<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On Sunday 04 August 2013 07:25 AM,
Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:78C90130-88C9-49E7-BA7A-43489B9D68F7@gmail.com"
type="cite">
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<div>Dear All, </div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>The discussions are disintegrating and becoming non-
productive. It is perfectly normal to hold and have diverse
conflicting view points. Why don't we consider developing
considerations ( does not have to be principles at this stage)
for IGF workshop convenors. We can start by listing things that
have been shared through this emai thread and also other past
discussions on the list on the subject.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>This can be put to the IGC and if there is consensus, we can
move to have this sent to the MAG.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>A material point of distinction would of course be to mention
the prism of the IGF, some see it as a policy body some see it
as a conference, some want concrete outcomes and others are
happy to let it be just a forum where diverse stakeholders can
come together.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>The attacks on the APRIGF Chair were totally uncalled for and
so was the alleged stereotyping...this is not the place for
personal attacks.</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
Sala,<br>
<br>
I note that this email is written in your official capacity as
co-coordinator. Pl clarify what you call as 'the attacks on APIGF
chair' because you are presumably talking about me here. <br>
<br>
The below is my version of what happened.<br>
<br>
I made a public interest exposure of a problematic fund raising
document of the local IGF organising committee. This document was
spoken of later by the MAG chair (of UN IGF) in terms of
'commercialisation of the IGF' and fully disapproved (in fact, he
has already asked the committee to remove it). The exposure led to
discussions both inside and outside this group, and also in the
MAG.... As a result of this exposure, the document was hurriedly
taken off the host country IGF website. The ensuing discussions, in
many spaces,, in my humble opinion, must have significantly
contributed to establishing/ strengthening norms against
commercialisation or corporatisation of the IGF. I dont know what
you think of it, but I think that these are a set of considerable
achievements, which happened only because the initial exposure took
place. (I have no intention to blow my own trumpet, but neither can
I take lying down such concerted targeting for having undertaken a
public interest work.) <br>
<br>
When the exposure was first made, two persons associated with
organising the UN IGF and a chair of a regional IGF said, quickly
one after the other, that there was nothing new with such an
approach - which, in the circumstances, I take to mean there was
really nothing terribly wrong with it. Paul, the mentioned AP IGF
Chair, went further to explain that he considers it just an innocent
act to "attract funding by providing some traditional "value" back
to contributors". 'There is nothing wrong with it' was written all
over these responses. The person making the exposure would obviously
take issue with such 'defences', which would have the effect of
stopping in its track the process of exposure and demand for
amendments. What else do you expect him to do. Be cowered down? <br>
<br>
I expressed deep disappointment at the fact that prominent people
with official roles in managing IGF are taking such a position. I
also expressed further disappointment that regional IGF head could
say that there is nothing new or wrong with such an approach, which
I took as an indication that the malaise of accepting
commercialisation of policy spaces has really gone deep.<br>
<br>
Please explain to me where is a personal attack here...<br>
<br>
I see your 'judgement' as taking sides in the important exchange as
above between someone who made an important public interest
exposure, and those who defended the problematic actions as nothing
new or nothing wrong.... . <br>
<br>
I further take your above judgement to, willy nilly, be causing a
chilling effect vis a vis engagement with certain kinds of issues on
this list. It seems that certain biggies of multistakeholder power
structures are not to be pulled into any argument and counter-view
making here..... You are stopping me from discussing an issue which
i consider to be among those of the highest importance to
safeguarding democracy, which I do consider threatened by certain
versions of MSism. <br>
<br>
I await you clarification. Since you make this judgement in your
official capacity, unless you withdraw it, I mean to take it to the
appeals committee.<br>
<br>
(BTW, perhaps you did not read all emails as you say you were out,
but try reading those from Anriette, Suresh and Avri.)<br>
<br>
Also, please clarify what is the 'alleged stereo-typing' that you
have judged as uncalled for.....<br>
<br>
(BTW, I have long standing differences with the organisers of AP IGF
on somewhat connected issues which I have often discussed with them.
