[governance] Clinton Admits: "Free" Trade is Harmful to 3rd

[jefsey]

At 16:58 07/04/2010, Avri Doria wrote:
>On 6 Apr 2010, at 09:18, McTim wrote:
> > I know many on this list have had some unpleasant experiences with
> > ICANN/ISOC, etc and have lost some faith along the way, but that
> > doesn't mean they are not CS, at least, not according to the LSE, et.
> > al.
>
>i think we have to be careful in these designations.

Amen.

>- The internet community wants to define itself as a separate leg of 
>the multistakeholder process, so to call them CS might thwart their 
>own interests in being something other then that.

Correct. The slow process of identifying the network, usage, user 
governance and adminance from progresses achieved everywhere calls 
for enhanced precise definitions. We will get them progressively from 
clarification ICANN and ISOC (ex. IAB) have to make, irt. the 
Multilingual Network due to the architectural extensions it introduces.

>-  While the I* are non profitare non profit organization , it is 
>their membership and focus that really determines whether they are 
>CS or not.  e.g. the ICC is a non profit, but since it entire focus 
>is commerce, we don't group them with CS.

The more we go, the more we go by scope and needs. Once the notion of 
adminance (common system administration) is better evaluated, there 
will be some natural reshuffling. For example, enhanced cooperations 
are a true need for adminance - as dynamic coalitions are for governance.

>- ICANN still declares itself as a private sector led - and by 
>private sector the mean business.  other then that they try to wear 
>the mantle of multistakeholder giving both CS and Governments a seat 
>at the table (more then most organization other then the IGF ).  so 
>i would have a hard time considering them CS.

When you consider it, ICANN was designed as a "user" organization 
(50% of the BoD). It is now a TLD syndicate. ALAC's involvement is 
not included enough.

>- ISOC is more of a people's organization though it does have some 
>large private sector donors.  And except for the fact that they have 
>been vocal in demanding that the Internet Technical Community be a 
>stakeholder in its own right, I might have been able to consider 
>them CS.  I would probably put the RIRs in this same categories.

ISOC and RIRs are true adminance organizations. However, the 
IAB/IRTF/IESG, IETF, RIRs articulation and purposes are to clarifie. 
Also, depending on IETF (IAB response to my appeal after IESG's) 
decision regarding the Internet Usage Interface (IUI) responsibility 
we may or not restore ATLARGE as an independent IUCG backsupport.

>so while some of the I* is CSish, I do not think we can consider 
>them CS. of course the individuals who work for them can, in their 
>own capacity be CS, as long as those are the interests they 
>personally align themselves with.  and then yes, they should be open 
>about where their support comes from.
>
>On 6 Apr 2010, at 05:52, Milton L Mueller wrote:
>
> >  If you disagree with them about anything, theny won't even 
> consider funding your research on an IG topic.
>
>so this is why i get so little funding?
>
>disclosure: currently only funded by the university in Luleå based 
>on a grant from the EC - but hoping for more real soon now.  does 
>the fact that I will take funding from anyone i don't despise who is 
>wiling to fund me to do what i want to do make me less CSish?

I think we have a real identification problem. CS is a governance 
issue. Internet (smart/lead) Users, i.e. individual people having the 
need and the capacity of modifying the network to their common 
advantage have still different motivations, needs, influence, 
experience , etc. They may share in the various dynamic coalitions 
and enhanced cooperations. The idea of associating CS with academic 
research is wrong. Political parties, consumer organizations, people 
defense associations, trade-unions, etc. are CS. Moreover than RFC 
3935 acknowledges innovation does not come from IETF.

disclosure: as an Internet Users Political and Technological Catalyst 
I self-finance for 20 years. The good is that I am free, the bad is 
that we waste time.

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

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t