<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<br>
<div class="moz-forward-container"><br>
<br>
<br>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
<br>
<font face="Verdana">Dear All<br>
<br>
As discussed elsewhere, I continue to be unclear whether this is
a proposal for urgent and high priority discussion of a
particular subject - gov role in global IG, or a proposal for
testing a process for the IGF to produce more concrete
outcomes.... The response to my queries on this count has not at
all been clear.<br>
<br>
I am independently very interested both in, <br>
<br>
(1) Exploring the role of all stakeholders, including
governments, in global IG. However in the context of the recent
statment by some civil society organisations at the end of WTPF,
I had asked for clarification on what exactly is meant by equal
role/ participation of all stakeholders. I got no response.
While i fully accept the legitimacy of some civil society
organisations getting together and issuing statements that they
agree on, due to time related exigencies or otherwise, even when
they are aprt of wider networks, what I do not find legitimate
is not even providing clarifications about text of the statement
post facto to members of those networks. <br>
<br>
and<br>
<br>
(2) exploring how IGF can be more effective, and produce more
concrete outcomes (we, as in my organisation, did a lot in this
regard at the WG on IGF improvements against a lot of resistance
- active or passive - from some other civil society
participants, which I am still to fully understand). However
this is a larger - much larger - subject - which should be
deliberated in CS lists and a considered specific proposal
should be made. Such a proposal cannot be pushed through a
back-door of what looks like a completely different proposal
about taking up a particular subject for discussion at the IGF.<br>
<br>
For these reasons, we cant sign it, and propose that BestBits
and IRP coalition do not sign it either..<br>
<br>
parminder <br>
<br>
<br>
</font>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On Tuesday 21 May 2013 10:58 PM,
Grace Mutung'u (Bomu) wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAMwG4pyWijBOkCfgc=A4EmgKh=BBB_C_far61in1eAO3izF-NA@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">i agree!
2013/5/21, Brown, Abbe <a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:abbe.brown@abdn.ac.uk"><abbe.brown@abdn.ac.uk></a>:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">I think yes
Abbe
-----Original Message-----
From: <a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:irp-bounces@lists.internetrightsandprinciples.org">irp-bounces@lists.internetrightsandprinciples.org</a>
[<a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="mailto:irp-bounces@lists.internetrightsandprinciples.org">mailto:irp-bounces@lists.internetrightsandprinciples.org</a>] On Behalf Of
Marianne Franklin
Sent: 21 May 2013 10:29
To: Jeremy Malcolm; <a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:irp@lists.internetrightsandprinciples.org">irp@lists.internetrightsandprinciples.org</a>
Subject: Re: [IRPCoalition] [bestbits] Reminder: please endorse IGF proposal
today if you agree
Thanks very much Jeremy
Dear IRP'ers. Please access the link and let us know if the IRP Coalition
should sign up to this. There has been some intense and thorough discussion
on the Best Bits list about wording and the drafting process itself:
discussions which this list are accustomed to.
<a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://bestbits.net/igf-opinions/">http://bestbits.net/igf-opinions/</a>
Please let us know asap I.e. today!
Cheers
MF
-----Original Message-----
From: <a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:irp-bounces@lists.internetrightsandprinciples.org">irp-bounces@lists.internetrightsandprinciples.org</a>
[<a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="mailto:irp-bounces@lists.internetrightsandprinciples.org">mailto:irp-bounces@lists.internetrightsandprinciples.org</a>] On Behalf Of
Jeremy Malcolm
Sent: 21 May 2013 10:21
To: <a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:irp@lists.internetrightsandprinciples.org">irp@lists.internetrightsandprinciples.org</a>
Subject: Re: [IRPCoalition] [bestbits] Reminder: please endorse IGF proposal
today if you agree
On 21/05/13 16:59, Marianne Franklin wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Dear Jeremy
Could you resend the link/document please and through to the IRP list
as I see that time is short. For some reason I can't access the
statement to forward or read.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://bestbits.net/igf-opinions">http://bestbits.net/igf-opinions</a>
--
Jeremy Malcolm PhD LLB (Hons) B Com
Internet and Open Source lawyer, consumer advocate, geek host -t NAPTR
5.9.8.5.2.8.2.2.1.0.6.e164.org|awk -F! '{print $3}'
_______________________________________________
IRP mailing list
<a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:IRP@lists.internetrightsandprinciples.org">IRP@lists.internetrightsandprinciples.org</a>
<a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.internetrightsandprinciples.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/irp">http://lists.internetrightsandprinciples.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/irp</a>
The University of Aberdeen is a charity registered in Scotland, No
SC013683.
_______________________________________________
IRP mailing list
<a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:IRP@lists.internetrightsandprinciples.org">IRP@lists.internetrightsandprinciples.org</a>
<a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.internetrightsandprinciples.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/irp">http://lists.internetrightsandprinciples.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/irp</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
<br>
</div>
<br>
</body>
</html>