<html><head></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; ">Hi there Wolfgang,<div><br></div><div>May I ask for the sources you are referring to regarding the "unintended side effects"? Sorry for my old journalistic habits. I sincerely regret that you do not share more often such comments made by Russia, China and Saudi Arabia over IG, as you now have a pretty good access to their conclusions on Milton's views. From Milton's good book and critical Meissen lectures to his comments regarding NMI, I am wondering if your message should be read with all of the subtle understatement that it seems to contain.What are the Meissen lectures by the way? Just wondering. Probably Milton is the only one to fully read <i>entre les lignes</i> here.</div><div><br></div><div>Sources or links most welcome.</div><div><br></div><div>Thanks</div><div>JC</div><div><br></div><div><br><div><div>Le 24 nov. 2014 à 20:01, Kleinwächter, Wolfgang a écrit :</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><blockquote type="cite"><div><br>Hi Milton,<br><br>thanks for this clarifying words and also for the clar statement with regard to the role of governments in IG. As you know I like your book "Networks vs. States" and your Meissen lectures because this is the central conflict of today´s discussiony. The probLem is that your recent staments are used by some governments to jusify the opposite you want to achieve. This is really a good (and sad) example of unintended side effeets. Some of your comments that the multistakeholder model does not work within ICANN or Net Munidal have got a lot of support in Russia,, China, Saudi Arabia which argue: Look Milton says multistakehiderism is bad an thatswhy we need intergovernmental mechanisms.<br><br>I know it is complex. But be careful in what you aer posting.<br><br>wolfgang<br><br><br>Carlos<br>I hope that my abstention from NMI is not interpreted as hostility towards <a href="http://CGI.br">CGI.br</a> or to questions about its legitimacy. There is none of that. <br><br>You are right that before anything can happen someone has to take initiative, and that such initiative is, by definition, taken by specific people without full consultation of everyone about everything. Indeed, Fadi's approach to Brazil that led to the actual Netmundial event was very "top down" but I supported it and so did almost everyone in the NCSG because we realized that an unprecedented opportunity was being seized and a new process was being created that improved things for all of us. <br><br>Remember, I am advocating abstention from this round of the NMI CC, I am not saying it should be destroyed or shunned forever. I just don't see anything new here. I see the usual suspects that I am already engaged with in ICANN and IGF, plus WEF. If I'm going to work with WEF people I want a better idea of who they are and what their agenda is before I commit myself to an institution in which they are the third leg of the stool. I see the CS people who are already deeply embedded in IGF and ICANN getting excited about this, and I see that ICANN and WEF have reached out to those usual suspects and again I ask, "what's new?" <br><br>Is this Onenet v 2.0? There's a certain governance fatigue that sets in. "Hey Milton, please devote another 20 hours/week of your time and labor to another organization built upon almost exactly the same rationale as the IGF, so that it can elevate the same voices saying the same things and continue to marginalize you because you're too liberal and oppositional." :-)<br><br>If you read my blog post you know that my objection was not really the composition of the initiative and only marginally its top-down origins but primarily the idea that its ambitions need to be tamed. If Fadi and WEF want to promote the Ilves report, and not the much better documented and well thought out program emanating from IGP ;-), let them. Just don't let them pretend they are speaking for me, or us. <br><br><br><blockquote type="cite">-----Original Message-----<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">From: Carlos A. Afonso [mailto:ca@cafonso.ca]<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">Sent: Monday, November 24, 2014 7:05 AM<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">To: <a href="mailto:governance@lists.igcaucus.org">governance@lists.igcaucus.org</a>; Milton L Mueller<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">Subject: Re: [governance] Civil society participation in NMI Coordination<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">committee<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">Hi MM, my personal comments on your article in IGP regarding NMI. (*)<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">First, "inheritance" of the legacy of NM is open -- the decision makers, the<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">participants in the IG forums and entities, in summa, the communities<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">involved in the processes of developing IG who may want to advance on the<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">roadmap or principles would be the "inheritors", I guess.<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">The legacy is a proposal for worldwide principles and guidelines for a<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">roadmap for these processes. The "inheritors" are not this or that initiative<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">or group or stakeholder in particular. We are all free to have as many<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">initiatives as we wish (as you actually mention later on in your article), and of<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">course be against any of them.<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">Regarding your "mocking", which you are free to do as well of course :), I<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">guess it takes more than IGP mocking anything to abort it... although of<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">course we do need to consider it seriously.<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">Sorry, but the fact that a initiative proposes to form a facilitating group does<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">not automatically imply it being or staying top-down.<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">Actually, I wonder how to you imagine all the entities and forums we have<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">involved with IG today were born? IETF, ICANN, EuroDIG just to name a few<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">just came to be?<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">The actual practice of how the different stakeholders will decide to get<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">involved (if they do) and actually do it will define it -- and may even change<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">its purpose. So far not a single CS name has been nominated by anyone<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">pertaining to the initial group of organizations, and we at <a href="http://CGI.br">CGI.br</a> insist this<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">will not happen, despite gossips to the contrary.<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">I hope you are aware ISOC decided to publish its board declaration without<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">proper bottom-up consultation with its chapters -- which is odd, given that<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">ISOC supposedly tries to do everything in a transparent, bottom-up,<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">multistakeholder fashion. Since then and after criticism from a number of<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">members the CEO has written the ISOC community to say "all doors are<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">open" to rediscuss the issue.<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">Finally, we all know how it started, but it seems not everyone is aware that<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">we (<a href="http://CGI.br">CGI.br</a>) tried hard to reformulate it to make sure we have a chance to<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">build a multistakeholder process much along the way we built it for<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">NETmundial. We consider it to be clearly in a formative stage. If we do not<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">get real multistakeholder support, the initiative as it is proposed today may<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">fail, and we (<a href="http://CGI.br">CGI.br</a>) are clearly prepared to recognize its failure if it comes to<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">this, and maybe end our participation or try to reorient its purpose.<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">fraternal regards<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">--c.a.<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">===========<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">(*)<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><a href="http://www.internetgovernance.org/2014/11/20/nyet-mundial-taming-the-">http://www.internetgovernance.org/2014/11/20/nyet-mundial-taming-the-</a><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">ambitions-of-the-weficanncgi-alliance/<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">On 11/20/2014 06:31 PM, Milton L Mueller wrote:<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">IGP has just published a blog post on the topic referenced above (NMI)<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><a href="http://www.internetgovernance.org/2014/11/20/nyet-mundial-taming-">http://www.internetgovernance.org/2014/11/20/nyet-mundial-taming-</a><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">the-a<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">mbitions-of-the-weficanncgi-alliance/<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">Milton L. Mueller<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">Laura J. and L. Douglas Meredith Professor Syracuse University School<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">of Information Studies<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><a href="http://faculty.ischool.syr.edu/mueller/mueller/Home.html">http://faculty.ischool.syr.edu/mueller/mueller/Home.html</a><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote><br><br>____________________________________________________________<br>You received this message as a subscriber on the list:<br> <a href="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">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></div></blockquote></div><br></div></body></html>