From alice at apc.org  Wed Nov 30 22:28:44 2011
From: alice at apc.org (alice at apc.org)
Date: Thu, 1 Dec 2011 03:28:44 +0000
Subject: [governance] Fwd: [AfriNIC-announce] Alice Munuya Winner of the
 NI&I Service Award!!
In-Reply-To: <CAM29qGZk_=_y+O91gnM1gfxqMkKGHrqQ4+HDsVwk35R6yvSWTg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4ED39334.3070005@afrinic.net>
 	<CACAaNxjWdDpHPv4YZb-AnZ0EeK84KXroWoDHany7LOrY_L-b_g@mail.gmail.com>
 	<4ED4EB16.5000309@cgi.br>
 	<97657EF9087F754BBF54D3D0322DAD0F03DC3FAE@IQALUITMX05.nunavut.local>
  <CAM29qGZk_=_y+O91gnM1gfxqMkKGHrqQ4+HDsVwk35R6yvSWTg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <1705329014-1322710123-cardhu_decombobulator_blackberry.rim.net-102741426-@b3.c8.bise7.blackberry>

Thank you Aaron.
Alice
-----Original Message-----
From: Nyangkwe Agien Aaron <nyangkweagien at gmail.com>
Sender: governance at lists.cpsr.org
Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2011 21:32:16 
To: <governance at lists.cpsr.org>; Thompson, Darlene<DThompson1 at gov.nu.ca>
Reply-To: governance at lists.cpsr.org,Nyangkwe Agien Aaron <nyangkweagien at gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [governance] Fwd: [AfriNIC-announce] Alice Munuya Winner of the
 NI&I Service Award!!

I am proud of you Alice

Aaron

On 11/30/11, Thompson, Darlene <DThompson1 at gov.nu.ca> wrote:
> Could NOT have gone to a better person.   Congratulations, Alice!!!!
>
> Darlene A. Thompson
> Community Access Program Administrator
> Nunavut Dept. of Education / N-CAP
> P.O. Box 1000, Station 910
> Iqaluit, NU  X0A 0H0
> Phone:  (867) 975-5631
> Fax:  (867) 975-5610
> E-mail:  dthompson at gov.nu.ca<mailto:dthompson at gov.nu.ca>
>
> From: governance at lists.cpsr.org [mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org] On Behalf
> Of Hartmut Richard Glaser
> Sent: Tuesday, November 29, 2011 9:24 AM
> To: governance at lists.cpsr.org; 'alice at apc.org'
> Subject: Re: [governance] Fwd: [AfriNIC-announce] Alice Munuya Winner of the
> NI&I Service Award!!
>
>
> Congratulations Alice ...!
>
> Hartmut
>
> ===================================
> On 28/11/11 12:07, McTim wrote:
>
> FYI:
>
>
>
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>
> From: Babusha Radhakissoon <babusha at afrinic.net><mailto:babusha at afrinic.net>
>
> Date: Mon, Nov 28, 2011 at 4:57 PM
>
> Subject: [AfriNIC-announce] Alice Munuya Winner of the NI&I Service Award!!
>
> To: announce at afrinic.net<mailto:announce at afrinic.net>
>
>
>
>
>
> Dear colleagues,
>
>
>
> Please see herewith the press release for the 2011 NI&I Service Award,
>
> for your perusal.
>
>
>
> "Alice Munuya awarded the 2011 NI&I Service Award "
>
>
>
> Yaounde, 25 November 2011 - The 3rd Network Information and
>
> Infrastructure Service Award has been awarded to Alice Munuya in
>
> recognition to her contribution to improving and sustaining Africa's
>
> Internet community. Dr. Nii Quaynor conveyor of AfNOG presented the
>
> Award during AfriNIC 15th Public Policy Meeting in Yaounde, Cameroon
>
> on 22 November 2011.
>
>
>
> For Dr. Nii, Quaynor the initiator of the Award, "Recognising Alice is
>
> for us a way to highlight the importance of the civil society and
>
> government's contribution to the growth of our local community. We are
>
> at a stage where we need to build a more coherent and strong
>
> multistakeholder community in order to address our current challenges
>
> to build a brighter future for Internet in Africa "
>
>
>
> Alice is Kenya's representative on the Internet Corporation for
>
> Assigned Names and Numbers Government Advisory Committee (ICANN, GAC)
>
> and the chair of the 2011 UN-Internet Governance Forum (IGF) held in
>
> Kenya in September 2011 and convenes the East Africa Internet
>
> Governance Forum and the Kenya ICT Action Network (Kictanet). "For me,
>
> this award is a tribute to my work and contribution at the regional
>
> level, a great recognition from my role model and peers in the region.
>
> I have been dedicated to creating awareness and understanding in order
>
> to ensure that our region contributes meaningfully in global internet
>
> governance and policy processes and hope to continue to do so as
>
> internet governance becomes more and more significant." says Alice
>
> Munyua.
>
>
>
> Besides the main NI&I Award, a Young professional Award was also given
>
> to Jean Robert Hountomey for his continuous contribution to the
>
> internet technical community. Jean Robert has a passion for
>
> Information Systems Security and is engaged in the community as track
>
> leader of the African network Operator Group French Track, ICANN
>
> Address Supporting Organization/ Address Council member for AfriNIC
>
> region from 2005 to December 2011, Chair of Internet Society Chapter
>
> in Togo, former member of Internet Exchange point Team. He is
>
> currently performing the coordination function of the AfricaCERT
>
> initiative.
>
>
>
> "I'm very happy and proud to welcome both Alice and Jean-Robert as
>
> NI&I Award alumni. It is hard to miss Alice Munuya's effort in
>
> promoting a bottom-up and participative Internet Governance culture in
>
> our region." says Adiel Akplogan, CEO of AfriNIC and recipient of the
>
> first NI&I Service Award.
>
>
>
> The Network Information & Infrastructure (NI&I) Service Award was
>
> instituted in 2009 during AfNOG's 10 years anniversary by Dr Nii Narku
>
> Quaynor, who himself received the Internet Society's prestigious
>
> Jonathan Postel Award in 2007 for his service in the region and
>
> example of dedication, commitment and leadership for the young
>
> generation to emulate. The NI&I Service Award has been set up to
>
> reward individuals and organisations for providing Internetworking
>
> services and Infrastructure in Africa. The NI&I Service Award pays
>
> tribute to the actors of this sector in Africa and the Indian Ocean
>
> and sets the foundation to reward the next generation of heroes and
>
> models from the African Internet technical community for their
>
> achievements. www.niiserviceaward.org<http://www.niiserviceaward.org>
>
>
>
> The African Network Information Centre (AfriNIC) is the Regional
>
> Registry for Internet Number Resources for Africa. Based in Mauritius,
>
> AfriNIC's mission is to support Internet development in Africa and
>
> promote bottom up Internet policy development in the region.
>
> www.afrinic.net<http://www.afrinic.net>
>
>
>
> The Africa Network Operators Group (AfNOG) is a forum for the exchange
>
> of technical information, and aims to promote discussion of
>
> implementation issues that require community cooperation through
>
> coordination and cooperation among network service providers to ensure
>
> the stability of service to end users.The goal of AfNOG is to share
>
> experience of technical challenges in setting up, building and running
>
> IP networks on the African continent www.afnog.org<http://www.afnog.org>
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
> The AfriNIC Meeting Team
>
>
>
> AfriNIC | 11th Floor| Raffles Tower | Cybercity | Mauritius
>
> Tel: +230 403 5100 |Fax: +230 466 6758
>
>
>
> Join us at AfriNIC-15 in Cameroon, 19-25 November 2011
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> announce mailing list
>
> announce at afrinic.net<mailto:announce at afrinic.net>
>
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo.cgi/announce
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>


-- 
Aaron Agien Nyangkwe
Journalist-OutCome Mapper
Special Assistant to Tha President
ASAFE
Telephone:237 33 01 30 13
P.O.Box 5213
Douala-Cameroon
____________________________________________________________
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


From nb at bollow.ch  Tue Nov  1 03:30:08 2011
From: nb at bollow.ch (Norbert Bollow)
Date: Tue,  1 Nov 2011 08:30:08 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [governance] Indian proposal => "IGF improvements"
In-Reply-To: <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD202CE04@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu>
	(message from Milton L Mueller on Sun, 30 Oct 2011 19:06:31 +0000)
References: <4b2cbc0e-bc83-4238-ba44-a5ac4b52f2d7@email.android.com>
 <3483B830-C6BA-4D67-8327-9C59CB52BCC7@uzh.ch> <4E9F0812.9000104@apc.org>
 <97790962-6914-4C52-959E-18C163B8488F@uzh.ch> <4EA0132B.4060708@cafonso.ca>
 <999A64B5-B15D-49A2-9A9B-1322BA103DE3@uzh.ch> <4EA14A95.4020404@apc.org>
 <3B9704FA-0B65-4398-B99A-3B5561468E7C@uzh.ch>
 <CACpVkK39uOKRnh7Cy64M1v5quGi1AgBbw7RWsefXUmS6b-uycw@mail.gmail.com>
 <549EFAF4-B302-4E15-B666-7C167CE71AB8@uzh.ch> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD202CE04@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu>
Message-ID: <20111101073008.3542015C28F@quill.bollow.ch>

> [Milton L Mueller] Agree, and a very important point. Either IBSA
> governments move to strengthen the IGF, or they give up on it and
> propose a CIRP. It's clear which path they have chosen.

Yes.

They might plan to come back to a "strengthen the IGF" agenda as a
kind of "plan B" in case the CIRP proposal fails.

There can be no doubt that if the CIRP proposal is approved, that
would weaken or even endanger the IGF. The only way in which the
CIRP proposal can strengthen the IGF is if some governments who
would rather not see IGF strengthened but who are much more strongly
opposed to the CIRP idea were to agree, in some kind of backroom
intergovernmental horse trading, to a strengthening of the IGF as
a kind of compromise with the IBSA countries who would in turn
agree to stop seeking an additional UN role in Internet governance
besides the strengthened IGF.

Greetings,
Norbert
____________________________________________________________
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


From baudouin.schombe at gmail.com  Tue Nov  1 04:03:03 2011
From: baudouin.schombe at gmail.com (Baudouin Schombe)
Date: Tue, 1 Nov 2011 09:03:03 +0100
Subject: [governance] CSTD WG going on
In-Reply-To: <1320081340.82295.yint-ygo-j2me@web161005.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
References: <1320081340.82295.yint-ygo-j2me@web161005.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <CAPcSPKX+kBqq8LXtWJu+ZSiWA_sRf92CnoU4b6B10xAkgv2E_g@mail.gmail.com>

Hello,
Imran has a raised section of our concerns about the participation of
developing
economies. I not only support but I think it's essential that we participate in
consultations and fora in Geneva WSIS (like 2012). Remote participation can
be effective if it creates a synergy with a physical presence at the scene of
the consultation and the actors in the field.

Baudouin

2011/10/31 Imran Ahmed Shah <ias_pk at yahoo.com>

> Dear Izumi,
> Thank you for sharing the progress, Step by step.
>
> Its really a positive change and constructive discussion about IGF
> improvement.
> May I suggest some points for the discussion over there (if you also
> agree):
> 1. Travel Support to attend IGF meetings for the Internet Community from
> Developing Economies through open application program like the ICANN have
> Fellowship Application System.
> 2. Open and Online Discussion Forum at IGF Website like the
> DiploInternetGovernance have.
> 3. Increase the number of the membership (count) of MAG Members to have at
> least two members from each Country, one from CS and one from Internet
> Regulating Authority from the same Country.
> 4. Regarding IGF meeting outcomes, and the strengthen IGF secretariat, it
> is suggested that each IGF meeting specially and IGF secretariat in
> general, should release a declaration and report about the Internet
> Regulating Authorities if they adopt such policies that conflicting
> Internet Governance.
>
> Thanking you and Best Regards
>
> Imran Ahmed Shah
>
> >On Mon, 31 Oct 2011 21:05 PKT Izumi AIZU wrote:>In the afternoon, we
> started to examine if there is broad (and>minimum) agreement on each of>the
> 5 topic categories identified in the morning:>>A)  Shaping the outcomes of
> IGF meetings>B)  Working modalities including open consultation, MAG and
> Secretariat>C)  Funding of the IGF>D)  Participation – broadening>E)
>  Linking IGF to other related processes/mechanisms/bodies>>And then we
> reached the point of confusion – it seems very difficult>to reach some
> specific>agreement or consensus of so many different issues in limited time
> –>so that Chair suggested>to go into three small working groups and come
> back to plenary.>>Several governments showed resistance to this proposal
> and we went back to>exploring how to go forward as plenary.>>Some
> governments started to talk about more specifics of item A, and>then
> Marilia>pointed out that we should go over all 5 elements first without
> going>into
>  subetantive>discussions, and we can go more specifics later. That was
> accepted by the group.>>Then we agreed (tentatively):>“B Working modalities
> including open consultation MAG, and Secretariat>Broad agreement on need to
> rotate MAG members regularly, keep MAG>deliberations transparent.>Broad
> agreement to strengthen the IGF secretariat”>Broad agreement that the MAG
> should be more representative of all the>groups that Internet Governance
> increasingly impacts.>Broad agreement that the use of remote participation
> tools and>resources should be strengthened.>Broad agreement that MAG needs
> clear Terms of Reference, constitution>of the MAG is done in a transparent
> and documented fashion.>>C Funding of the IGF>Broad agreement that
> additional voluntary funding should be sought,>accepted, and
> encouraged.>Broad agreement that funding is stable and predictable and
> independent.>>We have had several rounds of interesting exchanges of
> different views>before
>  reaching these broad agreement.>>Another Coffee break
> now.>>izumi>____________________________________________________________>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
>
>


-- 
SCHOMBE BAUDOUIN
CENTRE AFRICAIN D'ECHANGE CULTUREL/
ACADEMIE DES TIC
FACILITATEUR GAID/AFRIQUE Membre
At-Large Member
NCSG Member

email:baudouin.schombe at gmail.com
         baudouin.schombe at ticafrica.net
tél:+243998983491
skype:b.schombe
wite web:http://webmail.ticafrica.net
blog:http://akimambo.unblog.fr
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111101/d45625fd/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, 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


From isolatedn at gmail.com  Tue Nov  1 04:38:31 2011
From: isolatedn at gmail.com (Sivasubramanian M)
Date: Tue, 1 Nov 2011 14:08:31 +0530
Subject: [governance] Fwd: [At-Large] India proposes Government controlled
 Internet
In-Reply-To: <CAHyAo0G5rvXUHRwND98g=EKLB0zOWe4mXyiw2Pbj8tw7f86PDg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAHyAo0H9cR7bFmHUTatLqqhntY1mVuYfOZzSKHGOxm_Ckdum_w@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAOZQb9RQb535nXkFEvSpBw=h3Wn7BW9COsjEUVRF_ga0q64Ajw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAHyAo0EpiFe9_Hg9Tcd0H12O+LgCHMPc5GwrfcmCX3aJy1Rspg@mail.gmail.com>
	<5236CBE9-5380-4BB7-8AB9-E84F11B2DFE1@uzh.ch>
	<CAHyAo0G5rvXUHRwND98g=EKLB0zOWe4mXyiw2Pbj8tw7f86PDg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAHyAo0FEJxd_h+YnUgG4dNFDvy0hQ-OLh83L4s=-y9QGXz7g3w@mail.gmail.com>

Hello,


On this topic, there is a discussion on the At-Large list which I wish to
cross-post here :

Sivasubramanian M



---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Sivasubramanian M <isolatedn at gmail.com>
Date: Mon, Oct 31, 2011 at 11:39 PM
Subject: Re: [At-Large] India proposes Government controlled Internet
To: At-Large Worldwide <at-large at atlarge-lists.icann.org>


Dear Bill Drake,

The CIRP proposal is from the Government of India, not from India. It is a
proposal which has not been drafted transparently nor after due
consultations and does not reflect the will of the people of India.  I am
not aware of a call for inputs or even a call for comments to the Business
Community or to the Civil Society. If there is any claim of inclusion of
the Business Community that I am not aware of, it could not possibly have
been wide enough and the opinions might not be representative of the
different sectors of Business, small, medium and large. And as a practice,
if Civil Society is ever included, it is no more than a handful of
convenient participants.  The most influential of India's Political leaders
and Administrators in Power at the moment do not appear not to be in a mood
to include the Civil Society :) . On matters related to Internet
Governance, the Civil Society, and to a large extent, the Business Sector
in India do not know what is happening.

Earlier, India's proposal for IGF improvements showed some commitment for
the multi-stakeholder model, though on deeper examination, one can see a
strong multilateral undertone, especially in Point 9.

The IBSA proposal went one step further, it completely dropped all
references to the multi-stakeholder model.

Now we have the CIRP proposal from India, taken to the UN. A proposal of
this magnitude, that affects the lives of people of the whole world for the
next century or two requires ample consultation in a transparent manner,
with wide participation of the Business Community and the Civil Society.
Had there been fair consultation with neutral information, a proposal of
this nature would have been "Dead on Origin".

Personally, I totally disagree with the idea of the CIRP proposal, even on
the face of the prospects of being repeatedly reminded that I am an Indian
first. Am I supposed to stand by and watch a shortsighted and ill-advised
proposal jeopardize the civil liberties of all the people of the World,
merely because the proposal has been introduced as a proposal from India?

We may not have Brazil-like receptiveness for some more time, but we try...
I will gather opinions, for and against, and send an email to our
Government.

Thank you.
Sivasubramanian M



On Mon, Oct 31, 2011 at 4:48 PM, William Drake <william.drake at uzh.ch> wrote:

> Hi Siva
>
> If I may be allowed a brief intervention from the NC-ALAC liaison peanut
> gallery: As you know, some of us are having heated debates on this on the
> governance list and did in Nairobi as well.  One aspect that hasn't gotten
> much attention in these contexts is whether the Indian government undertook
> domestic level consultations with relevant business, technical community,
> and civil society actors.  In Nairobi I asked several Indians, including
> the delegation from Tata, whether they had any idea what their government
> was advocating in their name, and the answer was no.  So one really helpful
> step you could take here is to get the word out nationally and see whether
> any sort of shared position either way can be stated.  You may recall that
> amidst the Nairobi debates some Brazilian CS people came out against what
> their government was doing in IBSA, and this had a significant effect in
> softening the Brazilian position, which resulted in an Indian rather than
> an IBSA proposal to the UNGA.
>
> Just a thought,
>
> Bill
>
> On Oct 28, 2011, at 12:15 PM, Sivasubramanian M wrote:
>
> > Dear Carlton
> >
> >
> > Thank you. It would be of ample help if there are more opinions on this
> > development, especially by those from developing countries.
> >
> > This is what I wrote to our Government earlier on the IBSA proposal:
> >
> > --- begin quote from what I wrote earlier --- The proposal to "establish
> a
> > new Global body "located within the UN system", "tasked to develop ...
> > policies" and to "oversee bodies responsible for the technical and
> > operational functioning of the Internet including standards setting",
> > "undertake arbitration and dispute resolution" and "be responsible for
> > crisis management" is a proposal to offer the Internet bundled with the
> IETF
> > to the ITU or an ITU-controlled or an ITU-friendly new global body within
> > the UN system where ITU is comfortable. It is perhaps with these
> > apprehensions that the draft has been criticized as "unimaginative,
> > backward-looking, and authoritarian and ... very destructive" and has
> > generated a loud discussion among Civil Society participants. --- end of
> > quote
> >
> >
> > Sivasubramanian M
> >
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 3:24 PM, Carlton Samuels
> > <carlton.samuels at gmail.com>wrote:
> >
> >> Thanks for sharing, Siva.   Helluva thing to be the canary in the mine.
> >>
> >> Carlton
> >>
> >> ==============================
> >> Carlton A Samuels
> >> Mobile: 876-818-1799
> >> *Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround*
> >> =============================
> >>
> >>
> >> On Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 4:21 AM, Sivasubramanian M <isolatedn at gmail.com
> >>> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Hello,
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> http://news.dot-nxt.com/2011/10/27/india-proposes-government-control-internet
> >>>
> >>> This is from Kieren MacCarthy's article:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>
> >>>> "In a statement<
> >>> http://news.dot-nxt.com/2011/10/27/un-ga-india-cirp-proposal> sent
> >>>> yesterday, India argued for the creation of a new body to be called
> the
> >>>> United Nations Committee for Internet-Related Policies (CIRP) which
> >> would
> >>>> develop Internet policies, oversee all Internet standards bodies and
> >>> policy
> >>>> organizations, negotiate Internet-related treaties, and act as an
> >>> arbitrator
> >>>> in Internet-related disputes.
> >>>> The CIRP would exist under the United Nations, comprise of 50 Member
> >>>> States, be funded by the United Nations, run by staff from the UN’s
> >>>> Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) arm, and report directly
> >> to
> >>> the
> >>>> UN General Assembly."
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> #  And the Government spokesperson argued that this “should not be
> viewed
> >>> as
> >>> an attempt by governments to ‘take over’ or ‘regulate and circumscribe’
> >> the
> >>> Internet.” !!
> >>>
> >>> #  The IBSA proposal was badly criticized by the Civil Society in the
> >> lists
> >>> and at the Nairobi Internet Governance Forum, it appeared that India
> >> wasn't
> >>> the prime contributor to that imaginative proposal, but those of us who
> >>> believed that India couldn't have proposed or fully endorsed the first
> >> IBSA
> >>> proposal --- we were wrong.
> >>>
> >>> Sivasubramanian M
> >>> ISOC India Chennai
> >>> http://isocindiachennai.org
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> At-Large mailing list
> >>> At-Large at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> >>> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large
> >>>
> >>> At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> At-Large mailing list
> >> At-Large at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> >> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large
> >>
> >> At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
> >>
> > _______________________________________________
> > At-Large mailing list
> > At-Large at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> > https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large
> >
> > At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> At-Large mailing list
> At-Large at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large
>
> At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111101/95635276/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, 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


From iza at anr.org  Tue Nov  1 06:49:14 2011
From: iza at anr.org (Izumi AIZU)
Date: Tue, 1 Nov 2011 19:49:14 +0900
Subject: [governance] CSTD WG Day 2 morning
Message-ID: <CA+YNoKjUAsyghZgNoZShD-O_6vjK09J8GMReUXOhtRUd26-VcQ@mail.gmail.com>

We have started to discuss the substantive elements of 5 broad
categories we agreed yesterday.
Parminder and Anriette started to put CS members idea of shaping
outcome, as follows, which
has been well accepted by mot members of the WG.

And the group members are throwing their ideas/contributions to the
"blank page" on the
screen and moving in a good positive direction. Very little divergence
of opinions, so far.
Some suggested "repository" functions including website enhancement,
outcome oriented
to capacity building and strengthening the participation from
developing countries or youth.

izumi
----

This proposal addresses A Shaping IGF outcomes.

It also addresses concern raised in IGF open consultations that main
sessions are increasingly hard to organise.

1) IGF has two dimensions:  open and exploratory on the one hand, and,
on the other, focused on themes and specific policy challenges

2) Overall modalities of the IGF remains the same: main sessions,
feeder workshops, workshops, round tables, open forums

3) With regard to main sessions, the IGF secretariat and MAG invites
IGF community to identify pertinent key questions. There is precedent
for this. This is more or less how the IGF has been organised in the
past.
Key policy questions were identified for each main theme for the 2011 IGF.

4) Main sessions are structured around these key questions.

5) In response to each main session a report captures the following,
in response to the key policy questions:
- points of convergence
- points of divergence
- points that stood out as requiring further exploration

6) When finalising the reporting of each IGF, the MAG and secretariat
would discuss these reports, and communicate them to other
policy-making institutions.

This report, focused on the main policy questions that were discussed,
will not replace the chairman's summary or the proceedings of the IGF.

----
____________________________________________________________
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


From william.drake at uzh.ch  Tue Nov  1 07:21:11 2011
From: william.drake at uzh.ch (William Drake)
Date: Tue, 1 Nov 2011 12:21:11 +0100
Subject: [governance] Re: Indian proposal => "IGF improvements"
In-Reply-To: <CACpVkK22ip=5hx8ZMugUt_iS6rbXqmzFwUX=LCg2qs0b7wgpgQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4b2cbc0e-bc83-4238-ba44-a5ac4b52f2d7@email.android.com> <3483B830-C6BA-4D67-8327-9C59CB52BCC7@uzh.ch> <4E9F0812.9000104@apc.org> <97790962-6914-4C52-959E-18C163B8488F@uzh.ch> <4EA0132B.4060708@cafonso.ca> <999A64B5-B15D-49A2-9A9B-1322BA103DE3@uzh.ch> <4EA14A95.4020404@apc.org> <3B9704FA-0B65-4398-B99A-3B5561468E7C@uzh.ch> <CACpVkK39uOKRnh7Cy64M1v5quGi1AgBbw7RWsefXUmS6b-uycw@mail.gmail.com> <549EFAF4-B302-4E15-B666-7C167CE71AB8@uzh.ch> <CACpVkK0F3KNvA5t-hv7ovJqjWG31SDawQ_Qae4VLSrN7HpRsnA@mail.gmail.com> <06B943D5-5A15-4E16-9C2C-726FE05279B5@uzh.ch> <CACpVkK22ip=5hx8ZMugUt_iS6rbXqmzFwUX=LCg2qs0b7wgpgQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <FC605DE0-691B-44FA-9CE3-9AC05FEE656C@uzh.ch>

Hi Marilia

You packed a lot of things into message…

On Nov 1, 2011, at 12:28 AM, Marilia Maciel wrote:

> Hi Bill,
> 
> It is getting late here, so I will take only 2 of your points and come back on the others later.
> 
> On Mon, Oct 31, 2011 at 5:22 AM, William Drake <william.drake at uzh.ch> wrote:
> 
>> If an EC mechanism is created, I would never want it to disregard IGF's inputs, would you?
> 
> BILL: I would not want an intergovernmental EC mechanism to be created, therefore I would not want the IGF restructured for the purpose of providing inputs into it.  But IGF discussions have already influenced other sphere, e.g. the OECD's decision to allow TC and CS participation, some of ICANN's internal reforms, etc.
> 
> MARILIA: The discussion about improvements with respect to outcomes is based on the feeling shared by many actors that the rich discussions that take place in the IGF have not been captured in a way that: a) can serve as input in global policy making; b) can be communicated to other bodies; c) can create a track of IGF discussions, so we can see improvements from year to year. One proposal advanced by many of us in CS is that more concrete outcomes should capture convergences and divergent policy options, as explained in detail before. This improvement would be made after years of discussion and after many people in IGF have made claims for more concrete outcomes. It would not be made with the purpose to provide inputs into an non-existant EC mechanism.

I'm with you until the last sentence.  We just view enhanced cooperation differently and probably there's no way to bridge that divide.  For you I guess it means a UN intergovernmental body with comprehensive authority to make global public policies on whatever issues governments want to target and to oversee and give binding directions to the nongovernmental bodies governing in CIR.  For me that model is undesirable on the merits, unworkable in practice, and has zero chance of being a consensus position in the international community.   And the fact that people with the motivation can read a mandate for that into the purposely ambiguous language agreed at the 12th hour of the Tunis prepcom to avoid a summit disaster is not so compelling.  One can also read into those words a mandate for precisely the kinds of enhancements to cooperation that have been stimulated by the WSIS process in multiple policy spaces.  So there's no point in going through yet another textual exegesis of the TA provisions, which we've done on this list multiple times over the years.  If anything, we'd need instead to have the sort of discussion that's been asked for previously, e.g. on what specific problems would such an organization be a solution to, how would it work, what would be the costs and benefits, etc.  

But the immediate point I made was about how this agenda affects the prospects for getting consensus on the sort of IGF improvements CS has advocated. Years of discussion make it clear that as long as they believe the end game for some countries is a UN intergovernmental body with broad powers, the TC, business, and many governments (and not just in the industrialized world) simply will not agree to changes that they fear would make the IGF focused on the intergovernmental negotiation of recs.  You've responded by insisting that the two matters are separate, but they don't appear to believe that, and the Indian government making a direct linkage doesn't help your argument.  So again, I'd urge you to take this up with them in the WGIGF and beyond, I'm not their spokesperson.  

> 
> BILL: I have been for a more outcome oriented IGF since before there was an IGF.  But if there is an intergovernmental EC mechanism soaking up all the attention of governments and generating an untold number of irresolvable conflicts, I agree with Milton that IGF could end up marginalized.  Many G77 governments have repeatedly demonstrated that they don't particularly care about having a space to talk to stakeholders and engage in collective learning.  What they want is what's been proposed, an UNCTAD of the Internet that nominally can facilitate treaty negotiations and GA resolutions.  The model here would not look like OECD deliberations.  It'd be more like the CSTD.  
>  
> MARILIA: Well, then you agree that more concrete outcomes are the way to go, you just don't think it is strategically interesting to move on that direction.

I don't think it is possible, which is a different thing. 

> So, if got your point, if there is no EC,

no intergovernmental uber-body...

> outcomes would be good.

Working groups that could potentially develop consensus views for consideration in main sessions and by governance decision making bodies would be good.  Plenary negotiations of recommendations with governments in a dominant position would not be.

> But if EC comes into existence, then  outcomes from IGF would become a bad thing? I dont understand why.

Because I think EC as you understand it would be a bad thing, and anyway would probably diminish the IGF rather than strengthen it.

> In addition, if the IGF continues for more 5 years without providing more concrete outcomes, do you really think that it will remain relevant?

I don't think the criteria for relevance is whether it negotiates formal inputs into an intergovernmental process.  As the continually strong attendance suggests, the IGF plays other roles that are valued by a lot of people, even if some governments can't be bothered to participate.

> That people and organizations who are asking for concrete outcomes will continue attending happily?

If by concrete outcomes you mean formal inputs into an intergovernmental process, it's not entirely clear who all these proponents are, how much they actually participate now, and whether they would participate in the future.  If instead concrete outcomes can mean the sort of thing I've suggested, then I suppose some people would continue to come despite any frustration that it's not happening, and maybe some would choose not to.  Either way, IGFs would still probably attract crowds.

> That governments will still be there (including western governments?)

I'd guess that the ones that are there now would probably still be there and the ones that aren't there now probably would still not be there.

> Countries who have funding maybe will send one or two low level officials. But most likely countries will resort to their established regional platforms. We are currently discussing the meeting in UK. That may become more frequent. And without a stronger IGF, that sends messaged, there is little that can be done to prevent that trend, or to call attention to more legitimately debated policy options. 

Governments have always met in non-universal settings and will continue to do so irrespective of what happens to the IGF.  

Anyway, it's not obvious going around like this will yield consensus.  My position remains that if we could take intergovernmental control off the table,  it might be easier to persuade all the actors that don't want it that a stronger IGF not only need not threatening but might even be useful.  Your position is they should change their positions and agree with you.  So go ahead and persuade them of that if you can.  But please don't convey that there's consensus support in CS for the Indian proposal, as there obviously isn't.

Best of luck,

Bill
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111101/40880d3f/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, 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


From ias_pk at yahoo.com  Tue Nov  1 08:00:42 2011
From: ias_pk at yahoo.com (Imran Ahmed Shah)
Date: Tue, 1 Nov 2011 17:00:42 +0500
Subject: [governance] CSTD WG going on
In-Reply-To: <GYK4kj5rgvrOFAbr@internetpolicyagency.com>
References: <1320081340.82295.yint-ygo-j2me@web161005.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> <GYK4kj5rgvrOFAbr@internetpolicyagency.com>
Message-ID: <002b01cc988d$e35ee700$aa1cb500$@yahoo.com>

Hi Ronald, 
My comments are as follows starting with IAS:

-----Original Message-----
From: governance at lists.cpsr.org [mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org] On Behalf
Of Roland Perry
Sent: Tuesday, November 01, 2011 12:34 AM
To: governance at lists.cpsr.org
Subject: Re: [governance] CSTD WG going on

In message
<1320081340.82295.yint-ygo-j2me at web161005.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>, at
10:15:40 on Mon, 31 Oct 2011, Imran Ahmed Shah <ias_pk at yahoo.com> writes
>May I suggest some points for the discussion over there (if you also
agree):
>1. Travel Support to attend IGF meetings for the Internet Community 
>from Developing Economies through open application program like the 
>ICANN have Fellowship Application System.

Ronald: Roughly how many of these? (As a benchmark ICANN supported nineteen
at Dakar, that's approximately one from every ten countries).

IAS:  The support in essential through a predefined open opportunity for
everyone, which is not available at this movement, One who want to attend
IGF meeting, has to seek travel support through local or global
organizations (asking to many organization Please Please ..... can you
support me to attend IGF meeting .....). The number of the supported
applicants is dependent to the importance is given to volunteers.  Is it not
better to have an online application submission mechanism to apply for the
support to participate in IGF Annual Meeting. 

>3. Increase the number of the membership (count) of MAG Members to have 
>at least two members from each Country, one from CS and one from 
>Internet Regulating Authority from the same Country.

Ronald: That makes the MAG begin to sound like an ITU summit with perhaps
400 attendees. That's a rather different animal from the current one. And
who will pay for all that travel?
IAS: again my point of view is not carried. I want to say that membership
(count) of MAG should be increase. And in order to resolve the issues that
are commonly discussed at the forum for dialogue (IGF) and the concern
raised by CS on behalf a common citizen (public/people or nation of a
country) should be addressed to resolve and in presence of regulating
authorities who give their arguments or otherwise satisfy their
people/public/citizen/CS. What is going on now a days, CS Representation
from Global is very limited at these Governance related Event, if the some
problem are raised (pointed out) at these forums, there is no one to listen
them to resolve. Its good debate to appreciate each other on these forums,
but there is no way to discuss the matters to resolve them. For example, if
someone approaches IGF Forum from Egypt claimed that Govt. has stopped their
Internet Broadband Access and closed the Cyber Café....arrested Google
Manager on creating a page on facebook.... please tell me that what one side
dialogue may have influence over the Internet controlling authorities, if
there representative is not sitting in the meeting? 
  
--
>Roland Perry
____________________________________________________________
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


From ias_pk at yahoo.com  Tue Nov  1 08:11:01 2011
From: ias_pk at yahoo.com (Imran Ahmed Shah)
Date: Tue, 1 Nov 2011 17:11:01 +0500
Subject: [governance] CSTD WG going on
In-Reply-To: <CACAaNxisMaaYgxuqSYdECRW+c9mPj56Rp4Aej3orCW46JhzhAA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <1320081340.82295.yint-ygo-j2me@web161005.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> <GYK4kj5rgvrOFAbr@internetpolicyagency.com> <CACAaNxisMaaYgxuqSYdECRW+c9mPj56Rp4Aej3orCW46JhzhAA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <002c01cc988f$5476d140$fd6473c0$@yahoo.com>

Hi McTim
See my comments below (IAS):

-----Original Message-----
From: governance at lists.cpsr.org [mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org] On Behalf
Of McTim
Sent: Tuesday, November 01, 2011 12:47 AM
To: governance at lists.cpsr.org; Roland Perry
Subject: Re: [governance] CSTD WG going on

On Mon, Oct 31, 2011 at 10:34 PM, Roland Perry
<roland at internetpolicyagency.com> wrote:
> In message 
> <1320081340.82295.yint-ygo-j2me at web161005.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>, at
> 10:15:40 on Mon, 31 Oct 2011, Imran Ahmed Shah <ias_pk at yahoo.com> 
> writes
>>
>> May I suggest some points for the discussion over there (if you also
>> agree):
>> 1. Travel Support to attend IGF meetings for the Internet Community 
>> from Developing Economies through open application program like the 
>> ICANN have Fellowship Application System.
>
> Roughly how many of these? (As a benchmark ICANN supported nineteen at 
> Dakar, that's approximately one from every ten countries).
>
>> 3. Increase the number of the membership (count) of MAG Members to 
>> have at least two members from each Country, one from CS and one from 
>> Internet Regulating Authority from the same Country.
>
> That makes the MAG begin to sound like an ITU summit with perhaps 400 
> attendees. That's a rather different animal from the current one.


McTim: exactly, and ~half of them would be regulators??  How is that
balanced?

IAS: Instead of balance, you have to use the term weightage. In order to
increase the weightage comparing to Regulating Authorities (either they
belongs to Gov. or Non-Govt.),  you may include Academia and or Technical or
Business Community participation are from private as well, by the reason of
having them on the same table, I have mentioned in my previous reply to
Ronald's Email.

I have tried to express my concern as a common Internet User, what's other's
as Regulating Authorities, government representative, ISPs or Business
Communities they can express themselves.

Thanks

Imran Ahmad Shah

--
>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, 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


From ias_pk at yahoo.com  Tue Nov  1 08:14:16 2011
From: ias_pk at yahoo.com (Imran Ahmed Shah)
Date: Tue, 1 Nov 2011 17:14:16 +0500
Subject: [governance] CSTD WG going on
In-Reply-To: <CA+EjHYrEVEwq107UyRJxhJAHFrCZw7+RpoNHYbHofm55d0gstw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <1320081340.82295.yint-ygo-j2me@web161005.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> <CA+EjHYrEVEwq107UyRJxhJAHFrCZw7+RpoNHYbHofm55d0gstw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <002d01cc988f$c8c0b700$5a422500$@yahoo.com>

Thanks for sharing the document.

 

From: governance at lists.cpsr.org [mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org] On Behalf
Of Louis Pouzin (well)
Sent: Tuesday, November 01, 2011 12:33 AM
To: governance at lists.cpsr.org; Imran Ahmed Shah
Cc: iza at anr.org
Subject: [governance] CSTD WG going on

 

On Mon, Oct 31, 2011 at 18:15, Imran Ahmed Shah <ias_pk at yahoo.com> wrote:

Dear Izumi,

 

. . 

May I suggest some points for the discussion over there (if you also agree):

 

1. Travel Support to attend IGF meetings for the Internet Community from
Developing Economies through open application program like the ICANN have
Fellowship Application System.

- - - 


This topic has been a recurring tune since early WSIS prepcom meetings 10
years ago.

Here is a document specifically focusing on it.

http://www.eurolinc.eu/spip.php?article72

It was part of a contribution to the CSTD WG on improving IGF, mailed to the
previous chair Frédéric Riehl, on Mar 14, 2011.

French and Spanish versions are also available on request.

Good luck




-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111101/1160fb8c/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, 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


From Philipp.Mirtl at oiip.ac.at  Tue Nov  1 08:42:41 2011
From: Philipp.Mirtl at oiip.ac.at (Philipp Mirtl)
Date: Tue, 1 Nov 2011 13:42:41 +0100
Subject: AW: [governance] November 1-2 Ministerial Cyber Event was Re: []
 Cyber Security 2011
References: <B11CE329-B4CC-4FDC-A3BC-A80C38218DD5@acm.org><CA+EjHYo+Xd4jS=Fes2SYj5rOGtEVSUfTyufmDB2OoixDFU-BQA@mail.gmail.com><CAJiMDiQnXMUTRVQ1EXKgC+F330xVErci6-onLyuNVqWTgEwcsA@mail.gmail.com><CAMz5XN64AScsyKU=FoB7MhChgpadp=e_YNvbYmkw8EvTbULcdw@mail.gmail.com><1115D927-9D4E-4A8D-9B1F-EBC504428956@acm.org><77A59FC9477004489D44DE7FC6840E7B034DA0@SUEX10-mbx-08.ad.syr.edu> <CAJwbTiDptNa6U+XNowC61w7eCQZnnWrXCxP5zBLnCo3WXDHPbQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <45460B8AE6CC454F846577DC3E9B38A04C5A75@srvsbs01.OIIP.local>

For those interested, here's William Hague's opening address at the London Cyberspace Conference (accessed from: http://www.fco.gov.uk/en/news/latest-news/?id=684997682&view=Speech).

Best,

philipp

-----------

CHECK AGAINST DELIVERY

Good morning and welcome to the London Conference on Cyberspace, the first of its kind.

This is not a traditional summit between governments. We have brought together representatives from industry, companies that own and operate international digital infrastructure, civil society and major international organisations.  

I proposed this meeting in February in Munich to consider how we reach new international agreement about behaviour in cyberspace.

Many of the countries and representatives here will have very different views. But the reasons to cooperate are far more compelling than the issues that divide us.

The spread of connectivity between individuals, governments and organisations is bringing benefits and opportunities on a vast scale.

We have pushed the bounds of ingenuity and discovery to develop incredibly versatile technologies which we use in every area of life, with the prospect of further yet-undreamt of innovations still to come.

As an elected Member of Parliament, I relish how social media has narrowed the gap between government and individual citizens. It allows the exchange of ideas between people who otherwise never would meet, and in my case as Foreign Secretary, direct digital engagement with not just British citizens, but people of many other countries too.

Across the world we see an explosion of new ways of accessing information and education and of doing business. Whether it is internet banking here in Britain or mobile banking across Africa, people are adapting technology to their local circumstances and improving it all the time. The economic benefit is clear: as the internet expands, so does global GDP.

But we also see glaring inequalities - 95% internet access in Iceland, 0.1% in Liberia – and the rise in malicious use of digital networks, targeted often at the most vulnerable in our societies and at national systems themselves.  

The internet is not separate from society; it is part of society and mirrors it. The best and worst of human behaviour find expression online, and the technology lends itself to misuse as well as to great benefit.

This particularly applies to online crime, which is growing exponentially. Across the globe there are people and groups seeking to turn our personal information into cash, or to wreak havoc on the net to express political grievances. In Europe and North America, one single denial of service tool designed by hacktivists was downloaded by more than 75,000 computer users earlier this year. Militaries, citizen services, credit card companies and businesses like Amazon were attacked. More than 6 million unique types of new malware were detected by industry in the first three months of this year.

As all our societies become more wired-up and technologies converge, the scope for malignant activity will widen alongside the many advantages, whether it is the theft of intellectual property or the spread of malware and viruses. It will become harder to protect our users or to prevent our defences from being swamped.

Furthermore it is increasingly clear that countries with weak cyber defences and capabilities will find themselves exposed over the long term; at a serious strategic disadvantage given the apparent rise in state-sponsored attacks.

So if we want a future in which the benefits of the digital age are expanded to all peoples and economies of the world, and the risks minimised as much as possible, then we need to act to achieve that.

I believe we must aspire to a future for cyberspace which is not stifled by government control or censorship, but where innovation and competition flourish and investment and enterprise are rewarded. Nothing would be more fatal or self-defeating than the heavy hand of State control on the internet, which only thrives because of the talent of individuals and of industry within an open market for ideas and innovation.

The internet must remain open and not become fragmented and ghettoised, subject to separate rules and processes in different regions set by isolated national services; with state-imposed barriers to trade, commerce and the free flow of information and ideas. It would be deeply counter-productive to import into the digital world barriers to trade that we have spent years trying to negotiate away across the world.

We must strive for a model for internet governance in which governments, industry and users of the internet work together in a collective endeavour, establishing a balance of responsibility.

And it is my passionate conviction that all human rights should carry full force online: not just the right to privacy, but the right to freedom of expression. Human rights are universal. Cultural differences are not an excuse to water down human rights, nor can the exploitation of digital networks by a minority of criminals or terrorists be a justification for states to censor their citizens.

We reject the view that government suppression of the internet, phone networks and social media at times of unrest is acceptable.

In fact we would go further, and boil this concept down to a single proposition: that behaviour that is unacceptable offline is also unacceptable online, whether it is carried out by individuals or by governments.

We know that this is not a view that is shared by all countries. But states will find it harder and harder to try to restrict their citizens’ demands for the freedom to express their ideas on the internet. Furthermore such refusal will have a direct impact on their ability to harness the full economic potential of cyberspace. Britain will always be on the side of people aspiring for political and economic freedom, in the Middle East and around the world.

The truth is that in cyberspace, no one country can go it alone. In Britain we are significantly increasing our national cyber defences and have created a new four year programme with over £650 million of new government funding. We are working to ensure that as many small businesses as possible win contracts to help build our cyber security infrastructure, supporting the next generation of cyber assurance technology as well as innovation and growth in our economy. We want to make the UK the pre-eminent, safe space for e-commerce and intellectual property online.

But many countries do not yet have the resources or capability to invest to the same degree. The international dimensions of the misuse of digital networks also requires new forms of cooperation and collaboration, especially as the internet changes. More of the vital infrastructure of the internet is moving East, and its future users will be different too. 90% of Africa could join the internet in the coming years, for example.

There is currently no forum of the kind this conference represents in which nations, business and civil society can engage as equal partners to discuss issues in cyberspace. We believe that needs to change.

In the place of today’s cyber free-for-all, we need understood rules of the road.

Britain has proposed a set of seven principles as a basis for more effective cooperation between states, business and organisations.

These are:

    The need for governments to act proportionately in cyberspace and in accordance with international law;
    The need for everyone to have the ability to access cyberspace, including the skills, technology, confidence and opportunity to do so;
    The need for users of cyberspace to show tolerance and respect for diversity of language, culture and ideas;
    Ensuring that cyberspace remains open to innovation and the free flow of ideas, information and expression;
    The need to respect individual rights of privacy and to provide proper protection to intellectual property;
    The need for us all to work collectively to tackle the threat from criminals acting online;
    And the promotion of a competitive environment which ensures a fair return on investment in networks, services and content.

We suggested these principles as a starting point in efforts to reach a broad agreement about behaviour in cyberspace.

We want to widen the pool of nations and cyber users that agree with us about the need for norms of behaviour and that want to seek a future cyberspace based on opportunity, freedom, innovation, human rights and partnership between government, civil society and the private sector.

Building this consensus is a great challenge for our time.

It must be pursued with the same intensity as efforts to eradicate global poverty or tackle climate change.

For just as our climate is ever-present and all-pervasive, our way of living dependent on our environment and our prosperity inseparable from that of the global economy, so we are all linked by the innumerable connections of the networked world.

We all need the internet to be a driver of growth and innovation in our economies, bringing down costs and supporting employment.

All of us want to benefit from the efficiency, safety and reliability that comes from integrated systems online to deliver public services and manage national infrastructure.

Whatever country we are from, we have an interest in ensuring that our children are not vulnerable online, that terrorists have no safe havens on the web, and that the integrity of our financial systems is maintained.

And many of us want to use the digital sphere to enable us to be more transparent, responsive and accountable to our citizens and to support free trade and democratic development worldwide.

It is in all our interests to ensure a future in which everyone can have safe and reliable access to cyberspace, without fear that they will be targeted by criminals; a future in which the rights, protections and laws that protect us offline do so online; and those who abuse the internet for crime, terrorism or malicious attack find it harder to do so.  

That is the positive vision, one in which we are able to use new technologies to the full to spur economic growth in developing countries, to narrow the digital divide, to give our citizens greater choice, to find new ways of addressing conflicts, to protect cultural diversity and the free flow of ideas, to root out and prevent grotesque human rights abuses, and to make successful prosecutions against cyber criminals the norm, rather than the exception as it is today.

But unless we begin to take action to ensure that positive future a darker scenario could well prevail.

For the private sector, rising costs to business from cyber crime, barriers to trade and commerce, companies being held to ransom by hacktivists, and the theft of intellectual property sapping prosperity and innovation and driving investment away from countries whose systems are seen to be insecure.

For individuals, a heightened risk of exposure to crime as efforts to clamp down on crimes such as child pornography in one part of the world are rendered ineffective by illegal practices on networks in other countries; disruptions in service due to state intrusion or crude censorship in some parts of the world, the general uncertainty, fear and loss of confidence in a compromised cyberspace.

And for governments, threats to critical infrastructure, the loss of tax revenue or the defrauding of government services, the theft of confidential national information and vulnerability to attacks in cyberspace.

If these scenarios come to pass, they will undermine the wider benefits of our networked world.

It is time to build on our common interests, developing firm ideas and proposals with real political and diplomatic weight, that help us attain the full economic and social potential of cyberspace while guarding against an unpredictable and potentially dangerous future.

I welcome the leadership shown by Hungary which will offer to host a follow-on conference on norms of behaviour in cyberspace in 2012, and by the Republic of Korea which will also host a conference in 2013. Both conferences will build on what we discuss here in London.

We will not succeed in agreeing a way forward over night, but it is work that must begin now.


-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: governance at lists.cpsr.org im Auftrag von Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro
Gesendet: Di 01.11.2011 00:32
An: governance at lists.cpsr.org
Betreff: Re: [governance] November 1-2 Ministerial Cyber Event was Re: [] Cyber Security 2011
 
In any democracy, parliamentary rule dictates the formulation of laws in
the midst of an ecosystem in which the Doctrine of Separation of powers
exist where the three arms of government are independent and
constitutionally mandated to act as check and balance each other. The
reality is that in the 192 member countries that make up the United Nations
and the few countries that are not part of the UN, this of course differs,
there are some where rule is by the Executive because of power of the "gun"
and are not democracies etc and we have a complex range of diverse
governance models amongst countries and territories.

It is the norm for democracies, that the only legitimate constitutionally
enshrined exception is when there is a State of Emergency and the President
invokes the Doctrine of Necessity. There are some jurisdictions that have
abused this process to legitimise political rule (I won't get into that but
can discuss offline, lest I be accused of sedition) ;)

For the Doctrine of Necessity to be invoked there has to be proof (visible)
that it is necessary and relevant for the temporary suspension and
derogation of certain rights and privileges. With the increasing cyber
security concerns and the approaches that governments all over the world
are taking (I see this is an indicator in itself of the political climate
in the globe today) as governments all over the world are declaring that it
is a matter of national priority etc, we are witnessing all over the globe
the new battle between the state and the private sector over infrastructure
and when is it legitimate for governments or states to step in etc? Of
course at the end of the day, there is only cause and effect.

(Thinking out loud: would the threat of  "cyber security" justify
intergovernmental control? I would say, no because at the end of the day,
one still needs a multistakeholder approach to handling things like cyber
security threats. What sort of check and balance mechanisms do we need to
ensure that the end user interests and rights are protected?

What is interesting is that when these plays out in the global context, how
does the end user fare? What is the role of civil society in the evolution?
What type of governance models will help preserve an open and free internet?

My 2 cents.

On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 8:20 AM, Lee W McKnight <lmcknigh at syr.edu> wrote:

> Avri,
>
> I am missing how a meeting with a bunch of speeches, including one British
> minister with a pre-existing talking points agenda (William Hague), gets to
> point of multiple governments reaching consensus.
>
> Last week the German and French government didn't even want the British PM
> in the same room with them as they struggled to save the Euro; and now we
> worry (with all due respect) that William Hague will set the global agenda
> for cybersecurity? Doubt it.
>
> Stranger things have happened I admit, but as our on-site reporter hinted,
> odds of a major advance given the structure of the meeting seems  - very
> low.
>
> Lee
> ________________________________________
> From: governance at lists.cpsr.org [governance at lists.cpsr.org] on behalf of
> Avri Doria [avri at acm.org]
> Sent: Monday, October 31, 2011 12:31 PM
> To: IGC
> Subject: RE: [governance] November 1-2 Ministerial Cyber Event  was Re: []
> Cyber Security 2011
>
> On 31 Oct 2011, at 06:31, Deirdre Williams wrote:
>
> > http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-15355739 UK seeks 'consensus' at
> cyberspace conference
>
>
> and earlier message asked:
>
> > On 30 Oct 2011, at 14:59, Lee W McKnight wrote:
> >
> >> I'm unclear what people are alarmed about;
> >
>
> Me personally? It is that Governments at a ministerial level reach a
> consensus, without proper multistakeholder participation and then work to
> cram it down the collective throats of the world.  I fear that such a
> consensus would be at the expense of the freedoms most of us hold dear, but
> that governments often find troublesome when trying to control their
> populations.  And I feat that in any follow-up, Civil Society would find
> itself fighting against the tide - agreeable to the Business community
> because it spurs the sale of further hardware and software systems, but
> deleterious to the public good.
>
> That is what alarms me.
>
> avri
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
>
>


-- 
Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala

Tweeter: @SalanietaT
Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro
Cell: +679 998 2851

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111101/609bb91d/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, 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


From Philipp.Mirtl at oiip.ac.at  Tue Nov  1 08:52:54 2011
From: Philipp.Mirtl at oiip.ac.at (Philipp Mirtl)
Date: Tue, 1 Nov 2011 13:52:54 +0100
Subject: [governance] ripe 63, vienna (31 october-4 november)
References: <B11CE329-B4CC-4FDC-A3BC-A80C38218DD5@acm.org><CA+EjHYo+Xd4jS=Fes2SYj5rOGtEVSUfTyufmDB2OoixDFU-BQA@mail.gmail.com><CAJiMDiQnXMUTRVQ1EXKgC+F330xVErci6-onLyuNVqWTgEwcsA@mail.gmail.com><CAMz5XN64AScsyKU=FoB7MhChgpadp=e_YNvbYmkw8EvTbULcdw@mail.gmail.com><1115D927-9D4E-4A8D-9B1F-EBC504428956@acm.org><77A59FC9477004489D44DE7FC6840E7B034DA0@SUEX10-mbx-08.ad.syr.edu> <CAJwbTiDptNa6U+XNowC61w7eCQZnnWrXCxP5zBLnCo3WXDHPbQ@mail.gmail.com> <45460B8AE6CC454F846577DC3E9B38A04C5A75@srvsbs01.OIIP.local>
Message-ID: <45460B8AE6CC454F846577DC3E9B38A04C5A78@srvsbs01.OIIP.local>

Also, I want to remind you that there is a RIPE conference going on in Vienna at the moment, where you can particpate remotely (http://ripe63.ripe.net/programme/meeting-plan/).

Wishes,
philipp


-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: governance at lists.cpsr.org im Auftrag von Philipp Mirtl
Gesendet: Di 01.11.2011 13:42
An: governance at lists.cpsr.org; Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro; governance at lists.cpsr.org
Betreff: AW: [governance] November 1-2 Ministerial Cyber Event was Re: [] Cyber Security 2011
 
For those interested, here's William Hague's opening address at the London Cyberspace Conference (accessed from: http://www.fco.gov.uk/en/news/latest-news/?id=684997682&view=Speech).

Best,

philipp

-----------

CHECK AGAINST DELIVERY

Good morning and welcome to the London Conference on Cyberspace, the first of its kind.

This is not a traditional summit between governments. We have brought together representatives from industry, companies that own and operate international digital infrastructure, civil society and major international organisations.  

I proposed this meeting in February in Munich to consider how we reach new international agreement about behaviour in cyberspace.

Many of the countries and representatives here will have very different views. But the reasons to cooperate are far more compelling than the issues that divide us.

The spread of connectivity between individuals, governments and organisations is bringing benefits and opportunities on a vast scale.

We have pushed the bounds of ingenuity and discovery to develop incredibly versatile technologies which we use in every area of life, with the prospect of further yet-undreamt of innovations still to come.

As an elected Member of Parliament, I relish how social media has narrowed the gap between government and individual citizens. It allows the exchange of ideas between people who otherwise never would meet, and in my case as Foreign Secretary, direct digital engagement with not just British citizens, but people of many other countries too.

Across the world we see an explosion of new ways of accessing information and education and of doing business. Whether it is internet banking here in Britain or mobile banking across Africa, people are adapting technology to their local circumstances and improving it all the time. The economic benefit is clear: as the internet expands, so does global GDP.

But we also see glaring inequalities - 95% internet access in Iceland, 0.1% in Liberia - and the rise in malicious use of digital networks, targeted often at the most vulnerable in our societies and at national systems themselves.  

The internet is not separate from society; it is part of society and mirrors it. The best and worst of human behaviour find expression online, and the technology lends itself to misuse as well as to great benefit.

This particularly applies to online crime, which is growing exponentially. Across the globe there are people and groups seeking to turn our personal information into cash, or to wreak havoc on the net to express political grievances. In Europe and North America, one single denial of service tool designed by hacktivists was downloaded by more than 75,000 computer users earlier this year. Militaries, citizen services, credit card companies and businesses like Amazon were attacked. More than 6 million unique types of new malware were detected by industry in the first three months of this year.

As all our societies become more wired-up and technologies converge, the scope for malignant activity will widen alongside the many advantages, whether it is the theft of intellectual property or the spread of malware and viruses. It will become harder to protect our users or to prevent our defences from being swamped.

Furthermore it is increasingly clear that countries with weak cyber defences and capabilities will find themselves exposed over the long term; at a serious strategic disadvantage given the apparent rise in state-sponsored attacks.

So if we want a future in which the benefits of the digital age are expanded to all peoples and economies of the world, and the risks minimised as much as possible, then we need to act to achieve that.

I believe we must aspire to a future for cyberspace which is not stifled by government control or censorship, but where innovation and competition flourish and investment and enterprise are rewarded. Nothing would be more fatal or self-defeating than the heavy hand of State control on the internet, which only thrives because of the talent of individuals and of industry within an open market for ideas and innovation.

The internet must remain open and not become fragmented and ghettoised, subject to separate rules and processes in different regions set by isolated national services; with state-imposed barriers to trade, commerce and the free flow of information and ideas. It would be deeply counter-productive to import into the digital world barriers to trade that we have spent years trying to negotiate away across the world.

We must strive for a model for internet governance in which governments, industry and users of the internet work together in a collective endeavour, establishing a balance of responsibility.

And it is my passionate conviction that all human rights should carry full force online: not just the right to privacy, but the right to freedom of expression. Human rights are universal. Cultural differences are not an excuse to water down human rights, nor can the exploitation of digital networks by a minority of criminals or terrorists be a justification for states to censor their citizens.

We reject the view that government suppression of the internet, phone networks and social media at times of unrest is acceptable.

In fact we would go further, and boil this concept down to a single proposition: that behaviour that is unacceptable offline is also unacceptable online, whether it is carried out by individuals or by governments.

We know that this is not a view that is shared by all countries. But states will find it harder and harder to try to restrict their citizens' demands for the freedom to express their ideas on the internet. Furthermore such refusal will have a direct impact on their ability to harness the full economic potential of cyberspace. Britain will always be on the side of people aspiring for political and economic freedom, in the Middle East and around the world.

The truth is that in cyberspace, no one country can go it alone. In Britain we are significantly increasing our national cyber defences and have created a new four year programme with over £650 million of new government funding. We are working to ensure that as many small businesses as possible win contracts to help build our cyber security infrastructure, supporting the next generation of cyber assurance technology as well as innovation and growth in our economy. We want to make the UK the pre-eminent, safe space for e-commerce and intellectual property online.

But many countries do not yet have the resources or capability to invest to the same degree. The international dimensions of the misuse of digital networks also requires new forms of cooperation and collaboration, especially as the internet changes. More of the vital infrastructure of the internet is moving East, and its future users will be different too. 90% of Africa could join the internet in the coming years, for example.

There is currently no forum of the kind this conference represents in which nations, business and civil society can engage as equal partners to discuss issues in cyberspace. We believe that needs to change.

In the place of today's cyber free-for-all, we need understood rules of the road.

Britain has proposed a set of seven principles as a basis for more effective cooperation between states, business and organisations.

These are:

    The need for governments to act proportionately in cyberspace and in accordance with international law;
    The need for everyone to have the ability to access cyberspace, including the skills, technology, confidence and opportunity to do so;
    The need for users of cyberspace to show tolerance and respect for diversity of language, culture and ideas;
    Ensuring that cyberspace remains open to innovation and the free flow of ideas, information and expression;
    The need to respect individual rights of privacy and to provide proper protection to intellectual property;
    The need for us all to work collectively to tackle the threat from criminals acting online;
    And the promotion of a competitive environment which ensures a fair return on investment in networks, services and content.

We suggested these principles as a starting point in efforts to reach a broad agreement about behaviour in cyberspace.

We want to widen the pool of nations and cyber users that agree with us about the need for norms of behaviour and that want to seek a future cyberspace based on opportunity, freedom, innovation, human rights and partnership between government, civil society and the private sector.

Building this consensus is a great challenge for our time.

It must be pursued with the same intensity as efforts to eradicate global poverty or tackle climate change.

For just as our climate is ever-present and all-pervasive, our way of living dependent on our environment and our prosperity inseparable from that of the global economy, so we are all linked by the innumerable connections of the networked world.

We all need the internet to be a driver of growth and innovation in our economies, bringing down costs and supporting employment.

All of us want to benefit from the efficiency, safety and reliability that comes from integrated systems online to deliver public services and manage national infrastructure.

Whatever country we are from, we have an interest in ensuring that our children are not vulnerable online, that terrorists have no safe havens on the web, and that the integrity of our financial systems is maintained.

And many of us want to use the digital sphere to enable us to be more transparent, responsive and accountable to our citizens and to support free trade and democratic development worldwide.

It is in all our interests to ensure a future in which everyone can have safe and reliable access to cyberspace, without fear that they will be targeted by criminals; a future in which the rights, protections and laws that protect us offline do so online; and those who abuse the internet for crime, terrorism or malicious attack find it harder to do so.  

That is the positive vision, one in which we are able to use new technologies to the full to spur economic growth in developing countries, to narrow the digital divide, to give our citizens greater choice, to find new ways of addressing conflicts, to protect cultural diversity and the free flow of ideas, to root out and prevent grotesque human rights abuses, and to make successful prosecutions against cyber criminals the norm, rather than the exception as it is today.

But unless we begin to take action to ensure that positive future a darker scenario could well prevail.

For the private sector, rising costs to business from cyber crime, barriers to trade and commerce, companies being held to ransom by hacktivists, and the theft of intellectual property sapping prosperity and innovation and driving investment away from countries whose systems are seen to be insecure.

For individuals, a heightened risk of exposure to crime as efforts to clamp down on crimes such as child pornography in one part of the world are rendered ineffective by illegal practices on networks in other countries; disruptions in service due to state intrusion or crude censorship in some parts of the world, the general uncertainty, fear and loss of confidence in a compromised cyberspace.

And for governments, threats to critical infrastructure, the loss of tax revenue or the defrauding of government services, the theft of confidential national information and vulnerability to attacks in cyberspace.

If these scenarios come to pass, they will undermine the wider benefits of our networked world.

It is time to build on our common interests, developing firm ideas and proposals with real political and diplomatic weight, that help us attain the full economic and social potential of cyberspace while guarding against an unpredictable and potentially dangerous future.

I welcome the leadership shown by Hungary which will offer to host a follow-on conference on norms of behaviour in cyberspace in 2012, and by the Republic of Korea which will also host a conference in 2013. Both conferences will build on what we discuss here in London.

We will not succeed in agreeing a way forward over night, but it is work that must begin now.


-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: governance at lists.cpsr.org im Auftrag von Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro
Gesendet: Di 01.11.2011 00:32
An: governance at lists.cpsr.org
Betreff: Re: [governance] November 1-2 Ministerial Cyber Event was Re: [] Cyber Security 2011
 
In any democracy, parliamentary rule dictates the formulation of laws in
the midst of an ecosystem in which the Doctrine of Separation of powers
exist where the three arms of government are independent and
constitutionally mandated to act as check and balance each other. The
reality is that in the 192 member countries that make up the United Nations
and the few countries that are not part of the UN, this of course differs,
there are some where rule is by the Executive because of power of the "gun"
and are not democracies etc and we have a complex range of diverse
governance models amongst countries and territories.

It is the norm for democracies, that the only legitimate constitutionally
enshrined exception is when there is a State of Emergency and the President
invokes the Doctrine of Necessity. There are some jurisdictions that have
abused this process to legitimise political rule (I won't get into that but
can discuss offline, lest I be accused of sedition) ;)

For the Doctrine of Necessity to be invoked there has to be proof (visible)
that it is necessary and relevant for the temporary suspension and
derogation of certain rights and privileges. With the increasing cyber
security concerns and the approaches that governments all over the world
are taking (I see this is an indicator in itself of the political climate
in the globe today) as governments all over the world are declaring that it
is a matter of national priority etc, we are witnessing all over the globe
the new battle between the state and the private sector over infrastructure
and when is it legitimate for governments or states to step in etc? Of
course at the end of the day, there is only cause and effect.

(Thinking out loud: would the threat of  "cyber security" justify
intergovernmental control? I would say, no because at the end of the day,
one still needs a multistakeholder approach to handling things like cyber
security threats. What sort of check and balance mechanisms do we need to
ensure that the end user interests and rights are protected?

What is interesting is that when these plays out in the global context, how
does the end user fare? What is the role of civil society in the evolution?
What type of governance models will help preserve an open and free internet?

My 2 cents.

On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 8:20 AM, Lee W McKnight <lmcknigh at syr.edu> wrote:

> Avri,
>
> I am missing how a meeting with a bunch of speeches, including one British
> minister with a pre-existing talking points agenda (William Hague), gets to
> point of multiple governments reaching consensus.
>
> Last week the German and French government didn't even want the British PM
> in the same room with them as they struggled to save the Euro; and now we
> worry (with all due respect) that William Hague will set the global agenda
> for cybersecurity? Doubt it.
>
> Stranger things have happened I admit, but as our on-site reporter hinted,
> odds of a major advance given the structure of the meeting seems  - very
> low.
>
> Lee
> ________________________________________
> From: governance at lists.cpsr.org [governance at lists.cpsr.org] on behalf of
> Avri Doria [avri at acm.org]
> Sent: Monday, October 31, 2011 12:31 PM
> To: IGC
> Subject: RE: [governance] November 1-2 Ministerial Cyber Event  was Re: []
> Cyber Security 2011
>
> On 31 Oct 2011, at 06:31, Deirdre Williams wrote:
>
> > http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-15355739 UK seeks 'consensus' at
> cyberspace conference
>
>
> and earlier message asked:
>
> > On 30 Oct 2011, at 14:59, Lee W McKnight wrote:
> >
> >> I'm unclear what people are alarmed about;
> >
>
> Me personally? It is that Governments at a ministerial level reach a
> consensus, without proper multistakeholder participation and then work to
> cram it down the collective throats of the world.  I fear that such a
> consensus would be at the expense of the freedoms most of us hold dear, but
> that governments often find troublesome when trying to control their
> populations.  And I feat that in any follow-up, Civil Society would find
> itself fighting against the tide - agreeable to the Business community
> because it spurs the sale of further hardware and software systems, but
> deleterious to the public good.
>
> That is what alarms me.
>
> avri
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
>
>


-- 
Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala

Tweeter: @SalanietaT
Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro
Cell: +679 998 2851



____________________________________________________________
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

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: winmail.dat
Type: application/ms-tnef
Size: 12592 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111101/c1ba0737/attachment.bin>

From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com  Tue Nov  1 09:21:06 2011
From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro)
Date: Wed, 2 Nov 2011 01:21:06 +1200
Subject: [governance] =?WINDOWS-1251?Q?Is_really_Bulgarian_Cyrillic_?=
 =?WINDOWS-1251?Q?=2E=E1=E3_=28=2Ebg=29_similar_to_other_Latin_ccTLDs=3F?=
In-Reply-To: <1291131665.20152.1407897083@webmail.messagingengine.com>
References: <1291131665.20152.1407897083@webmail.messagingengine.com>
Message-ID: <CAJwbTiA0ixrMYBTWFGZLphuHKzWwOVrYiAvc9yBf8WQsMN-66w@mail.gmail.com>

Dear George and others,

The relevance of IDNs to Internet Governance are in the "*multilingualism*"
policy category that was defined in the WGIG 2005 document.

I was going through the archives and found your email. You may be
interested in reading the Study Reports on the various variants, they are
open for comments and submissions, see:

I listened to certain speakers speak about IDN variants which are so very
exciting and interesting. You can access and view their study reports via
http://www.icann.org/en/public-comment/ The Cyrillic variant report is open
for comments until 16th November, 2011. Other variant reports are also
there (Arabic, Chinese, Greek, Latin etc). If you want to get submissions
in and quick, now is the time! :)

It is so interesting to see how certain scripts are politically charged,
the similarity in phonetics or confusingly similar script. Whilst IDNs have
been around for some time, I am sensing that it will only accelerate in its
prominence in the not too distant future.

The existing ITU model has closed memberships and this is true even for the
Dedicated Working Group on International Internet Related Public Policy
issues. This is a *closed group* I might add. Is there anyone on this list
that is a member of this group I would be interested to ask some policy
questions on the subject matter and we can discuss offlist.

 I am on record for asking At Large whether there is some level of
interface between ICANN and this Dedicated Working Group. This Dedicated
Working Group was established under Resolution 75. Membership is only
exclusive for member states and the current chair is Mr Majed Al Mazyed
from Saudi Arabia.

Resolution 133 deals from the ITU Plenipotentiary deals with the role of
administrations of member states in the management of
internationalized(multilingual)
domain names. [see
http://www.itu.int/osg/csd/intgov/resoultions_2010/PP-10/RESOLUTION_133.pdf
]

I should also state that the 2009 Council Resolution 1305 [which we are
denied access unless you are a member state invited Member States to
recognise the scope of the work of ITU on international Internet-related
public policy matters.] I will say that the approach of the ITU to close
discussions on internet policy and limit it to member states is worrying.
2012 will be a critical year within the ITU as they will be revising alot
of resolutions and positions etc to "make it more relevant".

I am not in anyway criticising ITU and have *great respect* for the degree
of capacity building  and recognise the role that they play but I strongly
disagree with the policy exclusionary development processes within the ITU.
The ICC also publicly in 2005 issued a Statement to tell ITU about what it
thought of ITU's role in the development of global internet policies and
think that the statement would be available on the ICC website.

There are some who have been vocal of wanting to see more efficient policy
processes and are debating what enhanced cooperation.

As civil society how can the voice of consumers be represented or at least
other critical stakeholders within policy development space? I think that
these are legitimate questions that require consideration.

I would also be interested to learn from other individuals or organisations
that deal with IDN other than the ITU Dedicated Working Group and ICANN. If
you can point me to URLs, that would be great.

I am also aware of the Declaration of the Committee of Ministers on the
management of the Internet protocol address resources in the public
interest (see:
https://wcd.coe.int/ViewDoc.jsp?id=1678299&Site=CM&BackColorInternet=C3C3C3&BackColorIntranet=EDB021&BackColorLogged=F5D383
 )

Tobias Mahler who is on this list had raised issues with s.9 of this
Declaration on another list.

It will be great to see all those working on these policies to share
resources and information, so that at the end of the day, consumer
interests and end users are protected.*
*

I was wondering whether civil society or individual members would like to
put in submissions, then they are at liberty to do so.

Best Regards,
Sala

On Wed, Dec 1, 2010 at 4:41 AM, George Todoroff <george_todoroff at imap.cc>wrote:

> Is really Bulgarian Cyrillic .бг (.bg) similar to other Latin ccTLDs?
>
>        Bulgaria has proposed for an IDN ccTLD the string .бг (Cyrillic
>        for .bg, or U+0431 U+0433), but the proposal was turned down by
>        the ICANN DNS Stability panel in May 2010 without any arguments
>        or an option for appeal.
>
> The proposed string is composed of two characters:
> U+0431 CYRILLIC SMALL LETTER BE (б) and
> U+0433 CYRILLIC SMALL LETTER GHE (г)
>
>        Reading the tables, provided with Unicode Technical Standard
>        #39,
>        (http://www.unicode.org/Public/security/revision-04/confusables.txt
> )
>        I see that confusable characters are only:
>
> 0431 ;  0036 ;  SL      # ( б → 6 ) CYRILLIC SMALL LETTER BE → DIGIT SIX
>    #
>
> 0433 ;  0072 ;  ML      # ( г → r ) CYRILLIC SMALL LETTER GHE → LATIN
> SMALL LETTER R #
>
>        As a result, we see that the applied string .бг could be
>        confused only with the string .6r, which does not exist.
>
> The Russian case
>
>        Opponents to the Bulgarian proposal say that Russia first wanted
>        to apply for .ру (Cyrillic for .ru), but then selected another
>        one, because .ру was found to be confusingly similar with the
>        Paraguayan ccTLD .py , and because of this, Bulgaria must be
>        obedient and select another IDN string.
>
>        Looking again at Unicode Technical Standard #39, I see that:
>
> 0440 ;  0070 ;  ML      # ( р → p ) CYRILLIC SMALL LETTER ER → LATIN
> SMALL LETTER P  #
>
> 0443 ;  0079 ;  ML      # ( у → y ) CYRILLIC SMALL LETTER U → LATIN
> SMALL LETTER Y   #
>
>        We have absolute similarity here! Very different than the
>        Bulgarian case with 50% similarity.
>
>        Russia selected and received the .рф (Cyrillic for .rf) string.
>        Looking for a third time at Unicode Technical Standard #39, I
>        see that:
>
> 0440 ;  0070 ;  MA      # ( р → p ) CYRILLIC SMALL LETTER ER → LATIN
> SMALL LETTER P  #
>
> 0444 ;  0278 ;  ML      # ( ф → ɸ ) CYRILLIC SMALL LETTER EF → LATIN
> SMALL LETTER PHI#
>
>        What do we have here? One similar character, and one not similar
>        to a Latin basic character. So, how is this different from the
>        Bulgarian case? Its the same! How the Russian string was
>        approved, and the Bulgarian – not???
>
>
> The DNS Stability panel rankings
>
> [6]  Both characters are visually identical to an ISO 646 Basic Version
> (ISO 646-BV) character.
> [5]  One character is visually identical to, and one character is
> visually confusable with, an ISO 646-BV character.
> [4]  Both characters are visually confusable with, but neither character
> is visually identical to, an ISO 646-BV character.
> [3]  One character is visually distinct from, and one character is
> visually identical to, an ISO 646-BV character.
> [2]  One character is visually distinct from, and one character is
> visually confusable with, an ISO 646-BV character.
> [1]  Both characters are visually distinct from an ISO 646-BV character.
>
>        The panel said that Bulgaria fails under [4] or [5], so the
>        string is not accepted, because rank [4] or more is not good.
>
>        But, from my findings here, the Bulgarian (as the Russian)
>        strings fail under [2] or [3], and its perfectly fine to be
>        approved.
>
> Security proposals
>
>        As another participant in the public comment forum said, two
>        security proposals must be implemented:
>
>        “1. All names in the .бг (.bg) IDN ccTLD must be registered only
>        with Cyrillic letters.”
>        “2. All names in the .бг (.bg) IDN ccTLD must contain at least
>        one letter, which can be visually distinguished from the Latin
>        alphabet (one of the letters: б, г, д, ж, и, й, л, п, ф, ц, ч,
>        ш, щ, ъ, ь, ю, я).” (“г“ may fail off this list, because of my
>        findings.)
>
> Examples
>
>        There must be really conservative people in the DNS Stability
>        panel, who don`t like seeing domains like:
> - раурал.бг because people would confuse it with paypal.br
>        Come on, раурал.бг and paypal.br ? Compare with paypal.it and
>        paypal.lt ?
>
>        Others are afraid of seeing:
> - руса.бг and pyca.br (whatever this means in Brazilian Portuguese) -
> check the second security proposal. The first domain can`t exist.
>
> - - - - -
>
>        Dear DNS Stability panel members, what is wrong here?
>        Dear ICANN Board members, Bulgaria needs an appeal procedure!
>
> Cheers,
> George Todoroff
> --
>  george_todoroff at imap.cc
>
> --
> http://www.fastmail.fm - Send your email first class
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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




-- 
Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala

Tweeter: @SalanietaT
Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro
Cell: +679 998 2851
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111102/a743ef90/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, 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


From andrea at digitalpolicy.it  Tue Nov  1 09:27:10 2011
From: andrea at digitalpolicy.it (Andrea Glorioso)
Date: Tue, 1 Nov 2011 13:27:10 +0000
Subject: [governance] Cyber Security 2011
In-Reply-To: <CAMz5XN64AScsyKU=FoB7MhChgpadp=e_YNvbYmkw8EvTbULcdw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <B11CE329-B4CC-4FDC-A3BC-A80C38218DD5@acm.org>
	<CA+EjHYo+Xd4jS=Fes2SYj5rOGtEVSUfTyufmDB2OoixDFU-BQA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAJiMDiQnXMUTRVQ1EXKgC+F330xVErci6-onLyuNVqWTgEwcsA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAMz5XN64AScsyKU=FoB7MhChgpadp=e_YNvbYmkw8EvTbULcdw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAOLD2+bA+q_Ayk=rXeq6QzU4mjT34Oh9qx6DNzabLo-02g9VvA@mail.gmail.com>

For those who might be interested, I am tweeting from the London Cyber
Conference (@andreaglorioso, you can also follow the hashtag
#LondonCyber).

For clarity, I am attending the London Cyber Conference as part of the
EU delegation, but the tweets express my personal position(s) only.

Best,

Andrea

On Mon, Oct 31, 2011 at 10:31 AM, Deirdre Williams
<williams.deirdre at gmail.com> wrote:
> These reports were on the BBC this morning, in case they are any help.
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-15516959   GCHQ chief reports 'disturbing'
> cyber attacks on UK
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-12371056  William Hague: UK is under
> cyber-attack
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-15355739 UK seeks 'consensus' at
> cyberspace conference
>
> Deirdre
> On 30 October 2011 09:01, Ben Wagner <b at nwagner.org> wrote:
>>
>> To clarify the difference, there is a difference between the two events.
>> The first link by Avri isn't the offical conference, it's the
>> inter-governmental event on Nov. 1-2 CS should be concerned about.
>>
>> To provide a little more context to the event:
>>
>> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/07/26/cyber_hague_event/
>>
>>
>> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/10/20/bring_economics_into_freedom_debate/
>>
>> From everything I have heard so far this will be a very high level event
>> attempting to focus the debate on cyber security at the expense of most
>> other internet governance issues.
>>
>> Ben
>>
>>
>>
>> On 30 October 2011 11:21, Louis Pouzin (well) <pouzin at well.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> This event sounds very much like a trade show on security, with a major
>>> sponsor Endace, a New Zealand company looking for worldwide expansion.
>>> Somehow, advertising the event smacks of show business, one day boondoggling
>>> in London for £995 + VAT registration. Are the good times coming back ?
>>> - - -
>>>
>>> On Sat, Oct 29, 2011 at 13:35, Avri Doria <avri at acm.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> This monstrosity was pointed out to me the other day.
>>>>
>>>> http://www.cybersecuritysummit.co.uk/
>>>>
>>>> As far as i can tell it is another conference on IG without Civil
>>>> society representation, though a fair amount of business - the business
>>>> especially who make a great part of their living from selling the tools of
>>>> so called security.
>>>>
>>>> Have I missed the discussion of this on this list?
>>>>
>>>> avri
>>>>
>>>
>>> ____________________________________________________________
>>> 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
>>
>>
>
>
>
> --
> “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, 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


From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com  Tue Nov  1 09:29:15 2011
From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro)
Date: Wed, 2 Nov 2011 01:29:15 +1200
Subject: [governance] =?WINDOWS-1251?Q?Is_really_Bulgarian_Cyrillic_?=
 =?WINDOWS-1251?Q?=2E=E1=E3_=28=2Ebg=29_similar_to_other_Latin_ccTLDs=3F?=
In-Reply-To: <CAJwbTiA0ixrMYBTWFGZLphuHKzWwOVrYiAvc9yBf8WQsMN-66w@mail.gmail.com>
References: <1291131665.20152.1407897083@webmail.messagingengine.com>
	<CAJwbTiA0ixrMYBTWFGZLphuHKzWwOVrYiAvc9yBf8WQsMN-66w@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAJwbTiCTh9KZbcNp-vn5XoiS1afV2jGAKWiwGYxa0ZdN2fMGEw@mail.gmail.com>

Pardon the typos and the bad grammar, this was sent at 3am. Apologies.

