The moderator could perhaps add the paragraph in full or in parts. As for the text as already emerged, it may be a bit long, but the idea needs to be clearly conveyed, so it may please be retained without condensing it further.<br>
<br>Shiva.<br>
<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, Jul 13, 2009 at 9:29 PM, Michael Gurstein <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:gurstein@gmail.com">gurstein@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
I don't think the following:<br>
<div class="im">"The present attendees of the IGF do not represent all participant segments<br>
</div>and geographic regions." ...<br>
<br>
is an appropriate replacement for:<br>
"we include for example, Indigenous peoples worldwide, people with<br>
disabilities, rural people and particularly those who are the poorest of<br>
the poor and often landless or migrants, those concerned with promoting<br>
peer to peer and open access governance structures built on an<br>
electronic platform, those looking to alternative modes of Internet<br>
governance as ways of responding to specific localized opportunities and<br>
limitations, and those working as practitioners and activists in<br>
implementing the Internet as a primary resource in support of broad<br>
based economic and social development."<br>
<br>
The latter is admittedly a mouthful but the problem is that these folks for<br>
the most part weren't included in WSIS, the IGF to date and the first<br>
statement presented isn't likely to provide much support for their specific<br>
participation in any future activities of the IGF either.<br>
<br>
As for the rest I'm not sure that beyond stating the principle that we need<br>
to go into so much detail on explanations, rationales and modalities... I<br>
would have thought that a couple of sentences or one paragraph would<br>
suffice.<br>
<br>
MBG<br>
<div><div></div><div class="h5"><br>
-----Original Message-----<br>
From: Ginger Paque [mailto:<a href="mailto:gpaque@gmail.com">gpaque@gmail.com</a>]<br>
Sent: Monday, July 13, 2009 11:18 AM<br>
To: Sivasubramanian Muthusamy<br>
Cc: <a href="mailto:governance@lists.cpsr.org">governance@lists.cpsr.org</a>; Michael Gurstein; 'Ginger Paque'<br>
Subject: [SPAM]Re: [governance] Question 6: Comments on Shiva's proposed<br>
paras<br>
<br>
<br>
Thank you Shiva, I can see that you made a serious effort at compromise.<br>
However, there are still areas I cannot agree with. Please consider the<br>
following counter-proposal, and of course, we hope for comments from<br>
others as well:<br>
<br>
[The following text was re-submitted by Shiva, and then edited by Ginger]<br>
<br>
The Internet Governance Caucus calls upon the IGF Secretariat to<br>
substantially fund IGF programs and participation to further enhance the<br>
quality of programs with greater diversity of participation.<br>
<br>
There are two aspects to be considered in this regard: a) Present IGF<br>
participants representing various stakeholder groups are highly<br>
qualified individuals with diverse accomplishments but it is also true<br>
that IGF participation needs to be further expanded to include more<br>
Civil Society participants known for their commitment and<br>
accomplishments outside the IGF arena on various Civil Society causes.<br>
Business leaders who are otherwise committed to social and other<br>
governance issues are not seen at the IGF, and not all governments are<br>
represented at the IGF. And b) The present attendees of the IGF do not<br>
represent all participant segments and geographic regions. This needs to<br>
be improved and it requires various efforts, but availability of various<br>
categories of travel grants for participants may help improve<br>
participation by those not attending the IGF for want of funds. IGF<br>
already has made some funds available for representation from Less<br>
