<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Exchange Server">
<!-- converted from text --><style><!-- .EmailQuote { margin-left: 1pt; padding-left: 4pt; border-left: #800000 2px solid; } --></style>
</head>
<body>
<div style="font-family:Calibri,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:11pt; color:black">
<span style="font-family:Calibri,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:11pt; color:black">Dear Wolfgang,<br>
<br>
Just by mere curiosity; could you explain further how could the edges be strengthened, when there is a permanent power quota assigned in the center of the organization? (something I think goes against the so-called bottom up approach).<br>
<br>
I am really looking forward to find arguments to support the permanent places.<br>
<br>
Manuel Haces<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<span style="color:black">-----Original Message----- <br>
<b>From:</b> Kleinwächter, Wolfgang [wolfgang.kleinwaechter@medienkomm.uni-halle.de]<br>
<b>Received:</b> martes, 18 nov 2014, 5:41PM<br>
<b>To:</b> michael gurstein [gurstein@gmail.com]; governance@lists.igcaucus.org [governance@lists.igcaucus.org]; Baudouin Schombe [baudouin.schombe@gmail.com]; Norbert Bollow [nb@bollow.ch]<br>
<b>CC:</b> bestbits@lists.bestbits.net [bestbits@lists.bestbits.net]<br>
<b>Subject:</b> AW: [governance] Re: [bestbits] FW: [discuss] JNC statement on WEF's Net Mundial Initiative<br>
<br>
</span></span></div>
<font size="2"><span style="font-size:10pt;">
<div class="PlainText">Hi Michael<br>
<br>
I recognize your doubts, but I think you are wrong. There is a chance to take away "power functions" from the CC by strenghtening the "edges".
<br>
<br>
w<br>
-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----<br>
Von: michael gurstein [<a href="mailto:gurstein@gmail.com">mailto:gurstein@gmail.com</a>]<br>
Gesendet: Di 18.11.2014 19:01<br>
An: Kleinwächter, Wolfgang; governance@lists.igcaucus.org; 'Baudouin Schombe'; 'Norbert Bollow'<br>
Cc: bestbits@lists.bestbits.net<br>
Betreff: RE: [governance] Re: [bestbits] FW: [discuss] JNC statement on WEF's Net Mundial Initiative<br>
<br>
Wolfgang<br>
<br>
We must be talking about different networks. The NMI as I understand it has<br>
ultimate centralized decision making (ie: the final say on appointments to<br>
the Steering Committee) and centralized control through the Steering<br>
Committee over financing/funding. <br>
<br>
In the NMI the intelligence may (or may not) be at the edges, but the power<br>
seems to be firmly entrenched at the centre.<br>
<br>
M <br>
<br>
-----Original Message-----<br>
From: "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang"<br>
[<a href="mailto:wolfgang.kleinwaechter@medienkomm.uni-halle.de">mailto:wolfgang.kleinwaechter@medienkomm.uni-halle.de</a>]
<br>
Sent: Tuesday, November 18, 2014 8:49 AM<br>
To: michael gurstein; governance@lists.igcaucus.org; Baudouin Schombe;<br>
Norbert Bollow<br>
Cc: bestbits@lists.bestbits.net<br>
Subject: AW: [governance] Re: [bestbits] FW: [discuss] JNC statement on<br>
WEF's Net Mundial Initiative<br>
<br>
Hi Michael<br>
<br>
in a decentralized network, the intelligence (and the power) is at the<br>
edges, not in the centre. A root server has no real power. It takes a query<br>
and sends it to the next server towards the final destination to enable<br>
communication between a sender and a receiver. Sender and receiver remain<br>
independent, but they benefit from their communication. To enable<br>
communication among independent national multistakeholder platforms would be<br>
produce benefit for both sides without creating a "power centre" in the<br>
middle of a network. Thatswhy the principle of network neutrality is so<br>
important. Take a ccTLD registry. The make their own Independent policy,b<br>
but they benefit from "best practices" via the CNSO.<br>
<br>
Wolfgang<br>
<br>
<br>
ergive (independent) <br>
<br>
<br>
-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----<br>
Von: michael gurstein [<a href="mailto:gurstein@gmail.com">mailto:gurstein@gmail.com</a>]<br>
Gesendet: Di 18.11.2014 16:25<br>
An: governance@lists.igcaucus.org; Kleinwächter, Wolfgang; 'Baudouin<br>
Schombe'; 'Norbert Bollow'<br>
Cc: bestbits@lists.bestbits.net<br>
Betreff: RE: [governance] Re: [bestbits] FW: [discuss] JNC statement on<br>
WEF's Net Mundial Initiative<br>
<br>
All presumably under the gentlest but strongest and tightest control from<br>
