-saharan Africa, Middle East and North Africa, East/Southeast Asia and -Pacific, South Asia, Latin America and Caribbean, Europe, North America/Other</li>
</ul>
<li>Total 10 positions, but &ldquo;no candidate&rdquo; is also an option which may result in fewer positions filled</li>
<li>Candidates can run for a regional position or for a non-geographical position simultaneously, ie. they need not elect for one position or the other.</li>
<li>Votes are counted using a &ldquo;first past the post&rdquo; system</li>
<li>It is aimed to achieve a panel of candidates with at least 40% of each gender &ndash; if not, the election will be postponed, unless there is a broad consensus amongst all eligible voters to run the election notwithstanding the failure to reach this standard.</li>
<li>Candidates can serve a minimum term of 1 year, maximum of 3 years, with a 1 year gap before reappointment.</li>
<li>Candidacy is open to civil society participants only.</li>
<li>An independent chair may be identified to run the election according to the guidelines outlined above.</li>
</ol>
<h2>5. Best Bits meetings and workshops</h2>
<ol>
<li>A Best Bits meeting is a gathering of civil society participants in the Best Bits community.</li>
<li>The primary annual Best Bits meeting is usually held on 1st Day and/or 2nd Day (day -2 and/or -1) of the Global IGF each year.</li>
<li>Secondary Best Bits gatherings may be held at other upcoming events if approved by the steering committee on the grounds that:</li>
<ul>
<li>The event is on-topic for Best Bits.</li>
<li>At least 10 participants have registered as attending (which may be done via the Best Bits event calendar).</li>
<li>A volunteer has agreed to report back on the meeting via the Best Bits website within 2 weeks.</li>
</ul>
<li>A multi-stakeholder workshop can be considered to be Best Bits organised if:</li>
<ul>
<li>The proposed workshop topic and moderator have been proposed to the mailing list and a general consensus in favour has emerged.</li>
<li>Civil society panelists for the workshop are selected through an open process as specified below in &ldquo;Appointing nominees&hellip;&rdquo;.</li>
</ul>
</ol>
<h2>6. Fluid working groups and mailing lists</h2>
<ol>
<li>Fluid working groups can be formed by demand according to the needs of the Best Bits network, either by consensus at a Best Bits meeting or on the main Best Bits mailing list. Once formed they should be announced on the main Best Bits mailing list.</li>
<li>Fluid working groups have mailing lists as their main tool for work. Every working group is free to decide how its working mailing list will function: moderations, workflow, participants, etc.</li>
<li>A new mailing list can be created for a fluid working group or on another specific topic under the bestbits.net domain by authority of the steering committee if:</li>
<ul>
<li>The list is to serve an objective consistent with the principles and objectives of Best Bits.</li>
<li>The proponent of the new list can identify a need for the new list that is not filled by an existing list.</li>
<li>The proposed initial members of the working group list, if any, have agreed to be included.</li>
</ul>
<li>Lists are to be open with public archives by default, but may be closed, privately archived and/or hidden if justification exists for this, including strategic considerations. If members of a fluid working group decide their list will be closed, participants are also encourage to assess if this closure will temporarily or not, meaning, whether the archives will be available later, once the strategic situation is finished (eg. after a particular event).</li>
<li>Access to closed mailing list archives is not available other than to those who have been active participants on the list.</li>
<li>A general &ldquo;social&rdquo; mailing list exists to be used for non-strategy related coordination between participants who are physically attending the same meeting.</li>
</ol>
<h2>7. Appointing nominees to other groups</h2>
<ol>
<li>Except in exceptional cases, Best Bits does not directly nominate or appoint civil society representatives to external bodies or groups, but does so through its representative on the <a style="text-decoration: none;" href="http://internetgov-cs.org/">Internet Governance Civil Society Coordination Group (CSCG)</a>. (An example of such a case would be the appointment of the Best Bits representative to the CSCG itself.)</li>
<li>In such exceptional cases, where the CSCG is unable or unwilling to act:</li>
<ul>
<li>The steering committee shall call for expressions of interest on the main list.</li>
<li>Selection criteria will be decided on a case-by-case basis and will be shared when the steering committee publicises the call, but at a very minimum geographical diversity (if not balance) and gender balance should be taken into account.</li>
<li>The steering committee will select a proposed slate of nominees, taking into account those who expressed interest.</li>
<li>The proposed nominees will be posted back to the main list and approved by consensus.</li>
</ul>
</ol>
<h2>8. Editing the website, calendar, social media, etc</h2>
<ol>
<li>The steering committee may appoint representatives, and may approve requests from volunteers, to take responsibility for the following:</li>
<ul>
<li>updating the website on the instructions of the steering committee;</li>
<li>posting to the Best Bits social media accounts, which are currently on Twitter, Facebook and Google Plus;</li>
<li>moving events imported from external calendars into the appropriate categories of the Best Bits calendar and filling in any incomplete fields, which shall be carried out at least once every two weeks.</li>
</ul>
<li>Anyone can add events, or event feeds, to the event calendar, which may be subject to moderation.</li>
<li>Except in case of urgency, on each occasion before posting to social media in the name of Best Bits, the authorised representative should obtain the approval for that post from at least one other steering committee member.</li>
<li>Anyone else who wants to join the Social Media team should get in touch with the steering committee member responsible for social media.</li>
</ol>
<h2>9. Fundraising</h2>
<ol>
<li>Any Best Bits participant may fundraise to support their own participation in the Best Bits network, or the participation of others.</li>
<li>A <a style="text-decoration: none;" href="../../../wp-uploads/2013/10/Generic-Best-Bits-concept-note.odt">draft concept note</a> may form the basis of fundraising approaches. If not based on this draft, the participant raising funding should share their concept note or proposal with the steering committee to ensure that it does not misrepresent Best Bits.</li>
<li>Criteria for accepting funding:</li>
<ul>
<li>Does the funding place staff, partners, supported communities or mission at risk.</li>
<li>Does the funding jeopardize relationships with partners or supported communities and networks.</li>
