AW: [governance] Burr & Cade: proposal for introducing multi-lateral oversight of the root

[Avri Doria]

<personal opinion>

On 21 jul 2006, at 13.01, Mawaki Chango wrote:

>
>>
>> and while i can see valid arguments for governments to participate
>> as
>> stakeholders on a par with other stakeholders, i still do not
>> understand any reason for them to have primacy.
>
> Then as someone pointed out, govts may as well say there's no point
> that non-profit, non-govt have primacy in some fora such as IETF,
> etc. If there are issue areas where non-profit, non-govt are best at,
> there might be some others where govts are not that bad.


anyone who participates in the ietf participates as a peer.
as a counter-example this one does not work.  there are very active  
government participants.

i also don't think much of the argument of 'the segment (govt, ps,  
cs) is better at x gets to rule x'  this is a argument meant to  
maintain a status quo as those in control always appear to know best  
and it is one that ignores the importance of stakeholders.  i think  
that it not about who is best at oversight, it is rather who is a  
stakeholder and therefore has an equal right of participation in any  
necessary oversight.

then again i, as many of the CS participants, was never comfortable  
with the WSIS/WGIG determination of 'participation of each according  
to their proper role'.  this sort of reasoning is meant to keep  
people in their place and i see no reason why CS should accept the  
place it has been given by governments.  and i repeat, i see no  
reason to ever accept government (uni or multilateral) primacy in the  
Internet.


a.
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.cpsr.org
To be removed from the list, send any message to:
     governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org

For all list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance