From Andrew at global-partners.co.uk Fri Mar 1 06:49:27 2013 From: Andrew at global-partners.co.uk (Andrew Puddephatt) Date: Fri, 1 Mar 2013 11:49:27 +0000 Subject: [bestbits] Report on Best Bits meeting at UNESCO WSIS plus 10 Paris February 2013 Message-ID: At the UNESCO WSIS plus 10 meeting we had an informal gathering of those Best Bits (BB) participants who were present at the event - about 25 people in total. We took the opportunity to review the usefulness of the Best Bits process and arrived at the following consensus about the potential roles for BB: * To convene a BB regular forum before major international events such as the ITU, IGF etc. to provide an opportunity to share information and develop co-ordinated CS positions on those events; * The emphasis of BB should be to convene to take action which means identifying, where possible, common CS positions and acting upon them as we did at the WCIT; BB is therefore different to more discussion based forums such as the IG caucus; * This will require some degree of organisation. Though specific events can be organised by the relevant groups on the ground (APC offered to organise the pre-Bali IGF BB event) there are a number of tasks that need to be carried out if the network to function. These include - maintaining the website as an information source about activities; developing a wiki calendar of events that allows BB to share details of who's going to what meetings; using the website to report back to the wider BB community on positions and actions taken, so strengthening our own accountability and transparency; maintaining the e-mail list and processing new people who want to join as well deregistering those who want to leave. * People have offered to take on different tasks (Access, Global Voices, APC etc.). Global Partners are already developing a calendar of events that could be the basis of a wiki on the website allowing people to signify events they are attending. Jeremy Malcolm from CI has indicated that he is willing to maintain the web and mailing list; Deborah from Access has also offered to help - any other offers please let me know; 5. At the BB official workshop we discussed a paper from Jeremy Malcolm looking at issues of internet governance. It analysed the deficiencies of the current internet governance model as well as suggesting a way forward. The overall conclusions of the formal discussion were: * We highlighted our concerns that current internet governance mechanisms are deficient. For example, they are unable to successfully address inequalities in internet access, threats to data privacy and network neutrality. * Participants acknowledged that governments do have a legitimate role to play in internet governance, for example in the areas outlined above. * In this context, we felt that the best way forward is to develop and grow the IGF by, for example, enabling the IGF to issue soft law in the form of recommendations or declarations. * Alongside enhancing the IGF it is essential that we address current accountability and transparency deficiencies of the IGF. Clearly there are many issues here that need further discussion. To that end we suggest that Jeremy's paper is circulated on the BB list and discussed with the goal of arriving at an agreed CS position at the Bali IGF BB event. In the informal meeting an new initiative called the "Web we want" was mentioned, initiated at a meeting in the Berkman Center in the US, with the support of Tim Berners-Lee. This initiative hopes to set out what kind of internet we would like to see being built over the next period of time. There was some concern expressed at the proliferation of initiatives but in the end we suggested we incorporate it as one of the themes for discussion in the run up to Bali alongside the issue of governance. So if BB participants are happy the meeting in Bali would have two purposes: to agree a CSO position on governance and a CS position on the web we want. In the meantime a calendar of events will be set up on the BB website so that we can indicate who is attending forthcoming meetings of the ITU and CSTD etc. so that we can consult online about strategy and tactics as will as co-ordinate our advocacy while at the meetings. Andrew Puddephatt, Director Global Partners & Associates Direct: +44 (0)20 7549 0336 Office: +44 (0)20 7549 0350 Mobile: +44 (0)771 339 9597 Email: andrew at global-partners.co.uk Address: Development House, 56-64 Leonard St, London EC2A 4LT, UK www.global-partners.co.uk -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From nb at bollow.ch Thu Mar 14 03:50:13 2013 From: nb at bollow.ch (Norbert Bollow) Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2013 08:50:13 +0100 Subject: [Fwd: [bestbits] Best Bits meeting plans for the 2013 IGF] In-Reply-To: <51417B4D.7090109@itforchange.net> References: <9f7db1d07be675a4910c806c46571f3c.squirrel@www.itforchange.net> <51417B4D.7090109@itforchange.net> Message-ID: <20130314085013.2d696116@quill.bollow.ch> Parminder wrote: > This looks like a very well done and purposeful agenda/ work plan . .. +1 Greetings, Norbert > > > parminder > > ---------------------------- Original Message > ---------------------------- Subject: [bestbits] Best Bits meeting > plans for the 2013 IGF From: "Jeremy Malcolm" > Date: Thu, March 14, 2013 12:07 am > To: bestbits at lists.igcaucus.org > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Hello all, > > This is to follow on from Andrew's summary of the informal Best Bits > meeting in Paris. If you can't find it, it is available in the web > archives of this list at http://lists.igcaucus.org/arc/bestbits. > (Thanks also to Deborah for forwarding the notice about the short > deadline for IGF workshop proposals.) > > On the basis of suggestions and offers made so far, here is what we > are proposing for Best Bits in 2013. It follows from the discussions > in Paris, but is just a rough outline and it is still open for your > comments: > > * A two-day pre-IGF Best Bits meeting on the weekend of 19-20 > October in Bali, with an overall theme around a positive agenda for > Internet governance, which (like last time) will split into two very > practical agenda items, one of them substantive ("what we want"), > and the other procedural ("how we can get it"): > o Identifying common civil society strategies for advancing a > human rights Internet. This can incorporate related > initiatives such as the IGF MAG's newly-established Internet > principles working group, and the "Web We Want" initiative that a > number of those from this list are involved with. > o A positive agenda for the evolution of Internet governance > arrangements. This will tie in with the work of the CSTD > Working Group on Enhanced Cooperation. The output of this > would be a common civil society position on an enhanced cooperation > mechanism or process (perhaps IGF-based) that we could > support. > * Two public IGF workshops that would present each of the two > agenda items above to a wider audience, and would include > participation by representatives of the other stakeholder groups. > Global Partners is working on text for the workshop proposals, and > will post them for comment when ready. > > Meanwhile I am fundraising now to get some more travel funds for those > who will need it, and indeed to broaden the funding base compared to > last time. The funds will also be used for a permanent website, > including a rather sophisticated event calendar, which will begin as a > rather less sophisticated event calendar, and grow features > progressively. > > If you have any comments on the above outline please share them. > Thanks! > From gurstein at gmail.com Thu Mar 14 04:25:19 2013 From: gurstein at gmail.com (michael gurstein) Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2013 01:25:19 -0700 Subject: [bestbits] Best Bits meeting plans for the 2013 IGF In-Reply-To: <5141773E.1070901@ciroap.org> References: <5141773E.1070901@ciroap.org> Message-ID: <117f01ce208d$7dcc9480$7965bd80$@gmail.com> Jeremy and all. As some of you know I found the WSIS +10 Information Society (IS) "track" extremely disappointing (I won't go into detail which I covered in a blogpost. Clearly the attention and the energy at that meeting was on the IG elements (probably having to do with the split in responsibilities between UNESCO (IS) and ITU (IG). But that aside and pointing to my initial and then Anita's definitive interventions at the WSIS +10 plenaries there are multiple issues arising around IS and including some very significant interweaving with IG issues that nobody seems to be very interested in addressing--but they are one's which I think we have a responsibility to address and an opportunity to take hold of and particularly towards and in the context of WSIS +10 in 2015 (and the increasingly inter-linked MDG's 15> and the establishment of a new round of Sustainable Development goals (not to speak of the Climate Change issues)). It does not serve our "interests" I think, to artificially maintain distinctions among these processes since, as we all know, ICTs are now necessary and constituent elements of all of these processes/issue areas (the UNDP as an example is at this moment attempting to rework the MDG's in an ICT context not only for the post MDG 15 period but to try to accerate the achievement of the MDG's prior to 2015). And particularly I don't think that we should allow WSIS +10 to disappear off the policy radar (as many Developed Countries appear quite anxious to ensure)--given the historical and continuing role that the WSIS process played in the development of CS in this area and the way in which it allows our IG focussed IGC/BB and related activities to link into much broader and more diverse constituencies. The WSIS issues have evolved but continue--access and use, gender, ICT and Development, rights and use by those with disabilities, indigenous peoples and so on; and as well of course, there are the issues that overlap with IG matters and which are of continuing concern viz. privacy, Human Rights and/on the Internet, free expression and so on--and now these need to be re-refracted through technology updates--broadband and mobiles; and perhaps most important we must begin to address some issues that were lurking but uncommented on in the original WSIS context--particularly around issues of digitally induced inequality in opportunity, income and power. I think that we would be very remiss not to spend some time reviewing these "IS" issues and strategizing on how to move these forward alongside and particularly as part of the increasingly visible and significant IG processes -- including within the IGF but also toward WSIS +10 and beyond. Best to all, Mike From: bestbits-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:bestbits-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Jeremy Malcolm Sent: Thursday, March 14, 2013 12:08 AM To: Subject: [bestbits] Best Bits meeting plans for the 2013 IGF Hello all, This is to follow on from Andrew's summary of the informal Best Bits meeting in Paris. If you can't find it, it is available in the web archives of this list at http://lists.igcaucus.org/arc/bestbits. (Thanks also to Deborah for forwarding the notice about the short deadline for IGF workshop proposals.) On the basis of suggestions and offers made so far, here is what we are proposing for Best Bits in 2013. It follows from the discussions in Paris, but is just a rough outline and it is still open for your comments: * A two-day pre-IGF Best Bits meeting on the weekend of 19-20 October in Bali, with an overall theme around a positive agenda for Internet governance, which (like last time) will split into two very practical agenda items, one of them substantive ("what we want"), and the other procedural ("how we can get it"): * Identifying common civil society strategies for advancing a human rights Internet. This can incorporate related initiatives such as the IGF MAG's newly-established Internet principles working group, and the "Web We Want" initiative that a number of those from this list are involved with. * A positive agenda for the evolution of Internet governance arrangements. This will tie in with the work of the CSTD Working Group on Enhanced Cooperation. The output of this would be a common civil society position on an enhanced cooperation mechanism or process (perhaps IGF-based) that we could support. * Two public IGF workshops that would present each of the two agenda items above to a wider audience, and would include participation by representatives of the other stakeholder groups. Global Partners is working on text for the workshop proposals, and will post them for comment when ready. Meanwhile I am fundraising now to get some more travel funds for those who will need it, and indeed to broaden the funding base compared to last time. The funds will also be used for a permanent website, including a rather sophisticated event calendar, which will begin as a rather less sophisticated event calendar, and grow features progressively. If you have any comments on the above outline please share them. Thanks! -- Dr Jeremy Malcolm Senior Policy Officer Consumers International | the global campaigning voice for consumers Office for Asia-Pacific and the Middle East Lot 5-1 Wisma WIM, 7 Jalan Abang Haji Openg, TTDI, 60000 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia Tel: +60 3 7726 1599 WCRD 2013 - Consumer Justice Now! | Consumer Protection Map: https://wcrd2013.crowdmap.com/main | #wcrd2013 @Consumers_Int | www.consumersinternational.org | www.facebook.com/consumersinternational Read our email confidentiality notice . Don't print this email unless necessary. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From anriette at apc.org Thu Mar 14 05:08:13 2013 From: anriette at apc.org (Anriette Esterhuysen) Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2013 11:08:13 +0200 Subject: Fwd: [Fwd: [bestbits] Best Bits meeting plans for the 2013 IGF] In-Reply-To: <51417F53.4070907@ciroap.org> References: <9f7db1d07be675a4910c806c46571f3c.squirrel@www.itforchange.net> <51417B4D.7090109@itforchange.net> <51417DB1.80001@apc.org> <51417F53.4070907@ciroap.org> Message-ID: <5141937D.8030206@apc.org> No hassle Jeremy.. but we would need to knowabout numbers soonish.. and also if people might be willing to share. We once used the most wonderful place in Ubud and with people sharing 'villas' it worked out really cheaply. Anriette On 14/03/2013 09:42, Jeremy Malcolm wrote: > On 14/03/13 15:35, Anriette Esterhuysen wrote: >> Yes... agree. Looks good. And APC's offer to help organise working >> with Donny and with our members and partners in Indonesia still stands. > Thanks Anriette, I should have acknowledged that in the email! > -- ------------------------------------------------------ anriette esterhuysen anriette at apc.org executive director, association for progressive communications www.apc.org po box 29755, melville 2109 south africa tel/fax +27 11 726 1692 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From farooq at ciroap.org Thu Mar 14 07:11:24 2013 From: farooq at ciroap.org (Farooq Ahmed Jam) Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2013 19:11:24 +0800 Subject: [bestbits] Best Bits meeting plans for the 2013 IGF In-Reply-To: <5141773E.1070901@ciroap.org> References: <5141773E.1070901@ciroap.org> Message-ID: <5141B05C.5060505@ciroap.org> Dear Jeremy, The two point agenda seems good enough to keep the best bits participants focused on outcomes and will help in finalizing the content to further support the upcoming workshops. I am happy with agenda and expected outcomes. As per Baku best bits, are we going to develop an agreed statement?. As there may be a difference of opinion among civil society members on " what we want" and " How we can get there". Thanks Farooq On 3/14/2013 3:07 PM, Jeremy Malcolm wrote: > Hello all, > > This is to follow on from Andrew's summary of the informal Best Bits > meeting in Paris. If you can't find it, it is available in the web > archives of this list at http://lists.igcaucus.org/arc/bestbits. > (Thanks also to Deborah for forwarding the notice about the short > deadline for IGF workshop proposals.) > > On the basis of suggestions and offers made so far, here is what we > are proposing for Best Bits in 2013. It follows from the discussions > in Paris, but is just a rough outline and it is still open for your > comments: > > * A two-day pre-IGF Best Bits meeting on the weekend of 19-20 > October in Bali, with an overall theme around a positive agenda > for Internet governance, which (like last time) will split into > two very practical agenda items, one of them substantive ("what we > want"), and the other procedural ("how we can get it"): > o Identifying common civil society strategies for advancing a > human rights Internet. This can incorporate related > initiatives such as the IGF MAG's newly-established Internet > principles working group, and the "Web We Want" initiative > that a number of those from this list are involved with. > o A positive agenda for the evolution of Internet governance > arrangements. This will tie in with the work of the CSTD > Working Group on Enhanced Cooperation. The output of this > would be a common civil society position on an enhanced > cooperation mechanism or process (perhaps IGF-based) that we > could support. > * Two public IGF workshops that would present each of the two agenda > items above to a wider audience, and would include participation > by representatives of the other stakeholder groups. Global > Partners is working on text for the workshop proposals, and will > post them for comment when ready. > > Meanwhile I am fundraising now to get some more travel funds for those > who will need it, and indeed to broaden the funding base compared to > last time. The funds will also be used for a permanent website, > including a rather sophisticated event calendar, which will begin as a > rather less sophisticated event calendar, and grow features progressively. > > If you have any comments on the above outline please share them. Thanks! > > -- > > *Dr Jeremy Malcolm > Senior Policy Officer > Consumers International | the global campaigning voice for consumers* > Office for Asia-Pacific and the Middle East > Lot 5-1 Wisma WIM, 7 Jalan Abang Haji Openg, TTDI, 60000 Kuala Lumpur, > Malaysia > Tel: +60 3 7726 1599 > > WCRD 2013 -- Consumer Justice Now! | Consumer Protection Map: > https://wcrd2013.crowdmap.com/main | #wcrd2013 > > @Consumers_Int | www.consumersinternational.org > | > www.facebook.com/consumersinternational > > > Read our email confidentiality notice > . Don't > print this email unless necessary. > -- *Farooq Ahmed Jam Intern Consumers International | the global campaigning voice for consumers* Office for Asia-Pacific and the Middle East Lot 5-1 Wisma WIM, 7 Jalan Abang Haji Openg, TTDI, 60000 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia Tel: +60 3 7726 1599 *Your rights, our mission -- download CI's Strategy 2015:* http://consint.info/RightsMission @Consumers_Int | www.consumersinternational.org | www.facebook.com/consumersinternational Read our email confidentiality notice . Don't print this email unless necessary. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rrangnath at publicknowledge.org Thu Mar 14 10:15:43 2013 From: rrangnath at publicknowledge.org (Rashmi Rangnath) Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2013 10:15:43 -0400 Subject: [bestbits] Comments asking ICANN to deny application for .pharmacy registration Message-ID: All: I thought many of you may be interested in this application that Public Citizen filed opposing the National Association of Boards of Pharmacy's (NABP) application for the .pharmacy TLD. Public Citizen is concerned that the registration would allow the NABP to exclude licensed pharmacies located in Canada from acquiring domain names under .pharmacy. This would prevent access to affordable medicines for many in the US. A link to Public Citizen's comments is here: https://gtldcomment.icann.org/comments-feedback/applicationcomment/commentdetails/12145 -- Best, Rashmi Rashmi Rangnath Director, Global Knowledge Initiative and Staff Attorney Public Knowledge 1818 N Street NW Suite 410 Washington, D.C. 20036 202 861 0020 rrangnath at publicknowledge.org ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From nb at bollow.ch Fri Mar 15 04:32:34 2013 From: nb at bollow.ch (Norbert Bollow) Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2013 09:32:34 +0100 Subject: [bestbits] Best Bits meeting plans for the 2013 IGF In-Reply-To: <117f01ce208d$7dcc9480$7965bd80$@gmail.com> References: <5141773E.1070901@ciroap.org> <117f01ce208d$7dcc9480$7965bd80$@gmail.com> Message-ID: <20130315093234.377a7dc3@quill.bollow.ch> Michael Gurstein wrote: > pointing to my initial and then Anita's definitive > interventions at the WSIS +10 plenaries there are multiple issues > arising around IS and including some very significant interweaving > with IG issues that nobody seems to be very interested in > addressing--but they are one's which I think we have a responsibility > to address and an opportunity to take hold of and particularly > towards and in the context of WSIS +10 in 2015 (and the increasingly > inter-linked MDG's 15> and the establishment of a new round of > Sustainable Development goals (not to speak of the Climate Change > issues)). Good point. It will certainly be worthwhile to devote some time at the Best Bits meeting at Bali to discuss how these important issues can be effectively put on the agenda of the discussions that matter. > And particularly I don't think that we should allow WSIS +10 to > disappear off the policy radar (as many Developed Countries appear > quite anxious to ensure)--given the historical and continuing role > that the WSIS process played in the development of CS in this area > and the way in which it allows our IG focussed IGC/BB and related > activities to link into much broader and more diverse constituencies. Agreed. Furthermore, it is important to get civil society actors from outside the Internet governance community more involved. Maybe, in addition to addressing these matters at the Best Bits meeting in Bali, we need to think about organizing a pre-event in the spirit of Best Bits (but maybe with a different name corresponding to a less technology-centered focus) to an international event where the chances are optimal for effectively introducing the family of issues that you're thinking about into the mainstream of discourse of international policy shaping. > I think that we would be very remiss not to spend some time reviewing > these "IS" issues and strategizing on how to move these forward > alongside and particularly as part of the increasingly visible and > significant IG processes -- including within the IGF but also toward > WSIS +10 and beyond. +1 Greetings, Norbert From parminder at itforchange.net Fri Mar 15 04:47:29 2013 From: parminder at itforchange.net (parminder) Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2013 14:17:29 +0530 Subject: [bestbits] Best Bits meeting plans for the 2013 IGF In-Reply-To: <20130315093234.377a7dc3@quill.bollow.ch> References: <5141773E.1070901@ciroap.org> <117f01ce208d$7dcc9480$7965bd80$@gmail.com> <20130315093234.377a7dc3@quill.bollow.ch> Message-ID: <5142E021.3090204@itforchange.net> On Friday 15 March 2013 02:02 PM, Norbert Bollow wrote: > Michael Gurstein wrote: > > Agreed. > > Furthermore, it is important to get civil society actors from outside > the Internet governance community more involved. Maybe, in addition to > addressing these matters at the Best Bits meeting in Bali, we need to > think about organizing a pre-event in the spirit of Best Bits (but > maybe with a different name corresponding to a less technology-centered > focus) to an international event where the chances are optimal for > effectively introducing the family of issues that you're thinking about > into the mainstream of discourse of international policy shaping. Something in the spirit of the 'world we want' and then proceed to discussing the 'web we want' for the 'world we want'. We can invite participation from non IG global and sub global civil society bodies, most of whom do now have an interest to see how IG connects to their work (and most now believe that it does in some basic though largely unclear ways) . Maybe many of them want to come and join in, but there are no good enough and appropriate docking points made available to them, in a manner that look at things in a manner that they traditionally look at. Such actors coming for such an event where they will get introduced to the world of IG can then also lead to a much needed more diverse participation in the IGF... .. parminder > >> I think that we would be very remiss not to spend some time reviewing >> these "IS" issues and strategizing on how to move these forward >> alongside and particularly as part of the increasingly visible and >> significant IG processes -- including within the IGF but also toward >> WSIS +10 and beyond. > +1 > > Greetings, > Norbert > > From parminder at itforchange.net Fri Mar 15 05:01:25 2013 From: parminder at itforchange.net (parminder) Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2013 14:31:25 +0530 Subject: [bestbits] Best Bits meeting plans for the 2013 IGF In-Reply-To: <5142E021.3090204@itforchange.net> References: <5141773E.1070901@ciroap.org> <117f01ce208d$7dcc9480$7965bd80$@gmail.com> <20130315093234.377a7dc3@quill.bollow.ch> <5142E021.3090204@itforchange.net> Message-ID: <5142E365.6060404@itforchange.net> I know I am getting increasingly and perhaps unsustainable ambitious, but maybe we can hold an 'Internet social forum' and then proceed to more focussed strategising in the bestbits meeting. I think a core/ real civil society in the Internet area needs to be recovered from the unclear ambiguous gooey mass that what goes for the IG civil society has increasingly become.... Perhaps just being too radical (and a bit modernist in a highly post modernist Internet world), which is not a bad thing to do once in a while :) parminder On Friday 15 March 2013 02:17 PM, parminder wrote: > > On Friday 15 March 2013 02:02 PM, Norbert Bollow wrote: >> Michael Gurstein wrote: >> >> Agreed. >> >> Furthermore, it is important to get civil society actors from outside >> the Internet governance community more involved. Maybe, in addition to >> addressing these matters at the Best Bits meeting in Bali, we need to >> think about organizing a pre-event in the spirit of Best Bits (but >> maybe with a different name corresponding to a less technology-centered >> focus) to an international event where the chances are optimal for >> effectively introducing the family of issues that you're thinking about >> into the mainstream of discourse of international policy shaping. > > Something in the spirit of the 'world we want' and then proceed to > discussing the 'web we want' for the 'world we want'. > > We can invite participation from non IG global and sub global civil > society bodies, most of whom do now have an interest to see how IG > connects to their work (and most now believe that it does in some > basic though largely unclear ways) . Maybe many of them want to come > and join in, but there are no good enough and appropriate docking > points made available to them, in a manner that look at things in a > manner that they traditionally look at. > > Such actors coming for such an event where they will get introduced to > the world of IG can then also lead to a much needed more diverse > participation in the IGF... > > > .. parminder > >> >>> I think that we would be very remiss not to spend some time reviewing >>> these "IS" issues and strategizing on how to move these forward >>> alongside and particularly as part of the increasingly visible and >>> significant IG processes -- including within the IGF but also toward >>> WSIS +10 and beyond. >> +1 >> >> Greetings, >> Norbert >> >> > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From nashton at consensus.pro Fri Mar 15 05:19:53 2013 From: nashton at consensus.pro (Nick Ashton-Hart) Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2013 09:19:53 +0000 Subject: [bestbits] Best Bits meeting plans for the 2013 IGF In-Reply-To: <5142E365.6060404@itforchange.net> References: <5141773E.1070901@ciroap.org> <117f01ce208d$7dcc9480$7965bd80$@gmail.com> <20130315093234.377a7dc3@quill.bollow.ch> <5142E021.3090204@itforchange.net> <5142E365.6060404@itforchange.net> Message-ID: <0000013d6d592b19-337ddd49-68f7-4d53-bc73-7885007679ad-000000@email.amazonses.com> Dear All, As I've mentioned to a few people privately, you should look a the World We Want process - here, and the civil-society-specific part here - which is based around post-2015 MDG followup. There's an obvious opportunity to get the Internet community more engaged in that process as there is vice-versa. Right now IG and post-2015 MDGs are really disconnected. Given the obvious opportunity to leverage ICTs to deliver real value in that process, this seems like something civil society should care very much about changing. On 15 Mar 2013, at 10:01, parminder wrote: > > > I know I am getting increasingly and perhaps unsustainable ambitious, but maybe we can hold an 'Internet social forum' and then proceed to more focussed strategising in the bestbits meeting. > > I think a core/ real civil society in the Internet area needs to be recovered from the unclear ambiguous gooey mass that what goes for the IG civil society has increasingly become.... > > Perhaps just being too radical (and a bit modernist in a highly post modernist Internet world), which is not a bad thing to do once in a while :) > > parminder > > > On Friday 15 March 2013 02:17 PM, parminder wrote: >> >> On Friday 15 March 2013 02:02 PM, Norbert Bollow wrote: >>> Michael Gurstein wrote: >>> >>> Agreed. >>> >>> Furthermore, it is important to get civil society actors from outside >>> the Internet governance community more involved. Maybe, in addition to >>> addressing these matters at the Best Bits meeting in Bali, we need to >>> think about organizing a pre-event in the spirit of Best Bits (but >>> maybe with a different name corresponding to a less technology-centered >>> focus) to an international event where the chances are optimal for >>> effectively introducing the family of issues that you're thinking about >>> into the mainstream of discourse of international policy shaping. >> >> Something in the spirit of the 'world we want' and then proceed to discussing the 'web we want' for the 'world we want'. >> >> We can invite participation from non IG global and sub global civil society bodies, most of whom do now have an interest to see how IG connects to their work (and most now believe that it does in some basic though largely unclear ways) . Maybe many of them want to come and join in, but there are no good enough and appropriate docking points made available to them, in a manner that look at things in a manner that they traditionally look at. >> >> Such actors coming for such an event where they will get introduced to the world of IG can then also lead to a much needed more diverse participation in the IGF... >> >> >> .. parminder >> >>> >>>> I think that we would be very remiss not to spend some time reviewing >>>> these "IS" issues and strategizing on how to move these forward >>>> alongside and particularly as part of the increasingly visible and >>>> significant IG processes -- including within the IGF but also toward >>>> WSIS +10 and beyond. >>> +1 >>> >>> Greetings, >>> Norbert >>> >>> >> >> >> > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Andrew at global-partners.co.uk Fri Mar 15 11:39:43 2013 From: Andrew at global-partners.co.uk (Andrew Puddephatt) Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2013 15:39:43 +0000 Subject: [bestbits] Best Bits meeting plans for the 2013 IGF In-Reply-To: <5142E365.6060404@itforchange.net> References: <5141773E.1070901@ciroap.org> <117f01ce208d$7dcc9480$7965bd80$@gmail.com> <20130315093234.377a7dc3@quill.bollow.ch> <5142E021.3090204@itforchange.net> <5142E365.6060404@itforchange.net> Message-ID: Interesting idea Parminder - how could we make it work? Andrew Puddephatt, Director Global Partners & Associates Direct: +44 (0)20 7549 0336 Office: +44 (0)20 7549 0350 Mobile: +44 (0)771 339 9597 Email: andrew at global-partners.co.uk Address: Development House, 56-64 Leonard St, London EC2A 4LT, UK www.global-partners.co.uk From: bestbits-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:bestbits-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of parminder Sent: 15 March 2013 09:01 To: bestbits at lists.igcaucus.org Subject: Re: [bestbits] Best Bits meeting plans for the 2013 IGF I know I am getting increasingly and perhaps unsustainable ambitious, but maybe we can hold an 'Internet social forum' and then proceed to more focussed strategising in the bestbits meeting. I think a core/ real civil society in the Internet area needs to be recovered from the unclear ambiguous gooey mass that what goes for the IG civil society has increasingly become.... Perhaps just being too radical (and a bit modernist in a highly post modernist Internet world), which is not a bad thing to do once in a while :) parminder On Friday 15 March 2013 02:17 PM, parminder wrote: On Friday 15 March 2013 02:02 PM, Norbert Bollow wrote: Michael Gurstein wrote: Agreed. Furthermore, it is important to get civil society actors from outside the Internet governance community more involved. Maybe, in addition to addressing these matters at the Best Bits meeting in Bali, we need to think about organizing a pre-event in the spirit of Best Bits (but maybe with a different name corresponding to a less technology-centered focus) to an international event where the chances are optimal for effectively introducing the family of issues that you're thinking about into the mainstream of discourse of international policy shaping. Something in the spirit of the 'world we want' and then proceed to discussing the 'web we want' for the 'world we want'. We can invite participation from non IG global and sub global civil society bodies, most of whom do now have an interest to see how IG connects to their work (and most now believe that it does in some basic though largely unclear ways) . Maybe many of them want to come and join in, but there are no good enough and appropriate docking points made available to them, in a manner that look at things in a manner that they traditionally look at. Such actors coming for such an event where they will get introduced to the world of IG can then also lead to a much needed more diverse participation in the IGF... .. parminder I think that we would be very remiss not to spend some time reviewing these "IS" issues and strategizing on how to move these forward alongside and particularly as part of the increasingly visible and significant IG processes -- including within the IGF but also toward WSIS +10 and beyond. +1 Greetings, Norbert -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kbankston at cdt.org Fri Mar 1 10:37:52 2013 From: kbankston at cdt.org (Kevin Bankston) Date: Fri, 1 Mar 2013 10:37:52 -0500 Subject: [bestbits] Report on Best Bits meeting at UNESCO WSIS plus 10 Paris February 2013 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <16BFC7F5-FC54-4ABD-A8DC-15C344A3A949@cdt.org> Hi Andrew-- Thank you so much for this comprehensive report out. Emma and I regret that we weren't able to join you all this time but we are glad that Matthew could, and we all look forward to CDT's continuing participation in Best Bits in whatever capacity we can be most useful. Best, Kevin ____________________________________ Kevin S. Bankston Senior Counsel and Free Expression Director Center for Democracy & Technology 1634 I St NW, Suite 1100 Washington, DC 20006 202.407.8834 direct 202.637.0968 fax kbankston at cdt.org Follow CDT on Twitter at @cendemtech On Mar 1, 2013, at 6:49 AM, Andrew Puddephatt wrote: > At the UNESCO WSIS plus 10 meeting we had an informal gathering of those Best Bits (BB) participants who were present at the event – about 25 people in total. We took the opportunity to review the usefulness of the Best Bits process and arrived at the following consensus about the potential roles for BB: > · To convene a BB regular forum before major international events such as the ITU, IGF etc. to provide an opportunity to share information and develop co-ordinated CS positions on those events; > · The emphasis of BB should be to convene to take action which means identifying, where possible, common CS positions and acting upon them as we did at the WCIT; BB is therefore different to more discussion based forums such as the IG caucus; > · This will require some degree of organisation. Though specific events can be organised by the relevant groups on the ground (APC offered to organise the pre-Bali IGF BB event) there are a number of tasks that need to be carried out if the network to function. These include - maintaining the website as an information source about activities; developing a wiki calendar of events that allows BB to share details of who’s going to what meetings; using the website to report back to the wider BB community on positions and actions taken, so strengthening our own accountability and transparency; maintaining the e-mail list and processing new people who want to join as well deregistering those who want to leave. > · People have offered to take on different tasks (Access, Global Voices, APC etc.). Global Partners are already developing a calendar of events that could be the basis of a wiki on the website allowing people to signify events they are attending. Jeremy Malcolm from CI has indicated that he is willing to maintain the web and mailing list; Deborah from Access has also offered to help – any other offers please let me know; > > 5. At the BB official workshop we discussed a paper from Jeremy Malcolm looking at issues of internet governance. It analysed the deficiencies of the current internet governance model as well as suggesting a way forward. The overall conclusions of the formal discussion were: > We highlighted our concerns that current internet governance mechanisms are deficient. For example, they are unable to successfully address inequalities in internet access, threats to data privacy and network neutrality. > Participants acknowledged that governments do have a legitimate role to play in internet governance, for example in the areas outlined above. > In this context, we felt that the best way forward is to develop and grow the IGF by, for example, enabling the IGF to issue soft law in the form of recommendations or declarations. > Alongside enhancing the IGF it is essential that we address current accountability and transparency