From kicki.nordstrom at srfriks.org Wed Aug 1 07:51:55 2007 From: kicki.nordstrom at srfriks.org (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Kicki_Nordstr=F6m?=) Date: Wed, 1 Aug 2007 13:51:55 +0200 Subject: SV: SV: [governance] Fundamentally broken design of society In-Reply-To: <120784.72500.qm@web25511.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> References: <3DF8101092666E4A9020D949E419EB6F01A8F4DC@ensms02.iris.se> <120784.72500.qm@web25511.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <3DF8101092666E4A9020D949E419EB6F01A8F576@ensms02.iris.se> Dear Kwasi Your comment and interest is very much appreciated. I hope someone would like to lead such a group as I am unable to take on more right now. However, I would very much like to be part of a group if someone is facilitating the inputs. I copy this to Hiroshi and hope he will join a group together with some of us to look into recommendations of how we can support accessible ICT for all persons without extra costs for some! warm regards Kicki Kicki Nordström Synskadades Riksförbund (SRF) World Blind Union (WBU) 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: kicki.nordstrom at srfriks.org kicki.nordstrom at telia.com (private) ________________________________ Från: kwasi boakye-akyeampong [mailto:kboakye1 at yahoo.co.uk] Skickat: den 31 juli 2007 20:06 Till: governance at lists.cpsr.org; Kicki Nordström Ämne: Re: SV: [governance] Fundamentally broken design of society Norbert, Kikki, I'd be part of any such initiative if you'd take it up. It will be an opportunity for me to learn. Until Kikki threw the disability angle to the digital divide debate, I, personally, had not given it much consideration since it is something that is (if I'm not exagerating) totally ignored in the developing world. I can at least say that for my country Ghana. Thanks, Kwasi Kicki Nordström wrote: Dear Norbert., Maybe you are absolutely right, we the civil society have to show the way forward! A group of people could be assigned to discuss this matter, and there are, I think, a network of persons with disabilities, linked to this list, (I hope) and we may have just to address this network to put a group together?! Others may be interested as well and should be welcome. The group I am thinking of was created at the first WSIS and with its side event, we have continued to work on the resolution we adopted, wishing a ICT society open for ALL! The resolution was further developed in Tunis at the second phase of WSIS and the disability Forum hold the second side event. I really hope something will happen now so as we can move this issue a bit further! Thanks Norbert., for your good initiative, do you mind to take the lead? Yours Kicki Kicki Nordström Synskadades Riksförbund (SRF) World Blind Union (WBU) 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: kicki.nordstrom at srfriks.org kicki.nordstrom at telia.com (private) -----Ursprungligt meddelande----- Från: Norbert Bollow [mailto:nb at bollow.ch] Skickat: den 31 juli 2007 18:23 Till: governance at lists.cpsr.org Ämne: [governance] Fundamentally broken design of society Dear Kicki, I very strongly agree with your assertion that the real problem lies with a fundamentally broken design of society! (Note: The following sentence is perhaps a bit complicated, but it can be safely ignored by all but the most pedantic of readers. In the above statement, I understand "design of society" to mean both the currently existing system by means of which society as a whole is composed out of a very large number of sub-systems, as well the way in which the decisions are made by means of which society as a whole is allowed to evolve.) Now the question arises, how can this fundamental brokenness be fixed? Certainly it is not possible for society as a whole to get fixed all at once! So the best that can be done, in my opinion, is to start small, get a small but diverse group of people together (electronically, by means of a mailing list) who agree on wanting to figure out how a subsystem of society can be constructed which avoids the kind of fundamental "design of society" flaws that result in the production of _disabling_ software. I'm sure that when we figure out how to produce, within such a subsystem of society, computer software which is not disabling but rather empowering for everyone, that kind of software is going to be a commercial success also with the large number of computer users who are not particularly interested in "design of society" problems. What do you think? Gruss, Norbert. -- Norbert Bollow http://Norbert.ch Präsident der Swiss Internet User Group SIUG http://SIUG.ch Die SIUG engagiert sich für den Schutz der Privatsphäre und dafür, dass auch in Zukunft das Internet auf offenen Standards basiert. ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.cpsr.org To be removed from the list, 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 .............................................................................................................................. "If I am not for myself, who will be for me? If I am not for others, what am I? And if not now, when?" - Rabbi Hillal .............................................................................................................................. ________________________________ Yahoo! Mail is the world's favourite email. Don't settle for less, sign up for your free account today . -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: message-footer.txt URL: From kicki.nordstrom at srfriks.org Thu Aug 2 14:03:58 2007 From: kicki.nordstrom at srfriks.org (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Kicki_Nordstr=F6m?=) Date: Thu, 2 Aug 2007 20:03:58 +0200 Subject: VB: SV: [governance] Fundamentally broken design of society Message-ID: <3DF8101092666E4A9020D949E419EB6F01033A56@ensms02.iris.se> Dear Hiroshi and all, I am very thankful to Hiroshi Kawamura to volunteer to lead a small group within the Governance network, on finding solutions on how we could: 1. Make for instance Microsoft interested in a real effort to cooperate with programmers who are specialists on adaptive applications and application programs for persons with disabilities 2. Make sure that the costs for applications to other "commonly" used programs are integrated in the price of those programs and do not carry extra costs for persons with disabilities. 3. How to get persons with disabilities from developing countries able to access computer and free software with applications. Could this be the first task for a small working group on this subject? All the best Kicki Kicki Nordström Synskadades Riksförbund (SRF) World Blind Union (WBU) 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: kicki.nordstrom at srfriks.org kicki.nordstrom at telia.com (private) -----Ursprungligt meddelande----- Från: Hiroshi Kawamura [mailto:hkawa at attglobal.net] Skickat: den 1 augusti 2007 22:05 Till: Kicki Nordström; kwasi boakye-akyeampong; governance at lists.cpsr.org Ämne: Re: SV: [governance] Fundamentally broken design of society Dear Kicky: Nice to hear from you always. Yes, the subject being discussed is exactly what I am concerned. I am interested to join the list to share what we are doing and thinking. Best Hiroshi ----- Original Message ----- From: "Kicki Nordström" To: "kwasi boakye-akyeampong" ; Cc: Sent: Wednesday, August 01, 2007 8:51 PM Subject: SV: SV: [governance] Fundamentally broken design of society Dear Kwasi Your comment and interest is very much appreciated. I hope someone would like to lead such a group as I am unable to take on more right now. However, I would very much like to be part of a group if someone is facilitating the inputs. I copy this to Hiroshi and hope he will join a group together with some of us to look into recommendations of how we can support accessible ICT for all persons without extra costs for some! warm regards Kicki Kicki Nordström Synskadades Riksförbund (SRF) World Blind Union (WBU) 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: kicki.nordstrom at srfriks.org kicki.nordstrom at telia.com (private) ________________________________ Från: kwasi boakye-akyeampong [mailto:kboakye1 at yahoo.co.uk] Skickat: den 31 juli 2007 20:06 Till: governance at lists.cpsr.org; Kicki Nordström Ämne: Re: SV: [governance] Fundamentally broken design of society Norbert, Kikki, I'd be part of any such initiative if you'd take it up. It will be an opportunity for me to learn. Until Kikki threw the disability angle to the digital divide debate, I, personally, had not given it much consideration since it is something that is (if I'm not exagerating) totally ignored in the developing world. I can at least say that for my country Ghana. Thanks, Kwasi Kicki Nordström wrote: Dear Norbert., Maybe you are absolutely right, we the civil society have to show the way forward! A group of people could be assigned to discuss this matter, and there are, I think, a network of persons with disabilities, linked to this list, (I hope) and we may have just to address this network to put a group together?! Others may be interested as well and should be welcome. The group I am thinking of was created at the first WSIS and with its side event, we have continued to work on the resolution we adopted, wishing a ICT society open for ALL! The resolution was further developed in Tunis at the second phase of WSIS and the disability Forum hold the second side event. I really hope something will happen now so as we can move this issue a bit further! Thanks Norbert., for your good initiative, do you mind to take the lead? Yours Kicki Kicki Nordström Synskadades Riksförbund (SRF) World Blind Union (WBU) 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: kicki.nordstrom at srfriks.org kicki.nordstrom at telia.com (private) -----Ursprungligt meddelande----- Från: Norbert Bollow [mailto:nb at bollow.ch] Skickat: den 31 juli 2007 18:23 Till: governance at lists.cpsr.org Ämne: [governance] Fundamentally broken design of society Dear Kicki, I very strongly agree with your assertion that the real problem lies with a fundamentally broken design of society! (Note: The following sentence is perhaps a bit complicated, but it can be safely ignored by all but the most pedantic of readers. In the above statement, I understand "design of society" to mean both the currently existing system by means of which society as a whole is composed out of a very large number of sub-systems, as well the way in which the decisions are made by means of which society as a whole is allowed to evolve.) Now the question arises, how can this fundamental brokenness be fixed? Certainly it is not possible for society as a whole to get fixed all at once! So the best that can be done, in my opinion, is to start small, get a small but diverse group of people together (electronically, by means of a mailing list) who agree on wanting to figure out how a subsystem of society can be constructed which avoids the kind of fundamental "design of society" flaws that result in the production of _disabling_ software. I'm sure that when we figure out how to produce, within such a subsystem of society, computer software which is not disabling but rather empowering for everyone, that kind of software is going to be a commercial success also with the large number of computer users who are not particularly interested in "design of society" problems. What do you think? Gruss, Norbert. -- Norbert Bollow http://Norbert.ch Präsident der Swiss Internet User Group SIUG http://SIUG.ch Die SIUG engagiert sich für den Schutz der Privatsphäre und dafür, dass auch in Zukunft das Internet auf offenen Standards basiert. ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.cpsr.org To be removed from the list, 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 .............................................................................................................................. "If I am not for myself, who will be for me? If I am not for others, what am I? And if not now, when?" - Rabbi Hillal .............................................................................................................................. ________________________________ Yahoo! Mail is the world's favourite email. Don't settle for less, sign up for your free account today . ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.cpsr.org To be removed from the list, 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 kboakye1 at yahoo.co.uk Thu Aug 2 14:23:05 2007 From: kboakye1 at yahoo.co.uk (kwasi boakye-akyeampong) Date: Thu, 2 Aug 2007 19:23:05 +0100 (BST) Subject: VB: SV: [governance] Fundamentally broken design of society In-Reply-To: <3DF8101092666E4A9020D949E419EB6F01033A56@ensms02.iris.se> Message-ID: <74836.90449.qm@web25502.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Hello Hiroshi, Do you accept to co-ordinate things? What would the name of the task force be? Kicki, what name would you propose? Regards, Kwasi Kicki Nordström wrote: Dear Hiroshi and all, I am very thankful to Hiroshi Kawamura to volunteer to lead a small group within the Governance network, on finding solutions on how we could: 1. Make for instance Microsoft interested in a real effort to cooperate with programmers who are specialists on adaptive applications and application programs for persons with disabilities 2. Make sure that the costs for applications to other "commonly" used programs are integrated in the price of those programs and do not carry extra costs for persons with disabilities. 3. How to get persons with disabilities from developing countries able to access computer and free software with applications. Could this be the first task for a small working group on this subject? All the best Kicki Kicki Nordström Synskadades Riksförbund (SRF) World Blind Union (WBU) 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: kicki.nordstrom at srfriks.org kicki.nordstrom at telia.com (private) -----Ursprungligt meddelande----- Från: Hiroshi Kawamura [mailto:hkawa at attglobal.net] Skickat: den 1 augusti 2007 22:05 Till: Kicki Nordström; kwasi boakye-akyeampong; governance at lists.cpsr.org Ämne: Re: SV: [governance] Fundamentally broken design of society Dear Kicky: Nice to hear from you always. Yes, the subject being discussed is exactly what I am concerned. I am interested to join the list to share what we are doing and thinking. Best Hiroshi ----- Original Message ----- From: "Kicki Nordström" To: "kwasi boakye-akyeampong" ; Cc: Sent: Wednesday, August 01, 2007 8:51 PM Subject: SV: SV: [governance] Fundamentally broken design of society Dear Kwasi Your comment and interest is very much appreciated. I hope someone would like to lead such a group as I am unable to take on more right now. However, I would very much like to be part of a group if someone is facilitating the inputs. I copy this to Hiroshi and hope he will join a group together with some of us to look into recommendations of how we can support accessible ICT for all persons without extra costs for some! warm regards Kicki Kicki Nordström Synskadades Riksförbund (SRF) World Blind Union (WBU) 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: kicki.nordstrom at srfriks.org kicki.nordstrom at telia.com (private) ________________________________ Från: kwasi boakye-akyeampong [mailto:kboakye1 at yahoo.co.uk] Skickat: den 31 juli 2007 20:06 Till: governance at lists.cpsr.org; Kicki Nordström Ämne: Re: SV: [governance] Fundamentally broken design of society Norbert, Kikki, I'd be part of any such initiative if you'd take it up. It will be an opportunity for me to learn. Until Kikki threw the disability angle to the digital divide debate, I, personally, had not given it much consideration since it is something that is (if I'm not exagerating) totally ignored in the developing world. I can at least say that for my country Ghana. Thanks, Kwasi Kicki Nordström wrote: Dear Norbert., Maybe you are absolutely right, we the civil society have to show the way forward! A group of people could be assigned to discuss this matter, and there are, I think, a network of persons with disabilities, linked to this list, (I hope) and we may have just to address this network to put a group together?! Others may be interested as well and should be welcome. The group I am thinking of was created at the first WSIS and with its side event, we have continued to work on the resolution we adopted, wishing a ICT society open for ALL! The resolution was further developed in Tunis at the second phase of WSIS and the disability Forum hold the second side event. I really hope something will happen now so as we can move this issue a bit further! Thanks Norbert., for your good initiative, do you mind to take the lead? Yours Kicki Kicki Nordström Synskadades Riksförbund (SRF) World Blind Union (WBU) 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: kicki.nordstrom at srfriks.org kicki.nordstrom at telia.com (private) -----Ursprungligt meddelande----- Från: Norbert Bollow [mailto:nb at bollow.ch] Skickat: den 31 juli 2007 18:23 Till: governance at lists.cpsr.org Ämne: [governance] Fundamentally broken design of society Dear Kicki, I very strongly agree with your assertion that the real problem lies with a fundamentally broken design of society! (Note: The following sentence is perhaps a bit complicated, but it can be safely ignored by all but the most pedantic of readers. In the above statement, I understand "design of society" to mean both the currently existing system by means of which society as a whole is composed out of a very large number of sub-systems, as well the way in which the decisions are made by means of which society as a whole is allowed to evolve.) Now the question arises, how can this fundamental brokenness be fixed? Certainly it is not possible for society as a whole to get fixed all at once! So the best that can be done, in my opinion, is to start small, get a small but diverse group of people together (electronically, by means of a mailing list) who agree on wanting to figure out how a subsystem of society can be constructed which avoids the kind of fundamental "design of society" flaws that result in the production of _disabling_ software. I'm sure that when we figure out how to produce, within such a subsystem of society, computer software which is not disabling but rather empowering for everyone, that kind of software is going to be a commercial success also with the large number of computer users who are not particularly interested in "design of society" problems. What do you think? Gruss, Norbert. -- Norbert Bollow http://Norbert.ch Präsident der Swiss Internet User Group SIUG http://SIUG.ch Die SIUG engagiert sich für den Schutz der Privatsphäre und dafür, dass auch in Zukunft das Internet auf offenen Standards basiert. ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.cpsr.org To be removed from the list, 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 .............................................................................................................................. "If I am not for myself, who will be for me? If I am not for others, what am I? And if not now, when?" - Rabbi Hillal .............................................................................................................................. ________________________________ Yahoo! Mail is the world's favourite email. Don't settle for less, sign up for your free account today . ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.cpsr.org To be removed from the list, send any message to: governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org For all list information and functions, see: http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance .............................................................................................................................. “If I am not for myself, who will be for me? If I am not for others, what am I? And if not now, when?” - Rabbi Hillal .............................................................................................................................. --------------------------------- Yahoo! Answers - Get better answers from someone who knows. Tryit now. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: message-footer.txt URL: From wsis at ngocongo.org Thu Aug 2 15:16:42 2007 From: wsis at ngocongo.org (CONGO WSIS - Philippe Dam) Date: Thu, 2 Aug 2007 21:16:42 +0200 Subject: [governance] TR: Launch of the GAID African Network - Demarrage du Reseau africain du GAID Message-ID: <200708021916.l72JG46O017381@smtp1.infomaniak.ch> Dear all, Find attached some information regarding the GAID African Network, recently launched in Addis Ababa in March 2007. For your information, the GAID African Network will set up a webpage shortly www.un-gaid-africa.org. All the best, Philippe Dam -----Message d'origine----- ----- Forwarded by Serge Kapto/NY/UNO on 07/27/2007 09:34 AM ----- Makane Faye/ECA at ECA 07/27/2007 09:08 AM To "WSIS focal points of African governments" , "African Information Society Initiative - Discussion Forum" cc Subject Launch of the GAID African Network - Demarrage du Reseau africain du GAID Dear Madam, Dear Sir, Following the launch of the Global Alliance on ICT and Development (GAID) African Network in Addis Ababa in March 2007, attached please find the Structures which were adopted by the Group of Facilitators in May 2007. We would be most grateful if you could review the different structures and let us know where you would like to focus or/and which network you would like to lead on. Mesdames et Messieurs, Suite au demarrage en mars 2007 du Reseau africain de l'Alliance globale sur les TIC et le Developpement , je vous prie de trouver en fichiers joints les Structures qui ont ete adoptees par le Groupe de Facilitateurs en mai 2007. Nous vous prions de bien vouloir passer en revue ces structures et nous proposer un secteur oun reseau que vous aimeriez diriger. Thank you very. Je vous remercie. Makane Faye United Nations Economic Commission for Africa (ECA) P.O. Box 3001 Addis Ababa, Ethiopia Tel: 251 11 5514534 Fax: 251 11 5510512 / 251 11 5515829 Email: mfaye at uneca.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 -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: The GAID Africa-Revised.pdf Type: application/octet-stream Size: 357260 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: GAID_Africa-French Version.doc Type: application/octet-stream Size: 70656 bytes Desc: not available URL: From ajp at glocom.ac.jp Fri Aug 3 06:39:15 2007 From: ajp at glocom.ac.jp (Adam Peake) Date: Fri, 3 Aug 2007 19:39:15 +0900 Subject: [governance] for info: Fellowships to Ensure Global Voices Heard at ICANN Message-ID: see Fellowships to Ensure Global Voices Heard at ICANN Program builds on the successful pilot program run at San Juan meeting 2 August 2007 MARINA DEL REY, Calif.: More voices from across the globe will be heard at ICANN's 30th International Public Meeting in Los Angeles later this year thanks to the global fellowships program being launched today. "ICANN has a global mandate and it's important that we do what we can to support participation from every corner of the world. This program makes sure we have involvement from individuals from developing and least developed nations who otherwise may be unable to attend," said Theresa Swinehart, ICANN's Vice President, Global and Strategic Partnerships. "The pilot of the fellowship program at our San Juan meeting was a success and has helped us refine the program for the upcoming ICANN meeting in Los Angeles." The 33 fellows from 24 countries who played an active role at the San Juan meeting were chosen from 125 applications received -- and 65 per cent of the fellows and 68 per cent of applicants had never attended an ICANN meeting. Priority will be given to applicants who are current residents of developing and least developed nations who are interested in participating in ICANN and its supporting organizations, such as the Governmental Advisory Committee, the Country Code Names Supporting Organization, and the Generic Names Supporting Organization. The fellowship will assist in covering airfare, hotel and a stipend. Recipients will be expected to actively participate in and contribute to ICANN processes. As always, registration for ICANN's meetings is free for anyone wanting to attend. The Los Angeles meeting will be held from 29 October to 2 November 2007. "ICANN is working on major efforts with internationalized domain names and new top-level domains -- efforts that represent some of the biggest changes to the Internet since it was invented," Swinehart added. "ICANN wants as much input and global engagement as possible on issues like IDNs and top-level domains -- and the fellowship program has a key role in helping us accomplish that goal." Applications will be accepted from now until 1200 PDT (UTC -7) on Friday 24 August 2007. More information, as well as a link to the application for a fellowship, is available online at: http://www.icann.org/fellowships/ etc etc about ICANN. ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.cpsr.org To be removed from the list, 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 Fri Aug 3 09:28:17 2007 From: wsis at ngocongo.org (CONGO WSIS - Philippe Dam) Date: Fri, 3 Aug 2007 15:28:17 +0200 Subject: [governance] ECOSOC Resolution Message-ID: <200708031327.l73DRdLK024771@smtp1.infomaniak.ch> For your information, find attached the ECOSOC resolution on integrated and coordinated implementation of UN conferences and summits (E/2007/L.32), adopted on 27 July. Its paragraph 4 refers to the role of the CSTD in the WSIS follow up. Paragraph 4 reads as follows: "4. Acknowledges the efforts of the Commission on Science and Technology for Development, in accordance with General Assembly resolutions 57/270 B and 60/252 and Council resolution 2006/46, to effectively assist the Council as the focal point in the system-wide follow-up, in particular the review and assessment of progress made in implementing the outcomes of the World Summit on the Information Society, while at the same time maintaining its original mandate on science and technology for development, also taking into account the provisions of paragraph 60 of the 2005 World Summit Outcome, and also acknowledges the efforts of the Commission to use the multi-stakeholder approach effectively while preserving its intergovernmental nature;" In addition, note that the CSTD draft resolution on the "Flow of Information for the Follow-Up of WSIS" and its draft decision on the "Multi-year work programme" were also adopted without a vote on 27 February. Philippe Dam CONGO - WSIS CS Secretariat 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 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: ECOSOC E-2007-L32.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 34650 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: message-footer.txt URL: From kboakye1 at yahoo.co.uk Fri Aug 3 10:11:08 2007 From: kboakye1 at yahoo.co.uk (kwasi boakye-akyeampong) Date: Fri, 3 Aug 2007 15:11:08 +0100 (BST) Subject: [governance] ccTLDs - potential source of income for developing countries? Message-ID: <356607.72904.qm@web25512.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Folks, I hope I'll be able to ask my question clear enough to get the right answers. Are there any direct benefits of ccTLDs to: countries, and businesses since a business in say, Ghana can buy a domain name with a .co.uk extension? I'd appreciate any response. Regards, Kwasi .............................................................................................................................. “If I am not for myself, who will be for me? If I am not for others, what am I? And if not now, when?” - Rabbi Hillal .............................................................................................................................. --------------------------------- Yahoo! Mail is the world's favourite email. Don't settle for less, sign up for your freeaccount today. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: message-footer.txt URL: From pr+governance at x0.dk Fri Aug 3 11:12:44 2007 From: pr+governance at x0.dk (Phil Regnauld) Date: Fri, 3 Aug 2007 17:12:44 +0200 Subject: [governance] ccTLDs - potential source of income for developing countries? In-Reply-To: <356607.72904.qm@web25512.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> References: <356607.72904.qm@web25512.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20070803151243.GH26228@macbook.catpipe.net> kwasi boakye-akyeampong (kboakye1) writes: > Folks, > > I hope I'll be able to ask my question clear enough to get the right answers. > > Are there any direct benefits of ccTLDs to: > > countries, and > businesses > > since a business in say, Ghana can buy a domain name with a .co.uk extension? > > I'd appreciate any response. It all depends on the policy of the ccTLD (or any TLD for that matter) that you are trying to buy into. If co.uk has a policy that says that you must be a registered business in the UK, then that's the limitation. Otherwise, I'm not sure I understand the question "are there any direct benefits of ccTLDs to countries and businesses". If you're asking if there's some kind of advantage to registering a ccTLD in the domain in which your business is incorporated or has its offices, then that depends again on that ccTLD's policy. In some cases national law will provide you better protection with regards to trademark claims (when defending or litigating), as compared to say a .COM, but then again there are trends to attempt to get ccTLDs to subscribe to UDRP-style policies. If you're asking "can the ccTLD be a source of income", well yes, that all depends on your pricing scheme, how easy it is to register and qualify, etc... Some countries use part or most of the registration fee (if the Registry is already being funded by some other organization), for example to contribute to a digital divide fund, or to finance network development/ access. It's a tradeoff of "protecting the national TLD" (for example restricting registration within a given ccTLD to individuals or businesses that are residents or nationals of that country alone vs. "Free for all and make loads of cash" (like .NU, .TV, ...). What the money ends up being used for is another question. The general idea is: don't let a third party, foreign company manage your ccTLD for you. Do it yourself! Phil ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.cpsr.org To be removed from the list, 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 peter at peter-dambier.de Fri Aug 3 11:13:14 2007 From: peter at peter-dambier.de (Peter Dambier) Date: Fri, 03 Aug 2007 17:13:14 +0200 Subject: [governance] ccTLDs - potential source of income for developing countries? In-Reply-To: <356607.72904.qm@web25512.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> References: <356607.72904.qm@web25512.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <46B3460A.8020901@peter-dambier.de> Hi Kwasi, it very much depends: Normal bussiness wants .com and rarely is satisfied with .biz .net is almost useless except for networking people or companies. .org is mostly for non profit oraganisations. .aero is too difficult and too expensive to obtain. .eu is only (mostly) populated by namesquatters. Rest the ccTLDs. .de is cheap to have - but you have to be german to get and keep it. .su is looking into its sunset but still very popular. .ru is not the same. Many of the .su people cannot get .ru that is why they probably will try to get .com .tv is special. They can sell because people want it .fm is just the same. They are lucky. .ag happens to mean "plc" in german. they are lucky. .ca too complicated. Who can remember me.com.qc.ca? that is why quebecois prefer .tk You can always sell to the .uk and .ca people. Their ccTLD is bad to remember. As long as your name is shorter and the price is reasonable you can sell. If you have an interesting name you can always sell. Kind regards Peter and Karin Dambier kwasi boakye-akyeampong wrote: > Folks, > > I hope I'll be able to ask my question clear enough to get the right > answers. > > Are there any direct benefits of ccTLDs to: > > 1. countries, and > 2. businesses > > since a business in say, Ghana can buy a domain name with a .co.uk > extension? > > I'd appreciate any response. > > Regards, > Kwasi > > > *..............................................................................................................................* > *“If I am not for myself, who will be for me? If I am not for others, > what am I? And if not now, when?”* - Rabbi Hillal > *..............................................................................................................................* > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Yahoo! Mail is the world's favourite email. Don't settle for less, sign > up for your free account today > . > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > ____________________________________________________________ > You received this message as a subscriber on the list: > governance at lists.cpsr.org > To be removed from the list, send any message to: > governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org > > For all list information and functions, see: > http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance -- Peter and Karin Dambier Cesidian Root - Radice Cesidiana Rimbacher Strasse 16 D-69509 Moerlenbach-Bonsweiher +49(6209)795-816 (Telekom) +49(6252)750-308 (VoIP: sipgate.de) mail: peter at peter-dambier.de mail: peter at echnaton.arl.pirates http://iason.site.voila.fr/ https://sourceforge.net/projects/iason/ http://www.cesidianroot.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 yehudakatz at mailinator.com Sat Aug 4 18:40:15 2007 From: yehudakatz at mailinator.com (yehudakatz at mailinator.com) Date: Sat, 4 Aug 2007 15:40:15 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [governance] ccTLDs - potential source of income for developing countries? In-Reply-To: 356607.72904.qm@web25512.mail.ukl.yahoo.com Message-ID: Kwasi, Take a moment .... You can be a 'Big Fish' in a small pond ... Or You can be a 'Small Fish' in a big pond ... Aside from all the things Ghana must overcome in itself, .gh must mature in its own, Before .gh can be competitive in the ccTDL arena. - If Ghanaian's were to develop web sites in their own mother-tongue with english as a second language, so that interactive exchange can grow within Ghana into a saturation point, upon which .gh would be ready for ccTDL competition. Ghana has eight (8) languages: Akan, Twi, Dagbani, Fante, Moshi-Dagomba, Ewe, Ga, English How many web sites are representative of these languages in the .gh domain? Ghanaians can't even register (go to a .gh registration site) a domain in their native language, seem to me GhNIC should at least offer web-pages in a selection of Ghana's local languages. Cost, you are absolutely right in questioning the cost of the .gh domains. I found a .gh register charging a 35$ annual fee. For a Country whos GDP/Capita is $1,900 annually, 35$ is very disproportionate. Ghanaian Citizens need to address this (protest), especially when a .info domain can be purchased at 10$ etc.. Personally I would not be opposed to an underdeveloped country having a two-tier pricing methood, a price for Ghanaians and a price for the rest of the world. The 'Point' is, Ghanaian's need to get behind .gh before the rest of the world will. - TO Answer your questions directly: 1. ccTLDs - potential source of income for developing countries? aws: NO - not until they reach a saturation point. 2. Are there any direct benefits of ccTLDs to: countries? aws: To the Country itself yes, a smaller benefit lies outside the Country (Internationally) 3. Are there any direct benefits of ccTLDs to: businesses? aws: Its an open market competition, Better to be a Big Fish in a small pond (have a safety-net) rather than a Small Fish in a big pond. Ghanaian businesses looking to enter the big pond, must have a industrial-base ready along with the opportunity (right place at the right time). Think of how the Japanese entered the US auto market, (right place at the right time) - http://go.hrw.com/atlas/norm_htm/ghana.htm http://www.nic.gh/ ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.cpsr.org To be removed from the list, 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 kicki.nordstrom at srfriks.org Sun Aug 5 05:00:21 2007 From: kicki.nordstrom at srfriks.org (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Kicki_Nordstr=F6m?=) Date: Sun, 5 Aug 2007 11:00:21 +0200 Subject: SV: VB: SV: [governance] Fundamentally broken design of society In-Reply-To: <74836.90449.qm@web25502.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> References: <3DF8101092666E4A9020D949E419EB6F01033A56@ensms02.iris.se> <74836.90449.qm@web25502.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <3DF8101092666E4A9020D949E419EB6F01033A7A@ensms02.iris.se> Dear Kwasi, Well I am not sure, but something like: Accessible and affordable programs? Or: Closing the ICT divide for PWD (persons with disabilities) Maybe Hiroshi has something better and shorter? Yours Kicki Kicki Nordström Synskadades Riksförbund (SRF) World Blind Union (WBU) 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: kicki.nordstrom at srfriks.org kicki.nordstrom at telia.com (private) ________________________________ Från: kwasi boakye-akyeampong [mailto:kboakye1 at yahoo.co.uk] Skickat: den 2 augusti 2007 20:23 Till: governance at lists.cpsr.org; Kicki Nordström; hkawa at attglobal.net Ämne: Re: VB: SV: [governance] Fundamentally broken design of society Hello Hiroshi, Do you accept to co-ordinate things? What would the name of the task force be? Kicki, what name would you propose? Regards, Kwasi Kicki Nordström wrote: Dear Hiroshi and all, I am very thankful to Hiroshi Kawamura to volunteer to lead a small group within the Governance network, on finding solutions on how we could: 1. Make for instance Microsoft interested in a real effort to cooperate with programmers who are specialists on adaptive applications and application programs for persons with disabilities 2. Make sure that the costs for applications to other "commonly" used programs are integrated in the price of those programs and do not carry extra costs for persons with disabilities. 3. How to get persons with disabilities from developing countries able to access computer and free software with applications. Could this be the first task for a small working group on this subject? All the best Kicki Kicki Nordström Synskadades Riksförbund (SRF) World Blind Union (WBU) 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: kicki.nordstrom at srfriks.org kicki.nordstrom at telia.com (private) -----Ursprungligt meddelande----- Från: Hiroshi Kawamura [mailto:hkawa at attglobal.net] Skickat: den 1 augusti 2007 22:05 Till: Kicki Nordström; kwasi boakye-akyeampong; governance at lists.cpsr.org Ämne: Re: SV: [governance] Fundamentally broken design of society Dear Kicky: Nice to hear from you always. Yes, the subject being discussed is exactly what I am concerned. I am interested to join the list to share what we are doing and thinking. Best Hiroshi ----- Original Message ----- From: "Kicki Nordström" To: "kwasi boakye-akyeampong" ; Cc: Sent: Wednesday, August 01, 2007 8:51 PM Subject: SV: SV: [governance] Fundamentally broken design of society Dear Kwasi Your comment and interest is very much appreciated. I hope someone would like to lead such a group as I am unable to take on more right now. However, I would very much like to be part of a group if someone is facilitating the inputs. I copy this to Hiroshi and hope he will join a group together with some of us to look into recommendations of how we can support accessible ICT for all persons without extra costs for some! warm regards Kicki Kicki Nordström Synskadades Riksförbund (SRF) World Blind Union (WBU) 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: kicki.nordstrom at srfriks.org kicki.nordstrom at telia.com (private) ________________________________ Från: kwasi boakye-akyeampong [mailto:kboakye1 at yahoo.co.uk] Skickat: den 31 juli 2007 20:06 Till: governance at lists.cpsr.org; Kicki Nordström Ämne: Re: SV: [governance] Fundamentally broken design of society Norbert, Kikki, I'd be part of any such initiative if you'd take it up. It will be an opportunity for me to learn. Until Kikki threw the disability angle to the digital divide debate, I, personally, had not given it much consideration since it is something that is (if I'm not exagerating) totally ignored in the developing world. I can at least say that for my country Ghana. Thanks, Kwasi Kicki Nordström wrote: Dear Norbert., Maybe you are absolutely right, we the civil society have to show the way forward! A group of people could be assigned to discuss this matter, and there are, I think, a network of persons with disabilities, linked to this list, (I hope) and we may have just to address this network to put a group together?! Others may be interested as well and should be welcome. The group I am thinking of was created at the first WSIS and with its side event, we have continued to work on the resolution we adopted, wishing a ICT society open for ALL! The resolution was further developed in Tunis at the second phase of WSIS and the disability Forum hold the second side event. I really hope something will happen now so as we can move this issue a bit further! Thanks Norbert., for your good initiative, do you mind to take the lead? Yours Kicki Kicki Nordström Synskadades Riksförbund (SRF) World Blind Union (WBU) 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: kicki.nordstrom at srfriks.org kicki.nordstrom at telia.com (private) -----Ursprungligt meddelande----- Från: Norbert Bollow [mailto:nb at bollow.ch] Skickat: den 31 juli 2007 18:23 Till: governance at lists.cpsr.org Ämne: [governance] Fundamentally broken design of society Dear Kicki, I very strongly agree with your assertion that the real problem lies with a fundamentally broken design of society! (Note: The following sentence is perhaps a bit complicated, but it can be safely ignored by all but the most pedantic of readers. In the above statement, I understand "design of society" to mean both the currently existing system by means of which society as a whole is composed out of a very large number of sub-systems, as well the way in which the decisions are made by means of which society as a whole is allowed to evolve.) Now the question arises, how can this fundamental brokenness be fixed? Certainly it is not possible for society as a whole to get fixed all at once! So the best that can be done, in my opinion, is to start small, get a small but diverse group of people together (electronically, by means of a mailing list) who agree on wanting to figure out how a subsystem of society can be constructed which avoids the kind of fundamental "design of society" flaws that result in the production of _disabling_ software. I'm sure that when we figure out how to produce, within such a subsystem of society, computer software which is not disabling but rather empowering for everyone, that kind of software is going to be a commercial success also with the large number of computer users who are not particularly interested in "design of society" problems. What do you think? Gruss, Norbert. -- Norbert Bollow http://Norbert.ch Präsident der Swiss Internet User Group SIUG http://SIUG.ch Die SIUG engagiert sich für den Schutz der Privatsphäre und dafür, dass auch in Zukunft das Internet auf offenen Standards basiert. ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.cpsr.org To be removed from the list, 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 .............................................................................................................................. "If I am not for myself, who will be for me? If I am not for others, what am I? And if not now, when?" - Rabbi Hillal .............................................................................................................................. ________________________________ Yahoo! Mail is the world's favourite email. Don't settle for less, sign up for your free account today . ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.cpsr.org To be removed from the list, send any message to: governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org For all list information and functions, see: http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance .............................................................................................................................. "If I am not for myself, who will be for me? If I am not for others, what am I? And if not now, when?" - Rabbi Hillal .............................................................................................................................. ________________________________ Yahoo! Answers - Get better answers from someone who knows. Try it now . -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: message-footer.txt URL: From kboakye1 at yahoo.co.uk Mon Aug 6 09:03:41 2007 From: kboakye1 at yahoo.co.uk (kwasi boakye-akyeampong) Date: Mon, 6 Aug 2007 14:03:41 +0100 (BST) Subject: [governance] ccTLDs and developing countries In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <726454.48588.qm@web25502.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Yehuda, Thanks for your comments and taking the trouble to research and respond to my questions. My reason for joining this list is to learn by interacting with you all so that I can effectively contribute to the debate when I return to Ghana later this year. I therefore appreciate every comment and opinion expressed when I post questions to this list in addiktion to what I gather from general discussions. You hit the nail on the head when you said "... Ghanaian's (and for that matter citizens of developing countries) need to get behind .gh before the rest of the world will". Trust me, people (I'm generalising here) don't understand the issues. The government doesn't, most probably the regulator doesn't and may be, the ISPs don't. Most IT professionals (me included) don't don't have a clear understanding of the issues and unless people understand they will not be in the position to contribute meaningfully. I have mentioned it before on this forum; in March 2002, ICANN held a general meeting in Accra but the IT community in Ghana was not even aware something that crucial was happening in their back yard. Those who happened to know did not understand things well enough to see the need to contribute and the organisers did not find it necessary to publicise this event even among the IT community meanwhile we had a sitting ICANN-At-Large Director co-ordinating (more or less) hosting the event. The ghnic (www.nic.gh) website has not been updated for years. They don't respond to e-mail enquiries. NCS, the company who owns ghana.com claims to be managing the .gh but would not respond to e-mail enquiries (matter of fact, I don't know the difference between ghana.com and ghnic). Wel, I'm trying to understand the issues so that I can stir up the debate when I return home and hope to be able to generate sufficient civil society interest to influence change. Talking about language, you are right about we not having websites in any local languages. Unfortunately, Ghana, like most African countries, doesn't have a local language. We have english as our official language which we can't even speak well. It will surprise you to know that students are punished in schools for not speaking english to the extent that some parents have resorted to communicating with their children in English at home and in certain circles it is considered "posh" when your children can speak only English but can't speak your language. Despite the fact that English is the widely spoken language globally, its effect on our development has been devasting. You are right, there are lots of fundamental issues that need to be addressed at home but without a well-informed and knowledgeable population who understand these global issues, every effort to bridge the digital divide (in this specific context) gets frustrated). I hope you will continue to take the trouble to answer my questions as and when I post them. Regards, Kwasi yehudakatz at mailinator.com wrote: Kwasi, Take a moment .... You can be a 'Big Fish' in a small pond ... Or You can be a 'Small Fish' in a big pond ... Aside from all the things Ghana must overcome in itself, .gh must mature in its own, Before .gh can be competitive in the ccTDL arena. - If Ghanaian's were to develop web sites in their own mother-tongue with english as a second language, so that interactive exchange can grow within Ghana into a saturation point, upon which .gh would be ready for ccTDL competition. Ghana has eight (8) languages: Akan, Twi, Dagbani, Fante, Moshi-Dagomba, Ewe, Ga, English How many web sites are representative of these languages in the .gh domain? Ghanaians can't even register (go to a .gh registration site) a domain in their native language, seem to me GhNIC should at least offer web-pages in a selection of Ghana's local languages. Cost, you are absolutely right in questioning the cost of the .gh domains. I found a .gh register charging a 35$ annual fee. For a Country whos GDP/Capita is $1,900 annually, 35$ is very disproportionate. Ghanaian Citizens need to address this (protest), especially when a .info domain can be purchased at 10$ etc.. Personally I would not be opposed to an underdeveloped country having a two-tier pricing methood, a price for Ghanaians and a price for the rest of the world. The 'Point' is, Ghanaian's need to get behind .gh before the rest of the world will. - TO Answer your questions directly: 1. ccTLDs - potential source of income for developing countries? aws: NO - not until they reach a saturation point. 2. Are there any direct benefits of ccTLDs to: countries? aws: To the Country itself yes, a smaller benefit lies outside the Country (Internationally) 3. Are there any direct benefits of ccTLDs to: businesses? aws: Its an open market competition, Better to be a Big Fish in a small pond (have a safety-net) rather than a Small Fish in a big pond. Ghanaian businesses looking to enter the big pond, must have a industrial-base ready along with the opportunity (right place at the right time). Think of how the Japanese entered the US auto market, (right place at the right time) - http://go.hrw.com/atlas/norm_htm/ghana.htm http://www.nic.gh/ ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.cpsr.org To be removed from the list, send any message to: governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org For all list information and functions, see: http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance .............................................................................................................................. “If I am not for myself, who will be for me? If I am not for others, what am I? And if not now, when?” - Rabbi Hillal .............................................................................................................................. --------------------------------- Yahoo! Answers - Get better answers from someone who knows. Tryit now. -------------- 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 Mon Aug 6 11:20:43 2007 From: bortzmeyer at internatif.org (Stephane Bortzmeyer) Date: Mon, 6 Aug 2007 17:20:43 +0200 Subject: [governance] Re: ccTLDs and developing countries In-Reply-To: <726454.48588.qm@web25502.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> References: <726454.48588.qm@web25502.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20070806152043.GA31767@nic.fr> On Mon, Aug 06, 2007 at 02:03:41PM +0100, kwasi boakye-akyeampong wrote a message of 152 lines which said: > in March 2002, ICANN held a general meeting in Accra but the IT > community in Ghana was not even aware something that crucial was > happening in their back yard. Come on, ICANN meetings are not "something that crucial". The management of the local ccTLD is certainly more important. > The ghnic (www.nic.gh) website has not been updated for > years. They don't respond to e-mail enquiries. NCS, the company > who owns ghana.com claims to be managing the .gh but would not > respond to e-mail enquiries (matter of fact, I don't know the > difference between ghana.com and ghnic). Also, the DNS setup of ".gh" is heavily broken (two of the only three name servers are lame). This sort of derelection of ccTLD is common in Africa, unfortunately. ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.cpsr.org To be removed from the list, 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 Mon Aug 6 12:43:07 2007 From: wsis at ngocongo.org (CONGO WSIS - Philippe Dam) Date: Mon, 6 Aug 2007 18:43:07 +0200 Subject: [governance] TR: [GAID Steering] Renewal of membership in the GAID Strategy Counciland Steering Committee Message-ID: <200708061642.l76GgTem006304@smtp2.infomaniak.ch> Dear all, This is to inform about the recent announcement circulated by the GAID Secretariat regarding the renewal of membership in GAID Structures (Steering Committee and Strategy Council). As the first step of the renewal process, current members are requested to indicate whether they are interested and available to be candidate for renewal of their terms. The GAID Secretariat proposed to renew the Steering Committee and Strategy Council membership through a principle of rotation, in order to ensure some kind of continuity, before the next meetings of those two structures. The GAID Secretariat also invited civil society to identify nominations from among its constituencies. A process similar to the self-nomination process used in May 2006 for the first terms of GAID structures will therefore be appropriate. See more details attached in Mr. Sarbuland Khan’s e-mail. GAID Steering Committee GAID Strategy Council Deadline for outgoing members to express their interest in a renewal of their terms 15 August 2007 1 October 2007 Deadline for new nominations for membership 1 September 2007 30 November 2007 Date of the GAID structure with its renewed membership 19 September 2007 New York May 2008 Kuala Lumpur CS self-nomination process: suggestions Any CS self nomination process for Strategy Council membership should be initiated in the course of September as regards the Strategy Council. As regards the Steering Committee, any self nomination process should be identified no later than 31 August. I would suggest that while to the Strategy Council CS self-nomination process should be broad and open to reach out to a large number of constituencies, a Steering Committee self-nomination process, due to the short deadline and the fact that only one seat might be open to renewal, should rather involve a smaller number of persons. I would suggest that current CS members of the Strategy Council (+ CS High Level Advisors?) should be asked to identify and select the CS member of the Steering Committee to be appointed in September by the UN SG. Please share your comments on that last proposal. I would also invite current members of GAID structures to also inform through the CS list serves whether they are interested and available to continue serving in GAID structures. All the best, Philippe Dam Philippe Dam CONGO - WSIS CS Secretariat E-mail: wsis at ngocongo.org Website: www.ngocongo.org _____ De la part de Sarbuland Khan Envoyé : mardi, 31. juillet 2007 23:04 À : steering at un-gaid.org Objet : [GAID Steering] Renewal of membership in the GAID Strategy Counciland Steering Committee Dear colleagues, According to the Terms of Reference adopted at the 27 September 2007 meeting of the Steering Committee (see attached), the term of the members of the GAID Steering Committee is due to end this September 2007, and the term of members of the GAID Strategy Council will conclude before the next meeting of the Strategy Council (to be held in May 2008 in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, during the World Congress on Information Technology (WCIT)). Consequently, there is a need to initiate the process for the rotation of the membership. In order to ensure both continuity and renewal, it is envisioned that approximately one-third of the membership of each body should rotate. RENEWAL OF MEMBERSHIP OF EXISTING MEMBERS The Secretariat would be grateful for an indication from current members as to whether they would be available and interested to be considered as a candidate for renewal. We would be grateful to receive this information (addressed to stafford at un.org and dejesus3 at un.org no later than 15 August 2007, for Steering Committee Members and by 1 October 2007, for Strategy Council Members. NOMINATIONS OF NEW CANDIDATES The Secretariat invites nominations for new candidatures for the Steering Committee for 2 governments, 1 civil society/not-for profit, 1 international organization and 1 media organization by 1 September 2007, and the Strategy Council for approximately 20 seats (1/3 of the membership of each stakeholder group) by 30 November 2007. (Please see http://www.un-gaid.org/en/about/howgaidworks for the list of current members.) As is established practice, nominations for Member States are being solicited through the United Nations regional groups. Civil society and trade organizations are being invited to identify nominations from among their constituencies. There is no limit to the number of nominations that may be submitted. Qualified organizations may also independently express interest in membership. Nominations should be submitted to the Secretariat by the appropriate deadline noted above through the email address nominate at un-gaid.org. Information on the nomination process is being published on the GAID website. APPOINTMENT The list of recommended candidates will be developed following consultations with the Strategy Council and the Steering Committee and presented to the Secretary-General for his approval. The appointment of new members is anticipated to be announced in September 2007 for the Steering Committee and by the end of December 2007 for the Strategy Council. If you have any questions on the process, please contact Ms. Cheryl Stafford (stafford at un.org, +1 (917) 367-3116) or Mr. Robert de Jesus (dejesus3 at un.org, +1 (917) 367-2432). With my best personal regards, Sincerely, -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.gif Type: image/gif Size: 4405 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: TOR_strategycouncil_7sep2006.doc Type: application/octet-stream Size: 48128 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: TOR_steeringcommittee_14sep2006.doc Type: application/octet-stream Size: 55808 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- An embedded message was scrubbed... From: "Sarbuland Khan" Subject: [GAID Steering] Renewal of membership in the GAID Strategy Counciland Steering Committee Date: Wed, 1 Aug 2007 00:04:01 +0200 Size: 157355 URL: -------------- next part -------------- An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: message-footer.txt URL: From kboakye1 at yahoo.co.uk Mon Aug 6 12:52:50 2007 From: kboakye1 at yahoo.co.uk (kwasi boakye-akyeampong) Date: Mon, 6 Aug 2007 17:52:50 +0100 (BST) Subject: [governance] Re: ccTLDs and developing countries In-Reply-To: <20070806152043.GA31767@nic.fr> Message-ID: <870977.13655.qm@web25504.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Stephane, You probably didn't get what I was trying to put across. In Ghana, Accra is the hub of IT. If this small IT community (who tend to know each other) did not know that there was an ICANN meeting going on, then something is fundamentally wrong. US is a very huge country yet most IT community members would be aware of the upcoming ICANN meeting though they may not be necessarily interested. Accra is a very small geographical area. I'm not suggesting ICANN meeting holds the answers but where the people are ignorant and oblivious of important happenings around them, it is a potential setback to ICT4D efforts. I may not be as technically savvy as you but when it comes to these things, I know what I'm talking about. Journalists don't even know about IT as result their coverage of IT related issues is scant and when it is covered very superficial. Well, I'm trying to understand what ccTLD is about and why we should take the management of the local ccTLD more seriously. Regards, Kwasi Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote: On Mon, Aug 06, 2007 at 02:03:41PM +0100, kwasi boakye-akyeampong wrote a message of 152 lines which said: > in March 2002, ICANN held a general meeting in Accra but the IT > community in Ghana was not even aware something that crucial was > happening in their back yard. Come on, ICANN meetings are not "something that crucial". The management of the local ccTLD is certainly more important. > The ghnic (www.nic.gh) website has not been updated for > years. They don't respond to e-mail enquiries. NCS, the company > who owns ghana.com claims to be managing the .gh but would not > respond to e-mail enquiries (matter of fact, I don't know the > difference between ghana.com and ghnic). Also, the DNS setup of ".gh" is heavily broken (two of the only three name servers are lame). This sort of derelection of ccTLD is common in Africa, unfortunately. ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.cpsr.org To be removed from the list, send any message to: governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org For all list information and functions, see: http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance .............................................................................................................................. “If I am not for myself, who will be for me? If I am not for others, what am I? And if not now, when?” - Rabbi Hillal .............................................................................................................................. --------------------------------- Yahoo! Mail is the world's favourite email. Don't settle for less, sign up for your freeaccount today. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: message-footer.txt URL: From yehudakatz at mailinator.com Mon Aug 6 13:56:48 2007 From: yehudakatz at mailinator.com (yehudakatz at mailinator.com) Date: Mon, 6 Aug 2007 10:56:48 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [governance] CPSR - California to recertify insecure voting machines Message-ID: F.Y.I. (CPSR Californians) California to recertify insecure voting machines By Ryan Paul | Published: August 06, 2007 - 09:27AM CT http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20070806-california-to-recertify-insecure- voting-machines.html California Secretary of State Debra Bowen announced on Friday that the state hopes to recertify and continue using electronic voting machines produced by Diebold, Sequoia, and Hart, even though the machines have known security vulnerabilities and severe flaws. The state government decided that the machines can still be used as long as the vendors adhere to a lengthy list of requirements that aim to limit the potential for security breaches and machine failure. This announcement from the state follows extensive red team security audits that illuminated profound security failings in all of the electronic voting machines that were subjected to scrutiny. The security researchers who analyzed the voting machines found ways to modify firmware, gain root access, trivially circumvent voting machine physical security mechanisms, install self-propagating trojan horses, and manipulate mock elections. On Diebold's voting machine, which uses the Windows operating system, researchers even found a remotely-accessible administrative account that wasn't protected by a password. In conditional recertification decision documents issued by the state, Bowen outlines an extensive set of requirements that the electronic voting machine vendors will have to meet before their products can be used in elections. The vendors will have to provide the Secretary of State with a document that lists the complete specifications of the hardware and software used by all components of the voting system, identify requirements for "hardening" the configuration of all software on the voting machines including the operating system, create automated testing mechanisms to ensure that individual voting machines conform to the standards established in the hardening requirements document, provide a plan for preventing the propagation of viruses between voting machines, establish documented procedures for performing necessary security updates on the voting machines and the underlying operating systems, collaborate with counties to develop requirements and procedures for protecting the physical security of voting machines, and document a system for auditing vote results. The decision documents also include source code disclosure requirements. The vendors must provide the Secretary of State with "the source code for any software or firmware contained in the voting system, including any commercial off the shelf software or firmware that is available and disclosable by the vendor." It gets better. According to the documents, "any reasonable costs associated with the review of the source code for any software or firmware contained in the voting system shall be born by the vendor." That's right, the vendors have to hand over their source code and then foot the bill for source code reviews. Bowen also lays out a series of requirements for election practices. Most notably, election officials will have to conduct complete manual audit counts of all votes tabulated on DRE machines. Use of any kind of Internet connectivity on the machines is strictly forbidden. Finally, the requirements limit the use of Sequoia and Diebold machines to one per polling location. Bowen clearly takes voting machine security very seriously. The requirements are impressive, but even if the vendors comply, it still won't change the fact that these machines are irreparably flawed. Considering the many weaknesses of the voting machines that received conditional recertification, the unbelievable ineptitude of the vendors, and the limited amount of time that they have to resolve these problems, it's hard to imagine that the vendors will really be able to meet Bowen's requirements. In some states, voting machines have been certified anyway even when the vendors refuse outright to adhere to government standards. Let's hope that Bowen is willing to give Sequoia, Hart, and Diebold the ax if they can't deliver. -- ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.cpsr.org To be removed from the list, 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 Mon Aug 6 18:08:30 2007 From: dogwallah at gmail.com (McTim) Date: Tue, 7 Aug 2007 01:08:30 +0300 Subject: [governance] Re: ccTLDs and developing countries In-Reply-To: <870977.13655.qm@web25504.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> References: <20070806152043.GA31767@nic.fr> <870977.13655.qm@web25504.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: Kwasi, On 8/6/07, kwasi boakye-akyeampong wrote: > > Stephane, > > You probably didn't get what I was trying to put across. In Ghana, Accra > is the hub of IT. If this small IT community (who tend to know each > other) did not know that there was an ICANN meeting going on, then something > is fundamentally wrong. US is a very huge country yet most IT community > members would be aware of the upcoming ICANN meeting > I would dispute this assertion. though they may not be necessarily interested. Accra is a very small > geographical area. > Well, I'm trying to understand what ccTLD is about and why we should take > the management of the local ccTLD more seriously. > Think of a ccTLD as a customised license plate for a car. It's not essential to the design or operation of the vehicle. It's a vanity thing. -- 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 pr+governance at x0.dk Mon Aug 6 18:46:50 2007 From: pr+governance at x0.dk (Phil Regnauld) Date: Tue, 7 Aug 2007 00:46:50 +0200 Subject: [governance] Re: ccTLDs and developing countries In-Reply-To: References: <20070806152043.GA31767@nic.fr> <870977.13655.qm@web25504.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20070806224649.GE1662@macbook.catpipe.net> McTim (dogwallah) writes: > > Well, I'm trying to understand what ccTLD is about and why we should take > > the management of the local ccTLD more seriously. > > > > Think of a ccTLD as a customised license plate for a car. It's not > essential to the design or operation of the vehicle. It's a vanity thing. You mean that: having ccTLDs, which allow citizens, residents and businesses of a country to register domain names within a legislative and political framework that may be more favorable to them, than a gTLD, (where UDRP will ensure that large corporations can force you to relinquish your domain if they believe they own the trademark to it) and *possibly*, at a cheaper price -- is a vanity thing ? Oh my, I am so looking forward to the argumentation to support that :) ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.cpsr.org To be removed from the list, 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 Aug 7 01:02:12 2007 From: dogwallah at gmail.com (McTim) Date: Tue, 7 Aug 2007 08:02:12 +0300 Subject: [governance] Re: ccTLDs and developing countries In-Reply-To: <20070806224649.GE1662@macbook.catpipe.net> References: <20070806152043.GA31767@nic.fr> <870977.13655.qm@web25504.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> <20070806224649.GE1662@macbook.catpipe.net> Message-ID: On 8/7/07, Phil Regnauld wrote: > > McTim (dogwallah) writes: > > > > Well, I'm trying to understand what ccTLD is about and why we should > take > > > the management of the local ccTLD more seriously. > > > > > > > Think of a ccTLD as a customised license plate for a car. It's not > > essential to the design or operation of the vehicle. It's a vanity > thing. > > You mean that: If I'd have meant that, i would have written that. > > Oh my, I am so looking forward to the argumentation to support > that :) > I'll let Shakespeare do that: 'Tis but thy name that is my enemy; Thou art thyself, though not a Montague. What's Montague? it is nor hand, nor foot, Nor arm, nor face, nor any other part Belonging to a man. O, be some other name! What's in a name? that which we call a rose By any other name would smell as sweet; So Romeo would, were he not Romeo call'd, Retain that dear perfection which he owes Without that title. Romeo, doff thy name, And for that name which is no part of thee Take all myself. *Romeo and Juliet* (II, ii, 1-2) -- 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 kicki.nordstrom at srfriks.org Tue Aug 7 03:26:32 2007 From: kicki.nordstrom at srfriks.org (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Kicki_Nordstr=F6m?=) Date: Tue, 7 Aug 2007 09:26:32 +0200 Subject: SV: [governance] CPSR - California to recertify insecure voting machines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <3DF8101092666E4A9020D949E419EB6F01033AB9@ensms02.iris.se> Dear all, Really interesting! Yours Kicki Kicki Nordström Synskadades Riksförbund (SRF) World Blind Union (WBU) 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: kicki.nordstrom at srfriks.org kicki.nordstrom at telia.com (private) -----Ursprungligt meddelande----- Från: yehudakatz at mailinator.com [mailto:yehudakatz at mailinator.com] Skickat: den 6 augusti 2007 19:57 Till: governance at lists.cpsr.org Ämne: [governance] CPSR - California to recertify insecure voting machines F.Y.I. (CPSR Californians) California to recertify insecure voting machines By Ryan Paul | Published: August 06, 2007 - 09:27AM CT http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20070806-california-to-recertify-insecure- voting-machines.html California Secretary of State Debra Bowen announced on Friday that the state hopes to recertify and continue using electronic voting machines produced by Diebold, Sequoia, and Hart, even though the machines have known security vulnerabilities and severe flaws. The state government decided that the machines can still be used as long as the vendors adhere to a lengthy list of requirements that aim to limit the potential for security breaches and machine failure. This announcement from the state follows extensive red team security audits that illuminated profound security failings in all of the electronic voting machines that were subjected to scrutiny. The security researchers who analyzed the voting machines found ways to modify firmware, gain root access, trivially circumvent voting machine physical security mechanisms, install self-propagating trojan horses, and manipulate mock elections. On Diebold's voting machine, which uses the Windows operating system, researchers even found a remotely-accessible administrative account that wasn't protected by a password. In conditional recertification decision documents issued by the state, Bowen outlines an extensive set of requirements that the electronic voting machine vendors will have to meet before their products can be used in elections. The vendors will have to provide the Secretary of State with a document that lists the complete specifications of the hardware and software used by all components of the voting system, identify requirements for "hardening" the configuration of all software on the voting machines including the operating system, create automated testing mechanisms to ensure that individual voting machines conform to the standards established in the hardening requirements document, provide a plan for preventing the propagation of viruses between voting machines, establish documented procedures for performing necessary security updates on the voting machines and the underlying operating systems, collaborate with counties to develop requirements and procedures for protecting the physical security of voting machines, and document a system for auditing vote results. The decision documents also include source code disclosure requirements. The vendors must provide the Secretary of State with "the source code for any software or firmware contained in the voting system, including any commercial off the shelf software or firmware that is available and disclosable by the vendor." It gets better. According to the documents, "any reasonable costs associated with the review of the source code for any software or firmware contained in the voting system shall be born by the vendor." That's right, the vendors have to hand over their source code and then foot the bill for source code reviews. Bowen also lays out a series of requirements for election practices. Most notably, election officials will have to conduct complete manual audit counts of all votes tabulated on DRE machines. Use of any kind of Internet connectivity on the machines is strictly forbidden. Finally, the requirements limit the use of Sequoia and Diebold machines to one per polling location. Bowen clearly takes voting machine security very seriously. The requirements are impressive, but even if the vendors comply, it still won't change the fact that these machines are irreparably flawed. Considering the many weaknesses of the voting machines that received conditional recertification, the unbelievable ineptitude of the vendors, and the limited amount of time that they have to resolve these problems, it's hard to imagine that the vendors will really be able to meet Bowen's requirements. In some states, voting machines have been certified anyway even when the vendors refuse outright to adhere to government standards. Let's hope that Bowen is willing to give Sequoia, Hart, and Diebold the ax if they can't deliver. -- ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.cpsr.org To be removed from the list, 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 bortzmeyer at internatif.org Tue Aug 7 04:16:49 2007 From: bortzmeyer at internatif.org (Stephane Bortzmeyer) Date: Tue, 7 Aug 2007 10:16:49 +0200 Subject: [governance] Re: ccTLDs and developing countries In-Reply-To: References: <20070806152043.GA31767@nic.fr> <870977.13655.qm@web25504.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> <20070806224649.GE1662@macbook.catpipe.net> Message-ID: <20070807081649.GA29179@nic.fr> On Tue, Aug 07, 2007 at 08:02:12AM +0300, Shakespeare wrote: > What's in a name? that which we call a rose > By any other name would smell as sweet; For the ordinary end-user, www.nic.gh or www.ghana.com are indeed equivalent and provide the same experience (although www.ghana.com will resolve faster because all the name servers work). But for the registrant, as Phil explained well, it is *not* the same thing to be subject to the laws of California (ICANNland, USA), Virginia (Verisignland, USA) or of his own country! ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.cpsr.org To be removed from the list, 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 Tue Aug 7 04:36:58 2007 From: bortzmeyer at internatif.org (Stephane Bortzmeyer) Date: Tue, 7 Aug 2007 10:36:58 +0200 Subject: [governance] Re: ccTLDs and developing countries In-Reply-To: <870977.13655.qm@web25504.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> References: <20070806152043.GA31767@nic.fr> <870977.13655.qm@web25504.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20070807083658.GB29179@nic.fr> On Mon, Aug 06, 2007 at 05:52:50PM +0100, kwasi boakye-akyeampong wrote a message of 74 lines which said: > If this small IT community (who tend to know each other) did not > know that there was an ICANN meeting going on, then something is > fundamentally wrong. It may mean that people are busy with important things, not with shows. > Well, I'm trying to understand what ccTLD is about and why we > should take the management of the local ccTLD more seriously. Shameless plug: there is a workshop at the IGF in Rio: http://info.intgovforum.org/yoppy.php?poj=22 ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.cpsr.org To be removed from the list, 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 Aug 7 04:38:25 2007 From: goldstein_david at yahoo.com.au (David Goldstein) Date: Tue, 7 Aug 2007 01:38:25 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [governance] Re: ccTLDs and developing countries Message-ID: <219211.55934.qm@web54105.mail.re2.yahoo.com> Further to this discussion, below is a Nominet news release from earlier this year that's particular relevant. While it's for .uk, there's no reason for it to be wildly different to other countries/ccTLDs with the exception of the USA: British Internet users are six times more likely to choose a .uk rather than .com address when looking for information via an Internet search engine. The online survey of 2,324 Internet users, which was carried out by YouGov, also found that 62% believe a .uk address suggests a company is local or more relevant than a .com, and a third (32%) believe that it is important for international companies to have local domain names in order to attract local customers. When asked about searching for a particular company on the Internet, 72% said they would visit a British web address above any other. So, if searching for Amazon, 72% would try www.amazon.co.uk before www.amazon.com. Only 5% of respondents would try the .com option first. “The findings show that British Internet users are loyal to local websites and have higher levels of trust for the .uk domain name,” says Lesley Cowley, Chief Executive at Nominet. “It’s clear that the trust issue is one of increasing importance to the Internet industry, as well as Internet users.” See http://www.nominet.org.uk/digitalAssets/20876_.uk_over_.com_Feb_07.pdf for the news release online. Regards David ----- Original Message ---- From: Stephane Bortzmeyer To: McTim Cc: governance at lists.cpsr.org; kwasi boakye-akyeampong Sent: Tuesday, 7 August, 2007 6:16:49 PM Subject: [governance] Re: ccTLDs and developing countries On Tue, Aug 07, 2007 at 08:02:12AM +0300, Shakespeare wrote: > What's in a name? that which we call a rose > By any other name would smell as sweet; For the ordinary end-user, www.nic.gh or www.ghana.com are indeed equivalent and provide the same experience (although www.ghana.com will resolve faster because all the name servers work). But for the registrant, as Phil explained well, it is *not* the same thing to be subject to the laws of California (ICANNland, USA), Virginia (Verisignland, USA) or of his own country! ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.cpsr.org To be removed from the list, 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!7 Mail has just got even bigger and better with unlimited storage on all webmail accounts. http://au.docs.yahoo.com/mail/unlimitedstorage.html -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: message-footer.txt URL: From yehudakatz at mailinator.com Tue Aug 7 10:19:15 2007 From: yehudakatz at mailinator.com (yehudakatz at mailinator.com) Date: Tue, 7 Aug 2007 07:19:15 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [governance] Re: ccTLDs and developing countries In-Reply-To: 20070807081649.GA29179@nic.fr Message-ID: Hello Stephane and Phil, I want to understand this particular thread (or parallel) better, wherein your opinions you demarc the 'Jurisdictional Boundaries' of ccTLDs and gTLDs. Could you please expand upon it technically (in terms of DNS) & non-technically (in terms of Governmental lines). [*Note: Please base your argument from the perspective of the Consumer/User/Registrant. If you'd like to add the Political aspects like UDRP, Intellectual Property, etc. / thats fine, but thoses are already understood ] - RE: Phil wrote: ... You mean that: having ccTLDs, which allow citizens, residents and businesses of a country to register domain names within a legislative and political framework that may be more favorable to them, than a gTLD, (where UDRP will ensure that large corporations can force you to relinquish your domain if they believe they own the trademark to it) and *possibly*, at a cheaper price -- is a vanity thing ? - Then Stephane wrote: ... But for the registrant, as Phil explained well, it is *not* the same thing to be subject to the laws of California (ICANNland, USA), Virginia (Verisignland, USA) or of his own country! -- Note* Stephane I like your rhetorical, however I'm not quite clear on how you have severed these into separate Jurisdictions (what you said, is what I'm looking to understand better): " ... it is *not* the same thing to be subject to the laws of California (ICANNland, USA), Virginia (Verisignland, USA) or of his own country! " - Thnx ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.cpsr.org To be removed from the list, 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 Tue Aug 7 10:28:03 2007 From: nb at bollow.ch (Norbert Bollow) Date: Tue, 7 Aug 2007 16:28:03 +0200 (CEST) Subject: [governance] Fundamentally broken design of society In-Reply-To: <3DF8101092666E4A9020D949E419EB6F01A8F4DC@ensms02.iris.se> (message from =?iso-8859-1?Q?Kicki_Nordstr=F6m?= on Tue, 31 Jul 2007 18:41:47 +0200) References: 3DF8101092666E4A9020D949E419EB6F01A8F452@ensms02.iris.se <3DF8101092666E4A9020D949E419EB6F01A8F4D2@ensms02.iris.se> <20070731162309.459DC2202EF@quill.bollow.ch> <3DF8101092666E4A9020D949E419EB6F01A8F4DC@ensms02.iris.se> Message-ID: <20070807142803.5EC2F2201FD@quill.bollow.ch> Kicki Nordström wrote: > The group I am thinking of was created at the first WSIS and with > its side event, we have continued to work on the resolution we > adopted, wishing a ICT society open for ALL! The resolution was > further developed in Tunis at the second phase of WSIS and the > disability Forum hold the second side event. > > I really hope something will happen now so as we can move this issue > a bit further! > > Thanks Norbert., for your good initiative, do you mind to take the lead? Dear Kicki and everyone, let me start by apologizing for having been so slow to get back to you with regard to this. Of course I feel honored by the suggestion that I could maybe take on a leadership role. Still I think that it may be important to clarify goals and expectations a bit more before it makes sense to decide that we want to go forward together and that I and/or others could agree to take on leadership responsibilities. Kicki's post and the entire discussion that led up to it (including in particular also the posting by Linda Misek-Falkoff about systems which may have gotten some thoughts going subconsciously which then surfaced when I read Kicki's message) have sparked something in me, so that I want to try get something going in the sense of a social hack which attempts to create a subsystem of society which will be arranged according to principles of empowerment rather than power. Therefore, what I have in mind is not specifically focused on just the particular needs of people with disabilities, but rather on implementing principles for empowering people (which implies active system design aimed at preventing anyone from getting disempowered or marginalized). I want to get rid of what Kicki called "disabling" technology by practicing and inspiring good, empowering principles of technology design, not only with regard to people with disabilities but also with regard to people in economically underdeveloped regions and also with regard to the people in whatever one's country of residence is (in my case, that's Switzerland). I'll admit right away that this set of objectives sounds extremely ambitious, and that might be a good reason why one might perhaps want to reconsider the idea of following whatever leadership I might be able to provide. Nevertheless, I want to go forward, and I'm perfectly willing to serve as a leader of a small group aimed at investigating the kind of ideas that I outlined above. I'll set up a mailing list for this shortly, then we'll see whether something gets going. The vision which I described here is of course not in conflict with more focused activities aimed more specifically at getting the needs of people with disabilities met, but I feel that such a more focused project should have someone else as leader while I want to work on the big vision that I described. 