On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 2:21 AM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro <
salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com> wrote:

> Dear George and others,
>
> The relevance of IDNs to Internet Governance are in the "*multilingualism*"
> policy category that was defined in the WGIG 2005 document.
>
> I was going through the archives and found your email. You may be
> interested in reading the Study Reports on the various variants, they are
> open for comments and submissions, see:
>
> I listened to certain speakers speak about IDN variants which are so very
> exciting and interesting. You can access and view their study reports via
> http://www.icann.org/en/public-comment/ The Cyrillic variant report is
> open for comments until 16th November, 2011. Other variant reports are also
> there (Arabic, Chinese, Greek, Latin etc). If you want to get submissions
> in and quick, now is the time! :)
>
> It is so interesting to see how certain scripts are politically charged,
> the similarity in phonetics or confusingly similar script. Whilst IDNs have
> been around for some time, I am sensing that it will only accelerate in its
> prominence in the not too distant future.
>
> The existing ITU model has closed memberships and this is true even for
> the Dedicated Working Group on International Internet Related Public Policy
> issues. This is a *closed group* I might add. Is there anyone on this
> list that is a member of this group I would be interested to ask some
> policy questions on the subject matter and we can discuss offlist.
>
>  I am on record for asking At Large whether there is some level of
> interface between ICANN and this Dedicated Working Group. This Dedicated
> Working Group was established under Resolution 75. Membership is only
> exclusive for member states and the current chair is Mr Majed Al Mazyed
> from Saudi Arabia.
>
> Resolution 133 deals from the ITU Plenipotentiary deals with the role of
> administrations of member states in the management of internationalized(multilingual)
> domain names. [see
> http://www.itu.int/osg/csd/intgov/resoultions_2010/PP-10/RESOLUTION_133.pdf
> ]
>
> I should also state that the 2009 Council Resolution 1305 [which we are
> denied access unless you are a member state invited Member States to
> recognise the scope of the work of ITU on international Internet-related
> public policy matters.] I will say that the approach of the ITU to close
> discussions on internet policy and limit it to member states is worrying.
> 2012 will be a critical year within the ITU as they will be revising alot
> of resolutions and positions etc to "make it more relevant".
>
> I am not in anyway criticising ITU and have *great respect* for the
> degree of capacity building  and recognise the role that they play but I
> strongly disagree with the policy exclusionary development processes within
> the ITU. The ICC also publicly in 2005 issued a Statement to tell ITU about
> what it thought of ITU's role in the development of global internet
> policies and think that the statement would be available on the ICC website.
>
> There are some who have been vocal of wanting to see more efficient policy
> processes and are debating what enhanced cooperation.
>
> As civil society how can the voice of consumers be represented or at least
> other critical stakeholders within policy development space? I think that
> these are legitimate questions that require consideration.
>
> I would also be interested to learn from other individuals or
> organisations that deal with IDN other than the ITU Dedicated Working Group
> and ICANN. If you can point me to URLs, that would be great.
>
> I am also aware of the Declaration of the Committee of Ministers on the
> management of the Internet protocol address resources in the public
> interest (see:
> https://wcd.coe.int/ViewDoc.jsp?id=1678299&Site=CM&BackColorInternet=C3C3C3&BackColorIntranet=EDB021&BackColorLogged=F5D383
>  )
>
> Tobias Mahler who is on this list had raised issues with s.9 of this
> Declaration on another list.
>
> It will be great to see all those working on these policies to share
> resources and information, so that at the end of the day, consumer
> interests and end users are protected.*
> *
>
> I was wondering whether civil society or individual members would like to
> put in submissions, then they are at liberty to do so.
>
> Best Regards,
> Sala
>
> On Wed, Dec 1, 2010 at 4:41 AM, George Todoroff <george_todoroff at imap.cc>wrote:
>
>> Is really Bulgarian Cyrillic .бг (.bg) similar to other Latin ccTLDs?
>>
>>        Bulgaria has proposed for an IDN ccTLD the string .бг (Cyrillic
>>        for .bg, or U+0431 U+0433), but the proposal was turned down by
>>        the ICANN DNS Stability panel in May 2010 without any arguments
>>        or an option for appeal.
>>
>> The proposed string is composed of two characters:
>> U+0431 CYRILLIC SMALL LETTER BE (б) and
>> U+0433 CYRILLIC SMALL LETTER GHE (г)
>>
>>        Reading the tables, provided with Unicode Technical Standard
>>        #39,
>>        (
>> http://www.unicode.org/Public/security/revision-04/confusables.txt)
>>        I see that confusable characters are only:
>>
>> 0431 ;  0036 ;  SL      # ( б → 6 ) CYRILLIC SMALL LETTER BE → DIGIT SIX
>>    #
>>
>> 0433 ;  0072 ;  ML      # ( г → r ) CYRILLIC SMALL LETTER GHE → LATIN
>> SMALL LETTER R #
>>
>>        As a result, we see that the applied string .бг could be
>>        confused only with the string .6r, which does not exist.
>>
>> The Russian case
>>
>>        Opponents to the Bulgarian proposal say that Russia first wanted
>>        to apply for .ру (Cyrillic for .ru), but then selected another
>>        one, because .ру was found to be confusingly similar with the
>>        Paraguayan ccTLD .py , and because of this, Bulgaria must be
>>        obedient and select another IDN string.
>>
>>        Looking again at Unicode Technical Standard #39, I see that:
>>
>> 0440 ;  0070 ;  ML      # ( р → p ) CYRILLIC SMALL LETTER ER → LATIN
>> SMALL LETTER P  #
>>
>> 0443 ;  0079 ;  ML      # ( у → y ) CYRILLIC SMALL LETTER U → LATIN
>> SMALL LETTER Y   #
>>
>>        We have absolute similarity here! Very different than the
>>        Bulgarian case with 50% similarity.
>>
>>        Russia selected and received the .рф (Cyrillic for .rf) string.
>>        Looking for a third time at Unicode Technical Standard #39, I
>>        see that:
>>
>> 0440 ;  0070 ;  MA      # ( р → p ) CYRILLIC SMALL LETTER ER → LATIN
>> SMALL LETTER P  #
>>
>> 0444 ;  0278 ;  ML      # ( ф → ɸ ) CYRILLIC SMALL LETTER EF → LATIN
>> SMALL LETTER PHI#
>>
>>        What do we have here? One similar character, and one not similar
>>        to a Latin basic character. So, how is this different from the
>>        Bulgarian case? Its the same! How the Russian string was
>>        approved, and the Bulgarian – not???
>>
>>
>> The DNS Stability panel rankings
>>
>> [6]  Both characters are visually identical to an ISO 646 Basic Version
>> (ISO 646-BV) character.
>> [5]  One character is visually identical to, and one character is
>> visually confusable with, an ISO 646-BV character.
>> [4]  Both characters are visually confusable with, but neither character
>> is visually identical to, an ISO 646-BV character.
>> [3]  One character is visually distinct from, and one character is
>> visually identical to, an ISO 646-BV character.
>> [2]  One character is visually distinct from, and one character is
>> visually confusable with, an ISO 646-BV character.
>> [1]  Both characters are visually distinct from an ISO 646-BV character.
>>
>>        The panel said that Bulgaria fails under [4] or [5], so the
>>        string is not accepted, because rank [4] or more is not good.
>>
>>        But, from my findings here, the Bulgarian (as the Russian)
>>        strings fail under [2] or [3], and its perfectly fine to be
>>        approved.
>>
>> Security proposals
>>
>>        As another participant in the public comment forum said, two
>>        security proposals must be implemented:
>>
>>        “1. All names in the .бг (.bg) IDN ccTLD must be registered only
>>        with Cyrillic letters.”
>>        “2. All names in the .бг (.bg) IDN ccTLD must contain at least
>>        one letter, which can be visually distinguished from the Latin
>>        alphabet (one of the letters: б, г, д, ж, и, й, л, п, ф, ц, ч,
>>        ш, щ, ъ, ь, ю, я).” (“г“ may fail off this list, because of my
>>        findings.)
>>
>> Examples
>>
>>        There must be really conservative people in the DNS Stability
>>        panel, who don`t like seeing domains like:
>> - раурал.бг because people would confuse it with paypal.br
>>        Come on, раурал.бг and paypal.br ? Compare with paypal.it and
>>        paypal.lt ?
>>
>>        Others are afraid of seeing:
>> - руса.бг and pyca.br (whatever this means in Brazilian Portuguese) -
>> check the second security proposal. The first domain can`t exist.
>>
>> - - - - -
>>
>>        Dear DNS Stability panel members, what is wrong here?
>>        Dear ICANN Board members, Bulgaria needs an appeal procedure!
>>
>> Cheers,
>> George Todoroff
>> --
>>  george_todoroff at imap.cc
>>
>> --
>> http://www.fastmail.fm - Send your email first class
>>
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> 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
>
>
>
>
> --
> Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala
>
> Tweeter: @SalanietaT
> Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro
> Cell: +679 998 2851
>
>
>
>


-- 
Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala

Tweeter: @SalanietaT
Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro
Cell: +679 998 2851
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111102/6bc69f56/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, 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


From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com  Tue Nov  1 09:31:47 2011
From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro)
Date: Wed, 2 Nov 2011 01:31:47 +1200
Subject: [governance] Cyber Security 2011
In-Reply-To: <CAOLD2+bA+q_Ayk=rXeq6QzU4mjT34Oh9qx6DNzabLo-02g9VvA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <B11CE329-B4CC-4FDC-A3BC-A80C38218DD5@acm.org>
	<CA+EjHYo+Xd4jS=Fes2SYj5rOGtEVSUfTyufmDB2OoixDFU-BQA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAJiMDiQnXMUTRVQ1EXKgC+F330xVErci6-onLyuNVqWTgEwcsA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAMz5XN64AScsyKU=FoB7MhChgpadp=e_YNvbYmkw8EvTbULcdw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAOLD2+bA+q_Ayk=rXeq6QzU4mjT34Oh9qx6DNzabLo-02g9VvA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAJwbTiBBvLUgorp=LtpZoLajS+KkudMSeiD_hFrG5kcxQPNM2Q@mail.gmail.com>

Thanks Andrea.

We know that you always comment from your personal position and will follow
the updates unless otherwise expressed. If there are position papers
published etc or press statements, we would be happy to read it, if they
are public documents.

Best,
Sala

On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 2:27 AM, Andrea Glorioso <andrea at digitalpolicy.it>wrote:

> For those who might be interested, I am tweeting from the London Cyber
> Conference (@andreaglorioso, you can also follow the hashtag
> #LondonCyber).
>
> For clarity, I am attending the London Cyber Conference as part of the
> EU delegation, but the tweets express my personal position(s) only.
>
> Best,
>
> Andrea
>
> On Mon, Oct 31, 2011 at 10:31 AM, Deirdre Williams
> <williams.deirdre at gmail.com> wrote:
> > These reports were on the BBC this morning, in case they are any help.
> > http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-15516959   GCHQ chief reports 'disturbing'
> > cyber attacks on UK
> > http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-12371056  William Hague: UK is under
> > cyber-attack
> > http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-15355739 UK seeks 'consensus' at
> > cyberspace conference
> >
> > Deirdre
> > On 30 October 2011 09:01, Ben Wagner <b at nwagner.org> wrote:
> >>
> >> To clarify the difference, there is a difference between the two events.
> >> The first link by Avri isn't the offical conference, it's the
> >> inter-governmental event on Nov. 1-2 CS should be concerned about.
> >>
> >> To provide a little more context to the event:
> >>
> >> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/07/26/cyber_hague_event/
> >>
> >>
> >>
> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/10/20/bring_economics_into_freedom_debate/
> >>
> >> From everything I have heard so far this will be a very high level event
> >> attempting to focus the debate on cyber security at the expense of most
> >> other internet governance issues.
> >>
> >> Ben
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On 30 October 2011 11:21, Louis Pouzin (well) <pouzin at well.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> This event sounds very much like a trade show on security, with a major
> >>> sponsor Endace, a New Zealand company looking for worldwide expansion.
> >>> Somehow, advertising the event smacks of show business, one day
> boondoggling
> >>> in London for £995 + VAT registration. Are the good times coming back ?
> >>> - - -
> >>>
> >>> On Sat, Oct 29, 2011 at 13:35, Avri Doria <avri at acm.org> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> Hi,
> >>>>
> >>>> This monstrosity was pointed out to me the other day.
> >>>>
> >>>> http://www.cybersecuritysummit.co.uk/
> >>>>
> >>>> As far as i can tell it is another conference on IG without Civil
> >>>> society representation, though a fair amount of business - the
> business
> >>>> especially who make a great part of their living from selling the
> tools of
> >>>> so called security.
> >>>>
> >>>> Have I missed the discussion of this on this list?
> >>>>
> >>>> avri
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> ____________________________________________________________
> >>> 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
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > “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, 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
>
>


-- 
Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala

Tweeter: @SalanietaT
Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro
Cell: +679 998 2851
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111102/839a6e80/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, 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


From andrea at digitalpolicy.it  Tue Nov  1 10:06:25 2011
From: andrea at digitalpolicy.it (Andrea Glorioso)
Date: Tue, 1 Nov 2011 14:06:25 +0000
Subject: [governance] Cyber Security 2011
In-Reply-To: <CAJwbTiBBvLUgorp=LtpZoLajS+KkudMSeiD_hFrG5kcxQPNM2Q@mail.gmail.com>
References: <B11CE329-B4CC-4FDC-A3BC-A80C38218DD5@acm.org>
	<CA+EjHYo+Xd4jS=Fes2SYj5rOGtEVSUfTyufmDB2OoixDFU-BQA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAJiMDiQnXMUTRVQ1EXKgC+F330xVErci6-onLyuNVqWTgEwcsA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAMz5XN64AScsyKU=FoB7MhChgpadp=e_YNvbYmkw8EvTbULcdw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAOLD2+bA+q_Ayk=rXeq6QzU4mjT34Oh9qx6DNzabLo-02g9VvA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAJwbTiBBvLUgorp=LtpZoLajS+KkudMSeiD_hFrG5kcxQPNM2Q@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAOLD2+YCFWm+gAnUNBUYBhMrFqgyTSS6GzB7bNy4FFvmnhyL=A@mail.gmail.com>

Hi Sala,

It's always better to specify. :)

I believe most documents are being uploaded on the conference website (see
http://www.fco.gov.uk/). I must say that in my view the organizers have
made real efforts to facilitate remote participation. I also don't agree
that they tried to keep the conference "secret", as someone said.

FYI, it looks like Hungary will host the 2012 edition of the conference and
Korea (I assume South :) will do it in 2013.

Best,

Andrea


> We know that you always comment from your personal position and will
follow the updates unless otherwise expressed. If there are position papers
published etc or press statements, we would be happy to read it, if they
are public documents.
> Best,
> Sala
>
> On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 2:27 AM, Andrea Glorioso <andrea at digitalpolicy.it>
wrote:
>
> For those who might be interested, I am tweeting from the London Cyber
> Conference (@andreaglorioso, you can also follow the hashtag
> #LondonCyber).
>
> For clarity, I am attending the London Cyber Conference as part of the
> EU delegation, but the tweets express my personal position(s) only.
>
> Best,
>
> Andrea
>
> On Mon, Oct 31, 2011 at 10:31 AM, Deirdre Williams
> <williams.deirdre at gmail.com> wrote:
>> These reports were on the BBC this morning, in case they are any help.
>> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-15516959   GCHQ chief reports 'disturbing'
>> cyber attacks on UK
>> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-12371056  William Hague: UK is under
>> cyber-attack
>> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-15355739 UK seeks 'consensus' at
>> cyberspace conference
>>
>> Deirdre
>> On 30 October 2011 09:01, Ben Wagner <b at nwagner.org> wrote:
>>>
>>> To clarify the difference, there is a difference between the two events.
>>> The first link by Avri isn't the offical conference, it's the
>>> inter-governmental event on Nov. 1-2 CS should be concerned about.
>>>
>>> To provide a little more context to the event:
>>>
>>> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/07/26/cyber_hague_event/
>>>
>>>
>>>
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/10/20/bring_economics_into_freedom_debate/
>>>
>>> From everything I have heard so far this will be a very high level event
>>> attempting to focus the debate on cyber security at the expense of most
>>> other internet governance issues.
>>>
>>> Ben
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 30 October 2011 11:21, Louis Pouzin (well) <pouzin at well.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> This event sounds very much like a trade show on security, with a major
>>>> sponsor Endace, a New Zealand company looking for worldwide expansion.
>>>> Somehow, advertising the event smacks of show business, one day
boondoggling
>>>> in London for £995 + VAT registration. Are the good times coming back ?
>>>> - - -
>>>>
>>>> On Sat, Oct 29, 2011 at 13:35, Avri Doria <avri at acm.org> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> This monstrosity was pointed out to me the other day.
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.cybersecuritysummit.co.uk/
>>>>>
>>>>> As far as i can tell it is another conference on IG without Civil
>>>>> society representation, though a fair amount of business - the
business
>>>>> especially who make a great part of their living from selling the
tools of
>>>>> so called security.
>>>>>
>>>>> Have I missed the discussion of this on this list?
>>>>>
>>>>> avri
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ____________________________________________________________
>>>> 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
>>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111101/f162d404/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, 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


From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com  Tue Nov  1 10:13:03 2011
From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro)
Date: Wed, 2 Nov 2011 02:13:03 +1200
Subject: [governance] Cyber Security 2011
In-Reply-To: <CAOLD2+YCFWm+gAnUNBUYBhMrFqgyTSS6GzB7bNy4FFvmnhyL=A@mail.gmail.com>
References: <B11CE329-B4CC-4FDC-A3BC-A80C38218DD5@acm.org>
	<CA+EjHYo+Xd4jS=Fes2SYj5rOGtEVSUfTyufmDB2OoixDFU-BQA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAJiMDiQnXMUTRVQ1EXKgC+F330xVErci6-onLyuNVqWTgEwcsA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAMz5XN64AScsyKU=FoB7MhChgpadp=e_YNvbYmkw8EvTbULcdw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAOLD2+bA+q_Ayk=rXeq6QzU4mjT34Oh9qx6DNzabLo-02g9VvA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAJwbTiBBvLUgorp=LtpZoLajS+KkudMSeiD_hFrG5kcxQPNM2Q@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAOLD2+YCFWm+gAnUNBUYBhMrFqgyTSS6GzB7bNy4FFvmnhyL=A@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAJwbTiDsSwk0xPW__EN9Ggife49dL=-rea_sLbOFYuSdDuE1wA@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 3:06 AM, Andrea Glorioso <andrea at digitalpolicy.it>wrote:

> Hi Sala,
>
> It's always better to specify. :)
>

You are right, better safe than sorry :)

>
> I believe most documents are being uploaded on the conference website (see
> http://www.fco.gov.uk/). I must say that in my view the organizers have
> made real efforts to facilitate remote participation. I also don't agree
> that they tried to keep the conference "secret", as someone said.
>

Thanks for the link. I am glad that remote participation is encouraged and
this is part of spirit of transparency and openness.

>
> FYI, it looks like Hungary will host the 2012 edition of the conference
> and Korea (I assume South :) will do it in 2013.
>

This will be interesting especially when Hungary laws and in light of their
new media law that came into effect, on 1st January 2011 and in light of
the Hungarian blacked website actions by certain groups protesting certain
erosions of their privileges. The APCICT just had a conference in Incheon
where one of the plenaries was on Cyber Security as a National Priority.

>
> Best,
>
> Andrea
>
>
>
> > We know that you always comment from your personal position and will
> follow the updates unless otherwise expressed. If there are position papers
> published etc or press statements, we would be happy to read it, if they
> are public documents.
> > Best,
> > Sala
> >
> > On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 2:27 AM, Andrea Glorioso <andrea at digitalpolicy.it>
> wrote:
> >
> > For those who might be interested, I am tweeting from the London Cyber
> > Conference (@andreaglorioso, you can also follow the hashtag
> > #LondonCyber).
> >
> > For clarity, I am attending the London Cyber Conference as part of the
> > EU delegation, but the tweets express my personal position(s) only.
> >
> > Best,
> >
> > Andrea
> >
> > On Mon, Oct 31, 2011 at 10:31 AM, Deirdre Williams
> > <williams.deirdre at gmail.com> wrote:
> >> These reports were on the BBC this morning, in case they are any help.
> >> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-15516959   GCHQ chief reports 'disturbing'
> >> cyber attacks on UK
> >> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-12371056  William Hague: UK is under
> >> cyber-attack
> >> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-15355739 UK seeks 'consensus' at
> >> cyberspace conference
> >>
> >> Deirdre
> >> On 30 October 2011 09:01, Ben Wagner <b at nwagner.org> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> To clarify the difference, there is a difference between the two
> events.
> >>> The first link by Avri isn't the offical conference, it's the
> >>> inter-governmental event on Nov. 1-2 CS should be concerned about.
> >>>
> >>> To provide a little more context to the event:
> >>>
> >>> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/07/26/cyber_hague_event/
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/10/20/bring_economics_into_freedom_debate/
> >>>
> >>> From everything I have heard so far this will be a very high level
> event
> >>> attempting to focus the debate on cyber security at the expense of most
> >>> other internet governance issues.
> >>>
> >>> Ben
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On 30 October 2011 11:21, Louis Pouzin (well) <pouzin at well.com> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> This event sounds very much like a trade show on security, with a
> major
> >>>> sponsor Endace, a New Zealand company looking for worldwide expansion.
> >>>> Somehow, advertising the event smacks of show business, one day
> boondoggling
> >>>> in London for £995 + VAT registration. Are the good times coming back
> ?
> >>>> - - -
> >>>>
> >>>> On Sat, Oct 29, 2011 at 13:35, Avri Doria <avri at acm.org> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Hi,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> This monstrosity was pointed out to me the other day.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> http://www.cybersecuritysummit.co.uk/
> >>>>>
> >>>>> As far as i can tell it is another conference on IG without Civil
> >>>>> society representation, though a fair amount of business - the
> business
> >>>>> especially who make a great part of their living from selling the
> tools of
> >>>>> so called security.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Have I missed the discussion of this on this list?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> avri
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> ____________________________________________________________
> >>>> 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
> >>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
>
>
>


-- 
Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala

Tweeter: @SalanietaT
Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro
Cell: +679 998 2851
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111102/eff730cf/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, 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


From iza at anr.org  Tue Nov  1 10:14:13 2011
From: iza at anr.org (Izumi AIZU)
Date: Tue, 1 Nov 2011 23:14:13 +0900
Subject: [governance] CSTD WG Day 2 (2)
Message-ID: <CA+YNoKig_VkRMoi50oHy6TWE1u5ACRRKouauTx=msFmXhYx0xA@mail.gmail.com>

We had lunch break and now starting the afternoon session.

After our proposal in the morning, other members also contributed
different proposals, but they are not too different or contentious.

The trust here is much better.

The secretariat will soon make a consolidated document for further
review, but the Chair now proposed to move to point B), Working
modalities includin open consultations, MAG and Secretariat.

The Chair also indicated that the second meeting will be held in
January, and possible third one back to back with IGF Open
consultation in February.

izumi
____________________________________________________________
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


From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com  Tue Nov  1 10:16:06 2011
From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro)
Date: Wed, 2 Nov 2011 02:16:06 +1200
Subject: [governance] Cyber Security 2011
In-Reply-To: <CAJwbTiDsSwk0xPW__EN9Ggife49dL=-rea_sLbOFYuSdDuE1wA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <B11CE329-B4CC-4FDC-A3BC-A80C38218DD5@acm.org>
	<CA+EjHYo+Xd4jS=Fes2SYj5rOGtEVSUfTyufmDB2OoixDFU-BQA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAJiMDiQnXMUTRVQ1EXKgC+F330xVErci6-onLyuNVqWTgEwcsA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAMz5XN64AScsyKU=FoB7MhChgpadp=e_YNvbYmkw8EvTbULcdw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAOLD2+bA+q_Ayk=rXeq6QzU4mjT34Oh9qx6DNzabLo-02g9VvA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAJwbTiBBvLUgorp=LtpZoLajS+KkudMSeiD_hFrG5kcxQPNM2Q@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAOLD2+YCFWm+gAnUNBUYBhMrFqgyTSS6GzB7bNy4FFvmnhyL=A@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAJwbTiDsSwk0xPW__EN9Ggife49dL=-rea_sLbOFYuSdDuE1wA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAJwbTiDV5F_-o3Ww6=-xmKDH_S2LM32dyWQP2N_zjZ3ucm63Hg@mail.gmail.com>

The live stream is clear, thanks Andrea and the resources are on the
website. :)

On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 3:13 AM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro <
salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com> wrote:

>
>
> On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 3:06 AM, Andrea Glorioso <andrea at digitalpolicy.it>wrote:
>
>> Hi Sala,
>>
>> It's always better to specify. :)
>>
>
> You are right, better safe than sorry :)
>
>>
>> I believe most documents are being uploaded on the conference website
>> (see http://www.fco.gov.uk/). I must say that in my view the organizers
>> have made real efforts to facilitate remote participation. I also don't
>> agree that they tried to keep the conference "secret", as someone said.
>>
>
> Thanks for the link. I am glad that remote participation is encouraged and
> this is part of spirit of transparency and openness.
>
>>
>> FYI, it looks like Hungary will host the 2012 edition of the conference
>> and Korea (I assume South :) will do it in 2013.
>>
>
> This will be interesting especially when Hungary laws and in light of
> their new media law that came into effect, on 1st January 2011 and in light
> of the Hungarian blacked website actions by certain groups protesting
> certain erosions of their privileges. The APCICT just had a conference in
> Incheon where one of the plenaries was on Cyber Security as a National
> Priority.
>
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> Andrea
>>
>>
>>
>> > We know that you always comment from your personal position and will
>> follow the updates unless otherwise expressed. If there are position papers
>> published etc or press statements, we would be happy to read it, if they
>> are public documents.
>> > Best,
>> > Sala
>> >
>> > On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 2:27 AM, Andrea Glorioso <
>> andrea at digitalpolicy.it> wrote:
>> >
>> > For those who might be interested, I am tweeting from the London Cyber
>> > Conference (@andreaglorioso, you can also follow the hashtag
>> > #LondonCyber).
>> >
>> > For clarity, I am attending the London Cyber Conference as part of the
>> > EU delegation, but the tweets express my personal position(s) only.
>> >
>> > Best,
>> >
>> > Andrea
>> >
>> > On Mon, Oct 31, 2011 at 10:31 AM, Deirdre Williams
>> > <williams.deirdre at gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> These reports were on the BBC this morning, in case they are any help.
>> >> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-15516959   GCHQ chief reports
>> 'disturbing'
>> >> cyber attacks on UK
>> >> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-12371056  William Hague: UK is under
>> >> cyber-attack
>> >> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-15355739 UK seeks 'consensus' at
>> >> cyberspace conference
>> >>
>> >> Deirdre
>> >> On 30 October 2011 09:01, Ben Wagner <b at nwagner.org> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> To clarify the difference, there is a difference between the two
>> events.
>> >>> The first link by Avri isn't the offical conference, it's the
>> >>> inter-governmental event on Nov. 1-2 CS should be concerned about.
>> >>>
>> >>> To provide a little more context to the event:
>> >>>
>> >>> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/07/26/cyber_hague_event/
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/10/20/bring_economics_into_freedom_debate/
>> >>>
>> >>> From everything I have heard so far this will be a very high level
>> event
>> >>> attempting to focus the debate on cyber security at the expense of
>> most
>> >>> other internet governance issues.
>> >>>
>> >>> Ben
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> On 30 October 2011 11:21, Louis Pouzin (well) <pouzin at well.com>
>> wrote:
>> >>>>
>> >>>> This event sounds very much like a trade show on security, with a
>> major
>> >>>> sponsor Endace, a New Zealand company looking for worldwide
>> expansion.
>> >>>> Somehow, advertising the event smacks of show business, one day
>> boondoggling
>> >>>> in London for £995 + VAT registration. Are the good times coming
>> back ?
>> >>>> - - -
>> >>>>
>> >>>> On Sat, Oct 29, 2011 at 13:35, Avri Doria <avri at acm.org> wrote:
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Hi,
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> This monstrosity was pointed out to me the other day.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> http://www.cybersecuritysummit.co.uk/
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> As far as i can tell it is another conference on IG without Civil
>> >>>>> society representation, though a fair amount of business - the
>> business
>> >>>>> especially who make a great part of their living from selling the
>> tools of
>> >>>>> so called security.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Have I missed the discussion of this on this list?
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> avri
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> ____________________________________________________________
>> >>>> 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
>> >>
>>
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> 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
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala
>
> Tweeter: @SalanietaT
> Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro
> Cell: +679 998 2851
>
>
>
>


-- 
Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala

Tweeter: @SalanietaT
Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro
Cell: +679 998 2851
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111102/4f956ec9/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, 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


From wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de  Tue Nov  1 10:14:53 2011
From: wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de (=?iso-8859-1?Q?=22Kleinw=E4chter=2C_Wolfgang=22?=)
Date: Tue, 01 Nov 2011 15:14:53 +0100
Subject: AW: [governance] Cyber Security 2011
References: <B11CE329-B4CC-4FDC-A3BC-A80C38218DD5@acm.org>
 <CA+EjHYo+Xd4jS=Fes2SYj5rOGtEVSUfTyufmDB2OoixDFU-BQA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAJiMDiQnXMUTRVQ1EXKgC+F330xVErci6-onLyuNVqWTgEwcsA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAMz5XN64AScsyKU=FoB7MhChgpadp=e_YNvbYmkw8EvTbULcdw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAOLD2+bA+q_Ayk=rXeq6QzU4mjT34Oh9qx6DNzabLo-02g9VvA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAJwbTiBBvLUgorp=LtpZoLajS+KkudMSeiD_hFrG5kcxQPNM2Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAOLD2+YCFWm+gAnUNBUYBhMrFqgyTSS6GzB7bNy4FFvmnhyL=A@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID:  <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8D2C6BB@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>

Hi
 
if this is another "flying circus", will it be linked to the IGF? Or will it get an organisational structure? A "steering committee" or a "MAG"?
 
w
 

________________________________

Von: governance at lists.cpsr.org im Auftrag von Andrea Glorioso
Gesendet: Di 01.11.2011 15:06
An: governance at lists.cpsr.org
Betreff: Re: [governance] Cyber Security 2011


Hi Sala,

It's always better to specify. :)

I believe most documents are being uploaded on the conference website (see http://www.fco.gov.uk/). I must say that in my view the organizers have made real efforts to facilitate remote participation. I also don't agree that they tried to keep the conference "secret", as someone said. 

FYI, it looks like Hungary will host the 2012 edition of the conference and Korea (I assume South :) will do it in 2013. 

Best,

Andrea


> We know that you always comment from your personal position and will follow the updates unless otherwise expressed. If there are position papers published etc or press statements, we would be happy to read it, if they are public documents.
> Best,
> Sala
>
> On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 2:27 AM, Andrea Glorioso <andrea at digitalpolicy.it> wrote:
>
> For those who might be interested, I am tweeting from the London Cyber
> Conference (@andreaglorioso, you can also follow the hashtag
> #LondonCyber).
>
> For clarity, I am attending the London Cyber Conference as part of the
> EU delegation, but the tweets express my personal position(s) only.
>
> Best,
>
> Andrea
>
> On Mon, Oct 31, 2011 at 10:31 AM, Deirdre Williams
> <williams.deirdre at gmail.com> wrote:
>> These reports were on the BBC this morning, in case they are any help.
>> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-15516959   GCHQ chief reports 'disturbing'
>> cyber attacks on UK
>> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-12371056  William Hague: UK is under
>> cyber-attack
>> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-15355739 UK seeks 'consensus' at
>> cyberspace conference
>>
>> Deirdre
>> On 30 October 2011 09:01, Ben Wagner <b at nwagner.org> wrote:
>>>
>>> To clarify the difference, there is a difference between the two events.
>>> The first link by Avri isn't the offical conference, it's the
>>> inter-governmental event on Nov. 1-2 CS should be concerned about.
>>>
>>> To provide a little more context to the event:
>>>
>>> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/07/26/cyber_hague_event/
>>>
>>>
>>> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/10/20/bring_economics_into_freedom_debate/
>>>
>>> From everything I have heard so far this will be a very high level event
>>> attempting to focus the debate on cyber security at the expense of most
>>> other internet governance issues.
>>>
>>> Ben
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 30 October 2011 11:21, Louis Pouzin (well) <pouzin at well.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> This event sounds very much like a trade show on security, with a major
>>>> sponsor Endace, a New Zealand company looking for worldwide expansion.
>>>> Somehow, advertising the event smacks of show business, one day boondoggling
>>>> in London for £995 + VAT registration. Are the good times coming back ?
>>>> - - -
>>>>
>>>> On Sat, Oct 29, 2011 at 13:35, Avri Doria <avri at acm.org> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> This monstrosity was pointed out to me the other day.
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.cybersecuritysummit.co.uk/
>>>>>
>>>>> As far as i can tell it is another conference on IG without Civil
>>>>> society representation, though a fair amount of business - the business
>>>>> especially who make a great part of their living from selling the tools of
>>>>> so called security.
>>>>>
>>>>> Have I missed the discussion of this on this list?
>>>>>
>>>>> avri
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ____________________________________________________________
>>>> 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
>> 
____________________________________________________________
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


From pouzin at well.com  Tue Nov  1 10:31:59 2011
From: pouzin at well.com (Louis Pouzin (well))
Date: Tue, 1 Nov 2011 15:31:59 +0100
Subject: [governance] =?UTF-8?Q?Is_really_Bulgarian_Cyrillic_=2E=D0=B1?=
 =?UTF-8?Q?=D0=B3_=28=2Ebg=29_similar_to_other_Latin_ccTLDs=3F?=
In-Reply-To: <CAJwbTiA0ixrMYBTWFGZLphuHKzWwOVrYiAvc9yBf8WQsMN-66w@mail.gmail.com>
References: <1291131665.20152.1407897083@webmail.messagingengine.com> <CAJwbTiA0ixrMYBTWFGZLphuHKzWwOVrYiAvc9yBf8WQsMN-66w@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CA+EjHYpNDBuY4NGi0wm7fT7N9ZsMPsZ_X5TftNeD5c3aSLP+Bw@mail.gmail.com>

Unless visually impaired, anyone should be able to tell *.бг* from *.br*
see attachment.

However, visually normal people can't tell *.lt *(Italy) from *.It*(Lithuania)

The problem is with ICANN, not with Cyrillic.
- - -

On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 14:21, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro <
salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com> wrote:

> Dear George and others,
>
> The relevance of IDNs to Internet Governance are in the "*multilingualism*"
> policy category that was defined in the WGIG 2005 document.
>
> I was going through the archives and found your email. You may be
> interested in reading the Study Reports on the various variants, they are
> open for comments and submissions, see:
>
> I listened to certain speakers speak about IDN variants which are so very
> exciting and interesting. You can access and view their study reports via
> http://www.icann.org/en/public-comment/ The Cyrillic variant report is
> open for comments until 16th November, 2011. Other variant reports are also
> there (Arabic, Chinese, Greek, Latin etc). If you want to get submissions
> in and quick, now is the time! :)
>
> It is so interesting to see how certain scripts are politically charged,
> the similarity in phonetics or confusingly similar script. Whilst IDNs have
> been around for some time, I am sensing that it will only accelerate in its
> prominence in the not too distant future.
>
> The existing ITU model has closed memberships and this is true even for
> the Dedicated Working Group on International Internet Related Public Policy
> issues. This is a *closed group* I might add. Is there anyone on this
> list that is a member of this group I would be interested to ask some
> policy questions on the subject matter and we can discuss offlist.
>
>  I am on record for asking At Large whether there is some level of
> interface between ICANN and this Dedicated Working Group. This Dedicated
> Working Group was established under Resolution 75. Membership is only
> exclusive for member states and the current chair is Mr Majed Al Mazyed
> from Saudi Arabia.
>
> Resolution 133 deals from the ITU Plenipotentiary deals with the role of
> administrations of member states in the management of internationalized(multilingual)
> domain names. [see
> http://www.itu.int/osg/csd/intgov/resoultions_2010/PP-10/RESOLUTION_133.pdf
> ]
>
> I should also state that the 2009 Council Resolution 1305 [which we are
> denied access unless you are a member state invited Member States to
> recognise the scope of the work of ITU on international Internet-related
> public policy matters.] I will say that the approach of the ITU to close
> discussions on internet policy and limit it to member states is worrying.
> 2012 will be a critical year within the ITU as they will be revising alot
> of resolutions and positions etc to "make it more relevant".
>
> I am not in anyway criticising ITU and have *great respect* for the
> degree of capacity building  and recognise the role that they play but I
> strongly disagree with the policy exclusionary development processes within
> the ITU. The ICC also publicly in 2005 issued a Statement to tell ITU about
> what it thought of ITU's role in the development of global internet
> policies and think that the statement would be available on the ICC website.
>
> There are some who have been vocal of wanting to see more efficient policy
> processes and are debating what enhanced cooperation.
>
> As civil society how can the voice of consumers be represented or at least
> other critical stakeholders within policy development space? I think that
> these are legitimate questions that require consideration.
>
> I would also be interested to learn from other individuals or
> organisations that deal with IDN other than the ITU Dedicated Working Group
> and ICANN. If you can point me to URLs, that would be great.
>
> I am also aware of the Declaration of the Committee of Ministers on the
> management of the Internet protocol address resources in the public
> interest (see:
> https://wcd.coe.int/ViewDoc.jsp?id=1678299&Site=CM&BackColorInternet=C3C3C3&BackColorIntranet=EDB021&BackColorLogged=F5D383
>  )
>
> Tobias Mahler who is on this list had raised issues with s.9 of this
> Declaration on another list.
>
> It will be great to see all those working on these policies to share
> resources and information, so that at the end of the day, consumer
> interests and end users are protected.*
> *
>
> I was wondering whether civil society or individual members would like to
> put in submissions, then they are at liberty to do so.
>
> Best Regards,
> Sala
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111101/0d34e341/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: правителство.бг.png
Type: image/png
Size: 172983 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111101/0d34e341/attachment.png>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
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


From roland at internetpolicyagency.com  Tue Nov  1 10:32:28 2011
From: roland at internetpolicyagency.com (Roland Perry)
Date: Tue, 1 Nov 2011 14:32:28 +0000
Subject: [governance] CSTD WG going on
In-Reply-To: <002b01cc988d$e35ee700$aa1cb500$@yahoo.com>
References: <1320081340.82295.yint-ygo-j2me@web161005.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
 <GYK4kj5rgvrOFAbr@internetpolicyagency.com>
 <002b01cc988d$e35ee700$aa1cb500$@yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <2BIkCPg8LAsOFA0Q@internetpolicyagency.com>

In message <002b01cc988d$e35ee700$aa1cb500$@yahoo.com>, at 17:00:42 on 
Tue, 1 Nov 2011, Imran Ahmed Shah <ias_pk at yahoo.com> writes
>>3. Increase the number of the membership (count) of MAG Members to have
>>at least two members from each Country, one from CS and one from
>>Internet Regulating Authority from the same Country.
>
>Ronald: That makes the MAG begin to sound like an ITU summit with perhaps
>400 attendees. That's a rather different animal from the current one. And
>who will pay for all that travel?
>IAS: again my point of view is not carried. I want to say that membership
>(count) of MAG should be increase. And in order to resolve the issues that
>are commonly discussed at the forum for dialogue (IGF) and the concern
>raised by CS on behalf a common citizen (public/people or nation of a
>country) should be addressed to resolve and in presence of regulating
>authorities who give their arguments or otherwise satisfy their
>people/public/citizen/CS. What is going on now a days, CS Representation
>from Global is very limited at these Governance related Event, if the some
>problem are raised (pointed out) at these forums, there is no one to listen
>them to resolve. Its good debate to appreciate each other on these forums,
>but there is no way to discuss the matters to resolve them. For example, if
>someone approaches IGF Forum from Egypt claimed that Govt. has stopped their
>Internet Broadband Access and closed the Cyber Café....arrested Google
>Manager on creating a page on facebook.... please tell me that what one side
>dialogue may have influence over the Internet controlling authorities, if
>there representative is not sitting in the meeting?

You haven't explained how this admirable inclusiveness works when there 
are so many deserving faces at the table (hundreds at the MAG and tens 
of thousands at the IGF).
-- 
Roland Perry
____________________________________________________________
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


From nhklein at gmx.net  Tue Nov  1 10:41:15 2011
From: nhklein at gmx.net (nhklein)
Date: Tue, 01 Nov 2011 21:41:15 +0700
Subject: [governance] Cyber Security 2011
In-Reply-To: <CAOLD2+YCFWm+gAnUNBUYBhMrFqgyTSS6GzB7bNy4FFvmnhyL=A@mail.gmail.com>
References: <B11CE329-B4CC-4FDC-A3BC-A80C38218DD5@acm.org>	<CA+EjHYo+Xd4jS=Fes2SYj5rOGtEVSUfTyufmDB2OoixDFU-BQA@mail.gmail.com>	<CAJiMDiQnXMUTRVQ1EXKgC+F330xVErci6-onLyuNVqWTgEwcsA@mail.gmail.com>	<CAMz5XN64AScsyKU=FoB7MhChgpadp=e_YNvbYmkw8EvTbULcdw@mail.gmail.com>	<CAOLD2+bA+q_Ayk=rXeq6QzU4mjT34Oh9qx6DNzabLo-02g9VvA@mail.gmail.com>	<CAJwbTiBBvLUgorp=LtpZoLajS+KkudMSeiD_hFrG5kcxQPNM2Q@mail.gmail.com> <CAOLD2+YCFWm+gAnUNBUYBhMrFqgyTSS6GzB7bNy4FFvmnhyL=A@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4EB0050B.5050908@gmx.net>

On 11/01/2011 09:06 PM, Andrea Glorioso wrote:
> Hi Sala,
>
> It's always better to specify. :)
>
> I believe most documents are being uploaded on the conference website 
> (see http://www.fco.gov.uk/). I must say that in my view the 
> organizers have made real efforts to facilitate remote participation. 
> I also don't agree that they tried to keep the conference "secret", as 
> someone said.
>
> FYI, it looks like Hungary will host the 2012 edition of the 
> conference and Korea (I assume South :) will do it in 2013.
>
> Best,
>
> Andrea

Please help me to understand: the "London Conference on Cyberspace" is 
announced on the website of the UK's "Foreign and Commonwealth Office" - 
what nature of conference is it, if a 2012 "edition" will be hosted by 
Hungary in 2012 and another one 2013 in Korea?

Norbert

-- 
A while ago, I started a new blog:

...thinking it over... after 21 years in Cambodia
http://www.thinking21.org/

continuing to share reports and comments from Cambodia.

Norbert Klein
nhklein at gmx.net
Phnom Penh / Cambodia


____________________________________________________________
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


From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com  Tue Nov  1 10:43:12 2011
From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro)
Date: Wed, 2 Nov 2011 02:43:12 +1200
Subject: [governance] =?UTF-8?Q?Is_really_Bulgarian_Cyrillic_=2E=D0=B1?=
 =?UTF-8?Q?=D0=B3_=28=2Ebg=29_similar_to_other_Latin_ccTLDs=3F?=
In-Reply-To: <CA+EjHYpNDBuY4NGi0wm7fT7N9ZsMPsZ_X5TftNeD5c3aSLP+Bw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <1291131665.20152.1407897083@webmail.messagingengine.com>
	<CAJwbTiA0ixrMYBTWFGZLphuHKzWwOVrYiAvc9yBf8WQsMN-66w@mail.gmail.com>
	<CA+EjHYpNDBuY4NGi0wm7fT7N9ZsMPsZ_X5TftNeD5c3aSLP+Bw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAJwbTiDudOghfdT5yTmHYPUetkHuJHoG3HNM2xU+HNidRTOhog@mail.gmail.com>

2011/11/2 Louis Pouzin (well) <pouzin at well.com>

> Unless visually impaired, anyone should be able to tell *.бг* from *.br*
> see attachment.
>
> I need glasses to read :) but can still tell the difference between  *.бг*and
* **.br :)*

> However, visually normal people can't tell *.lt *(Italy) from *.It*(Lithuania)
>
> I agree :) The more comments and submissions made on the issue would be
great and received an email from George offline and he is in the middle of
reading the report. It would be great if we could compile all the issues we
have the with IDN variant reports or problems that people have with policy
processes so these issues can be raised etc.

> The problem is with ICANN, not with Cyrillic.
>
 The issue is not the language but how as policy makers or part of the
policy formulation process are the end users protected. What are some
considerations that policy writers will have to factor in when making these
decisions etc. I have asked George for assistance in getting as many from
the Cyrillic speaking and writing community to comment on the report.

Best,

Sala

> - - -
>
>
> On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 14:21, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro <
> salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Dear George and others,
>>
>> The relevance of IDNs to Internet Governance are in the "*multilingualism
>> *" policy category that was defined in the WGIG 2005 document.
>>
>> I was going through the archives and found your email. You may be
>> interested in reading the Study Reports on the various variants, they are
>> open for comments and submissions, see:
>>
>> I listened to certain speakers speak about IDN variants which are so
>> very exciting and interesting. You can access and view their study reports
>> via http://www.icann.org/en/public-comment/ The Cyrillic variant report
>> is open for comments until 16th November, 2011. Other variant reports are
>> also there (Arabic, Chinese, Greek, Latin etc). If you want to get
>> submissions in and quick, now is the time! :)
>>
>> It is so interesting to see how certain scripts are politically charged,
>> the similarity in phonetics or confusingly similar script. Whilst IDNs have
>> been around for some time, I am sensing that it will only accelerate in its
>> prominence in the not too distant future.
>>
>> The existing ITU model has closed memberships and this is true even for
>> the Dedicated Working Group on International Internet Related Public Policy
>> issues. This is a *closed group* I might add. Is there anyone on this
>> list that is a member of this group I would be interested to ask some
>> policy questions on the subject matter and we can discuss offlist.
>>
>>  I am on record for asking At Large whether there is some level of
>> interface between ICANN and this Dedicated Working Group. This Dedicated
>> Working Group was established under Resolution 75. Membership is only
>> exclusive for member states and the current chair is Mr Majed Al Mazyed
>> from Saudi Arabia.
>>
>> Resolution 133 deals from the ITU Plenipotentiary deals with the role of
>> administrations of member states in the management of internationalized(multilingual)
>> domain names. [see
>> http://www.itu.int/osg/csd/intgov/resoultions_2010/PP-10/RESOLUTION_133.pdf
>> ]
>>
>> I should also state that the 2009 Council Resolution 1305 [which we are
>> denied access unless you are a member state invited Member States to
>> recognise the scope of the work of ITU on international Internet-related
>> public policy matters.] I will say that the approach of the ITU to close
>> discussions on internet policy and limit it to member states is worrying.
>> 2012 will be a critical year within the ITU as they will be revising alot
>> of resolutions and positions etc to "make it more relevant".
>>
>> I am not in anyway criticising ITU and have *great respect* for the
>> degree of capacity building  and recognise the role that they play but I
>> strongly disagree with the policy exclusionary development processes within
>> the ITU. The ICC also publicly in 2005 issued a Statement to tell ITU about
>> what it thought of ITU's role in the development of global internet
>> policies and think that the statement would be available on the ICC website.
>>
>> There are some who have been vocal of wanting to see more efficient
>> policy processes and are debating what enhanced cooperation.
>>
>> As civil society how can the voice of consumers be represented or at
>> least other critical stakeholders within policy development space? I think
>> that these are legitimate questions that require consideration.
>>
>> I would also be interested to learn from other individuals or
>> organisations that deal with IDN other than the ITU Dedicated Working Group
>> and ICANN. If you can point me to URLs, that would be great.
>>
>> I am also aware of the Declaration of the Committee of Ministers on the
>> management of the Internet protocol address resources in the public
>> interest (see:
>> https://wcd.coe.int/ViewDoc.jsp?id=1678299&Site=CM&BackColorInternet=C3C3C3&BackColorIntranet=EDB021&BackColorLogged=F5D383
>>  )
>>
>> Tobias Mahler who is on this list had raised issues with s.9 of this
>> Declaration on another list.
>>
>> It will be great to see all those working on these policies to share
>> resources and information, so that at the end of the day, consumer
>> interests and end users are protected.*
>> *
>>
>> I was wondering whether civil society or individual members would like to
>> put in submissions, then they are at liberty to do so.
>>
>> Best Regards,
>> Sala
>>
>>


-- 
Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala

Tweeter: @SalanietaT
Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro
Cell: +679 998 2851
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111102/52eb45f5/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, 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


From wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de  Tue Nov  1 10:55:54 2011
From: wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de (=?iso-8859-1?Q?=22Kleinw=E4chter=2C_Wolfgang=22?=)
Date: Tue, 01 Nov 2011 15:55:54 +0100
Subject: AW: [governance] Cyber Security 2011
References: <B11CE329-B4CC-4FDC-A3BC-A80C38218DD5@acm.org>
 <CA+EjHYo+Xd4jS=Fes2SYj5rOGtEVSUfTyufmDB2OoixDFU-BQA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAJiMDiQnXMUTRVQ1EXKgC+F330xVErci6-onLyuNVqWTgEwcsA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAMz5XN64AScsyKU=FoB7MhChgpadp=e_YNvbYmkw8EvTbULcdw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAOLD2+bA+q_Ayk=rXeq6QzU4mjT34Oh9qx6DNzabLo-02g9VvA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAJwbTiBBvLUgorp=LtpZoLajS+KkudMSeiD_hFrG5kcxQPNM2Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAOLD2+YCFWm+gAnUNBUYBhMrFqgyTSS6GzB7bNy4FFvmnhyL=A@mail.gmail.com>
 <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8D2C6BB@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
Message-ID:  <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8D2C6BF@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>

http://blogs.wsj.com/tech-europe/2011/11/01/our-man-in-cyberspace/?mod=google_news_blog
 
FYI from the Wall Street Journal
 
wolfgang
____________________________________________________________
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


From andrea at digitalpolicy.it  Tue Nov  1 10:59:57 2011
From: andrea at digitalpolicy.it (Andrea Glorioso)
Date: Tue, 1 Nov 2011 14:59:57 +0000
Subject: [governance] Cyber Security 2011
In-Reply-To: <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8D2C6BB@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
References: <B11CE329-B4CC-4FDC-A3BC-A80C38218DD5@acm.org>
	<CA+EjHYo+Xd4jS=Fes2SYj5rOGtEVSUfTyufmDB2OoixDFU-BQA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAJiMDiQnXMUTRVQ1EXKgC+F330xVErci6-onLyuNVqWTgEwcsA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAMz5XN64AScsyKU=FoB7MhChgpadp=e_YNvbYmkw8EvTbULcdw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAOLD2+bA+q_Ayk=rXeq6QzU4mjT34Oh9qx6DNzabLo-02g9VvA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAJwbTiBBvLUgorp=LtpZoLajS+KkudMSeiD_hFrG5kcxQPNM2Q@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAOLD2+YCFWm+gAnUNBUYBhMrFqgyTSS6GzB7bNy4FFvmnhyL=A@mail.gmail.com>
	<2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8D2C6BB@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
Message-ID: <CAOLD2+Zh+D5XUEqiwzUs=h7ZcuHeKvYco8cSiygRZwfyM1aK6Q@mail.gmail.com>

Hi Wolfgang,

I am not sure the question was directed at me, but to be clear: I have no
idea. This conference is organized by the UK Foreign Office and you should
ask them for further details.

Best,

Andrea

On Tuesday, November 1, 2011, &quot;Kleinwächter, Wolfgang&quot; <
wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de> wrote:
> Hi
>
> if this is another "flying circus", will it be linked to the IGF? Or will
it get an organisational structure? A "steering committee" or a "MAG"?
>
> w
>
>
> ________________________________
>
> Von: governance at lists.cpsr.org im Auftrag von Andrea Glorioso
> Gesendet: Di 01.11.2011 15:06
> An: governance at lists.cpsr.org
> Betreff: Re: [governance] Cyber Security 2011
>
>
> Hi Sala,
>
> It's always better to specify. :)
>
> I believe most documents are being uploaded on the conference website
(see http://www.fco.gov.uk/). I must say that in my view the organizers
have made real efforts to facilitate remote participation. I also don't
agree that they tried to keep the conference "secret", as someone said.
>
> FYI, it looks like Hungary will host the 2012 edition of the conference
and Korea (I assume South :) will do it in 2013.
>
> Best,
>
> Andrea
>
>
>> We know that you always comment from your personal position and will
follow the updates unless otherwise expressed. If there are position papers
published etc or press statements, we would be happy to read it, if they
are public documents.
>> Best,
>> Sala
>>
>> On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 2:27 AM, Andrea Glorioso <andrea at digitalpolicy.it>
wrote:
>>
>> For those who might be interested, I am tweeting from the London Cyber
>> Conference (@andreaglorioso, you can also follow the hashtag
>> #LondonCyber).
>>
>> For clarity, I am attending the London Cyber Conference as part of the
>> EU delegation, but the tweets express my personal position(s) only.
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> Andrea
>>
>> On Mon, Oct 31, 2011 at 10:31 AM, Deirdre Williams
>> <williams.deirdre at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> These reports were on the BBC this morning, in case they are any help.
>>> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-15516959   GCHQ chief reports 'disturbing'
>>> cyber attacks on UK
>>> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-12371056  William Hague: UK is under
>>> cyber-attack
>>> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-15355739 UK seeks 'consensus' at
>>> cyberspace conference
>>>
>>> Deirdre
>>> On 30 October 2011 09:01, Ben Wagner <b at nwagner.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> To clarify the difference, there is a difference between the two
events.
>>>> The first link by Avri isn't the offical conference, it's the
>>>> inter-governmental event on Nov. 1-2 CS should be concerned about.
>>>>
>>>> To provide a little more context to the event:
>>>>
>>>> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/07/26/cyber_hague_event/
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/10/20/bring_economics_into_freedom_debate/
>>>>
>>>> From everything I have heard so far this will be a very high level
event
>>>> attempting to focus the debate on cyber security at the expense of most
>>>> other internet governance issues.
>>>>
>>>> Ben
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 30 October 2011 11:21, Louis Pouzin (well) <pouzin at well.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> This event sounds very much like a trade show on security, with a
major
>>>>> sponsor Endace, a New Zealand company looking for worldwide expansion.
>>>>> Somehow, advertising the event smacks of show business, one day
boondoggling
>>>>> in London for £995 + VAT registration. Are the good times coming back
?
>>>>> - - -
>>>>>
>>>>> On Sat, Oct 29, 2011 at 13:35, Avri Doria <avri at acm.org> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This monstrosity was pointed out to me the other day.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://www.cybersecuritysummit.co.uk/
>>>>>>
>>>>>> As far as i can tell it is another conference on IG without Civil
>>>>>> society representation, though a fair amount of business - the
business
>>>>>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111101/8674167b/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, 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


From andrea at digitalpolicy.it  Tue Nov  1 11:04:01 2011
From: andrea at digitalpolicy.it (Andrea Glorioso)
Date: Tue, 1 Nov 2011 15:04:01 +0000
Subject: [governance] Cyber Security 2011
In-Reply-To: <4EB0050B.5050908@gmx.net>
References: <B11CE329-B4CC-4FDC-A3BC-A80C38218DD5@acm.org>
	<CA+EjHYo+Xd4jS=Fes2SYj5rOGtEVSUfTyufmDB2OoixDFU-BQA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAJiMDiQnXMUTRVQ1EXKgC+F330xVErci6-onLyuNVqWTgEwcsA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAMz5XN64AScsyKU=FoB7MhChgpadp=e_YNvbYmkw8EvTbULcdw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAOLD2+bA+q_Ayk=rXeq6QzU4mjT34Oh9qx6DNzabLo-02g9VvA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAJwbTiBBvLUgorp=LtpZoLajS+KkudMSeiD_hFrG5kcxQPNM2Q@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAOLD2+YCFWm+gAnUNBUYBhMrFqgyTSS6GzB7bNy4FFvmnhyL=A@mail.gmail.com>
	<4EB0050B.5050908@gmx.net>
Message-ID: <CAOLD2+Z7CVN01FDV+bAact8dGPTGmYvsgH+fm3hEwXMa-_GMGQ@mail.gmail.com>

Norbert,

I am not sure I understand the question and, as I mentioned, the European
Commission was not involved on organizing this conference.

I guess the UK are taking the lead this year and other countries will do so
in 2012 and 2013.. Nothing strange.

Best,

Andrea

On Tuesday, November 1, 2011, nhklein <nhklein at gmx.net> wrote:
> On 11/01/2011 09:06 PM, Andrea Glorioso wrote:
>>
>> Hi Sala,
>>
>> It's always better to specify. :)
>>
>> I believe most documents are being uploaded on the conference website
(see http://www.fco.gov.uk/). I must say that in my view the organizers
have made real efforts to facilitate remote participation. I also don't
agree that they tried to keep the conference "secret", as someone said.
>>
>> FYI, it looks like Hungary will host the 2012 edition of the conference
and Korea (I assume South :) will do it in 2013.
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> Andrea
>
> Please help me to understand: the "London Conference on Cyberspace" is
announced on the website of the UK's "Foreign and Commonwealth Office" -
what nature of conference is it, if a 2012 "edition" will be hosted by
Hungary in 2012 and another one 2013 in Korea?
>
> Norbert
>
> --
> A while ago, I started a new blog:
>
> ...thinking it over... after 21 years in Cambodia
> http://www.thinking21.org/
>
> continuing to share reports and comments from Cambodia.
>
> Norbert Klein
> nhklein at gmx.net
> Phnom Penh / Cambodia
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111101/b3183c93/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, 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


From baudouin.schombe at gmail.com  Tue Nov  1 11:07:25 2011
From: baudouin.schombe at gmail.com (Baudouin Schombe)
Date: Tue, 1 Nov 2011 16:07:25 +0100
Subject: [governance] CSTD WG Day 1 - last session
In-Reply-To: <CA+YNoKjqzE5ysunLUi4dHUzUen3t0nunuO18jyXqiC91k=_Nsw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CA+YNoKjqzE5ysunLUi4dHUzUen3t0nunuO18jyXqiC91k=_Nsw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAPcSPKUjGBSz3uJdAS1wCtLZ8d7Y-NTyoJwbUJtvQj0WUHNUQg@mail.gmail.com>

Izumi thank you for this very important report.

2011/10/31 Izumi AIZU <iza at anr.org>

> After coffee break, we quickly reached the following consensus.
> All seem to be tired, but also this D and E are non-controversial
> compared with previous issues.
>
> D Participation – broadening
> Broad agreement that the preparatory process need to be made more
> visible and for more stakeholders to participate in it
> Broad agreement on need to reach out to new stakeholders
> Broad agreement on need to enhance remote participation
> Broad agreement to increase and support participation of developing
> countries in IGF and its preparatory process,
> Increase Internet Governance for development (IG4D) topics in IGF
> Continue to rotate location of IGF annually, to enable different
> regions to have easy access to IGF
>
> E Linking IGF to other related processes/mechanisms/bodies
> Broad agreement on need to encourage greater links between national,
> regional, and global IGF
> Broad agreement on need to encourage greater links between IGF and
> intergovernmental organizations and international organizations
>
> The Chair asked us to study 20-page document of the Chair, and link them
> to the
> five major topics we agreed today.
>
> The Chair also indicated that we will have another meeting in January. But
> he
> indicated there is no intention to host the third meeting unless
> really necessary.
>
> We adjourned at 6 pm, as scheduled.
>
> For your reference, I attach the Chair's summary presentation this morning
> titled as "IGF 2.0, Reflections on the tasks of the CSTD Working Group"
>
> izumi
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
>
>


-- 
SCHOMBE BAUDOUIN
CENTRE AFRICAIN D'ECHANGE CULTUREL/
ACADEMIE DES TIC
FACILITATEUR GAID/AFRIQUE Membre
At-Large Member
NCSG Member

email:baudouin.schombe at gmail.com
         baudouin.schombe at ticafrica.net
tél:+243998983491
skype:b.schombe
wite web:http://webmail.ticafrica.net
blog:http://akimambo.unblog.fr
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111101/54e3d6a1/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, 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


From tapani.tarvainen at effi.org  Tue Nov  1 11:07:42 2011
From: tapani.tarvainen at effi.org (Tapani Tarvainen)
Date: Tue, 1 Nov 2011 17:07:42 +0200
Subject: [governance] =?UTF-8?Q?Is_really_Bulgarian_Cyrillic_=2E=D0=B1?=
 =?UTF-8?Q?=D0=B3_=28=2Ebg=29_similar_to_other_Latin_ccTLDs=3F?=
In-Reply-To: <CA+EjHYpNDBuY4NGi0wm7fT7N9ZsMPsZ_X5TftNeD5c3aSLP+Bw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <1291131665.20152.1407897083@webmail.messagingengine.com>
 <CAJwbTiA0ixrMYBTWFGZLphuHKzWwOVrYiAvc9yBf8WQsMN-66w@mail.gmail.com>
 <CA+EjHYpNDBuY4NGi0wm7fT7N9ZsMPsZ_X5TftNeD5c3aSLP+Bw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20111101150741.GA30404@haapana>

On Tue, Nov 01, 2011 at 03:31:59PM +0100, Louis Pouzin (well) (pouzin at well.com) wrote:

> Unless visually impaired, anyone should be able to tell *.бг* from *.br*
> see attachment.

I think that would depend on the font and what people are used to -
someone who's never seen Cyrillic could easily confuse бг with br,
thinking it's just an unusual font.
How big problem that would be in practice, I couldn't say without
some (empirical) research (has any such been made?).

> However, visually normal people can't tell *.lt *(Italy) from *.It*(Lithuania)

Hmm. I have worse than average eyesight, but I didn't think it's this bad,
for to me those are very distinct but opposite to what you say -
I thought .lt is Lithuania and .it Italy.
(Yes, I got the joke. But the point is that such distinctions
are easy if you're used to them, much harder otherwise.)

-- 
Tapani Tarvainen
____________________________________________________________
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


From wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de  Tue Nov  1 11:00:08 2011
From: wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de (=?iso-8859-1?Q?=22Kleinw=E4chter=2C_Wolfgang=22?=)
Date: Tue, 01 Nov 2011 16:00:08 +0100
Subject: AW: [governance] Cyber Security 2011
References: <B11CE329-B4CC-4FDC-A3BC-A80C38218DD5@acm.org>
 <CA+EjHYo+Xd4jS=Fes2SYj5rOGtEVSUfTyufmDB2OoixDFU-BQA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAJiMDiQnXMUTRVQ1EXKgC+F330xVErci6-onLyuNVqWTgEwcsA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAMz5XN64AScsyKU=FoB7MhChgpadp=e_YNvbYmkw8EvTbULcdw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAOLD2+bA+q_Ayk=rXeq6QzU4mjT34Oh9qx6DNzabLo-02g9VvA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAJwbTiBBvLUgorp=LtpZoLajS+KkudMSeiD_hFrG5kcxQPNM2Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAOLD2+YCFWm+gAnUNBUYBhMrFqgyTSS6GzB7bNy4FFvmnhyL=A@mail.gmail.com>
 <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8D2C6BB@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
 <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8D2C6BF@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
Message-ID:  <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8D2C6C0@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>

Here is another interesting article about "double standard" and the Russian-China proposal..No reference to the IBSA proposal or the IGF
 
w
 

http://www.moneycontrol.com/news/wire-news/uk-accuseddouble-standards-at-london-cyber-meet_609071.html
____________________________________________________________
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


From wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de  Tue Nov  1 11:11:28 2011
From: wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de (=?iso-8859-1?Q?=22Kleinw=E4chter=2C_Wolfgang=22?=)
Date: Tue, 01 Nov 2011 16:11:28 +0100
Subject: AW: [governance] Cyber Security 2011
References: <B11CE329-B4CC-4FDC-A3BC-A80C38218DD5@acm.org>
 <CA+EjHYo+Xd4jS=Fes2SYj5rOGtEVSUfTyufmDB2OoixDFU-BQA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAJiMDiQnXMUTRVQ1EXKgC+F330xVErci6-onLyuNVqWTgEwcsA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAMz5XN64AScsyKU=FoB7MhChgpadp=e_YNvbYmkw8EvTbULcdw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAOLD2+bA+q_Ayk=rXeq6QzU4mjT34Oh9qx6DNzabLo-02g9VvA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAJwbTiBBvLUgorp=LtpZoLajS+KkudMSeiD_hFrG5kcxQPNM2Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAOLD2+YCFWm+gAnUNBUYBhMrFqgyTSS6GzB7bNy4FFvmnhyL=A@mail.gmail.com>
 <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8D2C6BB@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
 <CAOLD2+Zh+D5XUEqiwzUs=h7ZcuHeKvYco8cSiygRZwfyM1aK6Q@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID:  <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8D2C6C2@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>

HI
 
This is waht the British Foreign Minister has said (according to the Guardian)
 

"Foreign Secretary William Hague said at the opening of the London Conference on Cyberspace that there currently are no forums where all parties can sit down and discuss key topics, including cyber crime, international security and how to achieve safe and reliable internet access."

Wolfgang: Did he ever heard about the IGF?

 

And he continued:

"In the place of today's cyber free-for-all, we need rules of the road," he said. "Britain has proposed a set of seven principles as a basis for more effective co-operation between states, businesses and organisations."

The seven principles include the need for governments to act in cyber space in accordance with international law, the need for universal internet access, the right to privacy, the protection of intellectual property and the need to tackle cyber crime.

Also included were "the promotion of a competitive environment which ensures a fair return on investment in networks, services and content", and "ensuring cyber space remains open to innovation and the free flow of ideas".


Wolfgang: Did he every read the Council of Europe or OECD principles (where the UK is a member state!!!). 
It feeds the discussion that top down policy processes are probably less effective than bottom up. 
 
Anyhow, another clip for the ongoing debate about legitimacy, accountability, representivness and global policy development.
 
Wolfgang  
________________________________

Von: governance at lists.cpsr.org im Auftrag von Andrea Glorioso
Gesendet: Di 01.11.2011 15:59
An: Kleinwächter, Wolfgang
Cc: governance at lists.cpsr.org
Betreff: Re: [governance] Cyber Security 2011


Hi Wolfgang,

I am not sure the question was directed at me, but to be clear: I have no idea. This conference is organized by the UK Foreign Office and you should ask them for further details. 

Best,

Andrea

On Tuesday, November 1, 2011, &quot;Kleinwächter, Wolfgang&quot; <wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de> wrote:
> Hi
>
> if this is another "flying circus", will it be linked to the IGF? Or will it get an organisational structure? A "steering committee" or a "MAG"?
>
> w
>
>
> ________________________________
>
> Von: governance at lists.cpsr.org im Auftrag von Andrea Glorioso
> Gesendet: Di 01.11.2011 15:06
> An: governance at lists.cpsr.org
> Betreff: Re: [governance] Cyber Security 2011
>
>
> Hi Sala,
>
> It's always better to specify. :)
>
> I believe most documents are being uploaded on the conference website (see http://www.fco.gov.uk/). I must say that in my view the organizers have made real efforts to facilitate remote participation. I also don't agree that they tried to keep the conference "secret", as someone said.
>
> FYI, it looks like Hungary will host the 2012 edition of the conference and Korea (I assume South :) will do it in 2013.
>
> Best,
>
> Andrea
>
>
>> We know that you always comment from your personal position and will follow the updates unless otherwise expressed. If there are position papers published etc or press statements, we would be happy to read it, if they are public documents.
>> Best,
>> Sala
>>
>> On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 2:27 AM, Andrea Glorioso <andrea at digitalpolicy.it> wrote:
>>
>> For those who might be interested, I am tweeting from the London Cyber
>> Conference (@andreaglorioso, you can also follow the hashtag
>> #LondonCyber).
>>
>> For clarity, I am attending the London Cyber Conference as part of the
>> EU delegation, but the tweets express my personal position(s) only.
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> Andrea
>>
>> On Mon, Oct 31, 2011 at 10:31 AM, Deirdre Williams
>> <williams.deirdre at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> These reports were on the BBC this morning, in case they are any help.
>>> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-15516959   GCHQ chief reports 'disturbing'
>>> cyber attacks on UK
>>> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-12371056  William Hague: UK is under
>>> cyber-attack
>>> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-15355739 UK seeks 'consensus' at
>>> cyberspace conference
>>>
>>> Deirdre
>>> On 30 October 2011 09:01, Ben Wagner <b at nwagner.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> To clarify the difference, there is a difference between the two events.
>>>> The first link by Avri isn't the offical conference, it's the
>>>> inter-governmental event on Nov. 1-2 CS should be concerned about.
>>>>
>>>> To provide a little more context to the event:
>>>>
>>>> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/07/26/cyber_hague_event/
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/10/20/bring_economics_into_freedom_debate/
>>>>
>>>> From everything I have heard so far this will be a very high level event
>>>> attempting to focus the debate on cyber security at the expense of most
>>>> other internet governance issues.
>>>>
>>>> Ben
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 30 October 2011 11:21, Louis Pouzin (well) <pouzin at well.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> This event sounds very much like a trade show on security, with a major
>>>>> sponsor Endace, a New Zealand company looking for worldwide expansion.
>>>>> Somehow, advertising the event smacks of show business, one day boondoggling
>>>>> in London for £995 + VAT registration. Are the good times coming back ?
>>>>> - - -
>>>>>
>>>>> On Sat, Oct 29, 2011 at 13:35, Avri Doria <avri at acm.org> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This monstrosity was pointed out to me the other day.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://www.cybersecuritysummit.co.uk/
>>>>>>
>>>>>> As far as i can tell it is another conference on IG without Civil
>>>>>> society representation, though a fair amount of business - the business
>>>>> 
____________________________________________________________
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


From nhklein at gmx.net  Tue Nov  1 11:35:13 2011
From: nhklein at gmx.net (nhklein)
Date: Tue, 01 Nov 2011 22:35:13 +0700
Subject: [governance] Cyber Security 2011
In-Reply-To: <CAOLD2+Z7CVN01FDV+bAact8dGPTGmYvsgH+fm3hEwXMa-_GMGQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <B11CE329-B4CC-4FDC-A3BC-A80C38218DD5@acm.org>	<CA+EjHYo+Xd4jS=Fes2SYj5rOGtEVSUfTyufmDB2OoixDFU-BQA@mail.gmail.com>	<CAJiMDiQnXMUTRVQ1EXKgC+F330xVErci6-onLyuNVqWTgEwcsA@mail.gmail.com>	<CAMz5XN64AScsyKU=FoB7MhChgpadp=e_YNvbYmkw8EvTbULcdw@mail.gmail.com>	<CAOLD2+bA+q_Ayk=rXeq6QzU4mjT34Oh9qx6DNzabLo-02g9VvA@mail.gmail.com>	<CAJwbTiBBvLUgorp=LtpZoLajS+KkudMSeiD_hFrG5kcxQPNM2Q@mail.gmail.com>	<CAOLD2+YCFWm+gAnUNBUYBhMrFqgyTSS6GzB7bNy4FFvmnhyL=A@mail.gmail.com>	<4EB0050B.5050908@gmx.net> <CAOLD2+Z7CVN01FDV+bAact8dGPTGmYvsgH+fm3hEwXMa-_GMGQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4EB011B1.9060308@gmx.net>

On 11/01/2011 10:04 PM, Andrea Glorioso wrote:
> Norbert,
>
> I am not sure I understand the question and, as I mentioned, the 
> European Commission was not involved on organizing this conference.
>
> I guess the UK are taking the lead this year and other countries will 
> do so in 2012 and 2013.. Nothing strange.
>
> Best,
>
> Andrea

Thanks, Andrea.

In the meantime I read the Wall Street Journal report to which Wolfgang 
had pointed:

http://blogs.wsj.com/tech-europe/2011/11/01/our-man-in-cyberspace/?mod=google_news_blog

and I am now even more confused about the nature of this conference (including the future plans):


= =
Mr. Duncan... [who wrote some COBOL and Algol code as an undergraduate student - is this quoted as a sign of qualification for the present task?]...

But he has a refreshingly open approach to the task. "We are all struggling with how to respond to the degree of interdependence and interconnectivity that exists in the network world," he said. "It is one of the major challenges that exists for our institutions and governments. That question cannot be easily resolved in one and a half days."

He is frank when challenged that the conference runs the risk of being simply "talks about talks." In one and a half days, the conference isn't going to produce an action plan or a treaty.*So what would the U.K. government consider a success? "If we have started a dialog at senior level with a series of platforms where that dialog can take place.*  It is a dialog with business, both small and big, civil society, and governments, looking at how do we rise to the challenges of cyberspace, both the opportunities and the threats," he said.
*
"Success is about making sure it is a sustainable dialog, not a one-off."*
= =

(*Boldface*  added by me)

I am baffled: Does Mr. Duncan not know that a dialog at senior level with a series of platforms... started with WSIS 2003 and 2005, there is the IGF, the OECD, the UK government sends regularly somebody to ICANN's GAC,  etc. etc.

Or is it a an intentional affront to state that all that what is going on is not useful - and now we come!!!

I am really at a loss to understand what is stated in the Wall Street Journal report.


Norbert

>
> On Tuesday, November 1, 2011, nhklein <nhklein at gmx.net 
> <mailto:nhklein at gmx.net>> wrote:
> > On 11/01/2011 09:06 PM, Andrea Glorioso wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi Sala,
> >>
> >> It's always better to specify. :)
> >>
> >> I believe most documents are being uploaded on the conference 
> website (see http://www.fco.gov.uk/). I must say that in my view the 
> organizers have made real efforts to facilitate remote participation. 
> I also don't agree that they tried to keep the conference "secret", as 
> someone said.
> >>
> >> FYI, it looks like Hungary will host the 2012 edition of the 
> conference and Korea (I assume South :) will do it in 2013.
> >>
> >> Best,
> >>
> >> Andrea
> >
> > Please help me to understand: the "London Conference on Cyberspace" 
> is announced on the website of the UK's "Foreign and Commonwealth 
> Office" - what nature of conference is it, if a 2012 "edition" will be 
> hosted by Hungary in 2012 and another one 2013 in Korea?
> >
> > Norbert--
A while ago, I started a new blog:

...thinking it over... after 21 years in Cambodia
http://www.thinking21.org/

continuing to share reports and comments from Cambodia.

Norbert Klein
nhklein at gmx.net
Phnom Penh / Cambodia


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111101/06c010ae/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, 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


From andrea at digitalpolicy.it  Tue Nov  1 11:43:38 2011
From: andrea at digitalpolicy.it (Andrea Glorioso)
Date: Tue, 1 Nov 2011 15:43:38 +0000
Subject: [governance] Cyber Security 2011
In-Reply-To: <4EB0050B.5050908@gmx.net>
References: <B11CE329-B4CC-4FDC-A3BC-A80C38218DD5@acm.org>
	<CA+EjHYo+Xd4jS=Fes2SYj5rOGtEVSUfTyufmDB2OoixDFU-BQA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAJiMDiQnXMUTRVQ1EXKgC+F330xVErci6-onLyuNVqWTgEwcsA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAMz5XN64AScsyKU=FoB7MhChgpadp=e_YNvbYmkw8EvTbULcdw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAOLD2+bA+q_Ayk=rXeq6QzU4mjT34Oh9qx6DNzabLo-02g9VvA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAJwbTiBBvLUgorp=LtpZoLajS+KkudMSeiD_hFrG5kcxQPNM2Q@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAOLD2+YCFWm+gAnUNBUYBhMrFqgyTSS6GzB7bNy4FFvmnhyL=A@mail.gmail.com>
	<4EB0050B.5050908@gmx.net>
Message-ID: <CAOLD2+ZvRdnEHC3_1i3MnnzTgc_dg1nFBuFpMYLBh4G9zfEeyg@mail.gmail.com>

Norbert,

I am not sure I understand the question and, as I mentioned, the European
Commission was not involved on organizing this conference.

I guess the UK are taking the lead this year and other countries will do so
in 2012 and 2013.. Nothing strange.

Best,

Andrea

On Tuesday, November 1, 2011, nhklein <nhklein at gmx.net> wrote:
> On 11/01/2011 09:06 PM, Andrea Glorioso wrote:
>>
>> Hi Sala,
>>
>> It's always better to specify. :)
>>
>> I believe most documents are being uploaded on the conference website
(see http://www.fco.gov.uk/). I must say that in my view the organizers
have made real efforts to facilitate remote participation. I also don't
agree that they tried to keep the conference "secret", as someone said.
>>
>> FYI, it looks like Hungary will host the 2012 edition of the conference
and Korea (I assume South :) will do it in 2013.
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> Andrea
>
> Please help me to understand: the "London Conference on Cyberspace" is
announced on the website of the UK's "Foreign and Commonwealth Office" -
what nature of conference is it, if a 2012 "edition" will be hosted by
Hungary in 2012 and another one 2013 in Korea?
>
> Norbert
>
> --
> A while ago, I started a new blog:
>
> ...thinking it over... after 21 years in Cambodia
> http://www.thinking21.org/
>
> continuing to share reports and comments from Cambodia.
>
> Norbert Klein
> nhklein at gmx.net
> Phnom Penh / Cambodia
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111101/57a79e48/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, 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


From andrea at digitalpolicy.it  Tue Nov  1 11:53:31 2011
From: andrea at digitalpolicy.it (Andrea Glorioso)
Date: Tue, 1 Nov 2011 15:53:31 +0000
Subject: [governance] Cyber Security 2011
In-Reply-To: <4EB011B1.9060308@gmx.net>
References: <B11CE329-B4CC-4FDC-A3BC-A80C38218DD5@acm.org>
	<CA+EjHYo+Xd4jS=Fes2SYj5rOGtEVSUfTyufmDB2OoixDFU-BQA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAJiMDiQnXMUTRVQ1EXKgC+F330xVErci6-onLyuNVqWTgEwcsA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAMz5XN64AScsyKU=FoB7MhChgpadp=e_YNvbYmkw8EvTbULcdw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAOLD2+bA+q_Ayk=rXeq6QzU4mjT34Oh9qx6DNzabLo-02g9VvA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAJwbTiBBvLUgorp=LtpZoLajS+KkudMSeiD_hFrG5kcxQPNM2Q@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAOLD2+YCFWm+gAnUNBUYBhMrFqgyTSS6GzB7bNy4FFvmnhyL=A@mail.gmail.com>
	<4EB0050B.5050908@gmx.net>
	<CAOLD2+Z7CVN01FDV+bAact8dGPTGmYvsgH+fm3hEwXMa-_GMGQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<4EB011B1.9060308@gmx.net>
Message-ID: <CAOLD2+aNR6ncAmVPzi1miGoVG4iUwakYvPOGwdSymrBkNJw3Cg@mail.gmail.com>

Norbert,

I guess yours are good questions for the online debate, see
http://www.fco.gov.uk/en/global-issues/london-conference-cyberspace/cyber-conference-details/#online-debate.

Best,

Andrea

On Tuesday, November 1, 2011, nhklein <nhklein at gmx.net> wrote:
> On 11/01/2011 10:04 PM, Andrea Glorioso wrote:
>
> Norbert,
>
> I am not sure I understand the question and, as I mentioned, the European
Commission was not involved on organizing this conference.
>
> I guess the UK are taking the lead this year and other countries will do
so in 2012 and 2013.. Nothing strange.
>
> Best,
>
> Andrea
>
> Thanks, Andrea.
>
> In the meantime I read the Wall Street Journal report to which Wolfgang
had pointed:
>
>
http://blogs.wsj.com/tech-europe/2011/11/01/our-man-in-cyberspace/?mod=google_news_blog
>
> and I am now even more confused about the nature of this conference
(including the future plans):
>
>
> = =
> Mr. Duncan... [who wrote some COBOL and Algol code as an undergraduate
student - is this quoted as a sign of qualification for the present
task?]...
>
> But he has a refreshingly open approach to the task. “We are all
struggling with how to respond to the degree of interdependence and
interconnectivity that exists in the network world,” he said. “It is one of
the major challenges that exists for our institutions and governments. That
question cannot be easily resolved in one and a half days.”
>
> He is frank when challenged that the conference runs the risk of being
simply “talks about talks.” In one and a half days, the conference isn’t
going to produce an action plan or a treaty. So what would the U.K.
government consider a success? “If we have started a dialog at senior level
with a series of platforms where that dialog can take place. It is a dialog
with business, both small and big, civil society, and governments, looking
at how do we rise to the challenges of cyberspace, both the opportunities
and the threats,” he said.
>
> “Success is about making sure it is a sustainable dialog, not a one-off.”
> = =
>
> (Boldface added by me)
>
> I am baffled: Does Mr. Duncan not know that a dialog at senior level with
a series of platforms... started with WSIS 2003 and 2005, there is the IGF,
the OECD, the UK government sends regularly somebody to ICANN's GAC,  etc.
etc.
>
> Or is it a an intentional affront to state that all that what is going on
is not useful - and now we come!!!
>
> I am really at a loss to understand what is stated in the Wall Street
Journal report.
>
>
> Norbert
>
>
> On Tuesday, November 1, 2011, nhklein <nhklein at gmx.net> wrote:
>> On 11/01/2011 09:06 PM, Andrea Glorioso wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Sala,
>>>
>>> It's always better to specify. :)
>>>
>>> I believe most documents are being uploaded on the conference website
(see http://www.fco.gov.uk/). I must say that in my view the organizers
have made real efforts to facilitate remote participation. I also don't
agree that they tried to keep the conference "secret", as someone said.
>>>
>>> FYI, it looks like Hungary will host the 2012 edition of the conference
and Korea (I assume South :) will do it in 2013.
>>>
>>> Best,
>>>
>>> Andrea
>>
>> Please help me to understand: the "London Conference on Cyberspace" is
announced on the website of the UK's "Foreign and Commonwealth Office" -
what nature of conference is it, if a 2012 "edition" will be hosted by
Hungary in 2012 and another one 2013 in Korea?
>>
>> Norbert--
>
> A while ago, I started a new blog:
>
> ...thinking it over... after 21 years in Cambodia
> http://www.thinking21.org/
>
> continuing to share reports and comments from Cambodia.
>
> Norbert Klein
> nhklein at gmx.net
> Phnom Penh / Cambodia
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111101/75fa3ea2/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, 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


From wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de  Tue Nov  1 11:58:28 2011
From: wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de (=?iso-8859-1?Q?=22Kleinw=E4chter=2C_Wolfgang=22?=)
Date: Tue, 01 Nov 2011 16:58:28 +0100
Subject: AW: [governance] Cyber Security 2011
References: <B11CE329-B4CC-4FDC-A3BC-A80C38218DD5@acm.org>
 <CA+EjHYo+Xd4jS=Fes2SYj5rOGtEVSUfTyufmDB2OoixDFU-BQA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAJiMDiQnXMUTRVQ1EXKgC+F330xVErci6-onLyuNVqWTgEwcsA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAMz5XN64AScsyKU=FoB7MhChgpadp=e_YNvbYmkw8EvTbULcdw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAOLD2+bA+q_Ayk=rXeq6QzU4mjT34Oh9qx6DNzabLo-02g9VvA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAJwbTiBBvLUgorp=LtpZoLajS+KkudMSeiD_hFrG5kcxQPNM2Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAOLD2+YCFWm+gAnUNBUYBhMrFqgyTSS6GzB7bNy4FFvmnhyL=A@mail.gmail.com>
 <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8D2C6BB@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
 <CAOLD2+Zh+D5XUEqiwzUs=h7ZcuHeKvYco8cSiygRZwfyM1aK6Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8D2C6C2@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
Message-ID:  <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8D2C6C5@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/oct/31/cybercrime-attacks-online-fco 
________________________________

____________________________________________________________
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


From iza at anr.org  Tue Nov  1 11:59:03 2011
From: iza at anr.org (Izumi AIZU)
Date: Wed, 2 Nov 2011 00:59:03 +0900
Subject: [governance] CSTD WG Day 2 (3)
Message-ID: <CA+YNoKifzirLnQQoodk_NF931DW=r_D_M2ObuoRPRSsHpFNJHw@mail.gmail.com>

After lunch break, we discussed the Point B - Working modality of IGF,
mainly around MAG.


Here are the text more less agreed so far. These are "rough consensus"
and not agreed to the precise wordings.

Then we are now discussing about the MAG selection process etc - based
on a working document submitted by business community.

The atmosphere is quite productive and friendly each other.

izumi
-----

B Working modalities including open consultation MAG, and Secretariat

Broad agreement on need to rotate MAG members regularly, keep MAG
deliberations transparent.
Broad agreement to strengthen the IGF secretariat”
Broad agreement to have the secretariat [remain independent and] based
in Geneva.
Broad agreement to strengthen/expand the IGF secretariat.
Broad agreement that the MAG should be more representative of all the
groups that Internet Governance increasingly impacts.
Broad agreement that the use of remote participation tools and
resources should be strengthened.
Broad agreement that MAG needs clear Terms of Reference, constitution
of the MAG is done in a transparent and documented fashion.

The MAG works through working groups around each key questions for
multi-stakeholder policy dialogue chosen for that year’s IGF and also
organizes preparative background material for that purpose.

Broad agreement on enhancing the bottom-up, open, inclusive nature of
the preparatory process of the IGF.

Broad agreement on the transparency of the self-management by each
stakeholder group.

Broad agreement on the openness and transparency of MAG meetings.

In light of transparency, stakeholder groups should publicize their
selection process. Stakeholder groups should identify the process that
works best for their own culture and methods of engagement.

Stakeholder groups should strive for geographic diversity, gender
balance and developing country representation.

