<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html charset=windows-1252"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;"><br><div><div>On 21 Nov 2014, at 4:53 pm, Ian Peter <<a href="mailto:ian.peter@ianpeter.com">ian.peter@ianpeter.com</a>> wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><blockquote type="cite">
<meta content="text/html charset=windows-1252" http-equiv="Content-Type">
<div style="WORD-WRAP: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space" dir="ltr">
<div dir="ltr">
<div style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: Calibri;">
<div>Hi David,</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Bear in mind that (as I understand it) ISOC has yet to fully consult its
chapters and members about this decision so I wouldn’t be too surprised to see
some adjustments to their current position.</div></div></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>That is true - but I understand this was a decision of the Board of Trustees, which is a fairly large group that includes members from a multiple chapters, so I think it relatively unlikely that broader consultation will change it too much. </div><div>I think if their position changes, it would be more likely to be due to changes to the NMI proposal. </div><div><br></div><div><br><blockquote type="cite"><div style="WORD-WRAP: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space" dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: Calibri;">
<div>As Jeanette pointed out, ISOC was originally opposed to the formation of
IGF, a position they reversed fairly quickly when IGF got under way. It’s also
not many years ago that ISOC was arguing for NTIA to continue its oversight role
of the root zone – a position that began to evolve after member chapters became
involved in reversing that policy decision.</div></div></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>Absolutely. I don't think ISOC will necessarily maintain opposition to the idea of something like NMI. But will NMI itself change enough to become that something?</div><div><br></div><div><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>Cheers</div><div><br></div><div><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>David (FWIW, I'm a member of ISOC-AU, but just a member, I have no particular insight into their thinking)</div><blockquote type="cite"><div style="WORD-WRAP: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space" dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: Calibri;">
<div> </div>
<div>So things do change. </div>
<div> </div>
<div>Ian Peter</div>
<div style="font-size: small; text-decoration: none; font-family: Calibri; font-weight: normal; font-style: normal; display: inline;">
<div style="FONT: 10pt tahoma">
<div> </div>
<div style="BACKGROUND: #f5f5f5">
<div style="font-color: black"><b>From:</b> <a title="dave@difference.com.au" href="mailto:dave@difference.com.au">David Cake</a> </div>
<div><b>Sent:</b> Friday, November 21, 2014 6:39 PM</div>
<div><b>To:</b> <a title="arsenebaguma@yahoo.fr" href="mailto:arsenebaguma@yahoo.fr">Arsene TUNGALI</a> </div>
<div><b>Cc:</b> <a title="governance@lists.igcaucus.org" href="mailto:governance@lists.igcaucus.org">governance@lists.igcaucus.org</a> ;
<a title="williams.deirdre@gmail.com" href="mailto:williams.deirdre@gmail.com">williams.deirdre@gmail.com</a> </div>
<div><b>Subject:</b> Re: [governance] URGENT: Last call for feedback on CS
participation in NETmundial Initiative</div></div></div>
<div> </div></div>
<div style="font-size: small; text-decoration: none; font-family: Calibri; font-weight: normal; font-style: normal; display: inline;">I
think if ISOC continues to not be involved, and there is no significant buy in
from other I* orgs other than ICANN, then the NMI will not end up being a very
significant process anyway.
<div> </div>
<div>But I certainly think that if the CSCG, or individual groups within it,
continue to negotiate, and particularly if there is a significant change that
responds to ISOC concerns, then that is no problem. If CS members wish to
participate in the process in the hope that happens, I have no problem with
that. </div>
<div> </div>
<div>That said, I'd be surprised if ISOC change their position without huge
changes to the process (possibly equivalent to more or less starting again).
