[governance] Wording to prevent a deadlock (re: Jeanette)

Mon Feb 8 04:07:28 EST 2010

Dear all,

Following Ian's thread, the following formulation : "T*owards
globally-applicable public policy principles*" is directly using the words
of the Tunis agenda. Harder to object.

Maybe worth giving it a thought.

Best

Bertrand

On Mon, Feb 8, 2010 at 7:28 AM, Ian Peter <ian.peter at ianpeter.com> wrote:

>  I should mention I am advancing this suggestion because it might get
> through MAG, not because I think rights are unimportant. Nor to amend what
> has been adopted as a general statement.
>
> And also the gist of it is to discuss basic principles for internet
> governance. WSIS gives us a start but perhaps its time to explore what else
> needs to be said here. Maybe it comes out as defining basic principles or
> something – anyway I am simply seeking a phrase and a topic broad enough to
> get MAG on board.
>
> Ian Peter
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
> *From: *Ian Peter <ian.peter at ianpeter.com>
> *Reply-To: *<governance at lists.cpsr.org>, Ian Peter <ian.peter at ianpeter.com
> >
> *Date: *Mon, 08 Feb 2010 12:28:10 +1100
> *To: *<governance at lists.cpsr.org>, Jeanette Hofmann <jeanette at wzb.eu>
>
> *Subject: *Re: [governance] Wording to prevent a deadlock (re: Jeanette)
>
> Or alternatively, if we talk about
>
> “towards defining basic principles for internet governance”
>
> Have we got a way forward?
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
> *From: *Deirdre Williams <williams.deirdre at gmail.com>
> *Reply-To: *<governance at lists.cpsr.org>, Deirdre Williams <
> williams.deirdre at gmail.com>
> *Date: *Sun, 7 Feb 2010 21:20:34 -0400
> *To: *<governance at lists.cpsr.org>, Lee W McKnight <lmcknigh at syr.edu>
> *Subject: *Re: [governance] Wording to prevent a deadlock (re: Jeanette)
>
> If 'rights" is the word that puts people's backs up why not use "human
> aspects (or human as opposed to technical aspects) of Internet governance",
> as Ginger suggested in the lead message of this string. The terminology
> includes rights, but also got frequent mention in the opening of the Sharm
> IGF, and, at least by implication, in "including the next billion" in
> Hyderabad so should be difficult to simply dismiss.
> Deirdre
>
> On 7 February 2010 20:25, Lee W McKnight <lmcknigh at syr.edu> wrote:
>
> I'm with the pragmatist; however Jeanette thinks she can phrase rights (&
> principles) to get a main theme at IGF is what I vote for.
> ________________________________________
> From: Jeanette Hofmann [jeanette at wzb.eu]
> Sent: Sunday, February 07, 2010 2:09 PM
> To: Paul Lehto
> Cc: governance at lists.cpsr.org; William Drake
> Subject: Re: [governance] Wording to prevent a deadlock (re: Jeanette)
>
> Paul Lehto wrote:
> > Milton Mueller is 100% correct: Then let them veto it.
> >
> > Just make sure the wording, in the event of a possible veto, is the
> > best possible thing to be vetoed, so that way it's a win/win in some
> > ways: Either we get the main session, which is a win, or we don't get
> > the main session but instead we get a 'cause celeb' so to speak, a
> > revealing display of hostility to the rights and interests of internet
> > users.
>
> I am sorry but we have this "revealing display of hostility to the
> rights and interests of internet users" in the transcript of almost
> every open consultation since WSIS. And we had the same stuff in the
> WSIS prepcoms before that. I really, really fail to understand what you
> hope to gain from being politically correct but practically losing out
> on the chance to explore the issue of rights in a main session.
>
> What counts in preparing IGFs is the _implementation_, the concrete
> organization of sessions (speakers, topics, moderators, etc). The formal
> title of a session, the buzz words, are symbolic politics at most.
>
> I begin to think that many of you find it more satisfying to heroically
> lose on a right cause than negotiating a pragmatic solution that would
> allow us to actually design the agenda of the next IGF.
>
> jeanette
> >
> > Without rights, all that's left is market power/money, and whatever
> > random concessions market power/money may wish to make in order to
> > keep a fig leaf of user rights in front of their exposed anatomy.
> >
> > All legitimate political power emanates from rights held by people.
> > The rest is the power of money to distort the discussion of rights.
> > To the extent any entities' power is out of proportion to the number
> > of human supporters, that entity is undemocratic to that same extent.
> >