-----
____________________________________________________________
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


From ca at cafonso.ca  Tue Nov  1 12:02:24 2011
From: ca at cafonso.ca (Carlos A. Afonso)
Date: Tue, 01 Nov 2011 14:02:24 -0200
Subject: [governance] London Conf on Cyberspace:  W.Hague's speech
In-Reply-To: <CAOLD2+ZvRdnEHC3_1i3MnnzTgc_dg1nFBuFpMYLBh4G9zfEeyg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <B11CE329-B4CC-4FDC-A3BC-A80C38218DD5@acm.org>	<CA+EjHYo+Xd4jS=Fes2SYj5rOGtEVSUfTyufmDB2OoixDFU-BQA@mail.gmail.com>	<CAJiMDiQnXMUTRVQ1EXKgC+F330xVErci6-onLyuNVqWTgEwcsA@mail.gmail.com>	<CAMz5XN64AScsyKU=FoB7MhChgpadp=e_YNvbYmkw8EvTbULcdw@mail.gmail.com>	<CAOLD2+bA+q_Ayk=rXeq6QzU4mjT34Oh9qx6DNzabLo-02g9VvA@mail.gmail.com>	<CAJwbTiBBvLUgorp=LtpZoLajS+KkudMSeiD_hFrG5kcxQPNM2Q@mail.gmail.com>	<CAOLD2+YCFWm+gAnUNBUYBhMrFqgyTSS6GzB7bNy4FFvmnhyL=A@mail.gmail.com>	<4EB0050B.5050908@gmx.net> <CAOLD2+ZvRdnEHC3_1i3MnnzTgc_dg1nFBuFpMYLBh4G9zfEeyg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4EB01810.6080200@cafonso.ca>

On the "cybersecurity 2011" thread, I reproduce below the opening speech
by Sir (I imagine) William Hague, Brit Foreign Secretary, addressing the
London Conference on Cyberspace today.

Quite interesting discourse indeed.

frt rgds

--c.a.

http://www.fco.gov.uk/en/news/latest-news/?id=684997682&view=Speech

Foreign Secretary opens the London Conference on Cyberspace

01 November 2011
Foreign Secretary William Hague addressed the London Conference on
Cyberspace on 1 November.
Speaker: 	Foreign Secretary William Hague
Event: 	London Conference on Cyberspace
Location: 	Queen Elizabeth II Centre, London

Good morning and welcome to the London Conference on Cyberspace.

This is not a traditional summit between governments. We have brought
together representatives from industry, companies that own and operate
international digital infrastructure, civil society and major
international organisations.

I proposed this meeting in February in Munich to consider how we reach
international agreements about behaviour in cyberspace.

Many of the countries and representatives here will have very different
views. But the reasons to cooperate are far more compelling than the
issues that divide us.

The spread of connectivity between individuals, governments and
organisations is bringing benefits and opportunities on a vast scale.

We have pushed the bounds of ingenuity and discovery to develop
incredibly versatile technologies that we now use in every area of life,
with the prospect of further yet-undreamt of innovations still to come.

As an elected Member of Parliament, I relish how social media has
narrowed the gap between governments and individual citizens. It allows
the exchange of ideas between people who otherwise never would meet, and
in my case as Foreign Secretary, direct digital engagement not just
British citizens, but people of many other countries too.

Across the world we see an explosion of new ways of accessing
information and education and of doing business. Whether it is internet
banking here in Britain or mobile banking across Africa, people are
adapting technology to their local circumstances and improving it all
the time. The economic benefit is clear: as the internet expands, so
does global GDP.
But we also see glaring inequalities - 95% internet access in Iceland,
0.1% in Liberia – and the rise in malicious use of digital networks,
targeted often at the most vulnerable in our societies and at national
systems themselves.

The internet is not separate from society; it is part of society and
mirrors society. The best and worst of human behaviour find expression
online, and the technology lends itself to misuse as well as to great
benefit.

This particularly applies to online crime, which is growing
exponentially. Across the globe there are people and groups seeking to
turn our personal information into cash, or to wreak havoc on the net to
express political grievances. In Europe and North America, one single
denial of service tool designed by hacktivists was downloaded by more
than 75,000 computer users earlier this year. Militaries, citizen
services, credit card companies and businesses like Amazon were
attacked. More than 6 million unique types of new malware were detected
by industry in the first three months of this year.

As all our societies become more wired-up and technologies converge, the
scope for malignant activity will widen alongside the many advantages,
whether it is the theft of intellectual property or the spread of
malware and viruses.  It will become harder to protect our users or to
prevent our defences from being swamped.

Furthermore it is increasingly clear that countries with weak cyber
defences and capabilities will find themselves exposed over the long
term; at a serious strategic disadvantage given the apparent rise in
state-sponsored attacks.

So if we want a future in which the benefits of the digital age are
expanded to all peoples and economies of the world, and the risks
minimised as much as possible, then we need to act to achieve that.

I believe we must aspire to a future for cyberspace which is not stifled
by government control or censorship, but where innovation and
competition flourish and investment and enterprise are rewarded. Nothing
would be more fatal or self-defeating than the heavy hand of State
control on the internet, which only thrives because of the talent of
individuals and of industry within an open market for ideas and innovation.

The internet must remain open and not become fragmented and ghettoised,
subject to separate rules and processes in different regions set by
isolated national services; with state-imposed barriers to trade,
commerce and the free flow of information and ideas. It would be deeply
counter-productive to import into the digital world barriers to trade
that we have spent years trying to negotiate away across the world.

We must strive for a model for internet governance in which governments,
industry and users of the internet work together in a collective
endeavour, establishing a balance of responsibility.

And it is my passionate conviction that all human rights should carry
full force online: not just the right to privacy, but the right to
freedom of expression. Human rights are universal. Cultural differences
are not an excuse to water down human rights, nor can the exploitation
of digital networks by criminals or terrorists be a justification for
states to censor their citizens.

We reject the view that government suppression of the internet, phone
networks and social media at times of unrest is acceptable.

In fact we would go further, and boil this concept down to a single
proposition: that behaviour that is unacceptable offline is also
unacceptable online, whether it is carried out by individuals or by
governments.

We know that this is not a view that is shared by all countries. But
states will find it harder and harder to try to restrict their citizens’
demands for the freedom to express their ideas.

Furthermore such refusal will have a direct impact on their ability to
harness the full economic potential of cyberspace. Britain will always
be on the side of people aspiring for political and economic freedom, in
the Middle East and around the world.

The truth is that in cyberspace, no one country can go it alone. In
Britain we are significantly increasing our national cyber defences and
have created a new four year programme with £650 million of additional
government funding. We are working to ensure that as many small
businesses as possible win contracts to help build our cyber security
infrastructure, supporting the next generation of cyber assurance
technology as well as innovation and growth in our economy. We want to
make the UK a pre-eminent, safe space for e-commerce and intellectual
property online.

But many countries do not yet have the resources or capability to invest
to the same degree. The international dimensions of the misuse of
digital networks also requires new forms of cooperation and
collaboration.  More of its vital infrastructure of the internet is
moving East, and its future users will be different too. 90% of Africa
could join the internet in the coming years, for example.

There is currently no forum of the kind this conference represents in
which nations, business and civil society can engage as equal partners
to discuss issues in cyberspace. And we believe that needs to change.

In the place of today’s cyber free-for-all, we need understood rules of
the road.
Britain has proposed a set of seven principles as a basis for more
effective cooperation between states, business and organisations.

These are:

    * The need for governments to act proportionately in cyberspace and
in accordance with international law;
    * The need for everyone to have the ability to access cyberspace,
including the skills, technology, confidence and opportunity to do so;
    * The need for users of cyberspace to show tolerance and respect for
diversity of language, culture and ideas;
    * Ensuring that cyberspace remains open to innovation and the free
flow of ideas, information and expression;
    * The need to respect individual rights of privacy and to provide
proper protection to intellectual property;
    * The need for us all to work together collectively to tackle the
threat from criminals acting online;
    * And the promotion of a competitive environment which ensures a
fair return on investment in networks, services and content.

We suggested these principles as a starting point in efforts to reach a
broad agreement about behaviour in cyberspace.

We want to widen the pool of nations and cyber users that agree with us
about the need for norms of behaviour and that want to seek a future
cyberspace based on opportunity, freedom, innovation, human rights and
partnership between government, civil society and the private sector.

Building this consensus is a great challenge for our time.

It must be pursued with the same intensity as efforts to eradicate
global poverty or tackle climate change.

For just as our climate is ever-present and all-pervasive, our way of
living dependent on our environment and our prosperity inseparable from
that of the global economy, so we are all linked by the innumerable
connections of the networked world.

We all need the internet to be a driver of growth and innovation in our
economies, bringing down costs and supporting employment.

All of us want to benefit from the efficiency, safety and reliability
that comes from integrated systems online to deliver public services and
manage national infrastructure.

Whatever country we are from, we have an interest in ensuring that
children are not vulnerable online, that terrorists have no safe havens
on the web, and that the integrity of our financial systems is maintained.

And many of us want to use the digital sphere to enable us to be more
transparent, responsive and accountable to our citizens and to support
free trade and democratic development worldwide.

It is in all our interests to ensure a future in which everyone can have
safe and reliable access to cyberspace, without fear that they will be
targeted by criminals; a future in which the rights, protections and
laws that protect us offline do so online; and those who abuse the
internet for crime, terrorism or malicious attack find it harder to do so.

That is the positive vision, one in which we are able to use new
technologies to the full to spur economic growth in developing
countries, to narrow the digital divide, to give our citizens greater
choice, to find new ways of addressing conflicts, to protect cultural
diversity and the free flow of ideas, to root out and prevent grotesque
human rights abuses, and to make successful prosecutions against cyber
criminals the norm, rather than the exception that it is today.

But unless we begin to take action to ensure that positive future a
darker scenario could well prevail.

For the private sector, rising costs to business from cyber crime,
barriers to trade and commerce, companies being held to ransom by
hacktivists, and the theft of intellectual property sapping prosperity
and innovation and driving investment away from countries whose systems
are seen to be insecure.

For individuals, a heightened risk of exposure to crime as efforts to
clamp down on crimes such as child pornography in one part of the world
are rendered ineffective by illegal practices on networks in other
countries; disruptions in service due to state intrusion or crude
censorship in some parts of the world, the general uncertainty, fear and
loss of confidence in a compromised cyberspace.

And for governments, threats to critical infrastructure, the loss of tax
revenue or the defrauding of government services, the theft of
confidential national information and vulnerability to attacks in
cyberspace.

If these scenarios come to pass, they will undermine the wider benefits
of our networked world.

So it is time to build on our common interests, developing firm ideas
and proposals with real political and diplomatic weight, that help us
attain the full economic and social potential of cyberspace while
guarding against an unpredictable and potentially dangerous future.

I welcome the leadership shown by Hungary which will offer to host a
follow-on conference on norms of behaviour in cyberspace in 2012, and by
the Republic of Korea which will also host a conference in 2013. Both
conferences will build on what we discuss here in London.

We will not succeed in agreeing a way forward over night, but it is work
that must begin now and I am grateful to you all for coming along today
to take part in this vital work.
____________________________________________________________
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


From anriette at apc.org  Tue Nov  1 13:10:17 2011
From: anriette at apc.org (Anriette Esterhuysen)
Date: Tue, 01 Nov 2011 19:10:17 +0200
Subject: [governance] CSTD WG Day 2 (2)
In-Reply-To: <CA+YNoKig_VkRMoi50oHy6TWE1u5ACRRKouauTx=msFmXhYx0xA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CA+YNoKig_VkRMoi50oHy6TWE1u5ACRRKouauTx=msFmXhYx0xA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4EB027F9.5030609@apc.org>

Tks for the updates Izumi and Marilia

The meeting is really going quite well......

Still early days.. but so much better than last time round.

Anriette


On 01/11/11 16:14, Izumi AIZU wrote:
> We had lunch break and now starting the afternoon session.
> 
> After our proposal in the morning, other members also contributed
> different proposals, but they are not too different or contentious.
> 
> The trust here is much better.
> 
> The secretariat will soon make a consolidated document for further
> review, but the Chair now proposed to move to point B), Working
> modalities includin open consultations, MAG and Secretariat.
> 
> The Chair also indicated that the second meeting will be held in
> January, and possible third one back to back with IGF Open
> consultation in February.
> 
> izumi
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
> 

-- 
------------------------------------------------------
anriette esterhuysen anriette at apc.org
executive director, association for progressive communications
www.apc.org
po box 29755, melville 2109
south africa
tel/fax +27 11 726 1692
____________________________________________________________
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


From iza at anr.org  Tue Nov  1 13:11:27 2011
From: iza at anr.org (Izumi AIZU)
Date: Wed, 2 Nov 2011 02:11:27 +0900
Subject: [governance] Re: CSTD WG Day 2 (4)
Message-ID: <CA+YNoKgphECUGHj_=3rpr93CJBRoPdNcRS0HudLfhKqwhT+kDA@mail.gmail.com>

We are still discussing on MAG role, composition, etc. almost like a brain
storming.  Chengtai was asked to report the current composition/breakdown
of the MAG by tomorrow.

The context is that IGF has now evolved into a process, so that MAG
should also be given evolution, be more than a program committee of
IGF.

Different views are expressed on some of the specifics of the ideas.

We are not closing this round with clear texts, but confirming where the
ideas more or less converge. Some members volunteered to draft the
text, will perhaps be discussed tomorrow.
Terms of Reference is also being proposed.
Not sure if we all agree with that.

Homeworks for tonight.

meeting adjourned at 18:10. Will reconvene at 09:30, not 10:00 as the
last day of our meeting.

Chair again emphasized to have this WG meeting in Feb back to back to
IGF open consultation.
izumi
____________________________________________________________
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


From avri at psg.com  Tue Nov  1 13:15:02 2011
From: avri at psg.com (Avri Doria)
Date: Tue, 1 Nov 2011 13:15:02 -0400
Subject: [governance] =?UTF-8?Q?Is_really_Bulgarian_Cyrillic_=2E=D0=B1?=
 =?UTF-8?Q?=D0=B3_=28=2Ebg=29_similar_to_other_Latin_ccTLDs=3F?=
In-Reply-To: <CA+EjHYpNDBuY4NGi0wm7fT7N9ZsMPsZ_X5TftNeD5c3aSLP+Bw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <1291131665.20152.1407897083@webmail.messagingengine.com> <CAJwbTiA0ixrMYBTWFGZLphuHKzWwOVrYiAvc9yBf8WQsMN-66w@mail.gmail.com> <CA+EjHYpNDBuY4NGi0wm7fT7N9ZsMPsZ_X5TftNeD5c3aSLP+Bw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4D7DCD47-E74D-47E1-ABE7-6BAD2BF29337@psg.com>


ageed on .бг & .br
disagree on .it & .lt  or .IT & .LT

but think that if .it & .lt is acceptable then .бг & .br should be as well

avri


On 1 Nov 2011, at 10:31, Louis Pouzin (well) wrote:

> Unless visually impaired, anyone should be able to tell .бг from .br
> see attachment.
> 
> However, visually normal people can't tell .lt (Italy) from .It (Lithuania)
> 
> The problem is with ICANN, not with Cyrillic.
> - - -
> 
> On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 14:21, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro <salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com> wrote:
> Dear George and others,
> 
> The relevance of IDNs to Internet Governance are in the "multilingualism" policy category that was defined in the WGIG 2005 document. 
> 
> I was going through the archives and found your email. You may be interested in reading the Study Reports on the various variants, they are open for comments and submissions, see:
> 
> I listened to certain speakers speak about IDN variants which are so very exciting and interesting. You can access and view their study reports via http://www.icann.org/en/public-comment/ The Cyrillic variant report is open for comments until 16th November, 2011. Other variant reports are also there (Arabic, Chinese, Greek, Latin etc). If you want to get submissions in and quick, now is the time! :)
> 
> It is so interesting to see how certain scripts are politically charged, the similarity in phonetics or confusingly similar script. Whilst IDNs have been around for some time, I am sensing that it will only accelerate in its prominence in the not too distant future.
> 
> The existing ITU model has closed memberships and this is true even for the Dedicated Working Group on International Internet Related Public Policy issues. This is a closed group I might add. Is there anyone on this list that is a member of this group I would be interested to ask some policy questions on the subject matter and we can discuss offlist.
> 
>  I am on record for asking At Large whether there is some level of interface between ICANN and this Dedicated Working Group. This Dedicated Working Group was established under Resolution 75. Membership is only exclusive for member states and the current chair is Mr Majed Al Mazyed from Saudi Arabia. 
> 
> Resolution 133 deals from the ITU Plenipotentiary deals with the role of administrations of member states in the management of internationalized(multilingual) domain names. [see http://www.itu.int/osg/csd/intgov/resoultions_2010/PP-10/RESOLUTION_133.pdf] 
> 
> I should also state that the 2009 Council Resolution 1305 [which we are denied access unless you are a member state invited Member States to recognise the scope of the work of ITU on international Internet-related public policy matters.] I will say that the approach of the ITU to close discussions on internet policy and limit it to member states is worrying. 2012 will be a critical year within the ITU as they will be revising alot of resolutions and positions etc to "make it more relevant".
> 
> I am not in anyway criticising ITU and have great respect for the degree of capacity building  and recognise the role that they play but I strongly disagree with the policy exclusionary development processes within the ITU. The ICC also publicly in 2005 issued a Statement to tell ITU about what it thought of ITU's role in the development of global internet policies and think that the statement would be available on the ICC website.
> 
> There are some who have been vocal of wanting to see more efficient policy processes and are debating what enhanced cooperation.
> 
> As civil society how can the voice of consumers be represented or at least other critical stakeholders within policy development space? I think that these are legitimate questions that require consideration.
> 
> I would also be interested to learn from other individuals or organisations that deal with IDN other than the ITU Dedicated Working Group and ICANN. If you can point me to URLs, that would be great.
> 
> I am also aware of the Declaration of the Committee of Ministers on the management of the Internet protocol address resources in the public interest (see:https://wcd.coe.int/ViewDoc.jsp?id=1678299&Site=CM&BackColorInternet=C3C3C3&BackColorIntranet=EDB021&BackColorLogged=F5D383 )
> 
> Tobias Mahler who is on this list had raised issues with s.9 of this Declaration on another list.
> 
> It will be great to see all those working on these policies to share resources and information, so that at the end of the day, consumer interests and end users are protected.
> 
> I was wondering whether civil society or individual members would like to put in submissions, then they are at liberty to do so.
> 
> Best Regards,
> Sala
> 
> <правителство.бг.png>____________________________________________________________
> 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


From iza at anr.org  Tue Nov  1 13:15:45 2011
From: iza at anr.org (Izumi AIZU)
Date: Wed, 2 Nov 2011 02:15:45 +0900
Subject: [governance] CSTD WG Day 2 (2)
In-Reply-To: <4EB027F9.5030609@apc.org>
References: <CA+YNoKig_VkRMoi50oHy6TWE1u5ACRRKouauTx=msFmXhYx0xA@mail.gmail.com>
 <4EB027F9.5030609@apc.org>
Message-ID: <CA+YNoKiWW-0MCkQDj-DWxGvBx6k8mgYEOD-Mp=B3QQZ0+8OzBA@mail.gmail.com>

To add, Anriette, Parminder, Marilia have taken the floor many times,
myself has been rather quite, but making good division of labor.
We met early in the morning together, had dinner last night as well,
as CS members of this G and making good inputs to the group
in more coordinated manner than before, too.

WG on improvement is improving its own performance.

izumi

2011/11/2 Anriette Esterhuysen <anriette at apc.org>:
> Tks for the updates Izumi and Marilia
>
> The meeting is really going quite well......
>
> Still early days.. but so much better than last time round.
>
> Anriette
>
>
____________________________________________________________
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


From daniel at digsys.bg  Tue Nov  1 13:33:28 2011
From: daniel at digsys.bg (Daniel Kalchev)
Date: Tue, 01 Nov 2011 19:33:28 +0200
Subject: [governance] =?UTF-8?Q?Is_really_Bulgarian_Cyrillic_=2E=D0=B1?=
 =?UTF-8?Q?=D0=B3_=28=2Ebg=29_similar_to_other_Latin_ccTLDs=3F?=
In-Reply-To: <20111101150741.GA30404@haapana>
References: <1291131665.20152.1407897083@webmail.messagingengine.com> <CAJwbTiA0ixrMYBTWFGZLphuHKzWwOVrYiAvc9yBf8WQsMN-66w@mail.gmail.com> <CA+EjHYpNDBuY4NGi0wm7fT7N9ZsMPsZ_X5TftNeD5c3aSLP+Bw@mail.gmail.com> <20111101150741.GA30404@haapana>
Message-ID: <4EB02D68.3090709@digsys.bg>



On 01.11.11 17:07, Tapani Tarvainen wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 01, 2011 at 03:31:59PM +0100, Louis Pouzin (well) (pouzin at well.com) wrote:
>
>> Unless visually impaired, anyone should be able to tell *.бг* from *.br*
>> see attachment.
> I think that would depend on the font and what people are used to -
> someone who's never seen Cyrillic could easily confuse бг with br,
> thinking it's just an unusual font.

I have done some presentations that demonstrate the use of different 
(widely available) computer fonts and the possible confusability of 
these two strings.

> How big problem that would be in practice, I couldn't say without
> some (empirical) research (has any such been made?).

It was never a problem. Since 2007 until early 2010 that same string was 
presented to ICANN staff working on the suggested "Fast Track" process 
(what we have now is nothing like the original idea, but better 
something than nothing) AND as official response to the board by both 
the Bulgarian Government and the BG ccTLD manager. It was only after the 
actually Fast Track application that it was indicated it would be 
"confusingly similar".

Rumors go, that this was indicated privately to a Government 
representative shortly before the application, but so far all attempts 
to find such documented has failed.

>> However, visually normal people can't tell *.lt *(Italy) from *.It*(Lithuania)
> Hmm. I have worse than average eyesight, but I didn't think it's this bad,
> for to me those are very distinct but opposite to what you say -
> I thought .lt is Lithuania and .it Italy.
> (Yes, I got the joke. But the point is that such distinctions
> are easy if you're used to them, much harder otherwise.)

The official response to this is that the ISO3166 table and therefore 
the current set of ccTLD names is inherited by ICANN, but they are 
committed to avoid confusability in future. Therefore, Cyrillic and 
Greek are declared "second grade" alphabets and any hint on possible 
confusability is taken as a show stopper.

Funny, that the IDN Fast Track process talk about the need to 
demonstrate probable confusion, not merely possible confusion.

All attempts to obtain scientific proof of this (professional, I guess) 
Linguistic Committee failed so far. I believe they already understand 
that this statement just does not hold water. But then, we don't know 
who instructed them to claim these strings are confusable.

In the end, the question is not how confusable the proposed IDN ccTLD is 
(as long as it it not identical). The question is that this is the 
desire of one nation that was abused for someone's private (or whatever) 
interests.


Daniel


____________________________________________________________
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


From tapani.tarvainen at effi.org  Tue Nov  1 16:04:22 2011
From: tapani.tarvainen at effi.org (Tapani Tarvainen)
Date: Tue, 1 Nov 2011 22:04:22 +0200
Subject: [governance] =?UTF-8?Q?Is_really_Bulgarian_Cyrillic_=2E=D0=B1?=
 =?UTF-8?Q?=D0=B3_=28=2Ebg=29_similar_to_other_Latin_ccTLDs=3F?=
In-Reply-To: <4D7DCD47-E74D-47E1-ABE7-6BAD2BF29337@psg.com>
References: <1291131665.20152.1407897083@webmail.messagingengine.com>
 <CAJwbTiA0ixrMYBTWFGZLphuHKzWwOVrYiAvc9yBf8WQsMN-66w@mail.gmail.com>
 <CA+EjHYpNDBuY4NGi0wm7fT7N9ZsMPsZ_X5TftNeD5c3aSLP+Bw@mail.gmail.com>
 <4D7DCD47-E74D-47E1-ABE7-6BAD2BF29337@psg.com>
Message-ID: <20111101200422.GA27907@musti>

On Tue, Nov 01, 2011 at 01:15:02PM -0400, Avri Doria (avri at psg.com) wrote:

> 
> ageed on .бг & .br
> disagree on .it & .lt  or .IT & .LT
> 
> but think that if .it & .lt is acceptable then .бг & .br should be as well

Yeah. I guess the likelyhood of confusion is more or less
comparable (and acceptably small) in either case.

-- 
Tapani Tarvainen
____________________________________________________________
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


From williams.deirdre at gmail.com  Tue Nov  1 16:59:43 2011
From: williams.deirdre at gmail.com (Deirdre Williams)
Date: Tue, 1 Nov 2011 16:59:43 -0400
Subject: [governance] =?UTF-8?Q?Is_really_Bulgarian_Cyrillic_=2E=D0=B1?=
 =?UTF-8?Q?=D0=B3_=28=2Ebg=29_similar_to_other_Latin_ccTLDs=3F?=
In-Reply-To: <20111101200422.GA27907@musti>
References: <1291131665.20152.1407897083@webmail.messagingengine.com>
 <CAJwbTiA0ixrMYBTWFGZLphuHKzWwOVrYiAvc9yBf8WQsMN-66w@mail.gmail.com>
 <CA+EjHYpNDBuY4NGi0wm7fT7N9ZsMPsZ_X5TftNeD5c3aSLP+Bw@mail.gmail.com>
 <4D7DCD47-E74D-47E1-ABE7-6BAD2BF29337@psg.com> <20111101200422.GA27907@musti>
Message-ID: <CAMz5XN7R7Bk+ZMYOvmSUbsKcNGaKqPzZxZdmR+CAnSYwB-ZP2A@mail.gmail.com>

And what about the responsibility of the user to exercise caution? More and
more there seems to be an insistence that "the machine has to do it" while
the user reneges any responsibility.
Deirdre

On 1 November 2011 16:04, Tapani Tarvainen <tapani.tarvainen at effi.org>wrote:

> On Tue, Nov 01, 2011 at 01:15:02PM -0400, Avri Doria (avri at psg.com) wrote:
>
> >
> > ageed on .бг & .br
> > disagree on .it & .lt  or .IT & .LT
> >
> > but think that if .it & .lt is acceptable then .бг & .br should be as
> well
>
> Yeah. I guess the likelyhood of confusion is more or less
> comparable (and acceptably small) in either case.
>
> --
> Tapani Tarvainen
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
>
>


-- 
“The fundamental cure for poverty is not money but knowledge" Sir William
Arthur Lewis, Nobel Prize Economics, 1979
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111101/801836e5/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, 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


From petko.kolev49 at gmail.com  Tue Nov  1 17:02:14 2011
From: petko.kolev49 at gmail.com (Petko Kolev)
Date: Tue, 1 Nov 2011 23:02:14 +0200
Subject: [governance] =?UTF-8?Q?Is_really_Bulgarian_Cyrillic_=2E=D0=B1?=
 =?UTF-8?Q?=D0=B3_=28=2Ebg=29_similar_to_other_Latin_ccTLDs=3F?=
In-Reply-To: <20111101200422.GA27907@musti>
References: <1291131665.20152.1407897083@webmail.messagingengine.com>
	<CAJwbTiA0ixrMYBTWFGZLphuHKzWwOVrYiAvc9yBf8WQsMN-66w@mail.gmail.com>
	<CA+EjHYpNDBuY4NGi0wm7fT7N9ZsMPsZ_X5TftNeD5c3aSLP+Bw@mail.gmail.com>
	<4D7DCD47-E74D-47E1-ABE7-6BAD2BF29337@psg.com>
	<20111101200422.GA27907@musti>
Message-ID: <CABL1mpUwxVh7G+151RB60xzqrpGAgQdX9qvxSLw2Ax2gmT_VLw@mail.gmail.com>

To make the problem even worse, the Greek IDN ccTLD proposal .ελ was
rejected because of similarity problems with the non-existent ccTLD
.EA in Capitals only. - .ΕΛ

Petko

On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 10:04 PM, Tapani Tarvainen
<tapani.tarvainen at effi.org> wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 01, 2011 at 01:15:02PM -0400, Avri Doria (avri at psg.com) wrote:
>
>>
>> ageed on .бг & .br
>> disagree on .it & .lt  or .IT & .LT
>>
>> but think that if .it & .lt is acceptable then .бг & .br should be as well
>
> Yeah. I guess the likelyhood of confusion is more or less
> comparable (and acceptably small) in either case.
>
> --
> Tapani Tarvainen
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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


From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com  Tue Nov  1 17:10:43 2011
From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro)
Date: Wed, 2 Nov 2011 10:10:43 +1300
Subject: [governance] =?UTF-8?Q?Is_really_Bulgarian_Cyrillic_=2E=D0=B1?=
 =?UTF-8?Q?=D0=B3_=28=2Ebg=29_similar_to_other_Latin_ccTLDs=3F?=
In-Reply-To: <4EB02D68.3090709@digsys.bg>
References: <1291131665.20152.1407897083@webmail.messagingengine.com>
	<CAJwbTiA0ixrMYBTWFGZLphuHKzWwOVrYiAvc9yBf8WQsMN-66w@mail.gmail.com>
	<CA+EjHYpNDBuY4NGi0wm7fT7N9ZsMPsZ_X5TftNeD5c3aSLP+Bw@mail.gmail.com>
	<20111101150741.GA30404@haapana>
	<4EB02D68.3090709@digsys.bg>
Message-ID: <CAJwbTiAtZcOafg8d=-Tfs5eE5E7NN8n2-A0oP+7jhUBShULZtA@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 6:33 AM, Daniel Kalchev <daniel at digsys.bg> wrote:

>
>
> I have done some presentations that demonstrate the use of different
>> (widely available) computer fonts and the possible confusability of these
>> two strings.
>
>
> This is awesome and it would be great to share some of the learnings, if
> possible but if you have already posted it on a website, maybe you can
> direct me to the URL or email me offline.
>
>> How big problem that would be in practice, I couldn't say without
>> some (empirical) research (has any such been made?).
>>
>
> It was never a problem. Since 2007 until early 2010 that same string was
> presented to ICANN staff working on the suggested "Fast Track" process
> (what we have now is nothing like the original idea, but better something
> than nothing) AND as official response to the board by both the Bulgarian
> Government and the BG ccTLD manager. It was only after the actually Fast
> Track application that it was indicated it would be "confusingly similar".
>
> Rumors go, that this was indicated privately to a Government
> representative shortly before the application, but so far all attempts to
> find such documented has failed.
>
> Interesting all we can do now is comment when we have the opportunity to
> comment, I suppose.
>
>> However, visually normal people can't tell *.lt *(Italy) from
>>> *.It*(Lithuania)
>>>
>>
>>
> The official response to this is that the ISO3166 table and therefore the
> current set of ccTLD names is inherited by ICANN, but they are committed to
> avoid confusability in future. Therefore, Cyrillic and Greek are declared
> "second grade" alphabets and any hint on possible confusability is taken as
> a show stopper.
>
> No language or aphabet is second grade.Article 19 of the Universal
Declaration of Human Rights gives people the right to freedom of
expression. There is also the Convention on the Protection and Promotion of
the Diversity of Cultural Expressions 2005 and another Convention for the
Safeguarding of Intangible Cultural Heritage.

*
*

> Funny, that the IDN Fast Track process talk about the need to demonstrate
> probable confusion, not merely possible confusion

This is interesting, to find what the difference between probable and
possible is and which is the lower threshold?

> .
>
> All attempts to obtain scientific proof of this (professional, I guess)
> Linguistic Committee failed so far. I believe they already understand that
> this statement just does not hold water. But then, we don't know who
> instructed them to claim these strings are confusable.
>
We need more linguistic experts to be involved in the contributions to
technical policy processes. This is why I am advocating as much input into
the policy processes and also to comment on the Variant Report before 16th
November, 2011 and for other reports by 14th November, 2011. At least,
people have to be on record for raising issues etc etc so it can be
factored into the considerations.

>
> In the end, the question is not how confusable the proposed IDN ccTLD is
> (as long as it it not identical). The question is that this is the desire
> of one nation that was abused for someone's private (or whatever) interests.
> This is a governance issue - what sort of mechanisms should be in place to
> ensure fairness and transparency?
>
> Daniel
>
>
>
> ______________________________**______________________________
> 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<http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing>
>
> For all other list information and functions, see:
>    http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/**info/governance<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<http://translate.google.com/translate_t>
>
>


-- 
Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala

Tweeter: @SalanietaT
Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro
Cell: +679 998 2851
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111102/3d69a03c/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, 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


From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com  Tue Nov  1 17:12:59 2011
From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro)
Date: Wed, 2 Nov 2011 10:12:59 +1300
Subject: [governance] =?UTF-8?Q?Is_really_Bulgarian_Cyrillic_=2E=D0=B1?=
 =?UTF-8?Q?=D0=B3_=28=2Ebg=29_similar_to_other_Latin_ccTLDs=3F?=
In-Reply-To: <CAMz5XN7R7Bk+ZMYOvmSUbsKcNGaKqPzZxZdmR+CAnSYwB-ZP2A@mail.gmail.com>
References: <1291131665.20152.1407897083@webmail.messagingengine.com>
	<CAJwbTiA0ixrMYBTWFGZLphuHKzWwOVrYiAvc9yBf8WQsMN-66w@mail.gmail.com>
	<CA+EjHYpNDBuY4NGi0wm7fT7N9ZsMPsZ_X5TftNeD5c3aSLP+Bw@mail.gmail.com>
	<4D7DCD47-E74D-47E1-ABE7-6BAD2BF29337@psg.com>
	<20111101200422.GA27907@musti>
	<CAMz5XN7R7Bk+ZMYOvmSUbsKcNGaKqPzZxZdmR+CAnSYwB-ZP2A@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAJwbTiCA9thjUHLgDxFuwiJg6b2jKZAPba7PDGD6fvV9DDMgng@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 9:59 AM, Deirdre Williams <williams.deirdre at gmail.com
> wrote:

> And what about the responsibility of the user to exercise caution? More
> and more there seems to be an insistence that "the machine has to do it"
> while the user reneges any responsibility.
> Deirdre
>
> To some extent, this is true Deirdre, the rationale behind "let the buyer
beware" and it is not so much buying something but the notion of
responsibility and caution and yes there is a responsibility expected of
both parties and user included.

>
> On 1 November 2011 16:04, Tapani Tarvainen <tapani.tarvainen at effi.org>wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Nov 01, 2011 at 01:15:02PM -0400, Avri Doria (avri at psg.com)
>> wrote:
>>
>> >
>> > ageed on .бг & .br
>> > disagree on .it & .lt  or .IT & .LT
>> >
>> > but think that if .it & .lt is acceptable then .бг & .br should be as
>> well
>>
>> Yeah. I guess the likelyhood of confusion is more or less
>> comparable (and acceptably small) in either case.
>>
>> --
>> Tapani Tarvainen
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> 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
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> “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, 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
>
>
>


-- 
Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala

Tweeter: @SalanietaT
Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro
Cell: +679 998 2851
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111102/5a30a640/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, 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


From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com  Tue Nov  1 17:15:13 2011
From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro)
Date: Wed, 2 Nov 2011 10:15:13 +1300
Subject: [governance] =?UTF-8?Q?Is_really_Bulgarian_Cyrillic_=2E=D0=B1?=
 =?UTF-8?Q?=D0=B3_=28=2Ebg=29_similar_to_other_Latin_ccTLDs=3F?=
In-Reply-To: <CABL1mpUwxVh7G+151RB60xzqrpGAgQdX9qvxSLw2Ax2gmT_VLw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <1291131665.20152.1407897083@webmail.messagingengine.com>
	<CAJwbTiA0ixrMYBTWFGZLphuHKzWwOVrYiAvc9yBf8WQsMN-66w@mail.gmail.com>
	<CA+EjHYpNDBuY4NGi0wm7fT7N9ZsMPsZ_X5TftNeD5c3aSLP+Bw@mail.gmail.com>
	<4D7DCD47-E74D-47E1-ABE7-6BAD2BF29337@psg.com>
	<20111101200422.GA27907@musti>
	<CABL1mpUwxVh7G+151RB60xzqrpGAgQdX9qvxSLw2Ax2gmT_VLw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAJwbTiBFRY3SQWEi5hEoBz5jQ60hah87FR9Ho5Sk4MAOcpLLXw@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 10:02 AM, Petko Kolev <petko.kolev49 at gmail.com>wrote:

> To make the problem even worse, the Greek IDN ccTLD proposal .ελ was
> rejected because of similarity problems with the non-existent ccTLD
> .EA in Capitals only. - .ΕΛ
>

Hi Petko!  I am sorry to hear this, they look so different to me, at least.
I hope you comment on the Greek Variant Project but you are probably
already involved in the studies??? It would also be great if you could
invite the general Greek community from all over the world to comment on
the Greek Variant Report which is on the link that I sent earlier.

>
> Petko
>
> On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 10:04 PM, Tapani Tarvainen
> <tapani.tarvainen at effi.org> wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 01, 2011 at 01:15:02PM -0400, Avri Doria (avri at psg.com)
> wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> ageed on .бг & .br
> >> disagree on .it & .lt  or .IT & .LT
> >>
> >> but think that if .it & .lt is acceptable then .бг & .br should be as
> well
> >
> > Yeah. I guess the likelyhood of confusion is more or less
> > comparable (and acceptably small) in either case.
> >
> > --
> > Tapani Tarvainen
> > ____________________________________________________________
> > 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
>
>


-- 
Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala

Tweeter: @SalanietaT
Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro
Cell: +679 998 2851
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111102/7f49e13a/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, 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


From Philipp.Mirtl at oiip.ac.at  Tue Nov  1 18:07:38 2011
From: Philipp.Mirtl at oiip.ac.at (Philipp Mirtl)
Date: Tue, 1 Nov 2011 23:07:38 +0100
Subject: AW: [governance] Cyber Security 2011
References: <B11CE329-B4CC-4FDC-A3BC-A80C38218DD5@acm.org> <CA+EjHYo+Xd4jS=Fes2SYj5rOGtEVSUfTyufmDB2OoixDFU-BQA@mail.gmail.com> <CAJiMDiQnXMUTRVQ1EXKgC+F330xVErci6-onLyuNVqWTgEwcsA@mail.gmail.com> <CAMz5XN64AScsyKU=FoB7MhChgpadp=e_YNvbYmkw8EvTbULcdw@mail.gmail.com> <CAOLD2+bA+q_Ayk=rXeq6QzU4mjT34Oh9qx6DNzabLo-02g9VvA@mail.gmail.com> <CAJwbTiBBvLUgorp=LtpZoLajS+KkudMSeiD_hFrG5kcxQPNM2Q@mail.gmail.com> <CAOLD2+YCFWm+gAnUNBUYBhMrFqgyTSS6GzB7bNy4FFvmnhyL=A@mail.gmail.com> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8D2C6BB@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> <CAOLD2+Zh+D5XUEqiwzUs=h7ZcuHeKvYco8cSiygRZwfyM1aK6Q@mail.gmail.com> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8D2C6C2@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8D2C6C5@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
Message-ID: <45460B8AE6CC454F846577DC3E9B38A04C5A81@srvsbs01.OIIP.local>

Hi all,

I just saw Andrea is at the conference too and am glad he is reporting as well. I also found all the posted links and articles to be very interesting for this discussion. In this respect, Alexander asked me to add the following three points to this list:

1. From behalf of the UK and US there was a stronger advocacy for the multistakeholder approach than originally thought (this includes civil society engagement as well as freedom of expression). In fact, the IGF (and the engagement of governments, the private sector, and civil society) was mentioned twice.

2. PM Cameron said: governments do not shape the Internet (speech see here: http://www.number10.gov.uk/news/cyberspace/)

3. US-VP Biden mentioned the IGF as a good example of what should be done (his address can be accessed here: http://www.whitehouse.gov/photos-and-video/video/2011/11/01/vice-president-biden-delivers-remarks-london-conference-cyberspace).

We'll keep you updated and hope to add some insightful impressions of the conference.

Kind regards,

philipp


-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: governance at lists.cpsr.org im Auftrag von "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang"
Gesendet: Di 01.11.2011 16:58
An: governance at lists.cpsr.org; "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang"; governance at lists.cpsr.org; Andrea Glorioso
Cc: governance at lists.cpsr.org
Betreff: AW: [governance] Cyber Security 2011
 
 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/oct/31/cybercrime-attacks-online-fco 
________________________________

____________________________________________________________
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



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111101/919ed1d1/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, 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


From williams.deirdre at gmail.com  Tue Nov  1 18:30:28 2011
From: williams.deirdre at gmail.com (Deirdre Williams)
Date: Tue, 1 Nov 2011 18:30:28 -0400
Subject: [governance] Cyber Security 2011
In-Reply-To: <45460B8AE6CC454F846577DC3E9B38A04C5A81@srvsbs01.OIIP.local>
References: <B11CE329-B4CC-4FDC-A3BC-A80C38218DD5@acm.org> <CA+EjHYo+Xd4jS=Fes2SYj5rOGtEVSUfTyufmDB2OoixDFU-BQA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAJiMDiQnXMUTRVQ1EXKgC+F330xVErci6-onLyuNVqWTgEwcsA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAMz5XN64AScsyKU=FoB7MhChgpadp=e_YNvbYmkw8EvTbULcdw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAOLD2+bA+q_Ayk=rXeq6QzU4mjT34Oh9qx6DNzabLo-02g9VvA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAJwbTiBBvLUgorp=LtpZoLajS+KkudMSeiD_hFrG5kcxQPNM2Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAOLD2+YCFWm+gAnUNBUYBhMrFqgyTSS6GzB7bNy4FFvmnhyL=A@mail.gmail.com>
 <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8D2C6BB@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
 <CAOLD2+Zh+D5XUEqiwzUs=h7ZcuHeKvYco8cSiygRZwfyM1aK6Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8D2C6C2@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
 <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8D2C6C5@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> <45460B8AE6CC454F846577DC3E9B38A04C5A81@srvsbs01.OIIP.local>
Message-ID: <CAMz5XN6eYzGz1n2rV0tAsrKZdByThm8w4KzwKOdyCMuM-cm5hw@mail.gmail.com>

Another link which may or may not be useful - Aljazeera is advertising a
documentary on Cyberwarfare at 12 GMT (noon I think) tomorrow  12:0008:00 Al
Jazeera World : Fighting In The Fifth Dimension
It’s been called the fifth dimension of warfare. Besides land, sea, air and
space – this film shows how cyberworld is increasingly become a new
frontline.Coincidence??
Deirdre

2011/11/1 Philipp Mirtl <Philipp.Mirtl at oiip.ac.at>

> **
>
> Hi all,
>
> I just saw Andrea is at the conference too and am glad he is reporting as
> well. I also found all the posted links and articles to be very interesting
> for this discussion. In this respect, Alexander asked me to add the
> following three points to this list:
>
> 1. From behalf of the UK and US there was a stronger advocacy for the
> multistakeholder approach than originally thought (this includes civil
> society engagement as well as freedom of expression). In fact, the IGF (and
> the engagement of governments, the private sector, and civil society) was
> mentioned twice.
>
> 2. PM Cameron said: governments do not shape the Internet (speech see
> here: http://www.number10.gov.uk/news/cyberspace/)
>
> 3. US-VP Biden mentioned the IGF as a good example of what should be done
> (his address can be accessed here:
> http://www.whitehouse.gov/photos-and-video/video/2011/11/01/vice-president-biden-delivers-remarks-london-conference-cyberspace
> ).
>
> We'll keep you updated and hope to add some insightful impressions of the
> conference.
>
> Kind regards,
>
> philipp
>
>
> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: governance at lists.cpsr.org im Auftrag von "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang"
> Gesendet: Di 01.11.2011 16:58
> An: governance at lists.cpsr.org; "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang";
> governance at lists.cpsr.org; Andrea Glorioso
> Cc: governance at lists.cpsr.org
> Betreff: AW: [governance] Cyber Security 2011
>
>
>
>
>
> http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/oct/31/cybercrime-attacks-online-fco
> ________________________________
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
>
>
>


-- 
“The fundamental cure for poverty is not money but knowledge" Sir William
Arthur Lewis, Nobel Prize Economics, 1979
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111101/215307c4/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, 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


From pouzin at well.com  Tue Nov  1 20:32:34 2011
From: pouzin at well.com (Louis Pouzin (well))
Date: Wed, 2 Nov 2011 01:32:34 +0100
Subject: [governance] =?UTF-8?Q?Is_really_Bulgarian_Cyrillic_=2E=D0=B1?=
 =?UTF-8?Q?=D0=B3_=28=2Ebg=29_similar_to_other_Latin_ccTLDs=3F?=
In-Reply-To: <4D7DCD47-E74D-47E1-ABE7-6BAD2BF29337@psg.com>
References: <1291131665.20152.1407897083@webmail.messagingengine.com>
 <CAJwbTiA0ixrMYBTWFGZLphuHKzWwOVrYiAvc9yBf8WQsMN-66w@mail.gmail.com>
 <CA+EjHYpNDBuY4NGi0wm7fT7N9ZsMPsZ_X5TftNeD5c3aSLP+Bw@mail.gmail.com> <4D7DCD47-E74D-47E1-ABE7-6BAD2BF29337@psg.com>
Message-ID: <CA+EjHYqKSTcbfqP7y-ymR-Aw3Rax1PttuaSPHzu8oSYHX_UWfA@mail.gmail.com>

Avri,

The two characters of a cctld may be in opposite cases.

With this font up *I* is visually identical to low *l*, and Italy is
confused with Lithuania.

16 cctld's exhibit similar confusions.

Too bad
- - -

On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 18:15, Avri Doria <avri at psg.com> wrote:

>
> ageed on .бг & .br
> disagree on .it & .lt  or .IT & .LT
>
> but think that if .it & .lt is acceptable then .бг & .br should be as well
>
> avri
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111102/e635c690/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, 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


From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com  Tue Nov  1 21:22:47 2011
From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro)
Date: Wed, 2 Nov 2011 14:22:47 +1300
Subject: [governance] =?UTF-8?Q?Is_really_Bulgarian_Cyrillic_=2E=D0=B1?=
 =?UTF-8?Q?=D0=B3_=28=2Ebg=29_similar_to_other_Latin_ccTLDs=3F?=
In-Reply-To: <CA+EjHYqKSTcbfqP7y-ymR-Aw3Rax1PttuaSPHzu8oSYHX_UWfA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <1291131665.20152.1407897083@webmail.messagingengine.com>
	<CAJwbTiA0ixrMYBTWFGZLphuHKzWwOVrYiAvc9yBf8WQsMN-66w@mail.gmail.com>
	<CA+EjHYpNDBuY4NGi0wm7fT7N9ZsMPsZ_X5TftNeD5c3aSLP+Bw@mail.gmail.com>
	<4D7DCD47-E74D-47E1-ABE7-6BAD2BF29337@psg.com>
	<CA+EjHYqKSTcbfqP7y-ymR-Aw3Rax1PttuaSPHzu8oSYHX_UWfA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAJwbTiD4eDSgOg2Chtm8f7xYRfkqdW8QDYWBnX95qOPF6UqjRQ@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 1:32 PM, Louis Pouzin (well) <pouzin at well.com> wrote:

> Avri,
>
> The two characters of a cctld may be in opposite cases.
>
> With this font up *I* is visually identical to low *l*, and Italy is
> confused with Lithuania.
>
> 16 cctld's exhibit similar confusions.
>

Out of curiosity which are the 16 ccTLDs?

>
> Too bad
> - - -
>
>
> On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 18:15, Avri Doria <avri at psg.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> ageed on .бг & .br
>> disagree on .it & .lt  or .IT & .LT
>>
>> but think that if .it & .lt is acceptable then .бг & .br should be as well
>>
>> avri
>>
>>
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
>
>
>


-- 
Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala

Tweeter: @SalanietaT
Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro
Cell: +679 998 2851
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111102/88f8e4a0/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, 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


From daniel at digsys.bg  Wed Nov  2 03:19:39 2011
From: daniel at digsys.bg (Daniel Kalchev)
Date: Wed, 02 Nov 2011 09:19:39 +0200
Subject: [governance] =?UTF-8?Q?Is_really_Bulgarian_Cyrillic_=2E=D0=B1?=
 =?UTF-8?Q?=D0=B3_=28=2Ebg=29_similar_to_other_Latin_ccTLDs=3F?=
In-Reply-To: <CAJwbTiAtZcOafg8d=-Tfs5eE5E7NN8n2-A0oP+7jhUBShULZtA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <1291131665.20152.1407897083@webmail.messagingengine.com> <CAJwbTiA0ixrMYBTWFGZLphuHKzWwOVrYiAvc9yBf8WQsMN-66w@mail.gmail.com> <CA+EjHYpNDBuY4NGi0wm7fT7N9ZsMPsZ_X5TftNeD5c3aSLP+Bw@mail.gmail.com> <20111101150741.GA30404@haapana> <4EB02D68.3090709@digsys.bg> <CAJwbTiAtZcOafg8d=-Tfs5eE5E7NN8n2-A0oP+7jhUBShULZtA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4EB0EF0B.2050402@digsys.bg>



On 01.11.11 23:10, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 6:33 AM, Daniel Kalchev <daniel at digsys.bg 
> <mailto:daniel at digsys.bg>> wrote:
>
>
>
>         I have done some presentations that demonstrate the use of
>         different (widely available) computer fonts and the possible
>         confusability of these two strings.
>
>
>     This is awesome and it would be great to share some of the
>     learnings, if possible but if you have already posted it on a
>     website, maybe you can direct me to the URL or email me offline.
>

It is publicly available and searchable on Google as well. I found an 
on-line version at 
https://www.centr.org/main/6079-CTR/version/default/part/AttachmentData/data/Daniel 
Kalchev - bgidn20110202v3.pdf

I believe the different font renderings are informative enough. That 
presentation was produced in the beginning of the year and is pretty 
much schematic, because the target audience is deeply aware of the 
issues -- there were some developments since then, but mostly in area 
of... talking. (ok, politics, I know)

>     The official response to this is that the ISO3166 table and
>     therefore the current set of ccTLD names is inherited by ICANN,
>     but they are committed to avoid confusability in future.
>     Therefore, Cyrillic and Greek are declared "second grade"
>     alphabets and any hint on possible confusability is taken as a
>     show stopper.
>
> No language or aphabet is second grade.Article 19 of the Universal 
> Declaration of Human Rights gives people the right to freedom of 
> expression. There is also the Convention on the Protection and 
> Promotion of the Diversity of Cultural Expressions 2005 and another 
> Convention for the Safeguarding of Intangible Cultural Heritage.

While this is true, one needs to remember what ICANN was like when the 
IDN Fast Track came into effect (end of 2009). An US based company was 
hired to provide the 'language expertise' for the IDN Fast Track and 
unfortunately, their work is covered in secrecy. I can understand that 
the combined desire to avoid any possible 'confusion' (and ICANN be 
blamed for making the Internet less 'stable') and the probably too US 
(therefore ASCII) centric knowledge of the experts led to this 
situation. Thing is, they by default assume any two letter Cyrillic or 
Greek strings is "confusingly similar" to any two character ASCII string 
-- which is ridiculous.. at least.

>     Funny, that the IDN Fast Track process talk about the need to
>     demonstrate probable confusion, not merely possible confusion
>
> This is interesting, to find what the difference between probable and 
> possible is and which is the lower threshold?

In my understanding of English, "possible" means it can be demonstrated 
that it is (however rare) subject to confusability, in some (even if 
carefully crafted and controlled) situations. "Probably", should require 
further qualification of the frequency this is happening. For example, 
you take an sample of 1000 persons. For 5 of those persons .бг and .bg 
are confusable -- this is "possible" but in no way "probable". If, for 
200-400 it is confusable, it is then perhaps "probable". If you have say 
500-700 confused, I would call it "very probable". Sort of that.

Thing is, you can demonstrate that almost any two strings are 
confusable, in a specific context and using specific fonts.

None of this data is available for the evaluation of the Bulgarian 
application however.

Daniel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111102/2809d8b2/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, 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


From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com  Wed Nov  2 05:11:44 2011
From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro)
Date: Wed, 2 Nov 2011 21:11:44 +1200
Subject: [governance] =?UTF-8?Q?Is_really_Bulgarian_Cyrillic_=2E=D0=B1?=
 =?UTF-8?Q?=D0=B3_=28=2Ebg=29_similar_to_other_Latin_ccTLDs=3F?=
In-Reply-To: <4EB0EF0B.2050402@digsys.bg>
References: <1291131665.20152.1407897083@webmail.messagingengine.com>
	<CAJwbTiA0ixrMYBTWFGZLphuHKzWwOVrYiAvc9yBf8WQsMN-66w@mail.gmail.com>
	<CA+EjHYpNDBuY4NGi0wm7fT7N9ZsMPsZ_X5TftNeD5c3aSLP+Bw@mail.gmail.com>
	<20111101150741.GA30404@haapana>
	<4EB02D68.3090709@digsys.bg>
	<CAJwbTiAtZcOafg8d=-Tfs5eE5E7NN8n2-A0oP+7jhUBShULZtA@mail.gmail.com>
	<4EB0EF0B.2050402@digsys.bg>
Message-ID: <CAJwbTiAwfVH4COfxOPFbcU+n=8JkjF-RnewgTtWqyAF9uBuLPg@mail.gmail.com>

Thanks Daniel, this is very helpful, I will go through the link you set.

Best Regards,
Sala

On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 8:19 PM, Daniel Kalchev <daniel at digsys.bg> wrote:

>
>
> On 01.11.11 23:10, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro wrote:
>
>
>
> On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 6:33 AM, Daniel Kalchev <daniel at digsys.bg> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> I have done some presentations that demonstrate the use of different
>>> (widely available) computer fonts and the possible confusability of these
>>> two strings.
>>
>>
>> This is awesome and it would be great to share some of the learnings, if
>> possible but if you have already posted it on a website, maybe you can
>> direct me to the URL or email me offline.
>>
>
> It is publicly available and searchable on Google as well. I found an
> on-line version at
> https://www.centr.org/main/6079-CTR/version/default/part/AttachmentData/data/DanielKalchev - bgidn20110202v3.pdf
>
> I believe the different font renderings are informative enough. That
> presentation was produced in the beginning of the year and is pretty much
> schematic, because the target audience is deeply aware of the issues --
> there were some developments since then, but mostly in area of... talking.
> (ok, politics, I know)
>
>
>  The official response to this is that the ISO3166 table and therefore
>> the current set of ccTLD names is inherited by ICANN, but they are
>> committed to avoid confusability in future. Therefore, Cyrillic and Greek
>> are declared "second grade" alphabets and any hint on possible
>> confusability is taken as a show stopper.
>>
>>  No language or aphabet is second grade.Article 19 of the Universal
> Declaration of Human Rights gives people the right to freedom of
> expression. There is also the Convention on the Protection and Promotion of
> the Diversity of Cultural Expressions 2005 and another Convention for the
> Safeguarding of Intangible Cultural Heritage.
>
>
> While this is true, one needs to remember what ICANN was like when the IDN
> Fast Track came into effect (end of 2009). An US based company was hired to
> provide the 'language expertise' for the IDN Fast Track and unfortunately,
> their work is covered in secrecy. I can understand that the combined desire
> to avoid any possible 'confusion' (and ICANN be blamed for making the
> Internet less 'stable') and the probably too US (therefore ASCII) centric
> knowledge of the experts led to this situation. Thing is, they by default
> assume any two letter Cyrillic or Greek strings is "confusingly similar" to
> any two character ASCII string -- which is ridiculous.. at least.
>
>
>   Funny, that the IDN Fast Track process talk about the need to
>> demonstrate probable confusion, not merely possible confusion
>
> This is interesting, to find what the difference between probable and
> possible is and which is the lower threshold?
>
>
> In my understanding of English, "possible" means it can be demonstrated
> that it is (however rare) subject to confusability, in some (even if
> carefully crafted and controlled) situations. "Probably", should require
> further qualification of the frequency this is happening. For example, you
> take an sample of 1000 persons. For 5 of those persons .бг and .bg are
> confusable -- this is "possible" but in no way "probable". If, for 200-400
> it is confusable, it is then perhaps "probable". If you have say 500-700
> confused, I would call it "very probable". Sort of that.
>
> Thing is, you can demonstrate that almost any two strings are confusable,
> in a specific context and using specific fonts.
>
> None of this data is available for the evaluation of the Bulgarian
> application however.
>
> Daniel
>



-- 
Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala

Tweeter: @SalanietaT
Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro
Cell: +679 998 2851
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111102/f441992d/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, 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


From iza at anr.org  Wed Nov  2 07:07:54 2011
From: iza at anr.org (Izumi AIZU)
Date: Wed, 2 Nov 2011 20:07:54 +0900
Subject: [governance] CSTD WG Day 3 (1)
Message-ID: <CA+YNoKgVRn8gmK66OuQfyMKkcL1z3NQ9tUr8LSYwJvuq8BcZpw@mail.gmail.com>

This morning, the climate is getting more cloudy than before.
Some of the documents produced by Secretariat and members
on points A and B last night were not well accepted by some other members.

After rounds of exchanges of comments around working procedure
of the WG, we are now talking about the MAG composition, functions,
etc. in substantive ways.

The Chair also indicated that the second meeting of this CSTD WG will
be January 11-13.

There will be additional third WG meeting back to back to IGF Open
consultation in
February, likely. Yet that date is not fixed, and  there are comments
among WG members
that we better TRY hard to conclude the work at the 2nd meeting,
provided we better
use online exchanges in between physical meetings. It was suggested to
evaluate the
progress at the beginning of the January meeting to decide if we
really need the third
meeting or not.

I have to leave for airport around 1 pm and thus will not be able to report the
afternoon session. Sorry about that.

izumi
____________________________________________________________
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


From ca at cafonso.ca  Wed Nov  2 07:44:52 2011
From: ca at cafonso.ca (Carlos A. Afonso)
Date: Wed, 02 Nov 2011 09:44:52 -0200
Subject: [governance] =?UTF-8?Q?Is_really_Bulgarian_Cyrillic_=2E=D0=B1?=
 =?UTF-8?Q?=D0=B3_=28=2Ebg=29_similar_to_other_Latin_ccTLDs=3F?=
In-Reply-To: <CAJwbTiD4eDSgOg2Chtm8f7xYRfkqdW8QDYWBnX95qOPF6UqjRQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <1291131665.20152.1407897083@webmail.messagingengine.com>	<CAJwbTiA0ixrMYBTWFGZLphuHKzWwOVrYiAvc9yBf8WQsMN-66w@mail.gmail.com>	<CA+EjHYpNDBuY4NGi0wm7fT7N9ZsMPsZ_X5TftNeD5c3aSLP+Bw@mail.gmail.com>	<4D7DCD47-E74D-47E1-ABE7-6BAD2BF29337@psg.com>	<CA+EjHYqKSTcbfqP7y-ymR-Aw3Rax1PttuaSPHzu8oSYHX_UWfA@mail.gmail.com> <CAJwbTiD4eDSgOg2Chtm8f7xYRfkqdW8QDYWBnX95qOPF6UqjRQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4EB12D34.4060404@cafonso.ca>

Isn't this ophtalmologic discussion a bit outdated, since it seems the
rules are already settled on the issue (for good, bad or worse)?

frt rgds

--c.a.

On 11/01/2011 11:22 PM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 1:32 PM, Louis Pouzin (well) <pouzin at well.com> wrote:
> 
>> Avri,
>>
>> The two characters of a cctld may be in opposite cases.
>>
>> With this font up *I* is visually identical to low *l*, and Italy is
>> confused with Lithuania.
>>
>> 16 cctld's exhibit similar confusions.
>>
> 
> Out of curiosity which are the 16 ccTLDs?
> 
>>
>> Too bad
>> - - -
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 18:15, Avri Doria <avri at psg.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> ageed on .бг & .br
>>> disagree on .it & .lt  or .IT & .LT
>>>
>>> but think that if .it & .lt is acceptable then .бг & .br should be as well
>>>
>>> avri
>>>
>>>
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> 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


From wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de  Wed Nov  2 08:20:44 2011
From: wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de (=?iso-8859-1?Q?=22Kleinw=E4chter=2C_Wolfgang=22?=)
Date: Wed, 02 Nov 2011 13:20:44 +0100
Subject: [governance] London
References: <B11CE329-B4CC-4FDC-A3BC-A80C38218DD5@acm.org>
 <CA+EjHYo+Xd4jS=Fes2SYj5rOGtEVSUfTyufmDB2OoixDFU-BQA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAJiMDiQnXMUTRVQ1EXKgC+F330xVErci6-onLyuNVqWTgEwcsA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAMz5XN64AScsyKU=FoB7MhChgpadp=e_YNvbYmkw8EvTbULcdw@mail.gmail.com>
 <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD202D49C@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu>
 <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8D2C6AB@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
Message-ID:  <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8D2C6D1@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>

http://blogs.ft.com/fttechhub/2011/11/why-government-should-not-touch-the-internet/#axzz1cY9oi4zu
 
w
 
____________________________________________________________
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


From williams.deirdre at gmail.com  Wed Nov  2 08:37:16 2011
From: williams.deirdre at gmail.com (Deirdre Williams)
Date: Wed, 2 Nov 2011 08:37:16 -0400
Subject: [governance] London
In-Reply-To: <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8D2C6D1@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
References: <B11CE329-B4CC-4FDC-A3BC-A80C38218DD5@acm.org> <CA+EjHYo+Xd4jS=Fes2SYj5rOGtEVSUfTyufmDB2OoixDFU-BQA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAJiMDiQnXMUTRVQ1EXKgC+F330xVErci6-onLyuNVqWTgEwcsA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAMz5XN64AScsyKU=FoB7MhChgpadp=e_YNvbYmkw8EvTbULcdw@mail.gmail.com>
 <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD202D49C@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu>
 <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8D2C6AB@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8D2C6D1@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
Message-ID: <CAMz5XN5Ag9y=jC6g8Z_OZUi3ifYbPUwDOaYECyROAv5HLkYW2A@mail.gmail.com>

Thank you Wolfgang. A slightly wry smile to start my morning.
Last month Diplo ran an online seminar during which, among other things,
the issue of perspective was discussed. Remembering that, and thinking
about the Internet and how it works, cannot "shutting other people out"
actually and more truthfully, be seen as "shutting oneself in"?
Deirdre

2011/11/2 "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang" <
wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de>

>
> http://blogs.ft.com/fttechhub/2011/11/why-government-should-not-touch-the-internet/#axzz1cY9oi4zu
>
> w
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
>
>


-- 
“The fundamental cure for poverty is not money but knowledge" Sir William
Arthur Lewis, Nobel Prize Economics, 1979
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111102/61171385/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, 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


From mariliamaciel at gmail.com  Wed Nov  2 10:18:05 2011
From: mariliamaciel at gmail.com (Marilia Maciel)
Date: Wed, 2 Nov 2011 12:18:05 -0200
Subject: [governance] CSTD WG Day 3 (1)
In-Reply-To: <CA+YNoKgVRn8gmK66OuQfyMKkcL1z3NQ9tUr8LSYwJvuq8BcZpw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CA+YNoKgVRn8gmK66OuQfyMKkcL1z3NQ9tUr8LSYwJvuq8BcZpw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CACpVkK0ubKF8_t7V4ZhNJAudeimLW4QvgM3cd0Mg=2_J4OM9+A@mail.gmail.com>

We started to discuss funding but we have not been able to move forward
because many information has not been available to us. So we decided to
formulate questions that will be forwareded to DESA and CSTD:

 -       Invite DESA and the secretariat next meeting

-       Is it possible to receive funding from the UN (without excluding
the option from the trust fund) without going against the mandate set by
the Tunis Agenda OR Tunis Agenda gives a mandate to the SG (not to the UN)
to convene a forum. So this is not a regular program and can only be funded
extrabudgetary contribuins. Would funding through the regular budget
require a change of mandate.

-       Is it possible to make available important background documents:
trust fund requirements, pledge fund

-       Is it possible to make available for the members of this group the
information about the amount of donations given by donors and

-       If UN funds the IGF would it be under committee five approval?
Would it be vulnerable to 3% across-the-board cut is risk of entire budget
being denied if it goes to committee 5?
Best,
Marília

On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 9:07 AM, Izumi AIZU <iza at anr.org> wrote:

> This morning, the climate is getting more cloudy than before.
> Some of the documents produced by Secretariat and members
> on points A and B last night were not well accepted by some other members.
>
> After rounds of exchanges of comments around working procedure
> of the WG, we are now talking about the MAG composition, functions,
> etc. in substantive ways.
>
> The Chair also indicated that the second meeting of this CSTD WG will
> be January 11-13.
>
> There will be additional third WG meeting back to back to IGF Open
> consultation in
> February, likely. Yet that date is not fixed, and  there are comments
> among WG members
> that we better TRY hard to conclude the work at the 2nd meeting,
> provided we better
> use online exchanges in between physical meetings. It was suggested to
> evaluate the
> progress at the beginning of the January meeting to decide if we
> really need the third
> meeting or not.
>
> I have to leave for airport around 1 pm and thus will not be able to
> report the
> afternoon session. Sorry about that.
>
> izumi
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
>
>


-- 
Centro de Tecnologia e Sociedade
FGV Direito Rio

Center for Technology and Society
Getulio Vargas Foundation
Rio de Janeiro - Brazil
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111102/3bca8413/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, 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


From jovank at diplomacy.edu  Wed Nov  2 11:42:51 2011
From: jovank at diplomacy.edu (Jovan Kurbalija)
Date: Wed, 02 Nov 2011 16:42:51 +0100
Subject: [governance] London
In-Reply-To: <CAMz5XN5Ag9y=jC6g8Z_OZUi3ifYbPUwDOaYECyROAv5HLkYW2A@mail.gmail.com>
References: <B11CE329-B4CC-4FDC-A3BC-A80C38218DD5@acm.org> <CA+EjHYo+Xd4jS=Fes2SYj5rOGtEVSUfTyufmDB2OoixDFU-BQA@mail.gmail.com> <CAJiMDiQnXMUTRVQ1EXKgC+F330xVErci6-onLyuNVqWTgEwcsA@mail.gmail.com> <CAMz5XN64AScsyKU=FoB7MhChgpadp=e_YNvbYmkw8EvTbULcdw@mail.gmail.com> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD202D49C@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8D2C6AB@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8D2C6D1@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> <CAMz5XN5Ag9y=jC6g8Z_OZUi3ifYbPUwDOaYECyROAv5HLkYW2A@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4EB164FB.7090707@diplomacy.edu>

Deirdre and Wolfgang,  thank you for an inspiration for the blog on 
prefixes <http://t.co/dSXy6TaY> wp.me/p81We-9R <http://t.co/dSXy6TaY>

JK


On 11/2/11 1:37 PM, Deirdre Williams wrote:
> Thank you Wolfgang. A slightly wry smile to start my morning.
> Last month Diplo ran an online seminar during which, among other 
> things, the issue of perspective was discussed. Remembering that, and 
> thinking about the Internet and how it works, cannot "shutting other 
> people out" actually and more truthfully, be seen as "shutting oneself 
> in"?
> Deirdre
>
> 2011/11/2 "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang" 
> <wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de 
> <mailto:wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de>>
>
>     http://blogs.ft.com/fttechhub/2011/11/why-government-should-not-touch-the-internet/#axzz1cY9oi4zu
>
>     w
>
>     ____________________________________________________________
>     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, 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
>
>
>
>
> -- 
> “The fundamental cure for poverty is not money but knowledge" Sir 
> William Arthur Lewis, Nobel Prize Economics, 1979

-- 

Jovan Kurbalija, PhD

Director

DiploFoundation

www.diplomacy.edu <http://www.diplomacy.edu>

/The latest from Diplo/... Follow us on /@DiplomacyEdu 
<http://www.twitter.com/diplomacyedu> /for the latest in Diplomacy *| 
*Internet governance *| *Climate Change

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111102/4afac6df/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, 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


From avri at acm.org  Wed Nov  2 12:29:55 2011
From: avri at acm.org (Avri Doria)
Date: Wed, 2 Nov 2011 12:29:55 -0400
Subject: [governance] =?UTF-8?Q?Is_really_Bulgarian_Cyrillic_=2E=D0=B1?=
 =?UTF-8?Q?=D0=B3_=28=2Ebg=29_similar_to_other_Latin_ccTLDs=3F?=
In-Reply-To: <4EB12D34.4060404@cafonso.ca>
References: <1291131665.20152.1407897083@webmail.messagingengine.com>	<CAJwbTiA0ixrMYBTWFGZLphuHKzWwOVrYiAvc9yBf8WQsMN-66w@mail.gmail.com>	<CA+EjHYpNDBuY4NGi0wm7fT7N9ZsMPsZ_X5TftNeD5c3aSLP+Bw@mail.gmail.com>	<4D7DCD47-E74D-47E1-ABE7-6BAD2BF29337@psg.com>	<CA+EjHYqKSTcbfqP7y-ymR-Aw3Rax1PttuaSPHzu8oSYHX_UWfA@mail.gmail.com> <CAJwbTiD4eDSgOg2Chtm8f7xYRfkqdW8QDYWBnX95qOPF6UqjRQ@mail.gmail.com> <4EB12D34.4060404@cafonso.ca>
Message-ID: <47D5B55C-0217-47F4-A1AE-2C7372F961A7@acm.org>

Carlos:

What issue is settled?

IANA certainly made a decision in favor of Brazil and to the detriment of Bulgaria.
But I do not see how that settles anything.

Given the unknown and seemingly ridiculous basis of the decision, what it opens up is the discussion of how this can remediated and how the process can be fixed to keep more of these decisions from being made badly.  At the least there needs to be a transparent decision process and a clear appeals mechanism.

avri


On 2 Nov 2011, at 07:44, Carlos A. Afonso wrote:

> Isn't this ophtalmologic discussion a bit outdated, since it seems the
> rules are already settled on the issue (for good, bad or worse)?
> 
> frt rgds
> 
> --c.a.
> 
> On 11/01/2011 11:22 PM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro wrote:
>> On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 1:32 PM, Louis Pouzin (well) <pouzin at well.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> Avri,
>>> 
>>> The two characters of a cctld may be in opposite cases.
>>> 
>>> With this font up *I* is visually identical to low *l*, and Italy is
>>> confused with Lithuania.
>>> 
>>> 16 cctld's exhibit similar confusions.
>>> 
>> 
>> Out of curiosity which are the 16 ccTLDs?
>> 
>>> 
>>> Too bad
>>> - - -
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 18:15, Avri Doria <avri at psg.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> ageed on .бг & .br
>>>> disagree on .it & .lt  or .IT & .LT
>>>> 
>>>> but think that if .it & .lt is acceptable then .бг & .br should be as well
>>>> 
>>>> avri
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>> ____________________________________________________________
>>> 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


From jcurran at istaff.org  Wed Nov  2 14:09:26 2011
From: jcurran at istaff.org (John Curran)
Date: Wed, 2 Nov 2011 14:09:26 -0400
Subject: [governance] =?UTF-8?Q?Is_really_Bulgarian_Cyrillic_=2E=D0=B1?=
 =?UTF-8?Q?=D0=B3_=28=2Ebg=29_similar_to_other_Latin_ccTLDs=3F?=
In-Reply-To: <47D5B55C-0217-47F4-A1AE-2C7372F961A7@acm.org>
References: <1291131665.20152.1407897083@webmail.messagingengine.com> <CAJwbTiA0ixrMYBTWFGZLphuHKzWwOVrYiAvc9yBf8WQsMN-66w@mail.gmail.com> <CA+EjHYpNDBuY4NGi0wm7fT7N9ZsMPsZ_X5TftNeD5c3aSLP+Bw@mail.gmail.com> <4D7DCD47-E74D-47E1-ABE7-6BAD2BF29337@psg.com> <CA+EjHYqKSTcbfqP7y-ymR-Aw3Rax1PttuaSPHzu8oSYHX_UWfA@mail.gmail.com> <CAJwbTiD4eDSgOg2Chtm8f7xYRfkqdW8QDYWBnX95qOPF6UqjRQ@mail.gmail.com> <4EB12D34.4060404@cafonso.ca> <47D5B55C-0217-47F4-A1AE-2C7372F961A7@acm.org>
Message-ID: <754021EA-7BEF-4A22-8F4A-836E85BEC60E@istaff.org>

On Nov 2, 2011, at 12:29 PM, Avri Doria wrote:

> IANA certainly made a decision in favor of Brazil and to the detriment of Bulgaria.

Avri - 

I do not believe that "IANA" (either in the classic IAB use 
of the term, or formal use per IANA Function Contract) was 
involved in this decision.   I believe that you meant either 
"ICANN" or "ICANN DNS Stability Panel" given the context.

FYI,
/John____________________________________________________________
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


From ca at cafonso.ca  Wed Nov  2 15:35:23 2011
From: ca at cafonso.ca (Carlos A. Afonso)
Date: Wed, 02 Nov 2011 17:35:23 -0200
Subject: [governance] =?UTF-8?Q?Is_really_Bulgarian_Cyrillic_=2E=D0=B1?=
 =?UTF-8?Q?=D0=B3_=28=2Ebg=29_similar_to_other_Latin_ccTLDs=3F?=
In-Reply-To: <47D5B55C-0217-47F4-A1AE-2C7372F961A7@acm.org>
References: <1291131665.20152.1407897083@webmail.messagingengine.com>	<CAJwbTiA0ixrMYBTWFGZLphuHKzWwOVrYiAvc9yBf8WQsMN-66w@mail.gmail.com>	<CA+EjHYpNDBuY4NGi0wm7fT7N9ZsMPsZ_X5TftNeD5c3aSLP+Bw@mail.gmail.com>	<4D7DCD47-E74D-47E1-ABE7-6BAD2BF29337@psg.com>	<CA+EjHYqKSTcbfqP7y-ymR-Aw3Rax1PttuaSPHzu8oSYHX_UWfA@mail.gmail.com> <CAJwbTiD4eDSgOg2Chtm8f7xYRfkqdW8QDYWBnX95qOPF6UqjRQ@mail.gmail.com> <4EB12D34.4060404@cafonso.ca> <47D5B55C-0217-47F4-A1AE-2C7372F961A7@acm.org>
Message-ID: <4EB19B7B.4050303@cafonso.ca>

I posed a question... :)

--c.a.

On 11/02/2011 02:29 PM, Avri Doria wrote:
> Carlos:
> 
> What issue is settled?
> 
> IANA certainly made a decision in favor of Brazil and to the detriment of Bulgaria.
> But I do not see how that settles anything.
> 
> Given the unknown and seemingly ridiculous basis of the decision, what it opens up is the discussion of how this can remediated and how the process can be fixed to keep more of these decisions from being made badly.  At the least there needs to be a transparent decision process and a clear appeals mechanism.
> 
> avri
> 
> 
> On 2 Nov 2011, at 07:44, Carlos A. Afonso wrote:
> 
>> Isn't this ophtalmologic discussion a bit outdated, since it seems the
>> rules are already settled on the issue (for good, bad or worse)?
>>
>> frt rgds
>>
>> --c.a.
>>
>> On 11/01/2011 11:22 PM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro wrote:
>>> On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 1:32 PM, Louis Pouzin (well) <pouzin at well.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Avri,
>>>>
>>>> The two characters of a cctld may be in opposite cases.
>>>>
>>>> With this font up *I* is visually identical to low *l*, and Italy is
>>>> confused with Lithuania.
>>>>
>>>> 16 cctld's exhibit similar confusions.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Out of curiosity which are the 16 ccTLDs?
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Too bad
>>>> - - -
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 18:15, Avri Doria <avri at psg.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> ageed on .бг & .br
>>>>> disagree on .it & .lt  or .IT & .LT
>>>>>
>>>>> but think that if .it & .lt is acceptable then .бг & .br should be as well
>>>>>
>>>>> avri
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> ____________________________________________________________
>>>> 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
> 
> 
____________________________________________________________
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


From nhklein at gmx.net  Wed Nov  2 21:51:39 2011
From: nhklein at gmx.net (nhklein)
Date: Thu, 03 Nov 2011 08:51:39 +0700
Subject: [governance] =?UTF-8?Q?Is_really_Bulgarian_Cyrillic_=2E=D0=B1?=
 =?UTF-8?Q?=D0=B3_=28=2Ebg=29_similar_to_other_Latin_ccTLDs=3F?=
In-Reply-To: <4EB19B7B.4050303@cafonso.ca>
References: <1291131665.20152.1407897083@webmail.messagingengine.com>	<CAJwbTiA0ixrMYBTWFGZLphuHKzWwOVrYiAvc9yBf8WQsMN-66w@mail.gmail.com>	<CA+EjHYpNDBuY4NGi0wm7fT7N9ZsMPsZ_X5TftNeD5c3aSLP+Bw@mail.gmail.com>	<4D7DCD47-E74D-47E1-ABE7-6BAD2BF29337@psg.com>	<CA+EjHYqKSTcbfqP7y-ymR-Aw3Rax1PttuaSPHzu8oSYHX_UWfA@mail.gmail.com> <CAJwbTiD4eDSgOg2Chtm8f7xYRfkqdW8QDYWBnX95qOPF6UqjRQ@mail.gmail.com> <4EB12D34.4060404@cafonso.ca> <47D5B55C-0217-47F4-A1AE-2C7372F961A7@acm.org> <4EB19B7B.4050303@cafonso.ca>
Message-ID: <4EB1F3AB.8010909@gmx.net>

Hi all,

I am happy that his issue comes now up here. As you know following the 
thread back, it is an old issue, but when the conflict arose, not many 
people got involved - and the Bulgarian applicant was in a way left 
alone (there is no clear, appropriate ICANN appeal process, as far as I 
know).

The ophthalmologic discussion is maybe interesting - or tragic-funny, 
but what is needed is to go beyond: the issue is not settled! A 
technically powerful body in ICANN can decide and override the broadly 
based decision of the Bulgarian people concerned and involved in an IDN 
problem.

How can this be brought to a solution? GNSO? Who can take a 
"procedurally correct and efficient" initiative? And if possible soon - 
as it has been dragging on already very long.


Norbert Klein
(a resident in the Bulgarian Embassy Apartment in Phnom Penh/Cambodia)

= =


On 11/03/2011 02:35 AM, Carlos A. Afonso wrote:
> I posed a question... :)
>
> --c.a.
>
> On 11/02/2011 02:29 PM, Avri Doria wrote:
>> Carlos:
>>
>> What issue is settled?
>>
>> IANA certainly made a decision in favor of Brazil and to the detriment of Bulgaria.
>> But I do not see how that settles anything.
>>
>> Given the unknown and seemingly ridiculous basis of the decision, what it opens up is the discussion of how this can remediated and how the process can be fixed to keep more of these decisions from being made badly.  At the least there needs to be a transparent decision process and a clear appeals mechanism.
>>
>> avri
>>
>>
>> On 2 Nov 2011, at 07:44, Carlos A. Afonso wrote:
>>
>>> Isn't this ophtalmologic discussion a bit outdated, since it seems the
>>> rules are already settled on the issue (for good, bad or worse)?
>>>
>>> frt rgds
>>>
>>> --c.a.
>>>

-- 
A while ago, I started a new blog:

...thinking it over... after 21 years in Cambodia
http://www.thinking21.org/

continuing to share reports and comments from Cambodia.

Norbert Klein
nhklein at gmx.net
Phnom Penh / Cambodia


____________________________________________________________
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


From jcurran at istaff.org  Wed Nov  2 22:33:32 2011
From: jcurran at istaff.org (John Curran)
Date: Wed, 2 Nov 2011 22:33:32 -0400
Subject: [governance] =?UTF-8?Q?Is_really_Bulgarian_Cyrillic_=2E=D0=B1?=
 =?UTF-8?Q?=D0=B3_=28=2Ebg=29_similar_to_other_Latin_ccTLDs=3F?=
In-Reply-To: <4EB1F3AB.8010909@gmx.net>
References: <1291131665.20152.1407897083@webmail.messagingengine.com> <CAJwbTiA0ixrMYBTWFGZLphuHKzWwOVrYiAvc9yBf8WQsMN-66w@mail.gmail.com> <CA+EjHYpNDBuY4NGi0wm7fT7N9ZsMPsZ_X5TftNeD5c3aSLP+Bw@mail.gmail.com> <4D7DCD47-E74D-47E1-ABE7-6BAD2BF29337@psg.com> <CA+EjHYqKSTcbfqP7y-ymR-Aw3Rax1PttuaSPHzu8oSYHX_UWfA@mail.gmail.com> <CAJwbTiD4eDSgOg2Chtm8f7xYRfkqdW8QDYWBnX95qOPF6UqjRQ@mail.gmail.com> <4EB12D34.4060404@cafonso.ca> <47D5B55C-0217-47F4-A1AE-2C7372F961A7@acm.org> <4EB19B7B.4050303@cafonso.ca> <4EB1F3AB.8010909@gmx.net>
Message-ID: <31712C30-80CA-4453-B517-521AA15F6261@istaff.org>

On Nov 2, 2011, at 9:51 PM, nhklein wrote:

> Hi all,
> 
> I am happy that his issue comes now up here. As you know following the thread back, it is an old issue, but when the conflict arose, not many people got involved - and the Bulgarian applicant was in a way left alone (there is no clear, appropriate ICANN appeal process, as far as I know).
> 
> The ophthalmologic discussion is maybe interesting - or tragic-funny, but what is needed is to go beyond: the issue is not settled! A technically powerful body in ICANN can decide and override the broadly based decision of the Bulgarian people concerned and involved in an IDN problem.
> 
> How can this be brought to a solution? GNSO? Who can take a "procedurally correct and efficient" initiative? And if possible soon - as it has been dragging on already very long.

If I felt that ICANN had made a decision without full consideration
of the relevant material information, I'd chat with their Ombudsman 
to review the possible next steps in getting it corrected:

    <http://www.icann.org/en/general/accountability_review.html>

I have no idea if that's called for in this particular situation, 
but there does seem to be some very clear processes documented for
handling such situations.

FYI,
/John____________________________________________________________
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


From daniel at digsys.bg  Thu Nov  3 03:39:06 2011
From: daniel at digsys.bg (Daniel Kalchev)
Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2011 09:39:06 +0200
Subject: [governance] =?UTF-8?Q?Is_really_Bulgarian_Cyrillic_=2E=D0=B1?=
 =?UTF-8?Q?=D0=B3_=28=2Ebg=29_similar_to_other_Latin_ccTLDs=3F?=
In-Reply-To: <31712C30-80CA-4453-B517-521AA15F6261@istaff.org>
References: <1291131665.20152.1407897083@webmail.messagingengine.com> <CAJwbTiA0ixrMYBTWFGZLphuHKzWwOVrYiAvc9yBf8WQsMN-66w@mail.gmail.com> <CA+EjHYpNDBuY4NGi0wm7fT7N9ZsMPsZ_X5TftNeD5c3aSLP+Bw@mail.gmail.com> <4D7DCD47-E74D-47E1-ABE7-6BAD2BF29337@psg.com> <CA+EjHYqKSTcbfqP7y-ymR-Aw3Rax1PttuaSPHzu8oSYHX_UWfA@mail.gmail.com> <CAJwbTiD4eDSgOg2Chtm8f7xYRfkqdW8QDYWBnX95qOPF6UqjRQ@mail.gmail.com> <4EB12D34.4060404@cafonso.ca> <47D5B55C-0217-47F4-A1AE-2C7372F961A7@acm.org> <4EB19B7B.4050303@cafonso.ca> <4EB1F3AB.8010909@gmx.net> <31712C30-80CA-4453-B517-521AA15F6261@istaff.org>
Message-ID: <80D0C874-EF78-448F-8509-0F66A79AED0A@digsys.bg>


On Nov 3, 2011, at 4:33 AM, John Curran wrote:

> If I felt that ICANN had made a decision without full consideration
> of the relevant material information, I'd chat with their Ombudsman 
> to review the possible next steps in getting it corrected:

We have considered such course of action, but it turns out that the Ombudsman does not really have any say in such situations.

