OFFLIST:Re: [governance] Separate statement on themes for Vilnius

[McTim]

Ginger.

On Fri, Feb 5, 2010 at 8:58 PM, Ginger Paque <gpaque at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi everyone... I just got in to Geneva, and see that there have been no
> responses to this. Jeremy, if it is ok with you, I think we should follow up
> on Parminder's proposal.

I think 6 hours is a bit hasty to make such a judgement.  Our charter
does not say that "Silence equals consent".

I am ok with Bill's formulation, but don't think we have time to
debate the addition of additional text.  While I am all for NN and
Open Internet, we can't agree amongst ourselves if we should phrase it
Open Internet or NN, so I think we should leave it out for now.  It
doesn't seem to be global concern, but primarily a US c issue. Perhaps
I've missed some NN issues coming from other countries.

I am of the opinion that since we failed on the Human Rights theme
last time, we should not try it again.  I do trust Bill's analysis re:
the acceptance of a DA as a ripe topic.  I think we will hurt our
chances if we includes the Human Rights theme as we did previously.

-- 
Cheers,

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



>
> Parminder: can you write up the actual wording for your proposal? I think it
> is better if it comes from someone in the list. If you and Jeremy agree, we
> can post:
>
> Parminder, since there have been no comments, please post your proposed
> wording as soon as possible. We will then open for comments and call for
> consensus... unfortunately probably 24h and 24h due to time constraints.
>
> Can you guys please try to get back to me asap?
>
> Thanks!
> Ginger
>
> Parminder wrote:
>
> I support Bill's draft below... I propose that co-coordinators take this
> language for dev agenda, and the Hyderabad statement's for NN/ Open
> Internet, and if the decision is to include 'Internet rights and principles'
> in the list, abstract a short para on it from the earlier statement which is
> relatively  not very sharp, and in size no longer than the paras on dev
> agenda and NN. We shd put it out for a day or so of last comments and then a
> final version for a consensus call over 48 hours.
>
> In the statement we should also mention that special 3 hour workshops on the
> two themes of dev agenda and NN were organized last year, which represents a
> certain degree of maturity of these themes within the IGF context. And if
> 'internet rights and principles' is included as a main theme, that the DC on
> IRP has been doing good work in this area for considerable time now, an dis
> in fact the most active dynamic coalition (the much celebrated concept in
> the IGF).
>
> Parminder
>
> William Drake wrote:
>
> Hi
> With just a few days to go before the OC, I'm not clear if we are proceeding
> with a theme statement or have given up on the idea.  In the event that it's
> the former, I just reread what we agreed for Hyderabad, and we really can't
> use it anymore, it's dated.
> On Feb 3, 2010, at 5:49 PM, Parminder wrote:
>
> A Development Agenda for Internet Governance
> Development is a key focus of the Tunis Agenda and its mandate for the IGF.
> Development also was listed as a cross-cutting theme of the Athens and Rio
> conferences, but neither featured a main session that devoted significant,
> focused attention to the linkages between Internet governance mechanisms and
> development. However, at Rio a workshop was organized by civil society
> actors in collaboration with the Swiss government, Brazilian Internet
> Steering Committee and other partners from all stakeholder groupings on,
> “Toward a Development Agenda for Internet Governance.” The workshop
> considered the options for establishing a holistic program of analysis and
> action that would help mainstream development considerations into Internet
> governance decision making processes.
> Attendees at this workshop expressed strong interest in further work on the
> topic being pursued in the IGF. Hence, we believe the Development Agenda
> concept should be taken up in a main session at Hyderabad, and that this
> would be of keen interest to a great many participants there. We also
> support the Swiss government’s proposal to consider establishing a
> multi-stakeholder Working Group that could develop recommendations to the
> IGF on a development agenda.
>
> How about something like this, which doesn't change the substantive thrust
> of what was previously agreed:
> A Development Agenda for Internet Governance
> Development is a key focus of the Tunis Agenda and its mandate for the IGF.
>  But while development has been posed as a cross-cutting theme of
> IGF meetings, they have not featured a broadly inclusive and probing
> dialogue on what Internet Governance for Development (IG4D) might mean in
> conceptual and operational terms.  To address this gap, the IGC previously
> has advocated a main session on A Development Agenda for Internet
> Governance, and some its members have organized workshops or produced
> position papers elaborating different visions of what such an agenda could
> entail.   In light of the related discussions during the Sharm el Sheikh
> cycle, we renew our call for a main session on this theme.  The dialogue at
> Vilnius could, inter alia, identify the linkages between Internet governance
> mechanisms and development, and consider options for mainstreaming
> development considerations into IGF discussions and Internet governance
> processes, as appropriate.  We also continue to support the
> Swiss government’'s proposal to consider establishing a multi-stakeholder
> Working Group that could develop recommendations to the IGF on a development
> agenda.
> Bill
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>     governance at lists.cpsr.org
> To be removed from the list, 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
>
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.cpsr.org
To be removed from the list, 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