From jfcallo at ciencitec.com  Thu Jan  1 10:33:15 2015
From: jfcallo at ciencitec.com (jfcallo at ciencitec.com)
Date: Thu, 01 Jan 2015 15:33:15 +0000
Subject: [governance] Re: URGENT: Call for candidates to IGC
 co-coordinatorship
In-Reply-To: <CAAYFVLvvS5g6GvDtW+MzB3xGc9Kvbrx2eFpX-FhCbtcC3sG5Lw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CACTo+v8AffjMHKRzrwO1AAZstz6m8aZufHdEyZkOqSdnPc=73w@mail.gmail.com>
 <1419833267.96345.YahooMailIosMobile@web28702.mail.ir2.yahoo.com>
 <CAAYFVLvvS5g6GvDtW+MzB3xGc9Kvbrx2eFpX-FhCbtcC3sG5Lw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20150101153315.Horde.TGowrHxDyXot9CrXnoJuow4@www.ciencitec.com>

Ilustre José Felix
Os agradezco vuestra proposición, todo para el avance de nuestro amado  
país, aprovecho de desearte un Feliz inicio y todo el éxito en este  
2015.
A tus ordenes
Atentamente
José Francisco Callo Romero


José Félix Arias Ynche <jaryn56 at gmail.com> escribió:

> Propongo como candidato a José F. Callo Romero, miembro de la lista
>
>
>
> *Cordialmente:         José Félix Arias Ynche*
> *                        Investigador Social Para El Desarrollo*
>
> 2014-12-29 1:07 GMT-05:00 Arsene TUNGALI (Yahoo) <arsenebaguma at yahoo.fr>:
>
>> Thank you Mawaki,
>>
>> I look forward to the poll. I take this opportunity to wish you a happy
>> and prosperous year ahead. Please do keep positive energy and work hard on
>> your cause.
>>
>> Best regards,
>> A
>> ------------------
>> Arsene Tungali,
>> Executive Director, Rudi International
>> www.rudiinternational.org
>>
>> Founder, Mabingwa Forum
>> www.mabingwa-forum.com
>> Phone:+243993810967
>>
>> ICANN Fellow | ISOC Member | Child Online Protection Advocate | Youth
>> Leader | Internet Governance.
>> Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC)
>>
>> Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone
>>
>> At 28 déc. 2014 17:41:26, Mawaki Chango<'kichango at gmail.com'> wrote:
>> I am confirming that we have received nominations for three candidates as
>> follows:
>>
>> - Analia Aspis
>> - Arsene Tungali
>> - Kawsar Uddin
>>
>> If there were other candidates left out from the above list, please let me
>> know. I'll directly get in touch shortly with the candidates in order to
>> prepare the poll which will be open sometime early January.
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Mawaki
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sat, Dec 13, 2014 at 10:40 AM, Mawaki Chango <kichango at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hello there,
>>>
>>> This is a gentle reminder to let you know for those who are interested in
>>> running for the available position of IGC co-coordinator that you have
>>> until this coming Friday, 19 December midnight UTC, to nominate (with the
>>> acceptance of the nominee) or self-nominate.
>>>
>>> So far, I have received nominations of or from:
>>>
>>> - Analia Aspis
>>> - Arsene Tungali
>>> - Kawsar Uddin
>>>
>>> Please let me know if I have forgotten someone. For those still on the
>>> fence (such as Vincent Solomon, Akinremi Peter Taiwo or Kwasi
>>> Boakye-Akyeampong to mention but those who did explicitly show some
>>> interest), I only have one proverbial phrase for you: If I can do it, you
>>> can do it too! So please let me know if you have made up your mind in favor
>>> of a run.
>>> Please find below a recall of instructions I posted earlier for the
>>> candidates. Please make sure you send your candidacy materials to me.
>>>
>>> Self-nomination: You do not have to forward it here on the list. You can
>>> send it to me directly or to Deirdre: williams (dot) deirdre (at) gmail
>>> (dot) com
>>>
>>> Third-party nomination: Please make sure your prospective nominee accept
>>> your nomination and then you can forward us his or her name as above.
>>> Alternatively, you can make public nomination on the list inviting your
>>> prospective nominee to respond by accepting or declining. Another variant
>>> of the same is that you send us a private email with your prospective
>>> nominee cc'ed on it, asking him or her to accept or decline in a reply to
>>> all, etc.
>>>
>>> In any event, all nominees who will have accepted their nomination will
>>> be asked to provide the following information directly to me at kichango
>>> (at) gmail (dot) com (NOT to this list), which will then be uploaded and
>>> made public on the Caucus website by the time the poll starts.
>>>
>>> 1) Name
>>> 2) Country you affiliate yourself with (nationality or residence)
>>> 3) Organizational/Network affiliations in the context of CS/Academia or
>>> in the context of ICTs
>>> 4) Disclosure of Conflict of Interest, if any.
>>> 5) Short Biography (you may also provide a link to your personal website
>>> or your Linkedin page if you have one.)
>>> 6) Why you think you would make a good co-coordinator for the IGC
>>> 7) Vision for the IGC
>>> 8) A picture of you (no more than 50 Kb headshot).
>>>
>>> We would be grateful if you can keep your text in 300 words or less.
>>> As I said previously, we hope to receive all nominations by 19th
>>> December, midnight UTC
>>>
>>> Best regards,
>>>
>>> Mawaki
>>>
>>> On Tue, Nov 18, 2014 at 10:59 AM, Mawaki Chango <kichango at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Dear All,
>>>>
>>>> Now that the excitement of the new MAG is over it's time for us at the
>>>> IGC to have our own election. We need to elect a second Co-coordinator.
>>>> The results of the elections for new Co-coordinators a year ago  
>>>> gave Mawaki
>>>> a one year term. As he already suggested at several occasions including
>>>> during the election last year, he is not in position to serve two more
>>>> years. In other words, Mawaki does not intend to stand again.
>>>>
>>>> We invite members of the IGC to nominate candidates (please check with
>>>> them first about their willingness to serve), or to nominate themselves as
>>>> a co-coordinator to serve from 2015-2017.
>>>>
>>>> Nominations will be open until 19th December, midnight UTC.
>>>>
>>>> Best regards,
>>>>
>>>> Mawaki Chango
>>>> Deirdre Williams
>>>> IGC Co-coordinators
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>>      governance at lists.igcaucus.org
>> To be removed from the list, visit:
>>      http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
>>
>> For all other list information and functions, see:
>>      http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
>> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
>>      http://www.igcaucus.org/
>>
>> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
>>
>>




-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From jfcallo at ciencitec.com  Thu Jan  1 10:41:32 2015
From: jfcallo at ciencitec.com (jfcallo at ciencitec.com)
Date: Thu, 01 Jan 2015 15:41:32 +0000
Subject: [governance] Felicidades
In-Reply-To: <D0C56B5C.52D4E%vanda@uol.com.br>
References: <CAAYFVLu2ZM+kBiw3Bwf2hERbs9v+T-sxoVo1_C-eFBVWzzA_Og@mail.gmail.com>
 <D0C56B5C.52D4E%vanda@uol.com.br>
Message-ID: <20150101154132.Horde.zM7I2E-lXfFvW71wYWtpgQ9@www.ciencitec.com>

Ilustre José, así como miembros de esta lista.
Desde Lima, Perú, desear que este 2015, se concrete el avance y  
desarrollo en reducir el analfabetismo digital y que las  
Organizaciones depuren a tanto oportunista, que lo único que hacen es  
hacer negocios particulares y nada en favor de su comunidad.
Insto a ISOC que hasta la fecha no define la situación de Perú,  
faltando a sus políticas de respeto a la democracia y a los Derechos  
Humanos, he escrito mas de 3 cartas a Ted Mooney, quien viene haciendo  
oídos sordos. ¿Complicidad?, ¿es que no interesa que el Perú, este en  
el contexto de la red internacional?. ¿Qué es lo que pasa?, ¿no le  
interesa a la comunidad mundial de Internet, lo que pasa con ISOC-PERU?.
José Felix, algo mas tendremos que hacer para salis de este  
entrampamiento hay en ISOC, otro Burga bien entornillado que enarbola  
inclusión y solo es un simple ególatra y discriminador.
Feliz 2015
Atentamente
José F. Callo Romero
Comunicador Digital
Fundador de ISOC - PERU
Fundador de Internauta Perú
Lima - Perú




Vanda Scartezini <vanda at uol.com.br> escribió:

> Lo mismo a ti Jose y familia. 2015 lleno de realizaciones!
> Vanda Scartezini
> Polo Consultores Associados
> Av. Paulista 1159, cj 1004
> 01311-200- Sao Paulo, SP, Brazil
> Land Line: +55 11 3266.6253
> Mobile: + 55 11 98181.1464
> Sorry for any typos.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On 12/24/14, 10:13, "José Félix Arias Ynche" <jaryn56 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> A toda la comunidad...mis felicidades por navidad y un venturoso año
>> nuevo... espero que todos la pasen bien y en compañía de sus
>> familiares.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Cordialmente:         José Félix Arias Ynche
>>                        Investigador Social Para El Desarrollo
>>
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>>     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
>> To be removed from the list, visit:
>>     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
>>
>> For all other list information and functions, see:
>>     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
>> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
>>     http://www.igcaucus.org/
>>
>> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t




-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From fulvio.frati at unimi.it  Fri Jan  2 10:48:03 2015
From: fulvio.frati at unimi.it (Fulvio Frati)
Date: Fri, 02 Jan 2015 16:48:03 +0100
Subject: [governance] [Deadline approaching: 10 Jan] 11th Intl. Conf. on
 Open Source Systems (OSS2015)
Message-ID: <00cb01d026a3$7ea19db0$7be4d910$@unimi.it>

[Apologies if you receive multiple copies of this CFP]

 

****************************************************************************
***************

11th Intl. Conf. on Open Source Systems (OSS2015)

co-located with the 2015 International Conference on Software Engineering
(ICSE2015)

 

Florence, Italy – 16-17 May 2015

http://www.oss2015.org 

****************************************************************************
***************

 

*** Theme: Open Frameworks: from Service to Cloud ***

 

Free and Open Source Software (FOSS) has had a disruptive effect on the
commercial software industry and the ways that organizations and individuals
create, distribute, acquire and use software and software-based services. In
addition to the many standalone FOSS projects, FOSS is at the heart of
modern network-based computing infrastructures and can be found in the vast
majority of applications that run in these environments. 

 

Many organizations that have been known for developing proprietary software
are now actively involved with FOSS. FOSS adoption continues to grow among
businesses, governments, and other organizations. FOSS remains important for
educators and researchers, as well as an important aspect of e-government
and information society initiatives, providing access to high-quality
software and the code used to create it. 

 

Also, FOSS has taken the lead in a number of crucial ICT domains, like Cloud
Computing, where open source cloud stacks are widely adopted, and Big Data,
where a wealth of FOSS solutions is now being built around Hadoop.

 

The 11th International Conference on Open Source Systems (OSS 2015) will
celebrate a decade of advances in the use of free and open source software
by emphasizing areas and topics that will drive future use over the next
decade. This will be achieved through a combination of high-quality research
papers, tutorials, workshops, demonstrations, and invited talks.  OSS2015
will be co-located with the 2015 International Conference on Software
Engineering as a way to cross-fertilize ideas. The theme for the 2015
edition will be "Open frameworks: from service to cloud", putting forward
the idea on how open source framework can develop the transition from
traditional IT services to cloud-based architectures.

 

A central goal of OSS 2015 is to provide an international forum where a
diverse community of professionals from academia, industry, the public
sector, and diverse FOSS initiatives can come together to share research
findings and practical experiences. The conference also aims to serve as a
meeting place where people can identify new research ideas and techniques
for putting FOSS into widespread use.  

 

OSS 2015 will include research papers, industry papers, formal tool
demonstrations, lightning talks, new ideas, experience reports, and posters.
OSS 2015 also invites proposals for tutorials and workshops, submissions to
the doctoral symposium, and submissions of panel proposals.

 

Accepted papers will be included in the conference proceedings, which are
published by Springer.

 

** Topics

 

We are seeking submissions across a broad range of topics, but are
particularly interested in those areas most likely to have an impact on
computing over the next decade, including computing infrastructure, data
management, and the Internet of Things. For practical experiences, we are
seeking submissions that describe FOSS applications in embedded systems
(IoT), health care, transportation, communications, and energy management.

 

Other topics of interest include, but are not limited to, the following:

 

- FOSS technologies

 

    - FOSS in the cloud

    - FOSS for data management and analysis

    - Security of FOSS

    - Interoperability, portability, scalability of FOSS

    - Open standards, open data, open cloud, open hardware and open exhibits

    - FOSS in cloud-based applications

    - Architecture and design of FOSS

 

- Mobile and Embedded FOSS

 

    - Mobile Operating Systems

    - Open Source apps for mobile devices

    - Open Source app markets and software delivery platforms

    - Software metrics for Open Source mobile software

    - Energy efficiency in Mobile FOSS 

 

- FOSS Quality

 

    - Static and Dynamic FOSS testing

    - Formal FOSS verification

    - Detection of bad coding practices and adoption of coding conventions

    - OSS metrics: measuring FOSS performance, safety, and quality

    - FOSS performance

 

- FOSS Evaluation, adoption and use

 

    - Evaluation of FOSS software, including comparisons with proprietary
software, in industry and government

    - Use and acceptance of FOSS; organizational policies

    - The role of FOSS-oriented foundations

    - Dissemination, redistribution and crowdsourcing of FOSS systems

    - Expanding scientific research and technology development methods
through openness

    - Role of FOSS in ICT and sustainable development 

 

-FOSS practices and methods

 

    - New experiences with FOSS development tools and practices

    - Knowledge and documentation management in FOSS  

 

- Economic, organizational and social issues related to FOSS

 

    - Economic analysis of FOSS

    - Maturity models of FOSS

    - FOSS in public sector

    - FOSS intellectual property, copyrights and licensing

    - Non-Governmental Organizations and FOSS 

 

- FOSS and education

                - Teaching FOSS to people of all ages and backgrounds

                - Use of FOSS in education

                

-FOSS platforms and toolkits

                - FOSS Data processing and storage platforms

                - FOSS environments for cloud computing

                - FOSS business intelligence toolkits

                - FOSS business packages (CRM, ERP, HRM)

                - FOSS collaboration and communication environments

                

** Important Dates

 

- Paper Submission due: January 10, 2015

- Notification to Authors: February 14, 2015

- Camera ready due: February 28, 2015

 

** Authors Instructions

 

Papers submitted to OSS 2015 must not have been published elsewhere and must
not be under review or submitted for review elsewhere while under
consideration for OSS 2015.

 

All papers must conform, at time of submission, to the Springer Formatting
Guidelines (LNCS)
(http://www.springer.com/computer/lncs?SGWID=0-164-6-793341-0). You may
utilize the templates provided in our website. Submissions must be in PDF
format with a limit of 10 pages for each paper.

 

All submissions will be peer-reviewed double blinded, therefore please
remove any information that could give an indication of the authorship or
affiliations. Authors of accepted papers will be therefore be required to
sign a copyright transfer (as well as register for and attend the
conference).

 

When your paper is finished, submit it using EasyChair
(https://easychair.org/conferences/?conf=oss2015) according to the
submission deadlines.

 

** Organizing Committee

 

* General Chair

- Ernesto Damiani, Università degli Studi di Milano, Italy

 

* Program Chairs

- Dirk Riehle, Friedrich-Alexander-University Erlangen-Nürnberg, Germany

- Tony Wasserman, Carnegie Mellon University, USA

 

* Regional Publicity Chairs

- Moataz Ahmed, King Fahd University of Petroleum & Minerals, Saudi Arabia

- Scott Hissam, Software Engineering Institute, Carnegie Mellon University,
USA

- Karl Reed, La Trobe University, Australia

- Francesco Zavatarelli, Università degli Studi di Milano, Italy

 

* Organizing Chairs

- Fulvio Frati, Università degli Studi di Milano, Italy

- Nadia Fusar Poli, Università degli Studi di Milano, Italy

 

* Web Chair

- Fulvio Frati, Università degli Studi di Milano, Italy

 

* Program Committee

- Chintan Amrit, University of Twente, The Netherlands

- Luciano Baresi, DEIB – Politecnico di Milano, Italy

- Paolo Ciancarini, University of Bologna, Italy

- Francesco Di Cerbo, SAP Research Sophia-Antipolis, France

- Jonas Gamalielsson, University of Skovde, Sweden

- Jesus M. Gonzalez-Barahona, Universidad Rey Juan Carlos, Spain

- Imed Hammouda, Chalmers and University of Gothenburg, Sweden

- Abram Hindle, University of Alberta, Canada

- Netta Iivari, University of Oulu, Finland

- Stefan Koch, Bogazici University, Turkey

- Fabio Kon, University of São Paulo, Brasil

- Luigi Lavazza, Università degli Studi dell’Insubria, Italy

- Eda Marchetti, ISTI-CNR, Italy

- Audris Mockus, University of Tennessee, Knoxville, USA

- Sandro Morasca, Università degli Studi dell’Insubria, Italy

- John Noll, Lero – the Irish Software Engineering Research Centre, Ireland

- Mauro Pezzè, University of Lugano, Switzerland

- Stephane Ribas, INRIA, France

- Gregorio Robles, Universidad Rey Juan Carlos, Italy

- Steve Schmid, Open Technology Foundation, Australia

- Alberto Sillitti, Free University of Bozen/Bolzano, Italy

- Diomidis Spinellis, Athens University of Economics and Business, Greece

- Megan Squire, Elon University, USA

- Klaas-Jan Stol, Lero – University of Limerick, Ireland

- Giancarlo Succi, Free University of Bozen/Bolzano, Italy

- Davide Tosi, Università degli Studi dell’Insubria, Italy

- Aaron Visaggio, University of Sannio, Italy

- Stefano Zacchiroli, Université de Paris Diderot, France

 

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150102/9b22a7c2/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From ian.peter at ianpeter.com  Sun Jan  4 17:04:02 2015
From: ian.peter at ianpeter.com (Ian Peter)
Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2015 09:04:02 +1100
Subject: [governance] Fw: [IP] DL- One Man's Freedom is Another Man's
 Imperialism (via Evgeny Morosov)
Message-ID: <B4418CFBBB404646A063F2FB593B15D8@Toshiba>

Worth reading. Puts a lot of the debate about internet freedom into the context of free trade vs protectionism.

Ian Peter

From: Dave Farber via ip 
Sent: Monday, January 05, 2015 6:45 AM
To: ip 
Subject: [IP] DL- One Man's Freedom is Another Man's Imperialism (via Evgeny Morosov)

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: "Mark Stahlman via Digital Life" <dl at listbox.com>
Date: Jan 4, 2015 1:02 PM
Subject: DL- One Man's Freedom is Another Man's Imperialism (via Evgeny Morosov)
To: "Dave" <dave at farber.net>
Cc: 


http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/jan/04/internet-freedom-china-russia-us-google-microsoft-digital-sovereignty


Who’s the true enemy of internet freedom - China, Russia, or the US?
Evgeny Morozov
Beijing and Moscow are rightly chastised for restricting their citizens’ online access – but it’s the US that is now even more aggressive in asserting its digital sovereignty
Saturday 3 January 201519.04 EST


Recent reports that China has imposed further restrictions on Gmail,Google’s flagship email service, should not really come as much of a surprise. While Chinese users have been unable to access Gmail’s site for several years now, they were still able to use much of its functionality, thanks to third-party services such as Outlook or Apple Mail. 

This loophole has now been closed (albeit temporarily – some of the new restrictions seem to have been mysteriously lifted already), which means determined Chinese users have had to turn to more advanced circumvention tools. Those unable or unwilling to perform any such acrobatics can simply switch to a service run by a domestic Chinese company – which is precisely what the Chinese government wants them to do. 

Such short-term and long-term disruptions of Gmail connections are part of China’s long-running efforts to protect its technological sovereignty by reducing its citizens’ reliance on American-run communication services. After North Korea saw its internet access blacked out temporarily in the Interview brouhaha – with little evidence that the country actually had anything to do with the massive hacking of Sony – the concept of technological sovereignty is poised to emerge as one of the most important and contentious doctrines of 2015. 

And it’s not just the Chinese: the Russian government is pursuing a similar agenda. A new law that came into effect last summer obliges all internet companies to store Russian citizens’ data on servers inside the country. This has already prompted Google to close down its engineering operations in Moscow. The Kremlin’s recent success in getting Facebook to block a page calling for protests in solidarity with the charged activist Alexey Navalny indicates that the government is rapidly re-establishing control over its citizens’ digital activities. 

But it’s hardly a global defeat for Google: the company is still expanding elsewhere, building communications infrastructure that extends far beyond simple email services. Thus, as South American countries began exploring plans to counter NSA surveillance with a fibre optic network of their own that would reduce their reliance on the US, Google opened its coffers to fund a $60m undersea cable connecting Brazil to Florida.


The aim was to ensure that Google’s own services run better for users in Brazil, but it is a potent reminder that extricating oneself from the grasp of America’s tech empire requires a multidimensional strategy attuned to the fact that Google today is not a mere search and email company – it also runs devices, operating systems, and even connectivity itself. 

Given that Russia and China are not known for their commitment to freedoms of expression and assembly, it is tempting to view their quest for information sovereignty as yet another stab at censorship and control. In fact, even when the far more benign government of Brazil toyed with the idea of forcing American companies to store user data locally – an idea it eventually abandoned – it was widely accused of draconian overreach.


However, Russia, China and Brazil are simply responding to the extremely aggressive tactics adopted by none other than the US. In typical fashion, though, America is completely oblivious to its own actions, believing that there is such a thing as a neutral, cosmopolitan internet and that any efforts to move away from it would result in its “Balkanisation”. But for many countries, this is not Balkanisation at all, merely de-Americanisation. 

US companies have been playing an ambiguous role in this project. On the one hand, they build efficient and highly functional infrastructure that locks in other countries, creating long-term dependencies that are very messy and costly to undo. They are the true vehicles for whatever is left of America’s global modernisation agenda. On the other hand, the companies cannot be seen as mere proxies for the American empire. Especially after the Edward Snowden revelations clearly demonstrated the cosy alliances between America’s business and state interests, these companies need to constantly assert their independence – occasionally by taking their own government to court – even if, in reality, most of their interests perfectly align with those of Washington. 

This explains why Silicon Valley has been so vocal in demanding that the Obama administration do something about internet privacy and surveillance: if internet companies were seen as compromised parties here, their business would collapse. Just look at the misfortunes of Verizon in 2014: uncertain of the extent of data-sharing between Verizon and the NSA, the German government ditched its contract with the US company in favour of Deutsche Telekom. A German government spokesman said at the time: “The federal government wants to win back more technological sovereignty, and therefore prefers to work with German companies.”


However, to grasp the full extent of America’s hypocrisy on the issue of information sovereignty, one needs to look no further than the ongoing squabble between Microsoft and the US government. It concerns some email content – relevant to an investigation – stored on Microsoft’s servers in Ireland. American prosecutors insist that they can obtain such content from Microsoft simply by serving it a warrant – as if it makes no difference that the email is stored in a foreign country. 

In order to obtain it, Washington would normally need to go through a complex legal process involving bilateral treaties between the governments involved. But now it wants to sidestep that completely and treat the handling of such data as a purely local issue with no international implications. The data resides in cyberspace – and cyberspace knows no borders! 

The government’s reasoning here is that the storage issue is irrelevant; what is relevant is where the content is accessed – and it can be accessed by Microsoft’s employees in the US. Microsoft and other tech giants are now fighting the US government in courts, with little success so far, while the Irish government and a handful of European politicians are backing Microsoft. 

In short, the US government insists that it should have access to data regardless of where it is stored as long as it is handled by US companies. Just imagine the outcry if the Chinese government were to demand access to any data that passes through devices manufactured by Chinese companies – Xiaomi, say, or Lenovo – regardless of whether their users are in London or New York or Tokyo. Note the crucial difference: Russia and China want to be able to access data generated by their citizens on their own soil, whereas the US wants to access data generated by anybody anywhere as long as American companies handle it. 

In opposing the efforts of other countries to reclaim a modicum of technological sovereignty, Washington is likely to run into a problem it has already encountered while promoting its nebulous “internet freedom” agenda: its actions speak louder than its words. Rhetorically, it is very hard to oppose government-run digital surveillance and online spin in Russia, China or Iran, when the US government probably does more of it than all of these countries combined.


Whatever motivates the desire of Russia and China to exert more control over their digital properties – and only the naive would believe that they are not motivated by concerns over domestic unrest – their actions are proportional to the aggressive efforts of Washington to exploit the fact that so much of the world’s communications infrastructure is run by Silicon Valley. One’s man internet freedom is another man’s internet imperialism. 

      Digital Life | Archives  | Modify Your Subscription   

      Archives  | Modify Your Subscription | Unsubscribe Now   
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150105/5b97c0b3/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From pouzin at well.com  Sun Jan  4 22:13:20 2015
From: pouzin at well.com (Louis Pouzin (well))
Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2015 04:13:20 +0100
Subject: [governance] Fw: [IP] DL- One Man's Freedom is Another Man's
 Imperialism (via Evgeny Morosov)
In-Reply-To: <B4418CFBBB404646A063F2FB593B15D8@Toshiba>
References: <B4418CFBBB404646A063F2FB593B15D8@Toshiba>
Message-ID: <CA+EjHYoP=FWV6dwRXViOY1f2HDtYMmjmHvTXy46seEQk--WE2A@mail.gmail.com>

Well written and articulate piece. It's quite disturbing that the bulk of
internet savvies still don't dig or admit the US redneck colonization,
quite obvious since ICANN creation. With them rhetorics is a waste. Only
active opposition by all means makes sense, like China does (see article
below). Ok, a diplomacy channel is valuable to keep contact points in times
of crises.

Another insightful reading:
Tomgram: Pepe Escobar, Eurasian Integration vs. the Empire of Chaos
December 16, 2014.
http://www.tomdispatch.com/post/175935/tomgram%3A_pepe_escobar%2C_eurasian_integration_vs._the_empire_of_chaos/

Louis.
- - -

On Sun, Jan 4, 2015 at 11:04 PM, Ian Peter <ian.peter at ianpeter.com> wrote:

>
> Worth reading. Puts a lot of the debate about internet freedom into the
> context of free trade vs protectionism.
>
> Ian Peter
>
>  *From:* Dave Farber via ip <ip at listbox.com>
> *Sent:* Monday, January 05, 2015 6:45 AM
> *To:* ip <ip at listbox.com>
> *Subject:* [IP] DL- One Man's Freedom is Another Man's Imperialism (via
> Evgeny Morosov)
>
>  ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: "Mark Stahlman via Digital Life" <dl at listbox.com>
> Date: Jan 4, 2015 1:02 PM
> Subject: DL- One Man's Freedom is Another Man's Imperialism (via Evgeny
> Morosov)
> To: "Dave" <dave at farber.net>
> Cc:
>
>
> http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/jan/04/internet-freedom-china-russia-us-google-microsoft-digital-sovereignty
>
>   Who's the true enemy of internet freedom - China, Russia, or the US?Evgeny
> Morozov <http://www.theguardian.com/profile/evgeny-morozov>
>   Beijing and Moscow are rightly chastised for restricting their
> citizens' onlinUS that is now even more aggressive in asserting its digital
> sovereignty
> Saturday 3 January 201519.04 EST
> [snip]
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150105/9b6d531e/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From suresh at hserus.net  Sun Jan  4 23:02:05 2015
From: suresh at hserus.net (Suresh Ramasubramanian)
Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2015 09:32:05 +0530
Subject: [governance] Fw: [IP] DL- One Man's Freedom is Another Man's
 Imperialism (via Evgeny Morosov)
In-Reply-To: <CA+EjHYoP=FWV6dwRXViOY1f2HDtYMmjmHvTXy46seEQk--WE2A@mail.gmail.com>
References: <B4418CFBBB404646A063F2FB593B15D8@Toshiba> <CA+EjHYoP=FWV6dwRXViOY1f2HDtYMmjmHvTXy46seEQk--WE2A@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <AD9E48AD-9048-4775-BCA7-2ADD4810B847@hserus.net>

Oh, all the USA has pellagra vitamin deficiency that causes a red, scaly rash on their necks?

When opposition takes the form of blind hatred, yes, rhetoric is a complete waste.

--srs (iPad)

> On 05-Jan-2015, at 08:43, Louis Pouzin (well) <pouzin at well.com> wrote:
> 
> Well written and articulate piece. It's quite disturbing that the bulk of internet savvies still don't dig or admit the US redneck colonization, quite obvious since ICANN creation. With them rhetorics is a waste. Only active opposition by all means makes sense, like China does (see article below). Ok, a diplomacy channel is valuable to keep contact points in times of crises.
> 
> Another insightful reading:
> Tomgram: Pepe Escobar, Eurasian Integration vs. the Empire of Chaos
> December 16, 2014.
> http://www.tomdispatch.com/post/175935/tomgram%3A_pepe_escobar%2C_eurasian_integration_vs._the_empire_of_chaos/
> 
> Louis.
> - - -
> 
>> On Sun, Jan 4, 2015 at 11:04 PM, Ian Peter <ian.peter at ianpeter.com> wrote:
>> 
>> Worth reading. Puts a lot of the debate about internet freedom into the context of free trade vs protectionism.
>>  
>> Ian Peter
>>  
>> From: Dave Farber via ip
>> Sent: Monday, January 05, 2015 6:45 AM
>> To: ip
>> Subject: [IP] DL- One Man's Freedom is Another Man's Imperialism (via Evgeny Morosov)
>>  
>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>> From: "Mark Stahlman via Digital Life" <dl at listbox.com>
>> Date: Jan 4, 2015 1:02 PM
>> Subject: DL- One Man's Freedom is Another Man's Imperialism (via Evgeny Morosov)
>> To: "Dave" <dave at farber.net>
>> Cc: 
>> 
>> http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/jan/04/internet-freedom-china-russia-us-google-microsoft-digital-sovereignty
>> 
>> Who’s the true enemy of internet freedom - China, Russia, or the US?
>> 
>> Evgeny Morozov
>> Beijing and Moscow are rightly chastised for restricting their citizens’ onlinUS that is now even more aggressive in asserting its digital sovereignty
>> Saturday 3 January 201519.04 EST
>> [snip]
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
> To be removed from the list, visit:
>     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
> 
> For all other list information and functions, see:
>     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
>     http://www.igcaucus.org/
> 
> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150105/596f9480/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From parminder at itforchange.net  Mon Jan  5 03:17:29 2015
From: parminder at itforchange.net (parminder)
Date: Mon, 05 Jan 2015 13:47:29 +0530
Subject: [governance] Fw: [IP] DL- One Man's Freedom is Another Man's
 Imperialism (via Evgeny Morosov)
In-Reply-To: <B4418CFBBB404646A063F2FB593B15D8@Toshiba>
References: <B4418CFBBB404646A063F2FB593B15D8@Toshiba>
Message-ID: <54AA4899.4040805@itforchange.net>


On Monday 05 January 2015 03:34 AM, Ian Peter wrote:
> Worth reading. Puts a lot of the debate about internet freedom into 
> the context of free trade vs protectionism.

If one is to believe what is written here is correct, one has to treat 
US and US delegations at global IG forums in the same way as China's or 
Russia's are treated. In fact, treated much worse, as Morozov also 
shows, a Chinese and Russian gov is the biggest threat to their 
respective national Internets but hardly a fraction of a threat to the 
global Internet as the US gov is.

But what is the reality? Has it been missed anyone here? What do we see 
at all global forums? And btw whose initiative is the NetMundial 
Initiative? We can of course make ourselves believe what Fadi says that 
it is the 'mother of bottom up initiatives', but everyone knows that the 
NM initiative, like the initial Net Mundual meeting, took shape in the 
deep strategic parts of the US establishment and is meant to serve its 
interests - and it will serve its interest, no doubt.

The US issued threats and sanctions against North Korea even when it is 
hardly yet proven that the latter was behind the Sony episode. What 
about the enormous intrusions that Snowden shows us as US having caused 
against practically the entire world - and intrusions of the worst 
possible kinds. But of course no one can issue threats and sanctions 
against the US - they are the big boss of the world. In the 
circumstances, the civil society needs to make the choice - it would 
resist and oppose this biggest power with respect to, and the biggest 
threat to, the global Internet, of which one of the most important 
planks is of course a strong global governance system for the Internet, 
which can check US's power. Or instead play the US's game, with perhaps 
the apology that the US's power is just too great to be resisted and 
instead one must try and get whatever little gains one can by playing 
along with it. Not worth the idealism that one expects from civil 
society, but that is not what many other people seem to think.


parminder


> Ian Peter
> *From:* Dave Farber via ip <mailto:ip at listbox.com>
> *Sent:* Monday, January 05, 2015 6:45 AM
> *To:* ip <mailto:ip at listbox.com>
> *Subject:* [IP] DL- One Man's Freedom is Another Man's Imperialism 
> (via Evgeny Morosov)
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: "Mark Stahlman via Digital Life" <dl at listbox.com 
> <mailto:dl at listbox.com>>
> Date: Jan 4, 2015 1:02 PM
> Subject: DL- One Man's Freedom is Another Man's Imperialism (via 
> Evgeny Morosov)
> To: "Dave" <dave at farber.net <mailto:dave at farber.net>>
> Cc:
>
> http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/jan/04/internet-freedom-china-russia-us-google-microsoft-digital-sovereignty
>
>
>   Who’s the true enemy of internet freedom - China, Russia, or the US?
>
> Evgeny Morozov <http://www.theguardian.com/profile/evgeny-morozov>
> Beijing and Moscow are rightly chastised for restricting their 
> citizens’ online access – but it’s the US that is now even more 
> aggressive in asserting its digital sovereignty
> Saturday 3 January 201519.04 EST
>
> Recent reports thatChina has imposed further restrictions on Gmail, 
> <http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/dec/29/google-gmail-blocked-china-great-firewall>Google’s 
> flagship email service, should not really come as much of a surprise. 
> While Chinese users have been unable to access Gmail’s site for 
> several years now, they were still able to use much of its 
> functionality, thanks to third-party services such as Outlook or Apple 
> Mail.
>
> This loophole has now been closed (albeit temporarily – some of the 
> new restrictions seem to have been mysteriously lifted already), which 
> means determined Chinese users have had to turn to more advanced 
> circumvention tools. Those unable or unwilling to perform any such 
> acrobatics can simply switch to a service run by a domestic Chinese 
> company – which is precisely what the Chinese government wants them to 
> do.
>
> Such short-term and long-term disruptions of Gmail connections are 
> part of China’s long-running efforts to protect its technological 
> sovereignty by reducing its citizens’ reliance on American-run 
> communication services. AfterNorth Korea saw its internet access 
> blacked out 
> <http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/dec/22/north-korea-suffers-internet-blackout>temporarily 
> in the/Interview/brouhaha – with little evidence that the country 
> actually had anything to do with the massive hacking of Sony – the 
> concept of technological sovereignty is poised to emerge as one of the 
> most important and contentious doctrines of 2015.
>
> And it’s not just the Chinese: the Russian government is pursuing a 
> similar agenda. A new law that came into effect last summer obliges 
> allinternet companies to store Russian citizens’ data on servers 
> inside the country 
> <http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jun/19/russia-digital-soveriegnty-nsa-surveillance>. 
> This has already promptedGoogle to close down its engineering 
> operations 
> <http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/dec/12/google-closes-engineering-office-russia>in 
> Moscow. The Kremlin’s recent success in gettingFacebook to block a 
> page calling for protests in solidarity with the charged activist 
> Alexey Navalny 
> <http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/dec/30/-sp-verdict-alexei-navalny-kremlin-critic-galvanises-russia-opposition>indicates 
> that the government is rapidly re-establishing control over its 
> citizens’ digital activities.
>
> But it’s hardly a global defeat for Google: the company is still 
> expanding elsewhere, building communications infrastructure that 
> extends far beyond simple email services. Thus, as South American 
> countries began exploring plans to counter NSA surveillance with a 
> fibre optic network of their own that would reduce their reliance on 
> the US,Google <http://www.theguardian.com/technology/google>opened its 
> coffers to fund a $60m undersea cable connecting Brazil to Florida.
>
> The aim was to ensure that Google’s own services run better for users 
> in Brazil, but it is a potent reminder that extricating oneself from 
> the grasp of America’s tech empire requires a multidimensional 
> strategy attuned to the fact that Google today is not a mere search 
> and email company – it also runs devices, operating systems, and even 
> connectivity itself.
>
> Given that Russia and China are not known for their commitment to 
> freedoms of expression and assembly, it is tempting to view their 
> quest for information sovereignty as yet another stab at censorship 
> and control. In fact, even when the far more benign government 
> ofBrazil toyed with the idea of forcing American companies to store 
> user data 
> locally<http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/sep/20/brazil-dilma-rousseff-internet-us-control>– 
> an idea it eventually abandoned – it was widely accused of draconian 
> overreach.
>
> However,Russia <http://www.theguardian.com/world/russia>, China and 
> Brazil are simply responding to the extremely aggressive tactics 
> adopted by none other than the US. In typical fashion, though, America 
> is completely oblivious to its own actions, believing that there is 
> such a thing as a neutral, cosmopolitan internet and that any efforts 
> to move away from it would result in its “Balkanisation”. But for many 
> countries, this is not Balkanisation at all, merely de-Americanisation.
>
> US companies have been playing an ambiguous role in this project. On 
> the one hand, they build efficient and highly functional 
> infrastructure that locks in other countries, creating long-term 
> dependencies that are very messy and costly to undo. They are the true 
> vehicles for whatever is left of America’s global modernisation 
> agenda. On the other hand, the companies cannot be seen as mere 
> proxies for the American empire. Especially after the Edward Snowden 
> revelations clearly demonstrated the cosy alliances between America’s 
> business and state interests, these companies need to constantly 
> assert their independence –occasionally by taking their own government 
> to 
> court<http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/sep/11/yahoo-nsa-lawsuit-documents-fine-user-data-refusal>– 
> even if, in reality, most of their interests perfectly align with 
> those of Washington.
>
> This explains why Silicon Valley has been so vocal in demanding that 
> the Obama administration do something about internet privacy and 
> surveillance: if internet companies were seen as compromised parties 
> here, their business would collapse. Just look at the misfortunes of 
> Verizon in 2014:uncertain of the extent of data-sharing between 
> Verizon and the NSA, the German government ditched its contract with 
> the US company <http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-28047877>in favour 
> of Deutsche Telekom. A German government spokesman said at the time: 
> “The federal government wants to win back more technological 
> sovereignty, and therefore prefers to work with German companies.”
>
> However, to grasp the full extent of America’s hypocrisy on the issue 
> of information sovereignty, one needs to look no further than 
> theongoing squabble between Microsoft and the US government 
> <http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/dec/14/privacy-is-not-dead-microsoft-lawyer-brad-smith-us-government>. 
> It concerns some email content – relevant to an investigation – stored 
> on Microsoft’s servers in Ireland. American prosecutors insist that 
> they can obtain such content from Microsoft simply by serving it a 
> warrant – as if it makes no difference that the email is stored in a 
> foreign country.
>
> In order to obtain it, Washington would normally need to go through a 
> complex legal process involving bilateral treaties between the 
> governments involved. But now it wants to sidestep that completely and 
> treat the handling of such data as a purely local issue with no 
> international implications. The data resides in cyberspace – and 
> cyberspace knows no borders!
>
> The government’s reasoning here is that the storage issue is 
> irrelevant; what is relevant is where the content is accessed – and it 
> can be accessed by Microsoft’s employees in the US. Microsoft and 
> other tech giants are now fighting the US government in courts, with 
> little success so far, while the Irish government and a handful of 
> European politicians are backingMicrosoft 
> <http://www.theguardian.com/technology/microsoft>.
>
> In short, the US government insists that it should have access to data 
> regardless of where it is stored as long as it is handled by US 
> companies. Just imagine the outcry if the Chinese government were to 
> demand access to any data that passes through devices manufactured by 
> Chinese companies – Xiaomi, say, or Lenovo – regardless of whether 
> their users are in London or New York or Tokyo. Note the crucial 
> difference: Russia andChina 
> <http://www.theguardian.com/world/china>want to be able to access data 
> generated by their citizens on their own soil, whereas the US wants to 
> access data generated by anybody anywhere as long as American 
> companies handle it.
>
> In opposing the efforts of other countries to reclaim a modicum of 
> technological sovereignty, Washington is likely to run into a problem 
> it has already encountered while promoting its nebulous “internet 
> freedom” agenda: its actions speak louder than its words. 
> Rhetorically, it is very hard to oppose government-run digital 
> surveillance and online spin in Russia, China or Iran, when the US 
> government probably does more of it than all of these countries combined.
>
> Whatever motivates the desire of Russia and China to exert more 
> control over their digital properties – and only the naive would 
> believe that they are not motivated by concerns over domestic unrest – 
> their actions are proportional to the aggressive efforts of Washington 
> to exploit the fact that so much of the world’s communications 
> infrastructure is run by Silicon Valley. One’s man internet freedom is 
> another man’s internet imperialism.
>
> *Digital Life* | Archives 
> <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/236460/=now> 
> <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/236460/26287180-34081d9d> 
> | Modify <https://www.listbox.com/member/?&> Your Subscription 
> [Powered by Listbox] <http://www.listbox.com>
>
> Archives <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/247/=now> 
> <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/247/853646-9b3abb6d> | 
> Modify 
> <https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=853646&id_secret=853646-9b832eb9> 
> Your Subscription | Unsubscribe Now 
> <https://www.listbox.com/unsubscribe/?member_id=853646&id_secret=853646-56396bc0&post_id=20150104144543:3DF9F91E-944A-11E4-8686-A82DFF76CA12> 
> 	[Powered by Listbox] <http://www.listbox.com>
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150105/3752e1ca/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From joao.caribe at me.com  Mon Jan  5 05:16:05 2015
From: joao.caribe at me.com (=?iso-8859-1?Q?=22Jo=E3o_Carlos_R=2E_Carib=E9=22?=)
Date: Mon, 05 Jan 2015 08:16:05 -0200
Subject: [governance] [bestbits] FW: [IP] NETmundial Initiative
 Announces Formation of its Inaugural Coordination Council and a Broad
 Global Community Consultation Phase | NETmundial
In-Reply-To:  <CA+YNoKib5Nda9mAzeubZ-oKYkMxP=bwxnGH=B2Yvkn3bx9dHSw@mail.gmail.com>
References:  <CAKx4trib6y0BgranYnJ_prgVT15ACZkSMA_YCGiw2tVKUOUORg@mail.gmail.com>
 <0741505aceab44558fde236d2885c5b0@EX13-MBX-07.ad.syr.edu>
 <CA+YNoKib5Nda9mAzeubZ-oKYkMxP=bwxnGH=B2Yvkn3bx9dHSw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <0E1CD9E7-3CBE-4345-B63D-6B7746BFCD9A@me.com>

Interesting or Concerning ? 

I did a little search about Mr Lu Wei and found some concerning informations:

ICAN 50 open session speech - https://www.icann.org/news/multimedia/301

Note from GIP Platform about IANA transition - http://giplatform.org/resources/gip-summary-report-icann-50
[..]The High Level Government Meeting addressing ICANN’s accountability and the transition of NTIA’s stewardship of the IANA functions, and chaired by the UK minister Ed Vaizey, came under the spotlight. The mere presence of China’s highest-level cyberspace official, Lu Wei, Minister of Cyberspace Affairs Administration, was a clear signal that China is interested in playing a strong role in the transition process. Although his address however mostly followed the known Chinese positions asking for an intergovernmental supervision of ICANN, he also mentioned the greater participation of his country (and various Chinese communities) in ICANN and argued that the candidates for the working groups on ICANN’s internationalisation should be determined quickly, in accordance with the number of Internet users of each country.[..]

China's cyberspace admin. chief visits Facebook, Apple, Amazon
http://www.iloveafrica.com/2014/12/10/VIDE1418182021367254.shtml

[..]Lu Wei, Minister of China’s Cyberspace Affairs Administration, was in the US to attend a Chinese-American Internet conference, at which China pushed for a louder voice in the management of the Internet... a voice which was obviously heard loud and clear by the founder of Facebook.[..]


Em 26/12/2014, às 22:16, Izumi AIZU escreveu:

> I see at least two names from China as very interesting or significant: Minister Lu Wei and Jack Ma of Alibaba, both were central figures at the World Internet Conference held in Wuzhen, China last month. Their participation in this Multistakeholder venture is a good sign.
> 
> I also hope our Civil Society colleagues actively engage and advance our core values.
> 
> Of course, there are certain or uncertain elements that are troublesome, but I like to remain constructive, critical, but more positive.
> 
> And Happy holidays and New Year to all!!
> 
> Izumi
> 2014/12/25 3:21 "Lee W McKnight" <lmcknigh at syr.edu>:
> FYI and happy holidays!
> 
> 
> Lee
> From: Dave Farber via ip <ip at listbox.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, December 24, 2014 10:58 AM
> To: ip
> Subject: [IP] NETmundial Initiative Announces Formation of its Inaugural Coordination Council and a Broad Global Community Consultation Phase | NETmundial
>  
> https://www.netmundial.org/blog/secretariat/netmundial-initiative-announces-formation-its-inaugural-coordination-council-and
> 
> Archives   | Modify Your Subscription | Unsubscribe Now	
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>      bestbits at lists.bestbits.net.
> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit:
>      http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
> To be removed from the list, visit:
>     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
> 
> For all other list information and functions, see:
>     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
>     http://www.igcaucus.org/
> 
> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

--
João Carlos R. Caribé
Consultor 
Skype joaocaribe
(021) 4042 7727 
(021) 9 8761 1967

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150105/df114d1c/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From ymshana2003 at gmail.com  Mon Jan  5 07:33:08 2015
From: ymshana2003 at gmail.com (ymshana2003)
Date: Mon, 05 Jan 2015 14:33:08 +0200
Subject: [governance] [bestbits] FW: [IP] NETmundial Initiative
 Announces Formation of its Inaugural Coordination Council and a Broad
 Global Community Consultation Phase | NETmundial
Message-ID: <n518tpaey71hrbpqxwjbws02.1420461188670@email.android.com>

This is a very interesting development during 2014. It is 10 years since the Policy for Internationalization of the Domain Names system 'processed'.
The inclusion of China, Russia and other major players who used various characters was the main aim for the policy in technical thinking... OR..was it NOT...? <I was there during this period>

NOW...10 years later, and after significant developments to make the Internet a powerful resource...suddenly ...this scramble for it governance becomes a Big Issue...

The QUESTION is. ...Why so if we knew where the home of the Internet is.?

Time to NEGOTIATE is now before the Governance issue becomes political at 100% ...assuming it has not reached thst far....

Y 2k-15 Greetings

Yassin

Sent from Samsung Mobile
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150105/107912f1/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From joly at punkcast.com  Mon Jan  5 13:44:30 2015
From: joly at punkcast.com (Joly MacFie)
Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2015 13:44:30 -0500
Subject: [bestbits] [governance] FW: [IP] NETmundial Initiative
 Announces Formation of its Inaugural Coordination Council and a Broad
 Global Community Consultation Phase | NETmundial
In-Reply-To: <0E1CD9E7-3CBE-4345-B63D-6B7746BFCD9A@me.com>
References: <CAKx4trib6y0BgranYnJ_prgVT15ACZkSMA_YCGiw2tVKUOUORg@mail.gmail.com>
 <0741505aceab44558fde236d2885c5b0@EX13-MBX-07.ad.syr.edu> <CA+YNoKib5Nda9mAzeubZ-oKYkMxP=bwxnGH=B2Yvkn3bx9dHSw@mail.gmail.com>
 <0E1CD9E7-3CBE-4345-B63D-6B7746BFCD9A@me.com>
Message-ID: <CAM9VJk3NQUXXRXTYDMDnKt8Wz6Qy9R5G4_FR3dqcL86DVLJ=LA@mail.gmail.com>

Note Fadi's comments, in NYC having just returned from China, about a "seat
at the table".

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bhFk-fcuTEM

​and then the NMI

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xvH2FTAM2y8​

On Mon, Jan 5, 2015 at 5:16 AM, "João Carlos R. Caribé" <joao.caribe at me.com>
wrote:

> Interesting or Concerning ?
>
> I did a little search about Mr Lu Wei and found some concerning
> informations:
>
> ICAN 50 open session speech - https://www.icann.org/news/multimedia/301
>
> Note from GIP Platform about IANA transition -
> http://giplatform.org/resources/gip-summary-report-icann-50
> [..]The High Level Government Meeting addressing ICANN’s accountability
> and the transition of NTIA’s stewardship of the IANA functions, and chaired
> by the UK minister Ed Vaizey, came under the spotlight. The mere presence
> of China’s highest-level cyberspace official, Lu Wei, Minister of
> Cyberspace Affairs Administration, was a clear signal that *China is
> interested in playing a strong role in the transition process*. Although
> his address however mostly followed the known Chinese positions asking for
> an intergovernmental supervision of ICANN, he also mentioned the greater
> participation of his country (and various Chinese communities) in ICANN and
> argued that the candidates for the working groups on ICANN’s
> internationalisation should be determined quickly, in *accordance with
> the number of Internet users of each country*.[..]
>
> China's cyberspace admin. chief visits Facebook, Apple, Amazon
> http://www.iloveafrica.com/2014/12/10/VIDE1418182021367254.shtml
>
> [..]Lu Wei, Minister of China’s Cyberspace Affairs Administration, was in
> the US to attend a Chinese-American Internet conference, at which China
> pushed for a louder voice in the management of the Internet... a voice
> which was obviously heard loud and clear by the founder of Facebook.[..]
>
>
> Em 26/12/2014, às 22:16, Izumi AIZU escreveu:
>
> I see at least two names from China as very interesting or significant:
> Minister Lu Wei and Jack Ma of Alibaba, both were central figures at the
> World Internet Conference held in Wuzhen, China last month. Their
> participation in this Multistakeholder venture is a good sign.
>
> I also hope our Civil Society colleagues actively engage and advance our
> core values.
>
> Of course, there are certain or uncertain elements that are troublesome,
> but I like to remain constructive, critical, but more positive.
>
> And Happy holidays and New Year to all!!
>
> Izumi
>  2014/12/25 3:21 "Lee W McKnight" <lmcknigh at syr.edu>:
>
>>  FYI and happy holidays!
>>
>>
>> Lee
>>  ------------------------------
>> *From:* Dave Farber via ip <ip at listbox.com>
>> *Sent:* Wednesday, December 24, 2014 10:58 AM
>> *To:* ip
>> *Subject:* [IP] NETmundial Initiative Announces Formation of its
>> Inaugural Coordination Council and a Broad Global Community Consultation
>> Phase | NETmundial
>>
>>
>>
>> https://www.netmundial.org/blog/secretariat/netmundial-initiative-announces-formation-its-inaugural-coordination-council-and
>>   Archives <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/247/=now>
>> <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/247/8923115-8446eb07> |
>> Modify
>> <https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=8923115&id_secret=8923115-86ed04cc>
>> Your Subscription | Unsubscribe Now
>> <https://www.listbox.com/unsubscribe/?member_id=8923115&id_secret=8923115-e899f1f0&post_id=20141224105832:B3E1D282-8B85-11E4-A91F-F4DD3793BE5A>
>> <http://www.listbox.com/>
>>
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>>      bestbits at lists.bestbits.net.
>> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit:
>>      http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits
>>
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
> To be removed from the list, visit:
>     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
>
> For all other list information and functions, see:
>     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
>     http://www.igcaucus.org/
>
> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
>
>
> --
> João Carlos R. Caribé
> Consultor
> Skype joaocaribe
> (021) 4042 7727
> (021) 9 8761 1967
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>      bestbits at lists.bestbits.net.
> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit:
>      http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits
>



-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------
Joly MacFie  218 565 9365 Skype:punkcast
WWWhatsup NYC - http://wwwhatsup.com
 http://pinstand.com - http://punkcast.com
 VP (Admin) - ISOC-NY - http://isoc-ny.org
--------------------------------------------------------------
-
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150105/58c0c1ca/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From bzs at world.std.com  Mon Jan  5 14:07:04 2015
From: bzs at world.std.com (Barry Shein)
Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2015 14:07:04 -0500
Subject: [governance] Fw: [IP] DL- One Man's Freedom is Another Man's
 Imperialism (via Evgeny Morosov)
In-Reply-To: <AD9E48AD-9048-4775-BCA7-2ADD4810B847@hserus.net>
References: <B4418CFBBB404646A063F2FB593B15D8@Toshiba>
	<CA+EjHYoP=FWV6dwRXViOY1f2HDtYMmjmHvTXy46seEQk--WE2A@mail.gmail.com>
	<AD9E48AD-9048-4775-BCA7-2ADD4810B847@hserus.net>
Message-ID: <21674.57560.115766.146423@world.std.com>


Something which strikes me in that article is that it makes the point
that the link between the Sony breaches and N Korea hasn't been
established but asserts that the US govt took down N Korea's internet
connection as if it were established fact.

Barring supporting evidence or admission what's more likely is they
were taken down by pranksters/miscreants who tend to attack anything
which is in the news.

I tend to doubt that's how the US govt is likely to deal with a
foreign power, it would be silly, except perhaps as a preventative
measure (to block some attack in progress.)

And I also doubt it would have much affect on N Korea.

So, no evidence, and it doesn't even make sense.


P.S. Did N Korea threaten harm to theater-goers if the film opened or
not? There's some suspicion the threat was a hoax tho they seemed to
retract the threat later.

This is all like tap-dancing on quicksand.

-- 
        -Barry Shein

The World              | bzs at TheWorld.com           | http://www.TheWorld.com
Purveyors to the Trade | Voice: 800-THE-WRLD        | Dial-Up: US, PR, Canada
Software Tool & Die    | Public Access Internet     | SINCE 1989     *oo*

-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From mousavi.sa48 at gmail.com  Mon Jan  5 19:50:13 2015
From: mousavi.sa48 at gmail.com (S.Aliakbar Mousavi)
Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2015 19:50:13 -0500
Subject: [bestbits] [governance] FW: [IP] NETmundial Initiative
 Announces Formation of its Inaugural Coordination Council and a Broad
 Global Community Consultation Phase | NETmundial
In-Reply-To: <CAM9VJk3NQUXXRXTYDMDnKt8Wz6Qy9R5G4_FR3dqcL86DVLJ=LA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAKx4trib6y0BgranYnJ_prgVT15ACZkSMA_YCGiw2tVKUOUORg@mail.gmail.com>
 <0741505aceab44558fde236d2885c5b0@EX13-MBX-07.ad.syr.edu> <CA+YNoKib5Nda9mAzeubZ-oKYkMxP=bwxnGH=B2Yvkn3bx9dHSw@mail.gmail.com>
 <0E1CD9E7-3CBE-4345-B63D-6B7746BFCD9A@me.com> <CAM9VJk3NQUXXRXTYDMDnKt8Wz6Qy9R5G4_FR3dqcL86DVLJ=LA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAGV2gWaw4WKhbRPkVgnvXaHwaWGzckViv+6r1_3qxtfDA87AVw@mail.gmail.com>

Thanks Mr. MacFie for sharing Mr. *Fadi Chehadé*'s comments after returning
from China.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bhFk-fcuTEM
He said that:

"China has now made clear announcement that they are now supporting ICANN,
legitimized ICANN, legitimized the root of ICANN, *legitimized the fact
that we want one single Internet".*

I have a question for him, related to those comments and not related to
NETmondial.

My question for Mr. Chehadé is that what about Iran، its *National Internet
project*, and the executive order for separating Internet and Intranet
traffic in the country?

The exact its online version is below:
http://www.matma.ir/documents/10180/13021/bakhshname12.png?t=1386407838000

I would like to ask Mr.Chehadé to travel Iran and raise the same concern to
come up with the same statement and one single Internet in Iran as well.

http://www.iranhumanrights.org/2014/11/internet-reportthe-national-information-network-national-internet/
http://www.iranhumanrights.org/2014/01/china-iran-internet/

Best wishes,
Ali
(Aliakbar Mousavi)




On 5 January 2015 at 13:44, Joly MacFie <joly at punkcast.com> wrote:

> Note Fadi's comments, in NYC having just returned from China, about a
> "seat at the table".
>
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bhFk-fcuTEM
>
> ​and then the NMI
>
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xvH2FTAM2y8​
>
> On Mon, Jan 5, 2015 at 5:16 AM, "João Carlos R. Caribé" <
> joao.caribe at me.com> wrote:
>
>> Interesting or Concerning ?
>>
>> I did a little search about Mr Lu Wei and found some concerning
>> informations:
>>
>> ICAN 50 open session speech - https://www.icann.org/news/multimedia/301
>>
>> Note from GIP Platform about IANA transition -
>> http://giplatform.org/resources/gip-summary-report-icann-50
>> [..]The High Level Government Meeting addressing ICANN’s accountability
>> and the transition of NTIA’s stewardship of the IANA functions, and chaired
>> by the UK minister Ed Vaizey, came under the spotlight. The mere presence
>> of China’s highest-level cyberspace official, Lu Wei, Minister of
>> Cyberspace Affairs Administration, was a clear signal that *China is
>> interested in playing a strong role in the transition process*. Although
>> his address however mostly followed the known Chinese positions asking for
>> an intergovernmental supervision of ICANN, he also mentioned the greater
>> participation of his country (and various Chinese communities) in ICANN and
>> argued that the candidates for the working groups on ICANN’s
>> internationalisation should be determined quickly, in *accordance with
>> the number of Internet users of each country*.[..]
>>
>> China's cyberspace admin. chief visits Facebook, Apple, Amazon
>> http://www.iloveafrica.com/2014/12/10/VIDE1418182021367254.shtml
>>
>> [..]Lu Wei, Minister of China’s Cyberspace Affairs Administration, was
>> in the US to attend a Chinese-American Internet conference, at which China
>> pushed for a louder voice in the management of the Internet... a voice
>> which was obviously heard loud and clear by the founder of Facebook.[..]
>>
>>
>> Em 26/12/2014, às 22:16, Izumi AIZU escreveu:
>>
>> I see at least two names from China as very interesting or significant:
>> Minister Lu Wei and Jack Ma of Alibaba, both were central figures at the
>> World Internet Conference held in Wuzhen, China last month. Their
>> participation in this Multistakeholder venture is a good sign.
>>
>> I also hope our Civil Society colleagues actively engage and advance our
>> core values.
>>
>> Of course, there are certain or uncertain elements that are troublesome,
>> but I like to remain constructive, critical, but more positive.
>>
>> And Happy holidays and New Year to all!!
>>
>> Izumi
>>  2014/12/25 3:21 "Lee W McKnight" <lmcknigh at syr.edu>:
>>
>>>  FYI and happy holidays!
>>>
>>>
>>> Lee
>>>  ------------------------------
>>> *From:* Dave Farber via ip <ip at listbox.com>
>>> *Sent:* Wednesday, December 24, 2014 10:58 AM
>>> *To:* ip
>>> *Subject:* [IP] NETmundial Initiative Announces Formation of its
>>> Inaugural Coordination Council and a Broad Global Community Consultation
>>> Phase | NETmundial
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> https://www.netmundial.org/blog/secretariat/netmundial-initiative-announces-formation-its-inaugural-coordination-council-and
>>>   Archives <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/247/=now>
>>> <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/247/8923115-8446eb07> |
>>> Modify
>>> <https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=8923115&id_secret=8923115-86ed04cc>
>>> Your Subscription | Unsubscribe Now
>>> <https://www.listbox.com/unsubscribe/?member_id=8923115&id_secret=8923115-e899f1f0&post_id=20141224105832:B3E1D282-8B85-11E4-A91F-F4DD3793BE5A>
>>> <http://www.listbox.com/>
>>>
>>> ____________________________________________________________
>>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>>>      bestbits at lists.bestbits.net.
>>> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit:
>>>      http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits
>>>
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>>     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
>> To be removed from the list, visit:
>>     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
>>
>> For all other list information and functions, see:
>>     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
>> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
>>     http://www.igcaucus.org/
>>
>> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
>>
>>
>> --
>> João Carlos R. Caribé
>> Consultor
>> Skype joaocaribe
>> (021) 4042 7727
>> (021) 9 8761 1967
>>
>>
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>>      bestbits at lists.bestbits.net.
>> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit:
>>      http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits
>>
>
>
>
> --
> ---------------------------------------------------------------
> Joly MacFie  218 565 9365 Skype:punkcast
> WWWhatsup NYC - http://wwwhatsup.com
>  http://pinstand.com - http://punkcast.com
>  VP (Admin) - ISOC-NY - http://isoc-ny.org
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> -
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>      governance at lists.igcaucus.org
> To be removed from the list, visit:
>      http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
>
> For all other list information and functions, see:
>      http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
>      http://www.igcaucus.org/
>
> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
>
>


-- 
            S.Aliakbar Mousavi
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150105/114701bf/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From parminder at itforchange.net  Tue Jan  6 03:52:30 2015
From: parminder at itforchange.net (parminder)
Date: Tue, 06 Jan 2015 14:22:30 +0530
Subject: [governance] Fw: [IP] DL- One Man's Freedom is Another Man's
 Imperialism (via Evgeny Morosov)
In-Reply-To: <21674.57560.115766.146423@world.std.com>
References: <B4418CFBBB404646A063F2FB593B15D8@Toshiba>	<CA+EjHYoP=FWV6dwRXViOY1f2HDtYMmjmHvTXy46seEQk--WE2A@mail.gmail.com>	<AD9E48AD-9048-4775-BCA7-2ADD4810B847@hserus.net> <21674.57560.115766.146423@world.std.com>
Message-ID: <54ABA24E.5040001@itforchange.net>


On Tuesday 06 January 2015 12:37 AM, Barry Shein wrote:
> Something which strikes me in that article is that it makes the point
> that the link between the Sony breaches and N Korea hasn't been
> established but asserts that the US govt took down N Korea's internet
> connection as if it were established fact.

What is certainly an established fact is that the US has announced 
sanctions against North Korea specially in relation to this episode , 
see 
http://washington.cbslocal.com/2015/01/02/obama-orders-sanctions-on-north-korea-over-sony-hack/ 
.

Further, Obama has warned that US's response would “take place at a time 
and in a manner of our choosing.”

However reprehensible the North Korean regime is, it is unacceptable 
that US should officially use such war like language for a yet to be 
proven allegation. (What about its own 'proven' attacks on Iranian 
nuclear reactors, and against practically everyone, that Snowden tells 
us about.) If any other country uses the same language against the US - 
that a response will take place at a time and in a manner of our 
choosing -  it is quiet likely that the US will declare that one as a 
terrorist state and begin suffocating it economically, and even justify 
drone attacks as it pleases.

Another important factor; the US is the main party that refuses to get 
into talking about a global cyber security treaty, of any kind 
whatsoever, bec it apparently does not want any global constraints upon 
its own global cyber adventures...

And this is the country that many of us here allow to lead the global 
Internet regime.... And allow it to keep the world hyper confused about 
everything Internet governance, from the need of global forums for 
Internet norms and policies to an IANA transition process that is made 
to order to confuse and mislead, unless of course it is me who has an 
exceptionally poor IQ..

parminder

> Barring supporting evidence or admission what's more likely is they
> were taken down by pranksters/miscreants who tend to attack anything
> which is in the news.
>
> I tend to doubt that's how the US govt is likely to deal with a
> foreign power, it would be silly, except perhaps as a preventative
> measure (to block some attack in progress.)
>
> And I also doubt it would have much affect on N Korea.
>
> So, no evidence, and it doesn't even make sense.
>
>
> P.S. Did N Korea threaten harm to theater-goers if the film opened or
> not? There's some suspicion the threat was a hoax tho they seemed to
> retract the threat later.
>
> This is all like tap-dancing on quicksand.
>


-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From bzs at world.std.com  Tue Jan  6 14:02:13 2015
From: bzs at world.std.com (Barry Shein)
Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2015 14:02:13 -0500
Subject: [governance] Fw: [IP] DL- One Man's Freedom is Another Man's
 Imperialism (via Evgeny Morosov)
In-Reply-To: <54ABA24E.5040001@itforchange.net>
References: <B4418CFBBB404646A063F2FB593B15D8@Toshiba>
	<CA+EjHYoP=FWV6dwRXViOY1f2HDtYMmjmHvTXy46seEQk--WE2A@mail.gmail.com>
	<AD9E48AD-9048-4775-BCA7-2ADD4810B847@hserus.net>
	<21674.57560.115766.146423@world.std.com>
	<54ABA24E.5040001@itforchange.net>
Message-ID: <21676.12597.402296.624573@world.std.com>


I don't think you have an "exceptionally poor IQ" :-)

But there is a whiff of moral nihilism inherent in this.

That said the problem we continue to run up against is no effective
international dispute resolution process. Even if we were to assume
the worst the DPRK is accused of were true, or Iran for that matter
(much of which is quite believable if for no other reason than they
boast about it) what is the resolution process? Beyond a group of
probably reasonable people agreeing to issue a statement sympathizing
with one side or another?

And, not surprisingly, we run into the same lack in cyber-matters.

So it devolves to exercises of raw power, justified or not, with all
the inherent dangers and unexpected consequences thereof.

To my thinking that's the real problem.

On January 6, 2015 at 14:22 parminder at itforchange.net (parminder) wrote:
 > 
 > On Tuesday 06 January 2015 12:37 AM, Barry Shein wrote:
 > > Something which strikes me in that article is that it makes the point
 > > that the link between the Sony breaches and N Korea hasn't been
 > > established but asserts that the US govt took down N Korea's internet
 > > connection as if it were established fact.
 > 
 > What is certainly an established fact is that the US has announced 
 > sanctions against North Korea specially in relation to this episode , 
 > see 
 > http://washington.cbslocal.com/2015/01/02/obama-orders-sanctions-on-north-korea-over-sony-hack/ 
 > .
 > 
 > Further, Obama has warned that US's response would ,Ab��(Btake place at a time 
 > and in a manner of our choosing.,Ab��(B
 > 
 > However reprehensible the North Korean regime is, it is unacceptable 
 > that US should officially use such war like language for a yet to be 
 > proven allegation. (What about its own 'proven' attacks on Iranian 
 > nuclear reactors, and against practically everyone, that Snowden tells 
 > us about.) If any other country uses the same language against the US - 
 > that a response will take place at a time and in a manner of our 
 > choosing -  it is quiet likely that the US will declare that one as a 
 > terrorist state and begin suffocating it economically, and even justify 
 > drone attacks as it pleases.
 > 
 > Another important factor; the US is the main party that refuses to get 
 > into talking about a global cyber security treaty, of any kind 
 > whatsoever, bec it apparently does not want any global constraints upon 
 > its own global cyber adventures...
 > 
 > And this is the country that many of us here allow to lead the global 
 > Internet regime.... And allow it to keep the world hyper confused about 
 > everything Internet governance, from the need of global forums for 
 > Internet norms and policies to an IANA transition process that is made 
 > to order to confuse and mislead, unless of course it is me who has an 
 > exceptionally poor IQ..
 > 
 > parminder
 > 
 > > Barring supporting evidence or admission what's more likely is they
 > > were taken down by pranksters/miscreants who tend to attack anything
 > > which is in the news.
 > >
 > > I tend to doubt that's how the US govt is likely to deal with a
 > > foreign power, it would be silly, except perhaps as a preventative
 > > measure (to block some attack in progress.)
 > >
 > > And I also doubt it would have much affect on N Korea.
 > >
 > > So, no evidence, and it doesn't even make sense.
 > >
 > >
 > > P.S. Did N Korea threaten harm to theater-goers if the film opened or
 > > not? There's some suspicion the threat was a hoax tho they seemed to
 > > retract the threat later.
 > >
 > > This is all like tap-dancing on quicksand.
 > >
 > 
 > 
 > ____________________________________________________________
 > You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
 >      governance at lists.igcaucus.org
 > To be removed from the list, visit:
 >      http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
 > 
 > For all other list information and functions, see:
 >      http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
 > To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
 >      http://www.igcaucus.org/
 > 
 > Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

-- 
        -Barry Shein

The World              | bzs at TheWorld.com           | http://www.TheWorld.com
Purveyors to the Trade | Voice: 800-THE-WRLD        | Dial-Up: US, PR, Canada
Software Tool & Die    | Public Access Internet     | SINCE 1989     *oo*

-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From kichango at gmail.com  Tue Jan  6 17:19:23 2015
From: kichango at gmail.com (Mawaki Chango)
Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2015 22:19:23 +0000
Subject: [governance] IGC Coordinator Election 2015
Message-ID: <CACTo+v84qBOx7AOzJe_b46ad1wA5tzVV7a9in=Mk8yOT2dZ=-w@mail.gmail.com>

Dear IGC Fellow Members,

I hope you enjoyed the holiday season. It is my pleasure to welcome you
back into the new year first by wishing you all a healthy, peaceful and
pleasant journey throughout 2015 filled with excitements, accomplishments,
joys and empathy; secondly by inviting you to choose our next new
coordinator.

The individual you will be voting for will, if he or she wins, replace me
as I conclude my term, and will be in custody during 2015 and 2016. For the
first year (2015) she or he will be working alongside Ms. Deirdre Williams
as co-coordinator for our activities.

For this purpose, you will be receiving in the next hour or so an
invitation email in your mailbox (at the email with which you are
subscribed to the IGC list.)

If one hour from now if you still haven't received your invitation while
you think you have maintained continuous membership over the last two
months (please, also check your spam folder), do let me know so that I can
look into it. While I do not expect many such cases, I have noted one
instance where this might likely be the case. So please even if you don't
intend to cast your vote right away, I would appreciate if you can check
within the next 24 hours and make sure you have received your invitation
(please do NOT send me a message if you have received your invitation, only
if you have not but think you should have.)

Good luck to our three candidates, and happy voting for us all!
Warm regards,

Mawaki

=====================================
Mawaki Chango, PhD
Founder
DIGILEXIS
http://www.digilexis.com
m.chango at digilexis.com | *kichango at gmail.com <kichango at gmail.com>*
Twitter: @digilexis & @prodigilexis
Mob. +225 57 55 57 53 | +225 44 48 77 64
Skype: digilexis
=====================================
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150106/5c0fdef6/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From ca at cafonso.ca  Tue Jan  6 18:39:14 2015
From: ca at cafonso.ca (Carlos A. Afonso)
Date: Tue, 06 Jan 2015 21:39:14 -0200
Subject: [governance] IGC Coordinator Election 2015
In-Reply-To: <CACTo+v84qBOx7AOzJe_b46ad1wA5tzVV7a9in=Mk8yOT2dZ=-w@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CACTo+v84qBOx7AOzJe_b46ad1wA5tzVV7a9in=Mk8yOT2dZ=-w@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <54AC7222.5070601@cafonso.ca>

Received and voted. Thanks, Mawaki.

[]s fraternos

--c.a.

On 01/06/2015 08:19 PM, Mawaki Chango wrote:
> Dear IGC Fellow Members,
> 
> I hope you enjoyed the holiday season. It is my pleasure to welcome you
> back into the new year first by wishing you all a healthy, peaceful and
> pleasant journey throughout 2015 filled with excitements,
> accomplishments, joys and empathy; secondly by inviting you to choose
> our next new coordinator.
> 
> The individual you will be voting for will, if he or she wins, replace
> me as I conclude my term, and will be in custody during 2015 and 2016.
> For the first year (2015) she or he will be working alongside Ms.
> Deirdre Williams as co-coordinator for our activities.
> 
> For this purpose, you will be receiving in the next hour or so an
> invitation email in your mailbox (at the email with which you are
> subscribed to the IGC list.)
> 
> If one hour from now if you still haven't received your invitation while
> you think you have maintained continuous membership over the last two
> months (please, also check your spam folder), do let me know so that I
> can look into it. While I do not expect many such cases, I have noted
> one instance where this might likely be the case. So please even if you
> don't intend to cast your vote right away, I would appreciate if you can
> check within the next 24 hours and make sure you have received your
> invitation (please do NOT send me a message if you have received your
> invitation, only if you have not but think you should have.)
> 
> Good luck to our three candidates, and happy voting for us all!
> Warm regards,
> 
> Mawaki 
> 
> =====================================
> Mawaki Chango, PhD                  
> Founder
> DIGILEXIS
> http://www.digilexis.com <http://www.digilexis.com/>
> m.chango at digilexis.com
> <mailto:m.chango at digilexis.com> | _kichango at gmail.com
> <mailto:kichango at gmail.com>_ 
> Twitter: @digilexis & @prodigilexis
> Mob. +225 57 55 57 53 | +225 44 48 77 64
> Skype: digilexis
> =====================================

-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From coffin at isoc.org  Tue Jan  6 19:01:09 2015
From: coffin at isoc.org (Jane Coffin)
Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2015 00:01:09 +0000
Subject: [governance] IGC Coordinator Election 2015
In-Reply-To: <54AC7222.5070601@cafonso.ca>
References: <CACTo+v84qBOx7AOzJe_b46ad1wA5tzVV7a9in=Mk8yOT2dZ=-w@mail.gmail.com>
 <54AC7222.5070601@cafonso.ca>
Message-ID: <D0D1E164.1F8BE%coffin@isoc.org>

Same.

From: "Carlos A. Afonso" <ca at cafonso.ca<mailto:ca at cafonso.ca>>
Reply-To: "governance at lists.igcaucus.org<mailto:governance at lists.igcaucus.org>" <governance at lists.igcaucus.org<mailto:governance at lists.igcaucus.org>>, "Carlos A. Afonso" <ca at cafonso.ca<mailto:ca at cafonso.ca>>
Date: Tuesday, January 6, 2015 at 18:39
To: "governance at lists.igcaucus.org<mailto:governance at lists.igcaucus.org>" <governance at lists.igcaucus.org<mailto:governance at lists.igcaucus.org>>
Subject: Re: [governance] IGC Coordinator Election 2015

Received and voted. Thanks, Mawaki.

[]s fraternos

--c.a.

On 01/06/2015 08:19 PM, Mawaki Chango wrote:
Dear IGC Fellow Members,
I hope you enjoyed the holiday season. It is my pleasure to welcome you
back into the new year first by wishing you all a healthy, peaceful and
pleasant journey throughout 2015 filled with excitements,
accomplishments, joys and empathy; secondly by inviting you to choose
our next new coordinator.
The individual you will be voting for will, if he or she wins, replace
me as I conclude my term, and will be in custody during 2015 and 2016.
For the first year (2015) she or he will be working alongside Ms.
Deirdre Williams as co-coordinator for our activities.
For this purpose, you will be receiving in the next hour or so an
invitation email in your mailbox (at the email with which you are
subscribed to the IGC list.)
If one hour from now if you still haven't received your invitation while
you think you have maintained continuous membership over the last two
months (please, also check your spam folder), do let me know so that I
can look into it. While I do not expect many such cases, I have noted
one instance where this might likely be the case. So please even if you
don't intend to cast your vote right away, I would appreciate if you can
check within the next 24 hours and make sure you have received your
invitation (please do NOT send me a message if you have received your
invitation, only if you have not but think you should have.)
Good luck to our three candidates, and happy voting for us all!
Warm regards,
Mawaki
=====================================
Mawaki Chango, PhD
Founder
DIGILEXIS
http://www.digilexis.com <http://www.digilexis.com/>
m.chango at digilexis.com<mailto:m.chango at digilexis.com>
<mailto:m.chango at digilexis.com> | _kichango at gmail.com<mailto:_kichango at gmail.com>
<mailto:kichango at gmail.com>_
Twitter: @digilexis & @prodigilexis
Mob. +225 57 55 57 53 | +225 44 48 77 64
Skype: digilexis
=====================================


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150107/c5ada8c4/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From soekpe at gmail.com  Tue Jan  6 20:50:06 2015
From: soekpe at gmail.com (Sonigitu Ekpe)
Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2015 02:50:06 +0100
Subject: [governance] IGC Coordinator Election 2015
In-Reply-To: <CACTo+v84qBOx7AOzJe_b46ad1wA5tzVV7a9in=Mk8yOT2dZ=-w@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CACTo+v84qBOx7AOzJe_b46ad1wA5tzVV7a9in=Mk8yOT2dZ=-w@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CALLeeavNVPBPBvOc-koJzOdbBVNRcn3r9az=RDKkK3B3Bd+DTQ@mail.gmail.com>

Dear Mawaki,

Greetings and a blissful new year.

I have not received a voting link.

Best.

Sonigitu Ekpe

Mobile +234 805 0232 469    Office + 234 802 751 0179
 "LIFE is all about love and thanksgiving"


On Tue, Jan 6, 2015 at 11:19 PM, Mawaki Chango <kichango at gmail.com> wrote:

> Dear IGC Fellow Members,
>
> I hope you enjoyed the holiday season. It is my pleasure to welcome you
> back into the new year first by wishing you all a healthy, peaceful and
> pleasant journey throughout 2015 filled with excitements, accomplishments,
> joys and empathy; secondly by inviting you to choose our next new
> coordinator.
>
> The individual you will be voting for will, if he or she wins, replace me
> as I conclude my term, and will be in custody during 2015 and 2016. For the
> first year (2015) she or he will be working alongside Ms. Deirdre Williams
> as co-coordinator for our activities.
>
> For this purpose, you will be receiving in the next hour or so an
> invitation email in your mailbox (at the email with which you are
> subscribed to the IGC list.)
>
> If one hour from now if you still haven't received your invitation while
> you think you have maintained continuous membership over the last two
> months (please, also check your spam folder), do let me know so that I can
> look into it. While I do not expect many such cases, I have noted one
> instance where this might likely be the case. So please even if you don't
> intend to cast your vote right away, I would appreciate if you can check
> within the next 24 hours and make sure you have received your invitation
> (please do NOT send me a message if you have received your invitation, only
> if you have not but think you should have.)
>
> Good luck to our three candidates, and happy voting for us all!
> Warm regards,
>
> Mawaki
>
> =====================================
> Mawaki Chango, PhD
> Founder
> DIGILEXIS
> http://www.digilexis.com
> m.chango at digilexis.com | *kichango at gmail.com <kichango at gmail.com>*
> Twitter: @digilexis & @prodigilexis
> Mob. +225 57 55 57 53 | +225 44 48 77 64
> Skype: digilexis
> =====================================
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>      governance at lists.igcaucus.org
> To be removed from the list, visit:
>      http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
>
> For all other list information and functions, see:
>      http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
>      http://www.igcaucus.org/
>
> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150107/98936ba3/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From shailam at yahoo.com  Tue Jan  6 23:03:05 2015
From: shailam at yahoo.com (shailam at yahoo.com)
Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2015 20:03:05 -0800
Subject: [governance] IGC Coordinator Election 2015
In-Reply-To: <CACTo+v84qBOx7AOzJe_b46ad1wA5tzVV7a9in=Mk8yOT2dZ=-w@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CACTo+v84qBOx7AOzJe_b46ad1wA5tzVV7a9in=Mk8yOT2dZ=-w@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CA604E90-ABDF-4670-B979-26940D2A4E3D@yahoo.com>

Hi Mawaki
Happy Mew Year 
I have not received the voting link !
Please forward to me
Shaila .


Sent from my iPhone

> On Jan 6, 2015, at 2:19 PM, Mawaki Chango <kichango at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Dear IGC Fellow Members,
> 
> I hope you enjoyed the holiday season. It is my pleasure to welcome you back into the new year first by wishing you all a healthy, peaceful and pleasant journey throughout 2015 filled with excitements, accomplishments, joys and empathy; secondly by inviting you to choose our next new coordinator.
> 
> The individual you will be voting for will, if he or she wins, replace me as I conclude my term, and will be in custody during 2015 and 2016. For the first year (2015) she or he will be working alongside Ms. Deirdre Williams as co-coordinator for our activities.
> 
> For this purpose, you will be receiving in the next hour or so an invitation email in your mailbox (at the email with which you are subscribed to the IGC list.)
> 
> If one hour from now if you still haven't received your invitation while you think you have maintained continuous membership over the last two months (please, also check your spam folder), do let me know so that I can look into it. While I do not expect many such cases, I have noted one instance where this might likely be the case. So please even if you don't intend to cast your vote right away, I would appreciate if you can check within the next 24 hours and make sure you have received your invitation (please do NOT send me a message if you have received your invitation, only if you have not but think you should have.)
> 
> Good luck to our three candidates, and happy voting for us all!
> Warm regards,
> 
> Mawaki 
> 
> =====================================
> Mawaki Chango, PhD                  
> Founder
> DIGILEXIS
> http://www.digilexis.com
> m.chango at digilexis.com | kichango at gmail.com 
> Twitter: @digilexis & @prodigilexis
> Mob. +225 57 55 57 53 | +225 44 48 77 64
> Skype: digilexis
> =====================================
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
> To be removed from the list, visit:
>     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
> 
> For all other list information and functions, see:
>     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
>     http://www.igcaucus.org/
> 
> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150106/ac67583a/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From judith at jhellerstein.com  Tue Jan  6 23:18:33 2015
From: judith at jhellerstein.com (Judith Hellerstein)
Date: Tue, 06 Jan 2015 23:18:33 -0500
Subject: [governance] IGC Coordinator Election 2015
In-Reply-To: <CACTo+v84qBOx7AOzJe_b46ad1wA5tzVV7a9in=Mk8yOT2dZ=-w@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CACTo+v84qBOx7AOzJe_b46ad1wA5tzVV7a9in=Mk8yOT2dZ=-w@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <54ACB399.1080102@jhellerstein.com>

An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150106/33f0f363/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From parminder at itforchange.net  Wed Jan  7 01:43:12 2015
From: parminder at itforchange.net (parminder)
Date: Wed, 07 Jan 2015 12:13:12 +0530
Subject: [governance] Fw: [IP] DL- One Man's Freedom is Another Man's
 Imperialism (via Evgeny Morosov)
In-Reply-To: <21676.12597.402296.624573@world.std.com>
References: <B4418CFBBB404646A063F2FB593B15D8@Toshiba>	<CA+EjHYoP=FWV6dwRXViOY1f2HDtYMmjmHvTXy46seEQk--WE2A@mail.gmail.com>	<AD9E48AD-9048-4775-BCA7-2ADD4810B847@hserus.net>	<21674.57560.115766.146423@world.std.com>	<54ABA24E.5040001@itforchange.net> <21676.12597.402296.624573@world.std.com>
Message-ID: <54ACD580.30009@itforchange.net>


On Wednesday 07 January 2015 12:32 AM, Barry Shein wrote:
> I don't think you have an "exceptionally poor IQ" :-)
>
> But there is a whiff of moral nihilism inherent in this.

Not at all. That is one one thing you can hardly ever accuse me of :)
>
> That said the problem we continue to run up against is no effective
> international dispute resolution process.
What about the International Court of Justice. In my view, with the 
digital encompassing a largely boundary-less world, there should be a 
separate digital bench of the ICJ. (Some organisations have suggested 
this as a part of the new institutional landscape that we need for 
global IG). But for that we need to develop international law bec ICJ 
applies international law - for which we need venues to legitimately 
develop international law..... Which is something many of us have been 
struggling for a long time, including in this space.

>   Even if we were to assume
> the worst the DPRK is accused of were true, or Iran for that matter
> (much of which is quite believable if for no other reason than they
> boast about it) what is the resolution process? Beyond a group of
> probably reasonable people agreeing to issue a statement sympathizing
> with one side or another?

The above is a clear plan of action, not just a vacant statement of 
outrage and sympathy. (and my proof against allegation of moral nihilism 
:) ) My view is that civil society should be working on such plans, to 
promote global public interest. But a lot of them seem to have other 
plans, for instance, joining up with big business like at the WEF to 
block development of international law and norms in this area...

parminder
>
> And, not surprisingly, we run into the same lack in cyber-matters.
>
> So it devolves to exercises of raw power, justified or not, with all
> the inherent dangers and unexpected consequences thereof.
>
> To my thinking that's the real problem.
>
> On January 6, 2015 at 14:22 parminder at itforchange.net (parminder) wrote:
>   >
>   > On Tuesday 06 January 2015 12:37 AM, Barry Shein wrote:
>   > > Something which strikes me in that article is that it makes the point
>   > > that the link between the Sony breaches and N Korea hasn't been
>   > > established but asserts that the US govt took down N Korea's internet
>   > > connection as if it were established fact.
>   >
>   > What is certainly an established fact is that the US has announced
>   > sanctions against North Korea specially in relation to this episode ,
>   > see
>   > http://washington.cbslocal.com/2015/01/02/obama-orders-sanctions-on-north-korea-over-sony-hack/
>   > .
>   >
>   > Further, Obama has warned that US's response would ,Ab���take place at a time
>   > and in a manner of our choosing.,Ab���
>   >
>   > However reprehensible the North Korean regime is, it is unacceptable
>   > that US should officially use such war like language for a yet to be
>   > proven allegation. (What about its own 'proven' attacks on Iranian
>   > nuclear reactors, and against practically everyone, that Snowden tells
>   > us about.) If any other country uses the same language against the US -
>   > that a response will take place at a time and in a manner of our
>   > choosing -  it is quiet likely that the US will declare that one as a
>   > terrorist state and begin suffocating it economically, and even justify
>   > drone attacks as it pleases.
>   >
>   > Another important factor; the US is the main party that refuses to get
>   > into talking about a global cyber security treaty, of any kind
>   > whatsoever, bec it apparently does not want any global constraints upon
>   > its own global cyber adventures...
>   >
>   > And this is the country that many of us here allow to lead the global
>   > Internet regime.... And allow it to keep the world hyper confused about
>   > everything Internet governance, from the need of global forums for
>   > Internet norms and policies to an IANA transition process that is made
>   > to order to confuse and mislead, unless of course it is me who has an
>   > exceptionally poor IQ..
>   >
>   > parminder
>   >
>   > > Barring supporting evidence or admission what's more likely is they
>   > > were taken down by pranksters/miscreants who tend to attack anything
>   > > which is in the news.
>   > >
>   > > I tend to doubt that's how the US govt is likely to deal with a
>   > > foreign power, it would be silly, except perhaps as a preventative
>   > > measure (to block some attack in progress.)
>   > >
>   > > And I also doubt it would have much affect on N Korea.
>   > >
>   > > So, no evidence, and it doesn't even make sense.
>   > >
>   > >
>   > > P.S. Did N Korea threaten harm to theater-goers if the film opened or
>   > > not? There's some suspicion the threat was a hoax tho they seemed to
>   > > retract the threat later.
>   > >
>   > > This is all like tap-dancing on quicksand.
>   > >
>   >
>   >
>   > ____________________________________________________________
>   > You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>   >      governance at lists.igcaucus.org
>   > To be removed from the list, visit:
>   >      http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
>   >
>   > For all other list information and functions, see:
>   >      http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
>   > To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
>   >      http://www.igcaucus.org/
>   >
>   > Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
>


-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From remmyn at gmail.com  Wed Jan  7 02:40:23 2015
From: remmyn at gmail.com (Remmy Nweke)
Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2015 23:40:23 -0800
Subject: [governance] IGC Coordinator Election 2015
Message-ID: <-5474218373577558485@unknownmsgid>

Dear Mawaki
Compliments of the season too and all.
Please note I am yet to get voting invite.
Thanks
Remmy Nweke
@ITRealms

Sent from my Windows Phone
------------------------------
From: Mawaki Chango <kichango at gmail.com>
Sent: 06/01/2015 23:20
To: Internet Governance <governance at lists.igcaucus.org>
Subject: [governance] IGC Coordinator Election 2015

Dear IGC Fellow Members,

I hope you enjoyed the holiday season. It is my pleasure to welcome you
back into the new year first by wishing you all a healthy, peaceful and
pleasant journey throughout 2015 filled with excitements, accomplishments,
joys and empathy; secondly by inviting you to choose our next new
coordinator.

The individual you will be voting for will, if he or she wins, replace me
as I conclude my term, and will be in custody during 2015 and 2016. For the
first year (2015) she or he will be working alongside Ms. Deirdre Williams
as co-coordinator for our activities.

For this purpose, you will be receiving in the next hour or so an
invitation email in your mailbox (at the email with which you are
subscribed to the IGC list.)

If one hour from now if you still haven't received your invitation while
you think you have maintained continuous membership over the last two
months (please, also check your spam folder), do let me know so that I can
look into it. While I do not expect many such cases, I have noted one
instance where this might likely be the case. So please even if you don't
intend to cast your vote right away, I would appreciate if you can check
within the next 24 hours and make sure you have received your invitation
(please do NOT send me a message if you have received your invitation, only
if you have not but think you should have.)

Good luck to our three candidates, and happy voting for us all!
Warm regards,

Mawaki

=====================================
Mawaki Chango, PhD
Founder
DIGILEXIS
http://www.digilexis.com
m.chango at digilexis.com | *kichango at gmail.com <kichango at gmail.com>*
Twitter: @digilexis & @prodigilexis
Mob. +225 57 55 57 53 | +225 44 48 77 64
Skype: digilexis
=====================================
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150106/72340bbd/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From daniel at digsys.bg  Wed Jan  7 03:03:49 2015
From: daniel at digsys.bg (Daniel Kalchev)
Date: Wed, 07 Jan 2015 10:03:49 +0200
Subject: [governance] Fw: [IP] DL- One Man's Freedom is Another Man's
 Imperialism (via Evgeny Morosov)
In-Reply-To: <21676.12597.402296.624573@world.std.com>
References: <B4418CFBBB404646A063F2FB593B15D8@Toshiba>	<CA+EjHYoP=FWV6dwRXViOY1f2HDtYMmjmHvTXy46seEQk--WE2A@mail.gmail.com>	<AD9E48AD-9048-4775-BCA7-2ADD4810B847@hserus.net>	<21674.57560.115766.146423@world.std.com>	<54ABA24E.5040001@itforchange.net> <21676.12597.402296.624573@world.std.com>
Message-ID: <54ACE865.4030503@digsys.bg>



On 06.01.15 21:02, Barry Shein wrote:
> 
> So it devolves to exercises of raw power, justified or not, with all
> the inherent dangers and unexpected consequences thereof.
> 
> To my thinking that's the real problem.

Yes. That is the real problem. The US for some reason think they are the
elected Government of the Earth. Or, if this is not the case, they are
apparently under the impression that a divine force has given them the
rule over the kingdom Earth.

Internet (governance) is just one of the facets.

Unfortunately, the possible ways to wake up from this will hurt a lot of
people.

Daniel

-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From ymshana2003 at gmail.com  Wed Jan  7 03:21:31 2015
From: ymshana2003 at gmail.com (ymshana2003)
Date: Wed, 07 Jan 2015 10:21:31 +0200
Subject: [governance] IGC Coordinator Election 2015
Message-ID: <2o1dp7im17h6bjjabhdddnsw.1420618891800@email.android.com>

Thank you. 
I have my constitutional right as a member of this group.
Good luck to the incumbents. 
Yassin


Sent from Samsung Mobile

-------- Original message --------
From: Mawaki Chango <kichango at gmail.com> 
Date:07/01/2015  00:19  (GMT+02:00) 
To: Internet Governance <governance at lists.igcaucus.org> 
Subject: [governance] IGC Coordinator Election 2015 

Dear IGC Fellow Members,

I hope you enjoyed the holiday season. It is my pleasure to welcome you back into the new year first by wishing you all a healthy, peaceful and pleasant journey throughout 2015 filled with excitements, accomplishments, joys and empathy; secondly by inviting you to choose our next new coordinator.

The individual you will be voting for will, if he or she wins, replace me as I conclude my term, and will be in custody during 2015 and 2016. For the first year (2015) she or he will be working alongside Ms. Deirdre Williams as co-coordinator for our activities.

For this purpose, you will be receiving in the next hour or so an invitation email in your mailbox (at the email with which you are subscribed to the IGC list.)

If one hour from now if you still haven't received your invitation while you think you have maintained continuous membership over the last two months (please, also check your spam folder), do let me know so that I can look into it. While I do not expect many such cases, I have noted one instance where this might likely be the case. So please even if you don't intend to cast your vote right away, I would appreciate if you can check within the next 24 hours and make sure you have received your invitation (please do NOT send me a message if you have received your invitation, only if you have not but think you should have.)

Good luck to our three candidates, and happy voting for us all!
Warm regards,

Mawaki 

=====================================
Mawaki Chango, PhD                  
Founder
DIGILEXIS
http://www.digilexis.com
m.chango at digilexis.com | kichango at gmail.com 
Twitter: @digilexis & @prodigilexis
Mob. +225 57 55 57 53 | +225 44 48 77 64
Skype: digilexis
=====================================
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150107/bea35dc5/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From norbertglakpe at gmail.com  Wed Jan  7 03:54:49 2015
From: norbertglakpe at gmail.com (Norbert Komlan GLAKPE)
Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2015 08:54:49 +0000
Subject: [governance] IGC Coordinator Election 2015
In-Reply-To: <D0D1E164.1F8BE%coffin@isoc.org>
References: <CACTo+v84qBOx7AOzJe_b46ad1wA5tzVV7a9in=Mk8yOT2dZ=-w@mail.gmail.com>
 <54AC7222.5070601@cafonso.ca> <D0D1E164.1F8BE%coffin@isoc.org>
Message-ID: <CAMVeOEWoeUKX_TyAeTxKhFG6eyWtxLiZzy_+x1p1rZUsx=EK+w@mail.gmail.com>

Hi Mawaki,
Thanks for to great job you did.

Received and voted too.

Norbert GLAKPE

2015-01-07 0:01 GMT+00:00 Jane Coffin <coffin at isoc.org>:

>  Same.
>
>   From: "Carlos A. Afonso" <ca at cafonso.ca>
> Reply-To: "governance at lists.igcaucus.org" <governance at lists.igcaucus.org>,
> "Carlos A. Afonso" <ca at cafonso.ca>
> Date: Tuesday, January 6, 2015 at 18:39
> To: "governance at lists.igcaucus.org" <governance at lists.igcaucus.org>
> Subject: Re: [governance] IGC Coordinator Election 2015
>
>   Received and voted. Thanks, Mawaki.
>
>  []s fraternos
>
>  --c.a.
>
>  On 01/06/2015 08:19 PM, Mawaki Chango wrote:
>
> Dear IGC Fellow Members,
>  I hope you enjoyed the holiday season. It is my pleasure to welcome you
> back into the new year first by wishing you all a healthy, peaceful and
> pleasant journey throughout 2015 filled with excitements,
> accomplishments, joys and empathy; secondly by inviting you to choose
> our next new coordinator.
>  The individual you will be voting for will, if he or she wins, replace
> me as I conclude my term, and will be in custody during 2015 and 2016.
> For the first year (2015) she or he will be working alongside Ms.
> Deirdre Williams as co-coordinator for our activities.
>  For this purpose, you will be receiving in the next hour or so an
> invitation email in your mailbox (at the email with which you are
> subscribed to the IGC list.)
>  If one hour from now if you still haven't received your invitation while
> you think you have maintained continuous membership over the last two
> months (please, also check your spam folder), do let me know so that I
> can look into it. While I do not expect many such cases, I have noted
> one instance where this might likely be the case. So please even if you
> don't intend to cast your vote right away, I would appreciate if you can
> check within the next 24 hours and make sure you have received your
> invitation (please do NOT send me a message if you have received your
> invitation, only if you have not but think you should have.)
>  Good luck to our three candidates, and happy voting for us all!
> Warm regards,
>  Mawaki
>  =====================================
> Mawaki Chango, PhD
> Founder
> DIGILEXIS
> http://www.digilexis.com <http://www.digilexis.com/>
> m.chango at digilexis.com
> <mailto:m.chango at digilexis.com <m.chango at digilexis.com>> |
> _kichango at gmail.com
> <mailto:kichango at gmail.com>_ <kichango at gmail.com%3E_>
> Twitter: @digilexis & @prodigilexis
> Mob. +225 57 55 57 53 | +225 44 48 77 64
> Skype: digilexis
> =====================================
>
>
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>      governance at lists.igcaucus.org
> To be removed from the list, visit:
>      http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
>
> For all other list information and functions, see:
>      http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
>      http://www.igcaucus.org/
>
> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150107/70a08e0a/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From andersj at elon.edu  Wed Jan  7 06:22:37 2015
From: andersj at elon.edu (Janna Anderson)
Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2015 11:22:37 +0000
Subject: [governance] IGC Coordinator Election 2015
In-Reply-To: <CALLeeavNVPBPBvOc-koJzOdbBVNRcn3r9az=RDKkK3B3Bd+DTQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <D0D280EF.51EEB%andersj@elon.edu>

Mawaki,

Thank you for your work. I also did not receive the voting link.

Best,
Janna

--
Janna Quitney Anderson
Director, Imagining the Internet Center
http://www.imaginingtheinternet.org
Professor Elon University School of Communications

From: Sonigitu Ekpe <soekpe at gmail.com<mailto:soekpe at gmail.com>>
Reply-To: Internet Governance <governance at lists.igcaucus.org<mailto:governance at lists.igcaucus.org>>, Sonigitu Ekpe <soekpe at gmail.com<mailto:soekpe at gmail.com>>
Date: Tuesday, January 6, 2015 8:50 PM
To: Internet Governance <governance at lists.igcaucus.org<mailto:governance at lists.igcaucus.org>>, Mawaki Chango <kichango at gmail.com<mailto:kichango at gmail.com>>
Subject: Re: [governance] IGC Coordinator Election 2015

Dear Mawaki,

Greetings and a blissful new year.

I have not received a voting link.

Best.

Sonigitu Ekpe

Mobile +234 805 0232 469    Office + 234 802 751 0179
 "LIFE is all about love and thanksgiving"


On Tue, Jan 6, 2015 at 11:19 PM, Mawaki Chango <kichango at gmail.com<mailto:kichango at gmail.com>> wrote:
Dear IGC Fellow Members,

I hope you enjoyed the holiday season. It is my pleasure to welcome you back into the new year first by wishing you all a healthy, peaceful and pleasant journey throughout 2015 filled with excitements, accomplishments, joys and empathy; secondly by inviting you to choose our next new coordinator.

The individual you will be voting for will, if he or she wins, replace me as I conclude my term, and will be in custody during 2015 and 2016. For the first year (2015) she or he will be working alongside Ms. Deirdre Williams as co-coordinator for our activities.

For this purpose, you will be receiving in the next hour or so an invitation email in your mailbox (at the email with which you are subscribed to the IGC list.)

If one hour from now if you still haven't received your invitation while you think you have maintained continuous membership over the last two months (please, also check your spam folder), do let me know so that I can look into it. While I do not expect many such cases, I have noted one instance where this might likely be the case. So please even if you don't intend to cast your vote right away, I would appreciate if you can check within the next 24 hours and make sure you have received your invitation (please do NOT send me a message if you have received your invitation, only if you have not but think you should have.)

Good luck to our three candidates, and happy voting for us all!
Warm regards,

Mawaki

=====================================
Mawaki Chango, PhD
Founder
DIGILEXIS
http://www.digilexis.com<http://www.digilexis.com/>
m.chango at digilexis.com<mailto:m.chango at digilexis.com> | kichango at gmail.com<mailto:kichango at gmail.com>
Twitter: @digilexis & @prodigilexis
Mob. +225 57 55 57 53 | +225 44 48 77 64
Skype: digilexis
=====================================

____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org<mailto:governance at lists.igcaucus.org>
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150107/674dca6c/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From remmyn at gmail.com  Wed Jan  7 06:27:53 2015
From: remmyn at gmail.com (Remmy Nweke)
Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2015 12:27:53 +0100
Subject: [governance] IGC Coordinator Election 2015
In-Reply-To: <54AC7222.5070601@cafonso.ca>
References: <CACTo+v84qBOx7AOzJe_b46ad1wA5tzVV7a9in=Mk8yOT2dZ=-w@mail.gmail.com>
	<54AC7222.5070601@cafonso.ca>
Message-ID: <CAMc__oonx9-9rUF39KHVYJrCQWu4Ud5CK8n__+MP=K7HTPCu5A@mail.gmail.com>

Thanks Mawaki, just voted.
Remmy Nweke
@ITRealms

On Wed, Jan 7, 2015 at 12:39 AM, Carlos A. Afonso <ca at cafonso.ca> wrote:

> Received and voted. Thanks, Mawaki.
>
> []s fraternos
>
> --c.a.
>
> On 01/06/2015 08:19 PM, Mawaki Chango wrote:
> > Dear IGC Fellow Members,
> >
> > I hope you enjoyed the holiday season. It is my pleasure to welcome you
> > back into the new year first by wishing you all a healthy, peaceful and
> > pleasant journey throughout 2015 filled with excitements,
> > accomplishments, joys and empathy; secondly by inviting you to choose
> > our next new coordinator.
> >
> > The individual you will be voting for will, if he or she wins, replace
> > me as I conclude my term, and will be in custody during 2015 and 2016.
> > For the first year (2015) she or he will be working alongside Ms.
> > Deirdre Williams as co-coordinator for our activities.
> >
> > For this purpose, you will be receiving in the next hour or so an
> > invitation email in your mailbox (at the email with which you are
> > subscribed to the IGC list.)
> >
> > If one hour from now if you still haven't received your invitation while
> > you think you have maintained continuous membership over the last two
> > months (please, also check your spam folder), do let me know so that I
> > can look into it. While I do not expect many such cases, I have noted
> > one instance where this might likely be the case. So please even if you
> > don't intend to cast your vote right away, I would appreciate if you can
> > check within the next 24 hours and make sure you have received your
> > invitation (please do NOT send me a message if you have received your
> > invitation, only if you have not but think you should have.)
> >
> > Good luck to our three candidates, and happy voting for us all!
> > Warm regards,
> >
> > Mawaki
> >
> > =====================================
> > Mawaki Chango, PhD
> > Founder
> > DIGILEXIS
> > http://www.digilexis.com <http://www.digilexis.com/>
> > m.chango at digilexis.com
> > <mailto:m.chango at digilexis.com> | _kichango at gmail.com
> > <mailto:kichango at gmail.com>_
> > Twitter: @digilexis & @prodigilexis
> > Mob. +225 57 55 57 53 | +225 44 48 77 64
> > Skype: digilexis
> > =====================================
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>      governance at lists.igcaucus.org
> To be removed from the list, visit:
>      http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
>
> For all other list information and functions, see:
>      http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
>      http://www.igcaucus.org/
>
> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
>
>


-- 
____
REMMY NWEKE,
Lead Strategist/Group Executive Editor,
DigitalSENSE Africa Media Ltd
(publishers of) DigitalSENSE Business News;
ITREALMS, NaijaAgroNet
(Multiple-award winning medium)
Published by: DigitalSENSE Africa Media Ltd
Block F1, Shop 133 Moyosore Aboderin Plaza
Bolade Junction, Oshodi-Lagos
M: 234-8033592762, 8023122558, 8051000475,
T: @ITRealms <http://www.twitter.com/ITRealms>
[Member, NIRA Executive Board]
Author: A Decade of ICT Reportage in Nigeria
<https://www.facebook.com/adecadeofictreportageinnigeria>
NDS Forum on Internet Governance for Development (IG4D) 2015 <
http://www.digitalsenseafrica.com.ng>- June 5
Nigeria IPv6 Roundtable 2015 <http://www.ipv6forumnigeria.ng> - June 6
@Welcome Centre Hotels. Register now. Email: remnekkv at gmail.com
_____________________________________________________________________
*Confidentiality Notice:* The information in this document and attachments
are confidential and may also be privileged information. It is intended
only for the use of the named recipient. Remmy Nweke does not accept legal
responsibility for the contents of this e-mail. If you are not the intended
recipient, please notify me immediately, then delete this document and do
not disclose the contents of this document to any other person, nor make
any copies. Violators may face court persecution.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150107/dd176d23/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From compsoftnet at gmail.com  Wed Jan  7 08:58:49 2015
From: compsoftnet at gmail.com (Akinremi Peter Taiwo)
Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2015 14:58:49 +0100
Subject: [governance] IGC Coordinator Election 2015
In-Reply-To: <CACTo+v84qBOx7AOzJe_b46ad1wA5tzVV7a9in=Mk8yOT2dZ=-w@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CACTo+v84qBOx7AOzJe_b46ad1wA5tzVV7a9in=Mk8yOT2dZ=-w@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAGK4d0-uffcRmJnXBjRKsWXVWsC_3cy9PEPFFXtwDxRO4ntZ7g@mail.gmail.com>

Hi Mawaki,

Great job.

Received and voted too.

Thanks
Peter
On Jan 6, 2015 11:20 PM, "Mawaki Chango" <kichango at gmail.com> wrote:

> Dear IGC Fellow Members,
>
> I hope you enjoyed the holiday season. It is my pleasure to welcome you
> back into the new year first by wishing you all a healthy, peaceful and
> pleasant journey throughout 2015 filled with excitements, accomplishments,
> joys and empathy; secondly by inviting you to choose our next new
> coordinator.
>
> The individual you will be voting for will, if he or she wins, replace me
> as I conclude my term, and will be in custody during 2015 and 2016. For the
> first year (2015) she or he will be working alongside Ms. Deirdre Williams
> as co-coordinator for our activities.
>
> For this purpose, you will be receiving in the next hour or so an
> invitation email in your mailbox (at the email with which you are
> subscribed to the IGC list.)
>
> If one hour from now if you still haven't received your invitation while
> you think you have maintained continuous membership over the last two
> months (please, also check your spam folder), do let me know so that I can
> look into it. While I do not expect many such cases, I have noted one
> instance where this might likely be the case. So please even if you don't
> intend to cast your vote right away, I would appreciate if you can check
> within the next 24 hours and make sure you have received your invitation
> (please do NOT send me a message if you have received your invitation, only
> if you have not but think you should have.)
>
> Good luck to our three candidates, and happy voting for us all!
> Warm regards,
>
> Mawaki
>
> =====================================
> Mawaki Chango, PhD
> Founder
> DIGILEXIS
> http://www.digilexis.com
> m.chango at digilexis.com | *kichango at gmail.com <kichango at gmail.com>*
> Twitter: @digilexis & @prodigilexis
> Mob. +225 57 55 57 53 | +225 44 48 77 64
> Skype: digilexis
> =====================================
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>      governance at lists.igcaucus.org
> To be removed from the list, visit:
>      http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
>
> For all other list information and functions, see:
>      http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
>      http://www.igcaucus.org/
>
> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150107/b7ac5b58/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From chlebrum at gmail.com  Wed Jan  7 09:22:28 2015
From: chlebrum at gmail.com (chlebrum .)
Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2015 15:22:28 +0100
Subject: [governance] IGC Coordinator Election 2015
In-Reply-To: <CACTo+v84qBOx7AOzJe_b46ad1wA5tzVV7a9in=Mk8yOT2dZ=-w@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CACTo+v84qBOx7AOzJe_b46ad1wA5tzVV7a9in=Mk8yOT2dZ=-w@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CANMQhZh+at3yXQH_sJZTi4cYcc1kgRS24uM26UN7VLCq354XtA@mail.gmail.com>

Dear Mawaki

Just to say you I haven't receive any email for ballot. Could you send me
link or information for this?

Chantal Lebrument
​Courriel: c <lebrument at open-root.eu>hlebrum at gmail.com
Mob: +33 6 8369 5460

2015-01-06 23:19 GMT+01:00 Mawaki Chango <kichango at gmail.com>:

> Dear IGC Fellow Members,
>
> I hope you enjoyed the holiday season. It is my pleasure to welcome you
> back into the new year first by wishing you all a healthy, peaceful and
> pleasant journey throughout 2015 filled with excitements, accomplishments,
> joys and empathy; secondly by inviting you to choose our next new
> coordinator.
>
> The individual you will be voting for will, if he or she wins, replace me
> as I conclude my term, and will be in custody during 2015 and 2016. For the
> first year (2015) she or he will be working alongside Ms. Deirdre Williams
> as co-coordinator for our activities.
>
> For this purpose, you will be receiving in the next hour or so an
> invitation email in your mailbox (at the email with which you are
> subscribed to the IGC list.)
>
> If one hour from now if you still haven't received your invitation while
> you think you have maintained continuous membership over the last two
> months (please, also check your spam folder), do let me know so that I can
> look into it. While I do not expect many such cases, I have noted one
> instance where this might likely be the case. So please even if you don't
> intend to cast your vote right away, I would appreciate if you can check
> within the next 24 hours and make sure you have received your invitation
> (please do NOT send me a message if you have received your invitation, only
> if you have not but think you should have.)
>
> Good luck to our three candidates, and happy voting for us all!
> Warm regards,
>
> Mawaki
>
> =====================================
> Mawaki Chango, PhD
> Founder
> DIGILEXIS
> http://www.digilexis.com
> m.chango at digilexis.com | *kichango at gmail.com <kichango at gmail.com>*
> Twitter: @digilexis & @prodigilexis
> Mob. +225 57 55 57 53 | +225 44 48 77 64
> Skype: digilexis
> =====================================
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>      governance at lists.igcaucus.org
> To be removed from the list, visit:
>      http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
>
> For all other list information and functions, see:
>      http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
>      http://www.igcaucus.org/
>
> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150107/ce19afaa/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From ca at cafonso.ca  Wed Jan  7 09:51:43 2015
From: ca at cafonso.ca (Carlos A. Afonso)
Date: Wed, 07 Jan 2015 12:51:43 -0200
Subject: [governance] A BR view of multistkaholder processes...
Message-ID: <54AD47FF.1000803@cafonso.ca>

Just published in the IEEE Internet Computing journal:

http://online.qmags.com/IC0115?sessionID=BD7A2B7CBEF89C57D8F47874E&cid=3193795&eid=19210#pg76&mode2

The Origin and Evolution of Multistakeholder Models

Virgilio Almeida - Federal University of Minas Gerais
Demi Getschko - Pontifícia Universidade Católica de São Paulo
Carlos Afonso - Instituto Nupef, Rio de Janeiro

Abstract: Various domains have adopted multistakeholder models (MSMs) to
address and deal with global challenges, such as sustainability,
environment, climate, and Internet governance. Here, the authors examine
the use of MSMs and their historical evolution, fundamentals, and
characteristics. They also present examples of how such models are used
in the global Internet governance ecosystem. Finally, the article
presents a series of research questions that can be tackled to improve
the efficiency of multistakeholder processes.

frt rgds

--c.a.

-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From kichango at gmail.com  Wed Jan  7 09:57:41 2015
From: kichango at gmail.com (Mawaki Chango)
Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2015 14:57:41 +0000
Subject: [governance] Re: IGC Coordinator Election 2015
In-Reply-To: <CACTo+v84qBOx7AOzJe_b46ad1wA5tzVV7a9in=Mk8yOT2dZ=-w@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CACTo+v84qBOx7AOzJe_b46ad1wA5tzVV7a9in=Mk8yOT2dZ=-w@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CACTo+v_HZ3wEBsi3bUDGPfH=O_WyGBzpUa=RKMqAkUbTBPqNvA@mail.gmail.com>

Hi,

For all who have reported (and maintained) that they have not received
their ballot so far, here is the status:

1) Sonigitu Ekpe: your name is in the voting list and the system reports
you were sent a ballot to your Corssriver state government account. I just
sent you again another invite in the form of a reminder (subject line:
Reminder to participate in survey). Please check and carefully or let us
know if you no longer have access to that email account.

2) Shaila Mistry: Idem, to the email you are subscribed with.

3) Chantal Lebrument: Idem, to the email you are subscribed with.

4) Judith Hellerstein: True you were not sent a ballot, but I also have
hard time locating you on the membership list. I just ran your name in the
IGC user list page after page (it's painful not to be able to search the
full database of members' names at once... so please bear with me and let
me know your answers to the following questions.) Have you subscribed to
the list with this name? Have you been a member for at least 8 weeks now?

5) Raúl Echeberría: In fact this is the one case we spotted early as being
subject to a glitch was. Have you, Raul, discontinued your membership
recently before reactivating it or have you remained a member for at least
the last 2 months?

I would appreciate everybody check and double check thoroughly (and be
clear about having been a subscribed member for the last 2 months at least)
before sending a claim that they have not received their ballot. Thank you
for your understanding.

Best,

Mawaki


On Tue, Jan 6, 2015 at 10:19 PM, Mawaki Chango <kichango at gmail.com> wrote:

> Dear IGC Fellow Members,
>
> I hope you enjoyed the holiday season. It is my pleasure to welcome you
> back into the new year first by wishing you all a healthy, peaceful and
> pleasant journey throughout 2015 filled with excitements, accomplishments,
> joys and empathy; secondly by inviting you to choose our next new
> coordinator.
>
> The individual you will be voting for will, if he or she wins, replace me
> as I conclude my term, and will be in custody during 2015 and 2016. For the
> first year (2015) she or he will be working alongside Ms. Deirdre Williams
> as co-coordinator for our activities.
>
> For this purpose, you will be receiving in the next hour or so an
> invitation email in your mailbox (at the email with which you are
> subscribed to the IGC list.)
>
> If one hour from now if you still haven't received your invitation while
> you think you have maintained continuous membership over the last two
> months (please, also check your spam folder), do let me know so that I can
> look into it. While I do not expect many such cases, I have noted one
> instance where this might likely be the case. So please even if you don't
> intend to cast your vote right away, I would appreciate if you can check
> within the next 24 hours and make sure you have received your invitation
> (please do NOT send me a message if you have received your invitation, only
> if you have not but think you should have.)
>
> Good luck to our three candidates, and happy voting for us all!
> Warm regards,
>
> Mawaki
>
> =====================================
> Mawaki Chango, PhD
> Founder
> DIGILEXIS
> http://www.digilexis.com
> m.chango at digilexis.com | *kichango at gmail.com <kichango at gmail.com>*
> Twitter: @digilexis & @prodigilexis
> Mob. +225 57 55 57 53 | +225 44 48 77 64
> Skype: digilexis
> =====================================
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150107/bce3889e/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From devonrb at gmail.com  Wed Jan  7 11:42:10 2015
From: devonrb at gmail.com (Devon Blake)
Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2015 11:42:10 -0500
Subject: [governance] IGC Coordinator Election 2015
In-Reply-To: <CACTo+v84qBOx7AOzJe_b46ad1wA5tzVV7a9in=Mk8yOT2dZ=-w@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CACTo+v84qBOx7AOzJe_b46ad1wA5tzVV7a9in=Mk8yOT2dZ=-w@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAE1T72TS2K8c2eppw1_TBjn6snsAdcdfR1jeL1NOtbRw2d4ZUA@mail.gmail.com>

Hi Mawaki,
Happy new year, I have not received a ballot.
Devon

On Tue, Jan 6, 2015 at 5:19 PM, Mawaki Chango <kichango at gmail.com> wrote:

> Dear IGC Fellow Members,
>
> I hope you enjoyed the holiday season. It is my pleasure to welcome you
> back into the new year first by wishing you all a healthy, peaceful and
> pleasant journey throughout 2015 filled with excitements, accomplishments,
> joys and empathy; secondly by inviting you to choose our next new
> coordinator.
>
> The individual you will be voting for will, if he or she wins, replace me
> as I conclude my term, and will be in custody during 2015 and 2016. For the
> first year (2015) she or he will be working alongside Ms. Deirdre Williams
> as co-coordinator for our activities.
>
> For this purpose, you will be receiving in the next hour or so an
> invitation email in your mailbox (at the email with which you are
> subscribed to the IGC list.)
>
> If one hour from now if you still haven't received your invitation while
> you think you have maintained continuous membership over the last two
> months (please, also check your spam folder), do let me know so that I can
> look into it. While I do not expect many such cases, I have noted one
> instance where this might likely be the case. So please even if you don't
> intend to cast your vote right away, I would appreciate if you can check
> within the next 24 hours and make sure you have received your invitation
> (please do NOT send me a message if you have received your invitation, only
> if you have not but think you should have.)
>
> Good luck to our three candidates, and happy voting for us all!
> Warm regards,
>
> Mawaki
>
> =====================================
> Mawaki Chango, PhD
> Founder
> DIGILEXIS
> http://www.digilexis.com
> m.chango at digilexis.com | *kichango at gmail.com <kichango at gmail.com>*
> Twitter: @digilexis & @prodigilexis
> Mob. +225 57 55 57 53 | +225 44 48 77 64
> Skype: digilexis
> =====================================
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>      governance at lists.igcaucus.org
> To be removed from the list, visit:
>      http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
>
> For all other list information and functions, see:
>      http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
>      http://www.igcaucus.org/
>
> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
>
>


-- 
Devon Blake
ICT and Development Consultant
4 Arlington Ave
Kgn 2
,Phone: Office 876-928-9902, Mobile, 876-483-2632

To be kind, To be helpful, To network
*Earthwise ... For Life!*
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150107/f6fe30bc/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From kichango at gmail.com  Wed Jan  7 12:08:41 2015
From: kichango at gmail.com (Mawaki Chango)
Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2015 17:08:41 +0000
Subject: [governance] IGC Coordinator Election 2015
In-Reply-To: <CAE1T72TS2K8c2eppw1_TBjn6snsAdcdfR1jeL1NOtbRw2d4ZUA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CACTo+v84qBOx7AOzJe_b46ad1wA5tzVV7a9in=Mk8yOT2dZ=-w@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAE1T72TS2K8c2eppw1_TBjn6snsAdcdfR1jeL1NOtbRw2d4ZUA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CACTo+v9p+0gjmA+RVjaSq8i93jOvQwgphpj15Cy7Wbk4DT9aLQ@mail.gmail.com>

Hi Devon,

Thanks. You are on the voting list and should have received the ballot. I
am sending you a reminder now.

For anyone who might still be looking for their ballot in their email, the
subject line is "Voting link for 2015 IGC coordinator election"
You may want to try and run a search on your mail client to maximize the
chances that you locate your ballot.

Again, happy voting!

mC.


On Wed, Jan 7, 2015 at 4:42 PM, Devon Blake <devonrb at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi Mawaki,
> Happy new year, I have not received a ballot.
> Devon
>
> On Tue, Jan 6, 2015 at 5:19 PM, Mawaki Chango <kichango at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Dear IGC Fellow Members,
>>
>> I hope you enjoyed the holiday season. It is my pleasure to welcome you
>> back into the new year first by wishing you all a healthy, peaceful and
>> pleasant journey throughout 2015 filled with excitements, accomplishments,
>> joys and empathy; secondly by inviting you to choose our next new
>> coordinator.
>>
>> The individual you will be voting for will, if he or she wins, replace me
>> as I conclude my term, and will be in custody during 2015 and 2016. For the
>> first year (2015) she or he will be working alongside Ms. Deirdre Williams
>> as co-coordinator for our activities.
>>
>> For this purpose, you will be receiving in the next hour or so an
>> invitation email in your mailbox (at the email with which you are
>> subscribed to the IGC list.)
>>
>> If one hour from now if you still haven't received your invitation while
>> you think you have maintained continuous membership over the last two
>> months (please, also check your spam folder), do let me know so that I can
>> look into it. While I do not expect many such cases, I have noted one
>> instance where this might likely be the case. So please even if you don't
>> intend to cast your vote right away, I would appreciate if you can check
>> within the next 24 hours and make sure you have received your invitation
>> (please do NOT send me a message if you have received your invitation, only
>> if you have not but think you should have.)
>>
>> Good luck to our three candidates, and happy voting for us all!
>> Warm regards,
>>
>> Mawaki
>>
>> =====================================
>> Mawaki Chango, PhD
>> Founder
>> DIGILEXIS
>> http://www.digilexis.com
>> m.chango at digilexis.com | *kichango at gmail.com <kichango at gmail.com>*
>> Twitter: @digilexis & @prodigilexis
>> Mob. +225 57 55 57 53 | +225 44 48 77 64
>> Skype: digilexis
>> =====================================
>>
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>>      governance at lists.igcaucus.org
>> To be removed from the list, visit:
>>      http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
>>
>> For all other list information and functions, see:
>>      http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
>> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
>>      http://www.igcaucus.org/
>>
>> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Devon Blake
> ICT and Development Consultant
> 4 Arlington Ave
> Kgn 2
> ,Phone: Office 876-928-9902, Mobile, 876-483-2632
>
> To be kind, To be helpful, To network
> *Earthwise ... For Life!*
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150107/128912fb/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From ekenyanito at gmail.com  Wed Jan  7 13:48:46 2015
From: ekenyanito at gmail.com (Ephraim Percy Kenyanito)
Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2015 21:48:46 +0300
Subject: [governance] ICT, Internet Rights and Post 2015 Development Agenda
Message-ID: <CAHwnKeH4u-5DSemM3+4itKHnYYS_4UOHbhxk2ODdCDy45g1WAA@mail.gmail.com>

Happy 2015,

Apologies for cross posting,

Just letting those in and around NYC, have time next week and are
interested in the Post 2015 process that the President of the 69th session
of the United Nations General Assembly, H.E. Mr. Sam Kutesa, is inviting
civil society representatives to a special interactive dialogue to be held
on Friday, 16 January, from 1:15 - 2:45 p.m. in the *Trusteeship Council
Chamber*.

If you have a valid UN Grounds Pass, you may attend the event without an
additional ticket. If you do not possess a UN Grounds Pass, please apply
for a Special Event Ticket by completing this online form by 13 January
2015: http://bit.ly/PGA-SETs

Please see attached to this email for further information.

The draft programmes and registration links for the *post-2015 preparatory
forum for major groups and other stakeholders*, to be held on 16 January,
and the *first post-2015 negotiating session*, to be held from 19-21
January, are now available on:

*UN FORMS AND INFORMATION*
*Stakeholder Preparatory Forum - 16 January 2015*
*To register, please click here
<https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1alZ1t9FFOl92F1kxzBsJUSOn2tvt4Z3i87mwUg5C9OM/viewform?c=0&w=1>
(deadline
12 January 2014). The draft proposed agenda is available
here: http://bit.ly/16Jan-Proposed-Agenda
<http://bit.ly/16Jan-Proposed-Agenda> DESA-DSD and UN-NGLS are coordinating
a preparatory forum for major groups and other civil society stakeholders
to be held on Friday, 16 January, in advance of the 19-21 January
negotiating session on the post-2015 development agenda.*

*​Post-2015 intergovernmental negotiations*
19 Jan 2015 - 21 Jan 2015
New York

*Programme*

Draft Programme for stocktaking session Intergovernmental negotiations on
the post-2015 development agenda
<http://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/5814Programme%20for%20stocktaking%20session%20Jan%2019%20to%2021%20rev2.pdf>

*Other documents*

Letter from Post-2015 co-facilitators regarding revised draft decision on
modalities for the process of intergovernmental negotiations on the
post-2015 development agenda
<http://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/5665Letter_transmittal_modalities_1212.pdf>

*Side events*

Guidelines for Organizers of Side Events
<http://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/5650Side%20Event%20Guidelines.pdf>
Side Event Request Form
<http://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/5675Side%20Event%20Request%20Form.docx>


--

Best Regards,
​​
*Ephraim Percy Kenyanito*
Website: http://about.me/ekenyanito
tel: (+254)-786-191-930 / (+254)-751-804-120
@ekenyanito
Skype: ekenyanito
PGP: E6BA8DC1
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150107/d22f1265/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: SAVETHEDATECIVILSOCIETY-2.docx
Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document
Size: 15089 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150107/d22f1265/attachment.docx>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From kstubbs at afilias.info  Wed Jan  7 14:13:40 2015
From: kstubbs at afilias.info (Ken Stubbs)
Date: Wed, 07 Jan 2015 14:13:40 -0500
Subject: [governance] IGC Coordinator Election 2015
In-Reply-To: <CAE1T72TS2K8c2eppw1_TBjn6snsAdcdfR1jeL1NOtbRw2d4ZUA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CACTo+v84qBOx7AOzJe_b46ad1wA5tzVV7a9in=Mk8yOT2dZ=-w@mail.gmail.com> <CAE1T72TS2K8c2eppw1_TBjn6snsAdcdfR1jeL1NOtbRw2d4ZUA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <54AD8564.7060300@afilias.info>

I wish the the users of this list would be a bit more considerate and 
stop using the "reply all" mode
for personal messages.

Much of the traffic on this list consists of inter-personal messages 
which are of _no relevance_
to most of the list members

thanks for your consideration...

Ken


On 1/7/2015 11:42 AM, Devon Blake wrote:
> Hi Mawaki,
> Happy new year, I have not received a ballot.
> Devon
>
> On Tue, Jan 6, 2015 at 5:19 PM, Mawaki Chango <kichango at gmail.com 
> <mailto:kichango at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>     Dear IGC Fellow Members,
>
>     I hope you enjoyed the holiday season. It is my pleasure to
>     welcome you back into the new year first by wishing you all a
>     healthy, peaceful and pleasant journey throughout 2015 filled with
>     excitements, accomplishments, joys and empathy; secondly by
>     inviting you to choose our next new coordinator.
>
>     The individual you will be voting for will, if he or she wins,
>     replace me as I conclude my term, and will be in custody during
>     2015 and 2016. For the first year (2015) she or he will be working
>     alongside Ms. Deirdre Williams as co-coordinator for our activities.
>
>     For this purpose, you will be receiving in the next hour or so an
>     invitation email in your mailbox (at the email with which you are
>     subscribed to the IGC list.)
>
>     If one hour from now if you still haven't received your invitation
>     while you think you have maintained continuous membership over the
>     last two months (please, also check your spam folder), do let me
>     know so that I can look into it. While I do not expect many such
>     cases, I have noted one instance where this might likely be the
>     case. So please even if you don't intend to cast your vote right
>     away, I would appreciate if you can check within the next 24 hours
>     and make sure you have received your invitation (please do NOT
>     send me a message if you have received your invitation, only if
>     you have not but think you should have.)
>
>     Good luck to our three candidates, and happy voting for us all!
>     Warm regards,
>
>     Mawaki
>
>     =====================================
>     Mawaki Chango, PhD
>     Founder
>     DIGILEXIS
>     http://www.digilexis.com <http://www.digilexis.com/>
>     m.chango at digilexis.com <mailto:m.chango at digilexis.com> |
>     _kichango at gmail.com <mailto:kichango at gmail.com>_
>     Twitter: @digilexis & @prodigilexis
>     Mob. +225 57 55 57 53 <tel:%2B225%2057%2055%2057%2053> | +225 44
>     48 77 64 <tel:%2B225%2044%2048%2077%2064>
>     Skype: digilexis
>     =====================================
>
>     ____________________________________________________________
>     You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>     governance at lists.igcaucus.org <mailto:governance at lists.igcaucus.org>
>     To be removed from the list, visit:
>     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
>
>     For all other list information and functions, see:
>     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
>     To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
>     http://www.igcaucus.org/
>
>     Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
>
>
>
>
> -- 
> Devon Blake
> ICT and Development Consultant
> 4 Arlington Ave
> Kgn 2
> ,Phone: Office 876-928-9902, Mobile, 876-483-2632
>
> To be kind, To be helpful, To network
> */Earthwise ... For Life!/*



---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
http://www.avast.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150107/8b831219/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From bzs at world.std.com  Wed Jan  7 15:18:08 2015
From: bzs at world.std.com (Barry Shein)
Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2015 15:18:08 -0500
Subject: [governance] Fw: [IP] DL- One Man's Freedom is Another Man's
 Imperialism (via Evgeny Morosov)
In-Reply-To: <54ACD580.30009@itforchange.net>
References: <B4418CFBBB404646A063F2FB593B15D8@Toshiba>
	<CA+EjHYoP=FWV6dwRXViOY1f2HDtYMmjmHvTXy46seEQk--WE2A@mail.gmail.com>
	<AD9E48AD-9048-4775-BCA7-2ADD4810B847@hserus.net>
	<21674.57560.115766.146423@world.std.com>
	<54ABA24E.5040001@itforchange.net>
	<21676.12597.402296.624573@world.std.com>
	<54ACD580.30009@itforchange.net>
Message-ID: <21677.38016.452784.333582@world.std.com>


On January 7, 2015 at 12:13 parminder at itforchange.net (parminder) wrote:
 > 
 > On Wednesday 07 January 2015 12:32 AM, Barry Shein wrote:
 > > I don't think you have an "exceptionally poor IQ" :-)
 > >
 > > But there is a whiff of moral nihilism inherent in this.
 > 
 > Not at all. That is one one thing you can hardly ever accuse me of :)
 > >
 > > That said the problem we continue to run up against is no effective
 > > international dispute resolution process.
 > What about the International Court of Justice. In my view, with the 

Has the ICJ ever gotten around to indicting anyone over the 9/11
attacks? Did they indict Osama bin Laden or others named (KSM, et al)?

To my knowledge, no. I suppose the effect on the World Trade Center in
NYC (etc) and boasting by OBL (et al) did not constitute sufficient
evidence to indict.

Or that's not what they do, my misunderstanding.

What do they do, exactly? Reading over their decisions they seem more
useful in cases where the two sides in dispute are likely to accept
their jurisdiction. Is North Korea (DPRK) likely to accept their
jurisdiction?

   http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/index.php?p1=3&p2=2

 > digital encompassing a largely boundary-less world, there should be a 
 > separate digital bench of the ICJ. (Some organisations have suggested 
 > this as a part of the new institutional landscape that we need for 
 > global IG). But for that we need to develop international law bec ICJ 
 > applies international law - for which we need venues to legitimately 
 > develop international law..... Which is something many of us have been 
 > struggling for a long time, including in this space.
 > 
 > >   Even if we were to assume
 > > the worst the DPRK is accused of were true, or Iran for that matter
 > > (much of which is quite believable if for no other reason than they
 > > boast about it) what is the resolution process? Beyond a group of
 > > probably reasonable people agreeing to issue a statement sympathizing
 > > with one side or another?
 > 
 > The above is a clear plan of action, not just a vacant statement of 
 > outrage and sympathy. (and my proof against allegation of moral nihilism 
 > :) ) My view is that civil society should be working on such plans, to 
 > promote global public interest. But a lot of them seem to have other 
 > plans, for instance, joining up with big business like at the WEF to 
 > block development of international law and norms in this area...
 > 
 > parminder

That said, perhaps the ICJ would be useful in the internet sphere.

-- 
        -Barry Shein

The World              | bzs at TheWorld.com           | http://www.TheWorld.com
Purveyors to the Trade | Voice: 800-THE-WRLD        | Dial-Up: US, PR, Canada
Software Tool & Die    | Public Access Internet     | SINCE 1989     *oo*

-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From bzs at world.std.com  Wed Jan  7 15:24:42 2015
From: bzs at world.std.com (Barry Shein)
Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2015 15:24:42 -0500
Subject: [governance] Fw: [IP] DL- One Man's Freedom is Another Man's
 Imperialism (via Evgeny Morosov)
In-Reply-To: <54ACE865.4030503@digsys.bg>
References: <B4418CFBBB404646A063F2FB593B15D8@Toshiba>
	<CA+EjHYoP=FWV6dwRXViOY1f2HDtYMmjmHvTXy46seEQk--WE2A@mail.gmail.com>
	<AD9E48AD-9048-4775-BCA7-2ADD4810B847@hserus.net>
	<21674.57560.115766.146423@world.std.com>
	<54ABA24E.5040001@itforchange.net>
	<21676.12597.402296.624573@world.std.com>
	<54ACE865.4030503@digsys.bg>
Message-ID: <21677.38410.881162.664769@world.std.com>


On January 7, 2015 at 10:03 daniel at digsys.bg (Daniel Kalchev) wrote:
 > 
 > 
 > On 06.01.15 21:02, Barry Shein wrote:
 > > 
 > > So it devolves to exercises of raw power, justified or not, with all
 > > the inherent dangers and unexpected consequences thereof.
 > > 
 > > To my thinking that's the real problem.
 > 
 > Yes. That is the real problem. The US for some reason think they are the
 > elected Government of the Earth. Or, if this is not the case, they are
 > apparently under the impression that a divine force has given them the
 > rule over the kingdom Earth.
 > 
 > Internet (governance) is just one of the facets.
 > 
 > Unfortunately, the possible ways to wake up from this will hurt a lot of
 > people.

