<html>
<head>
<base href="x-msg://6496/">
</head>
<body>
<div style="color: black;">
<div style="color: black;">
<p style="margin: 0 0 1em 0; color: black;">Amazing. A third way that still
works out in favor of the multilateral advocates</p>
<p style="margin: 0 0 1em 0; color: black;">If it walks like a multilateral
duck, if it quacks like a multilateral duck.. <br>
</p>
</div>
<div style="color: black;">
<p
style="color: black; font-size: 10pt; font-family: Arial, sans-serif; margin: 10pt 0;">On
March 8, 2015 9:01:14 PM Jean-Christophe NOTHIAS I The Global Journal
<jc.nothias@theglobaljournal.net> 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><span
class="Apple-style-span"
style="border-collapse: separate; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Optima; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: -webkit-auto; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-horizontal-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-vertical-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-decorations-in-effect: none; -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; font-size: medium; "><span
class="Apple-style-span"
style="orphans: 2; text-align: -webkit-auto; text-indent: 0px; widows: 2; -webkit-text-decorations-in-effect: none; "><span
class="Apple-style-span"
style="orphans: 2; text-align: -webkit-auto; text-indent: 0px; widows: 2; -webkit-text-decorations-in-effect: none; "><span
class="Apple-style-span"
style="orphans: 2; text-align: -webkit-auto; text-indent: 0px; widows: 2; -webkit-text-decorations-in-effect: none; "><span
class="Apple-style-span"
style="border-collapse: separate; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Optima; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: -webkit-auto; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-horizontal-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-vertical-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-decorations-in-effect: none; -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; font-size: medium; "><blockquote
type="cite"><span class="Apple-style-span"
style="border-collapse: separate; font-family: Optima; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: -webkit-auto; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-horizontal-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-vertical-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-decorations-in-effect: none; -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; font-size: medium; "><div><div
style="color: black; "><div style="color: black; "><p
style="margin-top: 0px; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 0px; margin-left: 0px; color: black; ">The
merits of democracy are not being argued (GREAT NEWS!!) here as much as the
tendency for this word to be used solely in a multilateral context in UN
circles.</p></div></div></div></span></blockquote>Solely? No. This is
solely your assumption.</span></span></span></span></span></div><div>In a
multilateral context? No, wrong again. One problem that do have MSists is
their dear denial of any role to governments. MSits favorite sport is
governmental bashing (except for USG, the good guy of their
story).</div><div>In UN circles. No. Most of its use happens outside the
UN, in civil life.</div><div><br
class="webkit-block-placeholder"></div><div><blockquote type="cite"><span
class="Apple-style-span"
style="border-collapse: separate; font-family: Optima; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: -webkit-auto; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-horizontal-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-vertical-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-decorations-in-effect: none; -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; font-size: medium; "><div><div
style="color: black; "><div style="color: black; "><p
style="margin-top: 0px; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 0px; margin-left: 0px; color: black; ">Any
consensus based approach can certainly be described as
democratic. </p></div></div></div></span></blockquote></div><div>Would
it be "through consensus" democracies would have gone no way. A majority,
made by honest voting in a clear constitutional framework, can only
exercise the will of the people. A consensus can be a good warning paving
the way to a new collective rule, still a vote might often turn it into
something that will be respected, transparent and accountable. Consensus is
a very vague process, easily flawed. Rough consensus is even worse. Again
governance is no to be built on techies's philosophy of daily practice.
