From fouadbajwa at gmail.com  Sat Oct 31 20:16:32 2009
From: fouadbajwa at gmail.com (Fouad Bajwa)
Date: Sun, 1 Nov 2009 09:16:32 +0900
Subject: [governance] Re: IDN's Internationalized Domain Names - A New
 Era
In-Reply-To: <C7131A12.78B1%ian.peter@ianpeter.com>
References: <20091031131123.GA22588@sources.org>
	 <C7131A12.78B1%ian.peter@ianpeter.com>
Message-ID: <701af9f70910311716w34b19daemba70f608733a97e9@mail.gmail.com>

Very true Ian, but again, we are getting them now in the developing
world countries. This was announced by ICANN day before yesterday and
so finally they are moving ahead.

I am however very convinced and geared for the fact that this means
further issues with relevance to Internet Governance....

Btw, was just sharing the news I witnessed live :o)

On Sun, Nov 1, 2009 at 8:57 AM, Ian Peter <ian.peter at ianpeter.com> wrote:
> Fouad wrote
>
>>> a move that is being described as the biggest change to the way the
>>> internet works since it was created 40 years ago.
>
> Very few people who have examined this subject think the Internet was
> created 40 years ago. See
> http://www.nethistory.info/History%20of%20the%20Internet/origins.html
> for an article I wrote when the same group celebrated the "35th
> anniversary".
>
> I think Stephane's comments are relevant. ICANN's tick on IDNs is welcome
> and overdue, but not ground breaking.
>
> The real credit here does not lie with ICANN, but with people like Dr. John
> Klensin, Dr. Konishi (Japan), Prof. Qian (China), Dr. Kenny Huang (Taiwan),
> and Dr. Ko (Korea), James Seng (Singapore), TanTin Wee, many others. And as
> Stephane states, the breakthrough was five years ago, not now.
>
> But spin doctors create popular history and myths propagate.
>
>
>
> On 1/11/09 12:11 AM, "Stephane Bortzmeyer" <bortzmeyer at internatif.org>
> wrote:
>
>> On Sat, Oct 31, 2009 at 08:22:33PM +0900,
>>  Fouad Bajwa <fouadbajwa at gmail.com> wrote
>>  a message of 109 lines which said:
>>
>>> The internet regulator ICANN has approved plans to allow
>>> non-Latin-script web addresses,
>>
>> Unicode characters in domain names have been technically approved in
>> 2003 (with the publication of RFC 3490) and installed first in a TLD a
>> few months later (though I do not remember which TLD was the first
>> one). ICANN, as often, is very late here. We see "non-Latin-script web
>> addresses" for many years.
>>
>>> a move that is being described as the biggest change to the way the
>>> internet works since it was created 40 years ago.
>>
>> This is simply ridiculous. More than the creation of the DNS? Or of
>> BGP? Or than the deployment of TCP/IPv4, both non-existent 40 years
>> ago?
>>
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> 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
>



-- 
Regards.
--------------------------
Fouad Bajwa
@skBajwa
Answering all your technology questions
http://www.askbajwa.com
http://twitter.com/fouadbajwa
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ATVDW1tDZzA
____________________________________________________________
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


From ian.peter at ianpeter.com  Sat Oct 31 19:57:22 2009
From: ian.peter at ianpeter.com (Ian Peter)
Date: Sun, 01 Nov 2009 10:57:22 +1100
Subject: [governance] Re: IDN's Internationalized Domain Names - A New
 Era
In-Reply-To: <20091031131123.GA22588@sources.org>
Message-ID: <C7131A12.78B1%ian.peter@ianpeter.com>

Fouad wrote

>> a move that is being described as the biggest change to the way the
>> internet works since it was created 40 years ago.

Very few people who have examined this subject think the Internet was
created 40 years ago. See
http://www.nethistory.info/History%20of%20the%20Internet/origins.html
for an article I wrote when the same group celebrated the "35th
anniversary". 

I think Stephane's comments are relevant. ICANN's tick on IDNs is welcome
and overdue, but not ground breaking.

The real credit here does not lie with ICANN, but with people like Dr. John
Klensin, Dr. Konishi (Japan), Prof. Qian (China), Dr. Kenny Huang (Taiwan),
and Dr. Ko (Korea), James Seng (Singapore), TanTin Wee, many others. And as
Stephane states, the breakthrough was five years ago, not now.

But spin doctors create popular history and myths propagate.



On 1/11/09 12:11 AM, "Stephane Bortzmeyer" <bortzmeyer at internatif.org>
wrote:

> On Sat, Oct 31, 2009 at 08:22:33PM +0900,
>  Fouad Bajwa <fouadbajwa at gmail.com> wrote
>  a message of 109 lines which said:
> 
>> The internet regulator ICANN has approved plans to allow
>> non-Latin-script web addresses,
> 
> Unicode characters in domain names have been technically approved in
> 2003 (with the publication of RFC 3490) and installed first in a TLD a
> few months later (though I do not remember which TLD was the first
> one). ICANN, as often, is very late here. We see "non-Latin-script web
> addresses" for many years.
> 
>> a move that is being described as the biggest change to the way the
>> internet works since it was created 40 years ago.
> 
> This is simply ridiculous. More than the creation of the DNS? Or of
> BGP? Or than the deployment of TCP/IPv4, both non-existent 40 years
> ago?
> 
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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


From cogitoergosum at sbcglobal.net  Thu Oct  1 02:08:55 2009
From: cogitoergosum at sbcglobal.net (Eric Dierker)
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 2009 23:08:55 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: AW: [governance] so do i owe bill drake a pizza or not?
Message-ID: <163852.38470.qm@web83915.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>

Wolfgang,
 
The majority on this list cannot possibly accept your analysis.  If they did they would have to accept some responsibility themselves.  Pontificates and professors and international foundation parasites cannot work in exchange for participation.  They cannot actually help to give individuals a voice or their organizations will lose their power.  They would have to stop criticizing stupid netizens and dotcommoners and BoD members. They would have to actually provide open and transparent and bottom up accountability in their own clubs. They would have to follow actual rules of human rights organizations and provide for voting in an appropriate manner within their own orgs. They would need to have open memberships. They would have to spend money on public education instead of conventions and worldwide meetings and self serving publications.
 
No I think they will continue to eat pizza with a fork and congratulate each other in the "I told you so - it will never work" old boy's network.

--- On Wed, 9/30/09, "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang" <wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de> wrote:


From: "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang" <wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
Subject: AW: [governance] so do i owe bill drake a pizza or not?
To: governance at lists.cpsr.org, "Jeanette Hofmann" <jeanette at wzb.eu>, governance at lists.cpsr.org, "Avri Doria" <avri at psg.com>
Date: Wednesday, September 30, 2009, 5:03 PM


Dear list,

I see it as a right next step into the right direction. If you understand the whole ICANN saga as a process than the "Affirmation" is just another step with an open outcome but a step forward. 

There are some points which are really innovative:

a. the review panels will produce an interesting mix of new and innocative multistakeholder bodies where the members of these bodies will have probably to write their own rules for inner communication and interaction. This is the exploration of new territory. This goes beyond the WGIG and MAG experiences. Certainly the final confirmation for the composition of the review panels is in the hands of ICANNs CEO abd the GAC Chair. But this is already an expression of "co-governance", or - with other words - a further decentralization of power and decision making. Nobody can make single decisions. This will complicated the process, will lead to delays and certain forms of fighting inwards and outwards, but it makes the whole process more transparent, democratic, inclusive and at the end accountable to the broader public.

b. I like also the various principles which are included in the text - starting from the public interest to consumer choice, privacy protection, competition, stability, security, interoperability etc. If you collect all these principles and list it on one page you have a "Internet Governance Declaration" which goes beyond the Tunis document.

c. I am also pleased that ICANN and NTIA resisted the bipartisan letter which came from the US Congress in August. In his video Beckstrom argues in an impressive way that the "Affirmation" meets on the one hand the criteria of the letter (security, stability, headquartered in the US, US role in the GAC) etc. but does not follow the congressional recommendation just to continue with the JPA in its present form for ever. A very smart move. 

I agree also with Bertrand that we need now a discussion how to implement this document, how to bring the paper language into political realities. It will depend to a high degree by the individuals (and institutions) who will become involved in this process. It will not be "rest in peace". It is a challenge with a lot of work, a lot of discussion and fierce struggles. But this process will create a dynamic process which will open doors to new territories with the potential to make Internet Governance more democratic, transparent, inclusive and accountable.

Wolfgang


________________________________

Von: Jeanette Hofmann [mailto:jeanette at wzb.eu]
Gesendet: Mi 30.09.2009 17:57
An: governance at lists.cpsr.org; Avri Doria
Betreff: Re: [governance] so do i owe bill drake a pizza or not?



I would say the new arrangement offers a potential for change but is
very difficult to say at this point to what extent such changes will
become reality.

What I really like about the document is the degree to which the Obama
administration acknowledges

* the existence of other fora and communities ("cross-community
deliberations", para 7). This is very different from what we used to
hear, namely that we should participate in ICANN instead of criticizing
it from outside or elsewhere

* the problems with policy development in ICANN. Buzz words such as
"fact-based policy development", responsive consultation procedures,
"thorough and reasoned explanation of decisions taken" can be
interpreted as an attempt to change to transform ICANN style of policy
development.

Whether or not such a document can contribute to the badly needed change
is another matter. As regulation experts like to say, the more detailed
the rules, the easier to game them.

jeanette



Avri Doria wrote:
>
> On 30 Sep 2009, at 11:21, Bertrand de La Chapelle wrote:
>
>> Hi Mc tim,
>>
>> I must have misunderstood. I thought Milton bought pizza if nothing
>> changed ?
>>
>> B.
>
>
> And something did change.
>
> Though I am not sure how much there is for Civil society to be cheer about.
> It is like the old days of WSIS, CS will be beholden to the gov't chair
> for right of participation.
>
> Or, in the long run, other then outward appearance, how significant the
> change will turn out to be for ICANN processes.
>
> a.
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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


____________________________________________________________
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/20090930/ef042111/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

From wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de  Thu Oct  1 03:43:17 2009
From: wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de (=?iso-8859-1?Q?=22Kleinw=E4chter=2C_Wolfgang=22?=)
Date: Thu, 01 Oct 2009 09:43:17 +0200
Subject: AW: [governance] Pizza? Leaning tower of Pizza.
References: <391822.33858.qm@web83912.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID:  <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8719592@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>

 

 
Erik  
The biggest point of interest will be: Will China now take a seat at the GAC table?
 
Wolfgang:
The Chinese government is a member of the GAC since 1998, but did not participate in the meetings until the recent Sydney emeting because Taiwan is also an official GAC members (due to the clause in the GAC founding document that giovernments and "recognized territories" were invited to join the GAC). However in Sydney China and Taiwan were sitting together in the same room and - supriose, surprise - sjakhed hans when they entered the room :-)))>> 

    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


From voxinternet at gmail.com  Thu Oct  1 03:45:20 2009
From: voxinternet at gmail.com (Programme de recherche Vox Internet)
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2009 09:45:20 +0200
Subject: [governance] =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Rappel:_colloque_du_r=E9seau_Netsuds?=
 =?ISO-8859-1?Q?_(GDRI_CNRS)_Bordeaux_13-16_octobre_2009.?=
Message-ID: <e30607110910010045m16ddaf9akc70a1f1b38fbe7e6@mail.gmail.com>

"Nous vous rappelons le programme du prochain colloque du réseau Netsuds
(GDRI CNRS) sur les "Politiques et modes d'appropriation des TIC dans les
Suds"qui se tient à Bordeaux du 13 au 16 octobre.

Il est compose de deux parties:

-  le colloque proprement dit <http://www.gdri-netsuds.org/>, du mardi 13 au
jeudi 15 octobre, avec mention spéciale pour la soirée du jeudi où NetSuds
est associé à Aquitaine Europe Communication (AEC) pour recevoir 7
entrepreneurs (3 Aquitains, 4 Africains) qui présenteront leurs innovations
dans le domaine des TIC,

- un événement associé, le vendredi 16 octobre : l' atelier du séminaire
IG3T (I*nternet governance, transparency trust and tools*) co-organisé avec
 le programme Vox Internet sous le titre : "Gouvernance d’Internet,
économie, politique et éthique : l’exemple de
l’Afrique<http://www.voxinternet.org/spip.php?article322&lang=fr>
."

L'inscription est gratuite mais il est indispensable de remplir le bulletin
en ligne sur le site <http://www.gdri-netsuds.org>

Le colloque aura lieu à la Maison des Suds, 12 Esplanade des Antilles, à
Pessac (33), où nous inaugurerons le nouvel amphithéâtre.

Bien à vous.


Annie Chéneau-Loquay
DR CNRS
CEAN
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20091001/3ad488c7/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: SYMPOSIUM NETSUDS 13-16.09.2009.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 351905 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20091001/3ad488c7/attachment.pdf>
-------------- 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

From lohento at oridev.org  Thu Oct  1 06:27:55 2009
From: lohento at oridev.org (lohento at oridev.org)
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2009 12:27:55 +0200 (CEST)
Subject: [governance] so do i owe bill drake a pizza or not?
In-Reply-To: <4AC37E18.8050406@apc.org>
References:     <75822E125BCB994F8446858C4B19F0D78FFC6E09@SUEX07-MBX-04.ad.syr.edu>
    <954259bd0909300041o7adc97f9v5c701cde107e0f7e@mail.gmail.com>
    <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8719585@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
    <f65fb55e0909300756w1b6e8c14h8760cfe5bc46ba6b@mail.gmail.com>
    <954259bd0909300821r2410d784q57d0c842e05773a5@mail.gmail.com>
    <27A2EB4A-DC87-4A0F-89BE-A6199BE73ADA@psg.com>
    <4AC37E18.8050406@apc.org>
Message-ID: <0509a7492a270d8de2fc292f9709a656.squirrel@ssl0.ovh.net>

Indeed, this is a good step towards more multilateralism in ICANN
processes. Let's hope that the review committee members will be really
independent (apart from those already linked to ICANN) or adopt
independent recommendations. It's true their nomination by ICANN and the
GAC brings about some fears about this independence towards ICANN, but
since there is room for public comments throughout the process, let's be
optimistic to start with. The involvement of GAC in particular in that
nomination is a good thing but I hope in some countries real experts will
be nominated (and not just lurkers).

For sure, IGF can still play a role here in contributing to bringing to
limelight some issues to be dealt with by the review committee. But IGF
would be really effective in that role only if in one way or the other it
has concrete outputs.

KL

> Ok, so the main shift is the establishment of four review processes
> which will assess ICANN's performance in four areas in three year
> cycles. The review teams will be jointly established by the ICANN Chair
> or CEO and the Chair of the GAC. These reviews will replace the role of
> the US DoC in reviewing ICANN's performance. One can see an increased
> role for the GAC in oversight of ICANN here, but it is a 'soft' form of
> oversight - the 'recommendations of the reviews will be provided to the
> Board and posted for public comment. The Board will take action within
> six months of receipt of the recommendations'. In other words, there is
> no enforcement mechanism for the recommendations - the ICANN Board is
> not obliged to implement the recommendations, i.e. the reviews will have
> the soft force of persuasion and moral or political pressure but not the
> instruments of 'hard' oversight. This is reinforced in the Affirmation
> by the clear statement that 'ICANN is a private organization and nothing
> in this Affirmation should be construed as control by any one entity.'
> So  the Board  remains the key body of power within ICANN  and the least
> accountable, as there is no democratic mechanism for the bottom-up ICANN
> community to dismiss the Board.
>
> Nevertheless this is a step forward, with respect to diluting unilateral
> US oversight of ICANN. It remains to be seen to what extent civil
> society is represented on any of the review teams and whether the
> recommendations of the reviews are accepted and implemented by the ICANN
> Board. The EU has come out in support of the continuation of the IGF 'as
> it is the only place where all internet related topics can be addressed
> by a wide range of stakeholders from all over the world, including
> Parliamentarians.' It will be interesting to see what role the IGF may
> be able to play as a space where the reviews can be deliberated on in a
> multi-stakeholder fashion and boost the transparency of the review
> process and perhaps its soft power.
>
> Willie
>
> Avri Doria wrote:
>>
>> On 30 Sep 2009, at 11:21, Bertrand de La Chapelle wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Mc tim,
>>>
>>> I must have misunderstood. I thought Milton bought pizza if nothing
>>> changed ?
>>>
>>> B.
>>
>>
>> And something did change.
>>
>> Though I am not sure how much there is for Civil society to be cheer
>> about.
>> It is like the old days of WSIS, CS will be beholden to the gov't
>> chair for right of participation.
>>
>> Or, in the long run, other then outward appearance, how significant
>> the change will turn out to be for ICANN processes.
>>
>> a.
>>
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> 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
>


____________________________________________________________
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


From william.drake at graduateinstitute.ch  Thu Oct  1 07:29:31 2009
From: william.drake at graduateinstitute.ch (William Drake)
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2009 13:29:31 +0200
Subject: [governance] so do i owe bill drake a pizza or not?
In-Reply-To: <75822E125BCB994F8446858C4B19F0D78FFC6E16@SUEX07-MBX-04.ad.syr.edu>
References: <75822E125BCB994F8446858C4B19F0D78FFC6E09@SUEX07-MBX-04.ad.syr.edu> <CD78E288-CEDE-4E1E-809E-39F1F591AD75@graduateinstitute.ch> <75822E125BCB994F8446858C4B19F0D78FFC6E16@SUEX07-MBX-04.ad.syr.edu>
Message-ID: <14BF930C-49AF-4C16-A982-58A6BF8685D0@graduateinstitute.ch>

Hi Milton,

On Sep 30, 2009, at 11:04 PM, Milton L Mueller wrote:

>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: William Drake [mailto:william.drake at graduateinstitute.ch]
>> You betcha.  A couple slices at least. Review panels doth not
>> a clean break make.
>
> Having read the AoC agreement now, and the original bet, I disagree.
> I think I win. Clean break. Ding dong, the JPA is dead, and  
> certainly "changed".
> Thanks to Adam for digging up the original bet.

I thought it was a debate/bet on decoupling from US control, but guess  
you ultimately turned it into "change something related to the JPA."   
Thus stated I obviously have to concede on your point, but it is less  
obvious that I have to concede on mine given the remaining contracts,  
larger political environment, "long-standing agreement" with the USG,  
et al.   Will be interesting to see the reactions within ITU and other  
places non-OECD governments roam. Either way, I suggest again that we  
split the bill (and change the subject line, getting tired).


On Sep 30, 2009, at 11:56 PM, Milton L Mueller wrote:

>> rules could be tough on they key issues.  Someone care to spell out
>> the argument for how this constitutes a real break in the governance
>> of names and numbers, rather than a limited, incremental
>> step? Some years ago the US and EU came up with the face-saving
>> safe harbor agreement on privacy protection, and US business pretty
>> much continued on its merry way.  How different will this be,
>> in terms of outcomes?
>
> Bill, you are saying that this is not a very good accountability  
> mechanism. Ding! On target.

  While I agree on the need for procedural rules and external  
accountability etc, I think I'm saying more than that.

> But, as far as the JPA termination goes, the basic issue is that  
> (other than IANA contract) Commerce Dept oversight is finished,  
> over, it's now just one of several GAC members in the basic  
> supervision.

Never heard the phrase, first among equals?

> Also the Affirmation itself seems to have no legal authority or  
> binding power. And, the NTIA-ers got all the folks who might scream  
> about "giving the internet away to furriners" (VeriSign, CSIS,  
> Google) to agree to it in advance and put up favorable public  
> comments on their web site. Altogether, an impressive fig leaf to  
> cover the end of the JPA. Well done, tactically.

Ergo the safe harbor comparison.

> But no, let's not be fooled about this solving the accountability  
> problem. And let's pay careful attention to the enhanced role of GAC  
> and the possible abuse of its selection powers.

And start saving info for NCUC's first submission to the review  
panels :-)

Bill




-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20091001/901a872f/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

From muguet at mdpi.net  Thu Oct  1 07:32:01 2009
From: muguet at mdpi.net (Dr. Francis MUGUET)
Date: Thu, 01 Oct 2009 13:32:01 +0200
Subject: [governance] =?ISO-8859-1?Q?EU_Commission_/_English_/_Fran=E7ais?=
Message-ID: <4AC49331.5090406@mdpi.net>

English / Français infra

FYI  an information from tomorrow ;-)

*IP/06/1297*

Brussels, 2 October 2006


  *Internet Governance: Commission welcomes move towards full
  private-sector management by 2009*


    */The United States government's decision to give more autonomy to
    the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) was
    welcomed by the European Commission today. On 30 September, a highly
    prescriptive Memorandum of Understanding between the US Department
    of Commerce and ICANN expired. It has now been replaced by lighter
    arrangements intended to end definitely by 2009. The European
    Commission has been working for several years on a system of
    internet governance entrusted fully to the private sector without
    government interference in the internet's day-to-day management. The
    Commission cooperated in 1998 with the US in setting up ICANN and
    hosted, until 2006, the Secretariat of the Governmental Advisory
    Committee (GAC) to ICANN. Completing the transition of internet
    governance to the private sector also had been the explicit request
    by the EU and its partners at the World Summit on the Information
    Society in Tunis in November 2005 (see IP/05/1424
    <http://europa.eu/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?reference=IP/05/1424&format=HTML&aged=0&language=EN&guiLanguage=en>
    and IP/05/1433
    <http://europa.eu/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?reference=IP/05/1433&format=HTML&aged=0&language=en&guiLanguage=en>)./*

/"I welcome the US government's declared intention to grant more 
autonomy to ICANN and to end its governmental oversight of the 
day-to-day management of the internet over the next three years,"/ said 
Viviane Reding, EU Commissioner for Information Society and Media. 
/"This is a very important step towards full private-sector management 
of the internet, on which the EU has been working with various US 
administrations since 1998. We in Europe trust ICANN's expertise and the 
unique multi-stakeholder model of consultation it represents. We 
consider ICANN to be best placed to ensure that the internet's 
international dimension is taken into account in organising the 
internet's root directory. The European Commission will follow closely 
ICANN's transition to full independence in the next three years. With 
our advice, we will contribute to this transition to ensure that it 
takes place transparently, reflecting the interests of industry and 
civil society alike." /

Last Friday, a Memorandum of Understanding between the US Department of 
Commerce and ICANN, in force since 1998 and last renewed in 2003, ended. 
The EU had repeatedly questioned whether these arrangements, which 
allowed the US government to unilaterally oversee ICANN's decisions, 
could still be reconciled with the internet's global role today. At the 
World Summit on the Information Society in Tunis in November 2005, the 
EU strongly supported the privatisation of the technical management of 
the worldwide domain name system in the hands of ICANN and had favoured 
an approach to internet governance that further removes government 
control from ICANN (see MEMO/05/428 
<http://europa.eu/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?reference=MEMO/05/428&format=HTML&aged=0&language=EN&guiLanguage=en>).

In the personal article "Privatise Internet Governance" in the Wall 
Street Journal of 16 November 2005, Commissioner Reding had stressed 
that /"governments should not have a say in the day-to-day management of 
the Net." /Commissioner Reding herself later criticised interventions by 
the present US administration in ICANN decisions related to the 
recognition of new generic Top Level Domain names (such as .xxx).

Following a broad consultation of stakeholders, new arrangements have 
now been agreed between ICANN and the US Department of Commerce in the 
form of a "Joint Project Agreement" that took effect on 1 October. These 
new arrangements recognise the internationally-organised, non-profit 
corporation ICANN as being responsible, on an ongoing basis, for the 
management of the internet's system of unique identifiers. With 
increased autonomy, as compared to the previous Memorandum of 
Understanding, ICANN will:

    * no longer have its work prescribed for it. How it works and what
      it works on is up to ICANN and its community to devise.
    * not be required to report every six months to the US Department of
      Commerce. It will now provide an annual report for the whole
      internet community.

The new "Joint Project Agreement" will expire in 2009, and it is the 
declared intention of the US administration that it will not be prolonged.

For the Commission, ICANN's increased autonomy builds on the 
international consensus on internet governance that arose at the World 
Summit on the Information Society in Tunis and from bilateral contacts 
with the US administration and ICANN since then. "/We welcome the 
continued commitment of the US government to the stability and security 
of the internet with regard to the domain name system,/" said 
Commissioner Reding. "/We will continue our talks with the US and other 
interested parties on these important issues and will also use the 
process of enhanced cooperation between governments, as agreed at Tunis. 
Personally, I would welcome a reformed Governmental Advisory Committee 
to ICANN playing an increasingly important role/."

The Commission is currently preparing for the first meeting of the newly 
created Internet Governance Forum (IGF) that will be convened, as agreed 
at the Tunis summit, by the UN Secretary-General from 30 October to 3 
November in Athens. It aims to transparently discuss with civil society, 
industry and other non-government stakeholders broader internet 
governance topics -- in particular development-related issues. "/The 
Commission will continue to fight for the openness of the internet, for 
freedom of expression and for the freedom to receive and access 
information,/" said Commissioner Reding, who will represent the European 
Commission at Athens. "/Cyber-repression, whether required by 
governments or supported by commercial companies, is incompatible with 
Europe's fundamental rights and Europe's open and pluralist model of 
society."/ (On this, see the European Commission's Communication 
"Towards a Global Partnership in the Information Society" adopted in 
April 2006; IP/06/542 
<http://europa.eu/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?reference=IP/06/542&format=HTML&aged=0&language=EN&guiLanguage=en>).

Further information:
European Commission website on internet governance issues:

http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/activities/internationalrel/global_issues/wsis/index_en.htm
ICANN's statement on the new arrangements in force until 2009:

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

*IP/06/1297*

Bruxelles, 2 octobre 2006


  *Gouvernance de l'internet: la Commission salue l'évolution vers une
  gestion entièrement privée d'ici 2009*


    */La Commission a salué aujourd'hui la décision du gouvernement des
    États-Unis d'accorder une plus grande autonomie à l'ICANN (Société
    pour l'attribution des noms de domaine et numéros sur Internet). Le
    30 septembre a expiré un protocole d'accord très contraignant signé
    entre le ministère américain du commerce et l'ICANN. /*
    */Il a été remplacé par des accords plus souples qui prendront fin
    en 2009. /*
    */La Commission européenne travaille depuis plusieurs années sur un
    système de gestion de l'internet entièrement privé, dans lequel les
    autorités publiques n'interviennent pas sur le plan de la gestion
    quotidienne. /*
    */En 1998, la Commission a coopéré avec les autorités américaines
    pour l'établissement de l'ICANN et héberge le secrétariat du comité
    consultatif gouvernemental (GAC) de l'ICANN depuis 2006. /*
    */Lors du sommet mondial sur la société de l'information qui s'est
    tenu à Tunis en novembre 2005, l'UE et ses partenaires ont également
    expressément demandé que soit menée à bien la transition vers une
    gestion privée de l'internet (cf. IP/05/1424
    <http://europa.eu/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?reference=IP/05/1424&format=HTML&aged=0&language=EN&guiLanguage=en>
    et IP/05/1433
    <http://europa.eu/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?reference=IP/05/1433&format=HTML&aged=0&language=en&guiLanguage=en>)./*

"/Je me réjouis de l'intention déclarée du gouvernement américain 
d'accorder davantage d'autonomie à l'ICANN et de ne plus superviser la 
gestion quotidienne de l'internet dans les trois prochaines années/", a 
déclaré Mme Viviane Reding, commissaire européen chargée de la société 
de l'information et des médias. /"C'est un progrès non négligeable vers 
une gestion entièrement privée de l'internet, dossier sur lequel l'UE 
travaille en collaboration avec différentes administrations américaines 
depuis 1998. Nous, les pays européens, avons confiance dans le 
savoir-faire de l'ICANN et dans le modèle unique de consultation 
multilatérale qu'il représente. L'ICANN est, selon nous, l'organisme le 
mieux placé pour garantir que la dimension internationale de l'internet 
sera prise en compte dans l'organisation du répertoire principal de 
l'internet. La Commission européenne suivra attentivement l'évolution de 
l'ICANN vers son indépendance totale au cours des trois années à venir. 
Nous jouerons un rôle dans cette évolution en veillant, par nos 
conseils, à ce qu'elle se fasse dans la transparence et en préservant de 
la même manière les intérêts des entreprises et ceux de la société 
civile." /

Vendredi dernier a pris fin un protocole d'accord entre le ministère 
américain du commerce et l'ICANN, en vigueur depuis 1998 et reconduit 
pour la dernière fois en 2003. L'UE avait à plusieurs reprises exprimé 
des doutes quant à la possibilité que ces accords, qui autorisaient le 
gouvernement américain à contrôler unilatéralement les décisions de 
l'ICANN, demeurent compatibles avec l'envergure mondiale de l'internet 
aujourd'hui. Lors du sommet mondial sur la société de l'information de 
Tunis, en novembre 2005, l'UE a fermement soutenu la privatisation de la 
gestion technique du système de noms de domaines, qui serait confiée à 
l'ICANN, et s'est déclarée en faveur d'une méthode de gestion de 
l'internet qui supprime en outre le contrôle des autorités publiques sur 
l'ICANN (cf. MEMO/05/428 
<http://europa.eu/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?reference=MEMO/05/428&format=HTML&aged=0&language=EN&guiLanguage=en>*).*

Dans son article intitulé "Privatise Internet Governance" paru dans le 
Wall Street Journal du 16 novembre 2005, Mme Reding a souligné que "les 
gouvernements ne devraient pas intervenir dans la gestion quotidienne du 
Net"./ /Elle a elle-même critiqué dernièrement les interventions de 
l'administration américaine actuelle dans les décisions de l'ICANN 
relatives à la reconnaissance de nouveaux noms génériques de domaines de 
premier niveau (comme .xxx).

Suite à une vaste consultation des parties concernées, l'ICANN et le 
ministère américain du commerce ont conclu de nouveaux accords sous la 
forme d'un "Projet d'accord commun" qui est entré en vigueur le 1^er 
octobre. En vertu de ces nouveaux accords, l'ICANN est reconnue comme 
une société de dimension internationale à but non lucratif, responsable 
de la gestion permanente du système d'identification unique de 
l'internet. Jouissant d'une autonomie accrue par rapport à ce que 
prévoyait le précédent protocole d'accord, l'ICANN:

    * ne se verra plus dicter son travail. L'ICANN et ses membres sont
      libres de choisir les sujets sur lesquels ils veulent travailler
      et leur manière de travailler;
    * ne sera plus tenue de rendre compte de son activité tous les six
      mois au ministère américain du Commerce. Elle présentera désormais
      un rapport annuel à l'intention de l'ensemble de la communauté de
      l'internet.

Le nouveau "projet d'accord commun" prendra fin en 2009 et 
l'administration américaine a déclaré qu'elle ne comptait pas le prolonger.

Selon la Commission, l'autonomie accrue de l'ICANN est le fruit du 
consensus général sur la gestion de l'internet dégagé lors du sommet 
mondial sur la société de l'information de Tunis et de contacts 
bilatéraux entretenus depuis lors avec l'administration américaine et 
l'ICANN. "/Nous notons avec satisfaction que le gouvernement US a 
toujours attaché de l'importance à la stabilité et à la sécurité de 
l'internet en ce qui concerne le système des noms de domaines/", a 
déclaré Mme Reding. "/Nous poursuivrons nos entretiens avec les 
États-Unis et les autres parties concernées sur ces sujets importants et 
utiliserons la procédure de coopération renforcée entre les autorités 
nationales approuvée à Tunis/./ Personnellement, je serais favorable à 
une réforme du comité consultatif gouvernemental avec un accroissement 
du rôle joué par l'ICANN./"

La Commission prépare actuellement la première réunion du Forum sur la 
Gouvernance de l'Internet (FGI) qui sera organisée, comme prévu lors du 
sommet de Tunis, par le secrétaire général des Nations unies du 30 
octobre au 3 novembre à Athènes. Elle a pour objet de discuter librement 
avec la société civile, les entreprises et d'autres organismes non 
gouvernementaux de sujets plus généraux concernant la gestion de 
l'internet, notamment de questions liées au développement. "/La 
Commission continuera d'agir en faveur d'une ouverture de l'internet, de 
la liberté d'expression et de la liberté de recevoir des informations et 
d'y avoir accès/", a déclaré Mme Reding, qui représentera la Commission 
européenne à Athènes. "La cyber-répression, qu'elle soit le fait de 
gouvernements ou soutenue par des entreprises commerciales, est 
contraire aux droits fondamentaux défendus en Europe et au modèle de 
société européen ouvert et pluraliste." (Sur ce sujet, se reporter à la 
communication de la Commission européenne intitulée "Vers un partenariat 
global dans la société de l'information", adoptée en avril 2006; 
IP/06/542 
<http://europa.eu/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?reference=IP/06/542&format=HTML&aged=0&language=EN&guiLanguage=en>*).*

Pour en savoir plus:
Site web de la Commission européenne sur les sujets relatifs à la 
gouvernance de l'internet:

http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/activities/internationalrel/global_issues/wsis/index_en.htm
Déclaration de l'ICANN concernant les nouveaux accords en vigueur depuis 
2009:




-- 

------------------------------------------------------ 
Francis F. MUGUET Ph.D 

MDPI Foundation Open Access Journals
http://www.mdpi.org   http://www.mdpi.net
muguet at mdpi.org       muguet at mdpi.net

KNIS http://knis.org
Academic Collaboration / University of Geneva
http://syinf.unige.ch/recherche/cooperation


Mobile France       +33 6 71 91 42 10
       Switzerland  +41 78 927 06 97
       Cameroun    +237 96 55 69 62 ( mostly in July )

World Summit On the Information Society (WSIS)
Civil Society Working Groups
Scientific Information :  http://www.wsis-si.org  chair 
Patents & Copyrights   :  http://www.wsis-pct.org co-chair
Financing Mechanismns  :  http://www.wsis-finance.org web
Info. Net. Govermance  :  http://www.wsis-gov.org  web

NET4D : http://www.net4D.org 
UNMSP : http://www.unmsp.org 
WTIS : http://www.wtis.org   REUSSI : http://www.reussi.org
------------------------------------------------------ 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20091001/de73daf0/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

From anriette at apc.org  Thu Oct  1 07:39:17 2009
From: anriette at apc.org (Anriette Esterhuysen)
Date: Thu, 01 Oct 2009 13:39:17 +0200
Subject: [governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation of Commitments
In-Reply-To: <14BF930C-49AF-4C16-A982-58A6BF8685D0@graduateinstitute.ch>
References: 	 <75822E125BCB994F8446858C4B19F0D78FFC6E09@SUEX07-MBX-04.ad.syr.edu>
	 <CD78E288-CEDE-4E1E-809E-39F1F591AD75@graduateinstitute.ch>
	 <75822E125BCB994F8446858C4B19F0D78FFC6E16@SUEX07-MBX-04.ad.syr.edu>
	 <14BF930C-49AF-4C16-A982-58A6BF8685D0@graduateinstitute.ch>
Message-ID: <1254397157.3941.611.camel@anriette-laptop>

Hi.. I took the liberty of changing the subject line, in response to
Bill's suggestion :)  Although it has been a lot of fun.. if a bit
northern hemispherish (I mean the food, not the people). 

One question I have about the GAC, does it not become very important to
have input from different stakeholders at country level in the
identification/nomination of GAC members? I hope this does not start
another debate on global vs. national governance...

Second question is about the submissions on the review panels. What is
the process likely to be?

Anriette


On Thu, 2009-10-01 at 13:29 +0200, William Drake wrote:
> Hi Milton,
> 
> On Sep 30, 2009, at 11:04 PM, Milton L Mueller wrote:
> 
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: William Drake [mailto:william.drake at graduateinstitute.ch] 
> > > You betcha.  A couple slices at least. Review panels doth not 
> > > a clean break make.
> > 
> > Having read the AoC agreement now, and the original bet, I
> > disagree. 
> > I think I win. Clean break. Ding dong, the JPA is dead, and
> > certainly "changed". 
> > Thanks to Adam for digging up the original bet. 
> > 
> 
> I thought it was a debate/bet on decoupling from US control, but guess
> you ultimately turned it into "change something related to the JPA."
>  Thus stated I obviously have to concede on your point, but it is less
> obvious that I have to concede on mine given the remaining contracts,
> larger political environment, "long-standing agreement" with the USG,
> et al.   Will be interesting to see the reactions within ITU and other
> places non-OECD governments roam. Either way, I suggest again that we
> split the bill (and change the subject line, getting tired).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Sep 30, 2009, at 11:56 PM, Milton L Mueller wrote:
> 
> > > rules could be tough on they key issues.  Someone care to spell
> > > out  
> > > the argument for how this constitutes a real break in the
> > > governance  
> > > of names and numbers, rather than a limited, incremental 
> > > step? Some years ago the US and EU came up with the face-saving 
> > > safe harbor agreement on privacy protection, and US business
> > > pretty 
> > > much continued on its merry way.  How different will this be, 
> > > in terms of outcomes?
> > 
> > Bill, you are saying that this is not a very good accountability
> > mechanism. Ding! On target. 
> 
> 
>  While I agree on the need for procedural rules and external
> accountability etc, I think I'm saying more than that.  
> 
> > But, as far as the JPA termination goes, the basic issue is that
> > (other than IANA contract) Commerce Dept oversight is finished,
> > over, it's now just one of several GAC members in the basic
> > supervision. 
> 
> 
> Never heard the phrase, first among equals?
> 
> > Also the Affirmation itself seems to have no legal authority or
> > binding power. And, the NTIA-ers got all the folks who might scream
> > about "giving the internet away to furriners" (VeriSign, CSIS,
> > Google) to agree to it in advance and put up favorable public
> > comments on their web site. Altogether, an impressive fig leaf to
> > cover the end of the JPA. Well done, tactically. 
> 
> 
> Ergo the safe harbor comparison.
> 
> > But no, let's not be fooled about this solving the accountability
> > problem. And let's pay careful attention to the enhanced role of GAC
> > and the possible abuse of its selection powers.
> > 
> 
> 
> And start saving info for NCUC's first submission to the review
> panels :-)
> 
> 
> Bill
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> plain text document attachment (message-footer.txt)
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
-- 
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
anriette esterhuysen - executive director
association for progressive communications
p o box 29755 melville - south africa 2109
anriette at apc.org - tel/fax + 27 11 726 1692
http://www.apc.org

____________________________________________________________
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


From muguet at mdpi.net  Thu Oct  1 07:45:33 2009
From: muguet at mdpi.net (Dr. Francis MUGUET)
Date: Thu, 01 Oct 2009 13:45:33 +0200
Subject: [governance] =?ISO-8859-1?Q?30_Sept_2009_EU_Commission_/_English?=
 =?ISO-8859-1?Q?_/_Fran=E7ais?=
Message-ID: <4AC4965D.9080406@mdpi.net>

English / Français infra

FYI  back to the present ..;  the last news from 2006... sorry it was so 
similar..  so confuding :-D

IP/09/1397

Brussels, 30 September 2009

European Commission welcomes US move to more independent, accountable, 
international internet governance

Viviane Reding, the EU's Commissioner for Information Society and Media, 
today welcomed news that ICANN, the body primarily responsible for 
managing internet domain names, will become more open and accountable to 
billions of internet users worldwide. As of 30 September, ICANN, the 
US-based Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers, will no 
longer be subject to the unilateral review by the US Department of 
Commerce, but by independent review panels appointed by ICANN's 
Governmental Advisory Committee (GAC) and ICANN itself with the 
involvement of governments around the world. Since 2005, the European 
Commission has repeatedly called for reform of the governance of the 
internet's key global resources. This is necessary to ensure important 
public policy objectives such as freedom of expression and facilitating 
stable business transactions online. The European Commission is strongly 
committed to accompany and support the implementation of the reforms 
announced today, in close cooperation with the EU's 27 Member States.

"I welcome the US administration's decision to adapt ICANN's key role in 
internet governance to the reality of the 21st century and of a 
globalised world," said Viviane Reding, European Commissioner for 
Information Society and Media. "Internet users worldwide can now 
anticipate that ICANN's decisions on domain names and addresses will be 
more independent and more accountable, taking into account everyone's 
interests. External review panels will periodically evaluate ICANN's 
performance. If effectively and transparently implemented, this reform 
can find broad acceptance among civil society, businesses and 
governments alike."

"The European Commission is strongly committed to make this reform a 
reality by working together with our partners in government, business, 
and civil society. We will play an active role in ICANN's Governmental 
Advisory Committee and in the further reform of the GAC. The challenge 
now is to make the GAC, with its enhanced role, more effective in its 
work, and to further strengthen the dialogue between governments, 
businesses, and civil society via the Internet Governance Forum. We will 
also pay close attention to the effect of ICANN's work on competition. I 
would also encourage all parties to actively explore the possibilities 
for stronger external appeal mechanisms in relation to decisions of the 
ICANN Board.

" Independence and accountability for ICANN now look much better on 
paper. Let's work together to ensure that they also work in practice."

As it became know today, the "Joint Project Agreement" in the US, which 
at present foresees a unilateral overview of ICANN decision by the US 
Department of Commerce, will not be extended as of 30 September 2009. It 
will be replaced by a joint "affirmation of commitments" of the US 
Government and of ICANN, which represents an important reform of the 
present governance arrangements. The most important reforms of ICANN 
include:

    *

      More independence from regular periodic reviews by a single
      government. Decisions taken by ICANN affect internet users world
      wide and therefore it is important to reflect all those interests.

    *

      External accountability involving independent review panels
      appointed jointly by the GAC and by ICANN. The GAC is open to
      governments and public authorities from around the world and
      advises the ICANN Board on public policy aspects of ICANN's
      activities. These review panels will periodically evaluate ICANN's
      performance in relation to their public commitments.

The internet is vital to economies and societies everywhere. For many 
years, the European Commission and EU Member States have actively 
participated in ICANN's policy making to ensure that European values are 
respected on the internet such as freedom of speech, privacy, consumer 
protection, and security.

In June 2009, the European Commission issued a policy document calling 
for improvement of ICANN's accountability to the international 
community, the transparency of its decision making and a clearer role of 
governments in defining public policy aspects of ICANN policy making ( 
IP/09/951 
<http://europa.eu/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?reference=IP/09/951&format=HTML&aged=0&language=EN&guiLanguage=en> 
). Today's announcement indicates that the US shares many of these 
concerns and objectives.

Next steps

Another important question in the area of internet governance is the 
continuation of the Internet Governance Forum, set up for an initial 
time frame of 5 years, with a first meeting in 2006, which is a unique 
place for discussion between those involved in internet governance. The 
European Commission wants it to continue, as it is the only place where 
all internet related topics can be addressed by a wide range of 
stakeholders from all over the world, including Parliamentarians.

Background

For internet traffic to reach its destination, domain names and 
addresses are essential. The organisation responsible for the definition 
of policies for the global coordination of the Domain Name System (DNS) 
is ICANN, a private sector, non-profit US corporation based in 
California. Since its creation in 1998, ICANN has operated under a 
series of Memoranda of Understanding with the US government which 
specified its objectives regarding policy making for the DNS. The most 
recent MoU (called the "Joint Project Agreement") will expire on 30 
September 2009. In May, EU Commissioner Viviane Reding outlined her 
vision for the future of internet governance in a video message ( 
IP/09/696 
<http://europa.eu/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?reference=IP/09/696&format=HTML&aged=0&language=EN&guiLanguage=en>):

http://ec.europa.eu/commission_barroso/reding/video/text/message_20090504.pdf 


Annex

Growth of internet users by regions of the world
1990-2008, in millions of users



------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

IP/09/ 1397

Bruxelles, le 30  septembre 2009

La Commission européenne salue la décision américaine de rendre la 
gouvernance de l'internet plus indépendante, plus démocratique et plus 
internationale

M me Viviane Reding, la commissaire européenne chargée de la société de 
l'information et des médias, a salué aujourd'hui le fait que l'ICANN, 
l'organisme chargé de la gestion des noms de domaine internet, devienne 
plus ouvert et doive mieux rendre compte de ses décisions à l'égard des 
milliards d'internautes du monde entier. À partir du 30 septembre, 
l'ICANN, basé aux États-Unis, ne sera plus soumis au contrôle unilatéral 
du ministère américain du commerce, mais à celui de commissions d'examen 
nommées par le Governmental Advisory Committee (GAC) de l'ICANN ainsi 
que par l'ICANN lui-même, avec la participation de gouvernements du 
monde entier. La Commission européenne avait demandé à plusieurs 
reprises depuis 2005 que la gouvernance des ressources essentielles et 
mondiales de l'internet soit réformée. Une telle réforme est nécessaire 
aux fins d'objectifs importants de politique publique tels que la 
liberté d'expression et la continuité des transactions en ligne. La 
Commission européenne accompagnera et soutiendra avec détermination la 
mise en oeuvre des réformes annoncées aujourd'hui, en coopération 
étroite avec les 27 pays de l'UE.

«Je salue la décision des autorités américaines de faire évoluer le 
fonctionnement de l'ICANN afin d'adapter son rôle, essentiel en matière 
de gouvernance de l'internet, aux réalités du 21 e siècle et d'un réseau 
de plus en plus mondial» , a déclaré M me Viviane Reding, commissaire 
européenne chargée de la société de l'information et des médias. «Les 
utilisateurs de l'internet du monde entier peuvent maintenant s'attendre 
à ce que les décisions de l'ICANN sur les noms de domaine et les 
adresses internet soient plus indépendantes et tiennent compte de 
l'intérêt de tous. Des commissions d'examen externes évalueront 
régulièrement les performances de l'ICANN. Si elle est mise en oeuvre de 
manière effective et transparente, cette réforme devrait bénéficier du 
soutien tant de la société civile que des entreprises et des autorités 
nationales.»

«La Commission européenne a la ferme volonté de faire aboutir cette 
réforme en collaborant avec les autorités nationales, les entreprises et 
la société civile. Elle participera activement au Governmental Advisory 
Committee de l'ICANN et à ses futures réformes. Le défi est maintenant 
de rendre le GAC, avec son rôle renforcé, plus efficace dans son 
travail, et d'approfondir encore le dialogue entre les autorités 
nationales, les entreprises et la société civile par l'intermédiaire de 
l'Internet Governance Forum. La Commission suivra également de près 
l'effet des travaux de l'ICANN sur la concurrence. J'encourage en outre 
toutes les parties à examiner les options envisageables pour améliorer 
les possibilités d'appel externe des décisions du comité directeur de 
l'ICANN.»

«L'ICANN devrait désormais, en théorie, devenir plus indépendant et plus 
démocratique. Faisons en sorte, tous ensemble, qu'il le devienne vraiment.»

Il a été annoncé aujourd'hui que le «Joint Project Agreement», qui 
prévoit un contrôle unilatéral du ministère américain du commerce sur 
les décisions de l'ICANN, ne serait pas prolongé au-delà du 30 septembre 
2009. Il sera remplacé par une «affirmation of commitments», une 
déclaration conjointe du gouvernement américain et de l'ICANN qui 
représente une réforme importante du système de gouvernance actuel . Les 
changements les plus importants sont les suivants:

    *

      plus d'indépendance à l'égard du contrôle périodique par les
      autorités d'un seul pays. Les décisions prises par l'ICANN ont une
      incidence sur les internautes du monde entier. Par conséquent, il
      est important que l'ensemble de leurs intérêts soit pris en compte;

    *

      un contrôle externe au moyen de commissions d'examen indépendantes
      nommées conjointement par le GAC et par l'ICANN. Le GAC est ouvert
      aux gouvernements et aux autorités publiques du monde entier et
      conseille le comité directeur de l'ICANN sur ses activités
      relatives aux politiques publiques. Ces commissions évalueront
      régulièrement les performances de l'ICANN eu égard à ses
      engagements publics. L'internet est indispensable à nos sociétés
      et à nos économies. Depuis des années, la Commission européenne et
      les pays de l'UE participent aux activités de l'ICANN afin de
      veiller à ce que les valeurs européennes soient respectées sur
      l'internet, notamment la liberté d'expression, le respect de la
      vie privée, la protection des consommateurs et la sécurité.

En juin 2009, la Commission européenne a demandé, dans une 
communication, que l'ICANN soit davantage tenu de rendre des comptes à 
la communauté internationale, que son processus de prise de décision 
devienne plus transparent et que le rôle des autorités nationales quant 
aux activités de l'ICANN qui concernent les politiques publiques soit 
clarifié (voir IP/09/951 
<http://europa.eu/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?reference=IP/09/951&format=HTML&aged=0&language=FR&guiLanguage=fr> 
). La décision américaine annoncée aujourd'hui montre que les États-Unis 
ont pour l'essentiel les mêmes préoccupations et les mêmes objectifs.

Prochaines étapes

Une autre question importante dans le domaine de la gouvernance de 
l'internet est la poursuite du Forum sur la gouvernance de l'internet 
(IGF), qui avait initialement été établi pour 5 ans et qui s'était réuni 
pour la première fois en 2006. Ce forum est un lieu de débat privilégié 
pour tous ceux qui participent à la gouvernance de l'internet. La 
Commission européenne souhaite qu'il poursuive ses activités car il 
s'agit de la seule enceinte où tous les sujets en rapport avec 
l'internet peuvent être abordés par un large éventail de parties 
prenantes du monde entier, et notamment les représentants des parlements.

Contexte

Les noms de domaines et les adresses IP sont indispensables pour que le 
trafic internet atteigne sa destination. L'organisme chargé de définir 
les politiques globales de coordination du système de noms de domaine 
(DNS) est l'ICANN, un organisme ayant le statut juridique de société à 
but non lucratif établi en Californie. Depuis sa création en 1998, le 
fonctionnement de l'ICANN est régi par une série de protocoles d'accord 
avec le gouvernement américain spécifiant les objectifs de ses activités 
en ce qui concerne le DNS. Le dernier de ces protocoles d'accord, le 
«Joint Project Agreement», expirera le 30 septembre 2009. En mai 
dernier, la commissaire européenne Viviane Reding avait présenté les 
grandes lignes de sa vision pour l'avenir de la gouvernance de 
l'internet dans un message vidéo (voir IP/09/696 
<http://europa.eu/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?reference=IP/09/696&format=HTML&aged=0&language=FR&guiLanguage=fr> 
):

http://ec.europa.eu/commission_barroso/reding/video/text/message_20090504.pdf 


Annex

Growth of internet users by regions of the world
1990-2008, in millions of users






-- 

------------------------------------------------------ 
Francis F. MUGUET Ph.D 

MDPI Foundation Open Access Journals
http://www.mdpi.org   http://www.mdpi.net
muguet at mdpi.org       muguet at mdpi.net

KNIS http://knis.org
Academic Collaboration / University of Geneva
http://syinf.unige.ch/recherche/cooperation


Mobile France       +33 6 71 91 42 10
       Switzerland  +41 78 927 06 97
       Cameroun    +237 96 55 69 62 ( mostly in July )

World Summit On the Information Society (WSIS)
Civil Society Working Groups
Scientific Information :  http://www.wsis-si.org  chair 
Patents & Copyrights   :  http://www.wsis-pct.org co-chair
Financing Mechanismns  :  http://www.wsis-finance.org web
Info. Net. Govermance  :  http://www.wsis-gov.org  web

NET4D : http://www.net4D.org 
UNMSP : http://www.unmsp.org 
WTIS : http://www.wtis.org   REUSSI : http://www.reussi.org
------------------------------------------------------ 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20091001/ce3ef6c1/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: 10000200000002C00000016F16C9FBF0.png
Type: image/png
Size: 4542 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20091001/ce3ef6c1/attachment.png>
-------------- 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

From cogitoergosum at sbcglobal.net  Thu Oct  1 10:06:18 2009
From: cogitoergosum at sbcglobal.net (Eric Dierker)
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2009 07:06:18 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: AW: [governance] Pizza? Leaning tower of Pizza.
Message-ID: <724442.38353.qm@web83908.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>

That is like many who "attend" here.  Yes they are members and yes they make nice. But do they contribute?  Oh yes they do and even add a sentence or comment here and there.
 
But do they stand up and demand rights?  Do they make their presence known? Do they go out on a limb and "own" a position?  Do they risk public opinion against them by forcing issues and holding others publicly accountable for their actions? 
 
In otherwords are they meeting the obligations of International Citizens?  With this space they occupy are the filling it or are they fulfilling it?
 
The greatest test of this "new accountability" era is not on ICANN. It is on those netizens and GAC members to demand and require it. Having rights in internet governance is not by grace, it is earned.
 


--- On Thu, 10/1/09, "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang" <wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de> wrote:


From: "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang" <wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
Subject: AW: [governance] Pizza? Leaning tower of Pizza.
To: governance at lists.cpsr.org, "Eric Dierker" <cogitoergosum at sbcglobal.net>, governance at lists.cpsr.org, "Willie Currie" <wcurrie at apc.org>
Date: Thursday, October 1, 2009, 7:43 AM





Erik  
The biggest point of interest will be: Will China now take a seat at the GAC table?

Wolfgang:
The Chinese government is a member of the GAC since 1998, but did not participate in the meetings until the recent Sydney emeting because Taiwan is also an official GAC members (due to the clause in the GAC founding document that giovernments and "recognized territories" were invited to join the GAC). However in Sydney China and Taiwan were sitting together in the same room and - supriose, surprise - sjakhed hans when they entered the room :-)))>> 

    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/20091001/a075a45c/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

From cogitoergosum at sbcglobal.net  Thu Oct  1 10:28:20 2009
From: cogitoergosum at sbcglobal.net (Eric Dierker)
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2009 07:28:20 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [governance] so do i owe bill a second chance?
In-Reply-To: <0509a7492a270d8de2fc292f9709a656.squirrel@ssl0.ovh.net>
Message-ID: <729923.39028.qm@web83905.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>

It is so important during this phase that people and governments step up and reach out to each other.  The best role of Governance is not in restrictions or rules or voting or technical expertise.  The ultimate success is in giving a platform and room and chair for the individual participants.  To not only invite them but make them feel worthy of contribution.  And it is in this act of governance that we see real purpose. For it is not the government that empowers individuals but individuals who empower government. The greatest shame is when they empower that government to do nothing.
 
And so it is now up to each user, registrant and individual to demand. Not with a silent secret ballot but with a hardened heavy mallet.*
 
*yes the java entendre is intended

--- On Thu, 10/1/09, lohento at oridev.org <lohento at oridev.org> wrote:


From: lohento at oridev.org <lohento at oridev.org>
Subject: Re: [governance] so do i owe bill drake a pizza or not?
To: governance at lists.cpsr.org
Cc: africann at afrinic.net
Date: Thursday, October 1, 2009, 10:27 AM


Indeed, this is a good step towards more multilateralism in ICANN
processes. Let's hope that the review committee members will be really
independent (apart from those already linked to ICANN) or adopt
independent recommendations. It's true their nomination by ICANN and the
GAC brings about some fears about this independence towards ICANN, but
since there is room for public comments throughout the process, let's be
optimistic to start with. The involvement of GAC in particular in that
nomination is a good thing but I hope in some countries real experts will
be nominated (and not just lurkers).

For sure, IGF can still play a role here in contributing to bringing to
limelight some issues to be dealt with by the review committee. But IGF
would be really effective in that role only if in one way or the other it
has concrete outputs.

KL

> Ok, so the main shift is the establishment of four review processes
> which will assess ICANN's performance in four areas in three year
> cycles. The review teams will be jointly established by the ICANN Chair
> or CEO and the Chair of the GAC. These reviews will replace the role of
> the US DoC in reviewing ICANN's performance. One can see an increased
> role for the GAC in oversight of ICANN here, but it is a 'soft' form of
> oversight - the 'recommendations of the reviews will be provided to the
> Board and posted for public comment. The Board will take action within
> six months of receipt of the recommendations'. In other words, there is
> no enforcement mechanism for the recommendations - the ICANN Board is
> not obliged to implement the recommendations, i.e. the reviews will have
> the soft force of persuasion and moral or political pressure but not the
> instruments of 'hard' oversight. This is reinforced in the Affirmation
> by the clear statement that 'ICANN is a private organization and nothing
> in this Affirmation should be construed as control by any one entity.'
> So  the Board  remains the key body of power within ICANN  and the least
> accountable, as there is no democratic mechanism for the bottom-up ICANN
> community to dismiss the Board.
>
> Nevertheless this is a step forward, with respect to diluting unilateral
> US oversight of ICANN. It remains to be seen to what extent civil
> society is represented on any of the review teams and whether the
> recommendations of the reviews are accepted and implemented by the ICANN
> Board. The EU has come out in support of the continuation of the IGF 'as
> it is the only place where all internet related topics can be addressed
> by a wide range of stakeholders from all over the world, including
> Parliamentarians.' It will be interesting to see what role the IGF may
> be able to play as a space where the reviews can be deliberated on in a
> multi-stakeholder fashion and boost the transparency of the review
> process and perhaps its soft power.
>
> Willie
>
> Avri Doria wrote:
>>
>> On 30 Sep 2009, at 11:21, Bertrand de La Chapelle wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Mc tim,
>>>
>>> I must have misunderstood. I thought Milton bought pizza if nothing
>>> changed ?
>>>
>>> B.
>>
>>
>> And something did change.
>>
>> Though I am not sure how much there is for Civil society to be cheer
>> about.
>> It is like the old days of WSIS, CS will be beholden to the gov't
>> chair for right of participation.
>>
>> Or, in the long run, other then outward appearance, how significant
>> the change will turn out to be for ICANN processes.
>>
>> a.
>>
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> 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
>


____________________________________________________________
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/20091001/2e89d5a4/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

From vanda at uol.com.br  Thu Oct  1 11:39:19 2009
From: vanda at uol.com.br (Vanda Scartezini)
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2009 12:39:19 -0300
Subject: [governance] POST JPA
In-Reply-To: <4AC37E18.8050406@apc.org>
References: <75822E125BCB994F8446858C4B19F0D78FFC6E09@SUEX07-MBX-04.ad.syr.edu> <954259bd0909300041o7adc97f9v5c701cde107e0f7e@mail.gmail.com> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8719585@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> <f65fb55e0909300756w1b6e8c14h8760cfe5bc46ba6b@mail.gmail.com> <954259bd0909300821r2410d784q57d0c842e05773a5@mail.gmail.com> <27A2EB4A-DC87-4A0F-89BE-A6199BE73ADA@psg.com> <4AC37E18.8050406@apc.org>
Message-ID: <00df01ca42ad$587f65c0$097e3140$@com.br>

 Dear list

 

 The ICANN's independence with the end of JPA can be seen at icann.org.  We
have translated Rod's speech to Portuguese to make it easy for all
Portuguese speaking colleagues.

 Best to all

 

Vanda Scartezini

POLO Consultores Associados

&  IT Trend

Alameda Santos 1470 cjs 1407/8

01418-903 Sao Paulo,SP.

Fone + 55 11 3266.6253

Mob + 5511 8181.1464

 

-----Original Message-----
From: Willie Currie [mailto:wcurrie at apc.org] 
Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2009 12:50 PM
To: governance at lists.cpsr.org; Avri Doria
Subject: Re: [governance] so do i owe bill drake a pizza or not?

 

Ok, so the main shift is the establishment of four review processes 

which will assess ICANN's performance in four areas in three year 

cycles. The review teams will be jointly established by the ICANN Chair 

or CEO and the Chair of the GAC. These reviews will replace the role of 

the US DoC in reviewing ICANN's performance. One can see an increased 

role for the GAC in oversight of ICANN here, but it is a 'soft' form of 

oversight - the 'recommendations of the reviews will be provided to the 

Board and posted for public comment. The Board will take action within 

six months of receipt of the recommendations'. In other words, there is 

no enforcement mechanism for the recommendations - the ICANN Board is 

not obliged to implement the recommendations, i.e. the reviews will have 

the soft force of persuasion and moral or political pressure but not the 

instruments of 'hard' oversight. This is reinforced in the Affirmation 

by the clear statement that 'ICANN is a private organization and nothing 

in this Affirmation should be construed as control by any one entity.' 

So  the Board  remains the key body of power within ICANN  and the least 

accountable, as there is no democratic mechanism for the bottom-up ICANN 

community to dismiss the Board.

 

Nevertheless this is a step forward, with respect to diluting unilateral 

US oversight of ICANN. It remains to be seen to what extent civil 

society is represented on any of the review teams and whether the 

recommendations of the reviews are accepted and implemented by the ICANN 

Board. The EU has come out in support of the continuation of the IGF 'as 

it is the only place where all internet related topics can be addressed 

by a wide range of stakeholders from all over the world, including 

Parliamentarians.' It will be interesting to see what role the IGF may 

be able to play as a space where the reviews can be deliberated on in a 

multi-stakeholder fashion and boost the transparency of the review 

process and perhaps its soft power.

 

Willie

 

Avri Doria wrote:

> 

> On 30 Sep 2009, at 11:21, Bertrand de La Chapelle wrote:

> 

>> Hi Mc tim,

>> 

>> I must have misunderstood. I thought Milton bought pizza if nothing 

>> changed ?

>> 

>> B.

> 

> 

> And something did change.

> 

> Though I am not sure how much there is for Civil society to be cheer 

> about.

> It is like the old days of WSIS, CS will be beholden to the gov't 

> chair for right of participation.

> 

> Or, in the long run, other then outward appearance, how significant 

> the change will turn out to be for ICANN processes.

> 

> a.

> 

> ____________________________________________________________

> 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/20091001/95bb77bf/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

From lehto.paul at gmail.com  Thu Oct  1 14:28:43 2009
From: lehto.paul at gmail.com (Paul Lehto)
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2009 14:28:43 -0400
Subject: [governance] =?ISO-8859-1?Q?30_Sept_2009_EU_Commission_/_Eng?=
 =?ISO-8859-1?Q?lish_/_Fran=E7ais?=
In-Reply-To: <4AC4965D.9080406@mdpi.net>
References: <4AC4965D.9080406@mdpi.net>
Message-ID: <76f819dd0910011128x15bca0d5w5a7b128819089b77@mail.gmail.com>

Let's not be fooled into thinking that a voluntary "loss" for the
United States of America and its Commerce Department is somehow a win
for global governance of the internet -- because NOTHING of any remote
equivalence on the global level takes the place of US control of
ICANN.   I.e., there is no "governance" in the global solution that is
the attractive package for total abdication of Public authority and
control (even if the "public" was too narrowly restricted to the USA,
given the internet's global reach).

Just below, with >'s, is the best summary paragraph of this tectonic
shift in governance (under the guise of increasing accountability),
followed by my comments in square brackets like these [...]

The bottom line, however,  is that no matter what the details are of
the "advisory" relationship between GAC and ICANN, it lacks the
following crucial elements entirely, while simultaneously claiming
this will help protect these things:

(1) public CONTROL (advice or "input" is no substitute for public control)

(2) Constitutional RIGHTS:  This privatization or independence for
ICANN, if upheld, means the US Constitution (and of course every other
binding national constitution) is rendered irrelevant, whereas
beforehand with government control (exercised or not) one had either
rights or arguments that constitutional rights apply. Constitutions in
the West with very rare exception generally do not apply to private
corporations at all, whether for profit or nonprofit.  Thus, ICANN is
pulled out from the protection of rights and public control, and freed
to be unaccountable (though they'll likely pose as really good
"listeners") and to ignore the rights and interests of the public,
except where they find it convenient to go along.  But without the
crucial element of control (and the remedy of voting someone out of
office is an attenuated one already) there's literally no leverage the
public has to do anything about a nonresponsive ICANN

(3) Enforceable Remedies.

THe only question is whether ICANN acts or will act somewhat like
philosopher kings, fooling people into thinking their interests are
"represented" when they aren't except by accidental alignment with the
ideas of the aristocrats, or whether they act more like the average
non-democratic rulers throughout world history, which is to say, like
tyrants or dictators.

> On 9/30/09, the EU Commission wrote:

> As it became know [sic] today, the "Joint Project Agreement" in the US, which at  >present foresees a unilateral overview of ICANN decision by the US Department of >Commerce, will not be extended as of 30 September 2009. It will be replaced by a >joint "affirmation of commitments" of the US Government and of ICANN, which >represents an important reform of the present governance arrangements. [actual or potential binding legal oversight replaced by amorphous emptiness, regardless of one's view on whether global control/oversight is desirable, that global control is not achieved, nor is there a mechanism to achieve that global control in the future]

>The most important reforms of ICANN include:
>
>* More independence from regular periodic reviews by a single government. [no
> accountability or oversight by "a single government"] Decisions taken by ICANN
> affect internet users world wide and therefore it is important to reflect all those >interests. [yes it is, but no mechanism takes the place of "a single government" >that has any power or enforcement or even a legal obligation to take those interests into consideration, much less defend internet rights!]
>
>* External accountability involving independent review panels appointed jointly by
> the GAC and by ICANN. The GAC is open to governments and public authorities >from around the world and advises the ICANN Board on public policy aspects of >ICANN's activities. These review panels will periodically evaluate ICANN's >performance in relation to their public commitments.



On 10/1/09, Dr. Francis MUGUET <muguet at mdpi.net> wrote:
> English / Français infra
>
> FYI  back to the present ..;  the last news from 2006... sorry it was so
> similar..  so confuding :-D
>
> IP/09/1397
>
> Brussels, 30 September 2009
>
> European Commission welcomes US move to more independent, accountable,
> international internet governance
>
> Viviane Reding, the EU's Commissioner for Information Society and Media,
> today welcomed news that ICANN, the body primarily responsible for
> managing internet domain names, will become more open and accountable to
> billions of internet users worldwide. As of 30 September, ICANN, the
> US-based Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers, will no
> longer be subject to the unilateral review by the US Department of
> Commerce, but by independent review panels appointed by ICANN's
> Governmental Advisory Committee (GAC) and ICANN itself with the
> involvement of governments around the world. Since 2005, the European
> Commission has repeatedly called for reform of the governance of the
> internet's key global resources. This is necessary to ensure important
> public policy objectives such as freedom of expression and facilitating
> stable business transactions online. The European Commission is strongly
> committed to accompany and support the implementation of the reforms
> announced today, in close cooperation with the EU's 27 Member States.
>
> "I welcome the US administration's decision to adapt ICANN's key role in
> internet governance to the reality of the 21st century and of a
> globalised world," said Viviane Reding, European Commissioner for
> Information Society and Media. "Internet users worldwide can now
> anticipate that ICANN's decisions on domain names and addresses will be
> more independent and more accountable, taking into account everyone's
> interests. External review panels will periodically evaluate ICANN's
> performance. If effectively and transparently implemented, this reform
> can find broad acceptance among civil society, businesses and
> governments alike."
>
> "The European Commission is strongly committed to make this reform a
> reality by working together with our partners in government, business,
> and civil society. We will play an active role in ICANN's Governmental
> Advisory Committee and in the further reform of the GAC. The challenge
> now is to make the GAC, with its enhanced role, more effective in its
> work, and to further strengthen the dialogue between governments,
> businesses, and civil society via the Internet Governance Forum. We will
> also pay close attention to the effect of ICANN's work on competition. I
> would also encourage all parties to actively explore the possibilities
> for stronger external appeal mechanisms in relation to decisions of the
> ICANN Board.
>
> " Independence and accountability for ICANN now look much better on
> paper. Let's work together to ensure that they also work in practice."
>
> As it became know today, the "Joint Project Agreement" in the US, which
> at present foresees a unilateral overview of ICANN decision by the US
> Department of Commerce, will not be extended as of 30 September 2009. It
> will be replaced by a joint "affirmation of commitments" of the US
> Government and of ICANN, which represents an important reform of the
> present governance arrangements. The most important reforms of ICANN
> include:
>
>     *
>
>       More independence from regular periodic reviews by a single
>       government. Decisions taken by ICANN affect internet users world
>       wide and therefore it is important to reflect all those interests.
>
>     *
>
>       External accountability involving independent review panels
>       appointed jointly by the GAC and by ICANN. The GAC is open to
>       governments and public authorities from around the world and
>       advises the ICANN Board on public policy aspects of ICANN's
>       activities. These review panels will periodically evaluate ICANN's
>       performance in relation to their public commitments.
>
> The internet is vital to economies and societies everywhere. For many
> years, the European Commission and EU Member States have actively
> participated in ICANN's policy making to ensure that European values are
> respected on the internet such as freedom of speech, privacy, consumer
> protection, and security.
>
> In June 2009, the European Commission issued a policy document calling
> for improvement of ICANN's accountability to the international
> community, the transparency of its decision making and a clearer role of
> governments in defining public policy aspects of ICANN policy making (
> IP/09/951
> <http://europa.eu/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?reference=IP/09/951&format=HTML&aged=0&language=EN&guiLanguage=en>
> ). Today's announcement indicates that the US shares many of these
> concerns and objectives.
>
> Next steps
>
> Another important question in the area of internet governance is the
> continuation of the Internet Governance Forum, set up for an initial
> time frame of 5 years, with a first meeting in 2006, which is a unique
> place for discussion between those involved in internet governance. The
> European Commission wants it to continue, as it is the only place where
> all internet related topics can be addressed by a wide range of
> stakeholders from all over the world, including Parliamentarians.
>
> Background
>
> For internet traffic to reach its destination, domain names and
> addresses are essential. The organisation responsible for the definition
> of policies for the global coordination of the Domain Name System (DNS)
> is ICANN, a private sector, non-profit US corporation based in
> California. Since its creation in 1998, ICANN has operated under a
> series of Memoranda of Understanding with the US government which
> specified its objectives regarding policy making for the DNS. The most
> recent MoU (called the "Joint Project Agreement") will expire on 30
> September 2009. In May, EU Commissioner Viviane Reding outlined her
> vision for the future of internet governance in a video message (
> IP/09/696
> <http://europa.eu/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?reference=IP/09/696&format=HTML&aged=0&language=EN&guiLanguage=en>):
>
> http://ec.europa.eu/commission_barroso/reding/video/text/message_20090504.pdf
>
>
> Annex
>
> Growth of internet users by regions of the world
> 1990-2008, in millions of users
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> IP/09/ 1397
>
> Bruxelles, le 30  septembre 2009
>
> La Commission européenne salue la décision américaine de rendre la
> gouvernance de l'internet plus indépendante, plus démocratique et plus
> internationale
>
> M me Viviane Reding, la commissaire européenne chargée de la société de
> l'information et des médias, a salué aujourd'hui le fait que l'ICANN,
> l'organisme chargé de la gestion des noms de domaine internet, devienne
> plus ouvert et doive mieux rendre compte de ses décisions à l'égard des
> milliards d'internautes du monde entier. À partir du 30 septembre,
> l'ICANN, basé aux États-Unis, ne sera plus soumis au contrôle unilatéral
> du ministère américain du commerce, mais à celui de commissions d'examen
> nommées par le Governmental Advisory Committee (GAC) de l'ICANN ainsi
> que par l'ICANN lui-même, avec la participation de gouvernements du
> monde entier. La Commission européenne avait demandé à plusieurs
> reprises depuis 2005 que la gouvernance des ressources essentielles et
> mondiales de l'internet soit réformée. Une telle réforme est nécessaire
> aux fins d'objectifs importants de politique publique tels que la
> liberté d'expression et la continuité des transactions en ligne. La
> Commission européenne accompagnera et soutiendra avec détermination la
> mise en oeuvre des réformes annoncées aujourd'hui, en coopération
> étroite avec les 27 pays de l'UE.
>
> «Je salue la décision des autorités américaines de faire évoluer le
> fonctionnement de l'ICANN afin d'adapter son rôle, essentiel en matière
> de gouvernance de l'internet, aux réalités du 21 e siècle et d'un réseau
> de plus en plus mondial» , a déclaré M me Viviane Reding, commissaire
> européenne chargée de la société de l'information et des médias. «Les
> utilisateurs de l'internet du monde entier peuvent maintenant s'attendre
> à ce que les décisions de l'ICANN sur les noms de domaine et les
> adresses internet soient plus indépendantes et tiennent compte de
> l'intérêt de tous. Des commissions d'examen externes évalueront
> régulièrement les performances de l'ICANN. Si elle est mise en oeuvre de
> manière effective et transparente, cette réforme devrait bénéficier du
> soutien tant de la société civile que des entreprises et des autorités
> nationales.»
>
> «La Commission européenne a la ferme volonté de faire aboutir cette
> réforme en collaborant avec les autorités nationales, les entreprises et
> la société civile. Elle participera activement au Governmental Advisory
> Committee de l'ICANN et à ses futures réformes. Le défi est maintenant
> de rendre le GAC, avec son rôle renforcé, plus efficace dans son
> travail, et d'approfondir encore le dialogue entre les autorités
> nationales, les entreprises et la société civile par l'intermédiaire de
> l'Internet Governance Forum. La Commission suivra également de près
> l'effet des travaux de l'ICANN sur la concurrence. J'encourage en outre
> toutes les parties à examiner les options envisageables pour améliorer
> les possibilités d'appel externe des décisions du comité directeur de
> l'ICANN.»
>
> «L'ICANN devrait désormais, en théorie, devenir plus indépendant et plus
> démocratique. Faisons en sorte, tous ensemble, qu'il le devienne vraiment.»
>
> Il a été annoncé aujourd'hui que le «Joint Project Agreement», qui
> prévoit un contrôle unilatéral du ministère américain du commerce sur
> les décisions de l'ICANN, ne serait pas prolongé au-delà du 30 septembre
> 2009. Il sera remplacé par une «affirmation of commitments», une
> déclaration conjointe du gouvernement américain et de l'ICANN qui
> représente une réforme importante du système de gouvernance actuel . Les
> changements les plus importants sont les suivants:
>
>     *
>
>       plus d'indépendance à l'égard du contrôle périodique par les
>       autorités d'un seul pays. Les décisions prises par l'ICANN ont une
>       incidence sur les internautes du monde entier. Par conséquent, il
>       est important que l'ensemble de leurs intérêts soit pris en compte;
>
>     *
>
>       un contrôle externe au moyen de commissions d'examen indépendantes
>       nommées conjointement par le GAC et par l'ICANN. Le GAC est ouvert
>       aux gouvernements et aux autorités publiques du monde entier et
>       conseille le comité directeur de l'ICANN sur ses activités
>       relatives aux politiques publiques. Ces commissions évalueront
>       régulièrement les performances de l'ICANN eu égard à ses
>       engagements publics. L'internet est indispensable à nos sociétés
>       et à nos économies. Depuis des années, la Commission européenne et
>       les pays de l'UE participent aux activités de l'ICANN afin de
>       veiller à ce que les valeurs européennes soient respectées sur
>       l'internet, notamment la liberté d'expression, le respect de la
>       vie privée, la protection des consommateurs et la sécurité.
>
> En juin 2009, la Commission européenne a demandé, dans une
> communication, que l'ICANN soit davantage tenu de rendre des comptes à
> la communauté internationale, que son processus de prise de décision
> devienne plus transparent et que le rôle des autorités nationales quant
> aux activités de l'ICANN qui concernent les politiques publiques soit
> clarifié (voir IP/09/951
> <http://europa.eu/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?reference=IP/09/951&format=HTML&aged=0&language=FR&guiLanguage=fr>
> ). La décision américaine annoncée aujourd'hui montre que les États-Unis
> ont pour l'essentiel les mêmes préoccupations et les mêmes objectifs.
>
> Prochaines étapes
>
> Une autre question importante dans le domaine de la gouvernance de
> l'internet est la poursuite du Forum sur la gouvernance de l'internet
> (IGF), qui avait initialement été établi pour 5 ans et qui s'était réuni
> pour la première fois en 2006. Ce forum est un lieu de débat privilégié
> pour tous ceux qui participent à la gouvernance de l'internet. La
> Commission européenne souhaite qu'il poursuive ses activités car il
> s'agit de la seule enceinte où tous les sujets en rapport avec
> l'internet peuvent être abordés par un large éventail de parties
> prenantes du monde entier, et notamment les représentants des parlements.
>
> Contexte
>
> Les noms de domaines et les adresses IP sont indispensables pour que le
> trafic internet atteigne sa destination. L'organisme chargé de définir
> les politiques globales de coordination du système de noms de domaine
> (DNS) est l'ICANN, un organisme ayant le statut juridique de société à
> but non lucratif établi en Californie. Depuis sa création en 1998, le
> fonctionnement de l'ICANN est régi par une série de protocoles d'accord
> avec le gouvernement américain spécifiant les objectifs de ses activités
> en ce qui concerne le DNS. Le dernier de ces protocoles d'accord, le
> «Joint Project Agreement», expirera le 30 septembre 2009. En mai
> dernier, la commissaire européenne Viviane Reding avait présenté les
> grandes lignes de sa vision pour l'avenir de la gouvernance de
> l'internet dans un message vidéo (voir IP/09/696
> <http://europa.eu/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?reference=IP/09/696&format=HTML&aged=0&language=FR&guiLanguage=fr>
> ):
>
> http://ec.europa.eu/commission_barroso/reding/video/text/message_20090504.pdf
>
>
> Annex
>
> Growth of internet users by regions of the world
> 1990-2008, in millions of users
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> ------------------------------------------------------
> Francis F. MUGUET Ph.D
>
> MDPI Foundation Open Access Journals
> http://www.mdpi.org   http://www.mdpi.net
> muguet at mdpi.org       muguet at mdpi.net
>
> KNIS http://knis.org
> Academic Collaboration / University of Geneva
> http://syinf.unige.ch/recherche/cooperation
>
>
> Mobile France       +33 6 71 91 42 10
>        Switzerland  +41 78 927 06 97
>        Cameroun    +237 96 55 69 62 ( mostly in July )
>
> World Summit On the Information Society (WSIS)
> Civil Society Working Groups
> Scientific Information :  http://www.wsis-si.org  chair
> Patents & Copyrights   :  http://www.wsis-pct.org co-chair
> Financing Mechanismns  :  http://www.wsis-finance.org web
> Info. Net. Govermance  :  http://www.wsis-gov.org  web
>
> NET4D : http://www.net4D.org
> UNMSP : http://www.unmsp.org
> WTIS : http://www.wtis.org   REUSSI : http://www.reussi.org
> ------------------------------------------------------
>
>


-- 
Paul R Lehto, J.D.
P.O. Box #1
Ishpeming, MI  49849
lehto.paul at gmail.com
906-204-4026
____________________________________________________________
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


From roland at internetpolicyagency.com  Thu Oct  1 15:18:35 2009
From: roland at internetpolicyagency.com (Roland Perry)
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2009 20:18:35 +0100
Subject: [governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation of Commitments
In-Reply-To: <1254397157.3941.611.camel@anriette-laptop>
References: <75822E125BCB994F8446858C4B19F0D78FFC6E09@SUEX07-MBX-04.ad.syr.edu>
 <CD78E288-CEDE-4E1E-809E-39F1F591AD75@graduateinstitute.ch>
 <75822E125BCB994F8446858C4B19F0D78FFC6E16@SUEX07-MBX-04.ad.syr.edu>
 <14BF930C-49AF-4C16-A982-58A6BF8685D0@graduateinstitute.ch>
 <1254397157.3941.611.camel@anriette-laptop>
Message-ID: <3QZdNroLCQxKFAts@perry.co.uk>

In message <1254397157.3941.611.camel at anriette-laptop>, at 13:39:17 on 
Thu, 1 Oct 2009, Anriette Esterhuysen <anriette at apc.org> writes
>One question I have about the GAC, does it not become very important to
>have input from different stakeholders at country level in the
>identification/nomination of GAC members

As a matter of simple fact, the GAC members are usually the most obvious 
career employee of the ministry charged with overseeing "International 
Telecoms issues", and are therefore likely to also turn up at ITU 
meetings, EU telecoms/Internet meetings, IGF consultations, UN-ECOSOC 
etc.

Plus there are a few who might alternatively be their country's 
"Internet Czar".
-- 
Roland Perry
____________________________________________________________
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


From lehto.paul at gmail.com  Thu Oct  1 15:42:19 2009
From: lehto.paul at gmail.com (Paul Lehto)
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2009 12:42:19 -0700
Subject: [governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation of Commitments
In-Reply-To: <3QZdNroLCQxKFAts@perry.co.uk>
References: <75822E125BCB994F8446858C4B19F0D78FFC6E09@SUEX07-MBX-04.ad.syr.edu>
	 <CD78E288-CEDE-4E1E-809E-39F1F591AD75@graduateinstitute.ch>
	 <75822E125BCB994F8446858C4B19F0D78FFC6E16@SUEX07-MBX-04.ad.syr.edu>
	 <14BF930C-49AF-4C16-A982-58A6BF8685D0@graduateinstitute.ch>
	 <1254397157.3941.611.camel@anriette-laptop>
	 <3QZdNroLCQxKFAts@perry.co.uk>
Message-ID: <76f819dd0910011242u2d26722eg4cac8f606ece0282@mail.gmail.com>

It doesn't matter how diverse the "stakeholders" are in their country
of origin, race, creed, sex, or what have you, if the stakeholders and
the public as a whole do not have a CONTROL mechanism.  The
elimination of all remaining control mechanisms (elections, as an
indirect control) is precisely what's being accomplished with the
agreement between the US Commerce Department and ICANN to make them
essentially independent, subject only to an advisory board.

With politicians, every communication to them is utterly toothless if
it idoes not carry (as it always does) an implied threat that one will
vote the poltician out of office if they don't do the right thing.
With the new ICANN structure, even this vestigial remedy (attenuated
as it was by the insulation of the commerce department from the
electorate) is eliminated in every meaningful sense.

I'd be the first to welcome true and real global governance regarding
the internet.  The fact that they've put in the semblance of "global"
but zero "governance" means that the shift is an abdication of all
public, democratic control, even if that control was improperly
limited to a single country, the USA.  Even more importantly, there's
no mechanism with which to fight to CREATE true control on the global
level in favor of the public interest.

Thus, we can't fight, lobby or progress from the new posture of an
independent ICANN to a situation of true global control/governance
without (1) a nearly unprecedented act (in the history of Power) to
voluntarily create genuine and real accountability on a global scale,
OR (2) a revolution or revolt.  And just how does one have a
revolution or revolt against a corporation at all, much less a
corporation that has a monopoly on what it does, and which we all need
to exist or have a "domain" on the internet?

Paul Lehto, Juris Doctor

On 10/1/09, Roland Perry <roland at internetpolicyagency.com> wrote:
> In message <1254397157.3941.611.camel at anriette-laptop>, at 13:39:17 on
> Thu, 1 Oct 2009, Anriette Esterhuysen <anriette at apc.org> writes
>>One question I have about the GAC, does it not become very important to
>>have input from different stakeholders at country level in the
>>identification/nomination of GAC members
>
> As a matter of simple fact, the GAC members are usually the most obvious
> career employee of the ministry charged with overseeing "International
> Telecoms issues", and are therefore likely to also turn up at ITU
> meetings, EU telecoms/Internet meetings, IGF consultations, UN-ECOSOC
> etc.
>
> Plus there are a few who might alternatively be their country's
> "Internet Czar".
> --
> Roland Perry
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
>


-- 
Paul R Lehto, J.D.
P.O. Box #1
Ishpeming, MI  49849
lehto.paul at gmail.com
906-204-4026
____________________________________________________________
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


From lehto.paul at gmail.com  Thu Oct  1 15:58:04 2009
From: lehto.paul at gmail.com (Paul Lehto)
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2009 12:58:04 -0700
Subject: [governance] POST JPA
In-Reply-To: <00df01ca42ad$587f65c0$097e3140$@com.br>
References: <75822E125BCB994F8446858C4B19F0D78FFC6E09@SUEX07-MBX-04.ad.syr.edu>
	 <954259bd0909300041o7adc97f9v5c701cde107e0f7e@mail.gmail.com>
	 <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8719585@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
	 <f65fb55e0909300756w1b6e8c14h8760cfe5bc46ba6b@mail.gmail.com>
	 <954259bd0909300821r2410d784q57d0c842e05773a5@mail.gmail.com>
	 <27A2EB4A-DC87-4A0F-89BE-A6199BE73ADA@psg.com>
	 <4AC37E18.8050406@apc.org> <00df01ca42ad$587f65c0$097e3140$@com.br>
Message-ID: <76f819dd0910011258q6cce08bbs49359ed46a88e034@mail.gmail.com>

One has to read the corporate spin with ICANN, as with all
corporations, with a lens to eliminate the happy-talk corporate PR
aspects and the weasel words.  The key sentences at icann.org are the
following:

"[ICANN and Commerce's agreement] declares ICANN is **independent**
and **not controlled** by any one entity. [It's not controlled by any
combination, either, though it speaks of various ones]  It commits
ICANN to reviews performed BY THE COMMUNITY – a further recognition
that the multi-stakeholder model is robust enough to review itself.
[We can all review ICANN, three times a day if we wish. It doesn't
mean anything, however, when push comes to shove, which is the
DECISIVE issue, it's not just an "issue" it's a decisive "controlling"
issue, as it were.]

"The Affirmation is of **long standing** and is not limited to the
three years for which previous agreements operated. [Corporate
Independence Forever and Uber Alles!]

The Government **Advisory** Committee's role is reaffirmed. And the
GAC is a key participant in selecting the membership of the review
teams. ["advisory" is a critical word, and it means zero control of
ICANN]

At bottom, ICANN is released to "partner" with whoever they choose,
probably just the large vested financial interests.  They may choose
in fact to create the world's most diverse advisory body, but it's all
an orwellian illusion if the public, whether in the USA or around the
globe, has no enforceable control.  to add insult to injury,
privatizing ICANN completely also means no claims of constitutional
rights can be made against ICANN in court -- at least that's the
position of all private corporations accepting privatization
initiatives.    The details are irrelevant, no matter how good they
are.  If in fact they come up with great policy somehow it will be the
actions of philosopher kings and/or queens, not the actions of an
accountable democratic body committed to public input.

Paul Lehto, Juris Doctor


On 10/1/09, Vanda Scartezini <vanda at uol.com.br> wrote:
>  Dear list
>
>
>
>  The ICANN's independence with the end of JPA can be seen at icann.org.  We
> have translated Rod's speech to Portuguese to make it easy for all
> Portuguese speaking colleagues.
>
>  Best to all
>
>
>
> Vanda Scartezini
>
> POLO Consultores Associados
>
> &  IT Trend
>
> Alameda Santos 1470 cjs 1407/8
>
> 01418-903 Sao Paulo,SP.
>
> Fone + 55 11 3266.6253
>
> Mob + 5511 8181.1464
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Willie Currie [mailto:wcurrie at apc.org]
> Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2009 12:50 PM
> To: governance at lists.cpsr.org; Avri Doria
> Subject: Re: [governance] so do i owe bill drake a pizza or not?
>
>
>
> Ok, so the main shift is the establishment of four review processes
>
> which will assess ICANN's performance in four areas in three year
>
> cycles. The review teams will be jointly established by the ICANN Chair
>
> or CEO and the Chair of the GAC. These reviews will replace the role of
>
> the US DoC in reviewing ICANN's performance. One can see an increased
>
> role for the GAC in oversight of ICANN here, but it is a 'soft' form of
>
> oversight - the 'recommendations of the reviews will be provided to the
>
> Board and posted for public comment. The Board will take action within
>
> six months of receipt of the recommendations'. In other words, there is
>
> no enforcement mechanism for the recommendations - the ICANN Board is
>
> not obliged to implement the recommendations, i.e. the reviews will have
>
> the soft force of persuasion and moral or political pressure but not the
>
> instruments of 'hard' oversight. This is reinforced in the Affirmation
>
> by the clear statement that 'ICANN is a private organization and nothing
>
> in this Affirmation should be construed as control by any one entity.'
>
> So  the Board  remains the key body of power within ICANN  and the least
>
> accountable, as there is no democratic mechanism for the bottom-up ICANN
>
> community to dismiss the Board.
>
>
>
> Nevertheless this is a step forward, with respect to diluting unilateral
>
> US oversight of ICANN. It remains to be seen to what extent civil
>
> society is represented on any of the review teams and whether the
>
> recommendations of the reviews are accepted and implemented by the ICANN
>
> Board. The EU has come out in support of the continuation of the IGF 'as
>
> it is the only place where all internet related topics can be addressed
>
> by a wide range of stakeholders from all over the world, including
>
> Parliamentarians.' It will be interesting to see what role the IGF may
>
> be able to play as a space where the reviews can be deliberated on in a
>
> multi-stakeholder fashion and boost the transparency of the review
>
> process and perhaps its soft power.
>
>
>
> Willie
>
>
>
> Avri Doria wrote:
>
>>
>
>> On 30 Sep 2009, at 11:21, Bertrand de La Chapelle wrote:
>
>>
>
>>> Hi Mc tim,
>
>>>
>
>>> I must have misunderstood. I thought Milton bought pizza if nothing
>
>>> changed ?
>
>>>
>
>>> B.
>
>>
>
>>
>
>> And something did change.
>
>>
>
>> Though I am not sure how much there is for Civil society to be cheer
>
>> about.
>
>> It is like the old days of WSIS, CS will be beholden to the gov't
>
>> chair for right of participation.
>
>>
>
>> Or, in the long run, other then outward appearance, how significant
>
>> the change will turn out to be for ICANN processes.
>
>>
>
>> a.
>
>>
>
>> ____________________________________________________________
>
>> 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
>
>


-- 
Paul R Lehto, J.D.
P.O. Box #1
Ishpeming, MI  49849
lehto.paul at gmail.com
906-204-4026
____________________________________________________________
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


From roland at internetpolicyagency.com  Thu Oct  1 16:12:10 2009
From: roland at internetpolicyagency.com (Roland Perry)
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2009 21:12:10 +0100
Subject: [governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation of Commitments
In-Reply-To: <76f819dd0910011242u2d26722eg4cac8f606ece0282@mail.gmail.com>
References: <75822E125BCB994F8446858C4B19F0D78FFC6E09@SUEX07-MBX-04.ad.syr.edu>
 <CD78E288-CEDE-4E1E-809E-39F1F591AD75@graduateinstitute.ch>
 <75822E125BCB994F8446858C4B19F0D78FFC6E16@SUEX07-MBX-04.ad.syr.edu>
 <14BF930C-49AF-4C16-A982-58A6BF8685D0@graduateinstitute.ch>
 <1254397157.3941.611.camel@anriette-laptop> <3QZdNroLCQxKFAts@perry.co.uk>
 <76f819dd0910011242u2d26722eg4cac8f606ece0282@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <rBdKJCua0QxKFAve@perry.co.uk>

In message 
<76f819dd0910011242u2d26722eg4cac8f606ece0282 at mail.gmail.com>, at 
12:42:19 on Thu, 1 Oct 2009, Paul Lehto <lehto.paul at gmail.com> writes
>It doesn't matter how diverse the "stakeholders" are in their country
>of origin, race, creed, sex, or what have you, if the stakeholders and
>the public as a whole do not have a CONTROL mechanism.  The
>elimination of all remaining control mechanisms (elections, as an
>indirect control) is precisely what's being accomplished with the
>agreement between the US Commerce Department and ICANN to make them
>essentially independent, subject only to an advisory board.

I'm not sure what this has to do with the GAC members.

Are you suggesting that the ultimate control be given over to ALAC, 
rather than GAC?

Just curious, I don't have a "position" of my own regarding this.

>With politicians, every communication to them is utterly toothless if
>it idoes not carry (as it always does) an implied threat that one will
>vote the poltician out of office if they don't do the right thing.
>With the new ICANN structure, even this vestigial remedy (attenuated
>as it was by the insulation of the commerce department from the
>electorate) is eliminated in every meaningful sense.
>
>I'd be the first to welcome true and real global governance regarding
>the internet.  The fact that they've put in the semblance of "global"
>but zero "governance" means that the shift is an abdication of all
>public, democratic control, even if that control was improperly
>limited to a single country, the USA.  Even more importantly, there's
>no mechanism with which to fight to CREATE true control on the global
>level in favor of the public interest.
>
>Thus, we can't fight, lobby or progress from the new posture of an
>independent ICANN to a situation of true global control/governance
>without (1) a nearly unprecedented act (in the history of Power) to
>voluntarily create genuine and real accountability on a global scale,
>OR (2) a revolution or revolt.  And just how does one have a
>revolution or revolt against a corporation at all, much less a
>corporation that has a monopoly on what it does, and which we all need
>to exist or have a "domain" on the internet?

So you don't think you can work inside the existing (and as-modified) 
ICANN framework to achieve any of this? [Same disclaimer as above].

>Paul Lehto, Juris Doctor
>
>On 10/1/09, Roland Perry <roland at internetpolicyagency.com> wrote:
>> In message <1254397157.3941.611.camel at anriette-laptop>, at 13:39:17 on
>> Thu, 1 Oct 2009, Anriette Esterhuysen <anriette at apc.org> writes
>>>One question I have about the GAC, does it not become very important to
>>>have input from different stakeholders at country level in the
>>>identification/nomination of GAC members
>>
>> As a matter of simple fact, the GAC members are usually the most obvious
>> career employee of the ministry charged with overseeing "International
>> Telecoms issues", and are therefore likely to also turn up at ITU
>> meetings, EU telecoms/Internet meetings, IGF consultations, UN-ECOSOC
>> etc.
>>
>> Plus there are a few who might alternatively be their country's
>> "Internet Czar".
>> --
>> Roland Perry
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> 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
>>
>
>

-- 
Roland Perry
____________________________________________________________
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


From jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com  Thu Oct  1 16:31:29 2009
From: jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com (Jeffrey A. Williams)
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2009 15:31:29 -0500 (GMT-05:00)
Subject: AW: [governance] Pizza? Leaning tower of Pizza.
Message-ID: <18762263.1254429090053.JavaMail.root@elwamui-milano.atl.sa.earthlink.net>

Wolfgang and all,

  China's reluctance in joining the GAC is not Taiwan's presence,
but far more technically and economically fundemental.  Frankly I
believe that some of their concerns are fully justified.  ICANN
does not.  Ergo the divide.  Unfortunately for ICANN the Chinese 
government knows it has a very big stick, and can weild it adeptly
when it feels the need to do so and has provided a few minor
demonstrations of same.  More robust demonstrations may be forthcoming.

-----Original Message-----
>From: "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang" <wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
>Sent: Oct 1, 2009 2:43 AM
>To: governance at lists.cpsr.org, Eric Dierker <cogitoergosum at sbcglobal.net>, governance at lists.cpsr.org, Willie Currie <wcurrie at apc.org>
>Subject: AW: [governance] Pizza? Leaning tower of Pizza.
>
> 
>
> 
>Erik  
>The biggest point of interest will be: Will China now take a seat at the GAC table?
> 
>Wolfgang:
>The Chinese government is a member of the GAC since 1998, but did not participate in the meetings until the recent Sydney emeting because Taiwan is also an official GAC members (due to the clause in the GAC founding document that giovernments and "recognized territories" were invited to join the GAC). However in Sydney China and Taiwan were sitting together in the same room and - supriose, surprise - sjakhed hans when they entered the room :-)))>> 
>
>    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

Regards,

Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 294k members/stakeholders strong!)
"Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" -
   Abraham Lincoln

"Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is very
often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt

"If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; liability
depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
United States v. Carroll Towing  (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
===============================================================
Updated 1/26/04
CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS. div. of
Information Network Eng.  INEG. INC.
ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com
Phone: 214-244-4827

____________________________________________________________
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


From vanda at uol.com.br  Thu Oct  1 16:36:11 2009
From: vanda at uol.com.br (Vanda Scartezini)
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2009 17:36:11 -0300
Subject: [governance] so do i owe bill drake a pizza or not?
In-Reply-To: <D65C7A95-1F54-40DC-AAAF-E822D373D710@psg.com>
References: <75822E125BCB994F8446858C4B19F0D78FFC6E09@SUEX07-MBX-04.ad.syr.edu> <954259bd0909300041o7adc97f9v5c701cde107e0f7e@mail.gmail.com> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8719585@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> <f65fb55e0909300756w1b6e8c14h8760cfe5bc46ba6b@mail.gmail.com> <954259bd0909300821r2410d784q57d0c842e05773a5@mail.gmail.com> <f65fb55e0909300843g25eb772fs663f1319ea99ef48@mail.gmail.com> <D65C7A95-1F54-40DC-AAAF-E822D373D710@psg.com>
Message-ID: <01f301ca42d6$d4821590$7d8640b0$@com.br>

Just clarifying some aspects:

To become an international organization under the real world we live now, it
will be necessary to pass under the approval of United Nations. To have the
support of several governments will be fundamental to get such approval.
ICANN make a relevant step forward into this direction. 
Best

Vanda Scartezini
POLO Consultores Associados
&  IT Trend
Alameda Santos 1470 cjs 1407/8
01418-903 Sao Paulo,SP.
Fone + 55 11 3266.6253
Mob + 5511 8181.1464


-----Original Message-----
From: Avri Doria [mailto:avri at psg.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2009 12:50 PM
To: Governance/IGC List
Subject: Re: [governance] so do i owe bill drake a pizza or not?


On 30 Sep 2009, at 11:43, McTim wrote:

>  read it as the denationalization that many of us have sought.

remember the IANA contract.
i don't think you are there yet.

plus it may not longer be beholden to one nation
but is rather beholden to many nations.
not the solution many of us sought
of having a  multistakeholder organization with no national oversight.

so i do not think yu can cal is denationalization, though you can call  
it multi-nationalization as opposed to uni-nationalization.

a.

____________________________________________________________
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


From jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com  Thu Oct  1 16:37:51 2009
From: jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com (Jeffrey A. Williams)
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2009 15:37:51 -0500 (GMT-05:00)
Subject: AW: [governance] so do i owe bill drake a pizza or not?
Message-ID: <10634359.1254429471420.JavaMail.root@elwamui-milano.atl.sa.earthlink.net>

An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20091001/04daf539/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

From jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com  Thu Oct  1 16:42:47 2009
From: jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com (Jeffrey A. Williams)
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2009 15:42:47 -0500 (GMT-05:00)
Subject: [governance] so do i owe bill drake a pizza or not?
Message-ID: <18318204.1254429767863.JavaMail.root@elwamui-milano.atl.sa.earthlink.net>

Vanda and all,

  Not exactly correct.  None the less ICANN has already made
the some the steps to be "Internationally Recognized".  The
UN has very little to say about such recognition, but their
recognition doesn't hurt all that much in some circles, in others
it may garner some distrust given the UN's history.

-----Original Message-----
>From: Vanda Scartezini <vanda at uol.com.br>
>Sent: Oct 1, 2009 3:36 PM
>To: governance at lists.cpsr.org, 'Avri Doria' <avri at psg.com>
>Subject: RE: [governance] so do i owe bill drake a pizza or not?
>
>Just clarifying some aspects:
>
>To become an international organization under the real world we live now, it
>will be necessary to pass under the approval of United Nations. To have the
>support of several governments will be fundamental to get such approval.
>ICANN make a relevant step forward into this direction. 
>Best
>
>Vanda Scartezini
>POLO Consultores Associados
>&  IT Trend
>Alameda Santos 1470 cjs 1407/8
>01418-903 Sao Paulo,SP.
>Fone + 55 11 3266.6253
>Mob + 5511 8181.1464
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Avri Doria [mailto:avri at psg.com] 
>Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2009 12:50 PM
>To: Governance/IGC List
>Subject: Re: [governance] so do i owe bill drake a pizza or not?
>
>
>On 30 Sep 2009, at 11:43, McTim wrote:
>
>>  read it as the denationalization that many of us have sought.
>
>remember the IANA contract.
>i don't think you are there yet.
>
>plus it may not longer be beholden to one nation
>but is rather beholden to many nations.
>not the solution many of us sought
>of having a  multistakeholder organization with no national oversight.
>
>so i do not think yu can cal is denationalization, though you can call  
>it multi-nationalization as opposed to uni-nationalization.
>
>a.
>
>____________________________________________________________
>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

Regards,

Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 294k members/stakeholders strong!)
"Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" -
   Abraham Lincoln

"Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is very
often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt

"If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; liability
depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
United States v. Carroll Towing  (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
===============================================================
Updated 1/26/04
CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS. div. of
Information Network Eng.  INEG. INC.
ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com
Phone: 214-244-4827

____________________________________________________________
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


From carlton.samuels at uwimona.edu.jm  Thu Oct  1 19:50:53 2009
From: carlton.samuels at uwimona.edu.jm (Carlton Samuels)
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2009 18:50:53 -0500
Subject: [governance] so do i owe bill drake a pizza or not?
In-Reply-To: <4AC3BAB6.1040304@cavebear.com>
References: <75822E125BCB994F8446858C4B19F0D78FFC6E09@SUEX07-MBX-04.ad.syr.edu>
	 <954259bd0909300041o7adc97f9v5c701cde107e0f7e@mail.gmail.com>
	 <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8719585@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
	 <f65fb55e0909300756w1b6e8c14h8760cfe5bc46ba6b@mail.gmail.com>
	 <954259bd0909300821r2410d784q57d0c842e05773a5@mail.gmail.com>
	 <27A2EB4A-DC87-4A0F-89BE-A6199BE73ADA@psg.com>
	 <p06240830c6e92de1b1f6@221.115.9.43>
	 <92A96C87-EB27-4BD8-A9A2-94F4BBD76882@graduateinstitute.ch>
	 <4AC3BAB6.1040304@cavebear.com>
Message-ID: <61a136f40910011650l2f864de4md2e069e1f840b1d1@mail.gmail.com>

I once had an [American] boss who taught me that when some persons shake on
a deal, you should be certain to check your fingers before you leave the
room.
For me, Karl has fingered one of the most important of the 'hanging chads'
of this entire business; the encomiums from that select list of re-actors.
 Good politics, true.  And undoubtedly an orchestration.  Leaves a body to
wonder...
Carlton Samuels

On Wed, Sep 30, 2009 at 3:08 PM, Karl Auerbach <karl at cavebear.com> wrote:

> On 09/30/2009 10:01 AM, William Drake wrote:
>
>> Let's see.  On the one hand we have
>>
>> 1. IANA contract
>> 2. VeriSign contract
>> 3. California law
>> 4. Entrenched org culture
>> 5. Entrenched commercial interests
>> 6. Whatever back channel political deals and assurances were needed in
>> DC, etc (the administration will probably take heat for it anyway)
>> 7. etc
>>
>> On the other hand, we have
>>
>> 1. NTIA's reviews replaced by non-binding panels.
>>
>
> I see serious problems with this "Affirmation".
>
> First of all, NTIA cites as authority only the most vague and general of
> statutory authorizations.  If one accepts those as adequate it means, for
> example, that NTIA has the general authority to enter into agreements that
> require US corporations to include a committee of foreign governments in
> their highest decision making processes.
>
> That might be a thought that gives comfort to some outside the US but it
> scares the beejeebers out of me as a whole new and previously unseen kind of
> expansion of US governmental power into the affairs of private activities.
>
> There are several other aspects in which NTIA's citation of authority is
> not adequate for the impositions it places on ICANN.
>
> Second, the agreement, as you mention, leaves open many other issues, such
> as who prepares the root zone, is NTIA still in the approval loop (I see no
> reason to believe that it is not).
>
> Third, the "Affirmation" seems to be designed to buttress the intellectual
> property industry's drumbeat for an every more revealing and privacy-busting
> "whois"
>
> Fourth, it leaves ICANN still in an unclear position with regard to
> anti-trust laws.
>
> Fifth, given that the ICANN-Verisign contracts and legal agreements are
> based on certain assumptions about what NTIA delegated to ICANN, there is
> now a cloud on those contracts and agreements in that they now may be based
> on a vanished foundation.
>
> The "Affirmation" is still based on the technically false belief that other
> DNS systems do exist and that some may come into larger use than they have.
>
> And where are the root operators in all of this - they, at a flick of their
> text editors - can obviate this entire ICANN/NTIA structure.
>
> This "Affirmation" is a collection of euphemisms wrapped in pretty ribbons.
>
> By-the-way, did anyone else notice the list of "reactions" - all from
> people who must have been given an advance copy and none of whom are ICANN
> critics.
>
>                --karl--
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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/20091001/ea794792/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

From cogitoergosum at sbcglobal.net  Thu Oct  1 22:53:06 2009
From: cogitoergosum at sbcglobal.net (Eric Dierker)
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2009 19:53:06 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [governance] POST JPA
Message-ID: <259838.32621.qm@web83914.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>


It should not be the role of International Internet Governance to hand over control to individuals.  Human Rights are not a turnkey operation.  
 
As netizens we have a responsibility to work at it.  Better to let those who really fight for it, have it. Until we have universal internet voting rights we must be careful who we crown.

--- On Thu, 10/1/09, Paul Lehto <lehto.paul at gmail.com> wrote:


From: Paul Lehto <lehto.paul at gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [governance] POST JPA
To: governance at lists.cpsr.org, "Vanda Scartezini" <vanda at uol.com.br>
Date: Thursday, October 1, 2009, 7:58 PM


One has to read the corporate spin with ICANN, as with all
corporations, with a lens to eliminate the happy-talk corporate PR
aspects and the weasel words.  The key sentences at icann.org are the
following:

"[ICANN and Commerce's agreement] declares ICANN is **independent**
and **not controlled** by any one entity. [It's not controlled by any
combination, either, though it speaks of various ones]  It commits
ICANN to reviews performed BY THE COMMUNITY – a further recognition
that the multi-stakeholder model is robust enough to review itself.
[We can all review ICANN, three times a day if we wish. It doesn't
mean anything, however, when push comes to shove, which is the
DECISIVE issue, it's not just an "issue" it's a decisive "controlling"
issue, as it were.]

"The Affirmation is of **long standing** and is not limited to the
three years for which previous agreements operated. [Corporate
Independence Forever and Uber Alles!]

The Government **Advisory** Committee's role is reaffirmed. And the
GAC is a key participant in selecting the membership of the review
teams. ["advisory" is a critical word, and it means zero control of
ICANN]

At bottom, ICANN is released to "partner" with whoever they choose,
probably just the large vested financial interests.  They may choose
in fact to create the world's most diverse advisory body, but it's all
an orwellian illusion if the public, whether in the USA or around the
globe, has no enforceable control.  to add insult to injury,
privatizing ICANN completely also means no claims of constitutional
rights can be made against ICANN in court -- at least that's the
position of all private corporations accepting privatization
initiatives.    The details are irrelevant, no matter how good they
are.  If in fact they come up with great policy somehow it will be the
actions of philosopher kings and/or queens, not the actions of an
accountable democratic body committed to public input.

Paul Lehto, Juris Doctor


On 10/1/09, Vanda Scartezini <vanda at uol.com.br> wrote:
>  Dear list
>
>
>
>  The ICANN's independence with the end of JPA can be seen at icann.org.  We
> have translated Rod's speech to Portuguese to make it easy for all
> Portuguese speaking colleagues.
>
>  Best to all
>
>
>
> Vanda Scartezini
>
> POLO Consultores Associados
>
> &  IT Trend
>
> Alameda Santos 1470 cjs 1407/8
>
> 01418-903 Sao Paulo,SP.
>
> Fone + 55 11 3266.6253
>
> Mob + 5511 8181.1464
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Willie Currie [mailto:wcurrie at apc.org]
> Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2009 12:50 PM
> To: governance at lists.cpsr.org; Avri Doria
> Subject: Re: [governance] so do i owe bill drake a pizza or not?
>
>
>
> Ok, so the main shift is the establishment of four review processes
>
> which will assess ICANN's performance in four areas in three year
>
> cycles. The review teams will be jointly established by the ICANN Chair
>
> or CEO and the Chair of the GAC. These reviews will replace the role of
>
> the US DoC in reviewing ICANN's performance. One can see an increased
>
> role for the GAC in oversight of ICANN here, but it is a 'soft' form of
>
> oversight - the 'recommendations of the reviews will be provided to the
>
> Board and posted for public comment. The Board will take action within
>
> six months of receipt of the recommendations'. In other words, there is
>
> no enforcement mechanism for the recommendations - the ICANN Board is
>
> not obliged to implement the recommendations, i.e. the reviews will have
>
> the soft force of persuasion and moral or political pressure but not the
>
> instruments of 'hard' oversight. This is reinforced in the Affirmation
>
> by the clear statement that 'ICANN is a private organization and nothing
>
> in this Affirmation should be construed as control by any one entity.'
>
> So  the Board  remains the key body of power within ICANN  and the least
>
> accountable, as there is no democratic mechanism for the bottom-up ICANN
>
> community to dismiss the Board.
>
>
>
> Nevertheless this is a step forward, with respect to diluting unilateral
>
> US oversight of ICANN. It remains to be seen to what extent civil
>
> society is represented on any of the review teams and whether the
>
> recommendations of the reviews are accepted and implemented by the ICANN
>
> Board. The EU has come out in support of the continuation of the IGF 'as
>
> it is the only place where all internet related topics can be addressed
>
> by a wide range of stakeholders from all over the world, including
>
> Parliamentarians.' It will be interesting to see what role the IGF may
>
> be able to play as a space where the reviews can be deliberated on in a
>
> multi-stakeholder fashion and boost the transparency of the review
>
> process and perhaps its soft power.
>
>
>
> Willie
>
>
>
> Avri Doria wrote:
>
>>
>
>> On 30 Sep 2009, at 11:21, Bertrand de La Chapelle wrote:
>
>>
>
>>> Hi Mc tim,
>
>>>
>
>>> I must have misunderstood. I thought Milton bought pizza if nothing
>
>>> changed ?
>
>>>
>
>>> B.
>
>>
>
>>
>
>> And something did change.
>
>>
>
>> Though I am not sure how much there is for Civil society to be cheer
>
>> about.
>
>> It is like the old days of WSIS, CS will be beholden to the gov't
>
>> chair for right of participation.
>
>>
>
>> Or, in the long run, other then outward appearance, how significant
>
>> the change will turn out to be for ICANN processes.
>
>>
>
>> a.
>
>>
>
>> ____________________________________________________________
>
>> 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
>
>


-- 
Paul R Lehto, J.D.
P.O. Box #1
Ishpeming, MI  49849
lehto.paul at gmail.com
906-204-4026
____________________________________________________________
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/20091001/4593b9b7/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

From nursesacrosstheborders at yahoo.com  Thu Oct  1 22:53:49 2009
From: nursesacrosstheborders at yahoo.com (nursesacrosstheborders at yahoo.com)
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2009 19:53:49 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [governance] so do i owe bill drake a pizza or not?
 (Action Required)
Message-ID: <638363.42957.qm@web34304.mail.mud.yahoo.com>


  Hello William Drake,

  This message serves as notification that you will not receive any more courtesy notices 
  from our members for two days. Messages you have sent will remain in a lower 
  priority queue for our member to review at their leisure.

  Future messages will be more likely to be viewed if you are on our member's priority
  Guest List.



  Thank you,
  nursesacrosstheborders at yahoo.com


About Boxbe
This courtesy notice is part of a free service to make email
more reliable and useful.  Boxbe (http://www.boxbe.com) uses
your existing social network and that of your friends to keep
your inbox clean and make sure you receive email from people
who matter to you.

Boxbe: Say Goodbye to Email Overload
Visit http://www.boxbe.com/how-it-works?tc=545215389_2074524377



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20091001/7669e2ad/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
Reporting-MTA: dns; yahoo.com
Action: failed
Arrival-Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2009 04:29:31 -0700 (PDT)

Final-Recipient: rfc822; nursesacrosstheborders at yahoo.com
Diagnostic-Code: X-Boxbe-Notice; Sender not pre-approved, delivery likely delayed.  Follow instructions in above notice
Status: 4.7.0
-------------- next part --------------
>From William Drake Thu Oct  1 11:29:31 2009
X-Apparently-To: nursesacrosstheborders at yahoo.com via 66.163.178.139; Thu, 01 Oct 2009 04:29:18 -0700
Return-Path: <governance-owner+nursesacrosstheborders=yahoo.com at lists.cpsr.org>
X-YMailISG: JVeUj1EWLDtztCGMgSnsAuU.eD6TJgDjRkWX_Eb7uJpCA8Asciv7Fx687_.kRsXu3HRS2Ih.76azN5XV4ZUKZcvVVwCvQtgkcGmqhtMXEgLVEeDx0OVOxSgWnTbWQPoY94qzMA.j4tZXzH_ygN4mKM9CGRbNflvN6Vub62kY4z5.31e1IOj5xitY2UqgHhdx48vOFk9OmkAGY.mzq54NTSTpZIoU0oUVEUWG8TCj1Eh_F4lkNCMtRUdQVkQZdzhdpSF6Sv3M6WZBFAWlsH3cPgCRXe4sfeBs7yiUlz.9uuwZgAKuoMHLioxAvVhY6G4QvVZaN51nL45uMBOz.JWAO96h0hI5W9n4w5g7uYltPeFCko9z5TdI4of6Ee_q8qevJNsCcpvgebp4R9UB
X-Originating-IP: [208.90.215.70]
Authentication-Results: mta276.mail.re4.yahoo.com  from=; domainkeys=neutral (no sig); from=; dkim=neutral (no  sig)
Received: from 208.90.215.70  (EHLO npogroups.org) (208.90.215.70)
  by mta276.mail.re4.yahoo.com with SMTP; Thu, 01 Oct 2009 04:29:18 -0700
Received: by npogroups.org (Postfix, from userid 1002)
	id 249DD91BEE; Thu,  1 Oct 2009 04:29:17 -0700 (PDT)
X-Original-To: governance at lists.cpsr.org
Delivered-To: lists.cpsr.org-governance at npogroups.org
Received: from smtp3.electricembers.net (smtp3 [208.90.215.69])
	by npogroups.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 21E1390309
	for <governance at lists.cpsr.org>; Thu,  1 Oct 2009 04:29:10 -0700 (PDT)
X-Envelope-From: william.drake at graduateinstitute.ch
X-Spam-Status: not spam, SpamAssassin (score=-2.598, required 6,
	autolearn=not spam, BAYES_00 -2.60, HTML_MESSAGE 0.00)
X-MailScanner: Found to be clean
X-ElectricEmbers-MailScanner-Information: Send questions or false-positive reports to help at electricembers.net
Received: from mail-bw0-f228.google.com (mail-bw0-f228.google.com [209.85.218.228])
	by smtp3.electricembers.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 798CACF01E
	for <governance at lists.cpsr.org>; Thu,  1 Oct 2009 04:28:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by bwz28 with SMTP id 28so34693bwz.6
        for <governance at lists.cpsr.org>; Thu, 01 Oct 2009 04:28:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.204.141.21 with SMTP id k21mr877587bku.124.1254396521885;
        Thu, 01 Oct 2009 04:28:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ?192.168.1.38? (150-113.107-92.cust.bluewin.ch [92.107.113.150])
        by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id 19sm1452935fkr.53.2009.10.01.04.28.39
        (version=SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5);
        Thu, 01 Oct 2009 04:28:40 -0700 (PDT)
From: William Drake <william.drake at graduateinstitute.ch>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1076)
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2009 13:29:31 +0200
In-Reply-To: <75822E125BCB994F8446858C4B19F0D78FFC6E16 at SUEX07-MBX-04.ad.syr.edu>
To: governance at lists.cpsr.org,
 Milton L Mueller <mueller at syr.edu>
References: <75822E125BCB994F8446858C4B19F0D78FFC6E09 at SUEX07-MBX-04.ad.syr.edu> <CD78E288-CEDE-4E1E-809E-39F1F591AD75 at graduateinstitute.ch> <75822E125BCB994F8446858C4B19F0D78FFC6E16 at SUEX07-MBX-04.ad.syr.edu>
Message-Id: <14BF930C-49AF-4C16-A982-58A6BF8685D0 at graduateinstitute.ch>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1076)
Subject: Re: [governance] so do i owe bill drake a pizza or not?
Reply-To: governance at lists.cpsr.org,William Drake <william.drake at graduateinstitute.ch>
X-Loop: governance at lists.cpsr.org
X-Sequence: 1
Errors-to: governance-owner at lists.cpsr.org
Precedence: list
X-no-archive: yes
List-Id: <governance.lists.cpsr.org>
List-Archive: <http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/arc/governance>
List-Help: <mailto:sympa at lists.cpsr.org?subject=help>
List-Owner: <mailto:governance-request at lists.cpsr.org>
List-Post: <mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:sympa at lists.cpsr.org?subject=subscribe%20governance>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:sympa at lists.cpsr.org?subject=unsubscribe%20governance>
Content-type: multipart/mixed; boundary="----------=_1254396552-48541-21"
Content-Length: 7834
-------------- 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

From lehto.paul at gmail.com  Fri Oct  2 13:37:38 2009
From: lehto.paul at gmail.com (Paul Lehto)
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 2009 13:37:38 -0400
Subject: [governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation of Commitments
In-Reply-To: <rBdKJCua0QxKFAve@perry.co.uk>
References: <75822E125BCB994F8446858C4B19F0D78FFC6E09@SUEX07-MBX-04.ad.syr.edu>
	 <CD78E288-CEDE-4E1E-809E-39F1F591AD75@graduateinstitute.ch>
	 <75822E125BCB994F8446858C4B19F0D78FFC6E16@SUEX07-MBX-04.ad.syr.edu>
	 <14BF930C-49AF-4C16-A982-58A6BF8685D0@graduateinstitute.ch>
	 <1254397157.3941.611.camel@anriette-laptop>
	 <3QZdNroLCQxKFAts@perry.co.uk>
	 <76f819dd0910011242u2d26722eg4cac8f606ece0282@mail.gmail.com>
	 <rBdKJCua0QxKFAve@perry.co.uk>
Message-ID: <76f819dd0910021037o36cd6b7aj9c8d7454ca116cc2@mail.gmail.com>

The bottom line is that every remnant of DEMOCRATIC accountability has
been stripped from ICANN.  Whatever remains appears to be merely
advisory, which has no power ultimately at all, but even if something
is created that DOES have power, it's most definitely NOT democratic.
THis is the coup de grace for privatization of the internet, which
means that the public interest can NEVER truly exist because the
private players on the internet are all larger corporations, whose
charters and legal structure require them to pursue one single thing
with a single-minded intensity -- profit for their shareholders (or,
in the case of nonprofits, whatever educational or charitable goal is
defined there).  Although nonprofits are definitely much more
public-interest minded, at the end of the day no nonprofit can
legitimately claim to represent the PUBLIC INTEREST -- only
democratically elected politicians can do that, and only if they are
behaving correctly as well.   Thus, no matter who (if anybody)
controls ICANN outside ICANN's board of directors, it isn't
democratic, we can be certain of that.

Thus, it's very disturbing to me that there's a giveaway of a huge
asset (for public interest protection purposes) like ICANN and they
didn't even SELL it or auction it off to get money for taxpayers NOR
did they transfer it to a democratically accountable global
organization with real power over ICANN (the best choice).

What I'm saying is that whoever effectively controls ICANN, it
certainly isn't the people of the United States of America, nor is it
the people of several nations, and it is definitely not the people of
the entire globe.  Thus, without a way for people to vote (ultimately,
even if a long process) to elect politicians with a mandate to
restructure or differently regulate ICANN, there is no public control
of ICANN, and thus ICANN has achieved independence from democracy or
democratic control itself.  And, ICANN has done so specifically
without creating any real substitute for the control of the US
government.

For what it's worth, "Advisory Boards" no matter how seriously they
are or seem to be taken, are a joke on the level of actual control.
They're free labor to the organization that ultimately can do whatever
it wants to and the advisors have no cause to complain, since they are
merely advisors, after all.   Thus, ICANN freely announces its
"independence" which is another way of announcing its separation from
democratic control of all kinds.  NOTHING THAT IS A PUBLIC SERVANT OF
THE PUBLIC INTEREST IS "INDEPENDENT" OR SEPARATE.

Thus, the announcement is a game of sleight of hand, in which they are
purporting to create global accountability, but most definitely and
clearly are not, because there's no democracy left in it.  The only
powers that be outside democracy are corporations.  Some or many will
cheer that the US government is taking its hands off, but at least the
people in the US could push for public interest policies and make them
stick if it became a big enough campaign issue.  But now, even that
limited possibility is gone.   The shell of independence for ICANN has
been moved, but underneath that shell is no real accountability for
ICANN to the global community.

 On 10/1/09, Roland Perry <roland at internetpolicyagency.com> wrote:
> In message
> <76f819dd0910011242u2d26722eg4cac8f606ece0282 at mail.gmail.com>, at
> 12:42:19 on Thu, 1 Oct 2009, Paul Lehto <lehto.paul at gmail.com> writes
>>It doesn't matter how diverse the "stakeholders" are in their country
>>of origin, race, creed, sex, or what have you, if the stakeholders and
>>the public as a whole do not have a CONTROL mechanism.  The
>>elimination of all remaining control mechanisms (elections, as an
>>indirect control) is precisely what's being accomplished with the
>>agreement between the US Commerce Department and ICANN to make them
>>essentially independent, subject only to an advisory board.
>
> I'm not sure what this has to do with the GAC members.
>
> Are you suggesting that the ultimate control be given over to ALAC,
> rather than GAC?
>
> Just curious, I don't have a "position" of my own regarding this.
>
>>With politicians, every communication to them is utterly toothless if
>>it idoes not carry (as it always does) an implied threat that one will
>>vote the poltician out of office if they don't do the right thing.
>>With the new ICANN structure, even this vestigial remedy (attenuated
>>as it was by the insulation of the commerce department from the
>>electorate) is eliminated in every meaningful sense.
>>
>>I'd be the first to welcome true and real global governance regarding
>>the internet.  The fact that they've put in the semblance of "global"
>>but zero "governance" means that the shift is an abdication of all
>>public, democratic control, even if that control was improperly
>>limited to a single country, the USA.  Even more importantly, there's
>>no mechanism with which to fight to CREATE true control on the global
>>level in favor of the public interest.
>>
>>Thus, we can't fight, lobby or progress from the new posture of an
>>independent ICANN to a situation of true global control/governance
>>without (1) a nearly unprecedented act (in the history of Power) to
>>voluntarily create genuine and real accountability on a global scale,
>>OR (2) a revolution or revolt.  And just how does one have a
>>revolution or revolt against a corporation at all, much less a
>>corporation that has a monopoly on what it does, and which we all need
>>to exist or have a "domain" on the internet?
>
> So you don't think you can work inside the existing (and as-modified)
> ICANN framework to achieve any of this? [Same disclaimer as above].
>
>>Paul Lehto, Juris Doctor
>>
>>On 10/1/09, Roland Perry <roland at internetpolicyagency.com> wrote:
>>> In message <1254397157.3941.611.camel at anriette-laptop>, at 13:39:17 on
>>> Thu, 1 Oct 2009, Anriette Esterhuysen <anriette at apc.org> writes
>>>>One question I have about the GAC, does it not become very important to
>>>>have input from different stakeholders at country level in the
>>>>identification/nomination of GAC members
>>>
>>> As a matter of simple fact, the GAC members are usually the most obvious
>>> career employee of the ministry charged with overseeing "International
>>> Telecoms issues", and are therefore likely to also turn up at ITU
>>> meetings, EU telecoms/Internet meetings, IGF consultations, UN-ECOSOC
>>> etc.
>>>
>>> Plus there are a few who might alternatively be their country's
>>> "Internet Czar".
>>> --
>>> Roland Perry
>>> ____________________________________________________________
>>> 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
>>>
>>
>>
>
> --
> Roland Perry
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
>


-- 
Paul R Lehto, J.D.
P.O. Box #1
Ishpeming, MI  49849
lehto.paul at gmail.com
906-204-4026
____________________________________________________________
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


From roland at internetpolicyagency.com  Fri Oct  2 14:44:50 2009
From: roland at internetpolicyagency.com (Roland Perry)
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 2009 19:44:50 +0100
Subject: [governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation of Commitments
In-Reply-To: <76f819dd0910021037o36cd6b7aj9c8d7454ca116cc2@mail.gmail.com>
References: <75822E125BCB994F8446858C4B19F0D78FFC6E09@SUEX07-MBX-04.ad.syr.edu>
 <CD78E288-CEDE-4E1E-809E-39F1F591AD75@graduateinstitute.ch>
 <75822E125BCB994F8446858C4B19F0D78FFC6E16@SUEX07-MBX-04.ad.syr.edu>
 <14BF930C-49AF-4C16-A982-58A6BF8685D0@graduateinstitute.ch>
 <1254397157.3941.611.camel@anriette-laptop> <3QZdNroLCQxKFAts@perry.co.uk>
 <76f819dd0910011242u2d26722eg4cac8f606ece0282@mail.gmail.com>
 <rBdKJCua0QxKFAve@perry.co.uk>
 <76f819dd0910021037o36cd6b7aj9c8d7454ca116cc2@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <y8DcmVKiokxKFAvp@perry.co.uk>

In message 
<76f819dd0910021037o36cd6b7aj9c8d7454ca116cc2 at mail.gmail.com>, at 
13:37:38 on Fri, 2 Oct 2009, Paul Lehto <lehto.paul at gmail.com> writes
>Although nonprofits are definitely much more public-interest minded, at 
>the end of the day no nonprofit can legitimately claim to represent the 
>PUBLIC INTEREST -- only democratically elected politicians can do that, 
>and only if they are behaving correctly as well.

So you don't think any charities can possibly act in the public 
interest?
-- 
Roland Perry
____________________________________________________________
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


From wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de  Fri Oct  2 14:56:49 2009
From: wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de (=?iso-8859-1?Q?=22Kleinw=E4chter=2C_Wolfgang=22?=)
Date: Fri, 02 Oct 2009 20:56:49 +0200
Subject: [governance] Congratulations
References: <259838.32621.qm@web83914.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID:  <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A871959F@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>

To all our Barzilian members:
 
Congratulations to the 2016 Olympics in Rio. This will be Olympic Games which can be followed not only by TV and radio but by billions of Internet Users worldwide. Lets waoit and see how Rio comes with new Internet innovations until 2016. :-)))
 
Wolfgang 
____________________________________________________________
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


From wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de  Fri Oct  2 14:57:41 2009
From: wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de (=?iso-8859-1?Q?=22Kleinw=E4chter=2C_Wolfgang=22?=)
Date: Fri, 02 Oct 2009 20:57:41 +0200
Subject: AW: [governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation of Commitments
References: <75822E125BCB994F8446858C4B19F0D78FFC6E09@SUEX07-MBX-04.ad.syr.edu>
 <CD78E288-CEDE-4E1E-809E-39F1F591AD75@graduateinstitute.ch>
 <75822E125BCB994F8446858C4B19F0D78FFC6E16@SUEX07-MBX-04.ad.syr.edu>
 <14BF930C-49AF-4C16-A982-58A6BF8685D0@graduateinstitute.ch>
 <1254397157.3941.611.camel@anriette-laptop> <3QZdNroLCQxKFAts@perry.co.uk>
 <76f819dd0910011242u2d26722eg4cac8f606ece0282@mail.gmail.com>
 <rBdKJCua0QxKFAve@perry.co.uk>
 <76f819dd0910021037o36cd6b7aj9c8d7454ca116cc2@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID:  <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A87195A0@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>

Paul 
 
what is your definition of legitimacy in a global world? Are there other soruces of legitimacy than one man one vote elections? And how to organize such elections globally (with 1.4 billion Chinese people who want certainly to have a vote)? 
 
And what is your definition of accountability? A single master-slave relationship? And in this case who will be the ultimate master and how the master gets the legitimacy to act on behalf of 2 billion Internet users in the public interest? 
 
Thanks
 
Wolfgang

________________________________

Von: Paul Lehto [mailto:lehto.paul at gmail.com]
Gesendet: Fr 02.10.2009 19:37
An: governance at lists.cpsr.org; Roland Perry
Betreff: Re: [governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation of Commitments



The bottom line is that every remnant of DEMOCRATIC accountability has
been stripped from ICANN.  Whatever remains appears to be merely
advisory, which has no power ultimately at all, but even if something
is created that DOES have power, it's most definitely NOT democratic.
THis is the coup de grace for privatization of the internet, which
means that the public interest can NEVER truly exist because the
private players on the internet are all larger corporations, whose
charters and legal structure require them to pursue one single thing
with a single-minded intensity -- profit for their shareholders (or,
in the case of nonprofits, whatever educational or charitable goal is
defined there).  Although nonprofits are definitely much more
public-interest minded, at the end of the day no nonprofit can
legitimately claim to represent the PUBLIC INTEREST -- only
democratically elected politicians can do that, and only if they are
behaving correctly as well.   Thus, no matter who (if anybody)
controls ICANN outside ICANN's board of directors, it isn't
democratic, we can be certain of that.

Thus, it's very disturbing to me that there's a giveaway of a huge
asset (for public interest protection purposes) like ICANN and they
didn't even SELL it or auction it off to get money for taxpayers NOR
did they transfer it to a democratically accountable global
organization with real power over ICANN (the best choice).

What I'm saying is that whoever effectively controls ICANN, it
certainly isn't the people of the United States of America, nor is it
the people of several nations, and it is definitely not the people of
the entire globe.  Thus, without a way for people to vote (ultimately,
even if a long process) to elect politicians with a mandate to
restructure or differently regulate ICANN, there is no public control
of ICANN, and thus ICANN has achieved independence from democracy or
democratic control itself.  And, ICANN has done so specifically
without creating any real substitute for the control of the US
government.

For what it's worth, "Advisory Boards" no matter how seriously they
are or seem to be taken, are a joke on the level of actual control.
They're free labor to the organization that ultimately can do whatever
it wants to and the advisors have no cause to complain, since they are
merely advisors, after all.   Thus, ICANN freely announces its
"independence" which is another way of announcing its separation from
democratic control of all kinds.  NOTHING THAT IS A PUBLIC SERVANT OF
THE PUBLIC INTEREST IS "INDEPENDENT" OR SEPARATE.

Thus, the announcement is a game of sleight of hand, in which they are
purporting to create global accountability, but most definitely and
clearly are not, because there's no democracy left in it.  The only
powers that be outside democracy are corporations.  Some or many will
cheer that the US government is taking its hands off, but at least the
people in the US could push for public interest policies and make them
stick if it became a big enough campaign issue.  But now, even that
limited possibility is gone.   The shell of independence for ICANN has
been moved, but underneath that shell is no real accountability for
ICANN to the global community.

 On 10/1/09, Roland Perry <roland at internetpolicyagency.com> wrote:
> In message
> <76f819dd0910011242u2d26722eg4cac8f606ece0282 at mail.gmail.com>, at
> 12:42:19 on Thu, 1 Oct 2009, Paul Lehto <lehto.paul at gmail.com> writes
>>It doesn't matter how diverse the "stakeholders" are in their country
>>of origin, race, creed, sex, or what have you, if the stakeholders and
>>the public as a whole do not have a CONTROL mechanism.  The
>>elimination of all remaining control mechanisms (elections, as an
>>indirect control) is precisely what's being accomplished with the
>>agreement between the US Commerce Department and ICANN to make them
>>essentially independent, subject only to an advisory board.
>
> I'm not sure what this has to do with the GAC members.
>
> Are you suggesting that the ultimate control be given over to ALAC,
> rather than GAC?
>
> Just curious, I don't have a "position" of my own regarding this.
>
>>With politicians, every communication to them is utterly toothless if
>>it idoes not carry (as it always does) an implied threat that one will
>>vote the poltician out of office if they don't do the right thing.
>>With the new ICANN structure, even this vestigial remedy (attenuated
>>as it was by the insulation of the commerce department from the
>>electorate) is eliminated in every meaningful sense.
>>
>>I'd be the first to welcome true and real global governance regarding
>>the internet.  The fact that they've put in the semblance of "global"
>>but zero "governance" means that the shift is an abdication of all
>>public, democratic control, even if that control was improperly
>>limited to a single country, the USA.  Even more importantly, there's
>>no mechanism with which to fight to CREATE true control on the global
>>level in favor of the public interest.
>>
>>Thus, we can't fight, lobby or progress from the new posture of an
>>independent ICANN to a situation of true global control/governance
>>without (1) a nearly unprecedented act (in the history of Power) to
>>voluntarily create genuine and real accountability on a global scale,
>>OR (2) a revolution or revolt.  And just how does one have a
>>revolution or revolt against a corporation at all, much less a
>>corporation that has a monopoly on what it does, and which we all need
>>to exist or have a "domain" on the internet?
>
> So you don't think you can work inside the existing (and as-modified)
> ICANN framework to achieve any of this? [Same disclaimer as above].
>
>>Paul Lehto, Juris Doctor
>>
>>On 10/1/09, Roland Perry <roland at internetpolicyagency.com> wrote:
>>> In message <1254397157.3941.611.camel at anriette-laptop>, at 13:39:17 on
>>> Thu, 1 Oct 2009, Anriette Esterhuysen <anriette at apc.org> writes
>>>>One question I have about the GAC, does it not become very important to
>>>>have input from different stakeholders at country level in the
>>>>identification/nomination of GAC members
>>>
>>> As a matter of simple fact, the GAC members are usually the most obvious
>>> career employee of the ministry charged with overseeing "International
>>> Telecoms issues", and are therefore likely to also turn up at ITU
>>> meetings, EU telecoms/Internet meetings, IGF consultations, UN-ECOSOC
>>> etc.
>>>
>>> Plus there are a few who might alternatively be their country's
>>> "Internet Czar".
>>> --
>>> Roland Perry
>>> ____________________________________________________________
>>> 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
>>>
>>
>>
>
> --
> Roland Perry
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
>


--
Paul R Lehto, J.D.
P.O. Box #1
Ishpeming, MI  49849
lehto.paul at gmail.com
906-204-4026
____________________________________________________________
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


From dogwallah at gmail.com  Fri Oct  2 15:28:41 2009
From: dogwallah at gmail.com (McTim)
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 2009 22:28:41 +0300
Subject: [governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation of Commitments
In-Reply-To: <76f819dd0910021037o36cd6b7aj9c8d7454ca116cc2@mail.gmail.com>
References: <75822E125BCB994F8446858C4B19F0D78FFC6E09@SUEX07-MBX-04.ad.syr.edu>
	 <CD78E288-CEDE-4E1E-809E-39F1F591AD75@graduateinstitute.ch>
	 <75822E125BCB994F8446858C4B19F0D78FFC6E16@SUEX07-MBX-04.ad.syr.edu>
	 <14BF930C-49AF-4C16-A982-58A6BF8685D0@graduateinstitute.ch>
	 <1254397157.3941.611.camel@anriette-laptop>
	 <3QZdNroLCQxKFAts@perry.co.uk>
	 <76f819dd0910011242u2d26722eg4cac8f606ece0282@mail.gmail.com>
	 <rBdKJCua0QxKFAve@perry.co.uk>
	 <76f819dd0910021037o36cd6b7aj9c8d7454ca116cc2@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <f65fb55e0910021228n628b6055lc2ec6b6914567bcc@mail.gmail.com>

Paul,

Apologies for top posting, I was going to rebut many of your points
inline, but have decided to simply point you here:

http://homes.eff.org/~barlow/Declaration-Final.html

and say that the end of the JPA supports this Internet ethos,
especially the notion that "You have no moral right to rule us nor do
you possess any methods of enforcement we have true reason to fear."

The Internet, ideally should be governed by its users, of which,
governments are but one among many.  The toothlessness of the
Affirmation is a positive step towards that ideal.

-- 
Cheers,

McTim
"A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A
route indicates how we get there."  Jon Postel



On Fri, Oct 2, 2009 at 8:37 PM, Paul Lehto <lehto.paul at gmail.com> wrote:
> The bottom line is that every remnant of DEMOCRATIC accountability has
> been stripped from ICANN.  Whatever remains appears to be merely
> advisory, which has no power ultimately at all, but even if something
> is created that DOES have power, it's most definitely NOT democratic.
> THis is the coup de grace for privatization of the internet, which
> means that the public interest can NEVER truly exist because the
> private players on the internet are all larger corporations, whose
> charters and legal structure require them to pursue one single thing
> with a single-minded intensity -- profit for their shareholders (or,
> in the case of nonprofits, whatever educational or charitable goal is
> defined there).  Although nonprofits are definitely much more
> public-interest minded, at the end of the day no nonprofit can
> legitimately claim to represent the PUBLIC INTEREST -- only
> democratically elected politicians can do that, and only if they are
> behaving correctly as well.   Thus, no matter who (if anybody)
> controls ICANN outside ICANN's board of directors, it isn't
> democratic, we can be certain of that.
>
> Thus, it's very disturbing to me that there's a giveaway of a huge
> asset (for public interest protection purposes) like ICANN and they
> didn't even SELL it or auction it off to get money for taxpayers NOR
> did they transfer it to a democratically accountable global
> organization with real power over ICANN (the best choice).
>
> What I'm saying is that whoever effectively controls ICANN, it
> certainly isn't the people of the United States of America, nor is it
> the people of several nations, and it is definitely not the people of
> the entire globe.  Thus, without a way for people to vote (ultimately,
> even if a long process) to elect politicians with a mandate to
> restructure or differently regulate ICANN, there is no public control
> of ICANN, and thus ICANN has achieved independence from democracy or
> democratic control itself.  And, ICANN has done so specifically
> without creating any real substitute for the control of the US
> government.
>
> For what it's worth, "Advisory Boards" no matter how seriously they
> are or seem to be taken, are a joke on the level of actual control.
> They're free labor to the organization that ultimately can do whatever
> it wants to and the advisors have no cause to complain, since they are
> merely advisors, after all.   Thus, ICANN freely announces its
> "independence" which is another way of announcing its separation from
> democratic control of all kinds.  NOTHING THAT IS A PUBLIC SERVANT OF
> THE PUBLIC INTEREST IS "INDEPENDENT" OR SEPARATE.
>
> Thus, the announcement is a game of sleight of hand, in which they are
> purporting to create global accountability, but most definitely and
> clearly are not, because there's no democracy left in it.  The only
> powers that be outside democracy are corporations.  Some or many will
> cheer that the US government is taking its hands off, but at least the
> people in the US could push for public interest policies and make them
> stick if it became a big enough campaign issue.  But now, even that
> limited possibility is gone.   The shell of independence for ICANN has
> been moved, but underneath that shell is no real accountability for
> ICANN to the global community.
____________________________________________________________
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


From toml at communisphere.com  Fri Oct  2 15:36:41 2009
From: toml at communisphere.com (Thomas Lowenhaupt)
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 2009 15:36:41 -0400
Subject: [governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation of Commitments
References: <75822E125BCB994F8446858C4B19F0D78FFC6E09@SUEX07-MBX-04.ad.syr.edu> <CD78E288-CEDE-4E1E-809E-39F1F591AD75@graduateinstitute.ch> <75822E125BCB994F8446858C4B19F0D78FFC6E16@SUEX07-MBX-04.ad.syr.edu> <14BF930C-49AF-4C16-A982-58A6BF8685D0@graduateinstitute.ch> <1254397157.3941.611.camel@anriette-laptop> <3QZdNroLCQxKFAts@perry.co.uk> <76f819dd0910011242u2d26722eg4cac8f606ece0282@mail.gmail.com> <rBdKJCua0QxKFAve@perry.co.uk> <76f819dd0910021037o36cd6b7aj9c8d7454ca116cc2@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <136301ca4397$ac34e1f0$6400a8c0@powuseren2ihcx>

Since the adoption of the New gTLD Policy in June 2008, I've been thinking 
through the process for establishing equitable representation for cities 
within the ICANN structure. Now, with the Affirmation, I'm wondering what 
forces within ICANN will advance the role of cities when such a sharing will 
result in a dilution of control for those in whose hands it currently 
resides.



I see two remaining threads of outside influence: the State of California 
and section 11 of the Affirmation. Perhaps Karl or another familiar with the 
Golden State's law/politics could speak on the role of California; if some 
changed relationship might be in the offing based on the recent 
transformation. Might the Attorney General (former and possibly future 
Governor Jerry Brown) take a fresh look?



As to section 11, when it states, "The agreement is intended to be 
long-standing, but may be amended at any time by mutual consent of the 
parties. Any party may terminate this Affirmation of Commitments by 
providing 120 days written notice to the other party." does this mean this 
if egregious activities are noted by the DOC, and notice provided to ICANN, 
that in 120 days we would see a transition to another oversight structure? 
If so, that sounds like a tacit veto for the DOC. And perhaps someone might 
be so brave as to speculate on a circumstance under which ICANN would 
terminate?



Tom Lowenhaupt





----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Paul Lehto" <lehto.paul at gmail.com>
To: <governance at lists.cpsr.org>; "Roland Perry" 
<roland at internetpolicyagency.com>
Sent: Friday, October 02, 2009 1:37 PM
Subject: Re: [governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation of Commitments


> The bottom line is that every remnant of DEMOCRATIC accountability has
> been stripped from ICANN.  Whatever remains appears to be merely
> advisory, which has no power ultimately at all, but even if something
> is created that DOES have power, it's most definitely NOT democratic.
> THis is the coup de grace for privatization of the internet, which
> means that the public interest can NEVER truly exist because the
> private players on the internet are all larger corporations, whose
> charters and legal structure require them to pursue one single thing
> with a single-minded intensity -- profit for their shareholders (or,
> in the case of nonprofits, whatever educational or charitable goal is
> defined there).  Although nonprofits are definitely much more
> public-interest minded, at the end of the day no nonprofit can
> legitimately claim to represent the PUBLIC INTEREST -- only
> democratically elected politicians can do that, and only if they are
> behaving correctly as well.   Thus, no matter who (if anybody)
> controls ICANN outside ICANN's board of directors, it isn't
> democratic, we can be certain of that.
>
> Thus, it's very disturbing to me that there's a giveaway of a huge
> asset (for public interest protection purposes) like ICANN and they
> didn't even SELL it or auction it off to get money for taxpayers NOR
> did they transfer it to a democratically accountable global
> organization with real power over ICANN (the best choice).
>
> What I'm saying is that whoever effectively controls ICANN, it
> certainly isn't the people of the United States of America, nor is it
> the people of several nations, and it is definitely not the people of
> the entire globe.  Thus, without a way for people to vote (ultimately,
> even if a long process) to elect politicians with a mandate to
> restructure or differently regulate ICANN, there is no public control
> of ICANN, and thus ICANN has achieved independence from democracy or
> democratic control itself.  And, ICANN has done so specifically
> without creating any real substitute for the control of the US
> government.
>
> For what it's worth, "Advisory Boards" no matter how seriously they
> are or seem to be taken, are a joke on the level of actual control.
> They're free labor to the organization that ultimately can do whatever
> it wants to and the advisors have no cause to complain, since they are
> merely advisors, after all.   Thus, ICANN freely announces its
> "independence" which is another way of announcing its separation from
> democratic control of all kinds.  NOTHING THAT IS A PUBLIC SERVANT OF
> THE PUBLIC INTEREST IS "INDEPENDENT" OR SEPARATE.
>
> Thus, the announcement is a game of sleight of hand, in which they are
> purporting to create global accountability, but most definitely and
> clearly are not, because there's no democracy left in it.  The only
> powers that be outside democracy are corporations.  Some or many will
> cheer that the US government is taking its hands off, but at least the
> people in the US could push for public interest policies and make them
> stick if it became a big enough campaign issue.  But now, even that
> limited possibility is gone.   The shell of independence for ICANN has
> been moved, but underneath that shell is no real accountability for
> ICANN to the global community.
>
> On 10/1/09, Roland Perry <roland at internetpolicyagency.com> wrote:
>> In message
>> <76f819dd0910011242u2d26722eg4cac8f606ece0282 at mail.gmail.com>, at
>> 12:42:19 on Thu, 1 Oct 2009, Paul Lehto <lehto.paul at gmail.com> writes
>>>It doesn't matter how diverse the "stakeholders" are in their country
>>>of origin, race, creed, sex, or what have you, if the stakeholders and
>>>the public as a whole do not have a CONTROL mechanism.  The
>>>elimination of all remaining control mechanisms (elections, as an
>>>indirect control) is precisely what's being accomplished with the
>>>agreement between the US Commerce Department and ICANN to make them
>>>essentially independent, subject only to an advisory board.
>>
>> I'm not sure what this has to do with the GAC members.
>>
>> Are you suggesting that the ultimate control be given over to ALAC,
>> rather than GAC?
>>
>> Just curious, I don't have a "position" of my own regarding this.
>>
>>>With politicians, every communication to them is utterly toothless if
>>>it idoes not carry (as it always does) an implied threat that one will
>>>vote the poltician out of office if they don't do the right thing.
>>>With the new ICANN structure, even this vestigial remedy (attenuated
>>>as it was by the insulation of the commerce department from the
>>>electorate) is eliminated in every meaningful sense.
>>>
>>>I'd be the first to welcome true and real global governance regarding
>>>the internet.  The fact that they've put in the semblance of "global"
>>>but zero "governance" means that the shift is an abdication of all
>>>public, democratic control, even if that control was improperly
>>>limited to a single country, the USA.  Even more importantly, there's
>>>no mechanism with which to fight to CREATE true control on the global
>>>level in favor of the public interest.
>>>
>>>Thus, we can't fight, lobby or progress from the new posture of an
>>>independent ICANN to a situation of true global control/governance
>>>without (1) a nearly unprecedented act (in the history of Power) to
>>>voluntarily create genuine and real accountability on a global scale,
>>>OR (2) a revolution or revolt.  And just how does one have a
>>>revolution or revolt against a corporation at all, much less a
>>>corporation that has a monopoly on what it does, and which we all need
>>>to exist or have a "domain" on the internet?
>>
>> So you don't think you can work inside the existing (and as-modified)
>> ICANN framework to achieve any of this? [Same disclaimer as above].
>>
>>>Paul Lehto, Juris Doctor
>>>
>>>On 10/1/09, Roland Perry <roland at internetpolicyagency.com> wrote:
>>>> In message <1254397157.3941.611.camel at anriette-laptop>, at 13:39:17 on
>>>> Thu, 1 Oct 2009, Anriette Esterhuysen <anriette at apc.org> writes
>>>>>One question I have about the GAC, does it not become very important to
>>>>>have input from different stakeholders at country level in the
>>>>>identification/nomination of GAC members
>>>>
>>>> As a matter of simple fact, the GAC members are usually the most 
>>>> obvious
>>>> career employee of the ministry charged with overseeing "International
>>>> Telecoms issues", and are therefore likely to also turn up at ITU
>>>> meetings, EU telecoms/Internet meetings, IGF consultations, UN-ECOSOC
>>>> etc.
>>>>
>>>> Plus there are a few who might alternatively be their country's
>>>> "Internet Czar".
>>>> --
>>>> Roland Perry
>>>> ____________________________________________________________
>>>> 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
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> --
>> Roland Perry
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> 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
>>
>
>
> -- 
> Paul R Lehto, J.D.
> P.O. Box #1
> Ishpeming, MI  49849
> lehto.paul at gmail.com
> 906-204-4026
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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


From peter at peter-dambier.de  Fri Oct  2 15:38:44 2009
From: peter at peter-dambier.de (Peter Dambier)
Date: Fri, 02 Oct 2009 21:38:44 +0200
Subject: [governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation of Commitments
In-Reply-To: <f65fb55e0910021228n628b6055lc2ec6b6914567bcc@mail.gmail.com>
References: <75822E125BCB994F8446858C4B19F0D78FFC6E09@SUEX07-MBX-04.ad.syr.edu>	 <CD78E288-CEDE-4E1E-809E-39F1F591AD75@graduateinstitute.ch>	 <75822E125BCB994F8446858C4B19F0D78FFC6E16@SUEX07-MBX-04.ad.syr.edu>	 <14BF930C-49AF-4C16-A982-58A6BF8685D0@graduateinstitute.ch>	 <1254397157.3941.611.camel@anriette-laptop>	 <3QZdNroLCQxKFAts@perry.co.uk>	 <76f819dd0910011242u2d26722eg4cac8f606ece0282@mail.gmail.com>	 <rBdKJCua0QxKFAve@perry.co.uk>	 <76f819dd0910021037o36cd6b7aj9c8d7454ca116cc2@mail.gmail.com> <f65fb55e0910021228n628b6055lc2ec6b6914567bcc@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4AC656C4.6030006@peter-dambier.de>

Thankyou McTim,

I feel the same.

McTim wrote:
> 
> The Internet, ideally should be governed by its users, of which,
> governments are but one among many.  The toothlessness of the
> Affirmation is a positive step towards that ideal.
> 

Kind regards
Peter

-- 
Peter and Karin Dambier
Cesidian Root - Radice Cesidiana
Rimbacher Strasse 16
D-69509 Moerlenbach-Bonsweiher
+49(6209)795-816 (Telekom)
+49(6252)750-308 (VoIP: sipgate.de)
mail: peter at peter-dambier.de
http://www.peter-dambier.de/
http://iason.site.voila.fr/
https://sourceforge.net/projects/iason/
ULA= fd80:4ce1:c66a::/48
____________________________________________________________
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


From jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com  Fri Oct  2 15:58:25 2009
From: jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com (Jeffrey A. Williams)
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 2009 14:58:25 -0500 (GMT-05:00)
Subject: [governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation of Commitments
Message-ID: <16671714.1254513505962.JavaMail.root@elwamui-hybrid.atl.sa.earthlink.net>

Peter, McTim, and all,

  I agree with McTim as well, but do not share his evaluation
that the "Afformation" has that meaning or intent. Rather the
meaning or intent is very nebulus at best and largely provides
for special interest groups an opertunity to grab significant
influence if not outright control of the direction and policies
going forward of the Internet.  However national based legal
regimes will continue to evolve that may put much of that
in limbo if not check effectively.

-----Original Message-----
>From: Peter Dambier <peter at peter-dambier.de>
>Sent: Oct 2, 2009 2:38 PM
>To: governance at lists.cpsr.org
>Subject: Re: [governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation of Commitments
>
>Thankyou McTim,
>
>I feel the same.
>
>McTim wrote:
>> 
>> The Internet, ideally should be governed by its users, of which,
>> governments are but one among many.  The toothlessness of the
>> Affirmation is a positive step towards that ideal.
>> 
>
>Kind regards
>Peter
>
>-- 
>Peter and Karin Dambier
>Cesidian Root - Radice Cesidiana
>Rimbacher Strasse 16
>D-69509 Moerlenbach-Bonsweiher
>+49(6209)795-816 (Telekom)
>+49(6252)750-308 (VoIP: sipgate.de)
>mail: peter at peter-dambier.de
>http://www.peter-dambier.de/
>http://iason.site.voila.fr/
>https://sourceforge.net/projects/iason/
>ULA= fd80:4ce1:c66a::/48
>____________________________________________________________
>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,

Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 294k members/stakeholders strong!)
"Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" -
   Abraham Lincoln

"Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is very
often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt

"If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; liability
depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
United States v. Carroll Towing  (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
===============================================================
Updated 1/26/04
CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS. div. of
Information Network Eng.  INEG. INC.
ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com
Phone: 214-244-4827

____________________________________________________________
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


From muguet at mdpi.net  Fri Oct  2 16:00:25 2009
From: muguet at mdpi.net (Dr. Francis MUGUET)
Date: Fri, 02 Oct 2009 22:00:25 +0200
Subject: [governance] =?ISO-8859-1?Q?French_official_position_/_Position_?=
 =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Fran=E7aise_officielle_?=
Message-ID: <4AC65BD9.8080609@mdpi.net>

FYI

English / Français infra


    The Evolution of ICANN after the end of the Joint Project Agreement
    (JPA)

*The Evolution of ICANN after the end of the Joint Project Agreement (JPA)*

* /France welcomes with interest the Affirmation of Commitments 
published today by the Department of Commerce and the Internet 
Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN), by which ICANN 
commits to develop the institutional reforms necessary to ensure its 
full accountability. This is a positive evolution. France will actively 
participate in the consultation processes to be established to turn this 
vision into practice and is willing, in concertation with its European 
partners, to facilitate them as indicated in the public statement issued 
by the Swedish Presidency of the EU.. / *

1) The Internet has become a shared infrastructure critical to the 
proper functionning of our societies at the world level. France 
therefore considers that the naming and addressing system upon which the 
Internet relies must be managed in a global public interest perspective, 
with due care given to the respect of the rights of citizens, the 
diversity of expressions and the safeguarding of the security of 
information systems.

2) In this context, French Authorities welcome with interest the 
Affirmation of Commitments jointly issued by the Department of Commerce 
and ICANN on September 30th, 2009 regarding the future of the Internet 
naming and addressing system and in particular the reaffirmation of the 
public trust dimension of the mission fulfilled by ICANN in the 
management of this global public resource.

3) The new context produced by the end of the Joint Project Agreement 
imparts upon ICANN an enhanced responsibility to spearhead in the coming 
months the institutional reforms required to make the organization fully 
multi-stakeholder and international, and to establish the mechanisms 
ensuring its accountability to all stakeholders.

4) The Affirmation of Commitments proposes, inter alia, to entrust 
dedicated review panels - instead of the US administration only - with 
the necessary periodic evaluation of the organization's performance. 
This is a positive evolution and France will actively participate in the 
discussions regarding the practical modalities of implementation of this 
proposal, as they will ultimately determine its efficiency.

5) Beyond this mechanism, France reaffirms the need to enhance the role 
of Governments in the current Internet Governance mechanisms, and 
particularly within ICANN, so that they can fully exercise their share 
of responsibilities in the management of the global public resources of 
the Internet

6) In order to implement in timely manner these new mechanisms of 
accountability, ICANN should initiate, at the latest during its upcoming 
Seoul meeting, a broad and inclusive consultation process, with a view 
in particular to finalizing a revised version of its Bylaws during its 
second meeting in June 2010.

7) ICANN should use, as much as possible, existing international fora - 
in particular the Internet Governance Forum set up by the United Nations 
World Summit on Information Society- to announce this initiative and 
invite actors not commonly participating in its activities to engage in 
this common effort.

8) France, in coordination with its European partners, is ready to help 
facilitate such a process, and in particular the organization of open 
consultations at the national and regional levels. We also propose to 
use the ICANN meeting in June 2010 as an opportunity for a high level 
gathering that would allow all stakeholders to appreciate progress 
achieved.

9) French Authorities finally want to seize the opportunity to reaffirm 
that beyond the evolution of ICANN and the naming and addressing system, 
reflections must be continued in all relevant fora to develop a global 
Internet governance in conformity with the principles and commitments of 
the World Summit on the Information Society.

-------------------------------

http://www.diplomatie.gouv.fr/fr/actions-france_830/internet-tic_1038/tic-pour-developpement_5332/evolution-icann-bernard-kouchner-nathalie-kosciusko-morizet-appellent-une-gouvernance-mieux-partagee-internet-02.10.09_76766.html



    Evolution de l'ICANN : Bernard Kouchner et Nathalie
    Kosciusko-Morizet appellent à une gouvernance mieux partagée de
    l'Internet (2 octobre 2009)

Illust: 7.9 ko, 100x159



Illust: 5.2 ko, 100x103













*Communiqué de Bernard Kouchner et de Nathalie Kosciusko-Morizet*

La France considère *essentiel le maintien de l'unité du réseau 
Internet* et a toujours soutenu que *la responsabilité de garantir sa 
sécurité et sa stabilité* ne pouvait échoir à un seul gouvernement ou à 
une seule organisation privée. C'est pourquoi elle appelle depuis 
plusieurs années à une prise en compte des intérêts et des 
recommandations des gouvernements du monde entier dans la gestion de 
cette infrastructure vitale et désormais partagée par tous qu'est devenu 
Internet. Le ministre des Affaires étrangères et la Secrétaire d'Etat à 
la Prospective et au Développement de l'économie numérique saluent en 
conséquence *les réels progrès contenus dans le nouvel accord 
(Affirmation of Commitments) signé entre le Département du Commerce 
américain et l'ICANN le 30 septembre dernier.*

La France a participé activement à *l'élaboration d'une position commune 
européenne sur ce sujet, et elle partage la vision de la présidence 
suédoise de l'UE*, qui porte une appréciation globalement positive sur 
ce nouvel accord conférant plus d'autonomie à l'ICANN et proposant de 
nouvelles modalités pour renforcer sa transparence et sa responsabilité.

Bernard Kouchner et Nathalie Kosciusko-Morizet appellent à *une conduite 
rapide du processus de réforme de l'ICANN,* désormais face à des 
responsabilités accrues. Cette organisation doit être plus que jamais 
ouverte à tous les acteurs (entreprises, ONG, universités, 
gouvernements) et ses décisions doivent être le reflet d'un consensus 
mondial comme l'est l'Internet.

L'implication du gouvernement français dans l'atteinte des objectifs 
fixés par le Sommet Mondial sur la Société de l'Information pour une 
gouvernance de l'Internet multilatérale, transparente et démocratique, 
ne se limite pour autant pas à la seule ICANN.

Aussi, le ministre des Affaires étrangères et européennes et la 
Secrétaire d'Etat à la Prospective et au Développement de l'économie 
Numérique rappellent à cette occasion que *la France entend participer 
très activement à une réflexion d'ensemble, notamment à l'occasion du 
prochain forum sur la gouvernance de l'Internet,* qui se tiendra à Charm 
el-Cheikh en novembre 2009.

Cette rencontre internationale traitera de la gestion du système des 
noms de domaines et de bien d'autres sujets cruciaux comme 
l'harmonisation des standards de protection des données personnelles sur 
Internet et la neutralité du réseau.


- *Déclaration française : Evolution de l'ICANN après la fin du Joint 
Project Agreement (JPA)*

* La France accueille avec intérêt la déclaration conjointe (Affirmation 
of Commitments) publiée ce jour par le Département du Commerce et 
l'Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers, par laquelle 
l'ICANN s'engage à développer les réformes institutionnelles nécessaires 
à son bon fonctionnement. Il s'agit d'une évolution positive. La France 
participera activement aux processus de concertation qui seront mis en 
place pour traduire cette vision dans les faits et est prête, avec ses 
partenaires Européens, à les faciliter, comme indiqué dans la 
déclaration publique de la présidence suédoise de l'Union Européenne. *

1) L'Internet est une infrastructure partagée à l'échelle mondiale 
désormais essentielle au fonctionnement de nos sociétés. Le système de 
noms de domaines et d'adresses sur lequel il repose doit donc être géré 
dans une perspective d'intérêt public global, en veillant au respect des 
droits des citoyens, à la diversité des expressions ainsi qu'à la 
sauvegarde de la sécurité des systèmes d'information.

2) Dans ce contexte, la France accueille avec intérêt la déclaration 
conjointe (Affirmation of Commitments) faite le 30 septembre 2009 par le 
Département du Commerce américain et l'ICANN relative à l'avenir du 
système de nommage et adressage Internet, et en particulier la 
réaffirmation de la dimension d'intérêt public de la mission qu'assume 
l'ICANN dans la gestion de cette ressource publique globale.

3) Le nouveau contexte créé par la fin du Joint Project Agreement 
confère désormais à l'ICANN une responsabilité accrue pour conduire dans 
les prochains mois les réformes institutionnelles nécessaires pour 
rendre l'organisation pleinement multi-acteurs et internationale, et 
mettre en place les mécanismes assurant sa responsabilité vis-à-vis de 
l'ensemble des parties prenantes.

4) La Déclaration Conjointe prévoit entre autres de confier à des panels 
dédiés et non plus à la seule administration américaine l'indispensable 
évaluation périodique des performances de cette organisation. Cette 
évolution est positive et a France participera activement à la réflexion 
sur les modalités pratiques de mise en oeuvre de cette proposition, qui 
détermineront son efficacité réelle.

5) Au-delà de ce dispositif, la France réaffirme la nécessité d'un 
renforcement du rôle des gouvernements dans les mécanismes de 
gouvernance de l'Internet, et particulièrement au sein de l'ICANN, afin 
qu'ils assument leur part de responsabilité dans la gestion des 
ressources publiques mondiales de l'Internet.

6) Afin de mettre en oeuvre dans les meilleurs délais les nouveaux 
mécanismes de responsabilité de l'ICANN, il lui appartient d'initier, au 
plus tard lors de sa réunion de Séoul, un processus large et inclusif de 
consultation, permettant notamment de finaliser lors de sa seconde 
réunion de l'année 2010 une version révisée de sa charte constitutive.

7) L'ICANN devrait utiliser les forums internationaux existants - et 
particulièrement le Forum sur la Gouvernance Internet issu du Sommet 
mondial des Nations-Unies sur la Société de l'Information - pour 
annoncer cette démarche et inviter les acteurs ne participant pas 
habituellement aux travaux de l'organisation à se joindre à cet effort 
commun.

8) La France, en coordination avec ses partenaires européens, est prête 
à contribuer à la facilitation de ce processus et en particulier à 
l'organisation de consultations ouvertes au niveau national et régional. 
Elle propose en outre que la réunion de l'ICANN en Juin 2010 soit 
l'occasion d'une rencontre à haut niveau permettant à l'ensemble des 
acteurs d'évaluer les progrès accomplis.

9) La France saisit enfin cette occasion pour réaffirmer qu'au-delà de 
l'évolution de l'ICANN et du système de nommage et d'adressage, la 
réflexion doit se poursuivre dans les enceintes appropriées pour 
développer une gouvernance mondiale de l'Internet conforme aux principes 
et aux engagements du Sommet Mondial sur la Société de l'Information.

-- 

------------------------------------------------------ 
Francis F. MUGUET Ph.D 

MDPI Foundation Open Access Journals
http://www.mdpi.org   http://www.mdpi.net
muguet at mdpi.org       muguet at mdpi.net

KNIS http://knis.org
Academic Collaboration / University of Geneva
http://syinf.unige.ch/recherche/cooperation


Mobile France       +33 6 71 91 42 10
       Switzerland  +41 78 927 06 97
       Cameroun    +237 96 55 69 62 ( mostly in July )

World Summit On the Information Society (WSIS)
Civil Society Working Groups
Scientific Information :  http://www.wsis-si.org  chair 
Patents & Copyrights   :  http://www.wsis-pct.org co-chair
Financing Mechanismns  :  http://www.wsis-finance.org web
Info. Net. Govermance  :  http://www.wsis-gov.org  web

NET4D : http://www.net4D.org 
UNMSP : http://www.unmsp.org 
WTIS : http://www.wtis.org   REUSSI : http://www.reussi.org
------------------------------------------------------ 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20091002/9073f514/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: economie_numerique_logo.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 8091 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20091002/9073f514/attachment.jpg>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: logo_maee-2.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 5371 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20091002/9073f514/attachment-0001.jpg>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: puce.gif
Type: image/gif
Size: 83 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20091002/9073f514/attachment.gif>
-------------- 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

From jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com  Fri Oct  2 16:02:07 2009
From: jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com (Jeffrey A. Williams)
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 2009 15:02:07 -0500 (GMT-05:00)
Subject: [governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation of Commitments
Message-ID: <5384257.1254513727633.JavaMail.root@elwamui-hybrid.atl.sa.earthlink.net>

Thomas and all,

  I believe that Eric would be a better choice as to
your query Thomas as he has far more experiance in
Calif. law in this area.

  Eric, can you perhaps give us all a quick and brief
evaluation?

-----Original Message-----
>From: Thomas Lowenhaupt <toml at communisphere.com>
>Sent: Oct 2, 2009 2:36 PM
>To: governance at lists.cpsr.org, Paul Lehto <lehto.paul at gmail.com>
>Subject: Re: [governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation of Commitments
>
>Since the adoption of the New gTLD Policy in June 2008, I've been thinking 
>through the process for establishing equitable representation for cities 
>within the ICANN structure. Now, with the Affirmation, I'm wondering what 
>forces within ICANN will advance the role of cities when such a sharing will 
>result in a dilution of control for those in whose hands it currently 
>resides.
>
>
>
>I see two remaining threads of outside influence: the State of California 
>and section 11 of the Affirmation. Perhaps Karl or another familiar with the 
>Golden State's law/politics could speak on the role of California; if some 
>changed relationship might be in the offing based on the recent 
>transformation. Might the Attorney General (former and possibly future 
>Governor Jerry Brown) take a fresh look?
>
>
>
>As to section 11, when it states, "The agreement is intended to be 
>long-standing, but may be amended at any time by mutual consent of the 
>parties. Any party may terminate this Affirmation of Commitments by 
>providing 120 days written notice to the other party." does this mean this 
>if egregious activities are noted by the DOC, and notice provided to ICANN, 
>that in 120 days we would see a transition to another oversight structure? 
>If so, that sounds like a tacit veto for the DOC. And perhaps someone might 
>be so brave as to speculate on a circumstance under which ICANN would 
>terminate?
>
>
>
>Tom Lowenhaupt
>
>
>
>
>
>----- Original Message ----- 
>From: "Paul Lehto" <lehto.paul at gmail.com>
>To: <governance at lists.cpsr.org>; "Roland Perry" 
><roland at internetpolicyagency.com>
>Sent: Friday, October 02, 2009 1:37 PM
>Subject: Re: [governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation of Commitments
>
>
>> The bottom line is that every remnant of DEMOCRATIC accountability has
>> been stripped from ICANN.  Whatever remains appears to be merely
>> advisory, which has no power ultimately at all, but even if something
>> is created that DOES have power, it's most definitely NOT democratic.
>> THis is the coup de grace for privatization of the internet, which
>> means that the public interest can NEVER truly exist because the
>> private players on the internet are all larger corporations, whose
>> charters and legal structure require them to pursue one single thing
>> with a single-minded intensity -- profit for their shareholders (or,
>> in the case of nonprofits, whatever educational or charitable goal is
>> defined there).  Although nonprofits are definitely much more
>> public-interest minded, at the end of the day no nonprofit can
>> legitimately claim to represent the PUBLIC INTEREST -- only
>> democratically elected politicians can do that, and only if they are
>> behaving correctly as well.   Thus, no matter who (if anybody)
>> controls ICANN outside ICANN's board of directors, it isn't
>> democratic, we can be certain of that.
>>
>> Thus, it's very disturbing to me that there's a giveaway of a huge
>> asset (for public interest protection purposes) like ICANN and they
>> didn't even SELL it or auction it off to get money for taxpayers NOR
>> did they transfer it to a democratically accountable global
>> organization with real power over ICANN (the best choice).
>>
>> What I'm saying is that whoever effectively controls ICANN, it
>> certainly isn't the people of the United States of America, nor is it
>> the people of several nations, and it is definitely not the people of
>> the entire globe.  Thus, without a way for people to vote (ultimately,
>> even if a long process) to elect politicians with a mandate to
>> restructure or differently regulate ICANN, there is no public control
>> of ICANN, and thus ICANN has achieved independence from democracy or
>> democratic control itself.  And, ICANN has done so specifically
>> without creating any real substitute for the control of the US
>> government.
>>
>> For what it's worth, "Advisory Boards" no matter how seriously they
>> are or seem to be taken, are a joke on the level of actual control.
>> They're free labor to the organization that ultimately can do whatever
>> it wants to and the advisors have no cause to complain, since they are
>> merely advisors, after all.   Thus, ICANN freely announces its
>> "independence" which is another way of announcing its separation from
>> democratic control of all kinds.  NOTHING THAT IS A PUBLIC SERVANT OF
>> THE PUBLIC INTEREST IS "INDEPENDENT" OR SEPARATE.
>>
>> Thus, the announcement is a game of sleight of hand, in which they are
>> purporting to create global accountability, but most definitely and
>> clearly are not, because there's no democracy left in it.  The only
>> powers that be outside democracy are corporations.  Some or many will
>> cheer that the US government is taking its hands off, but at least the
>> people in the US could push for public interest policies and make them
>> stick if it became a big enough campaign issue.  But now, even that
>> limited possibility is gone.   The shell of independence for ICANN has
>> been moved, but underneath that shell is no real accountability for
>> ICANN to the global community.
>>
>> On 10/1/09, Roland Perry <roland at internetpolicyagency.com> wrote:
>>> In message
>>> <76f819dd0910011242u2d26722eg4cac8f606ece0282 at mail.gmail.com>, at
>>> 12:42:19 on Thu, 1 Oct 2009, Paul Lehto <lehto.paul at gmail.com> writes
>>>>It doesn't matter how diverse the "stakeholders" are in their country
>>>>of origin, race, creed, sex, or what have you, if the stakeholders and
>>>>the public as a whole do not have a CONTROL mechanism.  The
>>>>elimination of all remaining control mechanisms (elections, as an
>>>>indirect control) is precisely what's being accomplished with the
>>>>agreement between the US Commerce Department and ICANN to make them
>>>>essentially independent, subject only to an advisory board.
>>>
>>> I'm not sure what this has to do with the GAC members.
>>>
>>> Are you suggesting that the ultimate control be given over to ALAC,
>>> rather than GAC?
>>>
>>> Just curious, I don't have a "position" of my own regarding this.
>>>
>>>>With politicians, every communication to them is utterly toothless if
>>>>it idoes not carry (as it always does) an implied threat that one will
>>>>vote the poltician out of office if they don't do the right thing.
>>>>With the new ICANN structure, even this vestigial remedy (attenuated
>>>>as it was by the insulation of the commerce department from the
>>>>electorate) is eliminated in every meaningful sense.
>>>>
>>>>I'd be the first to welcome true and real global governance regarding
>>>>the internet.  The fact that they've put in the semblance of "global"
>>>>but zero "governance" means that the shift is an abdication of all
>>>>public, democratic control, even if that control was improperly
>>>>limited to a single country, the USA.  Even more importantly, there's
>>>>no mechanism with which to fight to CREATE true control on the global
>>>>level in favor of the public interest.
>>>>
>>>>Thus, we can't fight, lobby or progress from the new posture of an
>>>>independent ICANN to a situation of true global control/governance
>>>>without (1) a nearly unprecedented act (in the history of Power) to
>>>>voluntarily create genuine and real accountability on a global scale,
>>>>OR (2) a revolution or revolt.  And just how does one have a
>>>>revolution or revolt against a corporation at all, much less a
>>>>corporation that has a monopoly on what it does, and which we all need
>>>>to exist or have a "domain" on the internet?
>>>
>>> So you don't think you can work inside the existing (and as-modified)
>>> ICANN framework to achieve any of this? [Same disclaimer as above].
>>>
>>>>Paul Lehto, Juris Doctor
>>>>
>>>>On 10/1/09, Roland Perry <roland at internetpolicyagency.com> wrote:
>>>>> In message <1254397157.3941.611.camel at anriette-laptop>, at 13:39:17 on
>>>>> Thu, 1 Oct 2009, Anriette Esterhuysen <anriette at apc.org> writes
>>>>>>One question I have about the GAC, does it not become very important to
>>>>>>have input from different stakeholders at country level in the
>>>>>>identification/nomination of GAC members
>>>>>
>>>>> As a matter of simple fact, the GAC members are usually the most 
>>>>> obvious
>>>>> career employee of the ministry charged with overseeing "International
>>>>> Telecoms issues", and are therefore likely to also turn up at ITU
>>>>> meetings, EU telecoms/Internet meetings, IGF consultations, UN-ECOSOC
>>>>> etc.
>>>>>
>>>>> Plus there are a few who might alternatively be their country's
>>>>> "Internet Czar".
>>>>> --
>>>>> Roland Perry
>>>>> ____________________________________________________________
>>>>> 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
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Roland Perry
>>> ____________________________________________________________
>>> 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
>>>
>>
>>
>> -- 
>> Paul R Lehto, J.D.
>> P.O. Box #1
>> Ishpeming, MI  49849
>> lehto.paul at gmail.com
>> 906-204-4026
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> 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

Regards,

Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 294k members/stakeholders strong!)
"Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" -
   Abraham Lincoln

"Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is very
often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt

"If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; liability
depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
United States v. Carroll Towing  (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
===============================================================
Updated 1/26/04
CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS. div. of
Information Network Eng.  INEG. INC.
ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com
Phone: 214-244-4827

____________________________________________________________
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


From jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com  Fri Oct  2 16:07:37 2009
From: jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com (Jeffrey A. Williams)
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 2009 15:07:37 -0500 (GMT-05:00)
Subject: [governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation of Commitments
Message-ID: <23664951.1254514057829.JavaMail.root@elwamui-hybrid.atl.sa.earthlink.net>

Roland and all,

  Yes they can, but unfortunately often do not.  Ergo
one of many reasons why Paul's comments ring so indellably
true.