Because of these differences I have not attended the last few AP
IGFs despite invitations. Your email/ judgement has the effect of
suppressing my dissent on this count. This is not acceptable. As an
aside, I must say, however, that things are improving with the AP
IG, and so is my engagement. Just my view.) <br>
<br>
parminder <br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:78C90130-88C9-49E7-BA7A-43489B9D68F7@gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div> Let's keep the discussions professional and it is really
great to see some of the considerations come up but by now we
expect a level of maturity that accepts that we will always have
people who do not think like us and frankly we do not expect
them too.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Once a point has been made, it is an " overkill" to continue
to hammer them down our throats. I apologise for the delayed
response, have been reading these but without a chance to
respond as I was with intermittent access as I was in the Cook
Islands. I am now in Niue and have time to respond better.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Sala T</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>(Co-coordinator)<br>
<br>
Sent from my iPad</div>
<div><br>
On Aug 3, 2013, at 2:43 PM, "michael gurstein" <<a
moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:gurstein@gmail.com">gurstein@gmail.com</a>>
wrote:<br>
<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;
charset=UTF-8">
<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;}
p.MsoAcetate, li.MsoAcetate, div.MsoAcetate
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"Balloon Text Char";
margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:8.0pt;
font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";}
span.apple-converted-space
{mso-style-name:apple-converted-space;}
span.BalloonTextChar
{mso-style-name:"Balloon Text Char";
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"Balloon Text";
font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";}
span.EmailStyle20
{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]-->
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">Stereotyping
is about the characterization of individuals. If there
is such a discussion of individuals on this list then
(as has been the case in the past) this is something
calling for intervention from the Co-Co's. <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">Finding
and articulating normative consensus (perhaps another
way of saying "circling the wagons") so as to draw a
boundary between those party to that consensus and those
who aren't is a necessary function of any grouping of
this kind and specifically for the formulation and
expression of collective positions on the part of the
various stakeholders. I fail to see what might be
negative about a process of that kind.<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>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF
1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<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"">
Suresh Ramasubramanian [<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:suresh@hserus.net">mailto:suresh@hserus.net</a>]
<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Sunday, August 04, 2013 8:24 AM<br>
<b>To:</b> <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:governance@lists.igcaucus.org">governance@lists.igcaucus.org</a>;
michael gurstein; 'George Sadowsky'<br>
<b>Subject:</b> RE: [governance] Update from today's
MAG call<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">We agree. However George did make the
point that stereotypes abound, as does a circle the
wagons and exclude outsiders mentality <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">--srs<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><br>
<br>
<br>
-------- Original message --------<br>
From: michael gurstein <<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:gurstein@gmail.com">gurstein@gmail.com</a>>
<br>
Date: 08/04/2013 6:33 AM (GMT+05:30) <br>
To: 'Suresh Ramasubramanian' <<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:suresh@hserus.net">suresh@hserus.net</a>>,'George
Sadowsky' <<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:george.sadowsky@gmail.com">george.sadowsky@gmail.com</a>>
<br>
Cc: <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:governance@lists.igcaucus.org">governance@lists.igcaucus.org</a>
<br>
Subject: RE: [governance] Update from today's MAG call <br>
<br>
<o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">I
think you have misread my point, which I assumed was
obvious from the context, and was simply meant to
respond to George's assertion that "characterizing all
members of a group stereotypically rather than
understanding that members of the group are
individuals and should be assessed as such". I did not
mention civil society etc.etc. Nice people in
specific normatively/organizationally defined contexts
can be understood to do nasty things and shouldn't be
let off the hook simply because they are "nice and
reasonable people"… That of course, holds for CS, the
corporate sector and governments equally with others.</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">M</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF
1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><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"">
Suresh Ramasubramanian [<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:suresh@hserus.net">mailto:suresh@hserus.net</a>]
<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Sunday, August 04, 2013 7:42 AM<br>
<b>To:</b> michael gurstein; 'George Sadowsky'<br>
<b>Cc:</b> <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:governance@lists.igcaucus.org">governance@lists.igcaucus.org</a><br>
<b>Subject:</b> RE: [governance] Update from
today's MAG call</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">I
am sorry but which of the several stakeholder groups
here is getting compared to the NSA and is full of
nice and reasonable people but with evil aims? <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">You
are talking about the policies of various governments
there which aren't set by any one individual that is
likely to attend the IGF but even there, tarring
governments with the same brush for the actions taken
by specific governments, isn't on. And human rights
violations and invasions of privacy span a broad
spectrum so I am not so sure such a simplistic world
view would work. <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">It
certainly isn't a brush that you could reasonably use
to paint all of industry or all of civil society the
uniform black. <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">--srs<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;margin-bottom:12.0pt"><br>
<br>
<br>
-------- Original message --------<br>
From: michael gurstein <<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:gurstein@gmail.com">gurstein@gmail.com</a>>
<br>
Date: 08/04/2013 5:30 AM (GMT+05:30) <br>
To: 'George Sadowsky' <<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:george.sadowsky@gmail.com">george.sadowsky@gmail.com</a>>
<br>
Cc: <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:governance@lists.igcaucus.org">governance@lists.igcaucus.org</a>
<br>
Subject: RE: [governance] Update from today's MAG call <o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">A
few inline comments George,</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF
1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><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"">
George Sadowsky [<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:george.sadowsky@gmail.com">mailto:george.sadowsky@gmail.com</a>]
<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Saturday, August 03, 2013 8:02 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> michael gurstein<br>
<b>Cc:</b> <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:governance@lists.igcaucus.org">governance@lists.igcaucus.org</a><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [governance] Update from
today's MAG call</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">Michael,<o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">I
believe that the best defense against capture is a
thorough understanding of exactly what interests
each party in a group brings to the table.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><b><i><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">[MG>]
certainly this is one defense amongst others
and its success will very much depend on the
context, the issue and the parties involved
(simple knowledge for example wouldn't be much
of a defense against overwhelming force,
overwhelming deployment of financial and other
resources for example -- the current
discussions concerning the "capture" of the
FCC by the incumbent telcos is one clear
example of this…</span></i></b><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">In
the west, as you know, conferences and meetings of
various genres are often sponsored by business
interests of some kind. In some conferences the
quid pro quo is not clear, and as a result it's
quite possible that messages become distorted
without many in the audience realizing it. Those of
us who do understand that there is a hidden quid pro
quo treat these events as infomercials and either
avoid them or consciously filter out what we believe
are the evidence and the effects of the favoritism.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><b><i><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">[MG>]
yes, certainly, but see above and one cannot
reasonably rely on everyone being as aware of
(or resistant to) the overt/covert nature of
the messages being transmitted/influence being
peddled as others</span></i></b><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">On
the other hand, the "Computers, Freedom an Privacy "
conference held annually in the US is squarely in
the area of what I think you and I would agree is
policy, and that has sponsors from multiple sectors.
Participants in that conference would be quite
aware if amy sponsoring organizations were trying to
use the event to distort presentations and outcomes.
The cooperation between sectors works, and one of
the contributing factors is that some the interests
of the business community parallel those of segments
of civil society.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><b><i><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">[MG>]
I think there there is a difference between
"policy conferences" and conferences "about
policy"… I think that to at least some degree
the IGF is a "policy conference" i.e. a
conference meant to influence or enable the
development of Internet governance related
policy while the CFP conference is one where
folks are talking about the various policy
options which are available and whose outcome
is informational for the various parties
involved… </span></i></b><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">There
is an underlying theme here that's worth exploring,
and that is the perception by a stakeholder group or
its members that the views, motives and goals of
other groups are homogeoenous. In fact, while there
may be some core principles within each group that
are universally or nearly universally accepted by
members of a group, there is also a wide variety of
opinion, often conflicting, regarding other issues.
