<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=windows-1252"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
Dear Anja<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On Sunday 13 October 2013 11:22 AM,
Anja Kovacs wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAJqNAHDQW=bg1b=9v67fOGZw57bNUpBfS=nrHX0Qr5Cgc9+QtQ@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div>Dear Parminder,<br>
<br>
Thanks for laying out in such detail how you see this debate.
This is very helpful to better understand your position.<br>
<br>
It also helps me to clarify the Internet Democracy Project
position, as we find ourselves in neither of the two groups
you describe. We do believe that the current unequal
distribution of power in global Internet governance is a major
problem and that the proposed meeting is a significant step in
efforts to address this. We also believe, however, that the
solution to this problem does not only lie in an equal and
just redistribution among states, but also, and crucially, in
the strengthening of civil society participation. Achieving
this will not be reached by simply demanding the possibility
of civil society participation again and again. We believe it
is far more forceful to start participating already by making
concrete proposals. <br>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
I can understand that you are not convinced by the logic, but the
above is not a very accurate description of our intention or
strategy. Calling for (1) a central role at this point in shaping
the emerging initiative, is at a completely different level from (2)
making concrete proposals. They are clearly two different things.
And you know IT for Change have never shied away from making
concrete proposals, including in the recent discussions here on this
list after the Montevideo statement, but did not find many
participants who want concrete proposals now jumping into that
discussion and seeking concrete outcomes/ proposals. How much faith
all of us have to entirely put into that few hours that some civil
society members would be in that small closed room of the Bali
BestBits meeting!<br>
<br>
Coming back to putting in the stake for, in the best scenario, being
a kind of an organising partner - I see this as very very different
from making concrete proposals to that process. I cant see how these
two very different things - though with a common intention - can be
essentially conflated. Indeed I can see a lot of sense in that when
we initially seek partnership in shaping an initiative, we dont
also throw in all our concrete proposals into that same demand......
I dont consider it strategic at all, unless of course we have a
strong basic ab initio distrust of the concerned process/ initiative
. <br>
<br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAJqNAHDQW=bg1b=9v67fOGZw57bNUpBfS=nrHX0Qr5Cgc9+QtQ@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div>
<br>
It is for this reason (and because we believe letters in short
succession do not add value, especially if they have nothing
substantially new to add) </div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
Not true. This letter has little to do with the earlier letter that
we sent after Rousseff's UN speech. This letter specifically
welcomes an initiative that has taken the global IG world by a good
amount of surprise, and further specifically seeks a partnership
role for civil society going forward with this initiative. How can
you say this letter has nothing new to add?<br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAJqNAHDQW=bg1b=9v67fOGZw57bNUpBfS=nrHX0Qr5Cgc9+QtQ@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div>that we proposed to wait until the Best Bits meeting next
weekend. </div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
IGC is IGC and BestBits is BestBits. I dont think it is proper to
put one process hostage to another, or to put any hierarchy ... BTW,
there may not be a good basis to suppose that IGC would necessarily
sign a statement just becuase those who gather for that meeting in
Bali agree to it. In any case, if concrete proposals are involved,
why cant we start on them here, in this space..... Lets at least see
what kind of proposals are we talking about here. As I said, arent
we putting some extra ordinary trust and expectation on these few
hours in Bali. <br>
<br>
best<br>
<br>
parminder <br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAJqNAHDQW=bg1b=9v67fOGZw57bNUpBfS=nrHX0Qr5Cgc9+QtQ@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div>This may be a different perspective than yours, but it
certainly isn't any less legitimate or valid in its commitment
to a more just system of global Internet governance or an
information society for all.<br>
<br>
</div>
Thanks and best,<br>
Anja<br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br>
<br>
<div class="gmail_quote">On 12 October 2013 12:01, parminder <span
dir="ltr"><<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:parminder@itforchange.net" target="_blank">parminder@itforchange.net</a>></span>
wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000"> <font face="Verdana">Rafik<br>
<br>
I did argue the potential benefits at length. At the
same time, logic of cautious wait may also appears as
sound. Finally, it is ones politics - and the extent of
ones disenchantment with the status quo of power in
global IG. As for those who are rather disenchanted,
this is a major potential opening for a disruptive
impact, something that has come after a long time, due
to certain historical matching of political
configurations - a prime element of which is the near
universal global outrage following Snowden revelations.
