[bestbits] Re: Multi-Equal Stakeholderism

[Pranesh Prakash]

Avri Doria [2013-11-30 15:22]:
> I don't know about how many government types use their government
> email l. Not sure i understand why that matters. We see bunches using
> other addresses in IGF space, so I am nor sure it is a clear
> indicator. In any case I will see if there are any stats.

I guess one other way to look at it would be to ask:
  * Has any government official ever co-authored an RFC?
  * Has any government official (especially non-US) ever participated in
IETF discussions in an official capacity?

McTim [2013-11-30 18:19]:
> It's a great example.  Can you name other settings in Internet policy that
> has folks operating as equals without being divided by silos?  Where
> government folks and CS and people who run telco networks all have the same
> status?

Who are these "government folks" that are being talked about?  Sure,
they're "free" to come join the discussion, but unless they are actually
part of the discussions, it makes little sense to talk of them having
the "same status".[1]  Formal equality vs. actual equality.

Please note, I'm not making an argument that IETF should change and try
and get government participation.  I'm just saying that governments
haven't participated in IETF.

  [1]: On the moon ants and antelopes have the same status.

-- 
Pranesh Prakash
Policy Director
Centre for Internet and Society
T: +91 80 40926283 | W: http://cis-india.org
PGP ID: 0x1D5C5F07 | Twitter: @pranesh_prakash
--------------------
Access to Knowledge Fellow
Information Society Project, Yale Law School
T: +1 520 314 7147 | W: http://yaleisp.org

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/bestbits/attachments/20131202/5805ba19/attachment.sig>