<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<br>
<div class="moz-forward-container">IGC-ians<br>
<br>
This is regarding the email I sent just now... In my below email I
discuss what was a decision taken by IGC and also BestBits
(alongwith two other CS networks) which was to have civil society
groups deal directly with the Brazilian organisers and not go
through 1Net, as the single conduit. I see that many people in key
positions have unilaterally - by omission or commission - allowed
that civil society position to slip and we are in a situation
where 1Net has indeed become the single conduit to the Brazil
meeting for all non-gov stakeholders. <br>
<br>
I think it is a key decision to be taken by IGC and other groups
whether they want to be essentially mediated by the 1Net entity,
or want to maintain their independent status and deal directly
with the Brazil meeting, and its organisers. <br>
<br>
1Net, as some of you would know, was formed at ICANN's initiative
(pl see <a
href="http://www.icann.org/en/groups/board/documents/resolutions-17nov13-en.htm"
target="_blank">http://www.icann.org/en/groups/board/documents/resolutions-17nov13-en.htm</a>
) with an agenda which is ICANN's. I have no problem with us
dealing with 1Net or even having joint positions on specific
issues with it if needed. I do not agree to appoint 1Net as civil
society’s conduit to the Brazil meeting. In fact, the plan is
larger, to have 1Net as a standing platform, and so this servitude
of the CS to this ICANN initiative will be enduring. This is not
acceptable. Civil society should step in now and stop it.<br>
<br>
This being a constitutional issue about what IG related civil
society is, its independence from power blocs, and its future, I
request IGC leadership to take a vote from the IGC membership on
this issue.<br>
<br>
parminder <br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
-------- Original Message --------
<table class="moz-email-headers-table" border="0" cellpadding="0"
cellspacing="0">
<tbody>
<tr>
<th align="RIGHT" nowrap="nowrap" valign="BASELINE">Subject:
</th>
<td>Re: [bestbits] Re: [discuss] [governance] Meeting in São
Paulo on Friday, January 10th, is between the LOG and 1Net</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<th align="RIGHT" nowrap="nowrap" valign="BASELINE">Date: </th>
<td>Fri, 10 Jan 2014 16:01:22 +0530</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<th align="RIGHT" nowrap="nowrap" valign="BASELINE">From: </th>
<td>parminder <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:parminder@itforchange.net"><parminder@itforchange.net></a></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<th align="RIGHT" nowrap="nowrap" valign="BASELINE">To: </th>
<td>Joana Varon <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:joana@varonferraz.com"><joana@varonferraz.com></a></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<th align="RIGHT" nowrap="nowrap" valign="BASELINE">CC: </th>
<td><,<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:bestbits@lists.bestbits.net>">bestbits@lists.bestbits.net></a>,
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:bestbits@lists.bestbits.net"><bestbits@lists.bestbits.net></a></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<br>
<br>
<meta content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
<font face="Verdana">Dear Joana/ other Liaisons (or who were
supposed to be Liaisons), <br>
<br>
Again, my responses are strictly political and not personal...<br>
<br>
Pl see inline <br>
<br>
</font>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On Thursday 09 January 2014 06:18 PM,
Joana Varon wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CALTAiTpF_YjLmM_RtZ9=3mQ8xUQ1JpqdAfN2GFfQx5LEGGwV+A@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div class="gmail_extra">Dear Parminder, <br>
<br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_extra">Sorry for not clarifing this
yesterday, was having hard time to find ur msg again in the
deep sea of emails in my inbox. <br>
<br>
All I can say is that, unfortunately, the Brazilian
government has never taken into consideration the role of
the liaisons.</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
Since CS groups gave you the mandate, if you were unable to fulfil
it, this should have been immediately reported back to us. On the
other hand, even when I repeatedly, and Ian and Jeremy once each,
asked for 'what is happening', there has been no report. This in
not my understanding is how Liaisons work. There is a little
point knowing this now, when this thing called 1Net, to confront
whose likely single-conduit role you all were appointed as
liaisons, is firmly in place and driving the process. <br>
<br>
As a person who took a primary role in insisting that we appoint
Liaisons immediately, in face of a lot of foot dragging among
many, and also suggested that 4 Brazilians at hand be asked to do
this job, I must express complete disappointment on how this role
has been played... In fact, I know of nothing at all that got done
vis a vis this role. I am happy to be told otherwise. <br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CALTAiTpF_YjLmM_RtZ9=3mQ8xUQ1JpqdAfN2GFfQx5LEGGwV+A@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div class="gmail_extra"> We were never invited to any single
meeting that has been assembled with ICANN and interactions
were always about us knocking on everyones doors to try to
be informed. </div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
Again, no one told anyone of us... Again, the word is 'Liaison'...