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 pr+governance at x0.dk Tue Aug 7 10:43:59 2007 From: pr+governance at x0.dk (Phil Regnauld) Date: Tue, 7 Aug 2007 16:43:59 +0200 Subject: [governance] Re: ccTLDs and developing countries In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20070807144359.GJ22916@macbook.catpipe.net> yehudakatz at mailinator.com (yehudakatz) writes: > Hello Stephane and Phil, > > I want to understand this particular thread (or parallel) better, wherein your > opinions you demarc the 'Jurisdictional Boundaries' of ccTLDs and gTLDs. > > Could you please expand upon it technically (in terms of DNS) & non-technically > (in terms of Governmental lines). In political terms, control over the root zone data itself (and therefore the underlying delegations) is asserted by US Department of Defense, and ICANN. In technical terms, the root server operators have control of what runs on their servers. Root server operators are not all under control of US interests, or even in the US at all: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jon_Postel#When_the_Internet_was_still_a_matter_of_public_domain_and_the_US_takeover_of_the_DNS_Root_Authority But in the end, ccTLDs and gTLDs are in the same boat if those that manage the root decide to pull the plug on a delegation. With regards to jurisdiction: - If you register a domain within a ccTLD, the general rule is that conflicts and complaints are solved by the courts of the country itself, and not subject to arbitration by (among others) the WIPO under the UDRP. (see http://www.theregister.co.uk/2001/10/04/what_the_hell_is_udrp/) It's particularly interesting as the above article was written by Kieren McCarthy, who now works at ICANN :) Anyway, seen from the point of view of a Consumer / User / Registrant, if said consumer happens to be called "ACME" or have a business called "ACME", it's much easier for Acme Corporation to go after an individual to force him to relinquish the domain if he has registered "acme.com" than if he has registered "acme.dk". The short story is: not all ccTLD registries see it a benefit to *their* community to subscribe to the UDRP, making it difficult for local people to register domains that happen to match those of big brands without being labelled "cyber squatters"... For reference: http://www.domainhandbook.com/dd.html -- catalog of domain name disputes. I'm sure other people will find better arguments than the ones above, but these are the ones that strike me as most important. > [*Note: Please base your argument from the perspective of the > Consumer/User/Registrant. If you'd like to add the Political aspects like UDRP, > Intellectual Property, etc. / thats fine, but thoses are already understood ] ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.cpsr.org To be removed from the list, 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 Tue Aug 7 11:02:32 2007 From: nne75 at yahoo.com (Nnenna) Date: Tue, 7 Aug 2007 08:02:32 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [governance] Re: ccTLDs and developing countries - Highway Africa In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <14565.38818.qm@web50202.mail.re2.yahoo.com> Mhhm I am reading these postings and I am asking me; Why should an African media person bother about ccTLDs? Why should an an SME in an African country take on a NIC when it might actually scare customers? Does anybody on this list know any reason why an ordinary African person in Africa searching for information will use his country's ccTLD? IMHO, you need to be somewhere to get on-the-ground experience. I do appreciate the efforts that ICANN has been making over the years to sort of "democratize" the debate. But there other existential issues that come first to African even before Technology, before the Internet, before domain names... I have come to learn by experience that tech is best when it serves to solve individuals' problems. Kwasi, your concerns are real. But I can promise that when you get back to Ghana, your understanding will expand. How many of you know the Highway Africa News Agency? It is an organization of African Media whose main thrust is ICT. Every year, around Septemeber, for 11 years now, HANA organizes trainings and a conference for media. This year, more than 500 media people will be in Highway Africa. The site is here http://hana.ru.ac.za/ I have copied the Editor here Very best Nnenna yehudakatz at mailinator.com wrote: Hello Stephane and Phil, I want to understand this particular thread (or parallel) better, wherein your opinions you demarc the 'Jurisdictional Boundaries' of ccTLDs and gTLDs. Could you please expand upon it technically (in terms of DNS) & non-technically (in terms of Governmental lines). [*Note: Please base your argument from the perspective of the Consumer/User/Registrant. If you'd like to add the Political aspects like UDRP, Intellectual Property, etc. / thats fine, but thoses are already understood ] - RE: Phil wrote: ... You mean that: having ccTLDs, which allow citizens, residents and businesses of a country to register domain names within a legislative and political framework that may be more favorable to them, than a gTLD, (where UDRP will ensure that large corporations can force you to relinquish your domain if they believe they own the trademark to it) and *possibly*, at a cheaper price -- is a vanity thing ? - Then Stephane wrote: ... But for the registrant, as Phil explained well, it is *not* the same thing to be subject to the laws of California (ICANNland, USA), Virginia (Verisignland, USA) or of his own country! -- Note* Stephane I like your rhetorical, however I'm not quite clear on how you have severed these into separate Jurisdictions (what you said, is what I'm looking to understand better): " ... it is *not* the same thing to be subject to the laws of California (ICANNland, USA), Virginia (Verisignland, USA) or of his own country! " - Thnx ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.cpsr.org To be removed from the list, 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! oneSearch: Finally, mobile search that gives answers, not web links. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: message-footer.txt URL: From nb at bollow.ch Tue Aug 7 11:58:46 2007 From: nb at bollow.ch (Norbert Bollow) Date: Tue, 7 Aug 2007 17:58:46 +0200 (CEST) Subject: [governance] Re: ccTLDs and developing countries In-Reply-To: (message from McTim on Tue, 7 Aug 2007 01:08:30 +0300) References: <20070806152043.GA31767@nic.fr> <870977.13655.qm@web25504.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20070807155846.7BE742201FD@quill.bollow.ch> Kwasi Boakye-Akyeampong wrote: > Well, I'm trying to understand what ccTLD is about and why we should take > the management of the local ccTLD more seriously. Here's some ideas on what kind of problems a ccTLD might help solve or at least reduce: - If your country's network connection to where the nameservers of the gTLDs are is very expensive or unreliable or has high latency or high packet loss, use of a ccTLD with nameservers within your country may be advantageous for technical reasons. - The same applies if within the country there are some long-distance connnections with one of more of these characteristics, separating from each other regions which within themselves have better connections. Putting nameservers for your ccTLD into each of these regions (I'd suggest in such a situation to publish two nameserver IPs and use anycast for both, putting a copy of each in each of these regions, plus another copy of each in a well-connected data center in the US) would in such a situation make DNS resolution for your ccTLD work quickly and reliably. - Depending on funding, it may be possible to make ccTLD registration for local businesses available at prices which are more easily affordable for local SMEs than the prices of gTLDs. - If the gTLD dispute resolution process is a problem for SMEs in your country, that's a problem which could be avoided by using the country's ccTLD if for that there are established dispute resolution procedures which don't create problems for local SMEs. - If your country's ccTLD is not as well-established as some other country's, that in itself could emotionally influence people in your country to make less good use of the opportunities of the internet. I think you really need to go there and talk with those who would, in theory at least, benefit from using the internet more, and learn what's holding them back. I would suggest that putting significant emphasis on ccTLD development makes economic sense only if such interviews reveal significant hinderances of one of the types that can be addressed by means of the ccTLD. 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 ldmisekfalkoff at gmail.com Tue Aug 7 12:11:04 2007 From: ldmisekfalkoff at gmail.com (l.d.misek-falkoff) Date: Tue, 7 Aug 2007 12:11:04 -0400 Subject: [governance] Fundamentally broken design of society In-Reply-To: <20070807142803.5EC2F2201FD@quill.bollow.ch> References: <3DF8101092666E4A9020D949E419EB6F01A8F4D2@ensms02.iris.se> <20070731162309.459DC2202EF@quill.bollow.ch> <3DF8101092666E4A9020D949E419EB6F01A8F4DC@ensms02.iris.se> <20070807142803.5EC2F2201FD@quill.bollow.ch> Message-ID: <8cbfe7410708070911g203da032me6f70095cdc99b4d@mail.gmail.com> large type. Dear Norbert, and greetings all: Your willingness to take leadership here is great, and yes please include all who are interested. The International Disability Caucus Task Force on ICT is also quite interested and I will be pleased to interface in both directions. It is cheering to work with one of the view that the solution space is equally or more important than the problem space. hope I read correctly that the concept of a broken system holds forth the hope and vision that either it was once whole, or can be brought into being [more] whole. Very best wishes, and continually at service via this email address, LDMF. Dr. Linda D. Misek-Falkoff *Respectful Interfaces*. 50 years on the "Nets." On 8/7/07, Norbert Bollow wrote: > > Kicki Nordström wrote: > > > The group I am thinking of was created at the first WSIS and with > > its side event, we have continued to work on the resolution we > > adopted, wishing a ICT society open for ALL! The resolution was > > further developed in Tunis at the second phase of WSIS and the > > disability Forum hold the second side event. > > > > I really hope something will happen now so as we can move this issue > > a bit further! > > > > Thanks Norbert., for your good initiative, do you mind to take the lead? > > Dear Kicki and everyone, > let me start by apologizing for having been so slow to get back > to you with regard to this. Of course I feel honored by the > suggestion that I could maybe take on a leadership role. Still I > think that it may be important to clarify goals and expectations > a bit more before it makes sense to decide that we want to go > forward together and that I and/or others could agree to take on > leadership responsibilities. > > Kicki's post and the entire discussion that led up to it (including > in particular also the posting by Linda Misek-Falkoff about systems > which may have gotten some thoughts going subconsciously which then > surfaced when I read Kicki's message) have sparked something in me, > so that I want to try get something going in the sense of a social > hack which attempts to create a subsystem of society which will be > arranged according to principles of empowerment rather than power. > Therefore, what I have in mind is not specifically focused on just > the particular needs of people with disabilities, but rather on > implementing principles for empowering people (which implies active > system design aimed at preventing anyone from getting disempowered > or marginalized). I want to get rid of what Kicki called "disabling" > technology by practicing and inspiring good, empowering principles of > technology design, not only with regard to people with disabilities > but also with regard to people in economically underdeveloped regions > and also with regard to the people in whatever one's country of > residence is (in my case, that's Switzerland). I'll admit right > away that this set of objectives sounds extremely ambitious, and that > might be a good reason why one might perhaps want to reconsider the > idea of following whatever leadership I might be able to provide. > > Nevertheless, I want to go forward, and I'm perfectly willing to > serve as a leader of a small group aimed at investigating the kind of > ideas that I outlined above. I'll set up a mailing list for this > shortly, then we'll see whether something gets going. > > The vision which I described here is of course not in conflict with > more focused activities aimed more specifically at getting the needs > of people with disabilities met, but I feel that such a more focused > project should have someone else as leader while I want to work on > the big vision that I described. > > Greetings, > Norbert. > > > -- > Norbert Bollow http://Norbert.ch > President of the Swiss Internet User Group SIUG http://SIUG.ch > ____________________________________________________________ > -------------- 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 Wed Aug 8 03:23:37 2007 From: bortzmeyer at internatif.org (Stephane Bortzmeyer) Date: Wed, 8 Aug 2007 09:23:37 +0200 Subject: [governance] Re: ccTLDs and developing countries In-Reply-To: <20070807155846.7BE742201FD@quill.bollow.ch> References: <20070806152043.GA31767@nic.fr> <870977.13655.qm@web25504.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> <20070807155846.7BE742201FD@quill.bollow.ch> Message-ID: <20070808072337.GA31828@nic.fr> On Tue, Aug 07, 2007 at 05:58:46PM +0200, Norbert Bollow wrote a message of 58 lines which said: > - If your country's network connection to where the nameservers of > the gTLDs are is very expensive or unreliable or has high latency or > high packet loss, use of a ccTLD with nameservers within your > country may be advantageous for technical reasons. There is a good paper / survey on this issue: http://www.pch.net/resources/papers/infrastructure-distribution/ "DNS Infrastructure Distribution" by Steve Gibbard > - Depending on funding, it may be possible to make ccTLD > registration for local businesses available at prices which are more > easily affordable for local SMEs than the prices of gTLDs. It is not only a matter of price but also of the ability to pay in local currency (US dollars can be difficult to obtain in many countries) and with local means (cash, because not everyone in the world has a credit card). Also, for the country as a whole, paying a local company (instead of an US-based gTLD registry) means less outgoing flow of hard currency. ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.cpsr.org To be removed from the list, 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 pr+governance at x0.dk Wed Aug 8 04:42:56 2007 From: pr+governance at x0.dk (Phil Regnauld) Date: Wed, 8 Aug 2007 10:42:56 +0200 Subject: [governance] Re: ccTLDs and developing countries In-Reply-To: <20070808072337.GA31828@nic.fr> References: <20070806152043.GA31767@nic.fr> <870977.13655.qm@web25504.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> <20070807155846.7BE742201FD@quill.bollow.ch> <20070808072337.GA31828@nic.fr> Message-ID: <20070808084255.GA28992@macbook.catpipe.net> Stephane Bortzmeyer (bortzmeyer) writes: > > It is not only a matter of price but also of the ability to pay in > local currency (US dollars can be difficult to obtain in many > countries) and with local means (cash, because not everyone in the > world has a credit card). > > Also, for the country as a whole, paying a local company (instead of > an US-based gTLD registry) means less outgoing flow of hard currency. Of course, nothing keeps anyone from starting a gTLD registry (com/net/ org/info/...) locally, selling in local currency, and using the profit from that (it's profitable, trust me :), fund/overtake/offer ccTLDs at a cheap price. It's been known to 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 bortzmeyer at internatif.org Wed Aug 8 05:21:32 2007 From: bortzmeyer at internatif.org (Stephane Bortzmeyer) Date: Wed, 8 Aug 2007 11:21:32 +0200 Subject: [governance] Re: Re: ccTLDs and developing countries In-Reply-To: <20070808084255.GA28992@macbook.catpipe.net> References: <20070806152043.GA31767@nic.fr> <870977.13655.qm@web25504.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> <20070807155846.7BE742201FD@quill.bollow.ch> <20070808072337.GA31828@nic.fr> <20070808084255.GA28992@macbook.catpipe.net> Message-ID: <20070808092132.GA13171@nic.fr> On Wed, Aug 08, 2007 at 10:42:56AM +0200, Phil Regnauld wrote a message of 16 lines which said: > Of course, nothing keeps anyone from starting a gTLD registry > (com/net/ org/info/...) locally, selling in local currency, > and using the profit from that (it's profitable, trust me :), > fund/overtake/offer ccTLDs at a cheap price. Right. Who's volunteer to start a ".africa" project with me? Volunteers will have to bring money, ICANN requests 50,000 US $ (not refundable) just for submitting the application. ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.cpsr.org To be removed from the list, 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 maja.andjelkovic at gmail.com Wed Aug 8 09:43:01 2007 From: maja.andjelkovic at gmail.com (Maja Andjelkovic) Date: Wed, 8 Aug 2007 09:43:01 -0400 Subject: [governance] CBC: Net founder pushes innovation to speed online video Message-ID: <6a19eea00708080643w45afd003ka52c2c17c49b8cd5@mail.gmail.com> Thought this article may interest the list. Could anyone explain what "proper priority" means here? Regards, maja Net founder pushes innovation to speed online video Tuesday, August 7, 2007 | 11:48 AM ET CBC News "Roberts said his new router will be an improvement over traditional network routers, which direct information across networks in bursts of bits of data called packets. Instead of sending data through smaller packets, Anagran's FR-1000 Intelligent Flow Router attempts to manage information by larger groups of related packets, called flows, and uses a technique to give ***proper priority*** to larger flows of information while ***capping how much of the network's resources they can use.***" http://www.cbc.ca/technology/story/2007/08/07/tech-flow-router.html -------------- 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 Wed Aug 8 09:51:45 2007 From: bortzmeyer at internatif.org (Stephane Bortzmeyer) Date: Wed, 8 Aug 2007 15:51:45 +0200 Subject: [governance] Re: CBC: Net founder pushes innovation to speed online video In-Reply-To: <6a19eea00708080643w45afd003ka52c2c17c49b8cd5@mail.gmail.com> References: <6a19eea00708080643w45afd003ka52c2c17c49b8cd5@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20070808135145.GA9950@nic.fr> > Net founder pushes innovation to speed online video How many Internet founders are present in 2007? And how many were there in 1969? :-) > Instead of sending data through smaller packets, Anagran's FR-1000 > Intelligent Flow Router attempts to manage information by larger > groups of related packets, called flows, A very old and very common technique. Most high-end network devices are flow-based. ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.cpsr.org To be removed from the list, 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 Aug 8 10:04:23 2007 From: wsis at ngocongo.org (CONGO WSIS - Philippe Dam) Date: Wed, 8 Aug 2007 16:04:23 +0200 Subject: [governance] GAID Youth Forum on Youth - "Youth and ICT as Agents of Change" - 24 to 26 September 2007 Message-ID: <200708081403.l78E3j21030091@smtp1.infomaniak.ch> Dear all, This is below some of the latest information we received from the organisers of the Geneva GAID Forum on Youth and ICTs (24 to 26 September 2007). On line registration is advised to be finalized before 10 August 2007: http://www.un-gaid.org/civicrm/event/register?id=1 &reset=1. The programme is now finalized (version is now online: http://www.un-gaid.org/fr/gfyouth/agenda and attached). But the organisers are still welcoming proposals for the Forum's marketplace (see web-page on the marketplace: http://www.un-gaid.org/fr/gfyouth/marketplace). Opening and closing ceremonies of the Forum are expected to feature speakers at the ministerial level. 400-600 youth representatives are also expected to participate in this event. Best, Philippe _____ De la part de Sarbuland Khan Objet : [GAID Strategy Council] GAID - Global Forum on Youth, Geneva,Switzerland, 24-26 September 2007 Dear Ccolleagues, As you are aware, GAID will hold a Global Forum on Youth and ICT for Development from 24 to 26 September 2007 in Geneva, Switzerland. Guided by the theme "Youth and ICT as Agents of Change", the Forum is being organized by GAID and the International Telecommunication Union (ITU), in partnership with United Nations agencies and organizations, youth organizations and networks, and civil society and private sector organizations. We expect the participation of some 400 to 600 young people, as well as ICT for Development policy-makers and practitioners from all sectors and regions. We look forward to your active engagement and participation in this event. Registration is done on line at http://www.un-gaid.org/gfyouth. If you need further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact the GAID Secretariat at tel. +1-212-963-5796 or via email at sanchez2 at un.org.. Please find attached a list of hotels in Geneva, Due to a high number of events taking place in Geneva at the same time as the Global Forum, we kindly urge to make your reservations now. We look forward to seeing you in Geneva. With best regards, Sarbuland Khan -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.gif Type: image/gif Size: 4405 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: programme GAID YOuth FOrum -24-26 Sept 2007.doc Type: application/msword Size: 52736 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Annual Hotel Price List 2007 .pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 137539 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: message-footer.txt URL: From seiiti.lists at googlemail.com Wed Aug 8 11:16:17 2007 From: seiiti.lists at googlemail.com (Seiiti Arata) Date: Wed, 8 Aug 2007 12:16:17 -0300 Subject: [governance] IGF Preparatory seminar held in Sao Paulo Message-ID: Hi all - just want to share some notes of an interesting event held in São Paulo recently as a preparation for the IGF. Hope it can be useful for you. If you are interested in more info, please get in touch with me or with Carlos. We will soon launch a second edition of this event in Rio de Janeiro (probab. Sept). Regards, Seiiti ** ***** *Observation - These are private notes taken by Seiiti Arata in the event organized by NUPEF/RITS with Direito GV, CTS/FGV and DiploFoundation, with support from CGI.br and Ford Foundation. RITS was the executive leader in the process. Note that the following are private interpretations and do not constitute the opinion of the speakers. An official transcript of the event will soon be made available at Nupef website and more information can be obtained from **seiitia at diplomacy.edu* * Further, a discussion list is to be made connecting the participants of the event and other interested people to make this an ongoing debate leading to the second preparatory seminar and beyond. * *Opening* The preparatory seminar to the IGF at Getulio Vargas Foundation in São Paulo held in July 3 and 4 discussed 'possible governance models', 'open standards', 'access to knowledge' and 'gender'. The second seminar will be held in Rio at Getulio Vargas Foundation on September 12 and 13. RITS and NUPEF are not only playing their role as actors in the context of a democratic process but also stimulating others to join. *DAY 1 – July 3* *Possible governance models* The initial involvement of the Brazilian delegation in the Internet governance debate can be identified in the ANATEL – Brazilian National Telecommunications Agency internal meeting for Bavaro PrepCom. The discussion of backbone cost and ICANN governance model got attention. At Bavaro, US joins to counter Cuba proposals. This is when Brazil adds the proposal to consider the Internet as a multilateral, democratic and transparent resource. As the US had joined the process because of the need to counterargument Cuban draft proposals, the Brazilian proposal does not get objection from the US side and is subscribed. From this point on, the Brazilian Foreign Relations officers are always promoting synergy with ANATEL officers in negotiation strategies. The discussion develops to the creation of the WGIG. A need for a centralized forum is felt, but at Tunis, the argument that we shall not fix what is not broken is still strong. IGF is created as a discussion forum with possibility of making recommendations, but that did not happen in Athens. Being the second host, Brazil wants to be better able to influence and promote further developments according to the mandate. One of the ideas is to bring ICANN issues in the core, such as the governance model for critical resources (ICANN) and infrastructure (ITU). These are the most critical governance discussions as there are no current existing discussion fora for that, compared to other issues in which existing bodies are taking charge of things. Spam is one such example needing more international cooperation. As a second product of the IGF, the enhanced cooperation, this was not implemented so far. Today we have the IGF with great potential for promoting ICANN and ITU change. -- We shall not take the internet for granted, just as we cannot take water for granted, the environmentalists would say. What is the governance behind? Different interests clash, different possible futures. The governance will have lots of political and cultural effects as well. Governance of what? Who makes it? Multistakeholder comprising different countries and also different actors. Tunis seemed too vague. But even then we advanced and the Brazilian delegation was very important. But how to conciliate so many different actors together? Countries in theory represent their people. But what about big corporations? What kind of representatives do we have? As this process is new and somehow connected to the UN crisis, we have to be aware of how to do it properly otherwise the IGF may become just a rhetoric process, a show for all to see but without effectiveness. Of what? Internet some years ago was considered another media. But TCP/IP transmission is swallowing other technologies and media. Let us think in layers. Different governance models for different layers such as infrastructure, which implies interconnection issues. Network neutrality is about keeping the road neutral. Logical layer governance makes us think whether a corporate entity in California can control finite resources. The problem is not its location, but being subject to US law. Now that China is entering the Internet market, there will be a huge demand for resources. Architecture (hardware and software) layer also to be internationally discussed. Content – do we want regulation? Of what kind? Undesired content such as spam, criminal content such as pedophilia and even intermediary and subtle issues such as age rating for television. Who makes governance? Of what? We are not anymore only discussing Internet strictu sensu – we have now a larger picture. Today is the deadline for organizations run into CGI (Brazilian Internet Steering Committee) elections. Brazil made a governance space that deals with some of these questions touching even digital divide, net neutrality, content regulation, etc. Also CGI has elected representatives – 3 from academy, 4 of the private sector and 3 from civil society. -- Why logical infrastructure is the most discussed issue? Domain names will soon loose importance with the evolution of search mechanisms. Unfortunately this is still a popular item for discussion. Interconnection agreements are unfair because developed countries have favorable agreements. It's too expensive to have broadband in developing countries as who decides the price has freedom to change how much they want. Australia and EU were able to negotiate prices. There is no international control of these costs. In the analogic era, these discussions were held in ITU. But today there's nothing, no body we can rely upon. Another issue is censorship. Here in Brazil senator Azeredo has proposed a bill to identify users. In the name of security, censorship is being proposed. There is no international convention to avoid these scenarios. Another important issue is convergence and net neutrality. In thesis you can connect your computer and render services. Servers are now located in certain places. It is still possible to render any service but with convergence there is a tendency to have a controlled layered network deciding which sites you can access and how to interact. A recent ICANN discussion on generic TLDs is that the registrar shall only use technical arguments. There is no international guideline to discuss what should be adequate or not, such as .fun or .xxx -- We want less of a show for Rio IGF and more knowledge from the panelists, increasing the depth of discussion. A wrap up is needed to avoid losing words in rhetoric. And the moderator shall also be able to make a link and point out which workshops will deal with such and such theme. Also, each country will be able to present its governance model in a specific forum. Another forum will be available for entities such as WIPO, ICANN, ITU… to present their work. Dynamic coalitions are another example of groups of people together decising. -- MAG was to be like WGIG however it is not so multilateral. MAG is too influenced by ICANN related members and thus ICANN issues were not discussed as we wanted. *Open standards* IDEC, the Institute of Consumer Protection, is just starting work in IPR although had previous contact with transgenics and patents. -- Open standards are very important. The network society is based in standards, protocols and architecture. Communication intermediaries are essential elements of the day to day life. Direct communication is being substituted by mediated, regulated and controlled intermediaries. Code is law. Standards define different levels of liberty and rights including research rights, anonymity, private and public interests. Therefore, standards have great importance and shall not be controlled by one single corporation. There are many layers of protocols such as application, transport, network and physical. And the Internet can be understood as a big agreement. There are agreements that one layer shall not interfere on the others to preserve free flow. From the economic point of view, standards are vital for the market. J. Stiglitz – mix of monopoly, competition and IP influences innovation pacing. Controls previous innovations, which is the base for next innovations, acts as barriers to disruptors. By innovating, increases the incumbent power and innovates just to keep position of power – this cannot be considered as an optimal innovation. Monopoly reduced innovation in the long term. De facto standards defined by the market are different from consensus standards, which shall not be the one from monopoly and not protect one company. IPv6. If we define that to communicate on the net we have to digitally sign each packet, this will be the end of anonymity. The network shall not work under the vigilance empire. Open Document Format allows any software to open documents. Assures whole interoperability. Why would companies approve ODF? Because it is ISO approved. Microsoft is the one reacting with OOXML standard. They are adding lots of routines under its property. OOXML implies lots of patents. It is open, but its contents are not. -- There are multicultural aspects linked to governance. The Azeredo bill, if not implemented on a global level, will not solve problems and will only be an obstacle to civil liberty rights. However, it is supported by the banking associations due to online fraud. *Intellectual property and access to knowledge* Challenges and opportunities for access to knowledge. Number 1 driver of change in IG space is the protection for IP rights. We have seen lots of rights being granted to holders and limiting users. How do we see these drivers being manifested? DRMs, Technology restrictions, policy issues for IPR which is not necessarily law, just policy with implications in rights. Technology restriction – digital locks for music, videos, digital books, for example. Proprietary standards and tech patents being embedded on the internet – patents in protocols are one example. To combat that, we have to promote open standards and protocols, non proprietary software and creative commons type of works. WIPO 1996 Internet treaties. Proposed treaty on Broadcasting was a threat to A2K. Brazil played an important role fighting it and the proposal was defeated 2 weeks ago. Development agenda – weigh costs and benefits. Are we increasing innovation? Become more public interest approach based. Free trade agreements – the target is P2P file sharing. ICANN is another policy forum. Problem with the UDRP is that the filing party picks the arbitror. 84% of decisions are favorable to the plaintiff. Policy for new gTLDs is a problem of expansion of trademarks' holders on the Internet. Keep the core neutral initiative. ICANN policy – no offensive words and ideas. No works against public policy or morality. Religious sensitivities. Problem: massive censorship and little protection of freedom of expression. ICANN whois: privacy threat to EU Data Protection laws and local laws such as the one from Argentina. -- History of intellectual property and the problem with its expansion and strengthening to protect not the authors and innovation, but the industry exploring it. *Gender* Gender issues are being discussed since the 90s conferences. Gender balance is necessary for social and economic development. Gender is not a synonym of women. In the WGIG lots of efforts to amplify female participation: only 6 members out of 40. Context in which technical aspect receive more attention than social themes. An effort must be made to demonstrate how IG debate shall bring more actors together. Part of WGIG members from the government were from countries in which women are treated as second class citizens. Hot issues linked to sex and freedom – freedom of expression, A2K, content, privacy and security. *DAY 2 – July 4* There are lots of people already dealing with horizontal issues. What is the goal? Preaching for the preachers or bringing new people around? A2K for instance – how was this proposed in the IGF? Is there coordination with WIPO/WTO? Seems we have 3 groups – those already connected to the IGF process. This is the core circle we already reached. The second group is related to people dealing with communications. The third circle is the civil society groups not already involved. It is also important to talk to media representatives. We will do this before Rio. Those meetings with media are very important. We already did this in the past and had great success. IGF is not a traditional event. For the Brazilian Foreign Relations, it is important to have good multistakeholder model. The IGF is still under construction The 4 big thematic groups from Athens are being considered – openness / access / security / diversity. A new one is technical resources. Inside these 5 big themes, what will we discuss? There are consultations for workshops, which differ from Athens – they will be linked to the themes. In this preliminary list of themes we have interesting ones. One Swiss entity will discuss a development agenda in IG similarly to what Argentina and Brazil did at WIPO. Dynamic coalitions – a space in Rio will be available for meetings and reporting to the central meeting. Who are the specialists we want in the tables? These are different days since Tunis. Civil society and private sector do not rely upon governments anymore to have their voices presented into international for a. Anyway, the Brazilian government, through the Itamaraty, is open to receive input from different stakeholders and compose a good position. There are ideas to use November 10 and 11 to a civil society meeting. -------------- 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 psg.com Wed Aug 8 14:38:52 2007 From: avri at psg.com (Avri Doria) Date: Wed, 8 Aug 2007 20:38:52 +0200 Subject: [governance] Fwd: [isoc-members-discuss] A Call for Subject Experts References: <20070808110554.Y30081@hiroshima.bogus.com> Message-ID: <952ADAA3-0D06-4D11-955C-DDD6BF382B1A@psg.com> Begin forwarded message: > From: Lucy Lynch > Date: 8 augusti 2007 20.06.17 GMT+02:00 > To: isoc-members-discuss at elists.isoc.org > Subject: [isoc-members-discuss] A Call for Subject Experts > > Greetings - > > Your help in disseminating this announce would be greatly appreciated: > > "Call for Participation: Trust and the Future of the Internet > > The Internet Society (ISOC) Board of Trustees is currently engaged > in a > discovery process to define a long term Major Strategic Initiative > to ensure > that the Internet of the future remains accessible to everyone. The > Board > believes that Trust is an essential component of all successful > relationships > and that an erosion of Trust: in individuals, networks, or > computing platforms, > will undermine the continued health and success of the Internet. > > The Board will meet in special session the first week October of > 2007 for > intensive study focused on the subject of trust within the context > of network > enabled relationships. As part of this process, the Board is > hereby issuing a > call for subject experts who can participate in the two day > discussion. Topics > of interest include: the changing nature of trust, security, > privacy, control > and protection of personal data, methods for establishing > authenticity and > providing assurance, management of threats, and dealing with > unwanted traffic. > > Participants will be selected based on a short paper summarizing > individual > interests and qualifications as well as availability. The retreat > will be held > in Toronto, Ontario (CA) . Travel and accommodation costs will be > covered by > ISOC and participants should expect to arrive October 4th and > depart on the 6th > or 7th. Expressions of interest may be emailed to: Oct07-retreat @ > elists.isoc.org and papers should not exceed three pages. Papers > must received > by August 24th, 2007 and the Program Committee will make their > selections on or > before September 7th, 2007. Subject experts will be allotted one > hour for > presentation on October 5th and will be included in the days round- > table > discussions. In order to facilitate open discussion, final > presentation > materials should be forwarded to ISOC no later than September 21st, > 2007. > > We look forward to a lively and informative meeting on this > important topic and > encourage you to share this announcement with your communities of > interest." > > Lucy Lynch > Director of Technical Projects > Internet Society (ISOC) > > _______________________________________________ > ISOC-members-discuss mailing list > ISOC-members-discuss at elists.isoc.org > http://elists.isoc.org/mailman/listinfo/isoc-members-discuss > ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.cpsr.org To be removed from the list, 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 Aug 9 05:59:39 2007 From: ajp at glocom.ac.jp (Adam Peake) Date: Thu, 9 Aug 2007 18:59:39 +0900 Subject: [governance] RIPE NCC Awarded Special Status from United Nations [news release] Message-ID: (found on David Goldstein's domain name news list ) RIPE NCC Awarded Special Status from United Nations [news release] The RIPE NCC has been awarded Special Consultative Status by the Economic and Social Council of the United Nations. With this consultative status, the RIPE NCC can designate official representatives to help advise the United Nations on issues related to Internet number resource management and the technical coordination of the Internet. <http://ripe.net/news/ngo.html> ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.cpsr.org To be removed from the list, 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 Thu Aug 9 09:38:29 2007 From: nb at bollow.ch (Norbert Bollow) Date: Thu, 9 Aug 2007 15:38:29 +0200 (CEST) Subject: [governance] Fundamentally broken design of society In-Reply-To: <8cbfe7410708070911g203da032me6f70095cdc99b4d@mail.gmail.com> (message from l.d.misek-falkoff on Tue, 7 Aug 2007 12:11:04 -0400) References: <3DF8101092666E4A9020D949E419EB6F01A8F4D2@ensms02.iris.se> <20070731162309.459DC2202EF@quill.bollow.ch> <3DF8101092666E4A9020D949E419EB6F01A8F4DC@ensms02.iris.se> <20070807142803.5EC2F2201FD@quill.bollow.ch> <8cbfe7410708070911g203da032me6f70095cdc99b4d@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20070809133830.013E82201FD@quill.bollow.ch> Linda Misek-Falkoff wrote: > hope I read correctly that the concept of a broken system holds forth the > hope and vision that either it was once whole, or can be brought into being > [more] whole. Yes, precisely: As long as I thought about the matter as "a social problem" I had little if any confidence of actually being able to do anything about it. But when I read that word "broken", that was helpful, to me at least, to inspire me towards more contructive lines of thought. If something is broken, it can usually be fixed or replaced. Now, while the thought "fix it or replace it" cannot be applied to society in any reasonably way, it can be applied to rules of conduct, legal rules, and computer software, all of which have significant influence on how society evolves. For example, when a company that creates and popularizes a new technology has neglected to get that technology evaluated with regard to its effects on people with disabilities, certainly justice would demand that there should be a legal liability connected to any resulting "disabling" or marginalizing effect on people with disabilities. Unfortunately this kind of legal change is difficult to achieve in any country, and even harder to achieve internationally, and on top of that, probably quite a few such changes would be needed in order to really fix what I see as overall brokenness in the system of legal rules and how they are applied. However there is another path, which seems much more promising to me: Namely, to try creating a subsystem of the overall economy, by means of designing an attractive and fair set of rules by means of which the subsystem of the economy would function. My inspiration for this idea is to a large extent the "social hack" approach of Richard Stallman's founding of the Free Software movement, which was successful precisely because it was sufficient for success to get support from a significant number of people who were willing and interested in doing the right thing, it was not necessary to get consent or acceptance from anyone else. The fundamental idea that I want to pursue is to focus on empowerment: --> What does it take to fully empower those people who are currently restricted from fully benefiting from ICT because of some kind of digital divide? I expect that discussing this question will lead to collecting some set of principles (or sets of principles) that will be supportive of empowerment, and that will help prevent those kinds of disempowerment that are possible to prevent. Then we can discuss how to form some kind of alliance (I'm thinking of something like a business alliance, but not restricted to businesses only) to support each other while pursuing this set of goals. This alliance would be the "social hack" / "movement" that can perhaps somehow follow the example of the Free Software movement. I have set up a discussion mailing list for these matters at http://quitbabylon.com/mailman/listinfo/allies and I would like to invite everyone who is interested in this set of topics to join me there. 