The problem is, that "ICANN" has decided nothing. They were advised by the "linguistic expert panel" that this string is confusingly similar with an existing ccTLD (funny, nobody ever says this is .br). Then ICANN staff offered the applicant to withdraw the application. There is no decision whatsoever by anybody at ICANN, including the board --- therefore no way to use the respective tools for appeal.

It cost me and a group of experts great effort to analyze the situation and suggest that the application should not be withdrawn without any proof related to this 'opinion'.
For me, the request to withdraw the application is a form of social engineering…

Daniel____________________________________________________________
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


From nb at bollow.ch  Thu Nov  3 04:10:16 2011
From: nb at bollow.ch (Norbert Bollow)
Date: Thu,  3 Nov 2011 09:10:16 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [governance] Call and Charter for a Free Parliament
Message-ID: <20111103081016.3124715C110@quill.bollow.ch>

I've thought a bit more about the idea of a parliament that could
take over, among other topics, the current role of the US government
in oversight over some key aspects of the Internet, as well as part
of the role of ICANN for "bottom-up" policy decisions.

Greetings,
Norbert


--snip---------------------------------------------------------------

                     Call and Charter

                          for a

                      Free Parliament

      on Human Rights and Other World-Wide Concerns



           Version 0.1, 2011-11-03, nb at bollow.ch



The free societies of the world shall each democratically elect
representatives who will be members of a Free Parliament that
debates and decides resolutions on matters of human rights and
other world-wide concerns.

A free society is what emerges and self-organizes in every
country that has a democratic government which respects freedom
of opinion and freedom of communication, and which protects the
human rights of minorities.

The residents of each country whose government fulfils these
conditions shall elect a number of representatives as members of
the Free Parliament, where the number of these representatives
shall be equal to the square root of the one millionth part of the
number of residents of the country, rounded up to the smallest
integer not exceeding this square root value. So for example
when a country with a population in the range from 4000001 to
9000000 people has a government that protects the fundamental
values of a free society, the residents of that country shall
elect three members of the Free Parliament.

The members of the Free Parliament shall each take an oath of
office in which they solemnly swear to be and remain in this
work free from any commitment to political or economic particular
interests, to seek what is good for humanity as a whole, and to
participate in the debates and votes of the Free Parliamanet
according to the perspective of their own understanding and
conscience. The term of office of members of the Free Parliament
shall be four years, with the possibility of re-election.

On each issue that the Free Parliament chooses (by means of a
majority vote in response to a motion from any member) to consider
for the purpose of passing a resolution, a public call for draft
resolutions shall be published between fourteen and fifteen
months before the scheduled start of the debate, and draft
resolutions for consideration shall be received from any source
until one month before the scheduled start of the debate. No
debate shall start before it is scheduled to start.

On each such issue where more than two proposed draft resolutions
have been submitted, the decision-making process of the Free
Parliament shall proceed in these three steps: First there shall
be a debate. Then there shall be a first vote during which each
member of the Free Parliament votes "yes" or "no" to each of the
proposals. Seven days after the results of this vote have been
announced, there shall be a second vote in which the members of
the Free Parliament choose between the following three options:
The two proposals that had received the greatest number of "yes"
votes in the first vote, and "disagree with both of these proposals"
as the third option. If one of the proposals achieves an absolute
majority of votes in this second vote, it shall be deemed to have
been passed as a resolution of the Free Parliament. On issues where
less than three proposed draft resolutions have been submitted, the
first of these two votes is skipped.

If this process has ended without resulting in the passing of a
resolution, members of the Free Parliament are of course free to
move again for adding the issue to the agenda of the Free Parliamant.
If that motion passes, it shall result in another public call for
draft resolutions.

The debates and votes of the Free Parliament shall be openly
published on the Internet, with each statement and vote attributed
by name to the corresponding member of the Free Parliament.

The Free Parliament may decide changes to this Charter by means of
the process for adopting resolutions. All other procedural matters
shall be decided by the Free Parliament by means of a majority vote
in response to a motion from any member.

--snap---------------------------------------------------------------
____________________________________________________________
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


From ajp at glocom.ac.jp  Thu Nov  3 04:24:39 2011
From: ajp at glocom.ac.jp (Adam Peake)
Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2011 17:24:39 +0900
Subject: [governance] =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Is_really_Bulgarian_Cyrillic_=2E?=
 =?ISO-8859-1?Q?=B7=93___=28=2Ebg=29_similar_to_other_Latin_ccTLDs=3F?=
In-Reply-To: <80D0C874-EF78-448F-8509-0F66A79AED0A@digsys.bg>
References: <1291131665.20152.1407897083@webmail.messagingengine.com>
 <CAJwbTiA0ixrMYBTWFGZLphuHKzWwOVrYiAvc9yBf8WQsMN-66w@mail.gmail.com>
 <CA+EjHYpNDBuY4NGi0wm7fT7N9ZsMPsZ_X5TftNeD5c3aSLP+Bw@mail.gmail.com>
 <4D7DCD47-E74D-47E1-ABE7-6BAD2BF29337@psg.com>
 <CA+EjHYqKSTcbfqP7y-ymR-Aw3Rax1PttuaSPHzu8oSYHX_UWfA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAJwbTiD4eDSgOg2Chtm8f7xYRfkqdW8QDYWBnX95qOPF6UqjRQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <4EB12D34.4060404@cafonso.ca>
 <47D5B55C-0217-47F4-A1AE-2C7372F961A7@acm.org>
 <4EB19B7B.4050303@cafonso.ca> <4EB1F3AB.8010909@gmx.net>
 <31712C30-80CA-4453-B517-521AA15F6261@istaff.org>
 <80D0C874-EF78-448F-8509-0F66A79AED0A@digsys.bg>
Message-ID: <p06240810cad7fe7bb53c@[192.168.1.160]>

"The Ombudsman does not have the power to make, 
change or set aside a policy, administrative or 
Board decision, act, or omission. The Ombudsman 
does have the power to investigate these events, 
and to use ADR technique to resolve them."

He's there to try and resolve disputes.  He has 
powers to make ICANN listen.  It's free (expect 
for your further time and effort.)

Current Ombudsman seems extremely professional, pleasant to talk to.

Adam


>On Nov 3, 2011, at 4:33 AM, John Curran wrote:
>
>>  If I felt that ICANN had made a decision without full consideration
>  > of the relevant material information, I'd chat with their Ombudsman
>>  to review the possible next steps in getting it corrected:
>
>We have considered such course of action, but it 
>turns out that the Ombudsman does not really 
>have any say in such situations.
>
>The problem is, that "ICANN" has decided 
>nothing. They were advised by the "linguistic 
>expert panel" that this string is confusingly 
>similar with an existing ccTLD (funny, nobody 
>ever says this is .br). Then ICANN staff offered 
>the applicant to withdraw the application. There 
>is no decision whatsoever by anybody at ICANN, 
>including the board --- therefore no way to use 
>the respective tools for appeal.
>
>It cost me and a group of experts great effort 
>to analyze the situation and suggest that the 
>application should not be withdrawn without any 
>proof related to this 'opinion'.
>For me, the request to withdraw the application 
>is a form of social engineeringŠ
>
>Daniel____________________________________________________________
>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


From wolfgang.benedek at uni-graz.at  Thu Nov  3 05:03:31 2011
From: wolfgang.benedek at uni-graz.at (Benedek, Wolfgang (wolfgang.benedek@uni-graz.at))
Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2011 10:03:31 +0100
Subject: [governance] Call and Charter for a Free Parliament
In-Reply-To: <20111103081016.3124715C110@quill.bollow.ch>
Message-ID: <CAD81733.B83C%wolfgang.benedek@uni-graz.at>

Please, note that there is already a quite advanced initiative in this
direction. See http://www.facebook.com/unpacampaign

Kind regards

Wolfgang Benedek







Am 03.11.11 09:10 schrieb "Norbert Bollow" unter <nb at bollow.ch>:

>I've thought a bit more about the idea of a parliament that could
>take over, among other topics, the current role of the US government
>in oversight over some key aspects of the Internet, as well as part
>of the role of ICANN for "bottom-up" policy decisions.
>
>Greetings,
>Norbert
>
>
>--snip---------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                     Call and Charter
>
>                          for a
>
>                      Free Parliament
>
>      on Human Rights and Other World-Wide Concerns
>
>
>
>           Version 0.1, 2011-11-03, nb at bollow.ch
>
>
>
>The free societies of the world shall each democratically elect
>representatives who will be members of a Free Parliament that
>debates and decides resolutions on matters of human rights and
>other world-wide concerns.
>
>A free society is what emerges and self-organizes in every
>country that has a democratic government which respects freedom
>of opinion and freedom of communication, and which protects the
>human rights of minorities.
>
>The residents of each country whose government fulfils these
>conditions shall elect a number of representatives as members of
>the Free Parliament, where the number of these representatives
>shall be equal to the square root of the one millionth part of the
>number of residents of the country, rounded up to the smallest
>integer not exceeding this square root value. So for example
>when a country with a population in the range from 4000001 to
>9000000 people has a government that protects the fundamental
>values of a free society, the residents of that country shall
>elect three members of the Free Parliament.
>
>The members of the Free Parliament shall each take an oath of
>office in which they solemnly swear to be and remain in this
>work free from any commitment to political or economic particular
>interests, to seek what is good for humanity as a whole, and to
>participate in the debates and votes of the Free Parliamanet
>according to the perspective of their own understanding and
>conscience. The term of office of members of the Free Parliament
>shall be four years, with the possibility of re-election.
>
>On each issue that the Free Parliament chooses (by means of a
>majority vote in response to a motion from any member) to consider
>for the purpose of passing a resolution, a public call for draft
>resolutions shall be published between fourteen and fifteen
>months before the scheduled start of the debate, and draft
>resolutions for consideration shall be received from any source
>until one month before the scheduled start of the debate. No
>debate shall start before it is scheduled to start.
>
>On each such issue where more than two proposed draft resolutions
>have been submitted, the decision-making process of the Free
>Parliament shall proceed in these three steps: First there shall
>be a debate. Then there shall be a first vote during which each
>member of the Free Parliament votes "yes" or "no" to each of the
>proposals. Seven days after the results of this vote have been
>announced, there shall be a second vote in which the members of
>the Free Parliament choose between the following three options:
>The two proposals that had received the greatest number of "yes"
>votes in the first vote, and "disagree with both of these proposals"
>as the third option. If one of the proposals achieves an absolute
>majority of votes in this second vote, it shall be deemed to have
>been passed as a resolution of the Free Parliament. On issues where
>less than three proposed draft resolutions have been submitted, the
>first of these two votes is skipped.
>
>If this process has ended without resulting in the passing of a
>resolution, members of the Free Parliament are of course free to
>move again for adding the issue to the agenda of the Free Parliamant.
>If that motion passes, it shall result in another public call for
>draft resolutions.
>
>The debates and votes of the Free Parliament shall be openly
>published on the Internet, with each statement and vote attributed
>by name to the corresponding member of the Free Parliament.
>
>The Free Parliament may decide changes to this Charter by means of
>the process for adopting resolutions. All other procedural matters
>shall be decided by the Free Parliament by means of a majority vote
>in response to a motion from any member.
>
>--snap---------------------------------------------------------------
>____________________________________________________________
>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


From ca at cafonso.ca  Thu Nov  3 06:57:19 2011
From: ca at cafonso.ca (Carlos A. Afonso)
Date: Thu, 03 Nov 2011 08:57:19 -0200
Subject: [governance] =?UTF-8?Q?Is_really_Bulgarian_Cyrillic_=2E=D0=B1?=
 =?UTF-8?Q?=D0=B3_=28=2Ebg=29_similar_to_other_Latin_ccTLDs=3F?=
In-Reply-To: <4EB1F3AB.8010909@gmx.net>
References: <1291131665.20152.1407897083@webmail.messagingengine.com>	<CAJwbTiA0ixrMYBTWFGZLphuHKzWwOVrYiAvc9yBf8WQsMN-66w@mail.gmail.com>	<CA+EjHYpNDBuY4NGi0wm7fT7N9ZsMPsZ_X5TftNeD5c3aSLP+Bw@mail.gmail.com>	<4D7DCD47-E74D-47E1-ABE7-6BAD2BF29337@psg.com>	<CA+EjHYqKSTcbfqP7y-ymR-Aw3Rax1PttuaSPHzu8oSYHX_UWfA@mail.gmail.com> <CAJwbTiD4eDSgOg2Chtm8f7xYRfkqdW8QDYWBnX95qOPF6UqjRQ@mail.gmail.com> <4EB12D34.4060404@cafonso.ca> <47D5B55C-0217-47F4-A1AE-2C7372F961A7@acm.org> <4EB19B7B.4050303@cafonso.ca> <4EB1F3AB.8010909@gmx.net>
Message-ID: <4EB2738F.8070005@cafonso.ca>

Hi Norbert, I agree mostly anything (except perhaps formal binding
contracts) can be overridden, but I see no signs of a proposal which
would convince Icann to change decisions already made.

E.g, how about proposing that cyrillic ccTLDs have three instead of two
chars, using ISO 3166-1 alpha-3 instead of alpha-2? Anathema, great,
whatever, but were are the concrete proposals on the table? This is why
I posed the question with my implicit view that this might not change if
concrete, sound proposals are not submitted and enable consensus.

--c.a.

On 11/02/2011 11:51 PM, nhklein wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> I am happy that his issue comes now up here. As you know following the
> thread back, it is an old issue, but when the conflict arose, not many
> people got involved - and the Bulgarian applicant was in a way left
> alone (there is no clear, appropriate ICANN appeal process, as far as I
> know).
> 
> The ophthalmologic discussion is maybe interesting - or tragic-funny,
> but what is needed is to go beyond: the issue is not settled! A
> technically powerful body in ICANN can decide and override the broadly
> based decision of the Bulgarian people concerned and involved in an IDN
> problem.
> 
> How can this be brought to a solution? GNSO? Who can take a
> "procedurally correct and efficient" initiative? And if possible soon -
> as it has been dragging on already very long.
> 
> 
> Norbert Klein
> (a resident in the Bulgarian Embassy Apartment in Phnom Penh/Cambodia)
> 
> = =
> 
> 
> On 11/03/2011 02:35 AM, Carlos A. Afonso wrote:
>> I posed a question... :)
>>
>> --c.a.
>>
>> On 11/02/2011 02:29 PM, Avri Doria wrote:
>>> Carlos:
>>>
>>> What issue is settled?
>>>
>>> IANA certainly made a decision in favor of Brazil and to the
>>> detriment of Bulgaria.
>>> But I do not see how that settles anything.
>>>
>>> Given the unknown and seemingly ridiculous basis of the decision,
>>> what it opens up is the discussion of how this can remediated and how
>>> the process can be fixed to keep more of these decisions from being
>>> made badly.  At the least there needs to be a transparent decision
>>> process and a clear appeals mechanism.
>>>
>>> avri
>>>
>>>
>>> On 2 Nov 2011, at 07:44, Carlos A. Afonso wrote:
>>>
>>>> Isn't this ophtalmologic discussion a bit outdated, since it seems the
>>>> rules are already settled on the issue (for good, bad or worse)?
>>>>
>>>> frt rgds
>>>>
>>>> --c.a.
>>>>
> 
____________________________________________________________
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


From daniel at digsys.bg  Thu Nov  3 07:56:06 2011
From: daniel at digsys.bg (Daniel Kalchev)
Date: Thu, 03 Nov 2011 13:56:06 +0200
Subject: [governance] =?UTF-8?Q?Is_really_Bulgarian_Cyrillic_=2E=D0=B1?=
 =?UTF-8?Q?=D0=B3_=28=2Ebg=29_similar_to_other_Latin_ccTLDs=3F?=
In-Reply-To: <4EB2738F.8070005@cafonso.ca>
References: <1291131665.20152.1407897083@webmail.messagingengine.com>	<CAJwbTiA0ixrMYBTWFGZLphuHKzWwOVrYiAvc9yBf8WQsMN-66w@mail.gmail.com>	<CA+EjHYpNDBuY4NGi0wm7fT7N9ZsMPsZ_X5TftNeD5c3aSLP+Bw@mail.gmail.com>	<4D7DCD47-E74D-47E1-ABE7-6BAD2BF29337@psg.com>	<CA+EjHYqKSTcbfqP7y-ymR-Aw3Rax1PttuaSPHzu8oSYHX_UWfA@mail.gmail.com> <CAJwbTiD4eDSgOg2Chtm8f7xYRfkqdW8QDYWBnX95qOPF6UqjRQ@mail.gmail.com> <4EB12D34.4060404@cafonso.ca> <47D5B55C-0217-47F4-A1AE-2C7372F961A7@acm.org> <4EB19B7B.4050303@cafonso.ca> <4EB1F3AB.8010909@gmx.net> <4EB2738F.8070005@cafonso.ca>
Message-ID: <4EB28156.9050700@digsys.bg>



On 03.11.11 12:57, Carlos A. Afonso wrote:
> Hi Norbert, I agree mostly anything (except perhaps formal binding
> contracts) can be overridden, but I see no signs of a proposal which
> would convince Icann to change decisions already made.

Problem is, there is no decision, by anyone, on this subject. There is 
only this 'expert' opinion about confusability, floating around.

If there was a decision, there would already be appeal or other process 
to challenge it. There is, an year and a half already, social 
engineering effort to convince Bulgaria to withdraw it's request for .бг.

> E.g, how about proposing that cyrillic ccTLDs have three instead of two
> chars, using ISO 3166-1 alpha-3 instead of alpha-2? Anathema, great,
> whatever, but were are the concrete proposals on the table? This is why
> I posed the question with my implicit view that this might not change if
> concrete, sound proposals are not submitted and enable consensus.

There is already research to permit 'single letter' IDN labels in the 
root. It appears that the opinion so far is that this should not be a 
problem. My guess is, there is already an IDN gTLD ... customer... that 
demonstrated such demand.

The original IDN Fast Track procedure had quite different idea, than the 
actual implementation. Under the original idea, it was not ICANN's 
business to decide what labels are acceptable. There were many 
proposals, from various international bodies, including the ISO 3166 
committee (of which ICANN is a member) to produce an "IDN list of 
country codes". All of these were denied by ICANN. The obvious reason at 
the time was that "it will take too much time", but then, the IDN Fast 
Track proposal already took too much time.

The ISO 3166-1 list is just that -- a list of codes that countries 
agreed to identify each of them (using one procedure or another). There 
is no anonymous 'linguistic expert panel' that has veto rights or such. 
The process is slow but stable and quite predictable. I believe at some 
point ISO3166 will have IDN codes as well, soon or later, with our 
without ICANN. Since these codes are used for many more things than 
domain names on Internet, it is likely ICANN will have no say in this 
process at all. But one day, there will be these codes in the ISO3166 
list. Guess what will be the code for Bulgaria.

I am little confused by your proposal though: are you suggesting that 
Cyrillic and perhaps Greek alphabet strings for the root (because, we 
talk about a ccTLD now, but the requirements should be the same for 
anything in DNS, right?) should be at least three characters long, as to 
reduce the probability of being confused by a similarly looking Latin 
alphabet strings?

Daniel


____________________________________________________________
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


From ca at cafonso.ca  Thu Nov  3 08:29:09 2011
From: ca at cafonso.ca (Carlos A. Afonso)
Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2011 10:29:09 -0200
Subject: [governance] =?UTF-8?Q?Is_really_Bulgarian_Cyrillic_=2E=D0=B1?=
 =?UTF-8?Q?=D0=B3_=28=2Ebg=29_similar_to_other_Latin_ccTLDs=3F?=
In-Reply-To: <4EB28156.9050700@digsys.bg>
References: <1291131665.20152.1407897083@webmail.messagingengine.com> <CAJwbTiA0ixrMYBTWFGZLphuHKzWwOVrYiAvc9yBf8WQsMN-66w@mail.gmail.com> <CA+EjHYpNDBuY4NGi0wm7fT7N9ZsMPsZ_X5TftNeD5c3aSLP+Bw@mail.gmail.com> <4D7DCD47-E74D-47E1-ABE7-6BAD2BF29337@psg.com> <CA+EjHYqKSTcbfqP7y-ymR-Aw3Rax1PttuaSPHzu8oSYHX_UWfA@mail.gmail.com> <CAJwbTiD4eDSgOg2Chtm8f7xYRfkqdW8QDYWBnX95qOPF6UqjRQ@mail.gmail.com> <4EB12D34.4060404@cafonso.ca> <47D5B55C-0217-47F4-A1AE-2C7372F961A7@acm.org> <4EB19B7B.4050303@cafonso.ca> <4EB1F3AB.8010909@gmx.net> <4EB2738F.8070005@cafonso.ca> <4EB28156.9050700@digsys.bg>
Message-ID: <3CC8BECB-16B1-412E-83DE-2D245017854F@cafonso.ca>

No, I just mentioned it as one among several other possible proposals.

sent from a dumbphone

On 03/11/2011, at 09:56, Daniel Kalchev <daniel at digsys.bg> wrote:

> 
> 
> On 03.11.11 12:57, Carlos A. Afonso wrote:
>> Hi Norbert, I agree mostly anything (except perhaps formal binding
>> contracts) can be overridden, but I see no signs of a proposal which
>> would convince Icann to change decisions already made.
> 
> Problem is, there is no decision, by anyone, on this subject. There is only this 'expert' opinion about confusability, floating around.
> 
> If there was a decision, there would already be appeal or other process to challenge it. There is, an year and a half already, social engineering effort to convince Bulgaria to withdraw it's request for .бг.
> 
>> E.g, how about proposing that cyrillic ccTLDs have three instead of two
>> chars, using ISO 3166-1 alpha-3 instead of alpha-2? Anathema, great,
>> whatever, but were are the concrete proposals on the table? This is why
>> I posed the question with my implicit view that this might not change if
>> concrete, sound proposals are not submitted and enable consensus.
> 
> There is already research to permit 'single letter' IDN labels in the root. It appears that the opinion so far is that this should not be a problem. My guess is, there is already an IDN gTLD ... customer... that demonstrated such demand.
> 
> The original IDN Fast Track procedure had quite different idea, than the actual implementation. Under the original idea, it was not ICANN's business to decide what labels are acceptable. There were many proposals, from various international bodies, including the ISO 3166 committee (of which ICANN is a member) to produce an "IDN list of country codes". All of these were denied by ICANN. The obvious reason at the time was that "it will take too much time", but then, the IDN Fast Track proposal already took too much time.
> 
> The ISO 3166-1 list is just that -- a list of codes that countries agreed to identify each of them (using one procedure or another). There is no anonymous 'linguistic expert panel' that has veto rights or such. The process is slow but stable and quite predictable. I believe at some point ISO3166 will have IDN codes as well, soon or later, with our without ICANN. Since these codes are used for many more things than domain names on Internet, it is likely ICANN will have no say in this process at all. But one day, there will be these codes in the ISO3166 list. Guess what will be the code for Bulgaria.
> 
> I am little confused by your proposal though: are you suggesting that Cyrillic and perhaps Greek alphabet strings for the root (because, we talk about a ccTLD now, but the requirements should be the same for anything in DNS, right?) should be at least three characters long, as to reduce the probability of being confused by a similarly looking Latin alphabet strings?
> 
> Daniel
> 
> 
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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


From avri at acm.org  Thu Nov  3 08:50:51 2011
From: avri at acm.org (Avri Doria)
Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2011 08:50:51 -0400
Subject: [governance] =?UTF-8?Q?Is_really_Bulgarian_Cyrillic_=2E=D0=B1?=
 =?UTF-8?Q?=D0=B3_=28=2Ebg=29_similar_to_other_Latin_ccTLDs=3F?=
In-Reply-To: <754021EA-7BEF-4A22-8F4A-836E85BEC60E@istaff.org>
References: <1291131665.20152.1407897083@webmail.messagingengine.com> <CAJwbTiA0ixrMYBTWFGZLphuHKzWwOVrYiAvc9yBf8WQsMN-66w@mail.gmail.com> <CA+EjHYpNDBuY4NGi0wm7fT7N9ZsMPsZ_X5TftNeD5c3aSLP+Bw@mail.gmail.com> <4D7DCD47-E74D-47E1-ABE7-6BAD2BF29337@psg.com> <CA+EjHYqKSTcbfqP7y-ymR-Aw3Rax1PttuaSPHzu8oSYHX_UWfA@mail.gmail.com> <CAJwbTiD4eDSgOg2Chtm8f7xYRfkqdW8QDYWBnX95qOPF6UqjRQ@mail.gmail.com> <4EB12D34.4060404@cafonso.ca> <47D5B55C-0217-47F4-A1AE-2C7372F961A7@acm.org> <754021EA-7BEF-4A22-8F4A-836E85BEC60E@istaff.org>
Message-ID: <0BEB5F21-54A0-484D-84A4-8913AE894ACF@acm.org>

John,  

I thought this was a Fast Track process managed by IANA.  and that it is IANA that gets the recommendation from the Panel and make the determination on whether to proceed or not.

I need to go back and check the process details, but I did not think there was any actual ICANN-that-is-not-IANA processing in this decision.  That is what makes it so hard to deal with by anyone as it occurs in the protected core of IANA.

avri

On 2 Nov 2011, at 14:09, John Curran wrote:

> On Nov 2, 2011, at 12:29 PM, Avri Doria wrote:
> 
>> IANA certainly made a decision in favor of Brazil and to the detriment of Bulgaria.
> 
> Avri - 
> 
> I do not believe that "IANA" (either in the classic IAB use 
> of the term, or formal use per IANA Function Contract) was 
> involved in this decision.   I believe that you meant either 
> "ICANN" or "ICANN DNS Stability Panel" given the context.
> 
> FYI,
> /John

____________________________________________________________
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


From avri at psg.com  Thu Nov  3 10:31:09 2011
From: avri at psg.com (Avri Doria)
Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2011 10:31:09 -0400
Subject: [governance] =?UTF-8?Q?Is_really_Bulgarian_Cyrillic_=2E=D0=B1?=
 =?UTF-8?Q?=D0=B3_=28=2Ebg=29_similar_to_other_Latin_ccTLDs=3F?=
In-Reply-To: <0BEB5F21-54A0-484D-84A4-8913AE894ACF@acm.org>
References: <1291131665.20152.1407897083@webmail.messagingengine.com> <CAJwbTiA0ixrMYBTWFGZLphuHKzWwOVrYiAvc9yBf8WQsMN-66w@mail.gmail.com> <CA+EjHYpNDBuY4NGi0wm7fT7N9ZsMPsZ_X5TftNeD5c3aSLP+Bw@mail.gmail.com> <4D7DCD47-E74D-47E1-ABE7-6BAD2BF29337@psg.com> <CA+EjHYqKSTcbfqP7y-ymR-Aw3Rax1PttuaSPHzu8oSYHX_UWfA@mail.gmail.com> <CAJwbTiD4eDSgOg2Chtm8f7xYRfkqdW8QDYWBnX95qOPF6UqjRQ@mail.gmail.com> <4EB12D34.4060404@cafonso.ca> <47D5B55C-0217-47F4-A1AE-2C7372F961A7@acm.org> <754021EA-7BEF-4A22-8F4A-836E85BEC60E@istaff.org> <0BEB5F21-54A0-484D-84A4-8913AE894ACF@acm.org>
Message-ID: <D8091442-97DA-41D4-9107-7C9227DCC86A@psg.com>

Hi,

On reviewing the Fast Track Implementation manual, I must concede: it is ICANN, not its IANA component that appears to be at fault here.  My apologies to the good people of IANA.

I beleive that a mistaken opinion from the DNS Stability Panel, Interisle Consulting*, has been accepted without due diligence.  While I have no doubt as to Interisle's technical talent and its ability to protect DNS Stability, I am curious about it capabilities in linguistic judgements and its capabilities in the area of confusing similarity.  What I am more concerned about is the inability for an appeal to this judgement, we all make mistakes and all deserve a chance to have someone correct them.

I might point out that this lack of appeal over string similarity judgements is also a feature, or rather misfeature, of the new gTLD process.  So I expect this case is just the first of many.  Although in the new gTLD process, there is a specialist String Review Panel,  and the function is not overloaded on the DNS Stability Panel.

Avri

* Disclaimer: I am a listed associate of Interisle Consulting, though currently inactive and currently walled off from any of its ICANN activities

On 3 Nov 2011, at 08:50, Avri Doria wrote:

> John,  
> 
> I thought this was a Fast Track process managed by IANA.  and that it is IANA that gets the recommendation from the Panel and make the determination on whether to proceed or not.
> 
> I need to go back and check the process details, but I did not think there was any actual ICANN-that-is-not-IANA processing in this decision.  That is what makes it so hard to deal with by anyone as it occurs in the protected core of IANA.
> 
> avri
> 
> On 2 Nov 2011, at 14:09, John Curran wrote:
> 
>> On Nov 2, 2011, at 12:29 PM, Avri Doria wrote:
>> 
>>> IANA certainly made a decision in favor of Brazil and to the detriment of Bulgaria.
>> 
>> Avri - 
>> 
>> I do not believe that "IANA" (either in the classic IAB use 
>> of the term, or formal use per IANA Function Contract) was 
>> involved in this decision.   I believe that you meant either 
>> "ICANN" or "ICANN DNS Stability Panel" given the context.
>> 
>> FYI,
>> /John
> 
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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


From chrisb at ripe.net  Thu Nov  3 10:37:45 2011
From: chrisb at ripe.net (Chris Buckridge)
Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2011 15:37:45 +0100
Subject: [governance] RIPE Cooperation Working Group webcast
Message-ID: <C2E007F7-377E-4165-8C25-F9643883893D@ripe.net>

Hello all, 

The RIPE Meeting is taking place this week, and the RIPE Cooperation Working Group will meet this afternoon. The agenda may be of interest to some on this list - it includes a presentation by Andrea Glorioso of the European Commission and an update on the work of the CSTD Working Group on improvements to the IGF. 

Proceedings will be webcast live from 16:00 CET (15:00 UTC) at: 
http://ripe63.ripe.net/live/side/

For more information on the RIPE Cooperation Working Group, see: 
https://www.ripe.net/ripe/groups/wg/coop


Best regards,
Chris Buckridge
External Relations Officer, RIPE NCC

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 1744 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111103/263f68e2/attachment.bin>

From jcurran at istaff.org  Thu Nov  3 10:50:02 2011
From: jcurran at istaff.org (John Curran)
Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2011 10:50:02 -0400
Subject: [governance] =?UTF-8?Q?Is_really_Bulgarian_Cyrillic_=2E=D0=B1?=
 =?UTF-8?Q?=D0=B3_=28=2Ebg=29_similar_to_other_Latin_ccTLDs=3F?=
In-Reply-To: <D8091442-97DA-41D4-9107-7C9227DCC86A@psg.com>
References: <1291131665.20152.1407897083@webmail.messagingengine.com> <CAJwbTiA0ixrMYBTWFGZLphuHKzWwOVrYiAvc9yBf8WQsMN-66w@mail.gmail.com> <CA+EjHYpNDBuY4NGi0wm7fT7N9ZsMPsZ_X5TftNeD5c3aSLP+Bw@mail.gmail.com> <4D7DCD47-E74D-47E1-ABE7-6BAD2BF29337@psg.com> <CA+EjHYqKSTcbfqP7y-ymR-Aw3Rax1PttuaSPHzu8oSYHX_UWfA@mail.gmail.com> <CAJwbTiD4eDSgOg2Chtm8f7xYRfkqdW8QDYWBnX95qOPF6UqjRQ@mail.gmail.com> <4EB12D34.4060404@cafonso.ca> <47D5B55C-0217-47F4-A1AE-2C7372F961A7@acm.org> <754021EA-7BEF-4A22-8F4A-836E85BEC60E@istaff.org> <0BEB5F21-54A0-484D-84A4-8913AE894ACF@acm.org> <D8091442-97DA-41D4-9107-7C9227DCC86A@psg.com>
Message-ID: <2B05F52B-DBF8-4EBE-8B01-0156CC223D60@istaff.org>

On Nov 3, 2011, at 10:31 AM, Avri Doria wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> On reviewing the Fast Track Implementation manual, I must concede: it is ICANN, not its IANA component that appears to be at fault here.  My apologies to the good people of IANA.

Avri - No problem at all.   I normally wouldn't even raise the distinction, 
but it is very important for all of us that actions performed under the name 
"IANA" be strictly _recording_ tasks and not involve any judgement other than 
against unequivocal criteria in adopted policy.  Loss of this principle at
this particular point in time would be rather suboptimal on multiple levels.

/John

____________________________________________________________
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


From daniel at digsys.bg  Thu Nov  3 10:49:51 2011
From: daniel at digsys.bg (Daniel Kalchev)
Date: Thu, 03 Nov 2011 16:49:51 +0200
Subject: [governance] =?UTF-8?Q?Is_really_Bulgarian_Cyrillic_=2E=D0=B1?=
 =?UTF-8?Q?=D0=B3_=28=2Ebg=29_similar_to_other_Latin_ccTLDs=3F?=
In-Reply-To: <D8091442-97DA-41D4-9107-7C9227DCC86A@psg.com>
References: <1291131665.20152.1407897083@webmail.messagingengine.com> <CAJwbTiA0ixrMYBTWFGZLphuHKzWwOVrYiAvc9yBf8WQsMN-66w@mail.gmail.com> <CA+EjHYpNDBuY4NGi0wm7fT7N9ZsMPsZ_X5TftNeD5c3aSLP+Bw@mail.gmail.com> <4D7DCD47-E74D-47E1-ABE7-6BAD2BF29337@psg.com> <CA+EjHYqKSTcbfqP7y-ymR-Aw3Rax1PttuaSPHzu8oSYHX_UWfA@mail.gmail.com> <CAJwbTiD4eDSgOg2Chtm8f7xYRfkqdW8QDYWBnX95qOPF6UqjRQ@mail.gmail.com> <4EB12D34.4060404@cafonso.ca> <47D5B55C-0217-47F4-A1AE-2C7372F961A7@acm.org> <754021EA-7BEF-4A22-8F4A-836E85BEC60E@istaff.org> <0BEB5F21-54A0-484D-84A4-8913AE894ACF@acm.org> <D8091442-97DA-41D4-9107-7C9227DCC86A@psg.com>
Message-ID: <4EB2AA0F.1010907@digsys.bg>

Hi Avri,

To further make things complicated, there is a theory within ICANN, that 
the IDN Fast Track process does not have the provision for correcting 
this expert opinion. By reading the Implementation manual however, one 
discovers that such provision is already there: ICANN staff may request 
review by a second three member panel for any application for which it 
was found the string is confusingly similar if either the panel feels 
they are not sufficiently capable or if the opinion is negative and the 
application is struck (our case). There is even a graph in the manual, 
that clearly depicts this situation. That graph cycles trough this 
process until the applicant withdraws the application or it is 
successfully processed.

By the way, we may discuss this at length at our event in Sofia. 
Unofficially, as it is both not part of the program and we do not want 
to make the issue way too public. :-)

Daniel

On 03.11.11 16:31, Avri Doria wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On reviewing the Fast Track Implementation manual, I must concede: it is ICANN, not its IANA component that appears to be at fault here.  My apologies to the good people of IANA.
>
> I beleive that a mistaken opinion from the DNS Stability Panel, Interisle Consulting*, has been accepted without due diligence.  While I have no doubt as to Interisle's technical talent and its ability to protect DNS Stability, I am curious about it capabilities in linguistic judgements and its capabilities in the area of confusing similarity.  What I am more concerned about is the inability for an appeal to this judgement, we all make mistakes and all deserve a chance to have someone correct them.
>
> I might point out that this lack of appeal over string similarity judgements is also a feature, or rather misfeature, of the new gTLD process.  So I expect this case is just the first of many.  Although in the new gTLD process, there is a specialist String Review Panel,  and the function is not overloaded on the DNS Stability Panel.
>
> Avri
>
> * Disclaimer: I am a listed associate of Interisle Consulting, though currently inactive and currently walled off from any of its ICANN activities
>
> On 3 Nov 2011, at 08:50, Avri Doria wrote:
>
>> John,
>>
>> I thought this was a Fast Track process managed by IANA.  and that it is IANA that gets the recommendation from the Panel and make the determination on whether to proceed or not.
>>
>> I need to go back and check the process details, but I did not think there was any actual ICANN-that-is-not-IANA processing in this decision.  That is what makes it so hard to deal with by anyone as it occurs in the protected core of IANA.
>>
>> avri
>>
>> On 2 Nov 2011, at 14:09, John Curran wrote:
>>
>>> On Nov 2, 2011, at 12:29 PM, Avri Doria wrote:
>>>
>>>> IANA certainly made a decision in favor of Brazil and to the detriment of Bulgaria.
>>> Avri -
>>>
>>> I do not believe that "IANA" (either in the classic IAB use
>>> of the term, or formal use per IANA Function Contract) was
>>> involved in this decision.   I believe that you meant either
>>> "ICANN" or "ICANN DNS Stability Panel" given the context.
>>>
>>> FYI,
>>> /John
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> 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
>
____________________________________________________________
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


From wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de  Thu Nov  3 10:47:47 2011
From: wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de (=?iso-8859-1?Q?=22Kleinw=E4chter=2C_Wolfgang=22?=)
Date: Thu, 03 Nov 2011 15:47:47 +0100
Subject: [governance] London
References: <C2E007F7-377E-4165-8C25-F9643883893D@ripe.net>
Message-ID:  <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8D2C6E7@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>

http://marketplace.publicradio.org/display/web/2011/11/03/tech-report-can-nations-really-work-together-on-cybersecurity/?refid=0

Wolfgang
____________________________________________________________
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


From ajp at glocom.ac.jp  Thu Nov  3 11:53:00 2011
From: ajp at glocom.ac.jp (Adam Peake)
Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2011 00:53:00 +0900
Subject: [governance] =?UTF-8?Q?Is_really_Bulgarian_Cyrillic_=2E=D0=B1?=
 =?UTF-8?Q?=D0=B3_=28=2Ebg=29_similar_to_other_Latin_ccTLDs=3F?=
In-Reply-To: <4EB2AA0F.1010907@digsys.bg>
References: <1291131665.20152.1407897083@webmail.messagingengine.com>
	<CAJwbTiA0ixrMYBTWFGZLphuHKzWwOVrYiAvc9yBf8WQsMN-66w@mail.gmail.com>
	<CA+EjHYpNDBuY4NGi0wm7fT7N9ZsMPsZ_X5TftNeD5c3aSLP+Bw@mail.gmail.com>
	<4D7DCD47-E74D-47E1-ABE7-6BAD2BF29337@psg.com>
	<CA+EjHYqKSTcbfqP7y-ymR-Aw3Rax1PttuaSPHzu8oSYHX_UWfA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAJwbTiD4eDSgOg2Chtm8f7xYRfkqdW8QDYWBnX95qOPF6UqjRQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<4EB12D34.4060404@cafonso.ca>
	<47D5B55C-0217-47F4-A1AE-2C7372F961A7@acm.org>
	<754021EA-7BEF-4A22-8F4A-836E85BEC60E@istaff.org>
	<0BEB5F21-54A0-484D-84A4-8913AE894ACF@acm.org>
	<D8091442-97DA-41D4-9107-7C9227DCC86A@psg.com>
	<4EB2AA0F.1010907@digsys.bg>
Message-ID: <CAFabd1+xTqWZy2vPKbMy+OmELwLKfcSs1Ak=5LG7PxhaBZXSLA@mail.gmail.com>

Think it needs to be raised somewhere, and one thing the Ombudsman can
do is identify problems, make recommendations to the Board.  Might
bring a good result, might make other processes better.
From the transcript of the public forum, Dakar:
(Filiz reading a question from a remote participant)
>>FILIZ YILMAZ:  (saying name) Bulgarian IUG.  Could you provide theBulgarian Internet community with an advice on the rejected IDN ccTLDapplication because of similarity issues?  How should we proceed ifthe majority of the people doesn't want a new string.
Greece has also the same problem.  Thank you.
>>ROD BECKSTROM:  Thank you for the question.  We'd be happy to havediscussions with you privately.  We don't have public discussionsabout IDN fast track applications.  Thank you.
 - - -
Adam


On Thu, Nov 3, 2011 at 11:49 PM, Daniel Kalchev <daniel at digsys.bg> wrote:
> Hi Avri,
>
> To further make things complicated, there is a theory within ICANN, that the
> IDN Fast Track process does not have the provision for correcting this
> expert opinion. By reading the Implementation manual however, one discovers
> that such provision is already there: ICANN staff may request review by a
> second three member panel for any application for which it was found the
> string is confusingly similar if either the panel feels they are not
> sufficiently capable or if the opinion is negative and the application is
> struck (our case). There is even a graph in the manual, that clearly depicts
> this situation. That graph cycles trough this process until the applicant
> withdraws the application or it is successfully processed.
>
> By the way, we may discuss this at length at our event in Sofia.
> Unofficially, as it is both not part of the program and we do not want to
> make the issue way too public. :-)
>
> Daniel
>
> On 03.11.11 16:31, Avri Doria wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> On reviewing the Fast Track Implementation manual, I must concede: it is
>> ICANN, not its IANA component that appears to be at fault here.  My
>> apologies to the good people of IANA.
>>
>> I beleive that a mistaken opinion from the DNS Stability Panel, Interisle
>> Consulting*, has been accepted without due diligence.  While I have no doubt
>> as to Interisle's technical talent and its ability to protect DNS Stability,
>> I am curious about it capabilities in linguistic judgements and its
>> capabilities in the area of confusing similarity.  What I am more concerned
>> about is the inability for an appeal to this judgement, we all make mistakes
>> and all deserve a chance to have someone correct them.
>>
>> I might point out that this lack of appeal over string similarity
>> judgements is also a feature, or rather misfeature, of the new gTLD process.
>>  So I expect this case is just the first of many.  Although in the new gTLD
>> process, there is a specialist String Review Panel,  and the function is not
>> overloaded on the DNS Stability Panel.
>>
>> Avri
>>
>> * Disclaimer: I am a listed associate of Interisle Consulting, though
>> currently inactive and currently walled off from any of its ICANN activities
>>
>> On 3 Nov 2011, at 08:50, Avri Doria wrote:
>>
>>> John,
>>>
>>> I thought this was a Fast Track process managed by IANA.  and that it is
>>> IANA that gets the recommendation from the Panel and make the determination
>>> on whether to proceed or not.
>>>
>>> I need to go back and check the process details, but I did not think
>>> there was any actual ICANN-that-is-not-IANA processing in this decision.
>>>  That is what makes it so hard to deal with by anyone as it occurs in the
>>> protected core of IANA.
>>>
>>> avri
>>>
>>> On 2 Nov 2011, at 14:09, John Curran wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Nov 2, 2011, at 12:29 PM, Avri Doria wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> IANA certainly made a decision in favor of Brazil and to the detriment
>>>>> of Bulgaria.
>>>>
>>>> Avri -
>>>>
>>>> I do not believe that "IANA" (either in the classic IAB use
>>>> of the term, or formal use per IANA Function Contract) was
>>>> involved in this decision.   I believe that you meant either
>>>> "ICANN" or "ICANN DNS Stability Panel" given the context.
>>>>
>>>> FYI,
>>>> /John
>>>
>>> ____________________________________________________________
>>> 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
>>
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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


From lehto.paul at gmail.com  Thu Nov  3 12:31:30 2011
From: lehto.paul at gmail.com (Paul Lehto)
Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2011 12:31:30 -0400
Subject: [governance] =?UTF-8?Q?Is_really_Bulgarian_Cyrillic_=2E=D0=B1?=
 =?UTF-8?Q?=D0=B3_=28=2Ebg=29_similar_to_other_Latin_ccTLDs=3F?=
In-Reply-To: <4EB28156.9050700@digsys.bg>
References: <1291131665.20152.1407897083@webmail.messagingengine.com>
	<CAJwbTiA0ixrMYBTWFGZLphuHKzWwOVrYiAvc9yBf8WQsMN-66w@mail.gmail.com>
	<CA+EjHYpNDBuY4NGi0wm7fT7N9ZsMPsZ_X5TftNeD5c3aSLP+Bw@mail.gmail.com>
	<4D7DCD47-E74D-47E1-ABE7-6BAD2BF29337@psg.com>
	<CA+EjHYqKSTcbfqP7y-ymR-Aw3Rax1PttuaSPHzu8oSYHX_UWfA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAJwbTiD4eDSgOg2Chtm8f7xYRfkqdW8QDYWBnX95qOPF6UqjRQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<4EB12D34.4060404@cafonso.ca>
	<47D5B55C-0217-47F4-A1AE-2C7372F961A7@acm.org>
	<4EB19B7B.4050303@cafonso.ca>
	<4EB1F3AB.8010909@gmx.net>
	<4EB2738F.8070005@cafonso.ca>
	<4EB28156.9050700@digsys.bg>
Message-ID: <CAD=1OvfGdTedrtQkkmUy1761TsOS2kWMcDGQef0b9+wZs2r0Uw@mail.gmail.com>

On Thu, Nov 3, 2011 at 7:56 AM, Daniel Kalchev <daniel at digsys.bg> wrote:

>
> Problem is, there is no decision, by anyone, on this subject. There is
> only this 'expert' opinion about confusability, floating around.
>
> If there was a decision, there would already be appeal or other process to
> challenge it. There is, an year and a half already, social engineering
> effort to convince Bulgaria to withdraw it's request for .бг.


If there has been no denial to appeal from, only talk against it, there's
been no denial and no decision.  On the positive side, in nearly all
instances, probabilities of winning on appeal are lower than the
probabilities of winning in an original hearing or trial or decision.

It would seem that there either is, or should be, a process to "call the
question" as they say in parliamentary procedure.  If not, a motion can be
made for a decision, or a letter sent citing undue delay and calling for a
decision (with or without additional clarifying expertise appended to it).
A person familiar with whatever exists in terms of procedure can recommend
the best format or vehicle for forcing a decision.

If indeed there is no rule or even informal precedent at all in this area,
then "just do it" anyway.  There are all kinds of things respected by
everyone in the area of "common sense" that have no rule or precedent to
support them.  One example are principles of logic: they remain fully
applicable to ICANN absent a formal ICANN rule or ruling prohibiting the
application of logic in a given set of instances that somehow applies to
this issue.   (Etc....)

-- 
Paul R Lehto, J.D.
P.O. Box 1
Ishpeming, MI  49849
lehto.paul at gmail.com
906-204-4026 (cell)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111103/071cd4f3/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, 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


From parminder at itforchange.net  Thu Nov  3 08:01:04 2011
From: parminder at itforchange.net (parminder)
Date: Thu, 03 Nov 2011 17:31:04 +0530
Subject: [governance] Reconciling Democracy & Multistakeholderism:
 Having a Voice vs. Having a Vote
In-Reply-To: <CAD=1OvdKVZ7huxL1K-HoXyhmE_jWOoyRX5=_wHGfm=ogw9awXw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAD=1OvdKVZ7huxL1K-HoXyhmE_jWOoyRX5=_wHGfm=ogw9awXw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4EB28280.7050901@itforchange.net>

Thanks Paul, for a very good and pertinent exposition.

Multistakeholderism is about voice, and its structures and outcomes are 
different than involving providing *actual participation* in political 
decision making, which can only be through votes and representative systems.

And yes, non human entities (  businesses as well as NGOs) cannot have 
votes. They should have voice though.

Positing what should be channels of voice (multi-stakeholder systems) as 
those of votes have mostly meant that those with the greatest resources 
have exclusive or additional votes, and the less resourced are sought to 
be pacified by giving nominal space and opportunity for voice (that they 
are mostly not able to exercise in competition with well resourced 
voices) *instead* of giving votes - or actual participation in decision 
making....

Which does not mean that current (or any) systems of representation are 
perfect (or even good enough). They need to be constantly improved 
through processes of deepening democracy. But it is counter productive 
to impose non democratic forms over them.

Paul's exposition is also instructive for showing the contradiction 
involved in standing for 'human' rights and also advocating 
multistakeholderism as a political decision making system. Only actual 
humans have the human right of  participation in making the political 
decisions that effect them, not businesses or NGOs. Agreed that humans 
need to effectively organise to exercise political choice. That is what 
the project of democracy is about. But a private business can hardly be 
seen as a system for organising humans for exercising choice. At 
present, only elected democratic governments are such a system, 
especially those who listen to and respect all voices.

parminder



On Monday 31 October 2011 09:30 PM, Paul Lehto wrote:
>
> It seems that in the longstanding debates about the merits and 
> demerits of multi-stakeholderism, there is a perspective that may 
> possibly help reconcile the views of some major positions on this 
> issue, or perhaps even reconcile all of them:  The question perhaps 
> ought to be framed in terms of having a voice versus having a vote.
>
> Under human rights and democracy laws, only human beings (or their 
> elected representatives) have votes.  But businesses, NGOs, and others 
> often have relevant if not important expertise, and thus have relevant 
> if not important "voices" that are either useful or even necessary to 
> intelligent process, and thus to good outcomes.
>
> Garbage in, garbage out.  For good process, we need good "voices" or 
> good information.  One big source of this good information are all the 
> folks we think of as invitees or participants in a "multi-stakeholder" 
> process.
>
> The issues arise when the voices are also the only votes or the main 
> votes.  This confuses good, democratic process of furthering the 
> important cause of an INFORMED decision-making electorate or process, 
> with the issue of WHO HAS A VOTE.   Under democracy and fundamental 
> humans rights laws, only human beings have votes, and it is one a one 
> person/one vote basis.
>
> For the moment, let's put aside the issue of building robust electoral 
> systems on a global scale allowing all the humans to vote who are 
> interested in doing so and effected by what's proposed (i.e. "the 
> governed.")   There may be challenges there to be sure, but if this is 
> considered a worthy objection ultimately, then it is a worthy 
> objection for a dictator to object to democracy because polling 
> places, precincts, ballots and other infrastructure simply does not 
> exist.  That's a bad joke, or an excuse for authoritarianism, not a 
> valid objection to working towards and implementing democracy.
>
> The call of freedom and democracy movements worldwide has nearly 
> always been essentially the same thing: let's make democracy REAL.  
> And then we will eternally have to keep it real, of course.
>
> We ought to have multi-stakeholderism in terms of Voice Process, but 
> not in terms of Vote Process.  It's very important to hear all the 
> different perspectives including business perspectives 
> (Multi-stakeholderism), but that should not translate into non-elected 
> OR non-human persons or entities voting and determining the laws and 
> policies that structure and define the freedom of the internet (or the 
> necessary protections against fraud and abuse).
>
> Paul Lehto, J.D.
>
>
>
> -- 
> Paul R Lehto, J.D.
> P.O. Box 1
> Ishpeming, MI  49849
> lehto.paul at gmail.com <mailto:lehto.paul at gmail.com>
> 906-204-4026 (cell)
>
>
>
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111103/75d59315/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, 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


From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com  Thu Nov  3 12:41:17 2011
From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro)
Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2011 04:41:17 +1200
Subject: [governance] =?UTF-8?Q?Is_really_Bulgarian_Cyrillic_=2E=D0=B1?=
 =?UTF-8?Q?=D0=B3_=28=2Ebg=29_similar_to_other_Latin_ccTLDs=3F?=
In-Reply-To: <CAD=1OvfGdTedrtQkkmUy1761TsOS2kWMcDGQef0b9+wZs2r0Uw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <1291131665.20152.1407897083@webmail.messagingengine.com>
	<CAJwbTiA0ixrMYBTWFGZLphuHKzWwOVrYiAvc9yBf8WQsMN-66w@mail.gmail.com>
	<CA+EjHYpNDBuY4NGi0wm7fT7N9ZsMPsZ_X5TftNeD5c3aSLP+Bw@mail.gmail.com>
	<4D7DCD47-E74D-47E1-ABE7-6BAD2BF29337@psg.com>
	<CA+EjHYqKSTcbfqP7y-ymR-Aw3Rax1PttuaSPHzu8oSYHX_UWfA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAJwbTiD4eDSgOg2Chtm8f7xYRfkqdW8QDYWBnX95qOPF6UqjRQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<4EB12D34.4060404@cafonso.ca>
	<47D5B55C-0217-47F4-A1AE-2C7372F961A7@acm.org>
	<4EB19B7B.4050303@cafonso.ca>
	<4EB1F3AB.8010909@gmx.net>
	<4EB2738F.8070005@cafonso.ca>
	<4EB28156.9050700@digsys.bg>
	<CAD=1OvfGdTedrtQkkmUy1761TsOS2kWMcDGQef0b9+wZs2r0Uw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAJwbTiBZ9cYs0Jyv0mjKarZj44EiKuZ0Zv7giwTiL-h85N7bfg@mail.gmail.com>

On Fri, Nov 4, 2011 at 5:31 AM, Paul Lehto <lehto.paul at gmail.com> wrote:

>
> On Thu, Nov 3, 2011 at 7:56 AM, Daniel Kalchev <daniel at digsys.bg> wrote:
>
>>
>> Problem is, there is no decision, by anyone, on this subject. There is
>> only this 'expert' opinion about confusability, floating around.
>>
>> If there was a decision, there would already be appeal or other process
>> to challenge it. There is, an year and a half already, social engineering
>> effort to convince Bulgaria to withdraw it's request for .бг.
>
>
> If there has been no denial to appeal from, only talk against it, there's
> been no denial and no decision.  On the positive side, in nearly all
> instances, probabilities of winning on appeal are lower than the
> probabilities of winning in an original hearing or trial or decision.
>
> I agree. The rationale that may be attributed to the "denial" can be found
in this blog:
http://blog.icann.org/2010/03/clearing-the-confusion-fast-track/




> It would seem that there either is, or should be, a process to "call the
> question" as they say in parliamentary procedure.  If not, a motion can be
> made for a decision, or a letter sent citing undue delay and calling for a
> decision (with or without additional clarifying expertise appended to it).
> A person familiar with whatever exists in terms of procedure can recommend
> the best format or vehicle for forcing a decision.
>
> If indeed there is no rule or even informal precedent at all in this area,
> then "just do it" anyway.  There are all kinds of things respected by
> everyone in the area of "common sense" that have no rule or precedent to
> support them.  One example are principles of logic: they remain fully
> applicable to ICANN absent a formal ICANN rule or ruling prohibiting the
> application of logic in a given set of instances that somehow applies to
> this issue.   (Etc....)
>
> --
> Paul R Lehto, J.D.
> P.O. Box 1
> Ishpeming, MI  49849
> lehto.paul at gmail.com
> 906-204-4026 (cell)
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
>
>
>


-- 
Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala

Tweeter: @SalanietaT
Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro
Cell: +679 998 2851
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111104/35ee8655/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, 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


From karl at cavebear.com  Thu Nov  3 12:55:14 2011
From: karl at cavebear.com (Karl Auerbach)
Date: Thu, 03 Nov 2011 09:55:14 -0700
Subject: [governance] =?UTF-8?Q?Is_really_Bulgarian_Cyrillic_=2E=D0=B1?=
 =?UTF-8?Q?=D0=B3_=28=2Ebg=29_similar_to_other_Latin_ccTLDs=3F?=
In-Reply-To: <2B05F52B-DBF8-4EBE-8B01-0156CC223D60@istaff.org>
References: <1291131665.20152.1407897083@webmail.messagingengine.com> <CAJwbTiA0ixrMYBTWFGZLphuHKzWwOVrYiAvc9yBf8WQsMN-66w@mail.gmail.com> <CA+EjHYpNDBuY4NGi0wm7fT7N9ZsMPsZ_X5TftNeD5c3aSLP+Bw@mail.gmail.com> <4D7DCD47-E74D-47E1-ABE7-6BAD2BF29337@psg.com> <CA+EjHYqKSTcbfqP7y-ymR-Aw3Rax1PttuaSPHzu8oSYHX_UWfA@mail.gmail.com> <CAJwbTiD4eDSgOg2Chtm8f7xYRfkqdW8QDYWBnX95qOPF6UqjRQ@mail.gmail.com> <4EB12D34.4060404@cafonso.ca> <47D5B55C-0217-47F4-A1AE-2C7372F961A7@acm.org> <754021EA-7BEF-4A22-8F4A-836E85BEC60E@istaff.org> <0BEB5F21-54A0-484D-84A4-8913AE894ACF@acm.org> <D8091442-97DA-41D4-9107-7C9227DCC86A@psg.com> <2B05F52B-DBF8-4EBE-8B01-0156CC223D60@istaff.org>
Message-ID: <4EB2C772.3000105@cavebear.com>

On 11/03/2011 07:50 AM, John Curran wrote:


> ... it is very important for all of us that actions performed under the name 
> "IANA" be strictly _recording_ tasks and not involve any judgement other than 
> against unequivocal criteria in adopted policy.  Loss of this principle at
> this particular point in time would be rather suboptimal on multiple levels.

Much agreed, particularly given the pending re-bid for "the IANA
function" contract.

However:

Some years back an IETF chair insisted that the IANA function involved
techno-policy decisions that were so deep, so esoteric, and of such
critical import that it would require a post-graduate degree in computer
science to comprehend, much less to do, the job.

That assertion was, of course, self-serving institutional nonsense.

When stripped of all the smoke and mirrors, IANA is essentially a
non-discretionary clerical function - maintenance of the internet's big
book of numbers

Occasionally in the maintenance of the internet's protocol parameters
there are technical ramifications and questions that involve some
discretion.  That does not mean that that discretion is vested in IANA -
for instance the IETF established a mechanism through which IANA has
access to IETF experts who can be involved in those cases where more
than clerical expertise is required.

If there is an area of discretion that IANA has staked out as its own it
is in the allocation of the top blocks of address space to the RIRs.  In
this, as well as the other things it does, IANA has done a good job.

Unfortunately, ICANN, because its authority rests largely on thin air,
has found it a useful foundational prop to have opacity rather than
clarity regarding its relationship with "the IANA function".

For instance, the scope and limits of "the IANA function" are
sufficiently vague that I had to make a written request of NTIA to
clarify whether the L-root is associated with IANA or ICANN.  In
response I received a rather vague statement that the L-root was *not*
part of "the IANA function" under the IANA purchase order performed by
ICANN, but no clarification at all regarding where the L-root does fall.

		--karl--
____________________________________________________________
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


From nhklein at gmx.net  Thu Nov  3 13:27:31 2011
From: nhklein at gmx.net (nhklein)
Date: Fri, 04 Nov 2011 00:27:31 +0700
Subject: [governance] =?UTF-8?Q?Is_really_Bulgarian_Cyrillic_=2E=D0=B1?=
 =?UTF-8?Q?=D0=B3_=28=2Ebg=29_similar_to_other_Latin_ccTLDs=3F?=
In-Reply-To: <CAJwbTiBZ9cYs0Jyv0mjKarZj44EiKuZ0Zv7giwTiL-h85N7bfg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <1291131665.20152.1407897083@webmail.messagingengine.com>	<CAJwbTiA0ixrMYBTWFGZLphuHKzWwOVrYiAvc9yBf8WQsMN-66w@mail.gmail.com>	<CA+EjHYpNDBuY4NGi0wm7fT7N9ZsMPsZ_X5TftNeD5c3aSLP+Bw@mail.gmail.com>	<4D7DCD47-E74D-47E1-ABE7-6BAD2BF29337@psg.com>	<CA+EjHYqKSTcbfqP7y-ymR-Aw3Rax1PttuaSPHzu8oSYHX_UWfA@mail.gmail.com>	<CAJwbTiD4eDSgOg2Chtm8f7xYRfkqdW8QDYWBnX95qOPF6UqjRQ@mail.gmail.com>	<4EB12D34.4060404@cafonso.ca>	<47D5B55C-0217-47F4-A1AE-2C7372F961A7@acm.org>	<4EB19B7B.4050303@cafonso.ca>	<4EB1F3AB.8010909@gmx.net>	<4EB2738F.8070005@cafonso.ca>	<4EB28156.9050700@digsys.bg>	<CAD=1OvfGdTedrtQkkmUy1761TsOS2kWMcDGQef0b9+wZs2r0Uw@mail.gmail.com> <CAJwbTiBZ9cYs0Jyv0mjKarZj44EiKuZ0Zv7giwTiL-h85N7bfg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4EB2CF03.50600@gmx.net>

While I appreciate that we moved from the ophthalmologic discussion on - 
what is confusingly similar? -  I still feel very much with the 
Bulgarian applicants and their frustration, having followed the 
discussion since the beginning:

They have been locked into a kind of "closed circuit" situation: those 
who considered the Bulgarian proposal to be confusingly similar were the 
same ones to whom the Bulgarian applicants could talk - and these 
experts did not display much sense (as I do not see any signs of it) for 
the fact that this is an application properly based in the selfhood of a 
linguistic-script community with a history of many centuries - apart 
from the fact that many voices using "common sense" did not agree with 
the "expert" group's opinion.

But as Adam Peake quoted, the discussion during a recent ICANN meeting 
did not open any exit from the dilemma, with the following casual remarks:

= = = =
 >> ROD BECKSTROM:  Thank you for the question.  We'd be happy to have 
discussions with you privately.  We don't have public discussions about 
IDN fast track applications.  Thank you.
= = = =

When the "rules" do not provide a satisfying solution and the applicant 
feels being handled unjustly, there is only one way: that a sufficiently 
concerned group of people take the initiative to change the "rules" - 
that is to propose to the ICANN board to institute an open appeal 
process, where not only ophthalmologic questions are discussed, but also 
the more fundamental problem: whether a technical group appointed by 
ICANN can override arguments of a fundamental nature - like that the 
people of a script community have an appropriate weight with their own 
arguments rooted in their linguistic and script tradition.

Norbert Klein

=


On 11/03/2011 11:41 PM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 4, 2011 at 5:31 AM, Paul Lehto <lehto.paul at gmail.com 
> <mailto:lehto.paul at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>
>     On Thu, Nov 3, 2011 at 7:56 AM, Daniel Kalchev <daniel at digsys.bg
>     <mailto:daniel at digsys.bg>> wrote:
>
>
>         Problem is, there is no decision, by anyone, on this subject.
>         There is only this 'expert' opinion about confusability,
>         floating around.
>
>         If there was a decision, there would already be appeal or
>         other process to challenge it. There is, an year and a half
>         already, social engineering effort to convince Bulgaria to
>         withdraw it's request for .бг.
>
>
>     If there has been no denial to appeal from, only talk against it,
>     there's been no denial and no decision.  On the positive side, in
>     nearly all instances, probabilities of winning on appeal are lower
>     than the probabilities of winning in an original hearing or trial
>     or decision.
>
> I agree. The rationale that may be attributed to the "denial" can be 
> found in this blog: 
> http://blog.icann.org/2010/03/clearing-the-confusion-fast-track/
>
>     It would seem that there either is, or should be, a process to
>     "call the question" as they say in parliamentary procedure.  If
>     not, a motion can be made for a decision, or a letter sent citing
>     undue delay and calling for a decision (with or without additional
>     clarifying expertise appended to it). A person familiar with
>     whatever exists in terms of procedure can recommend the best
>     format or vehicle for forcing a decision.
>
>     If indeed there is no rule or even informal precedent at all in
>     this area, then "just do it" anyway.  There are all kinds of
>     things respected by everyone in the area of "common sense" that
>     have no rule or precedent to support them.  One example are
>     principles of logic: they remain fully applicable to ICANN absent
>     a formal ICANN rule or ruling prohibiting the application of logic
>     in a given set of instances that somehow applies to this issue.  
>     (Etc....)
>
>     -- 
>     Paul R Lehto, J.D.
>     P.O. Box 1
>     Ishpeming, MI  49849
>     lehto.paul at gmail.com <mailto:lehto.paul at gmail.com>
>     906-204-4026 (cell)
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>     ____________________________________________________________
>     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, 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
>
>
>
>
>
> -- 
> Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala
>
> Tweeter: @SalanietaT
> Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro
> Cell: +679 998 2851
>
>


-- 
A while ago, I started a new blog:

...thinking it over... after 21 years in Cambodia
http://www.thinking21.org/

continuing to share reports and comments from Cambodia.

Norbert Klein
nhklein at gmx.net
Phnom Penh / Cambodia


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111104/308b82db/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, 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


From wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de  Thu Nov  3 13:30:15 2011
From: wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de (=?iso-8859-1?Q?=22Kleinw=E4chter=2C_Wolfgang=22?=)
Date: Thu, 03 Nov 2011 18:30:15 +0100
Subject: AW: [governance] Reconciling Democracy & Multistakeholderism:
 Having a Voice vs. Having a Vote
References:  <CAD=1OvdKVZ7huxL1K-HoXyhmE_jWOoyRX5=_wHGfm=ogw9awXw@mail.gmail.com>
 <4EB28280.7050901@itforchange.net>
Message-ID:  <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8D2C6E8@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>

Hi
 
this artificial disctincton between "voice" (for civil society, technical community and private sector) and "vote" (governments) in Internet Governance comes from an academic Ivory Tower. It depends very much from the circumstances and the concrete issue where the fine line between  between "voice" and "vote" can be drawn. 
 
The "one state one vote" system of the UN has its merits, but also it flaws. And there is a lot of space for improvement. In the UN General Assembly each member state, represented through its government, has a "vote". But I am questionning whether all those governments listen to the "voices" of their domestic civil society. I would have a lot of problems if the vote of the government of Zimbabwe becomes a decisive element in a voting about Internet Governance. I remember the days of WSIS 1 in December 2003 in Geneva when President Mugabe came with "his government" (248 members, the largest governmental delegation). The confusing fact was, that nobody was siiting behing the nameplae opf Sinmbabwe after Mugabe had finished his speech. With all resepct for the national sovereignty of a UN member state, ist this the "global democracy" Parminder proposes?
 
With other words, majority voting in the UNGA tells you something, but could be also very misleading. This space is full of contradictions. The Veto-System of the UN Security Council is obviously undemocratic but it is had worked in certain cases and avoided a nuclear war among superpowers (which was good for mankind but not so god for democratization of intergovernmental relations). India, obviously one of the largest democracies in the world, wants to get a veto-right in the UN Secueirty Council. Would this make the system more democratic?   

BTW, as a Nom-Com Chair under ICANN I had a "voice" but not a "vote". And this was good. So first ask what is at stake and then move to a differentiation between "voice" and "vote". 
 
Wolfgang
 
 
________________________________

Von: governance at lists.cpsr.org im Auftrag von parminder
Gesendet: Do 03.11.2011 13:01
An: governance at lists.cpsr.org
Betreff: Re: [governance] Reconciling Democracy & Multistakeholderism: Having a Voice vs. Having a Vote


Thanks Paul, for a very good and pertinent exposition.

Multistakeholderism is about voice, and its structures and outcomes are different than involving providing *actual participation* in political decision making, which can only be through votes and representative systems.

And yes, non human entities (  businesses as well as NGOs) cannot have votes. They should have voice though. 

Positing what should be channels of voice (multi-stakeholder systems) as those of votes have mostly meant that those with the greatest resources have exclusive or additional votes, and the less resourced are sought to be pacified by giving nominal space and opportunity for voice (that they are mostly not able to exercise in competition with well resourced voices) *instead* of giving votes - or actual participation in decision making....

Which does not mean that current (or any) systems of representation are perfect (or even good enough). They need to be constantly improved through processes of deepening democracy. But it is counter productive to impose non democratic forms over them.

Paul's exposition is also instructive for showing the contradiction involved in standing for 'human' rights and also advocating multistakeholderism as a political decision making system. Only actual humans have the human right of  participation in making the political decisions that effect them, not businesses or NGOs. Agreed that humans need to effectively organise to exercise political choice. That is what the project of democracy is about. But a private business can hardly be seen as a system for organising humans for exercising choice. At present, only elected democratic governments are such a system, especially those who listen to and respect all voices.

parminder 



On Monday 31 October 2011 09:30 PM, Paul Lehto wrote: 


	It seems that in the longstanding debates about the merits and demerits of multi-stakeholderism, there is a perspective that may possibly help reconcile the views of some major positions on this issue, or perhaps even reconcile all of them:  The question perhaps ought to be framed in terms of having a voice versus having a vote.
	
	Under human rights and democracy laws, only human beings (or their elected representatives) have votes.  But businesses, NGOs, and others often have relevant if not important expertise, and thus have relevant if not important "voices" that are either useful or even necessary to intelligent process, and thus to good outcomes.
	
	Garbage in, garbage out.  For good process, we need good "voices" or good information.  One big source of this good information are all the folks we think of as invitees or participants in a "multi-stakeholder" process.
	
	The issues arise when the voices are also the only votes or the main votes.  This confuses good, democratic process of furthering the important cause of an INFORMED decision-making electorate or process, with the issue of WHO HAS A VOTE.   Under democracy and fundamental humans rights laws, only human beings have votes, and it is one a one person/one vote basis.
	
	For the moment, let's put aside the issue of building robust electoral systems on a global scale allowing all the humans to vote who are interested in doing so and effected by what's proposed (i.e. "the governed.")   There may be challenges there to be sure, but if this is considered a worthy objection ultimately, then it is a worthy objection for a dictator to object to democracy because polling places, precincts, ballots and other infrastructure simply does not exist.  That's a bad joke, or an excuse for authoritarianism, not a valid objection to working towards and implementing democracy.
	
	The call of freedom and democracy movements worldwide has nearly always been essentially the same thing: let's make democracy REAL.  And then we will eternally have to keep it real, of course.
	
	We ought to have multi-stakeholderism in terms of Voice Process, but not in terms of Vote Process.  It's very important to hear all the different perspectives including business perspectives (Multi-stakeholderism), but that should not translate into non-elected OR non-human persons or entities voting and determining the laws and policies that structure and define the freedom of the internet (or the necessary protections against fraud and abuse).
	
	Paul Lehto, J.D. 
	
	
	 
	-- 
	Paul R Lehto, J.D.
	P.O. Box 1 
	Ishpeming, MI  49849 
	lehto.paul at gmail.com
	906-204-4026 (cell)
	
	
	
	
	
	
	

____________________________________________________________
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


From lehto.paul at gmail.com  Thu Nov  3 15:13:45 2011
From: lehto.paul at gmail.com (Paul Lehto)
Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2011 15:13:45 -0400
Subject: [governance] Reconciling Democracy & Multistakeholderism:
 Having a Voice vs. Having a Vote
In-Reply-To: <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8D2C6E8@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
References: <CAD=1OvdKVZ7huxL1K-HoXyhmE_jWOoyRX5=_wHGfm=ogw9awXw@mail.gmail.com>
	<4EB28280.7050901@itforchange.net>
	<2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8D2C6E8@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
Message-ID: <CAD=1OveAs=_nD7N2_fSDtpqekdVHfAxgLyg+rP9mTejikd1vPg@mail.gmail.com>

2011/11/3 "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang" <
wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de>

> this artificial disctincton between "voice" (for civil society, technical
> community and private sector) and "vote" (governments) in Internet
> Governance comes from an academic Ivory Tower.


I am not, have not been, and am not seeking to be employed or even present
in any "academic Ivory Tower."  Based on comments received and my own
intent, I had thought I expressed myself rather simply, especially
considering the complicated terrain of debates I was trying to distill into
more clarity.

In any event, Wolfgang, you are lucky to be as respected as you are.  This
explains why you report (below) feeling little difference between a
situation where you had a voice, and one with a vote.   The less one is
part of the necessarily narrow group of people who decisionmakers learn to
develop respect for based on expertise and like things, the more one is
like a child, who has a voice but not a vote.

Children have voices, but not votes.  Parents have voices too, and the only
votes.  This distinction is not "artificial" it is absolutely fundamental
to freedom and democracy.


> It depends very much from the circumstances and the concrete issue where
> the fine line between  between "voice" and "vote" can be drawn.
>

Sure, any intelligent person can think of hard cases, or line-drawing
questions.  The only words that can not be debated are the words of a
strongman dictator.  (But that's not because the words and ideas aren't
depending a lot on circumstances, distinctions, and line-drawing, just like
"voice" and "vote" is if and only if we imagine harder cases at the
margins.   Those always exist, in all languages.  Differences are ones of
degree.

People standing in line for a one minute chance to address a city council
have a voice, sort of, but no vote.  Surely it's better to sit silently on
the city council and suffer through the public comments, and be one of a
relatively small number of votes, is it not?

>
> The "one state one vote" system of the UN has its merits, but also it
> flaws. And there is a lot of space for improvement. In the UN General
> Assembly each member state, represented through its government, has a
> "vote". But I am questionning whether all those governments listen to the
> "voices" of their domestic civil society.


You should be more than simply "questioning" whether all governments listen
to their people.  Clearly, some do not.

The United Nations, itself as a corporate body, is not a "democracy."
Democracy can not be composed of non-human corporations, whether they be
government or municipal corporations or business corporations.

Again I find myself feeling I need to repeat what should be a fundamental
axiom: examples of corruption of an idea or system are not proof that the
idea or system is not workable on the whole.  If examples of corruption do
serve this purpose, I suggest we must then give up on the project of making
anti-criminal laws, because clearly these have been violated since before
the dawn of history, and it seems the violations will never fully cease.
Does it follow that criminal law as an entire enterprise is "questionable?"

The question should be, instead:  "If we add more of X, does it improve
things?"   Within one small sector of criminal law, it starts to be
arguable that when we add more anti-drug or Prohibition laws, we create
more crime and organized crime, so maybe we can consider giving up on that
small part of the criminal law.

If we add more Democracy, does it improve things?  The answer is clearly
yes.   Anything less than democracy, such as voting multistakeholderism,
means that certain humans get multiple voices and multiple votes (as
humans, as investors in several businesses, as officers, or etc) and other
humans get nothing.

The cutting edge MS models allow for token 'voice' and "Listening" programs
where they purport to listen to the little people.  It's like parents and
children, again.

Is the defense from MS supporters to be "I am a good parent" to the charge
from fellow adults that democracy is not being respected?


> I would have a lot of problems if the vote of the government of Zimbabwe
> becomes a decisive element in a voting about Internet Governance.
>

I know what you mean, and sympathize.  But the cause of world peace and
cooperation, and the need for negotiation, mean that we have to talk with
all parties and countries.  Making deals with, and according a certain
respect for even enemies, is called diplomacy, and it seems that's a good
part of what the UN is about, and rightly so.  Diplomacy with some
democratic principles respected in practice, some respected presently
mostly in theory, andsome democratic principles inapplicable because it's
an assocation of governments, not humans.  But still, excepting the
Security council and a couple other things, the UN is remarkably
*relatively* democratic considering the sovereignty of every member state.

>
>   India, obviously one of the largest democracies in the world, wants to
> get a veto-right in the UN Secueirty Council. Would this make the system
> more democratic?
>

Yes and no. It would bring India into the elite countries on the Security
Council, which is itself democratic. It gives India more power and a bigger
vote, but vis a vis every other country in the world it is not democratic.


>
> BTW, as a Nom-Com Chair under ICANN I had a "voice" but not a "vote". And
> this was good. So first ask what is at stake and then move to a
> differentiation between "voice" and "vote".
>

As I said above, the only reason having a voice but not a vote would be if
you were very respected, as I know you are.   Perhaps there's one other
example of voice without vote that is acceptable and that is if one is
extremely knowledgeable and persuasive and the voters are eager to be
sheep.  THen no vote is needed.  Otherwise, children have voices, and
parents have votes (and voices).