Consensus related to governance fits to capos and rubber barons. Not to
public policy making (which is where we do have a
fight).</div><div><br></div><div><blockquote type="cite"><span
class="Apple-style-span"
style="border-collapse: separate; font-family: Optima; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: -webkit-auto; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-horizontal-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-vertical-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-decorations-in-effect: none; -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; font-size: medium; "><div><div
style="color: black; "><div style="color: black; "><p
style="margin-top: 0px; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 0px; margin-left: 0px; color: black; ">The
question here is what political significance will get attached to that
word, especially when it is advocated by a grouping that explicitly favors
multilateral governance
structures. </p></div></div></div></span></blockquote></div><div>Especially
when its very existence is denied by MSits who, amusingly, claimed to be
MSits for the sake of democracy. MSits know better what the people
need.</div><div><br></div><div>No, JNC is not favoring Multilateral
governance. This another assumption is a lie. JNC is advocating a third
way. Most MSists are bodyguards to the status-quo. We see it in any list,
any venue. We have seen it again during the connecting the dots, or
the Dotting the I's, as Louis Pouzin put
it.</div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div>
<br><div><div>Le 8 mars 2015 à 14:31, Suresh Ramasubramanian a écrit
:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><blockquote type="cite"><span
class="Apple-style-span"
style="border-collapse: separate; font-family: Optima; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: -webkit-auto; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-horizontal-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-vertical-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-decorations-in-effect: none; -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; font-size: medium; "><div><div
style="color: black; "><div style="color: black; "><p
style="margin-top: 0px; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 0px; margin-left: 0px; color: black; ">The
merits of democracy are not being argued here as much as the tendency for
this word to be used solely in a multilateral context in UN circles.</p><p
style="margin-top: 0px; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 0px; margin-left: 0px; color: black; ">Any
consensus based approach can certainly be described as democratic.
The question here is what political significance will get attached to that
word, especially when it is advocated by a grouping that explicitly favors
multilateral governance structures.<span
class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><br></p></div><div
style="color: black; "><p
style="margin-top: 10pt; margin-bottom: 10pt; color: black; font-size: 10pt; font-family: Arial, sans-serif; margin-right: 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">On
March 8, 2015 6:40:17 PM JOSEFSSON Erik <<a
href="mailto:erik.josefsson@europarl.europa.eu">erik.josefsson@europarl.europa.eu</a>>
wrote:</p><blockquote type="cite" class="gmail_quote"
style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0.75ex; border-left-width: 1px; border-left-style: solid; border-left-color: rgb(128, 128, 128); padding-left: 0.75ex; "><div
style="direction: ltr; font-family: Arial; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-size: 10pt; ">I
want to add to the complexity with another perspective (albeit I think the
underlying understanding is congruent with what Jean-Christophe described),
namely the overview Eben Moglen recently gave in New Zealand at<a
href="http://linux.conf.au/">http://linux.conf.au/</a>. I point the video
to the part where transparency, participation and non-hierarchical
collaboration is described as conditions that grew out of technical work on
making the internet.<br><br><a
href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aOcpDsDSWY0#t=11m20s"
target="_blank">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aOcpDsDSWY0#t=11m20s</a><br><br>Mr
Moglen says that later on (at ~18m) that
"principles of transparency, participation and non-hierarchical collaboration, they are themselves a social and political program".<br><br>Isn't
that program about democratically accountable internet
governance?<br><br>Or am I just taking the best governance bits out of the
conference of connected dots?<br><br>//Erik<br><br><div
style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-size: 16px; "><hr
tabindex="-1"><div id="divRpF204420" style="direction: ltr; "><font
face="Tahoma" color="#000000" size="2"><b>From:</b><span
class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><a
href="mailto:bestbits-request@lists.bestbits.net">bestbits-request@lists.bestbits.net</a><span
class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>[bestbits-request@lists.bestbits.net]
on behalf of parminder [parminder@itforchange.net]<br><b>Sent:</b><span
class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>Sunday 8 March 2015
11:16<br><b>To:</b><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><a
href="mailto:governance@lists.igcaucus.org">governance@lists.igcaucus.org</a>;
"Kleinwächter, Wolfgang"; Michael Gurstein; Benedek, Wolfgang; best
Bits<br><b>Subject:</b><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>Re:
[bestbits] [governance] Remarks at UNESCO Closing Ceremony of
"Connecting the Dots Conference"<br></font><br></div><div></div><div><font
face="Verdana">And of course, the main question still is: what is your
Internet-related global public policy decision making model?</font><span
class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>(Or do you have a case that