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 Fri Aug 10 00:58:28 2007 From: goldstein_david at yahoo.com.au (David Goldstein) Date: Thu, 9 Aug 2007 21:58:28 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [governance] Fundamentally broken design of society Message-ID: <538860.85646.qm@web54102.mail.re2.yahoo.com> Hi Norbert et al, I agree with the views expressed here, in short, on making technology accessible to all regardless of location, income and ability or disability. However there are many constraints in achieving this. In the developing world, what does a funder or government spend money on - malaria nets or internet access? To name just one issue. Safe drinking water, child poverty, sanitation, disease, infrastructure such as roads, railways, airports? This is reflected in the UN's 8 Millennium Development Goals. These are: Goal 1: Eradicate Extreme Hunger and Poverty Goal 2: Achieve Universal Primary Education Goal 3: Promote Gender Equality and Empower Women Goal 4: Reduce Child Mortality Goal 5: Improve Maternal Health Goal 6: Combat HIV/AIDS, Malaria and other diseases Goal 7: Ensure Environmental Sustainability Goal 8: Develop a Global Partnership for Development. See http://www.un.org/millenniumgoals/ You could argue technology fits within goal 8, but it's a low priority. Even Bill Gates has seen that the issues raised in the 8 goals above is more important than technology. So a business alliance, while laudable, is going to be difficult to get to work when the essentials are in other areas. Do we support the development of technology in the developing world, but people die who, if the money was spent on the above goals might have lived? Of course, we make all sorts of decisions and they all have costs in other areas. The chocolate bar, the flight to visit my parents, the coffee... the money purchasing all these things, it can be argued could go to better use. I don't have an answer. There are many views and maybe there are many right ones. Maybe talking to an organisation such as The Gates and/or Ford Foundations or others working towards the above goals could give guidance on how support can be given in the area of technology. Who knows, they may like the project and give money! Cheers David ----- Original Message ---- From: Norbert Bollow To: governance at lists.cpsr.org; ldmisekfalkoff at gmail.com Cc: allies at QuitBabylon.com; IDC-ICT-Taskforce at yahoogroups.com; AdHoc_IDC at yahoogroups.com Sent: Thursday, 9 August, 2007 11:38:29 PM Subject: Re: [governance] Fundamentally broken design of society Linda Misek-Falkoff wrote: > hope I read correctly that the concept of a broken system holds forth the > hope and vision that either it was once whole, or can be brought into being > [more] whole. Yes, precisely: As long as I thought about the matter as "a social problem" I had little if any confidence of actually being able to do anything about it. But when I read that word "broken", that was helpful, to me at least, to inspire me towards more contructive lines of thought. If something is broken, it can usually be fixed or replaced. Now, while the thought "fix it or replace it" cannot be applied to society in any reasonably way, it can be applied to rules of conduct, legal rules, and computer software, all of which have significant influence on how society evolves. For example, when a company that creates and popularizes a new technology has neglected to get that technology evaluated with regard to its effects on people with disabilities, certainly justice would demand that there should be a legal liability connected to any resulting "disabling" or marginalizing effect on people with disabilities. Unfortunately this kind of legal change is difficult to achieve in any country, and even harder to achieve internationally, and on top of that, probably quite a few such changes would be needed in order to really fix what I see as overall brokenness in the system of legal rules and how they are applied. However there is another path, which seems much more promising to me: Namely, to try creating a subsystem of the overall economy, by means of designing an attractive and fair set of rules by means of which the subsystem of the economy would function. My inspiration for this idea is to a large extent the "social hack" approach of Richard Stallman's founding of the Free Software movement, which was successful precisely because it was sufficient for success to get support from a significant number of people who were willing and interested in doing the right thing, it was not necessary to get consent or acceptance from anyone else. The fundamental idea that I want to pursue is to focus on empowerment: --> What does it take to fully empower those people who are currently restricted from fully benefiting from ICT because of some kind of digital divide? I expect that discussing this question will lead to collecting some set of principles (or sets of principles) that will be supportive of empowerment, and that will help prevent those kinds of disempowerment that are possible to prevent. Then we can discuss how to form some kind of alliance (I'm thinking of something like a business alliance, but not restricted to businesses only) to support each other while pursuing this set of goals. This alliance would be the "social hack" / "movement" that can perhaps somehow follow the example of the Free Software movement. I have set up a discussion mailing list for these matters at http://quitbabylon.com/mailman/listinfo/allies and I would like to invite everyone who is interested in this set of topics to join me there. 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 ____________________________________________________________________________________ Sick of deleting your inbox? Yahoo!7 Mail has free unlimited storage. http://au.docs.yahoo.com/mail/unlimitedstorage.html -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: message-footer.txt URL: From goldstein_david at yahoo.com.au Fri Aug 10 01:01:29 2007 From: goldstein_david at yahoo.com.au (David Goldstein) Date: Thu, 9 Aug 2007 22:01:29 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [governance] Global Information Society 2007 - The digital divide: a review of ICTs in Africa, Asia and Latin America Message-ID: <138753.96975.qm@web54110.mail.re2.yahoo.com> Hi all, This is quite relevant. Cheers David Global Information Society 2007 - The digital divide: a review of ICTs in Africa, Asia and Latin America The Global Information Society Watch 2007 report - the first in a series of annual reports- looks at state of the field of ICT policy at local and global levels and particularly how policy impacts on the lives of people living in developing countries. ... The report concludes that when it comes to ICTs for development, there are some conspicuous similarities between the countries. Excluding Spain, the other twenty-one countries each show obvious evidence of the "digital divide" which impacts on the majority of people negatively. According to Brazilian authors RITS, the absence of a people-orientated policy framework in Brazil runs the risk of condemning the vast majority of people to "eternal disconnection." The report also includes provocative, analytical essays on five international institutions (including ICANN and the World Intellectual Property Organisation) questioning the extent to which they allow all stake-holders to participate in their processes. http://technewsreview.com.au/article.php?article=2290 --------- 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 ____________________________________________________________________________________ Sick of deleting your inbox? Yahoo!7 Mail has free unlimited storage. http://au.docs.yahoo.com/mail/unlimitedstorage.html -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: message-footer.txt URL: From dan at musicunbound.com Fri Aug 10 15:23:33 2007 From: dan at musicunbound.com (Dan Krimm) Date: Fri, 10 Aug 2007 12:23:33 -0700 Subject: [governance] Fundamentally broken design of society In-Reply-To: <538860.85646.qm@web54102.mail.re2.yahoo.com> References: <538860.85646.qm@web54102.mail.re2.yahoo.com> Message-ID: David, It could just be that the Millennium Development Goals have a blind spot in the area of Media and the Fourth Estate. How does one expect all of these goals to be accomplished without a robust and nondiscriminatory communication platform for collective discourse? Is it just a paternalistic responsibility of developed nations to help out their "crippled cousins" in the developing world, or is the responsibility to help those developing nations become systematically more self-sufficient? Unilateral paternalism only goes so far, and it is this unfortunate tendency in the current U.S. administration that bothers *many* U.S. citizens, for example. I know it bothers a lot of other people around the world as well. I would argue that provision of empowering communication platforms is an absolutely critical issue underlying *all* other substantive issues, because collective communication drives and enables substantive action on all other fronts. If you make it a trade-off, then in the long run the developing country loses anyway. That may in fact be a false dichotomy. Who says that investing in communications will not pay off in empowering efforts in all the other areas listed? Knowledge is Power, and Access to Knowledge is Empowering. ICT provision is not an isolated silver bullet by any means, but I think it must be an ineliminable component of any development package. It is the glue that holds all the rest together, in the end. Dan At 9:58 PM -0700 8/9/07, David Goldstein wrote: >Hi Norbert et al, > >I agree with the views expressed here, in short, on making technology >accessible to all regardless of location, income and ability or >disability. However there are many constraints in achieving this. In the >developing world, what does a funder or government spend money on - >malaria nets or internet access? To name just one issue. Safe drinking >water, child poverty, sanitation, disease, infrastructure such as roads, >railways, airports? > >This is reflected in the UN's 8 Millennium Development Goals. These are: >Goal 1: Eradicate Extreme Hunger and Poverty >Goal 2: Achieve Universal Primary Education >Goal 3: Promote Gender Equality and Empower Women >Goal 4: Reduce Child Mortality >Goal 5: Improve Maternal Health >Goal 6: Combat HIV/AIDS, Malaria and other diseases >Goal 7: Ensure Environmental Sustainability >Goal 8: Develop a Global Partnership for Development. > >See http://www.un.org/millenniumgoals/ > >You could argue technology fits within goal 8, but it's a low priority. >Even Bill Gates has seen that the issues raised in the 8 goals above is >more important than technology. So a business alliance, while laudable, is >going to be difficult to get to work when the essentials are in other >areas. > >Do we support the development of technology in the developing world, but >people die who, if the money was spent on the above goals might have >lived? Of course, we make all sorts of decisions and they all have costs >in other areas. The chocolate bar, the flight to visit my parents, the >coffee... the money purchasing all these things, it can be argued could go >to better use. > >I don't have an answer. There are many views and maybe there are many >right ones. Maybe talking to an organisation such as The Gates and/or Ford >Foundations or others working towards the above goals could give guidance >on how support can be given in the area of technology. Who knows, they may >like the project and give money! > >Cheers >David > > > >----- Original Message ---- >From: Norbert Bollow >To: governance at lists.cpsr.org; ldmisekfalkoff at gmail.com >Cc: allies at QuitBabylon.com; IDC-ICT-Taskforce at yahoogroups.com; >AdHoc_IDC at yahoogroups.com >Sent: Thursday, 9 August, 2007 11:38:29 PM >Subject: Re: [governance] Fundamentally broken design of society > >Linda Misek-Falkoff wrote: > >> hope I read correctly that the concept of a broken system holds forth the >> hope and vision that either it was once whole, or can be brought into being >> [more] whole. > >Yes, precisely: As long as I thought about the matter as "a social >problem" I had little if any confidence of actually being able to do >anything about it. But when I read that word "broken", that was >helpful, to me at least, to inspire me towards more contructive lines >of thought. If something is broken, it can usually be fixed or >replaced. > >Now, while the thought "fix it or replace it" cannot be applied to >society in any reasonably way, it can be applied to rules of conduct, >legal rules, and computer software, all of which have significant >influence on how society evolves. For example, when a company that >creates and popularizes a new technology has neglected to get that >technology evaluated with regard to its effects on people with >disabilities, certainly justice would demand that there should be a >legal liability connected to any resulting "disabling" or >marginalizing effect on people with disabilities. > >Unfortunately this kind of legal change is difficult to achieve in >any country, and even harder to achieve internationally, and on top of >that, probably quite a few such changes would be needed in order to >really fix what I see as overall brokenness in the system of legal >rules and how they are applied. > >However there is another path, which seems much more promising to me: >Namely, to try creating a subsystem of the overall economy, by means >of designing an attractive and fair set of rules by means of which >the subsystem of the economy would function. My inspiration for this >idea is to a large extent the "social hack" approach of Richard >Stallman's founding of the Free Software movement, which was >successful precisely because it was sufficient for success to get >support from a significant number of people who were willing and >interested in doing the right thing, it was not necessary to get >consent or acceptance from anyone else. > >The fundamental idea that I want to pursue is to focus on empowerment: > >--> What does it take to fully empower those people who are currently > restricted from fully benefiting from ICT because of some kind of > digital divide? > >I expect that discussing this question will lead to collecting some >set of principles (or sets of principles) that will be supportive of >empowerment, and that will help prevent those kinds of disempowerment >that are possible to prevent. > >Then we can discuss how to form some kind of alliance (I'm thinking >of something like a business alliance, but not restricted to >businesses only) to support each other while pursuing this set of >goals. This alliance would be the "social hack" / "movement" that >can perhaps somehow follow the example of the Free Software movement. > >I have set up a discussion mailing list for these matters at >http://quitbabylon.com/mailman/listinfo/allies >and I would like to invite everyone who is interested in this set of >topics to join me there. > >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 > > > > >Sick of deleting your inbox? Yahoo!7 Mail has free unlimited storage. >Get it now. > >____________________________________________________________ >You received this message as a subscriber on the list: > governance at lists.cpsr.org >To be removed from the list, 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 Sat Aug 11 19:25:29 2007 From: goldstein_david at yahoo.com.au (David Goldstein) Date: Sat, 11 Aug 2007 16:25:29 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [governance] Fundamentally broken design of society Message-ID: <956174.29045.qm@web54109.mail.re2.yahoo.com> Hi Dan, Your example of a paternalistic funder, such as the USA, is only one example. Europe appears to be moving forwards and being much better in its ability to fund the developing world. But, still it's not perfect. But then, it's probable it will never be perfect. And where does the first world give its money? Does it give to targetted programmes, or to governments. The latter has been an abject failure in most cases. The Economist recently had an interesting article. It gave examples of successful funding of water filtration plants. Funding for AIDS prevention and medicines for those with AIDS, and malaria, have been very successful. The article gives an example of a success story in Africa - Mali. Mali is a success story, making agriculture and infrastructure a priority. And of course, telecommunications can be included in infrastructure. But if there's no roads it's difficult to provide telecommunications, even wireless. Nigeria on the other hand is riddled with corruption. Its leaders appear to have only a passing interest in their people. Nigeria has the potential to be one of the world's richest countries, but its wealth is squandered. So Mali has funders flocking to give it money. And from what I can tell, Mali is one of the few shining lights in Africa. When funders have the choice of funding the projects I have mentioned, I've no doubt most will not choose telecommunications. I imagine most will see their role in other projects. But again, engaging with foundations, or even people such as Jeffrey Sachs, on how to get telecommunications on the agenda could only be a step forward. Going off funding/supporting projects willy nilly is a sure way to failure. By the way, it has to be a trade-off. There is only so much money to go around, so there has to be choices made all along. There's also a good article by Jeffrey Sachs in The Economist available at http://economist.com/opinion/displaystory.cfm?story_id=E1_TQDPVQQ. It's for subscribers only, but there are probably other articles available if people search online. The articles is from 2002, and begins: "IF GEORGE BUSH spent more time and money on mobilising Weapons of Mass Salvation (WMS) in addition to combating Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD), we might actually get somewhere in making this planet a safer and more hospitable home. WMD can kill millions and their spread to dangerous hands needs to be opposed resolutely. WMS, in contrast, are the arsenal of life-saving vaccines, medicines and health interventions, emergency food aid and farming technologies that could avert literally millions of deaths each year in the wars against epidemic disease, drought and famine. Yet while the Bush administration is prepared to spend $100 billion to rid Iraq of WMD, it has been unwilling to spend more than 0.2% of that sum ($200m) this year on the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria." This debate reminds me of the debate around climate change with Bjorn Lomborg. Simplistically he advocates climate change is over-rated as a problem and money should be better spent on other programmes in the developing world. But, climate change is likely to make any money spent on other programmes pointless if everyone is dead as a result of climate change. If everyone in the developing world dies of malaria and other diseases, funding of telecommunications will have been useless. David ----- Original Message ---- From: Dan Krimm To: governance at lists.cpsr.org Sent: Saturday, 11 August, 2007 5:23:33 AM Subject: Re: [governance] Fundamentally broken design of society David, It could just be that the Millennium Development Goals have a blind spot in the area of Media and the Fourth Estate. How does one expect all of these goals to be accomplished without a robust and nondiscriminatory communication platform for collective discourse? Is it just a paternalistic responsibility of developed nations to help out their "crippled cousins" in the developing world, or is the responsibility to help those developing nations become systematically more self-sufficient? Unilateral paternalism only goes so far, and it is this unfortunate tendency in the current U.S. administration that bothers *many* U.S. citizens, for example. I know it bothers a lot of other people around the world as well. I would argue that provision of empowering communication platforms is an absolutely critical issue underlying *all* other substantive issues, because collective communication drives and enables substantive action on all other fronts. If you make it a trade-off, then in the long run the developing country loses anyway. That may in fact be a false dichotomy. Who says that investing in communications will not pay off in empowering efforts in all the other areas listed? Knowledge is Power, and Access to Knowledge is Empowering. ICT provision is not an isolated silver bullet by any means, but I think it must be an ineliminable component of any development package. It is the glue that holds all the rest together, in the end. Dan At 9:58 PM -0700 8/9/07, David Goldstein wrote: >Hi Norbert et al, > >I agree with the views expressed here, in short, on making technology >accessible to all regardless of location, income and ability or >disability. However there are many constraints in achieving this. In the >developing world, what does a funder or government spend money on - >malaria nets or internet access? To name just one issue. Safe drinking >water, child poverty, sanitation, disease, infrastructure such as roads, >railways, airports? > >This is reflected in the UN's 8 Millennium Development Goals. These are: >Goal 1: Eradicate Extreme Hunger and Poverty >Goal 2: Achieve Universal Primary Education >Goal 3: Promote Gender Equality and Empower Women >Goal 4: Reduce Child Mortality >Goal 5: Improve Maternal Health >Goal 6: Combat HIV/AIDS, Malaria and other diseases >Goal 7: Ensure Environmental Sustainability >Goal 8: Develop a Global Partnership for Development. > >See http://www.un.org/millenniumgoals/ > >You could argue technology fits within goal 8, but it's a low priority. >Even Bill Gates has seen that the issues raised in the 8 goals above is >more important than technology. So a business alliance, while laudable, is >going to be difficult to get to work when the essentials are in other >areas. > >Do we support the development of technology in the developing world, but >people die who, if the money was spent on the above goals might have >lived? Of course, we make all sorts of decisions and they all have costs >in other areas. The chocolate bar, the flight to visit my parents, the >coffee... the money purchasing all these things, it can be argued could go >to better use. > >I don't have an answer. There are many views and maybe there are many >right ones. Maybe talking to an organisation such as The Gates and/or Ford >Foundations or others working towards the above goals could give guidance >on how support can be given in the area of technology. Who knows, they may >like the project and give money! > >Cheers >David > > > >----- Original Message ---- >From: Norbert Bollow >To: governance at lists.cpsr.org; ldmisekfalkoff at gmail.com >Cc: allies at QuitBabylon.com; IDC-ICT-Taskforce at yahoogroups.com; >AdHoc_IDC at yahoogroups.com >Sent: Thursday, 9 August, 2007 11:38:29 PM >Subject: Re: [governance] Fundamentally broken design of society > >Linda Misek-Falkoff wrote: > >> hope I read correctly that the concept of a broken system holds forth the >> hope and vision that either it was once whole, or can be brought into being >> [more] whole. > >Yes, precisely: As long as I thought about the matter as "a social >problem" I had little if any confidence of actually being able to do >anything about it. But when I read that word "broken", that was >helpful, to me at least, to inspire me towards more contructive lines >of thought. If something is broken, it can usually be fixed or >replaced. > >Now, while the thought "fix it or replace it" cannot be applied to >society in any reasonably way, it can be applied to rules of conduct, >legal rules, and computer software, all of which have significant >influence on how society evolves. For example, when a company that >creates and popularizes a new technology has neglected to get that >technology evaluated with regard to its effects on people with >disabilities, certainly justice would demand that there should be a >legal liability connected to any resulting "disabling" or >marginalizing effect on people with disabilities. > >Unfortunately this kind of legal change is difficult to achieve in >any country, and even harder to achieve internationally, and on top of >that, probably quite a few such changes would be needed in order to >really fix what I see as overall brokenness in the system of legal >rules and how they are applied. > >However there is another path, which seems much more promising to me: >Namely, to try creating a subsystem of the overall economy, by means >of designing an attractive and fair set of rules by means of which >the subsystem of the economy would function. My inspiration for this >idea is to a large extent the "social hack" approach of Richard >Stallman's founding of the Free Software movement, which was >successful precisely because it was sufficient for success to get >support from a significant number of people who were willing and >interested in doing the right thing, it was not necessary to get >consent or acceptance from anyone else. > >The fundamental idea that I want to pursue is to focus on empowerment: > >--> What does it take to fully empower those people who are currently > restricted from fully benefiting from ICT because of some kind of > digital divide? > >I expect that discussing this question will lead to collecting some >set of principles (or sets of principles) that will be supportive of >empowerment, and that will help prevent those kinds of disempowerment >that are possible to prevent. > >Then we can discuss how to form some kind of alliance (I'm thinking >of something like a business alliance, but not restricted to >businesses only) to support each other while pursuing this set of >goals. This alliance would be the "social hack" / "movement" that >can perhaps somehow follow the example of the Free Software movement. > >I have set up a discussion mailing list for these matters at >http://quitbabylon.com/mailman/listinfo/allies >and I would like to invite everyone who is interested in this set of >topics to join me there. > >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 > > > > >Sick of deleting your inbox? Yahoo!7 Mail has free unlimited storage. >Get it now. > >____________________________________________________________ >You received this message as a subscriber on the list: > governance at lists.cpsr.org >To be removed from the list, 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 ____________________________________________________________________________________ Sick of deleting your inbox? Yahoo!7 Mail has free unlimited storage. http://au.docs.yahoo.com/mail/unlimitedstorage.html -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: message-footer.txt URL: From nne75 at yahoo.com Sun Aug 12 15:01:20 2007 From: nne75 at yahoo.com (Nnenna) Date: Sun, 12 Aug 2007 12:01:20 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [governance] on IDNs at the root Message-ID: <209410.20737.qm@web50211.mail.re2.yahoo.com> Procedures for IDN TLD Evaluation Deployment in the Root Zone6 August 2007 ICANN has finalized the procedures describing how IANA will manage the insertion, administration and removal of internationalized top- level domains in the root zone for the upcoming evaluation. The procedures were posted previously for public comments. That comment, as well as advice from the technical community (including RSSAC), was taken into consideration in editing the final versions. The two procedures guiding this effort are: 1. IANA Root Zone Procedures for Test IDN Deployment The final procedure was approved by the ICANN Board on 29 June 2007 (see http://icann.org/minutes/resolutions-29jun07.htm) after some clarifications were provided in response to public comment (see http://forum.icann.org/lists/iana-idn-process/). These procedures are being implemented by IANA in preparation for the insertion of IDN evaluation TLDs. 2. Root Server Operator Procedures for Emergency Revocation of Evaluation-purpose IDN TLDs The purpose of this procedure is to provide a method of quickly removing IDN TLDs from the root zone in the very unlikely event that insertion of these evaluation strings negatively impact DNS or root server operations. After consultation with the RSSAC, the procedure has been modified to focus on a communication protocol that root server operators will employ in the identification and mitigation of any problems that might arise for root server operations as a consequence of the proposed testing of IDN strings . Root server operators will monitor and identify deteriorated service potentially caused by IDNs in the root. If such a result is detected, ICANN will be notified and in turn activate the procedure. IDN Program -- looking forward: The next milestones in the IDN Program Plan requires obtaining necessary approvals to insert the eleven suggested evaluation top-level domains (the term <.test> translated into eleven languages). (See the IDN .test Evaluation Plan at http:// icann.org/announcements/announcement-2-19jun07.htm). An additional announcement will be made once the approvals have been received. It is anticipated that these evaluation TLDs will be launched in late September 2007. ------------------------------------ Updated IDN .test Evaluation Plan ICANN updates the IDN .test Evaluation Plan based on comment to the previously posted version of the plan for the insertion of evaluation IDN TLDs in the root zone 19 July 2007 Update ICANN has amended the draft plan for insertion of evaluation IDN TDs into the root zone based on comments received on the public forum established for that purpose (see, http://forum.icann.org/lists/idn-tld-test/). Specifically, an amended version of the proposed label for the Persian TLD, has been posted (see, http://www.icann.org/topics/idn/idn-evaluation-plan-v2.9.1.pdf [PDF, 241K]). The changes that have been made: (i) replaces the previously suggested Persian .test TLD with an alternate TLD label that more clearly reveals the Persian YEH, and (ii) changes of the reference to the name of the language from Farsi to Persian. Comments on this or other aspects of the evaluation plan can be made to idn-tld-test at icann.org and viewed at http://forum.icann.org/lists/idn-tld-test/. For more details please see: http://forum.icann.org/lists/idn-tld-test/msg00002.html and http://forum.icann.org/lists/idn-tld-test/msg00003.html. --------------------------------------------------- ICANN Releases Draft IDN Evaluation Plans 19 June 2007 As announced previously in the IDN program status report, in the draft IANA Root Zone Procedures for Test IDN Deployment, and the draft IDN TLD Root Server Performance / Tolerance, ICANN has developed a plan for insertion of IDN TLDs in the root zone for evaluation. The .test plan contains two separate evaluation facilities where the feasibility and usability of fully localized domain names can be evaluated and tested in a live environment. Implementation of this plan is one of the core elements in ICANN¢s IDN Program. The draft .test plan is posted here for public comment. The draft contains a preliminary list of scripts for the example.test evaluation strings. Recommendations for changes or additions to this list of strings will be reviewed carefully to ensure broad public participation in the evaluations. During the public comment period, the plan will be discussed during several sessions of the ICANN meeting in San Juan (June 2007) and at the RSSAC / IETF meeting in Chicago (July 2007). Subject to these and other consultations, a final version of the plan will be provided for ICANN Board consideration at its 14 August 2007 meeting. ICANN Board approval will be sought for the plan, including approval of the insertion of the suggested evaluations strings (<.test> translated into a number of different languages), in the root zone. According to the plan the evaluation facilities will be launched in late September 2007. Comments to the draft .test plan can be submitted idn-tld-test at icann.org and viewed here http://forum.icann.org/lists/idn-tld-test/. For other questions or inquiries regarding ICANN¢s IDN Program please contact Tina Dam, ICANN¢s Director for the IDN Program, at tina.dam at icann.org. Translation of the .test plan into Arabic, French, Spanish, Russian, and Chinese is currently underway and will be released shortly. --------------------------------- Fussy? Opinionated? Impossible to please? Perfect. Join Yahoo!'s user panel and lay it on us. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: message-footer.txt URL: From dan at musicunbound.com Sun Aug 12 15:51:51 2007 From: dan at musicunbound.com (Dan Krimm) Date: Sun, 12 Aug 2007 12:51:51 -0700 Subject: [governance] Fundamentally broken design of society In-Reply-To: <956174.29045.qm@web54109.mail.re2.yahoo.com> References: <956174.29045.qm@web54109.mail.re2.yahoo.com> Message-ID: David, Well, I was by no means suggesting that we stop funding other direct, substantive support where it is effective. Simply that ICT should be somewhere in the policy mix at meaningful levels of attention, especially as it has a strong potential to synergize with other substantive policy efforts. The question is not "Why fund substantive projects?" -- it is obvious why we should. The question, rather, is "Why not fund ICT efforts?" -- I can see no compelling reason why we should not include ICT in the mix, especially given that the investment is bound to increase the value of other supportive investments. What is "fundamentally broken" about society, inter alia, is that we take apart synergistic packages of benefits and try to trade them off against one another when in fact we are generally better off when we address the full range together. Your hyper-extreme case of "everybody dying of malaria" is a straw horse. I can easily counter with "if everybody lives but they are oppressed by authoritarian governance because of a failure of ICT policy" are they (we) better off? Balance in all things. ICT policy deserves to be in the balance along with other substantive policies, if for no other reason than the ineliminably critical role of the Fourth Estate in democratic public governance. ICT issues are highly political, because they *do* have a strong political impact these days. The fact that there is such controversy and passion surrounding these issues suggests in and of itself that we ought to pay attention to them at the highest political levels. The "powers that be" care about them for very good reasons. The rest of us ought to care too, before the plutocracy cements its control for good. Let's be clear here: This is a raw power struggle, no more/no less. If we fail to show up at the table or on the battlefield, then we lose, plain and simple. Dan PS -- I am of course arguing for the "ought" position, not making any argument for "will" or "how". That remains to be discovered, and we struggle with that proposition every day. But one thing that motivates me is that, until proven impossible, the "ought" ought to be sought. It is far too early to be fatalistic about what can or cannot be accomplished, "realism" notwithstanding. Not everything that appears "unrealistic" is impossible to accomplish. The specific path of human history is rife with improbable occurrences, and taken as a whole the actual development of history represents a minuscule probability when viewed from the standpoint of the past (let's say, from 10,000 years ago, assuming you do believe that there *was* a "10,000 years ago" ... not everyone does). We live in highly fractal times, and common predictions of what is possible or probable are (or at least should be) rife with doubt and caveats. At 4:25 PM -0700 8/11/07, David Goldstein wrote: >Hi Dan, > >Your example of a paternalistic funder, such as the USA, is only one >example. Europe appears to be moving forwards and being much better in its >ability to fund the developing world. But, still it's not perfect. But >then, it's probable it will never be perfect. > >And where does the first world give its money? Does it give to targetted >programmes, or to governments. The latter has been an abject failure in >most cases. The Economist ><http://economist.com/world/displaystory.cfm?story_id=9440765> >recently had an interesting article. It gave examples of successful >funding of water filtration plants. Funding for AIDS prevention and >medicines for those with AIDS, and malaria, have been very successful. > > >The article gives an example of a success story in Africa - Mali. Mali is >a success story, making agriculture and infrastructure a priority. And of >course, telecommunications can be included in infrastructure. But if >there's no roads it's difficult to provide telecommunications, even >wireless. Nigeria on the other hand is riddled with corruption. Its >leaders appear to have only a passing interest in their people. Nigeria >has the potential to be one of the world's richest countries, but its >wealth is squandered. So Mali has funders flocking to give it money. And >from what I can tell, Mali is one of the few shining lights in Africa. > >When funders have the choice of funding the projects I have mentioned, >I've no doubt most will not choose telecommunications. I imagine most will >see their role in other projects. But again, engaging with foundations, or >even people such as Jeffrey Sachs, on how to get telecommunications on the >agenda could only be a step forward. Going off funding/supporting projects >willy nilly is a sure way to failure. By the way, it has to be a >trade-off. There is only so much money to go around, so there has to be >choices made all along. > >There's also a good article by Jeffrey Sachs in The Economist available at >http://economist.com/opinion/displaystory.cfm?story_id=E1_TQDPVQQ. >It's for subscribers only, but there are probably other articles available >if people search online. The articles is from 2002, and begins: >"IF GEORGE BUSH spent more time and money on mobilising Weapons of Mass >Salvation (WMS) in addition to combating Weapons of Mass Destruction >(WMD), we might actually get somewhere in making this planet a safer and >more hospitable home. WMD can kill millions and their spread to dangerous >hands needs to be opposed resolutely. WMS, in contrast, are the arsenal of >life-saving vaccines, medicines and health interventions, emergency food >aid and farming technologies that could avert literally millions of deaths >each year in the wars against epidemic disease, drought and famine. Yet >while the Bush administration is prepared to spend $100 billion to rid >Iraq of WMD, it has been unwilling to spend more than 0.2% of that sum >($200m) this year on the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and >Malaria." > >This debate reminds me of the debate around climate change with Bjorn >Lomborg. Simplistically he advocates climate change is over-rated as a >problem and money should be better spent on other programmes in the >developing world. But, climate change is likely to make any money spent on >other programmes pointless if everyone is dead as a result of climate >change. If everyone in the developing world dies of malaria and other >diseases, funding of telecommunications will have been useless. > >David > >----- Original Message ---- >From: Dan Krimm >To: governance at lists.cpsr.org >Sent: Saturday, 11 August, 2007 5:23:33 AM >Subject: Re: [governance] Fundamentally broken design of society > >David, > >It could just be that the Millennium Development Goals have a blind spot in >the area of Media and the Fourth Estate. How does one expect all of these >goals to be accomplished without a robust and nondiscriminatory >communication platform for collective discourse? > >Is it just a paternalistic responsibility of developed nations to help out >their "crippled cousins" in the developing world, or is the responsibility >to help those developing nations become systematically more >self-sufficient? Unilateral paternalism only goes so far, and it is this >unfortunate tendency in the current U.S. administration that bothers *many* >U.S. citizens, for example. I know it bothers a lot of other people around >the world as well. > >I would argue that provision of empowering communication platforms is an >absolutely critical issue underlying *all* other substantive issues, >because collective communication drives and enables substantive action on >all other fronts. > >If you make it a trade-off, then in the long run the developing country >loses anyway. That may in fact be a false dichotomy. Who says that >investing in communications will not pay off in empowering efforts in all >the other areas listed? Knowledge is Power, and Access to Knowledge is >Empowering. > >ICT provision is not an isolated silver bullet by any means, but I think it >must be an ineliminable component of any development package. It is the >glue that holds all the rest together, in the end. > >Dan > > > >At 9:58 PM -0700 8/9/07, David Goldstein wrote: >>Hi Norbert et al, >> >>I agree with the views expressed here, in short, on making technology >>accessible to all regardless of location, income and ability or >>disability. However there are many constraints in achieving this. In the >>developing world, what does a funder or government spend money on - >>malaria nets or internet access? To name just one issue. Safe drinking >>water, child poverty, sanitation, disease, infrastructure such as roads, >>railways, airports? >> >>This is reflected in the UN's 8 Millennium Development Goals. These are: >>Goal 1: Eradicate Extreme Hunger and Poverty >>Goal 2: Achieve Universal Primary Education >>Goal 3: Promote Gender Equality and Empower Women >>Goal 4: Reduce Child Mortality >>Goal 5: Improve Maternal Health >>Goal 6: Combat HIV/AIDS, Malaria and other diseases >>Goal 7: Ensure Environmental Sustainability >>Goal 8: Develop a Global Partnership for Development. >> >>See <http://www.un.org/millenniumgoals/>http://www.un.org/millenniumgoals/ >> >>You could argue technology fits within goal 8, but it's a low priority. >>Even Bill Gates has seen that the issues raised in the 8 goals above is >>more important than technology. So a business alliance, while laudable, is >>going to be difficult to get to work when the essentials are in other >>areas. >> >>Do we support the development of technology in the developing world, but >>people die who, if the money was spent on the above goals might have >>lived? Of course, we make all sorts of decisions and they all have costs >>in other areas. The chocolate bar, the flight to visit my parents, the >>coffee... the money purchasing all these things, it can be argued could go >>to better use. >> >>I don't have an answer. There are many views and maybe there are many >>right ones. Maybe talking to an organisation such as The Gates and/or Ford >>Foundations or others working towards the above goals could give guidance >>on how support can be given in the area of technology. Who knows, they may >>like the project and give money! >> >>Cheers >>David >> >> >> >>----- Original Message ---- >>From: Norbert Bollow >>To: governance at lists.cpsr.org; ldmisekfalkoff at gmail.com >>Cc: allies at QuitBabylon.com; IDC-ICT-Taskforce at yahoogroups.com; >>AdHoc_IDC at yahoogroups.com >>Sent: Thursday, 9 August, 2007 11:38:29 PM >>Subject: Re: [governance] Fundamentally broken design of society >> >>Linda Misek-Falkoff wrote: >> >>> hope I read correctly that the concept of a broken system holds forth the >>> hope and vision that either it was once whole, or can be brought into being >>> [more] whole. >> >>Yes, precisely: As long as I thought about the matter as "a social >>problem" I had little if any confidence of actually being able to do >>anything about it. But when I read that word "broken", that was >>helpful, to me at least, to inspire me towards more contructive lines >>of thought. If something is broken, it can usually be fixed or >>replaced. >> >>Now, while the thought "fix it or replace it" cannot be applied to >>society in any reasonably way, it can be applied to rules of conduct, >>legal rules, and computer software, all of which have significant >>influence on how society evolves. For example, when a company that >>creates and popularizes a new