the master spiders sitting at the centre of the web in Washington and<br>
Geneva.<br>
<br>
M<br>
<br>
-----Original Message-----<br>
From: governance-request@lists.igcaucus.org<br>
[<a href="mailto:governance-request@lists.igcaucus.org">mailto:governance-request@lists.igcaucus.org</a>] On Behalf Of "Kleinwächter,<br>
Wolfgang"<br>
Sent: Tuesday, November 18, 2014 6:09 AM<br>
To: governance@lists.igcaucus.org; Baudouin Schombe;<br>
governance@lists.igcaucus.org; Norbert Bollow<br>
Cc: bestbits@lists.bestbits.net<br>
Subject: AW: [governance] Re: [bestbits] FW: [discuss] JNC statement on<br>
WEF's Net Mundial Initiative<br>
<br>
I see NMI as an initiative which moves forward with innovative policy ideas<br>
into still unknown territory. One recommendation of NetMundial in Sau Paulo<br>
was to encourage the formation of national multistakeholder Internet<br>
Governance platforms which will help to deals with the local Internet<br>
Governance issues, taking into account the global and regional discussions.<br>
Zhis wold be a concret step where CS can ans has to become a driving force.<br>
NMI is a good opportunity a. to help the launch of such national platforms<br>
and b. to link them together in a decentralized and diversified "Internet<br>
Governance Web" which is based on the local realities, needs and challenges.<br>
<br>
<br>
Wolfgang<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----<br>
Von: governance-request@lists.igcaucus.org im Auftrag von Baudouin Schombe<br>
Gesendet: Di 18.11.2014 14:51<br>
An: governance@lists.igcaucus.org; Norbert Bollow<br>
Cc: <,bestbits@lists.bestbits.net>,<br>
Betreff: Re: [governance] Re: [bestbits] FW: [discuss] JNC statement on<br>
WEF's Net Mundial Initiative<br>
<br>
Hello all,<br>
<br>
My question becomes increasingly growing:<br>
1. What happens to the NetMundial?<br>
2. NetMundial initiative is different from NetMundial launched in Brazil?<br>
3. All these groupings of civil society are more partisan and exclusive<br>
selections. It looks like copineries and friendships circles.<br>
I think we should take into account national and regional realities. Whether<br>
we talk about IGF or NetMundial we need from considerations of each country<br>
because everything is based on some national issues is our continental<br>
location.<br>
All these debates within civil society suggests a crisis of leadership with<br>
all its consequences.<br>
What we want exactly?<br>
With representation from civil society in UNCTAD, there has been exclusion;<br>
for MAG, so many asctuces and in the current situation for NetMundial again<br>
and again discriminatory policies.<br>
Ultimately, whatever the plurality of civil society, should understand that<br>
many plurality of concepts also need?<br>
<br>
Baudouin<br>
<br>
<br>
2014-11-18 14:04 GMT+01:00 Norbert Bollow <nb@bollow.ch>:<br>
<br>
> Jeremy Malcolm (the representative of Best Bits in CSCG) wrote:<br>
><br>
> > Via Norbert I have requested that JNC issue a public apology for <br>
> > wrongly stating in this article, along with much other dumping on <br>
> > civil society colleagues, that Best Bits is supporting the <br>
> > NETmundial Initiative.<br>
><br>
> Before I reply to the substance of this accusation of lying, let me <br>
> quickly comment on why these facts (about which JNC is being accused <br>
> of having told a lie) have some importance: In view of the phenomenon <br>
> which were calling "the caravan for a neo-liberal capture of global <br>
> governance", it would in our view be a huge step forward if the <br>
> support for that could be reduced to those who are willing to publicly <br>
> admit and defend their support for it. From this perspective, it is a <br>
> very serious and significant systemic problem in civil society when <br>
> actions are taken which are in their effect supportive of this <br>
> "caravan", but where those who take or explicitly support such action <br>
> get away with simply disclaiming responsibility, or even claiming that <br>
> it didn't happen. (By contrast it is a legitimate course of action for <br>
> any of the concerned parties to admit to having made a mistake, and to <br>
> consequently change their stance.)<br>
><br>
> Now to the substance of what we're accused of having been untruthful <br>
> about...<br>
><br>
> The footnote which is referenced in this demand for an apology (and <br>
> which is the only place where any mention of Best Bits is made) reads <br>
> in full as follows:<br>
><br>
