[governance] Merger of workshop "Reflection on the Indian proposal towards an IGF 2.0"

Katitza Rodriguez katitza at eff.org
Fri May 13 12:03:40 EDT 2011


+1
> On Fri, May 13, 2011 at 5:24 PM, Avri Doria<avri at acm.org>  wrote:
>> Hi Fouad,
>>
>> I understand you not speaking on the substance of the threats on a public list.
>>
>> But I do not believe the shame is on you.  It is on those who threaten.  And it is something that the IGC should find a way to help you with given that you are one of ours.  Perhaps if you talk to the Coordinators or others in Geneva confidentially, something can be figured out.
>>
>> a.
>>
>>
>>
>> On 13 May 2011, at 10:43, Fouad Bajwa wrote:
>>
>>> McTim, threats don't happen on public record. They are made by reps of
>>> other stakeholder groups trying to create fear usually targeted to
>>> come to play in the country I come from.
>>>
>>> These have been made on issues like but not limited to ICANN,
>>> Information intermediary workshops, critical internet resources issues
>>> with regards to my country etc.
>>>
>>> I won't be sharing these in much more detail in public since the shame
>>> is on me and I am very sensitive.
>>>
>>> -- FoO
>>>
>>> On Fri, May 13, 2011 at 2:30 PM, Adam Peake<ajp at glocom.ac.jp>  wrote:
>>>> Fouad, how long have you been a MAG member?
>>>>
>>>> More important, it would be good to know of the nature of the threats you
>>>> experienced during the MAG meetings.
>>>>
>>>> Adam
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> At 1:58 PM +0200 5/13/11, Fouad Bajwa wrote:
>>>>> I believe its misunderstanding the text here.
>>>>>
>>>>> I did not blame the coordinators, I said the steps required to ensure
>>>>> that IGC communicates during open consultations and MAG meetings. Its
>>>>> a coordinator effort.
>>>>>
>>>>> Sensitive is a good aspect as it enables realization and
>>>>> understanding. Sensitivity to issues and situations is a very humane
>>>>> activity and characteristic.
>>>>>
>>>>> I do feel sad when alumnus MAG members do not share their knowledge or
>>>>> gather existing MAG members and work with them on formulating strategy
>>>>> and countering the attacks that happen.
>>>>>
>>>>> Its easy to point fingers but not easy to make things happen and it
>>>>> does take a certain sensitive mindset to make things happen.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks for identifying the sensitivity in my nature.
>>>>>
>>>>> Fouad
>>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, May 13, 2011 at 12:46 PM, Adam Peake<ajp at glocom.ac.jp>  wrote:
>>>>>>   Fouad, a shame you have taken such offence.  I do know what it's like to
>>>>>> be
>>>>>   >  criticized... I was a MAG member and coordinator for a couple of years.
>>>>> But
>>>>>   >  you are very sensitive. And blaming the coordinators makes no sense,
>>>>> just do
>>>>>>   your part.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>   More important though is something you say at the end of your long
>>>>>> email:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>   I have already been threatened three times during MAG meetings etc and
>>>>>>> it
>>>>>>>   does hold value.