>
>
> Von: governance at lists.cpsr.org im Auftrag von parminder
> Gesendet: Do 03.11.2011 13:01
> An: governance at lists.cpsr.org
> Betreff: Re: [governance] Reconciling Democracy & Multistakeholderism:
> Having a Voice vs. Having a Vote
>
>
> Thanks Paul, for a very good and pertinent exposition.
>
> Multistakeholderism is about voice, and its structures and outcomes are
> different than involving providing *actual participation* in political
> decision making, which can only be through votes and representative systems.
>
> And yes, non human entities (  businesses as well as NGOs) cannot have
> votes. They should have voice though.
>
> Positing what should be channels of voice (multi-stakeholder systems) as
> those of votes have mostly meant that those with the greatest resources
> have exclusive or additional votes, and the less resourced are sought to be
> pacified by giving nominal space and opportunity for voice (that they are
> mostly not able to exercise in competition with well resourced voices)
> *instead* of giving votes - or actual participation in decision making....
>
> Which does not mean that current (or any) systems of representation are
> perfect (or even good enough). They need to be constantly improved through
> processes of deepening democracy. But it is counter productive to impose
> non democratic forms over them.
>
> Paul's exposition is also instructive for showing the contradiction
> involved in standing for 'human' rights and also advocating
> multistakeholderism as a political decision making system. Only actual
> humans have the human right of  participation in making the political
> decisions that effect them, not businesses or NGOs. Agreed that humans need
> to effectively organise to exercise political choice. That is what the
> project of democracy is about. But a private business can hardly be seen as
> a system for organising humans for exercising choice. At present, only
> elected democratic governments are such a system, especially those who
> listen to and respect all voices.
>
> parminder
>
>
>
> On Monday 31 October 2011 09:30 PM, Paul Lehto wrote:
>
>
>        It seems that in the longstanding debates about the merits and
> demerits of multi-stakeholderism, there is a perspective that may possibly
> help reconcile the views of some major positions on this issue, or perhaps
> even reconcile all of them:  The question perhaps ought to be framed in
> terms of having a voice versus having a vote.
>
>        Under human rights and democracy laws, only human beings (or their
> elected representatives) have votes.  But businesses, NGOs, and others
> often have relevant if not important expertise, and thus have relevant if
> not important "voices" that are either useful or even necessary to
> intelligent process, and thus to good outcomes.
>
>        Garbage in, garbage out.  For good process, we need good "voices"
> or good information.  One big source of this good information are all the
> folks we think of as invitees or participants in a "multi-stakeholder"
> process.
>
>        The issues arise when the voices are also the only votes or the
> main votes.  This confuses good, democratic process of furthering the
> important cause of an INFORMED decision-making electorate or process, with
> the issue of WHO HAS A VOTE.   Under democracy and fundamental humans
> rights laws, only human beings have votes, and it is one a one person/one
> vote basis.
>
>        For the moment, let's put aside the issue of building robust
> electoral systems on a global scale allowing all the humans to vote who are
> interested in doing so and effected by what's proposed (i.e. "the
> governed.")   There may be challenges there to be sure, but if this is
> considered a worthy objection ultimately, then it is a worthy objection for
> a dictator to object to democracy because polling places, precincts,
> ballots and other infrastructure simply does not exist.  That's a bad joke,
> or an excuse for authoritarianism, not a valid objection to working towards
> and implementing democracy.
>
>        The call of freedom and democracy movements worldwide has nearly
> always been essentially the same thing: let's make democracy REAL.  And
> then we will eternally have to keep it real, of course.
>
>        We ought to have multi-stakeholderism in terms of Voice Process,
> but not in terms of Vote Process.  It's very important to hear all the
> different perspectives including business perspectives
> (Multi-stakeholderism), but that should not translate into non-elected OR
> non-human persons or entities voting and determining the laws and policies
> that structure and define the freedom of the internet (or the necessary
> protections against fraud and abuse).
>
>        Paul Lehto, J.D.
>
>
>
>        --
>        Paul R Lehto, J.D.
>        P.O. Box 1
>        Ishpeming, MI  49849
>        lehto.paul at gmail.com
>        906-204-4026 (cell)
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
>
>


-- 
Paul R Lehto, J.D.
P.O. Box 1
Ishpeming, MI  49849
lehto.paul at gmail.com
906-204-4026 (cell)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111103/e4a1dcb1/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, 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


From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com  Thu Nov  3 16:51:04 2011
From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro)
Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2011 09:51:04 +1300
Subject: [governance] IANA contract to be opened for competitive bidding
 on November 4 - more history
In-Reply-To: <CACC04D2.1D9D2%ian.peter@ianpeter.com>
References: <81309079-5233-4A5D-808D-FD963B9C74A7@istaff.org>
	<CACC04D2.1D9D2%ian.peter@ianpeter.com>
Message-ID: <CAJwbTiBxC+YBKFrowUMyWey089xtD3_eCdw7ON3cM3XFNmR7kQ@mail.gmail.com>

On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 8:16 AM, Ian Peter <ian.peter at ianpeter.com> wrote:

> Perhaps in the context of this discussion it is worth looking at how ICANN
> evolved from the work on Jon Postel, how Postel at one stage favoured an
> ITU
> solution, and how the USG reacted to this. What is below combines a little
> of my writings with a large input from Wolfgang Kleinwachter. I would urge
> you to read this, as it outlines the initial involvement of many players
> still involved in internet governance debates.
>
> Today is the 4th November, 2011 at least here in Fiji, so warm greetings
> everyone. Ian thank you very much for the opportunity view history through
> yours and Wolfgang's lenses. I suppose the bidding for the IANA contract
> starts today so it will be interesting. This helps me to understand context
> better :)
>
> His (Postel²s)  first idea was to use the ³Internet Society² (ISOC),
> established in 1992, as an umbrella organization. In 1994 he proposed
> adding
> 150 new generic Top Level Domains (gTLDs) to the existing Domain Name
> System
> consisting of seven gTLDs[7]
> <
> http://ianpeter.wordpress.com/2011/03/28/internet-governance-history-writte
> n-2010/#_ftn7>  and 243 ccTLDs in 1994.
>
> Postel¹s initiative was not co-ordinated with the US Department of
> Commerce.
> Network Solutions Inc. (NSI), a private company based in Herndon/Virginia
> which managed .com, .net, and .org as well as the A Root Server, was rather
> angry about such an initiative. In 1992 NSI had been given a contract by
> the
> DOC to be the sole domain name registrar for the three gTLDs .com, .net and
> .org. Based on such a monopoly position NSI saw in the emerging domain name
> market a grandiose new business opportunity. Consequently, NSI opposed the
> Postel plan to introduce 150 competitive gTLDs at this early stage in the
> development of a global domain name market. NSI lobbied the US Congress and
> the DOC, which finally intervened with Postel¹s plan and stopped the
> handover of the DNS management to ISOC and the introduction of 150 new
> gTLDs.
>
>
> Very interesting :)
> Postel¹s frustration about this governmental intervention prompted him to
> look for other options. He approached the Geneva based International
> Telecommunication Union (ITU)ŠŠ Postel¹s idea was to create a new form of
> public-private partnership for Internet Governance by bringing technical
> organizations, private sector institutions and intergovernmental
> organizations together, launching a bottom-up policy development process
> and
> creating a new form of oversight body for the management of some of the key
> Internet resources. Postel pushed for the establishment of an ³Interim Ad
> Hoc Committee² (IAHC) which was formed in summer 1996².
>
>
>
> The members of the IAHC were ISOC and Postel¹s IANA, the Internet
> Architecture Board (IAB), the International Trademark Association (INTA),
> the ITU and the World Intellectual Property Organisation (WIPO).  In 1997
> they signed an MOU proposing a new Geneva based structure.
>
>
>
> The US Government was unhappy about this, and within a few weeks began a
> process to ensure that this plan did not eventuate. Under the Clinton
> administration, they began a process to establish an alternative mechanism
> for DNS management, and its successive Green Paper and White Paper outlined
> a new organization.
>
>
>
> Again quoting Kleinwachter,
>
>
>
> ³ The European Union supported in principle the idea of privatizing the
> DNS.
> But it criticized the US centric approach of the Green Paper. In a rather
> critical comment about the Green Paper the European Commission wrote: ³The
> European Union and its Member States would wish to emphasize our concern
> that the future management of the Internet should reflect the fact that it
> is already a global communication medium and the subject of valid
> international interests.
>
>
>
> Ira Magaziner, US President Clinton¹s Internet adviser and the main
> architect of what later became ICANN, replied in a hearing before the US
> Congress to the European criticism: ³The purpose of the Commerce Department
> proposal is to improve the technical management of the DNS only. The Green
> Paper does not propose a monolithic Internet Governance system. Frankly we
> doubt that the Internet should be governed by a single body or plan.²
>
>
>
> Jon Postel again changed his plans and took active part in the debate which
> led to a ³White Paper², published in June 1998 by the US Department of
> Commerce.² [ii]
> <
> http://ianpeter.wordpress.com/2011/03/28/internet-governance-history-writte
> n-2010/#_edn2>
>
>
>
> The US Government prevailed, and thus ICANN was born.- with a MOU with the
> US Government Department of Commerce which included in part ³ICANN will
> perform other IANA functions as needed upon request of DOC². Thus ICANN
> became a corporation under US law, with a contract to operate from the US
> government, despite concerns of many stakeholders.
>
>
>
> Jon  Postel unfortunately died  in 1998,  just a dew days before ICANN was
> formally established,
>
>
>
>
> > From: John Curran <jcurran at istaff.org>
> > Reply-To: <governance at lists.cpsr.org>, John Curran <jcurran at istaff.org>
> > Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2011 16:13:23 +0000
> > To: Norbert Bollow <nb at bollow.ch>
> > Cc: <governance at lists.cpsr.org>
> > Subject: Re: [governance] IANA contract to be opened for competitive
> bidding
> > on November 4
> >
> > On Oct 24, 2011, at 3:22 PM, Norbert Bollow wrote:
> >
> >> According to RFC 2850 (published in the year 2000), the ICANN's IANA
> >> department is acting "as IANA on behalf of the IETF", and its
> >> appointment to this role was approved by IAB.
> >
> > Specifically, the IAB believes that it has the ability to
> > direct the IANA's range of action, as specifically stated
> > in their second IANA NOI response, which notes "... IANA's
> > actions are constrained by the technical boundary conditions
> > as set by the IETF."
> >
> >> I understand this as implying that in the year 2000, the US Government
> >> was not opposed that that perspective on IANA.
> >
> > I'm uncertain how the publication of RFC 2850 implies
> > anything with respect to USG position at the time. It
> > was well known at the time that both IAB and USG made
> > various claims regarding authority to direct the IANA;
> > the entire purpose of RFC 2860 was to delineate these
> > authorities, in particular with respect to identifiers
> > with policy implications.
> >
> >> Now the US Government apparantly believes to have the authority to
> >> unilaterally decide who performs the IANA function.
> >
> > And this is unchanged from the first IANA contract issuance
> > by DoC.  We can all stare at the announcement until we start
> > seeing things, but as far I can tell there's a distinct lack
> > of evidence of any policy change at this time.
> >
> >> This looks to me like the US Government taking back authority that it
> >> had previously given away (or at least pretended to give away).
> >>
> >> So I feel quite justified in asking whether this is a policy change of
> >> some kind, or what is it?
> >
> > It is a resolictation of an existing contract to perform specific
> > technical tasks.  It's not magic, and so far it does not appear to
> > be any policy change (although I think we should wait to see the
> > actual statement of work to be certain of that...)
> >
> > FYI,
> > /John
> >
> > ____________________________________________________________
> > 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
>
>


-- 
Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala

Tweeter: @SalanietaT
Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro
Cell: +679 998 2851
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111104/5cb2baa6/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, 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


From pouzin at well.com  Thu Nov  3 17:04:01 2011
From: pouzin at well.com (Louis Pouzin (well))
Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2011 22:04:01 +0100
Subject: [governance] =?UTF-8?Q?Is_really_Bulgarian_Cyrillic_=2E=D0=B1?=
 =?UTF-8?Q?=D0=B3_=28=2Ebg=29_similar_to_other_Latin_ccTLDs=3F?=
In-Reply-To: <CAJwbTiD4eDSgOg2Chtm8f7xYRfkqdW8QDYWBnX95qOPF6UqjRQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <1291131665.20152.1407897083@webmail.messagingengine.com>
 <CAJwbTiA0ixrMYBTWFGZLphuHKzWwOVrYiAvc9yBf8WQsMN-66w@mail.gmail.com>
 <CA+EjHYpNDBuY4NGi0wm7fT7N9ZsMPsZ_X5TftNeD5c3aSLP+Bw@mail.gmail.com>
 <4D7DCD47-E74D-47E1-ABE7-6BAD2BF29337@psg.com> <CA+EjHYqKSTcbfqP7y-ymR-Aw3Rax1PttuaSPHzu8oSYHX_UWfA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAJwbTiD4eDSgOg2Chtm8f7xYRfkqdW8QDYWBnX95qOPF6UqjRQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CA+EjHYrNc4Jfhc=Jhh+Rru=Ds1egQNcsP6W71Q08MzhQoTq-hQ@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 1:32 PM, Louis Pouzin (well) <pouzin at well.com> wrote:

16 cctld's exhibit similar confusions.
>>
>
> On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 02:22, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro <
salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com> wrote:


> Out of curiosity which are the 16 ccTLDs?
>
>>
>> - - -

Actually it's not 16 but 18. See in Arial (most frequent font)

   *Albania* *Al* *AI* *Anguilla*  *Chile* *Cl* *CI* *Côte d'Ivoire*  *
Gibraltar* *GI* *Gl* *Greenland*  *Iceland* *IS* *lS* *Lesotho*  *Iran* *IR*
*lR* *Liberia*  *Israel* *Il* *lI * *Liechtenstein*  *Italy* *IT* *lT* *
Lithuania*  *Nicaragua* *NI* *Nl* *Netherlands*  *Sierra Leone* *Sl* *SI* *
Slovenia* - - -
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111103/2de08a1c/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, 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


From dogwallah at gmail.com  Thu Nov  3 17:08:19 2011
From: dogwallah at gmail.com (McTim)
Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2011 00:08:19 +0300
Subject: [governance] Reconciling Democracy & Multistakeholderism:
 Having a Voice vs. Having a Vote
In-Reply-To: <CAD=1OveAs=_nD7N2_fSDtpqekdVHfAxgLyg+rP9mTejikd1vPg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAD=1OvdKVZ7huxL1K-HoXyhmE_jWOoyRX5=_wHGfm=ogw9awXw@mail.gmail.com>
 <4EB28280.7050901@itforchange.net> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8D2C6E8@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
 <CAD=1OveAs=_nD7N2_fSDtpqekdVHfAxgLyg+rP9mTejikd1vPg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CACAaNxg-XFuT3wRcSrGyyK9QodziMB900SPHp1WeDEf_V6XuaQ@mail.gmail.com>

On Thu, Nov 3, 2011 at 10:13 PM, Paul Lehto <lehto.paul at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> 2011/11/3 "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang" <wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
>>
>> this artificial disctincton between "voice" (for civil society, technical community and private sector) and "vote" (governments) in Internet Governance comes from an academic Ivory Tower.
>
>
> I am not, have not been, and am not seeking to be employed or even present in any "academic Ivory Tower."  Based on comments received and my own intent, I had thought I expressed myself rather simply, especially considering the complicated terrain of debates I was trying to distill into more clarity.
>
> In any event, Wolfgang, you are lucky to be as respected as you are.  This explains why you report (below) feeling little difference between a situation where you had a voice, and one with a vote.   The less one is part of the necessarily narrow group of people who decisionmakers learn to develop respect for based on expertise and like things, the more one is like a child, who has a voice but not a vote.


Historically, the way decision have been made in the "governance" of
the Internetwork, is that we don't vote, we reach consensus after
hearing all voices.

This is reflected in the IETF credo "“We reject kings, presidents and
voting...."


>
> Children have voices, but not votes.  Parents have voices too, and the only votes.  This distinction is not "artificial" it is absolutely fundamental to freedom and democracy.
>
>>
>> It depends very much from the circumstances and the concrete issue where the fine line between  between "voice" and "vote" can be drawn.
>
> Sure, any intelligent person can think of hard cases, or line-drawing questions.  The only words that can not be debated are the words of a strongman dictator.  (But that's not because the words and ideas aren't depending a lot on circumstances, distinctions, and line-drawing, just like "voice" and "vote" is if and only if we imagine harder cases at the margins.   Those always exist, in all languages.  Differences are ones of degree.
>
> People standing in line for a one minute chance to address a city council have a voice, sort of, but no vote.  Surely it's better to sit silently on the city council and suffer through the public comments, and be one of a relatively small number of votes, is it not?



Surely it is better to listen to all voices and have a consensus
emerge (or not).

Is that not the more democratic process?

At least my online dictionary defines democracy as:

"government by the people; a form of government in which the supreme
power is vested in the people and exercised directly by them..."

--
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, 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


From lehto.paul at gmail.com  Thu Nov  3 19:27:01 2011
From: lehto.paul at gmail.com (Paul Lehto)
Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2011 19:27:01 -0400
Subject: [governance] Reconciling Democracy & Multistakeholderism:
 Having a Voice vs. Having a Vote
In-Reply-To: <CACAaNxg-XFuT3wRcSrGyyK9QodziMB900SPHp1WeDEf_V6XuaQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAD=1OvdKVZ7huxL1K-HoXyhmE_jWOoyRX5=_wHGfm=ogw9awXw@mail.gmail.com>
	<4EB28280.7050901@itforchange.net>
	<2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8D2C6E8@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
	<CAD=1OveAs=_nD7N2_fSDtpqekdVHfAxgLyg+rP9mTejikd1vPg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CACAaNxg-XFuT3wRcSrGyyK9QodziMB900SPHp1WeDEf_V6XuaQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAD=1Ovf66-ZTCgNafAcV5iH91GqiObHH03Z9tBz970S4w8s3KA@mail.gmail.com>

2011/11/3 McTim <dogwallah at gmail.com>

> Historically, the way decision have been made in the "governance" of
> the Internetwork, is that we don't vote, we reach consensus after
> hearing all voices.
>
> This is reflected in the IETF credo "“We reject kings, presidents and
> voting...."
> [snip]
> Surely it is better to listen to all voices and have a consensus
> emerge (or not).
>
> Is that not the more democratic process?
>
> At least my online dictionary defines democracy as:
>
> "government by the people; a form of government in which the supreme
> power is vested in the people and exercised directly by them..."
>

Actually, McTim, no it is not democratic.  It is a hyper-conservative
status quo-protecting non-democratic procedure, and here's why:

A concensus procedure means that every individual or business has an
effective veto power (or whatever level of minority dissent it takes to
create "non-consensus" has this same veto power).

Given that vast amount of internet law and policy are created by contracts
and terms of service that are not negotiated but "take it or leave it."  If
one wishes to change this status quo, in a real democracy that takes 50%
plus one vote.  In a hyper-conservative "consensus" based model, it takes
something as high as 100% of the vote to perhaps 80%, depending on how
"consensus" is defined as a practical matter.   To me, "consensus" means
basically 100%, though on this list I've seen it defined at lower levels
than that, but still large super-majorities.

A fundamental problem in democracy law is the right of past or dead
generations to pass Constitutions or laws that bind future generations
SPECIFICALLY with the necessity of super-majorities to reverse or change
those provisions.  What right does a past generation have to bind the
present generation, on pain of a consensus or a super-majority, when
democracy means majority rule???

I acknowledge that democracy as most know it is representative democracy
that contains certain constitutional or fundamental provisions changeable
only by supermajorities via a difficult amendment procedure.

The consensus model you are trying to call democracy means the burden of
changing the system, on every issue big and little, carries the difficulty
with it that approximates the difficulty of amending a constitution.  That
is very conservative, whereas democracy is more tolerant and encouraging of
change.

It's not like I don't understand the beauties of certain processes in which
consensus is ATTEMPTED to be reached via real constructive dialog. I
actually advocate for that kind of process.

But here again, just as with Voice vs. Votes, there's a fundamental
distinction between Consensus-Process or Consensus-Voice, and the
requirement of consensus as restricting the power of the vote.

If one loves the status quo, it's a smart strategic move to support
consensus voting procedures, but it is not a democratic procedure if
consensus supermajorities are required for change.  That's not to say that
one should not aim to achieve harmony or consensus whenever possible, which
is always a good goal.

Put another way, even dictators must ultimately yield to consensus public
opinion, at least if that public opinion has any force and staying power
behind it.  The fact that consensus can usually change things even in a
dictatorship does not mean consensus driven processes FOR VOTING constitute
democracy.

There's no consensus on consensus, McTim.  :)

Paul Lehto, J.D.

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



-- 
Paul R Lehto, J.D.
P.O. Box 1
Ishpeming, MI  49849
lehto.paul at gmail.com
906-204-4026 (cell)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111103/f7937f69/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, 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


From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com  Thu Nov  3 23:06:10 2011
From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro)
Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2011 16:06:10 +1300
Subject: [governance] =?UTF-8?Q?Is_really_Bulgarian_Cyrillic_=2E=D0=B1?=
 =?UTF-8?Q?=D0=B3_=28=2Ebg=29_similar_to_other_Latin_ccTLDs=3F?=
In-Reply-To: <CA+EjHYrNc4Jfhc=Jhh+Rru=Ds1egQNcsP6W71Q08MzhQoTq-hQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <1291131665.20152.1407897083@webmail.messagingengine.com>
	<CAJwbTiA0ixrMYBTWFGZLphuHKzWwOVrYiAvc9yBf8WQsMN-66w@mail.gmail.com>
	<CA+EjHYpNDBuY4NGi0wm7fT7N9ZsMPsZ_X5TftNeD5c3aSLP+Bw@mail.gmail.com>
	<4D7DCD47-E74D-47E1-ABE7-6BAD2BF29337@psg.com>
	<CA+EjHYqKSTcbfqP7y-ymR-Aw3Rax1PttuaSPHzu8oSYHX_UWfA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAJwbTiD4eDSgOg2Chtm8f7xYRfkqdW8QDYWBnX95qOPF6UqjRQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CA+EjHYrNc4Jfhc=Jhh+Rru=Ds1egQNcsP6W71Q08MzhQoTq-hQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAJwbTiCV4ay2xDTdN+KQqa2FCy0WZM0eDQVHpU_7=8tos3ZxTg@mail.gmail.com>

Thanks Louis. :)

On Fri, Nov 4, 2011 at 10:04 AM, Louis Pouzin (well) <pouzin at well.com>wrote:

> On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 1:32 PM, Louis Pouzin (well) <pouzin at well.com>wrote:
>
> 16 cctld's exhibit similar confusions.
>>>
>>
>> On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 02:22, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro <
> salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>> Out of curiosity which are the 16 ccTLDs?
>>
>>>
>>> - - -
>
> Actually it's not 16 but 18. See in Arial (most frequent font)
>
>    *Albania* *Al* *AI* *Anguilla*  *Chile* *Cl* *CI* *Côte d'Ivoire*  *
> Gibraltar* *GI* *Gl* *Greenland*  *Iceland* *IS* *lS* *Lesotho*  *Iran* *
> IR* *lR* *Liberia*  *Israel* *Il* *lI * *Liechtenstein*  *Italy* *IT* *lT*
> *Lithuania*  *Nicaragua* *NI* *Nl* *Netherlands*  *Sierra Leone* *Sl* *SI*
> *Slovenia* - - -
>
>
>
>


-- 
Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala

Tweeter: @SalanietaT
Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro
Cell: +679 998 2851
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111104/9aa7efc9/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, 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


From karl at cavebear.com  Thu Nov  3 23:10:08 2011
From: karl at cavebear.com (Karl Auerbach)
Date: Thu, 03 Nov 2011 20:10:08 -0700
Subject: [governance] Reconciling Democracy & Multistakeholderism:
 Having a Voice vs. Having a Vote
In-Reply-To: <CAD=1Ovf66-ZTCgNafAcV5iH91GqiObHH03Z9tBz970S4w8s3KA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAD=1OvdKVZ7huxL1K-HoXyhmE_jWOoyRX5=_wHGfm=ogw9awXw@mail.gmail.com>	<4EB28280.7050901@itforchange.net>	<2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8D2C6E8@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>	<CAD=1OveAs=_nD7N2_fSDtpqekdVHfAxgLyg+rP9mTejikd1vPg@mail.gmail.com>	<CACAaNxg-XFuT3wRcSrGyyK9QodziMB900SPHp1WeDEf_V6XuaQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAD=1Ovf66-ZTCgNafAcV5iH91GqiObHH03Z9tBz970S4w8s3KA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4EB35790.8050608@cavebear.com>

On 11/03/2011 04:27 PM, Paul Lehto wrote:

> Actually, McTim, no it is not democratic.  It is a hyper-conservative
> status quo-protecting non-democratic procedure, and here's why:

I agree - "consensus" generally means stasis.  The reason it works in
the IETF is that the IETF faces questions on narrow technical issues
that are decided by a narrow group of people who tend to share a lot of
values.

A voice without a vote is a nullity.

"Stakeholderism" is, in my book, a word of ill import as it contains the
notion that some people are more worthy than others.

See my paper "Stakeholderism – The Wrong Road For Internet Governance" at:
http://www.cavebear.com/archive/rw/igf-democracy-in-internet-governance.pdf

	--karl--


____________________________________________________________
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


From dogwallah at gmail.com  Fri Nov  4 00:19:05 2011
From: dogwallah at gmail.com (McTim)
Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2011 07:19:05 +0300
Subject: [governance] Reconciling Democracy & Multistakeholderism:
 Having a Voice vs. Having a Vote
In-Reply-To: <CAD=1Ovf66-ZTCgNafAcV5iH91GqiObHH03Z9tBz970S4w8s3KA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAD=1OvdKVZ7huxL1K-HoXyhmE_jWOoyRX5=_wHGfm=ogw9awXw@mail.gmail.com>
 <4EB28280.7050901@itforchange.net> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8D2C6E8@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
 <CAD=1OveAs=_nD7N2_fSDtpqekdVHfAxgLyg+rP9mTejikd1vPg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CACAaNxg-XFuT3wRcSrGyyK9QodziMB900SPHp1WeDEf_V6XuaQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAD=1Ovf66-ZTCgNafAcV5iH91GqiObHH03Z9tBz970S4w8s3KA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CACAaNxjCAUgc6h4uBx3ssaoyPMoW6QSwC4mFgqoTM=xPGCK88A@mail.gmail.com>

On Fri, Nov 4, 2011 at 2:27 AM, Paul Lehto <lehto.paul at gmail.com> wrote:
>
<snip>

>
> Put another way, even dictators must ultimately yield to consensus public
> opinion, at least if that public opinion has any force and staying power
> behind it.  The fact that consensus can usually change things even in a
> dictatorship does not mean consensus driven processes FOR VOTING constitute
> democracy.
>
> There's no consensus on consensus, McTim.  :)

Well, there has been for the last 40 years of Internet policy making.

As I have said before, Internet policy is constantly evolving.  While
Constitutions are difficult to change (and that's probably a good
thing), Internet policy is much easier to change.

-- 
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, 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


From ias_pk at yahoo.com  Fri Nov  4 01:38:50 2011
From: ias_pk at yahoo.com (Imran Ahmed Shah)
Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2011 10:38:50 +0500
Subject: [governance] =?UTF-8?Q?Is_really_Bulgarian_Cyrillic_=2E=D0=B1?=
 =?UTF-8?Q?=D0=B3_=28=2Ebg=29=3F_-_Recommendation?=
Message-ID: <007901cc9ab4$0bc8edd0$235ac970$@yahoo.com>

Dear Friends,

 

Context:

Actually, the visual resemblance of TLD string had not been studied thoroughly and precisely in early stages, when the ccTLDs were being allocated with ASCI codes (Latin Characters). That is why the 18 ccTLD script has confusing similarity in visual text with each other. However, this kind of study become the focus  of the DNS stability teams when the IDN ccTLDs were being introduced and they had to exercise their authority for the refusal, easily say, No. According the Fast Track they do not have liability and responsible to justify their decision or recommendations to the public. That is why, confusions are being developed among public and technical community trust on the transparent decision making process of the ICANN. Internet recognized by ASCI codes (Latin Characters) and simply Cyrillic .бг has resemblance with Latin .6r (digit six + r). I also underact that Bulgarians would not like leave the abbreviated string by selecting alternatively full name of the Country in Cyrillic Language script. 

 

Review on Requirement Analysis:

Now, my question is with the Bulgarians Internet Community that do they really want to go for the cyrillic language script and feel much benefit out of it by having Cyrillic .бг in parallel to the English .bg then what is the solution? (because in Korea, the Korean Internet community do not feel much benefit and advantage to have domain names with IDN ccTLD with Korean Language). And I believe that the public and technical communities and ICANN are unaware with the future (upcoming) prospects and potential of the failures of IDN TLDs framework. 

 

Recommended Solution:

In order to resolve this conflict I do not understand that appealing to ombudsman could resolve the conflict, because they provisioning allows to refuse. I would recommend that Internet Community and Internet Governance supporting organizations should write to the ICANN Board and requesting them to authorize ccNSO and GNSO with a mandate to develop a Working Group, and that working groups would address these issues and to sort out the way to compensate IDN TLDs applicant’s to promote Internationalized Domain Name System. And the allocation of the Cyrillic .бг string may be allowed with the recommendation of that specific working group to the board of ICANN.

 

Regards

 

Imran Ahmad Shah

 

From: governance at lists.cpsr.org [mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org] On Behalf Of Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro
Sent: Friday, November 04, 2011 08:06 AM
To: Louis Pouzin (well)
Cc: governance at lists.cpsr.org
Subject: Re: [governance] Is really Bulgarian Cyrillic .бг (.bg) similar to other Latin ccTLDs?

 

Thanks Louis. :)

On Fri, Nov 4, 2011 at 10:04 AM, Louis Pouzin (well) <pouzin at well.com> wrote:

On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 1:32 PM, Louis Pouzin (well) <pouzin at well.com> wrote:

16 cctld's exhibit similar confusions.

 

On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 02:22, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro <salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com> wrote:
 

Out of curiosity which are the 16 ccTLDs? 

 

- - -

Actually it's not 16 but 18. See in Arial (most frequent font)


Albania

Al

AI

Anguilla


Chile

Cl

CI

Côte d'Ivoire


Gibraltar

GI

Gl

Greenland


Iceland

IS

lS

Lesotho


Iran

IR

lR

Liberia


Israel

Il

lI 

Liechtenstein


Italy

IT

lT

Lithuania


Nicaragua

NI

Nl

Netherlands


Sierra Leone

Sl

SI

Slovenia

- - -








 

-- 

Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala

 

Tweeter: @SalanietaT

Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro

Cell: +679 998 2851

 

 

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111104/0136167e/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, 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


From garth.graham at telus.net  Fri Nov  4 01:46:48 2011
From: garth.graham at telus.net (Garth Graham)
Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2011 22:46:48 -0700
Subject: [governance] Reconciling Democracy & Multistakeholderism:
 Having a Voice vs. Having a Vote
In-Reply-To: <CACAaNxg-XFuT3wRcSrGyyK9QodziMB900SPHp1WeDEf_V6XuaQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAD=1OvdKVZ7huxL1K-HoXyhmE_jWOoyRX5=_wHGfm=ogw9awXw@mail.gmail.com> <4EB28280.7050901@itforchange.net> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8D2C6E8@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> <CAD=1OveAs=_nD7N2_fSDtpqekdVHfAxgLyg+rP9mTejikd1vPg@mail.gmail.com> <CACAaNxg-XFuT3wRcSrGyyK9QodziMB900SPHp1WeDEf_V6XuaQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <81B75927-F82F-4F7E-9688-7E5A6E46DB92@telus.net>

On 2011-11-03, at 2:08 PM, McTim wrote:

> Historically, the way decision have been made in the "governance" of
> the Internetwork, is that we don't vote, we reach consensus after
> hearing all voices.
> 
> This is reflected in the IETF credo "“We reject kings, presidents and
> voting…."

Good point, but it gets better if you don't leave out the other half of the equation. Because they aren't really "decisions" are they.  They are just "take it or leave it" specifications for standards and protocols.  And the consensus is "rough" and then followed by "and running code."  That's because, "Between the idea and the reality, between the motion and the act, falls the Shadow."  So the running of code tests the consensus against reality and feeds back so that the consensus can adapt to the experience of what could not be anticipated.  The governance of dynamic systems and the evolution of practice are situational, self-referential and recursive, and quite other than the linearity of kings, representation and delegated authorities.  

I believe governments are now fully and fearfully alert to the emergence of a radical difference in the way things can be done.  I also believe that complex systems models (like IETF!) provide an improved way of addressing problems of complex interdependencies, the very problems that conventional governing institutions are proving themselves incapable of addressing.  What I don't see, other than personally stepping up and participating whenever you have something to offer, is how two very different ways of thinking about ways of doing get reconciled, so that the importance of rough consensus and running code is both understood as non-threatening and allowed to flourish.

GG____________________________________________________________
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


From daniel at digsys.bg  Fri Nov  4 03:16:10 2011
From: daniel at digsys.bg (Daniel Kalchev)
Date: Fri, 04 Nov 2011 09:16:10 +0200
Subject: [governance] =?UTF-8?Q?Is_really_Bulgarian_Cyrillic_=2E=D0=B1?=
 =?UTF-8?Q?=D0=B3_=28=2Ebg=29_similar_to_other_Latin_ccTLDs=3F?=
In-Reply-To: <CAD=1OvfGdTedrtQkkmUy1761TsOS2kWMcDGQef0b9+wZs2r0Uw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <1291131665.20152.1407897083@webmail.messagingengine.com> <CAJwbTiA0ixrMYBTWFGZLphuHKzWwOVrYiAvc9yBf8WQsMN-66w@mail.gmail.com> <CA+EjHYpNDBuY4NGi0wm7fT7N9ZsMPsZ_X5TftNeD5c3aSLP+Bw@mail.gmail.com> <4D7DCD47-E74D-47E1-ABE7-6BAD2BF29337@psg.com> <CA+EjHYqKSTcbfqP7y-ymR-Aw3Rax1PttuaSPHzu8oSYHX_UWfA@mail.gmail.com> <CAJwbTiD4eDSgOg2Chtm8f7xYRfkqdW8QDYWBnX95qOPF6UqjRQ@mail.gmail.com> <4EB12D34.4060404@cafonso.ca> <47D5B55C-0217-47F4-A1AE-2C7372F961A7@acm.org> <4EB19B7B.4050303@cafonso.ca> <4EB1F3AB.8010909@gmx.net> <4EB2738F.8070005@cafonso.ca> <4EB28156.9050700@digsys.bg> <CAD=1OvfGdTedrtQkkmUy1761TsOS2kWMcDGQef0b9+wZs2r0Uw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4EB3913A.9050707@digsys.bg>



On 03.11.11 18:31, Paul Lehto wrote:
> It would seem that there either is, or should be, a process to "call 
> the question" as they say in parliamentary procedure.  If not, a 
> motion can be made for a decision, or a letter sent citing undue delay 
> and calling for a decision (with or without additional clarifying 
> expertise appended to it). A person familiar with whatever exists in 
> terms of procedure can recommend the best format or vehicle for 
> forcing a decision.
>

There is no formal process to question the outcome of the IDN Fast Track 
applications. By definition, the only possible communication is between 
ICANN "staff" (whatever that means) and the original applicant. 
Ironically, even that country's Government does not have formal way to 
communicate with ICANN on the matter.

Nevertheless, we are exploring every available possibility for some 18 
months now, to understand why this situation continues to persist. ICANN 
staff are very wary of any such discussions and I perfectly understand 
their position. More so, that the principal that handled this case, Tina 
Dam, is no longer with ICANN.
My understanding is that ICANN now recognizes they made a mistake. But 
they not only made the mistake to accept blindli this "expert opinion". 
They also made the mistake to make several statements already to the 
effect that "this is it, accept it or go away". Therefore, the problem 
at the moment is how ICANN admits their mistake and how they go out of 
the rising political problem.
I have made many proposals on how to address this, but this has been 
slow process.. Nobody has given up anyway and it now seems inevitable 
things will go on a more global and more politicized forums.

Daniel
____________________________________________________________
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


From daniel at digsys.bg  Fri Nov  4 04:16:29 2011
From: daniel at digsys.bg (Daniel Kalchev)
Date: Fri, 04 Nov 2011 10:16:29 +0200
Subject: [governance] =?UTF-8?Q?Is_really_Bulgarian_Cyrillic_=2E=D0=B1?=
 =?UTF-8?Q?=D0=B3_=28=2Ebg=29=3F_-_Recommendation?=
In-Reply-To: <007901cc9ab4$0bc8edd0$235ac970$@yahoo.com>
References: <007901cc9ab4$0bc8edd0$235ac970$@yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <4EB39F5D.5000108@digsys.bg>



On 04.11.11 07:38, Imran Ahmed Shah wrote:
>
> Dear Friends,
>
> *Context:*
>
> Actually, the visual resemblance of TLD string had not been studied 
> thoroughly and precisely in early stages, when the ccTLDs were being 
> allocated with ASCI codes (Latin Characters). That is why the 18 ccTLD 
> script has confusing similarity in visual text with each other.
>

Not exactly...
The reason these strings have "similarity" problems is because, these 
strings are listed in an internationally accepted list of country codes. 
Those who accepted the list and the "possible confusion" are way, way 
larger and more important in this world than ICANN. In this sense, 
ICANNs stance on this matter is simply arrogant.

The use of existing two letter country codes as ccTLD strings was a 
decision made long before ICANN existed and has never been disqualified. 
Apparently, such existing similarity, within the same (ASCII) script has 
not led to any instability for Internet nor impacted it's security.

> However, this kind of study become the focus  of the DNS stability 
> teams when the IDN ccTLDs were being introduced and they had to 
> exercise their authority for the refusal, easily say, No. According 
> the Fast Track they do not have liability and responsible to justify 
> their decision or recommendations to the public.
>

This is correct. The expert panel says: "We were given specific 
instructions by ICANN and for this given input, we are supposed to 
produce this output". ICANN says: "we did not make this decision. We 
gave the application to the stability panel and they said no".
The specific "instructions" are kept secret. I could speculate that 
today's ICANN staff may not even know what they were.

> That is why, confusions are being developed among public and technical 
> community trust on the transparent decision making process of the 
> ICANN. Internet recognized by ASCI codes (Latin Characters) and simply 
> Cyrillic.бг has resemblance with Latin .6r (digit six + r). I also 
> underact that Bulgarians would not like leave the abbreviated string 
> by selecting alternatively full name of the Country in Cyrillic 
> Language script.
>

It is interesting to note, that digits are not permitted as TLD names.

It is also interesting to note, that until recently, everybody was 
talking about .бг and .br, now more and more talk about .бг and .6r.
Perhaps because we already pointed out that the UNICODE table of 
confusable characters do not list any match for the Latin 'r' and a 
Cyrillic character.


> *Review on Requirement Analysis:*
>
> Now, my question is with the Bulgarians Internet Community that do 
> they really want to go for the cyrillic language script and feel much 
> benefit out of it by having Cyrillic.бг in parallel to the English .bg 
> then what is the solution? (because in Korea, the Korean Internet 
> community do not feel much benefit and advantage to have domain names 
> with IDN ccTLD with Korean Language). And I believe that the public 
> and technical communities and ICANN are unaware with the future 
> (upcoming) prospects and potential of the failures of IDN TLDs framework.
>

During my talks with ICANN staff on the subject, I raised the point that 
one should look in perspective. In the past, it was viewed that IDN TLDs 
should not be similar to ASCII TLDs. However, reality is that the Latin 
alphabet on which ASCII is based is actually an minority alphabet. The 
use of other alphabets is more significant and as Internet becomes more 
and more "internationalized" (which is rather poor choice of 
terminology, by the way), ASCII labels will have less and less 
importance. What is more, ICANNs own great new IDN gTLD initiative will 
spring a lot more IDN new TLDs than ASCII TLDs.
So at some point things will be actually reversed and ASCII TLD 
applications will have to make sure they are not similar with some other 
script's characters. Why not Cyrillic... ;-)

Some background:
I am obviously with the BG ccTLD Registry. As such, in theory I should, 
according to some people, have no interest in supporting the development 
of an IDN ccTLD for Bulgaria. That is of course speculation. Cyrillic is 
deeply involved in the Bulgarian culture -- some even go that far to 
claim that Bulgaria is the originator of the Cyrillic script.
Further, the abbreviation "БГ" is how Bulgarians identify the country in 
our own language. There was no other Cyrillic abbreviation in use for 
that purpose, ever.

When the IDN Fast Track process started, we initiated a number of pools 
in Bulgaria to inquire what the community opinion on the best IDN ccTLD 
would be. All previous pools were more or less informal and it was 
always 'БГ". These pools were formal this time. I am aware of three big 
pools: one done by the BG Registry (you can see the results on 
https://www.register.bg), another done by the Bulgarian Government and 
yet another done by the Uninet Association (who were experimenting at 
that time with a .бг in alternate root environment). The pool made by 
Register.BG was to all BG TLD contact persons -- therefore anyone who 
has had anything to do with a BG domain name. Therefore, we consider it 
most representative of the "community opinion" and it is somewhat 
related to your question. The pool by the Government wasn't very popular 
in participation, perhaps due to the short time frame an d lack of 
enough publicity. All pools suggested the prevalent choice being '.бг' 
and therefore this is why such application was made.

Later, when the applicant was informed of the expert panel opinion, 
there was a second pool made by the Government, with the special 
question "what OTHER string you prefer". The response was overwhelming, 
this time with much greater participation. The prevailing majority of 
answers were:

- we want .бг.
- if we are not going to get .бг, we do not want any IDN ccTLD.

With this public opinion, it is understandable that our Government are 
not looking for any other option anymore.

More specific on your question:

It was always assumed (at least by Register.BG) that all delegations 
under a Cyrillic TLD will be in Cyrillic. This is the whole point to 
have a Cyrillic TLD: to be able to type the entire domain name in 
Cyrillic. You already can register IDN domain names under the ASCII BG, 
such as президент.bg (president.bg), but these are not extremely 
popular, primarily because everyone now knows that you can have IDN.IDN 
names and.. sort of wait for this to happen (ICANN to sour our their 
internal confusion).

In respect of the pending application and eventual assignment of .бг, 
Register.BG has made a proposal to the Government, that should both TLDs 
be handled by the same registry, a form of 'bundling' may be 
appropriate, for example if one registers президент.бг they get 
президент.bg, subject to the applicable restrictions under BG of course: 
that is, you (at least under current rules) cannot have око.bg (око 
being in Cyrillic).

It is also interesting to note, that for many years, registries that 
have implemented IDN registrations, restrict the possible labels so that 
no string confusable labels are possible with (say) Cyrillic and ASCII 
characters. But note: this only applies to exact character match, not to 
"possibly similarly looking in some font". It is sad this is not the 
policy at the root level as well.


> *Recommended Solution:*
>
> In order to resolve this conflict I do not understand that appealing 
> to ombudsman could resolve the conflict, because they provisioning 
> allows to refuse. I would recommend that Internet Community and 
> Internet Governance supporting organizations should write to the ICANN 
> Board and requesting them to authorize ccNSO and GNSO with a mandate 
> to develop a Working Group, and that working groups would address 
> these issues and to sort out the way to compensate IDN TLDs 
> applicant’s to promote Internationalized Domain Name System. And the 
> allocation of the Cyrillic.бг string may be allowed with the 
> recommendation of that specific working group to the board of ICANN.
>
>

This has already happened. In a very ICANN-ish way...

On the San Francisco ICANN meeting, when it became clear that not only 
the Bulgarian case is halted, but also the Greek application and also 
the EU IDN application in Bulgarian and Greek (Bulgarian and Greek as 
well as the Cyrillic and Greek alphabets are official within the EU and 
according to the "EU law" are to be fully supported). Then, a 
sub-working group was created under IDN ccPDP WG1 to produce suggestions 
to ICANN how to handle these cases.
That working group eventually reported at the Dakar ICANN meeting... on 
the EU case only, stating in effect (you will excuse my imprecise 
citation) "well... we found out that those strings are confusingly 
similar, but it appears that they are confusingly similar with one 
another (?). We also discussed the matter with EURid (the EU registry) 
and agree that as long as they register only Cyrillic names under the 
Cyrillic TLD and Greek names under the Greek TLD, everything is fine. 
Therefore we recommend that ICANN approves this application.."

Double standard? Why the Bulgarian and Greek cases were not considered?

Indeed, it may happen that the full IDN ccPDP process will permit 
Bulgaria to have .бг at some point in the future. This is somehow not 
dependent on ICANN or the 'expert panel' opinions.

But then the question will remain: How come the .бг TLD was, let me cite 
from the 'expert panel' report:



.. and, in the future it will be less confusable?

Why was then Bulgaria delayed with it's Cyrillic TLD implementation and 
why was all this several years long attempt to undermine ICANNs 
credibility to the community?


Finally, I would like to comment thus:

If someone (ICANN in this case) is tasked with the heavy responsibility 
to make a decision in situation like this, effectively permitting or not 
a country's own language/script to be used and they are to consider the 
opinion of an expert panel, with whom they have a contract.. and it is 
apparent, that this opinion is accepted by practically no one, then a 
prudent one (ICANN) will simply seek the opinion of another expert 
panel, or two (to make easier choice). That would resolve any and all 
doubt. What is more, ICANN staff is required to do so according to the 
Fast Track Implementation Plan.

There are all kinds of theories and first hand knowledge why all this 
has happened.. but let's give ICANN chance to fix this stupid situation 
and clear their image, before these things go public.

Daniel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111104/02fcfaca/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: gffihbcb.png
Type: image/png
Size: 78810 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111104/02fcfaca/attachment.png>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
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


From jeanette at wzb.eu  Fri Nov  4 06:18:04 2011
From: jeanette at wzb.eu (Jeanette Hofmann)
Date: Fri, 04 Nov 2011 10:18:04 +0000
Subject: [governance] Reconciling Democracy & Multistakeholderism:
 Having a Voice vs. Having a Vote
In-Reply-To: <4EB28280.7050901@itforchange.net>
References: <CAD=1OvdKVZ7huxL1K-HoXyhmE_jWOoyRX5=_wHGfm=ogw9awXw@mail.gmail.com> <4EB28280.7050901@itforchange.net>
Message-ID: <4EB3BBDC.80600@wzb.eu>

Hi all,

for once I fully agree with Parminder. While the fight for 
multi-stakeholder arrangements is good and justified, we should not 
ignore their downsides. All studies I know of on the participation in 
referendum, open source projects, wikipedia and the likes confirm the 
non-egalitarian effect of participatory movements: they tend to increase 
the voice of resourceful groups and marginalize those without education, 
money, time etc. Multi-stakeholder participation is not the answer to 
everything. On the contrary, I think we need to assess and be wary of 
all forms of voice and vote.

Whether or not they meet democratic standards, there is a categorial 
difference between voice and vote. One is binding for third parties, the 
other is not. Decision making procedures need to reflect that difference 
in terms of accountability, transparency, representativeness etc.

jeanette



> And yes, non human entities ( businesses as well as NGOs) cannot have
> votes. They should have voice though.
>
> Positing what should be channels of voice (multi-stakeholder systems) as
> those of votes have mostly meant that those with the greatest resources
> have exclusive or additional votes, and the less resourced are sought to
> be pacified by giving nominal space and opportunity for voice (that they
> are mostly not able to exercise in competition with well resourced
> voices) *instead* of giving votes - or actual participation in decision
> making....
>
> Which does not mean that current (or any) systems of representation are
> perfect (or even good enough). They need to be constantly improved
> through processes of deepening democracy. But it is counter productive
> to impose non democratic forms over them.
>
> Paul's exposition is also instructive for showing the contradiction
> involved in standing for 'human' rights and also advocating
> multistakeholderism as a political decision making system. Only actual
> humans have the human right of participation in making the political
> decisions that effect them, not businesses or NGOs. Agreed that humans
> need to effectively organise to exercise political choice. That is what
> the project of democracy is about. But a private business can hardly be
> seen as a system for organising humans for exercising choice. At
> present, only elected democratic governments are such a system,
> especially those who listen to and respect all voices.
>
> parminder
>
>
>
> On Monday 31 October 2011 09:30 PM, Paul Lehto wrote:
>>
>> It seems that in the longstanding debates about the merits and
>> demerits of multi-stakeholderism, there is a perspective that may
>> possibly help reconcile the views of some major positions on this
>> issue, or perhaps even reconcile all of them: The question perhaps
>> ought to be framed in terms of having a voice versus having a vote.
>>
>> Under human rights and democracy laws, only human beings (or their
>> elected representatives) have votes. But businesses, NGOs, and others
>> often have relevant if not important expertise, and thus have relevant
>> if not important "voices" that are either useful or even necessary to
>> intelligent process, and thus to good outcomes.
>>
>> Garbage in, garbage out. For good process, we need good "voices" or
>> good information. One big source of this good information are all the
>> folks we think of as invitees or participants in a "multi-stakeholder"
>> process.
>>
>> The issues arise when the voices are also the only votes or the main
>> votes. This confuses good, democratic process of furthering the
>> important cause of an INFORMED decision-making electorate or process,
>> with the issue of WHO HAS A VOTE. Under democracy and fundamental
>> humans rights laws, only human beings have votes, and it is one a one
>> person/one vote basis.
>>
>> For the moment, let's put aside the issue of building robust electoral
>> systems on a global scale allowing all the humans to vote who are
>> interested in doing so and effected by what's proposed (i.e. "the
>> governed.") There may be challenges there to be sure, but if this is
>> considered a worthy objection ultimately, then it is a worthy
>> objection for a dictator to object to democracy because polling
>> places, precincts, ballots and other infrastructure simply does not
>> exist. That's a bad joke, or an excuse for authoritarianism, not a
>> valid objection to working towards and implementing democracy.
>>
>> The call of freedom and democracy movements worldwide has nearly
>> always been essentially the same thing: let's make democracy REAL. And
>> then we will eternally have to keep it real, of course.
>>
>> We ought to have multi-stakeholderism in terms of Voice Process, but
>> not in terms of Vote Process. It's very important to hear all the
>> different perspectives including business perspectives
>> (Multi-stakeholderism), but that should not translate into non-elected
>> OR non-human persons or entities voting and determining the laws and
>> policies that structure and define the freedom of the internet (or the
>> necessary protections against fraud and abuse).
>>
>> Paul Lehto, J.D.
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Paul R Lehto, J.D.
>> P.O. Box 1
>> Ishpeming, MI 49849
>> lehto.paul at gmail.com <mailto:lehto.paul at gmail.com>
>> 906-204-4026 (cell)
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
____________________________________________________________
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


From baudouin.schombe at gmail.com  Fri Nov  4 05:27:45 2011
From: baudouin.schombe at gmail.com (Baudouin Schombe)
Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2011 10:27:45 +0100
Subject: [governance] Reconciling Democracy & Multistakeholderism:
 Having a Voice vs. Having a Vote
In-Reply-To: <CAD=1OvdKVZ7huxL1K-HoXyhmE_jWOoyRX5=_wHGfm=ogw9awXw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAD=1OvdKVZ7huxL1K-HoXyhmE_jWOoyRX5=_wHGfm=ogw9awXw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAPcSPKXZppnM7sMAY9dbTHfuDUBmkBQBkf724yS_Zw+SP4TE+Q@mail.gmail.com>

Hello Paul,

I believe with you on this principle of a "voice" but a credible voice. This
procedure is feasible and possible in a democracy where the leaders respect
the rights of citizens. In the African context, more partioculièrement in
my country, this practice is totally politicized. Most non-state actors
without power of decision fits easily into acquaintances without political
parties most often reflects the will of the people or the communities they are
supposed to represent. There is still some way to go before the principle
of "multisakeholderism" is effectively understood and applied satisfactorily to
the benefit of all concerned.

Baudouin

2011/10/31 Paul Lehto <lehto.paul at gmail.com>

>
> It seems that in the longstanding debates about the merits and demerits of
> multi-stakeholderism, there is a perspective that may possibly help
> reconcile the views of some major positions on this issue, or perhaps even
> reconcile all of them:  The question perhaps ought to be framed in terms of
> having a voice versus having a vote.
>
> Under human rights and democracy laws, only human beings (or their elected
> representatives) have votes.  But businesses, NGOs, and others often have
> relevant if not important expertise, and thus have relevant if not
> important "voices" that are either useful or even necessary to intelligent
> process, and thus to good outcomes.
>
> Garbage in, garbage out.  For good process, we need good "voices" or good
> information.  One big source of this good information are all the folks we
> think of as invitees or participants in a "multi-stakeholder" process.
>
> The issues arise when the voices are also the only votes or the main
> votes.  This confuses good, democratic process of furthering the important
> cause of an INFORMED decision-making electorate or process, with the issue
> of WHO HAS A VOTE.   Under democracy and fundamental humans rights laws,
> only human beings have votes, and it is one a one person/one vote basis.
>
> For the moment, let's put aside the issue of building robust electoral
> systems on a global scale allowing all the humans to vote who are
> interested in doing so and effected by what's proposed (i.e. "the
> governed.")   There may be challenges there to be sure, but if this is
> considered a worthy objection ultimately, then it is a worthy objection for
> a dictator to object to democracy because polling places, precincts,
> ballots and other infrastructure simply does not exist.  That's a bad joke,
> or an excuse for authoritarianism, not a valid objection to working towards
> and implementing democracy.
>
> The call of freedom and democracy movements worldwide has nearly always
> been essentially the same thing: let's make democracy REAL.  And then we
> will eternally have to keep it real, of course.
>
> We ought to have multi-stakeholderism in terms of Voice Process, but not
> in terms of Vote Process.  It's very important to hear all the different
> perspectives including business perspectives (Multi-stakeholderism), but
> that should not translate into non-elected OR non-human persons or entities
> voting and determining the laws and policies that structure and define the
> freedom of the internet (or the necessary protections against fraud and
> abuse).
>
> Paul Lehto, J.D.
>
>
>
> --
> Paul R Lehto, J.D.
> P.O. Box 1
> Ishpeming, MI  49849
> lehto.paul at gmail.com
> 906-204-4026 (cell)
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
>
>
>


-- 
SCHOMBE BAUDOUIN
CENTRE AFRICAIN D'ECHANGE CULTUREL/
ACADEMIE DES TIC
FACILITATEUR GAID/AFRIQUE Membre
At-Large Member
NCSG Member

email:baudouin.schombe at gmail.com
         baudouin.schombe at ticafrica.net
tél:+243998983491
skype:b.schombe
wite web:http://webmail.ticafrica.net
blog:http://akimambo.unblog.fr
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111104/73087fbd/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, 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


From wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de  Fri Nov  4 05:48:14 2011
From: wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de (=?iso-8859-1?Q?=22Kleinw=E4chter=2C_Wolfgang=22?=)
Date: Fri, 04 Nov 2011 10:48:14 +0100
Subject: [governance] Cybersecurity
References:  <CAD=1OvdKVZ7huxL1K-HoXyhmE_jWOoyRX5=_wHGfm=ogw9awXw@mail.gmail.com>
 <4EB28280.7050901@itforchange.net> <4EB3BBDC.80600@wzb.eu>
Message-ID:  <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8D2C6EF@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>

FYI
 
http://www.ncix.gov/publications/reports/fecie_all/Foreign_Economic_Collection_2011.pdf
 
wolfgang
____________________________________________________________
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


From pouzin at well.com  Fri Nov  4 06:11:49 2011
From: pouzin at well.com (Louis Pouzin (well))
Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2011 11:11:49 +0100
Subject: [governance] =?WINDOWS-1251?Q?Is_really_Bulgarian_Cyrillic_=2E=E1?=
 =?WINDOWS-1251?Q?=E3_=28=2Ebg=29=3F_-_Recommendation?=
In-Reply-To: <4EB39F5D.5000108@digsys.bg>
References: <007901cc9ab4$0bc8edd0$235ac970$@yahoo.com> <4EB39F5D.5000108@digsys.bg>
Message-ID: <CA+EjHYoP-a9G+LcW4zXpDyDTo4RaTeBeigU_MgnfqHfFj+EgAA@mail.gmail.com>

The .бг story is very well analysed in previous postings by Daniel, and
need no more explanation. To sum up, ICANN is resorting to well known
dilatory tactics to elude its responsibility, and snow the issue.

In particular, the theory of "confusingly similar" ccTLD strings is a
typical maneuver to divert attention from a more fundamental principle
established in the UN WSIS Summit 2005 by the Tunis Agenda (TA), which
reads:

*« 63. Countries should not be involved in decisions regarding another
country’s country-code Top-Level Domain (ccTLD). Their legitimate
interests, as expressed and defined by each country, in diverse ways,
regarding decisions affecting their ccTLDs, need to be respected, upheld
and addressed via a flexible and improved framework and mechanisms. »
*
This is crystal clear. It is none of ICANN business to argue on Bulgarian
.бг.

The USG has signed the TA. Was it just a scrap of paper ? It was not.
Article 63 of the TA was worded in a way China wanted it, because she had
already implemented Chinese TLDs. USG and ICANN had to accept the fact.
There was nothing they could do, except pretending that Chinese names were
just a minor twig subordinate to the ICANN DNS. A non event, sort of.

So, *acccording to TA, picking a cyrillic ccTLD is for Bulgaria to decide,
and none other*.

Presumably ICANN does not see Bulgaria as a significant political actor,
like China, and doesn't care much of Bulgarian wishes. Hence an easy
opportunity to creep into a not well guarded territory, to expand its
illegitimate monopoly. Familiar ICANN tactics, isn't ?

At this stage it is clear that playing cat and mouse game with ICANN on
silly arguments is a waste of time.

Perhaps Bulgaria could write a letter to DOC, and remind them of the USG
signature on the TA. It would be useful to get a response, even if it is
plain fuzzy. But no response would also be significant.

Or ICANN could shift tactics and say "no objection to .бг, but it won't be
in the ICANN root". If so, this position should be expressed in writing.

Bulgaria is a member of the EU. Commissioner Neelie Kroes would certainly
be interested in this story, because there are dozens of non latin
languages in the EU, and she is not enthusiastic for abusive monopolies.
She might even come to a conclusion that a European root would make sense.
- - -

On Fri, Nov 4, 2011 at 09:16, Daniel Kalchev <daniel at digsys.bg> wrote:

>
>
> On 04.11.11 07:38, Imran Ahmed Shah wrote:
>
>  Dear Friends,****
>
> ** **
>
> *Context:*
>
> Actually, the visual resemblance of TLD string had not been studied
> thoroughly and precisely in early stages, when the ccTLDs were being
> allocated with ASCI codes (Latin Characters). That is why the 18 ccTLD
> script has confusing similarity in visual text with each other.
>
>
> Not exactly...
> The reason these strings have "similarity" problems is because, these
> strings are listed in an internationally accepted list of country codes.
> Those who accepted the list and the "possible confusion" are way, way
> larger and more important in this world than ICANN. In this sense, ICANNs
> stance on this matter is simply arrogant.
>
> The use of existing two letter country codes as ccTLD strings was a
> decision made long before ICANN existed and has never been disqualified.
> Apparently, such existing similarity, within the same (ASCII) script has
> not led to any instability for Internet nor impacted it's security.
>
>   However, this kind of study become the focus  of the DNS stability
> teams when the IDN ccTLDs were being introduced and they had to exercise
> their authority for the refusal, easily say, No. According the Fast Track
> they do not have liability and responsible to justify their decision or
> recommendations to the public.
>
>
> This is correct. The expert panel says: "We were given specific
> instructions by ICANN and for this given input, we are supposed to produce
> this output". ICANN says: "we did not make this decision. We gave the
> application to the stability panel and they said no".
> The specific "instructions" are kept secret. I could speculate that
> today's ICANN staff may not even know what they were.
>
>   That is why, confusions are being developed among public and technical
> community trust on the transparent decision making process of the ICANN.
> Internet recognized by ASCI codes (Latin Characters) and simply Cyrillic .бг
> has resemblance with Latin .6r (digit six + r). I also underact that
> Bulgarians would not like leave the abbreviated string by selecting
> alternatively full name of the Country in Cyrillic Language script.
>
>
> It is interesting to note, that digits are not permitted as TLD names.
>
> It is also interesting to note, that until recently, everybody was talking
> about .бг and .br, now more and more talk about .бг and .6r.
> Perhaps because we already pointed out that the UNICODE table of
> confusable characters do not list any match for the Latin 'r' and a
> Cyrillic character.
>
>  ****
>
> ** **
>
> *Review on Requirement Analysis:*
>
> Now, my question is with the Bulgarians Internet Community that do they
> really want to go for the cyrillic language script and feel much benefit
> out of it by having Cyrillic .бг in parallel to the English .bg then what
> is the solution? (because in Korea, the Korean Internet community do not
> feel much benefit and advantage to have domain names with IDN ccTLD with
> Korean Language). And I believe that the public and technical communities
> and ICANN are unaware with the future (upcoming) prospects and potential of
> the failures of IDN TLDs framework.
>
>
> During my talks with ICANN staff on the subject, I raised the point that
> one should look in perspective. In the past, it was viewed that IDN TLDs
> should not be similar to ASCII TLDs. However, reality is that the Latin
> alphabet on which ASCII is based is actually an minority alphabet. The use
> of other alphabets is more significant and as Internet becomes more and
> more "internationalized" (which is rather poor choice of terminology, by
> the way), ASCII labels will have less and less importance. What is more,
> ICANNs own great new IDN gTLD initiative will spring a lot more IDN new
> TLDs than ASCII TLDs.
> So at some point things will be actually reversed and ASCII TLD
> applications will have to make sure they are not similar with some other
> script's characters. Why not Cyrillic... ;-)
>
> Some background:
> I am obviously with the BG ccTLD Registry. As such, in theory I should,
> according to some people, have no interest in supporting the development of
> an IDN ccTLD for Bulgaria. That is of course speculation. Cyrillic is
> deeply involved in the Bulgarian culture -- some even go that far to claim
> that Bulgaria is the originator of the Cyrillic script.
> Further, the abbreviation "БГ" is how Bulgarians identify the country in
> our own language. There was no other Cyrillic abbreviation in use for that
> purpose, ever.
>
> When the IDN Fast Track process started, we initiated a number of pools in
> Bulgaria to inquire what the community opinion on the best IDN ccTLD would
> be. All previous pools were more or less informal and it was always 'БГ".
> These pools were formal this time. I am aware of three big pools: one done
> by the BG Registry (you can see the results on https://www.register.bg),
> another done by the Bulgarian Government and yet another done by the Uninet
> Association (who were experimenting at that time with a .бг in alternate
> root environment). The pool made by Register.BG was to all BG TLD contact
> persons -- therefore anyone who has had anything to do with a BG domain
> name. Therefore, we consider it most representative of the "community
> opinion" and it is somewhat related to your question. The pool by the
> Government wasn't very popular in participation, perhaps due to the short
> time frame an d lack of enough publicity. All pools suggested the prevalent
> choice being '.бг' and therefore this is why such application was made.
>
> Later, when the applicant was informed of the expert panel opinion, there
> was a second pool made by the Government, with the special question "what
> OTHER string you prefer". The response was overwhelming, this time with
> much greater participation. The prevailing majority of answers were:
>
> - we want .бг.
> - if we are not going to get .бг, we do not want any IDN ccTLD.
>
> With this public opinion, it is understandable that our Government are not
> looking for any other option anymore.
>
> More specific on your question:
>
> It was always assumed (at least by Register.BG) that all delegations under
> a Cyrillic TLD will be in Cyrillic. This is the whole point to have a
> Cyrillic TLD: to be able to type the entire domain name in Cyrillic. You
> already can register IDN domain names under the ASCII BG, such as
> президент.bg <http://xn--d1abbgf6aiiy.bg> (president.bg), but these are
> not extremely popular, primarily because everyone now knows that you can
> have IDN.IDN names and.. sort of wait for this to happen (ICANN to sour our
> their internal confusion).
>
> In respect of the pending application and eventual assignment of .бг,
> Register.BG has made a proposal to the Government, that should both TLDs be
> handled by the same registry, a form of 'bundling' may be appropriate, for
> example if one registers президент.бг they get президент.bg<http://xn--d1abbgf6aiiy.bg>,
> subject to the applicable restrictions under BG of course: that is, you (at
> least under current rules) cannot have око.bg <http://xn--j1ahb.bg> (око
> being in Cyrillic).
>
> It is also interesting to note, that for many years, registries that have
> implemented IDN registrations, restrict the possible labels so that no
> string confusable labels are possible with (say) Cyrillic and ASCII
> characters. But note: this only applies to exact character match, not to
> "possibly similarly looking in some font". It is sad this is not the policy
> at the root level as well.
>
>  ****
>
> ** **
>
> *Recommended Solution:*
>
> In order to resolve this conflict I do not understand that appealing to
> ombudsman could resolve the conflict, because they provisioning allows to
> refuse. I would recommend that Internet Community and Internet Governance
> supporting organizations should write to the ICANN Board and requesting
> them to authorize ccNSO and GNSO with a mandate to develop a Working Group,
> and that working groups would address these issues and to sort out the way
> to compensate IDN TLDs applicant’s to promote Internationalized Domain Name
> System. And the allocation of the Cyrillic .бг string may be allowed with
> the recommendation of that specific working group to the board of ICANN.**
> **
>
>
> This has already happened. In a very ICANN-ish way...
>
> On the San Francisco ICANN meeting, when it became clear that not only the
> Bulgarian case is halted, but also the Greek application and also the EU
> IDN application in Bulgarian and Greek (Bulgarian and Greek as well as the
> Cyrillic and Greek alphabets are official within the EU and according to
> the "EU law" are to be fully supported). Then, a sub-working group was
> created under IDN ccPDP WG1 to produce suggestions to ICANN how to handle
> these cases.
> That working group eventually reported at the Dakar ICANN meeting... on
> the EU case only, stating in effect (you will excuse my imprecise citation)
> "well... we found out that those strings are confusingly similar, but it
> appears that they are confusingly similar with one another (?). We also
> discussed the matter with EURid (the EU registry) and agree that as long as
> they register only Cyrillic names under the Cyrillic TLD and Greek names
> under the Greek TLD, everything is fine. Therefore we recommend that ICANN
> approves this application.."
>
> Double standard? Why the Bulgarian and Greek cases were not considered?
>
> Indeed, it may happen that the full IDN ccPDP process will permit Bulgaria
> to have .бг at some point in the future. This is somehow not dependent on
> ICANN or the 'expert panel' opinions.
>
> But then the question will remain: How come the .бг TLD was, let me cite
> from the 'expert panel' report:
>
>
>
> .. and, in the future it will be less confusable?
>
> Why was then Bulgaria delayed with it's Cyrillic TLD implementation and
> why was all this several years long attempt to undermine ICANNs credibility
> to the community?
>
>
> Finally, I would like to comment thus:
>
> If someone (ICANN in this case) is tasked with the heavy responsibility to
> make a decision in situation like this, effectively permitting or not a
> country's own language/script to be used and they are to consider the
> opinion of an expert panel, with whom they have a contract.. and it is
> apparent, that this opinion is accepted by practically no one, then a
> prudent one (ICANN) will simply seek the opinion of another expert panel,
> or two (to make easier choice). That would resolve any and all doubt. What
> is more, ICANN staff is required to do so according to the Fast Track
> Implementation Plan.
>
> There are all kinds of theories and first hand knowledge why all this has
> happened.. but let's give ICANN chance to fix this stupid situation and
> clear their image, before these things go public.
>
> Daniel
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111104/08a622d8/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, 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


From jlfullsack at orange.fr  Fri Nov  4 06:58:57 2011
From: jlfullsack at orange.fr (Jean-Louis FULLSACK)
Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2011 11:58:57 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [governance] Cybersecurity
In-Reply-To: <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8D2C6EF@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
References: <CAD=1OvdKVZ7huxL1K-HoXyhmE_jWOoyRX5=_wHGfm=ogw9awXw@mail.gmail.com>
 <4EB28280.7050901@itforchange.net> <4EB3BBDC.80600@wzb.eu>
 <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8D2C6EF@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
Message-ID: <30139759.50526.1320404337669.JavaMail.www@wwinf1k15>

Oh, Wolfgang ! This is a case of the biters bite ! 
(in french : l'arroseur arrosé, i.e. the sprinkled sprinkler).

I'd just recall the ECHELON spying system that the USG extended over the whole globus with the precious collaboration of the UK, Australia and New Zealand. They have been  spying European electronic entreprises -inter alia- for more than a decade for their own interests. And continue to do so. 

That's why they -the USG, but also its "associates" in ECHELON- are disqualified from invoking "cyberspsying" ; it's just crying wolf and that is rather laughable !

For remembering ECHELON, please read "IC 200" by Duncan Campbell, and the Report of the European Parliament on ECHELON (there was a very interesting debate about it in the early 2000s).    

Never did I see nor hear any critics on this list about such a State-predator's practice. Probably because we are here among "IG gentlemen" ...   

Friendly

Jean-Louis Fulklsack
CSDPTT-France



> Message du 04/11/11 10:49
> De : ""Kleinwächter, Wolfgang"" 
> A : governance at lists.cpsr.org
> Copie à : 
> Objet : [governance] Cybersecurity
> 
> FYI
> 
> http://www.ncix.gov/publications/reports/fecie_all/Foreign_Economic_Collection_2011.pdf
> 
> wolfgang
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
> 
> 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111104/cec8a6a4/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, 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


From nhklein at gmx.net  Fri Nov  4 10:36:19 2011
From: nhklein at gmx.net (nhklein)
Date: Fri, 04 Nov 2011 21:36:19 +0700
Subject: [governance] =?UTF-8?Q?Is_really_Bulgarian_Cyrillic_=2E=D0=B1?=
 =?UTF-8?Q?=D0=B3_=28=2Ebg=29_similar_to_other_Latin_ccTLDs=3F?=
In-Reply-To: <4EB3913A.9050707@digsys.bg>
References: <1291131665.20152.1407897083@webmail.messagingengine.com> <CAJwbTiA0ixrMYBTWFGZLphuHKzWwOVrYiAvc9yBf8WQsMN-66w@mail.gmail.com> <CA+EjHYpNDBuY4NGi0wm7fT7N9ZsMPsZ_X5TftNeD5c3aSLP+Bw@mail.gmail.com> <4D7DCD47-E74D-47E1-ABE7-6BAD2BF29337@psg.com> <CA+EjHYqKSTcbfqP7y-ymR-Aw3Rax1PttuaSPHzu8oSYHX_UWfA@mail.gmail.com> <CAJwbTiD4eDSgOg2Chtm8f7xYRfkqdW8QDYWBnX95qOPF6UqjRQ@mail.gmail.com> <4EB12D34.4060404@cafonso.ca> <47D5B55C-0217-47F4-A1AE-2C7372F961A7@acm.org> <4EB19B7B.4050303@cafonso.ca> <4EB1F3AB.8010909@gmx.net> <4EB2738F.8070005@cafonso.ca> <4EB28156.9050700@digsys.bg> <CAD=1OvfGdTedrtQkkmUy1761TsOS2kWMcDGQef0b9+wZs2r0Uw@mail.gmail.com> <4EB3913A.9050707@digsys.bg>
Message-ID: <4EB3F863.7030006@gmx.net>

On 11/04/2011 02:16 PM, Daniel Kalchev wrote:
> On 03.11.11 18:31, Paul Lehto wrote:
>> It would seem that there either is, or should be, a process to "call 
>> the question" as they say in parliamentary procedure.  If not, a 
>> motion can be made for a decision, or a letter sent citing undue 
>> delay and calling for a decision (with or without additional 
>> clarifying expertise appended to it). A person familiar with whatever 
>> exists in terms of procedure can recommend the best format or vehicle 
>> for forcing a decision.
>>
> There is no formal process to question the outcome of the IDN Fast 
> Track applications. By definition, the only possible communication is 
> between ICANN "staff" (whatever that means) and the original 
> applicant. Ironically, even that country's Government does not have 
> formal way to communicate with ICANN on the matter.
>
> Nevertheless, we are exploring every available possibility for some 18 
> months now,...


Having observed this process, going around in a closed circuit course 
with no formal process of appeal, and therefore no way out, I had written:

= =
When the "rules" do not provide a satisfying solution and the applicant 
feels being handled unjustly, there is only one way: that a sufficiently 
concerned group of people take the initiative to change the "rules" - 
that is to propose to the ICANN board to institute an open appeal 
process, where not only ophthalmologic questions are discussed, but also 
the more fundamental problem: whether a technical group appointed by 
ICANN can override arguments of a fundamental nature - like that the 
people of a script community have an appropriate weight with their own 
arguments rooted in their linguistic and script tradition.
= =

What is wrong with this?


Norbert Klein

-- 

A while ago, I started a new blog:

...thinking it over... after 21 years in Cambodia
http://www.thinking21.org/

continuing to share reports and comments from Cambodia.

Norbert Klein
nhklein at gmx.net
Phnom Penh / Cambodia


____________________________________________________________
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


From williams.deirdre at gmail.com  Fri Nov  4 11:08:55 2011
From: williams.deirdre at gmail.com (Deirdre Williams)
Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2011 11:08:55 -0400
Subject: [governance] =?UTF-8?Q?Is_really_Bulgarian_Cyrillic_=2E=D0=B1?=
 =?UTF-8?Q?=D0=B3_=28=2Ebg=29_similar_to_other_Latin_ccTLDs=3F?=
In-Reply-To: <4EB3F863.7030006@gmx.net>
References: <1291131665.20152.1407897083@webmail.messagingengine.com>
 <CAJwbTiA0ixrMYBTWFGZLphuHKzWwOVrYiAvc9yBf8WQsMN-66w@mail.gmail.com>
 <CA+EjHYpNDBuY4NGi0wm7fT7N9ZsMPsZ_X5TftNeD5c3aSLP+Bw@mail.gmail.com>
 <4D7DCD47-E74D-47E1-ABE7-6BAD2BF29337@psg.com> <CA+EjHYqKSTcbfqP7y-ymR-Aw3Rax1PttuaSPHzu8oSYHX_UWfA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAJwbTiD4eDSgOg2Chtm8f7xYRfkqdW8QDYWBnX95qOPF6UqjRQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <4EB12D34.4060404@cafonso.ca> <47D5B55C-0217-47F4-A1AE-2C7372F961A7@acm.org>
 <4EB19B7B.4050303@cafonso.ca> <4EB1F3AB.8010909@gmx.net> <4EB2738F.8070005@cafonso.ca>
 <4EB28156.9050700@digsys.bg> <CAD=1OvfGdTedrtQkkmUy1761TsOS2kWMcDGQef0b9+wZs2r0Uw@mail.gmail.com>
 <4EB3913A.9050707@digsys.bg> <4EB3F863.7030006@gmx.net>
Message-ID: <CAMz5XN7PCkNw+itCC9DKXfR2ozmh=PgMivLL6gUyhQjm=bkiLQ@mail.gmail.com>

That sounds good. "Confusingly similar" is a very subjective judgement to
come from an "expert panel".
Deirdre

On 4 November 2011 10:36, nhklein <nhklein at gmx.net> wrote:

> On 11/04/2011 02:16 PM, Daniel Kalchev wrote:
>
>> On 03.11.11 18:31, Paul Lehto wrote:
>>
>>> It would seem that there either is, or should be, a process to "call the
>>> question" as they say in parliamentary procedure.  If not, a motion can be
>>> made for a decision, or a letter sent citing undue delay and calling for a
>>> decision (with or without additional clarifying expertise appended to it).
>>> A person familiar with whatever exists in terms of procedure can recommend
>>> the best format or vehicle for forcing a decision.
>>>
>>>  There is no formal process to question the outcome of the IDN Fast
>> Track applications. By definition, the only possible communication is
>> between ICANN "staff" (whatever that means) and the original applicant.
>> Ironically, even that country's Government does not have formal way to
>> communicate with ICANN on the matter.
>>
>> Nevertheless, we are exploring every available possibility for some 18
>> months now,...
>>
>
>
> Having observed this process, going around in a closed circuit course with
> no formal process of appeal, and therefore no way out, I had written:
>
>
> = =
> When the "rules" do not provide a satisfying solution and the applicant
> feels being handled unjustly, there is only one way: that a sufficiently
> concerned group of people take the initiative to change the "rules" - that
> is to propose to the ICANN board to institute an open appeal process, where
> not only ophthalmologic questions are discussed, but also the more
> fundamental problem: whether a technical group appointed by ICANN can
> override arguments of a fundamental nature - like that the people of a
> script community have an appropriate weight with their own arguments rooted
> in their linguistic and script tradition.
>  = =
>
> What is wrong with this?
>
>
> Norbert Klein
>
>
> --
>
> A while ago, I started a new blog:
>
> ...thinking it over... after 21 years in Cambodia
> http://www.thinking21.org/
>
> continuing to share reports and comments from Cambodia.
>
> Norbert Klein
> nhklein at gmx.net
> Phnom Penh / Cambodia
>
>
> ______________________________**______________________________
> 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<http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing>
>
> For all other list information and functions, see:
>    http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/**info/governance<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<http://translate.google.com/translate_t>
>
>


-- 
“The fundamental cure for poverty is not money but knowledge" Sir William
Arthur Lewis, Nobel Prize Economics, 1979
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111104/4dc55610/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, 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


From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com  Fri Nov  4 13:30:46 2011
From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro)
Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2011 06:30:46 +1300
Subject: [governance] Reconciling Democracy & Multistakeholderism:
 Having a Voice vs. Having a Vote
In-Reply-To: <4EB35790.8050608@cavebear.com>
References: <CAD=1OvdKVZ7huxL1K-HoXyhmE_jWOoyRX5=_wHGfm=ogw9awXw@mail.gmail.com>
	<4EB28280.7050901@itforchange.net>
	<2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8D2C6E8@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
	<CAD=1OveAs=_nD7N2_fSDtpqekdVHfAxgLyg+rP9mTejikd1vPg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CACAaNxg-XFuT3wRcSrGyyK9QodziMB900SPHp1WeDEf_V6XuaQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAD=1Ovf66-ZTCgNafAcV5iH91GqiObHH03Z9tBz970S4w8s3KA@mail.gmail.com>
	<4EB35790.8050608@cavebear.com>
Message-ID: <CAJwbTiBXSjR3QA02x0yg7b0xSbZcWCQRRUTQW6mFVPr0x85aCg@mail.gmail.com>

I am enjoying the discussions and exchange of views etc on the subject
matter.This is my 2cents.

Firstly - take the word "stake" and replace it "interest". Just as property
can have different competing interests, for example,

   - legal interest (such as a title or a "charge" or hold eg.
   mortgage/charge/encumbrance);
   - equitable interest (no direct ownership - but interest is determined
   by the level of impact (good or bad) by those holding possession;
   - usufructory interest;
   - proprietary interest;

Because the Internet has so many diverse and complex "stakeholders" and all
> with varying degrees of "stake" or "interests" how does one when looking to
> see how you give a voice or vote or a combination of both to its complex
> governance processes. To this end there are two dichotomies, and
> potentially polar views.
>

We had a previous thread in which we had some interesting discussions on
perception. In that thread, there was a graphic image, where people were
asked what they could see. Where some saw an old woman, others saw a young
girl. Similarly, if we take the internet, because there are quite a number
of lenses (resulting from training/culture/context/socialisation etc), for
me I am embracing the diversity of perspectives on this single thread and
trying to appreciate the tapestry.

>From a real law perspective - I would agree with everything that Paul wrote
in his initial email. Yes, true democracies are through votes and there are
people who may not be able to speak (physically challenged) but may be able
to vote with their hand etc but within sovereign  territories, true
democratic rule is through free and fair elections where people elect their
people to govern them and perform all the functions of government which in
a nutshell is to serve and protect the people who elected them. On the same
token, you have governments who do not have these processes, recent case in
point is the Syrian Government shooting their own civilians and there are
other governments and examples.  The reality is that all around the world,
you have certain governments who have forcefully come into power. People
within those countries live in fear and they have neither a voice nor a
vote.

In a democratic country, one expects the three arms of governments are
equal and separate and able to check and balance each other to achieve some
semblance of the rule of law. There are many countries around the world
that struggle in this area as one of the arms, usually the executive arm
dominates the other two - Wolfgang pointed to one of those countries.
Another country, Iran was creating its own cyber army to hunt down
dissidents, this was in a previous thread, I think.

There is a country in the Pacific that has had 4 Coup D' Etats and a
Putsche, I have witnessed the imbalance of internal check mechanisms and
usually in countries that go through the same, you have things like the
removal of the office of the Auditor General and publication of Reports,
you see the Judiciary being taken over by one of the arms and on certain
issues - you cannot expect a fair trial. There are laws made without
consultation of the masses and it is not robustly debated in Parliament
because Parliament has been dissolved.  There are other countries who are
strong and vibrant democracies of course like the United States, Australia
etc. When inter-governmental bodies convene such as the United Nations for
instance, they gather irrespective of whether they were voted in or not,
they are there by virtue of one single fact, they hold office within
Government. This is regardless of how they got into office but for as long
as they hold office. Yes all governments have one vote [if we were to be
pedantic - how did some of them get into government? - does the IGO care, I
would say that it would not for one reason - every nation is sovereign and
so technically every country gets to determine their own destinies, after
all was'nt this what self determination all about? The IGO will only care
on a few rare grounds and on exceptional circumstances to justify an
"intervention", anything outside this is forgotten or swept under the
carpet, left for some activist somewhere to highlight etc.

So the question is ultimately, "*Should the Public Sector be given
unfettered power over global internet policy?*"

When the WGIG gathered to discuss the form of governance and explored the
"multistakeholder" concept (I can't say I know what was discussed) but I am
assuming that they would have had to see the internet universe or what some
call the global internet ecosystem. They would have recognised and
appreciated that infrastructure is often by far and large in liberalised
markets owned by the Private Sector.

So some may ask, "*Should the Private Sector be given unfettered power over
global internet policy*?"

The role of civil society is made up of ordinary citizens (in our case -
netizens) who organise themselves outside of government and the public
service to deal with specific issues and concerns that normal governmental
processes cannot address by itself. They play a huge role in the protection
of global public interest. There are instances where certain companies have
been known to violate rights of privacy for some end users and in some
jurisdictions, take the recent example of the German Regulator who gave
notice to Facebook to remove the "tag feature" - this was effectively a
"check".

So some may ask, "*Should Civil Society be given unfettered power over
global internet policy*?"
Also when there are human rights violations over the internet, the strong
voice of civil society advocating for those who cannot speak because they
are scared of the repercussions from within their countries. Here the voice
of civil society creates a sort of "check".


To this end I would say that in a sense these three Sectors have the
capability of acting as a "natural" check and balance mechanism for each
other. The wisdom, and diplomacy that is so evident in the way "internet
governance" within the 2005 WGIG Report to me imputes the significance of
the very different roles  that the public sector, private sector and civil
society play and it does not take away from any their roles but in the
world of internet governance, they are meant to function alongside each
other. If in terms of policy development, any of these three sectors had
too much power, and others weak, then the "theory of check and balance"
becomes vulnerable to abuse. I gave the example of where I have seen this
in the Pacific country.

Of course these raises other issues such as how should these checks and
balance work within the Internet Universe.

Kind Regards,
Sala



____________________________________________________________

> 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
>
>


-- 
Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala

Tweeter: @SalanietaT
Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro
Cell: +679 998 2851
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111105/44d439bd/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, 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


From avri at psg.com  Fri Nov  4 21:58:57 2011
From: avri at psg.com (Avri Doria)
Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2011 21:58:57 -0400
Subject: [governance] =?UTF-8?Q?Is_really_Bulgarian_Cyrillic_=2E=D0=B1?=
 =?UTF-8?Q?=D0=B3_=28=2Ebg=29_similar_to_other_Latin_ccTLDs=3F?=
In-Reply-To: <4EB3913A.9050707@digsys.bg>
References: <1291131665.20152.1407897083@webmail.messagingengine.com> <CAJwbTiA0ixrMYBTWFGZLphuHKzWwOVrYiAvc9yBf8WQsMN-66w@mail.gmail.com> <CA+EjHYpNDBuY4NGi0wm7fT7N9ZsMPsZ_X5TftNeD5c3aSLP+Bw@mail.gmail.com> <4D7DCD47-E74D-47E1-ABE7-6BAD2BF29337@psg.com> <CA+EjHYqKSTcbfqP7y-ymR-Aw3Rax1PttuaSPHzu8oSYHX_UWfA@mail.gmail.com> <CAJwbTiD4eDSgOg2Chtm8f7xYRfkqdW8QDYWBnX95qOPF6UqjRQ@mail.gmail.com> <4EB12D34.4060404@cafonso.ca> <47D5B55C-0217-47F4-A1AE-2C7372F961A7@acm.org> <4EB19B7B.4050303@cafonso.ca> <4EB1F3AB.8010909@gmx.net> <4EB2738F.8070005@cafonso.ca> <4EB28156.9050700@digsys.bg> <CAD=1OvfGdTedrtQkkmUy1761TsOS2kWMcDGQef0b9+wZs2r0Uw@mail.gmail.com> <4EB3913A.9050707@digsys.bg>
Message-ID: <058E2D0E-EE83-4D0E-8DC1-243BBB5B8FE3@psg.com>

Well there is a new Board now, with a new chair.  
All they need to do is recognize the mistake and tell the staff to fix it.
Takes a little courage, but a lot of people on that Board have courage.

avri 

On 4 Nov 2011, at 03:16, Daniel Kalchev wrote:

> 
> 
> On 03.11.11 18:31, Paul Lehto wrote:
>> It would seem that there either is, or should be, a process to "call the question" as they say in parliamentary procedure.  If not, a motion can be made for a decision, or a letter sent citing undue delay and calling for a decision (with or without additional clarifying expertise appended to it). A person familiar with whatever exists in terms of procedure can recommend the best format or vehicle for forcing a decision.
>> 
> 
> There is no formal process to question the outcome of the IDN Fast Track applications. By definition, the only possible communication is between ICANN "staff" (whatever that means) and the original applicant. Ironically, even that country's Government does not have formal way to communicate with ICANN on the matter.
> 
> Nevertheless, we are exploring every available possibility for some 18 months now, to understand why this situation continues to persist. ICANN staff are very wary of any such discussions and I perfectly understand their position. More so, that the principal that handled this case, Tina Dam, is no longer with ICANN.
> My understanding is that ICANN now recognizes they made a mistake. But they not only made the mistake to accept blindli this "expert opinion". They also made the mistake to make several statements already to the effect that "this is it, accept it or go away". Therefore, the problem at the moment is how ICANN admits their mistake and how they go out of the rising political problem.
> I have made many proposals on how to address this, but this has been slow process.. Nobody has given up anyway and it now seems inevitable things will go on a more global and more politicized forums.
> 
> Daniel
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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


From ian.peter at ianpeter.com  Sat Nov  5 00:07:38 2011
From: ian.peter at ianpeter.com (Ian Peter)
Date: Sat, 05 Nov 2011 15:07:38 +1100
Subject: [governance] =?WINDOWS-1251?Q?Is_really_Bulgarian_Cyrillic_?=
 =?WINDOWS-1251?Q?=2E=E1=E3_=28=2Ebg=29_similar_to_other_Latin_ccTLDs=3F?=
In-Reply-To: <058E2D0E-EE83-4D0E-8DC1-243BBB5B8FE3@psg.com>
Message-ID: <CADB01BA.1E008%ian.peter@ianpeter.com>

Avri wrote:

> Well there is a new Board now, with a new chair.
> All they need to do is recognize the mistake and tell the staff to fix it.
> Takes a little courage, but a lot of people on that Board have courage.

Perhaps a carefully drafted letter from this Caucus would be useful in this
regard?