</div>
<div> </div>
<div>I personally doubt JNC will rejoin the process unless WEF is effectively
removed from any leadership role, but I'm sure they are more than capable of
explaining their position themselves. </div>
<div> </div>
<div>David</div>
<div>
<div> </div>
<div>
<div> </div>
<div>
<div>
<div>On 21 Nov 2014, at 3:23 pm, Arsene TUNGALI <<a href="mailto:arsenebaguma@yahoo.fr">arsenebaguma@yahoo.fr</a>>
wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline">
<blockquote type="cite">
<div style="WHITE-SPACE: normal; WORD-SPACING: 0px; TEXT-TRANSFORM: none; FONT: 12px helvetica; LETTER-SPACING: normal; TEXT-INDENT: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px">
<table style="" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" border="0">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td valign="top">
<div id="yahoo__compose_area" style="FONT-SIZE: 15px; FONT-FAMILY: helveticaneue-regular, helvetica; POSITION: static; Z-INDEX: auto; DISPLAY: block; BACKGROUND-COLOR: white">
<div>David, you are right in many of the points raised but...</div>
<div> </div>Not participating, in my opinion, will result in no
change of structure or so within NMI. However, being part of it will
certainly shape it. We need people who will challenge them to sit on the
same table for face-to-face debates.
<div> </div>
<div>From my understanding, ISOC, JNC and other groups who are againts
will be happy to join if there is some major changes happening. But
trust me, no change will happen if we remain on arguing on mailing lists
rather than on that table.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>I encourage those who are willing to join to go and help change the
course of things within NMI so the other CS bodies can join as
well:)<br><br>------------------<br>Arsene Tungali,<br>Executive
Director, Rudi International<br><a href="http://www.rudiinternational.org/" x-apple-data-detectors-result="0" x-apple-data-detectors-type="link" x-apple-data-detectors="true">www.rudiinternational.org</a><br><br>Founder,
Mabingwa Forum<br><a href="http://www.mabingwa-forum.com/" x-apple-data-detectors-result="1" x-apple-data-detectors-type="link" x-apple-data-detectors="true">www.mabingwa-forum.com</a><br>Phone:<a href="tel:+243993810967" x-apple-data-detectors-result="2" x-apple-data-detectors-type="telephone" x-apple-data-detectors="true">+243993810967</a><br><br>ICANN Fellow |
ISOC Member | Child Online Protection Advocate | Youth Leader | Internet
Governance.<br>Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC)<br><br>Sent from Yahoo
Mail for iPhone</div></div>
<div id="yahoo__original_message" class="yQTDBase"><br>
<blockquote style="PADDING-LEFT: 1ex; MARGIN: 0px 0px 0px 0.8ex; BORDER-LEFT: rgb(204,204,204) 1px solid">At
21 nov. 2014 09:10:39, David Cake<'<a href="mailto:dave@difference.com.au" x-apple-data-detectors-result="4" x-apple-data-detectors-type="link" x-apple-data-detectors="true">dave@difference.com.au</a>'> wrote:I
think Deirdre speaks a fair bit of sense here.