I'm pretty sure for most instances one might cite the US would happily
step aside in favor of any reasonably effective, more local solution.

But what this has to do with the recent kerfuffle between the US and
North Korea escapes me. Assuming the charges were accurate -- and they
may well not be, but that's a different dicussion -- the US would have
a generally recognized right to respond, no?

My comments were referring to creating venues for such a response,
international dispute resolution fora with some effectiveness.

I suppose it's far easier to toss peanut shells from the cheap seats.

-- 
        -Barry Shein

The World              | bzs at TheWorld.com           | http://www.TheWorld.com
Purveyors to the Trade | Voice: 800-THE-WRLD        | Dial-Up: US, PR, Canada
Software Tool & Die    | Public Access Internet     | SINCE 1989     *oo*

-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From fouadbajwa at gmail.com  Wed Jan  7 18:22:17 2015
From: fouadbajwa at gmail.com (Fouad Bajwa)
Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2015 04:22:17 +0500
Subject: [governance] IGC Coordinator Election 2015
In-Reply-To: <54AD8564.7060300@afilias.info>
References: <CACTo+v84qBOx7AOzJe_b46ad1wA5tzVV7a9in=Mk8yOT2dZ=-w@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAE1T72TS2K8c2eppw1_TBjn6snsAdcdfR1jeL1NOtbRw2d4ZUA@mail.gmail.com>
	<54AD8564.7060300@afilias.info>
Message-ID: <CAHuaJtORy2HoD-S9YA+a=WWxcMW+Gy86+cPSXeWWOTXGTpTj_A@mail.gmail.com>

Dear Mawaki,

Thank you for your wonderful contributions! I completed my vote last night!

Take care.

On Thu, Jan 8, 2015 at 12:13 AM, Ken Stubbs <kstubbs at afilias.info> wrote:

>  I wish the the users of this list would be a bit more considerate and
> stop using the "reply all" mode
> for personal messages.
>
> Much of the traffic on this list consists of inter-personal messages which
> are of *no relevance*
> to most of the list members
>
> thanks for your consideration...
>
> Ken
>
>
>
> On 1/7/2015 11:42 AM, Devon Blake wrote:
>
> Hi Mawaki,
> Happy new year, I have not received a ballot.
> Devon
>
> On Tue, Jan 6, 2015 at 5:19 PM, Mawaki Chango <kichango at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>  Dear IGC Fellow Members,
>>
>>  I hope you enjoyed the holiday season. It is my pleasure to welcome you
>> back into the new year first by wishing you all a healthy, peaceful and
>> pleasant journey throughout 2015 filled with excitements, accomplishments,
>> joys and empathy; secondly by inviting you to choose our next new
>> coordinator.
>>
>>  The individual you will be voting for will, if he or she wins, replace
>> me as I conclude my term, and will be in custody during 2015 and 2016. For
>> the first year (2015) she or he will be working alongside Ms. Deirdre
>> Williams as co-coordinator for our activities.
>>
>>  For this purpose, you will be receiving in the next hour or so an
>> invitation email in your mailbox (at the email with which you are
>> subscribed to the IGC list.)
>>
>>  If one hour from now if you still haven't received your invitation
>> while you think you have maintained continuous membership over the last two
>> months (please, also check your spam folder), do let me know so that I can
>> look into it. While I do not expect many such cases, I have noted one
>> instance where this might likely be the case. So please even if you don't
>> intend to cast your vote right away, I would appreciate if you can check
>> within the next 24 hours and make sure you have received your invitation
>> (please do NOT send me a message if you have received your invitation, only
>> if you have not but think you should have.)
>>
>>  Good luck to our three candidates, and happy voting for us all!
>> Warm regards,
>>
>>  Mawaki
>>
>>     =====================================
>> Mawaki Chango, PhD
>> Founder
>> DIGILEXIS
>> http://www.digilexis.com
>>  m.chango at digilexis.com | *kichango at gmail.com <kichango at gmail.com>*
>> Twitter: @digilexis & @prodigilexis
>> Mob. +225 57 55 57 53 <%2B225%2057%2055%2057%2053> | +225 44 48 77 64
>> <%2B225%2044%2048%2077%2064>
>> Skype: digilexis
>>  =====================================
>>
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>>      governance at lists.igcaucus.org
>> To be removed from the list, visit:
>>      http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
>>
>> For all other list information and functions, see:
>>      http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
>> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
>>      http://www.igcaucus.org/
>>
>> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
>>
>>
>
>
>  --
>  Devon Blake
> ICT and Development Consultant
> 4 Arlington Ave
> Kgn 2
> ,Phone: Office 876-928-9902, Mobile, 876-483-2632
>
> To be kind, To be helpful, To network
> *Earthwise ... For Life!*
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>    <http://www.avast.com/>
>
> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
> www.avast.com
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>      governance at lists.igcaucus.org
> To be removed from the list, visit:
>      http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
>
> For all other list information and functions, see:
>      http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
>      http://www.igcaucus.org/
>
> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
>
>


-- 
Regards.
--------------------------
Fouad Bajwa
ICT4D and Internet Governance Advisor
My Blog: Internet's Governance: http://internetsgovernance.blogspot.com/
Follow my Tweets: http://twitter.com/fouadbajwa
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150108/0a957133/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From tracey at traceynaughton.com  Wed Jan  7 19:31:34 2015
From: tracey at traceynaughton.com (Tracey Naughton)
Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2015 11:31:34 +1100
Subject: [governance] IGC Coordinator Election 2015
In-Reply-To: <CAHuaJtORy2HoD-S9YA+a=WWxcMW+Gy86+cPSXeWWOTXGTpTj_A@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CACTo+v84qBOx7AOzJe_b46ad1wA5tzVV7a9in=Mk8yOT2dZ=-w@mail.gmail.com> <CAE1T72TS2K8c2eppw1_TBjn6snsAdcdfR1jeL1NOtbRw2d4ZUA@mail.gmail.com> <54AD8564.7060300@afilias.info> <CAHuaJtORy2HoD-S9YA+a=WWxcMW+Gy86+cPSXeWWOTXGTpTj_A@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <E3CD9E2F-E417-43EC-A9E8-164335541726@traceynaughton.com>

Hello, I have not received the link. Tracey

> On 8 Jan 2015, at 10:22 am, Fouad Bajwa <fouadbajwa at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Dear Mawaki, 
> 
> Thank you for your wonderful contributions! I completed my vote last night! 
> 
> Take care.
> 
> On Thu, Jan 8, 2015 at 12:13 AM, Ken Stubbs <kstubbs at afilias.info <mailto:kstubbs at afilias.info>> wrote:
> I wish the the users of this list would be a bit more considerate and stop using the "reply all" mode 
> for personal messages.
> 
> Much of the traffic on this list consists of inter-personal messages which are of no relevance
> to most of the list members
> 
> thanks for your consideration...
> 
> Ken
> 
>   
> 
> On 1/7/2015 11:42 AM, Devon Blake wrote:
>> Hi Mawaki,
>> Happy new year, I have not received a ballot.
>> Devon
>> 
>> On Tue, Jan 6, 2015 at 5:19 PM, Mawaki Chango <kichango at gmail.com <mailto:kichango at gmail.com>> wrote:
>> Dear IGC Fellow Members,
>> 
>> I hope you enjoyed the holiday season. It is my pleasure to welcome you back into the new year first by wishing you all a healthy, peaceful and pleasant journey throughout 2015 filled with excitements, accomplishments, joys and empathy; secondly by inviting you to choose our next new coordinator.
>> 
>> The individual you will be voting for will, if he or she wins, replace me as I conclude my term, and will be in custody during 2015 and 2016. For the first year (2015) she or he will be working alongside Ms. Deirdre Williams as co-coordinator for our activities.
>> 
>> For this purpose, you will be receiving in the next hour or so an invitation email in your mailbox (at the email with which you are subscribed to the IGC list.)
>> 
>> If one hour from now if you still haven't received your invitation while you think you have maintained continuous membership over the last two months (please, also check your spam folder), do let me know so that I can look into it. While I do not expect many such cases, I have noted one instance where this might likely be the case. So please even if you don't intend to cast your vote right away, I would appreciate if you can check within the next 24 hours and make sure you have received your invitation (please do NOT send me a message if you have received your invitation, only if you have not but think you should have.)
>> 
>> Good luck to our three candidates, and happy voting for us all!
>> Warm regards,
>> 
>> Mawaki 
>> 
>> =====================================
>> Mawaki Chango, PhD                  
>> Founder
>> DIGILEXIS
>> http://www.digilexis.com <http://www.digilexis.com/>
>> m.chango at digilexis.com <mailto:m.chango at digilexis.com> | kichango at gmail.com <mailto:kichango at gmail.com> 
>> Twitter: @digilexis & @prodigilexis
>> Mob. +225 57 55 57 53 <tel:%2B225%2057%2055%2057%2053> | +225 44 48 77 64 <tel:%2B225%2044%2048%2077%2064>
>> Skype: digilexis
>> =====================================
>> 
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>>      governance at lists.igcaucus.org <mailto:governance at lists.igcaucus.org>
>> To be removed from the list, visit:
>>      http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing <http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing>
>> 
>> For all other list information and functions, see:
>>      http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance <http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance>
>> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
>>      http://www.igcaucus.org/ <http://www.igcaucus.org/>
>> 
>> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t <http://translate.google.com/translate_t>
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> -- 
>> Devon Blake
>> ICT and Development Consultant
>> 4 Arlington Ave 
>> Kgn 2
>> ,Phone: Office 876-928-9902 <tel:876-928-9902>, Mobile, 876-483-2632 <tel:876-483-2632>
>> 
>> To be kind, To be helpful, To network
>> Earthwise ... For Life!
> 
> 
> 
>   <http://www.avast.com/>	
> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. 
> www.avast.com <http://www.avast.com/>
> 
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>      governance at lists.igcaucus.org <mailto:governance at lists.igcaucus.org>
> To be removed from the list, visit:
>      http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing <http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing>
> 
> For all other list information and functions, see:
>      http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance <http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance>
> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
>      http://www.igcaucus.org/ <http://www.igcaucus.org/>
> 
> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t <http://translate.google.com/translate_t>
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Regards.
> --------------------------
> Fouad Bajwa
> ICT4D and Internet Governance Advisor
> My Blog: Internet's Governance: http://internetsgovernance.blogspot.com/ <http://internetsgovernance.blogspot.com/>
> Follow my Tweets: http://twitter.com/fouadbajwa <http://twitter.com/fouadbajwa>
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
> To be removed from the list, visit:
>     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
> 
> For all other list information and functions, see:
>     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
>     http://www.igcaucus.org/
> 
> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150108/a620de52/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From matthias.kettemann at gmail.com  Thu Jan  8 03:09:49 2015
From: matthias.kettemann at gmail.com (Matthias C. Kettemann)
Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2015 09:09:49 +0100
Subject: [governance] Fw: [IP] DL- One Man's Freedom is Another Man's
 Imperialism (via Evgeny Morosov)
In-Reply-To: <21677.38016.452784.333582@world.std.com>
References: <B4418CFBBB404646A063F2FB593B15D8@Toshiba>
	<CA+EjHYoP=FWV6dwRXViOY1f2HDtYMmjmHvTXy46seEQk--WE2A@mail.gmail.com>
	<AD9E48AD-9048-4775-BCA7-2ADD4810B847@hserus.net>
	<21674.57560.115766.146423@world.std.com>
	<54ABA24E.5040001@itforchange.net>
	<21676.12597.402296.624573@world.std.com>
	<54ACD580.30009@itforchange.net>
	<21677.38016.452784.333582@world.std.com>
Message-ID: <CALjW9_nx5BwOyaVk5=Y=tshT9MHO02P3fBKELaq4cveYkM+DCA@mail.gmail.com>

The International Court of Justice (ICJ), unlike the International Criminal
Court (ICC), cannot indict persons. It is a court of last resort in which
disputes between states are settled. The Court can also be asked to provide
advisory opinions. States need to submit to its jurisdiction, either ex
ante for all cases, or for a specific case. It seems unlikely that North
Korea would agree to any proceedings.

Suggestions for 'digital benches' at the ICJ are premature. As has been
correctly pointed out, the ICJ applies international law - treaties,
custom, principles - and does not create new law. International law
regarding the Internet is still crystallizing. The Tallinn Manual (Process)
<https://ccdcoe.org/tallinn-manual.html> and the Articles on State
Responsibility can help us determine whether acts of private actors can be
attributed to states. If you are interested in theses issues, do read this
interesting comment
<http://www.asil.org/insights/volume/19/issue/1/cyber-operations-private-actors-ukraine-russia-conflict-cyber-war-cyber>
by Gertjan Boulet on the attributability of cyber attacks in the Ukraine
conflict.

International criminal law is another matter entirely. Individuals,
including heads of states and government, can be (and have been) indicted
<http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/apr/07/north-korea-case-to-the-hague>
by the ICC for certain serious crimes. Alternatively, the Security Council
could refer a situation to the ICC.

Cheers
Matthias


On Wed, Jan 7, 2015 at 9:18 PM, Barry Shein <bzs at world.std.com> wrote:

>
> On January 7, 2015 at 12:13 parminder at itforchange.net (parminder) wrote:
>  >
>  > On Wednesday 07 January 2015 12:32 AM, Barry Shein wrote:
>  > > I don't think you have an "exceptionally poor IQ" :-)
>  > >
>  > > But there is a whiff of moral nihilism inherent in this.
>  >
>  > Not at all. That is one one thing you can hardly ever accuse me of :)
>  > >
>  > > That said the problem we continue to run up against is no effective
>  > > international dispute resolution process.
>  > What about the International Court of Justice. In my view, with the
>
> Has the ICJ ever gotten around to indicting anyone over the 9/11
> attacks? Did they indict Osama bin Laden or others named (KSM, et al)?
>
> To my knowledge, no. I suppose the effect on the World Trade Center in
> NYC (etc) and boasting by OBL (et al) did not constitute sufficient
> evidence to indict.
>
> Or that's not what they do, my misunderstanding.
>
> What do they do, exactly? Reading over their decisions they seem more
> useful in cases where the two sides in dispute are likely to accept
> their jurisdiction. Is North Korea (DPRK) likely to accept their
> jurisdiction?
>
>    http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/index.php?p1=3&p2=2
>
>  > digital encompassing a largely boundary-less world, there should be a
>  > separate digital bench of the ICJ. (Some organisations have suggested
>  > this as a part of the new institutional landscape that we need for
>  > global IG). But for that we need to develop international law bec ICJ
>  > applies international law - for which we need venues to legitimately
>  > develop international law..... Which is something many of us have been
>  > struggling for a long time, including in this space.
>  >
>  > >   Even if we were to assume
>  > > the worst the DPRK is accused of were true, or Iran for that matter
>  > > (much of which is quite believable if for no other reason than they
>  > > boast about it) what is the resolution process? Beyond a group of
>  > > probably reasonable people agreeing to issue a statement sympathizing
>  > > with one side or another?
>  >
>  > The above is a clear plan of action, not just a vacant statement of
>  > outrage and sympathy. (and my proof against allegation of moral nihilism
>  > :) ) My view is that civil society should be working on such plans, to
>  > promote global public interest. But a lot of them seem to have other
>  > plans, for instance, joining up with big business like at the WEF to
>  > block development of international law and norms in this area...
>  >
>  > parminder
>
> That said, perhaps the ICJ would be useful in the internet sphere.
>
> --
>         -Barry Shein
>
> The World              | bzs at TheWorld.com           |
> http://www.TheWorld.com
> Purveyors to the Trade | Voice: 800-THE-WRLD        | Dial-Up: US, PR,
> Canada
> Software Tool & Die    | Public Access Internet     | SINCE 1989     *oo*
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>      governance at lists.igcaucus.org
> To be removed from the list, visit:
>      http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
>
> For all other list information and functions, see:
>      http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
>      http://www.igcaucus.org/
>
> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
>
>


-- 

Dr. Matthias C. Kettemann, LL.M. (Harvard)
Post-Doc Fellow | Cluster of Excellence „
<http://www.normativeorders.net/de/organisation/mitarbeiter-a-z/person/442>Normative
Orders
<http://www.normativeorders.net/de/organisation/mitarbeiter-a-z/person/442>”
<http://www.normativeorders.net/de/organisation/mitarbeiter-a-z/person/442>,
University of Frankfurt am Main
Lecturer | Institute of International Law andInternational Relations
<http://voelkerrecht.uni-graz.at/en/>, University of Graz
<http://trainingszentrum-menschenrechte.uni-graz.at/en/infos-fuer-studierende/>

Goethe-Universität Frankfurt am Main
Exzellenzcluster „Normative Ordnungen“
Max-Horkheimer-Straße 2
60629 Frankfurt am Main / Germany

E | matthias.kettemann at gmail.com
Blog <http://internationallawandtheinternet.blogspot.com/> | SSRN
<http://ssrn.com/author=1957909> | Google Scholar
<http://scholar.google.ch/citations?user=8jRGt2QAAAAJ> | Twitter
<http://twitter.com/#%21/MCKettemann> | Facebook
<http://www.facebook.com/matthias.kettemann> | Google+
<https://plus.google.com/u/0/116310540881122884114/posts>

Recent publications:
The Common Interest in International Law (2014, co-editor)
<http://www.intersentia.co.uk/searchDetail.aspx?bookId=103066&authors=Wolfgang>
European Yearbook on Human Rights 2014 (2014, co-editor)
<http://www.nwv.at/recht/verfassungsrecht/1077_european_yearbook_on_human_rights_2014/>
Freedom of Expression and the Internet (2014, co-author)
<https://book.coe.int/eur/en/human-rights-and-democracy/5810-freedom-of-expression-and-the-internet.html>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150108/46bf6873/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From fulvio.frati at unimi.it  Thu Jan  8 03:45:32 2015
From: fulvio.frati at unimi.it (Fulvio Frati)
Date: Thu, 08 Jan 2015 09:45:32 +0100
Subject: [governance] [Deadline Extended: January 17] 11th Intl. Conf. on
 Open Source Systems (OSS2015)
Message-ID: <00bf01d02b1f$76b469e0$641d3da0$@unimi.it>

[Apologies if you receive multiple copies of this CFP]

 

****************************************************************************
***************

11th Intl. Conf. on Open Source Systems (OSS2015)

co-located with the 2015 International Conference on Software Engineering
(ICSE2015)

 

Florence, Italy – 16-17 May 2015

http://www.oss2015.org 

****************************************************************************
***************

 

+++++++++ Extended Paper Submission: January 17, 2015 ++++++++++

 

*** Theme: Open Frameworks: from Service to Cloud ***

 

Free and Open Source Software (FOSS) has had a disruptive effect on the
commercial software industry and the ways that organizations and individuals
create, distribute, acquire and use software and software-based services. In
addition to the many standalone FOSS projects, FOSS is at the heart of
modern network-based computing infrastructures and can be found in the vast
majority of applications that run in these environments. 

 

Many organizations that have been known for developing proprietary software
are now actively involved with FOSS. FOSS adoption continues to grow among
businesses, governments, and other organizations. FOSS remains important for
educators and researchers, as well as an important aspect of e-government
and information society initiatives, providing access to high-quality
software and the code used to create it. 

 

Also, FOSS has taken the lead in a number of crucial ICT domains, like Cloud
Computing, where open source cloud stacks are widely adopted, and Big Data,
where a wealth of FOSS solutions is now being built around Hadoop.

 

The 11th International Conference on Open Source Systems (OSS 2015) will
celebrate a decade of advances in the use of free and open source software
by emphasizing areas and topics that will drive future use over the next
decade. This will be achieved through a combination of high-quality research
papers, tutorials, workshops, demonstrations, and invited talks.  OSS2015
will be co-located with the 2015 International Conference on Software
Engineering as a way to cross-fertilize ideas. The theme for the 2015
edition will be "Open frameworks: from service to cloud", putting forward
the idea on how open source framework can develop the transition from
traditional IT services to cloud-based architectures.

 

A central goal of OSS 2015 is to provide an international forum where a
diverse community of professionals from academia, industry, the public
sector, and diverse FOSS initiatives can come together to share research
findings and practical experiences. The conference also aims to serve as a
meeting place where people can identify new research ideas and techniques
for putting FOSS into widespread use.  

 

OSS 2015 will include research papers, industry papers, formal tool
demonstrations, lightning talks, new ideas, experience reports, and posters.
OSS 2015 also invites proposals for tutorials and workshops, submissions to
the doctoral symposium, and submissions of panel proposals.

 

Accepted papers will be included in the conference proceedings, which are
published by Springer.

 

** Topics

 

We are seeking submissions across a broad range of topics, but are
particularly interested in those areas most likely to have an impact on
computing over the next decade, including computing infrastructure, data
management, and the Internet of Things. For practical experiences, we are
seeking submissions that describe FOSS applications in embedded systems
(IoT), health care, transportation, communications, and energy management.

 

Other topics of interest include, but are not limited to, the following:

 

- FOSS technologies

 

    - FOSS in the cloud

    - FOSS for data management and analysis

    - Security of FOSS

    - Interoperability, portability, scalability of FOSS

    - Open standards, open data, open cloud, open hardware and open exhibits

    - FOSS in cloud-based applications

    - Architecture and design of FOSS

 

- Mobile and Embedded FOSS

 

    - Mobile Operating Systems

    - Open Source apps for mobile devices

    - Open Source app markets and software delivery platforms

    - Software metrics for Open Source mobile software

    - Energy efficiency in Mobile FOSS 

 

- FOSS Quality

 

    - Static and Dynamic FOSS testing

    - Formal FOSS verification

    - Detection of bad coding practices and adoption of coding conventions

    - OSS metrics: measuring FOSS performance, safety, and quality

    - FOSS performance

 

- FOSS Evaluation, adoption and use

 

    - Evaluation of FOSS software, including comparisons with proprietary
software, in industry and government

    - Use and acceptance of FOSS; organizational policies

    - The role of FOSS-oriented foundations

    - Dissemination, redistribution and crowdsourcing of FOSS systems

    - Expanding scientific research and technology development methods
through openness

    - Role of FOSS in ICT and sustainable development 

 

-FOSS practices and methods

 

    - New experiences with FOSS development tools and practices

    - Knowledge and documentation management in FOSS  

 

- Economic, organizational and social issues related to FOSS

 

    - Economic analysis of FOSS

    - Maturity models of FOSS

    - FOSS in public sector

    - FOSS intellectual property, copyrights and licensing

    - Non-Governmental Organizations and FOSS 

 

- FOSS and education

                - Teaching FOSS to people of all ages and backgrounds

                - Use of FOSS in education

                

-FOSS platforms and toolkits

                - FOSS Data processing and storage platforms

                - FOSS environments for cloud computing

                - FOSS business intelligence toolkits

                - FOSS business packages (CRM, ERP, HRM)

                - FOSS collaboration and communication environments

                

** Important Dates

 

- Extended Paper Submission: January 17, 2015

- Notification to Authors: February 14, 2015

- Camera ready due: February 28, 2015

 

** Authors Instructions

 

Papers submitted to OSS 2015 must not have been published elsewhere and must
not be under review or submitted for review elsewhere while under
consideration for OSS 2015.

 

All papers must conform, at time of submission, to the Springer Formatting
Guidelines (LNCS)
(http://www.springer.com/computer/lncs?SGWID=0-164-6-793341-0). You may
utilize the templates provided in our website. Submissions must be in PDF
format with a limit of 10 pages for each paper.

 

All submissions will be peer-reviewed double blinded, therefore please
remove any information that could give an indication of the authorship or
affiliations. Authors of accepted papers will be therefore be required to
sign a copyright transfer (as well as register for and attend the
conference).

 

When your paper is finished, submit it using EasyChair
(https://easychair.org/conferences/?conf=oss2015) according to the
submission deadlines.

 

** Organizing Committee

 

* General Chair

- Ernesto Damiani, Università degli Studi di Milano, Italy

 

* Program Chairs

- Dirk Riehle, Friedrich-Alexander-University Erlangen-Nürnberg, Germany

- Tony Wasserman, Carnegie Mellon University, USA

 

* Regional Publicity Chairs

- Moataz Ahmed, King Fahd University of Petroleum & Minerals, Saudi Arabia

- Scott Hissam, Software Engineering Institute, Carnegie Mellon University,
USA

- Karl Reed, La Trobe University, Australia

- Francesco Zavatarelli, Università degli Studi di Milano, Italy

 

* Organizing Chairs

- Fulvio Frati, Università degli Studi di Milano, Italy

- Nadia Fusar Poli, Università degli Studi di Milano, Italy

 

* Web Chair

- Fulvio Frati, Università degli Studi di Milano, Italy

 

* Program Committee

- Chintan Amrit, University of Twente, The Netherlands

- Luciano Baresi, DEIB – Politecnico di Milano, Italy

- Paolo Ciancarini, University of Bologna, Italy

- Francesco Di Cerbo, SAP Research Sophia-Antipolis, France

- Jonas Gamalielsson, University of Skovde, Sweden

- Jesus M. Gonzalez-Barahona, Universidad Rey Juan Carlos, Spain

- Imed Hammouda, Chalmers and University of Gothenburg, Sweden

- Abram Hindle, University of Alberta, Canada

- Netta Iivari, University of Oulu, Finland

- Stefan Koch, Bogazici University, Turkey

- Fabio Kon, University of São Paulo, Brasil

- Luigi Lavazza, Università degli Studi dell’Insubria, Italy

- Eda Marchetti, ISTI-CNR, Italy

- Audris Mockus, University of Tennessee, Knoxville, USA

- Sandro Morasca, Università degli Studi dell’Insubria, Italy

- John Noll, Lero – the Irish Software Engineering Research Centre, Ireland

- Mauro Pezzè, University of Lugano, Switzerland

- Stephane Ribas, INRIA, France

- Gregorio Robles, Universidad Rey Juan Carlos, Italy

- Steve Schmid, Open Technology Foundation, Australia

- Alberto Sillitti, Free University of Bozen/Bolzano, Italy

- Diomidis Spinellis, Athens University of Economics and Business, Greece

- Megan Squire, Elon University, USA

- Klaas-Jan Stol, Lero – University of Limerick, Ireland

- Giancarlo Succi, Free University of Bozen/Bolzano, Italy

- Davide Tosi, Università degli Studi dell’Insubria, Italy

- Aaron Visaggio, University of Sannio, Italy

- Stefano Zacchiroli, Université de Paris Diderot, France

 

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150108/c1997d3c/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From Elvana.THACI at coe.int  Thu Jan  8 05:44:33 2015
From: Elvana.THACI at coe.int (THACI Elvana)
Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2015 10:44:33 +0000
Subject: [governance] Statement by Council of Europe Secretary General
 Jagland: 'Charlie Hebdo' massacre, attack on democratic society'
Message-ID: <2BC8C1F8EE620E4DBF566BCF5F804CE39116E414@V-Linguistix00.key.coe.int>

Dear IGC members,

For your information, here is the statement issued by Mr Thorbjørn Jagland, Council of Europe Secretary General on the Charlie Hebdo massacre.

"I am shocked and deeply saddened by the horrendous attack on innocent people at the Charlie Hebdo in Paris today.

This terrorist attack was clearly targeted to hit journalists and undermine freedom of expression. It was an outrageous attack on our democratic and European values. It is another example of the threatening radicalization of our societies, which we must resolutely resist.

Europe's governments and institutions, including the Council of Europe, have to take all possible action to better protect journalists and media freedom in future.

I extend my condolences to the people of France and especially to the victims' families and friends."

The Council of Europe will hold a commemorative ceremony to honour the victims on Friday.
The statement is also available at this address<http://www.coe.int/en/web/portal/-/council-of-europe-secretary-general-shocked-by-news-of-shooting-in-paris>.

Elvana Thaçi
Administrator, Media & Internet
Council of Europe
+ 33 (0) 3 90 21 56 98
+ 33 (0) 6 20 74 64 48
elvana.thaci at coe.int<mailto:elvana.thaci at coe.int>
http://www.coe.int/media




-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150108/869dad57/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From kichango at gmail.com  Thu Jan  8 08:02:55 2015
From: kichango at gmail.com (Mawaki Chango)
Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2015 13:02:55 +0000
Subject: [governance] Re: IGC Coordinator Election 2015
In-Reply-To: <CACTo+v_HZ3wEBsi3bUDGPfH=O_WyGBzpUa=RKMqAkUbTBPqNvA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CACTo+v84qBOx7AOzJe_b46ad1wA5tzVV7a9in=Mk8yOT2dZ=-w@mail.gmail.com>
 <CACTo+v_HZ3wEBsi3bUDGPfH=O_WyGBzpUa=RKMqAkUbTBPqNvA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CACTo+v8-ZiVEJzw6Mn9Xy9y-TzK-xsEdNPxbN=eKaOEccB5Ldw@mail.gmail.com>

Dear all,

My apologies for just sending a vote reminder to a bunch of people who most
probably didn't need one. Please discard if you have already voted or
located your initial email invite. This was the result of mistakenly
hitting the wrong button while I was trying to send a reminder to just one
person.

Please indulge that I repeat this. When you check your mailbox using your
human senses and you don't find your ballot, the first thing to do is this:

1) Use your email client's search engine to look up key words related to
this subject. For that purpose, the subject line of your email invitation
to vote is supposed to be  "Voting link for 2015 IGC coordinator election"

Only after you did that, making sure your spam folder is also included in
the search, and still haven't found your ballot, then you may:

2) Send me a note off list reporting this, and I will check the record and
make sure you receive your ballot.

If our record actually shows that you were sent a ballot, I will send you a
reminder the subject line of which should read "Reminder to participate in
survey" (in case you need to look that up too using a search engine.)

Thank you for your understanding.
Best regards,

Mawaki


On Wed, Jan 7, 2015 at 2:57 PM, Mawaki Chango <kichango at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> For all who have reported (and maintained) that they have not received
> their ballot so far, here is the status:
>
> 1) Sonigitu Ekpe: your name is in the voting list and the system reports
> you were sent a ballot to your Corssriver state government account. I just
> sent you again another invite in the form of a reminder (subject line:
> Reminder to participate in survey). Please check and carefully or let us
> know if you no longer have access to that email account.
>
> 2) Shaila Mistry: Idem, to the email you are subscribed with.
>
> 3) Chantal Lebrument: Idem, to the email you are subscribed with.
>
> 4) Judith Hellerstein: True you were not sent a ballot, but I also have
> hard time locating you on the membership list. I just ran your name in the
> IGC user list page after page (it's painful not to be able to search the
> full database of members' names at once... so please bear with me and let
> me know your answers to the following questions.) Have you subscribed to
> the list with this name? Have you been a member for at least 8 weeks now?
>
> 5) Raúl Echeberría: In fact this is the one case we spotted early as being
> subject to a glitch was. Have you, Raul, discontinued your membership
> recently before reactivating it or have you remained a member for at least
> the last 2 months?
>
> I would appreciate everybody check and double check thoroughly (and be
> clear about having been a subscribed member for the last 2 months at least)
> before sending a claim that they have not received their ballot. Thank you
> for your understanding.
>
> Best,
>
> Mawaki
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 6, 2015 at 10:19 PM, Mawaki Chango <kichango at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Dear IGC Fellow Members,
>>
>> I hope you enjoyed the holiday season. It is my pleasure to welcome you
>> back into the new year first by wishing you all a healthy, peaceful and
>> pleasant journey throughout 2015 filled with excitements, accomplishments,
>> joys and empathy; secondly by inviting you to choose our next new
>> coordinator.
>>
>> The individual you will be voting for will, if he or she wins, replace me
>> as I conclude my term, and will be in custody during 2015 and 2016. For the
>> first year (2015) she or he will be working alongside Ms. Deirdre Williams
>> as co-coordinator for our activities.
>>
>> For this purpose, you will be receiving in the next hour or so an
>> invitation email in your mailbox (at the email with which you are
>> subscribed to the IGC list.)
>>
>> If one hour from now if you still haven't received your invitation while
>> you think you have maintained continuous membership over the last two
>> months (please, also check your spam folder), do let me know so that I can
>> look into it. While I do not expect many such cases, I have noted one
>> instance where this might likely be the case. So please even if you don't
>> intend to cast your vote right away, I would appreciate if you can check
>> within the next 24 hours and make sure you have received your invitation
>> (please do NOT send me a message if you have received your invitation, only
>> if you have not but think you should have.)
>>
>> Good luck to our three candidates, and happy voting for us all!
>> Warm regards,
>>
>> Mawaki
>>
>> =====================================
>> Mawaki Chango, PhD
>> Founder
>> DIGILEXIS
>> http://www.digilexis.com
>> m.chango at digilexis.com | *kichango at gmail.com <kichango at gmail.com>*
>> Twitter: @digilexis & @prodigilexis
>> Mob. +225 57 55 57 53 | +225 44 48 77 64
>> Skype: digilexis
>> =====================================
>>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150108/b973e60d/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From parminder at itforchange.net  Thu Jan  8 08:04:44 2015
From: parminder at itforchange.net (parminder)
Date: Thu, 08 Jan 2015 18:34:44 +0530
Subject: [governance] Re: [bestbits] A BR view of multistkaholder
 processes...
In-Reply-To: <54AD47FF.1000803@cafonso.ca>
References: <54AD47FF.1000803@cafonso.ca>
Message-ID: <54AE806C.3090703@itforchange.net>

Dear Carlos,

Thanks for the very useful article, and for posting it here. (For those 
who would like to read it, i recommend downloading the full magazine and 
then reading the article. It is very difficult to read it online.)

I am happy that finally multistakeholderism (MSism) is being openly 
discussed and argued for, in formal write ups.

I will like to make the following points about your article, and the 
comparison it makes between the evolution of MSism in other areas of 
global governance, largely within the UN system, and the MSism of the IG 
world, of which the Net Mundial Initiative is the latest version.

My main point here is that MS models hitherto, including all historical 
examples that you have discussed, have always developed in relation to a 
larger and clearly more formal and authoritative decision making 
structure - and in all cases you discuss, such a structure has been a UN 
body. In fact your article clearly speaks of the relationship of MS 
structures to decision making bodies.

(quote beings)
*Connection to Decision-Makers*

Multistakeholder bodies can interact in different ways with official 
decision-making processes at the international, regional, or national 
levels. Some MSM bodies are purely informative. Others can develop best 
practices concerning a particular issue and present them to governments. 
Multistakeholder bodies can also conduct participatory monitoring of 
issues that affect society, such as a deforestation index or the quality 
of Internet access provided by telecommunications operators.

(ends)

Here, you lay our three functions of an MS system - providing 
information and best practices (together, inputs) to decision makers, 
and monitoring and assessments to hold policy makers accountable.

All this is very well, and is what is generally called as participatory 
democracy. In fact the Agenda 21  that you quote as being the " first UN 
document to include different stakeholders’ roles in a global agreement 
" is an excellent documenton participatory democracy. (Incidentally, it 
neither speaks of MSism, nor even the word 'stakeholder'.)  Please see 
what kind of different roles it gives to different groups (which you may 
like to call 'stakeholders'). Especially see how NGOs and business are 
seen so differently, and how the civil society group consists of so many 
different parts and business/ industry is just one. And also of course 
all the roles of all these groups stand is a specific relationship to 
policy makers.

These are the values and principles that civil society has long fought 
for - call it participatory democracy, or stakeholder consultations.. 
However, and this is my principal point, the MSism that we see in the IG 
space is not at all this kind of participatory democracy/ stakeholder 
involvement . I of course speak of the *equal footing MS model* that is 
we hear spoken of everywhere, and which is now meant to be embodied in 
the NetMundial Initiative.

This new post-democracy model cannot be derived from the growth of 
participatory democracy in global governance that your papers tries to 
derive it from... In this regard, I judge as inadequate, if not a bit 
misleading, the premise - conclusion logic of your paper.

The new equal footing (EF-MS) MS model, rather than work in relation to 
a legitimate policy making structure, seeks to anticipate and subvert 
it. We know that almost all NMI enthusiasts are firmly against 
development of an Internet policy venue inside the UN, or in any other 
democratic/ legitimate manner. It - the EF-MS model - seeks to itself be 
the policy giver to the world in this area, which is the real problem 
with equal footing MSism and with the NetMundial Initiative. In the 
circumstances, it is quite inappropriate to connect its evolution to 
that of participatory democracy in UN institutions, including that for 
sustainable development.

Now, you may say that neither is the equal footing MS model (nor the 
NMI) into anticipating and preventing legitimate policy work at the UN, 
nor is it even at all about policy work. Lets listen to the main 
flag-bearer of the NMI idea, Fadi Chehade, defending the need for the NMI.

"We need to make sure that next June we don't have delegation after 
delegation going to UNGA [the United Nations General Assembly] saying 
there are no solutions to these issues. "
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/12/12/im_begging_you_to_join_netmundial_initiative_gets_desperate/?page=2

Clear attempt to anticipate and prevent UN based policy development, or 
do we need even clearer proof! And since UN bodies develop policy, the 
proposed 'existing solutions', in the form of NMI's work, will in effect 
be policy stuff - there is a saying , you cannot compare apples to oranges.

Of course, there is considerable verbal acrobatics going on to hide and 
whitewash the (policy) intentions of the NMI. This is what another NMI 
champion Wolfgang says (on the NMI website):

"The NetMundial Initiative will bring solutions to the broad range of 
Internet related policy problems."

Again, an apples and oranges problem... If you bring solutions to policy 
problems, then they must be come kinds of policies, right! (One should 
be more considerate to ordinary language, but this is the new age PR.)

(One good thing about the NMI is that it is *equal footing MSism* in 
flesh and blood and so one can effectively critique it, unless the 
earlier slippery non-theories and non-substance of equal footing MSism, 
other than employing it as an self-evident and self-justifying creed).

In sum, I am unable to agree with your connecting the current versions 
of equal footing MSism, intending policy work, as a continuation of the 
evolution of some tendencies in the global governance system, beginning 
prominently with the Rio Summit on sustainable development. In fact, I 
believe that they go in exactly the opposite directions - one as 
deepening democracy and other as subverting it (equal footing MSism). I 
have above pointed to the chief structural difference between the two 
which can be observed empirically - that, one is based an a specific 
relationship to legitimate policy making systems and other seeks to 
anticipate and prevent them.

best regards

parminder



On Wednesday 07 January 2015 08:21 PM, Carlos A. Afonso wrote:
> Just published in the IEEE Internet Computing journal:
>
> http://online.qmags.com/IC0115?sessionID=BD7A2B7CBEF89C57D8F47874E&cid=3193795&eid=19210#pg76&mode2
>
> The Origin and Evolution of Multistakeholder Models
>
> Virgilio Almeida - Federal University of Minas Gerais
> Demi Getschko - Pontifícia Universidade Católica de São Paulo
> Carlos Afonso - Instituto Nupef, Rio de Janeiro
>
> Abstract: Various domains have adopted multistakeholder models (MSMs) to
> address and deal with global challenges, such as sustainability,
> environment, climate, and Internet governance. Here, the authors examine
> the use of MSMs and their historical evolution, fundamentals, and
> characteristics. They also present examples of how such models are used
> in the global Internet governance ecosystem. Finally, the article
> presents a series of research questions that can be tackled to improve
> the efficiency of multistakeholder processes.
>
> frt rgds
>
> --c.a.
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>       bestbits at lists.bestbits.net.
> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit:
>       http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150108/c9c38bfe/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From parminder at itforchange.net  Thu Jan  8 09:10:05 2015
From: parminder at itforchange.net (parminder)
Date: Thu, 08 Jan 2015 19:40:05 +0530
Subject: [governance] Re: [bestbits] A BR view of multistkaholder
 processes...
In-Reply-To: <54AE806C.3090703@itforchange.net>
References: <54AD47FF.1000803@cafonso.ca> <54AE806C.3090703@itforchange.net>
Message-ID: <54AE8FBD.30705@itforchange.net>

pa
On Thursday 08 January 2015 06:34 PM, parminder wrote:
> Dear Carlos,
>
> Thanks for the very useful article, and for posting it here. (For 
> those who would like to read it, i recommend downloading the full 
> magazine and then reading the article. It is very difficult to read it 
> online.)
>
> I am happy that finally multistakeholderism (MSism) is being openly 
> discussed and argued for, in formal write ups.
>
> I will like to make the following points about your article, and the 
> comparison it makes between the evolution of MSism in other areas of 
> global governance, largely within the UN system, and the MSism of the 
> IG world, of which the Net Mundial Initiative is the latest version.
>
> My main point here is that MS models hitherto, including all 
> historical examples that you have discussed, have always developed in 
> relation to a larger and clearly more formal and authoritative 
> decision making structure - and in all cases you discuss, such a 
> structure has been a UN body.

In fact, since the article mentions the CGI.Br model, and also, 
unfortunately, CGI guys seem to be driven to root for the NMI by the 
rightfulness and success of the CGI model,  it must be pointed out that 
CGI is what is it because it works clearly within and in relation to the 
state of Brazil, with its clear policy making systems and internal 
sovereignty. The equal footing MS model for IG at the global level, a la 
NMI, however, comes in and seeks to promote a global policy vacuum. This 
is not a small difference, it a basic structural one, which makes all 
the difference. Sorry to say, but one just hopes that the CGI people get 
this point.

On the other hand, even within the commanding overall structure of the 
Brazil state, there are 9 gov members in the 21 member CGI -- how is 
this equal footing? As you would see from the Commission for sustainable 
development  (CSD) participatory structures, the civil society group is 
so much vaster than business, which has just one small space. How is 
Internet different - how is it less significant to the lives of all 
people - why for instance media persons are not a separate group, as 
farmers are in the CSD, or women, as women are in the CSD? Because, the 
NMI is a plain and simple capture, by the US led status quoists, to 
prevent any global Internet normative and policy work. And 'they' spun 
the fable as suits them. To ask questions is of course to be on the side 
of China and Iran, the dark forces that are the ones that threaten the 
global Internet, not the US!

parminder


> In fact your article clearly speaks of the relationship of MS 
> structures to decision making bodies.
>
> (quote beings)
> *Connection to Decision-Makers*
>
> Multistakeholder bodies can interact in different ways with official 
> decision-making processes at the international, regional, or national 
> levels. Some MSM bodies are purely informative. Others can develop 
> best practices concerning a particular issue and present them to 
> governments. Multistakeholder bodies can also conduct participatory 
> monitoring of issues that affect society, such as a deforestation 
> index or the quality of Internet access provided by telecommunications 
> operators.
>
> (ends)
>
> Here, you lay our three functions of an MS system - providing 
> information and best practices (together, inputs) to decision makers, 
> and monitoring and assessments to hold policy makers accountable.
>
> All this is very well, and is what is generally called as 
> participatory democracy. In fact the Agenda 21  that you quote as 
> being the " first UN document to include different stakeholders’ roles 
> in a global agreement " is an excellent documenton participatory 
> democracy. (Incidentally, it neither speaks of MSism, nor even the 
> word 'stakeholder'.) Please see what kind of different roles it gives 
> to different groups (which you may like to call 'stakeholders'). 
> Especially see how NGOs and business are seen so differently, and how 
> the civil society group consists of so many different parts and 
> business/ industry is just one. And also of course all the roles of 
> all these groups stand is a specific relationship to policy makers.
>
> These are the values and principles that civil society has long fought 
> for - call it participatory democracy, or stakeholder consultations.. 
> However, and this is my principal point, the MSism that we see in the 
> IG space is not at all this kind of participatory democracy/ 
> stakeholder involvement . I of course speak of the *equal footing MS 
> model* that is we hear spoken of everywhere, and which is now meant to 
> be embodied in the NetMundial Initiative.
>
> This new post-democracy model cannot be derived from the growth of 
> participatory democracy in global governance that your papers tries to 
> derive it from... In this regard, I judge as inadequate, if not a bit 
> misleading, the premise - conclusion logic of your paper.
>
> The new equal footing (EF-MS) MS model, rather than work in relation 
> to a legitimate policy making structure, seeks to anticipate and 
> subvert it. We know that almost all NMI enthusiasts are firmly against 
> development of an Internet policy venue inside the UN, or in any other 
> democratic/ legitimate manner. It - the EF-MS model - seeks to itself 
> be the policy giver to the world in this area, which is the real 
> problem with equal footing MSism and with the NetMundial Initiative. 
> In the circumstances, it is quite inappropriate to connect its 
> evolution to that of participatory democracy in UN institutions, 
> including that for sustainable development.
>
> Now, you may say that neither is the equal footing MS model (nor the 
> NMI) into anticipating and preventing legitimate policy work at the 
> UN, nor is it even at all about policy work. Lets listen to the main 
> flag-bearer of the NMI idea, Fadi Chehade, defending the need for the NMI.
>
> "We need to make sure that next June we don't have delegation after 
> delegation going to UNGA [the United Nations General Assembly] saying 
> there are no solutions to these issues. "
> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/12/12/im_begging_you_to_join_netmundial_initiative_gets_desperate/?page=2
>
> Clear attempt to anticipate and prevent UN based policy development, 
> or do we need even clearer proof! And since UN bodies develop policy, 
> the proposed 'existing solutions', in the form of NMI's work, will in 
> effect be policy stuff - there is a saying , you cannot compare apples 
> to oranges.
>
> Of course, there is considerable verbal acrobatics going on to hide 
> and whitewash the (policy) intentions of the NMI. This is what another 
> NMI champion Wolfgang says (on the NMI website):
>
> "The NetMundial Initiative will bring solutions to the broad range of 
> Internet related policy problems."
>
> Again, an apples and oranges problem... If you bring solutions to 
> policy problems, then they must be come kinds of policies, right! (One 
> should be more considerate to ordinary language, but this is the new 
> age PR.)
>
> (One good thing about the NMI is that it is *equal footing MSism* in 
> flesh and blood and so one can effectively critique it, unless the 
> earlier slippery non-theories and non-substance of equal footing 
> MSism, other than employing it as an self-evident and self-justifying 
> creed).
>
> In sum, I am unable to agree with your connecting the current versions 
> of equal footing MSism, intending policy work, as a continuation of 
> the evolution of some tendencies in the global governance system, 
> beginning prominently with the Rio Summit on sustainable development. 
> In fact, I believe that they go in exactly the opposite directions - 
> one as deepening democracy and other as subverting it (equal footing 
> MSism). I have above pointed to the chief structural difference 
> between the two which can be observed empirically - that, one is based 
> an a specific relationship to legitimate policy making systems and 
> other seeks to anticipate and prevent them.
>
> best regards
>
> parminder
>
>
>
> On Wednesday 07 January 2015 08:21 PM, Carlos A. Afonso wrote:
>> Just published in the IEEE Internet Computing journal:
>>
>> http://online.qmags.com/IC0115?sessionID=BD7A2B7CBEF89C57D8F47874E&cid=3193795&eid=19210#pg76&mode2
>>
>> The Origin and Evolution of Multistakeholder Models
>>
>> Virgilio Almeida - Federal University of Minas Gerais
>> Demi Getschko - Pontifícia Universidade Católica de São Paulo
>> Carlos Afonso - Instituto Nupef, Rio de Janeiro
>>
>> Abstract: Various domains have adopted multistakeholder models (MSMs) to
>> address and deal with global challenges, such as sustainability,
>> environment, climate, and Internet governance. Here, the authors examine
>> the use of MSMs and their historical evolution, fundamentals, and
>> characteristics. They also present examples of how such models are used
>> in the global Internet governance ecosystem. Finally, the article
>> presents a series of research questions that can be tackled to improve
>> the efficiency of multistakeholder processes.
>>
>> frt rgds
>>
>> --c.a.
>>
>>
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>>       bestbits at lists.bestbits.net.
>> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit:
>>       http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150108/4d270a0a/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From ca at cafonso.ca  Thu Jan  8 15:45:38 2015
From: ca at cafonso.ca (Carlos Afonso)
Date: Thu, 08 Jan 2015 18:45:38 -0200
Subject: [governance] Re: [bestbits] A BR view of multistkaholder
 processes...
In-Reply-To: <54AE806C.3090703@itforchange.net>
References: <54AD47FF.1000803@cafonso.ca> <54AE806C.3090703@itforchange.net>
Message-ID: <54AEEC72.8040903@cafonso.ca>

Thanks for your comments, Parm. I've just copied to the other authors as 
well.

fraternal regards

--c.a.

On 08-01-15 11:04, parminder wrote:
> Dear Carlos,
>
> Thanks for the very useful article, and for posting it here. (For those
> who would like to read it, i recommend downloading the full magazine and
> then reading the article. It is very difficult to read it online.)
>
> I am happy that finally multistakeholderism (MSism) is being openly
> discussed and argued for, in formal write ups.
>
> I will like to make the following points about your article, and the
> comparison it makes between the evolution of MSism in other areas of
> global governance, largely within the UN system, and the MSism of the IG
> world, of which the Net Mundial Initiative is the latest version.
>
> My main point here is that MS models hitherto, including all historical
> examples that you have discussed, have always developed in relation to a
> larger and clearly more formal and authoritative decision making
> structure - and in all cases you discuss, such a structure has been a UN
> body. In fact your article clearly speaks of the relationship of MS
> structures to decision making bodies.
>
> (quote beings)
> *Connection to Decision-Makers*
>
> Multistakeholder bodies can interact in different ways with official
> decision-making processes at the international, regional, or national
> levels. Some MSM bodies are purely informative. Others can develop best
> practices concerning a particular issue and present them to governments.
> Multistakeholder bodies can also conduct participatory monitoring of
> issues that affect society, such as a deforestation index or the quality
> of Internet access provided by telecommunications operators.
>
> (ends)
>
> Here, you lay our three functions of an MS system - providing
> information and best practices (together, inputs) to decision makers,
> and monitoring and assessments to hold policy makers accountable.
>
> All this is very well, and is what is generally called as participatory
> democracy. In fact the Agenda 21  that you quote as being the " first UN
> document to include different stakeholders’ roles in a global agreement
> " is an excellent documenton participatory democracy. (Incidentally, it
> neither speaks of MSism, nor even the word 'stakeholder'.)  Please see
> what kind of different roles it gives to different groups (which you may
> like to call 'stakeholders'). Especially see how NGOs and business are
> seen so differently, and how the civil society group consists of so many
> different parts and business/ industry is just one. And also of course
> all the roles of all these groups stand is a specific relationship to
> policy makers.
>
> These are the values and principles that civil society has long fought
> for - call it participatory democracy, or stakeholder consultations..
> However, and this is my principal point, the MSism that we see in the IG
> space is not at all this kind of participatory democracy/ stakeholder
> involvement . I of course speak of the *equal footing MS model* that is
> we hear spoken of everywhere, and which is now meant to be embodied in
> the NetMundial Initiative.
>
> This new post-democracy model cannot be derived from the growth of
> participatory democracy in global governance that your papers tries to
> derive it from... In this regard, I judge as inadequate, if not a bit
> misleading, the premise - conclusion logic of your paper.
>
> The new equal footing (EF-MS) MS model, rather than work in relation to
> a legitimate policy making structure, seeks to anticipate and subvert
> it. We know that almost all NMI enthusiasts are firmly against
> development of an Internet policy venue inside the UN, or in any other
> democratic/ legitimate manner. It - the EF-MS model - seeks to itself be
> the policy giver to the world in this area, which is the real problem
> with equal footing MSism and with the NetMundial Initiative. In the
> circumstances, it is quite inappropriate to connect its evolution to
> that of participatory democracy in UN institutions, including that for
> sustainable development.
>
> Now, you may say that neither is the equal footing MS model (nor the
> NMI) into anticipating and preventing legitimate policy work at the UN,
> nor is it even at all about policy work. Lets listen to the main
> flag-bearer of the NMI idea, Fadi Chehade, defending the need for the NMI.
>
> "We need to make sure that next June we don't have delegation after
> delegation going to UNGA [the United Nations General Assembly] saying
> there are no solutions to these issues. "
> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/12/12/im_begging_you_to_join_netmundial_initiative_gets_desperate/?page=2
>
> Clear attempt to anticipate and prevent UN based policy development, or
> do we need even clearer proof! And since UN bodies develop policy, the
> proposed 'existing solutions', in the form of NMI's work, will in effect
> be policy stuff - there is a saying , you cannot compare apples to oranges.
>
> Of course, there is considerable verbal acrobatics going on to hide and
> whitewash the (policy) intentions of the NMI. This is what another NMI
> champion Wolfgang says (on the NMI website):
>
> "The NetMundial Initiative will bring solutions to the broad range of
> Internet related policy problems."
>
> Again, an apples and oranges problem... If you bring solutions to policy
> problems, then they must be come kinds of policies, right! (One should
> be more considerate to ordinary language, but this is the new age PR.)
>
> (One good thing about the NMI is that it is *equal footing MSism* in
> flesh and blood and so one can effectively critique it, unless the
> earlier slippery non-theories and non-substance of equal footing MSism,
> other than employing it as an self-evident and self-justifying creed).
>
> In sum, I am unable to agree with your connecting the current versions
> of equal footing MSism, intending policy work, as a continuation of the
> evolution of some tendencies in the global governance system, beginning
> prominently with the Rio Summit on sustainable development. In fact, I
> believe that they go in exactly the opposite directions - one as
> deepening democracy and other as subverting it (equal footing MSism). I
> have above pointed to the chief structural difference between the two
> which can be observed empirically - that, one is based an a specific
> relationship to legitimate policy making systems and other seeks to
> anticipate and prevent them.
>
> best regards
>
> parminder
>
>
>
> On Wednesday 07 January 2015 08:21 PM, Carlos A. Afonso wrote:
>> Just published in the IEEE Internet Computing journal:
>>
>> http://online.qmags.com/IC0115?sessionID=BD7A2B7CBEF89C57D8F47874E&cid=3193795&eid=19210#pg76&mode2
>>
>> The Origin and Evolution of Multistakeholder Models
>>
>> Virgilio Almeida - Federal University of Minas Gerais
>> Demi Getschko - Pontifícia Universidade Católica de São Paulo
>> Carlos Afonso - Instituto Nupef, Rio de Janeiro
>>
>> Abstract: Various domains have adopted multistakeholder models (MSMs) to
>> address and deal with global challenges, such as sustainability,
>> environment, climate, and Internet governance. Here, the authors examine
>> the use of MSMs and their historical evolution, fundamentals, and
>> characteristics. They also present examples of how such models are used
>> in the global Internet governance ecosystem. Finally, the article
>> presents a series of research questions that can be tackled to improve
>> the efficiency of multistakeholder processes.
>>
>> frt rgds
>>
>> --c.a.
>>
>>
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>>       bestbits at lists.bestbits.net.
>> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit:
>>       http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits
>

-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From mueller at syr.edu  Sat Jan 10 04:30:12 2015
From: mueller at syr.edu (Milton L Mueller)
Date: Sat, 10 Jan 2015 09:30:12 +0000
Subject: [governance] Article on national sovereignty and communications in
 Indian Magazine Diplomatist
Message-ID: <6f3f6ed293d3484282e8948d70b911d5@EX13-MBX-13.ad.syr.edu>

http://diplomatist.com/articles/article005.html

Milton L Mueller
Laura J. and L. Douglas Meredith Professor
Syracuse University School of Information Studies
http://faculty.ischool.syr.edu/mueller/
Internet Governance Project
http://internetgovernance.org<http://internetgovernance.org/>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150110/2cec5e42/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de  Sat Jan 10 04:40:03 2015
From: wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de (=?iso-8859-1?Q?=22Kleinw=E4chter=2C_Wolfgang=22?=)
Date: Sat, 10 Jan 2015 10:40:03 +0100
Subject: AW: [governance] Article on national sovereignty and communications
 in Indian Magazine Diplomatist
References: <6f3f6ed293d3484282e8948d70b911d5@EX13-MBX-13.ad.syr.edu>
Message-ID:  <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8016429F3@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>

Thx. Milton,

good article, agree with your conclusion for an "alliance". Isn´t NMI a "stumbling step" in that direction?

w

 


-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org im Auftrag von Milton L Mueller
Gesendet: Sa 10.01.2015 10:30
An: Governance (governance at lists.igcaucus.org)
Betreff: [governance] Article on national sovereignty and communications in Indian Magazine Diplomatist
 
http://diplomatist.com/articles/article005.html

Milton L Mueller
Laura J. and L. Douglas Meredith Professor
Syracuse University School of Information Studies
http://faculty.ischool.syr.edu/mueller/
Internet Governance Project
http://internetgovernance.org<http://internetgovernance.org/>



-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From ymshana2003 at gmail.com  Sun Jan 11 02:52:54 2015
From: ymshana2003 at gmail.com (ymshana2003)
Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2015 09:52:54 +0200
Subject: AW: [governance] Article on national sovereignty and
 communications in Indian Magazine Diplomatist
Message-ID: <gteni43iok6bx498g5q22b3a.1420962774965@email.android.com>

+1


Sent from Samsung Mobile

-------- Original message --------
From: "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang" <wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de> 
Date:10/01/2015  11:40  (GMT+02:00) 
To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org,Milton L Mueller <mueller at syr.edu> 
Subject: AW: [governance] Article on national sovereignty and communications in Indian Magazine Diplomatist 

Thx. Milton,

good article, agree with your conclusion for an "alliance". Isn´t NMI a "stumbling step" in that direction?

w




-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org im Auftrag von Milton L Mueller
Gesendet: Sa 10.01.2015 10:30
An: Governance (governance at lists.igcaucus.org)
Betreff: [governance] Article on national sovereignty and communications in Indian Magazine Diplomatist

http://diplomatist.com/articles/article005.html

Milton L Mueller
Laura J. and L. Douglas Meredith Professor
Syracuse University School of Information Studies
http://faculty.ischool.syr.edu/mueller/
Internet Governance Project
http://internetgovernance.org<http://internetgovernance.org/>



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150111/6052133f/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From jefsey at jefsey.com  Sun Jan 11 19:15:46 2015
From: jefsey at jefsey.com (Jefsey)
Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2015 01:15:46 +0100
Subject: [governance] Article on national sovereignty and
  communications in Indian Magazine Diplomatist
In-Reply-To: <6f3f6ed293d3484282e8948d70b911d5@EX13-MBX-13.ad.syr.edu>
References: <6f3f6ed293d3484282e8948d70b911d5@EX13-MBX-13.ad.syr.edu>
Message-ID: <E1YASW6-000058-2j@igcaucus.org>

At 10:30 10/01/2015, Milton L Mueller wrote:
>http://diplomatist.com/articles/article005.html

Dear Milton,

this contribution of yours is brillant. With the only limitation that 
the Internet you describe does not exist except in some academic and 
political brains. This is probably the reason why the internet 
governance you call for is intellectually appealing but practically 
inneffective.

The real network is the catenet. It is the substructure of all the 
communications technologies [protocol set] (one of them under 
TCP/IPv4/6 being the internet) between billions of people assisted by 
their machines. The substructure, the operations, the utilization are 
paid by us the people with our work and/or our money. The only thing 
we do not govern is the governance of the tables (AS, IPs, CLASS 
"IN") of that technology and the resulting benefits.

Now, the internet designers have decided to subject themsleves to the 
USG (the USIETF fork is to await the NTIA decisions 
http://www.ietf.org/blog/2015/01/taking-a-step-towards-iana-transition) 
as some FLOSS users are oganizing to take that governance back and to 
control their machines, names, addresses, protocols and parameters.

It will certainly take some time, but I bet that they will go faster, 
cheaper and better than what the I*core did since 1986 and since the 
WSIS. With the help of national laws to support the national catenet 
sovereignty and its neutral, Libre/Free support of the different 
technologies such as the internet, ndn, sdns, interplus, etc. and 
common services such as the ML-DNS (multi-ledger/CLASS - like ICANN 
for the "IN" ICANN/NTIA CLASS), and the catenet addressing.

The internet was a great project documented by IEN 48. However, it 
was blocked in the mid-80s by the status-quo strategy due to the 
TCP/IP inability to support its intended second phase, the world 
needs now to see completed. Civil society and Accademics seemed to be 
a possible way to address that issue. It turns out that this is not 
the case and that the solution (with the OSI layer six presentation) 
demands a revision/extension of the architecture. The IAB has decided 
to engage that work from/in the stack. Some Libre and other national 
teams (IAB is now to be understood as US-IAB) consider that this can 
be achieved at that catenet fringe to fringe layer (i.e. 
independently from the transportation technology, as an extension of 
the user interoperating system).

This makes the future of the world digital ecosystem and of networks exciting.

jfc
   


-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From kichango at gmail.com  Mon Jan 12 05:05:03 2015
From: kichango at gmail.com (Mawaki Chango)
Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2015 10:05:03 +0000
Subject: [governance] Re: IGC Coordinator Election 2015
In-Reply-To: <CACTo+v8-ZiVEJzw6Mn9Xy9y-TzK-xsEdNPxbN=eKaOEccB5Ldw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CACTo+v84qBOx7AOzJe_b46ad1wA5tzVV7a9in=Mk8yOT2dZ=-w@mail.gmail.com>
 <CACTo+v_HZ3wEBsi3bUDGPfH=O_WyGBzpUa=RKMqAkUbTBPqNvA@mail.gmail.com> <CACTo+v8-ZiVEJzw6Mn9Xy9y-TzK-xsEdNPxbN=eKaOEccB5Ldw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CACTo+v-wyuAFypao7fzQpEyv=sfZ14Sg+xjTev3OmqNUBVeTkg@mail.gmail.com>

Dear All,

On a member's request for the inclusion of the option to vote for none of
the nominees, as a pre-requisite for him to exercise his right to vote
(regardless of the actual choice he will eventually make), I have added
"None of these nominees" to the response options for the Election question
in the poll.

I have done this so as to make sure no IGC member feels deprived of their
right to express their vote. I have resolved to make the change now because
the person claims this is at least the second election he is making this
request, keeping in mind that we don't have an efficient way to keep track
of this kind of suggestions from one election to another, which are mostly
handled by a different person each time, and that as a result the request
might fall through the cracks again at the next election. Hopefully, we now
have a template including the "none" option which will be carried over into
the next elections.

I am letting you all know of this in the interest of transparency and
hoping that the addition of that option would not have made any material
difference for those who have already expressed their vote. If you have any
issue or concern with this please let us know, preferably to our individual
email addresses including Deirdre and myself, unless you think the whole
list needs to be aware of it.

Thank you for your understanding.
Best regards,

Mawaki


On Thu, Jan 8, 2015 at 1:02 PM, Mawaki Chango <kichango at gmail.com> wrote:

> Dear all,
>
> My apologies for just sending a vote reminder to a bunch of people who
> most probably didn't need one. Please discard if you have already voted or
> located your initial email invite. This was the result of mistakenly
> hitting the wrong button while I was trying to send a reminder to just one
> person.
>
> Please indulge that I repeat this. When you check your mailbox using your
> human senses and you don't find your ballot, the first thing to do is this:
>
> 1) Use your email client's search engine to look up key words related to
> this subject. For that purpose, the subject line of your email invitation
> to vote is supposed to be  "Voting link for 2015 IGC coordinator election"
>
> Only after you did that, making sure your spam folder is also included in
> the search, and still haven't found your ballot, then you may:
>
> 2) Send me a note off list reporting this, and I will check the record and
> make sure you receive your ballot.
>
> If our record actually shows that you were sent a ballot, I will send you
> a reminder the subject line of which should read "Reminder to participate
> in survey" (in case you need to look that up too using a search engine.)
>
> Thank you for your understanding.
> Best regards,
>
> Mawaki
>
>
> On Wed, Jan 7, 2015 at 2:57 PM, Mawaki Chango <kichango at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> For all who have reported (and maintained) that they have not received
>> their ballot so far, here is the status:
>>
>> 1) Sonigitu Ekpe: your name is in the voting list and the system reports
>> you were sent a ballot to your Corssriver state government account. I just
>> sent you again another invite in the form of a reminder (subject line:
>> Reminder to participate in survey). Please check and carefully or let us
>> know if you no longer have access to that email account.
>>
>> 2) Shaila Mistry: Idem, to the email you are subscribed with.
>>
>> 3) Chantal Lebrument: Idem, to the email you are subscribed with.
>>
>> 4) Judith Hellerstein: True you were not sent a ballot, but I also have
>> hard time locating you on the membership list. I just ran your name in the
>> IGC user list page after page (it's painful not to be able to search the
>> full database of members' names at once... so please bear with me and let
>> me know your answers to the following questions.) Have you subscribed to
>> the list with this name? Have you been a member for at least 8 weeks now?
>>
>> 5) Raúl Echeberría: In fact this is the one case we spotted early as
>> being subject to a glitch was. Have you, Raul, discontinued your membership
>> recently before reactivating it or have you remained a member for at least
>> the last 2 months?
>>
>> I would appreciate everybody check and double check thoroughly (and be
>> clear about having been a subscribed member for the last 2 months at least)
>> before sending a claim that they have not received their ballot. Thank you
>> for your understanding.
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> Mawaki
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Jan 6, 2015 at 10:19 PM, Mawaki Chango <kichango at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Dear IGC Fellow Members,
>>>
>>> I hope you enjoyed the holiday season. It is my pleasure to welcome you
>>> back into the new year first by wishing you all a healthy, peaceful and
>>> pleasant journey throughout 2015 filled with excitements, accomplishments,
>>> joys and empathy; secondly by inviting you to choose our next new
>>> coordinator.
>>>
>>> The individual you will be voting for will, if he or she wins, replace
>>> me as I conclude my term, and will be in custody during 2015 and 2016. For
>>> the first year (2015) she or he will be working alongside Ms. Deirdre
>>> Williams as co-coordinator for our activities.
>>>
>>> For this purpose, you will be receiving in the next hour or so an
>>> invitation email in your mailbox (at the email with which you are
>>> subscribed to the IGC list.)
>>>
>>> If one hour from now if you still haven't received your invitation while
>>> you think you have maintained continuous membership over the last two
>>> months (please, also check your spam folder), do let me know so that I can
>>> look into it. While I do not expect many such cases, I have noted one
>>> instance where this might likely be the case. So please even if you don't
>>> intend to cast your vote right away, I would appreciate if you can check
>>> within the next 24 hours and make sure you have received your invitation
>>> (please do NOT send me a message if you have received your invitation, only
>>> if you have not but think you should have.)
>>>
>>> Good luck to our three candidates, and happy voting for us all!
>>> Warm regards,
>>>
>>> Mawaki
>>>
>>> =====================================
>>> Mawaki Chango, PhD
>>> Founder
>>> DIGILEXIS
>>> http://www.digilexis.com
>>> m.chango at digilexis.com | *kichango at gmail.com <kichango at gmail.com>*
>>> Twitter: @digilexis & @prodigilexis
>>> Mob. +225 57 55 57 53 | +225 44 48 77 64
>>> Skype: digilexis
>>> =====================================
>>>
>>
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150112/9b07592b/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From remmyn at gmail.com  Mon Jan 12 05:36:35 2015
From: remmyn at gmail.com (Remmy Nweke)
Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2015 11:36:35 +0100
Subject: [governance] IGC Coordinator Election 2015
In-Reply-To: <CACTo+v-wyuAFypao7fzQpEyv=sfZ14Sg+xjTev3OmqNUBVeTkg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CACTo+v84qBOx7AOzJe_b46ad1wA5tzVV7a9in=Mk8yOT2dZ=-w@mail.gmail.com>
	<CACTo+v_HZ3wEBsi3bUDGPfH=O_WyGBzpUa=RKMqAkUbTBPqNvA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CACTo+v8-ZiVEJzw6Mn9Xy9y-TzK-xsEdNPxbN=eKaOEccB5Ldw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CACTo+v-wyuAFypao7fzQpEyv=sfZ14Sg+xjTev3OmqNUBVeTkg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAMc__orezWfCu09cCHD8z_3y3kEvNaXXVFF+TABMVuH4gyiCDA@mail.gmail.com>

Thanks Mawaki
I think the right thing should have been to have abstain button rather than
None, which is very much discouraging for candidates and potentials
candidates.

It is sad that someone should be making such a request which I think is not
in the best interest of any organisation, let alone a consensus-based organ
like IG caucus.

What happens if we have a good number of None button on record? It will
send wrong signals.

So, I will prefer and propose Abstain to None.

I hope my point helps.

Regards and keep walking.
Remmy Nweke
@ITRealms

On Monday, January 12, 2015, Mawaki Chango <kichango at gmail.com> wrote:

> Dear All,
>
> On a member's request for the inclusion of the option to vote for none of
> the nominees, as a pre-requisite for him to exercise his right to vote
> (regardless of the actual choice he will eventually make), I have added
> "None of these nominees" to the response options for the Election question
> in the poll.
>
> I have done this so as to make sure no IGC member feels deprived of their
> right to express their vote. I have resolved to make the change now because
> the person claims this is at least the second election he is making this
> request, keeping in mind that we don't have an efficient way to keep track
> of this kind of suggestions from one election to another, which are mostly
> handled by a different person each time, and that as a result the request
> might fall through the cracks again at the next election. Hopefully, we now
> have a template including the "none" option which will be carried over into
> the next elections.
>
> I am letting you all know of this in the interest of transparency and
> hoping that the addition of that option would not have made any material
> difference for those who have already expressed their vote. If you have any
> issue or concern with this please let us know, preferably to our individual
> email addresses including Deirdre and myself, unless you think the whole
> list needs to be aware of it.
>
> Thank you for your understanding.
> Best regards,
>
> Mawaki
>
>
> On Thu, Jan 8, 2015 at 1:02 PM, Mawaki Chango <kichango at gmail.com
> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','kichango at gmail.com');>> wrote:
>
>> Dear all,
>>
>> My apologies for just sending a vote reminder to a bunch of people who
>> most probably didn't need one. Please discard if you have already voted or
>> located your initial email invite. This was the result of mistakenly
>> hitting the wrong button while I was trying to send a reminder to just one
>> person.
>>
>> Please indulge that I repeat this. When you check your mailbox using your
>> human senses and you don't find your ballot, the first thing to do is this:
>>
>> 1) Use your email client's search engine to look up key words related to
>> this subject. For that purpose, the subject line of your email invitation
>> to vote is supposed to be  "Voting link for 2015 IGC coordinator
>> election"
>>
>> Only after you did that, making sure your spam folder is also included in
>> the search, and still haven't found your ballot, then you may:
>>
>> 2) Send me a note off list reporting this, and I will check the record
>> and make sure you receive your ballot.
>>
>> If our record actually shows that you were sent a ballot, I will send you
>> a reminder the subject line of which should read "Reminder to participate
>> in survey" (in case you need to look that up too using a search engine.)
>>
>> Thank you for your understanding.
>> Best regards,
>>
>> Mawaki
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Jan 7, 2015 at 2:57 PM, Mawaki Chango <kichango at gmail.com
>> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','kichango at gmail.com');>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> For all who have reported (and maintained) that they have not received
>>> their ballot so far, here is the status:
>>>
>>> 1) Sonigitu Ekpe: your name is in the voting list and the system reports
>>> you were sent a ballot to your Corssriver state government account. I just
>>> sent you again another invite in the form of a reminder (subject line:
>>> Reminder to participate in survey). Please check and carefully or let us
>>> know if you no longer have access to that email account.
>>>
>>> 2) Shaila Mistry: Idem, to the email you are subscribed with.
>>>
>>> 3) Chantal Lebrument: Idem, to the email you are subscribed with.
>>>
>>> 4) Judith Hellerstein: True you were not sent a ballot, but I also have
>>> hard time locating you on the membership list. I just ran your name in the
>>> IGC user list page after page (it's painful not to be able to search the
>>> full database of members' names at once... so please bear with me and let
>>> me know your answers to the following questions.) Have you subscribed to
>>> the list with this name? Have you been a member for at least 8 weeks now?
>>>
>>> 5) Raúl Echeberría: In fact this is the one case we spotted early as
>>> being subject to a glitch was. Have you, Raul, discontinued your membership
>>> recently before reactivating it or have you remained a member for at least
>>> the last 2 months?
>>>
>>> I would appreciate everybody check and double check thoroughly (and be
>>> clear about having been a subscribed member for the last 2 months at least)
>>> before sending a claim that they have not received their ballot. Thank you
>>> for your understanding.
>>>
>>> Best,
>>>
>>> Mawaki
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Jan 6, 2015 at 10:19 PM, Mawaki Chango <kichango at gmail.com
>>> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','kichango at gmail.com');>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Dear IGC Fellow Members,
>>>>
>>>> I hope you enjoyed the holiday season. It is my pleasure to welcome you
>>>> back into the new year first by wishing you all a healthy, peaceful and
>>>> pleasant journey throughout 2015 filled with excitements, accomplishments,
>>>> joys and empathy; secondly by inviting you to choose our next new
>>>> coordinator.
>>>>
>>>> The individual you will be voting for will, if he or she wins, replace
>>>> me as I conclude my term, and will be in custody during 2015 and 2016. For
>>>> the first year (2015) she or he will be working alongside Ms. Deirdre
>>>> Williams as co-coordinator for our activities.
>>>>
>>>> For this purpose, you will be receiving in the next hour or so an
>>>> invitation email in your mailbox (at the email with which you are
>>>> subscribed to the IGC list.)
>>>>
>>>> If one hour from now if you still haven't received your invitation
>>>> while you think you have maintained continuous membership over the last two
>>>> months (please, also check your spam folder), do let me know so that I can
>>>> look into it. While I do not expect many such cases, I have noted one
>>>> instance where this might likely be the case. So please even if you don't
>>>> intend to cast your vote right away, I would appreciate if you can check
>>>> within the next 24 hours and make sure you have received your invitation
>>>> (please do NOT send me a message if you have received your invitation, only
>>>> if you have not but think you should have.)
>>>>
>>>> Good luck to our three candidates, and happy voting for us all!
>>>> Warm regards,
>>>>
>>>> Mawaki
>>>>
>>>> =====================================
>>>> Mawaki Chango, PhD
>>>> Founder
>>>> DIGILEXIS
>>>> http://www.digilexis.com
>>>> m.chango at digilexis.com
>>>> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','m.chango at digilexis.com');> | *kichango at gmail.com
>>>> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','kichango at gmail.com');>*
>>>> Twitter: @digilexis & @prodigilexis
>>>> Mob. +225 57 55 57 53 | +225 44 48 77 64
>>>> Skype: digilexis
>>>> =====================================
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>

-- 
____
REMMY NWEKE,
Lead Strategist/Group Executive Editor,
DigitalSENSE Africa Media Ltd
(publishers of) DigitalSENSE Business News;
ITREALMS, NaijaAgroNet
(Multiple-award winning medium)
Published by: DigitalSENSE Africa Media Ltd
Block F1, Shop 133 Moyosore Aboderin Plaza
Bolade Junction, Oshodi-Lagos
M: 234-8033592762, 8023122558, 8051000475,
T: @ITRealms <http://www.twitter.com/ITRealms>
[Member, NIRA Executive Board]
Author: A Decade of ICT Reportage in Nigeria
<https://www.facebook.com/adecadeofictreportageinnigeria>
NDS Forum on Internet Governance for Development (IG4D) 2015 <
http://www.digitalsenseafrica.com.ng>- June 5
Nigeria IPv6 Roundtable 2015 <http://www.ipv6forumnigeria.ng> - June 6
@Welcome Centre Hotels. Register now. Email: remnekkv at gmail.com
_____________________________________________________________________
*Confidentiality Notice:* The information in this document and attachments
are confidential and may also be privileged information. It is intended
only for the use of the named recipient. Remmy Nweke does not accept legal
responsibility for the contents of this e-mail. If you are not the intended
recipient, please notify me immediately, then delete this document and do
not disclose the contents of this document to any other person, nor make
any copies. Violators may face court persecution.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150112/2d87422c/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From kichango at gmail.com  Mon Jan 12 06:43:24 2015
From: kichango at gmail.com (Mawaki Chango)
Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2015 11:43:24 +0000
Subject: [governance] IGC Coordinator Election 2015
In-Reply-To: <CAMc__orezWfCu09cCHD8z_3y3kEvNaXXVFF+TABMVuH4gyiCDA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CACTo+v84qBOx7AOzJe_b46ad1wA5tzVV7a9in=Mk8yOT2dZ=-w@mail.gmail.com>
 <CACTo+v_HZ3wEBsi3bUDGPfH=O_WyGBzpUa=RKMqAkUbTBPqNvA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CACTo+v8-ZiVEJzw6Mn9Xy9y-TzK-xsEdNPxbN=eKaOEccB5Ldw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CACTo+v-wyuAFypao7fzQpEyv=sfZ14Sg+xjTev3OmqNUBVeTkg@mail.gmail.com> <CAMc__orezWfCu09cCHD8z_3y3kEvNaXXVFF+TABMVuH4gyiCDA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CACTo+v8PVzHx7bMvugk02Bm3nVw+JqRzvTKiNLMjkgeJpfYNyQ@mail.gmail.com>

Thanks Remmy, your point is well taken.
I personally agree with you. Anyone who would want to vote that way should
have at least nominated someone, if not themselves (and we generally do
share, before the closing of nomination deadline, the list of nominations
received to help them make such decision.)

The current formulation is what has been requested verbatim, so let us keep
it as a tentative solution for now and we can open the debate as to what
should be the preferred formulation going forward.
Regards,

Mawaki


On Mon, Jan 12, 2015 at 10:36 AM, Remmy Nweke <remmyn at gmail.com> wrote:

> Thanks Mawaki
> I think the right thing should have been to have abstain button rather
> than None, which is very much discouraging for candidates and potentials
> candidates.
>
> It is sad that someone should be making such a request which I think is
> not in the best interest of any organisation, let alone a consensus-based
> organ like IG caucus.
>
> What happens if we have a good number of None button on record? It will
> send wrong signals.
>
> So, I will prefer and propose Abstain to None.
>
> I hope my point helps.
>
> Regards and keep walking.
> Remmy Nweke
> @ITRealms
>
>
> On Monday, January 12, 2015, Mawaki Chango <kichango at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Dear All,
>>
>> On a member's request for the inclusion of the option to vote for none of
>> the nominees, as a pre-requisite for him to exercise his right to vote
>> (regardless of the actual choice he will eventually make), I have added
>> "None of these nominees" to the response options for the Election question
>> in the poll.
>>
>> I have done this so as to make sure no IGC member feels deprived of their
>> right to express their vote. I have resolved to make the change now because
>> the person claims this is at least the second election he is making this
>> request, keeping in mind that we don't have an efficient way to keep track
>> of this kind of suggestions from one election to another, which are mostly
>> handled by a different person each time, and that as a result the request
>> might fall through the cracks again at the next election. Hopefully, we now
>> have a template including the "none" option which will be carried over into
>> the next elections.
>>
>> I am letting you all know of this in the interest of transparency and
>> hoping that the addition of that option would not have made any material
>> difference for those who have already expressed their vote. If you have any
>> issue or concern with this please let us know, preferably to our individual
>> email addresses including Deirdre and myself, unless you think the whole
>> list needs to be aware of it.
>>
>> Thank you for your understanding.
>> Best regards,
>>
>> Mawaki
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Jan 8, 2015 at 1:02 PM, Mawaki Chango <kichango at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Dear all,
>>>
>>> My apologies for just sending a vote reminder to a bunch of people who
>>> most probably didn't need one. Please discard if you have already voted or
>>> located your initial email invite. This was the result of mistakenly
>>> hitting the wrong button while I was trying to send a reminder to just one
>>> person.
>>>
>>> Please indulge that I repeat this. When you check your mailbox using
>>> your human senses and you don't find your ballot, the first thing to do is
>>> this:
>>>
>>> 1) Use your email client's search engine to look up key words related to
>>> this subject. For that purpose, the subject line of your email invitation
>>> to vote is supposed to be  "Voting link for 2015 IGC coordinator
>>> election"
>>>
>>> Only after you did that, making sure your spam folder is also included
>>> in the search, and still haven't found your ballot, then you may:
>>>
>>> 2) Send me a note off list reporting this, and I will check the record
>>> and make sure you receive your ballot.
>>>
>>> If our record actually shows that you were sent a ballot, I will send
>>> you a reminder the subject line of which should read "Reminder to
>>> participate in survey" (in case you need to look that up too using a search
>>> engine.)
>>>
>>> Thank you for your understanding.
>>> Best regards,
>>>
>>> Mawaki
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Jan 7, 2015 at 2:57 PM, Mawaki Chango <kichango at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> For all who have reported (and maintained) that they have not received
>>>> their ballot so far, here is the status:
>>>>
>>>> 1) Sonigitu Ekpe: your name is in the voting list and the system
>>>> reports you were sent a ballot to your Corssriver state government account.
>>>> I just sent you again another invite in the form of a reminder (subject
>>>> line: Reminder to participate in survey). Please check and carefully or let
>>>> us know if you no longer have access to that email account.
>>>>
>>>> 2) Shaila Mistry: Idem, to the email you are subscribed with.
>>>>
>>>> 3) Chantal Lebrument: Idem, to the email you are subscribed with.
>>>>
>>>> 4) Judith Hellerstein: True you were not sent a ballot, but I also have
>>>> hard time locating you on the membership list. I just ran your name in the
>>>> IGC user list page after page (it's painful not to be able to search the
>>>> full database of members' names at once... so please bear with me and let
>>>> me know your answers to the following questions.) Have you subscribed to
>>>> the list with this name? Have you been a member for at least 8 weeks now?
>>>>
>>>> 5) Raúl Echeberría: In fact this is the one case we spotted early as
>>>> being subject to a glitch was. Have you, Raul, discontinued your membership
>>>> recently before reactivating it or have you remained a member for at least
>>>> the last 2 months?
>>>>
>>>> I would appreciate everybody check and double check thoroughly (and be
>>>> clear about having been a subscribed member for the last 2 months at least)
>>>> before sending a claim that they have not received their ballot. Thank you
>>>> for your understanding.
>>>>
>>>> Best,
>>>>
>>>> Mawaki
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Jan 6, 2015 at 10:19 PM, Mawaki Chango <kichango at gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Dear IGC Fellow Members,
>>>>>
>>>>> I hope you enjoyed the holiday season. It is my pleasure to welcome
>>>>> you back into the new year first by wishing you all a healthy, peaceful and
>>>>> pleasant journey throughout 2015 filled with excitements, accomplishments,
>>>>> joys and empathy; secondly by inviting you to choose our next new
>>>>> coordinator.
>>>>>
>>>>> The individual you will be voting for will, if he or she wins, replace
>>>>> me as I conclude my term, and will be in custody during 2015 and 2016. For
>>>>> the first year (2015) she or he will be working alongside Ms. Deirdre
>>>>> Williams as co-coordinator for our activities.
>>>>>
>>>>> For this purpose, you will be receiving in the next hour or so an
>>>>> invitation email in your mailbox (at the email with which you are
>>>>> subscribed to the IGC list.)
>>>>>
>>>>> If one hour from now if you still haven't received your invitation
>>>>> while you think you have maintained continuous membership over the last two
>>>>> months (please, also check your spam folder), do let me know so that I can
>>>>> look into it. While I do not expect many such cases, I have noted one
>>>>> instance where this might likely be the case. So please even if you don't
>>>>> intend to cast your vote right away, I would appreciate if you can check
>>>>> within the next 24 hours and make sure you have received your invitation
>>>>> (please do NOT send me a message if you have received your invitation, only
>>>>> if you have not but think you should have.)
>>>>>
>>>>> Good luck to our three candidates, and happy voting for us all!
>>>>> Warm regards,
>>>>>
>>>>> Mawaki
>>>>>
>>>>> =====================================
>>>>> Mawaki Chango, PhD
>>>>> Founder
>>>>> DIGILEXIS
>>>>> http://www.digilexis.com
>>>>> m.chango at digilexis.com | *kichango at gmail.com*
>>>>> Twitter: @digilexis & @prodigilexis
>>>>> Mob. +225 57 55 57 53 | +225 44 48 77 64
>>>>> Skype: digilexis
>>>>> =====================================
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
> --
> ____
> REMMY NWEKE,
> Lead Strategist/Group Executive Editor,
> DigitalSENSE Africa Media Ltd
> (publishers of) DigitalSENSE Business News;
> ITREALMS, NaijaAgroNet
> (Multiple-award winning medium)
> Published by: DigitalSENSE Africa Media Ltd
> Block F1, Shop 133 Moyosore Aboderin Plaza
> Bolade Junction, Oshodi-Lagos
> M: 234-8033592762, 8023122558, 8051000475,
> T: @ITRealms <http://www.twitter.com/ITRealms>
> [Member, NIRA Executive Board]
> Author: A Decade of ICT Reportage in Nigeria
> <https://www.facebook.com/adecadeofictreportageinnigeria>
> NDS Forum on Internet Governance for Development (IG4D) 2015 <
> http://www.digitalsenseafrica.com.ng>- June 5
> Nigeria IPv6 Roundtable 2015 <http://www.ipv6forumnigeria.ng> - June 6
> @Welcome Centre Hotels. Register now. Email: remnekkv at gmail.com
> _____________________________________________________________________
> *Confidentiality Notice:* The information in this document and attachments
> are confidential and may also be privileged information. It is intended
> only for the use of the named recipient. Remmy Nweke does not accept legal
> responsibility for the contents of this e-mail. If you are not the
> intended
> recipient, please notify me immediately, then delete this document and do
> not disclose the contents of this document to any other person, nor make
> any copies. Violators may face court persecution.
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150112/96ed1e05/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From fsylla at gmail.com  Mon Jan 12 07:06:10 2015
From: fsylla at gmail.com (Fatimata Seye Sylla)
Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2015 12:06:10 +0000
Subject: [governance] IGC Coordinator Election 2015
In-Reply-To: <CACTo+v8PVzHx7bMvugk02Bm3nVw+JqRzvTKiNLMjkgeJpfYNyQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CACTo+v84qBOx7AOzJe_b46ad1wA5tzVV7a9in=Mk8yOT2dZ=-w@mail.gmail.com>
	<CACTo+v_HZ3wEBsi3bUDGPfH=O_WyGBzpUa=RKMqAkUbTBPqNvA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CACTo+v8-ZiVEJzw6Mn9Xy9y-TzK-xsEdNPxbN=eKaOEccB5Ldw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CACTo+v-wyuAFypao7fzQpEyv=sfZ14Sg+xjTev3OmqNUBVeTkg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAMc__orezWfCu09cCHD8z_3y3kEvNaXXVFF+TABMVuH4gyiCDA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CACTo+v8PVzHx7bMvugk02Bm3nVw+JqRzvTKiNLMjkgeJpfYNyQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAL_Zf5x-uMUTn6VB8JxHKU+Lu6UFGPVuEHYAAWu5szxWS7jSGg@mail.gmail.com>

Hi Mawaki,

I have voted!

Well done, thank you
Fatimata
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150112/2c9bf7f9/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From remmyn at gmail.com  Mon Jan 12 09:23:05 2015
From: remmyn at gmail.com (Remmy Nweke)
Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2015 15:23:05 +0100
Subject: [governance] IGC Coordinator Election 2015
In-Reply-To: <CACTo+v8PVzHx7bMvugk02Bm3nVw+JqRzvTKiNLMjkgeJpfYNyQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CACTo+v84qBOx7AOzJe_b46ad1wA5tzVV7a9in=Mk8yOT2dZ=-w@mail.gmail.com>
	<CACTo+v_HZ3wEBsi3bUDGPfH=O_WyGBzpUa=RKMqAkUbTBPqNvA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CACTo+v8-ZiVEJzw6Mn9Xy9y-TzK-xsEdNPxbN=eKaOEccB5Ldw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CACTo+v-wyuAFypao7fzQpEyv=sfZ14Sg+xjTev3OmqNUBVeTkg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAMc__orezWfCu09cCHD8z_3y3kEvNaXXVFF+TABMVuH4gyiCDA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CACTo+v8PVzHx7bMvugk02Bm3nVw+JqRzvTKiNLMjkgeJpfYNyQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAMc__oq1q0oKFH6JCO3WEyVo51_0S7mJDiArNtfCSj+T=qSOmQ@mail.gmail.com>

Thanks Mawaki, hope the incoming coordinator will not by-pass this moving
forward.
rgds
Remmy

On Mon, Jan 12, 2015 at 12:43 PM, Mawaki Chango <kichango at gmail.com> wrote:

> Thanks Remmy, your point is well taken.
> I personally agree with you. Anyone who would want to vote that way should
> have at least nominated someone, if not themselves (and we generally do
> share, before the closing of nomination deadline, the list of nominations
> received to help them make such decision.)
>
> The current formulation is what has been requested verbatim, so let us
> keep it as a tentative solution for now and we can open the debate as to
> what should be the preferred formulation going forward.
> Regards,
>
> Mawaki
>
>
> On Mon, Jan 12, 2015 at 10:36 AM, Remmy Nweke <remmyn at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Thanks Mawaki
>> I think the right thing should have been to have abstain button rather
>> than None, which is very much discouraging for candidates and potentials
>> candidates.
>>
>> It is sad that someone should be making such a request which I think is
>> not in the best interest of any organisation, let alone a consensus-based
>> organ like IG caucus.
>>
>> What happens if we have a good number of None button on record? It will
>> send wrong signals.
>>
>> So, I will prefer and propose Abstain to None.
>>
>> I hope my point helps.
>>
>> Regards and keep walking.
>> Remmy Nweke
>> @ITRealms
>>
>>
>> On Monday, January 12, 2015, Mawaki Chango <kichango at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Dear All,
>>>
>>> On a member's request for the inclusion of the option to vote for none
>>> of the nominees, as a pre-requisite for him to exercise his right to vote
>>> (regardless of the actual choice he will eventually make), I have added
>>> "None of these nominees" to the response options for the Election question
>>> in the poll.
>>>
>>> I have done this so as to make sure no IGC member feels deprived of
>>> their right to express their vote. I have resolved to make the change now
>>> because the person claims this is at least the second election he is making
>>> this request, keeping in mind that we don't have an efficient way to keep
>>> track of this kind of suggestions from one election to another, which are
>>> mostly handled by a different person each time, and that as a result the
>>> request might fall through the cracks again at the next election.
>>> Hopefully, we now have a template including the "none" option which will be
>>> carried over into the next elections.
>>>
>>> I am letting you all know of this in the interest of transparency and
>>> hoping that the addition of that option would not have made any material
>>> difference for those who have already expressed their vote. If you have any
>>> issue or concern with this please let us know, preferably to our individual
>>> email addresses including Deirdre and myself, unless you think the whole
>>> list needs to be aware of it.
>>>
>>> Thank you for your understanding.
>>> Best regards,
>>>
>>> Mawaki
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Jan 8, 2015 at 1:02 PM, Mawaki Chango <kichango at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Dear all,
>>>>
>>>> My apologies for just sending a vote reminder to a bunch of people who
>>>> most probably didn't need one. Please discard if you have already voted or
>>>> located your initial email invite. This was the result of mistakenly
>>>> hitting the wrong button while I was trying to send a reminder to just one
>>>> person.
>>>>
>>>> Please indulge that I repeat this. When you check your mailbox using
>>>> your human senses and you don't find your ballot, the first thing to do is
>>>> this:
>>>>
>>>> 1) Use your email client's search engine to look up key words related
>>>> to this subject. For that purpose, the subject line of your email
>>>> invitation to vote is supposed to be  "Voting link for 2015 IGC
>>>> coordinator election"
>>>>
>>>> Only after you did that, making sure your spam folder is also included
>>>> in the search, and still haven't found your ballot, then you may:
>>>>
>>>> 2) Send me a note off list reporting this, and I will check the record
>>>> and make sure you receive your ballot.
>>>>
>>>> If our record actually shows that you were sent a ballot, I will send
>>>> you a reminder the subject line of which should read "Reminder to
>>>> participate in survey" (in case you need to look that up too using a search
>>>> engine.)
>>>>
>>>> Thank you for your understanding.
>>>> Best regards,
>>>>
>>>> Mawaki
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Jan 7, 2015 at 2:57 PM, Mawaki Chango <kichango at gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> For all who have reported (and maintained) that they have not received
>>>>> their ballot so far, here is the status:
>>>>>
>>>>> 1) Sonigitu Ekpe: your name is in the voting list and the system
>>>>> reports you were sent a ballot to your Corssriver state government account.
>>>>> I just sent you again another invite in the form of a reminder (subject
>>>>> line: Reminder to participate in survey). Please check and carefully or let
>>>>> us know if you no longer have access to that email account.
>>>>>
>>>>> 2) Shaila Mistry: Idem, to the email you are subscribed with.
>>>>>
>>>>> 3) Chantal Lebrument: Idem, to the email you are subscribed with.
>>>>>
>>>>> 4) Judith Hellerstein: True you were not sent a ballot, but I also
>>>>> have hard time locating you on the membership list. I just ran your name in
>>>>> the IGC user list page after page (it's painful not to be able to search
>>>>> the full database of members' names at once... so please bear with me and
>>>>> let me know your answers to the following questions.) Have you subscribed
>>>>> to the list with this name? Have you been a member for at least 8 weeks now?
>>>>>
>>>>> 5) Raúl Echeberría: In fact this is the one case we spotted early as
>>>>> being subject to a glitch was. Have you, Raul, discontinued your membership
>>>>> recently before reactivating it or have you remained a member for at least
>>>>> the last 2 months?
>>>>>
>>>>> I would appreciate everybody check and double check thoroughly (and be
>>>>> clear about having been a subscribed member for the last 2 months at least)
>>>>> before sending a claim that they have not received their ballot. Thank you
>>>>> for your understanding.
>>>>>
>>>>> Best,
>>>>>
>>>>> Mawaki
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, Jan 6, 2015 at 10:19 PM, Mawaki Chango <kichango at gmail.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Dear IGC Fellow Members,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I hope you enjoyed the holiday season. It is my pleasure to welcome
>>>>>> you back into the new year first by wishing you all a healthy, peaceful and
>>>>>> pleasant journey throughout 2015 filled with excitements, accomplishments,
>>>>>> joys and empathy; secondly by inviting you to choose our next new
>>>>>> coordinator.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The individual you will be voting for will, if he or she wins,
>>>>>> replace me as I conclude my term, and will be in custody during 2015 and
>>>>>> 2016. For the first year (2015) she or he will be working alongside Ms.
>>>>>> Deirdre Williams as co-coordinator for our activities.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> For this purpose, you will be receiving in the next hour or so an
>>>>>> invitation email in your mailbox (at the email with which you are
>>>>>> subscribed to the IGC list.)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If one hour from now if you still haven't received your invitation
>>>>>> while you think you have maintained continuous membership over the last two
>>>>>> months (please, also check your spam folder), do let me know so that I can
>>>>>> look into it. While I do not expect many such cases, I have noted one
>>>>>> instance where this might likely be the case. So please even if you don't
>>>>>> intend to cast your vote right away, I would appreciate if you can check
>>>>>> within the next 24 hours and make sure you have received your invitation
>>>>>> (please do NOT send me a message if you have received your invitation, only
>>>>>> if you have not but think you should have.)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Good luck to our three candidates, and happy voting for us all!
>>>>>> Warm regards,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Mawaki
>>>>>>
>>>>>> =====================================
>>>>>> Mawaki Chango, PhD
>>>>>> Founder
>>>>>> DIGILEXIS
>>>>>> http://www.digilexis.com
>>>>>> m.chango at digilexis.com | *kichango at gmail.com*
>>>>>> Twitter: @digilexis & @prodigilexis
>>>>>> Mob. +225 57 55 57 53 | +225 44 48 77 64
>>>>>> Skype: digilexis
>>>>>> =====================================
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>> --
>> ____
>> REMMY NWEKE,
>> Lead Strategist/Group Executive Editor,
>> DigitalSENSE Africa Media Ltd
>> (publishers of) DigitalSENSE Business News;
>> ITREALMS, NaijaAgroNet
>> (Multiple-award winning medium)
>> Published by: DigitalSENSE Africa Media Ltd
>> Block F1, Shop 133 Moyosore Aboderin Plaza
>> Bolade Junction, Oshodi-Lagos
>> M: 234-8033592762, 8023122558, 8051000475,
>> T: @ITRealms <http://www.twitter.com/ITRealms>
>> [Member, NIRA Executive Board]
>> Author: A Decade of ICT Reportage in Nigeria
>> <https://www.facebook.com/adecadeofictreportageinnigeria>
>> NDS Forum on Internet Governance for Development (IG4D) 2015 <
>> http://www.digitalsenseafrica.com.ng>- June 5
>> Nigeria IPv6 Roundtable 2015 <http://www.ipv6forumnigeria.ng> - June 6
>> @Welcome Centre Hotels. Register now. Email: remnekkv at gmail.com
>> _____________________________________________________________________
>> *Confidentiality Notice:* The information in this document and
>> attachments
>> are confidential and may also be privileged information. It is intended
>> only for the use of the named recipient. Remmy Nweke does not accept
>> legal
>> responsibility for the contents of this e-mail. If you are not the
>> intended
>> recipient, please notify me immediately, then delete this document and do
>> not disclose the contents of this document to any other person, nor make
>> any copies. Violators may face court persecution.
>>
>>
>


-- 
____
REMMY NWEKE,
Lead Strategist/Group Executive Editor,
DigitalSENSE Africa Media Ltd
(publishers of) DigitalSENSE Business News;
ITREALMS, NaijaAgroNet
(Multiple-award winning medium)
Published by: DigitalSENSE Africa Media Ltd
Block F1, Shop 133 Moyosore Aboderin Plaza
Bolade Junction, Oshodi-Lagos
M: 234-8033592762, 8023122558, 8051000475,
T: @ITRealms <http://www.twitter.com/ITRealms>
[Member, NIRA Executive Board]
Author: A Decade of ICT Reportage in Nigeria
<https://www.facebook.com/adecadeofictreportageinnigeria>
NDS Forum on Internet Governance for Development (IG4D) 2015 <
http://www.digitalsenseafrica.com.ng>- June 5
Nigeria IPv6 Roundtable 2015 <http://www.ipv6forumnigeria.ng> - June 6
@Welcome Centre Hotels. Register now. Email: remnekkv at gmail.com
_____________________________________________________________________
*Confidentiality Notice:* The information in this document and attachments
are confidential and may also be privileged information. It is intended
only for the use of the named recipient. Remmy Nweke does not accept legal
responsibility for the contents of this e-mail. If you are not the intended
recipient, please notify me immediately, then delete this document and do
not disclose the contents of this document to any other person, nor make
any copies. Violators may face court persecution.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150112/2d9d2c46/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From compsoftnet at gmail.com  Mon Jan 12 10:50:21 2015
From: compsoftnet at gmail.com (Akinremi Peter Taiwo)
Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2015 16:50:21 +0100
Subject: [governance] IGC Coordinator Election 2015
In-Reply-To: <CAMc__oq1q0oKFH6JCO3WEyVo51_0S7mJDiArNtfCSj+T=qSOmQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CACTo+v84qBOx7AOzJe_b46ad1wA5tzVV7a9in=Mk8yOT2dZ=-w@mail.gmail.com>
	<CACTo+v_HZ3wEBsi3bUDGPfH=O_WyGBzpUa=RKMqAkUbTBPqNvA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CACTo+v8-ZiVEJzw6Mn9Xy9y-TzK-xsEdNPxbN=eKaOEccB5Ldw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CACTo+v-wyuAFypao7fzQpEyv=sfZ14Sg+xjTev3OmqNUBVeTkg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAMc__orezWfCu09cCHD8z_3y3kEvNaXXVFF+TABMVuH4gyiCDA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CACTo+v8PVzHx7bMvugk02Bm3nVw+JqRzvTKiNLMjkgeJpfYNyQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAMc__oq1q0oKFH6JCO3WEyVo51_0S7mJDiArNtfCSj+T=qSOmQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAGK4d09Zg2QjOMwjpNxNT7nRTuFKS98FFpzuM-_QJbvOnANA7A@mail.gmail.com>

Thanks Mawaki for the good works.
On Jan 12, 2015 3:23 PM, "Remmy Nweke" <remmyn at gmail.com> wrote:

> Thanks Mawaki, hope the incoming coordinator will not by-pass this moving
> forward.
> rgds
> Remmy
>
> On Mon, Jan 12, 2015 at 12:43 PM, Mawaki Chango <kichango at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Thanks Remmy, your point is well taken.
>> I personally agree with you. Anyone who would want to vote that way
>> should have at least nominated someone, if not themselves (and we generally
>> do share, before the closing of nomination deadline, the list of
>> nominations received to help them make such decision.)
>>
>> The current formulation is what has been requested verbatim, so let us
>> keep it as a tentative solution for now and we can open the debate as to
>> what should be the preferred formulation going forward.
>> Regards,
>>
>> Mawaki
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Jan 12, 2015 at 10:36 AM, Remmy Nweke <remmyn at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Thanks Mawaki
>>> I think the right thing should have been to have abstain button rather
>>> than None, which is very much discouraging for candidates and potentials
>>> candidates.
>>>
>>> It is sad that someone should be making such a request which I think is
>>> not in the best interest of any organisation, let alone a consensus-based
>>> organ like IG caucus.
>>>
>>> What happens if we have a good number of None button on record? It will
>>> send wrong signals.
>>>
>>> So, I will prefer and propose Abstain to None.
>>>
>>> I hope my point helps.
>>>
>>> Regards and keep walking.
>>> Remmy Nweke
>>> @ITRealms
>>>
>>>
>>> On Monday, January 12, 2015, Mawaki Chango <kichango at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Dear All,
>>>>
>>>> On a member's request for the inclusion of the option to vote for none
>>>> of the nominees, as a pre-requisite for him to exercise his right to vote
>>>> (regardless of the actual choice he will eventually make), I have added
>>>> "None of these nominees" to the response options for the Election question
>>>> in the poll.
>>>>
>>>> I have done this so as to make sure no IGC member feels deprived of
>>>> their right to express their vote. I have resolved to make the change now
>>>> because the person claims this is at least the second election he is making
>>>> this request, keeping in mind that we don't have an efficient way to keep
>>>> track of this kind of suggestions from one election to another, which are
>>>> mostly handled by a different person each time, and that as a result the
>>>> request might fall through the cracks again at the next election.
>>>> Hopefully, we now have a template including the "none" option which will be
>>>> carried over into the next elections.
>>>>
>>>> I am letting you all know of this in the interest of transparency and
>>>> hoping that the addition of that option would not have made any material
>>>> difference for those who have already expressed their vote. If you have any
>>>> issue or concern with this please let us know, preferably to our individual
>>>> email addresses including Deirdre and myself, unless you think the whole
>>>> list needs to be aware of it.
>>>>
>>>> Thank you for your understanding.
>>>> Best regards,
>>>>
>>>> Mawaki
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Jan 8, 2015 at 1:02 PM, Mawaki Chango <kichango at gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Dear all,
>>>>>
>>>>> My apologies for just sending a vote reminder to a bunch of people who
>>>>> most probably didn't need one. Please discard if you have already voted or
>>>>> located your initial email invite. This was the result of mistakenly
>>>>> hitting the wrong button while I was trying to send a reminder to just one
>>>>> person.
>>>>>
>>>>> Please indulge that I repeat this. When you check your mailbox using
>>>>> your human senses and you don't find your ballot, the first thing to do is
>>>>> this:
>>>>>
>>>>> 1) Use your email client's search engine to look up key words related
>>>>> to this subject. For that purpose, the subject line of your email
>>>>> invitation to vote is supposed to be  "Voting link for 2015 IGC
>>>>> coordinator election"
>>>>>
>>>>> Only after you did that, making sure your spam folder is also included
>>>>> in the search, and still haven't found your ballot, then you may:
>>>>>
>>>>> 2) Send me a note off list reporting this, and I will check the record
>>>>> and make sure you receive your ballot.
>>>>>
>>>>> If our record actually shows that you were sent a ballot, I will send
>>>>> you a reminder the subject line of which should read "Reminder to
>>>>> participate in survey" (in case you need to look that up too using a search
>>>>> engine.)
>>>>>
>>>>> Thank you for your understanding.
>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>>
>>>>> Mawaki
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, Jan 7, 2015 at 2:57 PM, Mawaki Chango <kichango at gmail.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> For all who have reported (and maintained) that they have not
>>>>>> received their ballot so far, here is the status:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 1) Sonigitu Ekpe: your name is in the voting list and the system
>>>>>> reports you were sent a ballot to your Corssriver state government account.
>>>>>> I just sent you again another invite in the form of a reminder (subject
>>>>>> line: Reminder to participate in survey). Please check and carefully or let
>>>>>> us know if you no longer have access to that email account.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 2) Shaila Mistry: Idem, to the email you are subscribed with.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 3) Chantal Lebrument: Idem, to the email you are subscribed with.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 4) Judith Hellerstein: True you were not sent a ballot, but I also
>>>>>> have hard time locating you on the membership list. I just ran your name in
>>>>>> the IGC user list page after page (it's painful not to be able to search
>>>>>> the full database of members' names at once... so please bear with me and
>>>>>> let me know your answers to the following questions.) Have you subscribed
>>>>>> to the list with this name? Have you been a member for at least 8 weeks now?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 5) Raúl Echeberría: In fact this is the one case we spotted early as
>>>>>> being subject to a glitch was. Have you, Raul, discontinued your membership
>>>>>> recently before reactivating it or have you remained a member for at least
>>>>>> the last 2 months?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I would appreciate everybody check and double check thoroughly (and
>>>>>> be clear about having been a subscribed member for the last 2 months at
>>>>>> least) before sending a claim that they have not received their ballot.
>>>>>> Thank you for your understanding.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Best,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Mawaki
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Tue, Jan 6, 2015 at 10:19 PM, Mawaki Chango <kichango at gmail.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Dear IGC Fellow Members,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I hope you enjoyed the holiday season. It is my pleasure to welcome
>>>>>>> you back into the new year first by wishing you all a healthy, peaceful and
>>>>>>> pleasant journey throughout 2015 filled with excitements, accomplishments,
>>>>>>> joys and empathy; secondly by inviting you to choose our next new
>>>>>>> coordinator.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The individual you will be voting for will, if he or she wins,
>>>>>>> replace me as I conclude my term, and will be in custody during 2015 and
>>>>>>> 2016. For the first year (2015) she or he will be working alongside Ms.
>>>>>>> Deirdre Williams as co-coordinator for our activities.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> For this purpose, you will be receiving in the next hour or so an
>>>>>>> invitation email in your mailbox (at the email with which you are
>>>>>>> subscribed to the IGC list.)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If one hour from now if you still haven't received your invitation
>>>>>>> while you think you have maintained continuous membership over the last two
>>>>>>> months (please, also check your spam folder), do let me know so that I can
>>>>>>> look into it. While I do not expect many such cases, I have noted one
>>>>>>> instance where this might likely be the case. So please even if you don't
>>>>>>> intend to cast your vote right away, I would appreciate if you can check
>>>>>>> within the next 24 hours and make sure you have received your invitation
>>>>>>> (please do NOT send me a message if you have received your invitation, only
>>>>>>> if you have not but think you should have.)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Good luck to our three candidates, and happy voting for us all!
>>>>>>> Warm regards,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Mawaki
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> =====================================
>>>>>>> Mawaki Chango, PhD
>>>>>>> Founder
>>>>>>> DIGILEXIS
>>>>>>> http://www.digilexis.com
>>>>>>> m.chango at digilexis.com | *kichango at gmail.com*
>>>>>>> Twitter: @digilexis & @prodigilexis
>>>>>>> Mob. +225 57 55 57 53 | +225 44 48 77 64
>>>>>>> Skype: digilexis
>>>>>>> =====================================
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> ____
>>> REMMY NWEKE,
>>> Lead Strategist/Group Executive Editor,
>>> DigitalSENSE Africa Media Ltd
>>> (publishers of) DigitalSENSE Business News;
>>> ITREALMS, NaijaAgroNet
>>> (Multiple-award winning medium)
>>> Published by: DigitalSENSE Africa Media Ltd
>>> Block F1, Shop 133 Moyosore Aboderin Plaza
>>> Bolade Junction, Oshodi-Lagos
>>> M: 234-8033592762, 8023122558, 8051000475,
>>> T: @ITRealms <http://www.twitter.com/ITRealms>
>>> [Member, NIRA Executive Board]
>>> Author: A Decade of ICT Reportage in Nigeria
>>> <https://www.facebook.com/adecadeofictreportageinnigeria>
>>> NDS Forum on Internet Governance for Development (IG4D) 2015 <
>>> http://www.digitalsenseafrica.com.ng>- June 5
>>> Nigeria IPv6 Roundtable 2015 <http://www.ipv6forumnigeria.ng> - June 6
>>> @Welcome Centre Hotels. Register now. Email: remnekkv at gmail.com
>>> _____________________________________________________________________
>>> *Confidentiality Notice:* The information in this document and
>>> attachments
>>> are confidential and may also be privileged information. It is intended
>>> only for the use of the named recipient. Remmy Nweke does not accept
>>> legal
>>> responsibility for the contents of this e-mail. If you are not the
>>> intended
>>> recipient, please notify me immediately, then delete this document and
>>> do
>>> not disclose the contents of this document to any other person, nor make
>>> any copies. Violators may face court persecution.
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
> --
> ____
> REMMY NWEKE,
> Lead Strategist/Group Executive Editor,
> DigitalSENSE Africa Media Ltd
> (publishers of) DigitalSENSE Business News;
> ITREALMS, NaijaAgroNet
> (Multiple-award winning medium)
> Published by: DigitalSENSE Africa Media Ltd
> Block F1, Shop 133 Moyosore Aboderin Plaza
> Bolade Junction, Oshodi-Lagos
> M: 234-8033592762, 8023122558, 8051000475,
> T: @ITRealms <http://www.twitter.com/ITRealms>
> [Member, NIRA Executive Board]
> Author: A Decade of ICT Reportage in Nigeria
> <https://www.facebook.com/adecadeofictreportageinnigeria>
> NDS Forum on Internet Governance for Development (IG4D) 2015 <
> http://www.digitalsenseafrica.com.ng>- June 5
> Nigeria IPv6 Roundtable 2015 <http://www.ipv6forumnigeria.ng> - June 6
> @Welcome Centre Hotels. Register now. Email: remnekkv at gmail.com
> _____________________________________________________________________
> *Confidentiality Notice:* The information in this document and attachments
> are confidential and may also be privileged information. It is intended
> only for the use of the named recipient. Remmy Nweke does not accept legal
> responsibility for the contents of this e-mail. If you are not the
> intended
> recipient, please notify me immediately, then delete this document and do
> not disclose the contents of this document to any other person, nor make
> any copies. Violators may face court persecution.
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>      governance at lists.igcaucus.org
> To be removed from the list, visit:
>      http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
>
> For all other list information and functions, see:
>      http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
>      http://www.igcaucus.org/
>
> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150112/d11730c7/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From bzs at world.std.com  Mon Jan 12 13:50:28 2015
From: bzs at world.std.com (Barry Shein)
Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2015 13:50:28 -0500
Subject: [governance] Article on national sovereignty and
  communications in Indian Magazine Diplomatist
In-Reply-To: <E1YASVk-0008Ur-6A@igcaucus.org>
References: <6f3f6ed293d3484282e8948d70b911d5@EX13-MBX-13.ad.syr.edu>
	<E1YASVk-0008Ur-6A@igcaucus.org>
Message-ID: <21684.6004.803314.319559@world.std.com>


Reading the article what strikes me is: How is the internet different,
fundamentally, from the voice or sms telephone networks (which most of
the internet travels on), or postal and package carriers, as a few
examples which come to mind?

They're all indepedent systems interconnected by some agreement of
protocols. For example sharing of undersea cables or mutual
recognition of postage.

Something which does distinguish them is that there seems to be much
less concern about regulating the content of these other
networks. Generally just customs, import/export regulation, and of
course any overt criminal content in all cases.

So we are led to a paradox raised implicitly by the article:

The internet is different because it resists regulation of its content
by any centralized, typically sovereign, actors. This is because its
control is distributed in super-sovereign or extra-sovereign patterns.

Yet it is the internet's very identifiable control points such as the
DNS system's single root-structured (in practice, not in theory)
management which causes us to worry about control and who shall
administer that control.

So, it is distributed and independent of sovereign control, except
when it isn't?

I think this can be repaired with a prefix of "we would prefer it
were..."  rather than trying to create this illusion that there is
anything inherent in the internet which resists control, any more than
my first examples, voice networks etc.

-- 
        -Barry Shein

The World              | bzs at TheWorld.com           | http://www.TheWorld.com
Purveyors to the Trade | Voice: 800-THE-WRLD        | Dial-Up: US, PR, Canada
Software Tool & Die    | Public Access Internet     | SINCE 1989     *oo*

-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From lmcknigh at syr.edu  Mon Jan 12 15:46:25 2015
From: lmcknigh at syr.edu (Lee W McKnight)
Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2015 20:46:25 +0000
Subject: [governance] Article on national sovereignty and
  communications in Indian Magazine Diplomatist
In-Reply-To: <21684.6004.803314.319559@world.std.com>
References: <6f3f6ed293d3484282e8948d70b911d5@EX13-MBX-13.ad.syr.edu>
	<E1YASVk-0008Ur-6A@igcaucus.org>,<21684.6004.803314.319559@world.std.com>
Message-ID: <54ffebb720c04cf0a7799432e02fe338@EX13-MBX-07.ad.syr.edu>

Barry,

Not to be pedantic...but then I am a prof so I guess I should not apologize: google 'statistical multiplexing'

Which explains why we now speak of voice or even tiny sms/instant messages over IP vs in their native telecom formats...

Lee

PS: And to reply to Jefsey's critique of Milton's article....there is the Internet and much more around the Internet; much of - that- can reasonably be governed/managed and be legally controlled by the usual suspect national legal arrangements, no doubt. But starting your critique by claiming the Internet went off the rails in 1986 when...the usual suspect national authorities (including USG/DOD) and ITU and EU and Japanese governments were all trying to strangle the strange new...statistically multiplexed beast in the cradle, in favor of a more controlled/tarriffed open systems interconnection model of the future...well sorry you seem to neglkect the 3 billion or so now free to chat about whatever they want now in ways they could not, back in the day.

________________________________________
From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org <governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org> on behalf of Barry Shein <bzs at world.std.com>
Sent: Monday, January 12, 2015 1:50 PM
To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org
Cc: Milton L Mueller
Subject: Re: [governance] Article on national sovereignty and  communications in Indian Magazine Diplomatist

Reading the article what strikes me is: How is the internet different,
fundamentally, from the voice or sms telephone networks (which most of
the internet travels on), or postal and package carriers, as a few
examples which come to mind?

They're all indepedent systems interconnected by some agreement of
protocols. For example sharing of undersea cables or mutual
recognition of postage.

Something which does distinguish them is that there seems to be much
less concern about regulating the content of these other
networks. Generally just customs, import/export regulation, and of
course any overt criminal content in all cases.

So we are led to a paradox raised implicitly by the article:

The internet is different because it resists regulation of its content
by any centralized, typically sovereign, actors. This is because its
control is distributed in super-sovereign or extra-sovereign patterns.

Yet it is the internet's very identifiable control points such as the
DNS system's single root-structured (in practice, not in theory)
management which causes us to worry about control and who shall
administer that control.

So, it is distributed and independent of sovereign control, except
when it isn't?

I think this can be repaired with a prefix of "we would prefer it
were..."  rather than trying to create this illusion that there is
anything inherent in the internet which resists control, any more than
my first examples, voice networks etc.

--
        -Barry Shein

The World              | bzs at TheWorld.com           | http://www.TheWorld.com
Purveyors to the Trade | Voice: 800-THE-WRLD        | Dial-Up: US, PR, Canada
Software Tool & Die    | Public Access Internet     | SINCE 1989     *oo*


-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From mueller at syr.edu  Mon Jan 12 16:33:47 2015
From: mueller at syr.edu (Milton L Mueller)
Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2015 21:33:47 +0000
Subject: [governance] Article on national sovereignty and
  communications in Indian Magazine Diplomatist
In-Reply-To: <201501120016.t0C0FwOP024055@mx2.syr.edu>
References: <6f3f6ed293d3484282e8948d70b911d5@EX13-MBX-13.ad.syr.edu>
 <201501120016.t0C0FwOP024055@mx2.syr.edu>
Message-ID: <0e34eba959124eb3a0c186cd3f7b5f7a@EX13-MBX-13.ad.syr.edu>



> -----Original Message-----
> 
> Dear Milton,
> 
> this contribution of yours is brillant. 

Thanks. That was the only part of your message I understood. 
;-)

--MM


-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From bzs at world.std.com  Mon Jan 12 16:45:40 2015
From: bzs at world.std.com (Barry Shein)
Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2015 16:45:40 -0500
Subject: [governance] Article on national sovereignty and
  communications in Indian Magazine Diplomatist
In-Reply-To: <54ffebb720c04cf0a7799432e02fe338@EX13-MBX-07.ad.syr.edu>
References: <6f3f6ed293d3484282e8948d70b911d5@EX13-MBX-13.ad.syr.edu>
	<E1YASVk-0008Ur-6A@igcaucus.org>
	<21684.6004.803314.319559@world.std.com>
	<54ffebb720c04cf0a7799432e02fe338@EX13-MBX-07.ad.syr.edu>
Message-ID: <21684.16516.563019.97479@world.std.com>


On January 12, 2015 at 20:46 lmcknigh at syr.edu (Lee W McKnight) wrote:
 > Barry,
 > 
 > Not to be pedantic...but then I am a prof so I guess I should not apologize: google 'statistical multiplexing'

Not to be pedantic, but in a previous life I spent about 10 years as a
lecturer in computer science in Boston University's Dept of Math & CS,
and have taught at Harvard's Kennedy School of Govt, by invitation.

And have run a commercial ISP probably longer than anyone on the
planet earth, since 1989, see:

  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_World_%28Internet_service_provider%29

You can look at a brief overview, including pubs, invited talks, etc
here:

  www.TheWorld.com/~bzs

(do you ever spend even one microsecond wondering about the
credentials of the other person before suggesting they google basic
terms?  Perhaps you need to do some googling of your own?)

 > 
 > Which explains why we now speak of voice or even tiny sms/instant messages over IP vs in their native telecom formats...

That's irrelevant.

Internet traffic travels over the international telephony network much
of which has been repurposed for internet traffic but is often much
the same as the historical voice network particularly in management
and structure (technology details change but this isn't about copper
vs fiber I hope.)

That they can (and do) float voice traffic over IP is not the
interesting point.

The interesting point is that it's almost all still owned and managed
by companies with names like AT&T, Verizon, and the various PTTs
internationally, or similar where de-monopolization has
occurred. Companies which by and large exist within sovereign
political boundaries, often heavily regulated or even state-owned.

Particularly though certainly not exclusively the Tier 1 core network
fabric. They also of course control nearly all the mobile traffic,
both data and voice.

It's the same people (metonymically speaking), with some notable
exceptions, as controlled the voice telephony network over the past
100 years (perhaps hyperbolic but roughly speaking) with largely the
same overall organization particularly across national boundaries.

Layered above this is a service, what we call the internet data
network, with its own organization.

The question is where are the control points and boundaries and are
they as sovereign-independent as is being portrayed?

-- 
        -Barry Shein

The World              | bzs at TheWorld.com           | http://www.TheWorld.com
Purveyors to the Trade | Voice: 800-THE-WRLD        | Dial-Up: US, PR, Canada
Software Tool & Die    | Public Access Internet     | SINCE 1989     *oo*

-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From bzs at world.std.com  Mon Jan 12 18:36:54 2015
From: bzs at world.std.com (Barry Shein)
Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2015 18:36:54 -0500
Subject: [governance] Article on national sovereignty and
  communications in Indian Magazine Diplomatist
In-Reply-To: <201501122314.t0CNEr5M004067@TheWorld.com>
References: <6f3f6ed293d3484282e8948d70b911d5@EX13-MBX-13.ad.syr.edu>
	<E1YASVk-0008Ur-6A@igcaucus.org>
	<21684.6004.803314.319559@world.std.com>
	<201501122314.t0CNEr5M004067@TheWorld.com>
Message-ID: <21684.23190.811943.306178@world.std.com>


We might just as well use the ISO 7-layer model to talk about this,
no?

Nonetheless I can imagine a view by AT&T et al that the internet is
largely just another layered service to them (and others), like E911
or various multi-drop private branch exchange systems.

        -Barry Shein

The World              | bzs at TheWorld.com           | http://www.TheWorld.com
Purveyors to the Trade | Voice: 800-THE-WRLD        | Dial-Up: US, PR, Canada
Software Tool & Die    | Public Access Internet     | SINCE 1989     *oo*


On January 13, 2015 at 00:11 daj at daj.dj (daj) wrote:
 > At 19:50 12/01/2015, Barry Shein wrote:
 > >Reading the article what strikes me is: How is the internet different,
 > >fundamentally, from the voice or sms telephone 
 > >networks (which most ofthe internet travels on), 
 > >or postal and package carriers, as a few
 > >examples which come to mind?
 > 
 > Dear Barry,
 > 
 > this is very interesting question as it shows 
 > that what is of main interest in the internet 
 > phenomena and its governance is not the network 
 > but the digital nature of a global pervasiveness 
 > (like radio, money, etc.). The network aspects are at three strata:
 > 
 > - lower catenet layers: the layers shared with other networks, like telephone.
 > - middle layers (end to end protocols) that are 
 > specific to technologies (like the internet, 
 > Myrinet, Ethernet, Infiniband, NDN, etc.).
 > - fringe to fringe upper-layers extended services 
 > (like security, authentication, IA, µpayment, etc. etc)
 > 
 > The lower layer is locally oriented (states). The 
 > fringe to fringe layer is at individually 
 > orientfed (civil society, Free/Libre). The end to 
 > end layer is commercially managed i.e. depending on markets (cf. RFC 6852).
 > 
 > jfc
 > 
 > 
 > 
 > 
 > >They're all indepedent systems interconnected by some agreement of
 > >protocols. For example sharing of undersea cables or
 > >recognition of postage.
 > >
 > >Something which does distinguish them is that there seems to be much
 > >less concern about regulating the content of these other
 > >networks. Generally just customs, import/export regulation, and of
 > >course any overt criminal content in all cases.
 > >
 > >So we are led to a paradox raised implicitly by the article:
 > >
 > >The internet is different because it resists regulation of its content
 > >by any centralized, typically sovereign, actors. This is because its
 > >control is distributed in super-sovereign or extra-sovereign patterns.
 > >
 > >Yet it is the internet's very identifiable control points such as the
 > >DNS system's single root-structured (in practice, not in theory)
 > >management which causes us to worry about control and who shall
 > >administer that control.
 > >
 > >So, it is distributed and independent of sovereign control, except
 > >when it isn't?
 > >
 > >I think this can be repaired with a prefix of "we would prefer it
 > >were..."  rather than trying to create this illusion that there is
 > >anything inherent in the internet which resists control, any more than
 > >my first examples, voice networks etc.
 > >
 > >--
 > >         -Barry Shein
 > >
 > >The World              | bzs at TheWorld.com           | http://www.TheWorld.com
 > >Purveyors to the Trade | Voice: 800-THE-WRLD        | Dial-Up: US, PR, Canada
 > >Software Tool & Die    | Public Access Internet     | SINCE 1989     *oo*
 > >
 > >
 > >Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
 > >Content-Disposition: inline; filename="message-footer.txt"
 > >
 > >____________________________________________________________
 > >You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
 > >      governance at lists.igcaucus.org
 > >To be removed from the list, visit:
 > >      http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
 > >
 > >For all other list information and functions, see:
 > >      http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
 > >To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
 > >      http://www.igcaucus.org/
 > >
 > >Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
 > 

-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From jefsey at jefsey.com  Mon Jan 12 19:55:12 2015
From: jefsey at jefsey.com (JFC Morfin)
Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2015 01:55:12 +0100
Subject: [governance] Article on national sovereignty and
  communications in Indian Magazine Diplomatist
Message-ID: <E1YApba-0004fj-Mo@igcaucus.org>

At 19:50 12/01/2015, Barry Shein wrote:
>Reading the article what strikes me is: How is the internet different,
>fundamentally, from the voice or sms telephone 
>networks (which most ofthe internet travels on), 
>or postal and package carriers, as a few
>examples which come to mind?

Dear Barry,

this is very interesting question as it shows 
that what is of main interest in the internet 
phenomena and its governance is not the network 
but the digital nature of a global pervasiveness 
(like radio, money, etc.). The network aspects are at three strata:

- lower catenet layers: the layers shared with other networks, like telephone.
- middle layers (end to end protocols) that are 
specific to technologies (like the internet, 
Myrinet, Ethernet, Infiniband, NDN, etc.).
- fringe to fringe upper-layers extended services 
(like security, authentication, IA, µpayment, etc. etc)

The lower layer is locally oriented (states). The 
fringe to fringe layer is at individually 
orientfed (civil society, Free/Libre). The end to 
end layer is commercially managed i.e. depending on markets (cf. RFC 6852).

jfc




>They're all indepedent systems interconnected by some agreement of
>protocols. For example sharing of undersea cables or
>recognition of postage.
>
>Something which does distinguish them is that there seems to be much
>less concern about regulating the content of these other
>networks. Generally just customs, import/export regulation, and of
>course any overt criminal content in all cases.
>
>So we are led to a paradox raised implicitly by the article:
>
>The internet is different because it resists regulation of its content
>by any centralized, typically sovereign, actors. This is because its
>control is distributed in super-sovereign or extra-sovereign patterns.
>
>Yet it is the internet's very identifiable control points such as the
>DNS system's single root-structured (in practice, not in theory)
>management which causes us to worry about control and who shall
>administer that control.
>
>So, it is distributed and independent of sovereign control, except
>when it isn't?
>
>I think this can be repaired with a prefix of "we would prefer it
>were..."  rather than trying to create this illusion that there is
>anything inherent in the internet which resists control, any more than
>my first examples, voice networks etc.
>
>--
>         -Barry Shein
>
>The World              | bzs at TheWorld.com           | http://www.TheWorld.com
>Purveyors to the Trade | Voice: 800-THE-WRLD        | Dial-Up: US, PR, Canada
>Software Tool & Die    | Public Access Internet     | SINCE 1989     *oo*
>
>
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
>Content-Disposition: inline; filename="message-footer.txt"
>
>____________________________________________________________
>You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>      governance at lists.igcaucus.org
>To be removed from the list, visit:
>      http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
>
>For all other list information and functions, see:
>      http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
>To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
>      http://www.igcaucus.org/
>
>Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t





-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From jefsey at jefsey.com  Mon Jan 12 18:53:55 2015
From: jefsey at jefsey.com (JFC Morfin)
Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2015 00:53:55 +0100
Subject: [governance] Article on national sovereignty and
  communications in Indian Magazine Diplomatist
In-Reply-To: <0e34eba959124eb3a0c186cd3f7b5f7a@EX13-MBX-13.ad.syr.edu>
References: <6f3f6ed293d3484282e8948d70b911d5@EX13-MBX-13.ad.syr.edu>
 <201501120016.t0C0FwOP024055@mx2.syr.edu>
 <0e34eba959124eb3a0c186cd3f7b5f7a@EX13-MBX-13.ad.syr.edu>
Message-ID: <E1YApcP-0004lr-Gd@igcaucus.org>

At 22:33 12/01/2015, Milton L Mueller wrote:
>Content-Language: en-US
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> >
> > Dear Milton,
> >
> > this contribution of yours is brillant.
>
>Thanks. That was the only part of your message I understood.
>;-)

I am afraid it is also the only part of the internet you also truely 
understand :-)

Actually, I confirm you are brillant, but have you designed, 
specified, developped, negociated, built, validated, managed, sold, 
documented, operated, maintained a network and daily supported their 
users? What has been the largest international network budget you 
managed? Which part of your revenues results from your network 
business related work? Which computer language do you program?

Certainly no offence intented but I am afraid you may miss some 
reality/architectural/architectonical first hand experience. This 
does not prevent good ideas, this is not absolutely necessary when 
you suggest propositions. However, I fell this might help you when 
you want to propose solutions.

Cheers ! Thanks anyway for the good spirit and work!
jfc

   


-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From jefsey at jefsey.com  Mon Jan 12 19:49:53 2015
From: jefsey at jefsey.com (JFC Morfin)
Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2015 01:49:53 +0100
Subject: [governance] Article on national sovereignty and
  communications in Indian Magazine Diplomatist
In-Reply-To: <54ffebb720c04cf0a7799432e02fe338@EX13-MBX-07.ad.syr.edu>
References: <6f3f6ed293d3484282e8948d70b911d5@EX13-MBX-13.ad.syr.edu>
 <E1YASVk-0008Ur-6A@igcaucus.org>
 <21684.6004.803314.319559@world.std.com>
 <54ffebb720c04cf0a7799432e02fe338@EX13-MBX-07.ad.syr.edu>
Message-ID: <E1YApfx-00055F-6h@igcaucus.org>

At 21:46 12/01/2015, Lee W McKnight wrote:
>PS: And to reply to Jefsey's critique of Milton's article....there 
>is the Internet and much more around the Internet; much of - that- 
>can reasonably be governed/managed and be legally controlled by the 
>usual suspect national legal arrangements, no doubt. But starting 
>your critique by claiming the Internet went off the rails in 1986 
>when...the usual suspect national authorities (including USG/DOD) 
>and ITU and EU and Japanese governments

Dear Lee,

I never said the internet went off the rails in 1986. I said the 
world was condemned to the internet by the US military industrial 
interests in 1986. Barry explained you what he did in life. I am 
sorry I also have to tell you why I can tell this: because the 
decision of the TCP/IP "status-quo" strategy was taken against me, my 
department, Tymnet Extended Services and in particular against my 
"Eurolab" on-going project. The same as it was taken in parallel 
against Doug Engelbart's Tymshare Augment division. (our Augment vs. 
Extend conceptual debate about the technological singularity did not 
interest McDD very much).

>were all trying to strangle the strange new...statistically 
>multiplexed beast in the cradle,

Surprising :-) In case I might have missed what this beast might be 
for the last 45 years, and since you advise Barry to google 
"statistical multiplexing", I did it. This led me to wikipedia that states:

"Examples of statistical multiplexing are:
    * The <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MPEG_transport_stream>MPEG 
transport stream  ...
    * The <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_Datagram_Protocol>UDP 
and <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transmission_Control_Protocol>TCP 
protocols, ....
    * The <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X.25>X.25 and 
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frame_relay>Frame relay ....
    * The 
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asynchronous_Transfer_Mode>Asynchronous 
Transfer Mode .. "
It happens that this all were some of the technologies I offered PTTs 
to implement worldwide at this time, I am not sure which one you 
suggest the internet made work better (with one exception, see below).

>in favor of a more controlled/tarriffed open systems interconnection 
>model of the future...well sorry you seem to neglkect the 3 billion 
>or so now free to chat about whatever they want now in ways they 
>could not, back in the day.

