<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On Tuesday 26 November 2013 03:11 AM,
Milton L Mueller wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD257073F@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu"
type="cite">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;
charset=ISO-8859-1">
<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";}
h1
{mso-style-priority:9;
mso-style-link:"Heading 1 Char";
mso-margin-top-alt:auto;
margin-right:0in;
mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;
margin-left:0in;
font-size:24.0pt;
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.Heading1Char
{mso-style-name:"Heading 1 Char";
mso-style-priority:9;
mso-style-link:"Heading 1";
font-family:"Cambria","serif";
color:#365F91;
font-weight:bold;}
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]-->
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">George<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">Normally
I would be very much in favor of shifting attention to
issues and substantive proposals. But in the present
context, that constitutes a diversion from the real problem
at hand.<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">The
preparations for the Brazil conference have pushed
representational issues to the fore. Specifically, we have
an entity called 1net that has been given the authority to
appoint half of the members of the steering committees for
the conference, </span></p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
I dont think such an authority was ever give to 1net.... Though
there seems to have been a strong attempt to claim it - so strong
that many people thought they already had it . parminder<br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD257073F@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu"
type="cite">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">and
which has also promised that a fixed number of slots on
these steering committees will be given to specific
stakeholder groups.
<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">Because
these steering committees will control the agenda of the
conference, and hence will be in de facto control of our
discussion of substantive issues at the Sao Paulo
conference, it behooves even those of us exclusively
interested in substan</span></p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD257073F@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu"
type="cite">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">tive
issues to pay attention to the composition of those
committees.
<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">In
particular, the coordinating committee of 1net itself needs
to be settled. Get that done, and yes, we can start to focus
on substantive issues.<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">--MM<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"">
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:governance-request@lists.igcaucus.org">governance-request@lists.igcaucus.org</a>
[<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="mailto:governance-request@lists.igcaucus.org">mailto:governance-request@lists.igcaucus.org</a>]
<b>On Behalf Of </b>George Sadowsky<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Monday, November 25, 2013 12:38 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> Deirdre Williams<br>
<b>Cc:</b> <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:governance@lists.igcaucus.org">governance@lists.igcaucus.org</a>; gurstein
michael; Peter Ian; bestbits; Akplogan Adiel A.;
Swinehart Theresa; <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:internetpolicy@elists.isoc.org">internetpolicy@elists.isoc.org</a>;
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:i-coordination@nro.net">i-coordination@nro.net</a>; Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro<br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [governance] Inter-stakeholder
issues in a multi-stakeholder environment<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Deirdre, and all,<o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Thank you, Deirdre. I take your point
that we should consider shifting the focus to issue-based
discussions and away from stakeholder membership-based
discussions. That is a very good way to phrase it. (Note
that accepting such a shift does not imply that it should
replace all other stakeholder membership activities.) <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Where should we have these issue-based
discussions? There have been a number of good and
provocative responses to what I wrote below, and I really
don't know where to post them and my reactions to them. How
can we get these conversations started in a productive and
inclusive manner?<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">We now have four relevant lists that I
know of, and here may well be more:<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">- the IGC list, <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">- the BestBits list, <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">- the ISOC policy list, and <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">- the new 1Net coordination list.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Many of us subscribe to some or all of
these list, and therefore see the same posting more than
once. I subscribe to all four of the above.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">With some trepidation, I'm going to post
this message on all of the above lists, with the hope that
we can converge on an acceptable solution. [I have trimmed
some early postings below that led to this point in the
discussion.] I myself would favor the 1net list, simply
because it is new and meant to be all-inclusive specifically
for this purpose, whereas other lists may be (I think)
somewhat restrictive and more focused and used for other
purposes also. <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">If you respond to this, please consider
trimming the response significantly, since the content below
will have been posted to all of the four lists. <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">IMO the question to be answered is: on
which list, or using which vehicle, can we collect broad
involvement in issue-based threads that have to do with
aspects of Internet governance? If we can converge on an
answer, then we'll eliminate some redundancy and we'll have
a more inclusive and more positive discussion of issues. If
the redundancy is felt to be useful, then we can keep it;
it's agreement on the focal point that's important here.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Comments? Suggestions? Criticisms?<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">George<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>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> On Nov 25, 2013, at 11:53 AM, Deirdre
Williams wrote:<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><br>
<br>
<o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">I began this message 12 days ago in
response to a thread started by Michael Gurstein <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<h1><span style="font-size:13.0pt">Let's Get Real
Folks--Re: [governance] Re: [bestbits] DISCLOSURE
REQUEST Re: Funding Available for Strengthening Civil
Society<o:p></o:p></span></h1>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">I gave up. Now I am encouraged to
try again by this new thread <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<h1><span style="font-size:13.0pt">Re: [governance]
Inter-stakeholder issues in a multi-stakeholder
environment<o:p></o:p></span></h1>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">begun by George Sadowsky.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Is there any way to shift the focus
from the people to the issues?<o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">In the final analysis everyone
belongs to civil society. That point was made by a
representative of a local telecommunications company
at a recent workshop on IXPs held in Saint Lucia. As
he said, his children also query the speed of the
Internet at home when they have to do their homework.
