[governance] Question 6: Comments on Shiva's proposed paras

Ginger Paque gpaque at gmail.com
Tue Jul 14 07:40:53 EDT 2009


Hi Shiva...

I simply have problems with "unconditional". I do understand your point, 
but I think it can be misinterpreted. I also think that it is understood 
that grants made through the UN or the IGF Secretariat cannot have any 
strings attached as to position.

However, is there a different phrase or other word you can suggest to 
convey your meaning?

Are there any other opinions on this? If I am the only one who objects 
to "unconditional", we can leave it in.

Thanks. Best, Ginger

Sivasubramanian Muthusamy wrote:
> Hello Ginger, Hello All,
>
> Thanks for modifying this text, but what is wrong with the idea of 
> unconditionality? That part is excluded from the text ? 
>
> IGC statements are sometimes? rushed out at the last moment, and in 
> the last minute rush as the deadline approaches, the time-constraint 
> justifies a more-than-necessary compromise, or  the point is dropped 
> completely.
>
> I feel that it is signinficant to propose the clause of 
> unconditionality, perhaps for further debate at the MAG, and later in 
> the process of acting upon this point.
>
> Sivasubramanian Muthusamy
>
>
> On Mon, Jul 13, 2009 at 11:20 PM, Ginger Paque <gpaque at gmail.com 
> <mailto:gpaque at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>     Shiva has had to run to catch a train, and has asked me to
>     continue this discussion. I have tried to find a middle ground,
>     which is the following. Do please comment and suggest revisions.
>
>     The Internet Governance Caucus calls upon the IGF Secretariat to
>     apply to the UN General Assembly for substantial funding for IGF
>     programs and participation to further enhance the quality of
>     programs to foster greater diversity of participation.
>
>     There are two aspects to be considered in this regard: a) Present
>     IGF participants representing various stakeholder groups are
>     highly qualified individuals with diverse accomplishments but it
>     is also true that IGF participation needs to be further expanded
>     to include more Civil Society participants known for their
>     commitment and accomplishments outside the IGF arena on various
>     Civil Society causes. And b) The present attendees of the IGF do
>     not represent all participant segments and geographic regions. We
>     mention in for example: Indigenous peoples worldwide, people with
>     disabilities, rural people and particularly those who are the
>     poorest of
>     the poor, landless or migrants; those concerned with promoting
>     peer-to-peer and open access governance structures built on an
>     electronic platform, those looking to alternative modes of
>     Internet governance as ways of responding to specific localized
>     opportunities and limitations, and those working as practitioners
>     and activists in implementing the Internet as a primary resource
>     in support of broad-based economic and social development. Funding
>     possibilities need to be improved and it requires various efforts,
>     but availability of various categories of travel grants for
>     participants may help improve attendance by those not yet seen at
>     the IGF for want of funds. The IGF already has made some funds
>     available for representation from Less Developed Countries, but
>     such funding achieves a limited objective.
>
>     The true cost of the IGF (including all visible and invisible
>     costs to the IGF Secretariat, participating Governments,
>     organizations and individual participants) would be several times
>     that of the actual outflow from the IGF Secretariat in organizing
>     the IGF, as reflected in the IGF book of accounts. If an economist
>     estimates the total visible and invisible costs of the IGF, it
>     would be an enormous sum, which is already being spent each year.
>     With an increment in funding for travel support to panel speaker
>     and participants, which would amount to a small proportion of the
>     true total cost of the IGF, the quality of panels and the
>     diversity of participation could be significantly improved.
>
>     With this rationale, the Internet Governance Caucus recommends
>     that the IGF should consider budgetary allocations supported by
>     grants from business, governments, well funded non-governmental
>     and international organizations and the United Nations. The fund
>     could extend travel grants to 200 lead participants (panel
>     speakers, program organizers), full and partial fellowships to a
>     greater number of participants with special attention to
>     participants from unrepresented categories (unrepresented
>     geographic regions and/or unrepresented participant segments and
>     even to those from affluent, represented regions if there is an
>     individual need).
>
>
>     Jeanette Hofmann wrote:
>
>         As I said before, I support funding the participation of
>         people from least developed countries. I do think that the IGF
>         secretariat should have a reliable funding that ensure
>         independence from private sector donations.
>
>         I don't support the funding of business leaders, business
>         class flights and expensive hotels. Since I don't think we
>         agree on this latter part, I suggested to omit such details.
>         jeanette
>
>         Sivasubramanian Muthusamy wrote:
>
>             Hello Jeanette Hoffmann
>
>             The IGC which makes this statement is fully aware of the
>             PRESENT realities and the statement stems from a positive
>             outlook unconstrained by the present situation. Another
>             million or two or ten or twenty for that matter, isn't way
>             beyond the reach of the IGF body.
>
>             1. When IGC calls for funds it is implied that the IGF
>             will find a way to find funds to answer thiso call.
>
>             2. We need to make this statement if we do not wish to
>             keep the IGF in eternal poverty,
>
>             I am looking at your later response and notice that I
>             would like it not mentioned what is funded. The statement
>             is complete only with such a suggestion and in its present
>             form, is there anything seriously objectionable with what
>             it says about enhancing the quality of programs with
>             greater diversity of participation?
>
>             Thank you.
>
>
>
>             On Mon, Jul 13, 2009 at 10:08 PM, Jeanette Hofmann
>             <jeanette at wzb.eu> wrote:
>
>                Hi, the issue is not that I would like to create
>             another California
>                as Michael G. suggests.
>                Of course, it would be good if the IGF had more means
>             to support
>                people's participation. The issue is whether it makes
>             sense to call
>                upon somebody for funding who has no funding and spends a
>                significant amount of time on soliciting donations for
>             its own
>                functioning.
>                If we ask for money, we should specificy where this
>             money should
>                come from or how it could be generated.
>                jeanette
>
>
>                Ginger Paque wrote:
>
>                    Shiva... you need to address this concern. It is
>             not only
>                    Jeanette who holds this view.
>
>                    Thanks, gp
>
>                    Jeanette Hofmann wrote:
>
>
>
>                        Ginger Paque wrote:
>
>                            Thank you Shiva, I can see that you made a
>             serious
>                            effort at compromise. However, there are
>             still areas I
>                            cannot agree with. Please consider the
>             following
>                            counter-proposal, and of course, we hope
>             for comments
>                            from others as well:
>
>                            [The following text was re-submitted by
>             Shiva, and then
>                            edited by Ginger]
>
>                            The Internet Governance Caucus calls upon
>             the IGF
>                            Secretariat to substantially fund IGF
>             programs and
>                            participation to further enhance the
>             quality of programs
>                            with greater diversity of participation.
>
>
>                        The IGF secretariat has no budget to fund the
>             expenses
>                        listed below. I don't understand why we would
>             want to "call
>                        upon the IGF Secretariat to
>                         > substantially fund IGF programs and
>             participation" in
>                        light of the lack of such funds.
>
>                        jeanette
>
>
>                            There are two aspects to be considered in
>             this regard:
>                            a) Present IGF participants representing
>             various
>                            stakeholder groups are highly qualified
>             individuals with
>                            diverse accomplishments but it is also true
>             that IGF
>                            participation needs to be further expanded
>             to include
>                            more Civil Society participants known for their
>                            commitment and accomplishments outside the
>             IGF arena on
>                            various Civil Society causes.  Business
>             leaders who are
>                            otherwise committed to social and other
>             governance
>                            issues are not seen at the IGF, and not all
>             governments
>                            are represented at the IGF. And b) The
>             present attendees
>                            of the IGF do not represent all participant
>             segments and
>                            geographic regions. This needs to be
>             improved and it
>                            requires various efforts, but availability
>             of various
>                            categories of travel grants for
>             participants may help
>                            improve participation by those not
>             attending the IGF for
>                            want of funds. IGF already has made some
>             funds available
>                            for representation from Less Developed
>             Countries, but
>                            such funding achieves a limited objective.
>
>                            The true cost of the IGF (including all
>             visible and
>                            invisible costs to the IGF Secretariat,
>             participating
>                            Governments, organizations and individual
>             participants)
>                            would be several times that of the actual
>             outflow from
>                            the IGF Secretariat in organizing the IGF,
>             as reflected
>                            in the IGF book of accounts. If an
>             economist estimates
>                            the total visible and invisible costs of
>             the IGF, it
>                            would be an enormous sum, which is already
>             spent. With
>                            an increment in funding for travel support
>             to panel
>                            speaker and participants, which would
>             amount to a small
>                            proportion of the true cost of the IGF, the
>             quality of
>                            panels and the diversity of participation
>             could be improved.
>
>                            With this rationale, the Internet
>             Governance Caucus
>                            recommends that the IGF should consider
>             budgetary
>                            allocations supported by grants from business,
>                            governments, well funded non-governmental and
>                            international organizations and the United
>             Nations. The
>                            fund may extend travel grants to 200 lead
>             participants
>                            (panel speakers, program organizers), full
>             and partial
>                            fellowships to a greater number of
>             participants with
>                            special attention to participants from
>             unrepresented
>                            categories (unrepresented geographic
>             regions and/or
>                            unrepresented participant segments and even
>             to those
>                            from affluent, represented regions if there
>             is an
>                            individual need ).
>
>                            Such a fund would enable the IGF to bring
>             in more
>                            diverse opinions to the IGF from experts
>             who would add
>                            further value to the IGF. It is especially
>             recommended
>                            that such a fund carry no link as to the
>             positions or
>                            content proposed by the presenter (as
>             opposed to a grant
>                            from a business trust with stated or
>             implied conditions
>                            about the positions to be taken). It is
>             recommended that
>                            the IGF create a fund large enough to have
>             significant
>                            impact in further enhancing quality and
>             diversity of
>                            participation.
>
>
>
>
>
>                            Sivasubramanian Muthusamy wrote:
>
>                                Hello Ginger, Michael Guerstein and All,
>
>                                Have revised the statement and the
>             changes made are
>                                highlighted. This mail is best viewed
>             with html /
>                                mime settings. ( for the convenience of
>             those whose
>                                mail settings are plain text, I am
>             attaching the
>                                text as a PDF file which would show the
>             highlighted
>                                changes )
>
>                                Thank you
>
>                                Sivasubramanian Muthusamy
>
>                                   The Internet Governance Caucus calls
>             upon the IGF
>                                Secretariat to
>                                   fund the IGF programs and participation
>                                substantially and
>                                   significantly to further enhance the
>             quality of
>                                programs with
>                                   greater diversity of participation.
>             * *There are
>                                two aspects to be
>                                   considered in this regard: a) WSIS/
>             present IGF
>                                participants
>                                   representing various stakeholder
>             groups are
>                                highly qualified
>                                   individuals with diverse
>             accomplishments but it
>                                is also true that
>                                   IGF participation needs to be
>             further expanded to
>                                invite and
>                                   include more Civil Society
>             participants known for
>                                their commitment
>                                   and accomplishments outside the IGF
>             arena on
>                                various Civil Society
>                                   causes ; business leaders who are
>             otherwise
>                                committed to social
>                                   and other governance issues are not
>             seen at the
>                                IGF, and not all
>                                   governments are represented at the
>             IGF ( and
>                                though not for
>                                   financial reasons, the present
>             participants from
>                                Government are
>                                   not represented on a high enough
>             level ) - [ this
>                                sentence in
>                                   parenthesis may be deleted if
>             unnecessary as it
>                                is not directly
>                                   relevant to the point ] and b) The
>             present
>                                participants of the IGF
>                                   do not represent all participant
>             segments and
>                                geographic regions.
>                                   This needs to be improved and it
>             requires various
>                                efforts, but
>                                   availability of various categories
>             of Travel
>                                Grants for different
>                                   classes of participants may help improve
>                                participation by those
>                                   not attending the IGF for want of
>             funds. IGF
>                                already has made some
>                                   funds available for representation
>             from Less
>                                Developed Countries,
>                                   but such funding achieves a limited
>             objective.
>
>                                   The true cost of the IGF (including
>             all visible
>                                and invisible
>                                   costs to the IGF Secretariat,
>             participating
>                                Governments,
>                                   organizations and individual
>             participants) would
>                                be several times
>                                   that of the actual outflow from the IGF
>                                Secretariat in organizing
>                                   the IGF, as reflected in the IGF book of
>                                accounts. If an economist
>                                   estimates the total visible and
>             invisible costs
>                                of the IGF, it
>                                   would be an enormous sum, which is
>             already spent.
>                                For want of a
>                                   marginal allocation for travel
>             support to panel
>                                speaker and
>                                   participants, which would amount to
>             a small
>                                proportion of the true
>                                   cost of the IGF, the quality of
>             panels and the
>                                diversity of
>                                   participation are compromised.