Internet related global policy making is not needed, or that it is
happening quite fine?)<br><br>If you are just ready to say - no, corporates
do not have the same role as governments, and cannot claim to participate
as equals or on an equal footing, in Internet-related global policy
decision making - that is enough. We can all agree, and all these
ongoing contentions be put behind us, and we can work as one. Is this that
difficult? Why do people choke on making this simple assertion, which would
clearly follow from simple democratic principles and ideals.<span
class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><br><br>Is this not a simple way
to remove the deep contestations that are evident here, which so many find
so unsightly?<br><br>Meanwhile, if others have any simple assertion (or a
set of them) that they want to know if JNC agrees to or not, we promise to
come back immediately on that.<br><br>Isnt it better to clearly bring out
the actual and specific points of differences, and see if these can be
closed, rather than long email exchanges where one can be presenting mother
and apple pie assertions, and feel quite good about it. Lets do real
political talk here, and seek closing differences, and if we cant, at least
know what the precise differences are. If we can commit ourself to this
concise methodology, we will be making progress.<span
class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><br><br>parminder <span
class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><br><br><br><br><div
class="moz-cite-prefix">On Sunday 08 March 2015 03:27 PM, parminder
wrote:<br></div><blockquote type="cite"><font face="Verdana">I will reply
to the emails of both Wolfgangs together, and some other emails of a
similar kind.<br><br>We are getting circular with this discussion, so lets
try to cut the circularity with some specifics.<br><br>1. You say
democracy, esp in its practise, is not clear, but is MSism
(multistakeholder-ism) clearer? Should then both words no longer be used in
IG docs.<br><br>2. No one asked for MS word to be removed from the doc,
this is an impotant point to remember. On the other hand people positively
insisted that democracy/ democratic not be included, and others thought
nothing of such insistence, and the consequent non-inclusion (and continue
to do so in this discussion) - this is the problem. Do you read nothing
here. I, and JNC, reads a lot, and is positively dismayed.<span
class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><br><br>3. About the advice that
we (JNC) should not play word games and focus on 'concrete issues': Really!
What was the Netmundial doc about with about 40 references to the MS word
and precisely one and a half to democratic? Did it just innocently come to
that, or were some people playing intensive word games there (Jeanette, you
really were in the middle of that whole thing, no)? Why this gratuitous
advice that dont mind 'democracy' but we will always be making sure that
the MS word goes into ever single place. Lets please be fair here.<span
class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><br><br>4. Finally, Can any one
of you honestly say that if someone has said at the meeting, 'MS term
contains baggage', and opposed the use of the term 'MS' as a result of
which it had got removed from the document, the whole space would not have
gone hopping mad? There would have been strong denouncements and walk outs.
This is direct question - would it not have been so? Then why cant people
think and act in a similar manner about the 'democratic' term. That is the
issue here. An honest consideration of this other hypothetical situation,
and a reponse on what would have happened if the MS word was excluded, will
make very clear what is the main issue here. Anyone?<br><br>parminder<span
class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><br><br></font><br><div
class="moz-cite-prefix">On Saturday 07 March 2015 11:07 PM,
"Kleinwächter, Wolfgang" wrote:<br></div><blockquote type="cite"><pre>This
discussion is bizarr.
Civil Society should concentrate on concrete issues as access,
infrastructure, data protection, freedom of expression, education, capacity
building, cultural diversity etc. In my eyes CS can achieve more when they
communicate and collaborate with other stakeholders. Insofar a
"multistakeholder approach" where CS is involved as an equal
partner in its respective role, gives civil society more opportunities and
options than a "one stakeholder approach" where CS is excluded
from final policy and decision making and its role is reduced to implement
on the "community level" what other stakeholders have decided.
Wolfgang
BTW, for people who like "wordsmithing" and "playing with
paragraphs" I recommend to read para. 35 of the Tunis Agenda in the
light of para. 34. Para. 34 speaks about "shared decision making
procedures". Para. 35a says that states "have rights and
responsibilities for international Internet-related public policy issues".
The paragraph 35a does not say that states have "exclusive
rights". With other words,if you read 35 in the light of 34, states
(and their governments) have to "share decision making" on
"Internet related public policy issues" with other stakeholders.
This is not easy to achive. But this is the challenge where we have to move
forward by being creative. The NetMundial conference offered an interesting
model. More forward looking Innovation is needed.
I think what you mean below is not "a consensus on the understanding and
role of democracy in the context of the internet" but rather a
consensus on
how to effectively operationalize democracy in the context of the Internet
something with which I (and the JNC) completely agree and which we have been
advocating for a long time.
Further, I think that even in the absence of a fully formed consensus on the
definition of "democracy" there seems, at least based on my
quotes from Mr.
