[governance] Comments related to the WGIG report

[Izumi AIZU]

At 22:07 05/08/13 -0400, Avri Doria wrote:
>hi,
>
>i wasn't so much arguing for the IETF model as arguing against the
>fact it had no employees.  but I am also not ready to argue against
>it.  i think the shape of any forum needs further discussion and is
>not something we can determine by Monday.

That, I quite agree, but I think  it's still a good opportunity now to think
and discuss about these.

>I also think it is a mistake to think of the IETF as a group of like
>minded individuals.  and i believe it a myth to argue that here are
>no politics, or even less politics, in the IETF.

I did not write"like minded", but "similar" - maybe that is almost same
in meaning ;-). And I do understand thear are lots of politics inside
IETF, but compared with coming Forum with broad Internet governance,
with "real politics" of nation states, I think it is still "less" political than
UN/IG politics we have seen and will see.

>as for IETF funding, though i expect that was a rhetorical question,
>as i understand it the funds come from donors, mostly corporate and
>individuals, and funds from PIR funneled through ISOC.  not a bad
>funding model.

I wanted to remind that even "small secretary" requires funding and
that funding should be "politically correct".

izumi


>a.
>
>On 13 aug 2005, at 21.30, Izumi AIZU wrote:
>
>>I think IETF model may not work for the forum which
>>is "multistakeholder" and "inclusive", to facilitate or ensure
>>full participation from all stakeholders including those from
>>developing countries.
>>
>>That requires more than "simple" secretariat I am afraid.
>>
>>IETF has essentially simpler objective with similar, if not
>>the same, minded people, and the organization evolved
>>over time with less "political" bias.
>>
>>The Forum is very different in nature. Depending solely
>>on "volunteers" may give more privileges to those who
>>have more resources and can afford to be volunteers.
>>
>>And, who paid for IETF secretariat? And who is paying it now
>>
>>That is another critical question.
>>
>>And I don't think it could function well if it is "all virtual".
>>
>>thanks,
>>
>>izumi
>>
>>At 16:52 05/08/13 -0400, Avri Doria wrote:
>>
>>
>>>On 13 aug 2005, at 15.14, McTim wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>The IETF springs to mind here.  It has only one employee (a recetn
>>>>hire). It has functioned for many years on volunteer efforts.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>well sort of.  there has been a secretariat for years of several
>>>people who do everything from planning meeting logistics, posting
>>>documents to the draft directory, and myriad other tasks that allow
>>>the volunteers to work on ietf issues.  around 5-6 people for a while
>>>now.
>>>
>>>and that is sort of what i see a secretariat as doing, allowing the
>>>other folks to volunteer to do work,  i.e. facilitation.  but do
>>>think there has to be a small group doing this full time as a job.
>>>
>>>a.
>>
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>governance mailing list
>>governance at lists.cpsr.org
>>https://ssl.cpsr.org/mailman/listinfo/governance
>>
>
>

_______________________________________________
governance mailing list
governance at lists.cpsr.org
https://ssl.cpsr.org/mailman/listinfo/governance