[bestbits] Whether to participate in NETmundial Initiative - RFC

[Seun Ojedeji]

Hi,

The way i have come to understand NMI (based on my discussion with Fadi
@GIC) is that its not going to be the usual meeting avenues and it will
infact not hold physical meetings (the NETMundial meeting the held in
Brazil will be its first and last physical meeting) but will have all its
meeting online with everyone participating remotely. So it seem there will
be room for participation, unless BB/other civil society are thinking of
participating at the NMI council level which is also important.

However, my concern in all these is how to ensure connection all these
different fora Silos in other to have some track-able outcomes. I am also
wondering how the developing nations will be able to fully participate in
all these.

Cheers!

On Tue, Nov 18, 2014 at 4:53 AM, Jeremy Malcolm <jmalcolm at eff.org> wrote:

> By now everyone will have read from previous threads that ISOC and the
> Just Net Coalition (JNC) have both decided not to participate in the
> NETmundial Initiative, and you may have also have read some false
> information that Best Bits and other networks represented on the Civil
> Society Coordination Group (CSCG) *have* decided to participate.  As Ian
> Peter's clarifying message setting out the truth of the matter should have
> made clear, that is *not* the case.  All that has happened is that the we
> have obtained as much assurance as we can that *if* we decide to
> participate, then the Secretariat (ICANN, WEF and CGI.br) will accept our
> self-nomination process rather than choosing civil society representatives
> independently.
>
> Now we turn to you, our communities, to provide us with guidance about
> whether to proceed further or not.  Some views have already been expressed
> pro and con.  I have been (and remain) publicly critical about the
> NETmundial Initiative, but on the other hand the reasoning ISOC and JNC
> give for boycotting it is rather specious, because they characterise the
> initiative as being something that it doesn't purport to be - ie. a single
> central policy-making body for Internet governance. This is an alarmist
> critique that turns the NETmundial Initiative into an exaggerated ITU-style
> bogeyman.
>
> So whilst there is certainly room for disagreement about whether we should
> bestow the benefit of our participation on the Initiative (I remain deeply
> conflicted about this), let's decide on the basis of factual pro and con
> arguments rather than oversimplifications about the 1% taking over the
> Internet.  Also note that a few civil society representatives, including
> Human Rights Watch, have endorsed it already and are featured on the
> carousel message on the front page of netmundial.org.
>
> So what do people think?  If you haven't already shared your views, please
> do so on this thread, within the next few days if possible.
>
> --
> Jeremy Malcolm
> Senior Global Policy Analyst
> Electronic Frontier Foundation
> https://eff.org
> jmalcolm at eff.org
>
> Tel: 415.436.9333 ext 161
>
> :: Defending Your Rights in the Digital World ::
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
>



-- 
------------------------------------------------------------------------





*Seun Ojedeji,Federal University Oye-Ekitiweb:      http://www.fuoye.edu.ng
<http://www.fuoye.edu.ng> Mobile: +2348035233535**alt email:
<http://goog_1872880453>seun.ojedeji at fuoye.edu.ng
<seun.ojedeji at fuoye.edu.ng>*

The key to understanding is humility - my view !
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/bestbits/attachments/20141118/f06a6647/attachment.htm>