True.

The international network we deployed from 1977 to 1986+ was open, 
neutral, secure, multitechnology, spam proof. You know what? people 
could even use TCP/IP to connect the network, even on an end to end basis.

However, you are right: due to our multitechnology multiplexing 
architecture, the traffic on our lines was not NSA compatible !!!!

This is what has made the internet experimental technology to be 
politically chosen by the US industry. NSA compatibility! (NB. At 
that time it was not to spy on people, but to protect their 
no-built-in-security TCP/IP machines.

This has delayed the deregulation, we had pieoneered with the FCC, 
and the deployement because it led to a dual monotechnology 
development of the digitality instead of the IEN 48 intended 
multitechnology the NSA could nof accept and TCP/IP could not secure. 
Now (one month ago) the IAB has called for  the 30 years+ delayed 
work to be engaged to harden the TCP/IP protocol stack and provide 
security and authentication as this was built-in the first internet 
(international network) under Tymnet architecture in 1977 (US/EU)

However, more probably, the ISP offering is now going to switch to 
multitechnological support, based upon the OpenStand RFC 6852 
paradigm and the recent USIETF fork (ultimate decision IRT the TCP/IP 
technical governance by the NTIA).

Take care.
jfc







. 


-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From jefsey at jefsey.com  Mon Jan 12 20:14:56 2015
From: jefsey at jefsey.com (JFC Morfin)
Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2015 02:14:56 +0100
Subject: [governance] Article on national sovereignty and
  communications in Indian Magazine Diplomatist
In-Reply-To: <21684.23190.811943.306178@world.std.com>
References: <6f3f6ed293d3484282e8948d70b911d5@EX13-MBX-13.ad.syr.edu>
 <E1YASVk-0008Ur-6A@igcaucus.org>
 <21684.6004.803314.319559@world.std.com>
 <201501122314.t0CNEr5M004067@TheWorld.com>
 <21684.23190.811943.306178@world.std.com>
Message-ID: <E1YApuL-00059m-51@igcaucus.org>

At 00:36 13/01/2015, Barry Shein wrote:

>We might just as well use the ISO 7-layer model to talk about this,
>no?

Yes and no. OSI 7layers was by Michel Elie/Huber 
Zimmerman, i.e. people from IRIA (i.e. public research  not from an operator).

>Nonetheless I can imagine a view by AT&T et al that the internet is
>largely just another layered service to them (and others), like E911
>or various multi-drop private branch exchange systems.

Absolutely. This is why I modelize these three strata :

1. the catenet is much larger than onlt AT&T et al. It includes
     - the private bandwidth (remember that PS 
came in parallel to commercial and satellite 
bandwidth the FCC and PTTs had to simultaneously accomodate).
     - the local hardware. In the case of Tymnet 
there was a network multiservice/technology front 
end under network operating system. In X.25 or 
the Internet there are only the edges connected 
to the front-end/proxies (boxes) on the userside. 
Without considering my full VM IUI (intelligent 
use interface) or MyCANN Plug-in the catenet 
extends on hardware/software belonging to the user.

2. We agree on Operators (except that there are 
services that they offer or might offer) that are 
outside of the OSI model. I suspect that all the 
blahblah about network neutrality will fade away 
with NDN/Netflix (strangely enough no-one discussed Akamaï)

3 My personnal area (extended and semiotic 
services) actually span through OSI-6/OSI-7 and 
far beyond. Theur "ecology" is also quite 
différent (the digital neworks only cover passive 
content information communications, I am mostly 
interested in active content intellition, i.e. 
also in complex communications, meanings, 
intercomprehension). Services that I see delayed for 30 years :-)

Status-quo is NSA compatibility. Permissionless 
innovation is roughly to start back to my 1985/86 
budget plan. Things and Libre takes time. 
However, you may delay demands, not prevent needs.

jfc

jfc


-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From jlfullsack at orange.fr  Tue Jan 13 07:39:27 2015
From: jlfullsack at orange.fr (Jean-Louis FULLSACK)
Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2015 13:39:27 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [governance] =?UTF-8?Q?Article_on_national_sovereignty_and_?=
 =?UTF-8?Q?=C2=A0communications_in_Indian_Magazine_Diplomatist?=
Message-ID: <2052514039.9895.1421152767532.JavaMail.www@wwinf1d11>

Dear Jefsey 

 

You worote :

> Actually, I confirm you are brillant, but have you designed, 
> specified, developped, negociated, built, validated, managed, sold, 
> documented, operated, maintained a network and daily supported their 
> users? What has been the largest international network budget you 
> managed? Which part of your revenues results from your network 
> business related work? Which computer language do you program?



Very appropriate and relevant questions to ask on this list ! A number of its members are mainly, if not only, "last layer expefrts", and you have quite rightly recalled the fundamentals of networking ! Our readers/members should never forget that Internet is a "TCP/IP cuckoo" in the telcos' networks nest.

 

Best regards

 

Jean-Louis Fullsack

42 years spent in telecom networks (France, Europe and Africa) at all stages described by Jefsey + "successful implementation" :-)

 

 

 

> Message du 13/01/15 01:57
> De : "JFC Morfin" 
> A : governance at lists.igcaucus.org, "Milton L Mueller" , "Governance (governance at lists.igcaucus.org)" 
> Copie à : 
> Objet : RE: [governance] Article on national sovereignty and  communications in Indian Magazine Diplomatist
> 
> At 22:33 12/01/2015, Milton L Mueller wrote:
> >Content-Language: en-US
> >Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
> >
> >
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > >
> > > Dear Milton,
> > >
> > > this contribution of yours is brillant.
> >
> >Thanks. That was the only part of your message I understood.
> >;-)
> 
> I am afraid it is also the only part of the internet you also truely 
> understand :-)
> 
> Actually, I confirm you are brillant, but have you designed, 
> specified, developped, negociated, built, validated, managed, sold, 
> documented, operated, maintained a network and daily supported their 
> users? What has been the largest international network budget you 
> managed? Which part of your revenues results from your network 
> business related work? Which computer language do you program?
> 
> Certainly no offence intented but I am afraid you may miss some 
> reality/architectural/architectonical first hand experience. This 
> does not prevent good ideas, this is not absolutely necessary when 
> you suggest propositions. However, I fell this might help you when 
> you want to propose solutions.
> 
> Cheers ! Thanks anyway for the good spirit and work!
> jfc
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
> governance at lists.igcaucus.org
> To be removed from the list, visit:
> http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
> 
> For all other list information and functions, see:
> http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
> http://www.igcaucus.org/
> 
> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150113/b9de2f25/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From arsenebaguma at yahoo.fr  Wed Jan 14 03:26:43 2015
From: arsenebaguma at yahoo.fr (Arsene TUNGALI (Yahoo))
Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2015 08:26:43 +0000 (UTC)
Subject: [governance] Tr : Fwd: Useful Reference: Human Rights: A PRACTICAL
 GUIDE FOR CIVIL SOCIETY
In-Reply-To: <CABDXvWpxW5z3-WopbL_aYf4LjpMhyuO4kYHiEL1rCcgvJk_GGA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CABDXvWpxW5z3-WopbL_aYf4LjpMhyuO4kYHiEL1rCcgvJk_GGA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <1494031398.824259.1421224003297.JavaMail.yahoo@jws11119.mail.ir2.yahoo.com>

FYI,
Regards,A ------------------------------------------------------Arsène Tungali,Co-founder and Executive Director, Rudi InternationalFounder, Mabingwa Forum
Work email: arsenebaguma at gmail.comFacebook - Twitter - LinkedInInternet Governance - Blogger - ISOC Member - ICANN Fellow - IGF Fellow.Democratic Republic of Congo

      Le Mercredi 14 janvier 2015 10h22, Arsène Tungali <arsenebaguma at gmail.com> a écrit :
   

 

*Arsène Tungali*,
Co-Founder & Executive Director, 
*Rudi International* www.rudiinternational.org

Founder & Director, *Mabingwa Forum*www.mabingwa-forum.com

Mobile: +243993810967
Facebook - Twitter - LinkedIn
Skype: arsenetungali
Democratic Republic Of Congo
------------------
Actualité chez Rudi International: Le Project Noel 2013 s'est tres bien passee et nous remercions les uns les autres pour leur appui. Voir les photos de la celebration ICI. Vous pouvez déjà donner pour la Noël 2014  ICI.
Actualité chez Mabingwa Forum: La premiere edition de Mabingwa Forum s'est tenu a Goma, du 6 au 8 decembre 2013 et fut un grand succès (voir les PHOTOS.) La 2e edition se tient a Goma du 5 au 7 decembre 2014. Prenez déjà votre inscription
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Sam Lanfranco <lanfran at yorku.ca>
Date: 2015-01-13 22:38 GMT+02:00
Subject: Useful Reference: Human Rights: A PRACTICAL GUIDE FOR CIVIL SOCIETY
To: NCSG-DISCUSS at listserv.syr.edu


  
     Useful Background:
 
 The Office of the High Commission for Human Rights, with input from civil society, has produced a guide entitled: 
 
 "€˜Civil Society Space and the United Nations Human Rights System - A Practical Guide for Civil Society€". 
 
 This publication underlines issues related to the work of civil society actors. It explains concepts of civil society, challenges civil society actors face, and describes civil society space and elements for promoting it.
 
 The PDF guide is available in English, French, Spanish, Arabic and Russian.
 
   ALSO: The UN Human Rights Office has launched a publication "€A ˜Women'€™s Rights are Human Rights"€™, a handbook for anyone seeking to understand the basics of women's human rights,€“ the legal standards, the political commitments, and specific issues of particular importance to women and girls' empowerment and rights.
 
  
  
  
 


   
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150114/ecb4b278/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed...
Name: Attached
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150114/ecb4b278/attachment.ksh>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From fulvio.frati at unimi.it  Wed Jan 14 05:17:13 2015
From: fulvio.frati at unimi.it (Fulvio Frati)
Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2015 11:17:13 +0100
Subject: [governance] [Deadline Approaching: 17 Jan, 2015] 11th Intl. Conf.
 on Open Source Systems (OSS2015)
Message-ID: <00d001d02fe3$43d86080$cb892180$@unimi.it>

[Apologies if you receive multiple copies of this CFP]

 

****************************************************************************
***************

11th Intl. Conf. on Open Source Systems (OSS2015)

co-located with the 2015 International Conference on Software Engineering
(ICSE2015)

 

Florence, Italy – 16-17 May 2015

http://www.oss2015.org

****************************************************************************
***************

 

+++++++++ Extended Paper Submission: January 17, 2015 ++++++++++

 

*** Theme: Open Frameworks: from Service to Cloud ***

 

Free and Open Source Software (FOSS) has had a disruptive effect on the
commercial software industry and the ways that organizations and individuals
create, distribute, acquire and use software and software-based services. In
addition to the many standalone FOSS projects, FOSS is at the heart of
modern network-based computing infrastructures and can be found in the vast
majority of applications that run in these environments. 

 

Many organizations that have been known for developing proprietary software
are now actively involved with FOSS. FOSS adoption continues to grow among
businesses, governments, and other organizations. FOSS remains important for
educators and researchers, as well as an important aspect of e-government
and information society initiatives, providing access to high-quality
software and the code used to create it. 

 

Also, FOSS has taken the lead in a number of crucial ICT domains, like Cloud
Computing, where open source cloud stacks are widely adopted, and Big Data,
where a wealth of FOSS solutions is now being built around Hadoop.

 

The 11th International Conference on Open Source Systems (OSS 2015) will
celebrate a decade of advances in the use of free and open source software
by emphasizing areas and topics that will drive future use over the next
decade. This will be achieved through a combination of high-quality research
papers, tutorials, workshops, demonstrations, and invited talks.  OSS2015
will be co-located with the 2015 International Conference on Software
Engineering as a way to cross-fertilize ideas. The theme for the 2015
edition will be "Open frameworks: from service to cloud", putting forward
the idea on how open source framework can develop the transition from
traditional IT services to cloud-based architectures.

 

A central goal of OSS 2015 is to provide an international forum where a
diverse community of professionals from academia, industry, the public
sector, and diverse FOSS initiatives can come together to share research
findings and practical experiences. The conference also aims to serve as a
meeting place where people can identify new research ideas and techniques
for putting FOSS into widespread use.  

 

OSS 2015 will include research papers, industry papers, formal tool
demonstrations, lightning talks, new ideas, experience reports, and posters.
OSS 2015 also invites proposals for tutorials and workshops, submissions to
the doctoral symposium, and submissions of panel proposals.

 

Accepted papers will be included in the conference proceedings, which are
published by Springer.

 

** Topics

 

We are seeking submissions across a broad range of topics, but are
particularly interested in those areas most likely to have an impact on
computing over the next decade, including computing infrastructure, data
management, and the Internet of Things. For practical experiences, we are
seeking submissions that describe FOSS applications in embedded systems
(IoT), health care, transportation, communications, and energy management.

 

Other topics of interest include, but are not limited to, the following:

 

- FOSS technologies

 

    - FOSS in the cloud

    - FOSS for data management and analysis

    - Security of FOSS

    - Interoperability, portability, scalability of FOSS

    - Open standards, open data, open cloud, open hardware and open exhibits

    - FOSS in cloud-based applications

    - Architecture and design of FOSS

 

- Mobile and Embedded FOSS

 

    - Mobile Operating Systems

    - Open Source apps for mobile devices

    - Open Source app markets and software delivery platforms

    - Software metrics for Open Source mobile software

    - Energy efficiency in Mobile FOSS 

 

- FOSS Quality

 

    - Static and Dynamic FOSS testing

    - Formal FOSS verification

    - Detection of bad coding practices and adoption of coding conventions

    - OSS metrics: measuring FOSS performance, safety, and quality

    - FOSS performance

 

- FOSS Evaluation, adoption and use

 

    - Evaluation of FOSS software, including comparisons with proprietary
software, in industry and government

    - Use and acceptance of FOSS; organizational policies

    - The role of FOSS-oriented foundations

    - Dissemination, redistribution and crowdsourcing of FOSS systems

    - Expanding scientific research and technology development methods
through openness

    - Role of FOSS in ICT and sustainable development 

 

-FOSS practices and methods

 

    - New experiences with FOSS development tools and practices

    - Knowledge and documentation management in FOSS  

 

- Economic, organizational and social issues related to FOSS

 

    - Economic analysis of FOSS

    - Maturity models of FOSS

    - FOSS in public sector

    - FOSS intellectual property, copyrights and licensing

    - Non-Governmental Organizations and FOSS 

 

- FOSS and education

                - Teaching FOSS to people of all ages and backgrounds

                - Use of FOSS in education

                

-FOSS platforms and toolkits

                - FOSS Data processing and storage platforms

                - FOSS environments for cloud computing

                - FOSS business intelligence toolkits

                - FOSS business packages (CRM, ERP, HRM)

                - FOSS collaboration and communication environments

                

** Important Dates

 

- Extended Paper Submission: January 17, 2015

- Notification to Authors: February 14, 2015

- Camera ready due: February 28, 2015

 

** Authors Instructions

 

Papers submitted to OSS 2015 must not have been published elsewhere and must
not be under review or submitted for review elsewhere while under
consideration for OSS 2015.

 

All papers must conform, at time of submission, to the Springer Formatting
Guidelines (LNCS)
(http://www.springer.com/computer/lncs?SGWID=0-164-6-793341-0). You may
utilize the templates provided in our website. Submissions must be in PDF
format with a limit of 10 pages for each paper.

 

All submissions will be peer-reviewed double blinded, therefore please
remove any information that could give an indication of the authorship or
affiliations. Authors of accepted papers will be therefore be required to
sign a copyright transfer (as well as register for and attend the
conference).

 

When your paper is finished, submit it using EasyChair
(https://easychair.org/conferences/?conf=oss2015) according to the
submission deadlines.

 

** Organizing Committee

 

* General Chair

- Ernesto Damiani, Università degli Studi di Milano, Italy

 

* Program Chairs

- Dirk Riehle, Friedrich-Alexander-University Erlangen-Nürnberg, Germany

- Tony Wasserman, Carnegie Mellon University, USA

 

* Ph.D. Contest Chair

- Slinger Jansen, Utrecht University, The Netherlands

 

* Regional Publicity Chairs

- Moataz Ahmed, King Fahd University of Petroleum & Minerals, Saudi Arabia

- Scott Hissam, Software Engineering Institute, Carnegie Mellon University,
USA

- Karl Reed, La Trobe University, Australia

- Francesco Zavatarelli, Università degli Studi di Milano, Italy

 

* Organizing Chairs

- Fulvio Frati, Università degli Studi di Milano, Italy

- Nadia Fusar Poli, Università degli Studi di Milano, Italy

 

* Web Chair

- Fulvio Frati, Università degli Studi di Milano, Italy

 

* Program Committee

- Chintan Amrit, University of Twente, The Netherlands

- Luciano Baresi, DEIB – Politecnico di Milano, Italy

- Paolo Ciancarini, University of Bologna, Italy

- Francesco Di Cerbo, SAP Research Sophia-Antipolis, France

- Jonas Gamalielsson, University of Skovde, Sweden

- Jesus M. Gonzalez-Barahona, Universidad Rey Juan Carlos, Spain

- Imed Hammouda, Chalmers and University of Gothenburg, Sweden

- Abram Hindle, University of Alberta, Canada

- Netta Iivari, University of Oulu, Finland

- Stefan Koch, Bogazici University, Turkey

- Fabio Kon, University of São Paulo, Brasil

- Luigi Lavazza, Università degli Studi dell’Insubria, Italy

- Eda Marchetti, ISTI-CNR, Italy

- Audris Mockus, University of Tennessee, Knoxville, USA

- Sandro Morasca, Università degli Studi dell’Insubria, Italy

- John Noll, Lero – the Irish Software Engineering Research Centre, Ireland

- Mauro Pezzè, University of Lugano, Switzerland

- Stephane Ribas, INRIA, France

- Gregorio Robles, Universidad Rey Juan Carlos, Italy

- Steve Schmid, Open Technology Foundation, Australia

- Alberto Sillitti, Free University of Bozen/Bolzano, Italy

- Diomidis Spinellis, Athens University of Economics and Business, Greece

- Megan Squire, Elon University, USA

- Klaas-Jan Stol, Lero – University of Limerick, Ireland

- Giancarlo Succi, Free University of Bozen/Bolzano, Italy

- Davide Tosi, Università degli Studi dell’Insubria, Italy

- Aaron Visaggio, University of Sannio, Italy

- Stefano Zacchiroli, Université de Paris Diderot, France

 

 

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150114/73d60570/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From joly at punkcast.com  Wed Jan 14 09:46:59 2015
From: joly at punkcast.com (Joly MacFie)
Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2015 09:46:59 -0500
Subject: [governance] REMOTE PARTICIPATION: NCUC Meeting with DC Internet
 Governance people 10am today
Message-ID: <CAM9VJk0ZSveMM1O3EFwrpg0h3OS-+_qy93NHi-43yw8pER7Vtg@mail.gmail.com>

​ISOC-NY is a member of the ​
​
NonCommercial Users Constituency, and our mebers are encouraged to involve
themselves in it's policy discussions. Here is a good opportunity.
Attending in person will be some of our DC Chapter colleagues plus Jane
Coffin from ISOC staff.

 joly posted: "Today Wednesday 14 January 2015, ancillary to the
intersessional meeting of the Non-Contracted Parties House (NCPH) of the
Generic Names Standing Organization (GNSO) at ICANN, the NonCommercial
Users Constituency (NCUC) will hold an outreach meeting with "


[image: NCUC] <http://ncuc.org>Today *Wednesday 14 January 2015*, ancillary
to the intersessional meeting
<https://community.icann.org/display/ncph/Intersessional+-+January+2015> of
the Non-Contracted Parties House (NCPH) of the Generic Names Standing
Organization (GNSO) at ICANN, the
*​​*
*NonCommercial Users Constituency* (NCUC) will hold *an outreach meeting
<http://www.ncuc.org/ncuc-civil-society-outreach-event-in-washington-dc-january-14/>*
with Internet Governance interested people at the Center for Democracy and
Technnology (CDT)in Washington DC. On the agenda, the IANA transition,
accountability mechanisms in the context of globalization, human rights in
internet governance, privacy and registry services, access to knowledge and
intellectual property, freedom of expression and development, and ICANN in
broader Internet governance, including NETmundial Initiative and the
Internet Governance Forum. The meeting is by invitation only, but *remote
participation* is possible via webex or phone bridge.








*What: NCUC Civil Society Outreach Event
<http://www.ncuc.org/ncuc-civil-society-outreach-event-in-washington-dc-january-14/>
Where: CDT, Washington DC When: Wednesday 14 January 2015 10am-Noon EST |
1500-1700 UTC Webex:
https://cdtmeetings.webex.com/cdtmeetings/j.php?MTID=m0abd02e67615e37bc2c948c3d722ec8d
<https://cdtmeetings.webex.com/cdtmeetings/j.php?MTID=m0abd02e67615e37bc2c948c3d722ec8d>
Phone bridge:
http://www.ncuc.org/ncuc-civil-society-outreach-event-in-washington-dc-january-14/
<http://www.ncuc.org/ncuc-civil-society-outreach-event-in-washington-dc-january-14/>
Twitter: @NCUC <https://twitter.com/search?f=realtime&q=%40NCUC&src=typd> *
*Agenda:*

1. Participant Introductions
2. Brief introduction of NCUC @ ICANN
3. 2-3 minute introductions of issues NCUC works on in ICANN, e.g.
• IANA and the transitioning of US authority (Matt Shears)
• Accountability mechanisms in the context of globalization (Matt Shears)
• Human rights generally (Bill Drake)
• Privacy and registry services (Stephanie Perrin)
• Access to knowledge and intellectual property (Kathy Kleiman)
• Freedom of expression (David Cake)
• Development (Rafik Dammak)
• ICANN in broader Internet governance, e.g. NETmundial Initiative, IGF
(Bill Drake)
4. Inputs from local participants on how these and related issues are being
addressed in Washington DC and beyond
5. Open integrative discussion


Comment <http://isoc-ny.org/p2/7375#respond>   See all comments
<http://isoc-ny.org/p2/7375#comments>






*​Permalink*
:
http://isoc-ny.org/p2/7375






---------------------------------------------------------------
Joly MacFie  218 565 9365 Skype:punkcast

 VP (Admin) - ISOC-NY - http://isoc-ny.org
---------------------------------------------------------------




-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------
Joly MacFie  218 565 9365 Skype:punkcast
WWWhatsup NYC - http://wwwhatsup.com
 http://pinstand.com - http://punkcast.com
 VP (Admin) - ISOC-NY - http://isoc-ny.org
--------------------------------------------------------------
-
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150114/7ba000b7/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From kichango at gmail.com  Sat Jan 17 16:33:05 2015
From: kichango at gmail.com (Mawaki Chango)
Date: Sat, 17 Jan 2015 21:33:05 +0000
Subject: [governance] IGC Coordinator Election 2015
In-Reply-To: <CAGK4d09Zg2QjOMwjpNxNT7nRTuFKS98FFpzuM-_QJbvOnANA7A@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CACTo+v84qBOx7AOzJe_b46ad1wA5tzVV7a9in=Mk8yOT2dZ=-w@mail.gmail.com>
 <CACTo+v_HZ3wEBsi3bUDGPfH=O_WyGBzpUa=RKMqAkUbTBPqNvA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CACTo+v8-ZiVEJzw6Mn9Xy9y-TzK-xsEdNPxbN=eKaOEccB5Ldw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CACTo+v-wyuAFypao7fzQpEyv=sfZ14Sg+xjTev3OmqNUBVeTkg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAMc__orezWfCu09cCHD8z_3y3kEvNaXXVFF+TABMVuH4gyiCDA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CACTo+v8PVzHx7bMvugk02Bm3nVw+JqRzvTKiNLMjkgeJpfYNyQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAMc__oq1q0oKFH6JCO3WEyVo51_0S7mJDiArNtfCSj+T=qSOmQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAGK4d09Zg2QjOMwjpNxNT7nRTuFKS98FFpzuM-_QJbvOnANA7A@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CACTo+v9x48EJ408iuwN4etMA4ABa0iF2ABOOM1K7=wSjDZUa8w@mail.gmail.com>

Hi,
Just a gentle reminder that the poll will be closing tomorrow 18th January
at 23:59 UTC/GMT.
I just sent a system generated reminder for all those who are yet to cast
their vote.
Thank you to all who have already done so.
Best,

Mawaki
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150117/5d92600e/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From remmyn at gmail.com  Sun Jan 18 01:46:45 2015
From: remmyn at gmail.com (Remmy Nweke)
Date: Sun, 18 Jan 2015 07:46:45 +0100
Subject: [governance] IGC Coordinator Election 2015
In-Reply-To: <CACTo+v9x48EJ408iuwN4etMA4ABa0iF2ABOOM1K7=wSjDZUa8w@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CACTo+v84qBOx7AOzJe_b46ad1wA5tzVV7a9in=Mk8yOT2dZ=-w@mail.gmail.com>
	<CACTo+v_HZ3wEBsi3bUDGPfH=O_WyGBzpUa=RKMqAkUbTBPqNvA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CACTo+v8-ZiVEJzw6Mn9Xy9y-TzK-xsEdNPxbN=eKaOEccB5Ldw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CACTo+v-wyuAFypao7fzQpEyv=sfZ14Sg+xjTev3OmqNUBVeTkg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAMc__orezWfCu09cCHD8z_3y3kEvNaXXVFF+TABMVuH4gyiCDA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CACTo+v8PVzHx7bMvugk02Bm3nVw+JqRzvTKiNLMjkgeJpfYNyQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAMc__oq1q0oKFH6JCO3WEyVo51_0S7mJDiArNtfCSj+T=qSOmQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAGK4d09Zg2QjOMwjpNxNT7nRTuFKS98FFpzuM-_QJbvOnANA7A@mail.gmail.com>
	<CACTo+v9x48EJ408iuwN4etMA4ABa0iF2ABOOM1K7=wSjDZUa8w@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAMc__orJAkJvd=DS5+tkFohU8jyi4PoMW82GTheQAKnoK=ALqA@mail.gmail.com>

Good reminder Mawaki
Keep up the good work
Remmy Nweke
@ITRealms

On Saturday, January 17, 2015, Mawaki Chango <kichango at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi,
> Just a gentle reminder that the poll will be closing tomorrow 18th January
> at 23:59 UTC/GMT.
> I just sent a system generated reminder for all those who are yet to cast
> their vote.
> Thank you to all who have already done so.
> Best,
>
> Mawaki
>
>
>

-- 
____
REMMY NWEKE,
Lead Strategist/Group Executive Editor,
DigitalSENSE Africa Media Ltd
(publishers of) DigitalSENSE Business News;
ITREALMS, NaijaAgroNet
(Multiple-award winning medium)
Published by: DigitalSENSE Africa Media Ltd
Block F1, Shop 133 Moyosore Aboderin Plaza
Bolade Junction, Oshodi-Lagos
M: 234-8033592762, 8023122558, 8051000475,
T: @ITRealms <http://www.twitter.com/ITRealms>
[Member, NIRA Executive Board]
Author: A Decade of ICT Reportage in Nigeria
<https://www.facebook.com/adecadeofictreportageinnigeria>
NDS Forum on Internet Governance for Development (IG4D) 2015 <
http://www.digitalsenseafrica.com.ng>- June 5
Nigeria IPv6 Roundtable 2015 <http://www.ipv6forumnigeria.ng> - June 6
@Welcome Centre Hotels. Register now. Email: remnekkv at gmail.com
_____________________________________________________________________
*Confidentiality Notice:* The information in this document and attachments
are confidential and may also be privileged information. It is intended
only for the use of the named recipient. Remmy Nweke does not accept legal
responsibility for the contents of this e-mail. If you are not the intended
recipient, please notify me immediately, then delete this document and do
not disclose the contents of this document to any other person, nor make
any copies. Violators may face court persecution.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150118/785997ce/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From jlfullsack at orange.fr  Sun Jan 18 13:29:59 2015
From: jlfullsack at orange.fr (Jean-Louis FULLSACK)
Date: Sun, 18 Jan 2015 19:29:59 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [governance] IGC Coordinator Election 2015
Message-ID: <1753736473.22292.1421605799156.JavaMail.www@wwinf1c18>

Hello all

 

Interesting news from South Africa in relation with "our new CS Partner" in IG : the WEF. 

visit : http://businesstech.co.za/news/general/77471/eskom-blowing-r1-million-on-davos-trip/

 

... and ENJOY !

 

How marvelous we feel, in IG CS, to be on "equal footing" with such a partner in the MSH dreamland !  

 

Best

 

Jean-Louis Fullsack

 

 

 

 

 

 

> Message du 18/01/15 07:48
> De : "Remmy Nweke" 
> A : "governance at lists.igcaucus.org" , "Mawaki Chango" 
> Copie à : 
> Objet : Re: [governance] IGC Coordinator Election 2015
> 
> Good reminder Mawaki
Keep up the good work
Remmy Nweke
@ITRealms
> 
> On Saturday, January 17, 2015, Mawaki Chango  wrote:
>


Hi,
Just a gentle reminder that the poll will be closing tomorrow 18th January at 23:59 UTC/GMT.
I just sent a system generated reminder for all those who are yet to cast their vote.
Thank you to all who have already done so.
Best,

>
Mawaki 









>












> 
> -- 
>


____
REMMY NWEKE, 
> Lead Strategist/Group Executive Editor, 
> DigitalSENSE Africa Media Ltd 
> (publishers of) DigitalSENSE Business News;
> ITREALMS, NaijaAgroNet
> (Multiple-award winning medium)
> Published by: DigitalSENSE Africa Media Ltd
> Block F1, Shop 133 Moyosore Aboderin Plaza
> Bolade Junction, Oshodi-Lagos
> M: 234-8033592762, 8023122558, 8051000475,
> T: @ITRealms
[Member, NIRA Executive Board]
> Author: A Decade of ICT Reportage in Nigeria
> NDS Forum on Internet Governance for Development (IG4D) 2015 - June 5 
> Nigeria IPv6 Roundtable 2015  - June 6 
> @Welcome Centre Hotels. Register now. Email: remnekkv at gmail.com
> _____________________________________________________________________
> *Confidentiality Notice:* The information in this document and attachments 
> are confidential and may also be privileged information. It is intended 
> only for the use of the named recipient. Remmy Nweke does not accept legal 
> responsibility for the contents of this e-mail. If you are not the intended 
> recipient, please notify me immediately, then delete this document and do 
> not disclose the contents of this document to any other person, nor make 
> any copies. Violators may face court persecution.
>





> 


____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150118/98b4b3c3/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From pouzin at well.com  Sun Jan 18 16:28:11 2015
From: pouzin at well.com (Louis Pouzin (well))
Date: Sun, 18 Jan 2015 22:28:11 +0100
Subject: [governance] IGC Coordinator Election 2015
In-Reply-To: <1753736473.22292.1421605799156.JavaMail.www@wwinf1c18>
References: <1753736473.22292.1421605799156.JavaMail.www@wwinf1c18>
Message-ID: <CA+EjHYq4cXJXE+V0--FiTcQ6FUahndpCynC0R_WynCtZit_JfA@mail.gmail.com>

It's well known that Davos is a boondoggle for WEF sponsors VIPs.
I was there once as an invited speaker.
Louis
- - -

On Sun, Jan 18, 2015 at 7:29 PM, Jean-Louis FULLSACK <jlfullsack at orange.fr>
wrote:

> Hello all
>
> Interesting news from South Africa in relation with "our new CS Partner"
> in IG : the WEF.
>
> visit :
> http://businesstech.co.za/news/general/77471/eskom-blowing-r1-million-on-davos-trip/
>
>
>
> ... and ENJOY !
>
>
>
> How marvelous we feel, in IG CS, to be on "equal footing" with such a
> partner in the MSH dreamland !
>
>
>
> Best
>
>
>
> Jean-Louis Fullsack
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150118/0dd23d56/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com  Sun Jan 18 17:57:51 2015
From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro)
Date: Sun, 18 Jan 2015 12:57:51 -1000
Subject: [governance] Invitation: Demystifying the IANA Stewardship
 Transition- where we are now #PTC15 Honolulu, Hawaii
Message-ID: <05D08D23-6DFF-443B-B1E7-01E3EBBAB1ED@gmail.com>

Dear All,

If you are at the Pacific Telecommunication Council PTC 15 Conference in Honolulu, I would like to invite you to join the discussion this afternoon at 3:30pm to 5:00pm on demystifying the IANA transition. For more information, visit: http://www.ptc.org/ptc15/program-and-attendees/complete-program/details.html?sid=128

Brief About the Session
In March 2014, the US Department of Commerce's National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) announced its intention to transition the stewardship of the IANA functions to the Internet community.

Discussion on how this transition will take place has captured the imaginations of many in the Internet community worldwide as an assembled Coordination Group of global experts now seeks to guide the development of a transition plan.

In some quarters, the transition has been branded as "handing over control of the Internet". But in reality, what exactly is being transferred, and what does this all mean?

This session will explore the IANA stewardship transition, from the basics of the IANA function and how it fits in with ICANN, to the implications for network operators, businesses, governments and Internet users, look forward to how the process is likely to progress, and answer your questions to demystify what can appear as a complex proposition.

Sent from my iPad
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From ggithaiga at hotmail.com  Mon Jan 19 12:44:18 2015
From: ggithaiga at hotmail.com (Grace Githaiga)
Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2015 17:44:18 +0000
Subject: [governance] Call for civil society expression of interest
In-Reply-To: <DUB109-W122AB04F62EA748FA1B9BF7BB4A0@phx.gbl>
References: <DUB109-W122AB04F62EA748FA1B9BF7BB4A0@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <DUB111-W117951CB618FD45608D6863B44A0@phx.gbl>





Dear Friends, [Apologies for possible duplications] We would like to bring to your attention the civil society call for expressions of interest to participate in the Global Conference on Cyberspace 2015 (GCCS 2015) and a civil society pre-event, hosted by the government of the Kingdom of the Netherlands, and taking place in The Hague on 16 and 17 April 2015. Following on from the London (2011), Budapest (2012), and Seoul (2013) Conferences, the 2015 event in The Hague will provide an opportunity for strategic level discussion of key cyberspace issues. The Conference aims to examine core issues related to the cyber domain, structured around the three main themes of Freedom, Security and Growth. Focus will be placed on exchange of knowledge and ideas on these issues and the development of concrete solutions. The Conference will encourage multi-stakeholder participation from the worlds of business, academia as well as civil society. A day and a half civil society pre-event will take place in the run-up to the Conference (14-15 April) to facilitate civil society coordination and input into the main Conference. An in-depth training on cyber security issues will be offered as part of this pre-event. In addition, an online training curriculum will be made available to the wider public. The Conference organisers are interested in a balanced and diverse participation and in supporting those who will find a practical use for the training and attendance offered. The Expression of Interest Form, in addition to logging interest in attending the Conference and the civil society pre-event, will also serve as a platform to capture requests for financial support. Limited financial support is available for a number of civil society participants. In order to be considered as a Conference/pre-event participant and/or a candidate for financial support, please fill in the Expression of Interest Form via the following link by January 30:https://www.gccs2015.com/civil-society-participation-form Expressions of interest and requests for funding received will be evaluated by an ad hoc Advisory Board set up to assist the organizers of the Conference in selecting civil society participants to receive funding and to attend the GCCS2015 and the civil society pre-event, to help ensure that the Conference is as inclusive and representative as possible. Criteria for financial support are designed to ensure a diverse spread of applicants is achieved, focussing on global south applicants and aimed at securing a balance of gender, regional diversity and level of experience in cyber security issues. Please feel free to share this information with your networks. Best wishes, On behalf of:Andrew Puddephatt, Evelien Wijkstra, Tim MaurerAdvisory Board Co-chairs-- Aditi Gupta Project Assistant | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITALDevelopment House, 56–64 Leonard Street, London EC2A 4LTT: +44 (0)20 7549 0337 | M: +44 (0)7876688351 | gp-digital.org
 		 	   		  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150119/de53708c/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From mariliamaciel at gmail.com  Mon Jan 19 13:27:41 2015
From: mariliamaciel at gmail.com (Marilia Maciel)
Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2015 16:27:41 -0200
Subject: [governance] Report on multistakeholder governance groups released
Message-ID: <CACpVkK1Ma9xtT4_4thnHp6L4MAMs56QhA0qE3Gc8RMAMTyKZ3g@mail.gmail.com>

Hello all,

Sorry for any duplication of this message.

I would like to share with you a recent publication
<https://publixphere.net/i/noc/page/Internet_Governance_Research_Project_Case_Studies>
that presents case studies on multiskeholder governance groups. They cover
experiences in many different areas - from aviation and water management to
Internet governance - on the national and global levels. Authors tried to
capture the most important characteristics of these arrangements and the
lessons learned. A synthesis paper summarizes the main findings. These
diverse array of experiences may provide some interesting insights on the
future evolution of Internet governance.

The studies were developed by academic institutions that are members
of the Global
Network of Internet & Society Research Centers <http://networkofcenters.net>
(NoC) and was facilitated by the Berkman Center for Internet & Society
<http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/> at Harvard University.

The Center for Technology and Society at the FGV School of Law in Rio de
Janeiro contributed with the case study on NETmundial
<https://publixphere.net/i/noc/page/IG_Case_Study_NETMundial>. We all hope
that you find the reading useful to your own projects and initiatives.


Best wishes,
Marília


   -
*Marília Maciel*
Pesquisadora Gestora - Centro de Tecnologia e Sociedade - FGV Direito Rio
Researcher and Coordinator - Center for Technology & Society - FGV Law
School
http://direitorio.fgv.br/cts

DiploFoundation associate - www.diplomacy.edu
PoliTICs Magazine Advisory Committee - http://www.politics.org.br/
Subscribe "Digital Rights: Latin America & the Caribbean" -
http://www.digitalrightslac.net/en
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150119/f9289e0a/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From kichango at gmail.com  Mon Jan 19 14:13:19 2015
From: kichango at gmail.com (Mawaki Chango)
Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2015 19:13:19 +0000
Subject: [governance] Results of the IGC 2015 Coordinator Election -
 Welcoming the newly elected co-coordinator
Message-ID: <CACTo+v--iTn=7kXdVSyAVf3rwxrvuRTdNucVujUgcW=XS_p+-w@mail.gmail.com>

Dear All,

Rejoice, for we have a new co-coordinator! Hence, here is my last message
as a co-co to report about the election and share some final thoughts on my
way out. .

THE ELECTION PROCESS

In this month of January 2015 one co-coordinator seat became vacant and was
up for filling. The election process kick started with a call for
nominations posted to the IGC list on 18 November 2014. By the end of the
nomination period on 19 December, we received the following confirmed
nominations:

1) Analia Aspis
2) Arsene Tungali
3) Kawsar Uddin

After setting up the survey in the online system used for IGC elections, we
had to prepare the voting list by making sure all members who meet the
voting criteria are included in the list, despite potential confusion due
to the fact that the IGC website seems to re-initialize the count of
membership time span from the last time members' information (eg, email
address) has been updated. This worked rather well since for all the misses
that were reported, only one or two were confirmed after verification. The
email ballot paper sent to about a dozen voters got probably lost in their
spam folder or they simply missed it in their regular mailbox.

After the election started, we were reminded of the need to add an
abstention option for those who do want to exercise their right to vote
(and be on the record for participating in the election) without the
obligation to give their vote to one or another of the candidates standing.
After checking, it has appeared that a "No candidate" vote was in option in
the last election cycle (2014). However, we first missed that as we were
using a template from the latest election where only one coordinator was to
be elected, which was in 2013 (in 2014, the two co-coordinators were to be
replaced.) Hopefully now we will systematically have an "Abstention" or "No
candidate" option (whichever the Caucus finds more appropriate) on the
ballot next to the candidates' names.

I would like to take this opportunity to thank all three candidates for
their dedication and willingness to step forward and serve this community.
Any of them would have made a positive difference for the Caucus and bring
more diversity to its leadership.

THE ELECTION RESULTS

The results of the elections are as follows.

Total number of tokens generated and invitations sent = 488
Total number of valid votes (survey completed) = 163
Incomplete responses = 31
Total responses = 194

Votes received by the candidates:
1) Analia Aspis = 83 (42.78%)
2) Arsene Tungali = 57 (29.38%)
3) Kawsar Uddin = 22 (11.34%)
4) None of the nominees = 1 (0.52%)
5) No answer = 10 (5.15%)
6) Not completed or not displayed = 21 (10.82%)

(Please note the details of these results will be posted to the IGC web
page later and the link will be forwarded here when done.)

This makes Analia Aspis the next IGC co-coordinator. Congratulations,
Analia! With you I am delighted and confident to pass on the baton to good
hands. Welcome on board! In your nomination statement, I note and applaud
your eagerness to bring IG regional actions into IGC focus and to make this
place ever more relevant to young researchers and beyond. I wish you every
success!

THANK YOU'S

Furthermore, I would like also to seize this opportunity to thank my
"coordinatorship mate" (for lack of a better word) Deirdre Williams. During
our time together she had carried out the most thankless coordination tasks
more times than I can count (the ones that we didn't even suspect would be
on our plate when each of us decided to stand for the election.) For that
and for her patience I am grateful.

I know well too much how easier (and much less time consuming) it often is
to get things done by yourself, when you know how to do them, than to have
to instruct and explain to a novice how to get the job done. Well, I,
stubborn learner, had Jeremy take the longer path and heavier burden to
provide guidance, patiently and always swiftly replying to my inquiries and
helping me navigate through the challenges I was facing with the online
election system and the mechanics of the IGC website. Thank you, Jeremy!

Last but not least, I would like to thank each and every one of you for
your support, patience and understanding. I know we have not always been in
agreement and I am most certain I haven't met everyone's expectations, but
I felt almost all of you have each time given me the benefit of the doubt.
I appreciate that, and only wish I could have done more to put IGC at a
better place on the IG map.

SOME PENDING BUSINESS

Speaking of the place of IGC on the Internet governance map, I recall we
had an unfinished business, which I'll make sure to leave you with.
Following is the synthesis of the consultation we had a while before IGF
Istanbul regarding the way forward for IGC. It was posted to this list on
31/8/2014. I would hope to see one day some follow up action or some
conclusion given to this matter.

Between June 26 and 30, we had here a discussion running by the following
subject line:
Inquiry for a new vision into the future of IGC
Following is the summary of the main points I got from
your contributions to this discussion
 [adding my summary notes, observations/comments in square brackets].

Suggestions include:

-
H
olding a face to face workshop, accommodating remote participation, on the
topic at Istanbul IGF

[This will be taking place at IGF 2014 this
Friday, 5 September, 12.30 - 14.00 is Bilateral Room 1 (Rumeli -1 Level /
Room 9).

-
C
ontemplating the possibility of national or regional chapters for IGC
[Make sure this not be confused with IGFs at the base. One thing for sure
is that IGC is meant to embody the CS component while IGF for all
stakeholders.]

-
N
eed for mutual respect between participants
[D
 ifferences in positions should be aired with the predicate that no matter
how strong
 we feel
 about being right, contradicting positions may still be
 both
 valid under
different
 circumstances or with different assumptions than our
 own
 (and sure we all have assumptions!)
]


-
A
 minimum level of decorum or "netiquette" to ensure it is safe for
everybody to participate
[It's critical to make it comfortable for people to participate
whatever their level of familiarity
(or unfamiliarity)
with the issues,
their level of
knowledge or

self-confidence
(or lack thereof)
as regards the relevance of their contribution.
 ]

-
E
nabling and fostering trust
[M
aybe a number of basic principles
and ideas
should be spelled out here (
including for possible
charter
 revision
 ?)
as to how to achieve that and
ensure a
 baseline in expectations with regard to
our respective and mutual commitments. This might be the place to consider
the question of 'conflict of interests' policy for those in leadership
position, if relevant.]

-  IGC still provides a space to aggregate many of the differing views that
"civil society" holds about Internet governance.

-
IGC should engage in Social
C
apacity building
in
 I
G and
 related activism

"
People need to be educated through any extensive
[as well as extension]
program in various level of literacy and knowledge regarding their
vulnerability
" in the face of the d
evelopment
 of the cyber-environment
.
"
People needs to be educated and know how to participate in procedure of
governance and how to share their concerns. I believe, it would be great,
if IGC opens a chapter for educating people in this area.
 "

-
IGC should engage in (enabling)
 Customer protection
based on
 Human rights, multilingualism
, regional/
 cultural diversity
: Seek best practices in the field of customer protection and help empower
end-users.
-
W
e absolutely need a credible broadly accepted civil society coordination
entity

[This is being taken care of through the newly set up Civil Society
Coordination Group, CSCG]

-
 R
eform is needed to enable
such entity

with
 reasonable and reasonably fast decision-making
with
 regard to all the decisions that need to be made in the context of a civil
society coordination function

[In process with the CSCG]

- Criticism or fear was raised with the notion that the CSCG might be
exclusionary or the fact that it is so far perceived by some as such.
[This might be addressed through the operating procedures to be developed
by the CSCG]

- "
The alternative
 [to CSCG in coordinating CS appointments]
 would be IGC. However that would require a few changes so that IGC could
respond more promptly, and also for the role and processes of IGC in doing
this to be acceptable to the myriad parties who in the past few years have
forwarded their own civil society MAG nominations. Quite clearly some
substantial groups within IGC have not been happy for IGC to do this on
their behalf in the past few years, thus leading to them making their own
nominations.
 "

[Please note that the CSCG is not meant to develop policies or submit
policy positions on behalf of its members' constituents. So the question
remains: How can we as IGC get there from here?]

- "a
s regards the broader question of policy statements and policy co
ordination - I do not think CSCG is a good vehicle for this.  IGC is
potentially, but there has been difficulty in getting consensus positions
here in the past, which led to the creation of Best Bits (where sign on
statements not acceptable to 100% of civil society became a useful tool)
and later to Just Net Coalition. Where there is potentially a broader
consensus, I think IGC can play a very useful role, providing it continues
to enjoy strong support from all groups.
 "

- In the discussion it was also noted that "
IGC is the big tent for Internet governance geeks of all persuasions
 ...
who will never agree on much
."

Now questions:
- How do we get there from here?
- Is there any remedy to this (the fact that IGC cab "never agree on much")
beyond the above points for improvements? Or are these points sufficient?
- How can we detect and handle cases where there is a potential for broader
consensus?
- Where there is not such potential how do we deal with the coordination of
policy positions and making policy statements? Shall we create some sort of
internal Dynamic Coalitions mechanism? Can these find some level of
compromise after they develop their baseline positions, and if not how will
those positions relate to IGC as a whole as they may be contradicting?
----

Right here ends my term as IGC co-coordinator. I am delighted to yield the
floor (or rather the stage) to two remarkable women and leaders, both
hailing from Latin America and the Caribbean.
Take it away, ladies!

With my very best wishes,

Mawaki


=====================================
Mawaki Chango, PhD
Founder
& CEO

DIGILEXIS
Consulting
http://www.digilexis.com
m.chango at digilexis.com | *kichango at gmail.com <kichango at gmail.com>*
Twitter: @digilexis & @prodigilexis
Mob. +225 57 55 57 53 | +225 44 48 77 64
Skype: digilexis
=====================================
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150119/0f6d23ae/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From isolatedn at gmail.com  Mon Jan 19 14:24:13 2015
From: isolatedn at gmail.com (Sivasubramanian M)
Date: Tue, 20 Jan 2015 00:54:13 +0530
Subject: [governance] Results of the IGC 2015 Coordinator Election -
 Welcoming the newly elected co-coordinator
In-Reply-To: <CACTo+v--iTn=7kXdVSyAVf3rwxrvuRTdNucVujUgcW=XS_p+-w@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CACTo+v--iTn=7kXdVSyAVf3rwxrvuRTdNucVujUgcW=XS_p+-w@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAHyAo0Gcpj7quz=etQ0jBomGHe=rhnLRk+9sXcmH2rTAfrMspQ@mail.gmail.com>

Thank you Mawaki for all your good work. Congratulations Analia.


Sivasubramanian M
India.

Sivasubramanian M <https://www.facebook.com/sivasubramanian.muthusamy>

On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 12:43 AM, Mawaki Chango <kichango at gmail.com> wrote:

> Dear All,
>
> Rejoice, for we have a new co-coordinator! Hence, here is my last message
> as a co-co to report about the election and share some final thoughts on my
> way out. .
>
> THE ELECTION PROCESS
>
> In this month of January 2015 one co-coordinator seat became vacant and
> was up for filling. The election process kick started with a call for
> nominations posted to the IGC list on 18 November 2014. By the end of the
> nomination period on 19 December, we received the following confirmed
> nominations:
>
> 1) Analia Aspis
> 2) Arsene Tungali
> 3) Kawsar Uddin
>
> After setting up the survey in the online system used for IGC elections,
> we had to prepare the voting list by making sure all members who meet the
> voting criteria are included in the list, despite potential confusion due
> to the fact that the IGC website seems to re-initialize the count of
> membership time span from the last time members' information (eg, email
> address) has been updated. This worked rather well since for all the misses
> that were reported, only one or two were confirmed after verification. The
> email ballot paper sent to about a dozen voters got probably lost in their
> spam folder or they simply missed it in their regular mailbox.
>
> After the election started, we were reminded of the need to add an
> abstention option for those who do want to exercise their right to vote
> (and be on the record for participating in the election) without the
> obligation to give their vote to one or another of the candidates standing.
> After checking, it has appeared that a "No candidate" vote was in option in
> the last election cycle (2014). However, we first missed that as we were
> using a template from the latest election where only one coordinator was to
> be elected, which was in 2013 (in 2014, the two co-coordinators were to be
> replaced.) Hopefully now we will systematically have an "Abstention" or "No
> candidate" option (whichever the Caucus finds more appropriate) on the
> ballot next to the candidates' names.
>
> I would like to take this opportunity to thank all three candidates for
> their dedication and willingness to step forward and serve this community.
> Any of them would have made a positive difference for the Caucus and bring
> more diversity to its leadership.
>
> THE ELECTION RESULTS
>
> The results of the elections are as follows.
>
> Total number of tokens generated and invitations sent = 488
> Total number of valid votes (survey completed) = 163
> Incomplete responses = 31
> Total responses = 194
>
> Votes received by the candidates:
> 1) Analia Aspis = 83 (42.78%)
> 2) Arsene Tungali = 57 (29.38%)
> 3) Kawsar Uddin = 22 (11.34%)
> 4) None of the nominees = 1 (0.52%)
> 5) No answer = 10 (5.15%)
> 6) Not completed or not displayed = 21 (10.82%)
>
> (Please note the details of these results will be posted to the IGC web
> page later and the link will be forwarded here when done.)
>
> This makes Analia Aspis the next IGC co-coordinator. Congratulations,
> Analia! With you I am delighted and confident to pass on the baton to good
> hands. Welcome on board! In your nomination statement, I note and applaud
> your eagerness to bring IG regional actions into IGC focus and to make this
> place ever more relevant to young researchers and beyond. I wish you every
> success!
>
> THANK YOU'S
>
> Furthermore, I would like also to seize this opportunity to thank my
> "coordinatorship mate" (for lack of a better word) Deirdre Williams. During
> our time together she had carried out the most thankless coordination tasks
> more times than I can count (the ones that we didn't even suspect would be
> on our plate when each of us decided to stand for the election.) For that
> and for her patience I am grateful.
>
> I know well too much how easier (and much less time consuming) it often is
> to get things done by yourself, when you know how to do them, than to have
> to instruct and explain to a novice how to get the job done. Well, I,
> stubborn learner, had Jeremy take the longer path and heavier burden to
> provide guidance, patiently and always swiftly replying to my inquiries and
> helping me navigate through the challenges I was facing with the online
> election system and the mechanics of the IGC website. Thank you, Jeremy!
>
> Last but not least, I would like to thank each and every one of you for
> your support, patience and understanding. I know we have not always been in
> agreement and I am most certain I haven't met everyone's expectations, but
> I felt almost all of you have each time given me the benefit of the doubt.
> I appreciate that, and only wish I could have done more to put IGC at a
> better place on the IG map.
>
> SOME PENDING BUSINESS
>
> Speaking of the place of IGC on the Internet governance map, I recall we
> had an unfinished business, which I'll make sure to leave you with.
> Following is the synthesis of the consultation we had a while before IGF
> Istanbul regarding the way forward for IGC. It was posted to this list on
> 31/8/2014. I would hope to see one day some follow up action or some
> conclusion given to this matter.
>
> Between June 26 and 30, we had here a discussion running by the following
> subject line:
> Inquiry for a new vision into the future of IGC
> Following is the summary of the main points I got from
> your contributions to this discussion
>  [adding my summary notes, observations/comments in square brackets].
>
> Suggestions include:
>
> -
> H
> olding a face to face workshop, accommodating remote participation, on the
> topic at Istanbul IGF
>
> [This will be taking place at IGF 2014 this
> Friday, 5 September, 12.30 - 14.00 is Bilateral Room 1 (Rumeli -1 Level /
> Room 9).
>
> -
> C
> ontemplating the possibility of national or regional chapters for IGC
> [Make sure this not be confused with IGFs at the base. One thing for sure
> is that IGC is meant to embody the CS component while IGF for all
> stakeholders.]
>
> -
> N
> eed for mutual respect between participants
> [D
>  ifferences in positions should be aired with the predicate that no matter
> how strong
>  we feel
>  about being right, contradicting positions may still be
>  both
>  valid under
> different
>  circumstances or with different assumptions than our
>  own
>  (and sure we all have assumptions!)
> ]
>
>
> -
> A
>  minimum level of decorum or "netiquette" to ensure it is safe for
> everybody to participate
> [It's critical to make it comfortable for people to participate
> whatever their level of familiarity
> (or unfamiliarity)
> with the issues,
> their level of
> knowledge or
>
> self-confidence
> (or lack thereof)
> as regards the relevance of their contribution.
>  ]
>
> -
> E
> nabling and fostering trust
> [M
> aybe a number of basic principles
> and ideas
> should be spelled out here (
> including for possible
> charter
>  revision
>  ?)
> as to how to achieve that and
> ensure a
>  baseline in expectations with regard to
> our respective and mutual commitments. This might be the place to consider
> the question of 'conflict of interests' policy for those in leadership
> position, if relevant.]
>
> -  IGC still provides a space to aggregate many of the differing views
> that "civil society" holds about Internet governance.
>
> -
> IGC should engage in Social
> C
> apacity building
> in
>  I
> G and
>  related activism
>
> "
> People need to be educated through any extensive
> [as well as extension]
> program in various level of literacy and knowledge regarding their
> vulnerability
> " in the face of the d
> evelopment
>  of the cyber-environment
> .
> "
> People needs to be educated and know how to participate in procedure of
> governance and how to share their concerns. I believe, it would be great,
> if IGC opens a chapter for educating people in this area.
>  "
>
> -
> IGC should engage in (enabling)
>  Customer protection
> based on
>  Human rights, multilingualism
> , regional/
>  cultural diversity
> : Seek best practices in the field of customer protection and help empower
> end-users.
> -
> W
> e absolutely need a credible broadly accepted civil society coordination
> entity
>
> [This is being taken care of through the newly set up Civil Society
> Coordination Group, CSCG]
>
> -
>  R
> eform is needed to enable
> such entity
>
> with
>  reasonable and reasonably fast decision-making
> with
>  regard to all the decisions that need to be made in the context of a civil
> society coordination function
>
> [In process with the CSCG]
>
> - Criticism or fear was raised with the notion that the CSCG might be
> exclusionary or the fact that it is so far perceived by some as such.
> [This might be addressed through the operating procedures to be developed
> by the CSCG]
>
> - "
> The alternative
>  [to CSCG in coordinating CS appointments]
>  would be IGC. However that would require a few changes so that IGC could
> respond more promptly, and also for the role and processes of IGC in doing
> this to be acceptable to the myriad parties who in the past few years have
> forwarded their own civil society MAG nominations. Quite clearly some
> substantial groups within IGC have not been happy for IGC to do this on
> their behalf in the past few years, thus leading to them making their own
> nominations.
>  "
>
> [Please note that the CSCG is not meant to develop policies or submit
> policy positions on behalf of its members' constituents. So the question
> remains: How can we as IGC get there from here?]
>
> - "a
> s regards the broader question of policy statements and policy co
> ordination – I do not think CSCG is a good vehicle for this.  IGC is
> potentially, but there has been difficulty in getting consensus positions
> here in the past, which led to the creation of Best Bits (where sign on
> statements not acceptable to 100% of civil society became a useful tool)
> and later to Just Net Coalition. Where there is potentially a broader
> consensus, I think IGC can play a very useful role, providing it continues
> to enjoy strong support from all groups.
>  "
>
> - In the discussion it was also noted that "
> IGC is the big tent for Internet governance geeks of all persuasions
>  ...
> who will never agree on much
> ."
>
> Now questions:
> - How do we get there from here?
> - Is there any remedy to this (the fact that IGC cab "never agree on
> much") beyond the above points for improvements? Or are these points
> sufficient?
> - How can we detect and handle cases where there is a potential for
> broader consensus?
> - Where there is not such potential how do we deal with the coordination
> of policy positions and making policy statements? Shall we create some sort
> of internal Dynamic Coalitions mechanism? Can these find some level of
> compromise after they develop their baseline positions, and if not how will
> those positions relate to IGC as a whole as they may be contradicting?
> ----
>
> Right here ends my term as IGC co-coordinator. I am delighted to yield the
> floor (or rather the stage) to two remarkable women and leaders, both
> hailing from Latin America and the Caribbean.
> Take it away, ladies!
>
> With my very best wishes,
>
> Mawaki
>
>
> =====================================
> Mawaki Chango, PhD
> Founder
> & CEO
>
> DIGILEXIS
> Consulting
> http://www.digilexis.com
> m.chango at digilexis.com | *kichango at gmail.com <kichango at gmail.com>*
> Twitter: @digilexis & @prodigilexis
> Mob. +225 57 55 57 53 | +225 44 48 77 64
> Skype: digilexis
> =====================================
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>      governance at lists.igcaucus.org
> To be removed from the list, visit:
>      http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
>
> For all other list information and functions, see:
>      http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
>      http://www.igcaucus.org/
>
> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150120/dcf2f33b/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From myaguero at msn.com  Mon Jan 19 14:42:24 2015
From: myaguero at msn.com (Maritza Y. Aguero Minano)
Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2015 13:42:24 -0600
Subject: [governance] Results of the IGC 2015 Coordinator Election -
 Welcoming the newly elected co-coordinator
In-Reply-To:  <CACTo+v--iTn=7kXdVSyAVf3rwxrvuRTdNucVujUgcW=XS_p+-w@mail.gmail.com>
References:  <CACTo+v--iTn=7kXdVSyAVf3rwxrvuRTdNucVujUgcW=XS_p+-w@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <BAY174-W418653EEF38A917EABC757DA4A0@phx.gbl>

Thank you very much Mawaki for your great support and work.
Congratulations Analia! So proud of you!
Regards,

From: kichango at gmail.com
Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2015 19:13:19 +0000
To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org
Subject: [governance] Results of the IGC 2015 Coordinator Election - Welcoming the newly elected co-coordinator

Dear All,
Rejoice, for we have a new co-coordinator! Hence, here is my last message as a co-co to report about the election and share some final thoughts on my way out. .
THE ELECTION PROCESS
In this month of January 2015 one co-coordinator seat became vacant and was up for filling. The election process kick started with a call for nominations posted to the IGC list on 18 November 2014. By the end of the nomination period on 19 December, we received the following confirmed nominations:
1) Analia Aspis2) Arsene Tungali3) Kawsar Uddin
After setting up the survey in the online system used for IGC elections, we had to prepare the voting list by making sure all members who meet the voting criteria are included in the list, despite potential confusion due to the fact that the IGC website seems to re-initialize the count of membership time span from the last time members' information (eg, email address) has been updated. This worked rather well since for all the misses that were reported, only one or two were confirmed after verification. The email ballot paper sent to about a dozen voters got probably lost in their spam folder or they simply missed it in their regular mailbox. 
After the election started, we were reminded of the need to add an abstention option for those who do want to exercise their right to vote (and be on the record for participating in the election) without the obligation to give their vote to one or another of the candidates standing. After checking, it has appeared that a "No candidate" vote was in option in the last election cycle (2014). However, we first missed that as we were using a template from the latest election where only one coordinator was to be elected, which was in 2013 (in 2014, the two co-coordinators were to be replaced.) Hopefully now we will systematically have an "Abstention" or "No candidate" option (whichever the Caucus finds more appropriate) on the ballot next to the candidates' names.   
I would like to take this opportunity to thank all three candidates for their dedication and willingness to step forward and serve this community. Any of them would have made a positive difference for the Caucus and bring more diversity to its leadership. 
THE ELECTION RESULTS
The results of the elections are as follows.
Total number of tokens generated and invitations sent = 488Total number of valid votes (survey completed) = 163Incomplete responses = 31Total responses = 194
Votes received by the candidates:1) Analia Aspis = 83 (42.78%)2) Arsene Tungali = 57 (29.38%)3) Kawsar Uddin = 22 (11.34%)4) None of the nominees = 1 (0.52%)5) No answer = 10 (5.15%)6) Not completed or not displayed = 21 (10.82%)
(Please note the details of these results will be posted to the IGC web page later and the link will be forwarded here when done.)
This makes Analia Aspis the next IGC co-coordinator. Congratulations, Analia! With you I am delighted and confident to pass on the baton to good hands. Welcome on board! In your nomination statement, I note and applaud your eagerness to bring IG regional actions into IGC focus and to make this place ever more relevant to young researchers and beyond. I wish you every success!
THANK YOU'S
Furthermore, I would like also to seize this opportunity to thank my "coordinatorship mate" (for lack of a better word) Deirdre Williams. During our time together she had carried out the most thankless coordination tasks more times than I can count (the ones that we didn't even suspect would be on our plate when each of us decided to stand for the election.) For that and for her patience I am grateful.
I know well too much how easier (and much less time consuming) it often is to get things done by yourself, when you know how to do them, than to have to instruct and explain to a novice how to get the job done. Well, I, stubborn learner, had Jeremy take the longer path and heavier burden to provide guidance, patiently and always swiftly replying to my inquiries and helping me navigate through the challenges I was facing with the online election system and the mechanics of the IGC website. Thank you, Jeremy!
Last but not least, I would like to thank each and every one of you for your support, patience and understanding. I know we have not always been in agreement and I am most certain I haven't met everyone's expectations, but I felt almost all of you have each time given me the benefit of the doubt. I appreciate that, and only wish I could have done more to put IGC at a better place on the IG map.
SOME PENDING BUSINESS
Speaking of the place of IGC on the Internet governance map, I recall we had an unfinished business, which I'll make sure to leave you with. Following is the synthesis of the consultation we had a while before IGF Istanbul regarding the way forward for IGC. It was posted to this list on 31/8/2014. I would hope to see one day some follow up action or some conclusion given to this matter.
Between June 26 and 30, we had here a discussion running by the following subject line:Inquiry for a new vision into the future of IGC
Following is the summary of the main points I got from your contributions to this discussion [adding my summary notes, observations/comments in square brackets].
Suggestions include:
- Holding a face to face workshop, accommodating remote participation, on the topic at Istanbul IGF  [This will be taking place at IGF 2014 this Friday, 5 September, 12.30 - 14.00 is Bilateral Room 1 (Rumeli -1 Level / Room 9). 
- Contemplating the possibility of national or regional chapters for IGC[Make sure this not be confused with IGFs at the base. One thing for sure is that IGC is meant to embody the CS component while IGF for all stakeholders.]
-  Need for mutual respect between participants[D ifferences in positions should be aired with the predicate that no matter how strong we feel about being right, contradicting positions may still be both valid underdifferent circumstances or with different assumptions than our own (and sure we all have assumptions!)]  
- A minimum level of decorum or "netiquette" to ensure it is safe for everybody to participate [It's critical to make it comfortable for people to participate whatever their level of familiarity(or unfamiliarity) with the issues, their level of knowledge or self-confidence (or lack thereof) as regards the relevance of their contribution. ]
- Enabling and fostering trust [Maybe a number of basic principles and ideas should be spelled out here (including for possible charter revision ?) as to how to achieve that and ensure a baseline in expectations with regard to our respective and mutual commitments. This might be the place to consider the question of 'conflict of interests' policy for those in leadership position, if relevant.]
-  IGC still provides a space to aggregate many of the differing views that "civil society" holds about Internet governance.

- IGC should engage in Social Capacity building in IG and related activism  "People need to be educated through any extensive [as well as extension] program in various level of literacy and knowledge regarding their vulnerability" in the face of the development of the cyber-environment. "People needs to be educated and know how to participate in procedure of governance and how to share their concerns. I believe, it would be great, if IGC opens a chapter for educating people in this area. "
- IGC should engage in (enabling)  Customer protection based on Human rights, multilingualism, regional/ cultural diversity: Seek best practices in the field of customer protection and help empower end-users.- We absolutely need a credible broadly accepted civil society coordination entity  [This is being taken care of through the newly set up Civil Society Coordination Group, CSCG]
-  Reform is needed to enable such entity with reasonable and reasonably fast decision-making with  regard to all the decisions that need to be made in the context of a civil society coordination function  [In process with the CSCG]
- Criticism or fear was raised with the notion that the CSCG might be exclusionary or the fact that it is so far perceived by some as such.[This might be addressed through the operating procedures to be developed by the CSCG]
- "The alternative [to CSCG in coordinating CS appointments] would be IGC. However that would require a few changes so that IGC could respond more promptly, and also for the role and processes of IGC in doing this to be acceptable to the myriad parties who in the past few years have forwarded their own civil society MAG nominations. Quite clearly some substantial groups within IGC have not been happy for IGC to do this on their behalf in the past few years, thus leading to them making their own nominations. "
[Please note that the CSCG is not meant to develop policies or submit policy positions on behalf of its members' constituents. So the question remains: How can we as IGC get there from here?]
- "as regards the broader question of policy statements and policy co ordination – I do not think CSCG is a good vehicle for this.  IGC is potentially, but there has been difficulty in getting consensus positions here in the past, which led to the creation of Best Bits (where sign on statements not acceptable to 100% of civil society became a useful tool) and later to Just Net Coalition. Where there is potentially a broader consensus, I think IGC can play a very useful role, providing it continues to enjoy strong support from all groups. "
- In the discussion it was also noted that "IGC is the big tent for Internet governance geeks of all persuasions ... who will never agree on much." 
Now questions:- How do we get there from here? - Is there any remedy to this (the fact that IGC cab "never agree on much") beyond the above points for improvements? Or are these points sufficient?- How can we detect and handle cases where there is a potential for broader consensus?- Where there is not such potential how do we deal with the coordination of policy positions and making policy statements? Shall we create some sort of internal Dynamic Coalitions mechanism? Can these find some level of compromise after they develop their baseline positions, and if not how will those positions relate to IGC as a whole as they may be contradicting?----
Right here ends my term as IGC co-coordinator. I am delighted to yield the floor (or rather the stage) to two remarkable women and leaders, both hailing from Latin America and the Caribbean. Take it away, ladies!
With my very best wishes,
Mawaki    
=====================================Mawaki Chango, PhD                  
Founder & CEO
DIGILEXIS Consultinghttp://www.digilexis.com
m.chango at digilexis.com | kichango at gmail.com 
Twitter: @digilexis & @prodigilexisMob. +225 57 55 57 53 | +225 44 48 77 64Skype: digilexis=====================================
 		 	   		  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150119/ed35f833/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com  Mon Jan 19 14:49:06 2015
From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro)
Date: Tue, 20 Jan 2015 07:49:06 +1200
Subject: [governance] Results of the IGC 2015 Coordinator Election -
 Welcoming the newly elected co-coordinator
In-Reply-To: <CACTo+v--iTn=7kXdVSyAVf3rwxrvuRTdNucVujUgcW=XS_p+-w@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CACTo+v--iTn=7kXdVSyAVf3rwxrvuRTdNucVujUgcW=XS_p+-w@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAJwbTiCjPw6PajUOiRzkQFFHwiFe9RfrBDPEqa1i5p8yU2qu_A@mail.gmail.com>

Dear All,

Firstly, thank you to all the candidates that stood and congratulations
Analis. Thank you Mawaki for your one year stint as co-coordinator and we
appreciate the behind the scenes work that goes into these things.

I would suggest that the co-cos pick up on points that Wolfgang raised as
it would be worthwhile communicating IGC input into key and critical areas.

With every best wish,
Sala
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150120/319d3280/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From lmcknigh at syr.edu  Mon Jan 19 15:04:09 2015
From: lmcknigh at syr.edu (Lee W McKnight)
Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2015 20:04:09 +0000
Subject: [governance] Results of the IGC 2015 Coordinator Election -
 Welcoming the newly elected co-coordinator
In-Reply-To: <CAJwbTiCjPw6PajUOiRzkQFFHwiFe9RfrBDPEqa1i5p8yU2qu_A@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CACTo+v--iTn=7kXdVSyAVf3rwxrvuRTdNucVujUgcW=XS_p+-w@mail.gmail.com>,<CAJwbTiCjPw6PajUOiRzkQFFHwiFe9RfrBDPEqa1i5p8yU2qu_A@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <b73e5e2bcf514aeda0db95cbedfae12c@EX13-MBX-07.ad.syr.edu>

Welcome Analia.  And thanks Mawaki for your time and leadership - excuse me co-co-ship. No doubt the most fun you have had...since doctoral studies? : )


Arsene and Kawsar, thanks for standing and please do stay engaged in whichever way suits you, there is always more than enough to do in all-volunteer organizations.


Analia, in typical IGC fashion, better get to work quick on that ever-longer IGC to-do list, or...well enough said, 2015 is interesting times for Internet Governance.


Lee



________________________________
From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org <governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org> on behalf of Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro <salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com>
Sent: Monday, January 19, 2015 2:49 PM
To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Mawaki Chango
Subject: Re: [governance] Results of the IGC 2015 Coordinator Election - Welcoming the newly elected co-coordinator

Dear All,

Firstly, thank you to all the candidates that stood and congratulations Analis. Thank you Mawaki for your one year stint as co-coordinator and we appreciate the behind the scenes work that goes into these things.

I would suggest that the co-cos pick up on points that Wolfgang raised as it would be worthwhile communicating IGC input into key and critical areas.

With every best wish,
Sala
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150119/6aacd097/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From ian.peter at ianpeter.com  Mon Jan 19 17:11:17 2015
From: ian.peter at ianpeter.com (Ian Peter)
Date: Tue, 20 Jan 2015 09:11:17 +1100
Subject: [governance] Results of the IGC 2015 Coordinator Election -
 Welcoming the newly elected co-coordinator
In-Reply-To: <b73e5e2bcf514aeda0db95cbedfae12c@EX13-MBX-07.ad.syr.edu>
References: <CACTo+v--iTn=7kXdVSyAVf3rwxrvuRTdNucVujUgcW=XS_p+-w@mail.gmail.com>,<CAJwbTiCjPw6PajUOiRzkQFFHwiFe9RfrBDPEqa1i5p8yU2qu_A@mail.gmail.com> <b73e5e2bcf514aeda0db95cbedfae12c@EX13-MBX-07.ad.syr.edu>
Message-ID: <EF146533939C4169B1F393D89139B6D8@Toshiba>

Yes, huge thanks to Mawaki for his term of office and for applying his considerable wisdom to IGC at a very difficult time. I am convinced that IGC is in a better state because of these efforts, and his work with Deirdre has achieved a lot over the last 12 months in stabilising IGC.

And congratulations to Analia!

Ian Peter

From: Lee W McKnight 
Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2015 7:04 AM
To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org ; Mawaki Chango ; Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro 
Subject: RE: [governance] Results of the IGC 2015 Coordinator Election - Welcoming the newly elected co-coordinator

Welcome Analia.  And thanks Mawaki for your time and leadership - excuse me co-co-ship. No doubt the most fun you have had...since doctoral studies? : )




Arsene and Kawsar, thanks for standing and please do stay engaged in whichever way suits you, there is always more than enough to do in all-volunteer organizations. 




Analia, in typical IGC fashion, better get to work quick on that ever-longer IGC to-do list, or...well enough said, 2015 is interesting times for Internet Governance. 



Lee







--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org <governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org> on behalf of Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro <salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com>
Sent: Monday, January 19, 2015 2:49 PM
To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Mawaki Chango
Subject: Re: [governance] Results of the IGC 2015 Coordinator Election - Welcoming the newly elected co-coordinator 

Dear All,


Firstly, thank you to all the candidates that stood and congratulations Analis. Thank you Mawaki for your one year stint as co-coordinator and we appreciate the behind the scenes work that goes into these things.


I would suggest that the co-cos pick up on points that Wolfgang raised as it would be worthwhile communicating IGC input into key and critical areas.


With every best wish,
Sala



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150120/50c0b5d1/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From williams.deirdre at gmail.com  Mon Jan 19 20:58:07 2015
From: williams.deirdre at gmail.com (Deirdre Williams)
Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2015 21:58:07 -0400
Subject: [governance] Results of the IGC 2015 Coordinator Election -
 Welcoming the newly elected co-coordinator
In-Reply-To: <CACTo+v--iTn=7kXdVSyAVf3rwxrvuRTdNucVujUgcW=XS_p+-w@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CACTo+v--iTn=7kXdVSyAVf3rwxrvuRTdNucVujUgcW=XS_p+-w@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAMz5XN6RHV3Jqm5LOtayn-CcF6hW967F+0a67SGtOtwO9bU5nA@mail.gmail.com>

Thank you Mawaki for doing such an excellent job with the election, and for
being such a comfortable "co".
I will have to owe you a longer reply until tomorrow.
Thank you to the candidates who offered themselves for the election, and
congratulations Analia - I look forward to working with you.
And thanks Jeremy for the technical help behind the scenes.
Best wishes to everyone for a peaceful and productive 2015
Deirdre

On 19 January 2015 at 15:13, Mawaki Chango <kichango at gmail.com> wrote:

> Dear All,
>
> Rejoice, for we have a new co-coordinator! Hence, here is my last message
> as a co-co to report about the election and share some final thoughts on my
> way out. .
>
> THE ELECTION PROCESS
>
> In this month of January 2015 one co-coordinator seat became vacant and
> was up for filling. The election process kick started with a call for
> nominations posted to the IGC list on 18 November 2014. By the end of the
> nomination period on 19 December, we received the following confirmed
> nominations:
>
> 1) Analia Aspis
> 2) Arsene Tungali
> 3) Kawsar Uddin
>
> After setting up the survey in the online system used for IGC elections,
> we had to prepare the voting list by making sure all members who meet the
> voting criteria are included in the list, despite potential confusion due
> to the fact that the IGC website seems to re-initialize the count of
> membership time span from the last time members' information (eg, email
> address) has been updated. This worked rather well since for all the misses
> that were reported, only one or two were confirmed after verification. The
> email ballot paper sent to about a dozen voters got probably lost in their
> spam folder or they simply missed it in their regular mailbox.
>
> After the election started, we were reminded of the need to add an
> abstention option for those who do want to exercise their right to vote
> (and be on the record for participating in the election) without the
> obligation to give their vote to one or another of the candidates standing.
> After checking, it has appeared that a "No candidate" vote was in option in
> the last election cycle (2014). However, we first missed that as we were
> using a template from the latest election where only one coordinator was to
> be elected, which was in 2013 (in 2014, the two co-coordinators were to be
> replaced.) Hopefully now we will systematically have an "Abstention" or "No
> candidate" option (whichever the Caucus finds more appropriate) on the
> ballot next to the candidates' names.
>
> I would like to take this opportunity to thank all three candidates for
> their dedication and willingness to step forward and serve this community.
> Any of them would have made a positive difference for the Caucus and bring
> more diversity to its leadership.
>
> THE ELECTION RESULTS
>
> The results of the elections are as follows.
>
> Total number of tokens generated and invitations sent = 488
> Total number of valid votes (survey completed) = 163
> Incomplete responses = 31
> Total responses = 194
>
> Votes received by the candidates:
> 1) Analia Aspis = 83 (42.78%)
> 2) Arsene Tungali = 57 (29.38%)
> 3) Kawsar Uddin = 22 (11.34%)
> 4) None of the nominees = 1 (0.52%)
> 5) No answer = 10 (5.15%)
> 6) Not completed or not displayed = 21 (10.82%)
>
> (Please note the details of these results will be posted to the IGC web
> page later and the link will be forwarded here when done.)
>
> This makes Analia Aspis the next IGC co-coordinator. Congratulations,
> Analia! With you I am delighted and confident to pass on the baton to good
> hands. Welcome on board! In your nomination statement, I note and applaud
> your eagerness to bring IG regional actions into IGC focus and to make this
> place ever more relevant to young researchers and beyond. I wish you every
> success!
>
> THANK YOU'S
>
> Furthermore, I would like also to seize this opportunity to thank my
> "coordinatorship mate" (for lack of a better word) Deirdre Williams. During
> our time together she had carried out the most thankless coordination tasks
> more times than I can count (the ones that we didn't even suspect would be
> on our plate when each of us decided to stand for the election.) For that
> and for her patience I am grateful.
>
> I know well too much how easier (and much less time consuming) it often is
> to get things done by yourself, when you know how to do them, than to have
> to instruct and explain to a novice how to get the job done. Well, I,
> stubborn learner, had Jeremy take the longer path and heavier burden to
> provide guidance, patiently and always swiftly replying to my inquiries and
> helping me navigate through the challenges I was facing with the online
> election system and the mechanics of the IGC website. Thank you, Jeremy!
>
> Last but not least, I would like to thank each and every one of you for
> your support, patience and understanding. I know we have not always been in
> agreement and I am most certain I haven't met everyone's expectations, but
> I felt almost all of you have each time given me the benefit of the doubt.
> I appreciate that, and only wish I could have done more to put IGC at a
> better place on the IG map.
>
> SOME PENDING BUSINESS
>
> Speaking of the place of IGC on the Internet governance map, I recall we
> had an unfinished business, which I'll make sure to leave you with.
> Following is the synthesis of the consultation we had a while before IGF
> Istanbul regarding the way forward for IGC. It was posted to this list on
> 31/8/2014. I would hope to see one day some follow up action or some
> conclusion given to this matter.
>
> Between June 26 and 30, we had here a discussion running by the following
> subject line:
> Inquiry for a new vision into the future of IGC
> Following is the summary of the main points I got from
> your contributions to this discussion
>  [adding my summary notes, observations/comments in square brackets].
>
> Suggestions include:
>
> -
> H
> olding a face to face workshop, accommodating remote participation, on the
> topic at Istanbul IGF
>
> [This will be taking place at IGF 2014 this
> Friday, 5 September, 12.30 - 14.00 is Bilateral Room 1 (Rumeli -1 Level /
> Room 9).
>
> -
> C
> ontemplating the possibility of national or regional chapters for IGC
> [Make sure this not be confused with IGFs at the base. One thing for sure
> is that IGC is meant to embody the CS component while IGF for all
> stakeholders.]
>
> -
> N
> eed for mutual respect between participants
> [D
>  ifferences in positions should be aired with the predicate that no matter
> how strong
>  we feel
>  about being right, contradicting positions may still be
>  both
>  valid under
> different
>  circumstances or with different assumptions than our
>  own
>  (and sure we all have assumptions!)
> ]
>
>
> -
> A
>  minimum level of decorum or "netiquette" to ensure it is safe for
> everybody to participate
> [It's critical to make it comfortable for people to participate
> whatever their level of familiarity
> (or unfamiliarity)
> with the issues,
> their level of
> knowledge or
>
> self-confidence
> (or lack thereof)
> as regards the relevance of their contribution.
>  ]
>
> -
> E
> nabling and fostering trust
> [M
> aybe a number of basic principles
> and ideas
> should be spelled out here (
> including for possible
> charter
>  revision
>  ?)
> as to how to achieve that and
> ensure a
>  baseline in expectations with regard to
> our respective and mutual commitments. This might be the place to consider
> the question of 'conflict of interests' policy for those in leadership
> position, if relevant.]
>
> -  IGC still provides a space to aggregate many of the differing views
> that "civil society" holds about Internet governance.
>
> -
> IGC should engage in Social
> C
> apacity building
> in
>  I
> G and
>  related activism
>
> "
> People need to be educated through any extensive
> [as well as extension]
> program in various level of literacy and knowledge regarding their
> vulnerability
> " in the face of the d
> evelopment
>  of the cyber-environment
> .
> "
> People needs to be educated and know how to participate in procedure of
> governance and how to share their concerns. I believe, it would be great,
> if IGC opens a chapter for educating people in this area.
>  "
>
> -
> IGC should engage in (enabling)
>  Customer protection
> based on
>  Human rights, multilingualism
> , regional/
>  cultural diversity
> : Seek best practices in the field of customer protection and help empower
> end-users.
> -
> W
> e absolutely need a credible broadly accepted civil society coordination
> entity
>
> [This is being taken care of through the newly set up Civil Society
> Coordination Group, CSCG]
>
> -
>  R
> eform is needed to enable
> such entity
>
> with
>  reasonable and reasonably fast decision-making
> with
>  regard to all the decisions that need to be made in the context of a civil
> society coordination function
>
> [In process with the CSCG]
>
> - Criticism or fear was raised with the notion that the CSCG might be
> exclusionary or the fact that it is so far perceived by some as such.
> [This might be addressed through the operating procedures to be developed
> by the CSCG]
>
> - "
> The alternative
>  [to CSCG in coordinating CS appointments]
>  would be IGC. However that would require a few changes so that IGC could
> respond more promptly, and also for the role and processes of IGC in doing
> this to be acceptable to the myriad parties who in the past few years have
> forwarded their own civil society MAG nominations. Quite clearly some
> substantial groups within IGC have not been happy for IGC to do this on
> their behalf in the past few years, thus leading to them making their own
> nominations.
>  "
>
> [Please note that the CSCG is not meant to develop policies or submit
> policy positions on behalf of its members' constituents. So the question
> remains: How can we as IGC get there from here?]
>
> - "a
> s regards the broader question of policy statements and policy co
> ordination – I do not think CSCG is a good vehicle for this.  IGC is
> potentially, but there has been difficulty in getting consensus positions
> here in the past, which led to the creation of Best Bits (where sign on
> statements not acceptable to 100% of civil society became a useful tool)
> and later to Just Net Coalition. Where there is potentially a broader
> consensus, I think IGC can play a very useful role, providing it continues
> to enjoy strong support from all groups.
>  "
>
> - In the discussion it was also noted that "
> IGC is the big tent for Internet governance geeks of all persuasions
>  ...
> who will never agree on much
> ."
>
> Now questions:
> - How do we get there from here?
> - Is there any remedy to this (the fact that IGC cab "never agree on
> much") beyond the above points for improvements? Or are these points
> sufficient?
> - How can we detect and handle cases where there is a potential for
> broader consensus?
> - Where there is not such potential how do we deal with the coordination
> of policy positions and making policy statements? Shall we create some sort
> of internal Dynamic Coalitions mechanism? Can these find some level of
> compromise after they develop their baseline positions, and if not how will
> those positions relate to IGC as a whole as they may be contradicting?
> ----
>
> Right here ends my term as IGC co-coordinator. I am delighted to yield the
> floor (or rather the stage) to two remarkable women and leaders, both
> hailing from Latin America and the Caribbean.
> Take it away, ladies!
>
> With my very best wishes,
>
> Mawaki
>
>
> =====================================
> Mawaki Chango, PhD
> Founder
> & CEO
>
> DIGILEXIS
> Consulting
> http://www.digilexis.com
> m.chango at digilexis.com | *kichango at gmail.com <kichango at gmail.com>*
> Twitter: @digilexis & @prodigilexis
> Mob. +225 57 55 57 53 | +225 44 48 77 64
> Skype: digilexis
> =====================================
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>      governance at lists.igcaucus.org
> To be removed from the list, visit:
>      http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
>
> For all other list information and functions, see:
>      http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
>      http://www.igcaucus.org/
>
> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
>
>


-- 
“The fundamental cure for poverty is not money but knowledge" Sir William
Arthur Lewis, Nobel Prize Economics, 1979
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150119/da89d4b4/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From kawsaru at yahoo.com  Tue Jan 20 05:17:40 2015
From: kawsaru at yahoo.com (kawsar Uddin)
Date: Tue, 20 Jan 2015 10:17:40 +0000 (UTC)
Subject: [governance] Results of the IGC 2015 Coordinator Election -
 Welcoming the newly elected co-coordinator
In-Reply-To: <CAMz5XN6RHV3Jqm5LOtayn-CcF6hW967F+0a67SGtOtwO9bU5nA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAMz5XN6RHV3Jqm5LOtayn-CcF6hW967F+0a67SGtOtwO9bU5nA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <1535700759.3768905.1421749061053.JavaMail.yahoo@jws10654.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>

Thank you Mawaki for excellent job with the election and congratulations Analia.
Thanks,Md. Kawsar UddinDhaka, Bangladesh


     On Tuesday, January 20, 2015 7:59 AM, Deirdre Williams <williams.deirdre at gmail.com> wrote:
   

 Thank you Mawaki for doing such an excellent job with the election, and for being such a comfortable "co".I will have to owe you a longer reply until tomorrow.Thank you to the candidates who offered themselves for the election, and congratulations Analia - I look forward to working with you.And thanks Jeremy for the technical help behind the scenes.Best wishes to everyone for a peaceful and productive 2015Deirdre
On 19 January 2015 at 15:13, Mawaki Chango <kichango at gmail.com> wrote:

Dear All,
Rejoice, for we have a new co-coordinator! Hence, here is my last message as a co-co to report about the election and share some final thoughts on my way out. .
THE ELECTION PROCESS
In this month of January 2015 one co-coordinator seat became vacant and was up for filling. The election process kick started with a call for nominations posted to the IGC list on 18 November 2014. By the end of the nomination period on 19 December, we received the following confirmed nominations:
1) Analia Aspis2) Arsene Tungali3) Kawsar Uddin
After setting up the survey in the online system used for IGC elections, we had to prepare the voting list by making sure all members who meet the voting criteria are included in the list, despite potential confusion due to the fact that the IGC website seems to re-initialize the count of membership time span from the last time members' information (eg, email address) has been updated. This worked rather well since for all the misses that were reported, only one or two were confirmed after verification. The email ballot paper sent to about a dozen voters got probably lost in their spam folder or they simply missed it in their regular mailbox. 
After the election started, we were reminded of the need to add an abstention option for those who do want to exercise their right to vote (and be on the record for participating in the election) without the obligation to give their vote to one or another of the candidates standing. After checking, it has appeared that a "No candidate" vote was in option in the last election cycle (2014). However, we first missed that as we were using a template from the latest election where only one coordinator was to be elected, which was in 2013 (in 2014, the two co-coordinators were to be replaced.) Hopefully now we will systematically have an "Abstention" or "No candidate" option (whichever the Caucus finds more appropriate) on the ballot next to the candidates' names.   
I would like to take this opportunity to thank all three candidates for their dedication and willingness to step forward and serve this community. Any of them would have made a positive difference for the Caucus and bring more diversity to its leadership. 
THE ELECTION RESULTS
The results of the elections are as follows.
Total number of tokens generated and invitations sent = 488Total number of valid votes (survey completed) = 163Incomplete responses = 31Total responses = 194
Votes received by the candidates:1) Analia Aspis = 83 (42.78%)2) Arsene Tungali = 57 (29.38%)3) Kawsar Uddin = 22 (11.34%)4) None of the nominees = 1 (0.52%)5) No answer = 10 (5.15%)6) Not completed or not displayed = 21 (10.82%)
(Please note the details of these results will be posted to the IGC web page later and the link will be forwarded here when done.)
This makes Analia Aspis the next IGC co-coordinator. Congratulations, Analia! With you I am delighted and confident to pass on the baton to good hands. Welcome on board! In your nomination statement, I note and applaud your eagerness to bring IG regional actions into IGC focus and to make this place ever more relevant to young researchers and beyond. I wish you every success!
THANK YOU'S
Furthermore, I would like also to seize this opportunity to thank my "coordinatorship mate" (for lack of a better word) Deirdre Williams. During our time together she had carried out the most thankless coordination tasks more times than I can count (the ones that we didn't even suspect would be on our plate when each of us decided to stand for the election.) For that and for her patience I am grateful.
I know well too much how easier (and much less time consuming) it often is to get things done by yourself, when you know how to do them, than to have to instruct and explain to a novice how to get the job done. Well, I, stubborn learner, had Jeremy take the longer path and heavier burden to provide guidance, patiently and always swiftly replying to my inquiries and helping me navigate through the challenges I was facing with the online election system and the mechanics of the IGC website. Thank you, Jeremy!
Last but not least, I would like to thank each and every one of you for your support, patience and understanding. I know we have not always been in agreement and I am most certain I haven't met everyone's expectations, but I felt almost all of you have each time given me the benefit of the doubt. I appreciate that, and only wish I could have done more to put IGC at a better place on the IG map.
SOME PENDING BUSINESS
Speaking of the place of IGC on the Internet governance map, I recall we had an unfinished business, which I'll make sure to leave you with. Following is the synthesis of the consultation we had a while before IGF Istanbul regarding the way forward for IGC. It was posted to this list on 31/8/2014. I would hope to see one day some follow up action or some conclusion given to this matter.
Between June 26 and 30, we had here a discussion running by the following subject line:Inquiry for a new vision into the future of IGC
Following is the summary of the main points I got from your contributions to this discussion [adding my summary notes, observations/comments in square brackets].
Suggestions include:
- Holding a face to face workshop, accommodating remote participation, on the topic at Istanbul IGF  [This will be taking place at IGF 2014 this Friday, 5 September, 12.30 - 14.00 is Bilateral Room 1 (Rumeli -1 Level / Room 9). 
- Contemplating the possibility of national or regional chapters for IGC[Make sure this not be confused with IGFs at the base. One thing for sure is that IGC is meant to embody the CS component while IGF for all stakeholders.]
-  Need for mutual respect between participants[D ifferences in positions should be aired with the predicate that no matter how strong we feel about being right, contradicting positions may still be both valid underdifferent circumstances or with different assumptions than our own (and sure we all have assumptions!)]  
- A minimum level of decorum or "netiquette" to ensure it is safe for everybody to participate [It's critical to make it comfortable for people to participate whatever their level of familiarity(or unfamiliarity) with the issues, their level of knowledge or self-confidence (or lack thereof) as regards the relevance of their contribution. ]
- Enabling and fostering trust [Maybe a number of basic principles and ideas should be spelled out here (including for possible charter revision ?) as to how to achieve that and ensure a baseline in expectations with regard to our respective and mutual commitments. This might be the place to consider the question of 'conflict of interests' policy for those in leadership position, if relevant.]
-  IGC still provides a space to aggregate many of the differing views that "civil society" holds about Internet governance.

- IGC should engage in Social Capacity building in IG and related activism  "People need to be educated through any extensive [as well as extension] program in various level of literacy and knowledge regarding their vulnerability" in the face of the development of the cyber-environment. "People needs to be educated and know how to participate in procedure of governance and how to share their concerns. I believe, it would be great, if IGC opens a chapter for educating people in this area. "
- IGC should engage in (enabling)  Customer protection based on Human rights, multilingualism, regional/ cultural diversity: Seek best practices in the field of customer protection and help empower end-users.- We absolutely need a credible broadly accepted civil society coordination entity  [This is being taken care of through the newly set up Civil Society Coordination Group, CSCG]
-  Reform is needed to enable such entity with reasonable and reasonably fast decision-making with  regard to all the decisions that need to be made in the context of a civil society coordination function  [In process with the CSCG]
- Criticism or fear was raised with the notion that the CSCG might be exclusionary or the fact that it is so far perceived by some as such.[This might be addressed through the operating procedures to be developed by the CSCG]
- "The alternative [to CSCG in coordinating CS appointments] would be IGC. However that would require a few changes so that IGC could respond more promptly, and also for the role and processes of IGC in doing this to be acceptable to the myriad parties who in the past few years have forwarded their own civil society MAG nominations. Quite clearly some substantial groups within IGC have not been happy for IGC to do this on their behalf in the past few years, thus leading to them making their own nominations. "
[Please note that the CSCG is not meant to develop policies or submit policy positions on behalf of its members' constituents. So the question remains: How can we as IGC get there from here?]
- "as regards the broader question of policy statements and policy co ordination – I do not think CSCG is a good vehicle for this.  IGC is potentially, but there has been difficulty in getting consensus positions here in the past, which led to the creation of Best Bits (where sign on statements not acceptable to 100% of civil society became a useful tool) and later to Just Net Coalition. Where there is potentially a broader consensus, I think IGC can play a very useful role, providing it continues to enjoy strong support from all groups. "
- In the discussion it was also noted that "IGC is the big tent for Internet governance geeks of all persuasions ... who will never agree on much." 
Now questions:- How do we get there from here? - Is there any remedy to this (the fact that IGC cab "never agree on much") beyond the above points for improvements? Or are these points sufficient?- How can we detect and handle cases where there is a potential for broader consensus?- Where there is not such potential how do we deal with the coordination of policy positions and making policy statements? Shall we create some sort of internal Dynamic Coalitions mechanism? Can these find some level of compromise after they develop their baseline positions, and if not how will those positions relate to IGC as a whole as they may be contradicting?----
Right here ends my term as IGC co-coordinator. I am delighted to yield the floor (or rather the stage) to two remarkable women and leaders, both hailing from Latin America and the Caribbean. Take it away, ladies!
With my very best wishes,
Mawaki    
=====================================Mawaki Chango, PhD                  
Founder & CEO
DIGILEXIS Consultinghttp://www.digilexis.com
m.chango at digilexis.com | kichango at gmail.com 
Twitter: @digilexis & @prodigilexisMob. +225 57 55 57 53 | +225 44 48 77 64Skype: digilexis=====================================
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t





-- 
“The fundamental cure for poverty is not money but knowledge" Sir William Arthur Lewis, Nobel Prize Economics, 1979
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
    governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
    http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
    http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
    http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t


   
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150120/200003e8/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From Kivuva at transworldafrica.com  Tue Jan 20 05:45:20 2015
From: Kivuva at transworldafrica.com (Mwendwa Kivuva)
Date: Tue, 20 Jan 2015 13:45:20 +0300
Subject: [governance] Results of the IGC 2015 Coordinator Election -
 Welcoming the newly elected co-coordinator
In-Reply-To: <CACTo+v--iTn=7kXdVSyAVf3rwxrvuRTdNucVujUgcW=XS_p+-w@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CACTo+v--iTn=7kXdVSyAVf3rwxrvuRTdNucVujUgcW=XS_p+-w@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAEhPqwr8GgL=DK3SBPZaAiPvWNtcz3yLN2v9GFuhaCQ_Zyhx=Q@mail.gmail.com>

Thank you Mawaki for all your good work. You have raised important points
that members should deliberate on. Congratulations Analia. Thanks Arsene
and Uddin for offering yourselves to serve.

On 19 January 2015 at 22:13, Mawaki Chango <kichango at gmail.com> wrote:

> After the election started, we were reminded of the need to add an
> abstention option for those who do want to exercise their right to vote
> (and be on the record for participating in the election) without the
> obligation to give their vote to one or another of the candidates standing.
> After checking, it has appeared that a "No candidate" vote was in option in
> the last election cycle (2014). However, we first missed that as we were
> using a template from the latest election where only one coordinator was to
> be elected, which was in 2013 (in 2014, the two co-coordinators were to be
> replaced.) Hopefully now we will systematically have an "Abstention" or "No
> candidate" option (whichever the Caucus finds more appropriate) on the
> ballot next to the candidates' names.


4) None of the nominees = 1 (0.52%)


It seems the "None of the nominees" vote is not very popular with ICG
members anyway.

Total number of tokens generated and invitations sent = 488
> Total number of valid votes (survey completed) = 163


Can the results be termed as voter apathy? 163 votes is about 33% turnout
and we should aim for at least 50%. Are there any lessons learned on why
there were many spoiled/uncompleted ballots?

Regards

______________________
Mwendwa Kivuva, Nairobi, Kenya

"There are some men who lift the age they inhabit, till all men walk on
higher ground in that lifetime." - Maxwell Anderson
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150120/21272133/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From ias_pk at yahoo.com  Tue Jan 20 05:46:30 2015
From: ias_pk at yahoo.com (Imran Ahmed Shah)
Date: Tue, 20 Jan 2015 10:46:30 +0000 (UTC)
Subject: [governance] Results of the IGC 2015 Coordinator Election -
 Welcoming the newly elected co-coordinator
In-Reply-To: <CACTo+v--iTn=7kXdVSyAVf3rwxrvuRTdNucVujUgcW=XS_p+-w@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CACTo+v--iTn=7kXdVSyAVf3rwxrvuRTdNucVujUgcW=XS_p+-w@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <912741079.2235299.1421750790132.JavaMail.yahoo@jws10051.mail.ne1.yahoo.com>

Congratulation to Analia Aspis, and thanks for Arsene and Kawsar making the elections more competitive for us.  
Thanks to Mawaki and Deirdre for their support and activities as co-co.
Thanking you and Best Regards
Imran Ahmed Shah
 
      From: Mawaki Chango <kichango at gmail.com>
 To: Internet Governance <governance at lists.igcaucus.org> 
 Sent: Tuesday, 20 January 2015, 0:13
 Subject: [governance] Results of the IGC 2015 Coordinator Election - Welcoming the newly elected co-coordinator
   
Dear All,
Rejoice, for we have a new co-coordinator! Hence, here is my last message as a co-co to report about the election and share some final thoughts on my way out. .
THE ELECTION PROCESS
In this month of January 2015 one co-coordinator seat became vacant and was up for filling. The election process kick started with a call for nominations posted to the IGC list on 18 November 2014. By the end of the nomination period on 19 December, we received the following confirmed nominations:
1) Analia Aspis2) Arsene Tungali3) Kawsar Uddin
After setting up the survey in the online system used for IGC elections, we had to prepare the voting list by making sure all members who meet the voting criteria are included in the list, despite potential confusion due to the fact that the IGC website seems to re-initialize the count of membership time span from the last time members' information (eg, email address) has been updated. This worked rather well since for all the misses that were reported, only one or two were confirmed after verification. The email ballot paper sent to about a dozen voters got probably lost in their spam folder or they simply missed it in their regular mailbox. 
After the election started, we were reminded of the need to add an abstention option for those who do want to exercise their right to vote (and be on the record for participating in the election) without the obligation to give their vote to one or another of the candidates standing. After checking, it has appeared that a "No candidate" vote was in option in the last election cycle (2014). However, we first missed that as we were using a template from the latest election where only one coordinator was to be elected, which was in 2013 (in 2014, the two co-coordinators were to be replaced.) Hopefully now we will systematically have an "Abstention" or "No candidate" option (whichever the Caucus finds more appropriate) on the ballot next to the candidates' names.   
I would like to take this opportunity to thank all three candidates for their dedication and willingness to step forward and serve this community. Any of them would have made a positive difference for the Caucus and bring more diversity to its leadership. 
THE ELECTION RESULTS
The results of the elections are as follows.
Total number of tokens generated and invitations sent = 488Total number of valid votes (survey completed) = 163Incomplete responses = 31Total responses = 194
Votes received by the candidates:1) Analia Aspis = 83 (42.78%)2) Arsene Tungali = 57 (29.38%)3) Kawsar Uddin = 22 (11.34%)4) None of the nominees = 1 (0.52%)5) No answer = 10 (5.15%)6) Not completed or not displayed = 21 (10.82%)
(Please note the details of these results will be posted to the IGC web page later and the link will be forwarded here when done.)
This makes Analia Aspis the next IGC co-coordinator. Congratulations, Analia! With you I am delighted and confident to pass on the baton to good hands. Welcome on board! In your nomination statement, I note and applaud your eagerness to bring IG regional actions into IGC focus and to make this place ever more relevant to young researchers and beyond. I wish you every success!
THANK YOU'S
Furthermore, I would like also to seize this opportunity to thank my "coordinatorship mate" (for lack of a better word) Deirdre Williams. During our time together she had carried out the most thankless coordination tasks more times than I can count (the ones that we didn't even suspect would be on our plate when each of us decided to stand for the election.) For that and for her patience I am grateful.
I know well too much how easier (and much less time consuming) it often is to get things done by yourself, when you know how to do them, than to have to instruct and explain to a novice how to get the job done. Well, I, stubborn learner, had Jeremy take the longer path and heavier burden to provide guidance, patiently and always swiftly replying to my inquiries and helping me navigate through the challenges I was facing with the online election system and the mechanics of the IGC website. Thank you, Jeremy!
Last but not least, I would like to thank each and every one of you for your support, patience and understanding. I know we have not always been in agreement and I am most certain I haven't met everyone's expectations, but I felt almost all of you have each time given me the benefit of the doubt. I appreciate that, and only wish I could have done more to put IGC at a better place on the IG map.
SOME PENDING BUSINESS
Speaking of the place of IGC on the Internet governance map, I recall we had an unfinished business, which I'll make sure to leave you with. Following is the synthesis of the consultation we had a while before IGF Istanbul regarding the way forward for IGC. It was posted to this list on 31/8/2014. I would hope to see one day some follow up action or some conclusion given to this matter.
Between June 26 and 30, we had here a discussion running by the following subject line:Inquiry for a new vision into the future of IGC
Following is the summary of the main points I got from your contributions to this discussion [adding my summary notes, observations/comments in square brackets].
Suggestions include:
- Holding a face to face workshop, accommodating remote participation, on the topic at Istanbul IGF  [This will be taking place at IGF 2014 this Friday, 5 September, 12.30 - 14.00 is Bilateral Room 1 (Rumeli -1 Level / Room 9). 
- Contemplating the possibility of national or regional chapters for IGC[Make sure this not be confused with IGFs at the base. One thing for sure is that IGC is meant to embody the CS component while IGF for all stakeholders.]
-  Need for mutual respect between participants[D ifferences in positions should be aired with the predicate that no matter how strong we feel about being right, contradicting positions may still be both valid underdifferent circumstances or with different assumptions than our own (and sure we all have assumptions!)]  
- A minimum level of decorum or "netiquette" to ensure it is safe for everybody to participate [It's critical to make it comfortable for people to participate whatever their level of familiarity(or unfamiliarity) with the issues, their level of knowledge or self-confidence (or lack thereof) as regards the relevance of their contribution. ]
- Enabling and fostering trust [Maybe a number of basic principles and ideas should be spelled out here (including for possible charter revision ?) as to how to achieve that and ensure a baseline in expectations with regard to our respective and mutual commitments. This might be the place to consider the question of 'conflict of interests' policy for those in leadership position, if relevant.]
-  IGC still provides a space to aggregate many of the differing views that "civil society" holds about Internet governance.

- IGC should engage in Social Capacity building in IG and related activism  "People need to be educated through any extensive [as well as extension] program in various level of literacy and knowledge regarding their vulnerability" in the face of the development of the cyber-environment. "People needs to be educated and know how to participate in procedure of governance and how to share their concerns. I believe, it would be great, if IGC opens a chapter for educating people in this area. "
- IGC should engage in (enabling)  Customer protection based on Human rights, multilingualism, regional/ cultural diversity: Seek best practices in the field of customer protection and help empower end-users.- We absolutely need a credible broadly accepted civil society coordination entity  [This is being taken care of through the newly set up Civil Society Coordination Group, CSCG]
-  Reform is needed to enable such entity with reasonable and reasonably fast decision-making with  regard to all the decisions that need to be made in the context of a civil society coordination function  [In process with the CSCG]
- Criticism or fear was raised with the notion that the CSCG might be exclusionary or the fact that it is so far perceived by some as such.[This might be addressed through the operating procedures to be developed by the CSCG]
- "The alternative [to CSCG in coordinating CS appointments] would be IGC. However that would require a few changes so that IGC could respond more promptly, and also for the role and processes of IGC in doing this to be acceptable to the myriad parties who in the past few years have forwarded their own civil society MAG nominations. Quite clearly some substantial groups within IGC have not been happy for IGC to do this on their behalf in the past few years, thus leading to them making their own nominations. "
[Please note that the CSCG is not meant to develop policies or submit policy positions on behalf of its members' constituents. So the question remains: How can we as IGC get there from here?]
- "as regards the broader question of policy statements and policy co ordination – I do not think CSCG is a good vehicle for this.  IGC is potentially, but there has been difficulty in getting consensus positions here in the past, which led to the creation of Best Bits (where sign on statements not acceptable to 100% of civil society became a useful tool) and later to Just Net Coalition. Where there is potentially a broader consensus, I think IGC can play a very useful role, providing it continues to enjoy strong support from all groups. "
- In the discussion it was also noted that "IGC is the big tent for Internet governance geeks of all persuasions ... who will never agree on much." 
Now questions:- How do we get there from here? - Is there any remedy to this (the fact that IGC cab "never agree on much") beyond the above points for improvements? Or are these points sufficient?- How can we detect and handle cases where there is a potential for broader consensus?- Where there is not such potential how do we deal with the coordination of policy positions and making policy statements? Shall we create some sort of internal Dynamic Coalitions mechanism? Can these find some level of compromise after they develop their baseline positions, and if not how will those positions relate to IGC as a whole as they may be contradicting?----
Right here ends my term as IGC co-coordinator. I am delighted to yield the floor (or rather the stage) to two remarkable women and leaders, both hailing from Latin America and the Caribbean. Take it away, ladies!
With my very best wishes,
Mawaki    
=====================================Mawaki Chango, PhD                  
Founder & CEO
DIGILEXIS Consultinghttp://www.digilexis.com
m.chango at digilexis.com | kichango at gmail.com 
Twitter: @digilexis & @prodigilexisMob. +225 57 55 57 53 | +225 44 48 77 64Skype: digilexis=====================================
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
    governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
    http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
    http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
    http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t


   
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150120/b62bb4c7/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From nkurunziza1999 at yahoo.fr  Tue Jan 20 09:39:25 2015
From: nkurunziza1999 at yahoo.fr (Jean Paul NKURUNZIZA)
Date: Tue, 20 Jan 2015 14:39:25 +0000
Subject: [governance] Call for civil society expression of interest
In-Reply-To: <DUB111-W117951CB618FD45608D6863B44A0@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <1421764765.22078.YahooMailBasic@web133206.mail.ir2.yahoo.com>

Dear Grace, 

Thank you very much for sharing that information.

Best regards

NKURUNZIZA Jean Paul
TRAINER IN COMPUTING AND INTERNET POLICY

ISOC BURUNDI : VICE PRESIDENT
Réseau des Télécentres Communautaires du Burundi : Président


Burundi Youth Training Centre : Secrétaire Général


Skype : jpnkurunziz

Facebook :  http://www.facebook.com/jeanpaul.nkurunziza
Tel : +257 79 981459

--------------------------------------------
En date de : Lun 19.1.15, Grace Githaiga <ggithaiga at hotmail.com> a écrit :

 Objet: [governance] Call for civil society expression of interest
 À: "AfrICANN list" <africann at afrinic.net>, "kictanet at lists.kictanet.or.ke" <kictanet at lists.kictanet.or.ke>, "info at isoc.or.ke" <info at isoc.or.ke>, "governance at lists.igcaucus.org" <governance at lists.igcaucus.org>
 Date: Lundi 19 janvier 2015, 19h44
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Dear Friends, [Apologies for possible
 duplications] We would like to bring to your
 attention the civil society call for expressions of interest
 to participate in the Global Conference on Cyberspace
 2015 (GCCS 2015) and a civil
 society pre-event, hosted by the government of the Kingdom
 of the Netherlands, and taking place in The Hague on 16 and
 17 April 2015. Following on from the London
 (2011), Budapest (2012), and Seoul (2013) Conferences, the
 2015 event in The Hague will provide an opportunity for
 strategic level discussion of key cyberspace issues. The
 Conference aims to examine core
 issues related to the cyber domain,
 structured around the three main themes of Freedom, Security and Growth. Focus will be placed on exchange
 of knowledge and ideas on these issues and the development
 of concrete solutions. The Conference will encourage
 multi-stakeholder participation from the worlds of business,
 academia as well as civil society. A day and a half civil society
 pre-event will take place in the run-up to the Conference
 (14-15 April) to facilitate civil society coordination and
 input into the main Conference. An in-depth training on
 cyber security issues will be offered as part of this
 pre-event. In addition, an online training curriculum will
 be made available to the wider public. The Conference
 organisers are interested in a balanced and diverse
 participation and in supporting those who will find a
 practical use for the training and attendance
 offered. The Expression of Interest Form, in
 addition to logging interest in attending the Conference and
 the civil society pre-event, will also serve as a platform
 to capture requests for financial support. Limited financial
 support is available for a number of civil society
 participants. In order to be considered as a
 Conference/pre-event participant and/or a candidate for
 financial support, please fill in the Expression of Interest
 Form via the following link by January
 30:https://www.gccs2015.com/civil-society-participation-form Expressions of interest and
 requests for funding received will be evaluated by an ad
 hoc Advisory Board set up to assist the
 organizers of the Conference in selecting civil society
 participants to receive funding and to attend the GCCS2015
 and the civil society pre-event, to help ensure that the
 Conference is as inclusive and representative as
 possible. Criteria for financial support are
 designed to ensure a diverse spread of applicants is
 achieved, focussing on global south applicants and aimed at
 securing a balance of gender, regional diversity and level
 of experience in cyber security issues. Please feel free to share this
 information with your networks. Best wishes, On behalf of:Andrew Puddephatt, Evelien
 Wijkstra, Tim MaurerAdvisory Board
 Co-chairs
 
 -- 
 Aditi
 Gupta Project Assistant | GLOBAL
 PARTNERS DIGITALDevelopment House, 56–64
 Leonard Street, London EC2A 4LTT: +44 (0)20 7549 0337 |
 M: +44
 (0)7876688351 | gp-digital.org
  		 	   		  
 
 -----La pièce jointe associée suit-----
 
 ____________________________________________________________
 You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
      governance at lists.igcaucus.org
 To be removed from the list, visit:
      http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
 
 For all other list information and functions, see:
      http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
 To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
      http://www.igcaucus.org/
 
 Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t


-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From williams.deirdre at gmail.com  Tue Jan 20 09:43:50 2015
From: williams.deirdre at gmail.com (Deirdre Williams)
Date: Tue, 20 Jan 2015 10:43:50 -0400
Subject: [governance] Telecommunications Policy and Regulation
Message-ID: <CAMz5XN6g7uZWFtWyZqjOTB0uQt7i1dP3CixetGuh-sO6tnVY7A@mail.gmail.com>

Dear Colleagues,
The Organisation of East Caribbean States (OECS) "is now a nine member
grouping comprising Antigua and Barbuda, Commonwealth of Dominica, Grenada,
Montserrat, St Kitts and Nevis, St Lucia and St Vincent and the Grenadines.
Anguilla and the British Virgin Islands are associate members of the OECS.
...[In 2010 a Treaty was signed which] establishes the OECS economic union,
making possible the creation of a single financial and economic space
within which goods, people and capital move freely, monetary and fiscal
policies are harmonized and countries continue to adopt a common approach
to trade, health, education and environment, as well as to the development
of such critical sectors as agriculture, tourism and energy. - See more at:
http://www.oecs.org/about-the-oecs/who-we-are/about-oecs#sthash.JTuqCraw.dpuf

Recently the OECS has published a draft paper
<http://www.oecs.org/publications/projects/oecs-telecommunications-reform/658-advancing-telecommunications-in-the-oecs-perspectives-and-recommendations-2015/file>
recommending
policy and regulations for the telecommunications sector in this region.
This paper is forwarded to you for your information and comment.

Deirdre
-- 
“The fundamental cure for poverty is not money but knowledge" Sir William
Arthur Lewis, Nobel Prize Economics, 1979
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150120/9bbb60a0/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From williams.deirdre at gmail.com  Tue Jan 20 10:20:34 2015
From: williams.deirdre at gmail.com (Deirdre Williams)
Date: Tue, 20 Jan 2015 11:20:34 -0400
Subject: [governance] A different frame
Message-ID: <CAMz5XN5Atg4LSuqrPzwRUB+uKLYoo-R-iKs-UMtJjMTgaXjEWA@mail.gmail.com>

As we consider the questions and comments that Mawaki has just sent to the
list it might be useful to read this blogpost
<https://johnc1912.wordpress.com/2015/01/18/a-different-way-of-looking-at-things/>
from
John Carr.
(John Carr is a leader in the call for the protection of children online)
Deirdre

-- 
“The fundamental cure for poverty is not money but knowledge" Sir William
Arthur Lewis, Nobel Prize Economics, 1979
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150120/2203a1f2/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From analia.aspis at gmail.com  Tue Jan 20 12:23:51 2015
From: analia.aspis at gmail.com (Analia Aspis)
Date: Tue, 20 Jan 2015 14:23:51 -0300
Subject: [governance] Results of the IGC 2015 Coordinator Election -
 Welcoming the newly elected co-coordinator
In-Reply-To: <CACTo+v--iTn=7kXdVSyAVf3rwxrvuRTdNucVujUgcW=XS_p+-w@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CACTo+v--iTn=7kXdVSyAVf3rwxrvuRTdNucVujUgcW=XS_p+-w@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CABi6_T8vZn2mw-htN5Xc3H5ocD9S-r64C89yfNBmdto39QTrqg@mail.gmail.com>

Dear all,

Thanks a lot for your kind messages :) I am very excited to work with you
and contribute with IGC mission. Thanks again Mawaki for your your help and
patience.

Best,
Analía


On Mon, Jan 19, 2015 at 4:13 PM, Mawaki Chango <kichango at gmail.com> wrote:

> Dear All,
>
> Rejoice, for we have a new co-coordinator! Hence, here is my last message
> as a co-co to report about the election and share some final thoughts on my
> way out. .
>
> THE ELECTION PROCESS
>
> In this month of January 2015 one co-coordinator seat became vacant and
> was up for filling. The election process kick started with a call for
> nominations posted to the IGC list on 18 November 2014. By the end of the
> nomination period on 19 December, we received the following confirmed
> nominations:
>
> 1) Analia Aspis
> 2) Arsene Tungali
> 3) Kawsar Uddin
>
> After setting up the survey in the online system used for IGC elections,
> we had to prepare the voting list by making sure all members who meet the
> voting criteria are included in the list, despite potential confusion due
> to the fact that the IGC website seems to re-initialize the count of
> membership time span from the last time members' information (eg, email
> address) has been updated. This worked rather well since for all the misses
> that were reported, only one or two were confirmed after verification. The
> email ballot paper sent to about a dozen voters got probably lost in their
> spam folder or they simply missed it in their regular mailbox.
>
> After the election started, we were reminded of the need to add an
> abstention option for those who do want to exercise their right to vote
> (and be on the record for participating in the election) without the
> obligation to give their vote to one or another of the candidates standing.
> After checking, it has appeared that a "No candidate" vote was in option in
> the last election cycle (2014). However, we first missed that as we were
> using a template from the latest election where only one coordinator was to
> be elected, which was in 2013 (in 2014, the two co-coordinators were to be
> replaced.) Hopefully now we will systematically have an "Abstention" or "No
> candidate" option (whichever the Caucus finds more appropriate) on the
> ballot next to the candidates' names.
>
> I would like to take this opportunity to thank all three candidates for
> their dedication and willingness to step forward and serve this community.
> Any of them would have made a positive difference for the Caucus and bring
> more diversity to its leadership.
>
> THE ELECTION RESULTS
>
> The results of the elections are as follows.
>
> Total number of tokens generated and invitations sent = 488
> Total number of valid votes (survey completed) = 163
> Incomplete responses = 31
> Total responses = 194
>
> Votes received by the candidates:
> 1) Analia Aspis = 83 (42.78%)
> 2) Arsene Tungali = 57 (29.38%)
> 3) Kawsar Uddin = 22 (11.34%)
> 4) None of the nominees = 1 (0.52%)
> 5) No answer = 10 (5.15%)
> 6) Not completed or not displayed = 21 (10.82%)
>
> (Please note the details of these results will be posted to the IGC web
> page later and the link will be forwarded here when done.)
>
> This makes Analia Aspis the next IGC co-coordinator. Congratulations,
> Analia! With you I am delighted and confident to pass on the baton to good
> hands. Welcome on board! In your nomination statement, I note and applaud
> your eagerness to bring IG regional actions into IGC focus and to make this
> place ever more relevant to young researchers and beyond. I wish you every
> success!
>
> THANK YOU'S
>
> Furthermore, I would like also to seize this opportunity to thank my
> "coordinatorship mate" (for lack of a better word) Deirdre Williams. During
> our time together she had carried out the most thankless coordination tasks
> more times than I can count (the ones that we didn't even suspect would be
> on our plate when each of us decided to stand for the election.) For that
> and for her patience I am grateful.
>
> I know well too much how easier (and much less time consuming) it often is
> to get things done by yourself, when you know how to do them, than to have
> to instruct and explain to a novice how to get the job done. Well, I,
> stubborn learner, had Jeremy take the longer path and heavier burden to
> provide guidance, patiently and always swiftly replying to my inquiries and
> helping me navigate through the challenges I was facing with the online
> election system and the mechanics of the IGC website. Thank you, Jeremy!
>
> Last but not least, I would like to thank each and every one of you for
> your support, patience and understanding. I know we have not always been in
> agreement and I am most certain I haven't met everyone's expectations, but
> I felt almost all of you have each time given me the benefit of the doubt.
> I appreciate that, and only wish I could have done more to put IGC at a
> better place on the IG map.
>
> SOME PENDING BUSINESS
>
> Speaking of the place of IGC on the Internet governance map, I recall we
> had an unfinished business, which I'll make sure to leave you with.
> Following is the synthesis of the consultation we had a while before IGF
> Istanbul regarding the way forward for IGC. It was posted to this list on
> 31/8/2014. I would hope to see one day some follow up action or some
> conclusion given to this matter.
>
> Between June 26 and 30, we had here a discussion running by the following
> subject line:
> Inquiry for a new vision into the future of IGC
> Following is the summary of the main points I got from
> your contributions to this discussion
>  [adding my summary notes, observations/comments in square brackets].
>
> Suggestions include:
>
> -
> H
> olding a face to face workshop, accommodating remote participation, on the
> topic at Istanbul IGF
>
> [This will be taking place at IGF 2014 this
> Friday, 5 September, 12.30 - 14.00 is Bilateral Room 1 (Rumeli -1 Level /
> Room 9).
>
> -
> C
> ontemplating the possibility of national or regional chapters for IGC
> [Make sure this not be confused with IGFs at the base. One thing for sure
> is that IGC is meant to embody the CS component while IGF for all
> stakeholders.]
>
> -
> N
> eed for mutual respect between participants
> [D
>  ifferences in positions should be aired with the predicate that no matter
> how strong
>  we feel
>  about being right, contradicting positions may still be
>  both
>  valid under
> different
>  circumstances or with different assumptions than our
>  own
>  (and sure we all have assumptions!)
> ]
>
>
> -
> A
>  minimum level of decorum or "netiquette" to ensure it is safe for
> everybody to participate
> [It's critical to make it comfortable for people to participate
> whatever their level of familiarity
> (or unfamiliarity)
> with the issues,
> their level of
> knowledge or
>
> self-confidence
> (or lack thereof)
> as regards the relevance of their contribution.
>  ]
>
> -
> E
> nabling and fostering trust
> [M
> aybe a number of basic principles
> and ideas
> should be spelled out here (
> including for possible
> charter
>  revision
>  ?)
> as to how to achieve that and
> ensure a
>  baseline in expectations with regard to
> our respective and mutual commitments. This might be the place to consider
> the question of 'conflict of interests' policy for those in leadership
> position, if relevant.]
>
> -  IGC still provides a space to aggregate many of the differing views
> that "civil society" holds about Internet governance.
>
> -
> IGC should engage in Social
> C
> apacity building
> in
>  I
> G and
>  related activism
>
> "
> People need to be educated through any extensive
> [as well as extension]
> program in various level of literacy and knowledge regarding their
> vulnerability
> " in the face of the d
> evelopment
>  of the cyber-environment
> .
> "
> People needs to be educated and know how to participate in procedure of
> governance and how to share their concerns. I believe, it would be great,
> if IGC opens a chapter for educating people in this area.
>  "
>
> -
> IGC should engage in (enabling)
>  Customer protection
> based on
>  Human rights, multilingualism
> , regional/
>  cultural diversity
> : Seek best practices in the field of customer protection and help empower
> end-users.
> -
> W
> e absolutely need a credible broadly accepted civil society coordination
> entity
>
> [This is being taken care of through the newly set up Civil Society
> Coordination Group, CSCG]
>
> -
>  R
> eform is needed to enable
> such entity
>
> with
>  reasonable and reasonably fast decision-making
> with
>  regard to all the decisions that need to be made in the context of a civil
> society coordination function
>
> [In process with the CSCG]
>
> - Criticism or fear was raised with the notion that the CSCG might be
> exclusionary or the fact that it is so far perceived by some as such.
> [This might be addressed through the operating procedures to be developed
> by the CSCG]
>
> - "
> The alternative
>  [to CSCG in coordinating CS appointments]
>  would be IGC. However that would require a few changes so that IGC could
> respond more promptly, and also for the role and processes of IGC in doing
> this to be acceptable to the myriad parties who in the past few years have
> forwarded their own civil society MAG nominations. Quite clearly some
> substantial groups within IGC have not been happy for IGC to do this on
> their behalf in the past few years, thus leading to them making their own
> nominations.
>  "
>
> [Please note that the CSCG is not meant to develop policies or submit
> policy positions on behalf of its members' constituents. So the question
> remains: How can we as IGC get there from here?]
>
> - "a
> s regards the broader question of policy statements and policy co
> ordination – I do not think CSCG is a good vehicle for this.  IGC is
> potentially, but there has been difficulty in getting consensus positions
> here in the past, which led to the creation of Best Bits (where sign on
> statements not acceptable to 100% of civil society became a useful tool)
> and later to Just Net Coalition. Where there is potentially a broader
> consensus, I think IGC can play a very useful role, providing it continues
> to enjoy strong support from all groups.
>  "
>
> - In the discussion it was also noted that "
> IGC is the big tent for Internet governance geeks of all persuasions
>  ...
> who will never agree on much
> ."
>
> Now questions:
> - How do we get there from here?
> - Is there any remedy to this (the fact that IGC cab "never agree on
> much") beyond the above points for improvements? Or are these points
> sufficient?
> - How can we detect and handle cases where there is a potential for
> broader consensus?
> - Where there is not such potential how do we deal with the coordination
> of policy positions and making policy statements? Shall we create some sort
> of internal Dynamic Coalitions mechanism? Can these find some level of
> compromise after they develop their baseline positions, and if not how will
> those positions relate to IGC as a whole as they may be contradicting?
> ----
>
> Right here ends my term as IGC co-coordinator. I am delighted to yield the
> floor (or rather the stage) to two remarkable women and leaders, both
> hailing from Latin America and the Caribbean.
> Take it away, ladies!
>
> With my very best wishes,
>
> Mawaki
>
>
> =====================================
> Mawaki Chango, PhD
> Founder
> & CEO
>
> DIGILEXIS
> Consulting
> http://www.digilexis.com
> m.chango at digilexis.com | *kichango at gmail.com <kichango at gmail.com>*
> Twitter: @digilexis & @prodigilexis
> Mob. +225 57 55 57 53 | +225 44 48 77 64
> Skype: digilexis
> =====================================
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>      governance at lists.igcaucus.org
> To be removed from the list, visit:
>      http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
>
> For all other list information and functions, see:
>      http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
>      http://www.igcaucus.org/
>
> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150120/128ae048/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From jaryn56 at gmail.com  Tue Jan 20 12:55:44 2015
From: jaryn56 at gmail.com (=?UTF-8?B?Sm9zw6kgRsOpbGl4IEFyaWFzIFluY2hl?=)
Date: Tue, 20 Jan 2015 12:55:44 -0500
Subject: [governance] Results of the IGC 2015 Coordinator Election -
 Welcoming the newly elected co-coordinator
In-Reply-To: <CABi6_T8vZn2mw-htN5Xc3H5ocD9S-r64C89yfNBmdto39QTrqg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CACTo+v--iTn=7kXdVSyAVf3rwxrvuRTdNucVujUgcW=XS_p+-w@mail.gmail.com>
 <CABi6_T8vZn2mw-htN5Xc3H5ocD9S-r64C89yfNBmdto39QTrqg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAAYFVLsp4NN2FD7TkKszLkr7XrKWPPVnpMOL6T5yC4v-FD3sUg@mail.gmail.com>

Saludos Analia Aspis...


Cordialmente:         José Félix Arias Ynche
                        Investigador Social Para El Desarrollo


2015-01-20 12:23 GMT-05:00 Analia Aspis <analia.aspis at gmail.com>:
> Dear all,
>
> Thanks a lot for your kind messages :) I am very excited to work with you
> and contribute with IGC mission. Thanks again Mawaki for your your help and
> patience.
>
> Best,
> Analía
>
>
> On Mon, Jan 19, 2015 at 4:13 PM, Mawaki Chango <kichango at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Dear All,
>>
>> Rejoice, for we have a new co-coordinator! Hence, here is my last message
>> as a co-co to report about the election and share some final thoughts on my
>> way out. .
>>
>> THE ELECTION PROCESS
>>
>> In this month of January 2015 one co-coordinator seat became vacant and
>> was up for filling. The election process kick started with a call for
>> nominations posted to the IGC list on 18 November 2014. By the end of the
>> nomination period on 19 December, we received the following confirmed
>> nominations:
>>
>> 1) Analia Aspis
>> 2) Arsene Tungali
>> 3) Kawsar Uddin
>>
>> After setting up the survey in the online system used for IGC elections,
>> we had to prepare the voting list by making sure all members who meet the
>> voting criteria are included in the list, despite potential confusion due to
>> the fact that the IGC website seems to re-initialize the count of membership
>> time span from the last time members' information (eg, email address) has
>> been updated. This worked rather well since for all the misses that were
>> reported, only one or two were confirmed after verification. The email
>> ballot paper sent to about a dozen voters got probably lost in their spam
>> folder or they simply missed it in their regular mailbox.
>>
>> After the election started, we were reminded of the need to add an
>> abstention option for those who do want to exercise their right to vote (and
>> be on the record for participating in the election) without the obligation
>> to give their vote to one or another of the candidates standing. After
>> checking, it has appeared that a "No candidate" vote was in option in the
>> last election cycle (2014). However, we first missed that as we were using a
>> template from the latest election where only one coordinator was to be
>> elected, which was in 2013 (in 2014, the two co-coordinators were to be
>> replaced.) Hopefully now we will systematically have an "Abstention" or "No
>> candidate" option (whichever the Caucus finds more appropriate) on the
>> ballot next to the candidates' names.
>>
>> I would like to take this opportunity to thank all three candidates for
>> their dedication and willingness to step forward and serve this community.
>> Any of them would have made a positive difference for the Caucus and bring
>> more diversity to its leadership.
>>
>> THE ELECTION RESULTS
>>
>> The results of the elections are as follows.
>>
>> Total number of tokens generated and invitations sent = 488
>> Total number of valid votes (survey completed) = 163
>> Incomplete responses = 31
>> Total responses = 194
>>
>> Votes received by the candidates:
>> 1) Analia Aspis = 83 (42.78%)
>> 2) Arsene Tungali = 57 (29.38%)
>> 3) Kawsar Uddin = 22 (11.34%)
>> 4) None of the nominees = 1 (0.52%)
>> 5) No answer = 10 (5.15%)
>> 6) Not completed or not displayed = 21 (10.82%)
>>
>> (Please note the details of these results will be posted to the IGC web
>> page later and the link will be forwarded here when done.)
>>
>> This makes Analia Aspis the next IGC co-coordinator. Congratulations,
>> Analia! With you I am delighted and confident to pass on the baton to good
>> hands. Welcome on board! In your nomination statement, I note and applaud
>> your eagerness to bring IG regional actions into IGC focus and to make this
>> place ever more relevant to young researchers and beyond. I wish you every
>> success!
>>
>> THANK YOU'S
>>
>> Furthermore, I would like also to seize this opportunity to thank my
>> "coordinatorship mate" (for lack of a better word) Deirdre Williams. During
>> our time together she had carried out the most thankless coordination tasks
>> more times than I can count (the ones that we didn't even suspect would be
>> on our plate when each of us decided to stand for the election.) For that
>> and for her patience I am grateful.
>>
>> I know well too much how easier (and much less time consuming) it often is
>> to get things done by yourself, when you know how to do them, than to have
>> to instruct and explain to a novice how to get the job done. Well, I,
>> stubborn learner, had Jeremy take the longer path and heavier burden to
>> provide guidance, patiently and always swiftly replying to my inquiries and
>> helping me navigate through the challenges I was facing with the online
>> election system and the mechanics of the IGC website. Thank you, Jeremy!
>>
>> Last but not least, I would like to thank each and every one of you for
>> your support, patience and understanding. I know we have not always been in
>> agreement and I am most certain I haven't met everyone's expectations, but I
>> felt almost all of you have each time given me the benefit of the doubt. I
>> appreciate that, and only wish I could have done more to put IGC at a better
>> place on the IG map.
>>
>> SOME PENDING BUSINESS
>>
>> Speaking of the place of IGC on the Internet governance map, I recall we
>> had an unfinished business, which I'll make sure to leave you with.
>> Following is the synthesis of the consultation we had a while before IGF
>> Istanbul regarding the way forward for IGC. It was posted to this list on
>> 31/8/2014. I would hope to see one day some follow up action or some
>> conclusion given to this matter.
>>
>> Between June 26 and 30, we had here a discussion running by the following
>> subject line:
>> Inquiry for a new vision into the future of IGC
>> Following is the summary of the main points I got from
>> your contributions to this discussion
>>  [adding my summary notes, observations/comments in square brackets].
>>
>> Suggestions include:
>>
>> -
>> H
>> olding a face to face workshop, accommodating remote participation, on the
>> topic at Istanbul IGF
>>
>> [This will be taking place at IGF 2014 this
>> Friday, 5 September, 12.30 - 14.00 is Bilateral Room 1 (Rumeli -1 Level /
>> Room 9).
>>
>> -
>> C
>> ontemplating the possibility of national or regional chapters for IGC
>> [Make sure this not be confused with IGFs at the base. One thing for sure
>> is that IGC is meant to embody the CS component while IGF for all
>> stakeholders.]
>>
>> -
>> N
>> eed for mutual respect between participants
>> [D
>>  ifferences in positions should be aired with the predicate that no matter
>> how strong
>>  we feel
>>  about being right, contradicting positions may still be
>>  both
>>  valid under
>> different
>>  circumstances or with different assumptions than our
>>  own
>>  (and sure we all have assumptions!)
>> ]
>>
>>
>> -
>> A
>>  minimum level of decorum or "netiquette" to ensure it is safe for
>> everybody to participate
>> [It's critical to make it comfortable for people to participate
>> whatever their level of familiarity
>> (or unfamiliarity)
>> with the issues,
>> their level of
>> knowledge or
>>
>> self-confidence
>> (or lack thereof)
>> as regards the relevance of their contribution.
>>  ]
>>
>> -
>> E
>> nabling and fostering trust
>> [M
>> aybe a number of basic principles
>> and ideas
>> should be spelled out here (
>> including for possible
>> charter
>>  revision
>>  ?)
>> as to how to achieve that and
>> ensure a
>>  baseline in expectations with regard to
>> our respective and mutual commitments. This might be the place to consider
>> the question of 'conflict of interests' policy for those in leadership
>> position, if relevant.]
>>
>> -  IGC still provides a space to aggregate many of the differing views
>> that "civil society" holds about Internet governance.
>>
>> -
>> IGC should engage in Social
>> C
>> apacity building
>> in
>>  I
>> G and
>>  related activism
>>
>> "
>> People need to be educated through any extensive
>> [as well as extension]
>> program in various level of literacy and knowledge regarding their
>> vulnerability
>> " in the face of the d
>> evelopment
>>  of the cyber-environment
>> .
>> "
>> People needs to be educated and know how to participate in procedure of
>> governance and how to share their concerns. I believe, it would be great, if
>> IGC opens a chapter for educating people in this area.
>>  "
>>
>> -
>> IGC should engage in (enabling)
>>  Customer protection
>> based on
>>  Human rights, multilingualism
>> , regional/
>>  cultural diversity
>> : Seek best practices in the field of customer protection and help empower
>> end-users.
>> -
>> W
>> e absolutely need a credible broadly accepted civil society coordination
>> entity
>>
>> [This is being taken care of through the newly set up Civil Society
>> Coordination Group, CSCG]
>>
>> -
>>  R
>> eform is needed to enable
>> such entity
>>
>> with
>>  reasonable and reasonably fast decision-making
>> with
>>  regard to all the decisions that need to be made in the context of a
>> civil society coordination function
>>
>> [In process with the CSCG]
>>
>> - Criticism or fear was raised with the notion that the CSCG might be
>> exclusionary or the fact that it is so far perceived by some as such.
>> [This might be addressed through the operating procedures to be developed
>> by the CSCG]
>>
>> - "
>> The alternative
>>  [to CSCG in coordinating CS appointments]
>>  would be IGC. However that would require a few changes so that IGC could
>> respond more promptly, and also for the role and processes of IGC in doing
>> this to be acceptable to the myriad parties who in the past few years have
>> forwarded their own civil society MAG nominations. Quite clearly some
>> substantial groups within IGC have not been happy for IGC to do this on
>> their behalf in the past few years, thus leading to them making their own
>> nominations.
>>  "
>>
>> [Please note that the CSCG is not meant to develop policies or submit
>> policy positions on behalf of its members' constituents. So the question
>> remains: How can we as IGC get there from here?]
>>
>> - "a
>> s regards the broader question of policy statements and policy co
>> ordination – I do not think CSCG is a good vehicle for this.  IGC is
>> potentially, but there has been difficulty in getting consensus positions
>> here in the past, which led to the creation of Best Bits (where sign on
>> statements not acceptable to 100% of civil society became a useful tool) and
>> later to Just Net Coalition. Where there is potentially a broader consensus,
>> I think IGC can play a very useful role, providing it continues to enjoy
>> strong support from all groups.
>>  "
>>
>> - In the discussion it was also noted that "
>> IGC is the big tent for Internet governance geeks of all persuasions
>>  ...
>> who will never agree on much
>> ."
>>
>> Now questions:
>> - How do we get there from here?
>> - Is there any remedy to this (the fact that IGC cab "never agree on
>> much") beyond the above points for improvements? Or are these points
>> sufficient?
>> - How can we detect and handle cases where there is a potential for
>> broader consensus?
>> - Where there is not such potential how do we deal with the coordination
>> of policy positions and making policy statements? Shall we create some sort
>> of internal Dynamic Coalitions mechanism? Can these find some level of
>> compromise after they develop their baseline positions, and if not how will
>> those positions relate to IGC as a whole as they may be contradicting?
>> ----
>>
>> Right here ends my term as IGC co-coordinator. I am delighted to yield the
>> floor (or rather the stage) to two remarkable women and leaders, both
>> hailing from Latin America and the Caribbean.
>> Take it away, ladies!
>>
>> With my very best wishes,
>>
>> Mawaki
>>
>>
>> =====================================
>> Mawaki Chango, PhD
>> Founder
>> & CEO
>>
>> DIGILEXIS
>> Consulting
>> http://www.digilexis.com
>> m.chango at digilexis.com | kichango at gmail.com
>> Twitter: @digilexis & @prodigilexis
>> Mob. +225 57 55 57 53 | +225 44 48 77 64
>> Skype: digilexis
>> =====================================
>>
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>>      governance at lists.igcaucus.org
>> To be removed from the list, visit:
>>      http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
>>
>> For all other list information and functions, see:
>>      http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
>> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
>>      http://www.igcaucus.org/
>>
>> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
>>
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>      governance at lists.igcaucus.org
> To be removed from the list, visit:
>      http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
>
> For all other list information and functions, see:
>      http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
>      http://www.igcaucus.org/
>
> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
>

-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From toml at communisphere.com  Tue Jan 20 13:21:18 2015
From: toml at communisphere.com (Thomas Lowenhaupt)
Date: Tue, 20 Jan 2015 13:21:18 -0500
Subject: [governance] A different frame
In-Reply-To: <CAMz5XN5Atg4LSuqrPzwRUB+uKLYoo-R-iKs-UMtJjMTgaXjEWA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAMz5XN5Atg4LSuqrPzwRUB+uKLYoo-R-iKs-UMtJjMTgaXjEWA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <54BE9C9E.50004@communisphere.com>

A most interesting post indeed.

