[governance] FINAL? DRAFT statement on enhanced cooperation

[Lee W McKnight]

oecd does set norms  and recommend best practices - eg the 1st calls for privacy protection for info systems pretty much anywhere was done at oecd 30+ years back...I didn;t see anything egregiously incorrect in the passing reference to OECD.

and we were talking about oecd just before the call, so given time constraints all around I am fine with this going ahead, with us perhaps encouraging our co-ordiators to fix any typos, after the consensus call 
________________________________________
From: McTim [dogwallah at gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, November 11, 2010 1:10 PM
To: governance at lists.cpsr.org; Katitza Rodriguez
Subject: Re: [governance] FINAL? DRAFT statement on enhanced cooperation

Jeremy, i think that the oecd reference is unneeded, and was not
discussed, and as such it should not go into the statement. I realise
that you have released the poll, but if i were you, i would cancel
that poll and just make a consensus call on list on the text that
actually has been discussed.  Adding text at the last minute with zero
chance to discuss it is just an invitation for folk to appeal.
Sometimes, less is actually more. Rgds, mctim

On 11/11/10, Katitza Rodriguez <katitza at eff.org> wrote:
> You can not rush the consensus Jeremy! There are even mistakes in the
> statements. OECD is not a norm setting. I am working on my email. Sorry
> but it is 8:30 am here in San Francisco. So please wait one hour.
>
> On 11/11/10 8:26 AM, Jeremy Malcolm wrote:
>> With some trepidation, because there hasn't been a proper chance to
>> discuss this, I've added a reference to the OECD in the version that
>> I'm now putting to a consensus call (but without deleting the other
>> options).  I can't delay the consensus call any longer, because I'm
>> leaving on an overseas flight tomorrow.
>>
>> On 12/11/2010, at 12:03 AM, parminder wrote:
>>
>>> Jeremy
>>>
>>> I suggest we remove all the (4) options in our draft statement vis a
>>> vis institutional developments under the Enhanced Cooperation rubric
>>> (because I dont see how we can recommend that such new institutional
>>> development  is optional) and put in which to me is a very fair and
>>> specific recommendation
>>>
>>>     The IGC strongly recommends that the existing institutional
>>>     framework within the OECD (we can name the Information, Computer
>>>     and Communication Policy Committee) (and also CoE?) designed to
>>>     help develop Internet public policies be taken as a model and
>>>     similar institutional framework be developed for globally
>>>     applicable Internet related public policies (Tunis Agenda) under
>>>     the UN, with participation of all countries and stakeholders.
>>>     This new 'body' will examine all critical Internet policy related
>>>     areas, develop policy frameworks, give detailed policy
>>>     recommendations, and help negotiate treaties etc in different
>>>     areas of Internet policies.
>>>
>>> What is good for the OECD must certainly be good for the whole world.
>>>
>>> A very large number of the people discussing this issue on the IGC
>>> list are engaged with this OECD institutional framework, therefore I
>>> cannot see  why this new proposal for inclusion in the draft should
>>> not be acceptable to them .
>>>
>>> Parminder
>>>
>>>
>>> ____________________________________________________________
>>> 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 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
>>
>> --
>>
>> *Jeremy Malcolm
>> Project Coordinator*
>> Consumers International
>> Kuala Lumpur Office for Asia Pacific and the Middle East
>> Lot 5-1 Wisma WIM, 7 Jalan Abang Haji Openg, TTDI, 60000 Kuala Lumpur,
>> Malaysia
>> Tel: +60 3 7726 1599
>>
>> *CI is 50*
>> Consumers International marks 50 years of the global consumer movement
>> in 2010.
>> Celebrate with us as we continue to support, promote and protect
>> consumer rights around the world.
>> _http://www.consumersinternational.org/50_
>>
>> Read our email confidentiality notice
>> <http://www.consumersinternational.org/Templates/Internal.asp?NodeID=100521&int1stParentNodeID=89765>.
>>
>> Don't print this email unless necessary.
>>
>
>
> --
> Katitza Rodriguez
> International Rights Director
> Electronic Frontier Foundation
> katitza at eff.org
> katitza at datos-personales.org (personal email)
>
> Please support EFF - Working to protect your digital rights and freedom of
> speech since 1990
>
>

--
Sent from my mobile device

Cheers,

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