>>>>>>   Threats of what kind?  Doesn't sound good at all.  Please explain.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>   As for the rest, hope all the MAG members will remember what they said
>>>>>> when
>>>>>>   taking part in the nominating process and having names put forward for
>>>>>> the
>>>>>>   MAG.  Not clear what any does anymore.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>   Adam
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>   Kindly accept my apologies in advance for being direct as this is
>>>>>>>   upsetting.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>   Adam that would be arguable. I appreciate your coming back at me as if
>>>>>>> I
>>>>>>>   or our MAG members may be faulty. I have never received a single
>>>>>>> response to
>>>>>>>   my requests to the list when I requested for input. this happened in
>>>>>>> 2009,
>>>>>>>   2010 and now fingers being pointed in 2011 which is upsetting.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>   At my end, i have taken IGC statements to the MAG meetings and
>>>>>>> attempted
>>>>>>>   to the best of my knowledge. I have run after IGC members present
>>>>>>> taking
>>>>>>>   ongoing advice on issues. Ginger, Parminder, Anriyette, Jovan, Ian,
>>>>>>>   Bertrand, Miguel, George, Qusai, Marillia, Bill and the list goes on
>>>>>>> have
>>>>>>>   all been very kind and helping.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>   For the first time in 3 years you interacted with me in the last mag
>>>>>>>   meeting on issues of participation. Sorry to say Avri has been right in
>>>>>>> many
>>>>>   >>  circumstances and so has Parminder that IGC does lack coordination. It
>>>>> is
>>>>>>>   not time to point fingers but to help work out and strategize for the
>>>>>>>   upcoming meeting.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>   People here come from various organizations and backgrounds. In my case
>>>>>>>   the developing state is my major concern and the continuous death and
>>>>>>> human
>>>>>>>   right violation issues associated with Internet policy are the biggest
>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>   threat to me, my citizenry and many others in the developing world.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>   I have witnessed that there is more interest in being part of mag by
>>>>>>> many
>>>>>>>   then to actually tackle the issues relevant to IG. We have to get our
>>>>>>> act
>>>>>>>   straight otherwise this is not belong us.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>   Where is IGC's MAG working group thread or discussions, why haven't the
>>>>>   >>  coordinators ever initiated such a thing? Why isn't there a skype
>>>>> discussion
>>>>>>>   group for Igc in open consultations and mag? Why aren't we coordinated
>>>>>>>   whereas we take so much time to relate and repeat histories of policy
>>>>>   >>  institutions and arrangements.
>>>>>>>   I hear you Adam but you do have the senior experience and exposure to
>>>>>>> help
>>>>>>>   us from developing countries, work with us and support advice sharing
>>>>>>> for
>>>>>>>   open consultations and mag meetings. Being cynical is fine but really I
>>>>>>> get
>>>>>>>   upset with all my developed country CS peers to be arguing on issues of
>>>>>   >>  least relevance to the developing world and more on history and
>>>>>>>   Process theory.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>   If we can't be helped by you then don't ridicule us especially when we
>>>>>>> are
>>>>>>>   a victim of our own severe life threatening situations and still
>>>>>>> struggling.
>>>>>>>   I have already been threatened three times during MAG meetings etc and
>>>>>>> it
>>>>>>>   does hold value.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>   I wish you and many others would be more understanding.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>   Fouad Bajwa
>>>>>>>   sent using my iPad
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>   On 12 May 2011, at 05:58 PM, Adam Peake<ajp at glocom.ac.jp>  wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>    On Fri, May 13, 2011 at 12:21 AM, Fouad Bajwa<fouadbajwa at gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>   wrote:
>>>>>>>>>    I will be going to the meetings.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>    We have the workshop scoring activity underway already and it ends
>>>>>>>>> at
>>>>>>>>>    the end of this week.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>    I am focusing on IG4D Workshops.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>    IGC really needs to work with its MAG representatives on issues of
>>>>>>>>>   interest.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>    You have that the wrong way round.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>    >  MAG representatives really need to work with the IGC.
>>>>>>>>    When nominated everyone made promises to consult, inform, etc.  It's
>>>>>>>>    not been happening.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>    Adam
>>>>>>>>    '
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>    Sorry for the short reply...travelling.....!
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>    Fouad
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>    On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 4:57 PM,<katitza at eff.org>  wrote:
>>>>>>>    >>>  I'm going through all the workshops, one by one to be ready for
>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>   MAG.