Developed Countries, but such funding achieves a limited objective.<br>
<br>
The true cost of the IGF (including all visible and invisible costs to<br>
the IGF Secretariat, participating Governments, organizations and<br>
individual participants) would be several times that of the actual<br>
outflow from the IGF Secretariat in organizing the IGF, as reflected in<br>
the IGF book of accounts. If an economist estimates the total visible<br>
and invisible costs of the IGF, it would be an enormous sum, which is<br>
already spent. With an increment in funding for travel support to panel<br>
speaker and participants, which would amount to a small proportion of<br>
the true cost of the IGF, the quality of panels and the diversity of<br>
participation could be improved.<br>
<br>
With this rationale, the Internet Governance Caucus recommends that the<br>
IGF should consider budgetary allocations supported by grants from<br>
business, governments, well funded non-governmental and international<br>
organizations and the United Nations. The fund may extend travel grants<br>
to 200 lead participants (panel speakers, program organizers), full and<br>
partial fellowships to a greater number of participants with special<br>
attention to participants from unrepresented categories (unrepresented<br>
geographic regions and/or unrepresented participant segments and even to<br>
those from affluent, represented regions if there is an individual need ).<br>
<br>
Such a fund would enable the IGF to bring in more diverse opinions to<br>
the IGF from experts who would add further value to the IGF. It is<br>
especially recommended that such a fund carry no link as to the<br>
positions or content proposed by the presenter (as opposed to a grant<br>
from a business trust with stated or implied conditions about the<br>
positions to be taken). It is recommended that the IGF create a fund<br>
large enough to have significant impact in further enhancing quality and<br>
diversity of participation.<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
Sivasubramanian Muthusamy wrote:<br>
> Hello Ginger, Michael Guerstein and All,<br>
><br>
> Have revised the statement and the changes made are highlighted. This<br>
> mail is best viewed with html / mime settings. ( for the convenience<br>
> of those whose mail settings are plain text, I am attaching the text<br>
> as a PDF file which would show the highlighted changes )<br>
><br>
> Thank you<br>
><br>
> Sivasubramanian Muthusamy<br>
><br>
> The Internet Governance Caucus calls upon the IGF Secretariat to<br>
> fund the IGF programs and participation substantially and<br>
> significantly to further enhance the quality of programs with<br>
> greater diversity of participation. * *There are two aspects to be<br>
> considered in this regard: a) WSIS/ present IGF participants<br>
> representing various stakeholder groups are highly qualified<br>
> individuals with diverse accomplishments but it is also true that<br>
> IGF participation needs to be further expanded to invite and<br>
> include more Civil Society participants known for their commitment<br>
> and accomplishments outside the IGF arena on various Civil Society<br>
> causes ; business leaders who are otherwise committed to social<br>
> and other governance issues are not seen at the IGF, and not all<br>
> governments are represented at the IGF ( and though not for<br>
> financial reasons, the present participants from Government are<br>
> not represented on a high enough level ) - [ this sentence in<br>
> parenthesis may be deleted if unnecessary as it is not directly<br>
> relevant to the point ] and b) The present participants of the IGF<br>
> do not represent all participant segments and geographic regions.<br>
> This needs to be improved and it requires various efforts, but<br>
> availability of various categories of Travel Grants for different<br>
> classes of participants may help improve participation by those<br>