And such openings dont come everyday. To those, like for
instance us, for whom there is major issue today about
who has power and who hasnt in global IG, and is
marginalised, it is difficult to let go such a prime
opportunity without making the best attempt to leverage
it. That is the simple fact here.<br>
<br>
To others, there may be less threat in status quo and
more in the possible/ likely new configurations. Well,
that is how it is then... But we should understand and
acknowledge the politics that lies behind it.. It is not
some simple technical difference of appreciating whether
entrepreneurial political opportunism is better or
conservative caution is more well-advised. Well,
consensus-ism often does get used to safeguard the
status quo. <br>
<br>
If anybody is in fact ready to convey the statement to
Rousseff, our organisation's intention is still to go
ahead with it. Hopefully IGC would sign it, but if not,
those who want to send it can do so.<br>
<br>
Co-coordinators: Is is time to check rough consensus on
the shorter version or not yet? <br>
<br>
parminder <br>
<br>
</font>
<div>On Saturday 12 October 2013 10:45 AM, Rafik Dammak
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">Hello,<br>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br>
<div class="gmail_quote"><br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0
0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc
solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<blockquote type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div> </div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
Firstly, we can take the usual time for
seeking consensus. Just not postpone to
another time... Secondly, I have not clearly
heard, or any rate understood, the concerns.<br>
<br>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div>well I think that some people like Anriette
, Anja , already expressed scepticism and asked
at least to have the discuss in Bali and so
waiting before sending the letter . I also
didn't get till now what is the concrete outcome
of sending the letter </div>
<div><br>
</div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0
0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc
solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000"> Lets be
clear what we are doing at present - Just
welcoming an initiative that by all means
looks like a serious outcome oriented or at
least outcome seeking one, and saying that we
want to be there right away driving it along
with others.... What is wrong with it. The
potential benefit is clear - we try to get a
bit tri - lateral about this initiative....
Any other time will be too late.... And as I
said I dont see the downside....</div>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
<div> for me it seems more interpretation or
wishes of we may want to happen instead of
having clear proofs or indications or benefits.
and honestly I don't buy those arguments that
we should hurry and don't miss the opportunity
.any action we will take we have to bare the
consequence later. </div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0
0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc
solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<div> <br>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div>I want to be sure if I got you
message correctly.</div>
<div>I am still cautious with hurrying
to write letter , I am still not
convinced and I want to highlight that
any action we take, will have impact
soon or later and can backfire. I
don't think that you would disagree
with more strategical approach. <br>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
</div>
You are just making a general statement that
caution and foresight is good - and with such
a statement who can disagree.... But here I
havent been told the risk - and beyond a
point, just about any political act carries
risk. <br>
<br>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>I saw people talking about being
opportunistic and pragmatic,well I will take the
cynical standpoint and remind that we are
dealing with politicians(even for the ICANN
CEO), they will of course welcome any letter
support and like it. but what what will happen
if we found the initiative is going in totally
different direction? are we going to send
another letter?</div>
<div> do you really think they will care about it?
probably no and maybe they will keep referring
to the first letter because it support them and
their narrative.</div>
<div>why not investigating first and getting more
details about what they have in mind before
hurrying?</div>
<div>should we jump there because one public
statement?how can we make strategical decision
with such few details?</div>
<div>idem for people talking about benefit and
opportunity to be part of the initiative but
didn't give any clarification how that will
happen. kind of shot first and then wait and
see?</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>anyway, I expressed my concern about sending
letter to support initiative yet to be defined,
that we don't have so much details about and
without consensus on strategy that we have
follow.</div>
<div> <br>
</div>
<div>Best,</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Rafik</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0
0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc
solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000"> Regards,
parminder <br>
<div>
<div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div><br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_extra">Best,</div>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br
clear="all">
<div>
<div dir="ltr">
<div>Rafik</div>
</div>
</div>
<br>
<div class="gmail_quote">2013/10/11
parminder <span dir="ltr"><<a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:parminder@itforchange.net"
target="_blank">parminder@itforchange.net</a>></span><br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote"
style="margin:0 0 0
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc
solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div bgcolor="#FFFFFF"
text="#000000"> <font
face="Verdana">It is here<br>
<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://igcaucus.org:9001/p/Brazil2014"
target="_blank">http://igcaucus.org:9001/p/Brazil2014</a><br>
<br>
Just a word of caution - we
dont want to make this an
ominbus document of demands.
