[governance] Re: IGF Review Consensus Statement for

[Fouad Bajwa]

True, the IGF as an open dialogue forum for Internet Governance is yet
to mature as a stage for international cooperation for compliance and
that gives it uniqueness to be continued. I am sure that if the UN
gives it up, the EU is already geared to do something in the sphere of
Internet Internet Governance. This is a mutlistakeholder process and
if one multilateral process falls out of place, there are other
systems in place to take over this important arena of Internet
affairs.

On Sat, Jun 6, 2009 at 6:18 PM, Yehuda Katz<yehudakatz at mailinator.com> wrote:
> Bill,
>
>>With the IGF up for renewal and China and others pressing to kill it, ...
>
> I promise you the IGF will not die, true UN funding may cease, but the IGF will
> continue.  Who knows maybe it will be picked up by ICANN itself.
>
> If the UN sheds-off the IGF (mainly to reduce cost), there will always be an
> online home for the IGF.
>
> Getting rid of the UN would be like getting rid of the JPA, The IGF would be
> free of that constraint (i.e.: China et. al.  etc...).
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
>



-- 

Regards.
--------------------------
Fouad Bajwa
@skBajwa
Answering all your technology questions
http://www.askbajwa.com
http://twitter.com/fouadbajwa
____________________________________________________________
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