<li>Does the funding compromise organizational independence</li>
<li>Does the funding relationship influence priorities, policy positions, advocacy efforts, regions of focus or direct action work.</li>
</ul>
</ol>

Français:
<h2>1. Editing these procedures</h2>
<ol>
<li>These procedures should be agreed by consensus. &nbsp;Edits are treated as requests for comment only until they have been agreed by consensus, and this is denoted by the [RFC] tag. Remove [RFC] from a proposed procedure that has been agreed, or change to [Failed] if it fails.</li>
<li>You must have an account registered here to edit, and edits are not anonymous. To register an account, email [email protected].</li>
<li>Editing of these procedures is only open to civil society participants who are subscribed to the main Best Bits mailing list.</li>
<li><a style="text-decoration: none;" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Consensus">Consensus</a> for guidelines and policies should be reasonably strong, though unanimity is not required.</li>
<li>There must be exposure to the community beyond just the authors of the proposal.</li>
<li>Consider the strength of the proposed guideline or policy:</li>
<ul>
<li>Have major concerns raised during the community discussion been addressed?</li>
<li>Does the proposal contradict any existing guidelines or policies?</li>
<li>Can the new proposed guideline or policy be merged into an existing one?</li>
<li>Is the proposed guideline or policy, or some part of it, redundant with an existing guideline or policy?</li>
</ul>
<li>A proposal&rsquo;s status is not determined by counting votes.<a style="text-decoration: none;" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Polling_is_not_a_substitute_for_discussion">Polling is not a substitute for discussion</a>, nor is a poll&rsquo;s numerical outcome tantamount to consensus.</li>
<li>If consensus for broad community support has not developed after a reasonable time period, the proposal is considered failed. If consensus is neutral or unclear on the issue and unlikely to improve, the proposal has likewise failed.</li>
</ol>
<h2>2. Best Bits membership and guiding principles</h2>
<ol>
<li>Best Bits is a civil society platform, which although open, is built upon a foundation of basic principles on which its participants broadly share agreement, including:</li>
<ul>
<li>That the Internet is a global resource which should be managed in the public interest.</li>
<li>That rights that people have offline must also be protected online, in accordance with international human rights legal obligations.</li>
<li>That Internet governance should be multi-stakeholder, open, participative and consensus driven, democratic, transparent, accountable, inclusive and equitable, distributed, collaborative and should enable meaningful participation.</li>
<li>The ideal of multi-stakeholder governance towards which we strive is a form of participatory democracy that allows all those affected to participate as stakeholders in the deliberation of issues and the recommendation of solutions. This need not preclude final decisions and implementation being assigned to a single stakeholder group&mdash;however decision makers are always accountable to all of the stakeholders for their decisions and the implementations.</li>
</ul>
<li>By participating in this network you should understand and agree with the above principles and with<a style="text-decoration: none;" href="../../../organizer/best-bits/">our objectives</a>:</li>
<ul>
<li>To broaden and diversify participation in the initiatives that participants are undertaking individually or in smaller networks (in particular dissolving North-South divides), by allowing participants to report on those initiatives to their peers and thereby discover opportunities for collaboration or even merger of similar initiatives.</li>
<li>To amplify the voice of civil society at upcoming Internet governance events, by sharing knowledge and empowering participants to effectively represent the public interest.</li>
<li>To produce tangible shared outputs addressing pressing current issues that can be used in advocacy at such upcoming Internet governance events.</li>
<li>To raise the level of shared understanding about related groups, initiatives and issues and their political contexts, and thereby increase the quality of advocacy work conducted by individual groups and networks on Internet governance issues, and reduce duplication.</li>
</ul>
<li>There is no membership of Best Bits.</li>
<li>However Best Bits participants should be:</li>
<ul>
<li>action oriented</li>
<li>willing to compromise</li>
<li>realistic</li>
<li>committed to a plurality of representative voices</li>
<li>conservative in their contributions (so no one person should flood the platform)</li>
</ul>
<li>The main mailing list of Best Bits is open to all, although the steering committee may resolve to bar contributors from posting to the list for abusive behaviour. The steering committee may use <a style="text-decoration: none;" href="http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3683">RFC 3683</a>, with necessary modifications, as a guide to the process for suspending participants from posting to Best Bits mailing lists.</li>
<li>Subsidiary mailing lists may have different policies, which will be specified on the list membership page.</li>
<li>Face to face meetings of Best Bits are only open to civil society participants unless otherwise agreed by the meeting. Meetings will not be webcast unless agreed by the meeting.</li>
<li>Consensus decisions will only be taken on the basis of the views of civil society participants.</li>
<li>Any civil society organisation that has participated in the work of the Best Bits network, and whose representative/s remain in good standing on the network&rsquo;s mailing lists, may have its logo featured on the front page of the Best Bits website on request.</li>
</ol>
<h2>3. Producing Best Bits statements</h2>
<ol>
<li>Statements are not issued by Best Bits but by individual endorsers, and public statements about the statement should be worded with care to avoid suggesting otherwise.</li>
<li>In exceptional cases where a large proportion of participants are physically present or otherwise actively express their views about a statement, and it appears that it enjoys full consensus of those participants, they may resolve that it be issued as a statement &ldquo;of the Best Bits network.</li>
<li>Anyone may propose posting a statement (eg. joint letter, submission) be posted to the Best Bits website. Any such proposal should be accompanied by either:</li>
<ul>
<li>a proposed text, accompanied by a description of the process by which it was drafted and a proposed process and timetable for finalising and posting it for endorsement; or</li>
<li>a proposed process and timetable for drafting, finalising and posting the text for endorsement.</li>
</ul>
