Thanks for your explanations... and to state again that Oshca is
definitely "action oriented".
The first two urgent tasks are probably to communicate more inside, then
to organize how the Oshca network can manage the communication outside.
Philippe
Molly Cheah a écrit :
>I do not wish to get involved in the current debate as it arise from a
>xenophobic _expression_ based on a news item of two foreign leaders (both
>duly elected by democratic process that we all accept) shaking hands but
>unfortunately one had been portrayed to be a "terrorist" and to the mind
>of the xenophobian, the other leader is now rendered uncceptable after
>shaking hands. This followed with the argument that by the
>unacceptability of the country he leads, it is now unacceptable for
>OSHCA to be registered in the country. I don't know whether to laugh or
>to cry by such expressions of intolerence.
>
>Tim had provided some feedback on OSHCA's progress. There is a
>sub-committee headed by Tim to develop a portal and virtual office for
>OSHCA. That will include mailing lists for OSHCA matters (which will
>undoubtedly include the "politics" evolving around OSHCA). I am
>preparing a draft document on OSHCA's proposed programme framework for
>the next 12-24 months at least, including funding proposals. This will
>include an OSHCA conference/meeting towards the end of this year.
>
>I will table this for discussion by this week-end. I envisage one of
>OSHCA's role to be participatory and supportive of the implementation
>roadmap of WSIS. The inauguration of this participatory meeting will be
>the Global Alliance meeting to be held in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia on
>19-20 June 2006. I will be attending this and the workshop on e-Health.
>See http://www.unicttaskforce.org/
>
>The other is the first post-WSIS milestone event for global ICT4D and
>K4D practitione*rs, proponents and policy makers that will take place in
>Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia 11-13 December 2007. The flyer for this is
>available at the GKP web site http://www.globalknowledge.org/ GKP's
>Strategy 2010 Programme Framework is worth reading.
>
>As GKP is not actively involved in ICT in healthcare, they have sounded
>to me that they can work with OSHCA to address the health MDGs. We
>already had preliminary discussions on this.
>
>The other area of collaboration will be with the UNDP-APDIP Centres of
>Excellence - to set up collaborative networks as test beds for open
>source health applications for interoperability and standards.
>
>That's all I have time for now. I'll provide more depth to these
>proposals. At the same time I welcome comments and volunteers to work
>with me on this.
>
>Rgds,
>Molly
>**
> *Tim.Churches wrote:
>
>
>
>>Philippe AMELINE wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>Hi to all,
>>>
>>>I must confess I feel not at ease with current situation.
>>>
>>>The choice of Indonesia as an incorporation country has been a political
>>>choice: to show that open/libre software is an opportunity for all
>>>country, whatever their development level.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>Joseph has already pointed out that the country of incorporation is
>>Malaysia, not Indonesia. However, mistake aside, the primary reason for
>>the choice of country for incorporation were pragmatic ones: Molly Cheah
>>has been the driving force behind the second attempt to incorporate
>>OSHCA, and Molly lives in Malaysia. However, there were secondary
>>reasons why Malaysia was thought to be a good choice: it is one of the
>>leaders of the non-aligned group of countries (and has been for many
>>decades, including during the Cold War), which means that Malaysian
>>foreign policy did/does/will not follow in lock-step with that of the
>>previous superpowers (US/EU and USSR), the current superpower (US) or
>>the future superpowers (BRIC: Brasil, Russia, India, China). As a
>>result, Malaysia can maintain cordial relations and engage in dialogue
>>with a very wide range of countries, far more easily than, say, the US,
>>UK or Australia could. That is important, because although FOSS will
>>play an important role in health in rich Western countries, in the
>>near-term at least that will only be a small role, whereas there is
>>little doubt (at least in my mind) that FOSS will play a very major role
>>in health in developing and transitional countries, and very soon. It
>>sends out the "right message" to have OSHCA incorporated in a
>>developing/transitional country. Key audiences for that "message"
>>include WHO and other UN agencies, as well as international and national
>>philanthropic and donor agencies (which are an important target for
>>OSHCA's lobbying/advocacy role: if these agencies fund health
>>information systems in poorer countries, and they increasingly are, we
>>want to convince them, and/or the aid recipients, to seriously consider
>>FOSS as a more sustainable long-term solution).
