[governance] Programme outline and schedule released

[Veni Markovski]

George,
I agree with you, and I also think that could be a good way to 
approach the TA, and all different paragraphs.
If we, the civil society, focus on the substential issues, and have 
some governments focus there too, each of us will do a little, but we 
all will do a lot.

So, can we try to reach an agreement on what are the important, and 
useful for the users, things? I already named some, but here are 
they, and some more (in no specific order):

- Affordability of the access to the Internet (prices for end-users, 
cross-subsidizing, interconnectivity)
- building the right framework for development, deployment, and 
promotion of Internet (including dealing with IP/DNS - case studies; 
how important it is, etc.)
- SPAM and impact on developing countries (heavy load on slow bandwidth, etc.)
- cybersecurity
- IDN

veni

At 18:26 5/1/2007  -0400, you wrote:
>Carlos,
>
>I take as the overall objective of whatever the IGF does as focusing 
>on issues relating to Internet governance, defined in the broad 
>sense, to serve the purpose of economic and social development. 
>Clearly there are multiple dimensions of IG, and reasonable people 
>may differ in their assessment regarding how important the issues in 
>each dimension are to accomplish that goal.
>
>Within that scope, I could argue that each of the subparagraphs of 
>para. 72 has the capability of meeting a set of overall long term 
>goals.  However, I think that for most of  the subparagraphs below, 
>I could imagine activities that are believed (by someone) to be 
>consistent with the Tunis agenda, but that I believe would not meet 
>those goals and would be counterproductive.
>
>The problem with the Tunis agenda as a guide is that it can be read 
>in different ways by different people, very much like complex 
>religious documents such as the Bible.  Now para. 72 prescribes the 
>initiation of actions or activities.  Rather than trying to define 
>activities as good or relevant, or alternatively bad or irrelevant, 
>i would like to focus on goals, and for each activity, ask whether 
>it produces good or bad results with respect to those goals.  This 
>reflects my consequentialist leanings in which the concepts of good 
>and bad are the major focus rather than the concepts of right or 
>wrong.  An action is 'right' if its consequences are good, and vice-versa.
>
>So while I do not dismiss para. 72, I would argue that the 
>interpretation and implementation of the specific activities chosen 
>under each of its sub-paragraphs does need to be subjected to a test 
>of whether it meets overall development goals which the IGF was 
>established to promote.  Each of those sub-paragraphs can give rise 
>to activities that I believe would be consistent with and supportive 
>of those goals.  Likewise each can give rise to activities that are 
>inconsistent with or destructive with respect to those goals.
>
>Opinions will clearly differ on these points.
>
>George

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

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