[governance] IGF financing

[Carlos Afonso]

Yes, there are other ways. The blackmailing tone in the letter from 
Disspain (which he claims to be from a "group" -- can we guess who this 
"group" is?) may be shocking for some, but what is really the reason the 
ICANN camp was so supportive? When Microsoft or any other big one 
supports a "pluralist" project like this, what do they expect in 
exchange? Is the same situation: they expect adherence to certain rules 
which comply with their interests. In the case of ICANN camp, to ensure 
that certain themes and proceedings remain anathemas. Or else..., as 
Chris so frankly states.

So the IGF does not need funding which captures it. One criteria is 
diversification -- do not depend for anything on just a few funders. 
Another is the mobilization of the 174 governments who happily signed 
the agreement to form the IGF but did not take the corresponding 
responsibilities (except for very few).

frt rgds

--c.a.

William Drake wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> On 6/11/07 6:44 PM, "Bertrand de La Chapelle" <bdelachapelle at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>> Anyway, I'd be happy to learn what your own preference would be, what concrete
>> solution you favor : just governments ? or just the UN ? or just some
>> international organizations ? The key question is, again : what is the
>> appropriate financing structure for the IGF in order to guarantee regularity
>> of resources and independence from lobbies and pressure groups ? Can we
>> address this issue calmly, with the attention it deserves ?
>>
> ------
> 
> According to this news item from yesterday,
> www.theregister.co.uk/2007/06/12/igf_nominet_2007/
> 
> ³Kummer has spent much of the last six months trying to win more funding. At
> a meeting at Parliament last week, hosted by Nominet, the not-for-profit
> which operates the .uk registry, the Department of Trade and Industry
> announced it had found £23,000 down the back of its sofas (the Swiss
> government has donated $500,000).²
> 
> 174 states & the EU signed off on the Tunis Agenda creating the IGF.  If
> just ten more could find some chump change in their sofas (equivalent to
> about a nanosecond of their foreign affairs budgets, or maybe one cocktail
> break at the G8), we (taxpayers all---to two countries in the case of us
> unfortunate US expats) wouldn¹t need to have this conversation, the IGF
> could have something more like a secretariat, and Markus could refocus his
> energies.  To me the question is not can we shake micropayments out of
> individual taxpayers and financially marginal NGOs, but rather what sort of
> game are the governments playing here.
> 
> Two cents,
> 
> Bill
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition. 
> Version: 7.5.472 / Virus Database: 269.8.15/847 - Release Date: 12/6/2007 21:42

-- 

Carlos A. Afonso
Rio       Brazil
***************************************************************
Projeto Sacix - Apoio técnico a iniciativas de inclusão digital
com software livre, mantido pela Rits em colaboração com o
Coletivo Digital. Para mais informações:
www.sacix.org.br   www.rits.org.br   www.coletivodigital.org.br
***************************************************************

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

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