deficiencies of the IGF. > Clearly there are many issues here that need further discussion. To that end we suggest that Jeremy’s paper is circulated on the BB list and discussed with the goal of arriving at an agreed CS position at the Bali IGF BB event. > > In the informal meeting an new initiative called the “Web we want” was mentioned, initiated at a meeting in the Berkman Center in the US, with the support of Tim Berners-Lee. This initiative hopes to set out what kind of internet we would like to see being built over the next period of time. There was some concern expressed at the proliferation of initiatives but in the end we suggested we incorporate it as one of the themes for discussion in the run up to Bali alongside the issue of governance. So if BB participants are happy the meeting in Bali would have two purposes: to agree a CSO position on governance and a CS position on the web we want. > > In the meantime a calendar of events will be set up on the BB website so that we can indicate who is attending forthcoming meetings of the ITU and CSTD etc. so that we can consult online about strategy and tactics as will as co-ordinate our advocacy while at the meetings. > > > Andrew Puddephatt, Director > Global Partners & Associates > > Direct: +44 (0)20 7549 0336 > Office: +44 (0)20 7549 0350 > Mobile: +44 (0)771 339 9597 > Email: andrew at global-partners.co.uk > Address: Development House, 56-64 Leonard St, London EC2A 4LT, UK > > www.global-partners.co.uk > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From gurstein at gmail.com Fri Mar 15 11:52:05 2013 From: gurstein at gmail.com (michael gurstein) Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2013 08:52:05 -0700 Subject: [bestbits] Best Bits meeting plans for the 2013 IGF In-Reply-To: References: <5141773E.1070901@ciroap.org> <117f01ce208d$7dcc9480$7965bd80$@gmail.com> <20130315093234.377a7dc3@quill.bollow.ch> <5142E021.3090204@itforchange.net> <5142E365.6060404@itforchange.net> Message-ID: <02c701ce2195$124d69b0$36e83d10$@gmail.com> It might be worth a try. I've had some very very preliminary discussions here in Vancouver with some environmental groups (coalitions of groups) concerning this (Vancouver is a hotspot for these groups). If there was a specific focal point event that we could promote to these groups it might motivate them to begin paying attention. M From: bestbits-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:bestbits-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Andrew Puddephatt Sent: Friday, March 15, 2013 8:40 AM To: parminder; bestbits at lists.igcaucus.org Subject: RE: [bestbits] Best Bits meeting plans for the 2013 IGF Interesting idea Parminder - how could we make it work? Andrew Puddephatt, Director Global Partners & Associates Direct: +44 (0)20 7549 0336 Office: +44 (0)20 7549 0350 Mobile: +44 (0)771 339 9597 Email: andrew at global-partners.co.uk Address: Development House, 56-64 Leonard St, London EC2A 4LT, UK www.global-partners.co.uk From: bestbits-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:bestbits-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of parminder Sent: 15 March 2013 09:01 To: bestbits at lists.igcaucus.org Subject: Re: [bestbits] Best Bits meeting plans for the 2013 IGF I know I am getting increasingly and perhaps unsustainable ambitious, but maybe we can hold an 'Internet social forum' and then proceed to more focussed strategising in the bestbits meeting. I think a core/ real civil society in the Internet area needs to be recovered from the unclear ambiguous gooey mass that what goes for the IG civil society has increasingly become.... Perhaps just being too radical (and a bit modernist in a highly post modernist Internet world), which is not a bad thing to do once in a while :) parminder On Friday 15 March 2013 02:17 PM, parminder wrote: On Friday 15 March 2013 02:02 PM, Norbert Bollow wrote: Michael Gurstein wrote: Agreed. Furthermore, it is important to get civil society actors from outside the Internet governance community more involved. Maybe, in addition to addressing these matters at the Best Bits meeting in Bali, we need to think about organizing a pre-event in the spirit of Best Bits (but maybe with a different name corresponding to a less technology-centered focus) to an international event where the chances are optimal for effectively introducing the family of issues that you're thinking about into the mainstream of discourse of international policy shaping. Something in the spirit of the 'world we want' and then proceed to discussing the 'web we want' for the 'world we want'. We can invite participation from non IG global and sub global civil society bodies, most of whom do now have an interest to see how IG connects to their work (and most now believe that it does in some basic though largely unclear ways) . Maybe many of them want to come and join in, but there are no good enough and appropriate docking points made available to them, in a manner that look at things in a manner that they traditionally look at. Such actors coming for such an event where they will get introduced to the world of IG can then also lead to a much needed more diverse participation in the IGF... .. parminder I think that we would be very remiss not to spend some time reviewing these "IS" issues and strategizing on how to move these forward alongside and particularly as part of the increasingly visible and significant IG processes -- including within the IGF but also toward WSIS +10 and beyond. +1 Greetings, Norbert -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ceo at bnnrc.net Fri Mar 15 22:56:55 2013 From: ceo at bnnrc.net (AHM Bazlur Rahman) Date: Sat, 16 Mar 2013 08:56:55 +0600 Subject: [bestbits] Best Bits meeting plans for the 2013 IGF In-Reply-To: References: <5141773E.1070901@ciroap.org> <117f01ce208d$7dcc9480$7965bd80$@gmail.com> <20130315093234.377a7dc3@quill.bollow.ch> <5142E021.3090204@itforchange.net> <5142E365.6060404@itforchange.net> Message-ID: We support to organise *Internet social forum* *from Bangladesh * With best regards, *Bazlu* ________________________ AHM. Bazlur Rahman-S21BR |* *Chief Executive Officer | Bangladesh NGOs Network for Radio and Communication (BNNRC) *[NGO in Special Consultative Status with the UN Economic and Social Council]* House: 13/3, Road: 2, Shaymoli, Dhaka-1207| Bangladesh Phone: +88-02-9130750| 9101479 | Cell: +88 01711881647 Fax: 88-02-9138501 | E-mail: ceo at bnnrc.net | bnnr cbd at gmail.com| www.bnnrc.net On 15 March 2013 21:39, Andrew Puddephatt wrote: > Interesting idea Parminder – how could we make it work?**** > > ** ** > > *Andrew Puddephatt, Director* **** > > *Global Partners & Associates* > > * * > > *Direct: *+44 (0)20 7549 0336**** > > *Office*: +44 (0)20 7549 0350**** > > *Mobile*: +44 (0)771 339 9597**** > > *Email*: andrew at global-partners.co.uk **** > > *Address*: Development House, 56-64 Leonard St, London EC2A 4LT, UK**** > > * * > > *www.global-partners.co.uk * > > ** ** > > *From:* bestbits-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto: > bestbits-request at lists.igcaucus.org] *On Behalf Of *parminder > *Sent:* 15 March 2013 09:01 > *To:* bestbits at lists.igcaucus.org > *Subject:* Re: [bestbits] Best Bits meeting plans for the 2013 IGF**** > > ** ** > > > > I know I am getting increasingly and perhaps unsustainable ambitious, but > maybe we can hold an 'Internet social forum' and then proceed to more > focussed strategising in the bestbits meeting. > > I think a core/ real civil society in the Internet area needs to be > recovered from the unclear ambiguous gooey mass that what goes for the IG > civil society has increasingly become.... > > Perhaps just being too radical (and a bit modernist in a highly post > modernist Internet world), which is not a bad thing to do once in a while :) > > parminder > > **** > > On Friday 15 March 2013 02:17 PM, parminder wrote:**** > > > On Friday 15 March 2013 02:02 PM, Norbert Bollow wrote: > > **** > > Michael Gurstein wrote: > > Agreed. > > Furthermore, it is important to get civil society actors from outside > the Internet governance community more involved. Maybe, in addition to > addressing these matters at the Best Bits meeting in Bali, we need to > think about organizing a pre-event in the spirit of Best Bits (but > maybe with a different name corresponding to a less technology-centered > focus) to an international event where the chances are optimal for > effectively introducing the family of issues that you're thinking about > into the mainstream of discourse of international policy shaping. **** > > > Something in the spirit of the 'world we want' and then proceed to > discussing the 'web we want' for the 'world we want'. > > We can invite participation from non IG global and sub global civil > society bodies, most of whom do now have an interest to see how IG connects > to their work (and most now believe that it does in some basic though > largely unclear ways) . Maybe many of them want to come and join in, but > there are no good enough and appropriate docking points made available to > them, in a manner that look at things in a manner that they traditionally > look at. > > Such actors coming for such an event where they will get introduced to the > world of IG can then also lead to a much needed more diverse participation > in the IGF... > > > .. parminder > > > **** > > > > **** > > I think that we would be very remiss not to spend some time reviewing > these "IS" issues and strategizing on how to move these forward > alongside and particularly as part of the increasingly visible and > significant IG processes -- including within the IGF but also toward > WSIS +10 and beyond. **** > > +1 > > Greetings, > Norbert > > **** > > > > **** > > ** ** > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From parminder at itforchange.net Sat Mar 16 01:08:12 2013 From: parminder at itforchange.net (parminder) Date: Sat, 16 Mar 2013 10:38:12 +0530 Subject: [bestbits] Best Bits meeting plans for the 2013 IGF In-Reply-To: References: <5141773E.1070901@ciroap.org> <117f01ce208d$7dcc9480$7965bd80$@gmail.com> <20130315093234.377a7dc3@quill.bollow.ch> <5142E021.3090204@itforchange.net> <5142E365.6060404@itforchange.net> Message-ID: <5143FE3C.7070703@itforchange.net> Thanks, Andrew, Michael, Tiffiniy and Bazlur for egging me on... So, let me begin thinking aloud along with all of you. What I am thinking is something on the lines of providing an open platform for some freelance (world social forum style), but also purposefully organised, civil society idealism around the Internet and the future of the world. We can have this Internet Social Forum (hence ISF) with the slogan 'the Internet/ web we need - for the world we want'. The Web We Want initiative can be a prominent part of this effort. We should also have slogans stressing the social construction of the Internet, a point missed by most, even those otherwise very socio-politically informed. We have to use slogans like 'Internet is what WE make it to be', or 'we together make the Internet', and so on.... The main purpose is to give an opportunity for different global and sub-global civil society groups in different areas - gender, climate, livelihoods, democracy, FoE, education, health, trade, access to knowledge etc - to explore and propose what is the Internet they need for addressing their respective issues. (Of course this will need close engagement with IG types with these groups to help them in this exercise, but such engagement should be /on the terms of these other groups/ and not the other way around, which is what is missing in IGF kind of spaces) I have interacted with many such groups, and I have a distinct expression that many of them would be interested in such an exercise, and perhaps fund themselves to come for such an event. We can also form issue-wise egroups beforehand, so that there is better chance or real outcomes at the actual event. However, we will try to remain focussed on 'what Internet/ web we need'. The above kind of CS (civil society) groups will be complemented by other CS groups closer to the IG space - but still largely missing in IG spaces - community media, community networks, free and open source software, open access, access to knowledge, and so on... While the spread will be wide, we should organise the thinking, discussions and activity around the central question the 'Internet/ web we want', which BTW is already identified as the key substantive issue for the next BB IGF pre event. In fact we could even develop a document on the 'internet/ web we want', with very broad participation and thus legitimacy.... and if we get enough participants then also perhaps make a splash at the main IGF. Give it greater real CS colors, which often show in many global gatherings, but which is largely missing at the IGF which has begun to look boringly 'official' and self important (without anyone else seeing anything really important about it at all) Well, just this much for the present. Comments invited. parminder On Saturday 16 March 2013 08:26 AM, AHM Bazlur Rahman wrote: > We support to organise *Internet social forum* > *from Bangladesh > * > > With best regards, > > > *Bazlu* > ________________________ > AHM. Bazlur Rahman-S21BR |**Chief Executive Officer | > Bangladesh NGOs Network for Radio and Communication (BNNRC) > *[NGO in Special Consultative Status with the UN Economic and Social > Council]* > > House: 13/3, Road: 2, Shaymoli, Dhaka-1207| Bangladesh > Phone: +88-02-9130750| 9101479 | Cell: +88 01711881647 > Fax: 88-02-9138501 | E-mail: ceo at bnnrc.net | > bnnr cbd at gmail.com | > www.bnnrc.net > > > > On 15 March 2013 21:39, Andrew Puddephatt > > > wrote: > > Interesting idea Parminder – how could we make it work? > > *Andrew Puddephatt, Director* > > *Global Partners & Associates* > > ** > > *Direct: *+44 (0)20 7549 0336 > > *Office*: +44 (0)20 7549 0350 > > *Mobile*: +44 (0)771 339 9597 > > *Email*: andrew at global-partners.co.uk > > > *Address*: Development House, 56-64 Leonard St, London EC2A 4LT, UK > > ** > > *www.global-partners.co.uk * > > *From:*bestbits-request at lists.igcaucus.org > > [mailto:bestbits-request at lists.igcaucus.org > ] *On Behalf Of *parminder > *Sent:* 15 March 2013 09:01 > *To:* bestbits at lists.igcaucus.org > *Subject:* Re: [bestbits] Best Bits meeting plans for the 2013 IGF > > > > I know I am getting increasingly and perhaps unsustainable > ambitious, but maybe we can hold an 'Internet social forum' and > then proceed to more focussed strategising in the bestbits meeting. > > I think a core/ real civil society in the Internet area needs to > be recovered from the unclear ambiguous gooey mass that what goes > for the IG civil society has increasingly become.... > > Perhaps just being too radical (and a bit modernist in a highly > post modernist Internet world), which is not a bad thing to do > once in a while :) > > parminder > > On Friday 15 March 2013 02:17 PM, parminder wrote: > > > On Friday 15 March 2013 02:02 PM, Norbert Bollow wrote: > > Michael Gurstein > wrote: > > Agreed. > > Furthermore, it is important to get civil society actors from > outside > the Internet governance community more involved. Maybe, in > addition to > addressing these matters at the Best Bits meeting in Bali, we > need to > think about organizing a pre-event in the spirit of Best Bits > (but > maybe with a different name corresponding to a less > technology-centered > focus) to an international event where the chances are optimal > for > effectively introducing the family of issues that you're > thinking about > into the mainstream of discourse of international policy shaping. > > > Something in the spirit of the 'world we want' and then > proceed to discussing the 'web we want' for the 'world we want'. > > We can invite participation from non IG global and sub global > civil society bodies, most of whom do now have an interest to > see how IG connects to their work (and most now believe that > it does in some basic though largely unclear ways) . Maybe > many of them want to come and join in, but there are no good > enough and appropriate docking points made available to them, > in a manner that look at things in a manner that they > traditionally look at. > > Such actors coming for such an event where they will get > introduced to the world of IG can then also lead to a much > needed more diverse participation in the IGF... > > > .. parminder > > > > > I think that we would be very remiss not to spend some time > reviewing > these "IS" issues and strategizing on how to move these forward > alongside and particularly as part of the increasingly visible > and > significant IG processes -- including within the IGF but also > toward > WSIS +10 and beyond. > > +1 > > Greetings, > Norbert > > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From gurstein at gmail.com Sat Mar 16 01:21:21 2013 From: gurstein at gmail.com (michael gurstein) Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2013 22:21:21 -0700 Subject: [bestbits] Best Bits meeting plans for the 2013 IGF In-Reply-To: <5143FE3C.7070703@itforchange.net> References: <5141773E.1070901@ciroap.org> <117f01ce208d$7dcc9480$7965bd80$@gmail.com> <20130315093234.377a7dc3@quill.bollow.ch> <5142E021.3090204@itforchange.net> <5142E365.6060404@itforchange.net> <5143FE3C.7070703@itforchange.net> Message-ID: <058801ce2206$21580d90$640828b0$@gmail.com> This is really excellent Parminder. I particularly like the shift away from Internet Governance to the the social governance of the Internet--the World/Web/Internet we want! I think we should be thinking about drafting a brief document that expresses these thoughts and that we can start circulating to our respective networks (and particularly those beyond the IG world) to gauge responses, solicit inputs and begin to generate some momentum towards the event(s). M From: bestbits-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:bestbits-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of parminder Sent: Friday, March 15, 2013 10:08 PM To: bestbits at lists.igcaucus.org Subject: Re: [bestbits] Best Bits meeting plans for the 2013 IGF Thanks, Andrew, Michael, Tiffiniy and Bazlur for egging me on... So, let me begin thinking aloud along with all of you. What I am thinking is something on the lines of providing an open platform for some freelance (world social forum style), but also purposefully organised, civil society idealism around the Internet and the future of the world. We can have this Internet Social Forum (hence ISF) with the slogan 'the Internet/ web we need - for the world we want'. The Web We Want initiative can be a prominent part of this effort. We should also have slogans stressing the social construction of the Internet, a point missed by most, even those otherwise very socio-politically informed. We have to use slogans like 'Internet is what WE make it to be', or 'we together make the Internet', and so on.... The main purpose is to give an opportunity for different global and sub-global civil society groups in different areas - gender, climate, livelihoods, democracy, FoE, education, health, trade, access to knowledge etc - to explore and propose what is the Internet they need for addressing their respective issues. (Of course this will need close engagement with IG types with these groups to help them in this exercise, but such engagement should be on the terms of these other