Tom Lowenhaupt

On 1/20/2015 10:20 AM, Deirdre Williams wrote:
> As we consider the questions and comments that Mawaki has just sent to 
> the list it might be useful to read this blogpost 
> <https://johnc1912.wordpress.com/2015/01/18/a-different-way-of-looking-at-things/%20> from 
> John Carr.
> (John Carr is a leader in the call for the protection of children online)
> Deirdre
>
> -- 
> “The fundamental cure for poverty is not money but knowledge" Sir 
> William Arthur Lewis, Nobel Prize Economics, 1979

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150120/57a2aa0c/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From soekpe at gmail.com  Tue Jan 20 18:13:11 2015
From: soekpe at gmail.com (Sonigitu Ekpe)
Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2015 00:13:11 +0100
Subject: [governance] Results of the IGC 2015 Coordinator Election -
 Welcoming the newly elected co-coordinator
In-Reply-To: <CABi6_T8vZn2mw-htN5Xc3H5ocD9S-r64C89yfNBmdto39QTrqg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CACTo+v--iTn=7kXdVSyAVf3rwxrvuRTdNucVujUgcW=XS_p+-w@mail.gmail.com>
	<CABi6_T8vZn2mw-htN5Xc3H5ocD9S-r64C89yfNBmdto39QTrqg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CALLeeasU++4DYe5OeO+wXZPtNPq4EE4ydN9FtG-uuFfH5rJxwQ@mail.gmail.com>

Congratulations as you take IGC to a newer level in collaborations of the
Co-coordinator, D. Williams and the Elders of IGC.

Best wishes.

Sonigitu Ekpe Aji :-@ SEA

"Life becomes more meaningful; when we think of others, positively."

+234 8027510179
On Jan 20, 2015 6:24 PM, "Analia Aspis" <analia.aspis at gmail.com> wrote:

> Dear all,
>
> Thanks a lot for your kind messages :) I am very excited to work with you
> and contribute with IGC mission. Thanks again Mawaki for your your help and
> patience.
>
> Best,
> Analía
>
>
> On Mon, Jan 19, 2015 at 4:13 PM, Mawaki Chango <kichango at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Dear All,
>>
>> Rejoice, for we have a new co-coordinator! Hence, here is my last message
>> as a co-co to report about the election and share some final thoughts on my
>> way out. .
>>
>> THE ELECTION PROCESS
>>
>> In this month of January 2015 one co-coordinator seat became vacant and
>> was up for filling. The election process kick started with a call for
>> nominations posted to the IGC list on 18 November 2014. By the end of the
>> nomination period on 19 December, we received the following confirmed
>> nominations:
>>
>> 1) Analia Aspis
>> 2) Arsene Tungali
>> 3) Kawsar Uddin
>>
>> After setting up the survey in the online system used for IGC elections,
>> we had to prepare the voting list by making sure all members who meet the
>> voting criteria are included in the list, despite potential confusion due
>> to the fact that the IGC website seems to re-initialize the count of
>> membership time span from the last time members' information (eg, email
>> address) has been updated. This worked rather well since for all the misses
>> that were reported, only one or two were confirmed after verification. The
>> email ballot paper sent to about a dozen voters got probably lost in their
>> spam folder or they simply missed it in their regular mailbox.
>>
>> After the election started, we were reminded of the need to add an
>> abstention option for those who do want to exercise their right to vote
>> (and be on the record for participating in the election) without the
>> obligation to give their vote to one or another of the candidates standing.
>> After checking, it has appeared that a "No candidate" vote was in option in
>> the last election cycle (2014). However, we first missed that as we were
>> using a template from the latest election where only one coordinator was to
>> be elected, which was in 2013 (in 2014, the two co-coordinators were to be
>> replaced.) Hopefully now we will systematically have an "Abstention" or "No
>> candidate" option (whichever the Caucus finds more appropriate) on the
>> ballot next to the candidates' names.
>>
>> I would like to take this opportunity to thank all three candidates for
>> their dedication and willingness to step forward and serve this community.
>> Any of them would have made a positive difference for the Caucus and bring
>> more diversity to its leadership.
>>
>> THE ELECTION RESULTS
>>
>> The results of the elections are as follows.
>>
>> Total number of tokens generated and invitations sent = 488
>> Total number of valid votes (survey completed) = 163
>> Incomplete responses = 31
>> Total responses = 194
>>
>> Votes received by the candidates:
>> 1) Analia Aspis = 83 (42.78%)
>> 2) Arsene Tungali = 57 (29.38%)
>> 3) Kawsar Uddin = 22 (11.34%)
>> 4) None of the nominees = 1 (0.52%)
>> 5) No answer = 10 (5.15%)
>> 6) Not completed or not displayed = 21 (10.82%)
>>
>> (Please note the details of these results will be posted to the IGC web
>> page later and the link will be forwarded here when done.)
>>
>> This makes Analia Aspis the next IGC co-coordinator. Congratulations,
>> Analia! With you I am delighted and confident to pass on the baton to good
>> hands. Welcome on board! In your nomination statement, I note and applaud
>> your eagerness to bring IG regional actions into IGC focus and to make this
>> place ever more relevant to young researchers and beyond. I wish you every
>> success!
>>
>> THANK YOU'S
>>
>> Furthermore, I would like also to seize this opportunity to thank my
>> "coordinatorship mate" (for lack of a better word) Deirdre Williams. During
>> our time together she had carried out the most thankless coordination tasks
>> more times than I can count (the ones that we didn't even suspect would be
>> on our plate when each of us decided to stand for the election.) For that
>> and for her patience I am grateful.
>>
>> I know well too much how easier (and much less time consuming) it often
>> is to get things done by yourself, when you know how to do them, than to
>> have to instruct and explain to a novice how to get the job done. Well, I,
>> stubborn learner, had Jeremy take the longer path and heavier burden to
>> provide guidance, patiently and always swiftly replying to my inquiries and
>> helping me navigate through the challenges I was facing with the online
>> election system and the mechanics of the IGC website. Thank you, Jeremy!
>>
>> Last but not least, I would like to thank each and every one of you for
>> your support, patience and understanding. I know we have not always been in
>> agreement and I am most certain I haven't met everyone's expectations, but
>> I felt almost all of you have each time given me the benefit of the doubt.
>> I appreciate that, and only wish I could have done more to put IGC at a
>> better place on the IG map.
>>
>> SOME PENDING BUSINESS
>>
>> Speaking of the place of IGC on the Internet governance map, I recall we
>> had an unfinished business, which I'll make sure to leave you with.
>> Following is the synthesis of the consultation we had a while before IGF
>> Istanbul regarding the way forward for IGC. It was posted to this list on
>> 31/8/2014. I would hope to see one day some follow up action or some
>> conclusion given to this matter.
>>
>> Between June 26 and 30, we had here a discussion running by the following
>> subject line:
>> Inquiry for a new vision into the future of IGC
>> Following is the summary of the main points I got from
>> your contributions to this discussion
>>  [adding my summary notes, observations/comments in square brackets].
>>
>> Suggestions include:
>>
>> -
>> H
>> olding a face to face workshop, accommodating remote participation, on
>> the topic at Istanbul IGF
>>
>> [This will be taking place at IGF 2014 this
>> Friday, 5 September, 12.30 - 14.00 is Bilateral Room 1 (Rumeli -1 Level /
>> Room 9).
>>
>> -
>> C
>> ontemplating the possibility of national or regional chapters for IGC
>> [Make sure this not be confused with IGFs at the base. One thing for sure
>> is that IGC is meant to embody the CS component while IGF for all
>> stakeholders.]
>>
>> -
>> N
>> eed for mutual respect between participants
>> [D
>>  ifferences in positions should be aired with the predicate that no
>> matter how strong
>>  we feel
>>  about being right, contradicting positions may still be
>>  both
>>  valid under
>> different
>>  circumstances or with different assumptions than our
>>  own
>>  (and sure we all have assumptions!)
>> ]
>>
>>
>> -
>> A
>>  minimum level of decorum or "netiquette" to ensure it is safe for
>> everybody to participate
>> [It's critical to make it comfortable for people to participate
>> whatever their level of familiarity
>> (or unfamiliarity)
>> with the issues,
>> their level of
>> knowledge or
>>
>> self-confidence
>> (or lack thereof)
>> as regards the relevance of their contribution.
>>  ]
>>
>> -
>> E
>> nabling and fostering trust
>> [M
>> aybe a number of basic principles
>> and ideas
>> should be spelled out here (
>> including for possible
>> charter
>>  revision
>>  ?)
>> as to how to achieve that and
>> ensure a
>>  baseline in expectations with regard to
>> our respective and mutual commitments. This might be the place to
>> consider the question of 'conflict of interests' policy for those in
>> leadership position, if relevant.]
>>
>> -  IGC still provides a space to aggregate many of the differing views
>> that "civil society" holds about Internet governance.
>>
>> -
>> IGC should engage in Social
>> C
>> apacity building
>> in
>>  I
>> G and
>>  related activism
>>
>> "
>> People need to be educated through any extensive
>> [as well as extension]
>> program in various level of literacy and knowledge regarding their
>> vulnerability
>> " in the face of the d
>> evelopment
>>  of the cyber-environment
>> .
>> "
>> People needs to be educated and know how to participate in procedure of
>> governance and how to share their concerns. I believe, it would be great,
>> if IGC opens a chapter for educating people in this area.
>>  "
>>
>> -
>> IGC should engage in (enabling)
>>  Customer protection
>> based on
>>  Human rights, multilingualism
>> , regional/
>>  cultural diversity
>> : Seek best practices in the field of customer protection and help
>> empower end-users.
>> -
>> W
>> e absolutely need a credible broadly accepted civil society coordination
>> entity
>>
>> [This is being taken care of through the newly set up Civil Society
>> Coordination Group, CSCG]
>>
>> -
>>  R
>> eform is needed to enable
>> such entity
>>
>> with
>>  reasonable and reasonably fast decision-making
>> with
>>  regard to all the decisions that need to be made in the context of a civil
>> society coordination function
>>
>> [In process with the CSCG]
>>
>> - Criticism or fear was raised with the notion that the CSCG might be
>> exclusionary or the fact that it is so far perceived by some as such.
>> [This might be addressed through the operating procedures to be developed
>> by the CSCG]
>>
>> - "
>> The alternative
>>  [to CSCG in coordinating CS appointments]
>>  would be IGC. However that would require a few changes so that IGC could
>> respond more promptly, and also for the role and processes of IGC in doing
>> this to be acceptable to the myriad parties who in the past few years have
>> forwarded their own civil society MAG nominations. Quite clearly some
>> substantial groups within IGC have not been happy for IGC to do this on
>> their behalf in the past few years, thus leading to them making their own
>> nominations.
>>  "
>>
>> [Please note that the CSCG is not meant to develop policies or submit
>> policy positions on behalf of its members' constituents. So the question
>> remains: How can we as IGC get there from here?]
>>
>> - "a
>> s regards the broader question of policy statements and policy co
>> ordination - I do not think CSCG is a good vehicle for this.  IGC is
>> potentially, but there has been difficulty in getting consensus positions
>> here in the past, which led to the creation of Best Bits (where sign on
>> statements not acceptable to 100% of civil society became a useful tool)
>> and later to Just Net Coalition. Where there is potentially a broader
>> consensus, I think IGC can play a very useful role, providing it continues
>> to enjoy strong support from all groups.
>>  "
>>
>> - In the discussion it was also noted that "
>> IGC is the big tent for Internet governance geeks of all persuasions
>>  ...
>> who will never agree on much
>> ."
>>
>> Now questions:
>> - How do we get there from here?
>> - Is there any remedy to this (the fact that IGC cab "never agree on
>> much") beyond the above points for improvements? Or are these points
>> sufficient?
>> - How can we detect and handle cases where there is a potential for
>> broader consensus?
>> - Where there is not such potential how do we deal with the coordination
>> of policy positions and making policy statements? Shall we create some sort
>> of internal Dynamic Coalitions mechanism? Can these find some level of
>> compromise after they develop their baseline positions, and if not how will
>> those positions relate to IGC as a whole as they may be contradicting?
>> ----
>>
>> Right here ends my term as IGC co-coordinator. I am delighted to yield
>> the floor (or rather the stage) to two remarkable women and leaders, both
>> hailing from Latin America and the Caribbean.
>> Take it away, ladies!
>>
>> With my very best wishes,
>>
>> Mawaki
>>
>>
>> =====================================
>> Mawaki Chango, PhD
>> Founder
>> & CEO
>>
>> DIGILEXIS
>> Consulting
>> http://www.digilexis.com
>> m.chango at digilexis.com | *kichango at gmail.com <kichango at gmail.com>*
>> Twitter: @digilexis & @prodigilexis
>> Mob. +225 57 55 57 53 | +225 44 48 77 64
>> Skype: digilexis
>> =====================================
>>
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>>      governance at lists.igcaucus.org
>> To be removed from the list, visit:
>>      http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
>>
>> For all other list information and functions, see:
>>      http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
>> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
>>      http://www.igcaucus.org/
>>
>> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
>>
>>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>      governance at lists.igcaucus.org
> To be removed from the list, visit:
>      http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
>
> For all other list information and functions, see:
>      http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
>      http://www.igcaucus.org/
>
> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150121/ab3bfe09/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com  Tue Jan 20 20:49:28 2015
From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro)
Date: Tue, 20 Jan 2015 15:49:28 -1000
Subject: [governance] Invitation to Internet Governance Session #PTC15
Message-ID: <9EFFEF5C-D857-4656-BAF8-69B93FCA3805@gmail.com>

Dear All,

Firstly apologies for the cross posting. I would like to invite you to the Pacific Telecommunication Council 15 Conference's Executive Roundtable on Internet Governance which is being held in Coral Room 2 at The Hilton, Hawaiian Village from 4pm till 5pm Honolulu time.

You can follow the twitter hashtag #PTC15 #IGF 

Session Description is as follows:

Executive Insight Roundtable 10: Internet Governance
In 2005, the UN-sponsored World Summit on the Information Society defined Internet governance as "the development and application by governments, the private sector and civil society, in their respective roles, of shared principles, norms, rules, decision-making procedures, and programs that shape the evolution and use of the Internet." The Internet is expanding exponentially. The Internet Governance Forum mandate from the United nations ends in 2015. Though there is no sign that the future of the IGF is in danger, so far there is no word from the UN asking for input on the renewal of IGF. In early 2014, the U.S. government announced plans to relinquish its historic stewardship over the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA), which is operated by ICANN, to the global multi-stakeholder Internet community when its contract with ICANN expires in September 2015.Many experts believe this change may set the stage for broader changes in other areas of Internet governance, such as intellectual property rights and cybersecurity.

Who is responsible for Internet governance among the different stakeholder groups? What are issues that may disrupt the roles of existing stakeholders? How should consensus on key principles or outcomes be reached for solutions that benefit the global Internet rather than special interests?
 How should market-specific challenges or issues that are particular to a local community be approached for the global Internet to continue its innovative contributions? These are just some of the challenging questions around Internet Governance that will be discussed in this executive insight roundtable.

Moderator:
Steven Smith, Associate VP, IT Technology & Deputy CIO, University of Hawaii, USA
Panelists:
David Conrad, CTO, Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN)
John Curran, President and CEO, American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN)
Paul Wilson, Director General, Asia Pacific Network Information Centre (APNIC)
With every best wish,
Sala

Sent from my iPad
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150120/59292377/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From bzs at world.std.com  Tue Jan 20 21:08:32 2015
From: bzs at world.std.com (Barry Shein)
Date: Tue, 20 Jan 2015 21:08:32 -0500
Subject: [governance] A different frame
In-Reply-To: <54BE9C9E.50004@communisphere.com>
References: <CAMz5XN5Atg4LSuqrPzwRUB+uKLYoo-R-iKs-UMtJjMTgaXjEWA@mail.gmail.com>
	<54BE9C9E.50004@communisphere.com>
Message-ID: <21695.2592.764063.926146@world.std.com>


 > > <https://johnc1912.wordpress.com/2015/01/18/a-different-way-of-looking-at-things/%20> from 

Does anyone actually believe this? That the development of the
internet avoided political questions?

I've been involved with the internet since the 1970s and it always
seemed to me every new technology raised political and rights
questions almost to the point of tears.

The author gives an example of an IETF discussion about determining
location from browsers and how when possible misuse was raised by him
the participants shrugged him off, not our concern, he surmised.

It's not that they refused to consider the possible negative
implications. It's that technology tends to progress in parallel to
such considerations.

You can't just rathole every technical discussion with possible
negative implications any more than it would be appreciated if I, a
rather technical person, would rathole discussions on a list like this
with technical discourse. Most of you wouldn't even survive the hail
of acronyms any more than technical people could survive yours.

You'd get bored to the point of irritation or apathy, we'd make no
progress, the number of people present with expertise to judge whether
technical proposals were feasible is low in density here, and the
organization of the discussion is not suited to the convergence of
technical ideas.

I regularly see comments made here that indicate technical naivete but
then I try to refocus my mind on the more political aspect being
expressed rather than, analogous to the author, interrupt with
technical improvements or insights.

Look at what happened last week when I simply tried to point out how
the layers of the net are actually managed as opposed to the truncated
block-diagram fantasies many seem to work from.

The subject of the comment ignored me, sent a maverick who tried to
answer with a snarky two-word reply, and otherwise...silence (other
than a few if I may say applause lines sent privately to me.)

Trust me, technical people reading this list are as flabbergasted as
the author tries to express.

Rather than trying to draw such us vs them / tribalistic distinctions
-- my two-cent summary of that blog post -- perhaps it would be better
if we tried to work on these problems together?

This is a very complex interdisciplinary subject area, much like arms
control as one analogy. You're not going to make it by driving off or
trivializing people with a different skill set and focus.

-- 
        -Barry Shein

The World              | bzs at TheWorld.com           | http://www.TheWorld.com
Purveyors to the Trade | Voice: 800-THE-WRLD        | Dial-Up: US, PR, Canada
Software Tool & Die    | Public Access Internet     | SINCE 1989     *oo*

-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From remmyn at gmail.com  Wed Jan 21 05:17:30 2015
From: remmyn at gmail.com (Remmy Nweke)
Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2015 02:17:30 -0800
Subject: [governance] Results of the IGC 2015 Coordinator Election -
 Welcoming the newly elected co-coordinator
Message-ID: <-8400741725600205901@unknownmsgid>

Congrats to all the new executives.

Remmy Nweke
@ITRealms


Sent from my Windows Phone
------------------------------
From: Sivasubramanian M <isolatedn at gmail.com>
Sent: 19/01/2015 20:25
To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Mawaki Chango <kichango at gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [governance] Results of the IGC 2015 Coordinator Election -
Welcoming the newly elected co-coordinator

Thank you Mawaki for all your good work. Congratulations Analia.


Sivasubramanian M
India.

Sivasubramanian M <https://www.facebook.com/sivasubramanian.muthusamy>

On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 12:43 AM, Mawaki Chango <kichango at gmail.com> wrote:

> Dear All,
>
> Rejoice, for we have a new co-coordinator! Hence, here is my last message
> as a co-co to report about the election and share some final thoughts on my
> way out. .
>
> THE ELECTION PROCESS
>
> In this month of January 2015 one co-coordinator seat became vacant and
> was up for filling. The election process kick started with a call for
> nominations posted to the IGC list on 18 November 2014. By the end of the
> nomination period on 19 December, we received the following confirmed
> nominations:
>
> 1) Analia Aspis
> 2) Arsene Tungali
> 3) Kawsar Uddin
>
> After setting up the survey in the online system used for IGC elections,
> we had to prepare the voting list by making sure all members who meet the
> voting criteria are included in the list, despite potential confusion due
> to the fact that the IGC website seems to re-initialize the count of
> membership time span from the last time members' information (eg, email
> address) has been updated. This worked rather well since for all the misses
> that were reported, only one or two were confirmed after verification. The
> email ballot paper sent to about a dozen voters got probably lost in their
> spam folder or they simply missed it in their regular mailbox.
>
> After the election started, we were reminded of the need to add an
> abstention option for those who do want to exercise their right to vote
> (and be on the record for participating in the election) without the
> obligation to give their vote to one or another of the candidates standing.
> After checking, it has appeared that a "No candidate" vote was in option in
> the last election cycle (2014). However, we first missed that as we were
> using a template from the latest election where only one coordinator was to
> be elected, which was in 2013 (in 2014, the two co-coordinators were to be
> replaced.) Hopefully now we will systematically have an "Abstention" or "No
> candidate" option (whichever the Caucus finds more appropriate) on the
> ballot next to the candidates' names.
>
> I would like to take this opportunity to thank all three candidates for
> their dedication and willingness to step forward and serve this community.
> Any of them would have made a positive difference for the Caucus and bring
> more diversity to its leadership.
>
> THE ELECTION RESULTS
>
> The results of the elections are as follows.
>
> Total number of tokens generated and invitations sent = 488
> Total number of valid votes (survey completed) = 163
> Incomplete responses = 31
> Total responses = 194
>
> Votes received by the candidates:
> 1) Analia Aspis = 83 (42.78%)
> 2) Arsene Tungali = 57 (29.38%)
> 3) Kawsar Uddin = 22 (11.34%)
> 4) None of the nominees = 1 (0.52%)
> 5) No answer = 10 (5.15%)
> 6) Not completed or not displayed = 21 (10.82%)
>
> (Please note the details of these results will be posted to the IGC web
> page later and the link will be forwarded here when done.)
>
> This makes Analia Aspis the next IGC co-coordinator. Congratulations,
> Analia! With you I am delighted and confident to pass on the baton to good
> hands. Welcome on board! In your nomination statement, I note and applaud
> your eagerness to bring IG regional actions into IGC focus and to make this
> place ever more relevant to young researchers and beyond. I wish you every
> success!
>
> THANK YOU'S
>
> Furthermore, I would like also to seize this opportunity to thank my
> "coordinatorship mate" (for lack of a better word) Deirdre Williams. During
> our time together she had carried out the most thankless coordination tasks
> more times than I can count (the ones that we didn't even suspect would be
> on our plate when each of us decided to stand for the election.) For that
> and for her patience I am grateful.
>
> I know well too much how easier (and much less time consuming) it often is
> to get things done by yourself, when you know how to do them, than to have
> to instruct and explain to a novice how to get the job done. Well, I,
> stubborn learner, had Jeremy take the longer path and heavier burden to
> provide guidance, patiently and always swiftly replying to my inquiries and
> helping me navigate through the challenges I was facing with the online
> election system and the mechanics of the IGC website. Thank you, Jeremy!
>
> Last but not least, I would like to thank each and every one of you for
> your support, patience and understanding. I know we have not always been in
> agreement and I am most certain I haven't met everyone's expectations, but
> I felt almost all of you have each time given me the benefit of the doubt.
> I appreciate that, and only wish I could have done more to put IGC at a
> better place on the IG map.
>
> SOME PENDING BUSINESS
>
> Speaking of the place of IGC on the Internet governance map, I recall we
> had an unfinished business, which I'll make sure to leave you with.
> Following is the synthesis of the consultation we had a while before IGF
> Istanbul regarding the way forward for IGC. It was posted to this list on
> 31/8/2014. I would hope to see one day some follow up action or some
> conclusion given to this matter.
>
> Between June 26 and 30, we had here a discussion running by the following
> subject line:
> Inquiry for a new vision into the future of IGC
> Following is the summary of the main points I got from
> your contributions to this discussion
>  [adding my summary notes, observations/comments in square brackets].
>
> Suggestions include:
>
> -
> H
> olding a face to face workshop, accommodating remote participation, on the
> topic at Istanbul IGF
>
> [This will be taking place at IGF 2014 this
> Friday, 5 September, 12.30 - 14.00 is Bilateral Room 1 (Rumeli -1 Level /
> Room 9).
>
> -
> C
> ontemplating the possibility of national or regional chapters for IGC
> [Make sure this not be confused with IGFs at the base. One thing for sure
> is that IGC is meant to embody the CS component while IGF for all
> stakeholders.]
>
> -
> N
> eed for mutual respect between participants
> [D
>  ifferences in positions should be aired with the predicate that no matter
> how strong
>  we feel
>  about being right, contradicting positions may still be
>  both
>  valid under
> different
>  circumstances or with different assumptions than our
>  own
>  (and sure we all have assumptions!)
> ]
>
>
> -
> A
>  minimum level of decorum or "netiquette" to ensure it is safe for
> everybody to participate
> [It's critical to make it comfortable for people to participate
> whatever their level of familiarity
> (or unfamiliarity)
> with the issues,
> their level of
> knowledge or
>
> self-confidence
> (or lack thereof)
> as regards the relevance of their contribution.
>  ]
>
> -
> E
> nabling and fostering trust
> [M
> aybe a number of basic principles
> and ideas
> should be spelled out here (
> including for possible
> charter
>  revision
>  ?)
> as to how to achieve that and
> ensure a
>  baseline in expectations with regard to
> our respective and mutual commitments. This might be the place to consider
> the question of 'conflict of interests' policy for those in leadership
> position, if relevant.]
>
> -  IGC still provides a space to aggregate many of the differing views
> that "civil society" holds about Internet governance.
>
> -
> IGC should engage in Social
> C
> apacity building
> in
>  I
> G and
>  related activism
>
> "
> People need to be educated through any extensive
> [as well as extension]
> program in various level of literacy and knowledge regarding their
> vulnerability
> " in the face of the d
> evelopment
>  of the cyber-environment
> .
> "
> People needs to be educated and know how to participate in procedure of
> governance and how to share their concerns. I believe, it would be great,
> if IGC opens a chapter for educating people in this area.
>  "
>
> -
> IGC should engage in (enabling)
>  Customer protection
> based on
>  Human rights, multilingualism
> , regional/
>  cultural diversity
> : Seek best practices in the field of customer protection and help empower
> end-users.
> -
> W
> e absolutely need a credible broadly accepted civil society coordination
> entity
>
> [This is being taken care of through the newly set up Civil Society
> Coordination Group, CSCG]
>
> -
>  R
> eform is needed to enable
> such entity
>
> with
>  reasonable and reasonably fast decision-making
> with
>  regard to all the decisions that need to be made in the context of a civil
> society coordination function
>
> [In process with the CSCG]
>
> - Criticism or fear was raised with the notion that the CSCG might be
> exclusionary or the fact that it is so far perceived by some as such.
> [This might be addressed through the operating procedures to be developed
> by the CSCG]
>
> - "
> The alternative
>  [to CSCG in coordinating CS appointments]
>  would be IGC. However that would require a few changes so that IGC could
> respond more promptly, and also for the role and processes of IGC in doing
> this to be acceptable to the myriad parties who in the past few years have
> forwarded their own civil society MAG nominations. Quite clearly some
> substantial groups within IGC have not been happy for IGC to do this on
> their behalf in the past few years, thus leading to them making their own
> nominations.
>  "
>
> [Please note that the CSCG is not meant to develop policies or submit
> policy positions on behalf of its members' constituents. So the question
> remains: How can we as IGC get there from here?]
>
> - "a
> s regards the broader question of policy statements and policy co
> ordination - I do not think CSCG is a good vehicle for this.  IGC is
> potentially, but there has been difficulty in getting consensus positions
> here in the past, which led to the creation of Best Bits (where sign on
> statements not acceptable to 100% of civil society became a useful tool)
> and later to Just Net Coalition. Where there is potentially a broader
> consensus, I think IGC can play a very useful role, providing it continues
> to enjoy strong support from all groups.
>  "
>
> - In the discussion it was also noted that "
> IGC is the big tent for Internet governance geeks of all persuasions
>  ...
> who will never agree on much
> ."
>
> Now questions:
> - How do we get there from here?
> - Is there any remedy to this (the fact that IGC cab "never agree on
> much") beyond the above points for improvements? Or are these points
> sufficient?
> - How can we detect and handle cases where there is a potential for
> broader consensus?
> - Where there is not such potential how do we deal with the coordination
> of policy positions and making policy statements? Shall we create some sort
> of internal Dynamic Coalitions mechanism? Can these find some level of
> compromise after they develop their baseline positions, and if not how will
> those positions relate to IGC as a whole as they may be contradicting?
> ----
>
> Right here ends my term as IGC co-coordinator. I am delighted to yield the
> floor (or rather the stage) to two remarkable women and leaders, both
> hailing from Latin America and the Caribbean.
> Take it away, ladies!
>
> With my very best wishes,
>
> Mawaki
>
>
> =====================================
> Mawaki Chango, PhD
> Founder
> & CEO
>
> DIGILEXIS
> Consulting
> http://www.digilexis.com
> m.chango at digilexis.com | *kichango at gmail.com <kichango at gmail.com>*
> Twitter: @digilexis & @prodigilexis
> Mob. +225 57 55 57 53 | +225 44 48 77 64
> Skype: digilexis
> =====================================
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>      governance at lists.igcaucus.org
> To be removed from the list, visit:
>      http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
>
> For all other list information and functions, see:
>      http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
>      http://www.igcaucus.org/
>
> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150121/ecb82e52/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From jefsey at jefsey.com  Wed Jan 21 05:46:12 2015
From: jefsey at jefsey.com (Jefsey)
Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2015 11:46:12 +0100
Subject: [governance] A different frame
In-Reply-To: <21695.2592.764063.926146@world.std.com>
References: <CAMz5XN5Atg4LSuqrPzwRUB+uKLYoo-R-iKs-UMtJjMTgaXjEWA@mail.gmail.com>
 <54BE9C9E.50004@communisphere.com>
 <21695.2592.764063.926146@world.std.com>
Message-ID: <E1YDsdN-0006yX-8a@igcaucus.org>

At 03:08 21/01/2015, Barry Shein wrote:

>  > > 
> <https://johnc1912.wordpress.com/2015/01/18/a-different-way-of-looking-at-things/%20> 
> from
>
>Does anyone actually believe this? That the development of the
>internet avoided political questions?
>
>I've been involved with the internet since the 1970s and it always
>seemed to me every new technology raised political and rights
>questions almost to the point of tears.

So did I.
The worst one was the US political choice for the global spread of 
the internet status-quo strategy we are seeing politically evoluting 
nowadays as a "neutrality/permissionless innovation" culture of 
"multistakeholders" against an "omnistakeholders" reality.

Up to the point Jari Arkko has transitioned the IETF to the USIETF 
for its 29th birthday (http://www.ietf.org/blog/) where the NTIA has 
***replaced*** the IAB.

I quote:
"
* Both the numbers and names communities need to complete their 
proposals. We at the IETF will continue engage with them with their 
work, just as they assisted us with ours.
* Later, the IANA Transition Coordination Group (ICG) will assemble a 
complete proposal and gather community feedback on the result. When 
ready, they will submit the final proposal to the NTIA.
* The NTIA  must then consider and approve the proposal.
* Finally it must be implemented.
"

This is politically conformant to the RFC 6852 where IEEE, IAB, IETF, 
ISOC, and W3C state: "We embrace a modern paradigm for standards 
where the economics of global markets, fueled by technological 
advancements, drive global deployment of standards regardless of 
their formal status." We now know that the politicotechnical referent 
for the I*gang internet is the NTIA.

This is quite different from the master of my use of the collective 
FLOSS Catenet, as everyone, is me. The WSIS information society is to 
be "people centered, à caractère humain, centrada en la persona". The 
political opposition to that is to make it US (IETF) or WEF (ICANN) oriented.

This why we are engaging the Catenet.Coop projet for a non-political 
collective/cooperative/concerted intelligent use of our 
interconnected datacommunications resources and we will use a French 
law "SCIC" (common interest cooperative corporation) that "says one 
stakeholder, one vote; permits people, corporations and states to 
associate; and does not require capital funding - we all paid for our 
common catenet for a long).

Because Aristotle invented architectonics (the discipline of reality) 
as the ***science*** of politics, of which the ***art*** is to lead 
free men - whose the sociability is now computer facilitated.

Cheers !!!

jfc

NB. "I want to know about the vast conspiracy which, for as long as I 
can remember, has resulted in Barry Shein's always saying something 
that is more interesting and intelligent than everything everyone 
else (including me [and possibly Jefsey]) has said about the same 
topics. - Mark Dominus, on Facebook, 27 July 2009."
Le Monde C'est Lui !

>The author gives an example of an IETF discussion about determining
>location from browsers and how when possible misuse was raised by him
>the participants shrugged him off, not our concern, he surmised.
>
>It's not that they refused to consider the possible negative
>implications. It's that technology tends to progress in parallel to
>such considerations.
>
>You can't just rathole every technical discussion with possible
>negative implications any more than it would be appreciated if I, a
>rather technical person, would rathole discussions on a list like this
>with technical discourse. Most of you wouldn't even survive the hail
>of acronyms any more than technical people could survive yours.
>
>You'd get bored to the point of irritation or apathy, we'd make no
>progress, the number of people present with expertise to judge whether
>technical proposals were feasible is low in density here, and the
>organization of the discussion is not suited to the convergence of
>technical ideas.
>
>I regularly see comments made here that indicate technical naivete but
>then I try to refocus my mind on the more political aspect being
>expressed rather than, analogous to the author, interrupt with
>technical improvements or insights.
>
>Look at what happened last week when I simply tried to point out how
>the layers of the net are actually managed as opposed to the truncated
>block-diagram fantasies many seem to work from.
>
>The subject of the comment ignored me, sent a maverick who tried to
>answer with a snarky two-word reply, and otherwise...silence (other
>than a few if I may say applause lines sent privately to me.)
>
>Trust me, technical people reading this list are as flabbergasted as
>the author tries to express.
>
>Rather than trying to draw such us vs them / tribalistic distinctions
>-- my two-cent summary of that blog post -- perhaps it would be better
>if we tried to work on these problems together?
>
>This is a very complex interdisciplinary subject area, much like arms
>control as one analogy. You're not going to make it by driving off or
>trivializing people with a different skill set and focus.
>
>--
>         -Barry Shein
>
>The World              | bzs at TheWorld.com           | http://www.TheWorld.com
>Purveyors to the Trade | Voice: 800-THE-WRLD        | Dial-Up: US, PR, Canada
>Software Tool & Die    | Public Access Internet     | SINCE 1989     *oo*
>
>
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
>Content-Disposition: inline; filename="message-footer.txt"
>
>____________________________________________________________
>You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>      governance at lists.igcaucus.org
>To be removed from the list, visit:
>      http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
>
>For all other list information and functions, see:
>      http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
>To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
>      http://www.igcaucus.org/
>
>Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t


-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From jeanchristophe.nothias at gmail.com  Wed Jan 21 05:56:18 2015
From: jeanchristophe.nothias at gmail.com (Jean-Christophe Nothias)
Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2015 11:56:18 +0100
Subject: [governance] A different frame
In-Reply-To: <E1YDsdF-0006wY-0c@igcaucus.org>
References: <CAMz5XN5Atg4LSuqrPzwRUB+uKLYoo-R-iKs-UMtJjMTgaXjEWA@mail.gmail.com> <54BE9C9E.50004@communisphere.com> <21695.2592.764063.926146@world.std.com> <E1YDsdF-0006wY-0c@igcaucus.org>
Message-ID: <0EE5733D-4D5E-497C-A461-24D6F7C8ABEC@gmail.com>

e-thee who holds the world in his hands!

Thanks to you and Barry for these thoughts and info.

JC


Le 21 janv. 2015 à 11:46, Jefsey a écrit :

> At 03:08 21/01/2015, Barry Shein wrote:
> 
>> > > <https://johnc1912.wordpress.com/2015/01/18/a-different-way-of-looking-at-things/%20> from
>> 
>> Does anyone actually believe this? That the development of the
>> internet avoided political questions?
>> 
>> I've been involved with the internet since the 1970s and it always
>> seemed to me every new technology raised political and rights
>> questions almost to the point of tears.
> 
> So did I.
> The worst one was the US political choice for the global spread of the internet status-quo strategy we are seeing politically evoluting nowadays as a "neutrality/permissionless innovation" culture of "multistakeholders" against an "omnistakeholders" reality.
> 
> Up to the point Jari Arkko has transitioned the IETF to the USIETF for its 29th birthday (http://www.ietf.org/blog/) where the NTIA has ***replaced*** the IAB.
> 
> I quote:
> "
> * Both the numbers and names communities need to complete their proposals. We at the IETF will continue engage with them with their work, just as they assisted us with ours.
> * Later, the IANA Transition Coordination Group (ICG) will assemble a complete proposal and gather community feedback on the result. When ready, they will submit the final proposal to the NTIA.
> * The NTIA  must then consider and approve the proposal.
> * Finally it must be implemented.
> "
> 
> This is politically conformant to the RFC 6852 where IEEE, IAB, IETF, ISOC, and W3C state: "We embrace a modern paradigm for standards where the economics of global markets, fueled by technological advancements, drive global deployment of standards regardless of their formal status." We now know that the politicotechnical referent for the I*gang internet is the NTIA.
> 
> This is quite different from the master of my use of the collective FLOSS Catenet, as everyone, is me. The WSIS information society is to be "people centered, à caractère humain, centrada en la persona". The political opposition to that is to make it US (IETF) or WEF (ICANN) oriented.
> 
> This why we are engaging the Catenet.Coop projet for a non-political collective/cooperative/concerted intelligent use of our interconnected datacommunications resources and we will use a French law "SCIC" (common interest cooperative corporation) that "says one stakeholder, one vote; permits people, corporations and states to associate; and does not require capital funding - we all paid for our common catenet for a long).
> 
> Because Aristotle invented architectonics (the discipline of reality) as the ***science*** of politics, of which the ***art*** is to lead free men - whose the sociability is now computer facilitated.
> 
> Cheers !!!
> 
> jfc
> 
> NB. "I want to know about the vast conspiracy which, for as long as I can remember, has resulted in Barry Shein's always saying something that is more interesting and intelligent than everything everyone else (including me [and possibly Jefsey]) has said about the same topics. - Mark Dominus, on Facebook, 27 July 2009."
> Le Monde C'est Lui !
> 
>> The author gives an example of an IETF discussion about determining
>> location from browsers and how when possible misuse was raised by him
>> the participants shrugged him off, not our concern, he surmised.
>> 
>> It's not that they refused to consider the possible negative
>> implications. It's that technology tends to progress in parallel to
>> such considerations.
>> 
>> You can't just rathole every technical discussion with possible
>> negative implications any more than it would be appreciated if I, a
>> rather technical person, would rathole discussions on a list like this
>> with technical discourse. Most of you wouldn't even survive the hail
>> of acronyms any more than technical people could survive yours.
>> 
>> You'd get bored to the point of irritation or apathy, we'd make no
>> progress, the number of people present with expertise to judge whether
>> technical proposals were feasible is low in density here, and the
>> organization of the discussion is not suited to the convergence of
>> technical ideas.
>> 
>> I regularly see comments made here that indicate technical naivete but
>> then I try to refocus my mind on the more political aspect being
>> expressed rather than, analogous to the author, interrupt with
>> technical improvements or insights.
>> 
>> Look at what happened last week when I simply tried to point out how
>> the layers of the net are actually managed as opposed to the truncated
>> block-diagram fantasies many seem to work from.
>> 
>> The subject of the comment ignored me, sent a maverick who tried to
>> answer with a snarky two-word reply, and otherwise...silence (other
>> than a few if I may say applause lines sent privately to me.)
>> 
>> Trust me, technical people reading this list are as flabbergasted as
>> the author tries to express.
>> 
>> Rather than trying to draw such us vs them / tribalistic distinctions
>> -- my two-cent summary of that blog post -- perhaps it would be better
>> if we tried to work on these problems together?
>> 
>> This is a very complex interdisciplinary subject area, much like arms
>> control as one analogy. You're not going to make it by driving off or
>> trivializing people with a different skill set and focus.
>> 
>> --
>>        -Barry Shein
>> 
>> The World              | bzs at TheWorld.com           | http://www.TheWorld.com
>> Purveyors to the Trade | Voice: 800-THE-WRLD        | Dial-Up: US, PR, Canada
>> Software Tool & Die    | Public Access Internet     | SINCE 1989     *oo*
>> 
>> 
>> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
>> Content-Disposition: inline; filename="message-footer.txt"
>> 
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>>     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
>> To be removed from the list, visit:
>>     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
>> 
>> For all other list information and functions, see:
>>     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
>> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
>>     http://www.igcaucus.org/
>> 
>> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
> 
> 
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
> To be removed from the list, visit:
>     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
> 
> For all other list information and functions, see:
>     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
>     http://www.igcaucus.org/
> 
> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t


-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From williams.deirdre at gmail.com  Wed Jan 21 10:58:03 2015
From: williams.deirdre at gmail.com (Deirdre Williams)
Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2015 11:58:03 -0400
Subject: [governance] Fwd: EFF Seeks a Latin American Community Development
 Coordinator
Message-ID: <CAMz5XN6pW35eh8bWUgJU84zsd1f=RVy3E1G+aDqzEGLvbo+Zpg@mail.gmail.com>

For your information - Latin America, Spanish speakers.
Deirdre


*De:* Katitza Rodriguez <katitza at eff.org>
*Fecha:* 21 de enero de 2015, 12:46:39 GMT-3
*Para:* general at listas.redpatodos.co
*Asunto:* *[RedPato2] EFF Seeks a Latin American Community Development
Coordinator*
*Responder a:* general at listas.redpatodos.co

EFF Seeks a Latin American Community Development Coordinator

The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), a nonprofit civil society
organization based in San Francisco, is looking for a Latin American
Community Development Coordinator to support its work in the region.

Responsibilities include:


   - Communicating our (often complex) technical and policy issues to
   everyday citizens in a clear, compelling, and concise voice in Spanish and
   English;
   - Writing, co-writing, editing, and proofreading blog posts in Spanish
   about EFF’s work in Latin America as events unfold;
   - Monitoring emerging trends and developments in Latin America in the
   areas of human rights in the digital environment via social networks,
   Twitter, traditional media outlets, etc.; and
   - Meeting with EFF partners in Latin America to provide support on
   issues relating to the Internet and human rights, including ensuring that
   events are run successfully.


This ideal candidate is enthusiastic, committed and passionate about
technology and human rights. Along with the writing aspects of the work,
the role also requires tedious administrative work to organize online
discussions and workshops in Latin America.

Requirements:

   - Knowledge of issues related to digital rights generally, and
   preferably in Latin America;
   - Openness and ability to learn new issues quickly and comprehensively;
   - Intellectual curiosity;
   - Oral and written fluency in Spanish;
   - Ability to write clearly, persuasively, and quickly for a range of
   audiences in Spanish;
   - Ability to communicate comfortably and clearly in English;
   - Experience maintaining and contributing to online media, including
   blogs and social media;
   - Good organizational and administrative skills;
   - Ability to work under strict deadlines and/or time constraints, to
   prioritize your workload to meet deadlines, and to multitask; and
   - Willingness to travel within Latin America (no more than 20%).


EFF’s new Latin American Community Development Coordinator is a team player
with strong interpersonal skills who can also work independently. This
person is self-motivated and
has a positive attitude and can-do approach. This position is for an
individual who can focus on solutions, proactively and creatively seeking
out opportunities for process improvement.

In addition, knowledge of or experience with any of the following would be
advantageous:


   - A degree or comparable experience in communications or Spanish
   writing;
   - Experience organizing online campaigns; and
   - Ability to write clearly, persuasively, and quickly for a range of
   audiences in Portuguese.


The Latin American Community Development Coordinator is a new consultant
position and is based in Latin America. This person will report directly to
EFF’s International Rights Director, Katitza Rodriguez. The salary for this
position is USD 20,000 annually. To apply, send a cover letter and resume
in Spanish and English, along with two writing samples in Spanish, to
jobs at eff.org.  No phone calls please!

Closing date for applications: 31 January 2015 (midnight)
Interviews will be held the week of 10 February 2015.

 You are receiving this message because you are a member of the community
LatinoamerICANN <https://dgroups.org/alfa-redi-global/latinoamericann>.

View this contribution on the web site <https://dgroups.org/_/3m4db165>

A reply to this message will be sent to all members of LatinoamerICANN.

Reply to sender <eiriarte at alfa-redi.org> | Unsubscribe
<leave.latinoamericann at dgroups.org>



-- 
“The fundamental cure for poverty is not money but knowledge" Sir William
Arthur Lewis, Nobel Prize Economics, 1979
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150121/3bf68c5d/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From rafik.dammak at gmail.com  Thu Jan 22 04:03:18 2015
From: rafik.dammak at gmail.com (Rafik Dammak)
Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2015 18:03:18 +0900
Subject: [governance] =?UTF-8?Q?FW=3A_ICANN_News_Alert_--_Webinar_Invitati?=
 =?UTF-8?Q?on_=E2=80=93_IANA_Stewardship_Transition=3A_ICANN_Workshop_and_?=
 =?UTF-8?Q?Webinar_for_Civil_Society_and_the_Noncommercial_Sector?=
In-Reply-To: <ac22136e44f5420cbb47fd4f04416f15@PMBX112-W1-CA-1.PEXCH112.ICANN.ORG>
References: <0.0.340.19C.1D035D860A2C62E.0@drone126.ral.icpbounce.com>
	<ac22136e44f5420cbb47fd4f04416f15@PMBX112-W1-CA-1.PEXCH112.ICANN.ORG>
Message-ID: <CAH5sThk-CAy+a3swfMaRgwrhuY4f_s-QSVYfSXDYdpmOf_vP6A@mail.gmail.com>

FYI

> https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-2015-01-21-en
>
> ________________________________
> Webinar Invitation – IANA Stewardship Transition: ICANN Workshop and
Webinar for Civil Society and the Noncommercial Sector
>
> 21 January 2015
>
> ICANN is hosting an information session to brief and discuss the ongoing
evolution of Internet governance. This session will be tailored to provide
an update on the U.S. Government's announcement to transition its oversight
of the IANA functions contract to the global multistakeholder community,
and the parallel process of Enhancing ICANN's Accountability in light of
this changing historical relationship.
>
> This will be an event to learn more on the latest developments on the two
processes and walk-through any upcoming opportunities for input. (Lunch
will be provided)
>
> When: 23 January 12:00-13:00 CET (UTC + 01:00)
> Where: ICANN Brussels Office, 1st floor, 6 Rond-Point Schuman
>
> Additionally, the event will be hosted as a Webinar:
>
> Conference dial-in details: An audio line will be available to take part
in the discussion.
>
> From Belgium: +32 78 480 286
> From the UK: +442070990867
> Conference ID: 21912
>
> (For other countries, please visit: http://adigo.com/icann).
>
> Suggested Agenda
> Introduction/Overview of the Internet Governance Ecosystem and ICANN
(Jean-Jacques Sahel and Adam Peake)
> Overview of the IANA Stewardship Transition and Enhancing ICANN
Accountability Processes (Theresa Swinehart)
> Presentation on the IANA Stewardship Transition (Theresa Swinehart and
Grace Abuhamad)
> Presentation on Enhancing ICANN Accountability (Theresa Swinehart, Adam
Peake and Alice Jansen)
>
> Please register by emailing europe at icann.org.
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150122/e0b4fa75/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From nb at bollow.ch  Thu Jan 22 08:36:15 2015
From: nb at bollow.ch (Norbert Bollow)
Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2015 14:36:15 +0100
Subject: [governance] Internet Social Forum
Message-ID: <20150122143615.700b2f52@quill>

Global Civil Society launches the Internet Social Forum
– With a call to occupy the Internet

PRESS RELEASE. Geneva, Switzerland, 22st January, 2015.

A group of civil society organisations from around the world has
announced the Internet Social Forum, to bring together and articulate
bottom-up perspectives on the 'Internet we want'. Taking inspiration
from the World Social Forum, and its clarion call, 'Another World is
possible', the group seeks to draw urgent attention to the increasing
centralization of the Internet for extraction of monopoly rents and for
socio-political control, asserting that 'Another Internet is possible'!

The Internet Social Forum will inter alia offer an alternative to the
recently-launched World Economic Forum's 'Net Mundial Initiative' on
global Internet governance. While the World Economic Forum (WEF) and
the 'Net Mundial Initiative' convene global elites, the Internet Social
Forum will be a participatory and bottom-up space for all those who
believe that the global Internet must evolve in the public interest; a
direct parallel to the launch of the World Social Forum in 2001 as a
counter initiative to the WEF.

The Internet Social Forum will reach out to grassroots groups and
social movements across the world, catalysing a groundswell that
challenges the entrenched elite interests that currently control how
the Internet is managed. The Internet Social Forum's preparatory
process will kick off during the World Social Forum to take place in
Tunis, March 24th to 28th, 2015. The Internet Social Forum itself is
planned to be held either late 2015 or early 2016.

“While the world's biggest companies have every right to debate the
future of the Internet, we are concerned that their perspectives should
not drown out those of ordinary people who have no access to the
privileged terrain WEF occupies – in the end it is this wider public
interest that must be paramount in governing the Internet. We are
organising the Internet Social Forum to make sure their voices can't be
ignored in the corridors of power,” said Norbert Bollow, Co-Convenor of
the Just Net Coalition, which is one of the groups involved in the
initiative.

The Internet Social Forum, and its preparatory process, is intended as
a space to vision and build the 'Internet we want'. It will be
underpinned by values of democracy, human rights and social justice. It
will stand for participatory policy making and promote community media.
It will seek an Internet that is truly decentralized in its
architecture and based on people's full rights to data, information,
knowledge and other 'commons' that the Internet has enabled the world
community to generate and share.

Somewhat similar to Web inventor Tim Berners-Lee’s call for a ‘Magna
Carta for the Internet', the Internet Social Forum proposes to develop
a People's Internet Manifesto, through a bottom-up process involving
all concerned social groups and movements, in different areas, from
techies and ICT-for-development actors to media reform groups,
democracy movements and social justice activists.

This year will also see the 10 year high-level review of the World
Summit on the Information Society (WSIS), to be held in New York in
December. As a full-scale review of a major UN summit, this will be a
critical global political event. Since the WSIS, held in 2003 and 2005,
the Internet, and what it means socially, has undergone a paradigm
shift. The WSIS witnessed active engagement of civil society and
technical groups as well as of business. However, currently, there
seems to be an deliberate attempt to sideline this UN-led initiative on
governance issues of the information society and Internet in favour of
private, big-business-dominated initiatives like the WEF's Net Mundial
Initiative. The Internet Social Forum, while remaining primarily a
people's forum, will also seek to channel global civil society's
engagement towards the WSIS +10 review.

The following organisations form the initial group that is proposing
the Internet Social Forum, and many more are expected to join in the
immediate future. This is an open call to progressive groups from all
over the world to join this initiative, and participate in developing a
People's Internet Manifesto.

Just Net Coalition, Global
P2P Foundation, Global
Transnational Institute, Global
Forum on Communication for Integration of our America, Regional (Latin
America) Arab NGO Network for Development, Regional
Agencia Latinoamericana de Información, Regional
Alternative Informatics Association, Turkey
Knowledge Commons, India
Open-Root/EUROLINC, France
SLFC.in, India
CODE-IP Trust, Kenya
GodlyGlobal.org, Switzerland
Centre for Community Informatics Research, Development and Training,
Canada IT for Change, India
Association for Proper Internet Governance, Switzerland
Computer Professionals Union, Philippines
Free Press, USA
Advocates of Science and Technology for the People, Philippines
Other News, Italy
Free Software Movement of India
Global_Geneva, Switzerland
Solidarius (Solidarity Economy Network), Italy
All India Peoples Science Network, India
Institute for Local Self-Reliance - Community Broadband Networks, USA

Please contact us at secretariat at InternetSocialForum.net for further
information or clarification.

Or the following regional contacts:

Africa:        Alex Gakaru <AlexG at InternetSocialForum.net>
Asia:          Rishab Bailey <RishabB at InternetSocialForum.net>
Europe:        Norbert Bollow <NorbertB at InternetSocialForum.net>
North America: Micheal Gurstein <MichealG at InternetSocialForum.net>
South America: Sally Burch <SallyB at InternetSocialForum.net>


This press release is also available online, e.g. at
http://justnetcoalition.org/ISF

-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From fulvio.frati at unimi.it  Thu Jan 22 08:48:27 2015
From: fulvio.frati at unimi.it (Fulvio Frati)
Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2015 14:48:27 +0100
Subject: [governance] [CFP]: OSS2015 Ph.D. Contest
Message-ID: <011b01d0364a$1949a140$4bdce3c0$@unimi.it>

[Apologies if you receive multiple copies of this CFP]

*****************************************************************************

11th Intl. Conf. on Open Source Systems (OSS2015)

Software Ecosystems Mining and Modelling PH.D. Contest

*****************************************************************************

As an addition to the OSS conference in 2015, we invite talented graduate students (Msc, PhD, and beyond) to submit their data sets, models, and papers to the Software Ecosystems Mining and Modelling contest. We are looking for innovations in the fields of open source ecosystem mining and modelling and aim to showcase groundbreaking results in the domain. 

 

We invite submissions related to, but not limited to, the following topics of interest:

- Software ecosystems data

- Software ecosystems models

- Relationship and structure mining techniques

- Relationship analysis 

- Software modeling

- App store and plug-in directory analysis

- OSS ecosystem strategy analysis

- OSS governance

- OSS quality control

- Multi-homing

Please note that we are explicitly looking for software ecosystem themed submissions. Submissions that concern single OSS projects are definitely interesting, but if they do not have some direct consequence for multiple (related) projects, the submissions will automatically be appreciated lower.

** Submission Dates

Contest Deadline: 28 February 2015

Winner Announcement: 7 March 2015

** Submission Format

The format for your submission is not restricted. Please make sure it is accompanied by an LNCS formatted submission document of up to 10 pages, although in some cases one page might suffice. The submissions must be submitted to EcosystemMiningContest at oss.org <mailto:EcosystemMiningContest at oss.org> .  

 

** Prize

The best proposals will be published in the OSS2015 Conference Proceedings, in the Ph.D. Contest section.

The winner will be invited to present his/her paper during the conference, and will have travel expenses (flight, max 500€) and registration granted by the conference organization.

The winner will also be awarded with a certificate of winning the Graduate Student Software Ecosystems Mining and Modelling Contest.

** Committee

The jury for the contest consists of:

Slinger Jansen, Utrecht University, The Netherlands

Ernesto Damiani, Milan University, Italy

Fulvio Frati, Milan University, Italy

 

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150122/c4d23fce/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From parminder at itforchange.net  Thu Jan 22 11:01:33 2015
From: parminder at itforchange.net (parminder)
Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2015 21:31:33 +0530
Subject: [governance] Internet Social Forum
In-Reply-To: <20150122143615.700b2f52@quill>
References: <20150122143615.700b2f52@quill>
Message-ID: <54C11EDD.50505@itforchange.net>

Enclosed Spanish version... parminder


On Thursday 22 January 2015 07:06 PM, Norbert Bollow wrote:
> Global Civil Society launches the Internet Social Forum
> – With a call to occupy the Internet
>
> PRESS RELEASE. Geneva, Switzerland, 22st January, 2015.
>
> A group of civil society organisations from around the world has
> announced the Internet Social Forum, to bring together and articulate
> bottom-up perspectives on the 'Internet we want'. Taking inspiration
> from the World Social Forum, and its clarion call, 'Another World is
> possible', the group seeks to draw urgent attention to the increasing
> centralization of the Internet for extraction of monopoly rents and for
> socio-political control, asserting that 'Another Internet is possible'!
>
> The Internet Social Forum will inter alia offer an alternative to the
> recently-launched World Economic Forum's 'Net Mundial Initiative' on
> global Internet governance. While the World Economic Forum (WEF) and
> the 'Net Mundial Initiative' convene global elites, the Internet Social
> Forum will be a participatory and bottom-up space for all those who
> believe that the global Internet must evolve in the public interest; a
> direct parallel to the launch of the World Social Forum in 2001 as a
> counter initiative to the WEF.
>
> The Internet Social Forum will reach out to grassroots groups and
> social movements across the world, catalysing a groundswell that
> challenges the entrenched elite interests that currently control how
> the Internet is managed. The Internet Social Forum's preparatory
> process will kick off during the World Social Forum to take place in
> Tunis, March 24th to 28th, 2015. The Internet Social Forum itself is
> planned to be held either late 2015 or early 2016.
>
> “While the world's biggest companies have every right to debate the
> future of the Internet, we are concerned that their perspectives should
> not drown out those of ordinary people who have no access to the
> privileged terrain WEF occupies – in the end it is this wider public
> interest that must be paramount in governing the Internet. We are
> organising the Internet Social Forum to make sure their voices can't be
> ignored in the corridors of power,” said Norbert Bollow, Co-Convenor of
> the Just Net Coalition, which is one of the groups involved in the
> initiative.
>
> The Internet Social Forum, and its preparatory process, is intended as
> a space to vision and build the 'Internet we want'. It will be
> underpinned by values of democracy, human rights and social justice. It
> will stand for participatory policy making and promote community media.
> It will seek an Internet that is truly decentralized in its
> architecture and based on people's full rights to data, information,
> knowledge and other 'commons' that the Internet has enabled the world
> community to generate and share.
>
> Somewhat similar to Web inventor Tim Berners-Lee’s call for a ‘Magna
> Carta for the Internet', the Internet Social Forum proposes to develop
> a People's Internet Manifesto, through a bottom-up process involving
> all concerned social groups and movements, in different areas, from
> techies and ICT-for-development actors to media reform groups,
> democracy movements and social justice activists.
>
> This year will also see the 10 year high-level review of the World
> Summit on the Information Society (WSIS), to be held in New York in
> December. As a full-scale review of a major UN summit, this will be a
> critical global political event. Since the WSIS, held in 2003 and 2005,
> the Internet, and what it means socially, has undergone a paradigm
> shift. The WSIS witnessed active engagement of civil society and
> technical groups as well as of business. However, currently, there
> seems to be an deliberate attempt to sideline this UN-led initiative on
> governance issues of the information society and Internet in favour of
> private, big-business-dominated initiatives like the WEF's Net Mundial
> Initiative. The Internet Social Forum, while remaining primarily a
> people's forum, will also seek to channel global civil society's
> engagement towards the WSIS +10 review.
>
> The following organisations form the initial group that is proposing
> the Internet Social Forum, and many more are expected to join in the
> immediate future. This is an open call to progressive groups from all
> over the world to join this initiative, and participate in developing a
> People's Internet Manifesto.
>
> Just Net Coalition, Global
> P2P Foundation, Global
> Transnational Institute, Global
> Forum on Communication for Integration of our America, Regional (Latin
> America) Arab NGO Network for Development, Regional
> Agencia Latinoamericana de Información, Regional
> Alternative Informatics Association, Turkey
> Knowledge Commons, India
> Open-Root/EUROLINC, France
> SLFC.in, India
> CODE-IP Trust, Kenya
> GodlyGlobal.org, Switzerland
> Centre for Community Informatics Research, Development and Training,
> Canada IT for Change, India
> Association for Proper Internet Governance, Switzerland
> Computer Professionals Union, Philippines
> Free Press, USA
> Advocates of Science and Technology for the People, Philippines
> Other News, Italy
> Free Software Movement of India
> Global_Geneva, Switzerland
> Solidarius (Solidarity Economy Network), Italy
> All India Peoples Science Network, India
> Institute for Local Self-Reliance - Community Broadband Networks, USA
>
> Please contact us at secretariat at InternetSocialForum.net for further
> information or clarification.
>
> Or the following regional contacts:
>
> Africa:        Alex Gakaru <AlexG at InternetSocialForum.net>
> Asia:          Rishab Bailey <RishabB at InternetSocialForum.net>
> Europe:        Norbert Bollow <NorbertB at InternetSocialForum.net>
> North America: Micheal Gurstein <MichealG at InternetSocialForum.net>
> South America: Sally Burch <SallyB at InternetSocialForum.net>
>
>
> This press release is also available online, e.g. at
> http://justnetcoalition.org/ISF
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150122/7cbc7c87/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Comunicado FSI espa?ol.doc
Type: application/msword
Size: 29696 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150122/7cbc7c87/attachment.doc>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From parminder at itforchange.net  Fri Jan 23 03:24:12 2015
From: parminder at itforchange.net (parminder)
Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2015 13:54:12 +0530
Subject: [governance] for the WEF and NMI enthusiasts
Message-ID: <54C2052C.9010009@itforchange.net>

Maybe the following is something to ponder upon ..

Not only is the inequality at an unacceptable level, the pace of its 
growth in unthinkably high, coinciding with a period when Internet is 
transforming every social structure and system.

Is the IG civil society contributing to the problem or solving it - or 
has it even seen the problem in the right manner, beyond what is 
presented by those who gain the most from current Internet power 
configurations.....

But then perhaps one may want to ignore this as not an IG issue.... 
parminder

http://www.thehindu.com/opinion/columns/davos-world-economic-forum/article6812228.ece


thehindu.com 
<http://www.thehindu.com/opinion/columns/davos-world-economic-forum/article6812228.ece> 



  In Davos, worrying about inequality

  * by Seumas Milne
  * Jan. 23, 2015
  * original
    <http://www.thehindu.com/opinion/columns/davos-world-economic-forum/article6812228.ece>


The billionaires and corporate oligarchs meeting in Davos this week are 
getting worried about inequality. It might be hard to stomach that the 
overlords of a system that has delivered the widest global economic gulf 
in human history should be hand-wringing about the consequences of their 
own actions.

But even the architects of the crisis-ridden international economic 
order are starting to see the dangers. It’s not just the maverick 
hedge-funder George Soros, who likes to describe himself as a class 
traitor. Paul Polman, Unilever chief executive, frets about the 
“capitalist threat to capitalism.” Christine Lagarde, the IMF managing 
director, fears capitalism might indeed carry Marx’s “seeds of its own 
destruction” and warns that something needs to be done.

The scale of the crisis has been laid out for them by the charity Oxfam. 
Just 80 individuals now have the same net wealth as 3.5 billion people — 
half the entire global population. Last year, the best-off one per cent 
owned 48 per cent of the world’s wealth, up from 44 per cent five years 
ago. On current trends, the richest one per cent will have pocketed more 
than the other 99 per cent put together next year. The 0.1 per cent has 
been doing even better, quadrupling their share of U.S. income since the 
1980s.

This is wealth grab on a grotesque scale. For 30 years, under the rule 
of “market fundamentalism,” inequality in income and wealth has 
ballooned, both between and within the large majority of countries. In 
Africa, the absolute number living on less than $2 a day has doubled 
since 1981.

In most of the world, labour’s share of national income has fallen 
continuously and wages have stagnated under this regime of 
privatisation, deregulation and low taxes on the rich. At the same time 
finance has sucked wealth from the public realm into the hands of a 
small minority, even as it has laid waste the rest of the economy. Now 
the evidence has piled up that not only is such appropriation of wealth 
a moral and social outrage, but it is fuelling social and climate 
conflict, wars, mass migration and political corruption, stunting health 
and life chances and increasing poverty.

Escalating inequality has also been a crucial factor in the economic 
crisis of the past seven years, squeezing demand and fuelling the credit 
boom. We don’t just know that from the research of the French economist 
Thomas Piketty or the British authors of the social study The Spirit 
Level. After years of promoting Washington orthodoxy, even the 
western-dominated OECD and IMF argue that the widening income gap has 
been key to the slow growth of the past two neoliberal decades. The 
British economy would have been almost 10 per cent larger if inequality 
hadn’t mushroomed.

*The big exception*

The big exception to the tide of inequality in recent years has been 
Latin America. Progressive governments across the region turned their 
back on a disastrous economic model, took back resources from corporate 
control and slashed inequality. The numbers living on less than $2 a day 
have fallen from 108 million to 53 million in little over a decade. 
China, which also rejected much of the neoliberal catechism, has seen 
sharply rising inequality at home but also lifted more people out of 
poverty than the rest of the world combined, offsetting the growing 
global income gap.

These two cases underline that increasing inequality and poverty are 
very far from inevitable. They’re the result of political and economic 
decisions. The thinking person’s Davos oligarch realises that allowing 
things to carry on as they are is dangerous. So, some want a more 
“inclusive capitalism” — including more progressive taxes — to save the 
system from itself.

But it certainly won’t come about as a result of Swiss mountain musings 
or anxious Guildhall lunches. Whatever the feelings of some corporate 
barons, vested corporate and elite interests including the organisations 
they run and the political structures they have colonised have shown 
they will fight even modest reforms tooth and nail. To get the idea, you 
only have to listen to the squeals of protest, including from some in 
his own party, at Ed Miliband’s plans to tax homes worth over £2m to 
fund the health service, or the demand from the one-time reformist 
Fabian Society that the Labour leader be more pro-business, or the wall 
of congressional resistance to Barack Obama’s mild redistributive 
taxation proposals.

Perhaps a section of the worried elite might be prepared to pay a bit 
more tax. What they won’t accept is any change in the balance of social 
power — which is why, in one country after another, they resist any 
attempt to strengthen trade unions.

It’s only through a challenge to the entrenched interests that have 
dined off a dysfunctional economic order that the tide of inequality 
will be reversed. The anti-austerity Syriza party, favourite to win the 
Greek elections this weekend, is attempting to do just that — as the 
Latin American left has succeeded in doing over the past decade and a 
half. Even to get to that point demands stronger social and political 
movements to break down or bypass the blockage in a colonised political 
mainstream. Crocodile tears about inequality are a symptom of a fearful 
elite. But change will only come from unrelenting social pressure and 
political challenge.

— *© Guardian Newspapers Limited, 2015 *

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150123/ed55c582/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From jlfullsack at orange.fr  Fri Jan 23 04:12:40 2015
From: jlfullsack at orange.fr (Jean-Louis FULLSACK)
Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2015 10:12:40 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [governance] for the WEF and NMI enthusiasts
In-Reply-To: <54C2052C.9010009@itforchange.net>
References: <54C2052C.9010009@itforchange.net>
Message-ID: <1496714969.6326.1422004361007.JavaMail.www@wwinf1m07>

Thamnkd Parminder

 

for this document which sums-up the main features of the scandalous inequality put in place by the "Davos oligarchy". Thanks above all to Oxfam for its work, its commitment and its presence in all critical domains and spaces. BTW : did anybody ever meet Oxfam in WSIS events ? The NGO was visionary enough to see how this UN driven (?) Summit has completely failed since a long time ...

 

Best regards

 

Jean-Louis Fullsack

 

 

 

 

> Message du 23/01/15 09:24
> De : "parminder" 

> A : "governance at lists.igcaucus.org" , bestbits at lists.bestbits.net
> Copie à : 
> Objet : [governance] for the WEF and NMI enthusiasts
> 
>Maybe the following is something to ponder upon .. 
> 
> Not only is the inequality at an unacceptable level, the pace of its growth in unthinkably high, coinciding with a period when Internet is transforming every social structure and system. 
> 
> Is the IG civil society contributing to the problem or solving it - or has it even seen the problem in the right manner, beyond what is presented by those who gain the most from current Internet power configurations.....
> 
> But then perhaps one may want to ignore this as not an IG issue.... parminder
> 
> http://www.thehindu.com/opinion/columns/davos-world-economic-forum/article6812228.ece
> 
> 
>
thehindu.com 
In Davos, worrying about inequality

by Seumas Milne
Jan. 23, 2015
original 

The billionaires and corporate oligarchs meeting in Davos this week are getting worried about inequality. It might be hard to stomach that the overlords of a system that has delivered the widest global economic gulf in human history should be hand-wringing about the consequences of their own actions.

But even the architects of the crisis-ridden international economic order are starting to see the dangers. It’s not just the maverick hedge-funder George Soros, who likes to describe himself as a class traitor. Paul Polman, Unilever chief executive, frets about the “capitalist threat to capitalism.” Christine Lagarde, the IMF managing director, fears capitalism might indeed carry Marx’s “seeds of its own destruction” and warns that something needs to be done.

The scale of the crisis has been laid out for them by the charity Oxfam. Just 80 individuals now have the same net wealth as 3.5 billion people — half the entire global population. Last year, the best-off one per cent owned 48 per cent of the world’s wealth, up from 44 per cent five years ago. On current trends, the richest one per cent will have pocketed more than the other 99 per cent put together next year. The 0.1 per cent has been doing even better, quadrupling their share of U.S. income since the 1980s.

This is wealth grab on a grotesque scale. For 30 years, under the rule of “market fundamentalism,” inequality in income and wealth has ballooned, both between and within the large majority of countries. In Africa, the absolute number living on less than $2 a day has doubled since 1981.

In most of the world, labour’s share of national income has fallen continuously and wages have stagnated under this regime of privatisation, deregulation and low taxes on the rich. At the same time finance has sucked wealth from the public realm into the hands of a small minority, even as it has laid waste the rest of the economy. Now the evidence has piled up that not only is such appropriation of wealth a moral and social outrage, but it is fuelling social and climate conflict, wars, mass migration and political corruption, stunting health and life chances and increasing poverty.

Escalating inequality has also been a crucial factor in the economic crisis of the past seven years, squeezing demand and fuelling the credit boom. We don’t just know that from the research of the French economist Thomas Piketty or the British authors of the social study The Spirit Level. After years of promoting Washington orthodoxy, even the western-dominated OECD and IMF argue that the widening income gap has been key to the slow growth of the past two neoliberal decades. The British economy would have been almost 10 per cent larger if inequality hadn’t mushroomed.

The big exception
> 
> The big exception to the tide of inequality in recent years has been Latin America. Progressive governments across the region turned their back on a disastrous economic model, took back resources from corporate control and slashed inequality. The numbers living on less than $2 a day have fallen from 108 million to 53 million in little over a decade. China, which also rejected much of the neoliberal catechism, has seen sharply rising inequality at home but also lifted more people out of poverty than the rest of the world combined, offsetting the growing global income gap.

These two cases underline that increasing inequality and poverty are very far from inevitable. They’re the result of political and economic decisions. The thinking person’s Davos oligarch realises that allowing things to carry on as they are is dangerous. So, some want a more “inclusive capitalism” — including more progressive taxes — to save the system from itself.

But it certainly won’t come about as a result of Swiss mountain musings or anxious Guildhall lunches. Whatever the feelings of some corporate barons, vested corporate and elite interests including the organisations they run and the political structures they have colonised have shown they will fight even modest reforms tooth and nail. To get the idea, you only have to listen to the squeals of protest, including from some in his own party, at Ed Miliband’s plans to tax homes worth over £2m to fund the health service, or the demand from the one-time reformist Fabian Society that the Labour leader be more pro-business, or the wall of congressional resistance to Barack Obama’s mild redistributive taxation proposals.

Perhaps a section of the worried elite might be prepared to pay a bit more tax. What they won’t accept is any change in the balance of social power — which is why, in one country after another, they resist any attempt to strengthen trade unions.

It’s only through a challenge to the entrenched interests that have dined off a dysfunctional economic order that the tide of inequality will be reversed. The anti-austerity Syriza party, favourite to win the Greek elections this weekend, is attempting to do just that — as the Latin American left has succeeded in doing over the past decade and a half. Even to get to that point demands stronger social and political movements to break down or bypass the blockage in a colonised political mainstream. Crocodile tears about inequality are a symptom of a fearful elite. But change will only come from unrelenting social pressure and political challenge.

— © Guardian Newspapers Limited, 2015 




____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150123/c6a71fdf/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From arsenebaguma at yahoo.fr  Fri Jan 23 06:59:47 2015
From: arsenebaguma at yahoo.fr (Arsene TUNGALI (Yahoo))
Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2015 11:59:47 +0000
Subject: [governance] Results of the 2015 IGC Coordinator Election
Message-ID: <1422014387.17851.YahooMailIosMobile@web28702.mail.ir2.yahoo.com>

An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150123/1f048352/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From ca at cafonso.ca  Fri Jan 23 07:32:42 2015
From: ca at cafonso.ca (Carlos A. Afonso)
Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2015 10:32:42 -0200
Subject: [governance] Internet Social Forum
In-Reply-To: <20150122143615.700b2f52@quill>
References: <20150122143615.700b2f52@quill>
Message-ID: <54C23F6A.9090503@cafonso.ca>

Below is an excellent response from Jeremy Malcolm (Best Bits, EFF)
regarding the proposal to create a "world social forum" of the Internet.
I am really puzzled: the call from JNC to join ISF is for governments to
occupy the Internet??

fraternal regards

--c.a.

====

http://igfwatch.org/discussion-board/who-are-the-just-net-coalition-and-what-can-we-expect-from-the-internet-social-forum

Who are the Just Net Coalition and what can we expect from the Internet
Social Forum?

Jeremy Malcolm

Date: 23/1/2015 3:52 pm

Today, the Just Net Coalition (JNC) [1] has broadcast (on seven mailing
lists alone that I subscribe to) its plans for an Internet Social Forum,
modeled on the World Social Forum, the well-known anti-globalisation
summit. Just as the World Social Forum is held in opposition to the
annual Davos meeting of the World Economic Forum (WEF), so the Internet
Social Forum is framed as an alternative to the NETmundial Initiative
[2], which JNC describes (inaccurately) as a project of the WEF.

Before saying anything more, I should clarify that I too have been
critical [3] of the NETmundial Initiative, I too believe that the
Internet governance status quo is overdue for reform [4], I also share
concerns about a concentration of market power [5] in the hands of
US-based Internet companies, and I do believe that governments have an
important role to play [6] in future Internet governance arrangements.
However, I won't be supporting the Internet Social Forum, because the
Just Net Coalition's objectives are misguided, and its mode of
engagement with the rest of civil society has been profoundly dysfunctional.

History

Who are the Just Net Coalition? I briefly mentioned them in my last post
[7], but today's announcement has raised further questions among some of
my contacts, and led others to express support the proposal despite not
knowing much of the history of those proposing it. This post is to
provide some of that necessary background, so that those who choose to
endorse the Internet Social Forum will not be taken by surprise when its
proposed “People's Internet Manifesto” takes a course with which they
may profoundly disagree.

The founding meeting of what became the Just Net Coalition February 2014
was invitation-only, and invitations were issued, in the first instance,
only to those known to by sympathetic to the views of the organisers. (A
few key individuals excluded from the first round of invitations were,
at the urging of the meeting's funder, subsequently approached with late
invitations to attend; speaking for myself as one of these, the approach
came far too late for me to make the necessary arrangements even to
obtain a visa.) Consequently, the content of that meeting's outcome
document, the Delhi Declaration for a Just and Equitable Internet [8],
was largely predetermined.

The political programme of that document (more on this below) has a long
history in a disagreement between a few individuals who were members of
the Civil Society Internet Governance Caucus (IGC) [9], that has
frequently threatened to tear that group apart. On some accounts,
indeed, it has already done so – opinions vary on when or whether the
IGC “jumped the shark”, but many count it as the day at an IGC meeting
in 2013 when a prominent JNC member almost came to blows with a female
attendee in an argument, ironically, over his own overbearing behaviour.

The formation of Best Bits [10] in 2012 was (at least on my part, as one
of its founders), partly in response to the decline of the IGC and the
need for a more action-oriented, globally-inclusive civil society
community that could speak on Internet governance and human rights
issues, without requiring a full consensus which (for the IGC, at least)
had become completely unachievable. Those who now lead JNC, at the time,
also held hopes (as did we) that they too could make effective use of
Best Bits as a platform for actions and statements on which a broad
consensus could be reached, which for a time they did, but what
ultimately transpired will be recounted later.

So who are these individuals to whom I am obliquely referring? Although
I don't wish to unduly personalise this post, it is relevant that they
be identified in order to give context to the following section of this
post; and equally, it is quite proper that as spokespersons for the
group, they should be held accountable for their public behaviour and
statements. (I should also add before going further that I have had a
long record of working fruitfully with the individuals named both online
and in person, dating back to 2004. I have even retained one of them as
a paid consultant on a project I managed.)

Amongst the key individuals who have spoken publicly for JNC and who sit
on its steering committee are Parminder Jeet Singh who leads Indian NGO
IT for Change, Michael Gurstein who is a Canadian academic and edits the
Journal of Community Informatics, Norbert Bollow who is a Swiss systems
analyst and FOSS developer, and Richard Hill, former senior staff member
of the ITU, who continues to advocate for an expanded role for the ITU
on Internet-related public policy issues [11]. Many of the groups shown
as supporting the Internet Social Forum in today's announcement are
vanity or hobby projects of these founding individuals. For example
Centre for Community Informatics Research, Development and Training is
Gurstein, GodlyGlobal.org is Bollow, and Association for Proper Internet
Governance is Hill.

(You might note that the majority JNC's most vocal key figures,
including others not mentioned above such as Louis Pouzin and
Jean-Christophe Nothias, are white men from industrialised countries.
Now as a white man myself I'm certainly not one to point fingers at
them, but as an organisation that purports to be “globally concerned
with…social justice”, as JNC does [12], this lack of diversity perhaps
bears mentioning.)

Objectives

The positioning of the Just Net Coalition against multi-stakeholder
Internet governance [13], and in favour of a state-centric model,
although now quite overt, became evident gradually. The Delhi
Declaration covers this obliquely, stating “The right to make
Internet-related public policies lies exclusively with those who
legitimately and directly represent people” (ie. states). Another coded
phrase the JNC has used to call for the centralisation of Internet
governance authority in states it its call for “legitimate political
authority” [14].

A turning point came at the meeting of the Working Group on Enhanced
Cooperation on Public Policy Issues Pertaining to the Internet (WGEC) of
the UN Commission for Science and Technology for Development (CSTD) in
April 2014. To the surprise of other civil society and technical
community delegates at that meeting, Parminder Jeet Singh insisted that
support for paragraph 35 of the Tunis Agenda [15] be retained in working
group's report, as the representatives from Saudi Arabia and Iran also
forcefully argued. Up until then, indeed for an unbroken decade,
opposition to paragraph 35 had been a unanimous civil society position.

Paragraph 35 states (my emphasis):

We reaffirm that the management of the Internet encompasses both
technical and public policy issues and should involve all stakeholders
and relevant intergovernmental and international organizations. In this
respect it is recognized that:

a. *Policy authority for Internet-related public policy issues is the
sovereign right of States*. They have rights and responsibilities for
international Internet-related public policy issues.

b. The private sector has had, and should continue to have, an important
role in the development of the Internet, both in the technical and
economic fields.

c. *Civil society has also played an important role on Internet matters,
especially *at community level*, and should continue to play such a role.

d. Intergovernmental organizations have had, and should continue to
have, a facilitating role in the coordination of Internet-related public
policy issues.

e. International organizations have also had and should continue to have
an important role in the development of Internet-related technical
standards and relevant policies.

In supporting this paragraph that constricts civil society's role in
Internet governance, Parminder said:

"I have clarity about what is the role of different stakeholders being
quite different to one another and I don't appreciate that
non-governmental actors would have the same role in decision-making than
governmental actors. That should not be acceptable at a global level."

This, translated into JNC policy and the agenda for its Internet Social
Forum, marks a profound shift away from the decentralised and horizontal
model of Internet governance that civil society had heretofore
supported, towards an hierarchical, state-led model.

For a time, JNC attempted to explain away this change by drawing a straw
man distinction between “democratic multi-stakeholderism” (which JNC
supports) and “equal footing multi-stakeholderism” (which it doesn't,
mischaracterising it as “governance by self-selected elites”) [16]. But
it has since mostly abandoned that pretense and become more overt in
promoting an intergovernmental model of Internet governance [17],
stating for example in a more recent statement, “We invite all countries
to call for a Framework Convention on the Internet and to take up
leadership in developing global Internet-related policies,” and averring
that “[w]ithout governmental support, it is difficult, perhaps
impossible to combat the dominance of global Internet monopolies” [18].

Now, I have argued elsewhere why governments ought not to have a
monopoly on the development of Internet-related public policies, but why
a model of multi-stakeholderism that includes governments as a key, but
not dominant stakeholder can still be counted as democratic [19]. You
can accept those arguments or not. If you don't, then you might come
down on JNC's side on this issue, and that would be perfectly legitimate.

But that's only half of the problem with JNC. The other half is the
toxic relationship that its representatives have cultivated with the
rest of civil society.

Relationship with civil society

At the first Best Bits meeting in 2012, much time and many pains were
taken to accommodate the demands of those future JNC committee members
who attended, and this effort did successfully result in a consensus
text to which they were willing to put their names [20]. But from this
point, their participation in Best Bits became less productive and more
divisive, largely over two issues, which were intertwined.

The first has already been mentioned: the fundamental ideological
disagreement over the legitimacy of multi-stakeholder Internet
governance, which was accepted by a majority of Best Bits participants,
but not by those who were later to split off into JNC. This disagreement
took on greater currency when the NETmundial meeting was announced and
Best Bits participants began to coordinate the development of several
joint inputs [21]. When the future JNC leaders found themselves unable
to influence the drafting of these statements to sufficiently accord
with their view that governments should have an outsized role in
Internet governance, the next best option became to disrupt the
development of those statements by hectoring, intimidating and
disparaging participants who expressed pro-multistakeholder views.

As good an example as any, and a more recent one, is Gurstein's reaction
in November 2014 to the qualified support of the Association for
Progressive Communications (APC) for the NETmundial Initiative, to which
he wrote to Anriette Esterhuysen, APC's Executive Director, “I’m taking
from your argument that because the NMI offers some possibility, however
remote for the advancement of human rights, you are completely
abandoning perhaps irrevocably, the pursuit of social justice.” To
anyone who knows of the many years of devotion that Anriette and APC
have given in the cause of social justice (and Gurstein certainly does),
this is a farcical insult.

The second issue to which the disruptive behaviour of JNC
representatives has been directed, which probably arose from the first,
were criticisms of various processes that they found themselves unable
to influence, including not only those of Best Bits, 1net [22], and the
Civil Society Coordination Group (CSCG) [23]. In a rising tide of
authoritarian behaviour, those who became JNC's leaders would demand
appointment to a position of authority or that these fledgling groups
hold elections immediately, insist that other participants in those
groups disclose of their sources of funding, and cause a commotion about
any strategic discussions that took place off-list or in closed groups.

The response of a relative outsider, Milton Mueller, to Gurstein's
demands for inclusion in 1net aptly record the frustration that many
others felt:

"Stop pretending that CI [Community Informatics] is some massive
grassroots movement related to Internet governance that deserves special
representation; and stop pretending that  your frustration with not
being selected by CS means that their procedures were illegitimate. You
[and] your group are free to contribute position papers to the process
and to attend, as far as we know. Why don’t you see how far you can get
on persuasion and education, if that’s really your mission?"

To give another example, Bollow, who had earlier demanded a full
accounting of the funding sources of Best Bits participants, wrote in
November 2013, “I hereby request the members of the BestBits steering
committee, the members of the IRP Steering Committee, and the
coordinators of the IGC to disclose any direct or indirect financial
relationship to any 'capacity building' or similar kind of project where
a US government agency is among the funders.”

Then again he wrote in October 2014 to the moderators of a closed
strategy list formed for the recent ITU Plenipotentiary meeting – a list
that he had not joined – demanding the right to “inspect” its archives
on behalf of JNC. As for the CSCG, even after it acceded to JNC's
requests and added Bollow as a representative, JNC betrayed that trust
by publishing an account of its private deliberations which criticised
other CSCG members [24], falsely stating that they had decided to
support the NETmundial Initiative.

Although some of JNC's demands of other civil society groups and
networks may have been reasonable in themselves – Best Bits, for
example, always intended to hold steering committee elections and did
hold them within a year of its formation – these demands were delivered
with such hubris and entitlement that the effect has been to isolate JNC
from other civil society groups and networks and to sow seeds of discord
that will have lasting effects.

Ironically the result has been exactly the opposite of what JNC
intended. Discussions have retreated from public, open lists into
private, closed lists – or private cc groups that are not list-managed
at all – precisely to avoid unproductive exchanges with JNC members.

Even more ironically, JNC does not hold itself to the same standards of
transparency and accountability that it demands of others; it has never
been publicly disclosed, for example, receiving funding from
ThoughtWorks, and even the list of signatories of the Delhi Declaration,
which formed the JNC's first membership list, was not made public for
months after its supposed founding, even while further statements
continued to be issued. Neither does JNC operate an open mailing list,
despite vociferous demands that other civil society networks, such as
Best Bits, should do so.

It might be countered that as pernicious as the behaviour of key JNC
members may have been, they are only individuals, and this should not be
attributed to the organisation as a whole. Whilst none of the other JNC
members has ever “broken ranks” and spoken up against even the founders,
this may not be because they are condoning their behaviour, but because
they are unaware of it, since it takes place on other civil society
mailing lists. Might a change of leadership of JNC be all that is
required? This is hard to say, and at present a moot question since no
such change is on the horizon.

Conclusion

What, then, can we expect from JNC's Internet Social Forum? Sadly, we
can expect that any participants who support a distributed,
multi-stakeholder model for Internet governance will be required to
check those convictions at the door, and to embrace instead a UN-based
model that places governments firmly in control of Internet public
policy development. We can expect those who deviate from this line to be
interrogated mercilessly, and accused of being props for neoliberal
hegemony and corporate domination. May JNC's “take no prisoners”
approach serve them well.

This is a shame, because a well-reasoned leftist critique of Internet
governance arrangements and reforms that directs its ire at powerful
incumbents, rather than at those who seek to forge a middle path of
inclusive multi-stakeholder governance, would actually be very valuable.
To date, JNC has exhibited no desire to provide such a sober, productive
critique, instead preferring to focus its destructive anger on easier,
weaker targets – its own civil society colleagues.

-----------------------------

Notes:

[1] http://justnetcoalition.org

[2] https://www.netmundial.org

[3]
http://igfwatch.org/discussion-board/netmundial-initiative-takes-a-top-down-approach-to-implementing-the-netmundial-principles

[4]
http://igfwatch.org/discussion-board/netmundial-2014-submission-on-evolution-of-the-internet-governance-ecosystem

[5]
http://www.digitalnewsasia.com/insights/digital-consumers-breaking-through-the-cloud

[6]
http://igfwatch.org/discussion-board/three-false-assumptions-internet-freedom-in-a-world-of-states-part-1

[7]
http://igfwatch.org/discussion-board/civil-society-talks-tough-to-the-netmundial-initiative-but-holds-back-on-a-boycott

[8] http://justnetcoalition.org/delhi-declaration

[9] http://igcaucus.org

[10] http://bestbits.net

[11]
http://content.netmundial.br/contribution/roadmaps-for-further-evolution-of-internet-governance/65

[12]
http://justnetcoalition.org/sites/default/files/Delhi_Declaration_leaflet_0.pdf

[13]
http://blog.justnetcoalition.org/democracy-or-multi-stakeholderism-competing-models-of-governance-by-michael-gurstein

[14] http://justnetcoalition.org/sites/default/files/NewModel_r2.pdf

[15] http://www.itu.int/wsis/docs2/tunis/off/6rev1.html

[16] http://justnetcoalition.org/sites/default/files/ITU_PP_2014_Stmt2.pdf

[17]
http://blog.justnetcoalition.org/democracy-or-multi-stakeholderism-competing-models-of-governance-by-michael-gurstein

[18] http://justnetcoalition.org/sites/default/files/NewModel_r2.pdf

[19]
http://igfwatch.org/discussion-board/a-civil-society-agenda-for-internet-governance-in-2013-internet-freedom-in-a-world-of-states-part-3

[20] http://bestbits.net/statement

[21] http://bestbits.net/netmundial-principles,
http://bestbits.net/netmundial-roadmap, and
http://bestbits.net/netmundial-icann

[22] http://1net.org/

[23] http://lists.bestbits.net/info/cs-coord

[24] http://justnetcoalition.org/NMI-neoliberal-caravan

====

On 01/22/2015 11:36 AM, Norbert Bollow wrote:
> Global Civil Society launches the Internet Social Forum
> – With a call to occupy the Internet
> 
> PRESS RELEASE. Geneva, Switzerland, 22st January, 2015.
> 
> A group of civil society organisations from around the world has
> announced the Internet Social Forum, to bring together and articulate
> bottom-up perspectives on the 'Internet we want'. Taking inspiration
> from the World Social Forum, and its clarion call, 'Another World is
> possible', the group seeks to draw urgent attention to the increasing
> centralization of the Internet for extraction of monopoly rents and for
> socio-political control, asserting that 'Another Internet is possible'!
> 
> The Internet Social Forum will inter alia offer an alternative to the
> recently-launched World Economic Forum's 'Net Mundial Initiative' on
> global Internet governance. While the World Economic Forum (WEF) and
> the 'Net Mundial Initiative' convene global elites, the Internet Social
> Forum will be a participatory and bottom-up space for all those who
> believe that the global Internet must evolve in the public interest; a
> direct parallel to the launch of the World Social Forum in 2001 as a
> counter initiative to the WEF.
> 
> The Internet Social Forum will reach out to grassroots groups and
> social movements across the world, catalysing a groundswell that
> challenges the entrenched elite interests that currently control how
> the Internet is managed. The Internet Social Forum's preparatory
> process will kick off during the World Social Forum to take place in
> Tunis, March 24th to 28th, 2015. The Internet Social Forum itself is
> planned to be held either late 2015 or early 2016.
> 
> “While the world's biggest companies have every right to debate the
> future of the Internet, we are concerned that their perspectives should
> not drown out those of ordinary people who have no access to the
> privileged terrain WEF occupies – in the end it is this wider public
> interest that must be paramount in governing the Internet. We are
> organising the Internet Social Forum to make sure their voices can't be
> ignored in the corridors of power,” said Norbert Bollow, Co-Convenor of
> the Just Net Coalition, which is one of the groups involved in the
> initiative.
> 
> The Internet Social Forum, and its preparatory process, is intended as
> a space to vision and build the 'Internet we want'. It will be
> underpinned by values of democracy, human rights and social justice. It
> will stand for participatory policy making and promote community media.
> It will seek an Internet that is truly decentralized in its
> architecture and based on people's full rights to data, information,
> knowledge and other 'commons' that the Internet has enabled the world
> community to generate and share.
> 
> Somewhat similar to Web inventor Tim Berners-Lee’s call for a ‘Magna
> Carta for the Internet', the Internet Social Forum proposes to develop
> a People's Internet Manifesto, through a bottom-up process involving
> all concerned social groups and movements, in different areas, from
> techies and ICT-for-development actors to media reform groups,
> democracy movements and social justice activists.
> 
> This year will also see the 10 year high-level review of the World
> Summit on the Information Society (WSIS), to be held in New York in
> December. As a full-scale review of a major UN summit, this will be a
> critical global political event. Since the WSIS, held in 2003 and 2005,
> the Internet, and what it means socially, has undergone a paradigm
> shift. The WSIS witnessed active engagement of civil society and
> technical groups as well as of business. However, currently, there
> seems to be an deliberate attempt to sideline this UN-led initiative on
> governance issues of the information society and Internet in favour of
> private, big-business-dominated initiatives like the WEF's Net Mundial
> Initiative. The Internet Social Forum, while remaining primarily a
> people's forum, will also seek to channel global civil society's
> engagement towards the WSIS +10 review.
> 
> The following organisations form the initial group that is proposing
> the Internet Social Forum, and many more are expected to join in the
> immediate future. This is an open call to progressive groups from all
> over the world to join this initiative, and participate in developing a
> People's Internet Manifesto.
> 
> Just Net Coalition, Global
> P2P Foundation, Global
> Transnational Institute, Global
> Forum on Communication for Integration of our America, Regional (Latin
> America) Arab NGO Network for Development, Regional
> Agencia Latinoamericana de Información, Regional
> Alternative Informatics Association, Turkey
> Knowledge Commons, India
> Open-Root/EUROLINC, France
> SLFC.in, India
> CODE-IP Trust, Kenya
> GodlyGlobal.org, Switzerland
> Centre for Community Informatics Research, Development and Training,
> Canada IT for Change, India
> Association for Proper Internet Governance, Switzerland
> Computer Professionals Union, Philippines
> Free Press, USA
> Advocates of Science and Technology for the People, Philippines
> Other News, Italy
> Free Software Movement of India
> Global_Geneva, Switzerland
> Solidarius (Solidarity Economy Network), Italy
> All India Peoples Science Network, India
> Institute for Local Self-Reliance - Community Broadband Networks, USA
> 
> Please contact us at secretariat at InternetSocialForum.net for further
> information or clarification.
> 
> Or the following regional contacts:
> 
> Africa:        Alex Gakaru <AlexG at InternetSocialForum.net>
> Asia:          Rishab Bailey <RishabB at InternetSocialForum.net>
> Europe:        Norbert Bollow <NorbertB at InternetSocialForum.net>
> North America: Micheal Gurstein <MichealG at InternetSocialForum.net>
> South America: Sally Burch <SallyB at InternetSocialForum.net>
> 
> 
> This press release is also available online, e.g. at
> http://justnetcoalition.org/ISF
> 

-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From gurstein at gmail.com  Fri Jan 23 08:31:41 2015
From: gurstein at gmail.com (michael gurstein)
Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2015 05:31:41 -0800
Subject: [governance] FW: [discuss] Internet Social Forum
In-Reply-To: <54C240EB.9090908@cafonso.ca>
References: <20150122144714.2bf24d0b@quill> <54C240EB.9090908@cafonso.ca>
Message-ID: <0ab001d03710$ece501e0$c6af05a0$@gmail.com>

FWIW... Flouting normal academic/journalistic etiquette Jeremy omitted to reference my comments quoted in his blog which for anyone who hasn't been following can be found with context and elaboration in my blog http://gurstein.wordpress.com (key word searches on "multi-stakeholder" and "civil society" should turn these up--and with a bit of digging one might find even more fearsomely critical comments including about CS's unholy partnerships with and financial support from the global Internet elites.

BTW, I'm looking forward to seeing the invitation from Jeremy and the other NMI-nik's inviting global Civil Society to their next 1% err WEF, ICANN, cgi Internet Governance lovefest -- perhaps it could be called the I(%) SF ...

M

-----Original Message-----
From: discuss-bounces at 1net.org [mailto:discuss-bounces at 1net.org] On Behalf Of Carlos A. Afonso
Sent: Friday, January 23, 2015 4:39 AM
To: discuss at 1net.org
Subject: Re: [discuss] Internet Social Forum

Dear people,

Below is an excellent response from Jeremy Malcolm (Best Bits, EFF) regarding the proposal to create a "world social forum" of the Internet.
I am really puzzled: the call from JNC to join ISF is for governments to occupy the Internet??

fraternal regards

--c.a.

====

http://igfwatch.org/discussion-board/who-are-the-just-net-coalition-and-what-can-we-expect-from-the-internet-social-forum

Who are the Just Net Coalition and what can we expect from the Internet Social Forum?

Jeremy Malcolm

Date: 23/1/2015 3:52 pm

Today, the Just Net Coalition (JNC) [1] has broadcast (on seven mailing lists alone that I subscribe to) its plans for an Internet Social Forum, modeled on the World Social Forum, the well-known anti-globalisation summit. Just as the World Social Forum is held in opposition to the annual Davos meeting of the World Economic Forum (WEF), so the Internet Social Forum is framed as an alternative to the NETmundial Initiative [2], which JNC describes (inaccurately) as a project of the WEF.

Before saying anything more, I should clarify that I too have been critical [3] of the NETmundial Initiative, I too believe that the Internet governance status quo is overdue for reform [4], I also share concerns about a concentration of market power [5] in the hands of US-based Internet companies, and I do believe that governments have an important role to play [6] in future Internet governance arrangements.
However, I won't be supporting the Internet Social Forum, because the Just Net Coalition's objectives are misguided, and its mode of engagement with the rest of civil society has been profoundly dysfunctional.

History

Who are the Just Net Coalition? I briefly mentioned them in my last post [7], but today's announcement has raised further questions among some of my contacts, and led others to express support the proposal despite not knowing much of the history of those proposing it. This post is to provide some of that necessary background, so that those who choose to endorse the Internet Social Forum will not be taken by surprise when its proposed “People's Internet Manifesto” takes a course with which they may profoundly disagree.

The founding meeting of what became the Just Net Coalition February 2014 was invitation-only, and invitations were issued, in the first instance, only to those known to by sympathetic to the views of the organisers. (A few key individuals excluded from the first round of invitations were, at the urging of the meeting's funder, subsequently approached with late invitations to attend; speaking for myself as one of these, the approach came far too late for me to make the necessary arrangements even to obtain a visa.) Consequently, the content of that meeting's outcome document, the Delhi Declaration for a Just and Equitable Internet [8], was largely predetermined.

The political programme of that document (more on this below) has a long history in a disagreement between a few individuals who were members of the Civil Society Internet Governance Caucus (IGC) [9], that has frequently threatened to tear that group apart. On some accounts, indeed, it has already done so – opinions vary on when or whether the IGC “jumped the shark”, but many count it as the day at an IGC meeting in 2013 when a prominent JNC member almost came to blows with a female attendee in an argument, ironically, over his own overbearing behaviour.

The formation of Best Bits [10] in 2012 was (at least on my part, as one of its founders), partly in response to the decline of the IGC and the need for a more action-oriented, globally-inclusive civil society community that could speak on Internet governance and human rights issues, without requiring a full consensus which (for the IGC, at least) had become completely unachievable. Those who now lead JNC, at the time, also held hopes (as did we) that they too could make effective use of Best Bits as a platform for actions and statements on which a broad consensus could be reached, which for a time they did, but what ultimately transpired will be recounted later.

So who are these individuals to whom I am obliquely referring? Although I don't wish to unduly personalise this post, it is relevant that they be identified in order to give context to the following section of this post; and equally, it is quite proper that as spokespersons for the group, they should be held accountable for their public behaviour and statements. (I should also add before going further that I have had a long record of working fruitfully with the individuals named both online and in person, dating back to 2004. I have even retained one of them as a paid consultant on a project I managed.)

Amongst the key individuals who have spoken publicly for JNC and who sit on its steering committee are Parminder Jeet Singh who leads Indian NGO IT for Change, Michael Gurstein who is a Canadian academic and edits the Journal of Community Informatics, Norbert Bollow who is a Swiss systems analyst and FOSS developer, and Richard Hill, former senior staff member of the ITU, who continues to advocate for an expanded role for the ITU on Internet-related public policy issues [11]. Many of the groups shown as supporting the Internet Social Forum in today's announcement are vanity or hobby projects of these founding individuals. For example Centre for Community Informatics Research, Development and Training is Gurstein, GodlyGlobal.org is Bollow, and Association for Proper Internet Governance is Hill.

(You might note that the majority JNC's most vocal key figures, including others not mentioned above such as Louis Pouzin and Jean-Christophe Nothias, are white men from industrialised countries.
Now as a white man myself I'm certainly not one to point fingers at them, but as an organisation that purports to be “globally concerned with…social justice”, as JNC does [12], this lack of diversity perhaps bears mentioning.)

Objectives

The positioning of the Just Net Coalition against multi-stakeholder Internet governance [13], and in favour of a state-centric model, although now quite overt, became evident gradually. The Delhi Declaration covers this obliquely, stating “The right to make Internet-related public policies lies exclusively with those who legitimately and directly represent people” (ie. states). Another coded phrase the JNC has used to call for the centralisation of Internet governance authority in states it its call for “legitimate political authority” [14].

A turning point came at the meeting of the Working Group on Enhanced Cooperation on Public Policy Issues Pertaining to the Internet (WGEC) of the UN Commission for Science and Technology for Development (CSTD) in April 2014. To the surprise of other civil society and technical community delegates at that meeting, Parminder Jeet Singh insisted that support for paragraph 35 of the Tunis Agenda [15] be retained in working group's report, as the representatives from Saudi Arabia and Iran also forcefully argued. Up until then, indeed for an unbroken decade, opposition to paragraph 35 had been a unanimous civil society position.

Paragraph 35 states (my emphasis):

We reaffirm that the management of the Internet encompasses both technical and public policy issues and should involve all stakeholders and relevant intergovernmental and international organizations. In this respect it is recognized that:

a. *Policy authority for Internet-related public policy issues is the sovereign right of States*. They have rights and responsibilities for international Internet-related public policy issues.

b. The private sector has had, and should continue to have, an important role in the development of the Internet, both in the technical and economic fields.

c. *Civil society has also played an important role on Internet matters, especially *at community level*, and should continue to play such a role.

d. Intergovernmental organizations have had, and should continue to have, a facilitating role in the coordination of Internet-related public policy issues.

e. International organizations have also had and should continue to have an important role in the development of Internet-related technical standards and relevant policies.

In supporting this paragraph that constricts civil society's role in Internet governance, Parminder said:

"I have clarity about what is the role of different stakeholders being quite different to one another and I don't appreciate that non-governmental actors would have the same role in decision-making than governmental actors. That should not be acceptable at a global level."

This, translated into JNC policy and the agenda for its Internet Social Forum, marks a profound shift away from the decentralised and horizontal model of Internet governance that civil society had heretofore supported, towards an hierarchical, state-led model.

For a time, JNC attempted to explain away this change by drawing a straw man distinction between “democratic multi-stakeholderism” (which JNC
supports) and “equal footing multi-stakeholderism” (which it doesn't, mischaracterising it as “governance by self-selected elites”) [16]. But it has since mostly abandoned that pretense and become more overt in promoting an intergovernmental model of Internet governance [17], stating for example in a more recent statement, “We invite all countries to call for a Framework Convention on the Internet and to take up leadership in developing global Internet-related policies,” and averring that “[w]ithout governmental support, it is difficult, perhaps impossible to combat the dominance of global Internet monopolies” [18].

Now, I have argued elsewhere why governments ought not to have a monopoly on the development of Internet-related public policies, but why a model of multi-stakeholderism that includes governments as a key, but not dominant stakeholder can still be counted as democratic [19]. You can accept those arguments or not. If you don't, then you might come down on JNC's side on this issue, and that would be perfectly legitimate.

But that's only half of the problem with JNC. The other half is the toxic relationship that its representatives have cultivated with the rest of civil society.

Relationship with civil society

At the first Best Bits meeting in 2012, much time and many pains were taken to accommodate the demands of those future JNC committee members who attended, and this effort did successfully result in a consensus text to which they were willing to put their names [20]. But from this point, their participation in Best Bits became less productive and more divisive, largely over two issues, which were intertwined.

The first has already been mentioned: the fundamental ideological disagreement over the legitimacy of multi-stakeholder Internet governance, which was accepted by a majority of Best Bits participants, but not by those who were later to split off into JNC. This disagreement took on greater currency when the NETmundial meeting was announced and Best Bits participants began to coordinate the development of several joint inputs [21]. When the future JNC leaders found themselves unable to influence the drafting of these statements to sufficiently accord with their view that governments should have an outsized role in Internet governance, the next best option became to disrupt the development of those statements by hectoring, intimidating and disparaging participants who expressed pro-multistakeholder views.

As good an example as any, and a more recent one, is Gurstein's reaction in November 2014 to the qualified support of the Association for Progressive Communications (APC) for the NETmundial Initiative, to which he wrote to Anriette Esterhuysen, APC's Executive Director, “I’m taking from your argument that because the NMI offers some possibility, however remote for the advancement of human rights, you are completely abandoning perhaps irrevocably, the pursuit of social justice.” To anyone who knows of the many years of devotion that Anriette and APC have given in the cause of social justice (and Gurstein certainly does), this is a farcical insult.

The second issue to which the disruptive behaviour of JNC representatives has been directed, which probably arose from the first, were criticisms of various processes that they found themselves unable to influence, including not only those of Best Bits, 1net [22], and the Civil Society Coordination Group (CSCG) [23]. In a rising tide of authoritarian behaviour, those who became JNC's leaders would demand appointment to a position of authority or that these fledgling groups hold elections immediately, insist that other participants in those groups disclose of their sources of funding, and cause a commotion about any strategic discussions that took place off-list or in closed groups.

The response of a relative outsider, Milton Mueller, to Gurstein's demands for inclusion in 1net aptly record the frustration that many others felt:

"Stop pretending that CI [Community Informatics] is some massive grassroots movement related to Internet governance that deserves special representation; and stop pretending that  your frustration with not being selected by CS means that their procedures were illegitimate. You [and] your group are free to contribute position papers to the process and to attend, as far as we know. Why don’t you see how far you can get on persuasion and education, if that’s really your mission?"

To give another example, Bollow, who had earlier demanded a full accounting of the funding sources of Best Bits participants, wrote in November 2013, “I hereby request the members of the BestBits steering committee, the members of the IRP Steering Committee, and the coordinators of the IGC to disclose any direct or indirect financial relationship to any 'capacity building' or similar kind of project where a US government agency is among the funders.”

Then again he wrote in October 2014 to the moderators of a closed strategy list formed for the recent ITU Plenipotentiary meeting – a list that he had not joined – demanding the right to “inspect” its archives on behalf of JNC. As for the CSCG, even after it acceded to JNC's requests and added Bollow as a representative, JNC betrayed that trust by publishing an account of its private deliberations which criticised other CSCG members [24], falsely stating that they had decided to support the NETmundial Initiative.

Although some of JNC's demands of other civil society groups and networks may have been reasonable in themselves – Best Bits, for example, always intended to hold steering committee elections and did hold them within a year of its formation – these demands were delivered with such hubris and entitlement that the effect has been to isolate JNC from other civil society groups and networks and to sow seeds of discord that will have lasting effects.

Ironically the result has been exactly the opposite of what JNC intended. Discussions have retreated from public, open lists into private, closed lists – or private cc groups that are not list-managed at all – precisely to avoid unproductive exchanges with JNC members.

Even more ironically, JNC does not hold itself to the same standards of transparency and accountability that it demands of others; it has never been publicly disclosed, for example, receiving funding from ThoughtWorks, and even the list of signatories of the Delhi Declaration, which formed the JNC's first membership list, was not made public for months after its supposed founding, even while further statements continued to be issued. Neither does JNC operate an open mailing list, despite vociferous demands that other civil society networks, such as Best Bits, should do so.

It might be countered that as pernicious as the behaviour of key JNC members may have been, they are only individuals, and this should not be attributed to the organisation as a whole. Whilst none of the other JNC members has ever “broken ranks” and spoken up against even the founders, this may not be because they are condoning their behaviour, but because they are unaware of it, since it takes place on other civil society mailing lists. Might a change of leadership of JNC be all that is required? This is hard to say, and at present a moot question since no such change is on the horizon.

Conclusion

What, then, can we expect from JNC's Internet Social Forum? Sadly, we can expect that any participants who support a distributed, multi-stakeholder model for Internet governance will be required to check those convictions at the door, and to embrace instead a UN-based model that places governments firmly in control of Internet public policy development. We can expect those who deviate from this line to be interrogated mercilessly, and accused of being props for neoliberal hegemony and corporate domination. May JNC's “take no prisoners”
approach serve them well.

This is a shame, because a well-reasoned leftist critique of Internet governance arrangements and reforms that directs its ire at powerful incumbents, rather than at those who seek to forge a middle path of inclusive multi-stakeholder governance, would actually be very valuable.
To date, JNC has exhibited no desire to provide such a sober, productive critique, instead preferring to focus its destructive anger on easier, weaker targets – its own civil society colleagues.

-----------------------------

Notes:

[1] http://justnetcoalition.org

[2] https://www.netmundial.org

[3]
http://igfwatch.org/discussion-board/netmundial-initiative-takes-a-top-down-approach-to-implementing-the-netmundial-principles

[4]
http://igfwatch.org/discussion-board/netmundial-2014-submission-on-evolution-of-the-internet-governance-ecosystem

[5]
http://www.digitalnewsasia.com/insights/digital-consumers-breaking-through-the-cloud

[6]
http://igfwatch.org/discussion-board/three-false-assumptions-internet-freedom-in-a-world-of-states-part-1

[7]
http://igfwatch.org/discussion-board/civil-society-talks-tough-to-the-netmundial-initiative-but-holds-back-on-a-boycott

[8] http://justnetcoalition.org/delhi-declaration

[9] http://igcaucus.org

[10] http://bestbits.net

[11]
http://content.netmundial.br/contribution/roadmaps-for-further-evolution-of-internet-governance/65

[12]
http://justnetcoalition.org/sites/default/files/Delhi_Declaration_leaflet_0.pdf

[13]
http://blog.justnetcoalition.org/democracy-or-multi-stakeholderism-competing-models-of-governance-by-michael-gurstein

[14] http://justnetcoalition.org/sites/default/files/NewModel_r2.pdf

[15] http://www.itu.int/wsis/docs2/tunis/off/6rev1.html

[16] http://justnetcoalition.org/sites/default/files/ITU_PP_2014_Stmt2.pdf

[17]
http://blog.justnetcoalition.org/democracy-or-multi-stakeholderism-competing-models-of-governance-by-michael-gurstein

[18] http://justnetcoalition.org/sites/default/files/NewModel_r2.pdf

[19]
http://igfwatch.org/discussion-board/a-civil-society-agenda-for-internet-governance-in-2013-internet-freedom-in-a-world-of-states-part-3

[20] http://bestbits.net/statement

[21] http://bestbits.net/netmundial-principles,
http://bestbits.net/netmundial-roadmap, and http://bestbits.net/netmundial-icann

[22] http://1net.org/

[23] http://lists.bestbits.net/info/cs-coord

[24] http://justnetcoalition.org/NMI-neoliberal-caravan

====

On 01/22/2015 11:47 AM, Norbert Bollow wrote:
> Global Civil Society launches the Internet Social Forum – With a call 
> to occupy the Internet
> 
> PRESS RELEASE. Geneva, Switzerland, 22st January, 2015.
> 
> A group of civil society organisations from around the world has 
> announced the Internet Social Forum, to bring together and articulate 
> bottom-up perspectives on the 'Internet we want'. Taking inspiration 
> from the World Social Forum, and its clarion call, 'Another World is 
> possible', the group seeks to draw urgent attention to the increasing 
> centralization of the Internet for extraction of monopoly rents and 
> for socio-political control, asserting that 'Another Internet is possible'!
> 
> The Internet Social Forum will inter alia offer an alternative to the 
> recently-launched World Economic Forum's 'Net Mundial Initiative' on 
> global Internet governance. While the World Economic Forum (WEF) and 
> the 'Net Mundial Initiative' convene global elites, the Internet 
> Social Forum will be a participatory and bottom-up space for all those 
> who believe that the global Internet must evolve in the public 
> interest; a direct parallel to the launch of the World Social Forum in 
> 2001 as a counter initiative to the WEF.
> 
> The Internet Social Forum will reach out to grassroots groups and 
> social movements across the world, catalysing a groundswell that 
> challenges the entrenched elite interests that currently control how 
> the Internet is managed. The Internet Social Forum's preparatory 
> process will kick off during the World Social Forum to take place in 
> Tunis, March 24th to 28th, 2015. The Internet Social Forum itself is 
> planned to be held either late 2015 or early 2016.
> 
> “While the world's biggest companies have every right to debate the 
> future of the Internet, we are concerned that their perspectives 
> should not drown out those of ordinary people who have no access to 
> the privileged terrain WEF occupies – in the end it is this wider 
> public interest that must be paramount in governing the Internet. We 
> are organising the Internet Social Forum to make sure their voices 
> can't be ignored in the corridors of power,” said Norbert Bollow, 
> Co-Convenor of the Just Net Coalition, which is one of the groups 
> involved in the initiative.
> 
> The Internet Social Forum, and its preparatory process, is intended as 
> a space to vision and build the 'Internet we want'. It will be 
> underpinned by values of democracy, human rights and social justice. 
> It will stand for participatory policy making and promote community media.
> It will seek an Internet that is truly decentralized in its 
> architecture and based on people's full rights to data, information, 
> knowledge and other 'commons' that the Internet has enabled the world 
> community to generate and share.
> 
> Somewhat similar to Web inventor Tim Berners-Lee’s call for a ‘Magna 
> Carta for the Internet', the Internet Social Forum proposes to develop 
> a People's Internet Manifesto, through a bottom-up process involving 
> all concerned social groups and movements, in different areas, from 
> techies and ICT-for-development actors to media reform groups, 
> democracy movements and social justice activists.
> 
> This year will also see the 10 year high-level review of the World 
> Summit on the Information Society (WSIS), to be held in New York in 
> December. As a full-scale review of a major UN summit, this will be a 
> critical global political event. Since the WSIS, held in 2003 and 
> 2005, the Internet, and what it means socially, has undergone a 
> paradigm shift. The WSIS witnessed active engagement of civil society 
> and technical groups as well as of business. However, currently, there 
> seems to be an deliberate attempt to sideline this UN-led initiative 
> on governance issues of the information society and Internet in favour 
> of private, big-business-dominated initiatives like the WEF's Net 
> Mundial Initiative. The Internet Social Forum, while remaining 
> primarily a people's forum, will also seek to channel global civil 
> society's engagement towards the WSIS +10 review.
> 
> The following organisations form the initial group that is proposing 
> the Internet Social Forum, and many more are expected to join in the 
> immediate future. This is an open call to progressive groups from all 
> over the world to join this initiative, and participate in developing 
> a People's Internet Manifesto.
> 
> Just Net Coalition, Global
> P2P Foundation, Global
> Transnational Institute, Global
> Forum on Communication for Integration of our America, Regional (Latin
> America) Arab NGO Network for Development, Regional Agencia 
> Latinoamericana de Información, Regional Alternative Informatics 
> Association, Turkey Knowledge Commons, India Open-Root/EUROLINC, 
> France SLFC.in, India CODE-IP Trust, Kenya GodlyGlobal.org, 
> Switzerland Centre for Community Informatics Research, Development and 
> Training, Canada IT for Change, India Association for Proper Internet 
> Governance, Switzerland Computer Professionals Union, Philippines Free 
> Press, USA Advocates of Science and Technology for the People, 
> Philippines Other News, Italy Free Software Movement of India 
> Global_Geneva, Switzerland Solidarius (Solidarity Economy Network), 
> Italy All India Peoples Science Network, India Institute for Local 
> Self-Reliance - Community Broadband Networks, USA
> 
> Please contact us at secretariat at InternetSocialForum.net for further 
> information or clarification.
> 
> Or the following regional contacts:
> 
> Africa:        Alex Gakaru <AlexG at InternetSocialForum.net>
> Asia:          Rishab Bailey <RishabB at InternetSocialForum.net>
> Europe:        Norbert Bollow <NorbertB at InternetSocialForum.net>
> North America: Micheal Gurstein <MichealG at InternetSocialForum.net>
> South America: Sally Burch <SallyB at InternetSocialForum.net>
> 
> 
> This press release is also available online, e.g. at 
> http://justnetcoalition.org/ISF
> 
> _______________________________________________
> discuss mailing list
> discuss at 1net.org
> http://1net-mail.1net.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
> 

_______________________________________________
discuss mailing list
discuss at 1net.org
http://1net-mail.1net.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss


-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From nb at bollow.ch  Fri Jan 23 08:57:22 2015
From: nb at bollow.ch (Norbert Bollow)
Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2015 14:57:22 +0100
Subject: [governance] Internet Social Forum
In-Reply-To: <54C23F6A.9090503@cafonso.ca>
References: <20150122143615.700b2f52@quill>
	<54C23F6A.9090503@cafonso.ca>
Message-ID: <20150123145722.41e43a18@quill>

On Fri, 23 Jan 2015 10:32:42 -0200
"Carlos A. Afonso" <ca at cafonso.ca> wrote:

> Below is an excellent response from Jeremy Malcolm (Best Bits, EFF)
> regarding the proposal to create a "world social forum" of the
> Internet. I am really puzzled: the call from JNC to join ISF is for
> governments to occupy the Internet??

I'm not going to spend time at this point on responding to Jeremy's
various insinuations and distortions of the facts. I do admit however
that his current response is more excellent than his initial response
to http://justnetcoalition.org/NMI-neoliberal-caravan right here on
this list which in his own words essentially consisted of accusing me of
being "a dick".

But to answer your question:

1. Of course the "call to occupy the Internet" is not directed to
governments. That should be totally clear from the text that we have
published. We are at this point not in any way formally linked to the
occupy movement http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occupy_movement but we use
the term "occupy" to broadly align the Internet Social Forum initiative
with that kind of protest viewpoint.

2. Did anyone seriously think that when JNC decided that we would not
participate in the "NETmundial initiative" which was originally
single-handedly led by WEF and then led jointly by WEF, ICANN and
CGI.br (while there appears to be strong evidence of WEF still being
the leading partner among the three), that that would mean that we
would want to remove ourselves entirely from an important part of the
discourse about the future of the Internet??? That is what it would
have meant to disassociate ourselves from what was happening without
seeking to create an alternative to that "NETmundial initiative" in
which we had decided not to participate!

