Mars attacks - Re: [governance] Comments on Rio - Suggestions for Delhi - main

[Michael Gurstein]

McTim and all I'm sure that all of these folks listed below are most
estimable and public spirited but probably would be as reflective
ideologically of their own societies as any random sample would be i.e. no
more (or less) supportive of a Civil Society position on issues of global
institutional governance (or anything else) as any queue on a public street.

What you/those folks mean by "Internet policy making" is I would guess the
kind of "policy" that one would find in a normal network management
operations manual -- I googled "network management policy" and this was the
first thing that popped up was
http://www.bitpipe.com/data/web/bp/netmgmt/netmgmt_tutorial.jsp ... Not much
there that is recognizable to most of the folks discussing Internet
governance policy here (or at the IGF) I would guess.

Surely someone somewhere has access to a grad student who could quickly put
together maybe two Internet governance glossaries one covering the technical
details and the other covering the institutional ones with some sort of
notation to separate the different meanings given to the common terms and
eliminate some of these dialogues of the deaf.

MG


-----Original Message-----
From: McTim [mailto:dogwallah at gmail.com] 
Sent: February 14, 2008 10:53 PM
To: governance at lists.cpsr.org; Meryem Marzouki
Subject: Re: Mars attacks - Re: [governance] Comments on Rio - Suggestions
for Delhi - main


On Thu, Feb 14, 2008 at 9:26 PM, Meryem Marzouki <marzouki at ras.eu.org>
wrote:
>
>  Le 14 févr. 08 à 18:12, McTim a écrit :
>
>  > But IF you really think so, then you must, logically, admit them as 
> a  > 4th stakeholder group!  After all, if they aren't clearly animal,  
> > mineral or vegetable, they MUST be a new type of thing,
>
>  "the others", "the mutants", what exactly?!

If you'd like a list, it just so happens that I have a sample available.
The RIPE community decided last year to begin a Enhanced Cooperation Task
Force. I thought it might be useful to look at the number of gov't folk that
participated in that community pre- vs. post WSIS.  Seems that there wasn't
any significant differences in the pre and post samples, but it did leave me
with a list of folk who are non-profit, non-business and non-governmental,
all of whom are keen to
promote public interest in Internet policy making.   The following are
groups (mainly of EU origins) whose reps attended one single meeting (RIPE
55) in 2007 (NB: all duplicates removed, full list of attendees of RIPE
meetings available at ripe.net.):

.SE
ACONET
AFNIC
AfriNIC
AMS-IX
APNIC
ARIN
Autonomica AB
Caspur
CERN - European Organization for
CZ.NIC
DENIC eG
DFN Verein
DK Hostmaster A/S
DNS BE
DNS-Belgium
Euro-IX
HEAnet
ICANN
ICM, Warsaw University
Internet Systems Consortium
JANET-CERT
Japan Network Information Center
Japan Registry Services Co.,Ltd.
KTHNOC/Sunet
Kungliga Tekniska Hogskolan
LACNIC
LINX
LITNET
LONAP Ltd
London Internet Exchange
MANDA
Merit Network
MIX - Milan Internet eXchange
NaMeX
NETNOD Internet Exchange
nic.at
NIKHEF
NIX.CZ
NLnet Labs
Nominet UK
Packet Clearing House
RENATER
RIPE NCC
Royal Institute of Technology
SIDN
Southwest Research Institute
SWITCH
Technical Chamber of Greece
TERENA
The Spamhaus Project
TOP-IX
UKERNA
UNINETT
UniVie / ACOnet / VIX

So it's not just ICANN/ISOC/IETF, etc that we are talking about.  The above
is a small snapshot, the global picture is, of course, much larger.

>
>  > and be given
>  > equal representation.
>
>  Hey, wait a minute! Before giving them equal representation, we've to  
> check this new specy, see if it doesn't have aggressive intentions, 
> etc.
>
>  Just kidding, but come on, Mc Tim, where do you expect to take the  
> caucus with such points?

Ideally, I'd like to take the caucus to the places (lists and
meetings) where I have participated in Internet administration. However,
since I have been tilting at that particular windmill for quite a while with
little success, for the purpose of this discussion, I will settle for some
reality based, logical thinking.

There are hundreds of Non-PS, non-gov't, non-profit groups around the world
who do Internet administration/coordination/communication and policy making.
Many of them built and help run the Internet.

IF we as a group recognize there are non-governmental, non-PS organisations
who participate in Internet administration/coordination/communication and
policy making AND we deny that they are CS bodies, then we MUST allow that
they constitute a 4th SH grouping.

The realpolitik of the situation AFAIK is  that this 4th group has already
been enshrined in the pantheon of the MAG.  To say they shouldn't exist as a
4th group, AND to say that they are not "pure enough CS" to be considered as
CS, but we will throw them a bone and give them a quota of 6 seats is, at
best, self- defeating.

Beyond the deadline for submitting IGC
>  comments?

I have already signified that I am ok with the majority of the statement.

I would rather the caucus make no statement than say something that is
illogical, self-denying and ultimately self-defeating.  Removing references
to the section that offends some would be the ideal situation under the
circumstance.  Otherwise, the coordinators can call rough consensus on the
statement and then we go through the appeal process if there is an appeal.
My reading of the charter makes me think that voting is only for leadership
roles, but I may be mistaken.

I must say that impugning ones motives does not impress.

In the archives, you can find posts where I have made my agenda, motivations
and reasons for participating on this list clear.  I have always been
upfront about this, and wish that others would be as forthcoming.

AFAIK, we as a group have taken no stance against "neo-liberalism".  I don't
even know what it means, nor do I care. I only care that whatever we help
build is as good as what we have, and that it helps bring more folk online
while prtecting the traditional values of the Internet (end2end, bottom-up,
etc).  If that is neo-liberal, I will proudly wear the label.

-- 
Cheers,

McTim
$ whois -h whois.afrinic.net mctim
____________________________________________________________
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