For example, those of us who have dealt with
governments quickly learn this, and identify paths
through governmental structures that allow us to
advance the causes that we espouse.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><b><i><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">[MG>]
yes, but the notion of MSism is that the
various stakeholders have "stakes" (interests)
which at some level they are pursuing based on
some level of consensus as to the nature of
the stake/interest under discussion. So while
there may be disagreement on details there is
a presumption of a broad agreement on the
nature of the stakes involved.</span></i></b><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">I
have a concern that by partitioning our world
conceptually into stakeholder groups, we blur our
ability to see that there are wide varieties of
opinion in other stakeholder groups, and that some
of the stakeholders and of the positions are
consistent with ours. This can lead to a situation
in which other groups are considered as adversaries,
as a class. That in turn could lead to a
demonization of "outsiders", rather than a
recognition that our society is composed of
different groups, all with their own interests, and
that it may be more important to explore what mutual
accommodation could provide rather than looking for
issues to fight over.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><b><i><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">[MG>]
Yes, and of course, you are correct in this
but this again is at the level of tactics.
From a strategic perspective I think it makes
most sense to recognize the difference of
interests involved as between the various
stakeholder groups (while of course
recognizing that there are differences in
details within each of these groups) and act
accordingly making alliances where this is
possible and recognizing differences and what
is implied by this where necessary.</span></i></b><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">In
the particular case of relationships between civil
society and the private sector, the rules are clear
for the IGF. They are set by the UN and forbid
specific types of recognition for private sector
donors. In other cases where private sector donors
support an event or an activity, some form of
recognition is expected, even if it consists only
of oral thanks in a session. If we accept Suresh's
criterion of a non-intervention firewall between
financial support and the presentation of substance
in the program of the event or activity, to which I
subscribe, then surely we should be able to accept
that the private sector's motivation and aims just
might be consistent in specific ways with ours;
otherwise why would they be providing support.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><b><i><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">[MG>]
I'm not sure what you are saying here. Yes,
there needs to be firewalls--full stop. Beyond
that what else is there to say.</span></i></b><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">Perhaps
this last example is too simplistic, and if it is,
I'm sure that someone on the list will tell me so. <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">However
the more general point, that opinions within
stakeholder groups are varied, and that we should
not perceive differences between groups in black and
white terms that would lead to suspicion of others,
is fundamental to working out differences. The
latter employs the same mechanism as prejudice;
characterizing all members of a group
stereotypically rather than understanding that
members of the group are individuals and should be
assessed as such.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><b><i><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">[MG>]
Yes, and I'm sure that the folks in the NSA
and the various governments globally that are
complicit in the building of the Surveillance
State are very nice and reasonable people by
and large. That doesn't change very much
about the nature of their work and the overall
and very real threat that that implies to
human rights at a global level.</span></i></b><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">By
the way, it should be obvious, but I want to state
that I speak only for myself here. These are my
opinions and not necessarily those of any other
person or group.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><b><i><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">[MG>]
</span></i></b><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><b><i><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">Best,</span></i></b><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><b><i><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"> </span></i></b><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><b><i><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">Mike</span></i></b><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">Regards,<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">George<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">On
Aug 3, 2013, at 3:52 AM, michael gurstein wrote:<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;margin-bottom:12.0pt"><br>
<br>
<br>
<o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">(Sorry,
working through my mail front to back…</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">I'm
not sure I agree with this… The issue I
think would be the degree to which the IGF
-- either globally, regionally or nationally
had a public policy component to it… The
more the public policy element (or the
expectation of a public policy
output/outcome/influence of some sort) the
more there is a need for some minimum
standards concerning the inputs into the
IGFs at whatever level (and presuming some
degree of cascading upwards from the local
to the global).</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">Of
course, if one is making the assumption that
the IGF's are essentially valueless from a
public policy perspective then there is no