At this stage we need a
clear, crisp and strong
letter, of a few sentences,
that Brazilian President or
some top guy would actually
read, and not get confusing
messages. I am not saying we
should not say whatever we
definitively want to say -
but be clear and short, that
is all.<span><font
color="#888888"><br>
<br>
parminder<br>
<br>
<br>
</font></span></font>
<div>
<div>
<div>On Friday 11 October
2013 11:15 AM, Rafik
Dammak wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">Hi
Parminder,
<div><br>
</div>
<div>sorry I am not
really getting the
proposal you are
developing here? can
you please clarify?</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div
class="gmail_extra"><br
clear="all">
<div>
<div dir="ltr">
<div> Rafik </div>
</div>
</div>
<br>
<br>
<div
class="gmail_quote">2013/10/11
parminder <span
dir="ltr"><<a
moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:parminder@itforchange.net"
target="_blank">parminder@itforchange.net</a>></span><br>
<blockquote
class="gmail_quote"
style="margin:0
0 0
.8ex;border-left:1px
#ccc
solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div
bgcolor="#FFFFFF"
text="#000000">
<br>
<font
face="Verdana">Since
as argued
below, in our
judgement,
time is
strategically
of essense,
some of us
would keep
working on a
posible text
over today and
try to present
something to
IGC and BB by
the end of the
day.... We do
very much hope
IGC and BB can
sign on it by
consensus, but
it doesnt
happen we
would open it
to
organisations
and people who
want to sign
it (sorry,
this is a
practice I
normally do
not like so
much, but I
dont think it
is ok that we
can produce a
statement to
critique a UN
process is
just no time,
with all kind
of ambiguous
languages, and
on such an
important -
potential game
changer -
initiative
from a
developing
country, a
paralysis
seems to be
setting in)...<span><font
color="#888888"><br>
<br>
parminder <br>
<br>
<br>
</font></span></font>
<div>
<div>
<div>On Friday
11 October
2013 11:02 AM,
parminder
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
type="cite">
Well let then
that be as it
has to be... "<span>There
is <em>a tide</em>
in the <em>affairs
of men</em>.
Which, taken
at the flood,
leads on to
fortune"... </span><br>
<br>
Leadership
doesnt come
searching for
you, you have
to seize
it....
President
Rousseff was
made, what
would have
perhaps been,
somewhat a
regular kind
of offer. She
seized it with
both her
hands, even
announced the
like month
etc.. That is
what gave it
such a sudden
high
prominence,
and people are
celebrating
Rousseff, and
somewhere, if
it plays its
cards well,
Brazil have
now got an
edge.... which
it can use to
further its
interest...<br>
<br>
Civil society
also is
supposed to be
representing
some interests
- real
interests of
real people,
who are most
marginalised,
and we have to
take our own
responsibility
seriously . We
cannot be
eternally
paralysed,
which hurts
these
interests. If
there are real
differences of
views, well,
that
counts.... But
a permanent
simple
wait-and-watch
attitude would
do us no
good...<br>
<br>
Lets analyse
what we have
here.... Or
what risks we
run and what
gains we can
make... And
others must
also
contribute
what they
think are
risks or
advantages....
merely saying
we are not
sure yet,
tells talk
more, do face
to face and
all,,,, Such
stuff I think,
just my own
view, is not
the
appropriate
response. <br>
<br>
ICANN, either
on its own or
tech
community's
behalf tries
to cosy up to
the Brazilians
(perhaps in
anticipation
of the new
proposal for
democratising
global IG that
Rousseff said
Brazil will
soon present -
BTW, the day
of the annual
discussion on
WSIS and IG
issues in the
UN GA is 22nd
Oct, but
whatever...) .
It proposes a
real dialogue
to see what
needs to be
changed about
the global
governance of
the Internet.
Rousseff
immediately
seizes the
initiative,
and even
declares a
possible
timeline, just
like that,
off-hand....
That is
leadership
material. That
is all that
has happened,
and that is
all anyone
knows has
happened.
