<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40"><head><meta http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=us-ascii"><meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 14 (filtered medium)"><style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Tahoma;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
span.hoenzb
{mso-style-name:hoenzb;}
span.EmailStyle18
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]--></head><body lang=EN-US link=blue vlink=purple><div class=WordSection1><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>As seems to be apparent in all aspects having to do with MS stuff there are a number of significant ambiguities in what you (and others) have written on this Sala…<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>Does "muliti-stakeholder" mean multiple stakeholder groups or multiple stakeholders irrespective of groupings i.e. many stakeholders <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>Following this does "stakeholder" refer to an individual element with a "stake"/interest, or a grouping which presumably has a stake/interest in common among its members viz. is Google for example, a single "stakeholder" or is it a component of the "private sector" stakeholder grouping or is it both and if so what kind of a MS process would be the result… <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>And then how do we define "stake" (interest?) (and thus the holder of such a "stake"/interest i.e. a "stakeholder") and is this definition something done by the individual, by the grouping, by an external party… <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>Is there a gradation of "stakes" i.e. do some have more of a "stake" than others and if so what are the implications of this--from a for example, weight of participation perspective--should the participation of those with more "stake" be given more weight in multi-stakeholder processes (and so on… If the answer is no, then what procedure is in place to ensure that those with "legitimate" stakes are equally able to pursue those stakes whatever their base of resources to support their interventions…<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>Can the stakeholder be incorrect in their delineation of their "stake" i.e. can a 3rd party say to a stakeholder (or to a stakeholder group q.v.) -- you cannot participate because you are not a "legitimate" stakeholder in this particular decision process… If this is possible who determines the process of this assessment, if it is not possible then how would it be possible to, for example exclude trolls, brigands, those using false information to pursue ulterior (illegal?) ends, <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>(and as I alluded to in my blogpost…answering these (and the myriad of other) issues is not purely academic since it would appear that extremely weighty issues and decisions are being mooted for realization through MS processes.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>M<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'>From:</span></b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'> governance-request@lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request@lists.igcaucus.org] <b>On Behalf Of </b>Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro<br><b>Sent:</b> Wednesday, May 15, 2013 11:54 PM<br><b>To:</b> governance@lists.igcaucus.org; Roland Perry<br><b>Subject:</b> Re: [governance] Digital restrictions management in HTML standards<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal>On Thu, May 16, 2013 at 6:47 PM, Roland Perry <<a href="mailto:roland@internetpolicyagency.com" target="_blank">roland@internetpolicyagency.com</a>> wrote:<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>In message <CAOLD2+Y=<a href="mailto:szx6oOaY79gYuwNqojYrCykkdOwyjW9xEZcX7UvDqQ@mail.gmail.com" target="_blank">szx6oOaY79gYuwNqojYrCykkdOwyjW9xEZcX7UvDqQ@mail.gmail.com</a>>, at 06:18:04 on Thu, 16 May 2013, Andrea Glorioso <<a href="mailto:andrea@digitalpolicy.it" target="_blank">andrea@digitalpolicy.it</a>> writes<o:p></o:p></p><div><blockquote style='border:none;border-left:solid #CCCCCC 1.0pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 6.0pt;margin-left:4.8pt;margin-top:5.0pt;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:5.0pt'><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>isn't a membership organisation which allows multiple stakeholders to become members, a multi-stakeholder organisation?<o:p></o:p></p></blockquote><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><p class=MsoNormal>As a piece of Internet Governance jargon, multi-stakeholder has come to mean every-stakeholder. We would need a new name for several-stakeholder (or even many-stakeholder) organisations.<br><br>For example, if Governments ceased attending ICANN meetings, I think it would no longer be truly "multi"-stakeholder (despite the large number of remaining stakeholders).<o:p></o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>[ST: That's an excellent point Roland. Multistakeholder has been perceived to have at least three core components, namely civil society, private sector and the public sector] <o:p></o:p></p></div><blockquote style='border:none;border-left:solid #CCCCCC 1.0pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 6.0pt;margin-left:4.8pt;margin-top:5.0pt;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:5.0pt'><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'><span style='color:#888888'><br><br><span class=hoenzb>-- </span><br><span class=hoenzb>Roland Perry</span><br><br></span><br>____________________________________________________________<br>You received this message as a subscriber on the list:<br> <a href="mailto:governance@lists.igcaucus.org">governance@lists.igcaucus.org</a><br>To be removed from the list, visit:<br> <a href="http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing" target="_blank">http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing</a><br><br>For all other list information and functions, see:<br> <a href="http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance" target="_blank">http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance</a><br>To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:<br> <a href="http://www.igcaucus.org/" target="_blank">http://www.igcaucus.org/</a><br><br>Translate this email: <a href="http://translate.google.com/translate_t" target="_blank">http://translate.google.com/translate_t</a><o:p></o:p></p></blockquote></div><p class=MsoNormal><br><br clear=all><o:p></o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><p class=MsoNormal>-- <o:p></o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal>Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>P.O. Box 17862<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>Suva<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>Fiji<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>Twitter: @SalanietaT<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>Tel: +679 3544828<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>Blog: <a href="http://salanieta.blogspot.com" target="_blank">salanieta.blogspot.com</a><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div></div></body></html>