<font color="#333333"><font size="2"><font face="verdana,sans-serif"><div><font color="#333333"><font size="2"><font face="verdana,sans-serif"><meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"><a href="http://www.itnews.com.au/News/242051,un-mulls-internet-regulation-options.aspx">http://www.itnews.com.au/News/242051,un-mulls-internet-regulation-options.aspx</a></font></font></font></div>
<div><font color="#333333"><font size="2"><font face="verdana,sans-serif"><br></font></font></font></div><br clear="all"></font></font></font>Sivasubramanian M<br><br><br>
<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Sat, Dec 18, 2010 at 3:37 AM, Izumi AIZU <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:aizu@anr.org">aizu@anr.org</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">
Sorry for the delay. Now back at the hotel, munching some bread.<br>
<br>
Well, as I put in the previous thread, Round III, they all reached the<br>
consensus of the text. Both sides kind of compromised for some words<br>
against other.<br>
<br>
In essence, the non-governmental stakeholders were "invited" to the WG,<br>
but not as the fully fledged member, but as the guest, or as "second<br>
class citizen"<br>
which has been used many times during the negotiation.<br>
<br>
The US, EU and other MSH friendly governments did not really insist on the<br>
pure equal footing of non-governmental actors in the WG. There was a proposal<br>
from Iran, I guess to have only 2 from each sector, not 5. The Chair sort of<br>
insisted that they be 5 each, provided that the status of these non-gov actors<br>
are lower than the gov members.<br>
<br>
So OECD governments, let's say became somewhat relived by seeing at least<br>
there be some members from CS, PS and tech and academia inside the WG,<br>
not with the full membership, nor the "observer" - can participate in the debate<br>
and deliberations, but not at the decision making. Well that's how<br>
most governments<br>
accept.<br>
<br>
So then the focus of the debate went to the "rules of the procedures<br>
of ECOSOC and<br>
CSTD" - how much to impose these to non-gov actors.<br>
"in accordance with" was sort of first version, then Greece proposed:<br>
"bearing in mind"... at one time it was dropped, then came back, then<br>
Mexico questioned<br>
the secretariat if there is any CSTD rules of procedure. The answer was No, only<br>
functional commissions of the CSTD has rules of procedures, but not CSTD itself.<br>
So they dropped reference of CSTD and only left ECOSOC.<br>
<br>
There are some details where the devils or the angels may reside but no one<br>
had the energy to visit the details - say how to select the civil<br>
society members,<br>
etc.<br>
<br>
Of course, the outcome is far from satisfactory. Better than the Dec 6 decision?<br>
I think yes. Worth to pull the plug? I don't think so, at least at<br>
this stage, no.<br>
<br>
Frankly, we did not have that much coherent move, yet. We do not have<br>
active work of strategy, outreach and work plan, yet. I mean it is not too late<br>
to work on these and define what exactly we like to gain, nor not to lose and<br>
then head to the next round.<br>
<br>
Simply boycotting AT THIS STAGE doesn't give much gain, IMHO.<br>
<br>
Thanks,<br>
<br>
izumi<br>
<br>
(gimme a break).<br>
<br>
<br>
2010/12/18 Bertrand de La Chapelle <<a href="mailto:bdelachapelle@gmail.com">bdelachapelle@gmail.com</a>>:<br>
<div><div></div><div class="h5">> Dear all,<br>
> Is anybody able to say what finally happened ?<br>
> Best<br>
> Bertrand<br>
><br>
> --<br>
> ____________________<br>
> Bertrand de La Chapelle<br>
> Tel : +33 (0)6 11 88 33 32<br>
><br>
> "Le plus beau métier des hommes, c'est d'unir les hommes" Antoine de Saint<br>
> Exupéry<br>
> ("there is no greater mission for humans than uniting humans")<br>
><br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
</div></div>--<br>
>> Izumi Aizu <<<br>
<br>
Institute for InfoSocionomics, Tama University, Tokyo<br>
<br>
Institute for HyperNetwork Society, Oita,<br>
Japan<br>
* * * * *<br>
<< Writing the Future of the History >><br>
<a href="http://www.anr.org" target="_blank">www.anr.org</a><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>
Translate this email: <a href="http://translate.google.com/translate_t" target="_blank">http://translate.google.com/translate_t</a></blockquote></div><br>