<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" 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)">
<!--[if !mso]>
<style>
v\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
o\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
w\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
.shape {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
</style>
<![endif]--><o:SmartTagType
namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" name="PersonName"/>
<!--[if !mso]>
<style>
st1\:*{behavior:url(#default#ieooui) }
</style>
<![endif]-->
<style>
<!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:Tahoma;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0cm;
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:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
p.MsoAutoSig, li.MsoAutoSig, div.MsoAutoSig
{margin:0cm;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";}
p
{mso-margin-top-alt:auto;
margin-right:0cm;
mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;
margin-left:0cm;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";}
span.EmailStyle18
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:Arial;
color:navy;}
@page Section1
{size:612.0pt 792.0pt;
margin:72.0pt 90.0pt 72.0pt 90.0pt;}
div.Section1
{page:Section1;}
/* List Definitions */
@list l0
{mso-list-id:1559827448;
mso-list-template-ids:-1943351376;}
ol
{margin-bottom:0cm;}
ul
{margin-bottom:0cm;}
-->
</style>
</head>
<body lang=EN-US link=blue vlink=blue>
<div class=Section1>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'>Siva I would not include this for many reasons,
but a few are below. Just too many inaccuracies. At this late stage I would
leave this out but would be happy to debate at length later on if desired.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<div>
<p class=MsoAutoSig><st1:PersonName w:st="on"><font size=3 color=navy
face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:navy'>Ian Peter</span></font></st1:PersonName><font
color=navy><span style='color:navy'><o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<div style='border:none;border-left:solid blue 1.5pt;padding:0cm 0cm 0cm 4.0pt'>
<div>
<div class=MsoNormal align=center style='text-align:center'><font size=3
face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>
<hr size=2 width="100%" align=center tabindex=-1>
</span></font></div>
<p class=MsoNormal><b><font size=2 face=Tahoma><span style='font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Tahoma;font-weight:bold'>From:</span></font></b><font size=2
face=Tahoma><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Tahoma'> Sivasubramanian
Muthusamy [mailto:isolatedn@gmail.com] <br>
<b><span style='font-weight:bold'>Sent:</span></b> 11 September 2008 04:37<br>
<b><span style='font-weight:bold'>To:</span></b> <st1:PersonName w:st="on">governance@lists.cpsr.org</st1:PersonName>;
Parminder<br>
<b><span style='font-weight:bold'>Subject:</span></b> Re: [governance] Inputs
for synthesis paper</span></font><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'><font size=3
face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>Hello All,<br>
<br>
I have included the following preamble to the Input Synthesis paper to place
our proposals in context. The preamble is drafted in such a way that it could
eventually be further worked upon to come up with a declaration of rights:<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p style='mso-margin-top-alt:5.0pt;margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:4.3pt;
margin-left:36.0pt;text-indent:-18.0pt;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo1'><![if !supportLists]><font
size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'><span
style='mso-list:Ignore'>1.<font size=1 face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font:7.0pt "Times New Roman"'> </span></font></span></span></font><![endif]>The
Internet has evolved as a medium neutral of technology, nationhood, language,
religion or race. The internet is evolving and functions on a community model.
The people who designed the internet had a very good sense of what they were
doing-what kind of space they were creating and what its characteristics would
be. <o:p></o:p></p>
<p style='margin-bottom:4.3pt'><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'>It is still not neutral
in language even if it is getting there. The people who originally designed it
were creating a timesharing system for super computers. No security layer, many
other flaws when compared with ideal design.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p style='mso-margin-top-alt:5.0pt;margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:4.3pt;
margin-left:36.0pt;text-indent:-18.0pt;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo1'><![if !supportLists]><font
size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'><span
style='mso-list:Ignore'>2.<font size=1 face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font:7.0pt "Times New Roman"'> </span></font></span></span></font><![endif]>Different
nations across the globe have differing concepts of freedom. Despite occasional
attempts at restraint, the Internet has emerged as a medium for freedom of
speech even in geographical regions where freedom of expression is restrained.
