From ajp at glocom.ac.jp Thu Nov 30 17:56:30 2006 From: ajp at glocom.ac.jp (Adam Peake) Date: Fri, 1 Dec 2006 07:56:30 +0900 Subject: [governance] ITU IG Resolution In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: > >>> parminder at itforchange.net 11/30/2006 7:04 AM >>> > >I think the civil society engaging with >>IG issues need to give up its self-doubts in >>frontally facing the 'public policy' question in >>IG and the issue of institutional arrangements >>adequate to this purpose. > >Good statement. Some of us have never avoided these issues. I would >make two suggestions: > >1. You are now one of the coordinators of IGC therefore you are in a >position to exert leadership and take initiative in this regard, so >let's see some specific proposals. Adam made a one (send a letter to >Desai asking what's up with Enhanced cooperation) which is fine although >it is a very modest initiative. Modest, or simplistic. But I think before sending in a detailed set of suggestions and demands we should at least try to find out what has happened over the past year. This doesn't mean not working on ideas that might be in a later letter/statement, just take things step by step (and we have a good set dating back to the caucus' response to WGIG and the "Gallagher" statement that may still be relevant at least as a starting point.) å >2. The problem is that we need to find a point of leverage, which may >or may not come from working within normal policy processes. The >blocking power of one sovereign, USG, is not easily ignored or bypoassed >in these international institutions. By way of contrast, the free >software movement has gained leverage over the policy debate regarding >its issues by creating its own institution -- the general public license >-- embodying its values. Are there analogues that could be pursued in >the IG arena? > Continuing to work on a framework convention -- did a "dynamic coalition" come from Athens? AND -- for those involved in dynamic coalitions, it would be good to hear what's happening... Still only 3 on the website AND -- also respond to the taking stock questions. Adam >____________________________________________________________ >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 ____________________________________________________________ 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 From ajp at glocom.ac.jp Thu Nov 30 17:58:17 2006 From: ajp at glocom.ac.jp (Adam Peake) Date: Fri, 1 Dec 2006 07:58:17 +0900 Subject: [governance] ITU IG Resolution In-Reply-To: <456EEA73.6060202@bertola.eu.org> References: <456EEA73.6060202@bertola.eu.org> Message-ID: >Milton Mueller ha scritto: >>Good statement. Some of us have never avoided these issues. I would >>make two suggestions: >>1. You are now one of the coordinators of IGC therefore you are in a >>position to exert leadership and take initiative in this regard, so >>let's see some specific proposals. Adam made a one (send a letter to >>Desai asking what's up with Enhanced cooperation) which is fine although >>it is a very modest initiative. > >I would support something like that, and, for example, I could >forward it to the EU (the original proposer of the "enhanced >cooperation" moniker). We could try to make as much noise as >possible to ask what's up and request inclusion. This fits with what I'm thinking: a letter asking for progress/update, why aren't we being told, and we would like to be involved. And cc'ing govt and others we know interested to see if they will also then ask the same questions might be helpful. Adam ____________________________________________________________ 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 From ajp at glocom.ac.jp Thu Nov 30 18:04:46 2006 From: ajp at glocom.ac.jp (Adam Peake) Date: Fri, 1 Dec 2006 08:04:46 +0900 Subject: [governance] ITU IG Resolution In-Reply-To: <456EEDC2.6080605@Malcolm.id.au> References: <456EEDC2.6080605@Malcolm.id.au> Message-ID: >Milton Mueller wrote: >>2. The problem is that we need to find a point of leverage, which may >>or may not come from working within normal policy processes. The >>blocking power of one sovereign, USG, is not easily ignored or bypoassed >>in these international institutions. By way of contrast, the free >>software movement has gained leverage over the policy debate regarding >>its issues by creating its own institution -- the general public license >>-- embodying its values. Are there analogues that could be pursued in >>the IG arena? > >More good thoughts. In answer to Milton, I think we need to seek to >institutionalise this leverage in the structures and processes of >the IGF. Not easy, but the gentle pressure of our CS >representatives on the Advisory Group will be key, together with >public and persistent communication with Nitin and the IGF >Secretariat. The desired outcome, as I see it, is that USG (or >other) unilateralism in policy development will become politically >more expensive than to engage in the IGF's multi-stakeholder >process, in which CS already has (but must entrench and solidify) a >stronger position than it has in traditional governmental and >intergovernmental fora. If we do ask In MAG I expect we will be told that enhanced cooperation and IGF are separate processes (we've asked before and been told that.) The Tunis Agenda made them so. But it may not be a waste of breathe to ask again (it doesn't hurt to ask), but just for timing it would be better to take it up in the MAG at the same time as sending a letter from the caucus to Nitin about enhanced cooperation. Personally, I would prefer to keep enhanced cooperation away from IGF, ICANN sucks the life out of good things. Adam >-- >Jeremy Malcolm LLB (Hons) B Com >Internet and Open Source lawyer, IT consultant, actor >host -t NAPTR 1.0.8.0.3.1.2.9.8.1.6.e164.org|awk -F! '{print $3}' >____________________________________________________________ >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 ____________________________________________________________ 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 From wcurrie at apc.org Thu Nov 30 17:43:00 2006 From: wcurrie at apc.org (wcurrie at apc.org) Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2006 20:43:00 -0200 (BRST) Subject: [governance] ITU IG Resolution In-Reply-To: <20061130120421.178E9E1104@smtp3.electricembers.net> References: <4134.66.156.104.114.1164465972.squirrel@webmail.apc.org> <20061130120421.178E9E1104@smtp3.electricembers.net> Message-ID: <3629.68.198.123.72.1164926580.squirrel@webmail.apc.org> 'An early and pro-active engagement with the 'public policy and its institutional arrangement issues' can still serve to give a greater handle to the civil society to promote (and safeguard) public interest.' I agree with Parminder that we need to engage the issue directly and think Adam's suggestion of a letter to Ntin Desai from the IGC is a good start, followed by engaging the new UN SG and ITU SG in the new year. I wasn't sure whether Milton's suggestion of looking at the analogy of the free software movement meant getting an exact equivalent or rather producing a simulation of 'enhanced cooperation', which could include a legal-type instrument addressing the ideal-type public policy principles for the management of critical internet resources and then getting some kind of rolling symbolic buy in from governments...like an inverse of the bilateral free trade agreements.. the frontier on this issue is still there: USG, some developed country governments, ICANN, ISOC and the private sector on one side vs EU, ITU, most developing country governments and civil society on the other.. is this a case of maximising support around a single narrow set of demands reagarding internet resources or putting together the broad range of public policy issues on IG broadly understood. My inclination is to go for the latter but use what was narrowly agreed - enhanced cooperation - as the 'wedge' issue. Broadening it would put pressure on the developing countries that are uncomfortable with rights issues, but it may be possible to extract some of the democratic developing countries to take a lead such as India, Brazil and South Africa..and have three frontiers - 1. the hegemonic US bloc (USG, Japan, Australia, ICANN, private sector, 2. the democratic bloc (EU, democratic developing countries, civil society with Amnesty International) and 3. the authoritarian bloc (ITU, China, Iran etc)- this, of course, may just be wishful thinking aloud...when one thinks say of the rigidity of the G77 or how India is operating within the US sphere of influence over nuclear and economic issues... willie ____________________________________________________________ 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 From goldstein_david at yahoo.com.au Thu Nov 30 19:30:15 2006 From: goldstein_david at yahoo.com.au (David Goldstein) Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2006 16:30:15 -0800 (PST) Subject: [governance] InternetNZ supports International Day of Disabled Persons Message-ID: <20061201003015.20129.qmail@web54115.mail.yahoo.com> Hi all, A news release from InternetNZ that I thought could be of interest. Cheers David InternetNZ supports International Day of Disabled Persons Media Release 1 November 2006 InternetNZ (The Internet Society of New Zealand) expresses its support for the International Day of Disabled Persons, on Sunday 3 November, which this year has the theme of “E-Accessibility”. There are clear benefits to disabled people in the use of the Internet, particularly in access to information, personal communication, integration with larger society, and also in the highlighting of disability issues. InternetNZ lauds the goals of the International Day of Disabled Persons of full and equal enjoyment of human rights and participation in society by persons with disabilities. Recently the United Nations completed the Disability Rights Convention, which included substantial material on access to information. InternetNZ understands the Internet also played a significant role in bringing thousands of disabled people into the discussion and consultation process. For further information contact: Richard Wood Communications and Research Officer InternetNZ 04 495 2333 Richard at internetnz.net.nz --------- David Goldstein address: 4/3 Abbott Street COOGEE NSW 2034 AUSTRALIA email: Goldstein_David @yahoo.com.au phone: +61 418 228 605 (mobile); +61 2 9665 5773 (home) "Every time you use fossil fuels, you're adding to the problem. Every time you forgo fossil fuels, you're being part of the solution" - Dr Tim Flannery Send instant messages to your online friends http://au.messenger.yahoo.com ____________________________________________________________ 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 From aizu at anr.org Thu Nov 30 20:11:42 2006 From: aizu at anr.org (Izumi AIZU) Date: Fri, 1 Dec 2006 10:11:42 +0900 Subject: [governance] NomCom Process Call/Proposal$B!!!](B2 weeks to go Message-ID: Dear List, December has come (at least in Tokyo now). We have two more weeks and at least 6 more names to go for volunteering for the NomCom that selects the Appeal Team. 19 generous people volunteered for the pool is listed here : http://www.igcaucus.org/2006-AT-volunteers.html If for some reason your name is not listed here, please indicate so so that we could add you. As announced before, and adviced so, I will stay with the original deadline of Dec 14. But please join as soon as possible so that we have no worry for the last minute. Thanks again, izumi > > > -----Original Message----- > From: izumiaizu at gmail.com [mailto:izumiaizu at gmail.com] On Behalf Of Izumi > AIZU > Sent: Monday, November 20, 2006 4:50 PM > To: governance at lists.cpsr.org > Subject: [governance] NomCom Process Call/Proposal > > Dear Caucus members, > > I will try to steer the Appeal Team NomCom selection process, but we > need your active participation. Given the Christmas/New Year season, > we need your early enrolment. > > Here's a proposed draft call for volunteers. Please share your > comments/questions if any. I basically like to proceed as follows, > but welcome your comments/questions. > > 1) We need at least 25 volunteers for NomCom member candidates for > running the random drawing as described below: > http://www.igcaucus.org/nomcom-process.html > > 2) Please indicate that you like to volunteer on this list. Once you > are selected as NomCom, you are not eligible to become an Appeal Team > Member. (If not selected, then you can become Appeal Team member) > > 3) The volunteers will be posted here: > http://www.igcaucus.org/2006-AT-volunteers.html > (Thanks to Avri who made this). > > 4) The call for volunteers will be closed by 14 Dec. > > 5) The final list of volunteers will be confirmed on 15 Dec. > > 6) The random seeds will be announced on 16 Dec. > > 7) The drawing will be done on 17 Dec. > > 8) We will allow 3 days for challenges then the nomcom starts on Dec 20. > > Then NomCom have to figure out the dates for nominations, and go into > selection process, each will take around 2 weeks (or shorter) I assume. > > As you have seen, we have already got two volunteers, Karen and > Jeremy. SO, 23 more to go. > > Thanks, > > izumi > > -- > >> Izumi Aizu << > > Institute for HyperNetwork Society > Kumon Center, Tama University > * * * * * > << Writing the Future of the History >> > www.anr.org > > > -- > >> Izumi Aizu << > > Institute for HyperNetwork Society > Kumon Center, Tama University > * * * * * > << Writing the Future of the History >> > www.anr.org > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > > -- >> Izumi Aizu << Institute for HyperNetwork Society Kumon Center, Tama University * * * * * << Writing the Future of the History >> www.anr.org ____________________________________________________________ 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 From vb at bertola.eu.org Wed Nov 1 02:11:52 2006 From: vb at bertola.eu.org (Vittorio Bertola) Date: Wed, 01 Nov 2006 09:11:52 +0200 Subject: [governance] IGF Workshop on the Internet Bill of Rights (today 1:30pm) Message-ID: <454848B8.5000704@bertola.eu.org> All, I would like to encourage everyone to pop in at this workshop - I think this project could determine a major advance in all our campaigns. ===== IGF Workshop Wednesday, November 1st, 2006 – 13:30-15:00 Workshop Room I – Aphrodite C The Internet Bill of Rights Stating rights and duties of individuals in the online digital environment The WSIS/IGF process and many others prompted broad and strong discussions on what rights and duties should be enjoyed by individuals in the digital space. Themes like freedom of expression, privacy, consumer rights, access rights both to connectivity and to knowledge, intellectual property, cultural diversity,,and many others, underpin many of the digital governance issues. As many have drafted or discussed charters and statements of these rights and duties, there is the need to merge them and build consensus over one global statement: an Internet Bill of Rights. The workshop will focus on two sides of the matter: on substance, which kind of rights should be reflected in such a Bill, and how could they be articulated; on process, how can all interested parties start working together to then get to a formal statement acknowledged by all stakeholder groups. Its objectives will be, to let all those who share this concept finally meet; to work towards common understanding of the types of rights that should be part of this document; to identify the next steps, in the IGF environment, needed to start actual collective work on such a document. Panelists Ms. Danièle Auffray, Alderwoman for ICT, Paris, France Mr. Fiorello Cortiana, Province of Milan, Green Party, Italy Ms. Robin Gross, IP Justice Executive Director and Attorney, United States Mr. Jose Murilo Junior, Ministry of Culture, Brazil Prof. Stefano Rodotà, Former Head of the Council of European Data Protection Agencies, Italy Moderator: Mr. Vittorio Bertola, Società Internet and ICANN At Large, Italy Organized by Government of Italy, Ministry of Reform and Innovation in the Public Administration IP Justice Società Internet (ISOC Italy) Centre for Technology and Society of Getulio Vargas Foundation School of Law -- vb. [Vittorio Bertola - v.bertola [a] bertola.eu.org]<----- http://bertola.eu.org/ <- Prima o poi... ____________________________________________________________ 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 From Parminder at ITforChange.net Wed Nov 1 02:15:18 2006 From: Parminder at ITforChange.net (Parminder) Date: Wed, 01 Nov 2006 12:45:18 +0530 Subject: [governance] framework convention on the Internet - workshop report and working group In-Reply-To: <454780B7.1020508@Malcolm.id.au> References: <77C537FB-5D6F-495D-AD8D-9770C4F4250B@acm.org> <954259bd0610270656y5a933bdav1d6809c8eeeb5691@mail.gmail.com> <454780B7.1020508@Malcolm.id.au> Message-ID: <1162365318.45484986d9b77@secure.symonds.net> enclosed is the workshop report on 'exploring a framework convention on the internet' . Some of the participants have agreed to form a dynamic coalition or a working group on ' framework of principles for Interent Governance' which will take forward various ideas that emerged at the worhshop. Parminder www.ITforChange.net IT for Change Bridging Developmental Realities and Technological Possibilities ____________________________________________________________ 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 -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Framework convention workshop Report.doc Type: application/octet-stream Size: 50688 bytes Desc: not available URL: From wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de Wed Nov 1 04:41:41 2006 From: wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Wolfgang_Kleinw=E4chter?=) Date: Wed, 01 Nov 2006 10:41:41 +0100 Subject: [governance] EU Consultations References: <77C537FB-5D6F-495D-AD8D-9770C4F4250B@acm.org> <954259bd0610270656y5a933bdav1d6809c8eeeb5691@mail.gmail.com> <454780B7.1020508@Malcolm.id.au> <1162365318.45484986d9b77@secure.symonds.net> Message-ID: <3AEE633F500281489D5F3303731CE9F30438A4@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> Dear list, there will be a EU - Civil Society Consultation tonight 6.00 p.m. - just after the main session - in the APHRODITE A Room. It is on the left side when you leave the main hall. Wolfgang ____________________________________________________________ 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 From goldstein_david at yahoo.com.au Wed Nov 1 07:42:04 2006 From: goldstein_david at yahoo.com.au (David Goldstein) Date: Wed, 1 Nov 2006 04:42:04 -0800 (PST) Subject: [governance] the latest coverage of the IGF in the world press Message-ID: <20061101124204.13419.qmail@web54112.mail.yahoo.com> Hi all Below, for anyone interested, is a comprehensive coverage of the IGF over the last few days. Some of the more interesting articles I'm putting on my website on a daily basis. At the bottom is coverage in non-English language newspapers. To check out daily IGF updates, go to http://technewsreview.com.au/ Cheers David International net domains 'risky' The global inter-operability of the internet needs to be preserved, Vint Cerf told a global gathering in Athens. He said the ability for everyone and every device to connect to the net using a simple protocol was the backbone of the internet. But changes to the way the net works, to accommodate a multi-lingual internet, raised concerns. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/6099370.stm 'Gambits' are a risk to Internet domain system Vinton Cerf, a communications expert known as a father of the Internet, said Sunday that he feared the network's addressing system would break down if "political gambits" by international groups or national agencies interfere with plans to expand the languages used in domain names. http://iht.com/articles/2006/10/29/business/net.php http://www.toptechnews.com/news/Political-Gambits-Put-Internet-at-Risk/story.xhtml?story_id=13300C80PH1L http://www.newsfactor.com/news/Political-Gambits-Put-Internet-at-Risk/story.xhtml?story_id=13300C80PH1L IGF - Major changes ahead for domain name system Vint Cerf told the open session of the inaugural IGF that he accepts that it will be necessary to expand the range of characters that can be used in domain name so that individuals and organisations can include characters from their own languages in their websites' URLs. http://www.itpro.co.uk/internet/news/96933/igf-major-changes-ahead-for-domain-name-system.html A Web Conflict Centers on Languages Used in Addresses As the first Internet Governance Forum begins today near Athens, a conflict is emerging over the use of non-Western characters and languages in Internet addresses. http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/30/technology/30net.html BBC Reporter's Log: Internet Governance Forum The future of the net is under discussion at the first-ever Internet Governance Forum in Athens on Monday. The four-day forum has been set up by the United Nations to give companies, governments, organisations and individuals the space to debate what should happen to the net in the coming years. BBC News website Technology editor Darren Waters is reporting from the conference as it happens. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/6090394.stm World discusses internet future The future of the net is the ambitious topic under discussion at the first global Internet Governance Forum, being held in Athens over the next five days. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/6087174.stm Dialogue needed on internet's future by Nitin Desai, Chair, IGF organising group The Internet Governance Forum, set up by the United Nations as a multi-stakeholder space for dialogue, will meet for the first time on 30 October in Athens. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/6081440.stm UK perspective on the net's future by Emily Taylor, Director of legal and policy, Nominet The Internet Governance Forum takes place in Athens from 30 October, at which the future of the net will be discussed by thousands of stakeholders - governments, organisations, companies and individuals. But what does the UK have at stake in the discussions? http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/6086960.stm Moderation, frustration, and making people uncomfortable - An internet conference with no internet You reach a certain level of frustration and then, suddenly, you relax. The struggle becomes impossible and then you realise that, ultimately, it's not that important. You're still breathing air, you still have legs, this will come to an end. What on earth am I talking about? The mild insanity of hosting a global, revolutionary internet conference and then failing to allow anyone to actually access it - the internet, that is. http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/10/31/igf_blog_tuesday/ Internet forum promises democracy to the masses The inaugural meeting of the IGF was opened in Athens yesterday morning by Greek prime minister Konstantinos Karamanlis amid proud claims that the forum represented a new level of democratic thinking at the top of the internet. http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/10/31/igf_day_one/ IGF: Why you should care The inaugural meeting of the IGF will be opened today at 10am by the Greek prime minister in Athens, starting the gun on four days of discussion that many hope will provide answers to some of the internet's biggest problems. http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/10/30/igf_overview/ Greek blogger arrest infuriates world The arrest of a blogger by Greek police just days before Athens hosts the inaugural meeting of the IGF has left the blogosphere in uproar and the authorities with egg on their face. http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/10/30/greek_blogger_arrested/ Global net forum opens its doors - online and off Ordinary internet users will have a chance to make points and ask questions of the world's governments, not to mention business, engineers and media, over the next four days as the IGF opens its doors - both physically and online - for the first time. http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/10/30/igf_opens_doors/ http://out-law.com/page-7431 New Internet Governance Proposal Would Trim US Role, Boost Private Sector Becky Burr and Marilyn Cade have issued an updated proposal aimed at defusing the biggest policy tensions by moving governance to the private sector and increasing international involvement. The proposal calls on the US government to initiate several steps to respond to international concern about its unique authority over the authoritative root. The steps include clarifying that the appropriate role of government is limited to serving as the “backstop” for threats to the stability and security of the Internet, identification of changes to the underlying Internet structure that do not threaten the Internet’s security or stability, development of a new intergovernmental working group with regional representation to review changes to the Internet structure that create serious stability concerns, and calling upon ICANN to become more transparent and accountable. http://www.ip-watch.org/weblog/index.php?p=439&res=1152_ff&print=0 Online Content Among Many Issues At Internet Governance Forum The four-day Internet Governance Forum opened on 30 October by addressing many topics, among them the availability of content online. Content on the Internet will be addressed in a variety of ways this week, including ways to boost local content creation in developing countries, ways to protect intellectual property rights, the free flow of information and open standards for information technology. http://www.ip-watch.org/weblog/index.php?p=437&res=1152_ff&print=0 The internet's future is out of this world by Vint Cerf In 2006 most people in the developed world would find it hard to imagine life without the internet; never before has a single technology become so central to our lives so quickly. Email, search, e-commerce, social networking sites — hundreds of millions of people use them every day. But the original internet was a very different world. Designed in 1973, the idea was to enable the US Defence Department to integrate computers into its command and control system. Of course, it was also immediately adopted by its academic developers for their own uses! http://www.zdnet.co.uk/zdnetuk/opinion/comment/0,1000002138,39284432,00.htm Chairman Vint Cerf's Opening Remarks at Internet Governance Forum, Vint Cerf's opening remarks address the structure of the internet, International Domain Names, interoperability, IPv6 and more. http://icann.org/announcements/announcement-1-30oct06.htm ICANN at the Internet Governance Forum ICANN is co-hosting two workshops that will run in parallel to the IGF main sessions. The purpose of the workshop, co-hosted with ISOC, is to discuss the importance of participating in the processes of key Internet organisations and mechanisms, to show how one can participate and, importantly, how to locally build the appropriate expertise and capacity to successfully contribute. Different perspectives on participation and engagement by different communities and stakeholders will be explored with an emphasis on encouraging a discussion of practical examples and key learnings for increasing participation, particularly from communities that are typically under-represented. http://icann.org/announcements/announcement-2-30oct06.htm ICANN: IDNA Protocol Review and Proposals for Changes In follow up to the RFC4690 that was made available in September and announced on http://www.icann.org on 19 October 2006, a review of the IDNA protocol is underway. The review is managed through the IAB and the IETF. http://icann.org/announcements/announcement-31oct06.htm EC: Web 2.0 means power and responsibility The move towards Web 2.0 will stir the debate over internet governance and make businesses and individuals more powerful and responsible web users, Viviane Reding, European Commissioner for Information Society and Media, has told the IGF. http://news.zdnet.co.uk/internet/0,1000000097,39284476,00.htm Viviane Reding, Member of the European Commission responsible for Information Society and Media speech titled "The Internet – key to freedom, democracy and economic development" The Internet Governance Forum will be one important pillar of the new model of co-operation between all stakeholders, including all governments, agreed upon in Tunis last year. The Internet Governance Forum does not replace negotiations between governments on the enhanced co-operation model, but is a complementary process. I expect it to generate ideas and solutions that I intend to feed into the debate between governments to ensure that both processes do not operate in isolation. In that respect, I see first efforts circulating notably on the management of the DNS. This goes in the right direction and the European Commission will keep contributing to the discussions. http://europa.eu/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?reference=SPEECH/06/650&format=HTML&aged=0&language=EN&guiLanguage=en Firms defend dealings with China The work of firms such as Microsoft and Cisco was the centre of a debate about openness at the IGF in Athens. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/6102180.stm RSF blasts firms for China Web control (Reuters) China's control of the Internet stirred controversy at the first global Internet governance forum on Tuesday when Reporters sans frontières accused western firms of providing Chinese police with technology to limit Web freedom. http://www.cnn.com/2006/TECH/internet/10/31/china.web.freedom.reut China blows minds at Athens IGF On Monday, at a workshop held under the UN sponsored Internet Governance Forum in Athens, Greece, Chinese diplomat Yang Xiaokun set a new world record in cognitive dissonance as he explained in an exchange with BBC anchor and session moderator, Nik Gowing, that there is no internet censorship in China. http://www.shanghaiist.com/archives/2006/11/01/china_blows_min.php China: We don't censor the Internet. Really While many countries block off some Web sites, China has long drawn heightened scrutiny because of the breadth and sophistication of its Internet censorship. http://news.zdnet.com/2100-9588_22-6130970.html http://news.com.com/2100-1028_3-6130970.html http://go.reuters.co.uk/newsArticle.jhtml?type=internetNews&storyID=13953292 Companies say Web censorship growing (AP) Internet search leader Google and other major U.S. technology companies insisted Tuesday that their products benefit Chinese citizens despite government restrictions and warnings that online censorship is spreading. http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2006/10/31/1162056949189.html http://www.siliconvalley.com/mld/siliconvalley/business/technology/15895104.htm http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/I/INTERNET_GOVERNANCE IGF - ICANN protesters face human rights protesters The Internet Governance Forum is already running towards a major split in Athens. Although the US is slowly loosening its control of ICANN, this is not enough for some of the delegates. The secretary-general of the International Telecommunication Union, Mr Utsumi, summed up the view of many when he lambasted the US for dragging its feet over independence for ICANN and its stonewalling at the World Summit. http://www.pcpro.co.uk/broadband/news/96940/igf-icann-protesters-face-human-rights-protesters.html Companies Say Web Censorship Growing Internet search leader Google and other major U.S. technology companies insisted Tuesday that their products benefit Chinese citizens despite government restrictions and warnings that online censorship is spreading. http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2006/10/31/1162056949189.html Annan stresses development role at first ever meeting of the Internet Governance Forum United Nations Secretary-General Kofi Annan Monday stressed the importance of using the worldwide net to promote global development as he opened the first ever Internet Governance Forum by encouraging participants to use the four-day gathering to foster dialogue and cooperation. http://www.irna.ir/en/news/view/menu-235/0610317258182329.htm Rhetorical Questions on IDN TLD Approaches by Jothan Frakes With the IGF underway, there's a lot of discussion surrounding Internationalized Domain Names (IDN). There has been lots of great progress in IDN technology with IE7 and Firefox browsers now fully IDN-Aware, strong IDN registrations and websites behind them. Now that many of the hurdles to implementation have been addressed to where the technology is either currently available to most internet users, or shall be soon, we now focus to the other aspects of IDN. http://www.circleid.com/posts/rhetorical_questions_idn_tld/ The Internet Governance Forum: Will Theory Lead To Action? The first meeting of the U.N. IGF began yesterday in Athens, and it's promoting a very worthy agenda. Some of the critical issues to be discussed include these: Who has access to the Internet? Who has control? What are the best ways to combat spam, phishing, and child pornography? How can we protect freedom of speech online--especially in countries with repressive regimes? http://informationweek.com/story/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=193500586 Use Of Multi-Lingual Internet, Raises Concern Vint Cerf, one of the founders of the Internet, told delegates at the first-ever Internet Governance Forum being held in Athens, Greece that global inter-interoperability of the Internet needs to be preserved. The IGF is sponsored by the U.N. in the hopes of bringing all the decision makers involved in the Internet together. http://bizreport.com/2006/10/use_of_multilingual_internet_raises_concern.html Internet Governance Forum takes on China, US The IGF is meeting in Athens this week, and they've been talking up a storm. The global body was convened under the auspices of the UN after last year's meeting of the WSIS in Tunis, where it was agreed that a global venue for discussing 'Net issues ought to be created. Gathering technocrats, activists, and politicians from around the globe for four days of talking sounds a lot like golf on TV—wonderful for playing in the background while you take a Sunday afternoon nap—but in reality has already proved to be quite fascinating. With half the conference concluded, Ars brings you up to speed on what's gone down so far at the IGF. http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20061031-8115.html Net governance forum: Hot air or hot opinions? (IDG) For many critics, the United Nations-sponsored IGF is nothing more than a hot-air event void of any decision-making power. But advocates see the meeting, the first to follow last year's contentious WSIS, as an opportunity to set the tone for future discussions on who should govern the Internet and how. http://infoworld.com/article/06/10/30/HNnetgovernanceforum_1.html http://www.linuxworld.com.au/index.php/id;1115598626;fp;2;fpid;1 http://www.itworld.com/Tech/4535/061030netgov/ Internet expansion 'will happen in developing countries' Asia will drive a massive online expansion by the end of the decade, helped by computer sharing and emerging mobile phone technology, the United Nation’s top Internet official has predicted. http://www.sbpost.ie/breakingnews/breaking_story.asp?j=230734650&p=z3x735465 IGF Debates Localization of the Internet (reg req'd) The IGF, which could ultimately turn out to be either the United Nations of the internet or just a toothless policy talking shop, convened for the first time yesterday, and the issue of internationalization was at the forefront. http://www.computerwire.com/industries/research/?pid=D6661EE6%2D0170%2D4D3D%2DACF5%2D1C4718B1C685 U.N. proposes changes to Net's operation Yoshio Utsumi, a top United Nations official on Monday called for changes in the way the Internet is operated, taking aim at "self-serving justifications" for permitting the United States to preserve its unique influence and authority online. http://news.com.com/2100-1028_3-6130549.html http://news.zdnet.co.uk/internet/0,1000000097,39284474,00.htm IGF: The Future of the Internet is in Asia, on Cell Phones In case you missed it, The IGF is going on in Greece this week. The conference has been set up by the UN to give governments, companies, organizations and individuals the opportunity to meet and debate the future of the Internet. Here are some highlights. http://www.dmwmedia.com/news/2006/10/30/igf-the-future-of-the-internet-is-in-asia-on-cell-phones EU official satisfied with ICANN's performance managing Internet (AP) A top EU official praised the United States' commitment to pull back from its historic oversight of the Internet as a worldwide conference on the network's future opened Monday. http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2006/10/31/1162056949186.html http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/30/AR2006103000531.html http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2006/10/30/financial/f100012S87.DTL http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2006/10/30/financial/f100305S88.DTL EU Says Will Press For Uncensored Internet (Dow Jones) The European Union will urge countries to uncensor the Internet for its citizens at this week's IGF in Greece, Commission telecom spokesman Martin Selmayr said Monday. http://nasdaq.com/aspxcontent/NewsStory.aspx?cpath=20061030%5cACQDJON200610300821DOWJONESDJONLINE000320.htm& UN forum on control of the Internet opens in Athens (AFP) A year after the United States narrowly avoided a bruising row with the rest of the world over control of the Internet, round two of talks on the Web's future opened in Athens Monday in a UN-sponsored Forum on Internet Governance. http://metimes.com/storyview.php?StoryID=20061031-050016-9905r Forum in Greece tackles internet governance Online access and security are high on the agenda of an international conference on internet governance taking place in Athens from Monday. http://www.nzz.ch/2006/10/30/eng/article7205675.html Double-byte domains a risk Internet pioneer Vint Cerf says attempts to introduce double-byte domain names could threaten the stability of the internet, warning against moves by countries such as China to create new domain systems. http://australianit.news.com.au/articles/0,7204,20672214%5e15318%5e%5enbv%5e,00.html http://www.mg.co.za/articledirect.aspx?articleid=288160 http://news.ert.gr/en/10/21569.asp http://www.betanews.com/article/UN_Conference_Convenes_on_Net_Control/1162222386 http://www.todayonline.com/articles/151633.asp Experts gather to debate control of the internet (with AFP) Over one thousand internet experts will gather in Greece this week for the first UN-sponsored Internet Governance Forum (IGF) meeting, amid grumblings over the dominant position currently enjoyed by the US. http://www.newscientisttech.com/article.ns?id=dn10406 Internet control forum opens (AFP) A year after the United States narrowly avoided a bruising row with the rest of the world over control of the Internet, Round Two of talks on the Web's future opened in Athens on Monday in a UN-sponsored Forum on Internet Governance. http://cooltech.iafrica.com/technews/344182.htm http://australianit.news.com.au/articles/0,7204,20670914%5e15318%5e%5enbv%5e,00.html http://khaleejtimes.com/DisplayArticleNew.asp?xfile=data/theworld/2006/October/theworld_October1110.xml§ion=theworld&col= http://www.bigmouthmedia.com/live/articles/internet-future-disucssed-in-athens.asp/3291/ Internet control up for debate at Athens forum (Agence France-Presse) Over a thousand Internet experts will gather in Athens next week for a UN-sponsored IGF, the first of its kind, amid grumbling over the dominant position enjoyed by the United States. http://newsinfo.inq7.net/breakingnews/infotech/view_article.php?article_id=29385 Greek and Egyptian Governments Applaud ICANN's Move Toward Autonomy (news release) Speaking at the opening of the inaugural Internet Governance Forum held in Athens today, the Greek Minister of Transport and Communications, His Excellency Mr Michael Liapis, and the Egyptian Minister of Communications and Information Technology, His Excellency Dr Tarek Kamel, made separate statements indicating their support for ICANN's move toward autonomy under the recently signed Joint Partnership Agreement with the United States Government. http://icann.org/announcements/announcement-30oct06.htm Die Netzregierung der Zukunft tagt Eines Tages soll es die von den USA dominierte Organisation Icann ablösen: Das Internet Governance Forum der Vereinten Nationen. Derzeit tagt die Netzregierung in spe in Griechenland - in der Hoffnung, eines Tages mehr zu sagen zu haben. http://www.spiegel.de/netzwelt/web/0,1518,445597,00.html UNO: Verwaltung des Internets Im griechischen Badeort Vouliagmenti findet seit Montag das erste internationalen Forum zur Verwaltung des Internets statt. Die IGF-Treffen sollen künftig jedes Jahr stattfinden. http://www.vienna.at/engine.aspx/page/vienna-article-detail-page/cn/news-20061031-07553113/dc/tp:vol:news-welt http://www.kleine.co.at/nachrichten/politik/252247/index.do http://futurezone.orf.at/it/stories/147234/ Peinliche Fragen an Google und Cisco Auf dem IGF in Athen mussten sich die Vertreter von Google, Microsoft und Cisco kritische Fragen zu ihren Geschäftspraktiken in China anhören. http://futurezone.orf.at/it/stories/147406/ Das World Wide Web trifft sich Beim ersten UN Internet Governance Forum sollen die Probleme diskutiert werden, die alle Internetnutzer betreffen. Eine neue Welt-Internet-Ordnung soll entstehen. http://www.dw-world.de/dw/article/0,,2216993,00.html Fórum debate em Atenas governança da internet Representantes do mundo inteiro debatem em encontro promovido pela ONU questões relacionadas à internet e buscam reduzir o domínio norte-americano na web. http://www.dw-world.de/dw/article/0,,2220628,00.html IGF: StopSpamAlliance soll Anti-Spam-Netze unter ein Dach bringen Sechs internationale Anti-Spam-Netzwerke starten am heutigen Mittwoch im Rahmen des Internet Governance Forum in Athen ihre Anti-Spam-Allianz unter www.StopSpamAlliance.org. http://www.heise.de/newsticker/meldung/80327 IGF: Mehr freie Inhalte für das Internet Ein völkerrechtlicher Vertrag über den Zugang zum Wissen (Access to Knowledge, A2K) soll ein Gegengewicht zum zunehmend schärferen Urheberrecht bieten. Das forderte in der Diskussion über die Offenheit der Netze beim Internet Governance Forum ein südafrikanischer Vertreter. http://www.heise.de/newsticker/meldung/80323 IGF: Die Internet-Verwaltung und der freie, allgemeine Netzzugang Debatten über Cybercrime, Spam oder die Kompetenzverteilung im Geflecht von Internetorganisationen und Internetwächtern nutzen denen, die noch keinen Zugang haben, herzlich wenig: Bei der ersten so genannten "Multistakeholder"-Diskussion beim Internet Governance Forum (IGF) in Athen kommentierte die Präsidentin der Internet Society, Lynn St. Amour, trocken: "Ich würde sagen, die fünf Milliarden Menschen, die keinen Zugang haben, kümmert Spam oder Sicherheit verdammt wenig." http://www.heise.de/newsticker/meldung/80265 "Grober Konsens" als Aufgabe für das Internet Governance Forum Morgen beginnt das erste UN IGF in Athen, das künftig jährlich über alle Arten von Regeln und Konventionen im Netz diskutieren soll. Das IGF ist Ergebnis des ersten UN-Weltgipfels der Informationsgesellschaft (WSIS) und soll sich um offen gebliebene oder neue Fragen rund ums Internet kümmern. http://www.heise.de/newsticker/meldung/80192 Die Zukunft der Internet-Verwaltung: Internet Governance Forum eröffnet Die Debatte um die künftige Verwaltung des Internet sowie um inhaltliche wie politische Fragen des weltweiten Netzes kann zumindest im Rahmen des Internet Governance Forum der UN erneut losgehen: Athen als "Geburtsort der Demokratie" sei ein durchaus passender Ort für den Start einer neuen Diskussion über das "demokratischste Medium in der Welt überhaupt", sagte der griechische Minister für Transport und Kommunikation Michalis Liapis bei der Eröffnung des ersten Internet Governance Forum (IGF) am heutigen Montag. http://www.heise.de/newsticker/meldung/80236 IGF: Druck auf Firmen wegen Zusammenarbeit mit autoritären Staaten Cisco, Microsoft, Yahoo und Google hatten sich am heutigen Dienstag in einer lebhaften Debatte beim Internet Governance Forum in Athen erneut gegen den Vorwurf zu wehren, sie würden mit den Machthabern autoritärer Staaten gemeinsame Sache machen – auf Kosten der Internetnutzer in Ländern wie China oder dem Iran. http://www.heise.de/newsticker/meldung/80300 Séance inaugurale du Forum mondial sur le gouvernance de l'Internet Cette nouvelle structure, émanation de l'ONU, va servir de centre de réflexion sur des grands thèmes liés au Net. Les débats risquent d'être chauds. http://www.vnunet.fr/fr/vnunet/news/2006/10/30/s-ance-inaugurale-forum-mondial La question du contrôle américain sur la Toile toujours aussi brûlante (AFP) L'épineuse question du contrôle des Etats-Unis sur l'internet devrait revenir de manière lancinante pendant le Forum mondial sur le gouvernance de l'internet (FGI), qui s'ouvre lundi à Athènes, après avoir été il y a un an au centre du Sommet sur l'information de Tunis. http://www.radiofrance.fr/chaines/france-info/depeches/detail.php?depeche_id=061030074348.95j0gpvv L'ICANN sur toutes les lèvres Notre envoyé spécial au Forum sur la Gouvernance de l'Internet, le président de l'ISOC France Sébastien Bachollet, nous fait pénétrer au cœur de cet évènement très centré sur les problématiques de gouvernance sur Internet. http://domainesinfo.fr/actualite/1040/l-icann-sur-toutes-les-levres.php Forum sur la gouvernance du Net: l'Icann hors des débats Ce forum qui a ouvert ses portes à Athènes suite à une initiative de l'ONU, n'abordera pas le sujet qui fâche http://silicon.fr/fr/silicon/news/2006/10/31/forum-gouvernance-net-l-icann-d Le premier Forum mondial sur la gouvernance de l'internet s'ouvre lundi à Athènes Les principaux acteurs de l'internet et des représentants d'au moins 90 Etats se réunissent à partir de lundi à Athènes sous l'égide de l'ONU pour le premier Forum sur la gouvernance de l'internet (FGI), vaste et inédite plateforme d'échanges sur l'avenir de la toile. http://www.journaldunet.com/actualite/depeche/28/228081/ Le premier Forum mondial sur la gouvernance de l'internet s'ouvre à Athènes (AFP) Le premier Forum mondial sur la gouvernance de l'internet (FGI) a débuté lundi à Vouliagmeni, dans la banlieue d'Athènes, pour quatre jours de discussions d'une ampleur inédite entre les représentants de plus de 90 Etats et les principaux acteurs de la Toile. http://www.la-croix.com/afp.static/pages/061030101627.s1t1v2cn.htm http://www.radiofrance.fr/chaines/france-info/depeches/detail.php?depeche_id=061030073150.1h8apmap http://www.journaldunet.com/actualite/depeche/28/228130/le_premier_forum_mondial_sur_la_gouvernance_de_l_internet_s_ouvre_a_athenes.shtml Le rôle des Etats-Unis au coeur des débats du Forum mondial sur la gouvernance de l'internet (ZDnet) La première édition du Forum mondial sur la gouvernance de l'internet (FGI) a ouvert ses portes ce lundi à Athènes sous l'égide de l'Organisation des nations unies (ONU). Durant quatre jours, des responsables d'entreprises du web tels que Yahoo ou Google, des représentants d'administrations de plus de 90 États, ainsi que des ONG telles qu'Amnesty International vont débattre du développement d'internet, sur le plan technique mais aussi politique. http://permanent.nouvelobs.com/multimedia/20061030.ZDN9364391.html La question du contrôle américain sur la Toile toujours aussi brûlante L'épineuse question du contrôle des Etats-Unis sur l'internet devrait revenir de manière lancinante pendant le Forum mondial sur le gouvernance de l'internet (FGI), qui s'ouvre lundi à Athènes, après avoir été il y a un an au centre du Sommet sur l'information de Tunis. http://www.menara.ma/Infos/includes/detail.asp?article_id=11953&lmodule=Technologie Cerf: ok ai domini orientali, ma senza fretta Vinton Cerf conferma la disponibilità dell'ICANN al multilinguismo nella registrazione dei domini, ma nel contempo chiede pazienza: il processo di traslazione non ammette errori ed assimilare nuovi caratteri al range attuale impone valutazioni preventive http://webnews.html.it/news/leggi/4943/cerf-ok-ai-domini-orientali-ma-senza-fretta/ Amnesty chiama a raccolta i blogger All'Internet Governance Forum in Grecia, l'organizzazione umanitaria chiede ai Blog di mostrare solidarietà contro l'oppressione degli utenti online http://www.vnunet.it/it/vnunet/news/2006/10/30/igf-amnesty-chiama-raccolta Futuro di Internet, si apre il forum di Atene Oggi il discorso inaugurale di un evento mondiale che molti sperano possa portare ad una maggiore comprensione della rete e delle opportunità che offre. Al centro il dibattito su chi debba disporre delle.. chiavi di internet http://punto-informatico.it/p.aspx?id=1727105 L'Unione Europea contro la cyber-repressione "Internet potrà continuare a svolgere un ruolo di democratizzazione e di propulsore dello sviluppo economico solo se sono garantite la libertà di espressione e di accesso all'informazione. Per questo la Commissione europea invita i governi e l'industria del mondo intero a non tollerare restrizioni pubbliche all'accesso a internet, né qualsiasi forma di cyber-repressione". http://www.rainews24.rai.it/Notizia.asp?NewsID=65013 Il futuro della governance di Internet E’ stata già definita la risposta internazionale alla leadership americana su Internet e al celebre WSIS di Tunisi e nasce proprio dallo sforzo diplomatico dello scorso anno: l’Internet Governance Forum di Atene (anzi di Vouliagmeni, a 30 chilometri da Atene) porterà con sé tutte, ma proprio tutte, le grandi questioni della Rete. http://www.corriere.it/Primo_Piano/Scienze_e_Tecnologie/2006/10_Ottobre/30/forum.shtml La política de control de EEUU marca el foro mundial de internet La espinosa cuestión del control de Estados Unidos saldrá de nuevo a relucir durante el Foro de Gobernanza de Internet (FGI) que se inaugura este lunes en Atenas, tras haber sido la estrella hace un año en la Cumbre sobre la Información de Túnez. http://actualidad.tiscali.es/articulo.jsp?pos=3⊂=1&content=520778 http://laflecha.net/canales/blackhats/noticias/la-politica-de-control-de-eeuu-marca-el-foro-mundial-de-internet http://www.lavozdelinterior.net/06/10/30/secciones/sociedad/nota.asp?nota_id=13754 El mundo debate el futuro de internet El futuro de la red es el ambicioso tema de discusión del primer Foro Internacional sobre la Regulación de Internet (IGF por sus siglas en inglés), que tiene lugar en Atenas, durante los próximos cinco días. http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/spanish/science/newsid_6098000/6098646.stm La seguridad y la accesibilidad de la Red, a debate * Hoy ha dado comienzo la primera reunión del Foro para el Gobierno de Internet (FGI) de la ONU. * El objetivo es definir el esquema de cómo debe ser Internet en el futuro. * No se tratará el tema del control de Internet. http://www.20minutos.es/noticia/167447/0/foro/internet/gobernabilidad/ Dominios de internet, "un riesgo" La capacidad de operación global de internet necesita ser preservada, dijo Vint Cerf, uno de los fundadores de la red, en un encuentro mundial en Atenas. http://www.latinoamericann.org/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=1396 Para Cerf, é preciso reformular endereços de sites Vint Cerf, um dos criadores do protocolo de internet, mais conhecido por IP, afirma, na abertura do IGF, que é necessário fazer mudanças para que mais pessoas sejam incluídas na rede. Segundo ele, isso demanda muito estudo, mas o trabalho está sendo feito. http://www.latinoamericann.org/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=1395 ICANN en el Foro de Gobernanza de Internet... Informacion remitida por Pablo Hinojosa, Liason de ICANN para America Latina http://www.latinoamericann.org/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=1394 IGF: Anistia pede liberdade de expressão Na abertura do primeiro Fórum de Governança da Internet, que acontece em Atenas até 2 de novembro, a ONG Anistia Internacional divulgou manifesto em que condena a censura e o controle da rede por governos. O texto é assinado por 43 mil pessoas e pede a libertação de ativistas e jornalistas presos por desobedecerem as leis que cerceiam a liberdade de informação em seus países. http://www.latinoamericann.org/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=1393 El mundo debate el futuro de internet El futuro de la red es el ambicioso tema de discusión del primer Foro Internacional sobre la Regulación de Internet (IGF por sus siglas en inglés), que tiene lugar en Atenas, durante los próximos cinco días. http://www.latinoamericann.org/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=1392 Comienza Foro para la Gobernanza de Internet en Atenas Atenas se ha convertido en el punto de encuentro de cientos de representantes gubernamentales, ejecutivos, académicos y expertos en tecnología de la información que este lunes empezaron a discutir sobre el acceso a Internet en el mundo, en el marco del Foro para la Gobernanza de Internet. http://www.latinoamericann.org/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=1391 Utsumi ... "el Heretico" y Kamel "el aristotelico" Reporte de la primera sesión del Internet Governance Forum en Atenas. http://www.latinoamericann.org/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=1390 Debaten futuro de la Red Unos mil expertos y altos funcionarios de 90 países se dan cita desde ayer en Vuliagmeni, cerca de Atenas, para celebrar, bajo el auspicio de la ONU, el primer Foro de la Gobernabilidad de Internet y debatir sobre las futuras reglas de esta red informática. http://estrellaarica.cl/prontus4_nots/site/artic/20061030/pags/20061030205622.html http://www.elmostrador.cl/modulos/noticias/constructor/noticia_new.asp?id_noticia=201486 http://www.endi.com/XStatic/endi/template/nota.aspx?n=100420 http://www.lanacion.cl/prontus_noticias/site/artic/20061031/pags/20061031184432.html El mundo debate el futuro de Internet El futuro de la red es el ambicioso tema de discusión del primer Foro Internacional sobre la Regulación de Internet (IGF por sus siglas en inglés), que tiene lugar en Atenas, durante los próximos cinco días. http://www3.terra.com.ar/canales/tecnologia/148/148808.html http://ar.news.yahoo.com/061031/14/vuxc.html Inauguran Foro Mundial de Gobernabilidad de Internet Unos mil expertos y altos funcionarios de 90 países se dan desde este lunes la cita en Vuliagmeni, cerca de Atenas, para celebrar, bajo el auspicio de la ONU, el primer Foro de la Gobernabilidad de Internet y debatir sobre las futuras reglas de esta red informática http://www.observa.com.uy/Osecciones/ciencia/nota.aspx?id=63666 Il governo di Internet riunito ad Atene Dal 30 ottobre Vouliagmeni, cittadini a 30 Km da Atene, sarà il centro di discussione del futuro prossimo di Internet. La città ellenica ospita infatti il primo Forum mondiale sul governo di Internet. L'evento avviene sotto l'egida delle Nazioni Unite e vi partecipano oltre 90 paesi assieme ad una nutrita squadra di aziende, organizzazioni ed enti legati alla rete. Tra i big del settore è da segnalare la presenza di delegazioni di Yahoo!, Google e ovviamente Microsoft. In totale sono attesi oltre 1500 delegati. http://azpoint.net/internet/eventi/13757/Il-governo-di-Internet-riunito-ad-Atene.asp Idioma de endereços na internet gera conflito na web O uso de caracteres não-ocidentais e o idioma dos endereços da internet têm sido fontes de conflito no primeiro fórum sobre a governança da internet (Internet Governance Forum), em Atenas, segundo uma reportagem publicada hoje pelo jornal "The New York Times". http://www1.folha.uol.com.br/folha/informatica/ult124u20876.shtml http://www2.opopular.com.br/ultimas/noticia.php?cod=278672 Comienza en Atenas Foro para la Administración de Internet Representantes gubernamentales, ejecutivos de empresas, académicos y expertos en tecnología de la información se dieron cita hoy en Atenas para discutir el acceso a la red y su seguridad durante el Foro para la Administración de Internet. http://www.diariolacapital.com/2006/10/30/mundodigital/noticia_338886.shtml FN: Hur ska nätet styras? Vem styr nätet och vem ska styra? Frågan dök upp direkt när FN-konferensen Internet Governance Forum inleddes i Aten. Frågorna om nätets framtid är många och stora, men mötet saknar verklig makt. http://www1.idg.se/2.1085/1.80505 Story in Greek on the IGF http://news.ert.gr/10/265993.asp Story on the IGF in Russian http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/russian/sci/tech/newsid_6102000/6102372.stm Stories in Russian on the IGF in Athens http://www.izvestia.ru/news/news118429/ http://www.utro.ru/news/2006/10/30/596769.shtml Story in Hungarian on IGF http://www.magyarhirlap.hu/cikk.php?cikk=110515&hir=1 Story in Croatian on IGF http://www.nacional.hr/articles/view/28784/ Story in Turkish on IGF http://www.hurriyet.com.tr/teknonet/5343325.asp?m=1&gid=112&srid=3439&oid=1 Story on IGF in Vietnamese http://www.nhandan.com.vn/tinbai/?top=41⊂=76&article=77968 Story on IGF in Latvian http://www.bb.lv/index.php?p=1&i=3564&s=106&a=129959 --------- David Goldstein address: 4/3 Abbott Street COOGEE NSW 2034 AUSTRALIA email: Goldstein_David @yahoo.com.au phone: +61 418 228 605 (mobile); +61 2 9665 5773 (home) "Every time you use fossil fuels, you're adding to the problem. Every time you forgo fossil fuels, you're being part of the solution" - Dr Tim Flannery Send instant messages to your online friends http://au.messenger.yahoo.com ____________________________________________________________ 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 From bnkuerbi at syr.edu Wed Nov 1 07:57:01 2006 From: bnkuerbi at syr.edu (Brenden Kuerbis) Date: Wed, 01 Nov 2006 07:57:01 -0500 Subject: [governance] IGF Workshop: DNS and Root Zone File Management Message-ID: Dear all, If you are not in Athens, or are attending a concurrent workshop, please feel free to drop in online on the workshop, "DNS and Root Zone File Management". This workshop, sponsored by the Third World Network, the Government of Brazil and the Internet Governance Project looks at the Domain Name System (DNS) and root zone file management. The DNS is a critical part of the Internet's infrastructure and has served Internet users well, but it has some well-known vulnerabilities. These problems can be exploited to engage in disruptive or criminal acts which can threaten commerce, reputation, or security. In response to these threats, the IETF proposed the Domain Name System Security Extensions (DNSSEC). DNSSEC introduces public-key cryptographic signatures into the DNS infrastructure to ensure the integrity and authenticity of information retrieved by DNS resolver queries. In addition to posing numerous technical challenges, the implementation of DNSSEC requires making substantial operational and policy decisions concerning the root. These decisions will impact all root server operators, all domain name registries (including ccTLDs), as well as DNS name server operators, resolver software and application developers, and end users. The panel will examine DNSSEC from the end user and ccTLD and gTLD registries perspective, while members of ICANN's SSAC, Generic Names Supporting Organization (GNSO) and the Third World Network will explore the accountability and transperency of policy decisions pertaining to changes made at the root. Attendees will be able to pose questions or participate in the discussion either in person or online using Elluminate. Your computer will need speakers and/or a microphone in order to participate. Click here - http://cotelco.syr.edu/Webconferencing/tabid/219/Default.aspx - to join the meeting. If this is the first time you will be using Elluminate, your computer will download Java-based client software (around 5 minutes) when you click the link above. Once setup is complete, you will then be redirected to the meeting. Hope to see you in person or online! Best, Brenden Kuerbis Internet Governance Project ____________________________________________________________ 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 From bnkuerbi at syr.edu Wed Nov 1 08:14:19 2006 From: bnkuerbi at syr.edu (Brenden Kuerbis) Date: Wed, 01 Nov 2006 08:14:19 -0500 Subject: [governance] IGF Workshop: DNS and Root Zone File Management Message-ID: Argh, the details would help! IGF Workshop: DNS and Root Zone File Management 1 November, 2006 Workshop Room II (Kleoniki), Divani Apollon Hotel and Spa Athens, Greece 17:30-19:00 (Athens) And the link again - http://cotelco.syr.edu/Webconferencing/tabid/219/Default.aspx Best, Brenden ____________________________________________________________ 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 From wsis at ngocongo.org Wed Nov 1 09:24:05 2006 From: wsis at ngocongo.org (CONGO - Philippe Dam) Date: Wed, 1 Nov 2006 15:24:05 +0100 Subject: [governance] CS wrap up meeting - 2 November - 13:15 Message-ID: <200611011324.kA1DO2bH014846@smtp2.infomaniak.ch> Dear all, We invite you to participate tomorrow in a CS wrap up meeting to the inaugural IGF meeting. Thursday 2 November 2006 13:15-15:00 Meeting room: Poseidon C. Best regards, Philippe Dam Conference of NGOs (CONGO) Program Officer - WSIS and Human Rights 11, Avenue de la Paix CH-1202 Geneva Tel: +41 22 301 1000 Fax: +41 22 301 2000 E-mail: wsis at ngocongo.org Website: www.ngocongo.org The Conference of NGOs (CONGO) is an international, membership association that facilitates the participation of NGOs in United Nations debates and decisions. Founded in 1948, CONGO's major objective is to ensure the presence of NGOs in exchanges among the world's governments and United Nations agencies on issues of global concern. For more information see our website at www.ngocongo.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: message-footer.txt URL: From wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de Wed Nov 1 08:39:43 2006 From: wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Wolfgang_Kleinw=E4chter?=) Date: Wed, 01 Nov 2006 14:39:43 +0100 Subject: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?RE=A0?=: [governance] CS wrap up meeting - 2 November - 13:15 References: <200611011324.kA1DO2bH014846@smtp2.infomaniak.ch> Message-ID: <3AEE633F500281489D5F3303731CE9F30438A6@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> sorry this collides with the ALAC meeting. w ________________________________ De: CONGO - Philippe Dam [mailto:wsis at ngocongo.org] Date: mer. 01/11/2006 15:24 À: governance at lists.cpsr.org; plenary at wsis-cs.org Objet : [governance] CS wrap up meeting - 2 November - 13:15 S Dear all, We invite you to participate tomorrow in a CS wrap up meeting to the inaugural IGF meeting. Thursday 2 November 2006 13:15-15:00 Meeting room: Poseidon C. Best regards, Philippe Dam Conference of NGOs (CONGO) Program Officer - WSIS and Human Rights 11, Avenue de la Paix CH-1202 Geneva Tel: +41 22 301 1000 Fax: +41 22 301 2000 E-mail: wsis at ngocongo.org Website: www.ngocongo.org The Conference of NGOs (CONGO) is an international, membership association that facilitates the participation of NGOs in United Nations debates and decisions. Founded in 1948, CONGO's major objective is to ensure the presence of NGOs in exchanges among the world's governments and United Nations agencies on issues of global concern. For more information see our website at www.ngocongo.org ____________________________________________________________ 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 From vb at bertola.eu.org Wed Nov 1 10:06:30 2006 From: vb at bertola.eu.org (Vittorio Bertola) Date: Wed, 01 Nov 2006 17:06:30 +0200 Subject: [governance] IGF conclusions Message-ID: <4548B7F6.10404@bertola.eu.org> I've just heard from Markus that there is no way that anything discussed or agreed in a workshop can get into the IGF's official conclusions, as per a decision by the AG. Do our AG members confirm this? As a workshop organizer, and as a participant who was not on any panel and was never given the floor at any plenary session, I'd find this quite troubling. I had 100 people in my workshop lively discussing for 100 minutes - and it was a discussion, not like some workshops in which panelists spoke for 85 minutes and then one 30 seconds comment was allowed from the floor - and I would like to leave some trace of it into the official summary. I'm no fan of formal stuff, but still I'm troubled by the continued restrictions of this IGF. How can we actually get some input from the bottom into the final acts? And, I hope that the final documents don't dare to include "recommendations" that were never presented or discussed with anyone... -- vb. [Vittorio Bertola - v.bertola [a] bertola.eu.org]<----- http://bertola.eu.org/ <- Prima o poi... ____________________________________________________________ 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 From baptista at cynikal.net Wed Nov 1 10:19:23 2006 From: baptista at cynikal.net (Joe Baptista) Date: Wed, 01 Nov 2006 10:19:23 -0500 Subject: Is this Open - NOT Re: [governance] IGF Workshop: DNS and Root Zone File Management In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4548BAFB.1090605@cynikal.net> I just logged into this - and have discovered that my name "Joe Baptista" is banned from logging in. Obviously the people behind this nonsense (Milton Muller??) do not subscribe in practice to the so called open stakeholder participatio model they worship. Censoring people is not proper. regards joe baptista Brenden Kuerbis wrote: >Dear all, > >If you are not in Athens, or are attending a concurrent workshop, please >feel free to drop in online on the workshop, "DNS and Root Zone File >Management". This workshop, sponsored by the Third World Network, the >Government of Brazil and the Internet Governance Project looks at the >Domain Name System (DNS) and root zone file management. The DNS is a >critical part of the Internet's infrastructure and has served Internet >users well, but it has some well-known vulnerabilities. These problems >can be exploited to engage in disruptive or criminal acts which can >threaten commerce, reputation, or security. In response to these >threats, the IETF proposed the Domain Name System Security Extensions >(DNSSEC). DNSSEC introduces public-key cryptographic signatures into the >DNS infrastructure to ensure the integrity and authenticity of >information retrieved by DNS resolver queries. In addition to posing >numerous technical challenges, the implementation of DNSSEC requires >making substantial operational and policy decisions concerning the root. >These decisions will impact all root server operators, all domain name >registries (including ccTLDs), as well as DNS name server operators, >resolver software and application developers, and end users. The panel >will examine DNSSEC from the end user and ccTLD and gTLD registries >perspective, while members of ICANN's SSAC, Generic Names Supporting >Organization (GNSO) and the Third World Network will explore the >accountability and transperency of policy decisions pertaining to >changes made at the root. > >Attendees will be able to pose questions or participate in the >discussion either in person or online using Elluminate. Your computer >will need speakers and/or a microphone in order to participate. > >Click here - >http://cotelco.syr.edu/Webconferencing/tabid/219/Default.aspx - to join >the meeting. > >If this is the first time you will be using Elluminate, your computer >will download Java-based client software (around 5 minutes) when you >click the link above. Once setup is complete, you will then be >redirected to the meeting. > >Hope to see you in person or online! > >Best, > >Brenden Kuerbis >Internet Governance Project >____________________________________________________________ >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 > > ____________________________________________________________ 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 From robin at ipjustice.org Wed Nov 1 10:30:33 2006 From: robin at ipjustice.org (Robin Gross) Date: Wed, 01 Nov 2006 07:30:33 -0800 Subject: [governance] IGF conclusions In-Reply-To: <4548B7F6.10404@bertola.eu.org> References: <4548B7F6.10404@bertola.eu.org> Message-ID: <4548BD99.4080006@ipjustice.org> Hello Vittorio, Yes, there are no "official conclusions" of IGF. The closest thing to this is the report of the workshop. And this report can be read at the main session on the last day from the floor. The template for this report is on the IGF website and workshop organizers are invited to (briefly) present their report in the main session on Thursday morning. Thanks, Robin Vittorio Bertola wrote: > I've just heard from Markus that there is no way that anything > discussed or agreed in a workshop can get into the IGF's official > conclusions, as per a decision by the AG. Do our AG members confirm this? > > As a workshop organizer, and as a participant who was not on any panel > and was never given the floor at any plenary session, I'd find this > quite troubling. I had 100 people in my workshop lively discussing for > 100 minutes - and it was a discussion, not like some workshops in > which panelists spoke for 85 minutes and then one 30 seconds comment > was allowed from the floor - and I would like to leave some trace of > it into the official summary. > > I'm no fan of formal stuff, but still I'm troubled by the continued > restrictions of this IGF. How can we actually get some input from the > bottom into the final acts? > > And, I hope that the final documents don't dare to include > "recommendations" that were never presented or discussed with anyone... ____________________________________________________________ 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 From vb at bertola.eu.org Wed Nov 1 10:36:12 2006 From: vb at bertola.eu.org (Vittorio Bertola) Date: Wed, 01 Nov 2006 17:36:12 +0200 Subject: [governance] CS wrap up meeting - 2 November - 13:15 In-Reply-To: <200611011324.kA1DO2bH014846@smtp2.infomaniak.ch> References: <200611011324.kA1DO2bH014846@smtp2.infomaniak.ch> Message-ID: <4548BEEC.1050507@bertola.eu.org> CONGO - Philippe Dam ha scritto: > > > Dear all, > > > > We invite you to participate tomorrow in a CS wrap up meeting to the > inaugural IGF meeting. > > * * > > *Thursday 2 November 2006* > > *13:15-15:00* > > *Meeting room: Poseidon C.* Could we perhaps move this after the final session ends, at 5pm, or at 6pm if you want to watch the closure? This would avoid at least some conflict (not all of it) with the already scheduled civil society meetings. Apart from this, we need to work out better coordination: I don't mind too much whether it's CONGO or the IGC to call for CS meetings at the IGF, as long as it's clear who of us does what and we talk to each other first :) -- vb. [Vittorio Bertola - v.bertola [a] bertola.eu.org]<----- http://bertola.eu.org/ <- Prima o poi... ____________________________________________________________ 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 From karenb at gn.apc.org Wed Nov 1 10:42:58 2006 From: karenb at gn.apc.org (karen banks) Date: Wed, 01 Nov 2006 17:42:58 +0200 Subject: [governance] Clarify: CS wrap up meeting(s)? In-Reply-To: <4548BEEC.1050507@bertola.eu.org> References: <200611011324.kA1DO2bH014846@smtp2.infomaniak.ch> <4548BEEC.1050507@bertola.eu.org> Message-ID: <20061101154301.A85021715F4@mail.gn.apc.org> hi vittorio, philippe Can someone clarify what meetings are proposed at the moment? I'm confused if it is two, or three 1) congo 2) ALAC 3) IG wouldn't it be possible to combine the congo IG caucus meetings? i imagine both would be largely addressing civil society concerns (and possibly some good stuff? :) we just need a clear agenda and maybe division of facilitation roles? (or, do we have different agendas?) alac of course is different, but again, any reason why alac can't speak to civil society as a whole?. (in fact, wouldn't it be a good idea?) karen At 17:36 01/11/2006, Vittorio Bertola wrote: >CONGO - Philippe Dam ha scritto: >> >>Dear all, >> >>We invite you to participate tomorrow in a CS wrap up meeting to >>the inaugural IGF meeting. >>* * >>*Thursday 2 November 2006* >>*13:15-15:00* >>*Meeting room: Poseidon C.* > >Could we perhaps move this after the final session ends, at 5pm, or >at 6pm if you want to watch the closure? This would avoid at least >some conflict (not all of it) with the already scheduled civil >society meetings. > >Apart from this, we need to work out better coordination: I don't >mind too much whether it's CONGO or the IGC to call for CS meetings >at the IGF, as long as it's clear who of us does what and we talk to >each other first :) >-- >vb. [Vittorio Bertola - v.bertola [a] bertola.eu.org]<----- >http://bertola.eu.org/ <- Prima o poi... >____________________________________________________________ >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 ____________________________________________________________ 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 From aizu at anr.org Wed Nov 1 10:45:20 2006 From: aizu at anr.org (Izumi AIZU) Date: Thu, 2 Nov 2006 00:45:20 +0900 Subject: Fwd: RE : [governance] CS wrap up meeting - 2 November - 13:15 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Indeed, we will have lunch meeting from 13:15 to 15;00 at Garbi Restaurant, near the beach. The flyers have been already circulated and at this point not possible to change the time I assume. izumi 2006/11/1, Wolfgang Kleinwächter : > sorry this collides with the ALAC meeting. > > w > > > De: CONGO - Philippe Dam [mailto:wsis at ngocongo.org] > Date: mer. 01/11/2006 15:24 > À: governance at lists.cpsr.org; plenary at wsis-cs.org > Objet : [governance] CS wrap up meeting - 2 November - 13:15 > > > S > > > > Dear all, > > > > We invite you to participate tomorrow in a CS wrap up meeting to the inaugural IGF meeting. > > > > Thursday 2 November 2006 > > 13:15-15:00 > > Meeting room: Poseidon C. > > > > Best regards, > > > > Philippe Dam > Conference of NGOs (CONGO) > Program Officer - WSIS and Human Rights > 11, Avenue de la Paix > CH-1202 Geneva > Tel: +41 22 301 1000 > Fax: +41 22 301 2000 > E-mail: wsis at ngocongo.org > Website: www.ngocongo.org ____________________________________________________________ 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 From ajp at glocom.ac.jp Wed Nov 1 10:49:34 2006 From: ajp at glocom.ac.jp (Adam Peake) Date: Thu, 2 Nov 2006 00:49:34 +0900 Subject: [governance] IGF conclusions In-Reply-To: <4548BD99.4080006@ipjustice.org> References: <4548B7F6.10404@bertola.eu.org> <4548BD99.4080006@ipjustice.org> Message-ID: This is what I now understand too. There is no official conclusion of the IGF. There will be a report to the Sec General will give to the UN GA (required by Tunis Agenda), but we don't know what that will be like. The one page summary you write will be on the IGF website. If you can take the floor in the morning open mic session, then whatever you say will be heard by all. Anyway. Will try to get some clarity on this. Adam On 11/2/06, Robin Gross wrote: > Hello Vittorio, > > Yes, there are no "official conclusions" of IGF. The closest thing to > this is the report of the workshop. And this report can be read at the > main session on the last day from the floor. The template for this > report is on the IGF website and workshop organizers are invited to > (briefly) present their report in the main session on Thursday morning. > > Thanks, > Robin > > Vittorio Bertola wrote: > > > I've just heard from Markus that there is no way that anything > > discussed or agreed in a workshop can get into the IGF's official > > conclusions, as per a decision by the AG. Do our AG members confirm this? > > > > As a workshop organizer, and as a participant who was not on any panel > > and was never given the floor at any plenary session, I'd find this > > quite troubling. I had 100 people in my workshop lively discussing for > > 100 minutes - and it was a discussion, not like some workshops in > > which panelists spoke for 85 minutes and then one 30 seconds comment > > was allowed from the floor - and I would like to leave some trace of > > it into the official summary. > > > > I'm no fan of formal stuff, but still I'm troubled by the continued > > restrictions of this IGF. How can we actually get some input from the > > bottom into the final acts? > > > > And, I hope that the final documents don't dare to include > > "recommendations" that were never presented or discussed with anyone... > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > ____________________________________________________________ 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 From karenb at gn.apc.org Wed Nov 1 10:53:54 2006 From: karenb at gn.apc.org (karen banks) Date: Wed, 01 Nov 2006 17:53:54 +0200 Subject: [governance] IGF conclusions In-Reply-To: <4548BD99.4080006@ipjustice.org> References: <4548B7F6.10404@bertola.eu.org> <4548BD99.4080006@ipjustice.org> Message-ID: <20061101155820.5BF66172921@mail.gn.apc.org> hi robin, vittorio >Yes, there are no "official conclusions" of IGF. The closest thing >to this is the report of the workshop. And this report can be read >at the main session on the last day from the floor. The template >for this report is on the IGF website and workshop organizers are >invited to (briefly) present their report in the main session on >Thursday morning. robin - are you asking all workshop cooridnators to do this? (39 workshops or so?) - or, that if a workshop coordinator so wishes they can read the report from the floor? i imagine the IGF will post workshop reports online and therefore, will form part of the official record of the meeting karen ps.. the report format is here: . ____________________________________________________________ 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 From robin at ipjustice.org Wed Nov 1 11:02:40 2006 From: robin at ipjustice.org (Robin Gross) Date: Wed, 01 Nov 2006 08:02:40 -0800 Subject: [governance] IGF conclusions In-Reply-To: <20061101155820.5BF66172921@mail.gn.apc.org> References: <4548B7F6.10404@bertola.eu.org> <4548BD99.4080006@ipjustice.org> <20061101155820.5BF66172921@mail.gn.apc.org> Message-ID: <4548C520.5050606@ipjustice.org> karen banks wrote: > hi robin, vittorio > >> Yes, there are no "official conclusions" of IGF. The closest thing >> to this is the report of the workshop. And this report can be read >> at the main session on the last day from the floor. The template for >> this report is on the IGF website and workshop organizers are invited >> to (briefly) present their report in the main session on Thursday >> morning. > > > robin - are you asking all workshop cooridnators to do this? (39 > workshops or so?) - or, that if a workshop coordinator so wishes they > can read the report from the floor? > Hi Karen! Yes, workshop organizers MAY read the report of their workshop during the main session on Thursday AM. And these reports will be posted on the IGF website. Thanks, Robin > i imagine the IGF will post workshop reports online and therefore, > will form part of the official record of the meeting > > karen > ps.. the report format is here: . > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > ____________________________________________________________ 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 From jeanette at wz-berlin.de Wed Nov 1 11:12:32 2006 From: jeanette at wz-berlin.de (Jeanette Hofmann) Date: Wed, 01 Nov 2006 17:12:32 +0100 Subject: [governance] IGF conclusions In-Reply-To: <20061101155820.5BF66172921@mail.gn.apc.org> References: <4548B7F6.10404@bertola.eu.org> <4548BD99.4080006@ipjustice.org> <20061101155820.5BF66172921@mail.gn.apc.org> Message-ID: <4548C770.10607@wz-berlin.de> karen banks wrote: > hi robin, vittorio > >> Yes, there are no "official conclusions" of IGF. The closest thing >> to this is the report of the workshop. And this report can be read at >> the main session on the last day from the floor. The template for >> this report is on the IGF website and workshop organizers are invited >> to (briefly) present their report in the main session on Thursday >> morning. > > > robin - are you asking all workshop cooridnators to do this? (39 > workshops or so?) - or, that if a workshop coordinator so wishes they > can read the report from the floor? Sorry, if this has been unclear. There is an open mike session each morning between 9.30 and 10 am. All workshop organizers can ask for the mic and give a two minute report on their workshop. I was surprised to see how few people made use of this opportunity this morning. The open mic session is also open for any other type of comment. The only requirement is that it is concise. jeanette > > i imagine the IGF will post workshop reports online and therefore, will > form part of the official record of the meeting > > karen > ps.. the report format is here: . > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 ____________________________________________________________ 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 From vb at bertola.eu.org Wed Nov 1 11:08:14 2006 From: vb at bertola.eu.org (Vittorio Bertola) Date: Wed, 01 Nov 2006 18:08:14 +0200 Subject: [governance] IGF conclusions In-Reply-To: References: <4548B7F6.10404@bertola.eu.org> <4548BD99.4080006@ipjustice.org> Message-ID: <4548C66E.8030007@bertola.eu.org> Adam Peake ha scritto: > This is what I now understand too. There is no official conclusion of > the IGF. There will be a report to the Sec General will give to the UN > GA (required by Tunis Agenda), but we don't know what that will be > like. Fine, then - but we should ensure that we get no surprises - ie it does not contain any substantive statement on the issues that's presented as "consensus of the IGF", but just "contentless" factual reporting. -- vb. [Vittorio Bertola - v.bertola [a] bertola.eu.org]<----- http://bertola.eu.org/ <- Prima o poi... ____________________________________________________________ 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 From jeanette at wz-berlin.de Wed Nov 1 11:47:23 2006 From: jeanette at wz-berlin.de (Jeanette Hofmann) Date: Wed, 01 Nov 2006 17:47:23 +0100 Subject: [governance] IGF conclusions In-Reply-To: <4548B7F6.10404@bertola.eu.org> References: <4548B7F6.10404@bertola.eu.org> Message-ID: <4548CF9B.9080707@wz-berlin.de> Vittorio Bertola wrote: > I've just heard from Markus that there is no way that anything discussed > or agreed in a workshop can get into the IGF's official conclusions, as > per a decision by the AG. Do our AG members confirm this? This is not what I remember. What I remember from the AG's discussion is that there was no agreement on the actual status of workshops. The concern was raised by some AG members that workshop organizers could use the IGF branding and sell an outcome of one workshop as the actual outcome of the forum. Some suggested that the reporting should therefore be limited to the main session and not include the workshops. As a compromise the open mic session was created so that we have now both, official reporting from the main session and voluntary reporting from the workshop organizers or worshop participants. From what I remember this issue of the status of workshops within the framework of the overall forum was left open to some degree. I think this is good because it now depends on the attendees to lend political weight to the various session or workshop formats. Significance depends on what the participants actually do in terms of attendence, contributions etc. > > As a workshop organizer, and as a participant who was not on any panel > and was never given the floor at any plenary session, I don't understand this comment. Do you mean you wanted to speak and you didn't get the opportunity? This I'd find surprising because my opinion has been that the moderators really tried to do get the audience involved. I had no problem to report from our workshop this morning. Neither had Parminder. I'd find this > quite troubling. I had 100 people in my workshop lively discussing for > 100 minutes - and it was a discussion, not like some workshops in which > panelists spoke for 85 minutes and then one 30 seconds comment was > allowed from the floor - and I would like to leave some trace of it into > the official summary. There is the template Robin mentioned for collecting and archiving such traces. > > I'm no fan of formal stuff, but still I'm troubled by the continued > restrictions of this IGF. Sorry but I really don't see these continued restrictions, and I don't find this a fair description of the overall structure and dynamics of the forum meeting. jeanette How can we actually get some input from the > bottom into the final acts? > > And, I hope that the final documents don't dare to include > "recommendations" that were never presented or discussed with anyone... ____________________________________________________________ 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 From vb at bertola.eu.org Wed Nov 1 12:01:35 2006 From: vb at bertola.eu.org (Vittorio Bertola) Date: Wed, 01 Nov 2006 19:01:35 +0200 Subject: [governance] IGF conclusions In-Reply-To: <4548CF9B.9080707@wz-berlin.de> References: <4548B7F6.10404@bertola.eu.org> <4548CF9B.9080707@wz-berlin.de> Message-ID: <4548D2EF.9040709@bertola.eu.org> Sorry Jeanette, I mixed the two issues so this possibly wasn't very clear - I meant that if you are so unfortunate not to get the floor at the plenary (which is unavoidable, not everyone in a 800 people room can get it) and you can't funnel results from the workshops into the main sessions, then you can't get anything about your issue into the IGF results from the bottom. At the same time, I agree with your point that the formal "IGF results" are not as important as getting people to actually meet and start work on a specific issue, and I will definitely use the opportunity to report tomorrow morning. I'm just a bit frustrated by the apparent success of the attempt to "emasculate" the Forum, but I take it as temporary - getting teeth and other relevant body parts added to the structure of the IGF will be our task for the next year. -- vb. [Vittorio Bertola - v.bertola [a] bertola.eu.org]<----- http://bertola.eu.org/ <- Prima o poi... ____________________________________________________________ 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 From declan at well.com Wed Nov 1 13:51:17 2006 From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh) Date: Wed, 01 Nov 2006 20:51:17 +0200 Subject: [governance] DNS forum @ Athens In-Reply-To: <4548D2EF.9040709@bertola.eu.org> References: <4548B7F6.10404@bertola.eu.org> <4548CF9B.9080707@wz-berlin.de> <4548D2EF.9040709@bertola.eu.org> Message-ID: <4548ECA5.6060400@well.com> So I was sitting in the back of the DNS/root server workshop at Athens and just wanted to say that Milton did a terrific job. Imagine that, an on-topic discussion. :) -Declan ____________________________________________________________ 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 From dcogburn at syr.edu Wed Nov 1 14:49:19 2006 From: dcogburn at syr.edu (Derrick L. Cogburn) Date: Wed, 01 Nov 2006 14:49:19 -0500 Subject: Is this Open - NOT Re: [governance] IGF Workshop: DNS and Root Zone File Management Message-ID: Dear Joe, As you now know, this was not true. No one - including you - was banned from attending the session. I apologize for whatever glitch prevented you from logging in initially under whatever name you wanted to use (an applaud your tenacity in logging in under another name). However, you were able to log out, and log back in under your preferred name - Joe Baptista - so you saw that you were not banned from participating. Thanks for your attendance. Cheers, Derrick >>> baptista at cynikal.net 11/01/06 10:19 am >>> I just logged into this - and have discovered that my name Joe Baptista is banned from logging in. Obviously the people behind this nonsense (Milton Muller??) do not subscribe in practice to the so called open stakeholder participatio model they worship. Censoring people is not proper. regards joe baptista Brenden Kuerbis wrote: >Dear all, > >If you are not in Athens, or are attending a concurrent workshop, please >feel free to drop in online on the workshop, DNS and Root Zone File >Management. This workshop, sponsored by the Third World Network, the >Government of Brazil and the Internet Governance Project looks at the >Domain Name System (DNS) and root zone file management. The DNS is a >critical part of the Internet's infrastructure and has served Internet >users well, but it has some well-known vulnerabilities. These problems >can be exploited to engage in disruptive or criminal acts which can >threaten commerce, reputation, or security. In response to these >threats, the IETF proposed the Domain Name System Security Extensions >(DNSSEC). DNSSEC introduces public-key cryptographic signatures into the >DNS infrastructure to ensure the integrity and authenticity of >information retrieved by DNS resolver queries. In addition to posing >numerous technical challenges, the implementation of DNSSEC requires >making substantial operational and policy decisions concerning the root. >These decisions will impact all root server operators, all domain name >registries (including ccTLDs), as well as DNS name server operators, >resolver software and application developers, and end users. The panel >will examine DNSSEC from the end user and ccTLD and gTLD registries >perspective, while members of ICANN's SSAC, Generic Names Supporting >Organization (GNSO) and the Third World Network will explore the >accountability and transperency of policy decisions pertaining to >changes made at the root. > >Attendees will be able to pose questions or participate in the >discussion either in person or online using Elluminate. Your computer >will need speakers and/or a microphone in order to participate. > >Click here - >http://cotelco.syr.edu/Webconferencing/tabid/219/Default.aspx - to join >the meeting. > >If this is the first time you will be using Elluminate, your computer >will download Java-based client software (around 5 minutes) when you >click the link above. Once setup is complete, you will then be >redirected to the meeting. > >Hope to see you in person or online! > >Best, > >Brenden Kuerbis >Internet Governance Project > >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 > > 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 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: message-footer.txt URL: From jberleur at info.fundp.ac.be Wed Nov 1 16:05:14 2006 From: jberleur at info.fundp.ac.be (Jacques Berleur) Date: Wed, 01 Nov 2006 22:05:14 +0100 (MET) Subject: [governance] DNS forum @ Athens In-Reply-To: <4548ECA5.6060400@well.com> References: <4548B7F6.10404@bertola.eu.org> <4548CF9B.9080707@wz-berlin.de> <4548D2EF.9040709@bertola.eu.org> <4548ECA5.6060400@well.com> Message-ID: <1162415114.45490c0aa1f02@webmail.fundp.ac.be> "Terrific" in what sense? Please be more precise so that we can understand! En réponse à Declan McCullagh : > So I was sitting in the back of the DNS/root server workshop at Athens > and just wanted to say that Milton did a terrific job. Imagine that, an > > on-topic discussion. :) > > -Declan ____________________________________________________________ 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 From declan at well.com Wed Nov 1 16:41:17 2006 From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh) Date: Wed, 01 Nov 2006 23:41:17 +0200 Subject: [governance] DNS forum @ Athens In-Reply-To: <1162415114.45490c0aa1f02@webmail.fundp.ac.be> References: <4548B7F6.10404@bertola.eu.org> <4548CF9B.9080707@wz-berlin.de> <4548D2EF.9040709@bertola.eu.org> <4548ECA5.6060400@well.com> <1162415114.45490c0aa1f02@webmail.fundp.ac.be> Message-ID: <4549147D.6090301@well.com> Well, I've moderated my share of panels and can attest to the fact that it's difficult to keep conversations on track, especially when you have aggressively talkative audience members and a hot topic. (Discussions strayed to ICANN GAC composition and the Patriot Act, Swift financial surveillance, the Iraq war, etc.) I'm writing an article for News.com on the substance now. Which explains why I'm not being more social at the receptions this evening. -Declan Jacques Berleur wrote: > "Terrific" in what sense? > Please be more precise so that we can understand! > > > En réponse à Declan McCullagh : > >> So I was sitting in the back of the DNS/root server workshop at Athens >> and just wanted to say that Milton did a terrific job. Imagine that, an >> >> on-topic discussion. :) >> >> -Declan > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > ____________________________________________________________ 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 From jeanette at wz-berlin.de Wed Nov 1 17:56:27 2006 From: jeanette at wz-berlin.de (Jeanette Hofmann) Date: Wed, 01 Nov 2006 23:56:27 +0100 Subject: [governance] IGF conclusions In-Reply-To: <4548D2EF.9040709@bertola.eu.org> References: <4548B7F6.10404@bertola.eu.org> <4548CF9B.9080707@wz-berlin.de> <4548D2EF.9040709@bertola.eu.org> Message-ID: <4549261B.3020304@wz-berlin.de> Hi Vittorio, Vittorio Bertola wrote: > Sorry Jeanette, I mixed the two issues so this possibly wasn't very > clear - I meant that if you are so unfortunate not to get the floor at > the plenary (which is unavoidable, not everyone in a 800 people room can > get it) From what I have seen, it is only a minority of people who feeling speaking up with so many people in the room. My impression is that everybody who really wanted to could speak at this first meeting of the forum. I have thought about the assertion of a restriction or regulation of public exchange at the forum. I would predict that the forum's first years might in hindsight lool like the most open and interesting ones. Should the forum survive its first 5 years and become political relevant, there will much more regulation of workshops and reporting thereof as we see right now. We should make good, constructive use of the open structure we've got right now. jeanette and you can't funnel results from the workshops into the main > sessions, then you can't get anything about your issue into the IGF > results from the bottom. > > At the same time, I agree with your point that the formal "IGF results" > are not as important as getting people to actually meet and start work > on a specific issue, and I will definitely use the opportunity to report > tomorrow morning. I'm just a bit frustrated by the apparent success of > the attempt to "emasculate" the Forum, but I take it as temporary - > getting teeth and other relevant body parts added to the structure of > the IGF will be our task for the next year. ____________________________________________________________ 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 From baptista at cynikal.net Wed Nov 1 21:11:37 2006 From: baptista at cynikal.net (Joe Baptista) Date: Wed, 01 Nov 2006 21:11:37 -0500 Subject: Is this Open - NOT Re: [governance] IGF Workshop: DNS and Root Zone File Management In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <454953D9.80507@cynikal.net> Well whatever happened the glitch seemed to have disappeared after I complained often. So yes I was eventally able to login under my proper name. Obviously the glitch understood the concept of equal and fair access. cheers joe Derrick L. Cogburn wrote: > Dear Joe, > > As you now know, this was not true. No one - including you - was > "banned" from attending the session. I apologize for whatever glitch > prevented you from logging in initially under whatever name you wanted > to use (an applaud your tenacity in logging in under another name). > However, you were able to log out, and log back in under your > preferred name - Joe Baptista - so you saw that you were not banned > from participating. Thanks for your attendance. > > Cheers, > Derrick > > >>> baptista at cynikal.net 11/01/06 10:19 am >>> > > I just logged into this - and have discovered that my name "Joe > > Baptista" is banned from logging in. Obviously the people behind this > > nonsense (Milton Muller??) do not subscribe in practice to the so called > > open stakeholder participatio model they worship. > > > Censoring people is not proper. > > > regards > > joe baptista > > > Brenden Kuerbis wrote: > > > >Dear all, > > > > > >If you are not in Athens, or are attending a concurrent workshop, please > > >feel free to drop in online on the workshop, "DNS and Root Zone File > > >Management". This workshop, sponsored by the Third World Network, the > > >Government of Brazil and the Internet Governance Project looks at the > > >Domain Name System (DNS) and root zone file management. The DNS is a > > >critical part of the Internet's infrastructure and has served Internet > > >users well, but it has some well-known vulnerabilities. These problems > > >can be exploited to engage in disruptive or criminal acts which can > > >threaten commerce, reputation, or security. In response to these > > >threats, the IETF proposed the Domain Name System Security Extensions > > >(DNSSEC). DNSSEC introduces public-key cryptographic signatures into the > > >DNS infrastructure to ensure the integrity and authenticity of > > >information retrieved by DNS resolver queries. In addition to posing > > >numerous technical challenges, the implementation of DNSSEC requires > > >making substantial operational and policy decisions concerning the root. > > >These decisions will impact all root server operators, all domain name > > >registries (including ccTLDs), as well as DNS name server operators, > > >resolver software and application developers, and end users. The panel > > >will examine DNSSEC from the end user and ccTLD and gTLD registries > > >perspective, while members of ICANN's SSAC, Generic Names Supporting > > >Organization (GNSO) and the Third World Network will explore the > > >accountability and transperency of policy decisions pertaining to > > >changes made at the root. > > > > > >Attendees will be able to pose questions or participate in the > > >discussion either in person or online using Elluminate. Your computer > > >will need speakers and/or a microphone in order to participate. > > > > > >Click here - > > >http://cotelco.syr.edu/Webconferencing/tabid/219/Default.aspx - to join > > >the meeting. > > > > > >If this is the first time you will be using Elluminate, your computer > > >will download Java-based client software (around 5 minutes) when you > > >click the link above. Once setup is complete, you will then be > > >redirected to the meeting. > > > > > >Hope to see you in person or online! > > > > > >Best, > > > > > >Brenden Kuerbis > > >Internet Governance Project > > > > > >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 > > > > > > > > > > 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 ____________________________________________________________ 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 From mueller at syr.edu Thu Nov 2 01:33:39 2006 From: mueller at syr.edu (Milton Mueller) Date: Thu, 02 Nov 2006 01:33:39 -0500 Subject: [governance] Clarify: CS wrap up meeting(s)? Message-ID: >>> karenb at gn.apc.org 11/1/2006 5:42:58 PM >>> >wouldn't it be possible to combine the congo IG caucus meetings? i >imagine both would be largely addressing civil society concerns (and >possibly some good stuff? :) we just need a clear agenda and maybe >division of facilitation roles? (or, do we have different agendas?) > >alac of course is different, but again, any reason why alac can't >speak to civil society as a whole?. (in fact, wouldn't it be a good idea?) I would strongly support combining all these meetings. ALAC is in fact no different and should set aside its persistent effort to claim for itself the mantle of civil society in ICANN, especially now that a reform which will fold ALAC, NCUC and Nomcom into a more integrated civil society will probably happen. ____________________________________________________________ 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 From mueller at syr.edu Thu Nov 2 01:37:08 2006 From: mueller at syr.edu (Milton Mueller) Date: Thu, 02 Nov 2006 01:37:08 -0500 Subject: [governance] Draft Workshop Report -- DNS forum @ Athens Message-ID: Thanks DM! Here's my summary which is probably too long to read all of but will go into the official report. If anyone thinks I missed something please let me know. Workshop Report New Technical and Policy Challenges in DNS Root Zone Management The panelists and audience vigorously aired conflicting views on the political, economic and technical issues raised by management of the DNS root zone file. The panelists and audience all seemed to agree that this topic was "the elephant in the room" and that it was time to discuss it openly. On the issue of unilateral control by the U.S. government, some felt that the situation was tolerable as long as the arrangements are stable and the root server operators have one clear authoritative source for the root zone file. They also mentioned the risk of losing coordination in a move to a new arrangement, stressing the need for caution. Those willing to tolerate the status quo did acknowledge, however, the possibility of an arbitrary unilateral action that could strain or break down global coordination. The discussion explored the potential benefits and dangers of a move to multi-lateral or internationalized root zone file management. One panelist offered a detailed proposal to internationalize root oversight and argued that it would remove a huge distraction from the ICANN regime and improve stability; another argued that whatever new arrangements are adopted must give excluded developing countries a voice in the regime; others complained that such a change would bring destructive intergovernmental conflict into a domain that should be governed by commercial and technical criteria. DNSSEC is a new IETF standard that uses public-key cryptographic signatures to ensure the integrity and authenticity of DNS data. DNSSEC implementation would affect root zone file management because one must decide who will sign the root and who will hold the encryption keys. It is possible to implement DNSSEC without signing the root, but that would create only "islands of trust" in specific TLDs, posing many key management and rollover problems for those who tried to use DNSSEC at lower levels. Such problems would undermine DNSSEC's cost-benefit calculus and possibly prove fatal to efforts to gain acceptance. Registrars lack economic incentives to adopt it on their own. A panelist noted progress in ICANN's ccNSO toward automation of routine changes in the root zone file. >>> declan at well.com 11/1/2006 8:51:17 PM >>> So I was sitting in the back of the DNS/root server workshop at Athens and just wanted to say that Milton did a terrific job. Imagine that, an on-topic discussion. :) -Declan ____________________________________________________________ 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 ____________________________________________________________ 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 From Jeremy at Malcolm.id.au Thu Nov 2 01:57:20 2006 From: Jeremy at Malcolm.id.au (Jeremy Malcolm) Date: Thu, 02 Nov 2006 08:57:20 +0200 Subject: [governance] My latest thoughts after meeting with Markus Message-ID: <454996D0.9070103@Malcolm.id.au> Here is a blog entry which outlines a perhaps slightly more politically acceptable version of the same nonsense that I've been spouting lately: http://igfwatch.org/discussion-board/my-meeting-with-markus-kummer If I get an opportunity I might speak up during The Way Forward, unless someone else from civil society does so first along the same lines (which I'd prefer). -- Jeremy Malcolm LLB (Hons) B Com Internet and Open Source lawyer, IT consultant, actor host -t NAPTR 1.0.8.0.3.1.2.9.8.1.6.e164.org|awk -F! '{print $3}' ____________________________________________________________ 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 From bendrath at zedat.fu-berlin.de Thu Nov 2 01:58:15 2006 From: bendrath at zedat.fu-berlin.de (Ralf Bendrath) Date: Thu, 02 Nov 2006 08:58:15 +0200 Subject: [governance] Dynamic Coalition on Privacy launched at UN Internet Meeting in Athens Message-ID: <45499707.9070806@zedat.fu-berlin.de> *Press Release / IGF outcome on Privacy Protection* Press Contacts: Gus Hosein Information Systems Group at the London School of Economics and Political Science (+44) 797 046 2041 Email: i.hosein at lse.ac.uk Ralf Bendrath Collaborative Research Center “Transformations of the State”, University of Bremen (+49) 179 215 4614 Email: bendrath at zedat.fu-berlin.de *Dynamic Coalition on Privacy launched at UN Internet Meeting in Athens* IGF participants kick off process for privacy in digital identity management, development, and freedom of expression Athens, 2 November 2006. At the Internet Governance Forum (IGF), a UN conference on future internet public policy taking place in Athens this week, a diverse group of stakeholders has agreed to launch a Dynamic Coalition on Privacy, which will address emerging issues of internet privacy protection such as digital identities, the link between privacy and development, and the importance of privacy and anonymity for freedom of expression. It will initiate an open process to further develop and clarify the public policy aspects of privacy in internet governance in the perspective of the next IGF meeting in Brazil in 2007. The group will use online collaboration tools as well as facilitate meetings at related events all over the world throughout the year. Participants in Athens in particular agreed that there is a need for greater public participation in technical and legal standardizations that have a global public policy impact on privacy. They also emphasised that it is important to better include perspectives from developing countries in these processes. One of the main outcomes of the IGF is the creation of "dynamic coalitions" or multi-stakeholder groups working together on a common issue over a multi-year process. The Dynamic Coalition on Privacy is a direct outcome of two privacy workshops at the IGF on 31 October, co-organized by the Information Systems Group at the LSE and the University of Bremen. It also reflects discussions held during the IGF main session on cyber-security as well as the IGF workshops on "Human Rights and the Internet" organized by the Council of Europe and on an "Internet Bill of Rights" organized by the Government of Italy together with IP Justice and the Internet Society of Italy. It builds upon several months of multi-stakeholder collaboration in the run-up to the UN meeting in Athens. Start-up actors include representatives from - Privacy International - "Privacy and Identity Management in Europe" (PRIME) Project - Association for Progressive Communication (APC) - Microsoft - Amnesty International - French Government - Council of Europe (to be confirmed) - Privacy Commissioner of Canada - WSIS Civil Society Working Group on Privacy and Security - North American Consumer Project on Electronic Commerce (NACPEC) - Net Dialogue of Harvard's Berkman Center and Stanford's Center for Internet and Society - OSCE Representative on Freedom of the Media - LSE Information Systems Group - American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) - University of Bremen - Internet Service Providers' Association of South Africa - Hellenic Data Protection Authority - IP Justice - European Digital Rights (EDRi) - Danish Human Rights Institute - Electronic Frontier Finland - Independent Centre for Privacy Protection in Kiel, Germany - WISeKey - Digital Rights Ireland, - Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility (CPSR) - Privaterra - Deutsche Vereinigung für Datenschutz (DVD) - Metamorphosis Foundation - Kuwait Information Technology Society - Japan Computer Access for Empowerment (JCAFE) - Netzwerk Neue Medien (NNM) - Identity Commons Working Group on Identity Rights Agreements - Cyberlaw Asia The coalition is open to interested parties and will start a global process to engage more stakeholders over the next year. Therefore, the start-up actors call for people interested in or willing to join the work of this coalition and for recommending other stakeholders that should be contacted. The French government has offered to host a follow-up meeting in Paris in early 2007. For more information: LSE Identity Project http://identityproject.lse.ac.uk/ Privacy International http://www.privacyinternational.org/ The Berkman Center for Internet & Society, Harvard Law School http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/ general information on the Internet Governance Forum (IGF) http://www.intgovforum.org ____________________________________________________________ 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 From wsis at ngocongo.org Thu Nov 2 03:39:06 2006 From: wsis at ngocongo.org (CONGO - Philippe Dam) Date: Thu, 2 Nov 2006 09:39:06 +0100 Subject: [governance] Clarify: CS wrap up meeting(s)? In-Reply-To: <20061101154301.A85021715F4@mail.gn.apc.org> Message-ID: <200611020739.kA27d2lV012362@smtp1.infomaniak.ch> Hi Karen, For clarification: The IG Caucus is on board for the meeting taking place today during lunchtime. IG Caucus and CONGO are therefore combined. *Thursday 2 November 2006* *13:15-15:00* *Meeting room: Poseidon C.* Best, Ph -----Message d'origine----- De : karen banks [mailto:karenb at gn.apc.org] Envoyé : mercredi 1 novembre 2006 16:43 À : governance at lists.cpsr.org; Vittorio Bertola; governance at lists.cpsr.org; CONGO - Philippe Dam Cc : plenary at wsis-cs.org Objet : [governance] Clarify: CS wrap up meeting(s)? hi vittorio, philippe Can someone clarify what meetings are proposed at the moment? I'm confused if it is two, or three 1) congo 2) ALAC 3) IG wouldn't it be possible to combine the congo IG caucus meetings? i imagine both would be largely addressing civil society concerns (and possibly some good stuff? :) we just need a clear agenda and maybe division of facilitation roles? (or, do we have different agendas?) alac of course is different, but again, any reason why alac can't speak to civil society as a whole?. (in fact, wouldn't it be a good idea?) karen At 17:36 01/11/2006, Vittorio Bertola wrote: >CONGO - Philippe Dam ha scritto: >> >>Dear all, >> >>We invite you to participate tomorrow in a CS wrap up meeting to >>the inaugural IGF meeting. >>* * >>*Thursday 2 November 2006* >>*13:15-15:00* >>*Meeting room: Poseidon C.* > >Could we perhaps move this after the final session ends, at 5pm, or >at 6pm if you want to watch the closure? This would avoid at least >some conflict (not all of it) with the already scheduled civil >society meetings. > >Apart from this, we need to work out better coordination: I don't >mind too much whether it's CONGO or the IGC to call for CS meetings >at the IGF, as long as it's clear who of us does what and we talk to >each other first :) >-- >vb. [Vittorio Bertola - v.bertola [a] bertola.eu.org]<----- >http://bertola.eu.org/ <- Prima o poi... >____________________________________________________________ >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 ____________________________________________________________ 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 ____________________________________________________________ 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 From ajp at glocom.ac.jp Thu Nov 2 02:55:07 2006 From: ajp at glocom.ac.jp (Adam Peake) Date: Thu, 2 Nov 2006 16:55:07 +0900 Subject: [governance] Dynamic Coalition on Privacy launched at UN Internet Meeting in Athens In-Reply-To: <45499707.9070806@zedat.fu-berlin.de> References: <45499707.9070806@zedat.fu-berlin.de> Message-ID: Ralf, great news. Thanks. Do others have announcements of "dynamic coalitions" or partnerships of any kind? The session this morning from 10am to 1pm will be open mic, And the chair will give time to any new coalitions/partnerships/interest groups. If you have something to say, please come and fine me and we can try to coordinate this. Adam (I'm not subscribed to a couple of the lists cc'd but will try them anyway.) On 11/2/06, Ralf Bendrath wrote: > *Press Release / IGF outcome on Privacy Protection* > > Press Contacts: > > Gus Hosein > Information Systems Group at the London School of Economics and Political > Science > (+44) 797 046 2041 > Email: i.hosein at lse.ac.uk > > Ralf Bendrath > Collaborative Research Center "Transformations of the State", University > of Bremen > (+49) 179 215 4614 > Email: bendrath at zedat.fu-berlin.de > > > *Dynamic Coalition on Privacy launched at UN Internet Meeting in Athens* > IGF participants kick off process for privacy in digital identity > management, development, and freedom of expression > > Athens, 2 November 2006. > > At the Internet Governance Forum (IGF), a UN conference on future internet > public policy taking place in Athens this week, a diverse group of > stakeholders has agreed to launch a Dynamic Coalition on Privacy, which > will address emerging issues of internet privacy protection such as > digital identities, the link between privacy and development, and the > importance of privacy and anonymity for freedom of expression. It will > initiate an open process to further develop and clarify the public policy > aspects of privacy in internet governance in the perspective of the next > IGF meeting in Brazil in 2007. The group will use online collaboration > tools as well as facilitate meetings at related events all over the world > throughout the year. Participants in Athens in particular agreed that > there is a need for greater public participation in technical and legal > standardizations that have a global public policy impact on privacy. They > also emphasised that it is important to better include perspectives from > developing countries in these processes. > > One of the main outcomes of the IGF is the creation of "dynamic > coalitions" or multi-stakeholder groups working together on a common issue > over a multi-year process. The Dynamic Coalition on Privacy is a direct > outcome of two privacy workshops at the IGF on 31 October, co-organized by > the Information Systems Group at the LSE and the University of Bremen. It > also reflects discussions held during the IGF main session on > cyber-security as well as the IGF workshops on "Human Rights and the > Internet" organized by the Council of Europe and on an "Internet Bill of > Rights" organized by the Government of Italy together with IP Justice and > the Internet Society of Italy. It builds upon several months of > multi-stakeholder collaboration in the run-up to the UN meeting in Athens. > > Start-up actors include representatives from > > - Privacy International > - "Privacy and Identity Management in Europe" (PRIME) Project > - Association for Progressive Communication (APC) > - Microsoft > - Amnesty International > - French Government > - Council of Europe (to be confirmed) > - Privacy Commissioner of Canada > - WSIS Civil Society Working Group on Privacy and Security > - North American Consumer Project on Electronic Commerce (NACPEC) > - Net Dialogue of Harvard's Berkman Center and Stanford's Center for > Internet and Society > - OSCE Representative on Freedom of the Media > - LSE Information Systems Group > - American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) > - University of Bremen > - Internet Service Providers' Association of South Africa > - Hellenic Data Protection Authority > - IP Justice > - European Digital Rights (EDRi) > - Danish Human Rights Institute > - Electronic Frontier Finland > - Independent Centre for Privacy Protection in Kiel, Germany > - WISeKey > - Digital Rights Ireland, > - Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility (CPSR) > - Privaterra > - Deutsche Vereinigung für Datenschutz (DVD) > - Metamorphosis Foundation > - Kuwait Information Technology Society > - Japan Computer Access for Empowerment (JCAFE) > - Netzwerk Neue Medien (NNM) > - Identity Commons Working Group on Identity Rights Agreements > - Cyberlaw Asia > > The coalition is open to interested parties and will start a global > process to engage more stakeholders over the next year. Therefore, the > start-up actors call for people interested in or willing to join the work > of this coalition and for recommending other stakeholders that should be > contacted. > > The French government has offered to host a follow-up meeting in Paris in > early 2007. > > For more information: > > LSE Identity Project > http://identityproject.lse.ac.uk/ > > Privacy International > http://www.privacyinternational.org/ > > The Berkman Center for Internet & Society, Harvard Law School > http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/ > > general information on the Internet Governance Forum (IGF) > http://www.intgovforum.org > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > ____________________________________________________________ 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 From wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de Thu Nov 2 02:59:54 2006 From: wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Wolfgang_Kleinw=E4chter?=) Date: Thu, 02 Nov 2006 08:59:54 +0100 Subject: [WSIS CS-Plenary] Re: [governance] Clarify: CS wrap up meeting(s)? References: Message-ID: <3AEE633F500281489D5F3303731CE9F30438A8@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> I also support this integrated approach. wolfgang ________________________________ From: Milton Mueller [mailto:mueller at syr.edu] Sent: Thu 11/2/2006 7:33 AM To: Vittorio Bertola; karenb at gn.apc.org; governance at lists.cpsr.org; CONGO - Philippe Dam Cc: plenary at wsis-cs.org Subject: [WSIS CS-Plenary] Re: [governance] Clarify: CS wrap up meeting(s)? [Please note that by using 'REPLY', your response goes to the entire list. Kindly use individual addresses for responses intended for specific people] Click http://wsis.funredes.org/plenary/ to access automatic translation of this message! _______________________________________ >>> karenb at gn.apc.org 11/1/2006 5:42:58 PM >>> >wouldn't it be possible to combine the congo IG caucus meetings? i >imagine both would be largely addressing civil society concerns (and >possibly some good stuff? :) we just need a clear agenda and maybe >division of facilitation roles? (or, do we have different agendas?) > >alac of course is different, but again, any reason why alac can't >speak to civil society as a whole?. (in fact, wouldn't it be a good idea?) I would strongly support combining all these meetings. ALAC is in fact no different and should set aside its persistent effort to claim for itself the mantle of civil society in ICANN, especially now that a reform which will fold ALAC, NCUC and Nomcom into a more integrated civil society will probably happen. _______________________________________________ Plenary mailing list Plenary at wsis-cs.org http://mailman.greennet.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/plenary ____________________________________________________________ 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 From vb at bertola.eu.org Thu Nov 2 03:35:10 2006 From: vb at bertola.eu.org (Vittorio Bertola) Date: Thu, 02 Nov 2006 10:35:10 +0200 Subject: [governance] My latest thoughts after meeting with Markus In-Reply-To: <454996D0.9070103@Malcolm.id.au> References: <454996D0.9070103@Malcolm.id.au> Message-ID: <4549ADBE.8020703@bertola.eu.org> Jeremy Malcolm ha scritto: > Here is a blog entry which outlines a perhaps slightly more politically > acceptable version of the same nonsense that I've been spouting lately: > > http://igfwatch.org/discussion-board/my-meeting-with-markus-kummer > > If I get an opportunity I might speak up during The Way Forward, unless > someone else from civil society does so first along the same lines > (which I'd prefer). I might say more or less your same things. Anyway, I think it is important that many of us get to the microphone and state the point that the IGF should be able to find a process to make recommendations and actually release substantive results. The official report of the IGF is going to be "1500 people assembled in Athens and had a lot of discussion on a lot of things". Period. I think it's a real pity - fine for this time, but needs to be addressed for the future. -- vb. [Vittorio Bertola - v.bertola [a] bertola.eu.org]<----- http://bertola.eu.org/ <- Prima o poi... ____________________________________________________________ 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 From aizu at anr.org Thu Nov 2 04:24:15 2006 From: aizu at anr.org (Izumi AIZU) Date: Thu, 2 Nov 2006 18:24:15 +0900 Subject: [governance] Clarify: CS wrap up meeting(s)? In-Reply-To: References: <3AEE633F500281489D5F3303731CE9F30438A8@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> Message-ID: It then left only to ICANN RALO meeting which will take place at Garbi Restaunrant already circulated with flyer - not easy to change at this point of time.... We may try send our "rep" to the CS/IGC meeting at least to liaise and bridge, not diverge. Thanks, izumi 2006/11/2, Wolfgang Kleinwächter : > I also support this integrated approach. > > wolfgang > > > ________________________________ > > From: Milton Mueller [mailto:mueller at syr.edu] > Sent: Thu 11/2/2006 7:33 AM > To: Vittorio Bertola; karenb at gn.apc.org; governance at lists.cpsr.org; CONGO - Philippe Dam > Cc: plenary at wsis-cs.org > Subject: [WSIS CS-Plenary] Re: [governance] Clarify: CS wrap up meeting(s)? > > > > [Please note that by using 'REPLY', your response goes to the entire list. Kindly use individual addresses for responses intended for specific people] > > Click http://wsis.funredes.org/plenary/ to access automatic translation of this message! > _______________________________________ > > > > >>> karenb at gn.apc.org 11/1/2006 5:42:58 PM >>> > >wouldn't it be possible to combine the congo IG caucus meetings? i > >imagine both would be largely addressing civil society concerns (and > >possibly some good stuff? :) we just need a clear agenda and maybe > >division of facilitation roles? (or, do we have different agendas?) > > > >alac of course is different, but again, any reason why alac can't > >speak to civil society as a whole?. (in fact, wouldn't it be a good > idea?) > > I would strongly support combining all these meetings. ALAC is in fact > no different and should set aside its persistent effort to claim for > itself the mantle of civil society in ICANN, especially now that a > reform which will fold ALAC, NCUC and Nomcom into a more integrated > civil society will probably happen. > _______________________________________________ > Plenary mailing list > Plenary at wsis-cs.org > http://mailman.greennet.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/plenary > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > -- >> Izumi Aizu << Institute for HyperNetwork Society Kumon Center, Tama University * * * * * << Writing the Future of the History >> www.anr.org -- >> Izumi Aizu << Institute for HyperNetwork Society Kumon Center, Tama University * * * * * << Writing the Future of the History >> www.anr.org ____________________________________________________________ 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 From dogwallah at gmail.com Thu Nov 2 04:56:55 2006 From: dogwallah at gmail.com (McTim) Date: Thu, 2 Nov 2006 12:56:55 +0300 Subject: [governance] Draft Workshop Report -- DNS forum @ Athens In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 11/2/06, Milton Mueller wrote: > > DNSSEC is a new IETF standard that uses public-key cryptographic > signatures to ensure the integrity and authenticity of DNS data. DNSSEC > implementation would affect root zone file management because one must > decide who will sign the root and who will hold the encryption keys. Publication of the public key is also an important issue that hasn't yet been resolved. -- Cheers, McTim $ whois -h whois.afrinic.net mctim ____________________________________________________________ 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 From Jeremy at Malcolm.id.au Thu Nov 2 05:37:30 2006 From: Jeremy at Malcolm.id.au (Jeremy Malcolm) Date: Thu, 02 Nov 2006 12:37:30 +0200 Subject: [governance] Advisory Group appointment Message-ID: <4549CA6A.6060200@Malcolm.id.au> Adam, would it be possible for you to raise on the Advisory Group mailing list (which I can't post to, because it's closed) the proposal that from now on it be appointed by an open and multi-stakeholder nominations committee (as delegates of the Secretary-General)? The nominations committee would still have to consider the same criteria that the Secretariat does now - geographic and gender balance, and so on. I was speaking to Markus about this last night, and although he dismissed it at first, after he mulled it over he conceded it would be possible. I think for this issue to be fed to the Advisory Group and for it to consider it and respond might help abate the concerns of those who are worried about its transparency and accountability to the stakeholders (though opening the mailing list would help more with the former). -- Jeremy Malcolm LLB (Hons) B Com Internet and Open Source lawyer, IT consultant, actor host -t NAPTR 1.0.8.0.3.1.2.9.8.1.6.e164.org|awk -F! '{print $3}' ____________________________________________________________ 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 From ajp at glocom.ac.jp Thu Nov 2 05:59:32 2006 From: ajp at glocom.ac.jp (Adam Peake) Date: Thu, 2 Nov 2006 19:59:32 +0900 Subject: [governance] Advisory Group appointment In-Reply-To: <4549CA6A.6060200@Malcolm.id.au> References: <4549CA6A.6060200@Malcolm.id.au> Message-ID: why don't you ask Markus about how the first MAG was selected and the reasons for those selections. Adam On 11/2/06, Jeremy Malcolm wrote: > Adam, would it be possible for you to raise on the Advisory Group > mailing list (which I can't post to, because it's closed) the proposal > that from now on it be appointed by an open and multi-stakeholder > nominations committee (as delegates of the Secretary-General)? > > The nominations committee would still have to consider the same criteria > that the Secretariat does now - geographic and gender balance, and so > on. I was speaking to Markus about this last night, and although he > dismissed it at first, after he mulled it over he conceded it would be > possible. > > I think for this issue to be fed to the Advisory Group and for it to > consider it and respond might help abate the concerns of those who are > worried about its transparency and accountability to the stakeholders > (though opening the mailing list would help more with the former). > > -- > Jeremy Malcolm LLB (Hons) B Com > Internet and Open Source lawyer, IT consultant, actor > host -t NAPTR 1.0.8.0.3.1.2.9.8.1.6.e164.org|awk -F! '{print $3}' > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > ____________________________________________________________ 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 From Jeremy at Malcolm.id.au Thu Nov 2 06:32:42 2006 From: Jeremy at Malcolm.id.au (Jeremy Malcolm) Date: Thu, 02 Nov 2006 13:32:42 +0200 Subject: [governance] Advisory Group appointment In-Reply-To: References: <4549CA6A.6060200@Malcolm.id.au> Message-ID: <4549D75A.8080806@Malcolm.id.au> Adam Peake wrote: > why don't you ask Markus about how the first MAG was selected and the > reasons for those selections. I did, last night, but I'm not sure what your point is. My issue is not at all with the people who were appointed, or even the criteria that were used in their appointment, it's with the transparency and inclusiveness of the process by which they were appointed and the criteria applied. (A secondary issue is the low proportion of civil society delegates.) -- Jeremy Malcolm LLB (Hons) B Com Internet and Open Source lawyer, IT consultant, actor host -t NAPTR 1.0.8.0.3.1.2.9.8.1.6.e164.org|awk -F! '{print $3}' ____________________________________________________________ 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 From vb at bertola.eu.org Thu Nov 2 08:48:40 2006 From: vb at bertola.eu.org (Vittorio Bertola) Date: Thu, 02 Nov 2006 15:48:40 +0200 Subject: [governance] Advisory Group appointment In-Reply-To: <4549CA6A.6060200@Malcolm.id.au> References: <4549CA6A.6060200@Malcolm.id.au> Message-ID: <4549F738.40204@bertola.eu.org> Jeremy Malcolm ha scritto: > Adam, would it be possible for you to raise on the Advisory Group > mailing list (which I can't post to, because it's closed) the proposal > that from now on it be appointed by an open and multi-stakeholder > nominations committee (as delegates of the Secretary-General)? I think that then you have a problem: who is going to select the members of the nominating committee that is going to select the Advisory Group? If it's the SG and you trust the SG to pick a balanced Nomcom, then why don't you trust him to pick a balanced AG? If the point is that constituencies should self-select representatives, then we'd rather ask the SG to tell us how many he wants, and we'll provide the names. This might however shift the heat on ourselves, as I don't think that we ever agreed, for example, that the IGC is entitled to provide names on behalf of the entire civil society. I'd like this scenario, but are we ready for it? If the point is that renewed (better) criteria for selection should be used, or that there were too many I*-societies people and too few civil society (and, by the way, this point was spontaneously made to me by a governmental person as well: it seems that we're not the only ones who are disturbed by that), then we'd rather put out a "formal" CS statement to say: we think that the next AG should have more civil society people and be more geographically and gender balanced. Actually, that's what we were trying to do just before the IGF - I think we now need to release a civil society assessment of the IGF. Finally: > I think for this issue to be fed to the Advisory Group How could the existing (imbalanced) AG conclude that itself was ill selected and so it should be replaced by a different mix of people? I don't see that happening, honestly. To conclude frankly: I imagine that the Secretariat was forced to pick all these Internet technical people as a precondition for some stakeholders not to opt out of the process. I think that now, after a first, successful meeting, strength ratios are different and the Secretariat might be able to do a better job, as it did with the WGIG. We should first of all lobby it to that extent. -- vb. [Vittorio Bertola - v.bertola [a] bertola.eu.org]<----- http://bertola.eu.org/ <- Prima o poi... ____________________________________________________________ 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 From Jeremy at Malcolm.id.au Thu Nov 2 09:12:31 2006 From: Jeremy at Malcolm.id.au (Jeremy Malcolm) Date: Thu, 02 Nov 2006 16:12:31 +0200 Subject: [governance] Advisory Group appointment In-Reply-To: <4549F738.40204@bertola.eu.org> References: <4549CA6A.6060200@Malcolm.id.au> <4549F738.40204@bertola.eu.org> Message-ID: <4549FCCF.7000305@Malcolm.id.au> Vittorio Bertola wrote: > Jeremy Malcolm ha scritto: >> Adam, would it be possible for you to raise on the Advisory Group >> mailing list (which I can't post to, because it's closed) the proposal >> that from now on it be appointed by an open and multi-stakeholder >> nominations committee (as delegates of the Secretary-General)? > > I think that then you have a problem: who is going to select the members > of the nominating committee that is going to select the Advisory Group? > If it's the SG and you trust the SG to pick a balanced Nomcom, then why > don't you trust him to pick a balanced AG? By saying "open" I did not make clear my meaning that anyone who volunteered to be on it could do so (which I've written about elsewhere but didn't make explicit here). So it would have to operate by consensus rather than by voting. You might say that that couldn't possibly work, but it does work in many other contexts: Wikipedia, IETF... if you need more examples I can direct you to the relevant part of my thesis. Self-selection, just FYI, is something that Kummer has flatly ruled out. -- Jeremy Malcolm LLB (Hons) B Com Internet and Open Source lawyer, IT consultant, actor host -t NAPTR 1.0.8.0.3.1.2.9.8.1.6.e164.org|awk -F! '{print $3}' ____________________________________________________________ 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 From aizu at anr.org Thu Nov 2 10:37:19 2006 From: aizu at anr.org (Izumi AIZU) Date: Fri, 3 Nov 2006 00:37:19 +0900 Subject: [governance] Dynamic Coalition on IGF Fund, with focus on participation from developing parts of the world Message-ID: Friends, I said the following in the morning open mike session this morning at IGF, for the record, and invite you to join this, give advice, or take on board and make it better. Several person mostly engaged in ITC4D areas personally responded to join this. I like to ask CS members of Advisory Committee to bring this to their attention in an appropriate manner. Please remind and push me in the near future. izumi A proposal for Dynamic Coalition on IGF Funding with a focus on Participation and Development Izumi Aizu, A member of ALAC, ICANN Here is an ad hoc proposal: One of the differences we observe between Tunis Summit and IGF here in Athens I observe is less number of participants from the developing countries. Even though the overarching single theme of this IGF is IG for Development. So, I like to submit an Ad Hoc Proposal to form a Dynamic Coalition on Funding of IGF, with a special focus on supporting the participation of developing parts of the world. This includes, of course, developing countries, but perhaps also such relatively marginalized people or those having higher barriers for participation as persons with disabilities, youth and many NGOs and Civil Society people mostly in developing countries, but sometimes to those even in developed country, but in say rural areas etc. I think that early effort should be made for this program. We call on governments of the North, donor countries, international organizations in charge of development, and IG related bodies such as ICANN, ITU, WIPO or any others to provide adequate funding to bring more people from developing countries – to next IGF meeting in Brazil. A number of individuals mostly within the Civil Society group and IG Caucus expressed their interest to act as conduit, or function as facilitators to implement these funds into tangible programs, working together with the IGF secretariat, host government of Brazil and IGF Advisory Group members. Again, we appeal to those government and international organizations who are interested in allocating some of your small budget for the next year 2007 and onward, ITU, ICANN, World Bank, or private sector bodies such as Keidanren, ICC or big or small companies such as Microsoft, Siemens, Amazon or Google, France Telecom, BT, NTT, T-Mobile, Orange… just to name a few – and we will commit to make best use of the funding. ____________________________________________________________ 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 From jeremy.shtern at umontreal.ca Thu Nov 2 10:52:18 2006 From: jeremy.shtern at umontreal.ca (Jeremy Shtern) Date: Thu, 02 Nov 2006 10:52:18 -0500 Subject: [governance] Dynamic Coalition on IGF Fund, with focus on participation from developing parts of the world In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <454A1432.5090308@umontreal.ca> Does anyone have any idea where the term 'dynamic colalitions' has come from, how it entered into the IGF process etc? Adam? Anyone else? Cheers, Jeremy Izumi AIZU wrote: > Friends, > > I said the following in the morning open mike session this morning at > IGF, for the record, and invite you to join this, give advice, or take > on board and make it better. > > Several person mostly engaged in ITC4D areas personally responded to > join this. > > I like to ask CS members of Advisory Committee to bring this to their > attention in an appropriate manner. > > Please remind and push me in the near future. > > izumi > > A proposal for Dynamic Coalition on IGF Funding with a focus on > Participation and Development > > Izumi Aizu, A member of ALAC, ICANN > > Here is an ad hoc proposal: > > One of the differences we observe between Tunis Summit and IGF here in > Athens I observe is less number of participants from the developing > countries. Even though the overarching single theme of this IGF is IG > for Development. So, I like to submit an Ad Hoc Proposal to form a > Dynamic Coalition on Funding of IGF, with a special focus on > supporting the participation of developing parts of the world. This > includes, of course, developing countries, but perhaps also such > relatively marginalized people or those having higher barriers for > participation as persons with disabilities, youth and many NGOs and > Civil Society people mostly in developing countries, but sometimes to > those even in developed country, but in say rural areas etc. > > I think that early effort should be made for this program. > > We call on governments of the North, donor countries, international > organizations in charge of development, and IG related bodies such as > ICANN, ITU, WIPO or any others to provide adequate funding to bring > more people from developing countries – to next IGF meeting in Brazil. > > A number of individuals mostly within the Civil Society group and IG > Caucus expressed their interest to act as conduit, or function as > facilitators to implement these funds into tangible programs, working > together with the IGF secretariat, host government of Brazil and IGF > Advisory Group members. Again, we appeal to those government and > international organizations who are interested in allocating some of > your small budget for the next year 2007 and onward, ITU, ICANN, World > Bank, or private sector bodies such as Keidanren, ICC or big or small > companies such as Microsoft, Siemens, Amazon or Google, France > Telecom, BT, NTT, T-Mobile, Orange… just to name a few – and we will > commit to make best use of the funding. > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > ____________________________________________________________ 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 From nyangkweagien at gmail.com Thu Nov 2 11:09:35 2006 From: nyangkweagien at gmail.com (Nyangkwe Agien Aaron) Date: Thu, 2 Nov 2006 17:09:35 +0100 Subject: [governance] Dynamic Coalition on IGF Fund, with focus on participation from developing parts of the world In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: The idea is wonderful. How I wish you had carried out some diplomacy to get the all-that-important issue debated on the floor by having some other members support or engage in a discussion of the idea. Ours now is the inputs to get our strategic partners as Izumi has said to join the fold and provide the means. L'IDEE EST MERVEILLEUX! COMMENT J'AURAI SOUHAITE QU'UNE ACTION DIPLOMATIQUE AIT ETE MENEE AVANT SUR L'IDEE POUR QU'UN PROBLEME SI IMPORTANT SOIT DEBATU DANS LA SALLE, EN AYANT QUELQUES MEMBRES SOUTENIR OU ENGAGER UNE DISCUSSION SUR LE SUJET. NEANMOINS, CE QUI NOUS RESTE A FAIRE MAINTENANT, C' EST D'ASSEMBLER TOUS LES INPUTS NECESSAIRES AFIN D'AMENER NOS PARTENAIRES STRATEGIQUES A NOUS REJOINDRE, EN APPORTANT LES MOYENS NECESSAIRES REQUIS. Nyangkwe On 11/2/06, Izumi AIZU wrote: > Friends, > > I said the following in the morning open mike session this morning at > IGF, for the record, and invite you to join this, give advice, or take > on board and make it better. > > Several person mostly engaged in ITC4D areas personally responded to join this. > > I like to ask CS members of Advisory Committee to bring this to their > attention in an appropriate manner. > > Please remind and push me in the near future. > > izumi > > A proposal for Dynamic Coalition on IGF Funding with a focus on > Participation and Development > > Izumi Aizu, A member of ALAC, ICANN > > Here is an ad hoc proposal: > > One of the differences we observe between Tunis Summit and IGF here in > Athens I observe is less number of participants from the developing > countries. Even though the overarching single theme of this IGF is IG > for Development. So, I like to submit an Ad Hoc Proposal to form a > Dynamic Coalition on Funding of IGF, with a special focus on > supporting the participation of developing parts of the world. This > includes, of course, developing countries, but perhaps also such > relatively marginalized people or those having higher barriers for > participation as persons with disabilities, youth and many NGOs and > Civil Society people mostly in developing countries, but sometimes to > those even in developed country, but in say rural areas etc. > > I think that early effort should be made for this program. > > We call on governments of the North, donor countries, international > organizations in charge of development, and IG related bodies such as > ICANN, ITU, WIPO or any others to provide adequate funding to bring > more people from developing countries – to next IGF meeting in Brazil. > > A number of individuals mostly within the Civil Society group and IG > Caucus expressed their interest to act as conduit, or function as > facilitators to implement these funds into tangible programs, working > together with the IGF secretariat, host government of Brazil and IGF > Advisory Group members. Again, we appeal to those government and > international organizations who are interested in allocating some of > your small budget for the next year 2007 and onward, ITU, ICANN, World > Bank, or private sector bodies such as Keidanren, ICC or big or small > companies such as Microsoft, Siemens, Amazon or Google, France > Telecom, BT, NTT, T-Mobile, Orange… just to name a few – and we will > commit to make best use of the funding. > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > -- Aaron Agien Nyangkwe Journalist/Outcome Mapper Special Assistant To The President ASAFE Tel. 237 337 50 22 Fax. 237 342 29 70 ____________________________________________________________ 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 From ajp at glocom.ac.jp Thu Nov 2 11:15:05 2006 From: ajp at glocom.ac.jp (Adam Peake) Date: Fri, 3 Nov 2006 01:15:05 +0900 Subject: [governance] Dynamic Coalition on IGF Fund, with focus on participation from developing parts of the world In-Reply-To: <454A1432.5090308@umontreal.ca> References: <454A1432.5090308@umontreal.ca> Message-ID: I'm not sure, but Nitin Desai seems to like what it conveys and it's become a bit of a meme. I think I remember Matthew Shears using "dynamic coalition" in an off the cuff comment during an early IGF consultation. Matthew denies all knowledge and responsibility :-) Adam On 11/3/06, Jeremy Shtern wrote: > Does anyone have any idea where the term 'dynamic colalitions' has come > from, how it entered into the IGF process etc? Adam? Anyone else? > > Cheers, > Jeremy > > > Izumi