<div> </div>
<div>I don't think the two sides of this debate are as far apart some
would suggest.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>The majority of CS certainly seemed to feel that the initial
proposal for structure presented by the NMI founding organisations was
very badly flawed.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Now, it may be that there are some within JNC and other parts of
civil society who are willing to write off the entire enterprise
simply because WEF is one of the founding organisations, regardless of
the specific role it has in the current structure. That position
generally goes along with an opposition to all fora in which
commercial organisations are full participants (a familiar JNC
refrain), and I think we can say that is solidly a minority position
within CS groups that participate in IG processes, and likely to stay
that way.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>There are also those, primarily within the technical community,
who feel that having transnational fora that can make meaningful
decisions on anything related to the Internet, outside the narrow
technical remit of the I* agencies, is a problem. There is perhaps a
lingering sense of this within the ISOC decision (though there is more
to it than that). But I get the feeling that the majority of us would
cautiously welcome some more meaningful fora for addressing some
broader IG issues, in the spirit of NetMundial. There are some who
would rather than took place by an expanded role for the IGF, but I
don't think there are many of us who think that is likely to happen in
the near future.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>So, I think we are more or less left with a majority that feels
that something with similar goals to the NMI would be valuable, but
the current NMI as proposed has some very real problems in structure
and process, especially with the significant role of the WEF. The big
question is how to respond to the existence of this badly flawed
initiative.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>So we essentially have divisions between those who feel the
process and structure so far is so badly flawed that the best response
is to ignore it and hope that a better initiative can be constructed
after its failure, those who feel that with sufficient negotiation and
pressure it can be wrenched into more acceptable shape, and those who
feel that despite its significant flaws it might turn out to be a
significant venue. I think these divisions are largely tactical (there
are no insurmountable differences regarding the potential value of a
forum with general aims similar to NMI, or on the significant flaws of
this proposal to fill that space). Most of the arguments turn on
whether or not it will turn out to be a significant forum. If it will
be significant with or without CS, the argument is we should be
involved. If ISOC withdrawal has already killed it, we should not
bother participating. If CS involvement is the deciding factor on
whether or not it will be acceptable, then how should we use that
potential leverage, or should we simply drop it on principle.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>My opinion is that ISOC withdrawing has already holed it below
the waterline, and it will not be a significant initiative unless it
can drag the tech community back in to refloat it, and doing so would
probably require the significant changes to the structure and process
that CS wants. So, I'm probably in favour of no participation at this
point, and maybe agreeing to participate at a later date if the
structure is changed. But I regard that as a tactical decision at this
point, and I certainly don't think anyone who does want to participate
is letting down CS as a whole by choosing to do so.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>David</div>
<div> </div>
<div>
<div> </div>
<div>
<div>On 21 Nov 2014, at 4:43 am, Deirdre Williams <<a rel="nofollow" target="_blank" ymailto="mailto:williams.deirdre@gmail.com">williams.deirdre@gmail.com</a>><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline">
<blockquote type="cite">
<div dir="ltr"><p style="MARGIN-BOTTOM: 0in">I asked in an earlier post<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><font color="#0000ff"><font face="arial, sans-serif">whether<br>civil society has been
manoeuvred into a position in which choosing<br>not to be involved
becomes not really an option?</font></font><br>As civil society we
have a very broad range of perspective and<br>therefore it is much
more difficult for this group to act together<br>rapidly, as ISOC
has done, when the nature of the issue itself is<br>still doubtful.
Other people have already reminded us of the<br>hesitation before
the NETmundial meeting in April, and the enthusiasm<br>(in general)
which greeted the outcomes of that meeting, although<br>there are
still some reservations – Renata just shared hers.</p><p style="MARGIN-BOTTOM: 0in">My sympathies lean towards a
reluctance<br>to provide legitimacy, but my common sense suggests
the following:<br></p><br>
<ol><br>
<li><p style="MARGIN-BOTTOM: 0in">As far as I can see the
Netmundial<br>Initiative will continue with or without us.</p><br>
</li><li><p style="MARGIN-BOTTOM: 0in">Civil Society is split now
