<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=windows-1252"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
<br>
<font face="Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif">McTim wrote:<br>
<b>"My initial reading was the same as yours, but after some offlist
chat and a reread, it seems that Ginger is trying to formulate a
fallback</b></font><font face="Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif"><b>
position in case the HR language isn't well rec'd. Is that correct</b><big><b>
</b><small><b>Ginger?"</b><br>
<br>
Yes, McTim, thanks for clarifying this. I am not proposing changing the
wording of the three points in the Call for Consensus. We are reaching
consensus on these, and while we may tweak them to add minor
corrections (add short introductory sentence; add "titles" of NN,
Development Agenda, IRP instead of numbers; consider Milton and Ian's
removal of "layers") we cannot change the substance at this point.
(Yehuda, I hope that answers your concern as well).<br>
<br>
It appears we will have a majority/consensus who want to present the
current wording of IRP. However, as McTim points out, the meeting does
not end there, and I would like to have IGC input on how to proceed
towards an effective compromise if appropriate. The purpose of this
thread is to develop </small></big></font><font
face="Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif"><big><small>"negotiation wording"
for use during the meeting. First we make our point, then we must be
prepared to compromise. This strategy seems to encompass the range our
IGC viewpoints. Your input is encouraged. This is obviously an
important point for the IGC and it is valuable to get all opinions
about how to make some progress this year.<br>
<br>
We have most support for Ian's suggestion of </small></big></font><b>
“towards defining basic principles for internet governance”</b>
(Ian, Quasi, McTim).<br>
and other suggestions:<br>
legal provisions (Jeanette)<br>
Human/personal/individual aspects of Internet Governance (+McTim)<br>
Human/personal/individual dimensions of Internet Governance (+McTim)<br>
Internet governance and the position of individuals<br>
Internet governance and individuals<br>
Human aspects (Deirdre)<br>
<br>
Please continue your suggestions.<br>
<br>
Best, Ginger<br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:f65fb55e1002071007g52fc1b70m49da3400948af2cd@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">All,
Can we please trim CC list in future, it's getting annoying.
On Sun, Feb 7, 2010 at 5:09 PM, Milton L Mueller <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:mueller@syr.edu"><mueller@syr.edu></a> wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Let them veto it. Make the decision transparent, let the public discuss it –
at the consultation and at the main sessions of the Vilnius IGF.
Just be sure that the call for a rights theme is clear and well-phrased
enough so that we can better make an issue of it.
Instead of using “alternate wording” on the vain hope that authoritarians
can somehow be tricked into participating in a discourse on individual
rights, use even clearer, sharper language to ensure that everyone knows
what is happening when the MAG vetoes it.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->
My initial reading was the same as yours, but after some offlist chat
and a reread, it seems that Ginger is trying to formulate a fallback
position in case the HR language isn't well rec'd. Is that correct
Ginger?
If so, I am happy to have Ginger go with either "personal or
individual aspects of Internet Governance or personal or individual
dimensions of Internet Governance" under the rule of our charter which
states:
"The coordinators will act as the official representatives of the
caucus and will be responsible for approving any statement that cannot
be discussed by the caucus within the time available.
In the case of face-to-face meetings, they will also coordinate with
the members of the IGC who are present. Any statement should reflect
the assumed general thinking of the caucus, rather than just that of
those members who are physically present at the meeting."
</pre>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>