Greetings,
Norbert
co-convenor, Just Net Coalition
http://JustNetCoalition.org

> ====
> 
> http://igfwatch.org/discussion-board/who-are-the-just-net-coalition-and-what-can-we-expect-from-the-internet-social-forum
> 
> Who are the Just Net Coalition and what can we expect from the
> Internet Social Forum?
> 
> Jeremy Malcolm
> 
> Date: 23/1/2015 3:52 pm
> 
> Today, the Just Net Coalition (JNC) [1] has broadcast (on seven
> mailing lists alone that I subscribe to) its plans for an Internet
> Social Forum, modeled on the World Social Forum, the well-known
> anti-globalisation summit. Just as the World Social Forum is held in
> opposition to the annual Davos meeting of the World Economic Forum
> (WEF), so the Internet Social Forum is framed as an alternative to
> the NETmundial Initiative [2], which JNC describes (inaccurately) as
> a project of the WEF.
> 
> Before saying anything more, I should clarify that I too have been
> critical [3] of the NETmundial Initiative, I too believe that the
> Internet governance status quo is overdue for reform [4], I also share
> concerns about a concentration of market power [5] in the hands of
> US-based Internet companies, and I do believe that governments have an
> important role to play [6] in future Internet governance arrangements.
> However, I won't be supporting the Internet Social Forum, because the
> Just Net Coalition's objectives are misguided, and its mode of
> engagement with the rest of civil society has been profoundly
> dysfunctional.
> 
> History
> 
> Who are the Just Net Coalition? I briefly mentioned them in my last
> post [7], but today's announcement has raised further questions among
> some of my contacts, and led others to express support the proposal
> despite not knowing much of the history of those proposing it. This
> post is to provide some of that necessary background, so that those
> who choose to endorse the Internet Social Forum will not be taken by
> surprise when its proposed “People's Internet Manifesto” takes a
> course with which they may profoundly disagree.
> 
> The founding meeting of what became the Just Net Coalition February
> 2014 was invitation-only, and invitations were issued, in the first
> instance, only to those known to by sympathetic to the views of the
> organisers. (A few key individuals excluded from the first round of
> invitations were, at the urging of the meeting's funder, subsequently
> approached with late invitations to attend; speaking for myself as
> one of these, the approach came far too late for me to make the
> necessary arrangements even to obtain a visa.) Consequently, the
> content of that meeting's outcome document, the Delhi Declaration for
> a Just and Equitable Internet [8], was largely predetermined.
> 
> The political programme of that document (more on this below) has a
> long history in a disagreement between a few individuals who were
> members of the Civil Society Internet Governance Caucus (IGC) [9],
> that has frequently threatened to tear that group apart. On some
> accounts, indeed, it has already done so – opinions vary on when or
> whether the IGC “jumped the shark”, but many count it as the day at
> an IGC meeting in 2013 when a prominent JNC member almost came to
> blows with a female attendee in an argument, ironically, over his own
> overbearing behaviour.
> 
> The formation of Best Bits [10] in 2012 was (at least on my part, as
> one of its founders), partly in response to the decline of the IGC
> and the need for a more action-oriented, globally-inclusive civil
> society community that could speak on Internet governance and human
> rights issues, without requiring a full consensus which (for the IGC,
> at least) had become completely unachievable. Those who now lead JNC,
> at the time, also held hopes (as did we) that they too could make
> effective use of Best Bits as a platform for actions and statements
> on which a broad consensus could be reached, which for a time they
> did, but what ultimately transpired will be recounted later.
> 
> So who are these individuals to whom I am obliquely referring?
> Although I don't wish to unduly personalise this post, it is relevant
> that they be identified in order to give context to the following
> section of this post; and equally, it is quite proper that as
> spokespersons for the group, they should be held accountable for
> their public behaviour and statements. (I should also add before
> going further that I have had a long record of working fruitfully
> with the individuals named both online and in person, dating back to
> 2004. I have even retained one of them as a paid consultant on a
> project I managed.)
> 
> Amongst the key individuals who have spoken publicly for JNC and who
> sit on its steering committee are Parminder Jeet Singh who leads
> Indian NGO IT for Change, Michael Gurstein who is a Canadian academic
> and edits the Journal of Community Informatics, Norbert Bollow who is
> a Swiss systems analyst and FOSS developer, and Richard Hill, former
> senior staff member of the ITU, who continues to advocate for an
> expanded role for the ITU on Internet-related public policy issues
> [11]. Many of the groups shown as supporting the Internet Social
> Forum in today's announcement are vanity or hobby projects of these
> founding individuals. For example Centre for Community Informatics
> Research, Development and Training is Gurstein, GodlyGlobal.org is
> Bollow, and Association for Proper Internet Governance is Hill.
> 
> (You might note that the majority JNC's most vocal key figures,
> including others not mentioned above such as Louis Pouzin and
> Jean-Christophe Nothias, are white men from industrialised countries.
> Now as a white man myself I'm certainly not one to point fingers at
> them, but as an organisation that purports to be “globally concerned
> with…social justice”, as JNC does [12], this lack of diversity perhaps
> bears mentioning.)
> 
> Objectives
> 
> The positioning of the Just Net Coalition against multi-stakeholder
> Internet governance [13], and in favour of a state-centric model,
> although now quite overt, became evident gradually. The Delhi
> Declaration covers this obliquely, stating “The right to make
> Internet-related public policies lies exclusively with those who
> legitimately and directly represent people” (ie. states). Another
> coded phrase the JNC has used to call for the centralisation of
> Internet governance authority in states it its call for “legitimate
> political authority” [14].
> 
> A turning point came at the meeting of the Working Group on Enhanced
> Cooperation on Public Policy Issues Pertaining to the Internet (WGEC)
> of the UN Commission for Science and Technology for Development
> (CSTD) in April 2014. To the surprise of other civil society and
> technical community delegates at that meeting, Parminder Jeet Singh
> insisted that support for paragraph 35 of the Tunis Agenda [15] be
> retained in working group's report, as the representatives from Saudi
> Arabia and Iran also forcefully argued. Up until then, indeed for an
> unbroken decade, opposition to paragraph 35 had been a unanimous
> civil society position.
> 
> Paragraph 35 states (my emphasis):
> 
> We reaffirm that the management of the Internet encompasses both
> technical and public policy issues and should involve all stakeholders
> and relevant intergovernmental and international organizations. In
> this respect it is recognized that:
> 
> a. *Policy authority for Internet-related public policy issues is the
> sovereign right of States*. They have rights and responsibilities for
> international Internet-related public policy issues.
> 
> b. The private sector has had, and should continue to have, an
> important role in the development of the Internet, both in the
> technical and economic fields.
> 
> c. *Civil society has also played an important role on Internet
> matters, especially *at community level*, and should continue to play
> such a role.
> 
> d. Intergovernmental organizations have had, and should continue to
> have, a facilitating role in the coordination of Internet-related
> public policy issues.
> 
> e. International organizations have also had and should continue to
> have an important role in the development of Internet-related
> technical standards and relevant policies.
> 
> In supporting this paragraph that constricts civil society's role in
> Internet governance, Parminder said:
> 
> "I have clarity about what is the role of different stakeholders being
> quite different to one another and I don't appreciate that
> non-governmental actors would have the same role in decision-making
> than governmental actors. That should not be acceptable at a global
> level."
> 
> This, translated into JNC policy and the agenda for its Internet
> Social Forum, marks a profound shift away from the decentralised and
> horizontal model of Internet governance that civil society had
> heretofore supported, towards an hierarchical, state-led model.
> 
> For a time, JNC attempted to explain away this change by drawing a
> straw man distinction between “democratic
> multi-stakeholderism” (which JNC supports) and “equal footing
> multi-stakeholderism” (which it doesn't, mischaracterising it as
> “governance by self-selected elites”) [16]. But it has since mostly
> abandoned that pretense and become more overt in promoting an
> intergovernmental model of Internet governance [17], stating for
> example in a more recent statement, “We invite all countries to call
> for a Framework Convention on the Internet and to take up leadership
> in developing global Internet-related policies,” and averring that
> “[w]ithout governmental support, it is difficult, perhaps impossible
> to combat the dominance of global Internet monopolies” [18].
> 
> Now, I have argued elsewhere why governments ought not to have a
> monopoly on the development of Internet-related public policies, but
> why a model of multi-stakeholderism that includes governments as a
> key, but not dominant stakeholder can still be counted as democratic
> [19]. You can accept those arguments or not. If you don't, then you
> might come down on JNC's side on this issue, and that would be
> perfectly legitimate.
> 
> But that's only half of the problem with JNC. The other half is the
> toxic relationship that its representatives have cultivated with the
> rest of civil society.
> 
> Relationship with civil society
> 
> At the first Best Bits meeting in 2012, much time and many pains were
> taken to accommodate the demands of those future JNC committee members
> who attended, and this effort did successfully result in a consensus
> text to which they were willing to put their names [20]. But from this
> point, their participation in Best Bits became less productive and
> more divisive, largely over two issues, which were intertwined.
> 
> The first has already been mentioned: the fundamental ideological
> disagreement over the legitimacy of multi-stakeholder Internet
> governance, which was accepted by a majority of Best Bits
> participants, but not by those who were later to split off into JNC.
> This disagreement took on greater currency when the NETmundial
> meeting was announced and Best Bits participants began to coordinate
> the development of several joint inputs [21]. When the future JNC
> leaders found themselves unable to influence the drafting of these
> statements to sufficiently accord with their view that governments
> should have an outsized role in Internet governance, the next best
> option became to disrupt the development of those statements by
> hectoring, intimidating and disparaging participants who expressed
> pro-multistakeholder views.
> 
> As good an example as any, and a more recent one, is Gurstein's
> reaction in November 2014 to the qualified support of the Association
> for Progressive Communications (APC) for the NETmundial Initiative,
> to which he wrote to Anriette Esterhuysen, APC's Executive Director,
> “I’m taking from your argument that because the NMI offers some
> possibility, however remote for the advancement of human rights, you
> are completely abandoning perhaps irrevocably, the pursuit of social
> justice.” To anyone who knows of the many years of devotion that
> Anriette and APC have given in the cause of social justice (and
> Gurstein certainly does), this is a farcical insult.
> 
> The second issue to which the disruptive behaviour of JNC
> representatives has been directed, which probably arose from the
> first, were criticisms of various processes that they found
> themselves unable to influence, including not only those of Best
> Bits, 1net [22], and the Civil Society Coordination Group (CSCG)
> [23]. In a rising tide of authoritarian behaviour, those who became
> JNC's leaders would demand appointment to a position of authority or
> that these fledgling groups hold elections immediately, insist that
> other participants in those groups disclose of their sources of
> funding, and cause a commotion about any strategic discussions that
> took place off-list or in closed groups.
> 
> The response of a relative outsider, Milton Mueller, to Gurstein's
> demands for inclusion in 1net aptly record the frustration that many
> others felt:
> 
> "Stop pretending that CI [Community Informatics] is some massive
> grassroots movement related to Internet governance that deserves
> special representation; and stop pretending that  your frustration
> with not being selected by CS means that their procedures were
> illegitimate. You [and] your group are free to contribute position
> papers to the process and to attend, as far as we know. Why don’t you
> see how far you can get on persuasion and education, if that’s really
> your mission?"
> 
> To give another example, Bollow, who had earlier demanded a full
> accounting of the funding sources of Best Bits participants, wrote in
> November 2013, “I hereby request the members of the BestBits steering
> committee, the members of the IRP Steering Committee, and the
> coordinators of the IGC to disclose any direct or indirect financial
> relationship to any 'capacity building' or similar kind of project
> where a US government agency is among the funders.”
> 
> Then again he wrote in October 2014 to the moderators of a closed
> strategy list formed for the recent ITU Plenipotentiary meeting – a
> list that he had not joined – demanding the right to “inspect” its
> archives on behalf of JNC. As for the CSCG, even after it acceded to
> JNC's requests and added Bollow as a representative, JNC betrayed
> that trust by publishing an account of its private deliberations
> which criticised other CSCG members [24], falsely stating that they
> had decided to support the NETmundial Initiative.
> 
> Although some of JNC's demands of other civil society groups and
> networks may have been reasonable in themselves – Best Bits, for
> example, always intended to hold steering committee elections and did
> hold them within a year of its formation – these demands were
> delivered with such hubris and entitlement that the effect has been
> to isolate JNC from other civil society groups and networks and to
> sow seeds of discord that will have lasting effects.
> 
> Ironically the result has been exactly the opposite of what JNC
> intended. Discussions have retreated from public, open lists into
> private, closed lists – or private cc groups that are not list-managed
> at all – precisely to avoid unproductive exchanges with JNC members.
> 
> Even more ironically, JNC does not hold itself to the same standards
> of transparency and accountability that it demands of others; it has
> never been publicly disclosed, for example, receiving funding from
> ThoughtWorks, and even the list of signatories of the Delhi
> Declaration, which formed the JNC's first membership list, was not
> made public for months after its supposed founding, even while
> further statements continued to be issued. Neither does JNC operate
> an open mailing list, despite vociferous demands that other civil
> society networks, such as Best Bits, should do so.
> 
> It might be countered that as pernicious as the behaviour of key JNC
> members may have been, they are only individuals, and this should not
> be attributed to the organisation as a whole. Whilst none of the
> other JNC members has ever “broken ranks” and spoken up against even
> the founders, this may not be because they are condoning their
> behaviour, but because they are unaware of it, since it takes place
> on other civil society mailing lists. Might a change of leadership of
> JNC be all that is required? This is hard to say, and at present a
> moot question since no such change is on the horizon.
> 
> Conclusion
> 
> What, then, can we expect from JNC's Internet Social Forum? Sadly, we
> can expect that any participants who support a distributed,
> multi-stakeholder model for Internet governance will be required to
> check those convictions at the door, and to embrace instead a UN-based
> model that places governments firmly in control of Internet public
> policy development. We can expect those who deviate from this line to
> be interrogated mercilessly, and accused of being props for neoliberal
> hegemony and corporate domination. May JNC's “take no prisoners”
> approach serve them well.
> 
> This is a shame, because a well-reasoned leftist critique of Internet
> governance arrangements and reforms that directs its ire at powerful
> incumbents, rather than at those who seek to forge a middle path of
> inclusive multi-stakeholder governance, would actually be very
> valuable. To date, JNC has exhibited no desire to provide such a
> sober, productive critique, instead preferring to focus its
> destructive anger on easier, weaker targets – its own civil society
> colleagues.
> 
> -----------------------------
> 
> Notes:
> 
> [1] http://justnetcoalition.org
> 
> [2] https://www.netmundial.org
> 
> [3]
> http://igfwatch.org/discussion-board/netmundial-initiative-takes-a-top-down-approach-to-implementing-the-netmundial-principles
> 
> [4]
> http://igfwatch.org/discussion-board/netmundial-2014-submission-on-evolution-of-the-internet-governance-ecosystem
> 
> [5]
> http://www.digitalnewsasia.com/insights/digital-consumers-breaking-through-the-cloud
> 
> [6]
> http://igfwatch.org/discussion-board/three-false-assumptions-internet-freedom-in-a-world-of-states-part-1
> 
> [7]
> http://igfwatch.org/discussion-board/civil-society-talks-tough-to-the-netmundial-initiative-but-holds-back-on-a-boycott
> 
> [8] http://justnetcoalition.org/delhi-declaration
> 
> [9] http://igcaucus.org
> 
> [10] http://bestbits.net
> 
> [11]
> http://content.netmundial.br/contribution/roadmaps-for-further-evolution-of-internet-governance/65
> 
> [12]
> http://justnetcoalition.org/sites/default/files/Delhi_Declaration_leaflet_0.pdf
> 
> [13]
> http://blog.justnetcoalition.org/democracy-or-multi-stakeholderism-competing-models-of-governance-by-michael-gurstein
> 
> [14] http://justnetcoalition.org/sites/default/files/NewModel_r2.pdf
> 
> [15] http://www.itu.int/wsis/docs2/tunis/off/6rev1.html
> 
> [16]
> http://justnetcoalition.org/sites/default/files/ITU_PP_2014_Stmt2.pdf
> 
> [17]
> http://blog.justnetcoalition.org/democracy-or-multi-stakeholderism-competing-models-of-governance-by-michael-gurstein
> 
> [18] http://justnetcoalition.org/sites/default/files/NewModel_r2.pdf
> 
> [19]
> http://igfwatch.org/discussion-board/a-civil-society-agenda-for-internet-governance-in-2013-internet-freedom-in-a-world-of-states-part-3
> 
> [20] http://bestbits.net/statement
> 
> [21] http://bestbits.net/netmundial-principles,
> http://bestbits.net/netmundial-roadmap, and
> http://bestbits.net/netmundial-icann
> 
> [22] http://1net.org/
> 
> [23] http://lists.bestbits.net/info/cs-coord
> 
> [24] http://justnetcoalition.org/NMI-neoliberal-caravan
> 
> ====
> 
> On 01/22/2015 11:36 AM, Norbert Bollow wrote:
> > Global Civil Society launches the Internet Social Forum
> > – With a call to occupy the Internet
> > 
> > PRESS RELEASE. Geneva, Switzerland, 22st January, 2015.
> > 
> > A group of civil society organisations from around the world has
> > announced the Internet Social Forum, to bring together and
> > articulate bottom-up perspectives on the 'Internet we want'. Taking
> > inspiration from the World Social Forum, and its clarion call,
> > 'Another World is possible', the group seeks to draw urgent
> > attention to the increasing centralization of the Internet for
> > extraction of monopoly rents and for socio-political control,
> > asserting that 'Another Internet is possible'!
> > 
> > The Internet Social Forum will inter alia offer an alternative to
> > the recently-launched World Economic Forum's 'Net Mundial
> > Initiative' on global Internet governance. While the World Economic
> > Forum (WEF) and the 'Net Mundial Initiative' convene global elites,
> > the Internet Social Forum will be a participatory and bottom-up
> > space for all those who believe that the global Internet must
> > evolve in the public interest; a direct parallel to the launch of
> > the World Social Forum in 2001 as a counter initiative to the WEF.
> > 
> > The Internet Social Forum will reach out to grassroots groups and
> > social movements across the world, catalysing a groundswell that
> > challenges the entrenched elite interests that currently control how
> > the Internet is managed. The Internet Social Forum's preparatory
> > process will kick off during the World Social Forum to take place in
> > Tunis, March 24th to 28th, 2015. The Internet Social Forum itself is
> > planned to be held either late 2015 or early 2016.
> > 
> > “While the world's biggest companies have every right to debate the
> > future of the Internet, we are concerned that their perspectives
> > should not drown out those of ordinary people who have no access to
> > the privileged terrain WEF occupies – in the end it is this wider
> > public interest that must be paramount in governing the Internet.
> > We are organising the Internet Social Forum to make sure their
> > voices can't be ignored in the corridors of power,” said Norbert
> > Bollow, Co-Convenor of the Just Net Coalition, which is one of the
> > groups involved in the initiative.
> > 
> > The Internet Social Forum, and its preparatory process, is intended
> > as a space to vision and build the 'Internet we want'. It will be
> > underpinned by values of democracy, human rights and social
> > justice. It will stand for participatory policy making and promote
> > community media. It will seek an Internet that is truly
> > decentralized in its architecture and based on people's full rights
> > to data, information, knowledge and other 'commons' that the
> > Internet has enabled the world community to generate and share.
> > 
> > Somewhat similar to Web inventor Tim Berners-Lee’s call for a ‘Magna
> > Carta for the Internet', the Internet Social Forum proposes to
> > develop a People's Internet Manifesto, through a bottom-up process
> > involving all concerned social groups and movements, in different
> > areas, from techies and ICT-for-development actors to media reform
> > groups, democracy movements and social justice activists.
> > 
> > This year will also see the 10 year high-level review of the World
> > Summit on the Information Society (WSIS), to be held in New York in
> > December. As a full-scale review of a major UN summit, this will be
> > a critical global political event. Since the WSIS, held in 2003 and
> > 2005, the Internet, and what it means socially, has undergone a
> > paradigm shift. The WSIS witnessed active engagement of civil
> > society and technical groups as well as of business. However,
> > currently, there seems to be an deliberate attempt to sideline this
> > UN-led initiative on governance issues of the information society
> > and Internet in favour of private, big-business-dominated
> > initiatives like the WEF's Net Mundial Initiative. The Internet
> > Social Forum, while remaining primarily a people's forum, will also
> > seek to channel global civil society's engagement towards the WSIS
> > +10 review.
> > 
> > The following organisations form the initial group that is proposing
> > the Internet Social Forum, and many more are expected to join in the
> > immediate future. This is an open call to progressive groups from
> > all over the world to join this initiative, and participate in
> > developing a People's Internet Manifesto.
> > 
> > Just Net Coalition, Global
> > P2P Foundation, Global
> > Transnational Institute, Global
> > Forum on Communication for Integration of our America, Regional
> > (Latin America) Arab NGO Network for Development, Regional
> > Agencia Latinoamericana de Información, Regional
> > Alternative Informatics Association, Turkey
> > Knowledge Commons, India
> > Open-Root/EUROLINC, France
> > SLFC.in, India
> > CODE-IP Trust, Kenya
> > GodlyGlobal.org, Switzerland
> > Centre for Community Informatics Research, Development and Training,
> > Canada IT for Change, India
> > Association for Proper Internet Governance, Switzerland
> > Computer Professionals Union, Philippines
> > Free Press, USA
> > Advocates of Science and Technology for the People, Philippines
> > Other News, Italy
> > Free Software Movement of India
> > Global_Geneva, Switzerland
> > Solidarius (Solidarity Economy Network), Italy
> > All India Peoples Science Network, India
> > Institute for Local Self-Reliance - Community Broadband Networks,
> > USA
> > 
> > Please contact us at secretariat at InternetSocialForum.net for further
> > information or clarification.
> > 
> > Or the following regional contacts:
> > 
> > Africa:        Alex Gakaru <AlexG at InternetSocialForum.net>
> > Asia:          Rishab Bailey <RishabB at InternetSocialForum.net>
> > Europe:        Norbert Bollow <NorbertB at InternetSocialForum.net>
> > North America: Micheal Gurstein <MichealG at InternetSocialForum.net>
> > South America: Sally Burch <SallyB at InternetSocialForum.net>
> > 
> > 
> > This press release is also available online, e.g. at
> > http://justnetcoalition.org/ISF
> > 


-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From dogwallah at gmail.com  Fri Jan 23 09:21:54 2015
From: dogwallah at gmail.com (McTim)
Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2015 08:21:54 -0600
Subject: [governance] FW: [discuss] Internet Social Forum
In-Reply-To: <0ab001d03710$ece501e0$c6af05a0$@gmail.com>
References: <20150122144714.2bf24d0b@quill> <54C240EB.9090908@cafonso.ca> <0ab001d03710$ece501e0$c6af05a0$@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CACAaNxi9SGyC+D-A8EuPpQsPyi1hN0PH6MH+y119JeYP_Jq+rA@mail.gmail.com>

Dear MG,

Your post just provided further proof everything that Jeremy wrote was true.



On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 7:31 AM, michael gurstein <gurstein at gmail.com>
wrote:

> FWIW... Flouting normal academic/journalistic etiquette Jeremy omitted to
> reference my comments quoted in his blog which for anyone who hasn't been
> following can be found with context and elaboration in my blog
> http://gurstein.wordpress.com (key word searches on "multi-stakeholder"
> and "civil society" should turn these up--and with a bit of digging one
> might find even more fearsomely critical comments including about CS's
> unholy partnerships with and financial support from the global Internet
> elites.
>
> BTW, I'm looking forward to seeing the invitation from Jeremy and the
> other NMI-nik's inviting global Civil Society to their next 1% err WEF,
> ICANN, cgi Internet Governance lovefest -- perhaps it could be called the
> I(%) SF ...
>
> M
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: discuss-bounces at 1net.org [mailto:discuss-bounces at 1net.org] On
> Behalf Of Carlos A. Afonso
> Sent: Friday, January 23, 2015 4:39 AM
> To: discuss at 1net.org
> Subject: Re: [discuss] Internet Social Forum
>
> Dear people,
>
> Below is an excellent response from Jeremy Malcolm (Best Bits, EFF)
> regarding the proposal to create a "world social forum" of the Internet.
> I am really puzzled: the call from JNC to join ISF is for governments to
> occupy the Internet??
>
> fraternal regards
>
> --c.a.
>
> ====
>
>
> http://igfwatch.org/discussion-board/who-are-the-just-net-coalition-and-what-can-we-expect-from-the-internet-social-forum
>
> Who are the Just Net Coalition and what can we expect from the Internet
> Social Forum?
>
> Jeremy Malcolm
>
> Date: 23/1/2015 3:52 pm
>
> Today, the Just Net Coalition (JNC) [1] has broadcast (on seven mailing
> lists alone that I subscribe to) its plans for an Internet Social Forum,
> modeled on the World Social Forum, the well-known anti-globalisation
> summit. Just as the World Social Forum is held in opposition to the annual
> Davos meeting of the World Economic Forum (WEF), so the Internet Social
> Forum is framed as an alternative to the NETmundial Initiative [2], which
> JNC describes (inaccurately) as a project of the WEF.
>
> Before saying anything more, I should clarify that I too have been
> critical [3] of the NETmundial Initiative, I too believe that the Internet
> governance status quo is overdue for reform [4], I also share concerns
> about a concentration of market power [5] in the hands of US-based Internet
> companies, and I do believe that governments have an important role to play
> [6] in future Internet governance arrangements.
> However, I won't be supporting the Internet Social Forum, because the Just
> Net Coalition's objectives are misguided, and its mode of engagement with
> the rest of civil society has been profoundly dysfunctional.
>
> History
>
> Who are the Just Net Coalition? I briefly mentioned them in my last post
> [7], but today's announcement has raised further questions among some of my
> contacts, and led others to express support the proposal despite not
> knowing much of the history of those proposing it. This post is to provide
> some of that necessary background, so that those who choose to endorse the
> Internet Social Forum will not be taken by surprise when its proposed
> “People's Internet Manifesto” takes a course with which they may profoundly
> disagree.
>
> The founding meeting of what became the Just Net Coalition February 2014
> was invitation-only, and invitations were issued, in the first instance,
> only to those known to by sympathetic to the views of the organisers. (A
> few key individuals excluded from the first round of invitations were, at
> the urging of the meeting's funder, subsequently approached with late
> invitations to attend; speaking for myself as one of these, the approach
> came far too late for me to make the necessary arrangements even to obtain
> a visa.) Consequently, the content of that meeting's outcome document, the
> Delhi Declaration for a Just and Equitable Internet [8], was largely
> predetermined.
>
> The political programme of that document (more on this below) has a long
> history in a disagreement between a few individuals who were members of the
> Civil Society Internet Governance Caucus (IGC) [9], that has frequently
> threatened to tear that group apart. On some accounts, indeed, it has
> already done so – opinions vary on when or whether the IGC “jumped the
> shark”, but many count it as the day at an IGC meeting in 2013 when a
> prominent JNC member almost came to blows with a female attendee in an
> argument, ironically, over his own overbearing behaviour.
>
> The formation of Best Bits [10] in 2012 was (at least on my part, as one
> of its founders), partly in response to the decline of the IGC and the need
> for a more action-oriented, globally-inclusive civil society community that
> could speak on Internet governance and human rights issues, without
> requiring a full consensus which (for the IGC, at least) had become
> completely unachievable. Those who now lead JNC, at the time, also held
> hopes (as did we) that they too could make effective use of Best Bits as a
> platform for actions and statements on which a broad consensus could be
> reached, which for a time they did, but what ultimately transpired will be
> recounted later.
>
> So who are these individuals to whom I am obliquely referring? Although I
> don't wish to unduly personalise this post, it is relevant that they be
> identified in order to give context to the following section of this post;
> and equally, it is quite proper that as spokespersons for the group, they
> should be held accountable for their public behaviour and statements. (I
> should also add before going further that I have had a long record of
> working fruitfully with the individuals named both online and in person,
> dating back to 2004. I have even retained one of them as a paid consultant
> on a project I managed.)
>
> Amongst the key individuals who have spoken publicly for JNC and who sit
> on its steering committee are Parminder Jeet Singh who leads Indian NGO IT
> for Change, Michael Gurstein who is a Canadian academic and edits the
> Journal of Community Informatics, Norbert Bollow who is a Swiss systems
> analyst and FOSS developer, and Richard Hill, former senior staff member of
> the ITU, who continues to advocate for an expanded role for the ITU on
> Internet-related public policy issues [11]. Many of the groups shown as
> supporting the Internet Social Forum in today's announcement are vanity or
> hobby projects of these founding individuals. For example Centre for
> Community Informatics Research, Development and Training is Gurstein,
> GodlyGlobal.org is Bollow, and Association for Proper Internet Governance
> is Hill.
>
> (You might note that the majority JNC's most vocal key figures, including
> others not mentioned above such as Louis Pouzin and Jean-Christophe
> Nothias, are white men from industrialised countries.
> Now as a white man myself I'm certainly not one to point fingers at them,
> but as an organisation that purports to be “globally concerned with…social
> justice”, as JNC does [12], this lack of diversity perhaps bears
> mentioning.)
>
> Objectives
>
> The positioning of the Just Net Coalition against multi-stakeholder
> Internet governance [13], and in favour of a state-centric model, although
> now quite overt, became evident gradually. The Delhi Declaration covers
> this obliquely, stating “The right to make Internet-related public policies
> lies exclusively with those who legitimately and directly represent people”
> (ie. states). Another coded phrase the JNC has used to call for the
> centralisation of Internet governance authority in states it its call for
> “legitimate political authority” [14].
>
> A turning point came at the meeting of the Working Group on Enhanced
> Cooperation on Public Policy Issues Pertaining to the Internet (WGEC) of
> the UN Commission for Science and Technology for Development (CSTD) in
> April 2014. To the surprise of other civil society and technical community
> delegates at that meeting, Parminder Jeet Singh insisted that support for
> paragraph 35 of the Tunis Agenda [15] be retained in working group's
> report, as the representatives from Saudi Arabia and Iran also forcefully
> argued. Up until then, indeed for an unbroken decade, opposition to
> paragraph 35 had been a unanimous civil society position.
>
> Paragraph 35 states (my emphasis):
>
> We reaffirm that the management of the Internet encompasses both technical
> and public policy issues and should involve all stakeholders and relevant
> intergovernmental and international organizations. In this respect it is
> recognized that:
>
> a. *Policy authority for Internet-related public policy issues is the
> sovereign right of States*. They have rights and responsibilities for
> international Internet-related public policy issues.
>
> b. The private sector has had, and should continue to have, an important
> role in the development of the Internet, both in the technical and economic
> fields.
>
> c. *Civil society has also played an important role on Internet matters,
> especially *at community level*, and should continue to play such a role.
>
> d. Intergovernmental organizations have had, and should continue to have,
> a facilitating role in the coordination of Internet-related public policy
> issues.
>
> e. International organizations have also had and should continue to have
> an important role in the development of Internet-related technical
> standards and relevant policies.
>
> In supporting this paragraph that constricts civil society's role in
> Internet governance, Parminder said:
>
> "I have clarity about what is the role of different stakeholders being
> quite different to one another and I don't appreciate that non-governmental
> actors would have the same role in decision-making than governmental
> actors. That should not be acceptable at a global level."
>
> This, translated into JNC policy and the agenda for its Internet Social
> Forum, marks a profound shift away from the decentralised and horizontal
> model of Internet governance that civil society had heretofore supported,
> towards an hierarchical, state-led model.
>
> For a time, JNC attempted to explain away this change by drawing a straw
> man distinction between “democratic multi-stakeholderism” (which JNC
> supports) and “equal footing multi-stakeholderism” (which it doesn't,
> mischaracterising it as “governance by self-selected elites”) [16]. But it
> has since mostly abandoned that pretense and become more overt in promoting
> an intergovernmental model of Internet governance [17], stating for example
> in a more recent statement, “We invite all countries to call for a
> Framework Convention on the Internet and to take up leadership in
> developing global Internet-related policies,” and averring that “[w]ithout
> governmental support, it is difficult, perhaps impossible to combat the
> dominance of global Internet monopolies” [18].
>
> Now, I have argued elsewhere why governments ought not to have a monopoly
> on the development of Internet-related public policies, but why a model of
> multi-stakeholderism that includes governments as a key, but not dominant
> stakeholder can still be counted as democratic [19]. You can accept those
> arguments or not. If you don't, then you might come down on JNC's side on
> this issue, and that would be perfectly legitimate.
>
> But that's only half of the problem with JNC. The other half is the toxic
> relationship that its representatives have cultivated with the rest of
> civil society.
>
> Relationship with civil society
>
> At the first Best Bits meeting in 2012, much time and many pains were
> taken to accommodate the demands of those future JNC committee members who
> attended, and this effort did successfully result in a consensus text to
> which they were willing to put their names [20]. But from this point, their
> participation in Best Bits became less productive and more divisive,
> largely over two issues, which were intertwined.
>
> The first has already been mentioned: the fundamental ideological
> disagreement over the legitimacy of multi-stakeholder Internet governance,
> which was accepted by a majority of Best Bits participants, but not by
> those who were later to split off into JNC. This disagreement took on
> greater currency when the NETmundial meeting was announced and Best Bits
> participants began to coordinate the development of several joint inputs
> [21]. When the future JNC leaders found themselves unable to influence the
> drafting of these statements to sufficiently accord with their view that
> governments should have an outsized role in Internet governance, the next
> best option became to disrupt the development of those statements by
> hectoring, intimidating and disparaging participants who expressed
> pro-multistakeholder views.
>
> As good an example as any, and a more recent one, is Gurstein's reaction
> in November 2014 to the qualified support of the Association for
> Progressive Communications (APC) for the NETmundial Initiative, to which he
> wrote to Anriette Esterhuysen, APC's Executive Director, “I’m taking from
> your argument that because the NMI offers some possibility, however remote
> for the advancement of human rights, you are completely abandoning perhaps
> irrevocably, the pursuit of social justice.” To anyone who knows of the
> many years of devotion that Anriette and APC have given in the cause of
> social justice (and Gurstein certainly does), this is a farcical insult.
>
> The second issue to which the disruptive behaviour of JNC representatives
> has been directed, which probably arose from the first, were criticisms of
> various processes that they found themselves unable to influence, including
> not only those of Best Bits, 1net [22], and the Civil Society Coordination
> Group (CSCG) [23]. In a rising tide of authoritarian behaviour, those who
> became JNC's leaders would demand appointment to a position of authority or
> that these fledgling groups hold elections immediately, insist that other
> participants in those groups disclose of their sources of funding, and
> cause a commotion about any strategic discussions that took place off-list
> or in closed groups.
>
> The response of a relative outsider, Milton Mueller, to Gurstein's demands
> for inclusion in 1net aptly record the frustration that many others felt:
>
> "Stop pretending that CI [Community Informatics] is some massive
> grassroots movement related to Internet governance that deserves special
> representation; and stop pretending that  your frustration with not being
> selected by CS means that their procedures were illegitimate. You [and]
> your group are free to contribute position papers to the process and to
> attend, as far as we know. Why don’t you see how far you can get on
> persuasion and education, if that’s really your mission?"
>
> To give another example, Bollow, who had earlier demanded a full
> accounting of the funding sources of Best Bits participants, wrote in
> November 2013, “I hereby request the members of the BestBits steering
> committee, the members of the IRP Steering Committee, and the coordinators
> of the IGC to disclose any direct or indirect financial relationship to any
> 'capacity building' or similar kind of project where a US government agency
> is among the funders.”
>
> Then again he wrote in October 2014 to the moderators of a closed strategy
> list formed for the recent ITU Plenipotentiary meeting – a list that he had
> not joined – demanding the right to “inspect” its archives on behalf of
> JNC. As for the CSCG, even after it acceded to JNC's requests and added
> Bollow as a representative, JNC betrayed that trust by publishing an
> account of its private deliberations which criticised other CSCG members
> [24], falsely stating that they had decided to support the NETmundial
> Initiative.
>
> Although some of JNC's demands of other civil society groups and networks
> may have been reasonable in themselves – Best Bits, for example, always
> intended to hold steering committee elections and did hold them within a
> year of its formation – these demands were delivered with such hubris and
> entitlement that the effect has been to isolate JNC from other civil
> society groups and networks and to sow seeds of discord that will have
> lasting effects.
>
> Ironically the result has been exactly the opposite of what JNC intended.
> Discussions have retreated from public, open lists into private, closed
> lists – or private cc groups that are not list-managed at all – precisely
> to avoid unproductive exchanges with JNC members.
>
> Even more ironically, JNC does not hold itself to the same standards of
> transparency and accountability that it demands of others; it has never
> been publicly disclosed, for example, receiving funding from ThoughtWorks,
> and even the list of signatories of the Delhi Declaration, which formed the
> JNC's first membership list, was not made public for months after its
> supposed founding, even while further statements continued to be issued.
> Neither does JNC operate an open mailing list, despite vociferous demands
> that other civil society networks, such as Best Bits, should do so.
>
> It might be countered that as pernicious as the behaviour of key JNC
> members may have been, they are only individuals, and this should not be
> attributed to the organisation as a whole. Whilst none of the other JNC
> members has ever “broken ranks” and spoken up against even the founders,
> this may not be because they are condoning their behaviour, but because
> they are unaware of it, since it takes place on other civil society mailing
> lists. Might a change of leadership of JNC be all that is required? This is
> hard to say, and at present a moot question since no such change is on the
> horizon.
>
> Conclusion
>
> What, then, can we expect from JNC's Internet Social Forum? Sadly, we can
> expect that any participants who support a distributed, multi-stakeholder
> model for Internet governance will be required to check those convictions
> at the door, and to embrace instead a UN-based model that places
> governments firmly in control of Internet public policy development. We can
> expect those who deviate from this line to be interrogated mercilessly, and
> accused of being props for neoliberal hegemony and corporate domination.
> May JNC's “take no prisoners”
> approach serve them well.
>
> This is a shame, because a well-reasoned leftist critique of Internet
> governance arrangements and reforms that directs its ire at powerful
> incumbents, rather than at those who seek to forge a middle path of
> inclusive multi-stakeholder governance, would actually be very valuable.
> To date, JNC has exhibited no desire to provide such a sober, productive
> critique, instead preferring to focus its destructive anger on easier,
> weaker targets – its own civil society colleagues.
>
> -----------------------------
>
> Notes:
>
> [1] http://justnetcoalition.org
>
> [2] https://www.netmundial.org
>
> [3]
>
> http://igfwatch.org/discussion-board/netmundial-initiative-takes-a-top-down-approach-to-implementing-the-netmundial-principles
>
> [4]
>
> http://igfwatch.org/discussion-board/netmundial-2014-submission-on-evolution-of-the-internet-governance-ecosystem
>
> [5]
>
> http://www.digitalnewsasia.com/insights/digital-consumers-breaking-through-the-cloud
>
> [6]
>
> http://igfwatch.org/discussion-board/three-false-assumptions-internet-freedom-in-a-world-of-states-part-1
>
> [7]
>
> http://igfwatch.org/discussion-board/civil-society-talks-tough-to-the-netmundial-initiative-but-holds-back-on-a-boycott
>
> [8] http://justnetcoalition.org/delhi-declaration
>
> [9] http://igcaucus.org
>
> [10] http://bestbits.net
>
> [11]
>
> http://content.netmundial.br/contribution/roadmaps-for-further-evolution-of-internet-governance/65
>
> [12]
>
> http://justnetcoalition.org/sites/default/files/Delhi_Declaration_leaflet_0.pdf
>
> [13]
>
> http://blog.justnetcoalition.org/democracy-or-multi-stakeholderism-competing-models-of-governance-by-michael-gurstein
>
> [14] http://justnetcoalition.org/sites/default/files/NewModel_r2.pdf
>
> [15] http://www.itu.int/wsis/docs2/tunis/off/6rev1.html
>
> [16] http://justnetcoalition.org/sites/default/files/ITU_PP_2014_Stmt2.pdf
>
> [17]
>
> http://blog.justnetcoalition.org/democracy-or-multi-stakeholderism-competing-models-of-governance-by-michael-gurstein
>
> [18] http://justnetcoalition.org/sites/default/files/NewModel_r2.pdf
>
> [19]
>
> http://igfwatch.org/discussion-board/a-civil-society-agenda-for-internet-governance-in-2013-internet-freedom-in-a-world-of-states-part-3
>
> [20] http://bestbits.net/statement
>
> [21] http://bestbits.net/netmundial-principles,
> http://bestbits.net/netmundial-roadmap, and
> http://bestbits.net/netmundial-icann
>
> [22] http://1net.org/
>
> [23] http://lists.bestbits.net/info/cs-coord
>
> [24] http://justnetcoalition.org/NMI-neoliberal-caravan
>
> ====
>
> On 01/22/2015 11:47 AM, Norbert Bollow wrote:
> > Global Civil Society launches the Internet Social Forum – With a call
> > to occupy the Internet
> >
> > PRESS RELEASE. Geneva, Switzerland, 22st January, 2015.
> >
> > A group of civil society organisations from around the world has
> > announced the Internet Social Forum, to bring together and articulate
> > bottom-up perspectives on the 'Internet we want'. Taking inspiration
> > from the World Social Forum, and its clarion call, 'Another World is
> > possible', the group seeks to draw urgent attention to the increasing
> > centralization of the Internet for extraction of monopoly rents and
> > for socio-political control, asserting that 'Another Internet is
> possible'!
> >
> > The Internet Social Forum will inter alia offer an alternative to the
> > recently-launched World Economic Forum's 'Net Mundial Initiative' on
> > global Internet governance. While the World Economic Forum (WEF) and
> > the 'Net Mundial Initiative' convene global elites, the Internet
> > Social Forum will be a participatory and bottom-up space for all those
> > who believe that the global Internet must evolve in the public
> > interest; a direct parallel to the launch of the World Social Forum in
> > 2001 as a counter initiative to the WEF.
> >
> > The Internet Social Forum will reach out to grassroots groups and
> > social movements across the world, catalysing a groundswell that
> > challenges the entrenched elite interests that currently control how
> > the Internet is managed. The Internet Social Forum's preparatory
> > process will kick off during the World Social Forum to take place in
> > Tunis, March 24th to 28th, 2015. The Internet Social Forum itself is
> > planned to be held either late 2015 or early 2016.
> >
> > “While the world's biggest companies have every right to debate the
> > future of the Internet, we are concerned that their perspectives
> > should not drown out those of ordinary people who have no access to
> > the privileged terrain WEF occupies – in the end it is this wider
> > public interest that must be paramount in governing the Internet. We
> > are organising the Internet Social Forum to make sure their voices
> > can't be ignored in the corridors of power,” said Norbert Bollow,
> > Co-Convenor of the Just Net Coalition, which is one of the groups
> > involved in the initiative.
> >
> > The Internet Social Forum, and its preparatory process, is intended as
> > a space to vision and build the 'Internet we want'. It will be
> > underpinned by values of democracy, human rights and social justice.
> > It will stand for participatory policy making and promote community
> media.
> > It will seek an Internet that is truly decentralized in its
> > architecture and based on people's full rights to data, information,
> > knowledge and other 'commons' that the Internet has enabled the world
> > community to generate and share.
> >
> > Somewhat similar to Web inventor Tim Berners-Lee’s call for a ‘Magna
> > Carta for the Internet', the Internet Social Forum proposes to develop
> > a People's Internet Manifesto, through a bottom-up process involving
> > all concerned social groups and movements, in different areas, from
> > techies and ICT-for-development actors to media reform groups,
> > democracy movements and social justice activists.
> >
> > This year will also see the 10 year high-level review of the World
> > Summit on the Information Society (WSIS), to be held in New York in
> > December. As a full-scale review of a major UN summit, this will be a
> > critical global political event. Since the WSIS, held in 2003 and
> > 2005, the Internet, and what it means socially, has undergone a
> > paradigm shift. The WSIS witnessed active engagement of civil society
> > and technical groups as well as of business. However, currently, there
> > seems to be an deliberate attempt to sideline this UN-led initiative
> > on governance issues of the information society and Internet in favour
> > of private, big-business-dominated initiatives like the WEF's Net
> > Mundial Initiative. The Internet Social Forum, while remaining
> > primarily a people's forum, will also seek to channel global civil
> > society's engagement towards the WSIS +10 review.
> >
> > The following organisations form the initial group that is proposing
> > the Internet Social Forum, and many more are expected to join in the
> > immediate future. This is an open call to progressive groups from all
> > over the world to join this initiative, and participate in developing
> > a People's Internet Manifesto.
> >
> > Just Net Coalition, Global
> > P2P Foundation, Global
> > Transnational Institute, Global
> > Forum on Communication for Integration of our America, Regional (Latin
> > America) Arab NGO Network for Development, Regional Agencia
> > Latinoamericana de Información, Regional Alternative Informatics
> > Association, Turkey Knowledge Commons, India Open-Root/EUROLINC,
> > France SLFC.in, India CODE-IP Trust, Kenya GodlyGlobal.org,
> > Switzerland Centre for Community Informatics Research, Development and
> > Training, Canada IT for Change, India Association for Proper Internet
> > Governance, Switzerland Computer Professionals Union, Philippines Free
> > Press, USA Advocates of Science and Technology for the People,
> > Philippines Other News, Italy Free Software Movement of India
> > Global_Geneva, Switzerland Solidarius (Solidarity Economy Network),
> > Italy All India Peoples Science Network, India Institute for Local
> > Self-Reliance - Community Broadband Networks, USA
> >
> > Please contact us at secretariat at InternetSocialForum.net for further
> > information or clarification.
> >
> > Or the following regional contacts:
> >
> > Africa:        Alex Gakaru <AlexG at InternetSocialForum.net>
> > Asia:          Rishab Bailey <RishabB at InternetSocialForum.net>
> > Europe:        Norbert Bollow <NorbertB at InternetSocialForum.net>
> > North America: Micheal Gurstein <MichealG at InternetSocialForum.net>
> > South America: Sally Burch <SallyB at InternetSocialForum.net>
> >
> >
> > This press release is also available online, e.g. at
> > http://justnetcoalition.org/ISF
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > discuss mailing list
> > discuss at 1net.org
> > http://1net-mail.1net.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> discuss mailing list
> discuss at 1net.org
> http://1net-mail.1net.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>      governance at lists.igcaucus.org
> To be removed from the list, visit:
>      http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
>
> For all other list information and functions, see:
>      http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
>      http://www.igcaucus.org/
>
> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
>
>


-- 
Cheers,

McTim
"A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A route
indicates how we get there."  Jon Postel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150123/b6db04c9/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de  Fri Jan 23 13:01:49 2015
From: wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de (=?iso-8859-1?Q?=22Kleinw=E4chter=2C_Wolfgang=22?=)
Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2015 19:01:49 +0100
Subject: AW: [governance] Internet Social Forum
References: <20150122143615.700b2f52@quill> <54C11EDD.50505@itforchange.net>
Message-ID:  <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A801642A70@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>

Hi Parminder,

how the ISF is linked to the IGF?

Wolfgang

 


-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org im Auftrag von parminder
Gesendet: Do 22.01.2015 17:01
An: governance at lists.igcaucus.org
Betreff: Re: [governance] Internet Social Forum
 
Enclosed Spanish version... parminder


On Thursday 22 January 2015 07:06 PM, Norbert Bollow wrote:
> Global Civil Society launches the Internet Social Forum
> - With a call to occupy the Internet
>
> PRESS RELEASE. Geneva, Switzerland, 22st January, 2015.
>
> A group of civil society organisations from around the world has
> announced the Internet Social Forum, to bring together and articulate
> bottom-up perspectives on the 'Internet we want'. Taking inspiration
> from the World Social Forum, and its clarion call, 'Another World is
> possible', the group seeks to draw urgent attention to the increasing
> centralization of the Internet for extraction of monopoly rents and for
> socio-political control, asserting that 'Another Internet is possible'!
>
> The Internet Social Forum will inter alia offer an alternative to the
> recently-launched World Economic Forum's 'Net Mundial Initiative' on
> global Internet governance. While the World Economic Forum (WEF) and
> the 'Net Mundial Initiative' convene global elites, the Internet Social
> Forum will be a participatory and bottom-up space for all those who
> believe that the global Internet must evolve in the public interest; a
> direct parallel to the launch of the World Social Forum in 2001 as a
> counter initiative to the WEF.
>
> The Internet Social Forum will reach out to grassroots groups and
> social movements across the world, catalysing a groundswell that
> challenges the entrenched elite interests that currently control how
> the Internet is managed. The Internet Social Forum's preparatory
> process will kick off during the World Social Forum to take place in
> Tunis, March 24th to 28th, 2015. The Internet Social Forum itself is
> planned to be held either late 2015 or early 2016.
>
> "While the world's biggest companies have every right to debate the
> future of the Internet, we are concerned that their perspectives should
> not drown out those of ordinary people who have no access to the
> privileged terrain WEF occupies - in the end it is this wider public
> interest that must be paramount in governing the Internet. We are
> organising the Internet Social Forum to make sure their voices can't be
> ignored in the corridors of power," said Norbert Bollow, Co-Convenor of
> the Just Net Coalition, which is one of the groups involved in the
> initiative.
>
> The Internet Social Forum, and its preparatory process, is intended as
> a space to vision and build the 'Internet we want'. It will be
> underpinned by values of democracy, human rights and social justice. It
> will stand for participatory policy making and promote community media.
> It will seek an Internet that is truly decentralized in its
> architecture and based on people's full rights to data, information,
> knowledge and other 'commons' that the Internet has enabled the world
> community to generate and share.
>
> Somewhat similar to Web inventor Tim Berners-Lee's call for a 'Magna
> Carta for the Internet', the Internet Social Forum proposes to develop
> a People's Internet Manifesto, through a bottom-up process involving
> all concerned social groups and movements, in different areas, from
> techies and ICT-for-development actors to media reform groups,
> democracy movements and social justice activists.
>
> This year will also see the 10 year high-level review of the World
> Summit on the Information Society (WSIS), to be held in New York in
> December. As a full-scale review of a major UN summit, this will be a
> critical global political event. Since the WSIS, held in 2003 and 2005,
> the Internet, and what it means socially, has undergone a paradigm
> shift. The WSIS witnessed active engagement of civil society and
> technical groups as well as of business. However, currently, there
> seems to be an deliberate attempt to sideline this UN-led initiative on
> governance issues of the information society and Internet in favour of
> private, big-business-dominated initiatives like the WEF's Net Mundial
> Initiative. The Internet Social Forum, while remaining primarily a
> people's forum, will also seek to channel global civil society's
> engagement towards the WSIS +10 review.
>
> The following organisations form the initial group that is proposing
> the Internet Social Forum, and many more are expected to join in the
> immediate future. This is an open call to progressive groups from all
> over the world to join this initiative, and participate in developing a
> People's Internet Manifesto.
>
> Just Net Coalition, Global
> P2P Foundation, Global
> Transnational Institute, Global
> Forum on Communication for Integration of our America, Regional (Latin
> America) Arab NGO Network for Development, Regional
> Agencia Latinoamericana de Información, Regional
> Alternative Informatics Association, Turkey
> Knowledge Commons, India
> Open-Root/EUROLINC, France
> SLFC.in, India
> CODE-IP Trust, Kenya
> GodlyGlobal.org, Switzerland
> Centre for Community Informatics Research, Development and Training,
> Canada IT for Change, India
> Association for Proper Internet Governance, Switzerland
> Computer Professionals Union, Philippines
> Free Press, USA
> Advocates of Science and Technology for the People, Philippines
> Other News, Italy
> Free Software Movement of India
> Global_Geneva, Switzerland
> Solidarius (Solidarity Economy Network), Italy
> All India Peoples Science Network, India
> Institute for Local Self-Reliance - Community Broadband Networks, USA
>
> Please contact us at secretariat at InternetSocialForum.net for further
> information or clarification.
>
> Or the following regional contacts:
>
> Africa:        Alex Gakaru <AlexG at InternetSocialForum.net>
> Asia:          Rishab Bailey <RishabB at InternetSocialForum.net>
> Europe:        Norbert Bollow <NorbertB at InternetSocialForum.net>
> North America: Micheal Gurstein <MichealG at InternetSocialForum.net>
> South America: Sally Burch <SallyB at InternetSocialForum.net>
>
>
> This press release is also available online, e.g. at
> http://justnetcoalition.org/ISF
>



-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From parminder at itforchange.net  Fri Jan 23 18:21:48 2015
From: parminder at itforchange.net (parminder)
Date: Sat, 24 Jan 2015 04:51:48 +0530
Subject: AW: [governance] Internet Social Forum
In-Reply-To: <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A801642A70@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
References: <20150122143615.700b2f52@quill> <54C11EDD.50505@itforchange.net> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A801642A70@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
Message-ID: <54C2D78C.2010900@itforchange.net>


On Friday 23 January 2015 11:31 PM, "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang" wrote:
> Hi Parminder,
>
> how the ISF is linked to the IGF?

Hi Wolfgang

One is a civil society forum, the other a multistakeholder one. One 
develops people's and civil society's positions on the key issue of the 
global Internet, the other is a place where such positions can enter 
into dialogue with holders of political and economic power - the 
governments and the corporate actors.

Unless now the whole idea and concept of civil society - and along with 
those of people's movements, grassroots, activism, and so on - has been 
fully coopted in some people's mind with that of multistakeholderism 
(whatever one actually means by it, something that has remained 
notoriously unclear), the connection or link that you inquire about is 
extremely clear to me.

Internet is not the first thing for which there has been felt a need for 
'independently' forming a people's conception and set of hopes, 
expectations and demands - away from conclaves of power. There have been 
scores of others, and newer ones continue to arise. Accordingly if 
people's and civil society forums etc have been meaningful and needed in 
these areas, it is incumbent upon *those* who think they are *not 
needed* in the Internet space to explain why it is so, then the other 
way around.

To put is somewhat flippantly, ISF is also a reaction of people who are 
fed up with an ongoing IG charade where for instance Fadi Chehade can 
with a straight face call the WEF's Net Mundial Initiative as the 
'mother of all bottom -up processes' - even jokes require some 
plausibility limits!

To take the example of one of the latest international global forums on 
a key global governance issue, the Lima meeting on climate change, you 
will perhaps know that parallel to it a people's meeting was held. 
Internet and its governance also needs such meetings, that is the simple 
logic of the Internet Social Forum. If you think that in the Internet's 
case, such meetings and forums are not needed, I would of course be 
curious to hear your case.

I am happy to engage further with you on this issue, and answer your 
questions.

Lastly, let me invite you to join the ISF process. We work under the 
World Social Forum (WSF) process and principles - whereby its meetings 
are open to all civil society participants subject to very inimum 
conditions that are listed on their website.

Further, if the discussion is to now turn to the WSF, its meaning, 
relevance, etc, I am as happy to engage with you on that subject.

Regards, parminder

>
> Wolfgang
>
>   
>
>
> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org im Auftrag von parminder
> Gesendet: Do 22.01.2015 17:01
> An: governance at lists.igcaucus.org
> Betreff: Re: [governance] Internet Social Forum
>   
> Enclosed Spanish version... parminder
>
>
> On Thursday 22 January 2015 07:06 PM, Norbert Bollow wrote:
>> Global Civil Society launches the Internet Social Forum
>> - With a call to occupy the Internet
>>
>> PRESS RELEASE. Geneva, Switzerland, 22st January, 2015.
>>
>> A group of civil society organisations from around the world has
>> announced the Internet Social Forum, to bring together and articulate
>> bottom-up perspectives on the 'Internet we want'. Taking inspiration
>> from the World Social Forum, and its clarion call, 'Another World is
>> possible', the group seeks to draw urgent attention to the increasing
>> centralization of the Internet for extraction of monopoly rents and for
>> socio-political control, asserting that 'Another Internet is possible'!
>>
>> The Internet Social Forum will inter alia offer an alternative to the
>> recently-launched World Economic Forum's 'Net Mundial Initiative' on
>> global Internet governance. While the World Economic Forum (WEF) and
>> the 'Net Mundial Initiative' convene global elites, the Internet Social
>> Forum will be a participatory and bottom-up space for all those who
>> believe that the global Internet must evolve in the public interest; a
>> direct parallel to the launch of the World Social Forum in 2001 as a
>> counter initiative to the WEF.
>>
>> The Internet Social Forum will reach out to grassroots groups and
>> social movements across the world, catalysing a groundswell that
>> challenges the entrenched elite interests that currently control how
>> the Internet is managed. The Internet Social Forum's preparatory
>> process will kick off during the World Social Forum to take place in
>> Tunis, March 24th to 28th, 2015. The Internet Social Forum itself is
>> planned to be held either late 2015 or early 2016.
>>
>> "While the world's biggest companies have every right to debate the
>> future of the Internet, we are concerned that their perspectives should
>> not drown out those of ordinary people who have no access to the
>> privileged terrain WEF occupies - in the end it is this wider public
>> interest that must be paramount in governing the Internet. We are
>> organising the Internet Social Forum to make sure their voices can't be
>> ignored in the corridors of power," said Norbert Bollow, Co-Convenor of
>> the Just Net Coalition, which is one of the groups involved in the
>> initiative.
>>
>> The Internet Social Forum, and its preparatory process, is intended as
>> a space to vision and build the 'Internet we want'. It will be
>> underpinned by values of democracy, human rights and social justice. It
>> will stand for participatory policy making and promote community media.
>> It will seek an Internet that is truly decentralized in its
>> architecture and based on people's full rights to data, information,
>> knowledge and other 'commons' that the Internet has enabled the world
>> community to generate and share.
>>
>> Somewhat similar to Web inventor Tim Berners-Lee's call for a 'Magna
>> Carta for the Internet', the Internet Social Forum proposes to develop
>> a People's Internet Manifesto, through a bottom-up process involving
>> all concerned social groups and movements, in different areas, from
>> techies and ICT-for-development actors to media reform groups,
>> democracy movements and social justice activists.
>>
>> This year will also see the 10 year high-level review of the World
>> Summit on the Information Society (WSIS), to be held in New York in
>> December. As a full-scale review of a major UN summit, this will be a
>> critical global political event. Since the WSIS, held in 2003 and 2005,
>> the Internet, and what it means socially, has undergone a paradigm
>> shift. The WSIS witnessed active engagement of civil society and
>> technical groups as well as of business. However, currently, there
>> seems to be an deliberate attempt to sideline this UN-led initiative on
>> governance issues of the information society and Internet in favour of
>> private, big-business-dominated initiatives like the WEF's Net Mundial
>> Initiative. The Internet Social Forum, while remaining primarily a
>> people's forum, will also seek to channel global civil society's
>> engagement towards the WSIS +10 review.
>>
>> The following organisations form the initial group that is proposing
>> the Internet Social Forum, and many more are expected to join in the
>> immediate future. This is an open call to progressive groups from all
>> over the world to join this initiative, and participate in developing a
>> People's Internet Manifesto.
>>
>> Just Net Coalition, Global
>> P2P Foundation, Global
>> Transnational Institute, Global
>> Forum on Communication for Integration of our America, Regional (Latin
>> America) Arab NGO Network for Development, Regional
>> Agencia Latinoamericana de Información, Regional
>> Alternative Informatics Association, Turkey
>> Knowledge Commons, India
>> Open-Root/EUROLINC, France
>> SLFC.in, India
>> CODE-IP Trust, Kenya
>> GodlyGlobal.org, Switzerland
>> Centre for Community Informatics Research, Development and Training,
>> Canada IT for Change, India
>> Association for Proper Internet Governance, Switzerland
>> Computer Professionals Union, Philippines
>> Free Press, USA
>> Advocates of Science and Technology for the People, Philippines
>> Other News, Italy
>> Free Software Movement of India
>> Global_Geneva, Switzerland
>> Solidarius (Solidarity Economy Network), Italy
>> All India Peoples Science Network, India
>> Institute for Local Self-Reliance - Community Broadband Networks, USA
>>
>> Please contact us at secretariat at InternetSocialForum.net for further
>> information or clarification.
>>
>> Or the following regional contacts:
>>
>> Africa:        Alex Gakaru <AlexG at InternetSocialForum.net>
>> Asia:          Rishab Bailey <RishabB at InternetSocialForum.net>
>> Europe:        Norbert Bollow <NorbertB at InternetSocialForum.net>
>> North America: Micheal Gurstein <MichealG at InternetSocialForum.net>
>> South America: Sally Burch <SallyB at InternetSocialForum.net>
>>
>>
>> This press release is also available online, e.g. at
>> http://justnetcoalition.org/ISF
>>
>
>


-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com  Fri Jan 23 18:43:18 2015
From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro)
Date: Sat, 24 Jan 2015 11:43:18 +1200
Subject: [governance] Re: [APAC-Discuss] [PICISOC] Invitation to Internet
 Governance Session #PTC15
In-Reply-To: <CA+19_w8XOJ298rDdtp8004V0fwE1xFAtWeuZsj36tPeTF_nJRQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <9EFFEF5C-D857-4656-BAF8-69B93FCA3805@gmail.com>
	<CA+19_w8XOJ298rDdtp8004V0fwE1xFAtWeuZsj36tPeTF_nJRQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAJwbTiCG8fSvLOUiSJtyRmf7OWnx2-SL97cVgK5CuDx85qi7rw@mail.gmail.com>

Dear All,

Regrettably the event has passed but certainly other key events to look
forward to is the upcoming APRICOT and APrIGF which will be held in
Fukuoka, Japan and Macau, China respectively.

Sadly there was no recording as you had to be on site but you can follow
the #PTC15 or #IGF

With every best wish,
Sala

On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 5:36 PM, Vish विशारद PYC <virat.surya at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Is it possible to participate via internet?
>
> On 1/21/15, Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro
> <salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Dear All,
> >
> > Firstly apologies for the cross posting. I would like to invite you to
> the
> > Pacific Telecommunication Council 15 Conference's Executive Roundtable on
> > Internet Governance which is being held in Coral Room 2 at The Hilton,
> > Hawaiian Village from 4pm till 5pm Honolulu time.
> >
> > You can follow the twitter hashtag #PTC15 #IGF
> >
> > Session Description is as follows:
> >
> > Executive Insight Roundtable 10: Internet Governance
> > In 2005, the UN-sponsored World Summit on the Information Society defined
> > Internet governance as "the development and application by governments,
> the
> > private sector and civil society, in their respective roles, of shared
> > principles, norms, rules, decision-making procedures, and programs that
> > shape the evolution and use of the Internet." The Internet is expanding
> > exponentially. The Internet Governance Forum mandate from the United
> nations
> > ends in 2015. Though there is no sign that the future of the IGF is in
> > danger, so far there is no word from the UN asking for input on the
> renewal
> > of IGF. In early 2014, the U.S. government announced plans to relinquish
> its
> > historic stewardship over the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA),
> > which is operated by ICANN, to the global multi-stakeholder Internet
> > community when its contract with ICANN expires in September 2015.Many
> > experts believe this change may set the stage for broader changes in
> other
> > areas of Internet governance, such as intellectual property rights and
> > cybersecurity.
> >
> > Who is responsible for Internet governance among the different
> stakeholder
> > groups? What are issues that may disrupt the roles of existing
> stakeholders?
> > How should consensus on key principles or outcomes be reached for
> solutions
> > that benefit the global Internet rather than special interests? How
> should
> > market-specific challenges or issues that are particular to a local
> > community be approached for the global Internet to continue its
> innovative
> > contributions? These are just some of the challenging questions around
> > Internet Governance that will be discussed in this executive insight
> > roundtable.
> >
> > Moderator:
> > Steven Smith, Associate VP, IT Technology & Deputy CIO, University of
> > Hawaii, USA
> > Panelists:
> > David Conrad, CTO, Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers
> > (ICANN)
> > John Curran, President and CEO, American Registry for Internet Numbers
> > (ARIN)
> > Paul Wilson, Director General, Asia Pacific Network Information Centre
> > (APNIC)
> > With every best wish,
> > Sala
> >
> > Sent from my iPad
>
>
> --
> नमस्ते Namaste
>
> धन्यवाद  Thanks
> --
> Facebook - https://www.facebook.com/VisharadManjeet
> _______________________________________________
> APAC-Discuss mailing list
> APAC-Discuss at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/apac-discuss
>
> Homepage for the region: http://www.apralo.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150124/35d6017c/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From jefsey at jefsey.com  Fri Jan 23 19:22:11 2015
From: jefsey at jefsey.com (JFC Morfin)
Date: Sat, 24 Jan 2015 01:22:11 +0100
Subject: [discuss] [governance] Internet Social Forum
In-Reply-To: <54C2D78C.2010900@itforchange.net>
References: <20150122143615.700b2f52@quill>
 <54C11EDD.50505@itforchange.net>
 <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A801642A70@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
 <54C2D78C.2010900@itforchange.net>
Message-ID: <E1YEoKt-0003AA-0A@igcaucus.org>

At 00:21 24/01/2015, parminder wrote:
>One is a civil society forum, the other a multistakeholder one.

Hi! Parminder,
I have a real difficulty understanding why you civil society activist 
continue using the "multistakeholder" discriminatroy concept and do 
not rally the omnistakeholder non discriminatory vision. Everyone is 
to be accepted as a network co-owner/builder and a co-decision member 
(through the pragmantic mechanisms of influence, synergy and emergence).
jfc


-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From chlebrum at gmail.com  Sat Jan 24 01:56:19 2015
From: chlebrum at gmail.com (chlebrum .)
Date: Sat, 24 Jan 2015 07:56:19 +0100
Subject: AW: [governance] Internet Social Forum
In-Reply-To: <54C2D78C.2010900@itforchange.net>
References: <20150122143615.700b2f52@quill> <54C11EDD.50505@itforchange.net>
 <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A801642A70@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> <54C2D78C.2010900@itforchange.net>
Message-ID: <CANMQhZiP4UgPXgx-isJSsyu2CKaFOfKQ-=A-t92gwBsy40YD1w@mail.gmail.com>

The last Kieren McCarthy opus…

24/01/2015 05:07
<https://twitter.com/theregister/status/558838370437431296?refsrc=email&s=11>
Hibernating NetMundial continues to rattle internet governance world
reg.cx/2dZG <http://t.co/0D2vSUtqqf>
​with wide JNC and WSF quotes​


Chantal Lebrument
​Courriel: c <lebrument at open-root.eu>hlebrum at gmail.com
Mob: +33 6 8369 5460

2015-01-24 0:21 GMT+01:00 parminder <parminder at itforchange.net>:

>
> On Friday 23 January 2015 11:31 PM, "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang" wrote:
>
>> Hi Parminder,
>>
>> how the ISF is linked to the IGF?
>>
>
> Hi Wolfgang
>
> One is a civil society forum, the other a multistakeholder one. One
> develops people's and civil society's positions on the key issue of the
> global Internet, the other is a place where such positions can enter into
> dialogue with holders of political and economic power - the governments and
> the corporate actors.
>
> Unless now the whole idea and concept of civil society - and along with
> those of people's movements, grassroots, activism, and so on - has been
> fully coopted in some people's mind with that of multistakeholderism
> (whatever one actually means by it, something that has remained notoriously
> unclear), the connection or link that you inquire about is extremely clear
> to me.
>
> Internet is not the first thing for which there has been felt a need for
> 'independently' forming a people's conception and set of hopes,
> expectations and demands - away from conclaves of power. There have been
> scores of others, and newer ones continue to arise. Accordingly if people's
> and civil society forums etc have been meaningful and needed in these
> areas, it is incumbent upon *those* who think they are *not needed* in the
> Internet space to explain why it is so, then the other way around.
>
> To put is somewhat flippantly, ISF is also a reaction of people who are
> fed up with an ongoing IG charade where for instance Fadi Chehade can with
> a straight face call the WEF's Net Mundial Initiative as the 'mother of all
> bottom -up processes' - even jokes require some plausibility limits!
>
> To take the example of one of the latest international global forums on a
> key global governance issue, the Lima meeting on climate change, you will
> perhaps know that parallel to it a people's meeting was held. Internet and
> its governance also needs such meetings, that is the simple logic of the
> Internet Social Forum. If you think that in the Internet's case, such
> meetings and forums are not needed, I would of course be curious to hear
> your case.
>
> I am happy to engage further with you on this issue, and answer your
> questions.
>
> Lastly, let me invite you to join the ISF process. We work under the World
> Social Forum (WSF) process and principles - whereby its meetings are open
> to all civil society participants subject to very inimum conditions that
> are listed on their website.
>
> Further, if the discussion is to now turn to the WSF, its meaning,
> relevance, etc, I am as happy to engage with you on that subject.
>
> Regards, parminder
>
>
>
>> Wolfgang
>>
>>
>>
>> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
>> Von: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org im Auftrag von parminder
>> Gesendet: Do 22.01.2015 17:01
>> An: governance at lists.igcaucus.org
>> Betreff: Re: [governance] Internet Social Forum
>>   Enclosed Spanish version... parminder
>>
>>
>> On Thursday 22 January 2015 07:06 PM, Norbert Bollow wrote:
>>
>>> Global Civil Society launches the Internet Social Forum
>>> - With a call to occupy the Internet
>>>
>>> PRESS RELEASE. Geneva, Switzerland, 22st January, 2015.
>>>
>>> A group of civil society organisations from around the world has
>>> announced the Internet Social Forum, to bring together and articulate
>>> bottom-up perspectives on the 'Internet we want'. Taking inspiration
>>> from the World Social Forum, and its clarion call, 'Another World is
>>> possible', the group seeks to draw urgent attention to the increasing
>>> centralization of the Internet for extraction of monopoly rents and for
>>> socio-political control, asserting that 'Another Internet is possible'!
>>>
>>> The Internet Social Forum will inter alia offer an alternative to the
>>> recently-launched World Economic Forum's 'Net Mundial Initiative' on
>>> global Internet governance. While the World Economic Forum (WEF) and
>>> the 'Net Mundial Initiative' convene global elites, the Internet Social
>>> Forum will be a participatory and bottom-up space for all those who
>>> believe that the global Internet must evolve in the public interest; a
>>> direct parallel to the launch of the World Social Forum in 2001 as a
>>> counter initiative to the WEF.
>>>
>>> The Internet Social Forum will reach out to grassroots groups and
>>> social movements across the world, catalysing a groundswell that
>>> challenges the entrenched elite interests that currently control how
>>> the Internet is managed. The Internet Social Forum's preparatory
>>> process will kick off during the World Social Forum to take place in
>>> Tunis, March 24th to 28th, 2015. The Internet Social Forum itself is
>>> planned to be held either late 2015 or early 2016.
>>>
>>> "While the world's biggest companies have every right to debate the
>>> future of the Internet, we are concerned that their perspectives should
>>> not drown out those of ordinary people who have no access to the
>>> privileged terrain WEF occupies - in the end it is this wider public
>>> interest that must be paramount in governing the Internet. We are
>>> organising the Internet Social Forum to make sure their voices can't be
>>> ignored in the corridors of power," said Norbert Bollow, Co-Convenor of
>>> the Just Net Coalition, which is one of the groups involved in the
>>> initiative.
>>>
>>> The Internet Social Forum, and its preparatory process, is intended as
>>> a space to vision and build the 'Internet we want'. It will be
>>> underpinned by values of democracy, human rights and social justice. It
>>> will stand for participatory policy making and promote community media.
>>> It will seek an Internet that is truly decentralized in its
>>> architecture and based on people's full rights to data, information,
>>> knowledge and other 'commons' that the Internet has enabled the world
>>> community to generate and share.
>>>
>>> Somewhat similar to Web inventor Tim Berners-Lee's call for a 'Magna
>>> Carta for the Internet', the Internet Social Forum proposes to develop
>>> a People's Internet Manifesto, through a bottom-up process involving
>>> all concerned social groups and movements, in different areas, from
>>> techies and ICT-for-development actors to media reform groups,
>>> democracy movements and social justice activists.
>>>
>>> This year will also see the 10 year high-level review of the World
>>> Summit on the Information Society (WSIS), to be held in New York in
>>> December. As a full-scale review of a major UN summit, this will be a
>>> critical global political event. Since the WSIS, held in 2003 and 2005,
>>> the Internet, and what it means socially, has undergone a paradigm
>>> shift. The WSIS witnessed active engagement of civil society and
>>> technical groups as well as of business. However, currently, there
>>> seems to be an deliberate attempt to sideline this UN-led initiative on
>>> governance issues of the information society and Internet in favour of
>>> private, big-business-dominated initiatives like the WEF's Net Mundial
>>> Initiative. The Internet Social Forum, while remaining primarily a
>>> people's forum, will also seek to channel global civil society's
>>> engagement towards the WSIS +10 review.
>>>
>>> The following organisations form the initial group that is proposing
>>> the Internet Social Forum, and many more are expected to join in the
>>> immediate future. This is an open call to progressive groups from all
>>> over the world to join this initiative, and participate in developing a
>>> People's Internet Manifesto.
>>>
>>> Just Net Coalition, Global
>>> P2P Foundation, Global
>>> Transnational Institute, Global
>>> Forum on Communication for Integration of our America, Regional (Latin
>>> America) Arab NGO Network for Development, Regional
>>> Agencia Latinoamericana de Información, Regional
>>> Alternative Informatics Association, Turkey
>>> Knowledge Commons, India
>>> Open-Root/EUROLINC, France
>>> SLFC.in, India
>>> CODE-IP Trust, Kenya
>>> GodlyGlobal.org, Switzerland
>>> Centre for Community Informatics Research, Development and Training,
>>> Canada IT for Change, India
>>> Association for Proper Internet Governance, Switzerland
>>> Computer Professionals Union, Philippines
>>> Free Press, USA
>>> Advocates of Science and Technology for the People, Philippines
>>> Other News, Italy
>>> Free Software Movement of India
>>> Global_Geneva, Switzerland
>>> Solidarius (Solidarity Economy Network), Italy
>>> All India Peoples Science Network, India
>>> Institute for Local Self-Reliance - Community Broadband Networks, USA
>>>
>>> Please contact us at secretariat at InternetSocialForum.net for further
>>> information or clarification.
>>>
>>> Or the following regional contacts:
>>>
>>> Africa:        Alex Gakaru <AlexG at InternetSocialForum.net>
>>> Asia:          Rishab Bailey <RishabB at InternetSocialForum.net>
>>> Europe:        Norbert Bollow <NorbertB at InternetSocialForum.net>
>>> North America: Micheal Gurstein <MichealG at InternetSocialForum.net>
>>> South America: Sally Burch <SallyB at InternetSocialForum.net>
>>>
>>>
>>> This press release is also available online, e.g. at
>>> http://justnetcoalition.org/ISF
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>      governance at lists.igcaucus.org
> To be removed from the list, visit:
>      http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
>
> For all other list information and functions, see:
>      http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
>      http://www.igcaucus.org/
>
> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150124/5baa62ab/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From jc.nothias at theglobaljournal.net  Sat Jan 24 02:23:23 2015
From: jc.nothias at theglobaljournal.net (Jean-Christophe NOTHIAS I The Global Journal)
Date: Sat, 24 Jan 2015 08:23:23 +0100
Subject: [bestbits] [governance] Internet Social Forum
In-Reply-To: <54C2D78C.2010900@itforchange.net>
References: <20150122143615.700b2f52@quill> <54C11EDD.50505@itforchange.net> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A801642A70@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> <54C2D78C.2010900@itforchange.net>
Message-ID: <62347604-80DB-474B-9421-91A684E17797@theglobaljournal.net>

Quoted a Register piece written by Kieren McCarthy
Hibernating NetMundial continues to rattle internet governance world reg.cx/2dZG

As to NetMundial's three-month consultation period, that will seemingly be led by respected internet governance academic and ICANN Board member Wolfgang Kleinwachter. The NetMundial organizers did not reveal how much they will pay Kleinwachter to lend the initiative his credibility, but his first attempt to make the internet community learn to love the idea came in the form of a blog post at the start of the year.




Le 24 janv. 2015 à 00:21, parminder a écrit :

> 
> On Friday 23 January 2015 11:31 PM, "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang" wrote:
>> Hi Parminder,
>> 
>> how the ISF is linked to the IGF?
> 
> Hi Wolfgang
> 
> One is a civil society forum, the other a multistakeholder one. One develops people's and civil society's positions on the key issue of the global Internet, the other is a place where such positions can enter into dialogue with holders of political and economic power - the governments and the corporate actors.
> 
> Unless now the whole idea and concept of civil society - and along with those of people's movements, grassroots, activism, and so on - has been fully coopted in some people's mind with that of multistakeholderism (whatever one actually means by it, something that has remained notoriously unclear), the connection or link that you inquire about is extremely clear to me.
> 
> Internet is not the first thing for which there has been felt a need for 'independently' forming a people's conception and set of hopes, expectations and demands - away from conclaves of power. There have been scores of others, and newer ones continue to arise. Accordingly if people's and civil society forums etc have been meaningful and needed in these areas, it is incumbent upon *those* who think they are *not needed* in the Internet space to explain why it is so, then the other way around.
> 
> To put is somewhat flippantly, ISF is also a reaction of people who are fed up with an ongoing IG charade where for instance Fadi Chehade can with a straight face call the WEF's Net Mundial Initiative as the 'mother of all bottom -up processes' - even jokes require some plausibility limits!
> 
> To take the example of one of the latest international global forums on a key global governance issue, the Lima meeting on climate change, you will perhaps know that parallel to it a people's meeting was held. Internet and its governance also needs such meetings, that is the simple logic of the Internet Social Forum. If you think that in the Internet's case, such meetings and forums are not needed, I would of course be curious to hear your case.
> 
> I am happy to engage further with you on this issue, and answer your questions.
> 
> Lastly, let me invite you to join the ISF process. We work under the World Social Forum (WSF) process and principles - whereby its meetings are open to all civil society participants subject to very inimum conditions that are listed on their website.
> 
> Further, if the discussion is to now turn to the WSF, its meaning, relevance, etc, I am as happy to engage with you on that subject.
> 
> Regards, parminder
> 
>> 
>> Wolfgang
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
>> Von: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org im Auftrag von parminder
>> Gesendet: Do 22.01.2015 17:01
>> An: governance at lists.igcaucus.org
>> Betreff: Re: [governance] Internet Social Forum
>>  Enclosed Spanish version... parminder
>> 
>> 
>> On Thursday 22 January 2015 07:06 PM, Norbert Bollow wrote:
>>> Global Civil Society launches the Internet Social Forum
>>> - With a call to occupy the Internet
>>> 
>>> PRESS RELEASE. Geneva, Switzerland, 22st January, 2015.
>>> 
>>> A group of civil society organisations from around the world has
>>> announced the Internet Social Forum, to bring together and articulate
>>> bottom-up perspectives on the 'Internet we want'. Taking inspiration
>>> from the World Social Forum, and its clarion call, 'Another World is
>>> possible', the group seeks to draw urgent attention to the increasing
>>> centralization of the Internet for extraction of monopoly rents and for
>>> socio-political control, asserting that 'Another Internet is possible'!
>>> 
>>> The Internet Social Forum will inter alia offer an alternative to the
>>> recently-launched World Economic Forum's 'Net Mundial Initiative' on
>>> global Internet governance. While the World Economic Forum (WEF) and
>>> the 'Net Mundial Initiative' convene global elites, the Internet Social
>>> Forum will be a participatory and bottom-up space for all those who
>>> believe that the global Internet must evolve in the public interest; a
>>> direct parallel to the launch of the World Social Forum in 2001 as a
>>> counter initiative to the WEF.
>>> 
>>> The Internet Social Forum will reach out to grassroots groups and
>>> social movements across the world, catalysing a groundswell that
>>> challenges the entrenched elite interests that currently control how
>>> the Internet is managed. The Internet Social Forum's preparatory
>>> process will kick off during the World Social Forum to take place in
>>> Tunis, March 24th to 28th, 2015. The Internet Social Forum itself is
>>> planned to be held either late 2015 or early 2016.
>>> 
>>> "While the world's biggest companies have every right to debate the
>>> future of the Internet, we are concerned that their perspectives should
>>> not drown out those of ordinary people who have no access to the
>>> privileged terrain WEF occupies - in the end it is this wider public
>>> interest that must be paramount in governing the Internet. We are
>>> organising the Internet Social Forum to make sure their voices can't be
>>> ignored in the corridors of power," said Norbert Bollow, Co-Convenor of
>>> the Just Net Coalition, which is one of the groups involved in the
>>> initiative.
>>> 
>>> The Internet Social Forum, and its preparatory process, is intended as
>>> a space to vision and build the 'Internet we want'. It will be
>>> underpinned by values of democracy, human rights and social justice. It
>>> will stand for participatory policy making and promote community media.
>>> It will seek an Internet that is truly decentralized in its
>>> architecture and based on people's full rights to data, information,
>>> knowledge and other 'commons' that the Internet has enabled the world
>>> community to generate and share.
>>> 
>>> Somewhat similar to Web inventor Tim Berners-Lee's call for a 'Magna
>>> Carta for the Internet', the Internet Social Forum proposes to develop
>>> a People's Internet Manifesto, through a bottom-up process involving
>>> all concerned social groups and movements, in different areas, from
>>> techies and ICT-for-development actors to media reform groups,
>>> democracy movements and social justice activists.
>>> 
>>> This year will also see the 10 year high-level review of the World
>>> Summit on the Information Society (WSIS), to be held in New York in
>>> December. As a full-scale review of a major UN summit, this will be a
>>> critical global political event. Since the WSIS, held in 2003 and 2005,
>>> the Internet, and what it means socially, has undergone a paradigm
>>> shift. The WSIS witnessed active engagement of civil society and
>>> technical groups as well as of business. However, currently, there
>>> seems to be an deliberate attempt to sideline this UN-led initiative on
>>> governance issues of the information society and Internet in favour of
>>> private, big-business-dominated initiatives like the WEF's Net Mundial
>>> Initiative. The Internet Social Forum, while remaining primarily a
>>> people's forum, will also seek to channel global civil society's
>>> engagement towards the WSIS +10 review.
>>> 
>>> The following organisations form the initial group that is proposing
>>> the Internet Social Forum, and many more are expected to join in the
>>> immediate future. This is an open call to progressive groups from all
>>> over the world to join this initiative, and participate in developing a
>>> People's Internet Manifesto.
>>> 
>>> Just Net Coalition, Global
>>> P2P Foundation, Global
>>> Transnational Institute, Global
>>> Forum on Communication for Integration of our America, Regional (Latin
>>> America) Arab NGO Network for Development, Regional
>>> Agencia Latinoamericana de Información, Regional
>>> Alternative Informatics Association, Turkey
>>> Knowledge Commons, India
>>> Open-Root/EUROLINC, France
>>> SLFC.in, India
>>> CODE-IP Trust, Kenya
>>> GodlyGlobal.org, Switzerland
>>> Centre for Community Informatics Research, Development and Training,
>>> Canada IT for Change, India
>>> Association for Proper Internet Governance, Switzerland
>>> Computer Professionals Union, Philippines
>>> Free Press, USA
>>> Advocates of Science and Technology for the People, Philippines
>>> Other News, Italy
>>> Free Software Movement of India
>>> Global_Geneva, Switzerland
>>> Solidarius (Solidarity Economy Network), Italy
>>> All India Peoples Science Network, India
>>> Institute for Local Self-Reliance - Community Broadband Networks, USA
>>> 
>>> Please contact us at secretariat at InternetSocialForum.net for further
>>> information or clarification.
>>> 
>>> Or the following regional contacts:
>>> 
>>> Africa:        Alex Gakaru <AlexG at InternetSocialForum.net>
>>> Asia:          Rishab Bailey <RishabB at InternetSocialForum.net>
>>> Europe:        Norbert Bollow <NorbertB at InternetSocialForum.net>
>>> North America: Micheal Gurstein <MichealG at InternetSocialForum.net>
>>> South America: Sally Burch <SallyB at InternetSocialForum.net>
>>> 
>>> 
>>> This press release is also available online, e.g. at
>>> http://justnetcoalition.org/ISF
>>> 
>> 
>> 
> 
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>     bestbits at lists.bestbits.net.
> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit:
>     http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150124/5dc9af3a/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From parminder at itforchange.net  Sat Jan 24 20:11:00 2015
From: parminder at itforchange.net (parminder)
Date: Sun, 25 Jan 2015 06:41:00 +0530
Subject: [governance] Piece on IG in the annual 'state of power' publication
Message-ID: <54C442A4.40904@itforchange.net>

Some of you may be aware that the Transnational Institute brings out an 
annual 'State of Power' publication to conclude with the WEF meetings in 
Davos and the declarations by the 1 percent that may be issued over there.

The introduction to this publication is as follows;

"The fourth edition of our annual State of Power report, coinciding with 
the international meeting in Switzerland of what Susan George calls “the 
Davos class”. This series seeks to examine different dimensions of 
power, unmask the key holders of power in our globalised world, and 
identify sources of transformative counter-power."
(ends)

While the whole of it is worth reading, I especially point to the 
chapter on Internet governance "The true stakes of Internet governance".

please see http://www.tni.org/stateofpower2015

parminder
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150125/278f9253/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de  Sun Jan 25 07:15:02 2015
From: wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de (=?iso-8859-1?Q?=22Kleinw=E4chter=2C_Wolfgang=22?=)
Date: Sun, 25 Jan 2015 13:15:02 +0100
Subject: [governance] AW: From Confusion to Clarification
References: <793FFF2DB19A4177851ACCDC06269034@Toshiba>
 <54762985.2010101@apc.org> <053001d009ba$768cf260$63a6d720$@gmail.com>
 <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8016428EE@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
Message-ID:  <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A801642A86@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>

Dear friends,

six weeks ago I made a proposal under the thread "From Confusion to Clarification" to produce a Civil Society Internet Governance Compendium or Handbook. What was the idea behind the proposal? 

Civil Society is a recognized and needed stakeholder in the global Internet Governance debate and a needed partner in the evolving multistakeholder approaches to manage Internet related public policy issues. 
2015 will see a number of Internet Governance events where the voice of civil society has to be raised: It starts with the ITU Council IG Working Group Meetings in February, continues with UNESCO conferences and meetings of the UNCSTD, the HRC, the forthcoming Cybersecurity Conference in The Hague, the IGF in Brazil, the WSIS 10+ conference in New York in December 2015 and others. 

Civil Society does not speak with one voice. It is characterized by a broad diversity. This is not a weakness, this is a strength. It reflects the reality. And it is not different from the diversity within other stakeholder groups. In the governmental stakeholder group you have a broad varierty of positions - from the US via EU, Brazil, Egypt and India to China. In the private sector stakeholder group there are different approaches among transnational corporations and small and medium enterprises from developed and developing countries. And even among the I* organizations there are differences, as we have seen recently in the positioning towards the NetMundial initiative. This pluralism and diversity reflects the reality of the Internet Governance ecosystem. If one want to achieve sustainable progress a rough consensus has to include the main arguments from the main groups of all stakeholders. To achieve concrete results openess and transparency with regard to the various positions is a key pre-condition to promote mutual understanding. 

Insofar it would be good if civil society Internet Governance groups or individuals could describe openly what they are standing for. To have on paper the various perspectives different civil society groups have if it comes to Internet policy related issues would be useful anbd could enhance civil society input into the forthcoming negotiations, in particular with regard to WSIS 10+.         

Since I did send this proposals to this list I got numerous comments and critical remarks. Some respondents supported the project and called it a good idea. Others argued that this is a bad, unrealistic and counterproductive idea. Many partners made concrete proposals how such a project could be further enhanced. Taking into account all the feed back I got since last month I would specify my proposal in the following way:

I. Ian Peter, in his capacity as acting chair of the CSCG, should function as the main editor. Each member of the CSCG should nominate a co-editor. The role of the editor and the co-editors would be technical. They should not intervene into the content of the individual contributions. The six co-editors of the six member groups of the CWSG should invite four contributors from their group, one for each chapter. It is up to the groups whether the individual author expresses his own individual position or represents the position of the whole group. Each contribution should be 4 - 8 pages. Each author would be free to cover either the whole subject or to select a special sub-item. 

II. The book should have four chapters:
1.	Human Rights and Internet(Access, Freedom of Expression, Privacy, Content, Culture etc.)
2.	Security in Cyberspace (Cyberwar, Cyberterrorism, Cybercrime, Surveillance, National Sovereignty etc.)
3.	Social, Economic and Cultural Development (Digital Divide, Market Domination, Competition, Infrastructure Development, Cultural and Linguistic Diversity etc.)
4.	Technical Coordination (Names, Numbers, Protocols, Accountability etc.)

III. Timetable
It would be good to have a first draft ready until early May (for the Meeting of the UNCSTD). The final e-Version of the whole book should be ready until early September for use by the WSIS 10+ negotiations groups. A formal presentation should be organized during the 10th IGF in Brazil. Efforts should be undertake to produce also a paper version for distribution at the 10th IGF in November 2014. 

Best regards

Wolfgang

PS: 
I have described the "Four Baskets" more in detail in my blog in CircleID 
http://www.circleid.com/posts/20150103_internet_governance_outlook_2015_2_processes_many_venues_4_baskets/

w



Hi everybody

After weeks of confusing conflicts let´s move towards clarifying collaboration. What we have seen in the recent (sometimes unfriendly) disputes is that there are many different  civil society activists with different civil society positions. This is confusing, both for newcomers who want to join civil society groups in Internet Governance discussions as well as for other stakeholders who want to collaborate with civil society. On the othher Hand: This is natural. The civil Society Stakeholder Groups has similar differences as the governmental stakeholder group if you compare the governmental positions of China, Russia, Saudi Arabia, US, EU, Brazil, India, Japan, Australia etc.
This not the Problem. The probllem is that you have to know what the position. So it is about transparency and clarity. 

Here is a proposal how to move forward:  We have seen so many people writing long e-mails arguing for their position. Wouldn´t it be better if we use this energy to write more comprehensive and structured position or issue papers so that newbies or outsiders will better understand what the real points under discussions are in CS circles? We have seen rather different arguments around the same issue from JNC to APC and NCUC folks.       

I propose that we start to work on what I call a “Civil Society Internet Governance Handbook”.  This handbook would allow all CS groups within the CSCG to present their own individual points of views so that everybody knows what the positions are. The book could be structured into four main chapters:

1.	Human Rights (Access, Freedom of Expression, Privacy etc.)
2.	Security (Cyberwar, Cyberterrorism, Cybercrime etc.)
3.	Economic Development (Market domination, competition, infrastructure development etc.)
4.	Technical Coordination (Names, Numbers, Protocols etc.)

Each of the six groups under the CSCG (IGC, BB, JNC, NCSG, Diplo, APC) could nominate four authors (one for each chapter). Each author would be free to argue for her/his position (five to maximum teen pages). There is no need for consensus. Every author would be free to present her/his radical, moderate, liberal and whatsoever position on one of the four main issues. 

Such a compendium would help to bring more transparency into the process and would enable a more fact based discussion in the IG events ahead of us.

We could deliver this as an e-book (probably with an Annex with main official texts as Tunis Agenda, Sao Paulo Principles, UN Resolutions etc.) until the May 2015 Sessions in Geneva. In total this book would be around 250 pages. If we find a sponsor we could publish this for the New York event in December 2015. Such a book would seen by the rest of the IG Community as a helpful contribution, it would strengthen the role of CS in the emerging IG multistakeholder mechanisms and would be also an input into the WSIS 10+ process. 

The chair of the CSCG (together with the co-chairs from the six groups) would be the editor.  

Any comment?

Wolfgang



-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From gurstein at gmail.com  Sun Jan 25 07:19:28 2015
From: gurstein at gmail.com (michael gurstein)
Date: Sun, 25 Jan 2015 04:19:28 -0800
Subject: [governance] FW: Towards an Internet Social Forum
In-Reply-To: <54C2E1A8.9040703@itforchange.net>
References: <w1tknuhwuokwhm1bwrq7nf82.1421824340505@email.android.com>    <54BFBF0D.3000504@itforchange.net>    <EBD518CE-0A41-4F63-8AB4-E68F33E602FB@globalgeneva.net>    <20150121172634.0fbbd8b5@quill> <54BFE3E9.8080005@itforchange.net>    <1421862025.163813248@apps.rackspace.com>    <54BFE647.50205@itforchange.net> <20150121190917.3066b781@quill>    <54BFEF3A.6080307@alainet.org> <20150121194828.1ce2f9ef@quill> <b6bf4820c07c5c5367db7cfe2f2c89c1.squirrel@webmail.tni.org>,<54C0BF75.9030809@itforchange.net> <207E590CDEB1344EB16A3D3424E8D74202304FE5AB3B@EXVMBX016-2.exch016.msoutlookonline.net> <54C0DFD4.6070202@itforchange.net> <54C111D0.2050809@itforchange.net> <54C12314.2060407@alainet.org> <54C236DE.3050903@itforchange.net> <54C2E1A8.9040703@itforchange.net>
Message-ID: <001001d03899$2ad41c00$807c5400$@gmail.com>

Coverage of the ISF in an Indian daily

M

http://www.deccanherald.com/content/455369/towards-democratic-internet-governance.html


Towards democratic Internet governance


*	1 min read 
*	 

Shruthi H M, Bengaluru, Jan 24, 2015, DHNS:

The Internet might have pervaded the common man's life but its governance still remains in the hands of a few corporate giants. To counter this, civil society organisations propose democratic Internet governance. 

Though Google’s Eric Schmidt predicts the “disappearance of Internet into the background”, a group of organisations have set out to bring to fore voices that have remained in the background in spite of the Internet’s all pervasive nature.As the World Economic Forum (WEF) 2015 is in progress in Davos (Jan 21-24), civil society organisations have come together to create a global ‘Internet Social Forum’ countering the WEF's NETmundial initiative for Internet governance. The organisations aim to create an Internet space governed in public interest. 

Bengaluru-based organisation IT for Change will be an active part of this global forum, along with five other Indian organisations: Society For Knowledge Commons, All India Peoples Science Network, Free Software Movement of India, SLFC.in and Digital Empowrment Foundation. 

The Internet Social Forum will consist of civil society organisations from across the globe who believe that Internet governance should not be limited to the vested interests of corporate giants. Their endeavour is to put in place a “bottom's up” approach, where grassroots groups can have their say in regulating Internet space.

Civil organisations feel that the WEF’s global internet policy making and governance initiative the ‘NETmundial’, restricts itself to the voices of the global elite. The concept of WEF itself has been countered by the “World Social Forum” and the Internet Social Forum draws inspiration from it. In fact, the “preparatory process” of the forum is likely to be held in March 2015 in Tunis, during the World Social Forum meet.

When one searches for something on the Internet, the most popular links related to the subject appear at the top of the list. 

However, more often links that appear first are not guided by popularity but by the money invested by interested parties to ensure they are displayed on top. In this regard, the Internet Social Forum will fight for “Net neutrality”. 

IT For Change Executive Director Parminder Jeet Singh said, “In its current form, internet governance has not yet become a people's movement. The Internet is increasingly controlled by corporates.” 

Community owned broadband, data ownership, limits to copyright and including rural communities in the dialogue process are some of the issues that the forum seeks to address.

Rishab Bailey, Director (legal), Society For Knowledge Commons, added that such an initiative was significant as, at present, a lot of thought is going into setting up institutions for Internet governance. “We have to ensure a representative and democratic Internet governance. Internet is a global construct and it touches all our lives. As of now there are no concrete mechanisms to deal with issues pertaining to Internet governance. We have to make sure that Internet governance is a true bottoms up approach.” 

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150125/0d00ebe6/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de  Sun Jan 25 07:58:45 2015
From: wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de (=?iso-8859-1?Q?=22Kleinw=E4chter=2C_Wolfgang=22?=)
Date: Sun, 25 Jan 2015 13:58:45 +0100
Subject: AW: [governance] FW: Towards an Internet Social Forum
References: <w1tknuhwuokwhm1bwrq7nf82.1421824340505@email.android.com>
 <54BFBF0D.3000504@itforchange.net>
 <EBD518CE-0A41-4F63-8AB4-E68F33E602FB@globalgeneva.net>
 <20150121172634.0fbbd8b5@quill> <54BFE3E9.8080005@itforchange.net>
 <1421862025.163813248@apps.rackspace.com> <54BFE647.50205@itforchange.net>
 <20150121190917.3066b781@quill> <54BFEF3A.6080307@alainet.org>
 <20150121194828.1ce2f9ef@quill>
 <b6bf4820c07c5c5367db7cfe2f2c89c1.squirrel@webmail.tni.org>
 <54C0BF75.9030809@itforchange.net>
 <207E590CDEB1344EB16A3D3424E8D74202304FE5AB3B@EXVMBX016-2.exch016.msoutlookonline.net>
 <54C0DFD4.6070202@itforchange.net> <54C111D0.2050809@itforchange.net>
 <54C12314.2060407@alainet.org> <54C236DE.3050903@itforchange.net>
 <54C2E1A8.9040703@itforchange.net> <001001d03899$2ad41c00$807c5400$@gmail.com>
Message-ID:  <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A801642A88@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>

Hi Michael,

I asked already Parminder how the ISF is linked to the IGF and I did not get an answer. Can you reply? 

Wolfgang




-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org im Auftrag von michael gurstein
Gesendet: So 25.01.2015 13:19
An: governance at lists.igcaucus.org
Betreff: [governance] FW: Towards an Internet Social Forum
 
Coverage of the ISF in an Indian daily

M

http://www.deccanherald.com/content/455369/towards-democratic-internet-governance.html


Towards democratic Internet governance


*	1 min read 
*	 

Shruthi H M, Bengaluru, Jan 24, 2015, DHNS:

The Internet might have pervaded the common man's life but its governance still remains in the hands of a few corporate giants. To counter this, civil society organisations propose democratic Internet governance. 

Though Google's Eric Schmidt predicts the "disappearance of Internet into the background", a group of organisations have set out to bring to fore voices that have remained in the background in spite of the Internet's all pervasive nature.As the World Economic Forum (WEF) 2015 is in progress in Davos (Jan 21-24), civil society organisations have come together to create a global 'Internet Social Forum' countering the WEF's NETmundial initiative for Internet governance. The organisations aim to create an Internet space governed in public interest. 

Bengaluru-based organisation IT for Change will be an active part of this global forum, along with five other Indian organisations: Society For Knowledge Commons, All India Peoples Science Network, Free Software Movement of India, SLFC.in and Digital Empowrment Foundation. 

The Internet Social Forum will consist of civil society organisations from across the globe who believe that Internet governance should not be limited to the vested interests of corporate giants. Their endeavour is to put in place a "bottom's up" approach, where grassroots groups can have their say in regulating Internet space.

Civil organisations feel that the WEF's global internet policy making and governance initiative the 'NETmundial', restricts itself to the voices of the global elite. The concept of WEF itself has been countered by the "World Social Forum" and the Internet Social Forum draws inspiration from it. In fact, the "preparatory process" of the forum is likely to be held in March 2015 in Tunis, during the World Social Forum meet.

When one searches for something on the Internet, the most popular links related to the subject appear at the top of the list. 

However, more often links that appear first are not guided by popularity but by the money invested by interested parties to ensure they are displayed on top. In this regard, the Internet Social Forum will fight for "Net neutrality". 

IT For Change Executive Director Parminder Jeet Singh said, "In its current form, internet governance has not yet become a people's movement. The Internet is increasingly controlled by corporates." 

Community owned broadband, data ownership, limits to copyright and including rural communities in the dialogue process are some of the issues that the forum seeks to address.

Rishab Bailey, Director (legal), Society For Knowledge Commons, added that such an initiative was significant as, at present, a lot of thought is going into setting up institutions for Internet governance. "We have to ensure a representative and democratic Internet governance. Internet is a global construct and it touches all our lives. As of now there are no concrete mechanisms to deal with issues pertaining to Internet governance. We have to make sure that Internet governance is a true bottoms up approach." 

 



-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From pimienta at funredes.org  Sun Jan 25 09:10:39 2015
From: pimienta at funredes.org (Daniel Pimienta)
Date: Sun, 25 Jan 2015 10:10:39 -0400
Subject: The Good the Bad and the Ugly was Re: [governance] Internet  Social
 Forum
In-Reply-To: <54C23F6A.9090503@cafonso.ca>
References: <20150122143615.700b2f52@quill>
 <54C23F6A.9090503@cafonso.ca>
Message-ID: <E1YFNjQ-0006Iu-1Q@igcaucus.org>

Thanks Carlos to share in this list the statement of J. Malcolm.

As an early follower and today member and ally of 
JNC and its plan to launch an ISF I have read 
with attention this document, especially because 
you qualified it as "excellent".
I appreciate the time the author has invested in 
putting together the document and the huge effort 
to maintain a neutral tone...which, as I will 
show, has been struggling and loosing againts a 
deep rage he cannot hide. Why facing different 
vision provokes that much rage is hard to 
understand to me... Why Carlos Afonso find excellence here does surprise me.

Maybe my reading is not enough objective but I 
read basically 2 strong arguments against the action plan of JNC for an ISF:

1) The first argument is that "We in JNC are 
clear partisan of governments taking charge of the governance of the Internet."
The very axiom of all the the demonstration is 
just not true so unfortunalely all the derived theorems are wrong.
The critic of today multistakeholderism is not 
synonym of allegance to traditional governmental 
form of democracy... or imagination has become so limited in civil society?
The arguing that JNC pretend to use standard 
democratic repreasentation and member states 
competent international organisations is nothing 
but an oversimplification which is not prone to 
good dialog and somehow is part of the second argument.

2) The second argument is the demonization of the players of JNC.

Let me just list the various qualificatives spead 
over the rationale to make my point:

- profoundly dysfunctional (engagement with civil society)
-  (the people of JNC has) frequently threatened to tear that group apart
- a prominent JNC member almost came to blows 
with a female attendee (this for Parminder)
- the toxic relationship that its representatives 
have cultivated with the rest of civil society.
- to disrupt ... by hectoring, intimidating and 
disparaging participants who expressed pro-multistakeholder views.
- this is a farcical insult (refer to Gurstein's)
-  the disruptive behaviour of JNC
- these demands were delivered with such hubris 
and entitlement  that the effect has been to 
isolate JNC from other civil society groups and 
networks and to sow seeds of discord
that will have lasting effects - JNC betrayed 
that trust...  (this is for Norbert)
- This is a shame
- preferring to focus its destructive anger on 
easier,weaker targets ­ its own civil society colleagues.

This seems to me to be a replay of a good 
spaghetti western with JNC in the role of the 
ugly, IGF in the role of the bad and BetBits in the role of the Good.
I prefer Sergio Leone version :-) and I have a 
hard time to understand why a profound difference 
of vision inside civil society should be treated 
as a pathologic deviance as would homosexuality 
be treated in some very conservative countries...

To conclude, I am myself a "white man" born in a 
developing country, with a nationality of an 
industrialized country who lived in a developing 
country... but who cares beyond Mr. Malcolm  (X :-)?)
and what sort of argument is that to designate MM. Pouzin and Nothias?

Daniel Pimienta

PD: There is a simple way to determine if, as M. 
Malcolm pretends, his views on the Ugly part of 
this community are shared by the majority: this 
is a survey on the list with the appropriate 
questions, a device that virtual community 
managers use when conflictive situation occurs. I 
do suggest to the convenors of this list to think 
seriously about it so nobody can pretend talking 
on the name of the rest of us without factual support.

-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150125/8fcf0d68/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca  Sun Jan 25 09:32:38 2015
From: stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca (Stephanie Perrin)
Date: Sun, 25 Jan 2015 09:32:38 -0500
Subject: [governance] AW: From Confusion to Clarification
In-Reply-To: <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A801642A86@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
References: <793FFF2DB19A4177851ACCDC06269034@Toshiba> <54762985.2010101@apc.org> <053001d009ba$768cf260$63a6d720$@gmail.com> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8016428EE@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A801642A86@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
Message-ID: <54C4FE86.30105@mail.utoronto.ca>

I think this is an excellent idea Wolfgang.  I am particularly aware and 
conscious of the tensions among/between groups promoting privacy/data 
protection/transparency/freedom of speech, and it would be good to set 
out some of the issues that lie at the heart of those tensions.  We 
sometimes need to remind ourselves that we are actually on the same side.
Kind regards,
Stephanie Perrin
On 2015-01-25 7:15, "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang" wrote:
> Dear friends,
>
> six weeks ago I made a proposal under the thread "From Confusion to Clarification" to produce a Civil Society Internet Governance Compendium or Handbook. What was the idea behind the proposal?
>
> Civil Society is a recognized and needed stakeholder in the global Internet Governance debate and a needed partner in the evolving multistakeholder approaches to manage Internet related public policy issues.
> 2015 will see a number of Internet Governance events where the voice of civil society has to be raised: It starts with the ITU Council IG Working Group Meetings in February, continues with UNESCO conferences and meetings of the UNCSTD, the HRC, the forthcoming Cybersecurity Conference in The Hague, the IGF in Brazil, the WSIS 10+ conference in New York in December 2015 and others.
>
> Civil Society does not speak with one voice. It is characterized by a broad diversity. This is not a weakness, this is a strength. It reflects the reality. And it is not different from the diversity within other stakeholder groups. In the governmental stakeholder group you have a broad varierty of positions - from the US via EU, Brazil, Egypt and India to China. In the private sector stakeholder group there are different approaches among transnational corporations and small and medium enterprises from developed and developing countries. And even among the I* organizations there are differences, as we have seen recently in the positioning towards the NetMundial initiative. This pluralism and diversity reflects the reality of the Internet Governance ecosystem. If one want to achieve sustainable progress a rough consensus has to include the main arguments from the main groups of all stakeholders. To achieve concrete results openess and transparency with regard to the various positions is a key pre-condition to promote mutual understanding.
>
> Insofar it would be good if civil society Internet Governance groups or individuals could describe openly what they are standing for. To have on paper the various perspectives different civil society groups have if it comes to Internet policy related issues would be useful anbd could enhance civil society input into the forthcoming negotiations, in particular with regard to WSIS 10+.
>
> Since I did send this proposals to this list I got numerous comments and critical remarks. Some respondents supported the project and called it a good idea. Others argued that this is a bad, unrealistic and counterproductive idea. Many partners made concrete proposals how such a project could be further enhanced. Taking into account all the feed back I got since last month I would specify my proposal in the following way:
>
> I. Ian Peter, in his capacity as acting chair of the CSCG, should function as the main editor. Each member of the CSCG should nominate a co-editor. The role of the editor and the co-editors would be technical. They should not intervene into the content of the individual contributions. The six co-editors of the six member groups of the CWSG should invite four contributors from their group, one for each chapter. It is up to the groups whether the individual author expresses his own individual position or represents the position of the whole group. Each contribution should be 4 - 8 pages. Each author would be free to cover either the whole subject or to select a special sub-item.
>
> II. The book should have four chapters:
> 1.	Human Rights and Internet(Access, Freedom of Expression, Privacy, Content, Culture etc.)
> 2.	Security in Cyberspace (Cyberwar, Cyberterrorism, Cybercrime, Surveillance, National Sovereignty etc.)
> 3.	Social, Economic and Cultural Development (Digital Divide, Market Domination, Competition, Infrastructure Development, Cultural and Linguistic Diversity etc.)
> 4.	Technical Coordination (Names, Numbers, Protocols, Accountability etc.)
>
> III. Timetable
> It would be good to have a first draft ready until early May (for the Meeting of the UNCSTD). The final e-Version of the whole book should be ready until early September for use by the WSIS 10+ negotiations groups. A formal presentation should be organized during the 10th IGF in Brazil. Efforts should be undertake to produce also a paper version for distribution at the 10th IGF in November 2014.
>
> Best regards
>
> Wolfgang
>
> PS:
> I have described the "Four Baskets" more in detail in my blog in CircleID
> http://www.circleid.com/posts/20150103_internet_governance_outlook_2015_2_processes_many_venues_4_baskets/
>
> w
>
>
>
> Hi everybody
>
> After weeks of confusing conflicts let´s move towards clarifying collaboration. What we have seen in the recent (sometimes unfriendly) disputes is that there are many different  civil society activists with different civil society positions. This is confusing, both for newcomers who want to join civil society groups in Internet Governance discussions as well as for other stakeholders who want to collaborate with civil society. On the othher Hand: This is natural. The civil Society Stakeholder Groups has similar differences as the governmental stakeholder group if you compare the governmental positions of China, Russia, Saudi Arabia, US, EU, Brazil, India, Japan, Australia etc.
> This not the Problem. The probllem is that you have to know what the position. So it is about transparency and clarity.
>
> Here is a proposal how to move forward:  We have seen so many people writing long e-mails arguing for their position. Wouldn´t it be better if we use this energy to write more comprehensive and structured position or issue papers so that newbies or outsiders will better understand what the real points under discussions are in CS circles? We have seen rather different arguments around the same issue from JNC to APC and NCUC folks.
>
> I propose that we start to work on what I call a "Civil Society Internet Governance Handbook".  This handbook would allow all CS groups within the CSCG to present their own individual points of views so that everybody knows what the positions are. The book could be structured into four main chapters:
>
> 1.	Human Rights (Access, Freedom of Expression, Privacy etc.)
> 2.	Security (Cyberwar, Cyberterrorism, Cybercrime etc.)
> 3.	Economic Development (Market domination, competition, infrastructure development etc.)
> 4.	Technical Coordination (Names, Numbers, Protocols etc.)
>
> Each of the six groups under the CSCG (IGC, BB, JNC, NCSG, Diplo, APC) could nominate four authors (one for each chapter). Each author would be free to argue for her/his position (five to maximum teen pages). There is no need for consensus. Every author would be free to present her/his radical, moderate, liberal and whatsoever position on one of the four main issues.
>
> Such a compendium would help to bring more transparency into the process and would enable a more fact based discussion in the IG events ahead of us.
>
> We could deliver this as an e-book (probably with an Annex with main official texts as Tunis Agenda, Sao Paulo Principles, UN Resolutions etc.) until the May 2015 Sessions in Geneva. In total this book would be around 250 pages. If we find a sponsor we could publish this for the New York event in December 2015. Such a book would seen by the rest of the IG Community as a helpful contribution, it would strengthen the role of CS in the emerging IG multistakeholder mechanisms and would be also an input into the WSIS 10+ process.
>
> The chair of the CSCG (together with the co-chairs from the six groups) would be the editor.
>
> Any comment?
>
> Wolfgang
>
>
>



-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From gurstein at gmail.com  Sun Jan 25 10:14:51 2015
From: gurstein at gmail.com (michael gurstein)
Date: Sun, 25 Jan 2015 07:14:51 -0800
Subject: [governance] FW: Towards an Internet Social Forum
In-Reply-To: <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A801642A88@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
References: <w1tknuhwuokwhm1bwrq7nf82.1421824340505@email.android.com> <54BFBF0D.3000504@itforchange.net> <EBD518CE-0A41-4F63-8AB4-E68F33E602FB@globalgeneva.net> <20150121172634.0fbbd8b5@quill> <54BFE3E9.8080005@itforchange.net> <1421862025.163813248@apps.rackspace.com> <54BFE647.50205@itforchange.net> <20150121190917.3066b781@quill> <54BFEF3A.6080307@alainet.org> <20150121194828.1ce2f9ef@quill> <b6bf4820c07c5c5367db7cfe2f2c89c1.squirrel@webmail.tni.org> <54C0BF75.9030809@itforchange.net> <207E590CDEB1344EB16A3D3424E8D74202304FE5AB3B@EXVMBX016-2.exch016.msoutlookonline.net> <54C0DFD4.6070202@itforchange.net> <54C111D0.2050809@itforchange.net> <54C12314.2060407@alainet.org> <54C236DE.3050903@itforchange.net> <54C2E1A8.9040703@itforchange.net> <001001d03899$2ad41c00$807c5400$@gmail.com> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A801642A88@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
Message-ID: <007d01d038b1$aaee5fa0$00cb1ee0$@gmail.com>

Hi Wolfgang,

I think that Parminder gave you a quite extensive answer which I won't even
attempt to repeat...

My own (and personal take) is that the ISF will give prominence to issues
related to the Internet and social justice, something which has been more or
less completely ignored in the context of the IGF and other Internet
Governance processes.

For me, my work in the context of community informatics and my activities in
linking the Community Informatics network to the JNC (and in future (I
expect) to the ISF) is about how the Internet (and ICTs overall) can be used
to promote social justice and how various kinds of interventions may be
needed to overcome the massive amounts of economic (and thus social)
inequalities which are emerging (one can assume causatively) as a more or
less direct result of the interventions of the Internet.

That civil society in Internet Governance has ignored these issues of social
justice and has allowed the various processes concerning Internet Governance
equally to ignore (including dare I say, allowing for and enabling the high
degree of selectivity in the choices of which Human Rights to promote and
which to avoid), is to my mind scandalous and a serious dereliction of their
responsibilities to the point where it is laughable and a fairly serious
category mistake to refer to most of the individuals and groups involved as
civil society at all.

So, to answer your question my own activities in relation to the ISF will be
to ensure that questions of social justice and economic and social
inequality in the context of the Internet, of Internet governance, and of
governance of and with the Internet are front and centre in our discussions.

Best,

Mike

-----Original Message-----
From: "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang"
[mailto:wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de] 
Sent: Sunday, January 25, 2015 4:59 AM
To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; michael gurstein;
governance at lists.igcaucus.org
Subject: AW: [governance] FW: Towards an Internet Social Forum

Hi Michael,

I asked already Parminder how the ISF is linked to the IGF and I did not get
an answer. Can you reply? 

Wolfgang




-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org im Auftrag von michael gurstein
Gesendet: So 25.01.2015 13:19
An: governance at lists.igcaucus.org
Betreff: [governance] FW: Towards an Internet Social Forum
 
Coverage of the ISF in an Indian daily

M

http://www.deccanherald.com/content/455369/towards-democratic-internet-gover
nance.html


Towards democratic Internet governance


*	1 min read 
*	 

Shruthi H M, Bengaluru, Jan 24, 2015, DHNS:

The Internet might have pervaded the common man's life but its governance
still remains in the hands of a few corporate giants. To counter this, civil
society organisations propose democratic Internet governance. 

Though Google's Eric Schmidt predicts the "disappearance of Internet into
the background", a group of organisations have set out to bring to fore
voices that have remained in the background in spite of the Internet's all
pervasive nature.As the World Economic Forum (WEF) 2015 is in progress in
Davos (Jan 21-24), civil society organisations have come together to create
a global 'Internet Social Forum' countering the WEF's NETmundial initiative
for Internet governance. The organisations aim to create an Internet space
governed in public interest. 

Bengaluru-based organisation IT for Change will be an active part of this
global forum, along with five other Indian organisations: Society For
Knowledge Commons, All India Peoples Science Network, Free Software Movement
of India, SLFC.in and Digital Empowrment Foundation. 

The Internet Social Forum will consist of civil society organisations from
across the globe who believe that Internet governance should not be limited
to the vested interests of corporate giants. Their endeavour is to put in
place a "bottom's up" approach, where grassroots groups can have their say
in regulating Internet space.

Civil organisations feel that the WEF's global internet policy making and
governance initiative the 'NETmundial', restricts itself to the voices of
the global elite. The concept of WEF itself has been countered by the "World
Social Forum" and the Internet Social Forum draws inspiration from it. In
fact, the "preparatory process" of the forum is likely to be held in March
2015 in Tunis, during the World Social Forum meet.

When one searches for something on the Internet, the most popular links
related to the subject appear at the top of the list. 

However, more often links that appear first are not guided by popularity but
by the money invested by interested parties to ensure they are displayed on
top. In this regard, the Internet Social Forum will fight for "Net
neutrality". 

IT For Change Executive Director Parminder Jeet Singh said, "In its current
form, internet governance has not yet become a people's movement. The
Internet is increasingly controlled by corporates." 

Community owned broadband, data ownership, limits to copyright and including
rural communities in the dialogue process are some of the issues that the
forum seeks to address.

Rishab Bailey, Director (legal), Society For Knowledge Commons, added that
such an initiative was significant as, at present, a lot of thought is going
into setting up institutions for Internet governance. "We have to ensure a
representative and democratic Internet governance. Internet is a global
construct and it touches all our lives. As of now there are no concrete
mechanisms to deal with issues pertaining to Internet governance. We have to
make sure that Internet governance is a true bottoms up approach." 

 



-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From ymshana2003 at gmail.com  Sun Jan 25 10:20:35 2015
From: ymshana2003 at gmail.com (ymshana2003)
Date: Sun, 25 Jan 2015 17:20:35 +0200
Subject: [governance] AW: From Confusion to Clarification
Message-ID: <gmdk81r4g5i35nbnswyhi59r.1422199235707@email.android.com>

+1
This is a very good suggestion in order to streamline the way forward. 

However,  since this compendium will be at global level, and since stakeholders operate in varied 'level of maturity' on Internet issues, may I suggest that a Chapter is added which is specufically on: "Internet Policy Development Processes and Isues"?

I presume that each Chapter might have policy development issues somehow but still there is a need for specificities.

That is my small addition to this great thought. 

Kind regards

Yassin




Sent from Samsung Mobile

-------- Original message --------
From: "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang" <wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de> 
Date:25/01/2015  14:15  (GMT+02:00) 
To: "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang" <wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de>,governance at lists.igcaucus.org,michael gurstein <gurstein at gmail.com>,bestbits at lists.bestbits.net,governance at lists.igcaucus.org 
Subject: [governance] AW: From Confusion to Clarification 

Dear friends,

six weeks ago I made a proposal under the thread "From Confusion to Clarification" to produce a Civil Society Internet Governance Compendium or Handbook. What was the idea behind the proposal? 

Civil Society is a recognized and needed stakeholder in the global Internet Governance debate and a needed partner in the evolving multistakeholder approaches to manage Internet related public policy issues. 
2015 will see a number of Internet Governance events where the voice of civil society has to be raised: It starts with the ITU Council IG Working Group Meetings in February, continues with UNESCO conferences and meetings of the UNCSTD, the HRC, the forthcoming Cybersecurity Conference in The Hague, the IGF in Brazil, the WSIS 10+ conference in New York in December 2015 and others. 

Civil Society does not speak with one voice. It is characterized by a broad diversity. This is not a weakness, this is a strength. It reflects the reality. And it is not different from the diversity within other stakeholder groups. In the governmental stakeholder group you have a broad varierty of positions - from the US via EU, Brazil, Egypt and India to China. In the private sector stakeholder group there are different approaches among transnational corporations and small and medium enterprises from developed and developing countries. And even among the I* organizations there are differences, as we have seen recently in the positioning towards the NetMundial initiative. This pluralism and diversity reflects the reality of the Internet Governance ecosystem. If one want to achieve sustainable progress a rough consensus has to include the main arguments from the main groups of all stakeholders. To achieve concrete results openess and transparency with regard to the various positions is a key pre-condition to promote mutual understanding. 

Insofar it would be good if civil society Internet Governance groups or individuals could describe openly what they are standing for. To have on paper the various perspectives different civil society groups have if it comes to Internet policy related issues would be useful anbd could enhance civil society input into the forthcoming negotiations, in particular with regard to WSIS 10+.         

Since I did send this proposals to this list I got numerous comments and critical remarks. Some respondents supported the project and called it a good idea. Others argued that this is a bad, unrealistic and counterproductive idea. Many partners made concrete proposals how such a project could be further enhanced. Taking into account all the feed back I got since last month I would specify my proposal in the following way:

I. Ian Peter, in his capacity as acting chair of the CSCG, should function as the main editor. Each member of the CSCG should nominate a co-editor. The role of the editor and the co-editors would be technical. They should not intervene into the content of the individual contributions. The six co-editors of the six member groups of the CWSG should invite four contributors from their group, one for each chapter. It is up to the groups whether the individual author expresses his own individual position or represents the position of the whole group. Each contribution should be 4 - 8 pages. Each author would be free to cover either the whole subject or to select a special sub-item. 

II. The book should have four chapters:
1.	Human Rights and Internet(Access, Freedom of Expression, Privacy, Content, Culture etc.)
2.	Security in Cyberspace (Cyberwar, Cyberterrorism, Cybercrime, Surveillance, National Sovereignty etc.)
3.	Social, Economic and Cultural Development (Digital Divide, Market Domination, Competition, Infrastructure Development, Cultural and Linguistic Diversity etc.)
4.	Technical Coordination (Names, Numbers, Protocols, Accountability etc.)

III. Timetable
It would be good to have a first draft ready until early May (for the Meeting of the UNCSTD). The final e-Version of the whole book should be ready until early September for use by the WSIS 10+ negotiations groups. A formal presentation should be organized during the 10th IGF in Brazil. Efforts should be undertake to produce also a paper version for distribution at the 10th IGF in November 2014. 

Best regards

Wolfgang

PS: 
I have described the "Four Baskets" more in detail in my blog in CircleID 
http://www.circleid.com/posts/20150103_internet_governance_outlook_2015_2_processes_many_venues_4_baskets/

w



Hi everybody

After weeks of confusing conflicts let´s move towards clarifying collaboration. What we have seen in the recent (sometimes unfriendly) disputes is that there are many different  civil society activists with different civil society positions. This is confusing, both for newcomers who want to join civil society groups in Internet Governance discussions as well as for other stakeholders who want to collaborate with civil society. On the othher Hand: This is natural. The civil Society Stakeholder Groups has similar differences as the governmental stakeholder group if you compare the governmental positions of China, Russia, Saudi Arabia, US, EU, Brazil, India, Japan, Australia etc.
This not the Problem. The probllem is that you have to know what the position. So it is about transparency and clarity. 

Here is a proposal how to move forward:  We have seen so many people writing long e-mails arguing for their position. Wouldn´t it be better if we use this energy to write more comprehensive and structured position or issue papers so that newbies or outsiders will better understand what the real points under discussions are in CS circles? We have seen rather different arguments around the same issue from JNC to APC and NCUC folks.       

I propose that we start to work on what I call a “Civil Society Internet Governance Handbook”.  This handbook would allow all CS groups within the CSCG to present their own individual points of views so that everybody knows what the positions are. The book could be structured into four main chapters:

1.	Human Rights (Access, Freedom of Expression, Privacy etc.)
2.	Security (Cyberwar, Cyberterrorism, Cybercrime etc.)
3.	Economic Development (Market domination, competition, infrastructure development etc.)
4.	Technical Coordination (Names, Numbers, Protocols etc.)

Each of the six groups under the CSCG (IGC, BB, JNC, NCSG, Diplo, APC) could nominate four authors (one for each chapter). Each author would be free to argue for her/his position (five to maximum teen pages). There is no need for consensus. Every author would be free to present her/his radical, moderate, liberal and whatsoever position on one of the four main issues. 

Such a compendium would help to bring more transparency into the process and would enable a more fact based discussion in the IG events ahead of us.

We could deliver this as an e-book (probably with an Annex with main official texts as Tunis Agenda, Sao Paulo Principles, UN Resolutions etc.) until the May 2015 Sessions in Geneva. In total this book would be around 250 pages. If we find a sponsor we could publish this for the New York event in December 2015. Such a book would seen by the rest of the IG Community as a helpful contribution, it would strengthen the role of CS in the emerging IG multistakeholder mechanisms and would be also an input into the WSIS 10+ process. 

The chair of the CSCG (together with the co-chairs from the six groups) would be the editor.  

Any comment?

Wolfgang



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150125/3b9af21e/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From f.massit at orange.fr  Sun Jan 25 10:58:31 2015
From: f.massit at orange.fr (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?fran=E7oise?=)
Date: Sun, 25 Jan 2015 16:58:31 +0100
Subject: The Good the Bad and the Ugly was Re: [governance] Internet
  Social Forum
In-Reply-To: <E1YFNjM-0006I7-Ue@igcaucus.org>
References: <20150122143615.700b2f52@quill> <54C23F6A.9090503@cafonso.ca> <E1YFNjM-0006I7-Ue@igcaucus.org>
Message-ID: <44EEED64-871D-4B1A-80B0-88B18B6B58C5@orange.fr>

+ 1
Thanks, Daniel, for your precise and critical  reading.

Relating to "consensus", may I suggest a reference towards a more  
dynamic conception of democracy ?
""I use the concept of agonistic pluralism to present a new way to  
think about democracy that is different from the traditional liberal  
conception of democracy as a negotiation among interests and is also  
different from the model that is currently being developed by people  
like Jürgen Habermas and John Rawls. While they have many differences,  
Rawls and Habermas have in common the idea that the aim of the  
democratic society is the creation of a consensus, and that consensus  
is possible if people are only able to leave aside their particular  
interests and think as rational beings. However, while we desire an  
end to conflict, if we want people to be free we must always allow for  
the possibility that conflict may appear and to provide an arena where  
differences can be confronted. The democratic process should supply  
that arena." Chantal Mouffe, (2000) The Democratic Paradox. London,  
New York. Verso.

And I would ask the proponents of peaceful debates to questioning the  
rough and contemptuous tone some of them are using towards  voices  
that don't endorse their positions ... Conflict has been existing for  
a long time (and probably it won't come to an end)  between civil  
society groups but the worst attitude would be ignoring or opacifying  
their rationale.

Best regards,
Françoise

Le 25 janv. 15 à 15:10, Daniel Pimienta a écrit :

> Thanks Carlos to share in this list the statement of J. Malcolm.
>
> As an early follower and today member and ally of JNC and its plan  
> to launch an ISF I have read with attention this document,  
> especially because you qualified it as "excellent".
> I appreciate the time the author has invested in putting together  
> the document and the huge effort to maintain a neutral tone...which,  
> as I will show, has been struggling and loosing againts a deep rage  
> he cannot hide. Why facing different vision provokes that much rage  
> is hard to understand to me... Why Carlos Afonso find excellence  
> here does surprise me.
>
> Maybe my reading is not enough objective but I read basically 2  
> strong arguments against the action plan of JNC for an ISF:
>
> 1) The first argument is that "We in JNC are clear partisan of  
> governments taking charge of the governance of the Internet."
> The very axiom of all the the demonstration is just not true so  
> unfortunalely all the derived theorems are wrong.
> The critic of today multistakeholderism is not synonym of allegance  
> to traditional governmental form of democracy... or imagination has  
> become so limited in civil society?
> The arguing that JNC pretend to use standard democratic  
> repreasentation and member states competent international  
> organisations is nothing but an oversimplification which is not  
> prone to good dialog and somehow is part of the second argument.
>
> 2) The second argument is the demonization of the players of JNC.
>
> Let me just list the various qualificatives spead over the rationale  
> to make my point:
>
> - profoundly dysfunctional (engagement with civil society)
> -  (the people of JNC has) frequently threatened to tear that group  
> apart
> - a prominent JNC member almost came to blows with a female attendee  
> (this for Parminder)
> - the toxic relationship that its representatives have cultivated  
> with the rest of civil society.
> - to disrupt ... by hectoring, intimidating and disparaging  
> participants who expressed pro-multistakeholder views.
> - this is a farcical insult (refer to Gurstein's)
> -  the disruptive behaviour of JNC
> - these demands were delivered with such hubris and entitlement   
> that the effect has been to isolate JNC from other civil society  
> groups and networks and to sow seeds of discord
> that will have lasting effects - JNC betrayed that trust...  (this  
> is for Norbert)
> - This is a shame
> - preferring to focus its destructive anger on easier,weaker targets  
> ­ its own civil society colleagues.
>
> This seems to me to be a replay of a good spaghetti western with JNC  
> in the role of the ugly, IGF in the role of the bad and BetBits in  
> the role of the Good.
> I prefer Sergio Leone version :-) and I have a hard time to  
> understand why a profound difference of vision inside civil society  
> should be treated as a pathologic deviance as would homosexuality be  
> treated in some very conservative countries...
>
> To conclude, I am myself a "white man" born in a developing country,  
> with a nationality of an industrialized country who lived in a  
> developing country... but who cares beyond Mr. Malcolm  (X :-)?)
> and what sort of argument is that to designate MM. Pouzin and Nothias?
>
> Daniel Pimienta
>
> PD: There is a simple way to determine if, as M. Malcolm pretends,  
> his views on the Ugly part of this community are shared by the  
> majority: this is a survey on the list with the appropriate  
> questions, a device that virtual community managers use when  
> conflictive situation occurs. I do suggest to the convenors of this  
> list to think seriously about it so nobody can pretend talking on  
> the name of the rest of us without factual support.
>
> -- 
> This message has been scanned for viruses and
> dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
> believed to be clean.
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
> To be removed from the list, visit:
>     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
>
> For all other list information and functions, see:
>     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
>     http://www.igcaucus.org/
>
> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

Françoise Massit-Folléa
f.massit at orange.fr
Mob. 06 74 51 67 65



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150125/ed2d01b7/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From ian.peter at ianpeter.com  Sun Jan 25 15:30:12 2015
From: ian.peter at ianpeter.com (Ian Peter)
Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2015 07:30:12 +1100
Subject: [governance] AW: From Confusion to Clarification
In-Reply-To: <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A801642A86@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
References: <793FFF2DB19A4177851ACCDC06269034@Toshiba> <54762985.2010101@apc.org> <053001d009ba$768cf260$63a6d720$@gmail.com> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8016428EE@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A801642A86@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
Message-ID: <D52271F36A224E63965667671E785EE1@Toshiba>

Hi Wolfgang,

I am glad you raised this again, because I think the idea is great.

I am not sure that a direct correlation with CSCG and with the different 
groups within civil society who are CSCG members is the best way to proceed 
(eg one JNC article followed by one Best Bits article etc) - because I think 
many of our best people sit between and across various groups and I am not 
sure that direct characterisation of opinions with groupings is always 
accurate or helpful.

But I am entirely behind the idea of a publication which would reflect in a 
balanced way all the voices within civil society, and including 
organisational stances on issues where these are clear.

But one catch. Although I am happy to be involved, I cannot take on the 
central organising role for this. I am wondering if someone else would like 
to take this on - I would be happy to assist, even be co-editor - but in 
this timeframe my time is limited due to other commitments.

If someone with the time available and organising skills would like to take 
on a coordinating role, I would be pleased to participate and help. Contact 
me off line if you wish.

It would be great to see this idea materialise.

Ian


-----Original Message----- 
From: "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang"
Sent: Sunday, January 25, 2015 11:15 PM
To: "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang" ; governance at lists.igcaucus.org ; michael 
gurstein ; bestbits at lists.bestbits.net ; governance at lists.igcaucus.org
Subject: [governance] AW: From Confusion to Clarification

Dear friends,

six weeks ago I made a proposal under the thread "From Confusion to 
Clarification" to produce a Civil Society Internet Governance Compendium or 
Handbook. What was the idea behind the proposal?

Civil Society is a recognized and needed stakeholder in the global Internet 
Governance debate and a needed partner in the evolving multistakeholder 
approaches to manage Internet related public policy issues.
2015 will see a number of Internet Governance events where the voice of 
civil society has to be raised: It starts with the ITU Council IG Working 
Group Meetings in February, continues with UNESCO conferences and meetings 
of the UNCSTD, the HRC, the forthcoming Cybersecurity Conference in The 
Hague, the IGF in Brazil, the WSIS 10+ conference in New York in December 
2015 and others.

Civil Society does not speak with one voice. It is characterized by a broad 
diversity. This is not a weakness, this is a strength. It reflects the 
reality. And it is not different from the diversity within other stakeholder 
groups. In the governmental stakeholder group you have a broad varierty of 
positions - from the US via EU, Brazil, Egypt and India to China. In the 
private sector stakeholder group there are different approaches among 
transnational corporations and small and medium enterprises from developed 
and developing countries. And even among the I* organizations there are 
differences, as we have seen recently in the positioning towards the 
NetMundial initiative. This pluralism and diversity reflects the reality of 
the Internet Governance ecosystem. If one want to achieve sustainable 
progress a rough consensus has to include the main arguments from the main 
groups of all stakeholders. To achieve concrete results openess and 
transparency with regard to the various positions is a key pre-condition to 
promote mutual understanding.

Insofar it would be good if civil society Internet Governance groups or 
individuals could describe openly what they are standing for. To have on 
paper the various perspectives different civil society groups have if it 
comes to Internet policy related issues would be useful anbd could enhance 
civil society input into the forthcoming negotiations, in particular with 
regard to WSIS 10+.

Since I did send this proposals to this list I got numerous comments and 
critical remarks. Some respondents supported the project and called it a 
good idea. Others argued that this is a bad, unrealistic and 
counterproductive idea. Many partners made concrete proposals how such a 
project could be further enhanced. Taking into account all the feed back I 
got since last month I would specify my proposal in the following way:

I. Ian Peter, in his capacity as acting chair of the CSCG, should function 
as the main editor. Each member of the CSCG should nominate a co-editor. The 
role of the editor and the co-editors would be technical. They should not 
intervene into the content of the individual contributions. The six 
co-editors of the six member groups of the CWSG should invite four 
contributors from their group, one for each chapter. It is up to the groups 
whether the individual author expresses his own individual position or 
represents the position of the whole group. Each contribution should be 4 - 
8 pages. Each author would be free to cover either the whole subject or to 
select a special sub-item.

II. The book should have four chapters:
1. Human Rights and Internet(Access, Freedom of Expression, Privacy, 
Content, Culture etc.)
2. Security in Cyberspace (Cyberwar, Cyberterrorism, Cybercrime, 
Surveillance, National Sovereignty etc.)
3. Social, Economic and Cultural Development (Digital Divide, Market 
Domination, Competition, Infrastructure Development, Cultural and Linguistic 
Diversity etc.)
4. Technical Coordination (Names, Numbers, Protocols, Accountability etc.)

III. Timetable
It would be good to have a first draft ready until early May (for the 
Meeting of the UNCSTD). The final e-Version of the whole book should be 
ready until early September for use by the WSIS 10+ negotiations groups. A 
formal presentation should be organized during the 10th IGF in Brazil. 
Efforts should be undertake to produce also a paper version for distribution 
at the 10th IGF in November 2014.

Best regards

Wolfgang

PS:
I have described the "Four Baskets" more in detail in my blog in CircleID
http://www.circleid.com/posts/20150103_internet_governance_outlook_2015_2_processes_many_venues_4_baskets/

w



Hi everybody

After weeks of confusing conflicts let´s move towards clarifying 
collaboration. What we have seen in the recent (sometimes unfriendly) 
disputes is that there are many different  civil society activists with 
different civil society positions. This is confusing, both for newcomers who 
want to join civil society groups in Internet Governance discussions as well 
as for other stakeholders who want to collaborate with civil society. On the 
othher Hand: This is natural. The civil Society Stakeholder Groups has 
similar differences as the governmental stakeholder group if you compare the 
governmental positions of China, Russia, Saudi Arabia, US, EU, Brazil, 
India, Japan, Australia etc.
This not the Problem. The probllem is that you have to know what the 
position. So it is about transparency and clarity.

Here is a proposal how to move forward:  We have seen so many people writing 
long e-mails arguing for their position. Wouldn´t it be better if we use 
this energy to write more comprehensive and structured position or issue 
papers so that newbies or outsiders will better understand what the real 
points under discussions are in CS circles? We have seen rather different 
arguments around the same issue from JNC to APC and NCUC folks.

I propose that we start to work on what I call a “Civil Society Internet 
Governance Handbook”.  This handbook would allow all CS groups within the 
CSCG to present their own individual points of views so that everybody knows 
what the positions are. The book could be structured into four main 
chapters:

1. Human Rights (Access, Freedom of Expression, Privacy etc.)
2. Security (Cyberwar, Cyberterrorism, Cybercrime etc.)
3. Economic Development (Market domination, competition, infrastructure 
development etc.)
4. Technical Coordination (Names, Numbers, Protocols etc.)

Each of the six groups under the CSCG (IGC, BB, JNC, NCSG, Diplo, APC) could 
nominate four authors (one for each chapter). Each author would be free to 
argue for her/his position (five to maximum teen pages). There is no need 
for consensus. Every author would be free to present her/his radical, 
moderate, liberal and whatsoever position on one of the four main issues.

Such a compendium would help to bring more transparency into the process and 
would enable a more fact based discussion in the IG events ahead of us.

We could deliver this as an e-book (probably with an Annex with main 
official texts as Tunis Agenda, Sao Paulo Principles, UN Resolutions etc.) 
until the May 2015 Sessions in Geneva. In total this book would be around 
250 pages. If we find a sponsor we could publish this for the New York event 
in December 2015. Such a book would seen by the rest of the IG Community as 
a helpful contribution, it would strengthen the role of CS in the emerging 
IG multistakeholder mechanisms and would be also an input into the WSIS 10+ 
process.

The chair of the CSCG (together with the co-chairs from the six groups) 
would be the editor.

Any comment?

Wolfgang









____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t 


-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From jefsey at jefsey.com  Sun Jan 25 20:31:25 2015
From: jefsey at jefsey.com (JFC Morfin)
Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2015 02:31:25 +0100
Subject: [governance] AW: From Confusion to Clarification
References: <793FFF2DB19A4177851ACCDC06269034@Toshiba>
 <54762985.2010101@apc.org>
 <053001d009ba$768cf260$63a6d720$@gmail.com>
 <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8016428EE@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
Message-ID: <E1YFYLy-0007Pm-7e@igcaucus.org>

Dear Wolfgang,

However I disagree with the ultimate target ...

At 13:15 25/01/2015, Kleinwächter, Wolfgang wrote:
>This pluralism and diversity reflects the 
>reality of the Internet Governance ecosystem. If 
>one want to achieve sustainable progress a rough 
>consensus has to include the main arguments from 
>the main groups of all stakeholders.

because we are not confronted to a semi 
democratic multistakhoderic but to a necessarily 
polycratic omnistakeholderic global network issue,

>To achieve concrete results openess and 
>transparency with regard to the various 
>positions is a key pre-condition to promote mutual understanding.

I certainly agree with this.


>Insofar it would be good if civil society 
>Internet Governance groups or individuals could 
>describe openly what they are standing for. To 
>have on paper the various perspectives different 
>civil society groups have if it comes to 
>Internet policy related issues would be useful 
>and could enhance civil society input into the 
>forthcoming negotiations, in particular with regard to WSIS 10+.

Yes.

>Since I did send this proposals to this list I 
>got numerous comments and critical remarks. Some 
>respondents supported the project and called it 
>a good idea. Others argued that this is a bad, 
>unrealistic and counterproductive idea. Many 
>partners made concrete proposals how such a 
>project could be further enhanced. Taking into 
>account all the feed back I got since last month 
>I would specify my proposal in the following way:

The processus is correct if no topic and no 
response is blocked. In any case a common and 
clear thematic reference grid will have been worked out.

>II. The book should have four chapters:
>1.      Human Rights and Internet(Access, 
>Freedom of Expression, Privacy, Content, Culture etc.)
>2.      Security in Cyberspace (Cyberwar, 
>Cyberterrorism, Cybercrime, Surveillance, National Sovereignty etc.)
>3.      Social, Economic and Cultural 
>Development (Digital Divide, Market Domination, 
>Competition, Infrastructure Development, 
>Cultural and Linguistic Diversity etc.)
>4.      Technical Coordination (Names, Numbers, 
>Protocols, Accountability etc.)

 From this I infer that the matter is open, yet 
also Internet centered. This only addresses half 
of the pending issues. The other half, which are 
at the origin of the current transition is the 
insertion of the internet issues within a quickly expending digitality.

>III. Timetable
>It would be good to have a first draft ready 
>until early May (for the Meeting of the UNCSTD). 
>The final e-Version of the whole book should be 
>ready until early September for use by the WSIS 
>10+ negotiations groups. A formal presentation 
>should be organized during the 10th IGF in 
>Brazil. Efforts should be undertake to produce 
>also a paper version for distribution at the 10th IGF in November 2014.

This is an acceptable framework. I note FYI that:

1. I may delay the IETF contributive RFC by my appeal that will reach ISOC.
2. The reason of this appeal is the dillution of 
the ICANN accountability to IAB through 
technology conformance and IANA. This leads to an 
accountability by coopetition (along the RFC 6852 
paradigm), at least with the Free/Libre community.

However, the result should only a formal 
clarification/affirmation of the IAB/IETF position.

It should therefore
1. not affect the framework and help the proposed process.
2. lead to a debate on two missing chapters of the book:
     - (sub)structural description of the cyberspace
     - cyberspace accountability framwork

Best
Jefsey


>
>
>Best regards
>
>Wolfgang
>
>PS:
>I have described the "Four Baskets" more in detail in my blog in CircleID
>http://www.circleid.com/posts/20150103_internet_governance_outlook_2015_2_processes_many_venues_4_baskets/


-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From pouzin at well.com  Sun Jan 25 23:27:35 2015
From: pouzin at well.com (Louis Pouzin (well))
Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2015 05:27:35 +0100
Subject: [governance] From Confusion to Clarification
In-Reply-To: <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8016428EE@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
References: <793FFF2DB19A4177851ACCDC06269034@Toshiba> <54762985.2010101@apc.org>
 <053001d009ba$768cf260$63a6d720$@gmail.com> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8016428EE@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
Message-ID: <CA+EjHYqo2c1W-Dck8ge5wZapObPMTGpf9Hn438nMbNazs8N-6A@mail.gmail.com>

There isn't anything on stakeholders roles, in particular States and USA.

