[governance] FW: Internet Users Globally

Fri Nov 20 09:18:58 EST 2009

Perhaps then in a non boolean way you could answer the simple question;

What concerns of your 5.5 were not addressed?

Seems like your looking for a hypothetical problem. Tell us what was not addressed.

(please, as you pointed out this was not about medicine or public safety or plumbing -- so give us an example that is germaine to Internet Governance not tennis in the Hamptons)

--- On Fri, 11/20/09, Michael Gurstein <gurstein at gmail.com> wrote:

From: Michael Gurstein <gurstein at gmail.com>
Subject: RE: [governance] FW: Internet Users Globally
To: "'Eric Dierker'" <cogitoergosum at sbcglobal.net>, governance at lists.cpsr.org, "'linda misek-falkoff'" <ldmisekfalkoff at gmail.com>
Cc: "'l.d. misek-falkoff'" <ldmisekfalkoff at gmail.com>, respectful.interfaces at gmail.com
Date: Friday, November 20, 2009, 10:09 AM

Eric and all,

So far as I know, I/we are not dealing here with matters of formal Boolean logic but rather concerns with the significance and impact of Internet Governance in the real world.

My question was (and remains) whether the matters under discussion were of significance to the roughly 5.5 billion without current Internet access in the real world and not whether the issues themselves were impacted or not by the numbers of those having Internet access, a subject which I personally consider to be of no interest whatsoever.

Your arguments and the analysis of your (and my) arguments are to my mind complete red herrings.

MBG

-----Original Message-----
From: Eric Dierker [mailto:cogitoergosum at sbcglobal.net] 
Sent: Thursday, November 19, 2009 11:06 PM
To: governance at lists.cpsr.org; linda misek-falkoff; Michael Gurstein
Cc: l.d. misek-falkoff; respectful.interfaces at gmail.com
Subject: Re: [governance] FW: Internet Users Globally

I believe and always have that saying things in a couple of different ways or languages or within differing social or cultural logics is most helpful. Your questions asks for a fair diagram of my antithesis in a straightforward manner. Fair enough.

1. Does the percentage of actual users in a given set have a significant impact on the issues presented? Mr. Gurstein makes that connection.
2. My antithesis to the positive belief of Mr. Gurstein is that it does not matter how many users there are with regard to issues presented.
3. My conclusion is that the percentage of users within any jurisdiction did not in any way influence the issues addressed most recently.

It is my observation that although not representative either by vote or election or life position, the members here and in general engaged in Internet Governance in fact do address the issues of the users and those effected and affected by the Internet. This suitable cadre of individuals in fact can see the large picture of protecting rights of non users as well as users and does in fact address those concerns.

On a more appropriate observation  -- I try very hard to remain as ignorant and ill informed as I can so that I can adequately represent others like me.

--- On Thu, 11/19/09, linda misek-falkoff <ldmisekfalkoff at gmail.com> wrote:

From: linda misek-falkoff <ldmisekfalkoff at gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [governance] FW: Internet Users Globally
To: governance at lists.cpsr.org, "Michael Gurstein" <gurstein at gmail.com>
Cc: "Eric Dierker" <cogitoergosum at sbcglobal.net>, "l.d. misek-falkoff" <ldmisekfalkoff at gmail.com>, respectful.interfaces at gmail.com
Date: Thursday, November 19, 2009, 7:55 PM

Hi Michael, I was in my post, above,  also delving for a minimalist description of the different approaches to topic here;  so if you can clarify or wish to, in response to my post (by choice of course, and no need to explicitly use thesis, antithesis, synthesis if not seeming apt)  - thanks. 

(I wouldn't ask Eric's artistic and exciting style and content to change a whit, or his wit to subside.  But all of you here can probably parse out the points of view for initiates upon this request; would be quite welcome).   

Best wishes, Linda.

On Thu, Nov 19, 2009 at 2:18 PM, Michael Gurstein <gurstein at gmail.com> wrote:

Eric,

I have no idea what this sentence could possibly mean from any
perspective--development, social science, marketing, management--"Direct use

and consumption of a good or service is not any kind of test as to it's
viability or value to a society."

Anyway, since we aren't talking about syringes or police academies (???) but
rather about access to the major and fundamental infrastructure of modern
society --

The unavailability of access is a major impediment to participation and
development... In my country, Canada, the fact that roughly 25% of the
population is not accessing the Internet means that the range of public and
private services that have and are migrating to the Net are inaccessible for
use by those individuals leading either to the requirement for duplication
of services (both manual and electronic) or to the denial of service (where
the service is available only in electronic form...

In the Cameroun (with which I'm not familiar) or in South Africa (with which
I am familiar) lack of access to the Net means that the 97.1% (the Cameroun)
or the 91.4% (South Africa) of the population not currently accessing/able
to access the Net prevents them from having access to the knowledge,
training, and support resources that are available to those with such
access.  Perhaps most important this means that the huge bulk of the
population is not sufficiently informatized as to make a direct contribution
to those activities which will spur local and national economic and social
development.  South Africa for example, has a significant net shortage of
those with sufficient skills to occupy available technical positions
necessary to maintain and extend the Information Society/Information
Economy.  That individuals, communities, local institutions are unable to
access the Net makes it all that much more difficult to bridge these gaps,
fill these slots and so on and so on.

All of which is to give me an opportunity to say once again BTW, how
disappointed I am that there seems to have been little or no discussion at
the IGF (although simply observing from afar I may have missed it) about
issues of concern to the other 5.5 billion or so not currently accessing the
Net.

MBG

 On Thu, Nov 19, 2009 at 11:08 AM, Eric Dierker
<cogitoergosum at sbcglobal.net> wrote:

This argument line is specious. Direct use and consumption of a good or
service is not any kind of test as to it's viability or value to a society.

Do we say that since only 2% of the population uses  syringe(s) to inoculate
thousands that the regulation and governance of medical appliances is not
relevant?  Do we say that because only the supplier uses a telecommunication
device to supply food more efficiently and less expensive that the
telecommunication device is not relevant to the eater?
Are police academies not relevant to the safety of a small child?

In fact the complete opposite is true. The need for intermediaries and those
skilled is the only reason to allow all of us pontithicators to have any say
in governance. The fact that the hunter and gatherer brings home the food
from the forest does not obsolve or relinquish the right and duty of the
homemaker to manage his forest and fields. And since facts and opinions
without study and understanding are more dangerous than helpful, I tolerate
all of you speaking for the consumer ;-) You all be careful that I do not
come up with an instant vaccine against ignorance, lest and whilst you be
out of a job.

--- On Thu, 11/19/09, Nyangkwe Agien Aaron <nyangkweagien at gmail.com> wrote:

From: Nyangkwe Agien Aaron <nyangkweagien at gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [governance] FW: Internet Users Globally
To: governance at lists.cpsr.org, "Michael Gurstein" <gurstein at gmail.com>
Date: Thursday, November 19, 2009, 10:42 AM

Many thanks Michael for the revelation.
I can now understand that despite the availability of an optical fibre
along the cost of my country Cameroun about 97.1% of my fellow country
men and women do not use internet. Astonishing is the finding that
only 86.56 Senegalese do not have access to Internet.
And when you look at the per capita income of both countries!!!

Internet bandwith capacity in my office is here in Douala is 256/64

Aaon

On 11/18/09, Michael Gurstein <gurstein at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> For a very revealing application concerning Internet users by country go
>> to  the

>>
>> If you go to Google and put "Internet users in (your country of choice)"
>> into the search bar you will get the information graphed by year!
>>
> I'm wondering how much of the discussion at this year's IGF was of
relevance
> to the 99.19% of Malians who are not currently Internet users (or
similalry
> for 99.16% of Chadians, 89.49% of Bolivians, 92.8% of Indians, 98.18% of
> Papua New Guineans etc.etc.
>
>> MBG
>

--
Aaron Agien Nyangkwe
Journalist-OutCome Mapper
Special Assistant The President
ASAFE
P.O.Box 5213
Douala-Cameroon

Tel. 237 3337 55 31, 3337 50 22
Fax. 237 3342 29 70
____________________________________________________________
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

--
LDMF.
> Dr. Linda D. Misek-Falkoff
> 914 769 3652
> law /  computing / humanities:
> Founder/Director *Respectful Interfaces*;
> Member, Board, Officer - Communications Coordination Committee for the
> U.N.;
> World Education Fellowship;
> Member Committees on disability, aging, health, values, development;
> National Disability Party (NDP); International Disability Caucus;
> Persons with Pain Intl.;
> ICT multiple decades;
> Other affiliations on Request.
>
> n.b.:

> -  You are welcome to join *Respectful Interfaces.* The *Respectful
> Interfaces* Coda is: "Achieving Dialogue While Cherishing Diversity" (ask
> about leadership interning).

> - Communication, Cooperation and Collaboration are core values of the
CCC/UN.

____________________________________________________________

-----Inline Attachment Follows-----

____________________________________________________________
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

-----Inline Attachment Follows-----

____________________________________________________________
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/20091120/f4361c30/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