The only people excluded from civil society are
incarcerated prisoners, and that also is a statement
that can be questioned. If I understand him correctly
George Sadowsky is making the same point. Civil
society is us - all of us.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Instead of trying to disentangle
the stakeholders from one another could we try to
reach agreement on the aspects of the issues? If no
one is wearing any particular hat then it should be
possible to obtain a clearer picture of the issues
that need to be discussed, and the multiple aspects of
those issues.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Surely at least a part of the
"multistakeholder" configuration of WSIS was to
provide a means of identifying and harnessing the
different types of expertise available, to tackle the
different aspects of the challenges created by the
Internet and its proliferation. In hindsight the
intention must have been partially collaboration and
cooperation. Sadly the focus shifted to a third "c" -
competition - so that instead of team-powered problem
solving we ended up with separation and power
struggles. And now on top of that comes betrayal and
the death of trust. And the "little people" the
"grassroots" become even further excluded from
discussion of the interests that affect them, washed
out in a wave of personalities and accusations.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">We do not need to let this
breakdown continue. We CAN work together, we've done
it before. Trust can be rebuilt. It is a hard slow
process, but each of us retains threads of trust which
we consider still to be viable. Otherwise we would not
be communicating at all. Weave these threads together
and we can build something stronger than what existed
before, because we will be depending on one another
instead of on abstract external factors. And together
we will be able to disaggregate the issues into their
component aspects and negotiate a point of balance
among the differing needs of government, technicians,
business and society.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Deirdre<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">On 24 November 2013 12:59, George
Sadowsky <<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:george.sadowsky@gmail.com"
target="_blank">george.sadowsky@gmail.com</a>>
wrote:<br>
<br>
<o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">All,<o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u>Please note that the
opinions that follow are my own personal
opinions and are independent of any of the
organizations with which I am affiliated.</u><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><<snip>><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><br>
<br>
<o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<div>
<blockquote style="border:none;border-left:solid #CCCCCC
1.0pt;padding:0in 0in 0in
6.0pt;margin-left:4.8pt;margin-right:0in;z-index:auto">
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">So with that understanding,
I'd like to throw out some thoughts to see if
any of them resonate with any of you.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u>First</u>, I believe that
the introduction of the idea of
multi-stakeholder approaches has had a
significant negative effect between the Internet
technical community and the community that has
coalesced to represent classical civil society
concerns. As I recall in the 1990s, these
communities were considerably intermingled; the
promise of the Internet encouraged us not only
to help it evolve in beneficial ways but also to
explore how to exploit it for social and
economic benefits.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">The solidification of
different stakeholder groups resulting from the
WSIS process, caused informal differences to
formalize. Issues of representation, power,
time at the microphone, visibility on (sometimes
competing) lists and victory in arguments on
those lists grew, while informal discussion
gradually declined. Polarization of opinion
grew as willingness to respect others' opinions
and to agree civilly to disagree suffered. <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u>Second</u>, I believe that
the specific role of the Internet technical
community as a stakeholder group for the
purposes of participating in the MAG and in the
IGF is not properly understood. At this point
in its evolution, the Internet is a very complex
system at most levels. In order to understand
fully the implications of policies that have to
do with Internet administration, operation and
governance, one has have a good technical
understand of what the effect of those policies
will be at a detailed level. The primary role
of representatives of the Internet technical
community, in a MAG and IGF setting, is to study
and understand such effects and to inform those
deliberating about them. That function may well
extend toward consideration of broader thematic
areas and suggestions of what needs to be
discussed for continued Internet health, either
short or long term, or both. <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">In the grand scheme of
things, this is a moderately narrow focus, but
it is extremely important.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u>Third</u>, I believe that
one result of formalized multi-stakeholderism
appears to have been to separate groups of
people rather than separating groups of ideas.