-----Original Message-----
>From: Roland Perry <roland at internetpolicyagency.com>
>Sent: Oct 2, 2009 1:44 PM
>To: governance at lists.cpsr.org
>Subject: Re: [governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation of Commitments
>
>In message 
><76f819dd0910021037o36cd6b7aj9c8d7454ca116cc2 at mail.gmail.com>, at 
>13:37:38 on Fri, 2 Oct 2009, Paul Lehto <lehto.paul at gmail.com> writes
>>Although nonprofits are definitely much more public-interest minded, at 
>>the end of the day no nonprofit can legitimately claim to represent the 
>>PUBLIC INTEREST -- only democratically elected politicians can do that, 
>>and only if they are behaving correctly as well.
>
>So you don't think any charities can possibly act in the public 
>interest?
>-- 
>Roland Perry
>____________________________________________________________
>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,

Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 294k members/stakeholders strong!)
"Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" -
   Abraham Lincoln

"Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is very
often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt

"If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; liability
depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
United States v. Carroll Towing  (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
===============================================================
Updated 1/26/04
CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS. div. of
Information Network Eng.  INEG. INC.
ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com
Phone: 214-244-4827

____________________________________________________________
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


From jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com  Fri Oct  2 16:19:02 2009
From: jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com (Jeffrey A. Williams)
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 2009 15:19:02 -0500 (GMT-05:00)
Subject: [governance] Experts: ICANN still needs Hill oversight
Message-ID: <18171797.1254514742803.JavaMail.root@elwamui-hybrid.atl.sa.earthlink.net>

All,

  As an FYI see:http://www.nextgov.com/nextgov/ng_20091001_5459.php?oref=rss?zone=NGtoday
Even though the U.S. government's grip on the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and 
Numbers has eased after both sides signed an agreement this week, Congress still has a 
critical role in ensuring a smoothly functioning Internet, experts said today.


Regards,

Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 294k members/stakeholders strong!)
"Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" -
   Abraham Lincoln

"Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is very
often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt

"If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; liability
depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
United States v. Carroll Towing  (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
===============================================================
Updated 1/26/04
CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS. div. of
Information Network Eng.  INEG. INC.
ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com
Phone: 214-244-4827

____________________________________________________________
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


From roland at internetpolicyagency.com  Fri Oct  2 16:21:58 2009
From: roland at internetpolicyagency.com (Roland Perry)
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 2009 21:21:58 +0100
Subject: [governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation of Commitments
In-Reply-To: <23664951.1254514057829.JavaMail.root@elwamui-hybrid.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
References: <23664951.1254514057829.JavaMail.root@elwamui-hybrid.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <74Se3dQmDmxKFAuk@perry.co.uk>

In message 
<23664951.1254514057829.JavaMail.root at elwamui-hybrid.atl.sa.earthlink.net
 >, at 15:07:37 on Fri, 2 Oct 2009, Jeffrey A. Williams 
<jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com> writes
>  Yes they can, but unfortunately often do not.

So some can legitimately claim to act in the public interest. That's an 
advance on "none".

>Ergo one of many reasons why Paul's comments ring so indellably true.

I've never seen quite such a close linkage being made between public 
interest and elected politicians. After many elections around half the 
electorate won't find the politicians acting in their interest. Is there 
some benchmark for how much of the public has to have its interests 
served by the particular flavour of elected politicians, in the context 
of the remarks here?

>-----Original Message-----
>>From: Roland Perry <roland at internetpolicyagency.com>
>>Sent: Oct 2, 2009 1:44 PM
>>To: governance at lists.cpsr.org
>>Subject: Re: [governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation of Commitments
>>
>>In message
>><76f819dd0910021037o36cd6b7aj9c8d7454ca116cc2 at mail.gmail.com>, at
>>13:37:38 on Fri, 2 Oct 2009, Paul Lehto <lehto.paul at gmail.com> writes
>>>Although nonprofits are definitely much more public-interest minded, at
>>>the end of the day no nonprofit can legitimately claim to represent the
>>>PUBLIC INTEREST -- only democratically elected politicians can do that,
>>>and only if they are behaving correctly as well.
>>
>>So you don't think any charities can possibly act in the public
>>interest?

-- 
Roland Perry
____________________________________________________________
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


From jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com  Fri Oct  2 16:48:51 2009
From: jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com (Jeffrey A. Williams)
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 2009 15:48:51 -0500 (GMT-05:00)
Subject: [governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation of Commitments
Message-ID: <17957550.1254516531501.JavaMail.root@elwamui-hybrid.atl.sa.earthlink.net>

Roland and all,

  I believe Paul already covered the ground to which
you are quering, see below: "only democratically elected 
politicians can do that, and only if they are behaving 
correctly as well."  "behaving correctly and well" being
the specific language to which your query relates.

  Certainly in the US as in Canada, and the UK, elected
representitives are significantly unpopular as has been
widely reported and polls have shown time an time again.
Citizens are partly responsible for taking the time to
keep their elected representatives accountable by 
communicating with them their concerns frequently, directly
as possible, and pointedly to their areas of concern.  Occaisonally
perhaps reminding them that your vote for them in the next 
election may be in the ballance accordingly.

-----Original Message-----
>From: Roland Perry <roland at internetpolicyagency.com>
>Sent: Oct 2, 2009 3:21 PM
>To: governance at lists.cpsr.org
>Subject: Re: [governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation of Commitments
>
>In message 
><23664951.1254514057829.JavaMail.root at elwamui-hybrid.atl.sa.earthlink.net
> >, at 15:07:37 on Fri, 2 Oct 2009, Jeffrey A. Williams 
><jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com> writes
>>  Yes they can, but unfortunately often do not.
>
>So some can legitimately claim to act in the public interest. That's an 
>advance on "none".
>
>>Ergo one of many reasons why Paul's comments ring so indellably true.
>
>I've never seen quite such a close linkage being made between public 
>interest and elected politicians. After many elections around half the 
>electorate won't find the politicians acting in their interest. Is there 
>some benchmark for how much of the public has to have its interests 
>served by the particular flavour of elected politicians, in the context 
>of the remarks here?
>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>>From: Roland Perry <roland at internetpolicyagency.com>
>>>Sent: Oct 2, 2009 1:44 PM
>>>To: governance at lists.cpsr.org
>>>Subject: Re: [governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation of Commitments
>>>
>>>In message
>>><76f819dd0910021037o36cd6b7aj9c8d7454ca116cc2 at mail.gmail.com>, at
>>>13:37:38 on Fri, 2 Oct 2009, Paul Lehto <lehto.paul at gmail.com> writes
>>>>Although nonprofits are definitely much more public-interest minded, at
>>>>the end of the day no nonprofit can legitimately claim to represent the
>>>>PUBLIC INTEREST -- only democratically elected politicians can do that,
>>>>and only if they are behaving correctly as well.
>>>
>>>So you don't think any charities can possibly act in the public
>>>interest?
>
>-- 
>Roland Perry
>____________________________________________________________
>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,

Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 294k members/stakeholders strong!)
"Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" -
   Abraham Lincoln

"Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is very
often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt

"If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; liability
depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
United States v. Carroll Towing  (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
===============================================================
Updated 1/26/04
CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS. div. of
Information Network Eng.  INEG. INC.
ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com
Phone: 214-244-4827

____________________________________________________________
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


From ca at cafonso.ca  Fri Oct  2 21:33:15 2009
From: ca at cafonso.ca (Carlos A. Afonso)
Date: Fri, 02 Oct 2009 22:33:15 -0300
Subject: [governance] Congratulations
In-Reply-To: <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A871959F@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
References: <259838.32621.qm@web83914.mail.sp1.yahoo.com> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A871959F@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
Message-ID: <4AC6A9DB.6000908@cafonso.ca>

Dear Wolf, lots of noise and joy here -- of course, not forgetting the
immense work ahead to make things right and, above all, to make sure
this will represent a powerful contribution to this wonderful city and
people.

I am not a carioca (I have been adopted by Rio nearly 30 years ago), but
I am absolutely crazy about Rio, so I am not ashamed to say I cried
today, as did our president :)

frt rgds

--c.a.

Kleinwächter, Wolfgang wrote:
> To all our Barzilian members:
>  
> Congratulations to the 2016 Olympics in Rio. This will be Olympic Games which can be followed not only by TV and radio but by billions of Internet Users worldwide. Lets waoit and see how Rio comes with new Internet innovations until 2016. :-)))
>  
> Wolfgang 
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
> 

-- 

Carlos A. Afonso
CGI.br (www.cgi.br)
Nupef (www.nupef.org.br)
====================================
new/nuevo/novo e-mail: ca at cafonso.ca
====================================
____________________________________________________________
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


From cogitoergosum at sbcglobal.net  Sat Oct  3 00:11:23 2009
From: cogitoergosum at sbcglobal.net (Eric Dierker)
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 2009 21:11:23 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation of Commitments
In-Reply-To: <4AC656C4.6030006@peter-dambier.de>
Message-ID: <846574.431.qm@web83914.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>

Good governance restricts the unlimited actions of megacorporations in order to promote competition and provide safety and accountability for consumers.  ICANN to date has restricted unlimited actions by big business in order to limit competition and provide for easy access to consumers.
 
Users must begin to have a voice. The beginings must have people who are not self proclaimed representatives of the people but rather people who are representative of many.

--- On Fri, 10/2/09, Peter Dambier <peter at peter-dambier.de> wrote:


From: Peter Dambier <peter at peter-dambier.de>
Subject: Re: [governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation of Commitments
To: governance at lists.cpsr.org
Date: Friday, October 2, 2009, 7:38 PM


Thankyou McTim,

I feel the same.

McTim wrote:
> 
> The Internet, ideally should be governed by its users, of which,
> governments are but one among many.  The toothlessness of the
> Affirmation is a positive step towards that ideal.
> 

Kind regards
Peter

-- 
Peter and Karin Dambier
Cesidian Root - Radice Cesidiana
Rimbacher Strasse 16
D-69509 Moerlenbach-Bonsweiher
+49(6209)795-816 (Telekom)
+49(6252)750-308 (VoIP: sipgate.de)
mail: peter at peter-dambier.de
http://www.peter-dambier.de/
http://iason.site.voila.fr/
https://sourceforge.net/projects/iason/
ULA= fd80:4ce1:c66a::/48
____________________________________________________________
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/20091002/7ed8abf3/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

From cogitoergosum at sbcglobal.net  Sat Oct  3 00:14:18 2009
From: cogitoergosum at sbcglobal.net (Eric Dierker)
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 2009 21:14:18 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation of Commitments
In-Reply-To: <74Se3dQmDmxKFAuk@perry.co.uk>
Message-ID: <970531.64057.qm@web83912.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>

The affirmations should be viewed as affirming those who have struggled to hold ICANN accountable.  Some who have so labored have done so as large benevolent societies with and earnest goal of providing for the well being of users. They are not perfect but they do help the cause by weighing in on such matters as human rights on the internet.

--- On Fri, 10/2/09, Roland Perry <roland at internetpolicyagency.com> wrote:


From: Roland Perry <roland at internetpolicyagency.com>
Subject: Re: [governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation of Commitments
To: governance at lists.cpsr.org
Date: Friday, October 2, 2009, 8:21 PM


In message 
<23664951.1254514057829.JavaMail.root at elwamui-hybrid.atl.sa.earthlink.net
>, at 15:07:37 on Fri, 2 Oct 2009, Jeffrey A. Williams 
<jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com> writes
>  Yes they can, but unfortunately often do not.

So some can legitimately claim to act in the public interest. That's an 
advance on "none".

>Ergo one of many reasons why Paul's comments ring so indellably true.

I've never seen quite such a close linkage being made between public 
interest and elected politicians. After many elections around half the 
electorate won't find the politicians acting in their interest. Is there 
some benchmark for how much of the public has to have its interests 
served by the particular flavour of elected politicians, in the context 
of the remarks here?

>-----Original Message-----
>>From: Roland Perry <roland at internetpolicyagency.com>
>>Sent: Oct 2, 2009 1:44 PM
>>To: governance at lists.cpsr.org
>>Subject: Re: [governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation of Commitments
>>
>>In message
>><76f819dd0910021037o36cd6b7aj9c8d7454ca116cc2 at mail.gmail.com>, at
>>13:37:38 on Fri, 2 Oct 2009, Paul Lehto <lehto.paul at gmail.com> writes
>>>Although nonprofits are definitely much more public-interest minded, at
>>>the end of the day no nonprofit can legitimately claim to represent the
>>>PUBLIC INTEREST -- only democratically elected politicians can do that,
>>>and only if they are behaving correctly as well.
>>
>>So you don't think any charities can possibly act in the public
>>interest?

-- 
Roland Perry
____________________________________________________________
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/20091002/e66c3680/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

From roland at internetpolicyagency.com  Sat Oct  3 01:59:51 2009
From: roland at internetpolicyagency.com (Roland Perry)
Date: Sat, 3 Oct 2009 06:59:51 +0100
Subject: [governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation of Commitments
In-Reply-To: <17957550.1254516531501.JavaMail.root@elwamui-hybrid.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
References: <17957550.1254516531501.JavaMail.root@elwamui-hybrid.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <+gOfxCSXhuxKFAve@perry.co.uk>

In message 
<17957550.1254516531501.JavaMail.root at elwamui-hybrid.atl.sa.earthlink.net
 >, at 15:48:51 on Fri, 2 Oct 2009, Jeffrey A. Williams 
<jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com> writes
>Roland and all,
>
>  I believe Paul already covered the ground to which
>you are quering, see below: "only democratically elected
>politicians can do that, and only if they are behaving
>correctly as well."  "behaving correctly and well" being
>the specific language to which your query relates.

Even by "behaving well" you cannot act in the public interest when the 
public are split 50:50 regarding what their interests are.

If the "public interest" according to one set of politicians is to go to 
war over oil, and according to a different set is to avoid going to war 
over oil; how is that resolved (for the supporters of the losing side) 
after an election?

>  Certainly in the US as in Canada, and the UK, elected
>representitives are significantly unpopular as has been
>widely reported and polls have shown time an time again.
>Citizens are partly responsible for taking the time to
>keep their elected representatives accountable by
>communicating with them their concerns frequently, directly
>as possible, and pointedly to their areas of concern.  Occaisonally
>perhaps reminding them that your vote for them in the next
>election may be in the ballance accordingly.
>
>-----Original Message-----

>>I've never seen quite such a close linkage being made between public
>>interest and elected politicians. After many elections around half the
>>electorate won't find the politicians acting in their interest. Is there
>>some benchmark for how much of the public has to have its interests
>>served by the particular flavour of elected politicians, in the context
>>of the remarks here?

-- 
Roland Perry
____________________________________________________________
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


From roland at internetpolicyagency.com  Sat Oct  3 03:20:37 2009
From: roland at internetpolicyagency.com (Roland Perry)
Date: Sat, 3 Oct 2009 08:20:37 +0100
Subject: [governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation of Commitments
In-Reply-To: <136301ca4397$ac34e1f0$6400a8c0@powuseren2ihcx>
References: <75822E125BCB994F8446858C4B19F0D78FFC6E09@SUEX07-MBX-04.ad.syr.edu>
 <CD78E288-CEDE-4E1E-809E-39F1F591AD75@graduateinstitute.ch>
 <75822E125BCB994F8446858C4B19F0D78FFC6E16@SUEX07-MBX-04.ad.syr.edu>
 <14BF930C-49AF-4C16-A982-58A6BF8685D0@graduateinstitute.ch>
 <1254397157.3941.611.camel@anriette-laptop> <3QZdNroLCQxKFAts@perry.co.uk>
 <76f819dd0910011242u2d26722eg4cac8f606ece0282@mail.gmail.com>
 <rBdKJCua0QxKFAve@perry.co.uk>
 <76f819dd0910021037o36cd6b7aj9c8d7454ca116cc2@mail.gmail.com>
 <136301ca4397$ac34e1f0$6400a8c0@powuseren2ihcx>
Message-ID: <QDqk5LYFtvxKFA5K@perry.co.uk>

In message <136301ca4397$ac34e1f0$6400a8c0 at powuseren2ihcx>, at 15:36:41 
on Fri, 2 Oct 2009, Thomas Lowenhaupt <toml at communisphere.com> writes
>Since the adoption of the New gTLD Policy in June 2008, I've been 
>thinking through the process for establishing equitable representation 
>for cities within the ICANN structure.

Maybe they should join the NCUC?

I was struggling to find a place for a charity to call "home" within the 
ICANN 'silo' system. Surely not in the "Business and Commercial" users - 
but if it was, then that would also be the place for a City (which is 
primarily a not-for-profit business run by the Mayor and funded by the 
citizens).

I'm sure there are many other classes of entity which don't currently 
have a well defined "home". Trade Unions, for example, which *do* have 
an "Advisory Committee" within the OECD's consultative process.
-- 
Roland Perry
____________________________________________________________
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


From wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de  Sat Oct  3 04:21:07 2009
From: wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de (=?iso-8859-1?Q?=22Kleinw=E4chter=2C_Wolfgang=22?=)
Date: Sat, 03 Oct 2009 10:21:07 +0200
Subject: AW: [governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation of Commitments
References: <75822E125BCB994F8446858C4B19F0D78FFC6E09@SUEX07-MBX-04.ad.syr.edu>
 <CD78E288-CEDE-4E1E-809E-39F1F591AD75@graduateinstitute.ch>
 <75822E125BCB994F8446858C4B19F0D78FFC6E16@SUEX07-MBX-04.ad.syr.edu>
 <14BF930C-49AF-4C16-A982-58A6BF8685D0@graduateinstitute.ch>
 <1254397157.3941.611.camel@anriette-laptop> <3QZdNroLCQxKFAts@perry.co.uk>
 <76f819dd0910011242u2d26722eg4cac8f606ece0282@mail.gmail.com>
 <rBdKJCua0QxKFAve@perry.co.uk>
 <76f819dd0910021037o36cd6b7aj9c8d7454ca116cc2@mail.gmail.com>
 <136301ca4397$ac34e1f0$6400a8c0@powuseren2ihcx> <QDqk5LYFtvxKFA5K@perry.co.uk>
Message-ID:  <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A87195A2@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>

What would be the "home for .ngo, advertised by VeriSign?
 
Wolfgang

________________________________

Von: Roland Perry [mailto:roland at internetpolicyagency.com]
Gesendet: Sa 03.10.2009 09:20
An: governance at lists.cpsr.org
Betreff: Re: [governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation of Commitments



In message <136301ca4397$ac34e1f0$6400a8c0 at powuseren2ihcx>, at 15:36:41
on Fri, 2 Oct 2009, Thomas Lowenhaupt <toml at communisphere.com> writes
>Since the adoption of the New gTLD Policy in June 2008, I've been
>thinking through the process for establishing equitable representation
>for cities within the ICANN structure.

Maybe they should join the NCUC?

I was struggling to find a place for a charity to call "home" within the
ICANN 'silo' system. Surely not in the "Business and Commercial" users -
but if it was, then that would also be the place for a City (which is
primarily a not-for-profit business run by the Mayor and funded by the
citizens).

I'm sure there are many other classes of entity which don't currently
have a well defined "home". Trade Unions, for example, which *do* have
an "Advisory Committee" within the OECD's consultative process.
--
Roland Perry
____________________________________________________________
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


From correia.rui at gmail.com  Sat Oct  3 04:58:57 2009
From: correia.rui at gmail.com (Rui Correia)
Date: Sat, 3 Oct 2009 10:58:57 +0200
Subject: [governance] Congratulations
In-Reply-To: <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A871959F@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
References: <259838.32621.qm@web83914.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
	 <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A871959F@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
Message-ID: <ec8caada0910030158v7adb30f6s96b072c1b5e76f48@mail.gmail.com>

Hi Wolfgang

You seem to know the list members quite well! Does "Bar"-zilians have to do
witg their habits or have you became a fan of the caipirinha? ;-)

My wife (Brazilian) and I already popped a Cordon Negro yesterday evening
and will be paying homage with caipirinha this afternoon.
Have a great weekend

Regards and um abraço fraterno!



2009/10/2 "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang" <
wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de>

> To all our Barzilian members:
>
> Congratulations to the 2016 Olympics in Rio. This will be Olympic Games
> which can be followed not only by TV and radio but by billions of Internet
> Users worldwide. Lets waoit and see how Rio comes with new Internet
> innovations until 2016. :-)))
>
> Wolfgang
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
>



-- 
________________________________________________


Rui Correia
Advocacy, Human Rights, Media and Language Consultant
2 Cutten St
Horison
Roodepoort-Johannesburg,
South Africa
Tel/ Fax (+27-11) 766-4336
Mobile (+27) (0) 84-498-6838
_______________
áâãçéêíóôõúç
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20091003/bb23fea3/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

From roland at internetpolicyagency.com  Sat Oct  3 06:11:36 2009
From: roland at internetpolicyagency.com (Roland Perry)
Date: Sat, 3 Oct 2009 11:11:36 +0100
Subject: AW: [governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation of Commitments
In-Reply-To: <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A87195A2@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
References: <75822E125BCB994F8446858C4B19F0D78FFC6E09@SUEX07-MBX-04.ad.syr.edu>
 <CD78E288-CEDE-4E1E-809E-39F1F591AD75@graduateinstitute.ch>
 <75822E125BCB994F8446858C4B19F0D78FFC6E16@SUEX07-MBX-04.ad.syr.edu>
 <14BF930C-49AF-4C16-A982-58A6BF8685D0@graduateinstitute.ch>
 <1254397157.3941.611.camel@anriette-laptop> <3QZdNroLCQxKFAts@perry.co.uk>
 <76f819dd0910011242u2d26722eg4cac8f606ece0282@mail.gmail.com>
 <rBdKJCua0QxKFAve@perry.co.uk>
 <76f819dd0910021037o36cd6b7aj9c8d7454ca116cc2@mail.gmail.com>
 <136301ca4397$ac34e1f0$6400a8c0@powuseren2ihcx>
 <QDqk5LYFtvxKFA5K@perry.co.uk>
 <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A87195A2@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
Message-ID: <JO9yKubYNyxKFAqK@perry.co.uk>

In message 
<2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A87195A2 at server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>, 
at 10:21:07 on Sat, 3 Oct 2009, "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang" 
<wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de> writes

>What would be the "home for .ngo, advertised by VeriSign?

How about a new silo called the Non-GAC? ["Non-G" AC]
-- 
Roland Perry
____________________________________________________________
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


From glaser at nic.br  Sat Oct  3 08:38:49 2009
From: glaser at nic.br (Hartmut Glaser)
Date: Sat, 03 Oct 2009 09:38:49 -0300
Subject: [governance] Congratulations
In-Reply-To: <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A871959F@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
References: <259838.32621.qm@web83914.mail.sp1.yahoo.com> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A871959F@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
Message-ID: <4AC745D9.9080108@nic.br>


Hi Wolfgang,

Thanks for the congratulations.

"Lets wait and see how Rio comes with new Internet innovations 
until 2016. :-)))"

Big surprise  ;-) ..., wait ..., wait ..., you will see  :-) !!!

All the best

Hartmut

P.S.:
... any special meaning in writing "BAR-zilian" ???

===================================================
On 02/10/2009 15:56, Kleinwächter, Wolfgang wrote:
> To all our Barzilian members:
>  
> Congratulations to the 2016 Olympics in Rio. This will be Olympic Games which can be followed not only by TV and radio but by billions of Internet Users worldwide. Lets waoit and see how Rio comes with new Internet innovations until 2016. :-)))
>  
> Wolfgang 
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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/20091003/ca891f52/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

From dpar2 at uottawa.ca  Sat Oct  3 10:31:28 2009
From: dpar2 at uottawa.ca (Daniel Pare)
Date: Sat, 03 Oct 2009 10:31:28 -0400
Subject: [governance] Newly Minted PhD among the IG ranks
In-Reply-To: <ec8caada0910030158v7adb30f6s96b072c1b5e76f48@mail.gmail.com>
References: <259838.32621.qm@web83914.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>	 <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A871959F@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> <ec8caada0910030158v7adb30f6s96b072c1b5e76f48@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4AC76040.308@uottawa.ca>

Many people on this list know Jeremy Schtern. And, as such, I thought 
you might like to know that he successfully defended his PhD 
dissertation yesterday afternoon in Montreal (I had the pleasure of 
being the external examiner). Congratulations Jeremy!! Well done!!

be well,
Daniel

-- 
*************************************************************** 
Dr. Daniel J. Paré, Associate Professor 
Department of Communication 
University of Ottawa 
554 King Edward Ave., 
Ottawa, Ontario, K1N 6N5, Canada 
Tel: (613) 562-5800 ext: 2052 
Fax: (613) 562-5240 
***************************************************************


____________________________________________________________
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


From lehto.paul at gmail.com  Sat Oct  3 10:40:20 2009
From: lehto.paul at gmail.com (Paul Lehto)
Date: Sat, 3 Oct 2009 10:40:20 -0400
Subject: [governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation of Commitments
In-Reply-To: <y8DcmVKiokxKFAvp@perry.co.uk>
References: <75822E125BCB994F8446858C4B19F0D78FFC6E09@SUEX07-MBX-04.ad.syr.edu>
	 <CD78E288-CEDE-4E1E-809E-39F1F591AD75@graduateinstitute.ch>
	 <75822E125BCB994F8446858C4B19F0D78FFC6E16@SUEX07-MBX-04.ad.syr.edu>
	 <14BF930C-49AF-4C16-A982-58A6BF8685D0@graduateinstitute.ch>
	 <1254397157.3941.611.camel@anriette-laptop>
	 <3QZdNroLCQxKFAts@perry.co.uk>
	 <76f819dd0910011242u2d26722eg4cac8f606ece0282@mail.gmail.com>
	 <rBdKJCua0QxKFAve@perry.co.uk>
	 <76f819dd0910021037o36cd6b7aj9c8d7454ca116cc2@mail.gmail.com>
	 <y8DcmVKiokxKFAvp@perry.co.uk>
Message-ID: <76f819dd0910030740v206a4661xcd43ea4ae54d2483@mail.gmail.com>

Charities can attempt to, sometimes even succeed in acting in the
public interest.  However, the true public, the only legitimate source
of political authority, has NO RECOURSE if the charity mistakenly
feels that, for example, a private internet will trickle down public
benefits and a public internet with rights is undesirable.

The bottom line is the shift, of tectonic importance here, where the
admittedly too narrow and attenuated accountability of the Commerce
Department/ICANN to the US public purports to be eliminated in favor
of what ICANN calls "independence."  In turn, "independence" means
there's ZERO RECOURSE.

I hope you understand this crucial point, it's the difference between
begging or asking politely or lobbying or seeking the king's good
favor, and sovereign rule in democracy where if the public servants
don't follow the public interest in the opinion of a majority, they
get voted out and new policies are implemented.

Regardless of how non-global US control of ICANN is, and that is a
problem, the situation is now much worse because there's no
accountability to anyone anywhere and no mechanism to manufacture
accountability to the global community. (unless this giveaway and
abdication of authority is challenged)

Paul Lehto, Juris Doctor
On 10/2/09, Roland Perry <roland at internetpolicyagency.com> wrote:
> In message
> <76f819dd0910021037o36cd6b7aj9c8d7454ca116cc2 at mail.gmail.com>, at
> 13:37:38 on Fri, 2 Oct 2009, Paul Lehto <lehto.paul at gmail.com> writes
>>Although nonprofits are definitely much more public-interest minded, at
>>the end of the day no nonprofit can legitimately claim to represent the
>>PUBLIC INTEREST -- only democratically elected politicians can do that,
>>and only if they are behaving correctly as well.
>
> So you don't think any charities can possibly act in the public
> interest?
> --
> Roland Perry
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
>


-- 
Paul R Lehto, J.D.
P.O. Box #1
Ishpeming, MI  49849
lehto.paul at gmail.com
906-204-4026
____________________________________________________________
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


From lehto.paul at gmail.com  Sat Oct  3 10:46:31 2009
From: lehto.paul at gmail.com (Paul Lehto)
Date: Sat, 3 Oct 2009 10:46:31 -0400
Subject: [governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation of Commitments
In-Reply-To: <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A87195A0@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
References: <75822E125BCB994F8446858C4B19F0D78FFC6E09@SUEX07-MBX-04.ad.syr.edu>
	 <CD78E288-CEDE-4E1E-809E-39F1F591AD75@graduateinstitute.ch>
	 <75822E125BCB994F8446858C4B19F0D78FFC6E16@SUEX07-MBX-04.ad.syr.edu>
	 <14BF930C-49AF-4C16-A982-58A6BF8685D0@graduateinstitute.ch>
	 <1254397157.3941.611.camel@anriette-laptop>
	 <3QZdNroLCQxKFAts@perry.co.uk>
	 <76f819dd0910011242u2d26722eg4cac8f606ece0282@mail.gmail.com>
	 <rBdKJCua0QxKFAve@perry.co.uk>
	 <76f819dd0910021037o36cd6b7aj9c8d7454ca116cc2@mail.gmail.com>
	 <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A87195A0@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
Message-ID: <76f819dd0910030746j3cc9b0fdk849b22a197f30971@mail.gmail.com>

On 10/2/09, "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang"
<wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de> wrote:
> Paul
>
> what is your definition of legitimacy in a global world? Are there other
> soruces of legitimacy than one man one vote elections? And how to organize
> such elections globally (with 1.4 billion Chinese people who want certainly
> to have a vote)?
>
> And what is your definition of accountability? A single master-slave
> relationship? And in this case who will be the ultimate master and how the
> master gets the legitimacy to act on behalf of 2 billion Internet users in
> the public interest?

As stated in the UN Declaration of Human Rights, the US Declaration of
Independence and amplified by the worldwide love of democracy, the
only legitimate source of political authority is the people, via the
consent of the governed which is generated via elections.  Without the
recourse of elections, everyone is a vassal, a slave, a servant to
whatever happens.  And if what happens turns out to be favorable for
any reason, what one receives is a privilege revokable at will and at
any time and most certainly not a right, because people don't have any
say or input that can't be ignored - they don't have a vote.

Accountability consists of transparency of information so that the
governed, the voters, can make a judgment about whether to continue
the policy and/or the policy makers in power, or not.  That
accountability is eliminated by the ICANN "independence" --
independence is separation with no accountability to anyone that ICANN
doesn't wish to or allow itself to be accountable.  If it ensures that
its funding is diverse enough and has caps on total amounts, it will
be a free "king" so to speak, but most likely large contributors,
mostly corporate, will be the only ones with influence and say.  But
even they have only one recourse, which is to withhold future
contributions.
>
> Thanks
>
> Wolfgang
>
> ________________________________
>
> Von: Paul Lehto [mailto:lehto.paul at gmail.com]
> Gesendet: Fr 02.10.2009 19:37
> An: governance at lists.cpsr.org; Roland Perry
> Betreff: Re: [governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation of Commitments
>
>
>
> The bottom line is that every remnant of DEMOCRATIC accountability has
> been stripped from ICANN.  Whatever remains appears to be merely
> advisory, which has no power ultimately at all, but even if something
> is created that DOES have power, it's most definitely NOT democratic.
> THis is the coup de grace for privatization of the internet, which
> means that the public interest can NEVER truly exist because the
> private players on the internet are all larger corporations, whose
> charters and legal structure require them to pursue one single thing
> with a single-minded intensity -- profit for their shareholders (or,
> in the case of nonprofits, whatever educational or charitable goal is
> defined there).  Although nonprofits are definitely much more
> public-interest minded, at the end of the day no nonprofit can
> legitimately claim to represent the PUBLIC INTEREST -- only
> democratically elected politicians can do that, and only if they are
> behaving correctly as well.   Thus, no matter who (if anybody)
> controls ICANN outside ICANN's board of directors, it isn't
> democratic, we can be certain of that.
>
> Thus, it's very disturbing to me that there's a giveaway of a huge
> asset (for public interest protection purposes) like ICANN and they
> didn't even SELL it or auction it off to get money for taxpayers NOR
> did they transfer it to a democratically accountable global
> organization with real power over ICANN (the best choice).
>
> What I'm saying is that whoever effectively controls ICANN, it
> certainly isn't the people of the United States of America, nor is it
> the people of several nations, and it is definitely not the people of
> the entire globe.  Thus, without a way for people to vote (ultimately,
> even if a long process) to elect politicians with a mandate to
> restructure or differently regulate ICANN, there is no public control
> of ICANN, and thus ICANN has achieved independence from democracy or
> democratic control itself.  And, ICANN has done so specifically
> without creating any real substitute for the control of the US
> government.
>
> For what it's worth, "Advisory Boards" no matter how seriously they
> are or seem to be taken, are a joke on the level of actual control.
> They're free labor to the organization that ultimately can do whatever
> it wants to and the advisors have no cause to complain, since they are
> merely advisors, after all.   Thus, ICANN freely announces its
> "independence" which is another way of announcing its separation from
> democratic control of all kinds.  NOTHING THAT IS A PUBLIC SERVANT OF
> THE PUBLIC INTEREST IS "INDEPENDENT" OR SEPARATE.
>
> Thus, the announcement is a game of sleight of hand, in which they are
> purporting to create global accountability, but most definitely and
> clearly are not, because there's no democracy left in it.  The only
> powers that be outside democracy are corporations.  Some or many will
> cheer that the US government is taking its hands off, but at least the
> people in the US could push for public interest policies and make them
> stick if it became a big enough campaign issue.  But now, even that
> limited possibility is gone.   The shell of independence for ICANN has
> been moved, but underneath that shell is no real accountability for
> ICANN to the global community.
>
>  On 10/1/09, Roland Perry <roland at internetpolicyagency.com> wrote:
>> In message
>> <76f819dd0910011242u2d26722eg4cac8f606ece0282 at mail.gmail.com>, at
>> 12:42:19 on Thu, 1 Oct 2009, Paul Lehto <lehto.paul at gmail.com> writes
>>>It doesn't matter how diverse the "stakeholders" are in their country
>>>of origin, race, creed, sex, or what have you, if the stakeholders and
>>>the public as a whole do not have a CONTROL mechanism.  The
>>>elimination of all remaining control mechanisms (elections, as an
>>>indirect control) is precisely what's being accomplished with the
>>>agreement between the US Commerce Department and ICANN to make them
>>>essentially independent, subject only to an advisory board.
>>
>> I'm not sure what this has to do with the GAC members.
>>
>> Are you suggesting that the ultimate control be given over to ALAC,
>> rather than GAC?
>>
>> Just curious, I don't have a "position" of my own regarding this.
>>
>>>With politicians, every communication to them is utterly toothless if
>>>it idoes not carry (as it always does) an implied threat that one will
>>>vote the poltician out of office if they don't do the right thing.
>>>With the new ICANN structure, even this vestigial remedy (attenuated
>>>as it was by the insulation of the commerce department from the
>>>electorate) is eliminated in every meaningful sense.
>>>
>>>I'd be the first to welcome true and real global governance regarding
>>>the internet.  The fact that they've put in the semblance of "global"
>>>but zero "governance" means that the shift is an abdication of all
>>>public, democratic control, even if that control was improperly
>>>limited to a single country, the USA.  Even more importantly, there's
>>>no mechanism with which to fight to CREATE true control on the global
>>>level in favor of the public interest.
>>>
>>>Thus, we can't fight, lobby or progress from the new posture of an
>>>independent ICANN to a situation of true global control/governance
>>>without (1) a nearly unprecedented act (in the history of Power) to
>>>voluntarily create genuine and real accountability on a global scale,
>>>OR (2) a revolution or revolt.  And just how does one have a
>>>revolution or revolt against a corporation at all, much less a
>>>corporation that has a monopoly on what it does, and which we all need
>>>to exist or have a "domain" on the internet?
>>
>> So you don't think you can work inside the existing (and as-modified)
>> ICANN framework to achieve any of this? [Same disclaimer as above].
>>
>>>Paul Lehto, Juris Doctor
>>>
>>>On 10/1/09, Roland Perry <roland at internetpolicyagency.com> wrote:
>>>> In message <1254397157.3941.611.camel at anriette-laptop>, at 13:39:17 on
>>>> Thu, 1 Oct 2009, Anriette Esterhuysen <anriette at apc.org> writes
>>>>>One question I have about the GAC, does it not become very important to
>>>>>have input from different stakeholders at country level in the
>>>>>identification/nomination of GAC members
>>>>
>>>> As a matter of simple fact, the GAC members are usually the most obvious
>>>> career employee of the ministry charged with overseeing "International
>>>> Telecoms issues", and are therefore likely to also turn up at ITU
>>>> meetings, EU telecoms/Internet meetings, IGF consultations, UN-ECOSOC
>>>> etc.
>>>>
>>>> Plus there are a few who might alternatively be their country's
>>>> "Internet Czar".
>>>> --
>>>> Roland Perry
>>>> ____________________________________________________________
>>>> 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
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> --
>> Roland Perry
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> 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
>>
>
>
> --
> Paul R Lehto, J.D.
> P.O. Box #1
> Ishpeming, MI  49849
> lehto.paul at gmail.com
> 906-204-4026
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
>
>
>


-- 
Paul R Lehto, J.D.
P.O. Box #1
Ishpeming, MI  49849
lehto.paul at gmail.com
906-204-4026
____________________________________________________________
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


From lehto.paul at gmail.com  Sat Oct  3 10:55:14 2009
From: lehto.paul at gmail.com (Paul Lehto)
Date: Sat, 3 Oct 2009 10:55:14 -0400
Subject: [governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation of Commitments
In-Reply-To: <f65fb55e0910021228n628b6055lc2ec6b6914567bcc@mail.gmail.com>
References: <75822E125BCB994F8446858C4B19F0D78FFC6E09@SUEX07-MBX-04.ad.syr.edu>
	 <CD78E288-CEDE-4E1E-809E-39F1F591AD75@graduateinstitute.ch>
	 <75822E125BCB994F8446858C4B19F0D78FFC6E16@SUEX07-MBX-04.ad.syr.edu>
	 <14BF930C-49AF-4C16-A982-58A6BF8685D0@graduateinstitute.ch>
	 <1254397157.3941.611.camel@anriette-laptop>
	 <3QZdNroLCQxKFAts@perry.co.uk>
	 <76f819dd0910011242u2d26722eg4cac8f606ece0282@mail.gmail.com>
	 <rBdKJCua0QxKFAve@perry.co.uk>
	 <76f819dd0910021037o36cd6b7aj9c8d7454ca116cc2@mail.gmail.com>
	 <f65fb55e0910021228n628b6055lc2ec6b6914567bcc@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <76f819dd0910030755o34f8b96s248c063f0eb02f1b@mail.gmail.com>

On 10/2/09, McTim <dogwallah at gmail.com> wrote:
> Paul,
>
> Apologies for top posting, I was going to rebut many of your points
> inline, but have decided to simply point you here:
>
> http://homes.eff.org/~barlow/Declaration-Final.html
>
> and say that the end of the JPA supports this Internet ethos,
> especially the notion that "You have no moral right to rule us nor do
> you possess any methods of enforcement we have true reason to fear."
>
> The Internet, ideally should be governed by its users, of which,
> governments are but one among many.  The toothlessness of the
> Affirmation is a positive step towards that ideal.

Tim, ask yourself the question of what recourse or power do internet
users or anyone else have over ICANN?  It is totally irrelevant what
ICANN says, or even if it says all the right things, they've announced
themselves "independent" and are therefore beyond all control, beyond
all recourse, and beyond all accountability.

Indeed, why should ICANN listen to anybody if there's no fundamental
check and balance?   I could (purely fanciful here) set up myself as
king of this listserv and at least initially purport to be very
broadminded and tolerant and adopt ideas of others.  But at all times,
as long as the notion that i'm an independent king is accepted, I can
do anything I want to and there's nothing remotely effective anybody
can do about it, except to leave the list.  There's a huge difference
between living under a "philosopher king" who recognizes the fact that
nobody wants to be ruled but fails to publicly recognize the
contradiction involved when the "philosopher" king eliminates
elections by the public - the only legitimate source of ultimate
political authority.

Paul Lehto, Juris Doctor
>
> On Fri, Oct 2, 2009 at 8:37 PM, Paul Lehto <lehto.paul at gmail.com> wrote:
>> The bottom line is that every remnant of DEMOCRATIC accountability has
>> been stripped from ICANN.  Whatever remains appears to be merely
>> advisory, which has no power ultimately at all, but even if something
>> is created that DOES have power, it's most definitely NOT democratic.
>> THis is the coup de grace for privatization of the internet, which
>> means that the public interest can NEVER truly exist because the
>> private players on the internet are all larger corporations, whose
>> charters and legal structure require them to pursue one single thing
>> with a single-minded intensity -- profit for their shareholders (or,
>> in the case of nonprofits, whatever educational or charitable goal is
>> defined there).  Although nonprofits are definitely much more
>> public-interest minded, at the end of the day no nonprofit can
>> legitimately claim to represent the PUBLIC INTEREST -- only
>> democratically elected politicians can do that, and only if they are
>> behaving correctly as well.   Thus, no matter who (if anybody)
>> controls ICANN outside ICANN's board of directors, it isn't
>> democratic, we can be certain of that.
>>
>> Thus, it's very disturbing to me that there's a giveaway of a huge
>> asset (for public interest protection purposes) like ICANN and they
>> didn't even SELL it or auction it off to get money for taxpayers NOR
>> did they transfer it to a democratically accountable global
>> organization with real power over ICANN (the best choice).
>>
>> What I'm saying is that whoever effectively controls ICANN, it
>> certainly isn't the people of the United States of America, nor is it
>> the people of several nations, and it is definitely not the people of
>> the entire globe.  Thus, without a way for people to vote (ultimately,
>> even if a long process) to elect politicians with a mandate to
>> restructure or differently regulate ICANN, there is no public control
>> of ICANN, and thus ICANN has achieved independence from democracy or
>> democratic control itself.  And, ICANN has done so specifically
>> without creating any real substitute for the control of the US
>> government.
>>
>> For what it's worth, "Advisory Boards" no matter how seriously they
>> are or seem to be taken, are a joke on the level of actual control.
>> They're free labor to the organization that ultimately can do whatever
>> it wants to and the advisors have no cause to complain, since they are
>> merely advisors, after all.   Thus, ICANN freely announces its
>> "independence" which is another way of announcing its separation from
>> democratic control of all kinds.  NOTHING THAT IS A PUBLIC SERVANT OF
>> THE PUBLIC INTEREST IS "INDEPENDENT" OR SEPARATE.
>>
>> Thus, the announcement is a game of sleight of hand, in which they are
>> purporting to create global accountability, but most definitely and
>> clearly are not, because there's no democracy left in it.  The only
>> powers that be outside democracy are corporations.  Some or many will
>> cheer that the US government is taking its hands off, but at least the
>> people in the US could push for public interest policies and make them
>> stick if it became a big enough campaign issue.  But now, even that
>> limited possibility is gone.   The shell of independence for ICANN has
>> been moved, but underneath that shell is no real accountability for
>> ICANN to the global community.
>


-- 
Paul R Lehto, J.D.
P.O. Box #1
Ishpeming, MI  49849
lehto.paul at gmail.com
906-204-4026
____________________________________________________________
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


From lehto.paul at gmail.com  Sat Oct  3 10:58:11 2009
From: lehto.paul at gmail.com (Paul Lehto)
Date: Sat, 3 Oct 2009 10:58:11 -0400
Subject: [governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation of Commitments
In-Reply-To: <136301ca4397$ac34e1f0$6400a8c0@powuseren2ihcx>
References: <75822E125BCB994F8446858C4B19F0D78FFC6E09@SUEX07-MBX-04.ad.syr.edu>
	 <CD78E288-CEDE-4E1E-809E-39F1F591AD75@graduateinstitute.ch>
	 <75822E125BCB994F8446858C4B19F0D78FFC6E16@SUEX07-MBX-04.ad.syr.edu>
	 <14BF930C-49AF-4C16-A982-58A6BF8685D0@graduateinstitute.ch>
	 <1254397157.3941.611.camel@anriette-laptop>
	 <3QZdNroLCQxKFAts@perry.co.uk>
	 <76f819dd0910011242u2d26722eg4cac8f606ece0282@mail.gmail.com>
	 <rBdKJCua0QxKFAve@perry.co.uk>
	 <76f819dd0910021037o36cd6b7aj9c8d7454ca116cc2@mail.gmail.com>
	 <136301ca4397$ac34e1f0$6400a8c0@powuseren2ihcx>
Message-ID: <76f819dd0910030758wb2f1cc1iaf7a0f5c820c1c9d@mail.gmail.com>

On 10/2/09, Thomas Lowenhaupt <toml at communisphere.com> wrote:
[snip]> As to section 11, when it states, "The agreement is intended to be
> long-standing, but may be amended at any time by mutual consent of the
> parties. Any party may terminate this Affirmation of Commitments by
> providing 120 days written notice to the other party." does this mean this
> if egregious activities are noted by the DOC, and notice provided to ICANN,
> that in 120 days we would see a transition to another oversight structure?
> If so, that sounds like a tacit veto for the DOC. And perhaps someone might
> be so brave as to speculate on a circumstance under which ICANN would
> terminate?

Termination "by mutual agreement" means that ICANN would have to agree
to end its own independence (read: freedom) and therefore mutual
agreement is worse than toothless, it means nothing happens unless
ICANN wants it to happen.  (PLUS, the DOC as well, which makes this
condition ever more impossible in an important case of conflicting
policies)

Paul Lehto, Juris Doctor

-- 
Paul R Lehto, J.D.
P.O. Box #1
Ishpeming, MI  49849
lehto.paul at gmail.com
906-204-4026
____________________________________________________________
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


From wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de  Sat Oct  3 10:57:46 2009
From: wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de (=?iso-8859-1?Q?=22Kleinw=E4chter=2C_Wolfgang=22?=)
Date: Sat, 03 Oct 2009 16:57:46 +0200
Subject: AW: [governance] Newly Minted PhD among the IG ranks
References: <259838.32621.qm@web83914.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
 <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A871959F@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
 <ec8caada0910030158v7adb30f6s96b072c1b5e76f48@mail.gmail.com>
 <4AC76040.308@uottawa.ca>
Message-ID:  <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A87195AB@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>

Congratulations Jeremy and can you post your PhD under the Creative Commons?
 
Wolfgang

________________________________

Von: Daniel Pare [mailto:dpar2 at uottawa.ca]
Gesendet: Sa 03.10.2009 16:31
An: governance at lists.cpsr.org
Betreff: [governance] Newly Minted PhD among the IG ranks



Many people on this list know Jeremy Schtern. And, as such, I thought
you might like to know that he successfully defended his PhD
dissertation yesterday afternoon in Montreal (I had the pleasure of
being the external examiner). Congratulations Jeremy!! Well done!!

be well,
Daniel

--
***************************************************************
Dr. Daniel J. Paré, Associate Professor
Department of Communication
University of Ottawa
554 King Edward Ave.,
Ottawa, Ontario, K1N 6N5, Canada
Tel: (613) 562-5800 ext: 2052
Fax: (613) 562-5240
***************************************************************


____________________________________________________________
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


From lehto.paul at gmail.com  Sat Oct  3 11:10:25 2009
From: lehto.paul at gmail.com (Paul Lehto)
Date: Sat, 3 Oct 2009 11:10:25 -0400
Subject: [governance] Disfranchisement in the ICANN/USG Affirmation of
 Commitments
Message-ID: <76f819dd0910030810u4a1c859cl5b705805f7f62ced@mail.gmail.com>

Think of the many millions of  people around the world who have, quite
literally, sacrificed and died to obtain the right to vote.  Were they
fools?  I ask because prior to having the right to vote, those people
could lobby, attempt to persuade, be "affirmed" by their rulers
greatly or not at all, but everything hinged on what the rulers
decided and there was nothing ultimately forcing the rulers to listen.

This situation is the same with charities purporting to act in the
public interest as it was in the bad old days before democracy.   With
charities, as with tyrants old and new, and also with ICANN of today,
we have no right to vote, unless of course we are allowed to pay for a
vote by being a member of that charity, and the charity provides for
such members, but can always vote to revoke membership individually or
collectively.  In any event, the membership fee is a poll tax,
outlawed in most or all countries because it disfranchises the average
person of modest means.

If one is distracted by the horse race of which policies are being
"affirmed" and which not, you will miss the fundamental and crucial
fact that we've just been disfranchised.  (People in other countries,
some of them, may feel they're not too concerned upon seeing the US
people lose whatever power they had, but now there's no way for either
the US people or the US government to give the globe a real vote,
unless the DOC/ICANN deal is found to be void and unwound.)

We can't get from the DOC/ICANN affirmations to true global
representation, in other words.  It's a totally corporate world now,
subject to whatever bones the corporate world wants to throw in its
grace and mercy, because nobody has any rights.

Paul Lehto, Juris Doctor

On 10/3/09, Roland Perry <roland at internetpolicyagency.com> wrote:
> In message
> <17957550.1254516531501.JavaMail.root at elwamui-hybrid.atl.sa.earthlink.net
>  >, at 15:48:51 on Fri, 2 Oct 2009, Jeffrey A. Williams
> <jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com> writes
>>Roland and all,
>>
>>  I believe Paul already covered the ground to which
>>you are quering, see below: "only democratically elected
>>politicians can do that, and only if they are behaving
>>correctly as well."  "behaving correctly and well" being
>>the specific language to which your query relates.
>
> Even by "behaving well" you cannot act in the public interest when the
> public are split 50:50 regarding what their interests are.
>
> If the "public interest" according to one set of politicians is to go to
> war over oil, and according to a different set is to avoid going to war
> over oil; how is that resolved (for the supporters of the losing side)
> after an election?
>
>>  Certainly in the US as in Canada, and the UK, elected
>>representitives are significantly unpopular as has been
>>widely reported and polls have shown time an time again.
>>Citizens are partly responsible for taking the time to
>>keep their elected representatives accountable by
>>communicating with them their concerns frequently, directly
>>as possible, and pointedly to their areas of concern.  Occaisonally
>>perhaps reminding them that your vote for them in the next
>>election may be in the ballance accordingly.
>>
>>-----Original Message-----
>
>>>I've never seen quite such a close linkage being made between public
>>>interest and elected politicians. After many elections around half the
>>>electorate won't find the politicians acting in their interest. Is there
>>>some benchmark for how much of the public has to have its interests
>>>served by the particular flavour of elected politicians, in the context
>>>of the remarks here?
>
> --
> Roland Perry
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
>


-- 
Paul R Lehto, J.D.
P.O. Box #1
Ishpeming, MI  49849
lehto.paul at gmail.com
906-204-4026
____________________________________________________________
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


From dcogburn at syr.edu  Sat Oct  3 11:11:12 2009
From: dcogburn at syr.edu (Derrick L. Cogburn)
Date: Sat, 3 Oct 2009 11:11:12 -0400
Subject: AW: [governance] Newly Minted PhD among the IG ranks
In-Reply-To: <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A87195AB@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
References: <259838.32621.qm@web83914.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
 <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A871959F@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
 <ec8caada0910030158v7adb30f6s96b072c1b5e76f48@mail.gmail.com>
 <4AC76040.308@uottawa.ca>
 <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A87195AB@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
Message-ID: <6D6CA2DF-8E90-497A-9C9E-F567F5CFAB52@syr.edu>

Ditto; congratulations Jeremy! Marc mentioned your progress this  
summer. I am delighted you have completed this milestone. Well done!

Cheers,
Derrick

Dr. Derrick L. Cogburn
American University
Syracuse University
http://cotelco.net
Twitter: derrickcogburn

Sent from my iPhone

On Oct 3, 2009, at 10:59 AM, "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang" <wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.d 
e> wrote:

> Congratulations Jeremy and can you post your PhD under the Creative  
> Commons?
>
> Wolfgang
>
> ________________________________
>
> Von: Daniel Pare [mailto:dpar2 at uottawa.ca]
> Gesendet: Sa 03.10.2009 16:31
> An: governance at lists.cpsr.org
> Betreff: [governance] Newly Minted PhD among the IG ranks
>
>
>
> Many people on this list know Jeremy Schtern. And, as such, I thought
> you might like to know that he successfully defended his PhD
> dissertation yesterday afternoon in Montreal (I had the pleasure of
> being the external examiner). Congratulations Jeremy!! Well done!!
>
> be well,
> Daniel
>
> --
> ***************************************************************
> Dr. Daniel J. Paré, Associate Professor
> Department of Communication
> University of Ottawa
> 554 King Edward Ave.,
> Ottawa, Ontario, K1N 6N5, Canada
> Tel: (613) 562-5800 ext: 2052
> Fax: (613) 562-5240
> ***************************************************************
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
____________________________________________________________
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

From dmiloshevic at afilias.info  Sat Oct  3 11:26:34 2009
From: dmiloshevic at afilias.info (Desiree Miloshevic)
Date: Sat, 3 Oct 2009 16:26:34 +0100
Subject: AW: [governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation of Commitments
In-Reply-To: <JO9yKubYNyxKFAqK@perry.co.uk>
References: <75822E125BCB994F8446858C4B19F0D78FFC6E09@SUEX07-MBX-04.ad.syr.edu> <CD78E288-CEDE-4E1E-809E-39F1F591AD75@graduateinstitute.ch> <75822E125BCB994F8446858C4B19F0D78FFC6E16@SUEX07-MBX-04.ad.syr.edu> <14BF930C-49AF-4C16-A982-58A6BF8685D0@graduateinstitute.ch> <1254397157.3941.611.camel@anriette-laptop> <3QZdNroLCQxKFAts@perry.co.uk> <76f819dd0910011242u2d26722eg4cac8f606ece0282@mail.gmail.com> <rBdKJCua0QxKFAve@perry.co.uk> <76f819dd0910021037o36cd6b7aj9c8d7454ca116cc2@mail.gmail.com> <136301ca4397$ac34e1f0$6400a8c0@powuseren2ihcx> <QDqk5LYFtvxKFA5K@perry.co.uk> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A87195A2@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> <JO9yKubYNyxKFAqK@perry.co.uk>
Message-ID: <6777BA8B-7220-4271-B155-AB442C45AE4B@afilias.info>


On 3 Oct 2009, at 11:11, Roland Perry wrote:

> In message <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A87195A2 at server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de 
> >, at 10:21:07 on Sat, 3 Oct 2009, "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang" <wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de 
> > writes
>
>> What would be the "home for .ngo, advertised by VeriSign?
>
> How about a new silo called the Non-GAC? ["Non-G" AC]

I like it!

Desiree
--

>
> Roland Perry
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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


From william.drake at graduateinstitute.ch  Sat Oct  3 12:35:03 2009
From: william.drake at graduateinstitute.ch (William Drake)
Date: Sat, 3 Oct 2009 18:35:03 +0200
Subject: [governance] Congratulations
In-Reply-To: <4AC745D9.9080108@nic.br>
References: <259838.32621.qm@web83914.mail.sp1.yahoo.com> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A871959F@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> <4AC745D9.9080108@nic.br>
Message-ID: <45E85E26-AD2D-42E7-8271-1B7F254C628E@graduateinstitute.ch>

Hi

Having publicly declared myself to be a native Chicagoan and guessed  
that Obama's staff might actually know what they were doing this time,  
I guess it's incumbent upon me to say congrats to our Brazilian  
colleagues as well.  Even folks raised on blues and beer love samba  
and caipirinhas...

Cheers,

Bill

PS: Congrats to Dr. Shtern as well...



On Oct 3, 2009, at 2:38 PM, Hartmut Glaser wrote:

>
> Hi Wolfgang,
>
> Thanks for the congratulations.
>  "Lets wait and see how Rio comes with new Internet innovations
> until 2016. :-)))"
>
> Big surprise  ;-) ..., wait ..., wait ..., you will see  :-) !!!
> All the best
>
> Hartmut
>
> P.S.:
> ... any special meaning in writing "BAR-zilian" ???
>
> ===================================================
> On 02/10/2009 15:56, Kleinwächter, Wolfgang wrote:
>>
>> To all our Barzilian members:
>>
>> Congratulations to the 2016 Olympics in Rio. This will be Olympic  
>> Games which can be followed not only by TV and radio but by  
>> billions of Internet Users worldwide. Lets waoit and see how Rio  
>> comes with new Internet innovations until 2016. :-)))
>>
>> Wolfgang
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> 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

***********************************************************
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
***********************************************************


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20091003/0ac1f4ab/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

From jeremy.shtern at umontreal.ca  Sat Oct  3 12:56:17 2009
From: jeremy.shtern at umontreal.ca (Jeremy Shtern)
Date: Sat, 03 Oct 2009 12:56:17 -0400
Subject: AW: [governance] Newly Minted PhD among the IG ranks
In-Reply-To: <6D6CA2DF-8E90-497A-9C9E-F567F5CFAB52@syr.edu>
References: <259838.32621.qm@web83914.mail.sp1.yahoo.com> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A871959F@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> <ec8caada0910030158v7adb30f6s96b072c1b5e76f48@mail.gmail.com> <4AC76040.308@uottawa.ca> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A87195AB@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> <6D6CA2DF-8E90-497A-9C9E-F567F5CFAB52@syr.edu>
Message-ID: <4AC78231.3070308@umontreal.ca>

Thanks Daniel, Wolfgang, Derek and Everyone,

In response to Wolfgang's query, my thesis isn't publicly available at 
this point.

My understanding is that the final draft (pending a last round of 
revisions and some I's to dot ant T's to cross), once deposited, should 
be available online through the library system of the University of 
Montreal.

I will be sure to pass along details about how it can be accessed at 
that time.

Cheers,

Jeremy



Derrick L. Cogburn wrote:
> Ditto; congratulations Jeremy! Marc mentioned your progress this  
> summer. I am delighted you have completed this milestone. Well done!
>
> Cheers,
> Derrick
>
> Dr. Derrick L. Cogburn
> American University
> Syracuse University
> http://cotelco.net
> Twitter: derrickcogburn
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Oct 3, 2009, at 10:59 AM, "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang" <wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.d 
> e> wrote:
>
>   
>> Congratulations Jeremy and can you post your PhD under the Creative  
>> Commons?
>>
>> Wolfgang
>>
>> ________________________________
>>
>> Von: Daniel Pare [mailto:dpar2 at uottawa.ca]
>> Gesendet: Sa 03.10.2009 16:31
>> An: governance at lists.cpsr.org
>> Betreff: [governance] Newly Minted PhD among the IG ranks
>>
>>
>>
>> Many people on this list know Jeremy Schtern. And, as such, I thought
>> you might like to know that he successfully defended his PhD
>> dissertation yesterday afternoon in Montreal (I had the pleasure of
>> being the external examiner). Congratulations Jeremy!! Well done!!
>>
>> be well,
>> Daniel
>>
>> --
>> ***************************************************************
>> Dr. Daniel J. Paré, Associate Professor
>> Department of Communication
>> University of Ottawa
>> 554 King Edward Ave.,
>> Ottawa, Ontario, K1N 6N5, Canada
>> Tel: (613) 562-5800 ext: 2052
>> Fax: (613) 562-5240
>> ***************************************************************
>>
>>
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> 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
>>     
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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


From parminder at itforchange.net  Sat Oct  3 13:05:00 2009
From: parminder at itforchange.net (Parminder)
Date: Sat, 03 Oct 2009 22:35:00 +0530
Subject: [governance] =?ISO-8859-1?Q?French_official_position_/_Posit?=
 =?ISO-8859-1?Q?ion_Fran=E7aise_officielle_?=
In-Reply-To: <4AC65BD9.8080609@mdpi.net>
References: <4AC65BD9.8080609@mdpi.net>
Message-ID: <4AC7843C.5010203@itforchange.net>

Thanks Muguet,

France's statement on the new agreement does show that non US countries 
see this is as an opening of a door, rather than the whole thing... It 
will be interesting to watch how this opening actually gets used. And 
civil society bodies, including IGC, may also start to look at the 
various possibilities ahead and participate in the developments as they 
unfold... Parminder

Dr. Francis MUGUET wrote:
> FYI
>
> English / Français infra
>
>
>     The Evolution of ICANN after the end of the Joint Project
>     Agreement (JPA)
>
> *The Evolution of ICANN after the end of the Joint Project Agreement 
> (JPA)*
>
> * /France welcomes with interest the Affirmation of Commitments 
> published today by the Department of Commerce and the Internet 
> Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN), by which ICANN 
> commits to develop the institutional reforms necessary to ensure its 
> full accountability. This is a positive evolution. France will 
> actively participate in the consultation processes to be established 
> to turn this vision into practice and is willing, in concertation with 
> its European partners, to facilitate them as indicated in the public 
> statement issued by the Swedish Presidency of the EU.. / *
>
> 1) The Internet has become a shared infrastructure critical to the 
> proper functionning of our societies at the world level. France 
> therefore considers that the naming and addressing system upon which 
> the Internet relies must be managed in a global public interest 
> perspective, with due care given to the respect of the rights of 
> citizens, the diversity of expressions and the safeguarding of the 
> security of information systems.
>
> 2) In this context, French Authorities welcome with interest the 
> Affirmation of Commitments jointly issued by the Department of 
> Commerce and ICANN on September 30th, 2009 regarding the future of the 
> Internet naming and addressing system and in particular the 
> reaffirmation of the public trust dimension of the mission fulfilled 
> by ICANN in the management of this global public resource.
>
> 3) The new context produced by the end of the Joint Project Agreement 
> imparts upon ICANN an enhanced responsibility to spearhead in the 
> coming months the institutional reforms required to make the 
> organization fully multi-stakeholder and international, and to 
> establish the mechanisms ensuring its accountability to all stakeholders.
>
> 4) The Affirmation of Commitments proposes, inter alia, to entrust 
> dedicated review panels - instead of the US administration only - with 
> the necessary periodic evaluation of the organization's performance. 
> This is a positive evolution and France will actively participate in 
> the discussions regarding the practical modalities of implementation 
> of this proposal, as they will ultimately determine its efficiency.
>
> 5) Beyond this mechanism, France reaffirms the need to enhance the 
> role of Governments in the current Internet Governance mechanisms, and 
> particularly within ICANN, so that they can fully exercise their share 
> of responsibilities in the management of the global public resources 
> of the Internet
>
> 6) In order to implement in timely manner these new mechanisms of 
> accountability, ICANN should initiate, at the latest during its 
> upcoming Seoul meeting, a broad and inclusive consultation process, 
> with a view in particular to finalizing a revised version of its 
> Bylaws during its second meeting in June 2010.
>
> 7) ICANN should use, as much as possible, existing international fora 
> - in particular the Internet Governance Forum set up by the United 
> Nations World Summit on Information Society- to announce this 
> initiative and invite actors not commonly participating in its 
> activities to engage in this common effort.
>
> 8) France, in coordination with its European partners, is ready to 
> help facilitate such a process, and in particular the organization of 
> open consultations at the national and regional levels. We also 
> propose to use the ICANN meeting in June 2010 as an opportunity for a 
> high level gathering that would allow all stakeholders to appreciate 
> progress achieved.
>
> 9) French Authorities finally want to seize the opportunity to 
> reaffirm that beyond the evolution of ICANN and the naming and 
> addressing system, reflections must be continued in all relevant fora 
> to develop a global Internet governance in conformity with the 
> principles and commitments of the World Summit on the Information Society.
>
> -------------------------------
>
> http://www.diplomatie.gouv.fr/fr/actions-france_830/internet-tic_1038/tic-pour-developpement_5332/evolution-icann-bernard-kouchner-nathalie-kosciusko-morizet-appellent-une-gouvernance-mieux-partagee-internet-02.10.09_76766.html
>
>   
>
>
>     Evolution de l'ICANN : Bernard Kouchner et Nathalie
>     Kosciusko-Morizet appellent à une gouvernance mieux partagée de
>     l'Internet (2 octobre 2009)
>
> Illust: 7.9 ko, 100x159
>
>
>
> Illust: 5.2 ko, 100x103
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *Communiqué de Bernard Kouchner et de Nathalie Kosciusko-Morizet*
>
> La France considère *essentiel le maintien de l'unité du réseau 
> Internet* et a toujours soutenu que *la responsabilité de garantir sa 
> sécurité et sa stabilité* ne pouvait échoir à un seul gouvernement ou 
> à une seule organisation privée. C'est pourquoi elle appelle depuis 
> plusieurs années à une prise en compte des intérêts et des 
> recommandations des gouvernements du monde entier dans la gestion de 
> cette infrastructure vitale et désormais partagée par tous qu'est 
> devenu Internet. Le ministre des Affaires étrangères et la Secrétaire 
> d'Etat à la Prospective et au Développement de l'économie numérique 
> saluent en conséquence *les réels progrès contenus dans le nouvel 
> accord (Affirmation of Commitments) signé entre le Département du 
> Commerce américain et l'ICANN le 30 septembre dernier.*
>
> La France a participé activement à *l'élaboration d'une position 
> commune européenne sur ce sujet, et elle partage la vision de la 
> présidence suédoise de l'UE*, qui porte une appréciation globalement 
> positive sur ce nouvel accord conférant plus d'autonomie à l'ICANN et 
> proposant de nouvelles modalités pour renforcer sa transparence et sa 
> responsabilité.
>
> Bernard Kouchner et Nathalie Kosciusko-Morizet appellent à *une 
> conduite rapide du processus de réforme de l'ICANN,* désormais face à 
> des responsabilités accrues. Cette organisation doit être plus que 
> jamais ouverte à tous les acteurs (entreprises, ONG, universités, 
> gouvernements) et ses décisions doivent être le reflet d'un consensus 
> mondial comme l'est l'Internet.
>
> L'implication du gouvernement français dans l'atteinte des objectifs 
> fixés par le Sommet Mondial sur la Société de l'Information pour une 
> gouvernance de l'Internet multilatérale, transparente et démocratique, 
> ne se limite pour autant pas à la seule ICANN.
>
> Aussi, le ministre des Affaires étrangères et européennes et la 
> Secrétaire d'Etat à la Prospective et au Développement de l'économie 
> Numérique rappellent à cette occasion que *la France entend participer 
> très activement à une réflexion d'ensemble, notamment à l'occasion du 
> prochain forum sur la gouvernance de l'Internet,* qui se tiendra à 
> Charm el-Cheikh en novembre 2009.
>
> Cette rencontre internationale traitera de la gestion du système des 
> noms de domaines et de bien d'autres sujets cruciaux comme 
> l'harmonisation des standards de protection des données personnelles 
> sur Internet et la neutralité du réseau.
>
>
> - *Déclaration française : Evolution de l'ICANN après la fin du Joint 
> Project Agreement (JPA)*
>
> * La France accueille avec intérêt la déclaration conjointe 
> (Affirmation of Commitments) publiée ce jour par le Département du 
> Commerce et l'Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers, par 
> laquelle l'ICANN s'engage à développer les réformes institutionnelles 
> nécessaires à son bon fonctionnement. Il s'agit d'une évolution 
> positive. La France participera activement aux processus de 
> concertation qui seront mis en place pour traduire cette vision dans 
> les faits et est prête, avec ses partenaires Européens, à les 
> faciliter, comme indiqué dans la déclaration publique de la présidence 
> suédoise de l'Union Européenne. *
>
> 1) L'Internet est une infrastructure partagée à l'échelle mondiale 
> désormais essentielle au fonctionnement de nos sociétés. Le système de 
> noms de domaines et d'adresses sur lequel il repose doit donc être 
> géré dans une perspective d'intérêt public global, en veillant au 
> respect des droits des citoyens, à la diversité des expressions ainsi 
> qu'à la sauvegarde de la sécurité des systèmes d'information.
>
> 2) Dans ce contexte, la France accueille avec intérêt la déclaration 
> conjointe (Affirmation of Commitments) faite le 30 septembre 2009 par 
> le Département du Commerce américain et l'ICANN relative à l'avenir du 
> système de nommage et adressage Internet, et en particulier la 
> réaffirmation de la dimension d'intérêt public de la mission qu'assume 
> l'ICANN dans la gestion de cette ressource publique globale.
>
> 3) Le nouveau contexte créé par la fin du Joint Project Agreement 
> confère désormais à l'ICANN une responsabilité accrue pour conduire 
> dans les prochains mois les réformes institutionnelles nécessaires 
> pour rendre l'organisation pleinement multi-acteurs et internationale, 
> et mettre en place les mécanismes assurant sa responsabilité vis-à-vis 
> de l'ensemble des parties prenantes.
>
> 4) La Déclaration Conjointe prévoit entre autres de confier à des 
> panels dédiés et non plus à la seule administration américaine 
> l'indispensable évaluation périodique des performances de cette 
> organisation. Cette évolution est positive et a France participera 
> activement à la réflexion sur les modalités pratiques de mise en 
> oeuvre de cette proposition, qui détermineront son efficacité réelle.
>
> 5) Au-delà de ce dispositif, la France réaffirme la nécessité d'un 
> renforcement du rôle des gouvernements dans les mécanismes de 
> gouvernance de l'Internet, et particulièrement au sein de l'ICANN, 
> afin qu'ils assument leur part de responsabilité dans la gestion des 
> ressources publiques mondiales de l'Internet.
>
> 6) Afin de mettre en oeuvre dans les meilleurs délais les nouveaux 
> mécanismes de responsabilité de l'ICANN, il lui appartient d'initier, 
> au plus tard lors de sa réunion de Séoul, un processus large et 
> inclusif de consultation, permettant notamment de finaliser lors de sa 
> seconde réunion de l'année 2010 une version révisée de sa charte 
> constitutive.
>
> 7) L'ICANN devrait utiliser les forums internationaux existants - et 
> particulièrement le Forum sur la Gouvernance Internet issu du Sommet 
> mondial des Nations-Unies sur la Société de l'Information - pour 
> annoncer cette démarche et inviter les acteurs ne participant pas 
> habituellement aux travaux de l'organisation à se joindre à cet effort 
> commun.
>
> 8) La France, en coordination avec ses partenaires européens, est 
> prête à contribuer à la facilitation de ce processus et en particulier 
> à l'organisation de consultations ouvertes au niveau national et 
> régional. Elle propose en outre que la réunion de l'ICANN en Juin 2010 
> soit l'occasion d'une rencontre à haut niveau permettant à l'ensemble 
> des acteurs d'évaluer les progrès accomplis.
>
> 9) La France saisit enfin cette occasion pour réaffirmer qu'au-delà de 
> l'évolution de l'ICANN et du système de nommage et d'adressage, la 
> réflexion doit se poursuivre dans les enceintes appropriées pour 
> développer une gouvernance mondiale de l'Internet conforme aux 
> principes et aux engagements du Sommet Mondial sur la Société de 
> l'Information.
>
> -- 
>
> ------------------------------------------------------ 
> Francis F. MUGUET Ph.D 
>
> MDPI Foundation Open Access Journals
> http://www.mdpi.org   http://www.mdpi.net
> muguet at mdpi.org       muguet at mdpi.net
>
> KNIS http://knis.org
> Academic Collaboration / University of Geneva
> http://syinf.unige.ch/recherche/cooperation
>
>
> Mobile France       +33 6 71 91 42 10
>        Switzerland  +41 78 927 06 97
>        Cameroun    +237 96 55 69 62 ( mostly in July )
>
> World Summit On the Information Society (WSIS)
> Civil Society Working Groups
> Scientific Information :  http://www.wsis-si.org  chair 
> Patents & Copyrights   :  http://www.wsis-pct.org co-chair
> Financing Mechanismns  :  http://www.wsis-finance.org web
> Info. Net. Govermance  :  http://www.wsis-gov.org  web
>
> NET4D : http://www.net4D.org 
> UNMSP : http://www.unmsp.org 
> WTIS : http://www.wtis.org   REUSSI : http://www.reussi.org
> ------------------------------------------------------ 
>   
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20091003/b394ba6a/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 8091 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20091003/b394ba6a/attachment.jpe>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 5371 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20091003/b394ba6a/attachment-0001.jpe>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/gif
Size: 83 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20091003/b394ba6a/attachment.gif>
-------------- 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

From roland at internetpolicyagency.com  Sat Oct  3 15:01:38 2009
From: roland at internetpolicyagency.com (Roland Perry)
Date: Sat, 3 Oct 2009 20:01:38 +0100
Subject: [governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation of Commitments
In-Reply-To: <76f819dd0910030740v206a4661xcd43ea4ae54d2483@mail.gmail.com>
References: <75822E125BCB994F8446858C4B19F0D78FFC6E09@SUEX07-MBX-04.ad.syr.edu>
 <CD78E288-CEDE-4E1E-809E-39F1F591AD75@graduateinstitute.ch>
 <75822E125BCB994F8446858C4B19F0D78FFC6E16@SUEX07-MBX-04.ad.syr.edu>
 <14BF930C-49AF-4C16-A982-58A6BF8685D0@graduateinstitute.ch>
 <1254397157.3941.611.camel@anriette-laptop> <3QZdNroLCQxKFAts@perry.co.uk>
 <76f819dd0910011242u2d26722eg4cac8f606ece0282@mail.gmail.com>
 <rBdKJCua0QxKFAve@perry.co.uk>
 <76f819dd0910021037o36cd6b7aj9c8d7454ca116cc2@mail.gmail.com>
 <y8DcmVKiokxKFAvp@perry.co.uk>
 <76f819dd0910030740v206a4661xcd43ea4ae54d2483@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <LjfihqAS+5xKFA5l@perry.co.uk>

In message 
<76f819dd0910030740v206a4661xcd43ea4ae54d2483 at mail.gmail.com>, at 
10:40:20 on Sat, 3 Oct 2009, Paul Lehto <lehto.paul at gmail.com> writes
>Charities can attempt to, sometimes even succeed in acting in the
>public interest.  However, the true public, the only legitimate source
>of political authority, has NO RECOURSE

In the UK we have an organisation called the Charity Commissioners, who 
provide quite a lot of oversight.

>if the charity mistakenly feels that, for example, a private internet 
>will trickle down public benefits and a public internet with rights is 
>undesirable.

Very few charities are operating in the Internet space.

>The bottom line is the shift, of tectonic importance here, where the
>admittedly too narrow and attenuated accountability of the Commerce
>Department/ICANN to the US public purports to be eliminated in favor
>of what ICANN calls "independence."  In turn, "independence" means
>there's ZERO RECOURSE.

That'll be a big disappointment to a lot of people, if true,

>the situation is now much worse because there's no
>accountability to anyone anywhere

What, not even the Review Teams? (The accountability might not be 
perfect, few things are, but they exist).

> and no mechanism to manufacture accountability to the global 
>community. (unless this giveaway and abdication of authority is 
>challenged)

So you don't think the proposed scheme delivers any of that?

R.

>Paul Lehto, Juris Doctor
>On 10/2/09, Roland Perry <roland at internetpolicyagency.com> wrote:
>> In message
>> <76f819dd0910021037o36cd6b7aj9c8d7454ca116cc2 at mail.gmail.com>, at
>> 13:37:38 on Fri, 2 Oct 2009, Paul Lehto <lehto.paul at gmail.com> writes
>>>Although nonprofits are definitely much more public-interest minded, at
>>>the end of the day no nonprofit can legitimately claim to represent the
>>>PUBLIC INTEREST -- only democratically elected politicians can do that,
>>>and only if they are behaving correctly as well.
>>
>> So you don't think any charities can possibly act in the public
>> interest?
>> --
>> Roland Perry
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> 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
>>
>
>

-- 
Roland Perry
____________________________________________________________
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


From jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com  Sat Oct  3 15:59:55 2009
From: jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com (Jeffrey A. Williams)
Date: Sat, 3 Oct 2009 14:59:55 -0500 (GMT-05:00)
Subject: [governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation of Commitments
Message-ID: <21947256.1254599995816.JavaMail.root@mswamui-cedar.atl.sa.earthlink.net>

Roland and all,

  My response interspersed below...

-----Original Message-----
>From: Roland Perry <roland at internetpolicyagency.com>
>Sent: Oct 3, 2009 2:01 PM
>To: governance at lists.cpsr.org
>Subject: Re: [governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation of Commitments
>
>In message 
><76f819dd0910030740v206a4661xcd43ea4ae54d2483 at mail.gmail.com>, at 
>10:40:20 on Sat, 3 Oct 2009, Paul Lehto <lehto.paul at gmail.com> writes
>>Charities can attempt to, sometimes even succeed in acting in the
>>public interest.  However, the true public, the only legitimate source
>>of political authority, has NO RECOURSE
>
>In the UK we have an organisation called the Charity Commissioners, who 
>provide quite a lot of oversight.
Yes, but does the Charity Commissioners have any real clout or force
of law of any sort?  My guess is no and not on a multijurisdictional
basis either which leaves them to be mostly a limp noodle.
>
>>if the charity mistakenly feels that, for example, a private internet 
>>will trickle down public benefits and a public internet with rights is 
>>undesirable.
>
>Very few charities are operating in the Internet space.
I disagree, many Charity organizations olerate on the internet.
>
>>The bottom line is the shift, of tectonic importance here, where the
>>admittedly too narrow and attenuated accountability of the Commerce
>>Department/ICANN to the US public purports to be eliminated in favor
>>of what ICANN calls "independence."  In turn, "independence" means
>>there's ZERO RECOURSE.
>
>That'll be a big disappointment to a lot of people, if true,

Well it's largely true.
>
>>the situation is now much worse because there's no
>>accountability to anyone anywhere
>
>What, not even the Review Teams? (The accountability might not be 
>perfect, few things are, but they exist).

Accountability means that whatever recourse has to have teeth
to be effective, otherwise such models to which you refer are
all roar and no bite.
>
>> and no mechanism to manufacture accountability to the global 
>>community. (unless this giveaway and abdication of authority is 
>>challenged)
>
>So you don't think the proposed scheme delivers any of that?

I don't, no.
>
>R.
>
>>Paul Lehto, Juris Doctor
>>On 10/2/09, Roland Perry <roland at internetpolicyagency.com> wrote:
>>> In message
>>> <76f819dd0910021037o36cd6b7aj9c8d7454ca116cc2 at mail.gmail.com>, at
>>> 13:37:38 on Fri, 2 Oct 2009, Paul Lehto <lehto.paul at gmail.com> writes
>>>>Although nonprofits are definitely much more public-interest minded, at
>>>>the end of the day no nonprofit can legitimately claim to represent the
>>>>PUBLIC INTEREST -- only democratically elected politicians can do that,
>>>>and only if they are behaving correctly as well.
>>>
>>> So you don't think any charities can possibly act in the public
>>> interest?
>>> --
>>> Roland Perry
>>> ____________________________________________________________
>>> 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
>>>
>>
>>
>
>-- 
>Roland Perry
>____________________________________________________________
>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,

Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 294k members/stakeholders strong!)
"Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" -
   Abraham Lincoln

"Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is very
often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt

"If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; liability
depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
United States v. Carroll Towing  (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
===============================================================
Updated 1/26/04
CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS. div. of
Information Network Eng.  INEG. INC.
ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com
Phone: 214-244-4827

____________________________________________________________
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


From jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com  Sat Oct  3 16:24:50 2009
From: jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com (Jeffrey A. Williams)
Date: Sat, 3 Oct 2009 15:24:50 -0500 (GMT-05:00)
Subject: [governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation of Commitments
Message-ID: <11536711.1254601490348.JavaMail.root@mswamui-cedar.atl.sa.earthlink.net>

Roland and all,

-----Original Message-----
>From: Roland Perry <roland at internetpolicyagency.com>
>Sent: Oct 3, 2009 12:59 AM
>To: governance at lists.cpsr.org
>Subject: Re: [governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation of Commitments
>
>In message 
><17957550.1254516531501.JavaMail.root at elwamui-hybrid.atl.sa.earthlink.net
> >, at 15:48:51 on Fri, 2 Oct 2009, Jeffrey A. Williams 
><jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com> writes
>>Roland and all,
>>
>>  I believe Paul already covered the ground to which
>>you are quering, see below: "only democratically elected
>>politicians can do that, and only if they are behaving
>>correctly as well."  "behaving correctly and well" being
>>the specific language to which your query relates.
>
>Even by "behaving well" you cannot act in the public interest when the 
>public are split 50:50 regarding what their interests are.

We don't know where the public is at any given point in time unless
we take a poll or vote of a representative sample.  Ergo assuming that
there is a 50:50 split is not even an accurate assumption but rather
an opinion. 
>
>If the "public interest" according to one set of politicians is to go to 
>war over oil, and according to a different set is to avoid going to war 
>over oil; how is that resolved (for the supporters of the losing side) 
>after an election?

It is or was resolved in your example by recognizing that majority
rules, even if you or I don't like the outcome.
>
>>  Certainly in the US as in Canada, and the UK, elected
>>representitives are significantly unpopular as has been
>>widely reported and polls have shown time an time again.
>>Citizens are partly responsible for taking the time to
>>keep their elected representatives accountable by
>>communicating with them their concerns frequently, directly
>>as possible, and pointedly to their areas of concern.  Occaisonally
>>perhaps reminding them that your vote for them in the next
>>election may be in the ballance accordingly.
>>
>>-----Original Message-----
>
>>>I've never seen quite such a close linkage being made between public
>>>interest and elected politicians. After many elections around half the
>>>electorate won't find the politicians acting in their interest. Is there
>>>some benchmark for how much of the public has to have its interests
>>>served by the particular flavour of elected politicians, in the context
>>>of the remarks here?
>
>-- 
>Roland Perry
>____________________________________________________________
>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,

Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 294k members/stakeholders strong!)
"Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" -
   Abraham Lincoln

"Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is very
often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt

"If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; liability
depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
United States v. Carroll Towing  (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
===============================================================
Updated 1/26/04
CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS. div. of
Information Network Eng.  INEG. INC.
ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com
Phone: 214-244-4827

____________________________________________________________
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


From jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com  Sat Oct  3 16:33:47 2009
From: jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com (Jeffrey A. Williams)
Date: Sat, 3 Oct 2009 15:33:47 -0500 (GMT-05:00)
Subject: [governance] Corporations Now Have a Right To "Personal Privacy"
Message-ID: <211473.1254602027502.JavaMail.root@mswamui-cedar.atl.sa.earthlink.net>

All,

  Well there went openess and transparency in the commercial
sector.  
See:http://yro.slashdot.org/firehose.pl?op=view&type=story&sid=09/10/02/1251203

https://secure.eff.org/site/SPageServer?pagename=DON_splash
I Don't Believe in Imaginary Property writes "Thanks to a 
http://www.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/084024p.pdf recent
ruling (PDF) by the US Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit,
http://privacylaw.proskauer.com/2009/09/articles/foia/since-when-does-a-legal-entity-have-privacy-rights/ corporations now have a right to 'personal privacy,' due to the
application of a carelessly worded definition in the Freedom of
Information Act. FOIA exempts disclosure of certain records, but only if
it 'could reasonably be expected to constitute an unwarranted invasion of
personal privacy.' But in its definitions, FOIA makes the mistake of
broadly defining 'person' to include legal entities, like corporations.
The FCC didn't think that 'personal privacy' could apply to a
corporation, so they ignored AT&T's claim that releasing data from an
investigation into how AT&T was overcharging certain customers would
violate the corporation's privacy. The Third Circuit thought that the
FCC's actions were contrary to what the law actually says. So now the FCC
has to jump through more hoops to show that releasing data on their
investigation into AT&T's overcharging is 'warranted' within the meaning
of http://codes.lp.findlaw.com/uscode/5/I/5/II/552 
5 USC 552(b)(7)(c) before it can release anything."

Regards,

Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 294k members/stakeholders strong!)
"Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" -
   Abraham Lincoln

"Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is very
often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt

"If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; liability
depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
United States v. Carroll Towing  (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
===============================================================
Updated 1/26/04
CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS. div. of
Information Network Eng.  INEG. INC.
ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com
Phone: 214-244-4827




Regards,

Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 294k members/stakeholders strong!)
"Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" -
   Abraham Lincoln

"Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is very
often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt

"If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; liability
depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
United States v. Carroll Towing  (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
===============================================================
Updated 1/26/04
CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS. div. of
Information Network Eng.  INEG. INC.
ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com
Phone: 214-244-4827

____________________________________________________________
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


From gurstein at gmail.com  Sat Oct  3 20:14:16 2009
From: gurstein at gmail.com (Michael Gurstein)
Date: Sat, 3 Oct 2009 17:14:16 -0700
Subject: [governance] FW: [IRP] Please provide your input on the impact
 of the IGF
In-Reply-To: <320067.74768.qm@web83912.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <6B869DF34F1346A4A0C64665F65E69EE@userPC>

As a matter of fact, yes... Having a group of people with some detailed
knowledge and experience in an area such as this would seem to me to be a
positive value... The difficulty comes in if that group is not sufficiently
diverse or representative of the range of those with an interest in
(interests in) the area (i.e. "suitable"...  which of course, has been the
basis of my critique/commentary on the IGF from the beginning.
 
MBG

-----Original Message-----
From: Eric Dierker [mailto:cogitoergosum at sbcglobal.net] 
Sent: Monday, September 14, 2009 11:02 PM
To: governance at lists.cpsr.org; Michael Gurstein
Subject: Re: [governance] FW: [IRP] Please provide your input on the impact
of the IGF



What do you mean by this paragraph. Are you stating that a "suitable" cadre
is a positive impact?
--- On Tue, 9/15/09, Michael Gurstein  <mailto:gurstein at gmail.com>
wrote:">gurstein at gmail.com> wrote:


 
 
Rather the significance of the IGF should be seen in terms of how it has
directly and indirectly contributed to the creation of a basis for
concensus, a language for discussion, a (suitable) cadre of informed people
to carry on the discussion (it is here where I have my issues with the
current IGF but I won't go into those further at this point), the provision
of a venue for the undertaking of the discussions and so on and so on.  None
of this is particularly "national" (in fact little of it is likely to be
national which is the point I think of transnational agencies) and little of
it is likely to be visible as concrete "impacts" (or even outputs--which is
what is currently being discussed in the form of possible IGF
"recommendations" etc.). So a quest for
identification/assessment/determination of "impacts" is really beside the
point.
 

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20091003/20f8f14f/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

From roland at internetpolicyagency.com  Sun Oct  4 02:36:02 2009
From: roland at internetpolicyagency.com (Roland Perry)
Date: Sun, 4 Oct 2009 07:36:02 +0100
Subject: [governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation of Commitments
In-Reply-To: <21947256.1254599995816.JavaMail.root@mswamui-cedar.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
References: <21947256.1254599995816.JavaMail.root@mswamui-cedar.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <nec5eGBSJEyKFAXr@perry.co.uk>

In message 
<21947256.1254599995816.JavaMail.root at mswamui-cedar.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
, at 14:59:55 on Sat, 3 Oct 2009, Jeffrey A. Williams 
<jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com> writes

>>In the UK we have an organisation called the Charity Commissioners, who
>>provide quite a lot of oversight.
>Yes, but does the Charity Commissioners have any real clout or force
>of law of any sort?  My guess is no

They are currently "striking off" a number of fee-paying schools because 
those schools are not considered "charitable enough" (there is some 
debate what this exactly means, but it probably includes giving a 
certain number of sponsored places to disadvantaged families, as well as 
allowing their facilities, such as sports fields, to be used by the 
wider community outside teaching hours). If they lose the charitable 
status, there are tax implications.

>and not on a multijurisdictional basis

Not sure what you men by that.

>>>undesirable.
>>
>>Very few charities are operating in the Internet space.
>I disagree, many Charity organizations olerate on the internet.

Many have a promotional website, but few are involved in the Internet 
Community. One reason for that is funders (other charities, trusts, 
legacies etc) have not yet caught up with the concept that charities 
generally operate at physical places, for the benefit of particular 
physical communities, and well known bricks-and-mortar benefits.

eg "We have funds for charities running soup kitchens[#1] for the 
unemployed[#2] in the East End of London[#3]". Fail any of the three 
tests and you won't qualify for that particular funding.

I'm currently involved in a project to try to break that particular mold 
(no, not the Nominet Foundation, but a potential recipient of funds).

>>>the situation is now much worse because there's no
>>>accountability to anyone anywhere
>>
>>What, not even the Review Teams? (The accountability might not be
>>perfect, few things are, but they exist).
>
>Accountability means that whatever recourse has to have teeth
>to be effective, otherwise such models to which you refer are
>all roar and no bite.

Is it not the community's responsibility to make sure they have teeth? 
Or at the very least monitor this new process and document its dental 
capability in practice?

-- 
Roland Perry
____________________________________________________________
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


From roland at internetpolicyagency.com  Sun Oct  4 02:42:27 2009
From: roland at internetpolicyagency.com (Roland Perry)
Date: Sun, 4 Oct 2009 07:42:27 +0100
Subject: [governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation of Commitments
In-Reply-To: <11536711.1254601490348.JavaMail.root@mswamui-cedar.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
References: <11536711.1254601490348.JavaMail.root@mswamui-cedar.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <RO80aGCTPEyKFARf@perry.co.uk>

In message 
<11536711.1254601490348.JavaMail.root at mswamui-cedar.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
, at 15:24:50 on Sat, 3 Oct 2009, Jeffrey A. Williams 
<jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com> writes

>>Even by "behaving well" you cannot act in the public interest when the
>>public are split 50:50 regarding what their interests are.
>
>We don't know where the public is at any given point in time unless
>we take a poll or vote of a representative sample.  Ergo assuming that
>there is a 50:50 split is not even an accurate assumption but rather
>an opinion.

It is a hypothetical example. And should be considered in that context. 
Imagine an election where that was the main debating point, and one side 
only just won.

>>If the "public interest" according to one set of politicians is to go to
>>war over oil, and according to a different set is to avoid going to war
>>over oil; how is that resolved (for the supporters of the losing side)
>>after an election?
>
>It is or was resolved in your example by recognizing that majority
>rules, even if you or I don't like the outcome.

The problem with that is that the majority is volatile as a measure of 
that. Look at this week's referendum in Ireland regarding the Lisbon 
Treaty. That's a document with implications measured in generations. And 
yet one short year later, when the vote was re-run, the voters 
completely reversed their opinion on the issue. I doubt the underlying 
"public interest" has changed that much.

Anyway, in the Internet Community we prefer to do things by consensus, 
rather than voting.
-- 
Roland Perry
____________________________________________________________
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


From pwilson at apnic.net  Sun Oct  4 04:24:58 2009
From: pwilson at apnic.net (Paul Wilson)
Date: Sun, 04 Oct 2009 18:24:58 +1000
Subject: [governance] Congratulations
In-Reply-To: <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A871959F@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
References: <259838.32621.qm@web83914.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
 <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A871959F@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
Message-ID: <AC0D23797AFB070838084CFF@as-paul-l-1813.local>

Reminds me of ECO '92, UNCED, or the United Nations Earth Summit in Rio, 
where Carlos Afonso's organisation Alternex was instrumental in bringing in 
one of the first permanent Internet connections (64kbps I think) in the 
country. Numerous APC folk, including Ian Peter and myself, were there to 
help, promoting the wonders of this new technology to delegates at the 
Summit.

It's nice to see we've come a little way since then.

Paul



--On 2 October 2009 8:56:49 PM +0200 "\"Kleinwächter, Wolfgang\"" 
<wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de> wrote:

> To all our Barzilian members:
>
> Congratulations to the 2016 Olympics in Rio. This will be Olympic Games
> which can be followed not only by TV and radio but by billions of
> Internet Users worldwide. Lets waoit and see how Rio comes with new
> Internet innovations until 2016. :-)))
> Wolfgang
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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



________________________________________________________________________
Paul Wilson, Director-General, APNIC                      <dg at apnic.net>
http://www.apnic.net                            ph/fx +61 7 3858 3100/99

____________________________________________________________
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


From glaser at nic.br  Sun Oct  4 08:41:33 2009
From: glaser at nic.br (Hartmut Richard Glaser)
Date: Sun, 04 Oct 2009 09:41:33 -0300
Subject: [governance] Congratulations
In-Reply-To: <45E85E26-AD2D-42E7-8271-1B7F254C628E@graduateinstitute.ch>
References: <259838.32621.qm@web83914.mail.sp1.yahoo.com> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A871959F@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> <4AC745D9.9080108@nic.br> <45E85E26-AD2D-42E7-8271-1B7F254C628E@graduateinstitute.ch>
Message-ID: <4AC897FD.3080906@nic.br>


Hi William,

Thanks for the congrats ...!

Next time (2020) will be the chance for an european city ...!

... and Chicago will have a chance again at 2024.

All the best

Hartmut

======================================================

William Drake wrote:
> Hi
>
> Having publicly declared myself to be a native Chicagoan and guessed 
> that Obama's staff might actually know what they were doing this time, 
> I guess it's incumbent upon me to say congrats to our Brazilian 
> colleagues as well.  Even folks raised on blues and beer love samba 
> and caipirinhas...
>
> Cheers,
>
> Bill
>
> PS: Congrats to Dr. Shtern as well...
>
>
>
> On Oct 3, 2009, at 2:38 PM, Hartmut Glaser wrote:
>
>>
>> Hi Wolfgang,
>>
>> Thanks for the congratulations.
>> "Lets wait and see how Rio comes with new Internet innovations 
>> until 2016. :-)))"
>>
>> Big surprise  ;-) ..., wait ..., wait ..., you will see  :-) !!!
>> All the best
>>
>> Hartmut
>>
>> P.S.:
>> ... any special meaning in writing "BAR-zilian" ???
>>
>> ===================================================
>> On 02/10/2009 15:56, Kleinwächter, Wolfgang wrote:
>>> To all our Barzilian members:
>>>  
>>> Congratulations to the 2016 Olympics in Rio. This will be Olympic Games which can be followed not only by TV and radio but by billions of Internet Users worldwide. Lets waoit and see how Rio comes with new Internet innovations until 2016. :-)))
>>>  
>>> Wolfgang 
>>> ____________________________________________________________
>>> 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 <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>
>>
>> For all list information and functions, see:
>>     http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance
>
> ***********************************************************
> William J. Drake
> Senior Associate
> Centre for International Governance
> Graduate Institute of International and
>  Development Studies
> Geneva, Switzerland
> william.drake at graduateinstitute.ch 
> <mailto:william.drake at graduateinstitute.ch>
> www.graduateinstitute.ch/cig/drake.html
> ***********************************************************
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20091004/987ef035/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

From cogitoergosum at sbcglobal.net  Sun Oct  4 11:06:01 2009
From: cogitoergosum at sbcglobal.net (Eric Dierker)
Date: Sun, 4 Oct 2009 08:06:01 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [governance] FW: [IRP] Please provide your input on the impact
 of the IGF
In-Reply-To: <6B869DF34F1346A4A0C64665F65E69EE@userPC>
Message-ID: <713262.23595.qm@web83908.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>

Your are specifically avoiding the point.  Define suitable.  Just what it means to you is fine.

--- On Sun, 10/4/09, Michael Gurstein <gurstein at gmail.com> wrote:


From: Michael Gurstein <gurstein at gmail.com>
Subject: RE: [governance] FW: [IRP] Please provide your input on the impact of the IGF
To: "'Eric Dierker'" <cogitoergosum at sbcglobal.net>, governance at lists.cpsr.org
Date: Sunday, October 4, 2009, 12:14 AM



As a matter of fact, yes... Having a group of people with some detailed knowledge and experience in an area such as this would seem to me to be a positive value... The difficulty comes in if that group is not sufficiently diverse or representative of the range of those with an interest in (interests in) the area (i.e. "suitable"...  which of course, has been the basis of my critique/commentary on the IGF from the beginning.
 
MBG


-----Original Message-----
From: Eric Dierker [mailto:cogitoergosum at sbcglobal.net] 
Sent: Monday, September 14, 2009 11:02 PM
To: governance at lists.cpsr.org; Michael Gurstein
Subject: Re: [governance] FW: [IRP] Please provide your input on the impact of the IGF






What do you mean by this paragraph. Are you stating that a "suitable" cadre is a positive impact?
--- On Tue, 9/15/09, Michael Gurstein gurstein at gmail.com> wrote:



 
 
Rather the significance of the IGF should be seen in terms of how it has directly and indirectly contributed to the creation of a basis for concensus, a language for discussion, a (suitable) cadre of informed people to carry on the discussion (it is here where I have my issues with the current IGF but I won't go into those further at this point), the provision of a venue for the undertaking of the discussions and so on and so on.  None of this is particularly "national" (in fact little of it is likely to be national which is the point I think of transnational agencies) and little of it is likely to be visible as concrete "impacts" (or even outputs--which is what is currently being discussed in the form of possible IGF "recommendations" etc.). So a quest for identification/assessment/determination of "impacts" is really beside the point.
 

 
-----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/20091004/2ed3f731/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

From gurstein at gmail.com  Sun Oct  4 11:18:41 2009
From: gurstein at gmail.com (Michael Gurstein)
Date: Sun, 4 Oct 2009 08:18:41 -0700
Subject: [governance] FW: [IRP] Please provide your input on the impact
 of the IGF
In-Reply-To: <713262.23595.qm@web83908.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <C276704094BC44F9B739B2710E28A6D0@userPC>

Hmmm... That's precisely what I've done... "a (diverse) group of people with
some detailed knowledge and experience in an area such as this"
 
MBG

-----Original Message-----
From: Eric Dierker [mailto:cogitoergosum at sbcglobal.net] 
Sent: Sunday, October 04, 2009 8:06 AM
To: governance at lists.cpsr.org; Michael Gurstein
Subject: RE: [governance] FW: [IRP] Please provide your input on the impact
of the IGF


Your are specifically avoiding the point.  Define suitable.  Just what it
means to you is fine.

--- On Sun, 10/4/09, Michael Gurstein <gurstein at gmail.com> wrote:




From: Michael Gurstein <gurstein at gmail.com>
Subject: RE: [governance] FW: [IRP] Please provide your input on the impact
of the IGF
To: "'Eric Dierker'" <cogitoergosum at sbcglobal.net>,
governance at lists.cpsr.org
Date: Sunday, October 4, 2009, 12:14 AM


As a matter of fact, yes... Having a group of people with some detailed
knowledge and experience in an area such as this would seem to me to be a
positive value... The difficulty comes in if that group is not sufficiently
diverse or representative of the range of those with an interest in
(interests in) the area (i.e. "suitable"...  which of course, has been the
basis of my critique/commentary on the IGF from the beginning.
 
MBG

-----Original Message-----
From: Eric Dierker [mailto:cogitoergosum at sbcglobal.net] 
Sent: Monday, September 14, 2009 11:02 PM
To: governance at lists.cpsr.org; Michael Gurstein
Subject: Re: [governance] FW: [IRP] Please provide your input on the impact
of the IGF



What do you mean by this paragraph. Are you stating that a "suitable" cadre
is a positive impact?
--- On Tue, 9/15/09, Michael Gurstein
<http://us.mc807.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=gurstein at gmail.com> wrote:"
rel=nofollow target=_blank ymailto="mailto:gurstein at gmail.com>
wrote:">gurstein at gmail.com> wrote:


 
 
Rather the significance of the IGF should be seen in terms of how it has
directly and indirectly contributed to the creation of a basis for
concensus, a language for discussion, a (suitable) cadre of informed people
to carry on the discussion (it is here where I have my issues with the
current IGF but I won't go into those further at this point), the provision
of a venue for the undertaking of the discussions and so on and so on.  None
of this is particularly "national" (in fact little of it is likely to be
national which is the point I think of transnational agencies) and little of
it is likely to be visible as concrete "impacts" (or even outputs--which is
what is currently being discussed in the form of possible IGF
"recommendations" etc.). So a quest for
identification/assessment/determination of "impacts" is really beside the
point.
 

 


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


____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.cpsr.org
<http://us.mc807.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=governance at lists.cpsr.org> 
To be removed from the list, send any message to:
     governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org
<http://us.mc807.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=governance-unsubscribe at lists.c
psr.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/20091004/8e164505/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

From maxsenges at gmail.com  Sun Oct  4 11:19:18 2009
From: maxsenges at gmail.com (Max Senges)
Date: Sun, 4 Oct 2009 17:19:18 +0200
Subject: [governance] Collabowriting: Charter of Human Rights and
 Principles on the Internet
Message-ID: <4d976d8e0910040819y5b36ab4t6bf2770a171b6a54@mail.gmail.com>

Dear IGClers

The Internet Rights and Principles coalition has partnered with APC to work
on a "Charter of Human Rights and Principles on the Internet", which is
based on and updates the 2006 version of APC's Internet Rights Charter
(IRC)<http://www.apc.org/en/pubs/briefs/apc-internet-rights-charter%7CAPC>

It would be great if you could contribute to this initiative, which is now
in it's crucial phase (first drafting round till Oct. 15th - second Nov.
1.).

You can find all information @ http://irc.wiki.apc.org/

If you have further questions please write to Robert Bodle (
Robert_Bodle at mail.msj.edu), who has kindly agreed to coordinate our
collabowriting efforts.

Yours,
Max
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20091004/d4f8bc6e/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

From nkeshav42 at yahoo.com  Sun Oct  4 12:40:26 2009
From: nkeshav42 at yahoo.com (Keshava Nireshwalia)
Date: Sun, 4 Oct 2009 09:40:26 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [governance] Congratulations
In-Reply-To: <4AC897FD.3080906@nic.br>
Message-ID: <610767.4341.qm@web112003.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>

Congrats!


Prof. Keshava Nireshwalia,M.Sc.,M.Ed.,D.F.P.Tech.,M.I.S.T.E.,
Consultant, Trainer & Auditor ISO 9001,17025,14000,18000, 22000,etc.
Reliance Advisor No.20095240;  Tel: 91-821-2342612; Mob: 094818 14418.
Visiting Professor, JSS University, Mysore; 
Life Member, MCC & Industries/APFS/AMI/NSI/AFST(I)/ISTD,etc.

--- On Sun, 10/4/09, Hartmut Richard Glaser <glaser at nic.br> wrote:

From: Hartmut Richard Glaser <glaser at nic.br>
Subject: Re: [governance] Congratulations
To: "William Drake" <william.drake at graduateinstitute.ch>
Cc: governance at lists.cpsr.org
Date: Sunday, October 4, 2009, 6:11 PM




  


Hi William,



Thanks for the congrats ...!



Next time (2020) will be the chance for an european city ...! 



... and Chicago will have a chance again at 2024.



All the best



Hartmut



======================================================



William Drake wrote:
Hi
  

  
  Having publicly declared myself to be a native Chicagoan and
guessed that Obama's staff might actually know what they were doing
this time, I guess it's incumbent upon me to say congrats to our
Brazilian colleagues as well.  Even folks raised on blues and beer
love samba and caipirinhas...
  

  
  Cheers,
  

  
  Bill
  

  
  PS: Congrats to Dr. Shtern as well...
  

  
  

  
  

  
  On Oct 3, 2009, at 2:38 PM, Hartmut Glaser wrote:
  

  
    

    Hi Wolfgang,

    

Thanks for the congratulations.

    
    "Lets wait and see how Rio comes with new Internet innovations 
until 2016. :-)))"

Big surprise  ;-) ..., wait ..., wait ..., you will see  :-) !!!

    All the best

    

Hartmut

    

P.S.:

... any special meaning in writing "BAR-zilian" ???

    

===================================================

On 02/10/2009 15:56, Kleinwächter, Wolfgang wrote:
    
      To all our Barzilian members:
 
Congratulations to the 2016 Olympics in Rio. This will be Olympic Games which can be followed not only by TV and radio but by billions of Internet Users worldwide. Lets waoit and see how Rio comes with new Internet innovations until 2016. :-)))
 
Wolfgang 
____________________________________________________________
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

  
  
  

  ***********************************************************

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

***********************************************************

  

  
  

  

 

-----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/20091004/c4fd13a4/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

From tracyhackshaw at gmail.com  Sun Oct  4 13:27:50 2009
From: tracyhackshaw at gmail.com (Tracy F. Hackshaw @ Google)
Date: Sun, 4 Oct 2009 13:27:50 -0400
Subject: [governance] Congratulations
In-Reply-To: <4AC897FD.3080906@nic.br>
References: <259838.32621.qm@web83914.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
	 <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A871959F@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
	 <4AC745D9.9080108@nic.br>
	 <45E85E26-AD2D-42E7-8271-1B7F254C628E@graduateinstitute.ch>
	 <4AC897FD.3080906@nic.br>
Message-ID: <808a83f60910041027l2698b417h56784f2acce6a0f4@mail.gmail.com>

Congrats to LATAM!!!

I would suggest that Africa, or perhaps even Pacific Rim/Austrailasia (i.e.
including New Zealand, and as opposed to traditional Asia) get the
opportunity before Europe in 2020.

Note Barcelona 1992, Athens 2004 and London 2012.

Imagine the games being held in Cairo or even home of the major distance
running nations - Kenya or Ethiopia.

These countries need our support!!

On Sun, Oct 4, 2009 at 8:41 AM, Hartmut Richard Glaser <glaser at nic.br>wrote:

>
> Hi William,
>
> Thanks for the congrats ...!
>
> Next time (2020) will be the chance for an european city ...!
>
> ... and Chicago will have a chance again at 2024.
>
> All the best
>
> Hartmut
>
> ======================================================
>
>
> William Drake wrote:
>
> Hi
> Having publicly declared myself to be a native Chicagoan and guessed that
> Obama's staff might actually know what they were doing this time, I guess
> it's incumbent upon me to say congrats to our Brazilian colleagues as well.
>  Even folks raised on blues and beer love samba and caipirinhas...
>
> Cheers,
>
> Bill
>
> PS: Congrats to Dr. Shtern as well...
>
>
>
>  On Oct 3, 2009, at 2:38 PM, Hartmut Glaser wrote:
>
>
> Hi Wolfgang,
>
> Thanks for the congratulations.
>
> "Lets wait and see how Rio comes with new Internet innovations
> until 2016. :-)))"
>
> Big surprise  ;-) ..., wait ..., wait ..., you will see  :-) !!!
>
> All the best
>
> Hartmut
>
> P.S.:
> ... any special meaning in writing "BAR-zilian" ???
>
> ===================================================
> On 02/10/2009 15:56, Kleinwächter, Wolfgang wrote:
>
> To all our Barzilian members:
>
> Congratulations to the 2016 Olympics in Rio. This will be Olympic Games which can be followed not only by TV and radio but by billions of Internet Users worldwide. Lets waoit and see how Rio comes with new Internet innovations until 2016. :-)))
>
> Wolfgang
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
>
>
> ***********************************************************
> 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
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20091004/77316b38/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

From jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com  Sun Oct  4 16:18:01 2009
From: jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com (Jeffrey A. Williams)
Date: Sun, 4 Oct 2009 15:18:01 -0500 (GMT-05:00)
Subject: [governance] Congratulations
Message-ID: <22884542.1254687481403.JavaMail.root@elwamui-lapwing.atl.sa.earthlink.net>

An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20091004/0c57b797/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

From jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com  Sun Oct  4 16:21:51 2009
From: jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com (Jeffrey A. Williams)
Date: Sun, 4 Oct 2009 15:21:51 -0500 (GMT-05:00)
Subject: [governance] FW: [IRP] Please provide your input on the impact
Message-ID: <861329.1254687711172.JavaMail.root@elwamui-lapwing.atl.sa.earthlink.net>

An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20091004/c9adf5bc/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

From jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com  Sun Oct  4 16:27:31 2009
From: jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com (Jeffrey A. Williams)
Date: Sun, 4 Oct 2009 15:27:31 -0500 (GMT-05:00)
Subject: [governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation of Commitments
Message-ID: <8219420.1254688051488.JavaMail.root@elwamui-lapwing.atl.sa.earthlink.net>

Roland and all,

-----Original Message-----
>From: Roland Perry <roland at internetpolicyagency.com>
>Sent: Oct 4, 2009 1:42 AM
>To: governance at lists.cpsr.org
>Subject: Re: [governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation of Commitments
>
>In message 
><11536711.1254601490348.JavaMail.root at mswamui-cedar.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
>, at 15:24:50 on Sat, 3 Oct 2009, Jeffrey A. Williams 
><jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com> writes
>
>>>Even by "behaving well" you cannot act in the public interest when the
>>>public are split 50:50 regarding what their interests are.
>>
>>We don't know where the public is at any given point in time unless
>>we take a poll or vote of a representative sample.  Ergo assuming that
>>there is a 50:50 split is not even an accurate assumption but rather
>>an opinion.
>
>It is a hypothetical example. And should be considered in that context. 
>Imagine an election where that was the main debating point, and one side 
>only just won.
>
>>>If the "public interest" according to one set of politicians is to go to
>>>war over oil, and according to a different set is to avoid going to war
>>>over oil; how is that resolved (for the supporters of the losing side)
>>>after an election?
>>
>>It is or was resolved in your example by recognizing that majority
>>rules, even if you or I don't like the outcome.
>
>The problem with that is that the majority is volatile as a measure of 
>that. Look at this week's referendum in Ireland regarding the Lisbon 
>Treaty. That's a document with implications measured in generations. And 
>yet one short year later, when the vote was re-run, the voters 
>completely reversed their opinion on the issue. I doubt the underlying 
>"public interest" has changed that much.

  I don't.  Opinions change rapidly and dramatically in part as
a result of better information proliferation which the Internet has
played a major role.  As more is known and understood about any issue
or in fact legislation regarding an issue by the body politic that is
Internet connected and believes they may be effected, their opinions
and subsequent votes change accordingly and usually in Internet time,
which as you have your self made note of, very rapid indeed.
>
>Anyway, in the Internet Community we prefer to do things by consensus, 
>rather than voting.

Consensus without measure is not a consensus, but a guess.  
>-- 
>Roland Perry
>____________________________________________________________
>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,

Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 294k members/stakeholders strong!)
"Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" -
   Abraham Lincoln

"Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is very
often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt

"If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; liability
depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
United States v. Carroll Towing  (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
===============================================================
Updated 1/26/04
CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS. div. of
Information Network Eng.  INEG. INC.
ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com
Phone: 214-244-4827

____________________________________________________________
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


From jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com  Sun Oct  4 16:40:48 2009
From: jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com (Jeffrey A. Williams)
Date: Sun, 4 Oct 2009 15:40:48 -0500 (GMT-05:00)
Subject: [governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation of Commitments
Message-ID: <26395.1254688848208.JavaMail.root@elwamui-lapwing.atl.sa.earthlink.net>

Roland and all,

-----Original Message-----
>From: Roland Perry <roland at internetpolicyagency.com>
>Sent: Oct 4, 2009 1:36 AM
>To: governance at lists.cpsr.org
>Subject: Re: [governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation of Commitments
>
>In message 
><21947256.1254599995816.JavaMail.root at mswamui-cedar.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
>, at 14:59:55 on Sat, 3 Oct 2009, Jeffrey A. Williams 
><jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com> writes
>
>>>In the UK we have an organisation called the Charity Commissioners, who
>>>provide quite a lot of oversight.
>>Yes, but does the Charity Commissioners have any real clout or force
>>of law of any sort?  My guess is no
>
>They are currently "striking off" a number of fee-paying schools because 
>those schools are not considered "charitable enough" (there is some 
>debate what this exactly means, but it probably includes giving a 
>certain number of sponsored places to disadvantaged families, as well as 
>allowing their facilities, such as sports fields, to be used by the 
>wider community outside teaching hours). If they lose the charitable 
>status, there are tax implications.

Yes I've seen much of this debate in the House of commons in questons
to the PM on C-Span several times.  Seems that this is a political
football/soccor ball in the UK.  Very unfortunate.  
>
>>and not on a multijurisdictional basis
>
>Not sure what you men by that.
>
>>>>undesirable.
>>>
>>>Very few charities are operating in the Internet space.
>>I disagree, many Charity organizations olerate on the internet.
>
>Many have a promotional website, but few are involved in the Internet 
>Community. One reason for that is funders (other charities, trusts, 
>legacies etc) have not yet caught up with the concept that charities 
>generally operate at physical places, for the benefit of particular 
>physical communities, and well known bricks-and-mortar benefits.

Funding models on the Internet by Charities are often used.  I recieve
many such requests from varried Charities nearly every day such 
Africa Action for instance.  So you'll excuse me but your claim here
rings rather hallow from my experiance.
>
>eg "We have funds for charities running soup kitchens[#1] for the 
>unemployed[#2] in the East End of London[#3]". Fail any of the three 
>tests and you won't qualify for that particular funding.

These should not be pre-conditions for tax exempt status or government
funding, nor IMHO funding from private sources necessarly unless those
sources of funding are spicifically targeting where their donated funds
are to go or be used for.
>
>I'm currently involved in a project to try to break that particular mold 
>(no, not the Nominet Foundation, but a potential recipient of funds).

Good!  Send me some will ya!  >:)  A couple thousand quid will do for now.
>
>>>>the situation is now much worse because there's no
>>>>accountability to anyone anywhere
>>>
>>>What, not even the Review Teams? (The accountability might not be
>>>perfect, few things are, but they exist).
>>
>>Accountability means that whatever recourse has to have teeth
>>to be effective, otherwise such models to which you refer are
>>all roar and no bite.
>
>Is it not the community's responsibility to make sure they have teeth? 

To a degree yes it is in part the communities responsibility.  But that
ability to exercise that responsibility is limited of course.  Government
entities and commercial entities also part of any community also bare
a implied responsibility as well, and government should at least be
aiding in facilitating thsoe entities to step up as it were.

>Or at the very least monitor this new process and document its dental 
>capability in practice?

Yes here also of course.  Diligance is very important, especially
from the public at large.
>
>-- 
>Roland Perry
>____________________________________________________________
>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,

Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 294k members/stakeholders strong!)
"Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" -
   Abraham Lincoln

"Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is very
often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt

"If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; liability
depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
United States v. Carroll Towing  (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
===============================================================
Updated 1/26/04
CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS. div. of
Information Network Eng.  INEG. INC.
ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com
Phone: 214-244-4827

____________________________________________________________
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


From dogwallah at gmail.com  Sun Oct  4 17:38:01 2009
From: dogwallah at gmail.com (McTim)
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 2009 00:38:01 +0300
Subject: [governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation of Commitments
In-Reply-To: <76f819dd0910030755o34f8b96s248c063f0eb02f1b@mail.gmail.com>
References: <75822E125BCB994F8446858C4B19F0D78FFC6E09@SUEX07-MBX-04.ad.syr.edu>
	 <75822E125BCB994F8446858C4B19F0D78FFC6E16@SUEX07-MBX-04.ad.syr.edu>
	 <14BF930C-49AF-4C16-A982-58A6BF8685D0@graduateinstitute.ch>
	 <1254397157.3941.611.camel@anriette-laptop>
	 <3QZdNroLCQxKFAts@perry.co.uk>
	 <76f819dd0910011242u2d26722eg4cac8f606ece0282@mail.gmail.com>
	 <rBdKJCua0QxKFAve@perry.co.uk>
	 <76f819dd0910021037o36cd6b7aj9c8d7454ca116cc2@mail.gmail.com>
	 <f65fb55e0910021228n628b6055lc2ec6b6914567bcc@mail.gmail.com>
	 <76f819dd0910030755o34f8b96s248c063f0eb02f1b@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <f65fb55e0910041438j62b277d2s19a6c67c6688dd9b@mail.gmail.com>

Paul,

Please find my answers inline:

On Sat, Oct 3, 2009 at 5:55 PM, Paul Lehto <lehto.paul at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 10/2/09, McTim <dogwallah at gmail.com> wrote:
<snip>

>
> Tim, ask yourself the question of what recourse or power do internet
> users or anyone else have over ICANN?

That easy.  To help shape Internet policy making under the ICANN
umbrella, one must get involved in ICANN in one way or another.

http://public.icann.org/

The average Internet user isn't really interested I'm afraid, but
pleny of ppl are.

As for "recourse or power", I think you need to understand how the
Internet is coordinated.  It always has been a multiplayer system,
coordinated by thousands of folks working in many different
organisational processes, such as ISOC/IETF, RSOs, RIRs, IAB, IESG,
W3C, etc, etc using freely accessible policy development processes.

It's not about "power" or coercive "control", it works via consensus,
collaboration and coordination.

ICANN plays a very small part in all this, yet it gets the most heat
and light.  ICANN is not a king, it's just one player among many.  The
idea of ICANN was always to be independent, it just took a decade.


 It is totally irrelevant what
> ICANN says, or even if it says all the right things, they've announced
> themselves "independent" and are therefore beyond all control, beyond
> all recourse, and beyond all accountability.
>

not at all, they have just successfully terminated the JPA.  One
(beyond all accountability) doesn't necessarily follow from another
(independence from the USG).

If you are looking for a US gov't "stick", there is still the IANA
contract (recently renewed).

> Indeed, why should ICANN listen to anybody if there's no fundamental
> check and balance?

ah, but there is/are.  ICANN doesn't operate in a vacuum. There is a
web of interrelated organisations all working together and keeping an
eye on one another (in a collegial, cooperative way).

When one does something unpopular however, it is kept in check (see
Sitefinder for a recent example).

 I could (purely fanciful here) set up myself as
> king of this listserv and at least initially purport to be very
> broadminded and tolerant and adopt ideas of others.  But at all times,
> as long as the notion that i'm an independent king is accepted,

but of course, it wouldn't be (accepted), would it, so that's just silly.


I can
> do anything I want to and there's nothing remotely effective anybody
> can do about it, except to leave the list.  There's a huge difference
> between living under a "philosopher king" who recognizes the fact that
> nobody wants to be ruled but fails to publicly recognize the
> contradiction involved when the "philosopher" king eliminates
> elections by the public - the only legitimate source of ultimate
> political authority.

Coordinating Internet technical resources is an administrative
process.  I find that eliminating a layer of misdirection
(politicians) and allowing people to become directly involved in these
processes is more purely democratic.


-- 
Cheers,

McTim
"A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A
route indicates how we get there."  Jon Postel
____________________________________________________________
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


From tracyhackshaw at gmail.com  Sun Oct  4 18:42:27 2009
From: tracyhackshaw at gmail.com (Tracy F. Hackshaw @ Google)
Date: Sun, 4 Oct 2009 18:42:27 -0400
Subject: [governance] Congratulations
In-Reply-To: <22884542.1254687481403.JavaMail.root@elwamui-lapwing.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
References: <22884542.1254687481403.JavaMail.root@elwamui-lapwing.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <808a83f60910041542t69aaf89en9c795294de8c398a@mail.gmail.com>

I'm not sure where you live Jeffrey - but I have one simple response -
Digital Inclusion.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/8222873.stm
http://www.knightcentercommunityconnection.org/london-2012-an-olympic-size-test-for-broadband-networks/

http://www.ngopulse.org/thetha



On Sun, Oct 4, 2009 at 4:18 PM, Jeffrey A. Williams
<jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com>wrote:

>  Tracy and all,
>
>
>
>   Perhaps so, but what does this have to do with IT governance?
>
>
>   -----Original Message-----
> From: "Tracy F. Hackshaw @ Google"
> Sent: Oct 4, 2009 12:27 PM
> To: governance at lists.cpsr.org, Hartmut Richard Glaser
> Subject: Re: [governance] Congratulations
>
> Congrats to LATAM!!!
>
> I would suggest that Africa, or perhaps even Pacific Rim/Austrailasia (i.e.
> including New Zealand, and as opposed to traditional Asia) get the
> opportunity before Europe in 2020.
>
> Note Barcelona 1992, Athens 2004 and London 2012.
>
> Imagine the games being held in Cairo or even home of the major distance
> running nations - Kenya or Ethiopia.
>
> These countries need our support!!
>
> On Sun, Oct 4, 2009 at 8:41 AM, Hartmut Richard Glaser <glaser at nic.br>wrote:
>
>>
>> Hi William,
>>
>> Thanks for the congrats ...!
>>
>> Next time (2020) will be the chance for an european city ...!
>>
>> ... and Chicago will have a chance again at 2024.
>>
>> All the best
>>
>> Hartmut
>>
>> ======================================================
>>
>>
>> William Drake wrote:
>>
>> Hi
>> Having publicly declared myself to be a native Chicagoan and guessed that
>> Obama's staff might actually know what they were doing this time, I guess
>> it's incumbent upon me to say congrats to our Brazilian colleagues as well.
>>  Even folks raised on blues and beer love samba and caipirinhas...
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Bill
>>
>> PS: Congrats to Dr. Shtern as well...
>>
>>
>>
>>  On Oct 3, 2009, at 2:38 PM, Hartmut Glaser wrote:
>>
>>
>> Hi Wolfgang,
>>
>> Thanks for the congratulations.
>>
>> "Lets wait and see how Rio comes with new Internet innovations
>> until 2016. :-)))"
>>
>> Big surprise  ;-) ..., wait ..., wait ..., you will see  :-) !!!
>>
>> All the best
>>
>> Hartmut
>>
>> P.S.:
>> ... any special meaning in writing "BAR-zilian" ???
>>
>> ===================================================
>> On 02/10/2009 15:56, Kleinwächter, Wolfgang wrote:
>>
>> To all our Barzilian members:
>>
>> Congratulations to the 2016 Olympics in Rio. This will be Olympic Games which can be followed not only by TV and radio but by billions of Internet Users worldwide. Lets waoit and see how Rio comes with new Internet innovations until 2016. :-)))
>>
>> Wolfgang
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> 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
>>
>>
>> ***********************************************************
>> 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
>>
>>
> Regards,
>
> Jeffrey A. Williams
> Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 294k members/stakeholders strong!)
> "Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" -
>    Abraham Lincoln
>
> "Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is very
> often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt
>
> "If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B;
> liability
> depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
> P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
> United States v. Carroll Towing  (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
> ===============================================================
> Updated 1/26/04
> CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS. div. of
> Information Network Eng.  INEG. INC.
> ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail
> jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com
> Phone: 214-244-4827
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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/20091004/2234117d/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

From vanda at uol.com.br  Sun Oct  4 20:14:30 2009
From: vanda at uol.com.br (Vanda Scartezini)
Date: Sun, 4 Oct 2009 21:14:30 -0300
Subject: [governance] Congratulations
In-Reply-To: <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A871959F@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
References: <259838.32621.qm@web83914.mail.sp1.yahoo.com> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A871959F@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
Message-ID: <013201ca4550$d24073e0$76c15ba0$@com.br>

Thanks Wolfgang. Rio is my home town so I am very glad with this chance
though we have a LOT to do, but the world cup in 2014 will help to be more
prepared.  Hope we will have lots of Germans here with us, including you!
kisses
Vanda Scartezini
POLO Consultores Associados
&  IT Trend
Alameda Santos 1470 cjs 1407/8
01418-903 Sao Paulo,SP.
Fone + 55 11 3266.6253
Mob + 5511 8181.1464


-----Original Message-----
From: "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang"
[mailto:wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de] 
Sent: Friday, October 02, 2009 3:57 PM
To: governance at lists.cpsr.org
Subject: [governance] Congratulations

To all our Barzilian members:
 
Congratulations to the 2016 Olympics in Rio. This will be Olympic Games
which can be followed not only by TV and radio but by billions of Internet
Users worldwide. Lets waoit and see how Rio comes with new Internet
innovations until 2016. :-)))
 
Wolfgang 
____________________________________________________________
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


From ca at cafonso.ca  Sun Oct  4 20:21:36 2009
From: ca at cafonso.ca (Carlos A. Afonso)
Date: Sun, 04 Oct 2009 21:21:36 -0300
Subject: [governance] Congratulations
In-Reply-To: <AC0D23797AFB070838084CFF@as-paul-l-1813.local>
References: <259838.32621.qm@web83914.mail.sp1.yahoo.com> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A871959F@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> <AC0D23797AFB070838084CFF@as-paul-l-1813.local>
Message-ID: <4AC93C10.80704@cafonso.ca>

Thanks, mate! After Wolf's message, I cannot stop thinking about what
the Net and media will be in seven years, and how this will reflect in
the 2016 Olympics.

--c.a.

Paul Wilson wrote:
> Reminds me of ECO '92, UNCED, or the United Nations Earth Summit in Rio,
> where Carlos Afonso's organisation Alternex was instrumental in bringing
> in one of the first permanent Internet connections (64kbps I think) in
> the country. Numerous APC folk, including Ian Peter and myself, were
> there to help, promoting the wonders of this new technology to delegates
> at the Summit.
> 
> It's nice to see we've come a little way since then.
> 
> Paul
> 
> 
> 
> --On 2 October 2009 8:56:49 PM +0200 "\"Kleinwächter, Wolfgang\""
> <wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de> wrote:
> 
>> To all our Barzilian members:
>>
>> Congratulations to the 2016 Olympics in Rio. This will be Olympic Games
>> which can be followed not only by TV and radio but by billions of
>> Internet Users worldwide. Lets waoit and see how Rio comes with new
>> Internet innovations until 2016. :-)))
>> Wolfgang
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> 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
> 
> 
> 
> ________________________________________________________________________
> Paul Wilson, Director-General, APNIC                      <dg at apnic.net>
> http://www.apnic.net                            ph/fx +61 7 3858 3100/99
> 
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
> 

-- 

Carlos A. Afonso
CGI.br (www.cgi.br)
Nupef (www.nupef.org.br)
====================================
new/nuevo/novo e-mail: ca at cafonso.ca
====================================
____________________________________________________________
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


From katitza at datos-personales.org  Sun Oct  4 23:24:01 2009
From: katitza at datos-personales.org (Katitza Rodriguez)
Date: Sun, 4 Oct 2009 23:24:01 -0400
Subject: [governance] Congratulations
In-Reply-To: <4AC93C10.80704@cafonso.ca>
References: <259838.32621.qm@web83914.mail.sp1.yahoo.com> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A871959F@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> <AC0D23797AFB070838084CFF@as-paul-l-1813.local> <4AC93C10.80704@cafonso.ca>
Message-ID: <F10C5DD8-B4DB-4ED7-8868-463D962EE574@datos-personales.org>

  (Abstracts from Privacy & Human Rights Report. A survey of privacy  
law and developments in 78 countries. (forthcoming).

Countries that host the Olympics increasingly ignore privacy  
considerations in their preparation for the Games and beyond in the  
name of security and counterterrorism. Violations of individuals’  
privacy under constitutional, statutory, and international frameworks  
range from the loss of anonymity in public places to the inability to  
communicate and associate freely with others. The coverage and  
capabilities of Closed Circuit Television (CCTV) has risen  
dramatically from the Games in Athens, Greece to the recent ones in  
Beijing, China. Technological advances incorporate CCTV surveillance  
systems with those related to electronic wiretapping, identification  
systems, and intelligence sharing. These purported counterterrorism  
measures have been developed and implemented with the assistance of  
foreign governments, some of which claim to support transparency and  
democratic values. The record US$ 6.4 billion dollars China was spent  
on surveillance equipment for the Games in Beijing represents a  
greater than fourfold increase compared to the ones in Athens.[1] The  
damage to individuals’ privacy rights and civil liberties continues  
beyond the Closing Ceremonies.

(...)


[1] Dexter Roberts, “China: Bombings Add to Olympics Terrorism Fears,”  
BusinessWeek, July 28, 2008, available at <http://www.businessweek.com/globalbiz/content/jul2008/gb20080728_898768.htm?campaign_id=rss_daily 
 >; see also Minas Samatas, “Security and Surveillance in the Athens  
2004 Olympics”, available at <http://icj.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/17/3/220 
 >


On Oct 4, 2009, at 8:21 PM, Carlos A. Afonso wrote:

> Thanks, mate! After Wolf's message, I cannot stop thinking about what
> the Net and media will be in seven years, and how this will reflect in
> the 2016 Olympics.
>
> --c.a.
>
> Paul Wilson wrote:
>> Reminds me of ECO '92, UNCED, or the United Nations Earth Summit in  
>> Rio,
>> where Carlos Afonso's organisation Alternex was instrumental in  
>> bringing
>> in one of the first permanent Internet connections (64kbps I think)  
>> in
>> the country. Numerous APC folk, including Ian Peter and myself, were
>> there to help, promoting the wonders of this new technology to  
>> delegates
>> at the Summit.
>>
>> It's nice to see we've come a little way since then.
>>
>> Paul
>>
>>
>>
>> --On 2 October 2009 8:56:49 PM +0200 "\"Kleinwächter, Wolfgang\""
>> <wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de> wrote:
>>
>>> To all our Barzilian members:
>>>
>>> Congratulations to the 2016 Olympics in Rio. This will be Olympic  
>>> Games
>>> which can be followed not only by TV and radio but by billions of
>>> Internet Users worldwide. Lets waoit and see how Rio comes with new
>>> Internet innovations until 2016. :-)))
>>> Wolfgang
>>> ____________________________________________________________
>>> 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
>>
>>
>>
>> ________________________________________________________________________
>> Paul Wilson, Director-General, APNIC                      <dg at apnic.net 
>> >
>> http://www.apnic.net                            ph/fx +61 7 3858  
>> 3100/99
>>
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> 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
>>
>
> -- 
>
> Carlos A. Afonso
> CGI.br (www.cgi.br)
> Nupef (www.nupef.org.br)
> ====================================
> new/nuevo/novo e-mail: ca at cafonso.ca
> ====================================
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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/20091004/f2f9da5f/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

From katitza at datos-personales.org  Sun Oct  4 23:34:20 2009
From: katitza at datos-personales.org (Katitza Rodriguez)
Date: Sun, 4 Oct 2009 23:34:20 -0400
Subject: [governance] Congratulations
In-Reply-To: <F10C5DD8-B4DB-4ED7-8868-463D962EE574@datos-personales.org>
References: <259838.32621.qm@web83914.mail.sp1.yahoo.com> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A871959F@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> <AC0D23797AFB070838084CFF@as-paul-l-1813.local> <4AC93C10.80704@cafonso.ca> <F10C5DD8-B4DB-4ED7-8868-463D962EE574@datos-personales.org>
Message-ID: <B37E60A6-4DBD-4A7D-A4C0-BB0D69E10368@datos-personales.org>

(Abstracts from Privacy & Human Rights Report. A survey of privacy law  
and developments in 78 countries. (forthcoming).

Athens 2004


Greece’s security preparations cost approximately US$ 1.2 billion  
dollars and involved assistance from the Olympic Advisory Group,  
consisting of seven nations.[1] Their foreign expertise related to  
military and counterterrorism capabilities and prior Olympic Games. 
[2]  For example, the United States National Geospatial-Intelligence  
Agency provided satellite imagery of the rapidly changing Athens  
infrastructure prior to the Games.[3] After the Athens Games, the U.S.  
Government Accountability Office recommended that security agencies  
centralize their resources by “collocating intelligence and  
interagency operations centers.”[4]



For the 2004 Olympic Games in Athens, law enforcement authorities and  
intelligence agencies used over 1,000 surveillance cameras.[5] The  
Hellenic Data Protection Authority (DPA) allowed the police to use the  
CCTV system only during the Olympics[6] with legal preconditions  
related to location, notice, and data retention.[7] After repeatedly  
approving extensions for CCTV use in public places, in 2006, the DPA  
found that the police breached the terms of use (Decision 57/2006)  
that limited the use of cameras to high traffic roads (Decision  
63/2004).[8]



Also, the DPA fined Vodafone Greece after public reports detailed the  
tapping of prominent Greek leaders’ mobile phones.[9] Vodafone and  
Ericsson, the mobile phone and software providers, respectively,  
revealed that unknown parties intercepted the wireless communications  
from more than 100 mobile phones from the beginning of the Olympics  
until March 2005.[10]



A dispute were held between the Data Protection Authority on one side,  
and the Police plans to use the CCTVs cameras (installed for the  
Athens Olympics to monitor traffic) to monitor public gatherings such  
as protests.[11] In October 2007, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of  
the police’s plan.[12] Furtheremore, an amendment of the Data  
Protection Act that exclude the CCTV cameras from the scope of the  
Data Protection Act was passed.[13]



In 2007, Greek Data Protection Authorities collectively resigned. The  
DPA issued a statement “charging that the police ‘flagrantly violated’  
the Data Protection Law, which require the cameras to be used only for  
monitoring traffic and not people.”[14] The most notable Decision of  
the new DPA (and their members) was reached in March 2008, allowing  
crime prevention authorities to acquire phone records from  
telecommunications operators while carrying out their investigations  
without notifying the individuals concerned.[15]


[1] Government Accountability Office, Olympic Security: U.S. Support  
to Athens Games Provides

Lessons for Future Olympics 5-6, GAO-05-547, May 2005, available at <http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d05547.pdf 
 > (the Olympic Advisory Group consisted of Australia, France, German,  
Israel, Spain, the United Kingdom, and the United States).

[2] Id.

[3] See id. at 14.

[4] Id. at 22.

[5] “Athens to Be on Full Alert for Games,” The Ottawa Citizen,  
November, 24, 2000.

[6] “Privacy Watchdog Approve Use of Street Camera, But Only During  
Games,” Kathimerini, May 5, 2004.

[7] E-mail from Fereniki Panagopoulou, to Cedric Laurant, Policy  
Counsel, Electronic Privacy Information Center, June 25, 2004 (on file  
with EPIC). See also Hellenic Data Protection Authority, Decision  
28/03.05.2004, available at <http://www.dpa.gr/decs.htm> (in Greek).

[8] Greek DPA website, available at <http://www.dpa.gr/portal/page?_pageid=33,15048&_dad=portal&_schema=PORTAL 
 >.

[9] Greek Privacy Watchdog Fines Vodaphone Over Wiretapping Scandal,  
International Herald Tribune Europe, December 14, 2006, available at <http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2006/12/14/europe/EU_GEN_Greece_Wiretaps_Vodaphone.php 
 >.

[10] Id.

[11] Law No.3625/2007.

[12] Christine Pirovolakis, “Greek Privacy Chief Resigns in Protest  
Over Camera Monitoring of Demonstrators,” BNA. Privacy Law & Security,  
Volume 6, Number 47, December 3, 2007, available at <http:// 
www.bna.com>.

[13] Law No.3625/2007.

[14] Christine Pirovolakis, “Greek Privacy Chief Resigns in Protest  
Over Camera Monitoring of Demonstrators,” BNA, Privacy Law & Security,  
Volume 6 Number 47, December 3, 2007, available at <http://www.bna.com>.

[15] Decision No.19/2008.

On Oct 4, 2009, at 11:24 PM, Katitza Rodriguez wrote:

>  (Abstracts from Privacy & Human Rights Report. A survey of privacy  
> law and developments in 78 countries. (forthcoming).
>
> Countries that host the Olympics increasingly ignore privacy  
> considerations in their preparation for the Games and beyond in the  
> name of security and counterterrorism. Violations of individuals’  
> privacy under constitutional, statutory, and international  
> frameworks range from the loss of anonymity in public places to the  
> inability to communicate and associate freely with others. The  
> coverage and capabilities of Closed Circuit Television (CCTV) has  
> risen dramatically from the Games in Athens, Greece to the recent  
> ones in Beijing, China. Technological advances incorporate CCTV  
> surveillance systems with those related to electronic wiretapping,  
> identification systems, and intelligence sharing. These purported  
> counterterrorism measures have been developed and implemented with  
> the assistance of foreign governments, some of which claim to  
> support transparency and democratic values. The record US$ 6.4  
> billion dollars China was spent on surveillance equipment for the  
> Games in Beijing represents a greater than fourfold increase  
> compared to the ones in Athens.[1] The damage to individuals’  
> privacy rights and civil liberties continues beyond the Closing  
> Ceremonies.
>
> (...)
>
>
> [1] Dexter Roberts, “China: Bombings Add to Olympics Terrorism  
> Fears,” BusinessWeek, July 28, 2008, available at <http://www.businessweek.com/globalbiz/content/jul2008/gb20080728_898768.htm?campaign_id=rss_daily 
> >; see also Minas Samatas, “Security and Surveillance in the Athens  
> 2004 Olympics”, available at <http://icj.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/17/3/220 
> >
>
>
> On Oct 4, 2009, at 8:21 PM, Carlos A. Afonso wrote:
>
>> Thanks, mate! After Wolf's message, I cannot stop thinking about what
>> the Net and media will be in seven years, and how this will reflect  
>> in
>> the 2016 Olympics.
>>
>> --c.a.
>>
>> Paul Wilson wrote:
>>> Reminds me of ECO '92, UNCED, or the United Nations Earth Summit  
>>> in Rio,
>>> where Carlos Afonso's organisation Alternex was instrumental in  
>>> bringing
>>> in one of the first permanent Internet connections (64kbps I  
>>> think) in
>>> the country. Numerous APC folk, including Ian Peter and myself, were
>>> there to help, promoting the wonders of this new technology to  
>>> delegates
>>> at the Summit.
>>>
>>> It's nice to see we've come a little way since then.
>>>
>>> Paul
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --On 2 October 2009 8:56:49 PM +0200 "\"Kleinwächter, Wolfgang\""
>>> <wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de> wrote:
>>>
>>>> To all our Barzilian members:
>>>>
>>>> Congratulations to the 2016 Olympics in Rio. This will be Olympic  
>>>> Games
>>>> which can be followed not only by TV and radio but by billions of
>>>> Internet Users worldwide. Lets waoit and see how Rio comes with new
>>>> Internet innovations until 2016. :-)))
>>>> Wolfgang
>>>> ____________________________________________________________
>>>> 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
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ________________________________________________________________________
>>> Paul Wilson, Director-General, APNIC                      <dg at apnic.net 
>>> >
>>> http://www.apnic.net                            ph/fx +61 7 3858  
>>> 3100/99
>>>
>>> ____________________________________________________________
>>> 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
>>>
>>
>> -- 
>>
>> Carlos A. Afonso
>> CGI.br (www.cgi.br)
>> Nupef (www.nupef.org.br)
>> ====================================
>> new/nuevo/novo e-mail: ca at cafonso.ca
>> ====================================
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> 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/20091004/0a0a296d/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

From omar at kaminski.com  Sun Oct  4 23:58:04 2009
From: omar at kaminski.com (Omar Kaminski)
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 2009 00:58:04 -0300
Subject: [governance] Congratulations
References: <259838.32621.qm@web83914.mail.sp1.yahoo.com> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A871959F@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> <AC0D23797AFB070838084CFF@as-paul-l-1813.local> <4AC93C10.80704@cafonso.ca> <F10C5DD8-B4DB-4ED7-8868-463D962EE574@datos-personales.org>
Message-ID: <DA17DF56249F44EAACDF7C5F0F026CD3@home>

As I've read somewhere, "privacy is so XX century". 

Unfortunatelly...

Regards from .br,

Omar

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Katitza Rodriguez 
  To: governance at lists.cpsr.org ; Carlos A. Afonso 
  Cc: Paul Wilson 
  Sent: Monday, October 05, 2009 00:24
  Subject: Re: [governance] Congratulations


   (Abstracts from Privacy & Human Rights Report. A survey of privacy law and developments in 78 countries. (forthcoming).

  Countries that host the Olympics increasingly ignore privacy considerations in their preparation for the Games and beyond in the name of security and counterterrorism. Violations of individuals’ privacy under constitutional, statutory, and international frameworks range from the loss of anonymity in public places to the inability to communicate and associate freely with others. The coverage and capabilities of Closed Circuit Television (CCTV) has risen dramatically from the Games in Athens, Greece to the recent ones in Beijing, China. Technological advances incorporate CCTV surveillance systems with those related to electronic wiretapping, identification systems, and intelligence sharing. These purported counterterrorism measures have been developed and implemented with the assistance of foreign governments, some of which claim to support transparency and democratic values. The record US$ 6.4 billion dollars China was spent on surveillance equipment for the Games in Beijing represents a greater than fourfold increase compared to the ones in Athens.[1] The damage to individuals’ privacy rights and civil liberties continues beyond the Closing Ceremonies.

  (...)



------------------------------------------------------------------------------

  [1] Dexter Roberts, “China: Bombings Add to Olympics Terrorism Fears,” BusinessWeek, July 28, 2008, available at <http://www.businessweek.com/globalbiz/content/jul2008/gb20080728_898768.htm?campaign_id=rss_daily>; see also Minas Samatas, “Security and Surveillance in the Athens 2004 Olympics”, available at <http://icj.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/17/3/220>



  On Oct 4, 2009, at 8:21 PM, Carlos A. Afonso wrote:


    Thanks, mate! After Wolf's message, I cannot stop thinking about what
    the Net and media will be in seven years, and how this will reflect in
    the 2016 Olympics.

    --c.a.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20091005/42d51d2f/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

From roland at internetpolicyagency.com  Mon Oct  5 03:04:31 2009
From: roland at internetpolicyagency.com (Roland Perry)
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 2009 08:04:31 +0100
Subject: [governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation of Commitments
In-Reply-To: <8219420.1254688051488.JavaMail.root@elwamui-lapwing.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
References: <8219420.1254688051488.JavaMail.root@elwamui-lapwing.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <6RHOtwK$pZyKFAEX@perry.co.uk>

In message 
<8219420.1254688051488.JavaMail.root at elwamui-lapwing.atl.sa.earthlink.net
 >, at 15:27:31 on Sun, 4 Oct 2009, Jeffrey A. Williams 
<jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com> writes
>>The problem with that is that the majority is volatile as a measure of
>>that. Look at this week's referendum in Ireland regarding the Lisbon
>>Treaty. That's a document with implications measured in generations. And
>>yet one short year later, when the vote was re-run, the voters
>>completely reversed their opinion on the issue. I doubt the underlying
>>"public interest" has changed that much.
>
>  I don't.  Opinions change rapidly and dramatically in part as
>a result of better information proliferation which the Internet has
>played a major role.  As more is known and understood about any issue
>or in fact legislation regarding an issue by the body politic that is
>Internet connected and believes they may be effected, their opinions
>and subsequent votes change accordingly and usually in Internet time,
>which as you have your self made note of, very rapid indeed.

Then you don't understand the amount of information already available to 
the population during the campaigning for these two real-world 
referendums.

>>Anyway, in the Internet Community we prefer to do things by consensus,
>>rather than voting.
>
>Consensus without measure is not a consensus, but a guess.

I'm not sure what this means.
-- 
Roland Perry
____________________________________________________________
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


From roland at internetpolicyagency.com  Mon Oct  5 03:14:09 2009
From: roland at internetpolicyagency.com (Roland Perry)
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 2009 08:14:09 +0100
Subject: [governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation of Commitments
In-Reply-To: <26395.1254688848208.JavaMail.root@elwamui-lapwing.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
References: <26395.1254688848208.JavaMail.root@elwamui-lapwing.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <yxIMV7LBzZyKFAHK@perry.co.uk>

In message 
<26395.1254688848208.JavaMail.root at elwamui-lapwing.atl.sa.earthlink.net>, 
at 15:40:48 on Sun, 4 Oct 2009, Jeffrey A. Williams 
<jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com> writes
>>Many have a promotional website, but few are involved in the Internet
>>Community. One reason for that is funders (other charities, trusts,
>>legacies etc) have not yet caught up with the concept that charities
>>generally operate at physical places, for the benefit of particular
>>physical communities, and well known bricks-and-mortar benefits.
>
>Funding models on the Internet by Charities are often used.  I recieve
>many such requests from varried Charities nearly every day such
>Africa Action for instance.

That's an example of "many have a promotional website". We seem to be in 
agreement over that.

But I'm more interested in the "few are involved in the Internet 
Community" part - and the reasons for that.

>>eg "We have funds for charities running soup kitchens[#1] for the
>>unemployed[#2] in the East End of London[#3]". Fail any of the three
>>tests and you won't qualify for that particular funding.
>
>These should not be pre-conditions for tax exempt status

They aren't, I didn't say they were!

>or government funding, nor IMHO funding from private sources necessarly 
>unless those sources of funding are spicifically targeting where their 
>donated funds are to go or be used for.

My point here is that very many funds *are* so targeted. The "Internet" 
is too new for it to be embraced by their scope yet.

>>I'm currently involved in a project to try to break that particular mold
>>(no, not the Nominet Foundation, but a potential recipient of funds).
>
>Good!  Send me some will ya!  >:)  A couple thousand quid will do for now.

I'm looking for money, not giving it out! (That's what a "potential 
recipient" is, surely?)
-- 
Roland Perry
____________________________________________________________
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


From william.drake at graduateinstitute.ch  Mon Oct  5 03:47:18 2009
From: william.drake at graduateinstitute.ch (William Drake)
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 2009 09:47:18 +0200
Subject: [governance] a faux meeting of the minds
Message-ID: <3210167A-D1E6-43D3-827F-DCFD373AB41F@graduateinstitute.ch>

Interesting how major trademark holders use (coopt?) the same sort of  
language as CS re: the AoC.  I guess capture is in the eye of the  
beholder...

http://www.cadna.org/en/newsroom/press-releases/iccan-affirmation-of-commitments-falls-short

“The Affirmation of Commitments document missed the mark by failing to  
create accountability for ICANN,” said Josh Bourne, President of  
CADNA. “The points addressed and the intent expressed in the new  
agreement touch on the many issues that are important for a stable and  
transparent Internet—however, without proper oversight and  
accountability, ICANN is not beholden to follow through on any of the  
promises made in the AOC.”...Furthermore, while the AOC calls for  
periodic internal reviews, only an independent review can provide an  
honest and objective assessment of the operations of an  
organization....“ICANN is still broken and as a regulator that has  
been captured from within, it cannot properly self-correct,” said  
Bourne. “Independent, outside pressure and accountability are needed  
to reform ICANN.”


***********************************************************
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
***********************************************************


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20091005/a82db20a/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

From jlfullsack at orange.fr  Mon Oct  5 03:53:05 2009
From: jlfullsack at orange.fr (Jean-Louis FULLSACK)
Date: Mon,  5 Oct 2009 09:53:05 +0200 (CEST)
Subject: [governance] Congratulations
In-Reply-To: <B37E60A6-4DBD-4A7D-A4C0-BB0D69E10368@datos-personales.org>
References: <259838.32621.qm@web83914.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
 <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A871959F@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
 <AC0D23797AFB070838084CFF@as-paul-l-1813.local> <4AC93C10.80704@cafonso.ca>
 <F10C5DD8-B4DB-4ED7-8868-463D962EE574@datos-personales.org>
 <B37E60A6-4DBD-4A7D-A4C0-BB0D69E10368@datos-personales.org>
Message-ID: <7042882.259581.1254729185338.JavaMail.www@wwinf1e09>


Dear Katitza

Many thanks for these very interesting comments that focus on reality and needs of the people concerned as well as their scorned civil rights. Even in Europe (cf Athens). We should also add all the corruption that prevails in the course of the Olympic Games, from the site selection through the construction of the sport places to the doped medal distribution.

IMHO there are other priorities in Brazil -as there are others in South Africa before the Football World Championship- but those who are directly concerned, i.e. the people and their organisations, just have to be the spectators ... at the TV sets. 

Remember : "Panem et Circenses" is still a hit, even (especially ?) in our .com societies. In these cases an opium for the people.

Best regards
Jean-Louis Fullsack 




> Message du 05/10/09 05:35
> De : "Katitza Rodriguez" 
> A : governance at lists.cpsr.org, "Katitza Rodriguez" 
> Copie à : "Carlos A. Afonso" , "Paul Wilson" 
> Objet : Re: [governance] Congratulations
> 
> 
(Abstracts from Privacy & Human Rights Report. A survey of privacy law and developments in 78 countries. (forthcoming).
Athens 2004
Greece’s security preparations cost approximately US$ 1.2 billion dollars and involved assistance from the Olympic Advisory Group, consisting of seven nations.[1] Their foreign expertise related to military and counterterrorism capabilities and prior Olympic Games.[2] For example, the United States National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency provided satellite imagery of the rapidly changing Athens infrastructure prior to the Games.[3] After the Athens Games, the U.S. Government Accountability Office recommended that security agencies centralize their resources by “collocating intelligence and interagency operations centers.”[4]

For the 2004 Olympic Games in Athens, law enforcement authorities and intelligence agencies used over 1,000 surveillance cameras.[5] The Hellenic Data Protection Authority (DPA) allowed the police to use the CCTV system only during the Olympics[6] with legal preconditions related to location, notice, and data retention.[7] After repeatedly approving extensions for CCTV use in public places, in 2006, the DPA found that the police breached the terms of use (Decision 57/2006) that limited the use of cameras to high traffic roads (Decision 63/2004).[8]

Also, the DPA fined Vodafone Greece after public reports detailed the tapping of prominent Greek leaders’ mobile phones.[9] Vodafone and Ericsson, the mobile phone and software providers, respectively, revealed that unknown parties intercepted the wireless communications from more than 100 mobile phones from the beginning of the Olympics until March 2005.[10] 

A dispute were held between the Data Protection Authority on one side, and the Police plans to use the CCTVs cameras (installed for the Athens Olympics to monitor traffic) to monitor public gatherings such as protests.[11] In October 2007, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of the police’s plan.[12] Furtheremore, an amendment of the Data Protection Act that exclude the CCTV cameras from the scope of the Data Protection Act was passed.[13]

In 2007, Greek Data Protection Authorities collectively resigned. The DPA issued a statement “charging that the police ‘flagrantly violated’ the Data Protection Law, which require the cameras to be used only for monitoring traffic and not people.”[14] The most notable Decision of the new DPA (and their members) was reached in March 2008, allowing crime prevention authorities to acquire phone records from telecommunications operators while carrying out their investigations without notifying the individuals concerned.[15]




[1] Government Accountability Office, Olympic Security: U.S. Support to Athens Games Provides Lessons for Future Olympics 5-6, GAO-05-547, May 2005, available at www.gao.gov/new.items/d05547.pdf> (the Olympic Advisory Group consisted of Australia, France, German, Israel, Spain, the United Kingdom, and the United States).
[2] Id.
[3] See id. at 14.
[4] Id. at 22.
[5] “Athens to Be on Full Alert for Games,” The Ottawa Citizen, November, 24, 2000.
[6] “Privacy Watchdog Approve Use of Street Camera, But Only During Games,” Kathimerini, May 5, 2004.
[7] E-mail from Fereniki Panagopoulou, to Cedric Laurant, Policy Counsel, Electronic Privacy Information Center, June 25, 2004 (on file with EPIC). See also Hellenic Data Protection Authority, Decision 28/03.05.2004, available at  (in Greek).
[8] Greek DPA website, available at .
[9] Greek Privacy Watchdog Fines Vodaphone Over Wiretapping Scandal, International Herald Tribune Europe, December 14, 2006, available at .
[10] Id.
[11] Law No.3625/2007.
[12] Christine Pirovolakis, “Greek Privacy Chief Resigns in Protest Over Camera Monitoring of Demonstrators,” BNA. Privacy Law & Security, Volume 6, Number 47, December 3, 2007, available at .
[13] Law No.3625/2007.
[14] Christine Pirovolakis, “Greek Privacy Chief Resigns in Protest Over Camera Monitoring of Demonstrators,” BNA, Privacy Law & Security, Volume 6 Number 47, December 3, 2007, available at .
[15] Decision No.19/2008.
On Oct 4, 2009, at 11:24 PM, Katitza Rodriguez wrote:


(Abstracts from Privacy & Human Rights Report. A survey of privacy law and developments in 78 countries. (forthcoming). 
Countries that host the Olympics increasingly ignore privacy considerations in their preparation for the Games and beyond in the name of security and counterterrorism. Violations of individuals’ privacy under constitutional, statutory, and international frameworks range from the loss of anonymity in public places to the inability to communicate and associate freely with others. The coverage and capabilities of Closed Circuit Television (CCTV) has risen dramatically from the Games in Athens, Greece to the recent ones in Beijing, China. Technological advances incorporate CCTV surveillance systems with those related to electronic wiretapping, identification systems, and intelligence sharing. These purported counterterrorism measures have been developed and implemented with the assistance of foreign governments, some of which claim to support transparency and democratic values. The record US$ 6.4 billion dollars China was spent on surveillance equipment for the Games in Beijing represents a greater than fourfold increase compared to the ones in Athens.[1] The damage to individuals’ privacy rights and civil liberties continues beyond the Closing Ceremonies.
(...)




[1] Dexter Roberts, “China: Bombings Add to Olympics Terrorism Fears,” BusinessWeek, July 28, 2008, available at ; see also Minas Samatas, “Security and Surveillance in the Athens 2004 Olympics”, available at 

> 
On Oct 4, 2009, at 8:21 PM, Carlos A. Afonso wrote:


Thanks, mate! After Wolf's message, I cannot stop thinking about what
> the Net and media will be in seven years, and how this will reflect in
> the 2016 Olympics.
> 
> --c.a.
> 
> Paul Wilson wrote:
> 
Reminds me of ECO '92, UNCED, or the United Nations Earth Summit in Rio,
> 
where Carlos Afonso's organisation Alternex was instrumental in bringing
> 
in one of the first permanent Internet connections (64kbps I think) in
> 
the country. Numerous APC folk, including Ian Peter and myself, were
> 
there to help, promoting the wonders of this new technology to delegates
> 
at the Summit.
> 

> 
It's nice to see we've come a little way since then.
> 

> 
Paul
> 

> 

> 

> 
--On 2 October 2009 8:56:49 PM +0200 "\"Kleinwächter, Wolfgang\""
> 
wrote:
> 

> 
To all our Barzilian members:
> 

> 
Congratulations to the 2016 Olympics in Rio. This will be Olympic Games
> 
which can be followed not only by TV and radio but by billions of
> 
Internet Users worldwide. Lets waoit and see how Rio comes with new
> 
Internet innovations until 2016. :-)))
> 
Wolfgang
> 
____________________________________________________________
> 
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
> 

> 

> 

> 
________________________________________________________________________
> 
Paul Wilson, Director-General, APNIC 
> 
http://www.apnic.net ph/fx +61 7 3858 3100/99
> 

> 
____________________________________________________________
> 
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
> 

> 

> -- 
> 
> Carlos A. Afonso
> CGI.br (www.cgi.br)
> Nupef (www.nupef.org.br)
> ====================================
> new/nuevo/novo e-mail: ca at cafonso.ca
> ====================================
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
> 

> 
>
> [ message-footer.txt (0.3 Ko) ]
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20091005/f02ce7bc/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

From ian.peter at ianpeter.com  Mon Oct  5 05:56:28 2009
From: ian.peter at ianpeter.com (Ian Peter)
Date: Mon, 05 Oct 2009 19:56:28 +1000
Subject: [governance] French official position / Position
In-Reply-To: <4AC7843C.5010203@itforchange.net>
Message-ID: <C6EFFFEC.6A48%ian.peter@ianpeter.com>

All of which makes our workshop first up on day one at Sharm on
³Transationalisation of Internet Governance ­ The way forward² pretty
interesting I think. As the main hall session at the time is Orientation, we
should get a good crowd in to discuss options and possibilities that lie
ahead. Interested in all thoughts on this ­ and also hope that many people
will come along to discuss various viewpoints and options.We definitely want
a very open session with lots of audience involvement.





On 4/10/09 3:05 AM, "Parminder" <parminder at itforchange.net> wrote:

> Thanks Muguet,
> 
> France's statement on the new agreement does show that non US countries see
> this is as an opening of a door, rather than the whole thing... It will be
> interesting to watch how this opening actually gets used. And civil society
> bodies, including IGC, may also start to look at the various possibilities
> ahead and participate in the developments as they unfold... Parminder
> 
> Dr. Francis MUGUET wrote:
>> FYI
>>  
>> English / Français infra
>>  
>>  
>> The Evolution of ICANN after the end of the Joint Project Agreement (JPA)
>>  
>>  
>> 
>> The Evolution of ICANN after the end of the Joint Project Agreement (JPA)
>>  
>> 
>>  France welcomes with interest the Affirmation of Commitments published today
>> by the Department of Commerce and the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names
>> and Numbers (ICANN), by which ICANN commits to develop the institutional
>> reforms necessary to ensure its full accountability. This is a positive
>> evolution. France will actively participate in the consultation processes to
>> be established to turn this vision into practice and is willing, in
>> concertation with its European partners, to facilitate them as indicated in
>> the public statement issued by the Swedish Presidency of the EU..
>>  
>> 
>> 1) The Internet has become a shared infrastructure critical to the proper
>> functionning of our societies at the world level. France therefore considers
>> that the naming and addressing system upon which the Internet relies must be
>> managed in a global public interest perspective, with due care given to the
>> respect of the rights of citizens, the diversity of expressions and the
>> safeguarding of the security of information systems.
>>  
>> 
>> 2) In this context, French Authorities welcome with interest the Affirmation
>> of Commitments jointly issued by the Department of Commerce and ICANN on
>> September 30th, 2009 regarding the future of the Internet naming and
>> addressing system and in particular the reaffirmation of the public trust
>> dimension of the mission fulfilled by ICANN in the management of this global
>> public resource.
>>  
>> 
>> 3) The new context produced by the end of the Joint Project Agreement imparts
>> upon ICANN an enhanced responsibility to spearhead in the coming months the
>> institutional reforms required to make the organization fully
>> multi-stakeholder and international, and to establish the mechanisms ensuring
>> its accountability to all stakeholders.
>>  
>> 
>> 4) The Affirmation of Commitments proposes, inter alia, to entrust dedicated
>> review panels - instead of the US administration only - with the necessary
>> periodic evaluation of the organization¹s performance. This is a positive
>> evolution and France will actively participate in the discussions regarding
>> the practical modalities of implementation of this proposal, as they will
>> ultimately determine its efficiency.
>>  
>> 
>> 5) Beyond this mechanism, France reaffirms the need to enhance the role of
>> Governments in the current Internet Governance mechanisms, and particularly
>> within ICANN, so that they can fully exercise their share of responsibilities
>> in the management of the global public resources of the Internet
>>  
>> 
>> 6) In order to implement in timely manner these new mechanisms of
>> accountability, ICANN should initiate, at the latest during its upcoming
>> Seoul meeting, a broad and inclusive consultation process, with a view in
>> particular to finalizing a revised version of its Bylaws during its second
>> meeting in June 2010.
>>  
>> 
>> 7) ICANN should use, as much as possible, existing international fora - in
>> particular the Internet Governance Forum set up by the United Nations World
>> Summit on Information Society- to announce this initiative and invite actors
>> not commonly participating in its activities to engage in this common effort.
>>  
>> 
>> 8) France, in coordination with its European partners, is ready to help
>> facilitate such a process, and in particular the organization of open
>> consultations at the national and regional levels. We also propose to use the
>> ICANN meeting in June 2010 as an opportunity for a high level gathering that
>> would allow all stakeholders to appreciate progress achieved.
>>  
>> 
>> 9) French Authorities finally want to seize the opportunity to reaffirm that
>> beyond the evolution of ICANN and the naming and addressing system,
>> reflections must be continued in all relevant fora to develop a global
>> Internet governance in conformity with the principles and commitments of the
>> World Summit on the Information Society.
>>  
>>  
>> -------------------------------
>> 
>> http://www.diplomatie.gouv.fr/fr/actions-france_830/internet-tic_1038/tic-pou
>> r-developpement_5332/evolution-icann-bernard-kouchner-nathalie-kosciusko-mori
>> zet-appellent-une-gouvernance-mieux-partagee-internet-02.10.09_76766.html
>> 
>>   
>>  
>> Evolution de l¹ICANN : Bernard Kouchner et Nathalie Kosciusko-Morizet
>> appellent à une gouvernance mieux partagée de l¹Internet (2 octobre 2009)
>>  
>>  
>>  
>> 
>> 
>>  
>>  
>>  
>>  
>>  
>>  
>> 
>> 
>>  
>>  
>>  
>> 
>>  
>>  
>>  
>>  
>>  
>>  
>>  
>>  
>>  
>>  
>>  
>>  
>>  
>>  
>>  Communiqué de Bernard Kouchner et de Nathalie Kosciusko-Morizet
>>  
>> 
>> La France considère essentiel le maintien de l¹unité du réseau Internet et a
>> toujours soutenu que la responsabilité de garantir sa sécurité et sa
>> stabilité ne pouvait échoir à un seul gouvernement ou à une seule
>> organisation privée. C¹est pourquoi elle appelle depuis plusieurs années à
>> une prise en compte des intérêts et des recommandations des gouvernements du
>> monde entier dans la gestion de cette infrastructure vitale et désormais
>> partagée par tous qu¹est devenu Internet. Le ministre des Affaires étrangères
>> et la Secrétaire d¹Etat à la Prospective et au Développement de l¹économie
>> numérique saluent en conséquence les réels progrès contenus dans le nouvel
>> accord (Affirmation of Commitments) signé entre le Département du Commerce
>> américain et l¹ICANN le 30 septembre dernier.
>>  
>> 
>> La France a participé activement à l¹élaboration d¹une position commune
>> européenne sur ce sujet, et elle partage la vision de la présidence suédoise
>> de l¹UE, qui porte une appréciation globalement positive sur ce nouvel accord
>> conférant plus d¹autonomie à l¹ICANN et proposant de nouvelles modalités pour
>> renforcer sa transparence et sa responsabilité.
>>  
>> 
>> Bernard Kouchner et Nathalie Kosciusko-Morizet appellent à une conduite
>> rapide du processus de réforme de l¹ICANN, désormais face à des
>> responsabilités accrues. Cette organisation doit être plus que jamais ouverte
>> à tous les acteurs (entreprises, ONG, universités, gouvernements) et ses
>> décisions doivent être le reflet d¹un consensus mondial comme l¹est
>> l¹Internet. 
>>  
>> 
>> L¹implication du gouvernement français dans l¹atteinte des objectifs fixés
>> par le Sommet Mondial sur la Société de l¹Information pour une gouvernance de
>> l¹Internet multilatérale, transparente et démocratique, ne se limite pour
>> autant pas à la seule ICANN.
>>  
>> 
>> Aussi, le ministre des Affaires étrangères et européennes et la Secrétaire
>> d¹Etat à la Prospective et au Développement de l¹économie Numérique
>> rappellent à cette occasion que la France entend participer très activement à
>> une réflexion d¹ensemble, notamment à l¹occasion du prochain forum sur la
>> gouvernance de l¹Internet, qui se tiendra à Charm el-Cheikh en novembre 2009.
>>  
>> 
>> Cette rencontre internationale traitera de la gestion du système des noms de
>> domaines et de bien d¹autres sujets cruciaux comme l¹harmonisation des
>> standards de protection des données personnelles sur Internet et la
>> neutralité du réseau.
>>  
>>  
>>   Déclaration française : Evolution de l¹ICANN après la fin du Joint Project
>> Agreement (JPA) 
>> 
>>  La France accueille avec intérêt la déclaration conjointe (Affirmation of
>> Commitments) publiée ce jour par le Département du Commerce et l¹Internet
>> Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers, par laquelle l¹ICANN s¹engage à
>> développer les réformes institutionnelles nécessaires à son bon
>> fonctionnement. Il s¹agit d¹une évolution positive. La France participera
>> activement aux processus de concertation qui seront mis en place pour
>> traduire cette vision dans les faits et est prête, avec ses partenaires
>> Européens, à les faciliter, comme indiqué dans la déclaration publique de la
>> présidence suédoise de l¹Union Européenne.
>>  
>> 
>> 1) L¹Internet est une infrastructure partagée à l¹échelle mondiale désormais
>> essentielle au fonctionnement de nos sociétés. Le système de noms de domaines
>> et d¹adresses sur lequel il repose doit donc être géré dans une perspective
>> d¹intérêt public global, en veillant au respect des droits des citoyens, à la
>> diversité des expressions ainsi qu¹à la sauvegarde de la sécurité des
>> systèmes d¹information.
>>  
>> 
>> 2) Dans ce contexte, la France accueille avec intérêt la déclaration
>> conjointe (Affirmation of Commitments) faite le 30 septembre 2009 par le
>> Département du Commerce américain et l¹ICANN relative à l¹avenir du système
>> de nommage et adressage Internet, et en particulier la réaffirmation de la
>> dimension d¹intérêt public de la mission qu¹assume l¹ICANN dans la gestion de
>> cette ressource publique globale.
>>  
>> 
>> 3) Le nouveau contexte créé par la fin du Joint Project Agreement confère
>> désormais à l¹ICANN une responsabilité accrue pour conduire dans les
>> prochains mois les réformes institutionnelles nécessaires pour rendre
>> l¹organisation pleinement multi-acteurs et internationale, et mettre en place
>> les mécanismes assurant sa responsabilité vis-à-vis de l¹ensemble des parties
>> prenantes. 
>>  
>> 
>> 4) La Déclaration Conjointe prévoit entre autres de confier à des panels
>> dédiés et non plus à la seule administration américaine l¹indispensable
>> évaluation périodique des performances de cette organisation. Cette évolution
>> est positive et a France participera activement à la réflexion sur les
>> modalités pratiques de mise en ¦uvre de cette proposition, qui détermineront
>> son efficacité réelle.
>>  
>> 
>> 5) Au-delà de ce dispositif, la France réaffirme la nécessité d¹un
>> renforcement du rôle des gouvernements dans les mécanismes de gouvernance de
>> l¹Internet, et particulièrement au sein de l¹ICANN, afin qu¹ils assument leur
>> part de responsabilité dans la gestion des ressources publiques mondiales de
>> l¹Internet. 
>>  
>> 
>> 6) Afin de mettre en oeuvre dans les meilleurs délais les nouveaux mécanismes
>> de responsabilité de l¹ICANN, il lui appartient d¹initier, au plus tard lors
>> de sa réunion de Séoul, un processus large et inclusif de consultation,
>> permettant notamment de finaliser lors de sa seconde réunion de l¹année 2010
>> une version révisée de sa charte constitutive.
>>  
>> 
>> 7) L¹ICANN devrait utiliser les forums internationaux existants - et
>> particulièrement le Forum sur la Gouvernance Internet issu du Sommet mondial
>> des Nations-Unies sur la Société de l¹Information - pour annoncer cette
>> démarche et inviter les acteurs ne participant pas habituellement aux travaux
>> de l¹organisation à se joindre à cet effort commun.
>>  
>> 
>> 8) La France, en coordination avec ses partenaires européens, est prête à
>> contribuer à la facilitation de ce processus et en particulier à
>> l¹organisation de consultations ouvertes au niveau national et régional. Elle
>> propose en outre que la réunion de l¹ICANN en Juin 2010 soit l¹occasion d¹une
>> rencontre à haut niveau permettant à l¹ensemble des acteurs d¹évaluer les
>> progrès accomplis.
>>  
>> 
>> 9) La France saisit enfin cette occasion pour réaffirmer qu¹au-delà de
>> l¹évolution de l¹ICANN et du système de nommage et d¹adressage, la réflexion
>> doit se poursuivre dans les enceintes appropriées pour développer une
>> gouvernance mondiale de l¹Internet conforme aux principes et aux engagements
>> du Sommet Mondial sur la Société de l¹Information.
>>  
>>  
>>  

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20091005/e244468b/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 8091 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20091005/e244468b/attachment.jpg>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 5371 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20091005/e244468b/attachment-0001.jpg>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image.gif
Type: image/gif
Size: 83 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20091005/e244468b/attachment.gif>
-------------- 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

From avri at acm.org  Mon Oct  5 07:05:42 2009
From: avri at acm.org (Avri Doria)
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 2009 07:05:42 -0400
Subject: [governance] a faux meeting of the minds
In-Reply-To: <3210167A-D1E6-43D3-827F-DCFD373AB41F@graduateinstitute.ch>
References: <3210167A-D1E6-43D3-827F-DCFD373AB41F@graduateinstitute.ch>
Message-ID: <8AFC39E9-88E5-4C4A-9C38-3687E9A49B1B@acm.org>

Hi,

Or maybe, as uncomfortable as it might seem, there are some views that  
are held in common between the two groups.

a.

On 5 Oct 2009, at 03:47, William Drake wrote:

> Interesting how major trademark holders use (coopt?) the same sort  
> of language as CS re: the AoC.  I guess capture is in the eye of the  
> beholder...
>
> http://www.cadna.org/en/newsroom/press-releases/iccan-affirmation-of-commitments-falls-short
>
> “The Affirmation of Commitments document missed the mark by failing  
> to create accountability for ICANN,” said Josh Bourne, President of  
> CADNA. “The points addressed and the intent expressed in the new  
> agreement touch on the many issues that are important for a stable  
> and transparent Internet—however, without proper oversight and  
> accountability, ICANN is not beholden to follow through on any of  
> the promises made in the AOC.”...Furthermore, while the AOC calls  
> for periodic internal reviews, only an independent review can  
> provide an honest and objective assessment of the operations of an  
> organization....“ICANN is still broken and as a regulator that has  
> been captured from within, it cannot properly self-correct,” said  
> Bourne. “Independent, outside pressure and accountability are needed  
> to reform ICANN.”
>
>
> ***********************************************************
> 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


From lehto.paul at gmail.com  Mon Oct  5 10:34:02 2009
From: lehto.paul at gmail.com (Paul Lehto)
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 2009 10:34:02 -0400
Subject: [governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation of Commitments
In-Reply-To: <LjfihqAS+5xKFA5l@perry.co.uk>
References: <75822E125BCB994F8446858C4B19F0D78FFC6E09@SUEX07-MBX-04.ad.syr.edu>
	 <14BF930C-49AF-4C16-A982-58A6BF8685D0@graduateinstitute.ch>
	 <1254397157.3941.611.camel@anriette-laptop>
	 <3QZdNroLCQxKFAts@perry.co.uk>
	 <76f819dd0910011242u2d26722eg4cac8f606ece0282@mail.gmail.com>
	 <rBdKJCua0QxKFAve@perry.co.uk>
	 <76f819dd0910021037o36cd6b7aj9c8d7454ca116cc2@mail.gmail.com>
	 <y8DcmVKiokxKFAvp@perry.co.uk>
	 <76f819dd0910030740v206a4661xcd43ea4ae54d2483@mail.gmail.com>
	 <LjfihqAS+5xKFA5l@perry.co.uk>
Message-ID: <76f819dd0910050734o5fbc2812k789c8232b30eac3b@mail.gmail.com>

On 10/3/09, Roland Perry <roland at internetpolicyagency.com> wrote:
>>The bottom line is the shift, of tectonic importance here, where the
>>admittedly too narrow and attenuated accountability of the Commerce
>>Department/ICANN to the US public purports to be eliminated in favor
>>of what ICANN calls "independence."  In turn, "independence" means
>>there's ZERO RECOURSE.
>
> That'll be a big disappointment to a lot of people, if true,

The above text to the right of the double carats >> is (ultimately)
undeniabily true in ICANN's opinion of itself, because it describes
itself now as "independent." An accountable employee or public servant
is by no means "independent", they are, in an important sense
"enslaved" to the public interest and subject to being removed from
power by the voters either directly or indirectly.  An organization
that is "independent" specifically of primary governmental oversight
from the USDOC is not in a subordinate position to anyone, it's
"independent."  As a free or independent organization, it doesn't have
to account to anyone except its own board and whatever it chooses to
be accountable to.

So long as one likes or can live with the policies made, one can
delude themselves or talk themselves into thinking this state of
affairs is acceptable.  But as soon as one is left out in the cold, it
will come home to them really fast that ICANN is unaccountable and
that there's zero recourse, remedy or solution to the problem except
for forms of begging (taking to the airwaves, harnessing public
opinion for what it's worth, as one does with kings or aristocrats)
and forms of retaliation (governments seeking to influence an
independent ICANN might threaten their interests in other unrelated
areas in order to promote a favorable policy in a certain area).  None
of this is remotely similar to the civilizing influences of
democratically based controls and accountability.
>
>>the situation is now much worse because there's no
>>accountability to anyone anywhere
>
> What, not even the Review Teams? (The accountability might not be
> perfect, few things are, but they exist).

Democracy is defined as government by all the people, aristocracy is
defined as government by less than all the people.  I don't see anyone
arguing that democratic control REMAINS, I only see rationalization of
what's left, such as charities and review teams.  But all the "Review
Teams" in the world without real democratic control are worse than
unavailing, they are a charade, or a disguise for aristocracy.
Perhaps some on this list, I really don't know, either are or hope to
be part of the aristocracy of Review Teams and thereby "do good" by
recommending good policies.  I can understand that love for good
policy, but one is forced to do it by living out a preference for
aristocracy rather than democracy, and one is implicitly defining
everyone not on the review team as someone who does not deserve a
voice, in addition to not having one, unless of course the review
team's primary recommendation was to restore democratic control of
ICANN.
>
>> and no mechanism to manufacture accountability to the global
>>community. (unless this giveaway and abdication of authority is
>>challenged)
>
> So you don't think the proposed scheme delivers any of that?

Like I said before, without CONTROL, and specifically DEMOCRATIC
control, all the review teams and all the details of ultimately or
expressly advisory bodies are rendered irrelevant without the crucial
element of democratic control.  Of course, even with tyrant kings,
there are those court advisors and certain elites who have the ear of
the king, usually because they are sycophants to power in sufficient
degree.  These persons or organizations might review the king, advise
the king, whisper in the kings ear, etc., but at the end of the day
the king does whatever he wishes.

The ICANN "proposed scheme" can thus have bells and whistles and
claimed Protections out to, literally, infinity, but not a single one
of them has the power to make anything stick unless the king, I mean
ICANN, wants them to stick.

Imagine having elections where the one time when the elections
wouldn't add up the votes properly was when corrupt incumbents were in
charge, and thus the population wishes to "kick the bums out" as they
say.  In such a case the right to vote fails to work at precisely the
time when it is most needed!

Similarly, with ICANN, perhaps it will be 2 days, 2 months or 2 years
before they make a decision that the majority (the ultimate decider of
the "public interest" under all political principles of democracy)
thinks is quite wrong, or even corrupted by business interests not
acting in the public interest (because they are institutionally
incapable of anything but their own business profit motives).   At
exactly the worst time, then, when ICANN has made a terrible decision,
there's going to be nothing you and I can do about it, even if 50% or
more of the public is totally on our side.

After a suitable period of elections with the information-exchange it
allows, the public, as a whole, best knows "if the shoe fits," that
is, if an alleged public policy is indeed the policy of the public.
Those who think they know better, and wish to benefit the public by
their genius, are either aristocrats or tyrants - many of who m at
least start with better motives to enforce their own ideas of policies
on everyone else for their own good...

The public interest is ultimately defined by, duh, the public.  By
definition, any wise men, "review teams" or committees of experts who
believe, sincerely or not, that they can do better are, by definition,
aristocrats or authoritarians in their direct actions.

I'd just like aristocrats and authoritarians (and whoever else is
opposed to democracy) to come out so that we can have a discussion
about the fundamental issue here of how "public interest" is derived,
be it democratically or otherwise.  I've been a part of elites, like
lawyers, and I don't like them (nor do most people).  Of course,
coming out into a discussion amongst equals would be both democratic
in nature, as well as exposing of the anti-democratic nature of the
ICANN structure as well as any who would expressly defend it.

I expect that no one will directly attack my argument for democracy,
because they would self-define themselvse as undemocratic, but I
welcome it.  Democracy -- accept no substitutes.
-- 
Paul R Lehto, J.D.
P.O. Box #1
Ishpeming, MI  49849
lehto.paul at gmail.com
906-204-4026
____________________________________________________________
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


From dogwallah at gmail.com  Mon Oct  5 11:55:08 2009
From: dogwallah at gmail.com (McTim)
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 2009 18:55:08 +0300
Subject: [governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation of Commitments
In-Reply-To: <76f819dd0910050734o5fbc2812k789c8232b30eac3b@mail.gmail.com>
References: <75822E125BCB994F8446858C4B19F0D78FFC6E09@SUEX07-MBX-04.ad.syr.edu>
	 <1254397157.3941.611.camel@anriette-laptop>
	 <3QZdNroLCQxKFAts@perry.co.uk>
	 <76f819dd0910011242u2d26722eg4cac8f606ece0282@mail.gmail.com>
	 <rBdKJCua0QxKFAve@perry.co.uk>
	 <76f819dd0910021037o36cd6b7aj9c8d7454ca116cc2@mail.gmail.com>
	 <y8DcmVKiokxKFAvp@perry.co.uk>
	 <76f819dd0910030740v206a4661xcd43ea4ae54d2483@mail.gmail.com>
	 <LjfihqAS+5xKFA5l@perry.co.uk>
	 <76f819dd0910050734o5fbc2812k789c8232b30eac3b@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <f65fb55e0910050855i179b899w8c0422ae0694ef@mail.gmail.com>

On Mon, Oct 5, 2009 at 5:34 PM, Paul Lehto <lehto.paul at gmail.com> wrote:
<snip>
> from the USDOC is not in a subordinate position to anyone, it's
> "independent."  As a free or independent organization, it doesn't have
> to account to anyone except its own board and whatever it chooses to
> be accountable to.

That's right, charities operating in the public interest have this
property in general.  Think Red Cross or Medicins Sans Frontieres.

>
<more snipped>
>
> Democracy is defined as government by all the people, aristocracy is
> defined as government by less than all the people.  I don't see anyone
> arguing that democratic control REMAINS,

Except for me, and all the other folk who prefer direct participation
in ICANN processes, rather than having a gov't represent us.  You
forget too, that in addition to the original design of ICANN being
independent, many folk around the world (and on this list) have
comlained bitterly over the last few years because of unilateral (USG)
control over bits of ICANN. They didn't like it so much.


I only see rationalization of
> what's left, such as charities and review teams.  But all the "Review
> Teams" in the world without real democratic control are worse than
> unavailing, they are a charade, or a disguise for aristocracy.

They are absolutely a disguise, a fig leaf if you will, but not for
aristocracy.  They are a political fig leaf for the US Administration
(provides a bit of cover so that Obama can't be blamed for "giving
away the Internet" in the next campaign).


> Perhaps some on this list, I really don't know, either are or hope to
> be part of the aristocracy of Review Teams and thereby "do good" by
> recommending good policies.


I think that is probably correct.

<even more snipped>
>
>
> Similarly, with ICANN, perhaps it will be 2 days, 2 months or 2 years
> before they make a decision that the majority (the ultimate decider of
> the "public interest" under all political principles of democracy)
> thinks is quite wrong, or even corrupted by business interests not
> acting in the public interest (because they are institutionally
> incapable of anything but their own business profit motives).

People have been complaining of this for a decade. Independence from
the USG MoU or JPA won't change it.


  At
> exactly the worst time, then, when ICANN has made a terrible decision,
> there's going to be nothing you and I can do about it, even if 50% or
> more of the public is totally on our side.
>
<snip>
>
> I'd just like aristocrats and authoritarians (and whoever else is
> opposed to democracy) to come out so that we can have a discussion
> about the fundamental issue here of how "public interest" is derived,
> be it democratically or otherwise.

Either you missed my last post or you have chosen to ignore it, but in
it, I expressed my preference for pure democracy
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/pure%20democracy) in this
case, as opposed to representative democracy.

 I've been a part of elites, like
> lawyers, and I don't like them (nor do most people).  Of course,
> coming out into a discussion amongst equals would be both democratic
> in nature, as well as exposing of the anti-democratic nature of the
> ICANN structure as well as any who would expressly defend it.
>
> I expect that no one will directly attack my argument for democracy,

I will, see above.


> because they would self-define themselvse as undemocratic,

or more democractic, as I do.


-- 
Cheers,

McTim
"A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A
route indicates how we get there."  Jon Postel
____________________________________________________________
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


From roland at internetpolicyagency.com  Mon Oct  5 13:24:42 2009
From: roland at internetpolicyagency.com (Roland Perry)
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 2009 18:24:42 +0100
Subject: [governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation of Commitments
In-Reply-To: <76f819dd0910050734o5fbc2812k789c8232b30eac3b@mail.gmail.com>
References: <75822E125BCB994F8446858C4B19F0D78FFC6E09@SUEX07-MBX-04.ad.syr.edu>
 <14BF930C-49AF-4C16-A982-58A6BF8685D0@graduateinstitute.ch>
 <1254397157.3941.611.camel@anriette-laptop> <3QZdNroLCQxKFAts@perry.co.uk>
 <76f819dd0910011242u2d26722eg4cac8f606ece0282@mail.gmail.com>
 <rBdKJCua0QxKFAve@perry.co.uk>
 <76f819dd0910021037o36cd6b7aj9c8d7454ca116cc2@mail.gmail.com>
 <y8DcmVKiokxKFAvp@perry.co.uk>
 <76f819dd0910030740v206a4661xcd43ea4ae54d2483@mail.gmail.com>
 <LjfihqAS+5xKFA5l@perry.co.uk>
 <76f819dd0910050734o5fbc2812k789c8232b30eac3b@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <D6ew3OJaviyKFAxR@perry.co.uk>

In message 
<76f819dd0910050734o5fbc2812k789c8232b30eac3b at mail.gmail.com>, at 
10:34:02 on Mon, 5 Oct 2009, Paul Lehto <lehto.paul at gmail.com> writes
>On 10/3/09, Roland Perry <roland at internetpolicyagency.com> wrote:
>>>The bottom line is the shift, of tectonic importance here, where the
>>>admittedly too narrow and attenuated accountability of the Commerce
>>>Department/ICANN to the US public purports to be eliminated in favor
>>>of what ICANN calls "independence."  In turn, "independence" means
>>>there's ZERO RECOURSE.
>>
>> That'll be a big disappointment to a lot of people, if true,
>
>The above text to the right of the double carats >> is (ultimately)
>undeniabily true in ICANN's opinion of itself, because it describes
>itself now as "independent." An accountable employee or public servant
>is by no means "independent", they are, in an important sense
>"enslaved" to the public interest and subject to being removed from
>power by the voters either directly or indirectly.  An organization
>that is "independent" specifically of primary governmental oversight
>from the USDOC is not in a subordinate position to anyone, it's
>"independent."  As a free or independent organization, it doesn't have
>to account to anyone except its own board and whatever it chooses to
>be accountable to.

And doesn't the recent Affirmation spell out who they think they are 
accountable to?

>So long as one likes or can live with the policies made, one can
>delude themselves or talk themselves into thinking this state of
>affairs is acceptable.  But as soon as one is left out in the cold, it
>will come home to them really fast that ICANN is unaccountable and
>that there's zero recourse, remedy or solution to the problem except
>for forms of begging (taking to the airwaves, harnessing public
>opinion for what it's worth, as one does with kings or aristocrats)
>and forms of retaliation (governments seeking to influence an
>independent ICANN might threaten their interests in other unrelated
>areas in order to promote a favorable policy in a certain area).  None
>of this is remotely similar to the civilizing influences of
>democratically based controls and accountability.

Governments appear to form (via the GAC) a significant element in the 
accountability. Much more than before.

>>>the situation is now much worse because there's no
>>>accountability to anyone anywhere
>>
>> What, not even the Review Teams? (The accountability might not be
>> perfect, few things are, but they exist).
>
>Democracy is defined as government by all the people, aristocracy is
>defined as government by less than all the people.  I don't see anyone
>arguing that democratic control REMAINS, I only see rationalization of
>what's left, such as charities and review teams.  But all the "Review
>Teams" in the world without real democratic control are worse than
>unavailing, they are a charade, or a disguise for aristocracy.

So you don't accept the concept that a major element in the Review Team 
is governments (not all of which are democratically elected, but would 
nevertheless claim to represent their people).
-- 
Roland Perry
____________________________________________________________
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


From avri at psg.com  Mon Oct  5 13:54:43 2009
From: avri at psg.com (Avri Doria)
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 2009 13:54:43 -0400
Subject: [governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation of Commitments
In-Reply-To: <f65fb55e0910050855i179b899w8c0422ae0694ef@mail.gmail.com>
References: <75822E125BCB994F8446858C4B19F0D78FFC6E09@SUEX07-MBX-04.ad.syr.edu> <1254397157.3941.611.camel@anriette-laptop> <3QZdNroLCQxKFAts@perry.co.uk> <76f819dd0910011242u2d26722eg4cac8f606ece0282@mail.gmail.com> <rBdKJCua0QxKFAve@perry.co.uk> <76f819dd0910021037o36cd6b7aj9c8d7454ca116cc2@mail.gmail.com> <y8DcmVKiokxKFAvp@perry.co.uk> <76f819dd0910030740v206a4661xcd43ea4ae54d2483@mail.gmail.com> <LjfihqAS+5xKFA5l@perry.co.uk> <76f819dd0910050734o5fbc2812k789c8232b30eac3b@mail.gmail.com> <f65fb55e0910050855i179b899w8c0422ae0694ef@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <F79A75C6-7295-49F8-A815-366F0AFD8A1D@psg.com>


On 5 Oct 2009, at 11:55, McTim wrote:

>>
>> I expect that no one will directly attack my argument for democracy,
>
> I will, see above.
>
>
>> because they would self-define themselvse as undemocratic,
>
> or more democractic, as I do.
>


I think you make a lot of sense McTim.

Democracy has a goal of expressing the will of the people.  But there  
are more ways of discovering and expressing this will then just mass  
elections, held frequently under the pressures of propaganda, mass  
illusion, fear and fraud.

Democracy is an ideal that can be approached in many ways.

Most national type elections i have seen in my life have not  
approached it very closely. Though elections on a more local basis  
seems to be pretty good, large scale elections seem to have more  
problems.

Whereas i think that that the Nomcom formulations that you find in the  
IETF and ICANN are often decent ways of rendering a democratic  
decision especially when you cannot name, count or reach all of the  
affected demos.

And there are probably other ways - but a one man one vote scheme is  
rarely the only way, or even necessarily the best way.

Additionally comparing ICANN to an aristocracy seems to be nonsense to  
me. Aristocracy means one is born into ones position.  I cannot name a  
single person who was born into their ICANN role.  Someone might make  
an argument for meritocracy or even for oligarchy in Internet  
governance but certainly not aristocracy.

So even though I think elections sometimes have their place in  
democracy, I do not believe they are the be all and end all of  
democracy and do not believe they are identical with democracy which  
sometimes must be achieved in other ways, like direct participation or  
other methods.

a.
____________________________________________________________
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


From jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com  Mon Oct  5 14:19:36 2009
From: jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com (Jeffrey A. Williams)
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 2009 13:19:36 -0500 (GMT-05:00)
Subject: [governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation of Commitments
Message-ID: <24765739.1254766776968.JavaMail.root@elwamui-milano.atl.sa.earthlink.net>

Avri and all,

  My response/comments interspersed below.

-----Original Message-----
>From: Avri Doria <avri at psg.com>
>Sent: Oct 5, 2009 12:54 PM
>To: Governance List <governance at lists.cpsr.org>
>Subject: Re: [governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation of Commitments
>
>
>On 5 Oct 2009, at 11:55, McTim wrote:
>
>>>
>>> I expect that no one will directly attack my argument for democracy,
>>
>> I will, see above.
>>
>>
>>> because they would self-define themselvse as undemocratic,
>>
>> or more democractic, as I do.
>>
>
>
>I think you make a lot of sense McTim.
>
>Democracy has a goal of expressing the will of the people.  But there  
>are more ways of discovering and expressing this will then just mass  
>elections, held frequently under the pressures of propaganda, mass  
>illusion, fear and fraud.

Agreed.  But knowing what the will of the people actually is can
only accurately or reasonably accurately measured by the people
voting their will.
>
>Democracy is an ideal that can be approached in many ways.
>
>Most national type elections i have seen in my life have not  
>approached it very closely. Though elections on a more local basis  
>seems to be pretty good, large scale elections seem to have more  
>problems.

Democracy and elections that significantly define same, is not 
perfict, but without the will of the people expressed in voting
that will cannot be truly known.
>
>Whereas i think that that the Nomcom formulations that you find in the  
>IETF and ICANN are often decent ways of rendering a democratic  
>decision especially when you cannot name, count or reach all of the  
>affected demos.

The IETF is open to anyone wishing to participate and the level of
that participation is largely in the hands of the individual.  Weather
of not those individuals, myself included, desire to be avaliable for
contact is their responsibility individually and recognized by the
IETF as such, same should be true of ICANN, but often is not due to
various forms and methods of Censorship.  
>
>And there are probably other ways - but a one man one vote scheme is  
>rarely the only way, or even necessarily the best way.
>
>Additionally comparing ICANN to an aristocracy seems to be nonsense to  
>me. Aristocracy means one is born into ones position.  I cannot name a  
>single person who was born into their ICANN role.  Someone might make  
>an argument for meritocracy or even for oligarchy in Internet  
>governance but certainly not aristocracy.

Agreed.
>
>So even though I think elections sometimes have their place in  
>democracy, I do not believe they are the be all and end all of  
>democracy and do not believe they are identical with democracy which  
>sometimes must be achieved in other ways, like direct participation or  
>other methods.

Direct participation is one method of participation true enough,
but it is not a method of measure of where the participants
stand on any issue or consideration for decision.
>
>a.
>____________________________________________________________
>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,

Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 294k members/stakeholders strong!)
"Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" -
   Abraham Lincoln

"Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is very
often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt

"If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; liability
depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
United States v. Carroll Towing  (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
===============================================================
Updated 1/26/04
CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS. div. of
Information Network Eng.  INEG. INC.
ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com
Phone: 214-244-4827

____________________________________________________________
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


From nursesacrosstheborders at yahoo.com  Mon Oct  5 14:48:14 2009
From: nursesacrosstheborders at yahoo.com (nursesacrosstheborders at yahoo.com)
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 2009 11:48:14 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation of Commitments (Action
 Required)
Message-ID: <764752.85210.qm@web34306.mail.mud.yahoo.com>


  Hello Avri Doria,

  This message serves as notification that you will not receive any more courtesy notices 
  from our members for two days. Messages you have sent will remain in a lower 
  priority queue for our member to review at their leisure.

  Future messages will be more likely to be viewed if you are on our member's priority
  Guest List.



  Thank you,
  nursesacrosstheborders at yahoo.com


About Boxbe
This courtesy notice is part of a free service to make email
more reliable and useful.  Boxbe (http://www.boxbe.com) uses
your existing social network and that of your friends to keep
your inbox clean and make sure you receive email from people
who matter to you.

Boxbe: Say Goodbye to Email Overload
Visit http://www.boxbe.com/how-it-works?tc=565821442_1637849185



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20091005/8c6a29e7/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
Reporting-MTA: dns; yahoo.com
Action: failed
Arrival-Date: Mon, 5 Oct 2009 10:54:43 -0700 (PDT)

Final-Recipient: rfc822; nursesacrosstheborders at yahoo.com
Diagnostic-Code: X-Boxbe-Notice; Sender not pre-approved, delivery likely delayed.  Follow instructions in above notice
Status: 4.7.0
-------------- next part --------------
>From Avri Doria Mon Oct  5 17:54:43 2009
X-Apparently-To: nursesacrosstheborders at yahoo.com via 66.163.178.134; Mon, 05 Oct 2009 10:55:17 -0700
Return-Path: <governance-owner+nursesacrosstheborders=yahoo.com at lists.cpsr.org>
X-YMailISG: O73A1IAWLDs7naWo6AU.ZBbV5ZuEAc6i5MEyGnGyvxE2zCDb.TU3qrHJDGbLBD_FsCLQtPWxPtY89TvJG8cks.p._9uYxxcQnBH3mxaP0py7.3bKbOT.kz9p7eM8bewvIicCmzd9OpTz7XADwo_tS2RvqBzN9arpSvY5mtTRqb8MmDT_.it9tYU9gJfRr5bglPNrxjU.r32AnHNuFCqYgqcj8oOKm8HvnZ6V7k_PUhIWHX4W.SNusm5rLFzyOMa_RBx4_iEI6Q1JAa3msnxDwtxi1tPy0qe01Ki5huejVKIXP4WtBvZnbcW9tv61XyuxV30vRp5yCeAQQtJmHxIGRmwjUJzUSA8N5rLs1GRmpIyllTCpKxTonhodvfBoY4RE8PQkkzFpRBtomf2GgysrXPGnXl5z9WKIkLg-
X-Originating-IP: [208.90.215.70]
Authentication-Results: mta141.mail.re3.yahoo.com  from=; domainkeys=neutral (no sig); from=; dkim=neutral (no  sig)
Received: from 208.90.215.70  (EHLO npogroups.org) (208.90.215.70)
  by mta141.mail.re3.yahoo.com with SMTP; Mon, 05 Oct 2009 10:55:16 -0700
Received: by npogroups.org (Postfix, from userid 1002)
	id EA4AC912B9; Mon,  5 Oct 2009 10:55:12 -0700 (PDT)
X-Original-To: governance at lists.cpsr.org
Delivered-To: lists.cpsr.org-governance at npogroups.org
Received: from smtp1.electricembers.net (smtp1 [208.90.215.67])
	by npogroups.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 99F7890882
	for <governance at lists.cpsr.org>; Mon,  5 Oct 2009 10:55:02 -0700 (PDT)
X-Envelope-From: avri at psg.com
X-Spam-Status: not spam, SpamAssassin (score=-6.975, required 6,
	autolearn=not spam, AWL -0.38, BAYES_00 -2.60,
	RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED -4.00)
X-MailScanner: Found to be clean
X-ElectricEmbers-MailScanner-Information: Send questions or false-positive reports to help at electricembers.net
Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62])
	by smtp1.electricembers.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 77A3667857
	for <governance at lists.cpsr.org>; Mon,  5 Oct 2009 10:54:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from psg.com ([147.28.0.62] helo=[127.0.0.1])
	by psg.com with esmtp (Exim 4.69 (FreeBSD))
	(envelope-from <avri at psg.com>)
	id 1Murlk-000CJl-8c
	for governance at lists.cpsr.org; Mon, 05 Oct 2009 17:54:51 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed; delsp=yes
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1076)
From: Avri Doria <avri at psg.com>
In-Reply-To: <f65fb55e0910050855i179b899w8c0422ae0694ef at mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 2009 13:54:43 -0400
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <F79A75C6-7295-49F8-A815-366F0AFD8A1D at psg.com>
References: <75822E125BCB994F8446858C4B19F0D78FFC6E09 at SUEX07-MBX-04.ad.syr.edu> <1254397157.3941.611.camel at anriette-laptop> <3QZdNroLCQxKFAts at perry.co.uk> <76f819dd0910011242u2d26722eg4cac8f606ece0282 at mail.gmail.com> <rBdKJCua0QxKFAve at perry.co.uk> <76f819dd0910021037o36cd6b7aj9c8d7454ca116cc2 at mail.gmail.com> <y8DcmVKiokxKFAvp at perry.co.uk> <76f819dd0910030740v206a4661xcd43ea4ae54d2483 at mail.gmail.com> <LjfihqAS+5xKFA5l at perry.co.uk> <76f819dd0910050734o5fbc2812k789c8232b30eac3b at mail.gmail.com> <f65fb55e0910050855i179b899w8c0422ae0694ef at mail.gmail.com>
To: Governance List <governance at lists.cpsr.org>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1076)
X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/)
Subject: Re: [governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation of Commitments
Reply-To: governance at lists.cpsr.org,Avri Doria <avri at psg.com>
X-Loop: governance at lists.cpsr.org
X-Sequence: 89
Errors-to: governance-owner at lists.cpsr.org
Precedence: list
X-no-archive: yes
List-Id: <governance.lists.cpsr.org>
List-Archive: <http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/arc/governance>
List-Help: <mailto:sympa at lists.cpsr.org?subject=help>
List-Owner: <mailto:governance-request at lists.cpsr.org>
List-Post: <mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:sympa at lists.cpsr.org?subject=subscribe%20governance>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:sympa at lists.cpsr.org?subject=unsubscribe%20governance>
Content-Length: 2096
-------------- 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

From jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com  Mon Oct  5 16:51:34 2009
From: jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com (Jeffrey A. Williams)
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 2009 15:51:34 -0500 (GMT-05:00)
Subject: [governance] IGC's suitable or suitable cadre?
Message-ID: <5997469.1254775894898.JavaMail.root@elwamui-rubis.atl.sa.earthlink.net>

All or anyone offlist,

  What is and how will or does the IGC define "Suitible" of "Suitible
Cadre" of IGC/IGF leaders or coordinators?  What is or will be the
criterion and whom determins that criterion by what method?  Is this
documented in no uncertain terms on the IGC website or elsewhere?

Regards,

Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 294k members/stakeholders strong!)
"Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" -
   Abraham Lincoln

"Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is very
often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt

"If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; liability
depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
United States v. Carroll Towing  (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
===============================================================
Updated 1/26/04
CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS. div. of
Information Network Eng.  INEG. INC.
ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com
Phone: 214-244-4827
Regards,

Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 294k members/stakeholders strong!)
"Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" -
   Abraham Lincoln

"Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is very
often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt

"If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; liability
depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
United States v. Carroll Towing  (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
===============================================================
Updated 1/26/04
CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS. div. of
Information Network Eng.  INEG. INC.
ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com
Phone: 214-244-4827

____________________________________________________________
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


From jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com  Mon Oct  5 17:04:21 2009
From: jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com (Jeffrey A. Williams)
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 2009 16:04:21 -0500 (GMT-05:00)
Subject: AW: [governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation of Commitments
Message-ID: <24927528.1254776661290.JavaMail.root@elwamui-rubis.atl.sa.earthlink.net>

Wolfgang and all,

  Unknown at this time, perhaps Verisign would be magnamous
in recommending Iran as the hosting country and physical
location?  After all such a recommendation might go far 
in diplomatic circles in outreach to a mid east nation and
garner better cooperation between the US and Iran as well
as participating sanctioning nations presently.  My guess is
that this possibility is unlikely and I personally would find
such a very questionable choice.

  Another choice might be Afghanistan for many obvious diplomatic
and economic reasons, safty aside of course.  But I am sure that
IGC members would be lining up to volunteer to man such a facility
for a time and aid in the training of more perminant native Afghans
to eventually take over.  Of course these volunteers would have to
provide for their own body armor ect. or perhaps Verisign would 
do the provisioning for same.

-----Original Message-----
>From: "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang" <wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
>Sent: Oct 3, 2009 3:21 AM
>To: governance at lists.cpsr.org, Roland Perry <roland at internetpolicyagency.com>, governance at lists.cpsr.org
>Subject: AW: [governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation of Commitments
>
>What would be the "home for .ngo, advertised by VeriSign?
> 
>Wolfgang
>
>________________________________
>
>Von: Roland Perry [mailto:roland at internetpolicyagency.com]
>Gesendet: Sa 03.10.2009 09:20
>An: governance at lists.cpsr.org
>Betreff: Re: [governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation of Commitments
>
>
>
>In message <136301ca4397$ac34e1f0$6400a8c0 at powuseren2ihcx>, at 15:36:41
>on Fri, 2 Oct 2009, Thomas Lowenhaupt <toml at communisphere.com> writes
>>Since the adoption of the New gTLD Policy in June 2008, I've been
>>thinking through the process for establishing equitable representation
>>for cities within the ICANN structure.
>
>Maybe they should join the NCUC?
>
>I was struggling to find a place for a charity to call "home" within the
>ICANN 'silo' system. Surely not in the "Business and Commercial" users -
>but if it was, then that would also be the place for a City (which is
>primarily a not-for-profit business run by the Mayor and funded by the
>citizens).
>
>I'm sure there are many other classes of entity which don't currently
>have a well defined "home". Trade Unions, for example, which *do* have
>an "Advisory Committee" within the OECD's consultative process.
>--
>Roland Perry
>____________________________________________________________
>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

Regards,

Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 294k members/stakeholders strong!)
"Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" -
   Abraham Lincoln

"Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is very
often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt

"If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; liability
depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
United States v. Carroll Towing  (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
===============================================================
Updated 1/26/04
CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS. div. of
Information Network Eng.  INEG. INC.
ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com
Phone: 214-244-4827

____________________________________________________________
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


From wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de  Tue Oct  6 03:28:50 2009
From: wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de (=?iso-8859-1?Q?=22Kleinw=E4chter=2C_Wolfgang=22?=)
Date: Tue, 06 Oct 2009 09:28:50 +0200
Subject: AW: AW: [governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation of Commitments
References:  <24927528.1254776661290.JavaMail.root@elwamui-rubis.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
Message-ID:  <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A87195C4@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>

Jeff
 
what about Georgia or Ossetia? Or the Falkland Islands? Let`s Doodle it :-)))
 
w
 

________________________________

Von: Jeffrey A. Williams [mailto:jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com]
Gesendet: Mo 05.10.2009 23:04
An: governance at lists.cpsr.org; Kleinwächter, Wolfgang; governance at lists.cpsr.org; Roland Perry; governance at lists.cpsr.org; cgomes at verisign.com
Cc: ssene at ntia.doc.gov
Betreff: Re: AW: [governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation of Commitments



Wolfgang and all,

  Unknown at this time, perhaps Verisign would be magnamous
in recommending Iran as the hosting country and physical
location?  After all such a recommendation might go far
in diplomatic circles in outreach to a mid east nation and
garner better cooperation between the US and Iran as well
as participating sanctioning nations presently.  My guess is
that this possibility is unlikely and I personally would find
such a very questionable choice.

  Another choice might be Afghanistan for many obvious diplomatic
and economic reasons, safty aside of course.  But I am sure that
IGC members would be lining up to volunteer to man such a facility
for a time and aid in the training of more perminant native Afghans
to eventually take over.  Of course these volunteers would have to
provide for their own body armor ect. or perhaps Verisign would
do the provisioning for same.

-----Original Message-----
>From: "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang" <wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
>Sent: Oct 3, 2009 3:21 AM
>To: governance at lists.cpsr.org, Roland Perry <roland at internetpolicyagency.com>, governance at lists.cpsr.org
>Subject: AW: [governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation of Commitments
>
>What would be the "home for .ngo, advertised by VeriSign?
>
>Wolfgang
>
>________________________________
>
>Von: Roland Perry [mailto:roland at internetpolicyagency.com]
>Gesendet: Sa 03.10.2009 09:20
>An: governance at lists.cpsr.org
>Betreff: Re: [governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation of Commitments
>
>
>
>In message <136301ca4397$ac34e1f0$6400a8c0 at powuseren2ihcx>, at 15:36:41
>on Fri, 2 Oct 2009, Thomas Lowenhaupt <toml at communisphere.com> writes
>>Since the adoption of the New gTLD Policy in June 2008, I've been
>>thinking through the process for establishing equitable representation
>>for cities within the ICANN structure.
>
>Maybe they should join the NCUC?
>
>I was struggling to find a place for a charity to call "home" within the
>ICANN 'silo' system. Surely not in the "Business and Commercial" users -
>but if it was, then that would also be the place for a City (which is
>primarily a not-for-profit business run by the Mayor and funded by the
>citizens).
>
>I'm sure there are many other classes of entity which don't currently
>have a well defined "home". Trade Unions, for example, which *do* have
>an "Advisory Committee" within the OECD's consultative process.
>--
>Roland Perry
>____________________________________________________________
>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

Regards,

Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 294k members/stakeholders strong!)
"Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" -
   Abraham Lincoln

"Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is very
often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt

"If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; liability
depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
United States v. Carroll Towing  (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
===============================================================
Updated 1/26/04
CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS. div. of
Information Network Eng.  INEG. INC.
ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com
Phone: 214-244-4827



____________________________________________________________
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


From lehto.paul at gmail.com  Tue Oct  6 11:57:35 2009
From: lehto.paul at gmail.com (Paul Lehto)
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 2009 08:57:35 -0700
Subject: [governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation of Commitments
In-Reply-To: <f65fb55e0910050855i179b899w8c0422ae0694ef@mail.gmail.com>
References: <75822E125BCB994F8446858C4B19F0D78FFC6E09@SUEX07-MBX-04.ad.syr.edu>
	 <3QZdNroLCQxKFAts@perry.co.uk>
	 <76f819dd0910011242u2d26722eg4cac8f606ece0282@mail.gmail.com>
	 <rBdKJCua0QxKFAve@perry.co.uk>
	 <76f819dd0910021037o36cd6b7aj9c8d7454ca116cc2@mail.gmail.com>
	 <y8DcmVKiokxKFAvp@perry.co.uk>
	 <76f819dd0910030740v206a4661xcd43ea4ae54d2483@mail.gmail.com>
	 <LjfihqAS+5xKFA5l@perry.co.uk>
	 <76f819dd0910050734o5fbc2812k789c8232b30eac3b@mail.gmail.com>
	 <f65fb55e0910050855i179b899w8c0422ae0694ef@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <76f819dd0910060857l766c25e5y4df848136e07598@mail.gmail.com>

Hey McTim, I don't mind you "attacking" my argument for democracy by
urging direct democracy as opposed to representative democracy,
because that's not an attack at all, from my perspective (I hadn't
specified which form of democracy or republic, I only insist that the
people, as the only legitimate source of power, retain or get -- if
they don't presently have it -- control over ICANN).

Moreover, a careful reading of my posts, which admittedly perhaps not
everybody has time for even though democracy deserves the time whether
or not I'm an adequate defender of it, will show that I admit that
having a global internet controlled only by the US public via the US
government leaves something major to be desired.

That being said, the problem here is that no matter what the problems
are or were with US government/DOC control on behalf of the US public,
the alleged "transfer" of power to a more global constituency is a
fake and a fraud, because no public entity empowered by any global
public or even any single country's public retains any control -- not
even in theory (unless the purported transfer is invalidated in court
or unwound).

So, I'm still waiting for my basic thesis to be attacked, namely, that
democratic control (emphasis on CONTROL, not mere "input") is the only
legitimate way to vindicate the public interest.  Every other charity
or organization can claim to advocate the public interest, but even
General Motors claims that what's good for GM is good for everyone.
Though there are surely good organizations out there that i personally
strongly believe are closer to, or even nearly identical to, the
public interest, that's merely my personal opinion. The only
legitimate way to fully claim the public interest mantle is by having
a mandate via consent of the governed from the people as a whole.  And
that's precisely what ICANN "independence" defeats -- any real
legitimacy for anyone to either represent, or be obligated to pursue,
the public interest.

Paul Lehto, Juris Doctor

On 10/5/09, McTim <dogwallah at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 5, 2009 at 5:34 PM, Paul Lehto <lehto.paul at gmail.com> wrote:
> <snip>
>> from the USDOC is not in a subordinate position to anyone, it's
>> "independent."  As a free or independent organization, it doesn't have
>> to account to anyone except its own board and whatever it chooses to
>> be accountable to.
>
> That's right, charities operating in the public interest have this
> property in general.  Think Red Cross or Medicins Sans Frontieres.
>
>>
> <more snipped>
>>
>> Democracy is defined as government by all the people, aristocracy is
>> defined as government by less than all the people.  I don't see anyone
>> arguing that democratic control REMAINS,
>
> Except for me, and all the other folk who prefer direct participation
> in ICANN processes, rather than having a gov't represent us.  You
> forget too, that in addition to the original design of ICANN being
> independent, many folk around the world (and on this list) have
> comlained bitterly over the last few years because of unilateral (USG)
> control over bits of ICANN. They didn't like it so much.
>
>
> I only see rationalization of
>> what's left, such as charities and review teams.  But all the "Review
>> Teams" in the world without real democratic control are worse than
>> unavailing, they are a charade, or a disguise for aristocracy.
>
> They are absolutely a disguise, a fig leaf if you will, but not for
> aristocracy.  They are a political fig leaf for the US Administration
> (provides a bit of cover so that Obama can't be blamed for "giving
> away the Internet" in the next campaign).
>
>
>> Perhaps some on this list, I really don't know, either are or hope to
>> be part of the aristocracy of Review Teams and thereby "do good" by
>> recommending good policies.
>
>
> I think that is probably correct.
>
> <even more snipped>
>>
>>
>> Similarly, with ICANN, perhaps it will be 2 days, 2 months or 2 years
>> before they make a decision that the majority (the ultimate decider of
>> the "public interest" under all political principles of democracy)
>> thinks is quite wrong, or even corrupted by business interests not
>> acting in the public interest (because they are institutionally
>> incapable of anything but their own business profit motives).
>
> People have been complaining of this for a decade. Independence from
> the USG MoU or JPA won't change it.
>
>
>   At
>> exactly the worst time, then, when ICANN has made a terrible decision,
>> there's going to be nothing you and I can do about it, even if 50% or
>> more of the public is totally on our side.
>>
> <snip>
>>
>> I'd just like aristocrats and authoritarians (and whoever else is
>> opposed to democracy) to come out so that we can have a discussion
>> about the fundamental issue here of how "public interest" is derived,
>> be it democratically or otherwise.
>
> Either you missed my last post or you have chosen to ignore it, but in
> it, I expressed my preference for pure democracy
> http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/pure%20democracy) in this
> case, as opposed to representative democracy.
>
>  I've been a part of elites, like
>> lawyers, and I don't like them (nor do most people).  Of course,
>> coming out into a discussion amongst equals would be both democratic
>> in nature, as well as exposing of the anti-democratic nature of the
>> ICANN structure as well as any who would expressly defend it.
>>
>> I expect that no one will directly attack my argument for democracy,
>
> I will, see above.
>
>
>> because they would self-define themselvse as undemocratic,
>
> or more democractic, as I do.
>
>
> --
> Cheers,
>
> McTim
> "A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A
> route indicates how we get there."  Jon Postel
>


-- 
Paul R Lehto, J.D.
P.O. Box #1
Ishpeming, MI  49849
lehto.paul at gmail.com
906-204-4026
____________________________________________________________
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


From lehto.paul at gmail.com  Tue Oct  6 12:19:54 2009
From: lehto.paul at gmail.com (Paul Lehto)
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 2009 09:19:54 -0700
Subject: [governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation of Commitments
In-Reply-To: <D6ew3OJaviyKFAxR@perry.co.uk>
References: <75822E125BCB994F8446858C4B19F0D78FFC6E09@SUEX07-MBX-04.ad.syr.edu>
	 <3QZdNroLCQxKFAts@perry.co.uk>
	 <76f819dd0910011242u2d26722eg4cac8f606ece0282@mail.gmail.com>
	 <rBdKJCua0QxKFAve@perry.co.uk>
	 <76f819dd0910021037o36cd6b7aj9c8d7454ca116cc2@mail.gmail.com>
	 <y8DcmVKiokxKFAvp@perry.co.uk>
	 <76f819dd0910030740v206a4661xcd43ea4ae54d2483@mail.gmail.com>
	 <LjfihqAS+5xKFA5l@perry.co.uk>
	 <76f819dd0910050734o5fbc2812k789c8232b30eac3b@mail.gmail.com>
	 <D6ew3OJaviyKFAxR@perry.co.uk>
Message-ID: <76f819dd0910060919u3b97805br140a134539a7578c@mail.gmail.com>

On 10/5/09, Roland Perry <roland at internetpolicyagency.com> wrote:
> In message
>
> And doesn't the recent Affirmation spell out who they think they are
> accountable to?

Think about what the word "accountable" means, and think about what it
means for someone (such as me for example) to say in speech or writing
that "I am accountable to (say) Roland Perry."  Such a statement is
meaningless overall unless Roland Perry can fire me, prosecute me,
compel me to a more detailed and full accounting, etc (all of these).
If Roland Perry can't do all of these, then I Paul Lehto act with
impunity ultimately (and now) as to any thing that I reall want to do.
>
> Governments appear to form (via the GAC) a significant element in the
> accountability. Much more than before.

The use of the word "accountability" and related concepts is, alone,
nothing more than 1984 doublespeak unless and until it matches the
reality on the ground plus the power to make it stick.  Those two
elements are absent from ICANN, which claims "INDEPENDENCE."  Think
about what independence means.  It means nobody truly controls them.
if nobody controls them, then they are not truly accountable to serve
anybody, they are nobody's "public servant."
>
>>>>the situation is now much worse because there's no
>>>>accountability to anyone anywhere
>>>
>>> What, not even the Review Teams? (The accountability might not be
>>> perfect, few things are, but they exist).

Perfection per se is not required, but to be accountable there has to
be a remedy equivalent to the ability of elections to "kick the bums
out" -- i.e. to fire them all.  If that can't be done, "less than
perfect" remedies, if they even exist, are unavailing and won't stop
or even greatly slow down an entity from doing whatever they want.

All persons, and entities, have the natural desire to enforce their
own ideas of what's right, quite regardless whether they are "right"
for the entire internet public or not. It would take a philosopher
king not to abuse the independence ICANN now claims, but even if one
agrees with all ICANN philosophy (something we surely should not
expect) when it is imposed in an unaccountable fashion via an
"independent" organization without real democratic accountability,
there's no INCENTIVE to act in the public interest coming from the
outside.  They do whatever they want to do, subject solely to
non-democratic pressures like retaliation, pressuring, etc., very
analogous to how sovereign nations and corporations push others
around.

Basically ICANN will just be a fight between the "big boys", fights
interspersed with pledges to "work together."  But the policy
outcomes, if they ever align with the public interest (assuming we can
truly KNOW that, as opposed to make educated guesses about it) will
only be accidents resulting from the outcomes of fights between the
big boys who have money and power to project into ICANN.  The "little
guy" public is totally excluded, except to the extent a big boy wants
to opportunistically claim the mantle of the public interest, but even
then it's merely the big boy's characterization or spin on the public
interest of the little guys, it's not anything straight from the
horse's mouth (of the little guy).
>>
>>Democracy is defined as government by all the people, aristocracy is
>>defined as government by less than all the people.  I don't see anyone
>>arguing that democratic control REMAINS, I only see rationalization of
>>what's left, such as charities and review teams.  But all the "Review
>>Teams" in the world without real democratic control are worse than
>>unavailing, they are a charade, or a disguise for aristocracy.
>
> So you don't accept the concept that a major element in the Review Team
> is governments (not all of which are democratically elected, but would
> nevertheless claim to represent their people).

I think  you should have stopped typing when you came to "not all of
which are democratically elected" since you're stating that they claim
to represent the public interest, but of course they do not in fact do
so.

How do we know what the public interest is??  We ask the public.  We
ask them not just in a paid-for push poll or even scientific poll, but
we ask them in elections via direct democracy like referenda and
initiatives, and/or we ask the representatives the public elects or
removes from office what they advocate on behalf of their districts
they represent.

How do we know what the Internet Policy Agency thinks are its
interests?  We ask them, or find evidence of their direct statements
somewhere.  There's no substitute for linking back to the horse's
mouth or else it's just putting words in someone's mouth.

Anyone claiming to represent the public interest that can't trace
their claim of legitimacy back to the public is no more legitimate
than if I were to speak on behalf of the Internet Policy Agency
without authority, or to claim to represent ICANN.  Even if I do such
"representation" in total good faith and come fairly close to
simulating the views, there's no authority in me to do so, and I can't
claim legitimacy.

It would be, and is, a fraud on the public to claim legitimacy without
tracing that back to an express authority.  if ICANN were to claim
that any of its actions REPRESENTED the public interest, that would be
a fraud.  They can only guess at the public interest, and misleadingly
claim that in their opinion it's in the public interest, but if they
went that crucial step further of claiming LEGITIMACY and the right to
bind the public that would be a fraud, just as much as if I purport to
speak for ICANN or the Internet Policy Agency.

Paul Lehto, Juris Doctor

-- 
Paul R Lehto, J.D.
P.O. Box #1
Ishpeming, MI  49849
lehto.paul at gmail.com
906-204-4026
____________________________________________________________
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


From lehto.paul at gmail.com  Tue Oct  6 12:27:19 2009
From: lehto.paul at gmail.com (Paul Lehto)
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 2009 09:27:19 -0700
Subject: [governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation of Commitments
In-Reply-To: <nec5eGBSJEyKFAXr@perry.co.uk>
References: <21947256.1254599995816.JavaMail.root@mswamui-cedar.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
	 <nec5eGBSJEyKFAXr@perry.co.uk>
Message-ID: <76f819dd0910060927s766d84c3q333480e9611e823f@mail.gmail.com>

The example of the UK, which seems to have a robust process for
"striking off" charities not truly acting in the public interest (if I
understand this correctly) is totally distinguishable from the ICANN
situation because it is elected representatives in the UK who review
or authorize the review of the charities and have the ability to
"nuke" them or remove them from any claim of legitimacy.  Without
finally judging the sufficiency of such a procedure, here we STILL
have a link to elected representatives who have the power to terminate
the status of the charity vis a vis the public interest, so that
retains a lifeline to democratic legitimacy PLUS (as is absolutely
necessary) the ability to make it stick by removing the charity. (And
I presume the robustness of the termination/review process the failure
of which would spoil everything).

Nobody has the ability to remove ICANN's board of directors or
terminate ICANN without their consent, right?  Without such a power,
all review is merely perfunctory advice that can be and will be freely
ignored whenever in conflict with any ICANN agenda.  Also, there's no
link all the way back to the global internet community.  Users don't
have a vote that can ultimately reverse or eliminate ICANN and
substitute "different guards for their future security" to quote the
US Declaration of Independence, asserting the ultimate rights of the
people.

When the ultimate power is not diffused among all the people via
democracy, that means power is concentrated in the hands of a few, and
all of history shows the danger and damage caused by that.

Paul Lehto, Juris Doctor

On 10/3/09, Roland Perry <roland at internetpolicyagency.com> wrote:
> In message
> <21947256.1254599995816.JavaMail.root at mswamui-cedar.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
> , at 14:59:55 on Sat, 3 Oct 2009, Jeffrey A. Williams
> <jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com> writes
>
>>>In the UK we have an organisation called the Charity Commissioners, who
>>>provide quite a lot of oversight.
>>Yes, but does the Charity Commissioners have any real clout or force
>>of law of any sort?  My guess is no
>
> They are currently "striking off" a number of fee-paying schools because
> those schools are not considered "charitable enough" (there is some
> debate what this exactly means, but it probably includes giving a
> certain number of sponsored places to disadvantaged families, as well as
> allowing their facilities, such as sports fields, to be used by the
> wider community outside teaching hours). If they lose the charitable
> status, there are tax implications.
>

-- 
Paul R Lehto, J.D.
P.O. Box #1
Ishpeming, MI  49849
lehto.paul at gmail.com
906-204-4026
____________________________________________________________
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


From avri at psg.com  Tue Oct  6 12:46:21 2009
From: avri at psg.com (Avri Doria)
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 2009 12:46:21 -0400
Subject: [governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation of Commitments
In-Reply-To: <76f819dd0910060857l766c25e5y4df848136e07598@mail.gmail.com>
References: <75822E125BCB994F8446858C4B19F0D78FFC6E09@SUEX07-MBX-04.ad.syr.edu> <3QZdNroLCQxKFAts@perry.co.uk> <76f819dd0910011242u2d26722eg4cac8f606ece0282@mail.gmail.com> <rBdKJCua0QxKFAve@perry.co.uk> <76f819dd0910021037o36cd6b7aj9c8d7454ca116cc2@mail.gmail.com> <y8DcmVKiokxKFAvp@perry.co.uk> <76f819dd0910030740v206a4661xcd43ea4ae54d2483@mail.gmail.com> <LjfihqAS+5xKFA5l@perry.co.uk> <76f819dd0910050734o5fbc2812k789c8232b30eac3b@mail.gmail.com> <f65fb55e0910050855i179b899w8c0422ae0694ef@mail.gmail.com> <76f819dd0910060857l766c25e5y4df848136e07598@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <6FDD041A-0DC5-44E6-A117-89ECDB296908@psg.com>


On 6 Oct 2009, at 11:57, Paul Lehto wrote:

> The only
> legitimate way to fully claim the public interest mantle is by having
> a mandate via consent of the governed from the people as a whole.


does this mean that until everyone in the world votes, ICANN will  
never be legitimate according to you?

a.

____________________________________________________________
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


From parminder at itforchange.net  Tue Oct  6 12:52:33 2009
From: parminder at itforchange.net (Parminder)
Date: Tue, 06 Oct 2009 22:22:33 +0530
Subject: [governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation of Commitments
In-Reply-To: <6FDD041A-0DC5-44E6-A117-89ECDB296908@psg.com>
References: <75822E125BCB994F8446858C4B19F0D78FFC6E09@SUEX07-MBX-04.ad.syr.edu> <3QZdNroLCQxKFAts@perry.co.uk> <76f819dd0910011242u2d26722eg4cac8f606ece0282@mail.gmail.com> <rBdKJCua0QxKFAve@perry.co.uk> <76f819dd0910021037o36cd6b7aj9c8d7454ca116cc2@mail.gmail.com> <y8DcmVKiokxKFAvp@perry.co.uk> <76f819dd0910030740v206a4661xcd43ea4ae54d2483@mail.gmail.com> <LjfihqAS+5xKFA5l@perry.co.uk> <76f819dd0910050734o5fbc2812k789c8232b30eac3b@mail.gmail.com> <f65fb55e0910050855i179b899w8c0422ae0694ef@mail.gmail.com> <76f819dd0910060857l766c25e5y4df848136e07598@mail.gmail.com> <6FDD041A-0DC5-44E6-A117-89ECDB296908@psg.com>
Message-ID: <4ACB75D1.1020706@itforchange.net>



Avri Doria wrote:
>
> On 6 Oct 2009, at 11:57, Paul Lehto wrote:
>
>> The only
>> legitimate way to fully claim the public interest mantle is by having
>> a mandate via consent of the governed from the people as a whole.
>
>
> does this mean that until everyone in the world votes, ICANN will 
> never be legitimate according to you?
If that is not practical, a much better link with, and accountability 
(in the 'real' terms as Paul discusses) to, the global public has to be 
established, than ICANN has.

For this ICANN would first need to understand the 'global public' in its 
socio-political nature, which it has shown a singular tendency to make 
no progress towards.


Parminder
>
> a.
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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


From lehto.paul at gmail.com  Tue Oct  6 12:52:44 2009
From: lehto.paul at gmail.com (Paul Lehto)
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 2009 09:52:44 -0700
Subject: [governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation of Commitments
In-Reply-To: <6FDD041A-0DC5-44E6-A117-89ECDB296908@psg.com>
References: <75822E125BCB994F8446858C4B19F0D78FFC6E09@SUEX07-MBX-04.ad.syr.edu>
	 <rBdKJCua0QxKFAve@perry.co.uk>
	 <76f819dd0910021037o36cd6b7aj9c8d7454ca116cc2@mail.gmail.com>
	 <y8DcmVKiokxKFAvp@perry.co.uk>
	 <76f819dd0910030740v206a4661xcd43ea4ae54d2483@mail.gmail.com>
	 <LjfihqAS+5xKFA5l@perry.co.uk>
	 <76f819dd0910050734o5fbc2812k789c8232b30eac3b@mail.gmail.com>
	 <f65fb55e0910050855i179b899w8c0422ae0694ef@mail.gmail.com>
	 <76f819dd0910060857l766c25e5y4df848136e07598@mail.gmail.com>
	 <6FDD041A-0DC5-44E6-A117-89ECDB296908@psg.com>
Message-ID: <76f819dd0910060952v8d6890cw56733e320452fc15@mail.gmail.com>

Have you ever heard of the "consent of the governed?"  There's more
than one way that consent of the governed can be achieved, but nobody
seriously believes and defends the position publicly that there's any
legitimate political authority outside some nexus to *elections* among
the people (such as electing representatives who then elect
ambassadors or delegates to an ICANN board or congress, etc.)

Are you, Avri Doria, really saying what it seems you're saying:
Elections are too difficult in your mind so they will be dispensed
with, or can be, in the interest of efficiency?

In any case, as President Harry Truman said "If you want efficiency,
you'll get a dictatorship."

This is because Democracy's core values don't always dictate
efficiency.  In fact, things like separation of powers and checks and
balances are in fact redundant inefficiencies that a strongman
dictator could well streamline and save money and time on.  Democracy,
by contrast, is a commitment to serial public discussions and votes
(and therefore disputes) lasting... forever -- or at least as long as
freedom and democracy lasts.

Paul Lehto, Juris Doctor

On 10/6/09, Avri Doria <avri at psg.com> wrote:
>
> On 6 Oct 2009, at 11:57, Paul Lehto wrote:
>
>> The only
>> legitimate way to fully claim the public interest mantle is by having
>> a mandate via consent of the governed from the people as a whole.
>
>
> does this mean that until everyone in the world votes, ICANN will
> never be legitimate according to you?
>
> a.
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
>


-- 
Paul R Lehto, J.D.
P.O. Box #1
Ishpeming, MI  49849
lehto.paul at gmail.com
906-204-4026
____________________________________________________________
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


From lehto.paul at gmail.com  Tue Oct  6 13:14:15 2009
From: lehto.paul at gmail.com (Paul Lehto)
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 2009 10:14:15 -0700
Subject: [governance] a faux meeting of the minds
In-Reply-To: <8AFC39E9-88E5-4C4A-9C38-3687E9A49B1B@acm.org>
References: <3210167A-D1E6-43D3-827F-DCFD373AB41F@graduateinstitute.ch>
	 <8AFC39E9-88E5-4C4A-9C38-3687E9A49B1B@acm.org>
Message-ID: <76f819dd0910061014r7ae5cb35v98ef8ab5557ec71e@mail.gmail.com>

any group taking a public position (and accountable at least to its
funders) is going to think long and hard before taking a position that
directly undermines democracy.  Therefore, many if not all groups will
share in common this concern about accountability being non-existent
in the new ICANN "independence" arrangement, EVEN IF they aren't
really totally behind democracy.  The alternative is to be perceieved
as undemocratic which is unsavory for all but the extreme fringe.

That being said, the difficulties and hazards for the success of any
given group's point of view are multiplied tremendously by putting
things out to an indirect (via representatives) or direct vote of the
people.  Therefore, those who are "players" in power tend not to want
to roll the dice with democracy, it forces them to lose relative
control and influence.  This is a natural conflict of interest for all
insiders, solved only by a ritual (and real) deference to democratic
processes.

Where that deference is lacking, then the approach is almost
invariably to simply ignore as best they can the defects in democratic
process, because it's ultimately not a good terrain to fight on (the
tides of history are decisively in favor of democracy).  Therefore, if
one is (in practice if not in heart) against democracy in order to
preserve an inside position (whether or not stated as being in the
public interest) then one is forced to do an end-round democracy,
undermine it covertly and not up front -- because a frontal attack on
democracy is just too dangerous.

Interestingly, and I don't claim its existence in this context, the
basic form of an attack on democracy (given that it must be indirect
and/or secret and not direct) would be something that, if identified
and criticized, could likely be called "conspiracy theory" as a way of
belittling it.  But if I am correct that democracy is too dangerous to
attack directly. there exist only two main ways for it to be damaged:

(1) purely unintentionally because people aren't realizing what they
are doing, and
(2) by what amounts to, or can be characterized by others as, a
conspiracy theory.

What this means is that committed defenders of democracy need to
realize that the primary mode of attack will be from within, and in
the nature of what is often called (to silence discussion, all too
often) a conspiracy theory.  The almost overwhelming power "conspiracy
theorist" denunciations have to silence debate combined with the fact
that they are usually made by totally unconnected non-conspirators who
just perceive they can score a good debate point in an email or oped
means that (drum roll please)....

Conspiracies, REAL ONES, when and if they exist, have nearly a free
hand to succeed.  They will get enormous assistance from innocent
people denouncing conspiracy theories.  Yet what all of this ignores
is that when something is really popular and can't be attacked
directly, the only way to attack it is in the general nature of what
people call a conspiracy theory in the vernacular sense (which doesn't
require the element of illegality, and thus is just an agreement among
two or more people to operate in favor of a common result  -- the most
common thing in politics, yet still denouncable as a "conspiracy".)

A conspiracy, after all, is nothing more than an agreement among two
or more people to accomplish an illegal result.  There are millions of
agreements a day, literally, and there are lots and lots of laws.  But
save your typing, I'm not alleging a conspiracy of anything secret
here with ICANN.  I'm just explaining that the decision to circumvent
democracy is not going to be the lead in their press releases, and
that it's natural to attack democracy indirectly since it's the only
way to be successful.

That being said, the ICANN affirmations themselves are public material
and more than enough to draw the conclusion that what remained of
democratic control is being eliminated via the affirmations.   We lost
Too-Narrow (US only) democratic control and gained absolutely nothing
in terms of global democratic control, therefore it's a big loss for
democracy, and there's no platform from which global democratic
control can be *readily* built.
Paul Lehto, Juris Doctor

PS I think for the first or second time I've reached a daily limit so
I'll see ya'll tomorrow if there are any replies.
On 10/5/09, Avri Doria <avri at acm.org> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Or maybe, as uncomfortable as it might seem, there are some views that
> are held in common between the two groups.
>
> a.
>
> On 5 Oct 2009, at 03:47, William Drake wrote:
>
>> Interesting how major trademark holders use (coopt?) the same sort
>> of language as CS re: the AoC.  I guess capture is in the eye of the
>> beholder...
>>
>> http://www.cadna.org/en/newsroom/press-releases/iccan-affirmation-of-commitments-falls-short
>>
>> “The Affirmation of Commitments document missed the mark by failing
>> to create accountability for ICANN,” said Josh Bourne, President of
>> CADNA. “The points addressed and the intent expressed in the new
>> agreement touch on the many issues that are important for a stable
>> and transparent Internet—however, without proper oversight and
>> accountability, ICANN is not beholden to follow through on any of
>> the promises made in the AOC.”...Furthermore, while the AOC calls
>> for periodic internal reviews, only an independent review can
>> provide an honest and objective assessment of the operations of an
>> organization....“ICANN is still broken and as a regulator that has
>> been captured from within, it cannot properly self-correct,” said
>> Bourne. “Independent, outside pressure and accountability are needed
>> to reform ICANN.”
>>
>>
>> ***********************************************************
>> 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
>


-- 
Paul R Lehto, J.D.
P.O. Box #1
Ishpeming, MI  49849
lehto.paul at gmail.com
906-204-4026
____________________________________________________________
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


From avri at psg.com  Tue Oct  6 13:20:37 2009
From: avri at psg.com (Avri Doria)
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 2009 13:20:37 -0400
Subject: [governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation of Commitments
In-Reply-To: <76f819dd0910060952v8d6890cw56733e320452fc15@mail.gmail.com>
References: <75822E125BCB994F8446858C4B19F0D78FFC6E09@SUEX07-MBX-04.ad.syr.edu> <rBdKJCua0QxKFAve@perry.co.uk> <76f819dd0910021037o36cd6b7aj9c8d7454ca116cc2@mail.gmail.com> <y8DcmVKiokxKFAvp@perry.co.uk> <76f819dd0910030740v206a4661xcd43ea4ae54d2483@mail.gmail.com> <LjfihqAS+5xKFA5l@perry.co.uk> <76f819dd0910050734o5fbc2812k789c8232b30eac3b@mail.gmail.com> <f65fb55e0910050855i179b899w8c0422ae0694ef@mail.gmail.com> <76f819dd0910060857l766c25e5y4df848136e07598@mail.gmail.com> <6FDD041A-0DC5-44E6-A117-89ECDB296908@psg.com> <76f819dd0910060952v8d6890cw56733e320452fc15@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CFF80708-6B72-4027-B5C1-A2DBDC5047F6@psg.com>


On 6 Oct 2009, at 12:52, Paul Lehto wrote:

> Have you ever heard of the "consent of the governed?"

of course i never heard of it.

and i have volunteered at ICANN for many years, so obviously i must  
want to enslave all and must want nothing more then a dictatorship.

sigh!

a,


____________________________________________________________
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


From wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de  Tue Oct  6 13:23:30 2009
From: wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de (=?iso-8859-1?Q?=22Kleinw=E4chter=2C_Wolfgang=22?=)
Date: Tue, 06 Oct 2009 19:23:30 +0200
Subject: AW: [governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation of Commitments
References: <75822E125BCB994F8446858C4B19F0D78FFC6E09@SUEX07-MBX-04.ad.syr.edu>
 <rBdKJCua0QxKFAve@perry.co.uk>
 <76f819dd0910021037o36cd6b7aj9c8d7454ca116cc2@mail.gmail.com>
 <y8DcmVKiokxKFAvp@perry.co.uk>
 <76f819dd0910030740v206a4661xcd43ea4ae54d2483@mail.gmail.com>
 <LjfihqAS+5xKFA5l@perry.co.uk>
 <76f819dd0910050734o5fbc2812k789c8232b30eac3b@mail.gmail.com>
 <f65fb55e0910050855i179b899w8c0422ae0694ef@mail.gmail.com>
 <76f819dd0910060857l766c25e5y4df848136e07598@mail.gmail.com>
 <6FDD041A-0DC5-44E6-A117-89ECDB296908@psg.com>
 <76f819dd0910060952v8d6890cw56733e320452fc15@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID:  <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A87195D2@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>

Dear Paul 
 
you describe and defebnd the classical "representative democracy" of the 20th century. Good points. Very good points. 
 
However, in the complexity of the 21st century the "chain of representation" gets longer and looner and there is less and less a direct relationship between the input of the people and the output of a government. Do you really believe, that a diplomat sitting in a UN meeting and discussing very concrete and difficult technical issue represents "her/his people"? In the best way she/he follows the instructions from her/his capital. In the worst sense she/he is doing wha she/he wants because nobody controls her/him. If she/he is a good guy you get a good solution. If she/he is a bad guy it is sad and bad. 
 
What the Internet has enabled is to add a layer which can combine representative with participatory democracy. The principle of multistakeholderism is the very concrete outcome of this development. It is still very early and we are exploring how it could work. But going back to the past would be the wrong turn to meet the challenges of the future (with all respect to President Truman who also order the drop of the first nuclar bomb to Hiroshoma). 
 
Best wishes
 
wolfgang

________________________________

Von: Paul Lehto [mailto:lehto.paul at gmail.com]
Gesendet: Di 06.10.2009 18:52
An: governance at lists.cpsr.org; Avri Doria
Betreff: Re: [governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation of Commitments



Have you ever heard of the "consent of the governed?"  There's more
than one way that consent of the governed can be achieved, but nobody
seriously believes and defends the position publicly that there's any
legitimate political authority outside some nexus to *elections* among
the people (such as electing representatives who then elect
ambassadors or delegates to an ICANN board or congress, etc.)

Are you, Avri Doria, really saying what it seems you're saying:
Elections are too difficult in your mind so they will be dispensed
with, or can be, in the interest of efficiency?

In any case, as President Harry Truman said "If you want efficiency,
you'll get a dictatorship."

This is because Democracy's core values don't always dictate
efficiency.  In fact, things like separation of powers and checks and
balances are in fact redundant inefficiencies that a strongman
dictator could well streamline and save money and time on.  Democracy,
by contrast, is a commitment to serial public discussions and votes
(and therefore disputes) lasting... forever -- or at least as long as
freedom and democracy lasts.

Paul Lehto, Juris Doctor

On 10/6/09, Avri Doria <avri at psg.com> wrote:
>
> On 6 Oct 2009, at 11:57, Paul Lehto wrote:
>
>> The only
>> legitimate way to fully claim the public interest mantle is by having
>> a mandate via consent of the governed from the people as a whole.
>
>
> does this mean that until everyone in the world votes, ICANN will
> never be legitimate according to you?
>
> a.
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
>


--
Paul R Lehto, J.D.
P.O. Box #1
Ishpeming, MI  49849
lehto.paul at gmail.com
906-204-4026
____________________________________________________________
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


From lehto.paul at gmail.com  Tue Oct  6 13:37:46 2009
From: lehto.paul at gmail.com (Paul Lehto)
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 2009 10:37:46 -0700
Subject: [governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation of Commitments
In-Reply-To: <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A87195D2@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
References: <75822E125BCB994F8446858C4B19F0D78FFC6E09@SUEX07-MBX-04.ad.syr.edu>
	 <y8DcmVKiokxKFAvp@perry.co.uk>
	 <76f819dd0910030740v206a4661xcd43ea4ae54d2483@mail.gmail.com>
	 <LjfihqAS+5xKFA5l@perry.co.uk>
	 <76f819dd0910050734o5fbc2812k789c8232b30eac3b@mail.gmail.com>
	 <f65fb55e0910050855i179b899w8c0422ae0694ef@mail.gmail.com>
	 <76f819dd0910060857l766c25e5y4df848136e07598@mail.gmail.com>
	 <6FDD041A-0DC5-44E6-A117-89ECDB296908@psg.com>
	 <76f819dd0910060952v8d6890cw56733e320452fc15@mail.gmail.com>
	 <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A87195D2@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
Message-ID: <76f819dd0910061037y43b6e6f8iaf3c4f279c6ee7d6@mail.gmail.com>

Guten Tag,

I agree that there exists a slippery slope where political actors get
more and more removed from democratic authority and accountability via
layers of what amount to insulation (appointment, etc.)  At some
point, it becomes so attenuated that there's no sufficient democratic
control left. In that case, at least under state law in the US (some
bad US Supreme Court decisions make federal law more dicey), it is
clear that the "nondelegation doctrine" will invalidate the action
because there is not a sufficient tie to democratic accountability
such that we can fairly say that the action of the person with
delegated authority from the legislature or congress was done with
sufficient oversight and standards attached to it that we can fairly
say that the legislature or Congress is still in charge (thus
vindicating democracy's control).  It's a control test, pure and
simple.

In the case of ICANN present here, we don't have to reach the slippery
slope issues above because ICANN expressly claims "independence" that,
at its very core, requires lack of control, thus defeating
accountability to any democratic constituency.

I freely admit that US-only control is not desirable, but when the
choice is between democratic control by a single large pluralistic
nation versus zero democratic control with a facade of globalism and
no real way to build global democratic control, the choice is obvious
because nobody globally is better off than they were before, it's just
the US that is worse off, and democracy is much worse off, and because
democracy is something the globe has an interest in, it's a loss for
the whole world in addition to a loss for the US public.

Paul Lehto, Juris Doctor

PS In quoting Pres. Truman I only do so to give credit for the
quotation, and to approve in this instance the content of it, but not
to approve everything else that speaker did, nor for that matter do
any of my quotations mean to imply such overall approval, especially
in the case of the second atomic bomb on Nagasaki, which was more
indefensible than the first on Hiroshima.

On 10/6/09, "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang"
<wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de> wrote:
> Dear Paul
>
> you describe and defebnd the classical "representative democracy" of the
> 20th century. Good points. Very good points.
>
> However, in the complexity of the 21st century the "chain of representation"
> gets longer and looner and there is less and less a direct relationship
> between the input of the people and the output of a government. Do you
> really believe, that a diplomat sitting in a UN meeting and discussing very
> concrete and difficult technical issue represents "her/his people"? In the
> best way she/he follows the instructions from her/his capital. In the worst
> sense she/he is doing wha she/he wants because nobody controls her/him. If
> she/he is a good guy you get a good solution. If she/he is a bad guy it is
> sad and bad.
>
> What the Internet has enabled is to add a layer which can combine
> representative with participatory democracy. The principle of
> multistakeholderism is the very concrete outcome of this development. It is
> still very early and we are exploring how it could work. But going back to
> the past would be the wrong turn to meet the challenges of the future (with
> all respect to President Truman who also order the drop of the first nuclar
> bomb to Hiroshoma).
>
> Best wishes
>
> wolfgang
>
> ________________________________
>
> Von: Paul Lehto [mailto:lehto.paul at gmail.com]
> Gesendet: Di 06.10.2009 18:52
> An: governance at lists.cpsr.org; Avri Doria
> Betreff: Re: [governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation of Commitments
>
>
>
> Have you ever heard of the "consent of the governed?"  There's more
> than one way that consent of the governed can be achieved, but nobody
> seriously believes and defends the position publicly that there's any
> legitimate political authority outside some nexus to *elections* among
> the people (such as electing representatives who then elect
> ambassadors or delegates to an ICANN board or congress, etc.)
>
> Are you, Avri Doria, really saying what it seems you're saying:
> Elections are too difficult in your mind so they will be dispensed
> with, or can be, in the interest of efficiency?
>
> In any case, as President Harry Truman said "If you want efficiency,
> you'll get a dictatorship."
>
> This is because Democracy's core values don't always dictate
> efficiency.  In fact, things like separation of powers and checks and
> balances are in fact redundant inefficiencies that a strongman
> dictator could well streamline and save money and time on.  Democracy,
> by contrast, is a commitment to serial public discussions and votes
> (and therefore disputes) lasting... forever -- or at least as long as
> freedom and democracy lasts.
>
> Paul Lehto, Juris Doctor
>
> On 10/6/09, Avri Doria <avri at psg.com> wrote:
>>
>> On 6 Oct 2009, at 11:57, Paul Lehto wrote:
>>
>>> The only
>>> legitimate way to fully claim the public interest mantle is by having
>>> a mandate via consent of the governed from the people as a whole.
>>
>>
>> does this mean that until everyone in the world votes, ICANN will
>> never be legitimate according to you?
>>
>> a.
>>
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> 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
>>
>
>
> --
> Paul R Lehto, J.D.
> P.O. Box #1
> Ishpeming, MI  49849
> lehto.paul at gmail.com
> 906-204-4026
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
>
>
>


-- 
Paul R Lehto, J.D.
P.O. Box #1
Ishpeming, MI  49849
lehto.paul at gmail.com
906-204-4026
____________________________________________________________
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


From jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com  Tue Oct  6 14:19:15 2009
From: jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com (Jeffrey A. Williams)
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 2009 13:19:15 -0500 (GMT-05:00)
Subject: AW: [governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation of Commitments
Message-ID: <30840676.1254853155265.JavaMail.root@mswamui-andean.atl.sa.earthlink.net>

Dear Wolfgang and all,

See remarks in response interspersed below Wolf's.

-----Original Message-----
>From: "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang" <wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
>Sent: Oct 6, 2009 12:23 PM
>To: governance at lists.cpsr.org, Paul Lehto <lehto.paul at gmail.com>, governance at lists.cpsr.org, Avri Doria <avri at psg.com>
>Subject: AW: [governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation of Commitments
>
>Dear Paul 
> 
>you describe and defebnd the classical "representative democracy" of the 20th century. Good points. Very good points. 
> 
>However, in the complexity of the 21st century the "chain of representation" gets longer and looner and there is less and less a direct relationship between the input of the people and the output of a government. Do you really believe, that a diplomat sitting in a UN meeting and discussing very concrete and difficult technical issue represents "her/his people"? In the best way she/he follows the instructions from her/his capital. In the worst sense she/he is doing wha she/he wants because nobody controls her/him. If she/he is a good guy you get a good solution. If she/he is a bad guy it is sad and bad. 

Your contention is true regardless of how long of short the "Chain of Representation"
and I would add Accountability is.   Further UN representatives are usually selected
by heads of state or sometimes the head of state presides as his nations UN representative,
which I think is a good idea, BTW.  As such a selected and/or appointed UN representative
can be replaced at the desire of the head of state if he/she is a bad actor.
> 
>What the Internet has enabled is to add a layer which can combine representative with participatory democracy. The principle of multistakeholderism is the very concrete outcome of this development. It is still very early and we are exploring how it could work. But going back to the past would be the wrong turn to meet the challenges of the future (with all respect to President Truman who also order the drop of the first nuclar bomb to Hiroshoma). 

I disagree.  The Internet hasn't added anything of such value or substance, but has
only excelerated and proliferated communication between interested parties.
> 
>Best wishes
> 
>wolfgang
>
>________________________________
>
>Von: Paul Lehto [mailto:lehto.paul at gmail.com]
>Gesendet: Di 06.10.2009 18:52
>An: governance at lists.cpsr.org; Avri Doria
>Betreff: Re: [governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation of Commitments
>
>
>
>Have you ever heard of the "consent of the governed?"  There's more
>than one way that consent of the governed can be achieved, but nobody
>seriously believes and defends the position publicly that there's any
>legitimate political authority outside some nexus to *elections* among
>the people (such as electing representatives who then elect
>ambassadors or delegates to an ICANN board or congress, etc.)
>
>Are you, Avri Doria, really saying what it seems you're saying:
>Elections are too difficult in your mind so they will be dispensed
>with, or can be, in the interest of efficiency?
>
>In any case, as President Harry Truman said "If you want efficiency,
>you'll get a dictatorship."
>
>This is because Democracy's core values don't always dictate
>efficiency.  In fact, things like separation of powers and checks and
>balances are in fact redundant inefficiencies that a strongman
>dictator could well streamline and save money and time on.  Democracy,
>by contrast, is a commitment to serial public discussions and votes
>(and therefore disputes) lasting... forever -- or at least as long as
>freedom and democracy lasts.
>
>Paul Lehto, Juris Doctor
>
>On 10/6/09, Avri Doria <avri at psg.com> wrote:
>>
>> On 6 Oct 2009, at 11:57, Paul Lehto wrote:
>>
>>> The only
>>> legitimate way to fully claim the public interest mantle is by having
>>> a mandate via consent of the governed from the people as a whole.
>>
>>
>> does this mean that until everyone in the world votes, ICANN will
>> never be legitimate according to you?
>>
>> a.
>>
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> 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
>>
>
>
>--
>Paul R Lehto, J.D.
>P.O. Box #1
>Ishpeming, MI  49849
>lehto.paul at gmail.com
>906-204-4026
>____________________________________________________________
>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

Regards,

Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 294k members/stakeholders strong!)
"Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" -
   Abraham Lincoln

"Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is very
often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt

"If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; liability
depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
United States v. Carroll Towing  (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
===============================================================
Updated 1/26/04
CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS. div. of
Information Network Eng.  INEG. INC.
ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com
Phone: 214-244-4827

____________________________________________________________
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


From jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com  Tue Oct  6 14:42:21 2009
From: jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com (Jeffrey A. Williams)
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 2009 13:42:21 -0500 (GMT-05:00)
Subject: AW: AW: [governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation of Commitments
Message-ID: <12514596.1254854541621.JavaMail.root@elwamui-muscovy.atl.sa.earthlink.net>

Wolf and all,

  Great sarcastically funny suggestions! >;)  Can I take it that you 
now got my point?

-----Original Message-----
>From: "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang" <wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
>Sent: Oct 6, 2009 2:28 AM
>To: "Jeffrey A. Williams" <jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com>, governance at lists.cpsr.org, governance at lists.cpsr.org, Roland Perry <roland at internetpolicyagency.com>, governance at lists.cpsr.org, cgomes at verisign.com
>Cc: ssene at ntia.doc.gov
>Subject: AW: AW: [governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation of Commitments
>
>Jeff
> 
>what about Georgia or Ossetia? Or the Falkland Islands? Let`s Doodle it :-)))
> 
>w
> 
>
>________________________________
>
>Von: Jeffrey A. Williams [mailto:jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com]
>Gesendet: Mo 05.10.2009 23:04
>An: governance at lists.cpsr.org; Kleinwächter, Wolfgang; governance at lists.cpsr.org; Roland Perry; governance at lists.cpsr.org; cgomes at verisign.com
>Cc: ssene at ntia.doc.gov
>Betreff: Re: AW: [governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation of Commitments
>
>
>
>Wolfgang and all,
>
>  Unknown at this time, perhaps Verisign would be magnamous
>in recommending Iran as the hosting country and physical
>location?  After all such a recommendation might go far
>in diplomatic circles in outreach to a mid east nation and
>garner better cooperation between the US and Iran as well
>as participating sanctioning nations presently.  My guess is
>that this possibility is unlikely and I personally would find
>such a very questionable choice.
>
>  Another choice might be Afghanistan for many obvious diplomatic
>and economic reasons, safty aside of course.  But I am sure that
>IGC members would be lining up to volunteer to man such a facility
>for a time and aid in the training of more perminant native Afghans
>to eventually take over.  Of course these volunteers would have to
>provide for their own body armor ect. or perhaps Verisign would
>do the provisioning for same.
>
>-----Original Message-----
>>From: "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang" <wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
>>Sent: Oct 3, 2009 3:21 AM
>>To: governance at lists.cpsr.org, Roland Perry <roland at internetpolicyagency.com>, governance at lists.cpsr.org
>>Subject: AW: [governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation of Commitments
>>
>>What would be the "home for .ngo, advertised by VeriSign?
>>
>>Wolfgang
>>
>>________________________________
>>
>>Von: Roland Perry [mailto:roland at internetpolicyagency.com]
>>Gesendet: Sa 03.10.2009 09:20
>>An: governance at lists.cpsr.org
>>Betreff: Re: [governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation of Commitments
>>
>>
>>
>>In message <136301ca4397$ac34e1f0$6400a8c0 at powuseren2ihcx>, at 15:36:41
>>on Fri, 2 Oct 2009, Thomas Lowenhaupt <toml at communisphere.com> writes
>>>Since the adoption of the New gTLD Policy in June 2008, I've been
>>>thinking through the process for establishing equitable representation
>>>for cities within the ICANN structure.
>>
>>Maybe they should join the NCUC?
>>
>>I was struggling to find a place for a charity to call "home" within the
>>ICANN 'silo' system. Surely not in the "Business and Commercial" users -
>>but if it was, then that would also be the place for a City (which is
>>primarily a not-for-profit business run by the Mayor and funded by the
>>citizens).
>>
>>I'm sure there are many other classes of entity which don't currently
>>have a well defined "home". Trade Unions, for example, which *do* have
>>an "Advisory Committee" within the OECD's consultative process.
>>--
>>Roland Perry
>>____________________________________________________________
>>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
>
>Regards,
>
>Jeffrey A. Williams
>Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 294k members/stakeholders strong!)
>"Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" -
>   Abraham Lincoln
>
>"Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is very
>often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt
>
>"If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; liability
>depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
>P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
>United States v. Carroll Towing  (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
>===============================================================
>Updated 1/26/04
>CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS. div. of
>Information Network Eng.  INEG. INC.
>ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com
>Phone: 214-244-4827
>
>
>
>____________________________________________________________
>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,

Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 294k members/stakeholders strong!)
"Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" -
   Abraham Lincoln

"Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is very
often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt

"If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; liability
depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
United States v. Carroll Towing  (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
===============================================================
Updated 1/26/04
CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS. div. of
Information Network Eng.  INEG. INC.
ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com
Phone: 214-244-4827

____________________________________________________________
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


From dogwallah at gmail.com  Tue Oct  6 16:09:18 2009
From: dogwallah at gmail.com (McTim)
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 2009 23:09:18 +0300
Subject: [governance] Fwd: [dns-operations] DNSSEC in the Root Zone
In-Reply-To: <3406E124-2E7E-41E5-8E32-215A4A721DF5@hopcount.ca>
References: <3406E124-2E7E-41E5-8E32-215A4A721DF5@hopcount.ca>
Message-ID: <f65fb55e0910061309x54a878f7kc7ffa6e4724c559a@mail.gmail.com>

FYI, red meat for the IGP blog!

-- 
Cheers,

McTim
"A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A
route indicates how we get there."  Jon Postel


---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Joe Abley
Date: Tue, Oct 6, 2009 at 10:30 PM
Subject: [dns-operations] DNSSEC in the Root Zone
To: dns-operations at mail.dns-oarc.net


Hi all,

Just a quick note to mention that earlier today Matt Larson and I
presented a high-level overview of the ongoing effort to sign the root
zone at the RIPE meeting in Lisbon. Slides for the presentation can be
found here:

http://www.ripe.net/ripe/meetings/ripe-59/presentations/uploads/presentations/Tuesday/Plenary%2014:00/Abley-DNSSEC_for_the_Root_Zone.mId7.pdf

The presentation includes a timeline for DNSSEC to be fully
operational in the root zone, with a target live date of 1 July 2010.


Joe
_______________________________________________
dns-operations mailing list
dns-operations at lists.dns-oarc.net
https://lists.dns-oarc.net/mailman/listinfo/dns-operations
____________________________________________________________
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


From jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com  Tue Oct  6 18:28:02 2009
From: jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com (Jeffrey A. Williams)
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 2009 17:28:02 -0500 (GMT-05:00)
Subject: [governance] Fwd: [dns-operations] DNSSEC in the Root Zone
Message-ID: <15598520.1254868082560.JavaMail.root@mswamui-valley.atl.sa.earthlink.net>


McTim and all,

  Should be.  Seems that PIR's .ORG DNSSEC went badly and is now needing
revision and re-implimentation.  I'm not surprised.

  I have heard rumors that the July date may need to be pushed
out until Sept. 2010.  July seems  very optomistic and Sept. isn't
much better unless one is willing to be overly Censored or operational
"Bugs" related but not obvious are fun for the users ourselves included.

-----Original Message-----
>From: McTim <dogwallah at gmail.com>
>Sent: Oct 6, 2009 3:09 PM
>To: governance at lists.cpsr.org
>Subject: [governance] Fwd: [dns-operations] DNSSEC in the Root Zone
>
>FYI, red meat for the IGP blog!
>
>-- 
>Cheers,
>
>McTim
>"A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A
>route indicates how we get there."  Jon Postel
>
>
>---------- Forwarded message ----------
>From: Joe Abley
>Date: Tue, Oct 6, 2009 at 10:30 PM
>Subject: [dns-operations] DNSSEC in the Root Zone
>To: dns-operations at mail.dns-oarc.net
>
>
>Hi all,
>
>Just a quick note to mention that earlier today Matt Larson and I
>presented a high-level overview of the ongoing effort to sign the root
>zone at the RIPE meeting in Lisbon. Slides for the presentation can be
>found here:
>
>http://www.ripe.net/ripe/meetings/ripe-59/presentations/uploads/presentations/Tuesday/Plenary%2014:00/Abley-DNSSEC_for_the_Root_Zone.mId7.pdf
>
>The presentation includes a timeline for DNSSEC to be fully
>operational in the root zone, with a target live date of 1 July 2010.
>
>
>Joe
>_______________________________________________
>dns-operations mailing list
>dns-operations at lists.dns-oarc.net
>https://lists.dns-oarc.net/mailman/listinfo/dns-operations
>____________________________________________________________
>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

Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 294k members/stakeholders strong!)
"Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" -
   Abraham Lincoln

"Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is very
often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt

"If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; liability
depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
United States v. Carroll Towing  (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
===============================================================
Updated 1/26/04
CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS. div. of
Information Network Eng.  INEG. INC.
ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com
Phone: 214-244-4827

____________________________________________________________
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


From jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com  Tue Oct  6 18:37:49 2009
From: jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com (Jeffrey A. Williams)
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 2009 17:37:49 -0500 (GMT-05:00)
Subject: [governance] a faux meeting of the minds
Message-ID: <9911051.1254868669488.JavaMail.root@mswamui-valley.atl.sa.earthlink.net>


Paul and all,

  My comments in response interspersed below..

-----Original Message-----
>From: Paul Lehto <lehto.paul at gmail.com>
>Sent: Oct 6, 2009 12:14 PM
>To: governance at lists.cpsr.org, Avri Doria <avri at acm.org>
>Subject: Re: [governance] a faux meeting of the minds
>
>any group taking a public position (and accountable at least to its
>funders) is going to think long and hard before taking a position that
>directly undermines democracy.  Therefore, many if not all groups will
>share in common this concern about accountability being non-existent
>in the new ICANN "independence" arrangement, EVEN IF they aren't
>really totally behind democracy.  The alternative is to be perceieved
>as undemocratic which is unsavory for all but the extreme fringe.

Agreed which is why ICANN is by some on the extreme fringe.  Could the
IGC follow suit?  Well lets hope not.
>
>That being said, the difficulties and hazards for the success of any
>given group's point of view are multiplied tremendously by putting
>things out to an indirect (via representatives) or direct vote of the
>people.  Therefore, those who are "players" in power tend not to want
>to roll the dice with democracy, it forces them to lose relative
>control and influence.  This is a natural conflict of interest for all
>insiders, solved only by a ritual (and real) deference to democratic
>processes.

Here here!
>
>Where that deference is lacking, then the approach is almost
>invariably to simply ignore as best they can the defects in democratic
>process, because it's ultimately not a good terrain to fight on (the
>tides of history are decisively in favor of democracy).  Therefore, if
>one is (in practice if not in heart) against democracy in order to
>preserve an inside position (whether or not stated as being in the
>public interest) then one is forced to do an end-round democracy,
>undermine it covertly and not up front -- because a frontal attack on
>democracy is just too dangerous.

Very much agreed and there are a number of historical refrences, one
reoccuring one is in the western hemisphere, Mexico.
>
>Interestingly, and I don't claim its existence in this context, the
>basic form of an attack on democracy (given that it must be indirect
>and/or secret and not direct) would be something that, if identified
>and criticized, could likely be called "conspiracy theory" as a way of
>belittling it.  But if I am correct that democracy is too dangerous to
>attack directly. there exist only two main ways for it to be damaged:
>
>(1) purely unintentionally because people aren't realizing what they
>are doing, and
>(2) by what amounts to, or can be characterized by others as, a
>conspiracy theory.

Most of us that are adults of 30+ years of age have witnessed
many "Real" Conspiracies in the government sector.  So belitteling
such is foolhardy to the wise and informed.
>
>What this means is that committed defenders of democracy need to
>realize that the primary mode of attack will be from within, and in
>the nature of what is often called (to silence discussion, all too
>often) a conspiracy theory.  The almost overwhelming power "conspiracy
>theorist" denunciations have to silence debate combined with the fact
>that they are usually made by totally unconnected non-conspirators who
>just perceive they can score a good debate point in an email or oped
>means that (drum roll please)....
>
>Conspiracies, REAL ONES, when and if they exist, have nearly a free
>hand to succeed.  They will get enormous assistance from innocent
>people denouncing conspiracy theories.  Yet what all of this ignores
>is that when something is really popular and can't be attacked
>directly, the only way to attack it is in the general nature of what
>people call a conspiracy theory in the vernacular sense (which doesn't
>require the element of illegality, and thus is just an agreement among
>two or more people to operate in favor of a common result  -- the most
>common thing in politics, yet still denouncable as a "conspiracy".)
>
>A conspiracy, after all, is nothing more than an agreement among two
>or more people to accomplish an illegal result.  There are millions of
>agreements a day, literally, and there are lots and lots of laws.  But
>save your typing, I'm not alleging a conspiracy of anything secret
>here with ICANN.  I'm just explaining that the decision to circumvent
>democracy is not going to be the lead in their press releases, and
>that it's natural to attack democracy indirectly since it's the only
>way to be successful.

Agreed fully here.
>
>That being said, the ICANN affirmations themselves are public material
>and more than enough to draw the conclusion that what remained of
>democratic control is being eliminated via the affirmations.   We lost
>Too-Narrow (US only) democratic control and gained absolutely nothing
>in terms of global democratic control, therefore it's a big loss for
>democracy, and there's no platform from which global democratic
>control can be *readily* built.

The only platform that could be used as and example is the UN and it
is historically not a good one especially in the past 20+ years of
history.  

>Paul Lehto, Juris Doctor
>
>PS I think for the first or second time I've reached a daily limit so
>I'll see ya'll tomorrow if there are any replies.
>On 10/5/09, Avri Doria <avri at acm.org> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> Or maybe, as uncomfortable as it might seem, there are some views that
>> are held in common between the two groups.
>>
>> a.
>>
>> On 5 Oct 2009, at 03:47, William Drake wrote:
>>
>>> Interesting how major trademark holders use (coopt?) the same sort
>>> of language as CS re: the AoC.  I guess capture is in the eye of the
>>> beholder...
>>>
>>> http://www.cadna.org/en/newsroom/press-releases/iccan-affirmation-of-commitments-falls-short
>>>
>>> “The Affirmation of Commitments document missed the mark by failing
>>> to create accountability for ICANN,” said Josh Bourne, President of
>>> CADNA. “The points addressed and the intent expressed in the new
>>> agreement touch on the many issues that are important for a stable
>>> and transparent Internet—however, without proper oversight and
>>> accountability, ICANN is not beholden to follow through on any of
>>> the promises made in the AOC.”...Furthermore, while the AOC calls
>>> for periodic internal reviews, only an independent review can
>>> provide an honest and objective assessment of the operations of an
>>> organization....“ICANN is still broken and as a regulator that has
>>> been captured from within, it cannot properly self-correct,” said
>>> Bourne. “Independent, outside pressure and accountability are needed
>>> to reform ICANN.”
>>>
>>>
>>> ***********************************************************
>>> 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
>>
>
>
>-- 
>Paul R Lehto, J.D.
>P.O. Box #1
>Ishpeming, MI  49849
>lehto.paul at gmail.com
>906-204-4026
>____________________________________________________________
>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

Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 294k members/stakeholders strong!)
"Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" -
   Abraham Lincoln

"Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is very
often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt

"If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; liability
depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
United States v. Carroll Towing  (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
===============================================================
Updated 1/26/04
CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS. div. of
Information Network Eng.  INEG. INC.
ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com
Phone: 214-244-4827

____________________________________________________________
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


From parminder at itforchange.net  Wed Oct  7 00:51:58 2009
From: parminder at itforchange.net (Parminder)
Date: Wed, 07 Oct 2009 10:21:58 +0530
Subject: AW: [governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation of Commitments
In-Reply-To: <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A87195D2@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
References: <75822E125BCB994F8446858C4B19F0D78FFC6E09@SUEX07-MBX-04.ad.syr.edu> <rBdKJCua0QxKFAve@perry.co.uk> <76f819dd0910021037o36cd6b7aj9c8d7454ca116cc2@mail.gmail.com> <y8DcmVKiokxKFAvp@perry.co.uk> <76f819dd0910030740v206a4661xcd43ea4ae54d2483@mail.gmail.com> <LjfihqAS+5xKFA5l@perry.co.uk> <76f819dd0910050734o5fbc2812k789c8232b30eac3b@mail.gmail.com> <f65fb55e0910050855i179b899w8c0422ae0694ef@mail.gmail.com> <76f819dd0910060857l766c25e5y4df848136e07598@mail.gmail.com> <6FDD041A-0DC5-44E6-A117-89ECDB296908@psg.com> <76f819dd0910060952v8d6890cw56733e320452fc15@mail.gmail.com> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A87195D2@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
Message-ID: <4ACC1E6E.50506@itforchange.net>

Wolfgang (and Avri and McTim)

We are all very unhappy with our present 'representative' democratic 
governance regimes, and seek to add more participatory layers and levers 
to it. You would not believe the kind of work being done or at least 
attempted  in India on this. we are ourselves are strongly in some such 
project, known variously under the labels of 'deepening democracy', 
communitization, open government, or even participatory development 
processes. So, the virtue of improving governance system by enhancing 
participation cannot be claimed solely by certain global efforts, often 
with techno-centric notions of assumed equality of people to start with, 
highly individualized with disregard to social  groups based exclusions, 
and also ignnoring many other structural issues.

In the specific context of governance of digital spaces (but also in the 
larger context) what is more significant ignored by these efforts or 
claims of new systems of direct and participatory democracy is the 
simultaneous, and strongly manifest, move towards corporates taking 
control of much of global 'governance' which to say the least is not 
democracy enhancing. They mostly just close their eyes to it. The 
neo-liberal system takes a lot of advantage  of this  fact, if not 
acquiescence. Multistakeholder models of policy making have been used in 
India to bring in monopolistic exploitative software models in schools 
in India and to lock in schools to paid commercial content rather than 
explore the best potential of collaborative content for schools....

I often and in a very engaged manner discuss the possibilities of new 
participatory forms to enhance our democracies with anyone who share our 
fears of what neoliberlaism is, or use the simpler word corporates are, 
doing - not in one-off but a systematic manner - to the fibre and future 
of our democracies. I dont engage so well if I do not notice sensitivity 
(without needing to completely agree with me) to this issue on the other 
side.... This corresponds to the reaosn why so many who are so strongly 
engaged with promoting people's democracy or participative democracy, 
especially in developing countries  (read about one of India foremost 
grassroots movements Mazdoor Kisan Shakti Sangathan) look askance at, in 
fact are mostly directly critical of, these new techno-centric visions 
of new forms of governance, without focusing enough on how their vision 
and efforts get placed in the overall struggle for democracy and social 
justice...

parminder

Kleinwächter, Wolfgang wrote:
> Dear Paul 
>  
> you describe and defebnd the classical "representative democracy" of the 20th century. Good points. Very good points. 
>  
> However, in the complexity of the 21st century the "chain of representation" gets longer and looner and there is less and less a direct relationship between the input of the people and the output of a government. Do you really believe, that a diplomat sitting in a UN meeting and discussing very concrete and difficult technical issue represents "her/his people"? In the best way she/he follows the instructions from her/his capital. In the worst sense she/he is doing wha she/he wants because nobody controls her/him. If she/he is a good guy you get a good solution. If she/he is a bad guy it is sad and bad. 
>  
> What the Internet has enabled is to add a layer which can combine representative with participatory democracy. The principle of multistakeholderism is the very concrete outcome of this development. It is still very early and we are exploring how it could work. But going back to the past would be the wrong turn to meet the challenges of the future (with all respect to President Truman who also order the drop of the first nuclar bomb to Hiroshoma). 
>  
> Best wishes
>  
> wolfgang
>
> ________________________________
>
> Von: Paul Lehto [mailto:lehto.paul at gmail.com]
> Gesendet: Di 06.10.2009 18:52
> An: governance at lists.cpsr.org; Avri Doria
> Betreff: Re: [governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation of Commitments
>
>
>
> Have you ever heard of the "consent of the governed?"  There's more
> than one way that consent of the governed can be achieved, but nobody
> seriously believes and defends the position publicly that there's any
> legitimate political authority outside some nexus to *elections* among
> the people (such as electing representatives who then elect
> ambassadors or delegates to an ICANN board or congress, etc.)
>
> Are you, Avri Doria, really saying what it seems you're saying:
> Elections are too difficult in your mind so they will be dispensed
> with, or can be, in the interest of efficiency?
>
> In any case, as President Harry Truman said "If you want efficiency,
> you'll get a dictatorship."
>
> This is because Democracy's core values don't always dictate
> efficiency.  In fact, things like separation of powers and checks and
> balances are in fact redundant inefficiencies that a strongman
> dictator could well streamline and save money and time on.  Democracy,
> by contrast, is a commitment to serial public discussions and votes
> (and therefore disputes) lasting... forever -- or at least as long as
> freedom and democracy lasts.
>
> Paul Lehto, Juris Doctor
>
> On 10/6/09, Avri Doria <avri at psg.com> wrote:
>   
>> On 6 Oct 2009, at 11:57, Paul Lehto wrote:
>>
>>     
>>> The only
>>> legitimate way to fully claim the public interest mantle is by having
>>> a mandate via consent of the governed from the people as a whole.
>>>       
>> does this mean that until everyone in the world votes, ICANN will
>> never be legitimate according to you?
>>
>> a.
>>
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> 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
>>
>>     
>
>
> --
> Paul R Lehto, J.D.
> P.O. Box #1
> Ishpeming, MI  49849
> lehto.paul at gmail.com
> 906-204-4026
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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/20091007/1322a193/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

From roland at internetpolicyagency.com  Wed Oct  7 03:00:26 2009
From: roland at internetpolicyagency.com (Roland Perry)
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2009 08:00:26 +0100
Subject: [governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation of Commitments
In-Reply-To: <76f819dd0910060927s766d84c3q333480e9611e823f@mail.gmail.com>
References: <21947256.1254599995816.JavaMail.root@mswamui-cedar.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
 <nec5eGBSJEyKFAXr@perry.co.uk>
 <76f819dd0910060927s766d84c3q333480e9611e823f@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <0frtunbKyDzKFAM$@perry.co.uk>

In message 
<76f819dd0910060927s766d84c3q333480e9611e823f at mail.gmail.com>, at 
09:27:19 on Tue, 6 Oct 2009, Paul Lehto <lehto.paul at gmail.com> writes
>The example of the UK, which seems to have a robust process for
>"striking off" charities not truly acting in the public interest (if I
>understand this correctly) is totally distinguishable from the ICANN
>situation because it is elected representatives in the UK who review
>or authorize the review of the charities and have the ability to
>"nuke" them or remove them from any claim of legitimacy.

The review is not done by elected representatives. Perhaps you will 
think that bad, but it's unusual for "Regulators" to be elected in 
Europe - they are generally appointed by the Government (which *is* an 
elected body, of course).

>Nobody has the ability to remove ICANN's board of directors or
>terminate ICANN without their consent, right?

It was my impression that their new accountability framework did contain 
the possibility to "nuke" the entire Board.

-- 
Roland Perry
____________________________________________________________
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


From roland at internetpolicyagency.com  Wed Oct  7 02:02:24 2009
From: roland at internetpolicyagency.com (Roland Perry)
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2009 07:02:24 +0100
Subject: [governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation of Commitments
In-Reply-To: <76f819dd0910060857l766c25e5y4df848136e07598@mail.gmail.com>
References: <75822E125BCB994F8446858C4B19F0D78FFC6E09@SUEX07-MBX-04.ad.syr.edu>
 <3QZdNroLCQxKFAts@perry.co.uk>
 <76f819dd0910011242u2d26722eg4cac8f606ece0282@mail.gmail.com>
 <rBdKJCua0QxKFAve@perry.co.uk>
 <76f819dd0910021037o36cd6b7aj9c8d7454ca116cc2@mail.gmail.com>
 <y8DcmVKiokxKFAvp@perry.co.uk>
 <76f819dd0910030740v206a4661xcd43ea4ae54d2483@mail.gmail.com>
 <LjfihqAS+5xKFA5l@perry.co.uk>
 <76f819dd0910050734o5fbc2812k789c8232b30eac3b@mail.gmail.com>
 <f65fb55e0910050855i179b899w8c0422ae0694ef@mail.gmail.com>
 <76f819dd0910060857l766c25e5y4df848136e07598@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <Q+l0GQZw7CzKFA6J@perry.co.uk>

In message <76f819dd0910060857l766c25e5y4df848136e07598 at mail.gmail.com>, 
at 08:57:35 on Tue, 6 Oct 2009, Paul Lehto <lehto.paul at gmail.com> writes
>I'm still waiting for my basic thesis to be attacked, namely, that
>democratic control (emphasis on CONTROL, not mere "input") is the only
>legitimate way to vindicate the public interest.

The simplest attack is to observe that your thesis relies upon "proof by 
assertion". At least one part of your assertion has been shown to be an 
exaggeration (it would be unkind to say "false"). Currently, the ball is 
in your court to improve upon your proof.
-- 
Roland Perry
____________________________________________________________
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


From roland at internetpolicyagency.com  Wed Oct  7 03:10:34 2009
From: roland at internetpolicyagency.com (Roland Perry)
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2009 08:10:34 +0100
Subject: [governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation of Commitments
In-Reply-To: <76f819dd0910060919u3b97805br140a134539a7578c@mail.gmail.com>
References: <75822E125BCB994F8446858C4B19F0D78FFC6E09@SUEX07-MBX-04.ad.syr.edu>
 <3QZdNroLCQxKFAts@perry.co.uk>
 <76f819dd0910011242u2d26722eg4cac8f606ece0282@mail.gmail.com>
 <rBdKJCua0QxKFAve@perry.co.uk>
 <76f819dd0910021037o36cd6b7aj9c8d7454ca116cc2@mail.gmail.com>
 <y8DcmVKiokxKFAvp@perry.co.uk>
 <76f819dd0910030740v206a4661xcd43ea4ae54d2483@mail.gmail.com>
 <LjfihqAS+5xKFA5l@perry.co.uk>
 <76f819dd0910050734o5fbc2812k789c8232b30eac3b@mail.gmail.com>
 <D6ew3OJaviyKFAxR@perry.co.uk>
 <76f819dd0910060919u3b97805br140a134539a7578c@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <BezwuVcq7DzKFAqN@perry.co.uk>

In message 
<76f819dd0910060919u3b97805br140a134539a7578c at mail.gmail.com>, at 
09:19:54 on Tue, 6 Oct 2009, Paul Lehto <lehto.paul at gmail.com> writes

>> And doesn't the recent Affirmation spell out who they think they are
>> accountable to?
>
>Think about what the word "accountable" means, and think about what it
>means for someone (such as me for example) to say in speech or writing
>that "I am accountable to (say) Roland Perry."  Such a statement is
>meaningless overall unless Roland Perry can fire me, prosecute me,
>compel me to a more detailed and full accounting, etc (all of these).

Accountability also includes being required to listen to external 
persuasion, and to implement governance mechanisms which can respond to 
concerns which are expressed. Rather than continue talking in the 
abstract, let's use an example of the sort of decision that ICANN might 
make:

Currently (and for a long time now) it's a rule that cctlds are composed 
of two-letter codes reminiscent of ISO 3166; for example Switzerland = 
.ch ; but there are also 3-letter ISO codes. Within the new gTLD process 
there are debates currently taking place about whether 3-letter ISO 
country codes should also be reserved to the appropriate country).

The decision might be "yes they are" or
                       "no they aren't" or
                       "yes, but there can be exceptions".

It's an interesting challenge to get Internet users in general to form 
an opinion about such a thing. If there was a public vote, what do you 
think the outcome would be? Might it help the people decide, if someone 
took the trouble to explain to them what the implications of each 
decision might be? Eventually, the ICANN process will come up with an 
answer, but they will be accountable (in my terms) to the whole 
community during the decision-making process, and even afterwards (via 
what we might call an "appeal".

It seems a little harsh to propose firing the entire board, or even the 
whole of ICANN, if the result is not what one section of the community 
wants ("throwing the toys out of the pram" is an expression that might 
be appropriate in those circumstances).

Moving on, let's assume the answer to that question is the third option 
(not entirely unlikely, as it puts off the real decision-making until 
later).

So we enter a situation where a group of Welsh speakers want to be 
assigned .cym (which is a widely accepted abbreviation for Cymru, the 
name of Wales in their native celtic language). To make it easy we'll 
assume it's the democratically elected Welsh Parliament (for there is 
such a thing) which is asking for this.

ICANN is asked to make an exception, because .cym would normally be 
reserved for the Cameroons (as a 3-letter ISO code). If there was to be 
a worldwide public vote on this, how might people align themselves?

Abstain   - it's an academic debate I don't understand, and I can't even
               find either country on a map.
Vote "Yes - Why does the Cameroons need a second "cctld" reserved for
               them anyway, who died and made ISO god? The Welsh deserve
               a break from time to time.
Vote "No" - Rules are rules, and this isn't a compelling enough
               exception. The Cameroons is a nicer place than Wales, so
               get my vote.

Should the Welsh and the Cameroons be allowed to lobby for votes, 
stating their respective points of view? Why should the Cameroons have 
to "defend" something (at some financial cost) which they thought was 
secured in their name. Should the Welsh, as the upstart, pay for the 
Cameroon lobbying campaign? And if any or all of these decisions don't 
turn out the way someone who demands accountability was expecting, is it 
such a big issue that you need to be end up firing the Board, if the 
appeal is "successful"?

I'd like to hear your views on how accountability should be built into 
the ICANN system, to allow for oversight of the kinds of decisions I 
mention above, so that it encapsulates the "public interest" you seek. 
And please explain in detail how it simultaneously reflects the public 
interest of Wales, the Cameroons, and 
everywhere-thats-not-Wales-or-Cameroons.

>> So you don't accept the concept that a major element in the Review Team
>> is governments (not all of which are democratically elected, but would
>> nevertheless claim to represent their people).
>
>I think  you should have stopped typing when you came to "not all of
>which are democratically elected" since you're stating that they claim
>to represent the public interest, but of course they do not in fact do
>so.

Are you going to maintain a list of which Governments are elected, and 
which aren't; and hand out GAC seats to one and not the other. What 
about the small number of democratically elected governments where some 
actors feel the "wrong side" got elected, and therefore refuse to 
acknowledge them?

>Anyone claiming to represent the public interest that can't trace
>their claim of legitimacy back to the public is no more legitimate
>than if I were to speak on behalf of the Internet Policy Agency
>without authority, or to claim to represent ICANN.

This is more of your particular brand of assertion. While it's 
consistent, it's becoming boring.

-- 
Roland Perry
____________________________________________________________
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


From bortzmeyer at internatif.org  Wed Oct  7 05:17:08 2009
From: bortzmeyer at internatif.org (Stephane Bortzmeyer)
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2009 10:17:08 +0100
Subject: [governance] Re: Fwd: [dns-operations] DNSSEC in the Root Zone
In-Reply-To: <f65fb55e0910061309x54a878f7kc7ffa6e4724c559a@mail.gmail.com>
References: <3406E124-2E7E-41E5-8E32-215A4A721DF5@hopcount.ca> <f65fb55e0910061309x54a878f7kc7ffa6e4724c559a@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20091007091708.GA13947@laperouse.bortzmeyer.org>

On Tue, Oct 06, 2009 at 11:09:18PM +0300,
 McTim <dogwallah at gmail.com> wrote 
 a message of 43 lines which said:

> FYI, red meat for the IGP blog!

An important thing to note is that there is no date, in the published
timeline, for the inclusion of the keys of the Top-Level Domains (the
"DS records"). This means that, even after the root it itself signed,
TLD which are already signed like .SE or .ORG will not be validated
through the root.

I mention this point because one of the reasons is probably related to
governance: since every change, however technical is it, in the root
zone, have to be approved a priori, in writing, by an office in
Washington DC (with office hours which may be different from those of
the requester), management of cryptographic keys will be a real pain!
(This is a good opportunity to show that the end of the JPA changed
nothing.)

IANA/ICANN, now "independent", is currently asking the US governement
about its plans for the inclusion of TLD keys in the signed root.

____________________________________________________________
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


From avri at psg.com  Wed Oct  7 07:46:51 2009
From: avri at psg.com (Avri Doria)
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2009 07:46:51 -0400
Subject: [governance] Re: Fwd: [dns-operations] DNSSEC in the Root Zone
In-Reply-To: <20091007091708.GA13947@laperouse.bortzmeyer.org>
References: <3406E124-2E7E-41E5-8E32-215A4A721DF5@hopcount.ca> <f65fb55e0910061309x54a878f7kc7ffa6e4724c559a@mail.gmail.com> <20091007091708.GA13947@laperouse.bortzmeyer.org>
Message-ID: <EC8E1E6F-46F9-4F43-B98A-C7883F314A89@psg.com>


On 7 Oct 2009, at 05:17, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:

> (This is a good opportunity to show that the end of the JPA changed
> nothing.)
>
> IANA/ICANN, now "independent", is currently asking the US governement
> about its plans for the inclusion of TLD keys in the signed root.


As several comments have already pointed out:  US DOC/NTIA  still  
controls the choke point.  And as I understand it, has no plans to  
change that arrangement.

But it may be wrong to say nothing has changed.  While the US used to  
be rather hands off in terms of JPA oversight, I wonder whether the  
governments of GAC will be as gentle with the AoC.

a.


____________________________________________________________
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


From mariliamaciel at gmail.com  Wed Oct  7 07:53:48 2009
From: mariliamaciel at gmail.com (Marilia Maciel)
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2009 08:53:48 -0300
Subject: [governance] UK imposes technical measures against P2P
Message-ID: <f7e605ab0910070453y741e9a8cw13ae292cd2899f05@mail.gmail.com>

http://www.iptegrity.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=419&Itemid=9

*UK latest: it's not a Hadopi, not as we know it *  Written by Monica Horten
     Oct 07, 2009 at 09:50 AM

*
*

*Parking-fine style Internet suspension may be proposed by the British
government, as a sanction for against peer-to-peer users who are alleged to
have infringed  copyright. *

Details have emerged of British government proposals for  an
administrative body to handle appeals by  users under threat of their
Internet being cut off by "technical measures".



The new proposals follow the agenda set out in the Digital Britain report
and the P2P Consultation, whereby  the rights-holders will make allegations
of copyright infringement, and ISPs will send warnings to their customers,
before applying "technical measures".



The new element is that the users will get a final warning, telling them
that a "technical measure" will be applied. The warning notice will give
them  opportunity to appeal before the measure is applied. The appeal will
be made to a panel of adjudicators. The panel will comprise legally-trained
people, but it is not envisaged that they will be judges, and it is not even
clear whether it will be a formal institution or a call centre.



The "parking fine" element is that users would receive a lesser technical
measure if they do not appeal, or conversely, they would risk a more severe
measure - possibly a longer period of being cut off the Internet - if they
do appeal and lose.



"Technical measures" is the British government's euphemistic term for the
use of network technology to cut off, block or slow traffic. They include
protcol blocking, URL blocking, "traffic shaping", throttling, and
suspension of the users account. In other words, "technical measures" mean
‘cutting people off the Internet'  either directly by suspending access, or
indirectly, by blocking them from doing specified activities. They would be
applied to users individually.



"Technical measures"  require equipment such as  traffic management systems
and deep packet inspection. Indeed,  the deep packet inspection systems are
necessary in order to apply technical measures to specific individual users.
They work in conjunction with software called ‘policy management' which
enables the ISPs to manage exactly what each individual user's account can
do.



The proposals are not strictly speaking the same as a Hadopi, because the
new adjudication panel  will be an appeals body,  whereas the French Hadopi
will impose sanctions. However, it arguably is a Hadopi in the sense that it
is about administrative justice, applied on the basis of an allegation by
private, commercial organisations, and it deprives the user of the right to
an oral hearing, before the sanction is applied.



There is also of course the question of whether an adjudication panel,
staffed by ‘legally trained' people  is a ‘legally competent tribunal'. It
is not clear whether industry or government would run the panel.



It's  understood that the new  proposals were drawn up by the  British music
industry at the request of the Department for Business, Innovation and
Skills (BIS). The request was apparently made because Amendment 138 in the
EU Telecoms Package is a problem.



It is another indication of the British government's failure to understand
Amendment 138, namely that the European Parliament  opposes cutting people
of the Internet as a sanction for copyright enforcement. It should not
matter what form the cut-off takes.



This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution
Non-commercial-Share Alike 2.5 UK:England and Wales License.
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.0/uk/ It may be used for
non-commercial purposes only, and the author's name should be attributed.
The correct attribution for this article is: Monica Horten (2009) UK latest:
it's not a Hadopi, not as we know it  , http://www.iptegrity.com 6 October
2009.


-- 
Centro de Tecnologia e Sociedade
FGV Direito Rio

Center of Technology and Society
Getulio Vargas Foundation
Rio de Janeiro - Brazil
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20091007/1d1f244a/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

From avri at psg.com  Wed Oct  7 08:00:46 2009
From: avri at psg.com (Avri Doria)
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2009 08:00:46 -0400
Subject: [governance] UK imposes technical measures against P2P
In-Reply-To: <f7e605ab0910070453y741e9a8cw13ae292cd2899f05@mail.gmail.com>
References: <f7e605ab0910070453y741e9a8cw13ae292cd2899f05@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <965A47B5-44F0-4CF2-8769-B1F34E98A561@psg.com>


On 7 Oct 2009, at 07:53, Marilia Maciel wrote:

> "Technical measures" is the British government's euphemistic term  
> for the use of network technology to cut off, block or slow traffic.  
> They include protcol blocking, URL blocking, "traffic shaping",  
> throttling, and suspension of the users account. In other words,  
> "technical measures" mean ‘cutting people off the Internet'  either  
> directly by suspending access, or indirectly, by blocking them from  
> doing specified activities. They would be applied to users  
> individually.
>
>
> "Technical measures"  require equipment such as  traffic management  
> systems and deep packet inspection. Indeed,  the deep packet  
> inspection systems are necessary in order to apply technical  
> measures to specific individual users. They work in conjunction with  
> software called ‘policy management' which enables the ISPs to manage  
> exactly what each individual user's account can do.
>
>


Since the UK telecoms has long been suspected of doing the same to  
Skype traffic, it would hardly surprising to find that they have the  
equipment in place already.

Business expediency and the lack of net neutrality apparently enables  
the restriction of access to information.  Quite an information  
ecosystem we are building.

a.

____________________________________________________________
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


From cogitoergosum at sbcglobal.net  Wed Oct  7 08:01:07 2009
From: cogitoergosum at sbcglobal.net (Eric Dierker)
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2009 05:01:07 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [governance] Re: Fwd: [dns-operations] DNSSEC in the Root Zone
In-Reply-To: <EC8E1E6F-46F9-4F43-B98A-C7883F314A89@psg.com>
Message-ID: <442313.64872.qm@web83913.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>

This comment shows so much.  Why would anyone want to start out with an assertion that nothing has changed?  It reveals that for some the agenda is only a personal, "I told you so".  Egotism has everything to do with politics and yet should have nothing to do with governance.

--- On Wed, 10/7/09, Avri Doria <avri at psg.com> wrote:


From: Avri Doria <avri at psg.com>
Subject: Re: [governance] Re: Fwd: [dns-operations] DNSSEC in the Root Zone
To: "Governance List" <governance at lists.cpsr.org>
Date: Wednesday, October 7, 2009, 11:46 AM



On 7 Oct 2009, at 05:17, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:

> (This is a good opportunity to show that the end of the JPA changed
> nothing.)
> 
> IANA/ICANN, now "independent", is currently asking the US governement
> about its plans for the inclusion of TLD keys in the signed root.


As several comments have already pointed out:  US DOC/NTIA  still controls the choke point.  And as I understand it, has no plans to change that arrangement.

But it may be wrong to say nothing has changed.  While the US used to be rather hands off in terms of JPA oversight, I wonder whether the governments of GAC will be as gentle with the AoC.

a.


____________________________________________________________
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/20091007/54d5d57e/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

From cogitoergosum at sbcglobal.net  Wed Oct  7 08:08:32 2009
From: cogitoergosum at sbcglobal.net (Eric Dierker)
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2009 05:08:32 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: AW: [governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation of Commitments
Message-ID: <924677.30222.qm@web83903.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>

It would seem helpful to check your bald assertions at the door: "We are all very unhappy with our present 'representative' democratic governance regimes, and seek to add more participatory layers and levers to it."
 
Clearly many are not unhappy, unless you gage happiness without looking at what people accept. And clearly many do not want layers and layers of bureaucracy.
 
But as to your point, I completely agree. Perhaps the tools of governance are already in place and by trying to build a whole new regime just for the Internet we are doing a disservice to all who need renovation of representation in a holistic sense.

--- On Wed, 10/7/09, Parminder <parminder at itforchange.net> wrote:


From: Parminder <parminder at itforchange.net>
Subject: Re: AW: [governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation of Commitments
To: governance at lists.cpsr.org, ""Kleinwächter, Wolfgang"" <wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
Date: Wednesday, October 7, 2009, 4:51 AM


Wolfgang (and Avri and McTim)

We are all very unhappy with our present 'representative' democratic governance regimes, and seek to add more participatory layers and levers to it. You would not believe the kind of work being done or at least attempted  in India on this. we are ourselves are strongly in some such project, known variously under the labels of 'deepening democracy', communitization, open government, or even participatory development processes. So, the virtue of improving governance system by enhancing participation cannot be claimed solely by certain global efforts, often with techno-centric notions of assumed equality of people to start with, highly individualized with disregard to social  groups based exclusions, and also ignnoring many other structural issues. 

In the specific context of governance of digital spaces (but also in the larger context) what is more significant ignored by these efforts or claims of new systems of direct and participatory democracy is the simultaneous, and strongly manifest, move towards corporates taking control of much of global 'governance' which to say the least is not democracy enhancing. They mostly just close their eyes to it. The neo-liberal system takes a lot of advantage  of this  fact, if not acquiescence. Multistakeholder models of policy making have been used in India to bring in monopolistic exploitative software models in schools in India and to lock in schools to paid commercial content rather than explore the best potential of collaborative content for schools....

I often and in a very engaged manner discuss the possibilities of new participatory forms to enhance our democracies with anyone who share our fears of what neoliberlaism is, or use the simpler word corporates are, doing - not in one-off but a systematic manner - to the fibre and future of our democracies. I dont engage so well if I do not notice sensitivity (without needing to completely agree with me) to this issue on the other side.... This corresponds to the reaosn why so many who are so strongly engaged with promoting people's democracy or participative democracy, especially in developing countries  (read about one of India foremost grassroots movements Mazdoor Kisan Shakti Sangathan) look askance at, in fact are mostly directly critical of, these new techno-centric visions of new forms of governance, without focusing enough on how their vision and efforts get placed in the overall struggle for democracy and social justice...

parminder 

Kleinwächter, Wolfgang wrote: 
Dear Paul 
 
you describe and defebnd the classical "representative democracy" of the 20th century. Good points. Very good points. 
 
However, in the complexity of the 21st century the "chain of representation" gets longer and looner and there is less and less a direct relationship between the input of the people and the output of a government. Do you really believe, that a diplomat sitting in a UN meeting and discussing very concrete and difficult technical issue represents "her/his people"? In the best way she/he follows the instructions from her/his capital. In the worst sense she/he is doing wha she/he wants because nobody controls her/him. If she/he is a good guy you get a good solution. If she/he is a bad guy it is sad and bad. 
 
What the Internet has enabled is to add a layer which can combine representative with participatory democracy. The principle of multistakeholderism is the very concrete outcome of this development. It is still very early and we are exploring how it could work. But going back to the past would be the wrong turn to meet the challenges of the future (with all respect to President Truman who also order the drop of the first nuclar bomb to Hiroshoma). 
 
Best wishes
 
wolfgang

________________________________

Von: Paul Lehto [mailto:lehto.paul at gmail.com]
Gesendet: Di 06.10.2009 18:52
An: governance at lists.cpsr.org; Avri Doria
Betreff: Re: [governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation of Commitments



Have you ever heard of the "consent of the governed?"  There's more
than one way that consent of the governed can be achieved, but nobody
seriously believes and defends the position publicly that there's any
legitimate political authority outside some nexus to *elections* among
the people (such as electing representatives who then elect
ambassadors or delegates to an ICANN board or congress, etc.)

Are you, Avri Doria, really saying what it seems you're saying:
Elections are too difficult in your mind so they will be dispensed
with, or can be, in the interest of efficiency?

In any case, as President Harry Truman said "If you want efficiency,
you'll get a dictatorship."

This is because Democracy's core values don't always dictate
efficiency.  In fact, things like separation of powers and checks and
balances are in fact redundant inefficiencies that a strongman
dictator could well streamline and save money and time on.  Democracy,
by contrast, is a commitment to serial public discussions and votes
(and therefore disputes) lasting... forever -- or at least as long as
freedom and democracy lasts.

Paul Lehto, Juris Doctor

On 10/6/09, Avri Doria <avri at psg.com> wrote:
  
On 6 Oct 2009, at 11:57, Paul Lehto wrote:

    
The only
legitimate way to fully claim the public interest mantle is by having
a mandate via consent of the governed from the people as a whole.
      does this mean that until everyone in the world votes, ICANN will
never be legitimate according to you?

a.

____________________________________________________________
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

    --
Paul R Lehto, J.D.
P.O. Box #1
Ishpeming, MI  49849
lehto.paul at gmail.com
906-204-4026
____________________________________________________________
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

  
-----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/20091007/073fba5c/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

From cogitoergosum at sbcglobal.net  Wed Oct  7 08:18:19 2009
From: cogitoergosum at sbcglobal.net (Eric Dierker)
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2009 05:18:19 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation of Commitments
In-Reply-To: <Q+l0GQZw7CzKFA6J@perry.co.uk>
Message-ID: <130591.78888.qm@web83913.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>

Roland,
 
Try to encompass differing types of proof. Circumstancial, inferential, logical, persuasive, emotional. Your entirely "inside the box" logic is a blatant display of engineering chauvanism. Our world of people does not revolve around strictly tangible empirical number counting proofs. Think thusly: 99% of funding for the UN is not done based upon "proof" of results. The Vatican is not wealthy due to logical bookkeeping in your sense. Most all things done of reason are done for future, disaster relief, wars and savings accounts are examples -- yet these are done without proof that the future will exist.
 
Think of a social work as an experiment and you will see more clearly.

--- On Wed, 10/7/09, Roland Perry <roland at internetpolicyagency.com> wrote:


From: Roland Perry <roland at internetpolicyagency.com>
Subject: Re: [governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation of Commitments
To: governance at lists.cpsr.org
Date: Wednesday, October 7, 2009, 6:02 AM


In message <76f819dd0910060857l766c25e5y4df848136e07598 at mail.gmail.com>, at 08:57:35 on Tue, 6 Oct 2009, Paul Lehto <lehto.paul at gmail.com> writes
> I'm still waiting for my basic thesis to be attacked, namely, that
> democratic control (emphasis on CONTROL, not mere "input") is the only
> legitimate way to vindicate the public interest.

The simplest attack is to observe that your thesis relies upon "proof by assertion". At least one part of your assertion has been shown to be an exaggeration (it would be unkind to say "false"). Currently, the ball is in your court to improve upon your proof.
-- Roland Perry
____________________________________________________________
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/20091007/7bd5bec8/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

From dogwallah at gmail.com  Wed Oct  7 08:51:45 2009
From: dogwallah at gmail.com (McTim)
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2009 15:51:45 +0300
Subject: [governance] Re: Fwd: [dns-operations] DNSSEC in the Root Zone
In-Reply-To: <EC8E1E6F-46F9-4F43-B98A-C7883F314A89@psg.com>
References: <3406E124-2E7E-41E5-8E32-215A4A721DF5@hopcount.ca>
	 <f65fb55e0910061309x54a878f7kc7ffa6e4724c559a@mail.gmail.com>
	 <20091007091708.GA13947@laperouse.bortzmeyer.org>
	 <EC8E1E6F-46F9-4F43-B98A-C7883F314A89@psg.com>
Message-ID: <f65fb55e0910070551g1c5f1a90x655147f43fb74b91@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Oct 7, 2009 at 2:46 PM, Avri Doria <avri at psg.com> wrote:
>
> On 7 Oct 2009, at 05:17, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:
>
>> (This is a good opportunity to show that the end of the JPA changed
>> nothing.)
>>
>> IANA/ICANN, now "independent", is currently asking the US governement
>> about its plans for the inclusion of TLD keys in the signed root.
>
>
> As several comments have already pointed out:  US DOC/NTIA  still controls
> the choke point.  And as I understand it, has no plans to change that
> arrangement.

One more extension after the current one.

However, if NTIA has a role in root signing, then after the next
extension runs out, they may still have to carry out that role, or
find someone else (NIST?).

-- 
Cheers,

McTim
"A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A
route indicates how we get there."  Jon Postel
____________________________________________________________
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


From mueller at syr.edu  Wed Oct  7 11:35:20 2009
From: mueller at syr.edu (Milton L Mueller)
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2009 11:35:20 -0400
Subject: [governance] Re: Fwd: [dns-operations] DNSSEC in the Root Zone
In-Reply-To: <EC8E1E6F-46F9-4F43-B98A-C7883F314A89@psg.com>
References: <3406E124-2E7E-41E5-8E32-215A4A721DF5@hopcount.ca>
 <f65fb55e0910061309x54a878f7kc7ffa6e4724c559a@mail.gmail.com>
 <20091007091708.GA13947@laperouse.bortzmeyer.org>
 <EC8E1E6F-46F9-4F43-B98A-C7883F314A89@psg.com>
Message-ID: <75822E125BCB994F8446858C4B19F0D78FFC6E7E@SUEX07-MBX-04.ad.syr.edu>

Something has changed. The JPA is dead. For years, we have been trying to get it through some thick heads in Washington that the JPA is not the IANA contract. Well, now that the two are detached let's not continue the confusion. 

Milton Mueller
Professor, Syracuse University School of Information Studies
XS4All Professor, Delft University of Technology
------------------------------
Internet Governance Project:
http://internetgovernance.org
 
> On 7 Oct 2009, at 05:17, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:
> 
> > (This is a good opportunity to show that the end of the JPA changed
> > nothing.)
> >
> > IANA/ICANN, now "independent", is currently asking the US 
> governement
> > about its plans for the inclusion of TLD keys in the signed root.
> 
> 
____________________________________________________________
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


From lehto.paul at gmail.com  Wed Oct  7 12:52:15 2009
From: lehto.paul at gmail.com (Paul Lehto)
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2009 12:52:15 -0400
Subject: [governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation of Commitments
In-Reply-To: <Q+l0GQZw7CzKFA6J@perry.co.uk>
References: <75822E125BCB994F8446858C4B19F0D78FFC6E09@SUEX07-MBX-04.ad.syr.edu>
	 <rBdKJCua0QxKFAve@perry.co.uk>
	 <76f819dd0910021037o36cd6b7aj9c8d7454ca116cc2@mail.gmail.com>
	 <y8DcmVKiokxKFAvp@perry.co.uk>
	 <76f819dd0910030740v206a4661xcd43ea4ae54d2483@mail.gmail.com>
	 <LjfihqAS+5xKFA5l@perry.co.uk>
	 <76f819dd0910050734o5fbc2812k789c8232b30eac3b@mail.gmail.com>
	 <f65fb55e0910050855i179b899w8c0422ae0694ef@mail.gmail.com>
	 <76f819dd0910060857l766c25e5y4df848136e07598@mail.gmail.com>
	 <Q+l0GQZw7CzKFA6J@perry.co.uk>
Message-ID: <76f819dd0910070952q73bf4e2bx7ed35c1aae933222@mail.gmail.com>

Roland,  now you're saying that I've got a burden of proof and that I
misstated something.   If you speak of getting rid of ICANN, aka
"nuking" it, that provision to which I presume you refer requires
ICANN's agreement, which renders it a nullity.  Otherwise, I've no
idea what you're talking about, because if you were able to prove that
I made a misstatement, you'd have to tell me specifically what it was.
 It wouldn't affect ICANN's self-claimed "independence", or, if it
did, then it would prove ICANN deceptive or lying.  So, if I'm lying
then ICANN is lying, and I'd happily take the fall if it means that I
can take ICANN with me.

Independence is good as applied to individuals or body politics, but
bad as applied to other entities, ALL of whom are supposed to be
public servants or claiming to be acting in the public interest.  So
acting is not true "independence" it is a form of Slavery, albeit
often thought an honorable slavery, which is why the term "public
servant" is supposed to be a term of honor, even though it has the
"servant" or slave-term at its core.

Basically there are no elections in ICANN that can terminate it or
fire its staff for corruption or incompetence in pursuing the public
interest.  Thus, that is, there is no democratic legitimacy even in
fig leaf form.  This is no problem for you, it appears, or
alternatively you claim against all evidence that it doesn't exist,
despite the clarity of the claim of "independence" in this specific
context.  Had ICANN intended to pursue the public interest, they would
not announce "independence" but rather their binding commitment (with
the bounds and keys held by others, not themselves) to be a servant of
the public interest, and not their corporate interest, which Otherwise
is not only the universal habit of corporations both profit and
nonprofit, but in fact what they are compelled by law to pursue:
either profit in the case of profit companies, or the mission in the
case of nonprofits.  That mission can't claim the mantle of public
interest without some legitimate nexus back to the public itself to
ask, from the horse's mouth, what the public wants.

If asking the persons whose rights and lives you wish to modify on the
internet is TOO MUCH TROUBLE for practical reasons, what right does
anyone have to go around squashing human beings like bugs who it is
not worth the time, effort or expense to solicit their opinions or
views on the question?  Each one should have a voice, thus universal
suffrage in democracy arises.

Yes, sometimes, when elected officials appoint someone or set up an
executive agency that appoints someone to another board of some sort,
the chain of accountability gets tenuous.  I've previously referred to
this as a slope and at some point, specifically when it is no longer
fair to say under all the circumstances that the public or the public
interest is in charge, then it becomes an illegal and unconstitutional
delegation or abdication of power.

A legislature charged with doing the job of making laws, for example,
can't just assign that lawmaking task to a private body and refuse to
oversee it or to provide standards and further disclaim its
responsibilities as charged by law or the constitution.   Yet that is
perilously close to, and appears to be exactly what, the DOC
accomplished an the Affirmations agreement.

In short, attenuated accountability such as the case of appointment
still leaves recourse like defunding the agency or firing its staff,
even if the details of the appointee somehow are impossible of
control.

To suggest that because there is some kind of attenuation of control
in the usual case in democracy, that it is ok to go to a situation of
"independence" from control, as ICANN itself now claims to have, is
truly an incredible leap.

Paul Lehto, Juris Doctor

On 10/7/09, Roland Perry <roland at internetpolicyagency.com> wrote:
> In message <76f819dd0910060857l766c25e5y4df848136e07598 at mail.gmail.com>,
> at 08:57:35 on Tue, 6 Oct 2009, Paul Lehto <lehto.paul at gmail.com> writes
>>I'm still waiting for my basic thesis to be attacked, namely, that
>>democratic control (emphasis on CONTROL, not mere "input") is the only
>>legitimate way to vindicate the public interest.
>
> The simplest attack is to observe that your thesis relies upon "proof by
> assertion". At least one part of your assertion has been shown to be an
> exaggeration (it would be unkind to say "false"). Currently, the ball is
> in your court to improve upon your proof.
> --
> Roland Perry
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
>


-- 
Paul R Lehto, J.D.
P.O. Box #1
Ishpeming, MI  49849
lehto.paul at gmail.com
906-204-4026
____________________________________________________________
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


From dogwallah at gmail.com  Wed Oct  7 14:42:53 2009
From: dogwallah at gmail.com (McTim)
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2009 21:42:53 +0300
Subject: [governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation of Commitments
In-Reply-To: <76f819dd0910070952q73bf4e2bx7ed35c1aae933222@mail.gmail.com>
References: <75822E125BCB994F8446858C4B19F0D78FFC6E09@SUEX07-MBX-04.ad.syr.edu>
	 <76f819dd0910021037o36cd6b7aj9c8d7454ca116cc2@mail.gmail.com>
	 <y8DcmVKiokxKFAvp@perry.co.uk>
	 <76f819dd0910030740v206a4661xcd43ea4ae54d2483@mail.gmail.com>
	 <LjfihqAS+5xKFA5l@perry.co.uk>
	 <76f819dd0910050734o5fbc2812k789c8232b30eac3b@mail.gmail.com>
	 <f65fb55e0910050855i179b899w8c0422ae0694ef@mail.gmail.com>
	 <76f819dd0910060857l766c25e5y4df848136e07598@mail.gmail.com>
	 <Q+l0GQZw7CzKFA6J@perry.co.uk>
	 <76f819dd0910070952q73bf4e2bx7ed35c1aae933222@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <f65fb55e0910071142r5b4c68ebq7338fd4208119e3f@mail.gmail.com>

This is becoming tedious, but I'll make one last attempt to explain it to you:

On Wed, Oct 7, 2009 at 7:52 PM, Paul Lehto <lehto.paul at gmail.com> wrote:
>
<yada yada snipped>
>
> If asking the persons whose rights and lives you wish to modify on the
> internet is TOO MUCH TROUBLE

gov'ts modify the rights and lives of Internet users, ICANN has a very
narrow the very narrow role of administering technical resources via
its IANA function.

 for practical reasons, what right does
> anyone have to go around squashing human beings like bugs

now that's just silly.

<more snippage>
>
> A legislature charged with doing the job of making laws, for example,
> can't just assign that lawmaking task to a private body and refuse to
> oversee it or to provide standards and further disclaim its
> responsibilities as charged by law or the constitution.   Yet that is
> perilously close to, and appears to be exactly what, the DOC
> accomplished an the Affirmations agreement.

Perhaps you don't understand the history behind this move.  During the
Clinton Administration, the USG basically said "who wants this job,
it's not really appropriate for us to do anymore".  To make a long
(but interesting) story short, ICANN was created and took the "job".
The goal all along was for it to be an independent body.  You are a
dozen years too late to complain about it now, that ship has long
since sailed.

-- 
Cheers,

McTim
"A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A
route indicates how we get there."  Jon Postel
____________________________________________________________
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


From jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com  Wed Oct  7 16:19:27 2009
From: jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com (Jeffrey A. Williams)
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2009 15:19:27 -0500 (GMT-05:00)
Subject: [governance] Telecoms Package: Does the EU Council hate Freedom?
Message-ID: <14755690.1254946767790.JavaMail.root@elwamui-huard.atl.sa.earthlink.net>

All,

  Seems our friends or perhaps used to be friends in the EU
are disapproving of individual freedom.  That's a shame.  Small
wonder than that ICANN has wanted to move to Geneva and out from
under the JPA.

See:http://www.laquadrature.net/en/telecoms-package-does-the-council-of-eu-hate-freedom

As the negotiations of the conciliation committee on the Telecoms
Package unfold, the Council of the European Union came up with a new,
alarming proposal. Member States offered to replace the notorious
"amendment 138" [1], an essential safeguard for citizen's freedom, with
a dangerous "knock-off" [2]. But the new version is not only
neutralizing citizens' protections adopted twice by 88% of the European
Parliament; it reduces legal protections for online activites in an
attempt to implement what looks like an open door to a repressive nightmare.

For the Council, the right to a due process, which is crucial to
preserve justice in a democracy, could be limited "in order to assure
national security, defence, public security, ***and the prevention,
investigation, detection, and prosecution of criminal offences.***".

Restricting Internet access without a prior ruling by the judicial
authorities in order to prevent and detect crime? Is this the Council's
vision for the future of European societies? It sounds for them that the
right to a fair trial shoud only be an option...

More than ever, the European Parliament must remain firm in its
commitment to protecting the freedoms of EU citizens.



Here is the full text of the Council's unacceptable proposition :

    Proposition for Article 1.3.a of the Framework directive.

    "Measures taken by Member States regarding end-users' access to or
use of services and applications through electronic communication
networks shall respect the fundamental rights and freedoms of natural
persons, including in relation to privacy, freedom of expression and
access to information and due process and the right to effective
judicial protection in compliance with the general principles of
Community law. Any such measures shall in particular respect the
principle of a fair and impartial procedure, including the right to be
heard.

    This paragraph is without prejudice to the competence of a Member
State to determine in line with its own constitutional order and with
fundamental rights appropriate procedural safeguards assuring due
process. This may include requirements of a judicial decision
authorising the measures to be taken and may take account of the need to
adopt urgent measures in order to assure national security, defence,
public security, and the prevention, investigation, detection, and
prosecution of criminal offences."

Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 294k members/stakeholders strong!)
"Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" -
   Abraham Lincoln

"Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is very
often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt

"If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; liability
depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
United States v. Carroll Towing  (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
===============================================================
Updated 1/26/04
CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS. div. of
Information Network Eng.  INEG. INC.
ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com
Phone: 214-244-4827

____________________________________________________________
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


From jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com  Wed Oct  7 16:25:52 2009
From: jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com (Jeffrey A. Williams)
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2009 15:25:52 -0500 (GMT-05:00)
Subject: [governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation of Commitments
Message-ID: <22787947.1254947153230.JavaMail.root@elwamui-huard.atl.sa.earthlink.net>

Paul and all,

  Execellently articulated and spot on IMO.  Seems that the
USG in DOC/NTIA has decided via some communications from
the White House and/or the relevant committees in both houses
of congress have decided that ICANN cannot be held accountable
effectively.  I think such a notion is/was nonsense and gives
US Citizens a hint of significant proportion that public servants
too often are not interested in serving the public's interests
unless those interests are in line with whatever politicaly 
correct or assumed consideration(s) from withing those USG
organs independantly.

-----Original Message-----
>From: Paul Lehto <lehto.paul at gmail.com>
>Sent: Oct 7, 2009 11:52 AM
>To: governance at lists.cpsr.org, Roland Perry <roland at internetpolicyagency.com>
>Subject: Re: [governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation of Commitments
>
>Roland,  now you're saying that I've got a burden of proof and that I
>misstated something.   If you speak of getting rid of ICANN, aka
>"nuking" it, that provision to which I presume you refer requires
>ICANN's agreement, which renders it a nullity.  Otherwise, I've no
>idea what you're talking about, because if you were able to prove that
>I made a misstatement, you'd have to tell me specifically what it was.
> It wouldn't affect ICANN's self-claimed "independence", or, if it
>did, then it would prove ICANN deceptive or lying.  So, if I'm lying
>then ICANN is lying, and I'd happily take the fall if it means that I
>can take ICANN with me.
>
>Independence is good as applied to individuals or body politics, but
>bad as applied to other entities, ALL of whom are supposed to be
>public servants or claiming to be acting in the public interest.  So
>acting is not true "independence" it is a form of Slavery, albeit
>often thought an honorable slavery, which is why the term "public
>servant" is supposed to be a term of honor, even though it has the
>"servant" or slave-term at its core.
>
>Basically there are no elections in ICANN that can terminate it or
>fire its staff for corruption or incompetence in pursuing the public
>interest.  Thus, that is, there is no democratic legitimacy even in
>fig leaf form.  This is no problem for you, it appears, or
>alternatively you claim against all evidence that it doesn't exist,
>despite the clarity of the claim of "independence" in this specific
>context.  Had ICANN intended to pursue the public interest, they would
>not announce "independence" but rather their binding commitment (with
>the bounds and keys held by others, not themselves) to be a servant of
>the public interest, and not their corporate interest, which Otherwise
>is not only the universal habit of corporations both profit and
>nonprofit, but in fact what they are compelled by law to pursue:
>either profit in the case of profit companies, or the mission in the
>case of nonprofits.  That mission can't claim the mantle of public
>interest without some legitimate nexus back to the public itself to
>ask, from the horse's mouth, what the public wants.
>
>If asking the persons whose rights and lives you wish to modify on the
>internet is TOO MUCH TROUBLE for practical reasons, what right does
>anyone have to go around squashing human beings like bugs who it is
>not worth the time, effort or expense to solicit their opinions or
>views on the question?  Each one should have a voice, thus universal
>suffrage in democracy arises.
>
>Yes, sometimes, when elected officials appoint someone or set up an
>executive agency that appoints someone to another board of some sort,
>the chain of accountability gets tenuous.  I've previously referred to
>this as a slope and at some point, specifically when it is no longer
>fair to say under all the circumstances that the public or the public
>interest is in charge, then it becomes an illegal and unconstitutional
>delegation or abdication of power.
>
>A legislature charged with doing the job of making laws, for example,
>can't just assign that lawmaking task to a private body and refuse to
>oversee it or to provide standards and further disclaim its
>responsibilities as charged by law or the constitution.   Yet that is
>perilously close to, and appears to be exactly what, the DOC
>accomplished an the Affirmations agreement.
>
>In short, attenuated accountability such as the case of appointment
>still leaves recourse like defunding the agency or firing its staff,
>even if the details of the appointee somehow are impossible of
>control.
>
>To suggest that because there is some kind of attenuation of control
>in the usual case in democracy, that it is ok to go to a situation of
>"independence" from control, as ICANN itself now claims to have, is
>truly an incredible leap.
>
>Paul Lehto, Juris Doctor
>
>On 10/7/09, Roland Perry <roland at internetpolicyagency.com> wrote:
>> In message <76f819dd0910060857l766c25e5y4df848136e07598 at mail.gmail.com>,
>> at 08:57:35 on Tue, 6 Oct 2009, Paul Lehto <lehto.paul at gmail.com> writes
>>>I'm still waiting for my basic thesis to be attacked, namely, that
>>>democratic control (emphasis on CONTROL, not mere "input") is the only
>>>legitimate way to vindicate the public interest.
>>
>> The simplest attack is to observe that your thesis relies upon "proof by
>> assertion". At least one part of your assertion has been shown to be an
>> exaggeration (it would be unkind to say "false"). Currently, the ball is
>> in your court to improve upon your proof.
>> --
>> Roland Perry
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> 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
>>
>
>
>-- 
>Paul R Lehto, J.D.
>P.O. Box #1
>Ishpeming, MI  49849
>lehto.paul at gmail.com
>906-204-4026
>____________________________________________________________
>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

Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 294k members/stakeholders strong!)
"Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" -
   Abraham Lincoln

"Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is very
often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt

"If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; liability
depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
United States v. Carroll Towing  (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
===============================================================
Updated 1/26/04
CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS. div. of
Information Network Eng.  INEG. INC.
ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com
Phone: 214-244-4827

____________________________________________________________
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


From jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com  Wed Oct  7 16:35:34 2009
From: jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com (Jeffrey A. Williams)
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2009 15:35:34 -0500 (GMT-05:00)
Subject: [governance] Re: Fwd: [dns-operations] DNSSEC in the Root Zone
Message-ID: <28622869.1254947734617.JavaMail.root@elwamui-huard.atl.sa.earthlink.net>

Avri and all,

  The GAC whether harsh or gental will have little actual
power if as is likely, they are divided idologically.

-----Original Message-----
>From: Avri Doria <avri at psg.com>
>Sent: Oct 7, 2009 6:46 AM
>To: Governance List <governance at lists.cpsr.org>
>Subject: Re: [governance] Re: Fwd: [dns-operations] DNSSEC in the Root Zone
>
>
>On 7 Oct 2009, at 05:17, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:
>
>> (This is a good opportunity to show that the end of the JPA changed
>> nothing.)
>>
>> IANA/ICANN, now "independent", is currently asking the US governement
>> about its plans for the inclusion of TLD keys in the signed root.
>
>
>As several comments have already pointed out:  US DOC/NTIA  still  
>controls the choke point.  And as I understand it, has no plans to  
>change that arrangement.
>
>But it may be wrong to say nothing has changed.  While the US used to  
>be rather hands off in terms of JPA oversight, I wonder whether the  
>governments of GAC will be as gentle with the AoC.
>
>a.
>
>
>____________________________________________________________
>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

Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 294k members/stakeholders strong!)
"Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" -
   Abraham Lincoln

"Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is very
often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt

"If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; liability
depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
United States v. Carroll Towing  (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
===============================================================
Updated 1/26/04
CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS. div. of
Information Network Eng.  INEG. INC.
ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com
Phone: 214-244-4827

____________________________________________________________
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


From gurstein at gmail.com  Wed Oct  7 20:10:48 2009
From: gurstein at gmail.com (Michael Gurstein)
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2009 17:10:48 -0700
Subject: [governance] FW: CIRA-Survey Invitation
Message-ID: <B51A452D480148FEB264DA70E188B96B@userPC>

I think this may be of broader interest... The q'aire seems to me to be well
conceptualized and usefully executed.

MBG

-----Original Message-----
From: Heather.Dryden at ic.gc.ca [mailto:Heather.Dryden at ic.gc.ca] 
Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 2:02 PM
Subject: CIRA-Survey Invitation 


Dear all,

The Canadian Internet Registration Authority (CORA) is undertaking a survey
on the "Canadian Public Interest in Internet Policy and Decision Making", as
described below.  

I am forwarding in case of interest.  Let me know if you would prefer to not
receive these emails and apologies to anyone receiving this notice more than
once.

Best,
Heather

===================================
(Le message en français suit le texte anglais).

A new survey on Canadian Public Interest in Internet Policy and Decision
Making: We would like to hear from you!

The growth of the Internet and its increasing role in our daily work and
lives is generating a broad range of issues. These issues may warrant more
public discussion among users, developers, industry and government. The
Canadian Internet Registration Authority (CIRA-www.cira.ca) believes that it
is time to assess the value in establishing a new forum through which
Canadians can explore issues around the growth and use of the Internet.

We would like your input on the following:

*       Your priorities and concerns around the evolution of the Internet in
Canada;
*       Your views about the type of process that might best serve Canadians
to advance public debate on these concerns;
*       How this process might best be linked to regional and international
stakeholders involved in shaping the future of the global Internet.

Please take 10 to 15 minutes to complete the survey at
https://www.surveymonkey.com/s.aspx?sm=dafBGf_2b8WQBgomF0iyOnAA_3d_3d.

This survey is being undertaken in conjunction with the International
Institute for Sustainable Development. For further information, email
cira_survey at iisd.ca<mailto:cira_survey at iisd.ca>.

====================================

Un nouvel aperçu sur l'intérêt du public canadien pour la politique touchant
Internet et le processus décisionnel Nous voudrions avoir de vos nouvelles !

La croissance de l'Internet et son rôle de plus en plus grand dans notre vie
et notre travail quotidiens soulèvent un large éventail de questions. Ces
issues peuvent justifier plus de discussions publiques entre les
utilisateurs, les concepteurs, l'industrie et le gouvernement. L'Autorité
canadienne pour les enregistrements Internet (ACEI-www.cira.ca) estime qu'il
est temps d'évaluer l'utilité de la création d'un nouveau forum par
l'entremise duquel les Canadiens peuvent examiner les questions touchant la
croissance et l'utilisation d'Internet.

Nous aimerions avoir vos commentaires sur les points suivants :

*       Vos priorités et vos préoccupations concernant l'évolution
d'Internet au Canada;
*       Votre point de vue sur le type de processus qui pourrait mieux
servir les Canadiens afin de faire avancer le débat public sur ces
préoccupations;
*       La façon dont on pourrait mieux lier ce processus aux intervenants
régionaux et internationaux qui façonnent l'avenir de l'Internet dans le
monde.

Veuillez prendre 10 à 15 minutes pour accomplir l'aperçu à
https://www.surveymonkey.com/s.aspx?sm=dafBGf_2b8WQBgomF0iyOnAA_3d_3d.

L'ACEI réalise le présent sondage de concert avec l'Institut international
du développement durable (IIDD). Pour de plus amples informations,
communiquer avec cira_survey at iisd.ca<mailto:cira_survey at iisd.ca>.

____________________________________________________________
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


From roland at internetpolicyagency.com  Thu Oct  8 05:31:19 2009
From: roland at internetpolicyagency.com (Roland Perry)
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2009 10:31:19 +0100
Subject: [governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation of Commitments
In-Reply-To: <76f819dd0910070952q73bf4e2bx7ed35c1aae933222@mail.gmail.com>
References: <75822E125BCB994F8446858C4B19F0D78FFC6E09@SUEX07-MBX-04.ad.syr.edu>
 <rBdKJCua0QxKFAve@perry.co.uk>
 <76f819dd0910021037o36cd6b7aj9c8d7454ca116cc2@mail.gmail.com>
 <y8DcmVKiokxKFAvp@perry.co.uk>
 <76f819dd0910030740v206a4661xcd43ea4ae54d2483@mail.gmail.com>
 <LjfihqAS+5xKFA5l@perry.co.uk>
 <76f819dd0910050734o5fbc2812k789c8232b30eac3b@mail.gmail.com>
 <f65fb55e0910050855i179b899w8c0422ae0694ef@mail.gmail.com>
 <76f819dd0910060857l766c25e5y4df848136e07598@mail.gmail.com>
 <Q+l0GQZw7CzKFA6J@perry.co.uk>
 <76f819dd0910070952q73bf4e2bx7ed35c1aae933222@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <5Sw+dNMnFbzKFAtB@perry.co.uk>

In message 
<76f819dd0910070952q73bf4e2bx7ed35c1aae933222 at mail.gmail.com>, at 
12:52:15 on Wed, 7 Oct 2009, Paul Lehto <lehto.paul at gmail.com> writes
>Roland,  now you're saying that I've got a burden of proof and that I
>misstated something.

No, I'm looking for something that supports your assertions. We haven't 
got to the stage of drawing conclusions, because you haven't fully 
evidenced a case.

>If you speak of getting rid of ICANN, aka "nuking" it, that provision 
>to which I presume you refer requires ICANN's agreement, which renders 
>it a nullity.

No, the proposition (if I understand it correctly) is that if ICANN does 
something completely unjustifiable, that there should be an option to 
"fire the board". ICANN isn't just the board, and the board wouldn't 
have to agree.

-- 
Roland Perry
____________________________________________________________
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


From roland at internetpolicyagency.com  Thu Oct  8 05:42:10 2009
From: roland at internetpolicyagency.com (Roland Perry)
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2009 10:42:10 +0100
Subject: [governance] UK imposes technical measures against P2P
In-Reply-To: <965A47B5-44F0-4CF2-8769-B1F34E98A561@psg.com>
References: <f7e605ab0910070453y741e9a8cw13ae292cd2899f05@mail.gmail.com>
 <965A47B5-44F0-4CF2-8769-B1F34E98A561@psg.com>
Message-ID: <UCl1JQOyPbzKFApR@perry.co.uk>

In message <965A47B5-44F0-4CF2-8769-B1F34E98A561 at psg.com>, at 08:00:46 
on Wed, 7 Oct 2009, Avri Doria <avri at psg.com> writes
>Since the UK telecoms has long been suspected of doing the same to 
>Skype traffic,

They have? As a UK resident that comes as news to me.

>it would hardly surprising to find that they have the  equipment in 
>place already.

Currently, several ISPs have "traffic shaping" that is bandwidth-driven 
rather than content-driven. As a commercial decision, you can buy an 
access account which has a daily bandwidth cap, and p2p is one of the 
obvious things which might trigger such a thing.
-- 
Roland Perry
____________________________________________________________
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


From roland at internetpolicyagency.com  Thu Oct  8 05:34:10 2009
From: roland at internetpolicyagency.com (Roland Perry)
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2009 10:34:10 +0100
Subject: [governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation of Commitments
In-Reply-To: <130591.78888.qm@web83913.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
References: <Q+l0GQZw7CzKFA6J@perry.co.uk>
 <130591.78888.qm@web83913.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <nCd5JCNSIbzKFAO8@perry.co.uk>

In message <130591.78888.qm at web83913.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>, at 05:18:19 on 
Wed, 7 Oct 2009, Eric Dierker <cogitoergosum at sbcglobal.net> writes
>Roland,
> 
>Try to encompass differing types of proof. Circumstancial, inferential,
>logical, persuasive, emotional.

I might be happy with anything in addition to assertion.
-- 
Roland Perry
____________________________________________________________
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


From cogitoergosum at sbcglobal.net  Thu Oct  8 10:06:00 2009
From: cogitoergosum at sbcglobal.net (Eric Dierker)
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2009 07:06:00 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [governance] Truths and Proofs
Message-ID: <65227.70396.qm@web83912.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>

Somethings do not need to be debated.  Somethings are self evident by their mere existance - hence cogitoergosum.  Some things are in fact Universally held. (exceptions and variance is the spice, not the rule - see Gregor Mendel.
 
ICANN exists and must be dealt with.
 
Universal Human Rights are worth fighting for, defending and advancing.
 
The will of the people can never be frozen and kept into a nice and neat formula.
 
Most, if given the choice, would like to exercise their own freedoms.
 
Highly technical matters are not within the area of common knowledge. See TLD .lowtech
 
In that Internet Governance is generally needed, not to protect the interests of those already in power, but to protect the rights of those not in power, we should be concerned with determining what the will of the people who use the Internet is.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20091008/4613ced0/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

From lehto.paul at gmail.com  Thu Oct  8 10:17:31 2009
From: lehto.paul at gmail.com (Paul Lehto)
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2009 10:17:31 -0400
Subject: [governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation of Commitments
In-Reply-To: <f65fb55e0910071142r5b4c68ebq7338fd4208119e3f@mail.gmail.com>
References: <75822E125BCB994F8446858C4B19F0D78FFC6E09@SUEX07-MBX-04.ad.syr.edu>
	 <y8DcmVKiokxKFAvp@perry.co.uk>
	 <76f819dd0910030740v206a4661xcd43ea4ae54d2483@mail.gmail.com>
	 <LjfihqAS+5xKFA5l@perry.co.uk>
	 <76f819dd0910050734o5fbc2812k789c8232b30eac3b@mail.gmail.com>
	 <f65fb55e0910050855i179b899w8c0422ae0694ef@mail.gmail.com>
	 <76f819dd0910060857l766c25e5y4df848136e07598@mail.gmail.com>
	 <Q+l0GQZw7CzKFA6J@perry.co.uk>
	 <76f819dd0910070952q73bf4e2bx7ed35c1aae933222@mail.gmail.com>
	 <f65fb55e0910071142r5b4c68ebq7338fd4208119e3f@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <76f819dd0910080717v5e7f5165o96654e55461832ab@mail.gmail.com>

The basic idea is that one can not legitimately regulate a person,
even if the regulation is described as "administration of technical
resources [of the Internet]" without also engaging in the process of
respecting the users enough to solicit, and obtain, their consent.  My
metaphor, too strong an image for some specific cases, but still apt
nevertheless, is that if one hasn't achieved legitimacy via the
consent of the governed (or to-be-governed) then one has no right to
rule - no right to "squash bugs."  In other words, humans are not mere
bugs that can be squashed or affected without checking in with them
and without legitimacy of the authority.

Nobody except valid legitimate governmental authorities directly or
indirectly elected or appointed by the public have the right to go
around affecting, diminishing or destroying user freedom on the
internet so long as that freedom is not hurting others.

To the above it's been said "but wait, we don't have global ELECTION
processes in place, so its not so easy to obtain this authority or
legitimacy."

To which I say:  Your authority therefore has zero legitimacy.  Law is
compulsion and force -- commands with the penalty of a civil monetary
liability or criminal sanction for their violation.  CONTRACT LAW IS
"PRIVATE LAW."  If one cannot have a domain or presence on the
internet without a contract then the contract is not a voluntary act
its required.  Therefore, outfits like ICANN are set up as
illegitimate private regulators, even if the scope of their regulation
is presently restricted.

One potential but unworkable way "out" of the private regulation
argument above is to say that ICANN is private, not public. That
doesn't work for two powerful reasons: (1) For years, until a few days
ago, ICANN was claimed to be under the direction and control of the
USG Dept of Commerce, a public entity, and
(2) As the US Supreme Court said in Lebron v Amtrak, what a government
or government corporation announces itself to be, even by statute, is
not only not controlling -- it's laughable to think it's reliable as a
solution to the issue.  Even Justice Scalia said it would be a
remarkable and unprecedented thing if the "government could evade its
constitutional obligations by mere resort to the fiction of the
corporate form [read ICANN corporation]".

Were the above principle of not trusting the actors in question in
fact valid, the FBI for example could easily claim none of their
actions were 4th amendment searches and seizures, and evade
independent legal review that way.

Thus, what ICANN or the DOC says about the case is not controlling for
any independent thinker or independent legal analysis, except when
ICANN or DOC make admissions against their own interest, since
admissions against one's own interest have a high degree of
reliability.

McTim, it's probably not fruitful to suggest your work in repeating
things to me is "tedious" as if I lack the intelligence to understand
or the ability to read.   What we are discussing is governance,
something that I have a strong interest in, not to mention a law
degree, and published articles on democracy with more on the way.  For
better or worse, in any justiciable case the legal system gets the
last word, including but not limited to the last word on disputes in
any expert terrain like computer science.

If there's some minutiae of computer science or "custom" of the
internet that I'm ignoring or seeming not to grasp, it's because those
details, each as a class, have no legal relevance to any issue of
fundamental importance to governance.

Paul Lehto, Juris Doctor

On 10/7/09, McTim <dogwallah at gmail.com> wrote:
> This is becoming tedious, but I'll make one last attempt to explain it to
> you:
>
> On Wed, Oct 7, 2009 at 7:52 PM, Paul Lehto <lehto.paul at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
> <yada yada snipped>
>>
>> If asking the persons whose rights and lives you wish to modify on the
>> internet is TOO MUCH TROUBLE
>
> gov'ts modify the rights and lives of Internet users, ICANN has a very
> narrow the very narrow role of administering technical resources via
> its IANA function.
>
>  for practical reasons, what right does
>> anyone have to go around squashing human beings like bugs
>
> now that's just silly.
>
> <more snippage>
>>
>> A legislature charged with doing the job of making laws, for example,
>> can't just assign that lawmaking task to a private body and refuse to
>> oversee it or to provide standards and further disclaim its
>> responsibilities as charged by law or the constitution.   Yet that is
>> perilously close to, and appears to be exactly what, the DOC
>> accomplished an the Affirmations agreement.
>
> Perhaps you don't understand the history behind this move.  During the
> Clinton Administration, the USG basically said "who wants this job,
> it's not really appropriate for us to do anymore".  To make a long
> (but interesting) story short, ICANN was created and took the "job".
> The goal all along was for it to be an independent body.  You are a
> dozen years too late to complain about it now, that ship has long
> since sailed.
>
> --
> Cheers,
>
> McTim
> "A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A
> route indicates how we get there."  Jon Postel
>


-- 
Paul R Lehto, J.D.
P.O. Box #1
Ishpeming, MI  49849
lehto.paul at gmail.com
906-204-4026
____________________________________________________________
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


From lehto.paul at gmail.com  Thu Oct  8 10:30:44 2009
From: lehto.paul at gmail.com (Paul Lehto)
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2009 10:30:44 -0400
Subject: [governance] Truths and Proofs
In-Reply-To: <65227.70396.qm@web83912.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
References: <65227.70396.qm@web83912.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <76f819dd0910080730y2b40e33eu358bd6f1c70a268e@mail.gmail.com>

A good summary, though I'm not saying it's a complete statement
because I'm not analyzing it that thoroughly, but it is good
nonetheless.  But I'd make one addition, for now:

If a person or entity thinks it is too bothersome or difficult to
measure the will of the people and obtain their consent, it takes a
lot of chutzpah, and then some, to presume to violate, structure,
frame, regulate or control the exercise of that person's freedom.
Note especially that freedom is the DEFAULT rule, it exists globally
wherever a legitimate law does not take it away.  Thus, neither ICANN
nor government can Grant rights of freedom, they exist beforehand,
they can only reduce freedom via laws, and then only if those laws are
promulgated legitimately.

For purposes of the above, I'm ignoring for the moment the substantial
issue of whether anything short of bona fide elections can provide the
necessary consent and will of the people, as well as ignoring the
extreme dubiousness of the trustability of internet-based "elections"
on topics the bulk of which will concern the fundamental business
interests of many of the most computer-savvy companies in the world,
with ample motive, means and opportunity to affect such an internet
election by "hacking" and the like.  This consideration applies
regardless of whether any such attempts occur, or not, because it is a
problem of perception based on possibility, even if we could know for
sure (and we can't) that a particular piece of software did not
contain  for example a double trojan horse.  See the classic paper
"Reflections on Trusting Trust".

Paul Lehto, Juris Doctor

On 10/8/09, Eric Dierker <cogitoergosum at sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> Somethings do not need to be debated.  Somethings are self evident by their
> mere existance - hence cogitoergosum.  Some things are in fact Universally
> held. (exceptions and variance is the spice, not the rule - see Gregor
> Mendel.
>
> ICANN exists and must be dealt with.
>
> Universal Human Rights are worth fighting for, defending and advancing.
>
> The will of the people can never be frozen and kept into a nice and neat
> formula.
>
> Most, if given the choice, would like to exercise their own freedoms.
>
> Highly technical matters are not within the area of common knowledge. See
> TLD .lowtech
>
> In that Internet Governance is generally needed, not to protect the
> interests of those already in power, but to protect the rights of those not
> in power, we should be concerned with determining what the will of the
> people who use the Internet is.


-- 
Paul R Lehto, J.D.
P.O. Box #1
Ishpeming, MI  49849
lehto.paul at gmail.com
906-204-4026
____________________________________________________________
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


From cogitoergosum at sbcglobal.net  Thu Oct  8 12:49:11 2009
From: cogitoergosum at sbcglobal.net (Eric Dierker)
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2009 09:49:11 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [governance] Truths and Proofs
In-Reply-To: <76f819dd0910080730y2b40e33eu358bd6f1c70a268e@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <559992.29544.qm@web83904.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>

The "proof" of the premise that voting is necessary in some form is contained in many places.* The reality of trustworthy votes is as ancient as the travesty that women would have no vote, and the concepts of Ideology in Europe**.  Tyranny justified by necessity is an accepted reality as we see from Pitt***. So the arguments of possibility of fraud are not justification for denying international direct voting on matters of Internet Governance. (I specifically do not include IANA type Standard setting, and this should be done through appropriate representation via the scientific community and endorsed by those elected)
 
Of course all things of human making are subject to flaw -- thank goodness this includes computers ;-)  The flaws are never appropriate reason for not acting -- that is the difference between a justification and an excuse. 
 
Marketing is Education and Education is Marketing.  People cringe at this phrase of mine, introduced to a communist country Internet Governance undergoing a Doi Moi, but several truths that are necessary here are held within.  It takes some type of propaganda to get folks caring enough to get out and participate and vote. There is a very fine line between revisionist history and education, Generally the debate between the two is settled by what the power at large wants to market. If we just accept that fact here we can move forward and begin to capitalize on the tools available.
 
We must begin the process of educating the users of the Internet of the fact that they in fact do have rights.  That the outsourced voice on the end of a helpline is not God.  That here they must Question Authority. That Use Agreements and Disclaimers and FAQs are not divinely inspired. We must begin to empower users -- not from without, to begin with, but from within their own self styled thought boxes. We must continue to act in a way that sheds some light on our freedoms and how they transcend modern global economies and instant communication networks.
 
When Parminder is tired and when McTim feels frustrated and when Paul believes no one cares and when Roland is cynical and when Avri only has hope -- they must get up and try harder and lead the way. They must talk when they are hoarse, must write when they are weary and must rally on bad news and celebrate on good. This is the foundation of Governance. Not polls or money or ease. But hard work and diligence and leading when there is no one to follow.
 
 
*
Article 21.

(1) Everyone has the right to take part in the government of his country, directly or through freely chosen representatives. 
(2) Everyone has the right of equal access to public service in his country. 
(3) The will of the people shall be the basis of the authority of government; this will shall be expressed in periodic and genuine elections which shall be by universal and equal suffrage and shall be held by secret vote or by equivalent free voting procedures. 
 
http://books.google.com/books?id=dodcJC_b1_QC&pg=PA101&lpg=PA101&dq=universal+suffrage+was+achieved+in+britain+in+the
+year&source=bl&ots=j_IIwx4i9s&sig=UhN50VnhxHAGIE
QN65QoFM1q5ao&hl=en&ei=dAHOSs7tIIOotgOSkdnJDg&sa=X&oi=book_
result&ct=result&resnum=10&ved=0CCAQ6AEwCQ#v=onepage&q=&f=false

*** http://thinkexist.com/quotation/necessity_is_the_plea_for_every_infringement_of/226531.html
 

--- On Thu, 10/8/09, Paul Lehto <lehto.paul at gmail.com> wrote:


From: Paul Lehto <lehto.paul at gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [governance] Truths and Proofs
To: governance at lists.cpsr.org, "Eric Dierker" <cogitoergosum at sbcglobal.net>
Date: Thursday, October 8, 2009, 2:30 PM


A good summary, though I'm not saying it's a complete statement
because I'm not analyzing it that thoroughly, but it is good
nonetheless.  But I'd make one addition, for now:

If a person or entity thinks it is too bothersome or difficult to
measure the will of the people and obtain their consent, it takes a
lot of chutzpah, and then some, to presume to violate, structure,
frame, regulate or control the exercise of that person's freedom.
Note especially that freedom is the DEFAULT rule, it exists globally
wherever a legitimate law does not take it away.  Thus, neither ICANN
nor government can Grant rights of freedom, they exist beforehand,
they can only reduce freedom via laws, and then only if those laws are
promulgated legitimately.

For purposes of the above, I'm ignoring for the moment the substantial
issue of whether anything short of bona fide elections can provide the
necessary consent and will of the people, as well as ignoring the
extreme dubiousness of the trustability of internet-based "elections"
on topics the bulk of which will concern the fundamental business
interests of many of the most computer-savvy companies in the world,
with ample motive, means and opportunity to affect such an internet
election by "hacking" and the like.  This consideration applies
regardless of whether any such attempts occur, or not, because it is a
problem of perception based on possibility, even if we could know for
sure (and we can't) that a particular piece of software did not
contain  for example a double trojan horse.  See the classic paper
"Reflections on Trusting Trust".

Paul Lehto, Juris Doctor

On 10/8/09, Eric Dierker <cogitoergosum at sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> Somethings do not need to be debated.  Somethings are self evident by their
> mere existance - hence cogitoergosum.  Some things are in fact Universally
> held. (exceptions and variance is the spice, not the rule - see Gregor
> Mendel.
>
> ICANN exists and must be dealt with.
>
> Universal Human Rights are worth fighting for, defending and advancing.
>
> The will of the people can never be frozen and kept into a nice and neat
> formula.
>
> Most, if given the choice, would like to exercise their own freedoms.
>
> Highly technical matters are not within the area of common knowledge. See
> TLD .lowtech
>
> In that Internet Governance is generally needed, not to protect the
> interests of those already in power, but to protect the rights of those not
> in power, we should be concerned with determining what the will of the
> people who use the Internet is.


-- 
Paul R Lehto, J.D.
P.O. Box #1
Ishpeming, MI  49849
lehto.paul at gmail.com
906-204-4026
____________________________________________________________
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/20091008/2055b684/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

From katitza at datos-personales.org  Thu Oct  8 12:51:11 2009
From: katitza at datos-personales.org (Katitza Rodriguez)
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2009 12:51:11 -0400
Subject: [governance] International Civil Society Coalition To Discuss
 Global Privacy Standards
References: <5D7ED5D4-6946-425F-B28D-1827349D0656@datos-personales.org>
Message-ID: <AEBBB09B-DE29-4105-95D5-BA91CF4B2363@datos-personales.org>

Greetings:

Here is the Press Release written by EDRI (Meryem Marzouki) and Matias  
Altamira IISD with the collaboration of many members of the coalition.  
I would appreciate if you can help us promote the event.

The event will be streaming. We will also have a twitter backchannel  
screen where everyone following #globalprivacy will be able to  
participate and interact with the panelist and the participants. Your  
tweets will be shown in the screen during the conference. If anyone is  
interested in participate on this livewebcast work,  pls. send me your  
twitter ID.

Thanks for your attention, and I hope you could help us spread the  
word of this event!!!

Katitza

International Civil Society Coalition To Discuss Global Privacy  
Standards
http://thepublicvoice.org/events/madrid09/

By Liason on September 21, 2009 8:07 PM | Permalink
The Public Voice, the largest worldwide civil society coalition, will  
discuss: Global Privacy Standards in a Global World; during its  
conference on November 3, 2009 in Madrid, Spain, to be held in  
conjunction with the 31st Annual International Conference of Data  
Protection and Privacy Commissioners.

Prominent advocates and experts from the academic, consumer, digital  
rights and labor communities will discuss with public officials and  
the business sector how to raise privacy awareness in the global  
community; and how to promote civil society participation in decision  
making processes towards the adoption of better privacy and data  
protection standards globally.

The Conference will first review recent privacy and human rights  
developments and major privacy activism campaigns around the world.  
Stavros Lambrinidis, Vice-President of the European Parliament, is  
invited to comment on the most recent developments.
The Conference will also address current challenges raised by emerging  
technologies and business practices: representatives from civil  
society and from the business sector will discuss privacy implications  
of issues such as cloud computing or Internet search. It will further  
address transborder data flows in the public and private sector, from  
passenger name records and financial transactions to the outsourcing  
of personal data.

The final Conference panel will launch the Madrid Civil Society  
Declaration on Global Privacy Standards; that will be discussed by  
invited public data protection officials from OECD, the EU Article 29  
Working Party, USA and Canada. Peter Hustinx, European Data Protection  
Supervisor, will provide closing remarks.
The Conference is sponsored by the Spanish Data Protection Agency and  
it is free to all participants. Registration is compulsory. Register  
NOW. Detailed program, registration and practical information at: http://thepublicvoice.org/events/madrid09/

LiveWecast and Twitter Backchannel will be available.

Follow #globalprivacy Nov. 3-6. Madrid http://bit.ly/h27dl & http://bit.ly/wI613 
  #privacy @thepublicvoice

The Public Voice and the Madrid Event have their own community! Join  
us! http://community.thepublicvoice.org/

Contact: Katitza Rodriguez,  katitza AT epic DOT org

Online Visibility Team

@avilarenata
@celiabv
@facambronero
  @petezin
  @palomallaneza
@txitua
  @graci_selaimen






-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20091008/ea801459/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

From katitza at datos-personales.org  Thu Oct  8 12:53:18 2009
From: katitza at datos-personales.org (Katitza Rodriguez)
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2009 12:53:18 -0400
Subject: [governance] International Civil Society Coalition To Discuss
 Global Privacy Standards
References: <7B6FACA9-C697-4D01-BE21-91FA09EE513A@epic.org>
Message-ID: <3006C5DD-117B-40C3-86B9-EC73205DE8E0@datos-personales.org>

fyi,

Greetings:

Ups wrong list. Here is the right one for the IGC community and I  
would like to extend an invitation to all of you to the event.
The event will also be streaming. We will also have a twitter  
backchannel screen where everyone following #globalprivacy will be  
able to participate and interact with the panelist and the  
participants. Your tweets will be shown in the screen during the  
conference. If anyone is interested in participate on this livewebcast  
work,  pls. send me your twitter ID.

Thanks for your attention, and I hope you could help us spread the  
word of this event!!!

Katitza

International Civil Society Coalition To Discuss Global Privacy  
Standards
http://thepublicvoice.org/events/madrid09/

By Liason on September 21, 2009 8:07 PM | Permalink
The Public Voice, the largest worldwide civil society coalition, will  
discuss: Global Privacy Standards in a Global World; during its  
conference on November 3, 2009 in Madrid, Spain, to be held in  
conjunction with the 31st Annual International Conference of Data  
Protection and Privacy Commissioners.

Prominent advocates and experts from the academic, consumer, digital  
rights and labor communities will discuss with public officials and  
the business sector how to raise privacy awareness in the global  
community; and how to promote civil society participation in decision  
making processes towards the adoption of better privacy and data  
protection standards globally.

The Conference will first review recent privacy and human rights  
developments and major privacy activism campaigns around the world.  
Stavros Lambrinidis, Vice-President of the European Parliament, is  
invited to comment on the most recent developments.
The Conference will also address current challenges raised by emerging  
technologies and business practices: representatives from civil  
society and from the business sector will discuss privacy implications  
of issues such as cloud computing or Internet search. It will further  
address transborder data flows in the public and private sector, from  
passenger name records and financial transactions to the outsourcing  
of personal data.

The final Conference panel will launch the Madrid Civil Society  
Declaration on Global Privacy Standards; that will be discussed by  
invited public data protection officials from OECD, the EU Article 29  
Working Party, USA and Canada. Peter Hustinx, European Data Protection  
Supervisor, will provide closing remarks.

The Conference is sponsored by the Spanish Data Protection Agency and  
it is free to all participants. Registration is compulsory. Register  
NOW. Detailed program, registration and practical information at: http://thepublicvoice.org/events/madrid09/

LiveWecast and Twitter Backchannel will be available.

Follow #globalprivacy Nov. 3-6. Madrid http://bit.ly/h27dl & http://bit.ly/wI613 
  #privacy @thepublicvoice

The Public Voice and the Madrid Event have their own community! Join  
us! http://community.thepublicvoice.org/

Contact: Katitza Rodriguez,  katitza AT epic DOT org


Online Visibility Team

@avilarenata
@celiabv
@facambronero
  @petezin
  @palomallaneza
@txitua
  @graci_selaimen





Katitza Rodriguez
Director, EPIC International Privacy Project
katitza at epic.org




-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20091008/0a15e8f9/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

From fatimacambronero at gmail.com  Thu Oct  8 13:00:47 2009
From: fatimacambronero at gmail.com (Fatima Cambronero)
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2009 14:00:47 -0300
Subject: [governance] International Civil Society Coalition To Discuss
In-Reply-To: <AEBBB09B-DE29-4105-95D5-BA91CF4B2363@datos-personales.org>
References: <5D7ED5D4-6946-425F-B28D-1827349D0656@datos-personales.org>
	 <AEBBB09B-DE29-4105-95D5-BA91CF4B2363@datos-personales.org>
Message-ID: <d8b17b190910081000u39f10ee6u7dd0ed350804c30b@mail.gmail.com>

Un detalle: es @seliabv con s.




2009/10/8 Katitza Rodriguez <katitza at datos-personales.org>

>   Greetings:
>
> Here is the Press Release written by EDRI (Meryem Marzouki) and Matias
> Altamira IISD with the collaboration of many members of the coalition. I
> would appreciate if you can help us promote the event.
>
> The event will be streaming. We will also have a twitter backchannel screen
> where everyone following #globalprivacy will be able to participate and
> interact with the panelist and the participants. Your tweets will be shown
> in the screen during the conference. If anyone is interested in participate
> on this livewebcast work,  pls. send me your twitter ID.
>
> Thanks for your attention, and I hope you could help us spread the word of
> this event!!!
>
> Katitza
>
> International Civil Society Coalition To Discuss Global Privacy Standards
> * http://thepublicvoice.org/events/madrid09/
>
> *
> By Liason <http://csisac.org/structure.php> on September 21, 2009 8:07 PM
> | Permalink<http://thepublicvoice.org/2009/09/worldwide-civil-society-coalition-to-discuss-global-privacy-standards.html>
>
> The Public Voice, the largest worldwide civil society coalition, will
> discuss: Global Privacy Standards in a Global World; during its conference
> on November 3, 2009 in Madrid, Spain, to be held in conjunction with the
> 31st Annual International Conference of Data Protection and Privacy
> Commissioners.
>
> Prominent advocates and experts from the academic, consumer, digital rights
> and labor communities will discuss with public officials and the business
> sector how to raise privacy awareness in the global community; and how to
> promote civil society participation in decision making processes towards the
> adoption of better privacy and data protection standards globally.
>
> The Conference will first review recent privacy and human rights
> developments and major privacy activism campaigns around the world. Stavros
> Lambrinidis, Vice-President of the European Parliament, is invited to
> comment on the most recent developments.
> The Conference will also address current challenges raised by emerging
> technologies and business practices: representatives from civil society and
> from the business sector will discuss privacy implications of issues such as
> cloud computing or Internet search. It will further address transborder data
> flows in the public and private sector, from passenger name records and
> financial transactions to the outsourcing of personal data.
>
> The final Conference panel will launch the Madrid Civil Society Declaration
> on Global Privacy Standards; that will be discussed by invited public data
> protection officials from OECD, the EU Article 29 Working Party, USA and
> Canada. Peter Hustinx, European Data Protection Supervisor, will provide
> closing remarks.
>
> The Conference is sponsored by the Spanish Data Protection Agency and it is
> free to all participants. Registration is compulsory. Register NOW<http://thepublicvoice.org/events/madrid09/register.php>.
> Detailed program, registration and practical information at:
> http://thepublicvoice.org/events/madrid09/
>
> LiveWecast and Twitter Backchannel will be available.
>
> Follow #globalprivacy Nov. 3-6. Madrid http://bit.ly/h27dl &
> http://bit.ly/wI613 #privacy @thepublicvoice
>
> The Public Voice and the Madrid Event have their own community! Join us!
> http://community.thepublicvoice.org/
>
> Contact: Katitza Rodriguez,  katitza AT epic DOT org
>
>  Online Visibility Team
> @avilarenata
> @celiabv
> @facambronero
>  @petezin
>  @palomallaneza
> @txitua
>  @graci_selaimen
>
>
>
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
>
>


-- 
Fátima Cambronero
Abogada-Argentina

http://ar.ageiadensi.org/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20091008/ef04bb72/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

From lehto.paul at gmail.com  Thu Oct  8 13:44:03 2009
From: lehto.paul at gmail.com (Paul Lehto)
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2009 13:44:03 -0400
Subject: [governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation of Commitments
In-Reply-To: <BezwuVcq7DzKFAqN@perry.co.uk>
References: <75822E125BCB994F8446858C4B19F0D78FFC6E09@SUEX07-MBX-04.ad.syr.edu>
	 <rBdKJCua0QxKFAve@perry.co.uk>
	 <76f819dd0910021037o36cd6b7aj9c8d7454ca116cc2@mail.gmail.com>
	 <y8DcmVKiokxKFAvp@perry.co.uk>
	 <76f819dd0910030740v206a4661xcd43ea4ae54d2483@mail.gmail.com>
	 <LjfihqAS+5xKFA5l@perry.co.uk>
	 <76f819dd0910050734o5fbc2812k789c8232b30eac3b@mail.gmail.com>
	 <D6ew3OJaviyKFAxR@perry.co.uk>
	 <76f819dd0910060919u3b97805br140a134539a7578c@mail.gmail.com>
	 <BezwuVcq7DzKFAqN@perry.co.uk>
Message-ID: <76f819dd0910081044jb3eced8lb2fcc02520430e6b@mail.gmail.com>

On 10/7/09, Roland Perry <roland at internetpolicyagency.com> wrote:
> Currently (and for a long time now) it's a rule that cctlds are composed
> of two-letter codes reminiscent of ISO 3166; for example Switzerland =
> .ch ; but there are also 3-letter ISO codes. Within the new gTLD process
> there are debates currently taking place about whether 3-letter ISO
> country codes should also be reserved to the appropriate country).
>
> The decision might be "yes they are" or
>                        "no they aren't" or
>                        "yes, but there can be exceptions".
>
> It's an interesting challenge to get Internet users in general to form
> an opinion about such a thing. If there was a public vote, what do you
> think the outcome would be? Might it help the people decide, if someone
> took the trouble to explain to them what the implications of each
> decision might be?


There are two aspects to your question:

(1) There is the technical mystification question, meaning that
average people don't immediately understand this computer language, so
does this mean that democracy must be subordinated to an aristocracy
of experts?  My question is somewhat loaded you may sense, but what it
is "loaded" with are the rights and principles millions of people
around the world have worked their lives for and often died for:
equality, one person one vote, democracy, self-government by the
people, etc.  These core justice concepts are defeated, and
transparency is certainly defeated as well, by the conversion (whether
necessary or not) of an issue into a foreign language, whether that
language is Finnish, Greek, Advanced Basic, COBOL, ASCII or what have
you.

So I agree there's a problem with everyone understanding the
interstices of an issue presented in a foreign language of any kind.
Just because I were to post, which I could with slight assistance, my
posts concerning an issue of interest to you (as evidenced by your
posts and your domain name) in the Finnish language, and if others
somehow were able to join that conversation in Finnish, you would be
effectively excluded from understanding if you desire to participate
in the debate as well as understanding if it affects you or not.

However, (c) below does not follow at all from (a) and (b) . (I'm
unsure if you intended to assert that they do, but it's worth pointing
out nonetheless):

(a) a government sponsors a "technical resource" corporation like
ICANN concerning the internet as a public resource, and

(b) that ICANN or persons related thereto express themselves in a
foreign technical language relative to most internet users, it doesn't
follow at all that

(c) The inability of the average person to determine if their
interests or rights are affected or if they otherwise desire to
participate in the decision means that those same persons need not
consent to action even in the normal, perceived as minimal but
nevertheless significant ways of participating in elections that
directly or indirectly control governance on the policy questions
involved.

Again, perhaps the tech example you give is as simple as it gets, and
perhaps it presents no real implications for rights.  The problem is
that nobody can take ICANN's word for it, or rather, anyone has the
right in a democracy to judge for themselves rather than accept
something on pure trust.

Granted, the remedies, or recourse, in democracy can be criticized as
insufficient or overly indirect in that one can not directly override
a decision on a detailed issue because there is no federal referendum
process like there is for state law, and thus we can only vote out of
office our Congresspeople and/or lobby them under the implied threat
of the same, ultimately.  And, in turn, Congress can't to an unlimited
degree micromanage every agency or instrumentality that it creates, so
to a significant degree congress's recourse is also limited to the
heavier hammers of defunding and replacing key appointed personnel,
just like the people's remedy is limited to "kicking the bums out of
office" completely in elections, and not to specific issue referenda
on the federal level (a good reform proposal for the future
discussion, I'd say). technical language, just as the Eventually, the
ICANN process will come up with an

> It seems a little harsh to propose firing the entire board, or even the
> whole of ICANN, if the result is not what one section of the community
> wants ("throwing the toys out of the pram" is an expression that might
> be appropriate in those circumstances).

"One section of the community" is not democratically legitimate to
have its way.  It's one person, one vote for the entire community body
politic, or in special cases such as utility improvements with tax
assessments only covering a given area, that subgroup that is
directly, and solely, affected.  (the "solely" affected is strictly
applied, as in the past, for just one example, it's been claimed that
an issue might only be of concern to rich folk, or white people, etc.,
or other offensive subgroup formulations, in addition to ones where
persons that were indirectly affected were defined out of the subgroup
improperly under equal protection).

I explained earlier, up top, why what you characterize as a harsh
remedy of firing the board is necessary -- it's the only power left
for voters, to be sure, to vote politicians out or fire them, and it's
largely the power of Congress, given the practical restrictions
against micro-managing its instrumentalities.

It doesn't follow at all that if the only main power is the "harsh"
power of board member removal, that this is childish unconstructive
stuff and thus somehow not proper.  Even when one hires an attorney or
accountant, they do things "their way" under professional judgment and
ethics, and the client's main right is to fire the professional and
get a new one, if talking to the professional doesn't work out.  It's
the same with employers.  They can't (legally) do the "lesser"
responses of detaining employees without pay for discipline, docking
their pay to cover employee pure mistakes, or whipping or spanking the
employees -- even though some or even many employees might prefer any
or all of these lesser responses to the "harsh" response of being
dismissed or fired.

Hey you know, government employees or public servants are not only
authorized solely by We the People, their salaries are paid for by
taxpaying We the People.  To suggest that under the circumstances our
ability to fire our employees or public servants is a tantrum in a
baby tram is really remarkable in its disregard or rather disrespect
for the people who provide all of the authority and pay for basically
all the bills of government action (for whatever corporate taxes
exist, corporations claim they pass those on to the consumer anyway,
so it's back to the people again...)


> So we enter a situation where a group of Welsh speakers want to be
> assigned .cym (which is a widely accepted abbreviation for Cymru, the
> name of Wales in their native celtic language). To make it easy we'll
> assume it's the democratically elected Welsh Parliament (for there is
> such a thing) which is asking for this.
>
> ICANN is asked to make an exception, because .cym would normally be
> reserved for the Cameroons (as a 3-letter ISO code). If there was to be
> a worldwide public vote on this, how might people align themselves?
>
> Abstain   - it's an academic debate I don't understand, and I can't even
>                find either country on a map.
> Vote "Yes - Why does the Cameroons need a second "cctld" reserved for
>                them anyway, who died and made ISO god? The Welsh deserve
>                a break from time to time.
> Vote "No" - Rules are rules, and this isn't a compelling enough
>                exception. The Cameroons is a nicer place than Wales, so
>                get my vote.
> Should the Welsh and the Cameroons be allowed to lobby for votes,
> stating their respective points of view? Why should the Cameroons have
> to "defend" something (at some financial cost) which they thought was
> secured in their name. Should the Welsh, as the upstart, pay for the
> Cameroon lobbying campaign? And if any or all of these decisions don't
> turn out the way someone who demands accountability was expecting, is it
> such a big issue that you need to be end up firing the Board, if the
> appeal is "successful"?

The recourse or remedy of firing the board reconciles the requirements
of self-government (the essence of freedom and being a "free people")
with the practice of not micro-managing every micro-issue.  So your
example is not well taken above.

That being said, the Cameroon example would be a good application of a
subgroup vote, not a worldwide vote, because the interests, as
presently seen at least, do not implicate world interests.   That
would apply in the event direct democracy is the method adopted by the
people.  On the other hand, if the current US regime of representative
democracy remains the practice, then removal of board members,
defunding, and certain "retaliatory" conditions and procedures
familiar to the US Congress are the recourse, with the US Congress in
turn 100% elected by the people.  In fact in the House, which does not
have appointed interim members like the US Senate does, they like to
take pride that there has never been a member who served a single day
without being elected by the people (or at least apparently so, to
allow for the history of election fraud).  This preserves the nexus of
control in the people.

Should that nexus be expanded? Yes, I think so. But that's not the
issue here, which is should the nexus of control via the people, as
attenuated as it is, be completely eliminated by privatizing ICANN as
"independent", when that cuts off 100% of any claim to legitimacy that
ICANN could possibly have?  Please read the UN Declaration of Human
Rights concerning political legitimacy and note that essentially every
country in the world has adopted this because they know its right.
Even dictators PURPORT to have the consent of the people via fake
elections, thuggery, and the like.

But ICANN, unlike dictators who masquerade as having the approval and
consent of the public, usually via fake elections, ICANN is truly
breathtaking in this staggering respect, given this global context of
democracy:

ICANN **openly** claims its "Independence," an "independence" that,
among other things, must mean independence from any control by the
people of the US and independence or freedom from any control by the
people of the entire globe as well.

That's breathtaking.  It can't be understated.  Even the present scope
of ICANN activity, claimed to be narrow, is subject to no restriction
other than whatever ICANN can contract for, purchase, fight for, or
fundraise for, if "independence" it has. It's now an independent
monster free to rule the globe if it can expand sufficiently, which is
the dream of every multinational corporation -- and ICANN is and
probably will increasingly be multinationally diverse.  I support that
diversity, but let's not pretend it's the only thing of importance,
and let's remember that the most oppressive sweatshop corporation or
abusive corporate actor generally only benefits from a diverse
composition or workforce -- it's all the harder for the workers to
find common ground and strengthens the hand of the employer in that
respect. Diversity is thus necessary but not sufficient but does
backfire in the way mentioned above.
>
> I'd like to hear your views on how accountability should be built into
> the ICANN system, to allow for oversight of the kinds of decisions I
> mention above, so that it encapsulates the "public interest" you seek.
> And please explain in detail how it simultaneously reflects the public
> interest of Wales, the Cameroons, and
> everywhere-thats-not-Wales-or-Cameroons.

Until a global governance system of elections exists, the US
Government has no business ridding itself of its responsibility.  When
an accountable and fair global system is created, the USG should
transfer responsibility and power to this democratic system forthwith.

I've served as an elected official of minor note, drafted regulations
that became law and/or court rules binding on all litigants.  The
recourse, admittedly, for constituents unhappy with my performance is
limited to removal, or perhaps courtroom challenge in a narrow set of
appropriate cases, but i would NEVER be comfortable with removing
these last vestiges of popular control because of what that would turn
me into.  You can call it anything you like except "public servant,"
"public official", "democracy," and "republic."

The technically proper terms for the above forms of governance are
considered name-calling and an insult by many. But what now, when
these names used as insults, actually have definitions that fit the
new posture with ICANN?  It perhaps has become uncivil to tell the
truth with actual precision, though I'll try my best.

So the solution is that we unwind this deal. It's void and of no force
and effect, in the ultimate legal reality, though it's also true that
many statutes stay on the books for years and decades before being
reversed, if they ever are, despite the fact that their illegality or
unconsitutionality has existed from day one of the action, and that
when courts finally declare things void, they are void as of the day
of passage of the law or signing of the agreement or contract.   Thus,
the  contract or affirmations, never having existed in the first place
because it is outside the power of government to assign its job to
someone else that is not accountable (though it can create more equal
protection by representing the entire globe, including the US,
equitably), are a nullity and the status quo is restored in the event
physical assets have changed hands (nothing is deemed to have happened
legally, and more than someone deeding me the moon has any legal force
or effect)

 It matters not the slightest that this is the direction of the past
decade or so, or that Clinton was involved.  Anybody in power of
either party is subject to abusing the power, since power itself
corrupts no matter who has it.

Imagine yourself, if you will, in any country fighting for its
freedom.  I'll take my own country, around 1776.  At the time, Kings
have ruled Great Britain literally not for ten years, but with only
one arguable hiccup, literally have ruled since time immemorial -- all
of recorded history.  They've ruled the American colonies since birth.

In this context, if the passage of ten or twelve years meant it was
"too late" for democracy and/or freedom, as has been suggested on this
list, how could the American colonists, or any other colonists in any
country, possibly justify their freedom (i.e. SELF-government, not
control by others) in the face of the argument "too late, too bad, so
sad?"   Here's how James Otis faced that argument of centuries of
history of "too late":

"Even if every prince since Nimrod had been a tyrant [read:not
allowing self-government but instead imposing  his own ideas], it
would not establish a general right to tyrannize."  The colonists
including Otis, possessed originally of no cannon, no navy, and no
government, ultimately went on to defeat the world's greatest
military/naval superpower and a history of non-self-government that
included essentially all of recorded history for Great Britain.

If twelve years is enough for someone to write off self-governing
democracy in favor of aristocratic or royal rule back in 1776, the
world's Age of Revolutions almost assuredly wouldn't have been
commenced.

Some may find ICANN of little scope, at least until they expand
without checks in place any more, but the PRINCIPLEs laid down here
are applicable globally in a whole variety of places.  I would not
recommend setting down a rule hostile to or acquiescing in a defeat of
democratic rights unless I were prepared to see that precedent
multiplied innumerable other places and times.

Paul Lehto, Juris Doctor


-- 
Paul R Lehto, J.D.
P.O. Box #1
Ishpeming, MI  49849
lehto.paul at gmail.com
906-204-4026
____________________________________________________________
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


From lehto.paul at gmail.com  Thu Oct  8 14:15:47 2009
From: lehto.paul at gmail.com (Paul Lehto)
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2009 14:15:47 -0400
Subject: [governance] Truths and Proofs
In-Reply-To: <559992.29544.qm@web83904.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
References: <76f819dd0910080730y2b40e33eu358bd6f1c70a268e@mail.gmail.com>
	 <559992.29544.qm@web83904.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <76f819dd0910081115j5427a79x4f7689715fcd4ec4@mail.gmail.com>

Some good thoughts in this post.  With the understanding that my prior
sentence is bigger (as far as my concurrence with the writer of the
post) than what follows, here goes my thoughts on the few
indispensable prerequisites for democratic voting (as opposed to that
field that variation can occur consist with the rights of all):

Eric Dierker wrote; "the arguments of possibility of fraud are not
justification for denying international direct voting on matters of
Internet Governance."

1.  This doesn't mean, I  hope, that its ok to propose, as do
countless authoritarian examples, a bogus or defective mechanism for
elections and that we have to approve of getting fake democracy rather
than real democracy?   Nothing is more common than a minority parading
as a majority, by force or by fraud, since all minorities believe or
aspire to be majorities in every case where issues are contested, any
quite many get ahead of themselves.

2.  If the specific voting system was over the internet, something the
military in the US quickly scuttled in 2004 after they received an
expert report on it, the threat would be more than "a possibility of
fraud."   Heck, on the internet, even people who style themselves
"election integrity" advocates routinely stuff the electronic ballot
boxes of informal unscientific polls if they can, the last thing they
want is a fair sampling procedure, and even when very scrupulous they
only get out the vote of their own side typically, not all voters.
Why?  Because most people find substantive justice (the issues on the
ballot) more fundamental than procedural justice (elections of one
person one vote) on hot issues, even though they all agree in the main
that democratic process is sacred or absolutely necessary, etc.
Thus, they cheat FOR JUSTICE in an important though twisted sense.
Moreover, prior to the adoption of the secret ballot casting process,
election day violence, intimidation, harassments, and yes, deaths was
an annual or more frequent event, especially including deaths of
attempting voters not to mention many brawls.  This was true for the
better part of a century in the USA for example, until the secret
ballot in the late 1800s.  Although citizen interest in voting has its
historical ups and downs to some extent, the interest of the
interested minorities of partisans has always been intense and will
always be intense so long as real issues and elections are on the
ballots.  I don't personally see any basis to conclude that the
election fraud "pressure" if you will that took the form of widespread
fights and even killings prior to the secret ballot simply went away
and disappeared when the secret ballot appeared.  No, I think the
pressure went into every other manipulable way to alter the count,
whether by propaganda of advertising or misinforming voters, Jim Crow
laws, or, most powerful of all, insider cheating, because it can get
you the result one wants overall, with the least risk.

The idea that all voting systems aren't perfect is an unhelpful and
even damaging statement as it plays out around the world because it
implicitly discourages differentiation of better systems from worse
systems. Applied to governance "no system of government is perfect"
would strike down democracy just as swiftly as authoritarianism,
because democracy "isn't perfect" according to numerous people.

I'll just say that Transparency is almost infinitely superior to
secrecy, because without informational transparency (combined with
remedies) we can't even get to first base to understand what is going
on in a government, or in a vote counting system.

Thus, a transparent system constitutes a basic qualification for a
democracy-compliant system of voting.  Without transparency, there's
no accountability, and who can be in favor of unaccountable
government???   Any system of voting that can't deliver transparency
lacks a basic job qualification in any democracy or republic.  Unlike
the rest of the year when voters are subjects of the law and must obey
it whether they know of it or not (just  like a citizen of a
dictatorship, which also insists on "the rule of law") in a free
country the voter is acting in a sovereign capacity, as the
(temporary) co-ruler together with all other voters, selecting their
public servant representatives so that they can go on with their lives
and not be in politics full time.  In this capacity as a voting
sovereign, the voter is COMPLETELY different than the citizen-subject.
 They are the "boss" albeit for a brief but nevertheless real period
related to voting.

 I don't think any voting technology or system that denies
transparency to voters (or sovereign co-rulers, the numerous equal
kings and queens of any free government), is consistent or acceptable
to democratic governments.  Specifically in elections, it's just as if
the public servants, who are employees, are telling the boss (We the
People, specifically in elections) that we can't have all the
information about our own company (our own country).

Either there is a transparent system of public voting as well as
public vote counting (except for the opportunity to secretly screw up
ONLY one's own personal ballot) or else the voting system is not one
that respects the rights and status of a free people.  If one's not
being treated like the co-partner boss, perhaps there's been a
rearrangement of things amongst the hired help.  Non-transparency is
an implicit but 100% clear denial that a democratic arrangement in
fact exists in the body politic in question.

The above being said, if you mean we don't need to wait for perfect in
OTHER RESPECTS besides transparency then I would be more inclined to
agree, provided there's also universal opportunity for suffrage of all
potentially affected persons.

Paul Lehto, Juris Doctor

On 10/8/09, Eric Dierker <cogitoergosum at sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> The "proof" of the premise that voting is necessary in some form is
> contained in many places.* The reality of trustworthy votes is as ancient as
> the travesty that women would have no vote, and the concepts of Ideology in
> Europe**.  Tyranny justified by necessity is an accepted reality as we see
> from Pitt***. So the arguments of possibility of fraud are not justification
> for denying international direct voting on matters of Internet Governance.
> (I specifically do not include IANA type Standard setting, and this should
> be done through appropriate representation via the scientific community and
> endorsed by those elected)
>
> Of course all things of human making are subject to flaw -- thank goodness
> this includes computers ;-)  The flaws are never appropriate reason for not
> acting -- that is the difference between a justification and an excuse.
>
> Marketing is Education and Education is Marketing.  People cringe at this
> phrase of mine, introduced to a communist country Internet Governance
> undergoing a Doi Moi, but several truths that are necessary here are held
> within.  It takes some type of propaganda to get folks caring enough to get
> out and participate and vote. There is a very fine line between revisionist
> history and education, Generally the debate between the two is settled by
> what the power at large wants to market. If we just accept that fact here we
> can move forward and begin to capitalize on the tools available.
>
> We must begin the process of educating the users of the Internet of the fact
> that they in fact do have rights.  That the outsourced voice on the end of a
> helpline is not God.  That here they must Question Authority. That Use
> Agreements and Disclaimers and FAQs are not divinely inspired. We must begin
> to empower users -- not from without, to begin with, but from within their
> own self styled thought boxes. We must continue to act in a way that sheds
> some light on our freedoms and how they transcend modern global economies
> and instant communication networks.
>
> When Parminder is tired and when McTim feels frustrated and when Paul
> believes no one cares and when Roland is cynical and when Avri only has hope
> -- they must get up and try harder and lead the way. They must talk when
> they are hoarse, must write when they are weary and must rally on bad news
> and celebrate on good. This is the foundation of Governance. Not polls or
> money or ease. But hard work and diligence and leading when there is no one
> to follow.
>
>
> *
> Article 21.
>
> (1) Everyone has the right to take part in the government of his country,
> directly or through freely chosen representatives.
> (2) Everyone has the right of equal access to public service in his country.
> (3) The will of the people shall be the basis of the authority of
> government; this will shall be expressed in periodic and genuine elections
> which shall be by universal and equal suffrage and shall be held by secret
> vote or by equivalent free voting procedures.
>
> http://books.google.com/books?id=dodcJC_b1_QC&pg=PA101&lpg=PA101&dq=universal+suffrage+was+achieved+in+britain+in+the
> +year&source=bl&ots=j_IIwx4i9s&sig=UhN50VnhxHAGIE
> QN65QoFM1q5ao&hl=en&ei=dAHOSs7tIIOotgOSkdnJDg&sa=X&oi=book_
> result&ct=result&resnum=10&ved=0CCAQ6AEwCQ#v=onepage&q=&f=false
>
> ***
> http://thinkexist.com/quotation/necessity_is_the_plea_for_every_infringement_of/226531.html
>
>
> --- On Thu, 10/8/09, Paul Lehto <lehto.paul at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> From: Paul Lehto <lehto.paul at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [governance] Truths and Proofs
> To: governance at lists.cpsr.org, "Eric Dierker" <cogitoergosum at sbcglobal.net>
> Date: Thursday, October 8, 2009, 2:30 PM
>
>
> A good summary, though I'm not saying it's a complete statement
> because I'm not analyzing it that thoroughly, but it is good
> nonetheless.  But I'd make one addition, for now:
>
> If a person or entity thinks it is too bothersome or difficult to
> measure the will of the people and obtain their consent, it takes a
> lot of chutzpah, and then some, to presume to violate, structure,
> frame, regulate or control the exercise of that person's freedom.
> Note especially that freedom is the DEFAULT rule, it exists globally
> wherever a legitimate law does not take it away.  Thus, neither ICANN
> nor government can Grant rights of freedom, they exist beforehand,
> they can only reduce freedom via laws, and then only if those laws are
> promulgated legitimately.
>
> For purposes of the above, I'm ignoring for the moment the substantial
> issue of whether anything short of bona fide elections can provide the
> necessary consent and will of the people, as well as ignoring the
> extreme dubiousness of the trustability of internet-based "elections"
> on topics the bulk of which will concern the fundamental business
> interests of many of the most computer-savvy companies in the world,
> with ample motive, means and opportunity to affect such an internet
> election by "hacking" and the like.  This consideration applies
> regardless of whether any such attempts occur, or not, because it is a
> problem of perception based on possibility, even if we could know for
> sure (and we can't) that a particular piece of software did not
> contain  for example a double trojan horse.  See the classic paper
> "Reflections on Trusting Trust".
>
> Paul Lehto, Juris Doctor
>
> On 10/8/09, Eric Dierker <cogitoergosum at sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>> Somethings do not need to be debated.  Somethings are self evident by
>> their
>> mere existance - hence cogitoergosum.  Some things are in fact Universally
>> held. (exceptions and variance is the spice, not the rule - see Gregor
>> Mendel.
>>
>> ICANN exists and must be dealt with.
>>
>> Universal Human Rights are worth fighting for, defending and advancing.
>>
>> The will of the people can never be frozen and kept into a nice and neat
>> formula.
>>
>> Most, if given the choice, would like to exercise their own freedoms.
>>
>> Highly technical matters are not within the area of common knowledge. See
>> TLD .lowtech
>>
>> In that Internet Governance is generally needed, not to protect the
>> interests of those already in power, but to protect the rights of those
>> not
>> in power, we should be concerned with determining what the will of the
>> people who use the Internet is.
>
>
> --
> Paul R Lehto, J.D.
> P.O. Box #1
> Ishpeming, MI  49849
> lehto.paul at gmail.com
> 906-204-4026
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
>


-- 
Paul R Lehto, J.D.
P.O. Box #1
Ishpeming, MI  49849
lehto.paul at gmail.com
906-204-4026
____________________________________________________________
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


From andersj at elon.edu  Thu Oct  8 14:44:37 2009
From: andersj at elon.edu (Janna Anderson)
Date: Thu, 08 Oct 2009 14:44:37 -0400
Subject: [governance] FYI IGF-USA information
Message-ID: <C6F3AB55.16E87%andersj@elon.edu>

FYI for those interested. While the video clips are still yet to be
processed, some reports and photos from the Internet Governance Forum-USA,
which took place last week in Washington, are posted online in various
locations, including:

Imagining the Internet:
http://www.elon.edu/e-web/predictions/igf_usa/default.xhtml

The WordPress site - blog posts completed during the day of the forum:
http://igfusa.wordpress.com/

Twitter from Imagining the Internet:
Real-time stream of comments from the various workshops and the plenaries
http://twitter.com/ImagineInternet

Forgive errors and let us know if there are any big ones. All of this
content was compiled on the spot and posted immediately.

Many Internet Governance Caucus members were active leaders of this event,
including Derrick Cogburn, Katitza Rodriguez, Brenden Kuerbis and others who
did an amazing amount of work to pull it all off extremely well.

I will also be posting more photos online on Facebook in my open photo
album.

As noted, video will be posted soon. And we will see you in Sharm.

Janna

-- 
Janna Quitney Anderson
Director of Imagining the Internet
www.imaginingtheinternet.org

Associate Professor
School of Communications
Elon University
andersj at elon.edu
(336) 278-5733 (o)





____________________________________________________________
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


From ajp at glocom.ac.jp  Thu Oct  8 17:10:51 2009
From: ajp at glocom.ac.jp (Adam Peake)
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2009 23:10:51 +0200
Subject: [governance] Western Sahara ccTLD dispute
Message-ID: <f31ae3560910081410o5ff5ce7cu6a2c3ed5190bda31@mail.gmail.com>

Anyone know background to the disputre over the Western Sahara
(Spanish) ccTLD?  Any info, please let me know off list.

Many thanks,

Adam
____________________________________________________________
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


From bnkuerbi at syr.edu  Thu Oct  8 17:32:22 2009
From: bnkuerbi at syr.edu (Brenden Kuerbis)
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2009 17:32:22 -0400
Subject: [governance] Fwd: Live Event Tonight!: "Civic Representation in
 ICANN: What Now?"
Message-ID: <28cfc1a40910081432i75b6e78cn9de0d2ac035514a2@mail.gmail.com>

FYI. Apologies for cross-posting, but this should be a good one.

---------------------------------------
Brenden Kuerbis
Internet Governance Project
http://internetgovernance.org




---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Noncommercial Users Constituency (NCUC) <xxxx at ncdnhc.org>
Date: Thu, Oct 8, 2009 at 5:07 PM
Subject: On Noncommercial Users Constituency (NCUC): Live Event
Tonight!: "Civic Representation in ICANN: What Now?"
To:


A message to all members of Noncommercial Users Constituency (NCUC)

NCUC member ISOC-NY is hosting a forum, "Civic Representation in
ICANN: What Now?," tonight at NYU's Warren Weaver Hall from
18:45-20:45 EDT (22:45-00:45 UTC).  Former NCUC Chair Milton Mueller,
consumer advocate Beau Brendler, and longtime ICANN participant Danny
Younger will debate the ongoing GNSO reforms occurring at ICANN, and
the possible structures for civil society participation in its policy
making activities.  You can watch the debate live here -
http://www.livestream.com/isocny - and join the discussion. More
information available at http://www.isoc-ny.org/?p=886

Visit Noncommercial Users Constituency (NCUC) at: http://ncdnhc.org

--
To control which emails you receive on Noncommercial Users
Constituency (NCUC), go to:
http://ncdnhc.org/profiles/profile/emailSettings
____________________________________________________________
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


From jefsey at jefsey.com  Thu Oct  8 21:45:01 2009
From: jefsey at jefsey.com (JFC Morfin)
Date: Fri, 09 Oct 2009 03:45:01 +0200
Subject: [governance] UK imposes technical measures against P2P
In-Reply-To: <UCl1JQOyPbzKFApR@perry.co.uk>
References: <f7e605ab0910070453y741e9a8cw13ae292cd2899f05@mail.gmail.com>
 <965A47B5-44F0-4CF2-8769-B1F34E98A561@psg.com>
 <UCl1JQOyPbzKFApR@perry.co.uk>
Message-ID: <20091009014538.5B4EC92193@npogroups.org>

At 11:42 08/10/2009, Roland Perry wrote:
>In message <965A47B5-44F0-4CF2-8769-B1F34E98A561 at psg.com>, at 
>08:00:46 on Wed, 7 Oct 2009, Avri Doria <avri at psg.com> writes
>>Since the UK telecoms has long been suspected of doing the same to 
>>Skype traffic,
>
>They have? As a UK resident that comes as news to me.
>
>>it would hardly surprising to find that they have the  equipment in 
>>place already.
>
>Currently, several ISPs have "traffic shaping" that is 
>bandwidth-driven rather than content-driven. As a commercial 
>decision, you can buy an access account which has a daily bandwidth 
>cap, and p2p is one of the obvious things which might trigger such a thing.
>--
>Roland Perry

A pay per use approach is certainly a good way to push for 
communication rationalisation and related R&D. The IETF strives to 
make the Internet work better, this does not prevent us to work on 
using it better.
jfc



____________________________________________________________
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


From bortzmeyer at internatif.org  Fri Oct  9 04:15:28 2009
From: bortzmeyer at internatif.org (Stephane Bortzmeyer)
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2009 09:15:28 +0100
Subject: [governance] Re: Western Sahara ccTLD dispute
In-Reply-To: <f31ae3560910081410o5ff5ce7cu6a2c3ed5190bda31@mail.gmail.com>
References: <f31ae3560910081410o5ff5ce7cu6a2c3ed5190bda31@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20091009081528.GA4419@laperouse.bortzmeyer.org>

On Thu, Oct 08, 2009 at 11:10:51PM +0200,
 Adam Peake <ajp at glocom.ac.jp> wrote 
 a message of 14 lines which said:

> Anyone know background to the disputre over the Western Sahara
> (Spanish) ccTLD?

It is not spanish anymore...

You can find good references in the good Wikipedia article:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.eh
____________________________________________________________
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


From wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de  Fri Oct  9 04:25:04 2009
From: wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de (=?iso-8859-1?Q?=22Kleinw=E4chter=2C_Wolfgang=22?=)
Date: Fri, 09 Oct 2009 10:25:04 +0200
Subject: [governance] Leipzig 1989
References: <955588.20095.qm@web83902.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
 <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A87193DD@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
Message-ID:  <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A87195E4@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>

Sorry for changing the subject but October 9, 1989 in Leipzig is a good exmpale what can be achieved bottom up :-)))
 
For people who read German. 
http://www.heise.de/tp/r4/artikel/31/31019/1.html
 
Wolfgang
____________________________________________________________
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


From maxsenges at gmail.com  Fri Oct  9 08:43:40 2009
From: maxsenges at gmail.com (Max Senges)
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2009 14:43:40 +0200
Subject: [governance] Call for Nominations "Breaking Borders Award"
Message-ID: <4d976d8e0910090543j35a507ah6d645eaa6b66fc84@mail.gmail.com>

Call for Nominations "Breaking Borders Award" On November 3rd 2009, Google
and Reporters without Borders will hold an event entitled "Breaking Borders"
to commemorate the 20th anniversary of the fall of the Berlin Wall.  We'd
like to take this opportunity to highlight the importance of free expression
around the world and send a clear message to repressive regimes that censor
content both online and offline by honoring outstanding individuals or
groups, who have shown courage, energy and resourcefulness in using the
internet to promote freedom of expression, ensure that diverse political
viewpoints are heard and stand up to those who censor information.

Therefore Google and Reporters without Borders invite you to nominate
candidates for the Breaking Borders Award.

We encourage you to share this Call for Nominations with others who might
wish to submit a nomination.

*Nomination & Selection Procedure*
Please send your nominations until the 20th of October to
breakingborders at google.com.
As part of your nomination please send us the name (contact if possible),
references (URLs or attachments), as well as at least one other person who
can assess the nominee's work. Nominations will be forwarded to the
designated Award Committee consisting of selected experts from Reporters
without Borders and Google.


*Background Information Breaking Borders Event*
Twenty years ago, the fall of the Berlin Wall became a striking symbol
forfreedom and self-determination far beyond the borders of Germany.
But in
many places around the world today, people are still struggling take hold of
the right to express their thoughts and beliefs freely and openly.
Dissidents and journalists remain under severe pressure, and their voices
are all too often silenced by force. Google and Reporters without Borders
have partnered to celebrate and advocate for the importance of freedom of
expression and the role the internet  plays in allowing each and everyone to
freely participate in our global discourse.

Today, the Internet continues to be an increasingly populous and powerful
medium for spreading opinions across the spectrum throughout the globe.  The
estimated number of blogs has grown to 110 million last year from fewer than
two million in 2004.  Expression through online video has become so popular
that 20 hours of videos are uploaded to YouTube every minute, and hundreds
of millions of videos are watched on the site everyday.  Even in countries
where governments engage in heavy censorship, the Internet has nevertheless
proven to be an effective tool for sharing information and promoting
political change.


---------------------------------------

Dr. Max Senges
Multistakeholder Cooperations

Unter den Linden 21
10117 Berlin

mobile: +49 1622122755
office:   + 49 30303986362

www.maxsenges.com
(google internal http://go/maxsenges)

AG Hamburg, HRB 86891

Sitz der Gesellschaft: Hamburg
Geschäftsführer: Nikesh Arora, John Herlihy, Graham Law, Lloyd Martin,
Kent Walker

-------------------------------------
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20091009/0c627559/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

From lehto.paul at gmail.com  Fri Oct  9 09:36:39 2009
From: lehto.paul at gmail.com (Paul Lehto)
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2009 09:36:39 -0400
Subject: [governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation; ICANN's Breathtaking Audacity
 Illustrated
Message-ID: <76f819dd0910090636wfdee8b1qd3e62ab83875c24e@mail.gmail.com>

The core claim of icann.org on its website is "independence" being
achieved.  Governments and regulators of all types are supposed to be
*servants* of the public, not independent at all. This is a very
important point, as shown in the following observations:

Even most dictators PURPORT and claim to have the support and consent
of the people through some process like a straw man opposition
election (a form of fake election) like Saddam Hussein receiving
something like 99% of the vote, election fraud generally, staged
demonstrations, real or doctored poll evidence -- something, anything
to reinforce that support from the people.  That authoritarians would
do this is not at all suprising give the Universal Declaration of
Human Rights stating that all legitimate political power comes only
from the people.  Non-democratic leaders do their best to fake this,
but everybody knows its a lie, at least outside the country in
question subject to usually intense propaganda.

But ICANN is openly stating something very remarkable. In contrast to
authoritarians who masquerade and go to pains to pretend that they
have the approval and consent of the public (in order to avoid real
elections) and thereby create the image without the reality of
political legitimacy, notice how ICANN contrasts sharply with that:

ICANN **openly** claims its "Independence," an "independence" that,
among other things, must mean independence from (1) any control by the
people of the US as well as (2) independence or freedom from any control by the
people of the entire globe as well.  Institutions of government can
only be "independent" of other arms of government for checks and
balances purposes, but never completely independent as ICANN clearly
appears to claim, having cut the remaining governmental ties and
requiring ICANN agreement to reinstate them.

This is breathtaking. Audacious.  It can't be understated.  More
courageous than most dictators, in a certain but important sense.

Even the present scope of ICANN activity, claimed to be narrow, is
subject to no restriction other than whatever ICANN can contract for,
purchase, fight for, or
fundraise for. Though unnecessary to my point of above, an independent
and free ICANN could become the Microsoft of the Internet, as just one
example.  King of the e-world, as it were.

-- 
Paul R Lehto, J.D.
P.O. Box #1
Ishpeming, MI  49849
lehto.paul at gmail.com
906-204-4026
____________________________________________________________
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


From cogitoergosum at sbcglobal.net  Fri Oct  9 09:46:06 2009
From: cogitoergosum at sbcglobal.net (Eric Dierker)
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2009 06:46:06 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [governance] Worthy goal of Governance
In-Reply-To: <20091009014545.1DE85921EC@npogroups.org>
Message-ID: <386122.49897.qm@web83907.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>

Jefsey,
 
This is a wonderful remark.

--- On Fri, 10/9/09, JFC Morfin <jefsey at jefsey.com> wrote:

 The IETF strives to make the Internet work better, this does not prevent us to work on using it better.
jfc

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20091009/d5540994/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

From toml at communisphere.com  Fri Oct  9 14:15:47 2009
From: toml at communisphere.com (Thomas Lowenhaupt)
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2009 14:15:47 -0400
Subject: [governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation of Commitments
Message-ID: <284601ca490c$88eb07e0$6400a8c0@powuseren2ihcx>

Paul,

 I have been following your comments on the AoC quite carefully and look 
forward to the next. I say this by way of encouraging you not to be 
dissuaded by claims that your comments are "tedious." Anything but.

Keep up the good work.

Tom Lowenhaupt

P.S. The following paragraph, clipped from the below, was not quite clear.

> One potential but unworkable way "out" of the private regulation
> argument above is to say that ICANN is private, not public. That
> doesn't work for two powerful reasons: (1) For years, until a few days
> ago, ICANN was claimed to be under the direction and control of the
> USG Dept of Commerce, a public entity, and
> (2) As the US Supreme Court said in Lebron v Amtrak, what a government
> or government corporation announces itself to be, even by statute, is
> not only not controlling -- it's laughable to think it's reliable as a
> solution to the issue.  Even Justice Scalia said it would be a
> remarkable and unprecedented thing if the "government could evade its
> constitutional obligations by mere resort to the fiction of the
> corporate form [read ICANN corporation]".
>
> Were the above principle of not trusting the actors in question in
> fact valid, the FBI for example could easily claim none of their
> actions were 4th amendment searches and seizures, and evade
> independent legal review that way.



 ----- Original Message ----- 
 From: "Paul Lehto" <lehto.paul at gmail.com>
 To: "McTim" <dogwallah at gmail.com>
 Cc: <governance at lists.cpsr.org>; "Roland Perry"
 <roland at internetpolicyagency.com>
 Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 10:17 AM
 Subject: Re: [governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation of Commitments


> The basic idea is that one can not legitimately regulate a person,
> even if the regulation is described as "administration of technical
> resources [of the Internet]" without also engaging in the process of
> respecting the users enough to solicit, and obtain, their consent.  My
> metaphor, too strong an image for some specific cases, but still apt
> nevertheless, is that if one hasn't achieved legitimacy via the
> consent of the governed (or to-be-governed) then one has no right to
> rule - no right to "squash bugs."  In other words, humans are not mere
> bugs that can be squashed or affected without checking in with them
> and without legitimacy of the authority.
>
> Nobody except valid legitimate governmental authorities directly or
> indirectly elected or appointed by the public have the right to go
> around affecting, diminishing or destroying user freedom on the
> internet so long as that freedom is not hurting others.
>
> To the above it's been said "but wait, we don't have global ELECTION
> processes in place, so its not so easy to obtain this authority or
> legitimacy."
>
> To which I say:  Your authority therefore has zero legitimacy.  Law is
> compulsion and force -- commands with the penalty of a civil monetary
> liability or criminal sanction for their violation.  CONTRACT LAW IS
> "PRIVATE LAW."  If one cannot have a domain or presence on the
> internet without a contract then the contract is not a voluntary act
> its required.  Therefore, outfits like ICANN are set up as
> illegitimate private regulators, even if the scope of their regulation
> is presently restricted.
>
> One potential but unworkable way "out" of the private regulation
> argument above is to say that ICANN is private, not public. That
> doesn't work for two powerful reasons: (1) For years, until a few days
> ago, ICANN was claimed to be under the direction and control of the
> USG Dept of Commerce, a public entity, and
> (2) As the US Supreme Court said in Lebron v Amtrak, what a government
> or government corporation announces itself to be, even by statute, is
> not only not controlling -- it's laughable to think it's reliable as a
> solution to the issue.  Even Justice Scalia said it would be a
> remarkable and unprecedented thing if the "government could evade its
> constitutional obligations by mere resort to the fiction of the
> corporate form [read ICANN corporation]".
>
> Were the above principle of not trusting the actors in question in
> fact valid, the FBI for example could easily claim none of their
> actions were 4th amendment searches and seizures, and evade
> independent legal review that way.
>
> Thus, what ICANN or the DOC says about the case is not controlling for
> any independent thinker or independent legal analysis, except when
> ICANN or DOC make admissions against their own interest, since
> admissions against one's own interest have a high degree of
> reliability.
>
> McTim, it's probably not fruitful to suggest your work in repeating
> things to me is "tedious" as if I lack the intelligence to understand
> or the ability to read.   What we are discussing is governance,
> something that I have a strong interest in, not to mention a law
> degree, and published articles on democracy with more on the way.  For
> better or worse, in any justiciable case the legal system gets the
> last word, including but not limited to the last word on disputes in
> any expert terrain like computer science.
>
> If there's some minutiae of computer science or "custom" of the
> internet that I'm ignoring or seeming not to grasp, it's because those
> details, each as a class, have no legal relevance to any issue of
> fundamental importance to governance.
>
> Paul Lehto, Juris Doctor
>
> On 10/7/09, McTim <dogwallah at gmail.com> wrote:
>> This is becoming tedious, but I'll make one last attempt to explain it to
>> you:
>>
>> On Wed, Oct 7, 2009 at 7:52 PM, Paul Lehto <lehto.paul at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>> <yada yada snipped>
>>>
>>> If asking the persons whose rights and lives you wish to modify on the
>>> internet is TOO MUCH TROUBLE
>>
>> gov'ts modify the rights and lives of Internet users, ICANN has a very
>> narrow the very narrow role of administering technical resources via
>> its IANA function.
>>
>>  for practical reasons, what right does
>>> anyone have to go around squashing human beings like bugs
>>
>> now that's just silly.
>>
>> <more snippage>
>>>
>>> A legislature charged with doing the job of making laws, for example,
>>> can't just assign that lawmaking task to a private body and refuse to
>>> oversee it or to provide standards and further disclaim its
>>> responsibilities as charged by law or the constitution.   Yet that is
>>> perilously close to, and appears to be exactly what, the DOC
>>> accomplished an the Affirmations agreement.
>>
>> Perhaps you don't understand the history behind this move.  During the
>> Clinton Administration, the USG basically said "who wants this job,
>> it's not really appropriate for us to do anymore".  To make a long
>> (but interesting) story short, ICANN was created and took the "job".
>> The goal all along was for it to be an independent body.  You are a
>> dozen years too late to complain about it now, that ship has long
>> since sailed.
>>
>> --
>> Cheers,
>>
>> McTim
>> "A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A
>> route indicates how we get there."  Jon Postel
>>
>
>
> -- 
> Paul R Lehto, J.D.
> P.O. Box #1
> Ishpeming, MI  49849
> lehto.paul at gmail.com
> 906-204-4026
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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


From lehto.paul at gmail.com  Fri Oct  9 16:49:31 2009
From: lehto.paul at gmail.com (Paul Lehto)
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2009 16:49:31 -0400
Subject: [governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation of Commitments
In-Reply-To: <284601ca490c$88eb07e0$6400a8c0@powuseren2ihcx>
References: <284601ca490c$88eb07e0$6400a8c0@powuseren2ihcx>
Message-ID: <76f819dd0910091349x401611fegcf65a7d3979266f2@mail.gmail.com>

my reply is directly below this short original message:

On 10/9/09, Thomas Lowenhaupt <toml at communisphere.com> wrote:
> Paul,
>
>  I have been following your comments on the AoC quite carefully and look
> forward to the next. I say this by way of encouraging you not to be
> dissuaded by claims that your comments are "tedious." Anything but.
>
> Keep up the good work.
>
> Tom Lowenhaupt
>
> P.S. The following paragraph, clipped from the below, was not quite clear.
>
>> One potential but unworkable way "out" of the private regulation
>> argument above is to say that ICANN is private, not public. That
>> doesn't work for two powerful reasons: (1) For years, until a few days
>> ago, ICANN was claimed to be under the direction and control of the
>> USG Dept of Commerce, a public entity, and
>> (2) As the US Supreme Court said in Lebron v Amtrak, what a government
>> or government corporation announces itself to be, even by statute, is
>> not only not controlling -- it's laughable to think it's reliable as a
>> solution to the issue.  Even Justice Scalia said it would be a
>> remarkable and unprecedented thing if the "government could evade its
>> constitutional obligations by mere resort to the fiction of the
>> corporate form [read ICANN corporation]".
>>
>> Were the above principle of not trusting the actors in question in
>> fact valid, the FBI for example could easily claim none of their
>> actions were 4th amendment searches and seizures, and evade
>> independent legal review that way.
>

These paragraphs begin to address how the release of control and
review authority on behalf of the public might be challenged.  In any
such challenge, of course plaintiffs would want to assert rights
including but not limited to Constitutional rights.  In response to
such claims, defendant corporations routinely claim in privatization
situations like this a correct statement of legal doctrine in the US,
namely that the Constitution does not apply to the private sector
including of course corporations, it only provides rights against the
government and its actions.

The fact that, with narrow exception like the 13th amendment outlawing
slavery which was intended to and held to extend to private
slaveowners, this statement is broadly true (that the Constitution
only works as against the government) means the following:

Privatization of CORE government functions (not, say, leasing a
photocopier) means that a core function has been transferred OUTSIDE
the umbrella of rights and protections afforded by the Constitution,
and thus what seems from one perspective to be an efficiency-move to
the private sector (regardless of the merits of such claims) is in
fact a profound anti-rights move because it strips the core activity
in question of rights and protections the people previously enjoyed.

As a result of the above, in privatization cases like private prisons,
litigation ensues and the end result is a complicated mixed bag of
results, with some courts holding that the rights continue to apply
because the corporation has "stepped into the shoes" of the
government, and in fact and practice the corporation IS the government
because it's taken on an important function, and other courts finding
differences because of the private sector aspects.

I realized as plaintiff in a case about the privatization of vote
counts into "trade secret" computer software that I was researching
(To assist my attorney) virtually every provision in the constitution,
and that in direct effect the move to privatize, following by a bevy
of public interest lawsuits, amounts to nothing other than a
renegotiation, THROUGH THE COURTS, of the constitution's rights!
With, of course, the aforementioned mixed results.

However, the Constitution is ONLY supposed to be changed by AMENDMENT,
not by a mere contract between the government and a corporation.

A similar thing has occurred where pursuant to something less than a
contract (apparently) an "Affirmation" of Commitments, the USG gives
away ICANN to ICANN, which now claims "independence."  Independence at
the general level can only exist in the private sector.  NO
litigation's been filed yet, but we can certainly expect ICANN to make
the traditional claim that it is private sector, since it would be odd
indeed for an "independent" ICANN to say it is the government.  Thus
beings the renegotiation of ICANN's legal status via piecemeal
litigation, with the traditional mixed results in all likelihood in
the long run.

Does renegotiating ICANN's status via litigation sound good to all?
I don't think it's appropriate, but there are lots of "interesting"
questions raised that will keep lawyers and solicitors busy.  But at
the more important levels that lawyers with their narrow focus on
tightly defined issues sometimes or often don't reach, the whole AoC
is properly seen as void.  It's not a contract since the USG got no
consideration, they gave it away for free as far as I can see, and
even if they got some minimal consideration, by rights an "asset" (to
use private sector terminology for the moment) if it is rightful to
alienate ought to be put up for bids to see if anyone would like to
purchase it.  This would maximize the return to the taxpayers for
their initial investment (of course I don't favor this, but it's a
logical requirement if ICANN is an asset properly able to be sold or
given away).

I cited Lebron v. Amtrak for Justice Scalia's comment that the
government can't credibly "evade its most solemn constitutional
obligations by resorting to the fiction of the corporate form" and the
case stands in part for the idea that the government's statement, in a
statute, that Amtrak is a private corporation in no way predetermined
the court's resolution of the truth of the matter.  If it did, as the
case suggested, the FBI could claim all its activities were "not
searches" in a regulation and thereby evade all judicial review.

For the above reasons, what the USG and ICANN say that is self-serving
is to be dismissed or taken skeptically, but admissions AGAINST
interest are more reliable since they are not readily made.
Independence is one such admission.

Hope that helps


-- 
Paul R Lehto, J.D.
P.O. Box #1
Ishpeming, MI  49849
lehto.paul at gmail.com
906-204-4026
____________________________________________________________
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


From jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com  Fri Oct  9 17:13:14 2009
From: jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com (Jeffrey A. Williams)
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2009 16:13:14 -0500 (GMT-05:00)
Subject: [governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation; ICANN's Breathtaking
Message-ID: <18163423.1255122795013.JavaMail.root@elwamui-polski.atl.sa.earthlink.net>

Paul and all,

  ICANN has sense it's conception, and even before under the
gTLD-MOU has been seeking the "Independance" as it defines it.
Perhaps to some folks glee it has achieved that now or soon
will given this ICANN/USG Affirmation.  But the comparison you
IMO properly drew to an extent with the Sadam Hussain regime in
IRAQ, now thankfully defunct, to ICANN's "Independance" is indeed
shocking and audacious as well as very potentially dangerous as
well in may obvious and not so obvious ways and end effects.

-----Original Message-----
>From: Paul Lehto <lehto.paul at gmail.com>
>Sent: Oct 9, 2009 8:36 AM
>To: governance at lists.cpsr.org, Roland Perry <roland at internetpolicyagency.com>
>Subject: [governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation; ICANN's Breathtaking Audacity Illustrated
>
>The core claim of icann.org on its website is "independence" being
>achieved.  Governments and regulators of all types are supposed to be
>*servants* of the public, not independent at all. This is a very
>important point, as shown in the following observations:
>
>Even most dictators PURPORT and claim to have the support and consent
>of the people through some process like a straw man opposition
>election (a form of fake election) like Saddam Hussein receiving
>something like 99% of the vote, election fraud generally, staged
>demonstrations, real or doctored poll evidence -- something, anything
>to reinforce that support from the people.  That authoritarians would
>do this is not at all suprising give the Universal Declaration of
>Human Rights stating that all legitimate political power comes only
>from the people.  Non-democratic leaders do their best to fake this,
>but everybody knows its a lie, at least outside the country in
>question subject to usually intense propaganda.
>
>But ICANN is openly stating something very remarkable. In contrast to
>authoritarians who masquerade and go to pains to pretend that they
>have the approval and consent of the public (in order to avoid real
>elections) and thereby create the image without the reality of
>political legitimacy, notice how ICANN contrasts sharply with that:
>
>ICANN **openly** claims its "Independence," an "independence" that,
>among other things, must mean independence from (1) any control by the
>people of the US as well as (2) independence or freedom from any control by the
>people of the entire globe as well.  Institutions of government can
>only be "independent" of other arms of government for checks and
>balances purposes, but never completely independent as ICANN clearly
>appears to claim, having cut the remaining governmental ties and
>requiring ICANN agreement to reinstate them.
>
>This is breathtaking. Audacious.  It can't be understated.  More
>courageous than most dictators, in a certain but important sense.
>
>Even the present scope of ICANN activity, claimed to be narrow, is
>subject to no restriction other than whatever ICANN can contract for,
>purchase, fight for, or
>fundraise for. Though unnecessary to my point of above, an independent
>and free ICANN could become the Microsoft of the Internet, as just one
>example.  King of the e-world, as it were.
>
>-- 
>Paul R Lehto, J.D.
>P.O. Box #1
>Ishpeming, MI  49849
>lehto.paul at gmail.com
>906-204-4026
>____________________________________________________________
>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

Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 294k members/stakeholders strong!)
"Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" -
   Abraham Lincoln

"Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is very
often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt

"If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; liability
depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
United States v. Carroll Towing  (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
===============================================================
Updated 1/26/04
CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS. div. of
Information Network Eng.  INEG. INC.
ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com
Phone: 214-244-4827

____________________________________________________________
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


From jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com  Fri Oct  9 17:40:06 2009
From: jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com (Jeffrey A. Williams)
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2009 16:40:06 -0500 (GMT-05:00)
Subject: [governance] Truths and Proofs
Message-ID: <583082.1255124407079.JavaMail.root@elwamui-polski.atl.sa.earthlink.net>

An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20091009/a7badacb/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

From jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com  Fri Oct  9 17:45:23 2009
From: jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com (Jeffrey A. Williams)
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2009 16:45:23 -0500 (GMT-05:00)
Subject: [governance] Re: [ga] 2. At-large director appointment - when and
 how
Message-ID: <15347705.1255124723425.JavaMail.root@elwamui-polski.atl.sa.earthlink.net>

An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20091009/838470f0/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

From cogitoergosum at sbcglobal.net  Sat Oct 10 11:54:16 2009
From: cogitoergosum at sbcglobal.net (Eric Dierker)
Date: Sat, 10 Oct 2009 08:54:16 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [governance] Internet Voting, self determination
Message-ID: <463683.2372.qm@web83903.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>

It would be my hope that someone will take the torch and help to create more comprehensive voting and process rules for this "group". It seems that most with an open mind have learned a great deal from the latest vote here and certainly gained some understanding from Mr. Lehto's posts.
 
There is a very clear desire by those in power positions regarding the Internet not to allow any direct voting by users of the Internet. If you want proof that even a Roland would appreciate, here it is:;;;  (long pause - curtain lifted and___---) There is not any. Oh no! Not no proof!!  There is no voting; and that is the unadulterated, uncomplicated blatant in your face proof.
(arguments that we cannot are frivolous http://www.springerlink.com/content/ux88812274213058/)
 
One must surmise that the wizened gents that control things believe that they would lose control of those things if there were a vote. Or perhaps they are protecting us from ourselves, benevolent old men who just want to make sure we as people do not mess things up.  So I believe that we should really look and determine whether or not the masses are mature enough and trustworthy enough to decide what is best for them.  I am not being facetious here.  Is the public ready to have a say in governance?
 
My conclusion may surprise some that think I am an ideologue purist. I am. But what I am most sure of is that matters change. That growth is the antitheses of dying. And that by trying to keep things the same we really muck them up.  The world population is not ready to determine by free vote, those matters relevant to Internet governance.
The kicker is  -- They never will be.
(in the late 1700s a fellow with initials BF wrote his president GW. GW had asked how a country's revolution to democracy, away from monarchy, was going. BF responded in part: "A fool sir is still a fool, the fact that you gather them by the multitudes, only aggravates the situation")
But never the less the revolution continued and lives and resources were lost but all in all the masses came to power and grew into their role of self determination. At my son's majority there was a war raging, he was accepted to a fine University and he had itchy feet. It was not my decision that he would go to war, attend school or travel the world. Not my call. My job in directing was over. He has  since traveled the world, obtained degrees and is a strong advocate for peace, from a platform of freedom of choice.
 
It is not ours to judge or to decide who is ready to take control of the Internet Governance. It is ours to build and protect and to provide for those users to be in control of the destiny and choices that they want. 
 
The systems are not perfect, the people are not ready.  But governance is not about prevention it is about guidance.  Good governance requires lack of control to an extent which thereby guarantees that control be placed where it belongs.  If the goal of those here is to direct and control Internet activity they are frauds. If their goal is to cede power to the people they are not perfect but good.
 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20091010/4217c9ee/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

From cogitoergosum at sbcglobal.net  Sat Oct 10 12:02:03 2009
From: cogitoergosum at sbcglobal.net (Eric Dierker)
Date: Sat, 10 Oct 2009 09:02:03 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation of Commitments
In-Reply-To: <284601ca490c$88eb07e0$6400a8c0@powuseren2ihcx>
Message-ID: <927478.6003.qm@web83901.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>

I am forced by Pauls' long writings to take pause and read and think.  It is always my goal in writing to not focus on obtaining agreement but in obtaining the motivation of others to question and investigate and think. We are, none of us, so wise and knowing that we are not strengthened by contributions of colleagues, if we choose to learn rather than argue for winning sake.
 
Thank you Paul

--- On Fri, 10/9/09, Thomas Lowenhaupt <toml at communisphere.com> wrote:


From: Thomas Lowenhaupt <toml at communisphere.com>
Subject: [governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation of Commitments
To: governance at lists.cpsr.org, "Paul Lehto" <lehto.paul at gmail.com>
Date: Friday, October 9, 2009, 6:15 PM


Paul,

I have been following your comments on the AoC quite carefully and look 
forward to the next. I say this by way of encouraging you not to be 
dissuaded by claims that your comments are "tedious." Anything but.

Keep up the good work.

Tom Lowenhaupt

P.S. The following paragraph, clipped from the below, was not quite clear.

> One potential but unworkable way "out" of the private regulation
> argument above is to say that ICANN is private, not public. That
> doesn't work for two powerful reasons: (1) For years, until a few days
> ago, ICANN was claimed to be under the direction and control of the
> USG Dept of Commerce, a public entity, and
> (2) As the US Supreme Court said in Lebron v Amtrak, what a government
> or government corporation announces itself to be, even by statute, is
> not only not controlling -- it's laughable to think it's reliable as a
> solution to the issue.  Even Justice Scalia said it would be a
> remarkable and unprecedented thing if the "government could evade its
> constitutional obligations by mere resort to the fiction of the
> corporate form [read ICANN corporation]".
>
> Were the above principle of not trusting the actors in question in
> fact valid, the FBI for example could easily claim none of their
> actions were 4th amendment searches and seizures, and evade
> independent legal review that way.



----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Paul Lehto" <lehto.paul at gmail.com>
To: "McTim" <dogwallah at gmail.com>
Cc: <governance at lists.cpsr.org>; "Roland Perry"
<roland at internetpolicyagency.com>
Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 10:17 AM
Subject: Re: [governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation of Commitments


> The basic idea is that one can not legitimately regulate a person,
> even if the regulation is described as "administration of technical
> resources [of the Internet]" without also engaging in the process of
> respecting the users enough to solicit, and obtain, their consent.  My
> metaphor, too strong an image for some specific cases, but still apt
> nevertheless, is that if one hasn't achieved legitimacy via the
> consent of the governed (or to-be-governed) then one has no right to
> rule - no right to "squash bugs."  In other words, humans are not mere
> bugs that can be squashed or affected without checking in with them
> and without legitimacy of the authority.
>
> Nobody except valid legitimate governmental authorities directly or
> indirectly elected or appointed by the public have the right to go
> around affecting, diminishing or destroying user freedom on the
> internet so long as that freedom is not hurting others.
>
> To the above it's been said "but wait, we don't have global ELECTION
> processes in place, so its not so easy to obtain this authority or
> legitimacy."
>
> To which I say:  Your authority therefore has zero legitimacy.  Law is
> compulsion and force -- commands with the penalty of a civil monetary
> liability or criminal sanction for their violation.  CONTRACT LAW IS
> "PRIVATE LAW."  If one cannot have a domain or presence on the
> internet without a contract then the contract is not a voluntary act
> its required.  Therefore, outfits like ICANN are set up as
> illegitimate private regulators, even if the scope of their regulation
> is presently restricted.
>
> One potential but unworkable way "out" of the private regulation
> argument above is to say that ICANN is private, not public. That
> doesn't work for two powerful reasons: (1) For years, until a few days
> ago, ICANN was claimed to be under the direction and control of the
> USG Dept of Commerce, a public entity, and
> (2) As the US Supreme Court said in Lebron v Amtrak, what a government
> or government corporation announces itself to be, even by statute, is
> not only not controlling -- it's laughable to think it's reliable as a
> solution to the issue.  Even Justice Scalia said it would be a
> remarkable and unprecedented thing if the "government could evade its
> constitutional obligations by mere resort to the fiction of the
> corporate form [read ICANN corporation]".
>
> Were the above principle of not trusting the actors in question in
> fact valid, the FBI for example could easily claim none of their
> actions were 4th amendment searches and seizures, and evade
> independent legal review that way.
>
> Thus, what ICANN or the DOC says about the case is not controlling for
> any independent thinker or independent legal analysis, except when
> ICANN or DOC make admissions against their own interest, since
> admissions against one's own interest have a high degree of
> reliability.
>
> McTim, it's probably not fruitful to suggest your work in repeating
> things to me is "tedious" as if I lack the intelligence to understand
> or the ability to read.   What we are discussing is governance,
> something that I have a strong interest in, not to mention a law
> degree, and published articles on democracy with more on the way.  For
> better or worse, in any justiciable case the legal system gets the
> last word, including but not limited to the last word on disputes in
> any expert terrain like computer science.
>
> If there's some minutiae of computer science or "custom" of the
> internet that I'm ignoring or seeming not to grasp, it's because those
> details, each as a class, have no legal relevance to any issue of
> fundamental importance to governance.
>
> Paul Lehto, Juris Doctor
>
> On 10/7/09, McTim <dogwallah at gmail.com> wrote:
>> This is becoming tedious, but I'll make one last attempt to explain it to
>> you:
>>
>> On Wed, Oct 7, 2009 at 7:52 PM, Paul Lehto <lehto.paul at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>> <yada yada snipped>
>>>
>>> If asking the persons whose rights and lives you wish to modify on the
>>> internet is TOO MUCH TROUBLE
>>
>> gov'ts modify the rights and lives of Internet users, ICANN has a very
>> narrow the very narrow role of administering technical resources via
>> its IANA function.
>>
>>  for practical reasons, what right does
>>> anyone have to go around squashing human beings like bugs
>>
>> now that's just silly.
>>
>> <more snippage>
>>>
>>> A legislature charged with doing the job of making laws, for example,
>>> can't just assign that lawmaking task to a private body and refuse to
>>> oversee it or to provide standards and further disclaim its
>>> responsibilities as charged by law or the constitution.   Yet that is
>>> perilously close to, and appears to be exactly what, the DOC
>>> accomplished an the Affirmations agreement.
>>
>> Perhaps you don't understand the history behind this move.  During the
>> Clinton Administration, the USG basically said "who wants this job,
>> it's not really appropriate for us to do anymore".  To make a long
>> (but interesting) story short, ICANN was created and took the "job".
>> The goal all along was for it to be an independent body.  You are a
>> dozen years too late to complain about it now, that ship has long
>> since sailed.
>>
>> --
>> Cheers,
>>
>> McTim
>> "A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A
>> route indicates how we get there."  Jon Postel
>>
>
>
> -- 
> Paul R Lehto, J.D.
> P.O. Box #1
> Ishpeming, MI  49849
> lehto.paul at gmail.com
> 906-204-4026
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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/20091010/df294f67/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

From cogitoergosum at sbcglobal.net  Sat Oct 10 12:57:48 2009
From: cogitoergosum at sbcglobal.net (Eric Dierker)
Date: Sat, 10 Oct 2009 09:57:48 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [governance] IGC? IGF? Suitable Cadre?
Message-ID: <884977.10690.qm@web83916.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>

There seems to be some disconnect between Tunisia and here.  Where is this happening?
 
The mandate of the IGF, Paragraph 72 of the Tunis Agenda:
72. We ask the UN Secretary-General, in an open and inclusive process, to convene, by the second quarter of 2006, a meeting of the new forum for multi-stakeholder policy dialogue—called the Internet Governance Forum (IGF).The mandate of the Forum is to:

Discuss public policy issues related to key elements of Internet governance in order to foster the sustainability, robustness, security, stability and development of the Internet;
Facilitate discourse between bodies dealing with different cross-cutting international public policies regarding the Internet and discuss issues that do not fall within the scope of any existing body;
Interface with appropriate inter-governmental organizations and other institutions on matters under their purview;
Facilitate the exchange of information and best practices, and in this regard make full use of the expertise of the academic, scientific and technical communities;
Advise all stakeholders in proposing ways and means to accelerate the availability and affordability of the Internet in the developing world;
Strengthen and enhance the engagement of stakeholders in existing and/or future Internet governance mechanisms, particularly those from developing countries;
Identify emerging issues, bring them to the attention of the relevant bodies and the general public, and, where appropriate, make recommendations;
Contribute to capacity building for Internet governance in developing countries, drawing fully on local sources of knowledge and expertise;
Promote and assess, on an ongoing basis, the embodiment of WSIS principles in Internet governance processes;
Discuss, inter alia, issues relating to critical Internet resources;
Help to find solutions to the issues arising from the use and misuse of the Internet, of particular concern to everyday users;
Publish its proceedings.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20091010/7a274656/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

From avri at acm.org  Sat Oct 10 13:32:57 2009
From: avri at acm.org (Avri Doria)
Date: Sat, 10 Oct 2009 18:32:57 +0100
Subject: [governance] IGC? IGF? Suitable Cadre?
In-Reply-To: <884977.10690.qm@web83916.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
References: <884977.10690.qm@web83916.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <04A7AF74-4700-4A06-A5E8-F72CF8D499B6@acm.org>


On 10 Oct 2009, at 17:57, Eric Dierker wrote:

> There seems to be some disconnect between Tunisia and here.  Where  
> is this happening?
>
> The mandate of the IGF, Paragraph 72 of the Tunis Agenda:
>


IGF
Internet Governance forum
http://www.intgovforum.org/
____________________________________________________________
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


From jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com  Sat Oct 10 14:00:20 2009
From: jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com (Jeffrey A. Williams)
Date: Sat, 10 Oct 2009 13:00:20 -0500 (GMT-05:00)
Subject: [governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation of Commitments
Message-ID: <24029647.1255197621021.JavaMail.root@elwamui-royal.atl.sa.earthlink.net>

An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20091010/3ecb4c3b/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

From jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com  Sat Oct 10 14:21:31 2009
From: jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com (Jeffrey A. Williams)
Date: Sat, 10 Oct 2009 13:21:31 -0500 (GMT-05:00)
Subject: [governance] Internet Voting, self determination
Message-ID: <11021542.1255198891873.JavaMail.root@elwamui-royal.atl.sa.earthlink.net>

An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20091010/8f6d7376/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

From lehto.paul at gmail.com  Sat Oct 10 14:53:51 2009
From: lehto.paul at gmail.com (Paul Lehto)
Date: Sat, 10 Oct 2009 14:53:51 -0400
Subject: [governance] Internet Voting, self determination
In-Reply-To: <463683.2372.qm@web83903.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
References: <463683.2372.qm@web83903.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <76f819dd0910101153x89c93bcic149c2be39ab702b@mail.gmail.com>

On 10/10/09, Eric Dierker <cogitoergosum at sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> It would be my hope that someone will take the torch and help to create more
> comprehensive voting and process rules for this "group". It seems that most
> with an open mind have learned a great deal from the latest vote here and
> certainly gained some understanding from Mr. Lehto's posts.

Thank you for the positive comments. I myself learn from reading posts
here if and when I can do so with an open mind, albeit no one's mind
should be so "open" or so constituted as to ignore the most important
principles.  When that happens our brains are so open that the brains
themselves fall out of the process.

> One must surmise that the wizened gents that control things believe that
> they would lose control of those things if there were a vote. Or perhaps
> they are protecting us from ourselves, benevolent old men who just want to
> make sure we as people do not mess things up.  So I believe that we should
> really look and determine whether or not the masses are mature enough and
> trustworthy enough to decide what is best for them.  I am not being
> facetious here.  Is the public ready to have a say in governance?

To require that a population or sub-population be deemed "ready" to
vote is tantamount to condemning that population to wait FOREVER.
Those who have control, influence or a vote already will only see
their control, influence or vote diluted by the addition of other
voices or votes, and those with experience in controlling, influencing
or voting in a given area will forever deem themselves, with some good
justification, more experienced and knowledgeable in such things, and
thus will forever view newcomers to the process as insufficiently
"ready" to have a say in governance.

Instead, democracy is based on not only a belief that it's
illegitimate to deny a voice to those who one governs, but also that
once given a voice, those same persons will rise to the occasion (if
it's a real vote in real elections with real substantive issues of
concern) and make themselves "fit" and "suitable" for the exercise of
the franchise.

>
> My conclusion may surprise some that think I am an ideologue purist. I am.
> But what I am most sure of is that matters change. That growth is the
> antitheses of dying. And that by trying to keep things the same we really
> muck them up.  The world population is not ready to determine by free vote,
> those matters relevant to Internet governance.
> The kicker is  -- They never will be.

Because the only way to get experience with governance is the actual
experience itself.  People generally don't waste their time getting
ready for processes if the end result is that they will not or likely
will not be taken seriously.  Thus, relative "ignorance" or even
seeming apathy is primarily and sometimes exclusively a quite rational
judgment that it is not worth one's while to invest in the desirable
education since the payoff is either non-existent or quite uncertain.

> (in the late 1700s a fellow with initials BF wrote his president GW. GW had
> asked how a country's revolution to democracy, away from monarchy, was
> going. BF responded in part: "A fool sir is still a fool, the fact that you
> gather them by the multitudes, only aggravates the situation")

The multitudes always express a diversity of levels of sophistication,
no multitude is composed 100% of "fools" and one political party
always finds the members of the opposed party to be "fools" so this
term of disparagement is hardly reliable in politics.

That being said, in a multitude composed of even a sizable plurality
or even majority of "fools" in someone's (faulty or biased) estimation
tends to relatively quickly go through a rapid educational process if
a proper PROCESS of public deliberation goes on where the public
interest is a motivation of a critical mass of participants.  In such
a process, "wiser" thoughts are communicated to "fools" and the fools
over reasonable periods of time adjust their positions to accord with
more and more of the facts, making them less "foolish."  Of course,
this process doesn't happen unless the multitudes are enfranchised.

My personal experience with juries and with judges, consisting of many
decisions rendered by the two bodies, is that juries get it
approximately "right" just as much and sometimes more often than the
"experts" -- the judges -- even when the judges have the same amount
of time as the juries do - over the course of a multi-day trial.

I recognize that there are often news reports of seemingly strange
results reached by juries, but given the fact that the jury sat
through days or weeks of testimony one ought to give the jury the
benefit of the doubt until such time as the outside observer has
invested at least an equal amount of time, heard all the evidence and
not just news clips of portions of the evidence, and deliberated.
Even then, however, a solo person misses the benefit of the different
perspectives and ideas offered in a 12 person jury, and also misses
evaluating the credibility and demeanor of the witnesses in person, in
court.

Juries are how the people control the judicial system (in free
countries), together sometimes with judicial elections. Elections are
how the people control the executive and legislative systems (in free
countries).

If one points to an alleged mistake by a free jury or free people, and
somehow that "mistake" remains palpable even after a similar period of
deliberation, two or more major factors still militate against any
judgment against that alleged mistake:

(1) Under majority rule, the minority has to abide by the decision,
even if a mistake.
(2) No person, and no people, are free unless they are free to make
mistakes, even great mistakes.
(3) A person or a people who have their freedom, which must include
the ability to make even disastrous mistakes, taken away from them in
the name of avoiding mistakes has their HUMAN DIGNITY confiscated from
them:  The people whose right to decide is confiscated are rendered
like wards of the state requiring guardians to keep them from killing
or seriously injuring themselves or others.

In light of the above, we either grant all their human dignity via a
real voice and vote (democracy with universal suffrage) or else we set
up a class-based system in which elites protect their wards in the
nature of a guardianship, and those elites then make themselves a
superior class over the rest, forming a classic aristocracy or
oligarchy or plutocracy -- depending on the structural details of the
upper class or classes.

The allegation, or the fact, that some people or all people are
relatively dumb and unsophisticated is the very foundation of all
undemocratic societies.  The idea is that such fools need and require
elite guardianship in the form of experts or philosopher kings of
various types FOR THEIR OWN GOOD.  To call this patronizing is to make
a polite understatement of what this situation is.

> It is not ours to judge or to decide who is ready to take control of the
> Internet Governance. It is ours to build and protect and to provide for
> those users to be in control of the destiny and choices that they want.

Agreed.  My comments above don't necessarily dispute the position of
this post given the paragraph immediately above, since it colors and
reframes what went before.

> The systems are not perfect, the people are not ready.  But governance is
> not about prevention it is about guidance.  Good governance requires lack of
> control to an extent which thereby guarantees that control be placed where
> it belongs.  If the goal of those here is to direct and control Internet
> activity they are frauds. If their goal is to cede power to the people they
> are not perfect but good.

Good governance is about guidance (a loaded word, given my discussion
above) but the direction of the guidance must be provided by the
people for legitimacy.  Thus, the people are like the commander in
chief of a military force who points to the goal to be achieved (like
"capture that strategic asset"), and the governors are like the
commanders in the field who are in charge of all the details
operationally in terms of how to achieve the big-picture goal.

Even in aristocracies, the claim is made that the policies are for the
public good of the country in question -- i.e. for the good of those
who are governed.  Yet the governed are the ones in the best position
to decide and report "if the shoe fits" so to speak.  The governors
are simply guessing or giving opinions about the effects of their own
governance, and humans are naturally suspect in their ability to
objectively investigate themselves, evaluate themselves or their own
policies, watchdog themselves, or second-guess themselves.

All of the above things are in the nature of "checks and balances" in
a broad sense and as such they require other, relatively "outside"
parties to do perform the checking and balancing objectively.  THe
insider experts (even presuming they are every bit as wise as they
think they are) are institutionally disqualified from such checking
and balancing for the fundamental reason that power corrupts those who
exercise it, and blinds them greatly as well to their own felts. As
the near-ancient poet Bobby Burns put it, (from memory) "O wuld the
Lord the giftie gie us, To See Ourselves as others see us."   None of
us have this gift except in small occasional part -- we NEED outside
people to hold up a mirror for us, as it were.

In fact, (and this flips most of the aristocratic justifications of
dumbness right on their head) it is actually one of the great
irreplaceable strengths of democracy that there are so many seemingly
and relatively ignorant outsiders who nevertheless have power via a
vote, for the following reasons:

1.  There are more people who are outside the system enough to see and
say when the emperor has no clothes.
2.  For all policies made to affect or for the good of the people,
those people are in the best position to know if the shoe fits or not
since the best way to evaluate how something feels is to ask the
person or persons who've been asked to wear the shoe or the garment in
question.

Another core strength of democracy consists as follows (and is a much
better formulation, IMHO, than CHurchill's oft-quoted aphorism that
democracy isn't perfect it's just better than any other system ever
tried:

Democracy is the ONLY system that persists in asking the all-important
question (for both progress and the avoidance of systemic corruption)
of whether the powers that be are the powers that OUGHT to be.

We can not leave those who possess or exercise power to be their own
judges of whether their power is going to be, or of whether they ought
to remain in power.  That would be as absurd as suggesting that
individuals could audit themselves for tax compliance purposes, since
the more money one retains, the more of that type of power they are
able to keep for themselves.

At the end of the day, to justify a guardianship of a person or people
without the right of that person or people to fire their guardians and
"to find new guardians for their future security" as the Declaration
of Independence puts it, is to prove that the person or people is so
incompetent that they can't know right from wrong even after an
educational process.  One can, rarely, make that kind of showing and
set up a guardianship of the person or the estate for an individual,
but I don't think it's even possible to make that case about a people
or a large population without resort to the most pernicious and evil
stereotypes such as race hatred discrimination.

If man is not fit to govern himself, who then is fit to govern?  --
Thomas Jefferson

If there are such elites out there fit to govern me or some population
of some kind (much less to govern the internet globe) they should
rightly be proud of their intelligence and wisdom and therefore be
willing to prove it up publicly.  We have to start somewhere, so I
suggest we start here, and if such a person is available I could ask
them questions and evaluate their wisdom and expertise in order to
determine if they are competent to not only modify or waive their own
rights, but my rights as well those of an entire population.  Perhaps
we shall find that elusive person of such stature that he meets
Jefferson's satirical portrait of an aristocrat "Born booted and
spurred and ready to ride others by the Grace of God."

Is it really too much to ask a governor that he or she inquire of the
governed in terms of gaining knowledge and finding out if the shoe
fits or will likely fit?  It's not only not too much, it is only
fitting, right and proper to conduct such an investigation.  And what
will be the outcome of this data collection if it conflicts with the
opinions of the expert or aristocrat?  Here again, human beings, no
matter how expert, are extremely poor at reversing their own
positions.  It is rare to nonexistent to see a person defeated in a
debate openly admit their wrongs and change their position. Indeed in
present politics, such changes of mind would likely be denounced as
spineless "flip flopping" on the issues.

Only outsiders can speak truth to power objectively and without
serious conflicts of interset.  And only democracy has outsiders in
sufficient number to speak truth to power.  When the words of truth
are spoken to power the truth must be invested with all the power
appropriate to truth. The power appropriate to truth must be a power
able to override those in power who are erring in the exercise of
their power.   Thus, an equal vote for all the governed Outsiders is
but a humble and minimal request.  An equal vote amongst all the
governed is really the least that the powers that be can do, if they
are fit to govern at all in the name of the public's interests.

After all, the wisest of the wise aristocrats would fully realize the
limits of his or her own wisdom, and the justice of having the good of
the governed be the ultimate test, and thus the wisest aristocrat
would institute democracy, confident that he or she would trounce any
opposition in any fair election.

Consequently, democracy is the only candidate running for a political
system to truly serve the public interest.  It runs unopposed in that
race.  In "real" life there is democracy and then there are various
flavors of pretenders to wisdom, also known as usurpers of power.

Paul Lehto, Juris Doctor


-- 
Paul R Lehto, J.D.
P.O. Box #1
Ishpeming, MI  49849
lehto.paul at gmail.com
906-204-4026
____________________________________________________________
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


From lehto.paul at gmail.com  Sat Oct 10 15:25:00 2009
From: lehto.paul at gmail.com (Paul Lehto)
Date: Sat, 10 Oct 2009 15:25:00 -0400
Subject: [governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation; ICANN's Breathtaking
 Audacity
In-Reply-To: <18163423.1255122795013.JavaMail.root@elwamui-polski.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
References: <18163423.1255122795013.JavaMail.root@elwamui-polski.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <76f819dd0910101225hb1edc42g92cc7af26fe253e6@mail.gmail.com>

[For those seeking the most concise general statement of the problems
and ideas I'm writing about, the original post at bottom is probably
the best several paragraphs to show that.] Now follows a brief reply
to Jeffrey Williams reply:

The classic question of governance is:  What power will oversee the
exercise of Power?  And who oversees THAT power?

When Roman commanders informed their legionnaires that they had hired
guards to guard the chastity of their wives while they were away on
military campaigns, the legionnaire's howls of laughter were so loud
they can still be heard occasionally through the centuries of
intervening history: They couldn't stop laughing in response to the
question of their commanders:

"And who will guard the guards????"

How indeed to solve the question of ultimate power on a micro or macro scale?

The only way out of the box of having strong unaccountable power exist
is locating the ultimate power in as diffuse a way as possible, i.e.,
spread out over all those who are governed by that power on a one
person one vote basis amongst the people.

In my earlier post today, I pointed out various strong reasons why
governing in the name of the public interest requires the public to be
consulted for starters, but then to be meaningful those who hold power
must be accountable to actually execute actions in favor of the public
interest when and if necessary by some stronger power. The ultimate
power can only justly consist of all, voting on an equal basis.  This
creates a situation that sounds like a utopian impossible dream but is
in fact true when universal suffrage and real elections are present:
Each voter, each person is tied for being the #1 most powerful person
in the country, regardless of how rich, "wise" or powerful other
individuals may claim to be.  My voting power, for example, was
effectively declared to be equal to Bill Gates' voting power when I
voted in Washington state, where Gates lives, in the 2004 presidential
election. Of course, millions of others shared the same #1 status but
that's the point.

To deny folks this ability to be tied for the #1 most powerful person
via universage suffrage equality is to destroy human dignity by
setting up a system of upper classes and lower classes.

The lower classes are dehumanized in various ways as stupid, and the
upper classes are either corrupt (self-serving and self-aggrandizing
and openly so) or, if they claim the public interest mantle, they are
deluded into thinking they know what's in the public's interest
without seriously inquiring of the public, but if they seriously
inquire, the ultimate source of information about public interest
resides in the public itself, and thus it's foolhardy (in light of the
fact that power corrupts those who exercise it) for the public not to
be able to override its corrupt public leaders who fail or refus to
follow the public interest.

Paul Lehto, Juris Doctor

On 10/9/09, Jeffrey A. Williams <jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com> wrote:
> Paul and all,
>
>   ICANN has sense it's conception, and even before under the
> gTLD-MOU has been seeking the "Independance" as it defines it.
> Perhaps to some folks glee it has achieved that now or soon
> will given this ICANN/USG Affirmation.  But the comparison you
> IMO properly drew to an extent with the Sadam Hussain regime in
> IRAQ, now thankfully defunct, to ICANN's "Independance" is indeed
> shocking and audacious as well as very potentially dangerous as
> well in may obvious and not so obvious ways and end effects.
>
> -----Original Message-----
>>From: Paul Lehto <lehto.paul at gmail.com>
>>Sent: Oct 9, 2009 8:36 AM
>>To: governance at lists.cpsr.org, Roland Perry
>> <roland at internetpolicyagency.com>
>>Subject: [governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation; ICANN's Breathtaking Audacity
>> Illustrated
>>
>>The core claim of icann.org on its website is "independence" being
>>achieved.  Governments and regulators of all types are supposed to be
>>*servants* of the public, not independent at all. This is a very
>>important point, as shown in the following observations:
>>
>>Even most dictators PURPORT and claim to have the support and consent
>>of the people through some process like a straw man opposition
>>election (a form of fake election) like Saddam Hussein receiving
>>something like 99% of the vote, election fraud generally, staged
>>demonstrations, real or doctored poll evidence -- something, anything
>>to reinforce that support from the people.  That authoritarians would
>>do this is not at all suprising give the Universal Declaration of
>>Human Rights stating that all legitimate political power comes only
>>from the people.  Non-democratic leaders do their best to fake this,
>>but everybody knows its a lie, at least outside the country in
>>question subject to usually intense propaganda.
>>
>>But ICANN is openly stating something very remarkable. In contrast to
>>authoritarians who masquerade and go to pains to pretend that they
>>have the approval and consent of the public (in order to avoid real
>>elections) and thereby create the image without the reality of
>>political legitimacy, notice how ICANN contrasts sharply with that:
>>
>>ICANN **openly** claims its "Independence," an "independence" that,
>>among other things, must mean independence from (1) any control by the
>>people of the US as well as (2) independence or freedom from any control by
>> the
>>people of the entire globe as well.  Institutions of government can
>>only be "independent" of other arms of government for checks and
>>balances purposes, but never completely independent as ICANN clearly
>>appears to claim, having cut the remaining governmental ties and
>>requiring ICANN agreement to reinstate them.
>>
>>This is breathtaking. Audacious.  It can't be understated.  More
>>courageous than most dictators, in a certain but important sense.
>>
>>Even the present scope of ICANN activity, claimed to be narrow, is
>>subject to no restriction other than whatever ICANN can contract for,
>>purchase, fight for, or
>>fundraise for. Though unnecessary to my point of above, an independent
>>and free ICANN could become the Microsoft of the Internet, as just one
>>example.  King of the e-world, as it were.
>>
>>--
>>Paul R Lehto, J.D.
>>P.O. Box #1
>>Ishpeming, MI  49849
>>lehto.paul at gmail.com
>>906-204-4026
>>____________________________________________________________
>>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
>
> Jeffrey A. Williams
> Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 294k members/stakeholders strong!)
> "Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" -
>    Abraham Lincoln
>
> "Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is very
> often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt
>
> "If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; liability
> depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
> P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
> United States v. Carroll Towing  (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
> ===============================================================
> Updated 1/26/04
> CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS. div. of
> Information Network Eng.  INEG. INC.
> ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com
> Phone: 214-244-4827
>
>


-- 
Paul R Lehto, J.D.
P.O. Box #1
Ishpeming, MI  49849
lehto.paul at gmail.com
906-204-4026
____________________________________________________________
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


From cogitoergosum at sbcglobal.net  Sat Oct 10 21:19:59 2009
From: cogitoergosum at sbcglobal.net (Eric Dierker)
Date: Sat, 10 Oct 2009 18:19:59 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [governance] IGC? IGF? Suitable Cadre?
In-Reply-To: <04A7AF74-4700-4A06-A5E8-F72CF8D499B6@acm.org>
Message-ID: <97039.48792.qm@web83902.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>

So this is the only open forum on the net?
 


--- On Sat, 10/10/09, Avri Doria <avri at acm.org> wrote:


From: Avri Doria <avri at acm.org>
Subject: Re: [governance] IGC? IGF? Suitable Cadre?
To: "Eric Dierker's Personal playground" <governance at lists.cpsr.org>
Date: Saturday, October 10, 2009, 5:32 PM



On 10 Oct 2009, at 17:57, Eric Dierker wrote:

> There seems to be some disconnect between Tunisia and here.  Where is this happening?
> 
> The mandate of the IGF, Paragraph 72 of the Tunis Agenda:
> 


IGF
Internet Governance forum
http://www.intgovforum.org/
____________________________________________________________
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/20091010/cddd1e72/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

From avri at acm.org  Sun Oct 11 04:59:44 2009
From: avri at acm.org (Avri Doria)
Date: Sun, 11 Oct 2009 09:59:44 +0100
Subject: [governance] IGC? IGF? Suitable Cadre?
In-Reply-To: <97039.48792.qm@web83902.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
References: <97039.48792.qm@web83902.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <D04056C5-A0A0-4F16-BDB5-5E5E145A25AB@acm.org>

No.  IGF is open to all.
come to Sharm el Sheikh or participate remotely.
Send in Comments and contributions or participate in its forum.

a.

On 11 Oct 2009, at 02:19, Eric Dierker wrote:

> So this is the only open forum on the net?
>
>
>
> --- On Sat, 10/10/09, Avri Doria <avri at acm.org> wrote:
>
> From: Avri Doria <avri at acm.org>
> Subject: Re: [governance] IGC? IGF? Suitable Cadre?
> To: "Eric Dierker's Personal playground" <governance at lists.cpsr.org>
> Date: Saturday, October 10, 2009, 5:32 PM
>
>
> On 10 Oct 2009, at 17:57, Eric Dierker wrote:
>
> > There seems to be some disconnect between Tunisia and here.  Where  
> is this happening?
> >
> > The mandate of the IGF, Paragraph 72 of the Tunis Agenda:
> >
>
>
> IGF
> Internet Governance forum
> http://www.intgovforum.org/
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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


From rebecca.mackinnon at gmail.com  Sun Oct 11 05:58:56 2009
From: rebecca.mackinnon at gmail.com (Rebecca MacKinnon)
Date: Sun, 11 Oct 2009 17:58:56 +0800
Subject: [governance] Declaration of Internet Rights by 15 Chinese
 intellectuals
Message-ID: <58762b1a0910110258l24e48213uda2686553487ae30@mail.gmail.com>

http://rconversation.blogs.com/rconversation/2009/10/happy-internet-human-rights-day.html

*Internet Human Rights Declaration
Issued by 15 Chinese Intellectuals*

Those of us who are standing on the riverbank overlooking the torrent of
history have witnessed the potential of this new technology: the Internet.
We understand how this new technological revolution has brought about
progress and social change. It has great potential to advance basic human
rights and freedom for the Chinese people. Its contribution to civilisation
will be on a par with the discovery of iron and fire, or the invention of
plough and wheel in ancient times.

We acknowledge the arrival of netizen activism and regard it as an
irreversible trend. Citizen reporting, which involves the use of mobile
phones and digital cameras for live information dissemination, has already
become a popular trend. The Internet has also provided netizens with
unlimited space for creativity, and for voicing opinions through weblogs,
podcasts, BBS and online comments.

We believe it is a citizen’s responsibility to be concerned about public
affairs, and a netizen’s responsibility to care about freedom of speech on
the Internet. Netizens are exercising their civil rights when they legally
express their opinions or when they report the truth of what has actually
happened. The best way to rejuvenate an ancient civilisation is to inject it
with new core values based on the advancement of happiness and of basic
human rights for individuals. It is also the best way to improve well-being
for everyone in China. For these reasons, freedom of speech on the Internet
should be encouraged, nurtured and tolerated.

We therefore pledge for the following principles to be endorsed:

1. Freedom of speech on the Internet is a part of citizens’ rights to
freedom of speech. It is the most basic human rights and the most
fundamental value that should be pursued, treasured and protected.

2. Netizens who express their opinions on the Internet using words, sounds,
pictures or videos, should be protected and encouraged, as long as such
conduct is in accord with the constitution and local statutes.

3. The right to publish opinion is the most basic rights for netizens. This
includes the right to publish through weblogs and podcasts, as well as
online discussion forums. Netizens’ rights to publish should not be
subjected to unlawful investigation and interference. They should be allowed
freedom to hold and to express their views without feeling intimidated.

4. Netizens’ editorial rights should be respected. When they are exercising
those rights, they should not be subjected to harassment by authorities who
act outside of law.

5. It is the right of Netizens to conduct interviews and to report their
findings. This right is protected as a part of their constitutional rights
to freedom of speech. Netizens who excercise this right should endeavour to
report the truth, and to avoid distortions, fabrications and malicious
slander.

6. It is the right of netizens to make comments and to exchange opinion.
This includes the right to ask questions, to monitor, to criticise and to
boycott.

7. Netizens’ freedom of speech encompasses a right to express themselves
anonymously. Anonymity enables some authors to express their opinions in
ways that best suit their needs. This legal right should be respected as
long as an anonymous author is expressing his views in accordance with legal
and constitutional requirements.

8. The right to search for information on the Internet is an integral part
of netizens’ rights to expression, to be informed, and to act as watchdogs.
It is our opinion that law-abiding websites should not be filtered, and that
netizens’ rights to conduct searches on public information for personal use
should be respected and protected.

9. Online privacy should be respected and protected. Netizens’ real
identities and personal information should not be disclosed unless the
information is required for a transparent legal proceeding, or else if the
disclosure is necessary under the rule of law.

10. The free flow of information should be respected and protected as long
as it is conducted in line with legal and constitutional requirements.
Website monitoring, filtering and blockades that go against the principle of
freedom of speech should be condemned by public opinion. Netizens are
entitled to seek freedom of expression and justice through judicial
proceedings.

We call for the establishing of an Internet Human Rights Day, to remind
everyone of the need to safeguard freedom of speech on the Internet. This is
the only effective way to make sure all people in China enjoy human rights
and happiness.

10 October 1911 was the day when a group of patriots staged an uprising to
end the rule of a cruel and racist dynasty. They also put an end to a long
imperialist history. As a way of commemorating their bravery and their
spirit of freedom, we suggest to make every October 10th China’s Internet
Human Rights Day.

-- 
Rebecca MacKinnon
Open Society Fellow | Co-founder, GlobalVoicesOnline.org
Assistant Professor, Journalism & Media Studies Centre, University of Hong
Kong

UK: +44-7759-863406
USA: +1-617-939-3493
HK: +852-6334-8843
Mainland China: +86-13710820364

E-mail: rebecca.mackinnon at gmail.com
Blog: http://RConversation.blogs.com
Twitter: http://twitter.com/rmack
Friendfeed: http://friendfeed.com/rebeccamack
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20091011/3a1cfb04/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

From cogitoergosum at sbcglobal.net  Sun Oct 11 10:29:38 2009
From: cogitoergosum at sbcglobal.net (Eric Dierker)
Date: Sun, 11 Oct 2009 07:29:38 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [governance] Declaration of Internet Rights by 15 Chinese
 intellectuals
In-Reply-To: <58762b1a0910110258l24e48213uda2686553487ae30@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <606685.68411.qm@web83911.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>

Rebecca,
 
Could you please be so kind as to give us your opinion on this declaration.

--- On Sun, 10/11/09, Rebecca MacKinnon <rebecca.mackinnon at gmail.com> wrote:


From: Rebecca MacKinnon <rebecca.mackinnon at gmail.com>
Subject: [governance] Declaration of Internet Rights by 15 Chinese intellectuals
To: "NCUC-DISCUSS" <NCUC-DISCUSS at listserv.syr.edu>, "irp" <Irp at lists.internetrightsandprinciples.org>, "Berkman Friends" <berkmanfriends at eon.law.harvard.edu>, expression at ipjustice.org, governance at lists.cpsr.org, "EPIC Advisory Board Discussion" <epic_advisors at mailman.epic.org>
Date: Sunday, October 11, 2009, 9:58 AM




http://rconversation.blogs.com/rconversation/2009/10/happy-internet-human-rights-day.html


Internet Human Rights Declaration
Issued by 15 Chinese Intellectuals

Those of us who are standing on the riverbank overlooking the torrent of history have witnessed the potential of this new technology: the Internet. We understand how this new technological revolution has brought about progress and social change. It has great potential to advance basic human rights and freedom for the Chinese people. Its contribution to civilisation will be on a par with the discovery of iron and fire, or the invention of plough and wheel in ancient times.

We acknowledge the arrival of netizen activism and regard it as an irreversible trend. Citizen reporting, which involves the use of mobile phones and digital cameras for live information dissemination, has already become a popular trend. The Internet has also provided netizens with unlimited space for creativity, and for voicing opinions through weblogs, podcasts, BBS and online comments.

We believe it is a citizen’s responsibility to be concerned about public affairs, and a netizen’s responsibility to care about freedom of speech on the Internet. Netizens are exercising their civil rights when they legally express their opinions or when they report the truth of what has actually happened. The best way to rejuvenate an ancient civilisation is to inject it with new core values based on the advancement of happiness and of basic human rights for individuals. It is also the best way to improve well-being for everyone in China. For these reasons, freedom of speech on the Internet should be encouraged, nurtured and tolerated.

We therefore pledge for the following principles to be endorsed:

1. Freedom of speech on the Internet is a part of citizens’ rights to freedom of speech. It is the most basic human rights and the most fundamental value that should be pursued, treasured and protected.

2. Netizens who express their opinions on the Internet using words, sounds, pictures or videos, should be protected and encouraged, as long as such conduct is in accord with the constitution and local statutes.

3. The right to publish opinion is the most basic rights for netizens. This includes the right to publish through weblogs and podcasts, as well as online discussion forums. Netizens’ rights to publish should not be subjected to unlawful investigation and interference. They should be allowed freedom to hold and to express their views without feeling intimidated.

4. Netizens’ editorial rights should be respected. When they are exercising those rights, they should not be subjected to harassment by authorities who act outside of law.

5. It is the right of Netizens to conduct interviews and to report their findings. This right is protected as a part of their constitutional rights to freedom of speech. Netizens who excercise this right should endeavour to report the truth, and to avoid distortions, fabrications and malicious slander.

6. It is the right of netizens to make comments and to exchange opinion. This includes the right to ask questions, to monitor, to criticise and to boycott.

7. Netizens’ freedom of speech encompasses a right to express themselves anonymously. Anonymity enables some authors to express their opinions in ways that best suit their needs. This legal right should be respected as long as an anonymous author is expressing his views in accordance with legal and constitutional requirements.

8. The right to search for information on the Internet is an integral part of netizens’ rights to expression, to be informed, and to act as watchdogs. It is our opinion that law-abiding websites should not be filtered, and that netizens’ rights to conduct searches on public information for personal use should be respected and protected.

9. Online privacy should be respected and protected. Netizens’ real identities and personal information should not be disclosed unless the information is required for a transparent legal proceeding, or else if the disclosure is necessary under the rule of law.

10. The free flow of information should be respected and protected as long as it is conducted in line with legal and constitutional requirements. Website monitoring, filtering and blockades that go against the principle of freedom of speech should be condemned by public opinion. Netizens are entitled to seek freedom of expression and justice through judicial proceedings.

We call for the establishing of an Internet Human Rights Day, to remind everyone of the need to safeguard freedom of speech on the Internet. This is the only effective way to make sure all people in China enjoy human rights and happiness.

10 October 1911 was the day when a group of patriots staged an uprising to end the rule of a cruel and racist dynasty. They also put an end to a long imperialist history. As a way of commemorating their bravery and their spirit of freedom, we suggest to make every October 10th China’s Internet Human Rights Day.

-- 
Rebecca MacKinnon
Open Society Fellow | Co-founder, GlobalVoicesOnline.org
Assistant Professor, Journalism & Media Studies Centre, University of Hong Kong

UK: +44-7759-863406
USA: +1-617-939-3493
HK: +852-6334-8843
Mainland China: +86-13710820364

E-mail: rebecca.mackinnon at gmail.com
Blog: http://RConversation.blogs.com
Twitter: http://twitter.com/rmack
Friendfeed: http://friendfeed.com/rebeccamack


-----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/20091011/a3598235/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

From cogitoergosum at sbcglobal.net  Sun Oct 11 12:16:08 2009
From: cogitoergosum at sbcglobal.net (Eric Dierker)
Date: Sun, 11 Oct 2009 09:16:08 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [governance] Civil society & ICANN
Message-ID: <801915.29397.qm@web83907.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>

I am still quite puzzled at this term "civil" "society".  I suppose you could have an uncivilized society.  What rankles about it is an immediate notion that you are either part of it or you are uncivilized. I guess I just need to get over it. 
But a good read can be found here;
http://thepublicvoice.org/2009/08/top-ten-myths-about-civil-society-participation-in-icann.html A little frustrating as it basically builds on straw issues and then congratulates itself on being smarter than the issue that probably does not exist. No citations. But it gives an insight to the combative nature of the NCUC.
 
So I signed up for the IRPc trying to learn more and broaden by quite limited horizons:  http://internetrightsandprinciples.org/  And was kinda bummed out to see the history/lack thereof: http://internetrightsandprinciples.org/forum/1
 
I come from around 1999 and have been a participant in the ICANN GA ever since. I interfaced with Roberto before he was even elected Chair of the GA.  We are having real trouble keeping the GA alive as the only remaining open forum in ICANN.  They have done everything they can to get rid of us --  except the one thing they need to do -- have an open comment period on the dissolution of the GA. http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/index.htm  and by going here you will see a topic list that we sometime debate:
http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/ga-200709/msg03289.html
 
I suppose to be fair we are the UNcivilized societie de ICANN
 
The ISOC is quite confusing:
http://www.isoc.org/isoc/general/trustees/  Clearly there was an error in conception.  "Internet Society" would be a society of Internets.  What this group is, is a society of socialites involved with the Internet. I greatly appreciate their wisdom and intellectualism.(suffice to say I will not invite them to beer-fests and street protests)
 
I tried to give some money over to Robin at IP justice. ( http://ipjustice.org/ )They took my card info but then said the server had an error -- I will not stop payment, I hope my small contribution can get their servers up and running.
 
It would be good to see more expressions and more detail of places where freedoms are denied because GOVERNANCE is nonexistent or wrong.  I hope that in place of this ongoing trend to limit participation to suitable cadres, we begin to be more inclusive, transparent and accountable.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20091011/955f6e76/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

From cosmin.neagu at gmail.com  Sun Oct 11 12:43:40 2009
From: cosmin.neagu at gmail.com (Cosmin L. Neagu)
Date: Sun, 11 Oct 2009 19:43:40 +0300
Subject: [governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation; ICANN's Breathtaking
 Audacity
In-Reply-To: <76f819dd0910101225hb1edc42g92cc7af26fe253e6@mail.gmail.com>
References: <18163423.1255122795013.JavaMail.root@elwamui-polski.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
	 <76f819dd0910101225hb1edc42g92cc7af26fe253e6@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <12a3e0d10910110943p75e89123vf74200d5eaa3265a@mail.gmail.com>

Hi everybody,

I'm new to the list but the ICANN issue is of a philosophical interest
to me for quite some time.

You say that "one person one vote" might be a good option but in my
opinion that is not nearly enough. We have some experience with this
system and it is highly abusable.
There are methods of "guiding" the opinion of the mases and they seem
to work quite well. Even if the opinion of the majority was not
perverted you still have potentially billions of people in the
minority having to accept the majority decisions, however wrong they
may be.

In my opinion a just system would function like this:
- ICANN, IETF or whatever would be in charge of developing a standard
for a massive distributed system out of the possibility of control
from any single entity or group of entities.
  This system, let's call it DNS2 would be something like a DNS
combined with a cryptographic key server and functioning without a
root server.
- a new registered domain/key/tag would be signed by the end user and
would be automatically propagated into the DNS2 grid, any change would
also have to be signed by the end user and would also be automatically
propagated.
- any user using DNS2 could check various nodes for the same
information to be sure that he doesn't get different results.

A system like this would be designed based on core principles of
personal rights and would not delegate any authority to any central
body.
The central body would be able to run it's nodes to provide it's
responses to the user queries and assure everybody that the system is
not abused. Any country, university or private group could run it's
own nodes to have it's own assurances.
Nobody will ever have to vote and hope for the best or loose sleep
because the mass media promoted their own interests and not the end
user interests.

I believe that we reached a point where the technology allows us to
function as society without the need of creating massive nodes of
delegated authority.
Not only that but more, I believe that we reached a point where
delegating authority and relying on these nodes of delegated authority
is inefficient, slow and potentially dangerous.

Regards,
Cosmin L. Neagu

On Sat, Oct 10, 2009 at 10:25 PM, Paul Lehto <lehto.paul at gmail.com> wrote:
> [For those seeking the most concise general statement of the problems
> and ideas I'm writing about, the original post at bottom is probably
> the best several paragraphs to show that.] Now follows a brief reply
> to Jeffrey Williams reply:
>
> The classic question of governance is:  What power will oversee the
> exercise of Power?  And who oversees THAT power?
>
> When Roman commanders informed their legionnaires that they had hired
> guards to guard the chastity of their wives while they were away on
> military campaigns, the legionnaire's howls of laughter were so loud
> they can still be heard occasionally through the centuries of
> intervening history: They couldn't stop laughing in response to the
> question of their commanders:
____________________________________________________________
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


From cogitoergosum at sbcglobal.net  Sun Oct 11 12:58:27 2009
From: cogitoergosum at sbcglobal.net (Eric Dierker)
Date: Sun, 11 Oct 2009 09:58:27 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation; ICANN's Breathtaking
 Audacity
In-Reply-To: <12a3e0d10910110943p75e89123vf74200d5eaa3265a@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <392364.38843.qm@web83909.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>

Are you saying that the only way forward with any security, stability and accountability is with mass education?

--- On Sun, 10/11/09, Cosmin L. Neagu <cosmin.neagu at gmail.com> wrote:


From: Cosmin L. Neagu <cosmin.neagu at gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation; ICANN's Breathtaking Audacity
To: governance at lists.cpsr.org, "Paul Lehto" <lehto.paul at gmail.com>
Date: Sunday, October 11, 2009, 4:43 PM


Hi everybody,

I'm new to the list but the ICANN issue is of a philosophical interest
to me for quite some time.

You say that "one person one vote" might be a good option but in my
opinion that is not nearly enough. We have some experience with this
system and it is highly abusable.
There are methods of "guiding" the opinion of the mases and they seem
to work quite well. Even if the opinion of the majority was not
perverted you still have potentially billions of people in the
minority having to accept the majority decisions, however wrong they
may be.

In my opinion a just system would function like this:
- ICANN, IETF or whatever would be in charge of developing a standard
for a massive distributed system out of the possibility of control
from any single entity or group of entities.
  This system, let's call it DNS2 would be something like a DNS
combined with a cryptographic key server and functioning without a
root server.
- a new registered domain/key/tag would be signed by the end user and
would be automatically propagated into the DNS2 grid, any change would
also have to be signed by the end user and would also be automatically
propagated.
- any user using DNS2 could check various nodes for the same
information to be sure that he doesn't get different results.

A system like this would be designed based on core principles of
personal rights and would not delegate any authority to any central
body.
The central body would be able to run it's nodes to provide it's
responses to the user queries and assure everybody that the system is
not abused. Any country, university or private group could run it's
own nodes to have it's own assurances.
Nobody will ever have to vote and hope for the best or loose sleep
because the mass media promoted their own interests and not the end
user interests.

I believe that we reached a point where the technology allows us to
function as society without the need of creating massive nodes of
delegated authority.
Not only that but more, I believe that we reached a point where
delegating authority and relying on these nodes of delegated authority
is inefficient, slow and potentially dangerous.

Regards,
Cosmin L. Neagu

On Sat, Oct 10, 2009 at 10:25 PM, Paul Lehto <lehto.paul at gmail.com> wrote:
> [For those seeking the most concise general statement of the problems
> and ideas I'm writing about, the original post at bottom is probably
> the best several paragraphs to show that.] Now follows a brief reply
> to Jeffrey Williams reply:
>
> The classic question of governance is:  What power will oversee the
> exercise of Power?  And who oversees THAT power?
>
> When Roman commanders informed their legionnaires that they had hired
> guards to guard the chastity of their wives while they were away on
> military campaigns, the legionnaire's howls of laughter were so loud
> they can still be heard occasionally through the centuries of
> intervening history: They couldn't stop laughing in response to the
> question of their commanders:
____________________________________________________________
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/20091011/55a37f1f/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

From toml at communisphere.com  Sun Oct 11 13:12:35 2009
From: toml at communisphere.com (Thomas Lowenhaupt)
Date: Sun, 11 Oct 2009 13:12:35 -0400
Subject: [governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation; ICANN's Breathtaking
 Audacity
References: <18163423.1255122795013.JavaMail.root@elwamui-polski.atl.sa.earthlink.net> <76f819dd0910101225hb1edc42g92cc7af26fe253e6@mail.gmail.com> <12a3e0d10910110943p75e89123vf74200d5eaa3265a@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <029e01ca4a96$089d5940$6400a8c0@powuseren2ihcx>

Cosmin,

Interesting comment. But I'm not sure I understand. Would you please unpack 
the following:

"The central body would be able to run it's nodes to provide it's
responses to the user queries and assure everybody that the system is
not abused. Any country, university or private group could run it's
own nodes to have it's own assurances.

Nobody will ever have to vote and hope for the best or loose sleep
because the mass media promoted their own interests and not the end
user interests."

Also, as it's pretty much a new message, perhaps you might consider giving 
it a more reflective Subject.

Best,

Tom Lowenhaupt

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Cosmin L. Neagu" <cosmin.neagu at gmail.com>
To: <governance at lists.cpsr.org>; "Paul Lehto" <lehto.paul at gmail.com>
Sent: Sunday, October 11, 2009 12:43 PM
Subject: Re: [governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation; ICANN's Breathtaking 
Audacity


Hi everybody,

I'm new to the list but the ICANN issue is of a philosophical interest
to me for quite some time.

You say that "one person one vote" might be a good option but in my
opinion that is not nearly enough. We have some experience with this
system and it is highly abusable.
There are methods of "guiding" the opinion of the mases and they seem
to work quite well. Even if the opinion of the majority was not
perverted you still have potentially billions of people in the
minority having to accept the majority decisions, however wrong they
may be.

In my opinion a just system would function like this:
- ICANN, IETF or whatever would be in charge of developing a standard
for a massive distributed system out of the possibility of control
from any single entity or group of entities.
  This system, let's call it DNS2 would be something like a DNS
combined with a cryptographic key server and functioning without a
root server.
- a new registered domain/key/tag would be signed by the end user and
would be automatically propagated into the DNS2 grid, any change would
also have to be signed by the end user and would also be automatically
propagated.
- any user using DNS2 could check various nodes for the same
information to be sure that he doesn't get different results.

A system like this would be designed based on core principles of
personal rights and would not delegate any authority to any central
body.
The central body would be able to run it's nodes to provide it's
responses to the user queries and assure everybody that the system is
not abused. Any country, university or private group could run it's
own nodes to have it's own assurances.
Nobody will ever have to vote and hope for the best or loose sleep
because the mass media promoted their own interests and not the end
user interests.

I believe that we reached a point where the technology allows us to
function as society without the need of creating massive nodes of
delegated authority.
Not only that but more, I believe that we reached a point where
delegating authority and relying on these nodes of delegated authority
is inefficient, slow and potentially dangerous.

Regards,
Cosmin L. Neagu

On Sat, Oct 10, 2009 at 10:25 PM, Paul Lehto <lehto.paul at gmail.com> wrote:
> [For those seeking the most concise general statement of the problems
> and ideas I'm writing about, the original post at bottom is probably
> the best several paragraphs to show that.] Now follows a brief reply
> to Jeffrey Williams reply:
>
> The classic question of governance is: What power will oversee the
> exercise of Power? And who oversees THAT power?
>
> When Roman commanders informed their legionnaires that they had hired
> guards to guard the chastity of their wives while they were away on
> military campaigns, the legionnaire's howls of laughter were so loud
> they can still be heard occasionally through the centuries of
> intervening history: They couldn't stop laughing in response to the
> question of their commanders:
____________________________________________________________
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


From roland at internetpolicyagency.com  Sun Oct 11 13:55:12 2009
From: roland at internetpolicyagency.com (Roland Perry)
Date: Sun, 11 Oct 2009 18:55:12 +0100
Subject: [governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation of Commitments
In-Reply-To: <76f819dd0910081044jb3eced8lb2fcc02520430e6b@mail.gmail.com>
References: <75822E125BCB994F8446858C4B19F0D78FFC6E09@SUEX07-MBX-04.ad.syr.edu>
 <rBdKJCua0QxKFAve@perry.co.uk>
 <76f819dd0910021037o36cd6b7aj9c8d7454ca116cc2@mail.gmail.com>
 <y8DcmVKiokxKFAvp@perry.co.uk>
 <76f819dd0910030740v206a4661xcd43ea4ae54d2483@mail.gmail.com>
 <LjfihqAS+5xKFA5l@perry.co.uk>
 <76f819dd0910050734o5fbc2812k789c8232b30eac3b@mail.gmail.com>
 <D6ew3OJaviyKFAxR@perry.co.uk>
 <76f819dd0910060919u3b97805br140a134539a7578c@mail.gmail.com>
 <BezwuVcq7DzKFAqN@perry.co.uk>
 <76f819dd0910081044jb3eced8lb2fcc02520430e6b@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <iYOY$2OAwh0KFAXq@perry.co.uk>

In message <76f819dd0910081044jb3eced8lb2fcc02520430e6b at mail.gmail.com>, 
at 13:44:03 on Thu, 8 Oct 2009, Paul Lehto <lehto.paul at gmail.com> writes
>On 10/7/09, Roland Perry <roland at internetpolicyagency.com> wrote:
>> Currently (and for a long time now) it's a rule that cctlds are composed
>> of two-letter codes reminiscent of ISO 3166; for example Switzerland =
>> .ch ; but there are also 3-letter ISO codes. Within the new gTLD process
>> there are debates currently taking place about whether 3-letter ISO
>> country codes should also be reserved to the appropriate country).
>>
>> The decision might be "yes they are" or
>>                        "no they aren't" or
>>                        "yes, but there can be exceptions".
>>
>> It's an interesting challenge to get Internet users in general to form
>> an opinion about such a thing. If there was a public vote, what do you
>> think the outcome would be? Might it help the people decide, if someone
>> took the trouble to explain to them what the implications of each
>> decision might be?
>
>There are two aspects to your question:
>
>(1) There is the technical mystification question, meaning that
>average people don't immediately understand this computer language

I'm not sure what "computer language" is involved in asking whether 
Wales or Cameroons is 'more entitled' to win a .cym gTLD. Although we do 
have to assume that people voting in such circumstances understand what 
a gTLD - voters knowing even the barest context of what they are voting 
about.

>(c) The inability of the average person to determine if their
>interests or rights are affected

Are these the voters you desire?

>> It seems a little harsh to propose firing the entire board, or even the
>> whole of ICANN, if the result is not what one section of the community
>> wants ("throwing the toys out of the pram" is an expression that might
>> be appropriate in those circumstances).
>
>"One section of the community" is not democratically legitimate to
>have its way.

But that's my point, if there's a vote about Wales versus the Cameroons, 
surely only people with an interest in one or the other will vote.

And now you've made a u-turn saying they are not legitimate, because 
each is only a section of the community.

>> I'd like to hear your views on how accountability should be built into
>> the ICANN system, to allow for oversight of the kinds of decisions I
>> mention above, so that it encapsulates the "public interest" you seek.
>> And please explain in detail how it simultaneously reflects the public
>> interest of Wales, the Cameroons, and
>> everywhere-thats-not-Wales-or-Cameroons.
>
>Until a global governance system of elections exists, the US
>Government has no business ridding itself of its responsibility.

Did I mention the US government? No. I was proposing a situation you 
seemed to aspire to where *everyone* could vote.

Would you care to have another attempt to answer my question?
-- 
Roland Perry
____________________________________________________________
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


From jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com  Sun Oct 11 14:46:30 2009
From: jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com (Jeffrey A. Williams)
Date: Sun, 11 Oct 2009 13:46:30 -0500 (GMT-05:00)
Subject: [governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation; ICANN's Breathtaking
Message-ID: <26876801.1255286790604.JavaMail.root@elwamui-ovcar.atl.sa.earthlink.net>

An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20091011/8b6d6194/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

From jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com  Sun Oct 11 14:55:25 2009
From: jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com (Jeffrey A. Williams)
Date: Sun, 11 Oct 2009 13:55:25 -0500 (GMT-05:00)
Subject: [governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation; ICANN's Breathtaking
Message-ID: <8826423.1255287325514.JavaMail.root@elwamui-ovcar.atl.sa.earthlink.net>

Cosmin and all,

  I fear little if end users see instutional abuse as they
will vote with their feet, wallets, and PC's eventually unless
they are ignorant or scamed.  It is therefore the latter that
concerns me and our INEGroup members most seriously.  Such is
why as Eric, myself, Paul, and many others over the years
sense 1999 have been concerned about ICANN's behavior are
are more so today than in 1999.  This growing concern is in
part due to a lack of effectiveness of ICANN's and frankly
DOC/NTIA's oversight ability and authority as well as a
propensity to cater to big money interests over user and
small registrant interests for the sake of their (ICANN's)
own coffers nearly exclusively.

  From our point of view this mess is a product of poor
GNSO and ICANN ASO structure and individual professionalism.

-----Original Message-----
>From: "Cosmin L. Neagu" <cosmin.neagu at gmail.com>
>Sent: Oct 11, 2009 11:43 AM
>To: governance at lists.cpsr.org, Paul Lehto <lehto.paul at gmail.com>
>Subject: Re: [governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation; ICANN's Breathtaking Audacity
>
>Hi everybody,
>
>I'm new to the list but the ICANN issue is of a philosophical interest
>to me for quite some time.
>
>You say that "one person one vote" might be a good option but in my
>opinion that is not nearly enough. We have some experience with this
>system and it is highly abusable.
>There are methods of "guiding" the opinion of the mases and they seem
>to work quite well. Even if the opinion of the majority was not
>perverted you still have potentially billions of people in the
>minority having to accept the majority decisions, however wrong they
>may be.
>
>In my opinion a just system would function like this:
>- ICANN, IETF or whatever would be in charge of developing a standard
>for a massive distributed system out of the possibility of control
>from any single entity or group of entities.
>  This system, let's call it DNS2 would be something like a DNS
>combined with a cryptographic key server and functioning without a
>root server.
>- a new registered domain/key/tag would be signed by the end user and
>would be automatically propagated into the DNS2 grid, any change would
>also have to be signed by the end user and would also be automatically
>propagated.
>- any user using DNS2 could check various nodes for the same
>information to be sure that he doesn't get different results.
>
>A system like this would be designed based on core principles of
>personal rights and would not delegate any authority to any central
>body.
>The central body would be able to run it's nodes to provide it's
>responses to the user queries and assure everybody that the system is
>not abused. Any country, university or private group could run it's
>own nodes to have it's own assurances.
>Nobody will ever have to vote and hope for the best or loose sleep
>because the mass media promoted their own interests and not the end
>user interests.
>
>I believe that we reached a point where the technology allows us to
>function as society without the need of creating massive nodes of
>delegated authority.
>Not only that but more, I believe that we reached a point where
>delegating authority and relying on these nodes of delegated authority
>is inefficient, slow and potentially dangerous.
>
>Regards,
>Cosmin L. Neagu
>
>On Sat, Oct 10, 2009 at 10:25 PM, Paul Lehto <lehto.paul at gmail.com> wrote:
>> [For those seeking the most concise general statement of the problems
>> and ideas I'm writing about, the original post at bottom is probably
>> the best several paragraphs to show that.] Now follows a brief reply
>> to Jeffrey Williams reply:
>>
>> The classic question of governance is:  What power will oversee the
>> exercise of Power?  And who oversees THAT power?
>>
>> When Roman commanders informed their legionnaires that they had hired
>> guards to guard the chastity of their wives while they were away on
>> military campaigns, the legionnaire's howls of laughter were so loud
>> they can still be heard occasionally through the centuries of
>> intervening history: They couldn't stop laughing in response to the
>> question of their commanders:
>____________________________________________________________
>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


From jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com  Sun Oct 11 15:01:23 2009
From: jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com (Jeffrey A. Williams)
Date: Sun, 11 Oct 2009 14:01:23 -0500 (GMT-05:00)
Subject: [governance] Civil society & ICANN
Message-ID: <24025699.1255287683429.JavaMail.root@elwamui-ovcar.atl.sa.earthlink.net>

An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20091011/4d1ae000/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

From jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com  Sun Oct 11 15:06:57 2009
From: jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com (Jeffrey A. Williams)
Date: Sun, 11 Oct 2009 14:06:57 -0500 (GMT-05:00)
Subject: [governance] IGC? IGF? Suitable Cadre?
Message-ID: <4380631.1255288017960.JavaMail.root@elwamui-ovcar.atl.sa.earthlink.net>

Avri and all,

  For me, attending at Sharm el Sheikh as a Jew is
a very dangerous consideration for very little 
gain or potential gain.  Perhaps with body guards
from Blackwatter that risk can be mitigated, perhaps
not.  Lets hope that the remote participation will be
working adaquately and seemlessly.

-----Original Message-----
>From: Avri Doria <avri at acm.org>
>Sent: Oct 11, 2009 3:59 AM
>To: Eric Dierker's Personal playground <governance at lists.cpsr.org>
>Subject: Re: [governance] IGC? IGF? Suitable Cadre?
>
>No.  IGF is open to all.
>come to Sharm el Sheikh or participate remotely.
>Send in Comments and contributions or participate in its forum.
>
>a.
>
>On 11 Oct 2009, at 02:19, Eric Dierker wrote:
>
>> So this is the only open forum on the net?
>>
>>
>>
>> --- On Sat, 10/10/09, Avri Doria <avri at acm.org> wrote:
>>
>> From: Avri Doria <avri at acm.org>
>> Subject: Re: [governance] IGC? IGF? Suitable Cadre?
>> To: "Eric Dierker's Personal playground" <governance at lists.cpsr.org>
>> Date: Saturday, October 10, 2009, 5:32 PM
>>
>>
>> On 10 Oct 2009, at 17:57, Eric Dierker wrote:
>>
>> > There seems to be some disconnect between Tunisia and here.  Where  
>> is this happening?
>> >
>> > The mandate of the IGF, Paragraph 72 of the Tunis Agenda:
>> >
>>
>>
>> IGF
>> Internet Governance forum
>> http://www.intgovforum.org/
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> 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

Regards,

 

Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 294k members/stakeholders strong!)
"Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" -
   Abraham Lincoln

"Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is very
often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt

"If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; liability
depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
United States v. Carroll Towing  (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
===============================================================
Updated 1/26/04
CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS. div. of
Information Network Eng.  INEG. INC.
ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com
Phone: 214-244-4827


____________________________________________________________
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


From cosmin.neagu at gmail.com  Sun Oct 11 20:18:43 2009
From: cosmin.neagu at gmail.com (Cosmin L. Neagu)
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 03:18:43 +0300
Subject: [governance] SELF - Authority
In-Reply-To: <12a3e0d10910111710t224561fdvc80ff785ba1b0e41@mail.gmail.com>
References: <12a3e0d10910111656w479c1e34x1d52dd841864f511@mail.gmail.com>
	 <12a3e0d10910111710t224561fdvc80ff785ba1b0e41@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <12a3e0d10910111718vc0db150m43cf26701f258c56@mail.gmail.com>

I started this as a reply to a comment of Paul Lehto saying that the
only way to "guard against the guardians" is to dilute the ultimate
power as much as possible (one person one vote) and hope that in the
end it will all be OK or at least as good as could be expected.
It might be good enough for governing a few millions but as the
governing body "serves" more and more people it tends to develop ways
of insulating itself against it's subjects.
Even if it remains accountable it tends to be slow and inefficient
especially when it comes to conflict resolutions.

I say that this is not good enough, at least not when it comes to
governing the Internet of billions of people. I say we can do better,
at least regarding the ICANN / DNS issue.
The "one person one vote" assumes that everybody willing to delegate
his authority to the central body (let's say ICANN) using their vote.
The ones that do not vote have to accept the majority decision.
This is flawed in several ways:
- it produces potentially billions of people of "minority" while the
majority gets to make arbitrary decisions
- it assumes that the people that don't vote are OK with whatever result
- the process of election is expensive (time, money, fraud, manipulation, ...)

The alternative I proposed was to design a system that would not
delegate the power of the user to ICANN.
Every person could create for himself a asymmetrical key pair (PGP,
public/private encryption key) that he will need in order to make
decisions regarding his domains, his email, ...
ICANN would need to create and maintain the standard of a distributed
software (something similar to the current DNS software) and make sure
it's being run properly.
In short, a system like this would allow ICANN to make sure the
current principles of the Internet are not perverted and it would
allow the users to keep their authority to themselves (not to trust
ICANN or anybody else with their vote).

Even though the technical part might seem confusing it is quite strait
forward. I don't think that conventional methods will do.

Even more, I believe that a system that does not delegate the
authority of the user will eventually emerge... it doesn't actually
need permission from anybody. It only needs critical mass.
ICANN or IGF patronage might just make it happen better and quicker
but I cannot see a future without this happening at all.
It becomes easier and and easier and after all ... these days it only
takes a few good tweets to reach critical mass.


Cosmin
____________________________________________________________
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


From cogitoergosum at sbcglobal.net  Sun Oct 11 20:37:00 2009
From: cogitoergosum at sbcglobal.net (Eric Dierker)
Date: Sun, 11 Oct 2009 17:37:00 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [governance] Re: SELF - Authority
In-Reply-To: <12a3e0d10910111656w479c1e34x1d52dd841864f511@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <310674.70096.qm@web83911.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>

Thank you Cosmin for this insightful piece that I am lucky enough to share. May we always remember and hold in thought those who cannot. There are three clear sets of chains that keep many from actively participating here, ignorance, poverty and tyranny. If all we do is partially loose the binds in any, we are rewarded tenfold.
 
First let me address a few "technical problems that I see".
 
Should we assume that insulation from the passions and needs of the governed is bad?
Pure Political Accountability is not always a good thing. Justices come to mind.
One person One vote does no such thing as assume delegation to an incumbant regime.
There is a huge gap between a "minority of billions" and the majority making arbitrary decisions.
 
Now to the crux of your issue. Direct democratic governance. I think I would reread Locke and More on Utopia and Anarchy then Marx's manifesto. Then I would begin some study of the Federalist Papers. Then I would spend some Socialogy and Anthropology time on the human condition and desire to constantly be making decisions of a technical nature regarding their governance. Probably start with the reality check that most people in the world do not spend more than 1 hour a year excercising their right to vote.
 
Here is your most glaring flaw. Your whole premise is that people must have full control of their government because other people are basically immoral and will not keep the good of the people in mind. See the problem?  If people are basically bad then giving more control to more people simply makes it badder.
 
All governance requires some trust. All choice assumes a free will to make choice. The best models we have are where people are free to chose who they will trust to govern them. What I trust is openness and transparency and accountability.  With this I can question. And in my questioning I can discern.  And in my discernment I can chose who to follow. So give me an option of processes to chose from, give me a choice of who to provide the process and then keep it open enough to evaluate. Then me and the other minority of voting people can decide. That model works, the world over. Do not force people to vote -- bad idea.


--- On Sun, 10/11/09, Cosmin L. Neagu <cosmin.neagu at rohost.com> wrote:


From: Cosmin L. Neagu <cosmin.neagu at rohost.com>
Subject: SELF - Authority
To: "governance" <governance at lists.cpsr.org>
Cc: "Paul Lehto" <lehto.paul at gmail.com>, "Eric Dierker" <cogitoergosum at sbcglobal.net>, toml at communisphere.com
Date: Sunday, October 11, 2009, 11:56 PM


I started this as a reply to a comment of Paul Lehto saying that the
only way to "guard against the guardians" is to dilute the ultimate
power as much as possible (one person one vote) and hope that in the
end it will all be OK or at least as good as could be expected.
It might be good enough for governing a few millions but as the
governing body "serves" more and more people it tends to develop ways
of insulating itself against it's subjects.
Even if it remains accountable it tends to be slow and inefficient
especially when it comes to conflict resolutions.

I say that this is not good enough, at least not when it comes to
governing the Internet of billions of people. I say we can do better,
at least regarding the ICANN / DNS issue.
The "one person one vote" assumes that everybody willing to delegate
his authority to the central body (let's say ICANN) using their vote.
The ones that do not vote have to accept the majority decision.
This is flawed in several ways:
- it produces potentially billions of people of "minority" while the
majority gets to make arbitrary decisions
- it assumes that the people that don't vote are OK with whatever result
- the process of election is expensive (time, money, fraud, manipulation, ...)

The alternative I proposed was to design a system that would not
delegate the power of the user to ICANN.
Every person could create for himself a asymmetrical key pair (PGP,
public/private encryption key) that he will need in order to make
decisions regarding his domains, his email, ...
ICANN would need to create and maintain the standard of a distributed
software (something similar to the current DNS software) and make sure
it's being run properly.
In short, a system like this would allow ICANN to make sure the
current principles of the Internet are not perverted and it would
allow the users to keep their authority to themselves (not to trust
ICANN or anybody else with their vote).

Even though the technical part might seem confusing it is quite strait
forward. I don't think that conventional methods will do.

Even more, I believe that a system that does not delegate the
authority of the user will eventually emerge... it doesn't actually
need permission from anybody. It only needs critical mass.
ICANN or IGF patronage might just make it happen better and quicker
but I cannot see a future without this happening at all.
It becomes easier and and easier and after all ... these days it only
takes a few good tweets to reach critical mass.


Cosmin
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20091011/f82a36b1/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

From cosmin.neagu at gmail.com  Sun Oct 11 21:20:11 2009
From: cosmin.neagu at gmail.com (Cosmin L. Neagu)
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 04:20:11 +0300
Subject: [governance] Re: SELF - Authority
In-Reply-To: <310674.70096.qm@web83911.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
References: <12a3e0d10910111656w479c1e34x1d52dd841864f511@mail.gmail.com>
	 <310674.70096.qm@web83911.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <12a3e0d10910111820s1325b9b8jccf94f71734e4c3b@mail.gmail.com>

I never said that the "other people" are basically immoral or bad. I just
said that a government for billions of people based on "one person one vote"
tends to be inefficient.
Also, such a voting process at this scale would be quite the nightmare for
all kind of reasons.

I am not advocating the abolition of all kinds of government and I'm not
advocating for ICANN. I'm only saying that we don't need it for everything
and that having a vote on the matter is just an illusion of control.
We have all kind of standards developed outside of government. We can just
as well have a standard for collaborating in the DNS field without the need
trust ICANN.

We can have more control bypassing ICANN altogether.
Again, I'm only talking about the particular ICANN/DNS situation ... we can
develop a system to bypass ICANN control and leave all the power in the
hands of the people.
In this situation you don't need to vote so that somebody might do the right
thing ... we already have the power and just have to use it.


Cosmin
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20091012/95ec1196/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

From lehto.paul at gmail.com  Sun Oct 11 21:29:01 2009
From: lehto.paul at gmail.com (Paul Lehto)
Date: Sun, 11 Oct 2009 18:29:01 -0700
Subject: [governance] Re: SELF - Authority
In-Reply-To: <12a3e0d10910111816w5cb81197p9d92f887a3bbb905@mail.gmail.com>
References: <12a3e0d10910111656w479c1e34x1d52dd841864f511@mail.gmail.com>
	 <310674.70096.qm@web83911.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
	 <12a3e0d10910111816w5cb81197p9d92f887a3bbb905@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <76f819dd0910111829n2ce0ed14ob3240f11cfab91cc@mail.gmail.com>

On 10/11/09, Cosmin L. Neagu <cosmin.neagu at rohost.com> wrote:
> I never said that the "other people" are basically immoral or bad. I just
> said that a government for billions of people based on "one person one vote"
> tends to be inefficient.

"Efficiency" is at best a secondary value for democracy. I previously
quoted US President Harry Truman: "If you want efficiency, you'll get
a dictatorship." Indeed, things like redundant checks and balances
have opposed powers working against each other from time to time -
that's hardly "efficient." Political campaigns to educate, for better
or worse, an electorate can be seen as sunk or wasted costs - in a
dictatorship all such sums spend on campaigns could be "efficiently"
eliminated.

My discussion of one person one vote was and is at the level of a
minimum principle sounding in fundamental equality.  If there's NOT
one person one vote, then we have an elite more powerful class or
classes.

One can build on top of the equality of one person one vote, and
that's most welcome.  This is where I see this post by Cosmin to be
at, and where it's headed.  Again, my discussions have been entirely
at the level of showing how ICANN's structure and especially its
restructuring falls well below many principles enshrined in the law of
democracy and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights' minimum
guarantees related to political legitimacy.  While I by no means am
opposed to a discussion of what might be built on top of the equality
of one person one vote, for my personal purposes at the present time
an affirmative proposal that goes beyond minimum guarantees would
invite distraction in the form of critiques related to the merits of
the affirmative proposal, which would undermine my role of bringing
attention to the immediate situation.

> Also, such a voting process at this scale would be quite the nightmare for
> all kind of reasons.
>
> I am not advocating the abolition of all kinds of government and I'm not
> advocating for ICANN. I'm only saying that we don't need it for everything
> and that having a vote on the matter is just an illusion of control.
> We have all kind of standards developed outside of government. We can just
> as well have a standard for collaborating in the DNS field without the need
> trust ICANN.
>
> We can have more control bypassing ICANN altogether.
> Again, I'm only talking about the particular ICANN/DNS situation ... we can
> develop a system to bypass ICANN control and leave all the power in the
> hands of the people.
> In this situation you don't need to vote so that somebody might do the right
> thing ... we already have the power and just have to use it.

As someone else suggested, this idea merits being fleshed out, since I
too am not sure what is meant by this bypass.  But the prospect sounds
good, if it can work.  one caveat is that the bypass should work for
everyone, and not leave some or many still subject to ICANN while a
privileged few, for reasons of smarts or perhaps financial
wherewithal, are able to bypass ICANN.

Paul Lehto, Juris Doctor


-- 
Paul R Lehto, J.D.
P.O. Box #1
Ishpeming, MI  49849
lehto.paul at gmail.com
906-204-4026
____________________________________________________________
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


From lehto.paul at gmail.com  Sun Oct 11 21:44:33 2009
From: lehto.paul at gmail.com (Paul Lehto)
Date: Sun, 11 Oct 2009 18:44:33 -0700
Subject: [governance] Declaration of Internet Rights by 15 Chinese 
In-Reply-To: <58762b1a0910110258l24e48213uda2686553487ae30@mail.gmail.com>
References: <58762b1a0910110258l24e48213uda2686553487ae30@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <76f819dd0910111844s7f6bdadeh115c5265521546f7@mail.gmail.com>

On 10/11/09, Rebecca MacKinnon <rebecca.mackinnon at gmail.com> wrote:
> http://rconversation.blogs.com/rconversation/2009/10/happy-internet-human-rights-day.html
>
> *Internet Human Rights Declaration
> Issued by 15 Chinese Intellectuals*
>
[snip]> 7. Netizens’ freedom of speech encompasses a right to express themselves
> anonymously. Anonymity enables some authors to express their opinions in
> ways that best suit their needs. This legal right should be respected as
> long as an anonymous author is expressing his views in accordance with legal
> and constitutional requirements.


I am a party to internet discussions among top election law scholars,
lawyers and professors with a concentration in the United States but
with worldwide participation.  What I'm about to say is not a
prediction but an accurate characterization of what is actually
happening right now, which seizes upon principle 7 above and attempts
to expand it in a way that I believe is highly damaging to democracy,
namely:

Taking arguments and precedents from anonymous internet speech cases,
which there have been a good handful recently upholding anonymity even
in cases of defamatory speech posted on the web, scholars and lawyers
sympathetic to and working for wealthy sponsors are arguing that they
must have the right to contribute to political campaigns anonymously,
without anybody ever finding out who is behind the political campaign.
 This takes the anonymous speech/whistleblower protections envisioned
above and harnesses it as a force AGAINST transparency and
accountability.

Because the people, the voters, are the sovereign entity (like a king
is the sovereign in royalty) when they are voting, this idea is
equivalent to asserting that people could appear in front of the king
and the king would have no right to know who is advising them/lobbying
them or "whispering in the king's ear" as it were.  Obviously, if the
people are the sole source of political legitimacy or ultimate power,
in this specific context, UNLIKE the context of web-posted internet
speech, the sovereign voters should clearly have the right to know and
evaluate who is talking to them. If they don't have that right and
power, they aren't really being treated as the sovereign they're
entitled to be.

I don't see any problem with the principle #7 regarding anonymous
speech if the scope of that anonymous speech is restricted.  But I
wonder if that principle can be kept within a reasonable scope.  It
can be if everyone remembers that elections are extraordinarily unique
and that every voter wears a different "hat" -- the sovereign hat of
the voter, as opposed to the normal hat in non-voting situations of
being a subject of the law, having to obey it whether we know what it
is, or not.  But since the fundamental distinction between people
acting as voters and when they act as normal citizens is all too often
forgotton, underplayed or ignored, I do have concerns that this
principle would be seized upon and then spill over into areas into
which it doesn't apply.

Actually, I don't have "concerns" about that, it's really happening.
I'm making an observation.

This observation reminds of the aphorism that one ought not to act
unless the principle of that action is something the actor would wish
to become a universal law.

Paul R Lehto, J.D.
P.O. Box #1
Ishpeming, MI  49849
lehto.paul at gmail.com
906-204-4026
____________________________________________________________
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


From ca at cafonso.ca  Mon Oct 12 00:50:12 2009
From: ca at cafonso.ca (Carlos A. Afonso)
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 01:50:12 -0300
Subject: [governance] mp3 audio files -- II LA&C Prep.Meeting of the IGF
In-Reply-To: <AFA019417F5E4DAB856CFD2B8429AED8@gonzalomorelis>
References: <ddcb05dc0907301134s5abf5765j25ba6b75d9e5f3da@mail.gmail.com> <AFA019417F5E4DAB856CFD2B8429AED8@gonzalomorelis>
Message-ID: <4AD2B584.9090604@cafonso.ca>

Dear people,

The mp3 audio files of the II Latin-American and the Caribbean Regional
Preparatory Meeting for the IGF (Rio, 11-13 August 2009) are online, and
you can download them by visiting the following link:

http://audio.nupef.org.br/sound_files/II_pre_IGF_LAC/

Speeches are in the original language of the participants (Spanish,
Portuguese, and English).

Files and their sizes are the following:

11-ago-2009:
II_preIGF_LAC_20090811_opening_session.mp3 -- 23,3 MB
II_preIGF_LAC_20090811_premio_trayectoria.mp3 --  9,2 MB

12-ago-2009:
II_preIGF_LAC_20090812_access.mp3 -- 58,9 MB
II_preIGF_LAC_20090812_CIR.mp3 -- 37,5 MB
II_preIGF_LAC_20090812_dialogue.mp3 -- 44,3 MB
II_preIGF_LAC_20090812_multiling.mp3 -- 46,1 MB

13-ago-2009:
II_preIGF_LAC_20090813_futureigf.mp3 -- 34,1 MB
II_preIGF_LAC_20090813_openness_security.mp3 -- 48,2 MB
II_preIGF_LAC_20090813_privacy.mp3 -- 54,6 MB
II_preIGF_LAC_20090813_reports.mp3 -- 26,4 MB

I hope to have the videos (in MP4 iPod-like format) online very soon.

For more information on the meeting, please visit:

http://www.nupef.org.br/igf/

[]s fraternos

--c.a.

-- 

Carlos A. Afonso
CGI.br (www.cgi.br)
Nupef (www.nupef.org.br)
====================================
new/nuevo/novo e-mail: ca at cafonso.ca
====================================

____________________________________________________________
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


From jlfullsack at orange.fr  Mon Oct 12 04:23:47 2009
From: jlfullsack at orange.fr (Jean-Louis FULLSACK)
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 10:23:47 +0200 (CEST)
Subject: [governance] Arguable relations
Message-ID: <30003014.275058.1255335827271.JavaMail.www@wwinf1f19>



Dear all

I'd be interested in the reaction and in the opinion of African CS organizations or members, especially those who were/are involved in the WSIS process, after watching this ITU Telecom World "event" around Zimbabwe's president. 


http://www.telecomtv.com/comspace_videoDetail.aspx?v=4149&id=e9381817-0593-417a-8639-c4c53e2a2a10#

As for me, I'm profoundly shocked by this "cheek to cheek" between the ITU SG and one of the world's most controversial head of state, partcularly as far as civil rights and citizens survival are concerned.
That's why I also ask APC as a sector member of ITU, what they intend to do concerning this "event". Perhaps Willie Currie may make an appropriate comment ? 

Jean-Louis Fullsack
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20091012/4517139c/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

From wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de  Mon Oct 12 04:52:01 2009
From: wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de (=?iso-8859-1?Q?=22Kleinw=E4chter=2C_Wolfgang=22?=)
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 10:52:01 +0200
Subject: [governance] ICANN meets Silicon Valley
References: <12a3e0d10910111656w479c1e34x1d52dd841864f511@mail.gmail.com>
 <310674.70096.qm@web83911.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
 <12a3e0d10910111816w5cb81197p9d92f887a3bbb905@mail.gmail.com>
 <76f819dd0910111829n2ce0ed14ob3240f11cfab91cc@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID:  <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8719600@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>

FYI, ICANN will open new office in Palo Alto
w
 
  

>From the Board Finance Committee - Approval of Lease for Palo Alto Office 

The Board received an update from Staff on the lease for the proposed Palo Alto office space, as required by the presence of ICANN's CEO in Palo Alto. 

The Board then took the following action: 

Whereas, ICANN has need for office space in Palo Alto, CA, U.S.A. to meet needs for current staff, including the CEO; 

Whereas, ICANN, as a technical coordinator of Internet identifiers, has an organizational benefit in maintaining a geographic presence in one of the leading technology centers of the world; 

Whereas future ICANN staff growth is likely to be outside of the existing offices in Marina del Rey, CA, and likely to increase in other parts of the U.S. and the World; 

Resolved (2009.09.30.14) that the ICANN Board authorize the Chief Financial Officer to negotiate for and finalize a lease for office space in Palo Alto, CA on commercially reasonable terms, for approximately 5,000 square feet of space, not to exceed a ten year term, and for total occupancy costs to start out at less than $400,000 per year, and not to exceed $600,000 per year during the lease term. 

One Board member abstained from voting on this resolution. All remaining Board members in attendance approved of this resolution. The resolution passed. 

In abstaining Director Subrenat, noted the following: " I wish to make clear that my abstention is in no way a negative reflection on Rod Beckstrom: quite on the contrary, I find he is an inspiring Chief Executive. My abstention is based on a matter of principle." 

"Having been much involved in the President Strategy Committee's 'improving institutional confidence' work, I can state that the challenge in the coming months and years for the Internet, and for ICANN, is to become more global, through more international involvement." 

"In this context, opening a new office in the US is not in any way a priority, and would even send a contrary message to the ICANN community worldwide." 


 
____________________________________________________________
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


From jlfullsack at orange.fr  Mon Oct 12 05:00:08 2009
From: jlfullsack at orange.fr (Jean-Louis FULLSACK)
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 11:00:08 +0200 (CEST)
Subject: [governance] ICANN meets Silicon Valley
In-Reply-To: <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8719600@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
References: <12a3e0d10910111656w479c1e34x1d52dd841864f511@mail.gmail.com>
 <310674.70096.qm@web83911.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
 <12a3e0d10910111816w5cb81197p9d92f887a3bbb905@mail.gmail.com>
 <76f819dd0910111829n2ce0ed14ob3240f11cfab91cc@mail.gmail.com>
 <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8719600@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
Message-ID: <11346771.418534.1255338008258.JavaMail.www@wwinf1f01>


Dear all

at least there is ONE people in ICANN to link Real Politik and ethics 
My sincere compliments to Mr Subrenat !

Jean-Louis Fullsack





> Message du 12/10/09 10:53
> De : ""Kleinwächter, Wolfgang"" 
> A : governance at lists.cpsr.org
> Copie à : 
> Objet : [governance] ICANN meets Silicon Valley
> 
> 
> FYI, ICANN will open new office in Palo Alto
> w
> 
> 
> 
> From the Board Finance Committee - Approval of Lease for Palo Alto Office 
> 
> The Board received an update from Staff on the lease for the proposed Palo Alto office space, as required by the presence of ICANN's CEO in Palo Alto. 
> 
> The Board then took the following action: 
> 
> Whereas, ICANN has need for office space in Palo Alto, CA, U.S.A. to meet needs for current staff, including the CEO; 
> 
> Whereas, ICANN, as a technical coordinator of Internet identifiers, has an organizational benefit in maintaining a geographic presence in one of the leading technology centers of the world; 
> 
> Whereas future ICANN staff growth is likely to be outside of the existing offices in Marina del Rey, CA, and likely to increase in other parts of the U.S. and the World; 
> 
> Resolved (2009.09.30.14) that the ICANN Board authorize the Chief Financial Officer to negotiate for and finalize a lease for office space in Palo Alto, CA on commercially reasonable terms, for approximately 5,000 square feet of space, not to exceed a ten year term, and for total occupancy costs to start out at less than $400,000 per year, and not to exceed $600,000 per year during the lease term. 
> 
> One Board member abstained from voting on this resolution. All remaining Board members in attendance approved of this resolution. The resolution passed. 
> 
> In abstaining Director Subrenat, noted the following: " I wish to make clear that my abstention is in no way a negative reflection on Rod Beckstrom: quite on the contrary, I find he is an inspiring Chief Executive. My abstention is based on a matter of principle." 
> 
> "Having been much involved in the President Strategy Committee's 'improving institutional confidence' work, I can state that the challenge in the coming months and years for the Internet, and for ICANN, is to become more global, through more international involvement." 
> 
> "In this context, opening a new office in the US is not in any way a priority, and would even send a contrary message to the ICANN community worldwide." 
> 
> 
> 
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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/20091012/da94036a/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

From mariliamaciel at gmail.com  Tue Oct 13 11:31:04 2009
From: mariliamaciel at gmail.com (Marilia Maciel)
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2009 12:31:04 -0300
Subject: [governance] IGF remote participation: registration of Hubs (until
 22/10)
Message-ID: <f7e605ab0910130831m7d9039fai79390bbe9eb6f945@mail.gmail.com>

Sorry for the cross-posting.

The IGF in Sharm-El-Sheikh is approaching fast. Some of us will travel
there. Others will not. But *staying in your home city does not mean that it
is not possible to follow the debates. *There will be channels for remote
participation. People can follow the discussions from home, watching the
webcast of the event and participating in chat. But it is also possible to
organize *IGF hubs*.



*What are the Hubs?*

The hubs are local meetings that take place in parallel with the IGF. People
can watch the webcast together and send questions (text or video) that will
be answered by panelists in the IGF (in main sessions and workshops). In
addition to that, organizers can hold debates to discuss the themes of the
IGF from a local perspective. This way, the hub gains its own dynamics, and
the webcast serves a starting point for a meaningful local debates. There
are *several advantages in creating a hub*: it helps to raise awareness
about IG issues, it fosters networking among participants and community
building and it encourages follow-up activities.



*The deadline to register a hub is 22 October.*



Training to hub organizers will be provided in late October.





*How to organize a hub?*



The requisites are very simple:



A four day activity, on flexible hours.

A room or auditorium. It can be held at a university class or any other
convenient

place in the city

A broadband Internet connection and a video-conference (or projector)
equipment.

A server

A moderator, who will plan the dynamics of the discussion

A general call in lists, forums, etc, to invite the interested local
community in

Information Society and Internet Governance



*How to register a hub*



An e-mail should be sent to the IGF Secretariat to ask for registration. The
address is igf at unog.ch. Please, ask the Secretariat to confirm reception.
The following information should be provided:



   1. Institution where the hub will be based:
   2. Possible area(s) of interest within the 5 main IGF themes:
   3. Number of expected participants within the hub:
   4. Planned pre-meeting activities:
   5. Hub Coordinator:
   6. Contact email:


If you have any doubts do not hesitate to contact the Secretariat (
igf at unog.ch) and/or the Remote Participation Working Group (
marilia.maciel at gmail.com)



Hope to see you all, physically or remotely, in Sharm!



Best regards,



Marília Maciel
Remote Participation Working Group

-- 
Centro de Tecnologia e Sociedade
FGV Direito Rio

Center of Technology and Society
Getulio Vargas Foundation
Rio de Janeiro - Brazil
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20091013/5df012fe/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

From jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com  Tue Oct 13 17:55:32 2009
From: jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com (Jeffrey A. Williams)
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2009 16:55:32 -0500 (GMT-05:00)
Subject: [governance] Re: SELF - Authority
Message-ID: <26546229.1255470932782.JavaMail.root@elwamui-muscovy.atl.sa.earthlink.net>

An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20091013/1bc274f7/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

From David_Allen_AB63 at post.harvard.edu  Wed Oct 14 00:12:55 2009
From: David_Allen_AB63 at post.harvard.edu (David Allen)
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2009 00:12:55 -0400
Subject: [governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation of Commitments
In-Reply-To: <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A87195D2@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
References: <75822E125BCB994F8446858C4B19F0D78FFC6E09@SUEX07-MBX-04.ad.syr.edu> <rBdKJCua0QxKFAve@perry.co.uk> <76f819dd0910021037o36cd6b7aj9c8d7454ca116cc2@mail.gmail.com> <y8DcmVKiokxKFAvp@perry.co.uk> <76f819dd0910030740v206a4661xcd43ea4ae54d2483@mail.gmail.com> <LjfihqAS+5xKFA5l@perry.co.uk> <76f819dd0910050734o5fbc2812k789c8232b30eac3b@mail.gmail.com> <f65fb55e0910050855i179b899w8c0422ae0694ef@mail.gmail.com> <76f819dd0910060857l766c25e5y4df848136e07598@mail.gmail.com> <6FDD041A-0DC5-44E6-A117-89ECDB296908@psg.com> <76f819dd0910060952v8d6890cw56733e320452fc15@mail.gmail.com> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A87195D2@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
Message-ID: <6C3346F9-F06E-4115-8713-3AA012E1AA4D@post.harvard.edu>

> What the Internet has enabled is to add a layer which can combine  
> representative with participatory democracy.

I believe there is very little evidence to this effect.

The Internet, like other electronic media, _can_ speed up the feedback  
loops, from governed to those governing, and in the reverse  
direction.  Whether that occurs and has effect on those governing  
turns, as usual, on the humans in the loops.  Are they engaged?  do  
they care?  do they respond? etc, etc.

There are plenty of modern day cases, such as the miraculous turn  
around in US administrations where all the old verities still, so  
sadly, apply - polarized hard right versus hard left, etc.

And the 'representatives' still make the decisions.  Just as one for  
instance, financial interests in the US still call those shots,  
through the elected 'representatives,' never mind a near-death  
experience aka almost-a-Depression.

> The principle of multistakeholderism is the very concrete outcome of  
> this development.

Again, I believe an accurate analysis sees the emergence of other than  
state actors onto the governance stage as part of a complicated  
evolution over quite some time.  Certainly, technologies play some  
part.  But numerous factors play a part, certainly, in cases, with  
much more impact than comms tech.

Blithe propositions, elevating our favorite stuff, are tempting.  But  
somewhat more grounded analysis may well serve us more accurately.

David
____________________________________________________________
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


From cogitoergosum at sbcglobal.net  Wed Oct 14 01:20:50 2009
From: cogitoergosum at sbcglobal.net (Eric Dierker)
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2009 22:20:50 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation of Commitments
In-Reply-To: <6C3346F9-F06E-4115-8713-3AA012E1AA4D@post.harvard.edu>
Message-ID: <450355.78252.qm@web83902.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>

I think the key here, that is quite "grounded, is the term "enabled". Enabled and empowered are great terms.  The practical is definately required after the psycho-anthropologic mechanisms are in place.  A ten thousand dollar bicycle does nothing for the health of the wealthy owner who sits on his couch watching while others do.
 
It is imperative that through education and outreach we get people active and interested in their own governance.  I have found that while very bright people can use the net and be perfectly satisfied that it requires techies to keep their access running smoothely.  When you ask them about policies that allow their access and content and rights they just look at you like you are from mars. Countries still do not get it. Successful enterprises do get it. It is socially irresponsible that they do not share that knowledge --  yet we can see why they to not.
 
I once had cards that said I was a Global Information Technology Strategist.  I think I know what it meant but not really.

--- On Wed, 10/14/09, David Allen <David_Allen_AB63 at post.harvard.edu> wrote:


From: David Allen <David_Allen_AB63 at post.harvard.edu>
Subject: Re: [governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation of Commitments
To: governance at lists.cpsr.org
Date: Wednesday, October 14, 2009, 4:12 AM


> What the Internet has enabled is to add a layer which can combine representative with participatory democracy.

I believe there is very little evidence to this effect.

The Internet, like other electronic media, _can_ speed up the feedback loops, from governed to those governing, and in the reverse direction.  Whether that occurs and has effect on those governing turns, as usual, on the humans in the loops.  Are they engaged?  do they care?  do they respond? etc, etc.

There are plenty of modern day cases, such as the miraculous turn around in US administrations where all the old verities still, so sadly, apply - polarized hard right versus hard left, etc.

And the 'representatives' still make the decisions.  Just as one for instance, financial interests in the US still call those shots, through the elected 'representatives,' never mind a near-death experience aka almost-a-Depression.

> The principle of multistakeholderism is the very concrete outcome of this development.

Again, I believe an accurate analysis sees the emergence of other than state actors onto the governance stage as part of a complicated evolution over quite some time.  Certainly, technologies play some part.  But numerous factors play a part, certainly, in cases, with much more impact than comms tech.

Blithe propositions, elevating our favorite stuff, are tempting.  But somewhat more grounded analysis may well serve us more accurately.

David
____________________________________________________________
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/20091013/813f1606/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

From lehto.paul at gmail.com  Wed Oct 14 10:51:39 2009
From: lehto.paul at gmail.com (Paul Lehto)
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2009 10:51:39 -0400
Subject: [governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation of Commitments
In-Reply-To: <6C3346F9-F06E-4115-8713-3AA012E1AA4D@post.harvard.edu>
References: <75822E125BCB994F8446858C4B19F0D78FFC6E09@SUEX07-MBX-04.ad.syr.edu>
	 <76f819dd0910030740v206a4661xcd43ea4ae54d2483@mail.gmail.com>
	 <LjfihqAS+5xKFA5l@perry.co.uk>
	 <76f819dd0910050734o5fbc2812k789c8232b30eac3b@mail.gmail.com>
	 <f65fb55e0910050855i179b899w8c0422ae0694ef@mail.gmail.com>
	 <76f819dd0910060857l766c25e5y4df848136e07598@mail.gmail.com>
	 <6FDD041A-0DC5-44E6-A117-89ECDB296908@psg.com>
	 <76f819dd0910060952v8d6890cw56733e320452fc15@mail.gmail.com>
	 <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A87195D2@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
	 <6C3346F9-F06E-4115-8713-3AA012E1AA4D@post.harvard.edu>
Message-ID: <76f819dd0910140751y6c6650cdie603f1744351654f@mail.gmail.com>

On 10/14/09, David Allen <David_Allen_AB63 at post.harvard.edu> wrote:
>> What the Internet has enabled is to add a layer which can combine
>> representative with participatory democracy.
>
> I believe there is very little evidence to this effect.

The intersection of the internet and democracy, specifically at the
nexus of voting and voting systems, is the core of my area of
specialization.  Although the internet can have (or not, as David
Allen suggests) a great role in increasing transparency such as by
making documents available for download and facilitating feedback
loops, the application of the internet specifically to voting is a
world class disaster if one cares about the preservation of real
democracy.  As applied to voting, for example, computerization is
inherently non-transparent because the vote counting is invisible, and
perhaps even more importantly, the DOJ election crimes division
specifies a sensible time period of SIX MONTHS to obtain eletronic
evidence and make a charging decision regarding a computerized
election crime, but the statute of limitations for challenging an
election ranges between ten days and no more than two months at the
outer limit.  For those who remember the US SUpreme Court case of Bush
v. Gore, the clock was deemed to run out of time on December 13, 2000,
just a little over a month after the election. After the statute of
limitations has run the interest in finality of elections, for good or
bad, trumps the interest in accuracy of elections.   Thus, it's not
really reasonably possible to correct any errors in a computerized
count in a timely fashion, regardless of whether it is via
computerized evidence (6 months, if evidence is even disclosed fully)
or via recount of a paper ballot (Bush v. Gore, just over 1 month).

All a voting system can do, its only job, is to give us transparency
and therefore  evidence of any problems, errors or frauds that may
occur.  It's up to humans and the legal system to act upon the errors,
and to do so in a timely manner, both of which often don't occur.
It's critical to "get it right on election night" and before newspaper
headlines declare winners, and alleged "sore losers" who are highly
disincentivized to bring a challenge, and yet since winners don't look
a gift hourse in the mouth, only the "losers" can protect the
integrity of the election, but they are under heavy pressure not to do
so.

The only solution is a transparent FIRST count -- protections for
election integrity simply cannot put all or really any significant
number of eggs in the post-election basket.  In the USA, the
post-election recount process is often stymied before completion, has
only worked in fact twice in 30 years to change a statewide election
result, and challenges that ought to be brought never are because of
political pressures, and even those that are often are not timely
brought or timely completed.  The post-election "remedies" of audits
and recounts and such are nothing to bet democracy and election
integrity on.

To move to the internet for voting specifically means the total
non-transparency and total "privatization" of the voting process.
There's no transparency in the home or wherever the ballot is voted
(granting the private ballot is entitled to be, since the only ballot
that can be messed up is one's own, and one's entitled to do that...),
no transparency in the transit of the ballot, nor in its counting or
tabulation, all of which is invisible per the nature of computers, and
claimed as a trade secret
as well to defeat transparency even in a litigated election contest.

In elections, every voter and especially every insider has a motive
and opportunity to cheat -- and even every non-voter is significantly
affected by election results and consequent government policy (such as
taxes).  There's no "safe" private place for ballots to be, and the
only "privacy" that's legitimate in elections is the privacy where one
is isolated with one's own ballot and no one else's.

Thus, even if internet voting was somehow proven safe and untamperable
(a proposition any informed computer scientist will say is literally
IMPOSSIBLE to achieve), it's very inappropriate for any democratic
society.  Governments run the very elections that determine their own
power and composition - kind of the ultimate conflict of interest, or
nearly so.  To make the vote count invisible to nearly everyone except
the government and its vendors is a recipe for disaster, since the
only thing we can know with certainty about the election result is
that there's literally no rational basis for confidence in the result.

The reason I say strongly there's "no rational basis for confidence"
in the results of nontransparent vote counts is that mere conclusory
final results are "transparently" reported as they pop out of
computerized counting processes, but in court any conclusion or final
opinion made triggers in all other interested parties the right to
examine the underlying data to confirm the result for themselves.
Thus, every expert opinion must disclose their data and analyses.
THis data, in computerized vote counts, is not available timely, its
understandable only to a few, is claimed protected from all disclosure
by trade secret laws, and literally never sees the light of day. Thus,
all we have are "magic numbers" for ballots that pop out of black
boxes.  As long as the number of ballots equals the number of voters,
the percentages can be freely made up within reason -- there's no
evidence that any count of the VOTES occurred at all -- only a count
of the ballots as a whole, not the individual races.

Elections are supposed to create confidence AFTER the election's
checks and balances have all been reviewed.  There are no meaningful
checks with internet based voting, and no evidence to support the
results.  No thinking person can have a RATIONAL basis for confidence
in the results - one can only have faith that the government has not
chosen to protect itself, and that nobody else with a few minutes of
access has chosen to change the results or insert an appropriate virus
or trojan horse.

That being said, internet voting is wonderful for pure entertainment
purposes on the internet, but even then I know lots of people who
speak of stuffing the internet ballot box even for a meaningless
unscienfific internet "poll" because they want to see their side win.
One can only imagine the risk if we up the ante just slightly from
"informal unscientific poll" to a real election for control of, say,
the world's sole military superpower via the presidency of the USA.
Gee -- think anyone might have an incentive and motivation to cheat
there???

Paul Lehto, Juris Doctor

Paul Lehto, Juris Doctor

>
> The Internet, like other electronic media, _can_ speed up the feedback
> loops, from governed to those governing, and in the reverse
> direction.  Whether that occurs and has effect on those governing
> turns, as usual, on the humans in the loops.  Are they engaged?  do
> they care?  do they respond? etc, etc.
>
> There are plenty of modern day cases, such as the miraculous turn
> around in US administrations where all the old verities still, so
> sadly, apply - polarized hard right versus hard left, etc.
>
> And the 'representatives' still make the decisions.  Just as one for
> instance, financial interests in the US still call those shots,
> through the elected 'representatives,' never mind a near-death
> experience aka almost-a-Depression.
>
>> The principle of multistakeholderism is the very concrete outcome of
>> this development.
>
> Again, I believe an accurate analysis sees the emergence of other than
> state actors onto the governance stage as part of a complicated
> evolution over quite some time.  Certainly, technologies play some
> part.  But numerous factors play a part, certainly, in cases, with
> much more impact than comms tech.
>
> Blithe propositions, elevating our favorite stuff, are tempting.  But
> somewhat more grounded analysis may well serve us more accurately.
>
> David
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
>


-- 
Paul R Lehto, J.D.
P.O. Box #1
Ishpeming, MI  49849
lehto.paul at gmail.com
906-204-4026
____________________________________________________________
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


From lehto.paul at gmail.com  Wed Oct 14 11:16:59 2009
From: lehto.paul at gmail.com (Paul Lehto)
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2009 11:16:59 -0400
Subject: [governance] Afghan election - fraudulent "audit" protocols
 preserve initial numbers
Message-ID: <76f819dd0910140816g28ff6056hd42d73534b5a1fb0@mail.gmail.com>

Under the thread title ICANN/Affirmation of Commitments" a subject
came up regarding internet governance, and I replied to show why
internet voting, specifically, can not only never be secure, it can
never be timely investigated and corrected for error given short
statutes of limitation, and because only the "conclusions" or vote
totals are ever disclosed, there's no scientifically rational basis
for confidence in the results whatsoever, given that no data is
disclosed.  They are purely faith-based elections, specifically in a
context where the government that would run such an election has close
to the ultimate conflict of interest given that the elections
themselves determine the government's own power and composition and
they are tabulating the results in complete nontransparency combined
with claims of corporate trade secrecy that are brought to bear if a
court order is sought for forensic computer evidence.  Internet voting
is nothing to bet democracy or governance or even ten Euros on.

In the past I've done a congressional election contest together with
other election contests.  I've found that post-election remedies like
recounts and audits work so infrequently that they can not be
considered to give any significant support to a flawed and
nontransparent first count -- the one that creates the headlines and
the 'sore losers' in any case.

Here's an example, a perfect one, of the kind of BS that goes on with
post-election remedies.  I haven't confirmed the mathematics myself,
but the author, a mathematician named Kathy Dopp who works in the area
of election analysis, states the following. If for any reason it would
turn out to be a mistake, which is possible but not likely, then
consider it a hypothetical example of the kinds of things I've seen
happen in the post-election time frame regarding real recounts and
audits -- which work so infrequently, only twice in 30 years has a
statewide result been changed (the latest being Senator Norm Coleman
losing to Al Franken in Minnesota just recently):
----------------Afghanistan report ----------- from Kathy Dopp ---------------

Someone *really* needs to contact someone in the US Department of
State or contact someone who can reach President Obama because the
Electoral Complaints Commission (ECC) and the Independent Election
Commission (IEC) are using fraudulent methods of analyzing the Afghan
election audit results that ensure that the initial reported margins
never change regardless of the amount of margin error found in the
audit sample. They are doing this by adding up all the error found in
all candidates' initial counts and subtracting that total share from
*all* the candidates' vote shares and reporting that (unchanged) vote
share (after you renormalize it to add up to 100%) for all candidates.

In other words the methods being applied by these election
organizations *always* preserve the exact same ratios of candidate
shares relative to each other as the original shares were before the
audit, even when there is more than enough error to change the
election outcome (or reduce Karzai's share below 50% and trigger a
top-two runoff).

Here is a short math proof that the method they are using *never*
changes the original election outcome regardless of the error since
they subtract the exact same percentage from every candidates' vote
share.

In other words, if there are three candidates with vote shares
 a%, b% and c% respectively (where a + b + c = 1)

and I subtract x% (no matter what x is) from every candidate's vote
share, then I get

a(1-x)%,  b(1-x)%  and c(1-x)%

when I total these I get (1-x)(a + b + c)%

and then add up all the candidates' shares and divide by that number
I get the new vote shares that add up to 100% of:

a(1-x)/(1-x)(a+b+c)% which reduces to a%

b(1-x)/(1-x)(a+b+c)% which reduces to b%

c(1-x)/(1-x)(a+b+c)% which reduces to c%

These are the exact same initial candidate shares that we started
with.  So the *new* method is a hoax, meant to fool the Afghan and US
public because if you incorrectly subtract the same amount x% from
every candidate's vote share then the candidates will *always* have
the same proportion of votes relative to each other that they had
before you subtracted x%.

That is clearly *not* an honest way to readjust the vote shares in
response to error found in election audits.

----

The State Dept needs to know about this, investigate, and do something
to insist on an honest election process if this is true.
--Kathy Dopp

-- 
Paul R Lehto, J.D.
P.O. Box #1
Ishpeming, MI  49849
lehto.paul at gmail.com
906-204-4026
____________________________________________________________
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


From jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com  Wed Oct 14 13:36:11 2009
From: jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com (Jeffrey A. Williams)
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2009 12:36:11 -0500 (GMT-05:00)
Subject: [governance] Re: [ga] What is ICANN doing to make sure that the
 UDRP providers are truly neutral?
Message-ID: <7222666.1255541771774.JavaMail.root@elwamui-cypress.atl.sa.earthlink.net>

George and all,

  Long before you were on the scene many of us complained bitterly
regarding Ester Dysons suggestion and eventual implimentation of the
UDRP as a resolution mechnisim for cybersquatting disputes as we than
knew it such a method would grow in to the now ugly and disproportionately
unfair and unjust mechinisim it has become.  But thank you for your well
reasoned and frankly stated remarks in reminder.  Well done!  >:)

  The UDRP is an abominition and has grown into an even bigger
abomination. 

-----Original Message-----
>From: George Kirikos <gkirikos at yahoo.com>
>Sent: Oct 14, 2009 11:18 AM
>To: ga at gnso.icann.org
>Subject: [ga] What is ICANN doing to make sure that the UDRP providers are truly neutral?
>
>
>Hi folks,
>
>There was a very good article in the Wall Street Journal today discussing the turmoil in the arbitration world, in particular with NAF:
>
>http://online.wsj.com/article/SB125548128115183913.html?mod=googlenews_wsj
>
>"Banks "don't need the taint that comes with mandatory arbitration."
>
>"While telling consumers that it was an impartial arbitrator, NAF worked closely with creditors, the regulator claimed, including drafting claims against consumers."
>
>"Former arbitrators, a congressional subcommittee, consumers and government suits are now alleging that NAF has been systematically ruling against consumers for years."
>
>"A congressional subcommittee, which began an investigation last year to study the fairness of mandatory arbitration, concluded in July that the current arbitration system is "ripe for abuse." Arbitration, as "operated by NAF, does not provide protection for those consumers," the committee said."
>
>"Before that case, she had ruled in favor of credit-card companies 18 consecutive times, she told the committee. She says she finished several pending NAF cases after she ruled for the card holder, but then wasn't given more cases. The official reason the NAF gave for canceling more work was scheduling conflicts. But Ms. Bartholet said in an interview that an NAF manager told her she was likely removed because she ruled for the debtor."
>
>In light of this, what is ICANN doing to ensure that UDRP is conducted in a neutral manner? Ideally it should be optional, unless *both* parties agree to it (i.e. parties should be permitted to choose the courts, a superior method for complex matters, if they feel it is appropriate).
>
>We have had NAF openly admit (in their IRT comments) that:
>
>http://forum.icann.org/lists/irt-final-report/msg00178.html
>
>"Panelists have taken the opportunity, over time, to agree with those complainants and broaden the scope of the UDRP, but it started out as a mechanism only for clear cut cases of cybersquatting."
>
>It's clearly in the financial interests of UDRP providers (and panelists) to continue to expand the scope of cases and tilt their decisions towards complainants in order to encourage more complaints overall, and more complaints that involve either themselves as panelists or their UDRP provider ("forum shopping"). This represents a perversion of the system of justice that domain registrants rely upon.
>
>ICANN staff and the GSNO should prepare an issues report, and perhaps fund independent scholarly research like that conducted by Professor Michael Geist in the past:
>
>http://www.udrpinfo.com/
>
>Sincerely,
>
>George Kirikos
>http://www.leap.com/

Regards,



Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 294k members/stakeholders strong!)
"Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" -
   Abraham Lincoln

"Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is very
often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt

"If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; liability
depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
United States v. Carroll Towing  (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
===============================================================
Updated 1/26/04
CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS. div. of
Information Network Eng.  INEG. INC.
ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com
Phone: 214-244-4827

____________________________________________________________
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


From jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com  Wed Oct 14 13:43:46 2009
From: jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com (Jeffrey A. Williams)
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2009 12:43:46 -0500 (GMT-05:00)
Subject: [governance] Amendment 138: The Parliament betrayed by its
 negotiators
Message-ID: <13712362.1255542227056.JavaMail.root@elwamui-cypress.atl.sa.earthlink.net>

All and especially Paul and Eric,


La Quadrature du Net - For immediate release

Permanent link:
http://www.laquadrature.net/en/amendment-138-the-parliament-betrayed-by-its-negotiators


Amendment 138: The Parliament betrayed by its negotiators



*** Brussels, October 14th, 2009 - Negotiations on the Telecoms Package
took a worrying turn for citizens rights and freedoms. The European
Parliament Delegation was betrayed by its negotiators, led by Catherine
Trautmann (S&D) and Alejo Vidal-Quadras (EPP). In total contradiction
with the mandate given by their colleagues representing the Parliament,
the negotiators unilaterally accepted to work on a proposal by the
Council of the EU that negates citizens' rights [1]. This dangerous
proposition is set to replace "amendment 138", voted twice by 88% of the
Parliament. ***

On Wednesday morning, a clear mandate was given to the negotiation team
by the Parliament delegation. A dubious legal analysis was produced by
the administrative services of the Parliament a few hours before, to
justify to abandon the original amendment 138 safeguarding citizens
rights. Thanks to an impressive mobilization of citizens across Europe,
MEPs were informed about the importance of preserving user rights at the
level set in amendment 138. Several MEPs therefore strongly opposed the
analysis of the administrative services and the delegation told the
negotiators to disregard it in the upcoming trilogue meeting.
Previously, the delegation had already decided that the negotiation
should proceed by considering all 3 texts : amendment 138, the second
reading compromise of Council and the new proposal.

Nonetheless, a few hours later during a trialogue with representatives
from the Council and the Commission, the negotiators violated their
mandate by agreeing that the fake "compromise" presented last week will
be the basis of further negotiations. By doing so, they gave up on the
idea that Internet access could only be restricted by a "prior ruling by
the judicial authority", ignoring the core principle of a provision
adopted twice by a 88% majority of the European Parliament.

"This turn-around is worryingly undermining the Parliament's powers. It
reveals a profound and lack of transparency and democratic credibility
of the European institutions. The negotiators led by Catherine Trautmann
decided to ignore the mandate they received from the Parliament
delegation and to accept a negotiation basis that reduced citizens
freedoms in comparison to the existing levels provided by the European
Convention for Human Rights.", analyzes Philippe Aigrain, co-founder of
citizen advocacy group La Quadrature du Net.

The new proposal could authorize Member States to implement exceptions
to the right to a due process in national Internet-related legislation.
Thereby, the proposal amounts to legitimizing an Orwellian surveillance
of the Net. Even in the Parliament's legal services opinion [2], which
seems custom-crafted to benefit the Council during the negotiation,
nothing justifies to accept this text as a new basis. The original
amendment 138 could if necessary be modified to fit the European Court
of Justice's case law.

"When the Parliament adopted amendment 138 on two occasions, it boldly
stated that a free access to the Internet is an integral part of
fundamental freedoms, and cannot be restricted without a judge's prior
decision. Mrs Trautmann and Mr Vidal-Quadras just helped the Council of
the EU to restrict citizens' freedoms at their will. This outrageous
maneuver could open the door to 'three strikes' policies, discrimination
of content and arbitrary filtering of the Net all over Europe.",
concludes Jérémie Zimmermann, co-founder and spokesperson for La Quadrature.



* Références *

1. See
http://www.laquadrature.net/en/telecoms-package-does-the-council-of-eu-hate-freedom
2. See http://www.laquadrature.net/wiki/EP_legal_service_138_analysis,
counter-arguments are being produced and will be published in the
following days. A draft is available at
http://www.laquadrature.net/wiki/Amendement_138_is_compatible_with_95_CE



** About la Quadrature du Net **

La Quadrature du Net (Squaring the Net) is citizen group informing about
legislative projects menacing civil liberties as well as economic and
social development in the digital age.

La Quadrature du Net informs citizens, public authorities,
organizations, corporations.

It works with everyone to elaborate balanced alternative solutions.

La Quadrature du Net is supported by French, european and international
NGOs including the Electronic Frontier Foundation, the Open Society
Institute and Privacy International.

List of supporting organisations :
http://www.laquadrature.net/en/they-support-squaring-net-la-quadrature-du-net




Regards,



Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 294k members/stakeholders strong!)
"Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" -
   Abraham Lincoln

"Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is very
often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt

"If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; liability
depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
United States v. Carroll Towing  (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
===============================================================
Updated 1/26/04
CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS. div. of
Information Network Eng.  INEG. INC.
ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com
Phone: 214-244-4827

____________________________________________________________
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


From roland at internetpolicyagency.com  Wed Oct 14 14:42:45 2009
From: roland at internetpolicyagency.com (Roland Perry)
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2009 19:42:45 +0100
Subject: [governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation of Commitments
In-Reply-To: <iYOY$2OAwh0KFAXq@perry.co.uk>
References: <75822E125BCB994F8446858C4B19F0D78FFC6E09@SUEX07-MBX-04.ad.syr.edu>
 <rBdKJCua0QxKFAve@perry.co.uk>
 <76f819dd0910021037o36cd6b7aj9c8d7454ca116cc2@mail.gmail.com>
 <y8DcmVKiokxKFAvp@perry.co.uk>
 <76f819dd0910030740v206a4661xcd43ea4ae54d2483@mail.gmail.com>
 <LjfihqAS+5xKFA5l@perry.co.uk>
 <76f819dd0910050734o5fbc2812k789c8232b30eac3b@mail.gmail.com>
 <D6ew3OJaviyKFAxR@perry.co.uk>
 <76f819dd0910060919u3b97805br140a134539a7578c@mail.gmail.com>
 <BezwuVcq7DzKFAqN@perry.co.uk>
 <76f819dd0910081044jb3eced8lb2fcc02520430e6b@mail.gmail.com>
 <iYOY$2OAwh0KFAXq@perry.co.uk>
Message-ID: <0Mmd6Ueluh1KFAdQ@perry.co.uk>

In message <iYOY$2OAwh0KFAXq at perry.co.uk>, at 18:55:12 on Sun, 11 Oct 
2009, Roland Perry <roland at internetpolicyagency.com> writes to Paul 
Lehto:

>Would you care to have another attempt to answer my question?

Apparently not.
-- 
Roland Perry
____________________________________________________________
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


From karl at cavebear.com  Wed Oct 14 18:40:02 2009
From: karl at cavebear.com (Karl Auerbach)
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2009 15:40:02 -0700
Subject: [governance] ICANN meets Silicon Valley
In-Reply-To: <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8719600@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
References: <12a3e0d10910111656w479c1e34x1d52dd841864f511@mail.gmail.com> <310674.70096.qm@web83911.mail.sp1.yahoo.com> <12a3e0d10910111816w5cb81197p9d92f887a3bbb905@mail.gmail.com> <76f819dd0910111829n2ce0ed14ob3240f11cfab91cc@mail.gmail.com>  <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8719600@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
Message-ID: <4AD65342.1050000@cavebear.com>

On 10/12/2009 01:52 AM, "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang" wrote:
> FYI, ICANN will open new office in Palo Alto

ICANN routinely does this for its presidents (by-the-way, for ICANN the 
term "CEO" is inaccurate.)  When I was on the board I suggested that 
ICANN do this the president of that era.

There is a reason for this.

Under US tax law the costs of commuting from home to/from office are not 
tax deductable.

But the costs of going from office to office are.

Thus, by way of establishing an "office" near the home of the president 
of ICANN the costs of travel between that "office" and Marina del Rey 
become tax deductible.

Its a way of shifting a piece of the compensation of the president off 
of ICANN and onto the US taxpayer.

		--karl--




____________________________________________________________
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


From bdelachapelle at gmail.com  Thu Oct 15 04:33:55 2009
From: bdelachapelle at gmail.com (Bertrand de La Chapelle)
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2009 10:33:55 +0200
Subject: [governance] Review Panels
Message-ID: <954259bd0910150133k6651bee5lb9beb1a809ff402f@mail.gmail.com>

Dear all,

Could this list also address Anriette's concrete second question ? What do
you think the review process should be ? Fundamentally, the community is
facing a now recurring problem (cf. WGIG, MAG,...) : how to compose a
multi-stakeholder group for a given task, so that it is sufficiently
diverse, balanced and representative of the variety of viewpoints ?

In addition, what do you tink the timing is ?

Best

Bertrand


On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 1:39 PM, Anriette Esterhuysen <anriette at apc.org>wrote:

> snip
>
> Second question is about the submissions on the review panels. What is
> the process likely to be?
>
> Anriette
>
>
>

-- 
____________________
Bertrand de La Chapelle
Délégué Spécial pour la Société de l'Information / Special Envoy for the
Information Society
Ministère des Affaires Etrangères et Européennes/ French Ministry of Foreign
and European Affairs
Tel : +33 (0)6 11 88 33 32

"Le plus beau métier des hommes, c'est d'unir les hommes" Antoine de Saint
Exupéry
("there is no greater mission for humans than uniting humans")
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20091015/7ca86294/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

From jefsey at jefsey.com  Thu Oct 15 07:14:43 2009
From: jefsey at jefsey.com (JFC Morfin)
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2009 13:14:43 +0200
Subject: [governance] ICANN meets Silicon Valley
In-Reply-To: <4AD65342.1050000@cavebear.com>
References: <12a3e0d10910111656w479c1e34x1d52dd841864f511@mail.gmail.com>
 <310674.70096.qm@web83911.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
 <12a3e0d10910111816w5cb81197p9d92f887a3bbb905@mail.gmail.com>
 <76f819dd0910111829n2ce0ed14ob3240f11cfab91cc@mail.gmail.com>
 <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8719600@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
 <4AD65342.1050000@cavebear.com>
Message-ID: <20091015111505.0EEE890D7F@npogroups.org>

At 00:40 15/10/2009, Karl Auerbach wrote:
>On 10/12/2009 01:52 AM, "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang" wrote:
>>FYI, ICANN will open new office in Palo Alto
>
>ICANN routinely does this for its presidents (by-the-way, for ICANN 
>the term "CEO" is inaccurate.)  When I was on the board I suggested 
>that ICANN do this the president of that era.
>
>There is a reason for this.
>
>Under US tax law the costs of commuting from home to/from office are 
>not tax deductable.
>
>But the costs of going from office to office are.
>
>Thus, by way of establishing an "office" near the home of the 
>president of ICANN the costs of travel between that "office" and 
>Marina del Rey become tax deductible.
>
>Its a way of shifting a piece of the compensation of the president 
>off of ICANN and onto the US taxpayer.

Karl,
May be a good reason why to transfer ICANN outside of such a tax country?
jfc

PS. It roughly means that Rod's commuting will cost ICANN more than $ 
2000 a day? i.e. roughly what my Intlnet operations cost me per year. 
Interesting, it confirms what I suspected: I am engaged in a weak to 
strong strategy :-)

____________________________________________________________
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


From jefsey at jefsey.com  Thu Oct 15 07:13:19 2009
From: jefsey at jefsey.com (jefsey)
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2009 13:13:19 +0200
Subject: [governance] Review Panels
In-Reply-To: <954259bd0910150133k6651bee5lb9beb1a809ff402f@mail.gmail.co
 m>
References: <954259bd0910150133k6651bee5lb9beb1a809ff402f@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20091015111534.EAD2A90E7B@npogroups.org>

At 10:33 15/10/2009, Bertrand de La Chapelle wrote:
>Dear all,
>Could this list also address Anriette's concrete second question ? 
>What do you think the review process should be ? Fundamentally, the 
>community is facing a now recurring problem (cf. WGIG, MAG,...) : 
>how to compose a multi-stakeholder group for a given task, so that 
>it is sufficiently diverse, balanced and representative of the 
>variety of viewpoints ?

Bertrand,
this is a good question. I think a way could be to try the WSIS recepee.

- get national IGFs up - so people know better what they talk about.
- get regional IGFs up (and T&L funded on a perequation basis)
- get IGF up (and T&L funded on a perquation basis)
- get Enhanced Cooperations up (and T&L funded on a perequation basis)
- get Dynamic Coalitions focused on corresponding Enhanced 
Cooperations achievements.
- get Enhanced Cooperations, Dynamic Coalitions, Govs and 
International institutions represented in a nommitation fair.
- get activated an open contributing mailing list to shadow every 
group, the same a Dynamic Coalitions are to shadows Enhanced Cooperations.
- understand that the IGF is a place for individual and not for 
collective decisions.
- pray God that selections are good enough not to push 
better-stakeholder groups in a better position.

jfc



____________________________________________________________
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


From dannyyounger at yahoo.com  Thu Oct 15 08:28:05 2009
From: dannyyounger at yahoo.com (Danny Younger)
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2009 05:28:05 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [governance] Review Panels
In-Reply-To: <954259bd0910150133k6651bee5lb9beb1a809ff402f@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <945154.26944.qm@web110102.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>

Bertrand,
 
There is more to this equation than diversity, balance, and representativeness; these review panels will require individuals with extensive knowledge regarding the particulars of the areas under review (which is why independent experts are cited as part of the necessary review team mix).

The teams will include:
 
the Chair of the GAC 
the CEO of ICANN
representatives of the Root Server System Advisory Committee
representatives of the Security and Stability Advisory Committee
representatives of the At-Large Advisory Committee
representatives of the Generic Names Supporting Organization
representatives of the Address Supporting Organization
representatives of the Country Code Names Supporting Organization
independent experts (likely drawn from either the Technical Liason Group, the IETF, the IAB, or from the pool of volunteer community members)
 
and in the accountability/transparency review team, these members will be joined by the Assistant Secretary for Communications and Information of the DOC,
 
The current arrangement calls for the composition of the review team to be agreed jointly by the Chair of the GAC (in consultation with GAC members) and the CEO of ICANN. 
 
Like all comparable ICANN processes, there will likely be a call for volunteers (similar to the recent call for NSCG placeholder councilors).  The ICANN Board will then privately settle upon whomever best promotes the ICANN interest (likely those that have never been critics) and will then advance those names to the Chair of the GAC.
 
I fully expect these reviews to be as much of a whitewash as all earlier ICANN self-review efforts.  Perhaps you will recall the earlier commissioned review of transparency and accountability provided in the One World Trust report -- we were told that ICANN is a model of transparency with robust accountability mechanisms... and yet we all know the reality.
 
Don't waste your energy on this project.  The deck will be stacked from day one.
 
best regards,
Danny Younger
 

--- On Thu, 10/15/09, Bertrand de La Chapelle <bdelachapelle at gmail.com> wrote:


From: Bertrand de La Chapelle <bdelachapelle at gmail.com>
Subject: [governance] Review Panels
To: governance at lists.cpsr.org, "Anriette Esterhuysen" <anriette at apc.org>
Date: Thursday, October 15, 2009, 4:33 AM


Dear all,

Could this list also address Anriette's concrete second question ? What do you think the review process should be ? Fundamentally, the community is facing a now recurring problem (cf. WGIG, MAG,...) : how to compose a multi-stakeholder group for a given task, so that it is sufficiently diverse, balanced and representative of the variety of viewpoints ? 

In addition, what do you tink the timing is ? 

Best

Bertrand



On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 1:39 PM, Anriette Esterhuysen <anriette at apc.org> wrote:

snip

Second question is about the submissions on the review panels. What is
the process likely to be?

Anriette




-- 
____________________
Bertrand de La Chapelle
Délégué Spécial pour la Société de l'Information / Special Envoy for the Information Society
Ministère des Affaires Etrangères et Européennes/ French Ministry of Foreign and European Affairs
Tel : +33 (0)6 11 88 33 32

"Le plus beau métier des hommes, c'est d'unir les hommes" Antoine de Saint Exupéry
("there is no greater mission for humans than uniting humans")

-----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/20091015/39b3ba72/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

From jefsey at jefsey.com  Thu Oct 15 09:20:42 2009
From: jefsey at jefsey.com (jefsey)
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2009 15:20:42 +0200
Subject: [governance] Review Panels
In-Reply-To: <945154.26944.qm@web110102.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
References: <954259bd0910150133k6651bee5lb9beb1a809ff402f@mail.gmail.com>
 <945154.26944.qm@web110102.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20091015133925.1855790CF3@npogroups.org>

At 14:28 15/10/2009, Danny Younger wrote:
>Don't waste your energy on this project.  The deck will be stacked 
>from day one.

Anyway, now the mission of ICANN is quite technically reduced 
(nothing), politically limited (to be a Gov's bait), and commercially 
(to make believe they are of any use). Too bad, they could have really helped.

jfc

____________________________________________________________
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


From george.sadowsky at attglobal.net  Thu Oct 15 10:17:55 2009
From: george.sadowsky at attglobal.net (George Sadowsky)
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2009 10:17:55 -0400
Subject: [governance] Review Panels
Message-ID: <p0620072cc6fcdf9000a9@[10.0.1.4]>

Danny,

Thank you very much for introducing factors of 
technical competence and knowledge into this 
discussion.

I suspect that your cynicism is born from years 
of personal experience, but I would not be so 
quick to direct it toward a situation which does 
represent a changing environment characterized by 
a new set of relationships, and which deserves a 
chance to succeed.

Regards,

George

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


>Bertrand,
>
>There is more to this equation than diversity, 
>balance, and representativeness; these review 
>panels will require individuals with extensive 
>knowledge regarding the particulars of the areas 
>under review (which is why independent experts 
>are cited as part of the necessary review team 
>mix).
>
>The teams will include:
>
>the Chair of the GAC
>the CEO of ICANN
>representatives of the Root Server System Advisory Committee
>representatives of the Security and Stability Advisory Committee
>representatives of the At-Large Advisory Committee
>representatives of the Generic Names Supporting Organization
>representatives of the Address Supporting Organization
>representatives of the Country Code Names Supporting Organization
>independent experts (likely drawn from either 
>the Technical Liason Group, the IETF, the IAB, 
>or from the pool of volunteer community members)
>
>and in the accountability/transparency review 
>team, these members will be joined by the 
>Assistant Secretary for Communications and 
>Information of the DOC,
>
>The current arrangement calls for the 
>composition of the review team to be agreed 
>jointly by the Chair of the GAC (in consultation 
>with GAC members) and the CEO of ICANN.
>
>Like all comparable ICANN processes, there will 
>likely be a call for volunteers (similar to the 
>recent call for NSCG placeholder councilors). 
>The ICANN Board will then privately settle upon 
>whomever best promotes the ICANN interest 
>(likely those that have never been critics) and 
>will then advance those names to the Chair of 
>the GAC.
>
>I fully expect these reviews to be as much of a 
>whitewash as all earlier ICANN self-review 
>efforts.  Perhaps you will recall the earlier 
>commissioned review of transparency and 
>accountability provided in the One World Trust 
>report -- we were told that ICANN is a model of 
>transparency with robust accountability 
>mechanisms... and yet we all know the reality.
>
>Don't waste your energy on this project.  The 
>deck will be stacked from day one.
>
>best regards,
>Danny Younger
>
>
>--- On Thu, 10/15/09, Bertrand de La Chapelle <bdelachapelle at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>From: Bertrand de La Chapelle <bdelachapelle at gmail.com>
>Subject: [governance] Review Panels
>To: governance at lists..cpsr.org, "Anriette Esterhuysen" <anriette at apc.org>
>Date: Thursday, October 15, 2009, 4:33 AM
>
>Dear all,
>
>Could this list also address Anriette's concrete 
>second question ? What do you think the review 
>process should be ? Fundamentally, the community 
>is facing a now recurring problem (cf. WGIG, 
>MAG,...) : how to compose a multi-stakeholder 
>group for a given task, so that it is 
>sufficiently diverse, balanced and 
>representative of the variety of viewpoints ?
>
>In addition, what do you tink the timing is ?
>
>Best
>
>Bertrand
>
>On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 1:39 PM, Anriette 
>Esterhuysen 
><<http://us.mc1101.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=anriette at apc.org>anriette at apc.org> 
>wrote:
>
>snip
>
>Second question is about the submissions on the review panels. What is
>the process likely to be?
>
>Anriette
>
>
>
>--
>____________________
>Bertrand de La Chapelle
>Délégué Spécial pour la Société de l'Information 
>/ Special Envoy for the Information Society
>Ministère des Affaires Etrangères et 
>Européennes/ French Ministry of Foreign and 
>European Affairs
>Tel : +33 (0)6 11 88 33 32
>
>"Le plus beau métier des hommes, c'est d'unir 
>les hommes" Antoine de Saint Exupéry
>("there is no greater mission for humans than uniting humans")
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20091015/b939c35e/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

From dannyyounger at yahoo.com  Thu Oct 15 11:02:02 2009
From: dannyyounger at yahoo.com (Danny Younger)
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2009 08:02:02 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [governance] Review Panels
In-Reply-To: <p0620072cc6fcdf9000a9@[10.0.1.4]>
Message-ID: <330434.8924.qm@web110102.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>

Hello George,

You are correct in noting that cynicism can stem from years of experience.  

I look back at other notable reviews such as the At-Large Study that involved such worthies as Carl Bildt and Esther Dyson (wherein outreach to the community extended over an eight month period, in meetings and online, with the consideration of over 1163 
  forum comments and input from 16 outreach events worldwide).

That particular review resulted in a recommendation from a team that found a broad-based community consensus to seat at-large directors on one-third of ICANN's board.

Of course, we all know what happened:

1.  The board thanked them for their work.
2.  The board disagreed with their findings and recommendations
3.  The board completely disregarded the recorded community consensus
3.  The board went on its merry way and wiped out all board-level at-large representation

In the ICANN world, recommendations from review panels are too readily ignored as ICANN fully understands that it is accountable to no one.  The Affirmation of Commitments has not changed that reality.  

As always, I'm willing to be proven wrong by healthy changes at ICANN... unfortunately, I don't currently see the organization on that path.  The approach taken regarding new gTLDS well illustrates that point.  

There is a large community that has vociferously argued that an "open-the-floodgates" approach is not a prudent way forward, will severely impact holders of marks, and can't effectively be managed by an ICANN Compliance team that won't be able to scale to meet the challenge.  Rather than putting together a team to devise principles to govern the allocation of names in a measured release of new gTLDs, the board is now saying to the GNSO, "you have 2 months to come up with a plan to fully address intellectual property concerns, and if you don't succeed in that limited time-frame, we will move forward come hell or high water with the Staff recommendations that have already mangled your earlier proposals".  

This is board hell-bent on having its own way no matter what the rest of the world thinks.  No amount of reviews will ever change that dynamic.





      
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20091015/5e4d0fee/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

From jefsey at jefsey.com  Thu Oct 15 12:20:29 2009
From: jefsey at jefsey.com (jefsey)
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2009 18:20:29 +0200
Subject: [governance] Review Panels
In-Reply-To: <p0620072cc6fcdf9000a9@[10.0.1.4]>
References: <p0620072cc6fcdf9000a9@[10.0.1.4]>
Message-ID: <20091015162130.050549066C@npogroups.org>

At 16:17 15/10/2009, George Sadowsky wrote:
>Danny,
>Thank you very much for introducing factors of technical competence 
>and knowledge into this discussion.
>I suspect that your cynicism is born from years of personal 
>experience, but I would not be so quick to direct it toward a 
>situation which does represent a changing environment characterized 
>by a new set of relationships, and which deserves a chance to succeed.


Dear George,

knowledge and technical competence in a pseudo-consensual environment 
are good to protect status-quo, or at most a very slow incremental 
innovation. This implicitly calls for disruptive innovation as a 
reaction. Due to that reaction phase, such an innovation is usually 
initially "proposed" by opposing disrupters rather than by people of 
knowledge and competence (who went to less noisy but also less 
efficient research places paid by public funds). Please re-read IAB's 
RFC 3869.

This innovation will be opposed on the grounds of that disruption 
rather than considered for its (may be too early) innovative merit. 
This is how disruptive innovation may consolidate technical, 
political, relational etc. status-quo. For example, look at the 
so-called "alt-roots" and the IETF disinterest in ICP-3, leaving 
ICANN stark-naked in front of the current technology evolution.

This makes progress only result from States sponsored or users 
supported architectural reviews. In very large systems like the 
Internet, reviews will probably be major. It will sweep entire 
industries with too important changes, without enough transition, for 
most not to suffer. BTW, one calls that a revolution.
We never experienced a world revolution yet. Until now (end of the 
80's), very large systems (telephone, postal services, power network, 
etc.) where mostly operated by state monopolies with an high 
resilience factor. This is not the case anymore 20 years later on, 
while the decremental cost of confusion and pollution (including in 
the DNS) puts many global things at individual range.

The US Cybersecurity document is not bad. It says that status-quo is 
a mistake. In a situation (you agree about this) which has changed, 
is that not very risky to give a chance more to a management method 
(governance by status-quo) which has led to status-quo? Moreover 
while a specially designed solution has been consensually documented 
not a long ago and not yet given a try?

I was at the core of the US deregulation short view datacoms mistake. 
It left the USA outside of the international communication network 
and without a nationwide network. This called for the Internet 
national patch. The world accepted that patch for a while, because we 
needed the USA to hold back their industrial and political digital 
rank. I think that while is over. Not because anyone said it or 
decided it, but because technology says it. The same as the planet 
says "please stop polluting". The internet says "please stop 
ICANNing" or something very near. Not again ICANN per se, but again 
the mental and technical attitude which led to ICANN and permits it to survive.

What is very worrying is that the people of knowledge and technical 
competences that are selected certainly feel something is around. 
However, they are not those who are doing it. Those who know and are 
technically competent enough for blowing a revolution have not been 
spotted. This is why I say we need first to comb the world, through 
local IGFs, to find these people and get them and their idea 
evaluated by their peers and by pundits. Then to evaluate the very 
bests plans, not their resumes, place of birth, political friends or wealth.

jfc



____________________________________________________________
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


From jefsey at jefsey.com  Thu Oct 15 12:27:13 2009
From: jefsey at jefsey.com (JFC Morfin)
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2009 18:27:13 +0200
Subject: [governance] Review Panels
In-Reply-To: <330434.8924.qm@web110102.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
References: <p0620072cc6fcdf9000a9@[10.0.1.4]>
 <330434.8924.qm@web110102.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20091015162804.4CD219090C@npogroups.org>

At 17:02 15/10/2009, Danny Younger wrote:
>This is board hell-bent on having its own way no matter what the 
>rest of the world thinks.  No amount of reviews will ever change that dynamic.

It would great if it was a dynamic. I am afraid it is just as you say 
an hell-bent cinematic.

You remember the  WG-Review?
jfc  

____________________________________________________________
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


From lehto.paul at gmail.com  Thu Oct 15 15:02:43 2009
From: lehto.paul at gmail.com (Paul Lehto)
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2009 12:02:43 -0700
Subject: [governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation of Commitments
In-Reply-To: <0Mmd6Ueluh1KFAdQ@perry.co.uk>
References: <75822E125BCB994F8446858C4B19F0D78FFC6E09@SUEX07-MBX-04.ad.syr.edu>
	 <76f819dd0910030740v206a4661xcd43ea4ae54d2483@mail.gmail.com>
	 <LjfihqAS+5xKFA5l@perry.co.uk>
	 <76f819dd0910050734o5fbc2812k789c8232b30eac3b@mail.gmail.com>
	 <D6ew3OJaviyKFAxR@perry.co.uk>
	 <76f819dd0910060919u3b97805br140a134539a7578c@mail.gmail.com>
	 <BezwuVcq7DzKFAqN@perry.co.uk>
	 <76f819dd0910081044jb3eced8lb2fcc02520430e6b@mail.gmail.com>
	 <iYOY$2OAwh0KFAXq@perry.co.uk> <0Mmd6Ueluh1KFAdQ@perry.co.uk>
Message-ID: <76f819dd0910151202y2a0ac3bbna59f0435a6a21558@mail.gmail.com>

Roland, you dropped out of the debate about democracy and ICANN,
specifically as to how ICANN drops below absolute minimum standards
for democratic governance.  Now you want to create an impression that
I can't or won't answer some unspecified question.  Is this your
hypothetical question about Cameroon and such?  If so, please
understand that even if you proved your apparent "case" that there are
difficulties of implementation in your (straw man) version of
democracy, it does not follow whatsoever that any old thing, most
especially an un-democratic any old thing, can take the  place of some
version of democracy.

It would be more enlightening for you to answer the question:

Do you believe any subset of the people, whether "experts" or owners,
have the right to define and/or control or regulate the common life of
people on the Internet?  (On this question, Please note that the fact
that, in practice, the right to override an elected official's (or
their appointee's) decision under representative-democracy forms is
rarely exercised, as well as the notion that perhaps override ought
not to be often exercised, doesn't at all mean that there should be NO
RIGHT to so override when the "experts" decisions conflict with the
majority of more of the people. That distinction is the difference
between, by analogy, the ability to hire an attorney to represent
one's self, and the INABILITY to fire or replace the attorney no
matter what happens, which is the situation the people presently find
themselves in with ICANN).

To prevent the need for repeated questions, please don't read into the
above some detail that you personally deem outside the direct
management or control of democracy, since clearly ICANN does make
decisions of interest to the people, which is precisely why there's a
listserv entitled "Governance" that is not strictly by appointment or
invitation only.  Instead, assume that ICANN is making a decision
clearly triggering the interests of the people, and does so in a way
that is adverse to the perceived interests of a majority of people.

So, do you defend as rightful ICANN's apparent ability to do this
regardless of the opinions and the intensity thereof of the people?
If so, where does ICANN's power come from to run our common life on
the internet, or part of it, and why is it legitimate that they, above
all others, be able to do this within the domain they deem within
their territory?

I will answer your question if you will restate it. I thought I had
answered it. But your answer to the above questions will help
illuminate and perhaps resolve the real issues far quicker.

Paul Lehto, Juris Doctor

On 10/14/09, Roland Perry <roland at internetpolicyagency.com> wrote:
> In message <iYOY$2OAwh0KFAXq at perry.co.uk>, at 18:55:12 on Sun, 11 Oct
> 2009, Roland Perry <roland at internetpolicyagency.com> writes to Paul
> Lehto:
>
>>Would you care to have another attempt to answer my question?
>
> Apparently not.
> --
> Roland Perry
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
>


-- 
Paul R Lehto, J.D.
P.O. Box #1
Ishpeming, MI  49849
lehto.paul at gmail.com
906-204-4026
____________________________________________________________
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


From ian.peter at ianpeter.com  Thu Oct 15 15:45:09 2009
From: ian.peter at ianpeter.com (Ian Peter)
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2009 06:45:09 +1100
Subject: [governance] Review Panels
In-Reply-To: <954259bd0910150133k6651bee5lb9beb1a809ff402f@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <C6FDC6F5.6FF4%ian.peter@ianpeter.com>


Hi Bertrand,

My quick response is that, like the JPA before it, the review panels will be
more symbolic than effective and we should not expect much more. The JPA did
very little, except symbolise unilateral control; I think the review panels
will do even less, but symbolise a multistakeholder involvement.

If we want to improve internet governance we need to look further and beyond
what might be achieved by review panels.

Ian Peter

On 15/10/09 7:33 PM, "Bertrand de LA CHAPELLE" <bdelachapelle at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Dear all,
> 
> Could this list also address Anriette's concrete second question ? What do you
> think the review process should be ? Fundamentally, the community is facing a
> now recurring problem (cf. WGIG, MAG,...) : how to compose a multi-stakeholder
> group for a given task, so that it is sufficiently diverse, balanced and
> representative of the variety of viewpoints ?
> 
> In addition, what do you tink the timing is ?
> 
> Best
> 
> Bertrand
> 
> 
> On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 1:39 PM, Anriette Esterhuysen <anriette at apc.org> wrote:
>> snip
>> 
>> Second question is about the submissions on the review panels. What is
>> the process likely to be?
>> 
>> Anriette
>> 
>> 
> 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20091016/4521d495/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

From avri at psg.com  Thu Oct 15 15:59:07 2009
From: avri at psg.com (Avri Doria)
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2009 21:59:07 +0200
Subject: [governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation of Commitments
In-Reply-To: <76f819dd0910151202y2a0ac3bbna59f0435a6a21558@mail.gmail.com>
References: <75822E125BCB994F8446858C4B19F0D78FFC6E09@SUEX07-MBX-04.ad.syr.edu> <76f819dd0910030740v206a4661xcd43ea4ae54d2483@mail.gmail.com> <LjfihqAS+5xKFA5l@perry.co.uk> <76f819dd0910050734o5fbc2812k789c8232b30eac3b@mail.gmail.com> <D6ew3OJaviyKFAxR@perry.co.uk> <76f819dd0910060919u3b97805br140a134539a7578c@mail.gmail.com> <BezwuVcq7DzKFAqN@perry.co.uk> <76f819dd0910081044jb3eced8lb2fcc02520430e6b@mail.gmail.com> <iYOY$2OAwh0KFAXq@perry.co.uk> <0Mmd6Ueluh1KFAdQ@perry.co.uk> <76f819dd0910151202y2a0ac3bbna59f0435a6a21558@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <0BA256A2-CA3B-4D8E-BD9E-95FDF2137333@psg.com>


On 15 Oct 2009, at 21:02, Paul Lehto wrote:

> To prevent the need for repeated questions, please don't read into the
> above some detail that you personally deem outside the direct
> management or control of democracy, since clearly ICANN does make
> decisions of interest to the people, which is precisely why there's a
> listserv entitled "Governance" that is not strictly by appointment or
> invitation only.


ICANN has a governance listserve?

which?

a.

____________________________________________________________
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


From fouadbajwa at gmail.com  Thu Oct 15 16:13:50 2009
From: fouadbajwa at gmail.com (Fouad Bajwa)
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2009 01:13:50 +0500
Subject: [governance] Review Panels
In-Reply-To: <954259bd0910150133k6651bee5lb9beb1a809ff402f@mail.gmail.com>
References: <954259bd0910150133k6651bee5lb9beb1a809ff402f@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <701af9f70910151313n25de7a0coe2dbb5689e990c7e@mail.gmail.com>

Dear Bertrand,

Anriette's question is very valid and when it will come down to review
panels, I would not deem them to be the best approach. The review
panels will have to be first lead with a multistakeholder but more
"involved group". We have the governments, the ICANN and the various
technical internet community and technology-non-technology Civil
Society. The review panels should be adopted with a more dynamic
approach and above all, a concrete team should be available above the
review panels to quickly note, review and disseminate.

One thing about IGF's approach that has confused me within the MAG as
well is its lack of interest to touch the policy side of things
whereas consensus and collaborative resolutions to issues, finding
solutions to problems and recommending through resolutions is a UN
mechanism then why cannot that be included as an exploration within
the IGF process.

The second thing I am more interested in is the institutionalization
of the IGF and acting as an umbrella facilitator than just a dialogue
facilitator (this is one area IGF has been very successful in) but
this model will only evolve if the IGF acts as an umbrella forum to
which every participating member country conducts a regional IGF and
contributes back to the main IGF. This is pretty nascent but I would
like the Review Panel to take institutionalization of the IGF into
account since if the IGF is continued, it should evolve into a much
more concrete role and other organizations like the ITU, UNGAID, CSTD,
UNESCO etc. should be involved in such a way that they can realize
that IGF is the right way to move instead of everyone trying to push
their ticket into the process and also realize that everyone is a
stakeholder of the Internet and IGF is a very powerful example that
everyone can move into the dialogue process and real actions can be
resolved to benefit the global internet citizenry at large.

One thing that intimidates alot is the over emphasis on ICANN and the
tug-of-war that exists within the minds of the stakeholders. Yes ICANN
is one part of the problem but we have to realize that ICANN is not
the convergence and convergence will reform its power structures and
one thing is there for the IGF to be present when it happens, that is,
when the name space opens up and as convergence continues to take
place, other forms of name space attributes are continuing to be
evolved through research and one day we will have a very different
name space structure and that future is not so far.

The role of the Review Panels has to be very dynamic bringing its
members in an equal level and a very fast and efficient process
because Internet Governance will continue to evolve therefore why
should the review process be slower on a fast moving bullet technology
train?



On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 1:33 PM, Bertrand de La Chapelle
<bdelachapelle at gmail.com> wrote:
> Dear all,
>
> Could this list also address Anriette's concrete second question ? What do
> you think the review process should be ? Fundamentally, the community is
> facing a now recurring problem (cf. WGIG, MAG,...) : how to compose a
> multi-stakeholder group for a given task, so that it is sufficiently
> diverse, balanced and representative of the variety of viewpoints ?
>
> In addition, what do you tink the timing is ?
>
> Best
>
> Bertrand
>
>
> On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 1:39 PM, Anriette Esterhuysen <anriette at apc.org>
> wrote:
>>
>> snip
>>
>> Second question is about the submissions on the review panels. What is
>> the process likely to be?
>>
>> Anriette
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> ____________________
> Bertrand de La Chapelle
> Délégué Spécial pour la Société de l'Information / Special Envoy for the
> Information Society
> Ministère des Affaires Etrangères et Européennes/ French Ministry of Foreign
> and European Affairs
> Tel : +33 (0)6 11 88 33 32
>
> "Le plus beau métier des hommes, c'est d'unir les hommes" Antoine de Saint
> Exupéry
> ("there is no greater mission for humans than uniting humans")
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ATVDW1tDZzA
____________________________________________________________
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


From jfcallo at isocperu.org  Thu Oct 15 20:39:50 2009
From: jfcallo at isocperu.org (jfcallo at isocperu.org)
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2009 20:39:50 -0400
Subject: [governance] Review Panels
In-Reply-To: <945154.26944.qm@web110102.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
References: <945154.26944.qm@web110102.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20091015203950.7cvn8ev328w800ss@www.isocperu.org>

Distinguished members of this list:
I write from Lima, Peru, we are interested in participating in ICANN,  
contribute from our experience, how do to connect with ICANN?, Send an  
e-mail for 10 days and no one responds.
Thanks
Jose F. Callo Romero
     Secretario
     ISOC Peru


Quoting Danny Younger <dannyyounger at yahoo.com>:

> Bertrand,
>  
> There is more to this equation than diversity, balance, and   
> representativeness; these review panels will require individuals   
> with extensive knowledge regarding the particulars of the areas   
> under review (which is why independent experts are cited as part of   
> the necessary review team mix).
>
> The teams will include:
>  
> the Chair of the GAC
> the CEO of ICANN
> representatives of the Root Server System Advisory Committee
> representatives of the Security and Stability Advisory Committee
> representatives of the At-Large Advisory Committee
> representatives of the Generic Names Supporting Organization
> representatives of the Address Supporting Organization
> representatives of the Country Code Names Supporting Organization
> independent experts (likely drawn from either the Technical Liason   
> Group, the IETF, the IAB, or from the pool of volunteer community   
> members)
>  
> and in the accountability/transparency review team, these members   
> will be joined by the Assistant Secretary for Communications and   
> Information of the DOC,
>  
> The current arrangement calls for the composition of the review  
> team to be agreed jointly by the Chair of the GAC (in consultation  
> with GAC members) and the CEO of ICANN.
>  
> Like all comparable ICANN processes, there will likely be a call for  
> volunteers (similar to the recent call for NSCG placeholder  
> councilors).  The ICANN Board will then privately settle upon  
> whomever best promotes the ICANN interest (likely those that have  
> never been critics) and will then advance those names to the Chair  
> of the GAC.
>  
> I fully expect these reviews to be as much of a whitewash as all  
> earlier ICANN self-review efforts.  Perhaps you will recall the  
> earlier commissioned review of transparency and accountability  
> provided in the One World Trust report -- we were told that ICANN is  
> a model of transparency with robust accountability mechanisms... and  
> yet we all know the reality.
>  
> Don't waste your energy on this project.  The deck will be stacked  
> from day one.
>  
> best regards,
> Danny Younger
>  
>
> --- On Thu, 10/15/09, Bertrand de La Chapelle   
> <bdelachapelle at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> From: Bertrand de La Chapelle <bdelachapelle at gmail.com>
> Subject: [governance] Review Panels
> To: governance at lists.cpsr.org, "Anriette Esterhuysen" <anriette at apc.org>
> Date: Thursday, October 15, 2009, 4:33 AM
>
>
> Dear all,
>
> Could this list also address Anriette's concrete second question ?   
> What do you think the review process should be ? Fundamentally, the   
> community is facing a now recurring problem (cf. WGIG, MAG,...) :   
> how to compose a multi-stakeholder group for a given task, so that   
> it is sufficiently diverse, balanced and representative of the   
> variety of viewpoints ?
>
> In addition, what do you tink the timing is ?
>
> Best
>
> Bertrand
>
>
>
> On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 1:39 PM, Anriette Esterhuysen   
> <anriette at apc.org> wrote:
>
> snip
>
> Second question is about the submissions on the review panels. What is
> the process likely to be?
>
> Anriette
>
>
>
>
> --
> ____________________
> Bertrand de La Chapelle
> Délégué Spécial pour la Société de l'Information / Special Envoy for  
> the Information Society
> Ministère des Affaires Etrangères et Européennes/ French Ministry of  
> Foreign and European Affairs
> Tel : +33 (0)6 11 88 33 32
>
> "Le plus beau métier des hommes, c'est d'unir les hommes" Antoine de  
> Saint Exupéry
> ("there is no greater mission for humans than uniting humans")
>
> -----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
>
>
>
>



____________________________________________________________
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


From george.sadowsky at attglobal.net  Thu Oct 15 21:12:13 2009
From: george.sadowsky at attglobal.net (George Sadowsky)
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2009 21:12:13 -0400
Subject: [governance] Review Panels
In-Reply-To: <20091015203950.7cvn8ev328w800ss@www.isocperu.org>
References: <945154.26944.qm@web110102.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
 <20091015203950.7cvn8ev328w800ss@www.isocperu.org>
Message-ID: <p06200736c6fd74cb059f@[10.0.1.4]>

Dear José,

Your timing is good.  I believe that there will 
be an ICANN meeting in Peru in about a year's 
time.  Find out who has volunteered to be the 
local host and work with them.

You don't need to wait until next year.  Start 
with the ICANN web site, and connect with those 
people in Latin America who are active in ICANN 
and in the regional registries, such as Olga 
Cavalli, Raul Echeberria, Vanda Scartezini and 
Alejandro Pisanty.  Think about which issues you 
would like to be involved in and learn about what 
is happening.  Talk with Anne Lord on the ISOC 
staff who is present at ICANN events.  Observe 
what is being posted on the ISOC Chapter List and 
participate in it.


Come to the ICANN meetings in Seoul, Nairobi and 
Brussels if you can; I know that it is expensive, 
but that's one reason why ICANN moves its 
meetings around the world  --  so that when ICANN 
comes to Peru, there can be intensive 
representation of people from Peru and also from 
the surrounding countries.

Does Peru have a representative on the GAC?  If 
not, why not?  It's open for them.

I'm glad that you want to get involved.  I'll 
look forward to meeting you,either in Peru, or 
before.

Regards,

George Sadowsky

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


At 8:39 PM -0400 10/15/09, jfcallo at isocperu.org wrote:
>Distinguished members of this list:
>I write from Lima, Peru, we are interested in 
>participating in ICANN, contribute from our 
>experience, how do to connect with ICANN?, Send 
>an e-mail for 10 days and no one responds.
>Thanks
>Jose F. Callo Romero
>     Secretario
>     ISOC Peru
>
>
>Quoting Danny Younger <dannyyounger at yahoo.com>:
>
>>Bertrand,
>>
>>There is more to this equation than diversity, balance, and
>>representativeness; these review panels will require individuals
>>with extensive knowledge regarding the particulars of the areas
>>under review (which is why independent experts are cited as part of
>>the necessary review team mix).
>>
>>The teams will include:
>>
>>the Chair of the GAC
>>the CEO of ICANN
>>representatives of the Root Server System Advisory Committee
>>representatives of the Security and Stability Advisory Committee
>>representatives of the At-Large Advisory Committee
>>representatives of the Generic Names Supporting Organization
>>representatives of the Address Supporting Organization
>>representatives of the Country Code Names Supporting Organization
>>independent experts (likely drawn from either the Technical Liason
>>Group, the IETF, the IAB, or from the pool of volunteer community
>>members)
>>
>>and in the accountability/transparency review team, these members
>>will be joined by the Assistant Secretary for Communications and
>>Information of the DOC,
>>
>>The current arrangement calls for the 
>>composition of the review team to be agreed 
>>jointly by the Chair of the GAC (in 
>>consultation with GAC members) and the CEO of 
>>ICANN.
>>
>>Like all comparable ICANN processes, there will 
>>likely be a call for volunteers (similar to the 
>>recent call for NSCG placeholder councilors). 
>>The ICANN Board will then privately settle upon 
>>whomever best promotes the ICANN interest 
>>(likely those that have never been critics) and 
>>will then advance those names to the Chair of 
>>the GAC.
>>
>>I fully expect these reviews to be as much of a 
>>whitewash as all earlier ICANN self-review 
>>efforts.  Perhaps you will recall the earlier 
>>commissioned review of transparency and 
>>accountability provided in the One World Trust 
>>report -- we were told that ICANN is a model of 
>>transparency with robust accountability 
>>mechanisms... and yet we all know the reality.
>>
>>Don't waste your energy on this project.  The 
>>deck will be stacked from day one.
>>
>>best regards,
>>Danny Younger
>>
>>
>>--- On Thu, 10/15/09, Bertrand de La Chapelle
>><bdelachapelle at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>From: Bertrand de La Chapelle <bdelachapelle at gmail.com>
>>Subject: [governance] Review Panels
>>To: governance at lists.cpsr.org, "Anriette Esterhuysen" <anriette at apc.org>
>>Date: Thursday, October 15, 2009, 4:33 AM
>>
>>
>>Dear all,
>>
>>Could this list also address Anriette's concrete second question ?
>>What do you think the review process should be ? Fundamentally, the
>>community is facing a now recurring problem (cf. WGIG, MAG,...) :
>>how to compose a multi-stakeholder group for a given task, so that
>>it is sufficiently diverse, balanced and representative of the
>>variety of viewpoints ?
>>
>>In addition, what do you tink the timing is ?
>>
>>Best
>>
>>Bertrand
>>
>>
>>
>>On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 1:39 PM, Anriette Esterhuysen
>><anriette at apc.org> wrote:
>>
>>snip
>>
>>Second question is about the submissions on the review panels. What is
>>the process likely to be?
>>
>>Anriette
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>--
>>____________________
>>Bertrand de La Chapelle
>>Délégué Spécial pour la Société de 
>>l'Information / Special Envoy for the 
>>Information Society
>>Ministère des Affaires Etrangères et 
>>Européennes/ French Ministry of Foreign and 
>>European Affairs
>>Tel : +33 (0)6 11 88 33 32
>>
>>"Le plus beau métier des hommes, c'est d'unir 
>>les hommes" Antoine de Saint Exupéry
>>("there is no greater mission for humans than uniting humans")
>>
>>-----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


From ian.peter at ianpeter.com  Thu Oct 15 21:30:02 2009
From: ian.peter at ianpeter.com (Ian Peter)
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2009 12:30:02 +1100
Subject: [governance] IGF as an umbrella facilitator for Internet Governance?
In-Reply-To: <701af9f70910151313n25de7a0coe2dbb5689e990c7e@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <C6FE17CA.7024%ian.peter@ianpeter.com>

I'm interested to know what others think of the concept raised by Fouad
Bajwa of IGF developing as an "umbrella facilitator". Is this something
civil society broadly supports and is it something we should raise as part
of the IGF review?

More on Fouad's thoughts below.


On 16/10/09 7:13 AM, "Fouad Bajwa" <fouadbajwa at gmail.com> wrote:

> Dear Bertrand,
> 
> Anriette's question is very valid and when it will come down to review
> panels, I would not deem them to be the best approach. The review
> panels will have to be first lead with a multistakeholder but more
> "involved group". We have the governments, the ICANN and the various
> technical internet community and technology-non-technology Civil
> Society. The review panels should be adopted with a more dynamic
> approach and above all, a concrete team should be available above the
> review panels to quickly note, review and disseminate.
> 
> One thing about IGF's approach that has confused me within the MAG as
> well is its lack of interest to touch the policy side of things
> whereas consensus and collaborative resolutions to issues, finding
> solutions to problems and recommending through resolutions is a UN
> mechanism then why cannot that be included as an exploration within
> the IGF process.
> 
> The second thing I am more interested in is the institutionalization
> of the IGF and acting as an umbrella facilitator than just a dialogue
> facilitator (this is one area IGF has been very successful in) but
> this model will only evolve if the IGF acts as an umbrella forum to
> which every participating member country conducts a regional IGF and
> contributes back to the main IGF. This is pretty nascent but I would
> like the Review Panel to take institutionalization of the IGF into
> account since if the IGF is continued, it should evolve into a much
> more concrete role and other organizations like the ITU, UNGAID, CSTD,
> UNESCO etc. should be involved in such a way that they can realize
> that IGF is the right way to move instead of everyone trying to push
> their ticket into the process and also realize that everyone is a
> stakeholder of the Internet and IGF is a very powerful example that
> everyone can move into the dialogue process and real actions can be
> resolved to benefit the global internet citizenry at large.
> 
> One thing that intimidates alot is the over emphasis on ICANN and the
> tug-of-war that exists within the minds of the stakeholders. Yes ICANN
> is one part of the problem but we have to realize that ICANN is not
> the convergence and convergence will reform its power structures and
> one thing is there for the IGF to be present when it happens, that is,
> when the name space opens up and as convergence continues to take
> place, other forms of name space attributes are continuing to be
> evolved through research and one day we will have a very different
> name space structure and that future is not so far.
> 
> The role of the Review Panels has to be very dynamic bringing its
> members in an equal level and a very fast and efficient process
> because Internet Governance will continue to evolve therefore why
> should the review process be slower on a fast moving bullet technology
> train?
> 
> 
> 
> On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 1:33 PM, Bertrand de La Chapelle
> <bdelachapelle at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Dear all,
>> 
>> Could this list also address Anriette's concrete second question ? What do
>> you think the review process should be ? Fundamentally, the community is
>> facing a now recurring problem (cf. WGIG, MAG,...) : how to compose a
>> multi-stakeholder group for a given task, so that it is sufficiently
>> diverse, balanced and representative of the variety of viewpoints ?
>> 
>> In addition, what do you tink the timing is ?
>> 
>> Best
>> 
>> Bertrand
>> 
>> 
>> On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 1:39 PM, Anriette Esterhuysen <anriette at apc.org>
>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> snip
>>> 
>>> Second question is about the submissions on the review panels. What is
>>> the process likely to be?
>>> 
>>> Anriette
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>> 
>> --
>> ____________________
>> Bertrand de La Chapelle
>> Délégué Spécial pour la Société de l'Information / Special Envoy for the
>> Information Society
>> Ministère des Affaires Etrangères et Européennes/ French Ministry of Foreign
>> and European Affairs
>> Tel : +33 (0)6 11 88 33 32
>> 
>> "Le plus beau métier des hommes, c'est d'unir les hommes" Antoine de Saint
>> Exupéry
>> ("there is no greater mission for humans than uniting humans")
>> 
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> 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


From ocl at gih.com  Fri Oct 16 03:12:51 2009
From: ocl at gih.com (Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond)
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2009 09:12:51 +0200
Subject: [governance] Review Panels
References: <945154.26944.qm@web110102.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> <20091015203950.7cvn8ev328w800ss@www.isocperu.org>
Message-ID: <673227F2C6A04602ABA7A76CC5DBB297@GIH.CO.UK>

Hello Jose,

you might wish get ISOC Peru to join the At Large constituency in ICANN as 
an At LArge structure (ALS).
http://www.atlarge.isoc.org/

For more information in Spanish, go to:
http://www.atlarge.icann.org/es/announcements/announcement-23may05-spanish.html

and:
http://www.atlarge.icann.org/es/correspondence/structures-app_ES.htm

If you have any problem, don't hesitate to email me in private and I'll 
point you to specific people.

Warm regards,

Olivier

-- 
Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond, PhD
http://www.gih.com/ocl.html

----- Original Message ----- 
From: <jfcallo at isocperu.org>
To: <governance at lists.cpsr.org>; "Danny Younger" <dannyyounger at yahoo.com>
Cc: <governance at lists.cpsr.org>; "Bertrand de La Chapelle" 
<bdelachapelle at gmail.com>; "Anriette Esterhuysen" <anriette at apc.org>
Sent: Friday, October 16, 2009 2:39 AM
Subject: Re: [governance] Review Panels


> Distinguished members of this list:
> I write from Lima, Peru, we are interested in participating in ICANN, 
> contribute from our experience, how do to connect with ICANN?, Send an 
> e-mail for 10 days and no one responds.
> Thanks
> Jose F. Callo Romero
>     Secretario
>     ISOC Peru

____________________________________________________________
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


From roland at internetpolicyagency.com  Fri Oct 16 06:00:10 2009
From: roland at internetpolicyagency.com (Roland Perry)
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2009 11:00:10 +0100
Subject: [governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation of Commitments
In-Reply-To: <76f819dd0910151202y2a0ac3bbna59f0435a6a21558@mail.gmail.com>
References: <75822E125BCB994F8446858C4B19F0D78FFC6E09@SUEX07-MBX-04.ad.syr.edu>
 <76f819dd0910030740v206a4661xcd43ea4ae54d2483@mail.gmail.com>
 <LjfihqAS+5xKFA5l@perry.co.uk>
 <76f819dd0910050734o5fbc2812k789c8232b30eac3b@mail.gmail.com>
 <D6ew3OJaviyKFAxR@perry.co.uk>
 <76f819dd0910060919u3b97805br140a134539a7578c@mail.gmail.com>
 <BezwuVcq7DzKFAqN@perry.co.uk>
 <76f819dd0910081044jb3eced8lb2fcc02520430e6b@mail.gmail.com>
 <iYOY$2OAwh0KFAXq@perry.co.uk> <0Mmd6Ueluh1KFAdQ@perry.co.uk>
 <76f819dd0910151202y2a0ac3bbna59f0435a6a21558@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <0Umd8spqQE2KFAU3@perry.co.uk>

In message 
<76f819dd0910151202y2a0ac3bbna59f0435a6a21558 at mail.gmail.com>, at 
12:02:43 on Thu, 15 Oct 2009, Paul Lehto <lehto.paul at gmail.com> writes
>Roland, you dropped out of the debate about democracy and ICANN,

I had said everything I wanted to.

>Is this your hypothetical question about Cameroon and such?

Yes. And while it's hypothetical today, I'm 99% sure that such a 
decision will need to be made in the foreseeable future. Two groups of 
people are on a collision course!

[I have no special interest in either the Cameroons, or Wales, but it's 
an elegant example to highlight the difficulties than can arise in a 
congested name-space]

>  If so, please understand that even if you proved your apparent "case" 
>that there are difficulties of implementation in your (straw man) 
>version of democracy, it does not follow whatsoever that any old thing, 
>most especially an un-democratic any old thing, can take the  place of 
>some version of democracy.

Which is why I asked what precise form of democracy *you* recommend to 
resolve the 'collision' I described.

>It would be more enlightening for you to answer the question:
>
>Do you believe any subset of the people, whether "experts" or owners,
>have the right to define and/or control or regulate the common life of
>people on the Internet?

I'm trying to discover what subset of the people *you* would recommend 
made decisions to resolve 'collisions' like the one I described.

Or if it's "all of the people", how would you organise a ballot on this 
'collision', that would avoid the drawbacks I mentioned in my original 
question.

-- 
Roland Perry
____________________________________________________________
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


From lehto.paul at gmail.com  Fri Oct 16 09:20:04 2009
From: lehto.paul at gmail.com (Paul Lehto)
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2009 09:20:04 -0400
Subject: [governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation of Commitments
In-Reply-To: <0Umd8spqQE2KFAU3@perry.co.uk>
References: <75822E125BCB994F8446858C4B19F0D78FFC6E09@SUEX07-MBX-04.ad.syr.edu>
	 <76f819dd0910050734o5fbc2812k789c8232b30eac3b@mail.gmail.com>
	 <D6ew3OJaviyKFAxR@perry.co.uk>
	 <76f819dd0910060919u3b97805br140a134539a7578c@mail.gmail.com>
	 <BezwuVcq7DzKFAqN@perry.co.uk>
	 <76f819dd0910081044jb3eced8lb2fcc02520430e6b@mail.gmail.com>
	 <iYOY$2OAwh0KFAXq@perry.co.uk> <0Mmd6Ueluh1KFAdQ@perry.co.uk>
	 <76f819dd0910151202y2a0ac3bbna59f0435a6a21558@mail.gmail.com>
	 <0Umd8spqQE2KFAU3@perry.co.uk>
Message-ID: <76f819dd0910160620g187dc5a0jb515a4838f25b4e9@mail.gmail.com>

Roland, I'm asking you to admit that ICANN is not constituted as an
organization practicing any form of democracy?  Do you agree or
disagree?  If you decline to answer that question on any grounds, you
lack enough interest in the subject of democracy or the lack thereof
to make me specifying what particular style of democratic
decision-making I would personally prefer, and as I stated before,
that issue just distracts from the more pressing issue of the lack of
any democracy at ICANN at all.

So, do you agree that ICANN is not constituted as an organization
practicing any form of democracy?

And to Avri, you may have guesses, or should have by now, that I have
a "bias" in favor of democracy - one required I'd say by the Univ.
Decl. of Human Rights. Any listserv that discusses governance is a
listserv that discusses ICANN governance, since ICANN has a global
reach.  WE ARE ALREADY EMPOWERED you could say, without any listserv
to discuss governance of our common life as global citizens.  This
listserv on governance makes ICANN governance especially topical.

Paul Lehto, Juris Doctor On 10/16/09, Roland Perry
<roland at internetpolicyagency.com> wrote:
> In message
> <76f819dd0910151202y2a0ac3bbna59f0435a6a21558 at mail.gmail.com>, at
> 12:02:43 on Thu, 15 Oct 2009, Paul Lehto <lehto.paul at gmail.com> writes
>>Roland, you dropped out of the debate about democracy and ICANN,
>
> I had said everything I wanted to.
>
>>Is this your hypothetical question about Cameroon and such?
>
> Yes. And while it's hypothetical today, I'm 99% sure that such a
> decision will need to be made in the foreseeable future. Two groups of
> people are on a collision course!
>
> [I have no special interest in either the Cameroons, or Wales, but it's
> an elegant example to highlight the difficulties than can arise in a
> congested name-space]
>
>>  If so, please understand that even if you proved your apparent "case"
>>that there are difficulties of implementation in your (straw man)
>>version of democracy, it does not follow whatsoever that any old thing,
>>most especially an un-democratic any old thing, can take the  place of
>>some version of democracy.
>
> Which is why I asked what precise form of democracy *you* recommend to
> resolve the 'collision' I described.
>
>>It would be more enlightening for you to answer the question:
>>
>>Do you believe any subset of the people, whether "experts" or owners,
>>have the right to define and/or control or regulate the common life of
>>people on the Internet?
>
> I'm trying to discover what subset of the people *you* would recommend
> made decisions to resolve 'collisions' like the one I described.
>
> Or if it's "all of the people", how would you organise a ballot on this
> 'collision', that would avoid the drawbacks I mentioned in my original
> question.
>
> --
> Roland Perry
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
>


-- 
Paul R Lehto, J.D.
P.O. Box #1
Ishpeming, MI  49849
lehto.paul at gmail.com
906-204-4026
____________________________________________________________
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


From yehudakatz at mailinator.com  Fri Oct 16 10:53:52 2009
From: yehudakatz at mailinator.com (Yehuda Katz)
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2009 07:53:52 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [governance] IGF as an umbrella facilitator for Internet
In-Reply-To: C6FE17CA.7024%ian.peter@ianpeter.com
Message-ID: <sympa.1255703751.70027.356@lists.cpsr.org>

There are to-many angles involved now, for the IGF to be singularly effective.

For instance, take this morning's Wall Street Journal artical:

CWA Calls On FCC To Include Web COs In Internet Rule 

By Fawn Johnson 
Of DOW JONES NEWSWIRES
Art. Ref.: http://online.wsj.com/article/BT-CO-20091015-716646.html 

The Communications Workers of America is calling on the Federal Communications
Commission to include Web companies like Google Inc. (GOOG) in new Internet
rules, signaling increasing pressure on regulators to tread carefully in
imposing the regulations .... 

Unions are now taking action, so its just a matter of time untill Other Labor
Unions that depend on the Internet, take some actions in regards to the
[Governance].

-

Peter my take is; Eventually the Finacile Markets, Unionized Labor, National
Politics, and Religoius factors will shape (governance) the Net. 

That is to say, the Real-World Controllers will work their way into the fabric
of Internet Governace because of the Internets' "power-of-advocacy", due to the
Net's effective & prolific communication capabilities.

The IGF had better get it together quickly, the competiors are close.
____________________________________________________________
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


From vanda at uol.com.br  Fri Oct 16 11:19:42 2009
From: vanda at uol.com.br (Vanda UOL)
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2009 12:19:42 -0300
Subject: RES: [governance] Review Panels
In-Reply-To: <20091015203950.7cvn8ev328w800ss@www.isocperu.org>
References: <945154.26944.qm@web110102.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> <20091015203950.7cvn8ev328w800ss@www.isocperu.org>
Message-ID: <00b701ca4e74$1d656e80$58304b80$@com.br>

Estimado Jose

Yo soy miembro del Comité de usuarios de internet que tienen asiento en ALAC
(vea en el site www.icann.org/alac) asta este meeting en Seoul soy Vice
Chair de ALC  como persona de Latino América y Caribe y donde todos los
interesados poden participar. Nos gustaría muchísimo que como ISOC Peru
usted aplicase para ser una ALS  de LACRALO, la organización regional de
Latino América y Caribe  ( visite  
	
http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-discuss-en_atlarge-lists
.icann.org ) y se quieres mi dirección en SKYPE es vanda(punto) scartezini,
y  podemos hablar o pro chat, como quieras.
Abrazos y por favor cualquiera duda que tengas , email: vanda at uol.com.br 
 Perdóname el "portuñol"
 Abrazos 

 Vanda Scartezini
 NEXTI
Alameda Santos 1470 cjs 1407/8
Tel: + 55 11 3266.6253
Mob: + 55 11 8181 1464



-----Mensagem original-----
De: jfcallo at isocperu.org [mailto:jfcallo at isocperu.org] 
Enviada em: quinta-feira, 15 de outubro de 2009 21:40
Para: governance at lists.cpsr.org; Danny Younger
Cc: governance at lists.cpsr.org; Bertrand de La Chapelle; Anriette Esterhuysen
Assunto: Re: [governance] Review Panels

Distinguished members of this list:
I write from Lima, Peru, we are interested in participating in ICANN,  
contribute from our experience, how do to connect with ICANN?, Send an  
e-mail for 10 days and no one responds.
Thanks
Jose F. Callo Romero
     Secretario
     ISOC Peru


Quoting Danny Younger <dannyyounger at yahoo.com>:

> Bertrand,
>  
> There is more to this equation than diversity, balance, and   
> representativeness; these review panels will require individuals   
> with extensive knowledge regarding the particulars of the areas   
> under review (which is why independent experts are cited as part of   
> the necessary review team mix).
>
> The teams will include:
>  
> the Chair of the GAC
> the CEO of ICANN
> representatives of the Root Server System Advisory Committee
> representatives of the Security and Stability Advisory Committee
> representatives of the At-Large Advisory Committee
> representatives of the Generic Names Supporting Organization
> representatives of the Address Supporting Organization
> representatives of the Country Code Names Supporting Organization
> independent experts (likely drawn from either the Technical Liason   
> Group, the IETF, the IAB, or from the pool of volunteer community   
> members)
>  
> and in the accountability/transparency review team, these members   
> will be joined by the Assistant Secretary for Communications and   
> Information of the DOC,
>  
> The current arrangement calls for the composition of the review  
> team to be agreed jointly by the Chair of the GAC (in consultation  
> with GAC members) and the CEO of ICANN.
>  
> Like all comparable ICANN processes, there will likely be a call for  
> volunteers (similar to the recent call for NSCG placeholder  
> councilors).  The ICANN Board will then privately settle upon  
> whomever best promotes the ICANN interest (likely those that have  
> never been critics) and will then advance those names to the Chair  
> of the GAC.
>  
> I fully expect these reviews to be as much of a whitewash as all  
> earlier ICANN self-review efforts.  Perhaps you will recall the  
> earlier commissioned review of transparency and accountability  
> provided in the One World Trust report -- we were told that ICANN is  
> a model of transparency with robust accountability mechanisms... and  
> yet we all know the reality.
>  
> Don't waste your energy on this project.  The deck will be stacked  
> from day one.
>  
> best regards,
> Danny Younger
>  
>
> --- On Thu, 10/15/09, Bertrand de La Chapelle   
> <bdelachapelle at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> From: Bertrand de La Chapelle <bdelachapelle at gmail.com>
> Subject: [governance] Review Panels
> To: governance at lists.cpsr.org, "Anriette Esterhuysen" <anriette at apc.org>
> Date: Thursday, October 15, 2009, 4:33 AM
>
>
> Dear all,
>
> Could this list also address Anriette's concrete second question ?   
> What do you think the review process should be ? Fundamentally, the   
> community is facing a now recurring problem (cf. WGIG, MAG,...) :   
> how to compose a multi-stakeholder group for a given task, so that   
> it is sufficiently diverse, balanced and representative of the   
> variety of viewpoints ?
>
> In addition, what do you tink the timing is ?
>
> Best
>
> Bertrand
>
>
>
> On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 1:39 PM, Anriette Esterhuysen   
> <anriette at apc.org> wrote:
>
> snip
>
> Second question is about the submissions on the review panels. What is
> the process likely to be?
>
> Anriette
>
>
>
>
> --
> ____________________
> Bertrand de La Chapelle
> Délégué Spécial pour la Société de l'Information / Special Envoy for  
> the Information Society
> Ministère des Affaires Etrangères et Européennes/ French Ministry of  
> Foreign and European Affairs
> Tel : +33 (0)6 11 88 33 32
>
> "Le plus beau métier des hommes, c'est d'unir les hommes" Antoine de  
> Saint Exupéry
> ("there is no greater mission for humans than uniting humans")
>
> -----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
>
>
>
>



____________________________________________________________
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


From bdelachapelle at gmail.com  Fri Oct 16 11:43:15 2009
From: bdelachapelle at gmail.com (Bertrand de La Chapelle)
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2009 17:43:15 +0200
Subject: [governance] Cameroon and Wales collision in TLD space ?????
Message-ID: <954259bd0910160843q1740718ay670d369134549ba7@mail.gmail.com>

Hi all,

I have seen in previous posts this reference to the possible collision
between .cym and the three letter ISO code for Cameroon. Did not chime in
then as the thread had continued on another topic, but I am a bit puzzled
here.

If there is a problem, it's with the Cayman island (3-letter iso code CYM),
not Cameroon. As the Cayman islands are a UK territory, the relevant
national authority is the same as the Wales proposal, isn't it ? Anyway,
don't they already have a 2-letter ccTLD (kY is the 2-letter ISO 3166 code)
?

The issue may be real (there may be cases of possible collision) but
apparently the example does not work. Unless I'm mistaken which is possible
given that it was a rapid check. I may have just exposed my insufficient
knowledge ;-)

I suppose the possible collisions will only appear in due course as other
proposals will be put forward.

Best

Bertrand



On Fri, Oct 16, 2009 at 12:00 PM, Roland Perry <
roland at internetpolicyagency.com> wrote:

> In message <76f819dd0910151202y2a0ac3bbna59f0435a6a21558 at mail.gmail.com>,
> at 12:02:43 on Thu, 15 Oct 2009, Paul Lehto <lehto.paul at gmail.com> writes
>
>> Roland, you dropped out of the debate about democracy and ICANN,
>>
>
> I had said everything I wanted to.
>
>  Is this your hypothetical question about Cameroon and such?
>>
>
> Yes. And while it's hypothetical today, I'm 99% sure that such a decision
> will need to be made in the foreseeable future. Two groups of people are on
> a collision course!
>
> [I have no special interest in either the Cameroons, or Wales, but it's an
> elegant example to highlight the difficulties than can arise in a congested
> name-space]
>
>   If so, please understand that even if you proved your apparent "case"
>> that there are difficulties of implementation in your (straw man) version of
>> democracy, it does not follow whatsoever that any old thing, most especially
>> an un-democratic any old thing, can take the  place of some version of
>> democracy.
>>
>
> Which is why I asked what precise form of democracy *you* recommend to
> resolve the 'collision' I described.
>
>  It would be more enlightening for you to answer the question:
>>
>> Do you believe any subset of the people, whether "experts" or owners,
>> have the right to define and/or control or regulate the common life of
>> people on the Internet?
>>
>
> I'm trying to discover what subset of the people *you* would recommend made
> decisions to resolve 'collisions' like the one I described.
>
> Or if it's "all of the people", how would you organise a ballot on this
> 'collision', that would avoid the drawbacks I mentioned in my original
> question.
>
> --
> Roland Perry
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
>



-- 
____________________
Bertrand de La Chapelle
Délégué Spécial pour la Société de l'Information / Special Envoy for the
Information Society
Ministère des Affaires Etrangères et Européennes/ French Ministry of Foreign
and European Affairs
Tel : +33 (0)6 11 88 33 32

"Le plus beau métier des hommes, c'est d'unir les hommes" Antoine de Saint
Exupéry
("there is no greater mission for humans than uniting humans")
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20091016/a89082ee/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

From lehto.paul at gmail.com  Fri Oct 16 11:53:31 2009
From: lehto.paul at gmail.com (Paul Lehto)
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2009 11:53:31 -0400
Subject: [governance] Cameroon and Wales collision in TLD space ?????
In-Reply-To: <954259bd0910160843q1740718ay670d369134549ba7@mail.gmail.com>
References: <954259bd0910160843q1740718ay670d369134549ba7@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <76f819dd0910160853t7d929187g37e2791feb2d85e4@mail.gmail.com>

If there's not a democratic system of governance at ICANN, any such
"collision" of domain names or any other issue for that matter is
purely a matter for insider "experts" at ICANN and not the proper
"domain" of anyone on this list. If they wish to have anyone's
opinion, they will surely let us know.   ICANN has declared itself
"Independent" so to the extent anyone's opinion is even considered, it
is purely a matter (according to ICANN) of ICANN's grace in allowing
us to do so.  They just wouldn't of course call it "grace" but that's
what it would be.  They'd say they wished to invite a "diverse" and
"suitable cadre" to advise them.  Even Henry VIII would have said the
same.

Paul Lehto, Juris Doctor

On 10/16/09, Bertrand de La Chapelle <bdelachapelle at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I have seen in previous posts this reference to the possible collision
> between .cym and the three letter ISO code for Cameroon. Did not chime in
> then as the thread had continued on another topic, but I am a bit puzzled
> here.
>
> If there is a problem, it's with the Cayman island (3-letter iso code CYM),
> not Cameroon. As the Cayman islands are a UK territory, the relevant
> national authority is the same as the Wales proposal, isn't it ? Anyway,
> don't they already have a 2-letter ccTLD (kY is the 2-letter ISO 3166 code)
> ?
>
> The issue may be real (there may be cases of possible collision) but
> apparently the example does not work. Unless I'm mistaken which is possible
> given that it was a rapid check. I may have just exposed my insufficient
> knowledge ;-)
>
> I suppose the possible collisions will only appear in due course as other
> proposals will be put forward.
>
> Best
>
> Bertrand
>
>
>
> On Fri, Oct 16, 2009 at 12:00 PM, Roland Perry <
> roland at internetpolicyagency.com> wrote:
>
>> In message <76f819dd0910151202y2a0ac3bbna59f0435a6a21558 at mail.gmail.com>,
>> at 12:02:43 on Thu, 15 Oct 2009, Paul Lehto <lehto.paul at gmail.com> writes
>>
>>> Roland, you dropped out of the debate about democracy and ICANN,
>>>
>>
>> I had said everything I wanted to.
>>
>>  Is this your hypothetical question about Cameroon and such?
>>>
>>
>> Yes. And while it's hypothetical today, I'm 99% sure that such a decision
>> will need to be made in the foreseeable future. Two groups of people are
>> on
>> a collision course!
>>
>> [I have no special interest in either the Cameroons, or Wales, but it's an
>> elegant example to highlight the difficulties than can arise in a
>> congested
>> name-space]
>>
>>   If so, please understand that even if you proved your apparent "case"
>>> that there are difficulties of implementation in your (straw man) version
>>> of
>>> democracy, it does not follow whatsoever that any old thing, most
>>> especially
>>> an un-democratic any old thing, can take the  place of some version of
>>> democracy.
>>>
>>
>> Which is why I asked what precise form of democracy *you* recommend to
>> resolve the 'collision' I described.
>>
>>  It would be more enlightening for you to answer the question:
>>>
>>> Do you believe any subset of the people, whether "experts" or owners,
>>> have the right to define and/or control or regulate the common life of
>>> people on the Internet?
>>>
>>
>> I'm trying to discover what subset of the people *you* would recommend
>> made
>> decisions to resolve 'collisions' like the one I described.
>>
>> Or if it's "all of the people", how would you organise a ballot on this
>> 'collision', that would avoid the drawbacks I mentioned in my original
>> question.
>>
>> --
>> Roland Perry
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> 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
>>
>
>
>
> --
> ____________________
> Bertrand de La Chapelle
> Délégué Spécial pour la Société de l'Information / Special Envoy for the
> Information Society
> Ministère des Affaires Etrangères et Européennes/ French Ministry of Foreign
> and European Affairs
> Tel : +33 (0)6 11 88 33 32
>
> "Le plus beau métier des hommes, c'est d'unir les hommes" Antoine de Saint
> Exupéry
> ("there is no greater mission for humans than uniting humans")
>


-- 
Paul R Lehto, J.D.
P.O. Box #1
Ishpeming, MI  49849
lehto.paul at gmail.com
906-204-4026
____________________________________________________________
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


From gurstein at gmail.com  Fri Oct 16 12:48:39 2009
From: gurstein at gmail.com (Michael Gurstein)
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2009 09:48:39 -0700
Subject: [governance] Cameroon and Wales collision in TLD space ?????
In-Reply-To: <76f819dd0910160853t7d929187g37e2791feb2d85e4@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <F1C157329BAC4311B3F2FBB318F2E7D4@userPC>

Since my casually tossed terms re: "diverse" and "suitable cadres" seems to
have entered into some sort of lexicological bestiary I think it may be
worth while teasing it out a bit...

To recall... I used that terminology in the context of the IGF evaluation
indicating things I saw as positive outcomes of the IGF.  One of the
positives I saw was that the IGF was creating (or partially creating and
partially eliciting) a cadre of people knowledgeable in the area of Internet
Governance.  As with most semi-technical or technical areas 	Internet
Governance is an area with a somewhat significant learning curve required to
become an actual "player" in the field i.e. one who can contribute
substantively to discussions and potentially to outcomes.

Having individuals who have been self-selected or designated (in some formal
process by a range of institutions including governments, civil society
etc.) as being IG people and then going through the process of
self-education in that area sufficient to contribute, is I think overall
useful especially since special interest groups (mostly the private sector)
spend considerable resources hiring and retaining such expertise.  Having
folks like Bill Graham formerly of the Canadian Government and now of ISOC
or the graduates from the Diplo IG course, I think all have made and are
making significant positive contributions to broad civil society objectives
in the IG context. 

My concern with this is that the range of those who are able to self-select
or be involved in programs such as Diplo's is rather too narrow (i.e. not
sufficiently "diverse") although the current initiative towards national and
regional IGF's will go a considerable distance to correcting this I would
hope.

Would that such developments were available in other reas of interest. If
suitable and diverse cadres of expertise were being developed in areas such
as for example, community informatics the current failure of most Universal
Access programs around the world to be anything other than agents for
providing subsidies to incumbent carriers would have been long since
overcome.

Best,

Mike   

-----Original Message-----rgrams 
From: Paul Lehto [mailto:lehto.paul at gmail.com] 
Sent: Friday, October 16, 2009 8:54 AM
To: governance at lists.cpsr.org; Bertrand de La Chapelle
Cc: Roland Perry
Subject: Re: [governance] Cameroon and Wales collision in TLD space ?????


If there's not a democratic system of governance at ICANN, any such
"collision" of domain names or any other issue for that matter is purely a
matter for insider "experts" at ICANN and not the proper "domain" of anyone
on this list. If they wish to have anyone's
opinion, they will surely let us know.   ICANN has declared itself
"Independent" so to the extent anyone's opinion is even considered, it is
purely a matter (according to ICANN) of ICANN's grace in allowing us to do
so.  They just wouldn't of course call it "grace" but that's what it would
be.  They'd say they wished to invite a "diverse" and "suitable cadre" to
advise them.  Even Henry VIII would have said the same.

Paul Lehto, Juris Doctor

On 10/16/09, Bertrand de La Chapelle <bdelachapelle at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I have seen in previous posts this reference to the possible collision 
> between .cym and the three letter ISO code for Cameroon. Did not chime 
> in then as the thread had continued on another topic, but I am a bit 
> puzzled here.
>
> If there is a problem, it's with the Cayman island (3-letter iso code 
> CYM), not Cameroon. As the Cayman islands are a UK territory, the 
> relevant national authority is the same as the Wales proposal, isn't 
> it ? Anyway, don't they already have a 2-letter ccTLD (kY is the 
> 2-letter ISO 3166 code) ?
>
> The issue may be real (there may be cases of possible collision) but 
> apparently the example does not work. Unless I'm mistaken which is 
> possible given that it was a rapid check. I may have just exposed my 
> insufficient knowledge ;-)
>
> I suppose the possible collisions will only appear in due course as 
> other proposals will be put forward.
>
> Best
>
> Bertrand
>
>
>
> On Fri, Oct 16, 2009 at 12:00 PM, Roland Perry < 
> roland at internetpolicyagency.com> wrote:
>
>> In message 
>> <76f819dd0910151202y2a0ac3bbna59f0435a6a21558 at mail.gmail.com>,
>> at 12:02:43 on Thu, 15 Oct 2009, Paul Lehto <lehto.paul at gmail.com> writes
>>
>>> Roland, you dropped out of the debate about democracy and ICANN,
>>>
>>
>> I had said everything I wanted to.
>>
>>  Is this your hypothetical question about Cameroon and such?
>>>
>>
>> Yes. And while it's hypothetical today, I'm 99% sure that such a 
>> decision will need to be made in the foreseeable future. Two groups 
>> of people are on a collision course!
>>
>> [I have no special interest in either the Cameroons, or Wales, but 
>> it's an elegant example to highlight the difficulties than can arise 
>> in a congested name-space]
>>
>>   If so, please understand that even if you proved your apparent 
>> "case"
>>> that there are difficulties of implementation in your (straw man) 
>>> version of democracy, it does not follow whatsoever that any old 
>>> thing, most especially
>>> an un-democratic any old thing, can take the  place of some version of
>>> democracy.
>>>
>>
>> Which is why I asked what precise form of democracy *you* recommend 
>> to resolve the 'collision' I described.
>>
>>  It would be more enlightening for you to answer the question:
>>>
>>> Do you believe any subset of the people, whether "experts" or 
>>> owners, have the right to define and/or control or regulate the 
>>> common life of people on the Internet?
>>>
>>
>> I'm trying to discover what subset of the people *you* would 
>> recommend made decisions to resolve 'collisions' like the one I 
>> described.
>>
>> Or if it's "all of the people", how would you organise a ballot on 
>> this 'collision', that would avoid the drawbacks I mentioned in my 
>> original question.
>>
>> --
>> Roland Perry 
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> 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
>>
>
>
>
> --
> ____________________
> Bertrand de La Chapelle
> Délégué Spécial pour la Société de l'Information / Special Envoy for 
> the Information Society Ministère des Affaires Etrangères et 
> Européennes/ French Ministry of Foreign and European Affairs
> Tel : +33 (0)6 11 88 33 32
>
> "Le plus beau métier des hommes, c'est d'unir les hommes" Antoine de 
> Saint Exupéry ("there is no greater mission for humans than uniting 
> humans")
>


-- 
Paul R Lehto, J.D.
P.O. Box #1
Ishpeming, MI  49849
lehto.paul at gmail.com
906-204-4026 ____________________________________________________________
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


From gurstein at gmail.com  Fri Oct 16 12:55:01 2009
From: gurstein at gmail.com (Michael Gurstein)
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2009 09:55:01 -0700
Subject: [governance] Cameroon and Wales collision in TLD space ?????
Message-ID: <7FC27FFB96DD4D43AEF1D8C2DCF438D2@userPC>

(In my final paragraph below the term Universal Access should probably have
been Universal Service)...

MBG

-----Original Message-----
From: Michael Gurstein [mailto:gurstein at gmail.com] 
Sent: Friday, October 16, 2009 9:49 AM
To: 'governance at lists.cpsr.org'; 'Paul Lehto'
Subject: RE: [governance] Cameroon and Wales collision in TLD space ?????


Since my casually tossed terms re: "diverse" and "suitable cadres" seems to
have entered into some sort of lexicological bestiary I think it may be
worth while teasing it out a bit...

To recall... I used that terminology in the context of the IGF evaluation
indicating things I saw as positive outcomes of the IGF.  One of the
positives I saw was that the IGF was creating (or partially creating and
partially eliciting) a cadre of people knowledgeable in the area of Internet
Governance.  As with most semi-technical or technical areas 	Internet
Governance is an area with a somewhat significant learning curve required to
become an actual "player" in the field i.e. one who can contribute
substantively to discussions and potentially to outcomes.

Having individuals who have been self-selected or designated (in some formal
process by a range of institutions including governments, civil society
etc.) as being IG people and then going through the process of
self-education in that area sufficient to contribute, is I think overall
useful especially since special interest groups (mostly the private sector)
spend considerable resources hiring and retaining such expertise.  Having
folks like Bill Graham formerly of the Canadian Government and now of ISOC
or the graduates from the Diplo IG course, I think all have made and are
making significant positive contributions to broad civil society objectives
in the IG context. 

My concern with this is that the range of those who are able to self-select
or be involved in programs such as Diplo's is rather too narrow (i.e. not
sufficiently "diverse") although the current initiative towards national and
regional IGF's will go a considerable distance to correcting this I would
hope.

Would that such developments were available in other reas of interest. If
suitable and diverse cadres of expertise were being developed in areas such
as for example, community informatics the current failure of most Universal
Access programs around the world to be anything other than agents for
providing subsidies to incumbent carriers would have been long since
overcome.

Best,

Mike   

-----Original Message-----rgrams 
From: Paul Lehto [mailto:lehto.paul at gmail.com] 
Sent: Friday, October 16, 2009 8:54 AM
To: governance at lists.cpsr.org; Bertrand de La Chapelle
Cc: Roland Perry
Subject: Re: [governance] Cameroon and Wales collision in TLD space ?????


If there's not a democratic system of governance at ICANN, any such
"collision" of domain names or any other issue for that matter is purely a
matter for insider "experts" at ICANN and not the proper "domain" of anyone
on this list. If they wish to have anyone's
opinion, they will surely let us know.   ICANN has declared itself
"Independent" so to the extent anyone's opinion is even considered, it is
purely a matter (according to ICANN) of ICANN's grace in allowing us to do
so.  They just wouldn't of course call it "grace" but that's what it would
be.  They'd say they wished to invite a "diverse" and "suitable cadre" to
advise them.  Even Henry VIII would have said the same.

Paul Lehto, Juris Doctor

On 10/16/09, Bertrand de La Chapelle <bdelachapelle at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I have seen in previous posts this reference to the possible collision
> between .cym and the three letter ISO code for Cameroon. Did not chime 
> in then as the thread had continued on another topic, but I am a bit 
> puzzled here.
>
> If there is a problem, it's with the Cayman island (3-letter iso code
> CYM), not Cameroon. As the Cayman islands are a UK territory, the 
> relevant national authority is the same as the Wales proposal, isn't 
> it ? Anyway, don't they already have a 2-letter ccTLD (kY is the 
> 2-letter ISO 3166 code) ?
>
> The issue may be real (there may be cases of possible collision) but
> apparently the example does not work. Unless I'm mistaken which is 
> possible given that it was a rapid check. I may have just exposed my 
> insufficient knowledge ;-)
>
> I suppose the possible collisions will only appear in due course as
> other proposals will be put forward.
>
> Best
>
> Bertrand
>
>
>
> On Fri, Oct 16, 2009 at 12:00 PM, Roland Perry <
> roland at internetpolicyagency.com> wrote:
>
>> In message
>> <76f819dd0910151202y2a0ac3bbna59f0435a6a21558 at mail.gmail.com>,
>> at 12:02:43 on Thu, 15 Oct 2009, Paul Lehto <lehto.paul at gmail.com> writes
>>
>>> Roland, you dropped out of the debate about democracy and ICANN,
>>>
>>
>> I had said everything I wanted to.
>>
>>  Is this your hypothetical question about Cameroon and such?
>>>
>>
>> Yes. And while it's hypothetical today, I'm 99% sure that such a
>> decision will need to be made in the foreseeable future. Two groups 
>> of people are on a collision course!
>>
>> [I have no special interest in either the Cameroons, or Wales, but
>> it's an elegant example to highlight the difficulties than can arise 
>> in a congested name-space]
>>
>>   If so, please understand that even if you proved your apparent
>> "case"
>>> that there are difficulties of implementation in your (straw man)
>>> version of democracy, it does not follow whatsoever that any old 
>>> thing, most especially
>>> an un-democratic any old thing, can take the  place of some version of
>>> democracy.
>>>
>>
>> Which is why I asked what precise form of democracy *you* recommend
>> to resolve the 'collision' I described.
>>
>>  It would be more enlightening for you to answer the question:
>>>
>>> Do you believe any subset of the people, whether "experts" or
>>> owners, have the right to define and/or control or regulate the 
>>> common life of people on the Internet?
>>>
>>
>> I'm trying to discover what subset of the people *you* would
>> recommend made decisions to resolve 'collisions' like the one I 
>> described.
>>
>> Or if it's "all of the people", how would you organise a ballot on
>> this 'collision', that would avoid the drawbacks I mentioned in my 
>> original question.
>>
>> --
>> Roland Perry
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> 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
>>
>
>
>
> --
> ____________________
> Bertrand de La Chapelle
> Délégué Spécial pour la Société de l'Information / Special Envoy for
> the Information Society Ministère des Affaires Etrangères et 
> Européennes/ French Ministry of Foreign and European Affairs
> Tel : +33 (0)6 11 88 33 32
>
> "Le plus beau métier des hommes, c'est d'unir les hommes" Antoine de
> Saint Exupéry ("there is no greater mission for humans than uniting 
> humans")
>


-- 
Paul R Lehto, J.D.
P.O. Box #1
Ishpeming, MI  49849
lehto.paul at gmail.com
906-204-4026 ____________________________________________________________
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


From lehto.paul at gmail.com  Fri Oct 16 13:26:59 2009
From: lehto.paul at gmail.com (Paul Lehto)
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2009 13:26:59 -0400
Subject: [governance] Cameroon and Wales collision in TLD space ?????
In-Reply-To: <F1C157329BAC4311B3F2FBB318F2E7D4@userPC>
References: <76f819dd0910160853t7d929187g37e2791feb2d85e4@mail.gmail.com>
	 <F1C157329BAC4311B3F2FBB318F2E7D4@userPC>
Message-ID: <76f819dd0910161026h59ff7d07q500cf0956219864a@mail.gmail.com>

In other contexts, the terms "diverse" and "suitable cadre" may have
more inherent meaning (in that particular context) but in this
context, again because there's no check on "independent" ICANN power,
the terms "diverse" and "suitable cadre" as applied to ICANN would
mean whatever ICANN wants them to mean - and could well be different
at different times, or even contradictory.

If so, what can anyone do about it, without democracy?  It's the only
nonviolent, non-corrupt and non-civil disobedience method of social
change.

Paul Lehto, Juris Doctor

On 10/16/09, Michael Gurstein <gurstein at gmail.com> wrote:
> Since my casually tossed terms re: "diverse" and "suitable cadres" seems to
> have entered into some sort of lexicological bestiary I think it may be
> worth while teasing it out a bit...
>
> To recall... I used that terminology in the context of the IGF evaluation
> indicating things I saw as positive outcomes of the IGF.  One of the
> positives I saw was that the IGF was creating (or partially creating and
> partially eliciting) a cadre of people knowledgeable in the area of Internet
> Governance.  As with most semi-technical or technical areas 	Internet
> Governance is an area with a somewhat significant learning curve required to
> become an actual "player" in the field i.e. one who can contribute
> substantively to discussions and potentially to outcomes.
>
> Having individuals who have been self-selected or designated (in some formal
> process by a range of institutions including governments, civil society
> etc.) as being IG people and then going through the process of
> self-education in that area sufficient to contribute, is I think overall
> useful especially since special interest groups (mostly the private sector)
> spend considerable resources hiring and retaining such expertise.  Having
> folks like Bill Graham formerly of the Canadian Government and now of ISOC
> or the graduates from the Diplo IG course, I think all have made and are
> making significant positive contributions to broad civil society objectives
> in the IG context.
>
> My concern with this is that the range of those who are able to self-select
> or be involved in programs such as Diplo's is rather too narrow (i.e. not
> sufficiently "diverse") although the current initiative towards national and
> regional IGF's will go a considerable distance to correcting this I would
> hope.
>
> Would that such developments were available in other reas of interest. If
> suitable and diverse cadres of expertise were being developed in areas such
> as for example, community informatics the current failure of most Universal
> Access programs around the world to be anything other than agents for
> providing subsidies to incumbent carriers would have been long since
> overcome.
>
> Best,
>
> Mike
>
> -----Original Message-----rgrams
> From: Paul Lehto [mailto:lehto.paul at gmail.com]
> Sent: Friday, October 16, 2009 8:54 AM
> To: governance at lists.cpsr.org; Bertrand de La Chapelle
> Cc: Roland Perry
> Subject: Re: [governance] Cameroon and Wales collision in TLD space ?????
>
>
> If there's not a democratic system of governance at ICANN, any such
> "collision" of domain names or any other issue for that matter is purely a
> matter for insider "experts" at ICANN and not the proper "domain" of anyone
> on this list. If they wish to have anyone's
> opinion, they will surely let us know.   ICANN has declared itself
> "Independent" so to the extent anyone's opinion is even considered, it is
> purely a matter (according to ICANN) of ICANN's grace in allowing us to do
> so.  They just wouldn't of course call it "grace" but that's what it would
> be.  They'd say they wished to invite a "diverse" and "suitable cadre" to
> advise them.  Even Henry VIII would have said the same.
>
> Paul Lehto, Juris Doctor
>
> On 10/16/09, Bertrand de La Chapelle <bdelachapelle at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I have seen in previous posts this reference to the possible collision
>> between .cym and the three letter ISO code for Cameroon. Did not chime
>> in then as the thread had continued on another topic, but I am a bit
>> puzzled here.
>>
>> If there is a problem, it's with the Cayman island (3-letter iso code
>> CYM), not Cameroon. As the Cayman islands are a UK territory, the
>> relevant national authority is the same as the Wales proposal, isn't
>> it ? Anyway, don't they already have a 2-letter ccTLD (kY is the
>> 2-letter ISO 3166 code) ?
>>
>> The issue may be real (there may be cases of possible collision) but
>> apparently the example does not work. Unless I'm mistaken which is
>> possible given that it was a rapid check. I may have just exposed my
>> insufficient knowledge ;-)
>>
>> I suppose the possible collisions will only appear in due course as
>> other proposals will be put forward.
>>
>> Best
>>
>> Bertrand
>>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Oct 16, 2009 at 12:00 PM, Roland Perry <
>> roland at internetpolicyagency.com> wrote:
>>
>>> In message
>>> <76f819dd0910151202y2a0ac3bbna59f0435a6a21558 at mail.gmail.com>,
>>> at 12:02:43 on Thu, 15 Oct 2009, Paul Lehto <lehto.paul at gmail.com> writes
>>>
>>>> Roland, you dropped out of the debate about democracy and ICANN,
>>>>
>>>
>>> I had said everything I wanted to.
>>>
>>>  Is this your hypothetical question about Cameroon and such?
>>>>
>>>
>>> Yes. And while it's hypothetical today, I'm 99% sure that such a
>>> decision will need to be made in the foreseeable future. Two groups
>>> of people are on a collision course!
>>>
>>> [I have no special interest in either the Cameroons, or Wales, but
>>> it's an elegant example to highlight the difficulties than can arise
>>> in a congested name-space]
>>>
>>>   If so, please understand that even if you proved your apparent
>>> "case"
>>>> that there are difficulties of implementation in your (straw man)
>>>> version of democracy, it does not follow whatsoever that any old
>>>> thing, most especially
>>>> an un-democratic any old thing, can take the  place of some version of
>>>> democracy.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Which is why I asked what precise form of democracy *you* recommend
>>> to resolve the 'collision' I described.
>>>
>>>  It would be more enlightening for you to answer the question:
>>>>
>>>> Do you believe any subset of the people, whether "experts" or
>>>> owners, have the right to define and/or control or regulate the
>>>> common life of people on the Internet?
>>>>
>>>
>>> I'm trying to discover what subset of the people *you* would
>>> recommend made decisions to resolve 'collisions' like the one I
>>> described.
>>>
>>> Or if it's "all of the people", how would you organise a ballot on
>>> this 'collision', that would avoid the drawbacks I mentioned in my
>>> original question.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Roland Perry
>>> ____________________________________________________________
>>> 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
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> ____________________
>> Bertrand de La Chapelle
>> Délégué Spécial pour la Société de l'Information / Special Envoy for
>> the Information Society Ministère des Affaires Etrangères et
>> Européennes/ French Ministry of Foreign and European Affairs
>> Tel : +33 (0)6 11 88 33 32
>>
>> "Le plus beau métier des hommes, c'est d'unir les hommes" Antoine de
>> Saint Exupéry ("there is no greater mission for humans than uniting
>> humans")
>>
>
>
> --
> Paul R Lehto, J.D.
> P.O. Box #1
> Ishpeming, MI  49849
> lehto.paul at gmail.com
> 906-204-4026 ____________________________________________________________
> 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
>
>


-- 
Paul R Lehto, J.D.
P.O. Box #1
Ishpeming, MI  49849
lehto.paul at gmail.com
906-204-4026
____________________________________________________________
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


From ian.peter at ianpeter.com  Fri Oct 16 15:33:55 2009
From: ian.peter at ianpeter.com (Ian Peter)
Date: Sat, 17 Oct 2009 06:33:55 +1100
Subject: [governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation of Commitments
In-Reply-To: <76f819dd0910160620g187dc5a0jb515a4838f25b4e9@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <C6FF15D3.7086%ian.peter@ianpeter.com>

Paul, this is starting to get a little repetitive. You have made your point
and made it strongly.

For me - I live in a world which operates quite well where not everything
and every decision requires a vote. My world contains non democratic
structures like families, small and large businesses, charities, non
profits, all of which operate effectively and contribute to the community in
various ways. It also contains multiple tiers of government where every four
years or so people go out and do what the media tells them to in voting.

All of these structures have their advantages and disadvantages. I do not
have a religious attachment to any of these forms, and do not believe any to
be so vastly superior to any other as to suggest that here is only one sort
of structure that can provide effective internet governance.

But yes, a more democratic ICANN is a nice objective.  If we can get to a
discussion on exactly how the current organisation and structure  could be
improved, where and how voting might be useful, and some sort of transition
strategy, that would be a good way to get something productive from the
discussion. 


On 17/10/09 12:20 AM, "Paul Lehto" <lehto.paul at gmail.com> wrote:

> Roland, I'm asking you to admit that ICANN is not constituted as an
> organization practicing any form of democracy?  Do you agree or
> disagree?  If you decline to answer that question on any grounds, you
> lack enough interest in the subject of democracy or the lack thereof
> to make me specifying what particular style of democratic
> decision-making I would personally prefer, and as I stated before,
> that issue just distracts from the more pressing issue of the lack of
> any democracy at ICANN at all.
> 
> So, do you agree that ICANN is not constituted as an organization
> practicing any form of democracy?
> 
> And to Avri, you may have guesses, or should have by now, that I have
> a "bias" in favor of democracy - one required I'd say by the Univ.
> Decl. of Human Rights. Any listserv that discusses governance is a
> listserv that discusses ICANN governance, since ICANN has a global
> reach.  WE ARE ALREADY EMPOWERED you could say, without any listserv
> to discuss governance of our common life as global citizens.  This
> listserv on governance makes ICANN governance especially topical.
> 
> Paul Lehto, Juris Doctor On 10/16/09, Roland Perry
> <roland at internetpolicyagency.com> wrote:
>> In message
>> <76f819dd0910151202y2a0ac3bbna59f0435a6a21558 at mail.gmail.com>, at
>> 12:02:43 on Thu, 15 Oct 2009, Paul Lehto <lehto.paul at gmail.com> writes
>>> Roland, you dropped out of the debate about democracy and ICANN,
>> 
>> I had said everything I wanted to.
>> 
>>> Is this your hypothetical question about Cameroon and such?
>> 
>> Yes. And while it's hypothetical today, I'm 99% sure that such a
>> decision will need to be made in the foreseeable future. Two groups of
>> people are on a collision course!
>> 
>> [I have no special interest in either the Cameroons, or Wales, but it's
>> an elegant example to highlight the difficulties than can arise in a
>> congested name-space]
>> 
>>>  If so, please understand that even if you proved your apparent "case"
>>> that there are difficulties of implementation in your (straw man)
>>> version of democracy, it does not follow whatsoever that any old thing,
>>> most especially an un-democratic any old thing, can take the  place of
>>> some version of democracy.
>> 
>> Which is why I asked what precise form of democracy *you* recommend to
>> resolve the 'collision' I described.
>> 
>>> It would be more enlightening for you to answer the question:
>>> 
>>> Do you believe any subset of the people, whether "experts" or owners,
>>> have the right to define and/or control or regulate the common life of
>>> people on the Internet?
>> 
>> I'm trying to discover what subset of the people *you* would recommend
>> made decisions to resolve 'collisions' like the one I described.
>> 
>> Or if it's "all of the people", how would you organise a ballot on this
>> 'collision', that would avoid the drawbacks I mentioned in my original
>> question.
>> 
>> --
>> Roland Perry
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> 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


From gpaque at gmail.com  Fri Oct 16 16:48:14 2009
From: gpaque at gmail.com (Ginger Paque)
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2009 16:18:14 -0430
Subject: [governance] IGF in remote? What are the IGC plans?
Message-ID: <4AD8DC0E.1080709@gmail.com>

An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20091016/e8b09407/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

From ian.peter at ianpeter.com  Fri Oct 16 23:55:50 2009
From: ian.peter at ianpeter.com (Ian Peter)
Date: Sat, 17 Oct 2009 14:55:50 +1100
Subject: [governance] Sad news re Francis Muguet
Message-ID: <C6FF8B76.70CC%ian.peter@ianpeter.com>

Friends, I have just received the following email. I have no further
details, and this must be a shock to all of us.  I would particularly urge
those of you closer to Francis¹s immediate work to get in touch with his
family as requested below. This is sad news indeed.

Hey,
My name is Flore MUGUET, I'm the daughter of Francis MUGUET, I'm contacting
you because you are his friend on Facebook. My father died in Paris couple
days ago and I just found out Wednesday night, because I was worried that I
wasn't answering my emails. It's hard for me to realize, it' s happening so
fast... My dad was the only member of the family his side that I fully
loved, trusted and respected. On the other side I just have my mother. His
work was so important for him, I'm so sad I didn't accomplished it..
I need a lawyer for advices, so If you know one, please contact me.
Please get in touch with me at danceflore at hotmail.com or +33 (0)6 82 30 26
70 for the funerals. I would like to have a lot of people coming..


I have passed on to Flore condolences on behalf on those of us working with
Francis on Internet Governance issues, but I am sure the family would like
to hear from those who have worked closely with Francis. Flore also asked me
about Francis¹s work and travel movements ­ I did mention  to her IGF and
also his current project with ITU ­ but I don¹t have contacts for that work,
others might like to pass details on.

Sad news indeed. Francis was an original thinker with a great devotion to
these issues. It¹s hard to believe that he is no longer with us.

Ian Peter
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20091017/6d29087a/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

From hongxueipr at gmail.com  Sat Oct 17 02:48:10 2009
From: hongxueipr at gmail.com (Hong Xue)
Date: Sat, 17 Oct 2009 14:48:10 +0800
Subject: [governance] IGF in remote? What are the IGC plans?
In-Reply-To: <4AD8DC0E.1080709@gmail.com>
References: <4AD8DC0E.1080709@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <54535d540910162348o48049672v5f4602ea11a4bc74@mail.gmail.com>

Dear Ginger,

I've exactly the same plan as yours--doing a couple of presentations
via the Internet. Although it might be difficult for us "remoters" to
form a group due to time zone issues, but we may think about having a
skype group (or hot line) to report the connectivity problems, which
could be linked up with the IGF administration. So problems in remote
participation could be resolved as quickly as possible.

Hong

-- 
Hong Xue, Ph.D.
Professor of Law
Director of Institute for the Internet Policy & Law
Beijing Normal University
19 Xin Jie Kou Wai Street
Beijing 100875 China

On Sat, Oct 17, 2009 at 4:48 AM, Ginger Paque <gpaque at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi everyone...
>
> Should we be thinking about an IGC strategy for the upcoming IGF in Egypt?
> Are there specific issues we want to be involved in, intervene in, report
> back on?
>
> What concerns and suggestions do you have?
>
> I will be unable to attend the IGF in person this year, but I plan to be
> active through Remote Participation, and if my local connection is good
> enough, I will do a presentation or two through RP as well.
>
> I would like to encourage others to attend remotely--we can tweet, chat,
> Skype--we can be involved! We can intervene in sessions, and we can ask
> those who are present to include us in their Skype conversations.
>
> Will we work as a group, or is it preferable to act as individuals? We have
> a booth in the IGF Village Square that can be used for physical meetings and
> communications too.
>
> Thoughts?
>
> Best, Ginger
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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


From tijani.benjemaa at planet.tn  Sat Oct 17 04:10:24 2009
From: tijani.benjemaa at planet.tn (Tijani BEN JEMAA)
Date: Sat, 17 Oct 2009 09:10:24 +0100
Subject: [governance] Sad news re Francis Muguet
In-Reply-To: <C6FF8B76.70CC%ian.peter@ianpeter.com>
References: <C6FF8B76.70CC%ian.peter@ianpeter.com>
Message-ID: <6FF5EB9924AB4AEBADCC4C771D5F4821@MTBJ>

It’s indeed a very sad piece of news.

Françis was one of the very active and committed civil society actors in
WSIS, and especially in its second phase.

Françis always had his own opinion, but never was negative. Our views
weren’t always the same, and yet, we were really good friends. I feel too
sad.

I can’t forget his behaviour when Jean Louis had his health problem in ITU
in Geneva.

 

Now, he is away
.. It’s a nasty situation

 

------------------------------------------------------------

Tijani BEN JEMAA

Vice Chairman of CIC

World Federation of Engineering Organizations

Phone : + 216 98 330 114

Fax     : + 216 70 860 861

------------------------------------------------------------

 

  _____  

De : Ian Peter [mailto:ian.peter at ianpeter.com] 
Envoyé : samedi 17 octobre 2009 04:56
À : 'governance at lists.cpsr.org'; Gov at wsis-gov.org
Objet : [governance] Sad news re Francis Muguet

 

Friends, I have just received the following email. I have no further
details, and this must be a shock to all of us.  I would particularly urge
those of you closer to Francis’s immediate work to get in touch with his
family as requested below. This is sad news indeed.

Hey,
My name is Flore MUGUET, I'm the daughter of Francis MUGUET, I'm contacting
you because you are his friend on Facebook. My father died in Paris couple
days ago and I just found out Wednesday night, because I was worried that I
wasn't answering my emails. It's hard for me to realize, it' s happening so
fast... My dad was the only member of the family his side that I fully
loved, trusted and respected. On the other side I just have my mother. His
work was so important for him, I'm so sad I didn't accomplished it..
I need a lawyer for advices, so If you know one, please contact me.
Please get in touch with me at danceflore at hotmail.com or +33 (0)6 82 30 26
70 for the funerals. I would like to have a lot of people coming..


I have passed on to Flore condolences on behalf on those of us working with
Francis on Internet Governance issues, but I am sure the family would like
to hear from those who have worked closely with Francis. Flore also asked me
about Francis’s work and travel movements – I did mention  to her IGF and
also his current project with ITU – but I don’t have contacts for that work,
others might like to pass details on.

Sad news indeed. Francis was an original thinker with a great devotion to
these issues. It’s hard to believe that he is no longer with us.

Ian Peter 

Ce message entrant est certifié sans virus connu.
Analyse effectuée par AVG - www.avg.fr
Version: 8.5.421 / Base de données virale: 270.14.20/2440 - Date: 10/16/09
06:32:00


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20091017/7b940c16/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

From wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de  Sat Oct 17 05:16:33 2009
From: wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de (=?iso-8859-1?Q?=22Kleinw=E4chter=2C_Wolfgang=22?=)
Date: Sat, 17 Oct 2009 11:16:33 +0200
Subject: [governance] Condolences
Message-ID:  <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A871964F@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>

Dear Flore
 
I am shocked to hear from the passing away of our good great friend Francis. I can not believe it. 
 
I know Francis sind 2002 when we worked together within the framework of the UN World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS) in Geneva. He was such an active and courageous thinker, always on the side of the "small people", fighting for individual human rights and innovative technological developments. He stimulated so many discussions with his sometimes unusal interventions and perspectives. But he was a friend whom you could trusted, both in the WSIS process and, after 2006, in the process of the UN sponsored Internet Governance Forum (IGF). 
 
In the IGF, he was the founding father of a new "IGF Dynamic Coalition on the Internet of Things" which we established together in Hyderabad/India in December 2008. Just recently we worked together in the preparation of an EU expert workshop on the Internet of Things in Leipzig/Germany, in June 2009. He made very constructive, energetic and valuable contributions in this workshop. His paper was probably one of his last international presentations.http://www.guarder.net/kleinwaechter/images/euronf/muguet.pdf
 
We had a lof of plans how to use all the ideas to move forward with the "IGF Dynamic Coalition on the Internet of Things" towards the forthcoming 4th IGF in Sharm el Sheikh/Egypt in November 2009. Now I have to learn that Francis will not with us in Sharm. What a sad news. I will ask in Sharm el Sheikh the participants of the IGF to give a moment of silence to Francis to remember a good friend and a great Internet Governance activist. Take my deep condolences.
 
Prof. Wolfgang Kleinwächter
University of Aarhus
____________________________________________________________
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


From lohento at oridev.org  Sat Oct 17 06:13:37 2009
From: lohento at oridev.org (Lohento, ken)
Date: Sat, 17 Oct 2009 12:13:37 +0200 (CEST)
Subject: [governance] Sad news re Francis Muguet
In-Reply-To: <6FF5EB9924AB4AEBADCC4C771D5F4821@MTBJ>
References: <C6FF8B76.70CC%ian.peter@ianpeter.com>
    <6FF5EB9924AB4AEBADCC4C771D5F4821@MTBJ>
Message-ID: <92306eabf419738a34d87466ff94ec76.squirrel@ssl0.ovh.net>

Ian

I hope this is not true... Let's try to have confirmation, the mail is not
so clear....

KL


Le Sam 17 octobre 2009 10:10, Tijani BEN JEMAA a écrit :
> It’s indeed a very sad piece of news.
>
> Françis was one of the very active and committed civil society actors in
> WSIS, and especially in its second phase.
>
> Françis always had his own opinion, but never was negative. Our views
> weren’t always the same, and yet, we were really good friends. I feel too
> sad.
>
> I can’t forget his behaviour when Jean Louis had his health problem in ITU
> in Geneva.
>
>
>
> Now, he is away
.. It’s a nasty situation
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Tijani BEN JEMAA
>
> Vice Chairman of CIC
>
> World Federation of Engineering Organizations
>
> Phone : + 216 98 330 114
>
> Fax     : + 216 70 860 861
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
>   _____
>
> De : Ian Peter [mailto:ian.peter at ianpeter.com]
> Envoyé : samedi 17 octobre 2009 04:56
> À : 'governance at lists.cpsr.org'; Gov at wsis-gov.org
> Objet : [governance] Sad news re Francis Muguet
>
>
>
> Friends, I have just received the following email. I have no further
> details, and this must be a shock to all of us.  I would particularly urge
> those of you closer to Francis’s immediate work to get in touch with his
> family as requested below. This is sad news indeed.
>
> Hey,
> My name is Flore MUGUET, I'm the daughter of Francis MUGUET, I'm
> contacting
> you because you are his friend on Facebook. My father died in Paris couple
> days ago and I just found out Wednesday night, because I was worried that
> I
> wasn't answering my emails. It's hard for me to realize, it' s happening
> so
> fast... My dad was the only member of the family his side that I fully
> loved, trusted and respected. On the other side I just have my mother. His
> work was so important for him, I'm so sad I didn't accomplished it..
> I need a lawyer for advices, so If you know one, please contact me.
> Please get in touch with me at danceflore at hotmail.com or +33 (0)6 82 30 26
> 70 for the funerals. I would like to have a lot of people coming..
>
>
> I have passed on to Flore condolences on behalf on those of us working
> with
> Francis on Internet Governance issues, but I am sure the family would like
> to hear from those who have worked closely with Francis. Flore also asked
> me
> about Francis’s work and travel movements – I did mention  to her IGF and
> also his current project with ITU – but I don’t have contacts for that
> work,
> others might like to pass details on.
>
> Sad news indeed. Francis was an original thinker with a great devotion to
> these issues. It’s hard to believe that he is no longer with us.
>
> Ian Peter
>
> Ce message entrant est certifié sans virus connu.
> Analyse effectuée par AVG - www.avg.fr
> Version: 8.5.421 / Base de données virale: 270.14.20/2440 - Date: 10/16/09
> 06:32:00
>
>
>


-- 
Ken L


____________________________________________________________
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


From william.drake at graduateinstitute.ch  Sat Oct 17 06:15:54 2009
From: william.drake at graduateinstitute.ch (William Drake)
Date: Sat, 17 Oct 2009 12:15:54 +0200
Subject: [governance] Sad news re Francis Muguet
In-Reply-To: <C6FF8B76.70CC%ian.peter@ianpeter.com>
References: <C6FF8B76.70CC%ian.peter@ianpeter.com>
Message-ID: <31B5A25C-60D9-43B7-88D7-C1C06D7AC624@graduateinstitute.ch>

Really terrible news.

I got that message too from Facebook and responded to her, but I'm  
leaving soon for Seoul and am anyway not local and in a position to  
help.  Hopefully some caucus members based in Paris can get in touch  
with her and see what can be done...?

Bill

On Oct 17, 2009, at 5:55 AM, Ian Peter wrote:

> Friends, I have just received the following email. I have no further  
> details, and this must be a shock to all of us.  I would  
> particularly urge those of you closer to Francis’s immediate work to  
> get in touch with his family as requested below. This is sad news  
> indeed.
>
> Hey,
> My name is Flore MUGUET, I'm the daughter of Francis MUGUET, I'm  
> contacting you because you are his friend on Facebook. My father  
> died in Paris couple days ago and I just found out Wednesday night,  
> because I was worried that I wasn't answering my emails. It's hard  
> for me to realize, it' s happening so fast... My dad was the only  
> member of the family his side that I fully loved, trusted and  
> respected. On the other side I just have my mother. His work was so  
> important for him, I'm so sad I didn't accomplished it..
> I need a lawyer for advices, so If you know one, please contact me.
> Please get in touch with me at danceflore at hotmail.com or +33 (0)6 82  
> 30 26 70 for the funerals. I would like to have a lot of people  
> coming..
>
>
> I have passed on to Flore condolences on behalf on those of us  
> working with Francis on Internet Governance issues, but I am sure  
> the family would like to hear from those who have worked closely  
> with Francis. Flore also asked me about Francis’s work and travel  
> movements – I did mention  to her IGF and also his current project  
> with ITU – but I don’t have contacts for that work, others might  
> like to pass details on.
>
> Sad news indeed. Francis was an original thinker with a great  
> devotion to these issues. It’s hard to believe that he is no longer  
> with us.
>
> Ian Peter



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20091017/8a59ecf5/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

From a.beccalli at unesco.org  Sat Oct 17 06:47:31 2009
From: a.beccalli at unesco.org (Beccalli, Andrea)
Date: Sat, 17 Oct 2009 12:47:31 +0200
Subject: [governance] Sad news re Francis Muguet
In-Reply-To: <6FF5EB9924AB4AEBADCC4C771D5F4821@MTBJ>
References: <C6FF8B76.70CC%ian.peter@ianpeter.com> <6FF5EB9924AB4AEBADCC4C771D5F4821@MTBJ>
Message-ID: <3118A9AF91FFCE45A53E8B17C8537660CE223B@MAILSERVER-02.hq.int.unesco.org>

As I saw the terrible news this morning I could not simply believe it, I first called his mobile and then called his daughter and asked how, what happened.

 

I have no words to say how sincere and truth was Francis' commitment to the values of the WSIS, he was a true friend of UNESCO, always with ground breaking ideas and initiatives. His interventions were sometimes seen as provocative or unfeasible by many, but no one can say he was moved by self interest. 

 

I met him for the first time in 2003 in Geneva at the first WSIS, since then I shared many of his initiatives and was always inspired by his ideas and his commitment, what personally impressed me was his true belief in his work and total dedication. Francis was a true believer the kind of one that is always harder to find in this world. 

 

We will miss you Francis, 

 

Andrea 

 

 

Andrea Beccalli

Associate Expert
Information Society Division

Communication and Information Sector

United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO)

1, rue Miollis

75732 Paris cedex 15

Tel: +33(0)1 45 68 42 87

a.beccalli at unesco.org <mailto:a.beccalli at unesco.org> 

 

 

________________________________

From: Tijani BEN JEMAA [mailto:tijani.benjemaa at planet.tn] 
Sent: Saturday, October 17, 2009 10:10 AM
To: governance at lists.cpsr.org; 'Ian Peter'; Gov at wsis-gov.org
Subject: RE: [governance] Sad news re Francis Muguet

 

It's indeed a very sad piece of news.

Françis was one of the very active and committed civil society actors in WSIS, and especially in its second phase.

Françis always had his own opinion, but never was negative. Our views weren't always the same, and yet, we were really good friends. I feel too sad.

I can't forget his behaviour when Jean Louis had his health problem in ITU in Geneva.

 

Now, he is away..... It's a nasty situation

 

------------------------------------------------------------

Tijani BEN JEMAA

Vice Chairman of CIC

World Federation of Engineering Organizations

Phone : + 216 98 330 114

Fax     : + 216 70 860 861

------------------------------------------------------------

 

________________________________

De : Ian Peter [mailto:ian.peter at ianpeter.com] 
Envoyé : samedi 17 octobre 2009 04:56
À : 'governance at lists.cpsr.org'; Gov at wsis-gov.org
Objet : [governance] Sad news re Francis Muguet

 

Friends, I have just received the following email. I have no further details, and this must be a shock to all of us.  I would particularly urge those of you closer to Francis's immediate work to get in touch with his family as requested below. This is sad news indeed.

Hey,
My name is Flore MUGUET, I'm the daughter of Francis MUGUET, I'm contacting you because you are his friend on Facebook. My father died in Paris couple days ago and I just found out Wednesday night, because I was worried that I wasn't answering my emails. It's hard for me to realize, it' s happening so fast... My dad was the only member of the family his side that I fully loved, trusted and respected. On the other side I just have my mother. His work was so important for him, I'm so sad I didn't accomplished it..
I need a lawyer for advices, so If you know one, please contact me.
Please get in touch with me at danceflore at hotmail.com or +33 (0)6 82 30 26 70 for the funerals. I would like to have a lot of people coming..


I have passed on to Flore condolences on behalf on those of us working with Francis on Internet Governance issues, but I am sure the family would like to hear from those who have worked closely with Francis. Flore also asked me about Francis's work and travel movements - I did mention  to her IGF and also his current project with ITU - but I don't have contacts for that work, others might like to pass details on.

Sad news indeed. Francis was an original thinker with a great devotion to these issues. It's hard to believe that he is no longer with us.

Ian Peter 

Ce message entrant est certifié sans virus connu.
Analyse effectuée par AVG - www.avg.fr
Version: 8.5.421 / Base de données virale: 270.14.20/2440 - Date: 10/16/09 06:32:00


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20091017/49587afd/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

From renate.bloem at gmail.com  Sat Oct 17 07:10:58 2009
From: renate.bloem at gmail.com (Renate Bloem (Gmail))
Date: Sat, 17 Oct 2009 13:10:58 +0200
Subject: [governance] condolences
Message-ID: <4ad9a647.0a04d00a.7533.1529@mx.google.com>

Dear Flore,

 

This is an extreme shock to all of us who heard this so unbelievable piece
of news. As former President of CONGO and Civil Society coordinator in the
WSIS process, I knew Francis quite well. When he was in Geneva, he spent
much time with us in our Office. He was the exuberant friend, out of the box
thinker, sometimes not easy, but so full of energy and always exciting, warm
and full of new ideas.

 

When I changed into other fields, I lost somewhat contact, but remember -and
not so long ago - that he was so proud of having launched his latest
initiative with the ITU, and that he was dreaming to find a little house
overlooking the lake. It is so hard to believe that he is not there anymore!

 

My warmest condolences 

 

Renate Bloem

Past President of CONGO

Civicus UN Geneva

Tel:/Fax +33450 850815/16

Mobile : +41763462310

 <mailto:renate.bloem at civicus.org> renate.bloem at civicus.org

 <mailto:renate.bloem at gmail.com> renate.bloem at gmail.com 


CIVICUS: World Alliance for Citizen Participation

PO BOX 933, 2135, Johannesburg, South Africa
www.civicus.org
<file:///C:\Documents%20and%20Settings\estelle.baker\Application%20Data\Docu
ments%20and%20Settings\micha.hollestelle\Application%20Data\Microsoft\Signat
ures\www.civicus.org> 

 

P Please don't print this e-mail unless you really need to. Thank you.

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20091017/cc63fd42/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

From nyangkweagien at gmail.com  Sat Oct 17 08:16:03 2009
From: nyangkweagien at gmail.com (Nyangkwe Agien Aaron)
Date: Sat, 17 Oct 2009 14:16:03 +0200
Subject: [governance] Cameroon and Wales collision in TLD space ?????
In-Reply-To: <954259bd0910160843q1740718ay670d369134549ba7@mail.gmail.com>
References: <954259bd0910160843q1740718ay670d369134549ba7@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <a6bc8cb30910170516q798e2e49yea18b70efdc7e6fa@mail.gmail.com>

Hi all

This is an astonishing news beat.
As far as I can recall and recond, the ccTLD for Cameroon is CM. Or is some
one alluding that the authorities of my countries are about to make a change
and no communication is made.
If there is that change, what about those who registered their sites and web
names on CM?

All the best

Aaron

On Fri, Oct 16, 2009 at 5:43 PM, Bertrand de La Chapelle <
bdelachapelle at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> I have seen in previous posts this reference to the possible collision
> between .cym and the three letter ISO code for Cameroon. Did not chime in
> then as the thread had continued on another topic, but I am a bit puzzled
> here.
>
> If there is a problem, it's with the Cayman island (3-letter iso code CYM),
> not Cameroon. As the Cayman islands are a UK territory, the relevant
> national authority is the same as the Wales proposal, isn't it ? Anyway,
> don't they already have a 2-letter ccTLD (kY is the 2-letter ISO 3166 code)
> ?
>
> The issue may be real (there may be cases of possible collision) but
> apparently the example does not work. Unless I'm mistaken which is possible
> given that it was a rapid check. I may have just exposed my insufficient
> knowledge ;-)
>
> I suppose the possible collisions will only appear in due course as other
> proposals will be put forward.
>
> Best
>
> Bertrand
>
>
>
> On Fri, Oct 16, 2009 at 12:00 PM, Roland Perry <
> roland at internetpolicyagency.com> wrote:
>
>> In message <76f819dd0910151202y2a0ac3bbna59f0435a6a21558 at mail.gmail.com>,
>> at 12:02:43 on Thu, 15 Oct 2009, Paul Lehto <lehto.paul at gmail.com> writes
>>
>>> Roland, you dropped out of the debate about democracy and ICANN,
>>>
>>
>> I had said everything I wanted to.
>>
>>  Is this your hypothetical question about Cameroon and such?
>>>
>>
>> Yes. And while it's hypothetical today, I'm 99% sure that such a decision
>> will need to be made in the foreseeable future. Two groups of people are on
>> a collision course!
>>
>> [I have no special interest in either the Cameroons, or Wales, but it's
>> an elegant example to highlight the difficulties than can arise in a
>> congested name-space]
>>
>>   If so, please understand that even if you proved your apparent "case"
>>> that there are difficulties of implementation in your (straw man) version of
>>> democracy, it does not follow whatsoever that any old thing, most especially
>>> an un-democratic any old thing, can take the  place of some version of
>>> democracy.
>>>
>>
>> Which is why I asked what precise form of democracy *you* recommend to
>> resolve the 'collision' I described.
>>
>>  It would be more enlightening for you to answer the question:
>>>
>>> Do you believe any subset of the people, whether "experts" or owners,
>>> have the right to define and/or control or regulate the common life of
>>> people on the Internet?
>>>
>>
>> I'm trying to discover what subset of the people *you* would recommend
>> made decisions to resolve 'collisions' like the one I described.
>>
>> Or if it's "all of the people", how would you organise a ballot on this
>> 'collision', that would avoid the drawbacks I mentioned in my original
>> question.
>>
>> --
>> Roland Perry
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> 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
>>
>
>
>
> --
> ____________________
> Bertrand de La Chapelle
> Délégué Spécial pour la Société de l'Information / Special Envoy for the
> Information Society
> Ministère des Affaires Etrangères et Européennes/ French Ministry of
> Foreign and European Affairs
> Tel : +33 (0)6 11 88 33 32
>
> "Le plus beau métier des hommes, c'est d'unir les hommes" Antoine de Saint
> Exupéry
> ("there is no greater mission for humans than uniting humans")
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
>
>


-- 
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
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20091017/f74849ac/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

From rafik.dammak at gmail.com  Sat Oct 17 08:26:59 2009
From: rafik.dammak at gmail.com (Rafik Dammak)
Date: Sat, 17 Oct 2009 21:26:59 +0900
Subject: [governance] condolences
In-Reply-To: <4ad9a647.0a04d00a.7533.1529@mx.google.com>
References: <4ad9a647.0a04d00a.7533.1529@mx.google.com>
Message-ID: <bbd2a2cd0910170526i32189cbbr57df148857f68ce7@mail.gmail.com>

Mes sinceres condoleances pour Flore. Je crois qu'il faut continuer son
aventure et son challenge pour l'Internet of things
there is an article in RWW in french
http://fr.readwriteweb.com/2009/10/17/agenda/adieu-francis/

<http://fr.readwriteweb.com/2009/10/17/agenda/adieu-francis/>Rafik

2009/10/17 Renate Bloem (Gmail) <renate.bloem at gmail.com>

>  Dear Flore,
>
>
>
> This is an extreme shock to all of us who heard this so unbelievable piece
> of news. As former President of CONGO and Civil Society coordinator in the
> WSIS process, I knew Francis quite well. When he was in Geneva, he spent
> much time with us in our Office. He was the exuberant friend, out of the box
> thinker, sometimes not easy, but so full of energy and always exciting, warm
> and full of new ideas.
>
>
>
> When I changed into other fields, I lost somewhat contact, but remember
> –and not so long ago - that he was so proud of having launched his latest
> initiative with the ITU, and that he was dreaming to find a little house
> overlooking the lake. It is so hard to believe that he is not there anymore!
>
>
>
> My warmest condolences
>
>
>
> Renate Bloem
>
> Past President of CONGO
>
> *Civicus UN Geneva*
>
> Tel:/Fax +33450 850815/16
>
> Mobile : +41763462310
>
> renate.bloem at civicus.org
>
> renate.bloem at gmail.com
>
>
> *CIVICUS: World Alliance for Citizen Participation*
>
> PO BOX 933, 2135, Johannesburg, South Africa
> www.civicus.org
>
> * *
>
> *P** **Please don't print this e-mail unless you really need to. Thank
> you.*
>
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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/20091017/296c1160/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

From anriette at apc.org  Sat Oct 17 08:55:03 2009
From: anriette at apc.org (Anriette Esterhuysen)
Date: Sat, 17 Oct 2009 14:55:03 +0200
Subject: [governance] Sad news re Francis Muguet
In-Reply-To: <6FF5EB9924AB4AEBADCC4C771D5F4821@MTBJ>
References: <C6FF8B76.70CC%ian.peter@ianpeter.com>
	 <6FF5EB9924AB4AEBADCC4C771D5F4821@MTBJ>
Message-ID: <1255784103.6739.628.camel@anriette-laptop>

Dear all

Tijani's words capture my own feelings very well. Is this really true? I
still find this so sudden, difficult to believe. And it is not so long
ago that it was Francis who wrote to us about Jean Louis' heart attack
at the ITU, as Tijani points out.

Ian, thanks for communicating with Francis' daughter on our behalf. Do
we have any confirmation of what happened?  Andrea, did you manage to
speak to his family?

Anriette



On Sat, 2009-10-17 at 09:10 +0100, Tijani BEN JEMAA wrote:
> It’s indeed a very sad piece of news.
> 
> Françis was one of the very active and committed civil society actors
> in WSIS, and especially in its second phase.
> 
> Françis always had his own opinion, but never was negative. Our views
> weren’t always the same, and yet, we were really good friends. I feel
> too sad.
> 
> I can’t forget his behaviour when Jean Louis had his health problem in
> ITU in Geneva.
> 
>  
> 
> Now, he is away….. It’s a nasty situation
> 
>  
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> Tijani BEN JEMAA
> 
> Vice Chairman of CIC
> 
> World Federation of Engineering Organizations
> 
> Phone : + 216 98 330 114
> 
> Fax     : + 216 70 860 861
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> 
>  
> 
>                                    
> ______________________________________________________________________
> De : Ian Peter [mailto:ian.peter at ianpeter.com] 
> Envoyé : samedi 17 octobre 2009 04:56
> À : 'governance at lists.cpsr.org'; Gov at wsis-gov.org
> Objet : [governance] Sad news re Francis Muguet
> 
> 
>  
> 
> Friends, I have just received the following email. I have no further
> details, and this must be a shock to all of us.  I would particularly
> urge those of you closer to Francis’s immediate work to get in touch
> with his family as requested below. This is sad news indeed.
> 
> Hey,
> My name is Flore MUGUET, I'm the daughter of Francis MUGUET, I'm
> contacting you because you are his friend on Facebook. My father died
> in Paris couple days ago and I just found out Wednesday night, because
> I was worried that I wasn't answering my emails. It's hard for me to
> realize, it' s happening so fast... My dad was the only member of the
> family his side that I fully loved, trusted and respected. On the
> other side I just have my mother. His work was so important for him,
> I'm so sad I didn't accomplished it..
> I need a lawyer for advices, so If you know one, please contact me.
> Please get in touch with me at danceflore at hotmail.com or +33 (0)6 82
> 30 26 70 for the funerals. I would like to have a lot of people
> coming..
> 
> 
> I have passed on to Flore condolences on behalf on those of us working
> with Francis on Internet Governance issues, but I am sure the family
> would like to hear from those who have worked closely with Francis.
> Flore also asked me about Francis’s work and travel movements – I did
> mention  to her IGF and also his current project with ITU – but I
> don’t have contacts for that work, others might like to pass details
> on.
> 
> Sad news indeed. Francis was an original thinker with a great devotion
> to these issues. It’s hard to believe that he is no longer with us.
> 
> Ian Peter 
> 
> 
> Ce message entrant est certifié sans virus connu.
> Analyse effectuée par AVG - www.avg.fr
> Version: 8.5.421 / Base de données virale: 270.14.20/2440 - Date:
> 10/16/09 06:32:00
> 
> 
> plain text document attachment (message-footer.txt)
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
-- 
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
anriette esterhuysen - executive director
association for progressive communications
p o box 29755 melville - south africa 2109
anriette at apc.org - tel/fax + 27 11 726 1692
http://www.apc.org

____________________________________________________________
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


From a.beccalli at unesco.org  Sat Oct 17 09:13:40 2009
From: a.beccalli at unesco.org (Beccalli, Andrea)
Date: Sat, 17 Oct 2009 15:13:40 +0200
Subject: [governance] Sad news re Francis Muguet
In-Reply-To: <1255784103.6739.628.camel@anriette-laptop>
References: <C6FF8B76.70CC%ian.peter@ianpeter.com> <6FF5EB9924AB4AEBADCC4C771D5F4821@MTBJ> <1255784103.6739.628.camel@anriette-laptop>
Message-ID: <3118A9AF91FFCE45A53E8B17C8537660CE2249@MAILSERVER-02.hq.int.unesco.org>

Anriette, 

I called Flore this morning as soon I read the message, as for many it was hard for me to believe what I was readying. 
She is arranging the necessary for the funeral, I asked her to keep me informed and if she needs help.

Andrea

-----Original Message-----
From: Anriette Esterhuysen [mailto:anriette at apc.org] 
Sent: Saturday, October 17, 2009 2:55 PM
To: governance at lists.cpsr.org
Subject: RE: [governance] Sad news re Francis Muguet

Dear all

Tijani's words capture my own feelings very well. Is this really true? I
still find this so sudden, difficult to believe. And it is not so long
ago that it was Francis who wrote to us about Jean Louis' heart attack
at the ITU, as Tijani points out.

Ian, thanks for communicating with Francis' daughter on our behalf. Do
we have any confirmation of what happened?  Andrea, did you manage to
speak to his family?

Anriette



On Sat, 2009-10-17 at 09:10 +0100, Tijani BEN JEMAA wrote:
> It’s indeed a very sad piece of news.
> 
> Françis was one of the very active and committed civil society actors
> in WSIS, and especially in its second phase.
> 
> Françis always had his own opinion, but never was negative. Our views
> weren’t always the same, and yet, we were really good friends. I feel
> too sad.
> 
> I can’t forget his behaviour when Jean Louis had his health problem in
> ITU in Geneva.
> 
>  
> 
> Now, he is away….. It’s a nasty situation
> 
>  
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> Tijani BEN JEMAA
> 
> Vice Chairman of CIC
> 
> World Federation of Engineering Organizations
> 
> Phone : + 216 98 330 114
> 
> Fax     : + 216 70 860 861
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> 
>  
> 
>                                    
> ______________________________________________________________________
> De : Ian Peter [mailto:ian.peter at ianpeter.com] 
> Envoyé : samedi 17 octobre 2009 04:56
> À : 'governance at lists.cpsr.org'; Gov at wsis-gov.org
> Objet : [governance] Sad news re Francis Muguet
> 
> 
>  
> 
> Friends, I have just received the following email. I have no further
> details, and this must be a shock to all of us.  I would particularly
> urge those of you closer to Francis’s immediate work to get in touch
> with his family as requested below. This is sad news indeed.
> 
> Hey,
> My name is Flore MUGUET, I'm the daughter of Francis MUGUET, I'm
> contacting you because you are his friend on Facebook. My father died
> in Paris couple days ago and I just found out Wednesday night, because
> I was worried that I wasn't answering my emails. It's hard for me to
> realize, it' s happening so fast... My dad was the only member of the
> family his side that I fully loved, trusted and respected. On the
> other side I just have my mother. His work was so important for him,
> I'm so sad I didn't accomplished it..
> I need a lawyer for advices, so If you know one, please contact me.
> Please get in touch with me at danceflore at hotmail.com or +33 (0)6 82
> 30 26 70 for the funerals. I would like to have a lot of people
> coming..
> 
> 
> I have passed on to Flore condolences on behalf on those of us working
> with Francis on Internet Governance issues, but I am sure the family
> would like to hear from those who have worked closely with Francis.
> Flore also asked me about Francis’s work and travel movements – I did
> mention  to her IGF and also his current project with ITU – but I
> don’t have contacts for that work, others might like to pass details
> on.
> 
> Sad news indeed. Francis was an original thinker with a great devotion
> to these issues. It’s hard to believe that he is no longer with us.
> 
> Ian Peter 
> 
> 
> Ce message entrant est certifié sans virus connu.
> Analyse effectuée par AVG - www.avg.fr
> Version: 8.5.421 / Base de données virale: 270.14.20/2440 - Date:
> 10/16/09 06:32:00
> 
> 
> plain text document attachment (message-footer.txt)
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
-- 
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
anriette esterhuysen - executive director
association for progressive communications
p o box 29755 melville - south africa 2109
anriette at apc.org - tel/fax + 27 11 726 1692
http://www.apc.org

____________________________________________________________
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

From jlfullsack at orange.fr  Sat Oct 17 09:24:13 2009
From: jlfullsack at orange.fr (Jean-Louis FULLSACK)
Date: Sat, 17 Oct 2009 15:24:13 +0200 (CEST)
Subject: [governance] Sad news re Francis Muguet
In-Reply-To: <6FF5EB9924AB4AEBADCC4C771D5F4821@MTBJ>
References: <C6FF8B76.70CC%ian.peter@ianpeter.com>
 <6FF5EB9924AB4AEBADCC4C771D5F4821@MTBJ>
Message-ID: <2234289.298605.1255785852994.JavaMail.www@wwinf1e20>


Please excuse me for writing this message in French.It is the only language which can express my very feelings.

Yes, dear friends of the list, these are very sad and completely inunderstandable news for us all.


Cher Tijani, chers membres de la liste

Cette nouvelle me touche au plus profond. Je ne peux croire que celui qui m'a assisté et aidé si efficacement à rester en vie en mai dernier nous ait soudain quittés pour toujours.

Francis, ma mémoire est trop pleine de tes rires, de nos longues discussions et de nos fréquents échanges. Tu étais ce militant dont on ne peut que rêver et dont on s'honore d'être l'Ami. Je ne peux résister à pleurer en écrivant ces lignes à ta mémoire. 

Francis, sache bien que, où que tu sois -et pour moi tu ne peux être qu'à une place où règne la Paix et la Solidarité- mes pensées ne te quittent pas et ma reconnaissance t'est acquise à jamais. Mais il me faudra encore faire beaucoup d'efforts pour admettre que nous ne nous croiserons plus et -surtout- que nous ne partagerons plus nos vues sur les grands problèmes qui attendent la société et sur lesquels tu avais toujours un avis motivé. 

Rétrospectivement, le seul rayon de soleil dans ce triste paysage que tu nous laisses, c'est le souvenir de notre travail commun, de notre engagement dans le SMSI où tu nous as rejoints, comme nous le rappelle notre ami Tijani, avec toute ton ardeur, tes convictions, mais aussi ton engagement et ta grande disponibilité. Tu as interloqué plus d'un d'entre nous par ton travail impressionnant, tes analyses de fond, et ta sincérité. Et pour ce qui me concerne, j'y ajoute l'amitié qui a toujours prévalu dans nos relations. Merci mon cher Francis pour tout cela !

Je tacherai de continnuer une partie de ton engagement dans un domaine qui m'est moins étranger que les codes, protocoles et autres sciences de la complexité. Je veux parler des problèmes de financement des objectifs du SMSI et des nouveaux mécanismes et dispositifs que nous devons inventer ou remettre à l'honneur, pour contribuer à un développement humain plus équitable et plus solidaire. Je veux parler du Groupe de travail de la société civile sur le financement, créé sous tes pressions amicales sur notre ami Djilali (Benamrane) et moi-même, suite notamment à mes interventions et propositions au nom de CSDPTT au SMSI. Je te promets, mon cher Francis, de continuer ce combat, maintenant d'autant plus que je sais que tu seras en permanence "derrière moi".

Francis, par un concours de circonstance indépendant de ma volonté je n'ai pas pu te revoir à Genève comme je te l'avais (presque) promis lors d'un de nos nombreux échanges téléphoniques. En effet, à l'avant-veille de la réunion de l'UNGIS sur les mécanismes de financement, mon cardiologue m'a fortement dissuadé de participer à cette réunion, car il estimait après m'avoir sérieusement ausculté, que deux jours de discussions seraient une charge incompatible avec la proximité de mon opération. C'est donc avec une grande déception que j'ai dû renoncer à participer à ce rendez-vous si important, d'autant plus que -toi et moi- nous y avons travaillé dur pour convaincre nos interlocuteurs de l'urgence du débat sur ce problème fondamental. Je te remercie, Francis, pour ce coup de main que tu m'as donné pour faire aboutir -enfin!- cette revendication fondamentale de la société civile engagée dans le processus du SMSI. Mais je regretterai encore longtemps d'avoir trop écouté mon cardiologue et de ce fait d'avoir perdu la dernière occasion de te revoir et de partager avec toi quelques moments d'amitié et d'échanges.

Francis, tu nous as tous laissés un peu orphelins car tu avais encore tellement d'idées et de propositions à nous faire partager dans des domaines qui t'étaient plus que familiers. Tu avais accepté pour cela les propositions de l'UIT pour les porter encore davantage dans le domaine public concerné. Chacun d'entre nous, dans les futurs débats, sur la gouvernance de l'Internet et aussi dans l'autre problème majeur laissé en friche par le SMSI : le financement de ses objectifs, aura en mémoire tes contributions. Nous continuerons ainsi à t'associer à nos travaux pour faire avancer ces grandes problématique. 

Un immense merci à toi, Francis, mon ami, pour tout ce que tu nous as apporté. Nous serons tristes de ton départ, mais nous nous souviendrons de ton engagement pour nous redonner espoir !

Jean-Louis 


Chère Flore

Je vous exprime par cette voie un peu particulière, mes plus sincères condoléances et vous souhaite tout le courage nécessaire pour surmonter ces moments si difficiles après la perte de ce papa que vous aimiez tant. 
J'essairai de trouver votre adresse pour un échange plus formel, mais je vous saurais gré de bien vouloir m'aviser de la date de ses obsèques (en réponse à ce courriel), si ce n'est pas trop tard. D'avance merci. 



> Message du 17/10/09 10:38
> De : "Tijani BEN JEMAA" 
> A : governance at lists.cpsr.org, "'Ian Peter'" , Gov at wsis-gov.org
> Copie à : 
> Objet : RE: [governance] Sad news re Francis Muguet
> 
> 
It’s indeed a very sad piece of news.Françis was one of the very active and committed civil society actors in WSIS, and especially in its second phase.Françis always had his own opinion, but never was negative. Our views weren’t always the same, and yet, we were really good friends. I feel too sad.I can’t forget his behaviour when Jean Louis had his health problem in ITU in Geneva. Now, he is away….. It’s a nasty situation 
------------------------------------------------------------Tijani BEN JEMAAVice Chairman of CICWorld Federation of Engineering OrganizationsPhone : + 216 98 330 114Fax : + 216 70 860 861------------------------------------------------------------




De : Ian Peter [mailto:ian.peter at ianpeter.com] 
> Envoyé : samedi 17 octobre 2009 04:56
> À : 'governance at lists.cpsr.org'; Gov at wsis-gov.org
> Objet : [governance] Sad news re Francis Muguet
Friends, I have just received the following email. I have no further details, and this must be a shock to all of us. I would particularly urge those of you closer to Francis’s immediate work to get in touch with his family as requested below. This is sad news indeed.
> 
> Hey,
> My name is Flore MUGUET, I'm the daughter of Francis MUGUET, I'm contacting you because you are his friend on Facebook. My father died in Paris couple days ago and I just found out Wednesday night, because I was worried that I wasn't answering my emails. It's hard for me to realize, it' s happening so fast... My dad was the only member of the family his side that I fully loved, trusted and respected. On the other side I just have my mother. His work was so important for him, I'm so sad I didn't accomplished it..
> I need a lawyer for advices, so If you know one, please contact me.
> Please get in touch with me at danceflore at hotmail.com or +33 (0)6 82 30 26 70 for the funerals. I would like to have a lot of people coming..
> 
> 
> I have passed on to Flore condolences on behalf on those of us working with Francis on Internet Governance issues, but I am sure the family would like to hear from those who have worked closely with Francis. Flore also asked me about Francis’s work and travel movements – I did mention to her IGF and also his current project with ITU – but I don’t have contacts for that work, others might like to pass details on.
> 
> Sad news indeed. Francis was an original thinker with a great devotion to these issues. It’s hard to believe that he is no longer with us.
> 
> Ian Peter 
> Ce message entrant est certifié sans virus connu.
> Analyse effectuée par AVG - www.avg.fr
> Version: 8.5.421 / Base de données virale: 270.14.20/2440 - Date: 10/16/09 06:32:00
> 
> 

>
> [ message-footer.txt (0.3 Ko) ]
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20091017/e7b3326d/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

From nyangkweagien at gmail.com  Sat Oct 17 09:38:48 2009
From: nyangkweagien at gmail.com (Nyangkwe Agien Aaron)
Date: Sat, 17 Oct 2009 15:38:48 +0200
Subject: [governance] Sad news re Francis Muguet
In-Reply-To: <1255784103.6739.628.camel@anriette-laptop>
References: <C6FF8B76.70CC%ian.peter@ianpeter.com>
	 <6FF5EB9924AB4AEBADCC4C771D5F4821@MTBJ>
	 <1255784103.6739.628.camel@anriette-laptop>
Message-ID: <a6bc8cb30910170638p27625082i693f9b14b4687b1a@mail.gmail.com>

Hi all,

So sad news indeed if can be confirmed. But I wonder how Francis' daughter
could not gather the courage and be more precise on the date of the death
and what caused the passing away of her father and our friend Francis.

Was he sick? Of what? Since when and where did he pass away?

The pill is so big to be swallowed like that. Can some one come out with
precise information on the matter?

Deep condolences if information is confirmed

Aaron


On Sat, Oct 17, 2009 at 2:55 PM, Anriette Esterhuysen <anriette at apc.org>wrote:

> Dear all
>
> Tijani's words capture my own feelings very well. Is this really true? I
> still find this so sudden, difficult to believe. And it is not so long
> ago that it was Francis who wrote to us about Jean Louis' heart attack
> at the ITU, as Tijani points out.
>
> Ian, thanks for communicating with Francis' daughter on our behalf. Do
> we have any confirmation of what happened?  Andrea, did you manage to
> speak to his family?
>
> Anriette
>
>
>
> On Sat, 2009-10-17 at 09:10 +0100, Tijani BEN JEMAA wrote:
> > It’s indeed a very sad piece of news.
> >
> > Françis was one of the very active and committed civil society actors
> > in WSIS, and especially in its second phase.
> >
> > Françis always had his own opinion, but never was negative. Our views
> > weren’t always the same, and yet, we were really good friends. I feel
> > too sad.
> >
> > I can’t forget his behaviour when Jean Louis had his health problem in
> > ITU in Geneva.
> >
> >
> >
> > Now, he is away….. It’s a nasty situation
> >
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > Tijani BEN JEMAA
> >
> > Vice Chairman of CIC
> >
> > World Federation of Engineering Organizations
> >
> > Phone : + 216 98 330 114
> >
> > Fax     : + 216 70 860 861
> >
> > ------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ______________________________________________________________________
> > De : Ian Peter [mailto:ian.peter at ianpeter.com]
> > Envoyé : samedi 17 octobre 2009 04:56
> > À : 'governance at lists.cpsr.org'; Gov at wsis-gov.org
> > Objet : [governance] Sad news re Francis Muguet
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Friends, I have just received the following email. I have no further
> > details, and this must be a shock to all of us.  I would particularly
> > urge those of you closer to Francis’s immediate work to get in touch
> > with his family as requested below. This is sad news indeed.
> >
> > Hey,
> > My name is Flore MUGUET, I'm the daughter of Francis MUGUET, I'm
> > contacting you because you are his friend on Facebook. My father died
> > in Paris couple days ago and I just found out Wednesday night, because
> > I was worried that I wasn't answering my emails. It's hard for me to
> > realize, it' s happening so fast... My dad was the only member of the
> > family his side that I fully loved, trusted and respected. On the
> > other side I just have my mother. His work was so important for him,
> > I'm so sad I didn't accomplished it..
> > I need a lawyer for advices, so If you know one, please contact me.
> > Please get in touch with me at danceflore at hotmail.com or +33 (0)6 82
> > 30 26 70 for the funerals. I would like to have a lot of people
> > coming..
> >
> >
> > I have passed on to Flore condolences on behalf on those of us working
> > with Francis on Internet Governance issues, but I am sure the family
> > would like to hear from those who have worked closely with Francis.
> > Flore also asked me about Francis’s work and travel movements – I did
> > mention  to her IGF and also his current project with ITU – but I
> > don’t have contacts for that work, others might like to pass details
> > on.
> >
> > Sad news indeed. Francis was an original thinker with a great devotion
> > to these issues. It’s hard to believe that he is no longer with us.
> >
> > Ian Peter
> >
> >
> > Ce message entrant est certifié sans virus connu.
> > Analyse effectuée par AVG - www.avg.fr
> > Version: 8.5.421 / Base de données virale: 270.14.20/2440 - Date:
> > 10/16/09 06:32:00
> >
> >
> > plain text document attachment (message-footer.txt)
> > ____________________________________________________________
> > 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
> --
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> anriette esterhuysen - executive director
> association for progressive communications
> p o box 29755 melville - south africa 2109
> anriette at apc.org - tel/fax + 27 11 726 1692
> http://www.apc.org
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
>



-- 
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
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20091017/a4d86a9c/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

From tijani.benjemaa at planet.tn  Sat Oct 17 09:31:02 2009
From: tijani.benjemaa at planet.tn (Tijani BEN JEMAA)
Date: Sat, 17 Oct 2009 14:31:02 +0100
Subject: [governance] Sad news re Francis Muguet
In-Reply-To: <1255784103.6739.628.camel@anriette-laptop>
References: <C6FF8B76.70CC%ian.peter@ianpeter.com> <6FF5EB9924AB4AEBADCC4C771D5F4821@MTBJ> <1255784103.6739.628.camel@anriette-laptop>
Message-ID: <69FF0B70EC97499C926F799C6D5C7518@MTBJ>

Anriette,

I called this morning his daughter how sent me the same message as Ian's one. She told me that he died in his house where he was alone. Because the autopsy wasn't done, she said she doesn't know the real reason of the death even if some doctors said it was a heart attack. She needs a lawyer for advises, so please, if someone can help, do not hesitate to contact her by e-mail or by phone:
danceflore at hotmail.com
+33(0)6 82 30 26 70

Very hard to believe

------------------------------------------------------------
Tijani BEN JEMAA
Vice Chairman of CIC
World Federation of Engineering Organizations
Phone : + 216 98 330 114
Fax     : + 216 70 860 861
------------------------------------------------------------

-----Message d'origine-----
De : Anriette Esterhuysen [mailto:anriette at apc.org] 
Envoyé : samedi 17 octobre 2009 13:55
À : governance at lists.cpsr.org
Objet : RE: [governance] Sad news re Francis Muguet

Dear all

Tijani's words capture my own feelings very well. Is this really true? I
still find this so sudden, difficult to believe. And it is not so long
ago that it was Francis who wrote to us about Jean Louis' heart attack
at the ITU, as Tijani points out.

Ian, thanks for communicating with Francis' daughter on our behalf. Do
we have any confirmation of what happened?  Andrea, did you manage to
speak to his family?

Anriette



On Sat, 2009-10-17 at 09:10 +0100, Tijani BEN JEMAA wrote:
> It’s indeed a very sad piece of news.
> 
> Françis was one of the very active and committed civil society actors
> in WSIS, and especially in its second phase.
> 
> Françis always had his own opinion, but never was negative. Our views
> weren’t always the same, and yet, we were really good friends. I feel
> too sad.
> 
> I can’t forget his behaviour when Jean Louis had his health problem in
> ITU in Geneva.
> 
>  
> 
> Now, he is away….. It’s a nasty situation
> 
>  
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> Tijani BEN JEMAA
> 
> Vice Chairman of CIC
> 
> World Federation of Engineering Organizations
> 
> Phone : + 216 98 330 114
> 
> Fax     : + 216 70 860 861
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> 
>  
> 
>                                    
> ______________________________________________________________________
> De : Ian Peter [mailto:ian.peter at ianpeter.com] 
> Envoyé : samedi 17 octobre 2009 04:56
> À : 'governance at lists.cpsr.org'; Gov at wsis-gov.org
> Objet : [governance] Sad news re Francis Muguet
> 
> 
>  
> 
> Friends, I have just received the following email. I have no further
> details, and this must be a shock to all of us.  I would particularly
> urge those of you closer to Francis’s immediate work to get in touch
> with his family as requested below. This is sad news indeed.
> 
> Hey,
> My name is Flore MUGUET, I'm the daughter of Francis MUGUET, I'm
> contacting you because you are his friend on Facebook. My father died
> in Paris couple days ago and I just found out Wednesday night, because
> I was worried that I wasn't answering my emails. It's hard for me to
> realize, it' s happening so fast... My dad was the only member of the
> family his side that I fully loved, trusted and respected. On the
> other side I just have my mother. His work was so important for him,
> I'm so sad I didn't accomplished it..
> I need a lawyer for advices, so If you know one, please contact me.
> Please get in touch with me at danceflore at hotmail.com or +33 (0)6 82
> 30 26 70 for the funerals. I would like to have a lot of people
> coming..
> 
> 
> I have passed on to Flore condolences on behalf on those of us working
> with Francis on Internet Governance issues, but I am sure the family
> would like to hear from those who have worked closely with Francis.
> Flore also asked me about Francis’s work and travel movements – I did
> mention  to her IGF and also his current project with ITU – but I
> don’t have contacts for that work, others might like to pass details
> on.
> 
> Sad news indeed. Francis was an original thinker with a great devotion
> to these issues. It’s hard to believe that he is no longer with us.
> 
> Ian Peter 
> 
> 
> Ce message entrant est certifié sans virus connu.
> Analyse effectuée par AVG - www.avg.fr
> Version: 8.5.421 / Base de données virale: 270.14.20/2440 - Date:
> 10/16/09 06:32:00
> 
> 
> plain text document attachment (message-footer.txt)
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
-- 
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
anriette esterhuysen - executive director
association for progressive communications
p o box 29755 melville - south africa 2109
anriette at apc.org - tel/fax + 27 11 726 1692
http://www.apc.org

____________________________________________________________
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
Ce message entrant est certifié sans virus connu.
Analyse effectuée par AVG - www.avg.fr 
Version: 8.5.422 / Base de données virale: 270.14.20/2440 - Date: 10/16/09 18:39:00

____________________________________________________________
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


From roland at internetpolicyagency.com  Sat Oct 17 10:56:00 2009
From: roland at internetpolicyagency.com (Roland Perry)
Date: Sat, 17 Oct 2009 15:56:00 +0100
Subject: [governance] Re: Cameroon and Wales collision in TLD space ?????
In-Reply-To: <954259bd0910160843q1740718ay670d369134549ba7@mail.gmail.com>
References: <954259bd0910160843q1740718ay670d369134549ba7@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4hsORuaAsd2KFAGz@perry.co.uk>

In message 
<954259bd0910160843q1740718ay670d369134549ba7 at mail.gmail.com>, at 
17:43:15 on Fri, 16 Oct 2009, Bertrand de La Chapelle 
<bdelachapelle at gmail.com> writes
>Hi all,
>
>I have seen in previous posts this reference to the possible collision
>between .cym and the three letter ISO code for Cameroon. Did not chime
>in then as the thread had continued on another topic, but I am a bit
>puzzled here.
>
>If there is a problem, it's with the Cayman island (3-letter iso code
>CYM), not Cameroon.

You are quite right. I was mis-remembering who has the ISO3166-Alpha-3 
code CYM. It is indeed Cayman Islands.

>As the Cayman islands are a UK territory, the
>relevant national authority is the same as the Wales proposal, isn't it

I'm not sure the UK has jurisdiction in such matters, in those two 
places (but discussing that is a red herring). In any event the welsh 
Dot-cym is apparently not currently a government entity.

>? Anyway, don't they already have a 2-letter ccTLD (kY is the 2-letter
>ISO 3166 code) ?

They do, but as I understand it there's a GAC proposal to *also* reserve 
all the three-letter codes.

I don't express any view about the merit of such an additional 
reservation, but merely observe that if it happens at least one 
collision will occur (the welsh Dot-CYM campaign is well established).

>I suppose the possible collisions will only appear in due course as
>other proposals will be put forward.

I'm sure there will be other geographic collisions (even ones like 
Paris, Texas versus Paris, France).

What I'm asking Paul is this:  if he believes the winner should be 
decided "democratically", what form would the election take? It's about 
process, rather than the exact details of any particular collision.
-- 
Roland Perry
____________________________________________________________
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


From roland at internetpolicyagency.com  Sat Oct 17 11:45:56 2009
From: roland at internetpolicyagency.com (Roland Perry)
Date: Sat, 17 Oct 2009 16:45:56 +0100
Subject: [governance] ICANN/USG Affirmation of Commitments
In-Reply-To: <76f819dd0910160620g187dc5a0jb515a4838f25b4e9@mail.gmail.com>
References: <75822E125BCB994F8446858C4B19F0D78FFC6E09@SUEX07-MBX-04.ad.syr.edu>
 <76f819dd0910050734o5fbc2812k789c8232b30eac3b@mail.gmail.com>
 <D6ew3OJaviyKFAxR@perry.co.uk>
 <76f819dd0910060919u3b97805br140a134539a7578c@mail.gmail.com>
 <BezwuVcq7DzKFAqN@perry.co.uk>
 <76f819dd0910081044jb3eced8lb2fcc02520430e6b@mail.gmail.com>
 <iYOY$2OAwh0KFAXq@perry.co.uk> <0Mmd6Ueluh1KFAdQ@perry.co.uk>
 <76f819dd0910151202y2a0ac3bbna59f0435a6a21558@mail.gmail.com>
 <0Umd8spqQE2KFAU3@perry.co.uk>
 <76f819dd0910160620g187dc5a0jb515a4838f25b4e9@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <6jBuB9d0ae2KFA3+@perry.co.uk>

In message 
<76f819dd0910160620g187dc5a0jb515a4838f25b4e9 at mail.gmail.com>, at 
09:20:04 on Fri, 16 Oct 2009, Paul Lehto <lehto.paul at gmail.com> writes
>Roland, I'm asking you to admit that ICANN is not constituted as an
>organization practicing any form of democracy?  Do you agree or
>disagree?

This isn't about what I think of the situation today, but what you think 
might be a more democratic replacement. I've trying hard to get you come 
up with some specific suggestions, but you are remarkably reluctant.
-- 
Roland Perry
____________________________________________________________
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


From roland at internetpolicyagency.com  Sat Oct 17 11:52:06 2009
From: roland at internetpolicyagency.com (Roland Perry)
Date: Sat, 17 Oct 2009 16:52:06 +0100
Subject: [governance] Cameroon and Wales collision in TLD space ?????
In-Reply-To: <76f819dd0910160853t7d929187g37e2791feb2d85e4@mail.gmail.com>
References: <954259bd0910160843q1740718ay670d369134549ba7@mail.gmail.com>
 <76f819dd0910160853t7d929187g37e2791feb2d85e4@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <wDlsJ8emge2KFA1T@perry.co.uk>

In message 
<76f819dd0910160853t7d929187g37e2791feb2d85e4 at mail.gmail.com>, at 
11:53:31 on Fri, 16 Oct 2009, Paul Lehto <lehto.paul at gmail.com> writes
>If there's not a democratic system of governance at ICANN, any such
>"collision" of domain names or any other issue for that matter is
>purely a matter for insider "experts" at ICANN and not the proper
>"domain" of anyone on this list.

You seem to suppose there are none of those experts on this list.

But in the case of ISO 3166 assignments, the experts are not "inside" 
ICANN but outside. The proposition in RFC1591 cannot be clearer:

       The IANA is not in the business of deciding what is and what is
       not a country.

       The selection of the ISO 3166 list as a basis for country code
       top-level domain names was made with the knowledge that ISO has a
       procedure for determining which entities should be and should not
       be on that list.
-- 
Roland Perry
____________________________________________________________
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


From jsarr at refer.sn  Sat Oct 17 11:52:08 2009
From: jsarr at refer.sn (jsarr)
Date: Sat, 17 Oct 2009 15:52:08 +0000
Subject: [governance] =?UTF-8?Q?Condol=C3=A9ances_attrist=C3=A9es_pour_le?=
 =?UTF-8?Q?_d=C3=A9c=C3=A8s_de_Francis_MUGUET?=
In-Reply-To: <444388.59699.qm@web24208.mail.ird.yahoo.com>
References: <444388.59699.qm@web24208.mail.ird.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <2b714bebf99ccfc9f56e888b18c9c9ac@refer.sn>

A l'attention de Flore MUGUET, fille de Francis

Chère flore,

Veuillez recevoir mes condoléances les plus attristées.
Je connais Francis depuis le PREPCOM2 organisé à Genève en février
2003.
Il a toujours été un acteur respecté de la société civile qui a fait
le succès du Sommet Mondial sur la Société de l'Information. Il s'était
aussi fortement impliqué dans la problématique des collectivités
locales.
Il avait un dynamisme inégalable et une grande force dans son
argumentation.
La Société de l'Information vient de perdre un homme de grande valeur.
Je prie Dieu pour que son âme repose en Paix. AMEN

Joseph SARR
Université Cheikh Anta Diop de Dakar
Dakar - Sénégal

____________________________________________________________
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


From cogitoergosum at sbcglobal.net  Sat Oct 17 11:55:29 2009
From: cogitoergosum at sbcglobal.net (Eric Dierker)
Date: Sat, 17 Oct 2009 08:55:29 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [governance] Francis Muguet
Message-ID: <959180.81128.qm@web83913.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>

It is my pleasure to have known this fine man. I was most impressed with his constant drive to bring concept to reality. He did not waiver in his belief that things spoken of must be solidified and done. He influenced me in a very positive way, and so I am in his debt.
 
The attached are just some of his words recently on this list. And a few "places" I visited to learn more about this good man.
 
"If I could gather just the best of the best of men to form an ideal man, I would certainly gather a bit of Francis Muguet: his good Ideals shall live on."
 
Eric Hugh Dierker

--- On Sat, 10/17/09, Tijani BEN JEMAA <tijani.benjemaa at planet.tn> wrote:


From: Tijani BEN JEMAA <tijani.benjemaa at planet.tn>
Subject: RE: [governance] Sad news re Francis Muguet
To: governance at lists.cpsr.org, "'Anriette Esterhuysen'" <anriette at apc.org>
Date: Saturday, October 17, 2009, 1:31 PM


Anriette,

I called this morning his daughter how sent me the same message as Ian's one. She told me that he died in his house where he was alone. Because the autopsy wasn't done, she said she doesn't know the real reason of the death even if some doctors said it was a heart attack. She needs a lawyer for advises, so please, if someone can help, do not hesitate to contact her by e-mail or by phone:
danceflore at hotmail.com
+33(0)6 82 30 26 70

Very hard to believe

------------------------------------------------------------
Tijani BEN JEMAA
Vice Chairman of CIC
World Federation of Engineering Organizations
Phone : + 216 98 330 114
Fax     : + 216 70 860 861
------------------------------------------------------------

-----Message d'origine-----
De : Anriette Esterhuysen [mailto:anriette at apc.org] 
Envoyé : samedi 17 octobre 2009 13:55
À : governance at lists.cpsr.org
Objet : RE: [governance] Sad news re Francis Muguet

Dear all

Tijani's words capture my own feelings very well. Is this really true? I
still find this so sudden, difficult to believe. And it is not so long
ago that it was Francis who wrote to us about Jean Louis' heart attack
at the ITU, as Tijani points out.

Ian, thanks for communicating with Francis' daughter on our behalf. Do
we have any confirmation of what happened?  Andrea, did you manage to
speak to his family?

Anriette



On Sat, 2009-10-17 at 09:10 +0100, Tijani BEN JEMAA wrote:
> It’s indeed a very sad piece of news.
> 
> Françis was one of the very active and committed civil society actors
> in WSIS, and especially in its second phase.
> 
> Françis always had his own opinion, but never was negative. Our views
> weren’t always the same, and yet, we were really good friends. I feel
> too sad.
> 
> I can’t forget his behaviour when Jean Louis had his health problem in
> ITU in Geneva.
> 
>  
> 
> Now, he is away….. It’s a nasty situation
> 
>  
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> Tijani BEN JEMAA
> 
> Vice Chairman of CIC
> 
> World Federation of Engineering Organizations
> 
> Phone : + 216 98 330 114
> 
> Fax     : + 216 70 860 861
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> 
>  
> 
>                                    
> ______________________________________________________________________
> De : Ian Peter [mailto:ian.peter at ianpeter.com] 
> Envoyé : samedi 17 octobre 2009 04:56
> À : 'governance at lists.cpsr.org'; Gov at wsis-gov.org
> Objet : [governance] Sad news re Francis Muguet
> 
> 
>  
> 
> Friends, I have just received the following email. I have no further
> details, and this must be a shock to all of us.  I would particularly
> urge those of you closer to Francis’s immediate work to get in touch
> with his family as requested below. This is sad news indeed.
> 
> Hey,
> My name is Flore MUGUET, I'm the daughter of Francis MUGUET, I'm
> contacting you because you are his friend on Facebook. My father died
> in Paris couple days ago and I just found out Wednesday night, because
> I was worried that I wasn't answering my emails. It's hard for me to
> realize, it' s happening so fast... My dad was the only member of the
> family his side that I fully loved, trusted and respected. On the
> other side I just have my mother. His work was so important for him,
> I'm so sad I didn't accomplished it..
> I need a lawyer for advices, so If you know one, please contact me.
> Please get in touch with me at danceflore at hotmail.com or +33 (0)6 82
> 30 26 70 for the funerals. I would like to have a lot of people
> coming..
> 
> 
> I have passed on to Flore condolences on behalf on those of us working
> with Francis on Internet Governance issues, but I am sure the family
> would like to hear from those who have worked closely with Francis.
> Flore also asked me about Francis’s work and travel movements – I did
> mention  to her IGF and also his current project with ITU – but I
> don’t have contacts for that work, others might like to pass details
> on.
> 
> Sad news indeed. Francis was an original thinker with a great devotion
> to these issues. It’s hard to believe that he is no longer with us.
> 
> Ian Peter 
> 
> 
> Ce message entrant est certifié sans virus connu.
> Analyse effectuée par AVG - www.avg.fr
> Version: 8.5.421 / Base de données virale: 270.14.20/2440 - Date:
> 10/16/09 06:32:00
> 
> 
> plain text document attachment (message-footer.txt)
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
-- 
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
anriette esterhuysen - executive director
association for progressive communications
p o box 29755 melville - south africa 2109
anriette at apc.org - tel/fax + 27 11 726 1692
http://www.apc.org

____________________________________________________________
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
Ce message entrant est certifié sans virus connu.
Analyse effectuée par AVG - www.avg.fr 
Version: 8.5.422 / Base de données virale: 270.14.20/2440 - Date: 10/16/09 18:39:00

____________________________________________________________
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/20091017/c5e70974/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Francis.docx
Type: application/octet-stream
Size: 11347 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20091017/c5e70974/attachment.obj>
-------------- 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

From roland at internetpolicyagency.com  Sat Oct 17 11:57:27 2009
From: roland at internetpolicyagency.com (Roland Perry)
Date: Sat, 17 Oct 2009 16:57:27 +0100
Subject: [governance] Cameroon and Wales collision in TLD space ?????
In-Reply-To: <a6bc8cb30910170516q798e2e49yea18b70efdc7e6fa@mail.gmail.com>
References: <954259bd0910160843q1740718ay670d369134549ba7@mail.gmail.com>
 <a6bc8cb30910170516q798e2e49yea18b70efdc7e6fa@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <dc1XOcgnle2KFARk@perry.co.uk>

In message 
<a6bc8cb30910170516q798e2e49yea18b70efdc7e6fa at mail.gmail.com>, at 
14:16:03 on Sat, 17 Oct 2009, Nyangkwe Agien Aaron 
<nyangkweagien at gmail.com> writes
>As far as I can recall and recond, the ccTLD for Cameroon is CM. Or is 
>some one alluding that the authorities of my countries are about to 
>make a change and no communication is made.
>If there is that change, what about those who registered their sites 
>and web names on CM?

Yes, it was a mistake. I mis-remembered who CYM was allocated to, 
thinking it was CM. But in fact it's KY. (For completeness, CY is 
Cyprus, 3-letter code CYP!)

The remainder of my comments are still valid.
-- 
Roland Perry
____________________________________________________________
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


From fsylla at gmail.com  Sat Oct 17 12:12:48 2009
From: fsylla at gmail.com (Fatimata Seye Sylla)
Date: Sat, 17 Oct 2009 12:12:48 -0400
Subject: [governance] Sad news re Francis Muguet
In-Reply-To: <69FF0B70EC97499C926F799C6D5C7518@MTBJ>
References: <C6FF8B76.70CC%ian.peter@ianpeter.com>
	 <6FF5EB9924AB4AEBADCC4C771D5F4821@MTBJ>
	 <1255784103.6739.628.camel@anriette-laptop>
	 <69FF0B70EC97499C926F799C6D5C7518@MTBJ>
Message-ID: <19a59c60910170912u38401c9cn9d09567e5e89a408@mail.gmail.com>

TOUTES MES CONDOLEANCES A FLORE MUGUET ET A TOUTE LA COMMUNAUTE DE LA
GOUVERNACE DE L'INTERNET ET DU SMSI.

C'est une lourde perte pour nous tous et nous n'oublierons jamais son
engagement et son combat pour la bonne cause

Que son ame repose en paix !


-- 
Fatimata Seye Sylla
Presidente de l'ONG Bokk Jang
Senegal
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20091017/44a7ee09/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

From carlton.samuels at uwimona.edu.jm  Sat Oct 17 12:20:59 2009
From: carlton.samuels at uwimona.edu.jm (Carlton Samuels)
Date: Sat, 17 Oct 2009 11:20:59 -0500
Subject: [governance] Review Panels
In-Reply-To: <20091015203950.7cvn8ev328w800ss@www.isocperu.org>
References: <945154.26944.qm@web110102.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
	 <20091015203950.7cvn8ev328w800ss@www.isocperu.org>
Message-ID: <61a136f40910170920h6f675871ge749f8e2621927ba@mail.gmail.com>

Dear Jose:There is an ICANN At-Large community that might suit your purpose.
See http://www.atlarge.icann.org/.  Under the At-Large umbrella, the
regional organisation, LACRALO, may serve as your point of connection - see

https://st.icann.org/lacralo/index.cgi - and there are opportunities for
membership.   Since they are already members of LACRALO, your ISOC brethren
in Argentina and Mexico may be helpful in advising you.

Kind regards,
Carlton Samuels
LACRALO, Jamaica

On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 7:39 PM, <jfcallo at isocperu.org> wrote:

> Distinguished members of this list:
> I write from Lima, Peru, we are interested in participating in ICANN,
> contribute from our experience, how do to connect with ICANN?, Send an
> e-mail for 10 days and no one responds.
> Thanks
> Jose F. Callo Romero
>    Secretario
>    ISOC Peru
>
>
>
> Quoting Danny Younger <dannyyounger at yahoo.com>:
>
>  Bertrand,
>>
>> There is more to this equation than diversity, balance, and
>>  representativeness; these review panels will require individuals  with
>> extensive knowledge regarding the particulars of the areas  under review
>> (which is why independent experts are cited as part of  the necessary review
>> team mix).
>>
>> The teams will include:
>>
>> the Chair of the GAC
>> the CEO of ICANN
>> representatives of the Root Server System Advisory Committee
>> representatives of the Security and Stability Advisory Committee
>> representatives of the At-Large Advisory Committee
>> representatives of the Generic Names Supporting Organization
>> representatives of the Address Supporting Organization
>> representatives of the Country Code Names Supporting Organization
>> independent experts (likely drawn from either the Technical Liason  Group,
>> the IETF, the IAB, or from the pool of volunteer community  members)
>>
>> and in the accountability/transparency review team, these members  will be
>> joined by the Assistant Secretary for Communications and  Information of the
>> DOC,
>>
>> The current arrangement calls for the composition of the review team to be
>> agreed jointly by the Chair of the GAC (in consultation with GAC members)
>> and the CEO of ICANN.
>>
>> Like all comparable ICANN processes, there will likely be a call for
>> volunteers (similar to the recent call for NSCG placeholder councilors).
>> The ICANN Board will then privately settle upon whomever best promotes the
>> ICANN interest (likely those that have never been critics) and will then
>> advance those names to the Chair of the GAC.
>>
>> I fully expect these reviews to be as much of a whitewash as all earlier
>> ICANN self-review efforts.  Perhaps you will recall the earlier commissioned
>> review of transparency and accountability provided in the One World Trust
>> report -- we were told that ICANN is a model of transparency with robust
>> accountability mechanisms... and yet we all know the reality.
>>
>> Don't waste your energy on this project.  The deck will be stacked from
>> day one.
>>
>> best regards,
>> Danny Younger
>>
>>
>> --- On Thu, 10/15/09, Bertrand de La Chapelle  <bdelachapelle at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>> From: Bertrand de La Chapelle <bdelachapelle at gmail.com>
>> Subject: [governance] Review Panels
>> To: governance at lists.cpsr.org, "Anriette Esterhuysen" <anriette at apc.org>
>> Date: Thursday, October 15, 2009, 4:33 AM
>>
>>
>> Dear all,
>>
>> Could this list also address Anriette's concrete second question ?  What
>> do you think the review process should be ? Fundamentally, the  community is
>> facing a now recurring problem (cf. WGIG, MAG,...) :  how to compose a
>> multi-stakeholder group for a given task, so that  it is sufficiently
>> diverse, balanced and representative of the  variety of viewpoints ?
>>
>> In addition, what do you tink the timing is ?
>>
>> Best
>>
>> Bertrand
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 1:39 PM, Anriette Esterhuysen  <anriette at apc.org>
>> wrote:
>>
>> snip
>>
>> Second question is about the submissions on the review panels. What is
>> the process likely to be?
>>
>> Anriette
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> ____________________
>> Bertrand de La Chapelle
>> Délégué Spécial pour la Société de l'Information / Special Envoy for the
>> Information Society
>> Ministère des Affaires Etrangères et Européennes/ French Ministry of
>> Foreign and European Affairs
>> Tel : +33 (0)6 11 88 33 32
>>
>> "Le plus beau métier des hommes, c'est d'unir les hommes" Antoine de Saint
>> Exupéry
>> ("there is no greater mission for humans than uniting humans")
>>
>> -----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
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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/20091017/cc0ea818/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

From jameleddinekhemakhem at topnet.tn  Sat Oct 17 12:14:33 2009
From: jameleddinekhemakhem at topnet.tn (jameleddine khemakhem)
Date: Sat, 17 Oct 2009 17:14:33 +0100
Subject: [governance] Sad news re Francis Muguet
In-Reply-To: <31B5A25C-60D9-43B7-88D7-C1C06D7AC624@graduateinstitute.ch>
References: <C6FF8B76.70CC%ian.peter@ianpeter.com> <31B5A25C-60D9-43B7-88D7-C1C06D7AC624@graduateinstitute.ch>
Message-ID: <000c01ca4f44$ea3bd2c0$beb37840$@tn>

C’est un grand choc pour nous tous, Francis était très proche de nos cœurs, par sa gentillesse, son militantisme  raisonnable et objectif, il était l’ami de tous et nous avons perdu un grand homme de la société civile internationale.

 

De : William Drake [mailto:william.drake at graduateinstitute.ch] 
Envoyé : 17 اكتوبر, 2009 11:16
À : governance at lists.cpsr.org; Ian Peter
Cc : Gov at wsis-gov.org
Objet : Re: [governance] Sad news re Francis Muguet

 

Really terrible news.

 

I got that message too from Facebook and responded to her, but I'm leaving soon for Seoul and am anyway not local and in a position to help.  Hopefully some caucus members based in Paris can get in touch with her and see what can be done...?

 

Bill

 

On Oct 17, 2009, at 5:55 AM, Ian Peter wrote:





Friends, I have just received the following email. I have no further details, and this must be a shock to all of us.  I would particularly urge those of you closer to Francis’s immediate work to get in touch with his family as requested below. This is sad news indeed.

Hey,
My name is Flore MUGUET, I'm the daughter of Francis MUGUET, I'm contacting you because you are his friend on Facebook. My father died in Paris couple days ago and I just found out Wednesday night, because I was worried that I wasn't answering my emails. It's hard for me to realize, it' s happening so fast... My dad was the only member of the family his side that I fully loved, trusted and respected. On the other side I just have my mother. His work was so important for him, I'm so sad I didn't accomplished it..
I need a lawyer for advices, so If you know one, please contact me.
Please get in touch with me at danceflore at hotmail.com <x-msg://64/danceflore at hotmail.com>  or +33 (0)6 82 30 26 70 for the funerals. I would like to have a lot of people coming..


I have passed on to Flore condolences on behalf on those of us working with Francis on Internet Governance issues, but I am sure the family would like to hear from those who have worked closely with Francis. Flore also asked me about Francis’s work and travel movements – I did mention  to her IGF and also his current project with ITU – but I don’t have contacts for that work, others might like to pass details on.

Sad news indeed. Francis was an original thinker with a great devotion to these issues. It’s hard to believe that he is no longer with us.

Ian Peter 





 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20091017/b6704a37/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

From nursesacrosstheborders at yahoo.com  Sat Oct 17 13:44:51 2009
From: nursesacrosstheborders at yahoo.com (NURSES ACROSS THE BORDERS)
Date: Sat, 17 Oct 2009 10:44:51 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [governance] Sad news re Francis Muguet
Message-ID: <739332.40594.qm@web34308.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

Dear All,
This is very sad indeed if it is true.
But I will still advise we make an independent confrimation of this news.
First, was the author of the news a registered member of this list serve?
In interim, may his gentle soul rest in peace of the Lord Jesus Christ-amen.




Pastor Peters OMORAGBON 
Executive President/CEO 
Nurses Across the Borders Humanitarian Initiative-Inc.-(Nigeria & U.S.A) An NGO On Special Consultative Status with The Economic and Social Council of the United Nations-(ECOSOC) 
Member(OBSERVER),United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC)
URL: www.nursesacrosstheborders.org
NABHI as affiliate of the United Nations is poised to uphold the TENETS of the CHARTERS of the UN. THIS it pledges to promote and publicise for enhanced Sustainable Developmet. WE believe in a World of Law and Order, Peace and Security with RESPECT for Fundamental Human Rights.
NABHI IS NOT A VISA PROCUREMENT AGENCY NOR IS IT AN INTERNATIONAL RECRUITMENT AGENCY

--- On Sat, 10/17/09, jameleddine khemakhem <jameleddinekhemakhem at topnet.tn> wrote:


From: jameleddine khemakhem <jameleddinekhemakhem at topnet.tn>
Subject: RE: [governance] Sad news re Francis Muguet
To: governance at lists.cpsr.org, "'William Drake'" <william.drake at graduateinstitute.ch>
Date: Saturday, October 17, 2009, 5:57 PM



Junk Score: 2 out of 10 (below your Auto Allow threshold) | Approve sender | Block sender | Block domain 



      
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20091017/0a9fced2/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

From gpaque at gmail.com  Sat Oct 17 14:51:46 2009
From: gpaque at gmail.com (Ginger Paque)
Date: Sat, 17 Oct 2009 14:21:46 -0430
Subject: [governance] Re: Welcome to list governance
In-Reply-To: <d62ac6b30910171148m1bbdb924g984fb066499dcf9e@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20091017182753.A30DE9060C@npogroups.org> <d62ac6b30910171148m1bbdb924g984fb066499dcf9e@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4ADA1242.20800@paque.net>

An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20091017/62428bab/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

From ian.peter at ianpeter.com  Sat Oct 17 15:56:27 2009
From: ian.peter at ianpeter.com (Ian Peter)
Date: Sun, 18 Oct 2009 06:56:27 +1100
Subject: [governance] Sad news re Francis Muguet
In-Reply-To: <a6bc8cb30910170638p27625082i693f9b14b4687b1a@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <C7006C9B.7125%ian.peter@ianpeter.com>

This page seems to provide the unfortunate confirmation that Francis died in
Paris on October 14, and also that the cause of death was most likely a
heart attack. 

http://www.refondation.org/blog/1930/francis-muguet-nous-a-quittes

How fragile we are.




On 18/10/09 12:38 AM, "Nyangkwe Agien Aaron" <nyangkweagien at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Hi all,
> 
> So sad news indeed if can be confirmed. But I wonder how Francis' daughter
> could not gather the courage and be more precise on the date of the death and
> what caused the passing away of her father and our friend Francis.
> 
> Was he sick? Of what? Since when and where did he pass away?
> 
> The pill is so big to be swallowed like that. Can some one come out with
> precise information on the matter?
> 
> Deep condolences if information is confirmed
> 
> Aaron
> 
> 
> On Sat, Oct 17, 2009 at 2:55 PM, Anriette Esterhuysen <anriette at apc.org>
> wrote:
>> Dear all
>> 
>> Tijani's words capture my own feelings very well. Is this really true? I
>> still find this so sudden, difficult to believe. And it is not so long
>> ago that it was Francis who wrote to us about Jean Louis' heart attack
>> at the ITU, as Tijani points out.
>> 
>> Ian, thanks for communicating with Francis' daughter on our behalf. Do
>> we have any confirmation of what happened?  Andrea, did you manage to
>> speak to his family?
>> 
>> Anriette
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On Sat, 2009-10-17 at 09:10 +0100, Tijani BEN JEMAA wrote:
>>> > It’s indeed a very sad piece of news.
>>> >
>>> > Françis was one of the very active and committed civil society actors
>>> > in WSIS, and especially in its second phase.
>>> >
>>> > Françis always had his own opinion, but never was negative. Our views
>>> > weren’t always the same, and yet, we were really good friends. I feel
>>> > too sad.
>>> >
>>> > I can’t forget his behaviour when Jean Louis had his health problem in
>>> > ITU in Geneva.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > Now, he is away….. It’s a nasty situation
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > ------------------------------------------------------------
>>> >
>>> > Tijani BEN JEMAA
>>> >
>>> > Vice Chairman of CIC
>>> >
>>> > World Federation of Engineering Organizations
>>> >
>>> > Phone : + 216 98 330 114
>>> >
>>> > Fax     : + 216 70 860 861
>>> >
>>> > ------------------------------------------------------------
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > ______________________________________________________________________
>>> > De : Ian Peter [mailto:ian.peter at ianpeter.com]
>>> > Envoyé : samedi 17 octobre 2009 04:56
>>> > À : 'governance at lists.cpsr.org'; Gov at wsis-gov.org
>>> > Objet : [governance] Sad news re Francis Muguet
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > Friends, I have just received the following email. I have no further
>>> > details, and this must be a shock to all of us.  I would particularly
>>> > urge those of you closer to Francis’s immediate work to get in touch
>>> > with his family as requested below. This is sad news indeed.
>>> >
>>> > Hey,
>>> > My name is Flore MUGUET, I'm the daughter of Francis MUGUET, I'm
>>> > contacting you because you are his friend on Facebook. My father died
>>> > in Paris couple days ago and I just found out Wednesday night, because
>>> > I was worried that I wasn't answering my emails. It's hard for me to
>>> > realize, it' s happening so fast... My dad was the only member of the
>>> > family his side that I fully loved, trusted and respected. On the
>>> > other side I just have my mother. His work was so important for him,
>>> > I'm so sad I didn't accomplished it..
>>> > I need a lawyer for advices, so If you know one, please contact me.
>>> > Please get in touch with me at danceflore at hotmail.com or +33 (0)6 82
>>> > 30 26 70 for the funerals. I would like to have a lot of people
>>> > coming..
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > I have passed on to Flore condolences on behalf on those of us working
>>> > with Francis on Internet Governance issues, but I am sure the family
>>> > would like to hear from those who have worked closely with Francis.
>>> > Flore also asked me about Francis’s work and travel movements – I did
>>> > mention  to her IGF and also his current project with ITU – but I
>>> > don’t have contacts for that work, others might like to pass details
>>> > on.
>>> >
>>> > Sad news indeed. Francis was an original thinker with a great devotion
>>> > to these issues. It’s hard to believe that he is no longer with us.
>>> >
>>> > Ian Peter
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > Ce message entrant est certifié sans virus connu.
>>> > Analyse effectuée par AVG - www.avg.fr <http://www.avg.fr>
>>> > Version: 8.5.421 / Base de données virale: 270.14.20/2440 - Date:
>>> > 10/16/09 06:32:00
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > plain text document attachment (message-footer.txt)
>>> > ____________________________________________________________
>>> > 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
>> --
>> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>> anriette esterhuysen - executive director
>> association for progressive communications
>> p o box 29755 melville - south africa 2109
>> anriette at apc.org - tel/fax + 27 11 726 1692
>> http://www.apc.org
>> 
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> 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/20091018/b190d067/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

From tijani.benjemaa at planet.tn  Sat Oct 17 15:32:54 2009
From: tijani.benjemaa at planet.tn (Tijani BEN JEMAA)
Date: Sat, 17 Oct 2009 20:32:54 +0100
Subject: [governance] Sad news re Francis Muguet
In-Reply-To: <2234289.298605.1255785852994.JavaMail.www@wwinf1e20>
References: <C6FF8B76.70CC%ian.peter@ianpeter.com> <6FF5EB9924AB4AEBADCC4C771D5F4821@MTBJ> <2234289.298605.1255785852994.JavaMail.www@wwinf1e20>
Message-ID: <75097A434DDF4A839AD7B2F2F68CCCE8@MTBJ>

Mon cher Jean Louis,

 

Francis est parti, nous laissant « orphelins », les cœurs brisés.

Rien ne peut exprimer ma tristesse…. Quelle perte !

 

Flore a besoin des conseils d’un avocat. Elle semble pommée. De là où je
suis, je ne peux pas grand-chose pour elle.

Mais toi, Louis, Bruno et autre Dominique qui êtes sur place en France, vous
pouvez sûrement l’aider. Appelez-la s’il vous plait, pour voir ce dont elle
a besoin.  Je suis certain que vous allez tous faire ce que vous pouvez.

 

Merci d’avance

 

------------------------------------------------------------

Tijani BEN JEMAA

Vice Président de la CIC

Fédération Mondiale des Organisations d'Ingénieurs

Tél : + 216 98 330 114

Fax : + 216 70 860 861

------------------------------------------------------------

 

  _____  

De : Jean-Louis FULLSACK [mailto:jlfullsack at orange.fr] 
Envoyé : samedi 17 octobre 2009 14:24
À : governance at lists.cpsr.org; Tijani BEN JEMAA
Cc : danceflore at hotmail.com
Objet : RE: [governance] Sad news re Francis Muguet

 


Please excuse me for writing this message in French.It is the only language
which can express my very feelings.

Yes, dear friends of the list, these are very sad and completely
inunderstandable news for us all.


Cher Tijani, chers membres de la liste

Cette nouvelle me touche au plus profond. Je ne peux croire que celui qui
m'a assisté et aidé si efficacement à rester en vie en mai dernier nous ait
soudain quittés pour toujours.

Francis, ma mémoire est trop pleine de tes rires, de nos longues discussions
et de nos fréquents échanges. Tu étais ce militant dont on ne peut que rêver
et dont on s'honore d'être l'Ami. Je ne peux résister à pleurer en écrivant
ces lignes à ta mémoire. 

Francis, sache bien que, où que tu sois -et pour moi tu ne peux être qu'à
une place où règne la Paix et la Solidarité- mes pensées ne te quittent pas
et ma reconnaissance t'est acquise à jamais. Mais il me faudra encore faire
beaucoup d'efforts pour admettre que nous ne nous croiserons plus et
-surtout- que nous ne partagerons plus nos vues sur les grands problèmes qui
attendent la société et sur lesquels tu avais toujours un avis motivé. 

Rétrospectivement, le seul rayon de soleil dans ce triste paysage que tu
nous laisses, c'est le souvenir de notre travail commun, de notre engagement
dans le SMSI où tu nous as rejoints, comme nous le rappelle notre ami
Tijani, avec toute ton ardeur, tes convictions, mais aussi ton engagement et
ta grande disponibilité. Tu as interloqué plus d'un d'entre nous par ton
travail impressionnant, tes analyses de fond, et ta sincérité. Et pour ce
qui me concerne, j'y ajoute l'amitié qui a toujours prévalu dans nos
relations. Merci mon cher Francis pour tout cela !

Je tacherai de continnuer une partie de ton engagement dans un domaine qui
m'est moins étranger que les codes, protocoles et autres sciences de la
complexité. Je veux parler des problèmes de financement des objectifs du
SMSI et des nouveaux mécanismes et dispositifs que nous devons inventer ou
remettre à l'honneur, pour contribuer à un développement humain plus
équitable et plus solidaire. Je veux parler du Groupe de travail de la
société civile sur le financement, créé sous tes pressions amicales sur
notre ami Djilali (Benamrane) et moi-même, suite notamment à mes
interventions et propositions au nom de CSDPTT au SMSI. Je te promets, mon
cher Francis, de continuer ce combat, maintenant d'autant plus que je sais
que tu seras en permanence "derrière moi".

Francis, par un concours de circonstance indépendant de ma volonté je n'ai
pas pu te revoir à Genève comme je te l'avais (presque) promis lors d'un de
nos nombreux échanges téléphoniques. En effet, à l'avant-veille de la
réunion de l'UNGIS sur les mécanismes de financement, mon cardiologue m'a
fortement dissuadé de participer à cette réunion, car il estimait après
m'avoir sérieusement ausculté, que deux jours de discussions seraient une
charge incompatible avec la proximité de mon opération. C'est donc avec une
grande déception que j'ai dû renoncer à participer à ce rendez-vous si
important, d'autant plus que -toi et moi- nous y avons travaillé dur pour
convaincre nos interlocuteurs de l'urgence du débat sur ce problème
fondamental. Je te remercie, Francis, pour ce coup de main que tu m'as donné
pour faire aboutir -enfin!- cette revendication fondamentale de la société
civile engagée dans le processus du SMSI. Mais je regretterai encore
longtemps d'avoir trop écouté mon cardiologue et de ce fait d'avoir perdu la
dernière occasion de te revoir et de partager avec toi quelques moments
d'amitié et d'échanges.

Francis, tu nous as tous laissés un peu orphelins car tu avais encore
tellement d'idées et de propositions à nous faire partager dans des domaines
qui t'étaient plus que familiers. Tu avais accepté pour cela les
propositions de l'UIT pour les porter encore davantage dans le domaine
public concerné. Chacun d'entre nous, dans les futurs débats, sur la
gouvernance de l'Internet et aussi dans l'autre problème majeur laissé en
friche par le SMSI : le financement de ses objectifs, aura en mémoire tes
contributions. Nous continuerons ainsi à t'associer à nos travaux pour faire
avancer ces grandes problématique. 

Un immense merci à toi, Francis, mon ami, pour tout ce que tu nous as
apporté. Nous serons tristes de ton départ, mais nous nous souviendrons de
ton engagement pour nous redonner espoir !

Jean-Louis 


Chère Flore

Je vous exprime par cette voie un peu particulière, mes plus sincères
condoléances et vous souhaite tout le courage nécessaire pour surmonter ces
moments si difficiles après la perte de ce papa que vous aimiez tant. 
J'essairai de trouver votre adresse pour un échange plus formel, mais je
vous saurais gré de bien vouloir m'aviser de la date de ses obsèques (en
réponse à ce courriel), si ce n'est pas trop tard. D'avance merci. 



> Message du 17/10/09 10:38
> De : "Tijani BEN JEMAA" 
> A : governance at lists.cpsr.org, "'Ian Peter'" , Gov at wsis-gov.org
> Copie à : 
> Objet : RE: [governance] Sad news re Francis Muguet
> 
> 

It’s indeed a very sad piece of news.Françis was one of the very active and
committed civil society actors in WSIS, and especially in its second
phase.Françis always had his own opinion, but never was negative. Our views
weren’t always the same, and yet, we were really good friends. I feel too
sad.I can’t forget his behaviour when Jean Louis had his health problem in
ITU in Geneva. Now, he is away….. It’s a nasty situation  

------------------------------------------------------------Tijani BEN
JEMAAVice Chairman of CICWorld Federation of Engineering OrganizationsPhone
: + 216 98 330 114Fax     : + 216 70 860
861------------------------------------------------------------

  

  _____  

De : Ian Peter [mailto:ian.peter at ianpeter.com] 
> Envoyé : samedi 17 octobre 2009 04:56
> À : 'governance at lists.cpsr.org'; Gov at wsis-gov.org
> Objet : [governance] Sad news re Francis Muguet

 Friends, I have just received the following email. I have no further
details, and this must be a shock to all of us.  I would particularly urge
those of you closer to Francis’s immediate work to get in touch with his
family as requested below. This is sad news indeed.
> 
> Hey,
> My name is Flore MUGUET, I'm the daughter of Francis MUGUET, I'm
contacting you because you are his friend on Facebook. My father died in
Paris couple days ago and I just found out Wednesday night, because I was
worried that I wasn't answering my emails. It's hard for me to realize, it'
s happening so fast... My dad was the only member of the family his side
that I fully loved, trusted and respected. On the other side I just have my
mother. His work was so important for him, I'm so sad I didn't accomplished
it..
> I need a lawyer for advices, so If you know one, please contact me.
> Please get in touch with me at danceflore at hotmail.com
<http://webmail1e.orange.fr/webmail/fr_FR/danceflore at hotmail.com>  or +33
(0)6 82 30 26 70 for the funerals. I would like to have a lot of people
coming..
> 
> 
> I have passed on to Flore condolences on behalf on those of us working
with Francis on Internet Governance issues, but I am sure the family would
like to hear from those who have worked closely with Francis. Flore also
asked me about Francis’s work and travel movements – I did mention  to her
IGF and also his current project with ITU – but I don’t have contacts for
that work, others might like to pass details on.
> 
> Sad news indeed. Francis was an original thinker with a great devotion to
these issues. It’s hard to believe that he is no longer with us.
> 
> Ian Peter 

> Ce message entrant est certifié sans virus connu.
> Analyse effectuée par AVG - www.avg.fr
> Version: 8.5.421 / Base de données virale: 270.14.20/2440 - Date: 10/16/09
06:32:00
> 

> 


>
> [ message-footer.txt (0.3 Ko) ]

Ce message entrant est certifié sans virus connu.
Analyse effectuée par AVG - www.avg.fr
Version: 8.5.422 / Base de données virale: 270.14.20/2440 - Date: 10/16/09
18:39:00

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20091017/c8375055/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

From jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com  Sat Oct 17 16:49:56 2009
From: jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com (Jeffrey A. Williams)
Date: Sat, 17 Oct 2009 15:49:56 -0500 (GMT-05:00)
Subject: [governance] Cameroon and Wales collision in TLD space ?????
Message-ID: <3491278.1255812596469.JavaMail.root@elwamui-lapwing.atl.sa.earthlink.net>

Michael and all,

  Grads of Diplo-IG courses especially any that might be under
the ISOC's totalage are of very questionable value as many of 
other educational sector's Diplo degreed folks have proven to largely
be of very questionable quality with a very few exceptions.  Practical
experiance and on the ground experiance is a far better measure
of good "Suitable" canadates for a "Suitable Cadre", as it were and
whatever that actually is or can be difinitively defined as.

-----Original Message-----
>From: Michael Gurstein <gurstein at gmail.com>
>Sent: Oct 16, 2009 11:48 AM
>To: governance at lists.cpsr.org, 'Paul Lehto' <lehto.paul at gmail.com>
>Subject: RE: [governance] Cameroon and Wales collision in TLD space ?????
>
>Since my casually tossed terms re: "diverse" and "suitable cadres" seems to
>have entered into some sort of lexicological bestiary I think it may be
>worth while teasing it out a bit...
>
>To recall... I used that terminology in the context of the IGF evaluation
>indicating things I saw as positive outcomes of the IGF.  One of the
>positives I saw was that the IGF was creating (or partially creating and
>partially eliciting) a cadre of people knowledgeable in the area of Internet
>Governance.  As with most semi-technical or technical areas 	Internet
>Governance is an area with a somewhat significant learning curve required to
>become an actual "player" in the field i.e. one who can contribute
>substantively to discussions and potentially to outcomes.
>
>Having individuals who have been self-selected or designated (in some formal
>process by a range of institutions including governments, civil society
>etc.) as being IG people and then going through the process of
>self-education in that area sufficient to contribute, is I think overall
>useful especially since special interest groups (mostly the private sector)
>spend considerable resources hiring and retaining such expertise.  Having
>folks like Bill Graham formerly of the Canadian Government and now of ISOC
>or the graduates from the Diplo IG course, I think all have made and are
>making significant positive contributions to broad civil society objectives
>in the IG context. 
>
>My concern with this is that the range of those who are able to self-select
>or be involved in programs such as Diplo's is rather too narrow (i.e. not
>sufficiently "diverse") although the current initiative towards national and
>regional IGF's will go a considerable distance to correcting this I would
>hope.
>
>Would that such developments were available in other reas of interest. If
>suitable and diverse cadres of expertise were being developed in areas such
>as for example, community informatics the current failure of most Universal
>Access programs around the world to be anything other than agents for
>providing subsidies to incumbent carriers would have been long since
>overcome.
>
>Best,
>
>Mike   
>
>-----Original Message-----rgrams 
>From: Paul Lehto [mailto:lehto.paul at gmail.com] 
>Sent: Friday, October 16, 2009 8:54 AM
>To: governance at lists.cpsr.org; Bertrand de La Chapelle
>Cc: Roland Perry
>Subject: Re: [governance] Cameroon and Wales collision in TLD space ?????
>
>
>If there's not a democratic system of governance at ICANN, any such
>"collision" of domain names or any other issue for that matter is purely a
>matter for insider "experts" at ICANN and not the proper "domain" of anyone
>on this list. If they wish to have anyone's
>opinion, they will surely let us know.   ICANN has declared itself
>"Independent" so to the extent anyone's opinion is even considered, it is
>purely a matter (according to ICANN) of ICANN's grace in allowing us to do
>so.  They just wouldn't of course call it "grace" but that's what it would
>be.  They'd say they wished to invite a "diverse" and "suitable cadre" to
>advise them.  Even Henry VIII would have said the same.
>
>Paul Lehto, Juris Doctor
>
>On 10/16/09, Bertrand de La Chapelle <bdelachapelle at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I have seen in previous posts this reference to the possible collision 
>> between .cym and the three letter ISO code for Cameroon. Did not chime 
>> in then as the thread had continued on another topic, but I am a bit 
>> puzzled here.
>>
>> If there is a problem, it's with the Cayman island (3-letter iso code 
>> CYM), not Cameroon. As the Cayman islands are a UK territory, the 
>> relevant national authority is the same as the Wales proposal, isn't 
>> it ? Anyway, don't they already have a 2-letter ccTLD (kY is the 
>> 2-letter ISO 3166 code) ?
>>
>> The issue may be real (there may be cases of possible collision) but 
>> apparently the example does not work. Unless I'm mistaken which is 
>> possible given that it was a rapid check. I may have just exposed my 
>> insufficient knowledge ;-)
>>
>> I suppose the possible collisions will only appear in due course as 
>> other proposals will be put forward.
>>
>> Best
>>
>> Bertrand
>>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Oct 16, 2009 at 12:00 PM, Roland Perry < 
>> roland at internetpolicyagency.com> wrote:
>>
>>> In message 
>>> <76f819dd0910151202y2a0ac3bbna59f0435a6a21558 at mail.gmail.com>,
>>> at 12:02:43 on Thu, 15 Oct 2009, Paul Lehto <lehto.paul at gmail.com> writes
>>>
>>>> Roland, you dropped out of the debate about democracy and ICANN,
>>>>
>>>
>>> I had said everything I wanted to.
>>>
>>>  Is this your hypothetical question about Cameroon and such?
>>>>
>>>
>>> Yes. And while it's hypothetical today, I'm 99% sure that such a 
>>> decision will need to be made in the foreseeable future. Two groups 
>>> of people are on a collision course!
>>>
>>> [I have no special interest in either the Cameroons, or Wales, but 
>>> it's an elegant example to highlight the difficulties than can arise 
>>> in a congested name-space]
>>>
>>>   If so, please understand that even if you proved your apparent 
>>> "case"
>>>> that there are difficulties of implementation in your (straw man) 
>>>> version of democracy, it does not follow whatsoever that any old 
>>>> thing, most especially
>>>> an un-democratic any old thing, can take the  place of some version of
>>>> democracy.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Which is why I asked what precise form of democracy *you* recommend 
>>> to resolve the 'collision' I described.
>>>
>>>  It would be more enlightening for you to answer the question:
>>>>
>>>> Do you believe any subset of the people, whether "experts" or 
>>>> owners, have the right to define and/or control or regulate the 
>>>> common life of people on the Internet?
>>>>
>>>
>>> I'm trying to discover what subset of the people *you* would 
>>> recommend made decisions to resolve 'collisions' like the one I 
>>> described.
>>>
>>> Or if it's "all of the people", how would you organise a ballot on 
>>> this 'collision', that would avoid the drawbacks I mentioned in my 
>>> original question.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Roland Perry 
>>> ____________________________________________________________
>>> 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
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> ____________________
>> Bertrand de La Chapelle
>> Délégué Spécial pour la Société de l'Information / Special Envoy for 
>> the Information Society Ministère des Affaires Etrangères et 
>> Européennes/ French Ministry of Foreign and European Affairs
>> Tel : +33 (0)6 11 88 33 32
>>
>> "Le plus beau métier des hommes, c'est d'unir les hommes" Antoine de 
>> Saint Exupéry ("there is no greater mission for humans than uniting 
>> humans")
>>
>
>
>-- 
>Paul R Lehto, J.D.
>P.O. Box #1
>Ishpeming, MI  49849
>lehto.paul at gmail.com
>906-204-4026 ____________________________________________________________
>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

Regards,



Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 294k members/stakeholders strong!)
"Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" -
   Abraham Lincoln

"Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is very
often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt

"If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; liability
depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
United States v. Carroll Towing  (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
===============================================================
Updated 1/26/04
CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS. div. of
Information Network Eng.  INEG. INC.
ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com
Phone: 214-244-4827


____________________________________________________________
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


From raquelgatto at uol.com.br  Sat Oct 17 16:57:08 2009
From: raquelgatto at uol.com.br (Raquel Gatto)
Date: Sat, 17 Oct 2009 17:57:08 -0300
Subject: [governance] Fourth GigaNet Annual Symposium - Registration
 procedures
Message-ID: <4ada2fa48011b_6df97007eac855@weasel7.tmail>

An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20091017/13fb6cc8/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

From jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com  Sat Oct 17 17:01:21 2009
From: jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com (Jeffrey A. Williams)
Date: Sat, 17 Oct 2009 16:01:21 -0500 (GMT-05:00)
Subject: [governance] Secret ACTA Treaty May Sport "Internet Enforcement"
 Procedures After All
Message-ID: <30042260.1255813281876.JavaMail.root@elwamui-lapwing.atl.sa.earthlink.net>

All,

  As for some months suspected by INEGroup members it 
appears that governments are takeing more draconian
positions on regulating the Internet.
See:http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2009/10/these-42-people-are-shaping-us-internet-enforcement-policy.ars

Regards,



Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 294k members/stakeholders strong!)
"Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" -
   Abraham Lincoln

"Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is very
often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt

"If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; liability
depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
United States v. Carroll Towing  (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
===============================================================
Updated 1/26/04
CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS. div. of
Information Network Eng.  INEG. INC.
ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com
Phone: 214-244-4827


____________________________________________________________
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


From jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com  Sat Oct 17 17:18:10 2009
From: jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com (Jeffrey A. Williams)
Date: Sat, 17 Oct 2009 16:18:10 -0500 (GMT-05:00)
Subject: [governance] Review Panels
Message-ID: <6630411.1255814291067.JavaMail.root@elwamui-lapwing.atl.sa.earthlink.net>

Oliver and all,

  The problem with your suggestion is that all of the ALAC and
respective RALO's are selectively censored.  Ergo open and transparent
participation is not possible.

-----Original Message-----
>From: Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond <ocl at gih.com>
>Sent: Oct 16, 2009 2:12 AM
>To: governance at lists.cpsr.org, jfcallo at isocperu.org
>Subject: Re: [governance] Review Panels
>
>Hello Jose,
>
>you might wish get ISOC Peru to join the At Large constituency in ICANN as 
>an At LArge structure (ALS).
>http://www.atlarge.isoc.org/
>
>For more information in Spanish, go to:
>http://www.atlarge.icann.org/es/announcements/announcement-23may05-spanish.html
>
>and:
>http://www.atlarge.icann.org/es/correspondence/structures-app_ES.htm
>
>If you have any problem, don't hesitate to email me in private and I'll 
>point you to specific people.
>
>Warm regards,
>
>Olivier
>
>-- 
>Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond, PhD
>http://www.gih.com/ocl.html
>
>----- Original Message ----- 
>From: <jfcallo at isocperu.org>
>To: <governance at lists.cpsr.org>; "Danny Younger" <dannyyounger at yahoo.com>
>Cc: <governance at lists.cpsr.org>; "Bertrand de La Chapelle" 
><bdelachapelle at gmail.com>; "Anriette Esterhuysen" <anriette at apc.org>
>Sent: Friday, October 16, 2009 2:39 AM
>Subject: Re: [governance] Review Panels
>
>
>> Distinguished members of this list:
>> I write from Lima, Peru, we are interested in participating in ICANN, 
>> contribute from our experience, how do to connect with ICANN?, Send an 
>> e-mail for 10 days and no one responds.
>> Thanks
>> Jose F. Callo Romero
>>     Secretario
>>     ISOC Peru
>
>____________________________________________________________
>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,



Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 294k members/stakeholders strong!)
"Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" -
   Abraham Lincoln

"Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is very
often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt

"If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; liability
depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
United States v. Carroll Towing  (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
===============================================================
Updated 1/26/04
CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS. div. of
Information Network Eng.  INEG. INC.
ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com
Phone: 214-244-4827

____________________________________________________________
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


From vanda at uol.com.br  Sat Oct 17 17:30:56 2009
From: vanda at uol.com.br (Vanda UOL)
Date: Sat, 17 Oct 2009 18:30:56 -0300
Subject: RES: [governance] Sad news re Francis Muguet
In-Reply-To: <75097A434DDF4A839AD7B2F2F68CCCE8@MTBJ>
References: <C6FF8B76.70CC%ian.peter@ianpeter.com> <6FF5EB9924AB4AEBADCC4C771D5F4821@MTBJ> <2234289.298605.1255785852994.JavaMail.www@wwinf1e20> <75097A434DDF4A839AD7B2F2F68CCCE8@MTBJ>
Message-ID: <005a01ca4f71$206c2ee0$61448ca0$@com.br>

 Our sentiments  to the family and close friends. 

From Brazil

 Vanda Scartezini

 

De: Tijani BEN JEMAA [mailto:tijani.benjemaa at planet.tn] 
Enviada em: sábado, 17 de outubro de 2009 16:33
Para: governance at lists.cpsr.org; 'Jean-Louis FULLSACK'
Cc: danceflore at hotmail.com
Assunto: RE: [governance] Sad news re Francis Muguet

 

Mon cher Jean Louis,

 

Francis est parti, nous laissant « orphelins », les cœurs brisés.

Rien ne peut exprimer ma tristesse…. Quelle perte !

 

Flore a besoin des conseils d’un avocat. Elle semble pommée. De là où je
suis, je ne peux pas grand-chose pour elle.

Mais toi, Louis, Bruno et autre Dominique qui êtes sur place en France, vous
pouvez sûrement l’aider. Appelez-la s’il vous plait, pour voir ce dont elle
a besoin.  Je suis certain que vous allez tous faire ce que vous pouvez.

 

Merci d’avance

 

------------------------------------------------------------

Tijani BEN JEMAA

Vice Président de la CIC

Fédération Mondiale des Organisations d'Ingénieurs

Tél : + 216 98 330 114

Fax : + 216 70 860 861

------------------------------------------------------------

 

  _____  

De : Jean-Louis FULLSACK [mailto:jlfullsack at orange.fr] 
Envoyé : samedi 17 octobre 2009 14:24
À : governance at lists.cpsr.org; Tijani BEN JEMAA
Cc : danceflore at hotmail.com
Objet : RE: [governance] Sad news re Francis Muguet

 


Please excuse me for writing this message in French.It is the only language
which can express my very feelings.

Yes, dear friends of the list, these are very sad and completely
inunderstandable news for us all.


Cher Tijani, chers membres de la liste

Cette nouvelle me touche au plus profond. Je ne peux croire que celui qui
m'a assisté et aidé si efficacement à rester en vie en mai dernier nous ait
soudain quittés pour toujours.

Francis, ma mémoire est trop pleine de tes rires, de nos longues discussions
et de nos fréquents échanges. Tu étais ce militant dont on ne peut que rêver
et dont on s'honore d'être l'Ami. Je ne peux résister à pleurer en écrivant
ces lignes à ta mémoire. 

Francis, sache bien que, où que tu sois -et pour moi tu ne peux être qu'à
une place où règne la Paix et la Solidarité- mes pensées ne te quittent pas
et ma reconnaissance t'est acquise à jamais. Mais il me faudra encore faire
beaucoup d'efforts pour admettre que nous ne nous croiserons plus et
-surtout- que nous ne partagerons plus nos vues sur les grands problèmes qui
attendent la société et sur lesquels tu avais toujours un avis motivé. 

Rétrospectivement, le seul rayon de soleil dans ce triste paysage que tu
nous laisses, c'est le souvenir de notre travail commun, de notre engagement
dans le SMSI où tu nous as rejoints, comme nous le rappelle notre ami
Tijani, avec toute ton ardeur, tes convictions, mais aussi ton engagement et
ta grande disponibilité. Tu as interloqué plus d'un d'entre nous par ton
travail impressionnant, tes analyses de fond, et ta sincérité. Et pour ce
qui me concerne, j'y ajoute l'amitié qui a toujours prévalu dans nos
relations. Merci mon cher Francis pour tout cela !

Je tacherai de continnuer une partie de ton engagement dans un domaine qui
m'est moins étranger que les codes, protocoles et autres sciences de la
complexité. Je veux parler des problèmes de financement des objectifs du
SMSI et des nouveaux mécanismes et dispositifs que nous devons inventer ou
remettre à l'honneur, pour contribuer à un développement humain plus
équitable et plus solidaire. Je veux parler du Groupe de travail de la
société civile sur le financement, créé sous tes pressions amicales sur
notre ami Djilali (Benamrane) et moi-même, suite notamment à mes
interventions et propositions au nom de CSDPTT au SMSI. Je te promets, mon
cher Francis, de continuer ce combat, maintenant d'autant plus que je sais
que tu seras en permanence "derrière moi".

Francis, par un concours de circonstance indépendant de ma volonté je n'ai
pas pu te revoir à Genève comme je te l'avais (presque) promis lors d'un de
nos nombreux échanges téléphoniques. En effet, à l'avant-veille de la
réunion de l'UNGIS sur les mécanismes de financement, mon cardiologue m'a
fortement dissuadé de participer à cette réunion, car il estimait après
m'avoir sérieusement ausculté, que deux jours de discussions seraient une
charge incompatible avec la proximité de mon opération. C'est donc avec une
grande déception que j'ai dû renoncer à participer à ce rendez-vous si
important, d'autant plus que -toi et moi- nous y avons travaillé dur pour
convaincre nos interlocuteurs de l'urgence du débat sur ce problème
fondamental. Je te remercie, Francis, pour ce coup de main que tu m'as donné
pour faire aboutir -enfin!- cette revendication fondamentale de la société
civile engagée dans le processus du SMSI. Mais je regretterai encore
longtemps d'avoir trop écouté mon cardiologue et de ce fait d'avoir perdu la
dernière occasion de te revoir et de partager avec toi quelques moments
d'amitié et d'échanges.

Francis, tu nous as tous laissés un peu orphelins car tu avais encore
tellement d'idées et de propositions à nous faire partager dans des domaines
qui t'étaient plus que familiers. Tu avais accepté pour cela les
propositions de l'UIT pour les porter encore davantage dans le domaine
public concerné. Chacun d'entre nous, dans les futurs débats, sur la
gouvernance de l'Internet et aussi dans l'autre problème majeur laissé en
friche par le SMSI : le financement de ses objectifs, aura en mémoire tes
contributions. Nous continuerons ainsi à t'associer à nos travaux pour faire
avancer ces grandes problématique. 

Un immense merci à toi, Francis, mon ami, pour tout ce que tu nous as
apporté. Nous serons tristes de ton départ, mais nous nous souviendrons de
ton engagement pour nous redonner espoir !

Jean-Louis 


Chère Flore

Je vous exprime par cette voie un peu particulière, mes plus sincères
condoléances et vous souhaite tout le courage nécessaire pour surmonter ces
moments si difficiles après la perte de ce papa que vous aimiez tant. 
J'essairai de trouver votre adresse pour un échange plus formel, mais je
vous saurais gré de bien vouloir m'aviser de la date de ses obsèques (en
réponse à ce courriel), si ce n'est pas trop tard. D'avance merci. 

> Message du 17/10/09 10:38
> De : "Tijani BEN JEMAA" 
> A : governance at lists.cpsr.org, "'Ian Peter'" , Gov at wsis-gov.org
> Copie à : 
> Objet : RE: [governance] Sad news re Francis Muguet
> 
> 

It’s indeed a very sad piece of news.Françis was one of the very active and
committed civil society actors in WSIS, and especially in its second
phase.Françis always had his own opinion, but never was negative. Our views
weren’t always the same, and yet, we were really good friends. I feel too
sad.I can’t forget his behaviour when Jean Louis had his health problem in
ITU in Geneva. Now, he is away….. It’s a nasty situation  

------------------------------------------------------------Tijani BEN
JEMAAVice Chairman of CICWorld Federation of Engineering OrganizationsPhone
: + 216 98 330 114Fax     : + 216 70 860
861------------------------------------------------------------

  

  _____  

De : Ian Peter [mailto:ian.peter at ianpeter.com] 
> Envoyé : samedi 17 octobre 2009 04:56
> À : 'governance at lists.cpsr.org'; Gov at wsis-gov.org
> Objet : [governance] Sad news re Francis Muguet

 Friends, I have just received the following email. I have no further
details, and this must be a shock to all of us.  I would particularly urge
those of you closer to Francis’s immediate work to get in touch with his
family as requested below. This is sad news indeed.
> 
> Hey,
> My name is Flore MUGUET, I'm the daughter of Francis MUGUET, I'm
contacting you because you are his friend on Facebook. My father died in
Paris couple days ago and I just found out Wednesday night, because I was
worried that I wasn't answering my emails. It's hard for me to realize, it'
s happening so fast... My dad was the only member of the family his side
that I fully loved, trusted and respected. On the other side I just have my
mother. His work was so important for him, I'm so sad I didn't accomplished
it..
> I need a lawyer for advices, so If you know one, please contact me.
> Please get in touch with me at danceflore at hotmail.com
<http://webmail1e.orange.fr/webmail/fr_FR/danceflore at hotmail.com>  or +33
(0)6 82 30 26 70 for the funerals. I would like to have a lot of people
coming..
> 
> 
> I have passed on to Flore condolences on behalf on those of us working
with Francis on Internet Governance issues, but I am sure the family would
like to hear from those who have worked closely with Francis. Flore also
asked me about Francis’s work and travel movements – I did mention  to her
IGF and also his current project with ITU – but I don’t have contacts for
that work, others might like to pass details on.
> 
> Sad news indeed. Francis was an original thinker with a great devotion to
these issues. It’s hard to believe that he is no longer with us.
> 
> Ian Peter 

> Ce message entrant est certifié sans virus connu.
> Analyse effectuée par AVG - www.avg.fr
> Version: 8.5.421 / Base de données virale: 270.14.20/2440 - Date: 10/16/09
06:32:00
> 

> 


>
> [ message-footer.txt (0.3 Ko) ]

Ce message entrant est certifié sans virus connu.
Analyse effectuée par AVG - www.avg.fr
Version: 8.5.422 / Base de données virale: 270.14.20/2440 - Date: 10/16/09
18:39:00

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20091017/b51ba79e/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

From vanda at uol.com.br  Sat Oct 17 17:33:38 2009
From: vanda at uol.com.br (Vanda UOL)
Date: Sat, 17 Oct 2009 18:33:38 -0300
Subject: RES: [governance] Review Panels
In-Reply-To: <61a136f40910170920h6f675871ge749f8e2621927ba@mail.gmail.com>
References: <945154.26944.qm@web110102.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>	 <20091015203950.7cvn8ev328w800ss@www.isocperu.org> <61a136f40910170920h6f675871ge749f8e2621927ba@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <006001ca4f71$838fd260$8aaf7720$@com.br>

I also had written to him with the same invitation.. 

 

De: carlton.samuels at gmail.com [mailto:carlton.samuels at gmail.com] Em nome de
Carlton Samuels
Enviada em: sábado, 17 de outubro de 2009 13:21
Para: governance at lists.cpsr.org; jfcallo at isocperu.org
Assunto: Re: [governance] Review Panels

 

Dear Jose:

There is an ICANN At-Large community that might suit your purpose. See
http://www.atlarge.icann.org/.  Under the At-Large umbrella, the regional
organisation, LACRALO, may serve as your point of connection - see 

 

https://st.icann.org/lacralo/index.cgi - and there are opportunities for
membership.   Since they are already members of LACRALO, your ISOC brethren
in Argentina and Mexico may be helpful in advising you.

 

Kind regards,

Carlton Samuels

LACRALO, Jamaica 

On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 7:39 PM, <jfcallo at isocperu.org> wrote:

Distinguished members of this list:
I write from Lima, Peru, we are interested in participating in ICANN,
contribute from our experience, how do to connect with ICANN?, Send an
e-mail for 10 days and no one responds.
Thanks
Jose F. Callo Romero
   Secretario
   ISOC Peru




Quoting Danny Younger <dannyyounger at yahoo.com>:

Bertrand,
 
There is more to this equation than diversity, balance, and
representativeness; these review panels will require individuals  with
extensive knowledge regarding the particulars of the areas  under review
(which is why independent experts are cited as part of  the necessary review
team mix).

The teams will include:
 
the Chair of the GAC
the CEO of ICANN
representatives of the Root Server System Advisory Committee
representatives of the Security and Stability Advisory Committee
representatives of the At-Large Advisory Committee
representatives of the Generic Names Supporting Organization
representatives of the Address Supporting Organization
representatives of the Country Code Names Supporting Organization
independent experts (likely drawn from either the Technical Liason  Group,
the IETF, the IAB, or from the pool of volunteer community  members)
 
and in the accountability/transparency review team, these members  will be
joined by the Assistant Secretary for Communications and  Information of the
DOC,
 
The current arrangement calls for the composition of the review team to be
agreed jointly by the Chair of the GAC (in consultation with GAC members)
and the CEO of ICANN.
 
Like all comparable ICANN processes, there will likely be a call for
volunteers (similar to the recent call for NSCG placeholder councilors).
The ICANN Board will then privately settle upon whomever best promotes the
ICANN interest (likely those that have never been critics) and will then
advance those names to the Chair of the GAC.
 
I fully expect these reviews to be as much of a whitewash as all earlier
ICANN self-review efforts.  Perhaps you will recall the earlier commissioned
review of transparency and accountability provided in the One World Trust
report -- we were told that ICANN is a model of transparency with robust
accountability mechanisms... and yet we all know the reality.
 
Don't waste your energy on this project.  The deck will be stacked from day
one.
 
best regards,
Danny Younger
 

--- On Thu, 10/15/09, Bertrand de La Chapelle  <bdelachapelle at gmail.com>
wrote:


From: Bertrand de La Chapelle <bdelachapelle at gmail.com>
Subject: [governance] Review Panels
To: governance at lists.cpsr.org, "Anriette Esterhuysen" <anriette at apc.org>
Date: Thursday, October 15, 2009, 4:33 AM


Dear all,

Could this list also address Anriette's concrete second question ?  What do
you think the review process should be ? Fundamentally, the  community is
facing a now recurring problem (cf. WGIG, MAG,...) :  how to compose a
multi-stakeholder group for a given task, so that  it is sufficiently
diverse, balanced and representative of the  variety of viewpoints ?

In addition, what do you tink the timing is ?

Best

Bertrand



On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 1:39 PM, Anriette Esterhuysen  <anriette at apc.org>
wrote:

snip

Second question is about the submissions on the review panels. What is
the process likely to be?

Anriette




--
____________________
Bertrand de La Chapelle
Délégué Spécial pour la Société de l'Information / Special Envoy for the
Information Society
Ministère des Affaires Etrangères et Européennes/ French Ministry of Foreign
and European Affairs
Tel : +33 (0)6 11 88 33 32

"Le plus beau métier des hommes, c'est d'unir les hommes" Antoine de Saint
Exupéry
("there is no greater mission for humans than uniting humans")

-----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








____________________________________________________________
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/20091017/c202d3a9/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

From vanda at uol.com.br  Sat Oct 17 17:33:38 2009
From: vanda at uol.com.br (Vanda UOL)
Date: Sat, 17 Oct 2009 18:33:38 -0300
Subject: RES: [governance] IGF in remote? What are the IGC plans?
In-Reply-To: <54535d540910162348o48049672v5f4602ea11a4bc74@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4AD8DC0E.1080709@gmail.com> <54535d540910162348o48049672v5f4602ea11a4bc74@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <005f01ca4f71$7e707b40$7b5171c0$@com.br>

Good idea Hong.

-----Mensagem original-----
De: Hong Xue [mailto:hongxueipr at gmail.com] 
Enviada em: sábado, 17 de outubro de 2009 03:48
Para: Ginger Paque
Cc: governance at lists.cpsr.org
Assunto: Re: [governance] IGF in remote? What are the IGC plans?

Dear Ginger,

I've exactly the same plan as yours--doing a couple of presentations
via the Internet. Although it might be difficult for us "remoters" to
form a group due to time zone issues, but we may think about having a
skype group (or hot line) to report the connectivity problems, which
could be linked up with the IGF administration. So problems in remote
participation could be resolved as quickly as possible.

Hong

-- 
Hong Xue, Ph.D.
Professor of Law
Director of Institute for the Internet Policy & Law
Beijing Normal University
19 Xin Jie Kou Wai Street
Beijing 100875 China

On Sat, Oct 17, 2009 at 4:48 AM, Ginger Paque <gpaque at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi everyone...
>
> Should we be thinking about an IGC strategy for the upcoming IGF in Egypt?
> Are there specific issues we want to be involved in, intervene in, report
> back on?
>
> What concerns and suggestions do you have?
>
> I will be unable to attend the IGF in person this year, but I plan to be
> active through Remote Participation, and if my local connection is good
> enough, I will do a presentation or two through RP as well.
>
> I would like to encourage others to attend remotely--we can tweet, chat,
> Skype--we can be involved! We can intervene in sessions, and we can ask
> those who are present to include us in their Skype conversations.
>
> Will we work as a group, or is it preferable to act as individuals? We
have
> a booth in the IGF Village Square that can be used for physical meetings
and
> communications too.
>
> Thoughts?
>
> Best, Ginger
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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

____________________________________________________________
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


From andrespiazza at gmail.com  Sat Oct 17 17:39:16 2009
From: andrespiazza at gmail.com (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Andr=E9s_Piazza?=)
Date: Sat, 17 Oct 2009 18:39:16 -0300
Subject: [governance] Presentantion
Message-ID: <d62ac6b30910171439w2dca8e92x719dded475e41d0b@mail.gmail.com>

Hi everyone,

My Name is Andres Piazza from Argentina and I´m getting into the list.

Hope to make some contributions,

Regards,

Andrés
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20091017/08a418b2/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

From jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com  Sat Oct 17 17:46:02 2009
From: jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com (Jeffrey A. Williams)
Date: Sat, 17 Oct 2009 16:46:02 -0500 (GMT-05:00)
Subject: [governance] Re: [ga] .xxx IRP documents posted
Message-ID: <20196786.1255815962762.JavaMail.root@elwamui-lapwing.atl.sa.earthlink.net>

An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20091017/5f30f08a/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

From dina_hov2007 at yahoo.com  Sat Oct 17 19:01:56 2009
From: dina_hov2007 at yahoo.com (Dina)
Date: Sat, 17 Oct 2009 16:01:56 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [governance] condolences
In-Reply-To: <4ad9a647.0a04d00a.7533.1529@mx.google.com>
Message-ID: <274564.58531.qm@web45212.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>

Dear Flore,
 
This is an extreme shock to all of us who heard this, so unbelievable ,I know that these have been very difficult times for you ,I hope you will improve and you will have the strength to sustain yourself and and  your families. Love and peace for healing your 
soul in this  precious moment .
Kindest  regards.
Dina Hovakmian


      
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20091017/d1d9d704/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

From rudi.vansnick at isoc.be  Sat Oct 17 19:50:00 2009
From: rudi.vansnick at isoc.be (Rudi Vansnick)
Date: Sun, 18 Oct 2009 01:50:00 +0200
Subject: [governance] Presentantion
In-Reply-To: <d62ac6b30910171439w2dca8e92x719dded475e41d0b@mail.gmail.com>
References: <d62ac6b30910171439w2dca8e92x719dded475e41d0b@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4ADA5828.2010905@isoc.be>

Welcome Andrés ... nice to see you here too .

Rudi Vansnick
President Internet Society Belgium vzw
Voorzitter TIK vzw
Board member EURALO (ALAC - ICANN)

Tel: +32 (0)70 77 39 39
GSM: +32 (0)475 28 16 32
www.isoc.be <http://www.isoc.be> - www.vansnick.eu <http://www.vansnick.eu>



Andrés Piazza schreef:
> Hi everyone,
>
> My Name is Andres Piazza from Argentina and I´m getting into the list.
>
> Hope to make some contributions,
>
> Regards,
>
> Andrés
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com 
> Version: 8.5.422 / Virus Database: 270.14.20/2441 - Release Date: 10/16/09 18:39:00
>
>   

____________________________________________________________
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


From rudi.vansnick at isoc.be  Sat Oct 17 19:55:50 2009
From: rudi.vansnick at isoc.be (Rudi Vansnick)
Date: Sun, 18 Oct 2009 01:55:50 +0200
Subject: [governance] Sad news re Francis Muguet
In-Reply-To: <C6FF8B76.70CC%ian.peter@ianpeter.com>
References: <C6FF8B76.70CC%ian.peter@ianpeter.com>
Message-ID: <4ADA5986.1040904@isoc.be>

De la part de ISOC Belgique, son board et ses membres, nos plus sincères 
condoléances et nous vous souhaitons tout le courage nécessaire pour 
surmonter ces moments de tristesse.

Salutations,

Rudi Vansnick
President Internet Society Belgium vzw
Voorzitter TIK vzw
Board member EURALO (ALAC - ICANN)

Tel: +32 (0)70 77 39 39
GSM: +32 (0)475 28 16 32
www.isoc.be <http://www.isoc.be> - www.vansnick.eu <http://www.vansnick.eu>



Ian Peter schreef:
> Friends, I have just received the following email. I have no further 
> details, and this must be a shock to all of us.  I would particularly 
> urge those of you closer to Francis’s immediate work to get in touch 
> with his family as requested below. This is sad news indeed.
>
> Hey,
> My name is Flore MUGUET, I'm the daughter of Francis MUGUET, I'm 
> contacting you because you are his friend on Facebook. My father died 
> in Paris couple days ago and I just found out Wednesday night, because 
> I was worried that I wasn't answering my emails. It's hard for me to 
> realize, it' s happening so fast... My dad was the only member of the 
> family his side that I fully loved, trusted and respected. On the 
> other side I just have my mother. His work was so important for him, 
> I'm so sad I didn't accomplished it..
> I need a lawyer for advices, so If you know one, please contact me.
> Please get in touch with me at danceflore at hotmail.com or +33 (0)6 82 
> 30 26 70 for the funerals. I would like to have a lot of people coming..
>
>
> I have passed on to Flore condolences on behalf on those of us working 
> with Francis on Internet Governance issues, but I am sure the family 
> would like to hear from those who have worked closely with Francis. 
> Flore also asked me about Francis’s work and travel movements – I did 
> mention  to her IGF and also his current project with ITU – but I 
> don’t have contacts for that work, others might like to pass details on.
>
> Sad news indeed. Francis was an original thinker with a great devotion 
> to these issues. It’s hard to believe that he is no longer with us.
>
> Ian Peter
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com 
> Version: 8.5.421 / Virus Database: 270.14.20/2440 - Release Date: 10/16/09 06:32:00
>
>   

____________________________________________________________
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


From ca at cafonso.ca  Sat Oct 17 20:37:49 2009
From: ca at cafonso.ca (Carlos A. Afonso)
Date: Sat, 17 Oct 2009 21:37:49 -0300
Subject: [governance] Sad news re Francis Muguet
In-Reply-To: <19a59c60910170912u38401c9cn9d09567e5e89a408@mail.gmail.com>
References: <C6FF8B76.70CC%ian.peter@ianpeter.com>	 <6FF5EB9924AB4AEBADCC4C771D5F4821@MTBJ>	 <1255784103.6739.628.camel@anriette-laptop>	 <69FF0B70EC97499C926F799C6D5C7518@MTBJ> <19a59c60910170912u38401c9cn9d09567e5e89a408@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4ADA635D.1030109@cafonso.ca>

My deepest condolences to Flore and family. I am still trying to cope. 
Francis was many times a lone fighter in the pursuit of ideas with whom 
several times I had the honor to share.

Shocked by this loss.

--c.a.

Fatimata Seye Sylla wrote:
> TOUTES MES CONDOLEANCES A FLORE MUGUET ET A TOUTE LA COMMUNAUTE DE LA
> GOUVERNACE DE L'INTERNET ET DU SMSI.
> 
> C'est une lourde perte pour nous tous et nous n'oublierons jamais son
> engagement et son combat pour la bonne cause
> 
> Que son ame repose en paix !
> 
> 
> 
____________________________________________________________
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


From cogitoergosum at sbcglobal.net  Sat Oct 17 21:19:00 2009
From: cogitoergosum at sbcglobal.net (Eric Dierker)
Date: Sat, 17 Oct 2009 18:19:00 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [governance] Review Panels
In-Reply-To: <61a136f40910170920h6f675871ge749f8e2621927ba@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <83778.19123.qm@web83905.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>

Does anyone else get an uneasy feeling about regional discrimination and segregation?  Along comes this presumably fine fellow and he is immediately herded off into "Ralo".
 
1. Do the Ralos represent a region really? Seems that young and old, poor and rich, educated and denied, cityfolk and countryfolk, women and men, students and faculty, black or white, tall and short make just as reasonable grounds to segregate.
 
2. When ICANN settled into this model didn't anyone question it? (besides those of us in the GA that is)
 
3. From what I have seen you can almost pick a persons Ralo by their race.
 
When they first started I was denied membership in an Asian one. I lived and worked in Saigon (currently known as HCMC) I was denied. A cool gal named YJ told me because I was white. When I permanantly moved back to the SouthWestern United States of America with some land in the United States of Mexico I was denied for longevity reasons. What the hell does an Eskimo have in common with a migrant Jamaican in New York city. Why would a Lady from Johanasberg group with a chieftan from Somalia? If regional is such a good idea why don't gTLDs stick to regional? If I have a sports car - I do not drive it in streets of Siberia -- My pickup truck not in streets of Paris. 
 
The coolest thing about the internet is the lack of borders and regions  ----  what the heck was someone thinking making it a segregation tool.
 
I think we all know the answer -- one group wanted to divide and conquer and the other were bigots.

--- On Sat, 10/17/09, Carlton Samuels <carlton.samuels at uwimona.edu.jm> wrote:


From: Carlton Samuels <carlton.samuels at uwimona.edu.jm>
Subject: Re: [governance] Review Panels
To: governance at lists.cpsr.org, jfcallo at isocperu.org
Date: Saturday, October 17, 2009, 4:20 PM


Dear Jose:
There is an ICANN At-Large community that might suit your purpose. See http://www.atlarge.icann.org/.  Under the At-Large umbrella, the regional organisation, LACRALO, may serve as your point of connection - see 


https://st.icann.org/lacralo/index.cgi - and there are opportunities for membership.   Since they are already members of LACRALO, your ISOC brethren in Argentina and Mexico may be helpful in advising you.


Kind regards,
Carlton Samuels
LACRALO, Jamaica 


On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 7:39 PM, <jfcallo at isocperu.org> wrote:

Distinguished members of this list:
I write from Lima, Peru, we are interested in participating in ICANN, contribute from our experience, how do to connect with ICANN?, Send an e-mail for 10 days and no one responds.
Thanks
Jose F. Callo Romero
   Secretario
   ISOC Peru





Quoting Danny Younger <dannyyounger at yahoo.com>:


Bertrand,
 
There is more to this equation than diversity, balance, and  representativeness; these review panels will require individuals  with extensive knowledge regarding the particulars of the areas  under review (which is why independent experts are cited as part of  the necessary review team mix).

The teams will include:
 
the Chair of the GAC
the CEO of ICANN
representatives of the Root Server System Advisory Committee
representatives of the Security and Stability Advisory Committee
representatives of the At-Large Advisory Committee
representatives of the Generic Names Supporting Organization
representatives of the Address Supporting Organization
representatives of the Country Code Names Supporting Organization
independent experts (likely drawn from either the Technical Liason  Group, the IETF, the IAB, or from the pool of volunteer community  members)
 
and in the accountability/transparency review team, these members  will be joined by the Assistant Secretary for Communications and  Information of the DOC,
 
The current arrangement calls for the composition of the review team to be agreed jointly by the Chair of the GAC (in consultation with GAC members) and the CEO of ICANN.
 
Like all comparable ICANN processes, there will likely be a call for volunteers (similar to the recent call for NSCG placeholder councilors).  The ICANN Board will then privately settle upon whomever best promotes the ICANN interest (likely those that have never been critics) and will then advance those names to the Chair of the GAC.
 
I fully expect these reviews to be as much of a whitewash as all earlier ICANN self-review efforts.  Perhaps you will recall the earlier commissioned review of transparency and accountability provided in the One World Trust report -- we were told that ICANN is a model of transparency with robust accountability mechanisms... and yet we all know the reality.
 
Don't waste your energy on this project.  The deck will be stacked from day one.
 
best regards,
Danny Younger
 

--- On Thu, 10/15/09, Bertrand de La Chapelle  <bdelachapelle at gmail.com> wrote:


From: Bertrand de La Chapelle <bdelachapelle at gmail.com>
Subject: [governance] Review Panels
To: governance at lists.cpsr.org, "Anriette Esterhuysen" <anriette at apc.org>
Date: Thursday, October 15, 2009, 4:33 AM


Dear all,

Could this list also address Anriette's concrete second question ?  What do you think the review process should be ? Fundamentally, the  community is facing a now recurring problem (cf. WGIG, MAG,...) :  how to compose a multi-stakeholder group for a given task, so that  it is sufficiently diverse, balanced and representative of the  variety of viewpoints ?

In addition, what do you tink the timing is ?

Best

Bertrand



On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 1:39 PM, Anriette Esterhuysen  <anriette at apc.org> wrote:

snip

Second question is about the submissions on the review panels. What is
the process likely to be?

Anriette




--
____________________
Bertrand de La Chapelle
Délégué Spécial pour la Société de l'Information / Special Envoy for the Information Society
Ministère des Affaires Etrangères et Européennes/ French Ministry of Foreign and European Affairs
Tel : +33 (0)6 11 88 33 32

"Le plus beau métier des hommes, c'est d'unir les hommes" Antoine de Saint Exupéry
("there is no greater mission for humans than uniting humans")

-----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







____________________________________________________________
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/20091017/12cbb578/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

From mariliamaciel at gmail.com  Sun Oct 18 01:17:53 2009
From: mariliamaciel at gmail.com (Marilia Maciel)
Date: Sun, 18 Oct 2009 03:17:53 -0200
Subject: [governance] IGF in remote? What are the IGC plans?
In-Reply-To: <005f01ca4f71$7e707b40$7b5171c0$@com.br>
References: <4AD8DC0E.1080709@gmail.com>
	 <54535d540910162348o48049672v5f4602ea11a4bc74@mail.gmail.com>
	 <005f01ca4f71$7e707b40$7b5171c0$@com.br>
Message-ID: <f7e605ab0910172217g6c4262abmbac118459fbab02d@mail.gmail.com>

Dear all,

I just would like to remind you that it is also possible to organize IGF
hubs.
In the hubs, people can watch the webcast together and send questions (text
or video) that will be answered by panelists in the IGF. In addition to
that, organizers can hold debates to discuss the themes of the IGF from a
local perspective. This way, the hub gains its own dynamics, and the webcast
serves a starting point for a meaningful local debates.
To ask the registration of a new hub, an e-mail should be sent to the IGF
Secretariat. The address is igf at unog.ch.
The following information should be provided:
Institution where the hub will be based:
Possible area(s) of interest within the 5 main IGF themes:

Number of expected participants within the hub:

Planned pre-meeting activities:

Hub Coordinator:

Contact email:

*The deadline to register a hub is 22 October.*

Best regards,

Marilia
On Sat, Oct 17, 2009 at 7:33 PM, Vanda UOL <vanda at uol.com.br> wrote:

> Good idea Hong.
>
> -----Mensagem original-----
> De: Hong Xue [mailto:hongxueipr at gmail.com]
> Enviada em: sábado, 17 de outubro de 2009 03:48
> Para: Ginger Paque
> Cc: governance at lists.cpsr.org
> Assunto: Re: [governance] IGF in remote? What are the IGC plans?
>
> Dear Ginger,
>
> I've exactly the same plan as yours--doing a couple of presentations
> via the Internet. Although it might be difficult for us "remoters" to
> form a group due to time zone issues, but we may think about having a
> skype group (or hot line) to report the connectivity problems, which
> could be linked up with the IGF administration. So problems in remote
> participation could be resolved as quickly as possible.
>
> Hong
>
> --
> Hong Xue, Ph.D.
> Professor of Law
> Director of Institute for the Internet Policy & Law
> Beijing Normal University
> 19 Xin Jie Kou Wai Street
> Beijing 100875 China
>
> On Sat, Oct 17, 2009 at 4:48 AM, Ginger Paque <gpaque at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Hi everyone...
> >
> > Should we be thinking about an IGC strategy for the upcoming IGF in
> Egypt?
> > Are there specific issues we want to be involved in, intervene in, report
> > back on?
> >
> > What concerns and suggestions do you have?
> >
> > I will be unable to attend the IGF in person this year, but I plan to be
> > active through Remote Participation, and if my local connection is good
> > enough, I will do a presentation or two through RP as well.
> >
> > I would like to encourage others to attend remotely--we can tweet, chat,
> > Skype--we can be involved! We can intervene in sessions, and we can ask
> > those who are present to include us in their Skype conversations.
> >
> > Will we work as a group, or is it preferable to act as individuals? We
> have
> > a booth in the IGF Village Square that can be used for physical meetings
> and
> > communications too.
> >
> > Thoughts?
> >
> > Best, Ginger
> >
> > ____________________________________________________________
> > 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
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
>



-- 
Centro de Tecnologia e Sociedade
FGV Direito Rio

Center of Technology and Society
Getulio Vargas Foundation
Rio de Janeiro - Brazil
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20091018/1c599b2a/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

From andrespiazza at gmail.com  Sun Oct 18 02:33:29 2009
From: andrespiazza at gmail.com (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Andr=E9s_Piazza?=)
Date: Sun, 18 Oct 2009 04:33:29 -0200
Subject: [governance] Review Panels
In-Reply-To: <006001ca4f71$838fd260$8aaf7720$@com.br>
References: <945154.26944.qm@web110102.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
	 <20091015203950.7cvn8ev328w800ss@www.isocperu.org>
	 <61a136f40910170920h6f675871ge749f8e2621927ba@mail.gmail.com>
	 <006001ca4f71$838fd260$8aaf7720$@com.br>
Message-ID: <d62ac6b30910172333q3fc2d79fy652f9f398755f6fc@mail.gmail.com>

Dear jose,

As carlton says, LACRALO may be an interesting space for you. Since
there are not organisations from Peru in ICANN At Large this is also
great for latin american users.

As LACRALO chair I'm completely available to assist you. Do you remember me?

Regards,

Andres Piazza

2009/10/17, Vanda UOL <vanda at uol.com.br>:
> I also had written to him with the same invitation..
>
>
>
> De: carlton.samuels at gmail.com [mailto:carlton.samuels at gmail.com] Em nome de
> Carlton Samuels
> Enviada em: sábado, 17 de outubro de 2009 13:21
> Para: governance at lists.cpsr.org; jfcallo at isocperu.org
> Assunto: Re: [governance] Review Panels
>
>
>
> Dear Jose:
>
> There is an ICANN At-Large community that might suit your purpose. See
> http://www.atlarge.icann.org/.  Under the At-Large umbrella, the regional
> organisation, LACRALO, may serve as your point of connection - see
>
>
>
> https://st.icann.org/lacralo/index.cgi - and there are opportunities for
> membership.   Since they are already members of LACRALO, your ISOC brethren
> in Argentina and Mexico may be helpful in advising you.
>
>
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Carlton Samuels
>
> LACRALO, Jamaica
>
> On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 7:39 PM, <jfcallo at isocperu.org> wrote:
>
> Distinguished members of this list:
> I write from Lima, Peru, we are interested in participating in ICANN,
> contribute from our experience, how do to connect with ICANN?, Send an
> e-mail for 10 days and no one responds.
> Thanks
> Jose F. Callo Romero
>    Secretario
>    ISOC Peru
>
>
>
>
> Quoting Danny Younger <dannyyounger at yahoo.com>:
>
> Bertrand,
>
> There is more to this equation than diversity, balance, and
> representativeness; these review panels will require individuals  with
> extensive knowledge regarding the particulars of the areas  under review
> (which is why independent experts are cited as part of  the necessary review
> team mix).
>
> The teams will include:
>
> the Chair of the GAC
> the CEO of ICANN
> representatives of the Root Server System Advisory Committee
> representatives of the Security and Stability Advisory Committee
> representatives of the At-Large Advisory Committee
> representatives of the Generic Names Supporting Organization
> representatives of the Address Supporting Organization
> representatives of the Country Code Names Supporting Organization
> independent experts (likely drawn from either the Technical Liason  Group,
> the IETF, the IAB, or from the pool of volunteer community  members)
>
> and in the accountability/transparency review team, these members  will be
> joined by the Assistant Secretary for Communications and  Information of the
> DOC,
>
> The current arrangement calls for the composition of the review team to be
> agreed jointly by the Chair of the GAC (in consultation with GAC members)
> and the CEO of ICANN.
>
> Like all comparable ICANN processes, there will likely be a call for
> volunteers (similar to the recent call for NSCG placeholder councilors).
> The ICANN Board will then privately settle upon whomever best promotes the
> ICANN interest (likely those that have never been critics) and will then
> advance those names to the Chair of the GAC.
>
> I fully expect these reviews to be as much of a whitewash as all earlier
> ICANN self-review efforts.  Perhaps you will recall the earlier commissioned
> review of transparency and accountability provided in the One World Trust
> report -- we were told that ICANN is a model of transparency with robust
> accountability mechanisms... and yet we all know the reality.
>
> Don't waste your energy on this project.  The deck will be stacked from day
> one.
>
> best regards,
> Danny Younger
>
>
> --- On Thu, 10/15/09, Bertrand de La Chapelle  <bdelachapelle at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>
> From: Bertrand de La Chapelle <bdelachapelle at gmail.com>
> Subject: [governance] Review Panels
> To: governance at lists.cpsr.org, "Anriette Esterhuysen" <anriette at apc.org>
> Date: Thursday, October 15, 2009, 4:33 AM
>
>
> Dear all,
>
> Could this list also address Anriette's concrete second question ?  What do
> you think the review process should be ? Fundamentally, the  community is
> facing a now recurring problem (cf. WGIG, MAG,...) :  how to compose a
> multi-stakeholder group for a given task, so that  it is sufficiently
> diverse, balanced and representative of the  variety of viewpoints ?
>
> In addition, what do you tink the timing is ?
>
> Best
>
> Bertrand
>
>
>
> On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 1:39 PM, Anriette Esterhuysen  <anriette at apc.org>
> wrote:
>
> snip
>
> Second question is about the submissions on the review panels. What is
> the process likely to be?
>
> Anriette
>
>
>
>
> --
> ____________________
> Bertrand de La Chapelle
> Délégué Spécial pour la Société de l'Information / Special Envoy for the
> Information Society
> Ministère des Affaires Etrangères et Européennes/ French Ministry of Foreign
> and European Affairs
> Tel : +33 (0)6 11 88 33 32
>
> "Le plus beau métier des hommes, c'est d'unir les hommes" Antoine de Saint
> Exupéry
> ("there is no greater mission for humans than uniting humans")
>
> -----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
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
>
>
>
>

-- 
Enviado desde mi dispositivo móvil
____________________________________________________________
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


From fouadbajwa at gmail.com  Sun Oct 18 03:16:17 2009
From: fouadbajwa at gmail.com (Fouad Bajwa)
Date: Sun, 18 Oct 2009 12:16:17 +0500
Subject: [governance] Sad news re Francis Muguet
In-Reply-To: <C6FF8B76.70CC%ian.peter@ianpeter.com>
References: <C6FF8B76.70CC%ian.peter@ianpeter.com>
Message-ID: <701af9f70910180016i6996be53tfbe978aa17d3157f@mail.gmail.com>

This is really shocking news and I still cannot believe that Francis
has left us. His ideas, his initiative and drive have been part of his
wonderful sharing and last month we had detailed discussions in
Geneva. May God rest his soul in peace. This is so sudden, he wanted
to do so much and was doing some amazing amount of work on the name
space opening and its still difficult to believe. It is indeed a great
loss.

My deepest condolences to his daughter Flore and his family.

-- 
Regards.
--------------------------
Fouad Bajwa
@skBajwa
Answering all your technology questions
http://www.askbajwa.com
http://twitter.com/fouadbajwa
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ATVDW1tDZzA

On Sat, Oct 17, 2009 at 8:55 AM, Ian Peter <ian.peter at ianpeter.com> wrote:
> Friends, I have just received the following email. I have no further
> details, and this must be a shock to all of us.  I would particularly urge
> those of you closer to Francis’s immediate work to get in touch with his
> family as requested below. This is sad news indeed.
>
> Hey,
> My name is Flore MUGUET, I'm the daughter of Francis MUGUET, I'm contacting
> you because you are his friend on Facebook. My father died in Paris couple
> days ago and I just found out Wednesday night, because I was worried that I
> wasn't answering my emails. It's hard for me to realize, it' s happening so
> fast... My dad was the only member of the family his side that I fully
> loved, trusted and respected. On the other side I just have my mother. His
> work was so important for him, I'm so sad I didn't accomplished it..
> I need a lawyer for advices, so If you know one, please contact me.
> Please get in touch with me at danceflore at hotmail.com or +33 (0)6 82 30 26
> 70 for the funerals. I would like to have a lot of people coming..
>
>
> I have passed on to Flore condolences on behalf on those of us working with
> Francis on Internet Governance issues, but I am sure the family would like
> to hear from those who have worked closely with Francis. Flore also asked me
> about Francis’s work and travel movements – I did mention  to her IGF and
> also his current project with ITU – but I don’t have contacts for that work,
> others might like to pass details on.
>
> Sad news indeed. Francis was an original thinker with a great devotion to
> these issues. It’s hard to believe that he is no longer with us.
>
> Ian Peter
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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


From renate.bloem at gmail.com  Sun Oct 18 05:24:09 2009
From: renate.bloem at gmail.com (Renate Bloem (Gmail))
Date: Sun, 18 Oct 2009 11:24:09 +0200
Subject: [governance] Sad news re Francis Muguet
In-Reply-To: <31B5A25C-60D9-43B7-88D7-C1C06D7AC624@graduateinstitute.ch>
Message-ID: <4adadebe.0508d00a.72b8.1854@mx.google.com>

Hi Bill,

 

Do you have the e-address of Richard Stallmann: Flore asked for it? Can you
send immediately?

 

Thanks

Renate

 

  _____  

From: William Drake [mailto:william.drake at graduateinstitute.ch] 
Sent: samedi, 17. octobre 2009 12:16
To: governance at lists.cpsr.org; Ian Peter
Cc: Gov at wsis-gov.org
Subject: Re: [governance] Sad news re Francis Muguet

 

Really terrible news.

 

I got that message too from Facebook and responded to her, but I'm leaving
soon for Seoul and am anyway not local and in a position to help.  Hopefully
some caucus members based in Paris can get in touch with her and see what
can be done...?

 

Bill

 

On Oct 17, 2009, at 5:55 AM, Ian Peter wrote:





Friends, I have just received the following email. I have no further
details, and this must be a shock to all of us.  I would particularly urge
those of you closer to Francis's immediate work to get in touch with his
family as requested below. This is sad news indeed.

Hey,
My name is Flore MUGUET, I'm the daughter of Francis MUGUET, I'm contacting
you because you are his friend on Facebook. My father died in Paris couple
days ago and I just found out Wednesday night, because I was worried that I
wasn't answering my emails. It's hard for me to realize, it' s happening so
fast... My dad was the only member of the family his side that I fully
loved, trusted and respected. On the other side I just have my mother. His
work was so important for him, I'm so sad I didn't accomplished it..
I need a lawyer for advices, so If you know one, please contact me.
Please get in touch with me at danceflore at hotmail.com
<x-msg://64/danceflore at hotmail.com>  or +33 (0)6 82 30 26 70 for the
funerals. I would like to have a lot of people coming..


I have passed on to Flore condolences on behalf on those of us working with
Francis on Internet Governance issues, but I am sure the family would like
to hear from those who have worked closely with Francis. Flore also asked me
about Francis's work and travel movements - I did mention  to her IGF and
also his current project with ITU - but I don't have contacts for that work,
others might like to pass details on.

Sad news indeed. Francis was an original thinker with a great devotion to
these issues. It's hard to believe that he is no longer with us.

Ian Peter 





 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20091018/b9e51fcb/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

From william.drake at graduateinstitute.ch  Sun Oct 18 05:42:49 2009
From: william.drake at graduateinstitute.ch (William Drake)
Date: Sun, 18 Oct 2009 11:42:49 +0200
Subject: [governance] Sad news re Francis Muguet
In-Reply-To: <4adadebe.0508d00a.72b8.1854@mx.google.com>
References: <4adadebe.0508d00a.72b8.1854@mx.google.com>
Message-ID: <7A6F6E0D-925E-420B-BB62-2B8D37CE8229@graduateinstitute.ch>

AFAIK it's rms at gnu.org

Maybe someone else knows differently

On Oct 18, 2009, at 11:24 AM, Renate Bloem (Gmail) wrote:

> Hi Bill,
>
> Do you have the e-address of Richard Stallmann: Flore asked for it?  
> Can you send immediately?
>
> Thanks
> Renate
>
> From: William Drake [mailto:william.drake at graduateinstitute.ch]
> Sent: samedi, 17. octobre 2009 12:16
> To: governance at lists.cpsr.org; Ian Peter
> Cc: Gov at wsis-gov.org
> Subject: Re: [governance] Sad news re Francis Muguet
>
> Really terrible news.
>
> I got that message too from Facebook and responded to her, but I'm  
> leaving soon for Seoul and am anyway not local and in a position to  
> help.  Hopefully some caucus members based in Paris can get in touch  
> with her and see what can be done...?
>
> Bill
>
> On Oct 17, 2009, at 5:55 AM, Ian Peter wrote:
>
>
> Friends, I have just received the following email. I have no further  
> details, and this must be a shock to all of us.  I would  
> particularly urge those of you closer to Francis’s immediate work to  
> get in touch with his family as requested below. This is sad news  
> indeed.
>
> Hey,
> My name is Flore MUGUET, I'm the daughter of Francis MUGUET, I'm  
> contacting you because you are his friend on Facebook. My father  
> died in Paris couple days ago and I just found out Wednesday night,  
> because I was worried that I wasn't answering my emails. It's hard  
> for me to realize, it' s happening so fast... My dad was the only  
> member of the family his side that I fully loved, trusted and  
> respected. On the other side I just have my mother. His work was so  
> important for him, I'm so sad I didn't accomplished it..
> I need a lawyer for advices, so If you know one, please contact me.
> Please get in touch with me at danceflore at hotmail.com or +33 (0)6 82  
> 30 26 70 for the funerals. I would like to have a lot of people  
> coming..
>
>
> I have passed on to Flore condolences on behalf on those of us  
> working with Francis on Internet Governance issues, but I am sure  
> the family would like to hear from those who have worked closely  
> with Francis. Flore also asked me about Francis’s work and travel  
> movements – I did mention  to her IGF and also his current project  
> with ITU – but I don’t have contacts for that work, others might  
> like to pass details on.
>
> Sad news indeed. Francis was an original thinker with a great  
> devotion to these issues. It’s hard to believe that he is no longer  
> with us.
>
> Ian Peter
>
>
>

***********************************************************
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
***********************************************************


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20091018/b857cc19/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

From presidencia at internauta.org.ar  Sun Oct 18 08:20:33 2009
From: presidencia at internauta.org.ar (Presidencia Internauta)
Date: Sun, 18 Oct 2009 09:20:33 -0300
Subject: [governance] Review Panels
References: <945154.26944.qm@web110102.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> <20091015203950.7cvn8ev328w800ss@www.isocperu.org> <61a136f40910170920h6f675871ge749f8e2621927ba@mail.gmail.com> <006001ca4f71$838fd260$8aaf7720$@com.br> <d62ac6b30910172333q3fc2d79fy652f9f398755f6fc@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <E23B22B429334D29B0C7A5B2DD6F6038@Sergio>

Dear Jose,
would be very good for you to integrate LACRALO, but I need to correct what was said by 
Andres Piazza, IF there are organizations of Internet users in Peru and running in LACRALO 
(AUI Peru) and I think it would be great to find another who can work together.
Best regards
Sergio Salinas Porto
President
Internauta
Asociación Argentina de Usuarios de Internet

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Andrés Piazza" <andrespiazza at gmail.com>
To: <governance at lists.cpsr.org>; "Vanda UOL" <vanda at uol.com.br>; "Carlton Samuels" 
<carlton.samuels at uwimona.edu.jm>
Sent: Sunday, October 18, 2009 3:33 AM
Subject: Re: [governance] Review Panels


Dear jose,

As carlton says, LACRALO may be an interesting space for you. Since
there are not organisations from Peru in ICANN At Large this is also
great for latin american users.

As LACRALO chair I'm completely available to assist you. Do you remember me?

Regards,

Andres Piazza

2009/10/17, Vanda UOL <vanda at uol.com.br>:
> I also had written to him with the same invitation..
>
>
>
> De: carlton.samuels at gmail.com [mailto:carlton.samuels at gmail.com] Em nome de
> Carlton Samuels
> Enviada em: sábado, 17 de outubro de 2009 13:21
> Para: governance at lists.cpsr.org; jfcallo at isocperu.org
> Assunto: Re: [governance] Review Panels
>
>
>
> Dear Jose:
>
> There is an ICANN At-Large community that might suit your purpose. See
> http://www.atlarge.icann.org/.  Under the At-Large umbrella, the regional
> organisation, LACRALO, may serve as your point of connection - see
>
>
>
> https://st.icann.org/lacralo/index.cgi - and there are opportunities for
> membership.   Since they are already members of LACRALO, your ISOC brethren
> in Argentina and Mexico may be helpful in advising you.
>
>
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Carlton Samuels
>
> LACRALO, Jamaica
>
> On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 7:39 PM, <jfcallo at isocperu.org> wrote:
>
> Distinguished members of this list:
> I write from Lima, Peru, we are interested in participating in ICANN,
> contribute from our experience, how do to connect with ICANN?, Send an
> e-mail for 10 days and no one responds.
> Thanks
> Jose F. Callo Romero
>    Secretario
>    ISOC Peru
>
>
>
>
> Quoting Danny Younger <dannyyounger at yahoo.com>:
>
> Bertrand,
>
> There is more to this equation than diversity, balance, and
> representativeness; these review panels will require individuals  with
> extensive knowledge regarding the particulars of the areas  under review
> (which is why independent experts are cited as part of  the necessary review
> team mix).
>
> The teams will include:
>
> the Chair of the GAC
> the CEO of ICANN
> representatives of the Root Server System Advisory Committee
> representatives of the Security and Stability Advisory Committee
> representatives of the At-Large Advisory Committee
> representatives of the Generic Names Supporting Organization
> representatives of the Address Supporting Organization
> representatives of the Country Code Names Supporting Organization
> independent experts (likely drawn from either the Technical Liason  Group,
> the IETF, the IAB, or from the pool of volunteer community  members)
>
> and in the accountability/transparency review team, these members  will be
> joined by the Assistant Secretary for Communications and  Information of the
> DOC,
>
> The current arrangement calls for the composition of the review team to be
> agreed jointly by the Chair of the GAC (in consultation with GAC members)
> and the CEO of ICANN.
>
> Like all comparable ICANN processes, there will likely be a call for
> volunteers (similar to the recent call for NSCG placeholder councilors).
> The ICANN Board will then privately settle upon whomever best promotes the
> ICANN interest (likely those that have never been critics) and will then
> advance those names to the Chair of the GAC.
>
> I fully expect these reviews to be as much of a whitewash as all earlier
> ICANN self-review efforts.  Perhaps you will recall the earlier commissioned
> review of transparency and accountability provided in the One World Trust
> report -- we were told that ICANN is a model of transparency with robust
> accountability mechanisms... and yet we all know the reality.
>
> Don't waste your energy on this project.  The deck will be stacked from day
> one.
>
> best regards,
> Danny Younger
>
>
> --- On Thu, 10/15/09, Bertrand de La Chapelle  <bdelachapelle at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>
> From: Bertrand de La Chapelle <bdelachapelle at gmail.com>
> Subject: [governance] Review Panels
> To: governance at lists.cpsr.org, "Anriette Esterhuysen" <anriette at apc.org>
> Date: Thursday, October 15, 2009, 4:33 AM
>
>
> Dear all,
>
> Could this list also address Anriette's concrete second question ?  What do
> you think the review process should be ? Fundamentally, the  community is
> facing a now recurring problem (cf. WGIG, MAG,...) :  how to compose a
> multi-stakeholder group for a given task, so that  it is sufficiently
> diverse, balanced and representative of the  variety of viewpoints ?
>
> In addition, what do you tink the timing is ?
>
> Best
>
> Bertrand
>
>
>
> On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 1:39 PM, Anriette Esterhuysen  <anriette at apc.org>
> wrote:
>
> snip
>
> Second question is about the submissions on the review panels. What is
> the process likely to be?
>
> Anriette
>
>
>
>
> --
> ____________________
> Bertrand de La Chapelle
> Délégué Spécial pour la Société de l'Information / Special Envoy for the
> Information Society
> Ministère des Affaires Etrangères et Européennes/ French Ministry of Foreign
> and European Affairs
> Tel : +33 (0)6 11 88 33 32
>
> "Le plus beau métier des hommes, c'est d'unir les hommes" Antoine de Saint
> Exupéry
> ("there is no greater mission for humans than uniting humans")
>
> -----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
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
>
>
>
>

-- 
Enviado desde mi dispositivo móvil
____________________________________________________________
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


From divina.meigs at orange.fr  Sun Oct 18 09:42:48 2009
From: divina.meigs at orange.fr (Divina MEIGS)
Date: Sun, 18 Oct 2009 15:42:48 +0200
Subject: [governance] Condolences
In-Reply-To: <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A871964F@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
Message-ID: <C700E7F8.DE83%divina.meigs@orange.fr>


Dear Flore, dear all,

I just now find the various messages on the list about the sudden passing
away of your father. This is very sad news for our whole community of
researchers and activists. It is also a very sad personal loss for me as he
was a very solid and sincere friend. I feel I have to tell you that he loved
you and always mentioned you in conversation, being very proud of your
independent spirit and confident in your future.

I have met Francis in Geneva in 2003, much like many of us, and we have
worked together in similar coalitions, him for sciences me for humanities,
all pushing for civil society's voice to be heard in a constructive manner.
Francis was a very bright scholar in his own right, in chemistry, working
among other things on the beautiful topic of the memory of water. He was
also a genius at computing, with generous ideas about the internet of
things, for which I used to say that he should also push for the internet of
subjects,something that made him laugh but to which he definitely agreed. He
was developing with ITU a research on alternatives to the generation of
domain names, always in the perspective of making the digital networks more
accessible to all. (see a recent article in Le Monde:
www.lemonde.fr/technologies/article/2009/10/02/les-65-000-concurrents-de-l-i
cann_1248113_651865.html

I am particularly distraught because I feel that he was on the verge of
making the contribution to society that he was dreaming of, which I fear
will be lost with his passing away. When I saw him recently at Eurodig, in
mid-september in Geneva, he was genuinely happy, recovering from the
hardships inflicted on him in France. Like many mis-understood people, he
was not a prophet in his own country, something from which he suffered
though he was genuinely a citizen of the world. He will be remembered here,
among other things, for his proposal for "Mécénat global" that is slowly
catching up with the general public, as you can all check by going to Le
Monde: 
www.lemonde.fr/technologies/article/2009/09/09/le-mecenat-global-alternative
-a-hadopi_1238166_651865.html
   
He had just recently sent me his references as I will quote him in an
upcoming book. As he wrote back to me, "you can go and check it all there:
http://www.muguet.org".

I join my voice to Wolfgang Kleinwachter, to ask for a minute of silence in
his memory at IGF, in Sharm el Sheik, to commemorate a magnificent member of
our community whose name for me will always be connected to the memory of
water and to the surf of the internet. If all this is true, his memory will
endure in the fluidity of our open networks.

As he would always say at the end of any number of  meetings, "A plus"...

Divina 

  
^=^=^=^=^=^=^=^=^=^=^=^=^=^=^=^=^=^=^=^=^=^=^=^=^=^=^=^=^=^=^=^=^=^=^=^=^=^=
Divina Frau-Meigs
Professor, media sociology, University Sorbonne nouvelle, Paris (France)
Director, master's programme "E-learning and media education engineering"

Board Member, ECREA (European Communication Research and Education Asso)
Past vice-president, IAMCR (Intl Asso for Media and Communication Research)
Focal point, education, academia and research taskforce, WSIS
website: www.medias-matrices.net
^=^=^=^=^=^=^=^=^=^=^=^=^=^=^=^=^=^=^=^=^=^=^=^=^=^=^=^=^=^=^=^=^=^=^=^=^=^=





____________________________________________________________
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


From jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com  Sun Oct 18 14:35:23 2009
From: jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com (Jeffrey A. Williams)
Date: Sun, 18 Oct 2009 13:35:23 -0500 (GMT-05:00)
Subject: [governance] Re: [ga] UPDATE DARPA wants military to replace
 TCP/IP with new "Military  Network Protocol"
Message-ID: <31041834.1255890924110.JavaMail.root@mswamui-valley.atl.sa.earthlink.net>

An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20091018/5d6d0d4e/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

From jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com  Sun Oct 18 14:40:21 2009
From: jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com (Jeffrey A. Williams)
Date: Sun, 18 Oct 2009 13:40:21 -0500 (GMT-05:00)
Subject: [governance] Re: [ga] DEATH NOTICE: Stuart Duncan, Director &
 Chief Operating Officer at ICM Registry
Message-ID: <7570019.1255891221544.JavaMail.root@mswamui-valley.atl.sa.earthlink.net>

An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20091018/a1db20ae/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

From jfcallo at isocperu.org  Sun Oct 18 16:02:40 2009
From: jfcallo at isocperu.org (jfcallo at isocperu.org)
Date: Sun, 18 Oct 2009 16:02:40 -0400
Subject: [governance] Thanks very thanks
In-Reply-To: <E23B22B429334D29B0C7A5B2DD6F6038@Sergio>
References: <945154.26944.qm@web110102.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
	<20091015203950.7cvn8ev328w800ss@www.isocperu.org>
	<61a136f40910170920h6f675871ge749f8e2621927ba@mail.gmail.com>
	<006001ca4f71$838fd260$8aaf7720$@com.br>
	<d62ac6b30910172333q3fc2d79fy652f9f398755f6fc@mail.gmail.com>
	<E23B22B429334D29B0C7A5B2DD6F6038@Sergio>
Message-ID: <20091018160240.1r1jd2nrkc4kwogk@www.isocperu.org>


(English)
Respectable members:
Thank you very much for your generous responses. We serve the  
community, that is our desire and not only say but do effectively, so  
that you as members to see and support our work, with your experience  
and we with ours, is the great advantage of the Internet, for all we  
are united with the sole objective of eliminating digital illiteracy.
Andres Piazza, thanks for your response also fraternal, please can you  
call that number.
Thanks, I hope to soon form LACRALO part of my job and support the  
work of ICANN.
Thanks

(Spanish)
Respetables miembros:
Muchas gracias por sus generosas respuestas. Queremos servir a la  
comunidad, ese es nuestro deseo y no solo decirlo sino hacerlo en  
forma efectiva, de manera que ustedes como miembros vean y apoyen  
nuestra labor, con su experiencia y nosotros con la nuestra, es la  
gran ventaja de Internet, pues todos estamos unidos con el unico  
objetivo de acabar con el analfabetismo digital.
Andres Piazza, gracias por tu tambien fraterna respuesta, por favor a  
que numero te puedo llamar.
Gracias, espero poder formar pronto parte de LACRALO y apoyar con mi  
trabajo la labor de ICANN.
Gracias
Jose F. Callo Romero
     Secretario
     ISOC Peru



____________________________________________________________
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


From jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com  Sun Oct 18 17:05:28 2009
From: jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com (Jeffrey A. Williams)
Date: Sun, 18 Oct 2009 16:05:28 -0500 (GMT-05:00)
Subject: [governance] Thanks very thanks
Message-ID: <24104433.1255899928803.JavaMail.root@mswamui-thinleaf.atl.sa.earthlink.net>

Jose and all,

  Your very welcome.  I and many others of our organization members
in Peru hope that in the near future that the ISOC will return to
a full membership driven organization that it once was so that
all stakeholders voices can be heard and votes counted on issues
of importance to each and every ISOC member.  We also hope
fully that the principals of democracy, transparency and openness
will be what the ISOC Peru will advocate for and bring to the
aid of ICANN which is so sorely needed and been significantly
lacking.  Then and only then can actual accountability of ICANN
be realized and recognized by all..

-----Original Message-----
>From: jfcallo at isocperu.org
>Sent: Oct 18, 2009 3:02 PM
>To: governance at lists.cpsr.org, Presidencia Internauta <presidencia at internauta.org.ar>
>Cc: governance at lists.cpsr.org, Andrés Piazza <andrespiazza at gmail.com>, Vanda UOL <vanda at uol.com.br>, Carlton Samuels <carlton.samuels at uwimona.edu.jm>
>Subject: [governance] Thanks very thanks
>
>
>(English)
>Respectable members:
>Thank you very much for your generous responses. We serve the  
>community, that is our desire and not only say but do effectively, so  
>that you as members to see and support our work, with your experience  
>and we with ours, is the great advantage of the Internet, for all we  
>are united with the sole objective of eliminating digital illiteracy.
>Andres Piazza, thanks for your response also fraternal, please can you  
>call that number.
>Thanks, I hope to soon form LACRALO part of my job and support the  
>work of ICANN.
>Thanks
>
>(Spanish)
>Respetables miembros:
>Muchas gracias por sus generosas respuestas. Queremos servir a la  
>comunidad, ese es nuestro deseo y no solo decirlo sino hacerlo en  
>forma efectiva, de manera que ustedes como miembros vean y apoyen  
>nuestra labor, con su experiencia y nosotros con la nuestra, es la  
>gran ventaja de Internet, pues todos estamos unidos con el unico  
>objetivo de acabar con el analfabetismo digital.
>Andres Piazza, gracias por tu tambien fraterna respuesta, por favor a  
>que numero te puedo llamar.
>Gracias, espero poder formar pronto parte de LACRALO y apoyar con mi  
>trabajo la labor de ICANN.
>Gracias
>Jose F. Callo Romero
>     Secretario
>     ISOC Peru
>
>
>
>____________________________________________________________
>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,



Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 294k members/stakeholders strong!)
"Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" -
   Abraham Lincoln

"Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is very
often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt

"If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; liability
depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
United States v. Carroll Towing  (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
===============================================================
Updated 1/26/04
CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS. div. of
Information Network Eng.  INEG. INC.
ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com
Phone: 214-244-4827

____________________________________________________________
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


From jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com  Sun Oct 18 17:11:22 2009
From: jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com (Jeffrey A. Williams)
Date: Sun, 18 Oct 2009 16:11:22 -0500 (GMT-05:00)
Subject: [governance] ICANN meets Silicon Valley
Message-ID: <21058037.1255900283241.JavaMail.root@mswamui-thinleaf.atl.sa.earthlink.net>

Karl and all,

  Thanks you Karl for rightly pointing this out so
nicely and plainly for all of us.  It is unfortunate
that ICANN seems to seek ways by which the taxpayer
and/or stakeholder's costs can be increased rather than
seeking ways and means by which to reduce same.  Such
fiscal irresponisbility is plainly not in the best interests
of stakeholders, US Taxpayers or users and will eventually
likely be passed on to domain name holders in the near future.

-----Original Message-----
>From: Karl Auerbach <karl at cavebear.com>
>Sent: Oct 14, 2009 5:40 PM
>To: governance at lists.cpsr.org
>Subject: Re: [governance] ICANN meets Silicon Valley
>
>On 10/12/2009 01:52 AM, "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang" wrote:
>> FYI, ICANN will open new office in Palo Alto
>
>ICANN routinely does this for its presidents (by-the-way, for ICANN the 
>term "CEO" is inaccurate.)  When I was on the board I suggested that 
>ICANN do this the president of that era.
>
>There is a reason for this.
>
>Under US tax law the costs of commuting from home to/from office are not 
>tax deductable.
>
>But the costs of going from office to office are.
>
>Thus, by way of establishing an "office" near the home of the president 
>of ICANN the costs of travel between that "office" and Marina del Rey 
>become tax deductible.
>
>Its a way of shifting a piece of the compensation of the president off 
>of ICANN and onto the US taxpayer.
>
>		--karl--
>
>
>
>
>____________________________________________________________
>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,



Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 294k members/stakeholders strong!)
"Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" -
   Abraham Lincoln

"Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is very
often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt

"If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; liability
depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
United States v. Carroll Towing  (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
===============================================================
Updated 1/26/04
CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS. div. of
Information Network Eng.  INEG. INC.
ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com
Phone: 214-244-4827

____________________________________________________________
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


From jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com  Sun Oct 18 17:20:39 2009
From: jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com (Jeffrey A. Williams)
Date: Sun, 18 Oct 2009 16:20:39 -0500 (GMT-05:00)
Subject: [governance] Re: [ga] What is ICANN doing to make sure that the
 UDRP providers are truly neutral?
Message-ID: <22939412.1255900839259.JavaMail.root@mswamui-thinleaf.atl.sa.earthlink.net>

Andy and all,

  Good points up to a point.  I am not sure I would believe
or want ICANN doing any kind of investigation of such a nature
given yet again demonstrated inability or lack of diligance
in ICANN being able to keep their web site up to date and
George nicely and correctly recently informed us all.  Rather
it would seem more advisible that INTERPOL should conduct 
such investigations and soon.

-----Original Message-----
>From: Andy Gardner <andy at navigator.co.nz>
>Sent: Oct 14, 2009 1:31 PM
>To: Accountability Headquarters <ga at gnso.icann.org>
>Subject: Re: [ga] What is ICANN doing to make sure that the UDRP providers are truly neutral?
>
>
>
>You think NAF is bad?
>
>Wait until you hear what's been going on at ADNDRC HK.
>
>Apparently they've decided to do an internal investigation - yeah  
>that's the ticket - that'll cure the problems.
>
>Not.
>
>http://www.adndrc.org/announcement/ADNDRC_Press_Release_05102009.pdf
>
>Shouldn't ICANN be involved in any investigations pertaining to UDRP  
>fraud?
>
>

Regards,



Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 294k members/stakeholders strong!)
"Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" -
   Abraham Lincoln

"Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is very
often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt

"If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; liability
depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
United States v. Carroll Towing  (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
===============================================================
Updated 1/26/04
CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS. div. of
Information Network Eng.  INEG. INC.
ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com
Phone: 214-244-4827

____________________________________________________________
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


From vanda at uol.com.br  Sun Oct 18 19:15:27 2009
From: vanda at uol.com.br (Vanda UOL)
Date: Sun, 18 Oct 2009 21:15:27 -0200
Subject: RES: [governance] Thanks very thanks
In-Reply-To: <20091018160240.1r1jd2nrkc4kwogk@www.isocperu.org>
References: <945154.26944.qm@web110102.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>	<20091015203950.7cvn8ev328w800ss@www.isocperu.org>	<61a136f40910170920h6f675871ge749f8e2621927ba@mail.gmail.com>	<006001ca4f71$838fd260$8aaf7720$@com.br>	<d62ac6b30910172333q3fc2d79fy652f9f398755f6fc@mail.gmail.com>	<E23B22B429334D29B0C7A5B2DD6F6038@Sergio> <20091018160240.1r1jd2nrkc4kwogk@www.isocperu.org>
Message-ID: <004801ca5048$e45abe20$ad103a60$@com.br>

Welcome, bienvenido Jose.

-----Mensagem original-----
De: jfcallo at isocperu.org [mailto:jfcallo at isocperu.org] 
Enviada em: domingo, 18 de outubro de 2009 18:03
Para: governance at lists.cpsr.org; Presidencia Internauta
Cc: governance at lists.cpsr.org; Andrés Piazza; Vanda UOL; Carlton Samuels
Assunto: [governance] Thanks very thanks


(English)
Respectable members:
Thank you very much for your generous responses. We serve the  
community, that is our desire and not only say but do effectively, so  
that you as members to see and support our work, with your experience  
and we with ours, is the great advantage of the Internet, for all we  
are united with the sole objective of eliminating digital illiteracy.
Andres Piazza, thanks for your response also fraternal, please can you  
call that number.
Thanks, I hope to soon form LACRALO part of my job and support the  
work of ICANN.
Thanks

(Spanish)
Respetables miembros:
Muchas gracias por sus generosas respuestas. Queremos servir a la  
comunidad, ese es nuestro deseo y no solo decirlo sino hacerlo en  
forma efectiva, de manera que ustedes como miembros vean y apoyen  
nuestra labor, con su experiencia y nosotros con la nuestra, es la  
gran ventaja de Internet, pues todos estamos unidos con el unico  
objetivo de acabar con el analfabetismo digital.
Andres Piazza, gracias por tu tambien fraterna respuesta, por favor a  
que numero te puedo llamar.
Gracias, espero poder formar pronto parte de LACRALO y apoyar con mi  
trabajo la labor de ICANN.
Gracias
Jose F. Callo Romero
     Secretario
     ISOC Peru



____________________________________________________________
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


From ca at cafonso.ca  Sun Oct 18 22:04:42 2009
From: ca at cafonso.ca (Carlos A. Afonso)
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2009 00:04:42 -0200
Subject: [governance] summary report from II pre-IGF LAC
In-Reply-To: <701af9f70910151317o4aef27b0n1083b42047b2513f@mail.gmail.com>
References: <OFBC97AF66.AC651827-ONC125764F.0059214F-C125764F.005E45A4@unog.un.org>	<701af9f70910141535x29ae8cecx8d3ccc698baf87@mail.gmail.com>	<6494D800-6691-4B01-BF96-4C61C9D7B046@apc.org> <701af9f70910151317o4aef27b0n1083b42047b2513f@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4ADBC93A.6040100@cafonso.ca>

Dear people,

A summary document based on the reports of each panel in the II Latin
American and Caribbean Preparatory Meeting for the IGF is attached. The
event's Web page is www.nupef.org.br/igf.

fraternal regards

--c.a.

Fouad Bajwa wrote:
> Dear Natasha,
> 
> Thank you for replying to my observations. Once again, I did not
> intend to exceed any pre-agreed session arrangements from the
> September meetings and am only sharing certain observations that may
> appear productive in the spirit of the objectives of the panels
> mentioned. I must agree with Markus that they have done some important
> work and previous should not be just opened because of these
> observations.
> 
> But in the end, I believe there is much more space for more openness
> and inclusion and more representation would result in more productive
> experience sharing. Again, these are just observations and Markus and
> his secretariat team have already done such a wonderful job!
> 
> 
> On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 12:06 PM, Natasha Primo <natasha at apc.org> wrote:
>> Dear Fouad,
>>
>> Thank you for the comments and suggestions.
>>
>> With respect to the Access session: We tried to respond to several calls at
>> the September IGF Planning meeting for a focus on the remaining access
>> challenges in Africa (alongside Diversity and Multilingualism), given the
>> location of IGF4 in Africa. At the meeting, proposals were also made to
>> include relevant speakers from LAC. Speakers who can share possible
>> solutions to these remaining challenges were proposed.
>>
>> Our starting point was not to try and balance panelists for representation
>> across all regions. [As an aside: I am also fully aware that the panel is
>> not gender balanced].  However, if there is a strong feeling that regional
>> representation is important for this panel and we should include a panelist
>> from South Asia and Asia Pacific, we can solicit possible names to approach.
>>
>> I think we have Africa well covered.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Natasha
>>
>> On 15 Oct 2009, at 12:35 AM, Fouad Bajwa wrote:
>>
>>> Dear Markus,
>>>
>>> First of congratulations for a very productive meeting in Geneva
>>> during last month and the approach that was applied towards the end to
>>> finalize the speakers and content for the IGF. Yes, the speakers
>>> availability and confirmations is a tedious process but again it has
>>> been significantly dealt in a very productive manner.
>>>
>>> I have some observations that I would like to share and if possible
>>> the IGF Secretariat might want to look into these.
>>>
>>> Going through the scheduled program and speakers, I am very pleased
>>> with the diverse participation of multistakeholders in the orientation
>>> and finding the names of Ginger from the IGC, Lee Hibbard of the CoE,
>>> Nii Qaynor from Ghana and Rafik Dammak for Youth which definitely
>>> identifies careful and appropriate selection of the panellists.
>>>
>>> In the panel of Regional Perspectives, I would be very interested in
>>> bringing on board stakeholders from Central Europe, South Asia and the
>>> Asia Pacific regions as perspectives from these regions are of great
>>> concern and then can be true representative of most of the continents
>>> and regions of the world. Please do reconsider adding more people to
>>> the panel.
>>>
>>> On the panel of Security, Openness and Privacy, you might even
>>> consider bringing in three more important stakeholders missing but
>>> very useful for their input and that is the ITU Cybersecurity group,
>>> the Global Impact from Malaysia and a representative from Interpole or
>>> include Barrister Zahid Jamil for Pakistan to share their
>>> perspectives. Diversity again and the terrible scene of careless
>>> cybercrime related policy making should be discussed too. In my
>>> opinion some more closer legal implication discussants should be there
>>> on this occasion for meaningful dialogue.
>>>
>>> The Access session again lacks regional participation in the panellist
>>> list. You must have someone from IDRC Canada and they will be able to
>>> share some very good panellists from South Asia and Asia Pacific
>>> including Africa.
>>>
>>> I am once again happy to see Sunil Abraham and Rebecca's names in the
>>> panel of Emerging Issues: Impact of Social Networks.
>>>
>>> The rest is wonderfully fine and once again congratulations to the IGF
>>> Secretariat for its efforts and I would also like to request the
>>> secretariat to invite people from the Human Rights Council of the UN
>>> for more diverse and necessary participation in the IGF process.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 10:09 PM, Markus KUMMER <MKUMMER at unog.ch> wrote:
>>>> Dear colleagues,
>>>>
>>>> It took us longer than expected to get the panels together but by now we
>>>> are
>>>> there and my thanks go to those who moderated the various groups: Katitza
>>>> for security, openness and privacy, Natasha for diversity and access and
>>>> Bertrand for the emerging issues.
>>>>
>>>> The main change since our meeting last month relates to diversity and
>>>> access. After long discussions the group came to the conclusion that it
>>>> would not work as a single session and decided instead to split it into
>>>> two
>>>> sessions of 90 minutes each.
>>>>
>>>> Please find attached the main session programme. It includes the
>>>> programme
>>>> description (mainly as we had it in the previous programme paper) and the
>>>> names of moderators and panellists. We have not yet filled in the names
>>>> of
>>>> the Chairmen for each session, as we want to do so only once we have the
>>>> complete list. The same applies for the speakers at the opening
>>>> ceremony/session, the key note panel as well as the closing session.
>>>>
>>>> There may still be changes, but they will not be reflected in the printed
>>>> programme our hosts are preparing. We have not yet all the moderators
>>>> (the BBC journalist originally foreseen for the merging issues session
>>>> will
>>>> not be able to come to Sharm) and Janis was not yet able to confirm he
>>>> would
>>>> be able to make it, as he has conflicting commitments (hence tbc behind
>>>> his
>>>> name). We will post the programme on our Web site.
>>>>
>>>> We also added a line on the 'formal consultation on the desirability of
>>>> the
>>>> continuation of the Forum'. This will be held in a more formal manner and
>>>> we
>>>> will establish a speakers list. (We created a special email address for
>>>> this
>>>> purpose.) As speakers will address the meeting from the rostrum, this
>>>> will
>>>> also provide a welcome opportunity to give more visibility to Ministers,
>>>> CEOs and other high profile participants.
>>>>
>>>> As an input into that session we have prepared a synthesis paper that is
>>>> being translated into all six UN languages. Once we have all language
>>>> versions we will post the paper on our Web site.
>>>>
>>>> Best regards
>>>> Markus
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> igf_members mailing list
>>>> igf_members at intgovforum.org
>>>> http://intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/igf_members_intgovforum.org
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Regards.
>>> --------------------------
>>> Fouad Bajwa
>>> @skBajwa
>>> Answering all your technology questions
>>> http://www.askbajwa.com
>>> http://twitter.com/fouadbajwa
>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ATVDW1tDZzA
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> igf_members mailing list
>>> igf_members at intgovforum.org
>>> http://intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/igf_members_intgovforum.org
>> //\\//\\//\\//\\//\\//\\//\\//\\//\\//\\//\\//\\//\\//\\//\\//\\//\\//\\//\\//\/
>> Natasha Primo
>> National ICT Policy Advocacy Initiative
>> Association for Progressive Communications
>> Johannesburg, South Africa
>> Tel/Fax: +27118372122
>> Skype/Yahoo: natashaprimo
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
> 
> 
> 

-- 

Carlos A. Afonso
CGI.br (www.cgi.br)
Nupef (www.nupef.org.br)
====================================
new/nuevo/novo e-mail: ca at cafonso.ca
====================================

____________________________________________________________
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 embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed...
Name: summary_preIGF_II_LAC_summary_report.txt
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20091019/694c988a/attachment.txt>

From ca at cafonso.ca  Sun Oct 18 22:17:18 2009
From: ca at cafonso.ca (Carlos A. Afonso)
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2009 00:17:18 -0200
Subject: [governance] summary report from II pre-IGF LAC (resending)
In-Reply-To: <701af9f70910151317o4aef27b0n1083b42047b2513f@mail.gmail.com>
References: <OFBC97AF66.AC651827-ONC125764F.0059214F-C125764F.005E45A4@unog.un.org>	<701af9f70910141535x29ae8cecx8d3ccc698baf87@mail.gmail.com>	<6494D800-6691-4B01-BF96-4C61C9D7B046@apc.org> <701af9f70910151317o4aef27b0n1083b42047b2513f@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4ADBCC2E.5020705@cafonso.ca>

Resending with a slight revision of the text. Sorry for sending the
former msg with an unintended appended dialogue...

--c.a.

Dear people,

A summary document based on the reports of each panel in the II Latin
American and Caribbean Preparatory Meeting for the IGF is attached. The
event's Web page is www.nupef.org.br/igf.

fraternal regards

--c.a.

-- 

Carlos A. Afonso
CGI.br (www.cgi.br)
Nupef (www.nupef.org.br)
====================================
new/nuevo/novo e-mail: ca at cafonso.ca
====================================


____________________________________________________________
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 embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed...
Name: summary_preIGF_II_LAC_summary_report.txt
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20091019/9a2d0c62/attachment.txt>

From yehudakatz at mailinator.com  Sun Oct 18 23:04:25 2009
From: yehudakatz at mailinator.com (Yehuda Katz)
Date: Sun, 18 Oct 2009 20:04:25 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [governance] summary report from II pre-IGF LAC (resending)
In-Reply-To: 4ADBCC2E.5020705@cafonso.ca
Message-ID: <sympa.1255921067.80454.343@lists.cpsr.org>

Nicely done Carlos, 
The South American team 'produces' on-time and with brillent work.

Excellent!

-

>Re:
>  http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/arc/governance/2009-10/msg00282.html

---

-30-
____________________________________________________________
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


From roland at internetpolicyagency.com  Mon Oct 19 03:16:29 2009
From: roland at internetpolicyagency.com (Roland Perry)
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2009 08:16:29 +0100
Subject: [governance] Review Panels
In-Reply-To: <83778.19123.qm@web83905.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
References: <61a136f40910170920h6f675871ge749f8e2621927ba@mail.gmail.com>
 <83778.19123.qm@web83905.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <5o+ez+MNJB3KFAuX@perry.co.uk>

In message <83778.19123.qm at web83905.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>, at 18:19:00 on 
Sat, 17 Oct 2009, Eric Dierker <cogitoergosum at sbcglobal.net> writes

>1. Do the Ralos represent a region really? Seems that young and old,
>poor and rich, educated and denied, cityfolk and countryfolk, women and
>men, students and faculty, black or white, tall and short make just as
>reasonable grounds to segregate.

You forgot: those with Internet Access and those without.

[& Reminds me of the old joke: "The world is divided into two kinds of 
people: those who divide the world into two kinds of people; and those 
who don't"].
-- 
Roland Perry
____________________________________________________________
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


From lohento at oridev.org  Mon Oct 19 06:13:07 2009
From: lohento at oridev.org (Lohento, ken)
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2009 12:13:07 +0200 (CEST)
Subject: [governance] Sad news re Francis Muguet
In-Reply-To: <C7006C9B.7125%ian.peter@ianpeter.com>
References: <C7006C9B.7125%ian.peter@ianpeter.com>
Message-ID: <7e2149d0807b047d2d3186d2dcd2f321.squirrel@ssl0.ovh.net>

My sincere condolences to his family and to all. I couldn't believe it
initially.

He was someone who really passionately advocated for developing countries'
issues, in particular African CS issues, during WSIS and the IGF process.
We will miss you Francis.

Ken L



Le Sam 17 octobre 2009 21:56, Ian Peter a écrit :
> This page seems to provide the unfortunate confirmation that Francis died
> in
> Paris on October 14, and also that the cause of death was most likely a
> heart attack.
>
> http://www.refondation.org/blog/1930/francis-muguet-nous-a-quittes
>
> How fragile we are.
>
>
>
>
> On 18/10/09 12:38 AM, "Nyangkwe Agien Aaron" <nyangkweagien at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> So sad news indeed if can be confirmed. But I wonder how Francis'
>> daughter
>> could not gather the courage and be more precise on the date of the
>> death and
>> what caused the passing away of her father and our friend Francis.
>>
>> Was he sick? Of what? Since when and where did he pass away?
>>
>> The pill is so big to be swallowed like that. Can some one come out with
>> precise information on the matter?
>>
>> Deep condolences if information is confirmed
>>
>> Aaron
>>
>>
>> On Sat, Oct 17, 2009 at 2:55 PM, Anriette Esterhuysen <anriette at apc.org>
>> wrote:
>>> Dear all
>>>
>>> Tijani's words capture my own feelings very well. Is this really true?
>>> I
>>> still find this so sudden, difficult to believe. And it is not so long
>>> ago that it was Francis who wrote to us about Jean Louis' heart attack
>>> at the ITU, as Tijani points out.
>>>
>>> Ian, thanks for communicating with Francis' daughter on our behalf. Do
>>> we have any confirmation of what happened?  Andrea, did you manage to
>>> speak to his family?
>>>
>>> Anriette
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sat, 2009-10-17 at 09:10 +0100, Tijani BEN JEMAA wrote:
>>>> > It’s indeed a very sad piece of news.
>>>> >
>>>> > Françis was one of the very active and committed civil society
>>>> actors
>>>> > in WSIS, and especially in its second phase.
>>>> >
>>>> > Françis always had his own opinion, but never was negative. Our
>>>> views
>>>> > weren’t always the same, and yet, we were really good friends. I
>>>> feel
>>>> > too sad.
>>>> >
>>>> > I can’t forget his behaviour when Jean Louis had his health
>>>> problem in
>>>> > ITU in Geneva.
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > Now, he is away….. It’s a nasty situation
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > ------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> >
>>>> > Tijani BEN JEMAA
>>>> >
>>>> > Vice Chairman of CIC
>>>> >
>>>> > World Federation of Engineering Organizations
>>>> >
>>>> > Phone : + 216 98 330 114
>>>> >
>>>> > Fax     : + 216 70 860 861
>>>> >
>>>> > ------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > ______________________________________________________________________
>>>> > De : Ian Peter [mailto:ian.peter at ianpeter.com]
>>>> > Envoyé : samedi 17 octobre 2009 04:56
>>>> > À : 'governance at lists.cpsr.org'; Gov at wsis-gov.org
>>>> > Objet : [governance] Sad news re Francis Muguet
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > Friends, I have just received the following email. I have no further
>>>> > details, and this must be a shock to all of us.  I would
>>>> particularly
>>>> > urge those of you closer to Francis’s immediate work to get in
>>>> touch
>>>> > with his family as requested below. This is sad news indeed.
>>>> >
>>>> > Hey,
>>>> > My name is Flore MUGUET, I'm the daughter of Francis MUGUET, I'm
>>>> > contacting you because you are his friend on Facebook. My father
>>>> died
>>>> > in Paris couple days ago and I just found out Wednesday night,
>>>> because
>>>> > I was worried that I wasn't answering my emails. It's hard for me to
>>>> > realize, it' s happening so fast... My dad was the only member of
>>>> the
>>>> > family his side that I fully loved, trusted and respected. On the
>>>> > other side I just have my mother. His work was so important for him,
>>>> > I'm so sad I didn't accomplished it..
>>>> > I need a lawyer for advices, so If you know one, please contact me.
>>>> > Please get in touch with me at danceflore at hotmail.com or +33 (0)6 82
>>>> > 30 26 70 for the funerals. I would like to have a lot of people
>>>> > coming..
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > I have passed on to Flore condolences on behalf on those of us
>>>> working
>>>> > with Francis on Internet Governance issues, but I am sure the family
>>>> > would like to hear from those who have worked closely with Francis.
>>>> > Flore also asked me about Francis’s work and travel movements –
>>>> I did
>>>> > mention  to her IGF and also his current project with ITU – but I
>>>> > don’t have contacts for that work, others might like to pass
>>>> details
>>>> > on.
>>>> >
>>>> > Sad news indeed. Francis was an original thinker with a great
>>>> devotion
>>>> > to these issues. It’s hard to believe that he is no longer with
>>>> us.
>>>> >
>>>> > Ian Peter
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > Ce message entrant est certifié sans virus connu.
>>>> > Analyse effectuée par AVG - www.avg.fr <http://www.avg.fr>
>>>> > Version: 8.5.421 / Base de données virale: 270.14.20/2440 - Date:
>>>> > 10/16/09 06:32:00
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > plain text document attachment (message-footer.txt)
>>>> > ____________________________________________________________
>>>> > 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
>>> --
>>> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>> anriette esterhuysen - executive director
>>> association for progressive communications
>>> p o box 29755 melville - south africa 2109
>>> anriette at apc.org - tel/fax + 27 11 726 1692
>>> http://www.apc.org
>>>
>>> ____________________________________________________________
>>> 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
>>
>>
>
>


-- 
Ken L


____________________________________________________________
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


From wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de  Mon Oct 19 07:31:13 2009
From: wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de (=?iso-8859-1?Q?=22Kleinw=E4chter=2C_Wolfgang=22?=)
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2009 13:31:13 +0200
Subject: [governance] Kaspersky on Security
References:  <OFBC97AF66.AC651827-ONC125764F.0059214F-C125764F.005E45A4@unog.un.org>
 <701af9f70910141535x29ae8cecx8d3ccc698baf87@mail.gmail.com>
 <6494D800-6691-4B01-BF96-4C61C9D7B046@apc.org>
 <701af9f70910151317o4aef27b0n1083b42047b2513f@mail.gmail.com>
 <4ADBCC2E.5020705@cafonso.ca>
Message-ID:  <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A871966A@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>

 
FYI
http://www.zdnetasia.com/insight/security/0,39044829,62058697,00.htm

 
w
____________________________________________________________
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


From ca at cafonso.ca  Mon Oct 19 08:33:22 2009
From: ca at cafonso.ca (Carlos A. Afonso)
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2009 10:33:22 -0200
Subject: [governance] summary report from II pre-IGF LAC (resending)
In-Reply-To: <sympa.1255921067.80454.343@lists.cpsr.org>
References: <sympa.1255921067.80454.343@lists.cpsr.org>
Message-ID: <4ADC5C92.1090701@cafonso.ca>

Thanks, Yehuda. Please do correct the dates in the document's header --
they should be August 11-13.

frt rgds

--c.a.

Yehuda Katz wrote:
> Nicely done Carlos, 
> The South American team 'produces' on-time and with brillent work.
> 
> Excellent!
> 
> -
> 
>> Re:
>>  http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/arc/governance/2009-10/msg00282.html
> 
> ---
> 
> -30-
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
> 

-- 

Carlos A. Afonso
CGI.br (www.cgi.br)
Nupef (www.nupef.org.br)
====================================
new/nuevo/novo e-mail: ca at cafonso.ca
====================================
____________________________________________________________
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


From lehto.paul at gmail.com  Mon Oct 19 10:16:08 2009
From: lehto.paul at gmail.com (Paul Lehto)
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2009 10:16:08 -0400
Subject: [governance] Cameroon and Wales collision in TLD space ?????
In-Reply-To: <wDlsJ8emge2KFA1T@perry.co.uk>
References: <954259bd0910160843q1740718ay670d369134549ba7@mail.gmail.com>
	 <76f819dd0910160853t7d929187g37e2791feb2d85e4@mail.gmail.com>
	 <wDlsJ8emge2KFA1T@perry.co.uk>
Message-ID: <76f819dd0910190716w187f3505i84295e76e0dc0bc9@mail.gmail.com>

To clarify, I've previously stated that all of us are "already
empowered" to have and express our views re ICANN -- under the Univ.
Decl. of Human Rights and the law of democracy at national and
international levels.  That being said, my quote below implicitly
refers to ICANN's view, given its self-claimed "independence" that
they would quite obviously consider any issues they handle to
ultimately be nobody else's business except their own self-chosen
experts or their own ideas -- they are, after all, "independent" of
everyone, right?

Roland Perry's response is that I "seem to suppose there are none of
those experts on this list".

I "suppose" no such thing.  In fact I previously posted that I
suspected that some on this list may fancy themselves (or hope to be)
among the elite computre cadre that will advise on such decisions.

I'll add now that this "advising" ICANN may be both sufficiently
interesting at a technical level as well as flattering or exciting on
a personal level that one may (in effect) say "to hell with democracy,
I'll help craft a technical solution and ICANN will just IMPOSE it on
the internet without all the inefficiency of public discussion and
wrangling present with democratic processes."

And indeed, Roland, you step right up to the plate and appear to taunt
me, for the good cause of which entirely escapes me and I'll bet some
other people on the list, to come up with a detailed democratic
solution to a technical ICANN issue, clearly implying your belief that
democracy is unworkable, difficult or not worth it.

As the Englishman Thomas Paine wrote (he's also considered the
"architect of the American Revolution") regarding democratic suffrage
or voting rights (and as countless millions of women, minorities,
non-landowning males, and other non-elites have proven by their
valiant and restless agitation for the right to vote):

"[A person] without the right to vote for representatives is RENDERED
A SLAVE because he is subject to the will of another" [the definition
of a slave in the general sense, and applicable to political relations
as well as "ownership" of human beings].

Given that those who have no say in governance are subject to the will
of others (read: elites) and thereby become slaves -- just as the
residents in dictatorships have no say in the making of the law and
thus are not free regardless of how open-minded a philosopher the
dictator may be -- THE FOLLOWING ARE IRRELEVANT:

1. It's IRRELEVANT that democracy (universal suffrage) is
"inefficient" -- even if true.
2. It's IRRELEVANT that there are implementation challenges with
democracy - even if true.
3. It's IRRELEVANT that that admission to suffrage of world citizens
arguably doesn't improve the quality of decision-making because elite
"experts" think they know better -- EVEN IF IT'S TRUE and can somehow
be determined that they really do objectively know better (the track
record of aristocrats is poor in this regard)
4. It's IRRELEVANT what the cost is, BECAUSE

BECAUSE the bottom line is that the ALTERNATIVE of rendering us all
subject purely to the will of ICANN, without representation and the
right to vote, renders us all subject to ICANN's will - we're all
subjects of or slaves of ICANN as defined above.

And if Roland Perry is a technical advisor to ICANN and is so lucky as
to have his advice accepted as ICANN policy, one thing is clear to me:

Roland Perry is NOT listening to me -- a humble former lawyer and
writer about democracy, and he's not acting like he's concerned at all
about democracy's nonexistence at ICANN, he's just focused on his
perception that democracy's unworkable.

And therein lies the rub.  And therein lies the twin justifications
for all non-democratic forms of governance: At bottom they all assert
variations on two basic themes (1) democracy's unworkable/inefficient,
and (2) the people are too dumb or ill-informed to be allowed any real
say in how their common life  on the internet is structured.

Elitists or aristocrats of various stripes classically argue that
people need "guidance"  instead, and folks like ICANN mean to give
their best guidance, good and hard, as indeed any good idea argues for
vigorous total implementation.   Note that "guidance" is clearly a one
way street, providing for output on the people but not any meaningful
input FROM the people in the event they highly object to some
implemented policy -- the very point at which people need a real right
of action the most.

So ICANN policy, "could be good" like Plato's philosopher king "could"
develop good policy in theory - but no such king has existed, after
all, just what justice-minded philosopher king begins by making
political slaves of all of his fellow people by denying them a vote?

Or, ICANN policy could be bad, in which case the problem of "no
recourse" comes straight to the fore at the most inopportune possible
time, from the standpoint of the public interest.

I'm not aware of any  political theorist, thinker or philosopher who
holds "power does not corrupt." They hold the opposite to that.  And
ICANN has power, does it not?  Thus, if the nonexistence of
philosopher kings in reality is insufficiently persuasive, perhaps the
reality of the corrupting nature of power will help.   HERE'S ONE
REASON WHY it's inevitably corrupting:  The very act of listening to
each and every person wishing to give input or instructions to their
public servants is an incremental increase in burden, such that
there's over time an extremely strong disincentive to actually listen
to the public voices of the public interest one claims to act in
furtherance of, and instead officials simply impose their own views
they subjectively think are correct quite regardless of what everyone
else thinks (except their close cadre of suitable advisors) and tune
everyone else out as "noise."

In addition to the various other definitions of this phrase, in the
context of political representation (I worked in the past for a state
senator and in congressional campaigns), hearing what one wishes to
hear is to hear "signal" and what one doesn't wish to hear or
understand as relevant is "noise."  The corrupting influence of power
as well as this "signal" vs "noise" dynamic are just human nature in
very large part.

This is why anyone who truly is to represent the public interest must
be under a DUTY to do so.  Not under merely a voluntary "outreach"
project - that's worse than useless because a good thing (outreach)
parades around to disguise a very unsavory underlying reality.

So we're all subject to ICANN's independent will.  Political slaves,
under not only Thomas Paine's definition but liberal democratic theory
pretty much in general. Thus the tides of history toward universal
enfranchisement aren't a gift to the enfranchised, it's the avoidance
of creating de facto aristocracy or autocracy as well as avoiding the
oppression of the disenfranchised (who, it can't be missed, most
clearly WERE oppressed as chattel slaves, or as wife-servants under
glorified names until getting the vote started to change the tide).

Don't you, Roland, really think in your heart of hearts that being
undemocratic is just WRONG???   If not, let's start with me as an
example: Now that my government's purported to give away ICANN for
free for its "independence" I've got no say, direct or indirect
through the Commerce Dept, in its governance.

QUESTION:  Roland, why do you support me not having even the paltry
equal status of being one out of over a 100 million voters with an
attenuated say, but a say nonetheless via the USG DOC, over ICANN?
What's wrong with me Roland?  And if you personally find nothing
wrong, what do you think OTHERS find wrong with me such that I should
not have even an indirect vote via elected representatives making
appointments?

And, if you WOULD give me a vote if it were up to you, WHY NOT choose
everyone else within the affected jurisdiction(s) as well, like the
whole globe if it's a worldwide issue, or less if not?  Why be
arbitrary and choose me to have a vote but not others?   Or, why
should anyone at all have an enforceable say in ICANN policy if anyone
on this list, for example, does not?  Were certain people born "booted
and spurred and ready to ride others by the grace of God?"  If not,
who authorized them, and who authorized that authorizer to act in the
name of the public interest?

ICANN policy, however cloaked in technical language and perhaps
occasionally cloaked in apparent public interest, is nothing  less
than FORCIBLE structuring of the common life of the internet without
any DUTY that is meaningful and with any real teeth in it, to act in
the public interest.  And without those "teeth" one has no recourse,
say or power not only at all times but especially **at the very worst
possible time** -- when ICANN really blows it or really intentionally
does something for (say) corporate interests rather than the public
interest, and hurts the public in the process.

Paul Lehto, Juris Doctor

On 10/17/09, Roland Perry <roland at internetpolicyagency.com> wrote:
> In message
> <76f819dd0910160853t7d929187g37e2791feb2d85e4 at mail.gmail.com>, at
> 11:53:31 on Fri, 16 Oct 2009, Paul Lehto <lehto.paul at gmail.com> writes
>>If there's not a democratic system of governance at ICANN, any such
>>"collision" of domain names or any other issue for that matter is
>>purely a matter for insider "experts" at ICANN and not the proper
>>"domain" of anyone on this list.
>
> You seem to suppose there are none of those experts on this list.
>
> But in the case of ISO 3166 assignments, the experts are not "inside"
> ICANN but outside. The proposition in RFC1591 cannot be clearer:
>
>        The IANA is not in the business of deciding what is and what is
>        not a country.
>
>        The selection of the ISO 3166 list as a basis for country code
>        top-level domain names was made with the knowledge that ISO has a
>        procedure for determining which entities should be and should not
>        be on that list.
> --
> Roland Perry
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
>


-- 
Paul R Lehto, J.D.
P.O. Box #1
Ishpeming, MI  49849
lehto.paul at gmail.com
906-204-4026
____________________________________________________________
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


From roland at internetpolicyagency.com  Mon Oct 19 11:20:20 2009
From: roland at internetpolicyagency.com (Roland Perry)
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2009 16:20:20 +0100
Subject: [governance] Cameroon and Wales collision in TLD space ?????
In-Reply-To: <76f819dd0910190716w187f3505i84295e76e0dc0bc9@mail.gmail.com>
References: <954259bd0910160843q1740718ay670d369134549ba7@mail.gmail.com>
 <76f819dd0910160853t7d929187g37e2791feb2d85e4@mail.gmail.com>
 <wDlsJ8emge2KFA1T@perry.co.uk>
 <76f819dd0910190716w187f3505i84295e76e0dc0bc9@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <I6gyXlj0OI3KFAZ9@perry.co.uk>

In message 
<76f819dd0910190716w187f3505i84295e76e0dc0bc9 at mail.gmail.com>, at 
10:16:08 on Mon, 19 Oct 2009, Paul Lehto <lehto.paul at gmail.com> writes
>And indeed, Roland, you step right up to the plate and appear to taunt
>me,

"Challenge" would be a better word.

>for the good cause of which entirely escapes me and I'll bet some
>other people on the list, to come up with a detailed democratic
>solution to a technical ICANN issue, clearly implying your belief that
>democracy is unworkable, difficult or not worth it.

I have specifically refrained from making any such judgement until I can 
examine your practical proposal on how to make a democratic decision, 
regarding a typical issue that ICANN might be deciding upon.

Your proposal may be workable, it may not. Until we hear it, we can't 
tell.

 >Roland Perry is NOT listening to me

Oh, I am. But I just keep hearing the same thing over and over again.

 >-- a humble former lawyer and writer about democracy, and he's not 
 >acting like he's concerned at all about democracy's nonexistence at 
 >ICANN, he's just focused on his perception that democracy's unworkable.

I don't think I've expressed an opinion on the level of democracy 
currently operating inside ICANN. And I can't tell whether your version 
would work, because you keep failing to describe it.

 >QUESTION:  Roland, why do you support me not having even the paltry
 >equal status of being one out of over a 100 million voters with an
 >attenuated say, but a say nonetheless via the USG DOC, over ICANN?

Why do you think I don't support you? Until you give us an idea of how 
your new processes would work, it's impossible to know whether we'd 
support them.
-- 
Roland Perry
____________________________________________________________
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


From lehto.paul at gmail.com  Mon Oct 19 11:27:10 2009
From: lehto.paul at gmail.com (Paul Lehto)
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2009 11:27:10 -0400
Subject: [governance] Review Panels
In-Reply-To: <954259bd0910150133k6651bee5lb9beb1a809ff402f@mail.gmail.com>
References: <954259bd0910150133k6651bee5lb9beb1a809ff402f@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <76f819dd0910190827s58e7f66age572ca0eaa6992fb@mail.gmail.com>

The term "stakeholders" -- while honestly intended by some or even
many -- nevertheless boils down to this:

1. Take whatever one person one vote democratic accountability that exists, and

2. RECONFIGURE it in terms of "stakeholders", which, allowing for
variation amounts to:

3. Redesigning governance to eliminate accountability to democracy
(and/or INFLUENCE in democracy if it remains) in order that
"stakeholders" typically divide up 100% of the influence pie:

corporate vendors, get, say a "reasonable" 25% of the total,

administrative bureaucrats 20-50%,

possibly some hand selected public interest types notable for their
agreeable natures not so much in personality as with "go along with
policy to get along" and not rocking the boat - 25% (but not taken
seriously at any time) and

notable experts and sometimes policy wonks or dignitaries - 20-50%

The StakeHolder approach leaves the important impression that "all the
bases have been covered" -- but that's true only under the new rules -
of governance or of influence as the case may be.

Paul Lehto, Juris Doctor


On 10/15/09, Bertrand de La Chapelle <bdelachapelle at gmail.com> wrote:
> Dear all,
>
> Could this list also address Anriette's concrete second question ? What do
> you think the review process should be ? Fundamentally, the community is
> facing a now recurring problem (cf. WGIG, MAG,...) : how to compose a
> multi-stakeholder group for a given task, so that it is sufficiently
> diverse, balanced and representative of the variety of viewpoints ?
>
> In addition, what do you tink the timing is ?
>
> Best
>
> Bertrand
>
>
> On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 1:39 PM, Anriette Esterhuysen
> <anriette at apc.org>wrote:
>
>> snip
>>
>> Second question is about the submissions on the review panels. What is
>> the process likely to be?
>>
>> Anriette
>>
>>
>>
>
> --
> ____________________
> Bertrand de La Chapelle
> Délégué Spécial pour la Société de l'Information / Special Envoy for the
> Information Society
> Ministère des Affaires Etrangères et Européennes/ French Ministry of Foreign
> and European Affairs
> Tel : +33 (0)6 11 88 33 32
>
> "Le plus beau métier des hommes, c'est d'unir les hommes" Antoine de Saint
> Exupéry
> ("there is no greater mission for humans than uniting humans")
>


-- 
Paul R Lehto, J.D.
P.O. Box #1
Ishpeming, MI  49849
lehto.paul at gmail.com
906-204-4026
____________________________________________________________
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


From wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de  Mon Oct 19 11:58:35 2009
From: wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de (=?iso-8859-1?Q?=22Kleinw=E4chter=2C_Wolfgang=22?=)
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2009 17:58:35 +0200
Subject: [governance] Cerf, Crocker & Co. on Net Neutrality
References:  <OFBC97AF66.AC651827-ONC125764F.0059214F-C125764F.005E45A4@unog.un.org>
 <701af9f70910141535x29ae8cecx8d3ccc698baf87@mail.gmail.com>
 <6494D800-6691-4B01-BF96-4C61C9D7B046@apc.org>
 <701af9f70910151317o4aef27b0n1083b42047b2513f@mail.gmail.com>
 <4ADBCC2E.5020705@cafonso.ca>
 <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A871966A@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
Message-ID:  <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A871966C@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>

 
FYI
http://lauren.vortex.com/archive/000625.html
 
w
____________________________________________________________
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


From lehto.paul at gmail.com  Mon Oct 19 12:12:19 2009
From: lehto.paul at gmail.com (Paul Lehto)
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2009 12:12:19 -0400
Subject: [governance] Cameroon and Wales collision in TLD space ?????
In-Reply-To: <I6gyXlj0OI3KFAZ9@perry.co.uk>
References: <954259bd0910160843q1740718ay670d369134549ba7@mail.gmail.com>
	 <76f819dd0910160853t7d929187g37e2791feb2d85e4@mail.gmail.com>
	 <wDlsJ8emge2KFA1T@perry.co.uk>
	 <76f819dd0910190716w187f3505i84295e76e0dc0bc9@mail.gmail.com>
	 <I6gyXlj0OI3KFAZ9@perry.co.uk>
Message-ID: <76f819dd0910190912qb15dd70jd7ffdb4bc6e29a60@mail.gmail.com>

OK, you're informing me that you're listening Roland.  You wish to
evaluate my *specific* proposal for democratic governance, and
"challenge" me to do so.

But, what's your option or recourse, Roland, in the event you don't
get a "satisfactory" specific "suitable" democracy proposal in your
inbox *from me*? Or from someone else?   Is the plan then to go with
autocracy, oligarchy, plutocracy?   See, I'm happy with any form of
real democracy, and if you don't have the option to walk away from
democracy AND remain politically legitimate (you don't), I've got no
incentive to do free work for you that just shifts the spotlight from
ICANN illegitimacy and rendering us all, literally, political slaves:
"someone subject to the political will of another."  That's the result
of removing the democracy-connection.

You've been very hesitant to say any express negative words about
ICANN.  Perhaps this is why I somewhat repeat myself, thinking:
"Perhaps I've not made myself clear to Roland that there's no way to
go that's legitimate but democracy and ICANN "independence" isn't even
remotely democratic accountability."

So again, if you're not advocating for anti-democracy of some sort
(and I don't hear anybody else publicly support this) I am quite sure
that with the support of literally ALL OF US, or quite close thereto,
we could figure out a way to make internet democratic governance work
-- at least given some centuries of experience at varying levels in
substantial portions of the world, the governance knowledge for
designing elections systems ought to be there, no?

If indeed you are, or become, one of the vaunted ICANN advsisors or
stakeholders, can we rest confident that you'll be speaking
democracy-truth to ICANN power?   (Not publicly, anyway, as this list
evidences, and as to privately - we'll never know...)

This is a VERY clearcut issue on which USG DOC / ICANN are dead wrong.
 And there is no class of legal issue, rights issue, human rights
issue, or political justice issue that ranks any higher than the
question of whether the people as a whole will be subject to a de
facto dictatorship of power, as well as an announced dictatorship of
"independent" power.  Some forms of oppression can be more pressing to
be sure like mass genocide, but even genocide is still in the same
general class of total disregard for the human dignity, rights, due
process and the consent of the governed.

Power, at first is tentative, operates in secret or with deniability,
seeks to cover itself.  ICANN's breathtaking power grab is, however,
totally out in the open "independence" -- when power is confident of
itself then it likes to flaunt its own power.  Independence is power -
it's self-determination.  ANd it's in all of our faces.  We don't
matter unless ICANN wants us to matter.  They'd say, if pressed
there's nothing we can do about it against ICANN's consent....

So correct me if I'm wrong on this IN THE MAIN, Roland, don't nibble
at the edges with little critiques that fail to address the meat of
what I'm saying.  Around three or four other posters have written that
they follow me, in so many words.  Because, if I'm right, and I don't
see any avenue, unfortunately, for me to be wrong (only reversal of
course, perhaps by court order), then the details of the democracy
proposal are truly inconsequential compared to the need to restore any
democracy at all.

I'll draft up a democracy-proposal to a suitable requester, but not to
someone who on the surface appears to care so little about it that he
goes to pains to avoid any outright condemnation at democracy's loss.

Paul Lehto, Juris Doctor

PS Put yourself down in a detailed roll call vote response, so to
speak, and if you really take a position on this, then I'll take a
position and sketch out a specific vision for you.  Alternatively,
even without that, for a charitable donation of US $500 to the group
or charity of my choice I'll work up a white paper on this for you.
Please excuse me if I'm wrong, but I just get the abiding impression
you're not really serious about furthering democracy if you're not
upset with ICANN right now...
On 10/19/09, Roland Perry <roland at internetpolicyagency.com> wrote:
> In message
> <76f819dd0910190716w187f3505i84295e76e0dc0bc9 at mail.gmail.com>, at
> 10:16:08 on Mon, 19 Oct 2009, Paul Lehto <lehto.paul at gmail.com> writes
>>And indeed, Roland, you step right up to the plate and appear to taunt
>>me,
>
> "Challenge" would be a better word.
>
>>for the good cause of which entirely escapes me and I'll bet some
>>other people on the list, to come up with a detailed democratic
>>solution to a technical ICANN issue, clearly implying your belief that
>>democracy is unworkable, difficult or not worth it.
>
> I have specifically refrained from making any such judgement until I can
> examine your practical proposal on how to make a democratic decision,
> regarding a typical issue that ICANN might be deciding upon.
>
> Your proposal may be workable, it may not. Until we hear it, we can't
> tell.
>
>  >Roland Perry is NOT listening to me
>
> Oh, I am. But I just keep hearing the same thing over and over again.
>
>  >-- a humble former lawyer and writer about democracy, and he's not
>  >acting like he's concerned at all about democracy's nonexistence at
>  >ICANN, he's just focused on his perception that democracy's unworkable.
>
> I don't think I've expressed an opinion on the level of democracy
> currently operating inside ICANN. And I can't tell whether your version
> would work, because you keep failing to describe it.
>
>  >QUESTION:  Roland, why do you support me not having even the paltry
>  >equal status of being one out of over a 100 million voters with an
>  >attenuated say, but a say nonetheless via the USG DOC, over ICANN?
>
> Why do you think I don't support you? Until you give us an idea of how
> your new processes would work, it's impossible to know whether we'd
> support them.
> --
> Roland Perry
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
>


-- 
Paul R Lehto, J.D.
P.O. Box #1
Ishpeming, MI  49849
lehto.paul at gmail.com
906-204-4026
____________________________________________________________
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


From roland at internetpolicyagency.com  Mon Oct 19 12:40:48 2009
From: roland at internetpolicyagency.com (Roland Perry)
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2009 17:40:48 +0100
Subject: [governance] Cameroon and Wales collision in TLD space ?????
In-Reply-To: <76f819dd0910190912qb15dd70jd7ffdb4bc6e29a60@mail.gmail.com>
References: <954259bd0910160843q1740718ay670d369134549ba7@mail.gmail.com>
 <76f819dd0910160853t7d929187g37e2791feb2d85e4@mail.gmail.com>
 <wDlsJ8emge2KFA1T@perry.co.uk>
 <76f819dd0910190716w187f3505i84295e76e0dc0bc9@mail.gmail.com>
 <I6gyXlj0OI3KFAZ9@perry.co.uk>
 <76f819dd0910190912qb15dd70jd7ffdb4bc6e29a60@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <955PHjpQaJ3KFAPv@perry.co.uk>

In message <76f819dd0910190912qb15dd70jd7ffdb4bc6e29a60 at mail.gmail.com>, 
at 12:12:19 on Mon, 19 Oct 2009, Paul Lehto <lehto.paul at gmail.com> 
writes
>OK, you're informing me that you're listening Roland.  You wish to
>evaluate my *specific* proposal for democratic governance, and
>"challenge" me to do so.
>
>But, what's your option or recourse, Roland, in the event you don't
>get a "satisfactory" specific "suitable" democracy proposal in your
>inbox *from me*?

I would conclude that you weren't interested in discussing practical 
democracy, just the theory. Hey, I'm an engineer at heart; I like 
talking about practical solutions.

 >Please excuse me if I'm wrong, but I just get the abiding impression
 >you're not really serious about furthering democracy if you're not
 >upset with ICANN right now...

I've repeatedly said I'm not implying any opinion about ICANN (either 
positive or negative) as a result of this discussion with you.
-- 
Roland Perry
____________________________________________________________
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


From lehto.paul at gmail.com  Mon Oct 19 13:47:55 2009
From: lehto.paul at gmail.com (Paul Lehto)
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2009 13:47:55 -0400
Subject: [governance] Cameroon and Wales collision in TLD space ?????
In-Reply-To: <955PHjpQaJ3KFAPv@perry.co.uk>
References: <954259bd0910160843q1740718ay670d369134549ba7@mail.gmail.com>
	 <76f819dd0910160853t7d929187g37e2791feb2d85e4@mail.gmail.com>
	 <wDlsJ8emge2KFA1T@perry.co.uk>
	 <76f819dd0910190716w187f3505i84295e76e0dc0bc9@mail.gmail.com>
	 <I6gyXlj0OI3KFAZ9@perry.co.uk>
	 <76f819dd0910190912qb15dd70jd7ffdb4bc6e29a60@mail.gmail.com>
	 <955PHjpQaJ3KFAPv@perry.co.uk>
Message-ID: <76f819dd0910191047m11242c8ye93f032e649dd5d9@mail.gmail.com>

No solution is needed Roland where you don't identify a problem.

On 10/19/09, Roland Perry <roland at internetpolicyagency.com> wrote:
> In message <76f819dd0910190912qb15dd70jd7ffdb4bc6e29a60 at mail.gmail.com>,
> at 12:12:19 on Mon, 19 Oct 2009, Paul Lehto <lehto.paul at gmail.com>
> writes
>>OK, you're informing me that you're listening Roland.  You wish to
>>evaluate my *specific* proposal for democratic governance, and
>>"challenge" me to do so.
>>
>>But, what's your option or recourse, Roland, in the event you don't
>>get a "satisfactory" specific "suitable" democracy proposal in your
>>inbox *from me*?
>
> I would conclude that you weren't interested in discussing practical
> democracy, just the theory. Hey, I'm an engineer at heart; I like
> talking about practical solutions.
>
>  >Please excuse me if I'm wrong, but I just get the abiding impression
>  >you're not really serious about furthering democracy if you're not
>  >upset with ICANN right now...
>
> I've repeatedly said I'm not implying any opinion about ICANN (either
> positive or negative) as a result of this discussion with you.
> --
> Roland Perry
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
>


-- 
Paul R Lehto, J.D.
P.O. Box #1
Ishpeming, MI  49849
lehto.paul at gmail.com
906-204-4026
____________________________________________________________
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


From cls at rkey.com  Mon Oct 19 13:51:43 2009
From: cls at rkey.com (Craig Simon)
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2009 13:51:43 -0400
Subject: [governance] Cameroon and Wales collision in TLD space ?????
In-Reply-To: <955PHjpQaJ3KFAPv@perry.co.uk>
References: <954259bd0910160843q1740718ay670d369134549ba7@mail.gmail.com> <76f819dd0910160853t7d929187g37e2791feb2d85e4@mail.gmail.com> <wDlsJ8emge2KFA1T@perry.co.uk> <76f819dd0910190716w187f3505i84295e76e0dc0bc9@mail.gmail.com> <I6gyXlj0OI3KFAZ9@perry.co.uk> <76f819dd0910190912qb15dd70jd7ffdb4bc6e29a60@mail.gmail.com> <955PHjpQaJ3KFAPv@perry.co.uk>
Message-ID: <4ADCA72F.3010703@rkey.com>

If you folks actually do start discussing scalable online democracy in 
practical terms, please keep in mind that I've been taking concrete 
steps on this.

There's still a very long way to go, but you can experience the current 
prototype on Facebook at http://apps.facebook.com/we-vote/ .

This project is a direct consequence of my Ph.D. research on the DNS 
governance debates (see http://www.rkey.com/essays/diss.pdf ).

Craig Simon

Roland Perry wrote:

> I would conclude that you weren't interested in discussing practical 
> democracy, just the theory. Hey, I'm an engineer at heart; I like 
> talking about practical solutions.
> 
>  >Please excuse me if I'm wrong, but I just get the abiding impression
>  >you're not really serious about furthering democracy if you're not
>  >upset with ICANN right now...
> 
> I've repeatedly said I'm not implying any opinion about ICANN (either 
> positive or negative) as a result of this discussion with you.
____________________________________________________________
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


From dannyyounger at yahoo.com  Mon Oct 19 13:58:12 2009
From: dannyyounger at yahoo.com (Danny Younger)
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2009 10:58:12 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [governance] New ICANN Supporting Organization Proposed
In-Reply-To: <4ADCA72F.3010703@rkey.com>
Message-ID: <464351.23741.qm@web110109.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>

Khaled Fattal has proposed the creation of a new ICANN Supporting Organization -- the Internationalized Domain Name Supporting Organization (IDNSO) -- see his letter at http://www.icann.org/correspondence/fattal-to-beckstrom-15oct09-en.pdf

Khaled indicates that more details on the proposed structure/mode of operation and on the selection/election of future and interim members have been prepared, and he awaits board initiation of consultations on the topic.

I see a value in supporting a call for such consultations.

Regards,
Danny Younger


      

____________________________________________________________
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


From roland at internetpolicyagency.com  Mon Oct 19 14:01:50 2009
From: roland at internetpolicyagency.com (Roland Perry)
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2009 19:01:50 +0100
Subject: [governance] Cameroon and Wales collision in TLD space ?????
In-Reply-To: <76f819dd0910191047m11242c8ye93f032e649dd5d9@mail.gmail.com>
References: <954259bd0910160843q1740718ay670d369134549ba7@mail.gmail.com>
 <76f819dd0910160853t7d929187g37e2791feb2d85e4@mail.gmail.com>
 <wDlsJ8emge2KFA1T@perry.co.uk>
 <76f819dd0910190716w187f3505i84295e76e0dc0bc9@mail.gmail.com>
 <I6gyXlj0OI3KFAZ9@perry.co.uk>
 <76f819dd0910190912qb15dd70jd7ffdb4bc6e29a60@mail.gmail.com>
 <955PHjpQaJ3KFAPv@perry.co.uk>
 <76f819dd0910191047m11242c8ye93f032e649dd5d9@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <pb+q$CvOmK3KFA$X@perry.co.uk>

In message <76f819dd0910191047m11242c8ye93f032e649dd5d9 at mail.gmail.com>, 
at 13:47:55 on Mon, 19 Oct 2009, Paul Lehto <lehto.paul at gmail.com> 
writes
>No solution is needed Roland where you don't identify a problem.

The problem was "how to democratically resolve a clash between CYM and 
.cym" but don't worry, no need to answer.
-- 
Roland Perry
____________________________________________________________
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


From roland at internetpolicyagency.com  Mon Oct 19 14:03:51 2009
From: roland at internetpolicyagency.com (Roland Perry)
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2009 19:03:51 +0100
Subject: [governance] Cameroon and Wales collision in TLD space ?????
In-Reply-To: <4ADCA72F.3010703@rkey.com>
References: <954259bd0910160843q1740718ay670d369134549ba7@mail.gmail.com>
 <76f819dd0910160853t7d929187g37e2791feb2d85e4@mail.gmail.com>
 <wDlsJ8emge2KFA1T@perry.co.uk>
 <76f819dd0910190716w187f3505i84295e76e0dc0bc9@mail.gmail.com>
 <I6gyXlj0OI3KFAZ9@perry.co.uk>
 <76f819dd0910190912qb15dd70jd7ffdb4bc6e29a60@mail.gmail.com>
 <955PHjpQaJ3KFAPv@perry.co.uk> <4ADCA72F.3010703@rkey.com>
Message-ID: <rLcqbyvHoK3KFA$5@perry.co.uk>

In message <4ADCA72F.3010703 at rkey.com>, at 13:51:43 on Mon, 19 Oct 2009, 
Craig Simon <cls at rkey.com> writes
>If you folks actually do start discussing scalable online democracy in 
>practical terms, please keep in mind that I've been taking concrete 
>steps on this.

How do the majority of people, without Internet access, participate in 
such a vote? That's not intended to be a "smart question", by the way; 
just a recognition that democracy should be inclusive.
-- 
Roland Perry
____________________________________________________________
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


From lehto.paul at gmail.com  Mon Oct 19 14:56:11 2009
From: lehto.paul at gmail.com (Paul Lehto)
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2009 14:56:11 -0400
Subject: [governance] Cameroon and Wales collision in TLD space ?????
In-Reply-To: <rLcqbyvHoK3KFA$5@perry.co.uk>
References: <954259bd0910160843q1740718ay670d369134549ba7@mail.gmail.com>
	 <76f819dd0910160853t7d929187g37e2791feb2d85e4@mail.gmail.com>
	 <wDlsJ8emge2KFA1T@perry.co.uk>
	 <76f819dd0910190716w187f3505i84295e76e0dc0bc9@mail.gmail.com>
	 <I6gyXlj0OI3KFAZ9@perry.co.uk>
	 <76f819dd0910190912qb15dd70jd7ffdb4bc6e29a60@mail.gmail.com>
	 <955PHjpQaJ3KFAPv@perry.co.uk> <4ADCA72F.3010703@rkey.com>
	 <rLcqbyvHoK3KFA$5@perry.co.uk>
Message-ID: <76f819dd0910191156q71fd1103p3d4f32db2401e0df@mail.gmail.com>

Everybody votes the same way essentially with allowances for absentee
voting a slight to moderate exception, but controversial among
election security experts because there's SO MANY vulnerabilities
along the way.

It is hard to hold any election at all simply because, if the issues
are real, literally every voter and every non-voter for that matter
has serious motive to tamper with the election (tax rates affect all,
for example, whether voter or not).  Even worse than banks where
embezzlement is the #1 theft loss, in elections the problem of insider
manipulation (given the free rein for anybody wishing to do so) is so
intense that it exceeds problems banks have.

Example: The vote at home-style convenience "absentee" voting opens
the heretofore closed Pandora's box of voter intimidation and
harassment that was essentially solved by the secret ballot itself.
Prior to the secret ballot, in the USA for example, fights, riots,
intimidation and, yes, murders were an occurrence at every major
election in contested areas, with bosses watching employees, and vote
buyers watching to confirm the votes of vote sellers....

But even worse is internet voting on any Serious issue (I will
stipulate if nobody really has much $ at stake or no serious political
issues at stake, the risk to the election is manageable. But the
military killed (in the USA) internet voting in 2004 after being
advised by a panel, of, yup, experts that internet voting was a noble
idea that simply could not work in practice.  The New York Times
coverage on this is excerpted below.

The Answer is that a physical ballot for all should be provided, with
as little time between ballot issuance and casting, and as little time
between casting and counting as possible.  Preferably the same day
unless circumstances make that impossible.  In the USA state and
federal elections piggyback for cost savings and I'm sure a third
entity, if there was one, could be added.

I could send you my chapter from a book on elections voting systems
that was #1 on amazon.com in Political Parties and the category of
Elections in October 2008 (probably due much more to my fellow
co-authors like Robert F Kennedy Jr than to me).

I've a standing offer for any election official anywhere, or any
vendor for that matter, to publicly debate how they can possibly have
secure elections on computers, given "Reflections on Trusting Trust"
and other basic facts of computer science, not to mention democracy.
So far, no takers. I have sued the vendors and gotten their machines
out, though, so one way or another we engage in a "dialog" of sorts.

The New York Times on military internet voting:

Defense Dept. Cancels Use of Internet Voting Project

By JOHN SCHWARTZ

NEW YORK TIMES

Published: February 5, 2004

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/02/05/politics/campaign/05CND-VOTE.html?hp


Citing security concerns, the Department of Defense canceled the use
of a $22 million project today that would have allowed Americans
overseas to vote over the Internet in this year's elections.

The system, the Secure Electronic Registration and Voting Experiment,
or Serve, was developed with financing from the Defense Department.

The decision was announced in a memo from Deputy Secretary of Defense
Paul Wolfowitz to David Chu, undersecretary of defense for personnel
and readiness.

Paraphrasing the memo, a department of defense spokeswoman said "the
department has decided not to use Serve in the November 2004
elections. We made this decision in view of the inability to ensure
legitimacy of votes, thereby bringing into doubt the integrity of the
election results," the spokeswoman said. The memo also states that
efforts will continue to find other ways to cast ballots
electronically for Americans overseas, but "the integrity of the
election results have to be assured," the spokeswoman said.

The decision to cancel the project, which was developed by Accenture,
the consulting and technology services company, was announced two
weeks after members of a panel of scientists who were asked by the
government to assess the project's security recommended that it be
canceled because any system based on off-the-shelf personal computers
and run over today's Internet was inherently insecure.

Aviel D. Rubin, an author of that report, said today that the Serve
project was a noble idea that could not be carried out in a secure way
using today's technology. "While we appreciate their efforts to allow
this segment of the population to have more accessible voting, we
applaud their decision to cancel this project because of the security
concerns, he said.

======================
On 10/19/09, Roland Perry <roland at internetpolicyagency.com> wrote:
> In message <4ADCA72F.3010703 at rkey.com>, at 13:51:43 on Mon, 19 Oct 2009,
> Craig Simon <cls at rkey.com> writes
>>If you folks actually do start discussing scalable online democracy in
>>practical terms, please keep in mind that I've been taking concrete
>>steps on this.
>
> How do the majority of people, without Internet access, participate in
> such a vote? That's not intended to be a "smart question", by the way;
> just a recognition that democracy should be inclusive.
> --
> Roland Perry
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
>


-- 
Paul R Lehto, J.D.
P.O. Box #1
Ishpeming, MI  49849
lehto.paul at gmail.com
906-204-4026
____________________________________________________________
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


From carolinaaguerre at gmail.com  Mon Oct 19 15:24:59 2009
From: carolinaaguerre at gmail.com (Carolina Aguerre)
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2009 17:24:59 -0200
Subject: [governance] IGF in remote? What are the IGC plans?
In-Reply-To: <f7e605ab0910172217g6c4262abmbac118459fbab02d@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4AD8DC0E.1080709@gmail.com>
	 <54535d540910162348o48049672v5f4602ea11a4bc74@mail.gmail.com>
	 <005f01ca4f71$7e707b40$7b5171c0$@com.br>
	 <f7e605ab0910172217g6c4262abmbac118459fbab02d@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <c0777e350910191224q1ffac7ebh3d0964ea5388a8c5@mail.gmail.com>

Dear all

Thanks Ginger for prompting the issue and also for Marilia's tips .
I am trying to organize a hub in Buenos Aires through my university,
possibly with ISOC who organized the hub last year and has experience in the
matter, but it is not yet confirmed.

Will let you know if we manage to pull ourselves together before that date.
Best,

Carolina

------------------
Carolina Aguerre
Lecturer
Centro de Tecnología y Sociedad
Universidad de San Andrés
www.udesa.edu.ar

2009/10/18 Marilia Maciel <mariliamaciel at gmail.com>

> Dear all,
>
> I just would like to remind you that it is also possible to organize IGF
> hubs.
> In the hubs, people can watch the webcast together and send questions (text
> or video) that will be answered by panelists in the IGF. In addition to
> that, organizers can hold debates to discuss the themes of the IGF from a
> local perspective. This way, the hub gains its own dynamics, and the webcast
> serves a starting point for a meaningful local debates.
> To ask the registration of a new hub, an e-mail should be sent to the IGF
> Secretariat. The address is igf at unog.ch.
> The following information should be provided:
> Institution where the hub will be based:
> Possible area(s) of interest within the 5 main IGF themes:
>
> Number of expected participants within the hub:
>
> Planned pre-meeting activities:
>
> Hub Coordinator:
>
> Contact email:
>
> *The deadline to register a hub is 22 October.*
>
> Best regards,
>
> Marilia
>   On Sat, Oct 17, 2009 at 7:33 PM, Vanda UOL <vanda at uol.com.br> wrote:
>
>> Good idea Hong.
>>
>> -----Mensagem original-----
>> De: Hong Xue [mailto:hongxueipr at gmail.com]
>> Enviada em: sábado, 17 de outubro de 2009 03:48
>> Para: Ginger Paque
>> Cc: governance at lists.cpsr.org
>> Assunto: Re: [governance] IGF in remote? What are the IGC plans?
>>
>> Dear Ginger,
>>
>> I've exactly the same plan as yours--doing a couple of presentations
>> via the Internet. Although it might be difficult for us "remoters" to
>> form a group due to time zone issues, but we may think about having a
>> skype group (or hot line) to report the connectivity problems, which
>> could be linked up with the IGF administration. So problems in remote
>> participation could be resolved as quickly as possible.
>>
>> Hong
>>
>> --
>> Hong Xue, Ph.D.
>> Professor of Law
>> Director of Institute for the Internet Policy & Law
>> Beijing Normal University
>> 19 Xin Jie Kou Wai Street
>> Beijing 100875 China
>>
>> On Sat, Oct 17, 2009 at 4:48 AM, Ginger Paque <gpaque at gmail.com> wrote:
>> > Hi everyone...
>> >
>> > Should we be thinking about an IGC strategy for the upcoming IGF in
>> Egypt?
>> > Are there specific issues we want to be involved in, intervene in,
>> report
>> > back on?
>> >
>> > What concerns and suggestions do you have?
>> >
>> > I will be unable to attend the IGF in person this year, but I plan to be
>> > active through Remote Participation, and if my local connection is good
>> > enough, I will do a presentation or two through RP as well.
>> >
>> > I would like to encourage others to attend remotely--we can tweet, chat,
>> > Skype--we can be involved! We can intervene in sessions, and we can ask
>> > those who are present to include us in their Skype conversations.
>> >
>> > Will we work as a group, or is it preferable to act as individuals? We
>> have
>> > a booth in the IGF Village Square that can be used for physical meetings
>> and
>> > communications too.
>> >
>> > Thoughts?
>> >
>> > Best, Ginger
>> >
>> > ____________________________________________________________
>> > 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
>>
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> 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
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Centro de Tecnologia e Sociedade
> FGV Direito Rio
>
> Center of Technology and Society
> Getulio Vargas Foundation
> Rio de Janeiro - Brazil
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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/20091019/14fa8ff7/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

From cls at rkey.com  Mon Oct 19 16:27:46 2009
From: cls at rkey.com (Craig Simon)
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2009 16:27:46 -0400
Subject: [governance] Cameroon and Wales collision in TLD space ?????
In-Reply-To: <76f819dd0910191156q71fd1103p3d4f32db2401e0df@mail.gmail.com>
References: <954259bd0910160843q1740718ay670d369134549ba7@mail.gmail.com>	 <76f819dd0910160853t7d929187g37e2791feb2d85e4@mail.gmail.com>	 <wDlsJ8emge2KFA1T@perry.co.uk>	 <76f819dd0910190716w187f3505i84295e76e0dc0bc9@mail.gmail.com>	 <I6gyXlj0OI3KFAZ9@perry.co.uk>	 <76f819dd0910190912qb15dd70jd7ffdb4bc6e29a60@mail.gmail.com>	 <955PHjpQaJ3KFAPv@perry.co.uk> <4ADCA72F.3010703@rkey.com>	 <rLcqbyvHoK3KFA$5@perry.co.uk> <76f819dd0910191156q71fd1103p3d4f32db2401e0df@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4ADCCBC2.5090403@rkey.com>

To be clear, where formal public law-making and officer-selecting 
elections are concerned, I'm not an advocate of Internet voting in 
particular, or of electronic voting in general. I agree with those who 
argue that a system of physically auditable records marked by the voter 
in a secret manner (which we might call the "Hard Australian Ballot") 
promises a far more legitimate account of voter desires.

The problem I've set out to solve is how to best leverage the web as a 
venue for open debate and democratically-organized preference ordering. 
Since I'm inspired by concepts such as Town Halls, public caucuses, 
Indabas, and IETF Working Groups, there's no pretense of trying to keep 
participant identity secret.

By putting aside (for now) the daunting but critical challenge of 
pristine legitimacy, it's possible to address other important ones... 
namely, how to facilitate a style of mass, diversified participation 
that can effectively build consensus around valuable ideas.

My view of politics is that it's about managed competition. It's a way 
to allow formal articulation of demands and expectations, and to allow 
pursuit of those interests in ways that establish rights and 
obligations. It's a way of picking winners without resort to war. The 
tool I'm trying to create would allow for massively scalable 
articulation of demands and expectations through a technical strategy I 
call coalescent bubbling.

I like to think I've thought of a way to structure a venue that can 
avoid being paralyzed by "noisy idiots" without silencing them. I also 
believe I've figured out how to prevent a debate from being overwhelmed 
by "silly swarms" and "organized interests." The key is to take them 
seriously and allow them to put their best foot forward.

But those feature have yet to be demonstrated, So far, all I've been 
able to demonstrate is how to construct an interactive ranked-choice 
ballot and integrate it with a rich real-time visualization of results.


Paul Lehto wrote:
> Everybody votes the same way essentially with allowances for absentee
> voting a slight to moderate exception, but controversial among
> election security experts because there's SO MANY vulnerabilities
> along the way.
> 
> It is hard to hold any election at all simply because, if the issues
> are real, literally every voter and every non-voter for that matter
> has serious motive to tamper with the election (tax rates affect all,
> for example, whether voter or not).  Even worse than banks where
> embezzlement is the #1 theft loss, in elections the problem of insider
> manipulation (given the free rein for anybody wishing to do so) is so
> intense that it exceeds problems banks have.
> 
> Example: The vote at home-style convenience "absentee" voting opens
> the heretofore closed Pandora's box of voter intimidation and
> harassment that was essentially solved by the secret ballot itself.
> Prior to the secret ballot, in the USA for example, fights, riots,
> intimidation and, yes, murders were an occurrence at every major
> election in contested areas, with bosses watching employees, and vote
> buyers watching to confirm the votes of vote sellers....
> 
> But even worse is internet voting on any Serious issue (I will
> stipulate if nobody really has much $ at stake or no serious political
> issues at stake, the risk to the election is manageable. But the
> military killed (in the USA) internet voting in 2004 after being
> advised by a panel, of, yup, experts that internet voting was a noble
> idea that simply could not work in practice.  The New York Times
> coverage on this is excerpted below.
> 
> The Answer is that a physical ballot for all should be provided, with
> as little time between ballot issuance and casting, and as little time
> between casting and counting as possible.  Preferably the same day
> unless circumstances make that impossible.  In the USA state and
> federal elections piggyback for cost savings and I'm sure a third
> entity, if there was one, could be added.
> 
> I could send you my chapter from a book on elections voting systems
> that was #1 on amazon.com in Political Parties and the category of
> Elections in October 2008 (probably due much more to my fellow
> co-authors like Robert F Kennedy Jr than to me).
> 
> I've a standing offer for any election official anywhere, or any
> vendor for that matter, to publicly debate how they can possibly have
> secure elections on computers, given "Reflections on Trusting Trust"
> and other basic facts of computer science, not to mention democracy.
> So far, no takers. I have sued the vendors and gotten their machines
> out, though, so one way or another we engage in a "dialog" of sorts.
> 
> The New York Times on military internet voting:
> 
> Defense Dept. Cancels Use of Internet Voting Project
> 
> By JOHN SCHWARTZ
> 
> NEW YORK TIMES
> 
> Published: February 5, 2004
> 
> http://www.nytimes.com/2004/02/05/politics/campaign/05CND-VOTE.html?hp
> 
> 
> Citing security concerns, the Department of Defense canceled the use
> of a $22 million project today that would have allowed Americans
> overseas to vote over the Internet in this year's elections.
> 
> The system, the Secure Electronic Registration and Voting Experiment,
> or Serve, was developed with financing from the Defense Department.
> 
> The decision was announced in a memo from Deputy Secretary of Defense
> Paul Wolfowitz to David Chu, undersecretary of defense for personnel
> and readiness.
> 
> Paraphrasing the memo, a department of defense spokeswoman said "the
> department has decided not to use Serve in the November 2004
> elections. We made this decision in view of the inability to ensure
> legitimacy of votes, thereby bringing into doubt the integrity of the
> election results," the spokeswoman said. The memo also states that
> efforts will continue to find other ways to cast ballots
> electronically for Americans overseas, but "the integrity of the
> election results have to be assured," the spokeswoman said.
> 
> The decision to cancel the project, which was developed by Accenture,
> the consulting and technology services company, was announced two
> weeks after members of a panel of scientists who were asked by the
> government to assess the project's security recommended that it be
> canceled because any system based on off-the-shelf personal computers
> and run over today's Internet was inherently insecure.
> 
> Aviel D. Rubin, an author of that report, said today that the Serve
> project was a noble idea that could not be carried out in a secure way
> using today's technology. "While we appreciate their efforts to allow
> this segment of the population to have more accessible voting, we
> applaud their decision to cancel this project because of the security
> concerns, he said.
> 
> ======================
> On 10/19/09, Roland Perry <roland at internetpolicyagency.com> wrote:
>> In message <4ADCA72F.3010703 at rkey.com>, at 13:51:43 on Mon, 19 Oct 2009,
>> Craig Simon <cls at rkey.com> writes
>>> If you folks actually do start discussing scalable online democracy in
>>> practical terms, please keep in mind that I've been taking concrete
>>> steps on this.
>> How do the majority of people, without Internet access, participate in
>> such a vote? That's not intended to be a "smart question", by the way;
>> just a recognition that democracy should be inclusive.
>> --
>> Roland Perry
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> 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


From jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com  Mon Oct 19 18:21:04 2009
From: jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com (Jeffrey A. Williams)
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2009 17:21:04 -0500 (GMT-05:00)
Subject: [governance] Re: [ga] Newest Registrar Abuse
Message-ID: <5183918.1255990864940.JavaMail.root@elwamui-hound.atl.sa.earthlink.net>

Danny and all,

  Thanks Danny for the info/update.  Certainly ICANN needs to take
care of this gross abuse instance/occurance as soon as possible.

-----Original Message-----
>From: Danny Younger <dannyyounger at yahoo.com>
>Sent: Oct 19, 2009 4:05 PM
>To: ga at gnso.icann.org
>Subject: [ga] Newest Registrar Abuse
>
>
>http://domainnamewire.com/2009/10/19/internetx-reseller-problem-turned-on-domain-registrants/
>
>
>      
>
Regards,



Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 294k members/stakeholders strong!)
"Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" -
   Abraham Lincoln

"Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is very
often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt

"If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; liability
depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
United States v. Carroll Towing  (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
===============================================================
Updated 1/26/04
CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS. div. of
Information Network Eng.  INEG. INC.
ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com
Phone: 214-244-4827

____________________________________________________________
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


From jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com  Mon Oct 19 18:30:09 2009
From: jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com (Jeffrey A. Williams)
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2009 17:30:09 -0500 (GMT-05:00)
Subject: [governance] summary report from II pre-IGF LAC (resending)
Message-ID: <6996718.1255991409571.JavaMail.root@elwamui-hound.atl.sa.earthlink.net>

All,

  A shame that the archives are not open to the public for 
public review.  They should be.  When can this be corrected
appropriately?

-----Original Message-----
>From: "Carlos A. Afonso" <ca at cafonso.ca>
>Sent: Oct 19, 2009 7:33 AM
>To: governance at lists.cpsr.org, Yehuda Katz <yehudakatz at mailinator.com>
>Subject: Re: [governance] summary report from II pre-IGF LAC (resending)
>
>Thanks, Yehuda. Please do correct the dates in the document's header --
>they should be August 11-13.
>
>frt rgds
>
>--c.a.
>
>Yehuda Katz wrote:
>> Nicely done Carlos, 
>> The South American team 'produces' on-time and with brillent work.
>> 
>> Excellent!
>> 
>> -
>> 
>>> Re:
>>>  http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/arc/governance/2009-10/msg00282.html
>> 
>> ---
>> 
>> -30-
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> 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
>> 
>
>-- 
>
>Carlos A. Afonso
>CGI.br (www.cgi.br)
>Nupef (www.nupef.org.br)
>====================================
>new/nuevo/novo e-mail: ca at cafonso.ca
>====================================
>____________________________________________________________
>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,



Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 294k members/stakeholders strong!)
"Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" -
   Abraham Lincoln

"Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is very
often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt

"If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; liability
depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
United States v. Carroll Towing  (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
===============================================================
Updated 1/26/04
CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS. div. of
Information Network Eng.  INEG. INC.
ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com
Phone: 214-244-4827

____________________________________________________________
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


From jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com  Mon Oct 19 18:34:48 2009
From: jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com (Jeffrey A. Williams)
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2009 17:34:48 -0500 (GMT-05:00)
Subject: [governance] Kaspersky on Security
Message-ID: <26548514.1255991689186.JavaMail.root@elwamui-hound.atl.sa.earthlink.net>

Wolfgang and all,

  Microsoft is not world renound for it's acumen on security,
and in fact quite the contrary.  Although Kaspersky is a frequent
writer on IT security his views are not broadly shared amongst
us IT security professionals.  Thanks anyway for the link, it had
it's humor value.

-----Original Message-----
>From: "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang" <wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
>Sent: Oct 19, 2009 6:31 AM
>To: governance at lists.cpsr.org, WSIS Internet Governance Caucus <governance at lists.cpsr.org>
>Subject: [governance] Kaspersky on Security
>
> 
>FYI
>http://www.zdnetasia.com/insight/security/0,39044829,62058697,00.htm
>
> 
>w
>____________________________________________________________
>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,



Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 294k members/stakeholders strong!)
"Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" -
   Abraham Lincoln

"Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is very
often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt

"If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; liability
depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
United States v. Carroll Towing  (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
===============================================================
Updated 1/26/04
CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS. div. of
Information Network Eng.  INEG. INC.
ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com
Phone: 214-244-4827

____________________________________________________________
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


From jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com  Mon Oct 19 18:45:38 2009
From: jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com (Jeffrey A. Williams)
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2009 17:45:38 -0500 (GMT-05:00)
Subject: [governance] More MS security holes: Firefox Disables
 Microsoft<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.NET Addon
Message-ID: <26211633.1255992338342.JavaMail.root@elwamui-hound.atl.sa.earthlink.net>

Wolfgang and all,

  Here is a huge example of why MS's opinions on IT security
have been less than reasonable.  If anyone needs more of same
please let me know, I have a host of others.

See:http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=09/10/17/2058240

"Around 11:45 PM Friday night, I was prompted by Firefox
that it had http://www.pcworld.com/article/173858/mozilla_blocks_microsofts_buggy_firefox_plugin.html
disabled the addons that Microsoft has been http://tech.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=09/02/01/2143218&tid=11 including with .NET — specifically, the .NET Framework Assistant and the 
Windows Presentation Foundation. The popup announcing this said that the
'following addons have been known to cause stability or http://it.slashdot.org/story/09/10/16/189243
security issues with Firefox.' Thanks, Mozilla team, for hitting the kill 
switch and hopefully this will get Microsoft to release a patch sooner." 
Here's the http://blog.mozilla.com/security/2009/10/16/net-framework-assistant-blocked-to-disarm-security-vulnerability/
Mozilla security blog entry announcing the block, which Mozilla
implemented via its https://support.mozilla.com/en-US/kb/Add-ons+Blocklist
blocklisting mechanism.

Regards,



Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 294k members/stakeholders strong!)
"Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" -
   Abraham Lincoln

"Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is very
often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt

"If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; liability
depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
United States v. Carroll Towing  (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
===============================================================
Updated 1/26/04
CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS. div. of
Information Network Eng.  INEG. INC.
ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com
Phone: 214-244-4827

____________________________________________________________
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


From ca at cafonso.ca  Mon Oct 19 21:30:06 2009
From: ca at cafonso.ca (Carlos A. Afonso)
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2009 23:30:06 -0200
Subject: [Coalition] Fwd: [governance] summary report from II pre-IGF
In-Reply-To: <634A109C-FFE5-41B7-8CB4-50E45848E77A@datos-personales.org>
References: <4ADBCC2E.5020705@cafonso.ca> <634A109C-FFE5-41B7-8CB4-50E45848E77A@datos-personales.org>
Message-ID: <4ADD129E.4050109@cafonso.ca>

Just to let you all know, as announced before, that the full audio (mp3)
and video (mp4 iPod format) transcripts of all panels are online in
www.nupef.org.br/igf. Just choose the "audios/videos" options in the menu.

[]s fraternos

--c.,a.

Katitza Rodriguez wrote:
> Comments?
> 
> Begin forwarded message:
> 
>> From: "Carlos A. Afonso" <ca at cafonso.ca>
>> Date: October 19, 2009 4:17:18 AM CEDT
>> To: WSIS Internet Governance Caucus <governance at lists.cpsr.org>
>> Subject: [governance] summary report from II pre-IGF LAC (resending)
>> Reply-To: governance at lists.cpsr.org, "Carlos A. Afonso" <ca at cafonso.ca>
>>
>> Resending with a slight revision of the text. Sorry for sending the
>> former msg with an unintended appended dialogue...
>>
>> --c.a.
>>
>> Dear people,
>>
>> A summary document based on the reports of each panel in the II Latin
>> American and Caribbean Preparatory Meeting for the IGF is attached. The
>> event's Web page is www.nupef.org.br/igf.
>>
>> fraternal regards
>>
>> --c.a.
>>
>> -- 
>>
>> Carlos A. Afonso
>> CGI.br (www.cgi.br)
>> Nupef (www.nupef.org.br)
>> ====================================
>> new/nuevo/novo e-mail: ca at cafonso.ca
>> ====================================
>>
>>
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> 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
>> II LAC Pre-IGF Meeting
>> Rio, August 11-13, 2009
>> Summary of recommendations/findings
>> -----------------------------------
>>
>>
>> The second Latin American and the Caribbean preparatory meeting for
>> IGF was held in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, from 11 to 13 August, 2009.
>> More than 100 people from fourteen LAC countries attended it in
>> delegation of civil society organizations (49%), governments (17%),
>> private sector (15%), and academic/technical sectors (19%).
>>
>> The proposal of a regional preparatory meeting for IGF 2009 appeared
>> after the identification of the necessity of a greater
>> "regionalization" of the IGF process. Due to that, the idea of
>> specific spaces for the regional contributions was consensus in the
>> preparatory process coordinated by the IGF secretariat in cooperation
>> with the MAG (Multistakeholder Advisory Group).
>>
>> In order to occupy the space dedicated to Latin America and the
>> Caribbean, Nupef / Rits, APC, and LACNIC organized the event, which
>> had the purpose of involving more players from the region in the
>> discussion of the themes and dynamics of global IGF, promote a debate
>> focused on the central themes of IGF 2009 and point out priorities of
>> the region to be taken to the IGF in Egypt in November.
>>
>> Below is the summary of recommendations/findings based on the reports
>> from each panel.
>>
>>
>> 1. Access
>> =========
>>
>> Presentations in the panel brought the views of the several
>> participant countries regarding public policies or specific
>> initiatives contributing to universalization of access. Specific
>> aspects were singled out, such as:
>>
>> (a) Access and capacity building -- Educated users can take advantage
>> of the Internet to seek new opportunities, and this is an aspect of
>> the network as a tool for further social and economic development. One
>> of the perceived challenges is, together with universalization of the
>> infrastructure (including end-user access tools), to universalize the
>> building of capacities to empower as many users as possible, as well
>> as stimulating citizens to learn about the technologies involved and
>> understand its potential for helping to improve the quality of their
>> lives.
>>
>> (b) Adequate infrastructure to provide affordable connectivity -- In
>> most countries of the region there are few international backbone
>> providers, frequently just one. This is reproduced within many
>> countries, where just a few have more than one national  backbone
>> provider. This leads to high international connectivity prices, and
>> within countries to monopoly or cartel pricing practices which make
>> the price of broadband (which is usually available only in higher
>> income areas) many times higher for the final user than, for example,
>> Europe. In the cases where there is more than one national backbone,
>> deployment of Internet Exchange Points (IXPs) is necessary. In
>> countries like Brazil, these IXPs are non-profit services which do not
>> add to the cost of bandwidth and, to the contrary, help reduce costs
>> by optimizing national or in-country regional traffic. Broadband ought
>> to be universalized using an optimal combination of fiber and digital
>> radio, as well as regulatory and public policy incentives.
>>
>> c) Harmonization of regulatory practices -- This is mentioned as
>> especially important for the Caribbean -- many small countries with
>> divergent regulatory practices which make difficult the development of
>> a common public policy for developing infrastructure and attracting
>> private investment.
>>
>> d) Appropriate legislation -- This should facilitate planned
>> investments combining market competition with adequate regulation and
>> public policies which ensure effective universalization. It has been
>> verified that the market by itself will not guarantee
>> universalization, while significant restrictions to private initiative
>> or the replacement of state operators by private monopolies might
>> preclude innovation. Governments ought to be proactive regarding the
>> relevance of universalizing ICTs for sustainable human development,
>> and need to develop strategic planning in the deployment of these
>> technologies.
>>
>> (e) International connecvitity costs -- These impact directly in the
>> price of access for the final user, and most countries do not have the
>> leverage to negotiate better terms of trade in international
>> bandwidth. In the Caribbean, for instance, not all countries have
>> access to submarine cables.
>>
>> (f) Local content -- It is recognized that extending access to all
>> requires incentives to develop local content for all. National
>> strategies for producing appropriate local content which add value to
>> the access and connectivity policies are needed. In this sense, the
>> Internet is also an effective medium for social inclusion and
>> citizens' participation in democratic processes, allowing for
>> significant improvements in transparency and efficacy in government.
>> It enables as well new forms of business transactions and national
>> competitivity, thus further stimulating economic development. Finally,
>> access to communicate and exchange information is the basis of
>> realizing the right to communicate, a fundamental right for every
>> citizen.
>>
>>
>> 2. Privacy
>> ==========
>>
>> The three main issues to emerge were: the need for legal and
>> regulatory harmonization generally (within and among countries); the
>> importance of user involvement; the search for appropriate balance
>> between Privacy and Freedom of Expression.
>>
>> The need for regional normative harmonisation, and this concern was
>> echoed through the subsequent presentations.
>>
>> The importance of the individual user, and that the training of
>> stakeholders is more urgently needed than data protection itself.
>>
>> The change from the previous passive view of privacy as control or
>> interference by the state, to the current active approach where the
>> user is personally involved in the protection of his/her privacy. The
>> diversity of cultures and perspectives of privacy on the Internet
>> which will have to be addressed in creating globally acceptable
>> policies should be taken into account.
>>
>> Particular attention needed on privacy issues concerning social
>> networks and e-government. Concern about the locus of responsibility
>> between the company and the individual, and the difficulty where
>> protection of one’s privacy might involve an expensive lawsuit. Users
>> ought to be given tools and organic structures to enable the
>> protection of privacy.
>>
>> Pay attention to potential clashes between privacy and inclusion.
>> Importance of harmonization of traditional rights and
>> responsibilities, of law and reality, and of design.
>>
>> Users need information about the implications of what they are doing
>> in social networks, offered in simple language. Diversity makes it
>> essential that users be educated/empowered to make informed choices.
>>
>> Importance of privacy protection by design, recalling that huge
>> privacy difficulties can arise unexpectedly from tiny personal
>> projects. Taking into account problems of jurisdiction where data is
>> stored in another country (this also points to the issues involving
>> multinationals, global operations and jurisdiction).
>>
>> The Internet does not forget so that there is essentially no privacy.
>> What to do if a single model does not work for everyone.
>>
>> Legally, there is no privacy in Latin America as the concept is not
>> part of the legal tradition. Behaviour is based on personal respect
>> and local custom. This reinforces the value of regional dialogue in
>> creating harmonized policy. There is a need to translate public policy
>> into law, and a need for political decision. However there is also a
>> need for self-regulation.
>>
>> In the context of violence against women –  private spaces must be
>> defended but the Internet is also a powerful voice for victims as the
>> Internet “breaks the silence”. Panel responses supported the use of
>> the Internet to fight exploitation. However, there is also a need for
>> protection. The point was made about users that “no one knows what
>> they’re doing”, a point that recurred through the session.
>>
>> The need for recommendations from regional forums to drive
>> harmonisation projects, a slow but useful process. There is a need for
>> the regulation of conduct rather than of  technology.
>>
>> There is a need to consider enforcement where regulations are agreed.
>>
>> The situation of workers and the possibility of online background
>> checks  requires particular attention.
>>
>> The danger of perceiving technology as natural rather than man-made,
>> because it is opaque to society; the possibility of audit control
>> mechanisms or audit code was suggested.
>>
>> The constitution of Brazil includes an article that specifically
>> prohibits anonymity, in direct contrast to the efforts to protect
>> privacy. Clarification was provided from the floor that this refers to
>> anonymity of those making statements – expression is free but must not
>> be anonymous. However several speakers commented on the need, in
>> several cases, for anonymity to protect privacy and enable expression.
>>
>> One way to achieve harmonization for global governance is to agree on
>> principles rather than regulations and specific guidelines. This
>> allows for adaptation to regional and cultural differences, and for
>> different models.
>>
>> Cloud-computing has potential privacy issues which should be considered.
>>
>> Final comments:
>>
>> The panel reminded us of the need for safer designs to protect
>> fundamental rights; a planned initiative in Madrid to create a global
>> model of standards for privacy protection; the importance of users and
>> the need that they defend their rights; and the importance of user
>> feedback and of intergovernmental collaboration.
>>
>>
>> 3. Critical Resources
>> =====================
>>
>> The panel focused on the governance of the DNS -- domain names, IP
>> addresses, and the root structure which enables the global domain name
>> system. There was a consensus that these resources need to be unique
>> and globally coordinated, and the challenges in this regard are, on
>> the one hand, to legitimize this coordination, and on the other, to
>> identify the best global practices to manage these resources.
>>
>> It was agreed that the panel could not suggest all-embracing solutions
>> and responses to the challenges regarding governance of the critical
>> resources, and therefore it decided instead to bring to the IGF a
>> summary of the main concerns in the region.
>>
>> In this regard, six statements were made and are summarized below:
>>
>> (a) The importance of the Anycast system used to replicate the F root
>> server worldwide and in the region, thus reducing dependency on the 13
>> root servers was stressed; in particular, the "Mis Raices" Program of
>> LACNIC was regarded as quite positive.
>>
>> (b) The positive contribution of the IXP initiatives and local content
>> to help reducing international bandwidth costs.
>>
>> (c) There was agreement that the regional management of IP addresses
>> has been satisfactory while urgency was recommended in deploying IPv6.
>>
>> (d) Strong concern was raised regarding the protracted process leading
>> to the creation of new gTLDs.
>>
>> (e) To dispel all doubts regarding the impacts of IDNs on the
>> stability of the DNS was regarded as essential.
>>
>> (f) It was agreed that, while there might never be a definitive
>> solution to guarantee absolute stability of the DNS, deployment of
>> DNSSec constitutes an extremely positive step in this direction.
>>
>>
>> 4. Openness and Security
>> ========================
>>
>> The balance between the legal and enforcement needs on the one hand,
>> and freedom of expression on the other hand: the panel recognizes that
>> the relationship between security and openness in the Internet is
>> originated in the very open architecture of the network and that this
>> debate will be present at least until a true balance between freedom
>> and individual rights is achieved.
>>
>> There was consensus on focusing the debate on security of the
>> individuals -- who (user or no user of the Internet) are the ones
>> confronting significant threats to their security and privacy. In this
>> sense, the building and maintenance of a reliable environment for the
>> free flow of information and knowledge is crucial, since the network
>> develops as its members feel safe and trust that they will receive
>> social and economic benefits from getting involved in it.
>>
>> However, this reliable environment ought to be made viable at local,
>> regional and global levels, so that the different instances solve the
>> problems within their reach in a form which is acceptable to the
>> community. This requires that the issues are approached in a holistic
>> way, not just a sectoral perspective, seeking agreements based on
>> discussion and consensus building. These agreements ought also to be
>> product of pluralist invovlvement of all sectors of society -- the
>> broader the consensus, the more effective are the activities of
>> information, prevention, awareness raising and eventual repression of
>> delictive practices on or via the Internet.
>>
>> Focusing on the individual also means providing each person with
>> protective tools and methods, while private providers and the
>> government do their part. Actions need to be coordinated and
>> protective tools need to be developed so that the user can rely on the
>> necessary security at the lowest possible burden in terms of time,
>> complexity and costs.
>>
>> There is also a need to strengthen the capacity of the authorities in
>> charge of enforcing legislation against ICT-related offences, so that
>> they are able to properly detect, within the complex delictive chains,
>> the critical areas which may enable criminal practices, and apply the
>> proper legal/preventive measures.
>>
>> In summary, security needs to be approached from a holistic and
>> multistakeholder perspective, strengthening capacities of all players
>> involved (individuals, authorities, providers).
>>
>>
>> 5. Multilingualism and accessibility
>> ====================================
>>
>> The panel sought to set the theme in the context of the Internet as a
>> tool for human development.
>>
>> (a) Universal Access Funds -- It was recommended that these funds,
>> still not used in many countries in the region (in at least one case
>> having accumulated several billion dollars), be effectively and
>> urgently disbursed with a broader vision than at the time they were
>> created.
>>
>> (b) Multilingualism -- In order to achieve extensive multilingualism
>> on the Internet, not only language needs proper representation, but
>> the corresponding knowledge brought by this language needs to be
>> stored, archived, indexed, catalogued, in such a way that users can
>> search, classify and make conversions among formats in their own
>> languages. Standardization of languages, alphabets and scripts should
>> allow for representation in Web pages, e-mail and the myriad of other
>> Internet applications. Representing all idioms in UNICODE is
>> imperative. Standardization of Internationalized Domain Names (IDNs)
>> is quite advanced, and internationalization of e-mail services is also
>> advancing well. It is important to take into account that the Internet
>> is not just the Web. It is today essential -- with active use of the
>> resources produced in many countries -- to achieve a critical mass of
>> content in every language, and seek strict adherence to standards
>> which ensure interoperability and that content in any idiom can be
>> searched on the Internet. It is also essential to enable users as
>> producers of content in their own idioms. In synthesis, establishing
>> clear directives to achieve compliance with the standards which
>> guarantee interoperability, contributing to the development of an
>> inclusive and diverse Internet is strongly recommended. This leads to
>> a challenging question: what directives can be established to make
>> sure standards are broadly adopted?
>>
>> Accessibility -- Importante of access for people wit special needs,
>> which ought to be thought in a broad perspective, from software and
>> hardware design to the types of access available today besides the
>> traditional computer (PDAs, digital TV). This implies taking including
>> the theme of universal access in all courses related to software and
>> hardware development, as well as user interfaces. Take into account
>> that currently technical resources to facilitate access for people
>> with special needs is far more expensive than standard equipment, and
>> this requires compensatory public policies.
>>
>> Multilingualism -- This is treated in another panel. The
>> recommendation from this panel is that multilingualism is fully
>> considered as a theme transversal to all topics discussed by the IGF.
>>
>> The panel made a general recommendation that all regions and countries
>> should make an effort to maintain or develop national and regional IG
>> processes, similar to this one now culminating in this meeting in Rio,
>> as well similar processes in Europe and other regions, to make sure
>> proposals and eventual recommendations made at or by the IGF really
>> represent the interests and needs of each region.
>>
>>
>> 6. Dialogue on openness
>> =======================
>>
>> The dialogue basically focused on six topics (considered relevant to
>> the region) which require further debate. "Openness" shoudl be a theme
>> in itself, separated from the privacy-security debate. The panel
>> recommeds the IGF approaches the theme with focus on the following
>> topics:
>>
>> 1. Free expression and free flow of information
>>
>> Control vs. freedom of expression. Innovative proposals to enable
>> people who cannot express themselves on the Internet. Freedom of
>> expression on specific themes, such as sexuality, religion, racism.
>> Freedom of expression in social networks, blogs. Limits (or no limits)
>> to freedom of expression on the Internet. Freedom of expression beyond
>> the Internet: radio, open tv, pay-tv etc. Media offences. Presence of
>> traditional media on the Internet and traditional government
>> regulations. Self-regulation codes and codes of ethics for the media
>> seen from the point of view of the Internet. NAPs and censorship. Deep
>> packet inspection and free flow of information.
>>
>> 2. Access to knowledge and access to information
>>
>> Intellectual property on content created with public funds. Creative
>> Commons. Public data. Author rights. Exceptions to intellectual
>> property. Open access. WIPO and the intellectual property regulatory
>> framework: is WIPO the authoritative forum to revise author rights?
>> What would be the needed reform to achieve a better balance? Could
>> WIPO modify regulations on intellectual property? Global policies
>> which enable balancing the IP restrictions with universalization of
>> access to knowledge. Democratizing the Internet and the media, versus
>> appropriation of content by knowledge companies. Patent laws.
>> Knowledge about control mechanisms.
>>
>> 3. Open infrastructure
>>
>> Shared backbones, interconnection and transit costs, net neutrality.
>> ICTs as global assets of the commons. Provision of these assets --
>> roles of the state and the market. Symmetry of media in the context of
>> convergence. Traffic engineering and its possible impact on net
>> neutrality. Arbitrary tolls within the network. Auditability by
>> society of applications and critical resources.
>>
>> 4. Open opportunities
>>
>> Competition environment. Counter-monopoly practices. Market favorable
>> to enabling innovation by new actors. Business models. Possibility of
>> a Latin American and Caribbean Research and Development Fund to
>> stimulate sharing of technology.
>>
>> 5. Open technology
>>
>> Free and open source software. Open standards.
>>
>> 6. Open governance
>>
>> Enabling active, diversified, multisectoral participation. Opening the
>> governance models. Debate on ICANN. Basic standards for a more
>> consistent governance model.
>>
>>
>> 7. Future of the IGF
>> ====================
>>
>> [There was no summary report. Below are the summaries made by some of
>> the panelists of their presentations].
>>
>> Statement by Pablo Hinojosa (ICANN):
>>
>> 1.- ICANN considers that IGF has been established as an inclusive and
>> open forum for all stakeholders and therefore has fulfilled its
>> mandate according to the Tunis Agenda. It considers as well that IGF
>> has appropriately expressed the WSIS principles.
>>
>> 2.- ICANN agrees with continuing the IGF without modification either
>> in the format or in the terms agreed upon in Tunis.
>>
>> 3.- IGF has served as a platform to collect several themes in the
>> broad Internet governance agenda, like Tetris pieces which adjust
>> themselves and build concepts around which the debates will be carried
>> out.
>>
>> 4.- For ICANN the IGF has been a space to exchange information. The
>> Internet ecosystem encompasses many themes, stakeholders and
>> interests, and it is difficult to reduce this concept to a limited
>> agenda. Thus collaboration of everyone is indispensable to better
>> understand the ways of action.
>>
>> Statement by Pablo Accuosto (ITEM, Uruguay):
>>
>> - IGF is contributing to the Tunis Agenda commitments, in particular
>> items a, b, c and d of para 72, but there is much more to be done by
>> this forum regarding its objectives.
>>
>> - IGF has become an innovative public policy discussion space,
>> contributes to the understanding of the IG themes and facilitates a
>> better knowledge and the generation of better confidence and
>> collaboration levels among all stakeholders. Part of the “success” of
>> the IGF is based on the absence of commitments to build consensus
>> statements and the adoption of open and inclusive participation
>> mechanisms.
>>
>> - Because of the above, it is important to keep the IGF going, if
>> understood as an articulation space for multiple venues and processes
>> (MAG, annual meetings, dynamic coalitions, regional meetings,
>> processes related to IG in other fora etc). The annual meeting is
>> important to define in the agenda a venue and moment to debate the IG
>> themes.
>>
>> - There are some components of the IGF mandate which are not being
>> fully carried out. In particular, items e, f, g, h, i, j and k of para
>> 72 of the Tunis Agenda. It is necessary to find ways to fully comply
>> with all items of the Tunis Agenda regarding IG, being specially
>> careful in not losing the richness of the debates when trying to force
>> consensus and, on the other hand, and avoiding debates which lead to
>> nowhere – which end up undermining the relevance of the IGF as a space
>> of political debate.
>>
>> - In the annual IGF meeting it is currently not desirable nor possible
>> to reach consensus proposals. However, in all other fora which are
>> under the IGF “umbrella” recommendations can be formulated, thus
>> complying with part of the IGF mandate. The MAG could be reformulated
>> to take on this role, providing recommendations as inputs to the
>> debates in the annual meetings, and also taking the inputs from the
>> annual meetings as subsidies to its recommendations and proposals. The
>> WGIG is a successful reference in this sense, although it had another
>> mandate and was created in anoter context. WGIG carried out its
>> mandate to formulate recommendations (as inputs to WSIS) in a context
>> more critical than the IGF, and in the cases  in which consensus
>> recommendations were not achieved, the different views were included.
>> This would mean an enhanced MAG, with the autonomy to propose inputs
>> in a true multistakeholder fashion, as well as continuing to carry out
>> its current tasks.
>>
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Coalition mailing list
> Coalition at mailman.thepublicvoice.org
> http://mailman.thepublicvoice.org/listinfo.cgi/coalition-thepublicvoice.org
> 

-- 

Carlos A. Afonso
CGI.br (www.cgi.br)
Nupef (www.nupef.org.br)
====================================
new/nuevo/novo e-mail: ca at cafonso.ca
====================================
____________________________________________________________
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


From yehudakatz at mailinator.com  Tue Oct 20 00:57:59 2009
From: yehudakatz at mailinator.com (Yehuda Katz)
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2009 21:57:59 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [governance] A letter of support for "net neutrality"
Message-ID: <sympa.1256014526.11104.736@lists.cpsr.org>

A letter of support for "net neutrality"
To: FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski 

Doc.Ref.: PDF

http://assets.bizjournals.com/cms_media/pdf/NN%20Letter%20of%20Support%20to%20Chairman%20Genachowski%20final%201019.pdf?site=techflash.com

-

We write to express our support for your announcement that the Federal
Communications Commission will begin a process to adopt rules that preserve an
open Internet. We believe a process that results in common sense baseline rules
is critical to ensuring that the Internet remains a key engine of economic
growth, innovation, and global competitiveness.

For most of the Internet’s history, FCC rules have ensured that consumers
have been able to choose the content and services they want over their Internet
connections. Entrepreneurs, technologists, and venture capitalists have
previously been able to develop new online products and services with the
guarantee of neutral, nondiscriminatory access by users, which has fueled an
unprecedented era of economic growth and creativity. Existing businesses have
been able to leverage the power of the Internet to develop innovative product
lines, reach new consumers, and create new ways of doing business.

An open Internet fuels a competitive and efficient marketplace, where consumers
make the ultimate choices about which products succeed and which fail. This
allows businesses of all sizes, from the smallest startup to larger
corporations, to compete, yielding maximum economic growth and opportunity.

America’s leadership in the technology space has been due, in large part, to
the open Internet. We applaud your leadership in initiating a process to
develop rules to ensure that the qualities that have made the Internet so
successful are protected.

Signed ...

---

-30-____________________________________________________________
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


From lehto.paul at gmail.com  Tue Oct 20 10:24:14 2009
From: lehto.paul at gmail.com (Paul Lehto)
Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2009 10:24:14 -0400
Subject: [governance] Cameroon and Wales collision in TLD space ?????
In-Reply-To: <4ADCCBC2.5090403@rkey.com>
References: <954259bd0910160843q1740718ay670d369134549ba7@mail.gmail.com>
	 <wDlsJ8emge2KFA1T@perry.co.uk>
	 <76f819dd0910190716w187f3505i84295e76e0dc0bc9@mail.gmail.com>
	 <I6gyXlj0OI3KFAZ9@perry.co.uk>
	 <76f819dd0910190912qb15dd70jd7ffdb4bc6e29a60@mail.gmail.com>
	 <955PHjpQaJ3KFAPv@perry.co.uk> <4ADCA72F.3010703@rkey.com>
	 <rLcqbyvHoK3KFA$5@perry.co.uk>
	 <76f819dd0910191156q71fd1103p3d4f32db2401e0df@mail.gmail.com>
	 <4ADCCBC2.5090403@rkey.com>
Message-ID: <76f819dd0910200724m42cba025q570ed6d9a4777ad1@mail.gmail.com>

In situations where the secret ballot can appropriately (or by
agreement) be dispensed with, it makes election security ENORMOUSLY
easier, though not "easy" per se.  Legislators often vote
electronically, but it's not secret balloting so it's more or less
instantly obvious if an error's been made.

As I've said before the secret ballot makes elections fundamentally
unaccountable at a radical level, since you can't go back to the
source of the info (the voter) and verify what's there is what was
originally put there.

The vote COUNT especially is the ONE piece of real estate a free
people must control, and must control it so completely that when they
need to remove criminal mafia types or corrupt incumbents, they are
secure in their right to do so.

With incumbents running computerized elections, one can NEVER be
secure in their ability to turn out criminal incumbents -- yet this is
the point at which the vote is needed the very most.  That's why as
great as computers are in so many ways, they simply are inappropriate,
and TOTALLY so, for important elections, except to display results and
ancillary applications.

Basic fundamental freedom is at stake in vote counts (for "real"
important elections).  From that perspective, considering the number
of people who have literally died for the freedoms existing so far
(and that remain...) it is not for us to let that slip in the name of
the convenience of computer processing.

EXCEPTIONS:

Very small numbers of voters make things easier (but no arguale need
for electronics in the main, then)

Not having a secret ballot goes a long way but the smug complacency of
a person who has "Verified" there own *personal* vote doesn't mean the
ballot box hasn't been stuffed and additional signatures added to the
list of voters having voted.  In this way, "verifying" one's ballot
isa recipe for false complacency in that it by no means translates
into a properly counted ballot nor does it mean no ballot box stuffing
has occurred, even if 100% of your fellow voters "verify" their own
ballots individually and no problems are reported (invisible voters
don't complain...)

Paul Lehto, Juris Doctor


On 10/19/09, Craig Simon <cls at rkey.com> wrote:
> To be clear, where formal public law-making and officer-selecting
> elections are concerned, I'm not an advocate of Internet voting in
> particular, or of electronic voting in general. I agree with those who
> argue that a system of physically auditable records marked by the voter
> in a secret manner (which we might call the "Hard Australian Ballot")
> promises a far more legitimate account of voter desires.
>
> The problem I've set out to solve is how to best leverage the web as a
> venue for open debate and democratically-organized preference ordering.
> Since I'm inspired by concepts such as Town Halls, public caucuses,
> Indabas, and IETF Working Groups, there's no pretense of trying to keep
> participant identity secret.
>
> By putting aside (for now) the daunting but critical challenge of
> pristine legitimacy, it's possible to address other important ones...
> namely, how to facilitate a style of mass, diversified participation
> that can effectively build consensus around valuable ideas.
>
> My view of politics is that it's about managed competition. It's a way
> to allow formal articulation of demands and expectations, and to allow
> pursuit of those interests in ways that establish rights and
> obligations. It's a way of picking winners without resort to war. The
> tool I'm trying to create would allow for massively scalable
> articulation of demands and expectations through a technical strategy I
> call coalescent bubbling.
>
> I like to think I've thought of a way to structure a venue that can
> avoid being paralyzed by "noisy idiots" without silencing them. I also
> believe I've figured out how to prevent a debate from being overwhelmed
> by "silly swarms" and "organized interests." The key is to take them
> seriously and allow them to put their best foot forward.
>
> But those feature have yet to be demonstrated, So far, all I've been
> able to demonstrate is how to construct an interactive ranked-choice
> ballot and integrate it with a rich real-time visualization of results.
>
>
> Paul Lehto wrote:
>> Everybody votes the same way essentially with allowances for absentee
>> voting a slight to moderate exception, but controversial among
>> election security experts because there's SO MANY vulnerabilities
>> along the way.
>>
>> It is hard to hold any election at all simply because, if the issues
>> are real, literally every voter and every non-voter for that matter
>> has serious motive to tamper with the election (tax rates affect all,
>> for example, whether voter or not).  Even worse than banks where
>> embezzlement is the #1 theft loss, in elections the problem of insider
>> manipulation (given the free rein for anybody wishing to do so) is so
>> intense that it exceeds problems banks have.
>>
>> Example: The vote at home-style convenience "absentee" voting opens
>> the heretofore closed Pandora's box of voter intimidation and
>> harassment that was essentially solved by the secret ballot itself.
>> Prior to the secret ballot, in the USA for example, fights, riots,
>> intimidation and, yes, murders were an occurrence at every major
>> election in contested areas, with bosses watching employees, and vote
>> buyers watching to confirm the votes of vote sellers....
>>
>> But even worse is internet voting on any Serious issue (I will
>> stipulate if nobody really has much $ at stake or no serious political
>> issues at stake, the risk to the election is manageable. But the
>> military killed (in the USA) internet voting in 2004 after being
>> advised by a panel, of, yup, experts that internet voting was a noble
>> idea that simply could not work in practice.  The New York Times
>> coverage on this is excerpted below.
>>
>> The Answer is that a physical ballot for all should be provided, with
>> as little time between ballot issuance and casting, and as little time
>> between casting and counting as possible.  Preferably the same day
>> unless circumstances make that impossible.  In the USA state and
>> federal elections piggyback for cost savings and I'm sure a third
>> entity, if there was one, could be added.
>>
>> I could send you my chapter from a book on elections voting systems
>> that was #1 on amazon.com in Political Parties and the category of
>> Elections in October 2008 (probably due much more to my fellow
>> co-authors like Robert F Kennedy Jr than to me).
>>
>> I've a standing offer for any election official anywhere, or any
>> vendor for that matter, to publicly debate how they can possibly have
>> secure elections on computers, given "Reflections on Trusting Trust"
>> and other basic facts of computer science, not to mention democracy.
>> So far, no takers. I have sued the vendors and gotten their machines
>> out, though, so one way or another we engage in a "dialog" of sorts.
>>
>> The New York Times on military internet voting:
>>
>> Defense Dept. Cancels Use of Internet Voting Project
>>
>> By JOHN SCHWARTZ
>>
>> NEW YORK TIMES
>>
>> Published: February 5, 2004
>>
>> http://www.nytimes.com/2004/02/05/politics/campaign/05CND-VOTE.html?hp
>>
>>
>> Citing security concerns, the Department of Defense canceled the use
>> of a $22 million project today that would have allowed Americans
>> overseas to vote over the Internet in this year's elections.
>>
>> The system, the Secure Electronic Registration and Voting Experiment,
>> or Serve, was developed with financing from the Defense Department.
>>
>> The decision was announced in a memo from Deputy Secretary of Defense
>> Paul Wolfowitz to David Chu, undersecretary of defense for personnel
>> and readiness.
>>
>> Paraphrasing the memo, a department of defense spokeswoman said "the
>> department has decided not to use Serve in the November 2004
>> elections. We made this decision in view of the inability to ensure
>> legitimacy of votes, thereby bringing into doubt the integrity of the
>> election results," the spokeswoman said. The memo also states that
>> efforts will continue to find other ways to cast ballots
>> electronically for Americans overseas, but "the integrity of the
>> election results have to be assured," the spokeswoman said.
>>
>> The decision to cancel the project, which was developed by Accenture,
>> the consulting and technology services company, was announced two
>> weeks after members of a panel of scientists who were asked by the
>> government to assess the project's security recommended that it be
>> canceled because any system based on off-the-shelf personal computers
>> and run over today's Internet was inherently insecure.
>>
>> Aviel D. Rubin, an author of that report, said today that the Serve
>> project was a noble idea that could not be carried out in a secure way
>> using today's technology. "While we appreciate their efforts to allow
>> this segment of the population to have more accessible voting, we
>> applaud their decision to cancel this project because of the security
>> concerns, he said.
>>
>> ======================
>> On 10/19/09, Roland Perry <roland at internetpolicyagency.com> wrote:
>>> In message <4ADCA72F.3010703 at rkey.com>, at 13:51:43 on Mon, 19 Oct 2009,
>>> Craig Simon <cls at rkey.com> writes
>>>> If you folks actually do start discussing scalable online democracy in
>>>> practical terms, please keep in mind that I've been taking concrete
>>>> steps on this.
>>> How do the majority of people, without Internet access, participate in
>>> such a vote? That's not intended to be a "smart question", by the way;
>>> just a recognition that democracy should be inclusive.
>>> --
>>> Roland Perry
>>> ____________________________________________________________
>>> 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
>


-- 
Paul R Lehto, J.D.
P.O. Box #1
Ishpeming, MI  49849
lehto.paul at gmail.com
906-204-4026
____________________________________________________________
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


From ca at cafonso.ca  Tue Oct 20 10:56:35 2009
From: ca at cafonso.ca (Carlos A. Afonso)
Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2009 12:56:35 -0200
Subject: [governance] Brazil's official position on the "Affirmation of
 Commitments"
In-Reply-To: <7cd8c34e0910190257yebd2eeena66f73bbdcc07028@mail.gmail.com>
References: <190F1D19-CC9C-438B-A764-DFD55D3A6AB4@ipjustice.org> <7cd8c34e0910190257yebd2eeena66f73bbdcc07028@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4ADDCFA3.5040407@cafonso.ca>

Dear people, below is the official declaration (in English and
Portuguese) of the Brazilian government regarding the post-JPA
"Affirmation of Commitments" ICANN-USA.

fraternal regards

--c.a.

=====================================================

[English]

The Brazilian Government’s Position on the Affirmation of Commitments
between the U.S. Government and ICANN

On September 30, 2009, the U.S. Department of Commerce (DoC) and the
Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) released a
new agreement entitled Affirmation of Commitments, which completes the
transition of management of the Internet domain name and addressing
system (DNS) from the U.S. government to the private sector by granting
greater autonomy to ICANN and increasing international participation in
the oversight of its activities.

The Brazilian Government welcomes the approval of the Affirmation of
Commitments, which provides for a set of important advances in the
management and decision making processes of ICANN, consistent with the
demands presented by Brazil, either at the ICANN itself or at relevant
United Nations forums.

Among the positive aspects included in the new agreement, it is worth
highlighting the following:

(1) increasing participation of other governments in the process of
assessing and reviewing ICANN activities, with a greater role for the
Government Advisory Committee (GAC), along with the ICANN Board;
(2) ending the requirement to submit periodical reports exclusively to
the U.S. government, requiring ICANN to release annual reports on its
activities to all stakeholders;
(3) reaffirming the principles of transparency, multistakeholder
participation, public interest, interoperability and end-to-end
innovation; preserving the DNS security and stability and maintaining
one single global Internet;
(4) introducing the notion of an enhanced decision-making process,
through cross-community deliberations.

Notwithstanding these positive aspects, the Brazilian government
believes that there is still room for further improvements to be made to
the global governance of the Internet, in light of the results of the
World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS).

The Affirmation of Commitments does not advance on the issue of ICANN’s
institutional framework and the need to grant it international legal
status. The DNS root zone continues to be managed under the supervision
of the U.S. Department of Commerce. The Affirmation of Commitments may
be revoked at any time by either the Department of Commerce or ICANN,
which may generate insecurity vis‑à‑vis ICANN’s relationships with other
governments, international organizations and non-governmental
organizations that are not subject to the U.S. jurisdiction.

The Brazilian government will continue to contribute to further
improving the global governance of the Internet, towards full observance
of the principles of multilateralism, transparency and democracy adopted
at WSIS.

[Português]

Posição do Governo Brasileiro sobre a Afirmação de Compromissos entre o
Governo Norte–Americano e a ICANN

Em 30 de setembro de 2009, o Departamento de Comércio dos EUA (DoC) e a
Corporação para a Designação de Nomes e Números da Internet (ICANN)
divulgaram um novo contrato, denominado Afirmação de Compromissos, que
conclui o processo de transição do gerenciamento do sistema de endereços
e nomes de domínio (DNS) do governo norte-americano para a iniciativa
privada, atribuindo maior autonomia à ICANN e aumentando a participação
internacional na supervisão de suas atividades.

O Governo Brasileiro saúda a aprovação da Afirmação de Compromissos, que
contém um conjunto importante de aprimoramentos no gerenciamento e
processos decisórios da ICANN, que vêm ao encontro de reivindicações
apresentadas pelo Brasil tanto no âmbito da própria ICANN quanto nos
foros relevantes das Nações Unidas.

Dentre os aspectos positivos do novo contrato, convém mencionar os
seguintes:

(1) participação crescente de outros governos nos processos de avaliação
de desempenho e revisão das atividades da ICANN e aumento da relevância
do Comitê Assessor Governamental (GAC), ao lado do Conselho Diretor da
ICANN;
(2) fim da obrigatoriedade da apresentação de relatórios periódicos
exclusivos ao governo norte-americano, passando a ICANN a apresentar
relatórios anuais públicos;
(3) reafirmação dos princípios de transparência, participação
multissetorial, interesse público, interoperabilidade e inovação na
ponta, zelando pela segurança e a estabilidade do DNS e preservando a
unicidade e globalidade da Internet;
(4) incorporação do conceito de aprimoramento do processo decisório por
meio de deliberações inter-comunitárias;

Apesar desses aspectos positivos, o Governo Brasileiro acredita que
ainda há possibilidade de aprimoramentos adicionais no regime de
governança global da Internet, à luz dos resultados da Cúpula Mundial da
Sociedade da Informação;

A Afirmação de Compromissos não avançou na questão do arranjo
institucional da ICANN, nem na necessidade de dotá-la de
responsabilidade jurídica internacional. O DNS e o sistema-raiz seguem
sendo gerenciados sob a supervisão do Departamento de Comércio dos
Estados Unidos. A Afirmação de Compromissos pode ser rescindida a
qualquer momento, tanto pelo Departamento de Comércio quanto pela ICANN,
o que pode gerar insegurança no relacionamento entre a ICANN e outros
governos, organizações internacionais e organizações não-governamentais
que não estejam sujeitas à jurisdição dos Estados Unidos.

O Governo Brasileiro seguirá contribuindo para o aperfeiçoamento do
regime de governança global da Internet por meio da plena observância
dos princípios do multilateralismo, transparência e democracia,
reconhecidos pela Cúpula Mundial da Sociedade da Informação.

-- 

Carlos A. Afonso
CGI.br (www.cgi.br)
Nupef (www.nupef.org.br)
====================================
new/nuevo/novo e-mail: ca at cafonso.ca
====================================

____________________________________________________________
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


From cw at christopherwilkinson.eu  Tue Oct 20 10:59:03 2009
From: cw at christopherwilkinson.eu (Christopher Wilkinson)
Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2009 16:59:03 +0200
Subject: [governance] please call this thread something else ...
In-Reply-To: <76f819dd0910200724m42cba025q570ed6d9a4777ad1@mail.gmail.com>
References: <954259bd0910160843q1740718ay670d369134549ba7@mail.gmail.com> <wDlsJ8emge2KFA1T@perry.co.uk> <76f819dd0910190716w187f3505i84295e76e0dc0bc9@mail.gmail.com> <I6gyXlj0OI3KFAZ9@perry.co.uk> <76f819dd0910190912qb15dd70jd7ffdb4bc6e29a60@mail.gmail.com> <955PHjpQaJ3KFAPv@perry.co.uk> <4ADCA72F.3010703@rkey.com> <rLcqbyvHoK3KFA$5@perry.co.uk> <76f819dd0910191156q71fd1103p3d4f32db2401e0df@mail.gmail.com> <4ADCCBC2.5090403@rkey.com> <76f819dd0910200724m42cba025q570ed6d9a4777ad1@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <06A9BB12-CE66-4EB7-AFEA-7C43FF63E0A7@christopherwilkinson.eu>

I note that this thread no longer has anything to do either with Wales  
or with Cameroon.
With a sensitivity towards both and an affiliation with neither, may I  
ask you please to call it something else ...

CW


On 20 Oct 2009, at 16:24, Paul Lehto wrote:

> In situations where the secret ballot can appropriately (or by
> agreement) be dispensed with, it makes election security ENORMOUSLY
> easier, though not "easy" per se.  Legislators often vote
> electronically, but it's not secret balloting so it's more or less
> instantly obvious if an error's been made.
>
> . . . . . .
____________________________________________________________
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


From jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com  Tue Oct 20 18:23:03 2009
From: jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com (Jeffrey A. Williams)
Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2009 17:23:03 -0500 (GMT-05:00)
Subject: [governance] Re: [A2k] Richard Stallman, KEI and ORG file their
 opposition with the EC to Oracle's acquisition of MySQL
Message-ID: <27787535.1256077383553.JavaMail.root@mswamui-swiss.atl.sa.earthlink.net>

Thiru and all,

  I fully agree with Richards and KEI's position on this.  It has
been clear that for a number of years now that the EU council is far
less interested in fair compitition than they purport to be.  This 
decision clearly demonstrates that.  As such this decision sadly demonstrates
poor leadership in the EC which has been a bone of contention for
several years and has been largely upheald by the UK's PM recently.

-----Original Message-----
>From: Thiru Balasubramaniam <thiru at keionline.org>
>Sent: Oct 20, 2009 4:49 AM
>To: a2k discuss list <a2k at lists.essential.org>
>Subject: [A2k] Richard Stallman, KEI and ORG file their opposition with the EC to Oracle's acquisition of MySQL
>
>On 19 October 2009, Richard Stallman, Knowledge Ecology International
>(KEI) and the Open Rights Groups (ORG) sent a letter to Neelie Kroes,
>Commissioner for Competition for the European Commission expressing
>their opposition to Oracle's acquisition of MySQL as part of the
>proposed Oracle-Sun merger. The letter is available here:http://keionline.org/ec-mysql
>
>
>Neelie Kroes
>Commissioner for Competition
>European Commission
>1049 Brussels, Belgium
>E-mail: neelie.kroes at ec.europa.eu
>
>October 19, 2009
>
>Dear Commissioner Kroes,
>
>Oracle should not be permitted to acquire its competitor, MySQL
>
>Introduction
>
>We are writing to express our opposition to the proposed acquisition of
>MySQL as part of the larger merger between Sun Microsystems and Oracle
>Corporation.
>
>Richard Stallman [1] is a software developer and software freedom
>activist and is the main author of the GNU General Public License, the
>most widely used free software license. Stallman launched the Free
>Software Movement in 1983 and led the development of the GNU operating
>system (normally used together with the kernel Linux).
>
>Knowledge Ecology International (KEI) [2] is a non-profit public
>interest organization, supporting work carried out earlier by the
>Consumer Project on Technology (CPTech), an organization that has in the
>past participated in a number of merger reviews, including those
>involving legal publishing, retail distribution, and media concentration
>and telecommunications regulation. KEI uses MySQL to power several
>different web page platforms, including those run by Free/Libre/ and
>Open Source (FLOSS) content management systems such as Joomla, Drupal
>and Wordpress.
>
>The Open Rights Group (ORG) [3], a non-profit company founded in 2005 by
>1,000 digital activists, is the UK’s leading voice defending freedom of
>expression, privacy, innovation, consumer rights and creativity on the
>net.
>
>The European Commission should block Oracle's acquisition of MySQL as
>part of its acquisition of Sun Microsystems.
>
>Oracle seeks to acquire MySQL to prevent further erosion of its share of
>the market for database software licenses and services, and to protect
>the high prices now charged for its proprietary database software
>licenses and services.
>
>If Oracle is allowed to acquire MySQL, it will predictably limit the
>development of the functionality and performance of the MySQL software
>platform, leading to profound harm to those who use MySQL software to
>power applications.
>
>Oracle is the leading seller of proprietary database software designed
>for very large enterprises. In this market space, Oracle has market
>dominance, and charges very high prices and earns hefty profits. In
>other segments of the market, Oracle has faced more competition from
>other competitors for database
>software, including proprietary products such as Microsoft SQL Server,
>Sybase and IBM's DB2, but also from FLOSS platforms, including in
>particular MySQL.
>
>MySQL is made available to the public in two parallel ways. Most users
>obtain it as free/libre software under the GNU General Public License
>(GPL) version 2; the code is released in this way gratis. MySQL is also
>available under a different, proprietary license for a fee.
>
>This approach was able to provide (1) an attractive platform for
>developers looking to use FLOSS, and secured MySQL enormous mind share,
>particularly in supporting content rich web pages and other Internet
>applications, and (2) the ability for paying clientèle to combine and
>distribute MySQL in customizations that they do not want to make
>available to the public as free/libre software under the GPL. With
>excellent management and considerable trust within the user community,
>MySQL became
>the gold standard for web based FLOSS database applications.
>
>MySQL is the "M" in LAMP, an acronym coined in April 1998, for an open
>source web server software bundle comprised of the GNU/Linux operating
>system, the Apache HTTP server software, the database program MySQL, and
>PHP, a web scripting language. Collectively these applications are used
>to build millions of general purpose web applications, including many of
>the most important web based applications on the Internet. According to
>Sun, there are more than 65,000 downloads of the MySQL software per day.
>
>Over time, MySQL developed greater functionality, dependability and
>improved in performance, and became a very important element of the
>database market – much greater than can be measured by market share
>analysis based on revenues.
>
>MySQL is also creating substantial competitive pressure on prices for
>proprietary databases, leading to moderation or lowering of licensing
>fees from Oracle and Microsoft, as well as defection of many enterprise
>database services to a MySQL platform. If one considers proprietary
>software a good thing, this reduction in their prices is an instance of
>the economic benefit that we seek from competition. Many of the larger
>users that form the backbone of Oracle's cash flow have or are expected
>to evaluate the benefits of migrating database services to a MySQL
>platform. While Oracle's database is the dominant player today for the
>"old” database market, MySQL is the dominant player for the "new,”
>emerging database markets, and is seen by Oracle as the most important
>competitor for the future.
>
>Oracle made an earlier effort to buy MySQL in 2006, but the management
>rejected Oracle's offer, in part because Oracle would not disclose its
>plan for MySQL, and some members of the MySQL management team were
>concerned that Oracle was only acquiring MySQL to curb its advances in
>the marketplace.
>
>MySQL was acquired by Sun in February 2008, in a transaction welcomed by
>many users because of Sun's good reputation among advocates of FLOSS
>software, and a belief that Sun would position MySQL as a strong
>competitor. Under Sun, there was considerable staff turnover, but the
>core software product continued to expand and improve.
>
>Defenders of the Oracle acquisition of its competitor naively say Oracle
>cannot harm MySQL, because a free version of the software is available
>to anyone under GNU GPL version 2.0, and if Oracle is not a good host
>for the GPL version of the code, future development will be taken up by
>other businesses and
>individual programmers, who could freely and easily "fork" the GPL'd
>code into a new platform. This defense fails for the reasons that
>follow.
>
>MySQL uses the parallel licensing approach to generate revenue to
>continue the FLOSS development of the software. If Oracle acquired
>MySQL, it would then be the only entity able to release the code other
>than under the GPL. Oracle would not be obligated to diligently sell or
>reasonably price the MySQL commercial licenses. More importantly, Oracle
>is under no obligation to use the revenues from these licenses to
>advance MySQL. In making decisions in these matters, Oracle is facing an
>obvious conflict of interest – the continued development of a powerful,
>feature rich free alternative to its core product.
>
>As only the original rights holder can sell commercial licenses, no new
>forked version of the code will have the ability to practice the
>parallel licensing approach, and will not easily generate the resources
>to support continued development of the MySQL platform.
>
>The acquisition of MySQL by Oracle will be a major setback to the
>development of a FLOSS database platform, potentially alienating and
>dispersing MySQL's core community of developers. It could take several
>years before another database platform could rival the progress and
>opportunities now available to MySQL, because it will take time before
>any of them attract and cultivate a large enough team of developers and
>achieve a similar customer base.
>
>Yet another way in which Oracle will have the ability to determine the
>forking of MySQL relates to the evolution of the GNU GPL license. GPL
>version 2.0 (GPLv2) and GPL version 3.0 (GPLv3) are different licenses
>and each requires that any modified program carry the same license as
>the original. There are fundamental and unavoidable legal obstacles to
>combining code from programs licensed under the different GPL versions.
>Today MySQL is only available to the public under GPLv2.
>
>Many other FLOSS software projects are expected to move to GPLv3, often
>automatically due to the common use of the "any later version" clause.
>Because the current MySQL license lacks that clause, it will remain
>GPLv2 only and it will not be possible to combine its code with the code
>of many GPLv3-covered projects in the future. Given that forking of the
>MySQL code base will be particularly dependent on FLOSS community
>contributions - more so than on in-company development - the lack of a
>more flexible license for MySQL will present considerable barriers to a
>new forked development path for MySQL.
>
>We note that Oracle has been conspicuously silent about its plans for
>MySQL since the announcement of the Sun acquisition, until very
>recently. Oracle CEO Larry Ellison, in the first public statement on the
>subject, insisted that Oracle will not spin-off MySQL after the merger
>and also made the outlandish claim that Oracle's product was not in
>competition with MySQL. While some merger defenders have suggested that
>the MySQL acquisition will bolster Oracle's position with respect to
>competition from Microsoft's SQL Server, it is naturally more likely
>that Oracle will prioritize protecting its core product, the Oracle
>proprietary database, from further erosion of market share and the
>shrinking of licensing fees, and this will most efficiently be
>accomplished by curbing the growth and improvement of the free version
>of MySQL.
>
>We recognize the support Sun provides to increase competition in
>numerous markets through its support of FLOSS and open standards. We
>also recognize that Oracle's acquisition of Sun may be essential for
>Sun's survival. However, Oracle should not be allowed to harm consumer
>interests in the database market by weakening the competition provided
>by MySQL. For the reasons elucidated above, we ask that you block
>Oracle's acquisition of MySQL.
>
>Sincerely,
>
>Richard Stallman
>James Love and Malini Aisola, Knowledge Ecology International (KEI)
>Jim Killock, Open Rights Group (ORG)
>
>cc: Philip Lowe, Director General Competition, European Commission, DG
>Competition
>
>[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Stallman
>[2] http://www.keionline.org
>[3] http://www.openrightsgroup.org/
>
>------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>Thiru Balasubramaniam
>Geneva Representative
>Knowledge Ecology International (KEI)
>thiru at keionline.org
>
>
>Tel: +41 22 791 6727
>Mobile: +41 76 508 0997
>
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>A2k mailing list
>A2k at lists.essential.org
>http://lists.essential.org/mailman/listinfo/a2k

Regards,



Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 294k members/stakeholders strong!)
"Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" -
   Abraham Lincoln

"Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is very
often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt

"If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; liability
depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
United States v. Carroll Towing  (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
===============================================================
Updated 1/26/04
CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS. div. of
Information Network Eng.  INEG. INC.
ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com
Phone: 214-244-4827

____________________________________________________________
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


From lohento at oridev.org  Wed Oct 21 08:37:14 2009
From: lohento at oridev.org (Lohento, ken)
Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2009 14:37:14 +0200 (CEST)
Subject: [governance] =?ISO-8859-1?Q?West_African_Internet_Governance_For?=
 =?ISO-8859-1?Q?um_=0A_____Communiqu=E9?=
Message-ID: <539b00ea059ec7a6d4fb2a3942e00b93.squirrel@ssl0.ovh.net>

“Promoting the Multi-stakeholder Model for further Internet Development in
Africa” - Communique adopted at the end of the meeting.

WAIGF Communiqué, 14-16 October 2009 Accra, Ghana

See attached pdf

Html here http://www.cipaco.org/spip.php?article2104

and more information on the workshop on AfrINIC website:

http://meeting.afrinic.net/waigf/index.php

-- 
Ken L

____________________________________________________________
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 --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: WAIGF Communique.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 62042 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20091021/61d0bd79/attachment.pdf>

From katitza at datos-personales.org  Thu Oct 22 01:06:15 2009
From: katitza at datos-personales.org (Katitza Rodriguez)
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 2009 07:06:15 +0200
Subject: [governance] Call for Signatures: The Civil Society Madrid
 Declaration
References: <BB0D0517-C04A-4BFA-AB75-83320D091797@datos-personales.org>
Message-ID: <EACE56C0-D0B2-4147-B75B-D1BEF095A69E@datos-personales.org>

Call for Signatures..
----------------------

The Civil Society Madrid Declaration

Several leading NGOs will be organizing a conference in Madrid on
November 3, 2009 on "Global Privacy Standards for a Global World."
This civil society conference will be held in conjunction with the
31st annual meeting of the Privacy and Data Protection Commissioners.

http://thepublicvoice.org/events/madrid09/

Among the key outcomes of the week will be the release of the
Civil Society Madrid Declaration, a document prepared by the committee
group that is organizing the civil society event. The Madrid
Declaration is a substantial document that reaffirms international
instruments for privacy protection, identifies new challenges, and
recommends specific actions.

The Madrid Declaration is now open for signatures:

http://www.thepublicvoice.org/madrid-declaration

http://thepublicvoice.org/madrid-declaration/es/

http://thepublicvoice.org/madrid-declaration/fr/

http://thepublicvoice.org/madrid-declaration/kr/

http://thepublicvoice.org/madrid-declaration/cn/

http://thepublicvoice.org/madrid-declaration/br/


An indication of support for this Declaration will help focus the  
privacy agenda on protecting consumers and citizens and help send a  
unified message to Data Protection and Privacy authorities around the  
world. The timing and focus of this Declaration is particularly worth  
considering signing on to. So, if you are so inclined, signing on and  
spreading the word about the Madrid Declaration beforehand to maximize  
the number of signatures would be of great help too.

If you would like to add your name to this declaration, please send a  
note to: Katitza Rodriguez at privacy at datos-personales.org

Pls. indicate if you are signing the declaration on behalf of your  
organization or as individual expert. We we will continue collecting  
signatures after Madrid and towards the fourth IGF.

The Declaration will be available in more than two dozen languages in  
the following weeks.


Kind Regards,

Katitza Rodriguez
EPIC
_______________________________________________
IRP mailing list
IRP at lists.internetrightsandprinciples.org
http://lists.internetrightsandprinciples.org/listinfo.cgi/irp-internetrightsandprinciples.org

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20091022/9bf39ca9/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

From isolatedn at gmail.com  Thu Oct 22 01:10:49 2009
From: isolatedn at gmail.com (Sivasubramanian Muthusamy)
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 2009 10:40:49 +0530
Subject: [governance] Call for Signatures: The Civil Society Madrid 
In-Reply-To: <EACE56C0-D0B2-4147-B75B-D1BEF095A69E@datos-personales.org>
References: <BB0D0517-C04A-4BFA-AB75-83320D091797@datos-personales.org>
	 <EACE56C0-D0B2-4147-B75B-D1BEF095A69E@datos-personales.org>
Message-ID: <fecfce260910212210h3afd07a8l132dea080b52066d@mail.gmail.com>

Hello Katiza,

Please add my name as an individual. I have also sent a message to our
chapter mailing list about this declaration seeking consent of our members
to support this declaration. After about two days, will let you know if we
as a Chapter would support this declaration.


Sivasubramanian Muthusamy

Blog: http://isocmadras.blogspot.com
facebook: http://is.gd/x8Sh
LinkedIn: http://is.gd/x8U6
Twitter: http://is.gd/x8Vz




On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 10:36 AM, Katitza Rodriguez <
katitza at datos-personales.org> wrote:

> Call for Signatures..----------------------
>
> The Civil Society Madrid Declaration
>
> Several leading NGOs will be organizing a conference in Madrid on
> November 3, 2009 on "Global Privacy Standards for a Global World."
> This civil society conference will be held in conjunction with the
> 31st annual meeting of the Privacy and Data Protection Commissioners.
>
> http://thepublicvoice.org/events/madrid09/
>
> Among the key outcomes of the week will be the release of the
> Civil Society Madrid Declaration, a document prepared by the committee
> group that is organizing the civil society event. The Madrid
> Declaration is a substantial document that reaffirms international
> instruments for privacy protection, identifies new challenges, and
> recommends specific actions.
>
> The Madrid Declaration is now open for signatures:
>
> http://www.thepublicvoice.org/madrid-declaration
>
> http://thepublicvoice.org/madrid-declaration/es/
>
> http://thepublicvoice.org/madrid-declaration/fr/
>
> http://thepublicvoice.org/madrid-declaration/kr/
>
> http://thepublicvoice.org/madrid-declaration/cn/
>
> http://thepublicvoice.org/madrid-declaration/br/
>
>
> An indication of support for this Declaration will help focus the privacy
> agenda on protecting consumers and citizens and help send a unified message
> to Data Protection and Privacy authorities around the world. The timing and
> focus of this Declaration is particularly worth considering signing on to.
> So, if you are so inclined, signing on and spreading the word about the
> Madrid Declaration beforehand to maximize the number of signatures would be
> of great help too.
>
> If you would like to add your name to this declaration, please send a note
> to: Katitza Rodriguez at privacy at datos-personales.org
>
> Pls. indicate if you are signing the declaration on behalf of your
> organization or as individual expert. We we will continue collecting
> signatures after Madrid and towards the fourth IGF.
> The Declaration will be available in more than two dozen languages in the
> following weeks.
>
>
> Kind Regards,
>
> Katitza Rodriguez
> EPIC
> _______________________________________________
> IRP mailing list
> IRP at lists.internetrightsandprinciples.org
>
> http://lists.internetrightsandprinciples.org/listinfo.cgi/irp-internetrightsandprinciples.org
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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/20091022/159e7ade/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

From fouadbajwa at gmail.com  Thu Oct 22 05:06:51 2009
From: fouadbajwa at gmail.com (Fouad Bajwa)
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 2009 14:06:51 +0500
Subject: [governance] Call for Signatures: The Civil Society Madrid 
In-Reply-To: <EACE56C0-D0B2-4147-B75B-D1BEF095A69E@datos-personales.org>
References: <BB0D0517-C04A-4BFA-AB75-83320D091797@datos-personales.org>
	 <EACE56C0-D0B2-4147-B75B-D1BEF095A69E@datos-personales.org>
Message-ID: <701af9f70910220206n475bc09esc4567e950df20dd0@mail.gmail.com>

Dear Kati,

Hope you are doing well! Please include my signature to the document:

Fouad Bajwa
Internet Governance & ICT4D Researcher & Advisor
Member Multistakeholder Access Group
UN-Internet Governance Forum
Member Civil Society Internet Governance Caucus
UN-Internet Governance Forum

On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 10:06 AM, Katitza Rodriguez
<katitza at datos-personales.org> wrote:
> Call for Signatures..
> ----------------------
>
> The Civil Society Madrid Declaration
>
> Several leading NGOs will be organizing a conference in Madrid on
> November 3, 2009 on "Global Privacy Standards for a Global World."
> This civil society conference will be held in conjunction with the
> 31st annual meeting of the Privacy and Data Protection Commissioners.
>
> http://thepublicvoice.org/events/madrid09/
>
> Among the key outcomes of the week will be the release of the
> Civil Society Madrid Declaration, a document prepared by the committee
> group that is organizing the civil society event. The Madrid
> Declaration is a substantial document that reaffirms international
> instruments for privacy protection, identifies new challenges, and
> recommends specific actions.
>
> The Madrid Declaration is now open for signatures:
>
> http://www.thepublicvoice.org/madrid-declaration
>
> http://thepublicvoice.org/madrid-declaration/es/
>
> http://thepublicvoice.org/madrid-declaration/fr/
>
> http://thepublicvoice.org/madrid-declaration/kr/
>
> http://thepublicvoice.org/madrid-declaration/cn/
>
> http://thepublicvoice.org/madrid-declaration/br/
>
>
> An indication of support for this Declaration will help focus the privacy
> agenda on protecting consumers and citizens and help send a unified message
> to Data Protection and Privacy authorities around the world. The timing and
> focus of this Declaration is particularly worth considering signing on to.
> So, if you are so inclined, signing on and spreading the word about the
> Madrid Declaration beforehand to maximize the number of signatures would be
> of great help too.
>
> If you would like to add your name to this declaration, please send a note
> to: Katitza Rodriguez at privacy at datos-personales.org
>
> Pls. indicate if you are signing the declaration on behalf of your
> organization or as individual expert. We we will continue collecting
> signatures after Madrid and towards the fourth IGF.
> The Declaration will be available in more than two dozen languages in the
> following weeks.
>
>
> Kind Regards,
>
> Katitza Rodriguez
> EPIC
> _______________________________________________
> IRP mailing list
> IRP at lists.internetrightsandprinciples.org
> http://lists.internetrightsandprinciples.org/listinfo.cgi/irp-internetrightsandprinciples.org
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ATVDW1tDZzA
____________________________________________________________
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


From gate.one205 at yahoo.fr  Thu Oct 22 05:33:55 2009
From: gate.one205 at yahoo.fr (Jean-Yves GATETE)
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 2009 09:33:55 +0000 (GMT)
Subject: [governance] Call for Signatures: The Civil Society Madrid
In-Reply-To: <701af9f70910220206n475bc09esc4567e950df20dd0@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <427749.75981.qm@web27802.mail.ukl.yahoo.com>

Dear Katitza,

Hoping you are fine there,

Please add my signature.

Jean-Yves Gatete
General secretary ,Collectif National pour le développement humanitaire
CNDH Burundi.
UN-Internet Governance Forum-MAG


--- En date de : Jeu 22.10.09, Fouad Bajwa <fouadbajwa at gmail.com> a écrit :

De: Fouad Bajwa <fouadbajwa at gmail.com>
Objet: Re: [governance] Call for Signatures: The Civil Society Madrid
À: governance at lists.cpsr.org, "Katitza Rodriguez" <katitza at datos-personales.org>
Date: Jeudi 22 Octobre 2009, 11h06

Dear Kati,

Hope you are doing well! Please include my signature to the document:

Fouad Bajwa
Internet Governance & ICT4D Researcher & Advisor
Member Multistakeholder Access Group
UN-Internet Governance Forum
Member Civil Society Internet Governance Caucus
UN-Internet Governance Forum

On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 10:06 AM, Katitza Rodriguez
<katitza at datos-personales.org> wrote:
> Call for Signatures..
> ----------------------
>
> The Civil Society Madrid Declaration
>
> Several leading NGOs will be organizing a conference in Madrid on
> November 3, 2009 on "Global Privacy Standards for a Global World."
> This civil society conference will be held in conjunction with the
> 31st annual meeting of the Privacy and Data Protection Commissioners.
>
> http://thepublicvoice.org/events/madrid09/
>
> Among the key outcomes of the week will be the release of the
> Civil Society Madrid Declaration, a document prepared by the committee
> group that is organizing the civil society event. The Madrid
> Declaration is a substantial document that reaffirms international
> instruments for privacy protection, identifies new challenges, and
> recommends specific actions.
>
> The Madrid Declaration is now open for signatures:
>
> http://www.thepublicvoice.org/madrid-declaration
>
> http://thepublicvoice.org/madrid-declaration/es/
>
> http://thepublicvoice.org/madrid-declaration/fr/
>
> http://thepublicvoice.org/madrid-declaration/kr/
>
> http://thepublicvoice.org/madrid-declaration/cn/
>
> http://thepublicvoice.org/madrid-declaration/br/
>
>
> An indication of support for this Declaration will help focus the privacy
> agenda on protecting consumers and citizens and help send a unified message
> to Data Protection and Privacy authorities around the world. The timing and
> focus of this Declaration is particularly worth considering signing on to.
> So, if you are so inclined, signing on and spreading the word about the
> Madrid Declaration beforehand to maximize the number of signatures would be
> of great help too.
>
> If you would like to add your name to this declaration, please send a note
> to: Katitza Rodriguez at privacy at datos-personales.org
>
> Pls. indicate if you are signing the declaration on behalf of your
> organization or as individual expert. We we will continue collecting
> signatures after Madrid and towards the fourth IGF.
> The Declaration will be available in more than two dozen languages in the
> following weeks.
>
>
> Kind Regards,
>
> Katitza Rodriguez
> EPIC
> _______________________________________________
> IRP mailing list
> IRP at lists.internetrightsandprinciples.org
> http://lists.internetrightsandprinciples.org/listinfo.cgi/irp-internetrightsandprinciples.org
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ATVDW1tDZzA
____________________________________________________________
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/20091022/2de6613f/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

From bortzmeyer at internatif.org  Thu Oct 22 08:17:57 2009
From: bortzmeyer at internatif.org (Stephane Bortzmeyer)
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 2009 14:17:57 +0200
Subject: [governance] A ccTLD with very questionable registration policies
Message-ID: <20091022121757.GA6527@nic.fr>

Many ccTLD allow only registration by people or organisations located
in the country (or having a link with the country).

But this one is more original: it *forbids* registration from one
country:

http://nic.ae/english/pdf/Registration_Policies_and_Rules.pdf

> 2. Any Israeli individual or entity shall not be eligible for the
> registration of domain name(s) under .ae. The UAEnic shall have the
> right to remove any domain name which the Israeli Boycott Office
> Rules and Regulations in the UAE decide that it is similar or
> identical to an Israeli's, or any Intellectual Property Right
> belonging to person(s) under an interdict by virtue of a decision to
> that effect.


____________________________________________________________
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


From yehudakatz at mailinator.com  Thu Oct 22 10:20:46 2009
From: yehudakatz at mailinator.com (Yehuda Katz)
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 2009 07:20:46 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [governance] WIPO Marks 10th Anniversary of UDRP
Message-ID: <sympa.1256221200.75660.181@lists.cpsr.org>

WIPO Marks 10th Anniversary of UDRP
Geneva, October 12, 2009
PR/2009/613 

Art.Ref.:
http://www.wipo.int/pressroom/en/articles/2009/article_0045.html

A/V Ref.:
http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/events/workshops/2009/10yrs-udrp/program/

Flash File:
http://193.5.93.80/multimedia-video/en/DG/UDRP/dg_udrp.flv


WIPO marked the tenth anniversary of the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution
Policy (UDRP) on October 12, 2009 with a conference that brought together over
200 stakeholders from around the world. ...

---

-30-
____________________________________________________________
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


From correia.rui at gmail.com  Thu Oct 22 13:45:18 2009
From: correia.rui at gmail.com (Rui Correia)
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 2009 19:45:18 +0200
Subject: [governance] Internet at Madrid's Barajas Airport: Virus and Issue
 of access to the internet
Message-ID: <ec8caada0910221045l72b4cf6bh847fa127654e30ca@mail.gmail.com>

Dear All

For all those travelling through Madrid on a late flight, beware of the
internet - or lack thereof!

If you are on a late flight, the internet cafe is closed - IT DOES NOT EVEN
INDICATE ITS WORKING HOURS!.

Other options are wireless, and coin-operated machines. Of the three
wireless networks, two are not accessible/ out of range, the third one (kubi
wireless) is not security-enabled and asks you to supply credit card
details!! I arrived in SA the next day with a virus from the few minutes I
was connected contemplating what to do (they do have an email address to
which you can write in case of problems connecting/ complaints etc .... so
you have to pay (provide credit card details) to be able to lodge a query/
complaint! Nice one!

The coin-operated ones willingly take your coins, but that is as far as you
get! Don't expect to be able to log on and check mail!

 But, all of this is neither here nor there - what is more important, in
that in this day and age of the Information Society all international
airports should have free wireless internet connectivity. It is fine to pay
for internet in your own town etc, but at airport, after running around and
being pointed in the (often wrong) direction to go, a foreign traveller
should not have to put up with all these asinine barriers for the sake of a
few minutes of overcharged connectivity.

It does no more than leave a bitter taste of the country/ city/ airport!

Best regards,

Rui



-- 
________________________________________________


Rui Correia
Advocacy, Human Rights, Media and Language Consultant
2 Cutten St
Horison
Roodepoort-Johannesburg,
South Africa
Tel/ Fax (+27-11) 766-4336
Mobile (+27) (0) 84-498-6838
_______________
áâãçéêíóôõúç
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20091022/1859f175/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

From jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com  Thu Oct 22 16:25:13 2009
From: jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com (Jeffrey A. Williams)
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 2009 15:25:13 -0500 (GMT-05:00)
Subject: [governance] Re: [ga] DAG3:  VeriSign Concerns
Message-ID: <955804.1256243113848.JavaMail.root@elwamui-huard.atl.sa.earthlink.net>

Danny and all,

  These concerns from/by Verisign are perfictly reasonable and deserve
direct and concise answers.  I share several of these concerns from
Verisign.  ICANN has not come even close to demonstrating it has
any significant IT security acumen and in fact has demonstrated
the contrary far too often to even count accurately, however I have
reported some 432 different ICANN responsible security issues to
DHS accordingly.

  Conversly Versign has some rather embarasing IT security incidences,
one recently reported regarding their signature database being hacked,
exposing hundreds of thousands of customers to potential great risk
accordingly.  Such makes one wonder why DOC/NTIA signed a significant
contract with Verisign accordingly not long ago now and just prior to
the before mentioned security breach.

-----Original Message-----
>From: Danny Younger <dannyyounger at yahoo.com>
>Sent: Oct 22, 2009 11:44 AM
>To: ga at gnso.icann.org
>Subject: [ga] DAG3:  VeriSign Concerns
>
>
>Presented below are a series of questions put forth by VeriSign in their comments to DAG3:
>
>
>Registry/Registrar Separation
>
>VeriSign participated in the "ICANN Interactive Conference Call Regarding Registry/Registrar Separation Models" that was held on October 19, 2009.  We noticed that a number of questions submitted by us and by other participants online were not read by the moderator or directed to the presenters during the session.  Given that the session ended 30 minutes early, it is unclear why the various questions were not addressed.
>
>Accordingly, VeriSign submits the following questions, and requests that ICANN answer them in advance of the October 26, 2009 "Registry/Registrar Separation Discussion" forum to be held in Seoul.
>
>1.  How did ICANN choose only the "four options for community discussion and consideration with respect to registry/registrar separation" that are set forth in DAG3?
>2.  What (and where) is the economic data to support these options and not others?
>3.  If the community wishes to add options for consideration, how should we do this prior to November 22, 2009, when formal comments on DAG3 are due?
>4.  What is the process for deciding on the final menu of options that will be considered?
>5.  What is the process and timeline that ICANN will use to make final decisions on the Registry/Registrar separation issue?
>6.  How will ICANN apply the construct that is finally decided upon to existing TLDs as opposed to new TLDs?
>
>
>High Security Zones
>
>VeriSign further requests that ICANN answer the following questions with regard to High Security Zones to clarify the issues in advance of the Seoul meeting.
>
>1.  Where did this issue come from and why was it introduced now?
>2.  Why is ICANN looking to compete with commercial entities in the security field and with registries and registrars?
>3.  How can ICANN offer this without expanding the scope of its charter?
>4.  How much will this cost, and where will ICANN get the budget to do this?
>5.  How can ICANN do this and remain neutral on issues of security and stability, especially with respect to RSEP and Consensus Policies?
> 
>Thank you for answering these questions.
>
>http://forum.icann.org/lists/3gtld-guide/msg00004.html
>
>
>
>
>      
>
Regards,



Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 294k members/stakeholders strong!)
"Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" -
   Abraham Lincoln

"Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is very
often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt

"If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; liability
depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
United States v. Carroll Towing  (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
===============================================================
Updated 1/26/04
CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS. div. of
Information Network Eng.  INEG. INC.
ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com
Phone: 214-244-4827

____________________________________________________________
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


From jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com  Thu Oct 22 16:36:40 2009
From: jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com (Jeffrey A. Williams)
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 2009 15:36:40 -0500 (GMT-05:00)
Subject: [governance] WIPO Marks 10th Anniversary of UDRP
Message-ID: <29148185.1256243800541.JavaMail.root@elwamui-huard.atl.sa.earthlink.net>

Yehuda and all,

  I hope they marked such an ospicious occasion with a pile 
of dung, as would be appropriate, as the UDRP stinks.  Too
many UDRP decisions that have been further challanged in a
"Real" court of law have been overturned to warrent the
continuance of same without significant modifications
accordingly.

Regards,



Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 294k members/stakeholders strong!)
"Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" -
   Abraham Lincoln

"Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is very
often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt

"If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; liability
depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
United States v. Carroll Towing  (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
===============================================================
Updated 1/26/04
CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS. div. of
Information Network Eng.  INEG. INC.
ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com
Phone: 214-244-4827

____________________________________________________________
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


From jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com  Thu Oct 22 16:39:57 2009
From: jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com (Jeffrey A. Williams)
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 2009 15:39:57 -0500 (GMT-05:00)
Subject: [governance] Re: [A2k] For information -EU publishes its
 Communication on Copyright
Message-ID: <16795265.1256243997677.JavaMail.root@elwamui-huard.atl.sa.earthlink.net>

Chris and all,

  Indeed this is sad to read/hear of.  Such seem to express
a decided disregard and discrimination for the blind and/or
sight impaird by the EU's EC.  Somehow though I am not all
that surprised as such.  

-----Original Message-----
>From: Chris Friend <king.henry at btinternet.com>
>Sent: Oct 22, 2009 7:52 AM
>To: 'a2k discuss list' <a2k at lists.essential.org>
>Subject: [A2k] For information -EU publishes its Communication on Copyright
>
>
>Dear colleagues,
>
>The EU Commission yesterday published its "Communication on Copyright in the
>Knowledge Economy". This amounts to the Commission's response to the
>consultation in its Green Paper on Copyright, to which European Blind Union
>responded.
>
>It's at the link below.
>
>http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/copyright/copyright-infso/copyright-
>infso_en.htm
>
>EBU, as WBU's Regional Member,  called, in its response,  for the
>harmonisation of EU copyright exceptions for print disabled people. This
>call has not been met by the Communication.
>
>In short the Commission wants to organise a "round table" dialogue between
>disabled people's organisations and publishers.This looks a bit like
>replicating the WIPO stakeholder platform some of us are already engaged in
>with publishers' and other rights holders' organisations.
>
>
>All the best,
>
>
>Chris.
>
>
>Christopher Friend
>
>WBU Strategic Objective  Leader - Accessibility
>Chair WBU Global Right to Read Campaign
>
>Programme Development Advisor
>Sightsavers International
>
>T: +44 1444 446663;  M: +44 7919 552 170
>
>This e-mail may contain confidential information and/or copyright material.
>It is intended for the use of the addressee only. Any unauthorised use may
>be unlawful.
>If you have received it in error, please delete it from your system, do not
>use or disclose the information in any way and notify me immediately.
>The contents of this message may contain personal views which are not the
>views of Sight Savers International, unless specifically stated.
>
>Royal Commonwealth Society for the Blind. Incorporated under Royal Charter.
>Registered charity number: 207544 (England and Wales).
>Charity Registered in Scotland number: SC038110
>
>Registered office: Grosvenor Hall, Bolnore Road, Haywards Heath, West
>Sussex,
>RH16 4BX, England.
>
>Contact number: +44(0)1444 446600
>
>
>______________________________________________________________________
>This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
>For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email
>______________________________________________________________________
>
>_______________________________________________
>A2k mailing list
>A2k at lists.essential.org
>http://lists.essential.org/mailman/listinfo/a2k

Regards,



Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 294k members/stakeholders strong!)
"Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" -
   Abraham Lincoln

"Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is very
often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt

"If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; liability
depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
United States v. Carroll Towing  (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
===============================================================
Updated 1/26/04
CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS. div. of
Information Network Eng.  INEG. INC.
ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com
Phone: 214-244-4827

____________________________________________________________
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


From jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com  Thu Oct 22 16:43:32 2009
From: jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com (Jeffrey A. Williams)
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 2009 15:43:32 -0500 (GMT-05:00)
Subject: [governance] A ccTLD with very questionable registration
Message-ID: <29138918.1256244212420.JavaMail.root@elwamui-huard.atl.sa.earthlink.net>

Stephane and all,

  As a Jew I find this particularly insulting but not
all that suprising.

-----Original Message-----
>From: Stephane Bortzmeyer <bortzmeyer at internatif.org>
>Sent: Oct 22, 2009 7:17 AM
>To: governance at lists.cpsr.org
>Subject: [governance] A ccTLD with very questionable registration policies
>
>Many ccTLD allow only registration by people or organisations located
>in the country (or having a link with the country).
>
>But this one is more original: it *forbids* registration from one
>country:
>
>http://nic.ae/english/pdf/Registration_Policies_and_Rules.pdf
>
>> 2. Any Israeli individual or entity shall not be eligible for the
>> registration of domain name(s) under .ae. The UAEnic shall have the
>> right to remove any domain name which the Israeli Boycott Office
>> Rules and Regulations in the UAE decide that it is similar or
>> identical to an Israeli's, or any Intellectual Property Right
>> belonging to person(s) under an interdict by virtue of a decision to
>> that effect.
>
>
>____________________________________________________________
>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,



Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 294k members/stakeholders strong!)
"Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" -
   Abraham Lincoln

"Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is very
often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt

"If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; liability
depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
United States v. Carroll Towing  (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
===============================================================
Updated 1/26/04
CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS. div. of
Information Network Eng.  INEG. INC.
ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com
Phone: 214-244-4827

____________________________________________________________
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


From jam at jacquelinemorris.com  Fri Oct 23 11:52:12 2009
From: jam at jacquelinemorris.com (Jacqueline A. Morris)
Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2009 11:52:12 -0400
Subject: [governance] A ccTLD with very questionable registration
 policies
In-Reply-To: <20091022121757.GA6527@nic.fr>
References: <20091022121757.GA6527@nic.fr>
Message-ID: <4AE1D12C.7070307@jacquelinemorris.com>

Hmm... does .us allow registrations from Cuba?
Seems as if their Israeli boycott office does a similar job as the US 
laws governing the US boycott of Cuba?
Would like to know
Jacqueline

Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:
> Many ccTLD allow only registration by people or organisations located
> in the country (or having a link with the country).
>
> But this one is more original: it *forbids* registration from one
> country:
>
> http://nic.ae/english/pdf/Registration_Policies_and_Rules.pdf
>
>   
>> 2. Any Israeli individual or entity shall not be eligible for the
>> registration of domain name(s) under .ae. The UAEnic shall have the
>> right to remove any domain name which the Israeli Boycott Office
>> Rules and Regulations in the UAE decide that it is similar or
>> identical to an Israeli's, or any Intellectual Property Right
>> belonging to person(s) under an interdict by virtue of a decision to
>> that effect.
>>     
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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


From yehudakatz at mailinator.com  Fri Oct 23 14:02:51 2009
From: yehudakatz at mailinator.com (Yehuda Katz)
Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2009 11:02:51 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [governance] CIA's Latest Web 2.0 Move Raises Questions
Message-ID: <sympa.1256320917.96862.67@lists.cpsr.org>

CIA's Latest Web 2.0 Move Raises Questions
internetevolution.com By Rob Salkowitz
10/23/2009

Art.Ref.:
http://www.internetevolution.com/author.asp?section_id=697&doc_id=183570&

In a move sure to get knees jerking all over the Web, the investment arm of the
U.S. Central Intelligence Agency has taken an ownership share in Visible
Technologies, a private firm that specializes in the monitoring of social
media. 

While it's worth getting steamed that Big Brother is riffling through your
Flickr pics and reading your TripAdvisor posts, the details of this deal raise
a lot more questions beyond the basic "civil liberties vs. national security"
debate. 

In-Q-Tel , a federal entity that invests on behalf of the CIA and the
intelligence community, put an undisclosed amount of cash into Visible, which
crawls more than half a million public social sites per day, from lightly
trafficked blogs up to mega sites like Amazon, Twitter, and YouTube. It
provides real-time analytics and keyword searches for its customers, including
customized influence- and relationship-mapping.

The reasons why the CIA might take an interest in social media conversations
are pretty obvious. Al-Qaeda has a blog. The Taliban launched a YouTube
channel. The Secret Service reports that domestic death threats against the
president are up 400 percent since Obama took office in January. 

The smartest bad guys know how to keep a low profile, but plenty of crazies are
letting their freak flags fly online, and it's not a bad thing that
intelligence agencies are paying attention in a systematic way. Who knows what
clues might be waiting to be mined from people's NetFlix queues and Amazon
reviews?

Reportedly, Visible does not crawl private networks like Facebook. Everything
swept up in this net is public already. While the analytics angle may raise
some eyebrows, keeping track of conversations on public networks is not
fundamentally different from reading foreign newspapers and recording global
media broadcasts, which the CIA has done as part of its basic intelligence
gathering since the 1940s. 

One complicating factor is the rise of Twitter as a tool for dissidents and
political activists -- both overseas (as in Iran last summer) and closer to
home (some of the protests at the G8 Summit in Pittsburgh were coordinated
through Twitter). Tools like Twitter get their power from being public, and CIA
involvement raises the possibility of mischief ranging from provocation and
tampering to the targeting of "trouble makers" to attempts to chill free
speech. 

But that ship has sailed. If anyone thinks the CIA -- and every other
intelligence agency on Earth -- isn't already neck-deep in social media
counterintelligence and disinformation, I have a used tinfoil hat to sell you. 

No, the biggest questions here are on the business side, not the policy side.
Why is the CIA, through In-Q-Tel, taking ownership in a private company rather
than just contracting with the firm as a customer for its services? Given the
emerging technical standards and speed of innovation in the area of analytics,
why place a big bet on one firm rather than spread the risk around by engaging
with multiple firms with multiple methods for slicing and dicing the data? 

Of course, we don't know that In-Q-Tel is not also doing that, but it could be
that there is something unique to Visible -- its approach? Its technology? Its
personnel? Does U.S. intelligence need to bring Visible inside the tent to
integrate its analytics engine with systems whose reach and scope are not so
straightforward?

And if so, why make this public? Generally speaking, when the CIA wants to keep
something like this a secret, it stays secret. A public transaction through a
known CIA investment proxy is just asking for media coverage. And to what end?
The way you catch bad guys dumb enough to discuss their plans on public
networks is to let them think they are being clever and inconspicuous. Big
headlines saying "The CIA buys social analytics firm!" seems like an invitation
for folks to take their conversations underground.

In short, it's tough to fathom how the intelligence establishment could be
savvy enough to recognize they should be keeping tabs on the social Web, but
then leave this many threads dangling.

The play for Visible is certainly neither the CIA's first nor its only foray
into Web 2.0 analytics, but for whatever reason, it has become part of the
public discourse. Yes, the civil liberties angles are troubling, but I have the
feeling it's going to take John Le Carre to get to the bottom of this odd spy
story.

— Rob Salkowitz is the author of Generation Blend: Managing Across the
Technology Age Gap (2008) and co-author of Listening to the Future (2009). His
next book is Young World Rising: How Youth, Technology and Entrepreneurship Are
Transforming the Global Economy.

---

-30-____________________________________________________________
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


From wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de  Fri Oct 23 14:31:29 2009
From: wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de (=?iso-8859-1?Q?=22Kleinw=E4chter=2C_Wolfgang=22?=)
Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2009 20:31:29 +0200
Subject: [governance] Google & Internet Regulation
References:  <29138918.1256244212420.JavaMail.root@elwamui-huard.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
Message-ID:  <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8719685@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/10/22/AR2009102204357.html?wpisrc=newsletter

w
____________________________________________________________
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


From jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com  Fri Oct 23 16:44:12 2009
From: jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com (Jeffrey A. Williams)
Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2009 15:44:12 -0500 (GMT-05:00)
Subject: [governance] CIA's Latest Web 2.0 Move Raises Questions
Message-ID: <15645221.1256330652341.JavaMail.root@elwamui-hybrid.atl.sa.earthlink.net>

Yahuda and all,

  From strictly a intelegance gathering point of view this
is a very adept move by the Obama administration.  From a
social networking point of view it has perhaps many known
and unknown consequences of which the unknown we will
all learn of much later, or perhaps in the not too distant
future.  What's a bit galling is that this move was not
open and transparent to the US public, but will not go
unnoticed by other nations intelegance agencies or certainly
miscreants of various sorts.

  This said your earlier post regarding Google's concerns
about Internet regulation and it's effects on Google as
well as potential future customers/suckers that may consider
Google services of various sorts as well as users for use of
their search engine.  More interesting and nearly halarious
to me is that for several years I have along with some of our
members have been trying to warn Google of their business
practices as they have become the "Poster Child" for driving
Internet regulation by those very abusive and privacy intruding
business practices.  Now it appears that they shall reap the
whirlwind for such foolish abusive practices especially given
their Gmail and search engine products that have been the
main culprits for such a drive and the fact that Google had
been providing huge amounts of users and subscribers PII data
to Intelegance organizations such as the CIA.  

-----Original Message-----
>From: Yehuda Katz <yehudakatz at mailinator.com>
>Sent: Oct 23, 2009 1:02 PM
>To: governance at lists.cpsr.org
>Subject: [governance] CIA's Latest Web 2.0 Move Raises Questions
>
>CIA's Latest Web 2.0 Move Raises Questions
>internetevolution.com By Rob Salkowitz
>10/23/2009
>
>Art.Ref.:
>http://www.internetevolution.com/author.asp?section_id=697&doc_id=183570&
>
>In a move sure to get knees jerking all over the Web, the investment arm of the
>U.S. Central Intelligence Agency has taken an ownership share in Visible
>Technologies, a private firm that specializes in the monitoring of social
>media. 
>
>While it's worth getting steamed that Big Brother is riffling through your
>Flickr pics and reading your TripAdvisor posts, the details of this deal raise
>a lot more questions beyond the basic "civil liberties vs. national security"
>debate. 
>
>In-Q-Tel , a federal entity that invests on behalf of the CIA and the
>intelligence community, put an undisclosed amount of cash into Visible, which
>crawls more than half a million public social sites per day, from lightly
>trafficked blogs up to mega sites like Amazon, Twitter, and YouTube. It
>provides real-time analytics and keyword searches for its customers, including
>customized influence- and relationship-mapping.
>
>The reasons why the CIA might take an interest in social media conversations
>are pretty obvious. Al-Qaeda has a blog. The Taliban launched a YouTube
>channel. The Secret Service reports that domestic death threats against the
>president are up 400 percent since Obama took office in January. 
>
>The smartest bad guys know how to keep a low profile, but plenty of crazies are
>letting their freak flags fly online, and it's not a bad thing that
>intelligence agencies are paying attention in a systematic way. Who knows what
>clues might be waiting to be mined from people's NetFlix queues and Amazon
>reviews?
>
>Reportedly, Visible does not crawl private networks like Facebook. Everything
>swept up in this net is public already. While the analytics angle may raise
>some eyebrows, keeping track of conversations on public networks is not
>fundamentally different from reading foreign newspapers and recording global
>media broadcasts, which the CIA has done as part of its basic intelligence
>gathering since the 1940s. 
>
>One complicating factor is the rise of Twitter as a tool for dissidents and
>political activists -- both overseas (as in Iran last summer) and closer to
>home (some of the protests at the G8 Summit in Pittsburgh were coordinated
>through Twitter). Tools like Twitter get their power from being public, and CIA
>involvement raises the possibility of mischief ranging from provocation and
>tampering to the targeting of "trouble makers" to attempts to chill free
>speech. 
>
>But that ship has sailed. If anyone thinks the CIA -- and every other
>intelligence agency on Earth -- isn't already neck-deep in social media
>counterintelligence and disinformation, I have a used tinfoil hat to sell you. 
>
>No, the biggest questions here are on the business side, not the policy side.
>Why is the CIA, through In-Q-Tel, taking ownership in a private company rather
>than just contracting with the firm as a customer for its services? Given the
>emerging technical standards and speed of innovation in the area of analytics,
>why place a big bet on one firm rather than spread the risk around by engaging
>with multiple firms with multiple methods for slicing and dicing the data? 
>
>Of course, we don't know that In-Q-Tel is not also doing that, but it could be
>that there is something unique to Visible -- its approach? Its technology? Its
>personnel? Does U.S. intelligence need to bring Visible inside the tent to
>integrate its analytics engine with systems whose reach and scope are not so
>straightforward?
>
>And if so, why make this public? Generally speaking, when the CIA wants to keep
>something like this a secret, it stays secret. A public transaction through a
>known CIA investment proxy is just asking for media coverage. And to what end?
>The way you catch bad guys dumb enough to discuss their plans on public
>networks is to let them think they are being clever and inconspicuous. Big
>headlines saying "The CIA buys social analytics firm!" seems like an invitation
>for folks to take their conversations underground.
>
>In short, it's tough to fathom how the intelligence establishment could be
>savvy enough to recognize they should be keeping tabs on the social Web, but
>then leave this many threads dangling.
>
>The play for Visible is certainly neither the CIA's first nor its only foray
>into Web 2.0 analytics, but for whatever reason, it has become part of the
>public discourse. Yes, the civil liberties angles are troubling, but I have the
>feeling it's going to take John Le Carre to get to the bottom of this odd spy
>story.
>
>— Rob Salkowitz is the author of Generation Blend: Managing Across the
>Technology Age Gap (2008) and co-author of Listening to the Future (2009). His
>next book is Young World Rising: How Youth, Technology and Entrepreneurship Are
>Transforming the Global Economy.
>
>---
>
>-30-____________________________________________________________
>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,



Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 294k members/stakeholders strong!)
"Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" -
   Abraham Lincoln

"Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is very
often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt

"If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; liability
depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
United States v. Carroll Towing  (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
===============================================================
Updated 1/26/04
CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS. div. of
Information Network Eng.  INEG. INC.
ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com
Phone: 214-244-4827

____________________________________________________________
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


From jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com  Fri Oct 23 16:50:22 2009
From: jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com (Jeffrey A. Williams)
Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2009 15:50:22 -0500 (GMT-05:00)
Subject: [governance] Report Warns of Chinese Cyber Threat
Message-ID: <25957686.1256331022713.JavaMail.root@elwamui-hybrid.atl.sa.earthlink.net>

All,

  As an FYI:

(October 22, 2009)
The US-China Economic and security Review Commission this week released
a report titled "Capability of the People's Republic of China to Conduct
Cyber Warfare and Computer Network Exploitation." According to the
report, domination of an adversary's information flow is central to
Chinese military strategy.  It also warns that China will likely conduct
"a long term, sophisticated computer network exploitation campaign."
http://www.scmagazineus.com/Security-report-finds-Chinese-cyberspying-threat-growing/article/156013/
http://www.uscc.gov/researchpapers/2009/NorthropGrumman_PRC_Cyber_Paper_FINAL_Approved%20Report_16Oct2009.pdf
[Guest Editor's Note (Ed Giorgio, CSIS Commission member): Playing the
devil's advocate, when (uninformed) policy makers read the executive
summary, they will learn:
1. That China has a cyber doctrine very much like ours ("information
dominance", "network centric warfare", etc.) - *boring*
2. They have an espionage program very much like ours - *boring*
3. They can reach out to industry (as we do) to get specialized talent - *boring*
4. They are gradually discouraging hactivism as it is a source of
embarrassment and stuff like defacing whitehouse.gov doesn't achieve a
long term military or economic objective (they are catching up to us on
this policy) - *positive and* *boring*
5. While the case studies and time line are fascinating, I believe they
are only the tip of the iceberg. The (all important) scale on which this
is (apparently) happening (about 3 per year) is not convincing, and
hence *does not require immediate attention*.
***  What is really needed it something we did in the cold war, a *"Net
Assessment"* where we juxtapose operational capabilities (count nukes,
missiles, tests, etc.) and decide if we are winning or losing. Only our
government could make an informed statement of the scale on which this
is currently happening and they would have to declassify a lot of
information to do it; something I think is needed.
(Honan): RAND has just released a whitepaper on Cyber Warfare that I
highly recommend people interested in this topic should read.
http://www.rand.org/pubs/monographs/2009/RAND_MG877.pdf]



Regards,



Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 294k members/stakeholders strong!)
"Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" -
   Abraham Lincoln

"Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is very
often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt

"If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; liability
depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
United States v. Carroll Towing  (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
===============================================================
Updated 1/26/04
CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS. div. of
Information Network Eng.  INEG. INC.
ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com
Phone: 214-244-4827

____________________________________________________________
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


From jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com  Fri Oct 23 17:03:06 2009
From: jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com (Jeffrey A. Williams)
Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2009 16:03:06 -0500 (GMT-05:00)
Subject: [governance] European Parliament Shifts Stance on Disconnecting
 Illegal Filesharers
Message-ID: <22440272.1256331786510.JavaMail.root@elwamui-hybrid.atl.sa.earthlink.net>

All,

  Seems that the EU is not socially friendly...

  The European Parliament has removed an amendment to its
telecommunications legislation that would have made it difficult for
member countries to cut off Internet service to file sharing copyright
violators without a court order.  The European parliament earlier
indicated it viewed Internet access as a basic human right.  Now member
countries will have the leeway to make their own decisions about
punishments for illegal filesharing.  France has already adopted a
three-strikes policy that would allow illegal filesharers to be cut off
from the Internet for as long as one year.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/8322308.stm
http://www.siliconrepublic.com/news/article/14225/comms/eu-in-web-u-turn-to-allow-member-states-to-ban-illegal-file-sharers

My opinion on this diatribe is of course well known, as is our
INEGroup members position.  Basically we do not agree that the
Internet is a basic right, we don't see the two stances as being
irreconcilable.  Our judicial system is grounded on the notion of the
removal of basic human rights as punishment for illegal activity.]
Question to us is still open as to what is and what is not illegal
file sharing activity if said files are in the public domain wheather
or not they were intended to be initially.


Regards,



Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 294k members/stakeholders strong!)
"Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" -
   Abraham Lincoln

"Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is very
often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt

"If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; liability
depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
United States v. Carroll Towing  (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
===============================================================
Updated 1/26/04
CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS. div. of
Information Network Eng.  INEG. INC.
ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com
Phone: 214-244-4827

____________________________________________________________
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


From wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de  Sat Oct 24 03:14:04 2009
From: wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de (=?iso-8859-1?Q?=22Kleinw=E4chter=2C_Wolfgang=22?=)
Date: Sat, 24 Oct 2009 09:14:04 +0200
Subject: [governance] Internet Freedom vs. Blocking
References:  <15645221.1256330652341.JavaMail.root@elwamui-hybrid.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
Message-ID:  <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A871968A@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>

FYI
 
http://www.aconite.com/sites/default/files/Internet_blocking_and_Democracy.pdf

Wolfgang
____________________________________________________________
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


From b.schombe at gmail.com  Sat Oct 24 04:19:16 2009
From: b.schombe at gmail.com (Baudouin SCHOMBE)
Date: Sat, 24 Oct 2009 09:19:16 +0100
Subject: [governance] Call for Signatures: The Civil Society Madrid 
In-Reply-To: <EACE56C0-D0B2-4147-B75B-D1BEF095A69E@datos-personales.org>
References: <BB0D0517-C04A-4BFA-AB75-83320D091797@datos-personales.org>
	 <EACE56C0-D0B2-4147-B75B-D1BEF095A69E@datos-personales.org>
Message-ID: <ecb172de0910240119i4e777d4dl846d174cb99ba9be@mail.gmail.com>

Hi Rodriguez,

I sign for myself but I don't have any objection about whole NCUC signature


Baudouin

2009/10/22 Katitza Rodriguez <katitza at datos-personales.org>

> Call for Signatures..
> ----------------------
>
> The Civil Society Madrid Declaration
>
> Several leading NGOs will be organizing a conference in Madrid on
> November 3, 2009 on "Global Privacy Standards for a Global World."
> This civil society conference will be held in conjunction with the
> 31st annual meeting of the Privacy and Data Protection Commissioners.
>
> http://thepublicvoice.org/events/madrid09/
>
> Among the key outcomes of the week will be the release of the
> Civil Society Madrid Declaration, a document prepared by the committee
> group that is organizing the civil society event. The Madrid
> Declaration is a substantial document that reaffirms international
> instruments for privacy protection, identifies new challenges, and
> recommends specific actions.
>
> The Madrid Declaration is now open for signatures:
>
> http://www.thepublicvoice.org/madrid-declaration
>
> http://thepublicvoice.org/madrid-declaration/es/
>
> http://thepublicvoice.org/madrid-declaration/fr/
>
> http://thepublicvoice.org/madrid-declaration/kr/
>
> http://thepublicvoice.org/madrid-declaration/cn/
>
> http://thepublicvoice.org/madrid-declaration/br/
>
>
> An indication of support for this Declaration will help focus the privacy
> agenda on protecting consumers and citizens and help send a unified message
> to Data Protection and Privacy authorities around the world. The timing and
> focus of this Declaration is particularly worth considering signing on to.
> So, if you are so inclined, signing on and spreading the word about the
> Madrid Declaration beforehand to maximize the number of signatures would be
> of great help too.
>
> If you would like to add your name to this declaration, please send a note
> to: Katitza Rodriguez at privacy at datos-personales.org
>
> Pls. indicate if you are signing the declaration on behalf of your
> organization or as individual expert. We we will continue collecting
> signatures after Madrid and towards the fourth IGF.
>
> The Declaration will be available in more than two dozen languages in the
> following weeks.
>
>
> Kind Regards,
>
> Katitza Rodriguez
> EPIC
> _______________________________________________
> IRP mailing list
> IRP at lists.internetrightsandprinciples.org
>
> http://lists.internetrightsandprinciples.org/listinfo.cgi/irp-internetrightsandprinciples.org
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
>
>


-- 
SCHOMBE BAUDOUIN
COORDONNATEUR NATIONAL REPRONTIC
COORDONNATEUR SOUS REGIONAL ACSIS/AFRIQUE CENTRALE
MEMBRE FACILITATEUR GAID AFRIQUE
téléphone fixe: +243 1510 34 91
Téléphone mobile:+243998983491/+243999334571
                          +243811980914
email:b.schombe at gmail.com <email%3Ab.schombe at gmail.com>
blog:http://akimambo.unblog.fr
blog:http://educticafrique.ning.com/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20091024/ae4a47b5/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

From b.schombe at gmail.com  Sat Oct 24 04:19:54 2009
From: b.schombe at gmail.com (Baudouin SCHOMBE)
Date: Sat, 24 Oct 2009 09:19:54 +0100
Subject: [governance] Call for Signatures: The Civil Society Madrid 
In-Reply-To: <ecb172de0910240119i4e777d4dl846d174cb99ba9be@mail.gmail.com>
References: <BB0D0517-C04A-4BFA-AB75-83320D091797@datos-personales.org>
	 <EACE56C0-D0B2-4147-B75B-D1BEF095A69E@datos-personales.org>
	 <ecb172de0910240119i4e777d4dl846d174cb99ba9be@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <ecb172de0910240119g653a11c8y6e684e91ce82b861@mail.gmail.com>

> Hi Rodriguez,
>
> I sign for myself but I don't have any objection about whole NCUC signature
>
>
> Baudouin
>
> 2009/10/22 Katitza Rodriguez <katitza at datos-personales.org>
>
>> Call for Signatures..
>> ----------------------
>>
>> The Civil Society Madrid Declaration
>>
>> Several leading NGOs will be organizing a conference in Madrid on
>> November 3, 2009 on "Global Privacy Standards for a Global World."
>> This civil society conference will be held in conjunction with the
>> 31st annual meeting of the Privacy and Data Protection Commissioners.
>>
>> http://thepublicvoice.org/events/madrid09/
>>
>> Among the key outcomes of the week will be the release of the
>> Civil Society Madrid Declaration, a document prepared by the committee
>> group that is organizing the civil society event. The Madrid
>> Declaration is a substantial document that reaffirms international
>> instruments for privacy protection, identifies new challenges, and
>> recommends specific actions.
>>
>> The Madrid Declaration is now open for signatures:
>>
>> http://www.thepublicvoice.org/madrid-declaration
>>
>> http://thepublicvoice.org/madrid-declaration/es/
>>
>> http://thepublicvoice.org/madrid-declaration/fr/
>>
>> http://thepublicvoice.org/madrid-declaration/kr/
>>
>> http://thepublicvoice.org/madrid-declaration/cn/
>>
>> http://thepublicvoice.org/madrid-declaration/br/
>>
>>
>> An indication of support for this Declaration will help focus the privacy
>> agenda on protecting consumers and citizens and help send a unified message
>> to Data Protection and Privacy authorities around the world. The timing and
>> focus of this Declaration is particularly worth considering signing on to.
>> So, if you are so inclined, signing on and spreading the word about the
>> Madrid Declaration beforehand to maximize the number of signatures would be
>> of great help too.
>>
>> If you would like to add your name to this declaration, please send a note
>> to: Katitza Rodriguez at privacy at datos-personales.org
>>
>> Pls. indicate if you are signing the declaration on behalf of your
>> organization or as individual expert. We we will continue collecting
>> signatures after Madrid and towards the fourth IGF.
>>
>> The Declaration will be available in more than two dozen languages in the
>> following weeks.
>>
>>
>> Kind Regards,
>>
>> Katitza Rodriguez
>> EPIC
>> _______________________________________________
>> IRP mailing list
>> IRP at lists.internetrightsandprinciples.org
>>
>> http://lists.internetrightsandprinciples.org/listinfo.cgi/irp-internetrightsandprinciples.org
>>
>>
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> 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
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> SCHOMBE BAUDOUIN
> COORDONNATEUR NATIONAL REPRONTIC
> COORDONNATEUR SOUS REGIONAL ACSIS/AFRIQUE CENTRALE
> MEMBRE FACILITATEUR GAID AFRIQUE
> téléphone fixe: +243 1510 34 91
> Téléphone mobile:+243998983491/+243999334571
>                           +243811980914
> email:b.schombe at gmail.com <email%3Ab.schombe at gmail.com>
> blog:http://akimambo.unblog.fr
> blog:http://educticafrique.ning.com/
>



-- 
SCHOMBE BAUDOUIN
COORDONNATEUR NATIONAL REPRONTIC
COORDONNATEUR SOUS REGIONAL ACSIS/AFRIQUE CENTRALE
MEMBRE FACILITATEUR GAID AFRIQUE
téléphone fixe: +243 1510 34 91
Téléphone mobile:+243998983491/+243999334571
                          +243811980914
email:b.schombe at gmail.com <email%3Ab.schombe at gmail.com>
blog:http://akimambo.unblog.fr
blog:http://educticafrique.ning.com/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20091024/504d3750/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

From yehudakatz at mailinator.com  Sat Oct 24 09:08:08 2009
From: yehudakatz at mailinator.com (Yehuda Katz)
Date: Sat, 24 Oct 2009 06:08:08 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [governance] AT&T: Google Manipulates Media, is an Abusive, Power
 Hungry Monopoly
Message-ID: <sympa.1256388883.1879.543@lists.cpsr.org>

AT&T: Google Manipulates Media, is an Abusive, Power Hungry Monopoly
Jason Mick (Blog) - October 16, 2009 8:45 AM

Art,Ref.:
http://www.dailytech.com/ATT+Google+Manipulates+Media+is+an+Abusive+Power+Hungry+Monopoly/article16524.htm

Google's cache:
http://74.125.155.132/search?q=cache:L_ETkxBglDkJ:www.dailytech.com/ATT%2BGoogle%2BManipulates%2BMedia%2Bis%2Ban%2BAbusive%2BPower%2BHungry%2BMonopoly/article16524.htm+AT%26T+Google+Manipulates+Media&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us

Cover JPG:
http://images.dailytech.com/nimage/12400_google-big-brother1.jpg

-

A new letter from AT&T to the federal government makes it clear that the
company has little love for Google

If there's one thing clear from the Google Voice iPhone debacle, it's that
there's no love lost between AT&T and Google.  AT&T, to date, is accusing
Google of everything from political and news manipulation, to violating net
neutrality.

The drama surrounding the rejection began shortly after when the Federal
Communications Commission opened an inquiry into who was responsible for the
rejection of Google Voice and whether the rejection violated any federal laws
or rules.  AT&T quickly responded that it did not mastermind the rejection, and
that it was Apple's doing.  Apple followed up, taking the blame and say it was
working to get the app approved.

Then came a second response from AT&T.	Apparently in a sharing mood, AT&T
sounded off against Google and complained to the FCC that it believes Google
Voice breaks the law.  Since AT&T has allowed VoIP apps onto the iPhone, but
Google Voice is still no where to be found.  Now AT&T has delivered a third
letter to the FCC further attacking the internet giant.

While Google has been attacked by many -- newspaper moguls, telecoms, and
internet rivals -- the new letter is perhaps the harshest conglomerated
criticism leveled against the company to date.	Written by Robert W. Quinn,
Jr., an AT&T Senior Vice President, the letter entitled "Google Voice;
Establishing Just and Reasonable Rates for Local Exchange Carriers" opens
claiming Google is a hypocrite when it comes to net neutrality.

Mr. Quinn writes: 

"As the debate regarding “net neutrality” has evolved, it appeared on the
surface that all parties shared the same desire to preserve the “free and
open” nature of the Internet, a goal enunciated by [FCC] Chairman Genachowski
with which we heartily agree." 

As communications services increasingly migrate to broadband Internet-based
platforms, we can now see the power of Internet-based applications providers to
act as gatekeepers who can threaten the “free and open” Internet.
Google’s double-standard for “openness” – where Google does what it
wants while other providers are subject to Commission regulations – is
plainly inconsistent with the goal of preserving a “free and open” Internet
ecosystem.
The letter claims that Google's explanation that it is only blocking certain
kinds of rural calls like adult sex-chat lines, to avoid high fees leveled
against the free service, is a lie.  The letter accuses Google of conspiracy,
saying it also blocked calls to an ambulance service, church, bank, law firm,
automobile dealer, day spa, orchard, health clinic, tax preparation service,
community center, eye doctor, tribal community college, school, residential
consumers, a convent of Benedictine nuns, and the campaign office of a U.S.
Representative.

According to AT&T, Google is "abus[ing] its market power".  AT&T insists Google
is not exempt, either from being free or being internet-based, from federal
regulations that prevent such call blocking.

The letter also calls Google a monopoly, citing, "In preparing a complaint to
challenge the Google/Yahoo arrangement, the [U.S.] Department [of Justice]
reportedly concluded that Google had a “monopoly” in these markets and the
proposed arrangement “would have furthered [Google’s] monopoly."

Furthermore, AT&T accuses Google of practicing broad-scale manipulation of the
media.	It says that Google blocked political advertisements from Senator Susan
Collins, due to her criticism of Moveon.org, a Google net neutrality partner. 
It also accuses Google of blocking the Inner City Press from Google News, as
the publication criticized the United Nation Development Programme, a
Google-sponsored program.

It then goes on to accuse Google of illegitimately "buying" ads in its own
auction to push its agenda for keywords such as "net neutrality". The letter
concludes, "Ironically, Google appears oblivious to the hypocrisy of its net
neutrality advocacy relative to its own conduct. [A]t the same time, Google
exploits the dominance of its search engine and its gatekeeping power over
other applications to give its preferred content greater visibility than its
political opponents’ content or to simply block its competitors’
applications altogether."

"Deliberately narrowing the principles to award Google a special privilege to
play by its own rules – or no rules at all – would be grossly unfair,
patently unlawful, and a renunciation of President Obama’s assurance that the
Commission’s Internet Policy Statement would be used to “ensure there’s a
level playing field” between competitors. Thus, the Commission’s first
fundamental step in leveling that playing field must be to unequivocally
re-affirm in its proposed rulemaking that it will not exempt Google from
whatever rules it ultimately adopts."

---

-30-
____________________________________________________________
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


From cogitoergosum at sbcglobal.net  Sat Oct 24 10:11:07 2009
From: cogitoergosum at sbcglobal.net (Eric Dierker)
Date: Sat, 24 Oct 2009 07:11:07 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [governance] Internet Freedom vs. Blocking
Message-ID: <854685.36620.qm@web83902.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>

This is a very interesting study, thank you for bringing it to this forum.
 
I had to shake off the cobwebs and review the very important; 
"European Convention on Human Rights" and then review: Universal Declaration of Human Rights and then refer to the 
International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights
 
However one need not read this "study" for very long to be brought right back time and time again to this "Who should choose what should be blocked on the Internet?" on page 11. Well and this on page 175*
 
But what they basically describe and reveal and force one to conclude is that there are no special rules just for the Internet. When we try to carve out a cool very exceptional niche, it always comes back that the most successful models would have the Internet fully integrated with the rest of society and rules and laws that apply thereto.
 
*
As a result, operating an electronic communications network and blocking are philosophically
in opposition, and asking an operator to implement a blocking measure would put it in a
position where two obligations with contradictory effects have to be respected.
This is another argument for not requesting the industry of a given country to implement
blocking on the basis of a contract or an agreement with the government, but to hold the
measure within a law, which would take into account the possible interference of the blocking
measure in the other obligations the operators are legally responsible for.


--- On Sat, 10/24/09, "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang" <wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de> wrote:


From: "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang" <wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
Subject: [governance] Internet Freedom vs. Blocking
To: governance at lists.cpsr.org
Date: Saturday, October 24, 2009, 7:14 AM


FYI

http://www.aconite.com/sites/default/files/Internet_blocking_and_Democracy.pdf

Wolfgang
____________________________________________________________
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/20091024/0c6d3718/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

From cogitoergosum at sbcglobal.net  Sat Oct 24 11:06:16 2009
From: cogitoergosum at sbcglobal.net (Eric Dierker)
Date: Sat, 24 Oct 2009 08:06:16 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [governance] AT&T: Google Manipulates Media, is an Abusive,
 Power Hungry Monopoly
In-Reply-To: <sympa.1256388883.1879.543@lists.cpsr.org>
Message-ID: <103262.38147.qm@web83910.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>

 
Yehuda,
 
This is very funny. Does life imitate sitcoms and suspense novels now?  I can damn well guarantee that big corporations are not sneaky sneaky aroundy to health clinics, Mother Theresa's progeny and whoever is buried in Grants' tomb to either eavesdrop or censor.


--- On Sat, 10/24/09, Yehuda Katz <yehudakatz at mailinator.com> wrote:*





The letter accuses Google of conspiracy,
saying it also blocked calls to an ambulance service, church, bank, law firm,
automobile dealer, day spa, orchard, health clinic, tax preparation service,
community center, eye doctor, tribal community college, school, residential
consumers, a convent of Benedictine nuns, and the campaign office of a U.S.
Representative.
 
*Yehuda, when you republish something without direct comment -- you adopt it.  Either what you publish is worth reading and edited and remarkably commented on or it is important by itself -- republishing someone Else's work is making the news article itself important and not the topic. "Katie Couric" for president???
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20091024/1ae20764/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

From yehudakatz at mailinator.com  Sat Oct 24 13:18:46 2009
From: yehudakatz at mailinator.com (Yehuda Katz)
Date: Sat, 24 Oct 2009 10:18:46 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [governance] AT&T: Google Manipulates Media, is an
In-Reply-To: 103262.38147.qm@web83910.mail.sp1.yahoo.com
Message-ID: <sympa.1256404598.1879.447@lists.cpsr.org>

>*Yehuda, when you republish something without direct comment -- you adopt it. 
Either what you publish is worth reading and edited and remarkably commented on
or it is important by itself -- republishing someone Else's work is making the
news article itself important and not the topic. "Katie Couric" for
president??? 
-

Granted Eric,

There is a lot of 'mindless rhetorical' being exchanged between:
AT&T, Google, Apple et.al., 

I'm just posting an article of the Juicy Net-Poly-Couture, as it is.
Whether or not there is a "Situation" in the 'CPSR Situation Room'
is debatable, and is of no consequence.
[I'm not Wolf Blitzer launching a 3rd World War, just so I can report on it on
my own Fox Network Situation Room - Ha Ha]

There is one tid-bit I felt worthy within the news piece:

...
As communications services increasingly migrate to broadband Internet-based
platforms, we can now see the power of Internet-based applications providers 
to act as gatekeepers who can threaten the “free and open” Internet.
Google’s double-standard for “openness” – where Google does what it
wants while other providers are subject to Commission regulations – is
plainly inconsistent with the goal of preserving a “free and open” Internet
ecosystem. ...

-

For those of you outside the United States, I have a question.
How do you think Google's voip phone services will effect the buisness
landscape of Your Countrys' phone system?
____________________________________________________________
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


From cogitoergosum at sbcglobal.net  Sun Oct 25 15:07:27 2009
From: cogitoergosum at sbcglobal.net (Eric Dierker)
Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2009 12:07:27 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [governance] AT&T: Google Manipulates Media, is an
In-Reply-To: <sympa.1256404598.1879.447@lists.cpsr.org>
Message-ID: <209741.16347.qm@web83905.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>

Well Yehuda we definately see eye to eye on that.
 
Here is a great headline I found, -- very accusatory - and I do not believe true:
 
"ISOC and IGF participants under investigation for massive charitable donations fraud scheme. Allegations include perpetuating problems in order to continue funding."
 
Like I said, I do not believe it but I know there is some fire to this smoke.

--- On Sat, 10/24/09, Yehuda Katz <yehudakatz at mailinator.com> wrote:


From: Yehuda Katz <yehudakatz at mailinator.com>
Subject: Re: Re: [governance] AT&T: Google Manipulates Media, is an
To: governance at lists.cpsr.org
Date: Saturday, October 24, 2009, 5:18 PM


>*Yehuda, when you republish something without direct comment -- you adopt it. 
Either what you publish is worth reading and edited and remarkably commented on
or it is important by itself -- republishing someone Else's work is making the
news article itself important and not the topic. "Katie Couric" for
president??? 
-

Granted Eric,

There is a lot of 'mindless rhetorical' being exchanged between:
AT&T, Google, Apple et.al., 

I'm just posting an article of the Juicy Net-Poly-Couture, as it is.
Whether or not there is a "Situation" in the 'CPSR Situation Room'
is debatable, and is of no consequence.
[I'm not Wolf Blitzer launching a 3rd World War, just so I can report on it on
my own Fox Network Situation Room - Ha Ha]

There is one tid-bit I felt worthy within the news piece:

...
As communications services increasingly migrate to broadband Internet-based
platforms, we can now see the power of Internet-based applications providers 
to act as gatekeepers who can threaten the “free and open” Internet.
Google’s double-standard for “openness” – where Google does what it
wants while other providers are subject to Commission regulations – is
plainly inconsistent with the goal of preserving a “free and open” Internet
ecosystem. ...

-

For those of you outside the United States, I have a question.
How do you think Google's voip phone services will effect the buisness
landscape of Your Countrys' phone system?
____________________________________________________________
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/20091025/0f9ed5f0/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

From jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com  Sun Oct 25 15:47:57 2009
From: jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com (Jeffrey A. Williams)
Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2009 14:47:57 -0500 (GMT-05:00)
Subject: [governance] Open Source Voting Software Concept Released
Message-ID: <28243427.1256500077992.JavaMail.root@elwamui-darkeyed.atl.sa.earthlink.net>

All,

  Can ICANN still further afford to ignore?  Me thinks not for long...

"Wired is reporting that the Open Source Digital
Voting Foundation has announced the first release of http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2009/10/open-sourceLinux- and Ruby-based election management software. This software 
should compete in the same realm as Election Systems & Software, as well as
Diebold/Premiere for use by County registrars. Mitch Kapor founder of
Lotus 1-2-3 and Dean Logan, Registrar for Los Angeles County, and Debra
Bowen, California Secretary of State, all took part in a formal
announcement ceremony. The http://osdv.org/aboutOSDV is working with 
multiple jurisdictions, activists, developers and other organizations 
to bring together 'the best and brightest in technology and policy' 
to create 'guidelines and specifications for high assurance digital voting
services.' The announcement was made as part of the OSDV http://www.trustthevote.org/
Trust the Vote project, where open source tools are to be used to create a
certifiable and sustainable open source voting system."


Regards,



Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 294k members/stakeholders strong!)
"Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" -
   Abraham Lincoln

"Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is very
often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt

"If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; liability
depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
United States v. Carroll Towing  (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
===============================================================
Updated 1/26/04
CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS. div. of
Information Network Eng.  INEG. INC.
ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com
Phone: 214-244-4827

____________________________________________________________
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


From jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com  Sun Oct 25 16:13:25 2009
From: jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com (Jeffrey A. Williams)
Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2009 15:13:25 -0500 (GMT-05:00)
Subject: [governance] AT&T: Google Manipulates Media, is an Abusive,
Message-ID: <10942762.1256501605850.JavaMail.root@elwamui-darkeyed.atl.sa.earthlink.net>

Yehuda and all,

  Googles many and varried problems are of it's own making,
as is AT&T's, especially in the past, see Judge Green decision.

  Recently Google/Yutube stepped into it yet again.
See:http://newteevee.com/2009/10/23/achtung-criminal-investigation-against-youtube-underway-in-germany/
and
http://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=09/10/24/1153215

-----Original Message-----
>From: Yehuda Katz <yehudakatz at mailinator.com>
>Sent: Oct 24, 2009 8:08 AM
>To: governance at lists.cpsr.org
>Subject: [governance] AT&T: Google Manipulates Media, is an Abusive, Power Hungry Monopoly
>
>AT&T: Google Manipulates Media, is an Abusive, Power Hungry Monopoly
>Jason Mick (Blog) - October 16, 2009 8:45 AM
>
>Art,Ref.:
>http://www.dailytech.com/ATT+Google+Manipulates+Media+is+an+Abusive+Power+Hungry+Monopoly/article16524.htm
>
>Google's cache:
>http://74.125.155.132/search?q=cache:L_ETkxBglDkJ:www.dailytech.com/ATT%2BGoogle%2BManipulates%2BMedia%2Bis%2Ban%2BAbusive%2BPower%2BHungry%2BMonopoly/article16524.htm+AT%26T+Google+Manipulates+Media&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us
>
>Cover JPG:
>http://images.dailytech.com/nimage/12400_google-big-brother1.jpg
>
>-
>
>A new letter from AT&T to the federal government makes it clear that the
>company has little love for Google
>
>If there's one thing clear from the Google Voice iPhone debacle, it's that
>there's no love lost between AT&T and Google.  AT&T, to date, is accusing
>Google of everything from political and news manipulation, to violating net
>neutrality.
>
>The drama surrounding the rejection began shortly after when the Federal
>Communications Commission opened an inquiry into who was responsible for the
>rejection of Google Voice and whether the rejection violated any federal laws
>or rules.  AT&T quickly responded that it did not mastermind the rejection, and
>that it was Apple's doing.  Apple followed up, taking the blame and say it was
>working to get the app approved.
>
>Then came a second response from AT&T.	Apparently in a sharing mood, AT&T
>sounded off against Google and complained to the FCC that it believes Google
>Voice breaks the law.  Since AT&T has allowed VoIP apps onto the iPhone, but
>Google Voice is still no where to be found.  Now AT&T has delivered a third
>letter to the FCC further attacking the internet giant.
>
>While Google has been attacked by many -- newspaper moguls, telecoms, and
>internet rivals -- the new letter is perhaps the harshest conglomerated
>criticism leveled against the company to date.	Written by Robert W. Quinn,
>Jr., an AT&T Senior Vice President, the letter entitled "Google Voice;
>Establishing Just and Reasonable Rates for Local Exchange Carriers" opens
>claiming Google is a hypocrite when it comes to net neutrality.
>
>Mr. Quinn writes: 
>
>"As the debate regarding “net neutrality” has evolved, it appeared on the
>surface that all parties shared the same desire to preserve the “free and
>open” nature of the Internet, a goal enunciated by [FCC] Chairman Genachowski
>with which we heartily agree." 
>
>As communications services increasingly migrate to broadband Internet-based
>platforms, we can now see the power of Internet-based applications providers to
>act as gatekeepers who can threaten the “free and open” Internet.
>Google’s double-standard for “openness” – where Google does what it
>wants while other providers are subject to Commission regulations – is
>plainly inconsistent with the goal of preserving a “free and open” Internet
>ecosystem.
>The letter claims that Google's explanation that it is only blocking certain
>kinds of rural calls like adult sex-chat lines, to avoid high fees leveled
>against the free service, is a lie.  The letter accuses Google of conspiracy,
>saying it also blocked calls to an ambulance service, church, bank, law firm,
>automobile dealer, day spa, orchard, health clinic, tax preparation service,
>community center, eye doctor, tribal community college, school, residential
>consumers, a convent of Benedictine nuns, and the campaign office of a U.S.
>Representative.
>
>According to AT&T, Google is "abus[ing] its market power".  AT&T insists Google
>is not exempt, either from being free or being internet-based, from federal
>regulations that prevent such call blocking.
>
>The letter also calls Google a monopoly, citing, "In preparing a complaint to
>challenge the Google/Yahoo arrangement, the [U.S.] Department [of Justice]
>reportedly concluded that Google had a “monopoly” in these markets and the
>proposed arrangement “would have furthered [Google’s] monopoly."
>
>Furthermore, AT&T accuses Google of practicing broad-scale manipulation of the
>media.	It says that Google blocked political advertisements from Senator Susan
>Collins, due to her criticism of Moveon.org, a Google net neutrality partner. 
>It also accuses Google of blocking the Inner City Press from Google News, as
>the publication criticized the United Nation Development Programme, a
>Google-sponsored program.
>
>It then goes on to accuse Google of illegitimately "buying" ads in its own
>auction to push its agenda for keywords such as "net neutrality". The letter
>concludes, "Ironically, Google appears oblivious to the hypocrisy of its net
>neutrality advocacy relative to its own conduct. [A]t the same time, Google
>exploits the dominance of its search engine and its gatekeeping power over
>other applications to give its preferred content greater visibility than its
>political opponents’ content or to simply block its competitors’
>applications altogether."
>
>"Deliberately narrowing the principles to award Google a special privilege to
>play by its own rules – or no rules at all – would be grossly unfair,
>patently unlawful, and a renunciation of President Obama’s assurance that the
>Commission’s Internet Policy Statement would be used to “ensure there’s a
>level playing field” between competitors. Thus, the Commission’s first
>fundamental step in leveling that playing field must be to unequivocally
>re-affirm in its proposed rulemaking that it will not exempt Google from
>whatever rules it ultimately adopts."
>
>---
>
>-30-
>____________________________________________________________
>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,



Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 294k members/stakeholders strong!)
"Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" -
   Abraham Lincoln

"Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is very
often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt

"If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; liability
depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
United States v. Carroll Towing  (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
===============================================================
Updated 1/26/04
CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS. div. of
Information Network Eng.  INEG. INC.
ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com
Phone: 214-244-4827

____________________________________________________________
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


From dogwallah at gmail.com  Sun Oct 25 16:07:03 2009
From: dogwallah at gmail.com (McTim)
Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2009 23:07:03 +0300
Subject: [governance] AT&T: Google Manipulates Media, is an
In-Reply-To: <209741.16347.qm@web83905.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
References: <sympa.1256404598.1879.447@lists.cpsr.org>
	 <209741.16347.qm@web83905.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <f65fb55e0910251307i132e92baj5c20e1016c3c8bc7@mail.gmail.com>

On Sun, Oct 25, 2009 at 10:07 PM, Eric Dierker
<cogitoergosum at sbcglobal.net>wrote:

> Well Yehuda we definately see eye to eye on that.
>
> Here is a great headline I found, -- very accusatory - and I do not believe
> true:
>
> "ISOC and IGF participants under investigation for massive charitable
> donations fraud scheme. Allegations include perpetuating problems in order
> to continue funding."
>

Could you cite a reference for this "headline", or did you find it in your
own head?


-- 
Cheers,

McTim
"A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A route
indicates how we get there."  Jon Postel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20091025/e6670999/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

From cogitoergosum at sbcglobal.net  Sun Oct 25 17:16:14 2009
From: cogitoergosum at sbcglobal.net (Eric Dierker)
Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2009 14:16:14 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [governance] AT&T: Google Manipulates Media, is an
In-Reply-To: <f65fb55e0910251307i132e92baj5c20e1016c3c8bc7@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <544135.7806.qm@web83907.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>

Oh come on McTim -- If it was in my head I could not find it.  I was simply making the point that anyone can say anything -- the fact some other idiot prints it, should not elevate it to a fact by repeating it.
 
Wolfgangs is a good example of the responsible reposting or bringing to attention in:







[governance] Internet Freedom vs. Blocking
Where he cited: http://www.aconite.com/sites/default/files/Internet_blocking_and_Democracy.pdf

--- On Sun, 10/25/09, McTim <dogwallah at gmail.com> wrote:


From: McTim <dogwallah at gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Re: [governance] AT&T: Google Manipulates Media, is an
To: governance at lists.cpsr.org
Date: Sunday, October 25, 2009, 8:07 PM





On Sun, Oct 25, 2009 at 10:07 PM, Eric Dierker <cogitoergosum at sbcglobal.net> wrote:






Well Yehuda we definately see eye to eye on that.
 
Here is a great headline I found, -- very accusatory - and I do not believe true:
 
"ISOC and IGF participants under investigation for massive charitable donations fraud scheme. Allegations include perpetuating problems in order to continue funding."

Could you cite a reference for this "headline", or did you find it in your own head?


-- 
Cheers,

McTim
"A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A route indicates how we get there."  Jon Postel

-----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/20091025/9dc8807b/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

From ian.peter at ianpeter.com  Sun Oct 25 18:55:24 2009
From: ian.peter at ianpeter.com (Ian Peter)
Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 09:55:24 +1100
Subject: [governance] IGC Meeting at Sharm?
Message-ID: <C70B228C.754C%ian.peter@ianpeter.com>

Folks, we should lock into our calendars a time for an IGC meeting at Sharm.
I suggest we need about an hour, no more..

In the past we have done this on the evening before the event and
immediately after the GIGANET event. That would make it about 5.30pm (I
guess?), on November 14.

Does that suit most people? Also, could those involved with organising
GigaNet  let us know finishing time, and also which rooms you are using? I s
there a room booked we can use or should I book this via Secretariat?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20091026/bf2141a8/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

From yehudakatz at mailinator.com  Sun Oct 25 21:44:31 2009
From: yehudakatz at mailinator.com (Yehuda Katz)
Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2009 18:44:31 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [governance] AT&T: Google Manipulates Media
In-Reply-To: 10942762.1256501605850.JavaMail.root@elwamui-darkeyed.atl.sa.earthlink.net
Message-ID: <sympa.1256519977.69112.112@lists.cpsr.org>

Thanks Jeff, 
The two articles you cited follow well the chain of thought.

>Re.:
>... we can now see the power of Internet-based applications providers 
>to act as gatekeepers who can threaten the “free and open” Internet.
>Google’s double-standard for “openness” – where Google does what it
>wants while other providers are subject to Commission regulations ...

Particularly,  ...

Content ID (Google’s Content ID system) hasn’t stopped rights holders
around the globe from crossing swords with Google. Part of the problem is that
music rights are extraordinarily complicated, with many different parties
owning rights to the same song based on the type of use as well as the
territory. One example: Licensing talks between the German music rights group
GEMA and YouTube broke down this spring. ...

Art.Ref.: Achtung! Criminal Investigation Against YouTube Underway in Germany
See:http://newteevee.com/2009/10/23/achtung-criminal-investigation-against-youtube-underway-in-germany/
-

Where does the ITU stand in regards to Google's VOIP Phone Services and its
net-blanket coverage upon TeleCarriers both Private (AT&T, BT, et.al.) and
Nationalized systems?

Where is the WIPO with regards to Google's You Tube infringments?

Their 'out-of-sight'&'out-of-mind' ... in other words not to be found.

That so, Groups are forming their own rules: See
New ACTA copyright treaty dodges the UN, poor countries and activists
Art.Ref.: http://www.boingboing.net/2009/04/14/new-acta-copyright-t.html

Unfortuanlty I feel that 'Network Neutrality' is going to come in variety of
Localized flavors, perhapes at best, 1 blend per every ccTDL jusridiction.
____________________________________________________________
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


From raquelgatto at uol.com.br  Mon Oct 26 16:07:40 2009
From: raquelgatto at uol.com.br (Raquel Gatto)
Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 18:07:40 -0200
Subject: [governance] IGC Meeting at Sharm?
In-Reply-To: <C70B228C.754C%ian.peter@ianpeter.com>
References: <C70B228C.754C%ian.peter@ianpeter.com>
Message-ID: <4ae6018c1bc30_681982e36ac296@weasel23.tmail>

An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20091026/48c620da/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

From gpaque at gmail.com  Mon Oct 26 16:49:41 2009
From: gpaque at gmail.com (Ginger Paque)
Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 16:19:41 -0430
Subject: [governance] IGC Meeting at Sharm?
In-Reply-To: <4ae6018c1bc30_681982e36ac296@weasel23.tmail>
References: <C70B228C.754C%ian.peter@ianpeter.com> <4ae6018c1bc30_681982e36ac296@weasel23.tmail>
Message-ID: <4AE60B65.10801@gmail.com>

An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20091026/95848948/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

From charityg at diplomacy.edu  Mon Oct 26 18:05:22 2009
From: charityg at diplomacy.edu (Charity Gamboa)
Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 17:05:22 -0500
Subject: [governance] IGC Meeting at Sharm?
In-Reply-To: <4AE60B65.10801@gmail.com>
References: <C70B228C.754C%ian.peter@ianpeter.com>
	 <4ae6018c1bc30_681982e36ac296@weasel23.tmail>
	 <4AE60B65.10801@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <ad14556f0910261505y29e16b88v1b7573fc16fb4c05@mail.gmail.com>

Hi,

I am interested to attend the IGC meeting after our ISOC meeting/orientation
on the 14th in Sharm. Please keep us posted. Thanks!

See you all!

Regards,
Charity G.E.
ISOC PH IGFWG Chair

On Mon, Oct 26, 2009 at 3:49 PM, Ginger Paque <gpaque at gmail.com> wrote:

> I am glad arrangements are being made for an IGC meeting at IGF 2009. I
> think this is important. The IGC has been assigned booth 21 in the Village
> Square. Does anyone have ideas for taking advantage of this space? Is there
> a particular statement we should print up to give out? Or a half-page flyer
> about the IGC?
>
> If anyone who is not attending would like to make some points for
> discussion at the meeting, or suggestions for working in the meeting, Now is
> the time to do so.
>
> Also: Who else will be attending by Remote Participation besides Hong Xue
> and I? We should form a Skype group with remote IGC members, AND the members
> present in Sharm. That way we will have a much better feel for what is going
> on.
>
>
>
> Raquel Gatto wrote:
>
> Hi Ian, we are expecting to finish the GigaNet Symposium at 18:30 and we
> have already a room booked with Secretariat. I think we could ask an hour
> extension for IGC meeting. Please send me an e-mail if you agree so we can
> organize this.
>
> Thanks, Raquel
>
>
> Em 25/10/2009 20:55, *Ian Peter < ian.peter at ianpeter.com >* escreveu:
>
>
> IGC Meeting at Sharm?
> Folks, we should lock into our calendars a time for an IGC meeting at
> Sharm. I suggest we need about an hour, no more..
>
> In the past we have done this on the evening before the event and
> immediately after the GIGANET event. That would make it about 5.30pm (I
> guess?), on November 14.
>
> Does that suit most people? Also, could those involved with organising
> GigaNet  let us know finishing time, and also which rooms you are using? I s
> there a room booked we can use or should I book this via Secretariat?
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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://charitygamboa.towerofbabel.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20091026/956abfd8/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

From lehto.paul at gmail.com  Mon Oct 26 19:54:43 2009
From: lehto.paul at gmail.com (Paul Lehto)
Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 16:54:43 -0700
Subject: [governance] Open Source Voting Software Concept Released
In-Reply-To: <28243427.1256500077992.JavaMail.root@elwamui-darkeyed.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
References: <28243427.1256500077992.JavaMail.root@elwamui-darkeyed.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <76f819dd0910261654m73e029a2x6ae5c978e7406ca9@mail.gmail.com>

Given that, in an important election, a cheater or an insider can
economically justify spending up to billions of dollars in a
sophisticated cheating regime (given the trillions in spending that
might be controlled not to mention control of the world's sole
superpower if the election is for the presidency of the USA), how can
volunteers possibly keep up with that?  They can't.  Unlike other
scenarios where open source philosophy and approach can work
beautifully, it can't in elections.

Sometimes people say if the Apollo project could put men on the moon,
then surely we can design a computerized voting system that works.
This is not true for numerous completely fatal reasons, but I'll give
just two.

(1) Software, whether open source or proprietary is intrinsically
invisible, and any escrowed software has zero necessary relation to
software actually used on election day, not can the identity of the
two ever be proved, nor can it be proved that a given piece of
software is, for example, free of double trojan horses.  See
"Reflectionso on Trusting Trust."  Viruses may well be found, but
there can be no confidence all of them are found, and the incentive to
place a virus there, with important elections, is basically the
largest incentive in the world (control of the world's sole superpower
and trillions of dollars, etc.)

(2) Unlike the Apollo project where everyone wanted the same result
(bringing back the astronauts alive) elections are utterly different
because we all want, in real life, quite DIFFERENT results.  Some even
want the election to crash, keeping incumbents in power until a new
election can be had.  For an analogy from Apollo to elections with
computers to hold, there would have to be NASA engineering teams
peppered with engineers who had completely differing ideas about where
the spaceship should go, who should be on it, and on nearly every
other conceivable issue. Economists call this "moral hazard" but it is
much more than even just that.

Everyone who votes -- and even those who don't vote -- are all
affected by tax policy, military policy, etc. Nobody can be trusted to
write "trusted" code for elections because the incentives are all over
the place.  Therefore, the only system that can work is visible
transparency where everyone watches each other like hawks -- kind of
like at the bank teller's window.  When that happens, as in careful
recounts by teams of opposed workers, no more accurate system of
counting exists.  That's how machines are ultimately checked, in fact.

All in all, machines are a corporate boondoggle to spend billions to
create nontransparency in order to avoid some manual labor. Personso
of any country reminded of the sacrifices made for democracy and
freedom will volunteer in sufficient numbers to make a hand counting
system work, and the balance, if any, can be summonsed just like we
summons members for juries (and without such summonses, the juries
would be unrepresentative of the populace anyway!)

Paul Lehto, Juris Doctor

On 10/25/09, Jeffrey A. Williams <jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com> wrote:
> All,
>
>   Can ICANN still further afford to ignore?  Me thinks not for long...
>
> "Wired is reporting that the Open Source Digital
> Voting Foundation has announced the first release of
> http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2009/10/open-sourceLinux- and Ruby-based
> election management software. This software
> should compete in the same realm as Election Systems & Software, as well as
> Diebold/Premiere for use by County registrars. Mitch Kapor founder of
> Lotus 1-2-3 and Dean Logan, Registrar for Los Angeles County, and Debra
> Bowen, California Secretary of State, all took part in a formal
> announcement ceremony. The http://osdv.org/aboutOSDV is working with
> multiple jurisdictions, activists, developers and other organizations
> to bring together 'the best and brightest in technology and policy'
> to create 'guidelines and specifications for high assurance digital voting
> services.' The announcement was made as part of the OSDV
> http://www.trustthevote.org/
> Trust the Vote project, where open source tools are to be used to create a
> certifiable and sustainable open source voting system."
>
>
> Regards,
>
>
>
> Jeffrey A. Williams
> Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 294k members/stakeholders strong!)
> "Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" -
>    Abraham Lincoln
>
> "Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is very
> often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt
>
> "If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; liability
> depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
> P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
> United States v. Carroll Towing  (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
> ===============================================================
> Updated 1/26/04
> CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS. div. of
> Information Network Eng.  INEG. INC.
> ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com
> Phone: 214-244-4827
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
>


-- 
Paul R Lehto, J.D.
P.O. Box #1
Ishpeming, MI  49849
lehto.paul at gmail.com
906-204-4026
____________________________________________________________
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


From tapani.tarvainen at effi.org  Tue Oct 27 00:42:38 2009
From: tapani.tarvainen at effi.org (Tapani Tarvainen)
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2009 06:42:38 +0200
Subject: [governance] Open Source Voting Software Concept Released
In-Reply-To: <76f819dd0910261654m73e029a2x6ae5c978e7406ca9@mail.gmail.com>
References: <28243427.1256500077992.JavaMail.root@elwamui-darkeyed.atl.sa.earthlink.net> <76f819dd0910261654m73e029a2x6ae5c978e7406ca9@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20091027044238.GA3779@musti.tarvainen.info>

On Mon, Oct 26, 2009 at 04:54:43PM -0700, Paul Lehto (lehto.paul at gmail.com) wrote:

> Given that, in an important election, a cheater or an insider can
> economically justify spending up to billions of dollars in a
> sophisticated cheating regime (given the trillions in spending that
> might be controlled not to mention control of the world's sole
> superpower if the election is for the presidency of the USA), how can
> volunteers possibly keep up with that?  They can't.  Unlike other
> scenarios where open source philosophy and approach can work
> beautifully, it can't in elections.

There must be some misunderstanding here.

"Open source" does not mean or imply "non-professional" or
"done by volunteers" or "not paid for" or even "non-commercial".
It just means the source is in the open, available for everyone to see.

And while that obviously doesn't solve all problems in elections, it
just as obviously makes it at least a little harder to get away with
poor software.

Thus, I believe any election software should be open source, but at
the same time it should be done professionally and paid for by the
state, without particularly trying to save money thereby.

-- 
Tapani Tarvainen
____________________________________________________________
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


From ian.peter at ianpeter.com  Tue Oct 27 01:15:16 2009
From: ian.peter at ianpeter.com (Ian Peter)
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2009 16:15:16 +1100
Subject: [governance] IGC Meeting at Sharm?
In-Reply-To: <4ae6018c1bc30_681982e36ac296@weasel23.tmail>
Message-ID: <C70CCD14.75F0%ian.peter@ianpeter.com>

Then it is starting to look like a 7pm ­ 8pm meeeting ­ how does that sound,
particularly for those who have been at GigaNet all day?




On 27/10/09 7:07 AM, "Raquel Gatto" <raquelgatto at uol.com.br> wrote:

> Hi Ian, we are expecting to finish the GigaNet Symposium at 18:30 and we have
> already a room booked with Secretariat. I think we could ask an hour extension
> for IGC meeting. Please send me an e-mail if you agree so we can organize
> this.
> 
> Thanks, Raquel
>  
> 
> Em 25/10/2009 20:55, Ian Peter < ian.peter at ianpeter.com > escreveu:
>> 
>> IGC Meeting at Sharm?
>> Folks, we should lock into our calendars a time for an IGC meeting at Sharm.
>> I suggest we need about an hour, no more..
>>  
>>  In the past we have done this on the evening before the event and
>> immediately after the GIGANET event. That would make it about 5.30pm (I
>> guess?), on November 14.
>>  
>>  Does that suit most people? Also, could those involved with organising
>> GigaNet  let us know finishing time, and also which rooms you are using? I s
>> there a room booked we can use or should I book this via Secretariat?
> 
> 
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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/20091027/a445df4b/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

From rudi.vansnick at isoc.be  Tue Oct 27 02:08:24 2009
From: rudi.vansnick at isoc.be (Rudi Vansnick)
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2009 15:08:24 +0900
Subject: [governance] IGC Meeting at Sharm?
In-Reply-To: <C70CCD14.75F0%ian.peter@ianpeter.com>
References: <C70CCD14.75F0%ian.peter@ianpeter.com>
Message-ID: <4AE68E58.4080403@isoc.be>

Arriving in Sharm El Sheikh on the13th in the afternoon and having a 
full day meeting with ISOC, I think I will be available for a meeting 
around 7pm.

Best regards,

Rudi Vansnick
President Internet Society Belgium vzw
Voorzitter TIK vzw
Board member EURALO (ALAC - ICANN)

Tel: +32 (0)70 77 39 39
GSM: +32 (0)475 28 16 32
www.isoc.be <http://www.isoc.be> - www.vansnick.eu <http://www.vansnick.eu>

<------------ Travels and activities in the coming weeks ---------->
23/10-30/10 : 36th ICANN meetings in Seoul - South Korea
 1/11- 4/11 : ICT conference in Baku - Azerbaijan
 9/11-10/11 : Seminarie Vlaams parlement
15/11-18/11 : Internet Governance Forum Sharm El Sheikh - Egypt
<------------------------------------------------------------------>



Ian Peter schreef:
> Then it is starting to look like a 7pm – 8pm meeeting – how does that 
> sound, particularly for those who have been at GigaNet all day?
>
>
>
>
> On 27/10/09 7:07 AM, "Raquel Gatto" <raquelgatto at uol.com.br> wrote:
>
>     Hi Ian, we are expecting to finish the GigaNet Symposium at 18:30
>     and we have already a room booked with Secretariat. I think we
>     could ask an hour extension for IGC meeting. Please send me an
>     e-mail if you agree so we can organize this.
>
>     Thanks, Raquel
>      
>
>     Em 25/10/2009 20:55, *Ian Peter < ian.peter at ianpeter.com >* escreveu:
>
>
>         IGC Meeting at Sharm?
>         Folks, we should lock into our calendars a time for an IGC
>         meeting at Sharm. I suggest we need about an hour, no more..
>          
>          In the past we have done this on the evening before the event
>         and immediately after the GIGANET event. That would make it
>         about 5.30pm (I guess?), on November 14.
>          
>          Does that suit most people? Also, could those involved with
>         organising GigaNet  let us know finishing time, and also which
>         rooms you are using? I s there a room booked we can use or
>         should I book this via Secretariat?
>
>
>     ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>     ____________________________________________________________
>     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
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com 
> Version: 8.5.423 / Virus Database: 270.14.33/2461 - Release Date: 10/26/09 20:22:00
>
>   

____________________________________________________________
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


From tijani.benjemaa at planet.tn  Tue Oct 27 04:32:30 2009
From: tijani.benjemaa at planet.tn (tijani.benjemaa at planet.tn)
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2009 09:32:30 +0100
Subject: [governance] Re: IGC meeting in Sharm
Message-ID: <auto-000133909493@fes2.planet.net.tn>

An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20091027/8ea4ac1b/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

From ian.peter at ianpeter.com  Tue Oct 27 04:50:53 2009
From: ian.peter at ianpeter.com (Ian Peter)
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2009 19:50:53 +1100
Subject: [governance] Re: IGC meeting in Sharma
In-Reply-To: <auto-000133909493@fes2.planet.net.tn>
Message-ID: <C70CFF9D.7601%ian.peter@ianpeter.com>

We are looking at 14th, not 13th


On 27/10/09 7:32 PM, "tijani.benjemaa at planet.tn" <tijani.benjemaa at planet.tn>
wrote:

> I will be arriving on 13 November late in the night
> 
> so, I will not be able to attend if the meeting take place on 13 Nov at 19:00
> 
> Tijani
> 
> 
> 
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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/20091027/a93569f6/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

From lehto.paul at gmail.com  Tue Oct 27 08:32:30 2009
From: lehto.paul at gmail.com (Paul Lehto)
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2009 08:32:30 -0400
Subject: [governance] Open Source Voting Software Concept Released
In-Reply-To: <20091027044238.GA3779@musti.tarvainen.info>
References: <28243427.1256500077992.JavaMail.root@elwamui-darkeyed.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
	 <76f819dd0910261654m73e029a2x6ae5c978e7406ca9@mail.gmail.com>
	 <20091027044238.GA3779@musti.tarvainen.info>
Message-ID: <76f819dd0910270532k686e51cxbf16d1a846e41fcb@mail.gmail.com>

Sure.  Open source inspectors could still be paid. But by whom? The
government? If so they are disqualified by conflict of interest since
the government's own power is determined by elections.  If paid by a
private party, they are not truly acting in the public interest even
if the claim to be...  Only citizen violunteers will truly
(potentially) act in the public interest, and only ON THE WHOLE -- not
individually.  And these volunteers just don't have the resources to
keep up with professional hackers.

On 10/27/09, Tapani Tarvainen <tapani.tarvainen at effi.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 26, 2009 at 04:54:43PM -0700, Paul Lehto (lehto.paul at gmail.com)
> wrote:
>
>> Given that, in an important election, a cheater or an insider can
>> economically justify spending up to billions of dollars in a
>> sophisticated cheating regime (given the trillions in spending that
>> might be controlled not to mention control of the world's sole
>> superpower if the election is for the presidency of the USA), how can
>> volunteers possibly keep up with that?  They can't.  Unlike other
>> scenarios where open source philosophy and approach can work
>> beautifully, it can't in elections.
>
> There must be some misunderstanding here.
>
> "Open source" does not mean or imply "non-professional" or
> "done by volunteers" or "not paid for" or even "non-commercial".
> It just means the source is in the open, available for everyone to see.
>
> And while that obviously doesn't solve all problems in elections, it
> just as obviously makes it at least a little harder to get away with
> poor software.
>
> Thus, I believe any election software should be open source, but at
> the same time it should be done professionally and paid for by the
> state, without particularly trying to save money thereby.
>
> --
> Tapani Tarvainen
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
>


-- 
Paul R Lehto, J.D.
P.O. Box #1
Ishpeming, MI  49849
lehto.paul at gmail.com
906-204-4026
____________________________________________________________
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


From charlespmok at gmail.com  Tue Oct 27 11:47:36 2009
From: charlespmok at gmail.com (Charles Mok (gmail))
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2009 23:47:36 +0800
Subject: [governance] IGC Meeting at Sharm?
In-Reply-To: <4AE68E58.4080403@isoc.be>
References: <C70CCD14.75F0%ian.peter@ianpeter.com> <4AE68E58.4080403@isoc.be>
Message-ID: <7cd8c34e0910270847u4092e73dw63e3d58975ab52f9@mail.gmail.com>

Same here for me ... Will try!

