No subject

WCIT and IGF now than ever before.  Saying nothing new, but with more voice=
s at this time could be very significant for public awareness of where civi=
l society stands on these issues.
On Oct 28, 2012, at 3:40 PM, William Drake wrote:

> There is significant overlap among these schematic statements, which coul=
d be taken as a sign of an important emerging consensus on key points, and/=
or as sign that consensus is easy at a high level of generality=85
>=20
> One does wonder a little about the utility of the exercise if we end up s=
aying things like openness is good, restrictions are bad=85
>=20
> Bill
>=20
>=20
> On Oct 28, 2012, at 7:46 PM, Anriette Esterhuysen wrote:
>=20
>> Dear Jeremy
>>=20
>> I had a look at the survey.. and.. well.. I did not really find the
>> differences between the options that clear...and I also could not quite
>> relate them back to the discussion thread on the list. But I have been
>> busy and have not been able to follow the thread as carefully as I would
>> have liked to.
>>=20
>> Best
>>=20
>> Anriette
>>=20
>>=20
>> On 28/10/2012 03:45, Jeremy Malcolm wrote:
>>> On 22/10/2012, at 3:02 PM, Jeremy Malcolm <jeremy at ciroap.org> wrote:
>>>=20
>>>> On 02/10/12 18:44, Jeremy Malcolm wrote:
>>>>> This is a counterpart to the previous thread, for ideas about what sh=
ould go into the Internet governance principles statement for the IGF that =
we develop at Best Bits.  Whilst we will be working on this face-to-face, i=
t is sensible not to cram our work into one session when preparatory work c=
an be done online.
>>>>=20
>>>> In previous discussions here, nobody has disagreed that we should begi=
n from an existing document in developing our statement of     Internet gov=
ernance principles.  However differences of opinion have been expressed ove=
r what would be the most suitable document to use.
>>>>=20
>>>> Here is a survey which I would encourage you to take, which I presents=
 four of the most obvious choices, and asks you to rank them according to y=
our preference:
>>>>=20
>>>> http://www.igcaucus.org/limesurvey/index.php?sid=3D78947&lang=3Den
>>>>=20
>>>> Please take a few minutes to take the above survey, and I'll present t=
he options back here in one week.
>>>=20
>>>=20
>>> We still only have 5 responses to this... so if you haven't responded, =
please follow the link above and provide your preferred ranking for the Int=
ernet principles statements that we could use as a basis for our work next =
week.
>>>=20
>>> Thanks.
>>>=20
>>=20
>> --=20
>> ------------------------------------------------------
>> 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
>>=20
>=20
>=20