> From: Avri Doria <avri at psg.com>
> Reply-To: <governance at lists.cpsr.org>, Avri Doria <avri at psg.com>
> Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2011 21:58:57 -0400
> To: IGC <governance at lists.cpsr.org>
> Subject: Re: [governance] Is really Bulgarian Cyrillic .бг (.bg) similar to
> other Latin ccTLDs?
> 
> Well there is a new Board now, with a new chair.
> All they need to do is recognize the mistake and tell the staff to fix it.
> Takes a little courage, but a lot of people on that Board have courage.
> 
> avri 
> 
> On 4 Nov 2011, at 03:16, Daniel Kalchev wrote:
> 
>> 
>> 
>> On 03.11.11 18:31, Paul Lehto wrote:
>>> It would seem that there either is, or should be, a process to "call the
>>> question" as they say in parliamentary procedure.  If not, a motion can be
>>> made for a decision, or a letter sent citing undue delay and calling for a
>>> decision (with or without additional clarifying expertise appended to it). A
>>> person familiar with whatever exists in terms of procedure can recommend the
>>> best format or vehicle for forcing a decision.
>>> 
>> 
>> There is no formal process to question the outcome of the IDN Fast Track
>> applications. By definition, the only possible communication is between ICANN
>> "staff" (whatever that means) and the original applicant. Ironically, even
>> that country's Government does not have formal way to communicate with ICANN
>> on the matter.
>> 
>> Nevertheless, we are exploring every available possibility for some 18 months
>> now, to understand why this situation continues to persist. ICANN staff are
>> very wary of any such discussions and I perfectly understand their position.
>> More so, that the principal that handled this case, Tina Dam, is no longer
>> with ICANN.
>> My understanding is that ICANN now recognizes they made a mistake. But they
>> not only made the mistake to accept blindli this "expert opinion". They also
>> made the mistake to make several statements already to the effect that "this
>> is it, accept it or go away". Therefore, the problem at the moment is how
>> ICANN admits their mistake and how they go out of the rising political
>> problem.
>> I have made many proposals on how to address this, but this has been slow
>> process.. Nobody has given up anyway and it now seems inevitable things will
>> go on a more global and more politicized forums.
>> 
>> Daniel
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> 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
> 


____________________________________________________________
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


From sonigituekpe at crossriverstate.gov.ng  Sat Nov  5 02:12:47 2011
From: sonigituekpe at crossriverstate.gov.ng (Sonigitu Ekpe)
Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2011 07:12:47 +0100
Subject: [governance] =?UTF-8?Q?Is_really_Bulgarian_Cyrillic_=2E=D0=B1?=
 =?UTF-8?Q?=D0=B3_=28=2Ebg=29_similar_to_other_Latin_ccTLDs=3F?=
In-Reply-To: <CADB01BA.1E008%ian.peter@ianpeter.com>
References: <058E2D0E-EE83-4D0E-8DC1-243BBB5B8FE3@psg.com>
	<CADB01BA.1E008%ian.peter@ianpeter.com>
Message-ID: <CALLeeau51x0tn4siObPwvS6y7A75j4A8kKbyO5MwiO5PmAYiUw@mail.gmail.com>

+1

On 5 Nov 2011 05:08, "Ian Peter" <ian.peter at ianpeter.com> wrote:

Avri wrote:

> Well there is a new Board now, with a new chair.
> All they need to do is recognize t...
Perhaps a carefully drafted letter from this Caucus would be useful in this
regard?




> From: Avri Doria <avri at psg.com>
> Reply-To: <governance at lists.cpsr.org>, Avri Doria <avri at psg.com>
> Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2011 21:58:57 -0400
> To: IGC <governance at lists.cpsr.org>
> Subject: Re: [governance] Is really Bulgarian Cyrillic .бг (.bg) similar
to
> other Latin ccTLDs?
>

> Well there is a new Board now, with a new chair.
> All they need to do is recognize the mistake an...
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111105/92ea3eb2/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, 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


From ias_pk at yahoo.com  Sat Nov  5 03:31:17 2011
From: ias_pk at yahoo.com (Imran Ahmed Shah)
Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2011 12:31:17 +0500
Subject: [governance] =?UTF-8?Q?Is_really_Bulgarian_Cyrillic_=2E=D0=B1?=
 =?UTF-8?Q?=D0=B3_=28=2Ebg=29=3F_-_Recommendation?=
In-Reply-To: <4EB39F5D.5000108@digsys.bg>
References: <007901cc9ab4$0bc8edd0$235ac970$@yahoo.com> <4EB39F5D.5000108@digsys.bg>
Message-ID: <005001cc9b8c$ebfe2590$c3fa70b0$@yahoo.com>

My comments are as under quote “IAS:”.

Thanks, Imran

From: governance at lists.cpsr.org [mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org] On Behalf Of Daniel Kalchev
Sent: Friday, November 04, 2011 01:16 PM
To: ias_pk at yahoo.com
Cc: governance at lists.cpsr.org; 'Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro'; 'Louis Pouzin (well)'; imran at igfpak.org
Subject: Re: [governance] Is really Bulgarian Cyrillic .бг (.bg)? - Recommendation

 

On 04.11.11 07:38, Imran Ahmed Shah wrote: 

Dear Friends,

 

>>Context:

>>Actually, the visual resemblance of TLD string had not been studied thoroughly and precisely in early stages, when the ccTLDs were being allocated with ASCI codes (Latin Characters). That is why the 18 ccTLD script has confusing similarity in visual text with each other.


>Not exactly...
>The reason these strings have "similarity" problems is because, these strings are listed in an internationally accepted list of country codes. Those who accepted the list and the "possible confusion" are way, way larger and more important in this world than ICANN. In this sense, ICANNs stance on this matter is simply arrogant.

>The use of existing two letter country codes as ccTLD strings was a decision made long before ICANN existed and has never been disqualified. Apparently, such existing similarity, within the same (ASCII) script has not led to any instability for Internet nor impacted it's security.

 

IAS: I am also saying the same thing, in the early days, instability issues were not being the main focus comparing to the willingness allocation to ccTLD. Similarly, IANA neither focusing on the quality of service nor the consumer rights and assurance of the availability and accessibility that has become the need of the today. The solutions for such issues were being tackled along with the stages of the development as they arise. For example ICANN arranged the Agreements with ccTLD Registries.



>>However, this kind of study become the focus  of the DNS stability teams when the IDN ccTLDs were being introduced and they had to exercise their authority for the refusal, easily say, No. According the Fast Track they do not have liability and responsible to justify their decision or recommendations to the public.


>This is correct. The expert panel says: "We were given specific instructions by ICANN and for this given input, we are supposed to produce this output". ICANN says: "we did not make this decision. We gave the application to the stability panel and they said no".
>The specific "instructions" are kept secret. I could speculate that today's ICANN staff may not even know what they were.

 

IAS: You may never get the actual reason/ discussion that who gave which comments, both have shelter / coverage of the bylaws. 



>>That is why, confusions are being developed among public and technical community trust on the transparent decision making process of the ICANN. Internet recognized by ASCI codes (Latin Characters) and simply Cyrillic .бг has resemblance with Latin .6r (digit six + r). I also underact that Bulgarians would not like leave the abbreviated string by selecting alternatively full name of the Country in Cyrillic Language script. 


>It is interesting to note, that digits are not permitted as TLD names. 

>It is also interesting to note, that until recently, everybody was talking about .бг and .br, now more and more talk about .бг and .6r.
Perhaps because we already pointed out that the UNICODE table of confusable characters do not list any match for the Latin 'r' and a Cyrillic character.

 

>>Review on Requirement Analysis:

>>Now, my question is with the Bulgarians Internet Community that do they really want to go for the cyrillic language script and feel much benefit out of it by having Cyrillic .бг in parallel to the English .bg then what is the solution? (because in Korea, the Korean Internet community do not feel much benefit and advantage to have domain names with IDN ccTLD with Korean Language). And I believe that the public and technical communities and ICANN are unaware with the future (upcoming) prospects and potential of the failures of IDN TLDs framework. 


>During my talks with ICANN staff on the subject, I raised the point that one should look in perspective. In the past, it was viewed that IDN TLDs should not be similar to ASCII TLDs. >However, reality is that the Latin alphabet on which ASCII is based is actually an minority alphabet. The use of other alphabets is more significant and as Internet becomes more and more "internationalized" (which is rather poor choice of terminology, by the way), ASCII labels will have less and less importance. What is more, ICANNs own great new IDN gTLD initiative will spring a lot more IDN new TLDs than ASCII TLDs.
>So at some point things will be actually reversed and ASCII TLD applications will have to make sure they are not similar with some other script's characters. Why not Cyrillic... ;-)



>Some background:
>I am obviously with the BG ccTLD Registry. As such, in theory I should, according to some people, have no interest in supporting the development of an IDN ccTLD for Bulgaria. That is of course speculation. Cyrillic is deeply involved in the Bulgarian culture -- some even go that far to claim that Bulgaria is the originator of the Cyrillic script.
Further, the abbreviation "БГ" is how Bulgarians identify the country in our own language. There was no other Cyrillic abbreviation in use for that purpose, ever.

>When the IDN Fast Track process started, we initiated a number of pools in Bulgaria to inquire what the community opinion on the best IDN ccTLD would be. All previous pools were more or less informal and it was always 'БГ". These pools were formal this time. I am aware of three big pools: one done by the BG Registry (you can see the results on https://www.register.bg), another done by the Bulgarian Government and yet another done by the Uninet Association (who were experimenting at that time with a .бг in alternate root environment). The pool made by Register.BG was to all BG TLD contact persons -- therefore anyone who has had anything to do with a BG domain name. Therefore, we consider it most representative of the "community opinion" and it is somewhat related to your question. The pool by the Government wasn't very popular in participation, perhaps due to the short time frame an d lack of enough publicity. All pools suggested the prevalent choice being '.бг' and therefore this is why such application was made.

>Later, when the applicant was informed of the expert panel opinion, there was a second pool made by the Government, with the special question "what OTHER string you prefer". The response was overwhelming, this time with much greater participation. The prevailing majority of answers were:

>- we want .бг.
>- if we are not going to get .бг, we do not want any IDN ccTLD.

>With this public opinion, it is understandable that our Government are not looking for any other option anymore.

>More specific on your question:

>It was always assumed (at least by Register.BG) that all delegations under a Cyrillic TLD will be in Cyrillic. This is the whole point to have a Cyrillic TLD: to be able to type the entire domain name in Cyrillic. You already can register IDN domain names under the ASCII BG, such as президент.bg (president.bg), but these are not extremely popular, primarily because everyone now knows that you can have IDN.IDN names and.. sort of wait for this to happen (ICANN to sour our their internal confusion).

>In respect of the pending application and eventual assignment of .бг, Register.BG has made a proposal to the Government, that should both TLDs be handled by the same registry, a form of 'bundling' may be appropriate, for example if one registers президент.бг they get президент.bg, subject to the applicable restrictions under BG of course: that is, you (at least under current rules) cannot have око.bg (око being in Cyrillic).

>It is also interesting to note, that for many years, registries that have implemented IDN registrations, restrict the possible labels so that no string confusable labels are possible with (say) Cyrillic and ASCII characters. But note: this only applies to exact character match, not to "possibly similarly looking in some font". It is sad this is not the policy at the root level as well.
 

IAS: Thank you for giving much detail, Fast Track ccTLD Application pre-requisite neither require nor consider public demand. However, just need that applicant (only Government) to show (some) public support. However, the matter of the consensus between the public and the government is necessary element to confront the decision about the Fast Track ccTLD refusal. 

 

My above question “about the requirement analysis” was directly related to the understanding of the need of IDN ccLTD. There are two ways, either change the abbreviations from two letters (.bg) “.Бг” to three letters (.bgr) “.Блг” or leave the abbreviations a side and just opt the full name (.Bulgaria) .Блгария.

I think that tree letter option is not bad but the LOSS OF one (1) more letter has to bear. So, how to convince the ICANN to remain on the two letter application.

There is a way, if the well-wishers (community leaders) of the Bulgarian Nation think (and develop a consensus to speak one and same slogan) that “the complete name of the Bulgaria in Cyrillic language .България may not serve the purpose” or have the negative impact because every Internet User have to type 6 additional characters with each domain name for web browsing and for sending email, just for nothing.

 

Please think of it, discuss with some other technical community members in your country and give your answer, do you really need IDN ccTLD?

 

>>Recommended Solution:

>>In order to resolve this conflict I do not understand that appealing to ombudsman could resolve the conflict, because they provisioning allows to refuse. I would recommend that Internet Community and Internet Governance supporting organizations should write to the ICANN Board and requesting them to authorize ccNSO and GNSO with a mandate to develop a Working Group, and that working groups would address these issues and to sort out the way to compensate IDN TLDs applicant’s to promote Internationalized Domain Name System. And the allocation of the Cyrillic .бг string may be allowed with the recommendation of that specific working group to the board of ICANN.


>This has already happened. In a very ICANN-ish way...

>On the San Francisco ICANN meeting, when it became clear that not only the Bulgarian case is halted, but also the Greek application and also the EU IDN application in Bulgarian and Greek (Bulgarian and Greek as well as the Cyrillic and Greek alphabets are official within the EU and according to the "EU law" are to be fully supported). Then, a sub-working group was created under IDN ccPDP WG1 to produce suggestions to ICANN how to handle these cases.
That working group eventually reported at the Dakar ICANN meeting... on the EU case only, stating in effect (you will excuse my imprecise citation) "well... we found out that those strings are confusingly similar, but it appears that they are confusingly similar with one another (?). We also discussed the matter with EURid (the EU registry) and agree that as long as they register only Cyrillic names under the Cyrillic TLD and Greek names under the Greek TLD, everything is fine. Therefore we recommend that ICANN approves this application.."

>Double standard? Why the Bulgarian and Greek cases were not considered?

>Indeed, it may happen that the full IDN ccPDP process will permit Bulgaria to have .бг at some point in the future. This is somehow not dependent on ICANN or the 'expert panel' opinions. 

>But then the question will remain: How come the .бг TLD was, let me cite from the 'expert panel' report: 



>.. and, in the future it will be less confusable?

>Why was then Bulgaria delayed with it's Cyrillic TLD implementation and why was all this several years long attempt to undermine ICANNs credibility to the community?


>Finally, I would like to comment thus:

>If someone (ICANN in this case) is tasked with the heavy responsibility to make a decision in situation like this, effectively permitting or not a country's own language/script to be used and they are to consider the opinion of an expert panel, with whom they have a contract.. and it is apparent, that this opinion is accepted by practically no one, then a prudent one (ICANN) will simply seek the opinion of another expert panel, or two (to make easier choice). That would resolve any and all doubt. What is more, ICANN staff is required to do so according to the Fast Track Implementation Plan.



IAS: 

As I wrote “I would recommend that Internet Community and Internet Governance supporting organizations should write to the ICANN Board”+ 

and you have explained that the previous panels and groups were not appropriate to discuss the .Bg issue in particular and have soft corner for other countries,+
as on the other thread Avri has agreed on need to formulate expert panel at ICANN and+

Ian and Sonigitu has also agreed that IGC CS should draft a letter in this regard.

 

I would suggest you to 

1.        Re-evaluate the demand/requirement of IDN, and 

2.       Re-think about the selection of the script  the “.Бг” / “.Блг” or .Блгария

Then give you feedback and we will initiate the drafting a letter to the Board, CEO and Chairman to formulate a new Expert Panel to address this issue on urgent basis.

 

>There are all kinds of theories and first hand knowledge why all this has happened.. but let's give ICANN chance to fix this stupid situation and clear their image, before these things go public.

>Daniel

 

 

Thanks and Regards

 

Imran Ahmed Shah

(on behalf of IGFPAK)

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111105/574d37c2/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: image/png
Size: 78810 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111105/574d37c2/attachment.png>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
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


From ias_pk at yahoo.com  Sat Nov  5 03:31:47 2011
From: ias_pk at yahoo.com (Imran Ahmed Shah)
Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2011 12:31:47 +0500
Subject: [governance] =?KOI8-R?B?SXMgcmVhbGx5IEJ1bGdhcmlhbiBDeXJpbGxp?=
 =?KOI8-R?B?YyAuwscgKC5iZykgc2ltaWxhciB0byBvdGhlciBMYXRpbiBjY1RMRHM/?=
In-Reply-To: <058E2D0E-EE83-4D0E-8DC1-243BBB5B8FE3@psg.com>
References: <1291131665.20152.1407897083@webmail.messagingengine.com> <CAJwbTiA0ixrMYBTWFGZLphuHKzWwOVrYiAvc9yBf8WQsMN-66w@mail.gmail.com> <CA+EjHYpNDBuY4NGi0wm7fT7N9ZsMPsZ_X5TftNeD5c3aSLP+Bw@mail.gmail.com> <4D7DCD47-E74D-47E1-ABE7-6BAD2BF29337@psg.com> <CA+EjHYqKSTcbfqP7y-ymR-Aw3Rax1PttuaSPHzu8oSYHX_UWfA@mail.gmail.com> <CAJwbTiD4eDSgOg2Chtm8f7xYRfkqdW8QDYWBnX95qOPF6UqjRQ@mail.gmail.com> <4EB12D34.4060404@cafonso.ca> <47D5B55C-0217-47F4-A1AE-2C7372F961A7@acm.org> <4EB19B7B.4050303@cafonso.ca> <4EB1F3AB.8010909@gmx.net> <4EB2738F.8070005@cafonso.ca> <4EB28156.9050700@digsys.bg> <CAD=1OvfGdTedrtQkkmUy1761TsOS2kWMcDGQef0b9+wZs2r0Uw@mail.gmail.com> <4EB3913A.9050707@digsys.bg> <058E2D0E-EE83-4D0E-8DC1-243BBB5B8FE3@psg.com>
Message-ID: <005601cc9b8c$fbf29e90$f3d7dbb0$@yahoo.com>

I agree with you Avri.
Thanks
Imran

-----Original Message-----
From: governance at lists.cpsr.org [mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org] On Behalf
Of Avri Doria
Sent: Saturday, November 05, 2011 06:59 AM
To: IGC
Subject: Re: [governance] Is really Bulgarian Cyrillic .бг (.bg) similar to
other Latin ccTLDs?

Well there is a new Board now, with a new chair.  
All they need to do is recognize the mistake and tell the staff to fix it.
Takes a little courage, but a lot of people on that Board have courage.

avri 

On 4 Nov 2011, at 03:16, Daniel Kalchev wrote:

> 
> 
> On 03.11.11 18:31, Paul Lehto wrote:
>> It would seem that there either is, or should be, a process to "call the
question" as they say in parliamentary procedure.  If not, a motion can be
made for a decision, or a letter sent citing undue delay and calling for a
decision (with or without additional clarifying expertise appended to it). A
person familiar with whatever exists in terms of procedure can recommend the
best format or vehicle for forcing a decision.
>> 
> 
> There is no formal process to question the outcome of the IDN Fast Track
applications. By definition, the only possible communication is between
ICANN "staff" (whatever that means) and the original applicant. Ironically,
even that country's Government does not have formal way to communicate with
ICANN on the matter.
> 
> Nevertheless, we are exploring every available possibility for some 18
months now, to understand why this situation continues to persist. ICANN
staff are very wary of any such discussions and I perfectly understand their
position. More so, that the principal that handled this case, Tina Dam, is
no longer with ICANN.
> My understanding is that ICANN now recognizes they made a mistake. But
they not only made the mistake to accept blindli this "expert opinion". They
also made the mistake to make several statements already to the effect that
"this is it, accept it or go away". Therefore, the problem at the moment is
how ICANN admits their mistake and how they go out of the rising political
problem.
> I have made many proposals on how to address this, but this has been slow
process.. Nobody has given up anyway and it now seems inevitable things will
go on a more global and more politicized forums.
> 
> Daniel
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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


____________________________________________________________
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


From ias_pk at yahoo.com  Sat Nov  5 03:35:18 2011
From: ias_pk at yahoo.com (Imran Ahmed Shah)
Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2011 12:35:18 +0500
Subject: [governance] =?KOI8-R?B?SXMgcmVhbGx5IEJ1bGdhcmlhbiBDeXJpbGxp?=
 =?KOI8-R?B?YyAuwscgKC5iZykgc2ltaWxhciB0byBvdGhlciBMYXRpbiBjY1RMRHM/?=
In-Reply-To: <CADB01BA.1E008%ian.peter@ianpeter.com>
References: <058E2D0E-EE83-4D0E-8DC1-243BBB5B8FE3@psg.com> <CADB01BA.1E008%ian.peter@ianpeter.com>
Message-ID: <005701cc9b8d$7a07fe60$6e17fb20$@yahoo.com>

Thanks Ian, 

I also agree with you that IG Caucus being  Internet Governance supporting
organizations should write to the ICANN Board in this regard.
I also have replied to Daniel, with some questions about the evaluation of
the need of IDN ccTLD and as soon as he returns with demand and supporting
comments, we should start the drafting of the letter.

Thanking you  and Best Regards

Imran Ahmad Shah
-----Original Message-----
From: governance at lists.cpsr.org [mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org] On Behalf
Of Ian Peter
Sent: Saturday, November 05, 2011 09:08 AM
To: governance at lists.cpsr.org; Avri Doria
Subject: Re: [governance] Is really Bulgarian Cyrillic .бг (.bg) similar to
other Latin ccTLDs?

Avri wrote:

> Well there is a new Board now, with a new chair.
> All they need to do is recognize the mistake and tell the staff to fix it.
> Takes a little courage, but a lot of people on that Board have courage.

Perhaps a carefully drafted letter from this Caucus would be useful in this
regard?




> From: Avri Doria <avri at psg.com>
> Reply-To: <governance at lists.cpsr.org>, Avri Doria <avri at psg.com>
> Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2011 21:58:57 -0400
> To: IGC <governance at lists.cpsr.org>
> Subject: Re: [governance] Is really Bulgarian Cyrillic .бг (.bg) 
> similar to other Latin ccTLDs?
> 
> Well there is a new Board now, with a new chair.
> All they need to do is recognize the mistake and tell the staff to fix it.
> Takes a little courage, but a lot of people on that Board have courage.
> 
> avri
> 
> On 4 Nov 2011, at 03:16, Daniel Kalchev wrote:
> 
>> 
>> 
>> On 03.11.11 18:31, Paul Lehto wrote:
>>> It would seem that there either is, or should be, a process to "call 
>>> the question" as they say in parliamentary procedure.  If not, a 
>>> motion can be made for a decision, or a letter sent citing undue 
>>> delay and calling for a decision (with or without additional 
>>> clarifying expertise appended to it). A person familiar with 
>>> whatever exists in terms of procedure can recommend the best format or
vehicle for forcing a decision.
>>> 
>> 
>> There is no formal process to question the outcome of the IDN Fast 
>> Track applications. By definition, the only possible communication is 
>> between ICANN "staff" (whatever that means) and the original 
>> applicant. Ironically, even that country's Government does not have 
>> formal way to communicate with ICANN on the matter.
>> 
>> Nevertheless, we are exploring every available possibility for some 
>> 18 months now, to understand why this situation continues to persist. 
>> ICANN staff are very wary of any such discussions and I perfectly
understand their position.
>> More so, that the principal that handled this case, Tina Dam, is no 
>> longer with ICANN.
>> My understanding is that ICANN now recognizes they made a mistake. 
>> But they not only made the mistake to accept blindli this "expert 
>> opinion". They also made the mistake to make several statements 
>> already to the effect that "this is it, accept it or go away". 
>> Therefore, the problem at the moment is how ICANN admits their 
>> mistake and how they go out of the rising political problem.
>> I have made many proposals on how to address this, but this has been 
>> slow process.. Nobody has given up anyway and it now seems inevitable 
>> things will go on a more global and more politicized forums.
>> 
>> Daniel
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> 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
> 


____________________________________________________________
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


From jlfullsack at wanadoo.fr  Sat Nov  5 04:16:23 2011
From: jlfullsack at wanadoo.fr (jlfullsack at wanadoo.fr)
Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2011 09:16:23 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [governance] Reconciling Democracy & Multistakeholderism:
 Having a Voice vs. Having a Vote
In-Reply-To: <4EB28280.7050901@itforchange.net>
References: <CAD=1OvdKVZ7huxL1K-HoXyhmE_jWOoyRX5=_wHGfm=ogw9awXw@mail.gmail.com>
 <4EB28280.7050901@itforchange.net>
Message-ID: <24634020.10663.1320480983234.JavaMail.www@wwinf1f19>

Thanks to Paul for his explanations and to Parminder for his clarification. I fully subscribe to these positions, espeially in the WSIS (follow-up) process, when CS involvment and commitment are concerned. 

Jean-Louis Fullsack 
CSDPTT-France




> Message du 03/11/11 17:35
> De : "parminder" 
> A : governance at lists.cpsr.org
> Copie à : 
> Objet : Re: [governance] Reconciling Democracy & Multistakeholderism: Having a Voice vs. Having a Vote
> 
> Thanks Paul, for a very good and pertinent exposition.
> 
> Multistakeholderism is about voice, and its structures and outcomes are different than involving providing *actual participation* in political decision making, which can only be through votes and representative systems.
> 
> And yes, non human entities (  businesses as well as NGOs) cannot have votes. They should have voice though. 
> 
> Positing what should be channels of voice (multi-stakeholder systems) as those of votes have mostly meant that those with the greatest resources have exclusive or additional votes, and the less resourced are sought to be pacified by giving nominal space and opportunity for voice (that they are mostly not able to exercise in competition with well resourced voices) *instead* of giving votes - or actual participation in decision making....
> 
> Which does not mean that current (or any) systems of representation are perfect (or even good enough). They need to be constantly improved through processes of deepening democracy. But it is counter productive to impose non democratic forms over them.
> 
> Paul's exposition is also instructive for showing the contradiction involved in standing for 'human' rights and also advocating multistakeholderism as a political decision making system. Only actual humans have the human right of  participation in making the political decisions that effect them, not businesses or NGOs. Agreed that humans need to effectively organise to exercise political choice. That is what the project of democracy is about. But a private business can hardly be seen as a system for organising humans for exercising choice. At present, only elected democratic governments are such a system, especially those who listen to and respect all voices.
> 
> parminder 
> 
> 
> 
> On Monday 31 October 2011 09:30 PM, Paul Lehto wrote: 
> It seems that in the longstanding debates about the merits and demerits of multi-stakeholderism, there is a perspective that may possibly help reconcile the views of some major positions on this issue, or perhaps even reconcile all of them:  The question perhaps ought to be framed in terms of having a voice versus having a vote.
> 
> Under human rights and democracy laws, only human beings (or their elected representatives) have votes.  But businesses, NGOs, and others often have relevant if not important expertise, and thus have relevant if not important "voices" that are either useful or even necessary to intelligent process, and thus to good outcomes.
> 
> Garbage in, garbage out.  For good process, we need good "voices" or good information.  One big source of this good information are all the folks we think of as invitees or participants in a "multi-stakeholder" process.
> 
> The issues arise when the voices are also the only votes or the main votes.  This confuses good, democratic process of furthering the important cause of an INFORMED decision-making electorate or process, with the issue of WHO HAS A VOTE.   Under democracy and fundamental humans rights laws, only human beings have votes, and it is one a one person/one vote basis.
> 
> For the moment, let's put aside the issue of building robust electoral systems on a global scale allowing all the humans to vote who are interested in doing so and effected by what's proposed (i.e. "the governed.")   There may be challenges there to be sure, but if this is considered a worthy objection ultimately, then it is a worthy objection for a dictator to object to democracy because polling places, precincts, ballots and other infrastructure simply does not exist.  That's a bad joke, or an excuse for authoritarianism, not a valid objection to working towards and implementing democracy.
> 
> The call of freedom and democracy movements worldwide has nearly always been essentially the same thing: let's make democracy REAL.  And then we will eternally have to keep it real, of course.
> 
> We ought to have multi-stakeholderism in terms of Voice Process, but not in terms of Vote Process.  It's very important to hear all the different perspectives including business perspectives (Multi-stakeholderism), but that should not translate into non-elected OR non-human persons or entities voting and determining the laws and policies that structure and define the freedom of the internet (or the necessary protections against fraud and abuse).
> 
> Paul Lehto, J.D. 
> 
> 
>  
> -- 
> Paul R Lehto, J.D.
> P.O. Box 1 
> Ishpeming, MI  49849 
> lehto.paul at gmail.com
> 906-204-4026 (cell)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 


____________________________________________________________
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


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111105/f3797dc2/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, 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


From wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de  Sat Nov  5 05:19:29 2011
From: wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de (=?iso-8859-1?Q?=22Kleinw=E4chter=2C_Wolfgang=22?=)
Date: Sat, 05 Nov 2011 10:19:29 +0100
Subject: AW: [governance] Is really Bulgarian Cyrillic .?? (.bg) similar to
 other Latin ccTLDs?
References: <CADB01BA.1E008%ian.peter@ianpeter.com>
Message-ID:  <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8D2C6FA@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>

I would support such a letter. However it goes beyond the .bg case. My impression is that the existing (and proposed) ICANN mechanisms to deal with "confusingly similar" in TLD strings (in particular in the new gTLD program) are too weak and do probably have not the needed expertise. With other words, the IGC letter should include also the proposal to enhance the mechanisms to deal with such potential conflicts. 
 
Here is a another example how confusion can grow: A consotrium of people for Russia and Ukraine want to go under the new gTLD porgramm for .pyc on cyrillic. All three characters are similar the ASCII characters. What to do with a .pyc in Latin?
 
Wolfgang 

________________________________

Von: governance at lists.cpsr.org im Auftrag von Ian Peter
Gesendet: Sa 05.11.2011 05:07
An: governance at lists.cpsr.org; Avri Doria
Betreff: Re: [governance] Is really Bulgarian Cyrillic .?? (.bg) similar to other Latin ccTLDs?



Avri wrote:

> Well there is a new Board now, with a new chair.
> All they need to do is recognize the mistake and tell the staff to fix it.
> Takes a little courage, but a lot of people on that Board have courage.

Perhaps a carefully drafted letter from this Caucus would be useful in this
regard?




> From: Avri Doria <avri at psg.com>
> Reply-To: <governance at lists.cpsr.org>, Avri Doria <avri at psg.com>
> Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2011 21:58:57 -0400
> To: IGC <governance at lists.cpsr.org>
> Subject: Re: [governance] Is really Bulgarian Cyrillic .?? (.bg) similar to
> other Latin ccTLDs?
>
> Well there is a new Board now, with a new chair.
> All they need to do is recognize the mistake and tell the staff to fix it.
> Takes a little courage, but a lot of people on that Board have courage.
>
> avri
>
> On 4 Nov 2011, at 03:16, Daniel Kalchev wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On 03.11.11 18:31, Paul Lehto wrote:
>>> It would seem that there either is, or should be, a process to "call the
>>> question" as they say in parliamentary procedure.  If not, a motion can be
>>> made for a decision, or a letter sent citing undue delay and calling for a
>>> decision (with or without additional clarifying expertise appended to it). A
>>> person familiar with whatever exists in terms of procedure can recommend the
>>> best format or vehicle for forcing a decision.
>>>
>>
>> There is no formal process to question the outcome of the IDN Fast Track
>> applications. By definition, the only possible communication is between ICANN
>> "staff" (whatever that means) and the original applicant. Ironically, even
>> that country's Government does not have formal way to communicate with ICANN
>> on the matter.
>>
>> Nevertheless, we are exploring every available possibility for some 18 months
>> now, to understand why this situation continues to persist. ICANN staff are
>> very wary of any such discussions and I perfectly understand their position.
>> More so, that the principal that handled this case, Tina Dam, is no longer
>> with ICANN.
>> My understanding is that ICANN now recognizes they made a mistake. But they
>> not only made the mistake to accept blindli this "expert opinion". They also
>> made the mistake to make several statements already to the effect that "this
>> is it, accept it or go away". Therefore, the problem at the moment is how
>> ICANN admits their mistake and how they go out of the rising political
>> problem.
>> I have made many proposals on how to address this, but this has been slow
>> process.. Nobody has given up anyway and it now seems inevitable things will
>> go on a more global and more politicized forums.
>>
>> Daniel
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> 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
>


____________________________________________________________
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


From sonigituekpe at crossriverstate.gov.ng  Sat Nov  5 05:47:12 2011
From: sonigituekpe at crossriverstate.gov.ng (Sonigitu Ekpe)
Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2011 10:47:12 +0100
Subject: [governance] Reconciling Democracy & Multistakeholderism:
 Having a Voice vs. Having a Vote
In-Reply-To: <CALLeeavuLE9ZpouCNUJwcYAG0=Wc6covgUrufZVYGTzODDxWxw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAD=1OvdKVZ7huxL1K-HoXyhmE_jWOoyRX5=_wHGfm=ogw9awXw@mail.gmail.com>
	<4EB28280.7050901@itforchange.net>
	<24634020.10663.1320480983234.JavaMail.www@wwinf1f19>
	<CALLeeavuLE9ZpouCNUJwcYAG0=Wc6covgUrufZVYGTzODDxWxw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CALLeeaskWZ7=BJShmhr-cp0T7NRryKY1n8gPqYA-xXVFNm+Xdg@mail.gmail.com>

Dear All,

Thank you for the understanding.
Warm regards,

Sea

On 5 Nov 2011 09:28, <jlfullsack at wanadoo.fr> wrote:

Thanks to Paul for his explanations and to Parminder for his clarification.
I fully subscribe to these positions, espeially in the WSIS (follow-up)
process, when CS involvment and commitment are concerned.

Jean-Louis Fullsack
CSDPTT-France




> Message du 03/11/11 17:35
> De : "parminder"
> A : governance at lists.cpsr.org
> Copie à :
> Objet : Re: [governance] Reconciling Democracy & Multistakeholderism:
Having a Voice vs. Having a Vote


> >
> > Thanks Paul, for a very good and pertinent exposition.
> >
> > Multistakeholderism is abo...

> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subs...


____________________________________________________________
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
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111105/0086b9ba/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, 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


From mail at christopherwilkinson.eu  Sat Nov  5 05:55:47 2011
From: mail at christopherwilkinson.eu (CW Mail)
Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2011 10:55:47 +0100
Subject: AW: [governance] Is really Bulgarian Cyrillic .?? (.bg) similar
 to other Latin ccTLDs?
In-Reply-To: <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8D2C6FA@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
References: <CADB01BA.1E008%ian.peter@ianpeter.com> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8D2C6FA@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
Message-ID: <F585A446-ECF4-4285-BE3D-CC52D9D29F12@christopherwilkinson.eu>

Good morning:

  Although the broad outline of this issue is by now fairly clear,  
before writing a IGC letter, someone would have to do some fairly  
thorough research to ascertain the actual scope of the problem,  
particularly among the ccTLD "Fast Track" IDN domains. Also, since the  
principals are governments, some may welcome such support; others may  
feel that they can look after themselves ...

Just a thought,

CW



On 05 Nov 2011, at 10:19, Kleinwächter, Wolfgang wrote:

> I would support such a letter. However it goes beyond the .bg case.  
> My impression is that the existing (and proposed) ICANN mechanisms  
> to deal with "confusingly similar" in TLD strings (in particular in  
> the new gTLD program) are too weak and do probably have not the  
> needed expertise. With other words, the IGC letter should include  
> also the proposal to enhance the mechanisms to deal with such  
> potential conflicts.
>
> Here is a another example how confusion can grow: A consotrium of  
> people for Russia and Ukraine want to go under the new gTLD porgramm  
> for .pyc on cyrillic. All three characters are similar the ASCII  
> characters. What to do with a .pyc in Latin?
>
> Wolfgang
>
> ________________________________
>
> Von: governance at lists.cpsr.org im Auftrag von Ian Peter
> Gesendet: Sa 05.11.2011 05:07
> An: governance at lists.cpsr.org; Avri Doria
> Betreff: Re: [governance] Is really Bulgarian Cyrillic .?? (.bg)  
> similar to other Latin ccTLDs?
>
>
>
> Avri wrote:
>
>> Well there is a new Board now, with a new chair.
>> All they need to do is recognize the mistake and tell the staff to  
>> fix it.
>> Takes a little courage, but a lot of people on that Board have  
>> courage.
>
> Perhaps a carefully drafted letter from this Caucus would be useful  
> in this
> regard?
>
>
>
>
>> From: Avri Doria <avri at psg.com>
>> Reply-To: <governance at lists.cpsr.org>, Avri Doria <avri at psg.com>
>> Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2011 21:58:57 -0400
>> To: IGC <governance at lists.cpsr.org>
>> Subject: Re: [governance] Is really Bulgarian Cyrillic .?? (.bg)  
>> similar to
>> other Latin ccTLDs?
>>
>> Well there is a new Board now, with a new chair.
>> All they need to do is recognize the mistake and tell the staff to  
>> fix it.
>> Takes a little courage, but a lot of people on that Board have  
>> courage.
>>
>> avri
>>
>> On 4 Nov 2011, at 03:16, Daniel Kalchev wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 03.11.11 18:31, Paul Lehto wrote:
>>>> It would seem that there either is, or should be, a process to  
>>>> "call the
>>>> question" as they say in parliamentary procedure.  If not, a  
>>>> motion can be
>>>> made for a decision, or a letter sent citing undue delay and  
>>>> calling for a
>>>> decision (with or without additional clarifying expertise  
>>>> appended to it). A
>>>> person familiar with whatever exists in terms of procedure can  
>>>> recommend the
>>>> best format or vehicle for forcing a decision.
>>>>
>>>
>>> There is no formal process to question the outcome of the IDN Fast  
>>> Track
>>> applications. By definition, the only possible communication is  
>>> between ICANN
>>> "staff" (whatever that means) and the original applicant.  
>>> Ironically, even
>>> that country's Government does not have formal way to communicate  
>>> with ICANN
>>> on the matter.
>>>
>>> Nevertheless, we are exploring every available possibility for  
>>> some 18 months
>>> now, to understand why this situation continues to persist. ICANN  
>>> staff are
>>> very wary of any such discussions and I perfectly understand their  
>>> position.
>>> More so, that the principal that handled this case, Tina Dam, is  
>>> no longer
>>> with ICANN.
>>> My understanding is that ICANN now recognizes they made a mistake.  
>>> But they
>>> not only made the mistake to accept blindli this "expert opinion".  
>>> They also
>>> made the mistake to make several statements already to the effect  
>>> that "this
>>> is it, accept it or go away". Therefore, the problem at the moment  
>>> is how
>>> ICANN admits their mistake and how they go out of the rising  
>>> political
>>> problem.
>>> I have made many proposals on how to address this, but this has  
>>> been slow
>>> process.. Nobody has given up anyway and it now seems inevitable  
>>> things will
>>> go on a more global and more politicized forums.
>>>
>>> Daniel
>>> ____________________________________________________________
>>> 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
>>
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
>

____________________________________________________________
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


From daniel at digsys.bg  Sat Nov  5 07:09:02 2011
From: daniel at digsys.bg (Daniel Kalchev)
Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2011 13:09:02 +0200
Subject: [governance] Is really Bulgarian Cyrillic .?? (.bg) similar to
 other Latin ccTLDs?
In-Reply-To: <F585A446-ECF4-4285-BE3D-CC52D9D29F12@christopherwilkinson.eu>
References: <CADB01BA.1E008%ian.peter@ianpeter.com> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8D2C6FA@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> <F585A446-ECF4-4285-BE3D-CC52D9D29F12@christopherwilkinson.eu>
Message-ID: <7041F307-9F27-4A4A-BFDA-51BD3A42EAAA@digsys.bg>


On Nov 5, 2011, at 11:55 AM, CW Mail wrote:

> Good morning:
> 
> Although the broad outline of this issue is by now fairly clear, before writing a IGC letter, someone would have to do some fairly thorough research to ascertain the actual scope of the problem, particularly among the ccTLD "Fast Track" IDN domains. Also, since the principals are governments, some may welcome such support; others may feel that they can look after themselves …
> 

This research is certainly necessary, but not strictly required: as far as I understand, the idea is to express the concern that the case was not dealt with properly. There are enough opinions voiced to support this -- and no satisfactory response on part of ICANN. This applies to both the Bulgarian and the Greek cases, especially because the Geek case happened a year after that of Bulgaria -- but had very similar treatment.

On the topic of government involvement: strictly speaking the IDN Fast Track process does not require in any way Government participation in the application as such. The Government is requested to express support for the proposed TLD string and to ascertain that the language and script are official in that particular country. In some circumstances (documented in the Fast Track Implementation Plan), even this is not necessary if the 'proof' is readily available in international databases.

In the Bulgarian case, I believe the Government decided to get involved, because of several factors: first, they were told they have to 'control this', second, they were a brand new government, just after successful elections and determined to clean up bad legacy from previous governments -- I could suspect they just did not trust anyone at that time, third, I believe they underestimated the seriousness of such application and the necessary expertise and knowledge of the process -- and as we now know, the numerous traps and pitfalls that were buried in the IDN Fast Track process.

Back then in 2009 we suggested to our Government that they should charge another party, either the BG registry or someone else with the application task. That, besides access to better expertise, would let them in an case of dispute between the applicant and ICANN -- to use their weight as the country's Government to intervene and have the application taken more seriously by ICANN.

We have gone trough various stages with our Government, including "we will do this all alone" -- but the current thinking is, that any help is welcome. I will know more in few days, as we have changes in that part of the Government, new people to work with and possibly they have some new ideas.


Daniel____________________________________________________________
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


From ias_pk at yahoo.com  Sat Nov  5 07:17:48 2011
From: ias_pk at yahoo.com (Imran Ahmed Shah)
Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2011 04:17:48 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: AW: [governance] Is really Bulgarian Cyrillic .?? (.bg) similar
 to other Latin ccTLDs?
Message-ID: <1320491868.18292.yint-ygo-j2me@web161019.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>


Hi, 
>Although the broad outline of this issue is by now fairly clear, before writing a IGC letter, someone would have to do some fairly thorough research to ascertain the actual scope of the problem, particularly among the ccTLD "Fast Track" IDN domains. 

I agree with your thoughts about the requirement to study and list down the scope of the problem, and the possible solutions. 

However, I would like to include that .. IGC letter should be drafted in global prospects, and the recommended solution should include the guidance to resolve the forthcoming similar conflicts in favor of IDN TLDs (ccTLD/gTLD) applicants.
   
>Also, since the principals are governments, some may welcome such support; others may feel that they can look after themselves ...

As you mentioned that the governments are principal applicants for IDN ccTLDs, there are possibilities that they may have different path and opinion comparing to the recommendations of IGC letter. However, we should support the Internet Community inclusive .bg in policy development process. If the Govt. representatives from Bulgaria (might be the deputy Minister), could be engaged in discussion, that would be helpful for alignment of current and future progress.

Thanks

Imran Ahmed Shah 

>On Sat, 05 Nov 2011 14:55 PKT CW Mail wrote:>Good morning:>> Although the broad outline of this issue is by now fairly clear, before writing a IGC letter, someone would have to do some fairly thorough research to ascertain the actual scope of the problem, particularly among the ccTLD "Fast Track" IDN domains. Also, since the principals are governments, some may welcome such support; others may feel that they can look after themselves ...>>Just a thought,>>CW>>>>On 05 Nov 2011, at 10:19, Kleinwächter, Wolfgang wrote:>>> I would support such a letter. However it goes beyond the .bg case. My impression is that the existing (and proposed) ICANN mechanisms to deal with "confusingly similar" in TLD strings (in particular in the new gTLD program) are too weak and do probably have not the needed expertise. With other words, the IGC letter should include also the proposal to enhance the mechanisms to deal with such potential conflicts.>> >> Here is a another
 example how confusion can grow: A consotrium of people for Russia and Ukraine want to go under the new gTLD porgramm for .pyc on cyrillic. All three characters are similar the ASCII characters. What to do with a .pyc in Latin?>> >> Wolfgang>> >> ________________________________>> >> Von: governance at lists.cpsr.org im Auftrag von Ian Peter>> Gesendet: Sa 05.11.2011 05:07>> An: governance at lists.cpsr.org; Avri Doria>> Betreff: Re: [governance] Is really Bulgarian Cyrillic .?? (.bg) similar to other Latin ccTLDs?>> >> >> >> Avri wrote:>> >>> Well there is a new Board now, with a new chair.>>> All they need to do is recognize the mistake and tell the staff to fix it.>>> Takes a little courage, but a lot of people on that Board have courage.>> >> Perhaps a carefully drafted letter from this Caucus would be useful in this>> regard?>> >> >> >> >>> From: Avri Doria <avri at psg.com>>>> Reply-To: <governance at lists.cpsr.org>, Avri Doria <avri at psg.com>>>> Date: Fri, 4
 Nov 2011 21:58:57 -0400>>> To: IGC <governance at lists.cpsr.org>>>> Subject: Re: [governance] Is really Bulgarian Cyrillic .?? (.bg) similar to>>> other Latin ccTLDs?>>> >>> Well there is a new Board now, with a new chair.>>> All they need to do is recognize the mistake and tell the staff to fix it.>>> Takes a little courage, but a lot of people on that Board have courage.>>> >>> avri>>> >>> On 4 Nov 2011, at 03:16, Daniel Kalchev wrote:>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On 03.11.11 18:31, Paul Lehto wrote:>>>>> It would seem that there either is, or should be, a process to "call the>>>>> question" as they say in parliamentary procedure.  If not, a motion can be>>>>> made for a decision, or a letter sent citing undue delay and calling for a>>>>> decision (with or without additional clarifying expertise appended to it). A>>>>> person familiar with whatever exists in terms of procedure can recommend the>>>>> best format or vehicle for forcing a decision.>>>>> >>>> >>>>
 There is no formal process to question the outcome of the IDN Fast Track>>>> applications. By definition, the only possible communication is between ICANN>>>> "staff" (whatever that means) and the original applicant. Ironically, even>>>> that country's Government does not have formal way to communicate with ICANN>>>> on the matter.>>>> >>>> Nevertheless, we are exploring every available possibility for some 18 months>>>> now, to understand why this situation continues to persist. ICANN staff are>>>> very wary of any such discussions and I perfectly understand their position.>>>> More so, that the principal that handled this case, Tina Dam, is no longer>>>> with ICANN.>>>> My understanding is that ICANN now recognizes they made a mistake. But they>>>> not only made the mistake to accept blindli this "expert opinion". They also>>>> made the mistake to make several statements already to the effect that "this>>>> is it, accept it or go away". Therefore, the
 problem at the moment is how>>>> ICANN admits their mistake and how they go out of the rising political>>>> problem.>>>> I have made many proposals on how to address this, but this has been slow>>>> process.. Nobody has given up anyway and it now seems inevitable things will>>>> go on a more global and more politicized forums.>>>> >>>> Daniel>>>> ____________________________________________________________>>>> 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>>> >> >> >> ____________________________________________________________>> 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>> >>____________________________________________________________>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


From daniel at digsys.bg  Sat Nov  5 07:18:10 2011
From: daniel at digsys.bg (Daniel Kalchev)
Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2011 13:18:10 +0200
Subject: [governance] Is really Bulgarian Cyrillic .?? (.bg) similar to
 other Latin ccTLDs?
In-Reply-To: <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8D2C6FA@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
References: <CADB01BA.1E008%ian.peter@ianpeter.com> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8D2C6FA@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
Message-ID: <D7163BDA-6BA2-4960-AA4A-2DA60DC3C714@digsys.bg>


On Nov 5, 2011, at 11:19 AM, Kleinwächter, Wolfgang wrote:

> I would support such a letter. However it goes beyond the .bg case. My impression is that the existing (and proposed) ICANN mechanisms to deal with "confusingly similar" in TLD strings (in particular in the new gTLD program) are too weak and do probably have not the needed expertise. With other words, the IGC letter should include also the proposal to enhance the mechanisms to deal with such potential conflicts. 

Definitely it goes way beyond the Bulgarian case. The Bulgarian case is bad news, because it was allowed to remain in this state for such a long time.

But we need to remember the fate of the recent ccNSO working group, that was charged with the task to produce guidelines how cases such as the BG, GR and EU IDN applications should be handled by ICANN… and ended up reporting with a resolution of only the EU case (the youngest one, and perhaps the most political one as well)

Daniel____________________________________________________________
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


From daniel at digsys.bg  Sat Nov  5 07:25:03 2011
From: daniel at digsys.bg (Daniel Kalchev)
Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2011 13:25:03 +0200
Subject: [governance] Is really Bulgarian Cyrillic .?? (.bg) similar to
 other Latin ccTLDs?
In-Reply-To: <1320491868.18292.yint-ygo-j2me@web161019.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
References: <1320491868.18292.yint-ygo-j2me@web161019.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <9F244D65-EF7E-423A-88BE-F683D1383514@digsys.bg>


On Nov 5, 2011, at 1:17 PM, Imran Ahmed Shah wrote:

>> Also, since the principals are governments, some may welcome such support; others may feel that they can look after themselves ...
> 
> As you mentioned that the governments are principal applicants for IDN ccTLDs, there are possibilities that they may have different path and opinion comparing to the recommendations of IGC letter. However, we should support the Internet Community inclusive .bg in policy development process. If the Govt. representatives from Bulgaria (might be the deputy Minister), could be engaged in discussion, that would be helpful for alignment of current and future progress.


We are working on this and I hope things will be more clear and we can see better participation by our Government after the domain.forum we have in Sofia on 7 November.

Daniel____________________________________________________________
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


From ca at cafonso.ca  Sat Nov  5 07:47:44 2011
From: ca at cafonso.ca (Carlos A. Afonso)
Date: Sat, 05 Nov 2011 09:47:44 -0200
Subject: [governance] =?UTF-8?Q?Is_really_Bulgarian_Cyrillic_=2E=D0=B1?=
 =?UTF-8?Q?=D0=B3_=28=2Ebg=29_similar_to_other_Latin_ccTLDs=3F?=
In-Reply-To: <058E2D0E-EE83-4D0E-8DC1-243BBB5B8FE3@psg.com>
References: <1291131665.20152.1407897083@webmail.messagingengine.com> <CAJwbTiA0ixrMYBTWFGZLphuHKzWwOVrYiAvc9yBf8WQsMN-66w@mail.gmail.com> <CA+EjHYpNDBuY4NGi0wm7fT7N9ZsMPsZ_X5TftNeD5c3aSLP+Bw@mail.gmail.com> <4D7DCD47-E74D-47E1-ABE7-6BAD2BF29337@psg.com> <CA+EjHYqKSTcbfqP7y-ymR-Aw3Rax1PttuaSPHzu8oSYHX_UWfA@mail.gmail.com> <CAJwbTiD4eDSgOg2Chtm8f7xYRfkqdW8QDYWBnX95qOPF6UqjRQ@mail.gmail.com> <4EB12D34.4060404@cafonso.ca> <47D5B55C-0217-47F4-A1AE-2C7372F961A7@acm.org> <4EB19B7B.4050303@cafonso.ca> <4EB1F3AB.8010909@gmx.net> <4EB2738F.8070005@cafonso.ca> <4EB28156.9050700@digsys.bg> <CAD=1OvfGdTedrtQkkmUy1761TsOS2kWMcDGQef0b9+wZs2r0Uw@mail.gmail.com> <4EB3913A.9050707@digsys.bg> <058E2D0E-EE83-4D0E-8DC1-243BBB5B8FE3@psg.com>
Message-ID: <4EB52260.9030806@cafonso.ca>

As long as the board does not fall into the case-by-case "method" again
this merits review, I think.

--c.a.

On 11/04/2011 11:58 PM, Avri Doria wrote:
> Well there is a new Board now, with a new chair. All they need to do
> is recognize the mistake and tell the staff to fix it. Takes a little
> courage, but a lot of people on that Board have courage.
> 
> avri
> 
> On 4 Nov 2011, at 03:16, Daniel Kalchev wrote:
> 
>> 
>> 
>> On 03.11.11 18:31, Paul Lehto wrote:
>>> It would seem that there either is, or should be, a process to
>>> "call the question" as they say in parliamentary procedure.  If
>>> not, a motion can be made for a decision, or a letter sent citing
>>> undue delay and calling for a decision (with or without
>>> additional clarifying expertise appended to it). A person
>>> familiar with whatever exists in terms of procedure can recommend
>>> the best format or vehicle for forcing a decision.
>>> 
>> 
>> There is no formal process to question the outcome of the IDN Fast
>> Track applications. By definition, the only possible communication
>> is between ICANN "staff" (whatever that means) and the original
>> applicant. Ironically, even that country's Government does not have
>> formal way to communicate with ICANN on the matter.
>> 
>> Nevertheless, we are exploring every available possibility for some
>> 18 months now, to understand why this situation continues to
>> persist. ICANN staff are very wary of any such discussions and I
>> perfectly understand their position. More so, that the principal
>> that handled this case, Tina Dam, is no longer with ICANN. My
>> understanding is that ICANN now recognizes they made a mistake. But
>> they not only made the mistake to accept blindli this "expert
>> opinion". They also made the mistake to make several statements
>> already to the effect that "this is it, accept it or go away".
>> Therefore, the problem at the moment is how ICANN admits their
>> mistake and how they go out of the rising political problem. I have
>> made many proposals on how to address this, but this has been slow
>> process.. Nobody has given up anyway and it now seems inevitable
>> things will go on a more global and more politicized forums.
>> 
>> Daniel 
>> ____________________________________________________________ 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
> 
> 
____________________________________________________________
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


From ca at cafonso.ca  Sat Nov  5 07:49:14 2011
From: ca at cafonso.ca (Carlos A. Afonso)
Date: Sat, 05 Nov 2011 09:49:14 -0200
Subject: [governance] =?WINDOWS-1251?Q?Is_really_Bulgarian_Cyrillic_?=
 =?WINDOWS-1251?Q?=2E=E1=E3_=28=2Ebg=29_similar_to_other_Latin_ccTLDs=3F?=
In-Reply-To: <CADB01BA.1E008%ian.peter@ianpeter.com>
References: <CADB01BA.1E008%ian.peter@ianpeter.com>
Message-ID: <4EB522BA.8050006@cafonso.ca>

If we had a concrete proposal which takes the discussion away from the
case-by-case situations and establishes clear rules, instead of just
asking them to work it out by themselves, would be much better...

--c.a.

On 11/05/2011 02:07 AM, Ian Peter wrote:
> Avri wrote:
> 
>> Well there is a new Board now, with a new chair.
>> All they need to do is recognize the mistake and tell the staff to fix it.
>> Takes a little courage, but a lot of people on that Board have courage.
> 
> Perhaps a carefully drafted letter from this Caucus would be useful in this
> regard?
> 
> 
> 
> 
>> From: Avri Doria <avri at psg.com>
>> Reply-To: <governance at lists.cpsr.org>, Avri Doria <avri at psg.com>
>> Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2011 21:58:57 -0400
>> To: IGC <governance at lists.cpsr.org>
>> Subject: Re: [governance] Is really Bulgarian Cyrillic .бг (.bg) similar to
>> other Latin ccTLDs?
>>
>> Well there is a new Board now, with a new chair.
>> All they need to do is recognize the mistake and tell the staff to fix it.
>> Takes a little courage, but a lot of people on that Board have courage.
>>
>> avri 
>>
>> On 4 Nov 2011, at 03:16, Daniel Kalchev wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 03.11.11 18:31, Paul Lehto wrote:
>>>> It would seem that there either is, or should be, a process to "call the
>>>> question" as they say in parliamentary procedure.  If not, a motion can be
>>>> made for a decision, or a letter sent citing undue delay and calling for a
>>>> decision (with or without additional clarifying expertise appended to it). A
>>>> person familiar with whatever exists in terms of procedure can recommend the
>>>> best format or vehicle for forcing a decision.
>>>>
>>>
>>> There is no formal process to question the outcome of the IDN Fast Track
>>> applications. By definition, the only possible communication is between ICANN
>>> "staff" (whatever that means) and the original applicant. Ironically, even
>>> that country's Government does not have formal way to communicate with ICANN
>>> on the matter.
>>>
>>> Nevertheless, we are exploring every available possibility for some 18 months
>>> now, to understand why this situation continues to persist. ICANN staff are
>>> very wary of any such discussions and I perfectly understand their position.
>>> More so, that the principal that handled this case, Tina Dam, is no longer
>>> with ICANN.
>>> My understanding is that ICANN now recognizes they made a mistake. But they
>>> not only made the mistake to accept blindli this "expert opinion". They also
>>> made the mistake to make several statements already to the effect that "this
>>> is it, accept it or go away". Therefore, the problem at the moment is how
>>> ICANN admits their mistake and how they go out of the rising political
>>> problem.
>>> I have made many proposals on how to address this, but this has been slow
>>> process.. Nobody has given up anyway and it now seems inevitable things will
>>> go on a more global and more politicized forums.
>>>
>>> Daniel
>>> ____________________________________________________________
>>> 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
>>
> 
> 
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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


From ias_pk at yahoo.com  Sat Nov  5 07:52:20 2011
From: ias_pk at yahoo.com (Imran Ahmed Shah)
Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2011 04:52:20 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [governance] Is really Bulgarian Cyrillic .?? (.bg) similar to
 other Latin ccTLDs?
Message-ID: <1320493940.50056.yint-ygo-j2me@web161014.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>

Just to comment on one point as Daniel wrote 
"....On the topic of government involvement: strictly speaking the IDN Fast Track process does not require in any way Government participation in the application as such....." 

Fast Track Applicants required a Letter of Nomination from Government.
And that is the dependency on the Government decision, either they apply themselve or let others do it. 
 
Imran 



>On Sat, 05 Nov 2011 16:09 PKT Daniel Kalchev wrote:>>On Nov 5, 2011, at 11:55 AM, CW Mail wrote:>>> Good morning:>> >> Although the broad outline of this issue is by now fairly clear, before writing a IGC letter, someone would have to do some fairly thorough research to ascertain the actual scope of the problem, particularly among the ccTLD "Fast Track" IDN domains. Also, since the principals are governments, some may welcome such support; others may feel that they can look after themselves …>> >>This research is certainly necessary, but not strictly required: as far as I understand, the idea is to express the concern that the case was not dealt with properly. There are enough opinions voiced to support this -- and no satisfactory response on part of ICANN. This applies to both the Bulgarian and the Greek cases, especially because the Geek case happened a year after that of Bulgaria -- but had very similar treatment.>>On the topic of government
 involvement: strictly speaking the IDN Fast Track process does not require in any way Government participation in the application as such. The Government is requested to express support for the proposed TLD string and to ascertain that the language and script are official in that particular country. In some circumstances (documented in the Fast Track Implementation Plan), even this is not necessary if the 'proof' is readily available in international databases.>>In the Bulgarian case, I believe the Government decided to get involved, because of several factors: first, they were told they have to 'control this', second, they were a brand new government, just after successful elections and determined to clean up bad legacy from previous governments -- I could suspect they just did not trust anyone at that time, third, I believe they underestimated the seriousness of such application and the necessary expertise and knowledge of the process -- and as we now
 know, the numerous traps and pitfalls that were buried in the IDN Fast Track process.>>Back then in 2009 we suggested to our Government that they should charge another party, either the BG registry or someone else with the application task. That, besides access to better expertise, would let them in an case of dispute between the applicant and ICANN -- to use their weight as the country's Government to intervene and have the application taken more seriously by ICANN.>>We have gone trough various stages with our Government, including "we will do this all alone" -- but the current thinking is, that any help is welcome. I will know more in few days, as we have changes in that part of the Government, new people to work with and possibly they have some new ideas.>>>Daniel____________________________________________________________>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


From lmcknigh at syr.edu  Sat Nov  5 08:04:31 2011
From: lmcknigh at syr.edu (Lee W McKnight)
Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2011 12:04:31 +0000
Subject: [governance] =?KOI8-R?B?SXMgcmVhbGx5IEJ1bGdhcmlhbiBDeXJpbGxp?=
 =?KOI8-R?B?YyAuwscgKC5iZykgc2ltaWxhciB0byBvdGhlciBMYXRpbiBjY1RMRHM/?=
In-Reply-To: <4EB522BA.8050006@cafonso.ca>
References: <CADB01BA.1E008%ian.peter@ianpeter.com>,<4EB522BA.8050006@cafonso.ca>
Message-ID: <77A59FC9477004489D44DE7FC6840E7B03642D@SUEX10-mbx-08.ad.syr.edu>

Hi,

If I may, I suggest in the IGC letter we recommend:

1) Open and transparent decision-making

2) IF initial ICANN staff/committee review finds that there may be a risk of 'significant confusion' between strings

3) THEN: polls in both possibly affected linguistic communities/nations  are to be undertaken, to validate, or not, the 'experts' concern, before any action is recommended or taken.

Lee





________________________________________
From: governance at lists.cpsr.org [governance at lists.cpsr.org] on behalf of Carlos A. Afonso [ca at cafonso.ca]
Sent: Saturday, November 05, 2011 7:49 AM
To: governance at lists.cpsr.org; Ian Peter
Cc: Avri Doria
Subject: Re: [governance] Is really Bulgarian Cyrillic .бг (.bg) similar to other Latin ccTLDs?

If we had a concrete proposal which takes the discussion away from the
case-by-case situations and establishes clear rules, instead of just
asking them to work it out by themselves, would be much better...

--c.a.

On 11/05/2011 02:07 AM, Ian Peter wrote:
> Avri wrote:
>
>> Well there is a new Board now, with a new chair.
>> All they need to do is recognize the mistake and tell the staff to fix it.
>> Takes a little courage, but a lot of people on that Board have courage.
>
> Perhaps a carefully drafted letter from this Caucus would be useful in this
> regard?
>
>
>
>
>> From: Avri Doria <avri at psg.com>
>> Reply-To: <governance at lists.cpsr.org>, Avri Doria <avri at psg.com>
>> Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2011 21:58:57 -0400
>> To: IGC <governance at lists.cpsr.org>
>> Subject: Re: [governance] Is really Bulgarian Cyrillic .бг (.bg) similar to
>> other Latin ccTLDs?
>>
>> Well there is a new Board now, with a new chair.
>> All they need to do is recognize the mistake and tell the staff to fix it.
>> Takes a little courage, but a lot of people on that Board have courage.
>>
>> avri
>>
>> On 4 Nov 2011, at 03:16, Daniel Kalchev wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 03.11.11 18:31, Paul Lehto wrote:
>>>> It would seem that there either is, or should be, a process to "call the
>>>> question" as they say in parliamentary procedure.  If not, a motion can be
>>>> made for a decision, or a letter sent citing undue delay and calling for a
>>>> decision (with or without additional clarifying expertise appended to it). A
>>>> person familiar with whatever exists in terms of procedure can recommend the
>>>> best format or vehicle for forcing a decision.
>>>>
>>>
>>> There is no formal process to question the outcome of the IDN Fast Track
>>> applications. By definition, the only possible communication is between ICANN
>>> "staff" (whatever that means) and the original applicant. Ironically, even
>>> that country's Government does not have formal way to communicate with ICANN
>>> on the matter.
>>>
>>> Nevertheless, we are exploring every available possibility for some 18 months
>>> now, to understand why this situation continues to persist. ICANN staff are
>>> very wary of any such discussions and I perfectly understand their position.
>>> More so, that the principal that handled this case, Tina Dam, is no longer
>>> with ICANN.
>>> My understanding is that ICANN now recognizes they made a mistake. But they
>>> not only made the mistake to accept blindli this "expert opinion". They also
>>> made the mistake to make several statements already to the effect that "this
>>> is it, accept it or go away". Therefore, the problem at the moment is how
>>> ICANN admits their mistake and how they go out of the rising political
>>> problem.
>>> I have made many proposals on how to address this, but this has been slow
>>> process.. Nobody has given up anyway and it now seems inevitable things will
>>> go on a more global and more politicized forums.
>>>
>>> Daniel
>>> ____________________________________________________________
>>> 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
>>
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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

____________________________________________________________
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


From dogwallah at gmail.com  Sat Nov  5 08:56:50 2011
From: dogwallah at gmail.com (McTim)
Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2011 15:56:50 +0300
Subject: [governance] From the Google Policy Blog
Message-ID: <CACAaNxirbJKjtzqWb8SyT9Kvrrnc=7XSNQm32pDn4+x-ZMuMhg@mail.gmail.com>

Advancing the free flow of
information<http://googlepublicpolicy.blogspot.com/2011/11/advancing-free-flow-of-information.html>
Friday, November 4, 2011 at 12:28 PM ETPosted by Winter Casey, Senior
Policy Analyst, Google

The global economy relies on the free flow of information more than ever
before. Companies large and small can use the Internet to reach new
markets, which contributes to economic growth, job creation, and increased
trade around the world.

But as companies and individuals are transmitting more information online,
some governments are seeking to impose limits on the free flow of
information. More than 40 governments now block or restrict information and
data available on the Internet.

Last year, we released a white
paper<http://www.google.com/googleblogs/pdfs/trade_free_flow_of_information.pdf>
demonstrating
that governments which block the free flow of information on the Internet
are also blocking trade and economic growth. For example, when companies
can’t confidentially and confidently transmit the files and information
that are necessary to keep their business running, their ability to export
goods and services is hurt. The thesis is simple: when countries support
the free flow of information, they will see more economic growth.

That’s why we joined companies like Citi, Microsoft, IBM, GE and others to
endorse a new set of principles endorsing the free flow of information
across borders. The
principles<http://www.nftc.org/default/Innovation/PromotingCrossBorderDataFlowsNFTC.pdf>,
written under the leadership of the National Foreign Trade Council, outline
several priorities for the U.S. business community which will promote
transparent, fair, and secure cross-border data flows.

Individuals and businesses will benefit from a more consistent and
transparent framework for the treatment of cross-border flows of goods,
services and information. We look forward to continued work with
governments and industry to advance the free flow of information online.

------------------

Principles are here:

http://www.nftc.org/default/Innovation/PromotingCrossBorderDataFlowsNFTC.pdf

-- 
Cheers,

McTim
"A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A route
indicates how we get there."  Jon Postel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111105/9e57219a/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, 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


From avri at acm.org  Sat Nov  5 10:54:22 2011
From: avri at acm.org (Avri Doria)
Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2011 10:54:22 -0400
Subject: [governance] =?UTF-8?Q?Is_really_Bulgarian_Cyrillic_=2E=D0=B1?=
 =?UTF-8?Q?=D0=B3_=28=2Ebg=29_similar_to_other_Latin_ccTLDs=3F?=
In-Reply-To: <CADB01BA.1E008%ian.peter@ianpeter.com>
References: <CADB01BA.1E008%ian.peter@ianpeter.com>
Message-ID: <DFD576AA-245B-4E58-8B03-DD3BD60AF920@acm.org>

Hi,

I think this is a good idea.  If we can create an IGC consensus letter that

a. discusses this issue
b. asks for a transparent review of the issue
c. asks for a general process by which any ICANN Staff decision on string confusability have a method for transparent review and appeal.

I do not think we need to recommend a solution, but we might recommend policy considerations consistent with the Affirmation of Commitments that would govern such a review and apeal.

We might also want to copy the leadership of ALAC when the letter is sent asking for their support of such an appeal mechanism.

avri

On 5 Nov 2011, at 00:07, Ian Peter wrote:

> Avri wrote:
> 
>> Well there is a new Board now, with a new chair.
>> All they need to do is recognize the mistake and tell the staff to fix it.
>> Takes a little courage, but a lot of people on that Board have courage.
> 
> Perhaps a carefully drafted letter from this Caucus would be useful in this
> regard?
> 
> 
> 
> 
>> From: Avri Doria <avri at psg.com>
>> Reply-To: <governance at lists.cpsr.org>, Avri Doria <avri at psg.com>
>> Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2011 21:58:57 -0400
>> To: IGC <governance at lists.cpsr.org>
>> Subject: Re: [governance] Is really Bulgarian Cyrillic .бг (.bg) similar to
>> other Latin ccTLDs?
>> 
>> Well there is a new Board now, with a new chair.
>> All they need to do is recognize the mistake and tell the staff to fix it.
>> Takes a little courage, but a lot of people on that Board have courage.
>> 
>> avri 
>> 
>> On 4 Nov 2011, at 03:16, Daniel Kalchev wrote:
>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On 03.11.11 18:31, Paul Lehto wrote:
>>>> It would seem that there either is, or should be, a process to "call the
>>>> question" as they say in parliamentary procedure.  If not, a motion can be
>>>> made for a decision, or a letter sent citing undue delay and calling for a
>>>> decision (with or without additional clarifying expertise appended to it). A
>>>> person familiar with whatever exists in terms of procedure can recommend the
>>>> best format or vehicle for forcing a decision.
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> There is no formal process to question the outcome of the IDN Fast Track
>>> applications. By definition, the only possible communication is between ICANN
>>> "staff" (whatever that means) and the original applicant. Ironically, even
>>> that country's Government does not have formal way to communicate with ICANN
>>> on the matter.
>>> 
>>> Nevertheless, we are exploring every available possibility for some 18 months
>>> now, to understand why this situation continues to persist. ICANN staff are
>>> very wary of any such discussions and I perfectly understand their position.
>>> More so, that the principal that handled this case, Tina Dam, is no longer
>>> with ICANN.
>>> My understanding is that ICANN now recognizes they made a mistake. But they
>>> not only made the mistake to accept blindli this "expert opinion". They also
>>> made the mistake to make several statements already to the effect that "this
>>> is it, accept it or go away". Therefore, the problem at the moment is how
>>> ICANN admits their mistake and how they go out of the rising political
>>> problem.
>>> I have made many proposals on how to address this, but this has been slow
>>> process.. Nobody has given up anyway and it now seems inevitable things will
>>> go on a more global and more politicized forums.
>>> 
>>> Daniel
>>> ____________________________________________________________
>>> 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
>> 
> 
> 
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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


From wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de  Sat Nov  5 12:29:39 2011
From: wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de (=?iso-8859-1?Q?=22Kleinw=E4chter=2C_Wolfgang=22?=)
Date: Sat, 05 Nov 2011 17:29:39 +0100
Subject: [governance] UNESCO Code of Ethics in the Information Society
References: <1320493940.50056.yint-ygo-j2me@web161014.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID:  <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8D2C6FE@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>

FYI
 
Who knows whether the document was adopted as proposed? 
 
http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0021/002126/212696e.pdf
 
wolfgang
____________________________________________________________
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


From KovenRonald at aol.com  Sat Nov  5 12:59:05 2011
From: KovenRonald at aol.com (KovenRonald at aol.com)
Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2011 12:59:05 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [governance] UNESCO Code of Ethics in the Information Society
Message-ID: <580d.40a456d9.3be6c558@aol.com>


In a message dated 11/5/11 5:33:42 PM, 
wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de writes:


> FYI
> 
> Who knows whether the document was adopted as proposed?
> 
> http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0021/002126/212696e.pdf
> 
> wolfgang
> _________
> 

Dear Wofgang --

It was not adopted as proposed.

The United States in particular objected. There was a long and rather 
acrimonious debate, with the sides divided along predictable lines. Germany and 
Denmark proposed alternate concluding language simply putting things off, but 
that was not acceptable to the US.

Finally, a consensus was reached in the Communciation Program Commission, 
after an extra nite session on Tuesday and a an informal early morning 
negotiating session on Wednesday.

It reads:

"Invites the Director General at the 189th session of the Executive Board 
[in about 6 months] to suggest possible ways that the Organization could 
address issues of ethical dimensions of the information society."

In other words an ethics code mandated intergovernmentally is not on the 
cards.

The resolution must still be adopted by the UNESCO General Conference 
plenary in several days, but that shouldn't be a proble since the commission 
contains representatives of all the meber states.

The Secretariat seems likely to to suggest extended discussion of the 
issues in a revived Infoethics forum. UNESCO used to organize annual Infoethics 
conferences, but gave it up several years ago. The Secretariat has already 
successfully gotten agreement of member states in the Commission to revive 
those meetings.

Best regards, Rony Koven
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111105/37d707bb/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, 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


From meryem at marzouki.info  Sat Nov  5 13:24:12 2011
From: meryem at marzouki.info (Meryem Marzouki)
Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2011 11:24:12 -0600
Subject: [governance] UNESCO Code of Ethics in the Information Society
In-Reply-To: <580d.40a456d9.3be6c558@aol.com>
References: <580d.40a456d9.3be6c558@aol.com>
Message-ID: <4CC145FE-5507-487A-BB60-71FFEFDE829F@marzouki.info>

Thanks Rony!

Frankly, I'm wondering when the Unesco will stop thinking in terms of "ethics" (whose ethics, BTW?!) and start considering there are RIGHTS, which are binding governments, including when people exercise them on the Internet.... Unesco started this 15 years ago, and apparently they haven't understood yet!!
Best,
Meryem Marzouki

Le 5 nov. 2011 à 10:59, KovenRonald at aol.com a écrit :

> 
> In a message dated 11/5/11 5:33:42 PM, wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de writes:
> 
> 
>> FYI
>> 
>> Who knows whether the document was adopted as proposed?
>> 
>> http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0021/002126/212696e.pdf
>> 
>> wolfgang
>> _________
> 
> 
> Dear Wofgang --
> 
> It was not adopted as proposed.
> 
> The United States in particular objected. There was a long and rather acrimonious debate, with the sides divided along predictable lines. Germany and Denmark proposed alternate concluding language simply putting things off, but that was not acceptable to the US.
> 
> Finally, a consensus was reached in the Communciation Program Commission, after an extra nite session on Tuesday and a an informal early morning negotiating session on Wednesday.
> 
> It reads:
> 
> "Invites the Director General at the 189th session of the Executive Board [in about 6 months] to suggest possible ways that the Organization could address issues of ethical dimensions of the information society."
> 
> In other words an ethics code mandated intergovernmentally is not on the cards.
> 
> The resolution must still be adopted by the UNESCO General Conference plenary in several days, but that shouldn't be a proble since the commission contains representatives of all the meber states.
> 
> The Secretariat seems likely to to suggest extended discussion of the issues in a revived Infoethics forum. UNESCO used to organize annual Infoethics conferences, but gave it up several years ago. The Secretariat has already successfully gotten agreement of member states in the Commission to revive those meetings.
> 
> Best regards, Rony Koven
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
> 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111105/83fa87a3/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, 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


From wolfgang.benedek at uni-graz.at  Sat Nov  5 13:47:08 2011
From: wolfgang.benedek at uni-graz.at (Benedek, Wolfgang (wolfgang.benedek@uni-graz.at))
Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2011 18:47:08 +0100
Subject: AW: [governance] UNESCO Code of Ethics in the Information Society
In-Reply-To: <4CC145FE-5507-487A-BB60-71FFEFDE829F@marzouki.info>
References: <580d.40a456d9.3be6c558@aol.com>
 <4CC145FE-5507-487A-BB60-71FFEFDE829F@marzouki.info>
Message-ID: <9BE1170D378AFF47BAA5A0949EDBF76CA3581FFC@APOLLON.pers.ad.uni-graz.at>

They might understand, but their governments don’t want them to undertake a human rights based approach.

Wolfgang Benedek


Von: governance at lists.cpsr.org [mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org] Im Auftrag von Meryem Marzouki
Gesendet: Samstag, 05. November 2011 18:24
An: governance at lists.cpsr.org; KovenRonald at aol.com
Cc: wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de; governance at lists.cpsr.org; powerginny at gmail.com
Betreff: Re: [governance] UNESCO Code of Ethics in the Information Society

Thanks Rony!

Frankly, I'm wondering when the Unesco will stop thinking in terms of "ethics" (whose ethics, BTW?!) and start considering there are RIGHTS, which are binding governments, including when people exercise them on the Internet.... Unesco started this 15 years ago, and apparently they haven't understood yet!!
Best,
Meryem Marzouki

Le 5 nov. 2011 à 10:59, KovenRonald at aol.com<mailto:KovenRonald at aol.com> a écrit :

In a message dated 11/5/11 5:33:42 PM, wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de<mailto:wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de> writes:



FYI

Who knows whether the document was adopted as proposed?

http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0021/002126/212696e.pdf

wolfgang
_________


Dear Wofgang --

It was not adopted as proposed.

The United States in particular objected. There was a long and rather acrimonious debate, with the sides divided along predictable lines. Germany and Denmark proposed alternate concluding language simply putting things off, but that was not acceptable to the US.

Finally, a consensus was reached in the Communciation Program Commission, after an extra nite session on Tuesday and a an informal early morning negotiating session on Wednesday.

It reads:

"Invites the Director General at the 189th session of the Executive Board [in about 6 months] to suggest possible ways that the Organization could address issues of ethical dimensions of the information society."

In other words an ethics code mandated intergovernmentally is not on the cards.

The resolution must still be adopted by the UNESCO General Conference plenary in several days, but that shouldn't be a proble since the commission contains representatives of all the meber states.

The Secretariat seems likely to to suggest extended discussion of the issues in a revived Infoethics forum. UNESCO used to organize annual Infoethics conferences, but gave it up several years ago. The Secretariat has already successfully gotten agreement of member states in the Commission to revive those meetings.

Best regards, Rony Koven
____________________________________________________________
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, 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
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111105/7c9c9221/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, 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


From lehto.paul at gmail.com  Sat Nov  5 13:53:43 2011
From: lehto.paul at gmail.com (Paul Lehto)
Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2011 13:53:43 -0400
Subject: [governance] =?UTF-8?Q?Is_really_Bulgarian_Cyrillic_=2E=D0=B1?=
 =?UTF-8?Q?=D0=B3_=28=2Ebg=29_similar_to_other_Latin_ccTLDs=3F?=
In-Reply-To: <DFD576AA-245B-4E58-8B03-DD3BD60AF920@acm.org>
References: <CADB01BA.1E008%ian.peter@ianpeter.com>
	<DFD576AA-245B-4E58-8B03-DD3BD60AF920@acm.org>
Message-ID: <CAD=1OvcSDF0_UUi__iCt7Kn2H4U0bSAAhgMmt5O53f34oiu=ZA@mail.gmail.com>

To the extent possible, a statement regarding "mutual mistake of fact" is
usually grounds to get out of a contract or deal or understanding, and into
a new process or negotiation.   It also allows both parties to save face,
in that both have made a mistake.  I am not familiar enough with the
details of the communications and its history to know if this would
possibly apply or not, but if there is some basis for it, I'd advocate
serious consideration of making mutual mistake an element of a letter
urging reconsideration of this (non)decision.

Paul Lehto, J.D.

2011/11/5 Avri Doria <avri at acm.org>

> Hi,
>
> I think this is a good idea.  If we can create an IGC consensus letter that
>
> a. discusses this issue
> b. asks for a transparent review of the issue
> c. asks for a general process by which any ICANN Staff decision on string
> confusability have a method for transparent review and appeal.
>
> I do not think we need to recommend a solution, but we might recommend
> policy considerations consistent with the Affirmation of Commitments that
> would govern such a review and apeal.
>
> We might also want to copy the leadership of ALAC when the letter is sent
> asking for their support of such an appeal mechanism.
>
> avri
>
> On 5 Nov 2011, at 00:07, Ian Peter wrote:
>
> > Avri wrote:
> >
> >> Well there is a new Board now, with a new chair.
> >> All they need to do is recognize the mistake and tell the staff to fix
> it.
> >> Takes a little courage, but a lot of people on that Board have courage.
> >
> > Perhaps a carefully drafted letter from this Caucus would be useful in
> this
> > regard?
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >> From: Avri Doria <avri at psg.com>
> >> Reply-To: <governance at lists.cpsr.org>, Avri Doria <avri at psg.com>
> >> Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2011 21:58:57 -0400
> >> To: IGC <governance at lists.cpsr.org>
> >> Subject: Re: [governance] Is really Bulgarian Cyrillic .бг (.bg)
> similar to
> >> other Latin ccTLDs?
> >>
> >> Well there is a new Board now, with a new chair.
> >> All they need to do is recognize the mistake and tell the staff to fix
> it.
> >> Takes a little courage, but a lot of people on that Board have courage.
> >>
> >> avri
> >>
> >> On 4 Nov 2011, at 03:16, Daniel Kalchev wrote:
> >>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On 03.11.11 18:31, Paul Lehto wrote:
> >>>> It would seem that there either is, or should be, a process to "call
> the
> >>>> question" as they say in parliamentary procedure.  If not, a motion
> can be
> >>>> made for a decision, or a letter sent citing undue delay and calling
> for a
> >>>> decision (with or without additional clarifying expertise appended to
> it). A
> >>>> person familiar with whatever exists in terms of procedure can
> recommend the
> >>>> best format or vehicle for forcing a decision.
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> There is no formal process to question the outcome of the IDN Fast
> Track
> >>> applications. By definition, the only possible communication is
> between ICANN
> >>> "staff" (whatever that means) and the original applicant. Ironically,
> even
> >>> that country's Government does not have formal way to communicate with
> ICANN
> >>> on the matter.
> >>>
> >>> Nevertheless, we are exploring every available possibility for some 18
> months
> >>> now, to understand why this situation continues to persist. ICANN
> staff are
> >>> very wary of any such discussions and I perfectly understand their
> position.
> >>> More so, that the principal that handled this case, Tina Dam, is no
> longer
> >>> with ICANN.
> >>> My understanding is that ICANN now recognizes they made a mistake. But
> they
> >>> not only made the mistake to accept blindli this "expert opinion".
> They also
> >>> made the mistake to make several statements already to the effect that
> "this
> >>> is it, accept it or go away". Therefore, the problem at the moment is
> how
> >>> ICANN admits their mistake and how they go out of the rising political
> >>> problem.
> >>> I have made many proposals on how to address this, but this has been
> slow
> >>> process.. Nobody has given up anyway and it now seems inevitable
> things will
> >>> go on a more global and more politicized forums.
> >>>
> >>> Daniel
> >>> ____________________________________________________________
> >>> 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
> >>
> >
> >
> > ____________________________________________________________
> > 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
>
>


-- 
Paul R Lehto, J.D.
P.O. Box 1
Ishpeming, MI  49849
lehto.paul at gmail.com
906-204-4026 (cell)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111105/23258d46/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, 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


From tinadam at gmail.com  Sat Nov  5 16:41:41 2011
From: tinadam at gmail.com (Tina Dam)
Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2011 13:41:41 -0700
Subject: [governance] =?UTF-8?Q?Is_really_Bulgarian_Cyrillic_=2E=D0=B1?=
 =?UTF-8?Q?=D0=B3_=28=2Ebg=29_similar_to_other_Latin_ccTLDs=3F?=
In-Reply-To: <CAD=1OvcSDF0_UUi__iCt7Kn2H4U0bSAAhgMmt5O53f34oiu=ZA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CADB01BA.1E008%ian.peter@ianpeter.com>
	<DFD576AA-245B-4E58-8B03-DD3BD60AF920@acm.org>
	<CAD=1OvcSDF0_UUi__iCt7Kn2H4U0bSAAhgMmt5O53f34oiu=ZA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAN8jcvCxZzmWkd-u-gQ-6aHbrL0YT6m77ag82vK9GCA3fm-DWw@mail.gmail.com>

Hi everybody, just letting you know that I signed up to your list and
look forward to constructive dialogue.

On the Bulgarian IDN ccTLD I likely will not be able to support a
letter, but I am happy to answer any questions or anything else I can
do to be helpful.