<li>The process and timetable may vary depending on context and urgency, but in general:</li>
<ul>
<li>the text should be finalised by a fluid working group that is open to civil society participants from the main Best Bits mailing list (but which might work on a separate mailing list, which could be closed);</li>
<li>the timescale for drafting the text should normally be at least 48 hours;</li>
<li>the draft text should normally be posted to the main Best Bits mailing list for comment at least another 48 hours before being posted to the website;</li>
<li>there should be an adequate balance between inclusiveness of the initial drafting process, and the finality of the text. (In other words, we would seldom agree to post a text that is final and that only a few groups from one part of the world drafted.)</li>
</ul>
<li>Objections to the posting of a text for endorsement may be made at the stage of its initial proposal, or at a later stage when the draft text is posted for comment, and can be made both on strategic and on substantive grounds. Possible grounds for opposition include:</li>
<ul>
<li>The statement is not on-topic for Best Bits.</li>
<li>Any proposed statement should not go against the Best Bits principles and goals but should in fact further those.</li>
<li>The process and timetable are not realistic, or are not inclusive enough.</li>
<li>The process and timetable have not been complied with.</li>
</ul>
<li>However, consensus is not required in order for a text to be posted. If significant opposition to the posting of the text has been voiced on the main list and cannot be resolved, the steering committee may make a final decision about whether or not to post the statement, in consultation with at least one proponent of the text and at least one opponent.</li>
</ol>
<h2>4. Selecting the steering committee</h2>
<ol>
<li>Anyone can claim voting rights if they:</li>
<ul>
<li>have been subscribed to the list for 2 months prior to the election being called; and</li>
<li>agree to the existing statements of principles and objectives (see above and at http://bestbits.net/organizer/best-bits/).</li>
</ul>
<li>Voting is for each of 7 regional positions (voting for each separately) and 3 non-geographical positions (voting together):</li>
<ul>
<li>Regions are Sub-saharan Africa, Middle East and North Africa, East/Southeast Asia and -Pacific, South Asia, Latin America and Caribbean, Europe, North America/Other</li>
</ul>
<li>Total 10 positions, but &ldquo;no candidate&rdquo; is also an option which may result in fewer positions filled</li>
<li>Candidates can run for a regional position or for a non-geographical position simultaneously, ie. they need not elect for one position or the other.</li>
<li>Votes are counted using a &ldquo;first past the post&rdquo; system</li>
<li>It is aimed to achieve a panel of candidates with at least 40% of each gender &ndash; if not, the election will be postponed, unless there is a broad consensus amongst all eligible voters to run the election notwithstanding the failure to reach this standard.</li>
<li>Candidates can serve a minimum term of 1 year, maximum of 3 years, with a 1 year gap before reappointment.</li>
<li>Candidacy is open to civil society participants only.</li>
<li>An independent chair may be identified to run the election according to the guidelines outlined above.</li>
</ol>
<h2>5. Best Bits meetings and workshops</h2>
<ol>
<li>A Best Bits meeting is a gathering of civil society participants in the Best Bits community.</li>
<li>The primary annual Best Bits meeting is usually held on 1st Day and/or 2nd Day (day -2 and/or -1) of the Global IGF each year.</li>
<li>Secondary Best Bits gatherings may be held at other upcoming events if approved by the steering committee on the grounds that:</li>
<ul>
<li>The event is on-topic for Best Bits.</li>
<li>At least 10 participants have registered as attending (which may be done via the Best Bits event calendar).</li>
<li>A volunteer has agreed to report back on the meeting via the Best Bits website within 2 weeks.</li>
</ul>
<li>A multi-stakeholder workshop can be considered to be Best Bits organised if:</li>
<ul>
<li>The proposed workshop topic and moderator have been proposed to the mailing list and a general consensus in favour has emerged.</li>
<li>Civil society panelists for the workshop are selected through an open process as specified below in &ldquo;Appointing nominees&hellip;&rdquo;.</li>
</ul>
</ol>
<h2>6. Fluid working groups and mailing lists</h2>
<ol>
<li>Fluid working groups can be formed by demand according to the needs of the Best Bits network, either by consensus at a Best Bits meeting or on the main Best Bits mailing list. Once formed they should be announced on the main Best Bits mailing list.</li>
<li>Fluid working groups have mailing lists as their main tool for work. Every working group is free to decide how its working mailing list will function: moderations, workflow, participants, etc.</li>
<li>A new mailing list can be created for a fluid working group or on another specific topic under the bestbits.net domain by authority of the steering committee if:</li>
<ul>
<li>The list is to serve an objective consistent with the principles and objectives of Best Bits.</li>
<li>The proponent of the new list can identify a need for the new list that is not filled by an existing list.</li>
<li>The proposed initial members of the working group list, if any, have agreed to be included.</li>
</ul>
<li>Lists are to be open with public archives by default, but may be closed, privately archived and/or hidden if justification exists for this, including strategic considerations. If members of a fluid working group decide their list will be closed, participants are also encourage to assess if this closure will temporarily or not, meaning, whether the archives will be available later, once the strategic situation is finished (eg. after a particular event).</li>
<li>Access to closed mailing list archives is not available other than to those who have been active participants on the list.</li>
<li>A general &ldquo;social&rdquo; mailing list exists to be used for non-strategy related coordination between participants who are physically attending the same meeting.</li>
</ol>
<h2>7. Appointing nominees to other groups</h2>
<ol>
<li>Except in exceptional cases, Best Bits does not directly nominate or appoint civil society representatives to external bodies or groups, but does so through its representative on the <a style="text-decoration: none;" href="http://internetgov-cs.org/">Internet Governance Civil Society Coordination Group (CSCG)</a>. (An example of such a case would be the appointment of the Best Bits representative to the CSCG itself.)</li>
<li>In such exceptional cases, where the CSCG is unable or unwilling to act:</li>
<ul>
<li>The steering committee shall call for expressions of interest on the main list.</li>