>
>                                   With this rationale, the Internet
>             Governance
>                                Caucus recommends
>                                   that the IGF should consider liberal
>             budgetary
>                                allocations
>                                   supported by unconditional grants
>             from business,
>                                governments, well
>                                   funded non-governmental and
>             international
>                                organizations and the
>                                   United Nations. The fund may extend
>                                uncompromising, comfortable
>                                   travel grants/ honorarium to 200 lead
>                                participants (panel
>                                   speakers, program organizers, who
>             are largely
>                                invitees who are
>                                   required to be well-received for
>             participation),
>                                full and partial
>                                   fellowships to a large number of
>             participants
>                                with special
>                                   attention to participants from
>             unrepresented
>                                categories
>                                   (unrepresented geographic regions and/or
>                                unrepresented participant
>                                   segments and even to those from
>             affluent,
>                                represented regions if
>                                   there is an individual need ).
>
>                                   Such a fund would enable the IGF to
>             bring in
>                                really diverse
>                                   opinions to the IGF from experts who
>             would add
>                                further value to
>                                   the IGF. It is especially
>             recommended that such a
>                                fund may be
>                                   built up from contributions that are
>                                unconditional (as opposed to
>                                   a grant from a business trust with
>             stated or
>                                implied conditions
>                                   about the positions to be taken;
>             'unconditional'
>                                does not imply
>                                   that funds may have to be disbursed
>             without even
>                                the basic
>                                   conditions that the recipient should
>             attend the
>                                IGF and attend the
>                                   sessions etc. In this context
>             "unconditional"
>                                means something
>                                   larger. It is to hint at a system of
>             Travel
>                                Grants whereby IGF
>                                   will pool funds from Business
>             Corporations,
>                                Governments,
>                                   International Organizations, well
>             funded NGOs and
>                                UN with no
>                                   implied conditions on the positions
>             to be taken
>                                by participants*)*
>                                   and may be awarded to panelists and
>             participants
>                                unconditionally.
>                                   It is recommended that the IGF
>             create a fund
>                                large enough to have
>                                   significant impact in further
>             enhancing quality
>                                and diversity of
>                                   participation.
>
>
>                                Sivasubramanian Muthusamy
>                                Blog: http://isocmadras.blogspot.com
>
>                                facebook: http://is.gd/x8Sh
>                                LinkedIn: http://is.gd/x8U6
>                                Twitter: http://is.gd/x8Vz
>
>
>
>
>                                On Mon, Jul 13, 2009 at 5:55 PM,
>             Sivasubramanian
>                                Muthusamy <isolatedn at gmail.com
>             <mailto:isolatedn at gmail.com>
>                                <mailto:isolatedn at gmail.com
>             <mailto:isolatedn at gmail.com>>
>                                <mailto:isolatedn at gmail.com
>             <mailto:isolatedn at gmail.com>
>                                <mailto:isolatedn at gmail.com
>             <mailto:isolatedn at gmail.com>>>> wrote:
>
>                                   Hello Ginger
>
>                                   Will have just a little time to
>             spend on this,
>                                will review the
>                                   complete questionnaire comments, and
>             reword the
>                                Q6 comment, but
>                                   don't really have a lot of time
>             today. Leaving
>                                for the city in a
>                                   few hours for a short trip, will
>             find some time
>                                to work tomorrow
>                                   as well, but not tonight.
>
>                                   Would prefer this as an IGC
>             statement, rather
>                                than as an
>                                   independent proposal, which I could
>             have sent it
>                                on my own but
>                                   preferred not to.
>
>                                   Shiva.
>
>
>                                   On Mon, Jul 13, 2009 at 5:14 PM,
>             Ginger Paque
>                                <gpaque at gmail.com
>             <mailto:gpaque at gmail.com> <mailto:gpaque at gmail.com
>             <mailto:gpaque at gmail.com>>
>                                   <mailto:gpaque at gmail.com
>             <mailto:gpaque at gmail.com>
>                                <mailto:gpaque at gmail.com
>             <mailto:gpaque at gmail.com>>>> wrote:
>
>                                       Hi Shiva,
>
>                                       I was referring to Q6, as
>             several of us -
>                                including myself,
>                                       and Ian, as well as Michael and
>             others, are
>                                not yet satisfied
>                                       with the wording on the funding
>             concept. You
>                                are welcome to
>                                       continue the discussion and see
>             if you can
>                                reach a consensus
>                                       on it, but I suspect that by the
>             time
>                                everyone is happy, the
>                                       statement won't say much of
>             anything. Could
>                                you review the
>                                       thread on Q6, including Ian's
>             answer to the
>                                complete
>                                       questionnaire draft, and tell us
>             what you think?
>
>                                       Let's look at Q 3 separately, ok?