> For example, on the basis of positive views expressed by APC,<br>
> BestBits, Diplo and NCSG, the chair of the Civil Society Coordination<br>
> Group (CSCG) has sent a very positive letter to NMI offering to<br>
> organize a selection process for civil society representatives for<br>
> NMI's coordination committee. Until now, only the Just Net Coalition<br>
> (JNC) has opposed this plan, and JNC will refuse to participate if it<br>
> goes forward. The other member organizations of CSCG are: Association<br>
> for Progressive Communications (APC), Best Bits, Civicus, Diplo<br>
> Foundation, Internet Governance Caucus (IGC), Non-Commercial<br>
> Stakeholders Group (NCSG).<br>
><br>
> For context, this footnote is given in support of the assertion that <br>
> some "sections of civil society currently active in the area of <br>
> Internet ... have accepted the invitation from global corporate and <br>
> other elites to participate in the NetMundial Initiative".<br>
><br>
> I maintain that the concerned letter<br>
><br>
> * is indeed very positive, and that<br>
><br>
> * it offers to organize a selection process for civil society<br>
> representatives for NMI's coordination committee, and that<br>
><br>
> * it in fact represents acceptance in principle of the fundamental<br>
> concept of NMI and the invitation to participate.<br>
><br>
> This is certainly how we in JNC read the letter, and it appears that <br>
> also ICANN CEO Fadi Chehadé (one of the recipients) is understanding <br>
> the letter similarly, as Avri tweeted yesterday: "Fadi, praised the <br>
> letter from civil society asking to select is own members of the #NMI <br>
> council and legitimizing the initiative. #igeneva"<br>
><br>
> But it is probably necessary at this point for everyone here to be <br>
> given the opportunity to be able to make up their minds for themselves <br>
> on whether, as JNC claims, this letter expresses acceptance in <br>
> principle of NMI.<br>
><br>
> After all, JNC has in effect been accused of lying. The only way to <br>
> effectively counteract such an accusation is to present evidence that <br>
> what we're saying is in fact the truth about these events.<br>
><br>
> JNC will of course be very happy if (as we're in fact suggesting in <br>
> the<br>
> statement) now enough CSCG members change their position so that on <br>
> the basis of that the CSCG position changes, and a corresponding <br>
> letter is sent which contradicts the initial quite positive stance. We <br>
> would certainly acknowledge such a welcome development in an updated <br>
> version of the statement.<br>
><br>
> So here is the text of the concerned letter from CSCG's chair to NMI:<br>
><br>
> """<br>
> Dear Virgilio, Fadi and Richard,<br>
><br>
> RE: NETMUNDIAL INITIATIVE COORDINATION COUNCIL<br>
><br>
> I am writing to you on behalf of the Internet Governance Civil<br>
> Society Coordination Group (CSCG), in response to your call for<br>
> nominations for a Coordination Council for the new NetMundial<br>
> Initiative.<br>
><br>
> I think you all know something of our organisation. We are a<br>
> "coalition of coalitions" of the major civil society groups working<br>
> on internet governance issues, formed specifically to ensure a<br>
> co-ordinated civil society response and conduit when it comes to<br>
> making civil society appointments to outside bodies.<br>
><br>
> Our reach through the represented member coalitions (Internet<br>
> Governance Caucus, Association for Progressive Communications,<br>
> Diplo Foundation, Just Net Coalition, Best Bits, Civicus, and Non<br>
> Commercial Stakeholders Group of ICANN) extends to some thousands<br>
> of organisations. We provided the nominations for civil society<br>
> members appointed to various committees for the original NetMundial<br>
> initiative in Brazil and the 1net initiative, as well as<br>
> nominations for the recent IGF Multistakeholder Advisory Group<br>
> renewal.<br>
><br>
> A number of us listened in and participated on your webinar last<br>
> week. We are very pleased to see an effort underway to<br>
> collaboratively deal with some of the evolving issues in the<br>
> internet governance arena; and also pleased to see your strong<br>
> commitment to the NetMundial principles, and to a bottom up process<br>
> in bringing this into action.<br>
><br>
> We have noted carefully the procedures outlined on your website for<br>
> nominations, and the commitment to one civil society representative<br>