There is
nothing hidden
that civil
society may
suddenly
become
complicit to
if they
support this
proposal.<br>
<br>
In supporting
it, we would
only be saying
- <br>
(1) yes, we
agree that 'a
real dialogue'
on what needs
to change in
global
governance of
the Internet
should take
place with
some urgency,
<br>
(2) such a
dialogue
should take
place in an
open and not
a hidden
manner, <br>
(3) it is
certainly
encouraging
that the
initiative
comes from one
of the key
developing
nations - the
main votaries
of a 'real
change' - and
ICANN or the
technical
community -
seen as the
main symbol
and defender
of status
quo,and that <br>
(4) we want
civil society
to be equally
there in the
middle of all
action, as the
dialogue
shapes and
takes place...<br>
<br>
Nothing more
and nothing
less. (If
anything
sinister about
the proposed
meeting
surfaces at
any later time
we can as
publicly
withdraw our
support,
saying this
is not at all
what we
bargained for)<br>
<br>
So either
people here
agree to the
above, and we
can write a
statement, or
they dont...
This is the
time to do the
statement,
when people
are still
wondering what
kind of
initiative it
really is, and
with what
implications.
Throw in our
hat - and
well, kind of
make this
thing somewhat
trilateral
from its
current
bi-lateral
status (Brazil
- ICANN tech
community) We
may not
succeed, but
we must try.
.... In a few
weeks, the
initiative
would already
be too
solidified in
fact, or in
people's mind
for civil
society
support to
have this kind
of impact....<br>
<br>
Parminder <br>
<br>
<br>
<div>On Friday
11 October
2013 05:56 AM,
Ian Peter
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div
style="font-size:12pt;font-family:'Calibri'">
<div>I agree
with Deborah –
lets wait till
a bit more
information
emerges. We
can draft a
letter which
is more
meaningful
when we have a
better idea of
the scope,
objectives,
possible
outcomes,
likely
attendees, and
possible
processes for
the
conference.
It’s quite
likely more
information
will emerge in
the next week
or so,
therefore I
think we
should discuss
at Bali and
before then
try to find
out a little
more.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Ian Peter</div>
<div
style="font-style:normal;font-size:small;display:inline;text-decoration:none;font-family:'Calibri';font-weight:normal">
<div
style="FONT:10pt
tahoma">
<div> </div>
<div
style="BACKGROUND:#f5f5f5">
<div><b>From:</b>
<a
moz-do-not-send="true"
title="deborah@accessnow.org" href="mailto:deborah@accessnow.org"
target="_blank">Deborah
Brown</a> </div>
<div><b>Sent:</b>
Friday,
October 11,
2013 10:35 AM</div>
<div><b>To:</b>
<a
moz-do-not-send="true"
title="nnenna75@gmail.com" href="mailto:nnenna75@gmail.com"
target="_blank">Nnenna
Nwakanma</a> </div>
<div><b>Cc:</b>
<a
moz-do-not-send="true"
title="bestbits@lists.bestbits.net"
href="mailto:bestbits@lists.bestbits.net"
target="_blank">mailto:bestbits@lists.bestbits.net</a> </div>
<div><b>Subject:</b>
Re:
[governance]
RE: [bestbits]
Rousseff &
Chehade:
Brazil will
host world
event on
Internet
governance in
2014</div>
</div>
</div>
<div> </div>
</div>
<div
style="font-style:normal;font-size:small;display:inline;text-decoration:none;font-family:'Calibri';font-weight:normal">
<div dir="ltr">Dear
all,
<div> </div>
<div>I see the
advantage of
engaging early
on this, but
I'm a bit
concerned that
we are rushing
unnecessarily
to finalize a
letter before
many of us
travel and are
otherwise
overstretched.
I wonder if it
might make
more sense to
continue this
discussion
online and
take advantage
of the
in-person
meetings in
Bali, for
those of us
attending, to
develop a CS
agenda. Also,
as others have
pointed out,
we know so
little about
the initiative
at this point.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>The draft
text
(available
here: <a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://igcaucus.org:9001/p/Brazil2014" target="_blank">http://igcaucus.org:9001/p/Brazil2014</a>)
does not seem
to capture the
cautious
optimism that
a number of
people have
expressed. I
also have
concerns about
providing our
"strongest
endorsement"
of the Marco
Civil process,
when that
process is not
yet complete.
Of course the
text of the
letter could
change
dramatically
in just a few
hours ;)<br>
</div>
<div> </div>
<div>I find
Nnenna's
approach to be
sound, but it
does imply a
follow on
communication
with more
concrete
proposals. I
wonder if it
might be more
effective to
streamline our
communication
to the
Brazilian
president and
head of ICANN.
</div>
<div> </div>
<div>To sum
up, I see
clear
advantages to
both "striking
while the iron
is hot" and a
more cautious
approach. But
given the
factors I
mentioned
above, I would
support taking
some extra
time if we
need it. In
any case, I'm
looking
forward to
hearing
others' ideas
and continuing
the discussion
around this
important
development. </div>
<div> </div>
<div>Best
regards, <br>
Deborah </div>
</div>
<div
class="gmail_extra"><br>
<br>
<div
class="gmail_quote">On
Thu, Oct 10,
2013 at 3:41
PM, Nnenna
Nwakanma <span
dir="ltr"><<a
moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:nnenna75@gmail.com" target="_blank">nnenna75@gmail.com</a>></span>
wrote:<br>
<blockquote
class="gmail_quote"
style="PADDING-LEFT:1ex;MARGIN:0px
0px 0px
0.8ex;BORDER-LEFT:#ccc
1px solid">
<div dir="ltr">
<div>
<div>
<div>Dear all<br>
<br>
<ol>
<li>I do
believe that
if any support
there is, from
the civil
society, it is
support for an
IDEA that
"appears" more
open and
inclusive that
the current
IGF </li>
<li>So I am
cautious about
writing a
letter that
may be in any
way understood
as "Civil
Society lauds
Dilma and
ICANN's push".
</li>
<li>A short
letter
informing that
global Civil
Society that
are working
on, concerned
about and/or
interested in
IG and
Internet
issues intend
to play key
roles in the
summit. </li>
<li>I believe
we should
communicate
key values we
plan to pursue
in the summit
</li>
<li>Underline
the central
idea of
multistakeholder
participation
</li>
<li>Say that
we are
beginnning
discussions
about the
diverse roles
that CS can
play and that
some time in
Bali will be
dedicated to
the issue
during the BB
meeting in
Bali.<br>
<br>
</li>
</ol>
</div>
If we recall,
workshop 127
in Bali will
be discussing
the MS
Selection
processes, and
I do hope,
personally
that we can
use that
opportunity to
sharpen the
focus. A
reminder of
the WS is on <a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/wks2013/workshop_2013_status_list_view.php?xpsltipq_je=127"
target="_blank">http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/wks2013/workshop_2013_status_list_view.php?xpsltipq_je=127</a><br>
<br>
</div>
I am traveling
in unconnected
rural areas
but will be
back online
and I'm happy
to contribute
language if
any text
begins to
surface. In
case I do not,
here are my
ideas:<br>
</div>
<ol>
<li>Say what
exactly it is
the global CS
is supporting,
which is the
idea, and not
the
institutions </li>
<li>Make a
clear
statement on
our
willingness to
engage </li>
<li>Recall
that our
engagement is
based on the
Multistakeholder
principle </li>
<li>Inform
that
discussions
have started
and are
ongoing </li>
<li>Say we
will be coming
up with ore
concrete
engagement
proposals </li>
<li>Requesto
have
fundamental
info, if
available, to
help us scope
the idea
itself.</li>
</ol>
<p>Best</p>
<span><font
color="#888888">
<p> </p>
<p>Nnenna<br>
</p>
</font></span>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div
class="gmail_extra"><br>
<br>
<div
class="gmail_quote">On
Thu, Oct 10,
2013 at 7:01
PM, Joana
Varon <span
dir="ltr"><<a
moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:joana@varonferraz.com"
target="_blank">joana@varonferraz.com</a>></span>
wrote:<br>
<blockquote
class="gmail_quote"
style="PADDING-LEFT:1ex;MARGIN:0px
0px 0px
0.8ex;BORDER-LEFT:rgb(204,204,204)
1px solid">
<div dir="ltr">
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>Dear
people, <br>
<br>
</div>
For the level
of information
I have (which
is basically:
Brazil and
ICANN have
proposed to
host a Summit
on Internet
after April -
coincidentally
or right after
the meeting on
Sharm el Sheik
and before the
presidential
elections
period), I
don't feel
comfortable
about writing
a letter
congratulating
for something
I dont really
know what it
is. <br>
<br>
</div>
But I do truly
support Anja's
suggestion to
start working
on our agenda
online and,
with a
potential to
be much
richer, during
our several
meetings in
Bali. (what do
we want from
all this
besides
participating
in the
Summit??) <br>
<br>
</div>
In the
meanwhile, I
rather take
breath to
understand and
discuss this
with the
Brazilian
government and
Brazilian
colleagues
from civil
society or
other sectors.