> not attending the IGF for want of funds. IGF already has made some<br>
> funds available for representation from Less Developed Countries,<br>
> but such funding achieves a limited objective.<br>
><br>
> The true cost of the IGF (including all visible and invisible<br>
> costs to the IGF Secretariat, participating Governments,<br>
> organizations and individual participants) would be several times<br>
> that of the actual outflow from the IGF Secretariat in organizing<br>
> the IGF, as reflected in the IGF book of accounts. If an economist<br>
> estimates the total visible and invisible costs of the IGF, it<br>
> would be an enormous sum, which is already spent. For want of a<br>
> marginal allocation for travel support to panel speaker and<br>
> participants, which would amount to a small proportion of the true<br>
> cost of the IGF, the quality of panels and the diversity of<br>
> participation are compromised.<br>
><br>
> With this rationale, the Internet Governance Caucus recommends<br>
> that the IGF should consider liberal budgetary allocations<br>
> supported by unconditional grants from business, governments, well<br>
> funded non-governmental and international organizations and the<br>
> United Nations. The fund may extend uncompromising, comfortable<br>
> travel grants/ honorarium to 200 lead participants (panel<br>
> speakers, program organizers, who are largely invitees who are<br>
> required to be well-received for participation), full and partial<br>
> fellowships to a large number of participants with special<br>
> attention to participants from unrepresented categories<br>
> (unrepresented geographic regions and/or unrepresented participant<br>
> segments and even to those from affluent, represented regions if<br>
> there is an individual need ).<br>
><br>
> Such a fund would enable the IGF to bring in really diverse<br>
> opinions to the IGF from experts who would add further value to<br>
> the IGF. It is especially recommended that such a fund may be<br>
> built up from contributions that are unconditional (as opposed to<br>
> a grant from a business trust with stated or implied conditions<br>
> about the positions to be taken; 'unconditional' does not imply<br>
> that funds may have to be disbursed without even the basic<br>
> conditions that the recipient should attend the IGF and attend the<br>
> sessions etc. In this context "unconditional" means something<br>
> larger. It is to hint at a system of Travel Grants whereby IGF<br>
> will pool funds from Business Corporations, Governments,<br>
> International Organizations, well funded NGOs and UN with no<br>
> implied conditions on the positions to be taken by participants*)*<br>
> and may be awarded to panelists and participants unconditionally.<br>
> It is recommended that the IGF create a fund large enough to have<br>
> significant impact in further enhancing quality and diversity of<br>
> participation.<br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> Sivasubramanian Muthusamy<br>
> Blog: <a href="http://isocmadras.blogspot.com" target="_blank">http://isocmadras.blogspot.com</a><br>
><br>
> facebook: <a href="http://is.gd/x8Sh" target="_blank">http://is.gd/x8Sh</a><br>
> LinkedIn: <a href="http://is.gd/x8U6" target="_blank">http://is.gd/x8U6</a><br>
> Twitter: <a href="http://is.gd/x8Vz" target="_blank">http://is.gd/x8Vz</a><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> On Mon, Jul 13, 2009 at 5:55 PM, Sivasubramanian Muthusamy<br>
> <<a href="mailto:isolatedn@gmail.com">isolatedn@gmail.com</a> <mailto:<a href="mailto:isolatedn@gmail.com">isolatedn@gmail.com</a>>> wrote:<br>
><br>
> Hello Ginger<br>
><br>
> Will have just a little time to spend on this, will review the<br>
> complete questionnaire comments, and reword the Q6 comment, but<br>
> don't really have a lot of time today. Leaving for the city in a<br>