(and<br>has been split for some time) so that any attempt at a
boycott is<br>likely to fail because it will be
incomplete.</p><br>
</li><li><p style="MARGIN-BOTTOM: 0in">The invitation to join can
be<br>presented in such a way as to provide legitimacy even if not
all of<br>civil society agrees to accept. (This is what I meant
by<br>“manoeuvred” above.)<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><br></p><br>
</li><li><p style="MARGIN-BOTTOM: 0in">We have not been given a
clear<br>picture of what the initiative is – it may prove to be
something<br>that meets our approval – or not.</p><br>
</li><li><p style="MARGIN-BOTTOM: 0in">It is very important that
any<br>civil society representatives who join that committee
should be<br>people who go with an open mind. Those who disapprove
are absenting<br>themselves anyway; it would be better to have
representatives who<br>are initially neutral but open to be
persuaded one way or the other.</p><br>
</li><li><p style="MARGIN-BOTTOM: 0in">Finally, should the
initiative<br>prove to be unacceptable, a well publicised walkout
by the 5 civil<br>society representatives (who are also
representing “the world”)<br>would be much easier to arrange and
much more effective than a<br>partial boycott before the meeting
takes place.</p><br></li></ol><p style="MARGIN-BOTTOM: 0in">The discussion at the Geneva
Internet<br>Conference about the Netmundial Initiative yesterday
morning<br>(Wednesday 19<sup>th</sup>) was useful. On Tuesday during
“<strong><font color="#58585a"><font face="Open Sans, sans-serif">Same<br>issues, different perspectives:
overcoming policy silos in privacy<br>and data protection”,<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span></font></font></strong><strong><font face="Times New Roman, serif"><font size="3"><span style="FONT-WEIGHT: normal">one<br>of the afternoon sessions,<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span></span></font></font></strong><font face="Times New Roman, serif">Brian<br>Trammell, Senior Researcher,
Communication Systems Group, ETH Zurich,<br>presenting the
“technical” perspective, said of the Internet<br>Engineering Task
Force (IETF</font><font face="Times New Roman, serif">)<br>that
members are volunteers who “participate as individuals”.<br>This is
also true of the Internet Governance Caucus, and essentially<br>of
civil society as a whole. One of the freedoms that our society tries
to<br>provide is the right of the individual to follow the dictates
of<br>her/his own conscience. My own choice is a pragmatic one. It
should<br>in no way be seen as a criticism of anyone else's point of
view or<br>decision.</font><br></p><p style="MARGIN-BOTTOM: 0in"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">Deirdre</font></p>
<div class="gmail_extra">
<div> </div>
<div class="gmail_quote">On 20 November 2014 11:41, Mawaki Chango<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><span dir="ltr"><<a rel="nofollow" target="_blank" ymailto="mailto:kichango@gmail.com">kichango@gmail.com</a>></span><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </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 class="gmail_default" style="FONT-SIZE: small">Fellas,</div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="FONT-SIZE: small">Some of us have
raised questions about the views of the Brazilian party (<a href="http://cgi.br/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">CGI.br</a>) in
this NMI business. But I know they are in a delicate position and
may be concerned to appear as judge and jury if they come out
strong for a position (and we can expect which that position would
be.) Flavio is not on the IGC list but he granted me the
permission to forward to this list this message of his below,
originally posted to the Non-Commercial Stakeholder Group of
ICANN's GNSO.</div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="FONT-SIZE: small">Best,</div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="FONT-SIZE: small"> </div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="FONT-SIZE: small">Mawaki</div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="FONT-SIZE: small"> </div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="FONT-SIZE: small"> </div>
<div class="gmail_default">Fw: [NCSG-Discuss] UPDATE ON CIVIL
SOCIETY PARTICIPATION IN NET MUNDIAL INITIATIVE<br></div>
<div class="gmail_default"> </div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="FONT-SIZE: small">
<div style="FONT-SIZE: 16px; FONT-FAMILY: helveticaneue, 'Helvetica Neue', helvetica, arial, 'Lucida Grande', sans-serif" dir="ltr"><font face="Arial">On Wednesday, November 19, 2014 12:55 AM,
Flávio Rech Wagner <<a rel="nofollow" target="_blank" ymailto="mailto:flavio@INF.UFRGS.BR">flavio@INF.UFRGS.BR</a>><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>wrote:<br></font></div><br style="FONT-SIZE: 16px; FONT-FAMILY: helveticaneue, 'Helvetica Neue', helvetica, arial, 'Lucida Grande', sans-serif"><br style="FONT-SIZE: 16px; FONT-FAMILY: helveticaneue, 'Helvetica Neue', helvetica, arial, 'Lucida Grande', sans-serif">
<div style="FONT-SIZE: 16px; FONT-FAMILY: helveticaneue, 'Helvetica Neue', helvetica, arial, 'Lucida Grande', sans-serif">Robin<br clear="none"><br clear="none">I have been informed that the
