[bestbits] [very quick follow up] I*coalition/dialogue = 1net

Wed Nov 13 06:03:17 EST 2013

Dear all,

Thanks for the comments. It seams we are on the same page here, which is
great!

So next steps on my end here:

1) writing the Brazilian gov to reaffirm that the 4 liasons are the channel
for international civil society, independently of what happens with the
1net;

2) reaffirm the same to the 1net;

3) asking clarity and transparency regarding the next steps for debating
the two documents of 1net, demanding them to be public and the existence of
mechanisms for equally balanced engagement.

I'm doing all this right now.

On the other hand, in agreement with Matthew's suggestion, from all of you
it would be really useful indeed:

1) to have the 4 formally appointed from our network, please, remember that
CGI.br has a role in representing *national civil society *in the
organization of the summit, and it should have, but the liasons are working
as a bridge to the *international civil society.* It would be great if we
could have this in paper, so we could have more legitimacy to interact with
the Brazilian government, which will also feel more comfortable with it. I
could ask help from BB steering committee to write this or if anyone would
like to volunteer, it is great as well.

Does it seam like a plan?

best

joana

On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 8:35 AM, matthew shears <mshears at cdt.org> wrote:

>  Thanks Joana to you and others for keeping us apprised.
>
> Couple of comments:
>
> 2) If we have not already done so, I think it might be useful to formally
> identify the four representatives to the Brazilian government as the
> interfaces for civil society (or some appropriate wording) indicating that
> this is a follow-on from our discussions with them at the IGF etc.
>
> 3) it is important that the discussion on 1net documents either take place
> in an open manner or take place in a clearly defined and equally balanced
> multi-stakeholder group (steering or whatever).  At the moment they appear
> to be being drafted in public and private.
>
> 5) + 1 - we should participate *and shape* until that time we can make a
> decision based on facts.   That said, actual documents we can contribute to
> in a transparent way need to be available and participation mechanisms that
> enable equally balanced engagement need to be put in place.  We need to
> have these asap.
>
> Matthew
>
>
> On 12/11/2013 17:28, Joana Varon wrote:
>
>    Hi Matthew and all,
>
>  5 important points to complete my previous email, red for *important
> info *and blue for *actions* required:
>
> 1) The thread discussing the framing document/concept note stopped. I'm
> asking for a clarification to see either it is going to be debated within
> the steering committee or what. Nevertheless, it would be good if we manage
> to reach Buenos Aires with our comments on this (I'm trying to find means
> to go, if anyone has suggestions, let me know). So, let's follow Joy's
> comments and add it to a pad for inputs. I'll coordinate with Carolina to
> have a commented version online for edits and send you a link asap.
>
>
> 2) On the other hand, another document regarding the Summit (now called
> conference), has been sent to the list (please, find it attached). It's a
> proposal written by Icann and Adiel. I'm also trying to have clarifications
> about it's goal (either if it is meant to be a proposal from the
> 1net/dialogue to the Brazilian government or if it is a Icann draft). I
> don't like it in the way it stands, but we can discuss this later on, after
> we get this clarification. On the other hand, it would be good to advance a
> bit from our statement and know what do WE want from the summit. :)
>
>
>  3) Also, Carolina has just asked the list to have all this documents
> (concept note and summit draft) available for subscribers as well.
>
>
> 4) So, in order to answer Bill's question on the other thread initiated by
> Carolina with the previous follow up summary, we believe most of the work
> on the next steps for 1net will be focused on:
>
> -  these two documents (1 net/dialogue concept note and summit draft)
>
> - pointing representatives from each stakeholder group (business, tech
> and civil soc) for the steering committee and for the conference working
> group. Please, note that governments are not part of the list of
> stakeholders involved in the dialogue/1net. (ps. I'm just reporting, a
> dialogue without governments is not my perfect view of a coalition)
>
>  5) The issue of engaging or not still remains, but I would keep going to
> see.. once there is a steering committee and these two documents are