The Internet is a medium to connect people across national boundaries and this
is possible only as a free and unregulated medium.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p style='margin-bottom:4.3pt'><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'>Controversial<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p style='mso-margin-top-alt:5.0pt;margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:4.3pt;
margin-left:36.0pt;text-indent:-18.0pt;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo1'><![if !supportLists]><font
size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'><span
style='mso-list:Ignore'>3.<font size=1 face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font:7.0pt "Times New Roman"'> </span></font></span></span></font><![endif]>The
Internet Standards have emerged by open collaboration and participation from
across national boundaries. Internet is continuously evolving and the Internet
Community acknowledges the existence of problems related to security and
commits to work on architectural and protocol based solutions. <o:p></o:p></p>
<p style='margin-bottom:4.3pt'><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'>Developing country
participation has been minimal.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p style='mso-margin-top-alt:5.0pt;margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:4.3pt;
margin-left:36.0pt;text-indent:-18.0pt;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo1'><![if !supportLists]><font
size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'><span
style='mso-list:Ignore'>4.<font size=1 face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font:7.0pt "Times New Roman"'> </span></font></span></span></font><![endif]>The
internet is a global social space that works on community participation,
"governed" by conventions, unwritten rules without a hierarchy of
authrority. Internet has its own culture and ethos and is founded upon
unwritten codes that provide an inherent order. A form of Internet Governance
is to emerge out of commonwealth.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p style='margin-bottom:4.3pt'><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'>Disagree with this
analysis<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p style='mso-margin-top-alt:5.0pt;margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:4.3pt;
margin-left:36.0pt;text-indent:-18.0pt;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo1'><![if !supportLists]><font
size=3 color=navy face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt;
color:navy'><span style='mso-list:Ignore'>5.<font size=1 face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font:7.0pt "Times New Roman"'> </span></font></span></span></font><![endif]>The
Internet has the same relationship to the physical world that the mind does to
the b<font color=navy><span style='color:navy'>ody<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p style='margin-bottom:4.3pt'><font size=3 color=navy face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:12.0pt;color:navy'>Disagree with this analysis<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p style='mso-margin-top-alt:5.0pt;margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:4.3pt;
margin-left:36.0pt;text-indent:-18.0pt;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo1'><![if !supportLists]><font
size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'><span
style='mso-list:Ignore'>6.<font size=1 face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font:7.0pt "Times New Roman"'> </span></font></span></span></font><![endif]>The
Internet model differs from that of the Telecommunication or any other
industry's business model. The Internet can not to be confined to the
conventional legal definitions of an industry, or a "product" , and
its own conventions are evolving for Governance.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p style='margin-bottom:4.3pt'><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'>Disagree again.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p style='margin-bottom:4.3pt'><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p style='margin-bottom:4.3pt'><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'>On Wed, Sep 10, 2008 at 10:47 PM, Parminder <<a
href="mailto:parminder@itforchange.net">parminder@itforchange.net</a>>
wrote:<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'><font size=3
face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'><br>
> > it is not a satisfactory solution.<br>
> ><br>
> > The whole point of this debate is that some people mean completely<br>
> > different, sometimes clashing things by "rights."<br>
><br>
> The solution then is to say what you say above. People have different<br>
> interpretations of what are rights. I am fine with saying this in the<br>