Louis
- - -

On Fri, Nov 28, 2014 at 8:21 AM, "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang" <
wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de> wrote:

> Hi everybody
>
> After weeks of confusing conflicts let´s move towards clarifying
> collaboration. What we have seen in the recent (sometimes unfriendly)
> disputes is that there are many different  civil society activists with
> different civil society positions. This is confusing, both for newcomers
> who want to join civil society groups in Internet Governance discussions as
> well as for other stakeholders who want to collaborate with civil society.
> On the othher Hand: This is natural. The civil Society Stakeholder Groups
> has similar differences as the governmental stakeholder group if you
> compare the governmental positions of China, Russia, Saudi Arabia, US, EU,
> Brazil, India, Japan, Australia etc.
> This not the Problem. The probllem is that you have to know what the
> position. So it is about transparency and clarity.
>
> Here is a proposal how to move forward:  We have seen so many people
> writing long e-mails arguing for their position. Wouldn´t it be better if
> we use this energy to write more comprehensive and structured position or
> issue papers so that newbies or outsiders will better understand what the
> real points under discussions are in CS circles? We have seen rather
> different arguments around the same issue from JNC to APC and NCUC folks.
>
> I propose that we start to work on what I call a "Civil Society Internet
> Governance Handbook".  This handbook would allow all CS groups within the
> CSCG to present their own individual points of views so that everybody
> knows what the positions are. The book could be structured into four main
> chapters:
>
> 1.      Human Rights (Access, Freedom of Expression, Privacy etc.)
> 2.      Security (Cyberwar, Cyberterrorism, Cybercrime etc.)
> 3.      Economic Development (Market domination, competition,
> infrastructure development etc.)
> 4.      Technical Coordination (Names, Numbers, Protocols etc.)
>
> Each of the six groups under the CSCG (IGC, BB, JNC, NCSG, Diplo, APC)
> could nominate four authors (one for each chapter). Each author would be
> free to argue for her/his position (five to maximum teen pages). There is
> no need for consensus. Every author would be free to present her/his
> radical, moderate, liberal and whatsoever position on one of the four main
> issues.
>
> Such a compendium would help to bring more transparency into the process
> and would enable a more fact based discussion in the IG events ahead of us.
>
> We could deliver this as an e-book (probably with an Annex with main
> official texts as Tunis Agenda, Sao Paulo Principles, UN Resolutions etc.)
> until the May 2015 Sessions in Geneva. In total this book would be around
> 250 pages. If we find a sponsor we could publish this for the New York
> event in December 2015. Such a book would seen by the rest of the IG
> Community as a helpful contribution, it would strengthen the role of CS in
> the emerging IG multistakeholder mechanisms and would be also an input into
> the WSIS 10+ process.
>
> The chair of the CSCG (together with the co-chairs from the six groups)
> would be the editor.
>
> Any comment?
>
> Wolfgang
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150126/66ecad91/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From joly at punkcast.com  Mon Jan 26 02:31:18 2015
From: joly at punkcast.com (Joly MacFie)
Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2015 02:31:18 -0500
Subject: [governance] WEBCAST MONDAY: Governments and Internet Governance
Message-ID: <CAM9VJk3ch3u1TUO-YGQonOYEChJV18ywMd1ZNsAYqhjzG=9AZw@mail.gmail.com>

Another highly topical discussion from the dynamic DC duo of ISOC DC and
the IIEP. With the NMI staggering
<http://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/01/24/hibernating_netmundial_continues_to_rattle_internet_governance_world/>
into existence, and now a new kid on the block  - the Internet Social Forum
<http://justnetcoalition.org/ISF> rattling the cage, and the old stalwart
the IGF going intersessional
<http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/176-igf-2015/preparatory-process/2142-open-call-for-input-on-inter-sessional-work>
-
multistakeholder opportunities for governments to engage the Internet
community are expanding pell-mell! As the WSIS review
<http://www.itu.int/wsis/review/2014.html> looms, there is an urgency to
get ducks lined up..

NYC will be well represented at this one. Not only is Veni now based back
in town as he tackles the UN, but moderator Nancy Scola is also an emigre
from our fair city. Plus I (Joly) will be traveling down myself to run the
webcast.

 joly posted: " Today, Monday 26 January 2015 the Greater Washington DC
Chapter of the Internet Society (ISOC-DC) and the Institute of
International Economic Policy (IIEP) present Governments and Internet
Governance . Despite their long experience in global and domestic"


[image: ISOC DC Human Rights in IG]
<http://new.livestream.com/internetsociety/20150126InternetGovernance>
Today,* Monday 26 January 2015* the *Greater Washington DC Chapter of the
Internet Society <http://www.isoc-dc.org/>* (ISOC-DC) and the *Institute of
International Economic Policy <http://www.gwu.edu/~iiep/> *(IIEP)
present *Governments
and Internet Governance
<https://www.eventbrite.com/e/governments-and-internet-governance-tickets-15261753315/>
*. Despite their long experience in global and domestic governance,
policymakers from many nations struggle to find their way in Internet
governance. On one hand, only governments can join international
organizations such as the UN or WTO. However, the same governments do not
have a privileged role in Internet governance institutions such as the
Internet Governance Forum (IGF); the Internet Corporation for Assigned
Names and Numbers (ICANN); or the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF),
where governments are just one among many actors. Meanwhile, many other
stakeholders are increasingly concerned about increased participation by
governments in the technical infrastructure and governance bodies that
underpin the Internet. This event will examine several different
perspectives on participation by governments in Internet governance.
Panel: *Amr
Aljowaily*, Embassy of Egypt, NYC; Sally Wentworth, Vice President of
Global Policy Development, Internet Society; *Veni Markowski*, Bulgaria, VP
for UN Engagement, ICANN; *Dr. Marc Daumas*, Scientific Attache, Embassy of
France; *Carolina de Cresce El Debs*, Embassy of Brazil; *David Satola*,
The World Bank. Moderator: *Nancy Scola*, The Washington Post. The event
will be webcast live on the *Internet Society Livestream
<http://new.livestream.com/internetsociety/20150126InternetGovernance>*
channel.





*What: Governments and Internet Governance
<https://www.eventbrite.com/e/governments-and-internet-governance-tickets-15261753315/>
Where: Institute for International Economic Policy, George Washington
University, Washington DC When: Monday 26 January 2015 12:30pm-2pm EST |
17:30-19:00 UTC Webcast:
http://new.livestream.com/internetsociety/20150126InternetGovernance
<http://new.livestream.com/internetsociety/20150126InternetGovernance>
Twitter: @isocdc + #governance
<https://twitter.com/search?f=realtime&q=isocdc%20governance&src=typd>*


Comment <http://isoc-ny.org/p2/7408#respond>   See all comments
<http://isoc-ny.org/p2/7408#comments>






*​Permalink*

http://isoc-ny.org/p2/7408





-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------
Joly MacFie  218 565 9365 Skype:punkcast
WWWhatsup NYC - http://wwwhatsup.com
 http://pinstand.com - http://punkcast.com
 VP (Admin) - ISOC-NY - http://isoc-ny.org
--------------------------------------------------------------
-
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150126/7ee7e7fd/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From nb at bollow.ch  Mon Jan 26 05:15:50 2015
From: nb at bollow.ch (Norbert Bollow)
Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2015 11:15:50 +0100
Subject: The Good the Bad and the Ugly was Re: [governance] Internet
  Social Forum
In-Reply-To: <E1YFNjf-0006MW-TT@igcaucus.org>
References: <20150122143615.700b2f52@quill>
	<54C23F6A.9090503@cafonso.ca>
	<E1YFNjf-0006MW-TT@igcaucus.org>
Message-ID: <20150126111550.46147a20@quill>

On Sun, 25 Jan 2015 10:10:39 -0400
Daniel Pimienta <pimienta at funredes.org> wrote:

> Why facing different 
> vision provokes that much rage is hard to 
> understand to me...

My understanding of the situation is that the strong negative emotions
which are in the above described as "rage" are not so much because of
our vision and views being different from his, but I see them as having
started from a particular event, which makes them understandable to
some degree at least.

In my view, we need to accept human nature for what it is, which
includes the reality that sometimes civil society colleagues will act in
a way that others consider unacceptable, while the questionable action
is undertaken for reasons that in the eyes of whoever takes that action
at least makes that conduct appear acceptable or even necessary and
appropriate. Only on such a basis of basic acceptance is it possible to
learn to generally interact in a constructive manner. While accepting
that even *generally* interacting in a constructive manner does not
exclude situations where one colleague feels compelled to act in a way
that the other finds unacceptable. Accepting anger-provoking actions may
become a bit easier when realizing that among the most anger-provoking
actions there are those that are born out of the motive of wanting to
point out something that (from the perspective of a particular
perception and understanding of incomplete information) might be a
seriously bad development under the umbrella of global civil society in
Internet governance.

From my perspective, Jeremy's recent text is a libelous rant full of
insinuations and distortions of the facts. Some of it being direct
libelous attacks on some of his civil society colleagues, and as such
totally and absolutely unacceptable. He would see this differently of
course, I'm sure that he would never post anything with an intention of
thereby committing libel which is after all a punishable offense.
(Although what he has written about me and others who are mentioned by
name is probably less insulting than the implied reference to all
others who are involved as them somehow having no significance at all,
while in fact quite a few of them are much more senior and more
experienced activists than for example I am.)

In fact now after a couple of days have allowed me to calm down a bit in
that respect, I think that Jeremy's motives in being alarmed at what he
sees (in my view, totally mistakenly) as something that might be bad and
dangerous are not totally different from what motivated me when I first
heard rumors about the funding situation of some projects represented
on the BestBits steering committee and then, after starting to ask
questions, I received strong evidence that BestBits itself was, at
least initially and from some perspective, a formal "capacity building"
project partly funded by the US government. Having been a BestBits
participant personally, I was totally shocked. I am not in principle
opposed to formal civil society capacity building projects being partly
funded by governments, or even a government with so many highly
problematic (and in fact in my eyes outright criminal and imperialistic)
actions as the US government. Accepting money from a government is not
wrong in itself. When a government gives money for a good thing, that
is not wrong, it might just be a matter of the government simply doing
what governments are supposed to do. But care must be taken especially
in civil society contexts that what was initially intended to be a
genuine civil society activity does not get unduly influenced, in other
words corrupted, by that government money. (The same kind of concerns of
course also potentially applies to all other sources of money.) At the
very least, the participants in what is in any respect a formal
capacity building project need to be informed about the existence of
that capacity building project together with its objectives and funding
sources. That had not happened in the case of BestBits. This was in my
eyes particularly shocking in view of a very significant part of the
first BestBits meeting having been spent on preparing an international
civil society stance in preparation for the 2012 World Conference on
International Telecommunications (WCIT) which turned out to be very
much aligned with the US government's objectives in those international
negotiations. If view of that context, together with the other aspects
of the situation (which include a previous, unsuccessful, good faith
attempt on my part to get the situation clarified in a less public
manner) I eventually resorted to asking pointed questions in public.
Jeremy obviously considers that to have been unacceptable. I still view
it as having been appropriate and necessary if I wanted to be "on the
right side of history". I did not want to risk losing a significant
part of my personal integrity through becoming an accomplice through
silence.

That said, Jeremy was never personally implicated in any of the rumors
that I heard nor in the evidence that I have. His funding situation has
to my best knowledge always been totally clear and above-board, and I
have no indications whatsoever of him having been involved personally
in that capacity building project side of BestBits (which was so
unacceptable in my eyes precisely because it was not disclosed to the
participants in general -- I have no indication of it ever having been
disclosed to Jeremy before I informed him of what I had learned.)

However, Jeremy being the founder of BestBits, I find it perfectly
understandable that he got angry about my decision to ask pointed
questions in public, especially if those questions ended up making his
work a bit more difficult for some time. Perhaps not totally unlike how
his recent blog post is making the work of getting an Internet Social
Forum off the ground more difficult. 

Now that he has had his revenge, and I have clarified my perspective on
what I suspect was the core point of contention, I would propose that
it is time to let bygones be bygones, and go back to interacting in a
more constructive manner.

Greetings,
Norbert

-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From jlfullsack at wanadoo.fr  Mon Jan 26 05:28:34 2015
From: jlfullsack at wanadoo.fr (jlfullsack at wanadoo.fr)
Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2015 11:28:34 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [governance] From Confusion to Clarification
In-Reply-To: <CA+EjHYqo2c1W-Dck8ge5wZapObPMTGpf9Hn438nMbNazs8N-6A@mail.gmail.com>
References: <793FFF2DB19A4177851ACCDC06269034@Toshiba>
 <54762985.2010101@apc.org> <053001d009ba$768cf260$63a6d720$@gmail.com>
 <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8016428EE@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
 <CA+EjHYqo2c1W-Dck8ge5wZapObPMTGpf9Hn438nMbNazs8N-6A@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <1373404236.8327.1422268114566.JavaMail.www@wwinf1f10>

Right, Louis

 

There isn't anything about Ethics either. Yet it has been assigned a specific Action Line in the WSIS (AL-10) and was recognized as an issue transverse to the whole set of AL.

Probably Ethics are not " ITC/IG-soluble" ... 

 

Best 

Jean-Louis Fullsack

 

 

 

 

> Message du 26/01/15 05:29
> De : "Louis Pouzin (well)" 

> A : "governance at lists.igcaucus.org" , "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang" 
> Copie à : "michael gurstein" , "&lt,bestbits at lists.bestbits.net&gt," 
> Objet : Re: [governance] From Confusion to Clarification
> 
>

There isn't anything on stakeholders roles, in particular States and USA.

>
Louis
- - -

>
On Fri, Nov 28, 2014 at 8:21 AM, "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang"  wrote:
>
Hi everybody
> 
> After weeks of confusing conflicts let´s move towards clarifying collaboration. What we have seen in the recent (sometimes unfriendly) disputes is that there are many different  civil society activists with different civil society positions. This is confusing, both for newcomers who want to join civil society groups in Internet Governance discussions as well as for other stakeholders who want to collaborate with civil society. On the othher Hand: This is natural. The civil Society Stakeholder Groups has similar differences as the governmental stakeholder group if you compare the governmental positions of China, Russia, Saudi Arabia, US, EU, Brazil, India, Japan, Australia etc.
> This not the Problem. The probllem is that you have to know what the position. So it is about transparency and clarity.
> 
> Here is a proposal how to move forward:  We have seen so many people writing long e-mails arguing for their position. Wouldn´t it be better if we use this energy to write more comprehensive and structured position or issue papers so that newbies or outsiders will better understand what the real points under discussions are in CS circles? We have seen rather different arguments around the same issue from JNC to APC and NCUC folks.
> 
> I propose that we start to work on what I call a “Civil Society Internet Governance Handbook”.  This handbook would allow all CS groups within the CSCG to present their own individual points of views so that everybody knows what the positions are. The book could be structured into four main chapters:
> 
> 1.      Human Rights (Access, Freedom of Expression, Privacy etc.)
> 2.      Security (Cyberwar, Cyberterrorism, Cybercrime etc.)
> 3.      Economic Development (Market domination, competition, infrastructure development etc.)
> 4.      Technical Coordination (Names, Numbers, Protocols etc.)
> 
> Each of the six groups under the CSCG (IGC, BB, JNC, NCSG, Diplo, APC) could nominate four authors (one for each chapter). Each author would be free to argue for her/his position (five to maximum teen pages). There is no need for consensus. Every author would be free to present her/his radical, moderate, liberal and whatsoever position on one of the four main issues.
> 
> Such a compendium would help to bring more transparency into the process and would enable a more fact based discussion in the IG events ahead of us.
> 
> We could deliver this as an e-book (probably with an Annex with main official texts as Tunis Agenda, Sao Paulo Principles, UN Resolutions etc.) until the May 2015 Sessions in Geneva. In total this book would be around 250 pages. If we find a sponsor we could publish this for the New York event in December 2015. Such a book would seen by the rest of the IG Community as a helpful contribution, it would strengthen the role of CS in the emerging IG multistakeholder mechanisms and would be also an input into the WSIS 10+ process.
> 
> The chair of the CSCG (together with the co-chairs from the six groups) would be the editor.
> 
> Any comment?
> 
> Wolfgang
> 






____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150126/91de98fd/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From nb at bollow.ch  Mon Jan 26 05:46:38 2015
From: nb at bollow.ch (Norbert Bollow)
Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2015 11:46:38 +0100
Subject: [governance] From Confusion to Clarification
In-Reply-To: <1373404236.8327.1422268114566.JavaMail.www@wwinf1f10>
References: <793FFF2DB19A4177851ACCDC06269034@Toshiba>
	<54762985.2010101@apc.org>
	<053001d009ba$768cf260$63a6d720$@gmail.com>
	<2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8016428EE@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
	<CA+EjHYqo2c1W-Dck8ge5wZapObPMTGpf9Hn438nMbNazs8N-6A@mail.gmail.com>
	<1373404236.8327.1422268114566.JavaMail.www@wwinf1f10>
Message-ID: <20150126114638.4e2cee41@quill>

-Cc all except the IGC list

On Mon, 26 Jan 2015 11:28:34 +0100 (CET)
jlfullsack at wanadoo.fr wrote:

> There isn't anything about Ethics either. Yet it has been assigned a
> specific Action Line in the WSIS (AL-10) and was recognized as an
> issue transverse to the whole set of AL.

Good point.

> Probably Ethics are not " ITC/IG-soluble" ... 

Regardless of whether the questions around ethics are "soluble",
differences in viewpoints about matters of ethics certainly exist, and
I would say they underly many of the conflicts that have been so very
troubling especially here on this list, therefore a project aiming at
clarifying the different viewpoints should IMO not avoid the topic of
ethics, but rather address it heads-on.

Greetings,
Norbert

-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From kichango at gmail.com  Mon Jan 26 07:03:20 2015
From: kichango at gmail.com (Mawaki Chango)
Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2015 12:03:20 +0000
Subject: [bestbits] [governance] AW: From Confusion to Clarification
In-Reply-To: <D52271F36A224E63965667671E785EE1@Toshiba>
References: <793FFF2DB19A4177851ACCDC06269034@Toshiba> <54762985.2010101@apc.org>
 <053001d009ba$768cf260$63a6d720$@gmail.com> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8016428EE@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
 <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A801642A86@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> <D52271F36A224E63965667671E785EE1@Toshiba>
Message-ID: <CACTo+v-tsTzgPbiTMQYYuhdSkdYqUyxFLqjkO930Uq+HU0MTpg@mail.gmail.com>

Hi,

On Sun, Jan 25, 2015 at 8:30 PM, Ian Peter <ian.peter at ianpeter.com> wrote:

> Hi Wolfgang,
>
> I am glad you raised this again, because I think the idea is great.
>
> I am not sure that a direct correlation with CSCG and with the different
> groups within civil society who are CSCG members is the best way to proceed
> (eg one JNC article followed by one Best Bits article etc) - because I
> think many of our best people sit between and across various groups and I
> am not sure that direct characterisation of opinions with groupings is
> always accurate or helpful.
>

This has been my concern, too, from my very first reply to the initial
proposal, and still remains. We are far from having a homomorphism between
the CSCG member groupings and the "diverse voices" you are referring to,
Wolfgang. It seems to me the most identifiable voice(s) within the CSCG
setting -- in terms of what all members stand for -- include JNC (social
justice) and maybe BestBits (?), both of whom spun off from IGC where they
still have their footprint aside possible other voices. In other words, IGC
which is also a CSCG member is certainly not one voice. I suspect there is
also notable diversity of voices within NCSG although it is my sense that
they have clearer and tested working processes and are more ready to reach
a common position on a whole host of issues than IGC does. Furthermore you
have
on the other hand
folks such as JFC and their following, whom I am not sure to what extent
they overlap with JNC and to what extent they have a distinct voice.

All of this to say, you may go with the above groupings but I am not sure
they will provide a clear map of the actual voices that exist within CS in
terms of families of thought, basic assumptions, visions, goals, values or
principles of commitments, etc. If we can find a practical way to identify
those, that would be great but I recognize it might be challenging. I am
just putting the idea out there so that we recognize that potential
limitation and see whether we can come up with some innovative ways to work
around it. (Again, I also understand that you may just have made the
deliberate choice to start from the existing _social groupings_
 and let them
bear the responsibility to put forward their common voice OR their diverse
voices on the issues, taking the burden away from the architect of the
project (outline of the volume) as well as from the editors and placing it
on the groups themselves, which will not make IGC business any easier ;-)
Nevertheless, this approach also has its won merits.)


Mawaki



>
> -----Original Message----- From: "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang"
> Sent: Sunday, January 25, 2015 11:15 PM
> To: "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang" ; governance at lists.igcaucus.org ; michael
> gurstein ; bestbits at lists.bestbits.net ; governance at lists.igcaucus.org
> Subject: [governance] AW: From Confusion to Clarification
>
>
> Dear friends,
>
> six weeks ago I made a proposal under the thread "From Confusion to
> Clarification" to produce a Civil Society Internet Governance Compendium or
> Handbook. What was the idea behind the proposal?
>
> Civil Society is a recognized and needed stakeholder in the global
> Internet Governance debate and a needed partner in the evolving
> multistakeholder approaches to manage Internet related public policy issues.
> 2015 will see a number of Internet Governance events where the voice of
> civil society has to be raised: It starts with the ITU Council IG Working
> Group Meetings in February, continues with UNESCO conferences and meetings
> of the UNCSTD, the HRC, the forthcoming Cybersecurity Conference in The
> Hague, the IGF in Brazil, the WSIS 10+ conference in New York in December
> 2015 and others.
>
> Civil Society does not speak with one voice. It is characterized by a
> broad diversity. This is not a weakness, this is a strength. It reflects
> the reality. And it is not different from the diversity within other
> stakeholder groups. In the governmental stakeholder group you have a broad
> varierty of positions - from the US via EU, Brazil, Egypt and India to
> China. In the private sector stakeholder group there are different
> approaches among transnational corporations and small and medium
> enterprises from developed and developing countries. And even among the I*
> organizations there are differences, as we have seen recently in the
> positioning towards the NetMundial initiative. This pluralism and diversity
> reflects the reality of the Internet Governance ecosystem. If one want to
> achieve sustainable progress a rough consensus has to include the main
> arguments from the main groups of all stakeholders. To achieve concrete
> results openess and transparency with regard to the various positions is a
> key pre-condition to promote mutual understanding.
>
> Insofar it would be good if civil society Internet Governance groups or
> individuals could describe openly what they are standing for. To have on
> paper the various perspectives different civil society groups have if it
> comes to Internet policy related issues would be useful anbd could enhance
> civil society input into the forthcoming negotiations, in particular with
> regard to WSIS 10+.
>
> Since I did send this proposals to this list I got numerous comments and
> critical remarks. Some respondents supported the project and called it a
> good idea. Others argued that this is a bad, unrealistic and
> counterproductive idea. Many partners made concrete proposals how such a
> project could be further enhanced. Taking into account all the feed back I
> got since last month I would specify my proposal in the following way:
>
> I. Ian Peter, in his capacity as acting chair of the CSCG, should function
> as the main editor. Each member of the CSCG should nominate a co-editor.
> The role of the editor and the co-editors would be technical. They should
> not intervene into the content of the individual contributions. The six
> co-editors of the six member groups of the CWSG should invite four
> contributors from their group, one for each chapter. It is up to the groups
> whether the individual author expresses his own individual position or
> represents the position of the whole group. Each contribution should be 4 -
> 8 pages. Each author would be free to cover either the whole subject or to
> select a special sub-item.
>
> II. The book should have four chapters:
> 1. Human Rights and Internet(Access, Freedom of Expression, Privacy,
> Content, Culture etc.)
> 2. Security in Cyberspace (Cyberwar, Cyberterrorism, Cybercrime,
> Surveillance, National Sovereignty etc.)
> 3. Social, Economic and Cultural Development (Digital Divide, Market
> Domination, Competition, Infrastructure Development, Cultural and
> Linguistic Diversity etc.)
> 4. Technical Coordination (Names, Numbers, Protocols, Accountability etc.)
>
> III. Timetable
> It would be good to have a first draft ready until early May (for the
> Meeting of the UNCSTD). The final e-Version of the whole book should be
> ready until early September for use by the WSIS 10+ negotiations groups. A
> formal presentation should be organized during the 10th IGF in Brazil.
> Efforts should be undertake to produce also a paper version for
> distribution at the 10th IGF in November 2014.
>
> Best regards
>
> Wolfgang
>
> PS:
> I have described the "Four Baskets" more in detail in my blog in CircleID
> http://www.circleid.com/posts/20150103_internet_governance_
> outlook_2015_2_processes_many_venues_4_baskets/
>
> w
>
>
>
> Hi everybody
>
> After weeks of confusing conflicts let´s move towards clarifying
> collaboration. What we have seen in the recent (sometimes unfriendly)
> disputes is that there are many different  civil society activists with
> different civil society positions. This is confusing, both for newcomers
> who want to join civil society groups in Internet Governance discussions as
> well as for other stakeholders who want to collaborate with civil society.
> On the othher Hand: This is natural. The civil Society Stakeholder Groups
> has similar differences as the governmental stakeholder group if you
> compare the governmental positions of China, Russia, Saudi Arabia, US, EU,
> Brazil, India, Japan, Australia etc.
> This not the Problem. The probllem is that you have to know what the
> position. So it is about transparency and clarity.
>
> Here is a proposal how to move forward:  We have seen so many people
> writing long e-mails arguing for their position. Wouldn´t it be better if
> we use this energy to write more comprehensive and structured position or
> issue papers so that newbies or outsiders will better understand what the
> real points under discussions are in CS circles? We have seen rather
> different arguments around the same issue from JNC to APC and NCUC folks.
>
> I propose that we start to work on what I call a "Civil Society Internet
> Governance Handbook".  This handbook would allow all CS groups within the
> CSCG to present their own individual points of views so that everybody
> knows what the positions are. The book could be structured into four main
> chapters:
>
> 1. Human Rights (Access, Freedom of Expression, Privacy etc.)
> 2. Security (Cyberwar, Cyberterrorism, Cybercrime etc.)
> 3. Economic Development (Market domination, competition, infrastructure
> development etc.)
> 4. Technical Coordination (Names, Numbers, Protocols etc.)
>
> Each of the six groups under the CSCG (IGC, BB, JNC, NCSG, Diplo, APC)
> could nominate four authors (one for each chapter). Each author would be
> free to argue for her/his position (five to maximum teen pages). There is
> no need for consensus. Every author would be free to present her/his
> radical, moderate, liberal and whatsoever position on one of the four main
> issues.
>
> Such a compendium would help to bring more transparency into the process
> and would enable a more fact based discussion in the IG events ahead of us.
>
> We could deliver this as an e-book (probably with an Annex with main
> official texts as Tunis Agenda, Sao Paulo Principles, UN Resolutions etc.)
> until the May 2015 Sessions in Geneva. In total this book would be around
> 250 pages. If we find a sponsor we could publish this for the New York
> event in December 2015. Such a book would seen by the rest of the IG
> Community as a helpful contribution, it would strengthen the role of CS in
> the emerging IG multistakeholder mechanisms and would be also an input into
> the WSIS 10+ process.
>
> The chair of the CSCG (together with the co-chairs from the six groups)
> would be the editor.
>
> Any comment?
>
> Wolfgang
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
> To be removed from the list, visit:
>     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
>
> For all other list information and functions, see:
>     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
>     http://www.igcaucus.org/
>
> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>      bestbits at lists.bestbits.net.
> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit:
>      http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150126/dfec0965/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From joly at punkcast.com  Mon Jan 26 08:02:11 2015
From: joly at punkcast.com (Joly MacFie)
Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2015 08:02:11 -0500
Subject: [governance] =?UTF-8?Q?WEBCAST_TUESDAY_=E2=80=93_State_of_the_Net?=
 =?UTF-8?Q?_2015?=
Message-ID: <CAM9VJk17oZyzshaUF=Eyz4V2ejf2GEpaBvNmdBrts0JJi7=ddQ@mail.gmail.com>

At the State of the Net Tuesday again we have a healthy NYC contingent
representing. Nancy Scola is moderating a panel on Digital Protectionism
<http://stateofthenet2015.sched.org/event/b1c979890977bead1ac4a9c03ff77455>,
Rachel Sklar is moderating a panel on Diversity
<http://stateofthenet2015.sched.org/event/c7fb2ea7f4ea9d18a5ff3734f0e777be>
that includes NYTM's Jessica Lawrence. Nilay Patel is on the Open Internet
panel
<http://stateofthenet2015.sched.org/event/56b1c4199f03a723e29a4ef289a8b5df> -
along with Harold Feld! Nilay has to be an expert on NN since he moderated
the Legal Hackers South Street Seaport <https://isoc-ny.org/p2/6844>
special last July! And then, also from NYC is me (joly) doing the streaming.

Now, as far as the webcast goes. First the $99. SInce we are sponsoring the
webcast we have negotiated a reduced rate of $25 for ISOC members. To get
the rate all you have to do is email Paul Brigner (currently in Budapest so
he will up early on Tuesday morning!) at brigner at isoc.org and he will mail
you back an individualized discount code. If you are not an ISOC member
please join, it's free! While all that is confirmed for the webcast at the
moment are the morning plenaries,  If you are seriously into Internet
policy it has to be worth the 25.

 In the afternoon there are 3 tracks - see
http://stateofthenet2015.sched.org/venues/ - and how and if and which will
be streamed  is something I'll sort out on the fly. I'd like to do both
those rooms on the 8th floor. My feeling is that, if nobody objects and
it's technically feasible I might bounce room 807 out to another, possibly
free, channel. If so I will announce here. Stay tuned.


 joly posted: " On Tuesday January 27 2015 the  Internet Education
Foundation (IEF) will host the 2015 State of the Net Conference at the
Newseum in Washington DC. Among the many listed speakers are US CTO Megan
Smith, FTC Chair Edith Ramirez, Assistant AG Leslie Caldwe"


[image: State of the Net] <http://stateofthenet.cleeng.com/> On *Tuesday
January 27 2015* the  *Internet Education Foundation <http://neted.org/> *(IEF)
will host the *2015 State of the Net Conference*
<http://www.stateofthenet.org/> at the *Newseum* in *Washington DC*. Among
the many listed speakers are US CTO *Megan Smith*, FTC Chair *Edith Ramirez*,
Assistant AG *Leslie Caldwell*, WH Director of Cybersecurity *Ari Schwartz,*
Congressman *Bob Goodlatte*, the NTIA's *Larry Strickling*, ICANN's *Theresa
Swinehart*, the NCUC's* Milton Mueller*, ISOC's *Sally Wentworth*, CDT's *Nuala
O'Connor*, the FCC's *Gigi Sohn*, and her former PK colleague *Harold Feld*.
As the 114th Congress kicks off, attendees include some 300 congressional
staff and other policymakers. The *Internet Societ
<http://internetsociety.org>y* is sponsoring and providing the *live
webcast <http://stateofthenet.cleeng.com/>*, which is priced at *$99*.







*What: 2015 State of the Net Conference <http://www.stateofthenet.org/>
Where: Newseum, Washington DC When: Tuesday January 27 2015 pam-5pm EST |
14:00-22:00 UTC Agenda: http://www.stateofthenet.org/sotn15-agenda/
<http://www.stateofthenet.org/sotn15-agenda/> Speakers:
http://stateofthenet2015.sched.org/directory/speakers
<http://stateofthenet2015.sched.org/directory/speakers> Webcast:
http://stateofthenet.cleeng.com/ <http://stateofthenet.cleeng.com/> ($99)
Twitter: #sotn15
<https://twitter.com/search?f=realtime&q=%23sotn15&src=typd>*


Comment <http://isoc-ny.org/p2/7410#respond>   See all comments
<http://isoc-ny.org/p2/7410#comments>






*​Permalink*

http://isoc-ny.org/p2/7410





-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------
Joly MacFie  218 565 9365 Skype:punkcast
WWWhatsup NYC - http://wwwhatsup.com
 http://pinstand.com - http://punkcast.com
 VP (Admin) - ISOC-NY - http://isoc-ny.org
--------------------------------------------------------------
-
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150126/1eed8804/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From gpaque at gmail.com  Mon Jan 26 09:01:57 2015
From: gpaque at gmail.com (Ginger Paque)
Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2015 08:01:57 -0600
Subject: [governance] Fwd: [Webinar] Internet governance in 2015: a decisive
 year
In-Reply-To: <CAHY7YHG7Dy-EtwgH54jUwXJauQVx_KpAOC2z9kxjmNs08zkQZg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAHY7YHG7Dy-EtwgH54jUwXJauQVx_KpAOC2z9kxjmNs08zkQZg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAHXEJG1CfDt_rsrYxm+ioNFZ5dSDMT0rnRgiU0hLn_fCVOJbAA@mail.gmail.com>

*(Apologies for cross-posting!)*

I'd like to share two announcements which may be of interest to you and
your colleagues. The first is an invitation to join us tomorrow at 12h UTC
for the webinar *Internet Governance in 2015: A Decisive Year, *which is
the annual 'crystal ball' exercise led by Dr Jovan Kurbalija. More
information below, or here
<http://www.diplomacy.edu/calendar/webinar-internet-governance-2015>.
Please register to reserve your 'seat'.

The second relates to the call for applications for *Introduction to
Internet Governance <http://www.diplomacy.edu/courses/IGCBP-foundation> *online
course which starts in February. The deadline has been extended; for
additional extensions, please contact admissions at diplomacy.edu




         Is this email not displaying correctly?   View this email in your
browser
<http://us5.campaign-archive2.com/?u=89e7299f9fe54eed66d45cf3d&id=09fd5bca98&e=330e500107>
*January IG webinar:*
*Internet governance in 2015: a decisive year*

Dear friends,

We would like to invite you to our first webinar of the year, on *Tuesday,
27th January, at 12:00 UTC*, for the annual 'crystal ball' exercise with *Dr
Jovan Kurbalija*.

The NETmundial meeting and the IANA transition process dominated most of
the 2014 developments
<http://diplomacy.us5.list-manage.com/track/click?u=89e7299f9fe54eed66d45cf3d&id=781c3800df&e=330e500107>,
bringing Internet governance (IG) to a crossroads. 2015 will be a decisive
year in which stakeholders will agree on post-2015 agendas. What can we
expect in the coming months, and which issues are likely to be a priority?
The beginning of every year presents a good opportunity to reflect on the
previous year and make predictions for the year ahead. Join us next week,
online or in situ from Geneva.* Please register here
<http://diplomacy.us5.list-manage.com/track/click?u=89e7299f9fe54eed66d45cf3d&id=20f284f239&e=330e500107>;
attendance is free, registration is required.*

*Update!* As from next month, our regular webinars will undergo some
exciting changes. Read more in this blog post
<http://diplomacy.us5.list-manage.com/track/click?u=89e7299f9fe54eed66d45cf3d&id=152fee0f10&e=330e500107>
and let us know what you think.

E-see you on Tuesday!
Diplo's Webinars Team

<http://diplomacy.us5.list-manage2.com/track/click?u=89e7299f9fe54eed66d45cf3d&id=8a70f4fe42&e=330e500107>
 Like
us on FaceBook
<http://diplomacy.us5.list-manage.com/track/click?u=89e7299f9fe54eed66d45cf3d&id=b245fb9f05&e=330e500107>
<http://diplomacy.us5.list-manage2.com/track/click?u=89e7299f9fe54eed66d45cf3d&id=bb5b3eb6bd&e=330e500107>
 Follow
us on Twitter
<http://diplomacy.us5.list-manage.com/track/click?u=89e7299f9fe54eed66d45cf3d&id=c51769750e&e=330e500107>
<http://diplomacy.us5.list-manage.com/track/click?u=89e7299f9fe54eed66d45cf3d&id=ee9136d605&e=330e500107>
 Our
website
<http://diplomacy.us5.list-manage.com/track/click?u=89e7299f9fe54eed66d45cf3d&id=7e2141737e&e=330e500107>
<http://diplomacy.us5.list-manage.com/track/click?u=89e7299f9fe54eed66d45cf3d&id=0f0054bcbe&e=330e500107>
 Our
network
<http://diplomacy.us5.list-manage.com/track/click?u=89e7299f9fe54eed66d45cf3d&id=1705ac312a&e=330e500107>
                   *Copyright
© 2015 DiploFoundation, All rights reserved.*
        ------------------------------
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150126/bd9b033a/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From kichango at gmail.com  Mon Jan 26 10:00:39 2015
From: kichango at gmail.com (Mawaki Chango)
Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2015 15:00:39 +0000
Subject: [bestbits] [governance] AW: From Confusion to Clarification
In-Reply-To: <CACTo+v-tsTzgPbiTMQYYuhdSkdYqUyxFLqjkO930Uq+HU0MTpg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <793FFF2DB19A4177851ACCDC06269034@Toshiba> <54762985.2010101@apc.org>
 <053001d009ba$768cf260$63a6d720$@gmail.com> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8016428EE@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
 <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A801642A86@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
 <D52271F36A224E63965667671E785EE1@Toshiba> <CACTo+v-tsTzgPbiTMQYYuhdSkdYqUyxFLqjkO930Uq+HU0MTpg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CACTo+v9MxQx3UTLXj4nDbR5aOhE4gT4UyfwybqNFyq=9YCooXQ@mail.gmail.com>

N.B. Of course there also is APC as a clearly identifiable CS party under
the parasol of rights, but I would say more specifically women rights (as
several other CS families can also claim HR as their compass.) Anyway, that
was just to correct an oversight. For the rest it is up to each grouping to
come up with their best and accurate self-characterization. And just for
the sake of being complete, Diplo is an hybrid in my view and I'm not sure
how they would characterize their CS commitments (and btw, if my
information is correct they have announced their intention to withdraw from
CSCG which causes another problem if you rely on the latter to define which
groups will be included in this proposed opus.) Civicus has never really
engaged wiith CSCG as far as I can tell.

mC


On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 12:03 PM, Mawaki Chango <kichango at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> On Sun, Jan 25, 2015 at 8:30 PM, Ian Peter <ian.peter at ianpeter.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi Wolfgang,
>>
>> I am glad you raised this again, because I think the idea is great.
>>
>> I am not sure that a direct correlation with CSCG and with the different
>> groups within civil society who are CSCG members is the best way to proceed
>> (eg one JNC article followed by one Best Bits article etc) - because I
>> think many of our best people sit between and across various groups and I
>> am not sure that direct characterisation of opinions with groupings is
>> always accurate or helpful.
>>
>
> This has been my concern, too, from my very first reply to the initial
> proposal, and still remains. We are far from having a homomorphism between
> the CSCG member groupings and the "diverse voices" you are referring to,
> Wolfgang. It seems to me the most identifiable voice(s) within the CSCG
> setting -- in terms of what all members stand for -- include JNC (social
> justice) and maybe BestBits (?), both of whom spun off from IGC where they
> still have their footprint aside possible other voices. In other words, IGC
> which is also a CSCG member is certainly not one voice. I suspect there is
> also notable diversity of voices within NCSG although it is my sense that
> they have clearer and tested working processes and are more ready to reach
> a common position on a whole host of issues than IGC does. Furthermore you
> have
> on the other hand
> folks such as JFC and their following, whom I am not sure to what extent
> they overlap with JNC and to what extent they have a distinct voice.
>
> All of this to say, you may go with the above groupings but I am not sure
> they will provide a clear map of the actual voices that exist within CS in
> terms of families of thought, basic assumptions, visions, goals, values or
> principles of commitments, etc. If we can find a practical way to identify
> those, that would be great but I recognize it might be challenging. I am
> just putting the idea out there so that we recognize that potential
> limitation and see whether we can come up with some innovative ways to work
> around it. (Again, I also understand that you may just have made the
> deliberate choice to start from the existing _social groupings_
>  and let them
> bear the responsibility to put forward their common voice OR their diverse
> voices on the issues, taking the burden away from the architect of the
> project (outline of the volume) as well as from the editors and placing it
> on the groups themselves, which will not make IGC business any easier ;-)
> Nevertheless, this approach also has its won merits.)
>
>
> Mawaki
>
>
>
>>
>> -----Original Message----- From: "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang"
>> Sent: Sunday, January 25, 2015 11:15 PM
>> To: "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang" ; governance at lists.igcaucus.org ; michael
>> gurstein ; bestbits at lists.bestbits.net ; governance at lists.igcaucus.org
>> Subject: [governance] AW: From Confusion to Clarification
>>
>>
>> Dear friends,
>>
>> six weeks ago I made a proposal under the thread "From Confusion to
>> Clarification" to produce a Civil Society Internet Governance Compendium or
>> Handbook. What was the idea behind the proposal?
>>
>> Civil Society is a recognized and needed stakeholder in the global
>> Internet Governance debate and a needed partner in the evolving
>> multistakeholder approaches to manage Internet related public policy issues.
>> 2015 will see a number of Internet Governance events where the voice of
>> civil society has to be raised: It starts with the ITU Council IG Working
>> Group Meetings in February, continues with UNESCO conferences and meetings
>> of the UNCSTD, the HRC, the forthcoming Cybersecurity Conference in The
>> Hague, the IGF in Brazil, the WSIS 10+ conference in New York in December
>> 2015 and others.
>>
>> Civil Society does not speak with one voice. It is characterized by a
>> broad diversity. This is not a weakness, this is a strength. It reflects
>> the reality. And it is not different from the diversity within other
>> stakeholder groups. In the governmental stakeholder group you have a broad
>> varierty of positions - from the US via EU, Brazil, Egypt and India to
>> China. In the private sector stakeholder group there are different
>> approaches among transnational corporations and small and medium
>> enterprises from developed and developing countries. And even among the I*
>> organizations there are differences, as we have seen recently in the
>> positioning towards the NetMundial initiative. This pluralism and diversity
>> reflects the reality of the Internet Governance ecosystem. If one want to
>> achieve sustainable progress a rough consensus has to include the main
>> arguments from the main groups of all stakeholders. To achieve concrete
>> results openess and transparency with regard to the various positions is a
>> key pre-condition to promote mutual understanding.
>>
>> Insofar it would be good if civil society Internet Governance groups or
>> individuals could describe openly what they are standing for. To have on
>> paper the various perspectives different civil society groups have if it
>> comes to Internet policy related issues would be useful anbd could enhance
>> civil society input into the forthcoming negotiations, in particular with
>> regard to WSIS 10+.
>>
>> Since I did send this proposals to this list I got numerous comments and
>> critical remarks. Some respondents supported the project and called it a
>> good idea. Others argued that this is a bad, unrealistic and
>> counterproductive idea. Many partners made concrete proposals how such a
>> project could be further enhanced. Taking into account all the feed back I
>> got since last month I would specify my proposal in the following way:
>>
>> I. Ian Peter, in his capacity as acting chair of the CSCG, should
>> function as the main editor. Each member of the CSCG should nominate a
>> co-editor. The role of the editor and the co-editors would be technical.
>> They should not intervene into the content of the individual contributions.
>> The six co-editors of the six member groups of the CWSG should invite four
>> contributors from their group, one for each chapter. It is up to the groups
>> whether the individual author expresses his own individual position or
>> represents the position of the whole group. Each contribution should be 4 -
>> 8 pages. Each author would be free to cover either the whole subject or to
>> select a special sub-item.
>>
>> II. The book should have four chapters:
>> 1. Human Rights and Internet(Access, Freedom of Expression, Privacy,
>> Content, Culture etc.)
>> 2. Security in Cyberspace (Cyberwar, Cyberterrorism, Cybercrime,
>> Surveillance, National Sovereignty etc.)
>> 3. Social, Economic and Cultural Development (Digital Divide, Market
>> Domination, Competition, Infrastructure Development, Cultural and
>> Linguistic Diversity etc.)
>> 4. Technical Coordination (Names, Numbers, Protocols, Accountability etc.)
>>
>> III. Timetable
>> It would be good to have a first draft ready until early May (for the
>> Meeting of the UNCSTD). The final e-Version of the whole book should be
>> ready until early September for use by the WSIS 10+ negotiations groups. A
>> formal presentation should be organized during the 10th IGF in Brazil.
>> Efforts should be undertake to produce also a paper version for
>> distribution at the 10th IGF in November 2014.
>>
>> Best regards
>>
>> Wolfgang
>>
>> PS:
>> I have described the "Four Baskets" more in detail in my blog in CircleID
>> http://www.circleid.com/posts/20150103_internet_governance_
>> outlook_2015_2_processes_many_venues_4_baskets/
>>
>> w
>>
>>
>>
>> Hi everybody
>>
>> After weeks of confusing conflicts let´s move towards clarifying
>> collaboration. What we have seen in the recent (sometimes unfriendly)
>> disputes is that there are many different  civil society activists with
>> different civil society positions. This is confusing, both for newcomers
>> who want to join civil society groups in Internet Governance discussions as
>> well as for other stakeholders who want to collaborate with civil society.
>> On the othher Hand: This is natural. The civil Society Stakeholder Groups
>> has similar differences as the governmental stakeholder group if you
>> compare the governmental positions of China, Russia, Saudi Arabia, US, EU,
>> Brazil, India, Japan, Australia etc.
>> This not the Problem. The probllem is that you have to know what the
>> position. So it is about transparency and clarity.
>>
>> Here is a proposal how to move forward:  We have seen so many people
>> writing long e-mails arguing for their position. Wouldn´t it be better if
>> we use this energy to write more comprehensive and structured position or
>> issue papers so that newbies or outsiders will better understand what the
>> real points under discussions are in CS circles? We have seen rather
>> different arguments around the same issue from JNC to APC and NCUC folks.
>>
>> I propose that we start to work on what I call a "Civil Society Internet
>> Governance Handbook".  This handbook would allow all CS groups within the
>> CSCG to present their own individual points of views so that everybody
>> knows what the positions are. The book could be structured into four main
>> chapters:
>>
>> 1. Human Rights (Access, Freedom of Expression, Privacy etc.)
>> 2. Security (Cyberwar, Cyberterrorism, Cybercrime etc.)
>> 3. Economic Development (Market domination, competition, infrastructure
>> development etc.)
>> 4. Technical Coordination (Names, Numbers, Protocols etc.)
>>
>> Each of the six groups under the CSCG (IGC, BB, JNC, NCSG, Diplo, APC)
>> could nominate four authors (one for each chapter). Each author would be
>> free to argue for her/his position (five to maximum teen pages). There is
>> no need for consensus. Every author would be free to present her/his
>> radical, moderate, liberal and whatsoever position on one of the four main
>> issues.
>>
>> Such a compendium would help to bring more transparency into the process
>> and would enable a more fact based discussion in the IG events ahead of us.
>>
>> We could deliver this as an e-book (probably with an Annex with main
>> official texts as Tunis Agenda, Sao Paulo Principles, UN Resolutions etc.)
>> until the May 2015 Sessions in Geneva. In total this book would be around
>> 250 pages. If we find a sponsor we could publish this for the New York
>> event in December 2015. Such a book would seen by the rest of the IG
>> Community as a helpful contribution, it would strengthen the role of CS in
>> the emerging IG multistakeholder mechanisms and would be also an input into
>> the WSIS 10+ process.
>>
>> The chair of the CSCG (together with the co-chairs from the six groups)
>> would be the editor.
>>
>> Any comment?
>>
>> Wolfgang
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>>     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
>> To be removed from the list, visit:
>>     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
>>
>> For all other list information and functions, see:
>>     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
>> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
>>     http://www.igcaucus.org/
>>
>> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
>>
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>>      bestbits at lists.bestbits.net.
>> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit:
>>      http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits
>>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150126/82392ab9/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From arsenebaguma at yahoo.fr  Mon Jan 26 10:10:56 2015
From: arsenebaguma at yahoo.fr (Arsene TUNGALI (Yahoo))
Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2015 15:10:56 +0000
Subject: [governance] AW: From Confusion to Clarification
In-Reply-To: <gmdk81r4g5i35nbnswyhi59r.1422199235707@email.android.com>
Message-ID: <1422285056.32881.YahooMailIosMobile@web28704.mail.ir2.yahoo.com>

An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150126/b95de83c/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From williams.deirdre at gmail.com  Mon Jan 26 10:33:39 2015
From: williams.deirdre at gmail.com (Deirdre Williams)
Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2015 11:33:39 -0400
Subject: [governance] Comments please
Message-ID: <CAMz5XN5gsv+gzYtxe+ZT_cqV7ZKBdvjEz67JF76a=VAmAUA9Dw@mail.gmail.com>

Dear Colleagues,
I am currently preparing for the Caribbean Telecommunications Union 25th
Anniversary ICT Week to be held in Trinidad next week (2nd-6th February). I
believe that several members of this caucus will be attending that meeting.
Do members, particularly but not exclusively those from small developing
states, have knowledge that they would be willing to share on this topic?
Please indicate if you would NOT like your name to be used, as otherwise I
will of course credit the source of the ideas

This is from the letter of invitation:

We are living in an era of unprecedented technological convergence, which
is having significant ramifications for all of our stakeholders. The CTU
has been striving to prepare and support its members to leverage the
opportunities presented by this technological revolution. Consequently, the
theme chosen for the 25th Anniversary ICT Week is *“**Celebrating our past;
Committing to our future**”. *

The First Session of ICT Week is entitled, “*Thriving in the storm of the
technological revolution: Understanding the realities of our radically
changing world and identifying imperatives and opportunities for the
Caribbean to Succeed”*. Given your unique perspective as a Member of Civil
Society, we would like you to contribute to a Panel Discussion on the
topic, “*Crafting an Appropriate Regional Response to the Converged World”*
.

Thank you

Deirdre

-- 
“The fundamental cure for poverty is not money but knowledge" Sir William
Arthur Lewis, Nobel Prize Economics, 1979
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150126/bd5ef391/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From nb at bollow.ch  Mon Jan 26 10:48:32 2015
From: nb at bollow.ch (Norbert Bollow)
Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2015 16:48:32 +0100
Subject: [bestbits] [governance] AW: From Confusion to Clarification
In-Reply-To: <CACTo+v-tsTzgPbiTMQYYuhdSkdYqUyxFLqjkO930Uq+HU0MTpg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <793FFF2DB19A4177851ACCDC06269034@Toshiba>
	<54762985.2010101@apc.org>
	<053001d009ba$768cf260$63a6d720$@gmail.com>
	<2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8016428EE@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
	<2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A801642A86@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
	<D52271F36A224E63965667671E785EE1@Toshiba>
	<CACTo+v-tsTzgPbiTMQYYuhdSkdYqUyxFLqjkO930Uq+HU0MTpg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20150126164832.667c8138@quill>

-Cc all except the IGC list

On Mon, 26 Jan 2015 12:03:20 +0000
Mawaki Chango <kichango at gmail.com> wrote:

> In other words, IGC which is also a CSCG member is certainly not one
> voice.

In fact, despite all its shortcomings (which include the fact that
what the Charter says about enforcing the posting rules is not being
done, and may in fact be impossible to do) IGC. i.e. this list, right
now is still the best place to go to when desiring a broad discussion
inclusive of the whole variety of civil society viewpoints.

> Furthermore you have on the other hand folks such as JFC and their
> following, whom I am not sure to what extent they overlap with JNC
> and to what extent they have a distinct voice.

100% distinct. Neither JFC nor anyone with a similar viewpoint is a
member of JNC ( http://justnetcoalition.org/jnc-members ).

Also please keep in mind that JNC members have every right to speak
with their own distinct voice. JNC does not speak for its members
except when a JNC statement is issued. (These go through a formal
consensus call process.)

Greetings,
Norbert
co-convenor, Just Net Coalition (JNC)
http://JustNetCoalition.org

-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From jaryn56 at gmail.com  Mon Jan 26 11:15:14 2015
From: jaryn56 at gmail.com (=?UTF-8?B?Sm9zw6kgRsOpbGl4IEFyaWFzIFluY2hl?=)
Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2015 11:15:14 -0500
Subject: [bestbits] [governance] AW: From Confusion to Clarification
In-Reply-To: <CACTo+v9MxQx3UTLXj4nDbR5aOhE4gT4UyfwybqNFyq=9YCooXQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <793FFF2DB19A4177851ACCDC06269034@Toshiba> <54762985.2010101@apc.org>
 <053001d009ba$768cf260$63a6d720$@gmail.com> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8016428EE@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
 <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A801642A86@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
 <D52271F36A224E63965667671E785EE1@Toshiba> <CACTo+v-tsTzgPbiTMQYYuhdSkdYqUyxFLqjkO930Uq+HU0MTpg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CACTo+v9MxQx3UTLXj4nDbR5aOhE4gT4UyfwybqNFyq=9YCooXQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAAYFVLuxSTLpbhF4_+CJxHhVY-1+O7KtbM_sXtk5odNuJpQ5+A@mail.gmail.com>

Podemos estar un poco lejos de una estructura similar y de composición
de ideas y voces, pero eso no quiere decir que estemos lejos de llegar
éticamente a un acuerdo de las diversas voces de los grupos, tanto
dentro de la CSCG o de NCSG, o de diversos grupos no afiliados e
independientes sobre la Gobernanza de Internet.

Lo que falta es un llamado al dialogo y discusión sobre un fin, en el
cual todos den su opinión y sobre ello llegar a un acuerdo en donde no
haya vencidos ni vencedores.

Podemos comenzar como ejemplo un dialogo de ideas y sugerencias en
nuestra lista, pidiéndoles a todos los miembros que den su parecer o
su punto de vista de los temas que se debe de discutir o enriquecer
para llegar a un acuerdo, porque creo que aun dentro de nuestra lista
governance.lists.igcaucus.org, no todos comparten las misas opiniones
o ideas


Todo esto no quiere decir que de inmediato tendremos un mapa claro de
las voces de los diversos miembros o de las demás agrupaciones
aceptando, pero si estoy seguro de que proporcionará un mapa claro de
las voces reales que existen dentro de las diversas agrupaciones sobre
la Gobernanza de Internet, y con ello dar el nacimiento a lo que
podría ser a nivel mundial, como por ejemplo:

·  Los supuestos básicos en lo que se debe de regir una “Constitución
Única” sobre la Gobernanza de Internet.

·  Sus visiones y metas.



Todo ello es un reto, pero la idea es que aun siendo un reto grande,
tenemos que tener la voluntad de decidirnos a encontrar una forma de
unir criterios, ideas y voces, de que si podemos llegar a formas
innovadoras de unidad de ideas y de trabajar alrededor de ella.






Cordialmente:         José Félix Arias Ynche
                        Investigador Social Para El Desarrollo


2015-01-26 10:00 GMT-05:00 Mawaki Chango <kichango at gmail.com>:
> N.B. Of course there also is APC as a clearly identifiable CS party under
> the parasol of rights, but I would say more specifically women rights (as
> several other CS families can also claim HR as their compass.) Anyway, that
> was just to correct an oversight. For the rest it is up to each grouping to
> come up with their best and accurate self-characterization. And just for the
> sake of being complete, Diplo is an hybrid in my view and I'm not sure how
> they would characterize their CS commitments (and btw, if my information is
> correct they have announced their intention to withdraw from CSCG which
> causes another problem if you rely on the latter to define which groups will
> be included in this proposed opus.) Civicus has never really engaged wiith
> CSCG as far as I can tell.
>
> mC
>
>
> On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 12:03 PM, Mawaki Chango <kichango at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> On Sun, Jan 25, 2015 at 8:30 PM, Ian Peter <ian.peter at ianpeter.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Wolfgang,
>>>
>>> I am glad you raised this again, because I think the idea is great.
>>>
>>> I am not sure that a direct correlation with CSCG and with the different
>>> groups within civil society who are CSCG members is the best way to proceed
>>> (eg one JNC article followed by one Best Bits article etc) - because I think
>>> many of our best people sit between and across various groups and I am not
>>> sure that direct characterisation of opinions with groupings is always
>>> accurate or helpful.
>>
>>
>> This has been my concern, too, from my very first reply to the initial
>> proposal, and still remains. We are far from having a homomorphism between
>> the CSCG member groupings and the "diverse voices" you are referring to,
>> Wolfgang. It seems to me the most identifiable voice(s) within the CSCG
>> setting -- in terms of what all members stand for -- include JNC (social
>> justice) and maybe BestBits (?), both of whom spun off from IGC where they
>> still have their footprint aside possible other voices. In other words, IGC
>> which is also a CSCG member is certainly not one voice. I suspect there is
>> also notable diversity of voices within NCSG although it is my sense that
>> they have clearer and tested working processes and are more ready to reach a
>> common position on a whole host of issues than IGC does. Furthermore you
>> have
>> on the other hand
>> folks such as JFC and their following, whom I am not sure to what extent
>> they overlap with JNC and to what extent they have a distinct voice.
>>
>> All of this to say, you may go with the above groupings but I am not sure
>> they will provide a clear map of the actual voices that exist within CS in
>> terms of families of thought, basic assumptions, visions, goals, values or
>> principles of commitments, etc. If we can find a practical way to identify
>> those, that would be great but I recognize it might be challenging. I am
>> just putting the idea out there so that we recognize that potential
>> limitation and see whether we can come up with some innovative ways to work
>> around it. (Again, I also understand that you may just have made the
>> deliberate choice to start from the existing _social groupings_
>>  and let them
>> bear the responsibility to put forward their common voice OR their diverse
>> voices on the issues, taking the burden away from the architect of the
>> project (outline of the volume) as well as from the editors and placing it
>> on the groups themselves, which will not make IGC business any easier ;-)
>> Nevertheless, this approach also has its won merits.)
>>
>>
>> Mawaki
>>
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message----- From: "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang"
>>> Sent: Sunday, January 25, 2015 11:15 PM
>>> To: "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang" ; governance at lists.igcaucus.org ; michael
>>> gurstein ; bestbits at lists.bestbits.net ; governance at lists.igcaucus.org
>>> Subject: [governance] AW: From Confusion to Clarification
>>>
>>>
>>> Dear friends,
>>>
>>> six weeks ago I made a proposal under the thread "From Confusion to
>>> Clarification" to produce a Civil Society Internet Governance Compendium or
>>> Handbook. What was the idea behind the proposal?
>>>
>>> Civil Society is a recognized and needed stakeholder in the global
>>> Internet Governance debate and a needed partner in the evolving
>>> multistakeholder approaches to manage Internet related public policy issues.
>>> 2015 will see a number of Internet Governance events where the voice of
>>> civil society has to be raised: It starts with the ITU Council IG Working
>>> Group Meetings in February, continues with UNESCO conferences and meetings
>>> of the UNCSTD, the HRC, the forthcoming Cybersecurity Conference in The
>>> Hague, the IGF in Brazil, the WSIS 10+ conference in New York in December
>>> 2015 and others.
>>>
>>> Civil Society does not speak with one voice. It is characterized by a
>>> broad diversity. This is not a weakness, this is a strength. It reflects the
>>> reality. And it is not different from the diversity within other stakeholder
>>> groups. In the governmental stakeholder group you have a broad varierty of
>>> positions - from the US via EU, Brazil, Egypt and India to China. In the
>>> private sector stakeholder group there are different approaches among
>>> transnational corporations and small and medium enterprises from developed
>>> and developing countries. And even among the I* organizations there are
>>> differences, as we have seen recently in the positioning towards the
>>> NetMundial initiative. This pluralism and diversity reflects the reality of
>>> the Internet Governance ecosystem. If one want to achieve sustainable
>>> progress a rough consensus has to include the main arguments from the main
>>> groups of all stakeholders. To achieve concrete results openess and
>>> transparency with regard to the various positions is a key pre-condition to
>>> promote mutual understanding.
>>>
>>> Insofar it would be good if civil society Internet Governance groups or
>>> individuals could describe openly what they are standing for. To have on
>>> paper the various perspectives different civil society groups have if it
>>> comes to Internet policy related issues would be useful anbd could enhance
>>> civil society input into the forthcoming negotiations, in particular with
>>> regard to WSIS 10+.
>>>
>>> Since I did send this proposals to this list I got numerous comments and
>>> critical remarks. Some respondents supported the project and called it a
>>> good idea. Others argued that this is a bad, unrealistic and
>>> counterproductive idea. Many partners made concrete proposals how such a
>>> project could be further enhanced. Taking into account all the feed back I
>>> got since last month I would specify my proposal in the following way:
>>>
>>> I. Ian Peter, in his capacity as acting chair of the CSCG, should
>>> function as the main editor. Each member of the CSCG should nominate a
>>> co-editor. The role of the editor and the co-editors would be technical.
>>> They should not intervene into the content of the individual contributions.
>>> The six co-editors of the six member groups of the CWSG should invite four
>>> contributors from their group, one for each chapter. It is up to the groups
>>> whether the individual author expresses his own individual position or
>>> represents the position of the whole group. Each contribution should be 4 -
>>> 8 pages. Each author would be free to cover either the whole subject or to
>>> select a special sub-item.
>>>
>>> II. The book should have four chapters:
>>> 1. Human Rights and Internet(Access, Freedom of Expression, Privacy,
>>> Content, Culture etc.)
>>> 2. Security in Cyberspace (Cyberwar, Cyberterrorism, Cybercrime,
>>> Surveillance, National Sovereignty etc.)
>>> 3. Social, Economic and Cultural Development (Digital Divide, Market
>>> Domination, Competition, Infrastructure Development, Cultural and Linguistic
>>> Diversity etc.)
>>> 4. Technical Coordination (Names, Numbers, Protocols, Accountability
>>> etc.)
>>>
>>> III. Timetable
>>> It would be good to have a first draft ready until early May (for the
>>> Meeting of the UNCSTD). The final e-Version of the whole book should be
>>> ready until early September for use by the WSIS 10+ negotiations groups. A
>>> formal presentation should be organized during the 10th IGF in Brazil.
>>> Efforts should be undertake to produce also a paper version for distribution
>>> at the 10th IGF in November 2014.
>>>
>>> Best regards
>>>
>>> Wolfgang
>>>
>>> PS:
>>> I have described the "Four Baskets" more in detail in my blog in CircleID
>>>
>>> http://www.circleid.com/posts/20150103_internet_governance_outlook_2015_2_processes_many_venues_4_baskets/
>>>
>>> w
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Hi everybody
>>>
>>> After weeks of confusing conflicts let´s move towards clarifying
>>> collaboration. What we have seen in the recent (sometimes unfriendly)
>>> disputes is that there are many different  civil society activists with
>>> different civil society positions. This is confusing, both for newcomers who
>>> want to join civil society groups in Internet Governance discussions as well
>>> as for other stakeholders who want to collaborate with civil society. On the
>>> othher Hand: This is natural. The civil Society Stakeholder Groups has
>>> similar differences as the governmental stakeholder group if you compare the
>>> governmental positions of China, Russia, Saudi Arabia, US, EU, Brazil,
>>> India, Japan, Australia etc.
>>> This not the Problem. The probllem is that you have to know what the
>>> position. So it is about transparency and clarity.
>>>
>>> Here is a proposal how to move forward:  We have seen so many people
>>> writing long e-mails arguing for their position. Wouldn´t it be better if we
>>> use this energy to write more comprehensive and structured position or issue
>>> papers so that newbies or outsiders will better understand what the real
>>> points under discussions are in CS circles? We have seen rather different
>>> arguments around the same issue from JNC to APC and NCUC folks.
>>>
>>> I propose that we start to work on what I call a “Civil Society Internet
>>> Governance Handbook”.  This handbook would allow all CS groups within the
>>> CSCG to present their own individual points of views so that everybody knows
>>> what the positions are. The book could be structured into four main
>>> chapters:
>>>
>>> 1. Human Rights (Access, Freedom of Expression, Privacy etc.)
>>> 2. Security (Cyberwar, Cyberterrorism, Cybercrime etc.)
>>> 3. Economic Development (Market domination, competition, infrastructure
>>> development etc.)
>>> 4. Technical Coordination (Names, Numbers, Protocols etc.)
>>>
>>> Each of the six groups under the CSCG (IGC, BB, JNC, NCSG, Diplo, APC)
>>> could nominate four authors (one for each chapter). Each author would be
>>> free to argue for her/his position (five to maximum teen pages). There is no
>>> need for consensus. Every author would be free to present her/his radical,
>>> moderate, liberal and whatsoever position on one of the four main issues.
>>>
>>> Such a compendium would help to bring more transparency into the process
>>> and would enable a more fact based discussion in the IG events ahead of us.
>>>
>>> We could deliver this as an e-book (probably with an Annex with main
>>> official texts as Tunis Agenda, Sao Paulo Principles, UN Resolutions etc.)
>>> until the May 2015 Sessions in Geneva. In total this book would be around
>>> 250 pages. If we find a sponsor we could publish this for the New York event
>>> in December 2015. Such a book would seen by the rest of the IG Community as
>>> a helpful contribution, it would strengthen the role of CS in the emerging
>>> IG multistakeholder mechanisms and would be also an input into the WSIS 10+
>>> process.
>>>
>>> The chair of the CSCG (together with the co-chairs from the six groups)
>>> would be the editor.
>>>
>>> Any comment?
>>>
>>> Wolfgang
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ____________________________________________________________
>>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>>>     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
>>> To be removed from the list, visit:
>>>     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
>>>
>>> For all other list information and functions, see:
>>>     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
>>> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
>>>     http://www.igcaucus.org/
>>>
>>> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
>>>
>>> ____________________________________________________________
>>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>>>      bestbits at lists.bestbits.net.
>>> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit:
>>>      http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits
>>
>>
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>      governance at lists.igcaucus.org
> To be removed from the list, visit:
>      http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
>
> For all other list information and functions, see:
>      http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
>      http://www.igcaucus.org/
>
> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
>

-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From williams.deirdre at gmail.com  Mon Jan 26 11:31:38 2015
From: williams.deirdre at gmail.com (Deirdre Williams)
Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2015 12:31:38 -0400
Subject: [bestbits] [governance] AW: From Confusion to Clarification
In-Reply-To: <CAAYFVLuxSTLpbhF4_+CJxHhVY-1+O7KtbM_sXtk5odNuJpQ5+A@mail.gmail.com>
References: <793FFF2DB19A4177851ACCDC06269034@Toshiba> <54762985.2010101@apc.org>
 <053001d009ba$768cf260$63a6d720$@gmail.com> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8016428EE@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
 <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A801642A86@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
 <D52271F36A224E63965667671E785EE1@Toshiba> <CACTo+v-tsTzgPbiTMQYYuhdSkdYqUyxFLqjkO930Uq+HU0MTpg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CACTo+v9MxQx3UTLXj4nDbR5aOhE4gT4UyfwybqNFyq=9YCooXQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAAYFVLuxSTLpbhF4_+CJxHhVY-1+O7KtbM_sXtk5odNuJpQ5+A@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAMz5XN4ETabZUGPzhc7nZd7jZUsDdJ8rygfHJtWyMca2+T6nhQ@mail.gmail.com>

Dear Jose,
Thank you.
I think this message makes very good suggestions.
Expect to hear more from us when Analia and I can reply together.
Meanwhile thank you again
Deirdre

Estimado José,
Gracias.
Creo que este mensaje hace muy buenas sugerencias.
Espera escuchar más de nosotros cuando Analia y yo puedo responder juntos.
Mientras tanto gracias de nuevo
Deirdre

On 26 January 2015 at 12:15, José Félix Arias Ynche <jaryn56 at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Podemos estar un poco lejos de una estructura similar y de composición
> de ideas y voces, pero eso no quiere decir que estemos lejos de llegar
> éticamente a un acuerdo de las diversas voces de los grupos, tanto
> dentro de la CSCG o de NCSG, o de diversos grupos no afiliados e
> independientes sobre la Gobernanza de Internet.
>
> Lo que falta es un llamado al dialogo y discusión sobre un fin, en el
> cual todos den su opinión y sobre ello llegar a un acuerdo en donde no
> haya vencidos ni vencedores.
>
> Podemos comenzar como ejemplo un dialogo de ideas y sugerencias en
> nuestra lista, pidiéndoles a todos los miembros que den su parecer o
> su punto de vista de los temas que se debe de discutir o enriquecer
> para llegar a un acuerdo, porque creo que aun dentro de nuestra lista
> governance.lists.igcaucus.org, no todos comparten las misas opiniones
> o ideas
>
>
> Todo esto no quiere decir que de inmediato tendremos un mapa claro de
> las voces de los diversos miembros o de las demás agrupaciones
> aceptando, pero si estoy seguro de que proporcionará un mapa claro de
> las voces reales que existen dentro de las diversas agrupaciones sobre
> la Gobernanza de Internet, y con ello dar el nacimiento a lo que
> podría ser a nivel mundial, como por ejemplo:
>
> ·  Los supuestos básicos en lo que se debe de regir una “Constitución
> Única” sobre la Gobernanza de Internet.
>
> ·  Sus visiones y metas.
>
>
>
> Todo ello es un reto, pero la idea es que aun siendo un reto grande,
> tenemos que tener la voluntad de decidirnos a encontrar una forma de
> unir criterios, ideas y voces, de que si podemos llegar a formas
> innovadoras de unidad de ideas y de trabajar alrededor de ella.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Cordialmente:         José Félix Arias Ynche
>                         Investigador Social Para El Desarrollo
>
>
> 2015-01-26 10:00 GMT-05:00 Mawaki Chango <kichango at gmail.com>:
> > N.B. Of course there also is APC as a clearly identifiable CS party under
> > the parasol of rights, but I would say more specifically women rights (as
> > several other CS families can also claim HR as their compass.) Anyway,
> that
> > was just to correct an oversight. For the rest it is up to each grouping
> to
> > come up with their best and accurate self-characterization. And just for
> the
> > sake of being complete, Diplo is an hybrid in my view and I'm not sure
> how
> > they would characterize their CS commitments (and btw, if my information
> is
> > correct they have announced their intention to withdraw from CSCG which
> > causes another problem if you rely on the latter to define which groups
> will
> > be included in this proposed opus.) Civicus has never really engaged
> wiith
> > CSCG as far as I can tell.
> >
> > mC
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 12:03 PM, Mawaki Chango <kichango at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> On Sun, Jan 25, 2015 at 8:30 PM, Ian Peter <ian.peter at ianpeter.com>
> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Hi Wolfgang,
> >>>
> >>> I am glad you raised this again, because I think the idea is great.
> >>>
> >>> I am not sure that a direct correlation with CSCG and with the
> different
> >>> groups within civil society who are CSCG members is the best way to
> proceed
> >>> (eg one JNC article followed by one Best Bits article etc) - because I
> think
> >>> many of our best people sit between and across various groups and I am
> not
> >>> sure that direct characterisation of opinions with groupings is always
> >>> accurate or helpful.
> >>
> >>
> >> This has been my concern, too, from my very first reply to the initial
> >> proposal, and still remains. We are far from having a homomorphism
> between
> >> the CSCG member groupings and the "diverse voices" you are referring to,
> >> Wolfgang. It seems to me the most identifiable voice(s) within the CSCG
> >> setting -- in terms of what all members stand for -- include JNC (social
> >> justice) and maybe BestBits (?), both of whom spun off from IGC where
> they
> >> still have their footprint aside possible other voices. In other words,
> IGC
> >> which is also a CSCG member is certainly not one voice. I suspect there
> is
> >> also notable diversity of voices within NCSG although it is my sense
> that
> >> they have clearer and tested working processes and are more ready to
> reach a
> >> common position on a whole host of issues than IGC does. Furthermore you
> >> have
> >> on the other hand
> >> folks such as JFC and their following, whom I am not sure to what extent
> >> they overlap with JNC and to what extent they have a distinct voice.
> >>
> >> All of this to say, you may go with the above groupings but I am not
> sure
> >> they will provide a clear map of the actual voices that exist within CS
> in
> >> terms of families of thought, basic assumptions, visions, goals, values
> or
> >> principles of commitments, etc. If we can find a practical way to
> identify
> >> those, that would be great but I recognize it might be challenging. I am
> >> just putting the idea out there so that we recognize that potential
> >> limitation and see whether we can come up with some innovative ways to
> work
> >> around it. (Again, I also understand that you may just have made the
> >> deliberate choice to start from the existing _social groupings_
> >>  and let them
> >> bear the responsibility to put forward their common voice OR their
> diverse
> >> voices on the issues, taking the burden away from the architect of the
> >> project (outline of the volume) as well as from the editors and placing
> it
> >> on the groups themselves, which will not make IGC business any easier
> ;-)
> >> Nevertheless, this approach also has its won merits.)
> >>
> >>
> >> Mawaki
> >>
> >>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> -----Original Message----- From: "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang"
> >>> Sent: Sunday, January 25, 2015 11:15 PM
> >>> To: "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang" ; governance at lists.igcaucus.org ; michael
> >>> gurstein ; bestbits at lists.bestbits.net ; governance at lists.igcaucus.org
> >>> Subject: [governance] AW: From Confusion to Clarification
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Dear friends,
> >>>
> >>> six weeks ago I made a proposal under the thread "From Confusion to
> >>> Clarification" to produce a Civil Society Internet Governance
> Compendium or
> >>> Handbook. What was the idea behind the proposal?
> >>>
> >>> Civil Society is a recognized and needed stakeholder in the global
> >>> Internet Governance debate and a needed partner in the evolving
> >>> multistakeholder approaches to manage Internet related public policy
> issues.
> >>> 2015 will see a number of Internet Governance events where the voice of
> >>> civil society has to be raised: It starts with the ITU Council IG
> Working
> >>> Group Meetings in February, continues with UNESCO conferences and
> meetings
> >>> of the UNCSTD, the HRC, the forthcoming Cybersecurity Conference in The
> >>> Hague, the IGF in Brazil, the WSIS 10+ conference in New York in
> December
> >>> 2015 and others.
> >>>
> >>> Civil Society does not speak with one voice. It is characterized by a
> >>> broad diversity. This is not a weakness, this is a strength. It
> reflects the
> >>> reality. And it is not different from the diversity within other
> stakeholder
> >>> groups. In the governmental stakeholder group you have a broad
> varierty of
> >>> positions - from the US via EU, Brazil, Egypt and India to China. In
> the
> >>> private sector stakeholder group there are different approaches among
> >>> transnational corporations and small and medium enterprises from
> developed
> >>> and developing countries. And even among the I* organizations there are
> >>> differences, as we have seen recently in the positioning towards the
> >>> NetMundial initiative. This pluralism and diversity reflects the
> reality of
> >>> the Internet Governance ecosystem. If one want to achieve sustainable
> >>> progress a rough consensus has to include the main arguments from the
> main
> >>> groups of all stakeholders. To achieve concrete results openess and
> >>> transparency with regard to the various positions is a key
> pre-condition to
> >>> promote mutual understanding.
> >>>
> >>> Insofar it would be good if civil society Internet Governance groups or
> >>> individuals could describe openly what they are standing for. To have
> on
> >>> paper the various perspectives different civil society groups have if
> it
> >>> comes to Internet policy related issues would be useful anbd could
> enhance
> >>> civil society input into the forthcoming negotiations, in particular
> with
> >>> regard to WSIS 10+.
> >>>
> >>> Since I did send this proposals to this list I got numerous comments
> and
> >>> critical remarks. Some respondents supported the project and called it
> a
> >>> good idea. Others argued that this is a bad, unrealistic and
> >>> counterproductive idea. Many partners made concrete proposals how such
> a
> >>> project could be further enhanced. Taking into account all the feed
> back I
> >>> got since last month I would specify my proposal in the following way:
> >>>
> >>> I. Ian Peter, in his capacity as acting chair of the CSCG, should
> >>> function as the main editor. Each member of the CSCG should nominate a
> >>> co-editor. The role of the editor and the co-editors would be
> technical.
> >>> They should not intervene into the content of the individual
> contributions.
> >>> The six co-editors of the six member groups of the CWSG should invite
> four
> >>> contributors from their group, one for each chapter. It is up to the
> groups
> >>> whether the individual author expresses his own individual position or
> >>> represents the position of the whole group. Each contribution should
> be 4 -
> >>> 8 pages. Each author would be free to cover either the whole subject
> or to
> >>> select a special sub-item.
> >>>
> >>> II. The book should have four chapters:
> >>> 1. Human Rights and Internet(Access, Freedom of Expression, Privacy,
> >>> Content, Culture etc.)
> >>> 2. Security in Cyberspace (Cyberwar, Cyberterrorism, Cybercrime,
> >>> Surveillance, National Sovereignty etc.)
> >>> 3. Social, Economic and Cultural Development (Digital Divide, Market
> >>> Domination, Competition, Infrastructure Development, Cultural and
> Linguistic
> >>> Diversity etc.)
> >>> 4. Technical Coordination (Names, Numbers, Protocols, Accountability
> >>> etc.)
> >>>
> >>> III. Timetable
> >>> It would be good to have a first draft ready until early May (for the
> >>> Meeting of the UNCSTD). The final e-Version of the whole book should be
> >>> ready until early September for use by the WSIS 10+ negotiations
> groups. A
> >>> formal presentation should be organized during the 10th IGF in Brazil.
> >>> Efforts should be undertake to produce also a paper version for
> distribution
> >>> at the 10th IGF in November 2014.
> >>>
> >>> Best regards
> >>>
> >>> Wolfgang
> >>>
> >>> PS:
> >>> I have described the "Four Baskets" more in detail in my blog in
> CircleID
> >>>
> >>>
> http://www.circleid.com/posts/20150103_internet_governance_outlook_2015_2_processes_many_venues_4_baskets/
> >>>
> >>> w
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Hi everybody
> >>>
> >>> After weeks of confusing conflicts let´s move towards clarifying
> >>> collaboration. What we have seen in the recent (sometimes unfriendly)
> >>> disputes is that there are many different  civil society activists with
> >>> different civil society positions. This is confusing, both for
> newcomers who
> >>> want to join civil society groups in Internet Governance discussions
> as well
> >>> as for other stakeholders who want to collaborate with civil society.
> On the
> >>> othher Hand: This is natural. The civil Society Stakeholder Groups has
> >>> similar differences as the governmental stakeholder group if you
> compare the
> >>> governmental positions of China, Russia, Saudi Arabia, US, EU, Brazil,
> >>> India, Japan, Australia etc.
> >>> This not the Problem. The probllem is that you have to know what the
> >>> position. So it is about transparency and clarity.
> >>>
> >>> Here is a proposal how to move forward:  We have seen so many people
> >>> writing long e-mails arguing for their position. Wouldn´t it be better
> if we
> >>> use this energy to write more comprehensive and structured position or
> issue
> >>> papers so that newbies or outsiders will better understand what the
> real
> >>> points under discussions are in CS circles? We have seen rather
> different
> >>> arguments around the same issue from JNC to APC and NCUC folks.
> >>>
> >>> I propose that we start to work on what I call a “Civil Society
> Internet
> >>> Governance Handbook”.  This handbook would allow all CS groups within
> the
> >>> CSCG to present their own individual points of views so that everybody
> knows
> >>> what the positions are. The book could be structured into four main
> >>> chapters:
> >>>
> >>> 1. Human Rights (Access, Freedom of Expression, Privacy etc.)
> >>> 2. Security (Cyberwar, Cyberterrorism, Cybercrime etc.)
> >>> 3. Economic Development (Market domination, competition, infrastructure
> >>> development etc.)
> >>> 4. Technical Coordination (Names, Numbers, Protocols etc.)
> >>>
> >>> Each of the six groups under the CSCG (IGC, BB, JNC, NCSG, Diplo, APC)
> >>> could nominate four authors (one for each chapter). Each author would
> be
> >>> free to argue for her/his position (five to maximum teen pages). There
> is no
> >>> need for consensus. Every author would be free to present her/his
> radical,
> >>> moderate, liberal and whatsoever position on one of the four main
> issues.
> >>>
> >>> Such a compendium would help to bring more transparency into the
> process
> >>> and would enable a more fact based discussion in the IG events ahead
> of us.
> >>>
> >>> We could deliver this as an e-book (probably with an Annex with main
> >>> official texts as Tunis Agenda, Sao Paulo Principles, UN Resolutions
> etc.)
> >>> until the May 2015 Sessions in Geneva. In total this book would be
> around
> >>> 250 pages. If we find a sponsor we could publish this for the New York
> event
> >>> in December 2015. Such a book would seen by the rest of the IG
> Community as
> >>> a helpful contribution, it would strengthen the role of CS in the
> emerging
> >>> IG multistakeholder mechanisms and would be also an input into the
> WSIS 10+
> >>> process.
> >>>
> >>> The chair of the CSCG (together with the co-chairs from the six groups)
> >>> would be the editor.
> >>>
> >>> Any comment?
> >>>
> >>> Wolfgang
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> ____________________________________________________________
> >>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
> >>>     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
> >>> To be removed from the list, visit:
> >>>     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
> >>>
> >>> For all other list information and functions, see:
> >>>     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
> >>> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
> >>>     http://www.igcaucus.org/
> >>>
> >>> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
> >>>
> >>> ____________________________________________________________
> >>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
> >>>      bestbits at lists.bestbits.net.
> >>> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit:
> >>>      http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> > ____________________________________________________________
> > You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
> >      governance at lists.igcaucus.org
> > To be removed from the list, visit:
> >      http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
> >
> > For all other list information and functions, see:
> >      http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
> > To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
> >      http://www.igcaucus.org/
> >
> > Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
> >
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>      governance at lists.igcaucus.org
> To be removed from the list, visit:
>      http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
>
> For all other list information and functions, see:
>      http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
>      http://www.igcaucus.org/
>
> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
>
>


-- 
“The fundamental cure for poverty is not money but knowledge" Sir William
Arthur Lewis, Nobel Prize Economics, 1979
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150126/56bef81a/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From jfcallo at ciencitec.com  Mon Jan 26 12:32:32 2015
From: jfcallo at ciencitec.com (jfcallo at ciencitec.com)
Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2015 17:32:32 +0000
Subject: [governance] Las cosas bien claras
In-Reply-To: <CAAYFVLuxSTLpbhF4_+CJxHhVY-1+O7KtbM_sXtk5odNuJpQ5+A@mail.gmail.com>
References: <793FFF2DB19A4177851ACCDC06269034@Toshiba>
 <54762985.2010101@apc.org> <053001d009ba$768cf260$63a6d720$@gmail.com>
 <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8016428EE@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
 <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A801642A86@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
 <D52271F36A224E63965667671E785EE1@Toshiba>
 <CACTo+v-tsTzgPbiTMQYYuhdSkdYqUyxFLqjkO930Uq+HU0MTpg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CACTo+v9MxQx3UTLXj4nDbR5aOhE4gT4UyfwybqNFyq=9YCooXQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAAYFVLuxSTLpbhF4_+CJxHhVY-1+O7KtbM_sXtk5odNuJpQ5+A@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20150126173232.Horde.G5aItzq3S-4P7lueNDBMwg1@www.ciencitec.com>

Distinguido Tocayo Josè Arias:
Tienes razón en tu propuesta, además yo añadiría que al parecer no se  
tiene un contexto claro de la realidad. La lista por ejemplo desconoce  
lo que pasa en Perú con el Capitulo de ISOC, entrampado y apropiado  
por un egòlatra, que no hace absolutamente nada, un "perro del  
hortelano", ¿alguien dice algo?, nada, entonces los miembros no  
estamos agrupados, ni a veces bien representados, es importante tener  
un concierto grupal, general que nos arribe a un buen consenso, sin  
oportunistas, sino con gente, como de tu talla que hacen del uso de  
Internet, no una palanca personal, sino un tema de inclusión.
Bien Josè, espero sigamos en esta cantera de la contribución y el buen  
uso inclusivo de Internet.
Fraternalmente
Jose Francisco Callo Romero
Fundador de ISOC-PERU
internautaperu.org


José Félix Arias Ynche <jaryn56 at gmail.com> escribió:

> Podemos estar un poco lejos de una estructura similar y de composición
> de ideas y voces, pero eso no quiere decir que estemos lejos de llegar
> éticamente a un acuerdo de las diversas voces de los grupos, tanto
> dentro de la CSCG o de NCSG, o de diversos grupos no afiliados e
> independientes sobre la Gobernanza de Internet.
>
> Lo que falta es un llamado al dialogo y discusión sobre un fin, en el
> cual todos den su opinión y sobre ello llegar a un acuerdo en donde no
> haya vencidos ni vencedores.
>
> Podemos comenzar como ejemplo un dialogo de ideas y sugerencias en
> nuestra lista, pidiéndoles a todos los miembros que den su parecer o
> su punto de vista de los temas que se debe de discutir o enriquecer
> para llegar a un acuerdo, porque creo que aun dentro de nuestra lista
> governance.lists.igcaucus.org, no todos comparten las misas opiniones
> o ideas
>
>
> Todo esto no quiere decir que de inmediato tendremos un mapa claro de
> las voces de los diversos miembros o de las demás agrupaciones
> aceptando, pero si estoy seguro de que proporcionará un mapa claro de
> las voces reales que existen dentro de las diversas agrupaciones sobre
> la Gobernanza de Internet, y con ello dar el nacimiento a lo que
> podría ser a nivel mundial, como por ejemplo:
>
> ·  Los supuestos básicos en lo que se debe de regir una “Constitución
> Única” sobre la Gobernanza de Internet.
>
> ·  Sus visiones y metas.
>
>
>
> Todo ello es un reto, pero la idea es que aun siendo un reto grande,
> tenemos que tener la voluntad de decidirnos a encontrar una forma de
> unir criterios, ideas y voces, de que si podemos llegar a formas
> innovadoras de unidad de ideas y de trabajar alrededor de ella.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Cordialmente:         José Félix Arias Ynche
>                         Investigador Social Para El Desarrollo
>
>
> 2015-01-26 10:00 GMT-05:00 Mawaki Chango <kichango at gmail.com>:
>> N.B. Of course there also is APC as a clearly identifiable CS party under
>> the parasol of rights, but I would say more specifically women rights (as
>> several other CS families can also claim HR as their compass.) Anyway, that
>> was just to correct an oversight. For the rest it is up to each grouping to
>> come up with their best and accurate self-characterization. And just for the
>> sake of being complete, Diplo is an hybrid in my view and I'm not sure how
>> they would characterize their CS commitments (and btw, if my information is
>> correct they have announced their intention to withdraw from CSCG which
>> causes another problem if you rely on the latter to define which groups will
>> be included in this proposed opus.) Civicus has never really engaged wiith
>> CSCG as far as I can tell.
>>
>> mC
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 12:03 PM, Mawaki Chango <kichango at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> On Sun, Jan 25, 2015 at 8:30 PM, Ian Peter <ian.peter at ianpeter.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi Wolfgang,
>>>>
>>>> I am glad you raised this again, because I think the idea is great.
>>>>
>>>> I am not sure that a direct correlation with CSCG and with the different
>>>> groups within civil society who are CSCG members is the best way  
>>>> to proceed
>>>> (eg one JNC article followed by one Best Bits article etc) -  
>>>> because I think
>>>> many of our best people sit between and across various groups and I am not
>>>> sure that direct characterisation of opinions with groupings is always
>>>> accurate or helpful.
>>>
>>>
>>> This has been my concern, too, from my very first reply to the initial
>>> proposal, and still remains. We are far from having a homomorphism between
>>> the CSCG member groupings and the "diverse voices" you are referring to,
>>> Wolfgang. It seems to me the most identifiable voice(s) within the CSCG
>>> setting -- in terms of what all members stand for -- include JNC (social
>>> justice) and maybe BestBits (?), both of whom spun off from IGC where they
>>> still have their footprint aside possible other voices. In other words, IGC
>>> which is also a CSCG member is certainly not one voice. I suspect there is
>>> also notable diversity of voices within NCSG although it is my sense that
>>> they have clearer and tested working processes and are more ready  
>>> to reach a
>>> common position on a whole host of issues than IGC does. Furthermore you
>>> have
>>> on the other hand
>>> folks such as JFC and their following, whom I am not sure to what extent
>>> they overlap with JNC and to what extent they have a distinct voice.
>>>
>>> All of this to say, you may go with the above groupings but I am not sure
>>> they will provide a clear map of the actual voices that exist within CS in
>>> terms of families of thought, basic assumptions, visions, goals, values or
>>> principles of commitments, etc. If we can find a practical way to identify
>>> those, that would be great but I recognize it might be challenging. I am
>>> just putting the idea out there so that we recognize that potential
>>> limitation and see whether we can come up with some innovative ways to work
>>> around it. (Again, I also understand that you may just have made the
>>> deliberate choice to start from the existing _social groupings_
>>>  and let them
>>> bear the responsibility to put forward their common voice OR their diverse
>>> voices on the issues, taking the burden away from the architect of the
>>> project (outline of the volume) as well as from the editors and placing it
>>> on the groups themselves, which will not make IGC business any easier ;-)
>>> Nevertheless, this approach also has its won merits.)
>>>
>>>
>>> Mawaki
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> -----Original Message----- From: "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang"
>>>> Sent: Sunday, January 25, 2015 11:15 PM
>>>> To: "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang" ; governance at lists.igcaucus.org ; michael
>>>> gurstein ; bestbits at lists.bestbits.net ; governance at lists.igcaucus.org
>>>> Subject: [governance] AW: From Confusion to Clarification
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Dear friends,
>>>>
>>>> six weeks ago I made a proposal under the thread "From Confusion to
>>>> Clarification" to produce a Civil Society Internet Governance  
>>>> Compendium or
>>>> Handbook. What was the idea behind the proposal?
>>>>
>>>> Civil Society is a recognized and needed stakeholder in the global
>>>> Internet Governance debate and a needed partner in the evolving
>>>> multistakeholder approaches to manage Internet related public  
>>>> policy issues.
>>>> 2015 will see a number of Internet Governance events where the voice of
>>>> civil society has to be raised: It starts with the ITU Council IG Working
>>>> Group Meetings in February, continues with UNESCO conferences and meetings
>>>> of the UNCSTD, the HRC, the forthcoming Cybersecurity Conference in The
>>>> Hague, the IGF in Brazil, the WSIS 10+ conference in New York in December
>>>> 2015 and others.
>>>>
>>>> Civil Society does not speak with one voice. It is characterized by a
>>>> broad diversity. This is not a weakness, this is a strength. It  
>>>> reflects the
>>>> reality. And it is not different from the diversity within other  
>>>> stakeholder
>>>> groups. In the governmental stakeholder group you have a broad varierty of
>>>> positions - from the US via EU, Brazil, Egypt and India to China. In the
>>>> private sector stakeholder group there are different approaches among
>>>> transnational corporations and small and medium enterprises from developed
>>>> and developing countries. And even among the I* organizations there are
>>>> differences, as we have seen recently in the positioning towards the
>>>> NetMundial initiative. This pluralism and diversity reflects the  
>>>> reality of
>>>> the Internet Governance ecosystem. If one want to achieve sustainable
>>>> progress a rough consensus has to include the main arguments from the main
>>>> groups of all stakeholders. To achieve concrete results openess and
>>>> transparency with regard to the various positions is a key  
>>>> pre-condition to
>>>> promote mutual understanding.
>>>>
>>>> Insofar it would be good if civil society Internet Governance groups or
>>>> individuals could describe openly what they are standing for. To have on
>>>> paper the various perspectives different civil society groups have if it
>>>> comes to Internet policy related issues would be useful anbd could enhance
>>>> civil society input into the forthcoming negotiations, in particular with
>>>> regard to WSIS 10+.
>>>>
>>>> Since I did send this proposals to this list I got numerous comments and
>>>> critical remarks. Some respondents supported the project and called it a
>>>> good idea. Others argued that this is a bad, unrealistic and
>>>> counterproductive idea. Many partners made concrete proposals how such a
>>>> project could be further enhanced. Taking into account all the feed back I
>>>> got since last month I would specify my proposal in the following way:
>>>>
>>>> I. Ian Peter, in his capacity as acting chair of the CSCG, should
>>>> function as the main editor. Each member of the CSCG should nominate a
>>>> co-editor. The role of the editor and the co-editors would be technical.
>>>> They should not intervene into the content of the individual  
>>>> contributions.
>>>> The six co-editors of the six member groups of the CWSG should invite four
>>>> contributors from their group, one for each chapter. It is up to  
>>>> the groups
>>>> whether the individual author expresses his own individual position or
>>>> represents the position of the whole group. Each contribution  
>>>> should be 4 -
>>>> 8 pages. Each author would be free to cover either the whole subject or to
>>>> select a special sub-item.
>>>>
>>>> II. The book should have four chapters:
>>>> 1. Human Rights and Internet(Access, Freedom of Expression, Privacy,
>>>> Content, Culture etc.)
>>>> 2. Security in Cyberspace (Cyberwar, Cyberterrorism, Cybercrime,
>>>> Surveillance, National Sovereignty etc.)
>>>> 3. Social, Economic and Cultural Development (Digital Divide, Market
>>>> Domination, Competition, Infrastructure Development, Cultural and  
>>>> Linguistic
>>>> Diversity etc.)
>>>> 4. Technical Coordination (Names, Numbers, Protocols, Accountability
>>>> etc.)
>>>>
>>>> III. Timetable
>>>> It would be good to have a first draft ready until early May (for the
>>>> Meeting of the UNCSTD). The final e-Version of the whole book should be
>>>> ready until early September for use by the WSIS 10+ negotiations groups. A
>>>> formal presentation should be organized during the 10th IGF in Brazil.
>>>> Efforts should be undertake to produce also a paper version for  
>>>> distribution
>>>> at the 10th IGF in November 2014.
>>>>
>>>> Best regards
>>>>
>>>> Wolfgang
>>>>
>>>> PS:
>>>> I have described the "Four Baskets" more in detail in my blog in CircleID
>>>>
>>>> http://www.circleid.com/posts/20150103_internet_governance_outlook_2015_2_processes_many_venues_4_baskets/
>>>>
>>>> w
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Hi everybody
>>>>
>>>> After weeks of confusing conflicts let´s move towards clarifying
>>>> collaboration. What we have seen in the recent (sometimes unfriendly)
>>>> disputes is that there are many different  civil society activists with
>>>> different civil society positions. This is confusing, both for  
>>>> newcomers who
>>>> want to join civil society groups in Internet Governance  
>>>> discussions as well
>>>> as for other stakeholders who want to collaborate with civil  
>>>> society. On the
>>>> othher Hand: This is natural. The civil Society Stakeholder Groups has
>>>> similar differences as the governmental stakeholder group if you  
>>>> compare the
>>>> governmental positions of China, Russia, Saudi Arabia, US, EU, Brazil,
>>>> India, Japan, Australia etc.
>>>> This not the Problem. The probllem is that you have to know what the
>>>> position. So it is about transparency and clarity.
>>>>
>>>> Here is a proposal how to move forward:  We have seen so many people
>>>> writing long e-mails arguing for their position. Wouldn´t it be  
>>>> better if we
>>>> use this energy to write more comprehensive and structured  
>>>> position or issue
>>>> papers so that newbies or outsiders will better understand what the real
>>>> points under discussions are in CS circles? We have seen rather different
>>>> arguments around the same issue from JNC to APC and NCUC folks.
>>>>
>>>> I propose that we start to work on what I call a “Civil Society Internet
>>>> Governance Handbook”.  This handbook would allow all CS groups within the
>>>> CSCG to present their own individual points of views so that  
>>>> everybody knows
>>>> what the positions are. The book could be structured into four main
>>>> chapters:
>>>>
>>>> 1. Human Rights (Access, Freedom of Expression, Privacy etc.)
>>>> 2. Security (Cyberwar, Cyberterrorism, Cybercrime etc.)
>>>> 3. Economic Development (Market domination, competition, infrastructure
>>>> development etc.)
>>>> 4. Technical Coordination (Names, Numbers, Protocols etc.)
>>>>
>>>> Each of the six groups under the CSCG (IGC, BB, JNC, NCSG, Diplo, APC)
>>>> could nominate four authors (one for each chapter). Each author would be
>>>> free to argue for her/his position (five to maximum teen pages).  
>>>> There is no
>>>> need for consensus. Every author would be free to present her/his radical,
>>>> moderate, liberal and whatsoever position on one of the four main issues.
>>>>
>>>> Such a compendium would help to bring more transparency into the process
>>>> and would enable a more fact based discussion in the IG events  
>>>> ahead of us.
>>>>
>>>> We could deliver this as an e-book (probably with an Annex with main
>>>> official texts as Tunis Agenda, Sao Paulo Principles, UN Resolutions etc.)
>>>> until the May 2015 Sessions in Geneva. In total this book would be around
>>>> 250 pages. If we find a sponsor we could publish this for the New  
>>>> York event
>>>> in December 2015. Such a book would seen by the rest of the IG  
>>>> Community as
>>>> a helpful contribution, it would strengthen the role of CS in the emerging
>>>> IG multistakeholder mechanisms and would be also an input into  
>>>> the WSIS 10+
>>>> process.
>>>>
>>>> The chair of the CSCG (together with the co-chairs from the six groups)
>>>> would be the editor.
>>>>
>>>> Any comment?
>>>>
>>>> Wolfgang
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ____________________________________________________________
>>>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>>>>     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
>>>> To be removed from the list, visit:
>>>>     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
>>>>
>>>> For all other list information and functions, see:
>>>>     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
>>>> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
>>>>     http://www.igcaucus.org/
>>>>
>>>> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
>>>>
>>>> ____________________________________________________________
>>>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>>>>      bestbits at lists.bestbits.net.
>>>> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit:
>>>>      http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>>      governance at lists.igcaucus.org
>> To be removed from the list, visit:
>>      http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
>>
>> For all other list information and functions, see:
>>      http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
>> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
>>      http://www.igcaucus.org/
>>
>> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
>>



-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From jfcallo at ciencitec.com  Mon Jan 26 12:40:18 2015
From: jfcallo at ciencitec.com (jfcallo at ciencitec.com)
Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2015 17:40:18 +0000
Subject: [governance] Comments please
In-Reply-To: <CAMz5XN5gsv+gzYtxe+ZT_cqV7ZKBdvjEz67JF76a=VAmAUA9Dw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAMz5XN5gsv+gzYtxe+ZT_cqV7ZKBdvjEz67JF76a=VAmAUA9Dw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20150126174018.Horde.4iOpPIvqe1t-UXGdvVPIhA1@www.ciencitec.com>

I am interested in participating and contributing to an issue of my  
reality. I hope their communication.

Deirdre Williams <williams.deirdre at gmail.com> escribió:

> Dear Colleagues,
> I am currently preparing for the Caribbean Telecommunications Union 25th
> Anniversary ICT Week to be held in Trinidad next week (2nd-6th February). I
> believe that several members of this caucus will be attending that meeting.
> Do members, particularly but not exclusively those from small developing
> states, have knowledge that they would be willing to share on this topic?
> Please indicate if you would NOT like your name to be used, as otherwise I
> will of course credit the source of the ideas
>
> This is from the letter of invitation:
>
> We are living in an era of unprecedented technological convergence, which
> is having significant ramifications for all of our stakeholders. The CTU
> has been striving to prepare and support its members to leverage the
> opportunities presented by this technological revolution. Consequently, the
> theme chosen for the 25th Anniversary ICT Week is *“**Celebrating our past;
> Committing to our future**”. *
>
> The First Session of ICT Week is entitled, “*Thriving in the storm of the
> technological revolution: Understanding the realities of our radically
> changing world and identifying imperatives and opportunities for the
> Caribbean to Succeed”*. Given your unique perspective as a Member of Civil
> Society, we would like you to contribute to a Panel Discussion on the
> topic, “*Crafting an Appropriate Regional Response to the Converged World”*
> .
>
> Thank you
>
> Deirdre
>
> --
> “The fundamental cure for poverty is not money but knowledge" Sir William
> Arthur Lewis, Nobel Prize Economics, 1979




-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From compsoftnet at gmail.com  Mon Jan 26 16:11:44 2015
From: compsoftnet at gmail.com (Akinremi Peter Taiwo)
Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2015 22:11:44 +0100
Subject: [governance] FW: Towards an Internet Social Forum
In-Reply-To: <001001d03899$2ad41c00$807c5400$@gmail.com>
References: <w1tknuhwuokwhm1bwrq7nf82.1421824340505@email.android.com>
	<54BFBF0D.3000504@itforchange.net>
	<EBD518CE-0A41-4F63-8AB4-E68F33E602FB@globalgeneva.net>
	<20150121172634.0fbbd8b5@quill>
	<54BFE3E9.8080005@itforchange.net>
	<1421862025.163813248@apps.rackspace.com>
	<54BFE647.50205@itforchange.net>
	<20150121190917.3066b781@quill>
	<54BFEF3A.6080307@alainet.org>
	<20150121194828.1ce2f9ef@quill>
	<b6bf4820c07c5c5367db7cfe2f2c89c1.squirrel@webmail.tni.org>
	<54C0BF75.9030809@itforchange.net>
	<207E590CDEB1344EB16A3D3424E8D74202304FE5AB3B@EXVMBX016-2.exch016.msoutlookonline.net>
	<54C0DFD4.6070202@itforchange.net>
	<54C111D0.2050809@itforchange.net>
	<54C12314.2060407@alainet.org>
	<54C236DE.3050903@itforchange.net>
	<54C2E1A8.9040703@itforchange.net>
	<001001d03899$2ad41c00$807c5400$@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAGK4d0-tMcQ9fWdodQcu26O6ReHfpbrOdF6vwO0Gh0PVkb4JOw@mail.gmail.com>

Hey Michael,

    I can see the passion behind ISF and which is a good idea but....can't
these so called issues be address by existing civil society groups. I would
say that the issues parmider, and others want to address can be address if
the existing civil society groups can agree on a common ground.

I could see very well that most of the people behind ISF aren't in support
of NMI.

My questions is aren't we creating complexity for ourselves in the name of
not letting WEF from controlling the internet? Do you think it is possible
not allowing them getting involve?

I believe what we are all striving for is bottom up approach and
involvement of every stakeholders participation and that's why we have some
civil stakeholders on board to keep the NMI in the direction of bottom up
approach.

Also forming ISF, how do you intend steering NMI in good hope in favour of
every stakeholders?.

Hoping to hear from you.

Peter.
On Jan 25, 2015 1:19 PM, "michael gurstein" <gurstein at gmail.com> wrote:

> Coverage of the ISF in an Indian daily
>
> *M*
>
>
> http://www.deccanherald.com/content/455369/towards-democratic-internet-governance.html
> Towards democratic Internet governance
>
>    - 1 min read
>    -
>
> Shruthi H M, Bengaluru, Jan 24, 2015, DHNS:
>
> *The Internet might have pervaded the common man's life but its governance
> still remains in the hands of a few corporate giants. To counter this,
> civil society organisations propose democratic Internet governance. *
>
> Though Google’s Eric Schmidt predicts the “disappearance of Internet into
> the background”, a group of organisations have set out to bring to fore
> voices that have remained in the background in spite of the Internet’s all
> pervasive nature.As the World Economic Forum (WEF) 2015 is in progress in
> Davos (Jan 21-24), civil society organisations have come together to create
> a global ‘Internet Social Forum’ countering the WEF's NETmundial initiative
> for Internet governance. The organisations aim to create an Internet space
> governed in public interest.
>
> Bengaluru-based organisation IT for Change will be an active part of this
> global forum, along with five other Indian organisations: Society For
> Knowledge Commons, All India Peoples Science Network, Free Software
> Movement of India, SLFC.in and Digital Empowrment Foundation.
>
> The Internet Social Forum will consist of civil society organisations from
> across the globe who believe that Internet governance should not be limited
> to the vested interests of corporate giants. Their endeavour is to put in
> place a “bottom's up” approach, where grassroots groups can have their say
> in regulating Internet space.
>
> Civil organisations feel that the WEF’s global internet policy making and
> governance initiative the ‘NETmundial’, restricts itself to the voices of
> the global elite. The concept of WEF itself has been countered by the
> “World Social Forum” and the Internet Social Forum draws inspiration from
> it. In fact, the “preparatory process” of the forum is likely to be held in
> March 2015 in Tunis, during the World Social Forum meet.
>
> When one searches for something on the Internet, the most popular links
> related to the subject appear at the top of the list.
>
> However, more often links that appear first are not guided by popularity
> but by the money invested by interested parties to ensure they are
> displayed on top. In this regard, the Internet Social Forum will fight for
> “Net neutrality”.
>
> IT For Change Executive Director Parminder Jeet Singh said, “In its
> current form, internet governance has not yet become a people's movement.
> The Internet is increasingly controlled by corporates.”
>
> Community owned broadband, data ownership, limits to copyright and
> including rural communities in the dialogue process are some of the issues
> that the forum seeks to address.
>
> Rishab Bailey, Director (legal), Society For Knowledge Commons, added that
> such an initiative was significant as, at present, a lot of thought is
> going into setting up institutions for Internet governance. “We have to
> ensure a representative and democratic Internet governance. Internet is a
> global construct and it touches all our lives. As of now there are no
> concrete mechanisms to deal with issues pertaining to Internet governance.
> We have to make sure that Internet governance is a true bottoms up
> approach.”
>
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>      governance at lists.igcaucus.org
> To be removed from the list, visit:
>      http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
>
> For all other list information and functions, see:
>      http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
>      http://www.igcaucus.org/
>
> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150126/76f7d6ca/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From ymshana2003 at gmail.com  Mon Jan 26 16:30:56 2015
From: ymshana2003 at gmail.com (ymshana2003)
Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2015 23:30:56 +0200
Subject: [bestbits] [governance] AW: From Confusion to Clarification
Message-ID: <5lo8r2qqi1mryt0lfhggvcyw.1422307210187@email.android.com>

Btw. ..in addition to my previous request. ..this habit is what may culminate to demeaning thr CS to be just s Club of the knows just like the way we see Africans in the ICANN Structure. ....who need to represent development in Africa in Africans expectations. ..not their individual aspirations. ..I leave it there. .
Kind regards
Yassin Mshana


Sent from Samsung Mobile

-------- Original message --------
From: Mawaki Chango <kichango at gmail.com> 
Date:26/01/2015  17:00  (GMT+02:00) 
To: Ian Peter <ian.peter at ianpeter.com> 
Cc: "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang" <wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de>,"Bits bestbits at lists.bestbits.net" <bestbits at lists.bestbits.net>,Internet Governance <governance at lists.igcaucus.org> 
Subject: Re: [bestbits] [governance] AW: From Confusion to Clarification 

N.B. Of course there also is APC as a clearly identifiable CS party under the parasol of rights, but I would say more specifically women rights (as several other CS families can also claim HR as their compass.) Anyway, that was just to correct an oversight. For the rest it is up to each grouping to come up with their best and accurate self-characterization. And just for the sake of being complete, Diplo is an hybrid in my view and I'm not sure how they would characterize their CS commitments (and btw, if my information is correct they have announced their intention to withdraw from CSCG which causes another problem if you rely on the latter to define which groups will be included in this proposed opus.) Civicus has never really engaged wiith CSCG as far as I can tell.
  
mC


On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 12:03 PM, Mawaki Chango <kichango at gmail.com> wrote:
Hi,

On Sun, Jan 25, 2015 at 8:30 PM, Ian Peter <ian.peter at ianpeter.com> wrote:
Hi Wolfgang,

I am glad you raised this again, because I think the idea is great.

I am not sure that a direct correlation with CSCG and with the different groups within civil society who are CSCG members is the best way to proceed (eg one JNC article followed by one Best Bits article etc) - because I think many of our best people sit between and across various groups and I am not sure that direct characterisation of opinions with groupings is always accurate or helpful.

This has been my concern, too, from my very first reply to the initial proposal, and still remains. We are far from having a homomorphism between the CSCG member groupings and the "diverse voices" you are referring to, Wolfgang. It seems to me the most identifiable voice(s) within the CSCG setting -- in terms of what all members stand for -- include JNC (social justice) and maybe BestBits (?), both of whom spun off from IGC where they still have their footprint aside possible other voices. In other words, IGC which is also a CSCG member is certainly not one voice. I suspect there is also notable diversity of voices within NCSG although it is my sense that they have clearer and tested working processes and are more ready to reach a common position on a whole host of issues than IGC does. Furthermore you have on the other hand folks such as JFC and their following, whom I am not sure to what extent they overlap with JNC and to what extent they have a distinct voice.

All of this to say, you may go with the above groupings but I am not sure they will provide a clear map of the actual voices that exist within CS in terms of families of thought, basic assumptions, visions, goals, values or principles of commitments, etc. If we can find a practical way to identify those, that would be great but I recognize it might be challenging. I am just putting the idea out there so that we recognize that potential limitation and see whether we can come up with some innovative ways to work around it. (Again, I also understand that you may just have made the deliberate choice to start from the existing _social groupings_ and let them bear the responsibility to put forward their common voice OR their diverse voices on the issues, taking the burden away from the architect of the project (outline of the volume) as well as from the editors and placing it on the groups themselves, which will not make IGC business any easier ;-) Nevertheless, this approach also has its won merits.)
  
Mawaki  

 

-----Original Message----- From: "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang"
Sent: Sunday, January 25, 2015 11:15 PM
To: "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang" ; governance at lists.igcaucus.org ; michael gurstein ; bestbits at lists.bestbits.net ; governance at lists.igcaucus.org
Subject: [governance] AW: From Confusion to Clarification


Dear friends,

six weeks ago I made a proposal under the thread "From Confusion to Clarification" to produce a Civil Society Internet Governance Compendium or Handbook. What was the idea behind the proposal?

Civil Society is a recognized and needed stakeholder in the global Internet Governance debate and a needed partner in the evolving multistakeholder approaches to manage Internet related public policy issues.
2015 will see a number of Internet Governance events where the voice of civil society has to be raised: It starts with the ITU Council IG Working Group Meetings in February, continues with UNESCO conferences and meetings of the UNCSTD, the HRC, the forthcoming Cybersecurity Conference in The Hague, the IGF in Brazil, the WSIS 10+ conference in New York in December 2015 and others.

Civil Society does not speak with one voice. It is characterized by a broad diversity. This is not a weakness, this is a strength. It reflects the reality. And it is not different from the diversity within other stakeholder groups. In the governmental stakeholder group you have a broad varierty of positions - from the US via EU, Brazil, Egypt and India to China. In the private sector stakeholder group there are different approaches among transnational corporations and small and medium enterprises from developed and developing countries. And even among the I* organizations there are differences, as we have seen recently in the positioning towards the NetMundial initiative. This pluralism and diversity reflects the reality of the Internet Governance ecosystem. If one want to achieve sustainable progress a rough consensus has to include the main arguments from the main groups of all stakeholders. To achieve concrete results openess and transparency with regard to the various positions is a key pre-condition to promote mutual understanding.

Insofar it would be good if civil society Internet Governance groups or individuals could describe openly what they are standing for. To have on paper the various perspectives different civil society groups have if it comes to Internet policy related issues would be useful anbd could enhance civil society input into the forthcoming negotiations, in particular with regard to WSIS 10+.

Since I did send this proposals to this list I got numerous comments and critical remarks. Some respondents supported the project and called it a good idea. Others argued that this is a bad, unrealistic and counterproductive idea. Many partners made concrete proposals how such a project could be further enhanced. Taking into account all the feed back I got since last month I would specify my proposal in the following way:

I. Ian Peter, in his capacity as acting chair of the CSCG, should function as the main editor. Each member of the CSCG should nominate a co-editor. The role of the editor and the co-editors would be technical. They should not intervene into the content of the individual contributions. The six co-editors of the six member groups of the CWSG should invite four contributors from their group, one for each chapter. It is up to the groups whether the individual author expresses his own individual position or represents the position of the whole group. Each contribution should be 4 - 8 pages. Each author would be free to cover either the whole subject or to select a special sub-item.

II. The book should have four chapters:
1. Human Rights and Internet(Access, Freedom of Expression, Privacy, Content, Culture etc.)
2. Security in Cyberspace (Cyberwar, Cyberterrorism, Cybercrime, Surveillance, National Sovereignty etc.)
3. Social, Economic and Cultural Development (Digital Divide, Market Domination, Competition, Infrastructure Development, Cultural and Linguistic Diversity etc.)
4. Technical Coordination (Names, Numbers, Protocols, Accountability etc.)

III. Timetable
It would be good to have a first draft ready until early May (for the Meeting of the UNCSTD). The final e-Version of the whole book should be ready until early September for use by the WSIS 10+ negotiations groups. A formal presentation should be organized during the 10th IGF in Brazil. Efforts should be undertake to produce also a paper version for distribution at the 10th IGF in November 2014.

Best regards

Wolfgang

PS:
I have described the "Four Baskets" more in detail in my blog in CircleID
http://www.circleid.com/posts/20150103_internet_governance_outlook_2015_2_processes_many_venues_4_baskets/

w



Hi everybody

After weeks of confusing conflicts let´s move towards clarifying collaboration. What we have seen in the recent (sometimes unfriendly) disputes is that there are many different  civil society activists with different civil society positions. This is confusing, both for newcomers who want to join civil society groups in Internet Governance discussions as well as for other stakeholders who want to collaborate with civil society. On the othher Hand: This is natural. The civil Society Stakeholder Groups has similar differences as the governmental stakeholder group if you compare the governmental positions of China, Russia, Saudi Arabia, US, EU, Brazil, India, Japan, Australia etc.
This not the Problem. The probllem is that you have to know what the position. So it is about transparency and clarity.

Here is a proposal how to move forward:  We have seen so many people writing long e-mails arguing for their position. Wouldn´t it be better if we use this energy to write more comprehensive and structured position or issue papers so that newbies or outsiders will better understand what the real points under discussions are in CS circles? We have seen rather different arguments around the same issue from JNC to APC and NCUC folks.

I propose that we start to work on what I call a “Civil Society Internet Governance Handbook”.  This handbook would allow all CS groups within the CSCG to present their own individual points of views so that everybody knows what the positions are. The book could be structured into four main chapters:

1. Human Rights (Access, Freedom of Expression, Privacy etc.)
2. Security (Cyberwar, Cyberterrorism, Cybercrime etc.)
3. Economic Development (Market domination, competition, infrastructure development etc.)
4. Technical Coordination (Names, Numbers, Protocols etc.)

Each of the six groups under the CSCG (IGC, BB, JNC, NCSG, Diplo, APC) could nominate four authors (one for each chapter). Each author would be free to argue for her/his position (five to maximum teen pages). There is no need for consensus. Every author would be free to present her/his radical, moderate, liberal and whatsoever position on one of the four main issues.

Such a compendium would help to bring more transparency into the process and would enable a more fact based discussion in the IG events ahead of us.

We could deliver this as an e-book (probably with an Annex with main official texts as Tunis Agenda, Sao Paulo Principles, UN Resolutions etc.) until the May 2015 Sessions in Geneva. In total this book would be around 250 pages. If we find a sponsor we could publish this for the New York event in December 2015. Such a book would seen by the rest of the IG Community as a helpful contribution, it would strengthen the role of CS in the emerging IG multistakeholder mechanisms and would be also an input into the WSIS 10+ process.

The chair of the CSCG (together with the co-chairs from the six groups) would be the editor.

Any comment?

Wolfgang









____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
    governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
    http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
    http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
    http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t 

____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     bestbits at lists.bestbits.net.
To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit:
     http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150126/13704ade/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From ymshana2003 at gmail.com  Mon Jan 26 17:45:13 2015
From: ymshana2003 at gmail.com (ymshana2003)
Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2015 00:45:13 +0200
Subject: [governance] FW: Towards an Internet Social Forum
Message-ID: <vmocy84v11un14rqkead8mwx.1422312256356@email.android.com>

Well said but my 10 years experience tells me a different story. ..unless the CS comes up one voice...or shall I call it a Roar from the CS which is afterall, if I may say it.....another closed group of special interest..?
Kind regards
Yassin


Sent from Samsung Mobile

-------- Original message --------
From: Akinremi Peter Taiwo <compsoftnet at gmail.com> 
Date:26/01/2015  23:11  (GMT+02:00) 
To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org,michael gurstein <gurstein at gmail.com> 
Subject: Re:[governance] FW: Towards an Internet Social Forum 


Hey Michael,

    I can see the passion behind ISF and which is a good idea but....can't these so called issues be address by existing civil society groups. I would say that the issues parmider, and others want to address can be address if the existing civil society groups can agree on a common ground.

I could see very well that most of the people behind ISF aren't in support of NMI.

My questions is aren't we creating complexity for ourselves in the name of not letting WEF from controlling the internet? Do you think it is possible not allowing them getting involve?

I believe what we are all striving for is bottom up approach and involvement of every stakeholders participation and that's why we have some civil stakeholders on board to keep the NMI in the direction of bottom up approach.

Also forming ISF, how do you intend steering NMI in good hope in favour of every stakeholders?.

Hoping to hear from you.

Peter.

On Jan 25, 2015 1:19 PM, "michael gurstein" <gurstein at gmail.com> wrote:
Coverage of the ISF in an Indian daily

M

http://www.deccanherald.com/content/455369/towards-democratic-internet-governance.html

Towards democratic Internet governance

1 min read
 
Shruthi H M, Bengaluru, Jan 24, 2015, DHNS:

The Internet might have pervaded the common man's life but its governance still remains in the hands of a few corporate giants. To counter this, civil society organisations propose democratic Internet governance. 

Though Google’s Eric Schmidt predicts the “disappearance of Internet into the background”, a group of organisations have set out to bring to fore voices that have remained in the background in spite of the Internet’s all pervasive nature.As the World Economic Forum (WEF) 2015 is in progress in Davos (Jan 21-24), civil society organisations have come together to create a global ‘Internet Social Forum’ countering the WEF's NETmundial initiative for Internet governance. The organisations aim to create an Internet space governed in public interest.

Bengaluru-based organisation IT for Change will be an active part of this global forum, along with five other Indian organisations: Society For Knowledge Commons, All India Peoples Science Network, Free Software Movement of India, SLFC.in and Digital Empowrment Foundation. 

The Internet Social Forum will consist of civil society organisations from across the globe who believe that Internet governance should not be limited to the vested interests of corporate giants. Their endeavour is to put in place a “bottom's up” approach, where grassroots groups can have their say in regulating Internet space.

Civil organisations feel that the WEF’s global internet policy making and governance initiative the ‘NETmundial’, restricts itself to the voices of the global elite. The concept of WEF itself has been countered by the “World Social Forum” and the Internet Social Forum draws inspiration from it. In fact, the “preparatory process” of the forum is likely to be held in March 2015 in Tunis, during the World Social Forum meet.

When one searches for something on the Internet, the most popular links related to the subject appear at the top of the list. 

However, more often links that appear first are not guided by popularity but by the money invested by interested parties to ensure they are displayed on top. In this regard, the Internet Social Forum will fight for “Net neutrality”. 

IT For Change Executive Director Parminder Jeet Singh said, “In its current form, internet governance has not yet become a people's movement. The Internet is increasingly controlled by corporates.” 

Community owned broadband, data ownership, limits to copyright and including rural communities in the dialogue process are some of the issues that the forum seeks to address.

Rishab Bailey, Director (legal), Society For Knowledge Commons, added that such an initiative was significant as, at present, a lot of thought is going into setting up institutions for Internet governance. “We have to ensure a representative and democratic Internet governance. Internet is a global construct and it touches all our lives. As of now there are no concrete mechanisms to deal with issues pertaining to Internet governance. We have to make sure that Internet governance is a true bottoms up approach.” 

 


____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150127/e120540f/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From gurstein at gmail.com  Mon Jan 26 19:58:09 2015
From: gurstein at gmail.com (michael gurstein)
Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2015 16:58:09 -0800
Subject: [governance] FW: Towards an Internet Social Forum
In-Reply-To: <vmocy84v11un14rqkead8mwx.1422312256356@email.android.com>
References: <vmocy84v11un14rqkead8mwx.1422312256356@email.android.com>
Message-ID: <01c501d039cc$519204e0$f4b60ea0$@gmail.com>

Hi Peter,

Inline…
-------- Original message --------
From: Akinremi Peter Taiwo 
Date:26/01/2015 23:11 (GMT+02:00) 
To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org,michael gurstein 
Subject: Re:[governance] FW: Towards an Internet Social Forum


Hey Michael,

    I can see the passion behind ISF and which is a good idea but....can't these so called issues be address by existing civil society groups. I would say that the issues parmider, and others want to address can be address if the existing civil society groups can agree on a common ground.

[MG>] Yes the issues could probably be addressed in other ways but I’m not sure if there is common ground. Those involved with the JNC are concerned with traditional civil society issues particularly concerning social justice, democratic governance and of course human rights--not just human rights.  Others in CS have chosen for their own reasons to ignore social justice issues and democratic governance in their Internet Governance activities and positions.   

I could see very well that most of the people behind ISF aren't in support of NMI. 

[MG>] yes, and the reason for this is the same as the above in that is it is hard to see how the big business/elite/1% representation coming from the World Economic Forum can be reconciled with a democratically “governed” Internet. 

My questions is aren't we creating complexity for ourselves in the name of not letting WEF from controlling the internet? 

[MG>] possibly… but some degree of “complexity” may be the cost of not allowing the Internet and its profound impacts and influence into the future to be captured by (economic, political and security) elites/the 1% with little evident commitment to the public good, social justice or democratic governance beyond that which supports their own narrow private interests.

Do you think it is possible not allowing them getting involve?

[MG>] perhaps not, but it is necessary to ensure that there is an opportunity for democratic voices to be heard and if we don’t insist on measures towards social justice including (or perhaps particularly) through the Internet, the elites/1% will force us into an economic framework where a very very small elite control everything and the rest of us scramble to survive (the lessons of Greece should be on all of our minds these days…

I believe what we are all striving for is bottom up approach and involvement of every stakeholders participation and that's why we have some civil stakeholders on board to keep the NMI in the direction of bottom up approach.

[MG>] do you really think that one or two civil society representatives will have that kind of influence… that they will be able to withstand the power and wealth of the global economic and political elites and the glitter and enticements of the kind of manipulation that the roughly $1,000,000 start-up slush fund that the elites tossed in so casually, can achieve.  What is the likelihood that they can/would ensure that the Internet is governed in the interests of all of us… what we have already seen from the NMI is backroom dealing, shady and top down manipulation of appointments and representation, a more or less complete lack of transparency and no, even feeble, attempts at a broad base of accountability… The role of the CS representatives in the NMI however well-meaning they may be, is not to influence the outcomes but rather to legitimize the outcomes.

Also forming ISF, how do you intend steering NMI in good hope in favour of every stakeholders?.

[MG>] the ISF is not meant to “steer” the NMI but rather to work towards building a democratic, accountable and transparent framework of governance for the Internet, precisely what the NMI is not.

Hoping to hear from you.

[MG>] Best,

Mike

Peter.

On Jan 25, 2015 1:19 PM, "michael gurstein" <gurstein at gmail.com> wrote:

Coverage of the ISF in an Indian daily

M

http://www.deccanherald.com/content/455369/towards-democratic-internet-governance.html


Towards democratic Internet governance


*	1 min read 
*	 

Shruthi H M, Bengaluru, Jan 24, 2015, DHNS:

The Internet might have pervaded the common man's life but its governance still remains in the hands of a few corporate giants. To counter this, civil society organisations propose democratic Internet governance. 

Though Google’s Eric Schmidt predicts the “disappearance of Internet into the background”, a group of organisations have set out to bring to fore voices that have remained in the background in spite of the Internet’s all pervasive nature.As the World Economic Forum (WEF) 2015 is in progress in Davos (Jan 21-24), civil society organisations have come together to create a global ‘Internet Social Forum’ countering the WEF's NETmundial initiative for Internet governance. The organisations aim to create an Internet space governed in public interest. 

Bengaluru-based organisation IT for Change will be an active part of this global forum, along with five other Indian organisations: Society For Knowledge Commons, All India Peoples Science Network, Free Software Movement of India, SLFC.in and Digital Empowrment Foundation. 

The Internet Social Forum will consist of civil society organisations from across the globe who believe that Internet governance should not be limited to the vested interests of corporate giants. Their endeavour is to put in place a “bottom's up” approach, where grassroots groups can have their say in regulating Internet space.

Civil organisations feel that the WEF’s global internet policy making and governance initiative the ‘NETmundial’, restricts itself to the voices of the global elite. The concept of WEF itself has been countered by the “World Social Forum” and the Internet Social Forum draws inspiration from it. In fact, the “preparatory process” of the forum is likely to be held in March 2015 in Tunis, during the World Social Forum meet.

When one searches for something on the Internet, the most popular links related to the subject appear at the top of the list. 

However, more often links that appear first are not guided by popularity but by the money invested by interested parties to ensure they are displayed on top. In this regard, the Internet Social Forum will fight for “Net neutrality”. 

IT For Change Executive Director Parminder Jeet Singh said, “In its current form, internet governance has not yet become a people's movement. The Internet is increasingly controlled by corporates.” 

Community owned broadband, data ownership, limits to copyright and including rural communities in the dialogue process are some of the issues that the forum seeks to address.

Rishab Bailey, Director (legal), Society For Knowledge Commons, added that such an initiative was significant as, at present, a lot of thought is going into setting up institutions for Internet governance. “We have to ensure a representative and democratic Internet governance. Internet is a global construct and it touches all our lives. As of now there are no concrete mechanisms to deal with issues pertaining to Internet governance. We have to make sure that Internet governance is a true bottoms up approach.” 

 


____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150126/658a0127/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From williams.deirdre at gmail.com  Tue Jan 27 08:25:57 2015
From: williams.deirdre at gmail.com (Deirdre Williams)
Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2015 09:25:57 -0400
Subject: [governance] Fwd: [civic] Launching Open Data Day Coalition
 Micro-Grant Scheme: Apply Today!
In-Reply-To: <54C76959.3040802@yacine.net>
References: <54C76959.3040802@yacine.net>
Message-ID: <CAMz5XN6JkTtk8pufUrCv53DtxgXRXCU-L6t_VuCP4gQheLJpsw@mail.gmail.com>

May be of interest?
Deirdre

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Yacine Khelladi <yacine at yacine.net>
Date: 27 January 2015 at 09:13
Subject: [civic] Launching Open Data Day Coalition Micro-Grant Scheme:
Apply Today!
To: "Caribbean ICT stakeholders Virtual Community (CIVIC)" <
civic at dgroups.org>


Launching Open Data Day Coalition Micro-Grant Scheme: Apply
Today!
http://blog.okfn.org/2015/01/26/launching-open-data-day-coalition-micro-grant-scheme-apply-today/

[note it says: In the Caribbean, the Caribbean Open Institute will handle
the
process.]


January 26, 2015 in open knowledge
OPEN DATA DAY 2015 is coming and a coalition of partners have come together
to
provide a limited number of micro-grants designed to support communities
organise ODD activities all over the world !

Open Data Day (ODD) is one of the most exciting events of the year. As a
volunteer led event, with no organisation behind it, Open Data Day provides
the
perfect opportcaunity for communities all over the world to convene,
celebrate
and promote open data in ways most relevant to their fellow citizens. This
year,
Open Data Day will take place on Saturday, the 21st of February 2015 and a
coalition of partners have gotten together to help make the event bigger
(and
hopefully better) than its has ever been before!



While Open Data Day has always been a volunteer led initiative, organising
an
event often comes with quite a hefty price tag. From hiring a venue, to
securing
a proper wifi connection, to feeding and caffeinating the volunteer
storytellers, data wranglers and developers who donate their Saturday to
ensuring that open data empowers citizens in their communities, there are
costs
associated with convening people! Our Open Data Day Coalition is made of
open
data, open knowledge and open access organisations who are interested in
providing support for communities organising ODD activities. This idea
emerged
from an event that was organised in Kenya last year, where a small stipend
helped local organisers create an amazing event, exposing a number of new
people
to open data. This is exactly what we are trying to achieve on Open Data
Day!

As such, this year, for the first time ever, we are proud to announce the
availability of a limited number of micro grants of up to $300 to help
communities organise amazing events without incurring prohibitive personal
costs. The coalition will also provide in-kind support in the form
mentorship
and guidance or simply by providing a list of suggested activities proven
effective at engaging new communities!

The coalition consists of the following organisations (in alphabetical
order):
Caribbean Open Institute, Code for Africa, DAL, E-Democracy, ILDA, NDI, Open
Access Button, Open Coalition, Open Institute, Open Knowledge, Sunlight
Foundation and Wikimedia UK. Want to join? Read on.

ODD2

Applying for a Microgrant!

Any group or organisation from any country can apply. Given the difference
focus
of our partners, grants in Latin America will be handled and awarded by
ILDA. In
the Caribbean, the Caribbean Open Institute will handle the process.
Finally,
The Partnership for Open Data will focus on other low to mid income
countries.
Of course, in order to ensure that we are able to award the maximum number
of
grants, we will coordinate this effort!

You can find the application form here. The deadline to apply is February
3rd
and we aim to let you know whether your grant was approved ASAP.

Currently, we have one micro grant, provided by The Sunlight Foundation,
for a
group organising open data day activities in a country of any income level.
We
would love to provide additional support for groups organising in any
country;
as such, if you are interested in helping us find (or have!) additional
funding
(or other forms of in kind support such as an event space!), do get in touch
(see below how to join the coalition). We will make sure to spread the word
far
and wide once we have additional confirmed support!

How to Apply for an Open Data Day Micro Grant

If you are organising an event and would like additional support, apply
here. If
your grant is approved, you will be asked to provide us with bank transfer
details and proof of purchase. If it is not possible for you to make the
purchases in advance and be reimbursed, we will be sure to find an
alternative
solution.

Is this your first Open Data Day event? Fear not! In addition to the grant
itself, our coalition of partners is here to provide you with the support
you
need to ensure that your event is a success. Whether you need help
publicising
the event, deciding what to do, or some tips on event facilitation, we are
here
to help!

Requirements

All groups who receive support will be asked to add their event to the map
by
registering your event here as well as by adding it to list of events on the
Open Data Day wiki.

After the event, event organisers will be asked to share a short blog post
or
video discussing the event! What data did you work with, how many people
attended, are you planning on organising additional events? We’d also love
to
hear about what you learned, what were the challenges and what you would
have
done differently?

You can publish this in any language but if possible, we would love an
English
translation that we can share in a larger blog series about Open Data Day.
I you
would like to have your event included in our summary blog series but are
not
comfortable writing in English, write to us at local [at] okfn [dot] org
and we
will help you translate (or connect you with someone who can!).

What To Do Now

The next step is to start organising your event so that you can apply for
your
micro-grant ASAP! We are aware that we are a bit late getting started and
that
communities will need time to organise! As such, we aim to let you know
whether
your grant has been approved ASAP and ideally by the February 6th, 2015. If
February 3rd proves to be too tight a deadline, we will extend!

Finally, if you need inspiration for what to do on the day, we are building
a
menu of suggested activities on the Open Data Day wiki. Go here for
inspiration
or add your ideas and inspire others! For further inspiration and
information,
check out the Open Data Day website, which the community will be updating
and
improving as we move closer to the big day. If you need help, reach out to
us at
local [at] okfn [dot] org, or check in with one of the other organisations
in
the coalition.

Interested in joining the coalition?

We have a limited number of grants available and expect a large demand! If
you
are interested in joining the coalition and have either financial and/or
in-kind
support available, do get in touch and help us make Open Data Day 2015 the
the
largest open data hackday our community and the world has ever seen!

