<html xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:st1="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
<head>
<meta http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
<meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 11 (filtered medium)">
<o:SmartTagType namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags"
name="State" downloadurl="http://www.5iamas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags"/>
<o:SmartTagType namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags"
name="City" downloadurl="http://www.5iamas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags"/>
<o:SmartTagType namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags"
name="country-region" downloadurl="http://www.5iantlavalamp.com/"/>
<o:SmartTagType namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags"
name="place" downloadurl="http://www.5iantlavalamp.com/"/>
<!--[if !mso]>
<style>
st1\:*{behavior:url(#default#ieooui) }
</style>
<![endif]-->
<style>
<!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:Wingdings;
panose-1:5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
p.MsoPlainText, li.MsoPlainText, div.MsoPlainText
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Courier New";}
p
{mso-margin-top-alt:auto;
margin-right:0in;
mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;
margin-left:0in;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";}
@page Section1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 77.95pt 1.0in 77.95pt;}
div.Section1
{page:Section1;}
/* List Definitions */
@list l0
{mso-list-id:117337666;
mso-list-type:hybrid;
mso-list-template-ids:1800958656 67698689 67698691 67698693 67698689 67698691 67698693 67698689 67698691 67698693;}
@list l0:level1
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:\F0B7;
mso-level-tab-stop:.5in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;
font-family:Symbol;}
@list l1
{mso-list-id:234752069;
mso-list-type:hybrid;
mso-list-template-ids:-1153655458 67698689 67698691 67698693 67698689 67698691 67698693 67698689 67698691 67698693;}
@list l1:level1
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:\F0B7;
mso-level-tab-stop:.5in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;
font-family:Symbol;}
ol
{margin-bottom:0in;}
ul
{margin-bottom:0in;}
-->
</style>
</head>
<body lang=EN-US link=blue vlink=purple>
<div class=Section1>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span lang=EN-GB
style='font-size:10.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span lang=EN-GB
style='font-size:10.0pt'>Dear Milton,<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span lang=EN-GB
style='font-size:10.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span lang=EN-GB
style='font-size:10.0pt'>Your paper is very educative. In fact I must thank the
outputs (this and the earlier ones) from your IG project as my main source of
education on Internet Governance.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span lang=EN-GB
style='font-size:10.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span lang=EN-GB
style='font-size:10.0pt'>Thanks also for taking the straight-forward view on the
un-tenability of US's unilateral control of Internet, and exposing the
hypocrisy of its claims. <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span lang=EN-GB
style='font-size:10.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span lang=EN-GB
style='font-size:10.0pt'>The separation between narrow and broad oversight
functions is uncertainly useful, for the sake of understanding as well as
contemplating oversight mechanisms. <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span lang=EN-GB
style='font-size:10.0pt'>(“Narrow oversight refers to the policy
supervision of ICANN and its administration of Internet identifiers. Broad
oversight refers to the authority to set global public policy for the Internet
on a large range of issues, from intellectual property to spam, interconnection
and privacy – policy issues which include but go beyond Internet names
and addresses.”)<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span lang=EN-GB
style='font-size:10.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span lang=EN-GB
style='font-size:10.0pt'>However, I cannot agree that these two need to be
completely separated in their discussion at WSIS. Unless one appreciates the
broader oversight functions (which are very well illustrated in your IG Project
paper ‘Internet Governance: the State of Play’) one is not able to
see why the ‘narrow’ oversight functions are important from, and
linked to, the broader public policy point of view – and this
understanding alone can guide what should be the nature of ‘oversight’
of the narrow functions. In fact IG Project’s response to WGIG report clearly
mentions that <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span lang=EN-GB
style='font-size:10.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span lang=EN-GB
style='font-size:10.0pt'>“Moreover, on the Internet, policy issues are
often intimately and inextricably related to technical and operational
decisions.”<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span lang=EN-GB
style='font-size:10.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span lang=EN-GB
style='font-size:10.0pt'>I therefore will like to see your promised paper on
the ‘broader’ oversight functions alongside this one, to make a
case for appropriate institutional mechanisms for either kind of oversights. <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span lang=EN-GB
style='font-size:10.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><b><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span lang=EN-GB
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-weight:bold'>Who takes up oversight when (if) US relinquishes
it <o:p></o:p></span></font></b></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span lang=EN-GB
style='font-size:10.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span lang=EN-GB
style='font-size:10.0pt'>The second issue I have with the present paper is of
figuring out where does the oversight responsibility go once it is taken from
(or ceded by) the <st1:place w:st="on"><st1:country-region w:st="on">US</st1:country-region></st1:place>.