>
>                                       Thanks. I appreciate your
>             willingness to discuss.
>
>                                       Best,
>                                       Ginger
>
>                                       Sivasubramanian Muthusamy wrote:
>
>                                           Hello Ginger
>
>                                           You would like this
>             submitted as my own
>                                comment, rather
>                                           than as an IGC statement? Is
>             this only on
>                                Q6 or does it
>                                           also apply to Q3?
>
>                                           There were further exchanges
>             between
>                                Gurstein and me, and
>                                           the misunderstanding are
>             being clarified.
>                                Would you really
>                                           feel that the entire
>             statement has to be
>                                dropped as
>                                           comment from IGC?
>
>                                           Thanks.
>
>
>
>                                           On Mon, Jul 13, 2009 at 4:40
>             PM, Ginger Paque
>                                           <gpaque at gmail.com
>             <mailto:gpaque at gmail.com>
>                                <mailto:gpaque at gmail.com
>             <mailto:gpaque at gmail.com>> <mailto:gpaque at gmail.com
>             <mailto:gpaque at gmail.com>
>                                <mailto:gpaque at gmail.com
>             <mailto:gpaque at gmail.com>>>
>                                           <mailto:gpaque at gmail.com
>             <mailto:gpaque at gmail.com>
>                                <mailto:gpaque at gmail.com
>             <mailto:gpaque at gmail.com>> <mailto:gpaque at gmail.com
>             <mailto:gpaque at gmail.com>
>                                <mailto:gpaque at gmail.com
>             <mailto:gpaque at gmail.com>>>>> wrote:
>
>                                              Shiva, As there seems to
>             be quite a
>                                bit of controversy
>                                           about this
>                                              concept and wording, and
>             we are very
>                                short on time, I
>                                           wonder if we
>                                              could continue this
>             discussion after
>                                the questionnaire is
>                                              submitted, perhaps for
>             comments to be
>                                submitted by the
>                                           August
>                                              deadline?
>
>                                              In the meantime, you
>             could submit your
>                                own comment,
>                                           which would
>                                              give you more freedom to
>             make your
>                                point. Is that
>                                           acceptable to you?
>
>                                              Regards,
>                                              Ginger
>
>                                              Sivasubramanian Muthusamy
>             wrote:
>
>                                                  Hello Michael Gurstein
>
>                                                  A quick reply and a
>             little more later.
>
>                                                  On Mon, Jul 13, 2009
>             at 6:12 AM,
>                                Michael Gurstein
>                                                  <gurstein at gmail.com
>             <mailto:gurstein at gmail.com>
>                                <mailto:gurstein at gmail.com
>             <mailto:gurstein at gmail.com>>
>                                <mailto:gurstein at gmail.com
>             <mailto:gurstein at gmail.com> <mailto:gurstein at gmail.com
>             <mailto:gurstein at gmail.com>>>
>                                           <mailto:gurstein at gmail.com
>             <mailto:gurstein at gmail.com>
>                                <mailto:gurstein at gmail.com
>             <mailto:gurstein at gmail.com>>
>                                <mailto:gurstein at gmail.com
>             <mailto:gurstein at gmail.com> <mailto:gurstein at gmail.com
>             <mailto:gurstein at gmail.com>>>>
>                                                
>              <mailto:gurstein at gmail.com <mailto:gurstein at gmail.com>
>                                <mailto:gurstein at gmail.com
>             <mailto:gurstein at gmail.com>>
>                                           <mailto:gurstein at gmail.com
>             <mailto:gurstein at gmail.com>
>                                <mailto:gurstein at gmail.com
>             <mailto:gurstein at gmail.com>>>
>                                <mailto:gurstein at gmail.com
>             <mailto:gurstein at gmail.com> <mailto:gurstein at gmail.com
>             <mailto:gurstein at gmail.com>>
>                                           <mailto:gurstein at gmail.com
>             <mailto:gurstein at gmail.com>
>                                <mailto:gurstein at gmail.com
>             <mailto:gurstein at gmail.com>>>>>> wrote:
>
>                                                     Hi,
>
>                                                         -----Original
>             Message-----
>                                                         *From:*
>             Sivasubramanian
>                                Muthusamy
>                                                
>              [mailto:isolatedn at gmail.com <mailto:isolatedn at gmail.com>
>                                <mailto:isolatedn at gmail.com
>             <mailto:isolatedn at gmail.com>>
>                                           <mailto:isolatedn at gmail.com
>             <mailto:isolatedn at gmail.com>
>                                <mailto:isolatedn at gmail.com
>             <mailto:isolatedn at gmail.com>>>
>                                <mailto:isolatedn at gmail.com
>             <mailto:isolatedn at gmail.com> <mailto:isolatedn at gmail.com
>             <mailto:isolatedn at gmail.com>>
>                                           <mailto:isolatedn at gmail.com
>             <mailto:isolatedn at gmail.com>
>                                <mailto:isolatedn at gmail.com
>             <mailto:isolatedn at gmail.com>>>>
>                                                        
>             <mailto:isolatedn at gmail.com <mailto:isolatedn at gmail.com>
>                                <mailto:isolatedn at gmail.com
>             <mailto:isolatedn at gmail.com>>