> statement.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'>As with earlier contestation on this point, I write the below as an IGC<br>
member, and not a co-coordinator.<br>
<br>
As mentioned in my earlier email, I agree to put the sentence - Different<br>
people have different interpretations about rights - at the end of the<br>
contested paragraph, so that it will read as follows.<br>
<br>
"The openness and diversity of the internet provide an avenue for widely<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'>recognized (but still imperfectly enforced) basic human rights: the<br>
individual right to freedom of expression and to privacy. It may also be<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'>useful to explore if and how positive and collective rights may be<br>
meaningful in relation to the Internet - for instance, respectively, a<br>
'right to the Internet', or a right of cultural expression - including the<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'>right to have an Internet in ones own language, which can inform the<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'>important IGF thematic area of cultural diversity. It may be noted that<br>
different people have different interpretations about rights, which makes a<br>
discussion on various rights important." (ends)<br>
<br>
Though this sentence may in fact be unnecessary because later on the draft<br>
does mention that - " We also recognize that rights claims can
sometimes<br>
conflict or compete with each other." But, I am fine if the proponents of<br>
these statements insist, in the interest of getting a statement out and<br>
possible campaign towards making 'rights and the internet' the over-arching<br>
theme of IGF-4.<br>
<br>
Ian, I request you to explore if an agreement can be reached on the above<br>
text.<br>
<br>
Parminder<br>
<br>
PS: Without prejudice to my agreement to include these parts, I must observe<br>
that to say these sentences in a global civil society statement goes against<br>
'normal' claims of much of global civil society to both universality of<br>
rights and indivisibility of rights. By universality of rights one means<br>
that recognized human rights are true in all human conditions, which is<br>
contradicted by our 'different interpretations' part. And the doctrine of<br>
indivisibility of rights highlights interdependence of rights rather their<br>
conflicts, which too we contradict. Therefore I don't think it is right for<br>
us to say these sentences in our advocacy statements.<br>
<br>
It also regresses on the statement made earlier by the caucus during the<br>
WSIS process, which I cited a day or two ago.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'><font size=3
face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'><br>
"Nothing in Internet governance negotiations must impair, restrict, or<br>
contradict universally agreed human rights."<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'>I think the above parts of IGC's own statements will<br>
impair/restrict/contradict some universally agreed human rights.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'><br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
> -----Original Message-----<br>
> From: Parminder [mailto:<a href="mailto:parminder@itforchange.net">parminder@itforchange.net</a>]<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'>> Sent: Wednesday, September 10, 2008 9:27 AM<br>
> To: 'Milton L Mueller'; <a href="mailto:governance@lists.cpsr.org">governance@lists.cpsr.org</a>;
'Tapani Tarvainen'<br>
> Subject: RE: [governance] Inputs for synthesis paper<br>
><br>
><br>
> > > Ok, then lets do that. We will not use the terms negative,
positive<br>
> > and<br>
> > > collective rights, since we are not able to agree on analytical<br>
> > > difference/<br>
> ><br>
> > it is not a satisfactory solution.<br>
> ><br>
> > The whole point of this debate is that some people mean completely<br>
> > different, sometimes clashing things by "rights."<br>
><br>
> The solution then is to say what you say above. People have different<br>
> interpretations of what are rights. I am fine with saying this in the<br>
> statement.<br>
><br>
> The solution to the problem cannot to use the term individual and<br>
> collective<br>
> rights - because many people have said here that their real problem is<br>
> that<br>
> are not sure what is meant by these terms. We cant say there are<br>
> contestations between people who only admit individual rights and those<br>
> who<br>
> also support positive and collective rights - without some level of basic<br>
> agreement about what is meant by these terms. I think that is simple and<br>
> obvious.<br>
><br>
> I had earlier asked the group if those opposing collective rights can say<br>
> that in saying so they oppose these and these specific rights which I, and<br>
> many other, consider collective rights. I have not been getting any clear<br>
> reply to that. So the main problem seems to me to be that we cant
