[governance] FYI: Letter from Bulgarian Internet community
JFC Morfin
jefsey at jefsey.com
Sun May 31 16:24:23 EDT 2009
At 21:43 31/05/2009, Michael Froomkin - U.Miami School of Law wrote:
>Er, how about the restructuring of the board to have a controlling
>number of seats for paying members than those who formerly controled ISOC?
>Isn't that a form a 'favoritism'? (Apologies if I have the timing
>wrong, but wasn't that during your tenure?)
Dear George,
my point was not to raise a dispute. It was only to make clear that
as a sustaining member I understand I have no Trustee representing
me, that I understand the priorities of some, and that I have to
fight myself to sustain my own points of view against what I perceive
as a consortium oriented creep. Because I do not think that such a
creep is a good thing for the Internet. However, after years and
years where I tried to technically catalyze a positive evolution at
the IETF, after having been ignored, laughed at, I am now attacked (I
suppose you know what Gandhi said about that strategy). This means
that, unfortunately, a soft catalyzis will not succeed because some
big interests are at stake (that IAB documented this well in its RFC 3869) :
> The principal thesis of this document is that if commercial funding
> is the main source of funding for future Internet research, the
> future of the Internet infrastructure could be in trouble. In
> addition to issues about which projects are funded, the funding
> source can also affect the content of the research, for example,
> towards or against the development of open standards, or taking
> varying degrees of care about the effect of the developed protocols
> on the other traffic on the Internet.
A network cannot be a place of conflicts. This means that we have to
compose. This means that since the current ISOC leadership does not
wish to represent "users" so much and does not express interest in
"people" (in the IGF/WSIS way) we had to:
1) organizea way for the ead users to contribute to the IETF (along
with RFC 3935 which organises the IETF). This is the purpose of the
IUCG (pls look at the Charter).
2) as you say, ask the ISOC current leadership their position. Since
they do not respond, the best was to be practical. I observed the way
they did not support the French Chapter when put under attack, may be
because that chapter has always been rebel to unique thinking. I
listened to the ISOC meetings when they came in Paris last year. I am
one of the few still being present on the French chapter list, now
under the direction of a new commer. I tested staff with the "IPv6
Users Chapter" proposition. I keep reading some of the texts coming
from leadership..
3) as a result to move ahead and document a modern vision of the
Internet that is able to match the users' needs, before the vendors'
strategic interests.
If ISOC is truely ISOC there must be room for everyone in it :
corporations, sustaining members, chapters, local members. I am not
sure it is still the case, nor that the staff wants it. I am sure I
want and we can make it to be the case. I am also sure I am not alone
in sharing your and others' anxiety that ISOC stays Membership's
driven. My test is the OK or not to permit us/me to form the "User
IPv6 Chapter" - we are perfectly legitimate to create.
Best.
jfc
>On Sun, 31 May 2009, George Sadowsky wrote:
>>This is getting to be a silly argument.
>>Norbert: you know full well that ISOC is not governed the way
>>Cambodia is. Why make the post?
>>Parminder: You seem to have a lot of problems.
>>I was on the ISOC Board for 7 years, stepping down in 2004. I
>>never saw any evidence of favoritism to commercial entities that
>>were donors to ISOC. I doubt that this has changed.
>>I suggest that if you want an explanation of of what this
>>membership applications means, you go directly to ISOC and ask them.
>>
>>George
>>
>>~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
>>~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
>>~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
>>At 12:40 AM +0700 6/1/09, Norbert Klein wrote:
>>>Thanks, Parminder, for extending the text of the quote.
>>>Living in Cambodia, I know what "sponsorship" can mean.
>>>
>>>Norbert
>>>=
>>>On Sunday, 31 May 2009 23:20:47 Parminder wrote:
>>> > George Sadowsky wrote:
>>> > > All,
>>> > > > > I believe that what Jefsey writes about platinum members
>>> of ISOC being
>>> > > able to designate areas for standardization (presumably in the IETF,
>>> > > since that's where that happens) is and incorrect. The quote below
>>> > > does not come from the page he references.
>>> > > George,
>>> > > What Jefsey wrote does come directly from the document he
>>> links, if you
>>> > keep reading it after the quote you refer to. The full quote in the
>>> > document is:
>>> > > "The Platinum Sponsorship Program allows your company to
>>> specifically
>>> > designate areas or projects to be supported in the fields of a)
>>> > Standards, b) Public Policy or c) Education and Training. Your
>>> > organization will have enhanced, direct consultation with
>>> ISOC > regarding
>>> > its activities in your funded area. Additional benefits also apply."
>>> > > > The actual quote on that page is:
>>> > > > > "Supporting our Platinum Program gives your company
>>> the ability to
>>> > > focus your contributions specifically on the essential work of the
>>> > > IETF and our Standards activities.."
>>> > > > > Supporting the standards activities in general is not
>>> the same as, as
>>> > > he suggests, specifically designating areas or projects to be
>>> > > supported in the fields of standards.
>>> > > > > George
>>> > > Now that you know what he quoted is correct, what are your
>>> comments on
>>> > it, as someone who I understand is closely associated with ISOC. BTW
>>> > the term 'enhanced .... consultations' reminds me of something :) but
>>> > that is another matter .
>>> > > I have a huge problem with anyone being allowed to buy a
>>> position on > the
>>> > governance system of a body which is either closely involved in policy
>>> > making, or claims to be a civil society body (and ISOCs seems to do
>>> > both). I also have problem with providing any kind of preferred access
>>> > to policy spaces for private interests that are impacted by the
>>> > concerned policies, which is expressly mentioned in the above quote. My
>>> > concerns follow from what are hallowed canons of democratic societies,
>>> > and the fact that we are increasingly compromising them is
>>> indeed > alarming.
>>> > > I find these practices fundamentally antithetical to building of
>>> > legitimate and democratic governance and civil society structures and
>>> > basically against public interest. However, regrettably, the ideology
>>> > behind these kinds of practices is catching on which I think is one of
>>> > the biggest dangers our society faces today. (Remember, it was tried at
>>> > the IGF as well, with a threat to pull out funding if certain issues
>>> > were raised at the IGF.)
>>> > > I brought up exactly the same point at the recent workshop
>>> on APC-CoE's
>>> > proposed code of good practices on participation, transparency etc. The
>>> > list of the IG organizations reviewed in the study done by David Souter
>>> > for the above proposed code included ISOC. I inter alia
>>> raised the > issue
>>> > that we also need to review practices related to the relationship of
>>> > funding with seats in governance structures and preferred access to
>>> > policy spaces. This is an important aspect of participation and
>>> > transparency, which just cannot be left out.
>>> > > I earnestly hope that ISOC as a body involved in policy
>>> making, or as a
>>> > civil society entity, or both, will respond to these key
>>> issues that > are
>>> > being raised about its practices.
>>> > > Parminder
>>> > > PS: At another place the ISOC doc says: "...you can direct
>>> your support
>>> > dollars towards the Internet Society's public policy activities and
>>> > ensure that your voice will be heard on these critical issues". Does
>>> > ISOC act as a lobbying organization on behalf of any big corporate that
>>> > can afford to pay it? Are the public policy positions of ISOC then not
>>> > obviously disproportionately influenced by these big corporate funders?
>>> > These are important questions ISOC must answer as a key player in the
>>> > public arena vis a vis IG issues.
>>>
>>>--
>>>If you want to know what is going on in Cambodia, please visit
>>>The Mirror, a regular review of the Cambodian language press in English.
>>>This is the latest weekly editorial:
>>>Law Enforcement
>>>http://cambodiamirror.wordpress.com/2009/05/25/law-enforcement-sunday-24-5-2009/
>>>(To read it, click on the line above.)
>>>And here is something new every day:
>>>http://cambodiamirror.wordpress.com
>>>PGP key-id 0x0016D0A9
>>>
>>>____________________________________________________________
>>>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
>
>--
>http://www.icannwatch.org Personal Blog: http://www.discourse.net
>A. Michael Froomkin | Professor of Law | froomkin at law.tm
>U. Miami School of Law, P.O. Box 248087, Coral Gables, FL 33124 USA
>+1 (305) 284-4285 | +1 (305) 284-6506 (fax) | http://www.law.tm
> -->It's warm here.<--
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20090531/6a8309a2/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