technology has neglected to get that >>technology evaluated with regard to its effects on people with >>disabilities, certainly justice would demand that there should be a >>legal liability connected to any resulting "disabling" or >>marginalizing effect on people with disabilities. >> >>Unfortunately this kind of legal change is difficult to achieve in >>any country, and even harder to achieve internationally, and on top of >>that, probably quite a few such changes would be needed in order to >>really fix what I see as overall brokenness in the system of legal >>rules and how they are applied. >> >>However there is another path, which seems much more promising to me: >>Namely, to try creating a subsystem of the overall economy, by means >>of designing an attractive and fair set of rules by means of which >>the subsystem of the economy would function. My inspiration for this >>idea is to a large extent the "social hack" approach of Richard >>Stallman's founding of the Free Software movement, which was >>successful precisely because it was sufficient for success to get >>support from a significant number of people who were willing and >>interested in doing the right thing, it was not necessary to get >>consent or acceptance from anyone else. >> >>The fundamental idea that I want to pursue is to focus on empowerment: >> >>--> What does it take to fully empower those people who are currently >> restricted from fully benefiting from ICT because of some kind of >> digital divide? >> >>I expect that discussing this question will lead to collecting some >>set of principles (or sets of principles) that will be supportive of >>empowerment, and that will help prevent those kinds of disempowerment >>that are possible to prevent. >> >>Then we can discuss how to form some kind of alliance (I'm thinking >>of something like a business alliance, but not restricted to >>businesses only) to support each other while pursuing this set of >>goals. This alliance would be the "social hack" / "movement" that >>can perhaps somehow follow the example of the Free Software movement. >> >>I have set up a discussion mailing list for these matters at >><http://quitbabylon.com/mailman/listinfo/allies>http://quitbabylon.com/mailman/listinfo/allies >>and I would like to invite everyone who is interested in this set of >>topics to join me there. >> >>Greetings, >>Norbert. >> >> >>-- >>Norbert Bollow >> <http://Norbert.ch>http://Norbert.ch >>President of the Swiss Internet User Group >>SIUG <http://SIUG.ch>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>http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance >> >> >> >> >>Sick of deleting your inbox? Yahoo!7 Mail has free unlimited storage. >><http://au.docs.yahoo.com/mail/unlimitedstorage.html>Get >>it now. >> >>____________________________________________________________ >>You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >> governance at lists.cpsr.org >>To be removed from the list, 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 > > > > >Sick of deleting your inbox? Yahoo!7 Mail has free unlimited storage. >Get it now. > >____________________________________________________________ >You received this message as a subscriber on the list: > governance at lists.cpsr.org >To be removed from the list, 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 LMcKnigh at syr.edu Mon Aug 13 00:39:11 2007 From: LMcKnigh at syr.edu (Lee McKnight) Date: Mon, 13 Aug 2007 00:39:11 -0400 Subject: [governance] Fundamentally broken design of society Message-ID: Folks, Well I haven;t been around for 10,000 years, but this list discussion is definitely deja vu all over again for me * yes my grey hairs are showing : ( But with them I offer some perspective. The telecom & devt discussion began in earnest at world bank level say 25 years ago, but had no impact on their own internal priorities for more than a decade - the infodev program and the like got going much later and only really offers up pocket change by Bank standards. (Though of course they're much better than nothing). Going back further in history there was the radio & devt and then tv & devt discussions and academic analyses of the 50s & 60s, at times accompanied by $$ from one or another source like the Friedrich Ebert Stiftung in Germany, or the CIA winning hearts and minds wherever (NOT! ; ). Ok, let's not get sidetracked: ict & devt got on the global agenda 13 years ago, with Gore's '94 'global information infrastructure' speech at an ITU meeting in Buenos Aires, and moved from there to being a topic at a G7 summit I think in 95; note neither Gore nor G7 offered up any serious $$ but rather prescriptive advice for national policies to enable nations and firms to develop infrastructure. But along the way governments got the point that ICT might be a prerequisite/necessary correlary for development to take place/national competitiveness to be maintained, hence all the national handwringing these days about where nations rank in the broadband league tables kept by the OECD. OK, so now what? Well, it's still the same story, ict $$ will come largely from private investors because governments may be corrupt but are not stupid; that is, businesses will offer governments $$ for the chance to sell telecom/ICT services, because there is money to be made. So we may tip a cap to Gore for pointing this out to governments in developing countries who wished to get on the 90s Internet badnwagon - that is first they should get out of the way so businesses and individuals could do what they wanted to do, which all in all was reasonable advice I'd say. To apply the lessons of my summary history to the current discussion, the issue is less why don't governments give more support, since I doubt they ever will offer much more; but rather why don;t governments get out of our way so we can a) develop our own tools and services as Norbert discusses and b) maybe, try to make money selling those tools (admit it some of you are thinking that way but aren't talking about it on this list : ). So to conclude, the difference in ICTs, is that while society may be fundamentally broken, there might be money made while fixing (some parts of it) through ICTs/the Internet. And sharing resources towards those ends through the net can serve a lot of people's altrusitic and self-interests. Meaning: don;t hold your breath waiting for public $$, do it yourself. Lee Prof. Lee W. McKnight School of Information Studies Syracuse University +1-315-443-6891office +1-315-278-4392 mobile >>> dan at musicunbound.com 8/12/2007 3:51 PM >>> David, Well, I was by no means suggesting that we stop funding other direct, substantive support where it is effective. Simply that ICT should be somewhere in the policy mix at meaningful levels of attention, especially as it has a strong potential to synergize with other substantive policy efforts. The question is not "Why fund substantive projects?" -- it is obvious why we should. The question, rather, is "Why not fund ICT efforts?" -- I can see no compelling reason why we should not include ICT in the mix, especially given that the investment is bound to increase the value of other supportive investments. What is "fundamentally broken" about society, inter alia, is that we take apart synergistic packages of benefits and try to trade them off against one another when in fact we are generally better off when we address the full range together. Your hyper-extreme case of "everybody dying of malaria" is a straw horse. I can easily counter with "if everybody lives but they are oppressed by authoritarian governance because of a failure of ICT policy" are they (we) better off? Balance in all things. ICT policy deserves to be in the balance along with other substantive policies, if for no other reason than the ineliminably critical role of the Fourth Estate in democratic public governance. ICT issues are highly political, because they *do* have a strong political impact these days. The fact that there is such controversy and passion surrounding these issues suggests in and of itself that we ought to pay attention to them at the highest political levels. The "powers that be" care about them for very good reasons. The rest of us ought to care too, before the plutocracy cements its control for good. Let's be clear here: This is a raw power struggle, no more/no less. If we fail to show up at the table or on the battlefield, then we lose, plain and simple. Dan PS -- I am of course arguing for the "ought" position, not making any argument for "will" or "how". That remains to be discovered, and we struggle with that proposition every day. But one thing that motivates me is that, until proven impossible, the "ought" ought to be sought. It is far too early to be fatalistic about what can or cannot be accomplished, "realism" notwithstanding. Not everything that appears "unrealistic" is impossible to accomplish. The specific path of human history is rife with improbable occurrences, and taken as a whole the actual development of history represents a minuscule probability when viewed from the standpoint of the past (let's say, from 10,000 years ago, assuming you do believe that there *was* a "10,000 years ago" ... not everyone does). We live in highly fractal times, and common predictions of what is possible or probable are (or at least should be) rife with doubt and caveats. At 4:25 PM -0700 8/11/07, David Goldstein wrote: >Hi Dan, > >Your example of a paternalistic funder, such as the USA, is only one >example. Europe appears to be moving forwards and being much better in its >ability to fund the developing world. But, still it's not perfect. But >then, it's probable it will never be perfect. > >And where does the first world give its money? Does it give to targetted >programmes, or to governments. The latter has been an abject failure in >most cases. The Economist ><http://economist.com/world/displaystory.cfm?story_id=9440765> >recently had an interesting article. It gave examples of successful >funding of water filtration plants. Funding for AIDS prevention and >medicines for those with AIDS, and malaria, have been very successful. > > >The article gives an example of a success story in Africa - Mali. Mali is >a success story, making agriculture and infrastructure a priority. And of >course, telecommunications can be included in infrastructure. But if >there's no roads it's difficult to provide telecommunications, even >wireless. Nigeria on the other hand is riddled with corruption. Its >leaders appear to have only a passing interest in their people. Nigeria >has the potential to be one of the world's richest countries, but its >wealth is squandered. So Mali has funders flocking to give it money. And >from what I can tell, Mali is one of the few shining lights in Africa. > >When funders have the choice of funding the projects I have mentioned, >I've no doubt most will not choose telecommunications. I imagine most will >see their role in other projects. But again, engaging with foundations, or >even people such as Jeffrey Sachs, on how to get telecommunications on the >agenda could only be a step forward. Going off funding/supporting projects >willy nilly is a sure way to failure. By the way, it has to be a >trade-off. There is only so much money to go around, so there has to be >choices made all along. > >There's also a good article by Jeffrey Sachs in The Economist available at >http://economist.com/opinion/displaystory.cfm?story_id=E1_TQDPVQQ. >It's for subscribers only, but there are probably other articles available >if people search online. The articles is from 2002, and begins: >"IF GEORGE BUSH spent more time and money on mobilising Weapons of Mass >Salvation (WMS) in addition to combating Weapons of Mass Destruction >(WMD), we might actually get somewhere in making this planet a safer and >more hospitable home. WMD can kill millions and their spread to dangerous >hands needs to be opposed resolutely. WMS, in contrast, are the arsenal of >life-saving vaccines, medicines and health interventions, emergency food >aid and farming technologies that could avert literally millions of deaths >each year in the wars against epidemic disease, drought and famine. Yet >while the Bush administration is prepared to spend $100 billion to rid >Iraq of WMD, it has been unwilling to spend more than 0.2% of that sum >($200m) this year on the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and >Malaria." > >This debate reminds me of the debate around climate change with Bjorn >Lomborg. Simplistically he advocates climate change is over-rated as a >problem and money should be better spent on other programmes in the >developing world. But, climate change is likely to make any money spent on >other programmes pointless if everyone is dead as a result of climate >change. If everyone in the developing world dies of malaria and other >diseases, funding of telecommunications will have been useless. > >David > >----- Original Message ---- >From: Dan Krimm >To: governance at lists.cpsr.org >Sent: Saturday, 11 August, 2007 5:23:33 AM >Subject: Re: [governance] Fundamentally broken design of society > >David, > >It could just be that the Millennium Development Goals have a blind spot in >the area of Media and the Fourth Estate. How does one expect all of these >goals to be accomplished without a robust and nondiscriminatory >communication platform for collective discourse? > >Is it just a paternalistic responsibility of developed nations to help out >their "crippled cousins" in the developing world, or is the responsibility >to help those developing nations become systematically more >self-sufficient? Unilateral paternalism only goes so far, and it is this >unfortunate tendency in the current U.S. administration that bothers *many* >U.S. citizens, for example. I know it bothers a lot of other people around >the world as well. > >I would argue that provision of empowering communication platforms is an >absolutely critical issue underlying *all* other substantive issues, >because collective communication drives and enables substantive action on >all other fronts. > >If you make it a trade-off, then in the long run the developing country >loses anyway. That may in fact be a false dichotomy. Who says that >investing in communications will not pay off in empowering efforts in all >the other areas listed? Knowledge is Power, and Access to Knowledge is >Empowering. > >ICT provision is not an isolated silver bullet by any means, but I think it >must be an ineliminable component of any development package. It is the >glue that holds all the rest together, in the end. > >Dan > > > >At 9:58 PM -0700 8/9/07, David Goldstein wrote: >>Hi Norbert et al, >> >>I agree with the views expressed here, in short, on making technology >>accessible to all regardless of location, income and ability or >>disability. However there are many constraints in achieving this. In the >>developing world, what does a funder or government spend money on - >>malaria nets or internet access? To name just one issue. Safe drinking >>water, child poverty, sanitation, disease, infrastructure such as roads, >>railways, airports? >> >>This is reflected in the UN's 8 Millennium Development Goals. These are: >>Goal 1: Eradicate Extreme Hunger and Poverty >>Goal 2: Achieve Universal Primary Education >>Goal 3: Promote Gender Equality and Empower Women >>Goal 4: Reduce Child Mortality >>Goal 5: Improve Maternal Health >>Goal 6: Combat HIV/AIDS, Malaria and other diseases >>Goal 7: Ensure Environmental Sustainability >>Goal 8: Develop a Global Partnership for Development. >> >>See <http://www.un.org/millenniumgoals/>http://www.un.org/millenniumgoals/ >> >>You could argue technology fits within goal 8, but it's a low priority. >>Even Bill Gates has seen that the issues raised in the 8 goals above is >>more important than technology. So a business alliance, while laudable, is >>going to be difficult to get to work when the essentials are in other >>areas. >> >>Do we support the development of technology in the developing world, but >>people die who, if the money was spent on the above goals might have >>lived? Of course, we make all sorts of decisions and they all have costs >>in other areas. The chocolate bar, the flight to visit my parents, the >>coffee... the money purchasing all these things, it can be argued could go >>to better use. >> >>I don't have an answer. There are many views and maybe there are many >>right ones. Maybe talking to an organisation such as The Gates and/or Ford >>Foundations or others working towards the above goals could give guidance >>on how support can be given in the area of technology. Who knows, they may >>like the project and give money! >> >>Cheers >>David >> >> >> >>----- Original Message ---- >>From: Norbert Bollow >>To: governance at lists.cpsr.org; ldmisekfalkoff at gmail.com >>Cc: allies at QuitBabylon.com; IDC-ICT-Taskforce at yahoogroups.com; >>AdHoc_IDC at yahoogroups.com >>Sent: Thursday, 9 August, 2007 11:38:29 PM >>Subject: Re: [governance] Fundamentally broken design of society >> >>Linda Misek-Falkoff wrote: >> >>> hope I read correctly that the concept of a broken system holds forth the >>> hope and vision that either it was once whole, or can be brought into being >>> [more] whole. >> >>Yes, precisely: As long as I thought about the matter as "a social >>problem" I had little if any confidence of actually being able to do >>anything about it. But when I read that word "broken", that was >>helpful, to me at least, to inspire me towards more contructive lines >>of thought. If something is broken, it can usually be fixed or >>replaced. >> >>Now, while the thought "fix it or replace it" cannot be applied to >>society in any reasonably way, it can be applied to rules of conduct, >>legal rules, and computer software, all of which have significant >>influence on how society evolves. For example, when a company that >>creates and popularizes a new technology has neglected to get that >>technology evaluated with regard to its effects on people with >>disabilities, certainly justice would demand that there should be a >>legal liability connected to any resulting "disabling" or >>marginalizing effect on people with disabilities. >> >>Unfortunately this kind of legal change is difficult to achieve in >>any country, and even harder to achieve internationally, and on top of >>that, probably quite a few such changes would be needed in order to >>really fix what I see as overall brokenness in the system of legal >>rules and how they are applied. >> >>However there is another path, which seems much more promising to me: >>Namely, to try creating a subsystem of the overall economy, by means >>of designing an attractive and fair set of rules by means of which >>the subsystem of the economy would function. My inspiration for this >>idea is to a large extent the "social hack" approach of Richard >>Stallman's founding of the Free Software movement, which was >>successful precisely because it was sufficient for success to get >>support from a significant number of people who were willing and >>interested in doing the right thing, it was not necessary to get >>consent or acceptance from anyone else. >> >>The fundamental idea that I want to pursue is to focus on empowerment: >> >>--> What does it take to fully empower those people who are currently >> restricted from fully benefiting from ICT because of some kind of >> digital divide? >> >>I expect that discussing this question will lead to collecting some >>set of principles (or sets of principles) that will be supportive of >>empowerment, and that will help prevent those kinds of disempowerment >>that are possible to prevent. >> >>Then we can discuss how to form some kind of alliance (I'm thinking >>of something like a business alliance, but not restricted to >>businesses only) to support each other while pursuing this set of >>goals. This alliance would be the "social hack" / "movement" that >>can perhaps somehow follow the example of the Free Software movement. >> >>I have set up a discussion mailing list for these matters at >><http://quitbabylon.com/mailman/listinfo/allies>http://quitbabylon.com/mailman/listinfo/allies >>and I would like to invite everyone who is interested in this set of >>topics to join me there. >> >>Greetings, >>Norbert. >> >> >>-- >>Norbert Bollow >> <http://Norbert.ch>http://Norbert.ch >>President of the Swiss Internet User Group >>SIUG <http://SIUG.ch>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>http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance >> >> >> >> >>Sick of deleting your inbox? Yahoo!7 Mail has free unlimited storage. >><http://au.docs.yahoo.com/mail/unlimitedstorage.html>Get >>it now. >> >>____________________________________________________________ >>You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >> governance at lists.cpsr.org >>To be removed from the list, 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 > > > > >Sick of deleting your inbox? Yahoo!7 Mail has free unlimited storage. >Get it now. > >____________________________________________________________ >You received this message as a subscriber on the list: > governance at lists.cpsr.org >To be removed from the list, 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 dan at musicunbound.com Mon Aug 13 16:06:35 2007 From: dan at musicunbound.com (Dan Krimm) Date: Mon, 13 Aug 2007 13:06:35 -0700 Subject: [governance] Fundamentally broken design of society In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Makes sense to me. :-) Of course, this does mean that we still need to engage at the regulatory policy level, which is where the big fights are still happening. WIPO Development Agenda, etc. And, frankly, that takes substantial resources too. It won't happen *entirely* on disposable income alone (unless we can aggregate disposable income from a very broad range of citizen stakeholders, which idea has been mentioned here before). Dan At 12:39 AM -0400 8/13/07, Lee McKnight wrote: >Folks, > >Well I haven;t been around for 10,000 years, but this list discussion is >definitely deja vu all over again for me * yes my grey hairs are showing : >( But with them I offer some perspective. > >The telecom & devt discussion began in earnest at world bank level say 25 >years ago, but had no impact on their own internal priorities for more >than a decade - the infodev program and the like got going much later and >only really offers up pocket change by Bank standards. (Though of course >they're much better than nothing). Going back further in history there was >the radio & devt and then tv & devt discussions and academic analyses of >the 50s & 60s, at times accompanied by $$ from one or another source like >the Friedrich Ebert Stiftung in Germany, or the CIA winning hearts and >minds wherever (NOT! ; ). Ok, let's not get sidetracked: > > ict & devt got on the global agenda 13 years ago, with Gore's '94 'global >information infrastructure' speech at an ITU meeting in Buenos Aires, and >moved from there to being a topic at a G7 summit I think in 95; note >neither Gore nor G7 offered up any serious $$ but rather prescriptive >advice for national policies to enable nations and firms to develop >infrastructure. But along the way governments got the point that ICT >might be a prerequisite/necessary correlary for development to take >place/national competitiveness to be maintained, hence all the national >handwringing these days about where nations rank in the broadband league >tables kept by the OECD. > >OK, so now what? Well, it's still the same story, ict $$ will come largely >from private investors because governments may be corrupt but are not >stupid; that is, businesses will offer governments $$ for the chance to >sell telecom/ICT services, because there is money to be made. So we may >tip a cap to Gore for pointing this out to governments in developing >countries who wished to get on the 90s Internet badnwagon - that is first >they should get out of the way so businesses and individuals could do what >they wanted to do, which all in all was reasonable advice I'd say. > >To apply the lessons of my summary history to the current discussion, the >issue is less why don't governments give more support, since I doubt they >ever will offer much more; but rather why don;t governments get out of our >way so we can a) develop our own tools and services as Norbert discusses >and b) maybe, try to make money selling those tools (admit it some of you >are thinking that way but aren't talking about it on this list : ). > >So to conclude, the difference in ICTs, is that while society may be >fundamentally broken, there might be money made while fixing (some parts >of it) through ICTs/the Internet. And sharing resources towards those >ends through the net can serve a lot of people's altrusitic and >self-interests. Meaning: don;t hold your breath waiting for public $$, do >it yourself. > >Lee > >Prof. Lee W. McKnight >School of Information Studies >Syracuse University >+1-315-443-6891office >+1-315-278-4392 mobile > >>>> dan at musicunbound.com 8/12/2007 3:51 PM >>> >David, > >Well, I was by no means suggesting that we stop funding other direct, >substantive support where it is effective. Simply that ICT should be >somewhere in the policy mix at meaningful levels of attention, especially >as it has a strong potential to synergize with other substantive policy >efforts. > >The question is not "Why fund substantive projects?" -- it is obvious why >we should. > >The question, rather, is "Why not fund ICT efforts?" -- I can see no >compelling reason why we should not include ICT in the mix, especially >given that the investment is bound to increase the value of other >supportive investments. > >What is "fundamentally broken" about society, inter alia, is that we take >apart synergistic packages of benefits and try to trade them off against >one another when in fact we are generally better off when we address the >full range together. > >Your hyper-extreme case of "everybody dying of malaria" is a straw horse. >I can easily counter with "if everybody lives but they are oppressed by >authoritarian governance because of a failure of ICT policy" are they (we) >better off? > >Balance in all things. ICT policy deserves to be in the balance along with >other substantive policies, if for no other reason than the ineliminably >critical role of the Fourth Estate in democratic public governance. > >ICT issues are highly political, because they *do* have a strong political >impact these days. The fact that there is such controversy and passion >surrounding these issues suggests in and of itself that we ought to pay >attention to them at the highest political levels. The "powers that be" >care about them for very good reasons. The rest of us ought to care too, >before the plutocracy cements its control for good. > >Let's be clear here: This is a raw power struggle, no more/no less. If we >fail to show up at the table or on the battlefield, then we lose, plain and >simple. > >Dan > >PS -- I am of course arguing for the "ought" position, not making any >argument for "will" or "how". That remains to be discovered, and we >struggle with that proposition every day. But one thing that motivates me >is that, until proven impossible, the "ought" ought to be sought. It is >far too early to be fatalistic about what can or cannot be accomplished, >"realism" notwithstanding. Not everything that appears "unrealistic" is >impossible to accomplish. The specific path of human history is rife with >improbable occurrences, and taken as a whole the actual development of >history represents a minuscule probability when viewed from the standpoint >of the past (let's say, from 10,000 years ago, assuming you do believe that >there *was* a "10,000 years ago" ... not everyone does). > >We live in highly fractal times, and common predictions of what is possible >or probable are (or at least should be) rife with doubt and caveats. > > > >At 4:25 PM -0700 8/11/07, David Goldstein wrote: >>Hi Dan, >> >>Your example of a paternalistic funder, such as the USA, is only one >>example. Europe appears to be moving forwards and being much better in its >>ability to fund the developing world. But, still it's not perfect. But >>then, it's probable it will never be perfect. >> >>And where does the first world give its money? Does it give to targetted >>programmes, or to governments. The latter has been an abject failure in >>most cases. The Economist >><http://economist.com/world/displaystory.cfm?story_id=9440765> >>recently had an interesting article. It gave examples of successful >>funding of water filtration plants. Funding for AIDS prevention and >>medicines for those with AIDS, and malaria, have been very successful. >> >> >>The article gives an example of a success story in Africa - Mali. Mali is >>a success story, making agriculture and infrastructure a priority. And of >>course, telecommunications can be included in infrastructure. But if >>there's no roads it's difficult to provide telecommunications, even >>wireless. Nigeria on the other hand is riddled with corruption. Its >>leaders appear to have only a passing interest in their people. Nigeria >>has the potential to be one of the world's richest countries, but its >>wealth is squandered. So Mali has funders flocking to give it money. And >>from what I can tell, Mali is one of the few shining lights in Africa. >> >>When funders have the choice of funding the projects I have mentioned, >>I've no doubt most will not choose telecommunications. I imagine most will >>see their role in other projects. But again, engaging with foundations, or >>even people such as Jeffrey Sachs, on how to get telecommunications on the >>agenda could only be a step forward. Going off funding/supporting projects >>willy nilly is a sure way to failure. By the way, it has to be a >>trade-off. There is only so much money to go around, so there has to be >>choices made all along. >> >>There's also a good article by Jeffrey Sachs in The Economist available at >>http://economist.com/opinion/displaystory.cfm?story_id=E1_TQDPVQQ. >>It's for subscribers only, but there are probably other articles available >>if people search online. The articles is from 2002, and begins: >>"IF GEORGE BUSH spent more time and money on mobilising Weapons of Mass >>Salvation (WMS) in addition to combating Weapons of Mass Destruction >>(WMD), we might actually get somewhere in making this planet a safer and >>more hospitable home. WMD can kill millions and their spread to dangerous >>hands needs to be opposed resolutely. WMS, in contrast, are the arsenal of >>life-saving vaccines, medicines and health interventions, emergency food >>aid and farming technologies that could avert literally millions of deaths >>each year in the wars against epidemic disease, drought and famine. Yet >>while the Bush administration is prepared to spend $100 billion to rid >>Iraq of WMD, it has been unwilling to spend more than 0.2% of that sum >>($200m) this year on the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and >>Malaria." >> >>This debate reminds me of the debate around climate change with Bjorn >>Lomborg. Simplistically he advocates climate change is over-rated as a >>problem and money should be better spent on other programmes in the >>developing world. But, climate change is likely to make any money spent on >>other programmes pointless if everyone is dead as a result of climate >>change. If everyone in the developing world dies of malaria and other >>diseases, funding of telecommunications will have been useless. >> >>David >> >>----- Original Message ---- >>From: Dan Krimm >>To: governance at lists.cpsr.org >>Sent: Saturday, 11 August, 2007 5:23:33 AM >>Subject: Re: [governance] Fundamentally broken design of society >> >>David, >> >>It could just be that the Millennium Development Goals have a blind spot in >>the area of Media and the Fourth Estate. How does one expect all of these >>goals to be accomplished without a robust and nondiscriminatory >>communication platform for collective discourse? >> >>Is it just a paternalistic responsibility of developed nations to help out >>their "crippled cousins" in the developing world, or is the responsibility >>to help those developing nations become systematically more >>self-sufficient? Unilateral paternalism only goes so far, and it is this >>unfortunate tendency in the current U.S. administration that bothers *many* >>U.S. citizens, for example. I know it bothers a lot of other people around >>the world as well. >> >>I would argue that provision of empowering communication platforms is an >>absolutely critical issue underlying *all* other substantive issues, >>because collective communication drives and enables substantive action on >>all other fronts. >> >>If you make it a trade-off, then in the long run the developing country >>loses anyway. That may in fact be a false dichotomy. Who says that >>investing in communications will not pay off in empowering efforts in all >>the other areas listed? Knowledge is Power, and Access to Knowledge is >>Empowering. >> >>ICT provision is not an isolated silver bullet by any means, but I think it >>must be an ineliminable component of any development package. It is the >>glue that holds all the rest together, in the end. >> >>Dan >> >> >> >>At 9:58 PM -0700 8/9/07, David Goldstein wrote: >>>Hi Norbert et al, >>> >>>I agree with the views expressed here, in short, on making technology >>>accessible to all regardless of location, income and ability or >>>disability. However there are many constraints in achieving this. In the >>>developing world, what does a funder or government spend money on - >>>malaria nets or internet access? To name just one issue. Safe drinking >>>water, child poverty, sanitation, disease, infrastructure such as roads, >>>railways, airports? >>> >>>This is reflected in the UN's 8 Millennium Development Goals. These are: >>>Goal 1: Eradicate Extreme Hunger and Poverty >>>Goal 2: Achieve Universal Primary Education >>>Goal 3: Promote Gender Equality and Empower Women >>>Goal 4: Reduce Child Mortality >>>Goal 5: Improve Maternal Health >>>Goal 6: Combat HIV/AIDS, Malaria and other diseases >>>Goal 7: Ensure Environmental Sustainability >>>Goal 8: Develop a Global Partnership for Development. >>> >>>See >>><http://www.un.org/millenniumgoals/>http://www.un.org/millenniumgoals/ >>> >>> >>>You could argue technology fits within goal 8, but it's a low priority. >>>Even Bill Gates has seen that the issues raised in the 8 goals above is >>>more important than technology. So a business alliance, while laudable, is >>>going to be difficult to get to work when the essentials are in other >>>areas. >>> >>>Do we support the development of technology in the developing world, but >>>people die who, if the money was spent on the above goals might have >>>lived? Of course, we make all sorts of decisions and they all have costs >>>in other areas. The chocolate bar, the flight to visit my parents, the >>>coffee... the money purchasing all these things, it can be argued could go >>>to better use. >>> >>>I don't have an answer. There are many views and maybe there are many >>>right ones. Maybe talking to an organisation such as The Gates and/or Ford >>>Foundations or others working towards the above goals could give guidance >>>on how support can be given in the area of technology. Who knows, they may >>>like the project and give money! >>> >>>Cheers >>>David >>> >>> >>> >>>----- Original Message ---- >>>From: Norbert Bollow >>>To: governance at lists.cpsr.org; ldmisekfalkoff at gmail.com >>>Cc: allies at QuitBabylon.com; IDC-ICT-Taskforce at yahoogroups.com; >>>AdHoc_IDC at yahoogroups.com >>>Sent: Thursday, 9 August, 2007 11:38:29 PM >>>Subject: Re: [governance] Fundamentally broken design of society >>> >>>Linda Misek-Falkoff wrote: >>> >>>> hope I read correctly that the concept of a broken system holds forth the >>>> hope and vision that either it was once whole, or can be brought into >>>>being >>>> [more] whole. >>> >>>Yes, precisely: As long as I thought about the matter as "a social >>>problem" I had little if any confidence of actually being able to do >>>anything about it. But when I read that word "broken", that was >>>helpful, to me at least, to inspire me towards more contructive lines >>>of thought. If something is broken, it can usually be fixed or >>>replaced. >>> >>>Now, while the thought "fix it or replace it" cannot be applied to >>>society in any reasonably way, it can be applied to rules of conduct, >>>legal rules, and computer software, all of which have significant >>>influence on how society evolves. For example, when a company that >>>creates and popularizes a new technology has neglected to get that >>>technology evaluated with regard to its effects on people with >>>disabilities, certainly justice would demand that there should be a >>>legal liability connected to any resulting "disabling" or >>>marginalizing effect on people with disabilities. >>> >>>Unfortunately this kind of legal change is difficult to achieve in >>>any country, and even harder to achieve internationally, and on top of >>>that, probably quite a few such changes would be needed in order to >>>really fix what I see as overall brokenness in the system of legal >>>rules and how they are applied. >>> >>>However there is another path, which seems much more promising to me: >>>Namely, to try creating a subsystem of the overall economy, by means >>>of designing an attractive and fair set of rules by means of which >>>the subsystem of the economy would function. My inspiration for this >>>idea is to a large extent the "social hack" approach of Richard >>>Stallman's founding of the Free Software movement, which was >>>successful precisely because it was sufficient for success to get >>>support from a significant number of people who were willing and >>>interested in doing the right thing, it was not necessary to get >>>consent or acceptance from anyone else. >>> >>>The fundamental idea that I want to pursue is to focus on empowerment: >>> >>>--> What does it take to fully empower those people who are currently >>> restricted from fully benefiting from ICT because of some kind of >>> digital divide? >>> >>>I expect that discussing this question will lead to collecting some >>>set of principles (or sets of principles) that will be supportive of >>>empowerment, and that will help prevent those kinds of disempowerment >>>that are possible to prevent. >>> >>>Then we can discuss how to form some kind of alliance (I'm thinking >>>of something like a business alliance, but not restricted to >>>businesses only) to support each other while pursuing this set of >>>goals. This alliance would be the "social hack" / "movement" that >>>can perhaps somehow follow the example of the Free Software movement. >>> >>>I have set up a discussion mailing list for these matters at >>><http://quitbabylon.com/mailman/listinfo/allies>http://quitbabylon.com/mailman/listinfo/allies >>> >>>and I would like to invite everyone who is interested in this set of >>>topics to join me there. >>> >>>Greetings, >>>Norbert. >>> >>> >>>-- >>>Norbert Bollow >>> >>><http://Norbert.ch>http://Norbert.ch >>> >>>President of the Swiss Internet User Group >>>SIUG <http://SIUG.ch>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>http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>Sick of deleting your inbox? Yahoo!7 Mail has free unlimited storage. >>><http://au.docs.yahoo.com/mail/unlimitedstorage.html>Get >>>it now. >>> >>>____________________________________________________________ >>>You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >>> governance at lists.cpsr.org >>>To be removed from the list, 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 >> >> >> >> >> >>Sick of deleting your inbox? Yahoo!7 Mail has free unlimited storage. >>Get it now. >> >>____________________________________________________________ >>You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >> governance at lists.cpsr.org >>To be removed from the list, 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 parminder at itforchange.net Tue Aug 14 10:06:20 2007 From: parminder at itforchange.net (Parminder) Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2007 19:36:20 +0530 Subject: [governance] TR: [GAID Steering] Renewal of membership in the GAID Strategy Counciland Steering Committee In-Reply-To: <200708061642.l76GgTem006304@smtp2.infomaniak.ch> Message-ID: <20070814140620.62810E2355@smtp3.electricembers.net> Dear Philippe Thanks again for keeping us posted. I agree with the basic strategy outlined below >I would suggest that while to the Strategy Council CS self-nomination process should be broad and open to reach out to a large number of constituencies, a Steering >Committee self-nomination process, due to the short deadline and the fact that only one seat might be open to renewal, should rather involve a smaller number of >persons. I would suggest that current CS members of the Strategy Council (+ CS High Level Advisors?) should be asked to identify and select the CS member of the >Steering Committee to be appointed in September by the UN SG. CONGO can initiate a process for the strategy council like the one last year. For the one seat in the steering committee, I am agreeable to a group of CS members in strategy council and high level advisory group to form a committee and choose 3 names which could be one two from among themselves and one from outside (or the other way around).. However, this committee may only include those who are at least in some degree involved with collective CS processes – during WSIS and/ or later. Is it possible for you, Philippe to draw such a list – and any other from these two groups who watches this list can come in as well, so that there will be no arbitrariness about the list . These people can then work over an email list, and come up with recommendations. Others can suggest their recommendations for this group to consider over the plenary list. This is one way to do it, others may have other suggestions, but time is short, and suggestions should come in right away But they should be practical suggestions making possible recommendation of 2-3 names by the month’s end 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 _____ From: CONGO WSIS - Philippe Dam [mailto:wsis at ngocongo.org] Sent: Monday, August 06, 2007 10:13 PM To: plenary at wsis-cs.org; bureau at wsis-cs.org; governance at lists.cpsr.org Cc: rbloem at ngocongo.org; 'CONGO - Philippe Dam' Subject: [governance] TR: [GAID Steering] Renewal of membership in the GAID Strategy Counciland Steering Committee Importance: High Dear all, This is to inform about the recent announcement circulated by the GAID Secretariat regarding the renewal of membership in GAID Structures (Steering Committee and Strategy Council). As the first step of the renewal process, current members are requested to indicate whether they are interested and available to be candidate for renewal of their terms. The GAID Secretariat proposed to renew the Steering Committee and Strategy Council membership through a principle of rotation, in order to ensure some kind of continuity, before the next meetings of those two structures. The GAID Secretariat also invited civil society to identify nominations from among its constituencies. A process similar to the self-nomination process used in May 2006 for the first terms of GAID structures will therefore be appropriate. See more details attached in Mr. Sarbuland Khan’s e-mail. GAID Steering Committee GAID Strategy Council Deadline for outgoing members to express their interest in a renewal of their terms 15 August 2007 1 October 2007 Deadline for new nominations for membership 1 September 2007 30 November 2007 Date of the GAID structure with its renewed membership 19 September 2007 New York May 2008 Kuala Lumpur CS self-nomination process: suggestions Any CS self nomination process for Strategy Council membership should be initiated in the course of September as regards the Strategy Council. As regards the Steering Committee, any self nomination process should be identified no later than 31 August. I would suggest that while to the Strategy Council CS self-nomination process should be broad and open to reach out to a large number of constituencies, a Steering Committee self-nomination process, due to the short deadline and the fact that only one seat might be open to renewal, should rather involve a smaller number of persons. I would suggest that current CS members of the Strategy Council (+ CS High Level Advisors?) should be asked to identify and select the CS member of the Steering Committee to be appointed in September by the UN SG. Please share your comments on that last proposal. I would also invite current members of GAID structures to also inform through the CS list serves whether they are interested and available to continue serving in GAID structures. All the best, Philippe Dam Philippe Dam CONGO - WSIS CS Secretariat E-mail: wsis at ngocongo.org Website: www.ngocongo.org _____ De la part de Sarbuland Khan Envoyé : mardi, 31. juillet 2007 23:04 À : steering at un-gaid.org Objet : [GAID Steering] Renewal of membership in the GAID Strategy Counciland Steering Committee Dear colleagues, According to the Terms of Reference adopted at the 27 September 2007 meeting of the Steering Committee (see attached), the term of the members of the GAID Steering Committee is due to end this September 2007, and the term of members of the GAID Strategy Council will conclude before the next meeting of the Strategy Council (to be held in May 2008 in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, during the World Congress on Information Technology (WCIT)). Consequently, there is a need to initiate the process for the rotation of the membership. In order to ensure both continuity and renewal, it is envisioned that approximately one-third of the membership of each body should rotate. RENEWAL OF MEMBERSHIP OF EXISTING MEMBERS The Secretariat would be grateful for an indication from current members as to whether they would be available and interested to be considered as a candidate for renewal. We would be grateful to receive this information (addressed to stafford at un.org and dejesus3 at un.org no later than 15 August 2007, for Steering Committee Members and by 1 October 2007, for Strategy Council Members. NOMINATIONS OF NEW CANDIDATES The Secretariat invites nominations for new candidatures for the Steering Committee for 2 governments, 1 civil society/not-for profit, 1 international organization and 1 media organization by 1 September 2007, and the Strategy Council for approximately 20 seats (1/3 of the membership of each stakeholder group) by 30 November 2007. (Please see http://www.un-gaid.org/en/about/howgaidworks for the list of current members.) As is established practice, nominations for Member States are being solicited through the United Nations regional groups. Civil society and trade organizations are being invited to identify nominations from among their constituencies. There is no limit to the number of nominations that may be submitted. Qualified organizations may also independently express interest in membership. Nominations should be submitted to the Secretariat by the appropriate deadline noted above through the email address nominate at un-gaid.org. Information on the nomination process is being published on the GAID website. APPOINTMENT The list of recommended candidates will be developed following consultations with the Strategy Council and the Steering Committee and presented to the Secretary-General for his approval. The appointment of new members is anticipated to be announced in September 2007 for the Steering Committee and by the end of December 2007 for the Strategy Council. If you have any questions on the process, please contact Ms. Cheryl Stafford (stafford at un.org, +1 (917) 367-3116) or Mr. Robert de Jesus (dejesus3 at un.org, +1 (917) 367-2432). With my best personal regards, Sincerely, -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.gif Type: image/gif Size: 4405 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: message-footer.txt URL: From parminder at itforchange.net Tue Aug 14 10:26:16 2007 From: parminder at itforchange.net (Parminder) Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2007 19:56:16 +0530 Subject: [governance] IGC's workshop at IGF In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20070814142608.5F00C67955@smtp1.electricembers.net> Dear All As many of you would have noticed the IGC sponsored workshop on 'Fulfilling the mandate of IGF' has been accepted for IGF, Rio. Please see the full list at ....????? well the list was their yesterday on the IGF site, but seems to have been taken done now. In any case, a preliminary list was circulated to workshop proposers a few days back and our workshop was there. We will now soon put in place a process to finalize the format and speakers for the workshop. I am sure that this workshop will be a key one at the IGF. Best 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 ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.cpsr.org To be removed from the list, 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 kicki.nordstrom at srfriks.org Wed Aug 15 03:10:34 2007 From: kicki.nordstrom at srfriks.org (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Kicki_Nordstr=F6m?=) Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2007 09:10:34 +0200 Subject: SV: [governance] IGC's workshop at IGF In-Reply-To: <20070814142608.5F00C67955@smtp1.electricembers.net> References: <20070814142608.5F00C67955@smtp1.electricembers.net> Message-ID: <3DF8101092666E4A9020D949E419EB6F01AF0357@ensms02.iris.se> Dear all, Are there anybody who knows what G3ICT is? I know what ICT is and I know 3G, but not G3ICT! Yours Kicki Kicki Nordström Synskadades Riksförbund (SRF) World Blind Union (WBU) 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: kicki.nordstrom at srfriks.org kicki.nordstrom at telia.com (private) -----Ursprungligt meddelande----- Från: Parminder [mailto:parminder at itforchange.net] Skickat: den 14 augusti 2007 16:26 Till: governance at lists.cpsr.org Ämne: [governance] IGC's workshop at IGF Dear All As many of you would have noticed the IGC sponsored workshop on 'Fulfilling the mandate of IGF' has been accepted for IGF, Rio. Please see the full list at ....????? well the list was their yesterday on the IGF site, but seems to have been taken done now. In any case, a preliminary list was circulated to workshop proposers a few days back and our workshop was there. We will now soon put in place a process to finalize the format and speakers for the workshop. I am sure that this workshop will be a key one at the IGF. Best 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 ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.cpsr.org To be removed from the list, 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 Aug 17 10:55:03 2007 From: ajp at glocom.ac.jp (Adam Peake) Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2007 23:55:03 +0900 Subject: [governance] IGC's workshop at IGF In-Reply-To: <20070814142608.5F00C67955@smtp1.electricembers.net> References: <20070814142608.5F00C67955@smtp1.electricembers.net> Message-ID: Hi the workshop list is back online Described as a "preliminary list of workshops that will be part of the programme", so seems more may be added or more may be in the process of merging. Adam At 7:56 PM +0530 8/14/07, Parminder wrote: >Dear All > >As many of you would have noticed the IGC sponsored workshop on 'Fulfilling >the mandate of IGF' has been accepted for IGF, Rio. Please see the full list >at ....????? well the list was their yesterday on the IGF site, but seems to >have been taken done now. > >In any case, a preliminary list was circulated to workshop proposers a few >days back and our workshop was there. > >We will now soon put in place a process to finalize the format and speakers >for the workshop. I am sure that this workshop will be a key one at the IGF. > > >Best > >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 > > >____________________________________________________________ >You received this message as a subscriber on the list: > governance at lists.cpsr.org >To be removed from the list, 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 dan at musicunbound.com Fri Aug 17 23:10:22 2007 From: dan at musicunbound.com (Dan Krimm) Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2007 20:10:22 -0700 Subject: [governance] ICANN public comments on gTLD policy, KTCN Action Alert Message-ID: As many of you already know, ICANN is entering the second week of a 3-week public comment period on the proposed policy for approving new gTLDs, closing on 30 August. And many of you also know that NCUC and IP Justice created a public campaign following the principles expressed in Michael Palage and Avri Doria's paper "Please, Keep The Core Neutral". The KTCN campaign has created an Action Alert to encourage public comments defending core neutrality (with links to ICANN's public comment page, and a web form that submits comments directly into the ICANN system), found here: http://www.keep-the-core-neutral.org/action1 And our press release about the public comment period and the action is here: http://www.keep-the-core-neutral.org/node/48 Anyone can of course also submit comments independently/directly to ICANN at: Karl Auerbach started it all off with a nice post before we even launched the KTCN action (thanks!), and we've had a few posts come through our alert page since then. But we're trying to increase the attention while the comment period is still open. Many folks here signed our petition to launch the KTCN coalition (thanks to you too!), and any additional assistance folks here can provide getting the word out would be great. And I encourage you to add your own comments, too. This is a channel for stakeholder voice separate from our petition, which will be delivered to the ICANN Board in Los Angeles. The more the merrier, and the more personalized the better. Thanks, Dan PS -- I know some folks here have expressed doubts about engaging ICANN's public comment system, because they usually arise with little advance warning, are open for only a limited period, and are not well promoted to the general public. However, KTCN is trying to see whether it is possible to engage a broader public audience in these policy discussions more systematically. Such first-time efforts usually are challenging and take time to build momentum, but the most effective way to get things going is to engage existing communities with meaningful collective dynamics. We haven't had too bad a start, embarking total obscurity and getting a really decent group of estimable organizations and individuals to join us, but I'm hoping that there are enough sympathetic members of this governance-list community to help move this campaign to a higher level. Please note that KTCN has a newsletter and public discussion list as well as an internal coalition discussion list, and while we all have e-list overload, KTCN doesn't overload its own lists with spurious noise (you can check the web archives). So, if you would like to get notifications of this sort of thing directly from us, I encourage you to sign up. -- Dan Krimm Campaign Director, Keep The Core Neutral http://www.keep-the-core-neutral.org Global Policy Fellow, IP Justice ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.cpsr.org To be removed from the list, 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 Sat Aug 18 04:18:59 2007 From: ajp at glocom.ac.jp (Adam Peake) Date: Sat, 18 Aug 2007 17:18:59 +0900 Subject: [governance] workshops and main sessions Message-ID: Hi, There's not much to update about the workshops. But the caucus proposals seem to be in the selected list, so that's good. How are these being arranged? How's progress? Been no announcement about membership of the advisory group and the old members have not been as involved in meeting arrangements as much as last year. At least not yet. Next main issue may be about the sub-thematic workshops, each of the main sessions should have three linked workshops. Shouldn't be a problem deciding about Access as there are only three workshops in the list (and they seem complementary in many ways -- looks like a strong session likely to emerge.) But any thoughts on what the three thematic workshops should be for diversity, openness and security? Doesn't seem to be time on the agenda for thematic workshops on critical Internet resources Which workshops would best feed into the main session, make the most logical fit in making mini-tracks on diversity, openness and security? There has been no discussion about if or how the organizers of these workshops will have a role in also organizing the main session, if those organizers might select speakers (or help select speakers.) Not been discussed yet. Deciding speakers will be difficult as time is again very short, we need to consider issues of diversity, balancing stakeholder representation (or everyone's satisfaction with the selected speakers), and finding people who know about the issues. Plus, the actual style of these 2 hours sessions has not been discussed in much detail. And the number of speakers will be less, 4 5 or 6 people (the reason the panels grew so large last year were these very problems of finding a diverse set of knowledgeable speakers.) 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 siliconvalley2005 at yahoo.com Sun Aug 19 17:01:38 2007 From: siliconvalley2005 at yahoo.com (annan ebenezer) Date: Sun, 19 Aug 2007 14:01:38 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [governance] "buy made in ghana goods includes" ccTLD In-Reply-To: <20070807155846.7BE742201FD@quill.bollow.ch> Message-ID: <905834.4535.qm@web51009.mail.re2.yahoo.com> Hi All, I believe this mail will interest all. If we are interested in our identity ( The course to be proud as a people); not forgetting the recent re-launch of the "buying made in ghana goods", usage of our ccTLD (gh) will re-ignate a national self esteem and confidence.Read a case study of what corporate nigerian is doing. read on and lets start a national debate. Ebenezer Annang. Adopt the .ng ccTLD name NIRA moves to promote the .ng Country Code Top-Level Domain (ccTLD) Name to corporate organizations in the country The Nigeria Internet Registration Association, the Nigerian body in-charge of the administration of Nigeria's Top-Level Domain Name, .ng, is to begin talks with corporate organsiations to ensure that they register their websites under the .ng domain. The President, NIRA Mr. Kalu Ndukwe, said the plan was to ensure that the country had a net identity that was consistent with what obtained elsewhere in the world. "Our belief in this is that as the leading private and public sector organisations they are seen by both Nigerians and foreigners are a reflection of the Nigerian taste and direction,"he said. According to him, with the formation of NIRA, the time had come to ensure that issues that concerning Nigeria on the Internet were handled as they should. He said a National Website competition for the construction of the nira.org.ng website would also be held to promote internet growth in the country. Ndukwe said part of the policy to promote the dot ng ccTLD would involve a modification of the current annual Webjurist competition that rates the websites of banks. NIRA said it was working with Phillips Consulting, which administers the award towards ensuring an expansion of the competition to include sites of firms from other sectors of the economy. Besides, he said only websites that were registered in the Nigerian domain name would be analysed. This means websites that end with .com, .org, or .net and others would not be eligible for rating. It said NIRA had set up a transition arrangement that would precede the full take off of its activities in the country. He said, "The board has approved a transition operation to act as bridge between now and when NIRA take-full charge and control. This arrangement enables NIRA to meet administrative and technical demands." Among the things the board had put in place under the transition operation is a temporary office manned by a full time Administrative Secretary. He said this office would act as a physical point of contact for general correspondence, domain registration services and Membership services. The NIRA boss also said during the transition periods the subsisting policy of free domain registration would continue, but with a modification culled from HANA ICT magazine --------------------------------- Need a vacation? Get great deals to amazing places on Yahoo! Travel. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: message-footer.txt URL: From yehudakatz at mailinator.com Sun Aug 19 21:28:10 2007 From: yehudakatz at mailinator.com (yehudakatz at mailinator.com) Date: Sun, 19 Aug 2007 18:28:10 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [governance] New Power in Africa Entrepreneurs From China Flourish in Africa Message-ID: New Power in Africa Entrepreneurs From China Flourish in Africa By HOWARD W. FRENCH and LYDIA POLGREEN Benedicte Kurzen for The New York Times Published: August 18, 2007 Ref.: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/18/world/africa/18malawi.html?_r=1&oref=slogin Print: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/18/world/africa/18malawi.html?_r=1&oref=slogin&p agewanted=print -- Also -- World View Podcast The New York Times By GREG WINTER Published: August 18, 2007 Podcast: http://graphics8.nytimes.com/podcasts/2007/08/16/17worldview.mp3 Art. Ref.: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/18/weekinreview/19worldview.html Print: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/18/weekinreview/19worldview.html?pagewanted=prin t -- End ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.cpsr.org To be removed from the list, 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 Aug 20 05:05:03 2007 From: nyangkweagien at gmail.com (Nyangkwe Agien Aaron) Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2007 11:05:03 +0200 Subject: [governance] "buy made in ghana goods includes" ccTLD In-Reply-To: <905834.4535.qm@web51009.mail.re2.yahoo.com> References: <20070807155846.7BE742201FD@quill.bollow.ch> <905834.4535.qm@web51009.mail.re2.yahoo.com> Message-ID: It is quite refreshing to learn how African countries are making inroads into the ICT world. A ccTLD is a marketing tool whose impact cannot be under looked. Kudos to Nigeria Aaron On 8/19/07, annan ebenezer wrote: > > > > * Hi All, > > I believe this mail will interest all. If we are interested in our > identity ( The course to be proud as a people); not forgetting the recent > re-launch of the "buying made in ghana goods", usage of our ccTLD (gh) will > re-ignate a national self esteem and confidence.Read a case study of > what corporate nigerian is doing. > > read on and lets start a national debate. > > Ebenezer Annang. > > > Adopt the .ng ccTLD name > > NIRA moves to promote the .ng Country Code Top-Level Domain (ccTLD) > Name to corporate organizations in the country > The Nigeria Internet Registration Association, the Nigerian body > in-charge of the administration of Nigeria's Top-Level Domain Name, .ng, is > to begin talks with corporate organsiations to ensure that they register > their websites under the .ng domain. The President, NIRA Mr. Kalu Ndukwe, > said the plan was to ensure that the country had a net identity that was > consistent with what obtained elsewhere in the world. "Our belief in this is > that as the leading private and public sector organisations they are seen by > both Nigerians and foreigners are a reflection of the Nigerian taste and > direction,"he said. According to him, with the formation of NIRA, the time > had come to ensure that issues that concerning Nigeria on the Internet > were handled as they should. He said a National Website competition for the > construction of the nira.org.ng website would also be held to promote > internet growth in the country. Ndukwe said part of the policy to promote > the dot ng ccTLD would involve a modification of the current annual > Webjurist competition that rates the websites of banks. NIRA said it was > working with Phillips Consulting, which administers the award towards > ensuring an expansion of the competition to include sites of firms from > other sectors of the economy. Besides, he said only websites that were > registered in the Nigerian domain name would be analysed. This means > websites that end with .com, .org, or .net and others would not be eligible > for rating. It said NIRA had set up a transition arrangement that would > precede the full take off of its activities in the country. He said, "The > board has approved a transition operation to act as bridge between now and > when NIRA take-full charge and control. This arrangement enables NIRA to > meet administrative and technical demands." Among the things the board had > put in place under the transition operation is a temporary office manned by > a full time Administrative Secretary. He said this office would act as a > physical point of contact for general correspondence, domain registration > services and Membership services. The NIRA boss also said during the > transition periods the subsisting policy of free domain registration would > continue, but with a modification > > 1. > culled from HANA ICT magazine > > * > > ------------------------------ > Need a vacation? Get great deals to amazing places > on > Yahoo! Travel. > > > ____________________________________________________________ > You received this message as a subscriber on the list: > governance at lists.cpsr.org > To be removed from the list, 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 Coach of ASAFE Camaroes Street Football Team. ASAFE P.O.Box 5213 Douala-Cameroon Tel. 237 3337 50 22 Cell Phone: 237 79 95 71 97 Fax. 237 3342 29 70 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: message-footer.txt URL: From Sylvia.Caras at gmail.com Mon Aug 20 14:35:38 2007 From: Sylvia.Caras at gmail.com (Sylvia Caras) Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2007 11:35:38 -0700 Subject: [governance] technical openness Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20070820110534.0390fe48@peoplewho.org> Ideas related to open access, open software, ... http://openid.net/ and http://bradfitz.com/social-graph-problem/ ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.cpsr.org To be removed from the list, 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 siliconvalley2005 at yahoo.com Mon Aug 20 16:35:02 2007 From: siliconvalley2005 at yahoo.com (annan ebenezer) Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2007 13:35:02 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [governance] Internet Governance Capacity Building Programme - In-Reply-To: <727386.97887.qm@web51003.mail.re2.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <413829.92939.qm@web51011.mail.re2.yahoo.com> Hi All, Diplo, in cooperation with the Secretariat of the UN Working Group on Internet Governance (WGIG), the Global Knowledge Partnership (GKP) and the Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation (SDC), accepting applications for the Internet Governance Capacity Building Programme. This programme, amongs others, I know are aimed at improving Internet Governance related knowledge and skills for participants from developing countries. May i know when the next progamme takes off. I am really waiting for this opportunity to better myself and society about internet governance issues especially as i find myself with an ISP and a civil society person Please update me on it. thank you ebenezer annang,ghana - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - --------------------------------- Ready for the edge of your seat? Check out tonight's top picks on Yahoo! TV. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: message-footer.txt URL: From hananeB at diplomacy.edu Mon Aug 20 16:50:11 2007 From: hananeB at diplomacy.edu (Hanane Boujemi) Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2007 22:50:11 +0200 Subject: [governance] Internet Governance Capacity Building Programme - References: <413829.92939.qm@web51011.mail.re2.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <008401c7e36b$b41fd7a0$d061cb58@hananee1f0e145> Ebenezer and all, Thank you for your interest in Diplo's IGCBP. The application process normally starts every January, and the programme shall start by March. Keep an eye on the IG portal: www.diplomacy/ig for more informtion about the IGCBP and Diplo's IG related activities Cheers Hanane Boujemi IG Research Coordinator and Supervisor Internet Governance Projects DiploFoundation www.diplomacy.edu/ig ----- Original Message ----- From: annan ebenezer To: governance at lists.cpsr.org Sent: Monday, August 20, 2007 10:35 PM Subject: [governance] Internet Governance Capacity Building Programme - Hi All, Diplo, in cooperation with the Secretariat of the UN Working Group on Internet Governance (WGIG), the Global Knowledge Partnership (GKP) and the Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation (SDC), accepting applications for the Internet Governance Capacity Building Programme. This programme, amongs others, I know are aimed at improving Internet Governance related knowledge and skills for participants from developing countries. May i know when the next progamme takes off. I am really waiting for this opportunity to better myself and society about internet governance issues especially as i find myself with an ISP and a civil society person Please update me on it. thank you ebenezer annang,ghana - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Ready for the edge of your seat? Check out tonight's top picks on Yahoo! TV. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.cpsr.org To be removed from the list, 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 Jeremy at Malcolm.id.au Mon Aug 20 23:48:36 2007 From: Jeremy at Malcolm.id.au (Jeremy Malcolm) Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2007 11:48:36 +0800 Subject: [governance] [Fwd: [WSIS CS-Plenary] IGF/MAG renewal an opaque and non-incluse process / un processus opague et non-inclusif] Message-ID: <46CA6094.7050106@Malcolm.id.au> For those who are not also on the WSIS Plenary mailing list... -- 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: "Dr. Francis MUGUET" Subject: [WSIS CS-Plenary] IGF/MAG renewal an opaque and non-incluse process / un processus opague et non-inclusif Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2007 05:46:58 +0200 Size: 65925 URL: From parminder at itforchange.net Tue Aug 21 03:43:10 2007 From: parminder at itforchange.net (Parminder) Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2007 13:13:10 +0530 Subject: [governance] [Fwd: [WSIS CS-Plenary] IGF/MAG renewal an opaque and non-incluse process / un processus opague et non-inclusif] In-Reply-To: <46CA6094.7050106@Malcolm.id.au> Message-ID: <20070821074343.7B5A8A6CC7@smtp2.electricembers.net> Thanks Francis and Jeremy. Renewal of the mandate the MAG was I think necessary given that little time is left for Rio. However, a governmental co-chair is not at all good news for the CS, and this, in practice, can be expected to mean that governmental inputs will get more value than even before. I don't understand the need and purpose of a co-chair. We can think of writing a line of protest. This move is a pull-back from the promised multi-stakeholder character of the IGF. (I know powers-that-be will justify this by saying that MAG is after all a program committee, and host country's co-chairman-ship has practical uses. I think MAG has more powers than that of a program committee, it shapes the IGF, and therefore wields much of whatever power IGF has.) Against such dilution of equality and power the greatest weapon for the CS is of putting renewed energy into promoting all process of transparency and accountability in IG on which it has any control. I find some parts of the proclamation quite useful.. especially " As part of its mandate, the Advisory Group has been asked to enhance the transparency of the preparatory process by ensuring a continuous flow of information between its members and the various interested groups." Such transparency and 'continuous flow of information' will greatly obviate the need for email leaks, on an recent instance of which some people within CS reacted with almost a choking reaction, that made one wonder whether we were the CS, of which the watchdog function is perhaps the most primary. I think we need to go back to our CS strengths - and methods, and tools - rather than strategizing to side with - including hush-hushing things- some strongly entrenched vested interests (you know who!) to make sure other entrenched interests (governments) do not usurp more power. The above quote from the proclamation also points to another important point - of reaching out to 'various interested groups'(as also envisioned in the IGC charter). Our strength and legitimacy will be built over reaching out to more CS groups outside the current charmed circles and supporting/triggering a progressive movement in IG and IS polices generally, worldwide. This legitimacy can't be built over tactical closed arrangements with vested interests whose 'progressive-ness' is itself under challenge, and needs to be challenged vide the watchdog function of the CS... 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: Jeremy Malcolm [mailto:Jeremy at Malcolm.id.au] > Sent: Tuesday, August 21, 2007 9:19 AM > To: governance at lists.cpsr.org > Subject: [governance] [Fwd: [WSIS CS-Plenary] IGF/MAG renewal an opaque > and non-incluse process / un processus opague et non-inclusif] > > For those who are not also on the WSIS Plenary mailing list... > > -- > 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 -------------- next part -------------- An embedded message was scrubbed... From: "Dr. Francis MUGUET" Subject: [WSIS CS-Plenary] IGF/MAG renewal an opaque and non-incluse process / un processus opague et non-inclusif Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2007 09:16:58 +0530 Size: 63761 URL: From Jeremy at Malcolm.id.au Tue Aug 21 04:10:56 2007 From: Jeremy at Malcolm.id.au (Jeremy Malcolm) Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2007 16:10:56 +0800 Subject: [governance] [Fwd: [WSIS CS-Plenary] IGF/MAG renewal an opaque and non-incluse process / un processus opague et non-inclusif] Message-ID: <46CA9E10.1050008@Malcolm.id.au> Parminder wrote: > I don't understand the need and purpose of a co-chair. I think that the idea of a co-chair is an excellent one, except for the fact that, as you have noted, it is another governmental stakeholder representative. In fact I recently wrote in my PhD thesis on the IGF: "* Rather than being appointed by the UN Secretary-General, the chair should be selected by democratic or consensual means by the [Advisory Group] itself. ... * The rotation of the candidates for chair among the stakeholder groups is necessary to ensure the bureau’s legitimacy as the peak body of a multi-stakeholder governance network. ... * The election of co-chairs, as well as supporting the bureau’s multi-stakeholder legitimacy, adds a layer of accountability to the [Advisory Group] ..." > (I know powers-that-be will justify this by saying that MAG is after all a > program committee, and host country's co-chairman-ship has practical uses. I > think MAG has more powers than that of a program committee, it shapes the > IGF, and therefore wields much of whatever power IGF has.) Absolutely. This is also why it is unconscionable that the Advisory Group's members have been appointed without any open call for candidates, or any published criteria for their selection, or any transparency in the process of their selection - I mean, we don't even have a list of their names yet! They are apparently not all the same as the original Advisory Group. > I find some parts of the proclamation quite useful.. especially > > " As part of its mandate, the Advisory Group has been asked to enhance the > transparency of the preparatory process by ensuring a continuous flow of > information between its members and the various interested groups." I also took note of the statement that "Any decision on how to prepare subsequent meetings will be taken after the Rio de Janeiro meeting in an open, inclusive and transparent consultative process, taking into account the proposals of the Advisory Group." This suggests to me that we are being promised greater input into the selection of the third Advisory Group (or bureau, or whatever it becomes). But why couldn't that have been the case for this year? -- 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 yehudakatz at mailinator.com Tue Aug 21 11:08:46 2007 From: yehudakatz at mailinator.com (yehudakatz at mailinator.com) Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2007 08:08:46 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [governance] UN AGENCIES TO PUSH WSIS OUTCOMES Message-ID: UN agencies to push WSIS outcomes 27/08/2006 (http://www.choike.org/) Implementation of the outcomes of the recently concluded World Summit on the Information Society gathered momentum with the launch of the United Nations Group on the Information Society (UNGIS). High level representatives of twenty-two UN agencies met recently in Geneva to facilitate the process. READ Ref: International steps taken to build global Information Society United Nations agencies to coordinate implementation of WSIS Plan of Action Geneva, 20 July 2006 http://www.itu.int/newsarchive/press_releases/2006/NP05.html -- ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.cpsr.org To be removed from the list, 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 Tue Aug 21 12:09:05 2007 From: ajp at glocom.ac.jp (Adam Peake) Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2007 01:09:05 +0900 Subject: Fwd: [governance] workshops and main sessions Message-ID: Hi, with the advisory group membership renewed, think it's worth sending this note out again: >Date: Sat, 18 Aug 2007 17:18:59 +0900 >From: Adam Peake >Subject: [governance] workshops and main sessions > >Hi, > >There's not much to update about the workshops. But the caucus >proposals seem to be in the selected list, so that's good. How are >these being arranged? How's progress? > >Been no announcement about membership of the advisory group and the >old members have not been as involved in meeting arrangements as >much as last year. At least not yet. (now announced, see ) >Next main issue may be about the sub-thematic workshops, each of the >main sessions should have three linked workshops. Shouldn't be a >problem deciding about Access as there are only three workshops in >the list (and they seem complementary in many ways -- looks like a >strong session likely to emerge.) But any thoughts on what the >three thematic workshops should be for diversity, openness and >security? Doesn't seem to be time on the agenda for thematic >workshops on critical Internet resources > > >Which workshops would best feed into the main session, make the most >logical fit in making mini-tracks on diversity, openness and >security? > >There has been no discussion about if or how the organizers of these >workshops will have a role in also organizing the main session, if >those organizers might select speakers (or help select speakers.) >Not been discussed yet. Deciding speakers will be difficult as time >is again very short, we need to consider issues of diversity, >balancing stakeholder representation (or everyone's satisfaction >with the selected speakers), and finding people who know about the >issues. Plus, the actual style of these 2 hours sessions has not >been discussed in much detail. And the number of speakers will be >less, 4 5 or 6 people (the reason the panels grew so large last year >were these very problems of finding a diverse set of knowledgeable >speakers.) Above are key issues for the September consultation, about 2 weeks away. You can see from the advisory group membership there are still very few civil society members. It is difficult to argue for civil society's interests in the group. What can we say about the style of the main sessions: 2 hours and smaller panels has been agreed. Some will use journalist moderators again (I believe some have already been invited, you'd expect so as they are generally busy people and November's really not far off.) What other styles for the session can we suggest. How can these journalist moderators be used more efficiently? Which of the workshops look like a good fit as sub-thematic workshops for diversity, openness and security? I am guessing access is a given, and there will not be sub-thematic workshops for a critical Internet resources, I don't know for sure, but they aren't shown on the draft schedule. Suggesting three civil society oriented/organized workshops for each won't work, we need a balance of issues and interests. Any thoughts on the emerging issues session? Last - there's an open call for comments on the draft programme for the Rio meeting. Comments should be sent to , comments received by 27 August 2007 will be reflected in an conference room paper that will be made available prior to the next round of open consultations on 3 September 2007. Thanks, Adam >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 jeanette at wzb.eu Tue Aug 21 15:09:21 2007 From: jeanette at wzb.eu (Jeanette Hofmann) Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2007 21:09:21 +0200 Subject: [governance] Civil Society Participation in OECD Ministerial Meeting, Seoul, June 17-18 2008 Message-ID: <46CB3861.5060901@wzb.eu> Greetings, The OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development) is currently preparing its 10th Ministerial Meeting on “The Future of the Internet Economy”, which will take place in Seoul, South Korea, June 17-18 2008. APC and the Internet Governance Project, together with the 'Public Voice', is working with the OECD secretariat to increase participation of Civil Society groups in shaping the agenda of the Ministerial meeting and in organising a one day stakeholder pre-event on June 16th 2008. This message contains general background information about the OECD and the 10th Ministerial meeting, and some of the opportunities for civil society participation. A second message will soon follow, outlining these opportunities in more detail, include some of our preliminary thinking about priorities for civil society engagement with this process, why we think you should get involved and how you can get involved. We look forward to working with you on this! Jeanette Hofmann, Karen Banks, Milton Mueller About The Event ============= The OECD, an inter-governmental organisation that consists of 30 member Countries, will hold a Ministerial Meeting on “The Future of the Internet Economy” in Seoul, Korea, on 17-18 June 2008. www.oecd.org/futureinternet. The OECD Ministerial Meeting aims to formulate guiding principles and policies for the future development of the Internet economy. Recognizing that the world depends to a growing degree on the Internet, the goal is to help governments establish policies responding to new developments and concerns arising from the changing role of the Internet in our society and economy. The Ministerial meeting will be preceded by a day of “stakeholder fora” on June 16 2008, to give an opportunity to civil society and the business sector to present their viewpoints on the future development of the Internet economy. More information on the Ministerial and Stakeholder fora are available online. The OECD Ministerial Meeting offers a broad international public space to discuss the economic and societal implications of the emerging information economy. Civil society groups active in the area of information society related issues should use this opportunity to network among themselves and collectively express their visions on guiding policy principles for the development of the Future of the Internet economy. About The OECD ============= Membership in the OECD includes the majority of European countries, Canada, the United States, Mexico, New Zealand, Australia, Turkey, Japan and Korea. The OECD headquarters (the secretariat) is based in Paris. The OECD provides a setting where governments can compare policy experiences, seek answers to common problems, identify good practice and work to co-ordinate domestic and international policies. The OECD engages in policy analysis, data gathering, monitoring, and forecasting in many different areas but in particular for economic, environmental and social issues. In the fields of digital economy and information society, the OECD covers many areas that are of interest to civil society, such as privacy law enforcement, user-created content, network neutrality and gender in ICT employment. Reports of the OECD Committee of Information, Computer and Communications Policy can be found at (www.oecd.org/sti/ict) The OECD has relationships with about 70 non-member countries and a number of non-governmental entities such as the Business and Industry Advisory Committee (BIAC) and the Trade Union Advisory Committee (TUAC). There is as yet no formal link to civil society organisations, but the OECD is currently considering its relationship to the non-governmental sector with a view to greater inclusion. Public Consultation – open until September 14th 2007 ========================================= The OECD Online Public Consultation provides an opportunity for all stakeholders to comment on the topics and issues to be discussed at the OECD’s Ministerial meeting on the Future of the Internet Economy. The online consultation is open until September 14th and can be found here: http://www.oecd.org/document/9/0,3343,en_21571361_38415463_38985417_1_1_1_1,00.html Please contact us if you have difficulty accessing or completing the online version. Opportunities for Civil Society Engagement ================================== The next message will contain more detailed information about opportunities for Civil Society participation in the 10th Ministerial process including: o Linking work in other public policy processes (such as the World Summit on the Information Society and The Internet Governance Forum) with the OECD Ministerial meeting o Gathering Civil society statements and reports that deal with future development of the internet o Preparation of a Civil Society Declaration o Preparation for a one day civil society stakeholder event on June 16th2008 o Information about preparatory events in the run up to the meeting o A time-line of the process and important dates References ========= o The Public Voice has a resource site with links to useful background documents, a calendar of related events and a schedule for the Public Voice monthly calls:http://www.thepublicvoice.org/events/oecdministerial.html o About the OECD: http://www.oecd.org/pages/0,3417,en_36734052_36734103_1_1_1_1_1,00.html o About the 10th Ministerial Meeting: www.oecd.org/futureinternet o The OECD Public Online Consultation: http://www.oecd.org/document/9/0,3343,en_21571361_38415463_38985417_1_1_1_1,00.html o The OECD Organising Committee: www.oecd.org/sti/ict ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.cpsr.org To be removed from