<li>Selection criteria will be decided on a case-by-case basis and will be shared when the steering committee publicises the call, but at a very minimum geographical diversity (if not balance) and gender balance should be taken into account.</li>
<li>The steering committee will select a proposed slate of nominees, taking into account those who expressed interest.</li>
<li>The proposed nominees will be posted back to the main list and approved by consensus.</li>
</ul>
</ol>
<h2>8. Editing the website, calendar, social media, etc</h2>
<ol>
<li>The steering committee may appoint representatives, and may approve requests from volunteers, to take responsibility for the following:</li>
<ul>
<li>updating the website on the instructions of the steering committee;</li>
<li>posting to the Best Bits social media accounts, which are currently on Twitter, Facebook and Google Plus;</li>
<li>moving events imported from external calendars into the appropriate categories of the Best Bits calendar and filling in any incomplete fields, which shall be carried out at least once every two weeks.</li>
</ul>
<li>Anyone can add events, or event feeds, to the event calendar, which may be subject to moderation.</li>
<li>Except in case of urgency, on each occasion before posting to social media in the name of Best Bits, the authorised representative should obtain the approval for that post from at least one other steering committee member.</li>
<li>Anyone else who wants to join the Social Media team should get in touch with the steering committee member responsible for social media.</li>
</ol>
<h2>9. Fundraising</h2>
<ol>
<li>Any Best Bits participant may fundraise to support their own participation in the Best Bits network, or the participation of others.</li>
<li>A <a style="text-decoration: none;" href="../../../wp-uploads/2013/10/Generic-Best-Bits-concept-note.odt">draft concept note</a> may form the basis of fundraising approaches. If not based on this draft, the participant raising funding should share their concept note or proposal with the steering committee to ensure that it does not misrepresent Best Bits.</li>
<li>Criteria for accepting funding:</li>
<ul>
<li>Does the funding place staff, partners, supported communities or mission at risk.</li>
<li>Does the funding jeopardize relationships with partners or supported communities and networks.</li>
<li>Does the funding compromise organizational independence</li>
<li>Does the funding relationship influence priorities, policy positions, advocacy efforts, regions of focus or direct action work.</li>
</ul>
</ol>

Español:
<h2>1. Editing these procedures</h2>
<ol>
<li>These procedures should be agreed by consensus. &nbsp;Edits are treated as requests for comment only until they have been agreed by consensus, and this is denoted by the [RFC] tag. Remove [RFC] from a proposed procedure that has been agreed, or change to [Failed] if it fails.</li>
<li>You must have an account registered here to edit, and edits are not anonymous. To register an account, email [email protected].</li>
<li>Editing of these procedures is only open to civil society participants who are subscribed to the main Best Bits mailing list.</li>
<li><a style="text-decoration: none;" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Consensus">Consensus</a> for guidelines and policies should be reasonably strong, though unanimity is not required.</li>
<li>There must be exposure to the community beyond just the authors of the proposal.</li>
<li>Consider the strength of the proposed guideline or policy:</li>
<ul>
<li>Have major concerns raised during the community discussion been addressed?</li>
<li>Does the proposal contradict any existing guidelines or policies?</li>
<li>Can the new proposed guideline or policy be merged into an existing one?</li>
<li>Is the proposed guideline or policy, or some part of it, redundant with an existing guideline or policy?</li>
</ul>
<li>A proposal&rsquo;s status is not determined by counting votes.<a style="text-decoration: none;" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Polling_is_not_a_substitute_for_discussion">Polling is not a substitute for discussion</a>, nor is a poll&rsquo;s numerical outcome tantamount to consensus.</li>
<li>If consensus for broad community support has not developed after a reasonable time period, the proposal is considered failed. If consensus is neutral or unclear on the issue and unlikely to improve, the proposal has likewise failed.</li>
</ol>
<h2>2. Best Bits membership and guiding principles</h2>
<ol>
<li>Best Bits is a civil society platform, which although open, is built upon a foundation of basic principles on which its participants broadly share agreement, including:</li>
<ul>
<li>That the Internet is a global resource which should be managed in the public interest.</li>
<li>That rights that people have offline must also be protected online, in accordance with international human rights legal obligations.</li>
<li>That Internet governance should be multi-stakeholder, open, participative and consensus driven, democratic, transparent, accountable, inclusive and equitable, distributed, collaborative and should enable meaningful participation.</li>
<li>The ideal of multi-stakeholder governance towards which we strive is a form of participatory democracy that allows all those affected to participate as stakeholders in the deliberation of issues and the recommendation of solutions. This need not preclude final decisions and implementation being assigned to a single stakeholder group&mdash;however decision makers are always accountable to all of the stakeholders for their decisions and the implementations.</li>
</ul>
<li>By participating in this network you should understand and agree with the above principles and with<a style="text-decoration: none;" href="../../../organizer/best-bits/">our objectives</a>:</li>
<ul>
<li>To broaden and diversify participation in the initiatives that participants are undertaking individually or in smaller networks (in particular dissolving North-South divides), by allowing participants to report on those initiatives to their peers and thereby discover opportunities for collaboration or even merger of similar initiatives.</li>
<li>To amplify the voice of civil society at upcoming Internet governance events, by sharing knowledge and empowering participants to effectively represent the public interest.</li>
<li>To produce tangible shared outputs addressing pressing current issues that can be used in advocacy at such upcoming Internet governance events.</li>
<li>To raise the level of shared understanding about related groups, initiatives and issues and their political contexts, and thereby increase the quality of advocacy work conducted by individual groups and networks on Internet governance issues, and reduce duplication.</li>
</ul>
<li>There is no membership of Best Bits.</li>
<li>However Best Bits participants should be:</li>
<ul>
<li>action oriented</li>
<li>willing to compromise</li>
<li>realistic</li>
<li>committed to a plurality of representative voices</li>