Why did you not report this back and we would have wrote another
letter, or found another strategy to deal with this situation.<br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CALTAiTpF_YjLmM_RtZ9=3mQ8xUQ1JpqdAfN2GFfQx5LEGGwV+A@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div class="gmail_extra">On the other hand, this nomination
did serve as an incentive for the four/three of us to get
together and work to assemble information through different
channels and communicate whatever we could grasp to the
international community.</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
Can you provide me an instance of such a communication. <br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CALTAiTpF_YjLmM_RtZ9=3mQ8xUQ1JpqdAfN2GFfQx5LEGGwV+A@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div class="gmail_extra"> As Carolina has already explained in
a previous email exchange with you. If it was not good
enough, be assure, we have been doing our best. <br>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
I am not convinced... I did not know till date the fact now being
presented that despite your attempts you were not allowed into any
of the meetings, and given no information. Which simply means that
Brazilians completely ignored the letter that 4 key civil society
networks wrote to them - after all these groups having
communicated the same things to the Brazilians in person at
Bali...<br>
<br>
Why dont you, and we as civil society, consider this a serious
issue? I do. <br>
<br>
(I am positive that if they have been treating civil society like
it it is because we are allowing them to treat us like this. Why?
The question is, why?)<br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CALTAiTpF_YjLmM_RtZ9=3mQ8xUQ1JpqdAfN2GFfQx5LEGGwV+A@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div class="gmail_extra"> <br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_extra">My email to Glaser mentioning to
consider 1net steering was because he mentioned that the
meeting was with "LOG and representatives from 1net".</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
We need to first remind the LOG, no, civil society wants to
directly talk to LOG, that was the mandate given to you by CS
groups in Bali... We dont have to simply accept things, which in
fact go expressly against the mandate given to the Liaisons which
is to not accept 1Net as the conduit for CS interactions with the
Brazilians... Please let me know if you think that this was not
the mandate, and we can discuss it here. <br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CALTAiTpF_YjLmM_RtZ9=3mQ8xUQ1JpqdAfN2GFfQx5LEGGwV+A@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div class="gmail_extra"> If that was the scope of the
conversation, my natural reaction was to wonder: which 1net
representative? If 1net had just passed through a process of
electing representatives, why not referring to the elected
ones? Basically, I was just working in the scope of
possibilities that the LOG has given us with that email. <br>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
Again, the CS letter clearly said, you 3 or 4 as our Liaisons have
to deal directly with the Brazilians and not through 1Net.... I
know I am repeating it again and again but that was pretty much
what we decided at Bali when the role was given to you...<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CALTAiTpF_YjLmM_RtZ9=3mQ8xUQ1JpqdAfN2GFfQx5LEGGwV+A@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div class="gmail_extra"> <br>
The capacity of 1net to be a truly multistakeholder is yet
to be seen. The steering have just been formed. So, of
course, I'm not defending 1net's role, </div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
People have a right to take whatever political position they want
to take vis a vis 1Net.... But as CS Liaisons given a role which
was expressly to develop direct conduits to LOG (a mandate given
in the express context of 1Net wanting to be the conduit) I think
you needed to report back to us before you took the alternative
approach, which was directly opposed to the mandate given to you..<br>
<br>
Please no hard feelings... Everyone is doing our political jobs
here, and I have the job to defend the interests and
constituencies that I work for...<br>
<br>
It is very disappointing that after long discussions took place on
both IGC and BB lists where there was clear preponderance of view
that civil society should act independently and not through 1Net,
which we all know where it comes from and what its strategic
objective is (read ICANN resolution if you have any doubt), a good
part of the leadership, whether through acts of commission or
commission has landed civil society right in the lap of 1Net.<br>
<br>
This remains as unacceptable to me now as it was at Bali and pre
Bali... Others may have changed their views, but I havent. (The
least one can do however if to inform that their views have been
changed, and the reason for it).<br>
<br>
And well, this is too important a matter for a small group of
people to decide - whether IG civil society would want an
independent and direct-relationship status at global IG meetings
or go only through an ICANN developed space. I am sure that
majority of actors in the IGC and BB want an independent status
and a direct / un-intermediated relationship with meeting
organisers. And not have to do as a part of platform created by
ICANN and dominated by global big business. <br>
<br>
I would request IGC and BB list to take a vote from the membership
whether civil society wants an independent status and direct
relationship to the Brazil meeting, or do it only as part of 1Net.