Tina


On Sat, Nov 5, 2011 at 10:53 AM, Paul Lehto <lehto.paul at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> To the extent possible, a statement regarding "mutual mistake of fact" is
> usually grounds to get out of a contract or deal or understanding, and into
> a new process or negotiation.   It also allows both parties to save face, in
> that both have made a mistake.  I am not familiar enough with the details of
> the communications and its history to know if this would possibly apply or
> not, but if there is some basis for it, I'd advocate serious consideration
> of making mutual mistake an element of a letter urging reconsideration of
> this (non)decision.
>
> Paul Lehto, J.D.
>
> 2011/11/5 Avri Doria <avri at acm.org>
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I think this is a good idea.  If we can create an IGC consensus letter
>> that
>>
>> a. discusses this issue
>> b. asks for a transparent review of the issue
>> c. asks for a general process by which any ICANN Staff decision on string
>> confusability have a method for transparent review and appeal.
>>
>> I do not think we need to recommend a solution, but we might recommend
>> policy considerations consistent with the Affirmation of Commitments that
>> would govern such a review and apeal.
>>
>> We might also want to copy the leadership of ALAC when the letter is sent
>> asking for their support of such an appeal mechanism.
>>
>> avri
>>
>> On 5 Nov 2011, at 00:07, Ian Peter wrote:
>>
>> > Avri wrote:
>> >
>> >> Well there is a new Board now, with a new chair.
>> >> All they need to do is recognize the mistake and tell the staff to fix
>> >> it.
>> >> Takes a little courage, but a lot of people on that Board have courage.
>> >
>> > Perhaps a carefully drafted letter from this Caucus would be useful in
>> > this
>> > regard?
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >> From: Avri Doria <avri at psg.com>
>> >> Reply-To: <governance at lists.cpsr.org>, Avri Doria <avri at psg.com>
>> >> Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2011 21:58:57 -0400
>> >> To: IGC <governance at lists.cpsr.org>
>> >> Subject: Re: [governance] Is really Bulgarian Cyrillic .бг (.bg)
>> >> similar to
>> >> other Latin ccTLDs?
>> >>
>> >> Well there is a new Board now, with a new chair.
>> >> All they need to do is recognize the mistake and tell the staff to fix
>> >> it.
>> >> Takes a little courage, but a lot of people on that Board have courage.
>> >>
>> >> avri
>> >>
>> >> On 4 Nov 2011, at 03:16, Daniel Kalchev wrote:
>> >>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> On 03.11.11 18:31, Paul Lehto wrote:
>> >>>> It would seem that there either is, or should be, a process to "call
>> >>>> the
>> >>>> question" as they say in parliamentary procedure.  If not, a motion
>> >>>> can be
>> >>>> made for a decision, or a letter sent citing undue delay and calling
>> >>>> for a
>> >>>> decision (with or without additional clarifying expertise appended to
>> >>>> it). A
>> >>>> person familiar with whatever exists in terms of procedure can
>> >>>> recommend the
>> >>>> best format or vehicle for forcing a decision.
>> >>>>
>> >>>
>> >>> There is no formal process to question the outcome of the IDN Fast
>> >>> Track
>> >>> applications. By definition, the only possible communication is
>> >>> between ICANN
>> >>> "staff" (whatever that means) and the original applicant. Ironically,
>> >>> even
>> >>> that country's Government does not have formal way to communicate with
>> >>> ICANN
>> >>> on the matter.
>> >>>
>> >>> Nevertheless, we are exploring every available possibility for some 18
>> >>> months
>> >>> now, to understand why this situation continues to persist. ICANN
>> >>> staff are
>> >>> very wary of any such discussions and I perfectly understand their
>> >>> position.
>> >>> More so, that the principal that handled this case, Tina Dam, is no
>> >>> longer
>> >>> with ICANN.
>> >>> My understanding is that ICANN now recognizes they made a mistake. But
>> >>> they
>> >>> not only made the mistake to accept blindli this "expert opinion".
>> >>> They also
>> >>> made the mistake to make several statements already to the effect that
>> >>> "this
>> >>> is it, accept it or go away". Therefore, the problem at the moment is
>> >>> how
>> >>> ICANN admits their mistake and how they go out of the rising political
>> >>> problem.
>> >>> I have made many proposals on how to address this, but this has been
>> >>> slow
>> >>> process.. Nobody has given up anyway and it now seems inevitable
>> >>> things will
>> >>> go on a more global and more politicized forums.
>> >>>
>> >>> Daniel
>> >>> ____________________________________________________________
>> >>> 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
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> > ____________________________________________________________
>> > 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
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Paul R Lehto, J.D.
> P.O. Box 1
> Ishpeming, MI  49849
> lehto.paul at gmail.com
> 906-204-4026 (cell)
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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


From ias_pk at yahoo.com  Sat Nov  5 16:49:27 2011
From: ias_pk at yahoo.com (Imran Ahmed Shah)
Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2011 13:49:27 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [governance] =?UTF-8?Q?Is_really_Bulgarian_Cyrillic_=2E=D0=B1?=
 =?UTF-8?Q?=D0=B3_=28=2Ebg=29_similar_to_other_Latin_ccTLDs=3F?=
Message-ID: <1320526167.93011.yint-ygo-j2me@web161016.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>

My comments are as follows by IAS:

>a. discusses this issue

IAS: Issue(s)

>b. asks for a transparent review of the issue

IAS: ....transparent (and open) review .....

>c. asks for a general process by which any ICANN Staff decision on string confusability have a method for transparent review and appeal.
 
>I do not think we need to recommend a solution, but...

IAS: as they have allowed to other country, our letter should also ask to allow all subsequent applicants / appellants with the same merit or relaxation of rules.
Stability with in the same community of a Language has no problem and if there is, the proper awareness to local/national users is ensured, ICANN should not reject IDN ccTLDs.

>...we might recommend policy considerations consistent with the Affirmation of Commitments that would govern such a review and apeal.

Agreed.

Thanks

Imran

>On Sat, 05 Nov 2011 19:54 PKT Avri Doria wrote:>Hi,>>I think this is a good idea.  If we can create an IGC consensus letter that>>a. discusses this issue>b. asks for a transparent review of the issue>c. asks for a general process by which any ICANN Staff decision on string confusability have a method for transparent review and appeal.>>I do not think we need to recommend a solution, but we might recommend policy considerations consistent with the Affirmation of Commitments that would govern such a review and apeal.>>We might also want to copy the leadership of ALAC when the letter is sent asking for their support of such an appeal mechanism.>>avri>>On 5 Nov 2011, at 00:07, Ian Peter wrote:>>> Avri wrote:>> >>> Well there is a new Board now, with a new chair.>>> All they need to do is recognize the mistake and tell the staff to fix it.>>> Takes a little courage, but a lot of people on that Board have courage.>> >> Perhaps a carefully drafted letter from
 this Caucus would be useful in this>> regard?>> >> >> >> >>> From: Avri Doria <avri at psg.com>>>> Reply-To: <governance at lists.cpsr.org>, Avri Doria <avri at psg.com>>>> Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2011 21:58:57 -0400>>> To: IGC <governance at lists.cpsr.org>>>> Subject: Re: [governance] Is really Bulgarian Cyrillic .бг (.bg) similar to>>> other Latin ccTLDs?>>> >>> Well there is a new Board now, with a new chair.>>> All they need to do is recognize the mistake and tell the staff to fix it.>>> Takes a little courage, but a lot of people on that Board have courage.>>> >>> avri >>> >>> On 4 Nov 2011, at 03:16, Daniel Kalchev wrote:>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On 03.11.11 18:31, Paul Lehto wrote:>>>>> It would seem that there either is, or should be, a process to "call the>>>>> question" as they say in parliamentary procedure.  If not, a motion can be>>>>> made for a decision, or a letter sent citing undue delay and calling for a>>>>> decision (with or without additional clarifying
 expertise appended to it). A>>>>> person familiar with whatever exists in terms of procedure can recommend the>>>>> best format or vehicle for forcing a decision.>>>>> >>>> >>>> There is no formal process to question the outcome of the IDN Fast Track>>>> applications. By definition, the only possible communication is between ICANN>>>> "staff" (whatever that means) and the original applicant. Ironically, even>>>> that country's Government does not have formal way to communicate with ICANN>>>> on the matter.>>>> >>>> Nevertheless, we are exploring every available possibility for some 18 months>>>> now, to understand why this situation continues to persist. ICANN staff are>>>> very wary of any such discussions and I perfectly understand their position.>>>> More so, that the principal that handled this case, Tina Dam, is no longer>>>> with ICANN.>>>> My understanding is that ICANN now recognizes they made a mistake. But they>>>> not only made the mistake to
 accept blindli this "expert opinion". They also>>>> made the mistake to make several statements already to the effect that "this>>>> is it, accept it or go away". Therefore, the problem at the moment is how>>>> ICANN admits their mistake and how they go out of the rising political>>>> problem.>>>> I have made many proposals on how to address this, but this has been slow>>>> process.. Nobody has given up anyway and it now seems inevitable things will>>>> go on a more global and more politicized forums.>>>> >>>> Daniel>>>> ____________________________________________________________>>>> 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>>> >> >> >> ____________________________________________________________>> 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>
____________________________________________________________
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


From daniel at digsys.bg  Sat Nov  5 16:52:12 2011
From: daniel at digsys.bg (Daniel Kalchev)
Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2011 22:52:12 +0200
Subject: [governance] =?UTF-8?Q?Is_really_Bulgarian_Cyrillic_=2E=D0=B1?=
 =?UTF-8?Q?=D0=B3_=28=2Ebg=29_similar_to_other_Latin_ccTLDs=3F?=
In-Reply-To: <CAD=1OvcSDF0_UUi__iCt7Kn2H4U0bSAAhgMmt5O53f34oiu=ZA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CADB01BA.1E008%ian.peter@ianpeter.com> <DFD576AA-245B-4E58-8B03-DD3BD60AF920@acm.org> <CAD=1OvcSDF0_UUi__iCt7Kn2H4U0bSAAhgMmt5O53f34oiu=ZA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <348A3391-C691-4D2E-A0F9-E09F8CCF74C3@digsys.bg>

Paul,

This is indeed an interesting proposition, but until now nether the Bulgarian Government, neither ICANN has accepted the possibility that they may have make a mistake at some point. It would be interesting to observe if such progress is possible.

Daniel

On Nov 5, 2011, at 7:53 PM, Paul Lehto wrote:

> 
> To the extent possible, a statement regarding "mutual mistake of fact" is usually grounds to get out of a contract or deal or understanding, and into a new process or negotiation.   It also allows both parties to save face, in that both have made a mistake.  I am not familiar enough with the details of the communications and its history to know if this would possibly apply or not, but if there is some basis for it, I'd advocate serious consideration of making mutual mistake an element of a letter urging reconsideration of this (non)decision.
> 
> Paul Lehto, J.D.

____________________________________________________________
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


From lmcknigh at syr.edu  Sat Nov  5 17:07:29 2011
From: lmcknigh at syr.edu (Lee W McKnight)
Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2011 21:07:29 +0000
Subject: [governance] =?KOI8-R?B?SXMgcmVhbGx5IEJ1bGdhcmlhbiBDeXJpbGxp?=
 =?KOI8-R?B?YyAuwscgKC5iZykgc2ltaWxhciB0byBvdGhlciBMYXRpbiBjY1RMRHM/?=
In-Reply-To: <348A3391-C691-4D2E-A0F9-E09F8CCF74C3@digsys.bg>
References: <CADB01BA.1E008%ian.peter@ianpeter.com>
 <DFD576AA-245B-4E58-8B03-DD3BD60AF920@acm.org>
 <CAD=1OvcSDF0_UUi__iCt7Kn2H4U0bSAAhgMmt5O53f34oiu=ZA@mail.gmail.com>,<348A3391-C691-4D2E-A0F9-E09F8CCF74C3@digsys.bg>
Message-ID: <77A59FC9477004489D44DE7FC6840E7B03653E@SUEX10-mbx-08.ad.syr.edu>

I agree with the direction Avri and Imran have taken the suggested language for the letter.

And disagree with all due respect, with Paul that there is any point at trying to get a he said-she said apology process going.

Let's just encourage ICANN to move on towards an open and transparent process in next phase. 

Which coincidentally sets stage for a belated .бг (.bg) remedy; with noone making or asking for apologies. 

Lee
________________________________________
From: governance at lists.cpsr.org [governance at lists.cpsr.org] on behalf of Daniel Kalchev [daniel at digsys.bg]
Sent: Saturday, November 05, 2011 4:52 PM
To: governance at lists.cpsr.org
Subject: Re: [governance] Is really Bulgarian Cyrillic .бг (.bg) similar to other Latin ccTLDs?

Paul,

This is indeed an interesting proposition, but until now nether the Bulgarian Government, neither ICANN has accepted the possibility that they may have make a mistake at some point. It would be interesting to observe if such progress is possible.

Daniel

On Nov 5, 2011, at 7:53 PM, Paul Lehto wrote:

>
> To the extent possible, a statement regarding "mutual mistake of fact" is usually grounds to get out of a contract or deal or understanding, and into a new process or negotiation.   It also allows both parties to save face, in that both have made a mistake.  I am not familiar enough with the details of the communications and its history to know if this would possibly apply or not, but if there is some basis for it, I'd advocate serious consideration of making mutual mistake an element of a letter urging reconsideration of this (non)decision.
>
> Paul Lehto, J.D.

____________________________________________________________
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


From ias_pk at yahoo.com  Sat Nov  5 17:33:59 2011
From: ias_pk at yahoo.com (Imran Ahmed Shah)
Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2011 14:33:59 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [governance] =?UTF-8?Q?Is_really_Bulgarian_Cyrillic_=2E=D0=B1?=
 =?UTF-8?Q?=D0=B3_=28=2Ebg=29_similar_to_other_Latin_ccTLDs=3F?=
Message-ID: <1320528839.1836.yint-ygo-j2me@web161005.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>

Dear Tina, 
I am glad to seen you on the IGC CS.
I was really thinking today, to invite you to join IGC.

Thank you for offering your support. Yes, we will need your support, and there are many queries that you may answer.

First and important question is that what was the ICANN's Vision and scope of utilization of an (any) IDN ccTLD allocation?

It is obvious that many countries will be able to apply for ccTLD in non latin characters, but my question is about the usage, scope of the usage. 
Who will get benefit out of it after the allocation and enabling a IDN ccTLD? 

Thanks

Imran Ahmed Shah


>On Sun, 06 Nov 2011 01:41 PKT Tina Dam wrote:>Hi everybody, just letting you know that I signed up to your list and>look forward to constructive dialogue.>>On the Bulgarian IDN ccTLD I likely will not be able to support a>letter, but I am happy to answer any questions or anything else I can>do to be helpful.>>Tina>>>On Sat, Nov 5, 2011 at 10:53 AM, Paul Lehto <lehto.paul at gmail.com> wrote:>>>> To the extent possible, a statement regarding "mutual mistake of fact" is>> usually grounds to get out of a contract or deal or understanding, and into>> a new process or negotiation.   It also allows both parties to save face, in>> that both have made a mistake.  I am not familiar enough with the details of>> the communications and its history to know if this would possibly apply or>> not, but if there is some basis for it, I'd advocate serious consideration>> of making mutual mistake an element of a letter urging reconsideration of>> this (non)decision.>>>> Paul
 Lehto, J.D.>>>> 2011/11/5 Avri Doria <avri at acm.org>>>>>>> Hi,>>>>>> I think this is a good idea.  If we can create an IGC consensus letter>>> that>>>>>> a. discusses this issue>>> b. asks for a transparent review of the issue>>> c. asks for a general process by which any ICANN Staff decision on string>>> confusability have a method for transparent review and appeal.>>>>>> I do not think we need to recommend a solution, but we might recommend>>> policy considerations consistent with the Affirmation of Commitments that>>> would govern such a review and apeal.>>>>>> We might also want to copy the leadership of ALAC when the letter is sent>>> asking for their support of such an appeal mechanism.>>>>>> avri>>>>>> On 5 Nov 2011, at 00:07, Ian Peter wrote:>>>>>> > Avri wrote:>>> >>>> >> Well there is a new Board now, with a new chair.>>> >> All they need to do is recognize the mistake and tell the staff to fix>>> >> it.>>> >> Takes a little courage, but a lot
 of people on that Board have courage.>>> >>>> > Perhaps a carefully drafted letter from this Caucus would be useful in>>> > this>>> > regard?>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >> From: Avri Doria <avri at psg.com>>>> >> Reply-To: <governance at lists.cpsr.org>, Avri Doria <avri at psg.com>>>> >> Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2011 21:58:57 -0400>>> >> To: IGC <governance at lists.cpsr.org>>>> >> Subject: Re: [governance] Is really Bulgarian Cyrillic .бг (.bg)>>> >> similar to>>> >> other Latin ccTLDs?>>> >>>>> >> Well there is a new Board now, with a new chair.>>> >> All they need to do is recognize the mistake and tell the staff to fix>>> >> it.>>> >> Takes a little courage, but a lot of people on that Board have courage.>>> >>>>> >> avri>>> >>>>> >> On 4 Nov 2011, at 03:16, Daniel Kalchev wrote:>>> >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>> On 03.11.11 18:31, Paul Lehto wrote:>>> >>>> It would seem that there either is, or should be, a process to "call>>> >>>> the>>> >>>> question" as they say in
 parliamentary procedure.  If not, a motion>>> >>>> can be>>> >>>> made for a decision, or a letter sent citing undue delay and calling>>> >>>> for a>>> >>>> decision (with or without additional clarifying expertise appended to>>> >>>> it). A>>> >>>> person familiar with whatever exists in terms of procedure can>>> >>>> recommend the>>> >>>> best format or vehicle for forcing a decision.>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>> There is no formal process to question the outcome of the IDN Fast>>> >>> Track>>> >>> applications. By definition, the only possible communication is>>> >>> between ICANN>>> >>> "staff" (whatever that means) and the original applicant. Ironically,>>> >>> even>>> >>> that country's Government does not have formal way to communicate with>>> >>> ICANN>>> >>> on the matter.>>> >>>>>> >>> Nevertheless, we are exploring every available possibility for some 18>>> >>> months>>> >>> now, to understand why this situation continues to persist. ICANN>>> >>>
 staff are>>> >>> very wary of any such discussions and I perfectly understand their>>> >>> position.>>> >>> More so, that the principal that handled this case, Tina Dam, is no>>> >>> longer>>> >>> with ICANN.>>> >>> My understanding is that ICANN now recognizes they made a mistake. But>>> >>> they>>> >>> not only made the mistake to accept blindli this "expert opinion".>>> >>> They also>>> >>> made the mistake to make several statements already to the effect that>>> >>> "this>>> >>> is it, accept it or go away". Therefore, the problem at the moment is>>> >>> how>>> >>> ICANN admits their mistake and how they go out of the rising political>>> >>> problem.>>> >>> I have made many proposals on how to address this, but this has been>>> >>> slow>>> >>> process.. Nobody has given up anyway and it now seems inevitable>>> >>> things will>>> >>> go on a more global and more politicized forums.>>> >>>>>> >>> Daniel>>> >>>
 ____________________________________________________________>>> >>> 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>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> > ____________________________________________________________>>> > 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>>>>>>>>>>> -->> Paul R Lehto, J.D.>> P.O. Box 1>> Ishpeming, MI  49849>> lehto.paul at gmail.com>> 906-204-4026 (cell)>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ____________________________________________________________>> 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>
____________________________________________________________
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


From ias_pk at yahoo.com  Sat Nov  5 17:39:34 2011
From: ias_pk at yahoo.com (Imran Ahmed Shah)
Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2011 14:39:34 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [governance] =?UTF-8?Q?Is_really_Bulgarian_Cyrillic_=2E=D0=B1?=
 =?UTF-8?Q?=D0=B3_=28=2Ebg=29_similar_to_other_Latin_ccTLDs=3F?=
Message-ID: <1320529174.398.yint-ygo-j2me@web161009.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>

Thanks Lee for your support.
Regards
Imran

On Sun, 06 Nov 2011 02:07 PKT Lee W McKnight wrote:>I agree with the direction Avri and Imran have taken the suggested language for the letter.>>And disagree with all due respect, with Paul that there is any point at trying to get a he said-she said apology process going.>>Let's just encourage ICANN to move on towards an open and transparent process in next phase. >>Which coincidentally sets stage for a belated .бг (.bg) remedy; with noone making or asking for apologies. >>Lee>________________________________________>From: governance at lists.cpsr.org [governance at lists.cpsr.org] on behalf of Daniel Kalchev [daniel at digsys.bg]>Sent: Saturday, November 05, 2011 4:52 PM>To: governance at lists.cpsr.org>Subject: Re: [governance] Is really Bulgarian Cyrillic .бг (.bg) similar to other Latin ccTLDs?>>Paul,>>This is indeed an interesting proposition, but until now nether the Bulgarian Government, neither ICANN has accepted the possibility that they may have make a
 mistake at some point. It would be interesting to observe if such progress is possible.>>Daniel>>On Nov 5, 2011, at 7:53 PM, Paul Lehto wrote:>>>>> To the extent possible, a statement regarding "mutual mistake of fact" is usually grounds to get out of a contract or deal or understanding, and into a new process or negotiation.   It also allows both parties to save face, in that both have made a mistake.  I am not familiar enough with the details of the communications and its history to know if this would possibly apply or not, but if there is some basis for it, I'd advocate serious consideration of making mutual mistake an element of a letter urging reconsideration of this (non)decision.>>>> Paul Lehto, J.D.>>____________________________________________________________>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>
____________________________________________________________
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


From matthias.kettemann at uni-graz.at  Sat Nov  5 17:51:24 2011
From: matthias.kettemann at uni-graz.at (Matthias C. Kettemann)
Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2011 22:51:24 +0100
Subject: [governance] From the Google Policy Blog
In-Reply-To: <CACAaNxirbJKjtzqWb8SyT9Kvrrnc=7XSNQm32pDn4+x-ZMuMhg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CACAaNxirbJKjtzqWb8SyT9Kvrrnc=7XSNQm32pDn4+x-ZMuMhg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4EB5AFDC.9040904@uni-graz.at>

It's actually quite disappointing that the six-page principles outlining 
"priorities for the business community" do not contain a single 
reference to "human rights".

When the document refers to the need of establishing "international 
commitments" on, inter alia, "expressly prohibit[ing] restrictions on 
legitimate cross-border information flows", the narrow focus becomes 
very much apparent. These commitments already largely exist: they are 
called human rights.

Clearly, a business case can be (also) made for human rights diplomacy. 
Relying on existing human rights law and calling states to account for 
violations of information and communication freedoms is the shared 
responsiblity of all stakeholders, including companies.

The business community has shown that it is sometimes not afraid to call 
human rights by their name, as does for example the Global Network 
Initiative.

Kind regards

Matthias



Am 05.11.2011 13:56, schrieb McTim:
>
>
>       Advancing the free flow of information
>       <http://googlepublicpolicy.blogspot.com/2011/11/advancing-free-flow-of-information.html>
>
>
>     Friday, November 4, 2011 at 12:28 PM ET
>
> Posted by Winter Casey, Senior Policy Analyst, Google
>
> The global economy relies on the free flow of information more than 
> ever before. Companies large and small can use the Internet to reach 
> new markets, which contributes to economic growth, job creation, and 
> increased trade around the world.
>
> But as companies and individuals are transmitting more information 
> online, some governments are seeking to impose limits on the free flow 
> of information. More than 40 governments now block or restrict 
> information and data available on the Internet.
>
> Last year, we released a white paper 
> <http://www.google.com/googleblogs/pdfs/trade_free_flow_of_information.pdf> demonstrating 
> that governments which block the free flow of information on the 
> Internet are also blocking trade and economic growth. For example, 
> when companies can’t confidentially and confidently transmit the files 
> and information that are necessary to keep their business running, 
> their ability to export goods and services is hurt. The thesis is 
> simple: when countries support the free flow of information, they will 
> see more economic growth.
>
> That’s why we joined companies like Citi, Microsoft, IBM, GE and 
> others to endorse a new set of principles endorsing the free flow of 
> information across borders. The principles 
> <http://www.nftc.org/default/Innovation/PromotingCrossBorderDataFlowsNFTC.pdf>, 
> written under the leadership of the National Foreign Trade Council, 
> outline several priorities for the U.S. business community which will 
> promote transparent, fair, and secure cross-border data flows.
>
> Individuals and businesses will benefit from a more consistent and 
> transparent framework for the treatment of cross-border flows of 
> goods, services and information. We look forward to continued work 
> with governments and industry to advance the free flow of information 
> online.
>
>
> ------------------
>
> Principles are here:
>
> http://www.nftc.org/default/Innovation/PromotingCrossBorderDataFlowsNFTC.pdf
>
> -- 
> Cheers,
>
> McTim
> "A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A 
> route indicates how we get there."  Jon Postel
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111105/0300d276/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, 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


From kichango at gmail.com  Sat Nov  5 18:23:44 2011
From: kichango at gmail.com (Mawaki Chango)
Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2011 18:23:44 -0400
Subject: [governance] From the Google Policy Blog
In-Reply-To: <4EB5AFDC.9040904@uni-graz.at>
References: <CACAaNxirbJKjtzqWb8SyT9Kvrrnc=7XSNQm32pDn4+x-ZMuMhg@mail.gmail.com>
	<4EB5AFDC.9040904@uni-graz.at>
Message-ID: <CACTo+v9pEOyA1-W3mS13VEOU2k806kCf-MHiu7qHbAdXq6gDag@mail.gmail.com>

I do not see Facebook among the endorsers! Talking about cross-border
data flows in this day and age, and the nb. 1 online social networking
company is missing? Perhaps if you throw in there a single positive
mention of human rights you may end up with even less endorsers. Is
this (intended to be) anything more than a coalition of companies
petitioning their government to secure predictable --and friendly,
while at it-- environment for their business to thrive worldwide?
Best,

Mawaki

On Sat, Nov 5, 2011 at 5:51 PM, Matthias C. Kettemann
<matthias.kettemann at uni-graz.at> wrote:
> It's actually quite disappointing that the six-page principles outlining
> "priorities for the business community" do not contain a single reference to
> "human rights".
>
> When the document refers to the need of establishing "international
> commitments" on, inter alia, "expressly prohibit[ing] restrictions on
> legitimate cross‐border information flows", the narrow focus becomes very
> much apparent. These commitments already largely exist: they are called
> human rights.
>
> Clearly, a business case can be (also) made for human rights diplomacy.
> Relying on existing human rights law and calling states to account for
> violations of information and communication freedoms is the shared
> responsiblity of all stakeholders, including companies.
>
> The business community has shown that it is sometimes not afraid to call
> human rights by their name, as does for example the Global Network
> Initiative.
>
> Kind regards
>
> Matthias
>
>
>
> Am 05.11.2011 13:56, schrieb McTim:
>
> Advancing the free flow of information
>
> Friday, November 4, 2011 at 12:28 PM ET
>
> Posted by Winter Casey, Senior Policy Analyst, Google
>
> The global economy relies on the free flow of information more than ever
> before. Companies large and small can use the Internet to reach new markets,
> which contributes to economic growth, job creation, and increased trade
> around the world.
>
> But as companies and individuals are transmitting more information online,
> some governments are seeking to impose limits on the free flow of
> information. More than 40 governments now block or restrict information and
> data available on the Internet.
>
> Last year, we released a white paper demonstrating that governments which
> block the free flow of information on the Internet are also blocking trade
> and economic growth. For example, when companies can’t confidentially and
> confidently transmit the files and information that are necessary to keep
> their business running, their ability to export goods and services is hurt.
> The thesis is simple: when countries support the free flow of information,
> they will see more economic growth.
>
> That’s why we joined companies like Citi, Microsoft, IBM, GE and others to
> endorse a new set of principles endorsing the free flow of information
> across borders. The principles, written under the leadership of the National
> Foreign Trade Council, outline several priorities for the U.S. business
> community which will promote transparent, fair, and secure cross-border data
> flows.
>
> Individuals and businesses will benefit from a more consistent and
> transparent framework for the treatment of cross-border flows of goods,
> services and information. We look forward to continued work with governments
> and industry to advance the free flow of information online.
>
> ------------------
> Principles are here:
> http://www.nftc.org/default/Innovation/PromotingCrossBorderDataFlowsNFTC.pdf
>
> --
> 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, 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


From nashton at consensus.pro  Sat Nov  5 19:04:59 2011
From: nashton at consensus.pro (Nick Ashton-Hart)
Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2011 16:04:59 -0700
Subject: [governance] From the Google Policy Blog
In-Reply-To: <CACTo+v9pEOyA1-W3mS13VEOU2k806kCf-MHiu7qHbAdXq6gDag@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CACAaNxirbJKjtzqWb8SyT9Kvrrnc=7XSNQm32pDn4+x-ZMuMhg@mail.gmail.com> <4EB5AFDC.9040904@uni-graz.at> <CACTo+v9pEOyA1-W3mS13VEOU2k806kCf-MHiu7qHbAdXq6gDag@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <779DA2F8-DF5A-4194-A8CA-D68781541B61@consensus.pro>

Dear Matthias and Mawaki:

I think you can either see the glass as half full or half empty. 

Companies are declaring that they have a stake in the Internet being open, and not closed. Given that there are many voices who want the internet to be the opposite, it seems to me that you have more in common with these companies on this issue than you do differences. 

Being completely frank, there are many countries that aren't interested in human rights at all - but they are interested in economic arguments. If an economic argument for the open Internet helps countries with weak human rights records to see that they have an interest in keeping the Internet open for economic reasons, that's helpful to the overall goal, it seems to me. Do you really care if the open Internet facilitates commerce as well as free speech?

I think we all recognise that the Internet as we know it is under threat from many quarters; those of us who want to keep it open and free need to focus on what we have in common rather than on differences in how the message is put by different stakeholders.

Regards, Nick 

PS: anything I ever say here is entirely personal and unrelated to my professional life.

On 5 Nov 2011, at 15:23, Mawaki Chango wrote:

> I do not see Facebook among the endorsers! Talking about cross-border
> data flows in this day and age, and the nb. 1 online social networking
> company is missing? Perhaps if you throw in there a single positive
> mention of human rights you may end up with even less endorsers. Is
> this (intended to be) anything more than a coalition of companies
> petitioning their government to secure predictable --and friendly,
> while at it-- environment for their business to thrive worldwide?
> Best,
> 
> Mawaki
> 
> On Sat, Nov 5, 2011 at 5:51 PM, Matthias C. Kettemann
> <matthias.kettemann at uni-graz.at> wrote:
>> It's actually quite disappointing that the six-page principles outlining
>> "priorities for the business community" do not contain a single reference to
>> "human rights".
>> 
>> When the document refers to the need of establishing "international
>> commitments" on, inter alia, "expressly prohibit[ing] restrictions on
>> legitimate cross‐border information flows", the narrow focus becomes very
>> much apparent. These commitments already largely exist: they are called
>> human rights.
>> 
>> Clearly, a business case can be (also) made for human rights diplomacy.
>> Relying on existing human rights law and calling states to account for
>> violations of information and communication freedoms is the shared
>> responsiblity of all stakeholders, including companies.
>> 
>> The business community has shown that it is sometimes not afraid to call
>> human rights by their name, as does for example the Global Network
>> Initiative.
>> 
>> Kind regards
>> 
>> Matthias
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Am 05.11.2011 13:56, schrieb McTim:
>> 
>> Advancing the free flow of information
>> 
>> Friday, November 4, 2011 at 12:28 PM ET
>> 
>> Posted by Winter Casey, Senior Policy Analyst, Google
>> 
>> The global economy relies on the free flow of information more than ever
>> before. Companies large and small can use the Internet to reach new markets,
>> which contributes to economic growth, job creation, and increased trade
>> around the world.
>> 
>> But as companies and individuals are transmitting more information online,
>> some governments are seeking to impose limits on the free flow of
>> information. More than 40 governments now block or restrict information and
>> data available on the Internet.
>> 
>> Last year, we released a white paper demonstrating that governments which
>> block the free flow of information on the Internet are also blocking trade
>> and economic growth. For example, when companies can’t confidentially and
>> confidently transmit the files and information that are necessary to keep
>> their business running, their ability to export goods and services is hurt.
>> The thesis is simple: when countries support the free flow of information,
>> they will see more economic growth.
>> 
>> That’s why we joined companies like Citi, Microsoft, IBM, GE and others to
>> endorse a new set of principles endorsing the free flow of information
>> across borders. The principles, written under the leadership of the National
>> Foreign Trade Council, outline several priorities for the U.S. business
>> community which will promote transparent, fair, and secure cross-border data
>> flows.
>> 
>> Individuals and businesses will benefit from a more consistent and
>> transparent framework for the treatment of cross-border flows of goods,
>> services and information. We look forward to continued work with governments
>> and industry to advance the free flow of information online.
>> 
>> ------------------
>> Principles are here:
>> http://www.nftc.org/default/Innovation/PromotingCrossBorderDataFlowsNFTC.pdf
>> 
>> --
>> 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, 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
> 

____________________________________________________________
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


From lehto.paul at gmail.com  Sat Nov  5 19:14:40 2011
From: lehto.paul at gmail.com (Paul Lehto)
Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2011 19:14:40 -0400
Subject: [governance] =?KOI8-R?B?SXMgcmVhbGx5IEJ1bGdhcmlhbiBDeXJpbGxp?=
 =?KOI8-R?B?YyAuwscgKC5iZykgc2ltaWxhciB0byBvdGhlciBMYXRpbiBjY1RMRHM/?=
In-Reply-To: <77A59FC9477004489D44DE7FC6840E7B03653E@SUEX10-mbx-08.ad.syr.edu>
References: <CADB01BA.1E008%ian.peter@ianpeter.com>
	<DFD576AA-245B-4E58-8B03-DD3BD60AF920@acm.org>
	<CAD=1OvcSDF0_UUi__iCt7Kn2H4U0bSAAhgMmt5O53f34oiu=ZA@mail.gmail.com>
	<348A3391-C691-4D2E-A0F9-E09F8CCF74C3@digsys.bg>
	<77A59FC9477004489D44DE7FC6840E7B03653E@SUEX10-mbx-08.ad.syr.edu>
Message-ID: <CAD=1OvdiSKEqu5tfEOzM6CxDgwqy6NSHJKuDTNSre_h2PRbgSQ@mail.gmail.com>

2011/11/5 Lee W McKnight <lmcknigh at syr.edu>

>
> And disagree with all due respect, with Paul that there is any point at
> trying to get a he said-she said apology process going.
>

When I spoke of the mere possibility of a "mutual mistake" approach as just
one prong or part of an overall letter or approach, I admitted I don't know
the facts.  I'm totally fine with the rejection of my suggestion, as indeed
if I knew all the facts and was helping form a decision, I might well agree
that there's no room to argue "mutual mistake."

That being said, the "consensus" (ha) seems to be that something is amiss.

Whether or not it is even true that something is wrong in this application
process, there seem to be only a few general classes of possible responses:
(1)  if one is not happy with a course of action, one can suggest something
is wrong *to some extent on both sides* (for example, a mutual mistake) and
this class of approaches is usually easier to accept) or else (2) that
something is wrong *on only one side* (which is usually harder for the
other side to accept), or (3) that there has been a *miscommunication*,
which is a distinct from, but still a little bit like mutual mistake in
that there's a two-sided problem, with part being inarticulate speech of at
least one percent and the other being unclear understanding of at least 1%
on the other side.   Mutual mistake is just one example of the (1) class,
and tends to suggest that there is either no fault on either side (yet
cause for change nonetheless), or that the fault is shared about equally,
and there is still cause for change.

I freely admit the above oversimplifies, but still the point stands: one
may blame only the other side (however diplomatically) or one may somehow
share at least a little blame, such as with a mutual mistake approach.
(Miscommunication often being a blame avoidance, in effect).  It's usually
more effective, but often does not apply, to take a blame-sharing approach
of some type, or a blame free approach.  Few people like to be blamed
alone.  :)

Good luck on this effort.  I'm too ill-informed of the particulars, I
think, to be of any more relevance on this particular thread, unless
something knew comes up.

Paul Lehto, Juris Doctor
-- 
Paul R Lehto, J.D.
P.O. Box 1
Ishpeming, MI  49849
lehto.paul at gmail.com
906-204-4026 (cell)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111105/db96bc9d/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, 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


From lehto.paul at gmail.com  Sat Nov  5 19:24:48 2011
From: lehto.paul at gmail.com (Paul Lehto)
Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2011 19:24:48 -0400
Subject: [governance] From the Google Policy Blog
In-Reply-To: <779DA2F8-DF5A-4194-A8CA-D68781541B61@consensus.pro>
References: <CACAaNxirbJKjtzqWb8SyT9Kvrrnc=7XSNQm32pDn4+x-ZMuMhg@mail.gmail.com>
	<4EB5AFDC.9040904@uni-graz.at>
	<CACTo+v9pEOyA1-W3mS13VEOU2k806kCf-MHiu7qHbAdXq6gDag@mail.gmail.com>
	<779DA2F8-DF5A-4194-A8CA-D68781541B61@consensus.pro>
Message-ID: <CAD=1OvfdqmQXuFer11+sZ5Rmw8m8Fpx_t54eeVy_T9BbCdnpLQ@mail.gmail.com>

On Sat, Nov 5, 2011 at 7:04 PM, Nick Ashton-Hart <nashton at consensus.pro>wrote:

> Dear Matthias and Mawaki:
>
> I think we all recognise that the Internet as we know it is under threat
> from many quarters; those of us who want to keep it open and free need to
> focus on what we have in common rather than on differences in how the
> message is put by different stakeholders.
>

I think the truth for all humans is that we must address the audience in
the language and style that is most persuasive and relevant for them.  If a
teenager has a holiday in a foreign country, and is called upon to explain
it, they will use different details and emphases in talking of the same
event with their best friend, a stranger, a sibling, their parents and
their grandparents.  Often the entire package (and more) constitutes the
whole truth, but the point is that we choose different arguments and facts
to emphasize with different parties.

So yes, economic arguments may be the only ones that certain parties find
most persuasive, but most wise companies will give human rights at least
some weight even if it is clearly not very important to them.  I'm not sure
Nick is saying what I'm about to criticize: but a one size fits all
approach,  using only the "common arguments" so we can all be on message is
not particularly effective, nor human.  Sometimes we are forced to do that,
but only if a group of humans are so closely identified with each other
that it is fair to attribute the comments of person A to the comments of
person B.  In such cases, the persons in that kind of group will need to be
"on message" saying about the same things all the time.

But the whole reason for secret diplomacy and off-record discussions when
they are *occasionally* appropriate (and often abused) is for the very
reason that it is so hard to say the same thing all the time and convince
enough partners to join a majority, or a super-majority, or a consensus.
(Whichever applies)

Paul Lehto, J.D.

>
> Regards, Nick
>
> PS: anything I ever say here is entirely personal and unrelated to my
> professional life.
>
> On 5 Nov 2011, at 15:23, Mawaki Chango wrote:
>
> > I do not see Facebook among the endorsers! Talking about cross-border
> > data flows in this day and age, and the nb. 1 online social networking
> > company is missing? Perhaps if you throw in there a single positive
> > mention of human rights you may end up with even less endorsers. Is
> > this (intended to be) anything more than a coalition of companies
> > petitioning their government to secure predictable --and friendly,
> > while at it-- environment for their business to thrive worldwide?
> > Best,
> >
> > Mawaki
> >
> > On Sat, Nov 5, 2011 at 5:51 PM, Matthias C. Kettemann
> > <matthias.kettemann at uni-graz.at> wrote:
> >> It's actually quite disappointing that the six-page principles outlining
> >> "priorities for the business community" do not contain a single
> reference to
> >> "human rights".
> >>
> >> When the document refers to the need of establishing "international
> >> commitments" on, inter alia, "expressly prohibit[ing] restrictions on
> >> legitimate cross‐border information flows", the narrow focus becomes
> very
> >> much apparent. These commitments already largely exist: they are called
> >> human rights.
> >>
> >> Clearly, a business case can be (also) made for human rights diplomacy.
> >> Relying on existing human rights law and calling states to account for
> >> violations of information and communication freedoms is the shared
> >> responsiblity of all stakeholders, including companies.
> >>
> >> The business community has shown that it is sometimes not afraid to call
> >> human rights by their name, as does for example the Global Network
> >> Initiative.
> >>
> >> Kind regards
> >>
> >> Matthias
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Am 05.11.2011 13:56, schrieb McTim:
> >>
> >> Advancing the free flow of information
> >>
> >> Friday, November 4, 2011 at 12:28 PM ET
> >>
> >> Posted by Winter Casey, Senior Policy Analyst, Google
> >>
> >> The global economy relies on the free flow of information more than ever
> >> before. Companies large and small can use the Internet to reach new
> markets,
> >> which contributes to economic growth, job creation, and increased trade
> >> around the world.
> >>
> >> But as companies and individuals are transmitting more information
> online,
> >> some governments are seeking to impose limits on the free flow of
> >> information. More than 40 governments now block or restrict information
> and
> >> data available on the Internet.
> >>
> >> Last year, we released a white paper demonstrating that governments
> which
> >> block the free flow of information on the Internet are also blocking
> trade
> >> and economic growth. For example, when companies can’t confidentially
> and
> >> confidently transmit the files and information that are necessary to
> keep
> >> their business running, their ability to export goods and services is
> hurt.
> >> The thesis is simple: when countries support the free flow of
> information,
> >> they will see more economic growth.
> >>
> >> That’s why we joined companies like Citi, Microsoft, IBM, GE and others
> to
> >> endorse a new set of principles endorsing the free flow of information
> >> across borders. The principles, written under the leadership of the
> National
> >> Foreign Trade Council, outline several priorities for the U.S. business
> >> community which will promote transparent, fair, and secure cross-border
> data
> >> flows.
> >>
> >> Individuals and businesses will benefit from a more consistent and
> >> transparent framework for the treatment of cross-border flows of goods,
> >> services and information. We look forward to continued work with
> governments
> >> and industry to advance the free flow of information online.
> >>
> >> ------------------
> >> Principles are here:
> >>
> http://www.nftc.org/default/Innovation/PromotingCrossBorderDataFlowsNFTC.pdf
> >>
> >> --
> >> 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, 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
> >
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
>
>


-- 
Paul R Lehto, J.D.
P.O. Box 1
Ishpeming, MI  49849
lehto.paul at gmail.com
906-204-4026 (cell)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111105/450b0bd5/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, 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


From kichango at gmail.com  Sat Nov  5 20:20:55 2011
From: kichango at gmail.com (Mawaki Chango)
Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2011 20:20:55 -0400
Subject: [governance] From the Google Policy Blog
In-Reply-To: <CAD=1OvfdqmQXuFer11+sZ5Rmw8m8Fpx_t54eeVy_T9BbCdnpLQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CACAaNxirbJKjtzqWb8SyT9Kvrrnc=7XSNQm32pDn4+x-ZMuMhg@mail.gmail.com>
	<4EB5AFDC.9040904@uni-graz.at>
	<CACTo+v9pEOyA1-W3mS13VEOU2k806kCf-MHiu7qHbAdXq6gDag@mail.gmail.com>
	<779DA2F8-DF5A-4194-A8CA-D68781541B61@consensus.pro>
	<CAD=1OvfdqmQXuFer11+sZ5Rmw8m8Fpx_t54eeVy_T9BbCdnpLQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CACTo+v8=-it4ZnWYO6zUYkND-xV_HuoGOn+dEcbyUfw4_Z5J1w@mail.gmail.com>

Dear Nick,

Thank you for your explanation, and your point is well taken. I just
want to leave two questions open (I don't think we can, nor do we need
to, solve them here.)

I know which side I am NOT on. But phrases such as "open Internet" or
"net neutrality" are not simple and transparent things. They are
tropes that at times make strange bedfellows, and sometimes might even
need to be dissected before they themselves realize how strange. For
all those who want "open Internet," how open do they want it to be?
That's where it might get a little complicated.

You say "...the Internet as we know it is under threat from many
quarters" and I might think, Internet has ever since been under threat
from ALL quarters. The threats just have different faces. But that's
probably another debate.

Best,
Mawaki


On Sat, Nov 5, 2011 at 7:24 PM, Paul Lehto <lehto.paul at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Sat, Nov 5, 2011 at 7:04 PM, Nick Ashton-Hart <nashton at consensus.pro>
> wrote:
>>
>> Dear Matthias and Mawaki:
>>
>> I think we all recognise that the Internet as we know it is under threat
>> from many quarters; those of us who want to keep it open and free need to
>> focus on what we have in common rather than on differences in how the
>> message is put by different stakeholders.
>
> I think the truth for all humans is that we must address the audience in the
> language and style that is most persuasive and relevant for them.  If a
> teenager has a holiday in a foreign country, and is called upon to explain
> it, they will use different details and emphases in talking of the same
> event with their best friend, a stranger, a sibling, their parents and their
> grandparents.  Often the entire package (and more) constitutes the whole
> truth, but the point is that we choose different arguments and facts to
> emphasize with different parties.
>
> So yes, economic arguments may be the only ones that certain parties find
> most persuasive, but most wise companies will give human rights at least
> some weight even if it is clearly not very important to them.  I'm not sure
> Nick is saying what I'm about to criticize: but a one size fits all
> approach,  using only the "common arguments" so we can all be on message is
> not particularly effective, nor human.  Sometimes we are forced to do that,
> but only if a group of humans are so closely identified with each other that
> it is fair to attribute the comments of person A to the comments of person
> B.  In such cases, the persons in that kind of group will need to be "on
> message" saying about the same things all the time.
>
> But the whole reason for secret diplomacy and off-record discussions when
> they are *occasionally* appropriate (and often abused) is for the very
> reason that it is so hard to say the same thing all the time and convince
> enough partners to join a majority, or a super-majority, or a consensus.
> (Whichever applies)
>
> Paul Lehto, J.D.
>>
>> Regards, Nick
>>
>> PS: anything I ever say here is entirely personal and unrelated to my
>> professional life.
>>
>> On 5 Nov 2011, at 15:23, Mawaki Chango wrote:
>>
>> > I do not see Facebook among the endorsers! Talking about cross-border
>> > data flows in this day and age, and the nb. 1 online social networking
>> > company is missing? Perhaps if you throw in there a single positive
>> > mention of human rights you may end up with even less endorsers. Is
>> > this (intended to be) anything more than a coalition of companies
>> > petitioning their government to secure predictable --and friendly,
>> > while at it-- environment for their business to thrive worldwide?
>> > Best,
>> >
>> > Mawaki
>> >
>> > On Sat, Nov 5, 2011 at 5:51 PM, Matthias C. Kettemann
>> > <matthias.kettemann at uni-graz.at> wrote:
>> >> It's actually quite disappointing that the six-page principles
>> >> outlining
>> >> "priorities for the business community" do not contain a single
>> >> reference to
>> >> "human rights".
>> >>
>> >> When the document refers to the need of establishing "international
>> >> commitments" on, inter alia, "expressly prohibit[ing] restrictions on
>> >> legitimate cross‐border information flows", the narrow focus becomes
>> >> very
>> >> much apparent. These commitments already largely exist: they are called
>> >> human rights.
>> >>
>> >> Clearly, a business case can be (also) made for human rights diplomacy.
>> >> Relying on existing human rights law and calling states to account for
>> >> violations of information and communication freedoms is the shared
>> >> responsiblity of all stakeholders, including companies.
>> >>
>> >> The business community has shown that it is sometimes not afraid to
>> >> call
>> >> human rights by their name, as does for example the Global Network
>> >> Initiative.
>> >>
>> >> Kind regards
>> >>
>> >> Matthias
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Am 05.11.2011 13:56, schrieb McTim:
>> >>
>> >> Advancing the free flow of information
>> >>
>> >> Friday, November 4, 2011 at 12:28 PM ET
>> >>
>> >> Posted by Winter Casey, Senior Policy Analyst, Google
>> >>
>> >> The global economy relies on the free flow of information more than
>> >> ever
>> >> before. Companies large and small can use the Internet to reach new
>> >> markets,
>> >> which contributes to economic growth, job creation, and increased trade
>> >> around the world.
>> >>
>> >> But as companies and individuals are transmitting more information
>> >> online,
>> >> some governments are seeking to impose limits on the free flow of
>> >> information. More than 40 governments now block or restrict information
>> >> and
>> >> data available on the Internet.
>> >>
>> >> Last year, we released a white paper demonstrating that governments
>> >> which
>> >> block the free flow of information on the Internet are also blocking
>> >> trade
>> >> and economic growth. For example, when companies can’t confidentially
>> >> and
>> >> confidently transmit the files and information that are necessary to
>> >> keep
>> >> their business running, their ability to export goods and services is
>> >> hurt.
>> >> The thesis is simple: when countries support the free flow of
>> >> information,
>> >> they will see more economic growth.
>> >>
>> >> That’s why we joined companies like Citi, Microsoft, IBM, GE and others
>> >> to
>> >> endorse a new set of principles endorsing the free flow of information
>> >> across borders. The principles, written under the leadership of the
>> >> National
>> >> Foreign Trade Council, outline several priorities for the U.S. business
>> >> community which will promote transparent, fair, and secure cross-border
>> >> data
>> >> flows.
>> >>
>> >> Individuals and businesses will benefit from a more consistent and
>> >> transparent framework for the treatment of cross-border flows of goods,
>> >> services and information. We look forward to continued work with
>> >> governments
>> >> and industry to advance the free flow of information online.
>> >>
>> >> ------------------
>> >> Principles are here:
>> >>
>> >> http://www.nftc.org/default/Innovation/PromotingCrossBorderDataFlowsNFTC.pdf
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >> 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, 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
>> >
>>
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> 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
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Paul R Lehto, J.D.
> P.O. Box 1
> Ishpeming, MI  49849
> lehto.paul at gmail.com
> 906-204-4026 (cell)
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
____________________________________________________________
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


From tinadam at gmail.com  Sat Nov  5 20:45:02 2011
From: tinadam at gmail.com (Tina Dam)
Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2011 17:45:02 -0700
Subject: [governance] =?UTF-8?Q?Is_really_Bulgarian_Cyrillic_=2E=D0=B1?=
 =?UTF-8?Q?=D0=B3_=28=2Ebg=29_similar_to_other_Latin_ccTLDs=3F?=
In-Reply-To: <1320528839.1836.yint-ygo-j2me@web161005.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
References: <1320528839.1836.yint-ygo-j2me@web161005.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <CAN8jcvAFQ2MQU_UThYuu=9nMcVkDd3MdiFcoMeGp4nfXvz8gEg@mail.gmail.com>

As I am sure you understand I cannot speak on behalf of ICANN. So you
really need to ask ICANN staff.

I can say that my opinion is that the IDN development is for the
benefit of its users. It will also be the users that decide if they
want to use it or not.


On Sat, Nov 5, 2011 at 2:33 PM, Imran Ahmed Shah <ias_pk at yahoo.com> wrote:
> Dear Tina,
> I am glad to seen you on the IGC CS.
> I was really thinking today, to invite you to join IGC.
>
> Thank you for offering your support. Yes, we will need your support, and there are many queries that you may answer.
>
> First and important question is that what was the ICANN's Vision and scope of utilization of an (any) IDN ccTLD allocation?
>
> It is obvious that many countries will be able to apply for ccTLD in non latin characters, but my question is about the usage, scope of the usage.
> Who will get benefit out of it after the allocation and enabling a IDN ccTLD?
>
> Thanks
>
> Imran Ahmed Shah
>
>
>>On Sun, 06 Nov 2011 01:41 PKT Tina Dam wrote:>Hi everybody, just letting you know that I signed up to your list and>look forward to constructive dialogue.>>On the Bulgarian IDN ccTLD I likely will not be able to support a>letter, but I am happy to answer any questions or anything else I can>do to be helpful.>>Tina>>>On Sat, Nov 5, 2011 at 10:53 AM, Paul Lehto <lehto.paul at gmail.com> wrote:>>>> To the extent possible, a statement regarding "mutual mistake of fact" is>> usually grounds to get out of a contract or deal or understanding, and into>> a new process or negotiation.   It also allows both parties to save face, in>> that both have made a mistake.  I am not familiar enough with the details of>> the communications and its history to know if this would possibly apply or>> not, but if there is some basis for it, I'd advocate serious consideration>> of making mutual mistake an element of a letter urging reconsideration of>> this (non)decision.>>>> Paul
>  Lehto, J.D.>>>> 2011/11/5 Avri Doria <avri at acm.org>>>>>>> Hi,>>>>>> I think this is a good idea.  If we can create an IGC consensus letter>>> that>>>>>> a. discusses this issue>>> b. asks for a transparent review of the issue>>> c. asks for a general process by which any ICANN Staff decision on string>>> confusability have a method for transparent review and appeal.>>>>>> I do not think we need to recommend a solution, but we might recommend>>> policy considerations consistent with the Affirmation of Commitments that>>> would govern such a review and apeal.>>>>>> We might also want to copy the leadership of ALAC when the letter is sent>>> asking for their support of such an appeal mechanism.>>>>>> avri>>>>>> On 5 Nov 2011, at 00:07, Ian Peter wrote:>>>>>> > Avri wrote:>>> >>>> >> Well there is a new Board now, with a new chair.>>> >> All they need to do is recognize the mistake and tell the staff to fix>>> >> it.>>> >> Takes a little courage, but a lot
>  of people on that Board have courage.>>> >>>> > Perhaps a carefully drafted letter from this Caucus would be useful in>>> > this>>> > regard?>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >> From: Avri Doria <avri at psg.com>>>> >> Reply-To: <governance at lists.cpsr.org>, Avri Doria <avri at psg.com>>>> >> Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2011 21:58:57 -0400>>> >> To: IGC <governance at lists.cpsr.org>>>> >> Subject: Re: [governance] Is really Bulgarian Cyrillic .бг (.bg)>>> >> similar to>>> >> other Latin ccTLDs?>>> >>>>> >> Well there is a new Board now, with a new chair.>>> >> All they need to do is recognize the mistake and tell the staff to fix>>> >> it.>>> >> Takes a little courage, but a lot of people on that Board have courage.>>> >>>>> >> avri>>> >>>>> >> On 4 Nov 2011, at 03:16, Daniel Kalchev wrote:>>> >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>> On 03.11.11 18:31, Paul Lehto wrote:>>> >>>> It would seem that there either is, or should be, a process to "call>>> >>>> the>>> >>>> question" as they say in
>  parliamentary procedure.  If not, a motion>>> >>>> can be>>> >>>> made for a decision, or a letter sent citing undue delay and calling>>> >>>> for a>>> >>>> decision (with or without additional clarifying expertise appended to>>> >>>> it). A>>> >>>> person familiar with whatever exists in terms of procedure can>>> >>>> recommend the>>> >>>> best format or vehicle for forcing a decision.>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>> There is no formal process to question the outcome of the IDN Fast>>> >>> Track>>> >>> applications. By definition, the only possible communication is>>> >>> between ICANN>>> >>> "staff" (whatever that means) and the original applicant. Ironically,>>> >>> even>>> >>> that country's Government does not have formal way to communicate with>>> >>> ICANN>>> >>> on the matter.>>> >>>>>> >>> Nevertheless, we are exploring every available possibility for some 18>>> >>> months>>> >>> now, to understand why this situation continues to persist. ICANN>>> >>>
>  staff are>>> >>> very wary of any such discussions and I perfectly understand their>>> >>> position.>>> >>> More so, that the principal that handled this case, Tina Dam, is no>>> >>> longer>>> >>> with ICANN.>>> >>> My understanding is that ICANN now recognizes they made a mistake. But>>> >>> they>>> >>> not only made the mistake to accept blindli this "expert opinion".>>> >>> They also>>> >>> made the mistake to make several statements already to the effect that>>> >>> "this>>> >>> is it, accept it or go away". Therefore, the problem at the moment is>>> >>> how>>> >>> ICANN admits their mistake and how they go out of the rising political>>> >>> problem.>>> >>> I have made many proposals on how to address this, but this has been>>> >>> slow>>> >>> process.. Nobody has given up anyway and it now seems inevitable>>> >>> things will>>> >>> go on a more global and more politicized forums.>>> >>>>>> >>> Daniel>>> >>>
>  ____________________________________________________________>>> >>> 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>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> > ____________________________________________________________>>> > 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>>>>>>>>>>> -->> Paul R Lehto, J.D.>> P.O. Box 1>> Ishpeming, MI  49849>> lehto.paul at gmail.com>> 906-204-4026 (cell)>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ____________________________________________________________>> 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>
>
____________________________________________________________
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


From nhklein at gmx.net  Sat Nov  5 21:36:14 2011
From: nhklein at gmx.net (nhklein)
Date: Sun, 06 Nov 2011 08:36:14 +0700
Subject: [governance] =?UTF-8?Q?Is_really_Bulgarian_Cyrillic_=2E=D0=B1?=
 =?UTF-8?Q?=D0=B3_=28=2Ebg=29_similar_to_other_Latin_ccTLDs=3F?=
In-Reply-To: <CAD=1OvcSDF0_UUi__iCt7Kn2H4U0bSAAhgMmt5O53f34oiu=ZA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CADB01BA.1E008%ian.peter@ianpeter.com>	<DFD576AA-245B-4E58-8B03-DD3BD60AF920@acm.org> <CAD=1OvcSDF0_UUi__iCt7Kn2H4U0bSAAhgMmt5O53f34oiu=ZA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4EB5E48E.60105@gmx.net>

On 11/06/2011 12:53 AM, Paul Lehto wrote:
>
> To the extent possible, a statement regarding "mutual mistake of fact" 
> is usually grounds to get out of a contract or deal or understanding, 
> and into a new process or negotiation.   It also allows both parties 
> to save face, in that both have made a mistake.  I am not familiar 
> enough with the details of the communications and its history to know 
> if this would possibly apply or not, but if there is some basis for 
> it, I'd advocate serious consideration of making mutual mistake an 
> element of a letter urging reconsideration of this (non)decision.
>
> Paul Lehto, J.D.

Could somebody please point out where "both [parties] have made a mistake"?

In the absence of such mistakes by both parties, I do not consider this 
as a challenge for face-saving, but for rectifying a situation where a 
national community with its own cultural-script history of more than 
1000 years (and 2000 for Greek - in case the Greek representatives made 
a mistake) is trying to get its own position accepted. The fact that, by 
now, a lot of other voices consider the expert's opinion not to have 
been appropriate (while it may have been appropriate on their own 
decisions according to their own, not public detailed procedures without 
appeal possibilities), is an addition line of reasons to do justice to 
the Bulgarian request.

Norbert Klein

-- 
A while ago, I started a new blog:

...thinking it over... after 21 years in Cambodia
http://www.thinking21.org/

continuing to share reports and comments from Cambodia.

Norbert Klein
nhklein at gmx.net
Phnom Penh / Cambodia


____________________________________________________________
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


From ias_pk at yahoo.com  Sun Nov  6 01:47:48 2011
From: ias_pk at yahoo.com (Imran Ahmed Shah)
Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2011 22:47:48 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [governance] =?UTF-8?Q?Is_really_Bulgarian_Cyrillic_=2E=D0=B1?=
 =?UTF-8?Q?=D0=B3_=28=2Ebg=29_similar_to_other_Latin_ccTLDs=3F?=
Message-ID: <1320558468.44394.yint-ygo-j2me@web161009.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>

>As I am sure you understand I cannot speak on behalf of ICANN. So you
really need to ask ICANN staff.

Yes, I understand. But you had been with ICANN, so, I think that you would know and may share with us un officially. 
And you may also guide us if it is documented at any early discussion or ultimate document.

>I can say that my opinion is that the IDN development is for the benefit of its users. It will also be the users that decide if they
want to use it or not.

Yes, user* will have to decide to which option they adopt and not, however, at their-turn*.

In order to discuss about the rights of a consumer, it is first step to define the consumer first.
The consumer or prospective consumer are the 1. Registry Operators, 2. The Users / Users Community.
If we can define the user(s) (single/plural) in terms of ICANN's IDN ccTLD Fast Track Program, we will be in a better position to understand their rights and to advocate their case very well.

Thanks

Regards

Imran Ahmed Shah



>On Sun, 06 Nov 2011 05:45 PKT Tina Dam wrote:>As I am sure you understand I cannot speak on behalf of ICANN. So you>really need to ask ICANN staff.>>I can say that my opinion is that the IDN development is for the>benefit of its users. It will also be the users that decide if they>want to use it or not.>>>On Sat, Nov 5, 2011 at 2:33 PM, Imran Ahmed Shah <ias_pk at yahoo.com> wrote:>> Dear Tina,>> I am glad to seen you on the IGC CS.>> I was really thinking today, to invite you to join IGC.>>>> Thank you for offering your support. Yes, we will need your support, and there are many queries that you may answer.>>>> First and important question is that what was the ICANN's Vision and scope of utilization of an (any) IDN ccTLD allocation?>>>> It is obvious that many countries will be able to apply for ccTLD in non latin characters, but my question is about the usage, scope of the usage.>> Who will get benefit out of it after the allocation and enabling a IDN
 ccTLD?>>>> Thanks>>>> Imran Ahmed Shah>>>>>>>On Sun, 06 No >As I am sure you understand I cannot speak on behalf of ICANN. So you
really need to ask ICANN staff..


v 2011 01:41 PKT Tina Dam wrote:>Hi everybody, just letting you know that I signed up to your list and>look forward to constructive dialogue.>>On the Bulgarian IDN ccTLD I likely will not be able to support a>letter, but I am happy to answer any questions or anything else I can>do to be helpful.>>Tina>>>On Sat, Nov 5, 2011 at 10:53 AM, Paul Lehto <lehto.paul at gmail.com> wrote:>>>> To the extent possible, a statement regarding "mutual mistake of fact" is>> usually grounds to get out of a contract or deal or understanding, and into>> a new process or negotiation.   It also allows both parties to save face, in>> that both have made a mistake.  I am not familiar enough with the details of>> the communications and its history to know if this would possibly apply or>> not, but if there is some basis for it, I'd advocate serious consideration>> of making mutual mistake an element of a letter urging reconsideration of>> this (non)decision.>>>> Paul>>  Lehto,
 J.D.>>>> 2011/11/5 Avri Doria <avri at acm.org>>>>>>> Hi,>>>>>> I think this is a good idea.  If we can create an IGC consensus letter>>> that>>>>>> a. discusses this issue>>> b. asks for a transparent review of the issue>>> c. asks for a general process by which any ICANN Staff decision on string>>> confusability have a method for transparent review and appeal.>>>>>> I do not think we need to recommend a solution, but we might recommend>>> policy considerations consistent with the Affirmation of Commitments that>>> would govern such a review and apeal.>>>>>> We might also want to copy the leadership of ALAC when the letter is sent>>> asking for their support of such an appeal mechanism.>>>>>> avri>>>>>> On 5 Nov 2011, at 00:07, Ian Peter wrote:>>>>>> > Avri wrote:>>> >>>> >> Well there is a new Board now, with a new chair.>>> >> All they need to do is recognize the mistake and tell the staff to fix>>> >> it.>>> >> Takes a little courage, but a lot>>  of
 people on that Board have courage.>>> >>>> > Perhaps a carefully drafted letter from this Caucus would be useful in>>> > this>>> > regard?>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >> From: Avri Doria <avri at psg.com>>>> >> Reply-To: <governance at lists.cpsr.org>, Avri Doria <avri at psg.com>>>> >> Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2011 21:58:57 -0400>>> >> To: IGC <governance at lists.cpsr.org>>>> >> Subject: Re: [governance] Is really Bulgarian Cyrillic .бг (.bg)>>> >> similar to>>> >> other Latin ccTLDs?>>> >>>>> >> Well there is a new Board now, with a new chair.>>> >> All they need to do is recognize the mistake and tell the staff to fix>>> >> it.>>> >> Takes a little courage, but a lot of people on that Board have courage.>>> >>>>> >> avri>>> >>>>> >> On 4 Nov 2011, at 03:16, Daniel Kalchev wrote:>>> >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>> On 03.11.11 18:31, Paul Lehto wrote:>>> >>>> It would seem that there either is, or should be, a process to "call>>> >>>> the>>> >>>> question" as they say in>> 
 parliamentary procedure.  If not, a motion>>> >>>> can be>>> >>>> made for a decision, or a letter sent citing undue delay and calling>>> >>>> for a>>> >>>> decision (with or without additional clarifying expertise appended to>>> >>>> it). A>>> >>>> person familiar with whatever exists in terms of procedure can>>> >>>> recommend the>>> >>>> best format or vehicle for forcing a decision.>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>> There is no formal process to question the outcome of the IDN Fast>>> >>> Track>>> >>> applications. By definition, the only possible communication is>>> >>> between ICANN>>> >>> "staff" (whatever that means) and the original applicant. Ironically,>>> >>> even>>> >>> that country's Government does not have formal way to communicate with>>> >>> ICANN>>> >>> on the matter.>>> >>>>>> >>> Nevertheless, we are exploring every available possibility for some 18>>> >>> months>>> >>> now, to understand why this situation continues to persist. ICANN>>> >>>>> 
 staff are>>> >>> very wary of any such discussions and I perfectly understand their>>> >>> position.>>> >>> More so, that the principal that handled this case, Tina Dam, is no>>> >>> longer>>> >>> with ICANN.>>> >>> My understanding is that ICANN now recognizes they made a mistake. But>>> >>> they>>> >>> not only made the mistake to accept blindli this "expert opinion".>>> >>> They also>>> >>> made the mistake to make several statements already to the effect that>>> >>> "this>>> >>> is it, accept it or go away". Therefore, the problem at the moment is>>> >>> how>>> >>> ICANN admits their mistake and how they go out of the rising political>>> >>> problem.>>> >>> I have made many proposals on how to address this, but this has been>>> >>> slow>>> >>> process.. Nobody has given up anyway and it now seems inevitable>>> >>> things will>>> >>> go on a more global and more politicized forums.>>> >>>>>> >>> Daniel>>> >>>>> 
 ____________________________________________________________>>> >>> 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>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> > ____________________________________________________________>>> > 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>>>>>>>>>>> -->> Paul R Lehto, J.D.>> P.O. Box 1>> Ishpeming, MI  49849>> lehto.paul at gmail.com>> 906-204-4026 (cell)>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ____________________________________________________________>> 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>>>
____________________________________________________________
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


From daniel at digsys.bg  Sun Nov  6 01:29:52 2011
From: daniel at digsys.bg (Daniel Kalchev)
Date: Sun, 6 Nov 2011 08:29:52 +0200
Subject: [governance] =?UTF-8?Q?Is_really_Bulgarian_Cyrillic_=2E=D0=B1?=
 =?UTF-8?Q?=D0=B3_=28=2Ebg=29_similar_to_other_Latin_ccTLDs=3F?=
In-Reply-To: <4EB5E48E.60105@gmx.net>
References: <CADB01BA.1E008%ian.peter@ianpeter.com>	<DFD576AA-245B-4E58-8B03-DD3BD60AF920@acm.org> <CAD=1OvcSDF0_UUi__iCt7Kn2H4U0bSAAhgMmt5O53f34oiu=ZA@mail.gmail.com> <4EB5E48E.60105@gmx.net>
Message-ID: <35D9616E-DE06-43E0-974E-E26518FBEC5D@digsys.bg>


On Nov 6, 2011, at 3:36 AM, nhklein wrote:

> On 11/06/2011 12:53 AM, Paul Lehto wrote:
>> 
>> To the extent possible, a statement regarding "mutual mistake of fact" is usually grounds to get out of a contract or deal or understanding, and into a new process or negotiation.   It also allows both parties to save face, in that both have made a mistake.  I am not familiar enough with the details of the communications and its history to know if this would possibly apply or not, but if there is some basis for it, I'd advocate serious consideration of making mutual mistake an element of a letter urging reconsideration of this (non)decision.
>> 
>> Paul Lehto, J.D.
> 
> Could somebody please point out where "both [parties] have made a mistake"?

It can be argued of course, with sufficient proof that both the applicant and ICANN made mistakes during this process. I understand Pauls point here and such route is indeed exploitable, but..

My observation has been, that ICANN has never ever admitted a mistake. Instead, all similar occurrences so far were handled in a different way, by introducing something "new and breakthrough" with much fanfare, that not simply resolves the issue, but is a gorgeous gift from ICANN to the community.

Whatever the course, I do believe a strong IG opinion on the way these situations are handled will be most useful. Saving face, mutual mistake admitting etc is something that only ICANN and the Bulgarian Government (and other applicants) may decide -- not our community. That is not to mean we cannot give them such advice.

Daniel____________________________________________________________
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


From williams.deirdre at gmail.com  Sun Nov  6 07:29:24 2011
From: williams.deirdre at gmail.com (Deirdre Williams)
Date: Sun, 6 Nov 2011 08:29:24 -0400
Subject: [governance] =?UTF-8?Q?Is_really_Bulgarian_Cyrillic_=2E=D0=B1?=
 =?UTF-8?Q?=D0=B3_=28=2Ebg=29_similar_to_other_Latin_ccTLDs=3F?=
In-Reply-To: <35D9616E-DE06-43E0-974E-E26518FBEC5D@digsys.bg>
References: <CADB01BA.1E008%ian.peter@ianpeter.com> <DFD576AA-245B-4E58-8B03-DD3BD60AF920@acm.org>
 <CAD=1OvcSDF0_UUi__iCt7Kn2H4U0bSAAhgMmt5O53f34oiu=ZA@mail.gmail.com>
 <4EB5E48E.60105@gmx.net> <35D9616E-DE06-43E0-974E-E26518FBEC5D@digsys.bg>
Message-ID: <CAMz5XN66vvneNK55b34N5BuLgU0SdLE7SAmLiqeHMjhynL-==g@mail.gmail.com>

Perhaps ICANN needs a "spring", a "Facebook revolution"?
I always remember the ISOC meeting at ICANN 2007 in Puerto Rico, the first
occasion of ICANN fellowships - I had one, thank you. Someone from the
financial administration of ICANN was commenting gravely on the possible
negative response of "business" to the investment in fellowships and the
fact that they, after all, were providing the money. A very quiet but firm
response was offered by someone from the ISOC community in France, who
pointed out that "we", the users, pay for everything. Are the strings in
question "confusingly similar".to "us"? Has anybody bothered to ask?
Deirdre

On 6 November 2011 02:29, Daniel Kalchev <daniel at digsys.bg> wrote:

>
> On Nov 6, 2011, at 3:36 AM, nhklein wrote:
>
> > On 11/06/2011 12:53 AM, Paul Lehto wrote:
> >>
> >> To the extent possible, a statement regarding "mutual mistake of fact"
> is usually grounds to get out of a contract or deal or understanding, and
> into a new process or negotiation.   It also allows both parties to save
> face, in that both have made a mistake.  I am not familiar enough with the
> details of the communications and its history to know if this would
> possibly apply or not, but if there is some basis for it, I'd advocate
> serious consideration of making mutual mistake an element of a letter
> urging reconsideration of this (non)decision.
> >>
> >> Paul Lehto, J.D.
> >
> > Could somebody please point out where "both [parties] have made a
> mistake"?
>
> It can be argued of course, with sufficient proof that both the applicant
> and ICANN made mistakes during this process. I understand Pauls point here
> and such route is indeed exploitable, but..
>
> My observation has been, that ICANN has never ever admitted a mistake.
> Instead, all similar occurrences so far were handled in a different way, by
> introducing something "new and breakthrough" with much fanfare, that not
> simply resolves the issue, but is a gorgeous gift from ICANN to the
> community.
>
> Whatever the course, I do believe a strong IG opinion on the way these
> situations are handled will be most useful. Saving face, mutual mistake
> admitting etc is something that only ICANN and the Bulgarian Government
> (and other applicants) may decide -- not our community. That is not to mean
> we cannot give them such advice.
>
> Daniel____________________________________________________________
> 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
>
>


-- 
“The fundamental cure for poverty is not money but knowledge" Sir William
Arthur Lewis, Nobel Prize Economics, 1979
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111106/2d171261/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, 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


From sonigituekpe at crossriverstate.gov.ng  Sun Nov  6 13:13:58 2011
From: sonigituekpe at crossriverstate.gov.ng (Sonigitu Ekpe)
Date: Sun, 6 Nov 2011 19:13:58 +0100
Subject: [governance] =?UTF-8?Q?Is_really_Bulgarian_Cyrillic_=2E=D0=B1?=
 =?UTF-8?Q?=D0=B3_=28=2Ebg=29_similar_to_other_Latin_ccTLDs=3F?=
In-Reply-To: <CAMz5XN66vvneNK55b34N5BuLgU0SdLE7SAmLiqeHMjhynL-==g@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CADB01BA.1E008%ian.peter@ianpeter.com>
	<DFD576AA-245B-4E58-8B03-DD3BD60AF920@acm.org>
	<CAD=1OvcSDF0_UUi__iCt7Kn2H4U0bSAAhgMmt5O53f34oiu=ZA@mail.gmail.com>
	<4EB5E48E.60105@gmx.net>
	<35D9616E-DE06-43E0-974E-E26518FBEC5D@digsys.bg>
	<CAMz5XN66vvneNK55b34N5BuLgU0SdLE7SAmLiqeHMjhynL-==g@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CALLeeauxOEh5LmjmYQ87rYnY64Lh-nYo+5gBQ2K2DkG_jLY4bw@mail.gmail.com>

I asked but no answer yet!

Sea

On 6 Nov 2011 13:30, "Deirdre Williams" <williams.deirdre at gmail.com> wrote:

Perhaps ICANN needs a "spring", a "Facebook revolution"?
I always remember the ISOC meeting at ICANN 2007 in Puerto Rico, the first
occasion of ICANN fellowships - I had one, thank you. Someone from the
financial administration of ICANN was commenting gravely on the possible
negative response of "business" to the investment in fellowships and the
fact that they, after all, were providing the money. A very quiet but firm
response was offered by someone from the ISOC community in France, who
pointed out that "we", the users, pay for everything. Are the strings in
question "confusingly similar".to "us"? Has anybody bothered to ask?
Deirdre



On 6 November 2011 02:29, Daniel Kalchev <daniel at digsys.bg> wrote:
>
>
> On Nov 6, 2011, at 3:36 A...

-- 
“The fundamental cure for poverty is not money but knowledge" Sir William
Arthur Lewis, Nobel Pr...

____________________________________________________________
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
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111106/778aeb05/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, 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


From tinadam at gmail.com  Sun Nov  6 13:35:42 2011
From: tinadam at gmail.com (Tina Dam)
Date: Sun, 6 Nov 2011 10:35:42 -0800
Subject: [governance] =?UTF-8?Q?Is_really_Bulgarian_Cyrillic_=2E=D0=B1?=
 =?UTF-8?Q?=D0=B3_=28=2Ebg=29_similar_to_other_Latin_ccTLDs=3F?=
In-Reply-To: <1320558468.44394.yint-ygo-j2me@web161009.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
References: <1320558468.44394.yint-ygo-j2me@web161009.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <CAN8jcvCRYZ6NEW7wZ5gXcUoronJe_R-mO7ALfAwNWarMLNKTpQ@mail.gmail.com>

Imran, all,
I really would like to be as helpful as possible, but nothing is
non-official :) and it really must be clear I cannot and am not
speaking on behalf of ICANN.

I hope the following might help instead. I am not arguing that this is
a solution of any kind for the specific case at hand, but just
providing some options and some information.

First, please recall that the Fast Track Process is limited in it's
scope, and that ICANN staff simply is following that process and
cannot make any deviations from it. One of the limitations unde the
Fast TRack Process has to do with confusable strings.

Confusability between strings is and has been a highly debated subject
when it comes to the introductions of IDNs. And rightfully so. We have
seen the issues early on (early 2000) in the second-level IDN
implementations, where no barrier or protection was in place against
confusable strings. The result was phishing attacks and browser
developers that were reluctant to implement IDNs.

On a first implementation of IDNs at the top-level I think, with that
experience, it is entirely appropriate to have restrictions in place
to avoid issues - that is, avoid issues for the end-users (primarily
registrants and people that use the addresses by accessing the sites,
but also registrars, registries and application developers).

As it was said alot among groups of these back in the early IDN days:
One day some somebody is going to make a lawsuit against a phishing
attack. Who will they sue: the registrant of the phishing domain name,
the registrar, the registry, or the browser that send them to a place
they did not intent to go to, or someone else? The answer is not
straightforward, but we definitely saw application developers not
wanting to be liable for that. Hence reluctant to implement IDNs and
if that is the case we are nowhere because IDNs are not usable.

See more here: http://blog.icann.org/2008/11/compliance-with-idn-technical-requirements/

I can say that I fully agree with an initial, careful approach, that
then can be expanded later on if it turns out it was too restrictive.
See more below on future developments.

However, and unfortunately the limitations means that not all
countries can (i) participate in the process, e.g. countries where the
official languages are based on Latin, and/or (ii) get their first
choice or preferred string as an Internationalized ccTLD.

But, it was agreed in the community that it was better to allow a
limited set of Internationalized ccTLDs to move forward and be
delegated, than force those where no questions or issues remained to
wait until a solution was available for all.

Of options looking forward I see several. Again, I would not claim
that either are applicable or desired by any country, but simply
listing them for your reference.

1) If the preferred string, or first choice was not available for
delegation through Fast Track, then select the second choice instead.
I would probably make that a strong recommendation because a) it
results in a quick delivery of an Internationalized ccTLD, and b) it
avoid any conflicts or contentions against new gTLDs down the road.

A country could for example decide to get the entire country name as
Internationalized ccTLD. Some countries have already done so.

2) Working with the ccNSO on their policy development process for the
"long-term policy for Internationalized ccTLDs". This is the policy
that is intended to be implemented as a replacement or update of the
Fast Track Process. One obvious area would be to review the existing
restrictions to see if any of these were too restrictive and could be
eased. (note: I am not saying that they are or they should, it would
require an analysis).

I hope that is helpful and I am happy to answer any questions I can.

Tina

On Sat, Nov 5, 2011 at 10:47 PM, Imran Ahmed Shah <ias_pk at yahoo.com> wrote:
>>As I am sure you understand I cannot speak on behalf of ICANN. So you
> really need to ask ICANN staff.
>
> Yes, I understand. But you had been with ICANN, so, I think that you would know and may share with us un officially.
> And you may also guide us if it is documented at any early discussion or ultimate document.
>
>>I can say that my opinion is that the IDN development is for the benefit of its users. It will also be the users that decide if they
> want to use it or not.
>
> Yes, user* will have to decide to which option they adopt and not, however, at their-turn*.
>
> In order to discuss about the rights of a consumer, it is first step to define the consumer first.
> The consumer or prospective consumer are the 1. Registry Operators, 2. The Users / Users Community.
> If we can define the user(s) (single/plural) in terms of ICANN's IDN ccTLD Fast Track Program, we will be in a better position to understand their rights and to advocate their case very well.
>
> Thanks
>
> Regards
>
> Imran Ahmed Shah
>
>
>
>>On Sun, 06 Nov 2011 05:45 PKT Tina Dam wrote:>As I am sure you understand I cannot speak on behalf of ICANN. So you>really need to ask ICANN staff.>>I can say that my opinion is that the IDN development is for the>benefit of its users. It will also be the users that decide if they>want to use it or not.>>>On Sat, Nov 5, 2011 at 2:33 PM, Imran Ahmed Shah <ias_pk at yahoo.com> wrote:>> Dear Tina,>> I am glad to seen you on the IGC CS.>> I was really thinking today, to invite you to join IGC.>>>> Thank you for offering your support. Yes, we will need your support, and there are many queries that you may answer.>>>> First and important question is that what was the ICANN's Vision and scope of utilization of an (any) IDN ccTLD allocation?>>>> It is obvious that many countries will be able to apply for ccTLD in non latin characters, but my question is about the usage, scope of the usage.>> Who will get benefit out of it after the allocation and enabling a IDN
>  ccTLD?>>>> Thanks>>>> Imran Ahmed Shah>>>>>>>On Sun, 06 No >As I am sure you understand I cannot speak on behalf of ICANN. So you
> really need to ask ICANN staff..
>
>
> v 2011 01:41 PKT Tina Dam wrote:>Hi everybody, just letting you know that I signed up to your list and>look forward to constructive dialogue.>>On the Bulgarian IDN ccTLD I likely will not be able to support a>letter, but I am happy to answer any questions or anything else I can>do to be helpful.>>Tina>>>On Sat, Nov 5, 2011 at 10:53 AM, Paul Lehto <lehto.paul at gmail.com> wrote:>>>> To the extent possible, a statement regarding "mutual mistake of fact" is>> usually grounds to get out of a contract or deal or understanding, and into>> a new process or negotiation.   It also allows both parties to save face, in>> that both have made a mistake.  I am not familiar enough with the details of>> the communications and its history to know if this would possibly apply or>> not, but if there is some basis for it, I'd advocate serious consideration>> of making mutual mistake an element of a letter urging reconsideration of>> this (non)decision.>>>> Paul>>  Lehto,
>  J.D.>>>> 2011/11/5 Avri Doria <avri at acm.org>>>>>>> Hi,>>>>>> I think this is a good idea.  If we can create an IGC consensus letter>>> that>>>>>> a. discusses this issue>>> b. asks for a transparent review of the issue>>> c. asks for a general process by which any ICANN Staff decision on string>>> confusability have a method for transparent review and appeal.>>>>>> I do not think we need to recommend a solution, but we might recommend>>> policy considerations consistent with the Affirmation of Commitments that>>> would govern such a review and apeal.>>>>>> We might also want to copy the leadership of ALAC when the letter is sent>>> asking for their support of such an appeal mechanism.>>>>>> avri>>>>>> On 5 Nov 2011, at 00:07, Ian Peter wrote:>>>>>> > Avri wrote:>>> >>>> >> Well there is a new Board now, with a new chair.>>> >> All they need to do is recognize the mistake and tell the staff to fix>>> >> it.>>> >> Takes a little courage, but a lot>>  of
>  people on that Board have courage.>>> >>>> > Perhaps a carefully drafted letter from this Caucus would be useful in>>> > this>>> > regard?>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >> From: Avri Doria <avri at psg.com>>>> >> Reply-To: <governance at lists.cpsr.org>, Avri Doria <avri at psg.com>>>> >> Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2011 21:58:57 -0400>>> >> To: IGC <governance at lists.cpsr.org>>>> >> Subject: Re: [governance] Is really Bulgarian Cyrillic .бг (.bg)>>> >> similar to>>> >> other Latin ccTLDs?>>> >>>>> >> Well there is a new Board now, with a new chair.>>> >> All they need to do is recognize the mistake and tell the staff to fix>>> >> it.>>> >> Takes a little courage, but a lot of people on that Board have courage.>>> >>>>> >> avri>>> >>>>> >> On 4 Nov 2011, at 03:16, Daniel Kalchev wrote:>>> >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>> On 03.11.11 18:31, Paul Lehto wrote:>>> >>>> It would seem that there either is, or should be, a process to "call>>> >>>> the>>> >>>> question" as they say in>>
>  parliamentary procedure.  If not, a motion>>> >>>> can be>>> >>>> made for a decision, or a letter sent citing undue delay and calling>>> >>>> for a>>> >>>> decision (with or without additional clarifying expertise appended to>>> >>>> it). A>>> >>>> person familiar with whatever exists in terms of procedure can>>> >>>> recommend the>>> >>>> best format or vehicle for forcing a decision.>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>> There is no formal process to question the outcome of the IDN Fast>>> >>> Track>>> >>> applications. By definition, the only possible communication is>>> >>> between ICANN>>> >>> "staff" (whatever that means) and the original applicant. Ironically,>>> >>> even>>> >>> that country's Government does not have formal way to communicate with>>> >>> ICANN>>> >>> on the matter.>>> >>>>>> >>> Nevertheless, we are exploring every available possibility for some 18>>> >>> months>>> >>> now, to understand why this situation continues to persist. ICANN>>> >>>>>
>  staff are>>> >>> very wary of any such discussions and I perfectly understand their>>> >>> position.>>> >>> More so, that the principal that handled this case, Tina Dam, is no>>> >>> longer>>> >>> with ICANN.>>> >>> My understanding is that ICANN now recognizes they made a mistake. But>>> >>> they>>> >>> not only made the mistake to accept blindli this "expert opinion".>>> >>> They also>>> >>> made the mistake to make several statements already to the effect that>>> >>> "this>>> >>> is it, accept it or go away". Therefore, the problem at the moment is>>> >>> how>>> >>> ICANN admits their mistake and how they go out of the rising political>>> >>> problem.>>> >>> I have made many proposals on how to address this, but this has been>>> >>> slow>>> >>> process.. Nobody has given up anyway and it now seems inevitable>>> >>> things will>>> >>> go on a more global and more politicized forums.>>> >>>>>> >>> Daniel>>> >>>>>
>  ____________________________________________________________>>> >>> 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>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> > ____________________________________________________________>>> > 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>>>>>>>>>>> -->> Paul R Lehto, J.D.>> P.O. Box 1>> Ishpeming, MI  49849>> lehto.paul at gmail.com>> 906-204-4026 (cell)>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ____________________________________________________________>> 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>>>
>
____________________________________________________________
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


From tinadam at gmail.com  Sun Nov  6 21:19:40 2011
From: tinadam at gmail.com (Tina Dam)
Date: Sun, 6 Nov 2011 18:19:40 -0800
Subject: [governance] =?UTF-8?Q?Is_really_Bulgarian_Cyrillic_=2E=D0=B1?=
 =?UTF-8?Q?=D0=B3_=28=2Ebg=29_similar_to_other_Latin_ccTLDs=3F?=
In-Reply-To: <4EB2AA0F.1010907@digsys.bg>
References: <1291131665.20152.1407897083@webmail.messagingengine.com>
	<CAJwbTiA0ixrMYBTWFGZLphuHKzWwOVrYiAvc9yBf8WQsMN-66w@mail.gmail.com>
	<CA+EjHYpNDBuY4NGi0wm7fT7N9ZsMPsZ_X5TftNeD5c3aSLP+Bw@mail.gmail.com>
	<4D7DCD47-E74D-47E1-ABE7-6BAD2BF29337@psg.com>
	<CA+EjHYqKSTcbfqP7y-ymR-Aw3Rax1PttuaSPHzu8oSYHX_UWfA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAJwbTiD4eDSgOg2Chtm8f7xYRfkqdW8QDYWBnX95qOPF6UqjRQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<4EB12D34.4060404@cafonso.ca>
	<47D5B55C-0217-47F4-A1AE-2C7372F961A7@acm.org>
	<754021EA-7BEF-4A22-8F4A-836E85BEC60E@istaff.org>
	<0BEB5F21-54A0-484D-84A4-8913AE894ACF@acm.org>
	<D8091442-97DA-41D4-9107-7C9227DCC86A@psg.com>
	<4EB2AA0F.1010907@digsys.bg>
Message-ID: <CAN8jcvD66QaLyM4mbOUjMZ_VjomkJtDxtMkcsqwn80Z3XfQVDg@mail.gmail.com>

Daniel, quick question, is there webcast for the event in Sofia,
http://www.domainforum.bg/en/schedule ?