>                                           <mailto:isolatedn at gmail.com
>             <mailto:isolatedn at gmail.com>
>                                <mailto:isolatedn at gmail.com
>             <mailto:isolatedn at gmail.com>>>
>                                <mailto:isolatedn at gmail.com
>             <mailto:isolatedn at gmail.com> <mailto:isolatedn at gmail.com
>             <mailto:isolatedn at gmail.com>>
>                                           <mailto:isolatedn at gmail.com
>             <mailto:isolatedn at gmail.com>
>                                <mailto:isolatedn at gmail.com
>             <mailto:isolatedn at gmail.com>>>>>]
>                                                         *Sent:*
>             Sunday, July 12,
>                                2009 6:18 PM
>                                                         *To:*
>                                governance at lists.cpsr.org
>             <mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org>
>                                <mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org
>             <mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org>>
>                                          
>             <mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org
>             <mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org>
>                                <mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org
>             <mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org>>>
>                                                
>              <mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org
>             <mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org>
>                                <mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org
>             <mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org>>
>                                          
>             <mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org
>             <mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org>
>                                <mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org
>             <mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org>>>>
>                                                                      
>                  <mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org
>             <mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org>
>                                <mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org
>             <mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org>>
>                                          
>             <mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org
>             <mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org>
>                                <mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org
>             <mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org>>>
>                                                
>              <mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org
>             <mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org>
>                                <mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org
>             <mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org>>
>                                          
>             <mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org
>             <mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org>
>                                <mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org
>             <mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org>>>>>; Michael Gurstein
>                                                         *Subject:* Re:
>             [governance]
>                                Question 6:
>                                           Comments on Siva's
>                                                         proposed paras
>
>                                                         Hello Michael
>             Gurstein,
>
>                                                         On Mon, Jul
>             13, 2009 at
>                                2:50 AM, Michael
>                                           Gurstein
>                                                        
>             <gurstein at gmail.com <mailto:gurstein at gmail.com>
>                                <mailto:gurstein at gmail.com
>             <mailto:gurstein at gmail.com>>
>                                           <mailto:gurstein at gmail.com
>             <mailto:gurstein at gmail.com>
>                                <mailto:gurstein at gmail.com
>             <mailto:gurstein at gmail.com>>>
>                                <mailto:gurstein at gmail.com
>             <mailto:gurstein at gmail.com> <mailto:gurstein at gmail.com
>             <mailto:gurstein at gmail.com>>
>                                           <mailto:gurstein at gmail.com
>             <mailto:gurstein at gmail.com>
>                                <mailto:gurstein at gmail.com
>             <mailto:gurstein at gmail.com>>>>
>                                                
>              <mailto:gurstein at gmail.com <mailto:gurstein at gmail.com>
>                                <mailto:gurstein at gmail.com
>             <mailto:gurstein at gmail.com>>
>                                           <mailto:gurstein at gmail.com
>             <mailto:gurstein at gmail.com>
>                                <mailto:gurstein at gmail.com
>             <mailto:gurstein at gmail.com>>>
>                                <mailto:gurstein at gmail.com
>             <mailto:gurstein at gmail.com> <mailto:gurstein at gmail.com
>             <mailto:gurstein at gmail.com>>
>                                           <mailto:gurstein at gmail.com
>             <mailto:gurstein at gmail.com>
>                                <mailto:gurstein at gmail.com
>             <mailto:gurstein at gmail.com>>>>>> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>                                                             "The Internet
>                                Governance Caucus calls
>                                           upon the IGF
>                                                            
>             Secretariat to fund the
>                                IGF programs and
>                                           participation
>                                                            
>             substantially and
>                                significantly to
>                                           further enhance the
>                                                             quality of
>             programs
>                                with greater
>                                           diversity of
>                                                            
>             participation" sounds
>                                better?                                
