[governance] Call for consensus on IGC OC statement until 10 p.m

[Charity Gamboa]

Yes to all three Ginger. Thank you.

On Sun, Feb 7, 2010 at 7:53 AM, Sivasubramanian Muthusamy <
isolatedn at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hello
>
> On Sun, Feb 7, 2010 at 5:10 PM, Ginger Paque <gpaque at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hello all,
>> I apologize for being out of contact, as I have had a combination of
>> electrical and Internet cuts, travel and all day meetings. I am now in
>> Geneva, and attending your concerns about our statement for the OC on
>> Tuesday.
>>
>> With Jeremy's pre-authorized consent, as he is out of contact, I am now
>> making a call for consensus until 10 p.m. GMT Monday, Feb. 8th. This should
>> allow us to make a final decision at the in situ meeting here in Geneva
>> Monday evening. I will have my computer with me and connected (unless we
>> have some unavoidable problem), so you can email or skype during the
>> meeting, and we will try to reach a consensus with as many voices as
>> possible. My skype login is gingerpaque.
>>
>> I propose that we find consensus on three short statements that can be
>> read together or separately, as appropriate--not necessarily in the order
>> shown. The final suggested closing is an iteration of Parminder's recent
>> suggestion.
>>
>> An all agreement vote would read:
>> 1: Yes
>> 2: Yes
>> 3: Yes
>>
>> Conversely, one could opine with all "No" or a combination of opinions.
>>
>> 1.
>> Network neutrality has been an important architectural principle for
>> the Internet. This principle is under considerable challenge as the
>> Internet becomes the mainstream communication platform for almost all
>> business and social activities. The IGC proposes a main session with the
>> focus of Network Neutrality - Ensuring Openness in All Layers of the
>> Internet. This main session should examine the implications of this
>> principle, and its possible evolutionary interpretations for Internet policy
>> in different areas. Issues about the openness of the Internet architecture
>> are increasingly manifest in all layers of the Internet today.
>>
>
> Yes
>
>>
>> 2.
>> 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.
>>
>
> Yes
>
>>
>> 3.
>> Internet governance has up to this time largely been founded in technical
>> principles and, increasingly, on the Internet’s functionality as a giant
>> global marketplace. With the Internet becoming increasingly central to many
>> social and political institutions, we are of the view that a consideration
>> of 'internet rights and principles' can provide the basis for a more
>> comprehensive conceptual framework for IG.
>
>
> No
>
>
>>
>>
>> In Sharm El Sheikh, specific 3-hour workshops on the two themes of a
>> development agenda and Net Neutrality were organized, which represents a
>> certain degree of maturity of these themes within the IGF context. These
>> successful and productive sessions should be build upon in 2010.
>>
>> The Dynamic Coalition on Internet Rights and Principles has done dynamic
>> and productive work on the issue of IRP, highlighting the concept of Dynamic
>> Coalitions and laying the groundwork to address this issue as part of the
>> Vilnius agenda.
>>
>
>
>
>
>> Thank you very much.
>> Best,
>> Ginger
>
>
> Sivasubramanian Muthusamy
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>     governance at lists.cpsr.org
> To be removed from the list, 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
>



-- 
Charity Gamboa-Embley
Student Alternatives Program, Inc - South Plains Academy
4008 Avenue R
Lubbock, Texas 79412
Phone: +1 (806) 744 0330
Fax: +1 (806) 741 1089
http://www.stdsapi.com/
cembley at esc17.net
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20100207/c5cd962b/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

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