> few hours for a short trip, will find some time to work tomorrow<br>
> as well, but not tonight.<br>
><br>
> Would prefer this as an IGC statement, rather than as an<br>
> independent proposal, which I could have sent it on my own but<br>
> preferred not to.<br>
><br>
> Shiva.<br>
><br>
><br>
> On Mon, Jul 13, 2009 at 5:14 PM, Ginger Paque <<a href="mailto:gpaque@gmail.com">gpaque@gmail.com</a><br>
> <mailto:<a href="mailto:gpaque@gmail.com">gpaque@gmail.com</a>>> wrote:<br>
><br>
> Hi Shiva,<br>
><br>
> I was referring to Q6, as several of us - including myself,<br>
> and Ian, as well as Michael and others, are not yet satisfied<br>
> with the wording on the funding concept. You are welcome to<br>
> continue the discussion and see if you can reach a consensus<br>
> on it, but I suspect that by the time everyone is happy, the<br>
> statement won't say much of anything. Could you review the<br>
> thread on Q6, including Ian's answer to the complete<br>
> questionnaire draft, and tell us what you think?<br>
><br>
> Let's look at Q 3 separately, ok?<br>
><br>
> Thanks. I appreciate your willingness to discuss.<br>
><br>
> Best,<br>
> Ginger<br>
><br>
> Sivasubramanian Muthusamy wrote:<br>
><br>
> Hello Ginger<br>
><br>
> You would like this submitted as my own comment, rather<br>
> than as an IGC statement? Is this only on Q6 or does it<br>
> also apply to Q3?<br>
><br>
> There were further exchanges between Gurstein and me, and<br>
> the misunderstanding are being clarified. Would you really<br>
> feel that the entire statement has to be dropped as<br>
> comment from IGC?<br>
><br>
> Thanks.<br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> On Mon, Jul 13, 2009 at 4:40 PM, Ginger Paque<br>
> <<a href="mailto:gpaque@gmail.com">gpaque@gmail.com</a> <mailto:<a href="mailto:gpaque@gmail.com">gpaque@gmail.com</a>><br>
> <mailto:<a href="mailto:gpaque@gmail.com">gpaque@gmail.com</a> <mailto:<a href="mailto:gpaque@gmail.com">gpaque@gmail.com</a>>>><br>
> wrote:<br>
><br>
> Shiva, As there seems to be quite a bit of controversy<br>
> about this<br>
> concept and wording, and we are very short on time, I<br>
> wonder if we<br>
> could continue this discussion after the questionnaire is<br>
> submitted, perhaps for comments to be submitted by the<br>
> August<br>
> deadline?<br>
><br>
> In the meantime, you could submit your own comment,<br>
> which would<br>
> give you more freedom to make your point. Is that<br>
> acceptable to you?<br>
><br>
> Regards,<br>
> Ginger<br>
><br>
> Sivasubramanian Muthusamy wrote:<br>
><br>
> Hello Michael Gurstein<br>
><br>
> A quick reply and a little more later.<br>
><br>
> On Mon, Jul 13, 2009 at 6:12 AM, Michael Gurstein<br>
> <<a href="mailto:gurstein@gmail.com">gurstein@gmail.com</a> <mailto:<a href="mailto:gurstein@gmail.com">gurstein@gmail.com</a>><br>
> <mailto:<a href="mailto:gurstein@gmail.com">gurstein@gmail.com</a> <mailto:<a href="mailto:gurstein@gmail.com">gurstein@gmail.com</a>>><br>
> <mailto:<a href="mailto:gurstein@gmail.com">gurstein@gmail.com</a><br>
> <mailto:<a href="mailto:gurstein@gmail.com">gurstein@gmail.com</a>> <mailto:<a href="mailto:gurstein@gmail.com">gurstein@gmail.com</a><br>
> <mailto:<a href="mailto:gurstein@gmail.com">gurstein@gmail.com</a>>>>> wrote:<br>
><br>
> Hi,<br>
><br>
> -----Original Message-----<br>
> *From:* Sivasubramanian Muthusamy<br>
> [mailto:<a href="mailto:isolatedn@gmail.com">isolatedn@gmail.com</a><br>
> <mailto:<a href="mailto:isolatedn@gmail.com">isolatedn@gmail.com</a>> <mailto:<a href="mailto:isolatedn@gmail.com">isolatedn@gmail.com</a><br>
> <mailto:<a href="mailto:isolatedn@gmail.com">isolatedn@gmail.com</a>>><br>
> <mailto:<a href="mailto:isolatedn@gmail.com">isolatedn@gmail.com</a><br>
> <mailto:<a href="mailto:isolatedn@gmail.com">isolatedn@gmail.com</a>> <mailto:<a href="mailto:isolatedn@gmail.com">isolatedn@gmail.com</a><br>
> <mailto:<a href="mailto:isolatedn@gmail.com">isolatedn@gmail.com</a>>>>]<br>
> *Sent:* Sunday, July 12, 2009 6:18 PM<br>
> *To:* <a href="mailto:governance@lists.cpsr.org">governance@lists.cpsr.org</a><br>
> <mailto:<a href="mailto:governance@lists.cpsr.org">governance@lists.cpsr.org</a>><br>
> <mailto:<a href="mailto:governance@lists.cpsr.org">governance@lists.cpsr.org</a><br>
> <mailto:<a href="mailto:governance@lists.cpsr.org">governance@lists.cpsr.org</a>>><br>
> <mailto:<a href="mailto:governance@lists.cpsr.org">governance@lists.cpsr.org</a><br>
> <mailto:<a href="mailto:governance@lists.cpsr.org">governance@lists.cpsr.org</a>><br>
> <mailto:<a href="mailto:governance@lists.cpsr.org">governance@lists.cpsr.org</a><br>
> <mailto:<a href="mailto:governance@lists.cpsr.org">governance@lists.cpsr.org</a>>>>; Michael Gurstein<br>
> *Subject:* Re: [governance] Question 6:<br>
> Comments on Siva's<br>
> proposed paras<br>
><br>
> Hello Michael Gurstein,<br>
><br>
> On Mon, Jul 13, 2009 at 2:50 AM, Michael<br>
> Gurstein<br>
> <<a href="mailto:gurstein@gmail.com">gurstein@gmail.com</a><br>
> <mailto:<a href="mailto:gurstein@gmail.com">gurstein@gmail.com</a>> <mailto:<a href="mailto:gurstein@gmail.com">gurstein@gmail.com</a><br>
> <mailto:<a href="mailto:gurstein@gmail.com">gurstein@gmail.com</a>>><br>
> <mailto:<a href="mailto:gurstein@gmail.com">gurstein@gmail.com</a><br>
> <mailto:<a href="mailto:gurstein@gmail.com">gurstein@gmail.com</a>> <mailto:<a href="mailto:gurstein@gmail.com">gurstein@gmail.com</a><br>
> <mailto:<a href="mailto:gurstein@gmail.com">gurstein@gmail.com</a>>>>> wrote:<br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> "The Internet Governance Caucus calls<br>
> upon the IGF<br>
> Secretariat to fund the IGF programs and<br>
> participation<br>
> substantially and significantly to<br>
> further enhance the<br>
> quality of programs with greater<br>
> diversity of<br>
> participation" sounds better?<br>
> YES...<br>
> Thanks.<br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> There are two aspects to be considered<br>
> in this<br>
> regard: a)<br>
> The absence or<br>
> non-participation of some of the world's<br>
> most renowned<br>
> Civil Society opinion<br>
> leaders is noticeable; Business Leaders<br>
> who are<br>
> otherwise<br>
> committed to<br>
> social and other governance issues off<br>
> IGF are not<br>
> seen at<br>
> the IGF;<br>
> Governments are not represented on a<br>
> level high enough<br>
><br>
> HMMM. WHO/WHAT EXACTLY IS MEANT BY<br>
> "RENOWNED CIVIL<br>
> SOCIETY<br>
> OPINION LEADERS"<br>
> (IN SOME CIRCLES THERE ARE AT LEAST TWO AND<br>
> PROBABLY MORE<br>
> INTERNAL<br>
> CONTRADITIONS IN THAT SIMPLE STATEMENT<br>
> AND CERTAINLY<br>
> NEITHER WE NOR THE<br>
> SECRETARIAT SHOULD BE EXPECTED TO<br>
> IDENTIFY WHO THESE<br>
> "RENOWNED" FOLKS MIGHT<br>
> BE.<br>
><br>
> AS WELL, ARE WE LOOKING FOR CIVIL<br>
> SOCIETY "LEADERS" OR<br>
> FOLKS FROM CIVIL<br>
> SOCIETY ORGANIZATIONS IN LEADERSHIP<br>
> POSITIONS, OR<br>
> ARE WE<br>
> LOOKING FOR CIVIL<br>
> SOCIETY SPOKESPEOPLE WHO UNDERSTAND IG<br>
> ISSUES, OR<br>
> ARE WE<br>
> LOOKING FOR LEADERS<br>
> OF RESPONSIBLE REPRESENTATIVE CS<br>
> ORGANIZATIONS WHO<br>
> HAVE A<br>
> POSITION//OPINION/KNOWLEDGE ON IG ISSUES<br>
> (EACH OF THESE<br>
> CATEGORIES IS<br>
> PROBABLY DISCREET AND COULD BE INCLUDED<br>
> AMBIGUOUSLY<br>
> UNDER<br>
> YOUR STATEMENT.<br>
><br>
> IF BIZ LEADERS THINK IT IS OF SUFFICIENT<br>
> IMPORTANCE<br>
> THEY'LL LIKELY COME, IF<br>
> NOT, NOT AND NOT MUCH WE OR THE<br>
> SECRETARIAT CAN DO<br>
> ABOUT<br>
> THAT AND SIMILARLY<br>
> WITH GOVERNMENTS.<br>
><br>
> I THINK THIS PARA SHOULD BE DROPPED...<br>
><br>
><br>
> I am sorry, I don't agree with your negative<br>
> interpretation of<br>
> such a positive suggestion. Are we to assert<br>
> that the<br>
> present<br>
> participants constitute a complete,<br>
> representative, and<br>
> ultimate group ? NO, BUT<br>
