[governance] Re: IG questions that are not ICANN [was: Irony]

[Suresh Ramasubramanian]

Dan Krimm [04/12/07 12:27 -0800]:
>So, Suresh, can you address Milton's substantive claim that ITU's likely
>policy output (apparently a "top-down" approach to organizing the fight
>against cybercrime) is unlikely to make a difference?  I'm sure I would
>personally learn something from a structured analysis here.

This is not a top down process as such - at least in the context of the
botnet project. Part is top down of course but there's a lot of flow from
other directions - bottom up, grassroots etc.

And this is not a policy initiative as much as it is an education /
capacity building / outreach initiative.  Trying to mandate the way
countries set policy is way too overreaching a goal for the one year scope
of this project. Putting countries in touch with (say) the CoE so that
their framework on cybercrime may get extended ... now that's a bit
different.  Milton's claim is not as substantive as it appears to be, from
my perspective.

>PS -- Somehow we ended up talking about ICANN again, even though this
>particular topic is actually not about ICANN at all.  How in the world did
>that happen?  I'm still scratching my head.

Wasn't that the Peters Principle of Internet Governance?  With the
corollary that any mention of ICANN in a non ICANN related thread (topic
drift etc etc) would be equivalent to Godwin's law - "mention hitler and
the thread ends"? :)  

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

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