groups and not the other way around, which is what is missing in IGF kind of spaces) I have interacted with many such groups, and I have a distinct expression that many of them would be interested in such an exercise, and perhaps fund themselves to come for such an event. We can also form issue-wise egroups beforehand, so that there is better chance or real outcomes at the actual event. However, we will try to remain focussed on 'what Internet/ web we need'. The above kind of CS (civil society) groups will be complemented by other CS groups closer to the IG space - but still largely missing in IG spaces - community media, community networks, free and open source software, open access, access to knowledge, and so on... While the spread will be wide, we should organise the thinking, discussions and activity around the central question the 'Internet/ web we want', which BTW is already identified as the key substantive issue for the next BB IGF pre event. In fact we could even develop a document on the 'internet/ web we want', with very broad participation and thus legitimacy.... and if we get enough participants then also perhaps make a splash at the main IGF. Give it greater real CS colors, which often show in many global gatherings, but which is largely missing at the IGF which has begun to look boringly 'official' and self important (without anyone else seeing anything really important about it at all) Well, just this much for the present. Comments invited. parminder On Saturday 16 March 2013 08:26 AM, AHM Bazlur Rahman wrote: We support to organise Internet social forum from Bangladesh With best regards, Bazlu ________________________ AHM. Bazlur Rahman-S21BR | Chief Executive Officer | Bangladesh NGOs Network for Radio and Communication (BNNRC) [NGO in Special Consultative Status with the UN Economic and Social Council] House: 13/3, Road: 2, Shaymoli, Dhaka-1207| Bangladesh Phone: +88-02-9130750| 9101479 | Cell: +88 01711881647 Fax: 88-02-9138501 | E-mail: ceo at bnnrc.net | bnnr cbd at gmail.com| www.bnnrc.net On 15 March 2013 21:39, Andrew Puddephatt wrote: Interesting idea Parminder - how could we make it work? Andrew Puddephatt, Director Global Partners & Associates Direct: +44 (0)20 7549 0336 Office: +44 (0)20 7549 0350 Mobile: +44 (0)771 339 9597 Email: andrew at global-partners.co.uk Address: Development House, 56-64 Leonard St, London EC2A 4LT, UK www.global-partners.co.uk From: bestbits-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:bestbits-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of parminder Sent: 15 March 2013 09:01 To: bestbits at lists.igcaucus.org Subject: Re: [bestbits] Best Bits meeting plans for the 2013 IGF I know I am getting increasingly and perhaps unsustainable ambitious, but maybe we can hold an 'Internet social forum' and then proceed to more focussed strategising in the bestbits meeting. I think a core/ real civil society in the Internet area needs to be recovered from the unclear ambiguous gooey mass that what goes for the IG civil society has increasingly become.... Perhaps just being too radical (and a bit modernist in a highly post modernist Internet world), which is not a bad thing to do once in a while :) parminder On Friday 15 March 2013 02:17 PM, parminder wrote: On Friday 15 March 2013 02:02 PM, Norbert Bollow wrote: Michael Gurstein wrote: Agreed. Furthermore, it is important to get civil society actors from outside the Internet governance community more involved. Maybe, in addition to addressing these matters at the Best Bits meeting in Bali, we need to think about organizing a pre-event in the spirit of Best Bits (but maybe with a different name corresponding to a less technology-centered focus) to an international event where the chances are optimal for effectively introducing the family of issues that you're thinking about into the mainstream of discourse of international policy shaping. Something in the spirit of the 'world we want' and then proceed to discussing the 'web we want' for the 'world we want'. We can invite participation from non IG global and sub global civil society bodies, most of whom do now have an interest to see how IG connects to their work (and most now believe that it does in some basic though largely unclear ways) . Maybe many of them want to come and join in, but there are no good enough and appropriate docking points made available to them, in a manner that look at things in a manner that they traditionally look at. Such actors coming for such an event where they will get introduced to the world of IG can then also lead to a much needed more diverse participation in the IGF... .. parminder I think that we would be very remiss not to spend some time reviewing these "IS" issues and strategizing on how to move these forward alongside and particularly as part of the increasingly visible and significant IG processes -- including within the IGF but also toward WSIS +10 and beyond. +1 Greetings, Norbert -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From nashton at consensus.pro Sat Mar 16 02:17:28 2013 From: nashton at consensus.pro (Nick Ashton-Hart) Date: Sat, 16 Mar 2013 06:17:28 +0000 Subject: [bestbits] Best Bits meeting plans for the 2013 IGF In-Reply-To: <5142E365.6060404@itforchange.net> References: <5141773E.1070901@ciroap.org> <117f01ce208d$7dcc9480$7965bd80$@gmail.com> <20130315093234.377a7dc3@quill.bollow.ch> <5142E021.3090204@itforchange.net> <5142E365.6060404@itforchange.net> Message-ID: <0000013d71d88565-5f82e145-38b8-4dfe-af0b-5ecc64a5ca05-000000@email.amazonses.com> Dear All, As I've mentioned to a few people privately, you should look a the World We Want process - here, and the civil-society-specific part here - which is based around post-2015 MDG followup. There's an obvious opportunity to get the Internet community more engaged in that process as there is vice-versa. Right now IG and post-2015 MDGs are really disconnected. Given the obvious opportunity to leverage ICTs to deliver real value in that process, this seems like something civil society should care very much about changing. On 15 Mar 2013, at 10:01, parminder wrote: > > > I know I am getting increasingly and perhaps unsustainable ambitious, but maybe we can hold an 'Internet social forum' and then proceed to more focussed strategising in the bestbits meeting. > > I think a core/ real civil society in the Internet area needs to be recovered from the unclear ambiguous gooey mass that what goes for the IG civil society has increasingly become.... > > Perhaps just being too radical (and a bit modernist in a highly post modernist Internet world), which is not a bad thing to do once in a while :) > > parminder > > > On Friday 15 March 2013 02:17 PM, parminder wrote: >> >> On Friday 15 March 2013 02:02 PM, Norbert Bollow wrote: >>> Michael Gurstein wrote: >>> >>> Agreed. >>> >>> Furthermore, it is important to get civil society actors from outside >>> the Internet governance community more involved. Maybe, in addition to >>> addressing these matters at the Best Bits meeting in Bali, we need to >>> think about organizing a pre-event in the spirit of Best Bits (but >>> maybe with a different name corresponding to a less technology-centered >>> focus) to an international event where the chances are optimal for >>> effectively introducing the family of issues that you're thinking about >>> into the mainstream of discourse of international policy shaping. >> >> Something in the spirit of the 'world we want' and then proceed to discussing the 'web we want' for the 'world we want'. >> >> We can invite participation from non IG global and sub global civil society bodies, most of whom do now have an interest to see how IG connects to their work (and most now believe that it does in some basic though largely unclear ways) . Maybe many of them want to come and join in, but there are no good enough and appropriate docking points made available to them, in a manner that look at things in a manner that they traditionally look at. >> >> Such actors coming for such an event where they will get introduced to the world of IG can then also lead to a much needed more diverse participation in the IGF... >> >> >> .. parminder >> >>> >>>> I think that we would be very remiss not to spend some time reviewing >>>> these "IS" issues and strategizing on how to move these forward >>>> alongside and particularly as part of the increasingly visible and >>>> significant IG processes -- including within the IGF but also toward >>>> WSIS +10 and beyond. >>> +1 >>> >>> Greetings, >>> Norbert >>> >>> >> >> >> > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From m.i.franklin at gold.ac.uk Sat Mar 16 07:28:07 2013 From: m.i.franklin at gold.ac.uk (Marianne Franklin) Date: Sat, 16 Mar 2013 11:28:07 +0000 Subject: [bestbits] Best Bits meeting plans for the 2013 IGF In-Reply-To: <5143FE3C.7070703@itforchange.net> References: <5141773E.1070901@ciroap.org> <117f01ce208d$7dcc9480$7965bd80$@gmail.com> <20130315093234.377a7dc3@quill.bollow.ch> <5142E021.3090204@itforchange.net> <5142E365.6060404@itforchange.net> <5143FE3C.7070703@itforchange.net> Message-ID: <51445747.60004@gold.ac.uk> Dear all I think the idea of and Internet Social Forum is a great idea. And a timely one so +1 from me! best MF On 16/03/2013 05:08, parminder wrote: > > Thanks, Andrew, Michael, Tiffiniy and Bazlur for egging me on... > > So, let me begin thinking aloud along with all of you. > > What I am thinking is something on the lines of providing an open > platform for some freelance (world social forum style), but also > purposefully organised, civil society idealism around the Internet and > the future of the world. > > We can have this Internet Social Forum (hence ISF) with the slogan > 'the Internet/ web we need - for the world we want'. The Web We Want > initiative can be a prominent part of this effort. We should also have > slogans stressing the social construction of the Internet, a point > missed by most, even those otherwise very socio-politically informed. > We have to use slogans like 'Internet is what WE make it to be', or > 'we together make the Internet', and so on.... > > The main purpose is to give an opportunity for different global and > sub-global civil society groups in different areas - gender, climate, > livelihoods, democracy, FoE, education, health, trade, access to > knowledge etc - to explore and propose what is the Internet they need > for addressing their respective issues. (Of course this will need > close engagement with IG types with these groups to help them in this > exercise, but such engagement should be /on the terms of these other > groups/ and not the other way around, which is what is missing in IGF > kind of spaces) > > I have interacted with many such groups, and I have a distinct > expression that many of them would be interested in such an exercise, > and perhaps fund themselves to come for such an event. > > We can also form issue-wise egroups beforehand, so that there is > better chance or real outcomes at the actual event. However, we will > try to remain focussed on 'what Internet/ web we need'. > > The above kind of CS (civil society) groups will be complemented by > other CS groups closer to the IG space - but still largely missing in > IG spaces - community media, community networks, free and open source > software, open access, access to knowledge, and so on... > > While the spread will be wide, we should organise the thinking, > discussions and activity around the central question the 'Internet/ > web we want', which BTW is already identified as the key substantive > issue for the next BB IGF pre event. > > In fact we could even develop a document on the 'internet/ web we > want', with very broad participation and thus legitimacy.... and if we > get enough participants then also perhaps make a splash at the main > IGF. Give it greater real CS colors, which often show in many global > gatherings, but which is largely missing at the IGF which has begun to > look boringly 'official' and self important (without anyone else > seeing anything really important about it at all) > > Well, just this much for the present. Comments invited. > > parminder > > > > > > On Saturday 16 March 2013 08:26 AM, AHM Bazlur Rahman wrote: >> We support to organise *Internet social forum* >> *from Bangladesh >> * >> >> With best regards, >> >> >> *Bazlu* >> ________________________ >> AHM. Bazlur Rahman-S21BR |**Chief Executive Officer | >> Bangladesh NGOs Network for Radio and Communication (BNNRC) >> *[NGO in Special Consultative Status with the UN Economic and Social >> Council]* >> >> House: 13/3, Road: 2, Shaymoli, Dhaka-1207| Bangladesh >> Phone: +88-02-9130750| 9101479 | Cell: +88 01711881647 >> Fax: 88-02-9138501 | E-mail: ceo at bnnrc.net | >> bnnr cbd at gmail.com | >> www.bnnrc.net >> >> >> >> On 15 March 2013 21:39, Andrew Puddephatt >> > >> wrote: >> >> Interesting idea Parminder – how could we make it work? >> >> *Andrew Puddephatt, Director* >> >> *Global Partners & Associates* >> >> ** >> >> *Direct: *+44 (0)20 7549 0336 >> >> *Office*: +44 (0)20 7549 0350 >> >> *Mobile*: +44 (0)771 339 9597 >> >> *Email*: andrew at global-partners.co.uk >> >> >> *Address*: Development House, 56-64 Leonard St, London EC2A 4LT, UK >> >> ** >> >> *www.global-partners.co.uk * >> >> *From:*bestbits-request at lists.igcaucus.org >> >> [mailto:bestbits-request at lists.igcaucus.org >> ] *On Behalf Of >> *parminder >> *Sent:* 15 March 2013 09:01 >> *To:* bestbits at lists.igcaucus.org >> >> *Subject:* Re: [bestbits] Best Bits meeting plans for the 2013 IGF >> >> >> >> I know I am getting increasingly and perhaps unsustainable >> ambitious, but maybe we can hold an 'Internet social forum' and >> then proceed to more focussed strategising in the bestbits meeting. >> >> I think a core/ real civil society in the Internet area needs to >> be recovered from the unclear ambiguous gooey mass that what goes >> for the IG civil society has increasingly become.... >> >> Perhaps just being too radical (and a bit modernist in a highly >> post modernist Internet world), which is not a bad thing to do >> once in a while :) >> >> parminder >> >> On Friday 15 March 2013 02:17 PM, parminder wrote: >> >> >> On Friday 15 March 2013 02:02 PM, Norbert Bollow wrote: >> >> Michael Gurstein >> wrote: >> >> Agreed. >> >> Furthermore, it is important to get civil society actors from >> outside >> the Internet governance community more involved. Maybe, in >> addition to >> addressing these matters at the Best Bits meeting in Bali, we >> need to >> think about organizing a pre-event in the spirit of Best Bits >> (but >> maybe with a different name corresponding to a less >> technology-centered >> focus) to an international event where the chances are >> optimal for >> effectively introducing the family of issues that you're >> thinking about >> into the mainstream of discourse of international policy >> shaping. >> >> >> Something in the spirit of the 'world we want' and then >> proceed to discussing the 'web we want' for the 'world we want'. >> >> We can invite participation from non IG global and sub global >> civil society bodies, most of whom do now have an interest to >> see how IG connects to their work (and most now believe that >> it does in some basic though largely unclear ways) . Maybe >> many of them want to come and join in, but there are no good >> enough and appropriate docking points made available to them, >> in a manner that look at things in a manner that they >> traditionally look at. >> >> Such actors coming for such an event where they will get >> introduced to the world of IG can then also lead to a much >> needed more diverse participation in the IGF... >> >> >> .. parminder >> >> >> >> >> I think that we would be very remiss not to spend some time >> reviewing >> these "IS" issues and strategizing on how to move these forward >> alongside and particularly as part of the increasingly >> visible and >> significant IG processes -- including within the IGF but also >> toward >> WSIS +10 and beyond. >> >> +1 >> >> Greetings, >> Norbert >> >> >> >> > -- Dr Marianne Franklin Reader Convener: Global Media & Transnational Communications Program Co-Chair Internet Rights & Principles Coalition (UN IGF) Goldsmiths, University of London Dept. of Media & Communications New Cross, London SE14 6NW Tel: +44 20 7919 7072 @GloComm https://twitter.com/GloComm http://www.gold.ac.uk/media-communications/staff/franklin/ https://www.gold.ac.uk/pg/ma-global-media-transnational-communications/ www.internetrightsandprinciples.org @netrights -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sonigituekpe at CROSSRIVERSTATE.GOV.NG Sat Mar 16 11:28:21 2013 From: sonigituekpe at CROSSRIVERSTATE.GOV.NG (Sonigitu Ekpe) Date: Sat, 16 Mar 2013 15:28:21 +0000 Subject: [bestbits] Best Bits meeting plans for the 2013 IGF Message-ID: +1 for ISF. Sonigitu Ekpe Committee Secretary, State Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development on Flood Food Recovery and Double-Up Food Production Programme. 3 Barracks Road Calabar - Nigeria. +234 8050232469 Marianne Franklin wrote: Dear all I think the idea of and Internet Social Forum is a great idea. And a timely one so +1 from me! best MF On 16/03/2013 05:08, parminder wrote: Thanks, Andrew, Michael, Tiffiniy and Bazlur for egging me on... So, let me begin thinking aloud along with all of you. What I am thinking is something on the lines of providing an open platform for some freelance (world social forum style), but also purposefully organised, civil society idealism around the Internet and the future of the world. We can have this Internet Social Forum (hence ISF) with the slogan 'the Internet/ web we need - for the world we want'. The Web We Want initiative can be a prominent part of this effort. We should also have slogans stressing the social construction of the Internet, a point missed by most, even those otherwise very socio-politically informed. We have to use slogans like 'Internet is what WE make it to be', or 'we together make the Internet', and so on.... The main purpose is to give an opportunity for different global and sub-global civil society groups in different areas - gender, climate, livelihoods, democracy, FoE, education, health, trade, access to knowledge etc - to explore and propose what is the Internet they need for addressing their respective issues. (Of course this will need close engagement with IG types with these groups to help them in this exercise, but such engagement should be on the terms of these other groups and not the other way around, which is what is missing in IGF kind of spaces) I have interacted with many such groups, and I have a distinct expression that many of them would be interested in such an exercise, and perhaps fund themselves to come for such an event. W -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From farooq at ciroap.org Mon Mar 18 08:57:54 2013 From: farooq at ciroap.org (=?utf-8?B?ZmFyb29xQGNpcm9hcC5vcmc=?=) Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2013 20:57:54 +0800 Subject: [bestbits] Best Bits meeting plans for the 2013 IGF Message-ID: <20130318125755.00C505199E@mail.ciroap.org> I appreciate the idea of Internet Social Forum and will support by all means. Regards Farooq Ahmed Jam Sent from my HTC ----- Reply message ----- From: "Sonigitu Ekpe" To: "Marianne Franklin" , "bestbits at lists.igcaucus.org" Subject: [bestbits] Best Bits meeting plans for the 2013 IGF Date: Sat, Mar 16, 2013 11:28 PM +1 for ISF. Sonigitu Ekpe Committee Secretary, State Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development on Flood Food Recovery and Double-Up Food Production Programme. 