<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=windows-1252"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<br>
<font face="Verdana">An alternative civil society space like the
Internet Social Forum is something some of us have been thinking
for some time...</font> However, doing it outside the yet unknown,
unborn Brazil led new initiative is a very bad idea.... Why take a
civil society oppositional view to the (only) one global IG effort
that may be shaping from the South, for the first time ever. <br>
<br>
(meanwhile, for the record, while I greatly support if something
like what is being reported as Brazil led global dialogue is going
to happen, I think a lot of stuff/ talk on the CS lists right now is
very pre mature.... I am not even sure what exactly has been
proposed, what is in Brazilians' mind, what is in ICANN's mind,
whose initiative it really is, in what directions, of what shape and
effect, and so on)<br>
<br>
In fact, as was IT for Change's initial proposal, an Internet Social
Forum is needed outside the IGF today, to give an alternative point
of organising and expression - based on core principles of social
justice to which world social forums attest - to what is beginning
to be an increasingly captured space... Or maybe outside OECD
Internet policy meetings, or the Seoul conference....<br>
<br>
parminder <br>
<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On Thursday 10 October 2013 08:46 PM,
Avri Doria wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote cite="mid:CB05CECE-755C-4D73-891F-28C89F44AA2F@acm.org"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Hi,
I think the combination of inside+outside events and participation is almost always the strongest option. I think looking into something like this for reported Brazil forum is reasonable - especially if we find out that some participants end up being more equal than CS.
avri
On 10 Oct 2013, at 10:58, Evan Greer wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Hey everyone,
Evan here from Fight for the Future and the Internet Defense League.
I won't pretend that we are well connected to global internet governance issues, but we are very good at mobilizing grassroots internet users around the world.
I'm wondering what folks thoughts are on organizing an alternative summit in Brazil (like an Internet Social Forum) to coincide with the official event -- giving us the option to run both an inside game and also have a more "pristine" alternative event to discuss our wildest dreams and ideas for the future of the Internet. My experience is that alternative summits like these can be very effective at re-framing the debate within the walls of the official meetings, but provide an opportunity for other work to be done as well.
Brazil is such a hot-bed of social movements and tech that it seems like a strong location for something like this. We have very strong connections on the ground there in a variety of movements.
As I said, we are somewhat outsiders to this particular community, but we lurk on this list and try to stay informed, and would be happy to chat with anyone who thinks this idea is great / terrible.
Cheers,
-Evan Greer
Fight for the Future
On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 10:52 AM, Rafik Dammak <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:rafik.dammak@gmail.com"><rafik.dammak@gmail.com></a> wrote:
Hi Parminder,
being from developing county myself , I am not supporting cyber conf in seoul approach and asked why we should support a summit in Brazil yet to be defined when there are a lot of concerns about cyber conf series . the inflation of fora is not in benefit of CS and in particular those from developing countries
I would like to have clear principles about such IG conference and fora , I don't think that we can or should prevent them but at least asking them to embrace the principles of openness , inclusion etc
Best,
Rafik
2013/10/10 parminder <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:parminder@itforchange.net"><parminder@itforchange.net></a>
I am great votary of both (1) civil society jumping headlong into all *important* *global* IG processes, whether *UN or not*, and (2) fluid agendas ...
However cant but note a point. I had earlier repeatedly called for us to look into OCED's CICCP related *global* Internet policy development processes and its outcomes, and the process and outcomes of the Seoul cyber conference (or the London and Budapest series).... In fact I kept insisting that we do so .... But with a very lukewarm response if any.....
How do we square such cascading support for taking charge of the Brazil's new proposed (hardly born yet) process with this earlier attitude....
Why is that all processes where developing countries have important, or even significant, role require urgent examination and intervention, but those led by developed countries perhaps considered, what is it, friendly, safe ..... ??
Now, before anyone gets offended.... let me say, no personal offence intended, mine is (and is always) a political statement in a political space.... And I cant but do what I consider is my job as political civil society, with strong leanings towards Southern and other marginalised interests.
Thanks for understanding, parminder
On Thursday 10 October 2013 07:10 PM, Andrew Puddephatt wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">I think the Brazil initiative gives us a useful focus and we should definitely make time to discuss it on the fist morning.
In general, though we have suggested agenda I think we should be open to hacking the event and letting participants drive it the way they want if we can go for concrete positive outcomes.
Andrew Puddephatt | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL
Executive Director
Development House, 56–64 Leonard Street, London EC2A 4LT
T: +44 (0)20 7549 0336 | M: +44 (0)771 339 9597 | Skype: andrewpuddephatt
gp-digital.org
From: <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:bestbits-request@lists.bestbits.net">bestbits-request@lists.bestbits.net</a> [<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="mailto:bestbits-request@lists.bestbits.net">mailto:bestbits-request@lists.bestbits.net</a>] On Behalf Of Jeremy Malcolm
Sent: 10 October 2013 14:24
To: Valeria Betancourt
Cc: Anja Kovacs; <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:bestbits@lists.bestbits.net>">bestbits@lists.bestbits.net></a> <
Subject: Re: [bestbits] [governance] Rousseff & Chehade: Brazil will host world event on Internet governance in 2014
On 10/10/2013, at 9:11 PM, Valeria Betancourt <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:valeriab@apc.org"><valeriab@apc.org></a> wrote:
I agree with Anja on her proposal. Taking the opportunity not only for expressing our support but for outlining a civil society agenda for the summit would be an strategic move. + 1 as well on proposal re Chehade. Do you think it would be one of the outcomes of our meeting in Bali?
+1 from me - and the steering committee is discussing too. Let's see if we can't shuffle the day 1 schedule to include this, going beyond just an expression of support, but including some more substantive output that can be tabled at the IGF.
--
Dr Jeremy Malcolm
Senior Policy Officer
Consumers International | the global campaigning voice for consumers
Office for Asia-Pacific and the Middle East
Lot 5-1 Wisma WIM, 7 Jalan Abang Haji Openg, TTDI, 60000 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
Tel: +60 3 7726 1599
Explore our new Resource Zone - the global consumer movement knowledge hub |<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.consumersinternational.org/news-and-media/resource-zone">http://www.consumersinternational.org/news-and-media/resource-zone</a>
@Consumers_Int | <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="http://www.consumersinternational.org">www.consumersinternational.org</a> | <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="http://www.facebook.com/consumersinternational">www.facebook.com/consumersinternational</a>
Read our email confidentiality notice. Don't print this email unless necessary.
WARNING: This email has not been encrypted. You are strongly recommended to enable PGP or S/MIME encryption at your end. For instructions, see <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://jere.my/l/8m">http://jere.my/l/8m</a>.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">
--
Evan Greer
Campaign Manager
Fight for the Future
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://fightforthefuture.org">http://fightforthefuture.org</a>
Phone: +1 978.852.6457
Email: <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:evan@fightforthefuture.org">evan@fightforthefuture.org</a>
Twitter: @fightfortheftr
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>