← BudgetApps: The First All-Russia Contest on Open Finance Data - See more
at:
http://blog.okfn.org/2015/01/26/launching-open-data-day-coalition-micro-grant-scheme-apply-today/#sthash.6x6Xqp5t.dpuf
__________
You are receiving this message because you're a member of the community
Caribbean ICT stakeholders Virtual Community (CIVIC).

View this contribution on the web site https://dgroups.org/_/24688wa7


A reply to this message will be sent to all members of Caribbean ICT
stakeholders Virtual Community (CIVIC).
To reply to sender, send a message to yacine at yacine.net.
To unsubscribe, send an email to leave.civic at dgroups.org



-- 
“The fundamental cure for poverty is not money but knowledge" Sir William
Arthur Lewis, Nobel Prize Economics, 1979
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150127/a52ca1d7/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From vanda at uol.com.br  Tue Jan 27 10:24:38 2015
From: vanda at uol.com.br (Vanda UOL)
Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2015 13:24:38 -0200
Subject: [governance] Invitation: Demystifying the IANA Stewardship
 Transition- where we are now #PTC15 Honolulu, Hawaii
In-Reply-To: <05D08D23-6DFF-443B-B1E7-01E3EBBAB1ED@gmail.com>
References: <05D08D23-6DFF-443B-B1E7-01E3EBBAB1ED@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <21537257-8F8B-4018-8EA6-EEAD0C306D3E@uol.com.br>

Thank you! 

Vanda Scartezini
Sent from my iPhone

> On 18/01/2015, at 20:57, Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro <salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Dear All,
> 
> If you are at the Pacific Telecommunication Council PTC 15 Conference in Honolulu, I would like to invite you to join the discussion this afternoon at 3:30pm to 5:00pm on demystifying the IANA transition. For more information, visit: http://www.ptc.org/ptc15/program-and-attendees/complete-program/details.html?sid=128
> 
> Brief About the Session
> In March 2014, the US Department of Commerce's National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) announced its intention to transition the stewardship of the IANA functions to the Internet community.
> 
> Discussion on how this transition will take place has captured the imaginations of many in the Internet community worldwide as an assembled Coordination Group of global experts now seeks to guide the development of a transition plan.
> 
> In some quarters, the transition has been branded as "handing over control of the Internet". But in reality, what exactly is being transferred, and what does this all mean?
> 
> This session will explore the IANA stewardship transition, from the basics of the IANA function and how it fits in with ICANN, to the implications for network operators, businesses, governments and Internet users, look forward to how the process is likely to progress, and answer your questions to demystify what can appear as a complex proposition.
> 
> Sent from my iPad
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
> To be removed from the list, visit:
>     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
> 
> For all other list information and functions, see:
>     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
>     http://www.igcaucus.org/
> 
> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From dogwallah at gmail.com  Tue Jan 27 12:01:46 2015
From: dogwallah at gmail.com (McTim)
Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2015 11:01:46 -0600
Subject: [bestbits] [governance] Internet Social Forum
In-Reply-To: <62347604-80DB-474B-9421-91A684E17797@theglobaljournal.net>
References: <20150122143615.700b2f52@quill> <54C11EDD.50505@itforchange.net>
 <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A801642A70@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
 <54C2D78C.2010900@itforchange.net> <62347604-80DB-474B-9421-91A684E17797@theglobaljournal.net>
Message-ID: <CACAaNxhdXUbH9kZHnEVDrw6jvKRi3caU9U99S9HVf_UwSe1oNA@mail.gmail.com>

Quoting a CircleID piece by Philip Corwin:

http://www.circleid.com/posts/20150125_occupy_ig_internet_social_forum_targets_netmundial_initiative/

"The author is not familiar with most of the groups constituting ISF. As
always, a good rule for understanding true intent is "follow the money".
We'd find it illuminating to know where they get their funding and whether
any state actors are involved (and a colleague more familiar with the
global IG scene advises that at least several are indeed closely linked to
their national governments, and are unsurprisingly more favorable toward
the government-led multilateral approach on IG than the private sector
oriented MSM). So there is some question as to whether ISF is a genuine
grassroots Netizen movement — or a convergence of government-dominated
organizations pairing with "useful idiot
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Useful_idiot>” entities to pursue a broader
and more pernicious agenda of undermining the MSM and replacing it with a
UN-led, government-dominated one. "





On Sat, Jan 24, 2015 at 1:23 AM, Jean-Christophe NOTHIAS I The Global
Journal <jc.nothias at theglobaljournal.net> wrote:

> Quoted a Register piece written by Kieren McCarthy
> Hibernating NetMundial continues to rattle internet governance world
> reg.cx/2dZG <http://t.co/0D2vSUtqqf>
>
> As to NetMundial's three-month consultation period, that will seemingly be
> led by respected internet governance academic and ICANN Board member
> Wolfgang Kleinwachter. The NetMundial organizers did not reveal how much
> they will pay Kleinwachter to lend the initiative his credibility, but his
> first attempt to make the internet community learn to love the idea came in
> the form of a blog post
> <http://www.circleid.com/posts/20150103_internet_governance_outlook_2015_2_processes_many_venues_4_baskets/> at
> the start of the year.
>
>
>
> Le 24 janv. 2015 à 00:21, parminder a écrit :
>
>
> On Friday 23 January 2015 11:31 PM, "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang" wrote:
>
> Hi Parminder,
>
>
> how the ISF is linked to the IGF?
>
>
> Hi Wolfgang
>
> One is a civil society forum, the other a multistakeholder one. One
> develops people's and civil society's positions on the key issue of the
> global Internet, the other is a place where such positions can enter into
> dialogue with holders of political and economic power - the governments and
> the corporate actors.
>
> Unless now the whole idea and concept of civil society - and along with
> those of people's movements, grassroots, activism, and so on - has been
> fully coopted in some people's mind with that of multistakeholderism
> (whatever one actually means by it, something that has remained notoriously
> unclear), the connection or link that you inquire about is extremely clear
> to me.
>
> Internet is not the first thing for which there has been felt a need for
> 'independently' forming a people's conception and set of hopes,
> expectations and demands - away from conclaves of power. There have been
> scores of others, and newer ones continue to arise. Accordingly if people's
> and civil society forums etc have been meaningful and needed in these
> areas, it is incumbent upon *those* who think they are *not needed* in the
> Internet space to explain why it is so, then the other way around.
>
> To put is somewhat flippantly, ISF is also a reaction of people who are
> fed up with an ongoing IG charade where for instance Fadi Chehade can with
> a straight face call the WEF's Net Mundial Initiative as the 'mother of all
> bottom -up processes' - even jokes require some plausibility limits!
>
> To take the example of one of the latest international global forums on a
> key global governance issue, the Lima meeting on climate change, you will
> perhaps know that parallel to it a people's meeting was held. Internet and
> its governance also needs such meetings, that is the simple logic of the
> Internet Social Forum. If you think that in the Internet's case, such
> meetings and forums are not needed, I would of course be curious to hear
> your case.
>
> I am happy to engage further with you on this issue, and answer your
> questions.
>
> Lastly, let me invite you to join the ISF process. We work under the World
> Social Forum (WSF) process and principles - whereby its meetings are open
> to all civil society participants subject to very inimum conditions that
> are listed on their website.
>
> Further, if the discussion is to now turn to the WSF, its meaning,
> relevance, etc, I am as happy to engage with you on that subject.
>
> Regards, parminder
>
>
> Wolfgang
>
>
>
>
>
> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
>
> Von: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org im Auftrag von parminder
>
> Gesendet: Do 22.01.2015 17:01
>
> An: governance at lists.igcaucus.org
>
> Betreff: Re: [governance] Internet Social Forum
>
>  Enclosed Spanish version... parminder
>
>
>
> On Thursday 22 January 2015 07:06 PM, Norbert Bollow wrote:
>
> Global Civil Society launches the Internet Social Forum
>
> - With a call to occupy the Internet
>
>
> PRESS RELEASE. Geneva, Switzerland, 22st January, 2015.
>
>
> A group of civil society organisations from around the world has
>
> announced the Internet Social Forum, to bring together and articulate
>
> bottom-up perspectives on the 'Internet we want'. Taking inspiration
>
> from the World Social Forum, and its clarion call, 'Another World is
>
> possible', the group seeks to draw urgent attention to the increasing
>
> centralization of the Internet for extraction of monopoly rents and for
>
> socio-political control, asserting that 'Another Internet is possible'!
>
>
> The Internet Social Forum will inter alia offer an alternative to the
>
> recently-launched World Economic Forum's 'Net Mundial Initiative' on
>
> global Internet governance. While the World Economic Forum (WEF) and
>
> the 'Net Mundial Initiative' convene global elites, the Internet Social
>
> Forum will be a participatory and bottom-up space for all those who
>
> believe that the global Internet must evolve in the public interest; a
>
> direct parallel to the launch of the World Social Forum in 2001 as a
>
> counter initiative to the WEF.
>
>
> The Internet Social Forum will reach out to grassroots groups and
>
> social movements across the world, catalysing a groundswell that
>
> challenges the entrenched elite interests that currently control how
>
> the Internet is managed. The Internet Social Forum's preparatory
>
> process will kick off during the World Social Forum to take place in
>
> Tunis, March 24th to 28th, 2015. The Internet Social Forum itself is
>
> planned to be held either late 2015 or early 2016.
>
>
> "While the world's biggest companies have every right to debate the
>
> future of the Internet, we are concerned that their perspectives should
>
> not drown out those of ordinary people who have no access to the
>
> privileged terrain WEF occupies - in the end it is this wider public
>
> interest that must be paramount in governing the Internet. We are
>
> organising the Internet Social Forum to make sure their voices can't be
>
> ignored in the corridors of power," said Norbert Bollow, Co-Convenor of
>
> the Just Net Coalition, which is one of the groups involved in the
>
> initiative.
>
>
> The Internet Social Forum, and its preparatory process, is intended as
>
> a space to vision and build the 'Internet we want'. It will be
>
> underpinned by values of democracy, human rights and social justice. It
>
> will stand for participatory policy making and promote community media.
>
> It will seek an Internet that is truly decentralized in its
>
> architecture and based on people's full rights to data, information,
>
> knowledge and other 'commons' that the Internet has enabled the world
>
> community to generate and share.
>
>
> Somewhat similar to Web inventor Tim Berners-Lee's call for a 'Magna
>
> Carta for the Internet', the Internet Social Forum proposes to develop
>
> a People's Internet Manifesto, through a bottom-up process involving
>
> all concerned social groups and movements, in different areas, from
>
> techies and ICT-for-development actors to media reform groups,
>
> democracy movements and social justice activists.
>
>
> This year will also see the 10 year high-level review of the World
>
> Summit on the Information Society (WSIS), to be held in New York in
>
> December. As a full-scale review of a major UN summit, this will be a
>
> critical global political event. Since the WSIS, held in 2003 and 2005,
>
> the Internet, and what it means socially, has undergone a paradigm
>
> shift. The WSIS witnessed active engagement of civil society and
>
> technical groups as well as of business. However, currently, there
>
> seems to be an deliberate attempt to sideline this UN-led initiative on
>
> governance issues of the information society and Internet in favour of
>
> private, big-business-dominated initiatives like the WEF's Net Mundial
>
> Initiative. The Internet Social Forum, while remaining primarily a
>
> people's forum, will also seek to channel global civil society's
>
> engagement towards the WSIS +10 review.
>
>
> The following organisations form the initial group that is proposing
>
> the Internet Social Forum, and many more are expected to join in the
>
> immediate future. This is an open call to progressive groups from all
>
> over the world to join this initiative, and participate in developing a
>
> People's Internet Manifesto.
>
>
> Just Net Coalition, Global
>
> P2P Foundation, Global
>
> Transnational Institute, Global
>
> Forum on Communication for Integration of our America, Regional (Latin
>
> America) Arab NGO Network for Development, Regional
>
> Agencia Latinoamericana de Información, Regional
>
> Alternative Informatics Association, Turkey
>
> Knowledge Commons, India
>
> Open-Root/EUROLINC, France
>
> SLFC.in, India
>
> CODE-IP Trust, Kenya
>
> GodlyGlobal.org, Switzerland
>
> Centre for Community Informatics Research, Development and Training,
>
> Canada IT for Change, India
>
> Association for Proper Internet Governance, Switzerland
>
> Computer Professionals Union, Philippines
>
> Free Press, USA
>
> Advocates of Science and Technology for the People, Philippines
>
> Other News, Italy
>
> Free Software Movement of India
>
> Global_Geneva, Switzerland
>
> Solidarius (Solidarity Economy Network), Italy
>
> All India Peoples Science Network, India
>
> Institute for Local Self-Reliance - Community Broadband Networks, USA
>
>
> Please contact us at secretariat at InternetSocialForum.net for further
>
> information or clarification.
>
>
> Or the following regional contacts:
>
>
> Africa:        Alex Gakaru <AlexG at InternetSocialForum.net>
>
> Asia:          Rishab Bailey <RishabB at InternetSocialForum.net>
>
> Europe:        Norbert Bollow <NorbertB at InternetSocialForum.net>
>
> North America: Micheal Gurstein <MichealG at InternetSocialForum.net>
>
> South America: Sally Burch <SallyB at InternetSocialForum.net>
>
>
>
> This press release is also available online, e.g. at
>
> http://justnetcoalition.org/ISF
>
>
>
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>     bestbits at lists.bestbits.net.
> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit:
>     http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits
>
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>      governance at lists.igcaucus.org
> To be removed from the list, visit:
>      http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
>
> For all other list information and functions, see:
>      http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
>      http://www.igcaucus.org/
>
> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
>
>


-- 
Cheers,

McTim
"A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A route
indicates how we get there."  Jon Postel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150127/4cb131c3/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From chlebrum at gmail.com  Tue Jan 27 12:48:07 2015
From: chlebrum at gmail.com (chlebrum .)
Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2015 18:48:07 +0100
Subject: [bestbits] [governance] Internet Social Forum
In-Reply-To: <CACAaNxhdXUbH9kZHnEVDrw6jvKRi3caU9U99S9HVf_UwSe1oNA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20150122143615.700b2f52@quill> <54C11EDD.50505@itforchange.net>
 <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A801642A70@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
 <54C2D78C.2010900@itforchange.net> <62347604-80DB-474B-9421-91A684E17797@theglobaljournal.net>
 <CACAaNxhdXUbH9kZHnEVDrw6jvKRi3caU9U99S9HVf_UwSe1oNA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CANMQhZjPOFEc=cRj8L6uZn-cN3W-M_KszoQv=nBf27-FZOyFhw@mail.gmail.com>

It is funny to see an ICANN lobbyist  cannot believe that we can mobilize
for something else than money (hey yes, we pay oneself our travels in the
real civil society or what we are not submarines governments (and wicked
governments wicked, obviously).

In fact, he discovers ... real people

Chantal Lebrument
​Courriel: c <lebrument at open-root.eu>hlebrum at gmail.com
Mob: +33 6 8369 5460

2015-01-27 18:01 GMT+01:00 McTim <dogwallah at gmail.com>:

> Quoting a CircleID piece by Philip Corwin:
>
>
> http://www.circleid.com/posts/20150125_occupy_ig_internet_social_forum_targets_netmundial_initiative/
>
> "The author is not familiar with most of the groups constituting ISF. As
> always, a good rule for understanding true intent is "follow the money".
> We'd find it illuminating to know where they get their funding and whether
> any state actors are involved (and a colleague more familiar with the
> global IG scene advises that at least several are indeed closely linked to
> their national governments, and are unsurprisingly more favorable toward
> the government-led multilateral approach on IG than the private sector
> oriented MSM). So there is some question as to whether ISF is a genuine
> grassroots Netizen movement — or a convergence of government-dominated
> organizations pairing with "useful idiot
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Useful_idiot>” entities to pursue a
> broader and more pernicious agenda of undermining the MSM and replacing it
> with a UN-led, government-dominated one. "
>
>
>
>
>
> On Sat, Jan 24, 2015 at 1:23 AM, Jean-Christophe NOTHIAS I The Global
> Journal <jc.nothias at theglobaljournal.net> wrote:
>
>> Quoted a Register piece written by Kieren McCarthy
>> Hibernating NetMundial continues to rattle internet governance world
>> reg.cx/2dZG <http://t.co/0D2vSUtqqf>
>>
>> As to NetMundial's three-month consultation period, that will seemingly
>> be led by respected internet governance academic and ICANN Board member
>> Wolfgang Kleinwachter. The NetMundial organizers did not reveal how much
>> they will pay Kleinwachter to lend the initiative his credibility, but his
>> first attempt to make the internet community learn to love the idea came in
>> the form of a blog post
>> <http://www.circleid.com/posts/20150103_internet_governance_outlook_2015_2_processes_many_venues_4_baskets/> at
>> the start of the year.
>>
>>
>>
>> Le 24 janv. 2015 à 00:21, parminder a écrit :
>>
>>
>> On Friday 23 January 2015 11:31 PM, "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang" wrote:
>>
>> Hi Parminder,
>>
>>
>> how the ISF is linked to the IGF?
>>
>>
>> Hi Wolfgang
>>
>> One is a civil society forum, the other a multistakeholder one. One
>> develops people's and civil society's positions on the key issue of the
>> global Internet, the other is a place where such positions can enter into
>> dialogue with holders of political and economic power - the governments and
>> the corporate actors.
>>
>> Unless now the whole idea and concept of civil society - and along with
>> those of people's movements, grassroots, activism, and so on - has been
>> fully coopted in some people's mind with that of multistakeholderism
>> (whatever one actually means by it, something that has remained notoriously
>> unclear), the connection or link that you inquire about is extremely clear
>> to me.
>>
>> Internet is not the first thing for which there has been felt a need for
>> 'independently' forming a people's conception and set of hopes,
>> expectations and demands - away from conclaves of power. There have been
>> scores of others, and newer ones continue to arise. Accordingly if people's
>> and civil society forums etc have been meaningful and needed in these
>> areas, it is incumbent upon *those* who think they are *not needed* in the
>> Internet space to explain why it is so, then the other way around.
>>
>> To put is somewhat flippantly, ISF is also a reaction of people who are
>> fed up with an ongoing IG charade where for instance Fadi Chehade can with
>> a straight face call the WEF's Net Mundial Initiative as the 'mother of all
>> bottom -up processes' - even jokes require some plausibility limits!
>>
>> To take the example of one of the latest international global forums on a
>> key global governance issue, the Lima meeting on climate change, you will
>> perhaps know that parallel to it a people's meeting was held. Internet and
>> its governance also needs such meetings, that is the simple logic of the
>> Internet Social Forum. If you think that in the Internet's case, such
>> meetings and forums are not needed, I would of course be curious to hear
>> your case.
>>
>> I am happy to engage further with you on this issue, and answer your
>> questions.
>>
>> Lastly, let me invite you to join the ISF process. We work under the
>> World Social Forum (WSF) process and principles - whereby its meetings are
>> open to all civil society participants subject to very inimum conditions
>> that are listed on their website.
>>
>> Further, if the discussion is to now turn to the WSF, its meaning,
>> relevance, etc, I am as happy to engage with you on that subject.
>>
>> Regards, parminder
>>
>>
>> Wolfgang
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
>>
>> Von: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org im Auftrag von parminder
>>
>> Gesendet: Do 22.01.2015 17:01
>>
>> An: governance at lists.igcaucus.org
>>
>> Betreff: Re: [governance] Internet Social Forum
>>
>>  Enclosed Spanish version... parminder
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thursday 22 January 2015 07:06 PM, Norbert Bollow wrote:
>>
>> Global Civil Society launches the Internet Social Forum
>>
>> - With a call to occupy the Internet
>>
>>
>> PRESS RELEASE. Geneva, Switzerland, 22st January, 2015.
>>
>>
>> A group of civil society organisations from around the world has
>>
>> announced the Internet Social Forum, to bring together and articulate
>>
>> bottom-up perspectives on the 'Internet we want'. Taking inspiration
>>
>> from the World Social Forum, and its clarion call, 'Another World is
>>
>> possible', the group seeks to draw urgent attention to the increasing
>>
>> centralization of the Internet for extraction of monopoly rents and for
>>
>> socio-political control, asserting that 'Another Internet is possible'!
>>
>>
>> The Internet Social Forum will inter alia offer an alternative to the
>>
>> recently-launched World Economic Forum's 'Net Mundial Initiative' on
>>
>> global Internet governance. While the World Economic Forum (WEF) and
>>
>> the 'Net Mundial Initiative' convene global elites, the Internet Social
>>
>> Forum will be a participatory and bottom-up space for all those who
>>
>> believe that the global Internet must evolve in the public interest; a
>>
>> direct parallel to the launch of the World Social Forum in 2001 as a
>>
>> counter initiative to the WEF.
>>
>>
>> The Internet Social Forum will reach out to grassroots groups and
>>
>> social movements across the world, catalysing a groundswell that
>>
>> challenges the entrenched elite interests that currently control how
>>
>> the Internet is managed. The Internet Social Forum's preparatory
>>
>> process will kick off during the World Social Forum to take place in
>>
>> Tunis, March 24th to 28th, 2015. The Internet Social Forum itself is
>>
>> planned to be held either late 2015 or early 2016.
>>
>>
>> "While the world's biggest companies have every right to debate the
>>
>> future of the Internet, we are concerned that their perspectives should
>>
>> not drown out those of ordinary people who have no access to the
>>
>> privileged terrain WEF occupies - in the end it is this wider public
>>
>> interest that must be paramount in governing the Internet. We are
>>
>> organising the Internet Social Forum to make sure their voices can't be
>>
>> ignored in the corridors of power," said Norbert Bollow, Co-Convenor of
>>
>> the Just Net Coalition, which is one of the groups involved in the
>>
>> initiative.
>>
>>
>> The Internet Social Forum, and its preparatory process, is intended as
>>
>> a space to vision and build the 'Internet we want'. It will be
>>
>> underpinned by values of democracy, human rights and social justice. It
>>
>> will stand for participatory policy making and promote community media.
>>
>> It will seek an Internet that is truly decentralized in its
>>
>> architecture and based on people's full rights to data, information,
>>
>> knowledge and other 'commons' that the Internet has enabled the world
>>
>> community to generate and share.
>>
>>
>> Somewhat similar to Web inventor Tim Berners-Lee's call for a 'Magna
>>
>> Carta for the Internet', the Internet Social Forum proposes to develop
>>
>> a People's Internet Manifesto, through a bottom-up process involving
>>
>> all concerned social groups and movements, in different areas, from
>>
>> techies and ICT-for-development actors to media reform groups,
>>
>> democracy movements and social justice activists.
>>
>>
>> This year will also see the 10 year high-level review of the World
>>
>> Summit on the Information Society (WSIS), to be held in New York in
>>
>> December. As a full-scale review of a major UN summit, this will be a
>>
>> critical global political event. Since the WSIS, held in 2003 and 2005,
>>
>> the Internet, and what it means socially, has undergone a paradigm
>>
>> shift. The WSIS witnessed active engagement of civil society and
>>
>> technical groups as well as of business. However, currently, there
>>
>> seems to be an deliberate attempt to sideline this UN-led initiative on
>>
>> governance issues of the information society and Internet in favour of
>>
>> private, big-business-dominated initiatives like the WEF's Net Mundial
>>
>> Initiative. The Internet Social Forum, while remaining primarily a
>>
>> people's forum, will also seek to channel global civil society's
>>
>> engagement towards the WSIS +10 review.
>>
>>
>> The following organisations form the initial group that is proposing
>>
>> the Internet Social Forum, and many more are expected to join in the
>>
>> immediate future. This is an open call to progressive groups from all
>>
>> over the world to join this initiative, and participate in developing a
>>
>> People's Internet Manifesto.
>>
>>
>> Just Net Coalition, Global
>>
>> P2P Foundation, Global
>>
>> Transnational Institute, Global
>>
>> Forum on Communication for Integration of our America, Regional (Latin
>>
>> America) Arab NGO Network for Development, Regional
>>
>> Agencia Latinoamericana de Información, Regional
>>
>> Alternative Informatics Association, Turkey
>>
>> Knowledge Commons, India
>>
>> Open-Root/EUROLINC, France
>>
>> SLFC.in, India
>>
>> CODE-IP Trust, Kenya
>>
>> GodlyGlobal.org, Switzerland
>>
>> Centre for Community Informatics Research, Development and Training,
>>
>> Canada IT for Change, India
>>
>> Association for Proper Internet Governance, Switzerland
>>
>> Computer Professionals Union, Philippines
>>
>> Free Press, USA
>>
>> Advocates of Science and Technology for the People, Philippines
>>
>> Other News, Italy
>>
>> Free Software Movement of India
>>
>> Global_Geneva, Switzerland
>>
>> Solidarius (Solidarity Economy Network), Italy
>>
>> All India Peoples Science Network, India
>>
>> Institute for Local Self-Reliance - Community Broadband Networks, USA
>>
>>
>> Please contact us at secretariat at InternetSocialForum.net for further
>>
>> information or clarification.
>>
>>
>> Or the following regional contacts:
>>
>>
>> Africa:        Alex Gakaru <AlexG at InternetSocialForum.net>
>>
>> Asia:          Rishab Bailey <RishabB at InternetSocialForum.net>
>>
>> Europe:        Norbert Bollow <NorbertB at InternetSocialForum.net>
>>
>> North America: Micheal Gurstein <MichealG at InternetSocialForum.net>
>>
>> South America: Sally Burch <SallyB at InternetSocialForum.net>
>>
>>
>>
>> This press release is also available online, e.g. at
>>
>> http://justnetcoalition.org/ISF
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>>     bestbits at lists.bestbits.net.
>> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit:
>>     http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits
>>
>>
>>
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>>      governance at lists.igcaucus.org
>> To be removed from the list, visit:
>>      http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
>>
>> For all other list information and functions, see:
>>      http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
>> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
>>      http://www.igcaucus.org/
>>
>> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Cheers,
>
> McTim
> "A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A route
> indicates how we get there."  Jon Postel
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>      governance at lists.igcaucus.org
> To be removed from the list, visit:
>      http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
>
> For all other list information and functions, see:
>      http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
>      http://www.igcaucus.org/
>
> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150127/f84bff0b/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From williams.deirdre at gmail.com  Tue Jan 27 19:39:15 2015
From: williams.deirdre at gmail.com (Deirdre Williams)
Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2015 20:39:15 -0400
Subject: [governance] Fwd: [bestbits] WSIS+10 Review - Info-sharing & CS
 coordination event [March 2, Paris]
In-Reply-To: <CAJTVAjwnazYyOhAaSFjBGbF2yAHQv6sPgZEnqPGmPG58U6v=gg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAJTVAjwnazYyOhAaSFjBGbF2yAHQv6sPgZEnqPGmPG58U6v=gg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAMz5XN5KzyBTKuru=nJ6E=4mc8Sc4JufPVa=X9stNXsRoxqVXw@mail.gmail.com>

For your information.
Deirdre
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Lea Kaspar <lea at gp-digital.org>
Date: 27 January 2015 at 20:34
Subject: [bestbits] WSIS+10 Review - Info-sharing & CS coordination event
[March 2, Paris]
To: Best Bits <bestbits at lists.bestbits.net>
Cc: Nico S <seidler at isoc.org>, Constance Bommelaer <bommelaer at isoc.org>


Dear friends,

On Monday, March 2, in Paris, a group of civil society organisations -
Global Partners Digital (GPD), Association for Progressive Communications
(APC), Center for Democracy and Technology (CDT), International Federation
of Library Associations and Institutions (IFLA), Internet Democracy
Project, and KICTANet – in collaboration with the Internet Society (ISOC) -
will be holding a *1-day event focused on the WSIS+10 Overall Review*.

The purpose of the event will be to raise awareness of the review process
and to facilitate coordination and strategy development for effective civil
society engagement. While principally aimed at coordinating civil society
efforts in engaging in the WSIS, part of the event will be dedicated to
facilitating cross-community dialogue with representatives from the
technical community, the business sector and governments. The event will be
held on the margins of UNESCO's CONNECTing the Dots
<http://www.unesco.org/new/en/netconference2015> conference.

A *briefing note* with basic background information about the WSIS and its
review can be found here:
http://bestbits.net/wsis10-overall-review-briefing-note/. We hope this is
useful and welcome any feedback.

To give us an idea of interest for this event among civil society, please *let
us know if you would be interested in attending* by RSVP-ing via this link:
http://bestbits.net/events/wsis10-coordination/ Please note that limited
funding for civil society from developing countries will be made available.

A draft agenda and relevant logistical details will be circulated closer to
the date.

If any organisations are interested in helping organise this event please
let me know off-list or by replying to this email.

With warm wishes,

*Lea Kaspar*

Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL

Development House, 56–64 Leonard Street, London EC2A 4LT

T: +44 (0)20 7549 033*7* | M: +44 (0)7583 929216 | Skype: l.kaspar

gp-digital.org

____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     bestbits at lists.bestbits.net.
To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit:
     http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits



-- 
“The fundamental cure for poverty is not money but knowledge" Sir William
Arthur Lewis, Nobel Prize Economics, 1979
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150127/629e9afe/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From williams.deirdre at gmail.com  Tue Jan 27 19:54:36 2015
From: williams.deirdre at gmail.com (Deirdre Williams)
Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2015 20:54:36 -0400
Subject: [governance] Fwd: [latinoamericann] Fwd: [discuss] Internet Social
 Forum
In-Reply-To: <652611A7-B397-408D-8FCC-04E7FA2A9319@alfa-redi.org>
References: <20150122144714.2bf24d0b@quill> <652611A7-B397-408D-8FCC-04E7FA2A9319@alfa-redi.org>
Message-ID: <CAMz5XN6z9CtMU0eMTNn=7hBoYo=TrRni-P-mceRw0DJsoA1hqg@mail.gmail.com>

In the confusion of the various different lists I am not sure that this
announcement made it to the IGC.
Deirdre

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Erick Iriarte Ahon <eiriarte at alfa-redi.org>
Date: 22 January 2015 at 14:17
Subject: [latinoamericann] Fwd: [discuss] Internet Social Forum
To: LatinoamerICANN <latinoamericann at dgroups.org>
Cc: "\"Foro de Derecho Informático.\"" <derecho-informatico at dgroups.org>


FYI

Inicio del mensaje reenviado:

*Fecha: *22 de enero de 2015, 8:47:14 GMT-5
*De: *Norbert Bollow <nb at bollow.ch>
*Para: *discuss at 1net.org
*Asunto: **[discuss] Internet Social Forum*

Global Civil Society launches the Internet Social Forum
– With a call to occupy the Internet

PRESS RELEASE. Geneva, Switzerland, 22st January, 2015.

A group of civil society organisations from around the world has
announced the Internet Social Forum, to bring together and articulate
bottom-up perspectives on the 'Internet we want'. Taking inspiration
from the World Social Forum, and its clarion call, 'Another World is
possible', the group seeks to draw urgent attention to the increasing
centralization of the Internet for extraction of monopoly rents and for
socio-political control, asserting that 'Another Internet is possible'!

The Internet Social Forum will inter alia offer an alternative to the
recently-launched World Economic Forum's 'Net Mundial Initiative' on
global Internet governance. While the World Economic Forum (WEF) and
the 'Net Mundial Initiative' convene global elites, the Internet Social
Forum will be a participatory and bottom-up space for all those who
believe that the global Internet must evolve in the public interest; a
direct parallel to the launch of the World Social Forum in 2001 as a
counter initiative to the WEF.

The Internet Social Forum will reach out to grassroots groups and
social movements across the world, catalysing a groundswell that
challenges the entrenched elite interests that currently control how
the Internet is managed. The Internet Social Forum's preparatory
process will kick off during the World Social Forum to take place in
Tunis, March 24th to 28th, 2015. The Internet Social Forum itself is
planned to be held either late 2015 or early 2016.

“While the world's biggest companies have every right to debate the
future of the Internet, we are concerned that their perspectives should
not drown out those of ordinary people who have no access to the
privileged terrain WEF occupies – in the end it is this wider public
interest that must be paramount in governing the Internet. We are
organising the Internet Social Forum to make sure their voices can't be
ignored in the corridors of power,” said Norbert Bollow, Co-Convenor of
the Just Net Coalition, which is one of the groups involved in the
initiative.

The Internet Social Forum, and its preparatory process, is intended as
a space to vision and build the 'Internet we want'. It will be
underpinned by values of democracy, human rights and social justice. It
will stand for participatory policy making and promote community media.
It will seek an Internet that is truly decentralized in its
architecture and based on people's full rights to data, information,
knowledge and other 'commons' that the Internet has enabled the world
community to generate and share.

Somewhat similar to Web inventor Tim Berners-Lee’s call for a ‘Magna
Carta for the Internet', the Internet Social Forum proposes to develop
a People's Internet Manifesto, through a bottom-up process involving
all concerned social groups and movements, in different areas, from
techies and ICT-for-development actors to media reform groups,
democracy movements and social justice activists.

This year will also see the 10 year high-level review of the World
Summit on the Information Society (WSIS), to be held in New York in
December. As a full-scale review of a major UN summit, this will be a
critical global political event. Since the WSIS, held in 2003 and 2005,
the Internet, and what it means socially, has undergone a paradigm
shift. The WSIS witnessed active engagement of civil society and
technical groups as well as of business. However, currently, there
seems to be an deliberate attempt to sideline this UN-led initiative on
governance issues of the information society and Internet in favour of
private, big-business-dominated initiatives like the WEF's Net Mundial
Initiative. The Internet Social Forum, while remaining primarily a
people's forum, will also seek to channel global civil society's
engagement towards the WSIS +10 review.

The following organisations form the initial group that is proposing
the Internet Social Forum, and many more are expected to join in the
immediate future. This is an open call to progressive groups from all
over the world to join this initiative, and participate in developing a
People's Internet Manifesto.

Just Net Coalition, Global
P2P Foundation, Global
Transnational Institute, Global
Forum on Communication for Integration of our America, Regional (Latin
America) Arab NGO Network for Development, Regional
Agencia Latinoamericana de Información, Regional
Alternative Informatics Association, Turkey
Knowledge Commons, India
Open-Root/EUROLINC, France
SLFC.in, India
CODE-IP Trust, Kenya
GodlyGlobal.org, Switzerland
Centre for Community Informatics Research, Development and Training,
Canada IT for Change, India
Association for Proper Internet Governance, Switzerland
Computer Professionals Union, Philippines
Free Press, USA
Advocates of Science and Technology for the People, Philippines
Other News, Italy
Free Software Movement of India
Global_Geneva, Switzerland
Solidarius (Solidarity Economy Network), Italy
All India Peoples Science Network, India
Institute for Local Self-Reliance - Community Broadband Networks, USA

Please contact us at secretariat at InternetSocialForum.net for further
information or clarification.

Or the following regional contacts:

Africa:        Alex Gakaru <AlexG at InternetSocialForum.net>
Asia:          Rishab Bailey <RishabB at InternetSocialForum.net>
Europe:        Norbert Bollow <NorbertB at InternetSocialForum.net>
North America: Micheal Gurstein <MichealG at InternetSocialForum.net>
South America: Sally Burch <SallyB at InternetSocialForum.net>


This press release is also available online, e.g. at
http://justnetcoalition.org/ISF

_______________________________________________
discuss mailing list
discuss at 1net.org
http://1net-mail.1net.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss



 You are receiving this message because you are a member of the community
LatinoamerICANN <https://dgroups.org/alfa-redi-global/latinoamericann>.

View this contribution on the web site <https://dgroups.org/_/ylq21sm6>

A reply to this message will be sent to all members of LatinoamerICANN.

Reply to sender <eiriarte at alfa-redi.org> | Unsubscribe
<leave.latinoamericann at dgroups.org>



-- 
“The fundamental cure for poverty is not money but knowledge" Sir William
Arthur Lewis, Nobel Prize Economics, 1979
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150127/f8170fbd/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From gurstein at gmail.com  Wed Jan 28 11:00:52 2015
From: gurstein at gmail.com (michael gurstein)
Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2015 08:00:52 -0800
Subject: [bestbits] [governance] Internet Social Forum-->Jeremy's
 Jeremiad and Philip's Phillipic
Message-ID: <01e601d03b13$982da510$c888ef30$@gmail.com>

McTim (or should I say (Sen.) McCarthy…

 

I’m hoping that folks are wise enough not to think that if a lie is repeated often enough and loudly enough and particularly if it can be referenced to a blogpost with a reference to a (slightly deranged err over the top) blogpost that provides significantly distorted and selective references to a further set of documents then somehow it has a reality beyond simply self-interested commentary (sigh, but such is the Internet… 

 

And now to:

 

Jeremy’s Jeremiad <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeremiad>  and Phillip’s Philippic <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philippic> 

 

As they say the worst insult is to be ignored, and no publicity is bad publicity… so thanks folks for spreading the word about the JNC and the ISF.

                                                                                                                                             

That Philip got it wrong following Jeremy’s wild distortions and misrepresentations shouldn’t be too surprising.  I’ll leave a detailed cross referencing between reality and what Jeremy has oozed out to others with a more Talmudic bent but just to say that I’m expecting a libel action to be forthcoming from my PM Stephen Harper at the possibility that he might be funding my contributions to the JNC or the ISF (I would expect similar rumblings from various of the other “state actors” to which he might so circuitously and ponderously be referring).

 

But just to note—it is only in the minds of the profoundly anti-democratic (and historically illiterate) that statements to the effect that “The right to make Internet-related public policies lies exclusively with those who legitimately and directly represent people” is (mis) represented as calling for governance solely by and through existing governmental (or inter-governmental) structures or more specifically existing and very often undemocratic and unrepresentative governments and state structures/actors (whoever they may be).  

 

M

 

 

 

 

 

From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of McTim
Sent: Tuesday, January 27, 2015 9:02 AM
To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Jean-Christophe NOTHIAS I The Global Journal
Cc: parminder; bestbits at lists.bestbits.net; discuss at 1net.org >> 1Net List
Subject: Re: [bestbits] [governance] Internet Social Forum

 

Quoting a CircleID piece by Philip Corwin:

http://www.circleid.com/posts/20150125_occupy_ig_internet_social_forum_targets_netmundial_initiative/

"The author is not familiar with most of the groups constituting ISF. As always, a good rule for understanding true intent is "follow the money". We'd find it illuminating to know where they get their funding and whether any state actors are involved (and a colleague more familiar with the global IG scene advises that at least several are indeed closely linked to their national governments, and are unsurprisingly more favorable toward the government-led multilateral approach on IG than the private sector oriented MSM). So there is some question as to whether ISF is a genuine grassroots Netizen movement — or a convergence of government-dominated organizations pairing with "useful idiot <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Useful_idiot> ” entities to pursue a broader and more pernicious agenda of undermining the MSM and replacing it with a UN-led, government-dominated one. "




 

On Sat, Jan 24, 2015 at 1:23 AM, Jean-Christophe NOTHIAS I The Global Journal <jc.nothias at theglobaljournal.net> wrote:

Quoted a Register piece written by Kieren McCarthy

Hibernating NetMundial continues to rattle internet governance world  <http://t.co/0D2vSUtqqf> reg.cx/2dZG

 

As to NetMundial's three-month consultation period, that will seemingly be led by respected internet governance academic and ICANN Board member Wolfgang Kleinwachter. The NetMundial organizers did not reveal how much they will pay Kleinwachter to lend the initiative his credibility, but his first attempt to make the internet community learn to love the idea came in the form of a  <http://www.circleid.com/posts/20150103_internet_governance_outlook_2015_2_processes_many_venues_4_baskets/> blog post at the start of the year.

 

 

Le 24 janv. 2015 à 00:21, parminder a écrit :

 


On Friday 23 January 2015 11:31 PM, "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang" wrote:

Hi Parminder,

 

how the ISF is linked to the IGF?


Hi Wolfgang

One is a civil society forum, the other a multistakeholder one. One develops people's and civil society's positions on the key issue of the global Internet, the other is a place where such positions can enter into dialogue with holders of political and economic power - the governments and the corporate actors.

Unless now the whole idea and concept of civil society - and along with those of people's movements, grassroots, activism, and so on - has been fully coopted in some people's mind with that of multistakeholderism (whatever one actually means by it, something that has remained notoriously unclear), the connection or link that you inquire about is extremely clear to me.

Internet is not the first thing for which there has been felt a need for 'independently' forming a people's conception and set of hopes, expectations and demands - away from conclaves of power. There have been scores of others, and newer ones continue to arise. Accordingly if people's and civil society forums etc have been meaningful and needed in these areas, it is incumbent upon *those* who think they are *not needed* in the Internet space to explain why it is so, then the other way around.

To put is somewhat flippantly, ISF is also a reaction of people who are fed up with an ongoing IG charade where for instance Fadi Chehade can with a straight face call the WEF's Net Mundial Initiative as the 'mother of all bottom -up processes' - even jokes require some plausibility limits!

To take the example of one of the latest international global forums on a key global governance issue, the Lima meeting on climate change, you will perhaps know that parallel to it a people's meeting was held. Internet and its governance also needs such meetings, that is the simple logic of the Internet Social Forum. If you think that in the Internet's case, such meetings and forums are not needed, I would of course be curious to hear your case.

I am happy to engage further with you on this issue, and answer your questions.

Lastly, let me invite you to join the ISF process. We work under the World Social Forum (WSF) process and principles - whereby its meetings are open to all civil society participants subject to very inimum conditions that are listed on their website.

Further, if the discussion is to now turn to the WSF, its meaning, relevance, etc, I am as happy to engage with you on that subject.

Regards, parminder



 

Wolfgang

 

 

 

-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----

Von: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org im Auftrag von parminder

Gesendet: Do 22.01.2015 17:01

An: governance at lists.igcaucus.org

Betreff: Re: [governance] Internet Social Forum

 Enclosed Spanish version... parminder

 

 

On Thursday 22 January 2015 07:06 PM, Norbert Bollow wrote:

Global Civil Society launches the Internet Social Forum

- With a call to occupy the Internet

 

PRESS RELEASE. Geneva, Switzerland, 22st January, 2015.

 

A group of civil society organisations from around the world has

announced the Internet Social Forum, to bring together and articulate

bottom-up perspectives on the 'Internet we want'. Taking inspiration

from the World Social Forum, and its clarion call, 'Another World is

possible', the group seeks to draw urgent attention to the increasing

centralization of the Internet for extraction of monopoly rents and for

socio-political control, asserting that 'Another Internet is possible'!

 

The Internet Social Forum will inter alia offer an alternative to the

recently-launched World Economic Forum's 'Net Mundial Initiative' on

global Internet governance. While the World Economic Forum (WEF) and

the 'Net Mundial Initiative' convene global elites, the Internet Social

Forum will be a participatory and bottom-up space for all those who

believe that the global Internet must evolve in the public interest; a

direct parallel to the launch of the World Social Forum in 2001 as a

counter initiative to the WEF.

 

The Internet Social Forum will reach out to grassroots groups and

social movements across the world, catalysing a groundswell that

challenges the entrenched elite interests that currently control how

the Internet is managed. The Internet Social Forum's preparatory

process will kick off during the World Social Forum to take place in

Tunis, March 24th to 28th, 2015. The Internet Social Forum itself is

planned to be held either late 2015 or early 2016.

 

"While the world's biggest companies have every right to debate the

future of the Internet, we are concerned that their perspectives should

not drown out those of ordinary people who have no access to the

privileged terrain WEF occupies - in the end it is this wider public

interest that must be paramount in governing the Internet. We are

organising the Internet Social Forum to make sure their voices can't be

ignored in the corridors of power," said Norbert Bollow, Co-Convenor of

the Just Net Coalition, which is one of the groups involved in the

initiative.

 

The Internet Social Forum, and its preparatory process, is intended as

a space to vision and build the 'Internet we want'. It will be

underpinned by values of democracy, human rights and social justice. It

will stand for participatory policy making and promote community media.

It will seek an Internet that is truly decentralized in its

architecture and based on people's full rights to data, information,

knowledge and other 'commons' that the Internet has enabled the world

community to generate and share.

 

Somewhat similar to Web inventor Tim Berners-Lee's call for a 'Magna

Carta for the Internet', the Internet Social Forum proposes to develop

a People's Internet Manifesto, through a bottom-up process involving

all concerned social groups and movements, in different areas, from

techies and ICT-for-development actors to media reform groups,

democracy movements and social justice activists.

 

This year will also see the 10 year high-level review of the World

Summit on the Information Society (WSIS), to be held in New York in

December. As a full-scale review of a major UN summit, this will be a

critical global political event. Since the WSIS, held in 2003 and 2005,

the Internet, and what it means socially, has undergone a paradigm

shift. The WSIS witnessed active engagement of civil society and

technical groups as well as of business. However, currently, there

seems to be an deliberate attempt to sideline this UN-led initiative on

governance issues of the information society and Internet in favour of

private, big-business-dominated initiatives like the WEF's Net Mundial

Initiative. The Internet Social Forum, while remaining primarily a

people's forum, will also seek to channel global civil society's

engagement towards the WSIS +10 review.

 

The following organisations form the initial group that is proposing

the Internet Social Forum, and many more are expected to join in the

immediate future. This is an open call to progressive groups from all

over the world to join this initiative, and participate in developing a

People's Internet Manifesto.

 

Just Net Coalition, Global

P2P Foundation, Global

Transnational Institute, Global

Forum on Communication for Integration of our America, Regional (Latin

America) Arab NGO Network for Development, Regional

Agencia Latinoamericana de Información, Regional

Alternative Informatics Association, Turkey

Knowledge Commons, India

Open-Root/EUROLINC, France

SLFC.in, India

CODE-IP Trust, Kenya

GodlyGlobal.org, Switzerland

Centre for Community Informatics Research, Development and Training,

Canada IT for Change, India

Association for Proper Internet Governance, Switzerland

Computer Professionals Union, Philippines

Free Press, USA

Advocates of Science and Technology for the People, Philippines

Other News, Italy

Free Software Movement of India

Global_Geneva, Switzerland

Solidarius (Solidarity Economy Network), Italy

All India Peoples Science Network, India

Institute for Local Self-Reliance - Community Broadband Networks, USA

 

Please contact us at secretariat at InternetSocialForum.net for further

information or clarification.

 

Or the following regional contacts:

 

Africa:        Alex Gakaru <AlexG at InternetSocialForum.net>

Asia:          Rishab Bailey <RishabB at InternetSocialForum.net>

Europe:        Norbert Bollow <NorbertB at InternetSocialForum.net>

North America: Micheal Gurstein <MichealG at InternetSocialForum.net>

South America: Sally Burch <SallyB at InternetSocialForum.net>

 

 

This press release is also available online, e.g. at

http://justnetcoalition.org/ISF

 

 

 

 

____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
    bestbits at lists.bestbits.net.
To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit:
    http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits

 


____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t




-- 

Cheers,

McTim
"A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A route indicates how we get there."  Jon Postel

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150128/8a1c8850/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From dave at difference.com.au  Wed Jan 28 12:24:14 2015
From: dave at difference.com.au (David Cake)
Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2015 01:24:14 +0800
Subject: [governance] Internet Social Forum
In-Reply-To: <20150123145722.41e43a18@quill>
References: <20150122143615.700b2f52@quill> <54C23F6A.9090503@cafonso.ca> <20150123145722.41e43a18@quill>
Message-ID: <3A1B09A3-2607-432B-A4F8-F397EACEB8D2@difference.com.au>


On 24 Jan 2015, at 12:57 am, Norbert Bollow <nb at bollow.ch> wrote:
> 
> But to answer your question:
> 
> 1. Of course the "call to occupy the Internet" is not directed to
> governments. That should be totally clear from the text that we have
> published. We are at this point not in any way formally linked to the
> occupy movement http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occupy_movement but we use
> the term "occupy" to broadly align the Internet Social Forum initiative
> with that kind of protest viewpoint.

	Clarifying that the use of the occupy terminology (much as the term 'social forum' itself) is simply an attempt to associate a JNC project with an unassociated protest movement, with quite different goals, is appreciated. 

> 2. Did anyone seriously think that when JNC decided that we would not
> participate in the "NETmundial initiative" which was originally
> single-handedly led by WEF and then led jointly by WEF, ICANN and
> CGI.br (while there appears to be strong evidence of WEF still being
> the leading partner among the three), that that would mean that we
> would want to remove ourselves entirely from an important part of the
> discourse about the future of the Internet???

	We may have been a little surprised at the degree to which JNC is willing to try to co-opt the goodwill of unassociated organisations in order to promote its rather different agenda. 

	I for one found the obvious attempt to associate the ISF with the WSF, a forum that is based around a broad, diverse, pluralistic organisation of global civil society, having its name associated with a group that represents a very narrowly defined, deliberately excluding the mainstream civil society position, somewhat disingenuous. 

	I for one would welcome discussion of internet governance within a WSF context, but reject the ISF as a legitimate attempt at doing something similar, for obvious reasons. 
	Cheers
		David

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 455 bytes
Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150129/7275ccc1/attachment.sig>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From avri at acm.org  Wed Jan 28 12:28:22 2015
From: avri at acm.org (Avri Doria)
Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2015 12:28:22 -0500
Subject: [governance] Re: [] Internet Social Forum-->Jeremy's Jeremiad and
 Philip's Phillipic
In-Reply-To: <01e601d03b13$982da510$c888ef30$@gmail.com>
References: <01e601d03b13$982da510$c888ef30$@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <54C91C36.4010309@acm.org>

(repeat of reply sent to Bestbits)

Hi,

I must say, I am in complete agreement with the notion that a lie
repeated often enough neither becomes the truth nor  represents that
which is the case.

A main issue, however, is identifying whose statements constitute lies,
and I expect there are differences of opinion on who is putting forward
falsehoods.

Beyond that, I did not know we had any US Senators on this list.  
Living or dead.

avri


On 28-Jan-15 11:00, michael gurstein wrote:
>
> McTim (or should I say (Sen.) McCarthy…
>
>  
>
> I’m hoping that folks are wise enough not to think that if a lie is
> repeated often enough and loudly enough and particularly if it can be
> referenced to a blogpost with a reference to a (slightly deranged err
> over the top) blogpost that provides significantly distorted and
> selective references to a further set of documents then somehow it has
> a reality beyond simply self-interested commentary (sigh, but such is
> the Internet…
>
>  
>
> And now to:
>
>  
>
> Jeremy’s Jeremiad <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeremiad> and
> Phillip’s Philippic <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philippic>
>
>  
>
> As they say the worst insult is to be ignored, and no publicity is bad
> publicity… so thanks folks for spreading the word about the JNC and
> the ISF.
>
>                                                                                                                                             
>
>
> That Philip got it wrong following Jeremy’s wild distortions and
> misrepresentations shouldn’t be too surprising.  I’ll leave a detailed
> cross referencing between reality and what Jeremy has oozed out to
> others with a more Talmudic bent but just to say that I’m expecting a
> libel action to be forthcoming from my PM Stephen Harper at the
> possibility that he might be funding my contributions to the JNC or
> the ISF (I would expect similar rumblings from various of the other
> “state actors” to which he might so circuitously and ponderously be
> referring).
>
>  
>
> But just to note—it is only in the minds of the profoundly
> anti-democratic (and historically illiterate) that statements to the
> effect that “The right to make Internet-related public policies lies
> exclusively with those who legitimately and directly represent
> people”is (mis) represented as calling for governance solely by and
> through existing governmental (or inter-governmental) structures or
> more specifically existing and very often undemocratic and
> unrepresentative governments and state structures/actors (whoever they
> may be). 
>
>  
>
> M
>
>  
>
>  
>
>  
>
>  
>
>  
>
> *From:*governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org
> [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] *On Behalf Of *McTim
> *Sent:* Tuesday, January 27, 2015 9:02 AM
> *To:* governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Jean-Christophe NOTHIAS I The
> Global Journal
> *Cc:* parminder; bestbits at lists.bestbits.net; discuss at 1net.org >> 1Net
> List
> *Subject:* Re: [bestbits] [governance] Internet Social Forum
>
>  
>
> Quoting a CircleID piece by Philip Corwin:
>
> http://www.circleid.com/posts/20150125_occupy_ig_internet_social_forum_targets_netmundial_initiative/
>
> "The author is not familiar with most of the groups constituting ISF.
> As always, a good rule for understanding true intent is "follow the
> money". We'd find it illuminating to know where they get their funding
> and whether any state actors are involved (and a colleague more
> familiar with the global IG scene advises that at least several are
> indeed closely linked to their national governments, and are
> unsurprisingly more favorable toward the government-led multilateral
> approach on IG than the private sector oriented MSM). So there is some
> question as to whether ISF is a genuine grassroots Netizen movement —
> or a convergence of government-dominated organizations pairing with
> "useful idiot <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Useful_idiot>” entities
> to pursue a broader and more pernicious agenda of undermining the MSM
> and replacing it with a UN-led, government-dominated one. "
>
>
>  
>
> On Sat, Jan 24, 2015 at 1:23 AM, Jean-Christophe NOTHIAS I The Global
> Journal <jc.nothias at theglobaljournal.net
> <mailto:jc.nothias at theglobaljournal.net>> wrote:
>
> Quoted a Register piece written by Kieren McCarthy
>
> Hibernating NetMundial continues to rattle internet governance
> world reg.cx/2dZG <http://t.co/0D2vSUtqqf>
>
>  
>
> As to NetMundial's three-month consultation period, that will
> seemingly be led by respected internet governance academic and ICANN
> Board member Wolfgang Kleinwachter. The NetMundial organizers did not
> reveal how much they will pay Kleinwachter to lend the initiative his
> credibility, but his first attempt to make the internet community
> learn to love the idea came in the form of a blog post
> <http://www.circleid.com/posts/20150103_internet_governance_outlook_2015_2_processes_many_venues_4_baskets/> at
> the start of the year.
>
>  
>
>  
>
> Le 24 janv. 2015 à 00:21, parminder a écrit :
>
>  
>
>
> On Friday 23 January 2015 11:31 PM, "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang" wrote:
>
> Hi Parminder,
>
>      
>
>     how the ISF is linked to the IGF?
>
>
> Hi Wolfgang
>
> One is a civil society forum, the other a multistakeholder one. One
> develops people's and civil society's positions on the key issue of
> the global Internet, the other is a place where such positions can
> enter into dialogue with holders of political and economic power - the
> governments and the corporate actors.
>
> Unless now the whole idea and concept of civil society - and along
> with those of people's movements, grassroots, activism, and so on -
> has been fully coopted in some people's mind with that of
> multistakeholderism (whatever one actually means by it, something that
> has remained notoriously unclear), the connection or link that you
> inquire about is extremely clear to me.
>
> Internet is not the first thing for which there has been felt a need
> for 'independently' forming a people's conception and set of hopes,
> expectations and demands - away from conclaves of power. There have
> been scores of others, and newer ones continue to arise. Accordingly
> if people's and civil society forums etc have been meaningful and
> needed in these areas, it is incumbent upon *those* who think they are
> *not needed* in the Internet space to explain why it is so, then the
> other way around.
>
> To put is somewhat flippantly, ISF is also a reaction of people who
> are fed up with an ongoing IG charade where for instance Fadi Chehade
> can with a straight face call the WEF's Net Mundial Initiative as the
> 'mother of all bottom -up processes' - even jokes require some
> plausibility limits!
>
> To take the example of one of the latest international global forums
> on a key global governance issue, the Lima meeting on climate change,
> you will perhaps know that parallel to it a people's meeting was held.
> Internet and its governance also needs such meetings, that is the
> simple logic of the Internet Social Forum. If you think that in the
> Internet's case, such meetings and forums are not needed, I would of
> course be curious to hear your case.
>
> I am happy to engage further with you on this issue, and answer your
> questions.
>
> Lastly, let me invite you to join the ISF process. We work under the
> World Social Forum (WSF) process and principles - whereby its meetings
> are open to all civil society participants subject to very inimum
> conditions that are listed on their website.
>
> Further, if the discussion is to now turn to the WSF, its meaning,
> relevance, etc, I am as happy to engage with you on that subject.
>
> Regards, parminder
>
>  
>
>     Wolfgang
>
>      
>
>      
>
>      
>
>     -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
>
>     Von: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org
>     <mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org> im Auftrag von
>     parminder
>
>     Gesendet: Do 22.01.2015 17:01
>
>     An: governance at lists.igcaucus.org
>     <mailto:governance at lists.igcaucus.org>
>
>     Betreff: Re: [governance] Internet Social Forum
>
>      Enclosed Spanish version... parminder
>
>      
>
>      
>
>     On Thursday 22 January 2015 07:06 PM, Norbert Bollow wrote:
>
>         Global Civil Society launches the Internet Social Forum
>
>         - With a call to occupy the Internet
>
>          
>
>         PRESS RELEASE. Geneva, Switzerland, 22st January, 2015.
>
>          
>
>         A group of civil society organisations from around the world has
>
>         announced the Internet Social Forum, to bring together and
>         articulate
>
>         bottom-up perspectives on the 'Internet we want'. Taking
>         inspiration
>
>         from the World Social Forum, and its clarion call, 'Another
>         World is
>
>         possible', the group seeks to draw urgent attention to the
>         increasing
>
>         centralization of the Internet for extraction of monopoly
>         rents and for
>
>         socio-political control, asserting that 'Another Internet is
>         possible'!
>
>          
>
>         The Internet Social Forum will inter alia offer an alternative
>         to the
>
>         recently-launched World Economic Forum's 'Net Mundial
>         Initiative' on
>
>         global Internet governance. While the World Economic Forum
>         (WEF) and
>
>         the 'Net Mundial Initiative' convene global elites, the
>         Internet Social
>
>         Forum will be a participatory and bottom-up space for all
>         those who
>
>         believe that the global Internet must evolve in the public
>         interest; a
>
>         direct parallel to the launch of the World Social Forum in
>         2001 as a
>
>         counter initiative to the WEF.
>
>          
>
>         The Internet Social Forum will reach out to grassroots groups and
>
>         social movements across the world, catalysing a groundswell that
>
>         challenges the entrenched elite interests that currently
>         control how
>
>         the Internet is managed. The Internet Social Forum's preparatory
>
>         process will kick off during the World Social Forum to take
>         place in
>
>         Tunis, March 24th to 28th, 2015. The Internet Social Forum
>         itself is
>
>         planned to be held either late 2015 or early 2016.
>
>          
>
>         "While the world's biggest companies have every right to
>         debate the
>
>         future of the Internet, we are concerned that their
>         perspectives should
>
>         not drown out those of ordinary people who have no access to the
>
>         privileged terrain WEF occupies - in the end it is this wider
>         public
>
>         interest that must be paramount in governing the Internet. We are
>
>         organising the Internet Social Forum to make sure their voices
>         can't be
>
>         ignored in the corridors of power," said Norbert Bollow,
>         Co-Convenor of
>
>         the Just Net Coalition, which is one of the groups involved in the
>
>         initiative.
>
>          
>
>         The Internet Social Forum, and its preparatory process, is
>         intended as
>
>         a space to vision and build the 'Internet we want'. It will be
>
>         underpinned by values of democracy, human rights and social
>         justice. It
>
>         will stand for participatory policy making and promote
>         community media.
>
>         It will seek an Internet that is truly decentralized in its
>
>         architecture and based on people's full rights to data,
>         information,
>
>         knowledge and other 'commons' that the Internet has enabled
>         the world
>
>         community to generate and share.
>
>          
>
>         Somewhat similar to Web inventor Tim Berners-Lee's call for a
>         'Magna
>
>         Carta for the Internet', the Internet Social Forum proposes to
>         develop
>
>         a People's Internet Manifesto, through a bottom-up process
>         involving
>
>         all concerned social groups and movements, in different areas,
>         from
>
>         techies and ICT-for-development actors to media reform groups,
>
>         democracy movements and social justice activists.
>
>          
>
>         This year will also see the 10 year high-level review of the World
>
>         Summit on the Information Society (WSIS), to be held in New
>         York in
>
>         December. As a full-scale review of a major UN summit, this
>         will be a
>
>         critical global political event. Since the WSIS, held in 2003
>         and 2005,
>
>         the Internet, and what it means socially, has undergone a paradigm
>
>         shift. The WSIS witnessed active engagement of civil society and
>
>         technical groups as well as of business. However, currently, there
>
>         seems to be an deliberate attempt to sideline this UN-led
>         initiative on
>
>         governance issues of the information society and Internet in
>         favour of
>
>         private, big-business-dominated initiatives like the WEF's Net
>         Mundial
>
>         Initiative. The Internet Social Forum, while remaining primarily a
>
>         people's forum, will also seek to channel global civil society's
>
>         engagement towards the WSIS +10 review.
>
>          
>
>         The following organisations form the initial group that is
>         proposing
>
>         the Internet Social Forum, and many more are expected to join
>         in the
>
>         immediate future. This is an open call to progressive groups
>         from all
>
>         over the world to join this initiative, and participate in
>         developing a
>
>         People's Internet Manifesto.
>
>          
>
>         Just Net Coalition, Global
>
>         P2P Foundation, Global
>
>         Transnational Institute, Global
>
>         Forum on Communication for Integration of our America,
>         Regional (Latin
>
>         America) Arab NGO Network for Development, Regional
>
>         Agencia Latinoamericana de Información, Regional
>
>         Alternative Informatics Association, Turkey
>
>         Knowledge Commons, India
>
>         Open-Root/EUROLINC, France
>
>         SLFC.in, India
>
>         CODE-IP Trust, Kenya
>
>         GodlyGlobal.org <http://GodlyGlobal.org>, Switzerland
>
>         Centre for Community Informatics Research, Development and
>         Training,
>
>         Canada IT for Change, India
>
>         Association for Proper Internet Governance, Switzerland
>
>         Computer Professionals Union, Philippines
>
>         Free Press, USA
>
>         Advocates of Science and Technology for the People, Philippines
>
>         Other News, Italy
>
>         Free Software Movement of India
>
>         Global_Geneva, Switzerland
>
>         Solidarius (Solidarity Economy Network), Italy
>
>         All India Peoples Science Network, India
>
>         Institute for Local Self-Reliance - Community Broadband
>         Networks, USA
>
>          
>
>         Please contact us at secretariat at InternetSocialForum.net
>         <mailto:secretariat at InternetSocialForum.net> for further
>
>         information or clarification.
>
>          
>
>         Or the following regional contacts:
>
>          
>
>         Africa:        Alex Gakaru <AlexG at InternetSocialForum.net
>         <mailto:AlexG at InternetSocialForum.net>>
>
>         Asia:          Rishab Bailey <RishabB at InternetSocialForum.net
>         <mailto:RishabB at InternetSocialForum.net>>
>
>         Europe:        Norbert Bollow
>         <NorbertB at InternetSocialForum.net
>         <mailto:NorbertB at InternetSocialForum.net>>
>
>         North America: Micheal Gurstein
>         <MichealG at InternetSocialForum.net
>         <mailto:MichealG at InternetSocialForum.net>>
>
>         South America: Sally Burch <SallyB at InternetSocialForum.net
>         <mailto:SallyB at InternetSocialForum.net>>
>
>          
>
>          
>
>         This press release is also available online, e.g. at
>
>         http://justnetcoalition.org/ISF
>
>          
>
>      
>
>      
>
>  
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>     bestbits at lists.bestbits.net <mailto:bestbits at lists.bestbits.net>.
> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit:
>     http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits
>
>  
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>      governance at lists.igcaucus.org <mailto:governance at lists.igcaucus.org>
> To be removed from the list, visit:
>      http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
>
> For all other list information and functions, see:
>      http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
>      http://www.igcaucus.org/
>
> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
>
>
>
>
> -- 
>
> Cheers,
>
> McTim
> "A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A
> route indicates how we get there."  Jon Postel
>
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>      bestbits at lists.bestbits.net.
> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit:
>      http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150128/476504b8/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From jmalcolm at eff.org  Wed Jan 28 14:14:25 2015
From: jmalcolm at eff.org (Jeremy Malcolm)
Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2015 11:14:25 -0800
Subject: [governance] Downtime for this list and website
Message-ID: <54C93511.2020601@eff.org>

The IGC server needs to be upgraded to patch it against the recent Ghost
(CVE-2015-0235) vulnerability.  I'm going to take care of this on behalf
of the co-coords, but since we were several operating system releases
behind, this will be a bigger system upgrade than usual, with a bigger
chance of things going wrong.

Therefore please expect some disruption to the list and the website over
the next 6 hours.  Thanks!

-- 
Jeremy Malcolm
Senior Global Policy Analyst
Electronic Frontier Foundation
https://eff.org
jmalcolm at eff.org

Tel: 415.436.9333 ext 161

:: Defending Your Rights in the Digital World ::

Public key: https://www.eff.org/files/2014/10/09/key_jmalcolm.txt
PGP fingerprint: FF13 C2E9 F9C3 DF54 7C4F EAC1 F675 AAE2 D2AB 2220
OTR fingerprint: 26EE FD85 3740 8228 9460 49A8 536F BCD2 536F A5BD

Learn how to encrypt your email with the Email Self Defense guide:
https://emailselfdefense.fsf.org/en


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 244 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150128/7c4cec78/attachment.sig>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From williams.deirdre at gmail.com  Wed Jan 28 14:32:05 2015
From: williams.deirdre at gmail.com (Deirdre Williams)
Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2015 15:32:05 -0400
Subject: [governance] Downtime for this list and website
In-Reply-To: <54C93511.2020601@eff.org>
References: <54C93511.2020601@eff.org>
Message-ID: <CAMz5XN4nxtnRJTw=fix7ob7GRimtU48hGTSWucfgxpqhxH+8pQ@mail.gmail.com>

Thank you Jeremy.
The co-cos were informed of the problem by the IGC's current webhosting
service, and referred it to Jeremy since it is beyond our technical
competence.

This necessity, and the hosting arrangements generally, is one of the
in-house issues to which the IGC needs to give some attention when we're up
and running again.

Deirdre
Co-coordinator

On 28 January 2015 at 15:14, Jeremy Malcolm <jmalcolm at eff.org> wrote:

> The IGC server needs to be upgraded to patch it against the recent Ghost
> (CVE-2015-0235) vulnerability.  I'm going to take care of this on behalf
> of the co-coords, but since we were several operating system releases
> behind, this will be a bigger system upgrade than usual, with a bigger
> chance of things going wrong.
>
> Therefore please expect some disruption to the list and the website over
> the next 6 hours.  Thanks!
>
> --
> Jeremy Malcolm
> Senior Global Policy Analyst
> Electronic Frontier Foundation
> https://eff.org
> jmalcolm at eff.org
>
> Tel: 415.436.9333 ext 161
>
> :: Defending Your Rights in the Digital World ::
>
> Public key: https://www.eff.org/files/2014/10/09/key_jmalcolm.txt
> PGP fingerprint: FF13 C2E9 F9C3 DF54 7C4F EAC1 F675 AAE2 D2AB 2220
> OTR fingerprint: 26EE FD85 3740 8228 9460 49A8 536F BCD2 536F A5BD
>
> Learn how to encrypt your email with the Email Self Defense guide:
> https://emailselfdefense.fsf.org/en
>
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>      governance at lists.igcaucus.org
> To be removed from the list, visit:
>      http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
>
> For all other list information and functions, see:
>      http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
>      http://www.igcaucus.org/
>
> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
>
>


-- 
“The fundamental cure for poverty is not money but knowledge" Sir William
Arthur Lewis, Nobel Prize Economics, 1979
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150128/f5c840e4/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From jmalcolm at eff.org  Wed Jan 28 16:09:55 2015
From: jmalcolm at eff.org (Jeremy Malcolm)
Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2015 13:09:55 -0800
Subject: [governance] Downtime for this list and website
In-Reply-To: <54C93511.2020601@eff.org>
References: <54C93511.2020601@eff.org>
Message-ID: <54C95023.7080107@eff.org>

On 28/01/2015 11:14 am, Jeremy Malcolm wrote:
> The IGC server needs to be upgraded to patch it against the recent Ghost
> (CVE-2015-0235) vulnerability.  I'm going to take care of this on behalf
> of the co-coords, but since we were several operating system releases
> behind, this will be a bigger system upgrade than usual, with a bigger
> chance of things going wrong.
>
> Therefore please expect some disruption to the list and the website over
> the next 6 hours.  Thanks!

The server is back up and patched - please let me know if you notice
anything broken.

-- 
Jeremy Malcolm
Senior Global Policy Analyst
Electronic Frontier Foundation
https://eff.org
jmalcolm at eff.org

Tel: 415.436.9333 ext 161

:: Defending Your Rights in the Digital World ::

Public key: https://www.eff.org/files/2014/10/09/key_jmalcolm.txt
PGP fingerprint: FF13 C2E9 F9C3 DF54 7C4F EAC1 F675 AAE2 D2AB 2220
OTR fingerprint: 26EE FD85 3740 8228 9460 49A8 536F BCD2 536F A5BD

Learn how to encrypt your email with the Email Self Defense guide:
https://emailselfdefense.fsf.org/en


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 244 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150128/3da8ff65/attachment.sig>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From dogwallah at gmail.com  Wed Jan 28 18:35:42 2015
From: dogwallah at gmail.com (McTim)
Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2015 17:35:42 -0600
Subject: [governance] [] Internet Social Forum-->Jeremy's Jeremiad and
 Philip's Phillipic
In-Reply-To: <54C91C36.4010309@acm.org>
References: <01e601d03b13$982da510$c888ef30$@gmail.com> <54C91C36.4010309@acm.org>
Message-ID: <CACAaNxi5Za=6XvEN6=5YA8xWDEu=3Mz-DHRxfqBvut0zu8F3LA@mail.gmail.com>

Avri,

On Wed, Jan 28, 2015 at 11:28 AM, Avri Doria <avri at acm.org> wrote:

>  (repeat of reply sent to Bestbits)
>
> Hi,
>
> I must say, I am in complete agreement with the notion that a lie repeated
> often enough neither becomes the truth nor  represents that which is the
> case.
>
>
+1



> A main issue, however, is identifying whose statements constitute lies,
> and I expect there are differences of opinion on who is putting forward
> falsehoods.
>
>
Yup.


> Beyond that, I did not know we had any US Senators on this list.   Living
> or dead.
>
>

Does no one else find it hilarious that McCarthyism (
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McCarthyism) is being used to accuse someone
else of being McCarthy-ist?

All I did was send a link.  I did not endorse the views of the author.  I
was attacked for that.

I would appreciate the CoCo's intervention on this matter in accordance
with the Charter.








> avri
>
>
>
> On 28-Jan-15 11:00, michael gurstein wrote:
>
>  McTim (or should I say (Sen.) McCarthy…
>
>
>
> I’m hoping that folks are wise enough not to think that if a lie is
> repeated often enough and loudly enough and particularly if it can be
> referenced to a blogpost with a reference to a (slightly deranged err over
> the top) blogpost that provides significantly distorted and selective
> references to a further set of documents then somehow it has a reality
> beyond simply self-interested commentary (sigh, but such is the Internet…
>
>
>
> And now to:
>
>
>
> Jeremy’s Jeremiad <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeremiad> and Phillip’s
> Philippic <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philippic>
>
>
>
> As they say the worst insult is to be ignored, and no publicity is bad
> publicity… so thanks folks for spreading the word about the JNC and the ISF.
>
>
>
>
> That Philip got it wrong following Jeremy’s wild distortions and
> misrepresentations shouldn’t be too surprising.  I’ll leave a detailed
> cross referencing between reality and what Jeremy has oozed out to others
> with a more Talmudic bent but just to say that I’m expecting a libel action
> to be forthcoming from my PM Stephen Harper at the possibility that he
> might be funding my contributions to the JNC or the ISF (I would expect
> similar rumblings from various of the other “state actors” to which he
> might so circuitously and ponderously be referring).
>
>
>
> But just to note—it is only in the minds of the profoundly anti-democratic
> (and historically illiterate) that statements to the effect that “The
> right to make Internet-related public policies lies exclusively with those
> who legitimately and directly represent people” is (mis) represented as
> calling for governance solely by and through existing governmental (or
> inter-governmental) structures or more specifically existing and very often
> undemocratic and unrepresentative governments and state structures/actors
> (whoever they may be).
>
>
>
> M
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [
> mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org
> <governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org>] *On Behalf Of *McTim
> *Sent:* Tuesday, January 27, 2015 9:02 AM
> *To:* governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Jean-Christophe NOTHIAS I The Global
> Journal
> *Cc:* parminder; bestbits at lists.bestbits.net; discuss at 1net.org >> 1Net
> List
> *Subject:* Re: [bestbits] [governance] Internet Social Forum
>
>
>
> Quoting a CircleID piece by Philip Corwin:
>
>
> http://www.circleid.com/posts/20150125_occupy_ig_internet_social_forum_targets_netmundial_initiative/
>
> "The author is not familiar with most of the groups constituting ISF. As
> always, a good rule for understanding true intent is "follow the money".
> We'd find it illuminating to know where they get their funding and whether
> any state actors are involved (and a colleague more familiar with the
> global IG scene advises that at least several are indeed closely linked to
> their national governments, and are unsurprisingly more favorable toward
> the government-led multilateral approach on IG than the private sector
> oriented MSM). So there is some question as to whether ISF is a genuine
> grassroots Netizen movement — or a convergence of government-dominated
> organizations pairing with "useful idiot
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Useful_idiot>” entities to pursue a
> broader and more pernicious agenda of undermining the MSM and replacing it
> with a UN-led, government-dominated one. "
>
>
>
>
> On Sat, Jan 24, 2015 at 1:23 AM, Jean-Christophe NOTHIAS I The Global
> Journal <jc.nothias at theglobaljournal.net> wrote:
>
> Quoted a Register piece written by Kieren McCarthy
>
> Hibernating NetMundial continues to rattle internet governance world
> reg.cx/2dZG <http://t.co/0D2vSUtqqf>
>
>
>
> As to NetMundial's three-month consultation period, that will seemingly be
> led by respected internet governance academic and ICANN Board member
> Wolfgang Kleinwachter. The NetMundial organizers did not reveal how much
> they will pay Kleinwachter to lend the initiative his credibility, but his
> first attempt to make the internet community learn to love the idea came in
> the form of a blog post
> <http://www.circleid.com/posts/20150103_internet_governance_outlook_2015_2_processes_many_venues_4_baskets/> at
> the start of the year.
>
>
>
>
>
> Le 24 janv. 2015 à 00:21, parminder a écrit :
>
>
>
>
> On Friday 23 January 2015 11:31 PM, "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang" wrote:
>
> Hi Parminder,
>
>
>
>  how the ISF is linked to the IGF?
>
>
> Hi Wolfgang
>
> One is a civil society forum, the other a multistakeholder one. One
> develops people's and civil society's positions on the key issue of the
> global Internet, the other is a place where such positions can enter into
> dialogue with holders of political and economic power - the governments and
> the corporate actors.
>
> Unless now the whole idea and concept of civil society - and along with
> those of people's movements, grassroots, activism, and so on - has been
> fully coopted in some people's mind with that of multistakeholderism
> (whatever one actually means by it, something that has remained notoriously
> unclear), the connection or link that you inquire about is extremely clear
> to me.
>
> Internet is not the first thing for which there has been felt a need for
> 'independently' forming a people's conception and set of hopes,
> expectations and demands - away from conclaves of power. There have been
> scores of others, and newer ones continue to arise. Accordingly if people's
> and civil society forums etc have been meaningful and needed in these
> areas, it is incumbent upon *those* who think they are *not needed* in the
> Internet space to explain why it is so, then the other way around.
>
> To put is somewhat flippantly, ISF is also a reaction of people who are
> fed up with an ongoing IG charade where for instance Fadi Chehade can with
> a straight face call the WEF's Net Mundial Initiative as the 'mother of all
> bottom -up processes' - even jokes require some plausibility limits!
>
> To take the example of one of the latest international global forums on a
> key global governance issue, the Lima meeting on climate change, you will
> perhaps know that parallel to it a people's meeting was held. Internet and
> its governance also needs such meetings, that is the simple logic of the
> Internet Social Forum. If you think that in the Internet's case, such
> meetings and forums are not needed, I would of course be curious to hear
> your case.
>
> I am happy to engage further with you on this issue, and answer your
> questions.
>
> Lastly, let me invite you to join the ISF process. We work under the World
> Social Forum (WSF) process and principles - whereby its meetings are open
> to all civil society participants subject to very inimum conditions that
> are listed on their website.
>
> Further, if the discussion is to now turn to the WSF, its meaning,
> relevance, etc, I am as happy to engage with you on that subject.
>
> Regards, parminder
>
>
>
> Wolfgang
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>  -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
>
>  Von: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org im Auftrag von parminder
>
>  Gesendet: Do 22.01.2015 17:01
>
>  An: governance at lists.igcaucus.org
>
>  Betreff: Re: [governance] Internet Social Forum
>
>   Enclosed Spanish version... parminder
>
>
>
>
>
>  On Thursday 22 January 2015 07:06 PM, Norbert Bollow wrote:
>
>  Global Civil Society launches the Internet Social Forum
>
>   - With a call to occupy the Internet
>
>
>
>   PRESS RELEASE. Geneva, Switzerland, 22st January, 2015.
>
>
>
>   A group of civil society organisations from around the world has
>
>   announced the Internet Social Forum, to bring together and articulate
>
>   bottom-up perspectives on the 'Internet we want'. Taking inspiration
>
>   from the World Social Forum, and its clarion call, 'Another World is
>
>   possible', the group seeks to draw urgent attention to the increasing
>
>   centralization of the Internet for extraction of monopoly rents and for
>
>   socio-political control, asserting that 'Another Internet is possible'!
>
>
>
>   The Internet Social Forum will inter alia offer an alternative to the
>
>   recently-launched World Economic Forum's 'Net Mundial Initiative' on
>
>   global Internet governance. While the World Economic Forum (WEF) and
>
>   the 'Net Mundial Initiative' convene global elites, the Internet Social
>
>   Forum will be a participatory and bottom-up space for all those who
>
>   believe that the global Internet must evolve in the public interest; a
>
>   direct parallel to the launch of the World Social Forum in 2001 as a
>
>   counter initiative to the WEF.
>
>
>
>   The Internet Social Forum will reach out to grassroots groups and
>
>   social movements across the world, catalysing a groundswell that
>
>   challenges the entrenched elite interests that currently control how
>
>   the Internet is managed. The Internet Social Forum's preparatory
>
>   process will kick off during the World Social Forum to take place in
>
>   Tunis, March 24th to 28th, 2015. The Internet Social Forum itself is
>
>   planned to be held either late 2015 or early 2016.
>
>
>
>   "While the world's biggest companies have every right to debate the
>
>   future of the Internet, we are concerned that their perspectives should
>
>   not drown out those of ordinary people who have no access to the
>
>   privileged terrain WEF occupies - in the end it is this wider public
>
>   interest that must be paramount in governing the Internet. We are
>
>   organising the Internet Social Forum to make sure their voices can't be
>
>   ignored in the corridors of power," said Norbert Bollow, Co-Convenor of
>
>   the Just Net Coalition, which is one of the groups involved in the
>
>   initiative.
>
>
>
>   The Internet Social Forum, and its preparatory process, is intended as
>
>   a space to vision and build the 'Internet we want'. It will be
>
>   underpinned by values of democracy, human rights and social justice. It
>
>   will stand for participatory policy making and promote community media.
>
>   It will seek an Internet that is truly decentralized in its
>
>   architecture and based on people's full rights to data, information,
>
>   knowledge and other 'commons' that the Internet has enabled the world
>
>   community to generate and share.
>
>
>
>   Somewhat similar to Web inventor Tim Berners-Lee's call for a 'Magna
>
>   Carta for the Internet', the Internet Social Forum proposes to develop
>
>   a People's Internet Manifesto, through a bottom-up process involving
>
>   all concerned social groups and movements, in different areas, from
>
>   techies and ICT-for-development actors to media reform groups,
>
>   democracy movements and social justice activists.
>
>
>
>   This year will also see the 10 year high-level review of the World
>
>   Summit on the Information Society (WSIS), to be held in New York in
>
>   December. As a full-scale review of a major UN summit, this will be a
>
>   critical global political event. Since the WSIS, held in 2003 and 2005,
>
>   the Internet, and what it means socially, has undergone a paradigm
>
>   shift. The WSIS witnessed active engagement of civil society and
>
>   technical groups as well as of business. However, currently, there
>
>   seems to be an deliberate attempt to sideline this UN-led initiative on
>
>   governance issues of the information society and Internet in favour of
>
>   private, big-business-dominated initiatives like the WEF's Net Mundial
>
>   Initiative. The Internet Social Forum, while remaining primarily a
>
>   people's forum, will also seek to channel global civil society's
>
>   engagement towards the WSIS +10 review.
>
>
>
>   The following organisations form the initial group that is proposing
>
>   the Internet Social Forum, and many more are expected to join in the
>
>   immediate future. This is an open call to progressive groups from all
>
>   over the world to join this initiative, and participate in developing a
>
>   People's Internet Manifesto.
>
>
>
>   Just Net Coalition, Global
>
>   P2P Foundation, Global
>
>   Transnational Institute, Global
>
>   Forum on Communication for Integration of our America, Regional (Latin
>
>   America) Arab NGO Network for Development, Regional
>
>   Agencia Latinoamericana de Información, Regional
>
>   Alternative Informatics Association, Turkey
>
>   Knowledge Commons, India
>
>   Open-Root/EUROLINC, France
>
>   SLFC.in, India
>
>   CODE-IP Trust, Kenya
>
>   GodlyGlobal.org, Switzerland
>
>   Centre for Community Informatics Research, Development and Training,
>
>   Canada IT for Change, India
>
>   Association for Proper Internet Governance, Switzerland
>
>   Computer Professionals Union, Philippines
>
>   Free Press, USA
>
>   Advocates of Science and Technology for the People, Philippines
>
>   Other News, Italy
>
>   Free Software Movement of India
>
>   Global_Geneva, Switzerland
>
>   Solidarius (Solidarity Economy Network), Italy
>
>   All India Peoples Science Network, India
>
>   Institute for Local Self-Reliance - Community Broadband Networks, USA
>
>
>
>   Please contact us at secretariat at InternetSocialForum.net for further
>
>   information or clarification.
>
>
>
>   Or the following regional contacts:
>
>
>
>   Africa:        Alex Gakaru <AlexG at InternetSocialForum.net>
>
>   Asia:          Rishab Bailey <RishabB at InternetSocialForum.net>
>
>   Europe:        Norbert Bollow <NorbertB at InternetSocialForum.net>
>
>   North America: Micheal Gurstein <MichealG at InternetSocialForum.net>
>
>   South America: Sally Burch <SallyB at InternetSocialForum.net>
>
>
>
>
>
>   This press release is also available online, e.g. at
>
>   http://justnetcoalition.org/ISF
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>     bestbits at lists.bestbits.net.
> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit:
>     http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits
>
>
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>      governance at lists.igcaucus.org
> To be removed from the list, visit:
>      http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
>
> For all other list information and functions, see:
>      http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
>      http://www.igcaucus.org/
>
> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> Cheers,
>
> McTim
> "A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A route
> indicates how we get there."  Jon Postel
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>      bestbits at lists.bestbits.net.
> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit:
>      http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits
>
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>      governance at lists.igcaucus.org
> To be removed from the list, visit:
>      http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
>
> For all other list information and functions, see:
>      http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
>      http://www.igcaucus.org/
>
> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
>
>


-- 
Cheers,

McTim
"A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A route
indicates how we get there."  Jon Postel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150128/3c408971/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From suresh at hserus.net  Wed Jan 28 18:42:06 2015
From: suresh at hserus.net (Suresh Ramasubramanian)
Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2015 05:12:06 +0530
Subject: [governance] [] Internet Social Forum-->Jeremy's Jeremiad and
 Philip's Phillipic
In-Reply-To: <CACAaNxi5Za=6XvEN6=5YA8xWDEu=3Mz-DHRxfqBvut0zu8F3LA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <01e601d03b13$982da510$c888ef30$@gmail.com>
 <54C91C36.4010309@acm.org>
 <CACAaNxi5Za=6XvEN6=5YA8xWDEu=3Mz-DHRxfqBvut0zu8F3LA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <14b32ec4540.2762.4f968dcf8ecd56c9cb8acab6370fcfe0@hserus.net>

That propaganda maxim about repeated lies is more often attributed to 
Joseph goebbels than it is to Joe McCarthy, by the way.


On January 29, 2015 5:07:18 AM McTim <dogwallah at gmail.com> wrote:

> Avri,
>
> On Wed, Jan 28, 2015 at 11:28 AM, Avri Doria <avri at acm.org> wrote:
>
> >  (repeat of reply sent to Bestbits)
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > I must say, I am in complete agreement with the notion that a lie repeated
> > often enough neither becomes the truth nor  represents that which is the
> > case.
> >
> >
> +1
>
>
>
> > A main issue, however, is identifying whose statements constitute lies,
> > and I expect there are differences of opinion on who is putting forward
> > falsehoods.
> >
> >
> Yup.
>
>
> > Beyond that, I did not know we had any US Senators on this list.   Living
> > or dead.
> >
> >
>
> Does no one else find it hilarious that McCarthyism (
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McCarthyism) is being used to accuse someone
> else of being McCarthy-ist?
>
> All I did was send a link.  I did not endorse the views of the author.  I
> was attacked for that.
>
> I would appreciate the CoCo's intervention on this matter in accordance
> with the Charter.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > avri
> >
> >
> >
> > On 28-Jan-15 11:00, michael gurstein wrote:
> >
> >  McTim (or should I say (Sen.) McCarthy…
> >
> >
> >
> > I’m hoping that folks are wise enough not to think that if a lie is
> > repeated often enough and loudly enough and particularly if it can be
> > referenced to a blogpost with a reference to a (slightly deranged err over
> > the top) blogpost that provides significantly distorted and selective
> > references to a further set of documents then somehow it has a reality
> > beyond simply self-interested commentary (sigh, but such is the Internet…
> >
> >
> >
> > And now to:
> >
> >
> >
> > Jeremy’s Jeremiad <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeremiad> and Phillip’s
> > Philippic <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philippic>
> >
> >
> >
> > As they say the worst insult is to be ignored, and no publicity is bad
> > publicity… so thanks folks for spreading the word about the JNC and the ISF.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > That Philip got it wrong following Jeremy’s wild distortions and
> > misrepresentations shouldn’t be too surprising.  I’ll leave a detailed
> > cross referencing between reality and what Jeremy has oozed out to others
> > with a more Talmudic bent but just to say that I’m expecting a libel action
> > to be forthcoming from my PM Stephen Harper at the possibility that he
> > might be funding my contributions to the JNC or the ISF (I would expect
> > similar rumblings from various of the other “state actors” to which he
> > might so circuitously and ponderously be referring).
> >
> >
> >
> > But just to note—it is only in the minds of the profoundly anti-democratic
> > (and historically illiterate) that statements to the effect that “The
> > right to make Internet-related public policies lies exclusively with those
> > who legitimately and directly represent people” is (mis) represented as
> > calling for governance solely by and through existing governmental (or
> > inter-governmental) structures or more specifically existing and very often
> > undemocratic and unrepresentative governments and state structures/actors
> > (whoever they may be).
> >
> >
> >
> > M
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > *From:* governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [
> > mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org
> > <governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org>] *On Behalf Of *McTim
> > *Sent:* Tuesday, January 27, 2015 9:02 AM
> > *To:* governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Jean-Christophe NOTHIAS I The Global
> > Journal
> > *Cc:* parminder; bestbits at lists.bestbits.net; discuss at 1net.org >> 1Net
> > List
> > *Subject:* Re: [bestbits] [governance] Internet Social Forum
> >
> >
> >
> > Quoting a CircleID piece by Philip Corwin:
> >
> >
> > 
> http://www.circleid.com/posts/20150125_occupy_ig_internet_social_forum_targets_netmundial_initiative/
> >
> > "The author is not familiar with most of the groups constituting ISF. As
> > always, a good rule for understanding true intent is "follow the money".
> > We'd find it illuminating to know where they get their funding and whether
> > any state actors are involved (and a colleague more familiar with the
> > global IG scene advises that at least several are indeed closely linked to
> > their national governments, and are unsurprisingly more favorable toward
> > the government-led multilateral approach on IG than the private sector
> > oriented MSM). So there is some question as to whether ISF is a genuine
> > grassroots Netizen movement — or a convergence of government-dominated
> > organizations pairing with "useful idiot
> > <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Useful_idiot>” entities to pursue a
> > broader and more pernicious agenda of undermining the MSM and replacing it
> > with a UN-led, government-dominated one. "
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Sat, Jan 24, 2015 at 1:23 AM, Jean-Christophe NOTHIAS I The Global
> > Journal <jc.nothias at theglobaljournal.net> wrote:
> >
> > Quoted a Register piece written by Kieren McCarthy
> >
> > Hibernating NetMundial continues to rattle internet governance world
> > reg.cx/2dZG <http://t.co/0D2vSUtqqf>
> >
> >
> >
> > As to NetMundial's three-month consultation period, that will seemingly be
> > led by respected internet governance academic and ICANN Board member
> > Wolfgang Kleinwachter. The NetMundial organizers did not reveal how much
> > they will pay Kleinwachter to lend the initiative his credibility, but his
> > first attempt to make the internet community learn to love the idea came in
> > the form of a blog post
> > 
> <http://www.circleid.com/posts/20150103_internet_governance_outlook_2015_2_processes_many_venues_4_baskets/> 
> at
> > the start of the year.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Le 24 janv. 2015 à 00:21, parminder a écrit :
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Friday 23 January 2015 11:31 PM, "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang" wrote:
> >
> > Hi Parminder,
> >
> >
> >
> >  how the ISF is linked to the IGF?
> >
> >
> > Hi Wolfgang
> >
> > One is a civil society forum, the other a multistakeholder one. One
> > develops people's and civil society's positions on the key issue of the
> > global Internet, the other is a place where such positions can enter into
> > dialogue with holders of political and economic power - the governments and
> > the corporate actors.
> >
> > Unless now the whole idea and concept of civil society - and along with
> > those of people's movements, grassroots, activism, and so on - has been
> > fully coopted in some people's mind with that of multistakeholderism
> > (whatever one actually means by it, something that has remained notoriously
> > unclear), the connection or link that you inquire about is extremely clear
> > to me.
> >
> > Internet is not the first thing for which there has been felt a need for
> > 'independently' forming a people's conception and set of hopes,
> > expectations and demands - away from conclaves of power. There have been
> > scores of others, and newer ones continue to arise. Accordingly if people's
> > and civil society forums etc have been meaningful and needed in these
> > areas, it is incumbent upon *those* who think they are *not needed* in the
> > Internet space to explain why it is so, then the other way around.
> >
> > To put is somewhat flippantly, ISF is also a reaction of people who are
> > fed up with an ongoing IG charade where for instance Fadi Chehade can with
> > a straight face call the WEF's Net Mundial Initiative as the 'mother of all
> > bottom -up processes' - even jokes require some plausibility limits!
> >
> > To take the example of one of the latest international global forums on a
> > key global governance issue, the Lima meeting on climate change, you will
> > perhaps know that parallel to it a people's meeting was held. Internet and
> > its governance also needs such meetings, that is the simple logic of the
> > Internet Social Forum. If you think that in the Internet's case, such
> > meetings and forums are not needed, I would of course be curious to hear
> > your case.
> >
> > I am happy to engage further with you on this issue, and answer your
> > questions.
> >
> > Lastly, let me invite you to join the ISF process. We work under the World
> > Social Forum (WSF) process and principles - whereby its meetings are open
> > to all civil society participants subject to very inimum conditions that
> > are listed on their website.
> >
> > Further, if the discussion is to now turn to the WSF, its meaning,
> > relevance, etc, I am as happy to engage with you on that subject.
> >
> > Regards, parminder
> >
> >
> >
> > Wolfgang
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >  -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> >
> >  Von: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org im Auftrag von parminder
> >
> >  Gesendet: Do 22.01.2015 17:01
> >
> >  An: governance at lists.igcaucus.org
> >
> >  Betreff: Re: [governance] Internet Social Forum
> >
> >   Enclosed Spanish version... parminder
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >  On Thursday 22 January 2015 07:06 PM, Norbert Bollow wrote:
> >
> >  Global Civil Society launches the Internet Social Forum
> >
> >   - With a call to occupy the Internet
> >
> >
> >
> >   PRESS RELEASE. Geneva, Switzerland, 22st January, 2015.
> >
> >
> >
> >   A group of civil society organisations from around the world has
> >
> >   announced the Internet Social Forum, to bring together and articulate
> >
> >   bottom-up perspectives on the 'Internet we want'. Taking inspiration
> >
> >   from the World Social Forum, and its clarion call, 'Another World is
> >
> >   possible', the group seeks to draw urgent attention to the increasing
> >
> >   centralization of the Internet for extraction of monopoly rents and for
> >
> >   socio-political control, asserting that 'Another Internet is possible'!
> >
> >
> >
> >   The Internet Social Forum will inter alia offer an alternative to the
> >
> >   recently-launched World Economic Forum's 'Net Mundial Initiative' on
> >
> >   global Internet governance. While the World Economic Forum (WEF) and
> >
> >   the 'Net Mundial Initiative' convene global elites, the Internet Social
> >
> >   Forum will be a participatory and bottom-up space for all those who
> >
> >   believe that the global Internet must evolve in the public interest; a
> >
> >   direct parallel to the launch of the World Social Forum in 2001 as a
> >
> >   counter initiative to the WEF.
> >
> >
> >
> >   The Internet Social Forum will reach out to grassroots groups and
> >
> >   social movements across the world, catalysing a groundswell that
> >
> >   challenges the entrenched elite interests that currently control how
> >
> >   the Internet is managed. The Internet Social Forum's preparatory
> >
> >   process will kick off during the World Social Forum to take place in
> >
> >   Tunis, March 24th to 28th, 2015. The Internet Social Forum itself is
> >
> >   planned to be held either late 2015 or early 2016.
> >
> >
> >
> >   "While the world's biggest companies have every right to debate the
> >
> >   future of the Internet, we are concerned that their perspectives should
> >
> >   not drown out those of ordinary people who have no access to the
> >
> >   privileged terrain WEF occupies - in the end it is this wider public
> >
> >   interest that must be paramount in governing the Internet. We are
> >
> >   organising the Internet Social Forum to make sure their voices can't be
> >
> >   ignored in the corridors of power," said Norbert Bollow, Co-Convenor of
> >
> >   the Just Net Coalition, which is one of the groups involved in the
> >
> >   initiative.
> >
> >
> >
> >   The Internet Social Forum, and its preparatory process, is intended as
> >
> >   a space to vision and build the 'Internet we want'. It will be
> >
> >   underpinned by values of democracy, human rights and social justice. It
> >
> >   will stand for participatory policy making and promote community media.
> >
> >   It will seek an Internet that is truly decentralized in its
> >
> >   architecture and based on people's full rights to data, information,
> >
> >   knowledge and other 'commons' that the Internet has enabled the world
> >
> >   community to generate and share.
> >
> >
> >
> >   Somewhat similar to Web inventor Tim Berners-Lee's call for a 'Magna
> >
> >   Carta for the Internet', the Internet Social Forum proposes to develop
> >
> >   a People's Internet Manifesto, through a bottom-up process involving
> >
> >   all concerned social groups and movements, in different areas, from
> >
> >   techies and ICT-for-development actors to media reform groups,
> >
> >   democracy movements and social justice activists.
> >
> >
> >
> >   This year will also see the 10 year high-level review of the World
> >
> >   Summit on the Information Society (WSIS), to be held in New York in
> >
> >   December. As a full-scale review of a major UN summit, this will be a
> >
> >   critical global political event. Since the WSIS, held in 2003 and 2005,
> >
> >   the Internet, and what it means socially, has undergone a paradigm
> >
> >   shift. The WSIS witnessed active engagement of civil society and
> >
> >   technical groups as well as of business. However, currently, there
> >
> >   seems to be an deliberate attempt to sideline this UN-led initiative on
> >
> >   governance issues of the information society and Internet in favour of
> >
> >   private, big-business-dominated initiatives like the WEF's Net Mundial
> >
> >   Initiative. The Internet Social Forum, while remaining primarily a
> >
> >   people's forum, will also seek to channel global civil society's
> >
> >   engagement towards the WSIS +10 review.
> >
> >
> >
> >   The following organisations form the initial group that is proposing
> >
> >   the Internet Social Forum, and many more are expected to join in the
> >
> >   immediate future. This is an open call to progressive groups from all
> >
> >   over the world to join this initiative, and participate in developing a
> >
> >   People's Internet Manifesto.
> >
> >
> >
> >   Just Net Coalition, Global
> >
> >   P2P Foundation, Global
> >
> >   Transnational Institute, Global
> >
> >   Forum on Communication for Integration of our America, Regional (Latin
> >
> >   America) Arab NGO Network for Development, Regional
> >
> >   Agencia Latinoamericana de Información, Regional
> >
> >   Alternative Informatics Association, Turkey
> >
> >   Knowledge Commons, India
> >
> >   Open-Root/EUROLINC, France
> >
> >   SLFC.in, India
> >
> >   CODE-IP Trust, Kenya
> >
> >   GodlyGlobal.org, Switzerland
> >
> >   Centre for Community Informatics Research, Development and Training,
> >
> >   Canada IT for Change, India
> >
> >   Association for Proper Internet Governance, Switzerland
> >
> >   Computer Professionals Union, Philippines
> >
> >   Free Press, USA
> >
> >   Advocates of Science and Technology for the People, Philippines
> >
> >   Other News, Italy
> >
> >   Free Software Movement of India
> >
> >   Global_Geneva, Switzerland
> >
> >   Solidarius (Solidarity Economy Network), Italy
> >
> >   All India Peoples Science Network, India
> >
> >   Institute for Local Self-Reliance - Community Broadband Networks, USA
> >
> >
> >
> >   Please contact us at secretariat at InternetSocialForum.net for further
> >
> >   information or clarification.
> >
> >
> >
> >   Or the following regional contacts:
> >
> >
> >
> >   Africa:        Alex Gakaru <AlexG at InternetSocialForum.net>
> >
> >   Asia:          Rishab Bailey <RishabB at InternetSocialForum.net>
> >
> >   Europe:        Norbert Bollow <NorbertB at InternetSocialForum.net>
> >
> >   North America: Micheal Gurstein <MichealG at InternetSocialForum.net>
> >
> >   South America: Sally Burch <SallyB at InternetSocialForum.net>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >   This press release is also available online, e.g. at
> >
> >   http://justnetcoalition.org/ISF
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ____________________________________________________________
> > You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
> >     bestbits at lists.bestbits.net.
> > To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit:
> >     http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ____________________________________________________________
> > You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
> >      governance at lists.igcaucus.org
> > To be removed from the list, visit:
> >      http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
> >
> > For all other list information and functions, see:
> >      http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
> > To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
> >      http://www.igcaucus.org/
> >
> > Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> > McTim
> > "A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A route
> > indicates how we get there."  Jon Postel
> >
> >
> > ____________________________________________________________
> > You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
> >      bestbits at lists.bestbits.net.
> > To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit:
> >      http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits
> >
> >
> >
> > ____________________________________________________________
> > You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
> >      governance at lists.igcaucus.org
> > To be removed from the list, visit:
> >      http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
> >
> > For all other list information and functions, see:
> >      http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
> > To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
> >      http://www.igcaucus.org/
> >
> > Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> Cheers,
>
> McTim
> "A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A route
> indicates how we get there."  Jon Postel
>
>
>
> ----------
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>      governance at lists.igcaucus.org
> To be removed from the list, visit:
>      http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
>
> For all other list information and functions, see:
>      http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
>      http://www.igcaucus.org/
>
> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150129/3ed59abf/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From ahmed22digital at gmail.com  Wed Jan 28 23:27:41 2015
From: ahmed22digital at gmail.com (ahmed eisa)
Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2015 07:27:41 +0300
Subject: [governance] Fwd: [bestbits] WSIS+10 Review - Info-sharing & CS
 coordination event [March 2, Paris]
In-Reply-To: <CAMz5XN5KzyBTKuru=nJ6E=4mc8Sc4JufPVa=X9stNXsRoxqVXw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAJTVAjwnazYyOhAaSFjBGbF2yAHQv6sPgZEnqPGmPG58U6v=gg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAMz5XN5KzyBTKuru=nJ6E=4mc8Sc4JufPVa=X9stNXsRoxqVXw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CACKazKo-NqkeGH3mure=P28vLmF8vAX0dZ=7=eaUD3C8TLohbA@mail.gmail.com>

Dear FRIENDS

 we promote for WSIS process since 2009 through workshops, exhibition and
online consultation. We developed the initiative of iwrite4wsis in
partnership with ITU to promote and raise the awareness of WSIS process.

https://www.google.com/search?q=gdco+sudan+and+wsis&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8

http://www.wsis-community.org/pg/videos/play/ahmed22sudan/1065716/role-of-telecentre-for-community-development

https://www.google.com/search?q=itu+and+gdco+sudan&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8

http://search.itu.int/Pages/SearchResults.aspx?k=gdco+sudan

1-    I participated in the WSIS forums from 2009 to 2014 (workshops,
exhibitions and many interventions)

2-    Iam a partner with ITU in the intuitive of iwrite4wsis
<http://groups.itu.int/wsis-forum2012/NewsOutreach/iwrite4WSISForum.aspx>
to promote and write about the WSIS Process including wsis action lines,
MDGs and SDGs

3-    I participated in the world telecom in Geneva, Dubai and Doha

4-    I was a nominee for the wsis project prize since it started several
times

5-    Iam one of the bloggers about the WSIS process and I have more than
20 blogs and 1000 photos about wsis process

6-     Participated in many of WSIS online consultations

wsis 2011

http://groups.itu.int/wsis-forum2011/Agenda.aspx?event=event_230

http://groups.itu.int/wsis-forum2011/Home.aspx

http://groups.itu.int/wsis-forum2012/NewsOutreach/iwrite4WSISForum.aspx

wsis 2012

http://groups.itu.int/wsis-forum2012/Home.aspx

http://groups.itu.int/wsis-forum2012/NewsOutreach/iwrite4WSISForum.aspx

wsis 2013

 http://www.itu.int/wsis/implementation/2013/forum/agenda/agenda.html?se=19

http://www.itu.int/wsis/implementation/2013/forum/agenda/session_docs/19/WSIS_1_TCF_partners_presentation.pdf

http://www.itu.int/wsis/implementation/2013/forum/outreach/iwrite.html

http://www.itu.int/wsis/implementation/2013/forum/agenda/session_docs/19/LAST_PANELIST_2013_WSIS.ppt.pdf

http://www.itu.int/wsis/implementation/2013/forum/inc/doc/agenda/WF13_ProgrammeBrochure.pdf

http://www.itu.int/wsis/implementation/2013/forum/inc/doc/agenda/WF13_DraftAgenda_05.08.pdf

WSIS 2014

http://www.itu.int/wsis/implementation/2014/forum/agenda/#?se=202

http://www.itu.int/wsis/implementation/2014/forum/agenda/session_docs/202/WSIS10.hle-Captioning.s202.pdf

http://www.itu.int/wsis/implementation/2014/forum/agenda/#?se=150

http://www.itu.int/wsis/implementation/2014/forum/agenda/session_docs/150/wsis_2014_telecentre_sudan.pdf

https://wsisforum2014.pathable.com/organizations/list?per_page=24&sort_mode=asc&with[tag][]=28103

http://gedaref.com/index.php/featured/296-come-visit-our-campus-today

GENERAL

http://seepcommunity.com/profiles/blogs/gdco-sudan-and-telecentres-movement-promote-for-ict

http://seepcommunity.com/profiles/blog/list?user=21w449uixv4i

http://community.telecentre.org/profile/AHMED

http://community.telecentre.org/profiles/blog/list?user=21w449uixv4i

http://community.telecentre.org/photo/album/listForOwner?screenName=21w449uixv4i

http://www.unite-it.eu/profiles/blog/list?user=21w449uixv4i

http://gedaref.com/index.php/featured/296-come-visit-our-campus-today

GENERAL 2

https://www.youtube.com/user/Gedaref22sudan/videos
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCu9lTzYGTC0hIMIcqoqODbg/VIDEOS

Ahmed Mahmoud Mohamed Eisa
+249123031155 Sudani

+249912331155 Zain

+249999331155  MTN
KHARTOUM alamaraat P.O.BOX 15021

post code 12217


 http://www.gedaref.com/


Gedaref digital city organization (GDCO) is a nongovernmental and nonprofit
organization (Gedaref Sudan), it is part of the Telecentres movement where
ICT is used for community development.  GDCO is the winner of information
for development award  (i4d 2007 awards e-India) for the inclusion of the
disabled, GDCO is the  winner of i4d 2008 awards for the best innovations
at the grassroots Telecentres and the winner of i4d 2009 for the
initiatives of civil society for development (e-agriculture project and
other e-services).. ..it is the winner of eWorld award 2011. it is the
winner of best innovative NGO working on ICT for community development in
Sudan.  The winner of best album in Telecentre 2011 Philippines .. it the
founder of the first Telecentre academy in Africa and middle east and the
thirteen in world ..The Digital City of Eindhoven (DSE) Netherlands (the
founder and well-known partner of GDCO in Netherlands) donated 750
computers and more than ten projects were established using ICT for
community development and one of them is e-agriculture. GDCO & SPEG
(foundation of eindhoven volunteers for gedaref projects) started new
partnership for community development including people with disability
(especially deaf), gedaref university, (faculty of medicine) e-agriculture,
SeVO and other project



On 28 January 2015 at 03:39, Deirdre Williams <williams.deirdre at gmail.com>
wrote:

> For your information.
> Deirdre
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Lea Kaspar <lea at gp-digital.org>
> Date: 27 January 2015 at 20:34
> Subject: [bestbits] WSIS+10 Review - Info-sharing & CS coordination event
> [March 2, Paris]
> To: Best Bits <bestbits at lists.bestbits.net>
> Cc: Nico S <seidler at isoc.org>, Constance Bommelaer <bommelaer at isoc.org>
>
>
> Dear friends,
>
> On Monday, March 2, in Paris, a group of civil society organisations -
> Global Partners Digital (GPD), Association for Progressive Communications
> (APC), Center for Democracy and Technology (CDT), International Federation
> of Library Associations and Institutions (IFLA), Internet Democracy
> Project, and KICTANet – in collaboration with the Internet Society (ISOC) -
> will be holding a *1-day event focused on the WSIS+10 Overall Review*.
>
> The purpose of the event will be to raise awareness of the review process
> and to facilitate coordination and strategy development for effective civil
> society engagement. While principally aimed at coordinating civil society
> efforts in engaging in the WSIS, part of the event will be dedicated to
> facilitating cross-community dialogue with representatives from the
> technical community, the business sector and governments. The event will be
> held on the margins of UNESCO's CONNECTing the Dots
> <http://www.unesco.org/new/en/netconference2015> conference.
>
> A *briefing note* with basic background information about the WSIS and
> its review can be found here:
> http://bestbits.net/wsis10-overall-review-briefing-note/. We hope this is
> useful and welcome any feedback.
>
> To give us an idea of interest for this event among civil society, please *let
> us know if you would be interested in attending* by RSVP-ing via this
> link: http://bestbits.net/events/wsis10-coordination/ Please note that
> limited funding for civil society from developing countries will be made
> available.
>
> A draft agenda and relevant logistical details will be circulated closer
> to the date.
>
> If any organisations are interested in helping organise this event please
> let me know off-list or by replying to this email.
>
> With warm wishes,
>
> *Lea Kaspar*
>
> Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL
>
> Development House, 56–64 Leonard Street, London EC2A 4LT
>
> T: +44 (0)20 7549 033*7* | M: +44 (0)7583 929216 | Skype: l.kaspar
>
> gp-digital.org
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>      bestbits at lists.bestbits.net.
> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit:
>      http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits
>
>
>
> --
> “The fundamental cure for poverty is not money but knowledge" Sir William
> Arthur Lewis, Nobel Prize Economics, 1979
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>      governance at lists.igcaucus.org
> To be removed from the list, visit:
>      http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
>
> For all other list information and functions, see:
>      http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
>      http://www.igcaucus.org/
>
> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150129/e7b12f49/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From nb at bollow.ch  Thu Jan 29 04:23:17 2015
From: nb at bollow.ch (Norbert Bollow)
Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2015 10:23:17 +0100
Subject: [governance] Internet Social Forum
In-Reply-To: <3A1B09A3-2607-432B-A4F8-F397EACEB8D2@difference.com.au>
References: <20150122143615.700b2f52@quill>
	<54C23F6A.9090503@cafonso.ca>
	<20150123145722.41e43a18@quill>
	<3A1B09A3-2607-432B-A4F8-F397EACEB8D2@difference.com.au>
Message-ID: <20150129102317.5fe36f11@quill>

Whenever I post anything on this list, I'm obviously thereby taking the
risk of someone trying to twist my words around.

Of course we use the words that we use in order to convey the meaning
which those words have in the context in which we use them. Nothing
more, nothing less. The context of the Internet Social Forum (ISF)
announcement is a context of demanding social justice and of protesting
against the kind of agenda that the WEF is associated with.

In particular, in this kind of context, "social forum" has a very
specific meaning: a kind of forum in which all civil society groups
are welcome which are (like we also are) opposed to what is referred to
as neoliberalism and to what is referred to as imperialism, and in
which the organizers of the forum are not attempting to control the
substantive content of the forum.

That is the kind of Internet Social Forum that we want. It is an idea
born out of discussions which took place in the context of the Just Net
Coalition, yes, but already by now the ISF idea has much broader
support, and IMO the plan to launch the preparatory process at the
World Social Forum (WSF) pretty much guarantees that any attempt to give
the ISF a character which fundamentally differs from the WSF's spirit
which is in the below correctly characterized as "a broad, diverse,
pluralistic organisation of global civil society" would certainly fail.

So I hereby request that the Just Net Coalition and the Internet Social
Forum should not be conflated please. A coalition is by the very meaning
of the word based on agreeing about something. A forum is, again by the
very meaning of the word, all about bringing together a variety of
perspectives. I would expect that anyone who sees the Just Net
Coalition's set of viewpoints as being "very narrowly defined" should
agree that it makes sense for us to desire the existence of a civil
society forum which is much broader and which allows for exchanges of
views from a very wide variety of perspectives, but where (unlike the
situation e.g. here on the IGC list) the fundamentals of "opposition to
what in the social forums movement is referred to as neoliberalism and
to what is referred to as imperialism" are accepted. We desire to be
able to participate in a forum which is focused on the Internet and
where these fundamentals are not in themselves already a constant source
of conflict (conflict which is here on the IGC list so very often
disruptive, preventing the kind of discussions which we feel need to
take place from taking place here on the IGC list.)

Greetings,
Norbert
co-convenor, Just Net Coalition
http://JustNetCoalition.org


On Thu, 29 Jan 2015 01:24:14 +0800
David Cake <dave at difference.com.au> wrote:

> On 24 Jan 2015, at 12:57 am, Norbert Bollow <nb at bollow.ch> wrote:
> > 
> > But to answer your question:
> > 
> > 1. Of course the "call to occupy the Internet" is not directed to
> > governments. That should be totally clear from the text that we have
> > published. We are at this point not in any way formally linked to
> > the occupy movement http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occupy_movement
> > but we use the term "occupy" to broadly align the Internet Social
> > Forum initiative with that kind of protest viewpoint.
> 
> 	Clarifying that the use of the occupy terminology (much as
> the term 'social forum' itself) is simply an attempt to associate a
> JNC project with an unassociated protest movement, with quite
> different goals, is appreciated. 
> 
> > 2. Did anyone seriously think that when JNC decided that we would
> > not participate in the "NETmundial initiative" which was originally
> > single-handedly led by WEF and then led jointly by WEF, ICANN and
> > CGI.br (while there appears to be strong evidence of WEF still being
> > the leading partner among the three), that that would mean that we
> > would want to remove ourselves entirely from an important part of
> > the discourse about the future of the Internet???
> 
> 	We may have been a little surprised at the degree to which
> JNC is willing to try to co-opt the goodwill of unassociated
> organisations in order to promote its rather different agenda. 
> 
> 	I for one found the obvious attempt to associate the ISF with
> the WSF, a forum that is based around a broad, diverse, pluralistic
> organisation of global civil society, having its name associated with
> a group that represents a very narrowly defined, deliberately
> excluding the mainstream civil society position, somewhat
> disingenuous. 
> 
> 	I for one would welcome discussion of internet governance
> within a WSF context, but reject the ISF as a legitimate attempt at
> doing something similar, for obvious reasons. Cheers David
> 

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 181 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150129/e3b97735/attachment.sig>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From mehrzad.azghandi at gmail.com  Thu Jan 29 08:48:55 2015
From: mehrzad.azghandi at gmail.com (Mehrzad Azghandi)
Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2015 17:18:55 +0330
Subject: [governance] [bestbits] Internet Social Forum
In-Reply-To: <CANMQhZjPOFEc=cRj8L6uZn-cN3W-M_KszoQv=nBf27-FZOyFhw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20150122143615.700b2f52@quill>
	<54C11EDD.50505@itforchange.net>
	<2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A801642A70@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
	<54C2D78C.2010900@itforchange.net>
	<62347604-80DB-474B-9421-91A684E17797@theglobaljournal.net>
	<CACAaNxhdXUbH9kZHnEVDrw6jvKRi3caU9U99S9HVf_UwSe1oNA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CANMQhZjPOFEc=cRj8L6uZn-cN3W-M_KszoQv=nBf27-FZOyFhw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAFXGDf1LBC9s8iXFk2CJqckqNXQ9rODqtPoXWp2kFWvhPE2oNg@mail.gmail.com>

So, where is the real Civil Society, when there are something in minds and
opposite in speeches! . This is the truly Achilles' heel of MS-ism, when
there are rare truly independent people in CS as well as there are among
Academia & Technical.

I agree that money is the issue for anybody, and we can't blame anybody who
earn affordable money for his/her time and efforts. But the case of Big
Money is different and is mostly concerned, when we are talking about
$600K, which is officially announced, or when there are other investments
which are hided from us!. I don't think that anybody believe that this
procedure will get forward without money, but the presence of community may
guaranty the accountability in process on actual movements and others in
future.

On the other side, do we have any other options at his critical point,
except moving forward and discussing more and more, trying to purify and
empower Civil Society and MS-ism and truly decentralization?

I believe, independent people should participate in any possible way, and
be ware that Money is a never ending story all around the world and Big
Money knows how to find its way, even they participate or not. Money is
assumed to accelerate the procedure, but at the moment, we are making it as
a barrier for the community.

I was just thinking: what is forcing us to choose between NM initiative and
ISF, or any other initiatives in future, when we claim we are independence
and neutral, and trying to support MS-ism in any various perspectives? I
suggest any individual may/should participate and support both or several,
if he/she believes the principles of MS-ism; Transparency, Bottom up,
Diversity, etc.

BR

Mehrzad Azghandi


On Tue, Jan 27, 2015 at 9:18 PM, chlebrum . <chlebrum at gmail.com> wrote:

> It is funny to see an ICANN lobbyist  cannot believe that we can mobilize
> for something else than money (hey yes, we pay oneself our travels in the
> real civil society or what we are not submarines governments (and wicked
> governments wicked, obviously).
>
> In fact, he discovers ... real people
>
> Chantal Lebrument
> ​Courriel: c <lebrument at open-root.eu>hlebrum at gmail.com
> Mob: +33 6 8369 5460
>
> 2015-01-27 18:01 GMT+01:00 McTim <dogwallah at gmail.com>:
>
>> Quoting a CircleID piece by Philip Corwin:
>>
>>
>> http://www.circleid.com/posts/20150125_occupy_ig_internet_social_forum_targets_netmundial_initiative/
>>
>> "The author is not familiar with most of the groups constituting ISF. As
>> always, a good rule for understanding true intent is "follow the money".
>> We'd find it illuminating to know where they get their funding and whether
>> any state actors are involved (and a colleague more familiar with the
>> global IG scene advises that at least several are indeed closely linked to
>> their national governments, and are unsurprisingly more favorable toward
>> the government-led multilateral approach on IG than the private sector
>> oriented MSM). So there is some question as to whether ISF is a genuine
>> grassroots Netizen movement — or a convergence of government-dominated
>> organizations pairing with "useful idiot
>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Useful_idiot>” entities to pursue a
>> broader and more pernicious agenda of undermining the MSM and replacing it
>> with a UN-led, government-dominated one. "
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sat, Jan 24, 2015 at 1:23 AM, Jean-Christophe NOTHIAS I The Global
>> Journal <jc.nothias at theglobaljournal.net> wrote:
>>
>>> Quoted a Register piece written by Kieren McCarthy
>>> Hibernating NetMundial continues to rattle internet governance world
>>> reg.cx/2dZG <http://t.co/0D2vSUtqqf>
>>>
>>> As to NetMundial's three-month consultation period, that will seemingly
>>> be led by respected internet governance academic and ICANN Board member
>>> Wolfgang Kleinwachter. The NetMundial organizers did not reveal how much
>>> they will pay Kleinwachter to lend the initiative his credibility, but his
>>> first attempt to make the internet community learn to love the idea came in
>>> the form of a blog post
>>> <http://www.circleid.com/posts/20150103_internet_governance_outlook_2015_2_processes_many_venues_4_baskets/> at
>>> the start of the year.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Le 24 janv. 2015 à 00:21, parminder a écrit :
>>>
>>>
>>> On Friday 23 January 2015 11:31 PM, "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang" wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Parminder,
>>>
>>>
>>> how the ISF is linked to the IGF?
>>>
>>>
>>> Hi Wolfgang
>>>
>>> One is a civil society forum, the other a multistakeholder one. One
>>> develops people's and civil society's positions on the key issue of the
>>> global Internet, the other is a place where such positions can enter into
>>> dialogue with holders of political and economic power - the governments and
>>> the corporate actors.
>>>
>>> Unless now the whole idea and concept of civil society - and along with
>>> those of people's movements, grassroots, activism, and so on - has been
>>> fully coopted in some people's mind with that of multistakeholderism
>>> (whatever one actually means by it, something that has remained notoriously
>>> unclear), the connection or link that you inquire about is extremely clear
>>> to me.
>>>
>>> Internet is not the first thing for which there has been felt a need for
>>> 'independently' forming a people's conception and set of hopes,
>>> expectations and demands - away from conclaves of power. There have been
>>> scores of others, and newer ones continue to arise. Accordingly if people's
>>> and civil society forums etc have been meaningful and needed in these
>>> areas, it is incumbent upon *those* who think they are *not needed* in the
>>> Internet space to explain why it is so, then the other way around.
>>>
>>> To put is somewhat flippantly, ISF is also a reaction of people who are
>>> fed up with an ongoing IG charade where for instance Fadi Chehade can with
>>> a straight face call the WEF's Net Mundial Initiative as the 'mother of all
>>> bottom -up processes' - even jokes require some plausibility limits!
>>>
>>> To take the example of one of the latest international global forums on
>>> a key global governance issue, the Lima meeting on climate change, you will
>>> perhaps know that parallel to it a people's meeting was held. Internet and
>>> its governance also needs such meetings, that is the simple logic of the
>>> Internet Social Forum. If you think that in the Internet's case, such
>>> meetings and forums are not needed, I would of course be curious to hear
>>> your case.
>>>
>>> I am happy to engage further with you on this issue, and answer your
>>> questions.
>>>
>>> Lastly, let me invite you to join the ISF process. We work under the
>>> World Social Forum (WSF) process and principles - whereby its meetings are
>>> open to all civil society participants subject to very inimum conditions
>>> that are listed on their website.
>>>
>>> Further, if the discussion is to now turn to the WSF, its meaning,
>>> relevance, etc, I am as happy to engage with you on that subject.
>>>
>>> Regards, parminder
>>>
>>>
>>> Wolfgang
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
>>>
>>> Von: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org im Auftrag von parminder
>>>
>>> Gesendet: Do 22.01.2015 17:01
>>>
>>> An: governance at lists.igcaucus.org
>>>
>>> Betreff: Re: [governance] Internet Social Forum
>>>
>>>  Enclosed Spanish version... parminder
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thursday 22 January 2015 07:06 PM, Norbert Bollow wrote:
>>>
>>> Global Civil Society launches the Internet Social Forum
>>>
>>> - With a call to occupy the Internet
>>>
>>>
>>> PRESS RELEASE. Geneva, Switzerland, 22st January, 2015.
>>>
>>>
>>> A group of civil society organisations from around the world has
>>>
>>> announced the Internet Social Forum, to bring together and articulate
>>>
>>> bottom-up perspectives on the 'Internet we want'. Taking inspiration
>>>
>>> from the World Social Forum, and its clarion call, 'Another World is
>>>
>>> possible', the group seeks to draw urgent attention to the increasing
>>>
>>> centralization of the Internet for extraction of monopoly rents and for
>>>
>>> socio-political control, asserting that 'Another Internet is possible'!
>>>
>>>
>>> The Internet Social Forum will inter alia offer an alternative to the
>>>
>>> recently-launched World Economic Forum's 'Net Mundial Initiative' on
>>>
>>> global Internet governance. While the World Economic Forum (WEF) and
>>>
>>> the 'Net Mundial Initiative' convene global elites, the Internet Social
>>>
>>> Forum will be a participatory and bottom-up space for all those who
>>>
>>> believe that the global Internet must evolve in the public interest; a
>>>
>>> direct parallel to the launch of the World Social Forum in 2001 as a
>>>
>>> counter initiative to the WEF.
>>>
>>>
>>> The Internet Social Forum will reach out to grassroots groups and
>>>
>>> social movements across the world, catalysing a groundswell that
>>>
>>> challenges the entrenched elite interests that currently control how
>>>
>>> the Internet is managed. The Internet Social Forum's preparatory
>>>
>>> process will kick off during the World Social Forum to take place in
>>>
>>> Tunis, March 24th to 28th, 2015. The Internet Social Forum itself is
>>>
>>> planned to be held either late 2015 or early 2016.
>>>
>>>
>>> "While the world's biggest companies have every right to debate the
>>>
>>> future of the Internet, we are concerned that their perspectives should
>>>
>>> not drown out those of ordinary people who have no access to the
>>>
>>> privileged terrain WEF occupies - in the end it is this wider public
>>>
>>> interest that must be paramount in governing the Internet. We are
>>>
>>> organising the Internet Social Forum to make sure their voices can't be
>>>
>>> ignored in the corridors of power," said Norbert Bollow, Co-Convenor of
>>>
>>> the Just Net Coalition, which is one of the groups involved in the
>>>
>>> initiative.
>>>
>>>
>>> The Internet Social Forum, and its preparatory process, is intended as
>>>
>>> a space to vision and build the 'Internet we want'. It will be
>>>
>>> underpinned by values of democracy, human rights and social justice. It
>>>
>>> will stand for participatory policy making and promote community media.
>>>
>>> It will seek an Internet that is truly decentralized in its
>>>
>>> architecture and based on people's full rights to data, information,
>>>
>>> knowledge and other 'commons' that the Internet has enabled the world
>>>
>>> community to generate and share.
>>>
>>>
>>> Somewhat similar to Web inventor Tim Berners-Lee's call for a 'Magna
>>>
>>> Carta for the Internet', the Internet Social Forum proposes to develop
>>>
>>> a People's Internet Manifesto, through a bottom-up process involving
>>>
>>> all concerned social groups and movements, in different areas, from
>>>
>>> techies and ICT-for-development actors to media reform groups,
>>>
>>> democracy movements and social justice activists.
>>>
>>>
>>> This year will also see the 10 year high-level review of the World
>>>
>>> Summit on the Information Society (WSIS), to be held in New York in
>>>
>>> December. As a full-scale review of a major UN summit, this will be a
>>>
>>> critical global political event. Since the WSIS, held in 2003 and 2005,
>>>
>>> the Internet, and what it means socially, has undergone a paradigm
>>>
>>> shift. The WSIS witnessed active engagement of civil society and
>>>
>>> technical groups as well as of business. However, currently, there
>>>
>>> seems to be an deliberate attempt to sideline this UN-led initiative on
>>>
>>> governance issues of the information society and Internet in favour of
>>>
>>> private, big-business-dominated initiatives like the WEF's Net Mundial
>>>
>>> Initiative. The Internet Social Forum, while remaining primarily a
>>>
>>> people's forum, will also seek to channel global civil society's
>>>
>>> engagement towards the WSIS +10 review.
>>>
>>>
>>> The following organisations form the initial group that is proposing
>>>
>>> the Internet Social Forum, and many more are expected to join in the
>>>
>>> immediate future. This is an open call to progressive groups from all
>>>
>>> over the world to join this initiative, and participate in developing a
>>>
>>> People's Internet Manifesto.
>>>
>>>
>>> Just Net Coalition, Global
>>>
>>> P2P Foundation, Global
>>>
>>> Transnational Institute, Global
>>>
>>> Forum on Communication for Integration of our America, Regional (Latin
>>>
>>> America) Arab NGO Network for Development, Regional
>>>
>>> Agencia Latinoamericana de Información, Regional
>>>
>>> Alternative Informatics Association, Turkey
>>>
>>> Knowledge Commons, India
>>>
>>> Open-Root/EUROLINC, France
>>>
>>> SLFC.in, India
>>>
>>> CODE-IP Trust, Kenya
>>>
>>> GodlyGlobal.org, Switzerland
>>>
>>> Centre for Community Informatics Research, Development and Training,
>>>
>>> Canada IT for Change, India
>>>
>>> Association for Proper Internet Governance, Switzerland
>>>
>>> Computer Professionals Union, Philippines
>>>
>>> Free Press, USA
>>>
>>> Advocates of Science and Technology for the People, Philippines
>>>
>>> Other News, Italy
>>>
>>> Free Software Movement of India
>>>
>>> Global_Geneva, Switzerland
>>>
>>> Solidarius (Solidarity Economy Network), Italy
>>>
>>> All India Peoples Science Network, India
>>>
>>> Institute for Local Self-Reliance - Community Broadband Networks, USA
>>>
>>>
>>> Please contact us at secretariat at InternetSocialForum.net for further
>>>
>>> information or clarification.
>>>
>>>
>>> Or the following regional contacts:
>>>
>>>
>>> Africa:        Alex Gakaru <AlexG at InternetSocialForum.net>
>>>
>>> Asia:          Rishab Bailey <RishabB at InternetSocialForum.net>
>>>
>>> Europe:        Norbert Bollow <NorbertB at InternetSocialForum.net>
>>>
>>> North America: Micheal Gurstein <MichealG at InternetSocialForum.net>
>>>
>>> South America: Sally Burch <SallyB at InternetSocialForum.net>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> This press release is also available online, e.g. at
>>>
>>> http://justnetcoalition.org/ISF
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ____________________________________________________________
>>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>>>     bestbits at lists.bestbits.net.
>>> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit:
>>>     http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ____________________________________________________________
>>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>>>      governance at lists.igcaucus.org
>>> To be removed from the list, visit:
>>>      http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
>>>
>>> For all other list information and functions, see:
>>>      http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
>>> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
>>>      http://www.igcaucus.org/
>>>
>>> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Cheers,
>>
>> McTim
>> "A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A route
>> indicates how we get there."  Jon Postel
>>
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>>      governance at lists.igcaucus.org
>> To be removed from the list, visit:
>>      http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
>>
>> For all other list information and functions, see:
>>      http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
>> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
>>      http://www.igcaucus.org/
>>
>> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
>>
>>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>      governance at lists.igcaucus.org
> To be removed from the list, visit:
>      http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
>
> For all other list information and functions, see:
>      http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
>      http://www.igcaucus.org/
>
> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
>
>


-- 
*Mehrzad Azghandi*
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150129/66ee133b/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From analia.aspis at gmail.com  Thu Jan 29 10:09:24 2015
From: analia.aspis at gmail.com (Analia Aspis)
Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2015 12:09:24 -0300
Subject: [governance] IGC server - normal activity
Message-ID: <CABi6_T8DvnGz_ne4hc38dNTm-dLT3bwvRODX7tUE5cEqcVHCXA@mail.gmail.com>

Dear Jeremy,

On behalf of the IGC we would like to thank Jeremy Malcolm for dropping
everything at very short notice this afternoon to deal with an emergency in
the IGC server system.



Analia and Deirdre
Co-coordinators, IGC
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150129/c740e620/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From remmyn at gmail.com  Thu Jan 29 10:45:13 2015
From: remmyn at gmail.com (Remmy Nweke)
Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2015 07:45:13 -0800
Subject: [governance] IGC server - normal activity
Message-ID: <-2444526998123531666@unknownmsgid>

Weldone Jeremy

Sent from my Windows Phone
------------------------------
From: Analia Aspis <analia.aspis at gmail.com>
Sent: 29/01/2015 16:09
To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Jeremy Malcolm <Jeremy at malcolm.id.au>
Subject: [governance] IGC server - normal activity

Dear Jeremy,

On behalf of the IGC we would like to thank Jeremy Malcolm for dropping
everything at very short notice this afternoon to deal with an emergency in
the IGC server system.



Analia and Deirdre
Co-coordinators, IGC
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150129/ecabf8e4/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From ymshana2003 at gmail.com  Thu Jan 29 13:54:21 2015
From: ymshana2003 at gmail.com (ymshana2003)
Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2015 20:54:21 +0200
Subject: [governance] [bestbits] Internet Social Forum
Message-ID: <t7j8ql5tnuddojyw0lsfck2n.1422557388532@email.android.com>

+1
Well said.
Money Yes but Fairness should be supreme.. 

No Bribes, Lies,  Detractions or Favours..among other unfair games which are played. 

A very tall Wish List or a bitter pill?

Kind regards

Yassin 


Sent from Samsung Mobile

-------- Original message --------
From: Mehrzad Azghandi <mehrzad.azghandi at gmail.com> 
Date:29/01/2015  15:48  (GMT+02:00) 
To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org,"chlebrum ." <chlebrum at gmail.com> 
Cc: McTim <dogwallah at gmail.com> 
Subject: Re: [governance] [bestbits] Internet Social Forum 


So, where is the real Civil Society, when there are something in minds and opposite in speeches! . This is the truly Achilles' heel of MS-ism, when there are rare truly independent people in CS as well as there are among Academia & Technical.
 
I agree that money is the issue for anybody, and we can't blame anybody who earn affordable money for his/her time and efforts. But the case of Big Money is different and is mostly concerned, when we are talking about $600K, which is officially announced, or when there are other investments which are hided from us!. I don't think that anybody believe that this procedure will get forward without money, but the presence of community may guaranty the accountability in process on actual movements and others in future. 

On the other side, do we have any other options at his critical point, except moving forward and discussing more and more, trying to purify and empower Civil Society and MS-ism and truly decentralization?

I believe, independent people should participate in any possible way, and be ware that Money is a never ending story all around the world and Big Money knows how to find its way, even they participate or not. Money is assumed to accelerate the procedure, but at the moment, we are making it as a barrier for the community.

I was just thinking: what is forcing us to choose between NM initiative and ISF, or any other initiatives in future, when we claim we are independence and neutral, and trying to support MS-ism in any various perspectives? I suggest any individual may/should participate and support both or several, if he/she believes the principles of MS-ism; Transparency, Bottom up, Diversity, etc. 
   