AIZU wrote: > > Friends, > > > > I said the following in the morning open mike session this morning at > > IGF, for the record, and invite you to join this, give advice, or take > > on board and make it better. > > > > Several person mostly engaged in ITC4D areas personally responded to > > join this. > > > > I like to ask CS members of Advisory Committee to bring this to their > > attention in an appropriate manner. > > > > Please remind and push me in the near future. > > > > izumi > > > > A proposal for Dynamic Coalition on IGF Funding with a focus on > > Participation and Development > > > > Izumi Aizu, A member of ALAC, ICANN > > > > Here is an ad hoc proposal: > > > > One of the differences we observe between Tunis Summit and IGF here in > > Athens I observe is less number of participants from the developing > > countries. Even though the overarching single theme of this IGF is IG > > for Development. So, I like to submit an Ad Hoc Proposal to form a > > Dynamic Coalition on Funding of IGF, with a special focus on > > supporting the participation of developing parts of the world. This > > includes, of course, developing countries, but perhaps also such > > relatively marginalized people or those having higher barriers for > > participation as persons with disabilities, youth and many NGOs and > > Civil Society people mostly in developing countries, but sometimes to > > those even in developed country, but in say rural areas etc. > > > > I think that early effort should be made for this program. > > > > We call on governments of the North, donor countries, international > > organizations in charge of development, and IG related bodies such as > > ICANN, ITU, WIPO or any others to provide adequate funding to bring > > more people from developing countries – to next IGF meeting in Brazil. > > > > A number of individuals mostly within the Civil Society group and IG > > Caucus expressed their interest to act as conduit, or function as > > facilitators to implement these funds into tangible programs, working > > together with the IGF secretariat, host government of Brazil and IGF > > Advisory Group members. Again, we appeal to those government and > > international organizations who are interested in allocating some of > > your small budget for the next year 2007 and onward, ITU, ICANN, World > > Bank, or private sector bodies such as Keidanren, ICC or big or small > > companies such as Microsoft, Siemens, Amazon or Google, France > > Telecom, BT, NTT, T-Mobile, Orange… just to name a few – and we will > > commit to make best use of the funding. > > ____________________________________________________________ > > 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 > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > ____________________________________________________________ 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 From jrmathia at maxwell.syr.edu Thu Nov 2 11:23:30 2006 From: jrmathia at maxwell.syr.edu (John Mathiason) Date: Thu, 02 Nov 2006 18:23:30 +0200 Subject: [governance] Dynamic Coalition on IGF Fund, with focus on participation from developing parts of the world In-Reply-To: References: <454A1432.5090308@umontreal.ca> Message-ID: <809F1453-66BA-4E79-B1CD-7000203FFF5E@maxwell.syr.edu> To give credit where credit may be due, Bill Drake used the term in his presentation to the panel on a Framework Convention. You might ask him where he got it. John On Nov 2, 2006, at 6:15 PM, Adam Peake wrote: > I'm not sure, but Nitin Desai seems to like what it conveys and it's > become a bit of a meme. > > I think I remember Matthew Shears using "dynamic coalition" in an off > the cuff comment during an early IGF consultation. Matthew denies all > knowledge and responsibility :-) > > Adam > > > > On 11/3/06, Jeremy Shtern wrote: >> Does anyone have any idea where the term 'dynamic colalitions' >> has come >> from, how it entered into the IGF process etc? Adam? Anyone else? >> >> Cheers, >> Jeremy >> >> >> Izumi AIZU wrote: >> > Friends, >> > >> > I said the following in the morning open mike session this >> morning at >> > IGF, for the record, and invite you to join this, give advice, >> or take >> > on board and make it better. >> > >> > Several person mostly engaged in ITC4D areas personally >> responded to >> > join this. >> > >> > I like to ask CS members of Advisory Committee to bring this to >> their >> > attention in an appropriate manner. >> > >> > Please remind and push me in the near future. >> > >> > izumi >> > >> > A proposal for Dynamic Coalition on IGF Funding with a focus on >> > Participation and Development >> > >> > Izumi Aizu, A member of ALAC, ICANN >> > >> > Here is an ad hoc proposal: >> > >> > One of the differences we observe between Tunis Summit and IGF >> here in >> > Athens I observe is less number of participants from the developing >> > countries. Even though the overarching single theme of this IGF >> is IG >> > for Development. So, I like to submit an Ad Hoc Proposal to form a >> > Dynamic Coalition on Funding of IGF, with a special focus on >> > supporting the participation of developing parts of the world. This >> > includes, of course, developing countries, but perhaps also such >> > relatively marginalized people or those having higher barriers for >> > participation as persons with disabilities, youth and many NGOs and >> > Civil Society people mostly in developing countries, but >> sometimes to >> > those even in developed country, but in say rural areas etc. >> > >> > I think that early effort should be made for this program. >> > >> > We call on governments of the North, donor countries, international >> > organizations in charge of development, and IG related bodies >> such as >> > ICANN, ITU, WIPO or any others to provide adequate funding to bring >> > more people from developing countries – to next IGF meeting in >> Brazil. >> > >> > A number of individuals mostly within the Civil Society group >> and IG >> > Caucus expressed their interest to act as conduit, or function as >> > facilitators to implement these funds into tangible programs, >> working >> > together with the IGF secretariat, host government of Brazil and >> IGF >> > Advisory Group members. Again, we appeal to those government and >> > international organizations who are interested in allocating >> some of >> > your small budget for the next year 2007 and onward, ITU, ICANN, >> World >> > Bank, or private sector bodies such as Keidanren, ICC or big or >> small >> > companies such as Microsoft, Siemens, Amazon or Google, France >> > Telecom, BT, NTT, T-Mobile, Orange… just to name a few – and we >> will >> > commit to make best use of the funding. >> > ____________________________________________________________ >> > 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 >> > >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 >> > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 ____________________________________________________________ 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 From nyangkweagien at gmail.com Thu Nov 2 11:24:52 2006 From: nyangkweagien at gmail.com (Nyangkwe Agien Aaron) Date: Thu, 2 Nov 2006 17:24:52 +0100 Subject: [governance] Dynamic Coalition on IGF Fund, with focus on participation from developing parts of the world In-Reply-To: <454A1432.5090308@umontreal.ca> References: <454A1432.5090308@umontreal.ca> Message-ID: I do not think that the idea of a "Dynamic coalition" has to do with some trade unionism or some political coalitions what soever, as Jeremy is wont to fear, from his intervention, if I read well between the lines. All I seem to understand is that Izumi's dynamism is being put on the table for some other dynamic people to coalese so as to ascertain an inclusive participation of all and sundry at the IGF. Izumis "coalition" is no trade union against some status quo, far from that. It is just one big idea to get more participation from developing countries in the IGF. Echos from Athens proof that, the participation was not inclusive enough. The term "dynamic coalition" should scare no one. It calls for more dynamism if we want an inclusive participation in the on- going IGF process. Nyangkwe On 11/2/06, Jeremy Shtern wrote: > Does anyone have any idea where the term 'dynamic colalitions' has come > from, how it entered into the IGF process etc? Adam? Anyone else? > > Cheers, > Jeremy > > > Izumi AIZU wrote: > > Friends, > > > > I said the following in the morning open mike session this morning at > > IGF, for the record, and invite you to join this, give advice, or take > > on board and make it better. > > > > Several person mostly engaged in ITC4D areas personally responded to > > join this. > > > > I like to ask CS members of Advisory Committee to bring this to their > > attention in an appropriate manner. > > > > Please remind and push me in the near future. > > > > izumi > > > > A proposal for Dynamic Coalition on IGF Funding with a focus on > > Participation and Development > > > > Izumi Aizu, A member of ALAC, ICANN > > > > Here is an ad hoc proposal: > > > > One of the differences we observe between Tunis Summit and IGF here in > > Athens I observe is less number of participants from the developing > > countries. Even though the overarching single theme of this IGF is IG > > for Development. So, I like to submit an Ad Hoc Proposal to form a > > Dynamic Coalition on Funding of IGF, with a special focus on > > supporting the participation of developing parts of the world. This > > includes, of course, developing countries, but perhaps also such > > relatively marginalized people or those having higher barriers for > > participation as persons with disabilities, youth and many NGOs and > > Civil Society people mostly in developing countries, but sometimes to > > those even in developed country, but in say rural areas etc. > > > > I think that early effort should be made for this program. > > > > We call on governments of the North, donor countries, international > > organizations in charge of development, and IG related bodies such as > > ICANN, ITU, WIPO or any others to provide adequate funding to bring > > more people from developing countries – to next IGF meeting in Brazil. > > > > A number of individuals mostly within the Civil Society group and IG > > Caucus expressed their interest to act as conduit, or function as > > facilitators to implement these funds into tangible programs, working > > together with the IGF secretariat, host government of Brazil and IGF > > Advisory Group members. Again, we appeal to those government and > > international organizations who are interested in allocating some of > > your small budget for the next year 2007 and onward, ITU, ICANN, World > > Bank, or private sector bodies such as Keidanren, ICC or big or small > > companies such as Microsoft, Siemens, Amazon or Google, France > > Telecom, BT, NTT, T-Mobile, Orange… just to name a few – and we will > > commit to make best use of the funding. > > ____________________________________________________________ > > 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 > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > -- Aaron Agien Nyangkwe Journalist/Outcome Mapper Special Assistant To The President ASAFE Tel. 237 337 50 22 Fax. 237 342 29 70 ____________________________________________________________ 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 From jeremy.shtern at umontreal.ca Thu Nov 2 11:58:07 2006 From: jeremy.shtern at umontreal.ca (Jeremy Shtern) Date: Thu, 02 Nov 2006 11:58:07 -0500 Subject: [governance] Dynamic Coalition on IGF Fund, with focus on participation from developing parts of the world In-Reply-To: References: <454A1432.5090308@umontreal.ca> Message-ID: <454A239F.8040809@umontreal.ca> Nyangkwe Agien Aaron wrote: > I do not think that the idea of a "Dynamic coalition" has to do with > some trade unionism or some political coalitions what soever, as > Jeremy is wont to fear, from his intervention, if I read well between > the lines. ++++ Thanks Adam and Nyangkwe, but, just to be clear, if this quote above refers to my inquiry below, it had never occurred to me to associate this term with trade unionism and I wasn't really trying to read between the lines- just curious as to when we started using this (WSIS, pre-IGF, during IGF etc) and where it came from (CS, MAG, one of the consultation documents etc). If, as you seem to suggest Nyangkwe, it has a historical association from way outside the IG debates or the recent thinking about multi-stakeholder governance that invokes trade unionism or anything else- I would like to know more and maybe we can get Nitin to reflect on what one has to do with the other. Cheers, Jeremy > All I seem to understand is that Izumi's dynamism is being put on the > table for some other dynamic people to coalese so as to ascertain an > inclusive participation of all and sundry at the IGF. > Izumis "coalition" is no trade union against some status quo, far from > that. It is just one big idea to get more participation from > developing countries in the IGF. Echos from Athens proof that, the > participation was not inclusive enough. > > The term "dynamic coalition" should scare no one. It calls for more > dynamism if we want an inclusive participation in the on- going IGF > process. > > Nyangkwe > > > On 11/2/06, Jeremy Shtern wrote: >> Does anyone have any idea where the term 'dynamic colalitions' has come >> from, how it entered into the IGF process etc? Adam? Anyone else? >> >> Cheers, >> Jeremy >> >> >> Izumi AIZU wrote: >> > Friends, >> > >> > I said the following in the morning open mike session this morning at >> > IGF, for the record, and invite you to join this, give advice, or take >> > on board and make it better. >> > >> > Several person mostly engaged in ITC4D areas personally responded to >> > join this. >> > >> > I like to ask CS members of Advisory Committee to bring this to their >> > attention in an appropriate manner. >> > >> > Please remind and push me in the near future. >> > >> > izumi >> > >> > A proposal for Dynamic Coalition on IGF Funding with a focus on >> > Participation and Development >> > >> > Izumi Aizu, A member of ALAC, ICANN >> > >> > Here is an ad hoc proposal: >> > >> > One of the differences we observe between Tunis Summit and IGF here in >> > Athens I observe is less number of participants from the developing >> > countries. Even though the overarching single theme of this IGF is IG >> > for Development. So, I like to submit an Ad Hoc Proposal to form a >> > Dynamic Coalition on Funding of IGF, with a special focus on >> > supporting the participation of developing parts of the world. This >> > includes, of course, developing countries, but perhaps also such >> > relatively marginalized people or those having higher barriers for >> > participation as persons with disabilities, youth and many NGOs and >> > Civil Society people mostly in developing countries, but sometimes to >> > those even in developed country, but in say rural areas etc. >> > >> > I think that early effort should be made for this program. >> > >> > We call on governments of the North, donor countries, international >> > organizations in charge of development, and IG related bodies such as >> > ICANN, ITU, WIPO or any others to provide adequate funding to bring >> > more people from developing countries – to next IGF meeting in Brazil. >> > >> > A number of individuals mostly within the Civil Society group and IG >> > Caucus expressed their interest to act as conduit, or function as >> > facilitators to implement these funds into tangible programs, working >> > together with the IGF secretariat, host government of Brazil and IGF >> > Advisory Group members. Again, we appeal to those government and >> > international organizations who are interested in allocating some of >> > your small budget for the next year 2007 and onward, ITU, ICANN, World >> > Bank, or private sector bodies such as Keidanren, ICC or big or small >> > companies such as Microsoft, Siemens, Amazon or Google, France >> > Telecom, BT, NTT, T-Mobile, Orange… just to name a few – and we will >> > commit to make best use of the funding. >> > ____________________________________________________________ >> > 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 >> > >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 >> > > ____________________________________________________________ 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 From klohento at panos-ao.org Thu Nov 2 12:28:15 2006 From: klohento at panos-ao.org (klohento at panos-ao.org) Date: Thu, 2 Nov 2006 18:28:15 +0100 (CET) Subject: [governance] Dynamic Coalition on IGF Fund, with focus on participation from developing parts of the world In-Reply-To: References: <454A1432.5090308@umontreal.ca> Message-ID: <2605.62.103.107.120.1162488495.squirrel@webmail.rekcah.fr> I heard the phrase "Dynamic coalition" first during the a MAG meeting (May 06), but I don't know its precise origin. It's sure communication wise, it's a nice name but I don't know what is the real difference with "Coalition" only... KL > On 11/3/06, Jeremy Shtern wrote: >> Does anyone have any idea where the term 'dynamic colalitions' has come >> from, how it entered into the IGF process etc? Adam? Anyone else? >> >> Cheers, >> Jeremy >> ____________________________________________________________ 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 From nne75 at yahoo.com Thu Nov 2 13:08:26 2006 From: nne75 at yahoo.com (Nnenna) Date: Thu, 2 Nov 2006 10:08:26 -0800 (PST) Subject: [governance] IGF community Web site Message-ID: <20061102180826.95102.qmail@web50213.mail.yahoo.com> Hi Jeremy, all Have you sent this request to Kummer himself at the IGF? I am also copying other groups that may want to take a look at http://igf2006.intgovforum.org to see if there is anything that can be done. Best Nnenna ----- Original Message ---- From: Jeremy Malcolm To: plenary at intgovforum.org Cc: Mary Rundle Sent: Thursday, November 2, 2006 3:42:20 PM Subject: [Plenary] IGF community Web site Welcome to those who have recently joined this list. Please encourage anyone else you know who was at the first IGF meeting, or who participated remotely, or who intends to be involved at Rio, to join as well. Please particularly encourage those who are from government or the private sector to join - because that is the main difference between this list and the IGC and WSIS-Plenary lists: that it is for all four stakeholder groups. You all know about the igf2006.info Web site which Kieren McCarthy and I set up for lack of anything similar being forthcoming from the Secretariat. My questions to this list are: (a) Would anyone else like to be made an administrator of this site, to improve and add to it to a greater extent than they can as an ordinary user? (b) What domain should we move it to so that its URL doesn't have to move every year? (c) Where should we host it? We started off on some cheap Web space but the site quickly grew too large, and in the end even the United Nations' Web server suffered a notorious episode of down time. (d) Do civil society people want to use this site as their site for coordinating civil society activities related to the IGF? (e) What worked for you on the site this year and what didn't? (f) Should we ask the Secretariat to move anything from the official site onto our community site? I'm thinking of things like, most obviously, its discussion boards which are a bit redundant and were hardly used, and maybe less obviously, things like "Related Activities", "Media" and perhaps even "Contributions". -- Jeremy Malcolm LLB (Hons) B Com Internet and Open Source lawyer, IT consultant, actor host -t NAPTR 1.0.8.0.3.1.2.9.8.1.6.e164.org|awk -F! '{print $3}' -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: message-footer.txt URL: From garth.graham at telus.net Thu Nov 2 19:41:19 2006 From: garth.graham at telus.net (Garth Graham) Date: Thu, 2 Nov 2006 16:41:19 -0800 Subject: [governance] Dynamic Coalition on IGF Fund, with focus on participation from developing parts of the world In-Reply-To: References: <454A1432.5090308@umontreal.ca> Message-ID: I would assume that the "dynamic" in dynamic coalition means that the coalition self-organizes. GG On 2-Nov-06, at 8:24 AM, Nyangkwe Agien Aaron wrote: > The term "dynamic coalition" should scare no one. ____________________________________________________________ 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 From avri at psg.com Sat Nov 4 10:36:59 2006 From: avri at psg.com (Avri Doria) Date: Sat, 4 Nov 2006 10:36:59 -0500 Subject: [governance] Dynamic Coalition on IGF Fund, with focus on participation from developing parts of the world In-Reply-To: <2605.62.103.107.120.1162488495.squirrel@webmail.rekcah.fr> References: <454A1432.5090308@umontreal.ca> <2605.62.103.107.120.1162488495.squirrel@webmail.rekcah.fr> Message-ID: Hi, On 2 nov 2006, at 12.28, klohento at panos-ao.org wrote: > I heard the phrase "Dynamic coalition" first during the a MAG > meeting (May > 06), but I don't know its precise origin. yeah, i have been searching for first use but can't pin it down yet. > It's sure communication wise, > it's a nice name but I don't know what is the real difference with > "Coalition" only... Well, may coalitions i have seen are formed at one point and then remain fairly fixed in terms of membership. So my assumption, and it is only that, is that these coalition are not fixed. 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 From jonathanrobin at messagerie.net Sat Nov 4 11:38:10 2006 From: jonathanrobin at messagerie.net (Jonathan Robin) Date: Sat, 04 Nov 2006 17:38:10 +0100 Subject: Re(2): [governance] IGF ... In Good Faith ? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: With due apologies ... Regards Jonathan Frog Blog Haiku Internet Governance Forum – I.G.F. – In Good Faith Pink clouds wave, lazy, while webbed tree frogs dialogue, - evening hazy ... Reflect, rephrase the style : - free web blogs dialogue on controls maybe ... rich rhyme scheme weighs the Internet logs’ legal bogs - contradictions mazy. Little allays the concerns on how system cogs dog all those held crazy. Future conveys the theme of digital divide fogs, ‘choice’ upsy-daisy, while who will pay the piper as public sector clogs C.S. with slazy strategies daily, I.T.U. I.O.U. hogs our fate - Old Bailey Society slays key freedoms, going to the dogs, pushing up daisy. 3 November 2006 Network Trends Network Trends As the Internet extends its influence there seem to be few whose overview can key into the threats its message sends society, freedoms suspends when risk and opportunity are balanced. With impunity now governance those it defends transforms to victims. Means and ends confused appear. R.F.I.D. converging with technology emerging blessing mixed portends. Analogy : Pandora’s box outlines our challenge paradox. 3 November 2006 ____________________________________________________________ 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 From Jeremy at Malcolm.id.au Sun Nov 5 07:25:52 2006 From: Jeremy at Malcolm.id.au (Jeremy Malcolm) Date: Sun, 05 Nov 2006 20:25:52 +0800 Subject: [governance] Dynamic Coalition on IGF Fund, with focus on participation from developing parts of the world In-Reply-To: References: <454A1432.5090308@umontreal.ca> Message-ID: <454DD850.6010102@Malcolm.id.au> Nyangkwe Agien Aaron wrote: > I do not think that the idea of a "Dynamic coalition" has to do with > some trade unionism or some political coalitions what soever, as > Jeremy is wont to fear, from his intervention, if I read well between > the lines. Not really, my concern is more that the informality of the coalitions makes them unaccountable to the IGF at large. However as per my intervention, we can address this, and turn them into working groups in all but name, by: (a) agreeing on some criteria pursuant to which they can be accredited (not sure if this is an appropriate word, what do others think?) for conformity to standards of openness to multi-stakeholder participation, transparency and internal operation by consensus; and (b) allowing the output of an accredited dynamic coalition to be put to the IGF at large to be considered and, potentially, ratified and adopted by consensus (through some also yet undefined process). These are to some extent independent, so (a) (which Nitin already seems agreeable to) can be put in place first, and (b) brought in later after things are running smoothly. But we need to have a dialogue about what the criteria in (a) should be. I'm considering where to take things from here, but I'm open to suggestions. I would be happy to draft a list of criteria, develop a rough consensus on it here and on the plenary at intgovforum.org mailing list, and then ask Adam or someone to put it in front of the Advisory Group. An alternative is that a Dynamic Coalitions Dynamic Coalition could be formed to develop the draft criteria. -- Jeremy Malcolm LLB (Hons) B Com Internet and Open Source lawyer, IT consultant, actor host -t NAPTR 1.0.8.0.3.1.2.9.8.1.6.e164.org|awk -F! '{print $3}' ____________________________________________________________ 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 From bendrath at zedat.fu-berlin.de Sun Nov 5 07:58:51 2006 From: bendrath at zedat.fu-berlin.de (Ralf Bendrath) Date: Sun, 05 Nov 2006 13:58:51 +0100 Subject: [governance] Dynamic Coalition working methods (was: Coalition on IGF Fund) In-Reply-To: <454DD850.6010102@Malcolm.id.au> References: <454A1432.5090308@umontreal.ca> <454DD850.6010102@Malcolm.id.au> Message-ID: <454DE00B.9050709@zedat.fu-berlin.de> (Adapted the subject line) Jeremy Malcolm wrote: > Not really, my concern is more that the informality of the coalitions > makes them unaccountable to the IGF at large. First of all, the IGF at large is accountable to nobody. It is at the moment an "open house", as Niton Desai said, it can't (yet?) make decisions, and its composition is more or less random. So why should any dynamic coalition be accountable to the IGF? > (a) agreeing on some criteria pursuant to which they can be accredited > (not sure if this is an appropriate word, what do others think?) I suggest "recognized", which is more informal. > for conformity to standards of openness to multi-stakeholder > participation, transparency and internal operation by consensus; To my understanding (and as somebody who has a pretty large coalition on his back now), they are self-constituting entities / processes. We have to take care to not interfere in their inner workings too much from the outside, especially in the forming stage when the whole momentum is still fragile. One big problem will be the participation of governments. We have the French Government in our privacy coalition, and are in discussions with the Italians and the British. A major problem for them seems to be the explorative character of the coalitions, especially when addressing "emerging issues". They can only participate if the bylaws or statutes clearly state that the positions they take are not officially cleared government positions. We might even have to use Chatham House Rules or something like that fort parts of the coalition work if we really want to engage them in an open dialogue. And this is just EU governments. Try to think of Iran or others who might be willing to participate. Bottom line: There seems to be a trade-off between openness and broad participation. If we don't carefully address these issues, we will have some nice NGO-Business dialogue, but no governments on board. > (b) allowing the output of an accredited dynamic coalition to be put to > the IGF at large to be considered and, potentially, ratified and > adopted by consensus (through some also yet undefined process). It will only be "adopted" or "ratified" by a more formal forum, e.g. a WSIS-follow-up summit in 2010. Forget about anything else in the first years. And if you push too hard here, we will just fend off governments willing to work with us. What we will try in the privacy coalition is certainly to develop some position paper / FAQ / draft recommendations to be "considered" by the next IGF. If this works in an inclusive multi-stakeholder process, it will be more than I hoped for. > I'm considering where to take things from here, but I'm open to > suggestions. I would be happy to draft a list of criteria, develop a > rough consensus on it here and on the plenary at intgovforum.org mailing > list, Is that list populated yet? Especially: Is there a significant number of government reps? We can come up with anything we like at the moment, but the biggest problem seems to be the participation of governments. Don't overwhelm them. > and then ask Adam or someone to put it in front of the Advisory > Group. An alternative is that a Dynamic Coalitions Dynamic Coalition > could be formed to develop the draft criteria. Please... Not another meta-structure. I think if we come up with good *substance* that is supported by a large number of stakeholders from all groups, especially by enough governments, we will have an impact and will have made clear that multi-stakeholderism can produce quality outcomes. Everything else has to evolve, and we have to leave some room for trial & error. If we formalize it too early, it won't work. Best, Ralf ____________________________________________________________ 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 From Jeremy at Malcolm.id.au Sun Nov 5 10:39:33 2006 From: Jeremy at Malcolm.id.au (Jeremy Malcolm) Date: Sun, 05 Nov 2006 23:39:33 +0800 Subject: [governance] Dynamic Coalition working methods In-Reply-To: <454DE00B.9050709@zedat.fu-berlin.de> References: <454A1432.5090308@umontreal.ca> <454DD850.6010102@Malcolm.id.au> <454DE00B.9050709@zedat.fu-berlin.de> Message-ID: <454E05B5.7020206@Malcolm.id.au> Ralf Bendrath wrote: > Jeremy Malcolm wrote: >> Not really, my concern is more that the informality of the coalitions >> makes them unaccountable to the IGF at large. > First of all, the IGF at large is accountable to nobody. It is at the > moment an "open house", as Niton Desai said, it can't (yet?) make > decisions, and its composition is more or less random. So why should any > dynamic coalition be accountable to the IGF? Briefly, because he IGF now is not all that it has the potential to be; it has the potential to be a multi-stakeholder governance network which *does* make non-binding decisions, and it is to *that* IGF that it is more important that dynamic coalitions will eventually be accountable. So the only criteria by which I would suggest that dynamic coalitions could be assessed by the IGF are those that the latter *already* possesses - basically, open membership and (potentially) multi-stakeholder composition; I agree with you that there's not much else. But I also agree with you that "accountable" is a challenging word, and "recognised" less so - so thanks for offering that suggestion. Also, as I have just said in response to someone else's off-list comment, it is possible to go far without being binding. Even in orthodox international law, so-called "soft law" which includes codes, resolutions, declarations, model laws and standards, exists which is non binding but has normative force. Outside the conventional understanding of international law, transnational private law has consensual force only - which as Vittorio observed during his comments in the Way Forward session, is exactly how Internet governance worked before governments came along. >> (b) allowing the output of an accredited dynamic coalition to be put to >> the IGF at large to be considered and, potentially, ratified and >> adopted by consensus (through some also yet undefined process). > It will only be "adopted" or "ratified" by a more formal forum, e.g. a > WSIS-follow-up summit in 2010. Forget about anything else in the first > years. And if you push too hard here, we will just fend off governments > willing to work with us. In case you misunderstand what I am expecting here, I certainly do not imagine a formal act of international law-making. The effect of a consensus of the IGF being formed around a particular proposal would be that its views would be published as something like a recommendation or best practice document. Compare the OECD's publication of an Anti-Spam Toolkit. Also bear in mind that there is only ever the potential that a small subset of the output of the dynamic coalitions would be put forward for the IGF, and a much smaller subset ever reach consensus. >> I'm considering where to take things from here, but I'm open to >> suggestions. I would be happy to draft a list of criteria, develop a >> rough consensus on it here and on the plenary at intgovforum.org mailing >> list, > Is that list populated yet? Especially: Is there a significant number of > government reps? We can come up with anything we like at the moment, but > the biggest problem seems to be the participation of governments. Don't > overwhelm them. It's not very much populated yet, because the Secretariat declined to publicise it which is why I had to stand up on the last day and do so myself. Please, do encourage anyone you know (particular from government and the private sector!) to join it, otherwise those who are not participating in a dynamic coalition will have no interactive means of keeping in touch between IGF meetings. As I observed in the latest post at igfwatch.org, I'm no more concerned that we will scare governments off, as that they will scare the rest of us off but not listening to us and rendering this whole process pointless. -- Jeremy Malcolm LLB (Hons) B Com Internet and Open Source lawyer, IT consultant, actor host -t NAPTR 1.0.8.0.3.1.2.9.8.1.6.e164.org|awk -F! '{print $3}' ____________________________________________________________ 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 From nb at bollow.ch Sun Nov 5 13:29:16 2006 From: nb at bollow.ch (Norbert Bollow) Date: Sun, 5 Nov 2006 19:29:16 +0100 (CET) Subject: [governance] Dynamic Coalition working methods In-Reply-To: <454E05B5.7020206@Malcolm.id.au> (message from Jeremy Malcolm on Sun, 05 Nov 2006 23:39:33 +0800) References: <454A1432.5090308@umontreal.ca> <454DD850.6010102@Malcolm.id.au> <454DE00B.9050709@zedat.fu-berlin.de> <454E05B5.7020206@Malcolm.id.au> Message-ID: <20061105182916.4D5A71EFF2A@quill.bollow.ch> Jeremy Malcolm wrote: > Ralf Bendrath wrote: > > Jeremy Malcolm wrote: > >> I'm considering where to take things from here, but I'm open to > >> suggestions. I would be happy to draft a list of criteria, develop a > >> rough consensus on it here and on the plenary at intgovforum.org mailing > >> list, > > Is that list populated yet? Especially: Is there a significant number of > > government reps? We can come up with anything we like at the moment, but > > the biggest problem seems to be the participation of governments. Don't > > overwhelm them. > As I observed in the latest post at igfwatch.org, I'm no more concerned > that we will scare governments off, as that they will scare the rest of > us off but not listening to us and rendering this whole process pointless. Regardless of who is most scary to whom, what is needed at this stage is to create some "dynamic coalitions" / "working groups" / whatever that are genuinely multistakeholder and that are capable of getting some worthwhile work done. Congratulations to Ralf for the progress that he has succeeded in making! I think that it will make sense to talk normatively about requirements for some kind of formal or informal recognition of "dynamic coalitions" when several "dynamic coalitions" exist which are actually delivering results and we can be sure that the requirements that we would like to impose on the "dynamic coalitions" will not have the effect of preventing whatever multistakeholder progress is possible at the current stage. Greetings, Norbert. -- Norbert Bollow http://Norbert.ch President of the Swiss Internet User Group SIUG http://SIUG.ch ____________________________________________________________ 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 From goldstein_david at yahoo.com.au Sun Nov 5 15:41:44 2006 From: goldstein_david at yahoo.com.au (David Goldstein) Date: Sun, 5 Nov 2006 12:41:44 -0800 (PST) Subject: [governance] IGF news wrap Message-ID: <20061105204144.23528.qmail@web54110.mail.yahoo.com> Hi all, One more posting of news from the IGF. Any future news I'll just post to my website - see http://technewsreview.com.au/. Cheers David ********************************************************** Sponsored by the Singapore Internet Research Centre http://www.ntu.edu.sg/sci/sirc/ Sponsored by EuroDNS and AsiaDNS - for your domain name registration http://www.eurodns.com/?refid=57d25a87c8bffdc565a16a5bf01e8825 ********************************************************** World Internet summit ends with promise and concern for future (AP) The first IGF ended with promise of breakthrough technologies to accelerate online access in developing countries and concerns of growing government interference globally. Key participants said Thursday that the four-day meeting had at least helped clarify differences between governments, industry and online groups ahead of the next Internet Governance Forum next year in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2006/11/03/1162340014002.html http://iht.com/articles/ap/2006/11/02/business/EU_GEN_Greece_UN_Internet_Governance.php http://www.siliconvalley.com/mld/siliconvalley/news/editorial/15913311.htm Amnesty calls on UN to help open internet (Reuters) Amnesty International has called on the United Nations to help eliminate restrictions to internet access, which the rights watchdog said are a violation of basic human rights. http://www.nzherald.co.nz/section/story.cfm?c_id=5&objectid=10408982 United Nations lauds internet's 'arranged marriage' The closing day of the IGF has ended on a high note with attendees from across the world (from business, government, international organisations and civil society) all expressing their delight at the experimental forum. http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/11/02/igf_meeting_ends/ IGF: The good, the bad and the psycho cleaners The Greeks drove me to it. Last night, under the cover of conference quietness, I sneaked into the Apollon hotel store room and stole a waiter uniform. I’m not proud of it, but I am proudly wearing it today one for simple reason - I want my own coffee and water, and I don't want to have to wait 10 minutes for it to be served to me. http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/11/02/igf_blog_wed/ ICANN: Workshop Report — Towards a Multilingual Global Internet: Avoiding the Risk of Fragmentation The workshop provided the framework for dialogue on the multiple aspects linked to the development of a multilingual cyberspace and on solutions for avoiding the fragmentation of the Internet. Speakers from governments and the private and academic sectors participated in the discussion on how to create a truly multilingual Internet both from the content and the technical point of views. The workshop was structured in four sessions. http://icann.org/announcements/announcement-02nov06.htm Cuba: We're forced to 'finance' the Internet A Cuba government official told the IGF that the U.S. government was to blame for the poor Internet access that its citizens endure, arguing that, as a result, poorer countries are "financing" the Internet. U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan appointed Fernandez to a high-level working group two years ago. http://news.zdnet.com/2100-9588_22-6131854.html ITU meeting in Turkey will tackle key Internet issues (IDG) Government officials will meet in Turkey for the next three weeks to discuss the future of the Internet and take action on key issues such as cybercrime and Internet oversight. http://www.networkworld.com/news/2006/110306-itu-meeting-in-turkey-will.html Internet forum participants clash (IDG) The IGF touched on a number of issues, such as Internet oversight and multilingualism, with government officials, Internet experts and many others taking the stage to voice their opinions -- which often clashed. http://infoworld.com/article/06/11/02/HNnetforumclash_1.html Global Internet Policy Initiative Highlighted at Internet Governance Forum In presentations and workshops at the Internet Governance Forum this week, the Global Internet Policy Initiative (GIPI), a joint project of Internews Network and the Center for Democracy and Technology, was highlighted as a proven model for working locally to reform national laws and policies in order to foster expanded Internet access in developing countries. http://internews.org/prs/2006/20061102_ict.shtm United Nations Internet forum goes titsup The website of the IGF has been suspended (or had been at the time of writing of this article) and replaced with a cartoon dog pulling wires out of a PC. The site at igf2006.info was taken down with 20 minutes left of the main speaking session after the hosts complained that demand from a collaborative website set up to elicit views from the wider Internet was overwhelming its server. It also brought down the main information site at intgovforum.org which was held on the same server. http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/11/01/un_site_dies/ The IGF gossip issue I got some good advice once. It was: "Make sure you never take yourself too seriously." That has stuck with me despite (or perhaps because of) the fact that it was delivered by an old French drunk sitting on a Paris bench facing a lit-up Notre Dame over the Seine at 2am. http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/11/02/igd_blog_wed/ Microsoft restates China policy Microsoft has restated its position on China following comments by one of its senior legal staff. Earlier this week, Microsoft senior counsel Fred Tipson said concerns about repression in China might make it reconsider its presence there. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/6114846.stm UN unsuited to control internet The United Nations has called yet another great meeting, at another luxury site, to discuss its relentless campaign to gain control of the internet. This time, diplomats, UN officials and NGOs are on the expense account in pleasant Athens, where previous ''summits'' of Geneva and Tunis now have become an IGF. http://www.bangkokpost.com/News/03Nov2006_news24.php http://www.bangkokpost.com/031106_News/03Nov2006_news26.php The End User: Content vs. control Never mind who controls the Internet and whether the U.S. government has undue influence over domain names and root servers. If the question of control is about content, then the United States has a lock on the World Wide Web that looks unshakable. Of the top 30 most-visited Web sites, Asia is home to four and Europe has one, according to September statistics from comScore Networks, a U.S.-based market researcher. (And even the single European name, Lycos, has mixed U.S. parentage.) http://iht.com/articles/2006/11/01/business/ptend02.php Internet bill of rights proposed A bill of rights for the internet age has been proposed at the IGF. The bill would update and restate rights that have been enshrined for centuries, said Robin Gross of civil liberties group IP Justice. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/6106452.stm U.N. debate swirls around domain name power Call it the Iran and Syria problem. In theory, the Bush administration could order that the domain names of allegedly hostile or terrorist-friendly nations be deleted from the Internet--a unique authority that troubles many developing nations and became a source of contention at the IGF. http://news.com.com/2100-1028_3-6131746.html Assault on State Censorship at the IGF by Milton Mueller Knee-jerk UN haters in the US are fond of pointing horrified fingers at the presence of China, Syria and other authoritarian states whenever global governance is mentioned. See for example Declan McCullough’s slanted piece in CNET. They might be surprised to learn that the UN Internet Governance Forum has opened the opportunity for a major assault on Internet blocking and filtering, and put repressive governments on the defensive by heightening awareness of the practice and pressuring them to justify it or change it. http://www.circleid.com/posts/assault_on_state_censorship_at_the_igf/ Tough talk on net language issue More than 90% of the world's 6,000 languages are not represented on the internet. So what must be done to make the internet a truly global place? http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/6106048.stm ICANN warns mistake on non-English Web addresses could 'permanently break Internet' (AP) ICANN warned that a mistake in a creating more Web addresses using non-Latin letters could "permanently break the Internet." http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2006/11/02/1162339947135.html http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2006/11/02/1162339947135.html http://www.usatoday.com/tech/news/2006-11-01-icann-web_x.htm http://www.komotv.com/news/tech/4541186.html http://p2pnet.net/story/10308 ICANN runs tests for non-English domain names (AFP) ICANN said it was running tests to determine whether countries can register Web addresses in their own language, an option expected to further boost the Internet's global appeal. http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/worldbiz/archives/2006/11/03/2003334662 http://www.dawn.com/2006/11/03/int14.htm http://www.mybroadband.co.za/nephp/?m=show&id=4775 Johnny Foreigner will break the Internet ICANN said that if all these foreigners keep mistyping their nasty non-latin letters into browsers the internet could break. http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=35487 Is There Too Much English on the Web? Attendees at the IGF call for linguistic diversity to guarantee global democratic oversight of the Net http://businessweek.com/globalbiz/content/nov2006/gb20061102_790439.htm ICANN Unveils IDN Progress ICANN, yesterday announced a roadmap for the introduction of Internationalised Domain Names based on progress so far and future work. http://webhosting.info/news/1/icann-unveils-idn-progress_1102062786.htm ICANN: Internationalised Domain Names Roadmap — Progress and Future ICANN 1 November announced a clear roadmap for the introduction of Internationalised Domain Names (IDNs) based on progress so far and future work. http://icann.org/announcements/announcement-1-01nov06.htm IGF produces anti-spam plan Six of the world's largest anti-spam organisations have set up a new website aimed at killing the online menace. Timed to coincide with an anti-spam workshop at the IGF, the OECD has started StopSpamAlliance.org, along with Asia-Pacific Economic Co-operation (APEC), the EU Contact Network for Spam enforcement Authorities (CNSA), the International Telecommunication Union (ITU), the London Action Plan for Spam Enforcement (LAP), and the Seoul-Melbourne MoU. http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/11/01/oecd_anti_spam/ IGF: more free content for the Internet As a counterpoint to ever more stringent copyright provisions an international treaty on Access to Knowledge (A2K) should be drawn up, a South African representative during a discussion on the openness of networks at the Internet Governance Forum has said. For some time now South Africa, a number of governments of newly industrialized countries as well as non-governmental organizations (NGOs) have been advertising the A2K Initiative toward the member states of the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO). "I consider such a treaty to be possible," Hanne Sophie Greve, a former judge at the European Court of Justice now at the Council of Europe, said. http://www.heise.de/english/newsticker/news/80401 Web inventor fears for the future Sir Tim Berners-Lee, the British developer of the world wide web, says he is worried about the way it could be used to spread "misinformation and "undemocratic forces". http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/6108578.stm China forced to face its critics over internet censorship This time there was no hiding place. Countries accused of turning the internet into a tool of repression - and the companies accused of helping them do it - were confronted with the full force of international condemnation at a special United Nations conference in Athens last week. http://observer.guardian.co.uk/world/story/0,,1939801,00.html Microsoft And The China Question Microsoft is denying a report from the BBC that the company was considering withdrawing from China due to the hard-line government's repressive treatment of technology users. http://www.internetnews.com/bus-news/article.php/3642001 Internet for social justice and sustainable development The internet is a global public space that must be open, affordable and accessible to all. As more and more people gain access to this space, many remain excluded. Like the process of globalisation with which it has been closely intertwined, the spread of internet access takes place with uneven results and often exacerbates social and economic inequalities. However, the internet and other information and communication technologies (ICTs) can be a powerful tool for social mobilisation and development, resistance to injustices and expression of difference and creativity. http://rights.apc.org/charter.shtml APC puts up the fight for an open access, equal opportunity and educative internet UN Secretary General Kofi Annan convenes a new "forum for multi-stakeholder policy dialogue" on the future of the internet. The inaugural meeting of the IGF, which APC is viewing as a "vitally important event" will be held in Athens from October 30 to November 2. http://www.apc.org/english/news/index.shtml?x=5041512 Latin America makes noise at the Forum on Internet Governance Latin America makes noise at the Forum on Internet Governance. What priorities is Latin America carrying around in its briefcase for this first Forum on Internet Governance? How are all the sectors participating in a pioneer event in this format? APCNews spoke to Raúl Echeberría, LACNIC executive director, the Latin America and the Caribbean internet address registry. http://www.apc.org/english/news/index.shtml?x=5043143 Single country won't be allowed to govern Internet: Seminar calls for unity among poor nations A single country will not be allowed to govern the Internet, speakers at a national seminar vowed adding expectation of the poor countries should be addressed in the upcoming IGF meet. http://bangladeshictpolicy.bytesforall.net/?q=node/222 Digitale Demokratie Die USA dominieren mit Hilfe der ICANN das Internet. Das IGF soll eine Gegenpol dazu bilden. Manche sehen darin gar den Vorläufer einer künftigen Netzregierung. http://www.sueddeutsche.de/computer/artikel/536/90446/ Experten warnen vor Dominanz des Englischen im Internet Jahrtausende altes Wissen könne verloren gehen - "Jedes Mal, wenn eine Sprache stirbt, verschwindet eine Vision" http://derstandard.at/?id=2644322 IGF: Diskussion über den Masterschlüssel für die DNS-Aufsicht Die Debatte über die unilaterale Aufsicht über das DNS und die ICANN könnte bald neue Nahrung erhalten. Das sagten Experten bei einem Workshop im Rahmen des ersten IGF, das gestern in Athen zu Ende ging. http://www.heise.de/newsticker/meldung/80479 http://www.wcm.at/story.php?id=10850 http://www.portel.de/index.php?id=33&tx_ttnews%5btt_news%5d=12486 IGF: "Gigantisches Brainstorming" zur Zukunft des Netzes Die einen lobten es als gigantisches Brainstorming oder sogar gelungenes global-demokratisches Experiment, das fortgesetzt werden müsse. Andere forderten konkrete Empfehlungen, wenn sich das Internet Governance Forum im kommenden Jahr in Rio de Janeiro und anschließend in Indien und Ägypten wieder zusammentrifft. Das viertägige Forum, das erste seiner Art, endete am heutigen Donnerstag in Athen. http://www.heise.de/newsticker/meldung/80455 IGF: Frankreich unterstützt Datenschutzkoalition Die französische Regierung unterstützt die neue "Datenschutzkoalition", die sich heute beim IGF in Athen gegründet hat. http://www.heise.de/newsticker/meldung/80425 IGF: Eine Internet-Verfassung für die Rechte der Cyberbürger Die italienische Regierung warb beim IGF in Athen für eine "Internet Bill of Rights". Gemeinsam mit der brasilianischen Regierung und der Internet Society Italien startete sie eine der ersten so genannten "dynamischen Koalitionen", um die Bill of Rights zum offiziellen IGF-Thema zu machen. http://www.heise.de/newsticker/meldung/80404 "Wir haben heute die gri Uno-Forum zur Verwaltung des Internets in Griechenland (AP) Die Kontrolle der US-Regierung über das Internet und der Kampf gegen Online-Verbrechen wie Bankbetrug oder Kinderpornographie sind einige der zentralen Themen des ersten internationalen Forums zur Verwaltung des Internets. Am Internet Governance Forum (IGF) der Vereinten Nationen, das am Montag im griechischen Badeort Vouliagmenti eröffnet wurde, nehmen rund 1200 Wissenschafter, Politiker, Techniker, Nutzer-Vertreter und andere Delegierte teil. http://www.nzz.ch/2006/11/03/em/articleEMHSU.html Deutscher Kandidat für den ITU-Chefsessel im Wahlkampf In der kommenden Woche wählt die "Plenipotentiary Conference" der International Telecommunication Union (ITU) einen neuen Generalsekretär. Die sechs Kandidaten befinden sich daher im Endspurt ihrer Kampagnen. http://www.heise.de/newsticker/meldung/80372 Magere Bilanz des "Internet Governance Forums" in Athen Beim globalen Diskussionsforum wurde viel über die Zukunft des Internets geredet. Wichtige Fragen waren Zugang, Vielfalt und Sicherheit. Beschlüsse wurden keine gefasst. http://www.dw-world.de/dw/article/0,,2223677,00.html Le Forum mondial sur la gouvernance de l'Internet se termine sans aucune décision concrète Le premier Forum mondial sur la gouvernance de l'internet (FGI) s'est terminé, jeudi 2 novembre, sans déboucher sur aucune décision concrète, étant donné son rôle purement consultatif. http://www.lemonde.fr/web/article/0,1-0 at 2-651865,36-830314,0.html?xtor=RSS-651865 http://www.rfi.fr/actufr/articles/083/article_47220.asp http://www.tageblatt.lu/edition/article.asp?ArticleId=54650 http://technaute.lapresseaffaires.com/nouvelles/texte_complet.php?id=81,12399,0,112006,1309064.html http://solutions.journaldunet.com/actualite/depeche/28/229130/le_forum_sur_la_gouvernance_de_l_internet_s_acheve_dans_le_flou.shtml Qui contrôle… et quel contrôle ? Sébastien Bachollet continue de nous faire vivre de l'intérieur le Forum sur la Gouvernance de l'Internet, où la question centrale reste de savoir qui doit contrôler le réseau des réseaux, y compris au niveau technique. http://domainesinfo.fr/actualite/1041/qui-controle-et-quel-controle.php Haro sur l'anglais et l'alphabet latin, toujours maîtres sur la Toile Plusieurs participants au Forum mondial sur la gouvernance de l'internet (FGI) d'Athènes ont dénoncé mercredi la domination de l'anglais et de l'alphabet latin sur la Toile, réclamant que l'internet s'ouvre au multi-linguisme pour préserver la diversité culturelle. http://www.menara.ma/Infos/includes/detail.asp?article_id=11967&lmodule=Technologie Garanti uniti contro il Grande Fratello «Contro il Grande Fratello ci vuole un Governo Mondiale della Privacy». La proposta del Garante Francesco Pizzetti arriva alla vigilia del vertice annuale internazionale delle Authority che si terrà a Londra domani e dopodomani, mentre ad Atene 1200 delegati da tutto il mondo sono riuniti questa settimana per discutere del futuro di Internet al Forum sulla Governance. http://www.korazym.org/news1.asp?Id=19862 Le contrôle américain au cœur des débats Après l’annonce de la création du Forum mondial sur le gouvernance de l’internet (FGI) lors du Sommet mondial sur la société de l’information à Tunis en novembre 2005, il tient sa première réunion officielle à Athènes du 30 octobre au 2 novembre 2006. http://www.elwatan.com/spip.php?page=article&id_article=53099 América Latina hace ruido en el Foro de Gobernanza de Internet América Latina hace ruido en el Foro de Gobernanza de Internet ¿Cuáles son las prioridades que América Latina trae en la valija para este primer Foro de Gobernanza de Internet? ¿Cómo se está dando la participación de todos los sectores en un evento pionero en este tipo de formato? APCNoticias conversó con Raúl Echeberría, director ejecutivo de LACNIC, el registro de direcciones de internet para América Latina y el Caribe. http://www.latinoamericann.org/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=1398 --------- David Goldstein address: 4/3 Abbott Street COOGEE NSW 2034 AUSTRALIA email: Goldstein_David @yahoo.com.au phone: +61 418 228 605 (mobile); +61 2 9665 5773 (home) "Every time you use fossil fuels, you're adding to the problem. Every time you forgo fossil fuels, you're being part of the solution" - Dr Tim Flannery Send instant messages to your online friends http://au.messenger.yahoo.com ____________________________________________________________ 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 From avri at acm.org Sun Nov 5 19:51:21 2006 From: avri at acm.org (Avri Doria) Date: Sun, 5 Nov 2006 19:51:21 -0500 Subject: [governance] Elections for coordinators Message-ID: <6CB84530-7C34-4401-8758-B7112E49C29B@acm.org> Hi, Well the time for nominations is long over and we have two nominees for two positions Vittorio and Parminder - info at http:// www.igcaucus.org/IGC-candidates-2006.html There were a couple of private nominations made, but I checked with each of those nominated privately, and they declined. If anyone feels they were nominated of self-nominated and I missed it, please let me know immediately. We have two options for the election, as I mentioned before. 1. (my current inclination) Hold one vote and the person who gets the most votes wins the two year terms with the other getting the one year term. 2. A suggestion was made during the face to face get together during the IGF meeting, that two votes should be held. During the first vote, the person with the most votes gets the two year term. Under this suggestion nominations for the second slot remain open until after the first vote is completed. At that point the person who got the least votes in the first ballot and anyone yet to be nominated would stand a vote with the person getting the most votes be the coordinator with a one year term. If anyone on this list has a preference, please send a message picking an option. If no one speaks up, I will go with option 1. On the other hand if people speak up, I will go with whichever option has the largest voice. I will probably start the vote (or the first vote) by midweek. I will announce which option we are using at that time. thanks a. ps. Still looking for a volunteer to chair the nomcom to pick the appeals team - for this caucus to work according to the charter, we do need volunteers to take on the tasks. ____________________________________________________________ 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 From nursesacrosstheborders at yahoo.com Mon Nov 6 06:09:56 2006 From: nursesacrosstheborders at yahoo.com (NURSES ACROSS THE BORDERS) Date: Mon, 6 Nov 2006 03:09:56 -0800 (PST) Subject: [governance] Elections for coordinators In-Reply-To: <6CB84530-7C34-4401-8758-B7112E49C29B@acm.org> Message-ID: <20061106110956.47144.qmail@web34311.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Dear Avri, What then is democracy if we hold one vote or even applying the second option? My suggestion will be to hold the first vote for the first two year tenure, and declare the next vote open for ALL when the the next one tenure is getting close. Thank you. Pastor Peters OMORAGBON Coordiantor Nigerian Chapter ACSIS/WSIS --- Avri Doria wrote: > Hi, > > Well the time for nominations is long over and we > have two nominees > for two positions Vittorio and Parminder - info at > http:// > www.igcaucus.org/IGC-candidates-2006.html > > There were a couple of private nominations made, but > I checked with > each of those nominated privately, and they > declined. If anyone > feels they were nominated of self-nominated and I > missed it, please > let me know immediately. > > We have two options for the election, as I mentioned > before. > > 1. (my current inclination) Hold one vote and the > person who gets > the most votes wins the two year terms with the > other getting the one > year term. > > 2. A suggestion was made during the face to face get > together during > the IGF meeting, that two votes should be held. > During the first > vote, the person with the most votes gets the two > year term. Under > this suggestion nominations for the second slot > remain open until > after the first vote is completed. At that point the > person who got > the least votes in the first ballot and anyone yet > to be nominated > would stand a vote with the person getting the most > votes be the > coordinator with a one year term. > > If anyone on this list has a preference, please send > a message > picking an option. If no one speaks up, I will go > with option 1. On > the other hand if people speak up, I will go with > whichever option > has the largest voice. I will probably start the > vote (or the first > vote) by midweek. I will announce which option we > are using at that > time. > > thanks > > a. > > ps. Still looking for a volunteer to chair the > nomcom to pick the > appeals team - for this caucus to work according to > the charter, we > do need volunteers to take on the tasks. > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > Pastor Peters OMORAGBON Executive President/CEO Nurses Across the Borders Humanitarian Initiative-Inc.-(Nigeria & U.S.A) An NGO On Special Consultative Status with The Economic and Social Council of the United Nations-(ECOSOC) Member(OBSERVER),United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) 295, IKORODU ROAD, IDIROKO BUS STOP MARYLAND IKEJA LAGOS NIGERIA 350, MAIN STREET, EAST ORANGE NEW JERSEY 07018 U.S.A Tel:+234-1-812-8649, +234-1-818-6494,+234-802-308-5408(Mobile) FAX:+234-1-493-7203 Email:nursesacrosstheborders at yahoo.com URL: www.nursesacrosstheborders.4t.com ____________________________________________________________________________________ Everyone is raving about the all-new Yahoo! Mail (http://advision.webevents.yahoo.com/mailbeta/) ____________________________________________________________ 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 From bortzmeyer at internatif.org Mon Nov 6 08:43:29 2006 From: bortzmeyer at internatif.org (Stephane Bortzmeyer) Date: Mon, 6 Nov 2006 14:43:29 +0100 Subject: [governance] Re: Draft Workshop Report -- DNS forum @ Athens In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20061106134329.GA30889@nic.fr> On Thu, Nov 02, 2006 at 01:37:08AM -0500, Milton Mueller wrote a message of 70 lines which said: > It is possible to implement DNSSEC without signing the root, but > that would create only "islands of trust" in specific TLDs, This is no longer true since DLV (http://www.isc.org/index.pl?/about/press/?pr=2006032700). ____________________________________________________________ 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 From jeanette at wz-berlin.de Mon Nov 6 09:11:28 2006 From: jeanette at wz-berlin.de (Jeanette Hofmann) Date: Mon, 06 Nov 2006 15:11:28 +0100 Subject: [governance] Elections for coordinators In-Reply-To: <6CB84530-7C34-4401-8758-B7112E49C29B@acm.org> References: <6CB84530-7C34-4401-8758-B7112E49C29B@acm.org> Message-ID: <454F4290.1030200@wz-berlin.de> Avri Doria wrote: > Hi, > > Well the time for nominations is long over and we have two nominees for > two positions Vittorio and Parminder - info at > http://www.igcaucus.org/IGC-candidates-2006.html > > There were a couple of private nominations made, but I checked with each > of those nominated privately, and they declined. If anyone feels they > were nominated of self-nominated and I missed it, please let me know > immediately. Since it doesn't seem likely that we increase the pool of candidates by stretching the process and wait a bit longer, I am in favor of option 1. As recent experience with the voting on the charter shows, it is difficult to get people interested enough to vote at all. So, we should not make things more complicated than necessary. jeanette > > We have two options for the election, as I mentioned before. > > 1. (my current inclination) Hold one vote and the person who gets the > most votes wins the two year terms with the other getting the one year > term. > > 2. A suggestion was made during the face to face get together during the > IGF meeting, that two votes should be held. During the first vote, the > person with the most votes gets the two year term. Under this > suggestion nominations for the second slot remain open until after the > first vote is completed. At that point the person who got the least > votes in the first ballot and anyone yet to be nominated would stand a > vote with the person getting the most votes be the coordinator with a > one year term. > > If anyone on this list has a preference, please send a message picking > an option. If no one speaks up, I will go with option 1. On the other > hand if people speak up, I will go with whichever option has the largest > voice. I will probably start the vote (or the first vote) by midweek. > I will announce which option we are using at that time. > > thanks > > a. > > ps. Still looking for a volunteer to chair the nomcom to pick the > appeals team - for this caucus to work according to the charter, we do > need volunteers to take on the tasks. > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 ____________________________________________________________ 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 From jonathanrobin at messagerie.net Mon Nov 6 09:42:45 2006 From: jonathanrobin at messagerie.net (Jonathan Robin) Date: Mon, 06 Nov 2006 15:42:45 +0100 Subject: Re(2): [governance] Elections for coordinators In-Reply-To: <454F4290.1030200@wz-berlin.de> References: <6CB84530-7C34-4401-8758-B7112E49C29B@acm.org> <454F4290.1030200@wz-berlin.de> Message-ID: Good Afternoon IMHO the name of the game is transparency and under Avri's auspices there is both clarity and direction ... should there be unopposed candidates that corresponds at present to confidence in those who are standing. I therefore agree with Jeanette on principle, despite remaining a lurker in most respects Regards Jonathan ---------------- governance at lists.cpsr.org,Internet a écrit: > > >Avri Doria wrote: >> Hi, >> >> Well the time for nominations is long over and we have two nominees for >> two positions Vittorio and Parminder - info at >> http://www.igcaucus.org/IGC-candidates-2006.html >> >> There were a couple of private nominations made, but I checked with >each >> of those nominated privately, and they declined. If anyone feels they >> were nominated of self-nominated and I missed it, please let me know >> immediately. > >Since it doesn't seem likely that we increase the pool of candidates by >stretching the process and wait a bit longer, I am in favor of option 1. >As recent experience with the voting on the charter shows, it is >difficult to get people interested enough to vote at all. So, we should >not make things more complicated than necessary. >jeanette >> >> We have two options for the election, as I mentioned before. > > >> >> 1. (my current inclination) Hold one vote and the person who gets the >> most votes wins the two year terms with the other getting the one year >> term. >> >> 2. A suggestion was made during the face to face get together during >the >> IGF meeting, that two votes should be held. During the first vote, the >> person with the most votes gets the two year term. Under this >> suggestion nominations for the second slot remain open until after the >> first vote is completed. At that point the person who got the least >> votes in the first ballot and anyone yet to be nominated would stand a >> vote with the person getting the most votes be the coordinator with a >> one year term. >> >> If anyone on this list has a preference, please send a message picking >> an option. If no one speaks up, I will go with option 1. On the other >> hand if people speak up, I will go with whichever option has the >largest >> voice. I will probably start the vote (or the first vote) by midweek. >> I will announce which option we are using at that time. >> >> thanks >> >> a. >> >> ps. Still looking for a volunteer to chair the nomcom to pick the >> appeals team - for this caucus to work according to the charter, we do >> need volunteers to take on the tasks. >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 >____________________________________________________________ >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 > ____________________________________________________________ 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 From lists at privaterra.info Mon Nov 6 09:30:02 2006 From: lists at privaterra.info (Robert Guerra) Date: Mon, 06 Nov 2006 09:30:02 -0500 Subject: [governance] Elections for coordinators In-Reply-To: <454F4290.1030200@wz-berlin.de> References: <6CB84530-7C34-4401-8758-B7112E49C29B@acm.org> <454F4290.1030200@wz-berlin.de> Message-ID: <454F46EA.7040100@privaterra.info> I am of the opinion that more candidates are needed before an election can be called. Selecting among two candidates for two slots, well, isn't really an election as both will get in. The question is which of the two candidates will have the longer term. Given the comments on and about the importance of linguistic diversity, I would have hoped that a french and/or spanish speaker who is fluent in English would have run. I know proactive engagement is difficult with no resources at our disposal, but it doesn't mean we shouldn't at least try. I look forward to people's comments. regards Robert Jeanette Hofmann wrote: > > > Avri Doria wrote: >> Hi, >> >> Well the time for nominations is long over and we have two nominees >> for two positions Vittorio and Parminder - info at >> http://www.igcaucus.org/IGC-candidates-2006.html >> >> There were a couple of private nominations made, but I checked with >> each of those nominated privately, and they declined. If anyone feels >> they were nominated of self-nominated and I missed it, please let me >> know immediately. > ____________________________________________________________ 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 From avri at acm.org Mon Nov 6 09:43:52 2006 From: avri at acm.org (Avri Doria) Date: Mon, 6 Nov 2006 06:43:52 -0800 Subject: [governance] Elections for coordinators In-Reply-To: <20061106110956.47144.qmail@web34311.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <20061106110956.47144.qmail@web34311.