[governance] User input to Internet architecture work

[Ian Peter]

Hi McTim,


Let me pick up at

> 
> There is no "Internet Police Force', nor should there be, nor should
> there be an "Internet Government", rather decentralised functions in
> diverse bodies that use open, transparent, bottom-up processes, all
> communicating and coordinating and cooperating together.  Much like
> what we currently have, which has helped to make the Internet so
> resilient and useful for so many.
> 
> In addition, I think that giving this sort of authority to an
> organisation whose "Board" is a "Multistakeholder" Advisory Group
> which has some not so secret 50% rule of govt representation, and the
> rest of the folk are appointed by the UNSG is not the sort of body I
> would choose to take on this uberpower (if I wanted this power to be
> granted).
> 

I don’t see any of this as incompatible with what I am suggesting, nor do I
suggest some centralised power such as an IGF as controlling everything. IGF
to me would be a nice catalyst for development of separate structures and
groups where we currently have gaps (we went through a bit of an analysis of
where there are gaps a few months ago here)

What I would like to see is a situation where every stakeholder group had a
clear and appropriate role in each governance organisation, and where
governance organizations as a whole provided coverage of all critical areas
where we do need different groups of stakeholders involved. (and clear
interrelationships)  We aren't there yet!

No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition. 
Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: 269.21.3/1308 - Release Date: 03/03/2008
10:01
 

____________________________________________________________
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