<!DOCTYPE html>
<html>
<head>
</head>
<body>
<div style="font-family: sans-serif; font-size: 10pt;">
<p>Yes, the point mctim makes is that there is no such 'governance by
technical standards groups'. Deleting it does not take away their being a
stakeholder. </p>
<div style="font-family: sans-serif; font-size: 10pt;">
<p style="margin: 10pt 0; color: black;">On 21 March 2014 6:42:59 am
"Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro"
<salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro@gmail.com> wrote:</p>
<blockquote type="cite" class="gmail_quote"
style="margin: 0 0 0 0.75ex; border-left: 1px solid #808080; padding-left: 0.75ex;"><div
dir="ltr"><div><font color="#0000ff"><span
style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif"><b>"We understand the
multi-stakeholder
governance model as distinct from the "inter-governmental" model,
from the private sector led model, as well as from a model that exclusively
accommodates
technical standards setting
groups."</b><br><br></span></font></div><font color="#0000ff"><span
style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif"><span style="color:rgb(32,18,77)">Hi
Suresh and McTim - Suresh I note your suggestion to delete it. Perhaps we
can find some other way to say this. The current phrase attempts to
describe what "multistakeholder is not". </span><br>
</span></font></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><br><div
class="gmail_quote">On Fri, Mar 21, 2014 at 1:04 PM, Suresh Ramasubramanian
<span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:suresh@hserus.net"
target="_blank">suresh@hserus.net</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote"
style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><u></u>
<div>
<div style="font-family:sans-serif;font-size:10pt">
<p>I would just suggest deleting it. </p><div><div class="h5">
<div style="font-family:sans-serif;font-size:10pt">
<p style="margin:10pt 0">On 21 March 2014 6:28:36 am
"Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro"
<<a href="mailto:salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro@gmail.com"
target="_blank">salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro@gmail.com</a>> wrote:</p>
<blockquote type="cite" class="gmail_quote"
style="margin:0 0 0 0.75ex;border-left:1px solid #808080;padding-left:0.75ex"><div
dir="ltr"><br><div class="gmail_extra"><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote
class="gmail_quote"
style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<div><div><br>
<br>
</div></div>Why do we need this last phrase? Is there a "model that
exclusively<br>
<div>accommodates technical standards setting groups."<br>
<br>
<br>
</div>I have never noticed this in the previous drafts, if I had noticed i<br>
would have objected.<br>
<div><br>
</div><div><span style="color:rgb(0,0,255)">[Sala: I did not
initiate that particular phrase. I just took it from the existing text and
made revisions to the various aspects of the text. do you have another way
of phrasing it or a suggestion so that we can wrap this up?]</span><br>
</div><div>
<br>
<br>
In the inclusive spirit of an authentic Multistakeholder model, we<br>
> stand ready to work with all stakeholders and make sure effective<br>
> consideration is given to the concerns and views of Internet users,
citizens<br>
> and civil society organizations across the world.<br>
><br>
><br>
> We support the four principles put forward by NTIA to guide IANA and
the<br>
> global Internet community in the formulation of a transition proposal.
It is<br>
> critical that we continue to strive for openness and global
availability of<br>
> the Internet while continuously improving on its security and at the
same<br>
> time preserving and furthering Civil Liberties for all Internet users
around<br>
> the globe.<br>
><br>
><br>
<br>
<br>
</div>I don't see how the transition will preserve and further cilvil<br>
liberties, but it's just a nit, not an objection.<br>
<br>
The rest is fine by me.<br>
<div><br></div></blockquote><div><span style="color:rgb(0,0,255)">[Sala:
Noted] </span><br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote"
style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<div>
<br>
><br>
> The IGC urges the international community and the global Internet
community<br>
> to give particular attention to the cost structure associated with the<br>
> emerging governance framework so as to make effective participation<br>
> affordable for developing nations and related Internet stakeholders.<br>
> Capacity development initiatives outreach and are also critical in
improving<br>
> access and enabling meaningful participation.<br>
><br>
> Finally, the Internet Governance Caucus expresses hope that the<br>
> globalization of the IANA function will eventually become more
complete with<br>
> an internationally appropriate and neutral machinery and that suitable
and<br>
> effective accountability and transparency mechanisms will be
established for<br>
> the new global Internet governance institution.<br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> The Civil Society Internet Governance Caucus<br>
><br>
> March 21, 2014.<br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
</div>Cheers,<br>
<br>
McTim<br>
</blockquote></div><br></div></div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div></div></div>
</div>
</blockquote></div><br></div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</body>
</html>