> formatted, we will have a better idea of all this. Carolina, please,
> correct me if I'm wrong, but, besides recognizing that each stakeholder
> group will point it's representatives, I haven't seen any mechanism or
> process debated to set the steering, have you?
>
>  kind regards,
>
>  joana
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 1:20 PM, matthew shears <mshears at cdt.org> wrote:
>
>>  Hi all
>>
>> Could someone point us to the latest version of the 1net framing document?
>>
>> Thanks.
>>
>> Matthew
>>
>>
>> On 12/11/2013 15:18, Joana Varon wrote:
>>
>>   Good point, Adam. Please, remember that this quick summary is a report
>> on the the strategy developed just within the dialogue/1net.
>>
>> The Brazilian government is still to delivery an statement with details
>> for engagement, but the spirit, as far as I know, is that it will be open
>> and inclusive. Please, remember that we have even proposed to the Minister
>> of Communications to open a platform for public consultation and the idea
>> was welcomed.
>>  Let us develop further the conversations with the Brazilian government
>> to search for more on this.
>>
>> best
>>
>> joana
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 12:52 PM, Adam Peake <ajp at glocom.ac.jp> wrote:
>>
>>> Dear Joana,
>>>
>>> Thank you very much.
>>>
>>> Quick question - in the opening and closing sessions in Bali,
>>> representatives of Brazil said the meeting would be open for all to help
>>> organize and for all to participate: an open invitation to an open meeting.
>>>  Was this discussed on the list, and they instead decided on a more limited
>>> steering committee?  (I will try to look at the archives).
>>>
>>> Best,
>>>
>>> Adam
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Nov 12, 2013, at 11:09 PM, Joana Varon wrote:
>>>
>>> > Dear all,
>>> >
>>> > Hello! Sorry for being away on bb threads, I was offline for a few
>>> days, I´m catching up with the other emails, but please, find here quick
>>> updates on the debates about the I*coalition/dialogue, which now is being
>>> called dialogue or 1net:
>>> >
>>> > Wisely, the archive and the subscription process to the list is now
>>> open to anyone. Subscriptions here
>>> https://nro.net/mailman/listinfo/i-coordination. Archives accessible
>>> here https://nro.net/pipermail/i-coordination/
>>> >
>>> > Also, a website called 1net.org was put in place and sent by Adiel to
>>> the list, who asked for comments. A note will go out in the next days to
>>> those who attended wider meetings in Bali to sign up via the website.
>>> >
>>> > Work of the 1net dialogue shall be divided in two tracks:
>>> >
>>> > - Brazilian summit (that part of the coalition/dialogue, particularly
>>> business, remains calling meeting). For that, the dialogue, following our
>>> move in Bali, is also suggesting to have 3 representatives from each
>>> stakeholder (civil society, business, technical community), to identify 3
>>> representatives to participate in the preparations.
>>> >
>>> > - Overall dialogue, were the first step will be exchanges to establish
>>> a dialogue (or 1net) steering committee to help prepare any materials for
>>> discussion/coordinate with the broader community.  On my perception,
>>> reaching balance on this steering committee will be vital to assess our
>>> level of engagement in the dialogue. The issue of representativeness of CS
>>> will knock again on our doors.
>>> >
>>> > Hope it helps
>>> >
>>> > All the best,
>>> >
>>> > joana
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > --
>>> > --
>>> >
>>> > Joana Varon Ferraz
>>> > @joana_varon
>>> > PGP 0x016B8E73
>>> >
>>> >
>>>  > ____________________________________________________________
>>> > You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>>> >     bestbits at lists.bestbits.net.
>>> > To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit:
>>> >     http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> --
>>
>> Joana Varon Ferraz
>> @joana_varon
>> PGP 0x016B8E73
>>
>>
>>
>>   --
>>
>> Matthew Shears
>> Director and Representative
>> Global Internet Policy and Human Rights
>> Center for Democracy & Technology (CDT)mshears at cdt.org+44 (0) 771 247 2987
>> Skype: mshears
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> --
>
> Joana Varon Ferraz
> @joana_varon
> PGP 0x016B8E73
>
>
>
> --
>
> Matthew Shears
> Director and Representative
> Global Internet Policy and Human Rights
> Center for Democracy & Technology (CDT)mshears at cdt.org+44 (0) 771 247 2987
> Skype: mshears
>
>

-- 
-- 

Joana Varon Ferraz
@joana_varon
PGP 0x016B8E73
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/bestbits/attachments/20131113/5e374914/attachment.htm>