<li>conservative in their contributions (so no one person should flood the platform)</li>
</ul>
<li>The main mailing list of Best Bits is open to all, although the steering committee may resolve to bar contributors from posting to the list for abusive behaviour. The steering committee may use <a style="text-decoration: none;" href="http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3683">RFC 3683</a>, with necessary modifications, as a guide to the process for suspending participants from posting to Best Bits mailing lists.</li>
<li>Subsidiary mailing lists may have different policies, which will be specified on the list membership page.</li>
<li>Face to face meetings of Best Bits are only open to civil society participants unless otherwise agreed by the meeting. Meetings will not be webcast unless agreed by the meeting.</li>
<li>Consensus decisions will only be taken on the basis of the views of civil society participants.</li>
<li>Any civil society organisation that has participated in the work of the Best Bits network, and whose representative/s remain in good standing on the network&rsquo;s mailing lists, may have its logo featured on the front page of the Best Bits website on request.</li>
</ol>
<h2>3. Producing Best Bits statements</h2>
<ol>
<li>Statements are not issued by Best Bits but by individual endorsers, and public statements about the statement should be worded with care to avoid suggesting otherwise.</li>
<li>In exceptional cases where a large proportion of participants are physically present or otherwise actively express their views about a statement, and it appears that it enjoys full consensus of those participants, they may resolve that it be issued as a statement &ldquo;of the Best Bits network.</li>
<li>Anyone may propose posting a statement (eg. joint letter, submission) be posted to the Best Bits website. Any such proposal should be accompanied by either:</li>
<ul>
<li>a proposed text, accompanied by a description of the process by which it was drafted and a proposed process and timetable for finalising and posting it for endorsement; or</li>
<li>a proposed process and timetable for drafting, finalising and posting the text for endorsement.</li>
</ul>
<li>The process and timetable may vary depending on context and urgency, but in general:</li>
<ul>
<li>the text should be finalised by a fluid working group that is open to civil society participants from the main Best Bits mailing list (but which might work on a separate mailing list, which could be closed);</li>
<li>the timescale for drafting the text should normally be at least 48 hours;</li>
<li>the draft text should normally be posted to the main Best Bits mailing list for comment at least another 48 hours before being posted to the website;</li>
<li>there should be an adequate balance between inclusiveness of the initial drafting process, and the finality of the text. (In other words, we would seldom agree to post a text that is final and that only a few groups from one part of the world drafted.)</li>
</ul>
<li>Objections to the posting of a text for endorsement may be made at the stage of its initial proposal, or at a later stage when the draft text is posted for comment, and can be made both on strategic and on substantive grounds. Possible grounds for opposition include:</li>
<ul>
<li>The statement is not on-topic for Best Bits.</li>
<li>Any proposed statement should not go against the Best Bits principles and goals but should in fact further those.</li>
<li>The process and timetable are not realistic, or are not inclusive enough.</li>
<li>The process and timetable have not been complied with.</li>
</ul>
<li>However, consensus is not required in order for a text to be posted. If significant opposition to the posting of the text has been voiced on the main list and cannot be resolved, the steering committee may make a final decision about whether or not to post the statement, in consultation with at least one proponent of the text and at least one opponent.</li>
</ol>
<h2>4. Selecting the steering committee</h2>
<ol>
<li>Anyone can claim voting rights if they:</li>
<ul>
<li>have been subscribed to the list for 2 months prior to the election being called; and</li>
<li>agree to the existing statements of principles and objectives (see above and at http://bestbits.net/organizer/best-bits/).</li>
</ul>
<li>Voting is for each of 7 regional positions (voting for each separately) and 3 non-geographical positions (voting together):</li>
<ul>
<li>Regions are Sub-saharan Africa, Middle East and North Africa, East/Southeast Asia and -Pacific, South Asia, Latin America and Caribbean, Europe, North America/Other</li>
</ul>
<li>Total 10 positions, but &ldquo;no candidate&rdquo; is also an option which may result in fewer positions filled</li>
<li>Candidates can run for a regional position or for a non-geographical position simultaneously, ie. they need not elect for one position or the other.</li>
<li>Votes are counted using a &ldquo;first past the post&rdquo; system</li>
<li>It is aimed to achieve a panel of candidates with at least 40% of each gender &ndash; if not, the election will be postponed, unless there is a broad consensus amongst all eligible voters to run the election notwithstanding the failure to reach this standard.</li>
<li>Candidates can serve a minimum term of 1 year, maximum of 3 years, with a 1 year gap before reappointment.</li>
<li>Candidacy is open to civil society participants only.</li>
<li>An independent chair may be identified to run the election according to the guidelines outlined above.</li>
</ol>
<h2>5. Best Bits meetings and workshops</h2>
<ol>
<li>A Best Bits meeting is a gathering of civil society participants in the Best Bits community.</li>
<li>The primary annual Best Bits meeting is usually held on 1st Day and/or 2nd Day (day -2 and/or -1) of the Global IGF each year.</li>
<li>Secondary Best Bits gatherings may be held at other upcoming events if approved by the steering committee on the grounds that:</li>
<ul>
<li>The event is on-topic for Best Bits.</li>
<li>At least 10 participants have registered as attending (which may be done via the Best Bits event calendar).</li>
<li>A volunteer has agreed to report back on the meeting via the Best Bits website within 2 weeks.</li>
</ul>
<li>A multi-stakeholder workshop can be considered to be Best Bits organised if:</li>
<ul>
<li>The proposed workshop topic and moderator have been proposed to the mailing list and a general consensus in favour has emerged.</li>
<li>Civil society panelists for the workshop are selected through an open process as specified below in &ldquo;Appointing nominees&hellip;&rdquo;.</li>
</ul>
</ol>
<h2>6. Fluid working groups and mailing lists</h2>
<ol>
<li>Fluid working groups can be formed by demand according to the needs of the Best Bits network, either by consensus at a Best Bits meeting or on the main Best Bits mailing list. Once formed they should be announced on the main Best Bits mailing list.</li>
<li>Fluid working groups have mailing lists as their main tool for work. Every working group is free to decide how its working mailing list will function: moderations, workflow, participants, etc.</li>
<li>A new mailing list can be created for a fluid working group or on another specific topic under the bestbits.net domain by authority of the steering committee if:</li>
<ul>
<li>The list is to serve an objective consistent with the principles and objectives of Best Bits.</li>
<li>The proponent of the new list can identify a need for the new list that is not filled by an existing list.</li>
<li>The proposed initial members of the working group list, if any, have agreed to be included.</li>
</ul>
<li>Lists are to be open with public archives by default, but may be closed, privately archived and/or hidden if justification exists for this, including strategic considerations. If members of a fluid working group decide their list will be closed, participants are also encourage to assess if this closure will temporarily or not, meaning, whether the archives will be available later, once the strategic situation is finished (eg. after a particular event).</li>
<li>Access to closed mailing list archives is not available other than to those who have been active participants on the list.</li>
<li>A general &ldquo;social&rdquo; mailing list exists to be used for non-strategy related coordination between participants who are physically attending the same meeting.</li>
</ol>
<h2>7. Appointing nominees to other groups</h2>
<ol>
<li>Except in exceptional cases, Best Bits does not directly nominate or appoint civil society representatives to external bodies or groups, but does so through its representative on the <a style="text-decoration: none;" href="http://internetgov-cs.org/">Internet Governance Civil Society Coordination Group (CSCG)</a>. (An example of such a case would be the appointment of the Best Bits representative to the CSCG itself.)</li>
<li>In such exceptional cases, where the CSCG is unable or unwilling to act:</li>
<ul>
<li>The steering committee shall call for expressions of interest on the main list.</li>
<li>Selection criteria will be decided on a case-by-case basis and will be shared when the steering committee publicises the call, but at a very minimum geographical diversity (if not balance) and gender balance should be taken into account.</li>
<li>The steering committee will select a proposed slate of nominees, taking into account those who expressed interest.</li>
<li>The proposed nominees will be posted back to the main list and approved by consensus.</li>
</ul>
</ol>
<h2>8. Editing the website, calendar, social media, etc</h2>
<ol>
<li>The steering committee may appoint representatives, and may approve requests from volunteers, to take responsibility for the following:</li>
<ul>
<li>updating the website on the instructions of the steering committee;</li>
<li>posting to the Best Bits social media accounts, which are currently on Twitter, Facebook and Google Plus;</li>
<li>moving events imported from external calendars into the appropriate categories of the Best Bits calendar and filling in any incomplete fields, which shall be carried out at least once every two weeks.</li>
</ul>
<li>Anyone can add events, or event feeds, to the event calendar, which may be subject to moderation.</li>
<li>Except in case of urgency, on each occasion before posting to social media in the name of Best Bits, the authorised representative should obtain the approval for that post from at least one other steering committee member.</li>
<li>Anyone else who wants to join the Social Media team should get in touch with the steering committee member responsible for social media.</li>
</ol>
<h2>9. Fundraising</h2>
<ol>
<li>Any Best Bits participant may fundraise to support their own participation in the Best Bits network, or the participation of others.</li>
<li>A <a style="text-decoration: none;" href="../../../wp-uploads/2013/10/Generic-Best-Bits-concept-note.odt">draft concept note</a> may form the basis of fundraising approaches. If not based on this draft, the participant raising funding should share their concept note or proposal with the steering committee to ensure that it does not misrepresent Best Bits.</li>
<li>Criteria for accepting funding:</li>
<ul>
<li>Does the funding place staff, partners, supported communities or mission at risk.</li>
<li>Does the funding jeopardize relationships with partners or supported communities and networks.</li>
<li>Does the funding compromise organizational independence</li>
<li>Does the funding relationship influence priorities, policy positions, advocacy efforts, regions of focus or direct action work.</li>
</ul>
</ol>

한국어:
<h2>1. Editing these procedures</h2>
<ol>
<li>These procedures should be agreed by consensus. &nbsp;Edits are treated as requests for comment only until they have been agreed by consensus, and this is denoted by the [RFC] tag. Remove [RFC] from a proposed procedure that has been agreed, or change to [Failed] if it fails.</li>
<li>You must have an account registered here to edit, and edits are not anonymous. To register an account, email [email protected].</li>
<li>Editing of these procedures is only open to civil society participants who are subscribed to the main Best Bits mailing list.</li>
<li><a style="text-decoration: none;" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Consensus">Consensus</a> for guidelines and policies should be reasonably strong, though unanimity is not required.</li>
<li>There must be exposure to the community beyond just the authors of the proposal.</li>
<li>Consider the strength of the proposed guideline or policy:</li>
<ul>
<li>Have major concerns raised during the community discussion been addressed?</li>
<li>Does the proposal contradict any existing guidelines or policies?</li>
<li>Can the new proposed guideline or policy be merged into an existing one?</li>
<li>Is the proposed guideline or policy, or some part of it, redundant with an existing guideline or policy?</li>
</ul>
<li>A proposal&rsquo;s status is not determined by counting votes.<a style="text-decoration: none;" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Polling_is_not_a_substitute_for_discussion">Polling is not a substitute for discussion</a>, nor is a poll&rsquo;s numerical outcome tantamount to consensus.</li>
<li>If consensus for broad community support has not developed after a reasonable time period, the proposal is considered failed. If consensus is neutral or unclear on the issue and unlikely to improve, the proposal has likewise failed.</li>
</ol>
<h2>2. Best Bits membership and guiding principles</h2>
<ol>
<li>Best Bits is a civil society platform, which although open, is built upon a foundation of basic principles on which its participants broadly share agreement, including:</li>
<ul>
<li>That the Internet is a global resource which should be managed in the public interest.</li>
<li>That rights that people have offline must also be protected online, in accordance with international human rights legal obligations.</li>
<li>That Internet governance should be multi-stakeholder, open, participative and consensus driven, democratic, transparent, accountable, inclusive and equitable, distributed, collaborative and should enable meaningful participation.</li>
<li>The ideal of multi-stakeholder governance towards which we strive is a form of participatory democracy that allows all those affected to participate as stakeholders in the deliberation of issues and the recommendation of solutions. This need not preclude final decisions and implementation being assigned to a single stakeholder group&mdash;however decision makers are always accountable to all of the stakeholders for their decisions and the implementations.</li>
</ul>
<li>By participating in this network you should understand and agree with the above principles and with<a style="text-decoration: none;" href="../../../organizer/best-bits/">our objectives</a>:</li>
<ul>
<li>To broaden and diversify participation in the initiatives that participants are undertaking individually or in smaller networks (in particular dissolving North-South divides), by allowing participants to report on those initiatives to their peers and thereby discover opportunities for collaboration or even merger of similar initiatives.</li>
<li>To amplify the voice of civil society at upcoming Internet governance events, by sharing knowledge and empowering participants to effectively represent the public interest.</li>
<li>To produce tangible shared outputs addressing pressing current issues that can be used in advocacy at such upcoming Internet governance events.</li>
<li>To raise the level of shared understanding about related groups, initiatives and issues and their political contexts, and thereby increase the quality of advocacy work conducted by individual groups and networks on Internet governance issues, and reduce duplication.</li>
</ul>
<li>There is no membership of Best Bits.</li>
<li>However Best Bits participants should be:</li>
<ul>
<li>action oriented</li>
<li>willing to compromise</li>
<li>realistic</li>
<li>committed to a plurality of representative voices</li>
<li>conservative in their contributions (so no one person should flood the platform)</li>
</ul>
<li>The main mailing list of Best Bits is open to all, although the steering committee may resolve to bar contributors from posting to the list for abusive behaviour. The steering committee may use <a style="text-decoration: none;" href="http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3683">RFC 3683</a>, with necessary modifications, as a guide to the process for suspending participants from posting to Best Bits mailing lists.</li>
<li>Subsidiary mailing lists may have different policies, which will be specified on the list membership page.</li>
<li>Face to face meetings of Best Bits are only open to civil society participants unless otherwise agreed by the meeting. Meetings will not be webcast unless agreed by the meeting.</li>
<li>Consensus decisions will only be taken on the basis of the views of civil society participants.</li>
<li>Any civil society organisation that has participated in the work of the Best Bits network, and whose representative/s remain in good standing on the network&rsquo;s mailing lists, may have its logo featured on the front page of the Best Bits website on request.</li>
</ol>
<h2>3. Producing Best Bits statements</h2>
<ol>
<li>Statements are not issued by Best Bits but by individual endorsers, and public statements about the statement should be worded with care to avoid suggesting otherwise.</li>
<li>In exceptional cases where a large proportion of participants are physically present or otherwise actively express their views about a statement, and it appears that it enjoys full consensus of those participants, they may resolve that it be issued as a statement &ldquo;of the Best Bits network.</li>
<li>Anyone may propose posting a statement (eg. joint letter, submission) be posted to the Best Bits website. Any such proposal should be accompanied by either:</li>
<ul>
<li>a proposed text, accompanied by a description of the process by which it was drafted and a proposed process and timetable for finalising and posting it for endorsement; or</li>
<li>a proposed process and timetable for drafting, finalising and posting the text for endorsement.</li>
</ul>
<li>The process and timetable may vary depending on context and urgency, but in general:</li>
<ul>
<li>the text should be finalised by a fluid working group that is open to civil society participants from the main Best Bits mailing list (but which might work on a separate mailing list, which could be closed);</li>
<li>the timescale for drafting the text should normally be at least 48 hours;</li>
<li>the draft text should normally be posted to the main Best Bits mailing list for comment at least another 48 hours before being posted to the website;</li>
<li>there should be an adequate balance between inclusiveness of the initial drafting process, and the finality of the text. (In other words, we would seldom agree to post a text that is final and that only a few groups from one part of the world drafted.)</li>
</ul>
<li>Objections to the posting of a text for endorsement may be made at the stage of its initial proposal, or at a later stage when the draft text is posted for comment, and can be made both on strategic and on substantive grounds. Possible grounds for opposition include:</li>
<ul>
<li>The statement is not on-topic for Best Bits.</li>
<li>Any proposed statement should not go against the Best Bits principles and goals but should in fact further those.</li>
<li>The process and timetable are not realistic, or are not inclusive enough.</li>
<li>The process and timetable have not been complied with.</li>
</ul>
<li>However, consensus is not required in order for a text to be posted. If significant opposition to the posting of the text has been voiced on the main list and cannot be resolved, the steering committee may make a final decision about whether or not to post the statement, in consultation with at least one proponent of the text and at least one opponent.</li>
</ol>
<h2>4. Selecting the steering committee</h2>
<ol>
<li>Anyone can claim voting rights if they:</li>
<ul>
<li>have been subscribed to the list for 2 months prior to the election being called; and</li>
<li>agree to the existing statements of principles and objectives (see above and at http://bestbits.net/organizer/best-bits/).</li>
</ul>
<li>Voting is for each of 7 regional positions (voting for each separately) and 3 non-geographical positions (voting together):</li>
<ul>
<li>Regions are Sub-saharan Africa, Middle East and North Africa, East/Southeast Asia and -Pacific, South Asia, Latin America and Caribbean, Europe, North America/Other</li>
</ul>
<li>Total 10 positions, but &ldquo;no candidate&rdquo; is also an option which may result in fewer positions filled</li>
