[governance] IGC statement to IGF MAG - Yea

Parminder parminder at itforchange.net
Thu May 10 12:51:12 EDT 2007 

> And, in addition, I think adding "THEIR" (“Core Internet Resources and
> THEIR current governance institutions") seems a bit heavy in the
> phrasing, it does not change so much the scope of discussion in reality,
> and even it might restrict it.

Just for clarification and your consideration, since I suggested the 'their'
word.

That the 'their' in '"Core Internet Resources and their current governance
institutions" is meant to avoid confusion about which governance
institutions we are referring to. It is to make it clear that we are
referring to institutions of governance of core internet resources, and NOT
other governance institutions for the purpose of this session.

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: Ken Lohento [mailto:klohento at panos-ao.org]
> Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2007 4:11 PM
> To: governance at lists.cpsr.org
> Subject: Re: [governance] IGC statement to IGF MAG - Yea
> 
> Dear all:
> 
> A/
> I support Mawaki suggestion to say
> 
> "Core Internet Resources and current governance institutions"
> 
> instead of
> 
> "ICANN and Core Internet Resources"
> 
> ICANN is mentioned several in the proposal anyway, so it's not avoiding
> discussing ICANN issues. But not targeting directly ICANN in the title
> is relevant since (1) even though it plays a big/important role and is
> subject to criticism from many stakeholders, as you know ICANN is not
> the only institution that deals with core internet resources and (2)
> maybe more importantly, we are in a multistakeholder decision making
> process and we need to take into account the perception of other
> stakeholders within (and outside) the AG, who might/will be against
> ICANN being targeted so directly (as you know civil society, excluding
> in this case the technical community, only represents a small part of
> the MAG).
> 
> And, in addition, I think adding "THEIR" (“Core Internet Resources and
> THEIR current governance institutions") seems a bit heavy in the
> phrasing, it does not change so much the scope of discussion in reality,
> and even it might restrict it.
> 
> 
> B/ Another point, just to mention it: personally I doubt if it is really
> appropriate that an IGF MAIN session (according to IGF jargon) is
> reserved for a discussion on "Internet Global Public Policy - Issues and
> Institutions" as the question is described under its points a) and b) ;
> and also point (3) Global Internet policies impacting access to and
> effective use of the Internet by disadvantage people and groups - The
> development agenda in IG) as it presented is already the focus on the
> Access main session. However, I support including these 2 points (1 and
> 3) as they are in the document that will be sent since, they will not
> cause much problem and because we need not to discuss too much and send
> something as soon as possible.
> 
> Regards
> 
> KL
> 
> Mawaki Chango a écrit :
> > Parminder,
> >
> > as I said with my initial suggestion, a (close enough) variant
> > of the suggested header would do, and your proposed variant
> > "Core Internet Resources and THEIR current governance
> > institutions" is right on point.
> >
> > In any event, I leave the fate of this to the others to discuss.
> > If there is no sufficient support, please proceed and do your
> > job - and thanks for that.
> >
> > Mawaki
> >
> > --- Parminder <parminder at itforchange.net> wrote:
> >
> >
> >> Mawaki
> >>
> >> Under the consensus call rule
> >>
> >> " Some relatively substantive changes may also be accepted
> >> only if there is
> >> a resounding support, and no opposition at all, to them.
> >> However, this will
> >> be an exception, again completely up to the discretion of the
> >> co-coordinators."
> >>
> >> You may still keep this suggested change on the table..
> >>
> >> Instead of :
> >>
> >>> "(2) ICANN and Core Internet Resources"
> >>> we could have
> >>> "(2) Core Internet Resources and current governance
> >>>
> >> institutions"
> >>
> >> However, it will have to meet the strict conditions of the
> >> above rule. There
> >> should be more support - and no opposition (with earlier
> >> opposition - Lee,
> >> Afonso - withdrawn), and we will also check offline with those
> >> who have been
> >> pressing the ICANN discussion case most, and then it is still
> >> left to the
> >> discretion of co-coordinators... And also to see the
> >> exceptional nature of
> >> such a change (no pouring in more requests pl :))
> >>
> >> Parminder
> >>
> >> PS: meanwhile, if a change is at all to take place, in my
> >> personal capacity,
> >> I wonder if "Core Internet Resources and THEIR current
> >> governance
> >> institutions" looks more specific to the institutions we want
> >> discussed than
> >> "Core Internet Resources and current governance institutions"
> >>
> >> ________________________________________________
> >> 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: Mawaki Chango [mailto:ki_chango at yahoo.com]
> >>> Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2007 8:19 AM
> >>> To: Lee McKnight; governance at lists.cpsr.org
> >>> Subject: Re: [governance] IGC statement to IGF MAG - Yea
> >>>
> >>> Lee,
> >>> it's not at all being afraid of anything. if you read that
> >>> section, ICANN is mentioned several times, but also the RIRs
> >>> which are different legal entities and have their own
> >>>
> >> processes.
> >>
> >>> And if you push a little bit further, you may even fit in
> >>> (between the lines, of course) WIPO which implements a major
> >>> ICANN-related/initiated policy regarding core Internet
> >>> resources. So I thought ICANN shouldn't be the tree that
> >>>
> >> hides
> >>
> >>> the forest.
> >>>
> >>> Mawaki
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> --- Lee McKnight <LMcKnigh at syr.edu> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> I support the text as is, and the titles as they are - I
> >>>>
> >> still
> >>
> >>>> don;t get why we're afraid to say 'ICANN' in public.
> >>>>
> >>>> Lee
> >>>>
> >>>> Prof. Lee W. McKnight
> >>>> School of Information Studies
> >>>> Syracuse University
> >>>> +1-315-443-6891office
> >>>> +1-315-278-4392 mobile
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>>> jeanette at wzb.eu 5/9/2007 1:38 PM >>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>> I support the text and Mawaki's suggestion regarding the
> >>>> header of no 2.
> >>>>
> >>>> jeanette
> >>>>
> >>>> Mawaki Chango wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> I support.
> >>>>> I'd advise though to remove ICANN from the heading 2,
> >>>>>
> >> but
> >>
> >>>> not
> >>>>
> >>>>> from the text. Instead of :
> >>>>>
> >>>>> "(2) ICANN and Core Internet Resources"
> >>>>> we could have
> >>>>> "(2) Core Internet Resources and current governance
> >>>>> institutions"
> >>>>> or a variant of that.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Mawaki
> >>>>>
> >>>>> --- Carlos Afonso <ca at rits.org.br> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> No kiss of death -- we will protest! We will not just
> >>>>>>
> >> send
> >>
> >>>> the
> >>>>
> >>>>>> proposal
> >>>>>> and wait... I assume we are engaged in disseminating
> >>>>>>
> >> and
> >>
> >>>>>> lobbying for
> >>>>>> our positions in our constituencies (and, in some
> >>>>>>
> >> cases,
> >>
> >>>> with
> >>>>
> >>>>>> our
> >>>>>> governments as well). In any case, we can negotiate a
> >>>>>>
> >> word
> >>
> >>>>>> replacement
> >>>>>> (meaning the same, of course) later on in the actual
> >>>>>>
> >>>> debate.
> >>>>
> >>>>>> We can
> >>>>>> replace, for example, "ICANN" with "core resources such
> >>>>>>
> >> as
> >>
> >>>> the
> >>>>
> >>>>>> administration/governance of names, numbers and
> >>>>>>
> >>>> protocols..."
> >>>>
> >>>>>> :)
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> --c.a.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> DRAKE William wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Milton Mueller wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> I fully agree with Carlos, both about delivering it
> >>>>>>>>
> >> now,
> >>
> >>>>>> and about the
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> title. Thanks, Parminder for putting it together.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Has there been a formal consensus call, and that's
> >>>>>>>
> >> what
> >>
> >>>>>> we're responding
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> to here?  If so what's the time frame?
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> I'm a yes on both of the above, although it occurs to
> >>>>>>>
> >> me
> >>
> >>>>>> that there was
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> never any follow up discussion on Adam's argument that
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>> framing #2 in
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> terms of ICANN rather than just core resources would
> >>>>>>>
> >> be
> >>
> >>>> the
> >>>>
> >>>>>> kiss of
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> death mAG-wise.  But as the clock is running down and
> >>>>>>>
> >> we
> >>
> >>>>>> have no
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> alternative language to consider, I guess we'll just
> >>>>>>>
> >> see
> >>
> >>>> how
> >>>>
> >>>>>> it goes,
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> assuming the proposal gets through the IGC process.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Cheers,
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Bill
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >> ____________________________________________________________
> >>
> >>>>>>> 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
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>> --
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >>>>>> Carlos A. Afonso
> >>>>>> diretor de planejamento
> >>>>>> Rede de Informações para o Terceiro Setor - Rits
> >>>>>> http://www.rits.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
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >> ____________________________________________________________
> >>
> >>>>> 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
> >>
> >>
> >
> > ____________________________________________________________
> > 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
> >
> >
> 
> 
> --
> Ken Lohento
> Programme "Usages et politiques du numérique" (TIC)/
> Uses and Policies of Digital Technology (ICT)
> Institut Panos Afrique de l'Ouest/Panos Institute West Africa
> 6 rue Calmette Dakar Sénégal
> +221 849 16 66
> www.panos-ao.org
> www.cipaco.org
> www.euroafrica-ict.org
> http://mediatic.panos-ao.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

More information about the Governance mailing list