3 Barracks Road Calabar - Nigeria. +234 8050232469 Marianne Franklin wrote: Dear all I think the idea of and Internet Social Forum is a great idea. And a timely one so +1 from me! best MF On 16/03/2013 05:08, parminder wrote: Thanks, Andrew, Michael, Tiffiniy and Bazlur for egging me on... So, let me begin thinking aloud along with all of you. What I am thinking is something on the lines of providing an open platform for some freelance (world social forum style), but also purposefully organised, civil society idealism around the Internet and the future of the world. We can have this Internet Social Forum (hence ISF) with the slogan 'the Internet/ web we need - for the world we want'. The Web We Want initiative can be a prominent part of this effort. We should also have slogans stressing the social construction of the Internet, a point missed by most, even those otherwise very socio-politically informed. We have to use slogans like 'Internet is what WE make it to be', or 'we together make the Internet', and so on.... The main purpose is to give an opportunity for different global and sub-global civil society groups in different areas - gender, climate, livelihoods, democracy, FoE, education, health, trade, access to knowledge etc - to explore and propose what is the Internet they need for addressing their respective issues. (Of course this will need close engagement with IG types with these groups to help them in this exercise, but such engagement should be on the terms of these other groups and not the other way around, which is what is missing in IGF kind of spaces) I have interacted with many such groups, and I have a distinct expression that many of them would be interested in such an exercise, and perhaps fund themselves to come for such an event. W -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Andrew at global-partners.co.uk Mon Mar 18 10:14:32 2013 From: Andrew at global-partners.co.uk (Andrew Puddephatt) Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2013 14:14:32 +0000 Subject: [bestbits] Best Bits workshop proposal for the 2013 IGF] Message-ID: Following up on the previous e-mail about future work for the best Bits group, I said I'd draft an outline proposal for Best Bits workshops at the IGF in Bali At this stage it is a very simple outline so I'm suggesting submitting the following two proposals which reflect what we have already circulated. Could you send back comments by the end of Tuesday if possible as we have to submit proposals by the end of the week Workshop 1: Who runs the internet - how civil society can have a voice Concise description of broader thematic area of interest (500 characters): Debates about internet governance are coming to head in the next three years through the WSIS plus 10 process, and the CSTD working group on enhanced cooperation. They have moved beyond the internet's functional resources into more controversial policy areas such as privacy, surveillance, censorship, net neutrality. There are fierce disagreements between states about whether, or how, the internet should be governed. This multi-stakeholder discussion will seek to identify the appropriate role for different stakeholders, governments, business and civil society and how effective multi-stakeholder working can be encouraged. Concise description of specific issues or policy questions to be addressed (500 characters) * What is the specific and legitimate role of governments in internet policy making? * How civil society can participate effectively to internet policy debates while being both representative and transparent * How can companies with different and competing interests be represented in multi-stakeholder working * The role of normative, soft law mechanisms as opposed to hard law * Should we strengthen the IGF or replace it? * Is effective multi-stakeholder policy making possible where issues are fiercely contested? Workshop 2: The internet we want - supporting democracy and human rights Concise description of broader thematic area of interest (500 characters): Building upon broad principles for the internet, including the OECD Internet Policymaking Principles, the Council of Europe Internet Governance Declaration, and the Internet Rights and Principles Coalition Charter, there is a need to provide more detail and clarity on how human rights principles apply to the internet in practice. In particular, there is a need to move past the high level normative thinking to consider the technical infrastructure and commercial environment needed for the internet functionally to promote democracy and human rights. Concise description of specific issues or policy questions to be addressed (500 characters): Drawing upon (and bringing together) existing initiatives such as the current MAG review of principles initiatives, the "Web we want", and the Internet Rights and Principles Coalition the workshop will seek to define the specific technical features, the necessary commercial environment and the legal and normative measures that shape policy and regulation online, which, taken together, create the type of internet that can support democracy and human rights. Andrew Puddephatt, Director Global Partners & Associates Direct: +44 (0)20 7549 0336 Office: +44 (0)20 7549 0350 Mobile: +44 (0)771 339 9597 Email: andrew at global-partners.co.uk Address: Development House, 56-64 Leonard St, London EC2A 4LT, UK www.global-partners.co.uk -----Original Message----- From: bestbits-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:bestbits-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of parminder Sent: 14 March 2013 07:25 To: bestbits at lists.igcaucus.org Subject: Fwd: [Fwd: [bestbits] Best Bits meeting plans for the 2013 IGF] Thanks Jeremy and Andrew, This looks like a very well done and purposeful agenda/ work plan . .. parminder ---------------------------- Original Message ---------------------------- Subject: [bestbits] Best Bits meeting plans for the 2013 IGF From: "Jeremy Malcolm" > Date: Thu, March 14, 2013 12:07 am To: bestbits at lists.igcaucus.org -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hello all, This is to follow on from Andrew's summary of the informal Best Bits meeting in Paris. If you can't find it, it is available in the web archives of this list at http://lists.igcaucus.org/arc/bestbits. (Thanks also to Deborah for forwarding the notice about the short deadline for IGF workshop proposals.) On the basis of suggestions and offers made so far, here is what we are proposing for Best Bits in 2013. It follows from the discussions in Paris, but is just a rough outline and it is still open for your comments: * A two-day pre-IGF Best Bits meeting on the weekend of 19-20 October in Bali, with an overall theme around a positive agenda for Internet governance, which (like last time) will split into two very practical agenda items, one of them substantive ("what we want"), and the other procedural ("how we can get it"): o Identifying common civil society strategies for advancing a human rights Internet. This can incorporate related initiatives such as the IGF MAG's newly-established Internet principles working group, and the "Web We Want" initiative that a number of those from this list are involved with. o A positive agenda for the evolution of Internet governance arrangements. This will tie in with the work of the CSTD Working Group on Enhanced Cooperation. The output of this would be a common civil society position on an enhanced cooperation mechanism or process (perhaps IGF-based) that we could support. * Two public IGF workshops that would present each of the two agenda items above to a wider audience, and would include participation by representatives of the other stakeholder groups. Global Partners is working on text for the workshop proposals, and will post them for comment when ready. Meanwhile I am fundraising now to get some more travel funds for those who will need it, and indeed to broaden the funding base compared to last time. The funds will also be used for a permanent website, including a rather sophisticated event calendar, which will begin as a rather less sophisticated event calendar, and grow features progressively. If you have any comments on the above outline please share them. Thanks! -- *Dr Jeremy Malcolm Senior Policy Officer Consumers International | the global campaigning voice for consumers* Office for Asia-Pacific and the Middle East Lot 5-1 Wisma WIM, 7 Jalan Abang Haji Openg, TTDI, 60000 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia Tel: +60 3 7726 1599 WCRD 2013 -- Consumer Justice Now! | Consumer Protection Map: https://wcrd2013.crowdmap.com/main | #wcrd2013 @Consumers_Int | www.consumersinternational.org | www.facebook.com/consumersinternational Read our email confidentiality notice . Don't print this email unless necessary. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From parminder at itforchange.net Mon Mar 18 21:35:17 2013 From: parminder at itforchange.net (parminder) Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2013 07:05:17 +0530 Subject: [bestbits] Re: Best Bits workshop proposal for the 2013 IGF] In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <5147C0D5.6050209@itforchange.net> Thanks Andrew, again a set of very good proposals. I agree that we should submit these. A few suggestions though, but I leave it to you to take them or not. I do understand that there is a certain logic and integrity of such proposals in the original proponents mind and that is important. Pl see inline. On Monday 18 March 2013 07:44 PM, Andrew Puddephatt wrote: > > Following up on the previous e-mail about future work for the best > Bits group, I said I'd draft an outline proposal for Best Bits > workshops at the IGF in Bali > > At this stage it is a very simple outline so I'm suggesting submitting > the following two proposals which reflect what we have already > circulated. Could you send back comments by the end of Tuesday if > possible as we have to submit proposals by the end of the week > > Workshop 1: *Who runs the internet -- how civil society can have a voice* > Can we make it 'how people can have a voice'. I kind of want to reclaim the categories of people, public and public interest, becuase in the IG space somehow civil society, business, technical community seem to becoming self justifying represenation categories when in fact it should always be about people's representation in policy making and governance - while modalities may vary and evolve. > // > > /Concise description of broader thematic area of interest (500 > characters): / > > Debates about internet governance are coming to head in the next three > years through the WSIS plus 10 process, and the CSTD working group on > enhanced cooperation. They have moved beyond the internet's > functional resources into more controversial policy areas such as > privacy, surveillance, censorship, net neutrality. There are fierce > disagreements between states about whether, or how, the internet > should be governed. This multi-stakeholder discussion will seek to > identify the appropriate role for different stakeholders, governments, > business and civil society and how effective multi-stakeholder working > can be encouraged. > > // > > /Concise description of specific issues or policy questions to be > addressed (500 characters)/ > > . What is the specific and legitimate role of governments > in internet policy making? > > . How civil society can participate effectively to > internet policy debates while being both representative and transparent > > . How can companies with different and competing interests > be represented in multi-stakeholder working > > . The role of normative, soft law mechanisms as opposed to > hard law > > . Should we strengthen the IGF or replace it? > I think this is a bit distracting - no one have asked for IGF to be replaced, other than some people wrongly asserting that any new mechanism for enhanced cooperation is an effort to replace the IGF, which is a complete untruth. In fact the opposite is true; they want possible global policy making systems to be anticipated and thwarted by a loose IGF model, whose mandate is really something else. Maybe we can simply say here ' How the IGF can evolve and be strengthened'. > . Is effective multi-stakeholder policy making possible > where issues are fiercely contested? > > Workshop 2: *The internet we want -- supporting democracy and human > rights* > > /Concise description of broader thematic area of interest (500 > characters): / > > Building upon broad principles for the internet, including the OECD > Internet Policymaking Principles, > OECD principles are highly controversial, and were rejected by OECD's own civil society. While you may still mention them, can we maybe start with Brazilian Internet Principles . Thats about it :). Thanks. parminder > the Council of Europe Internet Governance Declaration, and the > Internet Rights and Principles Coalition Charter, there is a need > to provide more detail and clarity on how human rights principles > apply to the internet in practice. In particular, there is a need to > move past the high level normative thinking to consider the technical > infrastructure and commercial environment needed for the internet > functionally to promote democracy and human rights. > > // > > /Concise description of specific issues or policy questions to be > addressed (500 characters):/ > > Drawing upon (and bringing together) existing initiatives such as the > current MAG review of principles initiatives, the "Web we want", and > the Internet Rights and Principles Coalition the workshop will seek to > define the specific technical features, the necessary commercial > environment and the legal and normative measures that shape policy and > regulation online, which, taken together, create the type of internet > that can support democracy and human rights. > > Andrew Puddephatt, Director > > Global Partners & Associates > > Direct: +44 (0)20 7549 0336 > > Office: +44 (0)20 7549 0350 > > Mobile: +44 (0)771 339 9597 > > Email: andrew at global-partners.co.uk > > Address: Development House, 56-64 Leonard St, London EC2A 4LT, UK > > www.global-partners.co.uk > > -----Original Message----- > From: bestbits-request at lists.igcaucus.org > [mailto:bestbits-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of parminder > Sent: 14 March 2013 07:25 > To: bestbits at lists.igcaucus.org > Subject: Fwd: [Fwd: [bestbits] Best Bits meeting plans for the 2013 IGF] > > Thanks Jeremy and Andrew, > > This looks like a very well done and purposeful agenda/ work plan . .. > > parminder > > ---------------------------- Original Message ---------------------------- > > Subject: [bestbits] Best Bits meeting plans for the 2013 IGF > > From: "Jeremy Malcolm" > > > Date: Thu, March 14, 2013 12:07 am > > To: bestbits at lists.igcaucus.org > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Hello all, > > This is to follow on from Andrew's summary of the informal Best Bits > meeting in Paris. If you can't find it, it is available in the web > archives of this list at http://lists.igcaucus.org/arc/bestbits. > > (Thanks also to Deborah for forwarding the notice about the short > deadline for IGF workshop proposals.) > > On the basis of suggestions and offers made so far, here is what we > are proposing for Best Bits in 2013. It follows from the discussions > in Paris, but is just a rough outline and it is still open for your > comments: > > * A two-day pre-IGF Best Bits meeting on the weekend of 19-20 October > > in Bali, with an overall theme around a positive agenda for Internet > > governance, which (like last time) will split into two very > > practical agenda items, one of them substantive ("what we want"), > > and the other procedural ("how we can get it"): > > o Identifying common civil society strategies for advancing a > > human rights Internet. This can incorporate related initiatives > > such as the IGF MAG's newly-established Internet principles > > working group, and the "Web We Want" initiative that a number of > > those from this list are involved with. > > o A positive agenda for the evolution of Internet governance > > arrangements. This will tie in with the work of the CSTD > > Working Group on Enhanced Cooperation. The output of this would > > be a common civil society position on an enhanced cooperation > > mechanism or process (perhaps IGF-based) that we could support. > > * Two public IGF workshops that would present each of the two agenda > > items above to a wider audience, and would include participation by > > representatives of the other stakeholder groups. Global Partners is > > working on text for the workshop proposals, and will post them for > > comment when ready. > > Meanwhile I am fundraising now to get some more travel funds for those > who will need it, and indeed to broaden the funding base compared to > last time. The funds will also be used for a permanent website, > including a rather sophisticated event calendar, which will begin as a > rather less sophisticated event calendar, and grow features progressively. > > If you have any comments on the above outline please share them. Thanks! > > -- > > *Dr Jeremy Malcolm > > Senior Policy Officer > > Consumers International | the global campaigning voice for consumers* > Office for Asia-Pacific and the Middle East Lot 5-1 Wisma WIM, 7 Jalan > Abang Haji Openg, TTDI, 60000 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia > > Tel: +60 3 7726 1599 > > WCRD 2013 -- Consumer Justice Now! | Consumer Protection Map: > > https://wcrd2013.crowdmap.com/main | #wcrd2013 > > @Consumers_Int | www.consumersinternational.org > > | > www.facebook.com/consumersinternational > > > > > Read our email confidentiality notice > > . Don't > print this email unless necessary. > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From parminder at itforchange.net Fri Mar 1 16:12:25 2013 From: parminder at itforchange.net (parminder) Date: Sat, 02 Mar 2013 02:42:25 +0530 Subject: [bestbits] Report on Best Bits meeting at UNESCO WSIS plus 10 Paris February 2013 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <513119B9.4070108@itforchange.net> Andrew/ All The meeting seems to have done really useful work. Very encouraging. Sorry, I missed it because my colleague was speaking at the closing ceremony and I had to be there for the sake organisational solidarity. Can someone point to where more stuff about the 'web we want' initiative can be found. It is an excellent way to go for developing a positive agenda. Maybe, the 'Internet we want' would a better name for us, and also we cna make it an original BestBits initiative. About Jeremy's paper, as I wrote to him, I very much agree with his framing of the problem. However I am unable to agree with the solution - a consensual democracy model. Becuase such a model gives big business a veto over every policy proposal, and if that happens things can only go from bad to worse. Nothing will ever change in a progressive direction. For instance, we can never get the Internet/ web we want. And if anyone disagrees with this, I am happy to do a scenario building exercise here. As for strengthening the IGF - as what