[bestbits] Anatel blog post: Operationalizing the role of governments in internet governance

[Nick Ashton-Hart]

As I said, I don't think your assumption is necessarily the only reasonable
interpretation of the blog. I think I will stop here, I don't really care
to argue about what a third party may or may not have meant - but if you
really do, I suggest you just ask the Brazilians. Entirely your choice.
On 6 Jun 2013 12:25, "parminder" <parminder at itforchange.net> wrote:

>
> On Thursday 06 June 2013 03:45 PM, Nick Ashton-Hart wrote:
>
> Dear Parminder,
>
>  I wouldn't be willing to make that assumption, personally. Why not ask
> them what they meant? I, personally, suspect they did not intend it to be
> limited in the way you suggest, but neither of us really knows for sure.
>
>
> Dear Nick, I am going by what has been described as an 'anatel blog'. in
> any case written by a senior official of anatel. So, it is really not an
> 'assumption', right!...  parminder
>
>
>
>  On 6 Jun 2013, at 11:32, parminder <parminder at itforchange.net> wrote:
>
> Does this leave anyone in any doubt whatsoever that Brazil meant just the
> ICANN system by its phrase 'Multistakeholder framework of Internet
> governance', and *not* the entire realm of global Internet governance. This
> is about GAC and governments' unhappiness with the present set up....
>
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/bestbits/attachments/20130606/df9f185e/attachment.htm>