the list, 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 wzb.eu Tue Aug 21 15:41:25 2007 From: jeanette at wzb.eu (Jeanette Hofmann) Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2007 21:41:25 +0200 Subject: [governance] updated version of Civil Society Participation in OECD Ministerial Meeting, Seoul, June 17-18 2008 Message-ID: <46CB3FE5.2030904@wzb.eu> Sorry for the confusion, I was too quick with sending out the stuff below. Please circulate as appropriate. jeanette Greetings, The OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development) is currently preparing its 10th Ministerial Meeting on “The Future of the Internet Economy”, which will take place in Seoul, South Korea, June 17-18 2008. APC and the Internet Governance Project, together with EPIC and their Public Voice initiative, is working with the OECD secretariat to increase participation of Civil Society groups in shaping the agenda of the Ministerial meeting and in organising a one day stakeholder pre-event on June 16th 2008. This message contains general background information about the OECD and the 10th Ministerial meeting, and some of the opportunities for civil society participation. A second message will soon follow, outlining these opportunities in more detail, include some of our preliminary thinking about priorities for civil society engagement with this process, why we think you should get involved and how you can get involved. We look forward to working with you on this! Jeanette Hofmann, Karen Banks, Milton Mueller About The Event ============= The OECD, an inter-governmental organisation that consists of 30 member Countries, will hold a Ministerial Meeting on “The Future of the Internet Economy” in Seoul, Korea, on 17-18 June 2008. www.oecd.org/futureinternet. The OECD Ministerial Meeting aims to formulate guiding principles and policies for the future development of the Internet economy. Recognizing that the world depends to a growing degree on the Internet, the goal is to help governments establish policies responding to new developments and concerns arising from the changing role of the Internet in our society and economy. The Ministerial meeting will be preceded by a day of “stakeholder fora” on June 16 2008, to give an opportunity to civil society and the business sector to present their viewpoints on the future development of the Internet economy. More information on the Ministerial and Stakeholder fora are available online. The OECD Ministerial Meeting offers a broad international public space to discuss the economic and societal implications of the emerging information economy. Civil society groups active in the area of information society related issues should use this opportunity to network among themselves and collectively express their visions on guiding policy principles for the development of the Future of the Internet economy. About The OECD ============= Membership in the OECD includes the majority of European countries, Canada, the United States, Mexico, New Zealand, Australia, Turkey, Japan and Korea. The OECD headquarters (the secretariat) is based in Paris. The OECD provides a setting where governments can compare policy experiences, seek answers to common problems, identify good practice and work to co-ordinate domestic and international policies. The OECD engages in policy analysis, data gathering, monitoring, and forecasting in many different areas but in particular for economic, environmental and social issues. In the fields of digital economy and information society, the OECD covers many areas that are of interest to civil society, such as privacy law enforcement, user-created content, network neutrality and gender in ICT employment. Reports of the OECD Committee of Information, Computer and Communications Policy can be found at (www.oecd.org/sti/ict) The OECD has relationships with about 70 non-member countries and a number of non-governmental entities such as the Business and Industry Advisory Committee (BIAC) and the Trade Union Advisory Committee (TUAC). There is as yet no formal link to civil society organisations, but the OECD is currently considering its relationship to the non-governmental sector with a view to greater inclusion. Public Consultation – open until September 14th 2007 ===================================== The OECD Online Public Consultation provides an opportunity for all stakeholders to comment on the topics and issues to be discussed at the OECD’s Ministerial meeting on the Future of the Internet Economy. The online consultation is open until September 14th and can be found here: http://www.oecd.org/document/9/0,3343,en_21571361_38415463_38985417_1_1_1_1,00.html If you have any difficulty accessing or completing the online version, please write to FutureInternet at oecd.org. Opportunities for Civil Society Engagement ================================= The next message will contain more detailed information about opportunities for Civil Society participation in the 10th Ministerial process including: o Linking work in other public policy processes (such as the World Summit on the Information Society and The Internet Governance Forum) with the OECD Ministerial meeting o Gathering Civil society statements and reports that deal with future development of the internet o Preparation of a Civil Society Declaration o Preparation for a one day civil society stakeholder event on June 16th2008 o Information about preparatory events in the run up to the meeting o A time-line of the process and important dates References ========= The Public Voice has a resource site with links to useful background documents, a calendar of related events and a schedule for the Public Voice monthly calls:http://www.thepublicvoice.org/events/oecdministerial.html About the OECD: http://www.oecd.org/pages/0,3417,en_36734052_36734103_1_1_1_1_1,00.html About the 10th Ministerial Meeting: www.oecd.org/futureinternet The OECD Public Online Consultation: http://www.oecd.org/document/9/0,3343,en_21571361_38415463_38985417_1_1_1_1,00.html The OECD Organising Committee: www.oecd.org/sti/ict ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.cpsr.org To be removed from the list, 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 muguet at mdpi.net Tue Aug 21 18:58:59 2007 From: muguet at mdpi.net (Dr. Francis MUGUET) Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2007 00:58:59 +0200 Subject: [governance] [Fwd: [WSIS CS-Plenary] IGF/MAG renewal an opaque and non-incluse process / un processus opague et non-inclusif] In-Reply-To: <20070821074343.7B5A8A6CC7@smtp2.electricembers.net> References: <20070821074343.7B5A8A6CC7@smtp2.electricembers.net> Message-ID: <46CB6E33.9060708@mdpi.net> Dear Parminder et al. > > Thanks Francis and Jeremy. > Since I am referenced by name, since I have the highest esteem for your intellectual integrity, I am going to answer to your comments although this does not mean I am part of this caucus. In fact, I feel more than ever the need of a separate representation of Civil Society and the "Internet Community", this would partially ends the need for the Internet Community to have proxies within the Civil Society to represent the technico-industrial complex that has become the "Internet Community or Industry"; > Renewal of the mandate the MAG was I think necessary given that little time > is left for Rio. If you read the transcript of the 23 may meeting : >>CHAIRMAN DESAI: ../.. I would like to clarify one thing, which is that the Advisory Group has been constituted by the Secretary-General simply to advise him. It does not really have any other legislative basis than that. We could have done everything that we did without a formally constituted Advisory Group, simply by consulting those individuals individually as a U.N. secretariat.... not a necessity, merely a convenience for some, and a non-transparent, non inclusive convenience or .. annoyance And the role of the advisory group was more the fine tuning, the actual scheduling and this and that and trying to shape it into some coherent plan. ../.. The role of the group is --because moving from a discussion like this to actually putting down for or five pages of paper with a schedule, with titles for the themes and things like that is where the group starts coming in. Well this was done by the Secretariat up to now, for Rio, based on the Consultation meetings, as it was underlined by the UN SG invitation 24 July. I see no absolute operational need for a MAG. And then the group helps in the actual running of the meeting. Because you need -- you just need bodies, basically. You just need bodies. So please, somebody has to manage all of the events which are taking place in that hall. Markus can't be around all over the place. So the MAG other role should be "bodies" constituting conference volunteers force... running down the hallways... give me a break... who is going to design the T-shirt for the force... as one of the few Civil Society WSIS T-shirt designer I am ready to give an helping hand and a pair of rollers ... However, a governmental co-chair is not at all good news > for the CS, and this, in practice, can be expected to mean that governmental > inputs will get more value than even before. I don't understand the need and > purpose of a co-chair. > We can think of writing a line of protest. I believe energy should first better spent in writing a line of protest concerning the political behaviour of the "unique" chair that we got until now. I have been ( and I would say most of the french civil society ) baffled by the lack of enthusiasm of the current chair. In normal circumstances, the chair of a committee or whatever grouping is pushing for the full implementation of the mandate of the grouping, while other stakeholders are dragging their feet. This is the normal scenario. But here, it is totally the reverse that happens, the chair actually willfully and craftfully slows down the process. I have to give him the credit that he felt the need to gain the confidence of the 'Internet Industry" and its proxies so that they participate to the process. My feeling is that they would have participated anyway, but I am ready to concede that he might have a point. But now, this strategy is no longer required. Quite a few stakeholders have came to the conclusion that the problem was the chair's slowing down process. Therefore I am very happy to see a co-chair, coming from the LAC region that is unanimously in favor of the full implementation of the IGF mandate. > This move > is a pull-back from the promised multi-stakeholder character of the IGF. Sharing power is the essence of multi-stakeholderism, having two co-chairs is better than one... I would rather support a collective board. We would need an extra co-chair coming the internet community, one from business and yet another one from the Civil Society... Nitin Desai has been partly disawoved, and he should no longer be able to play his tricks unchecked. The next consultation meeting is going to be fun. He is a very clever and talented man, under his grand-daddy guise, he might have the upper hand.... Nothing may surprise me now anymore at the IGF. > (I > know powers-that-be will justify this by saying that MAG is after all a > program committee, and host country's co-chairman-ship has practical uses. I > think MAG has more powers than that of a program committee, it shapes the > IGF, and therefore wields much of whatever power IGF has.) Well, it seems that you are opening doors to a closet that I would not dare to open .. you did it... so far; since it was non-existant, the MAG should have not play any role... of course, this is the question of the real influence of the shadow MAG, has the shadow MAG, during the time of its non-existence has been illegally consulted by the secretariat in a non-transparent fashion. ? I have not noticed the representatives of this caucus to the MAG having reported anything on the caucus list. As chair of this caucus, it is up to you to investigate the relationship with the live MAG or the zombie MAG.... Anyway, everybody has made his/her own opinion. > > Against such dilution of equality and power the greatest weapon for the CS > is of putting renewed energy into promoting all process of transparency and > accountability in IG on which it has any control. I fully agree... transparency and acountablity at all levels, including financial resources of the secretariat, its staff, and consultants > I find some parts of the proclamation quite useful.. especially > > " As part of its mandate, the Advisory Group has been asked to enhance the > transparency of the preparatory process by ensuring a continuous flow of > information between its members and the various interested groups." > Is it that strange that this HAS to be put in writing ?!... should it not had to be obvious and natural ?... > Such transparency and 'continuous flow of information' will greatly obviate > the need for email leaks, well observed > on an recent instance of which some people within > CS reacted with almost a choking reaction, the lack of reaction, the law of silence of the IGC members of the MAG was even more choking... the "Dispaingate" was more troubling by the ensuing coverup and minimzation attempts than by the act itself of this member of the "internet industry" that has not shown any intent of remorse, apologies, or excuses. We could analyze things in a conflictual manner and say that this episode has discredited the IGC MAG members, but we would remain at the surface of things and it would not solve things. Actions of individuals ( and in a sense, it somewhat absolved them ) are the result of a structural conflict. What it really show that we are not in a sane situation, that individuals under the flag of the Civil Society, feel a strong loyalty to their true constituency : the "Internet Community" that they feel is under attack. Recognition of the "Internet Community" as the fourth class of stakeholder would ease up dramatically the tensions, and would avoid the use of proxies. This was the reason of the 4-component bureau that Eurolinc proposed. > that made one wonder whether we > were the CS, of which the watchdog function “who will watch the watchers themselves?” (quis custodiet ipsos custodes as Juvenal wrote ) > is perhaps the most primary. I > think we need to go back to our CS strengths - and methods, and tools - > rather than strategizing to side with - including hush-hushing things- some > strongly entrenched vested interests (you know who!) to make sure other > entrenched interests (governments) do not usurp more power. > exactly, fully agreed ( I am answering as I am reading you ) it is a battle between between two entrenched powers, the Civil Society must stay neutral and keeps its core value > The above quote from the proclamation also points to another important point > - of reaching out to 'various interested groups'(as also envisioned in the > IGC charter). Our strength and legitimacy will be built over reaching out to > more CS groups outside the current charmed circles and supporting/triggering > a progressive movement in IG and IS polices generally, worldwide. This > legitimacy can't be built over tactical closed arrangements with vested > interests whose 'progressive-ness' is itself under challenge, and needs to > be challenged vide the watchdog function of the CS... > fully agree Best Francis > 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: Jeremy Malcolm [mailto:Jeremy at Malcolm.id.au] >> Sent: Tuesday, August 21, 2007 9:19 AM >> To: governance at lists.cpsr.org >> Subject: [governance] [Fwd: [WSIS CS-Plenary] IGF/MAG renewal an opaque >> and non-incluse process / un processus opague et non-inclusif] >> >> For those who are not also on the WSIS Plenary mailing list... >> >> -- >> 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 > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Subject: > [WSIS CS-Plenary] IGF/MAG renewal an opaque and non-incluse process / un > processus opague et non-inclusif > From: > "Dr. Francis MUGUET" > Date: > Tue, 21 Aug 2007 09:16:58 +0530 > To: > "WSIS Plenary" > > To: > "WSIS Plenary" > > > English / Français ( plus bas ) > > Hello / Bonjour > > In what appears to be, I guess to many stakeholders, a completely > non-transparent, non-inclusive process, > in contradiction with the statements of the chair during the first > consultation meetings in 2006, the IGF MAG has been renewed. > The only thing that seems new ( so far ) is that the host country now > co-chairs the advisory group. > > > 20 August 2007 > > Press Release > PI/1791 > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > *Department of Public Information • News and Media Division • New York* > > > ADVISORY GROUP for INTERNET GOVERNANCE FORUM MEETING IN RIO DE JANEIRO > > > The mandate of the Advisory Group for the Internet Governance Forum has > been renewed in order to assist in preparations for the next meeting of > the Internet Governance Forum, to be held in Rio de Janeiro from 12 to > 15 November 2007. The Secretary-General is very appreciative of the > work carried out by the Advisory Group in the past and welcomes the > renewal of its mandate in preparation of the November Forum. > > > The Group is to be chaired by Nitin Desai, the Secretary-General’s > Special Adviser for Internet Governance, and Hadil da Rocha Vianna, > Director for Scientific and Technological Affairs in Brazil’s Ministry > of External Relations, representing the Host Country. The 47 Advisory > Group members will serve in their personal capacity. They have been > chosen from Governments, the private sector and civil society, including > the academic and technical communities, representing all regions. > > > As part of its mandate, the Advisory Group has been asked to enhance the > transparency of the preparatory process by ensuring a continuous flow of > information between its members and the various interested groups. It > has also been requested to make proposals on a suitable rotation among > its members, based on recommendations from the various interested > groups. Any decision on how to prepare subsequent meetings will be > taken after the Rio de Janeiro meeting in an open, inclusive and > transparent consultative process, taking into account the proposals of > the Advisory Group. > > > The co-chairmen may also select special advisers to assist them. > > > The Internet Governance Forum is an outcome of the Tunis phase of the > World Summit on the Information Society, which took place in 2005. In > the Tunis Agenda for the Information Society, Governments asked the > Secretary-General to convene a “new forum for policy dialogue” to > discuss issues related to key elements of Internet governance and set > out the Forum’s mandate. > > > The Forum’s inaugural meeting took place in Athens in November 2006. It > was attended by 1,350 registered participants, including 397 delegates > from 97 Member States and 152 accredited journalists. “The meeting > brought people together who would not normally meet under the same > roof,” said Markus Kummer, the Executive Coordinator of the Forum’s > Secretariat. “It encouraged dialogue on issues of common interest among > people who would not normally interact.” > > > A stock-taking session in Geneva last February showed broad support for > the multi-stakeholder format of the Athens meeting, which should be > maintained in the preparations for the Rio de Janeiro meeting. A round > of open consultations held in Geneva in May showed broad support for > keeping the four themes discussed at the inaugural meeting -- access, > diversity, openness and security. In addition, there was widespread > support for adding a new theme -- critical internet resources -- to the > agenda of the Rio de Janeiro meeting. > > > For further information, please visit www.intgovforum.org > or contact Markus Kummer, Executive > Coordinator, Secretariat of the Internet Governance Forum, tel.: > +41 0 22 917 54 88, e-mail: mkummer at unog.ch > > > --------------------------------------- > > A la suite d'un processus qui, à mon avis semble non transparent et > non-inclusif pour beaucoup d'acteurs, > et en tout cas, en contradiction avec les propos de N. Desai lors > des premières réunions consultatives en 2006. > La seule chose qui change est que le pays hote est maintenant > co-président du groupe consultatif. > > > *_LE GROUPE CONSULTATIF DU FORUM SUR LA GOUVERNANCE D’INTERNET_* > > *_SE LANCE DANS LES PRÉPARATIFS DE LA RÉUNION DE RIO_* > > > (Adapté de l’anglais) > > > Doté d’un mandat qui vient d’être renouvelé, le Groupe consultatif du > Forum sur la gouvernance d’Internet est désormais en mesure de > participer aux préparatifs de la prochaine réunion du Forum, prévue à > Rio de Janeiro, du 12 au 15 novembre 2007. Conformément à la décision > prise en mai dernier à Genève, les participants poursuivront les > discussions qu’ils ont entamées en novembre 2006 à Athènes, sur l’accès, > la diversité, l’ouverture et la sécurité d’Internet. > > > Le Groupe consultatif est chargé de renforcer la transparence dans le > processus préparatoire de cette deuxième édition du Forum, en assurant > un flux continu d’informations entre ses membres et les divers groupes > concernés. Le Groupe doit également faire des propositions sur la > rotation de ses membres, en tenant compte des recommandations faites par > les différentes parties prenantes. Les propositions du Groupe > concerneront aussi le calendrier des prochaines réunions du Forum. > > > Ce Forum est une création de la deuxième phase du Sommet mondial de la > société de l’information qui s’était tenue à Tunis en 2005. Quelque 1 > 350 personnes dont des représentants d’États Membres et des journalistes > avaient participé à la réunion d’Athènes. En février dernier à Genève, > ce format « diversifié » a été salué lors d’une session-bilan. > > > Le Groupe consultatif est présidé par Nitin Desai, Conseiller spécial du > Secrétaire général pour la gouvernance d’Internet, et par Hadil da Rocha > Vianna, Directeur des affaires scientifiques et technologiques au > Ministère des relations extérieures du Brésil, qui représentera ainsi le > pays hôte. Choisis par les gouvernements, le secteur privé et la > société civile de toutes les régions du monde, les 47 membres du Groupe > siègent en leur capacité personnelle. > > > Pour plus d’informations, prière de visiter le site > http://www.intgovforum.org . Vous pouvez > aussi contacter Markus Kummer, Coordonnateur exécutif, Secrétariat du > Forum sur la gouvernance d’Internet au 41 0 22 917 54 88 ou à l’adresse > électronique suivante: mkummer at unog.ch . > > -- > > ------------------------------------------------------ > Francis F. MUGUET Ph.D > > MDPI Foundation Open Access Journals > Associate Publisher > http://www.mdpi.org http://www.mdpi.net > muguet at mdpi.org muguet at mdpi.net > > ENSTA Paris, France > KNIS lab. Director > "Knowledge Networks & Information Society" (KNIS) > muguet at ensta.fr http://www.ensta.fr/~muguet > > World Summit On the Information Society (WSIS) > Civil Society Working Groups > Scientific Information : http://www.wsis-si.org chair > Patents & Copyrights : http://www.wsis-pct.org co-chair > Financing Mechanismns : http://www.wsis-finance.org web > > UNMSP project : http://www.unmsp.org > WTIS initiative: http://www.wtis.org > ------------------------------------------------------ > -- ------------------------------------------------------ Francis F. MUGUET Ph.D MDPI Foundation Open Access Journals Associate Publisher http://www.mdpi.org http://www.mdpi.net muguet at mdpi.org muguet at mdpi.net ENSTA Paris, France KNIS lab. Director "Knowledge Networks & Information Society" (KNIS) muguet at ensta.fr http://www.ensta.fr/~muguet World Summit On the Information Society (WSIS) Civil Society Working Groups Scientific Information : http://www.wsis-si.org chair Patents & Copyrights : http://www.wsis-pct.org co-chair Financing Mechanismns : http://www.wsis-finance.org web UNMSP project : http://www.unmsp.org WTIS initiative: http://www.wtis.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 muguet at mdpi.net Tue Aug 21 20:46:08 2007 From: muguet at mdpi.net (Dr. Francis MUGUET) Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2007 02:46:08 +0200 Subject: [governance] [Fwd: [WSIS CS-Plenary] IGF/MAG renewal an opaque and non-incluse process / un processus opague et non-inclusif] In-Reply-To: <46CA9E10.1050008@Malcolm.id.au> References: <46CA9E10.1050008@Malcolm.id.au> Message-ID: <46CB8750.80809@mdpi.net> Dear Jeremy > Parminder wrote: >> I don't understand the need and purpose of a co-chair. > > I think that the idea of a co-chair is an excellent one, except for the > fact that, as you have noted, it is another governmental stakeholder > representative. In fact I recently wrote in my PhD thesis on the IGF: Your scholarly work is quite interesting. > > "* Rather than being appointed by the UN Secretary-General, the chair > should be selected by democratic or consensual means by the [Advisory > Group] itself. ... > > * The rotation of the candidates for chair among the stakeholder groups > is necessary to ensure the bureau’s legitimacy as the peak body of a > multi-stakeholder governance network. ... > > * The election of co-chairs, as well as supporting the bureau’s > multi-stakeholder legitimacy, adds a layer of accountability to the > [Advisory Group] ..." > I agree with the intent of your proposal but I respecfully think that it should be reframed in a proper legal framework using exact words. Election of an advisory group as a group of personal advisers to the UN SG seems a contradiction in terms : >>CHAIRMAN DESAI: ../.. I would like to clarify one thing, which is that the Advisory Group has been constituted by the Secretary-General simply to advise him. It does not really have any other legislative basis than that. So it is very DIFFERENT, legally speaking from the WGIG, constituted by a decision of the WSIS. When a monarch or a president choose advisers he/she does not rely on elections, it is the "will of the prince". You have to "please" the prince or his/her closest "advisers" ( a pyramid of advisers... with all the intrigues and non-transparency that its implies ) The status of an adviser is a top-down process from the "fountain of power". Of course the selection by the Prince could be better, if the advisers to the Prince are making the widest as possible "consultations", or if each constituency presents a list ( a self-nonimation process, this happened for the WGIG, but it was done properly unfortunately, for lack of procedural oversight ) but you can see that this process, per se, belongs to an autocratic system. What you are really advocating here is a Bureau and more, where some form of autonomous representation is recognized, de jure. A Bureau may be formed of elected persons when the form of the constituency allows it (States ) or at least some form of self-determination by the constituency. It is a bottom-up process and this is new at the UN. It is the form of structure that the internet community is proud of. It was initiated during the WSIS by the formation of representation for procedural matters only however, for the CCBI and the CSB. It does mean it is perfect, both in the internet community or at the CSB, but I believe it is better than an autocratic selection of courtiers. Since a Bureau in UN terms is for procedural issues only, it should be supplemented by a Program Board or Committee, where a transparent self-nomination process should be implemented. Of course this implies, consensus and therefore it implies having constituencies that are well defined to allow such consensus to occur. In short, do we want to have an IGF "privy council" or some sort of a parliament ? This is the first thing that must be reflected upon. I would encourage social science, political science researchers, ethnologists to investigate this point and also to study current sociology and political mechanisms of the "Internet Community" >> (I know powers-that-be will justify this by saying that MAG is after >> all a >> program committee, and host country's co-chairman-ship has practical >> uses. I >> think MAG has more powers than that of a program committee, it shapes the >> IGF, and therefore wields much of whatever power IGF has.) > > Absolutely. This is also why it is unconscionable that the Advisory > Group's members have been appointed without any open call for > candidates, or any published criteria for their selection, or any > transparency in the process of their selection - exactly... I mean, we don't even > have a list of their names yet! They are apparently not all the same as > the original Advisory Group. My understanding is they are going to be same folks, >>GERMANY (European union) : ../.. we support the reconduction of the existing multistakeholder Advisory Group for the Rio meeting for the sake of efficiency. it is possible that they might some new people as special advisors to the new co-chair. > >> I find some parts of the proclamation quite useful.. especially >> >> " As part of its mandate, the Advisory Group has been asked to enhance >> the >> transparency of the preparatory process by ensuring a continuous flow of >> information between its members and the various interested groups." > > I also took note of the statement that "Any decision on how to prepare > subsequent meetings will be taken after the Rio de Janeiro meeting in an > open, inclusive and transparent consultative process, taking into > account the proposals of the Advisory Group." This suggests to me that > we are being promised greater input into the selection of the third > Advisory Group (or bureau, or whatever it becomes). But why couldn't > that have been the case for this year? This statement seems dangerous if only the proposal of the Advisory Group are taken into account, because it is going to have a strong tendency for survival.... Concerning Business and Governments, they seem to be happy with their representation, the Internet Community over-happy with their over-representation... so you can see where the proposal of the overall Advisory Group is going to lead to... In his July invitation letter, the UN SG indicated that he will take into account preparatory meetings and online consultations. The only fair and constructive thing is to do is to separate out Civil Society from the Internet Community otherwise CS is going to get crushed, and I think this is also in the best long term interest of the "Internet Community" if they want to reach, as they are dreaming of, the status of an "International Organization" enjoying the same diplomatic privileges as an Intergovernmental Organization. To reach this goal, they should first adopt decent modes of lobbying in order to gain better consideration and reputation. Lets see Francis > -- ------------------------------------------------------ Francis F. MUGUET Ph.D MDPI Foundation Open Access Journals Associate Publisher http://www.mdpi.org http://www.mdpi.net muguet at mdpi.org muguet at mdpi.net ENSTA Paris, France KNIS lab. Director "Knowledge Networks & Information Society" (KNIS) muguet at ensta.fr http://www.ensta.fr/~muguet World Summit On the Information Society (WSIS) Civil Society Working Groups Scientific Information : http://www.wsis-si.org chair Patents & Copyrights : http://www.wsis-pct.org co-chair Financing Mechanismns : http://www.wsis-finance.org web UNMSP project : http://www.unmsp.org WTIS initiative: http://www.wtis.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 yehudakatz at mailinator.com Tue Aug 21 22:14:31 2007 From: yehudakatz at mailinator.com (yehudakatz at mailinator.com) Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2007 19:14:31 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [governance] [Fwd: [WSIS CS-Plenary] IGF/MAG renewal an opaque and non-incluse process / un processus opague et non-inclusif] In-Reply-To: 46CB8750.80809@mdpi.net Message-ID: I must have the missed show? > ... the "Dispaingate" was more troubling by the ensuing coverup and minimzation attempts than by the act itself of ***this member of the "internet industry" that has not shown any intent of remorse, apologies, or excuses.*** ... ... - Who is it? "He-Who-Must-Not-Be-Named" - Lord Voldemort? [Juicy tabloid gossip like this - Where the Hell is Kieren? - WHAT's that ... Tuscany!!!] Listen, none of us where virgins when we can into this thingy (PolySci) After all Bush, Cheney, Rove, and Blair popped-yours-&-my-cherry not long ago. So it is fair to say the "internet industry" is robbing the cradle. Whats new - Parminder, is there anyway we can make it up to you / anything we can do? How would you like us to move on from here. (lend us your sense of direction) -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lord_Voldemort ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.cpsr.org To be removed from the list, 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 bdelachapelle at gmail.com Wed Aug 22 06:03:40 2007 From: bdelachapelle at gmail.com (Bertrand de La Chapelle) Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2007 12:03:40 +0200 Subject: [governance] MAG future Message-ID: <954259bd0708220303x43f12270g1ca91d3c5311e616@mail.gmail.com> Dear all, Renewal of the MAG has launched an interesting string of comments - as usual. I'd just like to call attention to the key paragraph in the UN announcement : "As part of its mandate, the Advisory Group has been asked to enhance the transparency of the preparatory process by ensuring a continuous flow of information between its members and the various interested groups. It has also been requested to make proposals on a suitable rotation among its members, based on recommendations from the various interested groups. *Any decision on how to prepare subsequent meetings will be taken after the Rio de Janeiro meeting in an open, inclusive and transparent consultative process, taking into account the proposals of the Advisory Group*." Whatever feelings people have on the present composition, methods of renewal, etc... the main challenge for all stakeholders will be to come up with a suitable MS structure and methods for selecting its members for the India meeting. Some of the comments already made on the list provided hints on what people see as solutions, but the discussion needs to be broader. This is a major challenge and opportunity for the governance list : can IGC come up with concrete proposals in that regard, that can be broadly accepted within CS and other constituencies, like it was instrumental in promoting and obtaining acceptance of concepts like the broad definition of internet governance, multi-stakeholderism and the forum ? Exciting perspective. Best Bertrand ____________________ 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: -------------- next part -------------- An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: message-footer.txt URL: From parminder at itforchange.net Wed Aug 22 06:19:29 2007 From: parminder at itforchange.net (Parminder) Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2007 15:49:29 +0530 Subject: [governance] MAG future In-Reply-To: <954259bd0708220303x43f12270g1ca91d3c5311e616@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20070822101930.8FDB8E1328@smtp3.electricembers.net> Bertrand is right. There is a good amount of stuff in the UN announcement that points to a feeling that things need to be more open, transparent and inclusive, and that new possibilities/ structures in this regard may need to be explored. IGC should try and give concrete suggestions. Meanwhile, my concern regarding the governmental co-chair of MAG becoming a permanent structural feature of IGF remains. We may at least put it across in some sort of a statement in response to this announcement that this part should itself be re-examined in the process implied by ‘Any decision on how to prepare subsequent meetings will be taken after the Rio de Janeiro meeting in an open, inclusive and transparent consultative process, taking into account the proposals of the Advisory Group’. 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 _____ From: Bertrand de La Chapelle [mailto:bdelachapelle at gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2007 3:34 PM To: governance at lists.cpsr.org Subject: [governance] MAG future Dear all, Renewal of the MAG has launched an interesting string of comments - as usual. I'd just like to call attention to the key paragraph in the UN announcement : "As part of its mandate, the Advisory Group has been asked to enhance the transparency of the preparatory process by ensuring a continuous flow of information between its members and the various interested groups. It has also been requested to make proposals on a suitable rotation among its members, based on recommendations from the various interested groups. Any decision on how to prepare subsequent meetings will be taken after the Rio de Janeiro meeting in an open, inclusive and transparent consultative process, taking into account the proposals of the Advisory Group ." Whatever feelings people have on the present composition, methods of renewal, etc... the main challenge for all stakeholders will be to come up with a suitable MS structure and methods for selecting its members for the India meeting. Some of the comments already made on the list provided hints on what people see as solutions, but the discussion needs to be broader. This is a major challenge and opportunity for the governance list : can IGC come up with concrete proposals in that regard, that can be broadly accepted within CS and other constituencies, like it was instrumental in promoting and obtaining acceptance of concepts like the broad definition of internet governance, multi-stakeholderism and the forum ? Exciting perspective. Best Bertrand ____________________ 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: -------------- next part -------------- An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: message-footer.txt URL: From bdelachapelle at gmail.com Wed Aug 22 06:50:39 2007 From: bdelachapelle at gmail.com (Bertrand de La Chapelle) Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2007 12:50:39 +0200 Subject: [governance] MAG future In-Reply-To: <46cc0db3.28bd720a.205b.ffffed3eSMTPIN_ADDED@mx.google.com> References: <954259bd0708220303x43f12270g1ca91d3c5311e616@mail.gmail.com> <46cc0db3.28bd720a.205b.ffffed3eSMTPIN_ADDED@mx.google.com> Message-ID: <954259bd0708220350u349376dcr4cc11c71f9b61fbd@mail.gmail.com> Thanks, Parminder, The point you raise regarding co-chairing gives at least one category of the items that will have to be discussed, ie : - Chairmanship of the [whatever it is called], including for instance : - single chairmanship or multiple ones (listing of the options) - mode of designation : by the group itself (in that case how) or otherwise (by some entity or by an automatic mechanism) - role of the Chair(s) : leadership or facilitation Other categories of issues will emerge as the discussion evolves, such as size, role, internal balance of actors, designation, etc... I think a good method could be to try and list the questions - and potentially the various options for each of them - before trying to define a solution. An issues paper listing those questions would certainly be useful as an initial exercise and could be provided as an input to the open, inclusive and transparent consultative process, in order to sollicit comments. Best Bertrand On 8/22/07, Parminder wrote: > > Bertrand is right. There is a good amount of stuff in the UN announcement > that points to a feeling that things need to be more open, transparent and > inclusive, and that new possibilities/ structures in this regard may need to > be explored. IGC should try and give concrete suggestions. > > > > Meanwhile, my concern regarding the governmental co-chair of MAG becoming > a permanent structural feature of IGF remains. We may at least put it across > in some sort of a statement in response to this announcement that this part > should itself be re-examined in the process implied by '*Any decision on > how to prepare subsequent meetings will be taken after the Rio de Janeiro > meeting in an open, inclusive and transparent consultative process, taking > into account the proposals of the Advisory Group'.