This is urgently required. To me, this is almost a constitutive
issue for IG related civil society. <br>
<br>
parminder <br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CALTAiTpF_YjLmM_RtZ9=3mQ8xUQ1JpqdAfN2GFfQx5LEGGwV+A@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div class="gmail_extra">as we still don't know what it is. My
intention was to pass this message to LOG: if 1net is meant
to be legitimate, or is meant to be the conduit by any form,
which is questionable, then, please, refer also to elected
representatives of that network. Otherwise, we would be
there just to legitimate something else, I role that I'm not
comfortable with.<br>
<br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_extra">That's basically it. Sorry if my msg
was unclear to you by any chance (I know that, at least for
the other liaisons, it would not be taken as any kind of
action to exclude then. We cannot be excluded, if we were
never included. We are working in the sense that if two ears
or one mouth from the three of us in on the room, it is
already a win.)<br>
<br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_extra">Looking forward for the committees to
be formed so we can stop jumping at people's windoms to
collect information or drop suggestions that might not be
taken into consideration. So we could focus on what
pleasures me the most: research and building collective
solutions. <br>
<br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_extra">Hope it makes it clear to you. I know
you are annoyed by many questions, but we are all annoyed
and anxious too. Just the reactions are different, I've been
trying to keep the positivity and patience, as the challenge
LOG is facing is huge and I still trust they have the best
of intentions. Maybe I'm naive. <br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_extra">all the best<br>
<br>
joana<br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br>
<br>
<br>
<div class="gmail_quote">On Wed, Jan 8, 2014 at 4:26 AM,
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">
<div class="im"> <br>
<div>On Tuesday 07 January 2014 10:02 PM, Joana
Varon wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div>
<div>Dear Glaser, <br>
<br>
Is it possible that at least those who were
elected in the steering/coordination
committee of 1net could also attend the next
planning meetings?<br>
<br>
At least from CS, it has been a demand from
some representatives in the various lists
where Adiel's report was shared that at
least representatives from international
civil society should attend such meetings to
report back to it's constituencies. <br>
<br>
As 1net has been pointed as a conduit by the
LOG, and we are now trying to create some
legitimacy for this network by electing it's
representatives for the
steering/coordination committee, I think
that at least enabling elected
representatives for 1net to attend and
report back should be a way forward to start
opening up the planing process while the Br
committees are not formed yet.</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
</div>
Joana<br>
<br>
Before you were sent to 1Net by some CS groups (for a
task never too clear to me) you were asked to be CS
Liaison to the Brazilians to ensure that CS has a
direct relationship with them and our that
relationship is not mediated. I remember that at Bali
your views were also quite strong on this issue. Now
you are slipping in an acceptance of the 1Net's
mediating role as fait accompli, and telling us that
you are trying to contribute to building legitimacy
for 1Net..<br>
<br>
I must admit, i remain thoroughly surprised by
whatever is happening, and in the closed manner that
it is happening...<br>
<br>
Hope that we can hear some words of clarification from
you and others...<span class="HOEnZb"><font
color="#888888"><br>
<br>
parminder <br>
<br>
</font></span>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div>
<div class="h5">
<div dir="ltr">
<div>
<div>IMHO I think that would even help CGI
to speed up this process. <br>
<br>
</div>
all the best<br>
<br>
</div>
joana<br>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br>
<br>
-- <br>
-- <br>
<br>
Joana Varon Ferraz<br>
@joana_varon<br>
researcher<br>
Center for Technology and Society<br>
Fundação Getulio Vargas<br>
PGP 0x016B8E73<br>
<br>
<br>
<div class="gmail_quote">On Tue, Jan 7, 2014
at 2:11 PM, Hartmut Richard Glaser <span
dir="ltr"><<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:glaser@cgi.br"
target="_blank">glaser@cgi.br</a>></span>
wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote"
style="margin:0px 0px 0px
0.8ex;border-left:1px solid
rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000"> <br>
<u><big><b>URGENT INFORMATION</b></big></u><u><b><big>/CLARIFICATION</big></b></u><br>
<pre><big><font face="Calibri">
Dear All,
There will be a face-to-face meeting in Brazil on Friday, January 10th, between the
local organizing group (LOG) and representatives of 1Net to sort out relevant details
related to the Brazil Meeting process, in particular the organization of the meeting's
committees.
<u>This is not a meeting of any of the committees planned for the event's</u><u> </u><u>process,</u> since
they are not yet constituted. We hope that by January 15th the nominations from all
stakeholders will be in place for all committees to start their work.
Thanks for your support.
<font face="AppleGothic">Local Organizing Group/CGI.br</font>
BR Meeting - Global Multistakeholder Meeting
on the Future of Internet Governance</font></big></pre>
<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"
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>
<br clear="all">
<br>
<br>
</div>
</div>
<br>
<fieldset></fieldset>
<br>
</div>
</div>
<div class="im">
<pre>_______________________________________________
discuss mailing list
<a moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:discuss@1net.org" target="_blank">discuss@1net.org</a>
<a moz-do-not-send="true" href="http://1net.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss" target="_blank">http://1net.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss</a></pre>
</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:bestbits@lists.bestbits.net">bestbits@lists.bestbits.net</a>.<br>
To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit:<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits"
target="_blank">http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits</a><br>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
<br clear="all">
<br>
-- <br>
-- <br>
<br>
Joana Varon Ferraz<br>
@joana_varon<br>
PGP 0x016B8E73<br>
<br>
<br>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
<br>
</div>
<br>
</body>
</html>