[bestbits] Re: [governance] Rousseff & Chehade: Brazil will host world event on Internet governance in 2014

[Valeria Betancourt]

+ 1

Valeria

On 10/10/2013, at 23:12, Anja Kovacs wrote:

> Having had a look at the draft letter after a good night's sleep, I  
> agree with Deborah and others, and will stick to my initial position  
> that we should take some time to develop our own agenda before  
> dashing this off. As someone else noted in this very long thread,  
> doing so can also be of value not only for this event but in a more  
> general sense. We needn't necessarily agree on answers, but it could  
> be powerful if we could at least collectively put forward (some of)  
> the questions to be asked - about CS involvement as much as about  
> the role of governments. Could this, for example, be an appropriate  
> place to start pushing a debate on the need to update the  
> "respective roles and responsibilities" clause in the Tunis Agenda,  
> or at least the way we read it? Even if we decide not to ask for it  
> here, that is one item that could be added to a CS agenda for the  
> reform of Internet governance.
>
> Sending letters that are too generic might also lead to them getting  
> ignored, which is obviously something we want to avoid. Ideally, the  
> news that a CS letter is on the way should fill the recipient with a  
> pleasant mix of excitement and apprehension ;)
>
> My two paise,
> Anja
>
> On Oct 11, 2013 8:45 AM, "Jeremy Malcolm" <jeremy at ciroap.org> wrote:
> On 11/10/13 00:00, Anriette Esterhuysen wrote:
>> I cannot agree more.
>>
>> Not only do I share Rafik's skepticism, I also think we should not  
>> fall into the trap of thinking of ICANN (and the ICANN DNS gold  
>> rush) as being at the core of the policy-making processes that  
>> matter to how people access, use, and develop the internet.
>>
>> That ICANN is now setting broader agendas, along with governments,  
>> reflects entirely what is problematic with how power and influence  
>> plays out in IG and I find it alarming.
>>
>> Definitely agree with Anja and others who say that CS should get  
>> involved in this debate. A critical perspective is needed now more  
>> than ever.
>
> My first thought too was that this was opportunism on ICANN's part  
> (and, heck, probably on Dilma's too), but so what?  When two top  
> leaders have done more in one day to open the doors to Internet  
> governance reform than the IGF MAG has done in eight years, hurrah  
> for opportunism - let's make the most of it.
>
> But I also agree that the proposed letter is a bit light on, and  
> that we should develop more of an agenda for the event before  
> sending such a letter.  This can, as Deborah said, be done online  
> and in person at the Best Bits meeting, and should be an output of  
> the meeting which we open for endorsements and IGC consensus call  
> then.
>
> -- 
> 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
>
> Explore our new Resource Zone - the global consumer movement  
> knowledge hub | http://www.consumersinternational.org/news-and-media/resource-zone
>
> @Consumers_Int | www.consumersinternational.org | www.facebook.com/consumersinternational
>
> Read our email confidentiality notice. Don't print this email unless  
> necessary.
>
> WARNING: This email has not been encrypted. You are strongly  
> recommended to enable PGP or S/MIME encryption at your end. For  
> instructions, see http://jere.my/l/8m.
>





-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/bestbits/attachments/20131011/643de5a8/attachment.htm>