I would like to call as an institution of (institutionalised) participatory democracy - I completely agree. But as in participatory democracy the relationship of the participatory sphere with policy making and executive spheres has to made clear. A self selection based participatory space cannot replace representation based democratic decision making process. But, yes, there is a much to discussed and innovated within larger principles of democracy which cannot be violated. parminder On Friday 01 March 2013 05:19 PM, Andrew Puddephatt wrote: > > At the UNESCO WSIS plus 10 meeting we had an informal gathering of > those Best Bits (BB) participants who were present at the event -- > about 25 people in total. We took the opportunity to review the > usefulness of the Best Bits process and arrived at the following > consensus about the potential roles for BB: > > ·To convene a BB regular forum before major international events such > as the ITU, IGF etc. to provide an opportunity to share information > and develop co-ordinated CS positions on those events; > > ·The emphasis of BB should be to convene to take action which means > identifying, where possible, common CS positions and acting upon them > as we did at the WCIT; BB is therefore different to more discussion > based forums such as the IG caucus; > > ·This will require some degree of organisation. Though specific events > can be organised by the relevant groups on the ground (APC offered to > organise the pre-Bali IGF BB event) there are a number of tasks that > need to be carried out ifthe network to function. These include - > maintaining the website as an information source about activities; > developing a wiki calendar of events that allows BB to share details > of who's going to what meetings; using the website to report back to > the wider BB community on positions and actions taken, so > strengthening our own accountability and transparency; maintaining the > e-mail list and processing new people who want to join as well > deregistering those who want to leave. > > ·People have offered to take on different tasks (Access, Global > Voices, APC etc.). Global Partners are already developing a calendar > of events that could be the basis of a wiki on the website allowing > people to signify events they are attending. Jeremy Malcolm from CI > has indicated that he is willing to maintain the web and mailing list; > Deborah from Access has also offered to help -- any other offers > please let me know; > > 5.At the BB official workshopwe discussed a paper from Jeremy Malcolm > looking at issues of internet governance. It analysed the > deficiencies of the current internet governance model as well as > suggesting a way forward. The overall conclusions of the formal > discussion were: > > * /We highlighted our concerns that current internet governance > mechanisms are deficient. For example, they are unable to > successfully address inequalities in internet access, threats to > data privacy and network neutrality. / > * /Participants acknowledged that governments do have a legitimate > role to play in internet governance, for example in the areas > outlined above. / > * /In this context, we felt that the best way forward is to develop > and grow the IGF by, for example, enabling the IGF to issue soft > law in the form of recommendations or declarations./ > * /Alongside enhancing the IGF it is essential that we address > current accountability and transparency deficiencies of the IGF. / > > Clearly there are many issues here that need further discussion. To > that end we suggest that Jeremy's paper is circulated on the BB list > and discussed with the goal of arriving at an agreed CS position at > the Bali IGF BB event. > > In the informal meeting an new initiative called the "Web we want" > was mentioned, initiated at a meeting in the Berkman Center in the US, > with the support of Tim Berners-Lee. This initiative hopes to set out > what kind of internet we would like to see being built over the next > period of time. There was some concern expressed at the proliferation > of initiatives but in the end we suggested we incorporate it as one of > the themes for discussion in the run up to Bali alongside the issue of > governance. So if BB participants are happy the meeting in Bali > would have two purposes: to agree a CSO position on governance and a > CS position on the web we want. > > In the meantime a calendar of events will be set up on the BB website > so that we can indicate who is attending forthcoming meetings of the > ITU and CSTDetc.so that we can consult online about strategy and > tactics as will as co-ordinate our advocacy while at the meetings. > > *Andrew Puddephatt, Director* > > *Global Partners & Associates* > > ** > > *Direct: *+44 (0)20 7549 0336 > > *Office*: +44 (0)20 7549 0350 > > *Mobile*: +44 (0)771 339 9597 > > *Email*: andrew at global-partners.co.uk > > *Address*: Development House, 56-64 Leonard St, London EC2A 4LT, UK > > ** > > *www.global-partners.co.uk * > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jeremy at ciroap.org Mon Mar 18 23:06:32 2013 From: jeremy at ciroap.org (Jeremy Malcolm) Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2013 11:06:32 +0800 Subject: [bestbits] Best Bits workshop proposal for the 2013 IGF] In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <5147D638.2030708@ciroap.org> On 18/03/13 22:14, Andrew Puddephatt wrote: > Workshop 1: *Who runs the internet -- how civil society can have a voice* > > / / > > /Concise description of broader thematic area of interest (500 > characters):/ > I would suggest that perhaps this first one could be a even more focussed on specific proposals for reform to existing processes and mechanisms, rather than a general discussion of roles and responsibilities in the abstract. Remembering also that this will be a session in which we report back on the discussions that we have already had as Best Bits. Hopefully we will have made enough progress that we can be a bit more concrete in what we present at the IGF workshop. > // > > This multi-stakeholder discussion will seek to identify the > appropriate role for different stakeholders, governments, business and > civil society and how effective multi-stakeholder working can be > encouraged. Maybe replace this part with "This multi-stakeholder discussion will present outputs from a civil society network, Best Bits, that has brainstormed ideas for effective multi-stakeholder working arrangements that allow different stakeholders, governments, business and civil society, to take an appropriate role in the future of Internet governance." > / Concise description of specific issues or policy questions to be > addressed (500 characters)/ > Maybe add or replace as appropriate (I'm not wedded to the exact wording, but you get the idea): * Where are existing Internet governance arrangements failing, and whom are they failing the most? * What improvements could be made to these arrangements without setting the scene for an intergovernmental takeover of the Internet?* * How could the suggestions of the Best Bits group be taken forward (eg. as appropriate within within the CSTD Working Group, the MAG, the General Assembly, etc)? * I figure - no reason to beat about the bush, let's acknowledge and confront this fear directly. -- *Dr Jeremy Malcolm Senior Policy Officer Consumers International | the global campaigning voice for consumers* Office for Asia-Pacific and the Middle East Lot 5-1 Wisma WIM, 7 Jalan Abang Haji Openg, TTDI, 60000 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia Tel: +60 3 7726 1599 WCRD 2013 -- Consumer Justice Now! | Consumer Protection Map: https://wcrd2013.crowdmap.com/main | #wcrd2013 @Consumers_Int | www.consumersinternational.org | www.facebook.com/consumersinternational Read our email confidentiality notice . Don't print this email unless necessary. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Andrew at global-partners.co.uk Tue Mar 19 08:51:29 2013 From: Andrew at global-partners.co.uk (Andrew Puddephatt) Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2013 12:51:29 +0000 Subject: [bestbits] RE: Best Bits workshop proposal for the 2013 IGF] In-Reply-To: <5147C0D5.6050209@itforchange.net> References: <5147C0D5.6050209@itforchange.net> Message-ID: Following a couple of suggestions from Parminder and Jeremy I've redrafted the proposals. I'll submit them tomorrow so last chance for suggested changes coming up! Best Bits Workshop proposals 1. Workshop working title (60 characters ): Who runs the internet - how people can have a voice 2. Concise description of broader thematic area of interest (500 characters): Debates about internet governance are coming to head in the next two years through the WSIS plus 10 process. There are fierce disagreements between states about whether, or how, the internet should be governed. This multi-stakeholder discussion will present outputs from a civil society network, Best Bits, that has brainstormed ideas for effective multi-stakeholder working arrangements that allow different stakeholders, governments, business and civil society, to take an appropriate role in the future of Internet governance. 3. Concise description of specific issues or policy questions to be addressed (500 characters) Where are existing Internet governance arrangements failing, and whom are they failing the most? Is effective multi-stakeholder policy making possible where issues are fiercely contested? How can the IGF evolve and be strengthened? What improvements could be made to these arrangements without setting the scene for an intergovernmental takeover of the Internet?* How can the suggestions of the Best Bits group be taken forward (e.g. as appropriate within the CSTD Working Group, the MAG, the UN General Assembly, etc.)? 2. Workshop working title (60 characters ): The internet we want - supporting democracy and human rights 2. Concise description of broader thematic area of interest (500 characters): Building upon broad principles for the internet, including the Brazilian Internet Principles, the Council of Europe Internet Governance Declaration, the OECD Internet Policymaking Principles and the Internet Rights and Principles Coalition Charter, there is a need to provide more detail and clarity on how human rights principles apply to the internet in practice. While there is high level normative thinking about the internet there is a need for more detail about the technical infrastructure and commercial environment needed to promote democracy and human rights. 3. Concise description of specific issues or policy questions to be addressed (500 characters) Drawing upon existing initiatives such as the current MAG review of principles and the "Web we want", the workshop will seek to define the specific technical features, the necessary commercial environment and the legal and normative measures that shape policy and regulation online, which, taken together, create the type of internet that can support democracy and human rights. Andrew Puddephatt, Director Global Partners & Associates Direct: +44 (0)20 7549 0336 Office: +44 (0)20 7549 0350 Mobile: +44 (0)771 339 9597 Email: andrew at global-partners.co.uk Address: Development House, 56-64 Leonard St, London EC2A 4LT, UK www.global-partners.co.uk -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From farooq at ciroap.org Wed Mar 20 08:17:25 2013 From: farooq at ciroap.org (Farooq Ahmed Jam) Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2013 20:17:25 +0800 Subject: [bestbits] RE: Best Bits workshop proposal for the 2013 IGF] In-Reply-To: References: <5147C0D5.6050209@itforchange.net> Message-ID: <5149A8D5.7090902@ciroap.org> Dear Andrew, I think both of the titles and thematic descriptions are comprehensive and concise so I appreciate the efforts of all involved in drafting it. good job:-) Regards Farooq On 3/19/2013 8:51 PM, Andrew Puddephatt wrote: > > Following a couple of suggestions from Parminder and Jeremy I've > redrafted the proposals. I'll submit them tomorrow so last chance for > suggested changes coming up! > > Best Bits Workshop proposals > > 1.Workshop working title (60 characters ): > > *Who runs the internet -- how people can have a voice* > > 2. Concise description of broader thematic area of interest > (500 > > characters): > > Debates about internet governance are coming to head in the next two > years through the WSIS plus 10 process. There are fierce > disagreements between states about whether, or how, the internet > should be governed. This multi-stakeholder discussion will present > outputs from a civil society network, Best Bits, that has brainstormed > ideas for effective multi-stakeholder working arrangements that allow > different stakeholders, governments, business and civil society, to > take an appropriate role in the future of Internet governance. > > 3. Concise description of specific issues or policy > questions to be > > addressed (500 characters) > > Where are existing Internet governance arrangements failing, and whom > are they failing the most? Is effective multi-stakeholder policy > making possible where issues are fiercely contested? > > How can the IGF evolve and be strengthened? > > What improvements could be made to these arrangements without setting > the scene for an intergovernmental takeover of the Internet?* > > How can the suggestions of the Best Bits group be taken forward (e.g. > as appropriate within the CSTD Working Group, the MAG, the UN General > Assembly, etc.)? > > 2.Workshop working title (60 characters ): > > ** > > *The internet we want -- supporting democracy and human rights* > > 2. Concise description of broader thematic area of interest > (500 > > characters): > > Building upon broad principles for the internet, including the > Brazilian Internet Principles, theCouncil of EuropeInternet Governance > Declaration, the OECDInternetPolicymakingPrinciples and the Internet > Rights and Principles Coalition Charter, there is a need to provide > more > detailandclarityonhowhumanrightsprinciplesapplytotheinternetinpractice. While > there is high level normative thinkingabout theinternet there is a > need for more detail about the technical infrastructure and commercial > environment needed to promote democracy and human rights. > > 3. Concise description of specific issues or policy > questions to be > > addressed (500 characters) > > Drawing upon existing initiatives such as the current MAG review of > principles and the "Web we want", the workshop will seek to define the > specific technical features, the necessary commercial environment and > the legal and normative measures that shape policy and regulation > online, which, taken together, create the type of internet that can > support democracy and human rights. > > *Andrew Puddephatt, Director* > > *Global Partners & Associates* > > ** > > *Direct: *+44 (0)20 7549 0336 > > *Office*: +44 (0)20 7549 0350 > > *Mobile*: +44 (0)771 339 9597 > > *Email*: andrew at global-partners.co.uk > > *Address*: Development House, 56-64 Leonard St, London EC2A 4LT, UK > > ** > > *www.global-partners.co.uk * > -- *Farooq Ahmed Jam Intern Consumers International | the global campaigning voice for consumers* Office for Asia-Pacific and the Middle East Lot 5-1 Wisma WIM, 7 Jalan Abang Haji Openg, TTDI, 60000 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia Tel: +60 3 7726 1599 *Your rights, our mission -- download CI's Strategy 2015:* http://consint.info/RightsMission @Consumers_Int | www.consumersinternational.org | www.facebook.com/consumersinternational Read our email confidentiality notice . Don't print this email unless necessary. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From gurstein at gmail.com Wed Mar 20 10:01:27 2013 From: gurstein at gmail.com (michael gurstein) Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2013 07:01:27 -0700 Subject: [bestbits] Blogpost: Multistakeholderism vs. Democracy: My Adventures in "Stakeholderland" Message-ID: <04ba01ce2573$71cb03c0$55610b40$@gmail.com> My reflections on the recent "stakeholder" discussions and what the larger meaning of these might be... for MSism and for democracy. http://gurstein.wordpress.com/wp-admin/post.php?post=710&action=edit&message =6&postpost=v2 http://tinyurl.com/cd2fo32 Comments appreciated. Mike From gurstein at gmail.com Wed Mar 20 10:27:04 2013 From: gurstein at gmail.com (michael gurstein) Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2013 07:27:04 -0700 Subject: [bestbits] Resend: Blogpost: Multistakeholderism vs. Democracy: My Adventures in "Stakeholderland" Message-ID: <04f401ce2577$087da130$1978e390$@gmail.com> It looks like I sent folks to the edit page again, sorry... http://gurstein.wordpress.com/2013/03/20/multistakeholderism-vs-democracy-my -adventures-in-stakeholderland/ http://tinyurl.com/ce582jb M -----Original Message----- From: michael gurstein [mailto:gurstein at gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, March 20, 2013 7:01 AM To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; bestbits at lists.igcaucus.org; IRP-SC at lists.internetrightsandprinciples.org Subject: Blogpost: Multistakeholderism vs. Democracy: My Adventures in "Stakeholderland" My reflections on the recent "stakeholder" discussions and what the larger meaning of these might be... for MSism and for democracy. http://gurstein.wordpress.com/wp-admin/post.php?post=710&action=edit&message =6&postpost=v2 http://tinyurl.com/cd2fo32 Comments appreciated. Mike From Lea at global-partners.co.uk Wed Mar 20 13:34:30 2013 From: Lea at global-partners.co.uk (Lea Kaspar) Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2013 17:34:30 +0000 Subject: [bestbits] GPA Report - Internet Governance: Mapping the Battleground Message-ID: Dear all, Find attached a report by Global Partners that maps the upcoming forums that are likely to be relevant for internet governance. The report includes a calendar with what we identified as the most important conferences. I am hoping we can feed this information into the BestBits website and calendar to facilitate coordinating efforts. Feel free to share widely. Kind Regards, Lea Kaspar, Project Manager Global Partners & Associates Direct: +44 (0)207 549 0337 Office: +44 (0)207 549 0350 Email: lea at global-partners.co.uk Address: Development House, 56-64 Leonard St, London EC2A 4LT, UK www.global-partners.co.uk -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Internet Governance - Mapping the Battleground_final.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 792817 bytes Desc: Internet Governance - Mapping the Battleground_final.pdf URL: From Lea at global-partners.co.uk Wed Mar 20 14:03:41 2013 From: Lea at global-partners.co.uk (Lea Kaspar) Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2013 18:03:41 +0000 Subject: [bestbits] RE: GPA Report - Internet Governance: Mapping the Battleground Message-ID: With apologies for spamming your inboxes, if you could please refer to the above version of the report. There was a minor mistake in the introduction that is now corrected. Many thanks, Lea From: Lea Kaspar Sent: 20 March 2013 17:35 To: bestbits at lists.igcaucus.org Subject: GPA Report - Internet Governance: Mapping the Battleground Dear all, Find attached a report by Global Partners that maps the upcoming forums that are likely to be relevant for internet governance. The report includes a calendar with what we identified as the most important conferences. I am hoping we can feed this information into the BestBits website and calendar to facilitate coordinating efforts. Feel free to share widely. Kind Regards, Lea Kaspar, Project Manager Global Partners & Associates Direct: +44 (0)207 549 0337 Office: +44 (0)207 549 0350 Email: lea at global-partners.co.uk Address: Development House, 56-64 Leonard St, London EC2A 4LT, UK www.global-partners.co.uk -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Internet Governance - Mapping the Battleground_final.