>             YES...
>                                                  Thanks.
>
>
>
>                                                             There are
>             two aspects
>                                to be considered
>                                           in this
>                                                  regard: a)
>                                                             The absence or
>                                                            
>             non-participation of
>                                some of the world's
>                                           most renowned
>                                                             Civil
>             Society opinion
>                                                             leaders is
>             noticeable;
>                                Business Leaders
>                                           who are
>                                                  otherwise
>                                                             committed to
>                                                             social and
>             other
>                                governance issues off
>                                           IGF are not
>                                                  seen at
>                                                             the IGF;
>                                                            
>             Governments are not
>                                represented on a
>                                           level high enough
>
>                                                             HMMM.
>             WHO/WHAT EXACTLY
>                                IS MEANT BY
>                                           "RENOWNED CIVIL
>                                                  SOCIETY
>                                                             OPINION
>             LEADERS"
>                                                             (IN SOME
>             CIRCLES THERE
>                                ARE AT LEAST TWO AND
>                                                  PROBABLY MORE
>                                                             INTERNAL
>                                                            
>             CONTRADITIONS IN THAT
>                                SIMPLE STATEMENT
>                                           AND CERTAINLY
>                                                             NEITHER WE
>             NOR THE
>                                                            
>             SECRETARIAT SHOULD BE
>                                EXPECTED TO
>                                           IDENTIFY WHO THESE
>                                                             "RENOWNED"
>             FOLKS MIGHT
>                                                             BE.
>
>                                                             AS WELL,
>             ARE WE LOOKING
>                                FOR CIVIL
>                                           SOCIETY "LEADERS" OR
>                                                             FOLKS FROM
>             CIVIL
>                                                             SOCIETY
>             ORGANIZATIONS
>                                IN LEADERSHIP
>                                           POSITIONS, OR
>                                                  ARE WE
>                                                             LOOKING
>             FOR CIVIL
>                                                             SOCIETY
>             SPOKESPEOPLE
>                                WHO UNDERSTAND IG
>                                           ISSUES, OR
>                                                  ARE WE
>                                                             LOOKING
>             FOR LEADERS
>                                                             OF RESPONSIBLE
>                                REPRESENTATIVE CS
>                                           ORGANIZATIONS WHO
>                                                  HAVE A
>                                                                      
>                      POSITION//OPINION/KNOWLEDGE ON IG ISSUES
>                                           (EACH OF THESE
>                                                             CATEGORIES IS
>                                                             PROBABLY
>             DISCREET AND
>                                COULD BE INCLUDED
>                                           AMBIGUOUSLY
>                                                  UNDER
>                                                             YOUR
>             STATEMENT.
>
>                                                             IF BIZ
>             LEADERS THINK IT
>                                IS OF SUFFICIENT
>                                           IMPORTANCE
>                                                             THEY'LL
>             LIKELY COME, IF
>                                                             NOT, NOT
>             AND NOT MUCH
>                                WE OR THE
>                                           SECRETARIAT CAN DO
>                                                  ABOUT
>                                                             THAT AND
>             SIMILARLY
>                                                             WITH
>             GOVERNMENTS.
>
>                                                             I THINK
>             THIS PARA
>                                SHOULD BE DROPPED...
>
>
>                                                         I am sorry, I
>             don't agree
>                                with your negative
>                                                  interpretation of
>                                                         such a
>             positive suggestion.
>                                Are we to assert
>                                           that the
>                                                  present
>                                                         participants
>             constitute a
>                                complete,
>                                           representative, and
>                                                         ultimate group
>             ?                                     NO, BUT
>                                           I'M HAVING
>                                                  TROUBLE SEEING WHAT
>             NAOMI KLEIN OR
>                                VENDANA
>                                                         SHIVA WOULD
>             HAVE TO
>                                CONTRIBUTE EITHER...
>
>                                                  I will have to browse
>             a little to
>                                learn about Naomi
>                                           Klein;
>                                                  Vendana Shiva is an
>             Indian name
>                                that sounds
>                                           familiar, but I
>                                                  wasn't thinking of
>             these names,
>                                nor was my point
>                                           intended to
>                                                  bring in anyone whom
>             I know or
>                                associated with.
>                                            Looks like
>                                                  you are reading
>             between the lines
>                                of what I write.
