<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
<TITLE>Message</TITLE>
<META name=GENERATOR content="MSHTML 8.00.6001.18241"></HEAD>
<BODY>
<DIV><SPAN class=687385718-15112008><FONT color=#0000ff size=2 face=Arial>I
think the real reason that the IGF is still vulnerable to attacks such as those
from the ITU rests with civil society and the overall way in which civil society
has consented and collaborated wiith the IGF in the current framing
and presenting of the issues. </FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=687385718-15112008><FONT color=#0000ff size=2
face=Arial></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=687385718-15112008><FONT color=#0000ff size=2 face=Arial>Rather
than attempt to engage the larger universe of the grassroots with a stake in the
opportunities that ICTs present (as well as the risks), the IGF following WSIS
has overall failed to either define the issues with which it is concerned in
terms amenable to grassroots involvement or otherwise has effectively ignored
the issues which would engage grassroots users and particularly organizations
working with and for the grassroot ICTs.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=687385718-15112008><FONT color=#0000ff size=2
face=Arial></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=687385718-15112008><FONT color=#0000ff size=2 face=Arial>The
absence of a linkage between WSIS and now the IGF and a
grassroots "movement" for effective ICT use and self-empowerment is
the direct cause of the absence of dynamism which we now observe in
</FONT></SPAN><SPAN class=687385718-15112008><FONT color=#0000ff size=2
face=Arial>the post-WSIS initiatives and which many are seeing as now
befalling the IGF.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=687385718-15112008><FONT color=#0000ff size=2
face=Arial></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=687385718-15112008><FONT color=#0000ff size=2
face=Arial>MG</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff size=2 face=Arial></FONT> </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr lang=en-us class=OutlookMessageHeader align=left><FONT size=2
face=Tahoma>-----Original Message-----<BR><B>From:</B>
gov-bounces@wsis-gov.org [mailto:gov-bounces@wsis-gov.org] <B>On Behalf Of
</B>JFC Morfin<BR><B>Sent:</B> November-09-08 5:36 PM<BR><B>To:</B> 'WSIS CS
WG on Information Networks Governance'; governance@lists.cpsr.org; 'Dr.
Francis MUGUET'<BR><B>Subject:</B> [Gov 589] Re: ITU and ICANN - a loveless
forced marriage Re: [governance] ITU & ICANN in
Cairo<BR><BR></FONT></DIV>At 19:01 09/11/2008, JFC Morfin wrote:<BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE class=cite cite="" type="cite"><FONT color=#000080 size=2>It is
a fact that the IGF may be in real trouble, and in the danger of being
sidelined as an annual conference that no one of any real importance takes
any note of. We must review what would it mean in terms of civil society and
progressive interests. In light of such a review we may need to have clearer
common positions of how we want to engage with the IGF, and how we want to
see it evolve. Such a review is an even more urgent imperative in view of
the forthcoming process of IGF review which will start in earnest
immediately after the IGF, Hyderabad. What gets said and discussed at
Hyderabad may have some important implications for this
review.</FONT></BLOCKQUOTE><BR>I agree with this. The reason why is that the
secretariat did not understand the role of the IGF in two key areas
:<BR><BR>1. IGF _is_ a decision making meeting. But in the new fashion. Not
for a single document to be voted by Govs. But for attendees to concert and
make their own minds, as the owners of their own part of the Internet and of
their own global connections and usage.<BR><BR>2. Secretariat has not
attempted to catalyse the necessary work concerning enhanced cooperations. I
do not know if we still have some hope for Hyderabad, but we can start working
for Cairo and establish our own enhanced cooperations, and make them
effective. One framework for such an effort is simple enough to start with: to
practically concert about actions for a People Internet by the people for the
people, in order to support a people centered information society. <BR><BR>The
basic idea is that dynamic coalitions are to influence the Internet governance
and enhanced cooperations are to enact it through cooperations among
interested parties. A typical enhanced cooperation could be geo-cultural TLDs,
to help protect and revive languages in the Internet age. Open cooperations at
the CS initiative could include concerned political authorities, cultural
entiies, businesses, and registrants. An "enhanced cooperation" of such
"enhanced cooperations" could play an equivalent role to ICANN, GSMA, China,
TLDA, etc. in running a part of the Internet virtual root and keep such TLD
out of the ICANN greed.<BR><BR>jfc<BR></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>