agree<br>
> on<br>
> what is meant by collective rights. That makes a statement about there<br>
> being<br>
> differences between backers of 'only individual rights' and 'also positive<br>
> and collective rights' meaningless. Does it not?<br>
><br>
> And the individual/negative rights folks say, "those<br>
> > conceptions of collective rights can often be threats to what we<br>
> > consider rights."<br>
><br>
> As I said, begs the question, which 'conceptions of collective rights..' .<br>
> Indigenous people's rights, cultural rights, women's rights, minority<br>
> rights, linguistic rights.... ???<br>
><br>
><br>
> Parminder<br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> > -----Original Message-----<br>
> > From: Milton L Mueller [mailto:<a href="mailto:mueller@syr.edu">mueller@syr.edu</a>]<br>
> > Sent: Tuesday, September 09, 2008 8:07 PM<br>
> > To: <a href="mailto:governance@lists.cpsr.org">governance@lists.cpsr.org</a>;
Parminder; Tapani Tarvainen<br>
> > Subject: RE: [governance] Inputs for synthesis paper<br>
> ><br>
> > > -----Original Message-----<br>
> > > From: Parminder [mailto:<a
href="mailto:parminder@itforchange.net">parminder@itforchange.net</a>]<br>
> > > Ok, then lets do that. We will not use the terms negative,
positive<br>
> > and<br>
> > > collective rights, since we are not able to agree on analytical<br>
> > > difference/<br>
> ><br>
> > it is not a satisfactory solution.<br>
> ><br>
> > The whole point of this debate is that some people mean completely<br>
> > different, sometimes clashing things by "rights." This
division applies<br>
> > not only within civil society, but to states and business, for
example<br>
> > IPRs. In essence, the positive and collective rights folks are
saying,<br>
> > "those individual rights you care about so much are not
meaningful, we<br>
> > need a different conception that pushes states into a more active<br>
> > guarantor role." And the individual/negative rights folks say,
"those<br>
> > conceptions of collective rights can often be threats to what we<br>
> > consider rights."<br>
> ><br>
> > I do not see how we advance a rights discourse around the internet by<br>
> > pretending that that problem does not exist. I would rather squarely<br>
> > face it, acknowledge its existence, and deal with it. I see
absolutely<br>
> > no value in initiating a rights discourse without dealing with that<br>
> > problem. And if you somehow succeed in making it the theme of IGF IV,<br>
> > you will immediately be forced to deal with it. So let the synthesis<br>
> > paper input openly acknowledge the problem, please.<br>
> ><br>
> > --MM<br>
> ><br>
> > > meaning etc. In fact in doing so we may be affirming the<br>
> > indivisibility of<br>
> > > human rights as agreed in many global human rights documents,<br>
> > including of<br>
> > > the UN. WSIS declaration of principles affirms 'the
universality,<br>
> > > indivisibility, interdependence and interrelation of all human
rights<br>
> > and<br>
> > > fundamental freedoms...'<br>
> > ><br>
> > > Accordingly, I propose the contested para to be,<br>
> > ><br>
> > ><br>
> > > "The openness and diversity of the internet are underpinned
by widely<br>
> > > recognized (but still imperfectly enforced) basic human rights:
the<br>
> > > individual right to freedom of expression and to privacy. It may
also<br>
> > be<br>
> > > useful to explore if and how other kinds of rights may be
meaningful<br>
> > in<br>
> > > relation to the Internet; for instance, a 'right to the
Internet',<br>
> > which<br>
> > > may<br>
> > > relate to the IGF's 'access' theme, and a right of cultural
expression<br>
> > -<br>
> > > including the right to have an Internet in ones own language,
which<br>
> > can<br>
> > > inform the important IGF thematic area of 'cultural
diversity'."<br>
> > ><br>
> > > I have deliberately kept the connection to IGF's thematic areas<br>
> > because if<br>
> > > we do make this proposed input we will need to take it forward
towards<br>
> > > achieving our real objective of getting a rights-based agenda to<br>
> > underpin<br>
> > > IGF's deliberations.<br>
> > ><br>
> > > In fact not just going with FoE and privacy rights is also
important<br>
> > in<br>
> > > this<br>
> > > context. Such a text can never get accepted as the basis of full
range<br>
> > of<br>
> > > IGF's work and discussions.<br>
> > ><br>
> > > Parminder<br>
> > ><br>
> > > > -----Original Message-----<br>
> > > > From: Tapani Tarvainen [mailto:<a
href="mailto:tapani.tarvainen@effi.org">tapani.tarvainen@effi.org</a>]<br>
> > > > Sent: Monday, September 08, 2008 10:41 PM<br>
> > > > To: <a href="mailto:governance@lists.cpsr.org">governance@lists.cpsr.org</a><br>
> > > > Subject: Re: [governance] Inputs for synthesis paper<br>
> > > ><br>
> > > > On Mon, Sep 08, 2008 at 10:02:20PM +0530, Parminder<br>
> > > > (<a href="mailto:parminder@itforchange.net">parminder@itforchange.net</a>)