Here there is still a lot of confusion and I think we need to take a clear view
- which is in keeping with the political realities. <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span lang=EN-GB
style='font-size:10.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span lang=EN-GB
style='font-size:10.0pt'>It is either supposed to disappear into nowhere, which
is to say` that there are really no issues that need public policy guidance
(which I know is not your intention to argue, but I know that many people hold
positions close to this, and therefore I state it here) <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span lang=EN-GB
style='font-size:10.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span lang=EN-GB
style='font-size:10.0pt'>Or, it goes to a reformed ICANN. The paper gives two
options. One, that international inputs are incorporated into the existing MOU
that governs ICANN. That of course is completely unacceptable, even if it were
practical to do so. The MOU will still be between US government and the ICANN,
and so US stays the custodian for fulfilment of the ‘international’
inputs. This is unacceptable. And this is not what one calls internationalised
oversight. I wont labour this point because your paper itself seems to favour
the second option. <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span lang=EN-GB
style='font-size:10.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span lang=EN-GB
style='font-size:10.0pt'>This second option is to let the MOU lapse, and ICANN
then is left under no oversight. And the powers for policies stay with a
‘reformed’ ICANN. One problem with this approach as your paper
mentions is that the <st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">US</st1:place></st1:country-region>
still keeps all the powers of DNS root etc. The other problem which is as big
is that this option contemplates that a major global governance issue will be
entirely ‘privatised’. <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span lang=EN-GB
style='font-size:10.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span lang=EN-GB
style='font-size:10.0pt'>This is too great a leap of faith. I do not want to
elaborate on the implications of this, which I think are not difficult to see
(and the elaboration will require a theoretical analysis), except to say that
this is neither desirable nor practical. The obvious issues of representative-ness,
legitimacy etc stare in our face. I am surprised that your paper while building
the argument for de-nationalising IG in its opening part, citing the global
nature of Internet, never considered the existing forums of global governance.
Especially when the IG project’s response to the WGIG report had this to
say about the UN:<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span lang=EN-GB
style='font-size:10.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span lang=EN-GB
style='font-size:10.0pt'>“General Assembly – the only universal
body whose competence covers all of the elements in Internet governance”.
<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span lang=EN-GB
style='font-size:10.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span lang=EN-GB
style='font-size:10.0pt'>I know that existing UN bodies may not be appropriate
to take up IG functions, but it is also obvious that for global legitimacy the
IG oversight MUST anchor in the UN.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span lang=EN-GB
style='font-size:10.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span lang=EN-GB
style='font-size:10.0pt'>And instead of operating from the private end of
‘policy making’, we need to start from the legitimate possibilities
from among public bodies and then see what all is needed to be done to ensure
that the free spirit and open principles of Internet are not compromised. In
fact the IG Project’s response to WGIG report speaks about initiating
a process of a framework convention to lay out the principles and rules,
and if needed a new institutional mechanism, for IG. I too think that is the
right way to go. <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span lang=EN-GB
style='font-size:10.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><b><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span lang=EN-GB
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-weight:bold'>CS needs to develop a clear position
on IG oversight<o:p></o:p></span></font></b></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span lang=EN-GB
style='font-size:10.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span lang=EN-GB
style='font-size:10.0pt'>IG is an important issue at <st1:place w:st="on"><st1:State
w:st="on">Tunis</st1:State></st1:place>, and CS needs to take clear,
principled and yet workable positions on this. Every option including the
status quo has its problems. For too long different fears have paralysed us
into inaction – but ‘politics is the art of the possible’ and
we need to clearly choose what we will like the <st1:City w:st="on"><st1:place
w:st="on">Summit</st1:place></st1:City> to do on this matter. Non-decision is
itself a choice, and I personally consider is as the most unacceptable one in
this case. <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span lang=EN-GB
style='font-size:10.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span lang=EN-GB
style='font-size:10.0pt'>And this in-decision makes us toy with untenable
possibilities of trying to ‘reform’ ICANN into a new legitimate
body of global governance for some very important public policy issues, which
will become even more crucial in times to come. We can be assured that ICANN is
not going to become a legitimate public policy body. (It has tried to get
greater representative-ness of what it calls the ‘internet community’
and the efforts have mostly been un-successful, and for all its good intentions
it can in no way be said to represent all on whom Internet has an impact. This
concept of ‘internet community’ as consisting of actual Internet
users itself is problematic. It may have been valid in the nineties. But today
Internet impacts everyone, and the entire world’s population has a great
stake in the Internet. ) <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span lang=EN-GB
style='font-size:10.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span lang=EN-GB
style='font-size:10.0pt'>The IG caucus’s response to the WGIG report says
that “ICANN's decisions, and any host country agreement, must be required
to comply with public policy requirements negotiated through international
treaties in regard to, inter alia, human rights treaties, privacy rights,
gender agreements and trade rules”. How will this
‘requirement’ be enforced? What if they do not comply with these
treaties? Can institutional arrangements work without accountability
interfaces? Compliance to these international treaties can only be ensured
through an oversight anchored in the UN, which is the framework in which these
treaties are made and enforced. <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span lang=EN-GB
style='font-size:10.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span lang=EN-GB
style='font-size:10.0pt'>And the proposal of leaving things to a
‘reformed ICANN’ without any other oversight mechanism cannot be