> > Paul Lehto, Juris Doctor
> >
> > On 2/7/10, Milton L Mueller <mueller at syr.edu> wrote:
> >> Let them veto it. Make the decision transparent, let the public discuss
> it -
> >> at the consultation and at the main sessions of the Vilnius IGF.
> >> Just be sure that the call for a rights theme is clear and well-phrased
> >> enough so that we can better make an issue of it.
> >> Instead of using "alternate wording" on the vain hope that
> authoritarians
> >> can somehow be tricked into participating in a discourse on individual
> >> rights, use even clearer, sharper language to ensure that everyone knows
> >> what is happening when the MAG vetoes it.
> >>
> >> --MM
> >>
> >> ________________________________
> >> From: Ginger Paque [mailto:gpaque at gmail.com <gpaque at gmail.com>]
> >> Sent: Sunday, February 07, 2010 7:59 AM
> >> To: governance at lists.cpsr.org; Jeanette Hofmann
> >> Cc: William Drake; McTim; Parminder
> >> Subject: [governance] Wording to prevent a deadlock (re: Jeanette)
> >>
> >> Jeanette Hofmann wrote:
> >> "Just to reiterate what I said, certain MAG members will veto a main
> session
> >> on rights. I didn't say that we should give up on this topic as Jeremy
> >> suggests. I said we should be inventive and find new, perhaps more
> abstract
> >> wording that offers a way out of this deadlock. I cannot think of
> anything
> >> good at the moment but perhaps something such as 'legal provisions'
> would
> >> work? "
> >>
> >> I understand Jeannette's concern, and agree that we need to address it.
> >> However, we have not been able to come up with alternate wording. I hope
> we
> >> can discuss options for interventions at the Monday evening meeting at
> Les
> >> Brasseurs, which will help us find common ground with the other
> >> stakeholders, so that the OC can develop an effective proposal to
> address
> >> IRP.
> >>
> >> If you have any ideas, please post them. We have some possibilities to
> >> consider:
> >>
> >> legal provisions (Jeanette)
> >> Human/personal/individual aspects of Internet Governance
> >> Human/personal/individual dimensions of Internet Governance
> >> Internet governance and the position of individuals
> >> Internet governance and individuals
> >>
> >> gp
> >>
> >> Jeanette Hofmann wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> William Drake wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi
> >>
> >> On Feb 7, 2010, at 8:51 AM, McTim wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> Perhaps you could send me the link to the thread where it was
> >> defined? I've 63 threads in my Inbox containing the term, and can't
> >> find a definition of it in any of them.
> >>
> >> McTim, Parminder, you are both right.  R&P is a broad and
> >> underspecified concept, which makes it a bit of a hard sell, AND the
> >> caucus has endorsed it several times and it enjoys a lot of support
> >> here.  The latter trumps the former,
> >>
> >> Why? Majority trumps reason?
> >>
> >> so it should be included in the
> >>
> >> statement.
> >>
> >> Just to reiterate what I said, certain MAG members will veto a main
> session
> >> on rights. I didn't say that we should give up on this topic as Jeremy
> >> suggests. I said we should be inventive and find new, perhaps more
> abstract
> >> wording that offers a way out of this deadlock. I cannot think of
> anything
> >> good at the moment but perhaps something such as 'legal provisions'
> would
> >> work?
> >>
> >> jeanette
> >>
> >>
> >> Best,
> >>
> >> Bill____________________________________________________________ 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@
> 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<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@
> 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
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>      governance at lists.cpsr.org
> To be removed from the list, 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
>
>
>
>
> --
> “The fundamental cure for poverty is not money but knowledge" Sir William
> Arthur Lewis, Nobel Prize Economics, 1979
>
> ------------------------------
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>      governance at lists.cpsr.org
> To be removed from the list, 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
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>     governance at lists.cpsr.org
> To be removed from the list, 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
>

-- 
____________________
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/20100208/2b0923b2/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