[governance] IGC on its list

Mon Jul 6 17:17:18 EDT 2009

I feel the same way at times, Ginger. If I have something constructive to
say here, then I comment. If I don't say anything, it doesn't mean I
completely ignore what is being passed around here. I listen and if I feel
that discussion needs my expert knowledge, then I say something. People are
different in many ways and it goes to say that they react differently, too.
I suppose we can always reply "here" the same way the teacher calls out our
name during attendance.  Some do raise their hand silently. But if there is
a need to be more verbal, like what a teacher does, "kindly-please-speak-up"
should be conveyed to the list.

I agree that people tend to ignore topics that they are not conversant with.
That is to be expected. Only a fool tries to pass off himself/herself as an
authority on everything. Consequently, we tend to restrict ourselves to
areas where we have some expertise and therefore, can positively contribute.
It so happen that there are a lot of issues going around ICANN that
basically a lot of people have to comment on.

For instance, you asked, Karl, if our future is tied with ICANN.  I cannot
exactly say that it's "everything" for us but we do know that there are
issues around ICANN that affect us in the Philippines.  We have issues in
ISOC PH that concern the .ph domain dispute and some felt there was some
progress when Twomey was the CEO. We don't know yet how Beckstrom will be
like. But our concern now is having a GAC rep from the Philippines who would
work more for the betterment of Filipinos rather than enjoy the perks of
being a GAC rep. We are trying to nominate a GAC rep to the CICT (Commission
of Information and Comm Technology) and hoping we can resolve our own local
issues. We try to. So  you cannot blame us if we tend to speak up on issues
that can affect us.

Regards,
Charity Gamboa-Embley
ISOC PH IGWG Chairperson

On Mon, Jul 6, 2009 at 10:48 AM, Ginger Paque <gpaque at gmail.com> wrote:

> IG issues are not restricted, except that they should be coherent and
> follow general rules of netiquette. (This is the Internet governance caucus
> list. IGF policy should be confirmed with the IGF Secretariat).
>
> I assume by "dumb" silence, you mean mute. Certainly silence is preferable
> to meaningless posts for the sake of posting.
>
> My personal experience is that people answer posts that interest and
> motivate them. I have found that if I am trying to push a non-essential or
> untimely issue, people do not answer me. There is certainly no obligation
> (or even expectation) for anyone to answer any post. If some people get more
> response than others, I assume it is because they are posting information
> and discussions that are more relevant to the list.
>
> Regards,
> Ginger
>
>
> kpeters at tldainc.org wrote:
>
>>     If I might add one further question to the very interesting questions
>> of Mr. Drake;
>>
>>     To what extent does this forum restrict itself to the internet as it
>> relatres to ICANN and the US DoC to resolve internet policies and does it in
>> fact have the freedom to discuss the real and dynamic internet (for better
>> or worse) making ICANN less and less relevant on the international scene?
>> Every time I have mentioned internet activity outside of ICANN, this list,
>> as it is very good at doing, completely ignores the subject as if not seeing
>> it will make it not exist. Is this an IGF policy? Is your future tied
>> exclusively to ICANN? Clear answers to these questions will tell a lot more
>> about your future than answers to all the other questions combined.
>>     Based on past experience, I expect dumb silence to this question but
>> would welcome thought out response!
>>
>> -Karl E. Peters
>> kpeters at tldainc.org
>>
>> Quoting William Drake <william.drake at graduateinstitute.ch>:
>>
>>  Hi,
>>>
>>> Skimming and deleting over morning coffee, a random thought occurs: is
>>> this still the listserv of the IGC?  It hasn't been obvious of late.
>>> It's been quite awhile since there much traffic from people who are in
>>> the IGC discussing the sort of concerns for which we established the
>>> list seven years ago, and it's not like there are no live issues out
>>> there.  For example, do we not intend to submit a group statement on
>>> the IGF review by the July 15 deadline?  We had some preliminary
>>> discussion on this in May and people indicated a preference for some
>>> focused dialogue leading to a statement of more than a couple
>>> paragraphs outlining why the caucus favors renewal.  Given the rather
>>> variable inputs the UN and the IGF secretariat (for the Sharm
>>> synthesis paper) will be receiving from member governments, one would
>>> think this is an important thing to do.
>>>
>>> Comments on the review process so far are at
>>>
>>> http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/index.php/component/chronocontact/?chronoformname=FormalConsult032009ListView
>>> (Great URL, I love the website ;-)
>>>
>>> The questions we are asked to address are:
>>>
>>> 1. To what extent has the IGF addressed the mandate set out for it in
>>> the Tunis Agenda?
>>> 2. To what extent has the IGF embodied the WSIS principles?
>>> 3. What has the impact of the IGF been in direct or indirect terms?
>>> Has it impacted you or your stakeholder group/institution/government?
>>> Has it acted as a catalyst for change?
>>> 4. How effective are IGF processes in addressing the tasks set out for
>>> it, including the functioning of the Multistakeholder Advisory Group
>>> (MAG), Secretariat and open consultations?
>>> 5. Is it desirable to continue the IGF past its initial five-year
>>> mandate, and why/why not?
>>> 6. If the continuation of the Forum is recommended, what improvements
>>> would you suggest in terms of its working methods, functioning and
>>> processes?
>>> 7. Do you have any other comments?
>>>
>>> Surely we can manage answers to these in the next ten days, no?
>>>
>>> Best,
>>>
>>> Bill
>>>
>>> ***********************************************************
>>> William J. Drake
>>> Senior Associate
>>> Centre for International Governance
>>> Graduate Institute of International and
>>>  Development Studies
>>> Geneva, Switzerland
>>> william.drake at graduateinstitute.ch
>>> www.graduateinstitute.ch/cig/drake.html
>>> ***********************************************************
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> 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
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20090706/c8c0e6d4/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