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

[Antonio Medina Gómez]

Very interesting the different views on those areas where efforts should be
concentrated. The next Wednesday hold the first meeting of the Internet
Governance Forum Colombia and moved to this stage all these initiatives.
Antonio

2010/2/7 Parminder <parminder at itforchange.net>

> Yes to all...
>
> Ginger Paque 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.
>
> 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.
>
> 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.
>
>
> 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
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>     governance at lists.cpsr.org
> To be removed from the list, 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
>



-- 
Antonio Medina Gomez
Presidente
Asociación Colombiana de Usuarios de Internet. ACUI
presidencia at acui.org.co
amedinagomez at gmail.com
http://www.acui.org.co
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20100208/bc8e2c94/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