justified even as a negotiation tactic - seeking what is achievable. The
EU proposal speaks of an internationalised oversight of current IG regime
– and I don’t think it could mean anything other than an oversight
mechanism anchored in the UN (of course, as the EU is eager to ensure, with all
precautionary measures to prevent ad-hoc interferences, and its proposal also states
as much). The EU proposal also speaks of putting in place a process of
transition – so the WSIS can itself mandate or at least indicate a
process like a framework convention (though I am not sure whether this is what EU
has mind as the transition process). <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span lang=EN-GB
style='font-size:10.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span lang=EN-GB
style='font-size:10.0pt'>So if EU, such a close friend of the US in most WSIS
matters, can take this option, which is the already the minimum position for
almost all the rest of the governments – we certainly are speaking of
practical solutions in the framework of what can/should happen at the Tunis
summit itself. <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span lang=EN-GB
style='font-size:10.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span lang=EN-GB
style='font-size:10.0pt'>Now with EU taking on this position, it leaves only
the US (with one or two die-hard supporters), the business sector and a good
part of the CS engaging with IG issues on one side, and the rest of the global
actors on the other. This kind of situation generally doesn’t
happen. And we also need to examine what it really means?(US on its own though
is quite used to being pitted against all the rest, as happened recently at
UNESCO’s ‘treaty on cultural diversity’.) <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span lang=EN-GB
style='font-size:10.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span lang=EN-GB
style='font-size:10.0pt'>Regards<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span lang=EN-GB
style='font-size:10.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span lang=EN-GB
style='font-size:10.0pt'>Parminder <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span lang=EN-GB
style='font-size:10.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span lang=EN-GB
style='font-size:10.0pt'>_________________________________________________<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span lang=EN-GB
style='font-size:10.0pt'>Parminder Jeet Singh<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span lang=EN-GB
style='font-size:10.0pt'>IT for Change<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span lang=EN-GB
style='font-size:10.0pt'>Bridging Development Realities and Technological
Possibilities <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span lang=EN-GB
style='font-size:10.0pt'>91-80-26654134<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span lang=EN-GB
style='font-size:10.0pt'>www.ITforChange.net <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span lang=EN-GB
style='font-size:10.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:
10.0pt'>-----Original Message-----<br>
From: governance-bounces@lists.cpsr.org [mailto:governance-bounces@lists.cpsr.org]
On Behalf Of Milton Mueller<br>
Sent: Tuesday, November 01, 2005 10:17 PM<br>
To: governance@lists.cpsr.org<br>
Subject: [governance] Political Oversight of ICANN: A Briefing for the
WSISSummit</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span lang=EN-GB
style='font-size:10.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span lang=EN-GB
style='font-size:10.0pt'>=================<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span lang=EN-GB
style='font-size:10.0pt'>Political Oversight of ICANN<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span lang=EN-GB
style='font-size:10.0pt'>=================<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span lang=EN-GB
style='font-size:10.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span lang=EN-GB
style='font-size:10.0pt'>The Internet Governance Project releases a new paper
clarifying the<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span lang=EN-GB
style='font-size:10.0pt'>controversies around "oversight" of ICANN. <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span lang=EN-GB
style='font-size:10.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span lang=EN-GB
style='font-size:10.0pt'> http://dcc.syr.edu/miscarticles/Political-Oversight.pdf
<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span lang=EN-GB
style='font-size:10.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span lang=EN-GB
style='font-size:10.0pt'>We explain why WSIS must separate discussion of
governments' role in<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span lang=EN-GB
style='font-size:10.0pt'>setting policy for all Internet issues from discussion
of the narrower<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span lang=EN-GB
style='font-size:10.0pt'>problem of ICANN's oversight. <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span lang=EN-GB
style='font-size:10.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span lang=EN-GB
style='font-size:10.0pt'>An analysis of the contractual instruments used by the
<st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">U.S.</st1:place></st1:country-region>
to<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span lang=EN-GB
style='font-size:10.0pt'>supervise ICANN shows how the problem of <st1:country-region
w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">U.S.</st1:place></st1:country-region> unilateral
oversight can<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span lang=EN-GB
style='font-size:10.0pt'>be addressed in a way that is both politically
feasible and avoids<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span lang=EN-GB
style='font-size:10.0pt'>threatening the stability or freedom of the Internet.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span lang=EN-GB
style='font-size:10.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span lang=EN-GB
style='font-size:10.0pt'>The paper can be downloaded here:<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span lang=EN-GB
style='font-size:10.0pt'>http://dcc.syr.edu/miscarticles/Political-Oversight.pdf
<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span lang=EN-GB
style='font-size:10.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span lang=EN-GB
style='font-size:10.0pt'>www.internetgovernance.org <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span lang=EN-GB
style='font-size:10.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span lang=EN-GB
style='font-size:10.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span lang=EN-GB
style='font-size:10.0pt'>_______________________________________________<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span lang=EN-GB
style='font-size:10.0pt'>governance mailing list<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span lang=EN-GB
style='font-size:10.0pt'>governance@lists.cpsr.org<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoPlainText><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span lang=EN-GB
style='font-size:10.0pt'>https://ssl.cpsr.org/mailman/listinfo/governance<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
</body>
</html>