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 793924 bytes Desc: Internet Governance - Mapping the Battleground_final.pdf URL: From vikszabados at gmail.com Wed Mar 20 16:01:07 2013 From: vikszabados at gmail.com (Viktor Szabados) Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2013 21:01:07 +0100 Subject: [bestbits] RE: GPA Report - Internet Governance: Mapping the Battleground In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hello, thanks for the report. I really like it as there are so many different Int.Gov. actuers and processes, this report is the missing link between all of them. I had the chance to participate and make interviews at the EuroDIG 2012 Stockholm, I miss this European IGF in the report, http://www.eurodig.org/is coordinated by CoE. I was also at the IGF2012 in Baku with the same New Media Summer School initiative http://www.facebook.com/weboftomorrow http://elnoksegtudositoi.eu/rovatok/english/google-s-touchdown-with-freedom-of-expression-in-baku/ And before that I organised and facilitated the Youth Forum at the Cyberspace conference in Budapest. http://elnoksegtudositoi.eu/rovatok/kulugyek/young-people-had-a-say-at-the-budapest-conference-on-cyberspace-2012/ For the CoE I also facilitated the international training end of last year in preparation to the campaign year against hate speech online. http://elnoksegtudositoi.eu/rovatok/english/openness-of-internet-vs-legislation-human-rights-online/ thanks,your viktor 2013/3/20 Lea Kaspar > With apologies for spamming your inboxes, if you could please refer to the > above version of the report. There was a minor mistake in the introduction > that is now corrected.**** > > ** ** > > Many thanks,**** > > Lea**** > > ** ** > > *From:* Lea Kaspar > *Sent:* 20 March 2013 17:35 > *To:* bestbits at lists.igcaucus.org > *Subject:* GPA Report - Internet Governance: Mapping the Battleground**** > > ** ** > > Dear all,**** > > ** ** > > Find attached a report by Global Partners that maps the upcoming forums > that are likely to be relevant for internet governance. The report includes > a calendar with what we identified as the most important conferences. I am > hoping we can feed this information into the BestBits website and calendar > to facilitate coordinating efforts. **** > > ** ** > > Feel free to share widely. **** > > ** ** > > Kind Regards,**** > > ** ** > > *Lea Kaspar, Project Manager* > > *Global Partners & Associates* > > * * > > *Direct:* +44 (0)207 549 0337**** > > *Office:* +44 (0)207 549 0350 **** > > *Email:* lea at global-partners.co.uk**** > > *Address:* Development House, 56-64 Leonard St, London EC2A 4LT, UK **** > > ** ** > > *www.global-partners.co.uk* **** > > ** ** > -- tag - Internetes Jogok és Alapelvek Koalíció Irányító Bizottsága http://internetrightsandprinciples.org tag - Új Média Fiatal Szakértői Csoport - Európai Ifjúsági Fórum elnök - Ifjúsági Strukturált Párbeszéd Nemzeti Munkacsoport www.facebook.com/szoljbele alapító, főszerkesztő - Elnökség Tudósítói www.elnoksegtudositoi.eu alapító - Elnökség Emberei www.elnoksegemberei.eu egykori magyar EU-elnökségi összekötő - Európai Ifjúsági Fórum www.youthforum.org -- SZABADOS Viktor vikszabados at gmail.com +36 30 8535388 Budapest, HU -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kbankston at cdt.org Wed Mar 20 18:18:53 2013 From: kbankston at cdt.org (Kevin Bankston) Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2013 15:18:53 -0700 Subject: [bestbits] RE: GPA Report - Internet Governance: Mapping the Battleground In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <921EFBD2-0066-4B5C-9C15-F470FE56B42B@cdt.org> This looks incredibly helpful, Lea--thanks for sharing! Will this be on your site soon (or is it now? I didn't see it)? Would love to be able to link to it. ____________________________________ Kevin S. Bankston Senior Counsel and Free Expression Director Center for Democracy & Technology 1634 I St NW, Suite 1100 Washington, DC 20006 202.407.8834 direct 202.637.0968 fax kbankston at cdt.org Follow CDT on Twitter at @cendemtech On Mar 20, 2013, at 11:03 AM, Lea Kaspar wrote: > With apologies for spamming your inboxes, if you could please refer to the above version of the report. There was a minor mistake in the introduction that is now corrected. > > Many thanks, > Lea > > From: Lea Kaspar > Sent: 20 March 2013 17:35 > To: bestbits at lists.igcaucus.org > Subject: GPA Report - Internet Governance: Mapping the Battleground > > Dear all, > > Find attached a report by Global Partners that maps the upcoming forums that are likely to be relevant for internet governance. The report includes a calendar with what we identified as the most important conferences. I am hoping we can feed this information into the BestBits website and calendar to facilitate coordinating efforts. > > Feel free to share widely. > > Kind Regards, > > Lea Kaspar, Project Manager > Global Partners & Associates > > Direct: +44 (0)207 549 0337 > Office: +44 (0)207 549 0350 > Email: lea at global-partners.co.uk > Address: Development House, 56-64 Leonard St, London EC2A 4LT, UK > > www.global-partners.co.uk > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From bkmitra at gmail.com Thu Mar 21 05:37:10 2013 From: bkmitra at gmail.com (B K Mitra) Date: Thu, 21 Mar 2013 15:07:10 +0530 Subject: [bestbits] RE: GPA Report - Internet Governance: Mapping the Battleground In-Reply-To: <921EFBD2-0066-4B5C-9C15-F470FE56B42B@cdt.org> References: <921EFBD2-0066-4B5C-9C15-F470FE56B42B@cdt.org> Message-ID: Dear All, I appreciate the report which contains all the information needed,However we require this to harmonize with the issues raised by various forums.Regards_B K Mitra On 21 March 2013 03:48, Kevin Bankston wrote: > This looks incredibly helpful, Lea--thanks for sharing! Will this be on > your site soon (or is it now? I didn't see it)? Would love to be able to > link to it. > ____________________________________ > Kevin S. Bankston > Senior Counsel and Free Expression Director > Center for Democracy & Technology > 1634 I St NW, Suite 1100 > Washington, DC 20006 > 202.407.8834 direct > 202.637.0968 fax > kbankston at cdt.org > > Follow CDT on Twitter at @cendemtech > > On Mar 20, 2013, at 11:03 AM, Lea Kaspar wrote: > > With apologies for spamming your inboxes, if you could please refer to the > above version of the report. There was a minor mistake in the introduction > that is now corrected.**** > ** ** > Many thanks,**** > Lea**** > ** ** > *From:* Lea Kaspar > *Sent:* 20 March 2013 17:35 > *To:* bestbits at lists.igcaucus.org > *Subject:* GPA Report - Internet Governance: Mapping the Battleground**** > ** ** > Dear all,**** > ** ** > Find attached a report by Global Partners that maps the upcoming forums > that are likely to be relevant for internet governance. The report includes > a calendar with what we identified as the most important conferences. I am > hoping we can feed this information into the BestBits website and calendar > to facilitate coordinating efforts.**** > ** ** > Feel free to share widely.**** > ** ** > Kind Regards,**** > ** ** > *Lea Kaspar, Project Manager* > *Global Partners & Associates* > * * > *Direct:* +44 (0)207 549 0337**** > *Office:* +44 (0)207 549 0350**** > *Email:* lea at global-partners.co.uk**** > *Address:* Development House, 56-64 Leonard St, London EC2A 4LT, UK**** > ** ** > *www.global-partners.co.uk* **** > ** ** > > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jlevy at freepress.net Sun Mar 3 09:54:26 2013 From: jlevy at freepress.net (Josh Levy) Date: Sun, 3 Mar 2013 06:54:26 -0800 Subject: [bestbits] Report on Best Bits meeting at UNESCO WSIS plus 10 Paris February 2013 In-Reply-To: <513119B9.4070108@itforchange.net> References: <513119B9.4070108@itforchange.net> Message-ID: Hi Parminder and all - Free Press, the World Wide Web Foundation and a few other groups (including Andrew and Global Partners) have been discussing this "Web We Want" idea for the last couple of months, and there's been a lot of enthusiasm for it. We absolutely see it as complementary to the good work being undertaken by the groups on these and other lists, as well as the Best Bits effort to forge consensus around policy objectives. Right now, the vision of the Web We Want is to generate popular support for the many policy objectives we are all working toward, to link these objectives to a broader vision for human rights, and to direct resources to local fights in order to support the broad agenda of achieving an open Internet for all, without censorship or surveillance. We are very much in the beginning stages of piecing this project together, and we would like to loop in anyone and everyone who's interested. Please let me know off-list if you'd like to set up a time to discuss this in more depth. Thanks, Josh Levy On Mar 1, 2013, at 4:12 PM, parminder > wrote: Andrew/ All The meeting seems to have done really useful work. Very encouraging. Sorry, I missed it because my colleague was speaking at the closing ceremony and I had to be there for the sake organisational solidarity. Can someone point to where more stuff about the 'web we want' initiative can be found. It is an excellent way to go for developing a positive agenda. Maybe, the 'Internet we want' would a better name for us, and also we cna make it an original BestBits initiative. About Jeremy's paper, as I wrote to him, I very much agree with his framing of the problem. However I am unable to agree with the solution - a consensual democracy model. Becuase such a model gives big business a veto over every policy proposal, and if that happens things can only go from bad to worse. Nothing will ever change in a progressive direction. For instance, we can never get the Internet/ web we want. And if anyone disagrees with this, I am happy to do a scenario building exercise here. As for strengthening the IGF - as what I would like to call as an institution of (institutionalised) participatory democracy - I completely agree. But as in participatory democracy the relationship of the participatory sphere with policy making and executive spheres has to made clear. A self selection based participatory space cannot replace representation based democratic decision making process. But, yes, there is a much to discussed and innovated within larger principles of democracy which cannot be violated. parminder On Friday 01 March 2013 05:19 PM, Andrew Puddephatt wrote: At the UNESCO WSIS plus 10 meeting we had an informal gathering of those Best Bits (BB) participants who were present at the event – about 25 people in total. We took the opportunity to review the usefulness of the Best Bits process and arrived at the following consensus about the potential roles for BB: · To convene a BB regular forum before major international events such as the ITU, IGF etc. to provide an opportunity to share information and develop co-ordinated CS positions on those events; · The emphasis of BB should be to convene to take action which means identifying, where possible, common CS positions and acting upon them as we did at the WCIT; BB is therefore different to more discussion based forums such as the IG caucus; · This will require some degree of organisation. Though specific events can be organised by the relevant groups on the ground (APC offered to organise the pre-Bali IGF BB event) there are a number of tasks that need to be carried out if the network to function. These include - maintaining the website as an information source about activities; developing a wiki calendar of events that allows BB to share details of who’s going to what meetings; using the website to report back to the wider BB community on positions and actions taken, so strengthening our own accountability and transparency; maintaining the e-mail list and processing new people who want to join as well deregistering those who want to leave. · People have offered to take on different tasks (Access, Global Voices, APC etc.). Global Partners are already developing a calendar of events that could be the basis of a wiki on the website allowing people to signify events they are attending. Jeremy Malcolm from CI has indicated that he is willing to maintain the web and mailing list; Deborah from Access has also offered to help – any other offers please let me know; 5. At the BB official workshop we discussed a paper from Jeremy Malcolm looking at issues of internet governance. It analysed the deficiencies of the current internet governance model as well as suggesting a way forward. The overall conclusions of the formal discussion were: * We highlighted our concerns that current internet governance mechanisms are deficient. For example, they are unable to successfully address inequalities in internet access, threats to data privacy and network neutrality. * Participants acknowledged that governments do have a legitimate role to play in internet governance, for example in the areas outlined above. * In this context, we felt that the best way forward is to develop and grow the IGF by, for example, enabling the IGF to issue soft law in the form of recommendations or declarations. * Alongside enhancing the IGF it is essential that we address current accountability and transparency deficiencies of the IGF. Clearly there are many issues here that need further discussion. To that end we suggest that Jeremy’s paper is circulated on the BB list and discussed with the goal of arriving at an agreed CS position at the Bali IGF BB event. In the informal meeting an new initiative called the “Web we want” was mentioned, initiated at a meeting in the Berkman Center in the US, with the support of Tim Berners-Lee. This initiative hopes to set out what kind of internet we would like to see being built over the next period of time. There was some concern expressed at the proliferation of initiatives but in the end we suggested we incorporate it as one of the themes for discussion in the run up to Bali alongside the issue of governance. So if BB participants are happy the meeting in Bali would have two purposes: to agree a CSO position on governance and a CS position on the web we want. In the meantime a calendar of events will be set up on the BB website so that we can indicate who is attending forthcoming meetings of the ITU and CSTD etc. so that we can consult online about strategy and tactics as will as co-ordinate our advocacy while at the meetings. Andrew Puddephatt, Director Global Partners & Associates Direct: +44 (0)20 7549 0336 Office: +44 (0)20 7549 0350 Mobile: +44 (0)771 339 9597 Email: andrew at global-partners.co.uk Address: Development House, 56-64 Leonard St, London EC2A 4LT, UK www.global-partners.co.uk -- Josh Levy Internet Campaign Director Free Press 413-585-1533 x208 National Conference for Media Reform Denver, April 5–7, 2013 http://conference.freepress.net -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From alex.comninos at gmail.com Thu Mar 21 06:12:38 2013 From: alex.comninos at gmail.com (Alex Comninos) Date: Thu, 21 Mar 2013 11:12:38 +0100 Subject: [bestbits] RE: GPA Report - Internet Governance: Mapping the Battleground In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Dear all The report looks great. I think however the use of the word "battleground" is perhaps not suited to IG. IG should not be a zero-sum game, with as in a battle, winners and losers. On 20 Mar 2013 7:05 PM, "Lea Kaspar" wrote: > With apologies for spamming your inboxes, if you could please refer to the > above version of the report. There was a minor mistake in the introduction > that is now corrected.**** > > ** ** > > Many thanks,**** > > Lea**** > > ** ** > > *From:* Lea Kaspar > *Sent:* 20 March 2013 17:35 > *To:* bestbits at lists.igcaucus.org > *Subject:* GPA Report - Internet Governance: Mapping the Battleground**** > > ** ** > > Dear all,**** > > ** ** > > Find attached a report by Global Partners that maps the upcoming forums > that are likely to be relevant for internet governance. The report includes > a calendar with what we identified as the most important conferences. I am > hoping we can feed this information into the BestBits website and calendar > to facilitate coordinating efforts. **** > > ** ** > > Feel free to share widely. **** > > ** ** > > Kind Regards,**** > > ** ** > > *Lea Kaspar, Project Manager* > > *Global Partners & Associates* > > * * > > *Direct:* +44 (0)207 549 0337**** > > *Office:* +44 (0)207 549 0350 **** > > *Email:* lea at global-partners.co.uk**** > > *Address:* Development House, 56-64 Leonard St, London EC2A 4LT, UK **** > > ** ** > > *www.global-partners.co.uk* **** > > ** ** > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Lea at global-partners.co.uk Thu Mar 21 08:10:31 2013 From: Lea at global-partners.co.uk (Lea Kaspar) Date: Thu, 21 Mar 2013 12:10:31 +0000 Subject: [bestbits] RE: GPA Report - Internet Governance: Mapping the Battleground In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Dear Alex, Thanks so much for your email and comment. Glad you like the report! As for the title, I see your point to a certain extent – bellicose rhetoric can be quite unhelpful. In this case, however, I think it fairly portrays the situation in which different arguments on appropriate IG models will be going head to head in these forums. That does not necessarily imply a binary outcome – finding common ground may well be what we get to in the end. But this win-win outcome is not a given, and in its absence, some actors may end up on the losing side of the debate. With this in mind, we thought this title gave the matter an adequate sense of urgency and weight. I’m happy to continue this discussion, but in the meantime I hope this helps clarify our point of view! Best, Lea From: Alex Comninos [mailto:alex.comninos at gmail.com] Sent: 21 March 2013 10:13 To: Lea Kaspar Cc: bestbits at lists.igcaucus.org Subject: Re: [bestbits] RE: GPA Report - Internet Governance: Mapping the Battleground Dear all The report looks great. I think however the use of the word "battleground" is perhaps not suited to IG. IG should not be a zero-sum game, with as in a battle, winners and losers. On 20 Mar 2013 7:05 PM, "Lea Kaspar" > wrote: With apologies for spamming your inboxes, if you could please refer to the above version of the report. There was a minor mistake in the introduction that is now corrected. Many thanks, Lea From: Lea Kaspar Sent: 20 March 2013 17:35 To: bestbits at lists.igcaucus.org Subject: GPA Report - Internet Governance: Mapping the Battleground Dear all, Find attached a report by Global Partners that maps the upcoming forums that are likely to be relevant for internet governance. The report includes a calendar with what we identified as the most important conferences. I am hoping we can feed this information into the BestBits website and calendar to facilitate coordinating efforts. Feel free to share widely. Kind Regards, Lea Kaspar, Project Manager Global Partners & Associates Direct: +44 (0)207 549 0337 Office: +44 (0)207 549 0350 Email: lea at global-partners.co.uk Address: Development House, 56-64 Leonard St, London EC2A 4LT, UK www.global-partners.co.uk -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Lea at global-partners.co.uk Thu Mar 21 12:39:39 2013 From: Lea at global-partners.co.uk (Lea Kaspar) Date: Thu, 21 Mar 2013 16:39:39 +0000 Subject: [bestbits] RE: GPA Report - Internet Governance: Mapping the Battleground In-Reply-To: <921EFBD2-0066-4B5C-9C15-F470FE56B42B@cdt.org> References: <921EFBD2-0066-4B5C-9C15-F470FE56B42B@cdt.org> Message-ID: Hi all, As promised, here's the link to our report: http://global-partners.