Mandela and the US State Department, sufficient comfort in a working
definition of democracy that Mr. Mandela would commit his life to the
endeavour and the US-State Department would make it a fundamental pillar of
US foreign policy. Based on this, presumably "we" could have
sufficient
comfort to "force" it into international documents.
The same, I should add cannot in any sense be said for multistakeholderism,
a concept which even its strongest advocates acknowledge is ill-formed,
shape shifting from context to context and lacks any consistent definition
either in theory or in practice.
M
-----Original Message-----
From: Benedek, Wolfgang (<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated"
href="mailto:wolfgang.benedek@uni-graz.at"
target="_blank">wolfgang.benedek@uni-graz.at</a>)
[<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="mailto:wolfgang.benedek@uni-graz.at"
target="_blank">mailto:wolfgang.benedek@uni-graz.at</a>]
Sent: March 7, 2015 6:02 AM
To: <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated"
href="mailto:governance@lists.igcaucus.org"
target="_blank">governance@lists.igcaucus.org</a>; Michael Gurstein
Subject: Re: [governance] [bestbits] Remarks at UNESCO Closing Ceremony of
"Connecting the Dots Conference"
First to make my position clear I'm myself an advocate of democratic
governance and a holistic approach to human rights although not as an
alternative to multistakeholderism, the potential of which in my view still
needs to be developed.
Second I have myself proposed in writing to the Secretariat to include
certain language on global citizenship education, a concept supported by the
UN Secretary General and developed very actively in the educational sector
of UNECO while only mentioned once in the UNESCO study to resolve ethical
issues in cyberspace. Finally, the concept was only mentioned without any
elaboration. And I'm aware that several other proposals made by others were
not taken up at all.
Regarding the baggage issue, I'm not an insider to these discussions, I have
no problem with appeals to democratic values, but I'm aware that the concept
of democracy has also been misused a lot in history, take the examples of
the former German Democratic Republic(GDR), the Democratic Republic of Congo
(DRC) or the Democratic Peoples Republic of Korea. It would be good to work
for a consensus on the understanding and role of democracy in the context of
the internet among civil society and academia first before forcing it into
international documents.
Wolfgang Benedek
Am 07.03.15 14:01 schrieb "Michael Gurstein" unter <
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:gurstein@gmail.com"
target="_blank"><mailto:gurstein@gmail.com></a> <a
class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:gurstein@gmail.com"
target="_blank">gurstein@gmail.com</a>>:
</pre><blockquote type="cite"><pre>And to be very clear, in the case of
"democracy" it wasn't
simply a
</pre></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><pre>matter of the concept
"not making it into the final
document" but
</pre></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><pre>rather that those involved
made the clear political choice to promote
</pre></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><pre>"multistakeholderism" and
suppress "democracy".
</pre></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"></blockquote><blockquote
type="cite"><pre>M
</pre></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"></blockquote><blockquote
type="cite"><pre>-----Original Message-----
</pre></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><pre>From: <a
class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E"
href="mailto:governance-request@lists.igcaucus.org"
target="_blank"><mailto:governance-request@lists.igcaucus.org></a>
</pre></blockquote><pre><a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated"
href="mailto:governance-request@lists.igcaucus.org"
target="_blank">governance-request@lists.igcaucus.org</a>
</pre><blockquote type="cite"><pre>[ <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E"
href="mailto:governance-request@lists.igcaucus.org"
target="_blank"><mailto:governance-request@lists.igcaucus.org></a>
</pre></blockquote><pre><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="mailto:governance-request@lists.igcaucus.org"
target="_blank">mailto:governance-request@lists.igcaucus.org</a>] On Behalf
Of Norbert
</pre><blockquote type="cite"><pre>Klein
</pre></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><pre>Sent: March 7, 2015 3:45 AM
</pre></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><pre>To: <a
class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:governance@lists.igcaucus.org"
target="_blank"><mailto:governance@lists.igcaucus.org></a> <a
class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated"
href="mailto:governance@lists.igcaucus.org"
target="_blank">governance@lists.igcaucus.org</a>
</pre></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><pre>Subject: Re: [governance]
[bestbits] Remarks at UNESCO Closing Ceremony
</pre></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><pre>of
"Connecting the Dots Conference"
</pre></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"></blockquote><blockquote
type="cite"></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><pre>On 03/07/2015 02:30
PM, Benedek, Wolfgang
</pre></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><pre>( <a
class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:wolfgang.benedek@uni-graz.at"
target="_blank"><mailto:wolfgang.benedek@uni-graz.at></a> <a
class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:wolfgang.benedek@uni-graz.at"
target="_blank">wolfgang.benedek@uni-graz.at</a>)
</pre></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><pre>wrote:
</pre></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><pre>As
a participant and speaker in the UNESCO conference Connecting the
</pre></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote
type="cite"><pre>dots: Options for future action in Paris I think it is
important to
</pre></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote
type="cite"><pre>put the record straight: the main purpose of the
conference was to
</pre></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote
type="cite"><pre>give feedback to the UNESCO draft Internet study and
advise on the
</pre></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote
type="cite"><pre>future priorities in this field. This was done in several
plenary and
</pre></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote
type="cite"><pre>16 breakout sessions in a MSH-approach quite successfully.