On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 2:08 PM, Rudi Vansnick <rudi.vansnick at isoc.be>wrote:

> Arriving in Sharm El Sheikh on the13th in the afternoon and having a full
> day meeting with ISOC, I think I will be available for a meeting around 7pm.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Rudi Vansnick
> President Internet Society Belgium vzw
> Voorzitter TIK vzw
> Board member EURALO (ALAC - ICANN)
>
> Tel: +32 (0)70 77 39 39
> GSM: +32 (0)475 28 16 32
> www.isoc.be <http://www.isoc.be> - www.vansnick.eu <http://www.vansnick.eu
> >
>
> <------------ Travels and activities in the coming weeks ---------->
> 23/10-30/10 : 36th ICANN meetings in Seoul - South Korea
> 1/11- 4/11 : ICT conference in Baku - Azerbaijan
> 9/11-10/11 : Seminarie Vlaams parlement
> 15/11-18/11 : Internet Governance Forum Sharm El Sheikh - Egypt
> <------------------------------------------------------------------>
>
>
>
> Ian Peter schreef:
>
>> Then it is starting to look like a 7pm – 8pm meeeting – how does that
>> sound, particularly for those who have been at GigaNet all day?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 27/10/09 7:07 AM, "Raquel Gatto" <raquelgatto at uol.com.br> wrote:
>>
>>    Hi Ian, we are expecting to finish the GigaNet Symposium at 18:30
>>    and we have already a room booked with Secretariat. I think we
>>    could ask an hour extension for IGC meeting. Please send me an
>>    e-mail if you agree so we can organize this.
>>
>>    Thanks, Raquel
>>
>>    Em 25/10/2009 20:55, *Ian Peter < ian.peter at ianpeter.com >* escreveu:
>>
>>
>>        IGC Meeting at Sharm?
>>        Folks, we should lock into our calendars a time for an IGC
>>        meeting at Sharm. I suggest we need about an hour, no more..
>>                 In the past we have done this on the evening before the
>> event
>>        and immediately after the GIGANET event. That would make it
>>        about 5.30pm (I guess?), on November 14.
>>                 Does that suit most people? Also, could those involved
>> with
>>        organising GigaNet  let us know finishing time, and also which
>>        rooms you are using? I s there a room booked we can use or
>>        should I book this via Secretariat?
>>
>>
>>
>>  ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>    ____________________________________________________________
>>    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
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>
>> No virus found in this incoming message.
>> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 8.5.423 / Virus Database:
>> 270.14.33/2461 - Release Date: 10/26/09 20:22:00
>>
>>
>>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
>



-- 
《「電子.書」何去何從？》  --
http://www.hkej.com/template/forum/php/forum_details.php?blog_posts_id=20878
Join Internet Society Hong Kong 加入香港互聯網協會 --
https://www.isoc.hk/membership_1.html
Blog: www.charlesmok.hk ; Facebook/Twitter: charlesmok
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20091027/3111d395/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

From charityg at diplomacy.edu  Tue Oct 27 12:57:07 2009
From: charityg at diplomacy.edu (Charity Gamboa)
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2009 11:57:07 -0500
Subject: [governance] IGC Meeting at Sharm?
In-Reply-To: <7cd8c34e0910270847u4092e73dw63e3d58975ab52f9@mail.gmail.com>
References: <C70CCD14.75F0%ian.peter@ianpeter.com> <4AE68E58.4080403@isoc.be>
	 <7cd8c34e0910270847u4092e73dw63e3d58975ab52f9@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <ad14556f0910270957x67bc929cg551d32cbaad1ff1e@mail.gmail.com>

Ian,

I am amenable to a 7-8pm IGC meeting.

Regards,
Charity Gamboa Embley
ISOC PH IGFWG Chair

2009/10/27 Charles Mok (gmail) <charlespmok at gmail.com>

> Same here for me ... Will try!
>
>
> On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 2:08 PM, Rudi Vansnick <rudi.vansnick at isoc.be>wrote:
>
>> Arriving in Sharm El Sheikh on the13th in the afternoon and having a full
>> day meeting with ISOC, I think I will be available for a meeting around 7pm.
>>
>> Best regards,
>>
>> Rudi Vansnick
>> President Internet Society Belgium vzw
>> Voorzitter TIK vzw
>> Board member EURALO (ALAC - ICANN)
>>
>> Tel: +32 (0)70 77 39 39
>> GSM: +32 (0)475 28 16 32
>> www.isoc.be <http://www.isoc.be> - www.vansnick.eu <
>> http://www.vansnick.eu>
>>
>> <------------ Travels and activities in the coming weeks ---------->
>> 23/10-30/10 : 36th ICANN meetings in Seoul - South Korea
>> 1/11- 4/11 : ICT conference in Baku - Azerbaijan
>> 9/11-10/11 : Seminarie Vlaams parlement
>> 15/11-18/11 : Internet Governance Forum Sharm El Sheikh - Egypt
>> <------------------------------------------------------------------>
>>
>>
>>
>> Ian Peter schreef:
>>
>>>  Then it is starting to look like a 7pm – 8pm meeeting – how does that
>>> sound, particularly for those who have been at GigaNet all day?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 27/10/09 7:07 AM, "Raquel Gatto" <raquelgatto at uol.com.br> wrote:
>>>
>>>    Hi Ian, we are expecting to finish the GigaNet Symposium at 18:30
>>>    and we have already a room booked with Secretariat. I think we
>>>    could ask an hour extension for IGC meeting. Please send me an
>>>    e-mail if you agree so we can organize this.
>>>
>>>    Thanks, Raquel
>>>
>>>    Em 25/10/2009 20:55, *Ian Peter < ian.peter at ianpeter.com >* escreveu:
>>>
>>>
>>>        IGC Meeting at Sharm?
>>>        Folks, we should lock into our calendars a time for an IGC
>>>        meeting at Sharm. I suggest we need about an hour, no more..
>>>                 In the past we have done this on the evening before the
>>> event
>>>        and immediately after the GIGANET event. That would make it
>>>        about 5.30pm (I guess?), on November 14.
>>>                 Does that suit most people? Also, could those involved
>>> with
>>>        organising GigaNet  let us know finishing time, and also which
>>>        rooms you are using? I s there a room booked we can use or
>>>        should I book this via Secretariat?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>  ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>    ____________________________________________________________
>>>    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
>>>
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>>
>>> No virus found in this incoming message.
>>> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 8.5.423 / Virus Database:
>>> 270.14.33/2461 - Release Date: 10/26/09 20:22:00
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> 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
>>
>
>
>
> --
> 《「電子.書」何去何從？》  --
> http://www.hkej.com/template/forum/php/forum_details.php?blog_posts_id=20878
> Join Internet Society Hong Kong 加入香港互聯網協會 --
> https://www.isoc.hk/membership_1.html
> Blog: www.charlesmok.hk ; Facebook/Twitter: charlesmok
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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://charitygamboa.towerofbabel.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20091027/4299c35b/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

From divina.meigs at orange.fr  Tue Oct 27 13:02:19 2009
From: divina.meigs at orange.fr (Divina MEIGS)
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2009 18:02:19 +0100
Subject: [governance] IGC Meeting at Sharm?
In-Reply-To: <ad14556f0910270957x67bc929cg551d32cbaad1ff1e@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <C70CE62B.E3C0%divina.meigs@orange.fr>


Sorry but i will be arriving late on the 14th, towards 21pm.
Will catch up with you during sessions and intersessions.
Do we have any idea how many of the IGC + Giganet will be present in Sharm
el Sheikh?
Divina


Le 27/10/09 17:57, « Charity Gamboa » <charityg at diplomacy.edu> a écrit :

> Ian,
>  
> I am amenable to a 7-8pm IGC meeting.
>  
> Regards,
> Charity Gamboa Embley
> ISOC PH IGFWG Chair
> 
> 2009/10/27 Charles Mok (gmail) <charlespmok at gmail.com>
>> Same here for me ... Will try!
>> 
>> 
>> On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 2:08 PM, Rudi Vansnick <rudi.vansnick at isoc.be> wrote:
>>> Arriving in Sharm El Sheikh on the13th in the afternoon and having a full
>>> day meeting with ISOC, I think I will be available for a meeting around 7pm.
>>> 
>>> Best regards,
>>> 
>>> Rudi Vansnick
>>> President Internet Society Belgium vzw
>>> Voorzitter TIK vzw
>>> Board member EURALO (ALAC - ICANN)
>>> 
>>> Tel: +32 (0)70 77 39 39
>>> GSM: +32 (0)475 28 16 32
>>> www.isoc.be <http://www.isoc.be/>  <http://www.isoc.be <http://www.isoc.be/>
>>> > - www.vansnick.eu <http://www.vansnick.eu <http://www.vansnick.eu/> >
>>> 
>>> <------------ Travels and activities in the coming weeks ---------->
>>> 23/10-30/10 : 36th ICANN meetings in Seoul - South Korea
>>> 1/11- 4/11 : ICT conference in Baku - Azerbaijan
>>> 9/11-10/11 : Seminarie Vlaams parlement
>>> 15/11-18/11 : Internet Governance Forum Sharm El Sheikh - Egypt
>>> <------------------------------------------------------------------>
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Ian Peter schreef:
>>>> Then it is starting to look like a 7pm ­ 8pm meeeting ­ how does that
>>>> sound, particularly for those who have been at GigaNet all day?
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> On 27/10/09 7:07 AM, "Raquel Gatto" <raquelgatto at uol.com.br> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>    Hi Ian, we are expecting to finish the GigaNet Symposium at 18:30
>>>>    and we have already a room booked with Secretariat. I think we
>>>>    could ask an hour extension for IGC meeting. Please send me an
>>>>    e-mail if you agree so we can organize this.
>>>> 
>>>>    Thanks, Raquel
>>>>     
>>>>    Em 25/10/2009 20:55, *Ian Peter < ian.peter at ianpeter.com >* escreveu:
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>        IGC Meeting at Sharm?
>>>>        Folks, we should lock into our calendars a time for an IGC
>>>>        meeting at Sharm. I suggest we need about an hour, no more..
>>>>                 In the past we have done this on the evening before the
>>>> event
>>>>        and immediately after the GIGANET event. That would make it
>>>>        about 5.30pm (I guess?), on November 14.
>>>>                 Does that suit most people? Also, could those involved with
>>>>        organising GigaNet  let us know finishing time, and also which
>>>>        rooms you are using? I s there a room booked we can use or
>>>>        should I book this via Secretariat?
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>    ____________________________________________________________
>>>>    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
>>>> 
>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> No virus found in this incoming message.
>>>> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com <http://www.avg.com/>  Version: 8.5.423 /
>>>> Virus Database: 270.14.33/2461 - Release Date: 10/26/09 20:22:00
>>>> 
>>>>  
>>> 
>>> ____________________________________________________________
>>> 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/20091027/20bf604a/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

From ian.peter at ianpeter.com  Tue Oct 27 16:14:29 2009
From: ian.peter at ianpeter.com (Ian Peter)
Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2009 07:14:29 +1100
Subject: [governance] Francis Muguet funeral arrangements
In-Reply-To: <C6FF8B76.70CC%ian.peter@ianpeter.com>
Message-ID: <C70D9FD5.764B%ian.peter@ianpeter.com>

I¹m passing this on at Flore Muguet¹s request for those who might be able to
attend. I¹m sure Flore will be happy to provide further details if
necessary.

Ian Peter (message follows)



Thank  you so much for your emails,

My dad funerals Francis MUGUET, will be Saturday October 31 at 10am at the
East Chapel of Pere Lachaise Cemetery.
I'm so sad that he left this earth so fast and I'll be glad for him if a lot
of people are coming..

Thank you,

Flore MUGUET
danceflore at hotmail.com

> 
> 
> 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20091028/8fdfbd38/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

From jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com  Tue Oct 27 18:22:44 2009
From: jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com (Jeffrey A. Williams)
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2009 17:22:44 -0500 (GMT-05:00)
Subject: [governance] Re: [ PRIVACY Forum ] Is Net Neutrality a Communist
 Plot? ("Declassified	DoD Film")
Message-ID: <10856634.1256682164797.JavaMail.root@elwamui-huard.atl.sa.earthlink.net>

Lauren and all,

  "Net Neutrality" as currently being touted has little to do with
"Neutrality" and alot to do with mandating content.  Unfortunately
"Net Neutrality" is not being sold that way...

-----Original Message-----
>From: privacy at vortex.com
>Sent: Oct 27, 2009 3:38 PM
>To: privacy-list at vortex.com
>Subject: [ PRIVACY Forum ] Is Net Neutrality a Communist Plot? ("Declassified	DoD Film")
>
>
>
>        Is Net Neutrality a Communist Plot? ("Declassified DoD Film")
>
>                http://lauren.vortex.com/archive/000627.html
>
>
>Greetings.  As a strong supporter of Net Neutrality 
>( http://lauren.vortex.com/archive/000625.html ), I've been increasingly
>concerned by recent accusations from some anti-neutrality forces and
>media commentators, who claim that Net Neutrality is actually an
>insidious and dangerous "communist plot" that must be destroyed at all
>costs.
>
>Such a characterization has seemed utterly ridiculous to me, and
>hopefully also to most other reasonable observers.
>
>However, a friend of mine working at a certain "Three-Initial Agency"
>(that must remain unnamed) recently uncovered a long-lost U.S.
>government film that appears to shed unexpected light on accusations
>of a linkage between communist/Marxist ideologies and Net Neutrality.
>
>He managed to get the short film (only a few minutes long) rapidly
>declassified and shipped it out to me.  I've now digitized the 16mm
>print and brought it online.
>
>The complete film (with associated very brief explanatory text, etc.
>that I've included) can be viewed at the YouTube link:
>
>   Is Net Neutrality a Communist Plot?
>
>   http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4fCLFKlYW3c  
>
>
>I must admit, the film certainly had an impact on me!
>
>--Lauren--
>Lauren Weinstein
>lauren at vortex.com
>Tel: +1 (818) 225-2800
>http://www.pfir.org/lauren
>Co-Founder, PFIR
>   - People For Internet Responsibility - http://www.pfir.org
>Co-Founder, NNSquad
>   - Network Neutrality Squad - http://www.nnsquad.org
>Founder, GCTIP - Global Coalition 
>   for Transparent Internet Performance - http://www.gctip.org
>Founder, PRIVACY Forum - http://www.vortex.com
>Member, ACM Committee on Computers and Public Policy
>Lauren's Blog: http://lauren.vortex.com
>Twitter: https://twitter.com/laurenweinstein
>
>_______________________________________________
>privacy mailing list
>http://lists.vortex.com/mailman/listinfo/privacy

Regards,



Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 294k members/stakeholders strong!)
"Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" -
   Abraham Lincoln

"Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is very
often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt

"If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; liability
depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
United States v. Carroll Towing  (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
===============================================================
Updated 1/26/04
CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS. div. of
Information Network Eng.  INEG. INC.
ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com
Phone: 214-244-4827

____________________________________________________________
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


From jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com  Tue Oct 27 18:30:23 2009
From: jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com (Jeffrey A. Williams)
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2009 17:30:23 -0500 (GMT-05:00)
Subject: [governance] Open Source Voting Software Concept Released
Message-ID: <12354787.1256682623809.JavaMail.root@elwamui-huard.atl.sa.earthlink.net>

Paul and all,

  Exactly right!  Additionally one has to have some set
of standards as to what is and what is not "Good" voting
software vis a vis open source as well as what is and
what is not good coding technique and method for open
source.  We have already seen too much "Bad" open source,
and more is being discovered every day.

-----Original Message-----
>From: Paul Lehto <lehto.paul at gmail.com>
>Sent: Oct 27, 2009 7:32 AM
>To: governance at lists.cpsr.org, Tapani Tarvainen <tapani.tarvainen at effi.org>
>Subject: Re: [governance] Open Source Voting Software Concept Released
>
>Sure.  Open source inspectors could still be paid. But by whom? The
>government? If so they are disqualified by conflict of interest since
>the government's own power is determined by elections.  If paid by a
>private party, they are not truly acting in the public interest even
>if the claim to be...  Only citizen violunteers will truly
>(potentially) act in the public interest, and only ON THE WHOLE -- not
>individually.  And these volunteers just don't have the resources to
>keep up with professional hackers.
>
>On 10/27/09, Tapani Tarvainen <tapani.tarvainen at effi.org> wrote:
>> On Mon, Oct 26, 2009 at 04:54:43PM -0700, Paul Lehto (lehto.paul at gmail.com)
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Given that, in an important election, a cheater or an insider can
>>> economically justify spending up to billions of dollars in a
>>> sophisticated cheating regime (given the trillions in spending that
>>> might be controlled not to mention control of the world's sole
>>> superpower if the election is for the presidency of the USA), how can
>>> volunteers possibly keep up with that?  They can't.  Unlike other
>>> scenarios where open source philosophy and approach can work
>>> beautifully, it can't in elections.
>>
>> There must be some misunderstanding here.
>>
>> "Open source" does not mean or imply "non-professional" or
>> "done by volunteers" or "not paid for" or even "non-commercial".
>> It just means the source is in the open, available for everyone to see.
>>
>> And while that obviously doesn't solve all problems in elections, it
>> just as obviously makes it at least a little harder to get away with
>> poor software.
>>
>> Thus, I believe any election software should be open source, but at
>> the same time it should be done professionally and paid for by the
>> state, without particularly trying to save money thereby.
>>
>> --
>> Tapani Tarvainen
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> 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
>>
>
>
>-- 
>Paul R Lehto, J.D.
>P.O. Box #1
>Ishpeming, MI  49849
>lehto.paul at gmail.com
>906-204-4026
>____________________________________________________________
>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,



Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 294k members/stakeholders strong!)
"Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" -
   Abraham Lincoln

"Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is very
often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt

"If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; liability
depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
United States v. Carroll Towing  (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
===============================================================
Updated 1/26/04
CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS. div. of
Information Network Eng.  INEG. INC.
ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com
Phone: 214-244-4827

____________________________________________________________
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


From jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com  Tue Oct 27 18:35:43 2009
From: jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com (Jeffrey A. Williams)
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2009 17:35:43 -0500 (GMT-05:00)
Subject: [governance] IGC Meeting at Sharm?
Message-ID: <19206061.1256682944099.JavaMail.root@elwamui-huard.atl.sa.earthlink.net>

An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20091027/c75c6464/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

From gpaque at gmail.com  Tue Oct 27 18:45:22 2009
From: gpaque at gmail.com (Ginger Paque)
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2009 18:15:22 -0430
Subject: [governance] IGC Meeting at Sharm?
In-Reply-To: <19206061.1256682944099.JavaMail.root@elwamui-huard.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
References: <19206061.1256682944099.JavaMail.root@elwamui-huard.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <4AE77802.1070009@gmail.com>

An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20091027/af33c73f/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

From ian.peter at ianpeter.com  Tue Oct 27 19:15:53 2009
From: ian.peter at ianpeter.com (Ian Peter)
Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2009 10:15:53 +1100
Subject: [governance] En Francais Francis Muguet funeral arrangements
In-Reply-To: <C70D9FD5.764B%ian.peter@ianpeter.com>
Message-ID: <C70DCA59.7666%ian.peter@ianpeter.com>

En francais


Je vous informe que les obsèques de mon père Francis MUGUET auront lieu
Samedi 31 Octobre a 1Oh à la Chapelle de l'Est du Père-Lachaise et seront
suivies de l'inhumation au cimetière du Père-Lachaise.
Vous etes évidemment tous les bienvenus pour honorer sa mémoire.

Avec mes sentiments les meilleurs,

Flore MUGUET




My dad Francis MUGUET funerals will be Saturday October 31 at 10 am at the
East Chapel of Père-Lachaise Cemetery.
You are all welcome to honor his memory.


Best Regards,

Flore MUGUET


On 28/10/09 7:14 AM, "Ian Peter" <ian.peter at ianpeter.com> wrote:

> I¹m passing this on at Flore Muguet¹s request for those who might be able to
> attend. I¹m sure Flore will be happy to provide further details if necessary.
> 
> Ian Peter (message follows)
> 
> 
> 
> Thank  you so much for your emails,
> 
> My dad funerals Francis MUGUET, will be Saturday October 31 at 10am at the
> East Chapel of Pere Lachaise Cemetery.
> I'm so sad that he left this earth so fast and I'll be glad for him if a lot
> of people are coming..
> 
> Thank you,
> 
> Flore MUGUET
> danceflore at hotmail.com
> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
> 
> 
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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/20091028/a7e96e99/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

From hempalshrestha at gmail.com  Tue Oct 27 21:58:50 2009
From: hempalshrestha at gmail.com (Hempal Shrestha)
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2009 20:58:50 -0500
Subject: [governance] IGC Meeting at Sharm?
In-Reply-To: <4AE68E58.4080403@isoc.be>
References: <C70CCD14.75F0%ian.peter@ianpeter.com> <4AE68E58.4080403@isoc.be>
Message-ID: <bf5d709e0910271858x19a4d64p13cf72389aef22f2@mail.gmail.com>

Hi ,

same case with me, I will also try to be in the IGC Meeting on 14th

Best Regards,

Hempal Shrestha

On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 1:08 AM, Rudi Vansnick <rudi.vansnick at isoc.be>wrote:

> Arriving in Sharm El Sheikh on the13th in the afternoon and having a full
> day meeting with ISOC, I think I will be available for a meeting around 7pm.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Rudi Vansnick
> President Internet Society Belgium vzw
> Voorzitter TIK vzw
> Board member EURALO (ALAC - ICANN)
>
> Tel: +32 (0)70 77 39 39
> GSM: +32 (0)475 28 16 32
> www.isoc.be <http://www.isoc.be> - www.vansnick.eu <http://www.vansnick.eu
> >
>
> <------------ Travels and activities in the coming weeks ---------->
> 23/10-30/10 : 36th ICANN meetings in Seoul - South Korea
> 1/11- 4/11 : ICT conference in Baku - Azerbaijan
> 9/11-10/11 : Seminarie Vlaams parlement
> 15/11-18/11 : Internet Governance Forum Sharm El Sheikh - Egypt
> <------------------------------------------------------------------>
>
>
>
> Ian Peter schreef:
>
>> Then it is starting to look like a 7pm – 8pm meeeting – how does that
>> sound, particularly for those who have been at GigaNet all day?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 27/10/09 7:07 AM, "Raquel Gatto" <raquelgatto at uol.com.br> wrote:
>>
>>    Hi Ian, we are expecting to finish the GigaNet Symposium at 18:30
>>    and we have already a room booked with Secretariat. I think we
>>    could ask an hour extension for IGC meeting. Please send me an
>>    e-mail if you agree so we can organize this.
>>
>>    Thanks, Raquel
>>
>>    Em 25/10/2009 20:55, *Ian Peter < ian.peter at ianpeter.com >* escreveu:
>>
>>
>>        IGC Meeting at Sharm?
>>        Folks, we should lock into our calendars a time for an IGC
>>        meeting at Sharm. I suggest we need about an hour, no more..
>>                 In the past we have done this on the evening before the
>> event
>>        and immediately after the GIGANET event. That would make it
>>        about 5.30pm (I guess?), on November 14.
>>                 Does that suit most people? Also, could those involved
>> with
>>        organising GigaNet  let us know finishing time, and also which
>>        rooms you are using? I s there a room booked we can use or
>>        should I book this via Secretariat?
>>
>>
>>
>>  ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>    ____________________________________________________________
>>    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
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>
>> No virus found in this incoming message.
>> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 8.5.423 / Virus Database:
>> 270.14.33/2461 - Release Date: 10/26/09 20:22:00
>>
>>
>>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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/20091027/c316b383/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

From ian.peter at ianpeter.com  Tue Oct 27 23:12:35 2009
From: ian.peter at ianpeter.com (Ian Peter)
Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2009 14:12:35 +1100
Subject: [governance] IGC Meeting at Sharm?
In-Reply-To: <bf5d709e0910271858x19a4d64p13cf72389aef22f2@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <C70E01D3.7682%ian.peter@ianpeter.com>


Sounds like this will be the best time then ­ so lets settle on 7pm,
November 14, same room as GigaNet. Ive asked Raquel to book this for us ­
I¹ll advise room name in a reminder a bit closer to the event.

I don¹t think we have a huge agenda to get through and we should aim to
finish by 8pm at the latest. But it is important I think to have the
opportunity to meet face to face before the IGF starts, particularly for
people who havent attended before and would like to get acquainted.

Ian Peter

On 28/10/09 12:58 PM, "Hempal Shrestha" <hempalshrestha at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi , 
> 
> same case with me, I will also try to be in the IGC Meeting on 14th
> 
> Best Regards,
> 
> Hempal Shrestha
> 
> On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 1:08 AM, Rudi Vansnick <rudi.vansnick at isoc.be> wrote:
>> Arriving in Sharm El Sheikh on the13th in the afternoon and having a full day
>> meeting with ISOC, I think I will be available for a meeting around 7pm.
>> 
>> Best regards,
>> 
>> Rudi Vansnick
>> President Internet Society Belgium vzw
>> Voorzitter TIK vzw
>> Board member EURALO (ALAC - ICANN)
>> 
>> Tel: +32 (0)70 77 39 39
>> GSM: +32 (0)475 28 16 32
>> www.isoc.be <http://www.isoc.be>  <http://www.isoc.be> - www.vansnick.eu
>> <http://www.vansnick.eu>
>> 
>> <------------ Travels and activities in the coming weeks ---------->
>> 23/10-30/10 : 36th ICANN meetings in Seoul - South Korea
>> 1/11- 4/11 : ICT conference in Baku - Azerbaijan
>> 9/11-10/11 : Seminarie Vlaams parlement
>> 15/11-18/11 : Internet Governance Forum Sharm El Sheikh - Egypt
>> <------------------------------------------------------------------>
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Ian Peter schreef:
>>> Then it is starting to look like a 7pm ­ 8pm meeeting ­ how does that sound,
>>> particularly for those who have been at GigaNet all day?
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On 27/10/09 7:07 AM, "Raquel Gatto" <raquelgatto at uol.com.br> wrote:
>>> 
>>>     Hi Ian, we are expecting to finish the GigaNet Symposium at 18:30
>>>     and we have already a room booked with Secretariat. I think we
>>>     could ask an hour extension for IGC meeting. Please send me an
>>>     e-mail if you agree so we can organize this.
>>> 
>>>     Thanks, Raquel
>>>      
>>>     Em 25/10/2009 20:55, *Ian Peter < ian.peter at ianpeter.com >* escreveu:
>>> 
>>> 
>>>         IGC Meeting at Sharm?
>>>         Folks, we should lock into our calendars a time for an IGC
>>>         meeting at Sharm. I suggest we need about an hour, no more..
>>>                   In the past we have done this on the evening before the
>>> event
>>>         and immediately after the GIGANET event. That would make it
>>>         about 5.30pm (I guess?), on November 14.
>>>                   Does that suit most people? Also, could those involved
>>> with
>>>         organising GigaNet  let us know finishing time, and also which
>>>         rooms you are using? I s there a room booked we can use or
>>>         should I book this via Secretariat?
>>> 
>>> 
>>>     ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>     ____________________________________________________________
>>>     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
>>> 
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> 
>>> 
>>> No virus found in this incoming message.
>>> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com <http://www.avg.com>  Version: 8.5.423 / Virus
>>> Database: 270.14.33/2461 - Release Date: 10/26/09 20:22:00
>>> 
>>>   
>> 
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> 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/20091028/594082d3/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

From rudi.vansnick at isoc.be  Wed Oct 28 00:14:44 2009
From: rudi.vansnick at isoc.be (Rudi Vansnick)
Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2009 13:14:44 +0900
Subject: [governance] IGC Meeting at Sharm?
In-Reply-To: <C70E01D3.7682%ian.peter@ianpeter.com>
References: <C70E01D3.7682%ian.peter@ianpeter.com>
Message-ID: <4AE7C534.6040306@isoc.be>

Thanks Ian for setting this up. I've not yet attended a physical meeting 
of Internet Governance group so I will be pleased to present myself and 
get you all know by "face". I'm at this very moment in Seoul for he 36th 
ICANN meeting and a lot is discussed on the governance aspect from ICANN 
perspective.

See you all soon

Rudi Vansnick
President Internet Society Belgium vzw
Voorzitter TIK vzw
Board member EURALO (ALAC - ICANN)
ccNSO liaison ALAC


Ian Peter schreef:
>
> Sounds like this will be the best time then – so lets settle on 7pm, 
> November 14, same room as GigaNet. Ive asked Raquel to book this for 
> us – I’ll advise room name in a reminder a bit closer to the event.
>
> I don’t think we have a huge agenda to get through and we should aim 
> to finish by 8pm at the latest. But it is important I think to have 
> the opportunity to meet face to face before the IGF starts, 
> particularly for people who havent attended before and would like to 
> get acquainted.
>
> Ian Peter
>
> On 28/10/09 12:58 PM, "Hempal Shrestha" <hempalshrestha at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>     Hi ,
>
>     same case with me, I will also try to be in the IGC Meeting on 14th
>
>     Best Regards,
>
>     Hempal Shrestha
>
>     On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 1:08 AM, Rudi Vansnick
>     <rudi.vansnick at isoc.be> wrote:
>
>         Arriving in Sharm El Sheikh on the13th in the afternoon and
>         having a full day meeting with ISOC, I think I will be
>         available for a meeting around 7pm.
>
>         Best regards,
>
>         Rudi Vansnick
>         President Internet Society Belgium vzw
>         Voorzitter TIK vzw
>         Board member EURALO (ALAC - ICANN)
>
>         Tel: +32 (0)70 77 39 39
>         GSM: +32 (0)475 28 16 32
>         www.isoc.be <http://www.isoc.be>  <http://www.isoc.be> -
>         www.vansnick.eu <http://www.vansnick.eu>
>
>         <------------ Travels and activities in the coming weeks
>         ---------->
>         23/10-30/10 : 36th ICANN meetings in Seoul - South Korea
>         1/11- 4/11 : ICT conference in Baku - Azerbaijan
>         9/11-10/11 : Seminarie Vlaams parlement
>         15/11-18/11 : Internet Governance Forum Sharm El Sheikh - Egypt
>         <------------------------------------------------------------------>
>
>
>
>         Ian Peter schreef:
>
>             Then it is starting to look like a 7pm – 8pm meeeting –
>             how does that sound, particularly for those who have been
>             at GigaNet all day?
>
>
>
>
>             On 27/10/09 7:07 AM, "Raquel Gatto"
>             <raquelgatto at uol.com.br> wrote:
>
>                 Hi Ian, we are expecting to finish the GigaNet
>             Symposium at 18:30
>                 and we have already a room booked with Secretariat. I
>             think we
>                 could ask an hour extension for IGC meeting. Please
>             send me an
>                 e-mail if you agree so we can organize this.
>
>                 Thanks, Raquel
>                 
>                 Em 25/10/2009 20:55, *Ian Peter <
>             ian.peter at ianpeter.com >* escreveu:
>
>
>                     IGC Meeting at Sharm?
>                     Folks, we should lock into our calendars a time
>             for an IGC
>                     meeting at Sharm. I suggest we need about an hour,
>             no more..
>                               In the past we have done this on the
>             evening before the event
>                     and immediately after the GIGANET event. That
>             would make it
>                     about 5.30pm (I guess?), on November 14.
>                               Does that suit most people? Also, could
>             those involved with
>                     organising GigaNet  let us know finishing time,
>             and also which
>                     rooms you are using? I s there a room booked we
>             can use or
>                     should I book this via Secretariat?
>
>
>               
>              ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>               
>              ____________________________________________________________
>                 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
>
>             ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>             No virus found in this incoming message.
>             Checked by AVG - www.avg.com <http://www.avg.com>
>              Version: 8.5.423 / Virus Database: 270.14.33/2461 -
>             Release Date: 10/26/09 20:22:00
>
>               
>
>
>         ____________________________________________________________
>         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
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com 
> Version: 8.5.423 / Virus Database: 270.14.34/2463 - Release Date: 10/27/09 15:50:00
>
>   

____________________________________________________________
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


From danielle.mincio at bcu.unil.ch  Wed Oct 28 05:31:59 2009
From: danielle.mincio at bcu.unil.ch (Danielle Mincio)
Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2009 10:31:59 +0100
Subject: [governance] =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Disparition_de_Francis_Muguet_condol?=
 =?ISO-8859-1?Q?=E9ances?=
Message-ID: <p06230901c70dbe2e2c6a@[130.223.131.161]>

Chère Flore,

Vous ne me connaissez  pas. J'ai connu votre père 
aux séances  du SMSI puis du suivi du SMSI où son 
intelligence, son dynamisme et sa disponibilité 
ont notamment permis aux bibliothèques de voir 
leur rôle reconnu dans la société de 
l'information.
La dernière fois que je l'ai vu c'était à Genève 
fin mai, il était en pleine forme. La nouvelle de 
sa disparition a été un choc.
C'est en mon nom et au nom de l'IFLA que je vous 
présente mes sincères condoléances.
Je ne pourrai être présente aux obsèques à Paris 
mais aurai une pensée pour lui et tous ceux qu'il 
laisse orphelin.

De tout coeur avec vous
--
Danielle Mincio
Member of IFLA Governing Board 2007-2009, 2009-2011
Conservateur des manuscrits
Responsable PAC
Bibliothèque cantonale et universitaire
Unithèque
CH 1015 Lausanne Dorigny
Tél +41 21 692 47 83
____________________________________________________________
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


From jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com  Wed Oct 28 14:50:22 2009
From: jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com (Jeffrey A. Williams)
Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2009 13:50:22 -0500 (GMT-05:00)
Subject: [governance] IGC Meeting at Sharm?
Message-ID: <27060545.1256755823131.JavaMail.root@mswamui-swiss.atl.sa.earthlink.net>

An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20091028/caac28d5/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

From gpaque at gmail.com  Wed Oct 28 15:10:19 2009
From: gpaque at gmail.com (Ginger Paque)
Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2009 14:40:19 -0430
Subject: [governance] IGC Meeting at Sharm?
In-Reply-To: <27060545.1256755823131.JavaMail.root@mswamui-swiss.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
References: <27060545.1256755823131.JavaMail.root@mswamui-swiss.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <4AE8971B.5090209@gmail.com>

An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20091028/bd9b7470/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

From shailam at yahoo.com  Wed Oct 28 16:19:34 2009
From: shailam at yahoo.com (shaila mistry)
Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2009 13:19:34 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [governance] IGC Meeting at Sharm?
In-Reply-To: <4AE8971B.5090209@gmail.com>
References: <27060545.1256755823131.JavaMail.root@mswamui-swiss.atl.sa.earthlink.net> <4AE8971B.5090209@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <334670.8755.qm@web55207.mail.re4.yahoo.com>

Hi Ginger
Is there any interest in a hub in Orange County in California?

regards

Shaila Rao Mistry
Jayco MMI
President
Input Technology With A Human Touch
 
MWOSB         ITAR
NAICS: 334419, 334119, 541330, 335931
www.jaycopanels.com
 Tel:  951 738 2000 
 
 From: Ginger Paque <gpaque at gmail.com>
To: Jeffrey A. Williams <jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com>
Cc: governance at lists.cpsr.org; Raquel Gatto <raquelgatto at uol.com.br>; Ian Peter <ian.peter at ianpeter.com>
Sent: Wed, October 28, 2009 12:10:19 PM
Subject: Re: [governance] IGC Meeting at Sharm?

For all those who are interested, the list of registered hubs and their information is available on the IGF 2009 website:
http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/index.php/component/content/article/84-remote-participation-/446-remote-hubs-2009
There are currently eight registered hubs, in Belgrade, Serbia; Colombia; Accra, Sao Paolo, Buenos Aires, Argentina; Peru; Philippines and Madrid, with one more in the planning stage (England).

If anyone is interested in organizing a hub, please register on the IGF website, or email me for more information.

This is one excellent way to attend the IGF remotely, if you don't want to attent "alone" from your office or home.

Best,
Ginger

Jeffrey A. Williams wrote: 
Ginger and all,
> 
>  As I assumed it appears clear that as of today there are no remote hubs for remote
>participation to occur.  Is than there a date specific when those hubs will be ready
>and working and will some sort of an announcment on this list forum be forthcoming
>in this regard?  
> 
>  BTW, please include me in the remote participation interest if and when such
>hubs are avaliable and working fully and properly.
>
>
>
>-----Original Message----- 
>>From: Ginger Paque 
>>Sent: Oct 27, 2009 5:45 PM 
>>To: "Jeffrey A. Williams" 
>>Cc: governance at lists.cpsr.org, Raquel Gatto , Ian Peter 
>>Subject: Re: [governance] IGC Meeting at Sharm? 
>>
>>Testing and final arrangements for remote participation are going on right now as the host country, Egypt, prepares for this years' IGF. More details will be available on the IGF website www.igf2009.org, under the Remote Participation link,  as we get closer to the IGF date.
>>
>>
>>Jeffrey A. Williams wrote: 
>>Ginger and all,
>>> 
>>>  What is the link for the remote participation?  Has it been tested?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>-----Original Message----- 
>>>>From: Ginger Paque 
>>>>Sent: Oct 26, 2009 3:49 PM 
>>>>To: governance at lists.cpsr.org, Raquel Gatto 
>>>>Cc: Ian Peter 
>>>>Subject: Re: [governance] IGC Meeting at Sharm? 
>>>>
>>>>I am glad arrangements are being made for an IGC meeting at IGF 2009. I think this is important. The IGC has been assigned booth 21 in the Village Square. Does anyone have ideas for taking advantage of this space? Is there a particular statement we should print up to give out? Or a half-page flyer about the IGC?
>>>>
>>>>If anyone who is not attending would like to make some points for discussion at the meeting, or suggestions for working in the meeting, Now is the time to do so.
>>>>
>>>>Also: Who else will be attending by Remote Participation besides Hong Xue and I? We should form a Skype group with remote IGC members, AND the members present in Sharm. That way we will have a much better feel for what is going on.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Raquel Gatto wrote: 
>>>>Hi Ian, we are expecting to finish the GigaNet Symposium at 18:30 and we have already a room booked with Secretariat. I think we could ask an hour extension for IGC meeting. Please send me an e-mail if you agree so we can organize this.
>>>>>Thanks, Raquel
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>Em 25/10/2009 20:55, Ian Peter < ian.peter at ianpeter.com > escreveu:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>IGC Meeting at Sharm?
>>>>>>Folks, we should lock into our calendars a time for an IGC meeting at Sharm. I suggest we need about an hour, no more..
>>>>>>
>>>>>>In the past we have done this on the evening before the event and immediately after the GIGANET event. That would make it about 5.30pm (I guess?), on November 14.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Does that suit most people? Also, could those involved with organising GigaNet  let us know finishing time, and also which rooms you are using? I s there a room booked we can use or should I book this via Secretariat? 
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Regards,
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Jeffrey A. Williams
>>>>>>Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 294k members/stakeholders strong!)
>>>>>>"Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" -
>>>>>>   Abraham Lincoln
>>>>>>
>>>>>>"Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is very
>>>>>>often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt
>>>>>>
>>>>>>"If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; liability
>>>>>>depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
>>>>>>P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
>>>>>>United States v. Carroll Towing  (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
>>>>>>===============================================================
>>>>>>Updated 1/26/04
>>>>>>CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS. div. of
>>>>>>Information Network Eng.  INEG. INC.
>>>>>>ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com
>>>>>>Phone: 214-244-4827
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>Regards,
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Jeffrey A. Williams
>>>>>>Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 294k members/stakeholders strong!)
>>>>>>"Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" -
>>>>>>   Abraham Lincoln
>>>>>>
>>>>>>"Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is very
>>>>>>often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt
>>>>>>
>>>>>>"If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; liability
>>>>>>depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
>>>>>>P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
>>>>>>United States v. Carroll Towing  (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
>>>>>>===============================================================
>>>>>>Updated 1/26/04
>>>>>>CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS. div. of
>>>>>>Information Network Eng.  INEG. INC.
>>>>>>ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com
>>>>>>Phone: 214-244-4827
>>>>>>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20091028/0a8e2e40/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

From jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com  Wed Oct 28 17:52:11 2009
From: jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com (Jeffrey A. Williams)
Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2009 16:52:11 -0500 (GMT-05:00)
Subject: [governance] IGC Meeting at Sharm?
Message-ID: <16733585.1256766731653.JavaMail.root@mswamui-chipeau.atl.sa.earthlink.net>

An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20091028/379a62bd/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

From gpaque at gmail.com  Wed Oct 28 18:18:13 2009
From: gpaque at gmail.com (Ginger Paque)
Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2009 17:48:13 -0430
Subject: [governance] IGC Meeting at Sharm?
In-Reply-To: <16733585.1256766731653.JavaMail.root@mswamui-chipeau.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
References: <16733585.1256766731653.JavaMail.root@mswamui-chipeau.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <4AE8C325.2040104@gmail.com>

An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20091028/02852e6e/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

From jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com  Wed Oct 28 18:18:28 2009
From: jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com (Jeffrey A. Williams)
Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2009 17:18:28 -0500 (GMT-05:00)
Subject: [governance] ISOC/IGF outstanding security concerns and IGF funding
Message-ID: <11858993.1256768308675.JavaMail.root@mswamui-chipeau.atl.sa.earthlink.net>

Ginger and all,

  When might the currently outstanding ISOC.BE or which the
ISOC is a funding provider to the IGF be cleaned up or otherwise
properly corrected.  
See:http://www.dnsstuff.com/tools/dnsreport?domain=isoc.be&token=26c007172000b5440af4149b016eb019
and
http://www.dnsstuff.com/tools/dnsreport?domain=intgovforum.org&token=2640b27226a2be4801f417920a6a8015

  Seems to me this should have already been properly addressed/corrected, and
it seems also that before the IGF meeting that these glaring problems would
be cleaned up accordingly.

  I hope that the ISOC in Belgium will NOT be offering or providing
remote access service for anyone in the near future or at least
until they get their DNS cleaned up properly.

Regards,



Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 294k members/stakeholders strong!)
"Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" -
   Abraham Lincoln

"Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is very
often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt

"If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; liability
depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
United States v. Carroll Towing  (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
===============================================================
Updated 1/26/04
CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS. div. of
Information Network Eng.  INEG. INC.
ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com
Phone: 214-244-4827


____________________________________________________________
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


From williams.deirdre at gmail.com  Wed Oct 28 18:27:05 2009
From: williams.deirdre at gmail.com (Deirdre Williams)
Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2009 18:27:05 -0400
Subject: [governance] IGC Meeting at Sharm?
In-Reply-To: <C70E01D3.7682%ian.peter@ianpeter.com>
References: <bf5d709e0910271858x19a4d64p13cf72389aef22f2@mail.gmail.com>
	 <C70E01D3.7682%ian.peter@ianpeter.com>
Message-ID: <fa468ac00910281527p256b7aday3053b1584294edb2@mail.gmail.com>

Dear Ian and others,
I'm a comparative newcomer to this group having been mostly "listening" for
3 or 4 months now.
While I fully understand that the meeting on 14th will be largely for the
social purpose of "de-virtualising" those members who are present to each
other, I would be grateful for some clarification on the question of
membership itself.
I'm looking forward to meeting you all, newly or again,
Deirdre

2009/10/27 Ian Peter <ian.peter at ianpeter.com>

>
> Sounds like this will be the best time then – so lets settle on 7pm,
> November 14, same room as GigaNet. Ive asked Raquel to book this for us –
> I’ll advise room name in a reminder a bit closer to the event.
>
> I don’t think we have a huge agenda to get through and we should aim to
> finish by 8pm at the latest. But it is important I think to have the
> opportunity to meet face to face before the IGF starts, particularly for
> people who havent attended before and would like to get acquainted.
>
> Ian Peter
>
>
> On 28/10/09 12:58 PM, "Hempal Shrestha" <hempalshrestha at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi ,
>
> same case with me, I will also try to be in the IGC Meeting on 14th
>
> Best Regards,
>
> Hempal Shrestha
>
> On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 1:08 AM, Rudi Vansnick <rudi.vansnick at isoc.be>
> wrote:
>
> Arriving in Sharm El Sheikh on the13th in the afternoon and having a full
> day meeting with ISOC, I think I will be available for a meeting around 7pm.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Rudi Vansnick
> President Internet Society Belgium vzw
> Voorzitter TIK vzw
> Board member EURALO (ALAC - ICANN)
>
> Tel: +32 (0)70 77 39 39
> GSM: +32 (0)475 28 16 32
> www.isoc.be <http://www.isoc.be>  <http://www.isoc.be> - www.vansnick.eu <
> http://www.vansnick.eu>
>
>
> <------------ Travels and activities in the coming weeks ---------->
> 23/10-30/10 : 36th ICANN meetings in Seoul - South Korea
> 1/11- 4/11 : ICT conference in Baku - Azerbaijan
> 9/11-10/11 : Seminarie Vlaams parlement
> 15/11-18/11 : Internet Governance Forum Sharm El Sheikh - Egypt
> <------------------------------------------------------------------>
>
>
>
> Ian Peter schreef:
>
> Then it is starting to look like a 7pm – 8pm meeeting – how does that
> sound, particularly for those who have been at GigaNet all day?
>
>
>
>
> On 27/10/09 7:07 AM, "Raquel Gatto" <raquelgatto at uol.com.br> wrote:
>
>     Hi Ian, we are expecting to finish the GigaNet Symposium at 18:30
>     and we have already a room booked with Secretariat. I think we
>     could ask an hour extension for IGC meeting. Please send me an
>     e-mail if you agree so we can organize this.
>
>     Thanks, Raquel
>
>     Em 25/10/2009 20:55, *Ian Peter < ian.peter at ianpeter.com >* escreveu:
>
>
>         IGC Meeting at Sharm?
>         Folks, we should lock into our calendars a time for an IGC
>         meeting at Sharm. I suggest we need about an hour, no more..
>                   In the past we have done this on the evening before the
> event
>         and immediately after the GIGANET event. That would make it
>         about 5.30pm (I guess?), on November 14.
>                   Does that suit most people? Also, could those involved
> with
>         organising GigaNet  let us know finishing time, and also which
>         rooms you are using? I s there a room booked we can use or
>         should I book this via Secretariat?
>
>
>
>  ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>     ____________________________________________________________
>     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
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com <http://www.avg.com>  Version: 8.5.423 /
> Virus Database: 270.14.33/2461 - Release Date: 10/26/09 20:22:00
>
>
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
>
>


-- 
“The fundamental cure for poverty is not money but knowledge" Sir William
Arthur Lewis, Nobel Prize Economics, 1979
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20091028/a7f56a6e/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

From ian.peter at ianpeter.com  Wed Oct 28 18:33:10 2009
From: ian.peter at ianpeter.com (Ian Peter)
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2009 09:33:10 +1100
Subject: [governance] IGC Meeting at Sharm?
In-Reply-To: <fa468ac00910281527p256b7aday3053b1584294edb2@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <C70F11D6.7709%ian.peter@ianpeter.com>

Hi Deidre,

All the information on membership is here

http://www.igcaucus.org/membership

But in terms of the meeting, everyone who is interested, member or not, is
welcome to attend.

Ian Peter


On 29/10/09 9:27 AM, "Deirdre Williams" <williams.deirdre at gmail.com> wrote:

> Dear Ian and others,
> I'm a comparative newcomer to this group having been mostly "listening" for 3
> or 4 months now.
> While I fully understand that the meeting on 14th will be largely for the
> social purpose of "de-virtualising" those members who are present to each
> other, I would be grateful for some clarification on the question of
> membership itself.
> I'm looking forward to meeting you all, newly or again,
> Deirdre
> 
> 2009/10/27 Ian Peter <ian.peter at ianpeter.com>
>> 
>> Sounds like this will be the best time then ­ so lets settle on 7pm, November
>> 14, same room as GigaNet. Ive asked Raquel to book this for us ­ I¹ll advise
>> room name in a reminder a bit closer to the event.
>> 
>> I don¹t think we have a huge agenda to get through and we should aim to
>> finish by 8pm at the latest. But it is important I think to have the
>> opportunity to meet face to face before the IGF starts, particularly for
>> people who havent attended before and would like to get acquainted.
>> 
>> Ian Peter
>> 
>> 
>> On 28/10/09 12:58 PM, "Hempal Shrestha" <hempalshrestha at gmail.com
>> <http://hempalshrestha at gmail.com> > wrote:
>> 
>>> Hi , 
>>> 
>>> same case with me, I will also try to be in the IGC Meeting on 14th
>>> 
>>> Best Regards,
>>> 
>>> Hempal Shrestha
>>> 
>>> On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 1:08 AM, Rudi Vansnick <rudi.vansnick at isoc.be
>>> <http://rudi.vansnick at isoc.be> > wrote:
>>>> Arriving in Sharm El Sheikh on the13th in the afternoon and having a full
>>>> day meeting with ISOC, I think I will be available for a meeting around
>>>> 7pm.
>>>> 
>>>> Best regards,
>>>> 
>>>> Rudi Vansnick
>>>> President Internet Society Belgium vzw
>>>> Voorzitter TIK vzw
>>>> Board member EURALO (ALAC - ICANN)
>>>> 
>>>> Tel: +32 (0)70 77 39 39
>>>> GSM: +32 (0)475 28 16 32
>>>> www.isoc.be <http://www.isoc.be>  <http://www.isoc.be>
>>>>  <http://www.isoc.be> - www.vansnick.eu <http://www.vansnick.eu>
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> <------------ Travels and activities in the coming weeks ---------->
>>>> 23/10-30/10 : 36th ICANN meetings in Seoul - South Korea
>>>> 1/11- 4/11 : ICT conference in Baku - Azerbaijan
>>>> 9/11-10/11 : Seminarie Vlaams parlement
>>>> 15/11-18/11 : Internet Governance Forum Sharm El Sheikh - Egypt
>>>> <------------------------------------------------------------------>
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Ian Peter schreef:
>>>>> Then it is starting to look like a 7pm ­ 8pm meeeting ­ how does that
>>>>> sound, particularly for those who have been at GigaNet all day?
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> On 27/10/09 7:07 AM, "Raquel Gatto" <raquelgatto at uol.com.br
>>>>> <http://raquelgatto at uol.com.br> > wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>     Hi Ian, we are expecting to finish the GigaNet Symposium at 18:30
>>>>>     and we have already a room booked with Secretariat. I think we
>>>>>     could ask an hour extension for IGC meeting. Please send me an
>>>>>     e-mail if you agree so we can organize this.
>>>>> 
>>>>>     Thanks, Raquel
>>>>>      
>>>>>     Em 25/10/2009 20:55, *Ian Peter < ian.peter at ianpeter.com
>>>>> <http://ian.peter at ianpeter.com>  >* escreveu:
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>>         IGC Meeting at Sharm?
>>>>>         Folks, we should lock into our calendars a time for an IGC
>>>>>         meeting at Sharm. I suggest we need about an hour, no more..
>>>>>                   In the past we have done this on the evening before the
>>>>> event
>>>>>         and immediately after the GIGANET event. That would make it
>>>>>         about 5.30pm (I guess?), on November 14.
>>>>>                   Does that suit most people? Also, could those involved
>>>>> with
>>>>>         organising GigaNet  let us know finishing time, and also which
>>>>>         rooms you are using? I s there a room booked we can use or
>>>>>         should I book this via Secretariat?
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>>    
>>>>>  ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>     ____________________________________________________________
>>>>>     You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>>>>>          governance at lists.cpsr.org <http://governance at lists.cpsr.org>
>>>>>     To be removed from the list, send any message to:
>>>>>          governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org
>>>>> <http://governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org>
>>>>> 
>>>>>     For all list information and functions, see:
>>>>>          http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance
>>>>> 
>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> No virus found in this incoming message.
>>>>> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com <http://www.avg.com>  <http://www.avg.com>
>>>>>  Version: 8.5.423 / Virus Database: 270.14.33/2461 - Release Date:
>>>>> 10/26/09 20:22:00
>>>>> 
>>>>>   
>>>> 
>>>> ____________________________________________________________
>>>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>>>>     governance at lists.cpsr.org <http://governance at lists.cpsr.org>
>>>> To be removed from the list, send any message to:
>>>>     governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org
>>>> <http://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 <http://governance at lists.cpsr.org>
>>> To be removed from the list, send any message to:
>>>      governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org
>>> <http://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/20091029/a6b03a9d/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

From lehto.paul at gmail.com  Wed Oct 28 19:36:58 2009
From: lehto.paul at gmail.com (Paul Lehto)
Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2009 16:36:58 -0700
Subject: [governance] Internet voting and work of Craig Simon of this list
Message-ID: <76f819dd0910281636h452b73dbia24e23dc9be8ed03@mail.gmail.com>

Dear Mr. Simon, Does your work address some of the preliminary
objections and concerns in the links below?  If it dispenses with
them, I'd be particularly interested in reading what you have to say
in your links below (though I'm not saying I won't in any event)

The fundamental, and a very fundamental difference indeed, between a
typical computer science project and internet voting is that (a) the
interests of the participants in voting are wildly diverse and
contradictory, especially considering that a valid election is
necessary to replace an incumbent and incumbents typically control all
of the electino laws and rules, thus lacking any real incentive to do
it right, and (b) the voting for democratic purposes must be
transparent (except for one's own private or secret ballot) and,
unlike the typical corporate context, the insiders are a much greater
threat than even employees in banks are for embezzlement (the #1 theft
risk in nearly all businesses) because elections determine the power
and composition of the government, yet are run by governments or their
direct designees, creating an intense conflict of interest.

The links to the internet voting reports, or one of them plus its
follow up, are below.

Paul Lehto, Juris Doctor

A report written for the Air Force about their SERVE system, Jan 2004.
"A Security Analysis of the Secure Electronic Registration and Voting
Experiment (SERVE)" Co-authors are Dr. David Jefferson, Dr. Aviel D.
Rubin, Dr. Barbara Simons, and Dr. David Wagner. The points are still
valid according to everything I've heard or the authors are aware of.
The same web page also includes a link to "The new report in response
to the May 2007 DoD report on Voting Technologies for UOCAVA Citizens"
http://www.servesecurityreport.org/


On 10/19/09, Craig Simon <cls at rkey.com> wrote:
> If you folks actually do start discussing scalable online democracy in
> practical terms, please keep in mind that I've been taking concrete
> steps on this.
>
> There's still a very long way to go, but you can experience the current
> prototype on Facebook at http://apps.facebook.com/we-vote/ .
>
> This project is a direct consequence of my Ph.D. research on the DNS
> governance debates (see http://www.rkey.com/essays/diss.pdf ).
>
> Craig Simon
>
> Roland Perry wrote:
>
>> I would conclude that you weren't interested in discussing practical
>> democracy, just the theory. Hey, I'm an engineer at heart; I like
>> talking about practical solutions.
>>
>>  >Please excuse me if I'm wrong, but I just get the abiding impression
>>  >you're not really serious about furthering democracy if you're not
>>  >upset with ICANN right now...
>>
>> I've repeatedly said I'm not implying any opinion about ICANN (either
>> positive or negative) as a result of this discussion with you.
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
>


-- 
Paul R Lehto, J.D.
P.O. Box #1
Ishpeming, MI  49849
lehto.paul at gmail.com
906-204-4026
____________________________________________________________
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


From fouadbajwa at gmail.com  Wed Oct 28 22:07:30 2009
From: fouadbajwa at gmail.com (Fouad Bajwa)
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2009 11:07:30 +0900
Subject: [governance] IGC Meeting at Sharm?
In-Reply-To: <C70E01D3.7682%ian.peter@ianpeter.com>
References: <bf5d709e0910271858x19a4d64p13cf72389aef22f2@mail.gmail.com>
	 <C70E01D3.7682%ian.peter@ianpeter.com>
Message-ID: <701af9f70910281907l6eb1dedenf08f1371d54cb7dc@mail.gmail.com>

Hi Ian,

I think this is a good decision to have our meeting. The benefit to
have the meeting around 7pm is very appropriate as some of the  IGC
members are participating in the IGF with support from ISOC and the
orientation/arrival/introduction meeting should end just around that
time. Hopefully, we will be on time but as soon as the ISOC team
relieves us :o)

Cheers all!

See you all in Sharam!

On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 12:12 PM, Ian Peter <ian.peter at ianpeter.com> wrote:
>
> Sounds like this will be the best time then – so lets settle on 7pm,
> November 14, same room as GigaNet. Ive asked Raquel to book this for us –
> I’ll advise room name in a reminder a bit closer to the event.
>
> I don’t think we have a huge agenda to get through and we should aim to
> finish by 8pm at the latest. But it is important I think to have the
> opportunity to meet face to face before the IGF starts, particularly for
> people who havent attended before and would like to get acquainted.
>
> Ian Peter
>
> On 28/10/09 12:58 PM, "Hempal Shrestha" <hempalshrestha at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi ,
>
> same case with me, I will also try to be in the IGC Meeting on 14th
>
> Best Regards,
>
> Hempal Shrestha
>
> On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 1:08 AM, Rudi Vansnick <rudi.vansnick at isoc.be>
> wrote:
>
> Arriving in Sharm El Sheikh on the13th in the afternoon and having a full
> day meeting with ISOC, I think I will be available for a meeting around 7pm.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Rudi Vansnick
> President Internet Society Belgium vzw
> Voorzitter TIK vzw
> Board member EURALO (ALAC - ICANN)
>
> Tel: +32 (0)70 77 39 39
> GSM: +32 (0)475 28 16 32
> www.isoc.be <http://www.isoc.be>  <http://www.isoc.be> - www.vansnick.eu
> <http://www.vansnick.eu>
>
> <------------ Travels and activities in the coming weeks ---------->
> 23/10-30/10 : 36th ICANN meetings in Seoul - South Korea
> 1/11- 4/11 : ICT conference in Baku - Azerbaijan
> 9/11-10/11 : Seminarie Vlaams parlement
> 15/11-18/11 : Internet Governance Forum Sharm El Sheikh - Egypt
> <------------------------------------------------------------------>
>
>
>
> Ian Peter schreef:
>
> Then it is starting to look like a 7pm – 8pm meeeting – how does that sound,
> particularly for those who have been at GigaNet all day?
>
>
>
>
> On 27/10/09 7:07 AM, "Raquel Gatto" <raquelgatto at uol.com.br> wrote:
>
>     Hi Ian, we are expecting to finish the GigaNet Symposium at 18:30
>     and we have already a room booked with Secretariat. I think we
>     could ask an hour extension for IGC meeting. Please send me an
>     e-mail if you agree so we can organize this.
>
>     Thanks, Raquel
>
>     Em 25/10/2009 20:55, *Ian Peter < ian.peter at ianpeter.com >* escreveu:
>
>
>         IGC Meeting at Sharm?
>         Folks, we should lock into our calendars a time for an IGC
>         meeting at Sharm. I suggest we need about an hour, no more..
>                   In the past we have done this on the evening before the
> event
>         and immediately after the GIGANET event. That would make it
>         about 5.30pm (I guess?), on November 14.
>                   Does that suit most people? Also, could those involved
> with
>         organising GigaNet  let us know finishing time, and also which
>         rooms you are using? I s there a room booked we can use or
>         should I book this via Secretariat?
>
>
>     ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>     ____________________________________________________________
>     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
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com <http://www.avg.com>  Version: 8.5.423 / Virus
> Database: 270.14.33/2461 - Release Date: 10/26/09 20:22:00
>
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ATVDW1tDZzA
____________________________________________________________
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


From pbekono at gmail.com  Thu Oct 29 07:43:12 2009
From: pbekono at gmail.com (Pascal Bekono)
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2009 12:43:12 +0100
Subject: [governance] IG Youth E-consultation
In-Reply-To: <80f151490910290440p17bcd435lf48efb9c8b44f29c@mail.gmail.com>
References: <80f151490910290440p17bcd435lf48efb9c8b44f29c@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <80f151490910290443q3480d74fgb8e895cc04937823@mail.gmail.com>

Dear All,
We inform you that Youth and IG Team is gathering inputs and feedbacks from
youth and the entire IG community.
These information will allow you to contribute for a suitable IG youth
strategy.


Please take just 10 minutes to your precious time to fulfil the short
questionnaire available at:
http://www.surveymonkey.com/s.aspx?sm=KrbuILlnM7lR_2fEAcETcoOw_3d_3d

We need your voice !


Deadline: 4th Nov.


Thank you,


Pascal
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20091029/bdb6e7c8/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

From cls at rkey.com  Thu Oct 29 08:43:46 2009
From: cls at rkey.com (Craig Simon)
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2009 08:43:46 -0400
Subject: [governance] Re: Internet voting and work of Craig Simon of this
 list
In-Reply-To: <76f819dd0910281636h452b73dbia24e23dc9be8ed03@mail.gmail.com>
References: <76f819dd0910281636h452b73dbia24e23dc9be8ed03@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4AE98E02.2080506@rkey.com>

To reiterate what I wrote when this discussion was raised in an earlier 
thread:

... where formal public law-making and officer-selecting elections are 
concerned, I'm not an advocate of Internet voting in particular, or of 
electronic voting in general. I agree with those who argue that a system 
of physically auditable records marked by the voter in a secret manner 
(which we might call the "Hard Australian Ballot") promises a far more 
legitimate account of voter desires.

...By putting aside (for now) the daunting but critical challenge of 
pristine legitimacy, it's possible to address other important ones... 
namely, how to facilitate a style of mass, diversified participation 
that can effectively build consensus around valuable ideas.

++++

So, it's clear enough that the system I've been developing is indeed 
flavored more like a computer science project than an immediate solution 
to the hard problems of online voting. Nevertheless, it's a project with 
a very practical intent.

Successful online-based democracies will need fair, scalable venues for 
debate and discussion at least as much as they need secure election 
processes. The system I've been developing is designed to enable online 
democracy in the sense of a town hall, caucus, Indaba, or Loya Jirga, 
where opinions are rendered in public and decision-making is an open 
process.

The goal is to build a set of tools that members of large online 
communities can use to: 1) gain the best possible awareness of candidate 
options being raised within their communities, and; 2) build consensus 
around the preferred candidates.

The project I've got in mind requires many pieces. One is already in 
operation as a ranked choice voting system that provides an interactive 
ballot and a rich visual display of results in real time. Please feel 
free to try it out at http://apps.facebook.com/we-vote/

Thanks for your interest,

Craig Simon

Paul Lehto wrote:
> Dear Mr. Simon, Does your work address some of the preliminary
> objections and concerns in the links below?  If it dispenses with
> them, I'd be particularly interested in reading what you have to say
> in your links below (though I'm not saying I won't in any event)
> 
> The fundamental, and a very fundamental difference indeed, between a
> typical computer science project and internet voting is that (a) the
> interests of the participants in voting are wildly diverse and
> contradictory, especially considering that a valid election is
> necessary to replace an incumbent and incumbents typically control all
> of the electino laws and rules, thus lacking any real incentive to do
> it right, and (b) the voting for democratic purposes must be
> transparent (except for one's own private or secret ballot) and,
> unlike the typical corporate context, the insiders are a much greater
> threat than even employees in banks are for embezzlement (the #1 theft
> risk in nearly all businesses) because elections determine the power
> and composition of the government, yet are run by governments or their
> direct designees, creating an intense conflict of interest.
> 
> The links to the internet voting reports, or one of them plus its
> follow up, are below.
> 
> Paul Lehto, Juris Doctor
> 
> A report written for the Air Force about their SERVE system, Jan 2004.
> "A Security Analysis of the Secure Electronic Registration and Voting
> Experiment (SERVE)" Co-authors are Dr. David Jefferson, Dr. Aviel D.
> Rubin, Dr. Barbara Simons, and Dr. David Wagner. The points are still
> valid according to everything I've heard or the authors are aware of.
> The same web page also includes a link to "The new report in response
> to the May 2007 DoD report on Voting Technologies for UOCAVA Citizens"
> http://www.servesecurityreport.org/
> 
> 
> On 10/19/09, Craig Simon <cls at rkey.com> wrote:
>> If you folks actually do start discussing scalable online democracy in
>> practical terms, please keep in mind that I've been taking concrete
>> steps on this.
>>
>> There's still a very long way to go, but you can experience the current
>> prototype on Facebook at http://apps.facebook.com/we-vote/ .
>>
>> This project is a direct consequence of my Ph.D. research on the DNS
>> governance debates (see http://www.rkey.com/essays/diss.pdf ).
>>
>> Craig Simon
>>
>> Roland Perry wrote:
>>
>>> I would conclude that you weren't interested in discussing practical
>>> democracy, just the theory. Hey, I'm an engineer at heart; I like
>>> talking about practical solutions.
>>>
>>>  >Please excuse me if I'm wrong, but I just get the abiding impression
>>>  >you're not really serious about furthering democracy if you're not
>>>  >upset with ICANN right now...
>>>
>>> I've repeatedly said I'm not implying any opinion about ICANN (either
>>> positive or negative) as a result of this discussion with you.
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> 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


From lehto.paul at gmail.com  Thu Oct 29 08:52:58 2009
From: lehto.paul at gmail.com (Paul Lehto)
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2009 08:52:58 -0400
Subject: [governance] Re: Internet voting and work of Craig Simon of this
 list
In-Reply-To: <4AE98E02.2080506@rkey.com>
References: <76f819dd0910281636h452b73dbia24e23dc9be8ed03@mail.gmail.com>
	 <4AE98E02.2080506@rkey.com>
Message-ID: <76f819dd0910290552l5dabe1d4p5bc0308fe2cbcb91@mail.gmail.com>

An internet-based speech forum, at least one that accepts as a model
the idea of presenting all points of view to the decision-makers
(voters) without substantial filtering is something the internet could
do a great job on, since the omission of a point of view would be
relatively easy to show.

I quibble just a bit with your use of the word "pristine" as that is
easily taken in some kind of utopian sense.  Democratic elections are
PURE procedure -- nothing but procedure.  IF the procedure is not
basically "pristine" you've got a defective procedure, which is to
say, nothing at all but a nullity.  Incorrectly designed procedures or
improperly performed procedures nullify the results or at least create
serious questions about whether results should be nullified (human
laziness wanting to rescue the election from being redone if at all
possible).  I'm not saying Craig intended the utopian sense, but I'm
reacting to the use of the word "pristine" nevertheless.

Pristine is a reasonable expectation when, as to voting, we are, after
all, only doing simple arithmetic, and adding only by 1s.  All of us
can do that prior to leaving compulsory schooling.

Paul Lehto, Juris Doctor

On 10/29/09, Craig Simon <cls at rkey.com> wrote:
> To reiterate what I wrote when this discussion was raised in an earlier
> thread:
>
> ... where formal public law-making and officer-selecting elections are
> concerned, I'm not an advocate of Internet voting in particular, or of
> electronic voting in general. I agree with those who argue that a system
> of physically auditable records marked by the voter in a secret manner
> (which we might call the "Hard Australian Ballot") promises a far more
> legitimate account of voter desires.
>
> ...By putting aside (for now) the daunting but critical challenge of
> pristine legitimacy, it's possible to address other important ones...
> namely, how to facilitate a style of mass, diversified participation
> that can effectively build consensus around valuable ideas.
>
> ++++
>
> So, it's clear enough that the system I've been developing is indeed
> flavored more like a computer science project than an immediate solution
> to the hard problems of online voting. Nevertheless, it's a project with
> a very practical intent.
>
> Successful online-based democracies will need fair, scalable venues for
> debate and discussion at least as much as they need secure election
> processes. The system I've been developing is designed to enable online
> democracy in the sense of a town hall, caucus, Indaba, or Loya Jirga,
> where opinions are rendered in public and decision-making is an open
> process.
>
> The goal is to build a set of tools that members of large online
> communities can use to: 1) gain the best possible awareness of candidate
> options being raised within their communities, and; 2) build consensus
> around the preferred candidates.
>
> The project I've got in mind requires many pieces. One is already in
> operation as a ranked choice voting system that provides an interactive
> ballot and a rich visual display of results in real time. Please feel
> free to try it out at http://apps.facebook.com/we-vote/
>
> Thanks for your interest,
>
> Craig Simon
>
> Paul Lehto wrote:
>> Dear Mr. Simon, Does your work address some of the preliminary
>> objections and concerns in the links below?  If it dispenses with
>> them, I'd be particularly interested in reading what you have to say
>> in your links below (though I'm not saying I won't in any event)
>>
>> The fundamental, and a very fundamental difference indeed, between a
>> typical computer science project and internet voting is that (a) the
>> interests of the participants in voting are wildly diverse and
>> contradictory, especially considering that a valid election is
>> necessary to replace an incumbent and incumbents typically control all
>> of the electino laws and rules, thus lacking any real incentive to do
>> it right, and (b) the voting for democratic purposes must be
>> transparent (except for one's own private or secret ballot) and,
>> unlike the typical corporate context, the insiders are a much greater
>> threat than even employees in banks are for embezzlement (the #1 theft
>> risk in nearly all businesses) because elections determine the power
>> and composition of the government, yet are run by governments or their
>> direct designees, creating an intense conflict of interest.
>>
>> The links to the internet voting reports, or one of them plus its
>> follow up, are below.
>>
>> Paul Lehto, Juris Doctor
>>
>> A report written for the Air Force about their SERVE system, Jan 2004.
>> "A Security Analysis of the Secure Electronic Registration and Voting
>> Experiment (SERVE)" Co-authors are Dr. David Jefferson, Dr. Aviel D.
>> Rubin, Dr. Barbara Simons, and Dr. David Wagner. The points are still
>> valid according to everything I've heard or the authors are aware of.
>> The same web page also includes a link to "The new report in response
>> to the May 2007 DoD report on Voting Technologies for UOCAVA Citizens"
>> http://www.servesecurityreport.org/
>>
>>
>> On 10/19/09, Craig Simon <cls at rkey.com> wrote:
>>> If you folks actually do start discussing scalable online democracy in
>>> practical terms, please keep in mind that I've been taking concrete
>>> steps on this.
>>>
>>> There's still a very long way to go, but you can experience the current
>>> prototype on Facebook at http://apps.facebook.com/we-vote/ .
>>>
>>> This project is a direct consequence of my Ph.D. research on the DNS
>>> governance debates (see http://www.rkey.com/essays/diss.pdf ).
>>>
>>> Craig Simon
>>>
>>> Roland Perry wrote:
>>>
>>>> I would conclude that you weren't interested in discussing practical
>>>> democracy, just the theory. Hey, I'm an engineer at heart; I like
>>>> talking about practical solutions.
>>>>
>>>>  >Please excuse me if I'm wrong, but I just get the abiding impression
>>>>  >you're not really serious about furthering democracy if you're not
>>>>  >upset with ICANN right now...
>>>>
>>>> I've repeatedly said I'm not implying any opinion about ICANN (either
>>>> positive or negative) as a result of this discussion with you.
>>> ____________________________________________________________
>>> 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
>>>
>>
>>
>


-- 
Paul R Lehto, J.D.
P.O. Box #1
Ishpeming, MI  49849
lehto.paul at gmail.com
906-204-4026
____________________________________________________________
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


From tapani.tarvainen at effi.org  Thu Oct 29 08:57:39 2009
From: tapani.tarvainen at effi.org (Tapani Tarvainen)
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2009 14:57:39 +0200
Subject: [governance] Open Source Voting Software Concept Released
In-Reply-To: <76f819dd0910270532k686e51cxbf16d1a846e41fcb@mail.gmail.com>
References: <28243427.1256500077992.JavaMail.root@elwamui-darkeyed.atl.sa.earthlink.net> <76f819dd0910261654m73e029a2x6ae5c978e7406ca9@mail.gmail.com> <20091027044238.GA3779@musti.tarvainen.info> <76f819dd0910270532k686e51cxbf16d1a846e41fcb@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20091029125739.GG14473@thorion.it.jyu.fi>

On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 08:32:30AM -0400, Paul Lehto (lehto.paul at gmail.com) wrote:

> Sure.  Open source inspectors could still be paid. But by whom? The
> government? If so they are disqualified by conflict of interest since
> the government's own power is determined by elections.  If paid by a
> private party, they are not truly acting in the public interest even
> if the claim to be...  Only citizen violunteers will truly
> (potentially) act in the public interest, and only ON THE WHOLE -- not
> individually.  And these volunteers just don't have the resources to
> keep up with professional hackers.

Perhaps I misunderstood you - I thought you were saying closed
source is better than open in the context of election systems.
If your point was that open source does not solve the big problems,
fine - I'll grant that even if it is better than closed source here,
by itself it doesn't make much of a difference.

But in principle I think voting systems (electronic or otherwise)
should be as open as possible in all their aspects, so that all
who want can inspect them to convince themselves of their fairness,
and that implies open source (or at least public source),
among other things.

-- 
Tapani Tarvainen
____________________________________________________________
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


From lehto.paul at gmail.com  Thu Oct 29 09:27:00 2009
From: lehto.paul at gmail.com (Paul Lehto)
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2009 09:27:00 -0400
Subject: [governance] Open Source Voting Software Concept Released
In-Reply-To: <20091029125739.GG14473@thorion.it.jyu.fi>
References: <28243427.1256500077992.JavaMail.root@elwamui-darkeyed.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
	 <76f819dd0910261654m73e029a2x6ae5c978e7406ca9@mail.gmail.com>
	 <20091027044238.GA3779@musti.tarvainen.info>
	 <76f819dd0910270532k686e51cxbf16d1a846e41fcb@mail.gmail.com>
	 <20091029125739.GG14473@thorion.it.jyu.fi>
Message-ID: <76f819dd0910290627p352c116fx5a2c0e642f6ae30b@mail.gmail.com>

We agree voting systems must be as open as possible.

My point, however, is that computerized systems can never be open
enough.  Yes, open source is better than closed, to be sure.  But
"open" source in a democracy means that not only the worst suspects
(the vendors and the insiders) have access to make changes but also
all the voters and non-voters.  As both voters and non-voters have
incentives and motivations not just to correct software but also to
rig it, "opening" the software to changes will only mean that
sophisticated outsiders have a chance to also rig the software in
addition to the usual insiders.  The situation is quite different with
regular software where all want the software to work well, and this
unity of interest can allow open source to do its magic.

We can put a man or woman on the moon, but only because all the
engineers fundamentally agree on the goal and the general means of
doing it.  Then the more eyes open for errors or opportunities the
better.

But with elections, we have folks who want to eliminate the space
program, some perhaps who want to see the astronauts dead because they
are of a "vile" political orientation, some want the spaceship to land
in their state and others in their state.  In other words, the radical
lack of unity of interest makes a common project a basic impossibility
if our goal is something approaching perfection.  And since elections
are pure procedure, something approaching pure perfection must be
achieved because a defective procedure is nothing but that: Defective
and void.

I'm all for computers and open source in many contexts, but the
extremely unique considerations as applied to IMPORTANT elections that
are binding in nature militates strongly against their use.

Example: I trust a computer auto-pilot to guide a plane I"m on. But to
analogize to elections, we'd have to posit strong disagreement among
not only passengers and crew members about how to fly, but where to
land, we'd have to let every single "voter" on the ground have access
to a voting machine capable of uploading a virus that affects the
overall "result" of the plane, we'd have to publish a year or more in
advance the one day per year this plane will fly, and load the plane
with billions of dollars and immense power for anyone capable of using
a virus to control the plane.  And if one succeeds in crashing the
plane, the incumbents stay in power until a proper election can be
had, in order, they will say, to "avoid anarchy."

In the plane example above, opening the code to open source is only
making the problem worse, since no volunteer can detect all double
trojan horses and in any case we've no way to know for sure if a
volunteer's honest or if they're a true computer genius, and in any
event, even a genius can't honestly certify they've detected all
trojan horses in a piece of software, and even if they could, there's
no necessary connection at all between the escrowed/tested software
and what's really running the plane in real time.

One would have to be a fool to board this once a  year flight for all
these financial and political high stakes, if the plane is run by
computers, even if they, like I, normally have no problem with
computers assisting in the flights of planes.

Paul Lehto

PS If you are of Finnish or perhaps Estonian descent, "moikka" to you
Tapani Tarvainen.  Harri Hursti of Finland stars in the movie "Hacking
Democracy" showing how to change an election given access to one
voting machine for about 5 minutes.

On 10/29/09, Tapani Tarvainen <tapani.tarvainen at effi.org> wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 08:32:30AM -0400, Paul Lehto (lehto.paul at gmail.com)
> wrote:
>
>> Sure.  Open source inspectors could still be paid. But by whom? The
>> government? If so they are disqualified by conflict of interest since
>> the government's own power is determined by elections.  If paid by a
>> private party, they are not truly acting in the public interest even
>> if the claim to be...  Only citizen violunteers will truly
>> (potentially) act in the public interest, and only ON THE WHOLE -- not
>> individually.  And these volunteers just don't have the resources to
>> keep up with professional hackers.
>
> Perhaps I misunderstood you - I thought you were saying closed
> source is better than open in the context of election systems.
> If your point was that open source does not solve the big problems,
> fine - I'll grant that even if it is better than closed source here,
> by itself it doesn't make much of a difference.
>
> But in principle I think voting systems (electronic or otherwise)
> should be as open as possible in all their aspects, so that all
> who want can inspect them to convince themselves of their fairness,
> and that implies open source (or at least public source),
> among other things.
>
> --
> Tapani Tarvainen
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
>


-- 
Paul R Lehto, J.D.
P.O. Box #1
Ishpeming, MI  49849
lehto.paul at gmail.com
906-204-4026
____________________________________________________________
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


From charityg at diplomacy.edu  Thu Oct 29 09:41:43 2009
From: charityg at diplomacy.edu (Charity Gamboa)
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2009 08:41:43 -0500
Subject: [governance] IG Youth E-consultation
In-Reply-To: <80f151490910290443q3480d74fgb8e895cc04937823@mail.gmail.com>
References: <80f151490910290440p17bcd435lf48efb9c8b44f29c@mail.gmail.com>
	 <80f151490910290443q3480d74fgb8e895cc04937823@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <ad14556f0910290641v472351e8u42fe58427303b160@mail.gmail.com>

Hi Pascal,

Just a question on the survey. There are two questions for each number in
the questionnaire (1-5) but it seems like there is only one comment box
found on the second question (b). Does this mean that the comment box is for
both questions or just for "b?" My apology for the confusion since the way I
understand in answering the survey, the comment boxes are for questions on
"b" only because the comment box is directly placed under all question "b"
and there was no specific comment box for the question on "a."

Thanks!

Regards,
Charity G.E.
ISOC PH IGFWG Chair

On Thu, Oct 29, 2009 at 6:43 AM, Pascal Bekono <pbekono at gmail.com> wrote:

> Dear All,
> We inform you that Youth and IG Team is gathering inputs and feedbacks from
> youth and the entire IG community.
> These information will allow you to contribute for a suitable IG youth
> strategy.
>
>
> Please take just 10 minutes to your precious time to fulfil the short
> questionnaire available at:
> http://www.surveymonkey.com/s.aspx?sm=KrbuILlnM7lR_2fEAcETcoOw_3d_3d
>
> We need your voice !
>
>
> Deadline: 4th Nov.
>
>
> Thank you,
>
>
> Pascal
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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://charitygamboa.towerofbabel.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20091029/e8bc8ef7/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

From tapani.tarvainen at effi.org  Thu Oct 29 09:59:58 2009
From: tapani.tarvainen at effi.org (Tapani Tarvainen)
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2009 15:59:58 +0200
Subject: [governance] Open Source Voting Software Concept Released
In-Reply-To: <76f819dd0910290627p352c116fx5a2c0e642f6ae30b@mail.gmail.com>
References: <28243427.1256500077992.JavaMail.root@elwamui-darkeyed.atl.sa.earthlink.net> <76f819dd0910261654m73e029a2x6ae5c978e7406ca9@mail.gmail.com> <20091027044238.GA3779@musti.tarvainen.info> <76f819dd0910270532k686e51cxbf16d1a846e41fcb@mail.gmail.com> <20091029125739.GG14473@thorion.it.jyu.fi> <76f819dd0910290627p352c116fx5a2c0e642f6ae30b@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20091029135958.GA25593@hamsu.tarvainen.info>

On Thu, Oct 29, 2009 at 09:27:00AM -0400, Paul Lehto (lehto.paul at gmail.com) wrote:

> We agree voting systems must be as open as possible.
> 
> My point, however, is that computerized systems can never be open
> enough.  Yes, open source is better than closed, to be sure.

So far so good.

> As both voters and non-voters have incentives and motivations not
> just to correct software but also to rig it, "opening" the software
> to changes [...]

Open source does not mean you let others change the code you run,
only that they can copy it for their own use (and modify it there
if they like).
The quality of the code depends on the number of (good) people
working on it, which isn't lessened by opening the source -
it only means those working on it can get some extra bug reports
from outsiders. They don't need to (and shouldn't) accept any
code from untrusted sources.

> I'm all for computers and open source in many contexts, but the
> extremely unique considerations as applied to IMPORTANT elections that
> are binding in nature militates strongly against their use.

I agree there are strong reasons against computerizing elections
in the first place, but not that open source makes it worse -
on the contrary, I think it makes it better, if only by a tiny bit.

> In the plane example above, opening the code to open source is only
> making the problem worse,

I don't follow. How is closed source any better?

> since no volunteer can detect all double trojan horses and in any
> case we've no way to know for sure if a volunteer's honest or if
> they're a true computer genius, and in any event, even a genius
> can't honestly certify they've detected all trojan horses in a piece
> of software, and even if they could, there's no necessary connection
> at all between the escrowed/tested software and what's really
> running the plane in real time.

That's all true - but doubly so with closed source, there the
number of people who can analyze it is much smaller.

> PS If you are of Finnish or perhaps Estonian descent, "moikka" to you
> Tapani Tarvainen.

I am quite solidly of Finnish descent, Finnish citizen,
resident of Finland, and have been working actively
to bury Finnish government's plans for evoting
(fairly succesfully, too). :-)
So "moikka" to you as well.

> Harri Hursti of Finland stars in the movie "Hacking Democracy"
> showing how to change an election given access to one voting machine
> for about 5 minutes.

Yes, I know him, he is pretty good.

-- 
Tapani Tarvainen
____________________________________________________________
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


From cls at rkey.com  Thu Oct 29 10:16:42 2009
From: cls at rkey.com (Craig Simon)
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2009 10:16:42 -0400
Subject: [governance] Re: Internet voting and work of Craig Simon of this
 list
In-Reply-To: <76f819dd0910290552l5dabe1d4p5bc0308fe2cbcb91@mail.gmail.com>
References: <76f819dd0910281636h452b73dbia24e23dc9be8ed03@mail.gmail.com>	 <4AE98E02.2080506@rkey.com> <76f819dd0910290552l5dabe1d4p5bc0308fe2cbcb91@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4AE9A3CA.4030705@rkey.com>

I did not intend "pristine" as a pejorative, but as an intensifier. 
Legitimacy is a critical challenge for any group decision-making 
process, especially where the making of laws and the spending of public 
resources is at stake.

With regard to filtering of discussion in a large online forum, the 
challenge is to structure the introduction of ideas and proposals in 
ways that drastically reduce first-mover, and swarm-promoted advantages.

The next phase of my project (presuming I can find the resources to 
proceed) is intended to demonstrate an approach by which every 
seriously-offered new idea and proposal would be vetted by some 
proportion of the serious participants. Thresholds for seriousness 
involve factors such as registration in order to speak, and completing 
work as a vetter in order to have one's own speech vetted.

Craig

Paul Lehto wrote:
> An internet-based speech forum, at least one that accepts as a model
> the idea of presenting all points of view to the decision-makers
> (voters) without substantial filtering is something the internet could
> do a great job on, since the omission of a point of view would be
> relatively easy to show.
> 
> I quibble just a bit with your use of the word "pristine" as that is
> easily taken in some kind of utopian sense.  Democratic elections are
> PURE procedure -- nothing but procedure.  IF the procedure is not
> basically "pristine" you've got a defective procedure, which is to
> say, nothing at all but a nullity.  Incorrectly designed procedures or
> improperly performed procedures nullify the results or at least create
> serious questions about whether results should be nullified (human
> laziness wanting to rescue the election from being redone if at all
> possible).  I'm not saying Craig intended the utopian sense, but I'm
> reacting to the use of the word "pristine" nevertheless.
> 
> Pristine is a reasonable expectation when, as to voting, we are, after
> all, only doing simple arithmetic, and adding only by 1s.  All of us
> can do that prior to leaving compulsory schooling.
> 
> Paul Lehto, Juris Doctor
> 
> On 10/29/09, Craig Simon <cls at rkey.com> wrote:
>> To reiterate what I wrote when this discussion was raised in an earlier
>> thread:
>>
>> ... where formal public law-making and officer-selecting elections are
>> concerned, I'm not an advocate of Internet voting in particular, or of
>> electronic voting in general. I agree with those who argue that a system
>> of physically auditable records marked by the voter in a secret manner
>> (which we might call the "Hard Australian Ballot") promises a far more
>> legitimate account of voter desires.
>>
>> ...By putting aside (for now) the daunting but critical challenge of
>> pristine legitimacy, it's possible to address other important ones...
>> namely, how to facilitate a style of mass, diversified participation
>> that can effectively build consensus around valuable ideas.
>>
>> ++++
>>
>> So, it's clear enough that the system I've been developing is indeed
>> flavored more like a computer science project than an immediate solution
>> to the hard problems of online voting. Nevertheless, it's a project with
>> a very practical intent.
>>
>> Successful online-based democracies will need fair, scalable venues for
>> debate and discussion at least as much as they need secure election
>> processes. The system I've been developing is designed to enable online
>> democracy in the sense of a town hall, caucus, Indaba, or Loya Jirga,
>> where opinions are rendered in public and decision-making is an open
>> process.
>>
>> The goal is to build a set of tools that members of large online
>> communities can use to: 1) gain the best possible awareness of candidate
>> options being raised within their communities, and; 2) build consensus
>> around the preferred candidates.
>>
>> The project I've got in mind requires many pieces. One is already in
>> operation as a ranked choice voting system that provides an interactive
>> ballot and a rich visual display of results in real time. Please feel
>> free to try it out at http://apps.facebook.com/we-vote/
>>
>> Thanks for your interest,
>>
>> Craig Simon
>>
>> Paul Lehto wrote:
>>> Dear Mr. Simon, Does your work address some of the preliminary
>>> objections and concerns in the links below?  If it dispenses with
>>> them, I'd be particularly interested in reading what you have to say
>>> in your links below (though I'm not saying I won't in any event)
>>>
>>> The fundamental, and a very fundamental difference indeed, between a
>>> typical computer science project and internet voting is that (a) the
>>> interests of the participants in voting are wildly diverse and
>>> contradictory, especially considering that a valid election is
>>> necessary to replace an incumbent and incumbents typically control all
>>> of the electino laws and rules, thus lacking any real incentive to do
>>> it right, and (b) the voting for democratic purposes must be
>>> transparent (except for one's own private or secret ballot) and,
>>> unlike the typical corporate context, the insiders are a much greater
>>> threat than even employees in banks are for embezzlement (the #1 theft
>>> risk in nearly all businesses) because elections determine the power
>>> and composition of the government, yet are run by governments or their
>>> direct designees, creating an intense conflict of interest.
>>>
>>> The links to the internet voting reports, or one of them plus its
>>> follow up, are below.
>>>
>>> Paul Lehto, Juris Doctor
>>>
>>> A report written for the Air Force about their SERVE system, Jan 2004.
>>> "A Security Analysis of the Secure Electronic Registration and Voting
>>> Experiment (SERVE)" Co-authors are Dr. David Jefferson, Dr. Aviel D.
>>> Rubin, Dr. Barbara Simons, and Dr. David Wagner. The points are still
>>> valid according to everything I've heard or the authors are aware of.
>>> The same web page also includes a link to "The new report in response
>>> to the May 2007 DoD report on Voting Technologies for UOCAVA Citizens"
>>> http://www.servesecurityreport.org/
>>>
>>>
>>> On 10/19/09, Craig Simon <cls at rkey.com> wrote:
>>>> If you folks actually do start discussing scalable online democracy in
>>>> practical terms, please keep in mind that I've been taking concrete
>>>> steps on this.
>>>>
>>>> There's still a very long way to go, but you can experience the current
>>>> prototype on Facebook at http://apps.facebook.com/we-vote/ .
>>>>
>>>> This project is a direct consequence of my Ph.D. research on the DNS
>>>> governance debates (see http://www.rkey.com/essays/diss.pdf ).
>>>>
>>>> Craig Simon
>>>>
>>>> Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I would conclude that you weren't interested in discussing practical
>>>>> democracy, just the theory. Hey, I'm an engineer at heart; I like
>>>>> talking about practical solutions.
>>>>>
>>>>>  >Please excuse me if I'm wrong, but I just get the abiding impression
>>>>>  >you're not really serious about furthering democracy if you're not
>>>>>  >upset with ICANN right now...
>>>>>
>>>>> I've repeatedly said I'm not implying any opinion about ICANN (either
>>>>> positive or negative) as a result of this discussion with you.
>>>> ____________________________________________________________
>>>> 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


From lehto.paul at gmail.com  Thu Oct 29 10:20:11 2009
From: lehto.paul at gmail.com (Paul Lehto)
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2009 10:20:11 -0400
Subject: [governance] Open Source Voting Software Concept Released
In-Reply-To: <20091029135958.GA25593@hamsu.tarvainen.info>
References: <28243427.1256500077992.JavaMail.root@elwamui-darkeyed.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
	 <76f819dd0910261654m73e029a2x6ae5c978e7406ca9@mail.gmail.com>
	 <20091027044238.GA3779@musti.tarvainen.info>
	 <76f819dd0910270532k686e51cxbf16d1a846e41fcb@mail.gmail.com>
	 <20091029125739.GG14473@thorion.it.jyu.fi>
	 <76f819dd0910290627p352c116fx5a2c0e642f6ae30b@mail.gmail.com>
	 <20091029135958.GA25593@hamsu.tarvainen.info>
Message-ID: <76f819dd0910290720v2c74f5cax9771b17b9d425746@mail.gmail.com>

OK, I can stipulate open source allows one to copy code and then add
to it.  But the only operations allowable in elections are specified
by law, either the laws of democracy or the laws of simple arithmetic,
and anything beyond that is either unauthorized or simply fraudulent.

Moreover, no matter whether open or closed source is used only experts
in computers can possibly know what's going on with them (but even
they will not, at least in USA, truly know what's going on IN TIME for
the statute of limitations for elections. THe Dept of Justice suggests
at least 6 months to fully investigate and make a charging decision on
a computerized election crime).  ALl such elitist or expert systems
are inherently undemocratic.  That's why in March 2009 the German
Constitutional Court, ironically using and interpreting a USA-imposed
(together with other Allied powers) constitution's requirement of
"public elections" decided quite sensibly that if the average member
of the public can't understand each essential step of an election from
casting to counting and tabulating, then it simply isn't a "public"
election, and therefore not a constitutional election.  Germany
reverted to hand counted paper ballots for both the June 2009 and
September 2009 Bundestag and EU elections, and the principles the
court laid down make it possible e-voting might be tried again, but
impossible, in my opinion, that any court in good faith applying the
high court's ruling would ever uphold computer voting again.  Full
transparency at every essential step, no expert knowledge may be
required, and no substitution of government "testing" or auditing for
any of the required transparency are the three key principles,
especially the last.

If one thinks about it, though the government is a ready source of
funding for testing, it is absurd for any entity or person to audit
themselves, investigate themselves or blow the whistle on themselves,
and similarly absurd for any entity including government to select
their own auditors, investigators and whistleblowers.   Sure, this is
done from time to time but in the most important of all possible
situations - elections - and in the most important times -- when we
need to kick out criminal incumbents for example -- we simply can't be
committed to computers and government-paid investigators unless we are
of a democracy-suicidal frame of mind.

So, all of your thinking is RIGHT on the "money" -- except for one
little but very important thing -- elections are so terribly unique.

On 10/29/09, Tapani Tarvainen <tapani.tarvainen at effi.org> wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 29, 2009 at 09:27:00AM -0400, Paul Lehto (lehto.paul at gmail.com)
> wrote:
>
>> We agree voting systems must be as open as possible.
>>
>> My point, however, is that computerized systems can never be open
>> enough.  Yes, open source is better than closed, to be sure.
>
> So far so good.
>
>> As both voters and non-voters have incentives and motivations not
>> just to correct software but also to rig it, "opening" the software
>> to changes [...]
>
> Open source does not mean you let others change the code you run,
> only that they can copy it for their own use (and modify it there
> if they like).
> The quality of the code depends on the number of (good) people
> working on it, which isn't lessened by opening the source -
> it only means those working on it can get some extra bug reports
> from outsiders. They don't need to (and shouldn't) accept any
> code from untrusted sources.
>
>> I'm all for computers and open source in many contexts, but the
>> extremely unique considerations as applied to IMPORTANT elections that
>> are binding in nature militates strongly against their use.
>
> I agree there are strong reasons against computerizing elections
> in the first place, but not that open source makes it worse -
> on the contrary, I think it makes it better, if only by a tiny bit.
>
>> In the plane example above, opening the code to open source is only
>> making the problem worse,
>
> I don't follow. How is closed source any better?
>
>> since no volunteer can detect all double trojan horses and in any
>> case we've no way to know for sure if a volunteer's honest or if
>> they're a true computer genius, and in any event, even a genius
>> can't honestly certify they've detected all trojan horses in a piece
>> of software, and even if they could, there's no necessary connection
>> at all between the escrowed/tested software and what's really
>> running the plane in real time.
>
> That's all true - but doubly so with closed source, there the
> number of people who can analyze it is much smaller.
>
>> PS If you are of Finnish or perhaps Estonian descent, "moikka" to you
>> Tapani Tarvainen.
>
> I am quite solidly of Finnish descent, Finnish citizen,
> resident of Finland, and have been working actively
> to bury Finnish government's plans for evoting
> (fairly succesfully, too). :-)
> So "moikka" to you as well.
>
>> Harri Hursti of Finland stars in the movie "Hacking Democracy"
>> showing how to change an election given access to one voting machine
>> for about 5 minutes.
>
> Yes, I know him, he is pretty good.
>
> --
> Tapani Tarvainen
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
>


-- 
Paul R Lehto, J.D.
P.O. Box #1
Ishpeming, MI  49849
lehto.paul at gmail.com
906-204-4026
____________________________________________________________
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


From lehto.paul at gmail.com  Thu Oct 29 10:24:43 2009
From: lehto.paul at gmail.com (Paul Lehto)
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2009 10:24:43 -0400
Subject: [governance] Re: Internet voting and work of Craig Simon of this
 list
In-Reply-To: <4AE9A3CA.4030705@rkey.com>
References: <76f819dd0910281636h452b73dbia24e23dc9be8ed03@mail.gmail.com>
	 <4AE98E02.2080506@rkey.com>
	 <76f819dd0910290552l5dabe1d4p5bc0308fe2cbcb91@mail.gmail.com>
	 <4AE9A3CA.4030705@rkey.com>
Message-ID: <76f819dd0910290724o63c0ce39l71bd1906314620ab@mail.gmail.com>

I'm interested in your work.  From a USA-based First Amendment
approach, this is akin to a "Mieklejohn" approach - a famous first
amendment writer, who focused on the right of listeners (decision
making voters) to HEAR as much as to speak, since after all the
purpose of freedom of speech is to inform the voters, in its core
application (though this is not the only purpose, just the most
important one)

On 10/29/09, Craig Simon <cls at rkey.com> wrote:
> I did not intend "pristine" as a pejorative, but as an intensifier.
> Legitimacy is a critical challenge for any group decision-making
> process, especially where the making of laws and the spending of public
> resources is at stake.
>
> With regard to filtering of discussion in a large online forum, the
> challenge is to structure the introduction of ideas and proposals in
> ways that drastically reduce first-mover, and swarm-promoted advantages.
>
> The next phase of my project (presuming I can find the resources to
> proceed) is intended to demonstrate an approach by which every
> seriously-offered new idea and proposal would be vetted by some
> proportion of the serious participants. Thresholds for seriousness
> involve factors such as registration in order to speak, and completing
> work as a vetter in order to have one's own speech vetted.
>
> Craig
>
> Paul Lehto wrote:
>> An internet-based speech forum, at least one that accepts as a model
>> the idea of presenting all points of view to the decision-makers
>> (voters) without substantial filtering is something the internet could
>> do a great job on, since the omission of a point of view would be
>> relatively easy to show.
>>
>> I quibble just a bit with your use of the word "pristine" as that is
>> easily taken in some kind of utopian sense.  Democratic elections are
>> PURE procedure -- nothing but procedure.  IF the procedure is not
>> basically "pristine" you've got a defective procedure, which is to
>> say, nothing at all but a nullity.  Incorrectly designed procedures or
>> improperly performed procedures nullify the results or at least create
>> serious questions about whether results should be nullified (human
>> laziness wanting to rescue the election from being redone if at all
>> possible).  I'm not saying Craig intended the utopian sense, but I'm
>> reacting to the use of the word "pristine" nevertheless.
>>
>> Pristine is a reasonable expectation when, as to voting, we are, after
>> all, only doing simple arithmetic, and adding only by 1s.  All of us
>> can do that prior to leaving compulsory schooling.
>>
>> Paul Lehto, Juris Doctor
>>
>> On 10/29/09, Craig Simon <cls at rkey.com> wrote:
>>> To reiterate what I wrote when this discussion was raised in an earlier
>>> thread:
>>>
>>> ... where formal public law-making and officer-selecting elections are
>>> concerned, I'm not an advocate of Internet voting in particular, or of
>>> electronic voting in general. I agree with those who argue that a system
>>> of physically auditable records marked by the voter in a secret manner
>>> (which we might call the "Hard Australian Ballot") promises a far more
>>> legitimate account of voter desires.
>>>
>>> ...By putting aside (for now) the daunting but critical challenge of
>>> pristine legitimacy, it's possible to address other important ones...
>>> namely, how to facilitate a style of mass, diversified participation
>>> that can effectively build consensus around valuable ideas.
>>>
>>> ++++
>>>
>>> So, it's clear enough that the system I've been developing is indeed
>>> flavored more like a computer science project than an immediate solution
>>> to the hard problems of online voting. Nevertheless, it's a project with
>>> a very practical intent.
>>>
>>> Successful online-based democracies will need fair, scalable venues for
>>> debate and discussion at least as much as they need secure election
>>> processes. The system I've been developing is designed to enable online
>>> democracy in the sense of a town hall, caucus, Indaba, or Loya Jirga,
>>> where opinions are rendered in public and decision-making is an open
>>> process.
>>>
>>> The goal is to build a set of tools that members of large online
>>> communities can use to: 1) gain the best possible awareness of candidate
>>> options being raised within their communities, and; 2) build consensus
>>> around the preferred candidates.
>>>
>>> The project I've got in mind requires many pieces. One is already in
>>> operation as a ranked choice voting system that provides an interactive
>>> ballot and a rich visual display of results in real time. Please feel
>>> free to try it out at http://apps.facebook.com/we-vote/
>>>
>>> Thanks for your interest,
>>>
>>> Craig Simon
>>>
>>> Paul Lehto wrote:
>>>> Dear Mr. Simon, Does your work address some of the preliminary
>>>> objections and concerns in the links below?  If it dispenses with
>>>> them, I'd be particularly interested in reading what you have to say
>>>> in your links below (though I'm not saying I won't in any event)
>>>>
>>>> The fundamental, and a very fundamental difference indeed, between a
>>>> typical computer science project and internet voting is that (a) the
>>>> interests of the participants in voting are wildly diverse and
>>>> contradictory, especially considering that a valid election is
>>>> necessary to replace an incumbent and incumbents typically control all
>>>> of the electino laws and rules, thus lacking any real incentive to do
>>>> it right, and (b) the voting for democratic purposes must be
>>>> transparent (except for one's own private or secret ballot) and,
>>>> unlike the typical corporate context, the insiders are a much greater
>>>> threat than even employees in banks are for embezzlement (the #1 theft
>>>> risk in nearly all businesses) because elections determine the power
>>>> and composition of the government, yet are run by governments or their
>>>> direct designees, creating an intense conflict of interest.
>>>>
>>>> The links to the internet voting reports, or one of them plus its
>>>> follow up, are below.
>>>>
>>>> Paul Lehto, Juris Doctor
>>>>
>>>> A report written for the Air Force about their SERVE system, Jan 2004.
>>>> "A Security Analysis of the Secure Electronic Registration and Voting
>>>> Experiment (SERVE)" Co-authors are Dr. David Jefferson, Dr. Aviel D.
>>>> Rubin, Dr. Barbara Simons, and Dr. David Wagner. The points are still
>>>> valid according to everything I've heard or the authors are aware of.
>>>> The same web page also includes a link to "The new report in response
>>>> to the May 2007 DoD report on Voting Technologies for UOCAVA Citizens"
>>>> http://www.servesecurityreport.org/
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 10/19/09, Craig Simon <cls at rkey.com> wrote:
>>>>> If you folks actually do start discussing scalable online democracy in
>>>>> practical terms, please keep in mind that I've been taking concrete
>>>>> steps on this.
>>>>>
>>>>> There's still a very long way to go, but you can experience the current
>>>>> prototype on Facebook at http://apps.facebook.com/we-vote/ .
>>>>>
>>>>> This project is a direct consequence of my Ph.D. research on the DNS
>>>>> governance debates (see http://www.rkey.com/essays/diss.pdf ).
>>>>>
>>>>> Craig Simon
>>>>>
>>>>> Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I would conclude that you weren't interested in discussing practical
>>>>>> democracy, just the theory. Hey, I'm an engineer at heart; I like
>>>>>> talking about practical solutions.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>  >Please excuse me if I'm wrong, but I just get the abiding impression
>>>>>>  >you're not really serious about furthering democracy if you're not
>>>>>>  >upset with ICANN right now...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I've repeatedly said I'm not implying any opinion about ICANN (either
>>>>>> positive or negative) as a result of this discussion with you.
>>>>> ____________________________________________________________
>>>>> 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
>>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>


-- 
Paul R Lehto, J.D.
P.O. Box #1
Ishpeming, MI  49849
lehto.paul at gmail.com
906-204-4026
____________________________________________________________
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


From tapani.tarvainen at effi.org  Thu Oct 29 10:40:56 2009
From: tapani.tarvainen at effi.org (Tapani Tarvainen)
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2009 16:40:56 +0200
Subject: [governance] Open Source Voting Software Concept Released
In-Reply-To: <76f819dd0910290720v2c74f5cax9771b17b9d425746@mail.gmail.com>
References: <28243427.1256500077992.JavaMail.root@elwamui-darkeyed.atl.sa.earthlink.net> <76f819dd0910261654m73e029a2x6ae5c978e7406ca9@mail.gmail.com> <20091027044238.GA3779@musti.tarvainen.info> <76f819dd0910270532k686e51cxbf16d1a846e41fcb@mail.gmail.com> <20091029125739.GG14473@thorion.it.jyu.fi> <76f819dd0910290627p352c116fx5a2c0e642f6ae30b@mail.gmail.com> <20091029135958.GA25593@hamsu.tarvainen.info> <76f819dd0910290720v2c74f5cax9771b17b9d425746@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20091029144056.GB27363@hamsu.tarvainen.info>

On Thu, Oct 29, 2009 at 10:20:11AM -0400, Paul Lehto (lehto.paul at gmail.com) wrote:

> OK, I can stipulate open source allows one to copy code and then add
> to it.  But the only operations allowable in elections are specified
> by law, either the laws of democracy or the laws of simple arithmetic,
> and anything beyond that is either unauthorized or simply fraudulent.

I'm still not sure there isn't some confusion here.
In the context of election software, only another country
or other organization planning to do their own election
would have an interest in modifying the code for their use,
and its legality is up to their laws and has no bearing
on its use in wherever it's copied from.

Anyway, as I've already said, the modifiability aspect of OSS is
not important here, only the availability and visibility of the code.
And even that isn't all that important, for as you say:

> Moreover, no matter whether open or closed source is used only experts
> in computers can possibly know what's going on with them [...]

Agreed on all that, and indeed I just today sent a statement
to Finnish department of justice, which included just that
point, as well as stating that open source would not solve
the big problems in computerized elections, even though it is
in principle better than closed source.
(Our justice dept. doesn't like us very much in this context,
especially after we got their first attempt at evoting
to be declared invalid by our high court so it had to be redone
by paper ballots, but they did formally ask for our view on their
final report on the experiment. If you can read Finnish, see
http://www.effi.org/lausunto-sahkoisen.html or
http://www.effi.org/system/files?file=effi-sahkoaanestyslausunto200910.pdf.)

> So, all of your thinking is RIGHT on the "money" -- except for one
> little but very important thing -- elections are so terribly unique.

I think I've have a fairly good idea why elections are unique here. :-)
And I doubt we really disagree on anything substantive here,
the openness of the code being after all a minor point.

-- 
Tapani Tarvainen
____________________________________________________________
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


From cls at rkey.com  Thu Oct 29 12:21:26 2009
From: cls at rkey.com (Craig Simon)
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2009 12:21:26 -0400
Subject: [governance] Re: Internet voting and work of Craig Simon of this
 list
In-Reply-To: <76f819dd0910290724o63c0ce39l71bd1906314620ab@mail.gmail.com>
References: <76f819dd0910281636h452b73dbia24e23dc9be8ed03@mail.gmail.com>	 <4AE98E02.2080506@rkey.com>	 <76f819dd0910290552l5dabe1d4p5bc0308fe2cbcb91@mail.gmail.com>	 <4AE9A3CA.4030705@rkey.com> <76f819dd0910290724o63c0ce39l71bd1906314620ab@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4AE9C106.7090803@rkey.com>

I found Alexander Meiklejohn's "Free speech and its relation to 
self-government" at 
http://digicoll.library.wisc.edu/cgi-bin/UW/UW-idx?type=header&id=UW.MeikFreeSp 
    I'll look at it more closely when I can. Or perhaps you might 
suggest something else that is more pertinent.

If you're interested in this project enough to help me advance it, I'd 
be grateful for any kind of support or connections you can offer.

Craig

Paul Lehto wrote:
> I'm interested in your work.  From a USA-based First Amendment
> approach, this is akin to a "Mieklejohn" approach - a famous first
> amendment writer, who focused on the right of listeners (decision
> making voters) to HEAR as much as to speak, since after all the
> purpose of freedom of speech is to inform the voters, in its core
> application (though this is not the only purpose, just the most
> important one)
> 
> On 10/29/09, Craig Simon <cls at rkey.com> wrote:
>> I did not intend "pristine" as a pejorative, but as an intensifier.
>> Legitimacy is a critical challenge for any group decision-making
>> process, especially where the making of laws and the spending of public
>> resources is at stake.
>>
>> With regard to filtering of discussion in a large online forum, the
>> challenge is to structure the introduction of ideas and proposals in
>> ways that drastically reduce first-mover, and swarm-promoted advantages.
>>
>> The next phase of my project (presuming I can find the resources to
>> proceed) is intended to demonstrate an approach by which every
>> seriously-offered new idea and proposal would be vetted by some
>> proportion of the serious participants. Thresholds for seriousness
>> involve factors such as registration in order to speak, and completing
>> work as a vetter in order to have one's own speech vetted.
>>
>> Craig
>>
>> Paul Lehto wrote:
>>> An internet-based speech forum, at least one that accepts as a model
>>> the idea of presenting all points of view to the decision-makers
>>> (voters) without substantial filtering is something the internet could
>>> do a great job on, since the omission of a point of view would be
>>> relatively easy to show.
>>>
>>> I quibble just a bit with your use of the word "pristine" as that is
>>> easily taken in some kind of utopian sense.  Democratic elections are
>>> PURE procedure -- nothing but procedure.  IF the procedure is not
>>> basically "pristine" you've got a defective procedure, which is to
>>> say, nothing at all but a nullity.  Incorrectly designed procedures or
>>> improperly performed procedures nullify the results or at least create
>>> serious questions about whether results should be nullified (human
>>> laziness wanting to rescue the election from being redone if at all
>>> possible).  I'm not saying Craig intended the utopian sense, but I'm
>>> reacting to the use of the word "pristine" nevertheless.
>>>
>>> Pristine is a reasonable expectation when, as to voting, we are, after
>>> all, only doing simple arithmetic, and adding only by 1s.  All of us
>>> can do that prior to leaving compulsory schooling.
>>>
>>> Paul Lehto, Juris Doctor
>>>
>>> On 10/29/09, Craig Simon <cls at rkey.com> wrote:
>>>> To reiterate what I wrote when this discussion was raised in an earlier
>>>> thread:
>>>>
>>>> ... where formal public law-making and officer-selecting elections are
>>>> concerned, I'm not an advocate of Internet voting in particular, or of
>>>> electronic voting in general. I agree with those who argue that a system
>>>> of physically auditable records marked by the voter in a secret manner
>>>> (which we might call the "Hard Australian Ballot") promises a far more
>>>> legitimate account of voter desires.
>>>>
>>>> ...By putting aside (for now) the daunting but critical challenge of
>>>> pristine legitimacy, it's possible to address other important ones...
>>>> namely, how to facilitate a style of mass, diversified participation
>>>> that can effectively build consensus around valuable ideas.
>>>>
>>>> ++++
>>>>
>>>> So, it's clear enough that the system I've been developing is indeed
>>>> flavored more like a computer science project than an immediate solution
>>>> to the hard problems of online voting. Nevertheless, it's a project with
>>>> a very practical intent.
>>>>
>>>> Successful online-based democracies will need fair, scalable venues for
>>>> debate and discussion at least as much as they need secure election
>>>> processes. The system I've been developing is designed to enable online
>>>> democracy in the sense of a town hall, caucus, Indaba, or Loya Jirga,
>>>> where opinions are rendered in public and decision-making is an open
>>>> process.
>>>>
>>>> The goal is to build a set of tools that members of large online
>>>> communities can use to: 1) gain the best possible awareness of candidate
>>>> options being raised within their communities, and; 2) build consensus
>>>> around the preferred candidates.
>>>>
>>>> The project I've got in mind requires many pieces. One is already in
>>>> operation as a ranked choice voting system that provides an interactive
>>>> ballot and a rich visual display of results in real time. Please feel
>>>> free to try it out at http://apps.facebook.com/we-vote/
>>>>
>>>> Thanks for your interest,
>>>>
>>>> Craig Simon
>>>>
>>>> Paul Lehto wrote:
>>>>> Dear Mr. Simon, Does your work address some of the preliminary
>>>>> objections and concerns in the links below?  If it dispenses with
>>>>> them, I'd be particularly interested in reading what you have to say
>>>>> in your links below (though I'm not saying I won't in any event)
>>>>>
>>>>> The fundamental, and a very fundamental difference indeed, between a
>>>>> typical computer science project and internet voting is that (a) the
>>>>> interests of the participants in voting are wildly diverse and
>>>>> contradictory, especially considering that a valid election is
>>>>> necessary to replace an incumbent and incumbents typically control all
>>>>> of the electino laws and rules, thus lacking any real incentive to do
>>>>> it right, and (b) the voting for democratic purposes must be
>>>>> transparent (except for one's own private or secret ballot) and,
>>>>> unlike the typical corporate context, the insiders are a much greater
>>>>> threat than even employees in banks are for embezzlement (the #1 theft
>>>>> risk in nearly all businesses) because elections determine the power
>>>>> and composition of the government, yet are run by governments or their
>>>>> direct designees, creating an intense conflict of interest.
>>>>>
>>>>> The links to the internet voting reports, or one of them plus its
>>>>> follow up, are below.
>>>>>
>>>>> Paul Lehto, Juris Doctor
>>>>>
>>>>> A report written for the Air Force about their SERVE system, Jan 2004.
>>>>> "A Security Analysis of the Secure Electronic Registration and Voting
>>>>> Experiment (SERVE)" Co-authors are Dr. David Jefferson, Dr. Aviel D.
>>>>> Rubin, Dr. Barbara Simons, and Dr. David Wagner. The points are still
>>>>> valid according to everything I've heard or the authors are aware of.
>>>>> The same web page also includes a link to "The new report in response
>>>>> to the May 2007 DoD report on Voting Technologies for UOCAVA Citizens"
>>>>> http://www.servesecurityreport.org/
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 10/19/09, Craig Simon <cls at rkey.com> wrote:
>>>>>> If you folks actually do start discussing scalable online democracy in
>>>>>> practical terms, please keep in mind that I've been taking concrete
>>>>>> steps on this.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> There's still a very long way to go, but you can experience the current
>>>>>> prototype on Facebook at http://apps.facebook.com/we-vote/ .
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This project is a direct consequence of my Ph.D. research on the DNS
>>>>>> governance debates (see http://www.rkey.com/essays/diss.pdf ).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Craig Simon
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I would conclude that you weren't interested in discussing practical
>>>>>>> democracy, just the theory. Hey, I'm an engineer at heart; I like
>>>>>>> talking about practical solutions.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  >Please excuse me if I'm wrong, but I just get the abiding impression
>>>>>>>  >you're not really serious about furthering democracy if you're not
>>>>>>>  >upset with ICANN right now...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I've repeatedly said I'm not implying any opinion about ICANN (either
>>>>>>> positive or negative) as a result of this discussion with you.
>>>>>> ____________________________________________________________
>>>>>> 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


From pbekono at gmail.com  Thu Oct 29 15:23:02 2009
From: pbekono at gmail.com (Pascal Bekono)
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2009 20:23:02 +0100
Subject: [governance] IG Youth E-consultation
In-Reply-To: <ad14556f0910290641v472351e8u42fe58427303b160@mail.gmail.com>
References: <80f151490910290440p17bcd435lf48efb9c8b44f29c@mail.gmail.com>
	 <80f151490910290443q3480d74fgb8e895cc04937823@mail.gmail.com>
	 <ad14556f0910290641v472351e8u42fe58427303b160@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <80f151490910291223l1a5167baw800bcb8658260561@mail.gmail.com>

Hi Charity,

Thanks for this important remark. You have to answer all question a, b, c in
the same comment box for each number (1-5).

Best Regards,

Pascal

2009/10/29 Charity Gamboa <charityg at diplomacy.edu>

> Hi Pascal,
>
> Just a question on the survey. There are two questions for each number in
> the questionnaire (1-5) but it seems like there is only one comment box
> found on the second question (b). Does this mean that the comment box is for
> both questions or just for "b?" My apology for the confusion since the way I
> understand in answering the survey, the comment boxes are for questions on
> "b" only because the comment box is directly placed under all question "b"
> and there was no specific comment box for the question on "a."
>
> Thanks!
>
> Regards,
> Charity G.E.
> ISOC PH IGFWG Chair
>
>   On Thu, Oct 29, 2009 at 6:43 AM, Pascal Bekono <pbekono at gmail.com>wrote:
>
>>   Dear All,
>> We inform you that Youth and IG Team is gathering inputs and feedbacks
>> from youth and the entire IG community.
>> These information will allow you to contribute for a suitable IG youth
>> strategy.
>>
>>
>> Please take just 10 minutes to your precious time to fulfil the short
>> questionnaire available at:
>> http://www.surveymonkey.com/s.aspx?sm=KrbuILlnM7lR_2fEAcETcoOw_3d_3d
>>
>> We need your voice !
>>
>>
>> Deadline: 4th Nov.
>>
>>
>> Thank you,
>>
>>
>> Pascal
>>
>>
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> 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://charitygamboa.towerofbabel.com
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20091029/7ff8591a/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

From lehto.paul at gmail.com  Thu Oct 29 16:07:00 2009
From: lehto.paul at gmail.com (Paul Lehto)
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2009 16:07:00 -0400
Subject: [governance] Re: Internet voting and work of Craig Simon of this
 list
In-Reply-To: <4AE9C106.7090803@rkey.com>
References: <76f819dd0910281636h452b73dbia24e23dc9be8ed03@mail.gmail.com>
	 <4AE98E02.2080506@rkey.com>
	 <76f819dd0910290552l5dabe1d4p5bc0308fe2cbcb91@mail.gmail.com>
	 <4AE9A3CA.4030705@rkey.com>
	 <76f819dd0910290724o63c0ce39l71bd1906314620ab@mail.gmail.com>
	 <4AE9C106.7090803@rkey.com>
Message-ID: <76f819dd0910291307s4dc21d8hc48581eaff159402@mail.gmail.com>

I will continue this conversation off-list.  Though I'd be happy to cc
any who are interested in staying in this particular subloop.  Just
email me, or Craig if you prefer.  My email is lehto.paul at gmail.com

On 10/29/09, Craig Simon <cls at rkey.com> wrote:
> I found Alexander Meiklejohn's "Free speech and its relation to
> self-government" at
> http://digicoll.library.wisc.edu/cgi-bin/UW/UW-idx?type=header&id=UW.MeikFreeSp
>     I'll look at it more closely when I can. Or perhaps you might
> suggest something else that is more pertinent.
>
> If you're interested in this project enough to help me advance it, I'd
> be grateful for any kind of support or connections you can offer.
>
> Craig
>
> Paul Lehto wrote:
>> I'm interested in your work.  From a USA-based First Amendment
>> approach, this is akin to a "Mieklejohn" approach - a famous first
>> amendment writer, who focused on the right of listeners (decision
>> making voters) to HEAR as much as to speak, since after all the
>> purpose of freedom of speech is to inform the voters, in its core
>> application (though this is not the only purpose, just the most
>> important one)
>>
>> On 10/29/09, Craig Simon <cls at rkey.com> wrote:
>>> I did not intend "pristine" as a pejorative, but as an intensifier.
>>> Legitimacy is a critical challenge for any group decision-making
>>> process, especially where the making of laws and the spending of public
>>> resources is at stake.
>>>
>>> With regard to filtering of discussion in a large online forum, the
>>> challenge is to structure the introduction of ideas and proposals in
>>> ways that drastically reduce first-mover, and swarm-promoted advantages.
>>>
>>> The next phase of my project (presuming I can find the resources to
>>> proceed) is intended to demonstrate an approach by which every
>>> seriously-offered new idea and proposal would be vetted by some
>>> proportion of the serious participants. Thresholds for seriousness
>>> involve factors such as registration in order to speak, and completing
>>> work as a vetter in order to have one's own speech vetted.
>>>
>>> Craig
>>>
>>> Paul Lehto wrote:
>>>> An internet-based speech forum, at least one that accepts as a model
>>>> the idea of presenting all points of view to the decision-makers
>>>> (voters) without substantial filtering is something the internet could
>>>> do a great job on, since the omission of a point of view would be
>>>> relatively easy to show.
>>>>
>>>> I quibble just a bit with your use of the word "pristine" as that is
>>>> easily taken in some kind of utopian sense.  Democratic elections are
>>>> PURE procedure -- nothing but procedure.  IF the procedure is not
>>>> basically "pristine" you've got a defective procedure, which is to
>>>> say, nothing at all but a nullity.  Incorrectly designed procedures or
>>>> improperly performed procedures nullify the results or at least create
>>>> serious questions about whether results should be nullified (human
>>>> laziness wanting to rescue the election from being redone if at all
>>>> possible).  I'm not saying Craig intended the utopian sense, but I'm
>>>> reacting to the use of the word "pristine" nevertheless.
>>>>
>>>> Pristine is a reasonable expectation when, as to voting, we are, after
>>>> all, only doing simple arithmetic, and adding only by 1s.  All of us
>>>> can do that prior to leaving compulsory schooling.
>>>>
>>>> Paul Lehto, Juris Doctor
>>>>
>>>> On 10/29/09, Craig Simon <cls at rkey.com> wrote:
>>>>> To reiterate what I wrote when this discussion was raised in an earlier
>>>>> thread:
>>>>>
>>>>> ... where formal public law-making and officer-selecting elections are
>>>>> concerned, I'm not an advocate of Internet voting in particular, or of
>>>>> electronic voting in general. I agree with those who argue that a
>>>>> system
>>>>> of physically auditable records marked by the voter in a secret manner
>>>>> (which we might call the "Hard Australian Ballot") promises a far more
>>>>> legitimate account of voter desires.
>>>>>
>>>>> ...By putting aside (for now) the daunting but critical challenge of
>>>>> pristine legitimacy, it's possible to address other important ones...
>>>>> namely, how to facilitate a style of mass, diversified participation
>>>>> that can effectively build consensus around valuable ideas.
>>>>>
>>>>> ++++
>>>>>
>>>>> So, it's clear enough that the system I've been developing is indeed
>>>>> flavored more like a computer science project than an immediate
>>>>> solution
>>>>> to the hard problems of online voting. Nevertheless, it's a project
>>>>> with
>>>>> a very practical intent.
>>>>>
>>>>> Successful online-based democracies will need fair, scalable venues for
>>>>> debate and discussion at least as much as they need secure election
>>>>> processes. The system I've been developing is designed to enable online
>>>>> democracy in the sense of a town hall, caucus, Indaba, or Loya Jirga,
>>>>> where opinions are rendered in public and decision-making is an open
>>>>> process.
>>>>>
>>>>> The goal is to build a set of tools that members of large online
>>>>> communities can use to: 1) gain the best possible awareness of
>>>>> candidate
>>>>> options being raised within their communities, and; 2) build consensus
>>>>> around the preferred candidates.
>>>>>
>>>>> The project I've got in mind requires many pieces. One is already in
>>>>> operation as a ranked choice voting system that provides an interactive
>>>>> ballot and a rich visual display of results in real time. Please feel
>>>>> free to try it out at http://apps.facebook.com/we-vote/
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks for your interest,
>>>>>
>>>>> Craig Simon
>>>>>
>>>>> Paul Lehto wrote:
>>>>>> Dear Mr. Simon, Does your work address some of the preliminary
>>>>>> objections and concerns in the links below?  If it dispenses with
>>>>>> them, I'd be particularly interested in reading what you have to say
>>>>>> in your links below (though I'm not saying I won't in any event)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The fundamental, and a very fundamental difference indeed, between a
>>>>>> typical computer science project and internet voting is that (a) the
>>>>>> interests of the participants in voting are wildly diverse and
>>>>>> contradictory, especially considering that a valid election is
>>>>>> necessary to replace an incumbent and incumbents typically control all
>>>>>> of the electino laws and rules, thus lacking any real incentive to do
>>>>>> it right, and (b) the voting for democratic purposes must be
>>>>>> transparent (except for one's own private or secret ballot) and,
>>>>>> unlike the typical corporate context, the insiders are a much greater
>>>>>> threat than even employees in banks are for embezzlement (the #1 theft
>>>>>> risk in nearly all businesses) because elections determine the power
>>>>>> and composition of the government, yet are run by governments or their
>>>>>> direct designees, creating an intense conflict of interest.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The links to the internet voting reports, or one of them plus its
>>>>>> follow up, are below.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Paul Lehto, Juris Doctor
>>>>>>
>>>>>> A report written for the Air Force about their SERVE system, Jan 2004.
>>>>>> "A Security Analysis of the Secure Electronic Registration and Voting
>>>>>> Experiment (SERVE)" Co-authors are Dr. David Jefferson, Dr. Aviel D.
>>>>>> Rubin, Dr. Barbara Simons, and Dr. David Wagner. The points are still
>>>>>> valid according to everything I've heard or the authors are aware of.
>>>>>> The same web page also includes a link to "The new report in response
>>>>>> to the May 2007 DoD report on Voting Technologies for UOCAVA Citizens"
>>>>>> http://www.servesecurityreport.org/
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 10/19/09, Craig Simon <cls at rkey.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> If you folks actually do start discussing scalable online democracy
>>>>>>> in
>>>>>>> practical terms, please keep in mind that I've been taking concrete
>>>>>>> steps on this.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> There's still a very long way to go, but you can experience the
>>>>>>> current
>>>>>>> prototype on Facebook at http://apps.facebook.com/we-vote/ .
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> This project is a direct consequence of my Ph.D. research on the DNS
>>>>>>> governance debates (see http://www.rkey.com/essays/diss.pdf ).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Craig Simon
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I would conclude that you weren't interested in discussing practical
>>>>>>>> democracy, just the theory. Hey, I'm an engineer at heart; I like
>>>>>>>> talking about practical solutions.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>  >Please excuse me if I'm wrong, but I just get the abiding
>>>>>>>> impression
>>>>>>>>  >you're not really serious about furthering democracy if you're not
>>>>>>>>  >upset with ICANN right now...
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I've repeatedly said I'm not implying any opinion about ICANN
>>>>>>>> (either
>>>>>>>> positive or negative) as a result of this discussion with you.
>>>>>>> ____________________________________________________________
>>>>>>> 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
>>>>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>


-- 
Paul R Lehto, J.D.
P.O. Box #1
Ishpeming, MI  49849
lehto.paul at gmail.com
906-204-4026
____________________________________________________________
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


From ian.peter at ianpeter.com  Thu Oct 29 16:36:38 2009
From: ian.peter at ianpeter.com (Ian Peter)
Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2009 07:36:38 +1100
Subject: [governance] Re: Internet voting and work of Craig Simon of this
In-Reply-To: <76f819dd0910291307s4dc21d8hc48581eaff159402@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <C7104806.779A%ian.peter@ianpeter.com>

Thanks Paul for taking this off list and inviting those interested to join
the conversation there.




On 30/10/09 7:07 AM, "Paul Lehto" <lehto.paul at gmail.com> wrote:

> I will continue this conversation off-list.  Though I'd be happy to cc
> any who are interested in staying in this particular subloop.  Just
> email me, or Craig if you prefer.  My email is lehto.paul at gmail.com
> 
> On 10/29/09, Craig Simon <cls at rkey.com> wrote:
>> I found Alexander Meiklejohn's "Free speech and its relation to
>> self-government" at
>> http://digicoll.library.wisc.edu/cgi-bin/UW/UW-idx?type=header&id=UW.MeikFree
>> Sp
>>     I'll look at it more closely when I can. Or perhaps you might
>> suggest something else that is more pertinent.
>> 
>> If you're interested in this project enough to help me advance it, I'd
>> be grateful for any kind of support or connections you can offer.
>> 
>> Craig
>> 
>> Paul Lehto wrote:
>>> I'm interested in your work.  From a USA-based First Amendment
>>> approach, this is akin to a "Mieklejohn" approach - a famous first
>>> amendment writer, who focused on the right of listeners (decision
>>> making voters) to HEAR as much as to speak, since after all the
>>> purpose of freedom of speech is to inform the voters, in its core
>>> application (though this is not the only purpose, just the most
>>> important one)
>>> 
>>> On 10/29/09, Craig Simon <cls at rkey.com> wrote:
>>>> I did not intend "pristine" as a pejorative, but as an intensifier.
>>>> Legitimacy is a critical challenge for any group decision-making
>>>> process, especially where the making of laws and the spending of public
>>>> resources is at stake.
>>>> 
>>>> With regard to filtering of discussion in a large online forum, the
>>>> challenge is to structure the introduction of ideas and proposals in
>>>> ways that drastically reduce first-mover, and swarm-promoted advantages.
>>>> 
>>>> The next phase of my project (presuming I can find the resources to
>>>> proceed) is intended to demonstrate an approach by which every
>>>> seriously-offered new idea and proposal would be vetted by some
>>>> proportion of the serious participants. Thresholds for seriousness
>>>> involve factors such as registration in order to speak, and completing
>>>> work as a vetter in order to have one's own speech vetted.
>>>> 
>>>> Craig
>>>> 
>>>> Paul Lehto wrote:
>>>>> An internet-based speech forum, at least one that accepts as a model
>>>>> the idea of presenting all points of view to the decision-makers
>>>>> (voters) without substantial filtering is something the internet could
>>>>> do a great job on, since the omission of a point of view would be
>>>>> relatively easy to show.
>>>>> 
>>>>> I quibble just a bit with your use of the word "pristine" as that is
>>>>> easily taken in some kind of utopian sense.  Democratic elections are
>>>>> PURE procedure -- nothing but procedure.  IF the procedure is not
>>>>> basically "pristine" you've got a defective procedure, which is to
>>>>> say, nothing at all but a nullity.  Incorrectly designed procedures or
>>>>> improperly performed procedures nullify the results or at least create
>>>>> serious questions about whether results should be nullified (human
>>>>> laziness wanting to rescue the election from being redone if at all
>>>>> possible).  I'm not saying Craig intended the utopian sense, but I'm
>>>>> reacting to the use of the word "pristine" nevertheless.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Pristine is a reasonable expectation when, as to voting, we are, after
>>>>> all, only doing simple arithmetic, and adding only by 1s.  All of us
>>>>> can do that prior to leaving compulsory schooling.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Paul Lehto, Juris Doctor
>>>>> 
>>>>> On 10/29/09, Craig Simon <cls at rkey.com> wrote:
>>>>>> To reiterate what I wrote when this discussion was raised in an earlier
>>>>>> thread:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> ... where formal public law-making and officer-selecting elections are
>>>>>> concerned, I'm not an advocate of Internet voting in particular, or of
>>>>>> electronic voting in general. I agree with those who argue that a
>>>>>> system
>>>>>> of physically auditable records marked by the voter in a secret manner
>>>>>> (which we might call the "Hard Australian Ballot") promises a far more
>>>>>> legitimate account of voter desires.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> ...By putting aside (for now) the daunting but critical challenge of
>>>>>> pristine legitimacy, it's possible to address other important ones...
>>>>>> namely, how to facilitate a style of mass, diversified participation
>>>>>> that can effectively build consensus around valuable ideas.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> ++++
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> So, it's clear enough that the system I've been developing is indeed
>>>>>> flavored more like a computer science project than an immediate
>>>>>> solution
>>>>>> to the hard problems of online voting. Nevertheless, it's a project
>>>>>> with
>>>>>> a very practical intent.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Successful online-based democracies will need fair, scalable venues for
>>>>>> debate and discussion at least as much as they need secure election
>>>>>> processes. The system I've been developing is designed to enable online
>>>>>> democracy in the sense of a town hall, caucus, Indaba, or Loya Jirga,
>>>>>> where opinions are rendered in public and decision-making is an open
>>>>>> process.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> The goal is to build a set of tools that members of large online
>>>>>> communities can use to: 1) gain the best possible awareness of
>>>>>> candidate
>>>>>> options being raised within their communities, and; 2) build consensus
>>>>>> around the preferred candidates.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> The project I've got in mind requires many pieces. One is already in
>>>>>> operation as a ranked choice voting system that provides an interactive
>>>>>> ballot and a rich visual display of results in real time. Please feel
>>>>>> free to try it out at http://apps.facebook.com/we-vote/
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Thanks for your interest,
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Craig Simon
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Paul Lehto wrote:
>>>>>>> Dear Mr. Simon, Does your work address some of the preliminary
>>>>>>> objections and concerns in the links below?  If it dispenses with
>>>>>>> them, I'd be particularly interested in reading what you have to say
>>>>>>> in your links below (though I'm not saying I won't in any event)
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> The fundamental, and a very fundamental difference indeed, between a
>>>>>>> typical computer science project and internet voting is that (a) the
>>>>>>> interests of the participants in voting are wildly diverse and
>>>>>>> contradictory, especially considering that a valid election is
>>>>>>> necessary to replace an incumbent and incumbents typically control all
>>>>>>> of the electino laws and rules, thus lacking any real incentive to do
>>>>>>> it right, and (b) the voting for democratic purposes must be
>>>>>>> transparent (except for one's own private or secret ballot) and,
>>>>>>> unlike the typical corporate context, the insiders are a much greater
>>>>>>> threat than even employees in banks are for embezzlement (the #1 theft
>>>>>>> risk in nearly all businesses) because elections determine the power
>>>>>>> and composition of the government, yet are run by governments or their
>>>>>>> direct designees, creating an intense conflict of interest.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> The links to the internet voting reports, or one of them plus its
>>>>>>> follow up, are below.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Paul Lehto, Juris Doctor
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> A report written for the Air Force about their SERVE system, Jan 2004.
>>>>>>> "A Security Analysis of the Secure Electronic Registration and Voting
>>>>>>> Experiment (SERVE)" Co-authors are Dr. David Jefferson, Dr. Aviel D.
>>>>>>> Rubin, Dr. Barbara Simons, and Dr. David Wagner. The points are still
>>>>>>> valid according to everything I've heard or the authors are aware of.
>>>>>>> The same web page also includes a link to "The new report in response
>>>>>>> to the May 2007 DoD report on Voting Technologies for UOCAVA Citizens"
>>>>>>> http://www.servesecurityreport.org/
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On 10/19/09, Craig Simon <cls at rkey.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> If you folks actually do start discussing scalable online democracy
>>>>>>>> in
>>>>>>>> practical terms, please keep in mind that I've been taking concrete
>>>>>>>> steps on this.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> There's still a very long way to go, but you can experience the
>>>>>>>> current
>>>>>>>> prototype on Facebook at http://apps.facebook.com/we-vote/ .
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> This project is a direct consequence of my Ph.D. research on the DNS
>>>>>>>> governance debates (see http://www.rkey.com/essays/diss.pdf ).
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Craig Simon
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> I would conclude that you weren't interested in discussing practical
>>>>>>>>> democracy, just the theory. Hey, I'm an engineer at heart; I like
>>>>>>>>> talking about practical solutions.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> Please excuse me if I'm wrong, but I just get the abiding
>>>>>>>>> impression
>>>>>>>>>> you're not really serious about furthering democracy if you're not
>>>>>>>>>> upset with ICANN right now...
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> I've repeatedly said I'm not implying any opinion about ICANN
>>>>>>>>> (either
>>>>>>>>> positive or negative) as a result of this discussion with you.
>>>>>>>> ____________________________________________________________
>>>>>>>> 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


From ian.peter at ianpeter.com  Thu Oct 29 17:57:03 2009
From: ian.peter at ianpeter.com (Ian Peter)
Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2009 08:57:03 +1100
Subject: [governance] Google power
Message-ID: <C7105ADF.77A4%ian.peter@ianpeter.com>

The following item and exchange show some amazing new possibilities for
navigation by matching the capabilities of various databases owned by Google
to satellite navigation capabilities.


http://radar.oreilly.com/2009/10/navigating-the-future-take-me.html#comments


Pretty cool features, but the danger here is the market power of Google. No
one else will be able to match the capabilities or provide the data for
these features. See the comments made by Tim O¹Reilly.

As Tim points out, what we are looking at here is the development of
applications that depend on coordinated data from multiple databases. This
will allow some quite amazing new features that no other player will be able
to match.

Apart from this ­ data matching raises various privacy issues. Many
countries have data matching restrictions embedded in prvacy legislation.
I¹m interested to know what people think about this and what social policy
implications might exist.

Ian Peter




-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20091030/35967a34/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

From jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com  Thu Oct 29 18:08:16 2009
From: jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com (Jeffrey A. Williams)
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2009 17:08:16 -0500 (GMT-05:00)
Subject: [governance] Google power
Message-ID: <23500286.1256854099995.JavaMail.root@mswamui-andean.atl.sa.earthlink.net>

An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20091029/6e135e1b/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

From jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com  Thu Oct 29 18:14:41 2009
From: jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com (Jeffrey A. Williams)
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2009 17:14:41 -0500 (GMT-05:00)
Subject: [governance] Re: Internet voting and work of Craig Simon of
Message-ID: <22612326.1256854481548.JavaMail.root@mswamui-andean.atl.sa.earthlink.net>

Paul and all,

  Frankly I am sorry that you felt the need to take this offlist,
contrary to IAN's response as this is an issue that is directly relevant
to the IGF and it's members.

-----Original Message-----
>From: Paul Lehto <lehto.paul at gmail.com>
>Sent: Oct 29, 2009 3:07 PM
>To: cls at rkey.com
>Cc: governance at lists.cpsr.org
>Subject: [governance] Re: Internet voting and work of Craig Simon of this list
>
>I will continue this conversation off-list.  Though I'd be happy to cc
>any who are interested in staying in this particular subloop.  Just
>email me, or Craig if you prefer.  My email is lehto.paul at gmail.com
>
>On 10/29/09, Craig Simon <cls at rkey.com> wrote:
>> I found Alexander Meiklejohn's "Free speech and its relation to
>> self-government" at
>> http://digicoll.library.wisc.edu/cgi-bin/UW/UW-idx?type=header&id=UW.MeikFreeSp
>>     I'll look at it more closely when I can. Or perhaps you might
>> suggest something else that is more pertinent.
>>
>> If you're interested in this project enough to help me advance it, I'd
>> be grateful for any kind of support or connections you can offer.
>>
>> Craig
>>
>> Paul Lehto wrote:
>>> I'm interested in your work.  From a USA-based First Amendment
>>> approach, this is akin to a "Mieklejohn" approach - a famous first
>>> amendment writer, who focused on the right of listeners (decision
>>> making voters) to HEAR as much as to speak, since after all the
>>> purpose of freedom of speech is to inform the voters, in its core
>>> application (though this is not the only purpose, just the most
>>> important one)
>>>
>>> On 10/29/09, Craig Simon <cls at rkey.com> wrote:
>>>> I did not intend "pristine" as a pejorative, but as an intensifier.
>>>> Legitimacy is a critical challenge for any group decision-making
>>>> process, especially where the making of laws and the spending of public
>>>> resources is at stake.
>>>>
>>>> With regard to filtering of discussion in a large online forum, the
>>>> challenge is to structure the introduction of ideas and proposals in
>>>> ways that drastically reduce first-mover, and swarm-promoted advantages.
>>>>
>>>> The next phase of my project (presuming I can find the resources to
>>>> proceed) is intended to demonstrate an approach by which every
>>>> seriously-offered new idea and proposal would be vetted by some
>>>> proportion of the serious participants. Thresholds for seriousness
>>>> involve factors such as registration in order to speak, and completing
>>>> work as a vetter in order to have one's own speech vetted.
>>>>
>>>> Craig
>>>>
>>>> Paul Lehto wrote:
>>>>> An internet-based speech forum, at least one that accepts as a model
>>>>> the idea of presenting all points of view to the decision-makers
>>>>> (voters) without substantial filtering is something the internet could
>>>>> do a great job on, since the omission of a point of view would be
>>>>> relatively easy to show.
>>>>>
>>>>> I quibble just a bit with your use of the word "pristine" as that is
>>>>> easily taken in some kind of utopian sense.  Democratic elections are
>>>>> PURE procedure -- nothing but procedure.  IF the procedure is not
>>>>> basically "pristine" you've got a defective procedure, which is to
>>>>> say, nothing at all but a nullity.  Incorrectly designed procedures or
>>>>> improperly performed procedures nullify the results or at least create
>>>>> serious questions about whether results should be nullified (human
>>>>> laziness wanting to rescue the election from being redone if at all
>>>>> possible).  I'm not saying Craig intended the utopian sense, but I'm
>>>>> reacting to the use of the word "pristine" nevertheless.
>>>>>
>>>>> Pristine is a reasonable expectation when, as to voting, we are, after
>>>>> all, only doing simple arithmetic, and adding only by 1s.  All of us
>>>>> can do that prior to leaving compulsory schooling.
>>>>>
>>>>> Paul Lehto, Juris Doctor
>>>>>
>>>>> On 10/29/09, Craig Simon <cls at rkey.com> wrote:
>>>>>> To reiterate what I wrote when this discussion was raised in an earlier
>>>>>> thread:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ... where formal public law-making and officer-selecting elections are
>>>>>> concerned, I'm not an advocate of Internet voting in particular, or of
>>>>>> electronic voting in general. I agree with those who argue that a
>>>>>> system
>>>>>> of physically auditable records marked by the voter in a secret manner
>>>>>> (which we might call the "Hard Australian Ballot") promises a far more
>>>>>> legitimate account of voter desires.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ...By putting aside (for now) the daunting but critical challenge of
>>>>>> pristine legitimacy, it's possible to address other important ones...
>>>>>> namely, how to facilitate a style of mass, diversified participation
>>>>>> that can effectively build consensus around valuable ideas.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ++++
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So, it's clear enough that the system I've been developing is indeed
>>>>>> flavored more like a computer science project than an immediate
>>>>>> solution
>>>>>> to the hard problems of online voting. Nevertheless, it's a project
>>>>>> with
>>>>>> a very practical intent.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Successful online-based democracies will need fair, scalable venues for
>>>>>> debate and discussion at least as much as they need secure election
>>>>>> processes. The system I've been developing is designed to enable online
>>>>>> democracy in the sense of a town hall, caucus, Indaba, or Loya Jirga,
>>>>>> where opinions are rendered in public and decision-making is an open
>>>>>> process.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The goal is to build a set of tools that members of large online
>>>>>> communities can use to: 1) gain the best possible awareness of
>>>>>> candidate
>>>>>> options being raised within their communities, and; 2) build consensus
>>>>>> around the preferred candidates.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The project I've got in mind requires many pieces. One is already in
>>>>>> operation as a ranked choice voting system that provides an interactive
>>>>>> ballot and a rich visual display of results in real time. Please feel
>>>>>> free to try it out at http://apps.facebook.com/we-vote/
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks for your interest,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Craig Simon
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Paul Lehto wrote:
>>>>>>> Dear Mr. Simon, Does your work address some of the preliminary
>>>>>>> objections and concerns in the links below?  If it dispenses with
>>>>>>> them, I'd be particularly interested in reading what you have to say
>>>>>>> in your links below (though I'm not saying I won't in any event)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The fundamental, and a very fundamental difference indeed, between a
>>>>>>> typical computer science project and internet voting is that (a) the
>>>>>>> interests of the participants in voting are wildly diverse and
>>>>>>> contradictory, especially considering that a valid election is
>>>>>>> necessary to replace an incumbent and incumbents typically control all
>>>>>>> of the electino laws and rules, thus lacking any real incentive to do
>>>>>>> it right, and (b) the voting for democratic purposes must be
>>>>>>> transparent (except for one's own private or secret ballot) and,
>>>>>>> unlike the typical corporate context, the insiders are a much greater
>>>>>>> threat than even employees in banks are for embezzlement (the #1 theft
>>>>>>> risk in nearly all businesses) because elections determine the power
>>>>>>> and composition of the government, yet are run by governments or their
>>>>>>> direct designees, creating an intense conflict of interest.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The links to the internet voting reports, or one of them plus its
>>>>>>> follow up, are below.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Paul Lehto, Juris Doctor
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> A report written for the Air Force about their SERVE system, Jan 2004.
>>>>>>> "A Security Analysis of the Secure Electronic Registration and Voting
>>>>>>> Experiment (SERVE)" Co-authors are Dr. David Jefferson, Dr. Aviel D.
>>>>>>> Rubin, Dr. Barbara Simons, and Dr. David Wagner. The points are still
>>>>>>> valid according to everything I've heard or the authors are aware of.
>>>>>>> The same web page also includes a link to "The new report in response
>>>>>>> to the May 2007 DoD report on Voting Technologies for UOCAVA Citizens"
>>>>>>> http://www.servesecurityreport.org/
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 10/19/09, Craig Simon <cls at rkey.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> If you folks actually do start discussing scalable online democracy
>>>>>>>> in
>>>>>>>> practical terms, please keep in mind that I've been taking concrete
>>>>>>>> steps on this.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> There's still a very long way to go, but you can experience the
>>>>>>>> current
>>>>>>>> prototype on Facebook at http://apps.facebook.com/we-vote/ .
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> This project is a direct consequence of my Ph.D. research on the DNS
>>>>>>>> governance debates (see http://www.rkey.com/essays/diss.pdf ).
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Craig Simon
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I would conclude that you weren't interested in discussing practical
>>>>>>>>> democracy, just the theory. Hey, I'm an engineer at heart; I like
>>>>>>>>> talking about practical solutions.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>  >Please excuse me if I'm wrong, but I just get the abiding
>>>>>>>>> impression
>>>>>>>>>  >you're not really serious about furthering democracy if you're not
>>>>>>>>>  >upset with ICANN right now...
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I've repeatedly said I'm not implying any opinion about ICANN
>>>>>>>>> (either
>>>>>>>>> positive or negative) as a result of this discussion with you.
>>>>>>>> ____________________________________________________________
>>>>>>>> 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
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
>-- 
>Paul R Lehto, J.D.
>P.O. Box #1
>Ishpeming, MI  49849
>lehto.paul at gmail.com
>906-204-4026
>____________________________________________________________
>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,



Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 294k members/stakeholders strong!)
"Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" -
   Abraham Lincoln

"Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is very
often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt

"If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; liability
depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
United States v. Carroll Towing  (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
===============================================================
Updated 1/26/04
CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS. div. of
Information Network Eng.  INEG. INC.
ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com
Phone: 214-244-4827

____________________________________________________________
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


From gpaque at gmail.com  Thu Oct 29 18:30:10 2009
From: gpaque at gmail.com (Ginger Paque)
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2009 18:00:10 -0430
Subject: [governance] Call for Nominations for IGC Co-coordinator
Message-ID: <4AEA1772.5030207@gmail.com>

An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20091029/f47fbb1e/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

From jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com  Thu Oct 29 18:45:28 2009
From: jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com (Jeffrey A. Williams)
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2009 17:45:28 -0500 (GMT-05:00)
Subject: [governance] Internet Safety Technical Task Force Report
Message-ID: <12522910.1256856328401.JavaMail.root@mswamui-andean.atl.sa.earthlink.net>

All,

  As an FYI and in conjunction with the IGF survey:

Internet Safety Technical Task Force Report 
Written by andy    
Monday, 26 October 2009 

A year ago, I teamed up with John Palfrey and Dena Sacco to co-direct the Internet Safety Technical Task Force. I came to this project with the strong conviction that policy concerning children's safety should be grounded in data. In other words, rather than focus on what might be, it would behoove us to take a look at what is and propose solutions to address known problems in ways that align with the logic and social conditions in which kids live. For years, I had been watching policy unfold that would do nothing to help the hurting kids that I met. I was frustrated and wanted to make a difference.

 

Going into this Task Force, I was extremely naive. I genuinely believed that people were making bad policy, bad technology, and bad decisions because they lacked the data or knowledge to interpret the data. I was upset that so much research was behind the pearly gates of locked-down journal publishers and that, even when accessed, many people didn't know how to read that material. I believed that I had a responsibility to make research accessible so that it could be usable. I thought that presenting data would motivate people to innovate and devise solutions to help kids. I was wrong. 

Read more at:
http://cfcamerica.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1053&Itemid=11

Regards,



Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 294k members/stakeholders strong!)
"Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" -
   Abraham Lincoln

"Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is very
often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt

"If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; liability
depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
United States v. Carroll Towing  (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
===============================================================
Updated 1/26/04
CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS. div. of
Information Network Eng.  INEG. INC.
ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com
Phone: 214-244-4827

____________________________________________________________
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


From ian.peter at ianpeter.com  Thu Oct 29 22:45:41 2009
From: ian.peter at ianpeter.com (Ian Peter)
Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2009 13:45:41 +1100
Subject: [governance] Meeting with European Commission at Sharm
Message-ID: <C7109E85.77CD%ian.peter@ianpeter.com>

Would people interested in a meeting between civil society and European
Commission at Sharm please note that this years meeting has been schedule
for Tuesday, November 17 at 6pm (venue to be confirmed). It would be good if
a few of us can make it, particularly if some of our European members can
commit to a short meeting.

If you would like to attend, drop me a quick email off line and I will make
sure that you are kept up to date with venue arrangements.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20091030/948ec05a/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

From ian.peter at ianpeter.com  Thu Oct 29 22:52:24 2009
From: ian.peter at ianpeter.com (Ian Peter)
Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2009 13:52:24 +1100
Subject: [governance] Google power
In-Reply-To: <23500286.1256854099995.JavaMail.root@mswamui-andean.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <C710A018.77D2%ian.peter@ianpeter.com>

The issue of course is not with the technical capabilities to merge
databases but with the potential power possessed by Google, with the unique
database content it holds, to create monopolies in certain market sectors
that others will not be able to compete with.


On 30/10/09 9:08 AM, "Jeffrey A. Williams" <jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com> wrote:

> Ian and all,
> 
>  
> 
>   This really nothing new at all other than the means by which the Database
> application is being
> 
> executed.  This technique has been around for two decades at least.  Secondly
> Google doesn't
> 
> have any such thing as a predominant position on this form of network data
> base processing.
> 
> This whole article is more hype than substance.
> 
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Ian Peter 
>> Sent: Oct 29, 2009 4:57 PM
>> To: "'governance at lists.cpsr.org'"
>> Subject: [governance] Google power
>> 
>> The following item and exchange show some amazing new possibilities for
>> navigation by matching the capabilities of various databases owned by Google
>> to satellite navigation capabilities.
>> 
>> 
>> http://radar.oreilly.com/2009/10/navigating-the-future-take-me.html#comments
>> 
>> 
>> Pretty cool features, but the danger here is the market power of Google. No
>> one else will be able to match the capabilities or provide the data for these
>> features. See the comments made by Tim O¹Reilly.
>> 
>> As Tim points out, what we are looking at here is the development of
>> applications that depend on coordinated data from multiple databases. This
>> will allow some quite amazing new features that no other player will be able
>> to match.
>> 
>> Apart from this ­ data matching raises various privacy issues. Many countries
>> have data matching restrictions embedded in prvacy legislation. I¹m
>> interested to know what people think about this and what social policy
>> implications might exist.
>> 
>> Ian Peter
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Regards,
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Jeffrey A. Williams
>> Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 294k members/stakeholders strong!)
>> "Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" -
>>    Abraham Lincoln
>> 
>> "Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is very
>> often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt
>> 
>> "If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; liability
>> depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
>> P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
>> United States v. Carroll Towing  (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
>> ===============================================================
>> Updated 1/26/04
>> CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS. div. of
>> Information Network Eng.  INEG. INC.
>> ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com
>> Phone: 214-244-4827
> 
> 
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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/20091030/516b53b3/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

From rudi.vansnick at isoc.be  Fri Oct 30 01:05:38 2009
From: rudi.vansnick at isoc.be (Rudi Vansnick)
Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2009 14:05:38 +0900
Subject: [governance] Meeting with European Commission at Sharm
In-Reply-To: <C7109E85.77CD%ian.peter@ianpeter.com>
References: <C7109E85.77CD%ian.peter@ianpeter.com>
Message-ID: <4AEA7422.4020101@isoc.be>

Dear Ian,
Dear all,

As European and panel member in the workshop 106 with EU project people, 
it is indeed a very good idea to sit together. So, yes you may count on 
my presence. Let's talk about during the Saturday meeting we scheduled.

Best regards,

Rudi Vansnick



Ian Peter schreef:
> Would people interested in a meeting between civil society and 
> European Commission at Sharm please note that this years meeting has 
> been schedule for Tuesday, November 17 at 6pm (venue to be confirmed). 
> It would be good if a few of us can make it, particularly if some of 
> our European members can commit to a short meeting.
>
> If you would like to attend, drop me a quick email off line and I will 
> make sure that you are kept up to date with venue arrangements.
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com 
> Version: 8.5.423 / Virus Database: 270.14.39/2468 - Release Date: 10/29/09 19:49:00
>
>   
____________________________________________________________
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


From wolfgang.benedek at uni-graz.at  Fri Oct 30 05:36:15 2009
From: wolfgang.benedek at uni-graz.at (wolfgang.benedek at uni-graz.at)
Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2009 10:36:15 +0100
Subject: AW: [governance] Meeting with European Commission at Sharm
References: <C7109E85.77CD%ian.peter@ianpeter.com> <4AEA7422.4020101@isoc.be>
Message-ID: <F2D773BD668B0B4E8465849B4F21E751053DEC9D@leto.pers.ad.uni-graz.at>

I would be interested as well.
 
Kind regards
 
Wolfgang Benedek

________________________________

Von: Rudi Vansnick [mailto:rudi.vansnick at isoc.be]
Gesendet: Fr 30.10.2009 06:05
An: governance at lists.cpsr.org; Ian Peter
Betreff: Re: [governance] Meeting with European Commission at Sharm



Dear Ian,
Dear all,

As European and panel member in the workshop 106 with EU project people,
it is indeed a very good idea to sit together. So, yes you may count on
my presence. Let's talk about during the Saturday meeting we scheduled.

Best regards,

Rudi Vansnick



Ian Peter schreef:
> Would people interested in a meeting between civil society and
> European Commission at Sharm please note that this years meeting has
> been schedule for Tuesday, November 17 at 6pm (venue to be confirmed).
> It would be good if a few of us can make it, particularly if some of
> our European members can commit to a short meeting.
>
> If you would like to attend, drop me a quick email off line and I will
> make sure that you are kept up to date with venue arrangements.
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 8.5.423 / Virus Database: 270.14.39/2468 - Release Date: 10/29/09 19:49:00
>
>  
____________________________________________________________
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/20091030/5d60f6c0/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

From fouadbajwa at gmail.com  Fri Oct 30 05:41:14 2009
From: fouadbajwa at gmail.com (Fouad Bajwa)
Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2009 18:41:14 +0900
Subject: [governance] Meeting with European Commission at Sharm
In-Reply-To: <C7109E85.77CD%ian.peter@ianpeter.com>
References: <C7109E85.77CD%ian.peter@ianpeter.com>
Message-ID: <701af9f70910300241k59dc19d1g12bed7d682fa49be@mail.gmail.com>

I'd be very interested in sitting from and with the IGC members as
Civil Society.

On Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 11:45 AM, Ian Peter <ian.peter at ianpeter.com> wrote:
> Would people interested in a meeting between civil society and European
> Commission at Sharm please note that this years meeting has been schedule
> for Tuesday, November 17 at 6pm (venue to be confirmed). It would be good if
> a few of us can make it, particularly if some of our European members can
> commit to a short meeting.
>
> If you would like to attend, drop me a quick email off line and I will make
> sure that you are kept up to date with venue arrangements.
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ATVDW1tDZzA
____________________________________________________________
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


From fouadbajwa at gmail.com  Fri Oct 30 15:06:14 2009
From: fouadbajwa at gmail.com (Fouad Bajwa)
Date: Sat, 31 Oct 2009 04:06:14 +0900
Subject: [governance] ICANN Fellowships for March 2009 Kenya Meeting - 6th
 November Last Date
Message-ID: <701af9f70910301206x4e5b48e9q635da55a3978d195@mail.gmail.com>

Hello All,

the Nairobi, ICANN 37th public meeting has finally been unveiled:

http://nbo.icann.org/

for fellowship application;

http://www.icann.org/en/fellowships/...

take note that there is no much time for the application.....

Kind Regards,

--------------------------
Fouad Bajwa
@skBajwa
Answering all your technology questions
http://www.askbajwa.com
http://twitter.com/fouadbajwa
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ATVDW1tDZzA
____________________________________________________________
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


From fouadbajwa at gmail.com  Fri Oct 30 15:07:01 2009
From: fouadbajwa at gmail.com (Fouad Bajwa)
Date: Sat, 31 Oct 2009 04:07:01 +0900
Subject: [governance] Re: ICANN Fellowships for March 2009 Kenya Meeting -
 6th November Last Date
In-Reply-To: <701af9f70910301206x4e5b48e9q635da55a3978d195@mail.gmail.com>
References: <701af9f70910301206x4e5b48e9q635da55a3978d195@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <701af9f70910301207m464eb2acudb204e57dec426c9@mail.gmail.com>

Sorry Typo error in subject: March 2010 Meeting

On Sat, Oct 31, 2009 at 4:06 AM, Fouad Bajwa <fouadbajwa at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hello All,
>
> the Nairobi, ICANN 37th public meeting has finally been unveiled:
>
> http://nbo.icann.org/
>
> for fellowship application;
>
> http://www.icann.org/en/fellowships/...
>
> take note that there is no much time for the application.....
>
> Kind Regards,
>
> --------------------------
> Fouad Bajwa
> @skBajwa
> Answering all your technology questions
> http://www.askbajwa.com
> http://twitter.com/fouadbajwa
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ATVDW1tDZzA
>



-- 
Regards.
--------------------------
Fouad Bajwa
@skBajwa
Answering all your technology questions
http://www.askbajwa.com
http://twitter.com/fouadbajwa
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ATVDW1tDZzA
____________________________________________________________
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


From jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com  Fri Oct 30 16:51:07 2009
From: jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com (Jeffrey A. Williams)
Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2009 15:51:07 -0500 (GMT-05:00)
Subject: [governance] Google power
Message-ID: <29091396.1256935867553.JavaMail.root@elwamui-norfolk.atl.sa.earthlink.net>

An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20091030/094d4f24/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

From jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com  Fri Oct 30 16:54:18 2009
From: jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com (Jeffrey A. Williams)
Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2009 15:54:18 -0500 (GMT-05:00)
Subject: [governance] FW: GNSO Council meeting in Seoul 28 October 2009
Message-ID: <24148403.1256936058823.JavaMail.root@elwamui-norfolk.atl.sa.earthlink.net>

All,

  For those interested:

Please find the presentations and transcript of the GNSO Council Public meeting held in Seoul on 28 October 2009 at:
http://sel.icann.org/node/6708

The resolutions are posted to the Council mailing list
http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/council/msg07807.html



Regards,

Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 294k members/stakeholders strong!)
"Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" -
   Abraham Lincoln

"Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is very
often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt

"If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; liability
depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
United States v. Carroll Towing  (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
===============================================================
Updated 1/26/04
CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS. div. of
Information Network Eng.  INEG. INC.
ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com
Phone: 214-244-4827

____________________________________________________________
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


From fouadbajwa at gmail.com  Sat Oct 31 07:22:33 2009
From: fouadbajwa at gmail.com (Fouad Bajwa)
Date: Sat, 31 Oct 2009 20:22:33 +0900
Subject: [governance] IDN's Internationalized Domain Names - A New Era of
 Internet and Local Languages
Message-ID: <701af9f70910310422g6e3e8336r6b336c91044a5b63@mail.gmail.com>

Reporting from Seoul!

The internet regulator ICANN has approved plans to allow
non-Latin-script web addresses, a move that is being described as the
biggest change to the way the internet works since it was created 40
years ago. For example, this opens up Pakistan's Internationalized
Domain Names Space in Urdu, Sindhi, Pashto etc....Initially the
Government of Pakistan, Ministry of IT&T/PTA will be provided with the
facility to acquire IDN's from ICANN before the companies and
individuals can! For participation in the various processes of ICANN.
The news in detail is below with video links:

Watch ICANN's Video about IDN's:
http://link.brightcove.com/services/player/bcpid46208174001?bctid=46955584001

Read the news on CNN:
Internet domain names set to appear in non-Latin scripts
October 30, 2009 -- Updated 1213 GMT (2013 HKT)
http://edition.cnn.com/2009/TECH/10/29/internet.domains.languages/index.html

Read the news on BBC:
Internet addresses set for change
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/8333194.stm

The Official News:
ICANN Bringing the Languages of the World to the Global Internet
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source: ICANN Website:
http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-30oct09-en.htm
Fast Track Process for Internationalized Domain Names Launches Nov 16

30 October 2009

Seoul: The first Internet addresses containing non-Latin characters
from start to finish will soon be online thanks to today's approval of
the new Internationalized Domain Name Fast Track Process by the
Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers board.

"The coming introduction of non-Latin characters represents the
biggest technical change to the Internet since it was created four
decades ago," said ICANN chairman Peter Dengate Thrush. "Right now
Internet address endings are limited to Latin characters – A to Z. But
the Fast Track Process is the first step in bringing the 100,000
characters of the languages of the world online for domain names."

ICANN's Fast Track Process launches on 16 November 2009. It will allow
nations and territories to apply for Internet extensions reflecting
their name – and made up of characters from their national language.
If the applications meet criteria that includes government and
community support and a stability evaluation, the applicants will be
approved to start accepting registrations.

" This is only the first step, but it is an incredibly big one and an
historic move toward the internationalization of the Internet ," said
Rod Beckstrom, ICANN's President and CEO. "The first countries that
participate will not only be providing valuable information of the
operation of IDNs in the domain name system, they are also going to
help to bring the first of billions more people online – people who
never use Roman characters in their daily lives."

IDNs have been a topic of discussion since before ICANN's inception.
It's taken years of intense technical testing, policy development, and
global co-operation to prepare the Fast Track process for its coming
launch.

"Our work on IDNs has gone through numerous drafts, dozens of tests,
and an incredible amount of development by volunteers since we started
this project. Today is the first step in moving from planning and
implementation to the real launch," said Tina Dam, ICANN's Senior
Director for IDNs. "The launch of the Fast Track Process will be an
amazing change to make the Internet an even more valuable tool, and
for even more people around the globe."

More information of the Fast Track program is available online at:
http://www.icann.org/en/topics/idn/fast-track/

About ICANN:

ICANN is responsible for the global coordination of the Internet's
system of unique identifiers like domain names (like .org, .museum and
country codes like .uk) and the addresses used in a variety of
Internet protocols that help computers reach each other over the
Internet. Careful management of these resources is vital to the
Internet's operation, so ICANN's global stakeholders meet regularly to
develop policies that ensure the Internet's ongoing security and
stability. ICANN is an internationally organized, public benefit
non-profit company. For more information please visit: www.icann.org.



-- 
Regards.
--------------------------
Fouad Bajwa
@skBajwa
Answering all your technology questions
http://www.askbajwa.com
http://twitter.com/fouadbajwa
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ATVDW1tDZzA
____________________________________________________________
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


From bortzmeyer at internatif.org  Sat Oct 31 09:11:23 2009
From: bortzmeyer at internatif.org (Stephane Bortzmeyer)
Date: Sat, 31 Oct 2009 14:11:23 +0100
Subject: [governance] Re: IDN's Internationalized Domain Names - A New Era
 of  Internet and Local Languages
In-Reply-To: <701af9f70910310422g6e3e8336r6b336c91044a5b63@mail.gmail.com>
References: <701af9f70910310422g6e3e8336r6b336c91044a5b63@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20091031131123.GA22588@sources.org>

On Sat, Oct 31, 2009 at 08:22:33PM +0900,
 Fouad Bajwa <fouadbajwa at gmail.com> wrote 
 a message of 109 lines which said:

> The internet regulator ICANN has approved plans to allow
> non-Latin-script web addresses,

Unicode characters in domain names have been technically approved in
2003 (with the publication of RFC 3490) and installed first in a TLD a
few months later (though I do not remember which TLD was the first
one). ICANN, as often, is very late here. We see "non-Latin-script web
addresses" for many years.

> a move that is being described as the biggest change to the way the
> internet works since it was created 40 years ago.

This is simply ridiculous. More than the creation of the DNS? Or of
BGP? Or than the deployment of TCP/IPv4, both non-existent 40 years
ago?

____________________________________________________________
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


From jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com  Sat Oct 31 14:19:30 2009
From: jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com (Jeffrey A. Williams)
Date: Sat, 31 Oct 2009 13:19:30 -0500 (GMT-05:00)
Subject: [governance] Re: IDN's Internationalized Domain Names - A New
Message-ID: <15456461.1257013170626.JavaMail.root@elwamui-darkeyed.atl.sa.earthlink.net>

Stephane and all,

  My comments in response are interspersed below...

-----Original Message-----
>From: Stephane Bortzmeyer <bortzmeyer at internatif.org>
>Sent: Oct 31, 2009 8:11 AM
>To: governance at lists.cpsr.org
>Subject: [governance] Re: IDN's Internationalized Domain Names - A New Era of  Internet and Local Languages
>
>On Sat, Oct 31, 2009 at 08:22:33PM +0900,
> Fouad Bajwa <fouadbajwa at gmail.com> wrote 
> a message of 109 lines which said:
>
>> The internet regulator ICANN has approved plans to allow
>> non-Latin-script web addresses,
>
>Unicode characters in domain names have been technically approved in
>2003 (with the publication of RFC 3490) and installed first in a TLD a
>few months later (though I do not remember which TLD was the first
>one). ICANN, as often, is very late here. We see "non-Latin-script web
>addresses" for many years.

ICANN is and has often been very late with inovation such as Unicode.
>
>> a move that is being described as the biggest change to the way the
>> internet works since it was created 40 years ago.
>
>This is simply ridiculous. More than the creation of the DNS? Or of
>BGP? Or than the deployment of TCP/IPv4, both non-existent 40 years
>ago?

Agreed.  
>
>____________________________________________________________
>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,

Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 294k members/stakeholders strong!)
"Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" -
   Abraham Lincoln

"Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is very
often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt

"If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; liability
depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
United States v. Carroll Towing  (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
===============================================================
Updated 1/26/04
CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS. div. of
Information Network Eng.  INEG. INC.
ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com
Phone: 214-244-4827

____________________________________________________________
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


From jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com  Sat Oct 31 14:28:18 2009
From: jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com (Jeffrey A. Williams)
Date: Sat, 31 Oct 2009 13:28:18 -0500 (GMT-05:00)
Subject: [governance] Towards a Permission-Based Web
Message-ID: <932266.1257013698138.JavaMail.root@elwamui-darkeyed.atl.sa.earthlink.net>

All

See:http://www.redmonk.com/jgovernor/2009/10/30/towards-a-permission-based-web-wherefore-net-neutrality-or-maybe-open-source-wins-after-all/

On his blog over at RedMonk, analyst James Governor looks at the
walled garden we seem to be moving into, and possible cracks in the wall.
"As we rush to purchase Apple products and services on Cupertinos
monochrome treadmill of shiny shiny, I can't help thinking the open web
community is losing something vital a commitment to net neutrality and
platform openness. If a single company can decide what plays on the
network and what does not, in arbitrary fashion, how can that be net
neutrality? ... Is the AppStore a neutral network? Should it be? Is
Comcast, the company net neutrality proponents love to hate, really the
only company we should be wary of? Pipe level neutrality is surely only
one layer of a stack. The wider market always chooses proprietary
wrappers every technology wave is co-opted by a master packager.
Success in the IT industry has always been about packaging doing the
best job of packaging technologies as they emerge. Twas ever thus."
Governor ends his essay with an optimistic look at Android, which he says
"potentially fragments The Permission Based Web, and associated data
ownership-based business models."

Regards,

Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 294k members/stakeholders strong!)
"Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" -
   Abraham Lincoln

"Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is very
often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt

"If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; liability
depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
United States v. Carroll Towing  (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
===============================================================
Updated 1/26/04
CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS. div. of
Information Network Eng.  INEG. INC.
ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com
Phone: 214-244-4827



____________________________________________________________
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


From jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com  Sat Oct 31 16:22:16 2009
From: jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com (Jeffrey A. Williams)
Date: Sat, 31 Oct 2009 15:22:16 -0500 (GMT-05:00)
Subject: [governance] Federal Judge Says E-mail Not Protected By 4th
 Amendment
Message-ID: <9102918.1257020536623.JavaMail.root@mswamui-swiss.atl.sa.earthlink.net>

All,

  As an perhaps important FYI...  FWIW this seems to be a rather shocking
rueling even given the narrowness of same as most users use third party
providers and as such their Email is therefore not protected under the
forth amendment in the opinion of this judge.  I personally believe
he is mistaken on the grounds that a user of such a service has or
should have a reasonable expectation of PII in the use of their
account.  This goes directly to governance concerns and perhaps
others would care to share their opinions???

See:

In the case In re United States, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_W._Mosman
Judge Mosman ruled that there is http://volokh.com/2009/10/28/district-judge-concludes-e-mail-not-protected-by-fourth-amendment/no constitutional requirement of 
notice to the account holder because the Fourth Amendment does not apply 
to e-mails under the third-party doctrine. 'When a person uses the Internet, 
the user's actions are no longer in his or her physical home; in fact he or
she is not truly acting in private space at all. The user is generally
accessing the Internet with a network account and computer storage owned
by an ISP like Comcast or NetZero. All materials stored online, whether
they are e-mails or remotely stored documents, are physically stored on
servers owned by an ISP. When we send an e-mail or instant message from
the comfort of our own homes to a friend across town the message travels
from our computer to computers owned by a third party, the ISP, before
being delivered to the intended recipient. Thus 'private' information is
actually being held by third-party private companies."" Updated 2:50 GMT
by timothy: Orin Kerr, on whose blog post of yesterday this story was
founded, has issued an http://volokh.com/2009/10/29/opinion-on-fourth-amendment-and-e-mail/important correction. He writes, at the above-linked Volokh Conspiracy, "In the 
course of re-reading the opinion to post it, I recognized that I was 
misreading a key part of the opinion.  As I read it now, Judge Mosman 
does not conclude that e-mails are not protected by the Fourth Amendment. 
Rather, he assumes for the sake of argument that the e-mails are protected 
(see bottom of page 12), but then concludes that the third party context 
negates an argument for Fourth Amendment notice to the subscribers."

Regards,

Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 294k members/stakeholders strong!)
"Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" -
   Abraham Lincoln

"Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is very
often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt

"If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; liability
depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
United States v. Carroll Towing  (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
===============================================================
Updated 1/26/04
CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS. div. of
Information Network Eng.  INEG. INC.
ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com
Phone: 214-244-4827

____________________________________________________________
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