> for each of the five regions outlined. You are aware of our<br>
> concerns, which I am sure you share, that the selection processes<br>
> be credible, involve stakeholder groups, and, as your nomination<br>
> process states, "formed through a bottom-up process, inspired by<br>
> the open and transparent approach employed by the organizers of the<br>
> São Paulo NETmundial meeting".<br>
><br>
> We believe this can best be achieved if we work closely with you to<br>
> ensure that the civil society representation, and involvement in<br>
> selection of its representatives, is as strong, credible and<br>
> effective as possible, and make the following suggestions with this<br>
> end in mind.<br>
><br>
> SUGGESTION ONE<br>
><br>
> Although we could go through a separate nomination process and<br>
> forward a number of names to you, it seems to us that in the<br>
> current situation a more workable process would be to encourage<br>
> suitable civil society people to nominate as per your process, but<br>
> then work with you at the close of nominations to provide our<br>
> recommendations on the most suitable candidates. Depending on<br>
> circumstances, we could give you one recommended name per region,<br>
> or we could give a maximum of say three suitable names per region,<br>
> to enable you to consider intra-regional balance across stakeholder<br>
> groups.<br>
><br>
> We would like your feedback on this option. If we were to follow<br>
> this process, we would need to receive from you full details of<br>
> each nomination received for civil society. We could undertake to<br>
> give completed recommendations within a week of the closing date;<br>
> ie by December 13. We employ well developed processes for achieving<br>
> such an outcome in a credible manner and can assure you than<br>
> necessary confidentiality in dealing with these documents would be<br>
> maintained.<br>
><br>
> SUGGESTION TWO<br>
><br>
> Additionally, we could have a representative work with you (the<br>
> transitional committee members) on finalising selections, and<br>
> writing up the rationale for decisions. We appreciate that if one<br>
> of us takes up such a role, the deliberations would be subject to<br>
> complete confidentiality, and this would be a facilitating role to<br>
> ensure the best possible selections. We would welcome your feedback<br>
> on this additional option as well.<br>
><br>
> TIME CONSTRAINTS<br>
><br>
> If we are to proceed with one or both of these options, we would<br>
> need to have your confirmation as to our participation in this<br>
> manner fairly quickly, so that we can inform our colleagues. Please<br>
> if possible get back to us this week, or advise when you will be<br>
> able to respond.<br>
><br>
> We look forward to working with you and to a highly successful<br>
> collaborative initiative to address some important issues of mutual<br>
> concern. We would like to see a strong, widely endorsed, and<br>
> effective civil society presence in developing this initiative, and<br>
> look forward to working with you to achieve this.<br>
><br>
> Thank you in advance for your cooperation.<br>
><br>
> Sincerely,<br>
><br>
> Ian Peter<br>
> Independent Chair<br>
> """<br>
><br>
> Greetings,<br>
> Norbert<br>
><br>
><br>
> ____________________________________________________________<br>
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:<br>
> governance@lists.igcaucus.org<br>
> To be removed from the list, visit:<br>
> <a href="http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing">http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing</a><br>
><br>
> For all other list information and functions, see:<br>
> <a href="http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance">http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance</a><br>
> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:<br>
> <a href="http://www.igcaucus.org/">http://www.igcaucus.org/</a><br>
><br>
> Translate this email: <a href="http://translate.google.com/translate_t">http://translate.google.com/translate_t</a><br>
><br>
><br>
<br>
<br>
--<br>
*SCHOMBE BAUDOUIN*<br>
<br>
<br>
*COORDINATION NATIONALE CAFEC*<br>
<br>
*ICANN/AFRALO Member*<br>
*ISOC Member*<br>
Téléphone mobile:+243998983491/+243813684512<br>
email : b.schombe@gmail.com<br>
skype : b.schombe<br>
blog : <a href="http://akimambo.unblog.fr">http://akimambo.unblog.fr</a><br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
</div>
</span></font>
</body>
</html>