* > > * * > > 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* > ------------------------------ > > *From:* Bertrand de La Chapelle [mailto:bdelachapelle at gmail.com] > *Sent:* Wednesday, August 22, 2007 3:34 PM > *To:* governance at lists.cpsr.org > *Subject:* [governance] MAG future > > > > Dear all, > > > > Renewal of the MAG has launched an interesting string of comments - as > usual. I'd just like to call attention to the key paragraph in the UN > announcement : > > "As part of its mandate, the Advisory Group has been asked to enhance the > transparency of the preparatory process by ensuring a continuous flow of > information between its members and the various interested groups. It has > also been requested to make proposals on a suitable rotation among its > members, based on recommendations from the various interested groups. *Any > decision on how to prepare subsequent meetings will be taken after the Rio > de Janeiro meeting in an open, inclusive and transparent consultative > process, taking into account the proposals of the Advisory Group *." > > Whatever feelings people have on the present composition, methods of > renewal, etc... the main challenge for all stakeholders will be to come up > with a suitable MS structure and methods for selecting its members for the > India meeting. Some of the comments already made on the list provided hints > on what people see as solutions, but the discussion needs to be broader. > > > > This is a major challenge and opportunity for the governance list : > can IGC come up with concrete proposals in that regard, that can be broadly > accepted within CS and other constituencies, like it was instrumental in > promoting and obtaining acceptance of concepts like the broad definition of > internet governance, multi-stakeholderism and the forum ? > > > > Exciting perspective. > > > > Best > > > > Bertrand > > > -- ____________________ 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: -------------- next part -------------- An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: message-footer.txt URL: From vb at bertola.eu Wed Aug 22 08:47:50 2007 From: vb at bertola.eu (Vittorio Bertola) Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2007 14:47:50 +0200 Subject: [governance] MAG future In-Reply-To: <20070822101930.8FDB8E1328@smtp3.electricembers.net> References: <20070822101930.8FDB8E1328@smtp3.electricembers.net> Message-ID: <46CC3076.6050900@bertola.eu> Parminder ha scritto: > Meanwhile, my concern regarding the governmental co-chair of MAG > becoming a permanent structural feature of IGF remains. I am concerned as well, but not more than I was for the opaque and top-down appointment and renewal of the MAG membership, or for its stacking with people from certain groups to prevent the mandate from being fully implemented (the fact that I actually agree with that stakeholder group on most practical issues is irrelevant to this regard). The real problem is that the IGF was born with high hopes, but was quickly dragged downwards by power struggles, short-sightedness and crossed fears. I agree with Bertrand, civil society should focus on preparing and presenting a proposal for the post-Rio IGF that restores the initial hopes, finding a way to implement the mandate that is not threatening to the Internet community, and ensuring some clarity, transparency and democracy in the internal procedures of the IGF. -- vb. Vittorio Bertola - vb [a] bertola.eu <-------- --------> finally with a new website at http://bertola.eu/ <-------- ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.cpsr.org To be removed from the list, 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 Aug 22 13:50:27 2007 From: wsis at ngocongo.org (CONGO WSIS - Philippe Dam) Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2007 19:50:27 +0200 Subject: [governance] TR: Suggested Guidelines for Nominations Committee - Renewal of GAID Steering Committee Message-ID: <200708221749.l7MHnmvH010994@smtp2.infomaniak.ch> Dear all, For your information and based on your feedback, I proposed this process to the 25 CS members of GAID structures. It includes most of the comments made so far, while keeping them somewhat flexible. We will try to make this process as simple and as little time-consuming as possible, given the timelines. It is of course understood that a nomination process for GAID Strategy Council membership should be wider and more inclusive. Thanks for your understanding. Best, Ph _____ De : CONGO - Philippe Dam [mailto:philippe.dam at ngocongo.org] Envoyé : mercredi, 22. août 2007 18:45 À : 'CONGO WSIS - Philippe Dam'; 'GAID-CS' Cc : 'kayadi at planet.tn'; 'rodrigob at cdi.org.br'; 'bruck at research.at'; 'Astrid.Dufborg at gesci.org'; 'hiroshikawamura at attglobal.net'; 'jlongmore at dotrust.org'; 'tracey at traceynaughton.com'; 'bnnrc at siriusbb.com'; 'st.amour at isoc.org'; 'wanyeki at iconnect.co.ke'; 'rinalia at gkpsecretariat.org.my'; 'alain.berranger at gmail.com'; 'iza at anr.org'; 'qshatti at safat.kisr.edu.kw'; 'rbissio at chasque.apc.org'; 'dcogburn at syr.edu'; 'pape.diouf at iued.unige.ch'; 'drake at hei.unige.ch'; 'ershova at iis.ru'; 'anriette at apc.org'; 'gurstein at ADM.NJIT.EDU'; 'akigua at telia.com'; 'wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de'; 'jrmathia at maxwell.syr.edu'; 'george.sadowsky at attglobal.net'; 'Henning.Wegener at t-online.de'; 'titi at mindset.co.za'; 'Renate Bloem' Objet : Suggested Guidelines for Nominations Committee - Renewal of GAID Steering Committee Importance : Haute Dear all, As you know the GAID Secretariat recently circulated a note on the partial renewal of the membership of the GAID governing structures. In particular, it was announced that one of the two seats reserved to civil society representatives in the GAID Steering Committee should be renewed before the next Steering Meeting taking place in New York on 19 September 2007. The GAID Secretariat invited civil society to identify nominations from among their constituencies, through a self-nomination process. Timelines for the renewal of Steering Committee membership are as follows: GAID Steering Committee Deadline for outgoing members to express their interest in a renewal of their terms 15 August 2007 Deadline for new nominations for membership 1 September 2007 Date of the membership renewal 19 September 2007 New York Based on the experiences of the CS Nomination Committee for the IGF Advisory Group and GAID governing structures in the first half of 2006, we proposed that we use of similar model for this process. However, due to the very short time available and to the fact that only one seat is going to be renewed, and in order to increase the representative ownership of the nomination to be done, we also proposed that a Nominations Committee to submit a recommendation for the member of the Steering Committee should be identified among the outgoing civil society members of the GAID Strategy Council and High Level Panel of Advisors. Those two proposals received several supports among CS constituencies. Selection of the CS Nominations Committee Members of the Nominations Committee will preferably have to demonstrate a long-standing engagement in the Information Society-related processes within the UN, in particular WSIS, as well as a good experience of civil society self-organised working processes. Out of the 25 civil society members of the Strategy Council and of the High Level Panel of Advisors (see list attached), at least 5 individuals should volunteer to serve within the Nominations Committee. The final number of members of the Nominations Committee could be flexible (preferably between 5 and 10 persons). They would act in their personal capacities. Volunteers should announce their wish to participate in the Nominations Committee no later than Friday 24 August 2007 at 12:00 am GMT. The NomCom’s final recommendations would have to be forwarded to the GAID Executive Director no later than 1 September 2007. The work of the Nominations Committee would be facilitated by a non-voting facilitator (I propose my service to serve in that capacity and to use the CONGO website for more transparency and updates if needed). Thanks for your attention. We will try to make it as simple as possible for volunteers serving in the nominations committee. I’ll circulate some more information on proposed timelines for identification of candidates and proposed guidelines for selection tomorrow. Looking forward to your reactions. All the best, Philippe -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: CS Members of StratC and SteerC outgoing.doc Type: application/msword Size: 30720 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: message-footer.txt URL: From karenb at gn.apc.org Mon Aug 27 05:06:20 2007 From: karenb at gn.apc.org (karen banks) Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2007 10:06:20 +0100 Subject: [governance] OII 2nd Call for Applications from Civil Society Practitioners in the global South Message-ID: <20070827090614.549FA1D86FA@mail.gn.apc.org> Dear all please find below information about the Oxford Internet Institute Civil Society internship programme.. regards karen ==== Reminder: Application deadline 26 September 2007 Oxford Internet Institute - Civil Society Practitioners Programme Invitation to apply The Oxford Internet Institute (University of Oxford) invites applications from the global South to fill two places in its Civil Society Practitioners Programme. This visitor programme is intended for Civil Society Practitioners of distinction or outstanding promise who wish to visit the Institute for a period of six weeks between February and December 2008, to undertake research concerning the social impact of the Internet and related ICTs. Visitors are expected to reside in Oxford during their stay, and to participate fully in the intellectual life of the Institute. The successful applicants will receive: A subsistence allowance of 3800 GBP (7500 USD) to cover research expenses and living costs during their stay in Oxford A travel grant of up to 1000 GBP (2000 USD) for travel to and from the UK Applications will ideally be submitted by Civil Society Practitioners in or from the global South, active in the areas of freedom of expression, media reform, media justice, and communications and information policy in the globalized context of the Internet. How to apply For details on how to apply, please download: Information for Applicants (PDF, 45kb) at http://www.oii.ox.ac.uk/people/CSPP_Application_Information.pdf You may also request to have this information emailed to you in plain text form. The deadline for completed applications to reach the OII Academic and Student Affairs Officer (by post or email: contact details below) is 26 September 2007. Please note that incomplete applications cannot be considered. Final notification of an award will occur in November 2007. Successful candidates will be expected to take up their six week residency in Oxford at any time between February and December 2008. Contact Laura Taylor Academic and Student Affairs Officer Oxford Internet Institute University of Oxford 1 St Giles, Oxford OX1 3JS United Kingdom Tel: +44 (0)1865 287222 Fax: +44 (0)1865 287211 Email: recruit at oii.ox.ac.uk This programme has been made possible through funding by the media policy portfolio in the Knowledge, Creativity and Freedom Program of the Ford Foundation. This Call for Applications is also available at: http://www.oii.ox.ac.uk/microsites/cspp/ ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.cpsr.org To be removed from the list, 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 cnd at knowprose.com Mon Aug 27 10:27:23 2007 From: cnd at knowprose.com (Taran Rampersad) Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2007 10:27:23 -0400 Subject: [governance] MAG future In-Reply-To: <46CC3076.6050900@bertola.eu> References: <20070822101930.8FDB8E1328@smtp3.electricembers.net> <46CC3076.6050900@bertola.eu> Message-ID: <46D2DF4B.3050206@knowprose.com> Vittorio Bertola wrote: > The real problem is that the IGF was born with high hopes, but was > quickly dragged downwards by power struggles, short-sightedness and > crossed fears. > > I agree with Bertrand, civil society should focus on preparing and > presenting a proposal for the post-Rio IGF that restores the initial > hopes, finding a way to implement the mandate that is not threatening > to the Internet community, and ensuring some clarity, transparency and > democracy in the internal procedures of the IGF. Concur. -- Taran Rampersad Presently in: San Fernando, Trinidad and Tobago cnd at knowprose.com http://www.knowprose.com 'Making Your Mark in Second Life: Business, Land, and Money' http://www.oreilly.com/catalog/9780596514174/ Pictures: http://www.flickr.com/photos/knowprose/ "Criticize by creating." — Michelangelo "The present is theirs; the future, for which I really worked, is mine." - Nikola Tesla ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.cpsr.org To be removed from the list, 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 Mon Aug 27 22:05:12 2007 From: Jeremy at Malcolm.id.au (Jeremy Malcolm) Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2007 10:05:12 +0800 Subject: [governance] MAG future In-Reply-To: <46D2DF4B.3050206@knowprose.com> References: <20070822101930.8FDB8E1328@smtp3.electricembers.net> <46CC3076.6050900@bertola.eu> <46D2DF4B.3050206@knowprose.com> Message-ID: <46D382D8.3060006@Malcolm.id.au> Taran Rampersad wrote: > Vittorio Bertola wrote: >> The real problem is that the IGF was born with high hopes, but was >> quickly dragged downwards by power struggles, short-sightedness and >> crossed fears. >> >> I agree with Bertrand, civil society should focus on preparing and >> presenting a proposal for the post-Rio IGF that restores the initial >> hopes, finding a way to implement the mandate that is not threatening >> to the Internet community, and ensuring some clarity, transparency and >> democracy in the internal procedures of the IGF. > Concur. I also concur. Maybe you would be interested in reading chapter 6 of my PhD thesis (now complete in draft) which aims to present just such a proposal in detail. Browse or download it from http://www.malcolm.id.au/thesis. -- 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 parminder at itforchange.net Wed Aug 29 12:57:15 2007 From: parminder at itforchange.net (Parminder) Date: Wed, 29 Aug 2007 22:27:15 +0530 Subject: [governance] MAG future In-Reply-To: <46D382D8.3060006@Malcolm.id.au> Message-ID: <20070829165734.BD7AA67A35@smtp1.electricembers.net> We have our workshop on 'fulfilling the mandate of the IGF' at the Rio meeting. We can explore how it can be used for the purpose of > >> ..... preparing and > >> presenting a proposal for the post-Rio IGF that restores the initial > >> hopes, finding a way to implement the mandate that is not threatening > >> to the Internet community, and ensuring some clarity, transparency and > >> democracy in the internal procedures of the IGF. Of course, it will be great if IGC can come out with some proposals for this before the IGF, and discuss and circulate them at the IGF.. Meanwhile, I happen to be in Europe the next week, and will be able to drop in at the open IGF consultations on 3rd. Let me know who all will be there. Karen I know will be there, Bill is based in Geneva ... Anyone else who will be attending? We can plan to meet. Please also let us know what issues any of the members may want raised at the consultations. I have looked the new draft program and things look quite fine at this stage. Along with our workshop on fulfilling the mandate of the IGF, three workshops organized by IGC members seem to be covering all the four agenda items that we proposed for the Rio meeting, which is quite good. These workshops are Public policy on the Internet (http://info.intgovforum.org/yoppy.php?poj=5 ) Towards a development Agenda for IG http://info.intgovforum.org/yoppy.php?poj=56 And Governance frameworks for CIRs http://info.intgovforum.org/yoppy.php?poj=37 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: Jeremy Malcolm [mailto:Jeremy at Malcolm.id.au] > Sent: Tuesday, August 28, 2007 7:35 AM > To: governance at lists.cpsr.org > Subject: Re: [governance] MAG future > > Taran Rampersad wrote: > > Vittorio Bertola wrote: > >> The real problem is that the IGF was born with high hopes, but was > >> quickly dragged downwards by power struggles, short-sightedness and > >> crossed fears. > >> > >> I agree with Bertrand, civil society should focus on preparing and > >> presenting a proposal for the post-Rio IGF that restores the initial > >> hopes, finding a way to implement the mandate that is not threatening > >> to the Internet community, and ensuring some clarity, transparency and > >> democracy in the internal procedures of the IGF. > > Concur. > > I also concur. Maybe you would be interested in reading chapter 6 of my > PhD thesis (now complete in draft) which aims to present just such a > proposal in detail. Browse or download it from > http://www.malcolm.id.au/thesis. > > -- > 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 $3}' > ____________________________________________________________ > You received this message as a subscriber on the list: > governance at lists.cpsr.org > To be removed from the list, send any message to: > governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org > > For all list information and functions, see: > http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.cpsr.org To be removed from the list, send any message to: governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org For all list information and functions, see: http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance From gurstein at gmail.com Wed Aug 29 15:34:42 2007 From: gurstein at gmail.com (michael gurstein) Date: Wed, 29 Aug 2007 12:34:42 -0700 Subject: [governance] Evaluation of UNESCO's Information for All Programme Message-ID: <00ba01c7ea73$a70a30b0$6700a8c0@michael78xnoln> At the risk of seeming self-promotional I would call your attention to the following http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0015/001518/151807E.pdf which is the evaluation of UNESCO's Information for All Programme and whose content was informed in part by a number of the discussions undertaken in this forum among others. Best, MG Michael Gurstein, Ph.D. Centre for Community Informatics Research, Training and Development Ste. 2101-989 Nelson St. Vancouver BC CANADA v6z 2s1 http://www.communityinformatics.net tel./fax +1-604-602-0624 Director: The Information Society Institute (TISI) Cape Town, SOUTH AFRICA Research Professor College of Computer and Information Systems New Jersey Institute of Technology Newark, NJ, USA ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.cpsr.org To be removed from the list, 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 muguet at mdpi.net Thu Aug 30 05:27:44 2007 From: muguet at mdpi.net (Dr. Francis MUGUET) Date: Thu, 30 Aug 2007 11:27:44 +0200 Subject: [governance] MAG future In-Reply-To: <20070829165734.BD7AA67A35@smtp1.electricembers.net> References: <20070829165734.BD7AA67A35@smtp1.electricembers.net> Message-ID: <46D68D90.6010608@mdpi.net> Dear Parminder and all stakeholders of good faith > Meanwhile, I happen to be in Europe the next week, and will be able to drop > in at the open IGF consultations on 3rd. Let me know who all will be there. > Karen I know will be there, Bill is based in Geneva ... Anyone else who will > be attending? We can plan to meet. It happens that the MAG has less and less future... I learned from a governmental stakeholder that the reconducted MAG will reconvene on Tuesday 5 and Wednesday 6 September. IF this information is correct, it would mean that the law of silence and opacity continues.... Non-governmental stakeholders that belongs to the IGC would have completely lost credibility. As for the IGF secratariat and the transparency of the IGF web site, the facts speak for themselves. When one reads the last SG statement : ---------- As part of its mandate, the Advisory Group has been asked to enhance the transparency of the preparatory process by ensuring a continuous flow of information between its members and the various interested groups. It has also been requested to make proposals on a suitable rotation among its members, based on recommendations from the various interested groups. --------- It would be clear that non-governmental MAG members are really lacking enthusiasm in enforcing the SG statement, except when they are nominated. I guess that the rotation would be really needed Best Francis > > Please also let us know what issues any of the members may want raised at > the consultations. I have looked the new draft program and things look quite > fine at this stage. > > Along with our workshop on fulfilling the mandate of the IGF, three > workshops organized by IGC members seem to be covering all the four agenda > items that we proposed for the Rio meeting, which is quite good. > > These workshops are > > Public policy on the Internet (http://info.intgovforum.org/yoppy.php?poj=5 ) > > Towards a development Agenda for IG > http://info.intgovforum.org/yoppy.php?poj=56 > > And > > Governance frameworks for CIRs http://info.intgovforum.org/yoppy.php?poj=37 > > 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: Jeremy Malcolm [mailto:Jeremy at Malcolm.id.au] >> Sent: Tuesday, August 28, 2007 7:35 AM >> To: governance at lists.cpsr.org >> Subject: Re: [governance] MAG future >> >> Taran Rampersad wrote: >>> Vittorio Bertola wrote: >>>> The real problem is that the IGF was born with high hopes, but was >>>> quickly dragged downwards by power struggles, short-sightedness and >>>> crossed fears. >>>> >>>> I agree with Bertrand, civil society should focus on preparing and >>>> presenting a proposal for the post-Rio IGF that restores the initial >>>> hopes, finding a way to implement the mandate that is not threatening >>>> to the Internet community, and ensuring some clarity, transparency and >>>> democracy in the internal procedures of the IGF. >>> Concur. >> I also concur. Maybe you would be interested in reading chapter 6 of my >> PhD thesis (now complete in draft) which aims to present just such a >> proposal in detail. Browse or download it from >> http://www.malcolm.id.au/thesis. >> >> -- >> 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 > -- ------------------------------------------------------ Francis F. MUGUET Ph.D MDPI Foundation Open Access Journals Associate Publisher http://www.mdpi.org http://www.mdpi.net muguet at mdpi.org muguet at mdpi.net ENSTA Paris, France KNIS lab. Director "Knowledge Networks & Information Society" (KNIS) muguet at ensta.fr http://www.ensta.fr/~muguet World Summit On the Information Society (WSIS) Civil Society Working Groups Scientific Information : http://www.wsis-si.org chair Patents & Copyrights : http://www.wsis-pct.org co-chair Financing Mechanismns : http://www.wsis-finance.org web UNMSP project : http://www.unmsp.org WTIS initiative: http://www.wtis.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 LMcKnigh at syr.edu Thu Aug 30 12:46:10 2007 From: LMcKnigh at syr.edu (Lee McKnight) Date: Thu, 30 Aug 2007 12:46:10 -0400 Subject: [governance] MAG future Message-ID: Francis, Your concern about MAG sounds a bit overwrought to me, frankly. "Non-governmental stakeholders that belongs to the IGC would have completely lost credibility?" Because? There's lots of meeting I'm not invited to, most of which I am happy to stay out of. Perhaps there are bigger deals for IGC to worry about like making IGF II a success? Lee Prof. Lee W. McKnight School of Information Studies Syracuse University +1-315-443-6891office +1-315-278-4392 mobile >>> muguet at mdpi.net 8/30/2007 5:27 AM >>> Dear Parminder and all stakeholders of good faith > Meanwhile, I happen to be in Europe the next week, and will be able to drop > in at the open IGF consultations on 3rd. Let me know who all will be there. > Karen I know will be there, Bill is based in Geneva ... Anyone else who will > be attending? We can plan to meet. It happens that the MAG has less and less future... I learned from a governmental stakeholder that the reconducted MAG will reconvene on Tuesday 5 and Wednesday 6 September. IF this information is correct, it would mean that the law of silence and opacity continues.... Non-governmental stakeholders that belongs to the IGC would have completely lost credibility. As for the IGF secratariat and the transparency of the IGF web site, the facts speak for themselves. When one reads the last SG statement : ---------- As part of its mandate, the Advisory Group has been asked to enhance the transparency of the preparatory process by ensuring a continuous flow of information between its members and the various interested groups. It has also been requested to make proposals on a suitable rotation among its members, based on recommendations from the various interested groups. --------- It would be clear that non-governmental MAG members are really lacking enthusiasm in enforcing the SG statement, except when they are nominated. I guess that the rotation would be really needed Best Francis > > Please also let us know what issues any of the members may want raised at > the consultations. I have looked the new draft program and things look quite > fine at this stage. > > Along with our workshop on fulfilling the mandate of the IGF, three > workshops organized by IGC members seem to be covering all the four agenda > items that we proposed for the Rio meeting, which is quite good. > > These workshops are > > Public policy on the Internet (http://info.intgovforum.org/yoppy.php?poj=5 ) > > Towards a development Agenda for IG > http://info.intgovforum.org/yoppy.php?poj=56 > > And > > Governance frameworks for CIRs http://info.intgovforum.org/yoppy.php?poj=37 > > 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: Jeremy Malcolm [mailto:Jeremy at Malcolm.id.au] >> Sent: Tuesday, August 28, 2007 7:35 AM >> To: governance at lists.cpsr.org >> Subject: Re: [governance] MAG future >> >> Taran Rampersad wrote: >>> Vittorio Bertola wrote: >>>> The real problem is that the IGF was born with high hopes, but was >>>> quickly dragged downwards by power struggles, short-sightedness and >>>> crossed fears. >>>> >>>> I agree with Bertrand, civil society should focus on preparing and >>>> presenting a proposal for the post-Rio IGF that restores the initial >>>> hopes, finding a way to implement the mandate that is not threatening >>>> to the Internet community, and ensuring some clarity, transparency and >>>> democracy in the internal procedures of the IGF. >>> Concur. >> I also concur. Maybe you would be interested in reading chapter 6 of my >> PhD thesis (now complete in draft) which aims to present just such a >> proposal in detail. Browse or download it from >> http://www.malcolm.id.au/thesis. >> >> -- >> 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 > -- ------------------------------------------------------ Francis F. MUGUET Ph.D MDPI Foundation Open Access Journals Associate Publisher http://www.mdpi.org http://www.mdpi.net muguet at mdpi.org muguet at mdpi.net ENSTA Paris, France KNIS lab. Director "Knowledge Networks & Information Society" (KNIS) muguet at ensta.fr http://www.ensta.fr/~muguet World Summit On the Information Society (WSIS) Civil Society Working Groups Scientific Information : http://www.wsis-si.org chair Patents & Copyrights : http://www.wsis-pct.org co-chair Financing Mechanismns : http://www.wsis-finance.org web UNMSP project : http://www.unmsp.org WTIS initiative: http://www.wtis.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 ldmisekfalkoff at gmail.com Thu Aug 30 13:07:42 2007 From: ldmisekfalkoff at gmail.com (l.d.misek-falkoff) Date: Thu, 30 Aug 2007 13:07:42 -0400 Subject: [governance] MAG future In-Reply-To: <954259bd0708220303x43f12270g1ca91d3c5311e616@mail.gmail.com> References: <954259bd0708220303x43f12270g1ca91d3c5311e616@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <8cbfe7410708301007q783f28f9s5118c67affb6a7b8@mail.gmail.com> Dear Bertrand and All: *Please accept the following response to your kind post with the intended light touch and spirit of congeniality, and bright / broad e-smile*. I will renew on a continuing basis my interest in being involved and serving as you may see fit. Interculturally, interconnectivity aligned, I think it would be good (I think) to have (include) a woman who started computing in the 1950's and continues today, programmed the actual macros for the original GML (precursor to HTML) Starter Set Tags upon survey and interview for end-user goals and resources, has been an Internet Lawyer re Human Rights, invented psycholinguistic and computational research e-tools, is published, has a ph.d. combining document analysis with systems engineering principles, has attended/presented at ICT conferences for 40 plus years, including WSIS I and II and IGF I, and continues in civil society service at the United Nations still interested and involved in computer aided education. But do you think so? A kind of *historical* factor. Hope you do not find this too *hysterical* ! And of course as per usual and the wonderful side-benefit here, all interested in the above topics is cheerfully invited to correspond back-channel. Warm regards, and *Respectfully Interfacing,* LDMF. Dr. Linda D. Misek-Falkoff. P.S. It would be great to have an ICT and Disabilities presentation in RIO, including but not restricted to the Convention on The Rights of Persons With Disabilities, and concerning Access of Course but other bearing-topics as well. . On 8/22/07, Bertrand de La Chapelle wrote: > > Dear all, > > Renewal of the MAG has launched an interesting string of comments - as > usual. I'd just like to call attention to the key paragraph in the UN > announcement : > > "As part of its mandate, the Advisory Group has been asked to enhance the > transparency of the preparatory process by ensuring a continuous flow of > information between its members and the various interested groups. It has > also been requested to make proposals on a suitable rotation among its > members, based on recommendations from the various interested > groups. *Any > decision on how to prepare subsequent meetings will be taken after the Rio > de Janeiro meeting in an open, inclusive and transparent consultative > process, taking into account the proposals of the Advisory Group*." > > Whatever feelings people have on the present composition, methods of > renewal, etc... the main challenge for all stakeholders will be to come up > with a suitable MS structure and methods for selecting its members for the > India meeting. Some of the comments already made on the list provided > hints > on what people see as solutions, but the discussion needs to be broader. > > This is a major challenge and opportunity for the governance list : > can IGC come up with concrete proposals in that regard, that can be > broadly > accepted within CS and other constituencies, like it was instrumental in > promoting and obtaining acceptance of concepts like the broad definition > of > internet governance, multi-stakeholderism and the forum ? > > Exciting perspective. > > Best > > Bertrand > > > ____________________ > 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") > ____________________________________________________________ > You received this message as a subscriber on the list: > governance at lists.cpsr.org > To be removed from the list, send any message to: > governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org > > For all list information and functions, see: > http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance > -- Linda D. Misek-Falkoff, Ph.D., J.D. For I.D. here: IDC-ICT Taskforce. Coordination of Singular Organizations on Disability (IDC Steering). Persons With Pain International. National Disability Party, International Disability Caucus. *Respectful Interfaces* - Communications Coordination Committee For The U.N. (Other Affiliations on Request) alternate email: Spelled out: (The year) 2007 is my 50th year in computing and I am a woman with disabilities - dot com. actual email address: linda at 2007ismy50thyearincomputingandIamawomanwithdisabilities.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 wsis at ngocongo.org Thu Aug 30 13:20:24 2007 From: wsis at ngocongo.org (CONGO WSIS - Philippe Dam) Date: Thu, 30 Aug 2007 19:20:24 +0200 Subject: [governance] RE: Closure of ICTRC Office in Tehran - Letter for support open for signature Message-ID: <200708301719.l7UHJkfx003750@smtp2.infomaniak.ch> Dear all, In follow up to our previous exchanges in the regards, note that the NGO support letter against the closure of the ICTRC Offices in Tehran has been changed in accordance with the various suggestions made on the Plenary List. Find the updated letter and the provisional list of signatures received from this list attached. We understood that the situation for ICTRC staff has not evolved since the last up date. NGOs involved in the WSIS process are encouraged to consider signing this letter ASAP. Individuals involved in WSIS are also encouraged to add their support to our colleagues from the ICTRC, even if they are not up to engaging their organisation. All the best, Ph _____ De : CONGO WSIS - Philippe Dam [mailto:wsis at ngocongo.org] Envoyé : mercredi, 11. juillet 2007 18:53 À : 'plenary at wsis-cs.org'; 'bureau at wsis-cs.org'; 'governance at lists.cpsr.org' Cc : 'rbloem at ngocongo.org'; 'CONGO - Philippe Dam' Objet : Closure of ICTRC Office in Tehran - Letter for support open for signature Importance : Haute Dear all, A couple of months ago, I forwarded an e-mail received from our WSIS colleague Mr. Sohrab Razzaghi, announcing that the office of the NGO he is the Executive Director of was closed and sealed by the Revolutionary Court without any legal justification or accusations. Apparently the situation has not evolved and that the staff was prevented to work. This is of particular concern for all of us because the focal points for West Asia and the Middle East within the Civil Society Bureau during the WSIS preparatory phase were member of the ICTRC. A group of NGOs have drafted a support letter regretting the closure of the ICTRC office and asking for clarification to the Iranian Authorities. You are invited to consider signing this support letter. I particularly encourage all formerly CSB members to look into it, in support for our partners during the WSIS process. I’ll be happy to forward your signatures to the coordinators of this initiative. All the best, Philippe Philippe Dam CONGO - WSIS CS Secretariat 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 -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Support Letter ICTRC - Jun07 (2) (2).doc Type: application/msword Size: 35328 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: message-footer.txt URL: From vivek at itforchange.net Fri Aug 31 00:18:00 2007 From: vivek at itforchange.net (Vivek Vaidyanathan) Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2007 09:48:00 +0530 Subject: [governance] IT for Change's background paper for the Internet Governance Forum (IGF) Rio - 2007 Message-ID: <20070831041809.CCE43E0FCC@smtp3.electricembers.net> Dear All, Apologies for cross posting! Greetings from IT for Change! Please find enclosed the background paper by IT for Change prepared as an input into the synthesis paper for the UN - Internet Governance Forum's (IGF) second meeting at Rio, 2007. This is a slightly improved version of the original submission which can be found on the IGF website at http://www.intgovforum.org/Substantive_2nd_IGF/IT%20for%20change_Four%20Crit ical%20Issues%20for%20the%20IGF%20Rio.pdf Best regards, Vivek Vivek Vaidyanathan IT for Change (ITfC) Bridging Development Realities and Technological Possibilities Tel:(+91 80) 26654134, 26536890 Fax:(+91 80) 41461055 www.ITforChange.net -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: ITfC's background paper for IGF Rio.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 74721 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: message-footer.txt URL: From vb at bertola.eu Fri Aug 31 09:25:41 2007 From: vb at bertola.eu (Vittorio Bertola) Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2007 15:25:41 +0200 Subject: [governance] Dialogue Forum on Internet rights, and call for contributions Message-ID: <46D816D5.9080709@bertola.eu> All, As anticipated in the past, the Italian government is organizing an international meeting on the theme of rights and duties of Internet users, entitled "Dialogue Forum on Internet rights". The conference will be held in Rome on 27 September 2007, and will be open to any interested stakeholder. I encourage participants from civil society to attend. More information can be found at http://www.innovazionepa.it/dfir/ and the draft agenda at http://www.innovazionepa.it/dfir/pdf/Draft_agenda_270707.pdf The organizers would like to encourage the submission of short written contributions that will then be summarized and introduced to the audience during the conference. Such contributions should focus on the two issues raised by the IGF Dynamic Coalition on the Internet Bill of Rights as working items for this year, and specifically: * Which are the appropriate forms and instruments to implement and better define human rights and duties in the Internet environment? * What areas and types of rights and duties, relevant to the Information Society, should be part of this work and of its results? Contributions should be submitted by September 20 through the conference web site. The contributions, as well as the results of the conference, will also be used as preparatory material for the workshop that the Dynamic Coalition will hold at the second IGF in Rio de Janeiro. Please feel free to forward this message to any interested parties or lists. Regards, -- vb. Vittorio Bertola - vb [a] bertola.eu <-------- --------> finally with a new website at http://bertola.eu/ <-------- ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.cpsr.org To be removed from the list, 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 muguet at mdpi.net Fri Aug 31 09:26:50 2007 From: muguet at mdpi.net (Dr. Francis MUGUET) Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2007 15:26:50 +0200 Subject: [governance] MAG future In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <46D8171A.1060301@mdpi.net> Dear Lee > Francis, > > Your concern about MAG sounds a bit overwrought to me, frankly. > > "Non-governmental stakeholders that belongs to the IGC would have > completely lost credibility?" Because? There's lots of meeting I'm not > invited to, most of which I am happy to stay out of. > I am somewhat surprised by your comment which is not relevant It is not about being invited to a meeting or to a club or a committee. Do not put aside the issue, and try to lead the discussion diverge away. So lets put the dot on the i, as we say in French. It is all about MANDATE : the Advisory Group has been asked to enhance the transparency of the preparatory process by ensuring a continuous flow of information between its members and the various interested groups. The MAG should have been announced publicly and IGC MAG members should have informed continuously the IGC. People that are not fulfilling the mandate that goes along with their nominiation have lost credibility. I would add that a few governmental MAG members are quite surprised by this lack of the transparency in the "civil society" as "represented" by the IGC. > Perhaps there are bigger deals for IGC to worry about like making IGF > II a success? > A success for who ? for those who do not respect any mandate, the one from the SG to start with, and then from the Tunis agenda ? This is a question of good faith... Nitin Desai, the "trusted chair" have spoken repeatedly about "good faith"... . Best Francis > Lee > > Prof. Lee W. McKnight > School of Information Studies > Syracuse University > +1-315-443-6891office > +1-315-278-4392 mobile > > >>>> muguet at mdpi.net 8/30/2007 5:27 AM >>> >>>> > Dear Parminder and all stakeholders of good faith > > >> Meanwhile, I happen to be in Europe the next week, and will be able >> > to drop > >> in at the open IGF consultations on 3rd. Let me know who all will be >> > there. > >> Karen I know will be there, Bill is based in Geneva ... Anyone else >> > who will > >> be attending? We can plan to meet. >> > > It happens that the MAG has less and less future... > > I learned from a governmental stakeholder that the reconducted MAG > will reconvene on Tuesday 5 and Wednesday 6 September. > > IF this information is correct, > it would mean that the law of silence and opacity continues.... > Non-governmental stakeholders that belongs to the IGC would have > completely lost credibility. > > As for the IGF secratariat and the transparency of the IGF web site, > the facts speak for themselves. > > When one reads the last SG statement : > ---------- > As part of its mandate, the Advisory Group has been asked to enhance > the > transparency of the preparatory process by ensuring a continuous flow > of > information between its members and the various interested groups. It > > has also been requested to make proposals on a suitable rotation among > > its members, based on recommendations from the various interested > groups. > --------- > > It would be clear that non-governmental MAG members are really > lacking enthusiasm in enforcing the SG statement, except when they > are nominated. > > I guess that the rotation would be really needed > > Best > > Francis > > > > > >> Please also let us know what issues any of the members may want >> > raised at > >> the consultations. I have looked the new draft program and things >> > look quite > >> fine at this stage. >> >> Along with our workshop on fulfilling the mandate of the IGF, three >> workshops organized by IGC members seem to be covering all the four >> > agenda > >> items that we proposed for the Rio meeting, which is quite good. >> >> These workshops are >> >> Public policy on the Internet >> > (http://info.intgovforum.org/yoppy.php?poj=5 ) > >> Towards a development Agenda for IG >> http://info.intgovforum.org/yoppy.php?poj=56 >> >> And >> >> Governance frameworks for CIRs >> > http://info.intgovforum.org/yoppy.php?poj=37 > >> 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: Jeremy Malcolm [mailto:Jeremy at Malcolm.id.au] >>> Sent: Tuesday, August 28, 2007 7:35 AM >>> To: governance at lists.cpsr.org >>> Subject: Re: [governance] MAG future >>> >>> Taran Rampersad wrote: >>> >>>> Vittorio Bertola wrote: >>>> >>>>> The real problem is that the IGF was born with high hopes, but >>>>> > was > >>>>> quickly dragged downwards by power struggles, short-sightedness >>>>> > and > >>>>> crossed fears. >>>>> >>>>> I agree with Bertrand, civil society should focus on preparing >>>>> > and > >>>>> presenting a proposal for the post-Rio IGF that restores the >>>>> > initial > >>>>> hopes, finding a way to implement the mandate that is not >>>>> > threatening > >>>>> to the Internet community, and ensuring some clarity, transparency >>>>> > and > >>>>> democracy in the internal procedures of the IGF. >>>>> >>>> Concur. >>>> >>> I also concur. Maybe you would be interested in reading chapter 6 >>> > of my > >>> PhD thesis (now complete in draft) which aims to present just such >>> > a > >>> proposal in detail. Browse or download it from >>> http://www.malcolm.id.au/thesis. >>> >>> -- >>> 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 >> >> > > > -- ----------------------------------------------------------- Francis F. Muguet Ph.D MDPI Open Access Journals - Associate Publisher http://www.mdpi.org muguet at mdpi.net Knowledge Networks & Information Society Lab. (KNIS) http://www.knis.org http://www.ensta.fr/~muguet E.N.S.T.A 32 Boulevard Victor muguet at ensta.fr 75739 PARIS CEDEX FRANCE (33) 01.45.52.60.19 -- Fax: (33) 01.45.52.52.82 WSIS World Summit on the Information Society Chair Scientific Information WG http://www.wsis-si.org Co-chair Patents & Copyrights WG htt://www.wsis-pct.org Multi-Stakeholders UN agency proposal http://www.unmsp.org WTIS World Tour of the Information Society http://www.wtis.org muguet at wtis;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 lists at privaterra.info Fri Aug 31 09:49:08 2007 From: lists at privaterra.info (Robert Guerra) Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2007 09:49:08 -0400 Subject: [governance] Dialogue Forum on Internet rights, and call for contributions In-Reply-To: <46D816D5.9080709@bertola.eu> References: <46D816D5.9080709@bertola.eu> Message-ID: <357127D3-ED03-47F6-B76F-B5C8D7371377@privaterra.info> Vittorio: it is kind of short notice for such type of event. usually there is an open call for such events, one that allows interested participants to submit papers and/or proposal. I would be interested to know who is involved - specifically if it is just includes participants from Italy or includes a more international perspective. regards, Robert --- Robert Guerra Managing Director, Privaterra Tel +1 416 893 0377 On 31-Aug-07, at 9:25 AM, Vittorio Bertola wrote: > All, > > As anticipated in the past, the Italian government is organizing an > international meeting on the theme of rights and duties of Internet > users, entitled "Dialogue Forum on Internet rights". The conference > will > be held in Rome on 27 September 2007, and will be open to any > interested > stakeholder. I encourage participants from civil society to attend. > > More information can be found at > > http://www.innovazionepa.it/dfir/ > > and the draft agenda at > > http://www.innovazionepa.it/dfir/pdf/Draft_agenda_270707.pdf > > The organizers would like to encourage the submission of short written > contributions that will then be summarized and introduced to the > audience during the conference. Such contributions should focus on the > two issues raised by the IGF Dynamic Coalition on the Internet Bill of > Rights as working items for this year, and specifically: > > * Which are the appropriate forms and instruments to implement and > better define human rights and duties in the Internet environment? > * What areas and types of rights and duties, relevant to the > Information Society, should be part of this work and of its results? > > Contributions should be submitted by September 20 through the > conference > web site. The contributions, as well as the results of the conference, > will also be used as preparatory material for the workshop that the > Dynamic Coalition will hold at the second IGF in Rio de Janeiro. > > Please feel free to forward this message to any interested parties > or lists. > > Regards, > -- > vb. Vittorio Bertola - vb [a] bertola.eu <-------- > --------> finally with a new website at http://bertola.eu/ <-------- > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > You received this message as a subscriber on the list: > governance at lists.cpsr.org > To be removed from the list, 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