<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 16/10/12 18:46, parminder wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote cite="mid:507D3B11.2020005@itforchange.net" type="cite">
<meta content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
I remain sceptical of how this exercise is going to be done and
concluded. for a long time I believed that we were looking at
substantive Internet principles but now I see we are only taking
about procedural principles for IG. First of all I think we need
to do substantive principles first</blockquote>
<br>
This doesn't necessarily count against using the APC/CoE document
rather than the IRP, as both of them have procedural and substantive
elements to them, just with a different emphasis. And as you say
(and as I also recently argued myself with a private sector
stakeholder, Peter Hellmonds, in a Facebook exchange), procedural
issues are never substantively or morally neutral - so I'm not sure
that either is necessarily "easier" to agree upon.<br>
<br>
Rather I think it has to do with breadth; the more we try to cover,
whether the issues are procedural or substantive, the more divisive
issues we will encounter, and - without wanting to prejudge anything
- your example of neutral public funding for IG institutions may be
one that several participants at Best Bits may speak against, and
therefore one that would end up being omitted if we are to agree on
anything at all.<br>
<br>
Of course, this is nothing new to you, because within the Internet
Governance Caucus when I was coordinating it, there were statements
to which almost everyone else agreed, that IT for Change could not,
and this is why you didn't even try to get the IGC to agree on your
most recent "joint civil society" statement to WSIS (which I
supported, with reservations), but assembled a group of southern
NGOs, some of whom hadn't previously worked on Internet governance,
as the signatories.<br>
<br>
Nothing of the above is any kind of criticism of you or IT for
Change as you know (I hope) that I have the highest respect for you
and that I personally agree with you on many or most issues.<br>
<br>
But I just make the point that it may be that the document that we
end up with at Best Bits may not be one that meets all of your
expectations of it, precisely because the group is so diverse. If
anything it's even more diverse than the IGC, as we have some
US-based NGOs who are not IGC members, and at least one of which has
a more free-market approach than what you do.<br>
<br>
To take another example, we will have some Muslim participants at
the meeting, so there may be differences of opinion on the extent to
which, if at all, the distribution of videos such as "The Innocence
of Muslims" is a legitimate subject of Internet regulation at either
the national or supranational level.<br>
<br>
Does this mean that we will be unable to agree on anything
meaningful? I very firmly think not. I have confidence that we
will be able to reach a wide (though not full) consensus on
something that is both broad and also meaningful. That's one of the
main reasons I'm doing all this.<br>
<br>
<blockquote cite="mid:507D3B11.2020005@itforchange.net" type="cite">
Jeremy, can we have a list of people on this elist, and those who
are now confirmed to attend the meeting. Thanks.<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
For the people on the list, visit
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.igcaucus.org/review/bestbits">http://lists.igcaucus.org/review/bestbits</a> and log in with your IGC
credentials, and if that doesn't work let me know and I'll send the
list by reply.<br>
<br>
I'll send a separate message with those who are now confirmed to
attend, because some people may have stopped reading by now (tl;dr)
and I want to make sure that everyone sees it.<b></b><br>
<br>
<div class="moz-signature">-- <br>
<p style="font-size:9.0pt;color:black"><b>Dr Jeremy Malcolm<br>
Senior Policy Officer<br>
Consumers International | the global campaigning voice for
consumers</b><br>
Office for Asia-Pacific and the Middle East<br>
Lot 5-1 Wisma WIM, 7 Jalan Abang Haji Openg, TTDI, 60000 Kuala
Lumpur, Malaysia<br>
Tel: +60 3 7726 1599</p>
<p style="font-size:9.0pt;color:black"><b>Your rights, our mission
– download CI's Strategy 2015:</b> <a
href="http://consint.info/RightsMission">http://consint.info/RightsMission</a></p>
<p style="font-size:9.0pt;color:black">@Consumers_Int | <a
href="http://www.consumersinternational.org">www.consumersinternational.org</a>
| <a href="http://www.facebook.com/consumersinternational">www.facebook.com/consumersinternational</a></p>
<p style="font-size:8.0pt;color:#999999">Read our <a
href="http://www.consumersinternational.org/email-confidentiality"
target="_blank">email confidentiality notice</a>. Don't print
this email unless necessary.</p>
</div>
</body>
</html>