And see what
is the final
draft of Marco
Civil that the
government
will bring to
our table very
soon (if it
truly endorses
all the
principles she
has mentioned
at the UNGA).
<br>
<br>
</div>
I'm sorry if
it's a bit of
a skeptic or
over cautious
position, but
I really need
more inputs to
see the big
picture. <br>
<div> </div>
<div>All the
best<span><font
color="#888888"><br>
<br>
joana<br>
</font></span></div>
<div> </div>
</div>
<div
class="gmail_extra">
<div>
<div><br>
<br>
<div
class="gmail_quote">On
Thu, Oct 10,
2013 at 2:59
PM, michael
gurstein <span
dir="ltr"><<a
moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:gurstein@gmail.com" target="_blank">gurstein@gmail.com</a>></span>
wrote:<br>
<blockquote
class="gmail_quote"
style="PADDING-LEFT:1ex;MARGIN:0px
0px 0px
0.8ex;BORDER-LEFT:rgb(204,204,204)
1px solid">+1<br>
<br>
M<br>
<div><br>
-----Original
Message-----<br>
From: <a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:bestbits-request@lists.bestbits.net" target="_blank">bestbits-request@lists.bestbits.net</a><br>
[mailto:<a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:bestbits-request@lists.bestbits.net" target="_blank">bestbits-request@lists.bestbits.net</a>]
On Behalf Of
Carlos A.
Afonso<br>
Sent:
Thursday,
October 10,
2013 10:12 AM<br>
To: McTim<br>
Cc: <a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:governance@lists.igcaucus.org" target="_blank">governance@lists.igcaucus.org</a>;
michael
gurstein; Lee
W McKnight;
Rafik<br>
Dammak; Joana
Varon;
<,<a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:bestbits@lists.bestbits.net" target="_blank">bestbits@lists.bestbits.net</a>>,;
NCSG List<br>
Subject: Re:
[governance]
RE: [bestbits]
Rousseff &
Chehade:
Brazil will<br>
host world
event on
Internet
governance in
2014<br>
<br>
</div>
<div>
<div>Dear
compa McT,<br>
<br>
You being a
rigorous
techie, maybe
you will not
change your
logical
view...<br>
:) And I
understand
there is a lot
of people in
all sectors
who feel<br>
disturbed by
the emerging
presence of
Brazil and its
concrete
proposals to<br>
finally move
on.<br>
<br>
At the very
beginning Fadi
describes the
motivation --
Rousseff's
statement<br>
at the UN, her
clear
adherence to
the basic
principles
most of civil
society<br>
defends (which
she has
repeated
several times
in her radio
program and
her<br>
twitter
@dilmabr), and
her proposal
to build a
planetary
framework of<br>
rights. This
did not come
out of the
blue, from a
meeting of IP
addressers<br>
in a wonderful
city called
Montevideo. Do
you think Fadi
just dropped
by the<br>
presidential
door in
Brasilia,
knocked and
entered to
sell that
proposal? :)<br>
<br>
Anyway, it is
relevant to
understand
that this is
not a proposal
for yet<br>
another Icann
meeting, or a
reedition of
the UN
chatting space
called IGF,<br>
as both Dilma
and Fadi made
it very clear.
It is a major
achievement
that<br>
that
motivation
brought Icann
to colead this
effort jointly
with BR.<br>
<br>
All the more
so because, as
you know,
there are
strong sectors
within the<br>
government who
would love to
bring the
root-zone to
the purview of
the ITU,<br>
who hate
Icann, who do
not like the
pluriparticipative
model of
governance<br>
we defend, and
who are
basically
associated
with the
transnational
telecom<br>
oligopoly
which controls
the main
networks in
BR.<br>
Dilma is
courageously
up against a
huge wall
here, to
defend those<br>
principles,
and receiving
Fadi and
emerging from
the meeting
with thar<br>
proposal was a
major
political
milestone for
her in those
internal
disputes<br>
as well.<br>
<br>
[] fraterno<br>
<br>
--c.a.<br>
<br>
On 10/10/2013
10:14 AM,
McTim wrote:<br>
> At 55
seconds in,
Fadi says:<br>
> "Her
Excellency
President
Rousseff has
accepted our
invitation
that we<br>
> hold next
year a Global
Summit"<br>
><br>
> Seem
fairly clear
to me.<br>
><br>
> On Thu,
Oct 10, 2013
at 9:10 AM,
Carlos A.