<li>Candidates can run for a regional position or for a non-geographical position simultaneously, ie. they need not elect for one position or the other.</li>
<li>Votes are counted using a &ldquo;first past the post&rdquo; system</li>
<li>It is aimed to achieve a panel of candidates with at least 40% of each gender &ndash; if not, the election will be postponed, unless there is a broad consensus amongst all eligible voters to run the election notwithstanding the failure to reach this standard.</li>
<li>Candidates can serve a minimum term of 1 year, maximum of 3 years, with a 1 year gap before reappointment.</li>
<li>Candidacy is open to civil society participants only.</li>
<li>An independent chair may be identified to run the election according to the guidelines outlined above.</li>
</ol>
<h2>5. Best Bits meetings and workshops</h2>
<ol>
<li>A Best Bits meeting is a gathering of civil society participants in the Best Bits community.</li>
<li>The primary annual Best Bits meeting is usually held on 1st Day and/or 2nd Day (day -2 and/or -1) of the Global IGF each year.</li>
<li>Secondary Best Bits gatherings may be held at other upcoming events if approved by the steering committee on the grounds that:</li>
<ul>
<li>The event is on-topic for Best Bits.</li>
<li>At least 10 participants have registered as attending (which may be done via the Best Bits event calendar).</li>
<li>A volunteer has agreed to report back on the meeting via the Best Bits website within 2 weeks.</li>
</ul>
<li>A multi-stakeholder workshop can be considered to be Best Bits organised if:</li>
<ul>
<li>The proposed workshop topic and moderator have been proposed to the mailing list and a general consensus in favour has emerged.</li>
<li>Civil society panelists for the workshop are selected through an open process as specified below in &ldquo;Appointing nominees&hellip;&rdquo;.</li>
</ul>
</ol>
<h2>6. Fluid working groups and mailing lists</h2>
<ol>
<li>Fluid working groups can be formed by demand according to the needs of the Best Bits network, either by consensus at a Best Bits meeting or on the main Best Bits mailing list. Once formed they should be announced on the main Best Bits mailing list.</li>
<li>Fluid working groups have mailing lists as their main tool for work. Every working group is free to decide how its working mailing list will function: moderations, workflow, participants, etc.</li>
<li>A new mailing list can be created for a fluid working group or on another specific topic under the bestbits.net domain by authority of the steering committee if:</li>
<ul>
<li>The list is to serve an objective consistent with the principles and objectives of Best Bits.</li>
<li>The proponent of the new list can identify a need for the new list that is not filled by an existing list.</li>
<li>The proposed initial members of the working group list, if any, have agreed to be included.</li>
</ul>
<li>Lists are to be open with public archives by default, but may be closed, privately archived and/or hidden if justification exists for this, including strategic considerations. If members of a fluid working group decide their list will be closed, participants are also encourage to assess if this closure will temporarily or not, meaning, whether the archives will be available later, once the strategic situation is finished (eg. after a particular event).</li>
<li>Access to closed mailing list archives is not available other than to those who have been active participants on the list.</li>
<li>A general &ldquo;social&rdquo; mailing list exists to be used for non-strategy related coordination between participants who are physically attending the same meeting.</li>
</ol>
<h2>7. Appointing nominees to other groups</h2>
<ol>
<li>Except in exceptional cases, Best Bits does not directly nominate or appoint civil society representatives to external bodies or groups, but does so through its representative on the <a style="text-decoration: none;" href="http://internetgov-cs.org/">Internet Governance Civil Society Coordination Group (CSCG)</a>. (An example of such a case would be the appointment of the Best Bits representative to the CSCG itself.)</li>
<li>In such exceptional cases, where the CSCG is unable or unwilling to act:</li>
<ul>
<li>The steering committee shall call for expressions of interest on the main list.</li>
<li>Selection criteria will be decided on a case-by-case basis and will be shared when the steering committee publicises the call, but at a very minimum geographical diversity (if not balance) and gender balance should be taken into account.</li>
<li>The steering committee will select a proposed slate of nominees, taking into account those who expressed interest.</li>
<li>The proposed nominees will be posted back to the main list and approved by consensus.</li>
</ul>
</ol>
<h2>8. Editing the website, calendar, social media, etc</h2>
<ol>
<li>The steering committee may appoint representatives, and may approve requests from volunteers, to take responsibility for the following:</li>
<ul>
<li>updating the website on the instructions of the steering committee;</li>
<li>posting to the Best Bits social media accounts, which are currently on Twitter, Facebook and Google Plus;</li>
<li>moving events imported from external calendars into the appropriate categories of the Best Bits calendar and filling in any incomplete fields, which shall be carried out at least once every two weeks.</li>
</ul>
<li>Anyone can add events, or event feeds, to the event calendar, which may be subject to moderation.</li>
<li>Except in case of urgency, on each occasion before posting to social media in the name of Best Bits, the authorised representative should obtain the approval for that post from at least one other steering committee member.</li>
<li>Anyone else who wants to join the Social Media team should get in touch with the steering committee member responsible for social media.</li>
</ol>
<h2>9. Fundraising</h2>
<ol>
<li>Any Best Bits participant may fundraise to support their own participation in the Best Bits network, or the participation of others.</li>
<li>A <a style="text-decoration: none;" href="../../../wp-uploads/2013/10/Generic-Best-Bits-concept-note.odt">draft concept note</a> may form the basis of fundraising approaches. If not based on this draft, the participant raising funding should share their concept note or proposal with the steering committee to ensure that it does not misrepresent Best Bits.</li>
<li>Criteria for accepting funding:</li>
<ul>
<li>Does the funding place staff, partners, supported communities or mission at risk.</li>
<li>Does the funding jeopardize relationships with partners or supported communities and networks.</li>
<li>Does the funding compromise organizational independence</li>
<li>Does the funding relationship influence priorities, policy positions, advocacy efforts, regions of focus or direct action work.</li>
</ul>
</ol>