BR 

Mehrzad Azghandi


On Tue, Jan 27, 2015 at 9:18 PM, chlebrum . <chlebrum at gmail.com> wrote:
It is funny to see an ICANN lobbyist  cannot believe that we can mobilize for something else than money (hey yes, we pay oneself our travels in the real civil society or what we are not submarines governments (and wicked governments wicked, obviously).

In fact, he discovers ... real people

Chantal Lebrument
​Courriel: chlebrum at gmail.com
Mob: +33 6 8369 5460

2015-01-27 18:01 GMT+01:00 McTim <dogwallah at gmail.com>:
Quoting a CircleID piece by Philip Corwin:

http://www.circleid.com/posts/20150125_occupy_ig_internet_social_forum_targets_netmundial_initiative/

"The author is not familiar with most of the groups constituting ISF. As always, a good rule for understanding true intent is "follow the money". We'd find it illuminating to know where they get their funding and whether any state actors are involved (and a colleague more familiar with the global IG scene advises that at least several are indeed closely linked to their national governments, and are unsurprisingly more favorable toward the government-led multilateral approach on IG than the private sector oriented MSM). So there is some question as to whether ISF is a genuine grassroots Netizen movement — or a convergence of government-dominated organizations pairing with "useful idiot” entities to pursue a broader and more pernicious agenda of undermining the MSM and replacing it with a UN-led, government-dominated one. "





On Sat, Jan 24, 2015 at 1:23 AM, Jean-Christophe NOTHIAS I The Global Journal <jc.nothias at theglobaljournal.net> wrote:
Quoted a Register piece written by Kieren McCarthy
Hibernating NetMundial continues to rattle internet governance world reg.cx/2dZG

As to NetMundial's three-month consultation period, that will seemingly be led by respected internet governance academic and ICANN Board member Wolfgang Kleinwachter. The NetMundial organizers did not reveal how much they will pay Kleinwachter to lend the initiative his credibility, but his first attempt to make the internet community learn to love the idea came in the form of a blog post at the start of the year.




Le 24 janv. 2015 à 00:21, parminder a écrit :


On Friday 23 January 2015 11:31 PM, "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang" wrote:
Hi Parminder,

how the ISF is linked to the IGF?

Hi Wolfgang

One is a civil society forum, the other a multistakeholder one. One develops people's and civil society's positions on the key issue of the global Internet, the other is a place where such positions can enter into dialogue with holders of political and economic power - the governments and the corporate actors.

Unless now the whole idea and concept of civil society - and along with those of people's movements, grassroots, activism, and so on - has been fully coopted in some people's mind with that of multistakeholderism (whatever one actually means by it, something that has remained notoriously unclear), the connection or link that you inquire about is extremely clear to me.

Internet is not the first thing for which there has been felt a need for 'independently' forming a people's conception and set of hopes, expectations and demands - away from conclaves of power. There have been scores of others, and newer ones continue to arise. Accordingly if people's and civil society forums etc have been meaningful and needed in these areas, it is incumbent upon *those* who think they are *not needed* in the Internet space to explain why it is so, then the other way around.

To put is somewhat flippantly, ISF is also a reaction of people who are fed up with an ongoing IG charade where for instance Fadi Chehade can with a straight face call the WEF's Net Mundial Initiative as the 'mother of all bottom -up processes' - even jokes require some plausibility limits!

To take the example of one of the latest international global forums on a key global governance issue, the Lima meeting on climate change, you will perhaps know that parallel to it a people's meeting was held. Internet and its governance also needs such meetings, that is the simple logic of the Internet Social Forum. If you think that in the Internet's case, such meetings and forums are not needed, I would of course be curious to hear your case.

I am happy to engage further with you on this issue, and answer your questions.

Lastly, let me invite you to join the ISF process. We work under the World Social Forum (WSF) process and principles - whereby its meetings are open to all civil society participants subject to very inimum conditions that are listed on their website.

Further, if the discussion is to now turn to the WSF, its meaning, relevance, etc, I am as happy to engage with you on that subject.

Regards, parminder


Wolfgang

 

-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org im Auftrag von parminder
Gesendet: Do 22.01.2015 17:01
An: governance at lists.igcaucus.org
Betreff: Re: [governance] Internet Social Forum
 Enclosed Spanish version... parminder


On Thursday 22 January 2015 07:06 PM, Norbert Bollow wrote:
Global Civil Society launches the Internet Social Forum
- With a call to occupy the Internet

PRESS RELEASE. Geneva, Switzerland, 22st January, 2015.

A group of civil society organisations from around the world has
announced the Internet Social Forum, to bring together and articulate
bottom-up perspectives on the 'Internet we want'. Taking inspiration
from the World Social Forum, and its clarion call, 'Another World is
possible', the group seeks to draw urgent attention to the increasing
centralization of the Internet for extraction of monopoly rents and for
socio-political control, asserting that 'Another Internet is possible'!

The Internet Social Forum will inter alia offer an alternative to the
recently-launched World Economic Forum's 'Net Mundial Initiative' on
global Internet governance. While the World Economic Forum (WEF) and
the 'Net Mundial Initiative' convene global elites, the Internet Social
Forum will be a participatory and bottom-up space for all those who
believe that the global Internet must evolve in the public interest; a
direct parallel to the launch of the World Social Forum in 2001 as a
counter initiative to the WEF.

The Internet Social Forum will reach out to grassroots groups and
social movements across the world, catalysing a groundswell that
challenges the entrenched elite interests that currently control how
the Internet is managed. The Internet Social Forum's preparatory
process will kick off during the World Social Forum to take place in
Tunis, March 24th to 28th, 2015. The Internet Social Forum itself is
planned to be held either late 2015 or early 2016.

"While the world's biggest companies have every right to debate the
future of the Internet, we are concerned that their perspectives should
not drown out those of ordinary people who have no access to the
privileged terrain WEF occupies - in the end it is this wider public
interest that must be paramount in governing the Internet. We are
organising the Internet Social Forum to make sure their voices can't be
ignored in the corridors of power," said Norbert Bollow, Co-Convenor of
the Just Net Coalition, which is one of the groups involved in the
initiative.

The Internet Social Forum, and its preparatory process, is intended as
a space to vision and build the 'Internet we want'. It will be
underpinned by values of democracy, human rights and social justice. It
will stand for participatory policy making and promote community media.
It will seek an Internet that is truly decentralized in its
architecture and based on people's full rights to data, information,
knowledge and other 'commons' that the Internet has enabled the world
community to generate and share.

Somewhat similar to Web inventor Tim Berners-Lee's call for a 'Magna
Carta for the Internet', the Internet Social Forum proposes to develop
a People's Internet Manifesto, through a bottom-up process involving
all concerned social groups and movements, in different areas, from
techies and ICT-for-development actors to media reform groups,
democracy movements and social justice activists.

This year will also see the 10 year high-level review of the World
Summit on the Information Society (WSIS), to be held in New York in
December. As a full-scale review of a major UN summit, this will be a
critical global political event. Since the WSIS, held in 2003 and 2005,
the Internet, and what it means socially, has undergone a paradigm
shift. The WSIS witnessed active engagement of civil society and
technical groups as well as of business. However, currently, there
seems to be an deliberate attempt to sideline this UN-led initiative on
governance issues of the information society and Internet in favour of
private, big-business-dominated initiatives like the WEF's Net Mundial
Initiative. The Internet Social Forum, while remaining primarily a
people's forum, will also seek to channel global civil society's
engagement towards the WSIS +10 review.

The following organisations form the initial group that is proposing
the Internet Social Forum, and many more are expected to join in the
immediate future. This is an open call to progressive groups from all
over the world to join this initiative, and participate in developing a
People's Internet Manifesto.

Just Net Coalition, Global
P2P Foundation, Global
Transnational Institute, Global
Forum on Communication for Integration of our America, Regional (Latin
America) Arab NGO Network for Development, Regional
Agencia Latinoamericana de Información, Regional
Alternative Informatics Association, Turkey
Knowledge Commons, India
Open-Root/EUROLINC, France
SLFC.in, India
CODE-IP Trust, Kenya
GodlyGlobal.org, Switzerland
Centre for Community Informatics Research, Development and Training,
Canada IT for Change, India
Association for Proper Internet Governance, Switzerland
Computer Professionals Union, Philippines
Free Press, USA
Advocates of Science and Technology for the People, Philippines
Other News, Italy
Free Software Movement of India
Global_Geneva, Switzerland
Solidarius (Solidarity Economy Network), Italy
All India Peoples Science Network, India
Institute for Local Self-Reliance - Community Broadband Networks, USA

Please contact us at secretariat at InternetSocialForum.net for further
information or clarification.

Or the following regional contacts:

Africa: Alex Gakaru <AlexG at InternetSocialForum.net>
Asia: Rishab Bailey <RishabB at InternetSocialForum.net>
Europe: Norbert Bollow <NorbertB at InternetSocialForum.net>
North America: Micheal Gurstein <MichealG at InternetSocialForum.net>
South America: Sally Burch <SallyB at InternetSocialForum.net>


This press release is also available online, e.g. at
http://justnetcoalition.org/ISF




____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
    bestbits at lists.bestbits.net.
To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit:
    http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits


____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t




-- 
Cheers,

McTim
"A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A route indicates how we get there."  Jon Postel

____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t



____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t




-- 
Mehrzad Azghandi
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150129/c23bb3c3/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From ian.peter at ianpeter.com  Thu Jan 29 14:55:37 2015
From: ian.peter at ianpeter.com (Ian Peter)
Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2015 06:55:37 +1100
Subject: [governance] Update on NMI
Message-ID: <5C00D77D925143C297A2A8771D7A8CFF@Toshiba>

Hi everyone, I am just posting this to IGC as a central list – please post to other lists if you feel it is necessary. This is just a quick update on the NMI Coordination Council activities. 

There is very little to report. The group mailing list got underway mid January, immediately forming a sub group to look at an approach to develop Terms of Reference. That sub group has had two phone calls – The first was poorly attended because it was called at short notice; I woke up one morning to find it underway for instance. 

After the first meeting NTIA (Larry Strickling and Fiona Alexander representing Penny Pritzker) decided to join the sub group. This caused a flurry of activity where many others joined as well, so the second sub group call had over 16 participants from a council of 21. It was something of a disaster because of technical problems with the link up.

Anyway – the only real activity is that on or around February 2 (if there are no more delays) a public call for input into terms of reference will be made. The CC sub group will then compile these inputs to put a draft terms of reference out for further public inputs. It may be that the technical platform used for NetMundial will be used for this activity. 

The objective is to have this finalised for a first face to face meeting of the Coordination Council on March 31 (venue to be determined)

You can find out more about the Council and NMI at www.netmundial.org. 

I will report back here periodically or when/if major developments occur. Right now there are a lot of questions up in the air for most of us involved and a lack of clarity on several operational aspects. It will take time to get these clarified.

Civil society and academic people involved who are regular participants here include Anriette Esterhuysen, Joao Carlos Caribe, Bill Drake, Marilia Maciel, and Wolfgang Kleinwachter and myself, as well as Jean Jacques Subrenat and Eileen Donohoe with other civil society affiliations.  The full CC membership can be found on the website referred to above.



Ian Peter
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150130/4b82881a/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From williams.deirdre at gmail.com  Thu Jan 29 15:55:07 2015
From: williams.deirdre at gmail.com (Deirdre Williams)
Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2015 16:55:07 -0400
Subject: [governance] Update on NMI
In-Reply-To: <5C00D77D925143C297A2A8771D7A8CFF@Toshiba>
References: <5C00D77D925143C297A2A8771D7A8CFF@Toshiba>
Message-ID: <CAMz5XN4w-kjd6e20XfJs--SokZgvzFKgqBskpAzheo=CbTo2=w@mail.gmail.com>

Thank you Ian.
Deirdre

On 29 January 2015 at 15:55, Ian Peter <ian.peter at ianpeter.com> wrote:

>   Hi everyone, I am just posting this to IGC as a central list – please
> post to other lists if you feel it is necessary. This is just a quick
> update on the NMI Coordination Council activities.
>
> There is very little to report. The group mailing list got underway mid
> January, immediately forming a sub group to look at an approach to develop
> Terms of Reference. That sub group has had two phone calls – The first was
> poorly attended because it was called at short notice; I woke up one
> morning to find it underway for instance.
>
> After the first meeting NTIA (Larry Strickling and Fiona Alexander
> representing Penny Pritzker) decided to join the sub group. This caused a
> flurry of activity where many others joined as well, so the second sub
> group call had over 16 participants from a council of 21. It was something
> of a disaster because of technical problems with the link up.
>
> Anyway – the only real activity is that on or around February 2 (if there
> are no more delays) a public call for input into terms of reference will be
> made. The CC sub group will then compile these inputs to put a draft terms
> of reference out for further public inputs. It may be that the technical
> platform used for NetMundial will be used for this activity.
>
> The objective is to have this finalised for a first face to face meeting
> of the Coordination Council on March 31 (venue to be determined)
>
> You can find out more about the Council and NMI at www.netmundial.org.
>
> I will report back here periodically or when/if major developments occur.
> Right now there are a lot of questions up in the air for most of us
> involved and a lack of clarity on several operational aspects. It will take
> time to get these clarified.
>
> Civil society and academic people involved who are regular participants
> here include Anriette Esterhuysen, Joao Carlos Caribe, Bill Drake, Marilia
> Maciel, and Wolfgang Kleinwachter and myself, as well as Jean Jacques
> Subrenat and Eileen Donohoe with other civil society affiliations.  The
> full CC membership can be found on the website referred to above.
>
>
>
> Ian Peter
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>      governance at lists.igcaucus.org
> To be removed from the list, visit:
>      http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
>
> For all other list information and functions, see:
>      http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
>      http://www.igcaucus.org/
>
> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
>
>


-- 
“The fundamental cure for poverty is not money but knowledge" Sir William
Arthur Lewis, Nobel Prize Economics, 1979
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150129/bc782e2b/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From jmalcolm at eff.org  Thu Jan 29 17:57:24 2015
From: jmalcolm at eff.org (Jeremy Malcolm)
Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2015 14:57:24 -0800
Subject: [governance] Internet Social Forum
In-Reply-To: <20150129102317.5fe36f11@quill>
References: <20150122143615.700b2f52@quill>	<54C23F6A.9090503@cafonso.ca>	<20150123145722.41e43a18@quill>	<3A1B09A3-2607-432B-A4F8-F397EACEB8D2@difference.com.au> <20150129102317.5fe36f11@quill>
Message-ID: <54CABAD4.2070906@eff.org>

On 29/01/2015 1:23 am, Norbert Bollow wrote:
> So I hereby request that the Just Net Coalition and the Internet Social
> Forum should not be conflated please. A coalition is by the very meaning
> of the word based on agreeing about something. A forum is, again by the
> very meaning of the word, all about bringing together a variety of
> perspectives. I would expect that anyone who sees the Just Net
> Coalition's set of viewpoints as being "very narrowly defined" should
> agree that it makes sense for us to desire the existence of a civil
> society forum which is much broader and which allows for exchanges of
> views from a very wide variety of perspectives, but where (unlike the
> situation e.g. here on the IGC list) the fundamentals of "opposition to
> what in the social forums movement is referred to as neoliberalism and
> to what is referred to as imperialism" are accepted.

I still don't see how this is ideologically "much broader" than JNC,
because there is very evidently no consensus against neoliberalism in
Internet governance circles of civil society.  Most of those who rail
against neoliberalism are those you've assembled in JNC already, and
that's the reason why you're recruiting predominantly outside of
Internet governance circles, bringing in groups that don't know much
about Internet policy and have no track record in it.  I'll grant you
that this is different in other domains, such as trade, aid
effectiveness, environment, etc - where you may be much closer to the
mainstream of civil society than you are here.  But you can't make out
that it will be an easy sell to gather the majority of Internet
activists into the ISF fold, by waving away the anti-neoliberal agenda
as an inconsequential footnote.  Actually, if anything, the IGC is more
left-radical than most.  People like Suresh, Tim, Milton and Avri (sorry
to lump the four of you together, I know that's not quite fair) at least
stand out on the IGC list for their pro-market views.  On many other
Internet activism lists, they would be considered positively bleeding
hearts.

> We desire to be
> able to participate in a forum which is focused on the Internet and
> where these fundamentals are not in themselves already a constant source
> of conflict (conflict which is here on the IGC list so very often
> disruptive, preventing the kind of discussions which we feel need to
> take place from taking place here on the IGC list.)

Funny, that.  I wanted much the same thing for Best Bits with respect to
multi-stakeholder governance.

-- 
Jeremy Malcolm
Senior Global Policy Analyst
Electronic Frontier Foundation
https://eff.org
jmalcolm at eff.org

Tel: 415.436.9333 ext 161

:: Defending Your Rights in the Digital World ::

Public key: https://www.eff.org/files/2014/10/09/key_jmalcolm.txt
PGP fingerprint: FF13 C2E9 F9C3 DF54 7C4F EAC1 F675 AAE2 D2AB 2220
OTR fingerprint: 26EE FD85 3740 8228 9460 49A8 536F BCD2 536F A5BD

Learn how to encrypt your email with the Email Self Defense guide:
https://emailselfdefense.fsf.org/en


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 244 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150129/df95c92b/attachment.sig>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From ian.peter at ianpeter.com  Thu Jan 29 17:58:32 2015
From: ian.peter at ianpeter.com (Ian Peter)
Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2015 09:58:32 +1100
Subject: [governance] GCCS - The Hague, 16 and 17 April 2015
Message-ID: <6A9F2D7A60FE4E6B93A9EDB3CA887FEC@Toshiba>

Just reposting this as applications close January 30. As I understand it there is still room for many more civil society participants, although most will have to pay their own. But whether you just wish to attend or whether you are seeking funding, expressions of interest are due by January 30.



We would like to bring to your attention the civil society call for expressions of interest to participate in the Global Conference on Cyberspace 2015 (GCCS 2015) and a civil society pre-event, hosted by the government of the Kingdom of the Netherlands, and taking place in The Hague on 16 and 17 April 2015.



Following on from the London (2011), Budapest (2012), and Seoul (2013) Conferences, the 2015 event in The Hague will provide an opportunity for strategic level discussion of key cyberspace issues. The Conference aims to examine core issues related to the cyber domain, structured around the three main themes of Freedom, Security and Growth. Focus will be placed on exchange of knowledge and ideas on these issues and the development of concrete solutions. The Conference will encourage multi-stakeholder participation from the worlds of business, academia as well as civil society.



A day and a half civil society pre-event will take place in the run-up to the Conference (14-15 April) to facilitate civil society coordination and input into the main Conference. An in-depth training on cyber security issues will be offered as part of this pre-event. In addition, an online training curriculum will be made available to the wider public. The Conference organisers are interested in a balanced and diverse participation and in supporting those who will find a practical use for the training and attendance offered.



The Expression of Interest Form, in addition to logging interest in attending the Conference and the civil society pre-event, will also serve as a platform to capture requests for financial support. Limited financial support is available for a number of civil society participants.



In order to be considered as a Conference/pre-event participant and/or a candidate for financial support, please fill in the Expression of Interest Form via the following link by January 30:https://www.gccs2015.com/civil-society-participation-form



Expressions of interest and requests for funding received will be evaluated by an ad hoc Advisory Board set up to assist the organizers of the Conference in selecting civil society participants to receive funding and to attend the GCCS2015 and the civil society pre-event, to help ensure that the Conference is as inclusive and representative as possible.



Criteria for financial support are designed to ensure a diverse spread of applicants is achieved, focussing on global south applicants and aimed at securing a balance of gender, regional diversity and level of experience in cyber security issues.



Please feel free to share this information with your networks.



Best wishes,



On behalf of:

Andrew Puddephatt, Evelien Wijkstra, Tim Maurer

Advisory Board Co-chairs

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150130/48bae213/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From analia.aspis at gmail.com  Thu Jan 29 18:21:41 2015
From: analia.aspis at gmail.com (Analia Aspis)
Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2015 20:21:41 -0300
Subject: [governance] GCCS - The Hague, 16 and 17 April 2015
In-Reply-To: <6A9F2D7A60FE4E6B93A9EDB3CA887FEC@Toshiba>
References: <6A9F2D7A60FE4E6B93A9EDB3CA887FEC@Toshiba>
Message-ID: <CABi6_T9OpWn96c9t4e6S--E7CJqPu2gbyOS-zB3j5NGr5-ekAg@mail.gmail.com>

Thank you very much for the information Ian.

Analía

On Thu, Jan 29, 2015 at 7:58 PM, Ian Peter <ian.peter at ianpeter.com> wrote:

>   Just reposting this as applications close January 30. As I understand
> it there is still room for many more civil society participants, although
> most will have to pay their own. But whether you just wish to attend or
> whether you are seeking funding, expressions of interest are due by January
> 30.
>
>
>
> We would like to bring to your attention the civil society call for
> expressions of interest to participate in the Global Conference on
> Cyberspace 2015 (GCCS 2015) and a civil society pre-event, hosted by the
> government of the Kingdom of the Netherlands, and taking place in The Hague
> on 16 and 17 April 2015.
>
>
>
> Following on from the London (2011), Budapest (2012), and Seoul (2013)
> Conferences, the 2015 event in The Hague will provide an opportunity for
> strategic level discussion of key cyberspace issues. The Conference aims to
> examine core issues related to the cyber domain, structured around the
> three main themes of Freedom, Security and Growth. Focus will be placed
> on exchange of knowledge and ideas on these issues and the development of
> concrete solutions. The Conference will encourage multi-stakeholder
> participation from the worlds of business, academia as well as civil
> society.
>
>
>
> A day and a half civil society pre-event will take place in the run-up to
> the Conference (14-15 April) to facilitate civil society coordination and
> input into the main Conference. An in-depth training on cyber security
> issues will be offered as part of this pre-event. In addition, an online
> training curriculum will be made available to the wider public. The
> Conference organisers are interested in a balanced and diverse
> participation and in supporting those who will find a practical use for the
> training and attendance offered.
>
>
>
> The Expression of Interest Form, in addition to logging interest in
> attending the Conference and the civil society pre-event, will also serve
> as a platform to capture requests for financial support. Limited financial
> support is available for a number of civil society participants.
>
>
>
> In order to be considered as a Conference/pre-event participant and/or a
> candidate for financial support, please fill in the Expression of Interest
> Form via the following link by *January 30*:
> *https://www.gccs2015.com/civil-society-participation-form*
>
>
>
> Expressions of interest and requests for funding received will be
> evaluated by an ad hoc Advisory Board set up to assist the organizers of
> the Conference in selecting civil society participants to receive funding
> and to attend the GCCS2015 and the civil society pre-event, to help ensure
> that the Conference is as inclusive and representative as possible.
>
>
>
> Criteria for financial support are designed to ensure a diverse spread of
> applicants is achieved, focussing on global south applicants and aimed at
> securing a balance of gender, regional diversity and level of experience in
> cyber security issues.
>
>
>
> Please feel free to share this information with your networks.
>
>
>
> Best wishes,
>
>
>
> On behalf of:
>
> Andrew Puddephatt, Evelien Wijkstra, Tim Maurer
>
> Advisory Board Co-chairs
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>      governance at lists.igcaucus.org
> To be removed from the list, visit:
>      http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
>
> For all other list information and functions, see:
>      http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
>      http://www.igcaucus.org/
>
> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150129/7f465fbb/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From suresh at hserus.net  Thu Jan 29 19:16:41 2015
From: suresh at hserus.net (Suresh Ramasubramanian)
Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2015 05:46:41 +0530
Subject: [governance] Internet Social Forum
In-Reply-To: <54CABAD4.2070906@eff.org>
References: <20150122143615.700b2f52@quill> <54C23F6A.9090503@cafonso.ca> <20150123145722.41e43a18@quill> <3A1B09A3-2607-432B-A4F8-F397EACEB8D2@difference.com.au> <20150129102317.5fe36f11@quill> <54CABAD4.2070906@eff.org>
Message-ID: <1516CB64-7E11-4B42-84D5-51832AC0E315@hserus.net>

> On 30-Jan-2015, at 04:27, Jeremy Malcolm <jmalcolm at eff.org> wrote:
> 
> left-radical than most.  People like Suresh, Tim, Milton and Avri (sorry
> to lump the four of you together, I know that's not quite fair) at least

What can I say. Here and elsewhere, I have had right wingers accuse me of being left wing.  And equally, I have had rather vocal left wing types accuse me of being right wing, neoliberal and such.   I suppose that makes me vaguely centrist enough to be obnoxious to extremists on either side, both of which I cordially detest.

--srs
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From sean at nexus.ie  Fri Jan 30 03:53:49 2015
From: sean at nexus.ie (Sean O Siochru)
Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2015 08:53:49 +0000
Subject: [governance] A Response re. Just Net Coalition and Internet Social
 Forum
Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.2.20150130085324.0750c7f0@mail.nexus.ie>

HI everyone

I read Jeremy Malcolm's comments about JNC and ISF (and I see a follow up 
by Philip Corwin) in IGF 
watch: 
http://igfwatch.org/discussion-board/who-are-the-just-net-coalition-and-what-can-we-expect-from-the-internet-social-forum#TIZtZ3Dh3r82NcRd0TaSzw. 
I think it was reposted on this list.

As a self-confessed serial communication activist of 30 years - and as a 
member of JNC and involved in the ISF idea -  I am pretty flabbergasted, 
but also a bit insulted by them.

I don't recognise the JNC and ISF described in Jeremy's note. The people he 
singles out are highly active in both but I can assure him that JNC is a 
lot more than them and has lively and open debate. It is not a mouthpiece 
for any clique - to suggest it is denigrates the multitude of others 
involved -  but it is a serious effort to raise the need for truly 
democratic internet governance.

As for the Internet Social Forum idea: Like the WSF itself, it is wide 
open.  By its very structure none can dominate it - we all need simply to 
respect the SWF basic philosophy.  Yes, it will take a lot of logistical 
effort and I applaud anyone willing to take that on.  But the real 
beneficiaries of an ISF will be all those who want to share ideas on 
'another Internet is possible' and then - after the event - want to start 
to build it with like-minded people. There are no hidden agendas there, and 
it is a great opportunity to bring in activists from all kinds of different 
areas into this key debate.

All are welcome, Sean


Seán Ó Siochrú: sean at nexus.ie  tel: +353 1 272 0739  mobile: +353 87 2048150
14 Eaton Brae, Shankill, Co. Dublin, Ireland
NEXUS Research Cooperative http://www.nexus.ie/  


-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From jlfullsack at orange.fr  Fri Jan 30 05:33:53 2015
From: jlfullsack at orange.fr (Jean-Louis FULLSACK)
Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2015 11:33:53 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [governance] A Response re. Just Net Coalition and Internet
 Social Forum
In-Reply-To: <6.0.3.0.2.20150130085324.0750c7f0@mail.nexus.ie>
References: <6.0.3.0.2.20150130085324.0750c7f0@mail.nexus.ie>
Message-ID: <1103216204.7882.1422614033622.JavaMail.www@wwinf1n02>

Dear Sean,

 

I warmly thank you for your smoothing words ; right now we need them, particularly on our lists :-)

 

I also remembrer your involvment in WSIS as soon as it began in 2002. During its course, CS (i.a. with Bill Mc Iver and Sally Burch) did a good job and was strong enough to elaborate and adopt its own Declaration, in Geneva and in Tunis; they still reference documents for us, even if many new issues did appear since then.

 

As you, Sean, I feel well in ISF and the spirit it inherited from WSF. 

 

Best regards

 

Jean-Louis Fullsack

 

  

 

 

 

 

 

> Message du 30/01/15 09:53
> De : "Sean O Siochru" 
> A : governance at lists.igcaucus.org
> Copie à : 
> Objet : [governance] A Response re. Just Net Coalition and Internet Social Forum
> 
> HI everyone
> 
> I read Jeremy Malcolm's comments about JNC and ISF (and I see a follow up 
> by Philip Corwin) in IGF 
> watch: 
> http://igfwatch.org/discussion-board/who-are-the-just-net-coalition-and-what-can-we-expect-from-the-internet-social-forum#TIZtZ3Dh3r82NcRd0TaSzw. 
> I think it was reposted on this list.
> 
> As a self-confessed serial communication activist of 30 years - and as a 
> member of JNC and involved in the ISF idea - I am pretty flabbergasted, 
> but also a bit insulted by them.
> 
> I don't recognise the JNC and ISF described in Jeremy's note. The people he 
> singles out are highly active in both but I can assure him that JNC is a 
> lot more than them and has lively and open debate. It is not a mouthpiece 
> for any clique - to suggest it is denigrates the multitude of others 
> involved - but it is a serious effort to raise the need for truly 
> democratic internet governance.
> 
> As for the Internet Social Forum idea: Like the WSF itself, it is wide 
> open. By its very structure none can dominate it - we all need simply to 
> respect the SWF basic philosophy. Yes, it will take a lot of logistical 
> effort and I applaud anyone willing to take that on. But the real 
> beneficiaries of an ISF will be all those who want to share ideas on 
> 'another Internet is possible' and then - after the event - want to start 
> to build it with like-minded people. There are no hidden agendas there, and 
> it is a great opportunity to bring in activists from all kinds of different 
> areas into this key debate.
> 
> All are welcome, Sean
> 
> 
> Seán Ó Siochrú: sean at nexus.ie tel: +353 1 272 0739 mobile: +353 87 2048150
> 14 Eaton Brae, Shankill, Co. Dublin, Ireland
> NEXUS Research Cooperative http://www.nexus.ie/ 
> 
> 
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
> governance at lists.igcaucus.org
> To be removed from the list, visit:
> http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
> 
> For all other list information and functions, see:
> http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
> http://www.igcaucus.org/
> 
> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150130/1d93adda/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de  Fri Jan 30 06:04:21 2015
From: wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de (=?iso-8859-1?Q?=22Kleinw=E4chter=2C_Wolfgang=22?=)
Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2015 12:04:21 +0100
Subject: AW: [governance] A Response re. Just Net Coalition and Internet
 Social Forum
References: <6.0.3.0.2.20150130085324.0750c7f0@mail.nexus.ie>
 <1103216204.7882.1422614033622.JavaMail.www@wwinf1n02>
Message-ID:  <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A801642ABB@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>

Hi Jean Lois, Sean etc.

good that you remember the Geneva CS declaration from 2003. As you know, the WSIS 10 conference in December 2015 will be a purely intergovernmental meeting with a final intergovernmental document. They want to have a multistakeholder discussion phase before the intergovernmental negotiations phase. With other words, there is no way for CS to participate in the drafting of the final document from a CS perspective. 

As you know I have proposed (from confusion to clarification) that CS organisations start to be more concrete in their discussions and bring substantial ideas to the various agenda points (my four baskets)in form of a CS IG Handbook. As you have seen from the conversation this is not easy and produces a broad range of supporting and opposing voices. However, such a "Civil Society Internet Governance Handbook" would only make a contribution to the planned WSIS 10+ multistakeholder consultations. It would not constitute a document like the CS Geneva Declaration from 2003. 

It would be great if somebody could start also a drafting process for a CS Statement for WSIS 10+ in New York. Such an Independent document should take the Geneva Declarationm from 2003 as a starting point and check what has been achieved and what not and what remains to be done. One could formulate some new objectives and pout this into an Independent document called "A Civil Society WSIS 2025 Agenda". 

Wolfgang
 


-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org im Auftrag von Jean-Louis FULLSACK
Gesendet: Fr 30.01.2015 11:33
An: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Sean O Siochru
Betreff
: re: [governance] A Response re. Just Net Coalition and Internet Social Forum
 
Dear Sean,

 

I warmly thank you for your smoothing words ; right now we need them, particularly on our lists :-)

 

I also remembrer your involvment in WSIS as soon as it began in 2002. During its course, CS (i.a. with Bill Mc Iver and Sally Burch) did a good job and was strong enough to elaborate and adopt its own Declaration, in Geneva and in Tunis; they still reference documents for us, even if many new issues did appear since then.

 

As you, Sean, I feel well in ISF and the spirit it inherited from WSF. 

 

Best regards

 

Jean-Louis Fullsack

 

  

 

 

 

 

 

> Message du 30/01/15 09:53
> De : "Sean O Siochru" 
> A : governance at lists.igcaucus.org
> Copie à : 
> Objet : [governance] A Response re. Just Net Coalition and Internet Social Forum
> 
> HI everyone
> 
> I read Jeremy Malcolm's comments about JNC and ISF (and I see a follow up 
> by Philip Corwin) in IGF 
> watch: 
> http://igfwatch.org/discussion-board/who-are-the-just-net-coalition-and-what-can-we-expect-from-the-internet-social-forum#TIZtZ3Dh3r82NcRd0TaSzw. 
> I think it was reposted on this list.
> 
> As a self-confessed serial communication activist of 30 years - and as a 
> member of JNC and involved in the ISF idea - I am pretty flabbergasted, 
> but also a bit insulted by them.
> 
> I don't recognise the JNC and ISF described in Jeremy's note. The people he 
> singles out are highly active in both but I can assure him that JNC is a 
> lot more than them and has lively and open debate. It is not a mouthpiece 
> for any clique - to suggest it is denigrates the multitude of others 
> involved - but it is a serious effort to raise the need for truly 
> democratic internet governance.
> 
> As for the Internet Social Forum idea: Like the WSF itself, it is wide 
> open. By its very structure none can dominate it - we all need simply to 
> respect the SWF basic philosophy. Yes, it will take a lot of logistical 
> effort and I applaud anyone willing to take that on. But the real 
> beneficiaries of an ISF will be all those who want to share ideas on 
> 'another Internet is possible' and then - after the event - want to start 
> to build it with like-minded people. There are no hidden agendas there, and 
> it is a great opportunity to bring in activists from all kinds of different 
> areas into this key debate.
> 
> All are welcome, Sean
> 
> 
> Seán Ó Siochrú: sean at nexus.ie tel: +353 1 272 0739 mobile: +353 87 2048150
> 14 Eaton Brae, Shankill, Co. Dublin, Ireland
> NEXUS Research Cooperative http://www.nexus.ie/ 
> 
> 
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
> governance at lists.igcaucus.org
> To be removed from the list, visit:
> http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
> 
> For all other list information and functions, see:
> http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
> http://www.igcaucus.org/
> 
> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
>


-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From willi.uebelherr at gmail.com  Fri Jan 30 09:36:30 2015
From: willi.uebelherr at gmail.com (willi uebelherr)
Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2015 10:36:30 -0400
Subject: [governance] Fwd: from confusion to clarification
Message-ID: <54CB96EE.8070600@gmail.com>


Dear friends,
my account is now activated. So I repeat the sending of this statement.
many greetings, willi
La Paz, Bolivia


-------- Weitergeleitete Nachricht --------
Betreff: from confusion to clarification
Datum: Wed, 28 Jan 2015 20:22:12 -0400
Von: willi uebelherr <willi.uebelherr at gmail.com>
An: 1net.org discuss <discuss at 1net.org>, BestBits 
<bestbits at lists.bestbits.net>, Governance <governance at lists.igcaucus.org>
Kopie (CC): Kleinwächter, Wolfgang 
<wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de>, ISF secretariat 
<secretariat at InternetSocialForum.net>

from confusion to clarification

Dear friends,

Wolfgang Kleinwaechter has chosen a great title for his text. And it is 
also clear that each person develops their own interpretation. So I did too.

It's about what we call the Internet. But this is a forgery. A huge lies 
theater. And even those who declare themselves as experts often do not 
know about what they are talking.

Internet, "the Inter connection of local Networks". We have 2 elements. 
The local networks, autonomous and independent, and the connections. A 
transport system for digital data. On this basis rests my contribution 
to this discussion.

1. Decentralization must be materialized in the inner architecture. It 
is an illusion that structures, that are based on the centralism, can be 
decentralized, distributed, open and transparent organized. That is why 
the claim to have created an open and "democratic" Internet Governance 
is at most an illusion. In fact, a vast and useless theater.

2. We need a technical basis for our transport system that allows a 
distributed and open structure, because it contains these principles 
themselves. Therefore, the retention of virtual address spaces is a 
complete contradiction to our intentions for an open participation of 
all, if we take this seriously and not just talk like that. But then 
comes our focus to the derivation of the global IP address of the local 
networks from their geographical position to the foreground.

3. Internet is nothing more than "the interconnection of local 
networks". From there the name comes. It is a transport system of 
digital data. Nothing more. The technical bases prepared Louis Pouzin 
along with his colleague in the 70s of last century. There is nothing 
new. We need to understand it that we can use it.

4. The basis in order to make our internet how we need it, is the 
independence in technology. Without this independence is all just cheap 
talk. Or illusionary fog. The centralization and monopolization is a 
fact. We can not oppose with gentle arguments.

5. "think globally, act locally" and "knowledge is always world 
heritage". On this basis, the free technology arises. Free for all 
people on our planet. For the theoretical basis we work together. The 
materialization takes place locally and regionally. We help each other.

6) We need the diversity and not the monotony. Monotony always leads to 
the death. Life is diversity. In it the optimal solutions arise. It is a 
free cooperation process that don't requires any dominant center.

This post is based on my proposal "Internet, the interconnection of 
local networks", which I introduced in May 2014 in the mail list of 
www.1net.org.

Internet: the INTER-connection of local NET-works 04.05.2014
http://1net-mail.1net.org/pipermail/discuss/2014-May/004073.html

1. general discussion post 05.05.2014
http://1net-mail.1net.org/pipermail/discuss/2014-May/004096.html

2. general discussion post 15.05.2014
http://1net-mail.1net.org/pipermail/discuss/2014-May/004184.html

3. general discussion post 23.05.2014
http://1net-mail.1net.org/pipermail/discuss/2014-May/004247.html

May 2014 Archives by date
http://1net-mail.1net.org/pipermail/discuss/2014-May/date.html

Sorry for the bad English.
many greetings, willi
La Paz, Bolivia

-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From willi.uebelherr at gmail.com  Fri Jan 30 12:10:02 2015
From: willi.uebelherr at gmail.com (willi uebelherr)
Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2015 13:10:02 -0400
Subject: [governance] from confusion to clarification
In-Reply-To: <F3AE17F1-F412-4C18-A152-53E0E10BFC09@gmail.com>
References: <54C97D34.1060106@gmail.com> <54C75205-014A-4AE1-8372-263F5389FC5F@yahoo.com> <54CA4854.9040804@gmail.com> <F3AE17F1-F412-4C18-A152-53E0E10BFC09@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <54CBBAEA.3010907@gmail.com>

Am 29/01/2015 um 11:04 a.m. schrieb Eduardo Villanueva:
"For what I understand of your argument, you believe that “internet 
governance” is irrelevant because there is only need for a number 
(perhaps a limited number) of technical decisions to guarantee that the 
Internet continues to work as such. While I think there’s a lot more 
there to discuss than just the technical issues of the interconnection 
of networks as they stand today, may I ask you how do you think the 
institutional arrangements necessary to reach the technical solutions 
should be? Just maintain the IETF? Or something different?

This particular issue is at the center of many debates about Internet 
governance, but i gather you may think that there is a better, simpler 
solution that will resolve the issue without all the hoopla around the 
IGF, NMI, ISF and everything else."


Dear Eduardo,

i was very happy to read a answer from Peru. We need here in Latin 
America the open discussion about the structure of the Internet, what we 
need and what we want. Then we can part of the big international discussion.

IGF, NM (NMI is different), ISF are answers to a real situation. The 
most people in our world don't like this centralisation and monopolizing 
of the technical bases. And, of course, all this institutions, was we 
have to manage the "Internet" are a result of this technical 
definitions. And they reproduce and defend this structures.

For me, in the IGF, NM, ISF, ISOC and many other we can find a process 
of self-organizing. But alway we have to be clear about, what we need, 
before we can go to a new destination.

Wolfgang Kleinwaechter initiate this handbook as a summary for all the 
different positions and perspectives in this different groups. i like 
this idea very much. And i hope, that this text collection can really 
bring out the essential elements of the various groups expressed.

The unity in diversity. This is our process. the unity with respect to a 
free global communication system for all people of our planet. The 
diversity in the ideas and suggestions for practical implementation.

The technology is always the base to realize the transportsystem for 
digital data. And if this technology is a instrument for centralized and 
monopolized groups, then we are always slaves. Then never we can say, "a 
InterNet is possible".

In the IETF we have the RFC's (request for comment". This is a very 
important instrument for us to distribute and discuss our technical 
principles, based on our philosophical principles. But this comes from 
Jonathan Postel and we know, how strong he was attacked and blocked in 
his work.

"Occupy the Internet". Yes, with all its consequences. Never we can say: 
"Papa, i need the technical components" like "Mama, i am hungry". No, we 
have to end our passivity, our wait on the activity of others. We have 
to do it yourself.

I will translate this answer to spanish and then send to my friends in 
Bolivia, Peru and Ecuador and to you.

many greetings, willi
La Paz, Bolivia


Am 29/01/2015 um 11:04 a.m. schrieb Eduardo Villanueva:
> Hi Willi
> For what I understand of your argument, you believe that “internet governance” is irrelevant because there is only need for a number (perhaps a limited number) of technical decisions to guarantee that the Internet continues to work as such. While I think there’s a lot more there to discuss than just the technical issues of the interconnection of networks as they stand today, may I ask you how do you think the institutional arrangements necessary to reach the technical solutions should be? Just maintain the IETF? Or something different?
> This particular issue is at the center of many debates about Internet governance, but i gather you may think that there is a better, simpler solution that will resolve the issue without all the hoopla around the IGF, NMI, ISF and everything else.
> Thanks for your time.
>
> Eduardo Villanueva-Mansilla
> Associate Professor, Dept. Communications
> Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú
> evillan at pucp.pe
> www.eduardovillanueva.com
>
>
>
>> El 29/1/2015, a las 9:48, willi uebelherr <willi.uebelherr at gmail.com> escribió:
>>
>> Dear Nathalie.
>>
>> Am 28/01/2015 um 09:26 p.m. schrieb Nathalie Coupet:
>>> Could you explain what kind of decentralized architecture would be necessary to eliminate the retention of virtual address spaces?
>>
>> In general, addresses are geografical position. Then the transport is very easy. If you destroy this principle, then you need administration to create the necessary information about the geografical location from you virtual address.
>>
>> For me, the "decentralized architecture" is the reality of distributed local communities, where we live. The reality self is the "architecture of decentralization".
>>
>> The "Internet Governance" is a useless and cheap theater. For that, they need this virtualisation of addresses.
>>
>>> What process would need to be in place to assign address space according to the geographical position in the network?
>>
>> We have to create a open discussion about a useful world coordinate system. Our WC84, what we mostly use, is not really optimal. The distances between 2 degrees is on the pol 0 and on the equator max. We use triangles.
>>
>> Also we have to discuss our transform algorithm from WC (world coordinate) to 64 bit global IP-address and back. The local 64 bit IP-address is independent of that. The people decide the address mechanism.
>>
>> And we have to discuss our decentralized DNS-System. The roots are always the local networks. You can ask this roots and save for later. Or forget and ask later the same. But because all people need it, we organize it as a common task in the locality.
>>
>>> Thank you. Nathalie
>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>> Thank you, Willi
>> Sent from my mail client Thunderbird portable with PortableApps
>>

-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From avri at acm.org  Sat Jan 31 00:51:07 2015
From: avri at acm.org (Avri Doria)
Date: Sat, 31 Jan 2015 00:51:07 -0500
Subject: [governance] Internet Social Forum
In-Reply-To: <54CABAD4.2070906@eff.org>
References: <20150122143615.700b2f52@quill>	<54C23F6A.9090503@cafonso.ca>	<20150123145722.41e43a18@quill>	<3A1B09A3-2607-432B-A4F8-F397EACEB8D2@difference.com.au> <20150129102317.5fe36f11@quill> <54CABAD4.2070906@eff.org>
Message-ID: <54CC6D4B.5070601@acm.org>


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
 

On 29-Jan-15 17:57, Jeremy Malcolm wrote:
> People like Suresh, Tim, Milton and Avri (sorry
> to lump the four of you together, I know that's not quite fair) at least
> stand out on the IGC list for their pro-market views.

hmmm, i doubt you will find me supporting pro market ideas very much.

I accept the market as existing, and I am willing to work with and be
friends with those who support it, hence multistakeholderism.   But I do
not consider myself a pro market supporter, though perhaps I am a bit of
a pragmatist and do accept that we live in a market prevalent culture
and thus must try to regulate it.

I am an evolutionist and not a revolutionary.  But I am still proud of
my Marxian background and look back fondly and somewhat longingly, on my
time as a primitive communist as a kibbutz member in the 80's.

Otherwise i don't mind being lumped with them, if lumping you must.

cheers,

avri

ps. i am surprised you have never seen Milton and I go after each other
on this theme.  Must be on list you do not inhabit.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (MingW32)
 
iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJUzG1LAAoJEOo+L8tCe36Ha/oH/j216PK0hs91yAMLmTeQSEPt
7QZxf+w1eRTDjSbfpaSBuCEK7SMGCnEaN/+Q+E7Gu+0qK7Z1dQuX0lMiDmI13qvz
hfeGgMTtzvog506LPgaT1z/L94pecXIhU4yFsLw5IcnVVax7pAq2TL9ct218nATB
AvKuj7EkvK8MuHy6+D7jCrdLigKx2RBNip04siG0x+ZXGJbukeVwn1VZADObE9mM
6j0X0mhGh/EQjLjCeB7+S1ybtQreg/kHlERzUaIREva1neVsQrB676NoM1dCmSVR
7jNHUDBKHWDdorrAIqOzB55LfutEsQbDe7VcxWetl6oKvzyTATtL4gIoS/9QxJA=
=WhBi
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150131/2bb431e6/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From avri at acm.org  Sat Jan 31 01:05:13 2015
From: avri at acm.org (Avri Doria)
Date: Sat, 31 Jan 2015 01:05:13 -0500
Subject: [governance] Internet Social Forum
In-Reply-To: <54CC6D4B.5070601@acm.org>
References: <20150122143615.700b2f52@quill>	<54C23F6A.9090503@cafonso.ca>	<20150123145722.41e43a18@quill>	<3A1B09A3-2607-432B-A4F8-F397EACEB8D2@difference.com.au> <20150129102317.5fe36f11@quill> <54CABAD4.2070906@eff.org> <54CC6D4B.5070601@acm.org>
Message-ID: <54CC7099.8040905@acm.org>


PS.  I feel pretty much the same about NMI & ISF.  I'm curious to see
what they end up becoming.  I worry about their effect on the IGF, but
otherwise, the more people working on the hard problems of IG
constructively, the better.

avri

On 31-Jan-15 00:51, Avri Doria wrote:
>
>
> On 29-Jan-15 17:57, Jeremy Malcolm wrote:
> > People like Suresh, Tim, Milton and Avri (sorry
> > to lump the four of you together, I know that's not quite fair) at least
> > stand out on the IGC list for their pro-market views.
>
> hmmm, i doubt you will find me supporting pro market ideas very much.
>
> I accept the market as existing, and I am willing to work with and be
> friends with those who support it, hence multistakeholderism.   But I
> do not consider myself a pro market supporter, though perhaps I am a
> bit of a pragmatist and do accept that we live in a market prevalent
> culture and thus must try to regulate it.
>
> I am an evolutionist and not a revolutionary.  But I am still proud of
> my Marxian background and look back fondly and somewhat longingly, on
> my time as a primitive communist as a kibbutz member in the 80's.
>
> Otherwise i don't mind being lumped with them, if lumping you must.
>
> cheers,
>
> avri
>
> ps. i am surprised you have never seen Milton and I go after each
> other on this theme.  Must be on list you do not inhabit.
>
>
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>      governance at lists.igcaucus.org
> To be removed from the list, visit:
>      http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
>
> For all other list information and functions, see:
>      http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
>      http://www.igcaucus.org/
>
> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150131/a53978d1/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From arsenebaguma at yahoo.fr  Sat Jan 31 03:09:30 2015
From: arsenebaguma at yahoo.fr (Arsene TUNGALI (Yahoo))
Date: Sat, 31 Jan 2015 08:09:30 +0000
Subject: [governance] Fwd: [latinoamericann] Fwd: [discuss] Internet
 Social Forum
In-Reply-To: <CAMz5XN6z9CtMU0eMTNn=7hBoYo=TrRni-P-mceRw0DJsoA1hqg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <1422691770.64932.YahooMailIosMobile@web28703.mail.ir2.yahoo.com>

An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150131/d49bd260/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From divina.meigs at orange.fr  Sat Jan 31 03:26:20 2015
From: divina.meigs at orange.fr (divina.meigs)
Date: Sat, 31 Jan 2015 09:26:20 +0100
Subject: [governance] A Response re. Just Net Coalition and Internet
 Social Forum
In-Reply-To: <1103216204.7882.1422614033622.JavaMail.www@wwinf1n02>
References: <6.0.3.0.2.20150130085324.0750c7f0@mail.nexus.ie>
 <1103216204.7882.1422614033622.JavaMail.www@wwinf1n02>
Message-ID: <D0F24FE7.1BF2B%divina.meigs@orange.fr>

Same here, Sean, nice to hear your voice again.  It would be nice to have
the spirit of the early debates back in time for the next phase WSIS + 10 Š

Divina

Divina Frau-Meigs
Professeur, sociologue des médias, Directrice CLEMI
ANR TRANSLIT (translitératies), Projet Européen ECO (MOOC)
Chaire UNESCO « savoir devenir dans le développement numérique durable »




De :  Jean-Louis FULLSACK <jlfullsack at orange.fr>
Répondre à :  <governance at lists.igcaucus.org>, Jean-Louis FULLSACK
<jlfullsack at orange.fr>
Date :  vendredi 30 janvier 2015 11:33
À :  <governance at lists.igcaucus.org>, Sean O Siochru <sean at nexus.ie>
Objet :  re: [governance] A Response re. Just Net Coalition and Internet
Social Forum


Dear Sean,

 

I warmly thank you for your smoothing words ; right now we need them,
particularly on our lists :-)

 

I also remembrer your involvment in WSIS as soon as it began in 2002. During
its course, CS (i.a. with Bill Mc Iver and Sally Burch) did a good job and
was strong enough to elaborate and adopt its own Declaration, in Geneva and
in Tunis; they still reference documents for us, even if many new issues did
appear since then.

 

As you, Sean, I feel well in ISF and the spirit it inherited from WSF.

 

Best regards

 

Jean-Louis Fullsack

 

  

 

 

 

 

 
>> > Message du 30/01/15 09:53
>> > De : "Sean O Siochru" <sean at nexus.ie>
>> > A : governance at lists.igcaucus.org
>> > Copie à : 
>> > Objet : [governance] A Response re. Just Net Coalition and Internet Social
>> Forum
>> > 
>> > HI everyone
>> > 
>> > I read Jeremy Malcolm's comments about JNC and ISF (and I see a follow up
>> > by Philip Corwin) in IGF
>> > watch: 
>> > 
>> http://igfwatch.org/discussion-board/who-are-the-just-net-coalition-and-what-
>> can-we-expect-from-the-internet-social-forum#TIZtZ3Dh3r82NcRd0TaSzw.
>> > I think it was reposted on this list.
>> > 
>> > As a self-confessed serial communication activist of 30 years - and as a
>> > member of JNC and involved in the ISF idea - I am pretty flabbergasted,
>> > but also a bit insulted by them.
>> > 
>> > I don't recognise the JNC and ISF described in Jeremy's note. The people he
>> > singles out are highly active in both but I can assure him that JNC is a
>> > lot more than them and has lively and open debate. It is not a mouthpiece
>> > for any clique - to suggest it is denigrates the multitude of others
>> > involved - but it is a serious effort to raise the need for truly
>> > democratic internet governance.
>> > 
>> > As for the Internet Social Forum idea: Like the WSF itself, it is wide
>> > open. By its very structure none can dominate it - we all need simply to
>> > respect the SWF basic philosophy. Yes, it will take a lot of logistical
>> > effort and I applaud anyone willing to take that on. But the real
>> > beneficiaries of an ISF will be all those who want to share ideas on
>> > 'another Internet is possible' and then - after the event - want to start
>> > to build it with like-minded people. There are no hidden agendas there, and
>> > it is a great opportunity to bring in activists from all kinds of different
>> > areas into this key debate.
>> > 
>> > All are welcome, Sean
>> > 
>> > 
>> > Seán Ó Siochrú: sean at nexus.ie tel: +353 1 272 0739 mobile: +353 87 2048150
>> > 14 Eaton Brae, Shankill, Co. Dublin, Ireland
>> > NEXUS Research Cooperative http://www.nexus.ie/
>> > 
>> > 
>> > ____________________________________________________________
>> > You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>> > governance at lists.igcaucus.org
>> > To be removed from the list, visit:
>> > http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
>> > 
>> > For all other list information and functions, see:
>> > http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
>> > To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
>> > http://www.igcaucus.org/
>> > 
>> > Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
>> > 
____________________________________________________________ You received
this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.igcaucus.org To
be removed from the list, visit: http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing For
all other list information and functions, see:
http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance To edit your profile and to find
the IGC's charter, see: http://www.igcaucus.org/ Translate this email:
http://translate.google.com/translate_t

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150131/28d7a9d3/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From arsenebaguma at yahoo.fr  Sat Jan 31 03:29:29 2015
From: arsenebaguma at yahoo.fr (Arsene TUNGALI (Yahoo))
Date: Sat, 31 Jan 2015 08:29:29 +0000
Subject: [governance] Update on NMI
In-Reply-To: <5C00D77D925143C297A2A8771D7A8CFF@Toshiba>
Message-ID: <1422692969.48147.YahooMailIosMobile@web28705.mail.ir2.yahoo.com>

An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150131/57c40bba/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From kichango at gmail.com  Sat Jan 31 03:31:55 2015
From: kichango at gmail.com (Mawaki Chango)
Date: Sat, 31 Jan 2015 08:31:55 +0000
Subject: [governance] Internet Social Forum
In-Reply-To: <54CC6D4B.5070601@acm.org>
References: <20150122143615.700b2f52@quill> <54C23F6A.9090503@cafonso.ca>
 <20150123145722.41e43a18@quill> <3A1B09A3-2607-432B-A4F8-F397EACEB8D2@difference.com.au>
 <20150129102317.5fe36f11@quill> <54CABAD4.2070906@eff.org> <54CC6D4B.5070601@acm.org>
Message-ID: <CACTo+v98J=4vcxaWmv+Q0yb42fVaDTx5k=eHJtMOm1Mf2EcdVw@mail.gmail.com>

On Sat, Jan 31, 2015 at 5:51 AM, Avri Doria <avri at acm.org> wrote:

>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
>
> On 29-Jan-15 17:57, Jeremy Malcolm wrote:
> > People like Suresh, Tim, Milton and Avri (sorry
> > to lump the four of you together, I know that's not quite fair) at least
> > stand out on the IGC list for their pro-market views.
>
> ps. i am surprised you have never seen Milton and I go after each other on
> this theme.  Must be on list you do not inhabit.
>

That's exactly what I thought, too, when I read that part.
Or I must be confusing memories from both NCUC-GNSO* and IGC discussions?

Mawaki
(*) folks, I hope y'all know by now what GNSO stands for, otherwise please
check it out on ICANN website.
NCUC: noncommercial user constituency.


>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (MingW32)
>
> iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJUzG1LAAoJEOo+L8tCe36Ha/oH/j216PK0hs91yAMLmTeQSEPt
> 7QZxf+w1eRTDjSbfpaSBuCEK7SMGCnEaN/+Q+E7Gu+0qK7Z1dQuX0lMiDmI13qvz
> hfeGgMTtzvog506LPgaT1z/L94pecXIhU4yFsLw5IcnVVax7pAq2TL9ct218nATB
> AvKuj7EkvK8MuHy6+D7jCrdLigKx2RBNip04siG0x+ZXGJbukeVwn1VZADObE9mM
> 6j0X0mhGh/EQjLjCeB7+S1ybtQreg/kHlERzUaIREva1neVsQrB676NoM1dCmSVR
> 7jNHUDBKHWDdorrAIqOzB55LfutEsQbDe7VcxWetl6oKvzyTATtL4gIoS/9QxJA=
> =WhBi
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>      governance at lists.igcaucus.org
> To be removed from the list, visit:
>      http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
>
> For all other list information and functions, see:
>      http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
>      http://www.igcaucus.org/
>
> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150131/3b19f147/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From kichango at gmail.com  Sat Jan 31 03:41:20 2015
From: kichango at gmail.com (Mawaki Chango)
Date: Sat, 31 Jan 2015 08:41:20 +0000
Subject: [governance] Internet Social Forum
In-Reply-To: <1516CB64-7E11-4B42-84D5-51832AC0E315@hserus.net>
References: <20150122143615.700b2f52@quill> <54C23F6A.9090503@cafonso.ca>
 <20150123145722.41e43a18@quill> <3A1B09A3-2607-432B-A4F8-F397EACEB8D2@difference.com.au>
 <20150129102317.5fe36f11@quill> <54CABAD4.2070906@eff.org> <1516CB64-7E11-4B42-84D5-51832AC0E315@hserus.net>
Message-ID: <CACTo+v8YzNu6JG5AG_h3qfYe1k7psxaWppboBvacRCQDisiDvw@mail.gmail.com>

On Fri, Jan 30, 2015 at 12:16 AM, Suresh Ramasubramanian <suresh at hserus.net>
wrote:

> > On 30-Jan-2015, at 04:27, Jeremy Malcolm <jmalcolm at eff.org> wrote:
> >
> > left-radical than most.  People like Suresh, Tim, Milton and Avri (sorry
> > to lump the four of you together, I know that's not quite fair) at least
>
> What can I say. Here and elsewhere, I have had right wingers accuse me of
> being left wing.


Really, Suresh? Here, really? I'm not going to go as far as to say they
must be out of their mind but I surely am dumbfounded at this! ;-)

Mawaki



> And equally, I have had rather vocal left wing types accuse me of being
> right wing, neoliberal and such.   I suppose that makes me vaguely centrist
> enough to be obnoxious to extremists on either side, both of which I
> cordially detest.
>
> --srs
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>      governance at lists.igcaucus.org
> To be removed from the list, visit:
>      http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
>
> For all other list information and functions, see:
>      http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
>      http://www.igcaucus.org/
>
> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150131/dd42b21d/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From dave at difference.com.au  Sat Jan 31 04:15:48 2015
From: dave at difference.com.au (David Cake)
Date: Sat, 31 Jan 2015 17:15:48 +0800
Subject: [governance] [bestbits] FW: [discuss] Internet Social Forum
In-Reply-To: <CACAaNxi9SGyC+D-A8EuPpQsPyi1hN0PH6MH+y119JeYP_Jq+rA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20150122144714.2bf24d0b@quill> <54C240EB.9090908@cafonso.ca> <0ab001d03710$ece501e0$c6af05a0$@gmail.com> <CACAaNxi9SGyC+D-A8EuPpQsPyi1hN0PH6MH+y119JeYP_Jq+rA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <B5DAA22C-9B59-4C50-A9D7-78558905A945@difference.com.au>

Indeed. 
MG, if you are upset that Jeremy has said you are unnecessarily insulting to your colleagues, the way to refute it is not by being unnecessarily insulting to your colleagues.

Regards

David

On 23 Jan 2015, at 10:21 pm, McTim <dogwallah at gmail.com> wrote:

> Dear MG,
> 
> Your post just provided further proof everything that Jeremy wrote was true.
> 
> 
> 
> On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 7:31 AM, michael gurstein <gurstein at gmail.com> wrote:
> FWIW... Flouting normal academic/journalistic etiquette Jeremy omitted to reference my comments quoted in his blog which for anyone who hasn't been following can be found with context and elaboration in my blog http://gurstein.wordpress.com (key word searches on "multi-stakeholder" and "civil society" should turn these up--and with a bit of digging one might find even more fearsomely critical comments including about CS's unholy partnerships with and financial support from the global Internet elites.
> 
> BTW, I'm looking forward to seeing the invitation from Jeremy and the other NMI-nik's inviting global Civil Society to their next 1% err WEF, ICANN, cgi Internet Governance lovefest -- perhaps it could be called the I(%) SF ...
> 
> M
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: discuss-bounces at 1net.org [mailto:discuss-bounces at 1net.org] On Behalf Of Carlos A. Afonso
> Sent: Friday, January 23, 2015 4:39 AM
> To: discuss at 1net.org
> Subject: Re: [discuss] Internet Social Forum
> 
> Dear people,
> 
> Below is an excellent response from Jeremy Malcolm (Best Bits, EFF) regarding the proposal to create a "world social forum" of the Internet.
> I am really puzzled: the call from JNC to join ISF is for governments to occupy the Internet??
> 
> fraternal regards
> 
> --c.a.
> 
> ====
> 
> http://igfwatch.org/discussion-board/who-are-the-just-net-coalition-and-what-can-we-expect-from-the-internet-social-forum
> 
> Who are the Just Net Coalition and what can we expect from the Internet Social Forum?
> 
> Jeremy Malcolm
> 
> Date: 23/1/2015 3:52 pm
> 
> Today, the Just Net Coalition (JNC) [1] has broadcast (on seven mailing lists alone that I subscribe to) its plans for an Internet Social Forum, modeled on the World Social Forum, the well-known anti-globalisation summit. Just as the World Social Forum is held in opposition to the annual Davos meeting of the World Economic Forum (WEF), so the Internet Social Forum is framed as an alternative to the NETmundial Initiative [2], which JNC describes (inaccurately) as a project of the WEF.
> 
> Before saying anything more, I should clarify that I too have been critical [3] of the NETmundial Initiative, I too believe that the Internet governance status quo is overdue for reform [4], I also share concerns about a concentration of market power [5] in the hands of US-based Internet companies, and I do believe that governments have an important role to play [6] in future Internet governance arrangements.
> However, I won't be supporting the Internet Social Forum, because the Just Net Coalition's objectives are misguided, and its mode of engagement with the rest of civil society has been profoundly dysfunctional.
> 
> History
> 
> Who are the Just Net Coalition? I briefly mentioned them in my last post [7], but today's announcement has raised further questions among some of my contacts, and led others to express support the proposal despite not knowing much of the history of those proposing it. This post is to provide some of that necessary background, so that those who choose to endorse the Internet Social Forum will not be taken by surprise when its proposed “People's Internet Manifesto” takes a course with which they may profoundly disagree.
> 
> The founding meeting of what became the Just Net Coalition February 2014 was invitation-only, and invitations were issued, in the first instance, only to those known to by sympathetic to the views of the organisers. (A few key individuals excluded from the first round of invitations were, at the urging of the meeting's funder, subsequently approached with late invitations to attend; speaking for myself as one of these, the approach came far too late for me to make the necessary arrangements even to obtain a visa.) Consequently, the content of that meeting's outcome document, the Delhi Declaration for a Just and Equitable Internet [8], was largely predetermined.
> 
> The political programme of that document (more on this below) has a long history in a disagreement between a few individuals who were members of the Civil Society Internet Governance Caucus (IGC) [9], that has frequently threatened to tear that group apart. On some accounts, indeed, it has already done so – opinions vary on when or whether the IGC “jumped the shark”, but many count it as the day at an IGC meeting in 2013 when a prominent JNC member almost came to blows with a female attendee in an argument, ironically, over his own overbearing behaviour.
> 
> The formation of Best Bits [10] in 2012 was (at least on my part, as one of its founders), partly in response to the decline of the IGC and the need for a more action-oriented, globally-inclusive civil society community that could speak on Internet governance and human rights issues, without requiring a full consensus which (for the IGC, at least) had become completely unachievable. Those who now lead JNC, at the time, also held hopes (as did we) that they too could make effective use of Best Bits as a platform for actions and statements on which a broad consensus could be reached, which for a time they did, but what ultimately transpired will be recounted later.
> 
> So who are these individuals to whom I am obliquely referring? Although I don't wish to unduly personalise this post, it is relevant that they be identified in order to give context to the following section of this post; and equally, it is quite proper that as spokespersons for the group, they should be held accountable for their public behaviour and statements. (I should also add before going further that I have had a long record of working fruitfully with the individuals named both online and in person, dating back to 2004. I have even retained one of them as a paid consultant on a project I managed.)
> 
> Amongst the key individuals who have spoken publicly for JNC and who sit on its steering committee are Parminder Jeet Singh who leads Indian NGO IT for Change, Michael Gurstein who is a Canadian academic and edits the Journal of Community Informatics, Norbert Bollow who is a Swiss systems analyst and FOSS developer, and Richard Hill, former senior staff member of the ITU, who continues to advocate for an expanded role for the ITU on Internet-related public policy issues [11]. Many of the groups shown as supporting the Internet Social Forum in today's announcement are vanity or hobby projects of these founding individuals. For example Centre for Community Informatics Research, Development and Training is Gurstein, GodlyGlobal.org is Bollow, and Association for Proper Internet Governance is Hill.
> 
> (You might note that the majority JNC's most vocal key figures, including others not mentioned above such as Louis Pouzin and Jean-Christophe Nothias, are white men from industrialised countries.
> Now as a white man myself I'm certainly not one to point fingers at them, but as an organisation that purports to be “globally concerned with…social justice”, as JNC does [12], this lack of diversity perhaps bears mentioning.)
> 
> Objectives
> 
> The positioning of the Just Net Coalition against multi-stakeholder Internet governance [13], and in favour of a state-centric model, although now quite overt, became evident gradually. The Delhi Declaration covers this obliquely, stating “The right to make Internet-related public policies lies exclusively with those who legitimately and directly represent people” (ie. states). Another coded phrase the JNC has used to call for the centralisation of Internet governance authority in states it its call for “legitimate political authority” [14].
> 
> A turning point came at the meeting of the Working Group on Enhanced Cooperation on Public Policy Issues Pertaining to the Internet (WGEC) of the UN Commission for Science and Technology for Development (CSTD) in April 2014. To the surprise of other civil society and technical community delegates at that meeting, Parminder Jeet Singh insisted that support for paragraph 35 of the Tunis Agenda [15] be retained in working group's report, as the representatives from Saudi Arabia and Iran also forcefully argued. Up until then, indeed for an unbroken decade, opposition to paragraph 35 had been a unanimous civil society position.
> 
> Paragraph 35 states (my emphasis):
> 
> We reaffirm that the management of the Internet encompasses both technical and public policy issues and should involve all stakeholders and relevant intergovernmental and international organizations. In this respect it is recognized that:
> 
> a. *Policy authority for Internet-related public policy issues is the sovereign right of States*. They have rights and responsibilities for international Internet-related public policy issues.
> 
> b. The private sector has had, and should continue to have, an important role in the development of the Internet, both in the technical and economic fields.
> 
> c. *Civil society has also played an important role on Internet matters, especially *at community level*, and should continue to play such a role.
> 
> d. Intergovernmental organizations have had, and should continue to have, a facilitating role in the coordination of Internet-related public policy issues.
> 
> e. International organizations have also had and should continue to have an important role in the development of Internet-related technical standards and relevant policies.
> 
> In supporting this paragraph that constricts civil society's role in Internet governance, Parminder said:
> 
> "I have clarity about what is the role of different stakeholders being quite different to one another and I don't appreciate that non-governmental actors would have the same role in decision-making than governmental actors. That should not be acceptable at a global level."
> 
> This, translated into JNC policy and the agenda for its Internet Social Forum, marks a profound shift away from the decentralised and horizontal model of Internet governance that civil society had heretofore supported, towards an hierarchical, state-led model.
> 
> For a time, JNC attempted to explain away this change by drawing a straw man distinction between “democratic multi-stakeholderism” (which JNC
> supports) and “equal footing multi-stakeholderism” (which it doesn't, mischaracterising it as “governance by self-selected elites”) [16]. But it has since mostly abandoned that pretense and become more overt in promoting an intergovernmental model of Internet governance [17], stating for example in a more recent statement, “We invite all countries to call for a Framework Convention on the Internet and to take up leadership in developing global Internet-related policies,” and averring that “[w]ithout governmental support, it is difficult, perhaps impossible to combat the dominance of global Internet monopolies” [18].
> 
> Now, I have argued elsewhere why governments ought not to have a monopoly on the development of Internet-related public policies, but why a model of multi-stakeholderism that includes governments as a key, but not dominant stakeholder can still be counted as democratic [19]. You can accept those arguments or not. If you don't, then you might come down on JNC's side on this issue, and that would be perfectly legitimate.
> 
> But that's only half of the problem with JNC. The other half is the toxic relationship that its representatives have cultivated with the rest of civil society.
> 
> Relationship with civil society
> 
> At the first Best Bits meeting in 2012, much time and many pains were taken to accommodate the demands of those future JNC committee members who attended, and this effort did successfully result in a consensus text to which they were willing to put their names [20]. But from this point, their participation in Best Bits became less productive and more divisive, largely over two issues, which were intertwined.
> 
> The first has already been mentioned: the fundamental ideological disagreement over the legitimacy of multi-stakeholder Internet governance, which was accepted by a majority of Best Bits participants, but not by those who were later to split off into JNC. This disagreement took on greater currency when the NETmundial meeting was announced and Best Bits participants began to coordinate the development of several joint inputs [21]. When the future JNC leaders found themselves unable to influence the drafting of these statements to sufficiently accord with their view that governments should have an outsized role in Internet governance, the next best option became to disrupt the development of those statements by hectoring, intimidating and disparaging participants who expressed pro-multistakeholder views.
> 
> As good an example as any, and a more recent one, is Gurstein's reaction in November 2014 to the qualified support of the Association for Progressive Communications (APC) for the NETmundial Initiative, to which he wrote to Anriette Esterhuysen, APC's Executive Director, “I’m taking from your argument that because the NMI offers some possibility, however remote for the advancement of human rights, you are completely abandoning perhaps irrevocably, the pursuit of social justice.” To anyone who knows of the many years of devotion that Anriette and APC have given in the cause of social justice (and Gurstein certainly does), this is a farcical insult.
> 
> The second issue to which the disruptive behaviour of JNC representatives has been directed, which probably arose from the first, were criticisms of various processes that they found themselves unable to influence, including not only those of Best Bits, 1net [22], and the Civil Society Coordination Group (CSCG) [23]. In a rising tide of authoritarian behaviour, those who became JNC's leaders would demand appointment to a position of authority or that these fledgling groups hold elections immediately, insist that other participants in those groups disclose of their sources of funding, and cause a commotion about any strategic discussions that took place off-list or in closed groups.
> 
> The response of a relative outsider, Milton Mueller, to Gurstein's demands for inclusion in 1net aptly record the frustration that many others felt:
> 
> "Stop pretending that CI [Community Informatics] is some massive grassroots movement related to Internet governance that deserves special representation; and stop pretending that  your frustration with not being selected by CS means that their procedures were illegitimate. You [and] your group are free to contribute position papers to the process and to attend, as far as we know. Why don’t you see how far you can get on persuasion and education, if that’s really your mission?"
> 
> To give another example, Bollow, who had earlier demanded a full accounting of the funding sources of Best Bits participants, wrote in November 2013, “I hereby request the members of the BestBits steering committee, the members of the IRP Steering Committee, and the coordinators of the IGC to disclose any direct or indirect financial relationship to any 'capacity building' or similar kind of project where a US government agency is among the funders.”
> 
> Then again he wrote in October 2014 to the moderators of a closed strategy list formed for the recent ITU Plenipotentiary meeting – a list that he had not joined – demanding the right to “inspect” its archives on behalf of JNC. As for the CSCG, even after it acceded to JNC's requests and added Bollow as a representative, JNC betrayed that trust by publishing an account of its private deliberations which criticised other CSCG members [24], falsely stating that they had decided to support the NETmundial Initiative.
> 
> Although some of JNC's demands of other civil society groups and networks may have been reasonable in themselves – Best Bits, for example, always intended to hold steering committee elections and did hold them within a year of its formation – these demands were delivered with such hubris and entitlement that the effect has been to isolate JNC from other civil society groups and networks and to sow seeds of discord that will have lasting effects.
> 
> Ironically the result has been exactly the opposite of what JNC intended. Discussions have retreated from public, open lists into private, closed lists – or private cc groups that are not list-managed at all – precisely to avoid unproductive exchanges with JNC members.
> 
> Even more ironically, JNC does not hold itself to the same standards of transparency and accountability that it demands of others; it has never been publicly disclosed, for example, receiving funding from ThoughtWorks, and even the list of signatories of the Delhi Declaration, which formed the JNC's first membership list, was not made public for months after its supposed founding, even while further statements continued to be issued. Neither does JNC operate an open mailing list, despite vociferous demands that other civil society networks, such as Best Bits, should do so.
> 
> It might be countered that as pernicious as the behaviour of key JNC members may have been, they are only individuals, and this should not be attributed to the organisation as a whole. Whilst none of the other JNC members has ever “broken ranks” and spoken up against even the founders, this may not be because they are condoning their behaviour, but because they are unaware of it, since it takes place on other civil society mailing lists. Might a change of leadership of JNC be all that is required? This is hard to say, and at present a moot question since no such change is on the horizon.
> 
> Conclusion
> 
> What, then, can we expect from JNC's Internet Social Forum? Sadly, we can expect that any participants who support a distributed, multi-stakeholder model for Internet governance will be required to check those convictions at the door, and to embrace instead a UN-based model that places governments firmly in control of Internet public policy development. We can expect those who deviate from this line to be interrogated mercilessly, and accused of being props for neoliberal hegemony and corporate domination. May JNC's “take no prisoners”
> approach serve them well.
> 
> This is a shame, because a well-reasoned leftist critique of Internet governance arrangements and reforms that directs its ire at powerful incumbents, rather than at those who seek to forge a middle path of inclusive multi-stakeholder governance, would actually be very valuable.
> To date, JNC has exhibited no desire to provide such a sober, productive critique, instead preferring to focus its destructive anger on easier, weaker targets – its own civil society colleagues.
> 
> -----------------------------
> 
> Notes:
> 
> [1] http://justnetcoalition.org
> 
> [2] https://www.netmundial.org
> 
> [3]
> http://igfwatch.org/discussion-board/netmundial-initiative-takes-a-top-down-approach-to-implementing-the-netmundial-principles
> 
> [4]
> http://igfwatch.org/discussion-board/netmundial-2014-submission-on-evolution-of-the-internet-governance-ecosystem
> 
> [5]
> http://www.digitalnewsasia.com/insights/digital-consumers-breaking-through-the-cloud
> 
> [6]
> http://igfwatch.org/discussion-board/three-false-assumptions-internet-freedom-in-a-world-of-states-part-1
> 
> [7]
> http://igfwatch.org/discussion-board/civil-society-talks-tough-to-the-netmundial-initiative-but-holds-back-on-a-boycott
> 
> [8] http://justnetcoalition.org/delhi-declaration
> 
> [9] http://igcaucus.org
> 
> [10] http://bestbits.net
> 
> [11]
> http://content.netmundial.br/contribution/roadmaps-for-further-evolution-of-internet-governance/65
> 
> [12]
> http://justnetcoalition.org/sites/default/files/Delhi_Declaration_leaflet_0.pdf
> 
> [13]
> http://blog.justnetcoalition.org/democracy-or-multi-stakeholderism-competing-models-of-governance-by-michael-gurstein
> 
> [14] http://justnetcoalition.org/sites/default/files/NewModel_r2.pdf
> 
> [15] http://www.itu.int/wsis/docs2/tunis/off/6rev1.html
> 
> [16] http://justnetcoalition.org/sites/default/files/ITU_PP_2014_Stmt2.pdf
> 
> [17]
> http://blog.justnetcoalition.org/democracy-or-multi-stakeholderism-competing-models-of-governance-by-michael-gurstein
> 
> [18] http://justnetcoalition.org/sites/default/files/NewModel_r2.pdf
> 
> [19]
> http://igfwatch.org/discussion-board/a-civil-society-agenda-for-internet-governance-in-2013-internet-freedom-in-a-world-of-states-part-3
> 
> [20] http://bestbits.net/statement
> 
> [21] http://bestbits.net/netmundial-principles,
> http://bestbits.net/netmundial-roadmap, and http://bestbits.net/netmundial-icann
> 
> [22] http://1net.org/
> 
> [23] http://lists.bestbits.net/info/cs-coord
> 
> [24] http://justnetcoalition.org/NMI-neoliberal-caravan
> 
> ====
> 
> On 01/22/2015 11:47 AM, Norbert Bollow wrote:
> > Global Civil Society launches the Internet Social Forum – With a call
> > to occupy the Internet
> >
> > PRESS RELEASE. Geneva, Switzerland, 22st January, 2015.
> >
> > A group of civil society organisations from around the world has
> > announced the Internet Social Forum, to bring together and articulate
> > bottom-up perspectives on the 'Internet we want'. Taking inspiration
> > from the World Social Forum, and its clarion call, 'Another World is
> > possible', the group seeks to draw urgent attention to the increasing
> > centralization of the Internet for extraction of monopoly rents and
> > for socio-political control, asserting that 'Another Internet is possible'!
> >
> > The Internet Social Forum will inter alia offer an alternative to the
> > recently-launched World Economic Forum's 'Net Mundial Initiative' on
> > global Internet governance. While the World Economic Forum (WEF) and
> > the 'Net Mundial Initiative' convene global elites, the Internet
> > Social Forum will be a participatory and bottom-up space for all those
> > who believe that the global Internet must evolve in the public
> > interest; a direct parallel to the launch of the World Social Forum in
> > 2001 as a counter initiative to the WEF.
> >
> > The Internet Social Forum will reach out to grassroots groups and
> > social movements across the world, catalysing a groundswell that
> > challenges the entrenched elite interests that currently control how
> > the Internet is managed. The Internet Social Forum's preparatory
> > process will kick off during the World Social Forum to take place in
> > Tunis, March 24th to 28th, 2015. The Internet Social Forum itself is
> > planned to be held either late 2015 or early 2016.
> >
> > “While the world's biggest companies have every right to debate the
> > future of the Internet, we are concerned that their perspectives
> > should not drown out those of ordinary people who have no access to
> > the privileged terrain WEF occupies – in the end it is this wider
> > public interest that must be paramount in governing the Internet. We
> > are organising the Internet Social Forum to make sure their voices
> > can't be ignored in the corridors of power,” said Norbert Bollow,
> > Co-Convenor of the Just Net Coalition, which is one of the groups
> > involved in the initiative.
> >
> > The Internet Social Forum, and its preparatory process, is intended as
> > a space to vision and build the 'Internet we want'. It will be
> > underpinned by values of democracy, human rights and social justice.
> > It will stand for participatory policy making and promote community media.
> > It will seek an Internet that is truly decentralized in its
> > architecture and based on people's full rights to data, information,
> > knowledge and other 'commons' that the Internet has enabled the world
> > community to generate and share.
> >
> > Somewhat similar to Web inventor Tim Berners-Lee’s call for a ‘Magna
> > Carta for the Internet', the Internet Social Forum proposes to develop
> > a People's Internet Manifesto, through a bottom-up process involving
> > all concerned social groups and movements, in different areas, from
> > techies and ICT-for-development actors to media reform groups,
> > democracy movements and social justice activists.
> >
> > This year will also see the 10 year high-level review of the World
> > Summit on the Information Society (WSIS), to be held in New York in
> > December. As a full-scale review of a major UN summit, this will be a
> > critical global political event. Since the WSIS, held in 2003 and
> > 2005, the Internet, and what it means socially, has undergone a
> > paradigm shift. The WSIS witnessed active engagement of civil society
> > and technical groups as well as of business. However, currently, there
> > seems to be an deliberate attempt to sideline this UN-led initiative
> > on governance issues of the information society and Internet in favour
> > of private, big-business-dominated initiatives like the WEF's Net
> > Mundial Initiative. The Internet Social Forum, while remaining
> > primarily a people's forum, will also seek to channel global civil
> > society's engagement towards the WSIS +10 review.
> >
> > The following organisations form the initial group that is proposing
> > the Internet Social Forum, and many more are expected to join in the
> > immediate future. This is an open call to progressive groups from all
> > over the world to join this initiative, and participate in developing
> > a People's Internet Manifesto.
> >
> > Just Net Coalition, Global
> > P2P Foundation, Global
> > Transnational Institute, Global
> > Forum on Communication for Integration of our America, Regional (Latin
> > America) Arab NGO Network for Development, Regional Agencia
> > Latinoamericana de Información, Regional Alternative Informatics
> > Association, Turkey Knowledge Commons, India Open-Root/EUROLINC,
> > France SLFC.in, India CODE-IP Trust, Kenya GodlyGlobal.org,
> > Switzerland Centre for Community Informatics Research, Development and
> > Training, Canada IT for Change, India Association for Proper Internet
> > Governance, Switzerland Computer Professionals Union, Philippines Free
> > Press, USA Advocates of Science and Technology for the People,
> > Philippines Other News, Italy Free Software Movement of India
> > Global_Geneva, Switzerland Solidarius (Solidarity Economy Network),
> > Italy All India Peoples Science Network, India Institute for Local
> > Self-Reliance - Community Broadband Networks, USA
> >
> > Please contact us at secretariat at InternetSocialForum.net for further
> > information or clarification.
> >
> > Or the following regional contacts:
> >
> > Africa:        Alex Gakaru <AlexG at InternetSocialForum.net>
> > Asia:          Rishab Bailey <RishabB at InternetSocialForum.net>
> > Europe:        Norbert Bollow <NorbertB at InternetSocialForum.net>
> > North America: Micheal Gurstein <MichealG at InternetSocialForum.net>
> > South America: Sally Burch <SallyB at InternetSocialForum.net>
> >
> >
> > This press release is also available online, e.g. at
> > http://justnetcoalition.org/ISF
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > discuss mailing list
> > discuss at 1net.org
> > http://1net-mail.1net.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
> >
> 
> _______________________________________________
> discuss mailing list
> discuss at 1net.org
> http://1net-mail.1net.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
> 
> 
> 
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>      governance at lists.igcaucus.org
> To be removed from the list, visit:
>      http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
> 
> For all other list information and functions, see:
>      http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
>      http://www.igcaucus.org/
> 
> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Cheers,
> 
> McTim
> "A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A route indicates how we get there."  Jon Postel
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>     bestbits at lists.bestbits.net.
> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit:
>     http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150131/230be3e4/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 455 bytes
Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150131/230be3e4/attachment.sig>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From wjdrake at gmail.com  Sat Jan 31 04:33:00 2015
From: wjdrake at gmail.com (William Drake)
Date: Sat, 31 Jan 2015 10:33:00 +0100
Subject: [governance] A Response re. Just Net Coalition and Internet
 Social Forum
In-Reply-To: <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A801642ABB@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
References: <6.0.3.0.2.20150130085324.0750c7f0@mail.nexus.ie> <1103216204.7882.1422614033622.JavaMail.www@wwinf1n02> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A801642ABB@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
Message-ID: <DF6FF8E0-650F-4747-BC01-59A90E022BAF@gmail.com>

Hi

> On Jan 30, 2015, at 12:04 PM, Kleinwächter, Wolfgang <wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de> wrote:
> 
> It would be great if somebody could start also a drafting process for a CS Statement for WSIS 10+ in New York.

The modalities for CS & other stakeholder input into the intergovernmental conference are not defined, the internal preparatory machinery in NY is lagging and may not get serious until the autumn, the government reps that participate in UNGA may lean heavily toward NY processes and have little connection to the past decade of Internet governance discussions, the renewal of the IGF will become a bargaining chit in other power plays and may not go well, etc.  Lots of known and unknown unknowns, and a lot could go wrong. So one would think it fairly important that when the modalities for stakeholder participation are announced, civil society is ready and able to step into the space with a document that will garner serious consideration and not be brushed aside in the ensuing debates.  Personally I think this should take priority over trying to write a big multi-author multi-perspective book, which many delegates are unlikely to read or know what to take away in terms of widely shared positions.  If both prove possible fine, but something that fits the process is key.  If the IGC is able to rally after a long dark night and develop a text, that would seem optimal given that it was recognized by governments during the WSIS process and early IGF years as the focal point mechanism for CS inputs.  Of course, other networks and organizations will want to ramp up their own efforts, hopefully multiple inputs will be accommodated.

Best

Bill

PS: Greetings from the past, Sean :-)



*********************************************************
William J. Drake
International Fellow & Lecturer
  Media Change & Innovation Division, IPMZ
  University of Zurich, Switzerland
Chair, Noncommercial Users Constituency, 
  ICANN, www.ncuc.org
william.drake at uzh.ch (direct), wjdrake at gmail.com (lists),
  www.williamdrake.org
Internet Governance: The NETmundial Roadmap http://goo.gl/sRR01q
*********************************************************

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150131/af8af98b/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From suresh at hserus.net  Sat Jan 31 05:30:03 2015
From: suresh at hserus.net (Suresh Ramasubramanian)
Date: Sat, 31 Jan 2015 16:00:03 +0530
Subject: [governance] Internet Social Forum
In-Reply-To: <CACTo+v8YzNu6JG5AG_h3qfYe1k7psxaWppboBvacRCQDisiDvw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20150122143615.700b2f52@quill>
 <54C23F6A.9090503@cafonso.ca>
 <20150123145722.41e43a18@quill>
 <3A1B09A3-2607-432B-A4F8-F397EACEB8D2@difference.com.au>
 <20150129102317.5fe36f11@quill>
 <54CABAD4.2070906@eff.org>
 <1516CB64-7E11-4B42-84D5-51832AC0E315@hserus.net>
 <CACTo+v8YzNu6JG5AG_h3qfYe1k7psxaWppboBvacRCQDisiDvw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <14b3f8a3488.2762.4f968dcf8ecd56c9cb8acab6370fcfe0@hserus.net>

Not on this caucus, no. Elsewhere.

Here I have had plenty of people on the harder side of the left assure me 
that I am a right winger.


On January 31, 2015 2:12:01 PM Mawaki Chango <kichango at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Fri, Jan 30, 2015 at 12:16 AM, Suresh Ramasubramanian <suresh at hserus.net>
> wrote:
>
> > > On 30-Jan-2015, at 04:27, Jeremy Malcolm <jmalcolm at eff.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > left-radical than most.  People like Suresh, Tim, Milton and Avri (sorry
> > > to lump the four of you together, I know that's not quite fair) at least
> >
> > What can I say. Here and elsewhere, I have had right wingers accuse me of
> > being left wing.
>
>
> Really, Suresh? Here, really? I'm not going to go as far as to say they
> must be out of their mind but I surely am dumbfounded at this! ;-)
>
> Mawaki
>
>
>
> > And equally, I have had rather vocal left wing types accuse me of being
> > right wing, neoliberal and such.   I suppose that makes me vaguely centrist
> > enough to be obnoxious to extremists on either side, both of which I
> > cordially detest.
> >
> > --srs
> >
> > ____________________________________________________________
> > You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
> >      governance at lists.igcaucus.org
> > To be removed from the list, visit:
> >      http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
> >
> > For all other list information and functions, see:
> >      http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
> > To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
> >      http://www.igcaucus.org/
> >
> > Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
> >
> >
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150131/d7b62f50/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From dave at difference.com.au  Sat Jan 31 05:38:41 2015
From: dave at difference.com.au (David Cake)
Date: Sat, 31 Jan 2015 18:38:41 +0800
Subject: [governance] Internet Social Forum
In-Reply-To: <54CABAD4.2070906@eff.org>
References: <20150122143615.700b2f52@quill>	<54C23F6A.9090503@cafonso.ca>	<20150123145722.41e43a18@quill>	<3A1B09A3-2607-432B-A4F8-F397EACEB8D2@difference.com.au> <20150129102317.5fe36f11@quill> <54CABAD4.2070906@eff.org>
Message-ID: <78996286-D4D8-47F2-ACF8-A83DE1BF8BEA@difference.com.au>


On 30 Jan 2015, at 6:57 am, Jeremy Malcolm <jmalcolm at eff.org> wrote:
> Actually, if anything, the IGC is more
> left-radical than most.  People like Suresh, Tim, Milton and Avri (sorry
> to lump the four of you together, I know that's not quite fair) at least
> stand out on the IGC list for their pro-market views.  On many other
> Internet activism lists, they would be considered positively bleeding
> hearts.

	Like several others, I find the idea that Avri being noted as one of the pro-market folks fairly hilarious. I know Avri pretty well, and if Avri is an example of our more pro-market activists, then yes, the IGC must be pretty left indeed!
	Now, Milton being pro-market, sure. 

	Cheers
		David


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 455 bytes
Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150131/6df06b1b/attachment.sig>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From parminder at itforchange.net  Sat Jan 31 05:51:46 2015
From: parminder at itforchange.net (parminder)
Date: Sat, 31 Jan 2015 16:21:46 +0530
Subject: [governance] [discuss] FW: FW: Towards an Internet Social Forum
In-Reply-To: <54C52F8E.9000601@acm.org>
References: <w1tknuhwuokwhm1bwrq7nf82.1421824340505@email.android.com>	<54BFBF0D.3000504@itforchange.net>	<EBD518CE-0A41-4F63-8AB4-E68F33E602FB@globalgeneva.net>	<20150121172634.0fbbd8b5@quill>	<54BFE3E9.8080005@itforchange.net>	<1421862025.163813248@apps.rackspace.com>	<54BFE647.50205@itforchange.net>	<20150121190917.3066b781@quill>	<54BFEF3A.6080307@alainet.org>	<20150121194828.1ce2f9ef@quill>	<b6bf4820c07c5c5367db7cfe2f2c89c1.squirrel@webmail.tni.org>	<54C0BF75.9030809@itforchange.net>	<207E590CDEB1344EB16A3D3424E8D74202304FE5AB3B@EXVMBX016-2.exch016.msoutlookonline.net>	<54C0DFD4.6070202@itforchange.net>	<54C111D0.2050809@itforchange.net>	<54C12314.2060407@alainet.org>	<54C236DE.3050903@itforchange.net>	<54C2E1A8.9040703@itforchange.net>	<001001d03899$2ad41c00$807c5400$@gmail.com>	<2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A801642A88@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>	<007d01d038b1$aaee5fa0$00cb1ee0$@gmail.com>	<009001d038b5$65699a40$303ccec0$@gmail.com> <54C52F8E.9000601@acm.org>
Message-ID: <54CCB3C2.30808@itforchange.net>


On Sunday 25 January 2015 11:31 PM, Avri Doria wrote:
> Hi,
>
> There have been a lot of criticisms of NMI based on its lack of 
> transparency and top down decsion making. It appears to be trying to 
> fix itself, but does not seem to having great success at this point.  
> How will the ISF distinguish itself in this respect.

Avri

ISF (Internet Social Forum) submits to WSF thinking and processes - 
which one must say are quite demanding inter alia with regard to 
openness and transparency, since  right now I am responding to a 
question on these points. At the same time, as has happened with regard 
to many WSF linked initiatives, that may produce document outcomes etc, 
like the intended People's Internet Manifesto, the ISF process would 
also go beyond what is 'WSF proper' which is clearly not an outcome 
producing forum. How this will be done would, I understand, be figured 
out collectively by the actors who join in this initiative, but 
obviously it cannot do anything that goes against WSF thinking and its 
extreme accent on openness and transparency. ISF would build on similar 
initiatives that have earlier formed under the umbrella of the WSF - of 
which there happen to be a considerable number. We are already in touch 
with a number of such groups/ initiatives.

As to the key operative phrase above, about 'the actors who join in the 
initiative' ,  ISF will be working under WSF rules and criteria, which 
are listed on the WSF 2015 website on the unambiguously titled page 
'criteria of participation 
<https://fsm2015.org/en/criteria-participation>'. . As you will see, one 
of the criterion is adherence to the original Charter of Principles 
<http://www.forumsocialmundial.org.br/main.php?id_menu=4&cd_language=2> 
of the WSF.

Now, if some people consider these criteria too exclusionary well that 
is what the WSF is, and ISF is working under the WSF umbrella . It is 
possible, just to give an example and no offence intended, that some 
anti abortionists may find some women's rights groups too exclusionary, 
but that is how it is. In my experiences any serious political work 
requires some boundary laying.

>
> Also, I do hope the ISF takes more pains than the NMI has in terms of 
> appearing to challenge the existence of the IGF.

I responded on this to Wolfgang (whose response BTW I still await). 
Unlike NMI, the ISF has no claim to be multistakeholder. It is 
out-and-out a civil society initiative (Please see WSF criteria above) . 
In the circumstances, I do not understand what conflict it presents with 
the IGF, In fact I asked Wolfgang and I ask you Avri, why and how does a 
civil society initiative present questions about 'challenge to the 
existence of the IGF'?

And again, we welcome all progressive groups and individuals who 
subscribe to the WSF thinking to join us in the ISF initiative. And this 
is a public pledge that the group working on this initiative will always 
holds itself highly accountable to the public, and will always respond 
to questions that are posed to the group.

If this response is not found satisfactory with respect to the original 
question, please do not hesitate to ask again or if needed re-frame the 
question or get more specific. If we do not have an answer right now, 
that too we will tell you.

parminder

Disclaimer: Above are just my views about what the ISF should and is 
likely to , and there is still no definitive articulation of the issues 
and processes discussed above by the collectivity behind the ISF initiative.

>
> avri
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> discuss mailing list
> discuss at 1net.org
> http://1net-mail.1net.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150131/45493423/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From parminder at itforchange.net  Sat Jan 31 05:54:55 2015
From: parminder at itforchange.net (parminder)
Date: Sat, 31 Jan 2015 16:24:55 +0530
Subject: [governance] [bestbits] [discuss] FW: FW: Towards an Internet
 Social Forum
In-Reply-To: <54CCB3C2.30808@itforchange.net>
References: <w1tknuhwuokwhm1bwrq7nf82.1421824340505@email.android.com>	<EBD518CE-0A41-4F63-8AB4-E68F33E602FB@globalgeneva.net>	<20150121172634.0fbbd8b5@quill>	<54BFE3E9.8080005@itforchange.net>	<1421862025.163813248@apps.rackspace.com>	<54BFE647.50205@itforchange.net>	<20150121190917.3066b781@quill>	<54BFEF3A.6080307@alainet.org>	<20150121194828.1ce2f9ef@quill>	<b6bf4820c07c5c5367db7cfe2f2c89c1.squirrel@webmail.tni.org>	<54C0BF75.9030809@itforchange.net>	<207E590CDEB1344EB16A3D3424E8D74202304FE5AB3B@EXVMBX016-2.exch016.msoutlookonline.net>	<54C0DFD4.6070202@itforchange.net>	<54C111D0.2050809@itforchange.net>	<54C12314.2060407@alainet.org>	<54C236DE.3050903@itforchange.net>	<54C2E1A8.9040703@itforchange.net>	<001001d03899$2ad41c00$807c5400$@gmail.com>	<2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A801642A88@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>	<007d01d038b1$aaee5fa0$00cb1ee0$@gmail.com>	<009001d038b5$65699a40$303ccec0$@gmail.com> <54C52F8E.9000601@acm.org> <54CCB3C2.30808@itforchange.net>
Message-ID: <54CCB47F.2030708@itforchange.net>


On Saturday 31 January 2015 04:21 PM, parminder wrote:
>
> On Sunday 25 January 2015 11:31 PM, Avri Doria wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> There have been a lot of criticisms of NMI based on its lack of 
>> transparency and top down decsion making. It appears to be trying to 
>> fix itself, but does not seem to having great success at this point.  
>> How will the ISF distinguish itself in this respect.
>
> Avri
>
> ISF (Internet Social Forum) submits to WSF 

Should have made clear -- WSF is the World Social Forum ...

> thinking and processes - which one must say are quite demanding inter 
> alia with regard to openness and transparency, since  right now I am 
> responding to a question on these points. At the same time, as has 
> happened with regard to many WSF linked initiatives, that may produce 
> document outcomes etc, like the intended People's Internet Manifesto, 
> the ISF process would also go beyond what is 'WSF proper' which is 
> clearly not an outcome producing forum. How this will be done would, I 
> understand, be figured out collectively by the actors who join in this 
> initiative, but obviously it cannot do anything that goes against WSF 
> thinking and its extreme accent on openness and transparency. ISF 
> would build on similar initiatives that have earlier formed under the 
> umbrella of the WSF - of which there happen to be a considerable 
> number. We are already in touch with a number of such groups/ 
> initiatives.
>
> As to the key operative phrase above, about 'the actors who join in 
> the initiative' ,  ISF will be working under WSF rules and criteria, 
> which are listed on the WSF 2015 website on the unambiguously titled 
> page 'criteria of participation 
> <https://fsm2015.org/en/criteria-participation>'. . As you will see, 
> one of the criterion is adherence to the original Charter of 
> Principles 
> <http://www.forumsocialmundial.org.br/main.php?id_menu=4&cd_language=2> of 
> the WSF.
>
> Now, if some people consider these criteria too exclusionary well that 
> is what the WSF is, and ISF is working under the WSF umbrella . It is 
> possible, just to give an example and no offence intended, that some 
> anti abortionists may find some women's rights groups too 
> exclusionary, but that is how it is. In my experiences any serious 
> political work requires some boundary laying.
>
>>
>> Also, I do hope the ISF takes more pains than the NMI has in terms of 
>> appearing to challenge the existence of the IGF.
>
> I responded on this to Wolfgang (whose response BTW I still await). 
> Unlike NMI, the ISF has no claim to be multistakeholder. It is 
> out-and-out a civil society initiative (Please see WSF criteria above) 
> . In the circumstances, I do not understand what conflict it presents 
> with the IGF, In fact I asked Wolfgang and I ask you Avri, why and how 
> does a civil society initiative present questions about 'challenge to 
> the existence of the IGF'?
>
> And again, we welcome all progressive groups and individuals who 
> subscribe to the WSF thinking to join us in the ISF initiative. And 
> this is a public pledge that the group working on this initiative will 
> always holds itself highly accountable to the public, and will always 
> respond to questions that are posed to the group.
>
> If this response is not found satisfactory with respect to the 
> original question, please do not hesitate to ask again or if needed 
> re-frame the question or get more specific. If we do not have an 
> answer right now, that too we will tell you.
>
> parminder
>
> Disclaimer: Above are just my views about what the ISF should and is 
> likely to , and there is still no definitive articulation of the 
> issues and processes discussed above by the collectivity behind the 
> ISF initiative.
>
>>
>> avri
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> discuss mailing list
>> discuss at 1net.org
>> http://1net-mail.1net.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>       bestbits at lists.bestbits.net.
> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit:
>       http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150131/7c552155/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From jefsey at jefsey.com  Sat Jan 31 06:34:41 2015
From: jefsey at jefsey.com (JFC Morfin)
Date: Sat, 31 Jan 2015 12:34:41 +0100
Subject: [governance] [discuss] from confusion to clarification
In-Reply-To: <F3AE17F1-F412-4C18-A152-53E0E10BFC09@gmail.com>
References: <54C97D34.1060106@gmail.com>
 <54C75205-014A-4AE1-8372-263F5389FC5F@yahoo.com>
 <54CA4854.9040804@gmail.com>
 <F3AE17F1-F412-4C18-A152-53E0E10BFC09@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <E1YHWKV-0005Mc-B1@igcaucus.org>

At 16:04 29/01/2015, Eduardo Villanueva wrote:
>Hi Willi
>
>For what I understand of your argument, you believe that “internet 
>governance” is irrelevant because there is only need for a number 
>(perhaps a limited number) of technical decisions to guarantee that 
>the Internet continues to work as such. While I think there’s a 
>lot more there to discuss than just the technical issues of the 
>interconnection of networks as they stand today, may I ask you how 
>do you think the institutional arrangements necessary to reach the 
>technical solutions should be? Just maintain the IETF? Or something different?

Dear Eduardo,

Digital networking is conceptually a singularity in human thinking, 
before becoming one in technology (I understand a singularity here as 
when human society extends by way of something that it must retain to 
remain human).

It is embodied in the mathematical, physical, cosmological, and 
biological scientific evolution of the last 125 years (since the 
Raymond Poincaré non-resolution of the "n-body" problem, i.e. the end 
of the Ptolemaic, Copernican, and Newtonian [a very long time] area 
where we thought that :

* space and time were absolute and continuous,
* understanding could be logic (dialectic and linear),
* the principle of an excluded third was correct,
* and the cause always came before the effect.

Since then, we know better, in that things, thoughts, influences, 
interests, etc. are not hierarchical but rather meshed and 
non-simultaneous. In particular, we know that the universe is 
multiple at least because everything is the center of its/his/her own 
universe, and probably because the meshing is complex.

This is why there is no such thing as an "internet governance": there 
are billions of individual governances, on individual men and 
machines digitalities, that include (or not) the use of one of the 
various main data network transport technologies (the number and 
power is enlarging: internet(s), NDN, SDN, ethernet, etc.).

Open-Stand
---------------
Pragmatically, the heads of IEEE, IETF, IAB, ISOC, and W3C have 
agreed that they have observed this paradigmatic change 
(<http://open-stand.org/>http://open-stand.org or RFC 6852). This 
results in a coopetitive innovation between global communities 
fostered by their market economies.

In an attempt to keep things under control, there are at least four 
complete/consistent doctrines that emerge:

- structured multilateral vision by governments. It is "ported" by 
the ITU and the International Telecommunication Treaty.
- industrial leadership, pushed by the NTIA which disengages partly 
from its internet exclusive involvement in order to be able to 
politically invest in the new ones.
- commercial leadership, ported by ICANN which asks the WEF to read 
the economic demand for them.
- Libre's cosmological (everyone is the center of his/her network) 
vision as chosen by the WSIS (an information society that is to be 
"people centered, à caractère humain, centrada en la persona").

An unproductive buzz is maintained by some claiming to be "the Civil Society".

The IETF/IAB acknowledgment
---------------------------------------
In a network, technological cohesion must come before innovation 
(there's no use in having a better yet fragmented network). This put 
the IAB at the core of the system stability, as the master of the 
IANA. However, this time is over. IAB is consistent with the general 
change and does not want to assume the responsibility anymore. This 
disengagement:

- was implied in RFC 6852 (I appealed it for that reason: for ISOC to 
clarify, but the NTIA's statement came before, after the IAB layer).
- this is documented in the WG/IANAPLAN IESG approved Draft (to be 
published as an RFC) 
<http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-ianaplan-icg-response/>http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-ianaplan-icg-response/ 

- I am going to appeal it - not to oppose it, but to force ISOC to 
give more exposure  to their decision, in order to leave no doubt in 
anyone's mind and avoid miscomprehension conflicts.

As a result, the IETF Chair has officially transferred the ultimate 
IETF guidance and decision to the NTIA: 
<http://www.ietf.org/blog/2015/01/taking-a-step-towards-iana-transition/>http://www.ietf.org/blog/2015/01/taking-a-step-towards-iana-transition/

Consequences
------------------
This is a great clarification: it transforms the IETF into an USIETF, 
the same as ICANN was the AmerICANN.

However, it leaves us in front of a fragmented multitechnology 
situation. This only means that we have accomplished the Internet 
Project's (IEN 48 http://www.rfc-editor.org/ien/ien48.txt) first 
motivation and now we are switching to its second one, i.e. its 
inter-technology phase. In this second phase, the network continuity 
does not result mainly from the middle layers: the catenet (the 
network of networks, the concatenation of all the local and virtual 
networks) is completed and is pervasive. So, we can trust and rely on 
the lower layers' stability, and differentiate our middle layers' 
choices depending on our different needs and communities' best 
interests: e.g. ICANN/Rosettanet, Google/Internet, Netflix/NDN, 
Cloud/SDN, smart cities/meshed networks, etc.

The political and economic hysteresis is in favor of ITU, NTIA (ISOC 
and ICANN probably apart), but the Libre is freed as a community and 
can focus on an upper layer (intelligent use) of the lower layers of 
the Catenet, whatever the middle layer (transport) being used.

This is why we have initiated the CCC Free/Libre project of a Catenet 
Cooperative Company, for an  intelligent use (IUse) of our 
collectively built and shared network of our networks. The advantage 
of the Cooperative concept (one man/corporate/institution = one vote) 
is that our polycratic multitude (no societal agreement with a 
specific sovereign power) can organize on structured a democratic 
basis. This permits an "omnishareholder" intergovernance that may be 
less conflict prone than the current forms of coopted/biased 
"multistakeholderism" and/or fuzzy forums, lose coalitions or fluid 
communities.

Required common technical work
------------------------------------------
This is to be technically ported by a standalone digital capacity for 
everyone in our anthropobotic (men + bots) society. A "post-human" 
capacity, even more than a "human right".

This calls for a catenetbox virtual machine/plug-ins and for a common 
metadata registry system. Users will need to load an intelligent use 
interface (IUI) plug-in, hosting the different communication network 
technologies to be used, and coordinating with upper layers in names 
(DNS CLASSes), numbers (everyone has already a digital network 
address: his/her/its telephone number), parameters (for/by each 
technology), and documentation areas.

Coopetitively developing/testing this Libre catenetbox, its various 
functions, and its netix interapplication system is now to be one of 
our priorities.

However, there are others, such as building a technically lasting 
shareholder database (everyone has a "diginame"), a wiki 3.0, and an 
IANA protocol to permit mutual documentation and information, etc. 
This is networking. Then, we need to advance in the direction we are 
really interested in: inter-comprehension facilitation. The Intersem, 
i.e. the intersemiotic layers of datacommunications.

>This particular issue is at the center of many debates about 
>Internet governance, but i gather you may think that there is a 
>better, simpler solution that will resolve the issue without all the 
>hoopla around the IGF, NMI, ISF and everything else.

They will remain as the wake of the new course we will have set.

Best.
jfc



>Thanks for your time.
>
>
>Eduardo Villanueva-Mansilla
>Associate Professor, Dept. Communications
>Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú
><mailto:evillan at pucp.pe>evillan at pucp.pe
>www.eduardovillanueva.com
>
>
>
>>El 29/1/2015, a las 9:48, willi uebelherr 
>><<mailto:willi.uebelherr at gmail.com>willi.uebelherr at gmail.com> escribió:
>>
>>Dear Nathalie.
>>
>>Am 28/01/2015 um 09:26 p.m. schrieb Nathalie Coupet:
>>>Could you explain what kind of decentralized architecture would be 
>>>necessary to eliminate the retention of virtual address spaces?
>>
>>In general, addresses are geografical position. Then the transport 
>>is very easy. If you destroy this principle, then you need 
>>administration to create the necessary information about the 
>>geografical location from you virtual address.
>>
>>For me, the "decentralized architecture" is the reality of 
>>distributed local communities, where we live. The reality self is 
>>the "architecture of decentralization".
>>
>>The "Internet Governance" is a useless and cheap theater. For that, 
>>they need this virtualisation of addresses.
>>
>>>What process would need to be in place to assign address space 
>>>according to the geographical position in the network?
>>
>>We have to create a open discussion about a useful world coordinate 
>>system. Our WC84, what we mostly use, is not really optimal. The 
>>distances between 2 degrees is on the pol 0 and on the equator max. 
>>We use triangles.
>>
>>Also we have to discuss our transform algorithm from WC (world 
>>coordinate) to 64 bit global IP-address and back. The local 64 bit 
>>IP-address is independent of that. The people decide the address mechanism.
>>
>>And we have to discuss our decentralized DNS-System. The roots are 
>>always the local networks. You can ask this roots and save for 
>>later. Or forget and ask later the same. But because all people 
>>need it, we organize it as a common task in the locality.
>>
>>>Thank you. Nathalie
>>>Sent from my iPhone
>>
>>Thank you, Willi
>>Sent from my mail client Thunderbird portable with PortableApps
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>discuss mailing list
>><mailto:discuss at 1net.org>discuss at 1net.org
>>http://1net-mail.1net.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>
>_______________________________________________
>discuss mailing list
>discuss at 1net.org
>http://1net-mail.1net.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150131/28f57f98/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From nb at bollow.ch  Sat Jan 31 06:58:38 2015
From: nb at bollow.ch (Norbert Bollow)
Date: Sat, 31 Jan 2015 12:58:38 +0100
Subject: [governance] Internet Social Forum
In-Reply-To: <54CC7099.8040905@acm.org>
References: <20150122143615.700b2f52@quill>
	<54C23F6A.9090503@cafonso.ca>
	<20150123145722.41e43a18@quill>
	<3A1B09A3-2607-432B-A4F8-F397EACEB8D2@difference.com.au>
	<20150129102317.5fe36f11@quill>
	<54CABAD4.2070906@eff.org>
	<54CC6D4B.5070601@acm.org>
	<54CC7099.8040905@acm.org>
Message-ID: <20150131125838.37cc5d98@quill>

On Sat, 31 Jan 2015 01:05:13 -0500
Avri Doria <avri at acm.org> wrote:

> PS.  I feel pretty much the same about NMI & ISF.  I'm curious to see
> what they end up becoming.  I worry about their effect on the IGF, but
> otherwise, the more people working on the hard problems of IG
> constructively, the better.

Thank you. In regard to the ISF, I can certainly assure you that there
is no intention of having a negative effect on the IGF, and in my
opinion there is no significant risk of that happening either. IGF has
been established as a broad everyone-is-welcome multistakeholder forum.
ISF is proposed as a forum for the part of civil society that takes an
interest in Internet matters (or can be convinced to take an interest
in Internet matters) and that agrees with the WSF's principles. So ISF
does not in any way intend to be in competition or in conflict with the
IGF.

It is certainly my goal and intention in relation to the ISF that it
must become a forum and movement that inspires a lot of people to work
constructively on at least some of what you appropriately call "the hard
problems of IG". In the ISF context, people will be free to engage in
discussions aimed towards finding solutions for these problems in an
environment where statements that involve some degree of
anti-neoliberal or anti-imperialistic rhetorics do not cause disruptive
conflict that effectively prevents any constructive progress in regard
to the substantive matters under discussion.

I am well aware that a lot of the people here on the list find any
anti-neoliberal or anti-imperialistic rhetorics so offensive that they
certainly have no desire to be part of the kind of ISF that we are
proposing. I certainly don't have any objections whatsoever when those
who are not comfortable with what we propose for the ISF continue to
discuss the same problems in any other fora of their choosing. Some of
those discussions might involve rhetorics which I find as objectionable
as how they view anti-neoliberal or anti-imperialistic rhetorics as
objectionable. For example, while I am all in favor of multistakeholder
processes as long as they are conducted within what I would accept as a
clear and reasonable democratic framework, I find any rhetorics highly
objectionable which I understand as elevating multistakeholderism to a
role of a fundamental principle and thereby lowering the relative status
of the principle of democratic governance.

If for a given Internet governance challenge, both flavors of
discussions happen and they both lead to a constructive result in the
form of a concrete proposal, it will IMO be very interesting to compare
the resulting proposals. I expect that in regard to some of the hard
problems of IG, the outcomes of such separate discourses will differ
very significantly depending on the interests and resulting
perspectives of the participants, while I won't be surprised if in
regard to some other problems the resulting proposals turn out to be
very similar.

Greetings,
Norbert

-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de  Sat Jan 31 08:02:32 2015
From: wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de (=?iso-8859-1?Q?=22Kleinw=E4chter=2C_Wolfgang=22?=)
Date: Sat, 31 Jan 2015 14:02:32 +0100
Subject: AW: [governance] [discuss] FW: FW: Towards an Internet Social Forum
References: <w1tknuhwuokwhm1bwrq7nf82.1421824340505@email.android.com>
 <54BFBF0D.3000504@itforchange.net>
 <EBD518CE-0A41-4F63-8AB4-E68F33E602FB@globalgeneva.net>
 <20150121172634.0fbbd8b5@quill> <54BFE3E9.8080005@itforchange.net>
 <1421862025.163813248@apps.rackspace.com> <54BFE647.50205@itforchange.net>
 <20150121190917.3066b781@quill> <54BFEF3A.6080307@alainet.org>
 <20150121194828.1ce2f9ef@quill>
 <b6bf4820c07c5c5367db7cfe2f2c89c1.squirrel@webmail.tni.org>
 <54C0BF75.9030809@itforchange.net>
 <207E590CDEB1344EB16A3D3424E8D74202304FE5AB3B@EXVMBX016-2.exch016.msoutlookonline.net>
 <54C0DFD4.6070202@itforchange.net> <54C111D0.2050809@itforchange.net>
 <54C12314.2060407@alainet.org> <54C236DE.3050903@itforchange.net>
 <54C2E1A8.9040703@itforchange.net> <001001d03899$2ad41c00$807c5400$@gmail.com>
 <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A801642A88@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
 <007d01d038b1$aaee5fa0$00cb1ee0$@gmail.com>
 <009001d038b5$65699a40$303ccec0$@gmail.com> <54C52F8E.9000601@acm.org>
 <"54CCB3C2.30 808"@itforchange.net>
Message-ID:  <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A801642ACE@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>

Parminder:
I responded on this to Wolfgang (whose response BTW I still await). 

Wolfgang:
Sorry for the late reply. And thanks Parminder (and Norbert) for the clarification with regard to the new ISF. Here are some comments:

1. The multistakeholder approach is a two layer approach where each stakholder has (on the lower layer) its own mechanisms to develop positions to various issues and where on the higher layer the various stakeholders communicate, coordinate and collaborate together to find solutions to common problems on the basis of what in the Internet world is called "rough consensus". If one stakeholder group disagrees there is no rough consensus. Insofar, I see no basic conflicts between the idea of an ISF and the IGF. ISF is one-stakeholder. IGF is multi-stakeholder. Welcome. 

2. For civil society - probably the weakest partner in a full multistakeholder mechanism - it would be good to speak with one voice. This enhances to chances not only to be heard but also to participate in decision making. We learned this lesson during WSIS I. The Geneva CS WSIS declaration opened the door for participation of CS (on equal footing) both in the WGIG and later in the IGF. This was an achievement and neither a "natural" development nor a present by the other stakeholders. A key role played the Interrnet Governance Caucus (IGC), established in June 2003. The IGC played a primary role in globale IG policy making until 2007 or 2008. Over the last couple of years the IGC became - unfortunately - a platform where disagreemet dominated and the readiness to find internal "rough consensus" among the various wings within the CS stakeholder groups became nearly impossible. This resulted in a dramtic declining of the influence of the IGC into multistakeholder processes and the ermegence of other CS IG Networks - from Best Bits to the Just Net Coalition. The diversity is not a bad thing. But if such a diversity ends in "infighting" (remember the unbelievable shouting during the IGC Meeting in Bali) the risk is high, that the CS as a whole looses a lot of credibility and weakens its opportunities to participate meaningful at the higher multistakeholder level. All (limited) energies and resources are wasted in fighting each other, nothing remains to made a construtive input into the broader processes of the higher level of multistakehoder policy development.  

3. In my eyes the CSCG - which did build an umbrella above six CS IG Networks - was the best what could happen after the split (which started already in Nairobi and continued in Baku). It allowed the various wings to stick to their - sometimes excentric - positions, but it also allowed the start of processes - on a case by case basis - where the various competing groups did find common language around concrete issues. But even this collapsed in the preparatory discussion for the NMI. 

4. To have the WSF as an umbrella organisation for the planned ISF is not a bad idea (do you have a charter or an MoU about the formalities of the relationship?). The objectives of the WSF are core objectives of the global civil society and they are relevant also for the Internet which includes efforts to bridge the digital divide, to promote human rights, to reduce and overcome social and economic injustice and to promote access to the Internet. If the ISF can make here a meaningful contribution, this is welcome. However as it looks at this moment, the ISF does not build bridges among the various wings of CS IG Groups, it deepends the split. This weakens CS and is not needed.

5. I do not see that the ISF is the counterinitiative to the NMI. ISF is one-stakeholder, NMI is multi-stakeholder. Two different shoes. The NMI brings together all four stakeholder groups on equal footing and a high level. Based on the Sao Paulo Declaration this is a stumbling step forward into a new territory of a multistakeholder policy development which offers new opportunities which has to be tested out. It is a challenge for civil society to bring its key positions to this process. 


Wolfgang




-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From ymshana2003 at gmail.com  Sat Jan 31 09:09:58 2015
From: ymshana2003 at gmail.com (ymshana2003)
Date: Sat, 31 Jan 2015 16:09:58 +0200
Subject: [governance] Internet Social Forum
Message-ID: <jiqn72ss789k043ohcfnq735.1422713398512@email.android.com>

Helo Avri.
Well stated. 
For some it is a career while others we take it as a public service for free..
Best
Yassin


Sent from Samsung Mobile

-------- Original message --------
From: Avri Doria <avri at acm.org> 
Date:31/01/2015  08:05  (GMT+02:00) 
To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org 
Subject: Re: [governance] Internet Social Forum 


PS.  I feel pretty much the same about NMI & ISF.  I'm curious to see what they end up becoming.  I worry about their effect on the IGF, but otherwise, the more people working on the hard problems of IG constructively, the better.

avri

On 31-Jan-15 00:51, Avri Doria wrote:
>

On 29-Jan-15 17:57, Jeremy Malcolm wrote:
> People like Suresh, Tim, Milton and Avri (sorry
> to lump the four of you together, I know that's not quite fair) at least
> stand out on the IGC list for their pro-market views.

hmmm, i doubt you will find me supporting pro market ideas very much.

I accept the market as existing, and I am willing to work with and       be friends with those who support it, hence multistakeholderism.   But I do not consider myself a pro market supporter, though perhaps I am a bit of a pragmatist and do accept that we live in a       market prevalent culture and thus must try to regulate it.

I am an evolutionist and not a revolutionary.  But I am still proud of my Marxian background and look back fondly and somewhat longingly, on my time as a primitive communist as a kibbutz member in the 80's.

Otherwise i don't mind being lumped with them, if lumping you must.

cheers,

avri

ps. i am surprised you have never seen Milton and I go after each other on this theme.  Must be on list you do not inhabit.

>

      >

      >

      > ____________________________________________________________

      > You received this message as a subscriber on the list:

      >      governance at lists.igcaucus.org

      > To be removed from the list, visit:

      >      http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

      >

      > For all other list information and functions, see:

      >      http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance

      > To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:

      >      http://www.igcaucus.org/

      >

      > Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150131/e76251b2/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From gurstein at gmail.com  Sat Jan 31 11:49:36 2015
From: gurstein at gmail.com (michael gurstein)
Date: Sat, 31 Jan 2015 08:49:36 -0800
Subject: [governance] [discuss] FW: FW: Towards an Internet Social Forum
In-Reply-To: <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A801642ACE@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
References: <w1tknuhwuokwhm1bwrq7nf82.1421824340505@email.android.com>
 <54BFBF0D.3000504@itforchange.net> <EBD518CE-0A41-4F63-8AB4-E68F33E602FB@globalgeneva.net>
 <20150121172634.0fbbd8b5@quill> <54BFE3E9.8080005@itforchange.net>
 <1421862025.163813248@apps.rackspace.com> <54BFE647.50205@itforchange.net>
 <20150121190917.3066b781@quill> <54BFEF3A.6080307@alainet.org>
 <20150121194828.1ce2f9ef@quill> <b6bf4820c07c5c5367db7cfe2f2c89c1.squirrel@webmail.tni.org>
 <54C0BF75.9030809@itforchange.net> <207E590CDEB1344EB16A3D3424E8D74202304FE5AB3B@EXVMBX016-2.exch016.msoutlookonline.net>
 <54C0DFD4.6070202@itforchange.net> <54C111D0.2050809@itforchange.net>
 <54C12314.2060407@alainet.org> <54C236DE.3050903@itforchange.net>
 <54C2E1A8.9040703@itforchange.net> <001001d03899$2ad41c00$807c5400$@gmail.com>
 <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A801642A88@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
 <007d01d038b1$aaee5fa0$00cb1ee0$@gmail.com> <009001d038b5$65699a40$303ccec0$@gmail.com>
 <54C52F8E.9000601@acm.org> <"54CCB3C2.30 808"@itforch ange.net> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A801642ACE@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
Message-ID: <014b01d03d75$e5ef5640$b1ce02c0$@gmail.com>

Wolfgang,

A few comments inline...

-----Original Message-----
From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org
[mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of "Kleinwächter,
Wolfgang"
Sent: Saturday, January 31, 2015 5:03 AM
To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; parminder; Avri Doria; discuss at 1net.org;
bestbits at lists.bestbits.net; governance at lists.igcaucus.org
Subject: AW: [governance] [discuss] FW: FW: Towards an Internet Social Forum

Parminder:
I responded on this to Wolfgang (whose response BTW I still await). 

Wolfgang:
Sorry for the late reply. And thanks Parminder (and Norbert) for the
clarification with regard to the new ISF. Here are some comments:

1. The multistakeholder approach is a two layer approach where each
stakholder has (on the lower layer) its own mechanisms to develop positions
to various issues and where on the higher layer the various stakeholders
communicate, coordinate and collaborate together to find solutions to common
problems on the basis of what in the Internet world is called "rough
consensus". If one stakeholder group disagrees there is no rough consensus.
Insofar, I see no basic conflicts between the idea of an ISF and the IGF.
ISF is one-stakeholder. IGF is multi-stakeholder. Welcome. 

[MG>] I'm never sure in these types of discussions whether MSism is a
technical mechanism or a normative position or both and whether it is meant
to be simply a part of the preparatory process for decision making or meant
to be the decision making mechanism itself.  Could you clarify? 

The ISF to my mind is not meant to re/present one stakeholder but is
concerned with ensuring that decision making in the Internet sphere is based
on democratic values and mechanisms. There would seem to be a fundamental
incompatibility between decision making undertaken by self-selected
stakeholder elites and democratic decision making.  Could you clarify?

2. For civil society - probably the weakest partner in a full
multistakeholder mechanism - it would be good to speak with one voice. This
enhances to chances not only to be heard but also to participate in decision
making. We learned this lesson during WSIS I. The Geneva CS WSIS declaration
opened the door for participation of CS (on equal footing) both in the WGIG
and later in the IGF. This was an achievement and neither a "natural"
development nor a present by the other stakeholders. A key role played the
Interrnet Governance Caucus (IGC), established in June 2003. The IGC played
a primary role in globale IG policy making until 2007 or 2008. Over the last
couple of years the IGC became - unfortunately - a platform where
disagreemet dominated and the readiness to find internal "rough consensus"
among the various wings within the CS stakeholder groups became nearly
impossible. This resulted in a dramtic declining of the influence of the IGC
into multistakeholder processes and the ermegence of other CS IG Networks -
from Best Bits to the Just Net Coalition. The diversity is not a bad thing.
But if such a diversity ends in "infighting" (remember the unbelievable
shouting during the IGC Meeting in Bali) the risk is high, that the CS as a
whole looses a lot of credibility and weakens its opportunities to
participate meaningful at the higher multistakeholder level. All (limited)
energies and resources are wasted in fighting each other, nothing remains to
made a construtive input into the broader processes of the higher level of
multistakehoder policy development.  

[MG>] There has been for some time in the IGC an unresolved ambiguity as to
what is meant by "civil society"... I clearly remember discussions with many
of those currently bewailing the development of the ISF where I and others
attempted to assert that civil society represented particular
normative/value positions (such as those represented by the WSF) while
others -- notably those identified by Jeremy i.e. Avri, McTim, Milton,
Suresh etc. argued vociferously that no, CS was a "category", not a movement
i.e. "CS is all those not otherwise associated with government or the
private sector (sometimes the technical community was included here and
sometimes not)".  The argument went so far as to have some assert that even
those otherwise employed by government or the private sector could in their
off days be classified as civil society if they chose to self-identify as
such whether or not the position that they espoused as CS was directly
consistent with the presumed interests of their employer.
       
To my mind this represents (and represented) a fundamental division within
the IGC between those who saw CS as being based on a common agreement on
certain values and norms (as for example those espoused by the WSF) and
those who simply saw CS as a convenient collection of self-identified actors
organized to promote certain interests within multistakeholder processes.
The ISF is a direct linear outgrowth of that division and the affiliations
with and opposition to the ISF would appear to be also directly associated
with how individuals aligned themselves in that debate.

3. In my eyes the CSCG - which did build an umbrella above six CS IG
Networks - was the best what could happen after the split (which started
already in Nairobi and continued in Baku). It allowed the various wings to
stick to their - sometimes excentric - positions, but it also allowed the
start of processes - on a case by case basis - where the various competing
groups did find common language around concrete issues. But even this
collapsed in the preparatory discussion for the NMI. 

[MG>] To my mind the CSCG simply papered over that division for convenience
sake.

4. To have the WSF as an umbrella organisation for the planned ISF is not a
bad idea (do you have a charter or an MoU about the formalities of the
relationship?). The objectives of the WSF are core objectives of the global
civil society and they are relevant also for the Internet which includes
efforts to bridge the digital divide, to promote human rights, to reduce and
overcome social and economic injustice and to promote access to the
Internet. If the ISF can make here a meaningful contribution, this is
welcome. However as it looks at this moment, the ISF does not build bridges
among the various wings of CS IG Groups, it deepends the split. This weakens
CS and is not needed.

[MG>] My expectation is that the ISF will be very welcoming of those who
look on and are willing to commit by their statements and actions to the
role of CS in IG as being the promotion of certain broadly agreed upon
normative positions (the ones you have pointed to above among others) and
will be not welcoming to those who are not. Whether this promotes
divisions/bridges in CS is neither here nor there since the division is a
already a fundamental and irreconcilable one and not obviously bridgeable
except on occasion on specific issues/campaigns.

5. I do not see that the ISF is the counterinitiative to the NMI. ISF is
one-stakeholder, NMI is multi-stakeholder. Two different shoes. The NMI
brings together all four stakeholder groups on equal footing and a high
level. Based on the Sao Paulo Declaration this is a stumbling step forward
into a new territory of a multistakeholder policy development which offers
new opportunities which has to be tested out. It is a challenge for civil
society to bring its key positions to this process. 

[MG>] I think you misunderstand the ISF which is meant to be the beginnings
of a popular movement to ensure that the Internet is "governed" is a way
which is consistent with and supportive of democracy, social and economic
justice, and human rights.  The feeling of many currently in the ISF is that
the NMI is in direct opposition to this;  rather it is supportive of an
Internet that is governed by and in the interests of economic and political
elites. The inclusion of token CS representation in the NMI is hardly a
substitute for democratic governance and certainly no protection against the
overwhelming power and resources of elites as working within the framework
of the NMI/WEF or elsewhere.

Mike


Wolfgang






-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From nb at bollow.ch  Sat Jan 31 12:03:41 2015
From: nb at bollow.ch (Norbert Bollow)
Date: Sat, 31 Jan 2015 18:03:41 +0100
Subject: [governance] Towards an Internet Social Forum
In-Reply-To: <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A801642ACE@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
References: <w1tknuhwuokwhm1bwrq7nf82.1421824340505@email.android.com>
	<1421862025.163813248@apps.rackspace.com>
	<54BFE647.50205@itforchange.net>
	<20150121190917.3066b781@quill>
	<54BFEF3A.6080307@alainet.org>
	<20150121194828.1ce2f9ef@quill>
	<b6bf4820c07c5c5367db7cfe2f2c89c1.squirrel@webmail.tni.org>
	<54C0BF75.9030809@itforchange.net>
	<207E590CDEB1344EB16A3D3424E8D74202304FE5AB3B@EXVMBX016-2.exch016.msoutlookonline.net>
	<54C0DFD4.6070202@itforchange.net>
	<54C111D0.2050809@itforchange.net>
	<54C12314.2060407@alainet.org>
	<54C236DE.3050903@itforchange.net>
	<54C2E1A8.9040703@itforchange.net>
	<001001d03899$2ad41c00$807c5400$@gmail.com>
	<2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A801642A88@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
	<007d01d038b1$aaee5fa0$00cb1ee0$@gmail.com>
	<009001d038b5$65699a40$303ccec0$@gmail.com>
	<54C52F8E.9000601@acm.org>
	<"54CCB3C2.30 808"@itforchange.net>
	<2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A801642ACE@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
Message-ID: <20150131180341.527f3a62@quill>

(-Cc all except the governance list)

On Sat, 31 Jan 2015 14:02:32 +0100
<wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de> wrote:

> 2. For civil society - probably the weakest partner in a full
> multistakeholder mechanism - it would be good to speak with one
> voice. This enhances to chances not only to be heard but also to
> participate in decision making.

How would it be determined what this "one voice" says concretely?

Greetings,
Norbert

-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From suresh at hserus.net  Sat Jan 31 15:11:01 2015
From: suresh at hserus.net (Suresh Ramasubramanian)
Date: Sun, 01 Feb 2015 01:41:01 +0530
Subject: [governance] Towards an Internet Social Forum
In-Reply-To: <20150131180341.527f3a62@quill>
References: <w1tknuhwuokwhm1bwrq7nf82.1421824340505@email.android.com>
 <1421862025.163813248@apps.rackspace.com>
 <54BFE647.50205@itforchange.net>
 <20150121190917.3066b781@quill>
 <54BFEF3A.6080307@alainet.org>
 <20150121194828.1ce2f9ef@quill>
 <b6bf4820c07c5c5367db7cfe2f2c89c1.squirrel@webmail.tni.org>
 <54C0BF75.9030809@itforchange.net>
 <207E590CDEB1344EB16A3D3424E8D74202304FE5AB3B@EXVMBX016-2.exch016.msoutlookonline.net>
 <54C0DFD4.6070202@itforchange.net>
 <54C111D0.2050809@itforchange.net>
 <54C12314.2060407@alainet.org>
 <54C236DE.3050903@itforchange.net>
 <54C2E1A8.9040703@itforchange.net>
 <001001d03899$2ad41c00$807c5400$@gmail.com>
 <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A801642A88@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
 <007d01d038b1$aaee5fa0$00cb1ee0$@gmail.com>
 <009001d038b5$65699a40$303ccec0$@gmail.com>
 <54C52F8E.9000601@acm.org>
 <"54CCB3C2.30
 808"@itforchange.net>
 <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A801642ACE@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
 <20150131180341.527f3a62@quill>
Message-ID: <14b419e2068.2762.4f968dcf8ecd56c9cb8acab6370fcfe0@hserus.net>

Did you, by any chance, miss what he said about consensus and it's gradual 
breakdown over the past two years on this caucus?


On January 31, 2015 10:33:43 PM Norbert Bollow <nb at bollow.ch> wrote:

> (-Cc all except the governance list)
>
> On Sat, 31 Jan 2015 14:02:32 +0100
> <wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de> wrote:
>
> > 2. For civil society - probably the weakest partner in a full
> > multistakeholder mechanism - it would be good to speak with one
> > voice. This enhances to chances not only to be heard but also to
> > participate in decision making.
>
> How would it be determined what this "one voice" says concretely?
>
> Greetings,
> Norbert
>
>
>
>
> ----------
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>      governance at lists.igcaucus.org
> To be removed from the list, visit:
>      http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
>
> For all other list information and functions, see:
>      http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
>      http://www.igcaucus.org/
>
> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
>



-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

From wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de  Sat Jan  3 16:28:26 2015
From: wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de (=?iso-8859-1?Q?=22Kleinw=E4chter=2C_Wolfgang=22?=)
Date: Sat, 03 Jan 2015 22:28:26 +0100
Subject: [governance] 2015
References: <D0BFA4DF.52BAA%vanda@uol.com.br>
 <CAMz5XN7aMMUUy1fTq5nnpwYx3M2TBgz-4+cFAGTd8b1frFHgog@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID:  <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8016429C2@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>

Best wishes for 2015 to everybody.

Here is my traditional Outlook from CircleID.

http://www.circleid.com/posts/20150103_internet_governance_outlook_2015_2_processes_many_venues_4_baskets/

Wolfgang



-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t