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Internet-Governance-Mapping-the-Battleground_final.pdf Best, Lea From: Kevin Bankston [mailto:kbankston at cdt.org] Sent: 20 March 2013 22:19 To: Lea Kaspar Cc: bestbits at lists.igcaucus.org Subject: Re: [bestbits] RE: GPA Report - Internet Governance: Mapping the Battleground This looks incredibly helpful, Lea--thanks for sharing! Will this be on your site soon (or is it now? I didn't see it)? Would love to be able to link to it. ____________________________________ Kevin S. Bankston Senior Counsel and Free Expression Director Center for Democracy & Technology 1634 I St NW, Suite 1100 Washington, DC 20006 202.407.8834 direct 202.637.0968 fax kbankston at cdt.org Follow CDT on Twitter at @cendemtech On Mar 20, 2013, at 11:03 AM, Lea Kaspar wrote: With apologies for spamming your inboxes, if you could please refer to the above version of the report. There was a minor mistake in the introduction that is now corrected. Many thanks, Lea From: Lea Kaspar Sent: 20 March 2013 17:35 To: bestbits at lists.igcaucus.org Subject: GPA Report - Internet Governance: Mapping the Battleground Dear all, Find attached a report by Global Partners that maps the upcoming forums that are likely to be relevant for internet governance. The report includes a calendar with what we identified as the most important conferences. I am hoping we can feed this information into the BestBits website and calendar to facilitate coordinating efforts. Feel free to share widely. Kind Regards, Lea Kaspar, Project Manager Global Partners & Associates Direct: +44 (0)207 549 0337 Office: +44 (0)207 549 0350 Email: lea at global-partners.co.uk Address: Development House, 56-64 Leonard St, London EC2A 4LT, UK www.global-partners.co.uk -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From joy at apc.org Sat Mar 30 23:31:05 2013 From: joy at apc.org (joy) Date: Sun, 31 Mar 2013 16:31:05 +1300 Subject: [bestbits] Comments asking ICANN to deny application for .pharmacy registration In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <5157ADF9.9060202@apc.org> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Hi Rashmi - for those who are following this, here is the link to the ICANN independent objector's recent comment on closed generics: http://www.independent-objector-newgtlds.org/english-version/the-issue-of-closed-generic-gtlds/ it is also worth looking at the opinions given in relation to "controversial" gTLD applications such as dotgay and dotislam among others: http://www.independent-objector-newgtlds.org/english-version/home/ Regards Joy On 15/03/2013 3:15 a.m., Rashmi Rangnath wrote: > All: > > I thought many of you may be interested in this application that > Public Citizen filed opposing the National Association of Boards of > Pharmacy's (NABP) application for the .pharmacy TLD. Public Citizen > is concerned that the registration would allow the NABP to exclude > licensed pharmacies located in Canada from acquiring domain names > under .pharmacy. This would prevent access to affordable medicines > for many in the US. > > A link to Public Citizen's comments is here: > https://gtldcomment.icann.org/comments-feedback/applicationcomment/commentdetails/12145-- > > > Best, > > Rashmi > > Rashmi Rangnath Director, Global Knowledge Initiative and Staff > Attorney Public Knowledge 1818 N Street NW Suite 410 Washington, > D.C. 20036 202 861 0020 rrangnath at publicknowledge.org > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJRV635AAoJEA9zUGgfM+bq8egH/2hQ1/NvJsIH1ru5F6hqOM19 pUOTD9uEXYeONEO0oUOWiI/dQluR7aI4kWvFLOMtTlMklDtqfE7uAg1Q/sxZfTtC yRms/I7BtyoeN7yyvEVF7hB+vZoxnQRdCDPAIqNCIuemHeR8cVI0SuTnIqvGkwTs lbk/zlGXgtF3G5BUIW0t+uAkLlvz3KytxoEO70NsghZ6TUEXtPCRLjGNmmL9LfJO H/BcvuEz2hSjaxhUlGeUAsr1mWoNJy2h2kgGJWyQFakjQDe/o7LYAg58zNQnZiDX hWoGipCzvEWq24ykwc3kIU34Q/w8kJgt2oph9sVUloughyqabI4pFt+uie77Bmc= =X6RY -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From deborah at accessnow.org Mon Mar 11 11:25:54 2013 From: deborah at accessnow.org (Deborah Brown) Date: Mon, 11 Mar 2013 11:25:54 -0400 Subject: [bestbits] IGF 2013 Preliminary Call for Workshops Proposals Message-ID: Dear all, I don't think this information has been circulated yet on this list. It's worth noting the 22 March to submit preliminary proposals for workshops for those who organized workshops at the 2011 and 2012 IGFs, and that for new comers, there is a later deadline of 30 April. Best, Deborah http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/component/content/article/121-preparatory-process/1288-2013-preliminary-call-for-workshops-proposals 2013 Preliminary Call for Workshops Proposals[image: PDF][image: Print][image: E-mail] The Multistakeholder Advisory Group (MAG) in its meeting on 1 March 2013 agreed to modify the procedure for the selection of workshops. They advised that a preliminary call for workshop proposals be issued. Workshop proponents should include a concise description of the thematic area of interest and other pertinent information in their submissions. The proposals could focus on the priority themes identified by the open consultations/MAG meetings or could also introduce other themes. (These can be found in the annex of the MAG summary report : .) The MAG recommended that a two track process be followed: - For organizers of workshops in *2011 or 2012* IGF meeting the submission of a preliminary proposal by *22 March 2013 *is mandatory. After this deadline the MAG will go through and assess the preliminary proposals. The MAG through the Secretariat will then invite selected workshop proponents to submit full and complete workshop proposals by *30 April 2013 *based on these preliminary proposals. Workshop proponents with similar proposals may be asked to work together to develop a single fully-fledged proposal. Workshop proponents cannot significantly change the topic of an approved proposal. - In order to broaden the base of workshop organizers, the MAG welcomes new comers. First time proponents are encouraged to but do not need to submit preliminary workshop proposals.They do however have to submit a full and complete workshop proposal by *30 April 2013. *The Secretariat stands ready to assist new workshop proponents in any way. As a result of the above MAG recommendations the IGF Secretariat is issuing a preliminary call for workshop proposals to which the deadline will be *22 March 2013*. An online form will be available on *15 March 2013 *on the IGF website for submissions. The template will be as follows: 1. Workshop working title: 2. Concise description of broader thematic area of interest: 3. Concise description of specific issues or policy questions to be addressed: 4. Indication of workshop format: a. Panel* b. Roundtable c. Free discussion (with one or two moderators) d. Other (please describe) 5. Name of contact person:** 6. Institution: 7. Contact email: -------------------------------------------------------------------- * Names of speakers are not required at this stage. * *New workshop organizers are encouraged. -- Deborah Brown Policy Analyst Access | AccessNow.org E. deborah at accessnow.org S. deborah.l.brown T. deblebrown PGP 0x5EB4727D -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jeremy at ciroap.org Thu Mar 14 03:07:42 2013 From: jeremy at ciroap.org (Jeremy Malcolm) Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2013 15:07:42 +0800 Subject: [bestbits] Best Bits meeting plans for the 2013 IGF Message-ID: <5141773E.1070901@ciroap.org> Hello all, This is to follow on from Andrew's summary of the informal Best Bits meeting in Paris. If you can't find it, it is available in the web archives of this list at http://lists.igcaucus.org/arc/bestbits. (Thanks also to Deborah for forwarding the notice about the short deadline for IGF workshop proposals.) On the basis of suggestions and offers made so far, here is what we are proposing for Best Bits in 2013. It follows from the discussions in Paris, but is just a rough outline and it is still open for your comments: * A two-day pre-IGF Best Bits meeting on the weekend of 19-20 October in Bali, with an overall theme around a positive agenda for Internet governance, which (like last time) will split into two very practical agenda items, one of them substantive ("what we want"), and the other procedural ("how we can get it"): o Identifying common civil society strategies for advancing a human rights Internet. This can incorporate related initiatives such as the IGF MAG's newly-established Internet principles working group, and the "Web We Want" initiative that a number of those from this list are involved with. o A positive agenda for the evolution of Internet governance arrangements. This will tie in with the work of the CSTD Working Group on Enhanced Cooperation. The output of this would be a common civil society position on an enhanced cooperation mechanism or process (perhaps IGF-based) that we could support. * Two public IGF workshops that would present each of the two agenda items above to a wider audience, and would include participation by representatives of the other stakeholder groups. Global Partners is working on text for the workshop proposals, and will post them for comment when ready. Meanwhile I am fundraising now to get some more travel funds for those who will need it, and indeed to broaden the funding base compared to last time. The funds will also be used for a permanent website, including a rather sophisticated event calendar, which will begin as a rather less sophisticated event calendar, and grow features progressively. If you have any comments on the above outline please share them. Thanks! -- *Dr Jeremy Malcolm Senior Policy Officer Consumers International | the global campaigning voice for consumers* Office for Asia-Pacific and the Middle East Lot 5-1 Wisma WIM, 7 Jalan Abang Haji Openg, TTDI, 60000 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia Tel: +60 3 7726 1599 WCRD 2013 -- Consumer Justice Now! | Consumer Protection Map: https://wcrd2013.crowdmap.com/main | #wcrd2013 @Consumers_Int | www.consumersinternational.org | www.facebook.com/consumersinternational Read our email confidentiality notice . Don't print this email unless necessary. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From parminder at itforchange.net Thu Mar 14 03:25:01 2013 From: parminder at itforchange.net (parminder) Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2013 12:55:01 +0530 Subject: Fwd: [Fwd: [bestbits] Best Bits meeting plans for the 2013 IGF] In-Reply-To: <9f7db1d07be675a4910c806c46571f3c.squirrel@www.itforchange.net> References: <9f7db1d07be675a4910c806c46571f3c.squirrel@www.itforchange.net> Message-ID: <51417B4D.7090109@itforchange.net> Thanks Jeremy and Andrew, This looks like a very well done and purposeful agenda/ work plan . .. parminder ---------------------------- Original Message ---------------------------- Subject: [bestbits] Best Bits meeting plans for the 2013 IGF From: "Jeremy Malcolm" Date: Thu, March 14, 2013 12:07 am To: bestbits at lists.igcaucus.org -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hello all, This is to follow on from Andrew's summary of the informal Best Bits meeting in Paris. If you can't find it, it is available in the web archives of this list at http://lists.igcaucus.org/arc/bestbits. (Thanks also to Deborah for forwarding the notice about the short deadline for IGF workshop proposals.) On the basis of suggestions and offers made so far, here is what we are proposing for Best Bits in 2013. It follows from the discussions in Paris, but is just a rough outline and it is still open for your comments: * A two-day pre-IGF Best Bits meeting on the weekend of 19-20 October in Bali, with an overall theme around a positive agenda for Internet governance, which (like last time) will split into two very practical agenda items, one of them substantive ("what we want"), and the other procedural ("how we can get it"): o Identifying common civil society strategies for advancing a human rights Internet. This can incorporate related initiatives such as the IGF MAG's newly-established Internet principles working group, and the "Web We Want" initiative that a number of those from this list are involved with. o A positive agenda for the evolution of Internet governance arrangements. This will tie in with the work of the CSTD Working Group on Enhanced Cooperation. The output of this would be a common civil society position on an enhanced cooperation mechanism or process (perhaps IGF-based) that we could support. * Two public IGF workshops that would present each of the two agenda items above to a wider audience, and would include participation by representatives of the other stakeholder groups. Global Partners is working on text for the workshop proposals, and will post them for comment when ready. Meanwhile I am fundraising now to get some more travel funds for those who will need it, and indeed to broaden the funding base compared to last time. The funds will also be used for a permanent website, including a rather sophisticated event calendar, which will begin as a rather less sophisticated event calendar, and grow features progressively. If you have any comments on the above outline please share them. Thanks! -- *Dr Jeremy Malcolm Senior Policy Officer Consumers International | the global campaigning voice for consumers* Office for Asia-Pacific and the Middle East Lot 5-1 Wisma WIM, 7 Jalan Abang Haji Openg, TTDI, 60000 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia Tel: +60 3 7726 1599 WCRD 2013 -- Consumer Justice Now! | Consumer Protection Map: https://wcrd2013.crowdmap.com/main | #wcrd2013 @Consumers_Int | www.consumersinternational.org | www.facebook.com/consumersinternational Read our email confidentiality notice . Don't print this email unless necessary. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From anriette at apc.org Thu Mar 14 03:35:13 2013 From: anriette at apc.org (Anriette Esterhuysen) Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2013 09:35:13 +0200 Subject: Fwd: [Fwd: [bestbits] Best Bits meeting plans for the 2013 IGF] In-Reply-To: <51417B4D.7090109@itforchange.net> References: <9f7db1d07be675a4910c806c46571f3c.squirrel@www.itforchange.net> <51417B4D.7090109@itforchange.net> Message-ID: <51417DB1.80001@apc.org> Yes... agree. Looks good. And APC's offer to help organise working with Donny and with our members and partners in Indonesia still stands. Anriette On 14/03/2013 09:25, parminder wrote: > > > Thanks Jeremy and Andrew, > > This looks like a very well done and purposeful agenda/ work plan . .. > > > parminder > > ---------------------------- Original Message > ---------------------------- > Subject: [bestbits] Best Bits meeting plans for the 2013 IGF > From: "Jeremy Malcolm" > Date: Thu, March 14, 2013 12:07 am > To: bestbits at lists.igcaucus.org > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > Hello all, > > This is to follow on from Andrew's summary of the informal Best Bits > meeting in Paris. If you can't find it, it is available in the web > archives of this list at http://lists.igcaucus.org/arc/bestbits. > (Thanks also to Deborah for forwarding the notice about the short > deadline for IGF workshop proposals.) > > On the basis of suggestions and offers made so far, here is what we are > proposing for Best Bits in 2013. It follows from the discussions in > Paris, but is just a rough outline and it is still open for your > comments: > > * A two-day pre-IGF Best Bits meeting on the weekend of 19-20 October > in Bali, with an overall theme around a positive agenda for Internet > governance, which (like last time) will split into two very > practical agenda items, one of them substantive ("what we want"), > and the other procedural ("how we can get it"): > o Identifying common civil society strategies for advancing a > human rights Internet. This can incorporate related initiatives > such as the IGF MAG's newly-established Internet principles > working group, and the "Web We Want" initiative that a number of > those from this list are involved with. > o A positive agenda for the evolution of Internet governance > arrangements. This will tie in with the work of the CSTD > Working Group on Enhanced Cooperation. The output of this would > be a common civil society position on an enhanced cooperation > mechanism or process (perhaps IGF-based) that we could support. > * Two public IGF workshops that would present each of the two agenda > items above to a wider audience, and would include participation by > representatives of the other stakeholder groups. Global Partners is > working on text for the workshop proposals, and will post them for > comment when ready. > > Meanwhile I am fundraising now to get some more travel funds for those > who will need it, and indeed to broaden the funding base compared to > last time. The funds will also be used for a permanent website, > including a rather sophisticated event calendar, which will begin as a > rather less sophisticated event calendar, and grow features > progressively. > > If you have any comments on the above outline please share them. Thanks! > -- ------------------------------------------------------ anriette esterhuysen anriette at apc.org executive director, association for progressive communications www.apc.org po box 29755, melville 2109 south africa tel/fax +27 11 726 1692 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jeremy at ciroap.org Thu Mar 14 03:42:11 2013 From: jeremy at ciroap.org (Jeremy Malcolm) Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2013 15:42:11 +0800 Subject: Fwd: [Fwd: [bestbits] Best Bits meeting plans for the 2013 IGF] In-Reply-To: <51417DB1.80001@apc.org> References: <9f7db1d07be675a4910c806c46571f3c.squirrel@www.itforchange.net> <51417B4D.7090109@itforchange.net> <51417DB1.80001@apc.org> Message-ID: <51417F53.4070907@ciroap.org> On 14/03/13 15:35, Anriette Esterhuysen wrote: > Yes... agree. Looks good. And APC's offer to help organise working > with Donny and with our members and partners in Indonesia still stands. Thanks Anriette, I should have acknowledged that in the email! -- *Dr Jeremy Malcolm Senior Policy Officer Consumers International | the global campaigning voice for consumers* Office for Asia-Pacific and the Middle East Lot 5-1 Wisma WIM, 7 Jalan Abang Haji Openg, TTDI, 60000 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia Tel: +60 3 7726 1599 WCRD 2013 -- Consumer Justice Now! | Consumer Protection Map: https://wcrd2013.crowdmap.com/main | #wcrd2013 @Consumers_Int | www.consumersinternational.org | www.facebook.com/consumersinternational Read our email confidentiality notice . Don't print this email unless necessary. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: