[governance] .xxx. igc and igf

[Bertrand de La Chapelle]

Jacqueline has taken words out of my mouth...

Of course it's not either / or.

The Internationalization of ICANN in 2010 is an issue that must be discussed
within ICANN because it has many consequences for its internal functionning
and procedures.
But it is also natural to discuss it within the IGF because this new Forum
has the mandate (72i) to "Promote [] the embodiment of WSIS principles in
Internet Governance  processes".

In that respect, ICANN in its future evolution, has a similar challenge than
all other relevant organizations : inventing a truly multi-stakeholder
Internet governance.

Bertrand


On 4/18/07, Jacqueline A. Morris <jam at jacquelinemorris.com> wrote:
>
> Vittorio
> Why not work in both forums? Work both within the ICANN process and the
> IGF?
> Must it be either/or?
> Jacqueline
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Vittorio Bertola [mailto:vb at bertola.eu]
> Sent: Tuesday, April 17, 2007 2:03 PM
> To: governance at lists.cpsr.org; Milton Mueller
> Subject: Re: [governance] .xxx. igc and igf
>
> Milton Mueller ha scritto:
> > True, of course I am not calling for starting from scratch. The IGF is
> > a valuable forum for advocacy and a "bully pulpit" to use an American
> > slang. I am not giving up on it and I hope my comments are not being
> > interpreted that way. But the severe limits being placed on its agenda
> > are a source of concern, especially when key actors in ICANN civil
> > society (i.e., Vittorio) seem to be abandoning the opportunity to
> > attempt to reform ICANN from an IGF-based platform.
>
> I must confess to be somehow lost in your reasoning.
> First you complain that the IGF is a forum for advocacy and for
> discussion only.
> Then you complain that ICANN reforms are not on the agenda of the IGF.
> And finally you complain about abandoning an "opportunity to attempt to
> reform ICANN from the IGF" which, if you accept your premise six lines
> before, does not exist.
> Earlier today, you complained that those from civil society who accept
> serving in positions at ICANN are being "soooooo easily co-opted" just
> to "feel important".
> In the meantime, you serve as the Chair of one of the two civil society
> structures of ICANN.
> So I'm not sure about what you are actually meaning, whether according
> to you it's good or bad for civil society to be engaged in ICANN, and
> what would be your practical suggestion for a politically feasible
> process to change ICANN and in what direction.
>
> As for ICANN reforms and the IGF, what I've said is that, given that any
> reforms of ICANN will have to be approved by the Board of ICANN, it
> might be more productive to participate in the process that ICANN has
> set up at its own meetings to discuss its strategic evolution, rather
> than to stand at the "bully pulpit" in Rio to rant about how ICANN needs
> to change. But these are just my two cents.
> --
> vb.                   Vittorio Bertola - vb [a] bertola.eu   <--------
> -------->  finally with a new website at http://bertola.eu/  <--------
>
>

-- 
____________________
Bertrand de La Chapelle

Tel : +33 (0)6 11 88 33 32

"Le plus beau métier des hommes, c'est d'unir les hommes" Antoine de Saint
Exupéry
("there is no better mission for humans than uniting humans")
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20070418/7e1f13be/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed...
Name: message-footer.txt
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20070418/7e1f13be/attachment.txt>