rules/standards necessary at all and
seats/slots/etc.etc. can, as with normal
commercial (and in many cases
"professional") conferences be sold to the
highest bidders.</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">(BTW
I think that the issues concerning "bottom
up vs. top down" are really not relevant
here in that I'm assuming the
intention/basis for this discussion is to
establish some broad based norms of conduct
for the IGF's. Such norms are usually the
result of broad based consensus on
values/principles etc. as governing the
activities of the community in question (in
this instance the global Internet governance
community)… Adherence to these norms is a
necessary element for inclusion in that
community--non-adherence is reason for
exclusion… These processes of norm setting
are neither bottom up nor top down but
horizontal processes of consensus building
within the relevant community.)</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">Mike</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF
1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in
0in;border-width:initial;border-color:initial">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><b><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"">From:</span></b><span
class="apple-converted-space"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif""> </span></span><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif""><a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:governance-request@lists.igcaucus.org">governance-request@lists.igcaucus.org</a><span
class="apple-converted-space"> </span>[<a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:governance-request@lists.igcaucus.org">mailto:governance-request@lists.igcaucus.org</a>]<span
class="apple-converted-space"> </span><b>On
Behalf Of<span
class="apple-converted-space"> </span></b>George
Sadowsky<br>
<b>Sent:</b><span
class="apple-converted-space"> </span>Friday,
August 02, 2013 11:06 PM<br>
<b>To:</b><span
class="apple-converted-space"> </span><a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:governance@lists.igcaucus.org">governance@lists.igcaucus.org</a>;
parminder<br>
<b>Cc:</b><span
class="apple-converted-space"> </span>Grace
Githaiga<br>
<b>Subject:</b><span
class="apple-converted-space"> </span>Re:
[governance] Update from today's MAG
call</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">All,<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">I
think that national and regional IGFs should
be able to make the decisions regarding the
nature of their IGFs that are consistent
with the needs an desires of those countries
and regions. The IGF is not a franchise
operation within which the top can dictate
the behavior of the smaller meetings
presumably feeding into it.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">In
fact, it would be more appropriate if
representatives of those smaller meetings
agreed upon the policies associated with
the global IGF, not the other way around.
This should not be a top down operation. <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">The
reason that the "no commercial
recognition" policy applies to the global
IGF is that it is a UN sponsord meetng,
and therefore UN rules apply. This is not
true for regional and national IGFs.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">Note
that I am not saying anything about the
desirability or non-desirability of such a
policy at lower levels, but rather that it
is their decision to make on an individual
basis, not a decision or even a
recommendation that should be made at a
global level. <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">On
Aug 2, 2013, at 5:49 PM, parminder
wrote:<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;margin-bottom:12.0pt"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">On
Friday 02 August 2013 02:09 PM,
Grace Githaiga wrote:<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
<blockquote
style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
style="font-size:11.5pt;color:#444444">"Can one now expect that this is
also made a basic condition
for regional and national
IGFs, among some basic
conditions that are listed for
such initiatives, and these
conditions are enforced". </span><br>
<br>
<br>
Parminder, can you clarify on
this sentence? <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"> <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">In
my opinion, I do not think
that this is a sound proposal
to start imposing conditions
on say national IGFs. Is
multistakeholdersim not about
getting all stakeholders on
board to discuss these issues?
For example if say Kenya is
holding the Kenya IGF and a
telco company decides it will
put in money since it has been
part of the process, should
that not be accepted? At
KICTANet, we have a
multistakeholder model that
brings even the corporate
stakeholders on boar<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div><span>____________________________________________________________</span><br>
<span>You received this message as a subscriber on the list:</span><br>
<span> <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:governance@lists.igcaucus.org">governance@lists.igcaucus.org</a></span><br>
<span>To be removed from the list, visit:</span><br>
<span> <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing">http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing</a></span><br>
<span></span><br>
<span>For all other list information and functions, see:</span><br>
<span> <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance">http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance</a></span><br>
<span>To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:</span><br>
<span> <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.igcaucus.org/">http://www.igcaucus.org/</a></span><br>
<span></span><br>
<span>Translate this email: <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://translate.google.com/translate_t">http://translate.google.com/translate_t</a></span><br>
</div>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>