"transitional council" of the NMI - NETmundial Initiative (which
contains representatives from ICANN,<a href="http://cgi.br/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">CGI.br</a><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>and WEF and is provisory,
until the 25 names of the permanent council have been defined) is
having an intense dialogue with CSCG (the Civil Society
Coordination Group) and, together, they shall come to a solution
for appointing names to the council by consensus and fully
respecting nominations from Civil Society. There is no intention
whatsoever from the transitional council to indicate names in a
closed, top-down manner and without full endorsement from CSCG.<br clear="none"><br clear="none">The transitional council also expects to
achieve similar solutions for appointing names that will represent
other stakeholder groups.<br clear="none"><br clear="none">Please
notice that<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><a href="http://cgi.br/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">CGI.br</a><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>(the Brazilian Internet
Steering Committee), which is one of the entities proposing the
NMI, would never agree with top-down, closed decisions that would
strongly undermine CGI's legitimacy as a true bottom-up,
multistakeholder body.<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><a href="http://cgi.br/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">CGI.br</a><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>is completely committed
to preserve the NETmundial principles in the implementation of the
NMI.<br clear="none"><br clear="none">Please remember also that, when
NETmundial was proposed by the end of 2013, all of us in the
global Internet Governance (IG) community, because of lack of
information, were puzzled about its organization and possible
success and outcomes. But the global community faced the challenge
and transformed a vague idea into a successful event, with a true
multistakeholder organization, with very open and transparent
processes, and with a final document that was achieved by rough
consensus and approved governance principles that were praised by
most of the stakeholders (including human rights and other
principles that are extremely valued by Civil Society).<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><br clear="none"><br clear="none">So let's try to transform NMI, which is still also a
vague idea, into something that is concrete and useful for the
advancement of IG and that fully respects the principles enshrined
in the NETmundial declaration.<br clear="none"><br clear="none">Flávio<br clear="none">(NCUC member and member of the
Board of<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><a href="http://cgi.br/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">CGI.br</a>)<br clear="none"><br clear="none"></div></div>
<div class="gmail_extra">
<div> </div>
<div class="gmail_quote"> </div></div></div><br><br>____________________________________________________________<br><br>You
received this message as a subscriber on the list:<br><br><a rel="nofollow" target="_blank" ymailto="mailto:governance@lists.igcaucus.org">governance@lists.igcaucus.org</a><br><br>To
be removed from the list, visit:<br><br><a href="http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing</a><br><br><br><br>For
all other list information and functions, see:<br><br><a href="http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance</a><br><br>To
edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:<br><br><a href="http://www.igcaucus.org/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">http://www.igcaucus.org/</a><br><br><br><br>Translate
this email:<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><a href="http://translate.google.com/translate_t" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">http://translate.google.com/translate_t</a><br><br><br></blockquote></div><br><br clear="all">
<div> </div>--<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><br>
<div>“The fundamental cure for poverty is not money but knowledge"
Sir William Arthur Lewis, Nobel Prize Economics, 1979</div>
<div> </div></div></div><br>____________________________________________________________<br>You
received this message as a subscriber on the list:<br><a rel="nofollow" target="_blank" ymailto="mailto:governance@lists.igcaucus.org">governance@lists.igcaucus.org</a><br>To
be removed from the list, visit:<br><a href="http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">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" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">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/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">http://www.igcaucus.org/</a><br><br>Translate this
email:<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><a href="http://translate.google.com/translate_t" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">http://translate.google.com/translate_t</a></blockquote></div></div></blockquote></div></td></tr></tbody></table></div></blockquote></div>
<div> </div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div>
</blockquote></div><br></body></html>