wrote:<br>
> > > ><br>
> > > > > 'Collective rights' is obviously an analytical
category and not a<br>
> > > right<br>
> > > > as<br>
> > > > > such. So when I speak of collective rights I am
clearly meaning<br>
> > > specific<br>
> > > > > rights like rights of indigenous people, linguistic
rights,<br>
> > cultural<br>
> > > > rights,<br>
> > > > > minority rights, right to development etc.<br>
> > > ><br>
> > > > > To say that one doesn't believe in collective rights
one must be<br>
> > able<br>
> > > to<br>
> > > > say<br>
> > > > > that one doesn't believe in the above rights.<br>
> > > ><br>
> > > > It does not follow if one does not agree that those rights
are<br>
> > > collective.<br>
> > > ><br>
> > > > I suspect one or maybe the key problem here is that the
term indeed<br>
> > > > carries different meanings, and people want to reject some
of them.<br>
> > > ><br>
> > > > In particular, probably few (?) people would oppose
collective<br>
> > > > rights as justification of individual rights - rights
individuals<br>
> > > > would have because of their membership in a group.<br>
> > > > The opposition stems from the other meaning, where
collective<br>
> > > > rights would justify depriving individuals of their rights.<br>
> > > ><br>
> > > > > In fact I am fine if one is ready to accept a long
list of all<br>
> > these<br>
> > > > rights,<br>
> > > > > and not mention the terms negative, positive and
collective<br>
> > rights.<br>
> > > That<br>
> > > > > merely would mean one thinks all these rights, along
with those<br>
> > that<br>
> > > may<br>
> > > > be<br>
> > > > > considered negative and positive rights are in the
same category,<br>
> > and<br>
> > > > need<br>
> > > > > not be differentiated. I could in fact be happier with
such a<br>
> > > position.<br>
> > > ><br>
> > > > That might be a useful approach.<br>
> > > ><br>
> > > > --<br>
> > > > Tapani Tarvainen<br>
> > > > ____________________________________________________________<br>
> > > > You received this message as a subscriber on the list:<br>
> > > > <a
href="mailto:governance@lists.cpsr.org">governance@lists.cpsr.org</a><br>
> > > > To be removed from the list, send any message to:<br>
> > > > <a
href="mailto:governance-unsubscribe@lists.cpsr.org">governance-unsubscribe@lists.cpsr.org</a><br>
> > > ><br>
> > > > For all list information and functions, see:<br>
> > > > <a
href="http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance" target="_blank">http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance</a><br>
> > ><br>
> > ><br>
> > > ____________________________________________________________<br>
> > > You received this message as a subscriber on the list:<br>
> > > <a href="mailto:governance@lists.cpsr.org">governance@lists.cpsr.org</a><br>
> > > To be removed from the list, send any message to:<br>
> > > <a
href="mailto:governance-unsubscribe@lists.cpsr.org">governance-unsubscribe@lists.cpsr.org</a><br>
> > ><br>
> > > For all list information and functions, see:<br>
> > > <a
href="http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance" target="_blank">http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance</a><br>
><br>
><br>
> ____________________________________________________________<br>
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:<br>
> <a href="mailto:governance@lists.cpsr.org">governance@lists.cpsr.org</a><br>
> To be removed from the list, send any message to:<br>
> <a href="mailto:governance-unsubscribe@lists.cpsr.org">governance-unsubscribe@lists.cpsr.org</a><br>
><br>
> For all list information and functions, see:<br>
> <a href="http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance"
target="_blank">http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance</a><br>
<br>
<br>
____________________________________________________________<br>
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:<br>
<a href="mailto:governance@lists.cpsr.org">governance@lists.cpsr.org</a><br>
To be removed from the list, send any message to:<br>
<a href="mailto:governance-unsubscribe@lists.cpsr.org">governance-unsubscribe@lists.cpsr.org</a><br>
<br>
For all list information and functions, see:<br>
<a href="http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance"
target="_blank">http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance</a><o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'><br>
<br clear=all>
<br>
-- <br>
<a href="http://www.linkedin.com/in/sivasubramanianmuthusamy">http://www.linkedin.com/in/sivasubramanianmuthusamy</a><o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<p><font size=2 face=Arial><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial'>Internal
Virus Database is out of date.<br>
Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com<br>
Version: 8.0.138 / Virus Database: 270.6.0/1602 - Release Date: 8/9/2008 1:22
PM</span></font><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
</body>
</html>