</pre></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote
type="cite"><pre>The fact that two concepts important to some did not make
it into the
</pre></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote
type="cite"><pre>outcome document should not be overestimated as this is
all work in
</pre></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote
type="cite"><pre>progress. Also other concepts dear to others were not or
only partly
</pre></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote
type="cite"><pre>included. I also do not remember that these concepts were
elaborated
</pre></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote
type="cite"><pre>on during the sessions or panels in any significant way in
order to
</pre></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote
type="cite"><pre>deepen their understanding.
</pre></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote
type="cite"></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote
type="cite"><pre>Wolfgang Benedek
</pre></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote
type="cite"></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote
type="cite"></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><pre>Dear Mr. Benedek,
</pre></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"></blockquote><blockquote
type="cite"><pre>thanks for this, for this type of, clarification - using only
</pre></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><pre>formalities like
"Also other concepts dear to others were not or
only
</pre></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><pre>partly included."
</pre></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"></blockquote><blockquote
type="cite"><pre>I cannot easily imagine what kind of "other concept" of a
similar
</pre></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><pre>importance and weight could
be lined up with "democracy." I
would
</pre></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><pre>appreciate it if you, as a
participant in this UNESCO conference, could
</pre></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><pre>share some of these
"other concepts" which were also not, or
only
</pre></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><pre>partially, included.
</pre></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"></blockquote><blockquote
type="cite"><pre>Thanks in advance,
</pre></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"></blockquote><blockquote
type="cite"><pre>Norbert Klein
</pre></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><pre>Cambodia
</pre></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"></blockquote><blockquote
type="cite"></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"></blockquote><blockquote
type="cite"></blockquote><pre>
</pre><br><fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"
target="_blank"></fieldset><br><pre>____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated"
href="mailto:governance@lists.igcaucus.org"
target="_blank">governance@lists.igcaucus.org</a>
To be removed from the list, visit:
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing"
target="_blank">http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing</a>
For all other list information and functions, see:
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance"
target="_blank">http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance</a>
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.igcaucus.org/"
target="_blank">http://www.igcaucus.org/</a>
Translate this email: <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="http://translate.google.com/translate_t"
target="_blank">http://translate.google.com/translate_t</a>
</pre></blockquote><br><br><fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"
target="_blank"></fieldset><br><pre>____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated"
href="mailto:bestbits@lists.bestbits.net"
target="_blank">bestbits@lists.bestbits.net</a>.
To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit:
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits"
target="_blank">http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits</a></pre></blockquote><br></div></div></div>____________________________________________________________<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 class="aqm-autolink aqm-autowrap"
href="http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing">http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing</a><br><br>For
all other list information and functions, see:<br><a
class="aqm-autolink aqm-autowrap"
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
class="aqm-autolink aqm-autowrap"
href="http://www.igcaucus.org/">http://www.igcaucus.org/</a><br><br>Translate
this email:<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><a
class="aqm-autolink aqm-autowrap"
href="http://translate.google.com/translate_t">http://translate.google.com/translate_t</a><br><br></blockquote></div></div>____________________________________________________________<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:<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><a
href="http://translate.google.com/translate_t">http://translate.google.com/translate_t</a><br></div></span></blockquote></div><br></blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</body>
</html>