> I'M HAVING<br>
> TROUBLE SEEING WHAT NAOMI KLEIN OR VENDANA<br>
> SHIVA WOULD HAVE TO CONTRIBUTE EITHER...<br>
><br>
> I will have to browse a little to learn about Naomi<br>
> Klein;<br>
> Vendana Shiva is an Indian name that sounds<br>
> familiar, but I<br>
> wasn't thinking of these names, nor was my point<br>
> intended to<br>
> bring in anyone whom I know or associated with.<br>
> Looks like<br>
> you are reading between the lines of what I write.<br>
><br>
> HAVING THE HEAD OF SEWA OR K-NET<br>
> WOULD SEEM TO<br>
> ME TO BE RATHER<br>
> MORE USEFUL, "RENOWNED" OR NOT, AS THEY AT<br>
> LEAST COULD TALK<br>
> WITH SOME DIRECT KNOWLEDGE ABOUT HOW IG<br>
> ISSUES IMPACT<br>
> THEM AND<br>
> THE KINDS OF THINGS THEY ARE TRYING TO DO ON<br>
> THE GROUND.<br>
><br>
> Again an Indian reference - you have used the word<br>
> "Sewa" in<br>
> your comment. Perhaps you are reading me as someone<br>
> pushing<br>
> the Indian point of view? I am not. I am born in<br>
> India, a<br>
> participant from India, I have faith in and respect<br>
> for my<br>
> country but I believe that in an International<br>
> context I am at<br>
> least a little wider than a national. I have been<br>
> inspired by<br>
> teachers who taught me in my school days that<br>
> "patriotism is a<br>
> prejudice" which is profound thinking which in<br>
> depths implies<br>
> that one must be beyond being patriotic and be<br>
> rather global.<br>
><br>
> (Will come back this point and write more in<br>
> response to what<br>
> you have written a little later)<br>
><br>
> Thank you.<br>
> Sivasubramanian Muthusamy.<br>
><br>
> MBG<br>
> Sivasubramanian Muthusamy<br>
><br>
> M<br>
><br>
><br>
> ____________________________________________________________<br>
> You received this message as a<br>
> subscriber on the list:<br>
> <a href="mailto:governance@lists.cpsr.org">governance@lists.cpsr.org</a><br>
> <mailto:<a href="mailto:governance@lists.cpsr.org">governance@lists.cpsr.org</a>><br>
> <mailto:<a href="mailto:governance@lists.cpsr.org">governance@lists.cpsr.org</a><br>
> <mailto:<a href="mailto:governance@lists.cpsr.org">governance@lists.cpsr.org</a>>><br>
> <mailto:<a href="mailto:governance@lists.cpsr.org">governance@lists.cpsr.org</a><br>
> <mailto:<a href="mailto:governance@lists.cpsr.org">governance@lists.cpsr.org</a>><br>
> <mailto:<a href="mailto:governance@lists.cpsr.org">governance@lists.cpsr.org</a><br>
> <mailto:<a href="mailto:governance@lists.cpsr.org">governance@lists.cpsr.org</a>>>><br>
> To be removed from the list, send any<br>
> message to:<br>
><br>
> <a href="mailto:governance-unsubscribe@lists.cpsr.org">governance-unsubscribe@lists.cpsr.org</a><br>
> <mailto:<a href="mailto:governance-unsubscribe@lists.cpsr.org">governance-unsubscribe@lists.cpsr.org</a>><br>
> <mailto:<a href="mailto:governance-unsubscribe@lists.cpsr.org">governance-unsubscribe@lists.cpsr.org</a><br>
> <mailto:<a href="mailto:governance-unsubscribe@lists.cpsr.org">governance-unsubscribe@lists.cpsr.org</a>>><br>
><br>
> <mailto:<a href="mailto:governance-unsubscribe@lists.cpsr.org">governance-unsubscribe@lists.cpsr.org</a><br>
> <mailto:<a href="mailto:governance-unsubscribe@lists.cpsr.org">governance-unsubscribe@lists.cpsr.org</a>><br>
> <mailto:<a href="mailto:governance-unsubscribe@lists.cpsr.org">governance-unsubscribe@lists.cpsr.org</a><br>
> <mailto:<a href="mailto:governance-unsubscribe@lists.cpsr.org">governance-unsubscribe@lists.cpsr.org</a>>>><br>
><br>
> For all list information and functions,<br>
> see:<br>
><br>
> <a href="http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance" target="_blank">http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance</a><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
<br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br><input id="gwProxy" type="hidden"><input onclick="jsCall();" id="jsProxy" type="hidden"><div id="refHTML"></div>