[governance] IGC review

Milton L Mueller mueller at syr.edu
Fri Jan 25 16:25:58 EST 2008


 
Parminder:
This letter is a great idea, I would encourage you to send it. Perhaps add to the charter signing explanation that only people who sign the charter can vote? 
 
Milton Mueller
Professor, Syracuse University School of Information Studies
XS4All Professor, Delft University of Technology
------------------------------
Internet Governance Project:
http://internetgovernance.org <http://internetgovernance.org/> 

 


________________________________

	From: Parminder [mailto:parminder at itforchange.net] 
	Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2008 11:00 PM
	To: governance at lists.cpsr.org
	Subject: [governance] IGC review
	
	

	Hi everyone

	 

	>Something tells me that it is the right time for all of us - at least those of us who care enough about this group - to take up a comprehensive review of the IGC

	 

	That something that prompted me to call for a comprehensive IGC review also whispered in my ears not to be surprised if no one responded :-). 

	 

	Well, the dose of medicine may have been too much for the present precarious state of the patient, but I do not think we have an alternative. We need to do this sooner or later. And therefore this thread will be kept open, and I may from time to time urge members to get on with this exercise. I have noticed that on this elist there are certain undefined factors - of timing and/ or content - that suddenly provoke some very energetic response and broad involvement. So we will wait for those moments in the context this important task.... :-) 

	 

	I have two offlist responses on what may be done to make the group more active in terms of its advocacy mandate, elements of which I will share with the list in the coming time. 

	 

	Meanwhile, I have a proposal. This is in context of the fact that

	 

	 

	1.	As stated, we urgently need to build/ strengthen the active advocacy component of this group, which is also required as per its charter (http://www.igcaucus.org/IGC-charter_final-061014.html) 

	 

	 

	2.	At Rio IGF I met some civil society members interested in IG issues, and willing to be actively involved in global CS advocacy on progressive directions in IG, who were not members of the IGC. Most did not know of its existence.   

	 

	 The IGC charter also mandates the group to make active efforts of outreach to the wider civil society constituency. I solicit both advice and action by the members of this group in this direction. What I propose at this point is to write the following email to all those on the IGF, Rio, participants list that are from civil society, and appear likely to be interested. 

	 

	"Dear ...... 

	 

	This email is from the Co-Coordinator of the Civil Society Internet Governance Caucus (IGC). IGC is a group of civil society actors who are interested in IG issues, and wish 'to promote global public interest objectives in Internet governance policy making' (to quote the charter of the group which may be seen at http://www.igcaucus.org/IGC-charter_final-061014.html).

	 

	Your participation at the IGF Rio indicates that you may be interested in associating with such a group. We are especially trying to reach out to such individuals who have not merely an academic interest in IG but are interested in pursuing a relatively active advocacy agenda in this area. Issues like openness of the Internet, freedom of expression, privacy, Internet and development and IPR versus public domain on the Internet are some important Internet policy areas which require civil society engagement at a global level.  A civil society group like the IGC which conducts most of its activities online, supported with some crucial interventions in face-to-face meetings on IG issues, provides a useful forum for individuals who may be differently situated in terms of availability of time and other resources, but are nonetheless interested in impacting Internet policy making. 

	 

	IGC mailing list is also one of the most active forums of informed discussions on IG issues with very diverse viewpoints. Participation in these discussions may help you understand and shape civil society perspectives on IG. 

	 

	If you are interested in joining the group, at the first level you may subscribe to the IGC mailing list using the web interface at http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/subscribe/governance . In addition, if you are willing to subscribe to the IGC charter (http://www.igcaucus.org/IGC-charter_final-061014.html ) please reply to this email with such indication, and we will add your name to the list of individuals who have subscribed to the IGC charter.

	 

	Thanks..... " 

	 

	I am not sure if many will respond but we will be fulfilling one of the tasks mandated to us by the charter, and can also hope to get some new energy into IGC. 

	 

	If any member has any comments to offer on the above please do it over the next week. 

	 

	 

	Parminder 

	 

	
________________________________


	From: Parminder [mailto:parminder at itforchange.net] 
	Sent: Monday, January 14, 2008 8:21 PM
	To: governance at lists.cpsr.org
	Subject: [governance] IGC review

	 

	IGC members,

	 

	Something tells me that it is the right time for all of us - at least those of us who care enough about this group - to take up a comprehensive review of the IGC in a back-to-basics/ bare-all spirit. We need to examine what we are here for, how well we are doing it, and which direction should we go from here. We did very briefly try some such review during the face-to-face IGC meeting at Rio, but the time was too short for anything worthwhile, and the participants' minds and energies were mostly occupied with what was happening in the IGF. However some concrete suggestions did come up, and I as a co-coordinator promised to initiate a discussion on the IGC email list on rethinking/ restructuring IGC.

	 

	We all can see that there is a certain limbo that this group is at present caught in. Apart from some continued high quality discussions there appears to be not much will and/or energy vis-à-vis an activist advocacy role in this group, which is one of its primary mandate as per the charter adopted in 2005 ( pl see http://www.igcaucus.org/IGC-charter_final-061014.html ). For instance, we are not making much progress towards developing a caucus position for the very important Feb. consultations for the IGF. I had given out a call seeking volunteers for the position of co-coordinator, and I have only received one name till now.  

	 

	Many members who had earlier been very involved in active advocacy kind of roles seem to have reduced their involvement and many other members who are very involved in discussions on this list seem to either not commit themselves to participating in activist roles of developing common positions etc, or they are unable yet to figure out the best way to do this.  And I think it is a good time to find out the reasons for this situation in  a constructive spirit of moving forward with a greater clarity of what is the best role for this group, and how can that be done most effectively. Such an exercise will help people shape their involvement (or, well, probably withdrawal of involvement) in this group. 

	 

	This in my opinion should be a time for all of us to come out clearly with how we see this group, and where do we want to take it from here. While this process may necessarily mean that many contentions would come out in the open, and we will try to figure out what best can we do about them, we hope that sufficient amount of civility is maintained in this process. This doesn't mean we need to necessarily moderate our views - I think, for a start, we need some very open and honest discussion here - but only that we do not get personal and abusive. 

	 

	While I will come out with my personal views on this subject separately, in order to set the ball rolling I will mention some of my 'more neutral' viewpoints. I think that the politics of technologies (or ICTs) are impacting our societies in a major way, and unfortunately there is great lack of awareness (and, consequently, involvement) of the public at large about how the manner of development of these technologies may underlie the very shaping of our societies. IGC is one of few public interest groups at the global level that is active in this very important area. Lack of public interest advocacy and involvement, which is what our inactivity/ abdication will contribute to, will make for dominant interests shaping the world in manner that serves their interests even more. All of us who fear this possibility, while also seeing the opportunity in the new technologies for a freer as well as a more equal and just world, and have some knowledge, expertise and 'positions/ connections/ linkages' in this area, should sincerely explore how best can we further the public interest through this group. On the process side, IGC also represents a unique experiment in global civil society organization, and it is up to us to prove that such new networked forms of civil society organization and advocacy can be successful. 

	 

	Recent emails by Garth and Dan, among others, do discuss some of the issues mentioned above. Hopefully we can have some involved discussions in the next few weeks on these issues which may help us focus and structure IGC more purposefully.  

	 

	Parminder 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20080125/63e60c42/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
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