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <09DB61CE-6E1A-4583-9548-0B11B29435C6@acm.org> Hi, I am not sure I understand your question. The charter determines that there will be 2 coordinators. As a startup process, the charter indicates that we elect one for 2 years and one for 1 year, so that we have staggered terms. As for declaring this non democratic, the nominations have been open to ALL, and we have two candidates for two roles. I do not see what is non democratic about following out process, or following either of the option I offered. a. On 6 nov 2006, at 03.09, NURSES ACROSS THE BORDERS wrote: > Dear Avri, > What then is democracy if we hold one vote or even > applying the second option? > My suggestion will be to hold the first vote for the > first two year tenure, and declare the next vote open > for ALL when the the next one tenure is getting close. > Thank you. > Pastor Peters OMORAGBON > Coordiantor Nigerian Chapter ACSIS/WSIS > > > --- Avri Doria wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> Well the time for nominations is long over and we >> have two nominees >> for two positions Vittorio and Parminder - info at >> http:// >> www.igcaucus.org/IGC-candidates-2006.html >> >> There were a couple of private nominations made, but >> I checked with >> each of those nominated privately, and they >> declined. If anyone >> feels they were nominated of self-nominated and I >> missed it, please >> let me know immediately. >> >> We have two options for the election, as I mentioned >> before. >> >> 1. (my current inclination) Hold one vote and the >> person who gets >> the most votes wins the two year terms with the >> other getting the one >> year term. >> >> 2. A suggestion was made during the face to face get >> together during >> the IGF meeting, that two votes should be held. >> During the first >> vote, the person with the most votes gets the two >> year term. Under >> this suggestion nominations for the second slot >> remain open until >> after the first vote is completed. At that point the >> person who got >> the least votes in the first ballot and anyone yet >> to be nominated >> would stand a vote with the person getting the most >> votes be the >> coordinator with a one year term. >> >> If anyone on this list has a preference, please send >> a message >> picking an option. If no one speaks up, I will go >> with option 1. On >> the other hand if people speak up, I will go with >> whichever option >> has the largest voice. I will probably start the >> vote (or the first >> vote) by midweek. I will announce which option we >> are using at that >> time. >> >> thanks >> >> a. >> >> ps. Still looking for a volunteer to chair the >> nomcom to pick the >> appeals team - for this caucus to work according to >> the charter, we >> do need volunteers to take on the tasks. >> >> > ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 >> > > > > Pastor Peters OMORAGBON > Executive President/CEO > Nurses Across the Borders Humanitarian Initiative-Inc.-(Nigeria & > U.S.A) > An NGO On Special Consultative Status with The Economic and Social > Council of the United Nations-(ECOSOC) > Member(OBSERVER),United Nations Framework Convention on Climate > Change (UNFCCC) > 295, IKORODU ROAD, IDIROKO BUS STOP MARYLAND IKEJA LAGOS NIGERIA > 350, MAIN STREET, EAST ORANGE NEW JERSEY 07018 U.S.A > Tel:+234-1-812-8649, +234-1-818-6494,+234-802-308-5408(Mobile) > FAX:+234-1-493-7203 > Email:nursesacrosstheborders at yahoo.com > URL: www.nursesacrosstheborders.4t.com > > > > > > ______________________________________________________________________ > ______________ > Everyone is raving about the all-new Yahoo! Mail > (http://advision.webevents.yahoo.com/mailbeta/) > > ____________________________________________________________ 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 From jeanette at wz-berlin.de Mon Nov 6 11:16:57 2006 From: jeanette at wz-berlin.de (Jeanette Hofmann) Date: Mon, 06 Nov 2006 17:16:57 +0100 Subject: [governance] speech on concluding panel in Athens Message-ID: <454F5FF9.5090901@wz-berlin.de> Hi, for transparency reasons, you find below the speech I gave on behalf of civil society on the concluding panel in Athens. The selection of the speaker was a last minute action over a lunch meeting of Congo and the IG caucus at Thursday. We also had a short discussion at that meeting of what should be said. Some of it I included. Speech was supposed to be short, 5-7 min. jeanette Thank you, Minister Nitin Desai, Markus Kummer, Ladies and Gentlement I'd like to share with you a little story that I will take home from the forum: It happened on Tuesday while I was moderating a workshop. Although it was late, the room was nonetheless packed and all chairs were taken. A few minutes after the workshop started, somebody from the German Foreign Office walked into the room, and since no chair was left, she chose to sit on the floor – on the floor, I should add, of temporary UN territory. So, what makes this a symbolic incident? It is the striking difference to the seating order we are used to from WSIS but also from other intergovernmental processes. The forum has no seating order, • there are no tables for delegations with nameplates on it and above all • there are no time slots for non-governmental actors. Governments have queued jointly with civil society and private sector in order to take the floor. The forum offers the great opportunity to experiment with new formats of communication and consensus building crossing all sorts of geographical, cultural, sectoral and political boundaries. The secretariat and the chair haven taken great effort to maximize the speaking time not only for panellists but particularely for the audience. The great innovation we have been witnessing here is the setting up of a global talk shop in the most constructive sense. The fact that the forum has no mandate to make binding decisions is the very precondition for equity among the stakeholders who attend this meeting. However, in order to make good use of the forum, it is vital that all stakeholders recognize and adopt this new venue as an innovative place of policy making. • While it is good that governments attend the forum with the intention to listen, it is important that they also practically engage with civil society and work on concrete solutions. • And while it is good that the private sector is present and shows its willingness for dialogue, we hope that industry will reach out to other corporations and strengthen particularly participation from developing countries. • And while it is good to meet again so many friends from the WSIS process here in Athens, we need to keep in mind that there would be many more people attending from civil society if we could provide them with funding. In order to make the forum a truly open space for participation, it is necessary for all of us to find financial support for those who lack the means to come here. In closing I would like to bring to your attention a few thoughts regarding the future Forum meetings that have been considered among civil society participants. We have' been wondering about how to strengthen the output orientation of the forum and how to ensure that the forum will become also practically relevant. It has been suggested • To reduce the number of overarching themes and focus more on specific issues such as capacity building and access. • Also, the forum should provide sufficient space to get into the details of these issues and • The forum should encourage the development of practical solutions – both in workshops but also in dynamic coalitions • Such practical solutions should be put on public records of the forum. • In so doing, the bottom process can gain some official recognition, which in turn may make it easier for all stakeholders to participate and learn, to quote Nitin Desai, "holding hands" also in between annual meetings of the forum. While it seems unlikely that civil society ever embraces the idea of arranged marriages, all people I have talked to here in the last days see great potential in the forum for developing concrete solutions for the challenges we face in the field of Internet Governance. Personally I am very proud of having being part of this process. On behalf of the civil society groups I'd like to thank the host country to make this meeting possible, but also the secretariat and the chair for their hard work. We are looking forward to fruitful dialogues, both online and face to face, in the year to come, and to the next forum meeting. ____________________________________________________________ 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 From nursesacrosstheborders at yahoo.com Mon Nov 6 12:39:02 2006 From: nursesacrosstheborders at yahoo.com (NURSES ACROSS THE BORDERS) Date: Mon, 6 Nov 2006 09:39:02 -0800 (PST) Subject: [governance] Elections for coordinators In-Reply-To: <09DB61CE-6E1A-4583-9548-0B11B29435C6@acm.org> Message-ID: <20061106173902.70982.qmail@web34303.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Hello, Lets go ahead and hold elections for the first two years. And then, when the first two years is getting to an end, fresh nominations should be called for everyone to indicate interest or not, if the only candidate we have now is returned unoposed then he becomes the candidate by general consensus. Got what I mean? Pastor Peters OMORAGBON --- Avri Doria wrote: > Hi, > > I am not sure I understand your question. > > The charter determines that there will be 2 > coordinators. As a > startup process, the charter indicates that we elect > one for 2 years > and one for 1 year, so that we have staggered terms. > > As for declaring this non democratic, the > nominations have been open > to ALL, and we have two candidates for two roles. I > do not see what > is non democratic about following out process, or > following either of > the option I offered. > > a. > > > > On 6 nov 2006, at 03.09, NURSES ACROSS THE BORDERS > wrote: > > > Dear Avri, > > What then is democracy if we hold one vote or even > > applying the second option? > > My suggestion will be to hold the first vote for > the > > first two year tenure, and declare the next vote > open > > for ALL when the the next one tenure is getting > close. > > Thank you. > > Pastor Peters OMORAGBON > > Coordiantor Nigerian Chapter ACSIS/WSIS > > > > > > --- Avri Doria wrote: > > > >> Hi, > >> > >> Well the time for nominations is long over and we > >> have two nominees > >> for two positions Vittorio and Parminder - info > at > >> http:// > >> www.igcaucus.org/IGC-candidates-2006.html > >> > >> There were a couple of private nominations made, > but > >> I checked with > >> each of those nominated privately, and they > >> declined. If anyone > >> feels they were nominated of self-nominated and I > >> missed it, please > >> let me know immediately. > >> > >> We have two options for the election, as I > mentioned > >> before. > >> > >> 1. (my current inclination) Hold one vote and > the > >> person who gets > >> the most votes wins the two year terms with the > >> other getting the one > >> year term. > >> > >> 2. A suggestion was made during the face to face > get > >> together during > >> the IGF meeting, that two votes should be held. > >> During the first > >> vote, the person with the most votes gets the two > >> year term. Under > >> this suggestion nominations for the second slot > >> remain open until > >> after the first vote is completed. At that point > the > >> person who got > >> the least votes in the first ballot and anyone > yet > >> to be nominated > >> would stand a vote with the person getting the > most > >> votes be the > >> coordinator with a one year term. > >> > >> If anyone on this list has a preference, please > send > >> a message > >> picking an option. If no one speaks up, I will > go > >> with option 1. On > >> the other hand if people speak up, I will go with > >> whichever option > >> has the largest voice. I will probably start the > >> vote (or the first > >> vote) by midweek. I will announce which option > we > >> are using at that > >> time. > >> > >> thanks > >> > >> a. > >> > >> ps. Still looking for a volunteer to chair the > >> nomcom to pick the > >> appeals team - for this caucus to work according > to > >> the charter, we > >> do need volunteers to take on the tasks. > >> > >> > > > ____________________________________________________________ > >> 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 > >> > > > > > > > > Pastor Peters OMORAGBON > > Executive President/CEO > > Nurses Across the Borders Humanitarian > Initiative-Inc.-(Nigeria & > > U.S.A) > > An NGO On Special Consultative Status with The > Economic and Social > > Council of the United Nations-(ECOSOC) > > Member(OBSERVER),United Nations Framework > Convention on Climate > > Change (UNFCCC) > > 295, IKORODU ROAD, IDIROKO BUS STOP MARYLAND IKEJA > LAGOS NIGERIA > > 350, MAIN STREET, EAST ORANGE NEW JERSEY 07018 > U.S.A > > Tel:+234-1-812-8649, > +234-1-818-6494,+234-802-308-5408(Mobile) > > FAX:+234-1-493-7203 > > Email:nursesacrosstheborders at yahoo.com > > URL: www.nursesacrosstheborders.4t.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > ______________________________________________________________________ > > > ______________ > > Everyone is raving about the all-new Yahoo! Mail > > (http://advision.webevents.yahoo.com/mailbeta/) > > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > ____________________________________________________________________________________ Cheap talk? Check out Yahoo! Messenger's low PC-to-Phone call rates. http://voice.yahoo.com ____________________________________________________________ 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 From avri at acm.org Mon Nov 6 13:15:32 2006 From: avri at acm.org (Avri Doria) Date: Mon, 6 Nov 2006 10:15:32 -0800 Subject: [governance] Elections for coordinators In-Reply-To: <20061106173902.70982.qmail@web34303.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <20061106173902.70982.qmail@web34303.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <16190FCA-1F87-46D2-8EAF-081E9C8E8341@acm.org> hi, I confess to still being confused. We currently have two coordinator positions open: 1 for 2 years 1 for 1 year. As far as I can tell we should have democratic elections for them now - just how to do it is up for questions - 1 vote or 2. And we should have democratic elections for these positions again as the terms end; 1 in 1 year, and 1 in two years. does this work? a. On 6 nov 2006, at 09.39, NURSES ACROSS THE BORDERS wrote: > Hello, > Lets go ahead and hold elections for the first two > years. And then, when the first two years is getting > to an end, fresh nominations should be called for > everyone to indicate interest or not, if the only > candidate we have now is returned unoposed then he > becomes the candidate by general consensus. > Got what I mean? > Pastor Peters OMORAGBON > > --- Avri Doria wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> I am not sure I understand your question. >> >> The charter determines that there will be 2 >> coordinators. As a >> startup process, the charter indicates that we elect >> one for 2 years >> and one for 1 year, so that we have staggered terms. >> >> As for declaring this non democratic, the >> nominations have been open >> to ALL, and we have two candidates for two roles. I >> do not see what >> is non democratic about following out process, or >> following either of >> the option I offered. >> >> a. >> >> >> >> On 6 nov 2006, at 03.09, NURSES ACROSS THE BORDERS >> wrote: >> >>> Dear Avri, >>> What then is democracy if we hold one vote or even >>> applying the second option? >>> My suggestion will be to hold the first vote for >> the >>> first two year tenure, and declare the next vote >> open >>> for ALL when the the next one tenure is getting >> close. >>> Thank you. >>> Pastor Peters OMORAGBON >>> Coordiantor Nigerian Chapter ACSIS/WSIS >>> >>> >>> --- Avri Doria wrote: >>> >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> Well the time for nominations is long over and we >>>> have two nominees >>>> for two positions Vittorio and Parminder - info >> at >>>> http:// >>>> www.igcaucus.org/IGC-candidates-2006.html >>>> >>>> There were a couple of private nominations made, >> but >>>> I checked with >>>> each of those nominated privately, and they >>>> declined. If anyone >>>> feels they were nominated of self-nominated and I >>>> missed it, please >>>> let me know immediately. >>>> >>>> We have two options for the election, as I >> mentioned >>>> before. >>>> >>>> 1. (my current inclination) Hold one vote and >> the >>>> person who gets >>>> the most votes wins the two year terms with the >>>> other getting the one >>>> year term. >>>> >>>> 2. A suggestion was made during the face to face >> get >>>> together during >>>> the IGF meeting, that two votes should be held. >>>> During the first >>>> vote, the person with the most votes gets the two >>>> year term. Under >>>> this suggestion nominations for the second slot >>>> remain open until >>>> after the first vote is completed. At that point >> the >>>> person who got >>>> the least votes in the first ballot and anyone >> yet >>>> to be nominated >>>> would stand a vote with the person getting the >> most >>>> votes be the >>>> coordinator with a one year term. >>>> >>>> If anyone on this list has a preference, please >> send >>>> a message >>>> picking an option. If no one speaks up, I will >> go >>>> with option 1. On >>>> the other hand if people speak up, I will go with >>>> whichever option >>>> has the largest voice. I will probably start the >>>> vote (or the first >>>> vote) by midweek. I will announce which option >> we >>>> are using at that >>>> time. >>>> >>>> thanks >>>> >>>> a. >>>> >>>> ps. Still looking for a volunteer to chair the >>>> nomcom to pick the >>>> appeals team - for this caucus to work according >> to >>>> the charter, we >>>> do need volunteers to take on the tasks. >>>> >>>> >>> >> > ____________________________________________________________ >>>> 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 >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> Pastor Peters OMORAGBON >>> Executive President/CEO >>> Nurses Across the Borders Humanitarian >> Initiative-Inc.-(Nigeria & >>> U.S.A) >>> An NGO On Special Consultative Status with The >> Economic and Social >>> Council of the United Nations-(ECOSOC) >>> Member(OBSERVER),United Nations Framework >> Convention on Climate >>> Change (UNFCCC) >>> 295, IKORODU ROAD, IDIROKO BUS STOP MARYLAND IKEJA >> LAGOS NIGERIA >>> 350, MAIN STREET, EAST ORANGE NEW JERSEY 07018 >> U.S.A >>> Tel:+234-1-812-8649, >> +234-1-818-6494,+234-802-308-5408(Mobile) >>> FAX:+234-1-493-7203 >>> Email:nursesacrosstheborders at yahoo.com >>> URL: www.nursesacrosstheborders.4t.com >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> > ______________________________________________________________________ >> >>> ______________ >>> Everyone is raving about the all-new Yahoo! Mail >>> (http://advision.webevents.yahoo.com/mailbeta/) >>> >>> >> >> > ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 >> > > > > > > ______________________________________________________________________ > ______________ > Cheap talk? > Check out Yahoo! Messenger's low PC-to-Phone call rates. > http://voice.yahoo.com > ____________________________________________________________ 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 From bnkuerbi at syr.edu Tue Nov 7 13:20:36 2006 From: bnkuerbi at syr.edu (Brenden Kuerbis) Date: Tue, 07 Nov 2006 13:20:36 -0500 Subject: [governance] Re: Draft Workshop Report -- DNS forum @ Athens In-Reply-To: <20061106134329.GA30889@nic.fr> References: <20061106134329.GA30889@nic.fr> Message-ID: <4550CE74.6050005@syr.edu> Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote: > On Thu, Nov 02, 2006 at 01:37:08AM -0500, > Milton Mueller wrote > a message of 70 lines which said: > > >> It is possible to implement DNSSEC without signing the root, but >> that would create only "islands of trust" in specific TLDs, >> > > This is no longer true since DLV > (http://www.isc.org/index.pl?/about/press/?pr=2006032700). > Yes, it is correct that DLV (DNS Lookaside Validation) makes it technically possible to deploy DNSSEC without signing the actual root zone file. It also my understanding that DLV retains the idea of a single key which could be used to sign lower zones, thereby avoiding the "islands of trust" issue. However, the DLV solution merely substitutes one "trusted" party controlling the private key (i.e., ISC or some other organization) for others (i.e., IANA/DoC/ICANN/VeriSign). IMO, DLV itself does not solve the governance problem of providing transparency and accountability in key operational procedures at the DNSSEC "root," wherever it may be. Best, Brenden Brenden Kuerbis, Operations Dir. Internet Governance Project http://internetgovernance.org ____________________________________________________________ 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 From jonathanrobin at messagerie.net Mon Nov 6 13:38:29 2006 From: jonathanrobin at messagerie.net (Jonathan Robin) Date: Mon, 06 Nov 2006 19:38:29 +0100 Subject: [governance] UN Internet Oversight In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Just an aside here noting that we seem to have come full circle in the context of UN Internet Governance oversight, At Telecom Geneva in 1999 I arranged a meeting with Vint Cerf and Philippe Queau - representing UNESCO, and Rosa Delgado was also present. This meeting lead directly to ISOC's recognition as UNESCO NGO (despite explicit reservations from some members of ISOC's BoT which is not the province of this exchange.) Among the questions explicitly discussed were UN system's potential implication in Internet Governance but also an initial exploration of a possible role for UN/UNESCO as as a recognized international Third Party Privacy Certification Authority ... this in turn lead to the terms of Charter of the Privacy and Security Working Group of the I.S.T.F. Internet Societal Task Force as it existed before ISOC's revamping http://istf-docs.norrnod.se/tpd/wg_privsec-2.2-tap.html Most of the Charter's points of concern remain as pertinent as they remain unanswered today. Nevertheless the focus has changed and become far more top down than 7 years ago - all to be expected. IMHO the question of Online / Offline legislative harmonization and of independant certification authorities is as important as the role played by convergence of emerging technologies in redefining effective network oversight offered Civil Society stakeholders but intellectual overview appears essential for those involved in oversight definition - before even broaching the thorny issues of modus operandi. For those involved ... Good Luck ! Best regards Jonathan ____________________________________________________________ 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 From bnkuerbi at syr.edu Tue Nov 7 13:21:11 2006 From: bnkuerbi at syr.edu (Brenden Kuerbis) Date: Tue, 07 Nov 2006 13:21:11 -0500 Subject: [governance] [Fwd: [IGP-ANNOUNCE] IGP Newsletter, Vol 1.05] Message-ID: <4550CE97.2020801@syr.edu> fyi. ____________________________________________________________ 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 -------------- next part -------------- An embedded message was scrubbed... From: IGP Info Subject: [IGP-ANNOUNCE] IGP Newsletter, Vol 1.05 Date: Mon, 06 Nov 2006 11:38:23 -0500 Size: 11116 URL: From bortzmeyer at internatif.org Mon Nov 6 15:54:03 2006 From: bortzmeyer at internatif.org (Stephane Bortzmeyer) Date: Mon, 6 Nov 2006 21:54:03 +0100 Subject: [governance] Re: Draft Workshop Report -- DNS forum @ Athens In-Reply-To: <4550CB50.5060508@twcny.rr.com> References: <20061106134329.GA30889@nic.fr> <4550CB50.5060508@twcny.rr.com> Message-ID: <20061106205403.GA1726@sources.org> On Tue, Nov 07, 2006 at 01:07:12PM -0500, Brenden Kuerbis wrote a message of 34 lines which said: > It also my understanding that DLV retains the idea of a single key Not really: DLV allows you to have several DLV "roots" (for instance, one for the root and a more specific one for ".org") and they may even overlap. (But I believe that the BIND implementation only supports one.) > However, the DLV solution merely substitutes one "trusted" party > controlling the private key (i.e., ISC or some other organization) > for others (i.e., IANA/DoC/ICANN/VeriSign). Except that you may have several (and not just one) trusted party, yes, you're right. > IMO, DLV itself does not solve the governance problem of providing > transparency and accountability in key operational procedures at the > DNSSEC "root," wherever it may be. Sure, DLV allows to bypass ICANN but it does not solve all the problems. You still need one (or several) trustable authority but it can be different from the DNS root authority. ____________________________________________________________ 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 From LMcKnigh at syr.edu Mon Nov 6 17:42:37 2006 From: LMcKnigh at syr.edu (Lee McKnight) Date: Mon, 06 Nov 2006 17:42:37 -0500 Subject: [governance] Elections for coordinators Message-ID: Presuming no further nominees or self-nominees surface in the next say 24 hours, I too support option 1. If there are any late additions to the candidate pool, then i'd urge Avri to slow down and let the list consider the candidates for another day or two. Lee Prof. Lee W. McKnight School of Information Studies Syracuse University +1-315-443-6891office +1-315-278-4392 mobile >>> qshatti at safat.kisr.edu.kw 11/6/2006 5:21 PM >>> I support option 1. Qusai --- Message Header --- The following message was sent by Avri Doria on Sun, 5 Nov 2006 19:51:21 -0500. --- Original Message --- > Hi, > > Well the time for nominations is long over and we have two nominees > for two positions Vittorio and Parminder - info at http:// > www.igcaucus.org/IGC-candidates-2006.html > > There were a couple of private nominations made, but I checked with > each of those nominated privately, and they declined. If anyone > feels they were nominated of self-nominated and I missed it, please > let me know immediately. > > We have two options for the election, as I mentioned before. > > 1. (my current inclination) Hold one vote and the person who gets > the most votes wins the two year terms with the other getting the one > year term. > > 2. A suggestion was made during the face to face get together during > the IGF meeting, that two votes should be held. During the first > vote, the person with the most votes gets the two year term. Under > this suggestion nominations for the second slot remain open until > after the first vote is completed. At that point the person who got > the least votes in the first ballot and anyone yet to be nominated > would stand a vote with the person getting the most votes be the > coordinator with a one year term. > > If anyone on this list has a preference, please send a message > picking an option. If no one speaks up, I will go with option 1. On > the other hand if people speak up, I will go with whichever option > has the largest voice. I will probably start the vote (or the first > vote) by midweek. I will announce which option we are using at that > time. > > thanks > > a. > > ps. Still looking for a volunteer to chair the nomcom to pick the > appeals team - for this caucus to work according to the charter, we > do need volunteers to take on the tasks. > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > Hi, > > Well the time for nominations is long over and we have two nominees > for two positions Vittorio and Parminder - info at http:// > www.igcaucus.org/IGC-candidates-2006.html > > There were a couple of private nominations made, but I checked with > each of those nominated privately, and they declined. If anyone > feels they were nominated of self-nominated and I missed it, please > let me know immediately. > > We have two options for the election, as I mentioned before. > > 1. (my current inclination) Hold one vote and the person who gets > the most votes wins the two year terms with the other getting the one > year term. > > 2. A suggestion was made during the face to face get together during > the IGF meeting, that two votes should be held. During the first > vote, the person with the most votes gets the two year term. Under > this suggestion nominations for the second slot remain open until > after the first vote is completed. At that point the person who got > the least votes in the first ballot and anyone yet to be nominated > would stand a vote with the person getting the most votes be the > coordinator with a one year term. > > If anyone on this list has a preference, please send a message > picking an option. If no one speaks up, I will go with option 1. On > the other hand if people speak up, I will go with whichever option > has the largest voice. I will probably start the vote (or the first > vote) by midweek. I will announce which option we are using at that > time. > > thanks > > a. > > ps. Still looking for a volunteer to chair the nomcom to pick the > appeals team - for this caucus to work according to the charter, we > do need volunteers to take on the tasks. > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > ____________________________________________________________ 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 ____________________________________________________________ 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 From David_Allen_AB63 at post.harvard.edu Mon Nov 6 18:01:21 2006 From: David_Allen_AB63 at post.harvard.edu (David Allen) Date: Mon, 6 Nov 2006 18:01:21 -0500 Subject: [governance] Re: Elections for coordinators In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Avri has made clear the time for nominations has passed. It is time for the caucus to live by its procedures and make clear to the rest of the world that it can do so. Some credibility can be the dividend. Equally, option 1 seems like the reasonable approach. David ____________________________________________________________ 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 From goldstein_david at yahoo.com.au Mon Nov 6 19:30:13 2006 From: goldstein_david at yahoo.com.au (David Goldstein) Date: Mon, 6 Nov 2006 16:30:13 -0800 (PST) Subject: [governance] Do the Rights of the Disabled Extend to the Blind on the Web? Message-ID: <20061107003013.76115.qmail@web54108.mail.yahoo.com> Hi all, This article appeared in the New York Times and International Herald Tribune, and should be interesting for those with an interest in people with disabilities accessing the internet. Cheers David Do the Rights of the Disabled Extend to the Blind on the Web? According to an advocacy group, Target declined last year to make its Web site fully accessible to blind people with specialized screen-reading technology last year. If true — and Target has denied the accusation in court — it was a public relations blunder, and it may have been illegal as well. http://iht.com/articles/2006/11/06/business/ecom.php http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/06/technology/06ecom.html --------- David Goldstein address: 4/3 Abbott Street COOGEE NSW 2034 AUSTRALIA email: Goldstein_David @yahoo.com.au phone: +61 418 228 605 (mobile); +61 2 9665 5773 (home) "Every time you use fossil fuels, you're adding to the problem. Every time you forgo fossil fuels, you're being part of the solution" - Dr Tim Flannery Send instant messages to your online friends http://au.messenger.yahoo.com ____________________________________________________________ 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 From christine at apdip.net Mon Nov 6 21:35:02 2006 From: christine at apdip.net (christine) Date: Tue, 7 Nov 2006 09:35:02 +0700 Subject: [governance] UNDP-APDIP Donates 15 e-Primers to Wikibooks Message-ID: <006501c70215$548f1360$8e0aa8c0@undp.or.th> ========================================================================== UNDP-APDIP Donates 15 e-Primers to Wikibooks http://www.apdip.net/news/wikibooks ========================================================================== 15 e-Primers are now available on Wikibooks for all to use and update. UNDP Asia-Pacific Development Information Programme (UNDP-APDIP) realizes how fast a published book gets out-of-date, especially in the fast-moving field of information and communications technology for development (ICT4D). UNDP-APDIP has therefore donated 15 of its e-Primers to Wikibooks for free use and update (see list below). Nine of the e-Primers are part of UNDP-APDIP's "e-Primers for the Information Economy, Society and Polity" series that detail the concepts, issues and trends surrounding different aspects of ICT4D, including e-commerce, education, e-government, Internet governance, legal and regulatory issues, and ICT for poverty reduction. Six of the e-Primers are part of the "e-Primers on Free/Open Source Software (FOSS)" series that introduce various aspects of FOSS, including education, government policy, licensing, localization and open standards. The FOSS series of e-Primers is developed by the International Open Source Network (http://www.iosn.net), an initiative of UNDP-APDIP supported by the International Development Research Centre of Canada. Wikibooks is our chosen platform because it facilitates collaboration. Every day, volunteers are improving Wikibooks, making many changes, writing, updating, and correcting books. Wikibooks maintains quality control and has policies and guidelines that users need to follow. Wikibooks are also available for all to freely distribute and reproduce as covered by the GNU Free Documentation License. We would like to invite you to visit the Wikibooks and contribute your knowledge and experiences in the relevant ICT4D topics. Forthcoming APDIP e-Primers on network infrastructure and security, open content and other topics will all automatically be donated to Wikibooks. The original published e-Primers will remain in http://www.apdip.net/elibrary#iesp (and, in the case of the e-Primers on FOSS, at http://www.iosn.net/publications/foss-primers), and the version in Wikibook will be linked to these. This way any user will be able to see the original version alongside the (modified) Wikibook version. E-PRIMERS FOR THE INFORMATION ECONOMY, SOCIETY AND POLITY http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Category:ICT4D_Books 1. The Information Age http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/The_Information_Age 2. Legal and Regulatory Issues in the Information Economy http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Legal_and_Regulatory_Issues_in_the_Information_ Economy 3. Nets, Webs and the Information Infrastructure http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Nets,_Webs_and_the_Information_Infrastructure 4. Information and Communication Technologies for Poverty Alleviation http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Information_and_Communication_Technologies_for_ Poverty_Alleviation 5. Internet Governance http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Category:Internet_Governance 6. e-Government http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/E-government 7. e-Commerce and e-Business http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/E-Commerce_and_E-Business 8. ICT in Education http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/ICT_in_Education 9. Genes, Technology and Policy http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Genes,_Technology_and_Policy E-PRIMERS ON FREE/OPEN SOURCE SOFTWARE http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Category:FOSS_Books 10. Free/Open Source Software: A General Introduction http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/FOSS_A_General_Introduction 11. Free/Open Source Software: Education http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/FOSS_Education 12. Free/Open Source Software: Government Policy http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/FOSS_Government_Policy 13. Free/Open Source Software: Licensing http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/FOSS_Licensing 14. Free/Open Source Software: Localization http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/FOSS_Localization 15. Free/Open Source Software: Open Standards http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/FOSS_Open_Standards ____________________________________________________________ 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 From dave at isoc-mu.org Mon Nov 6 23:34:54 2006 From: dave at isoc-mu.org (Dave Kissoondoyal) Date: Tue, 7 Nov 2006 08:34:54 +0400 Subject: [governance] Re: Elections for coordinators In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <007501c70226$127f64a0$0a01a8c0@TLFMDOM.local> I agree with David, Let's go with option 1 Best regards Dave Kissoondoyal -----Original Message----- From: governance-owner+dave=isoc-mu.org at lists.cpsr.org [mailto:governance-owner+dave=isoc-mu.org at lists.cpsr.org] On Behalf Of David Allen Sent: Tuesday, November 07, 2006 3:01 AM To: governance at lists.cpsr.org Subject: [governance] Re: Elections for coordinators Avri has made clear the time for nominations has passed. It is time for the caucus to live by its procedures and make clear to the rest of the world that it can do so. Some credibility can be the dividend. Equally, option 1 seems like the reasonable approach. David ____________________________________________________________ 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 ____________________________________________________________ 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 From dogwallah at gmail.com Tue Nov 7 00:21:10 2006 From: dogwallah at gmail.com (McTim) Date: Tue, 7 Nov 2006 08:21:10 +0300 Subject: [governance] Re: Draft Workshop Report -- DNS forum @ Athens In-Reply-To: <4550CE74.6050005@syr.edu> References: <20061106134329.GA30889@nic.fr> <4550CE74.6050005@syr.edu> Message-ID: On 11/7/06, Brenden Kuerbis wrote: > > Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote: > > On Thu, Nov 02, 2006 at 01:37:08AM -0500, > > Milton Mueller wrote > > a message of 70 lines which said: > > > > > >> It is possible to implement DNSSEC without signing the root, but > >> that would create only "islands of trust" in specific TLDs, > >> > > > > This is no longer true since DLV > > (http://www.isc.org/index.pl?/about/press/?pr=2006032700). > > > > Yes, it is correct that DLV (DNS Lookaside Validation) makes it > technically possible to deploy DNSSEC s/DNSSECbis/DNSSEC without signing the actual root > zone file. http://www.isc.org/index.pl?/pubs/tn/index.pl?tn=isc-tn-2006-1.html: "This is an early deployment aid, not intended to permanently replace the "certification follows delegation" model, or to scale to the size of the Internet. Once the DNSSEC community has matured, the methods described in this memo are not expected to be of any further use." -- Cheers, McTim $ whois -h whois.afrinic.net mctim -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: message-footer.txt URL: From bortzmeyer at internatif.org Tue Nov 7 02:14:28 2006 From: bortzmeyer at internatif.org (Stephane Bortzmeyer) Date: Tue, 7 Nov 2006 08:14:28 +0100 Subject: [governance] Re: Draft Workshop Report -- DNS forum @ Athens In-Reply-To: References: <20061106134329.GA30889@nic.fr> <4550CE74.6050005@syr.edu> Message-ID: <20061107071428.GA25079@sources.org> On Tue, Nov 07, 2006 at 08:21:10AM +0300, McTim wrote a message of 62 lines which said: > http://www.isc.org/index.pl?/pubs/tn/index.pl?tn=isc-tn-2006-1.html: > > "This is an early deployment aid, not intended to permanently > replace the "certification follows delegation" model, or to scale to > the size of the Internet. Once the DNSSEC community has matured, the > methods described in this memo are not expected to be of any further > use." It is purely lip service. It reminds me when the french national research network claimed to be "multi-protocol" because it was not authorized by the government to be IP-only (I believe they even had one X25 customer). Sorry to sound patronizing but you will never go far in Internet governance if you take everything at face value :-) ____________________________________________________________ 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 From wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de Tue Nov 7 03:31:26 2006 From: wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Wolfgang_Kleinw=E4chter?=) Date: Tue, 07 Nov 2006 09:31:26 +0100 Subject: AW: [governance] Re: Elections for coordinators References: Message-ID: <3AEE633F500281489D5F3303731CE9F30438C0@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> David is right. We have to live with our procedures. If we have only two candidates and two seats and people do not feel comfortable with the situation they have an option to be a candidate next year. The rotation system we have adopted allows an annual 50 per cent renewal. Lets move foreward and discuss real issues. After we have GIGANET for academic research, the CS IGC could be much clearer an "advocacy group", representing Individual Internet Users. The IGC should do also more outreach and, where useful and necessary, coordinate its activities with related bodies like CONGO or ALAC. What about "IGC liaisons" to other bodies? Wolfgang ________________________________ Von: David Allen [mailto:David_Allen_AB63 at post.harvard.edu] Gesendet: Di 07.11.2006 00:01 An: governance at lists.cpsr.org Betreff: [governance] Re: Elections for coordinators Avri has made clear the time for nominations has passed. It is time for the caucus to live by its procedures and make clear to the rest of the world that it can do so. Some credibility can be the dividend. Equally, option 1 seems like the reasonable approach. David ____________________________________________________________ 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 ____________________________________________________________ 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 From vb at bertola.eu.org Tue Nov 7 04:00:23 2006 From: vb at bertola.eu.org (Vittorio Bertola) Date: Tue, 07 Nov 2006 10:00:23 +0100 Subject: [governance] Dynamic Coalition working methods In-Reply-To: <454DE00B.9050709@zedat.fu-berlin.de> References: <454A1432.5090308@umontreal.ca> <454DD850.6010102@Malcolm.id.au> <454DE00B.9050709@zedat.fu-berlin.de> Message-ID: <45504B27.3000608@bertola.eu.org> Ralf Bendrath ha scritto: > First of all, the IGF at large is accountable to nobody. It is at the > moment an "open house", as Niton Desai said, it can't (yet?) make > decisions, and its composition is more or less random. So why should any > dynamic coalition be accountable to the IGF? I think that there's something to earn from adding the IGF brand to a coalition of people - recognition, credibility, and possibly the chance to get the results "blessed" by the Forum itself, as a "brand of quality policy output" if you like, just like the IETF/IAB process does with technical standards... which doesn't imply that all RFCs get widely adopted or all widely adopted standards are RFCs, but, in practice, means that most of the widely adopted standards are RFCs and most RFCs are widely adopted. In exchange for that, the Forum should ask coalitions to meet certain "quality standards" in term of process, and I agree that they should be about openness, free participation for all stakeholders, and transparent procedures (the opposite of privatized governance). Moreover, there are situations you might want to prevent - for example, what if those stakeholders who value security over privacy started their own "security privacy coalition" which addressed the same things as your coalition, but getting to opposite results? I think we have to accept to engage each other in a discussion, rather than try to use the IGF for pushing each one's pet position, and so we need to ensure that you have only one coalition for a specific policy item. > Bottom line: There seems to be a trade-off between openness and broad > participation. If we don't carefully address these issues, we will have > some nice NGO-Business dialogue, but no governments on board. I agree, but exactly because there is a delicate balance at stake, I think you need shared guidelines that apply to all coalitions. It will help people not getting lost, and getting used to a uniform working method that can become part over time of a common procedural foundation. The positive thing is that it's now up to us, basically, to work them out. > What we will try in the privacy coalition is certainly to develop some > position paper / FAQ / draft recommendations to be "considered" by the > next IGF. If this works in an inclusive multi-stakeholder process, it > will be more than I hoped for. Support :) Even if I'd like to get a way to move documents from the "for consideration" to the "rough IGF consensus" status. But we have to be careful not too ask for too much too soon. -- vb. [Vittorio Bertola - v.bertola [a] bertola.eu.org]<----- http://bertola.eu.org/ <- Prima o poi... ____________________________________________________________ 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 From krishnaswamysudhir at gmail.com Tue Nov 7 04:25:17 2006 From: krishnaswamysudhir at gmail.com (sudhir krishnaswamy) Date: Tue, 7 Nov 2006 14:55:17 +0530 Subject: [governance] Re: Elections for coordinators In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <5568c0bf0611070125w53a6cc51r260fa17f496fbc92@mail.gmail.com> Option 1 is the best way forward. Sudhir On 07/11/06, David Allen wrote: > Avri has made clear the time for nominations has passed. > > It is time for the caucus to live by its procedures and make clear to > the rest of the world that it can do so. Some credibility can be the > dividend. Equally, option 1 seems like the reasonable approach. > > David > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > -- Sudhir Krishnaswamy 50/6 Palace Road Bangalore 560052 India --------------------------- +91-80-22261090 +91-98861-20775 --------------------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From jberleur at info.fundp.ac.be Tue Nov 7 05:57:16 2006 From: jberleur at info.fundp.ac.be (Jacques Berleur) Date: Tue, 7 Nov 2006 11:57:16 +0100 Subject: [governance] Elections for coordinators In-Reply-To: <6CB84530-7C34-4401-8758-B7112E49C29B@acm.org> References: <6CB84530-7C34-4401-8758-B7112E49C29B@acm.org> Message-ID: Dear Avri, OK for me for Vittorio and Parminder. Jacques >Hi, > >Well the time for nominations is long over and we have two nominees >for two positions Vittorio and Parminder - info at >http://www.igcaucus.org/IGC-candidates-2006.html > >There were a couple of private nominations made, but I checked with >each of those nominated privately, and they declined. If anyone >feels they were nominated of self-nominated and I missed it, please >let me know immediately. > >We have two options for the election, as I mentioned before. > >1. (my current inclination) Hold one vote and the person who gets >the most votes wins the two year terms with the other getting the >one year term. > >2. A suggestion was made during the face to face get together during >the IGF meeting, that two votes should be held. During the first >vote, the person with the most votes gets the two year term. Under >this suggestion nominations for the second slot remain open until >after the first vote is completed. At that point the person who got >the least votes in the first ballot and anyone yet to be nominated >would stand a vote with the person getting the most votes be the >coordinator with a one year term. > >If anyone on this list has a preference, please send a message >picking an option. If no one speaks up, I will go with option 1. >On the other hand if people speak up, I will go with whichever >option has the largest voice. I will probably start the vote (or >the first vote) by midweek. I will announce which option we are >using at that time. > >thanks > >a. > >ps. Still looking for a volunteer to chair the nomcom to pick the >appeals team - for this caucus to work according to the charter, we >do need volunteers to take on the tasks. > >____________________________________________________________ >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 -- ************************************************ Prof. Jacques BERLEUR Facultes Universitaires Notre-Dame de la Paix Rue Grandgagnage, 21 Phone: +32 81 72-4976 Mobile: +32 (0)475 548372 5000 NAMUR Fax: +32 81 72 4967 BELGIUM mailto:jberleur at info.fundp.ac.be URL: http://www.info.fundp.ac.be/~jbl/ ************************************************ ____________________________________________________________ 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 From Jeremy at Malcolm.id.au Tue Nov 7 07:31:23 2006 From: Jeremy at Malcolm.id.au (Jeremy Malcolm) Date: Tue, 07 Nov 2006 20:31:23 +0800 Subject: [governance] [Fwd: post Athens] Message-ID: <45507C9B.7070000@Malcolm.id.au> This from Mary Rundle, forwarded with permission. -- Jeremy Malcolm LLB (Hons) B Com Internet and Open Source lawyer, IT consultant, actor host -t NAPTR 1.0.8.0.3.1.2.9.8.1.6.e164.org|awk -F! '{print $3}' ____________________________________________________________ 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 -------------- next part -------------- An embedded message was scrubbed... From: Mary Rundle Subject: post Athens Date: Mon, 06 Nov 2006 18:56:47 -0500 Size: 58602 URL: From lists at privaterra.info Tue Nov 7 08:01:08 2006 From: lists at privaterra.info (Robert Guerra) Date: Tue, 07 Nov 2006 08:01:08 -0500 Subject: [governance] [Fwd: post Athens] In-Reply-To: <45507C9B.7070000@Malcolm.id.au> References: <45507C9B.7070000@Malcolm.id.au> Message-ID: <45508394.7090208@privaterra.info> Thanks for this. Hasn't IGLOO already made the offer to provide a community space? If I remember correctly, Don MacLean and others mentioned it at the GigaNet meeting a bit over a week ago. Global Multi-Stakeholder Governance Forum http://www.igloo.org/multistakeholder http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Centre_for_International_Governance_Innovation How does Mary's offer to host the space differ from that of IGLOO's? Would be great to know. As a Canadian, i'd prefer to have the space hosted outside the US. After all, an IGLOO is already setup and ready in Canada for people to visit and use :-) regards Robert ____________________________________________________________ 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 From goldstein_david at yahoo.com.au Tue Nov 7 19:22:00 2006 From: goldstein_david at yahoo.com.au (David Goldstein) Date: Tue, 7 Nov 2006 16:22:00 -0800 (PST) Subject: [governance] more news on the IGF Message-ID: <20061108002201.71166.qmail@web54106.mail.yahoo.com> Hi all The Huffington Post has an article on the IGF and even mention "dynamic coalitions"!!! See below. Also an article by Pascal Lamy on "Globalisation and Global Governance" that's not dealing with the internet, but could be of interest. Don't forget to check out http://technewsreview.com.au/ for more news! Cheers David The UN launches the Internet Governance Forum, in Athens The IGF is a model for global governance. It is also a work in process. The differences between the IGF and previous UN bodies are significant and several. I will focus on the few that seem most important. The IGF is formally a "multi-stakeholder" body. That means the actors include not only government officials, but also businesses, NGOs of various types, academics, journalists and individuals. This appears to be pretty fundamental to the way the IGF operates, including equal participation and access to panels, workshops and social events. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/james-love/the-un-launches-the-inter_b_33498.html Globalization and Global Governance by Pascal Lamy Increasing globalization has led to more intense discussions of global "governance." But what does "governance" really mean — and how is it different from "government"? Pascal Lamy, director general of the World Trade Organization, provides insights into the history, meaning, benefits and limitations of governance — and explores how to achieve it. http://theglobalist.com/StoryId.aspx?StoryId=5740 --------- David Goldstein address: 4/3 Abbott Street COOGEE NSW 2034 AUSTRALIA email: Goldstein_David @yahoo.com.au phone: +61 418 228 605 (mobile); +61 2 9665 5773 (home) "Every time you use fossil fuels, you're adding to the problem. Every time you forgo fossil fuels, you're being part of the solution" - Dr Tim Flannery Send instant messages to your online friends http://au.messenger.yahoo.com ____________________________________________________________ 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 From wnew at ip-watch.ch Wed Nov 8 04:59:04 2006 From: wnew at ip-watch.ch (William New) Date: Wed, 8 Nov 2006 10:59:04 +0100 Subject: [governance] Intellectual Property Watch coverage of IGF Message-ID: <4513C5E200B7A14C@mail13.bluewin.ch> (added by postmaster@bluewin.ch) In case you missed it, below is the coverage by Intellectual Property Watch (www.ip-watch.org ) from the Internet Governance Forum: 05/11/2006: http://ip-watch.org/weblog/wp-trackback.php?p=444 "Dynamic Coalitions," The New Sword In Internet Governance Debates 01/11/2006: http://ip-watch.org/weblog/wp-trackback.php?p=441 Copyrights, Knowledge Access, Democracy Debated At Internet Forum 31/10/2006: http://ip-watch.org/weblog/wp-trackback.php?p=440 UN-led Conference Grills Corporations On Support For Restrictive Internet Regimes 31/10/2006: http://ip-watch.org/weblog/wp-trackback.php?p=439 New Internet Governance Proposal Would Trim US Role, Boost Private Sector 31/10/2006: http://ip-watch.org/weblog/wp-trackback.php?p=437 Online Content Among Many Issues At Internet Governance Forum -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: message-footer.txt URL: From mueller at syr.edu Wed Nov 8 09:06:31 2006 From: mueller at syr.edu (Milton Mueller) Date: Wed, 08 Nov 2006 09:06:31 -0500 Subject: [governance] [Fwd: post Athens] Message-ID: Robert: >>> lists at privaterra.info 11/7/2006 8:01 AM >>> >Hasn't IGLOO already made the offer to provide a community space? >If I remember correctly, Don MacLean and others mentioned it at >the GigaNet meeting a bit over a week ago. Indeed, Don M. is brokering an arrangement whereby _GigaNet_ gets to use IGLOO for free. Please keep in mind that we are talking about GigaNet and GigaNet only. The IGLOO arrangement will not be a "community space" for the IG caucus, and the IG caucus is a completely separate entity from the GigaNet. GigaNet is set up for researchers/academics and should not be confused with the caucus, which is a space for advocacy groups. As for this: >Global Multi-Stakeholder Governance Forum >http://www.igloo.org/multistakeholder I think Don set that up as purely a demonstration of IGLOO's capabilities. If there is more to it than that, if he or IGLOO are offering to host something broader, that's fine, but please keep it separate from GigaNet activities. ____________________________________________________________ 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 From avri at acm.org Thu Nov 9 15:22:59 2006 From: avri at acm.org (Avri Doria) Date: Thu, 9 Nov 2006 12:22:59 -0800 Subject: [governance] Upcoming Coordinator vote Message-ID: <60DEDE8B-FF4B-4CB5-9508-990B9EC31813@acm.org> Hi, I am about to initiate the coordinator vote. There were some bugs in the eVote software that have now been fixed due to the very kind efforts of Marilyn Davis, the author of eVote but not a member of our list. Unfortunately because so much effort went into chasing down the bug (which eliminated the vote of one person from the record the last time) and because I have been stretched to my limit between IGF, IETF and other obligations, we will need to continue using the plain text email method of voting as was used in the carter vote. I, and others, will continue work on the web interface and hopefully will have something more to offer before the next time the IGC votes. I know, I have said this before, but the effort does continue. After following the conversation on line about a one ballot process or a two ballot process, I decided to hold one ballot that will determine both the 2 year term and the one year term. I also talked to some election mavens and got a recommendation I will be following: Each voter (Governance list participants as of 24 September 2006) will be given 3 votes to distribute between the two candidates. A minimum of 0 votes and a maximum of 2 votes can be assigned to any one candidate. This allows for people to give 2 votes to the person they prefer for the 2 year term and 1 vote for the person they prefer for the 1 year term. There is, however, no requirement that a voter use all their votes. The two year term will be assigned to the person with the most votes while the other person will be assigned the one year term. I will be sending the explicit voting directions out on the voters' list and will follow up on this list after that with explicit instructions as I did in the charter vote. The vote is scheduled to last for 10 days: starting today 9 November 2006 and ending 19 November ends (any time zones - i.e. when). The charter prescribes that all votes are open unless closed by the coordinator. As this is a vote for individuals and not on a statement or a platform, I have decided, as interim coordinator, to make it a closed vote. Note: the charter does not have a required quorum for votes. I hope, however, that we can meet the same voting threshold as the charter and intend to encourage the list to meet that level. While desirable, however, it is not required. thanks 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 From avri at acm.org Thu Nov 9 17:38:13 2006 From: avri at acm.org (Avri Doria) Date: Thu, 9 Nov 2006 14:38:13 -0800 Subject: [governance] Coordinator Voting Primer Message-ID: hi, 0. address email to igc-voters at igcaucus.org 1. message must be plain text 2. the subject must be: coordinator vote 3. the first word must be: eVote Several possible messages: to give 1 vote to each person (note this is a safe message to make sure you got it right - you can change your vote later - send in as many ballots as you like - it records the last): eVote 1. 1 2. 1 to give 1 vote to candidate 1 and 2 votes to candidate 2 eVote 1. 1 2. 2 to give 1 vote to candidate 2 and 2 votes to candidate 1 eVote 1. 2 2. 1 to give 0 votes to candidate 1 and 2 votes to candidate 2 eVote 1. 0 2. 2 to give 0 votes to candidate 2 and 2 votes to candidate 1 eVote 1. 2 2. 0 ---- to find out who has voted: message must still be plain text subject must still be: coordinator vote message must be: eVote who I am sure I will refine this over time and add ore explanations as i discover what is necessary, but i wanted to get something out quickly 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 From rbloem at ngocongo.org Fri Nov 10 07:10:56 2006 From: rbloem at ngocongo.org (Renate Bloem) Date: Fri, 10 Nov 2006 13:10:56 +0100 Subject: [governance] Intecessional Panel on CSTD Message-ID: <200611101210.kAACAsSu010454@smtp2.infomaniak.ch> Dear all, At the conclusion of the Panel on "Promoting the building of a people-centred, development-oriented and inclusive information society, with a view to enhancing digital opportunities for all people" held at UNESCO in Paris from 6-8 November, I would like to share a few thoughts on the process and outcome. For more details on the agenda and programme see http://www.unctad.org/Templates/Meeting.asp?intItemID=2068&lang=1&m=12233&ye ar=2006&month=11 The objective of this Intercessional Panel was to discuss, prepare and make recommendations to the next session of the CSTD to be held in May 2007 under the same theme and in view of its new mandate of system-wide follow up of WSIS. In addition, the panel also allocated space to continued discussion on the traditional role of the Commission and proposed and created in this context a WG on Africa. As mentioned by Philippe before, as CONGO we had invested quite some effort to make this Panel as inclusive as possible for all stake-holders. Unfortunately, ECOSOC has not yet endorsed the list of CS WSIS accredited entities, and will do so only - as we heard now - in its resumed session at the beginning of 2007. However, the UNCTAD Secretariat had invited as resource, experts or other a few CS participants, including Parminder Singh and Delphine Nana, in addition to ECOSOC NGOs. The good news is that as CS we could fully participate in the discussion, not only in giving presentations, but on an equal footing with governments and UN Officials in the debate. The PS gave a good presentation during the Opening. There was indeed a very open spirit of welcome towards all actors. Parminder and myself were invited to participate in a small drafting group to hammer out some of the proposals emanating from the discussion. They are attached unedited. Ambassador Karklins in his introductory statement and later Chile and Brazil, very engaged, made it clear that this Commission is a follow up Commission, distinct from implementing mechanisms. But to do its job, it will receive information from all WSIS implemenation mechanisms, including from the ALFs, IGF, Global Allaince, Regional Commissions and any other actor, in order to assess and make policy recommendations to ECOSOC. In the CONGO statement I had asked for a trust fund for NGO participation. We were pleased to hear from Charles Geiger that Switzerland has already contributed and ask other governments to follow. More detailed information will follow. Best for today Renate ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Renate Bloem President of the Conference of NGOs (CONGO) 11, Avenue de la Paix CH-1202 Geneva Tel: +41 22 301 1000 Fax: +41 22 301 2000 E-mil: rbloem at ngocongo.org Website: www.ngocongo.org The Conference of NGOs (CONGO) is an international, membership association that facilitates the participation of NGOs in United Nations debates and decisions. Founded in 1948, CONGO's major objective is to ensure the presence of NGOs in exchanges among the world's governments and United Nations agencies on issues of global concern. For more information see our website at www.ngocongo.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: cstd paris 081106.doc Type: application/msword Size: 33280 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Conference of NGOs in Consultative Relationship.without logo.doc Type: application/msword Size: 48128 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: message-footer.txt URL: From nursesacrosstheborders at yahoo.com Fri Nov 10 10:01:10 2006 From: nursesacrosstheborders at yahoo.com (NURSES ACROSS THE BORDERS) Date: Fri, 10 Nov 2006 07:01:10 -0800 (PST) Subject: [governance] Intecessional Panel on CSTD In-Reply-To: <200611101210.kAACAsSu010454@smtp2.infomaniak.ch> Message-ID: <20061110150110.55224.qmail@web34309.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Madam President, That was an excellent speech and all-inclusive as all interests were adequately catered for. We hope the next session of ECOSOC will address the issues raised therein? Hopefully, those of us that are or will be opportuned to be at the next CSTD or ECOSOC sessions could reinforce these positions as a means of consensus from the CS. Germane to the above is the issue of relaxing the rules/regulations for visas to CS from the so called developing nations for an inclusive participation by all stakeholders-not necessarily changing the rules per say, but NGOS should be assessed on their merits and pedigree. Thank you once again. Pastor Peters OMORAGBON Coordinator WSIS/ACSIS, Nigerian Chapter --- Renate Bloem wrote: > Dear all, > > > > At the conclusion of the Panel on "Promoting the > building of a > people-centred, development-oriented and inclusive > information society, with > a view to enhancing digital opportunities for all > people" held at UNESCO in > Paris from 6-8 November, I would like to share a few > thoughts on the process > and outcome. For more details on the agenda and > programme see > > > ear=2006&month=11> > http://www.unctad.org/Templates/Meeting.asp?intItemID=2068&lang=1&m=12233&ye > ar=2006&month=11 > > The objective of this Intercessional Panel was to > discuss, prepare and make > recommendations to the next session of the CSTD to > be held in May 2007 under > the same theme and in view of its new mandate of > system-wide follow up of > WSIS. In addition, the panel also allocated space to > continued discussion on > the traditional role of the Commission and proposed > and created in this > context a WG on Africa. > > > > As mentioned by Philippe before, as CONGO we had > invested quite some effort > to make this Panel as inclusive as possible for all > stake-holders. > Unfortunately, ECOSOC has not yet endorsed the list > of CS WSIS accredited > entities, and will do so only - as we heard now - in > its resumed session at > the beginning of 2007. > > > > However, the UNCTAD Secretariat had invited as > resource, experts or other a > few CS participants, including Parminder Singh and > Delphine Nana, in > addition to ECOSOC NGOs. The good news is that as CS > we could fully > participate in the discussion, not only in giving > presentations, but on an > equal footing with governments and UN Officials in > the debate. The PS gave a > good presentation during the Opening. There was > indeed a very open spirit of > welcome towards all actors. > > > > Parminder and myself were invited to participate in > a small drafting group > to hammer out some of the proposals emanating from > the discussion. They are > attached unedited. > > > > Ambassador Karklins in his introductory statement > and later Chile and > Brazil, very engaged, made it clear that this > Commission is a follow up > Commission, distinct from implementing mechanisms. > But to do its job, it > will receive information from all WSIS implemenation > mechanisms, including > from the ALFs, IGF, Global Allaince, Regional > Commissions and any other > actor, in order to assess and make policy > recommendations to ECOSOC. > > > > In the CONGO statement I had asked for a trust fund > for NGO participation. > We were pleased to hear from Charles Geiger that > Switzerland has already > contributed and ask other governments to follow. > More detailed information > will follow. > > > > Best for today > > Renate > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > > > > > Renate Bloem > President of the Conference of NGOs (CONGO) > 11, Avenue de la Paix > CH-1202 Geneva > Tel: +41 22 301 1000 > Fax: +41 22 301 2000 > E-mil: > rbloem at ngocongo.org > Website: www.ngocongo.org > > > > > > > > The Conference of NGOs (CONGO) is an international, > membership association > that facilitates the participation of NGOs in United > Nations debates and > decisions. Founded in 1948, CONGO's major objective > is to ensure the > presence of NGOs in exchanges among the world's > governments and United > Nations agencies on issues of global concern. For > more information see our > website at > www.ngocongo.org > > > > > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > Pastor Peters OMORAGBON Executive President/CEO Nurses Across the Borders Humanitarian Initiative-Inc.-(Nigeria & U.S.A) An NGO On Special Consultative Status with The Economic and Social Council of the United Nations-(ECOSOC) Member(OBSERVER),United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) 295, IKORODU ROAD, IDIROKO BUS STOP MARYLAND IKEJA LAGOS NIGERIA 350, MAIN STREET, EAST ORANGE NEW JERSEY 07018 U.S.A Tel:+234-1-812-8649, +234-1-818-6494,+234-802-308-5408(Mobile) FAX:+234-1-493-7203 Email:nursesacrosstheborders at yahoo.com URL: www.nursesacrosstheborders.4t.com ____________________________________________________________________________________ Yahoo! Music Unlimited Access over 1 million songs. http://music.yahoo.com/unlimited ____________________________________________________________ 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 From avri at acm.org Sun Nov 12 11:40:20 2006 From: avri at acm.org (Avri Doria) Date: Sun, 12 Nov 2006 08:40:20 -0800 Subject: [governance] Progress of the vote so far. Message-ID: <346BDFF7-4155-4E3E-8909-B00E292BA17E@acm.org> hi, A good start: 26 votes have come in during the first 3 days of voting. But that is 15% of the 176 potential voters and 39% of those who voted in the charter vote. So, we have a long way to go to get a respectable vote recorded. and 7 days left in which to do it. To those who have voted already, thanks! To those who have yet to vote, the primer is repeated below for your information: a. ---- 0. address email to igc-voters at igcaucus.org 1. message MUST be plain text 2. the subject MUST be: coordinator vote 3. the first word of the message MUST be: eVote Several possible messages: to give 1 vote to each person (note this is a safe message to make sure you got it right - you can change your vote later - send in as many ballots as you like - it records the last): eVote 1. 1 2. 1 If you do this, be sure to vote again with your intended choice: to give 1 vote to candidate 1 and 2 votes to candidate 2 eVote 1. 1 2. 2 to give 1 vote to candidate 2 and 2 votes to candidate 1 eVote 1. 2 2. 1 to give 0 votes to candidate 1 and 2 votes to candidate 2 eVote 1. 0 2. 2 to give 0 votes to candidate 2 and 2 votes to candidate 1 eVote 1. 2 2. 0 ---- to find out who has voted: message must still be plain text subject must still be: coordinator vote message must be: eVote who ____________________________________________________________ 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 From remmyn at yahoo.co.uk Sun Nov 12 12:35:00 2006 From: remmyn at yahoo.co.uk (Remmy Nweke) Date: Sun, 12 Nov 2006 17:35:00 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [governance] Progress of the vote so far. In-Reply-To: <346BDFF7-4155-4E3E-8909-B00E292BA17E@acm.org> Message-ID: <20061112173500.88885.qmail@web23008.mail.ird.yahoo.com> eVote 1. 1 2. 1 Avri Doria wrote: hi, A good start: 26 votes have come in during the first 3 days of voting. But that is 15% of the 176 potential voters and 39% of those who voted in the charter vote. So, we have a long way to go to get a respectable vote recorded. and 7 days left in which to do it. To those who have voted already, thanks! To those who have yet to vote, the primer is repeated below for your information: a. ---- 0. address email to igc-voters at igcaucus.org 1. message MUST be plain text 2. the subject MUST be: coordinator vote 3. the first word of the message MUST be: eVote Several possible messages: to give 1 vote to each person (note this is a safe message to make sure you got it right - you can change your vote later - send in as many ballots as you like - it records the last): eVote 1. 1 2. 1 If you do this, be sure to vote again with your intended choice: to give 1 vote to candidate 1 and 2 votes to candidate 2 eVote 1. 1 2. 2 to give 1 vote to candidate 2 and 2 votes to candidate 1 eVote 1. 2 2. 1 to give 0 votes to candidate 1 and 2 votes to candidate 2 eVote 1. 0 2. 2 to give 0 votes to candidate 2 and 2 votes to candidate 1 eVote 1. 2 2. 0 ---- to find out who has voted: message must still be plain text subject must still be: coordinator vote message must be: eVote who ____________________________________________________________ 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 REMMY NWEKE Senior Reporter, IT & Telecom Head, ICT Desk Champion Newspapers Ltd 156/158 Oshodi-Apapa Expressway Isolo Industrial Layout, Ilasamaja P.O. Box 2276, Oshodi-Lagos Fax: 234-01-4526017, 4524421 GSM: 234-8023122558, 8033592762 Editor, ITREALMS Online www.itrealms.blogspot.com email: remmyn at yahoo.co.uk 'First Nigerian IT African Siemens Profile Award winner-2004' Second prize winner, ECA-AISI Media Award-05 'Two-time winner, African Siemens Profile Award IT Business Solution-2005' Highway Africa News Agency (HANA) Journalist of the Year - 2006 Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: message-footer.txt URL: From ajp at glocom.ac.jp Mon Nov 13 08:27:42 2006 From: ajp at glocom.ac.jp (Adam Peake) Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2006 22:27:42 +0900 Subject: [governance] IGF - updates Message-ID: The IGF website has been updated following the Athens meeting, , workshop reports, secretariat's summary etc. now there. Also, we have begun a stocktaking exercise, simple questions about what went well, what did not, how to improve, etc. Online form or use the discussion section of the site (I will ask the secretariat to provide a text form that can be completed offline and sent by email.) Also, the page for "Dynamic Coalitions" has been set up. Only one there at the moment, if you are involved in a coalition, please send info to me or the secretariat and the page will be updated The standard format seems to be Aims: Members: Website: Contact: Thanks, Adam ____________________________________________________________ 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 From jberleur at info.fundp.ac.be Mon Nov 13 09:17:01 2006 From: jberleur at info.fundp.ac.be (Jacques Berleur) Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2006 15:17:01 +0100 Subject: [governance] IGF - updates In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Adam, There is only 1 Dynamic coalition at http://www.intgovforum.org/Dynamic%20Coalitions.php The others seem to be at http://igf2006.intgovforum.org/wiki/Dynamic_Coalitions Where is the official site of them? Many thanks, Jacques >The IGF website has been updated following the Athens meeting, >, workshop reports, secretariat's >summary etc. now there. > >Also, we have begun a stocktaking exercise, simple questions about >what went well, what did not, how to improve, etc. Online form > or use the discussion >section of the site (I will ask the >secretariat to provide a text form that can be completed offline and >sent by email.) > >Also, the page for "Dynamic Coalitions" has been set up. Only one >there at the moment, if you are involved in a coalition, please send >info to me or the secretariat and the page will be updated > The standard >format seems to be > >Aims: >Members: >Website: >Contact: > >Thanks, > >Adam >____________________________________________________________ >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 -- ************************************************ Prof. Jacques BERLEUR Facultes Universitaires Notre-Dame de la Paix Rue Grandgagnage, 21 Phone: +32 81 72-4976 Mobile: +32 (0)475 548372 5000 NAMUR Fax: +32 81 72 4967 BELGIUM mailto:jberleur at info.fundp.ac.be URL: http://www.info.fundp.ac.be/~jbl/ ************************************************ ____________________________________________________________ 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 From avri at psg.com Mon Nov 13 10:13:18 2006 From: avri at psg.com (Avri Doria) Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2006 07:13:18 -0800 Subject: [governance] IGF - updates In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <7A8DABF9-9741-44A2-8524-B0E807AF7E84@psg.com> Hi, On 13 nov 2006, at 06.17, Jacques Berleur wrote: > Adam, > There is only 1 Dynamic coalition at http://www.intgovforum.org/ > Dynamic%20Coalitions.php > The others seem to be at http://igf2006.intgovforum.org/wiki/ > Dynamic_Coalitions > Where is the official site of them? > Many thanks, > Jacques I am not sure I would use words like official with dynamic coalitions, since every dynamic coalition will decide for itself what it wants to do 'officially'. but I recommend that all dynamic coalition get listed at www.intgovforum.org since that is the official IGF site and if one wants people to be able to find them then that is one place we can be sure they will go check. i think it is also probably a good idea for them to listed elsewhere as possible. e.g. if this caucus decides to get involved in some, then we should list the ones we support on our web site(s) 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 From lists at privaterra.info Mon Nov 13 10:18:26 2006 From: lists at privaterra.info (Robert Guerra) Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2006 10:18:26 -0500 Subject: [governance] IGF - updates In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <45588CC2.2070705@privaterra.info> Adam Peake wrote: > The IGF website has been updated following the Athens meeting, > , workshop reports, secretariat's summary > etc. now there. > > Also, we have begun a stocktaking exercise, simple questions about what > went well, what did not, how to improve, etc. Online form > or use the discussion section > of the site (I will ask the secretariat > to provide a text form that can be completed offline and sent by email.) > Adam: I attended the launch and/or press conferences of the coalitions (below) that I don't see listed yet on the intgovforum.org site. I hope those involved will send you their information ASAP. - Dynamic Coalition on Privacy - Dynamic Coalition on Open Standards - Dynamic Coalition on Access to Knowledge and Freedom of Expression regards Robert ____________________________________________________________ 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 From ajp at glocom.ac.jp Mon Nov 13 11:47:08 2006 From: ajp at glocom.ac.jp (Adam Peake) Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2006 01:47:08 +0900 Subject: [governance] IGF - updates In-Reply-To: <7A8DABF9-9741-44A2-8524-B0E807AF7E84@psg.com> References: <7A8DABF9-9741-44A2-8524-B0E807AF7E84@psg.com> Message-ID: I agree with Avri -- listing on http://www.intgovforum.org is preferable. If you know someone setting up/organizing a coalition effort, please ask them to send me the info: Aims: (can be a paragraph I think) Members: Website: Contact: (linking from the main IGF site to the community site Kieren and Jeremy are running and can be more easily edited by those who are actually running the coalition, might suit some.) Adam On 11/14/06, Avri Doria wrote: > > > Hi, > > On 13 nov 2006, at 06.17, Jacques Berleur wrote: > > > Adam, > > There is only 1 Dynamic coalition at http://www.intgovforum.org/ > > Dynamic%20Coalitions.php > > The others seem to be at http://igf2006.intgovforum.org/wiki/ > > Dynamic_Coalitions > > Where is the official site of them? > > Many thanks, > > Jacques > > I am not sure I would use words like official with dynamic > coalitions, since every dynamic coalition will decide for itself what > it wants to do 'officially'. but I recommend that all dynamic > coalition get listed at www.intgovforum.org since that is the > official IGF site and if one wants people to be able to find them > then that is one place we can be sure they will go check. > > i think it is also probably a good idea for them to listed elsewhere > as possible. e.g. if this caucus decides to get involved in some, > then we should list the ones we support on our web site(s) > > 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 > ____________________________________________________________ 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 From kierenmccarthy at gmail.com Mon Nov 13 12:19:38 2006 From: kierenmccarthy at gmail.com (Kieren McCarthy) Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2006 17:19:38 -0000 Subject: [governance] IGF - updates References: <7A8DABF9-9741-44A2-8524-B0E807AF7E84@psg.com> Message-ID: <01d401c70747$e70deb30$0300a8c0@HOME> >I agree with Avri -- listing on http://www.intgovforum.org is > preferable. If you know someone setting up/organizing a coalition > effort, please ask them to send me the info: I think this is a first of what may become many examples of unnecessary repetition of information (to everyone's detriment), which is why it is important to try to agree on an approach for IGF and related information to appear on one website with people given control over those parts where control is deemed important. Since that agreement is still a way off though, people will just have to repeat information for the time being. There are comparatively few dynamic coalitions and once you have the info in a documents, it is no great hassle to post on both sites, so there is no great problem as I see it. I do agree with Avri and Adam though: it is vastly preferable for a dynamic coalition to appear on the UN's official site. After all, alot of the coalition organisers have been asking for a tacit acceptance that they have been formed within the grounds of the IGF - with clear benefits - and this is clearly the mechanism by which that can be done. Of course the great benefit of the IGF2006.info website is that people can edit their entries without needing any permission or interaction from others. This means it can be kept up to date, and new information, meeting reports, email lists, whatever can all be added by the person or people most associated with the coalition. There is no reason why the more official submission made to the UN cannot contain URLs pointing to where more up-to-date material can be found - either the coalition's own pages (like IP Justice's for example), or the wiki page on IGF2006.info. But I do think this highlights why conversations over building a resource at a single domain (or perhaps just for introducing a simple system of interlinked pages) are important. I promise I will get around to knocking up a paper of what I think for dissemination, dissection and destruction as soon as I have cleared a backlog of work. Kieren ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Kieren McCarthy -------------------------- Homepages: http://www.kierenmccarthy.me.uk Blog: http://www.kierenmccarthy.co.uk/ ____________________________________________________________ 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 From kino at iris.se Mon Nov 13 15:22:49 2006 From: kino at iris.se (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Kicki_Nordstr=F6m?=) Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2006 21:22:49 +0100 Subject: SV: [governance] IGF - updates In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <3DF8101092666E4A9020D949E419EB6F012D133D@ensms02.iris.se> Dear Adam, There are several coalitions to refer to, but are there any particular sphere you are thinking of? For instance there are a group or caucus for ICT and persons with disabilities, for the work on the UN convention of persons with disabilities, we have an International Disability Caucus! However, the 8 major global disability organisations have formed an alliance, International disability Alliance (IDA) is it such coalitions you are thinking of? Yours Kicki Kicki Nordström World Blind Union (WBU) Immediate Past President Chair, WBU Working Group on UN Issues c/o SRF 122 88 Enskede Sweden Tel: +46 (0)8 399 000 Fax: +46 (0)8 725 99 20 Cell: +46 (0)70 766 18 19 E-mail: kino at iris.se -----Ursprungligt meddelande----- Från: Adam Peake [mailto:ajp at glocom.ac.jp] Skickat: den 13 november 2006 14:28 Till: governance at lists.cpsr.org Ämne: [governance] IGF - updates The IGF website has been updated following the Athens meeting, , workshop reports, secretariat's summary etc. now there. Also, we have begun a stocktaking exercise, simple questions about what went well, what did not, how to improve, etc. Online form or use the discussion section of the site (I will ask the secretariat to provide a text form that can be completed offline and sent by email.) Also, the page for "Dynamic Coalitions" has been set up. Only one there at the moment, if you are involved in a coalition, please send info to me or the secretariat and the page will be updated The standard format seems to be Aims: Members: Website: Contact: Thanks, Adam ____________________________________________________________ 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 ____________________________________________________________ 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 From Jeremy at Malcolm.id.au Tue Nov 14 23:28:29 2006 From: Jeremy at Malcolm.id.au (Jeremy Malcolm) Date: Wed, 15 Nov 2006 12:28:29 +0800 Subject: [governance] Revised version of letter to IGF re Web site Message-ID: <455A976D.3010903@Malcolm.id.au> Here is a much revised (and more polite) version of the proposed letter re the IGF Web site that I sent in draft a few days ago, courtesy of Kieren McCarthy. So far we have five people who are putting their names to the letter, so here is a last chance for those who would like to add their names also, to say so. I intend on one of us sending it to the Secretariat on Friday. ----------------- Dear IGF Secretariat, Congratulations again on the tremendous success of the first meeting of the Internet Governance Forum in Athens. Even though it was only a few weeks ago, our thoughts have already turned to the meeting scheduled for November 2007 in Rio de Janeiro, and this email will, we hope, serve as a useful start point in discussions for how we can make the 2007 IGF meeting even more of a success. In particular, we would like to concern ourselves with the online element of the IGF, by which we mean the information, interaction and collaboration achieved both before and during the meeting, as well as the explicit intentions of many groups at the IGF to use the Internet itself to help prepare for the next IGF. One of the areas that can certainly be improved upon is an online presence that acts as an authoritative source of information about the Rio meeting, as well as promote the IGF as a venue, and facilitate multi-stakeholder discussion. We would argue that the system in place for the Athens meeting, where there were three websites - a host site, an official IGF site, and an unofficial collaboration site - was a good starting point but led to some degree of confusion and can be improved upon in time for the Rio meeting. There is a risk that since important information has a tendency to change rapidly during this type of meeting, that the updating of such information (and its replication across several sites) can mean valuable time, effort and resources are spent unnecessarily maintaining several stores of data. In consequence, we would like to discuss ways in which the most can be made out of pooled resources. In many respects such an effort would mirror the very multi-stakeholder collaboration that has become the IGF's hallmark. Our current feeling is that the optimal solution would be to settle upon a single website, or perhaps more accurately, a single Internet address. Thanks to recent advances in Internet technology, it is now extremely simple and cost-effective to allow multiple users to work on different areas of a single website, with each area controlled by a different person, and each able to radically change the approach, content and appearance according to their particular needs. There are numerous advantages to this approach, not least that an outsider observer would only have to access a single Internet domain to find all the information they need. Those working within the space would also benefit from a sense of collaborative achievement, and since all the information would ultimately be contained on the same space and the same server, opportunities for the data itself to draw links would be massively enhanced. Other benefits include the fact that information could be more rapidly, and universally, adjusted, lifting the burden off one individual to keep permanently up-to-date. Equally, with areas outside someone's specific field being dealt with by that area's best representative, it gives everyone the opportunity to concentrate on where they excel, with the net effect that better and more accurate information will be produced across the board. This process may also have the beneficial effect of attracting experts from under-represented fields to help contribute, hugely increasing the value of such a site in terms of information resources and credibility. We feel sure that a new platform can be developed along these lines, but it will require some discussion among all those involved so everyone can be sure of the others' concerns and needs, and to ensure they are adequately addressed. Thanks to the flexibility of Internet technology we believe it is entirely possible that all issues can be dealt with, making such discussion all the more worthwhile since it can be virtually assured of a positive outcome. In the meantime of course, the value of holding such discussions could prove immeasurably valuable for future communication between stakeholders. It is worth stressing that under the scheme broadly envisaged above, it would still be possible for the Secretariat and the host country's government to maintain exclusive control of particular sections of the site which are to contain official information. This could be branded in whatever way was deemed desirable to draw a clear distinction between it and other areas of the site. At the same time, both the Secretariat and the host government would benefit from the legion of volunteers that would take menial and uncontroversial tasks off their hands. Those signed below would like to volunteer our services to helping this process get on its feet and take it forward. We believe such a process would be incredibly worthwhile and have a broad positive impact across all stakeholders and on the IGF itself. There are a number of issues to be tackled, not least the question of hosting such a site (although business would appear to be a good starting point), but also that of agreeing a URL and what the basic approach should be when allocating authority. And there is of course the issue of ensuring that all those interested in such a proposal are made aware of discussions before they happen. At this stage, however, we ask only that you consider the proposal and get back with your considerations and concerns. Yours sincerely, -- Jeremy Malcolm LLB (Hons) B Com Internet and Open Source lawyer, IT consultant, actor host -t NAPTR 1.0.8.0.3.1.2.9.8.1.6.e164.org|awk -F! '{print $3}' ____________________________________________________________ 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 From wnew at ip-watch.ch Wed Nov 15 04:18:28 2006 From: wnew at ip-watch.ch (William New) Date: Wed, 15 Nov 2006 10:18:28 +0100 Subject: [governance] FW: [domain-decisions] Decisions November 15, 2006 Message-ID: <4513C5E200D5F749@mail13.bluewin.ch> (added by postmaster@bluewin.ch) sorry, a little unrelated, just found it interesting from an internationalized domain name standpoint that in addition to its usual granting of names to gamblers, spammers and pharmaceutical companies, WIPO has granted a couple of names in non-western script. William New, Intellectual Property Watch Geneva _____ From: Arbiter Webmaster [mailto:arbiter.webmaster at wipo.int] Sent: mercredi, 15. novembre 2006 08:05 To: domain-updates at lists.wipo.int Subject: [domain-decisions] Decisions November 15, 2006 WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center Most recently notified WIPO Domain Name Decision(s): http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/decisions/html/2006/dch2006-0017.html bosshard.ch > Complaint denied http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/decisions/html/2006/d2006-1218.html bhpbiliton.com > Transfer http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/decisions/html/2006/d2006-1183.html fifththirdonlinebanking.com > Transfer http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/decisions/html/2006/d2006-1134.html 辉瑞.com > Transfer http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/decisions/html/2006/d2006-1065.html discount-harrods.com > Transfer http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/decisions/html/2006/d2006-0979.html sandshotelmacao.com sandshotelmacau.com > Transfer http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/decisions/html/2006/d2006-0704.html 苏富比.com > Transfer Search WIPO UDRP decisions by indexed terms, domain name, or case number: http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/search WIPO Overview of WIPO Panel Views on Selected UDRP Questions: http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/search/overview _____ ***NEW*** The WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center Plans to Hold the Following Events: - WIPO Workshop for Mediators in Intellectual Property Disputes, Geneva, June 11 and 12, 2007 - WIPO Advanced Workshop for Mediators in Intellectual Property Disputes, Geneva, June 14 and 15, 2007 Program information and pre-registration: http://www.wipo.int//amc/en/events/workshops/2007/mediation The WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center is an international provider of non-profit services for the out-of-court resolution of commercial disputes. The Center specializes in cases arising out of technology and intellectual property transactions, such as licensing, R&D and distribution agreements. WIPO arbitration and mediation contract clauses: http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/arbitration/contract-clauses WIPO Internet domain name dispute resolution: http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains To unsubscribe or update your subscription details, please go to http://www. wipo.int/amc/en/subscribe/decisions , or send an email to arbiter.webmaster at wipo.int -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: wi_logo2.gif Type: image/gif Size: 888 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: message-footer.txt URL: From nyangkweagien at gmail.com Wed Nov 15 04:47:03 2006 From: nyangkweagien at gmail.com (Nyangkwe Agien Aaron) Date: Wed, 15 Nov 2006 10:47:03 +0100 Subject: [governance] Revised version of letter to IGF re Web site In-Reply-To: <455A976D.3010903@Malcolm.id.au> References: <455A976D.3010903@Malcolm.id.au> Message-ID: Hi all I endorse the letter but cannot sign it because of the last but two paragraph. This paragraph requires availability from a signatory. It is regrettable that I'll not be availabe for further inputs. Moreover, the idea is lofty, why my endorsement. I encourage more big minds on this forum, with ample space in their tight schedules, to sign. Nyangkwe On 11/15/06, Jeremy Malcolm wrote: > Here is a much revised (and more polite) version of the proposed letter > re the IGF Web site that I sent in draft a few days ago, courtesy of > Kieren McCarthy. So far we have five people who are putting their names > to the letter, so here is a last chance for those who would like to add > their names also, to say so. I intend on one of us sending it to the > Secretariat on Friday. > > ----------------- > > Dear IGF Secretariat, > > Congratulations again on the tremendous success of the first meeting of > the Internet Governance Forum in Athens. > > Even though it was only a few weeks ago, our thoughts have already > turned to the meeting scheduled for November 2007 in Rio de Janeiro, and > this email will, we hope, serve as a useful start point in discussions > for how we can make the 2007 IGF meeting even more of a success. > > In particular, we would like to concern ourselves with the online > element of the IGF, by which we mean the information, interaction and > collaboration achieved both before and during the meeting, as well as > the explicit intentions of many groups at the IGF to use the Internet > itself to help prepare for the next IGF. > > One of the areas that can certainly be improved upon is an online > presence that acts as an authoritative source of information about the > Rio meeting, as well as promote the IGF as a venue, and facilitate > multi-stakeholder discussion. > > We would argue that the system in place for the Athens meeting, where > there were three websites - a host site, an official IGF site, and an > unofficial collaboration site - was a good starting point but led to > some degree of confusion and can be improved upon in time for the Rio > meeting. > > There is a risk that since important information has a tendency to > change rapidly during this type of meeting, that the updating of such > information (and its replication across several sites) can mean valuable > time, effort and resources are spent unnecessarily maintaining several > stores of data. In consequence, we would like to discuss ways in which > the most can be made out of pooled resources. In many respects such an > effort would mirror the very multi-stakeholder collaboration that has > become the IGF's hallmark. > > Our current feeling is that the optimal solution would be to settle upon > a single website, or perhaps more accurately, a single Internet address. > Thanks to recent advances in Internet technology, it is now extremely > simple and cost-effective to allow multiple users to work on different > areas of a single website, with each area controlled by a different > person, and each able to radically change the approach, content and > appearance according to their particular needs. > > There are numerous advantages to this approach, not least that an > outsider observer would only have to access a single Internet domain to > find all the information they need. Those working within the space would > also benefit from a sense of collaborative achievement, and since all > the information would ultimately be contained on the same space and the > same server, opportunities for the data itself to draw links would be > massively enhanced. > > Other benefits include the fact that information could be more rapidly, > and universally, adjusted, lifting the burden off one individual to keep > permanently up-to-date. Equally, with areas outside someone's specific > field being dealt with by that area's best representative, it gives > everyone the opportunity to concentrate on where they excel, with the > net effect that better and more accurate information will be produced > across the board. This process may also have the beneficial effect of > attracting experts from under-represented fields to help contribute, > hugely increasing the value of such a site in terms of information > resources and credibility. > > We feel sure that a new platform can be developed along these lines, but > it will require some discussion among all those involved so everyone can > be sure of the others' concerns and needs, and to ensure they are > adequately addressed. Thanks to the flexibility of Internet technology > we believe it is entirely possible that all issues can be dealt with, > making such discussion all the more worthwhile since it can be virtually > assured of a positive outcome. In the meantime of course, the value of > holding such discussions could prove immeasurably valuable for future > communication between stakeholders. > > It is worth stressing that under the scheme broadly envisaged above, it > would still be possible for the Secretariat and the host country's > government to maintain exclusive control of particular sections of the > site which are to contain official information. This could be branded in > whatever way was deemed desirable to draw a clear distinction between it > and other areas of the site. At the same time, both the Secretariat and > the host government would benefit from the legion of volunteers that > would take menial and uncontroversial tasks off their hands. > > Those signed below would like to volunteer our services to helping this > process get on its feet and take it forward. We believe such a process > would be incredibly worthwhile and have a broad positive impact across > all stakeholders and on the IGF itself. > > There are a number of issues to be tackled, not least the question of > hosting such a site (although business would appear to be a good > starting point), but also that of agreeing a URL and what the basic > approach should be when allocating authority. And there is of course the > issue of ensuring that all those interested in such a proposal are made > aware of discussions before they happen. > > At this stage, however, we ask only that you consider the proposal and > get back with your considerations and concerns. > > Yours sincerely, > > > -- > Jeremy Malcolm LLB (Hons) B Com > Internet and Open Source lawyer, IT consultant, actor > host -t NAPTR 1.0.8.0.3.1.2.9.8.1.6.e164.org|awk -F! '{print $3}' > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > -- Aaron Agien Nyangkwe Journalist/Outcome Mapper Special Assistant To The President ASAFE P.O.Box 5213 Douala-Cameroon Tel. 237 337 50 22 Fax. 237 342 29 70 ____________________________________________________________ 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 From kierenmccarthy at gmail.com Wed Nov 15 05:47:15 2006 From: kierenmccarthy at gmail.com (Kieren McCarthy) Date: Wed, 15 Nov 2006 10:47:15 -0000 Subject: [governance] Revised version of letter to IGF re Web site References: <455A976D.3010903@Malcolm.id.au> Message-ID: <001f01c708a3$6b004620$0200a8c0@HOME> Nyangkwe, It seems a terrible shame not to have you on this letter because of your experience and particuarly since you represent stakeholders that are usually under-represented and may benefit most from what we're trying to achieve. If it is only the statement about providing services that concerns you, I'm sure we can reword it, and I'm sure there will be others with the same concern that may also then join up. We certainly do not want people to feel as if this process would be an obligation. It will work much better if people are able to review what is going on and make comments and suggestions only when they feel what they have to say is important. Can I suggest the following change. And would you be willing to put your name to the letter if this change was made? --------------------------- Original >> Those signed below would like to volunteer our services to helping this >> process get on its feet and take it forward. We believe such a process >> would be incredibly worthwhile and have a broad positive impact across >> all stakeholders and on the IGF itself. -------------------------- New Those signed below would like to ***express our resolve*** in helping this process get on its feet and take it forward. We believe such a process would be incredibly worthwhile and have a broad positive impact across all stakeholders and on the IGF itself. ------------------------- Kieren ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Kieren McCarthy -------------------------- Homepages: http://www.kierenmccarthy.me.uk Blog: http://www.kierenmccarthy.co.uk/ ----- Original Message ----- From: "Nyangkwe Agien Aaron" To: ; "Jeremy Malcolm" Sent: Wednesday, November 15, 2006 9:47 AM Subject: Re: [governance] Revised version of letter to IGF re Web site > Hi all > > I endorse the letter but cannot sign it because of the last but two > paragraph. This paragraph requires availability from a signatory. It > is regrettable that I'll not be availabe for further inputs. Moreover, > the idea is lofty, why my endorsement. > I encourage more big minds on this forum, with ample space in their > tight schedules, to sign. > Nyangkwe > ____________________________________________________________ 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 From bendrath at zedat.fu-berlin.de Wed Nov 15 07:36:57 2006 From: bendrath at zedat.fu-berlin.de (Ralf Bendrath) Date: Wed, 15 Nov 2006 13:36:57 +0100 Subject: [governance] Revised version of letter to IGF re Web site In-Reply-To: <455A976D.3010903@Malcolm.id.au> References: <455A976D.3010903@Malcolm.id.au> Message-ID: <455B09E9.4090407@zedat.fu-berlin.de> Nice letter. Thanks, Jeremy and Kieren. One suggestion: Give one or two more concrete examples. An obvious one is the space for dynamic coalitions. It would be great to have e.g. an URL like for the dynamic coalition on privacy, where we would have CMS, wiki and FTP access for coalition coordinators or members. I am not a techie, so I won't volunteer to offer the service here, but I have some demand right now as a coalition bootstrapper. One more hint: In addition to sending letters, people can just drop a private mail to or even call Markus Kummer. An official letter needs an official response, which sometimes can complicate things. (But this specific letter should not be a problem in that regard.) Best, Ralf ____________________________________________________________ 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 From ajp at glocom.ac.jp Wed Nov 15 08:00:35 2006 From: ajp at glocom.ac.jp (Adam Peake) Date: Wed, 15 Nov 2006 22:00:35 +0900 Subject: [governance] Revised version of letter to IGF re Web site In-Reply-To: <455B09E9.4090407@zedat.fu-berlin.de> References: <455A976D.3010903@Malcolm.id.au> <455B09E9.4090407@zedat.fu-berlin.de> Message-ID: At 1:36 PM +0100 11/15/06, Ralf Bendrath wrote: >Nice letter. Thanks, Jeremy and Kieren. > >One suggestion: Give one or two more concrete examples. An obvious >one is the space for dynamic coalitions. It would be great to have >e.g. an URL like for >the dynamic coalition on privacy, where we would have CMS, wiki and >FTP access for coalition coordinators or members. My guess --and this is just a personal opinion, I have no insight on this from any discussion in the advisory group-- is that the requests in the letter will be too much at the moment. To have the coalitions listed on the IGF site and associated with the IGF is enough for now. You can brand them as IGF (just as the workshops took on the brand.) This is a great success (and not so easily achieved.) The IGF is on track to become what people dreamed of it -- so let it grow, but don't rub our vision and success in other stakeholders faces. Asking for a single website now is most likely asking for too much. Let the coalitions grow, they will be successful and will slowly come in from this arms length relationship with the formal process. By all means offer to help. Why not just leave it at that. A letter of thanks to the secretariat and Mr Desai, and offer the caucus' support and help, particularly in developing the website and online tools. See what the reply is and take it from there. Think Ralf may be right about official sounding letters requiring official replies. It's still the UN. Adam >I am not a techie, so I won't volunteer to offer the service here, >but I have some demand right now as a coalition bootstrapper. > >One more hint: In addition to sending letters, people can just drop >a private mail to or even call Markus Kummer. An official letter >needs an official response, which sometimes can complicate things. >(But this specific letter should not be a problem in that regard.) > >Best, Ralf >____________________________________________________________ >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 ____________________________________________________________ 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 From nyangkweagien at gmail.com Wed Nov 15 08:17:40 2006 From: nyangkweagien at gmail.com (Nyangkwe Agien Aaron) Date: Wed, 15 Nov 2006 14:17:40 +0100 Subject: [governance] Revised version of letter to IGF re Web site In-Reply-To: References: <455A976D.3010903@Malcolm.id.au> <455B09E9.4090407@zedat.fu-berlin.de> Message-ID: Kieren I am cooling off, since you got my point 5/5. That is another credit to this forum. Forumites to heed and listen and to others, that is what makes results of what comes out from here purpose oriented all the time. I look forward to a positive outcome to the letter so as to enable a "forward march" Let's get on board. Warmly Nyangkwe On 11/15/06, Adam Peake wrote: > At 1:36 PM +0100 11/15/06, Ralf Bendrath wrote: > >Nice letter. Thanks, Jeremy and Kieren. > > > >One suggestion: Give one or two more concrete examples. An obvious > >one is the space for dynamic coalitions. It would be great to have > >e.g. an URL like for > >the dynamic coalition on privacy, where we would have CMS, wiki and > >FTP access for coalition coordinators or members. > > > My guess --and this is just a personal opinion, I have no insight on > this from any discussion in the advisory group-- is that the requests > in the letter will be too much at the moment. > > To have the coalitions listed on the IGF site and associated with the > IGF is enough for now. You can brand them as IGF (just as the > workshops took on the brand.) This is a great success (and not so > easily achieved.) The IGF is on track to become what people dreamed > of it -- so let it grow, but don't rub our vision and success in > other stakeholders faces. > > Asking for a single website now is most likely asking for too much. > Let the coalitions grow, they will be successful and will slowly come > in from this arms length relationship with the formal process. > > By all means offer to help. Why not just leave it at that. A letter > of thanks to the secretariat and Mr Desai, and offer the caucus' > support and help, particularly in developing the website and online > tools. See what the reply is and take it from there. > > Think Ralf may be right about official sounding letters requiring > official replies. It's still the UN. > > Adam > > > > > >I am not a techie, so I won't volunteer to offer the service here, > >but I have some demand right now as a coalition bootstrapper. > > > >One more hint: In addition to sending letters, people can just drop > >a private mail to or even call Markus Kummer. An official letter > >needs an official response, which sometimes can complicate things. > >(But this specific letter should not be a problem in that regard.) > > > >Best, Ralf > >____________________________________________________________ > >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 > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > -- Aaron Agien Nyangkwe Journalist/Outcome Mapper Special Assistant To The President ASAFE Tel. 237 337 50 22 Fax. 237 342 29 70 ____________________________________________________________ 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 From nne75 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 15 09:15:27 2006 From: nne75 at yahoo.com (Nnenna) Date: Wed, 15 Nov 2006 06:15:27 -0800 (PST) Subject: [governance] Revised version of letter to IGF re Web site - Few questions In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20061115141528.34219.qmail@web50211.mail.yahoo.com> Hi people, just a few stuff that I would like to be cleared on. >I am not a techie, so I won't volunteer to offer the service here, >but I have some demand right now as a coalition bootstrapper. Is the service that is needed purely technical? I did use the community portal to track events during Athens. I also would like to be of help, maybe in content and operationability appraisal but not hard core tech. Is this letter from the Coalition or the individuals? It will be good to clarify. Will individuals endorsing the letter be understood to be members of the coalition? How far will a service to the IGF last? The letter does not clearly indicate so. All for now Nnenna --------------------------------- Cheap Talk? Check out Yahoo! Messenger's low PC-to-Phone call rates. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: message-footer.txt URL: From Jeremy at Malcolm.id.au Wed Nov 15 09:30:31 2006 From: Jeremy at Malcolm.id.au (Jeremy Malcolm) Date: Wed, 15 Nov 2006 22:30:31 +0800 Subject: [governance] Revised version of letter to IGF re Web site - Few questions In-Reply-To: <20061115141528.34219.qmail@web50211.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20061115141528.34219.qmail@web50211.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <455B2487.50805@Malcolm.id.au> Nnenna wrote: > 1. Is the service that is needed purely technical? I did use the > community portal to track events during Athens. I also would like > to be of help, maybe in content and operationability appraisal but > not hard core tech. That would be ideal. Thank you! Nobody is committing themselves to anything yet, anyhow. > 2. Is this letter from the Coalition or the individuals? It will be > good to clarify. Will individuals endorsing the letter be > understood to be members of the coalition? Just individuals, it's too hard otherwise... and not really necessary. This is intended as a pretty informal document. But for it to come from just one person would have made it too easy to ignore. > 3. How far will a service to the IGF last? The letter does not > clearly indicate so. It will evolve over time, no doubt, but we would like to be setting something in place that could carry on for the term of the IGF's mandate. In response to the suggestion that we are asking too much, I'd rather ask for too much, if I strongly believe in it, than too little. Did Amnesty worry about how much they were asking for before presenting their irrepressible.info petition? (Sorry, rant off now.) -- Jeremy Malcolm LLB (Hons) B Com Internet and Open Source lawyer, IT consultant, actor host -t NAPTR 1.0.8.0.3.1.2.9.8.1.6.e164.org|awk -F! '{print $3}' ____________________________________________________________ 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 From ajp at glocom.ac.jp Wed Nov 15 11:26:26 2006 From: ajp at glocom.ac.jp (Adam Peake) Date: Thu, 16 Nov 2006 01:26:26 +0900 Subject: [governance] Revised version of letter to IGF re Web site - Few questions In-Reply-To: <455B2487.50805@Malcolm.id.au> References: <20061115141528.34219.qmail@web50211.mail.yahoo.com> <455B2487.50805@Malcolm.id.au> Message-ID: Nope, Amnesty didn't worry about much before rolling up in Athens. Anyway, you could well be right. Secretariat's given space for the community section, there's already menu link to the coalitions from the main page www.intgovforum.org, workshop reports (people really should get on and submit those) are online, so why not the coalitions. But, if it were my coalition, I'd prefer to start with rather than with a links out to pages controlled and owned by the coalition. As more coalitions send in information the flat listing page could soon be pretty unusable (lengthy.) Individual pages (of some kind) make sense anyway you look at it. Adam On 11/15/06, Jeremy Malcolm wrote: > Nnenna wrote: > > 1. Is the service that is needed purely technical? I did use the > > community portal to track events during Athens. I also would like > > to be of help, maybe in content and operationability appraisal but > > not hard core tech. > > That would be ideal. Thank you! Nobody is committing themselves to > anything yet, anyhow. > > > 2. Is this letter from the Coalition or the individuals? It will be > > good to clarify. Will individuals endorsing the letter be > > understood to be members of the coalition? > > Just individuals, it's too hard otherwise... and not really necessary. > This is intended as a pretty informal document. But for it to come from > just one person would have made it too easy to ignore. > > > 3. How far will a service to the IGF last? The letter does not > > clearly indicate so. > > It will evolve over time, no doubt, but we would like to be setting > something in place that could carry on for the term of the IGF's mandate. > > In response to the suggestion that we are asking too much, I'd rather > ask for too much, if I strongly believe in it, than too little. Did > Amnesty worry about how much they were asking for before presenting > their irrepressible.info petition? (Sorry, rant off now.) > > -- > Jeremy Malcolm LLB (Hons) B Com > Internet and Open Source lawyer, IT consultant, actor > host -t NAPTR 1.0.8.0.3.1.2.9.8.1.6.e164.org|awk -F! '{print $3}' > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > ____________________________________________________________ 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 From goldstein_david at yahoo.com.au Wed Nov 15 15:27:03 2006 From: goldstein_david at yahoo.com.au (David Goldstein) Date: Wed, 15 Nov 2006 12:27:03 -0800 (PST) Subject: [governance] Revised version of letter to IGF re Web site - Few questions Message-ID: <20061115202704.5300.qmail@web54112.mail.yahoo.com> Adam, I beg to differ on Amnesty's interest in online censorship and human rights issues. They've had a long interest, although admittedly it's not as high as other issues. I can recall news releases over the years on issues. The irresponsible.info is a leap up though. David ----- Original Message ---- From: Adam Peake To: governance at lists.cpsr.org Sent: Thursday, 16 November, 2006 3:26:26 AM Subject: Re: [governance] Revised version of letter to IGF re Web site - Few questions Nope, Amnesty didn't worry about much before rolling up in Athens. Anyway, you could well be right. Secretariat's given space for the community section, there's already menu link to the coalitions from the main page www.intgovforum.org, workshop reports (people really should get on and submit those) are online, so why not the coalitions. But, if it were my coalition, I'd prefer to start with rather than with a links out to pages controlled and owned by the coalition. As more coalitions send in information the flat listing page could soon be pretty unusable (lengthy.) Individual pages (of some kind) make sense anyway you look at it. Adam On 11/15/06, Jeremy Malcolm wrote: > Nnenna wrote: > > 1. Is the service that is needed purely technical? I did use the > > community portal to track events during Athens. I also would like > > to be of help, maybe in content and operationability appraisal but > > not hard core tech. > > That would be ideal. Thank you! Nobody is committing themselves to > anything yet, anyhow. > > > 2. Is this letter from the Coalition or the individuals? It will be > > good to clarify. Will individuals endorsing the letter be > > understood to be members of the coalition? > > Just individuals, it's too hard otherwise... and not really necessary. > This is intended as a pretty informal document. But for it to come from > just one person would have made it too easy to ignore. > > > 3. How far will a service to the IGF last? The letter does not > > clearly indicate so. > > It will evolve over time, no doubt, but we would like to be setting > something in place that could carry on for the term of the IGF's mandate. > > In response to the suggestion that we are asking too much, I'd rather > ask for too much, if I strongly believe in it, than too little. Did > Amnesty worry about how much they were asking for before presenting > their irrepressible.info petition? (Sorry, rant off now.) > > -- > Jeremy Malcolm LLB (Hons) B Com > Internet and Open Source lawyer, IT consultant, actor > host -t NAPTR 1.0.8.0.3.1.2.9.8.1.6.e164.org|awk -F! '{print $3}' > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > ____________________________________________________________ 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 Send instant messages to your online friends http://au.messenger.yahoo.com ____________________________________________________________ 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 From bfausett at internet.law.pro Wed Nov 15 17:01:55 2006 From: bfausett at internet.law.pro (Bret Fausett) Date: Wed, 15 Nov 2006 14:01:55 -0800 Subject: [governance] Conference: Internet and the Law In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Sylvia, as near as I can tell this is some sort of scam. They are even trying to charge speakers mandatory "travel insurance" and other "fees" for the privilege of speaking. I'd skip it. On 10/5/06 9:50 AM, "Sylvia Caras" wrote: > Is anyone here planning to go to this next April? I had hoped to > attend the whole thing but there are no registration scholarships > being offered. I'm wondering whether to just go for one day and then > do some touring in the area. > > Sylvia > > Center for International Legal Studies: > > Sessions will deal with topics such as Internet Governance beyond the > Nation State, Cyber Regulation, Convergence of Telecommunications, PC > and Broadcast; Competition; Deregulation; Free Speech vs. > Defamation/Hate Speech, Privacy vs. Security; Consumer Protection, > Cryptography, Domain Name, Open Source, Patents, Copyright, > Trademarks, Cybercrime and Terrorism, E-Commerce, Legal Liability and > e-Transactions, Property and Piracy, Telemarketing Fraud et. al. // An > informal networking dinner kicks off proceedings on Wednesday, 25 > April. The Thursday dinner and reception is hosted at the William J. > Clinton Presidential Library and Museum and will include private tours > of the museum. Friday is open for optional hospitality and individual > dinners and the symposium will conclude Saturday with a dinner at the > Peabody Hotel. > > http://cils.net/conferences/conference.php?ConferenceID=183&&PHPSESSID=0911582 > 329da21792f1b7aed04188e7a > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 ____________________________________________________________ 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 From veni at veni.com Wed Nov 15 18:05:46 2006 From: veni at veni.com (Veni Markovski) Date: Wed, 15 Nov 2006 18:05:46 -0500 Subject: [governance] Conference: Internet and the Law In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <455b9d53.2ac1cf97.7ff1.7ca5@mx.google.com> I also thought it's a scam. However, I spent some time on the phone with different Arkanzas institutions; it took a while, but at the end I found out someone who said they have indeed planned this event. However, I didn't get confirmation by e-mail, I believe. If someone has confirmation by e-mail from somoene in Arkanzas, please, post it here. veni At 02:01 PM 15.11.2006 '?.'Ъ▄Ж -0800, Bret Fausett wrote: >Sylvia, as near as I can tell this is some sort of scam. They are even >trying to charge speakers mandatory "travel insurance" and other "fees" for >the privilege of speaking. I'd skip it. > > >On 10/5/06 9:50 AM, "Sylvia Caras" wrote: > > Is anyone here planning to go to this next April? I had hoped to > > attend the whole thing but there are no registration scholarships > > being offered. I'm wondering whether to just go for one day and then > > do some touring in the area. > > > > Sylvia > > > > Center for International Legal Studies: > > > > Sessions will deal with topics such as Internet Governance beyond the > > Nation State, Cyber Regulation, Convergence of Telecommunications, PC > > and Broadcast; Competition; Deregulation; Free Speech vs. > > Defamation/Hate Speech, Privacy vs. Security; Consumer Protection, > > Cryptography, Domain Name, Open Source, Patents, Copyright, > > Trademarks, Cybercrime and Terrorism, E-Commerce, Legal Liability and > > e-Transactions, Property and Piracy, Telemarketing Fraud et. al. // An > > informal networking dinner kicks off proceedings on Wednesday, 25 > > April. The Thursday dinner and reception is hosted at the William J. > > Clinton Presidential Library and Museum and will include private tours > > of the museum. Friday is open for optional hospitality and individual > > dinners and the symposium will conclude Saturday with a dinner at the > > Peabody Hotel. > > > > > http://cils.net/conferences/conference.php?ConferenceID=183&&PHPSESSID=0911582 > > 329da21792f1b7aed04188e7a > > ____________________________________________________________ > > 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 > > >____________________________________________________________ >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 Sincerely, Veni Markovski http://www.veni.com check also my blog: http://blog.veni.com ____________________________________________________________ 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 From bfausett at internet.law.pro Wed Nov 15 19:08:15 2006 From: bfausett at internet.law.pro (Bret Fausett) Date: Wed, 15 Nov 2006 16:08:15 -0800 Subject: [governance] Conference: Internet and the Law In-Reply-To: <455b9d53.2ac1cf97.7ff1.7ca5@mx.google.com> Message-ID: I think they really do have the Clinton Center reserved, but anyone can reserve it for a fee. I don't believe, however, that the Clinton Center is sponsoring it or is otherwise affiliated with the organization of it. > I also thought it's a scam. > However, I spent some time on the phone with > different Arkanzas institutions; it took a while, > but at the end I found out someone who said they > have indeed planned this event. However, I didn't > get confirmation by e-mail, I believe. > > If someone has confirmation by e-mail from > somoene in Arkanzas, please, post it here. > > veni > >> Sylvia, as near as I can tell this is some sort of scam. They are even >> trying to charge speakers mandatory "travel insurance" and other "fees" for >> the privilege of speaking. I'd skip it. >> >> ____________________________________________________________ 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 From wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de Thu Nov 16 03:12:52 2006 From: wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Wolfgang_Kleinw=E4chter?=) Date: Thu, 16 Nov 2006 09:12:52 +0100 Subject: [governance] Civil Society and ITU References: <45531B9C.9060007@zedat.fu-berlin.de> <4554A77E.8070805@gmx.de> <45586AF9.7010009@zedat.fu-berlin.de> <008301c70725$6b6abc50$14b2a8c0@Stern> <3AEE633F500281489D5F3303731CE9F3043915@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> Message-ID: <3AEE633F500281489D5F3303731CE9F304392C@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> http://www.itu.int/plenipotentiary/2006/newsroom/highlights/13.html Wolfgang ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.cpsr.org To be removed from the list, send any message to: governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org For all list information and functions, see: http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance From kierenmccarthy at gmail.com Thu Nov 16 04:52:01 2006 From: kierenmccarthy at gmail.com (Kieren McCarthy) Date: Thu, 16 Nov 2006 09:52:01 -0000 Subject: [governance] Re: Letter to IGF Secretariat re website References: <455A976D.3010903@Malcolm.id.au> <455B09E9.4090407@zedat.fu-berlin.de> Message-ID: <00c401c70964$de56d280$0200a8c0@HOME> I think it may be worth reiterating the basic history and idea behind this letter. Jeremy Malcolm and myself (Kieren McCarthy) collaborated in the weeks leading up to the IGF on a website that would allow some degree of online participation into the process for the simple reason that a website didn't exist and we felt this was a very large hole in what was supposed to be an Internet Governance Forum. The resulting website at http://igf2006.info proved to be far more successful that even we had hoped to the extent that we had to move it onto the IGF's servers (thanks to a very helpful IGF secretariat) on the day before the conference opened, and then on the Wednesday demand was such that it overwhelmed even this service and the UN's hosting company had to shift it onto a bigger, faster server. This confirmed what we had suspected (especially considering word of our IGF site only emerged literally the day before the conference), which was that there was great value and demand for an online collaborative site. During the course of this process - which, let's be honest, was an experiment - a large number of people from across all stakeholders, government, business, civil society and so on expressed their gratitude to us for setting up the site and asked if they could become involved in something more structured for next year's IGF. Also, despite initial uncertainty, the IGF Secretariat grew to understand and appreciate the role that such a site could have for helping people collaborate with one another and with them. Nitin Desai specifically mentioned improving online collaboration next year in his chairman's summary. However it was clear even during the conference that people were having a hard time figuring out which of the three websites they should go to - the IGF official site, the Greek hosts website or our unofficial site. In many cases, information was repeated, in other cases you could only find vital information on one of the three. In brief discussions at the conference and subsequently, it struck a number of us that if we followed the example led by the new-found "dynamic coalitions" and pooled all our resources, that by the time of the Rio meeting we could all be working together on a single website to everyone's benefit. Now, we don't know what are going to be the practical concerns from the IGF Secretariat, from the host government, and from the other stakeholders that took only a small role in our unofficial site. We do know that there is real concern about the ability for people to control certain sections of a website, for obvious reasons. But we really do think that if we open up discussions we can work through whatever issues are thrown up, particularly since the technology for this sort of thing (all of it, we should note, open source) is now so flexible that it is just a matter of designing a structure around people's wishes. This letter therefore is intended to act as an invitiation to the IGF Secretariat, who are the lynchpin in this scenario, to consider our proposal. The hope is to make a good enough case that the IGF opens discussions over how to achieve it. We shall see where it goes from there. There is a balance to be struck here between speed and structure. To get this letter in as soon as possible means that we have longer to make such a coalition work. Equally, I understand that Markus Kummer will have some early initial discussions with the Brazilian organisers next month when he attends the ICANN meeting in Sao Paulo. So in that sense, it makes sense to get this letter to the IGF Secretariat so at least the thought is in their minds early on. The downside to this is that, as yet, we have a very loose coalition of people and no real structure for deciding how to proceed. The letter will hold the signatures of interested individuals that share the same vision. It is perhaps fortunate that these individuals are also highly capable and knowledgeable about these sorts of issues, but our hope is really to show the IGF Secretariat that this isn't just a whim, that people are serious about making this work and so hopefully it will carry more weight. As such I would encourage anyone that believes that all stakeholders should work together on the online side of the IGF (to my mind this is obvious) to put their name to the letter. If the UN/IGF Secretariat then thinks this is worthwhile pursuing, we will sort out the issues of structure later. Kieren ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Kieren McCarthy -------------------------- Homepages: http://www.kierenmccarthy.me.uk Blog: http://www.kierenmccarthy.co.uk/ ____________________________________________________________ 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 From nyangkweagien at gmail.com Thu Nov 16 07:51:27 2006 From: nyangkweagien at gmail.com (Nyangkwe Agien Aaron) Date: Thu, 16 Nov 2006 13:51:27 +0100 Subject: [governance] Re: Letter to IGF Secretariat re website In-Reply-To: <00c401c70964$de56d280$0200a8c0@HOME> References: <455A976D.3010903@Malcolm.id.au> <455B09E9.4090407@zedat.fu-berlin.de> <00c401c70964$de56d280$0200a8c0@HOME> Message-ID: "that this isn't just a whim, that people are serious" Nice tune from a go-getter. Kieren, your said it all in you mail and I do not see any possible action that could stymie the move. Strategically, I will advise more people to sign the letter while the issue of resources for input be a matter of later debate (like that raised by Nenna). This is because, the more they are signatures, the more louder the bell will ring and the possibility for the message being quickly understood is higher too. You can guess the outcome. Time waits for no one, said the Poet, so let us sign the letter. Nyangkwe On 11/16/06, Kieren McCarthy wrote: > I think it may be worth reiterating the basic history and idea behind this > letter. > > Jeremy Malcolm and myself (Kieren McCarthy) collaborated in the weeks > leading up to the IGF on a website that would allow some degree of online > participation into the process for the simple reason that a website didn't > exist and we felt this was a very large hole in what was supposed to be an > Internet Governance Forum. > > The resulting website at http://igf2006.info proved to be far more > successful that even we had hoped to the extent that we had to move it onto > the IGF's servers (thanks to a very helpful IGF secretariat) on the day > before the conference opened, and then on the Wednesday demand was such that > it overwhelmed even this service and the UN's hosting company had to shift > it onto a bigger, faster server. > > This confirmed what we had suspected (especially considering word of our IGF > site only emerged literally the day before the conference), which was that > there was great value and demand for an online collaborative site. > > During the course of this process - which, let's be honest, was an > experiment - a large number of people from across all stakeholders, > government, business, civil society and so on expressed their gratitude to > us for setting up the site and asked if they could become involved in > something more structured for next year's IGF. Also, despite initial > uncertainty, the IGF Secretariat grew to understand and appreciate the role > that such a site could have for helping people collaborate with one another > and with them. Nitin Desai specifically mentioned improving online > collaboration next year in his chairman's summary. > > However it was clear even during the conference that people were having a > hard time figuring out which of the three websites they should go to - the > IGF official site, the Greek hosts website or our unofficial site. In many > cases, information was repeated, in other cases you could only find vital > information on one of the three. > > In brief discussions at the conference and subsequently, it struck a number > of us that if we followed the example led by the new-found "dynamic > coalitions" and pooled all our resources, that by the time of the Rio > meeting we could all be working together on a single website to everyone's > benefit. > > Now, we don't know what are going to be the practical concerns from the IGF > Secretariat, from the host government, and from the other stakeholders that > took only a small role in our unofficial site. We do know that there is real > concern about the ability for people to control certain sections of a > website, for obvious reasons. But we really do think that if we open up > discussions we can work through whatever issues are thrown up, particularly > since the technology for this sort of thing (all of it, we should note, open > source) is now so flexible that it is just a matter of designing a structure > around people's wishes. > > This letter therefore is intended to act as an invitiation to the IGF > Secretariat, who are the lynchpin in this scenario, to consider our > proposal. The hope is to make a good enough case that the IGF opens > discussions over how to achieve it. We shall see where it goes from there. > > There is a balance to be struck here between speed and structure. To get > this letter in as soon as possible means that we have longer to make such a > coalition work. Equally, I understand that Markus Kummer will have some > early initial discussions with the Brazilian organisers next month when he > attends the ICANN meeting in Sao Paulo. So in that sense, it makes sense to > get this letter to the IGF Secretariat so at least the thought is in their > minds early on. > > The downside to this is that, as yet, we have a very loose coalition of > people and no real structure for deciding how to proceed. The letter will > hold the signatures of interested individuals that share the same vision. It > is perhaps fortunate that these individuals are also highly capable and > knowledgeable about these sorts of issues, but our hope is really to show > the IGF Secretariat that this isn't just a whim, that people are serious > about making this work and so hopefully it will carry more weight. > > As such I would encourage anyone that believes that all stakeholders should > work together on the online side of the IGF (to my mind this is obvious) to > put their name to the letter. If the UN/IGF Secretariat then thinks this is > worthwhile pursuing, we will sort out the issues of structure later. > > > > Kieren > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > Kieren McCarthy > -------------------------- > Homepages: http://www.kierenmccarthy.me.uk > Blog: http://www.kierenmccarthy.co.uk/ > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > -- Aaron Agien Nyangkwe Journalist/Outcome Mapper Special Assistant To The President ASAFE Tel. 237 337 50 22 Fax. 237 342 29 70 ____________________________________________________________ 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 From ldmisekfalkoff at gmail.com Thu Nov 16 09:44:21 2006 From: ldmisekfalkoff at gmail.com (l.d.misek-falkoff) Date: Thu, 16 Nov 2006 09:44:21 -0500 Subject: [governance] Re: Letter to IGF Secretariat re website In-Reply-To: <00c401c70964$de56d280$0200a8c0@HOME> References: <455A976D.3010903@Malcolm.id.au> <455B09E9.4090407@zedat.fu-berlin.de> <00c401c70964$de56d280$0200a8c0@HOME> Message-ID: <8cbfe7410611160644weda7d55h78e8cb72b3f9cbf3@mail.gmail.com> Dear Kieren, and greetings All: The *Respectful Interfaces* Programme of the Communications Coordination Committee for the U.N. endorses the multi-stakeholder approach online and off. Thank you for your good work, :) Best wishes, LDMF. P.S., Hi Jeremy, your *sidebars* at IGF-I Athens were so helpful too. [post read in pertinent part:] On 11/16/06, Kieren McCarthy wrote: > > I think it may be worth reiterating the basic history and idea behind this > letter. > > Jeremy Malcolm and myself (Kieren McCarthy) collaborated in the weeks > leading up to the IGF on a website that would allow some degree of online > participation into the process for the simple reason that a website didn't > exist and we felt this was a very large hole in what was supposed to be an > Internet Governance Forum... As such I would encourage anyone that believes that all stakeholders should > work together on the online side of the IGF (to my mind this is obvious) > to > put their name to the letter. If the UN/IGF Secretariat then thinks this > is > worthwhile pursuing, we will sort out the issues of structure later. [ldmfnote: please see original post]. Kieren > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > Kieren McCarthy > -------------------------- > Homepages: http://www.kierenmccarthy.me.uk > Blog: http://www.kierenmccarthy.co.uk/ > > -- > Dr. Linda D. Misek-Falkoff (Ph.D., J.D.) > (914) 769 3652 > InterNetizen, ARPANet-Internet 45+ years.. > For Identification here: > National Disability Party; Intl. Disability Caucus. Persons With Pain > International. > Officer and Member of the Board of Directors, Communications Coordination > Committee for the U.N., *Respectful Interfaces* [RESPITES] and > *International Forum For Respectful Interfaces* [IFFRI] - Achieving Dialogue > While Cherishing Diversity*; ... -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: message-footer.txt URL: From avri at acm.org Thu Nov 16 10:44:52 2006 From: avri at acm.org (Avri Doria) Date: Thu, 16 Nov 2006 07:44:52 -0800 Subject: [governance] Nomcom Chair for Appeals Team Message-ID: Hi, As my tenure as interim coordinator draws to a close (2 more days) I am happy to announce that I have found a volunteer to lead the Nomcom to select appeals team. Izumi Aizu, well known to most of us and a long time IGC contributor, has agreed to take on the role as the non voting chair of the nomcom. I am sure he will be writing to the caucus in the next few days outlining how he will apply the guidelines contained in http:// www.igcaucus.org/nomcom-process.html including dates for the various processes. I have suggested that he try to shorten the process from 2 months, as indicated as optimal in the guidelines, but that will be his decision. It is difficult to shorten it by very much maybe a week or two. Please help make his job easier by first volunteering for the nomcom lottery and then later by suggesting good candidates for the appeals team. Thank you Izumi! 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 From jeremy.shtern at umontreal.ca Thu Nov 16 10:52:46 2006 From: jeremy.shtern at umontreal.ca (Jeremy Shtern) Date: Thu, 16 Nov 2006 10:52:46 -0500 Subject: [governance] Nomcom Chair for Appeals Team In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <455C894E.4010309@umontreal.ca> Thanks for following through on this Avri and for stepping up Izumi- a more honest honest broker would be hard to find. Please put me down as a volunteer for the nomcom lottery. Regards, Jeremy Shtern Avri Doria wrote: > Hi, > > As my tenure as interim coordinator draws to a close (2 more days) I > am happy to announce that I have found a volunteer to lead the Nomcom > to select appeals team. Izumi Aizu, well known to most of us and a > long time IGC contributor, has agreed to take on the role as the non > voting chair of the nomcom. > > I am sure he will be writing to the caucus in the next few days > outlining how he will apply the guidelines contained in > http://www.igcaucus.org/nomcom-process.html including dates for the > various processes. I have suggested that he try to shorten the > process from 2 months, as indicated as optimal in the guidelines, but > that will be his decision. It is difficult to shorten it by very much > maybe a week or two. > > Please help make his job easier by first volunteering for the nomcom > lottery and then later by suggesting good candidates for the appeals > team. > > Thank you Izumi! > > 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 > ____________________________________________________________ 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 From nyangkweagien at gmail.com Thu Nov 16 11:02:04 2006 From: nyangkweagien at gmail.com (Nyangkwe Agien Aaron) Date: Thu, 16 Nov 2006 17:02:04 +0100 Subject: [governance] Nomcom Chair for Appeals Team In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Welcome Izumi, 1. I hope you have fed yourself well enough in other to be to wear Avri's heavy shoes.Some kiddings anyway!! Izumi is such an available and articulate person whom I consider very fit to carry on and improve upon the coordination of the nomcom. His tank ofr ideas is aplus for the job. 2. We will be missing the ever present Avri. An ideal candidate for Minister of Foreign Affairs of her country. No more comment. Avri, it was nice having you on. Have a deserved rest as from d-day. Nyangkwe On 11/16/06, Avri Doria wrote: > Hi, > > As my tenure as interim coordinator draws to a close (2 more days) I > am happy to announce that I have found a volunteer to lead the > Nomcom to select appeals team. Izumi Aizu, well known to most of us > and a long time IGC contributor, has agreed to take on the role as > the non voting chair of the nomcom. > > I am sure he will be writing to the caucus in the next few days > outlining how he will apply the guidelines contained in http:// > www.igcaucus.org/nomcom-process.html including dates for the various > processes. I have suggested that he try to shorten the process from > 2 months, as indicated as optimal in the guidelines, but that will be > his decision. It is difficult to shorten it by very much maybe a > week or two. > > Please help make his job easier by first volunteering for the nomcom > lottery and then later by suggesting good candidates for the appeals > team. > > Thank you Izumi! > > 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 > -- Aaron Agien Nyangkwe Journalist/Outcome Mapper Special Assistant To The President ASAFE P.O.Box 5213 Douala-Cameroon Tel. 237 337 50 22 Fax. 237 342 29 70 ____________________________________________________________ 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 From avri at acm.org Thu Nov 16 14:23:59 2006 From: avri at acm.org (Avri Doria) Date: Thu, 16 Nov 2006 11:23:59 -0800 Subject: [governance] Nomcom Chair for Appeals Team In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <9C84E101-177F-437A-9117-EFEDC8DBD104@acm.org> On 16 nov 2006, at 08.02, Nyangkwe Agien Aaron wrote: > 2. We will be missing the ever present Avri. thank you, don't think you will be rid of me. i intend to remain active, and may even start arguing my political opinions again now that i will no longer have the self imposed constraint of dealing primarily with process issues. > An ideal candidate for > Minister of Foreign Affairs of her country. i cannot imagine that the country of my passport would feel that way. > No more comment. > Avri, it was nice having you on. thanks. i have valued carrying the role and have valued the voice of many in the caucus who contributed in doing all the work. a. Reminder 1.5 global days to vote. and 1 volunteer, 24 to go for nomcom selection. :-) ____________________________________________________________ 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 From aizu at anr.org Thu Nov 16 18:33:36 2006 From: aizu at anr.org (Izumi AIZU) Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2006 08:33:36 +0900 Subject: [governance] Nomcom Chair for Appeals Team In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Dear all, I have thought about this twice, with Avri's advice, and decided to try. I will do my best, and yes, 2-month time frame is rather long. Howeveer, we will face Christmas and New Year seasons which is quite challenging to achieve almost anything. So let me think how to overcome these and put dates to you soon. I really need your involvement, support and energy to mobilize our caucus again. First of all, I appeal you to vote for the coordinators position NOW. That is more important, at least now, than the nomcom for appeal team. I thank you for the warm words given, and above all, THANK Avri, for all of your contributions, and I am sure you stay active and support us just like you have done until today. izumi 2006/11/17, Avri Doria : > Hi, > > As my tenure as interim coordinator draws to a close (2 more days) I > am happy to announce that I have found a volunteer to lead the > Nomcom to select appeals team. Izumi Aizu, well known to most of us > and a long time IGC contributor, has agreed to take on the role as > the non voting chair of the nomcom. > > I am sure he will be writing to the caucus in the next few days > outlining how he will apply the guidelines contained in http:// > www.igcaucus.org/nomcom-process.html including dates for the various > processes. I have suggested that he try to shorten the process from > 2 months, as indicated as optimal in the guidelines, but that will be > his decision. It is difficult to shorten it by very much maybe a > week or two. > > Please help make his job easier by first volunteering for the nomcom > lottery and then later by suggesting good candidates for the appeals > team. > > Thank you Izumi! > > 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 From ca at rits.org.br Thu Nov 16 19:54:03 2006 From: ca at rits.org.br (Carlos Afonso) Date: Thu, 16 Nov 2006 22:54:03 -0200 Subject: [governance] IGF - updates In-Reply-To: <7A8DABF9-9741-44A2-8524-B0E807AF7E84@psg.com> References: <7A8DABF9-9741-44A2-8524-B0E807AF7E84@psg.com> Message-ID: <455D082B.2090602@rits.org.br> I agree with your personal viewpoint, Avri. frt rgds --c.a. Avri Doria wrote: > > > Hi, > > On 13 nov 2006, at 06.17, Jacques Berleur wrote: > >> Adam, >> There is only 1 Dynamic coalition at >> http://www.intgovforum.org/Dynamic%20Coalitions.php >> The others seem to be at >> http://igf2006.intgovforum.org/wiki/Dynamic_Coalitions >> Where is the official site of them? >> Many thanks, >> Jacques > > I am not sure I would use words like official with dynamic coalitions, > since every dynamic coalition will decide for itself what it wants to do > 'officially'. but I recommend that all dynamic coalition get listed at > www.intgovforum.org since that is the official IGF site and if one > wants people to be able to find them then that is one place we can be > sure they will go check. > > i think it is also probably a good idea for them to listed elsewhere as > possible. e.g. if this caucus decides to get involved in some, then we > should list the ones we support on our web site(s) > > 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 > > ____________________________________________________________ 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 From avri at acm.org Fri Nov 17 09:56:40 2006 From: avri at acm.org (Avri Doria) Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2006 06:56:40 -0800 Subject: [governance] Last Weekend of IGF coordinator vote Message-ID: <0DD08A0E-4107-41AF-AEA7-C415AFEC2637@acm.org> hi, In a previous email I was wrong when I said we only had 2 days left. I checked, and the vote is open until 19 November. So we still have a weekend left. So far 39 members of the IGC have voted. That is 22% of the 176 maximum possible voters and 58% of the 67 members who voted in the charter vote. To those who have voted already, thanks! To those who have yet to vote, please vote. The primer is repeated below for your convenience. a. ------------------------------------------- Instructions 0. address email to igc-voters at igcaucus.org 1. message MUST be plain text 2. the subject MUST be: coordinator vote 3. the first word MUST be: eVote 4. if your email adds a footer to messages add end as the last line of you ballot. e.g. eVote who end ----- Candidate 1. Parminder Singh Candidate 2. Vittorio Bertola ----- Several possible messages: to give 1 vote to each person (note this is a safe message to make sure you got it right - you can change your vote later - send in as many ballots as you like - it records the last): eVote 1. 1 2. 1 end to give 1 vote to candidate 1 and 2 votes to candidate 2 eVote 1. 1 2. 2 end to give 1 vote to candidate 2 and 2 votes to candidate 1 eVote 1. 2 2. 1 to give 0 votes to candidate 1 and 2 votes to candidate 2 eVote 1. 0 2. 2 end to give 0 votes to candidate 2 and 2 votes to candidate 1 eVote 1. 2 2. 0 end ---- to find out who has voted: message must still be plain text subject must still be: coordinator vote message must be: eVote who ____________________________________________________________ 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 From sylvia.caras at gmail.com Fri Nov 17 18:17:07 2006 From: sylvia.caras at gmail.com (Sylvia Caras) Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2006 15:17:07 -0800 Subject: [governance] Conference: Internet and the Law In-Reply-To: References: <455b9d53.2ac1cf97.7ff1.7ca5@mx.google.com> Message-ID: I appreciate the input. I've decided not to go, instead will spend my time/money on the Rio IGF. Sylvia ____________________________________________________________ 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 From declan at well.com Fri Nov 17 21:13:41 2006 From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh) Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2006 18:13:41 -0800 Subject: [governance] Conference: Internet and the Law In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <455E6C55.2080304@well.com> Yep. For instance you can reserve the National Press Club for a fee. Some UFO nutcases did it a few years ago (I got death threats for an article I wrote about them). Doesn't mean they're legit. Any Internet & the law conference worth going to (and there are dozens) will have some interesting keynotes and some recognizable names. This one doesn't. I'd avoid it. ILPF is a better bet if you want that kind of stuff, but CFP is probably more along the lines of what you'd want to go to. It's in Montreal next year and should be a good trip as long as it's not too cold. -Declan Bret Fausett wrote: > I think they really do have the Clinton Center reserved, but anyone can > reserve it for a fee. I don't believe, however, that the Clinton Center is > sponsoring it or is otherwise affiliated with the organization of it. > > >> I also thought it's a scam. >> However, I spent some time on the phone with >> different Arkanzas institutions; it took a while, >> but at the end I found out someone who said they >> have indeed planned this event. However, I didn't >> get confirmation by e-mail, I believe. >> >> If someone has confirmation by e-mail from >> somoene in Arkanzas, please, post it here. >> >> veni >> >>> Sylvia, as near as I can tell this is some sort of scam. They are even >>> trying to charge speakers mandatory "travel insurance" and other "fees" for >>> the privilege of speaking. I'd skip it. >>> >>> > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > ____________________________________________________________ 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 From baptista at cynikal.net Sun Nov 19 02:02:20 2006 From: baptista at cynikal.net (Joe Baptista) Date: Sun, 19 Nov 2006 02:02:20 -0500 Subject: [governance] Conference: Internet and the Law In-Reply-To: <455E6C55.2080304@well.com> References: <455E6C55.2080304@well.com> Message-ID: <4560017C.1060205@cynikal.net> Declan McCullagh wrote: > Yep. For instance you can reserve the National Press Club for a fee. > Some UFO nutcases did it a few years ago (I got death threats for an > article I wrote about them). Doesn't mean they're legit. > > Any Internet & the law conference worth going to (and there are > dozens) will have some interesting keynotes and some recognizable > names. This one doesn't. I'd avoid it. Yes we know. You've gotten complacent in your presumption you actually know whats going on. Hopefully you'll experience an eclipse of vigor in your old age. regards joe baptista > > ILPF is a better bet if you want that kind of stuff, but CFP is > probably more along the lines of what you'd want to go to. It's in > Montreal next year and should be a good trip as long as it's not too > cold. > > -Declan > > > > Bret Fausett wrote: > >> I think they really do have the Clinton Center reserved, but anyone can >> reserve it for a fee. I don't believe, however, that the Clinton >> Center is >> sponsoring it or is otherwise affiliated with the organization of it. >> >> >>> I also thought it's a scam. >>> However, I spent some time on the phone with >>> different Arkanzas institutions; it took a while, >>> but at the end I found out someone who said they >>> have indeed planned this event. However, I didn't >>> get confirmation by e-mail, I believe. >>> >>> If someone has confirmation by e-mail from >>> somoene in Arkanzas, please, post it here. >>> >>> veni >>> >>>> Sylvia, as near as I can tell this is some sort of scam. They are even >>>> trying to charge speakers mandatory "travel insurance" and other >>>> "fees" for >>>> the privilege of speaking. I'd skip it. >>>> >>>> >> >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 >> >> > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 ____________________________________________________________ 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 From karenb at gn.apc.org Sun Nov 19 08:24:30 2006 From: karenb at gn.apc.org (karen banks) Date: Sun, 19 Nov 2006 13:24:30 +0000 Subject: [governance] Nomcom Chair for Appeals Team In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20061119132441.0FDE617635B@mail.gn.apc.org> hi izumi, avri not sure where declare yourself for the pool, but you can add me karen At 21:33 16/11/2006, Izumi AIZU wrote: >Dear all, > >I have thought about this twice, with Avri's advice, and decided to try. >I will do my best, and yes, 2-month time frame is rather long. >Howeveer, we will face Christmas and New Year seasons which is >quite challenging to achieve almost anything. So let me think how to >overcome these and put dates to you soon. > >I really need your involvement, support and energy to mobilize >our caucus again. First of all, I appeal you to vote for the >coordinators position NOW. That is more important, at least now, than >the nomcom for appeal team. > >I thank you for the warm words given, and above all, THANK Avri, for all >of your contributions, and I am sure you stay active and support us >just like you have done until today. > >izumi > >2006/11/17, Avri Doria : >>Hi, >> >>As my tenure as interim coordinator draws to a close (2 more days) I >>am happy to announce that I have found a volunteer to lead the >>Nomcom to select appeals team. Izumi Aizu, well known to most of us >>and a long time IGC contributor, has agreed to take on the role as >>the non voting chair of the nomcom. >> >>I am sure he will be writing to the caucus in the next few days >>outlining how he will apply the guidelines contained in http:// >>www.igcaucus.org/nomcom-process.html including dates for the various >>processes. I have suggested that he try to shorten the process from >>2 months, as indicated as optimal in the guidelines, but that will be >>his decision. It is difficult to shorten it by very much maybe a >>week or two. >> >>Please help make his job easier by first volunteering for the nomcom >>lottery and then later by suggesting good candidates for the appeals >>team. >> >>Thank you Izumi! >> >>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 ____________________________________________________________ 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 From Sylvia.Caras at gmail.com Sun Nov 19 11:19:30 2006 From: Sylvia.Caras at gmail.com (Sylvia Caras) Date: Sun, 19 Nov 2006 08:19:30 -0800 Subject: [governance] process suggestions Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20061118084616.02b18ab8@peoplewho.org> I've seen several interesting information society articles recently. Is this list an appropriate place to post interesting news items about the future of the internet/web in general? If not, where should those discussions take place? I'm planning to attend the Rio meeting and if you'd like, I have time and energy for active involvement here on this list. I'm the ICT liaison (Technical Expert) for the International Disability Alliance. I started email lists in the mid-90's to build community among people with disability and live now near Silicon Valley. Details of my current service are here: http://peoplewho.org/sylvia/resume.htm In preparing for Athens there was conversation here on the list about involving new people, how to better reach out. I made some notes while I was there and have been thinking this over. I have some process suggestions. I understand how it happened, but it is very confusing to have several e mail discussions at several hosts, and several web pages. I also understand that this will probably continue. So I'd like to see in place somewhere a master web page with links to all of this and explanations of what is what. It's fine if it's here: http://www.igcaucus.org/ with adding some entry level links and explanations. Or here: http://www.net-gov.org/list.php again with an orientation for newcomers. How much of the original WSIS related structure is still valid, the lists, focal points, ... ? The acronyms and agency interactions are confusing. A matrix of which is what and a list of what the acronyms stand for would be helpful for orienting new people. For instance, I can no longer find the web page where suggestions for Rio were solicited. I don't even know what to search for, to whom I was giving input, ... If someone has that link, please post it for me. A project that would interest me and might be a helpful civil society product would be to develop some generally accepted email posting standards. Just as business letters have a format (opening, closing, addresses, date, ...) and press releases have formats (one page preferred, contact info, ... ), so successful emails are signed, brief, have white space, selectively quote, don't look like spam, ... . http://www.dtcc.edu/cs/rfc1855.html was last updated 24 October, 1995. I think 'netiquette' , like 'netizen' , are not currently familiar terms; perhaps something could be developed. I'm not suggesting a rigid standard but rather some guidelines or even simply examples of good practices and some suggestions. Sylvia Sylvia Caras www.peoplewho.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: message-footer.txt URL: From avri at acm.org Mon Nov 20 00:23:26 2006 From: avri at acm.org (Avri Doria) Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2006 00:23:26 -0500 Subject: [governance] Vote closed Message-ID: <52DED064-6DBA-4835-942A-D7C032BA5034@acm.org> Hi, Due to a software failure on the voting machine, I have had to close the vote a few hours early - there are about 5 hours left of 19 Nov in Honolulu and about 3 hours left in California. Out of 176 possible voters, 48 votes were recorded. The final report gives an average vote of: 1.23 for candidate 1. Parminder Singh 1.04 for candidate 2. Vittorio Bertola This means that Parminder has the 2 year coordinator term ending in 2008 and Vittorio has the 1 year coordinator term ending in 2007. I thank you all for your support during my year as interim coordinator and wish our 2 new coordinators success. With this note, I end my tenure as interim coordinator. thanks 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 From ca at rits.org.br Mon Nov 20 07:00:22 2006 From: ca at rits.org.br (Carlos Afonso) Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2006 10:00:22 -0200 Subject: [governance] Vote closed In-Reply-To: <52DED064-6DBA-4835-942A-D7C032BA5034@acm.org> References: <52DED064-6DBA-4835-942A-D7C032BA5034@acm.org> Message-ID: <456198D6.6010702@rits.org.br> With many thanks for your excellent and dedicated work, Avri. fraternal regards --c.a. Avri Doria wrote: > Hi, > > Due to a software failure on the voting machine, I have had to close the > vote a few hours early - there are about 5 hours left of 19 Nov in > Honolulu and about 3 hours left in California. > > Out of 176 possible voters, 48 votes were recorded. > > The final report gives an average vote of: > > 1.23 for candidate 1. Parminder Singh > 1.04 for candidate 2. Vittorio Bertola > > This means that Parminder has the 2 year coordinator term ending in 2008 > and Vittorio has the 1 year coordinator term ending in 2007. > > I thank you all for your support during my year as interim coordinator > and wish our 2 new coordinators success. > > With this note, I end my tenure as interim coordinator. > > thanks > > 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 > > ____________________________________________________________ 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 From dave at isoc-mu.org Mon Nov 20 07:11:50 2006 From: dave at isoc-mu.org (Dave Kissoondoyal) Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2006 16:11:50 +0400 Subject: [governance] Vote closed In-Reply-To: <456198D6.6010702@rits.org.br> Message-ID: <013501c70c9d$138cecb0$4101a8c0@TLFMDOM.local> Dear Avri, I join Carlos as well to thank you for your dedication and great work as usual Best regards Dave Kissoondoyal -----Original Message----- From: governance-owner+dave=isoc-mu.org at lists.cpsr.org [mailto:governance-owner+dave=isoc-mu.org at lists.cpsr.org] On Behalf Of Carlos Afonso Sent: Monday, November 20, 2006 4:00 PM To: governance at lists.cpsr.org; Avri Doria Subject: Re: [governance] Vote closed With many thanks for your excellent and dedicated work, Avri. fraternal regards --c.a. Avri Doria wrote: > Hi, > > Due to a software failure on the voting machine, I have had to close the > vote a few hours early - there are about 5 hours left of 19 Nov in > Honolulu and about 3 hours left in California. > > Out of 176 possible voters, 48 votes were recorded. > > The final report gives an average vote of: > > 1.23 for candidate 1. Parminder Singh > 1.04 for candidate 2. Vittorio Bertola > > This means that Parminder has the 2 year coordinator term ending in 2008 > and Vittorio has the 1 year coordinator term ending in 2007. > > I thank you all for your support during my year as interim coordinator > and wish our 2 new coordinators success. > > With this note, I end my tenure as interim coordinator. > > thanks > > 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 > > ____________________________________________________________ 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 ____________________________________________________________ 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 From nyangkweagien at gmail.com Mon Nov 20 07:20:50 2006 From: nyangkweagien at gmail.com (Nyangkwe Agien Aaron) Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2006 13:20:50 +0100 Subject: [governance] Nomcom Chair for Appeals Team In-Reply-To: <20061119132441.0FDE617635B@mail.gn.apc.org> References: <20061119132441.0FDE617635B@mail.gn.apc.org> Message-ID: Avri Your dedication to the task was worth emulation. Seeing you interact the way you did was refreshing. Ypu st the tune... Nyangkwe On 11/19/06, karen banks wrote: > hi izumi, avri > > not sure where declare yourself for the pool, but you can add me > > karen > > At 21:33 16/11/2006, Izumi AIZU wrote: > >Dear all, > > > >I have thought about this twice, with Avri's advice, and decided to try. > >I will do my best, and yes, 2-month time frame is rather long. > >Howeveer, we will face Christmas and New Year seasons which is > >quite challenging to achieve almost anything. So let me think how to > >overcome these and put dates to you soon. > > > >I really need your involvement, support and energy to mobilize > >our caucus again. First of all, I appeal you to vote for the > >coordinators position NOW. That is more important, at least now, than > >the nomcom for appeal team. > > > >I thank you for the warm words given, and above all, THANK Avri, for all > >of your contributions, and I am sure you stay active and support us > >just like you have done until today. > > > >izumi > > > >2006/11/17, Avri Doria : > >>Hi, > >> > >>As my tenure as interim coordinator draws to a close (2 more days) I > >>am happy to announce that I have found a volunteer to lead the > >>Nomcom to select appeals team. Izumi Aizu, well known to most of us > >>and a long time IGC contributor, has agreed to take on the role as > >>the non voting chair of the nomcom. > >> > >>I am sure he will be writing to the caucus in the next few days > >>outlining how he will apply the guidelines contained in http:// > >>www.igcaucus.org/nomcom-process.html including dates for the various > >>processes. I have suggested that he try to shorten the process from > >>2 months, as indicated as optimal in the guidelines, but that will be > >>his decision. It is difficult to shorten it by very much maybe a > >>week or two. > >> > >>Please help make his job easier by first volunteering for the nomcom > >>lottery and then later by suggesting good candidates for the appeals > >>team. > >> > >>Thank you Izumi! > >> > >>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 > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > -- Aaron Agien Nyangkwe Journalist/Outcome Mapper Special Assistant To The President ASAFE Tel. 237 337 50 22 Fax. 237 342 29 70 ____________________________________________________________ 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 From bendrath at zedat.fu-berlin.de Mon Nov 20 07:31:51 2006 From: bendrath at zedat.fu-berlin.de (Ralf Bendrath) Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2006 13:31:51 +0100 Subject: [governance] Vote closed In-Reply-To: <52DED064-6DBA-4835-942A-D7C032BA5034@acm.org> References: <52DED064-6DBA-4835-942A-D7C032BA5034@acm.org> Message-ID: <4561A037.3010903@zedat.fu-berlin.de> While I join everybody in thanking Avri for her tremendous job over the last year, I also want to say: Congratulations to Parminder and Vittorio as our new coordinators! Ralf ____________________________________________________________ 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 From nyangkweagien at gmail.com Mon Nov 20 07:40:33 2006 From: nyangkweagien at gmail.com (Nyangkwe Agien Aaron) Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2006 13:40:33 +0100 Subject: [governance] Vote closed In-Reply-To: <4561A037.3010903@zedat.fu-berlin.de> References: <52DED064-6DBA-4835-942A-D7C032BA5034@acm.org> <4561A037.3010903@zedat.fu-berlin.de> Message-ID: Congratulations to Parminder and Vittoro who, it should be noted, are very very fertile minds. Nyangkwe On 11/20/06, Ralf Bendrath wrote: > While I join everybody in thanking Avri for her tremendous job over the > last year, I also want to say: > > Congratulations to Parminder and Vittorio as our new coordinators! > > Ralf > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > -- Aaron Agien Nyangkwe Journalist/Outcome Mapper Special Assistant To The President ASAFE Tel. 237 337 50 22 Fax. 237 342 29 70 ____________________________________________________________ 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 From aizu at anr.org Mon Nov 20 07:50:29 2006 From: aizu at anr.org (Izumi AIZU) Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2006 21:50:29 +0900 Subject: [governance] NomCom Process Call/Proposal Message-ID: Dear Caucus members, I will try to steer the Appeal Team NomCom selection process, but we need your active participation. Given the Christmas/New Year season, we need your early enrolment. Here's a proposed draft call for volunteers. Please share your comments/questions if any. I basically like to proceed as follows, but welcome your comments/questions. 1) We need at least 25 volunteers for NomCom member candidates for running the random drawing as described below: http://www.igcaucus.org/nomcom-process.html 2) Please indicate that you like to volunteer on this list. Once you are selected as NomCom, you are not eligible to become an Appeal Team Member. (If not selected, then you can become Appeal Team member) 3) The volunteers will be posted here: http://www.igcaucus.org/2006-AT-volunteers.html (Thanks to Avri who made this). 4) The call for volunteers will be closed by 14 Dec. 5) The final list of volunteers will be confirmed on 15 Dec. 6) The random seeds will be announced on 16 Dec. 7) The drawing will be done on 17 Dec. 8) We will allow 3 days for challenges then the nomcom starts on Dec 20. Then NomCom have to figure out the dates for nominations, and go into selection process, each will take around 2 weeks (or shorter) I assume. As you have seen, we have already got two volunteers, Karen and Jeremy. SO, 23 more to go. Thanks, izumi -- >> Izumi Aizu << Institute for HyperNetwork Society Kumon Center, Tama University * * * * * << Writing the Future of the History >> www.anr.org -- >> Izumi Aizu << Institute for HyperNetwork Society Kumon Center, Tama University * * * * * << Writing the Future of the History >> www.anr.org ____________________________________________________________ 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 From bendrath at zedat.fu-berlin.de Mon Nov 20 07:55:45 2006 From: bendrath at zedat.fu-berlin.de (Ralf Bendrath) Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2006 13:55:45 +0100 Subject: [governance] NomCom Process Call/Proposal In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4561A5D1.5080809@zedat.fu-berlin.de> Izumi AIZU wrote: > 2) Please indicate that you like to volunteer on this list. Once you > are selected as NomCom, you are not eligible to become an Appeal Team > Member. I volunteer for the NomCom lottery. > (If not selected, then you can become Appeal Team member) This does not indicate I automatically run for the appeals team if not selected for the NomCom, right? Ralf ____________________________________________________________ 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 From aizu at anr.org Mon Nov 20 07:57:15 2006 From: aizu at anr.org (Izumi AIZU) Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2006 21:57:15 +0900 Subject: [governance] Vote closed In-Reply-To: References: <52DED064-6DBA-4835-942A-D7C032BA5034@acm.org> <4561A037.3010903@zedat.fu-berlin.de> Message-ID: Many many thanks to Avri, without your dedication, we would not have survived to date. Parminder and Vittorio, congratulations and thanks to you, the new duo. Though we lost the gender balance, I hope the new combination be as energetic and productive as before - of YJ-Wolfie, and Jeanette-Adam days. Now, as I just posted, it is YOUR turn to volunteer - to the Appeal Team NomCom of 25. 2006/11/20, Nyangkwe Agien Aaron : > Congratulations to Parminder and Vittoro who, it should be noted, are > very very fertile minds. > Nyangkwe > > On 11/20/06, Ralf Bendrath wrote: > > While I join everybody in thanking Avri for her tremendous job over the > > last year, I also want to say: > > > > Congratulations to Parminder and Vittorio as our new coordinators! > > > > Ralf > > ____________________________________________________________ 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 From jeanette at wz-berlin.de Mon Nov 20 08:01:40 2006 From: jeanette at wz-berlin.de (Jeanette Hofmann) Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2006 14:01:40 +0100 Subject: [governance] NomCom Process Call/Proposal In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4561A734.3070508@wz-berlin.de> Hi, I volunteer too and join all the others in there congratulations and thanks. jeanette Izumi AIZU wrote: > Dear Caucus members, > > I will try to steer the Appeal Team NomCom selection process, but we > need your active participation. Given the Christmas/New Year season, > we need your early enrolment. > > Here's a proposed draft call for volunteers. Please share your > comments/questions if any. I basically like to proceed as follows, > but welcome your comments/questions. > > 1) We need at least 25 volunteers for NomCom member candidates for > running the random drawing as described below: > http://www.igcaucus.org/nomcom-process.html > > 2) Please indicate that you like to volunteer on this list. Once you > are selected as NomCom, you are not eligible to become an Appeal Team > Member. (If not selected, then you can become Appeal Team member) > > 3) The volunteers will be posted here: > http://www.igcaucus.org/2006-AT-volunteers.html > (Thanks to Avri who made this). > > 4) The call for volunteers will be closed by 14 Dec. > > 5) The final list of volunteers will be confirmed on 15 Dec. > > 6) The random seeds will be announced on 16 Dec. > > 7) The drawing will be done on 17 Dec. > > 8) We will allow 3 days for challenges then the nomcom starts on Dec 20. > > Then NomCom have to figure out the dates for nominations, and go into > selection process, each will take around 2 weeks (or shorter) I assume. > > As you have seen, we have already got two volunteers, Karen and > Jeremy. SO, 23 more to go. > > Thanks, > > izumi > > -- > >> Izumi Aizu << > > Institute for HyperNetwork Society > Kumon Center, Tama University > * * * * * > << Writing the Future of the History >> > www.anr.org > > ____________________________________________________________ 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 From aizu at anr.org Mon Nov 20 08:11:26 2006 From: aizu at anr.org (Izumi AIZU) Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2006 22:11:26 +0900 Subject: [governance] NomCom Process Call/Proposal In-Reply-To: References: <4561A5D1.5080809@zedat.fu-berlin.de> Message-ID: Thanks Ralf, and you are right. To volunteer for NomCom is only for that matter and not automatically become Appeal Team member or its candidate at all. My guess is that one can choose to run for the Appeal Team only if one wants to (or somebody nominate you and you accept it). And Thanks Jeanette! Now. 21 to go. izumi 2006/11/20, Ralf Bendrath : > Izumi AIZU wrote: > > 2) Please indicate that you like to volunteer on this list. Once you > > are selected as NomCom, you are not eligible to become an Appeal Team > > Member. > I volunteer for the NomCom lottery. > > > (If not selected, then you can become Appeal Team member) > This does not indicate I automatically run for the appeals team if not > selected for the NomCom, right? > > Ralf > -- >> Izumi Aizu << Institute for HyperNetwork Society Kumon Center, Tama University * * * * * << Writing the Future of the History >> www.anr.org ____________________________________________________________ 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 From ca at rits.org.br Mon Nov 20 08:15:07 2006 From: ca at rits.org.br (Carlos Afonso) Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2006 11:15:07 -0200 Subject: [governance] Vote closed In-Reply-To: <4561A037.3010903@zedat.fu-berlin.de> References: <52DED064-6DBA-4835-942A-D7C032BA5034@acm.org> <4561A037.3010903@zedat.fu-berlin.de> Message-ID: <4561AA5B.30405@rits.org.br> Right! I missed this! Congrats, Parm and Vittorio! []s fraternos --c.a. Ralf Bendrath wrote: > While I join everybody in thanking Avri for her tremendous job over the > last year, I also want to say: > > Congratulations to Parminder and Vittorio as our new coordinators! > > Ralf > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > ____________________________________________________________ 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 From nne75 at yahoo.com Mon Nov 20 09:12:55 2006 From: nne75 at yahoo.com (Nnenna) Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2006 06:12:55 -0800 (PST) Subject: [governance] NomCom Process Call/Proposal In-Reply-To: <4561A734.3070508@wz-berlin.de> Message-ID: <20061120141256.86091.qmail@web50211.mail.yahoo.com> You may add Nnenna Nwakanma Best of the seasons Me Jeanette Hofmann wrote: Hi, I volunteer too and join all the others in there congratulations and thanks. jeanette --------------------------------- Everyone is raving about the all-new Yahoo! Mail beta. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: message-footer.txt URL: From mueller at syr.edu Mon Nov 20 10:00:52 2006 From: mueller at syr.edu (Milton Mueller) Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2006 10:00:52 -0500 Subject: [governance] Vote closed Message-ID: Thank you Avri for taking on this work. And let's look forward to Parminder and Vittorio maintaining your high standards of responsibility, efficiency and fairness. Avri Doria wrote: > Hi, > > Due to a software failure on the voting machine, I have had to close the > vote a few hours early - there are about 5 hours left of 19 Nov in > Honolulu and about 3 hours left in California. > > Out of 176 possible voters, 48 votes were recorded. > > The final report gives an average vote of: > > 1.23 for candidate 1. Parminder Singh > 1.04 for candidate 2. Vittorio Bertola > > This means that Parminder has the 2 year coordinator term ending in 2008 > and Vittorio has the 1 year coordinator term ending in 2007. > > I thank you all for your support during my year as interim coordinator > and wish our 2 new coordinators success. > > With this note, I end my tenure as interim coordinator. > > thanks > > 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 > > ____________________________________________________________ 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 ____________________________________________________________ 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 From mueller at syr.edu Mon Nov 20 10:03:19 2006 From: mueller at syr.edu (Milton Mueller) Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2006 10:03:19 -0500 Subject: [governance] NomCom Process Call/Proposal Message-ID: Izumi: Sounds like you need half of our electorate to succeed, so I had better volunteer. Issue me a lottery ticket. (Maybe you could sell them like the State of New York and make some money for the caucus....) Izumi AIZU wrote: > 2) Please indicate that you like to volunteer on this list. Once you > are selected as NomCom, you are not eligible to become an Appeal Team > Member. ____________________________________________________________ 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 From ldmisekfalkoff at gmail.com Mon Nov 20 10:21:52 2006 From: ldmisekfalkoff at gmail.com (l.d.misek-falkoff) Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2006 10:21:52 -0500 Subject: [governance] NomCom Process Call/Proposal In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <8cbfe7410611200721u2b064a9bic45bb4255adea4a7@mail.gmail.com> Hi Milton from also here in lotteryland; and Isumi, greetings ... and congratulations Officers-elect. As well, a chance also to say hello all, And if assuming were safe and sage, I'd assume that being on an appeal team would mean one had served on a nomcom first. But not necessarily ("never assume") so please add me to list of those interested in the appeal team, have done a lot of appeal work in other venues. Warm regards and great meeting face to face at IGF-Athens. :) LDMF. Linda D. Misek-Falkoff, Ph.D., J.D. Netizen ARPANet forward. On 11/20/06, Milton Mueller wrote: > > Izumi: > Sounds like you need half of our electorate to succeed, so I had better > volunteer. Issue me a lottery ticket. (Maybe you could sell them like > the State of New York and make some money for the caucus....) > > Izumi AIZU wrote: > > 2) Please indicate that you like to volunteer on this list. Once you > > > are selected as NomCom, you are not eligible to become an Appeal Team > > > Member. > > ____________________________________________________________ > ernance > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: message-footer.txt URL: From avri at acm.org Mon Nov 20 14:52:50 2006 From: avri at acm.org (Avri Doria) Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2006 14:52:50 -0500 Subject: [governance] One more thing Message-ID: Hi, A thing I forgot to mention: There was some discussion about when the vote would take place for coordinators in 2007 and 2008. Since the election was so late this year, it was suggested that the vote in 2007 be held after the IGF meeting in Rio - perhaps the nominations can be done before the meeting and the vote after in mid November. The election in 20008 would then be held on the scheduled proposed in the charter - around the summer solstice or there about. This was never discussed on this list, so of course you all need to buy into this schedule, but it seems reasonable to me as otherwise Vittorio would only be coorindator for 6 months. I wish I had remembered to discuss this before, but it slipped my mind over the last 3 weeks. I suggest that any discussion of this now be handled by Parminder, since - as the 2 year term holder, it does not directly affect his term. Thanks and apologies. 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 From parminder at itforchange.net Mon Nov 20 21:32:29 2006 From: parminder at itforchange.net (Parminder) Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2006 08:02:29 +0530 Subject: [governance] One more thing In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20061121023227.53E29E0F3A@smtp3.electricembers.net> Thanks Avri, for all the great work. And thanks everyone who has said kind words on our taking over the responsibilities... In fact, what has been gratifying in this votes that though there was not much to decide here (2 coordinators for 2 posts - and, if we accept the current proposal on the 2007 election time, with a few months difference of term) 48 members did cast their votes... apart from it being an expression of support, for which we are thankful, it augurs well for members' continued involvement and readiness to commit time and attention to IGC work. So, taking the proposal mentioned in Avri's email forward, I propose that the 2007 election takes place immediately after the Rio meeting. It is better to put this matter aside rather than discuss it close to the scheduled time of vote in summer. And we get back to the charter timelines for 2008. Thanks Parminder ________________________________________________ Parminder Jeet Singh IT for Change, Bangalore Bridging Development Realities and Technological Possibilities Tel: (+91-80) 2665 4134, 2653 6890 Fax: (+91-80) 4146 1055 www.ITforChange.net > -----Original Message----- > From: Avri Doria [mailto:avri at acm.org] > Sent: Tuesday, November 21, 2006 1:23 AM > To: Governance Caucus > Subject: [governance] One more thing > > Hi, > > A thing I forgot to mention: > > There was some discussion about when the vote would take place for > coordinators in 2007 and 2008. > > Since the election was so late this year, it was suggested that the > vote in 2007 be held after the IGF meeting in Rio - perhaps the > nominations can be done before the meeting and the vote after in mid > November. The election in 20008 would then be held on the scheduled > proposed in the charter - around the summer solstice or there about. > > This was never discussed on this list, so of course you all need to > buy into this schedule, but it seems reasonable to me as otherwise > Vittorio would only be coorindator for 6 months. > > I wish I had remembered to discuss this before, but it slipped my > mind over the last 3 weeks. I suggest that any discussion of this > now be handled by Parminder, since - as the 2 year term holder, it > does not directly affect his term. > > Thanks and apologies. > > 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 ____________________________________________________________ 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 From guru at itforchange.net Mon Nov 20 23:29:12 2006 From: guru at itforchange.net (Guru@ITfC) Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2006 09:59:12 +0530 Subject: [governance] NomCom Process Call/Proposal In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20061121042720.3D55DE0F5C@smtp3.electricembers.net> Izumi San, I volunteer to be a candidate for NomCom membership . Regards Guru _____________ Gurumurthy K IT for Change, Bangalore Bridging Development Realities and Technological Possibilities www.ITforChange.net -----Original Message----- From: izumiaizu at gmail.com [mailto:izumiaizu at gmail.com] On Behalf Of Izumi AIZU Sent: Monday, November 20, 2006 6:20 PM To: governance at lists.cpsr.org Subject: [governance] NomCom Process Call/Proposal Dear Caucus members, I will try to steer the Appeal Team NomCom selection process, but we need your active participation. Given the Christmas/New Year season, we need your early enrolment. Here's a proposed draft call for volunteers. Please share your comments/questions if any. I basically like to proceed as follows, but welcome your comments/questions. 1) We need at least 25 volunteers for NomCom member candidates for running the random drawing as described below: http://www.igcaucus.org/nomcom-process.html 2) Please indicate that you like to volunteer on this list. Once you are selected as NomCom, you are not eligible to become an Appeal Team Member. (If not selected, then you can become Appeal Team member) 3) The volunteers will be posted here: http://www.igcaucus.org/2006-AT-volunteers.html (Thanks to Avri who made this). 4) The call for volunteers will be closed by 14 Dec. 5) The final list of volunteers will be confirmed on 15 Dec. 6) The random seeds will be announced on 16 Dec. 7) The drawing will be done on 17 Dec. 8) We will allow 3 days for challenges then the nomcom starts on Dec 20. Then NomCom have to figure out the dates for nominations, and go into selection process, each will take around 2 weeks (or shorter) I assume. As you have seen, we have already got two volunteers, Karen and Jeremy. SO, 23 more to go. Thanks, izumi -- >> Izumi Aizu << Institute for HyperNetwork Society Kumon Center, Tama University * * * * * << Writing the Future of the History >> www.anr.org -- >> Izumi Aizu << Institute for HyperNetwork Society Kumon Center, Tama University * * * * * << Writing the Future of the History >> www.anr.org ____________________________________________________________ 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 ____________________________________________________________ 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 From hakik at sdnbd.org Tue Nov 21 00:35:10 2006 From: hakik at sdnbd.org (Hakikur Rahman) Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2006 11:35:10 +0600 Subject: [governance] NomCom Process Call/Proposal In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.1.20061121113243.01a989e0@sdnbd.org> I will be pleased to volunteer for NomCom membership. Best Regards. Hakik. At 06:50 PM 11/20/2006, Izumi AIZU wrote: >Dear Caucus members, > >I will try to steer the Appeal Team NomCom selection process, but we >need your active participation. Given the Christmas/New Year season, >we need your early enrolment. > >Here's a proposed draft call for volunteers. Please share your >comments/questions if any. I basically like to proceed as follows, >but welcome your comments/questions. > >1) We need at least 25 volunteers for NomCom member candidates for >running the random drawing as described below: >http://www.igcaucus.org/nomcom-process.html > >2) Please indicate that you like to volunteer on this list. Once you >are selected as NomCom, you are not eligible to become an Appeal Team >Member. (If not selected, then you can become Appeal Team member) > >3) The volunteers will be posted here: >http://www.igcaucus.org/2006-AT-volunteers.html >(Thanks to Avri who made this). > >4) The call for volunteers will be closed by 14 Dec. > >5) The final list of volunteers will be confirmed on 15 Dec. > >6) The random seeds will be announced on 16 Dec. > >7) The drawing will be done on 17 Dec. > >8) We will allow 3 days for challenges then the nomcom starts on Dec 20. > >Then NomCom have to figure out the dates for nominations, and go into >selection process, each will take around 2 weeks (or shorter) I assume. > >As you have seen, we have already got two volunteers, Karen and >Jeremy. SO, 23 more to go. > >Thanks, > >izumi > >-- > >> Izumi Aizu << > > Institute for HyperNetwork Society > Kumon Center, Tama University > * * * * * > << Writing the Future of the History >> > www.anr.org > > >-- > >> Izumi Aizu << > > Institute for HyperNetwork Society > Kumon Center, Tama University > * * * * * > << Writing the Future of the History >> > www.anr.org >____________________________________________________________ >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 > >-- >This message has been scanned for viruses and >dangerous content by MailScanner, and is >believed to be clean. -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean. ____________________________________________________________ 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 From rishi at gipi.org.in Tue Nov 21 05:46:56 2006 From: rishi at gipi.org.in (Rishi Chawla) Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2006 16:16:56 +0530 Subject: [governance] NomCom Process Call/Proposal In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.1.20061121113243.01a989e0@sdnbd.org> Message-ID: I volunteer for the NomCom Rishi Chawla Center for Communications Law & Policy Research, Global Internet Policy Initiative, India New Delhi, India -----Original Message----- From: Hakikur Rahman [mailto:hakik at sdnbd.org] Sent: Tuesday, November 21, 2006 11:05 AM To: governance at lists.cpsr.org; Izumi AIZU Subject: Re: [governance] NomCom Process Call/Proposal I will be pleased to volunteer for NomCom membership. Best Regards. Hakik. At 06:50 PM 11/20/2006, Izumi AIZU wrote: >Dear Caucus members, > >I will try to steer the Appeal Team NomCom selection process, but we >need your active participation. Given the Christmas/New Year season, >we need your early enrolment. > >Here's a proposed draft call for volunteers. Please share your >comments/questions if any. I basically like to proceed as follows, >but welcome your comments/questions. > >1) We need at least 25 volunteers for NomCom member candidates for >running the random drawing as described below: >http://www.igcaucus.org/nomcom-process.html > >2) Please indicate that you like to volunteer on this list. Once you >are selected as NomCom, you are not eligible to become an Appeal Team >Member. (If not selected, then you can become Appeal Team member) > >3) The volunteers will be posted here: >http://www.igcaucus.org/2006-AT-volunteers.html >(Thanks to Avri who made this). > >4) The call for volunteers will be closed by 14 Dec. > >5) The final list of volunteers will be confirmed on 15 Dec. > >6) The random seeds will be announced on 16 Dec. > >7) The drawing will be done on 17 Dec. > >8) We will allow 3 days for challenges then the nomcom starts on Dec 20. > >Then NomCom have to figure out the dates for nominations, and go into >selection process, each will take around 2 weeks (or shorter) I assume. > >As you have seen, we have already got two volunteers, Karen and >Jeremy. SO, 23 more to go. > >Thanks, > >izumi > >-- > >> Izumi Aizu << > > Institute for HyperNetwork Society > Kumon Center, Tama University > * * * * * > << Writing the Future of the History >> > www.anr.org > > >-- > >> Izumi Aizu << > > Institute for HyperNetwork Society > Kumon Center, Tama University > * * * * * > << Writing the Future of the History >> > www.anr.org >____________________________________________________________ >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 > >-- >This message has been scanned for viruses and >dangerous content by MailScanner, and is >believed to be clean. -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean. ____________________________________________________________ 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 ____________________________________________________________ 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 From dave at isoc-mu.org Tue Nov 21 05:54:42 2006 From: dave at isoc-mu.org (Dave Kissoondoyal) Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2006 14:54:42 +0400 Subject: [governance] NomCom Process Call/Proposal In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <008f01c70d5b$76ff3410$0e09090a@TLFMDOM.local> Dear Izumi, I will be pleased to volunteer for NomCom membership. Best regards Dave Kissoondoyal President Internet Society Chapter of Mauritius Director of Information Technology - Teleforma (Mauritius) Ltd 10th Floor, Cyber Tower Ebene Cybercity Mauritius +230 465-7474 Main Office +230 465-7171 Fax +230 465-7298 Direct Line +230 257-8703 Cell Phone 701-451-6530 US Dial Direct Line -----Original Message----- From: izumiaizu at gmail.com [mailto:izumiaizu at gmail.com] On Behalf Of Izumi AIZU Sent: Monday, November 20, 2006 4:50 PM To: governance at lists.cpsr.org Subject: [governance] NomCom Process Call/Proposal Dear Caucus members, I will try to steer the Appeal Team NomCom selection process, but we need your active participation. Given the Christmas/New Year season, we need your early enrolment. Here's a proposed draft call for volunteers. Please share your comments/questions if any. I basically like to proceed as follows, but welcome your comments/questions. 1) We need at least 25 volunteers for NomCom member candidates for running the random drawing as described below: http://www.igcaucus.org/nomcom-process.html 2) Please indicate that you like to volunteer on this list. Once you are selected as NomCom, you are not eligible to become an Appeal Team Member. (If not selected, then you can become Appeal Team member) 3) The volunteers will be posted here: http://www.igcaucus.org/2006-AT-volunteers.html (Thanks to Avri who made this). 4) The call for volunteers will be closed by 14 Dec. 5) The final list of volunteers will be confirmed on 15 Dec. 6) The random seeds will be announced on 16 Dec. 7) The drawing will be done on 17 Dec. 8) We will allow 3 days for challenges then the nomcom starts on Dec 20. Then NomCom have to figure out the dates for nominations, and go into selection process, each will take around 2 weeks (or shorter) I assume. As you have seen, we have already got two volunteers, Karen and Jeremy. SO, 23 more to go. Thanks, izumi -- >> Izumi Aizu << Institute for HyperNetwork Society Kumon Center, Tama University * * * * * << Writing the Future of the History >> www.anr.org -- >> Izumi Aizu << Institute for HyperNetwork Society Kumon Center, Tama University * * * * * << Writing the Future of the History >> www.anr.org ____________________________________________________________ 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 ____________________________________________________________ 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 From Sylvia.Caras at gmail.com Wed Nov 22 12:06:19 2006 From: Sylvia.Caras at gmail.com (Sylvia Caras) Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2006 09:06:19 -0800 Subject: [governance] news: no US antitrust liability for open source Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20061122090605.04536b68@peoplewho.org> The US Seventh Circuit, known for jurists steeped in theories of law and economics, has weighed in definitively against antitrust liability for open source software. http://technology.findlaw.com/articles/00006/010425.html ---------------- I didn't get any response when I asked if items like this above could be posted on this list or should be posted elsewhere, so I'm sending this one item I read today as a trial balloon. If not here, where? If here, what parameters and limits? Sylvia ____________________________________________________________ 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 From ldmisekfalkoff at gmail.com Wed Nov 22 12:52:39 2006 From: ldmisekfalkoff at gmail.com (l.d.misek-falkoff) Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2006 12:52:39 -0500 Subject: [governance] news: no US antitrust liability for open source In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.2.20061122090605.04536b68@peoplewho.org> References: <7.0.1.0.2.20061122090605.04536b68@peoplewho.org> Message-ID: <8cbfe7410611220952n4d0e7cecv4fe9d1689db66a88@mail.gmail.com> Dear Sylvia, I hope this is - yes, we shall learn - a good place to post a response since the topic ultimately touches on issues of control, as far as governance goes. But if the discussion moves elsewhere it still will be interesting to watch for comments on software being more like speech than beer (synopsis) which to me connotes a non-product product distinction ()correct me off-line if apt). However (we should read the actual Opinion, and shall) later in the nicely compact e-Article the commentator mentions the open source code as being part of a production process or leading to same... Hmmm. All e-law being laid down in our time bears watching. With 'Circuit splits' such suits can qualify for consideration by U.S. Supreme or other Regions; and States; highest jurist panels. Thanks and well met here, Linda. On 11/22/06, Sylvia Caras wrote: > > The US Seventh Circuit, known for jurists steeped in theories of law > and economics, has weighed in definitively against antitrust liability > for open source software. > > http://technology.findlaw.com/articles/00006/010425.html > > ---------------- > > I didn't get any response when I asked if items like this above could > be posted on this list or should be posted elsewhere, so I'm sending > this one item I read today as a trial balloon. If not here, where? > If here, what parameters and limits? > > Sylvia > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > -- Dr. Linda D. Misek-Falkoff (Ph.D., J.D.) (914) 769 3652 InterNetizen, ARPANet-Internet 47+ years.. Plaintiff at Suit, e-law cases. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: message-footer.txt URL: From s.zehle at kein.org Wed Nov 22 15:42:06 2006 From: s.zehle at kein.org (Soenke Zehle) Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2006 21:42:06 +0100 Subject: [governance] news: no US antitrust liability for open source In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.2.20061122090605.04536b68@peoplewho.org> References: <7.0.1.0.2.20061122090605.04536b68@peoplewho.org> Message-ID: <4564B61E.7030401@kein.org> Hi Sylvia, thx much for this, I reposted this to a2k (you might want to check them out, a good place for that kind of techie-law-stuff as well), best, Soenke A2k mailing list http://lists.essential.org/mailman/listinfo/a2k ____________________________________________________________ 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 From avri at acm.org Wed Nov 22 17:28:20 2006 From: avri at acm.org (Avri Doria) Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2006 17:28:20 -0500 Subject: [governance] Update on upcoming IGF consultations Message-ID: Hi, Plans are currently being made for an IGF stock taking session in Geneva in February. The MAG will tentatively meet on 12 Febraury to do it own stock taking and there will be open consultations on the 13th. The open consultations will include translation into the 6 UN languages. This is still in the planning stage and the dates won't be confirmed until the end of the year, but I wanted to let people know as early as possible. As I understand it, the agenda will be rather open and will include topics such as: - assessment of the the first IGF - recommendations for future IGF meetings both in terms of process and substance - discussion regarding the future of the advisory groups This should give us lots of time to come up with some coherent IGC positions. I don't have any info yet on whether there will be a call for contributions, but it would not surprise me if there were. a. (sometimes consultant to the igf secretariat) ____________________________________________________________ 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 From jeanette at wz-berlin.de Wed Nov 22 17:38:26 2006 From: jeanette at wz-berlin.de (Jeanette Hofmann) Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2006 23:38:26 +0100 Subject: [governance] Update on upcoming IGF consultations In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4564D162.2050606@wz-berlin.de> > This is still in the planning stage and the dates won't be confirmed > until the end of the year, but I wanted to let people know as early as > possible. As I understand it, the agenda will be rather open and will > include topics such as: > > - assessment of the the first IGF > - recommendations for future IGF meetings both in terms of process and > substance > - discussion regarding the future of the advisory groups Yes, it would be good if we came up with strong suggestions for overall themes and topics. Funding should also be an issue to think about. We cannot diversify participation without reliable donations. jeanette > > This should give us lots of time to come up with some coherent IGC > positions. > I don't have any info yet on whether there will be a call for > contributions, but it would not surprise me if there were. > > a. > (sometimes consultant to the igf secretariat) > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 ____________________________________________________________ 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 From Jeremy at Malcolm.id.au Wed Nov 22 19:11:57 2006 From: Jeremy at Malcolm.id.au (Jeremy Malcolm) Date: Thu, 23 Nov 2006 08:11:57 +0800 Subject: [governance] Update on upcoming IGF consultations In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4564E74D.3070604@Malcolm.id.au> Avri Doria wrote: > Hi, > > Plans are currently being made for an IGF stock taking session in Geneva > in February. > > The MAG will tentatively meet on 12 Febraury to do it own stock taking > and there will be open consultations on the 13th. The open > consultations will include translation into the 6 UN languages. Will they be open to synchronous/instantaneous remote participation via the Internet? If so, facilitated by whom? I can't afford to fly to Geneva from my own pocket, and it was on my and Kieren McCarthy's shoulders in Athens. -- Jeremy Malcolm LLB (Hons) B Com Internet and Open Source lawyer, IT consultant, actor host -t NAPTR 1.0.8.0.3.1.2.9.8.1.6.e164.org|awk -F! '{print $3}' ____________________________________________________________ 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 From aizu at anr.org Wed Nov 22 23:04:46 2006 From: aizu at anr.org (Izumi AIZU) Date: Thu, 23 Nov 2006 13:04:46 +0900 Subject: [governance] NomCom Process Call/Proposal In-Reply-To: <008f01c70d5b$76ff3410$0e09090a@TLFMDOM.local> References: <008f01c70d5b$76ff3410$0e09090a@TLFMDOM.local> Message-ID: Hi, Happy Thanksgiving for those who celebrate it! In Japan, we have no such a thing and most people are not aware of it at all. Recently, Halloween became much more popular. Anyway, thanks for all who have volunteered to the NomCom candidate pool. So far we got 13, not a bad start, but that is just half of what we need. After your Thanksgiving, please apply if that's the case. If you don't have thanksgiving at all, please do it NOW!! Please see here for the names: http://www.igcaucus.org/2006-AT-volunteers.html For the next step, here is my plan. Please give any comment/advice. When we reach 20, I will decide the source of Lotto - from among the following candidates: - Irish national Lottery http://www.lotto.ie/ - UK national lottery http://www.national-lottery.co.uk/ - US Powerball http://www.powerball.com And, we will use the result of these sources from the Dec 16th drawing. I like to ask Avir to do the drawing, though anyone can do the drawing and gets the same result. Is this OK? izumi ____________________________________________________________ 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 From mueller at syr.edu Wed Nov 22 23:48:36 2006 From: mueller at syr.edu (Milton Mueller) Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2006 23:48:36 -0500 Subject: [governance] Update on upcoming IGF consultations Message-ID: >>> Jeremy at Malcolm.id.au 11/22/2006 7:11:57 PM >>> >Will they be open to synchronous/instantaneous remote >participation via the Internet? If so, facilitated by whom? >I can't afford to fly to Geneva from my own pocket, and it >was on my and Kieren McCarthy's >shoulders in Athens. I second that emotion. I would hope IGF would move to a more virtual form of consultation/stocktaking, perhaps organizing a kind of mass online chat session if it can't do something better. One of the key issues will be the status and future of the MAG itself. ____________________________________________________________ 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 From bfausett at internet.law.pro Wed Nov 22 23:58:49 2006 From: bfausett at internet.law.pro (Bret Fausett) Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2006 20:58:49 -0800 Subject: [governance] NomCom Process Call/Proposal In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <000901c70ebc$12864b60$351fa8c0@CCKLLP.local> I'll do it again. Bret > -----Original Message----- > From: izumiaizu at gmail.com [mailto:izumiaizu at gmail.com] On > Behalf Of Izumi AIZU > Sent: Wednesday, November 22, 2006 8:05 PM > To: governance at lists.cpsr.org > Subject: Re: [governance] NomCom Process Call/Proposal > > Hi, > Happy Thanksgiving for those who celebrate it! > In Japan, we have no such a thing and most people are not > aware of it at all. Recently, Halloween became much more popular. > > Anyway, thanks for all who have volunteered to the NomCom > candidate pool. So far we got 13, not a bad start, but that > is just half of what we need. After your Thanksgiving, please > apply if that's the case. If you don't have thanksgiving at > all, please do it NOW!! > > Please see here for the names: > http://www.igcaucus.org/2006-AT-volunteers.html > > For the next step, here is my plan. Please give any comment/advice. > > When we reach 20, I will decide the source of Lotto - from > among the following candidates: > > - Irish national Lottery http://www.lotto.ie/ > - UK national lottery http://www.national-lottery.co.uk/ > - US Powerball http://www.powerball.com > > And, we will use the result of these sources from the Dec > 16th drawing. > > I like to ask Avir to do the drawing, though anyone can do > the drawing and gets the same result. > > Is this OK? > > izumi > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > ____________________________________________________________ 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 From ajp at glocom.ac.jp Thu Nov 23 03:01:42 2006 From: ajp at glocom.ac.jp (Adam Peake) Date: Thu, 23 Nov 2006 17:01:42 +0900 Subject: [governance] Update on upcoming IGF consultations In-Reply-To: <4564E74D.3070604@Malcolm.id.au> References: <4564E74D.3070604@Malcolm.id.au> Message-ID: On 11/23/06, Jeremy Malcolm wrote: > Avri Doria wrote: > > Hi, > > > > Plans are currently being made for an IGF stock taking session in Geneva > > in February. > > > > The MAG will tentatively meet on 12 Febraury to do it own stock taking > > and there will be open consultations on the 13th. The open > > consultations will include translation into the 6 UN languages. > > Will they be open to synchronous/instantaneous remote participation via > the Internet? Don't know -- but it's a good suggestion. I'll pass it along to MAG. Earlier consultations were webcast (English and French -- language always an issue), remote participation rather than just listening in would be ideal. Adam > If so, facilitated by whom? I can't afford to fly to > Geneva from my own pocket, and it was on my and Kieren McCarthy's > shoulders in Athens. > > -- > Jeremy Malcolm LLB (Hons) B Com > Internet and Open Source lawyer, IT consultant, actor > host -t NAPTR 1.0.8.0.3.1.2.9.8.1.6.e164.org|awk -F! '{print $3}' > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > ____________________________________________________________ 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 From ajp at glocom.ac.jp Thu Nov 23 03:04:31 2006 From: ajp at glocom.ac.jp (Adam Peake) Date: Thu, 23 Nov 2006 17:04:31 +0900 Subject: [governance] Update on upcoming IGF consultations In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 11/23/06, Milton Mueller wrote: > >>> Jeremy at Malcolm.id.au 11/22/2006 7:11:57 PM >>> > >Will they be open to synchronous/instantaneous remote > >participation via the Internet? If so, facilitated by whom? > >I can't afford to fly to Geneva from my own pocket, and it > >was on my and Kieren McCarthy's > >shoulders in Athens. > > I second that emotion. I would hope IGF would move to a more virtual > form of consultation/stocktaking, perhaps organizing a kind of mass > online chat session if it can't do something better. > What language would the chat sessions being in? One reason the dates are likely to be when they are is availability of UN translators, Feb 13 is apparently one of the few dates early next year when UN services can accommodate the meeting. And how can we help this online interaction/participation be multi-stakeholder? Remote participation is extremely important -- but it needs to accommodate multiple languages and all stakeholders. Considering the technical problems and that many things were done on the fly, the stuff Kieren and Jeremy did in Athens went well (comments by sms was perhaps a first.) But remote access pretty much meant being able to comment in English and most comments came from just a couple of people (I believe Mike Nelson "spoke" more than any other floor participant.) I don't know how many people were in the chat rooms for Athens (I couldn't get access...) but I suspect not many. At one point Jeremy said their were 6. Not very good. All comes down to money. If the IGF process has money it will be able to do much more. > One of the key issues will be the status and future of the MAG itself. > No one knows. The MAG's mandate was the help the secretary general convene the IGF, with a main task of helping him prepare the agenda and programme for Athens. Members were not sent letters inviting them to join, no period of appointment. With the change of secretary general things are less clear. Adam > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > ____________________________________________________________ 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 From ajp at glocom.ac.jp Thu Nov 23 03:21:27 2006 From: ajp at glocom.ac.jp (Adam Peake) Date: Thu, 23 Nov 2006 17:21:27 +0900 Subject: [governance] IGC domain name net-gov.org Message-ID: net-gov.org expires soon. Do we want to keep it? There's still live info on there (Vittorio provided the site, I provided the name), but the caucus is now also using If the caucus doesn't want it I might drop it or use it for something else. Adam ____________________________________________________________ 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 From Jeremy at Malcolm.id.au Thu Nov 23 03:50:20 2006 From: Jeremy at Malcolm.id.au (Jeremy Malcolm) Date: Thu, 23 Nov 2006 16:50:20 +0800 Subject: [governance] IGC domain name net-gov.org In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <456560CC.1030608@Malcolm.id.au> Adam Peake wrote: > net-gov.org expires soon. Do we want to keep it? > > There's still live info on there (Vittorio provided the site, I > provided the name), but the caucus is now also using > If the caucus doesn't want it I might drop > it or use it for something else. If it's dropped, then could the existing pages be moved elsewhere (to igcaucus.org would be logical)? They are of historical value at least. -- Jeremy Malcolm LLB (Hons) B Com Internet and Open Source lawyer, IT consultant, actor host -t NAPTR 1.0.8.0.3.1.2.9.8.1.6.e164.org|awk -F! '{print $3}' ____________________________________________________________ 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 From Jeremy at Malcolm.id.au Thu Nov 23 04:08:02 2006 From: Jeremy at Malcolm.id.au (Jeremy Malcolm) Date: Thu, 23 Nov 2006 17:08:02 +0800 Subject: [governance] Update on upcoming IGF consultations In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <456564F2.7070202@Malcolm.id.au> Adam Peake wrote: > What language would the chat sessions being in? One reason the dates > are likely to be when they are is availability of UN translators, Feb > 13 is apparently one of the few dates early next year when UN services > can accommodate the meeting. As well as the phones for SMS messages, there were three email addresses, English, French and Spanish, and the English chat forum. The emails were not monitored by the official UN translators, but by CS volunteers. One question or comment was received in Japanese, which was also duly translated by a volunteer, but it turned out to be spam. :-) It may not be ideal, but it's better than nothing: I suggest tell the MAG we want to run with it in English at least and see if we can pick up volunteers to handle other languages along the way. The question will be, who is going to be present in Geneva, with an Internet connection, and clueful enough to feed the comments and questions in. > And how can we help this online interaction/participation be > multi-stakeholder? Remote participation is extremely important -- but > it needs to accommodate multiple languages and all stakeholders. A bit of promotion of the facilities by the Secretariat to all stakeholders wouldn't go astray there IMHO. There was next to none for Athens. It came down to Kieren handing out fliers and me standing up in the opening session. We didn't even have, except for three days, a link to the IGF 2006 Community site from the official site. Not good enough. > All comes down to money. If the IGF process has money it will be able > to do much more. I actually think it comes down to will more than money. The reason the IGF's Internet presence has been fragmented and closed to public participation has had little to do with money. Sure, it would be nice if someone would say sponsor travel costs for a clueful person to handle remote participation issues (like that would happen), but what other costs are there? Everything else has been volunteered. -- Jeremy Malcolm LLB (Hons) B Com Internet and Open Source lawyer, IT consultant, actor host -t NAPTR 1.0.8.0.3.1.2.9.8.1.6.e164.org|awk -F! '{print $3}' ____________________________________________________________ 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 From drake at hei.unige.ch Thu Nov 23 04:23:28 2006 From: drake at hei.unige.ch (William Drake) Date: Thu, 23 Nov 2006 10:23:28 +0100 Subject: [governance] IGC domain name net-gov.org In-Reply-To: <456560CC.1030608@Malcolm.id.au> Message-ID: Hi, This came up some months ago. It'd make sense to consolidate everything on Avri's new site and add in the various caucus statements from prepcoms etc. that are not on Adam's site, plus perhaps some brief background/context material for new folks. But all this would take some work. Perhaps our new coordinators & volunteers could help with some elements...? Bill > From: Jeremy Malcolm > Reply-To: , Jeremy Malcolm > Date: Thu, 23 Nov 2006 16:50:20 +0800 > To: , Adam Peake > Subject: Re: [governance] IGC domain name net-gov.org > > Adam Peake wrote: >> net-gov.org expires soon. Do we want to keep it? >> >> There's still live info on there (Vittorio provided the site, I >> provided the name), but the caucus is now also using >> If the caucus doesn't want it I might drop >> it or use it for something else. > > If it's dropped, then could the existing pages be moved elsewhere (to > igcaucus.org would be logical)? They are of historical value at least. > > -- > Jeremy Malcolm LLB (Hons) B Com > Internet and Open Source lawyer, IT consultant, actor > host -t NAPTR 1.0.8.0.3.1.2.9.8.1.6.e164.org|awk -F! '{print $3}' > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 ____________________________________________________________ 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 From ajp at glocom.ac.jp Thu Nov 23 04:33:13 2006 From: ajp at glocom.ac.jp (Adam Peake) Date: Thu, 23 Nov 2006 18:33:13 +0900 Subject: [governance] Re: [Mmwg] Update on upcoming IGF consultations In-Reply-To: <81EBB31F-3A8A-44A3-A864-0156F633CC99@acm.org> References: <81EBB31F-3A8A-44A3-A864-0156F633CC99@acm.org> Message-ID: Reminder, the advisory group is looking for feedback on the Athens meeting and ideas for improving future meetings. There's an online form and text version that can be downloaded and returned to the secretariat Simple questions asking what worked well, what worked less well, suggestions for improvements, other comments/suggestions and a question about the synthesis paper. Question that I think missing is about IGF as a process rather than the meeting and future meetings. I hope IGF won't just be an annual conference. These will feed into the February consultation. Responses helpful. Thanks, Adam On 11/23/06, Avri Doria wrote: > > Hi, > > Plans are currently being made for an IGF stock taking session in > Geneva in February. > > The MAG will tentatively meet on 12 Febraury to do it own stock > taking and there will be open consultations on the 13th. The open > consultations will include translation into the 6 UN languages. > > This is still in the planning stage and the dates won't be confirmed > until the end of the year, but I wanted to let people know as early > as possible. As I understand it, the agenda will be rather open and > will include topics such as: > > - assessment of the the first IGF > - recommendations for future IGF meeting process > - discussion regarding the future of the advisory groups > - ideas for interim processes > > some of this has to do with multistakeholder modalities. and while > this group has gone dormant (or is that stillborn?) i am wondering > whether there is anything this group wants to work on as stock taking > and suggestions for the future. > > a. > > > > _______________________________________________ > mmwg mailing list > mmwg at wsis-cs.org > http://mailman-new.greennet.