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>Nandalal is very right when he says that the population is not the
>>>government, however, Indonesia can appear as quite extreme in the domain
>>>of military violence (remember the recent massacres in East Timor), of
>>>massive corruption and of human rights violation.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>As Syd pointed out, which country would be acceptable? For many
>>potential participants in OSHCA, the US, UK and Australia would be
>>unpalatable because those countries have participated in an illegal war
>>against Iraq which has caused the deaths of tens of thousands of
>>civilians and has brought the country to the brink of a even bloodier
>>civil war. Sweden perhaps? But then Sweden still has a large arms
>>industry and exports weapons to lots of regimes with a less than perfect
>>human rights record. It is very hard to find a perfect home for OSHCA.
>>So we compromise, and in my view, Malaysia is a very reasonable compromise.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>David could have remember all this earlier... however, I think that Tim
>>>is taking David's problem much too lightly (no problem... just have 2
>>>lists). My opinion is that if, do to the choice of the incorporation
>>>country, we let a single person behind, it means that the choice of this
>>>country is a mistake.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>I didn't take Dave's issue lightly, and spent some time discussing the
>>issue with him off-list (because the discussion was definitely
>>inappropriate for the openhealth list). However, it was fairly clear to
>>me that Dave's position could not be changed by mere argument and that
>>it probably represented an irreconcilable difference with the current
>>direction of OSHCA (which is that of incorporation in Malaysia).
>>
>>The reality is that in order to make decisions, either in timely
>>fashion, or at all, it may not always be possible to keep everyone
>>happy. That's the nature of life. OSHCA should strive to keep as many of
>>its members or potential members happy and comfortable with its
>>directions and actions, but from time-to-time, some people will
>>disagree. We are then left with the choice of OHSCA becoming paralysed
>>until the disagreement can be resolved - which may be never - or moving on.
>>
>>Of course, Dave is still very, very welcome to join OSHCA at some future
>>time should his position change. Perhaps there might be a US chapter of
>>OSHCA formed in the future, and Dave may care to join that? And of
>>course, membership of OSHCA or agreement to abide by its membership
>>rules is not required to participate in the openhealth discussion list.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>Don't expect to let the political matters outside Oshca... if David is
>>>out, it means they are already in, and it is a deadly poison. Better
>>>really address this issue as early and honestly as possible.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>OSHCA is a non-political organisation. That doesn't mean that it is
>>insensitive to or unaware of the political realities that exist in the
>>world, just that it will not takes sides on any political question. But
>>health and the need for healthcare is universal, and computers are also
>>remarkably non-partisan, so we don't expect to have to deal with a lot
>>of political issues in the normal business of OSHCA.
>>
>>Tim C
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>Tim.Churches a écrit :
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>David Forslund wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>I apologize for bringing this up, but it does affect my relationship
>>>>>with OSHCA
>>>>>since it is being incorporated in Malaysia. I will be unable to support
>>>>>OSHCA
>>>>>in Malaysia because of the politics/human rights issues I see happening
>>>>>in that country.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>I am sorry that you feel that way, Dave. However, it is your call and I
>>>>don't think it is productive or wise to try to change your mind.
>>>>
>>>>We will have a separate OSHCA mailing list established very shortly
>>>>which will handle all OSHCA business, and this openhealth list can be
>>>>devoted purely to more general health informatics issues. I hope you
>>>>will continue to participate in the openhealth list, because your
>>>>technical expertise is greatly valued.
>>>>
>>>>Tim C
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>K.S. Bhaskar wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>Please, let's keep the discussion on this mailing list focused on
>>>>>>Free/Libré and Open Source Software (with a broad interpretation of
>>>>>>software, so discussion of ICD codes and OSHCA incorporation are within
>>>>>>the scope of the group) as it pertains to healthcare. There are plenty
>>>>>>of other forums for other topics.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Thank you very much.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Regards
>>>>>>-- Bhaskar
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>
>
>
>
>
>Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
SPONSORED LINKS
| Software distribution | Salon software | Medical software |
| Software association | Software jewelry | Software deployment |
YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
- Visit your group "openhealth" on the web.
- To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
- Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