>
>                                                                 HAVING
>             THE HEAD OF
>                                SEWA OR K-NET
>                                           WOULD SEEM TO
>                                                  ME TO BE RATHER
>                                                         MORE USEFUL,
>             "RENOWNED" OR
>                                NOT, AS THEY AT
>                                           LEAST COULD TALK
>                                                         WITH SOME
>             DIRECT KNOWLEDGE
>                                ABOUT HOW IG
>                                           ISSUES IMPACT
>                                                  THEM AND
>                                                         THE KINDS OF
>             THINGS THEY
>                                ARE TRYING TO DO ON
>                                           THE GROUND.
>
>                                                  Again an Indian
>             reference - you
>                                have used the word
>                                           "Sewa" in
>                                                  your comment. Perhaps
>             you are
>                                reading me as someone
>                                           pushing
>                                                  the Indian point of
>             view? I am
>                                not. I am born in
>                                           India, a
>                                                  participant from
>             India, I have
>                                faith in and respect
>                                           for my
>                                                  country but I believe
>             that in an
>                                International
>                                           context I am at
>                                                  least a little wider
>             than a
>                                national.  I have been
>                                           inspired by
>                                                  teachers who taught
>             me in my
>                                school days that
>                                           "patriotism is a
>                                                  prejudice" which is
>             profound
>                                thinking which in
>                                           depths implies
>                                                  that one must be
>             beyond being
>                                patriotic and be
>                                           rather global.
>
>                                                  (Will come back this
>             point and
>                                write more in
>                                           response to what
>                                                  you have written a
>             little later)
>
>                                                  Thank you.
>                                                  Sivasubramanian
>             Muthusamy.
>
>                                                                      
>               MBG
>                                                                      
>                               Sivasubramanian Muthusamy
>                                                                      
>                                                            M
>
>                                                                      
>                                    
>              ____________________________________________________________
>                                                             You
>             received this
>                                message as a
>                                           subscriber on the list:
>                                                                      
>                         governance at lists.cpsr.org
>             <mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org>
>                                <mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org
>             <mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org>>
>                                          
>             <mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org
>             <mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org>
>                                <mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org
>             <mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org>>>
>                                                
>              <mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org
>             <mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org>
>                                <mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org
>             <mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org>>
>                                          
>             <mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org
>             <mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org>
>                                <mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org
>             <mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org>>>>
>                                                                      
>                      <mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org
>             <mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org>
>                                <mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org
>             <mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org>>
>                                          
>             <mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org
>             <mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org>
>                                <mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org
>             <mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org>>>
>                                                
>              <mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org
>             <mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org>
>                                <mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org
>             <mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org>>
>                                          
>             <mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org
>             <mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org>
>                                <mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org
>             <mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org>>>>>
>                                                             To be
>             removed from the
>                                list, send any
>                                           message to:
>                                                                      
>                                  
>              governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org
>             <mailto:governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org>
>                              
>              <mailto:governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org
>             <mailto:governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org>>
>                                                            
>              <mailto:governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org
>             <mailto:governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org>
>                              
>              <mailto:governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org
>             <mailto:governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org>>>
>                                                                    
>             <mailto:governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org
>             <mailto:governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org>
>                              
>              <mailto:governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org
>             <mailto:governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org>>
>                                                            
>              <mailto:governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org
>             <mailto:governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org>
>                              
>              <mailto:governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org
>             <mailto:governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org>>>>
>                                                                      
>                              
>              <mailto:governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org
>             <mailto:governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org>
>                              
>              <mailto:governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org
>             <mailto:governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org>>
>                                                            
>              <mailto:governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org
>             <mailto:governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org>
>                              
>              <mailto:governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org
>             <mailto:governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org>>>
>                                                                    
>             <mailto:governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org
>             <mailto:governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org>
>                              
>              <mailto:governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org
>             <mailto:governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org>>
>                                                            
>              <mailto:governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org
>             <mailto:governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org>
>                              
>              <mailto:governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org
>             <mailto: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
>             <mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org>
>                            <mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org
>             <mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org>>
>                            To be removed from the list, send any
>             message to:
>                               governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org
>             <mailto:governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org>
>                          
>              <mailto:governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org
>             <mailto: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
>             <mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org>
>             <mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org
>             <mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org>>
>                    To be removed from the list, send any message to:
>                       governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org
>             <mailto:governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org>
>                    <mailto:governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org
>             <mailto: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