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mmwg > ____________________________________________________________ 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 From ajp at glocom.ac.jp Thu Nov 23 06:33:43 2006 From: ajp at glocom.ac.jp (Adam Peake) Date: Thu, 23 Nov 2006 20:33:43 +0900 Subject: [governance] Update on upcoming IGF consultations In-Reply-To: <456564F2.7070202@Malcolm.id.au> References: <456564F2.7070202@Malcolm.id.au> Message-ID: On 11/23/06, Jeremy Malcolm wrote: > Adam Peake wrote: > > What language would the chat sessions being in? One reason the dates > > are likely to be when they are is availability of UN translators, Feb > > 13 is apparently one of the few dates early next year when UN services > > can accommodate the meeting. > > As well as the phones for SMS messages, there were three email > addresses, English, French and Spanish, Do you know how many messages were sent to each address (substantive, not spam.) > and the English chat forum. The > emails were not monitored by the official UN translators, but by CS > volunteers. One question or comment was received in Japanese, which was > also duly translated by a volunteer, but it turned out to be spam. :-) > Do you have stats on use of the community site? I know it went down under the amount of use: what caused that? (How many concurrent users, what files were they pulling down to make it hit the limits etc. Not clear from looking at the logs of number of messages what might have caused it.) Chat rooms: would be helpful to know how many people registered, how many read (if that stat's available) how many posted. Looks like most messages came from a few people (but that's usual.) We were checking SMS messages during one of the sessions (openness I think) and passed 2 to the moderator. Couple more came in repeating what had already been covered, some in Greek that looked like spam. > It may not be ideal, but it's better than nothing: I suggest tell the > MAG we want to run with it in English at least and see if we can pick up > volunteers to handle other languages along the way. Need more than that if we want to make online participation a meaningful part of IGF for all stakeholders. Adam > The question will > be, who is going to be present in Geneva, with an Internet connection, > and clueful enough to feed the comments and questions in. > > > And how can we help this online interaction/participation be > > multi-stakeholder? Remote participation is extremely important -- but > > it needs to accommodate multiple languages and all stakeholders. > > A bit of promotion of the facilities by the Secretariat to all > stakeholders wouldn't go astray there IMHO. There was next to none for > Athens. It came down to Kieren handing out fliers and me standing up in > the opening session. We didn't even have, except for three days, a link > to the IGF 2006 Community site from the official site. Not good enough. > > > All comes down to money. If the IGF process has money it will be able > > to do much more. > > I actually think it comes down to will more than money. The reason the > IGF's Internet presence has been fragmented and closed to public > participation has had little to do with money. Sure, it would be nice > if someone would say sponsor travel costs for a clueful person to handle > remote participation issues (like that would happen), but what other > costs are there? Everything else has been volunteered. > > -- > Jeremy Malcolm LLB (Hons) B Com > Internet and Open Source lawyer, IT consultant, actor > host -t NAPTR 1.0.8.0.3.1.2.9.8.1.6.e164.org|awk -F! '{print $3}' > ____________________________________________________________ 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 From rudi.vansnick at isoc.be Thu Nov 23 06:39:43 2006 From: rudi.vansnick at isoc.be (Rudi Vansnick) Date: Thu, 23 Nov 2006 12:39:43 +0100 Subject: [governance] NomCom Process Call/Proposal In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <01c701c70ef4$12695310$6902a8c0@Acer9412> You may add my name to the list of volunteers for the Nomcom. Rudi Vansnick - Belgium > -----Original Message----- > From: izumiaizu at gmail.com [mailto:izumiaizu at gmail.com] On > Behalf Of Izumi AIZU > Sent: maandag 20 november 2006 13:50 > To: governance at lists.cpsr.org > Subject: [governance] NomCom Process Call/Proposal > > > Dear Caucus members, > > I will try to steer the Appeal Team NomCom selection process, > but we need your active participation. Given the > Christmas/New Year season, we need your early enrolment. > > Here's a proposed draft call for volunteers. Please share > your comments/questions if any. I basically like to proceed > as follows, but welcome your comments/questions. > > 1) We need at least 25 volunteers for NomCom member > candidates for running the random drawing as described below: > http://www.igcaucus.org/nomcom-process.html > > 2) Please indicate that you like to volunteer on this list. > Once you are selected as NomCom, you are not eligible to > become an Appeal Team Member. (If not selected, then you can > become Appeal Team member) > > 3) The volunteers will be posted here: > http://www.igcaucus.org/2006-AT-volunteers.html > (Thanks to Avri who made this). > > 4) The call for volunteers will be closed by 14 Dec. > > 5) The final list of volunteers will be confirmed on 15 Dec. > > 6) The random seeds will be announced on 16 Dec. > > 7) The drawing will be done on 17 Dec. > > 8) We will allow 3 days for challenges then the nomcom starts > on Dec 20. > > Then NomCom have to figure out the dates for nominations, and > go into selection process, each will take around 2 weeks (or > shorter) I assume. > > As you have seen, we have already got two volunteers, Karen > and Jeremy. SO, 23 more to go. > > Thanks, > > izumi > > -- > >> Izumi Aizu << > > Institute for HyperNetwork Society > Kumon Center, Tama University > * * * * * > << Writing the Future of the History >> > www.anr.org > > > -- > >> Izumi Aizu << > > Institute for HyperNetwork Society > Kumon Center, Tama University > * * * * * > << Writing the Future of the History >> > www.anr.org > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > ____________________________________________________________ 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 From Jeremy at Malcolm.id.au Thu Nov 23 07:18:27 2006 From: Jeremy at Malcolm.id.au (Jeremy Malcolm) Date: Thu, 23 Nov 2006 20:18:27 +0800 Subject: [governance] Update on upcoming IGF consultations In-Reply-To: References: <456564F2.7070202@Malcolm.id.au> Message-ID: <45659193.3010104@Malcolm.id.au> Adam Peake wrote: >> As well as the phones for SMS messages, there were three email >> addresses, English, French and Spanish, > > Do you know how many messages were sent to each address (substantive, > not spam.) This is going to bear out your earlier comments - there were very few, I'd say only a couple per session. But the email addresses were an afterthought and hence were only made available from day 2. Neither were they widely publicised. > Do you have stats on use of the community site? I know it went down > under the amount of use: what caused that? (How many concurrent users, > what files were they pulling down to make it hit the limits etc. Not > clear from looking at the logs of number of messages what might have > caused it.) There are 235 registered users. I don't know how many of those were concurrent, and unfortunately the site has been configured to delete access logs older than one week - sorry, my fault there. Apparently up to 16Mb memory can be required per user, so I could estimate the number of concurrent users there were when the server went down from that - I'll ask Chengatai. > Chat rooms: would be helpful to know how many people registered, how > many read (if that stat's available) how many posted. Looks like most > messages came from a few people (but that's usual.) As you mentioned, there were only ever about half a dozen at a time, but with the site being moved over from the original server to the replacement one, the chat facility was broken for a while. I got it back up again only just in time for the first session, but some people may have given up in the meantime. >> It may not be ideal, but it's better than nothing: I suggest tell the >> MAG we want to run with it in English at least and see if we can pick up >> volunteers to handle other languages along the way. > > Need more than that if we want to make online participation a > meaningful part of IGF for all stakeholders. It's a question of degree though, isn't it? Not allowing for online participation at all will be exclusive of all those but the privileged elite who can make it to Geneva. In that context, excluding "only" non-English speakers could be the lesser of two evils. -- Jeremy Malcolm LLB (Hons) B Com Internet and Open Source lawyer, IT consultant, actor host -t NAPTR 1.0.8.0.3.1.2.9.8.1.6.e164.org|awk -F! '{print $3}' ____________________________________________________________ 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 From vb at bertola.eu.org Thu Nov 23 10:20:06 2006 From: vb at bertola.eu.org (Vittorio Bertola) Date: Thu, 23 Nov 2006 16:20:06 +0100 Subject: [governance] Vote closed In-Reply-To: <52DED064-6DBA-4835-942A-D7C032BA5034@acm.org> References: <52DED064-6DBA-4835-942A-D7C032BA5034@acm.org> Message-ID: <4565BC26.5050607@bertola.eu.org> Avri Doria ha scritto: > Hi, > > Due to a software failure on the voting machine, I have had to close > the vote a few hours early - there are about 5 hours left of 19 Nov in > Honolulu and about 3 hours left in California. > > Out of 176 possible voters, 48 votes were recorded. > > The final report gives an average vote of: > > 1.23 for candidate 1. Parminder Singh > 1.04 for candidate 2. Vittorio Bertola > > This means that Parminder has the 2 year coordinator term ending in 2008 > and Vittorio has the 1 year coordinator term ending in 2007. > > I thank you all for your support during my year as interim coordinator > and wish our 2 new coordinators success. > > With this note, I end my tenure as interim coordinator. I would like to thank everyone for the trust, I'll do my best to deserve it. And thanks to Avri for all she did to bring us here! -- vb. [Vittorio Bertola - v.bertola [a] bertola.eu.org]<----- http://bertola.eu.org/ <- Prima o poi... ____________________________________________________________ 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 From wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de Thu Nov 23 12:43:43 2006 From: wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Wolfgang_Kleinw=E4chter?=) Date: Thu, 23 Nov 2006 18:43:43 +0100 Subject: [governance] ITU IG Resolution References: <45531B9C.9060007@zedat.fu-berlin.de> <4554A77E.8070805@gmx.de> <45586AF9.7010009@zedat.fu-berlin.de> <008301c70725$6b6abc50$14b2a8c0@Stern> <3AEE633F500281489D5F3303731CE9F3043915@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> <3AEE633F500281489D5F3303731CE9F304392C@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> Message-ID: <3AEE633F500281489D5F3303731CE9F3043955@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> FYI wolfgang ____________________________________________________________ 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 -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Antalya Res. 102.doc Type: application/octet-stream Size: 124928 bytes Desc: Antalya Res. 102.doc URL: From jonathanrobin at messagerie.net Thu Nov 23 13:37:54 2006 From: jonathanrobin at messagerie.net (Jonathan Robin) Date: Thu, 23 Nov 2006 19:37:54 +0100 Subject: [governance] ITU IG Resolution In-Reply-To: <3AEE633F500281489D5F3303731CE9F3043955@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> References: <45531B9C.9060007@zedat.fu-berlin.de> <4554A77E.8070805@gmx.de> <45586AF9.7010009@zedat.fu-berlin.de> <008301c70725$6b6abc50$14b2a8c0@Stern> <3AEE633F500281489D5F3303731CE9F3043915@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> <3AEE633F500281489D5F3303731CE9F304392C@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> <3AEE633F500281489D5F3303731CE9F3043955@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> Message-ID: Hello Wolfgang, thanks for that ... as one could have anticipated there is very little space envisaged for Civil Society input despite the cosmetics, and of course Enum remains an ITU priority ... ITU continues to occupy the terrain and reinforce the perception of its position while cautiously advancing its pawns in many areas. Is there much more to say ? Best regards Jonathan profile http://www.icdri.org/JR.htm __________ governance at lists.cpsr.org,Internet a écrit: >FYI > >wolfgang > >____________________________________________________________ >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 > ____________________________________________________________ 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 From Sylvia.Caras at gmail.com Thu Nov 23 13:22:33 2006 From: Sylvia.Caras at gmail.com (Sylvia Caras) Date: Thu, 23 Nov 2006 10:22:33 -0800 Subject: [governance] IGC domain name net-gov.org Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20061123102223.02b370f0@peoplewho.org> My vote would be for this design (and expanded content) http://www.net-gov.org/ at this web site address http://www.igcaucus.org/ because the latter address is somewhat transparent . And please whatever is chosen make the necessary adjustment so that igcaucus.org (without the www) will also load (I get a not found with the www in front). Sylvia ____________________________________________________________ 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 From pouzin at well.com Thu Nov 23 15:05:52 2006 From: pouzin at well.com (Louis Pouzin) Date: Thu, 23 Nov 2006 21:05:52 +0100 (CET) Subject: [governance] news: no US antitrust liability for open source Message-ID: <200611232005.kANK5q3Z001916@muse.enst.fr> Sylvia, this particular item is useful to me. Thanks. - - On Wed, 22 Nov 2006 09:06:19 -0800, Sylvia Caras wrote: >The US Seventh Circuit, known for jurists steeped in theories of law and economics, has weighed in definitively against antitrust liability for open source software. http://technology.findlaw.com/articles/00006/010425.html ---------------- I didn't get any response when I asked if items like this above could be posted on this list or should be posted elsewhere, so I'm sending this one item I read today as a trial balloon. If not here, where? If here, what parameters and limits? ____________________________________________________________ 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 From bendrath at zedat.fu-berlin.de Thu Nov 23 18:27:52 2006 From: bendrath at zedat.fu-berlin.de (Ralf Bendrath) Date: Fri, 24 Nov 2006 00:27:52 +0100 Subject: [governance] ITU IG Resolution In-Reply-To: References: <45531B9C.9060007@zedat.fu-berlin.de> <4554A77E.8070805@gmx.de> <45586AF9.7010009@zedat.fu-berlin.de> <008301c70725$6b6abc50$14b2a8c0@Stern> <3AEE633F500281489D5F3303731CE9F3043915@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> <3AEE633F500281489D5F3303731CE9F304392C@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> <3AEE633F500281489D5F3303731CE9F3043955@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> Message-ID: <45662E78.4040504@zedat.fu-berlin.de> Jonathan Robin wrote: > as one could have anticipated there is very little > space envisaged for Civil Society input despite the cosmetics, I thought they are working on it? Can anyone tell us more about the debate on CS inclusion beyond what is in the declaration? Thanks, Ralf ____________________________________________________________ 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 From bfausett at internet.law.pro Thu Nov 23 18:29:37 2006 From: bfausett at internet.law.pro (Bret Fausett) Date: Thu, 23 Nov 2006 15:29:37 -0800 Subject: [governance] Update on upcoming IGF consultations In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <000601c70f57$3e435540$0201000a@CCKLLP.local> You can set up on Ninca Island on Second Life. http://tinyurl.com/ydny7r > Earlier consultations were webcast (English and French -- > language always an issue), remote participation rather than > just listening in would be ideal. > > Adam > > > If so, facilitated by whom? I can't afford to fly > > to Geneva from my > > own pocket, and it was on my and Kieren McCarthy's shoulders in > > Athens. ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.cpsr.org To be removed from the list, send any message to: governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org For all list information and functions, see: http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance From bfausett at internet.law.pro Thu Nov 23 18:34:37 2006 From: bfausett at internet.law.pro (Bret Fausett) Date: Thu, 23 Nov 2006 15:34:37 -0800 Subject: [governance] ITU IG Resolution In-Reply-To: <3AEE633F500281489D5F3303731CE9F3043955@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> Message-ID: <000701c70f57$f0e59e60$0201000a@CCKLLP.local> That's an amazing resolution. My hat is off to anyone who can write six pages on the management of Internet domain names and addresses and not mention ICANN even once! > -----Original Message----- > From: Wolfgang Kleinwächter > [mailto:wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de] > Sent: Thursday, November 23, 2006 9:44 AM > To: wsis at ilpostino.jpberlin.de > Cc: governance at lists.cpsr.org; plenary at wsis-cs.org > Subject: [governance] ITU IG Resolution > > FYI > > wolfgang > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > ____________________________________________________________ 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 From Jeremy at Malcolm.id.au Thu Nov 23 19:05:28 2006 From: Jeremy at Malcolm.id.au (Jeremy Malcolm) Date: Fri, 24 Nov 2006 08:05:28 +0800 Subject: [governance] Update on upcoming IGF consultations In-Reply-To: <000601c70f57$3e435540$0201000a@CCKLLP.local> References: <000601c70f57$3e435540$0201000a@CCKLLP.local> Message-ID: <45663748.8070008@Malcolm.id.au> Bret Fausett wrote: > You can set up on Ninca Island on Second Life. > > http://tinyurl.com/ydny7r I can predict what others will say to that, but I actually don't think it's such a bad idea provided that an IRC gateway could be set up for those who don't/can't run SL. Do you know much about that? IRC is actually a really good way to do simultaneous translation, too. The translators would monitor their own language channel and the English channel and translate between the two. -- Jeremy Malcolm LLB (Hons) B Com Internet and Open Source lawyer, IT consultant, actor host -t NAPTR 1.0.8.0.3.1.2.9.8.1.6.e164.org|awk -F! '{print $3}' ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.cpsr.org To be removed from the list, send any message to: governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org For all list information and functions, see: http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance From bfausett at internet.law.pro Thu Nov 23 19:22:42 2006 From: bfausett at internet.law.pro (Bret Fausett) Date: Thu, 23 Nov 2006 16:22:42 -0800 Subject: [governance] Update on upcoming IGF consultations In-Reply-To: <45663748.8070008@Malcolm.id.au> Message-ID: <000001c70f5e$a8b73570$351fa8c0@CCKLLP.local> Yes, indeed! An IRC-SL gateway is actually part of the functionality that will be in place for the ICANN meeting in Sao Paulo! You'll also be able to view the video feed from Brazil inside the SL conference center. It's a very high bandwidth answer to the remote participation problem, so not a solution for the developing world. But it's more proof of concept at this point than anything. Five years from now, I think this is how we'll all conference. > I can predict what others will say to that, but I actually > don't think it's such a bad idea provided that an IRC gateway > could be set up for those who don't/can't run SL. Do you > know much about that? IRC is actually a really good way to > do simultaneous translation, too. The translators would > monitor their own language channel and the English channel > and translate between the two. > > -- > Jeremy Malcolm LLB (Hons) B Com > Internet and Open Source lawyer, IT consultant, actor host -t > NAPTR 1.0.8.0.3.1.2.9.8.1.6.e164.org|awk -F! '{print $3}' > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > ____________________________________________________________ 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 From bendrath at zedat.fu-berlin.de Thu Nov 23 19:25:46 2006 From: bendrath at zedat.fu-berlin.de (Ralf Bendrath) Date: Fri, 24 Nov 2006 01:25:46 +0100 Subject: [governance] Update on upcoming IGF consultations In-Reply-To: <45663748.8070008@Malcolm.id.au> References: <000601c70f57$3e435540$0201000a@CCKLLP.local> <45663748.8070008@Malcolm.id.au> Message-ID: <45663C0A.407@zedat.fu-berlin.de> Jeremy Malcolm wrote: > Bret Fausett wrote: >> You can set up on Ninca Island on Second Life. > I can predict what others will say to that, but I actually don't think > it's such a bad idea I still say it: Standard argument: Don't believe the hype. SL is still smaller than my little city. Economic argument: As long as we don't have a reliable chat server and less than ten people in the forums or using the online participation functions, setting up shop in SL would be a huge waste of time and energy. Political Argument I: SL is excluding more than including. Even I can't run it on my laptop's graphics chip. (less than 3 years old) Political Argument II: If we move too far into cyberland, the governments won't follow us. To a lot of them, the whole IGF process was already way too fast and too CS-driven. My 5 cents. Ralf ____________________________________________________________ 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 From wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de Fri Nov 24 03:21:30 2006 From: wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Wolfgang_Kleinw=E4chter?=) Date: Fri, 24 Nov 2006 09:21:30 +0100 Subject: AW: [governance] ITU IG Resolution References: <45531B9C.9060007@zedat.fu-berlin.de> <4554A77E.8070805@gmx.de> <45586AF9.7010009@zedat.fu-berlin.de> <008301c70725$6b6abc50$14b2a8c0@Stern> <3AEE633F500281489D5F3303731CE9F3043915@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> <3AEE633F500281489D5F3303731CE9F304392C@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> <3AEE633F500281489D5F3303731CE9F3043955@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> <99E7300F-5E4C-4AF9-B8EE-EA847C70D007@acm.org> Message-ID: <3AEE633F500281489D5F3303731CE9F3043956@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> Avri: Dear dr mmwg co-chair, wouldn't this be a good mission for mmwg? Wolfgang: Any idea? First thing is we need a very deep and creative analysis of the text. I heard that one negotiator said that the text is vague enough that everybody can read everything. Another guy told me that it will depend to a high degree from the new SG what he plans to do. So let´s look what the African governments - who backed him against the Europeans - will plan. The only thing they can celebrate at the moment - and they celebrate it - is AFRINIC, a privat non-governmental body linked to ICANN. We should go forward in strengthening the African Civil Society Internet Governance groupings. The African boom in Mobile Telephony (pushed also by ITU) will have certainly effects to Internet Development in the continent. What are the regulatory models? Kenya or South Africa? Ghana or Tunisia? It is like chess and not yet over. ITU PP 2010 is in Mexico. This is the time when the IGF mandate is over best wishes wolfgang ________________________________ Von: Avri Doria [mailto:avri at acm.org] Gesendet: Do 23.11.2006 21:06 An: Wolfgang Kleinwächter Betreff: Re: [governance] ITU IG Resolution Dear dr mmwg co-chair, wouldn't this be a good mission for mmwg? a. On 23 nov 2006, at 12.43, Wolfgang Kleinwächter wrote: > FYI > > wolfgang > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > ____________________________________________________________ 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 From drake at hei.unige.ch Fri Nov 24 04:58:52 2006 From: drake at hei.unige.ch (William Drake) Date: Fri, 24 Nov 2006 10:58:52 +0100 Subject: [governance] ITU IG Resolution In-Reply-To: <000701c70f57$f0e59e60$0201000a@CCKLLP.local> Message-ID: Hi, On 11/24/06 12:34 AM, "Bret Fausett" wrote: > That's an amazing resolution. My hat is off to anyone who can write six > pages on the management of Internet domain names and addresses and not > mention ICANN even once! Amazing perhaps, but also entirely predictable; did anyone really believe the spin that the Tunis Agenda constituted a unanimous intergovernmental bear hug for ICANN? Moreover, while the TA called for enhanced cooperation on public policies to be started by the UN Secretary-General---involving all relevant organizations and stakeholders---by the end of the first quarter of 2006, it seems that not much has happened besides some sotto vocci, selective bilateral/small-n consultations. Not surprising then that governments would want to see the agenda carried forward on a multilateral basis in the ITU. Of course, the "involving all stakeholders" language may be of little practical consequence in the ITU without reforms that will not be forthcoming in the near term. Some other notable bits of word-craft for deconstruction: "the development of Internet Protocol (IP)-based networks and the Internet, taking into account the requirements, features and interoperability of next-generation networks (NGN);" " Member States represent the interests of the population of the country or territory for which a ccTLD has been delegated;" " the management of Internet domain names and addresses and other Internet resources within the mandate of ITU." [phrase appears five times in the text] Cheers, Bill ____________________________________________________________ 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 From ajp at glocom.ac.jp Fri Nov 24 06:04:31 2006 From: ajp at glocom.ac.jp (Adam Peake) Date: Fri, 24 Nov 2006 20:04:31 +0900 Subject: [governance] ITU IG Resolution In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: >Hi, > >On 11/24/06 12:34 AM, "Bret Fausett" wrote: > >> That's an amazing resolution. My hat is off to anyone who can write six >> pages on the management of Internet domain names and addresses and not >> mention ICANN even once! > >Amazing perhaps, but also entirely predictable; did anyone really believe >the spin that the Tunis Agenda constituted a unanimous intergovernmental >bear hug for ICANN? Moreover, while the TA called for enhanced cooperation >on public policies to be started by the UN Secretary-General---involving all >relevant organizations and stakeholders---by the end of the first quarter of >2006, it seems that not much has happened besides some sotto vocci, >selective bilateral/small-n consultations. Not surprising then that >governments would want to see the agenda carried forward on a multilateral >basis in the ITU. Of course, the "involving all stakeholders" language may >be of little practical consequence in the ITU without reforms that will not >be forthcoming in the near term. > >Some other notable bits of word-craft for deconstruction: > >"the development of Internet Protocol (IP)-based networks and the Internet, >taking into account the requirements, features and interoperability of >next-generation networks (NGN);" > >" Member States represent the interests of the population of the country or >territory for which a ccTLD has been delegated;" This is an interesting problem. The US (USTR) is writing clauses into bilateral free trade agreements requiring the ccTLDs of the country signing the FTA to adopt some form of dispute resolution policy. Example, words from the US/AU agreement goes on to also indicate whois "each Party shall require that the management of its country-code top-level domain (ccTLD) provide an appropriate procedure for the settlement of disputes, based on the principles established in the Uniform Domain-Name Dispute-Resolution Policy. 2. Each Party shall require that the management of its ccTLD provide online public access to a reliable and accurate database of contact information for domain-name registrants." Search string such as "ccTLD free trade agreement" in google finds a bunch. I would think one way to read this is that US also thinks member states control ccTLDs and can enforce rules on them. Not what I thought the US position was in WSIS. But I might be getting hot&bothered over a non-issue... Adam >" the management of Internet domain names and addresses and other Internet >resources within the mandate of ITU." [phrase appears five times in the >text] > >Cheers, > >Bill > > >____________________________________________________________ >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 ____________________________________________________________ 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 From kino at iris.se Fri Nov 24 06:03:32 2006 From: kino at iris.se (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Kicki_Nordstr=F6m?=) Date: Fri, 24 Nov 2006 12:03:32 +0100 Subject: SV: [governance] ITU IG Resolution In-Reply-To: A<3AEE633F500281489D5F3303731CE9F3043956@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> Message-ID: <3DF8101092666E4A9020D949E419EB6F01347490@ensms02.iris.se> Dear all, I am missing the so called "vulnerable groups " in the draft resolution/statement. Nothing on women, young persons indigenous peoples, , rural areas or on persons with disabilities! I am convinced that the world is identified as a man if nothing else is stated, so we need a gender approach to this document indeed to also make sure that women will be part of the ICT development. Yours Kicki Kicki Nordström World Blind Union (WBU) Immediate Past President Chair, WBU Working Group on UN Issues c/o SRF 122 88 Enskede Sweden Tel: +46 (0)8 399 000 Fax: +46 (0)8 725 99 20 Cell: +46 (0)70 766 18 19 E-mail: kino at iris.se -----Ursprungligt meddelande----- Från: Wolfgang Kleinwächter [mailto:wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de] Skickat: den 24 november 2006 09:22 Till: Avri Doria Kopia: governance at lists.cpsr.org Ämne: AW: [governance] ITU IG Resolution Avri: Dear dr mmwg co-chair, wouldn't this be a good mission for mmwg? Wolfgang: Any idea? First thing is we need a very deep and creative analysis of the text. I heard that one negotiator said that the text is vague enough that everybody can read everything. Another guy told me that it will depend to a high degree from the new SG what he plans to do. So let´s look what the African governments - who backed him against the Europeans - will plan. The only thing they can celebrate at the moment - and they celebrate it - is AFRINIC, a privat non-governmental body linked to ICANN. We should go forward in strengthening the African Civil Society Internet Governance groupings. The African boom in Mobile Telephony (pushed also by ITU) will have certainly effects to Internet Development in the continent. What are the regulatory models? Kenya or South Africa? Ghana or Tunisia? It is like chess and not yet over. ITU PP 2010 is in Mexico. This is the time when the IGF mandate is over best wishes wolfgang ________________________________ Von: Avri Doria [mailto:avri at acm.org] Gesendet: Do 23.11.2006 21:06 An: Wolfgang Kleinwächter Betreff: Re: [governance] ITU IG Resolution Dear dr mmwg co-chair, wouldn't this be a good mission for mmwg? a. On 23 nov 2006, at 12.43, Wolfgang Kleinwächter wrote: > FYI > > wolfgang > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > ____________________________________________________________ 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 ____________________________________________________________ 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 From ajp at glocom.ac.jp Fri Nov 24 06:34:14 2006 From: ajp at glocom.ac.jp (Adam Peake) Date: Fri, 24 Nov 2006 20:34:14 +0900 Subject: [governance] Update on upcoming IGF consultations In-Reply-To: <45663C0A.407@zedat.fu-berlin.de> References: <000601c70f57$3e435540$0201000a@CCKLLP.local> <45663748.8070008@Malcolm.id.au> <45663C0A.407@zedat.fu-berlin.de> Message-ID: Ralf thanks. And there's probably a development argument lurking somewhere as well. Bret, don't mean to be dismissive of a good suggestion, but I think there are many simpler and more accessible options to try and make work before looking at second life or anything similar. But for the meeting in Rio next November, using SL at least as a showcase of what's possible would make great sense. Particularly if the meeting again tries and consider emerging issues. Perhaps we can talk about it in Sao Paulo, Joi and Susan might also be interested. Adam >Jeremy Malcolm wrote: >>Bret Fausett wrote: >>>You can set up on Ninca Island on Second Life. > >>I can predict what others will say to that, but I actually don't >>think it's such a bad idea > >I still say it: > >Standard argument: Don't believe the hype. SL is still smaller than >my little city. > >Economic argument: As long as we don't have a reliable chat server >and less than ten people in the forums or using the online >participation functions, setting up shop in SL would be a huge waste >of time and energy. > >Political Argument I: SL is excluding more than including. Even I >can't run it on my laptop's graphics chip. (less than 3 years old) > >Political Argument II: If we move too far into cyberland, the >governments won't follow us. To a lot of them, the whole IGF process >was already way too fast and too CS-driven. > >My 5 cents. > >Ralf >____________________________________________________________ >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 ____________________________________________________________ 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 From bendrath at zedat.fu-berlin.de Fri Nov 24 07:58:37 2006 From: bendrath at zedat.fu-berlin.de (Ralf Bendrath) Date: Fri, 24 Nov 2006 13:58:37 +0100 Subject: [governance] Re: ITU IG Resolution Message-ID: <4566EC7D.1050305@zedat.fu-berlin.de> Forwarded on behalf of Monika Ermert. -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Fw: Re: [governance] ITU IG Resolution Date: Fri, 24 Nov 2006 12:53:48 +0100 From: Monika Ermert Reply-To: Monika Ermert >> as one could have anticipated there is very little >> space envisaged for Civil Society input despite the cosmetics, > I thought they are working on it? > Can anyone tell us more about the debate on CS inclusion beyond what is in > the declaration? There is a special resolution on the question of a multistakeholder particiation in the ITU, based on a proposal by Argentina and Switzerland who also chaired the ad-hoc working group on that issue. Debates about the question to open up according to the multistakeholder-model were quite intense even if the proposal is careful in first asking for a study. Result in short: "to conduct a study of the participation of all relevant stakeholders in the activities of the Union related to WSIS;" and "that all measures regarding the participation of relevant stakeholders in ITU’s activities related to WSIS shall respect the agreed strong development orientation of the UN system-wide follow-up of WSIS" According to my understanding there is a clear focus on WSIS issues - not on ITU in general, on the contrary the intergovernmental nature of ITU is underscored in the resolution. Other relevant resultions (one on IDN, that even talks about regional root servers in one sentence, on on WSIS follow-up, one on security); there might be others. Best, Monika ____________________________________________________________ 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 From Mueller at syr.edu Fri Nov 24 12:05:44 2006 From: Mueller at syr.edu (Milton Mueller) Date: Fri, 24 Nov 2006 12:05:44 -0500 Subject: [governance] ITU IG Resolution Message-ID: Adam: These free trade agreements that attempt to globalize US anti-privacy Whois policies are truly evil things, and indicate the degree to which US of A policy is driven by intellectual property interests. But I am not sure what they have to do with the ITU, except that the USA has been promoting WTO and trade agreements as a way of bypassing ITU power over the international telecom sector for a decade now. >>> ajp at glocom.ac.jp 11/24/2006 6:04 AM >>> >Hi, > >On 11/24/06 12:34 AM, "Bret Fausett" wrote: > >> That's an amazing resolution. My hat is off to anyone who can write six >> pages on the management of Internet domain names and addresses and not >> mention ICANN even once! > >Amazing perhaps, but also entirely predictable; did anyone really believe >the spin that the Tunis Agenda constituted a unanimous intergovernmental >bear hug for ICANN? Moreover, while the TA called for enhanced cooperation >on public policies to be started by the UN Secretary-General---involving all >relevant organizations and stakeholders---by the end of the first quarter of >2006, it seems that not much has happened besides some sotto vocci, >selective bilateral/small-n consultations. Not surprising then that >governments would want to see the agenda carried forward on a multilateral >basis in the ITU. Of course, the "involving all stakeholders" language may >be of little practical consequence in the ITU without reforms that will not >be forthcoming in the near term. > >Some other notable bits of word-craft for deconstruction: > >"the development of Internet Protocol (IP)-based networks and the Internet, >taking into account the requirements, features and interoperability of >next-generation networks (NGN);" > >" Member States represent the interests of the population of the country or >territory for which a ccTLD has been delegated;" This is an interesting problem. The US (USTR) is writing clauses into bilateral free trade agreements requiring the ccTLDs of the country signing the FTA to adopt some form of dispute resolution policy. Example, words from the US/AU agreement goes on to also indicate whois "each Party shall require that the management of its country-code top-level domain (ccTLD) provide an appropriate procedure for the settlement of disputes, based on the principles established in the Uniform Domain-Name Dispute-Resolution Policy. 2. Each Party shall require that the management of its ccTLD provide online public access to a reliable and accurate database of contact information for domain-name registrants." Search string such as "ccTLD free trade agreement" in google finds a bunch. I would think one way to read this is that US also thinks member states control ccTLDs and can enforce rules on them. Not what I thought the US position was in WSIS. But I might be getting hot&bothered over a non-issue... Adam >" the management of Internet domain names and addresses and other Internet >resources within the mandate of ITU." [phrase appears five times in the >text] > >Cheers, > >Bill > > >____________________________________________________________ >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 ____________________________________________________________ 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 ____________________________________________________________ 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 From jeanette at wz-berlin.de Fri Nov 24 12:10:53 2006 From: jeanette at wz-berlin.de (Jeanette Hofmann) Date: Fri, 24 Nov 2006 17:10:53 +0000 Subject: [governance] ITU IG Resolution In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4567279D.5070705@wz-berlin.de> Milton Mueller schrieb: > Adam: > These free trade agreements that attempt to globalize US anti-privacy > Whois policies are truly evil things, and indicate the degree to which > US of A policy is driven by intellectual property interests. > > But I am not sure what they have to do with the ITU, except that the > USA has been promoting WTO and trade agreements as a way of bypassing > ITU power over the international telecom sector for a decade now. It seems, the USG also bypasses ICANN and assumes that contracting governments have full control over the management of their ccTLD. One wonders what the ccNSO is for if the US government can negotiate all relevant matters in bilateral contracts, no? jeanette > >>>> ajp at glocom.ac.jp 11/24/2006 6:04 AM >>> >> Hi, >> >> On 11/24/06 12:34 AM, "Bret Fausett" > wrote: >>> That's an amazing resolution. My hat is off to anyone who can write > six >>> pages on the management of Internet domain names and addresses and > not >>> mention ICANN even once! >> Amazing perhaps, but also entirely predictable; did anyone really > believe >> the spin that the Tunis Agenda constituted a unanimous > intergovernmental >> bear hug for ICANN? Moreover, while the TA called for enhanced > cooperation >> on public policies to be started by the UN > Secretary-General---involving all >> relevant organizations and stakeholders---by the end of the first > quarter of >> 2006, it seems that not much has happened besides some sotto vocci, >> selective bilateral/small-n consultations. Not surprising then that >> governments would want to see the agenda carried forward on a > multilateral >> basis in the ITU. Of course, the "involving all stakeholders" > language may >> be of little practical consequence in the ITU without reforms that > will not >> be forthcoming in the near term. >> >> Some other notable bits of word-craft for deconstruction: >> >> "the development of Internet Protocol (IP)-based networks and the > Internet, >> taking into account the requirements, features and interoperability > of >> next-generation networks (NGN);" >> >> " Member States represent the interests of the population of the > country or >> territory for which a ccTLD has been delegated;" > > > > This is an interesting problem. The US (USTR) is writing clauses > into bilateral free trade agreements requiring the ccTLDs of the > country signing the FTA to adopt some form of dispute resolution > policy. Example, words from the US/AU agreement goes on to also > indicate whois "each Party shall require that the management of its > country-code top-level domain (ccTLD) provide an appropriate > procedure for the settlement of disputes, based on the principles > established in the Uniform Domain-Name Dispute-Resolution Policy. > > 2. Each Party shall require that the management of its ccTLD provide > online public access to a reliable and accurate database of contact > information for domain-name registrants." > > Search string such as "ccTLD free trade agreement" in google finds a > bunch. > > I would think one way to read this is that US also thinks member > states control ccTLDs and can enforce rules on them. Not what I > thought the US position was in WSIS. But I might be getting > hot&bothered over a non-issue... > > Adam > > > > > > >> " the management of Internet domain names and addresses and other > Internet >> resources within the mandate of ITU." [phrase appears five times in > the >> text] >> >> Cheers, >> >> Bill >> >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 ____________________________________________________________ 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 From ldmisekfalkoff at gmail.com Fri Nov 24 12:44:10 2006 From: ldmisekfalkoff at gmail.com (l.d.misek-falkoff) Date: Fri, 24 Nov 2006 12:44:10 -0500 Subject: *Diversity* and ITC (also Re: [governance] ITU IG Resolution) Message-ID: <8cbfe7410611240944j20281772ya81038377b6a1d83@mail.gmail.com> Greetings and: Brava to Kicki's posts and those of others emphasizing diversity considerations, even imperatives (paraphrase). And here's an e-peg on which to hang *the hat of hope* in this direction: The draft Resolution states early on (goal and incentive to...): "promote the extension of the benefits of new telecommunication technologies to *all* the world's inhabitants and to harmonize the efforts of Member States and Sector Members in the attainment of those ends;" [emphasis added]. Best wishes and Respectfully Interfacing (Achieving *Dialogue* While Cherishing *Diversity*), LDMF. n 11/24/06, Kicki Nordström wrote: > Dear all, > > I am missing the so called "vulnerable groups " in the draft > resolution/statement. Nothing on women, young persons indigenous peoples, , > rural areas or on persons with disabilities! > > I am convinced that the world is identified as a man if nothing else is > stated, so we need a gender approach to this document indeed to also make > sure that women will be part of the ICT development. > > Yours > Kicki > > Kicki Nordström > World Blind Union (WBU) > Immediate Past President > Chair, WBU Working Group on UN Issues > c/o SRF > 122 88 Enskede > Sweden > Tel: +46 (0)8 399 000 > Fax: +46 (0)8 725 99 20 > Cell: +46 (0)70 766 18 19 > E-mail: kino at iris.se > > > -----Ursprungligt meddelande----- > Från: Wolfgang Kleinwächter [mailto: > wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de] > Skickat: den 24 november 2006 09:22 > Till: Avri Doria > Kopia: governance at lists.cpsr.org > Ämne: AW: [governance] ITU IG Resolution > > Avri: > > > Dear dr mmwg co-chair, wouldn't this be a good mission for mmwg? > > Wolfgang: > > Any idea? First thing is we need a very deep and creative analysis of the > text. I heard that one negotiator said that the text is vague enough that > everybody can read everything. Another guy told me that it will depend to a > high degree from the new SG what he plans to do. So let´s look what the > African governments - who backed him against the Europeans - will plan. The > only thing they can celebrate at the moment - and they celebrate it - is > AFRINIC, a privat non-governmental body linked to ICANN. We should go > forward in strengthening the African Civil Society Internet Governance > groupings. The African boom in Mobile Telephony (pushed also by ITU) will > have certainly effects to Internet Development in the continent. What are > the regulatory models? Kenya or South Africa? Ghana or Tunisia? > > It is like chess and not yet over. ITU PP 2010 is in Mexico. This is the > time when the IGF mandate is over > > best wishes > > wolfgang > > > ________________________________ > > Von: Avri Doria [mailto:avri at acm.org] > Gesendet: Do 23.11.2006 21:06 > An: Wolfgang Kleinwächter > Betreff: Re: [governance] ITU IG Resolution > > > > Dear dr mmwg co-chair, > > wouldn't this be a good mission for mmwg? > > a. > > > On 23 nov 2006, at 12.43, Wolfgang Kleinwächter wrote: > > > FYI > > > > wolfgang > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > > 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 > > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > -- Dr. Linda D. Misek-Falkoff (Ph.D., J.D.) (914) 769 3652 InterNetizen, ARPANet-Internet 45+ years.. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: message-footer.txt URL: From jhunker at andrew.cmu.edu Fri Nov 24 16:55:08 2006 From: jhunker at andrew.cmu.edu (Jeffrey Hunker) Date: Fri, 24 Nov 2006 16:55:08 -0500 (EST) Subject: [governance] news: no US antitrust liability for open source In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.2.20061122090605.04536b68@peoplewho.org> References: <7.0.1.0.2.20061122090605.04536b68@peoplewho.org> Message-ID: <3216.172.190.12.38.1164405308.squirrel@172.190.12.38> Sylvia, I for one found your posting (and the source -- FindLaw) to be very valuable. Thank you for sharing this. Jeffrey Hunker Carnegie Mellon University > The US Seventh Circuit, known for jurists steeped in theories of law and > economics, has weighed in definitively against antitrust liability for > open source software. > > http://technology.findlaw.com/articles/00006/010425.html > > ---------------- > > I didn't get any response when I asked if items like this above could be > posted on this list or should be posted elsewhere, so I'm sending this one > item I read today as a trial balloon. If not here, where? If here, what > parameters and limits? > > Sylvia > > ____________________________________________________________ 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 > > ____________________________________________________________ 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 From David_Allen_AB63 at post.harvard.edu Sat Nov 25 00:54:25 2006 From: David_Allen_AB63 at post.harvard.edu (David Allen) Date: Sat, 25 Nov 2006 00:54:25 -0500 Subject: [governance] Re: Update on upcoming IGF consultations In-Reply-To: <45663C0A.407@zedat.fu-berlin.de> References: <000601c70f57$3e435540$0201000a@CCKLLP.local> <45663748.8070008@Malcolm.id.au> <45663C0A.407@zedat.fu-berlin.de> Message-ID: Noticing that, in particular, At 1:25 AM +0100 11/24/06, Ralf Bendrath wrote: >As long as we ... have ... less than ten people in the forums or using the online participation functions >... >If we move too far into cyberland, the governments won't follow us. To a lot of them, the whole IGF process was already way too fast and too CS-driven. This brings back to the fore what has been said before. For CS to be a credible partner to governments in the brave new MS world, it needs reasonable representation, from around the world. That reality is many, many CS organizations, well established in their lands. That sets a target of course, far beyond a few brave pioneers in chat rooms. Or, quite beyond the small kernel of people so far voting in this CS. Something to work for. As to online tools themselves - probably a more delicate subject here - many will see them only as an adjunct to and in support of real sitdowns. (Only) when the real limitations dictate usage - in other words, when face-to-face is the starting point and online is jiggered to be 'in support' - does it seem likely they might be given serious consideration. That said, Second Life and its brethren metaverses surely are a striking new entry, not possible without ICTs. Will they, in time, make more real the virtual meetings that, as just above, many would now find less than satisfactory? Major organizations are now trying them on for size. Along with some realism about adequate representation in CS and about the appropriate use of tools, surely we want to stay tuned. In that regard as Adam brings up, development must be on our minds, At 8:34 PM +0900 11/24/06, Adam Peake wrote: >using SL at least as a showcase of what's possible Rik P has raised my consciousness on this in Second Life, pointing out a simulation of Darfur there ... maybe not communications policy per se, but ... http://slurl.com/secondlife/Better%20World/194/243/22/?img=http%3A//images17.fotki.com/v305/photos/2/291733/3348416/stratics_032-vi.jpg&title=Camp%20Darfur%20on%20Better%20World%20Island (once you teleport to near the Peace & Justice Center, follow the red arrow and 'fly' over the little inlet to Camp Darfur.) David ____________________________________________________________ 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 From wcurrie at apc.org Sat Nov 25 09:46:12 2006 From: wcurrie at apc.org (wcurrie at apc.org) Date: Sat, 25 Nov 2006 12:46:12 -0200 (BRST) Subject: [governance] ITU IG Resolution In-Reply-To: <4567279D.5070705@wz-berlin.de> References: <4567279D.5070705@wz-berlin.de> Message-ID: <4134.66.156.104.114.1164465972.squirrel@webmail.apc.org> >so the ITU is mobilising for a process of enhanced cooperation which the UN SG failed to initiate in the first quarter of 2006. how is the ITU going to get the UN SG to do this: by getting member states into a process of discussion and agitation on the metter? what do we know about the incoming UN SG's views on the ITU - is he likely to allow the ITU to take a lead here? will something happen in the first quarter of 2007? should the IGC prepare to communicate with the incoming SG (both UN and ITU) about how this process of enhanced cooperation may be started and how the Geneva Principles on IG can be usefully applied? willie > > Milton Mueller schrieb: >> Adam: >> These free trade agreements that attempt to globalize US anti-privacy >> Whois policies are truly evil things, and indicate the degree to which >> US of A policy is driven by intellectual property interests. >> >> But I am not sure what they have to do with the ITU, except that the >> USA has been promoting WTO and trade agreements as a way of bypassing >> ITU power over the international telecom sector for a decade now. > > It seems, the USG also bypasses ICANN and assumes that contracting > governments have full control over the management of their ccTLD. One > wonders what the ccNSO is for if the US government can negotiate all > relevant matters in bilateral contracts, no? > jeanette > >> >>>>> ajp at glocom.ac.jp 11/24/2006 6:04 AM >>> >>> Hi, >>> >>> On 11/24/06 12:34 AM, "Bret Fausett" >> wrote: >>>> That's an amazing resolution. My hat is off to anyone who can write >> six >>>> pages on the management of Internet domain names and addresses and >> not >>>> mention ICANN even once! >>> Amazing perhaps, but also entirely predictable; did anyone really >> believe >>> the spin that the Tunis Agenda constituted a unanimous >> intergovernmental >>> bear hug for ICANN? Moreover, while the TA called for enhanced >> cooperation >>> on public policies to be started by the UN >> Secretary-General---involving all >>> relevant organizations and stakeholders---by the end of the first >> quarter of >>> 2006, it seems that not much has happened besides some sotto vocci, >>> selective bilateral/small-n consultations. Not surprising then that >>> governments would want to see the agenda carried forward on a >> multilateral >>> basis in the ITU. Of course, the "involving all stakeholders" >> language may >>> be of little practical consequence in the ITU without reforms that >> will not >>> be forthcoming in the near term. >>> >>> Some other notable bits of word-craft for deconstruction: >>> >>> "the development of Internet Protocol (IP)-based networks and the >> Internet, >>> taking into account the requirements, features and interoperability >> of >>> next-generation networks (NGN);" >>> >>> " Member States represent the interests of the population of the >> country or >>> territory for which a ccTLD has been delegated;" >> >> >> >> This is an interesting problem. The US (USTR) is writing clauses >> into bilateral free trade agreements requiring the ccTLDs of the >> country signing the FTA to adopt some form of dispute resolution >> policy. Example, words from the US/AU agreement goes on to also >> indicate whois "each Party shall require that the management of its >> country-code top-level domain (ccTLD) provide an appropriate >> procedure for the settlement of disputes, based on the principles >> established in the Uniform Domain-Name Dispute-Resolution Policy. >> >> 2. Each Party shall require that the management of its ccTLD provide >> online public access to a reliable and accurate database of contact >> information for domain-name registrants." >> >> Search string such as "ccTLD free trade agreement" in google finds a >> bunch. >> >> I would think one way to read this is that US also thinks member >> states control ccTLDs and can enforce rules on them. Not what I >> thought the US position was in WSIS. But I might be getting >> hot&bothered over a non-issue... >> >> Adam >> >> >> >> >> >> >>> " the management of Internet domain names and addresses and other >> Internet >>> resources within the mandate of ITU." [phrase appears five times in >> the >>> text] >>> >>> Cheers, >>> >>> Bill >>> >>> >>> ____________________________________________________________ >>> 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 >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > ____________________________________________________________ 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 From ldmisekfalkoff at gmail.com Sat Nov 25 10:29:02 2006 From: ldmisekfalkoff at gmail.com (l.d.misek-falkoff) Date: Sat, 25 Nov 2006 10:29:02 -0500 Subject: [governance] ITU IG Resolution In-Reply-To: <4134.66.156.104.114.1164465972.squirrel@webmail.apc.org> References: <4567279D.5070705@wz-berlin.de> <4134.66.156.104.114.1164465972.squirrel@webmail.apc.org> Message-ID: <8cbfe7410611250729w543b9f82mad0877c55304edd9@mail.gmail.com> Dear Willie and All: A highlighted theme in the incoming SG's early statements is: *bringing the U.N, to the people.* While this is not exactly the same as (but very well may entail) bringing the world to the people, the world to the world, the people to the people, and other such relational predicates, it is something. A something which could be rather.... huge. Hope this helps and at your continuing service, LDMF. On 11/25/06, wcurrie at apc.org wrote: > > >so the ITU is mobilising for a process of enhanced cooperation which the > UN SG failed to initiate in the first quarter of 2006. > > how is the ITU going to get the UN SG to do this: by getting member states > into a process of discussion and agitation on the metter? > > what do we know about the incoming UN SG's views on the ITU - is he likely > to allow the ITU to take a lead here? > > will something happen in the first quarter of 2007? should the IGC prepare > to communicate with the incoming SG (both UN and ITU) about how this > process of enhanced cooperation may be started and how the Geneva > Principles on IG can be usefully applied? > > willie > > > > Milton Mueller schrieb: > >> Adam: > >> These free trade agreements that attempt to globalize US anti-privacy > >> Whois policies are truly evil things, and indicate the degree to which > >> US of A policy is driven by intellectual property interests. > >> > >> But I am not sure what they have to do with the ITU, except that the > >> USA has been promoting WTO and trade agreements as a way of bypassing > >> ITU power over the international telecom sector for a decade now. > > > > It seems, the USG also bypasses ICANN and assumes that contracting > > governments have full control over the management of their ccTLD. One > > wonders what the ccNSO is for if the US government can negotiate all > > relevant matters in bilateral contracts, no? > > jeanette > > > >> > >>>>> ajp at glocom.ac.jp 11/24/2006 6:04 AM >>> > >>> Hi, > >>> > >>> On 11/24/06 12:34 AM, "Bret Fausett" > >> wrote: > >>>> That's an amazing resolution. My hat is off to anyone who can write > >> six > >>>> pages on the management of Internet domain names and addresses and > >> not > >>>> mention ICANN even once! > >>> Amazing perhaps, but also entirely predictable; did anyone really > >> believe > >>> the spin that the Tunis Agenda constituted a unanimous > >> intergovernmental > >>> bear hug for ICANN? Moreover, while the TA called for enhanced > >> cooperation > >>> on public policies to be started by the UN > >> Secretary-General---involving all > >>> relevant organizations and stakeholders---by the end of the first > >> quarter of > >>> 2006, it seems that not much has happened besides some sotto vocci, > >>> selective bilateral/small-n consultations. Not surprising then that > >>> governments would want to see the agenda carried forward on a > >> multilateral > >>> basis in the ITU. Of course, the "involving all stakeholders" > >> language may > >>> be of little practical consequence in the ITU without reforms that > >> will not > >>> be forthcoming in the near term. > >>> > >>> Some other notable bits of word-craft for deconstruction: > >>> > >>> "the development of Internet Protocol (IP)-based networks and the > >> Internet, > >>> taking into account the requirements, features and interoperability > >> of > >>> next-generation networks (NGN);" > >>> > >>> " Member States represent the interests of the population of the > >> country or > >>> territory for which a ccTLD has been delegated;" > >> > >> > >> > >> This is an interesting problem. The US (USTR) is writing clauses > >> into bilateral free trade agreements requiring the ccTLDs of the > >> country signing the FTA to adopt some form of dispute resolution > >> policy. Example, words from the US/AU agreement goes on to also > >> indicate whois "each Party shall require that the management of its > >> country-code top-level domain (ccTLD) provide an appropriate > >> procedure for the settlement of disputes, based on the principles > >> established in the Uniform Domain-Name Dispute-Resolution Policy. > >> > >> 2. Each Party shall require that the management of its ccTLD provide > >> online public access to a reliable and accurate database of contact > >> information for domain-name registrants." > >> > >> Search string such as "ccTLD free trade agreement" in google finds a > >> bunch. > >> > >> I would think one way to read this is that US also thinks member > >> states control ccTLDs and can enforce rules on them. Not what I > >> thought the US position was in WSIS. But I might be getting > >> hot&bothered over a non-issue... > >> > >> Adam > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >>> " the management of Internet domain names and addresses and other > >> Internet > >>> resources within the mandate of ITU." [phrase appears five times in > >> the > >>> text] > >>> > >>> Cheers, > >>> > >>> Bill > >>> > >>> > >>> ____________________________________________________________ > >>> 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 > >> > >> ____________________________________________________________ > >> 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 > >> ____________________________________________________________ > >> 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 > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > > 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 > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > -- Dr. Linda D. Misek-Falkoff (Ph.D., J.D.) (914) 769 3652 InterNetizen, ARPANet-Internet 45+ years.. For Identification here: National Disability Party; Intl. Disability Caucus. Persons With Pain International. Officer and Member of the Board of Directors, Communications Coordination Committee for the U.N., *Respectful Interfaces* [RESPITES] and *International Forum For Respectful Interfaces* [IFFRI] - Achieving Dialogue While Cherishing Diversity*; Presenter, WSIS/SMSI Tunis '05; Participant Geneva '03 and Athens Internet agovernance Forum, '06.; Member Fall '06 all DPI/NGO Conference Planning Committee, Media and Networking sub-Committees; Mandates and Progam Committee, World Democracy Movement. Appointee: Delegate to U.N. For United States Burn Support Org. Inviting Inquiries; other affiliations on Request. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: message-footer.txt URL: From LMcKnigh at syr.edu Sun Nov 26 20:25:30 2006 From: LMcKnigh at syr.edu (Lee McKnight) Date: Sun, 26 Nov 2006 20:25:30 -0500 Subject: [governance] ITU IG Resolution Message-ID: Jeanette, Adam, Milton, everyone, Re the USG stance re ccTLDs and sovereign nations, remember I deconstructed that on this list right after the Dept of Commerce's NTIA issued its '4 principles' statement June '05: USG now recognizes governments of nations have final say over their own ccTLDs, not usg or icann. Or whomever happens to be operating it at the moment. That's realpolitik 101 of ccTLDs these days. June 05 the US DOC/NTIA said: " Governments have legitimate interest in the management of their country code top level domains (ccTLD). The United States recognizes that governments have legitimate public policy and sovereignty concerns with respect to the management of their ccTLD. As such, the United States is committed to working with the international community to address these concerns, bearing in mind the fundamental need to ensure stability and security of the Internet's DNS." My impression is ICANN has gotten the message and is working harder to assist governments with ccTLD concerns of one sort or anothers. ICANN will need more support from governments, not just USG, in the next moves in the chess game as Wolfgang put it, than in the past. (And of course, if explicit pro-IPR/UDRP language can be inserted in bilateral trade agreements, all the better from the perspective of this US admin and oh yeah the usual suspect powerhouse DC lobby groups.) Lee Prof. Lee W. McKnight School of Information Studies Syracuse University +1-315-443-6891office +1-315-278-4392 mobile >>> jeanette at wz-berlin.de 11/24/2006 12:10 PM >>> Milton Mueller schrieb: > Adam: > These free trade agreements that attempt to globalize US anti-privacy > Whois policies are truly evil things, and indicate the degree to which > US of A policy is driven by intellectual property interests. > > But I am not sure what they have to do with the ITU, except that the > USA has been promoting WTO and trade agreements as a way of bypassing > ITU power over the international telecom sector for a decade now. It seems, the USG also bypasses ICANN and assumes that contracting governments have full control over the management of their ccTLD. One wonders what the ccNSO is for if the US government can negotiate all relevant matters in bilateral contracts, no? jeanette > >>>> ajp at glocom.ac.jp 11/24/2006 6:04 AM >>> >> Hi, >> >> On 11/24/06 12:34 AM, "Bret Fausett" > wrote: >>> That's an amazing resolution. My hat is off to anyone who can write > six >>> pages on the management of Internet domain names and addresses and > not >>> mention ICANN even once! >> Amazing perhaps, but also entirely predictable; did anyone really > believe >> the spin that the Tunis Agenda constituted a unanimous > intergovernmental >> bear hug for ICANN? Moreover, while the TA called for enhanced > cooperation >> on public policies to be started by the UN > Secretary-General---involving all >> relevant organizations and stakeholders---by the end of the first > quarter of >> 2006, it seems that not much has happened besides some sotto vocci, >> selective bilateral/small-n consultations. Not surprising then that >> governments would want to see the agenda carried forward on a > multilateral >> basis in the ITU. Of course, the "involving all stakeholders" > language may >> be of little practical consequence in the ITU without reforms that > will not >> be forthcoming in the near term. >> >> Some other notable bits of word-craft for deconstruction: >> >> "the development of Internet Protocol (IP)-based networks and the > Internet, >> taking into account the requirements, features and interoperability > of >> next-generation networks (NGN);" >> >> " Member States represent the interests of the population of the > country or >> territory for which a ccTLD has been delegated;" > > > > This is an interesting problem. The US (USTR) is writing clauses > into bilateral free trade agreements requiring the ccTLDs of the > country signing the FTA to adopt some form of dispute resolution > policy. Example, words from the US/AU agreement goes on to also > indicate whois "each Party shall require that the management of its > country-code top-level domain (ccTLD) provide an appropriate > procedure for the settlement of disputes, based on the principles > established in the Uniform Domain-Name Dispute-Resolution Policy. > > 2. Each Party shall require that the management of its ccTLD provide > online public access to a reliable and accurate database of contact > information for domain-name registrants." > > Search string such as "ccTLD free trade agreement" in google finds a > bunch. > > I would think one way to read this is that US also thinks member > states control ccTLDs and can enforce rules on them. Not what I > thought the US position was in WSIS. But I might be getting > hot&bothered over a non-issue... > > Adam > > > > > > >> " the management of Internet domain names and addresses and other > Internet >> resources within the mandate of ITU." [phrase appears five times in > the >> text] >> >> Cheers, >> >> Bill >> >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 ____________________________________________________________ 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 ____________________________________________________________ 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 From wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de Mon Nov 27 03:33:40 2006 From: wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Wolfgang_Kleinw=E4chter?=) Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2006 09:33:40 +0100 Subject: SV: [governance] ITU IG Resolution References: Message-ID: <3AEE633F500281489D5F3303731CE9F3043961@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> Dear list, it is worth to "study" the final ITU PP Press release. http://www.itu.int/newsroom/press_releases/2006/27.html Under the discussed items (Section II: Looking Ahead), which sets the priorities for the next four years, next to WSIS implementation with regard to Action Lines there is the "Internet enhanced cooperation" as a second priority. What does it mean? Priority six is the convening of a World Telecommunication Policy Forum in 2009 for Internet related public policy issues. It says "such as intreroperabiloity and convergence" but under such a general healdine everything can be disucssed. is this a counter-forum to the IGF, dominated by governments without civil society? The study process whether CS will become included or not in ITU will be over only in 2010 and then ITU will make a decision how to invite CS. Obvioulsy they want to build the house first and then invite the inhabitants. And here is what Mr. Toure said at the closing press conference: "Along with my dedicated staff and colleagues at ITU, I will build bridges to a digital future through the active and meaningful participation of all stakeholders, including the private sector and civil society dealing with ICT. I believe that teamwork is the key to success." With regard to IG he added: "The membership has set a task to deal with International Public Policy issues related to the internet in which ITU has been involved for many years in developing standards and providing services." Responding to a question on ITU's role in internet governance and management of the internet, Dr Touré said, "ITU is not looking at taking over internet governance. ITU very well positioned to manage internet resources and will continue to contribute to the growth of the internet in its area of expertise and along with all stakeholders." Also the language of the headline of the Press Release is interesting and worth to study. It says "ITU Conference signals enhanced international cooperation in ICT - Plenipotentiary Conference endorses expanded mandate for ITU ." What does it mean? What is the "expanded mandate". Is "Enhanced Cooperation on Internet Governance" as defined bt the Tunis Summit now part of a bigger process of "enhanced international cooperation in ICT". Is Tunis subordinated? Is there a linkage? Does somebody think that ICANN is a subsidary body of the ITU with limited responsibilities for some elements of the DNS like new gTLDs? Toure says that ITU is not looking at taking over Internet Governance but is "very well positioned to manage internet resources". Very interesting and slippery language which gives a lot of space for interpretation. Best wishes (and prepare your 2009 Travel Budget for two big Internet Governance Conferences: IGF in Cairo and WTPF elswhere). wolfgang ________________________________ Fra: Lee McKnight [mailto:LMcKnigh at syr.edu] Sendt: ma 27-11-2006 02:25 Til: governance at lists.cpsr.org; Milton Mueller; jeanette at wz-berlin.de Cc: ajp at glocom.ac.jp Emne: Re: [governance] ITU IG Resolution Jeanette, Adam, Milton, everyone, Re the USG stance re ccTLDs and sovereign nations, remember I deconstructed that on this list right after the Dept of Commerce's NTIA issued its '4 principles' statement June '05: USG now recognizes governments of nations have final say over their own ccTLDs, not usg or icann. Or whomever happens to be operating it at the moment. That's realpolitik 101 of ccTLDs these days. June 05 the US DOC/NTIA said: " Governments have legitimate interest in the management of their country code top level domains (ccTLD). The United States recognizes that governments have legitimate public policy and sovereignty concerns with respect to the management of their ccTLD. As such, the United States is committed to working with the international community to address these concerns, bearing in mind the fundamental need to ensure stability and security of the Internet's DNS." My impression is ICANN has gotten the message and is working harder to assist governments with ccTLD concerns of one sort or anothers. ICANN will need more support from governments, not just USG, in the next moves in the chess game as Wolfgang put it, than in the past. (And of course, if explicit pro-IPR/UDRP language can be inserted in bilateral trade agreements, all the better from the perspective of this US admin and oh yeah the usual suspect powerhouse DC lobby groups.) Lee Prof. Lee W. McKnight School of Information Studies Syracuse University +1-315-443-6891office +1-315-278-4392 mobile >>> jeanette at wz-berlin.de 11/24/2006 12:10 PM >>> Milton Mueller schrieb: > Adam: > These free trade agreements that attempt to globalize US anti-privacy > Whois policies are truly evil things, and indicate the degree to which > US of A policy is driven by intellectual property interests. > > But I am not sure what they have to do with the ITU, except that the > USA has been promoting WTO and trade agreements as a way of bypassing > ITU power over the international telecom sector for a decade now. It seems, the USG also bypasses ICANN and assumes that contracting governments have full control over the management of their ccTLD. One wonders what the ccNSO is for if the US government can negotiate all relevant matters in bilateral contracts, no? jeanette > >>>> ajp at glocom.ac.jp 11/24/2006 6:04 AM >>> >> Hi, >> >> On 11/24/06 12:34 AM, "Bret Fausett" > wrote: >>> That's an amazing resolution. My hat is off to anyone who can write > six >>> pages on the management of Internet domain names and addresses and > not >>> mention ICANN even once! >> Amazing perhaps, but also entirely predictable; did anyone really > believe >> the spin that the Tunis Agenda constituted a unanimous > intergovernmental >> bear hug for ICANN? Moreover, while the TA called for enhanced > cooperation >> on public policies to be started by the UN > Secretary-General---involving all >> relevant organizations and stakeholders---by the end of the first > quarter of >> 2006, it seems that not much has happened besides some sotto vocci, >> selective bilateral/small-n consultations. Not surprising then that >> governments would want to see the agenda carried forward on a > multilateral >> basis in the ITU. Of course, the "involving all stakeholders" > language may >> be of little practical consequence in the ITU without reforms that > will not >> be forthcoming in the near term. >> >> Some other notable bits of word-craft for deconstruction: >> >> "the development of Internet Protocol (IP)-based networks and the > Internet, >> taking into account the requirements, features and interoperability > of >> next-generation networks (NGN);" >> >> " Member States represent the interests of the population of the > country or >> territory for which a ccTLD has been delegated;" > > > > This is an interesting problem. The US (USTR) is writing clauses > into bilateral free trade agreements requiring the ccTLDs of the > country signing the FTA to adopt some form of dispute resolution > policy. Example, words from the US/AU agreement goes on to also > indicate whois "each Party shall require that the management of its > country-code top-level domain (ccTLD) provide an appropriate > procedure for the settlement of disputes, based on the principles > established in the Uniform Domain-Name Dispute-Resolution Policy. > > 2. Each Party shall require that the management of its ccTLD provide > online public access to a reliable and accurate database of contact > information for domain-name registrants." > > Search string such as "ccTLD free trade agreement" in google finds a > bunch. > > I would think one way to read this is that US also thinks member > states control ccTLDs and can enforce rules on them. Not what I > thought the US position was in WSIS. But I might be getting > hot&bothered over a non-issue... > > Adam > > > > > > >> " the management of Internet domain names and addresses and other > Internet >> resources within the mandate of ITU." [phrase appears five times in > the >> text] >> >> Cheers, >> >> Bill >> >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 ____________________________________________________________ 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 ____________________________________________________________ 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 ____________________________________________________________ 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 From Mueller at syr.edu Mon Nov 27 14:44:02 2006 From: Mueller at syr.edu (Milton Mueller) Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2006 14:44:02 -0500 Subject: [governance] Re: [SGA] FW: Advisory # 29 - Geneva Police Imposters Message-ID: This may be of interest to those of you who come to Geneva for international org visits: =============== Regional Security Office Advisory Bulletin #29 November 24, 2006 SUBJECT: GENEVA POLICE IMPOSTERS There has been an increase in incidents involving imposters pretending to be police officers, robbing tourists in Geneva. The local police are warning everyone to be especially alert during the holiday season. The imposters were noted to be working in the vicinity of the Cornavin Train Station, downtown Geneva and at Geneva's airport. The Swiss Mission noted in their alert that the imposters were physically large, athletic type individuals, 160-180 cm in height, age 25-40, and fluent in English. ____________________________________________________________ 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 From goldstein_david at yahoo.com.au Mon Nov 27 19:10:48 2006 From: goldstein_david at yahoo.com.au (David Goldstein) Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2006 16:10:48 -0800 (PST) Subject: [governance] A/P Ang Peng Hwa on the IGF Message-ID: <20061128001048.92005.qmail@web54111.mail.yahoo.com> Hi all, Associate Professor Ang Peng Hwa of the Singapore Internet Research Centre, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore, who several of you will know through the internet governance meetings, has 3 postings on the SIRC blog on the recent IGF in Athens. See http://internetinasia.typepad.com/ The postings are headed: - Internet Governance Forum Report 1: What's It All About - Internet Governance Forum Report 2: Why The Need for IG - Internet Governance Forum Report 3: 3 Jolting Statements at the IGF. And of course, I posted these to my website as he posted them to the SIRC blog, so feel free to check out my website for this and much much more. :) See http://technewsreview.com.au. I'm also happy for people to forward me postings to publicise in my mailing lists and on my website. Cheers David --------- David Goldstein address: 4/3 Abbott Street COOGEE NSW 2034 AUSTRALIA email: Goldstein_David @yahoo.com.au phone: +61 418 228 605 (mobile); +61 2 9665 5773 (home) "Every time you use fossil fuels, you're adding to the problem. Every time you forgo fossil fuels, you're being part of the solution" - Dr Tim Flannery Send instant messages to your online friends http://au.messenger.yahoo.com ____________________________________________________________ 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 From aizu at anr.org Tue Nov 28 01:30:51 2006 From: aizu at anr.org (Izumi AIZU) Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2006 15:30:51 +0900 Subject: [governance] NomCom Process Call/Proposal In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi, welcome back from Thanksgiving holidays for those who celebrated them. Now, we have got 18 names so far: http://www.igcaucus.org/2006-AT-volunteers.html We need 7 more to go. Given the deadline is Dec 14, it is not bad, but please send your name as soon as you could. If we reach 30 by Dec 7 or before, perhaps we could make the timeline 1 week or so earlier so that we have more time to discuss at NomCom despite the holiday seasons. Thanks, izumi 2006/11/20, Izumi AIZU : > > 1) We need at least 25 volunteers for NomCom member candidates for > running the random drawing as described below: > http://www.igcaucus.org/nomcom-process.html > > 2) Please indicate that you like to volunteer on this list. Once you > are selected as NomCom, you are not eligible to become an Appeal Team > Member. (If not selected, then you can become Appeal Team member) > > 3) The volunteers will be posted here: > http://www.igcaucus.org/2006-AT-volunteers.html > (Thanks to Avri who made this). > > 4) The call for volunteers will be closed by 14 Dec. > > 5) The final list of volunteers will be confirmed on 15 Dec. > > 6) The random seeds will be announced on 16 Dec. > > 7) The drawing will be done on 17 Dec. > > 8) We will allow 3 days for challenges then the nomcom starts on Dec 20. > > Then NomCom have to figure out the dates for nominations, and go into > selection process, each will take around 2 weeks (or shorter) I assume. > > As you have seen, we have already got two volunteers, Karen and > Jeremy. SO, 23 more to go. > > Thanks, > > izumi > > -- > >> Izumi Aizu << > > Institute for HyperNetwork Society > Kumon Center, Tama University > * * * * * > << Writing the Future of the History >> > www.anr.org > > > -- > >> Izumi Aizu << > > Institute for HyperNetwork Society > Kumon Center, Tama University > * * * * * > << Writing the Future of the History >> > www.anr.org > -- >> Izumi Aizu << Institute for HyperNetwork Society Kumon Center, Tama University * * * * * << Writing the Future of the History >> www.anr.org -- >> Izumi Aizu << Institute for HyperNetwork Society Kumon Center, Tama University * * * * * << Writing the Future of the History >> www.anr.org ____________________________________________________________ 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 From jberleur at info.fundp.ac.be Tue Nov 28 05:02:51 2006 From: jberleur at info.fundp.ac.be (Jacques Berleur) Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2006 11:02:51 +0100 Subject: [governance] NomCom Process Call/Proposal In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I volunteer for the appeals team. >Hi, welcome back from Thanksgiving holidays for those who celebrated >them. Now, we have got 18 names so far: >http://www.igcaucus.org/2006-AT-volunteers.html > >We need 7 more to go. Given the deadline is Dec 14, it is not bad, >but please send your name as soon as you could. If we reach 30 >by Dec 7 or before, perhaps we could make the timeline 1 week or so >earlier so that we have more time to discuss at NomCom despite the >holiday seasons. > >Thanks, > >izumi > > >2006/11/20, Izumi AIZU : > >> >>1) We need at least 25 volunteers for NomCom member candidates for >>running the random drawing as described below: >>http://www.igcaucus.org/nomcom-process.html >> >>2) Please indicate that you like to volunteer on this list. Once you >>are selected as NomCom, you are not eligible to become an Appeal Team >>Member. (If not selected, then you can become Appeal Team member) >> >>3) The volunteers will be posted here: >>http://www.igcaucus.org/2006-AT-volunteers.html >>(Thanks to Avri who made this). >> >>4) The call for volunteers will be closed by 14 Dec. >> >>5) The final list of volunteers will be confirmed on 15 Dec. >> >>6) The random seeds will be announced on 16 Dec. >> >>7) The drawing will be done on 17 Dec. >> >>8) We will allow 3 days for challenges then the nomcom starts on Dec 20. >> >>Then NomCom have to figure out the dates for nominations, and go into >>selection process, each will take around 2 weeks (or shorter) I assume. >> >>As you have seen, we have already got two volunteers, Karen and >>Jeremy. SO, 23 more to go. >> >>Thanks, >> >>izumi >> >>-- >> >> Izumi Aizu << >> >> Institute for HyperNetwork Society >> Kumon Center, Tama University >> * * * * * >> << Writing the Future of the History >> >> www.anr.org >> >> >>-- >> >> Izumi Aizu << >> >> Institute for HyperNetwork Society >> Kumon Center, Tama University >> * * * * * >> << Writing the Future of the History >> >> www.anr.org >> > > >-- > >> Izumi Aizu << > > Institute for HyperNetwork Society > Kumon Center, Tama University > * * * * * > << Writing the Future of the History >> > www.anr.org > > >-- > >> Izumi Aizu << > > Institute for HyperNetwork Society > Kumon Center, Tama University > * * * * * > << Writing the Future of the History >> > www.anr.org >____________________________________________________________ >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 -- ************************************************ Prof. Jacques BERLEUR Facultes Universitaires Notre-Dame de la Paix Rue Grandgagnage, 21 Phone: +32 81 72-4976 Mobile: +32 (0)475 548372 5000 NAMUR Fax: +32 81 72 4967 BELGIUM mailto:jberleur at info.fundp.ac.be URL: http://www.info.fundp.ac.be/~jbl/ ************************************************ ____________________________________________________________ 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 From ki_chango at yahoo.com Tue Nov 28 08:25:50 2006 From: ki_chango at yahoo.com (Mawaki Chango) Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2006 05:25:50 -0800 (PST) Subject: SV: [governance] ITU IG Resolution In-Reply-To: <3AEE633F500281489D5F3303731CE9F3043961@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> Message-ID: <20061128132550.74093.qmail@web58705.mail.re1.yahoo.com> Intersting indeed. At the current pace of the senior ICANN and IGF staff courting so assiduously each other (uh...I mean cross participating in each other's meetings with signs of support, etc.) one may be attempted to predict that we will see both wedded before current IGF mandate. Will then ITU become the chef de rang of the neo-rebels (and stubborns) or of the neo-conservatists? and where will the ultimate CS resistants be found? Interesting, indeed... Mawaki --- Wolfgang Kleinwächter wrote: > Dear list, > > it is worth to "study" the final ITU PP Press release. > > http://www.itu.int/newsroom/press_releases/2006/27.html > > Under the discussed items (Section II: Looking Ahead), which sets > the priorities for the next four years, next to WSIS implementation > with regard to Action Lines there is the "Internet enhanced > cooperation" as a second priority. What does it mean? Priority six > is the convening of a World Telecommunication Policy Forum in 2009 > for Internet related public policy issues. It says "such as > intreroperabiloity and convergence" but under such a general > healdine everything can be disucssed. is this a counter-forum to > the IGF, dominated by governments without civil society? The study > process whether CS will become included or not in ITU will be over > only in 2010 and then ITU will make a decision how to invite CS. > Obvioulsy they want to build the house first and then invite the > inhabitants. > > And here is what Mr. Toure said at the closing press conference: > "Along with my dedicated staff and colleagues at ITU, I will build > bridges to a digital future through the active and meaningful > participation of all stakeholders, including the private sector and > civil society dealing with ICT. I believe that teamwork is the key > to success." > > With regard to IG he added: "The membership has set a task to deal > with International Public Policy issues related to the internet in > which ITU has been involved for many years in developing standards > and providing services." Responding to a question on ITU's role in > internet governance and management of the internet, Dr Touré said, > "ITU is not looking at taking over internet governance. ITU very > well positioned to manage internet resources and will continue to > contribute to the growth of the internet in its area of expertise > and along with all stakeholders." > > Also the language of the headline of the Press Release is > interesting and worth to study. It says "ITU Conference signals > enhanced international cooperation in ICT - Plenipotentiary > Conference endorses expanded mandate for ITU > > ." What does it mean? What is the "expanded mandate". Is "Enhanced > Cooperation on Internet Governance" as defined bt the Tunis Summit > now part of a bigger process of "enhanced international cooperation > in ICT". Is Tunis subordinated? Is there a linkage? Does somebody > think that ICANN is a subsidary body of the ITU with limited > responsibilities for some elements of the DNS like new gTLDs? Toure > says that ITU is not looking at taking over Internet Governance but > is "very well positioned to manage internet resources". Very > interesting and slippery language which gives a lot of space for > interpretation. > > Best wishes (and prepare your 2009 Travel Budget for two big > Internet Governance Conferences: IGF in Cairo and WTPF elswhere). > > wolfgang > > > > ________________________________ > > Fra: Lee McKnight [mailto:LMcKnigh at syr.edu] > Sendt: ma 27-11-2006 02:25 > Til: governance at lists.cpsr.org; Milton Mueller; > jeanette at wz-berlin.de > Cc: ajp at glocom.ac.jp > Emne: Re: [governance] ITU IG Resolution > > > > Jeanette, Adam, Milton, everyone, > > Re the USG stance re ccTLDs and sovereign nations, remember I > deconstructed that on this list right after the Dept of Commerce's > NTIA > issued its '4 principles' statement June '05: > > USG now recognizes governments of nations have final say over their > own > ccTLDs, not usg or icann. Or whomever happens to be operating it > at > the moment. That's realpolitik 101 of ccTLDs these days. > > June 05 the US DOC/NTIA said: " Governments have legitimate > interest in > the management of their country code top level domains (ccTLD). > The > United States recognizes that governments have legitimate public > policy > and sovereignty concerns with respect to the management of their > ccTLD. > As such, the United States is committed to working with the > international community to address these concerns, bearing in mind > the > fundamental need to ensure stability and security of the Internet's > DNS." > > My impression is ICANN has gotten the message and is working harder > to > assist governments with ccTLD concerns of one sort or anothers. > ICANN > will need more support from governments, not just USG, in the next > moves > in the chess game as Wolfgang put it, than in the past. > > (And of course, if explicit pro-IPR/UDRP language can be inserted > in > bilateral trade agreements, all the better from the perspective of > this > US admin and oh yeah the usual suspect powerhouse DC lobby groups.) > > Lee > > Prof. Lee W. McKnight > School of Information Studies > Syracuse University > +1-315-443-6891office > +1-315-278-4392 mobile > > >>> jeanette at wz-berlin.de 11/24/2006 12:10 PM >>> > > > Milton Mueller schrieb: > > Adam: > > These free trade agreements that attempt to globalize US > anti-privacy > > > Whois policies are truly evil things, and indicate the degree to > which > > US of A policy is driven by intellectual property interests. > > > > But I am not sure what they have to do with the ITU, except that > the > > USA has been promoting WTO and trade agreements as a way of > bypassing > > ITU power over the international telecom sector for a decade now. > > It seems, the USG also bypasses ICANN and assumes that contracting > governments have full control over the management of their ccTLD. > One > wonders what the ccNSO is for if the US government can negotiate > all > relevant matters in bilateral contracts, no? > jeanette > > > > >>>> ajp at glocom.ac.jp 11/24/2006 6:04 AM >>> > >> Hi, > >> > >> On 11/24/06 12:34 AM, "Bret Fausett" > > wrote: > >>> That's an amazing resolution. My hat is off to anyone who can > write > > six > >>> pages on the management of Internet domain names and addresses > and > > not > >>> mention ICANN even once! > >> Amazing perhaps, but also entirely predictable; did anyone > really > > believe > >> the spin that the Tunis Agenda constituted a unanimous > > intergovernmental > >> bear hug for ICANN? Moreover, while the TA called for enhanced > > cooperation > >> on public policies to be started by the UN > > Secretary-General---involving all > >> relevant organizations and stakeholders---by the end of the > first > > quarter of > >> 2006, it seems that not much has happened besides some sotto > vocci, > >> selective bilateral/small-n consultations. Not surprising then > that > >> governments would want to see the agenda carried forward on a > > multilateral > >> basis in the ITU. Of course, the "involving all stakeholders" > > language may > >> be of little practical consequence in the ITU without reforms > that > > will not > >> be forthcoming in the near term. > >> > >> Some other notable bits of word-craft for deconstruction: > >> > >> "the development of Internet Protocol (IP)-based networks and > the > > Internet, > >> taking into account the requirements, features and > interoperability > > of > >> next-generation networks (NGN);" > >> > >> " Member States represent the interests of the population of the > > country or > >> territory for which a ccTLD has been delegated;" > > > > > > > > This is an interesting problem. The US (USTR) is writing clauses > > into bilateral free trade agreements requiring the ccTLDs of the > > country signing the FTA to adopt some form of dispute resolution > > policy. Example, words from the US/AU agreement goes on to also > > indicate whois "each Party shall require that the management of > its > > country-code top-level domain (ccTLD) provide an appropriate > > procedure for the settlement of disputes, based on the principles > > established in the Uniform Domain-Name Dispute-Resolution Policy. > > > > 2. Each Party shall require that the management of its ccTLD > provide > > > online public access to a reliable and accurate database of > contact > > information for domain-name registrants." > > > > Search string such as "ccTLD free trade agreement" in google > finds a > > bunch. > > > > I would think one way to read this is that US also thinks member > > states control ccTLDs and can enforce rules on them. Not what I > > thought the US position was in WSIS. But I might be getting > > hot&bothered over a non-issue... > > > > Adam > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> " the management of Internet domain names and addresses and > other > > Internet > >> resources within the mandate of ITU." [phrase appears five > times > in > > the > >> text] > >> > >> Cheers, > >> > >> Bill > >> > >> > >> ____________________________________________________________ > >> 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 > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > > 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 > > ____________________________________________________________ > > 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 > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > ____________________________________________________________________________________ Cheap talk? Check out Yahoo! Messenger's low PC-to-Phone call rates. http://voice.yahoo.com ____________________________________________________________ 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 From ki_chango at yahoo.com Tue Nov 28 08:35:42 2006 From: ki_chango at yahoo.com (Mawaki Chango) Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2006 05:35:42 -0800 (PST) Subject: [governance] NomCom Process Call/Proposal In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20061128133543.23103.qmail@web58715.mail.re1.yahoo.com> Izumi, to summarize for some of us have been a bit out of the loop about this, we are now trying to pool 30 volunteers from which a nomcom will be drawn, and the nomcom will then appoint the appeal team, and after that it gets dissolved? thanks... and yes, I'm ashamed asking this instead of checking the charter myself, but I'm hoping we'll have the remainder of volunteers in a row after your answer. Mawaki --- Izumi AIZU wrote: > Hi, welcome back from Thanksgiving holidays for those who > celebrated > them. Now, we have got 18 names so far: > http://www.igcaucus.org/2006-AT-volunteers.html > > We need 7 more to go. Given the deadline is Dec 14, it is not bad, > but please send your name as soon as you could. If we reach 30 > by Dec 7 or before, perhaps we could make the timeline 1 week or so > earlier so that we have more time to discuss at NomCom despite the > holiday seasons. > > Thanks, > > izumi > > > 2006/11/20, Izumi AIZU : > > > > > 1) We need at least 25 volunteers for NomCom member candidates > for > > running the random drawing as described below: > > http://www.igcaucus.org/nomcom-process.html > > > > 2) Please indicate that you like to volunteer on this list. Once > you > > are selected as NomCom, you are not eligible to become an Appeal > Team > > Member. (If not selected, then you can become Appeal Team member) > > > > 3) The volunteers will be posted here: > > http://www.igcaucus.org/2006-AT-volunteers.html > > (Thanks to Avri who made this). > > > > 4) The call for volunteers will be closed by 14 Dec. > > > > 5) The final list of volunteers will be confirmed on 15 Dec. > > > > 6) The random seeds will be announced on 16 Dec. > > > > 7) The drawing will be done on 17 Dec. > > > > 8) We will allow 3 days for challenges then the nomcom starts on > Dec 20. > > > > Then NomCom have to figure out the dates for nominations, and go > into > > selection process, each will take around 2 weeks (or shorter) I > assume. > > > > As you have seen, we have already got two volunteers, Karen and > > Jeremy. SO, 23 more to go. > > > > Thanks, > > > > izumi > > > > -- > > >> Izumi Aizu << > > > > Institute for HyperNetwork Society > > Kumon Center, Tama University > > * * * * * > > << Writing the Future of the History >> > > www.anr.org > > > > > > -- > > >> Izumi Aizu << > > > > Institute for HyperNetwork Society > > Kumon Center, Tama University > > * * * * * > > << Writing the Future of the History >> > > www.anr.org > > > > > -- > >> Izumi Aizu << > > Institute for HyperNetwork Society > Kumon Center, Tama University > * * * * * > << Writing the Future of the History >> > www.anr.org > > > -- > >> Izumi Aizu << > > Institute for HyperNetwork Society > Kumon Center, Tama University > * * * * * > << Writing the Future of the History >> > www.anr.org > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > ____________________________________________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Everyone is raving about the all-new Yahoo! Mail beta. http://new.mail.yahoo.com ____________________________________________________________ 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 From aizu at anr.org Tue Nov 28 09:26:50 2006 From: aizu at anr.org (Izumi AIZU) Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2006 23:26:50 +0900 Subject: [governance] NomCom Process Call/Proposal In-Reply-To: <20061128133543.23103.qmail@web58715.mail.re1.yahoo.com> References: <20061128133543.23103.qmail@web58715.mail.re1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: Thanks Jacques for your joining the pool. Mawaki, no, please do not hesitate to ask questions. It's always legitimate to ask questions to clarify. Yes we are trying to pool volunteers, minimum of 25 but better to be more than 30. And you are right, 5 members will be drawn and they form the NomCom with me as non-voting chair/facilitator. NomCom will solicit and appoint the Appeal Team, and once it's done NocCom will be gone. So, could you join the pool? That will be great. many thanks, izumi 2006/11/28, Mawaki Chango : > Izumi, > > to summarize for some of us have been a bit out of the loop about > this, we are now trying to pool 30 volunteers from which a nomcom > will be drawn, and the nomcom will then appoint the appeal team, and > after that it gets dissolved? > thanks... and yes, I'm ashamed asking this instead of checking the > charter myself, but I'm hoping we'll have the remainder of volunteers > in a row after your answer. > > Mawaki > > ____________________________________________________________ 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 From ki_chango at yahoo.com Tue Nov 28 11:07:19 2006 From: ki_chango at yahoo.com (Mawaki Chango) Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2006 08:07:19 -0800 (PST) Subject: [governance] NomCom Process Call/Proposal In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <197146.36469.qm@web58707.mail.re1.yahoo.com> Ok, then please count me as one of the volunteers. Thanks for your answer. Mawaki --- Izumi AIZU wrote: > Thanks Jacques for your joining the pool. > > Mawaki, no, please do not hesitate to ask questions. > It's always legitimate to ask questions to clarify. > > Yes we are trying to pool volunteers, minimum of 25 but > better to be more than 30. And you are right, 5 members > will be drawn and they form the NomCom with me as non-voting > chair/facilitator. NomCom will solicit and appoint the Appeal Team, > and once it's done NocCom will be gone. > > So, could you join the pool? That will be great. > > many thanks, > > izumi > > 2006/11/28, Mawaki Chango : > > Izumi, > > > > to summarize for some of us have been a bit out of the loop about > > this, we are now trying to pool 30 volunteers from which a nomcom > > will be drawn, and the nomcom will then appoint the appeal team, > and > > after that it gets dissolved? > > thanks... and yes, I'm ashamed asking this instead of checking > the > > charter myself, but I'm hoping we'll have the remainder of > volunteers > > in a row after your answer. > > > > Mawaki > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > ____________________________________________________________________________________ Yahoo! Music Unlimited Access over 1 million songs. http://music.yahoo.com/unlimited ____________________________________________________________ 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 From aizu at anr.org Wed Nov 29 07:47:02 2006 From: aizu at anr.org (Izumi AIZU) Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2006 21:47:02 +0900 Subject: [governance] NomCom Process Call/Proposal In-Reply-To: <197146.36469.qm@web58707.mail.re1.yahoo.com> References: <197146.36469.qm@web58707.mail.re1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: Dear Mawaki, Thank you so much! izumi 2006/11/29, Mawaki Chango : > Ok, then please count me as one of the volunteers. > Thanks for your answer. > > Mawaki > > --- Izumi AIZU wrote: > > > Thanks Jacques for your joining the pool. > > > > Mawaki, no, please do not hesitate to ask questions. > > It's always legitimate to ask questions to clarify. > > > > Yes we are trying to pool volunteers, minimum of 25 but > > better to be more than 30. And you are right, 5 members > > will be drawn and they form the NomCom with me as non-voting > > chair/facilitator. NomCom will solicit and appoint the Appeal Team, > > and once it's done NocCom will be gone. > > > > So, could you join the pool? That will be great. > > > > many thanks, > > > > izumi ____________________________________________________________ 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 From Sylvia.Caras at gmail.com Wed Nov 29 11:52:06 2006 From: Sylvia.Caras at gmail.com (Sylvia Caras) Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2006 08:52:06 -0800 Subject: [governance] psiphon software allows web access despite a censoring regime Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20061129081808.011c0318@peoplewho.org> The Citizen Lab at the Munk Centre for International Studies announced Sunday that it will release psiphon, a "human rights software project," under General Public License, by Friday. The system, part of the lab's CiviSec Project, is funded by the Open Society Institute. It is not entirely bulletproof, but developers say it will be difficult for censors to identify and block psiphon. People in free countries can install the free open source software and turn their home computers into "psiphonodes," or personal, encrypted servers. The psiphonode administrator can create and manage user accounts so friends and relatives can log in from censored countries. The encrypted connection allows people in restrictive countries to go to the administrators' unique Web addresses, login with usernames and passwords provided by administrators, and surf the Web. The psiphon Web site, which provides the software, doesn't have to be operative for the software to work. In other words, even if a censoring regime blocks access to the psiphon Web site, people in restrictive countries can access the wide open Web through their friends' and family members' computers. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: message-footer.txt URL: From nyangkweagien at gmail.com Thu Nov 30 06:52:09 2006 From: nyangkweagien at gmail.com (Nyangkwe Agien Aaron) Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2006 12:52:09 +0100 Subject: [governance] psiphon software allows web access despite a censoring regime In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.2.20061129081808.011c0318@peoplewho.org> References: <7.0.1.0.2.20061129081808.011c0318@peoplewho.org> Message-ID: Thank you Sylvia forn enabling us to know of this new weapon to fight censorship by unachievers. You will all agree with me that only thos who have not achieve some thing in their stewardship will be against the free flow of information. It is with release that I learn of this new development by the Citizen Lab. Once more, more grase to their elbows. Nyangkwe On 11/29/06, Sylvia Caras wrote: > The Citizen Lab at the Munk Centre for International Studies announced > Sunday that it will release psiphon, a "human rights software project," > under General Public License, by Friday. The system, part of the lab's > CiviSec Project, is funded by the Open Society Institute. > > It is not entirely bulletproof, but developers say it will be difficult for > censors to identify and block psiphon. > > People in free countries can install the free open source software and turn > their home computers into "psiphonodes," or personal, encrypted servers. The > psiphonode administrator can create and manage user accounts so friends and > relatives can log in from censored countries. The encrypted connection > allows people in restrictive countries to go to the administrators' unique > Web addresses, login with usernames and passwords provided by > administrators, and surf the Web. > > The psiphon Web site, which provides the software, doesn't have to be > operative for the software to work. In other words, even if a censoring > regime blocks access to the psiphon Web site, people in restrictive > countries can access the wide open Web through their friends' and family > members' computers. > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > > -- Aaron Agien Nyangkwe Journalist/Outcome Mapper Special Assistant To The President ASAFE P.O.Box 5213 Douala-Cameroon Tel. 237 337 50 22 Fax. 237 342 29 70 ____________________________________________________________ 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 From parminder at itforchange.net Thu Nov 30 07:04:14 2006 From: parminder at itforchange.net (Parminder) Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2006 17:34:14 +0530 Subject: [governance] ITU IG Resolution In-Reply-To: <4134.66.156.104.114.1164465972.squirrel@webmail.apc.org> Message-ID: <20061130120421.178E9E1104@smtp3.electricembers.net> > will something happen in the first quarter of 2007? should the IGC prepare > to communicate with the incoming SG (both UN and ITU) about how this > process of enhanced cooperation may be started and how the Geneva > Principles on IG can be usefully applied? I have been raising these questions in IGC (and other forums) but they have generally received a muted response. I think the civil society engaging with IG issues need to give up its self-doubts in frontally facing the 'public policy' question in IG and the issue of institutional arrangements adequate to this purpose. These issues will not go away, everyone always knew this, and every passing day brings increasing evidence that there are important public policy issues that are best dealt at global levels - it often serves the public interest better if they are addressed at global levels, rather than at national, or bi-lateral levels (see posts on US trade deals and ccTLD dispute resolution mechanisms). Just one company, Google, it seems takes on a legal suit at the rate of at least one per day, and each of these is in its ad hoc way setting public policy precedents that have implications for all of us. And now since (1) the issue (public policy in IG and its global institutional arrangements) will not go away, and (2) it has tremendous public interest implications (which the IGC espouses), we need to explore the reason and benefits of our not engaging with them. Is it strategic to postpone this engagement as much as possible? Does postponement lessens the danger of what are our principal fears from a relatively well institutionalized IG global policy arrangement. I see two basic fears (1) governments - we know which ones - will institutionalize and legitimize policies of control, hyper-security, censorship etc through such an arrangement (2) the new arrangement will reduce the level of influence that CS or non-governmental sectors have on Internet polices (or effects of their absence). I think on both these counts situation will worsen as we delay in institutionalizing a IG policy framework. The leverage that CS has on IG policies has come largely from the fact that the Internet grew away from governmental shadows and most governments did not understand Internet, and because of it they were ready to both submit to a global framework, and allow CS and other non-governmental sectors some influence on its policies. this situation we know is changing to the detriment of the CS. Most governments today understand Internet fairly well, and further growth of Internet is mostly taking place under their covetous eyes. They may not really need the CS for long, neither will they need a global framework of cooperation. As more time lapses the global IG policies will be negotiated by individual governments form a relative position of strength, and the outcomes will be determined by complete realpolitik, rather than any globally accepted values, and wide democratic participation. I recently read this article - "Jefferson Rebuffed - The United States and the Future of Internet Governance" - which speaks of a 'constitutional moment' missed for IG when the EU's proposal in the last stages of WSIS for working toward an institutional arrangement was missed. The same effort survives as the mention of a process towards 'enhanced cooperation' in the Tunis documents. I am not sure what IGC's response to the EU proposal was, but I do not remember any enthusiasm. A similar attitude is seen among many to the 'enhanced cooperation' part. It is not surprising - since the context and the space of a public policy institutional arrangement clearly and strongly exists - that various players - presently ITU - will try to use this lever. I agree with willie that IGC should firm up a proactive position in this area. An early and pro-active engagement with the 'public policy and its institutional arrangement issues' can still serve to give a greater handle to the civil society to promote (and safeguard) public interest. It may be better served through a global policy framework that is informed by globally accepted norms and values, rather than ad hoc adjudications, or worse, executive arbitrariness. And it will be better served if the CS takes a lead and ensures (though, probably, not granted) a greater role in the whole process.. Parminder ________________________________________________ Parminder Jeet Singh IT for Change, Bangalore Bridging Development Realities and Technological Possibilities Tel: (+91-80) 2665 4134, 2653 6890 Fax: (+91-80) 4146 1055 www.ITforChange.net > -----Original Message----- > From: wcurrie at apc.org [mailto:wcurrie at apc.org] > Sent: Saturday, November 25, 2006 8:16 PM > To: governance at lists.cpsr.org; Jeanette Hofmann > Subject: Re: [governance] ITU IG Resolution > > >so the ITU is mobilising for a process of enhanced cooperation which the > UN SG failed to initiate in the first quarter of 2006. > > how is the ITU going to get the UN SG to do this: by getting member states > into a process of discussion and agitation on the metter? > > what do we know about the incoming UN SG's views on the ITU - is he likely > to allow the ITU to take a lead here? > > will something happen in the first quarter of 2007? should the IGC prepare > to communicate with the incoming SG (both UN and ITU) about how this > process of enhanced cooperation may be started and how the Geneva > Principles on IG can be usefully applied? > > willie > > > > Milton Mueller schrieb: > >> Adam: > >> These free trade agreements that attempt to globalize US anti-privacy > >> Whois policies are truly evil things, and indicate the degree to which > >> US of A policy is driven by intellectual property interests. > >> > >> But I am not sure what they have to do with the ITU, except that the > >> USA has been promoting WTO and trade agreements as a way of bypassing > >> ITU power over the international telecom sector for a decade now. > > > > It seems, the USG also bypasses ICANN and assumes that contracting > > governments have full control over the management of their ccTLD. One > > wonders what the ccNSO is for if the US government can negotiate all > > relevant matters in bilateral contracts, no? > > jeanette > > > >> > >>>>> ajp at glocom.ac.jp 11/24/2006 6:04 AM >>> > >>> Hi, > >>> > >>> On 11/24/06 12:34 AM, "Bret Fausett" > >> wrote: > >>>> That's an amazing resolution. My hat is off to anyone who can write > >> six > >>>> pages on the management of Internet domain names and addresses and > >> not > >>>> mention ICANN even once! > >>> Amazing perhaps, but also entirely predictable; did anyone really > >> believe > >>> the spin that the Tunis Agenda constituted a unanimous > >> intergovernmental > >>> bear hug for ICANN? Moreover, while the TA called for enhanced > >> cooperation > >>> on public policies to be started by the UN > >> Secretary-General---involving all > >>> relevant organizations and stakeholders---by the end of the first > >> quarter of > >>> 2006, it seems that not much has happened besides some sotto vocci, > >>> selective bilateral/small-n consultations. Not surprising then that > >>> governments would want to see the agenda carried forward on a > >> multilateral > >>> basis in the ITU. Of course, the "involving all stakeholders" > >> language may > >>> be of little practical consequence in the ITU without reforms that > >> will not > >>> be forthcoming in the near term. > >>> > >>> Some other notable bits of word-craft for deconstruction: > >>> > >>> "the development of Internet Protocol (IP)-based networks and the > >> Internet, > >>> taking into account the requirements, features and interoperability > >> of > >>> next-generation networks (NGN);" > >>> > >>> " Member States represent the interests of the population of the > >> country or > >>> territory for which a ccTLD has been delegated;" > >> > >> > >> > >> This is an interesting problem. The US (USTR) is writing clauses > >> into bilateral free trade agreements requiring the ccTLDs of the > >> country signing the FTA to adopt some form of dispute resolution > >> policy. Example, words from the US/AU agreement goes on to also > >> indicate whois "each Party shall require that the management of its > >> country-code top-level domain (ccTLD) provide an appropriate > >> procedure for the settlement of disputes, based on the principles > >> established in the Uniform Domain-Name Dispute-Resolution Policy. > >> > >> 2. Each Party shall require that the management of its ccTLD provide > >> online public access to a reliable and accurate database of contact > >> information for domain-name registrants." > >> > >> Search string such as "ccTLD free trade agreement" in google finds a > >> bunch. > >> > >> I would think one way to read this is that US also thinks member > >> states control ccTLDs and can enforce rules on them. Not what I > >> thought the US position was in WSIS. But I might be getting > >> hot&bothered over a non-issue... > >> > >> Adam > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >>> " the management of Internet domain names and addresses and other > >> Internet > >>> resources within the mandate of ITU." [phrase appears five times in > >> the > >>> text] > >>> > >>> Cheers, > >>> > >>> Bill > >>> > >>> > >>> ____________________________________________________________ > >>> 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 > >> > >> ____________________________________________________________ > >> 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 > >> ____________________________________________________________ > >> 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 > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > > 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 > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: message-footer.txt URL: From ajp at glocom.ac.jp Thu Nov 30 08:45:38 2006 From: ajp at glocom.ac.jp (Adam Peake) Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2006 22:45:38 +0900 Subject: [governance] ITU IG Resolution In-Reply-To: <4134.66.156.104.114.1164465972.squirrel@webmail.apc.org> References: <4567279D.5070705@wz-berlin.de> <4134.66.156.104.114.1164465972.squirrel@webmail.apc.org> Message-ID: At 12:46 PM -0200 11/25/06, wcurrie at apc.org wrote: > >so the ITU is mobilising for a process of enhanced cooperation which the >UN SG failed to initiate in the first quarter of 2006. > >how is the ITU going to get the UN SG to do this: by getting member states >into a process of discussion and agitation on the metter? > >what do we know about the incoming UN SG's views on the ITU - is he likely >to allow the ITU to take a lead here? > >will something happen in the first quarter of 2007? should the IGC prepare >to communicate with the incoming SG (both UN and ITU) about how this >process of enhanced cooperation may be started and how the Geneva >Principles on IG can be usefully applied? I think we should start with a letter to Nitin Desai asking him to report on what has happened over the year. The UN SG tasked him to look after the enhanced cooperation process. Simple letter from the new coordinators to Nitin asking for information on behalf of the caucus would be a good start, no? Then once we know more, write to SG(s) or whatever is appropriate. Not sure that reacting to the ITU is the right way to go without first trying to get a report on what's done to date. Adam >willie >> >> Milton Mueller schrieb: >>> Adam: >>> These free trade agreements that attempt to globalize US anti-privacy >>> Whois policies are truly evil things, and indicate the degree to which >>> US of A policy is driven by intellectual property interests. >>> >>> But I am not sure what they have to do with the ITU, except that the >>> USA has been promoting WTO and trade agreements as a way of bypassing >>> ITU power over the international telecom sector for a decade now. >> >> It seems, the USG also bypasses ICANN and assumes that contracting >> governments have full control over the management of their ccTLD. One >> wonders what the ccNSO is for if the US government can negotiate all >> relevant matters in bilateral contracts, no? >> jeanette >> >>> >>>>>> ajp at glocom.ac.jp 11/24/2006 6:04 AM >>> >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> On 11/24/06 12:34 AM, "Bret Fausett" >>> wrote: >>>>> That's an amazing resolution. My hat is off to anyone who can write >>> six >>>>> pages on the management of Internet domain names and addresses and >>> not >>>>> mention ICANN even once! >>>> Amazing perhaps, but also entirely predictable; did anyone really >>> believe >>>> the spin that the Tunis Agenda constituted a unanimous >>> intergovernmental >>>> bear hug for ICANN? Moreover, while the TA called for enhanced >>> cooperation >>>> on public policies to be started by the UN >>> Secretary-General---involving all >>>> relevant organizations and stakeholders---by the end of the first >>> quarter of >>>> 2006, it seems that not much has happened besides some sotto vocci, >>>> selective bilateral/small-n consultations. Not surprising then that >>>> governments would want to see the agenda carried forward on a >>> multilateral >>>> basis in the ITU. Of course, the "involving all stakeholders" >>> language may >>>> be of little practical consequence in the ITU without reforms that >>> will not >>>> be forthcoming in the near term. >>>> >>>> Some other notable bits of word-craft for deconstruction: >>>> >>>> "the development of Internet Protocol (IP)-based networks and the >>> Internet, >>>> taking into account the requirements, features and interoperability >>> of >>>> next-generation networks (NGN);" >>>> >>>> " Member States represent the interests of the population of the >>> country or >>>> territory for which a ccTLD has been delegated;" >>> >>> >>> >>> This is an interesting problem. The US (USTR) is writing clauses >>> into bilateral free trade agreements requiring the ccTLDs of the >>> country signing the FTA to adopt some form of dispute resolution >>> policy. Example, words from the US/AU agreement goes on to also >>> indicate whois "each Party shall require that the management of its >>> country-code top-level domain (ccTLD) provide an appropriate >>> procedure for the settlement of disputes, based on the principles > >> established in the Uniform Domain-Name Dispute-Resolution Policy. >>> >>> 2. Each Party shall require that the management of its ccTLD provide >>> online public access to a reliable and accurate database of contact >>> information for domain-name registrants." >>> >>> Search string such as "ccTLD free trade agreement" in google finds a >>> bunch. >>> >>> I would think one way to read this is that US also thinks member >>> states control ccTLDs and can enforce rules on them. Not what I >>> thought the US position was in WSIS. But I might be getting >>> hot&bothered over a non-issue... >>> >>> Adam >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>> " the management of Internet domain names and addresses and other >>> Internet >>>> resources within the mandate of ITU." [phrase appears five times in >>> the >>>> text] >>>> >>>> Cheers, >>>> >>>> Bill >>>> >>>> >>>> ____________________________________________________________ >>>> 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 >>> >>> ____________________________________________________________ >>> 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 >>> ____________________________________________________________ >>> 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 >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 >> > > >____________________________________________________________ >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 ____________________________________________________________ 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 From Mueller at syr.edu Thu Nov 30 09:15:05 2006 From: Mueller at syr.edu (Milton Mueller) Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2006 09:15:05 -0500 Subject: [governance] ITU IG Resolution Message-ID: >>> parminder at itforchange.net 11/30/2006 7:04 AM >>> >I think the civil society engaging with >IG issues need to give up its self-doubts in >frontally facing the 'public policy' question in >IG and the issue of institutional arrangements >adequate to this purpose. Good statement. Some of us have never avoided these issues. I would make two suggestions: 1. You are now one of the coordinators of IGC therefore you are in a position to exert leadership and take initiative in this regard, so let's see some specific proposals. Adam made a one (send a letter to Desai asking what's up with Enhanced cooperation) which is fine although it is a very modest initiative. 2. The problem is that we need to find a point of leverage, which may or may not come from working within normal policy processes. The blocking power of one sovereign, USG, is not easily ignored or bypoassed in these international institutions. By way of contrast, the free software movement has gained leverage over the policy debate regarding its issues by creating its own institution -- the general public license -- embodying its values. Are there analogues that could be pursued in the IG arena? ____________________________________________________________ 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 From vb at bertola.eu.org Thu Nov 30 09:28:03 2006 From: vb at bertola.eu.org (Vittorio Bertola) Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2006 15:28:03 +0100 Subject: [governance] ITU IG Resolution In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <456EEA73.6060202@bertola.eu.org> Milton Mueller ha scritto: > Good statement. Some of us have never avoided these issues. I would > make two suggestions: > > 1. You are now one of the coordinators of IGC therefore you are in a > position to exert leadership and take initiative in this regard, so > let's see some specific proposals. Adam made a one (send a letter to > Desai asking what's up with Enhanced cooperation) which is fine although > it is a very modest initiative. I would support something like that, and, for example, I could forward it to the EU (the original proposer of the "enhanced cooperation" moniker). We could try to make as much noise as possible to ask what's up and request inclusion. > 2. The problem is that we need to find a point of leverage, which may > or may not come from working within normal policy processes. The > blocking power of one sovereign, USG, is not easily ignored or bypoassed > in these international institutions. By way of contrast, the free > software movement has gained leverage over the policy debate regarding > its issues by creating its own institution -- the general public license > -- embodying its values. Are there analogues that could be pursued in > the IG arena? Apart from inventing some new technology which would render the DNS obsolete (something I've often thought of, but no groundbreaking idea yet), I can't see much of that. On the Internet, you need to attach added value to something for people to embrace it. So, can we imagine anything practically feasible and having sensible advantages over the present DNS system and arrangements? -- vb. [Vittorio Bertola - v.bertola [a] bertola.eu.org]<----- http://bertola.eu.org/ <- Prima o poi... ____________________________________________________________ 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 From Jeremy at Malcolm.id.au Thu Nov 30 09:42:10 2006 From: Jeremy at Malcolm.id.au (Jeremy Malcolm) Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2006 22:42:10 +0800 Subject: [governance] ITU IG Resolution In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <456EEDC2.6080605@Malcolm.id.au> Milton Mueller wrote: > 2. The problem is that we need to find a point of leverage, which may > or may not come from working within normal policy processes. The > blocking power of one sovereign, USG, is not easily ignored or bypoassed > in these international institutions. By way of contrast, the free > software movement has gained leverage over the policy debate regarding > its issues by creating its own institution -- the general public license > -- embodying its values. Are there analogues that could be pursued in > the IG arena? More good thoughts. In answer to Milton, I think we need to seek to institutionalise this leverage in the structures and processes of the IGF. Not easy, but the gentle pressure of our CS representatives on the Advisory Group will be key, together with public and persistent communication with Nitin and the IGF Secretariat. The desired outcome, as I see it, is that USG (or other) unilateralism in policy development will become politically more expensive than to engage in the IGF's multi-stakeholder process, in which CS already has (but must entrench and solidify) a stronger position than it has in traditional governmental and intergovernmental fora. -- Jeremy Malcolm LLB (Hons) B Com Internet and Open Source lawyer, IT consultant, actor host -t NAPTR 1.0.8.0.3.1.2.9.8.1.6.e164.org|awk -F! '{print $3}' ____________________________________________________________ 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 From lists at privaterra.info Thu Nov 30 16:25:33 2006 From: lists at privaterra.info (lists) Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2006 16:25:33 -0500 Subject: [governance] IGF Athens / Forensic tests on three Boeing 767 aircraft Message-ID: I wanted to make sure that those who attended the IGF in Athens & flew out British Airways (BA), were aware that their flights might have been radioactively contaminated. Please read the text below VERY CAREFULL and, do forward to any colleagues you know who might have also flown BA. regards Robert -- The following British Airways flights are involved. - http:// tinyurl.com/y9n2ra -- Forensic tests on three Boeing 767 aircraft http://tinyurl.com/yhffyn British Airways has been advised that three of its Boeing 767 short haul aircraft have been identified by the UK government as part of the investigation into the death of Alexander Litvinenko. The airline was contacted on Tuesday, November 28 by the government. It has taken the three B767s out of service to enable forensic examination to be carried out. The initial results of the forensic tests, which was confirmed late this afternoon, has shown very low traces of a radioactive substance onboard two of the three aircraft. British Airways has been advised that this investigation is confined solely to these three B767 aircraft, which will remain out of service until further notice. British Airways understands that from advice it has been given that the risk to public health is low. The airline is in the process of making contact with customers who have travelled on flights operated by these aircraft, which operate within Europe. Flights affected are listed here. Customers on these flights who wish to receive further advice are advised to telephone NHS Direct on 0845 46 47. This includes UK citizens travelling overseas. For all non-UK nationals, please contact your local doctor. Only customers who have travelled on these specific flights are asked to telephone NHS Direct or seek medical advice locally. British Airways has set up a special helpline for customers in the UK on 0845 6040171 or + 44191 211 3690 for international calls. Further information will be released as it becomes available. Information is also available from the following websites NHS Direct www.nhsdirect.nhs.uk Health Protection Agency Information www.hpa.org.uk Further information will be released as it becomes available. ____________________________________________________________ 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 From qshatti at safat.kisr.edu.kw Wed Nov 1 11:30:29 2006 From: qshatti at safat.kisr.edu.kw (Qusai Al-Shatti) Date: Wed, 01 Nov 2006 19:30:29 +0300 Subject: [governance] IGF conclusions Message-ID: <200611011630.TAA15362@safat.kisr.edu.kw> > Sorry, if this has been unclear. There is an open mike session each > morning between 9.30 and 10 am. All workshop organizers can ask for the > mic and give a two minute report on their workshop. I was surprised to > see how few people made use of this opportunity this morning. The open > mic session is also open for any other type of comment. The only > requirement is that it is concise. > > jeanette I support Jeanette in her embeded encouragement to all workshop organizers to read their workshop report in open mic session for the benefit of all the participants. > > karen banks wrote: > > hi robin, vittorio > > > >> Yes, there are no "official conclusions" of IGF. The closest thing > >> to this is the report of the workshop. And this report can be read at > >> the main session on the last day from the floor. The template for > >> this report is on the IGF website and workshop organizers are invited > >> to (briefly) present their report in the main session on Thursday > >> morning. > > > > > > robin - are you asking all workshop cooridnators to do this? (39 > > workshops or so?) - or, that if a workshop coordinator so wishes they > > can read the report from the floor? > > Sorry, if this has been unclear. There is an open mike session each > morning between 9.30 and 10 am. All workshop organizers can ask for the > mic and give a two minute report on their workshop. I was surprised to > see how few people made use of this opportunity this morning. The open > mic session is also open for any other type of comment. The only > requirement is that it is concise. > > jeanette > > > > > > i imagine the IGF will post workshop reports online and therefore, will > > form part of the official record of the meeting > > > > karen > > ps.. the report format is here: . > > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > > 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 > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > ____________________________________________________________ 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 From qshatti at safat.kisr.edu.kw Mon Nov 6 17:21:43 2006 From: qshatti at safat.kisr.edu.kw (Qusai Al-Shatti) Date: Tue, 07 Nov 2006 01:21:43 +0300 Subject: [governance] Elections for coordinators Message-ID: <200611062221.BAA06508@safat.kisr.edu.kw> I support option 1. Qusai --- Message Header --- The following message was sent by Avri Doria on Sun, 5 Nov 2006 19:51:21 -0500. --- Original Message --- > Hi, > > Well the time for nominations is long over and we have two nominees > for two positions Vittorio and Parminder - info at http:// > www.igcaucus.org/IGC-candidates-2006.html > > There were a couple of private nominations made, but I checked with > each of those nominated privately, and they declined. If anyone > feels they were nominated of self-nominated and I missed it, please > let me know immediately. > > We have two options for the election, as I mentioned before. > > 1. (my current inclination) Hold one vote and the person who gets > the most votes wins the two year terms with the other getting the one > year term. > > 2. A suggestion was made during the face to face get together during > the IGF meeting, that two votes should be held. During the first > vote, the person with the most votes gets the two year term. Under > this suggestion nominations for the second slot remain open until > after the first vote is completed. At that point the person who got > the least votes in the first ballot and anyone yet to be nominated > would stand a vote with the person getting the most votes be the > coordinator with a one year term. > > If anyone on this list has a preference, please send a message > picking an option. If no one speaks up, I will go with option 1. On > the other hand if people speak up, I will go with whichever option > has the largest voice. I will probably start the vote (or the first > vote) by midweek. I will announce which option we are using at that > time. > > thanks > > a. > > ps. Still looking for a volunteer to chair the nomcom to pick the > appeals team - for this caucus to work according to the charter, we > do need volunteers to take on the tasks. > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > Hi, > > Well the time for nominations is long over and we have two nominees > for two positions Vittorio and Parminder - info at http:// > www.igcaucus.org/IGC-candidates-2006.html > > There were a couple of private nominations made, but I checked with > each of those nominated privately, and they declined. If anyone > feels they were nominated of self-nominated and I missed it, please > let me know immediately. > > We have two options for the election, as I mentioned before. > > 1. (my current inclination) Hold one vote and the person who gets > the most votes wins the two year terms with the other getting the one > year term. > > 2. A suggestion was made during the face to face get together during > the IGF meeting, that two votes should be held. During the first > vote, the person with the most votes gets the two year term. Under > this suggestion nominations for the second slot remain open until > after the first vote is completed. At that point the person who got > the least votes in the first ballot and anyone yet to be nominated > would stand a vote with the person getting the most votes be the > coordinator with a one year term. > > If anyone on this list has a preference, please send a message > picking an option. If no one speaks up, I will go with option 1. On > the other hand if people speak up, I will go with whichever option > has the largest voice. I will probably start the vote (or the first > vote) by midweek. I will announce which option we are using at that > time. > > thanks > > a. > > ps. Still looking for a volunteer to chair the nomcom to pick the > appeals team - for this caucus to work according to the charter, we > do need volunteers to take on the tasks. > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > ____________________________________________________________ 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 From qshatti at safat.kisr.edu.kw Mon Nov 20 14:40:09 2006 From: qshatti at safat.kisr.edu.kw (Qusai Al-Shatti) Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2006 22:40:09 +0300 Subject: [governance] Vote closed Message-ID: <200611201940.WAA05007@safat.kisr.edu.kw> Dear all: I would like to congratulate Parminder and Vittorio wishing them all the best in their tasks as coordinators. I would like also to thank Avri for all the initiatives and effort she made as coordinator for the governance caucus which were during a crucial time (voting processes and the charter). She was a leading example for us. wishing all our colleagues the best Qusai --- Message Header --- The following message was sent by Avri Doria on Mon, 20 Nov 2006 00:23:26 -0500. --- Original Message --- > Hi, > > Due to a software failure on the voting machine, I have had to close > the vote a few hours early - there are about 5 hours left of 19 Nov > in Honolulu and about 3 hours left in California. > > Out of 176 possible voters, 48 votes were recorded. > > The final report gives an average vote of: > > 1.23 for candidate 1. Parminder Singh > 1.04 for candidate 2. Vittorio Bertola > > This means that Parminder has the 2 year coordinator term ending in 2008 > and Vittorio has the 1 year coordinator term ending in 2007. > > I thank you all for your support during my year as interim > coordinator and wish our 2 new coordinators success. > > With this note, I end my tenure as interim coordinator. > > thanks > > 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 > Hi, > > Due to a software failure on the voting machine, I have had to close > the vote a few hours early - there are about 5 hours left of 19 Nov > in Honolulu and about 3 hours left in California. > > Out of 176 possible voters, 48 votes were recorded. > > The final report gives an average vote of: > > 1.23 for candidate 1. Parminder Singh > 1.04 for candidate 2. Vittorio Bertola > > This means that Parminder has the 2 year coordinator term ending in 2008 > and Vittorio has the 1 year coordinator term ending in 2007. > > I thank you all for your support during my year as interim > coordinator and wish our 2 new coordinators success. > > With this note, I end my tenure as interim coordinator. > > thanks > > 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 > ____________________________________________________________ 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