<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
<title></title>
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
<br>
Parminder wrote:
<blockquote cite="mid:4B46D0F8.101@itforchange.net" type="cite">
<meta content="text/html;charset=us-ascii" http-equiv="Content-Type">
<br>
<br>
Roland Perry wrote:<br>
<blockquote cite="mid:$hQPRxWsseRLFALv@perry.co.uk" type="cite">
<pre wrap="">I wonder how many people on this list would wish that governments got
themselves organised, and [attempted to] sort out all the perceived ills
on the Internet, on the grounds that they believe the current mechanisms
were failing their collective citizens?
</pre>
</blockquote>
or maybe the question is<br>
<br>
How many on the list believe that the Internet, in the directions that
it is taking, may exacerbate entrenched structural advantaged and
disadvantages, It is therefore important to have pulbic interest
policies to ensure "realization of internationally agreed human rights,
social equity and
interdependence, cultural concerns, and both social and economic
development" (from IGC's charter). And such policies are only possible
if there are adequate public policy mechanisms, and therefore such
mechanisms should be organised as soon as possible before it is too
late. Obviously governments will have to play an important in any such
mechanisms, but these mechanisms should be much more widely
participative, follow global HR and other socio-political norms, be
based on clearly articulated principles (constitutionalism) and not be
ad-hoc, transparent and involve a strong role of civil society
organizations. <br>
<br>
<br>
BTW, would like to have an IGC vote between the two propositions. We
can propose a question - which of the two formulations in your view
more correctly describes the situation vis a vis the current evolution
of the Internet, need (or not) for public policies, and the role of
governments in this relation. <br>
<br>
parminder <br>
<blockquote cite="mid:$hQPRxWsseRLFALv@perry.co.uk" type="cite">
<pre wrap="">And that, Ladies and Gentlemen, is most of the IG debate in a nutshell.
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
Which I consider is an ideologically committed attempt to rig the IG
space and debate (as I have arguned often earlier, also citing it as a
reason why many of us arent speaking up for IGF reform when the time is
ripe). I would argue instead that the propositon I wrote is 'most of
the IG debate in a nutshell'<br>
<br>
parminder <br>
<blockquote cite="mid:4B46D0F8.101@itforchange.net" type="cite">
<blockquote cite="mid:$hQPRxWsseRLFALv@perry.co.uk" type="cite">
<pre wrap=""> </pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>