<html><head></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; ">Hi Anriette<div><br></div><div>I agree with all your points, but one in particular merits consideration.<br><div>
</div>
<br><div><div>On Oct 21, 2011, at 12:33 PM, Anriette Esterhuysen wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><blockquote type="cite"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: separate; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: -webkit-auto; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-horizontal-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-vertical-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-decorations-in-effect: none; -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; font-size: medium; ">I agree with you Bill, that we should not be neutral in responding to<br>government actions that could infringe on rights/freedoms or that can<br>create more barriers.. but I do agree with Carlos that there is a<br>tendency (more so among the technical community than among civil<br>society) to assume that developing country intergovernmental efforts are<br>more sinister than intergovernmental efforts from the traditional<br>'western democracies'. (Not saying you are guilty of this Bill!)<br><br>The whole IGF improvement debate is an example of this.</span></blockquote><br></div><div>This is a barrier I wish we could somehow overcome. As long as developing country intergovernmental efforts on EC and in the ITU appear to have intergovernmental control as their end game and the IGF is getting tactically linked to this as you noted, one imagines the TC, business, and a lot of governments will remain wedded to the fear that an IGF that does more than meet and chat once a year would necessarily get leveraged to advance that agenda. And CS proponents of more intensive, structured and "outcome" oriented dialogues will remain isolated and frustrated. If intergovernmental control could be taken off the table, at least outside the ITU, that might help to make "IGF improvements" a less divisive topic. So again, if indeed IBSA has shifted, it'd be great for them to say so. And for more governments beyond Brazil and a distinct minority of other G77 to demonstrate that they take the IGF process seriously and will engage even if it doesn't offer a path to intergovernmental control.</div><div><br></div><div>Too much to hope for?</div><div><br></div><div>Bill</div><br></div></body></html>