A couple of examples illustrate the point. To
the extent that the Internet technical community
does its work in guiding the MAG well to enhance
Internet evolution, I believe that involved
representatives of civil society benefit and
should encourage their participation.
Conversely, representatives of the Internet
technical community are people, and many are
very likely to have beliefs that are quite
consistent with the positions espoused by those
same civil society representatives. The
multi-stakeholder approach, however, seems to
create a silo effect that minimizes or even
denies the overlap of commonality of interest
regarding issues by separating people into
different silos. So instead of recognizing
positive overlap of beliefs, the approach
encourages a focus on inter-stakeholder group
separation.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u>Fourth</u>, I'd like to
propose a reconceptualization of the term "civil
society." In the multi-stakeholder
instantiation that is now employed by the
UN/MAG/IGF axis , it refers to groups if
individuals, some representing organizations of
various sizes that agree to various extents
regarding the importance of individual rights of
various kinds. These groups represent civil
society goals and are therefore grouped as
"civil society" to populate that stakeholder
group. And although the goals of that group are
generally quite positive, their actions are
often based upon pushing back against other
stakeholder groups, most notably government but
also others. Perhaps that reflects the reality
of the tension between groups, but that tension
is not moderated, as it might sometimes be, by
people bridging groups instead of being siloed.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">An alternate way to define
civil society is to start with all people in the
world and remove government involvement, the
private sector involvement, and perhaps other
large institutional influences. To borrow a
phrase from Apple, what is left is "the rest of
us," and it contains fractions, generally large
fractions of most of us as individuals. <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Most individuals have
interests in more than one sector or stakeholder
group. We have interactions with government and
may work for it. Alternatively we may work for
a private or other public sector organization.
Almost all of us are increasingly users of the
internet. Using this approach, perhaps an
aggregate of 5 billion of us constitute "civil
society," as opposed to the people who are now
labeled as being in the civil society
stakeholder group. If we are all civil society
in large parts of our lives, then we all have
some claim to represent our views as we live.
Thus, a representative of Internet technology
on the MAG is likely to, and has a right to
opine on issues in the larger space, just as
self-defined representatives of civil society
positions have a right to do. This illustrates
again how the various stakeholder groups, or
silos, are really quite intertwined, making the
siloed and often competitive relationships
between them at a formal level quite
unrepresentative of the underlying reality,<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u>I conclude</u> that the
multi-stakeholder approach that is accepted to
be an approach to bring us together, has not
insignificant negative externalities that serve
to keep us apart. We need to assess the
multi-stakeholder approach with that in mind If
it is retained as an organizing principle, we
need to recognize and understand those negative
effects so that we can minimize them and can
exploit the positive aspects of that approach.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">This is a much longer note
than I ordinarily write, but it has helped me to
understand some of the roots of the often
unnecessarily antagonistic relationship between
proponents of issues important to civil society
and technical community experts guiding the
evolution of the Internet. Thank you for taking
the time to read it. I realize that what I have
written, and any discussion of it, is
considerably more nuanced than what I have
presented above. However, I have tried to
present the core of some ideas that I think may
be useful. The more nuanced discussion can and
will come later.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Your comments are welcome.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">George<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>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><<trimmed>><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
<br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<br>
<pre wrap="">_______________________________________________
I-coordination mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:I-coordination@nro.net">I-coordination@nro.net</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://nro.net/mailman/listinfo/i-coordination">https://nro.net/mailman/listinfo/i-coordination</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>