Afonso <<a
moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:ca@cafonso.ca" target="_blank">ca@cafonso.ca</a>>
wrote:<br>
>> McT,
maybe you
should watch
the video a
few times
more... :)<br>
>><br>
>>
--c.a.<br>
>><br>
>> On
10/10/2013
09:57 AM,
McTim wrote:<br>
>>>
On Wed, Oct 9,
2013 at 11:50
PM, michael
gurstein <<a
moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:gurstein@gmail.com" target="_blank">gurstein@gmail.com</a>><br>
wrote:<br>
>>>>
Why so
pessimistic
and cynical
everyone.. I
may be wrong
but this<br>
>>>>
isn't just
about ICANN,
although hats
off to Fadi
for getting
this<br>
</div>
</div>
>>>>
going and
putting that
into play.<br>
<div>>>><br>
>>><br>
>>>
I'm not
pessimistic or
cynical.<br>
>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>>
But I would be
extremely
surprised if
the Pres. of
Brazil is
going<br>
>>>>
to invite the
world to Rio
in April next
year to
discuss names
and<br>
>>>>
numbers.
Rather my
reading is
that she is
by-passing the
quite<br>
>>>>
evident
log-jam at the
ITU, the
frivolities of
the IGF, the
now<br>
>>>>
discredited
"Internet
Freedom"
crusade and
the status quo
which it<br>
</div>
>>>>
was intended
to cast into
concrete errr.
(non) rules
and regs.<br>
<div>
<div>>>><br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>>
It appears to
me, after
watching the
video again
several times
that<br>
>>>
it is ICANN
(and I assume
the rest of
the
Montevideoans)
that are<br>
>>>
spearheading
this. In
other words
the idea of
the Summit
comes from<br>
>>>
the T&A
folks, not
Brasilia.<br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
<br>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
<br
clear="all">
<br>
</div>
</div>
<div>-- <br>
-- <br>
<br>
Joana Varon
Ferraz<br>
@joana_varon<br>
PGP 0x016B8E73<br>
<br>
<br>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<div> </div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
<br
clear="all">
<div> </div>
-- <br>
<div dir="ltr">
<div
style="color:rgb(136,136,136);font-size:13px"><font
face="garamond,
serif">Deborah
Brown</font></div>
<div
style="color:rgb(136,136,136);font-size:13px"><font
face="garamond,
serif">Senior
Policy Analyst</font></div>
<div
style="color:rgb(136,136,136);font-size:13px"><font
face="garamond,
serif">Access
| <a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://accessnow.org" target="_blank">accessnow.org</a></font></div>
<div
style="color:rgb(136,136,136);font-size:13px"><font
face="garamond,
serif"><a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://rightscon.org" target="_blank">rightscon.org</a></font></div>
<div
style="color:rgb(136,136,136);font-size:13px"><font
face="garamond,
serif"><br>
</font></div>
<div
style="color:rgb(136,136,136);font-size:13px"><font
face="garamond,
serif">@deblebrown</font></div>
<div
style="color:rgb(136,136,136);font-size:13px"><font
face="garamond,
serif">PGP
0x5EB4727D</font></div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<br>
____________________________________________________________<br>
You received this message as a subscriber on the
list:<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:governance@lists.igcaucus.org"
target="_blank">governance@lists.igcaucus.org</a><br>
To be removed from the list, visit:<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
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 moz-do-not-send="true"
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 moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.igcaucus.org/"
target="_blank">http://www.igcaucus.org/</a><br>
<br>
Translate this email: <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://translate.google.com/translate_t"
target="_blank">http://translate.google.com/translate_t</a><br>
<br>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
</div>
<br>
____________________________________________________________<br>
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:governance@lists.igcaucus.org">governance@lists.igcaucus.org</a><br>
To be removed from the list, visit:<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
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 moz-do-not-send="true"
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 moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.igcaucus.org/" target="_blank">http://www.igcaucus.org/</a><br>
<br>
Translate this email: <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://translate.google.com/translate_t"
target="_blank">http://translate.google.com/translate_t</a><br>
<br>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
<br clear="all">
<br>
-- <br>
Dr. Anja Kovacs<br>
The Internet Democracy Project<br>
<br>
+91 9899028053 | @anjakovacs<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.internetdemocracy.in/" target="_blank">www.internetdemocracy.in</a><br>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>