>>>>>>>>>>    However during the meeting, we might divided the work by themes. I
>>>>>>>>>>   will be
>>>>>>>>>>    working in the SOP workshops.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>    If there are other workshops that are well done (ie touching the
>>>>>>>>>> key
>>>>>>>>>>   and hot
>>>>>>>>>>    policy issues) that require highly attention, let me know so I do
>>>>>>>>>> not
>>>>>>>>>>   miss
>>>>>>>>>>    it! Katitza.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>    Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>    ________________________________
>>>>>>>>>>    From: katitza at eff.org
>>>>>>>>>>    Sender: governance at lists.cpsr.org
>>>>>>>>>>    Date: Thu, 12 May 2011 14:41:10 +0000
>>>>>>>>>>    To:<governance at lists.cpsr.org>; Marilia
>>>>>>>>>>   Maciel<mariliamaciel at gmail.com>;
>>>>>>>>>>    Norbert Bollow<nb at bollow.ch>
>>>>>>>>>>    ReplyTo: governance at lists.cpsr.org,katitza at eff.org
>>>>>>>>>>    Subject: Re: [governance] Merger of workshop "Reflection on the
>>>>>>>>>>    Indianproposal towards an IGF 2.0"
>>>>>>>>>>    Thanks. I'm going to Geneva for the MAG meeting (thanks to APC
>>>>>>>>>>   support). I
>>>>>>>>>>    will take care of the workshops. I haven't been following the list
>>>>>>>>>> in
>>>>>>>>>>   the
>>>>>>>>>>    last few weeks. Any update about the main concerns from IGC that I
>>>>>>>>>>   should
>>>>>>>>>>    make sure to defend, please let me know.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>    All the best, Katitza.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>    Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>    ________________________________
>>>>>>>>>>    From: Marilia Maciel<mariliamaciel at gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>>>    Sender: governance at lists.cpsr.org
>>>>>>>>>>    Date: Thu, 12 May 2011 09:59:54 -0300
>>>>>>>>>>    To:<governance at lists.cpsr.org>; Norbert Bollow<nb at bollow.ch>
>>>>>>>>>>    ReplyTo: governance at lists.cpsr.org,Marilia Maciel
>>>>>>>>>>   <mariliamaciel at gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>>>    Subject: Re: [governance] Merger of workshop "Reflection on the
>>>>>>>>>> Indian
>>>>>>>>>>    proposal towards an IGF 2.0"
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>    Like Jeremy said, the reasons are difficult to speculate. I believe
>>>>>>>>>>   that our
>>>>>>>>>>    main concern should be if the merger is in the best interest of our
>>>>>>>>>>    proposal.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>    Two points I made in the meeting yesterday were that we should not
>>>>>>>>>> do
>>>>>>>>>>   a
>>>>>>>>>>    revival of CSTD WG (go through all topics in a superficial manner
>>>>>>>>>>   without
>>>>>>>>>>    reaching any conclusions) and we should not focus on procedural
>>>>>>>>>> issues
>>>>>>>>>>   (ex:
>>>>>>>>>>    CSTD WG x MAG as a way of improving the IGF). These are the two
>>>>>>>>>>   potential
>>>>>>>>>>    shortcomings of the proposals advanced, respectively, by the
>>>>>>>>>> business
>>>>>>>>>>   sector
>>>>>>>>>>    and the technical community, in my view.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>   >>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>    A merger should not make us lose our focus. Using indian proposal
>>>>>>>>>> as a
>>>>>>>>>>    starting point to discuss topics in-depth could help us ventilate
>>>>>>>>>>   ideas,
>>>>>>>>>>    reach a clear understanding and exorcise some ghosts that hunt
>>>>>>>>>> IGF¹s
>>>>>>>>>>   closet
>>>>>>>>>>    for a while, such as the fear of more concrete outcomes.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>    The only possibility I see for a merger would be that we have a
>>>>>>>>>> longer
>>>>>   >>>>>    workshop, with half of it dedicated to a ³setting the scene² and
>>>>> an
>>>>>>>>>>   overview
>>>>>>>>>>    of the main issues advanced in CSTD WG (that seems to be the core
>>>>>>>>>> of
>>>>>>>>>>   the
>>>>>>>>>>    proposal from the business sector) and the other half would be
>>>>>>>>>>   dedicated to
>>>>>>>>>>    focus on the topics covered by Indian proposal. But I don¹t know if
>>>>>>>>>>   that
>>>>>>>>>>    would be acceptable to the other groups and I am not convinced this
>>>>>>>>>>   would be
>>>>>>>>>>    in the best interest of our proposal in the end, but only a move
>>>>>>>>>>   driven by
>>>>>>>>>>    political considerations.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>    In any case, we should just be aware that if we do not merge, other
>>>>>>>>>>   groups
>>>>>>>>>>    will probably try to impinge us with the political burden of
>>>>>>>>>>    non-cooperation. We cannot let this stick. There are always several
>>>>>>>>>>   IGF
>>>>>>>>>>    workshops on NN, youth, etc. So why there can¹t be 2 or 3 workshops
>>>>>>>>>> on
>>>>>>>>>>   IGF
>>>>>>>>>>    improvement?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>    Best,
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>    Marília
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>    On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 7:32 AM, Norbert Bollow<nb at bollow.ch>
>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>    Jeremy Malcolm<jeremy at ciroap.org>  wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>    On 12/05/11 16:53, Norbert Bollow wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>    Jeremy Malcolm<jeremy at ciroap.org>  wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>    The ICC/BASIS and ISOC were invited to participate in our
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   workshop,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>    "Reflection on the Indian proposal towards an IGF 2.0".
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   Instead,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>    they
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>    responded by proposing competing workshops of their own and
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>    suggesting
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>    that the three be merged.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>    Is their motivation for choosing this course of action known?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>    How do their perspectives on workshop outcomes compare to the
>>>>>>>    >>>>>>  desires of Marilia and yourself?
>>>>>>>>>>>>    A summary was sent around privately after the teleconference, but
>>>>>>>>>>>> we
>>>>>>>>>>>>    have been requested not to repost it.  Anyway, my notes of the
>>>>>>>>>>>>    teleconference include a lot of catch-phrases like "holistic
>>>>>>>>>>>>   dialogue",
>>>>>>>>>>>>    "all-encompassing", "general debate", "range of ideas"... as
>>>>>>>>>>>> opposed
>>>>>>>>>>>>   to
>>>>>>>>>>>>    the much more focused agenda for our workshop.  I'm not sure how
>>>>>>>>>>>>   much
>>>>>>>>>>>>    more I can say about their motivations or perspectives, but it is
>>>>>>>>>>>>   not
>>>>>>>>>>>>    difficult to speculate.
>>>>>>>>>>>    Ok, given that there has been plenty of holistic dialogue and
>>>>>>>>>>> general
>>>>>>>>>>>    debate on the all-encompassing range of ideas already, I'd
>>>>>>>>>>> strongly
>>>>>>>>>>>    support sticking to the "much more focused agenda" that Marilia
>>>>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>>>>    you have in mind. It's IMO not a bad thing to have two workshops
>>>>>>>>>>> on
>>>>>>>>>>>    the same topic if the two workshops differ significantly in how
>>>>>>>>>>> they
>>>>>>>>>>>    approach the topic, provided they're not scheduled to both take
>>>>>>>>>>> place
>>>>>>>>>>>    at the same time. IGF participants are then free to attend one or
>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>    other or both. (I personally certainly won't be found attending
>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>    non-focused one, but nevertheless I think that there's nothing
>>>>>>>>>>> wrong
>>>>>>>>>>>    with some groups wanting to organize another opportunity for a
>>>>>>>>>>> broad
>>>>>>>>>>>    debate for those who wish to participate in that.)
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>    Greetings,
>>>>>>>>>>>    Norbert
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Regards.
>>>>> --------------------------
>>>>> Fouad Bajwa
>>>> ____________________________________________________________
>>>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>>>>     governance at lists.cpsr.org
>>>> To be removed from the list, visit:
>>>>     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
>>>>
>>>> For all other list information and functions, see:
>>>>     http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance
>>>> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
>>>>     http://www.igcaucus.org/
>>>>
>>>> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Regards.
>>> --------------------------
>>> Fouad
>>> ____________________________________________________________
>>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>>>      governance at lists.cpsr.org
>>> To be removed from the list, visit:
>>>      http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
>>>
>>> For all other list information and functions, see:
>>>      http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance
>>> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
>>>      http://www.igcaucus.org/
>>>
>>> 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, visit:
>       http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
>
> For all other list information and functions, see:
>       http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance
> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
>       http://www.igcaucus.org/
>
> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
>


-- 
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

____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.cpsr.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

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



More information about the Governance mailing list