Looks interesting and it would be great if we could listen in to the
IDN discussion.

Tina


On Thu, Nov 3, 2011 at 7:49 AM, Daniel Kalchev <daniel at digsys.bg> wrote:
> Hi Avri,
>
> To further make things complicated, there is a theory within ICANN, that the
> IDN Fast Track process does not have the provision for correcting this
> expert opinion. By reading the Implementation manual however, one discovers
> that such provision is already there: ICANN staff may request review by a
> second three member panel for any application for which it was found the
> string is confusingly similar if either the panel feels they are not
> sufficiently capable or if the opinion is negative and the application is
> struck (our case). There is even a graph in the manual, that clearly depicts
> this situation. That graph cycles trough this process until the applicant
> withdraws the application or it is successfully processed.
>
> By the way, we may discuss this at length at our event in Sofia.
> Unofficially, as it is both not part of the program and we do not want to
> make the issue way too public. :-)
>
> Daniel
____________________________________________________________
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


From karl at cavebear.com  Mon Nov  7 04:08:29 2011
From: karl at cavebear.com (Karl Auerbach)
Date: Mon, 07 Nov 2011 01:08:29 -0800
Subject: [governance] =?UTF-8?Q?Is_really_Bulgarian_Cyrillic_=2E=D0=B1?=
 =?UTF-8?Q?=D0=B3_=28=2Ebg=29_similar_to_other_Latin_ccTLDs=3F?=
In-Reply-To: <CAN8jcvCRYZ6NEW7wZ5gXcUoronJe_R-mO7ALfAwNWarMLNKTpQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <1320558468.44394.yint-ygo-j2me@web161009.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> <CAN8jcvCRYZ6NEW7wZ5gXcUoronJe_R-mO7ALfAwNWarMLNKTpQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4EB7A00D.3060107@cavebear.com>


I am constantly amused by the "confusingly similar" logic.  It is a
logic that has been fabricated into the domain name context to serve
goals that have nothing to do with whether people will be confused.

Whether two strings of glyphs on a screen are "similar", much less
whether they are "confusingly similar" is *not* a technical question.

"Confusingly similar" is a legal question, with cultural, moral, social,
political, economic, and historical overtones.

In other words it is exactly the kind of highly contextual and
subjective question that ICANN was never intended to handle.

And, consequently, it is the kind of question that ICANN has
demonstrated that ICANN is unable to handle.

(ICANN's own structure - a structure that gives little voice, and only a
meager and crippled kind of a vote, to the bulk of the those who might
be "confused", i.e. internet users - renders suspect even those
approaches that ICANN does occasionally emit.)

ICANN was created to do other jobs, jobs well worth doing:

ICANN's role in the domain name system was intended to be that of
assuring the technical stability of the upper tiers of DNS.

And that, to be specific, means dealing with issues that have a direct
impact upon the ability of the net efficiently and quickly to turn DNS
query packets into DNS reply packets with a low error rate, and without
prejudice against any query question or query source.

ICANN has been used by the trademark industry as a pawn to facilitate
their own goals - the benefit of the community of internet users not
being among those goals.  The phrase "confusingly similar" comes right
out of the law of trade and service marks.

Existing registries have been more than willing to go along because the
longer that ICANN engages in social engineering the longer their revenue
streams will remain insulated from competitive pressures.

It is long past time - in fact about 13 years past time - since ICANN
should have shaken off the pressures to do social engineering and
returned to the job that is was intended to do, and which it has never
really done, which is to assure that the upper tiers of DNS operate with
the reliability and quality of a lifeline grade utility.

ICANN's job is to make sure that the DNS lights stay on - It is not
ICANN's concern whether those lights illuminate a surgeon saving a life
or light-up a billboard advertising a lucrative drug to grow hair.

It is a cliche - as if anything from Voltaire could be a cliche - that
is appropriate for our situation with ICANN:

    "The perfect is the enemy of the good".

There are many who do not want innovation in the DNS space - for example
Verisign and the trademark protection industry (of which I am a
dues-paying member) very much like the status quo.  And many
governmental agencies fear change that DNS innovation might bring.

ICANN does not well distinguish between "the perfect" and "the good".
Consequently these groups know that even a pebble of feigned concern
will throw ICANN into cycles of study, delay, and expansion - all of
which serves the goals of those who benefit from stasis.

It is sad that ICANN does not give the same weight to the spirit of
innovation that it gives to concocted fears.

	--karl--



____________________________________________________________
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


From daniel at digsys.bg  Mon Nov  7 04:52:43 2011
From: daniel at digsys.bg (Daniel Kalchev)
Date: Mon, 7 Nov 2011 11:52:43 +0200
Subject: [governance] =?UTF-8?Q?Is_really_Bulgarian_Cyrillic_=2E=D0=B1?=
 =?UTF-8?Q?=D0=B3_=28=2Ebg=29_similar_to_other_Latin_ccTLDs=3F?=
In-Reply-To: <CAN8jcvD66QaLyM4mbOUjMZ_VjomkJtDxtMkcsqwn80Z3XfQVDg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <1291131665.20152.1407897083@webmail.messagingengine.com> <CAJwbTiA0ixrMYBTWFGZLphuHKzWwOVrYiAvc9yBf8WQsMN-66w@mail.gmail.com> <CA+EjHYpNDBuY4NGi0wm7fT7N9ZsMPsZ_X5TftNeD5c3aSLP+Bw@mail.gmail.com> <4D7DCD47-E74D-47E1-ABE7-6BAD2BF29337@psg.com> <CA+EjHYqKSTcbfqP7y-ymR-Aw3Rax1PttuaSPHzu8oSYHX_UWfA@mail.gmail.com> <CAJwbTiD4eDSgOg2Chtm8f7xYRfkqdW8QDYWBnX95qOPF6UqjRQ@mail.gmail.com> <4EB12D34.4060404@cafonso.ca> <47D5B55C-0217-47F4-A1AE-2C7372F961A7@acm.org> <754021EA-7BEF-4A22-8F4A-836E85BEC60E@istaff.org> <0BEB5F21-54A0-484D-84A4-8913AE894ACF@acm.org> <D8091442-97DA-41D4-9107-7C9227DCC86A@psg.com> <4EB2AA0F.1010907@digsys.bg> <CAN8jcvD66QaLyM4mbOUjMZ_VjomkJtDxtMkcsqwn80Z3XfQVDg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <A8762AAD-8721-4D08-BC1E-A2AEA5CDA8D9@digsys.bg>

Tina,

There is not real-time webcast but there is recording and it will be posted when the event is complete.

Daniel

On Nov 7, 2011, at 4:19 AM, Tina Dam wrote:

> Daniel, quick question, is there webcast for the event in Sofia,
> http://www.domainforum.bg/en/schedule ?
> 
> Looks interesting and it would be great if we could listen in to the
> IDN discussion.
> 
> Tina
> 

____________________________________________________________
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


From daniel at digsys.bg  Mon Nov  7 05:14:17 2011
From: daniel at digsys.bg (Daniel Kalchev)
Date: Mon, 7 Nov 2011 12:14:17 +0200
Subject: [governance] =?UTF-8?Q?Is_really_Bulgarian_Cyrillic_=2E=D0=B1?=
 =?UTF-8?Q?=D0=B3_=28=2Ebg=29_similar_to_other_Latin_ccTLDs=3F?=
In-Reply-To: <CAN8jcvCRYZ6NEW7wZ5gXcUoronJe_R-mO7ALfAwNWarMLNKTpQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <1320558468.44394.yint-ygo-j2me@web161009.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> <CAN8jcvCRYZ6NEW7wZ5gXcUoronJe_R-mO7ALfAwNWarMLNKTpQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <7960EC2D-A16A-464C-B828-686FBA010DDB@digsys.bg>


On Nov 6, 2011, at 8:35 PM, Tina Dam wrote:
> 1) If the preferred string, or first choice was not available for
> delegation through Fast Track, then select the second choice instead.
> I would probably make that a strong recommendation because a) it
> results in a quick delivery of an Internationalized ccTLD, and b) it
> avoid any conflicts or contentions against new gTLDs down the road.
> 
> A country could for example decide to get the entire country name as
> Internationalized ccTLD. Some countries have already done so.
> 
> 2) Working with the ccNSO on their policy development process for the
> "long-term policy for Internationalized ccTLDs". This is the policy
> that is intended to be implemented as a replacement or update of the
> Fast Track Process. One obvious area would be to review the existing
> restrictions to see if any of these were too restrictive and could be
> eased. (note: I am not saying that they are or they should, it would
> require an analysis).
> 

Tina,

We have discussed and beaten this to great details, but to be consistent, let me comment on this subject one more time:

1) When IDN Fast Track was launched (September 2009), there were various opinions in Bulgaria. There were groups, that wanted "any IDN TLD". Other groups, wanted .бг (and nothing else). Some of these groups tried to convince our Government to take their side (and choice). Instead, we supported the Government to make as wide as possible inquiry within Bulgaria as to what USERS want. The results are known. At that time, .бг was the preferred choice, but other choices were considered too.
Then, the application was made and subsequently put to halt with the opinion of the "confusability panel" (I went even that far to suggest in one of my presentations, that the issue is not "user confusion", but rather "expert confusion")
At that point, our Government initiated another round of consultations. Much more USERS responded and everybody had one single opinion: The IDN ccTLD for Bulgaria will be .бг

Therefore, nobody in Bulgaria is even looking at another IDN string. Apparently, the .българия string is reserved and it will NOT be sought for in the IDN Fast Track process. The Bulgarian society does not want "some IDN string".

The reason why the application was not for .българия initially is that those are abbreviations and this is not exactly an abbreviation. Further, it is widely accepted in Bulgaria, that the country's name abbreviation and cultural/language identification is "БГ".
By the way, if I was sending the application, I would have included a lot of community and cultural support for why/how people in Bulgaria consider БГ to be the proper choice.

There were many attempts, at different levels and by different entities to convince our Government to 'revise' their standing. But you need to understand that no sane Government is going to go against their people's wishes, that were clearly voiced.

2. We already participate in the ccNSO and other policy creation processes. This even predates the IDN Fast Track introduction. There is a long-term ccPDP in development and consideration, that will very likely assign (rather than approve) Bulgaria and Greece their preferred Internet identifiers in their own languages and scripts.
Our participation however is not "in order to convince somebody to permit Bulgaria to have .бг", but because we believe this is our duty as part of ICANN.

Tina, I hope you will not take this as a critic of some sort, but I want very much to make facts clear.

Daniel

____________________________________________________________
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


From email at hakik.org  Mon Nov  7 06:04:56 2011
From: email at hakik.org (Hakikur Rahman)
Date: Mon, 07 Nov 2011 11:04:56 +0000
Subject: [governance] New Title
Message-ID: <20111107110641.AFD924B12C@npogroups.org>

FYI.

IRIS plus 2011-5: Why Discuss Network Neutrality? (03/11/2011)
Scarcity of Internet capacity is the starting point of the "network 
neutrality" debate. At the heart of the discussion is the question to 
what extent the legislature should tackle this shortage and its 
consequences through regulation, or whether the answer can be 
provided by free market forces. This IRIS plus is therefore, in a 
way, linked to an edition of the IRIS Special series entitled "To 
Have or Not to Have - Must-carry Rules" in the cable television 
sector, must-carry obligations have, in the past, granted access 
rights to distribution networks. This IRIS plus reports on the latest 
developments in the network neutrality debate, summarises the most 
recent changes in the legal framework for electronic communication 
and compares the situation in Europe with that in the USA.
[]
[]

[]


Author(s) :

European Audiovisual Observatory
ISBN : 978-92-871-7246-4
Format : A4
No. of pages : 39
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111107/17ef495f/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, 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


From ernesto at lacnic.net  Mon Nov  7 06:06:18 2011
From: ernesto at lacnic.net (Ernesto Majo)
Date: Mon, 7 Nov 2011 11:06:18 +0000
Subject: [governance] =?UTF-8?Q?Is_really_Bulgarian_Cyrillic_=2E=D0=B1?=
 =?UTF-8?Q?_=D0=B3_=28=2Ebg=29_similar_to_other_Latin_ccTLDs=3F?=
In-Reply-To: <7960EC2D-A16A-464C-B828-686FBA010DDB@digsys.bg>
References: <1320558468.44394.yint-ygo-j2me@web161009.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
  <CAN8jcvCRYZ6NEW7wZ5gXcUoronJe_R-mO7ALfAwNWarMLNKTpQ@mail.gmail.com>
  <7960EC2D-A16A-464C-B828-686FBA010DDB@digsys.bg>
Message-ID: <1571465414-1320663978-cardhu_decombobulator_blackberry.rim.net-1086845379-@b4.c31.bise6.blackberry>

 
-----Original Message-----
From: Daniel Kalchev <daniel at digsys.bg>
Sender: governance at lists.cpsr.org
Date: Mon, 7 Nov 2011 12:14:17 
To: <governance at lists.cpsr.org>; Tina Dam<tinadam at gmail.com>
Reply-To: governance at lists.cpsr.org,Daniel Kalchev <daniel at digsys.bg>
Cc: Imran Ahmed Shah<ias_pk at yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: [governance] Is really Bulgarian Cyrillic .б
 г (.bg) similar to other Latin ccTLDs?


On Nov 6, 2011, at 8:35 PM, Tina Dam wrote:
> 1) If the preferred string, or first choice was not available for
> delegation through Fast Track, then select the second choice instead.
> I would probably make that a strong recommendation because a) it
> results in a quick delivery of an Internationalized ccTLD, and b) it
> avoid any conflicts or contentions against new gTLDs down the road.
> 
> A country could for example decide to get the entire country name as
> Internationalized ccTLD. Some countries have already done so.
> 
> 2) Working with the ccNSO on their policy development process for the
> "long-term policy for Internationalized ccTLDs". This is the policy
> that is intended to be implemented as a replacement or update of the
> Fast Track Process. One obvious area would be to review the existing
> restrictions to see if any of these were too restrictive and could be
> eased. (note: I am not saying that they are or they should, it would
> require an analysis).
> 

Tina,

We have discussed and beaten this to great details, but to be consistent, let me comment on this subject one more time:

1) When IDN Fast Track was launched (September 2009), there were various opinions in Bulgaria. There were groups, that wanted "any IDN TLD". Other groups, wanted .бг (and nothing else). Some of these groups tried to convince our Government to take their side (and choice). Instead, we supported the Government to make as wide as possible inquiry within Bulgaria as to what USERS want. The results are known. At that time, .бг was the preferred choice, but other choices were considered too.
Then, the application was made and subsequently put to halt with the opinion of the "confusability panel" (I went even that far to suggest in one of my presentations, that the issue is not "user confusion", but rather "expert confusion")
At that point, our Government initiated another round of consultations. Much more USERS responded and everybody had one single opinion: The IDN ccTLD for Bulgaria will be .бг

Therefore, nobody in Bulgaria is even looking at another IDN string. Apparently, the .българия string is reserved and it will NOT be sought for in the IDN Fast Track process. The Bulgarian society does not want "some IDN string".

The reason why the application was not for .българия initially is that those are abbreviations and this is not exactly an abbreviation. Further, it is widely accepted in Bulgaria, that the country's name abbreviation and cultural/language identification is "БГ".
By the way, if I was sending the application, I would have included a lot of community and cultural support for why/how people in Bulgaria consider БГ to be the proper choice.

There were many attempts, at different levels and by different entities to convince our Government to 'revise' their standing. But you need to understand that no sane Government is going to go against their people's wishes, that were clearly voiced.

2. We already participate in the ccNSO and other policy creation processes. This even predates the IDN Fast Track introduction. There is a long-term ccPDP in development and consideration, that will very likely assign (rather than approve) Bulgaria and Greece their preferred Internet identifiers in their own languages and scripts.
Our participation however is not "in order to convince somebody to permit Bulgaria to have .бг", but because we believe this is our duty as part of ICANN.

Tina, I hope you will not take this as a critic of some sort, but I want very much to make facts clear.

Daniel

____________________________________________________________
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


From ajp at glocom.ac.jp  Mon Nov  7 08:42:58 2011
From: ajp at glocom.ac.jp (Adam Peake)
Date: Mon, 7 Nov 2011 22:42:58 +0900
Subject: [governance] =?KOI8-R?B?SXMgcmVhbGx5IEJ1bGdhcmlhbiBDeXJpbGxp?=
 =?KOI8-R?B?YyAuwscgKC5iZykgc2ltaWxhciB0byBvdGhlciBMYXRpbiBjY1RMRHM/?=
In-Reply-To: <77A59FC9477004489D44DE7FC6840E7B03653E@SUEX10-mbx-08.ad.syr.edu>
References: <CADB01BA.1E008%ian.peter@ianpeter.com>
	<DFD576AA-245B-4E58-8B03-DD3BD60AF920@acm.org>
	<CAD=1OvcSDF0_UUi__iCt7Kn2H4U0bSAAhgMmt5O53f34oiu=ZA@mail.gmail.com>
	<348A3391-C691-4D2E-A0F9-E09F8CCF74C3@digsys.bg>
	<77A59FC9477004489D44DE7FC6840E7B03653E@SUEX10-mbx-08.ad.syr.edu>
Message-ID: <CAFabd1Kbo3byWE1mVCXWTJKn3K_j=2CQW5qU1KQ8fkTgY1gqcw@mail.gmail.com>

How about we suggest no ascii should be used under an idn ccTLD. If
there's cyrillic at the second, third etc level then no one's going to
confuse that with Brazil.
Still think taking this to the Ombudsman would be worthwhile. He might
not be able to make recommendations to help BG, but could provide
advice for the new gTLD round.
Adam



2011/11/6 Lee W McKnight <lmcknigh at syr.edu>:
> I agree with the direction Avri and Imran have taken the suggested language for the letter.
>
> And disagree with all due respect, with Paul that there is any point at trying to get a he said-she said apology process going.
>
> Let's just encourage ICANN to move on towards an open and transparent process in next phase.
>
> Which coincidentally sets stage for a belated .бг (.bg) remedy; with noone making or asking for apologies.
>
> Lee
> ________________________________________
> From: governance at lists.cpsr.org [governance at lists.cpsr.org] on behalf of Daniel Kalchev [daniel at digsys.bg]
> Sent: Saturday, November 05, 2011 4:52 PM
> To: governance at lists.cpsr.org
> Subject: Re: [governance] Is really Bulgarian Cyrillic .бг (.bg) similar to other Latin ccTLDs?
>
> Paul,
>
> This is indeed an interesting proposition, but until now nether the Bulgarian Government, neither ICANN has accepted the possibility that they may have make a mistake at some point. It would be interesting to observe if such progress is possible.
>
> Daniel
>
> On Nov 5, 2011, at 7:53 PM, Paul Lehto wrote:
>
>>
>> To the extent possible, a statement regarding "mutual mistake of fact" is usually grounds to get out of a contract or deal or understanding, and into a new process or negotiation.   It also allows both parties to save face, in that both have made a mistake.  I am not familiar enough with the details of the communications and its history to know if this would possibly apply or not, but if there is some basis for it, I'd advocate serious consideration of making mutual mistake an element of a letter urging reconsideration of this (non)decision.
>>
>> Paul Lehto, J.D.
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
>
>
____________________________________________________________
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


From ias_pk at yahoo.com  Mon Nov  7 11:44:19 2011
From: ias_pk at yahoo.com (Imran Ahmed Shah)
Date: Mon, 7 Nov 2011 08:44:19 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [governance] =?UTF-8?Q?Is_really_Bulgarian_Cyrillic_=2E=D0=B1?=
 =?UTF-8?Q?=D0=B3_=28=2Ebg=29_similar_to_other_Latin_ccTLDs=3F?=
Message-ID: <1320684259.18000.yint-ygo-j2me@web161011.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>


Hi Daniel,
Would you please give us some feedback about the IDN session of Domain.Forum at Sofia?
Have there some discussion made on the IDN ccTLD?
Thanks
Imran Ahmed Shah  
>On Mon, 07 Nov 2011 15:14 PKT Daniel Kalchev wrote:>>On Nov 6, 2011, at 8:35 PM, Tina Dam wrote:>> 1) If the preferred string, or first choice was not available for>> delegation through Fast Track, then select the second choice instead.>> I would probably make that a strong recommendation because a) it>> results in a quick delivery of an Internationalized ccTLD, and b) it>> avoid any conflicts or contentions against new gTLDs down the road.>> >> A country could for example decide to get the entire country name as>> Internationalized ccTLD. Some countries have already done so.>> >> 2) Working with the ccNSO on their policy development process for the>> "long-term policy for Internationalized ccTLDs". This is the policy>> that is intended to be implemented as a replacement or update of the>> Fast Track Process. One obvious area would be to review the existing>> restrictions to see if any of these were too restrictive and could be>> eased. (note: I am not
 saying that they are or they should, it would>> require an analysis).>> >>Tina,>>We have discussed and beaten this to great details, but to be consistent, let me comment on this subject one more time:>>1) When IDN Fast Track was launched (September 2009), there were various opinions in Bulgaria. There were groups, that wanted "any IDN TLD". Other groups, wanted .бг (and nothing else). Some of these groups tried to convince our Government to take their side (and choice). Instead, we supported the Government to make as wide as possible inquiry within Bulgaria as to what USERS want. The results are known. At that time, .бг was the preferred choice, but other choices were considered too.>Then, the application was made and subsequently put to halt with the opinion of the "confusability panel" (I went even that far to suggest in one of my presentations, that the issue is not "user confusion", but rather "expert confusion")>At that point, our Government
 initiated another round of consultations. Much more USERS responded and everybody had one single opinion: The IDN ccTLD for Bulgaria will be .бг>>Therefore, nobody in Bulgaria is even looking at another IDN string. Apparently, the .българия string is reserved and it will NOT be sought for in the IDN Fast Track process. The Bulgarian society does not want "some IDN string".>>The reason why the application was not for .българия initially is that those are abbreviations and this is not exactly an abbreviation. Further, it is widely accepted in Bulgaria, that the country's name abbreviation and cultural/language identification is "БГ".>By the way, if I was sending the application, I would have included a lot of community and cultural support for why/how people in Bulgaria consider БГ to be the proper choice.>>There were many attempts, at different levels and by different entities to convince our Government to 'revise' their standing.
 But you need to understand that no sane Government is going to go against their people's wishes, that were clearly voiced.>>2. We already participate in the ccNSO and other policy creation processes. This even predates the IDN Fast Track introduction. There is a long-term ccPDP in development and consideration, that will very likely assign (rather than approve) Bulgaria and Greece their preferred Internet identifiers in their own languages and scripts.>Our participation however is not "in order to convince somebody to permit Bulgaria to have .бг", but because we believe this is our duty as part of ICANN.>>Tina, I hope you will not take this as a critic of some sort, but I want very much to make facts clear.>>Daniel>>____________________________________________________________>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


From tinadam at gmail.com  Mon Nov  7 12:07:05 2011
From: tinadam at gmail.com (Tina Dam)
Date: Mon, 7 Nov 2011 09:07:05 -0800
Subject: [governance] =?WINDOWS-1251?Q?Is_really_Bulgarian_Cyrillic_?=
 =?WINDOWS-1251?Q?=2E=E1=E3_=28=2Ebg=29_similar_to_other_Latin_ccTLDs=3F?=
In-Reply-To: <7960EC2D-A16A-464C-B828-686FBA010DDB@digsys.bg>
References: <1320558468.44394.yint-ygo-j2me@web161009.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
	<CAN8jcvCRYZ6NEW7wZ5gXcUoronJe_R-mO7ALfAwNWarMLNKTpQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<7960EC2D-A16A-464C-B828-686FBA010DDB@digsys.bg>
Message-ID: <CAN8jcvCyuPEL6CvGoN8dhkb+APAn596EBb6EOVGpit48qFAd7w@mail.gmail.com>

Daniel, no worries, I don't take it as a critique in any way. As I
also said in my post, I am not trying to claim that what I am saying
will work for any country that was restricted by the Fast Track
limitations.

If you are speaking on behalf of Bulgaria then it clearly does not
work for Bulgaria.

I still posted it to the list because I want to make sure that we all
know that the Fast Track has limitations, and that it is a process
that ICANN staff is following. And I don't think that was a surprise
to anyone involved in the development of the process.

So I think the best thing is to look forward and see what we can do in
the future, and that is where (for IDN ccTLDs) that the ccNSO comes in
and where the work for analysing the restrictions and seeing if they
can relaxed lies.

I do really want to stress though (for any other country reps on the
list) that with the new gTLD program opening it is in any country's
own interest to make sure that whatever acronym or other string they
think resembles their country-name - and that they are eligible for in
the Fast Track Program - to go and get that before new gTLDs comes in
that look similar and causes contention. I know the gTLD program has
objections and GAC early warnings, but if it was me, and if it was an
important string for the country then I would go for it in Fast Track.

Another point is that right now the Fast Track is fairly simple, cheap
(to say the least), and with very few "contractual" requirements. Who
knows what the next process is going to be. I would use it while we
have it :)

Hope you had a great meeting in Sofia and look forward to listening to
the recording.

Tina

On Mon, Nov 7, 2011 at 2:14 AM, Daniel Kalchev <daniel at digsys.bg> wrote:
>
> On Nov 6, 2011, at 8:35 PM, Tina Dam wrote:
>> 1) If the preferred string, or first choice was not available for
>> delegation through Fast Track, then select the second choice instead.
>> I would probably make that a strong recommendation because a) it
>> results in a quick delivery of an Internationalized ccTLD, and b) it
>> avoid any conflicts or contentions against new gTLDs down the road.
>>
>> A country could for example decide to get the entire country name as
>> Internationalized ccTLD. Some countries have already done so.
>>
>> 2) Working with the ccNSO on their policy development process for the
>> "long-term policy for Internationalized ccTLDs". This is the policy
>> that is intended to be implemented as a replacement or update of the
>> Fast Track Process. One obvious area would be to review the existing
>> restrictions to see if any of these were too restrictive and could be
>> eased. (note: I am not saying that they are or they should, it would
>> require an analysis).
>>
>
> Tina,
>
> We have discussed and beaten this to great details, but to be consistent, let me comment on this subject one more time:
>
> 1) When IDN Fast Track was launched (September 2009), there were various opinions in Bulgaria. There were groups, that wanted "any IDN TLD". Other groups, wanted .бг (and nothing else). Some of these groups tried to convince our Government to take their side (and choice). Instead, we supported the Government to make as wide as possible inquiry within Bulgaria as to what USERS want. The results are known. At that time, .бг was the preferred choice, but other choices were considered too.
> Then, the application was made and subsequently put to halt with the opinion of the "confusability panel" (I went even that far to suggest in one of my presentations, that the issue is not "user confusion", but rather "expert confusion")
> At that point, our Government initiated another round of consultations. Much more USERS responded and everybody had one single opinion: The IDN ccTLD for Bulgaria will be .бг
>
> Therefore, nobody in Bulgaria is even looking at another IDN string. Apparently, the .българия string is reserved and it will NOT be sought for in the IDN Fast Track process. The Bulgarian society does not want "some IDN string".
>
> The reason why the application was not for .българия initially is that those are abbreviations and this is not exactly an abbreviation. Further, it is widely accepted in Bulgaria, that the country's name abbreviation and cultural/language identification is "БГ".
> By the way, if I was sending the application, I would have included a lot of community and cultural support for why/how people in Bulgaria consider БГ to be the proper choice.
>
> There were many attempts, at different levels and by different entities to convince our Government to 'revise' their standing. But you need to understand that no sane Government is going to go against their people's wishes, that were clearly voiced.
>
> 2. We already participate in the ccNSO and other policy creation processes. This even predates the IDN Fast Track introduction. There is a long-term ccPDP in development and consideration, that will very likely assign (rather than approve) Bulgaria and Greece their preferred Internet identifiers in their own languages and scripts.
> Our participation however is not "in order to convince somebody to permit Bulgaria to have .бг", but because we believe this is our duty as part of ICANN.
>
> Tina, I hope you will not take this as a critic of some sort, but I want very much to make facts clear.
>
> Daniel
>
>
____________________________________________________________
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


From tinadam at gmail.com  Mon Nov  7 12:18:52 2011
From: tinadam at gmail.com (Tina Dam)
Date: Mon, 7 Nov 2011 09:18:52 -0800
Subject: [governance] =?KOI8-R?B?SXMgcmVhbGx5IEJ1bGdhcmlhbiBDeXJpbGxp?=
 =?KOI8-R?B?YyAuwscgKC5iZykgc2ltaWxhciB0byBvdGhlciBMYXRpbiBjY1RMRHM/?=
In-Reply-To: <CAFabd1Kbo3byWE1mVCXWTJKn3K_j=2CQW5qU1KQ8fkTgY1gqcw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CADB01BA.1E008%ian.peter@ianpeter.com>
	<DFD576AA-245B-4E58-8B03-DD3BD60AF920@acm.org>
	<CAD=1OvcSDF0_UUi__iCt7Kn2H4U0bSAAhgMmt5O53f34oiu=ZA@mail.gmail.com>
	<348A3391-C691-4D2E-A0F9-E09F8CCF74C3@digsys.bg>
	<77A59FC9477004489D44DE7FC6840E7B03653E@SUEX10-mbx-08.ad.syr.edu>
	<CAFabd1Kbo3byWE1mVCXWTJKn3K_j=2CQW5qU1KQ8fkTgY1gqcw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAN8jcvABYULq0Lp4q9i44mNdWrERWkyNdxsAZh_aCHp7WgZEOw@mail.gmail.com>

Hi Adam, for illustration purposes, can you tell me if the attached is
ASCII (Latin characters) or if they are from another alphabet?

And just to mention that it is not possible at all to control the
third level (for registries operating with second level registrations.

Tina


2011/11/7 Adam Peake <ajp at glocom.ac.jp>:
> How about we suggest no ascii should be used under an idn ccTLD. If
> there's cyrillic at the second, third etc level then no one's going to
> confuse that with Brazil.
> Still think taking this to the Ombudsman would be worthwhile. He might
> not be able to make recommendations to help BG, but could provide
> advice for the new gTLD round.
> Adam
>
____________________________________________________________
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

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: adampeake.docx
Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document
Size: 162044 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111107/fa6a294d/attachment.docx>

From tinadam at gmail.com  Mon Nov  7 13:03:29 2011
From: tinadam at gmail.com (Tina Dam)
Date: Mon, 7 Nov 2011 10:03:29 -0800
Subject: [governance] =?UTF-8?Q?Is_really_Bulgarian_Cyrillic_=2E=D0=B1?=
 =?UTF-8?Q?=D0=B3_=28=2Ebg=29_similar_to_other_Latin_ccTLDs=3F?=
In-Reply-To: <F9A0407D-FB4B-4B02-A7BC-582B6EDB87B2@christopherwilkinson.eu>
References: <CADB01BA.1E008%ian.peter@ianpeter.com>
	<DFD576AA-245B-4E58-8B03-DD3BD60AF920@acm.org>
	<CAD=1OvcSDF0_UUi__iCt7Kn2H4U0bSAAhgMmt5O53f34oiu=ZA@mail.gmail.com>
	<348A3391-C691-4D2E-A0F9-E09F8CCF74C3@digsys.bg>
	<77A59FC9477004489D44DE7FC6840E7B03653E@SUEX10-mbx-08.ad.syr.edu>
	<CAFabd1Kbo3byWE1mVCXWTJKn3K_j=2CQW5qU1KQ8fkTgY1gqcw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAN8jcvABYULq0Lp4q9i44mNdWrERWkyNdxsAZh_aCHp7WgZEOw@mail.gmail.com>
	<F9A0407D-FB4B-4B02-A7BC-582B6EDB87B2@christopherwilkinson.eu>
Message-ID: <CAN8jcvDpZKoCgE-ekZNrA3VDyCqXxhuhso=4o2F8QOtXapMAUw@mail.gmail.com>

Here it is in PDF. I was trying to show that by avoiding ASCII at
second level does not mean that we get rid of confusion - as per
Adam's suggestion.

Tina


On Mon, Nov 7, 2011 at 9:59 AM, CW Mail <mail at christopherwilkinson.eu> wrote:
> Well, the attachment does not open in any meaningful way . . .
>
> What are we trying to demonstrate?
>
> CW
>
>
> On 07 Nov 2011, at 18:18, Tina Dam wrote:
>
>> Hi Adam, for illustration purposes, can you tell me if the attached is
>> ASCII (Latin characters) or if they are from another alphabet?
>>
>> And just to mention that it is not possible at all to control the
>> third level (for registries operating with second level registrations.
>>
>> Tina
>>
>>
>> 2011/11/7 Adam Peake <ajp at glocom.ac.jp>:
>>>
>>> How about we suggest no ascii should be used under an idn ccTLD. If
>>> there's cyrillic at the second, third etc level then no one's going to
>>> confuse that with Brazil.
>>> Still think taking this to the Ombudsman would be worthwhile. He might
>>> not be able to make recommendations to help BG, but could provide
>>> advice for the new gTLD round.
>>> Adam
>>>
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> 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
>>
>> <adampeake.docx>
>
>
____________________________________________________________
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

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: adampeake.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 83361 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111107/6ba1a566/attachment.pdf>

From ias_pk at yahoo.com  Mon Nov  7 14:35:00 2011
From: ias_pk at yahoo.com (Imran Ahmed Shah)
Date: Tue, 8 Nov 2011 00:35:00 +0500
Subject: [governance] =?KOI8-R?B?SXMgcmVhbGx5IEJ1bGdhcmlhbiBDeXJpbGxp?=
 =?KOI8-R?B?YyAuwscgKC5iZykgc2ltaWxhciB0byBvdGhlciBMYXRpbiBjY1RMRHM/?=
In-Reply-To: <CAFabd1Kbo3byWE1mVCXWTJKn3K_j=2CQW5qU1KQ8fkTgY1gqcw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CADB01BA.1E008%ian.peter@ianpeter.com>	<DFD576AA-245B-4E58-8B03-DD3BD60AF920@acm.org>	<CAD=1OvcSDF0_UUi__iCt7Kn2H4U0bSAAhgMmt5O53f34oiu=ZA@mail.gmail.com>	<348A3391-C691-4D2E-A0F9-E09F8CCF74C3@digsys.bg>	<77A59FC9477004489D44DE7FC6840E7B03653E@SUEX10-mbx-08.ad.syr.edu> <CAFabd1Kbo3byWE1mVCXWTJKn3K_j=2CQW5qU1KQ8fkTgY1gqcw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <!&!AAAAAAAAAAAYAAAAAAAAAFV+OJu0iddDsexbRu3QqDnCgAAAEAAAAC7BvLZ76TNOvsvIpvE7m4wBAAAAAA==@yahoo.com>

> -----Original Message-----
> From: governance at lists.cpsr.org [mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org] On
> Behalf Of Adam Peake
> Sent: Monday, November 07, 2011 06:43 PM
> To: governance at lists.cpsr.org; Lee W McKnight
> Cc: Daniel Kalchev
> Subject: Re: [governance] Is really Bulgarian Cyrillic .бг (.bg) similar
to other
> Latin ccTLDs?
> 
> How about we suggest no ascii should be used under an idn ccTLD. If
there's
> cyrillic at the second, third etc level then no one's going to confuse
that with
> Brazil.

[IAS:] If you would like to propose only Cyrillic characters will be allowed
for IDN.IDN (Cyrillic.бг) for Bulgaria, 
where ASCI.бг will not allowed, just to create a significant differentiation
this is a Cyrillic IDN domain. 
1. Please not that this is again different from the Fast Track  Program
implementation process where 1-IDN+ASCI.IDN is allowed. 
2. How the users will be educated to be able to understand that what's mean
what.
3. Today, Cyrillic-IDN.com & Cyrillic-IDN.net is already allowed, the above
education will not work in all cases.
4. Cyrillic-IDN.bg might be allowed now or in future, so again the formula
will not work to establish a common understanding.

> Still think taking this to the Ombudsman would be worthwhile. He might not
> be able to make recommendations to help BG, but could provide advice
for[IAS:]  
> the new gTLD round.
[IAS:] Ombudsman would be useful for the followings:
1.	To provide an example to be followed as precedent when the rules and
bylaws do not able to resolve the conflict.
2.	To prevent further decisions on weak backgrounds or against the
demand of user's requirements.
However, I think appeal with Ombudsman would only be workable, 
a.	if the case is submitted by including Bulgarian government
representative (applicant) 
b.	and we should know all about the consumer, 
c.	consumer rights, 
d.	decision against the consumer rights, 
e.	other similar examples and decisions made by the authority, 
f.	required solution / (to be proposed for helping Ombudsman for quick
decision making) 
and 
g.	if the IGC support this action, we should draft and propose a policy
in global prospect not only for the бг, however .бг example can be used.

Thanks

Imran Ahmad Shah

> Adam
> 
> 
> 
> 2011/11/6 Lee W McKnight <lmcknigh at syr.edu>:
> > I agree with the direction Avri and Imran have taken the suggested
> language for the letter.
> >
> > And disagree with all due respect, with Paul that there is any point at
trying
> to get a he said-she said apology process going.
> >
> > Let's just encourage ICANN to move on towards an open and transparent
> process in next phase.
> >
> > Which coincidentally sets stage for a belated .бг (.bg) remedy; with
noone
> making or asking for apologies.
> >
> > Lee
> > ________________________________________
> > From: governance at lists.cpsr.org [governance at lists.cpsr.org] on behalf
> > of Daniel Kalchev [daniel at digsys.bg]
> > Sent: Saturday, November 05, 2011 4:52 PM
> > To: governance at lists.cpsr.org
> > Subject: Re: [governance] Is really Bulgarian Cyrillic .бг (.bg) similar
to other
> Latin ccTLDs?
> >
> > Paul,
> >
> > This is indeed an interesting proposition, but until now nether the
Bulgarian
> Government, neither ICANN has accepted the possibility that they may have
> make a mistake at some point. It would be interesting to observe if such
> progress is possible.
> >
> > Daniel
> >
> > On Nov 5, 2011, at 7:53 PM, Paul Lehto wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> To the extent possible, a statement regarding "mutual mistake of fact"
is
> usually grounds to get out of a contract or deal or understanding, and
into a
> new process or negotiation.   It also allows both parties to save face, in
that
> both have made a mistake.  I am not familiar enough with the details of
the
> communications and its history to know if this would possibly apply or
not,
> but if there is some basis for it, I'd advocate serious consideration of
making
> mutual mistake an element of a letter urging reconsideration of this
> (non)decision.
> >>
> >> Paul Lehto, J.D.
> >
> >
> __________________________________________________________
> __
> > 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
> >
> >
> __________________________________________________________
> __
> 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


From ias_pk at yahoo.com  Mon Nov  7 15:08:46 2011
From: ias_pk at yahoo.com (Imran Ahmed Shah)
Date: Tue, 8 Nov 2011 01:08:46 +0500
Subject: [governance] =?KOI8-R?B?SXMgcmVhbGx5IEJ1bGdhcmlhbiBDeXJpbGxp?=
 =?KOI8-R?B?YyAuwscgKC5iZykgc2ltaWxhciB0byBvdGhlciBMYXRpbiBjY1RMRHM/?=
References: <CADB01BA.1E008%ian.peter@ianpeter.com>	<DFD576AA-245B-4E58-8B03-DD3BD60AF920@acm.org>	<CAD=1OvcSDF0_UUi__iCt7Kn2H4U0bSAAhgMmt5O53f34oiu=ZA@mail.gmail.com>	<348A3391-C691-4D2E-A0F9-E09F8CCF74C3@digsys.bg>	<77A59FC9477004489D44DE7FC6840E7B03653E@SUEX10-mbx-08.ad.syr.edu> <CAFabd1Kbo3byWE1mVCXWTJKn3K_j=2CQW5qU1KQ8fkTgY1gqcw@mail.gmail.com> 
Message-ID: <!&!AAAAAAAAAAAYAAAAAAAAAFV+OJu0iddDsexbRu3QqDnCgAAAEAAAABvgrIfpOKxNnxWRUfopXlQBAAAAAA==@yahoo.com>



> -----Original Message-----
> From: Imran Ahmed Shah [mailto:ias_pk at yahoo.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, November 08, 2011 12:35 AM
> To: 'governance at lists.cpsr.org'; 'Adam Peake'; 'Lee W McKnight'
> Cc: 'Daniel Kalchev'
> Subject: RE: [governance] Is really Bulgarian Cyrillic .бг (.bg) similar
to other
> Latin ccTLDs?
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: governance at lists.cpsr.org [mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org] On
> > Behalf Of Adam Peake
> > Sent: Monday, November 07, 2011 06:43 PM
> > To: governance at lists.cpsr.org; Lee W McKnight
> > Cc: Daniel Kalchev
> > Subject: Re: [governance] Is really Bulgarian Cyrillic .бг (.bg)
> > similar to other Latin ccTLDs?
> >
> > How about we suggest no ascii should be used under an idn ccTLD. If
> > there's cyrillic at the second, third etc level then no one's going to
> > confuse that with Brazil.
> 
> [IAS:] If you would like to propose only Cyrillic characters will be
allowed for
> IDN.IDN (Cyrillic.бг) for Bulgaria, where ASCI.бг will not allowed, just
to
> create a significant differentiation this is a Cyrillic IDN domain.
> 1. Please not that this is again different from the Fast Track  Program
> implementation process where 1-IDN+ASCI.IDN is allowed.
> 2. How the users will be educated to be able to understand that what's
mean
> what.
> 3. Today, Cyrillic-IDN.com & Cyrillic-IDN.net is already allowed, the
above
> education will not work in all cases.
> 4. Cyrillic-IDN.bg might be allowed now or in future, so again the formula
will
> not work to establish a common understanding.
> 
> > Still think taking this to the Ombudsman would be worthwhile. He might
> > not be able to make recommendations to help BG, but could provide
> > advice for[IAS:] the new gTLD round.
> [IAS:] Ombudsman would be useful for the followings:
> 1.	To provide an example to be followed as precedent when the rules
> and bylaws do not able to resolve the conflict.
> 2.	To prevent further decisions on weak backgrounds or against the
> demand of user's requirements.
> However, I think appeal with Ombudsman would only be workable,
> a.	if the case is submitted by including Bulgarian government
> representative (applicant)
[IAS:] Till now, we have no representative from the Applicant (.бг) is
appeared in the discussion, however I hope, Mr Daniel can bring them on IGC
mailing list and can engage them to take next step with sharing thoughts and
planning.

> b.	and we should know all about the consumer,
[IAS:] Required

> c.	consumer rights,
[IAS:] Required

> d.	decision against the consumer rights,
[IAS:]  .. and what is missing in the policy, what is the main cause and
reason of this conflict.
[IAS:] i.e. already under discussion, the refusal by ICANN on basis of DNS
Stability Panel declaration that . бг is "confusingly similar" (with some
other letters).

> e.	other similar examples and decisions made by the authority,
[IAS:] as mentioned by Daniel that Greek example is same, they were allowed
be Bulgaria is not.

> f.	required solution / (to be proposed for helping Ombudsman for
> quick decision making)
[IAS:] Required

> and
> g.	if the IGC support this action, we should draft and propose a policy
in
> global prospect not only for the бг, however .бг example can be used.
[IAS:] as we also discussed and agreed about writing letter to ICANN's Board
and ALAC

> 
> Thanks
> 
> Imran Ahmad Shah
> 
> > Adam
> >
> >
> >
> > 2011/11/6 Lee W McKnight <lmcknigh at syr.edu>:
> > > I agree with the direction Avri and Imran have taken the suggested
> > language for the letter.
> > >
> > > And disagree with all due respect, with Paul that there is any point
> > > at trying
> > to get a he said-she said apology process going.
> > >
> > > Let's just encourage ICANN to move on towards an open and
> > > transparent
> > process in next phase.
> > >
> > > Which coincidentally sets stage for a belated .бг (.bg) remedy; with
> > > noone
> > making or asking for apologies.
> > >
> > > Lee
> > > ________________________________________
> > > From: governance at lists.cpsr.org [governance at lists.cpsr.org] on
> > > behalf of Daniel Kalchev [daniel at digsys.bg]
> > > Sent: Saturday, November 05, 2011 4:52 PM
> > > To: governance at lists.cpsr.org
> > > Subject: Re: [governance] Is really Bulgarian Cyrillic .бг (.bg)
> > > similar to other
> > Latin ccTLDs?
> > >
> > > Paul,
> > >
> > > This is indeed an interesting proposition, but until now nether the
> > > Bulgarian
> > Government, neither ICANN has accepted the possibility that they may
> > have make a mistake at some point. It would be interesting to observe
> > if such progress is possible.
> > >
> > > Daniel
> > >
> > > On Nov 5, 2011, at 7:53 PM, Paul Lehto wrote:
> > >
> > >>
> > >> To the extent possible, a statement regarding "mutual mistake of
> > >> fact" is
> > usually grounds to get out of a contract or deal or understanding, and
> > into a new process or negotiation.   It also allows both parties to
> > save face, in that both have made a mistake.  I am not familiar enough
> > with the details of the communications and its history to know if this
> > would possibly apply or not, but if there is some basis for it, I'd
> > advocate serious consideration of making mutual mistake an element of
> > a letter urging reconsideration of this (non)decision.
> > >>
> > >> Paul Lehto, J.D.
> > >
> > >
> >
> __________________________________________________________
> > __
> > > 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
> > >
> > >
> >
> __________________________________________________________
> > __
> > 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


From ias_pk at yahoo.com  Mon Nov  7 16:21:25 2011
From: ias_pk at yahoo.com (Imran Ahmed Shah)
Date: Tue, 8 Nov 2011 02:21:25 +0500
Subject: [governance] =?UTF-8?Q?Is_really_Bulgarian_Cyrillic_=2E=D0=B1?=
 =?UTF-8?Q?=D0=B3_=28=2Ebg=29_similar_to_other_Latin_ccTLDs=3F?=
In-Reply-To: <CAN8jcvCRYZ6NEW7wZ5gXcUoronJe_R-mO7ALfAwNWarMLNKTpQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <1320558468.44394.yint-ygo-j2me@web161009.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> <CAN8jcvCRYZ6NEW7wZ5gXcUoronJe_R-mO7ALfAwNWarMLNKTpQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <!&!AAAAAAAAAAAYAAAAAAAAAFV+OJu0iddDsexbRu3QqDnCgAAAEAAAALzgMqkZz8ZPrZ4nqFTKBKoBAAAAAA==@yahoo.com>

Tina and All,
Thanks for your fair comments and sharing information and deep suggestions. 

Please find my comments here under:

> -----Original Message-----
> From: governance at lists.cpsr.org [mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org] On
> Behalf Of Tina Dam
> Sent: Sunday, November 06, 2011 11:36 PM
> To: Imran Ahmed Shah
> Cc: governance at lists.cpsr.org
> Subject: Re: [governance] Is really Bulgarian Cyrillic .бг (.bg) similar to other
> Latin ccTLDs?
> 
> Imran, all,
> I really would like to be as helpful as possible, but nothing is non-official :)
> and it really must be clear I cannot and am not speaking on behalf of ICANN.
> 
> I hope the following might help instead. I am not arguing that this is a solution
> of any kind for the specific case at hand, but just providing some options and
> some information.
> 
> First, please recall that the Fast Track Process is limited in it's scope, and that
> ICANN staff simply is following that process and cannot make any deviations
> from it. One of the limitations unde the Fast TRack Process has to do with
> confusable strings.
> 
> Confusability between strings is and has been a highly debated subject when
> it comes to the introductions of IDNs. And rightfully so. We have seen the
> issues early on (early 2000) in the second-level IDN implementations, where
> no barrier or protection was in place against confusable strings. The result
> was phishing attacks and browser developers that were reluctant to
> implement IDNs.
> 
> On a first implementation of IDNs at the top-level I think, with that
> experience, it is entirely appropriate to have restrictions in place to avoid
> issues - that is, avoid issues for the end-users (primarily registrants and
> people that use the addresses by accessing the sites, but also registrars,
> registries and application developers).
> 
> As it was said alot among groups of these back in the early IDN days:
> One day some somebody is going to make a lawsuit against a phishing attack.
> Who will they sue: the registrant of the phishing domain name, the registrar,
> the registry, or the browser that send them to a place they did not intent to
> go to, or someone else? The answer is not straightforward, but we definitely
> saw application developers not wanting to be liable for that. Hence reluctant
> to implement IDNs and if that is the case we are nowhere because IDNs are
> not usable.
> 
> See more here: http://blog.icann.org/2008/11/compliance-with-idn-
> technical-requirements/
[IAS:] I do not agree with the following problem (which is given as example in the article):
".....One specific example of this is paypal.com, where the “a”‘s are Cyrillic characters and the rest are Latin letters. This address is visually the same as paypal.com (all in Latin letters), but physically, to the computer, these are two different addresses. This is damaging the uniqueness principle of the DNS – probably the most important principle of the DNS and what makes it work in a stable manner."

[IAS:] Because this example state a mix IDN+ASCI(Latin) letters, used with in word. This is neither a DNS Poisoning nor DNS Stability issue. Because the if a visual reader of any of its state, will use only ASCI (Latin) letters to type the domain name, even some one is able to register, host or advertise this mix-languages word. There is common reason to use. However, as visual confusability or similarity for phishing attacks is an email system breakdown or failure and that is a separate issue, which is still open, and beyond the Fast Track Implementation process.

> 
> I can say that I fully agree with an initial, careful approach, that then can be
> expanded later on if it turns out it was too restrictive.
> See more below on future developments.
> 
> However, and unfortunately the limitations means that not all countries can
> (i) participate in the process, e.g. countries where the official languages are
> based on Latin, and/or (ii) get their first choice or preferred string as an
> Internationalized ccTLD.
> 
> But, it was agreed in the community that it was better to allow a limited set
> of Internationalized ccTLDs to move forward and be delegated, than force
> those where no questions or issues remained to wait until a solution was
> available for all.
> 
> Of options looking forward I see several. Again, I would not claim that either
> are applicable or desired by any country, but simply listing them for your
> reference.
> 
> 1) If the preferred string, or first choice was not available for delegation
> through Fast Track, then select the second choice instead.
> I would probably make that a strong recommendation because a) it results in
> a quick delivery of an Internationalized ccTLD, and b) it avoid any conflicts or
> contentions against new gTLDs down the road.
> 
> A country could for example decide to get the entire country name as
> Internationalized ccTLD. Some countries have already done so.
[IAS:] This decision is right in some cases where the meaningful abbreviation is not possible, Bulgaria has two options two letters (.bg) “.Бг” to three letters (.bgr) “.Блг”:
===============================
Ref: [http://www.idnnews.com/?p=9809], http://www.circleid.com/posts/scene_behind_the_screen_of_idn_cctlds/
PROS: Egypt (Misr مصر), UAE (Emarat امارات) and Al-Saudiah السعودية did not have shorter meaningful abbreviations in their Native Languages (Arabic), so, they got benefit to obtain meaningful abbreviations for IDN ccTLD.

CONS: However, in my own country, in Pakistan, Public (community) may lose the sharp and smart choice of appropriate IDN ccTLD i.e. “پاک.” (PAK). Instead of getting benefit of the option of removal of two characters limitation, Pakistan will be in huge loss by applying for a longer and full name script “پاکستان.” (PAKISTAN) in Urdu Language. Every user of this new mechanism will have to type 4 extra letters to browse پاکستان.IDN-URL” or to send email onto user at IDN.IDN (such as عمران۔شاہ@اردو۔پاکستان). "
==============================
> 
> 2) Working with the ccNSO on their policy development process for the
> "long-term policy for Internationalized ccTLDs". This is the policy that is
> intended to be implemented as a replacement or update of the Fast Track
> Process. One obvious area would be to review the existing restrictions to see
> if any of these were too restrictive and could be eased. (note: I am not saying
> that they are or they should, it would require an analysis).
[IAS:] We say welcome to any long-term policy for IDN ccTLDs but we all should review the policies, and if we think that there is something wrong or something missing in it our responsibility to indicate and propose right solution, being a Technical community and Internet Governance supporters. And there should be always a margin for modification and long-term policy should keep updating, otherwise, long-term policy will become an old policy after  one or two years like Fast Track Policy.

> 
> I hope that is helpful and I am happy to answer any questions I can.
[IAS:] 
We have discussed three option up to now:
A.	Convince Applicant to revise application for three letters (.bgr) “.Блг” or full name (.Bulgaria) .Блгария
B.	To draft a letter from IGC members to ICANN Board + ALAC + ccNSO/GNSO with IGC recommendations to re-evaluate “.Бг” issue, and to formulize the options for appeal and/or flexibility in Fast Track Program.
C.	Applicant should write to the Ombudsman (or IGC may also draft letter to Ombudsman, if consumes is developed)
D.	Applicant may seek the same string as gTLD program as there are wider provisioning about the IDN facility.

The answer to option A. is no from Bulgarian public and as well as their government (the applicant) since last one year and till yesterday.
Option C is also available with the applicant but he did not exercised this option yet.
Option D is a costly solution and has many additional formalities to fulfill e.g. IPV6, DNSSEC etc. And again if all pre-requisites + Costs are managed, what are the probabilities that next DNS Panel would not take this string same as before

So, what do you and other members say about to proceed on option B or A+C both as a collective efforts.

Thanking you and Best Regards

Imran Ahmed Shah

>
> Tina
> 
> On Sat, Nov 5, 2011 at 10:47 PM, Imran Ahmed Shah <ias_pk at yahoo.com>
> wrote:
> >>As I am sure you understand I cannot speak on behalf of ICANN. So you
> > really need to ask ICANN staff.
> >
> > Yes, I understand. But you had been with ICANN, so, I think that you would
> know and may share with us un officially.
> > And you may also guide us if it is documented at any early discussion or
> ultimate document.
> >
> >>I can say that my opinion is that the IDN development is for the
> >>benefit of its users. It will also be the users that decide if they
> > want to use it or not.
> >
> > Yes, user* will have to decide to which option they adopt and not,
> however, at their-turn*.
> >
> > In order to discuss about the rights of a consumer, it is first step to define
> the consumer first.
> > The consumer or prospective consumer are the 1. Registry Operators, 2.
> The Users / Users Community.
> > If we can define the user(s) (single/plural) in terms of ICANN's IDN ccTLD
> Fast Track Program, we will be in a better position to understand their rights
> and to advocate their case very well.
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> > Regards
> >
> > Imran Ahmed Shah
> >
> >
> >
> >>On Sun, 06 Nov 2011 05:45 PKT Tina Dam wrote:>As I am sure you
> >>understand I cannot speak on behalf of ICANN. So you>really need to
> >>ask ICANN staff.>>I can say that my opinion is that the IDN
> >>development is for the>benefit of its users. It will also be the users
> >>that decide if they>want to use it or not.>>>On Sat, Nov 5, 2011 at
> >>2:33 PM, Imran Ahmed Shah <ias_pk at yahoo.com> wrote:>> Dear Tina,>>
> I
> >>am glad to seen you on the IGC CS.>> I was really thinking today, to
> >>invite you to join IGC.>>>> Thank you for offering your support. Yes,
> >>we will need your support, and there are many queries that you may
> >>answer.>>>> First and important question is that what was the ICANN's
> >>Vision and scope of utilization of an (any) IDN ccTLD allocation?>>>>
> >>It is obvious that many countries will be able to apply for ccTLD in
> >>non latin characters, but my question is about the usage, scope of the
> >>usage.>> Who will get benefit out of it after the allocation and
> >>enabling a IDN
> >  ccTLD?>>>> Thanks>>>> Imran Ahmed Shah>>>>>>>On Sun, 06 No >As I
> am
> > sure you understand I cannot speak on behalf of ICANN. So you really need
> to ask ICANN staff..
> >
> >
> > v 2011 01:41 PKT Tina Dam wrote:>Hi everybody, just letting you know
> > that I signed up to your list and>look forward to constructive
> > dialogue.>>On the Bulgarian IDN ccTLD I likely will not be able to
> > support a>letter, but I am happy to answer any questions or anything
> > else I can>do to be helpful.>>Tina>>>On Sat, Nov 5, 2011 at 10:53 AM,
> > Paul Lehto <lehto.paul at gmail.com> wrote:>>>> To the extent possible, a
> > statement regarding "mutual mistake of fact" is>> usually grounds to
> > get out of a contract or deal or understanding, and into>> a new
> > process or negotiation.   It also allows both parties to save face,
> > in>> that both have made a mistake.  I am not familiar enough with the
> > details of>> the communications and its history to know if this would
> > possibly apply or>> not, but if there is some basis for it, I'd
> > advocate serious consideration>> of making mutual mistake an element
> > of a letter urging reconsideration of>> this (non)decision.>>>> Paul>>
> > Lehto,
> >  J.D.>>>> 2011/11/5 Avri Doria <avri at acm.org>>>>>>> Hi,>>>>>> I think
> > this is a good idea.  If we can create an IGC consensus letter>>>
> > that>>>>>> a. discusses this issue>>> b. asks for a transparent review
> > of the issue>>> c. asks for a general process by which any ICANN Staff
> > decision on string>>> confusability have a method for transparent
> > review and appeal.>>>>>> I do not think we need to recommend a
> > solution, but we might recommend>>> policy considerations consistent
> > with the Affirmation of Commitments that>>> would govern such a review
> > and apeal.>>>>>> We might also want to copy the leadership of ALAC
> > when the letter is sent>>> asking for their support of such an appeal
> > mechanism.>>>>>> avri>>>>>> On 5 Nov 2011, at 00:07, Ian Peter
> > wrote:>>>>>> > Avri wrote:>>> >>>> >> Well there is a new Board now,
> > with a new chair.>>> >> All they need to do is recognize the mistake
> > and tell the staff to fix>>> >> it.>>> >> Takes a little courage, but
> > a lot>>  of
> >  people on that Board have courage.>>> >>>> > Perhaps a carefully
> > drafted letter from this Caucus would be useful in>>> > this>>> >
> > regard?>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >> From: Avri Doria
> <avri at psg.com>>>>
> > >> Reply-To: <governance at lists.cpsr.org>, Avri Doria <avri at psg.com>>>>
> > >> Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2011 21:58:57 -0400>>> >> To: IGC
> > <governance at lists.cpsr.org>>>> >> Subject: Re: [governance] Is really
> > Bulgarian Cyrillic .бг (.bg)>>> >> similar to>>> >> other Latin
> > ccTLDs?>>> >>>>> >> Well there is a new Board now, with a new
> > chair.>>> >> All they need to do is recognize the mistake and tell the
> > staff to fix>>> >> it.>>> >> Takes a little courage, but a lot of
> > people on that Board have courage.>>> >>>>> >> avri>>> >>>>> >> On 4
> > Nov 2011, at 03:16, Daniel Kalchev wrote:>>> >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>
> > On 03.11.11 18:31, Paul Lehto wrote:>>> >>>> It would seem that there
> > either is, or should be, a process to "call>>> >>>> the>>> >>>>
> > question" as they say in>>
> >  parliamentary procedure.  If not, a motion>>> >>>> can be>>> >>>>
> > made for a decision, or a letter sent citing undue delay and
> > calling>>> >>>> for a>>> >>>> decision (with or without additional
> > clarifying expertise appended to>>> >>>> it). A>>> >>>> person
> > familiar with whatever exists in terms of procedure can>>> >>>>
> > recommend the>>> >>>> best format or vehicle for forcing a
> > decision.>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>> There is no formal process to question
> > the outcome of the IDN Fast>>> >>> Track>>> >>> applications. By
> > definition, the only possible communication is>>> >>> between ICANN>>>
> > >>> "staff" (whatever that means) and the original applicant.
> > Ironically,>>> >>> even>>> >>> that country's Government does not have
> > formal way to communicate with>>> >>> ICANN>>> >>> on the
> matter.>>>
> > >>>>>> >>> Nevertheless, we are exploring every available possibility
> > for some 18>>> >>> months>>> >>> now, to understand why this situation
> > continues to persist. ICANN>>> >>>>>
> >  staff are>>> >>> very wary of any such discussions and I perfectly
> > understand their>>> >>> position.>>> >>> More so, that the principal
> > that handled this case, Tina Dam, is no>>> >>> longer>>> >>> with
> > ICANN.>>> >>> My understanding is that ICANN now recognizes they
> made
> > a mistake. But>>> >>> they>>> >>> not only made the mistake to accept
> > blindli this "expert opinion".>>> >>> They also>>> >>> made the
> > mistake to make several statements already to the effect that>>> >>>
> > "this>>> >>> is it, accept it or go away". Therefore, the problem at
> > the moment is>>> >>> how>>> >>> ICANN admits their mistake and how
> > they go out of the rising political>>> >>> problem.>>> >>> I have made
> > many proposals on how to address this, but this has been>>> >>>
> > slow>>> >>> process.. Nobody has given up anyway and it now seems
> > inevitable>>> >>> things will>>> >>> go on a more global and more
> > politicized forums.>>> >>>>>> >>> Daniel>>> >>>>>
> >  _________________________________________________________
> ___>>> >>>
> > 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>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >
> >
> __________________________________________________________
> __>>> > 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>>>>>>>>>>> -->> Paul R Lehto,
> > J.D.>> P.O. Box 1>> Ishpeming, MI  49849>> lehto.paul at gmail.com>>
> > 906-204-4026 (cell)>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >
> __________________________________________________________
> __>> 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>>>
> >
> __________________________________________________________
> __
> 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


From ias_pk at yahoo.com  Mon Nov  7 16:26:16 2011
From: ias_pk at yahoo.com (Imran Ahmed Shah)
Date: Tue, 8 Nov 2011 02:26:16 +0500
Subject: [governance] =?KOI8-R?B?SXMgcmVhbGx5IEJ1bGdhcmlhbiBDeXJpbGxp?=
 =?KOI8-R?B?YyAuwscgKC5iZykgc2ltaWxhciB0byBvdGhlciBMYXRpbiBjY1RMRHM/?=
In-Reply-To: <DFD576AA-245B-4E58-8B03-DD3BD60AF920@acm.org>
References: <CADB01BA.1E008%ian.peter@ianpeter.com> <DFD576AA-245B-4E58-8B03-DD3BD60AF920@acm.org>
Message-ID: <!&!AAAAAAAAAAAYAAAAAAAAAFV+OJu0iddDsexbRu3QqDnCgAAAEAAAAJD5YdHsHm9CnlKue2/20cEBAAAAAA==@yahoo.com>

Hi, Avri
As you were there at domainsforum at Sofia, can you share some information
about the subject thread.
Thanks
Imran Ahmad Shah

> -----Original Message-----
> From: governance at lists.cpsr.org [mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org] On
> Behalf Of Avri Doria
> Sent: Saturday, November 05, 2011 07:54 PM
> To: IGC
> Subject: Re: [governance] Is really Bulgarian Cyrillic .бг (.bg) similar
to other
> Latin ccTLDs?
> 
> Hi,
> 
> I think this is a good idea.  If we can create an IGC consensus letter
that
> 
> a. discusses this issue
> b. asks for a transparent review of the issue c. asks for a general
process by
> which any ICANN Staff decision on string confusability have a method for
> transparent review and appeal.
> 
> I do not think we need to recommend a solution, but we might recommend
> policy considerations consistent with the Affirmation of Commitments that
> would govern such a review and apeal.
> 
> We might also want to copy the leadership of ALAC when the letter is sent
> asking for their support of such an appeal mechanism.
> 
> avri
> 
> On 5 Nov 2011, at 00:07, Ian Peter wrote:
> 
> > Avri wrote:
> >
> >> Well there is a new Board now, with a new chair.
> >> All they need to do is recognize the mistake and tell the staff to fix
it.
> >> Takes a little courage, but a lot of people on that Board have courage.
> >
> > Perhaps a carefully drafted letter from this Caucus would be useful in
> > this regard?
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >> From: Avri Doria <avri at psg.com>
> >> Reply-To: <governance at lists.cpsr.org>, Avri Doria <avri at psg.com>
> >> Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2011 21:58:57 -0400
> >> To: IGC <governance at lists.cpsr.org>
> >> Subject: Re: [governance] Is really Bulgarian Cyrillic .бг (.bg)
> >> similar to other Latin ccTLDs?
> >>
> >> Well there is a new Board now, with a new chair.
> >> All they need to do is recognize the mistake and tell the staff to fix
it.
> >> Takes a little courage, but a lot of people on that Board have courage.
> >>
> >> avri
> >>
> >> On 4 Nov 2011, at 03:16, Daniel Kalchev wrote:
> >>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On 03.11.11 18:31, Paul Lehto wrote:
> >>>> It would seem that there either is, or should be, a process to
> >>>> "call the question" as they say in parliamentary procedure.  If
> >>>> not, a motion can be made for a decision, or a letter sent citing
> >>>> undue delay and calling for a decision (with or without additional
> >>>> clarifying expertise appended to it). A person familiar with
> >>>> whatever exists in terms of procedure can recommend the best format
> or vehicle for forcing a decision.
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> There is no formal process to question the outcome of the IDN Fast
> >>> Track applications. By definition, the only possible communication
> >>> is between ICANN "staff" (whatever that means) and the original
> >>> applicant. Ironically, even that country's Government does not have
> >>> formal way to communicate with ICANN on the matter.
> >>>
> >>> Nevertheless, we are exploring every available possibility for some
> >>> 18 months now, to understand why this situation continues to
> >>> persist. ICANN staff are very wary of any such discussions and I
perfectly
> understand their position.
> >>> More so, that the principal that handled this case, Tina Dam, is no
> >>> longer with ICANN.
> >>> My understanding is that ICANN now recognizes they made a mistake.
> >>> But they not only made the mistake to accept blindli this "expert
> >>> opinion". They also made the mistake to make several statements
> >>> already to the effect that "this is it, accept it or go away".
> >>> Therefore, the problem at the moment is how ICANN admits their
> >>> mistake and how they go out of the rising political problem.
> >>> I have made many proposals on how to address this, but this has been
> >>> slow process.. Nobody has given up anyway and it now seems
> >>> inevitable things will go on a more global and more politicized
forums.
> >>>
> >>> Daniel
> >>>
> __________________________________________________________
> __
> >>> 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
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> __________________________________________________________
> __
> > 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


____________________________________________________________
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


From ias_pk at yahoo.com  Mon Nov  7 17:18:17 2011
From: ias_pk at yahoo.com (Imran Ahmed Shah)
Date: Tue, 8 Nov 2011 03:18:17 +0500
Subject: [governance] =?UTF-8?Q?Is_really_Bulgarian_Cyrillic_=2E=D0=B1?=
 =?UTF-8?Q?=D0=B3_=28=2Ebg=29_similar_to_other_Latin_ccTLDs=3F?=
In-Reply-To: <CAD=1OvcSDF0_UUi__iCt7Kn2H4U0bSAAhgMmt5O53f34oiu=ZA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CADB01BA.1E008%ian.peter@ianpeter.com>	<DFD576AA-245B-4E58-8B03-DD3BD60AF920@acm.org> <CAD=1OvcSDF0_UUi__iCt7Kn2H4U0bSAAhgMmt5O53f34oiu=ZA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <!&!AAAAAAAAAAAYAAAAAAAAAFV+OJu0iddDsexbRu3QqDnCgAAAEAAAAPYCUh5710FEkBsSWibBNEgBAAAAAA==@yahoo.com>

Dear Paul and all IGC Members.

If you are interested to know that who made the mistake, please study the following comments/recommendations of 22 February 2008 with the subject of “Introduction of IDN ccTLDs - Important Suggestions for Policy preparation of FastTrack”, http://forum.icann.org/lists/idn-cctld-issues/msg00011.html  that highlight many issues but as we are discussing the naming convention, so I will discuss over here only one:

 

“Problem Identification: 

It is proposed that basis of selecting 2 letter should be resolved first. 

Now the question arises is that how this modification will be made.

For the reference of UN Authorities they already have abbreviation in 3 letters for country codes (please see http://unstats.un.org/unsd/methods/m49/m49alpha.htm)

For reference of M/s International Organization of Standardization (ISO), their systems and procedures were developed on the basis of traditional English abbreviations only to accommodate Internet Community which knows English Language. Now the requirement has been changed and demand arisen to develop Multilingual Internet to further accommodate 65% non-English Internet Users (about 820 million). So if the nonconformity is reported, International Organization Standardization has to resolve this issue by deputing their resources (support auditors) to develop well-documented nonconformity and change their standards to accommodate International Languages for the formation of Country and Regional codes of abbreviations. The criteria for the selection of abbreviations should be meaningful to adopt with in the community of the related Country/ Language. “

 

[IAS:] I have identified the problems of abbreviations and informed ICANN that the standard list that you are going to follow ISO-3166-1 two or three letters country codes is already lacking the abbreviations of the countries in their own respective language. If ICANN is following it, this list should be updated accordingly. 
I also send letters & faxes to a. ISO International Offices, b. UN Office, c. World Bank International office at the same time 
because ICANN was going to refer this document ISO-3166-1 as a standard list of the countries or territories for IDN ccTLD Fast Track Program.

 

[IAS:] The result of this initial recommendation also relaxed the two letters limitation so far…

 

[IAS:] It was better to prepare a list of Country Names and Country Code Abbreviations jointly by UN+ISO+WorldBank and each Country, each line of each country in his official language, and this list should be used as a standard of ISO by any organization, thus ICANN would follow that list and every one may be benefitted. For example, today ccTLD for each country is a standard two letter, Airlines Country Codes for each Country and City is accommodated in 3 letters. Each language community per country would be facilitated with their own abbreviations or country code name as IDN ccTLD.

 

Now you can better guess what was the one of basic problem of this system that was ignored.

 

Thanks and Regards

 

Imran Ahmad Shah

From: governance at lists.cpsr.org [mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org] On Behalf Of Paul Lehto
Sent: Saturday, November 05, 2011 10:54 PM
To: governance at lists.cpsr.org; Avri Doria
Subject: Re: [governance] Is really Bulgarian Cyrillic .бг (.bg) similar to other Latin ccTLDs?

 


To the extent possible, a statement regarding "mutual mistake of fact" is usually grounds to get out of a contract or deal or understanding, and into a new process or negotiation.   It also allows both parties to save face, in that both have made a mistake.  I am not familiar enough with the details of the communications and its history to know if this would possibly apply or not, but if there is some basis for it, I'd advocate serious consideration of making mutual mistake an element of a letter urging reconsideration of this (non)decision.

Paul Lehto, J.D.

2011/11/5 Avri Doria <avri at acm.org>

Hi,

I think this is a good idea.  If we can create an IGC consensus letter that

a. discusses this issue
b. asks for a transparent review of the issue
c. asks for a general process by which any ICANN Staff decision on string confusability have a method for transparent review and appeal.

I do not think we need to recommend a solution, but we might recommend policy considerations consistent with the Affirmation of Commitments that would govern such a review and apeal.

We might also want to copy the leadership of ALAC when the letter is sent asking for their support of such an appeal mechanism.

avri


On 5 Nov 2011, at 00:07, Ian Peter wrote:

> Avri wrote:
>
>> Well there is a new Board now, with a new chair.
>> All they need to do is recognize the mistake and tell the staff to fix it.
>> Takes a little courage, but a lot of people on that Board have courage.
>
> Perhaps a carefully drafted letter from this Caucus would be useful in this
> regard?
>
>
>
>
>> From: Avri Doria <avri at psg.com>
>> Reply-To: <governance at lists.cpsr.org>, Avri Doria <avri at psg.com>
>> Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2011 21:58:57 -0400
>> To: IGC <governance at lists.cpsr.org>
>> Subject: Re: [governance] Is really Bulgarian Cyrillic .бг (.bg) similar to
>> other Latin ccTLDs?
>>
>> Well there is a new Board now, with a new chair.
>> All they need to do is recognize the mistake and tell the staff to fix it.
>> Takes a little courage, but a lot of people on that Board have courage.
>>
>> avri
>>
>> On 4 Nov 2011, at 03:16, Daniel Kalchev wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 03.11.11 18:31, Paul Lehto wrote:
>>>> It would seem that there either is, or should be, a process to "call the
>>>> question" as they say in parliamentary procedure.  If not, a motion can be
>>>> made for a decision, or a letter sent citing undue delay and calling for a
>>>> decision (with or without additional clarifying expertise appended to it). A
>>>> person familiar with whatever exists in terms of procedure can recommend the
>>>> best format or vehicle for forcing a decision.
>>>>
>>>
>>> There is no formal process to question the outcome of the IDN Fast Track
>>> applications. By definition, the only possible communication is between ICANN
>>> "staff" (whatever that means) and the original applicant. Ironically, even
>>> that country's Government does not have formal way to communicate with ICANN
>>> on the matter.
>>>
>>> Nevertheless, we are exploring every available possibility for some 18 months
>>> now, to understand why this situation continues to persist. ICANN staff are
>>> very wary of any such discussions and I perfectly understand their position.
>>> More so, that the principal that handled this case, Tina Dam, is no longer
>>> with ICANN.
>>> My understanding is that ICANN now recognizes they made a mistake. But they
>>> not only made the mistake to accept blindli this "expert opinion". They also
>>> made the mistake to make several statements already to the effect that "this
>>> is it, accept it or go away". Therefore, the problem at the moment is how
>>> ICANN admits their mistake and how they go out of the rising political
>>> problem.
>>> I have made many proposals on how to address this, but this has been slow
>>> process.. Nobody has given up anyway and it now seems inevitable things will
>>> go on a more global and more politicized forums.
>>>
>>> Daniel
>>> ____________________________________________________________
>>> 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
>>
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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




-- 
Paul R Lehto, J.D.
P.O. Box 1 
Ishpeming, MI  49849 
lehto.paul at gmail.com
906-204-4026 (cell)







-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111108/95856a13/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, 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


From Philipp.Mirtl at oiip.ac.at  Tue Nov  8 07:08:51 2011
From: Philipp.Mirtl at oiip.ac.at (Philipp Mirtl)
Date: Tue, 8 Nov 2011 13:08:51 +0100
Subject: AW: [governance] London
Message-ID: <45460B8AE6CC454F846577DC3E9B38A058277D@srvsbs01.OIIP.local>

Hi everybody,

Here is one more link to last week's London conference on cyberspace (http://www.chathamhouse.org/node/179307). The Chatham House interviewed different people about their expectations and personal opinions on multistakeholder representation at the conference and other topics. Among others, you will also hear Alexander speaking.

Kind regards,
philipp


-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: governance at lists.cpsr.org [mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org] Im Auftrag von "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang"
Gesendet: Donnerstag, 03. November 2011 15:48
An: governance at lists.cpsr.org; Chris Buckridge; IGC
Betreff: [governance] London

http://marketplace.publicradio.org/display/web/2011/11/03/tech-report-can-nations-really-work-together-on-cybersecurity/?refid=0

Wolfgang
____________________________________________________________
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


From ajp at glocom.ac.jp  Tue Nov  8 07:44:26 2011
From: ajp at glocom.ac.jp (Adam Peake)
Date: Tue, 8 Nov 2011 21:44:26 +0900
Subject: [governance] Is really Bulgarian Cyrillic .?? (.bg) similar to
  other Latin ccTLDs?
In-Reply-To:  <CAN8jcvABYULq0Lp4q9i44mNdWrERWkyNdxsAZh_aCHp7WgZEOw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CADB01BA.1E008%ian.peter@ianpeter.com>
 <DFD576AA-245B-4E58-8B03-DD3BD60AF920@acm.org>
 <CAD=1OvcSDF0_UUi__iCt7Kn2H4U0bSAAhgMmt5O53f34oiu=ZA@mail.gmail.com>
 <348A3391-C691-4D2E-A0F9-E09F8CCF74C3@digsys.bg>
 <77A59FC9477004489D44DE7FC6840E7B03653E@SUEX10-mbx-08.ad.syr.edu>
 <CAFabd1Kbo3byWE1mVCXWTJKn3K_j=2CQW5qU1KQ8fkTgY1gqcw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAN8jcvABYULq0Lp4q9i44mNdWrERWkyNdxsAZh_aCHp7WgZEOw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <p06240817cadeaf310aa7@[192.168.1.160]>

Tina, hi.

Have to admit to a very weak understanding of 
IDN, character sets, codes, etc.  And as you 
noticed I didn't think particularly hard about my 
note before sending, if I had I wouldn't have 
mentioned third level :-)


>Hi Adam, for illustration purposes, can you tell me if the attached is
>ASCII (Latin characters) or if they are from another alphabet?


I can't tell the difference.

I'm guessing (a technically ignorant guess) that 
for a Bulgarian IDN ccTLD, registrars should be 
able to recognize if the string someone was 
trying to register was Cyrillic or not.  So, for 
example, anything that contained ascii could 
automatically be rejected.  Not correct? Not eyes 
that recognize, but software.

So I am guessing it would be possible to ensure 
no ascii string could be registered under IDN 
.BG, and if that were so then the chance of 
having a confusing string under either .BR or IDN 
.BG would be remote.

Best,

Adam



>And just to mention that it is not possible at all to control the
>third level (for registries operating with second level registrations.
>
>Tina
>
>
>2011/11/7 Adam Peake <ajp at glocom.ac.jp>:
>>  How about we suggest no ascii should be used under an idn ccTLD. If
>>  there's cyrillic at the second, third etc level then no one's going to
>>  confuse that with Brazil.
>>  Still think taking this to the Ombudsman would be worthwhile. He might
>>  not be able to make recommendations to help BG, but could provide
>>  advice for the new gTLD round.
>>  Adam
>>
>____________________________________________________________
>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
>
>
>Content-Type: 
>application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document;
>	name="adampeake.docx"
>Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="adampeake.docx"
>X-Attachment-Id: f_gupqjagq0
>
>Attachment converted: Macintosh HD:adampeake 1.docx (    /    ) (00724568)

____________________________________________________________
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


From wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de  Tue Nov  8 10:50:43 2011
From: wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de (=?iso-8859-1?Q?=22Kleinw=E4chter=2C_Wolfgang=22?=)
Date: Tue, 08 Nov 2011 16:50:43 +0100
Subject: [governance] Is the patent system broken?
References: <1320558468.44394.yint-ygo-j2me@web161009.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
 <CAN8jcvCRYZ6NEW7wZ5gXcUoronJe_R-mO7ALfAwNWarMLNKTpQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <!&!AAAAAAAAAAAYAAAAAAAAAFV+OJu0iddDsexbRu3QqDnCgAAAEAAAALzgMqkZz8ZPrZ4nqFTKBKoBAAAAAA==@yahoo.com>
Message-ID:  <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8D2C70B@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>

FYI
 
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=%2Fc%2Fa%2F2011%2F11%2F05%2FBUQP1LQN3V.DTL
 
wolfgang
____________________________________________________________
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


From tinadam at gmail.com  Tue Nov  8 17:41:30 2011
From: tinadam at gmail.com (Tina Dam)
Date: Tue, 8 Nov 2011 14:41:30 -0800
Subject: [governance] Is really Bulgarian Cyrillic .?? (.bg) similar to
 other Latin ccTLDs?
In-Reply-To: <p06240817cadeaf310aa7@192.168.1.160>
References: <CADB01BA.1E008%ian.peter@ianpeter.com>
	<DFD576AA-245B-4E58-8B03-DD3BD60AF920@acm.org>
	<CAD=1OvcSDF0_UUi__iCt7Kn2H4U0bSAAhgMmt5O53f34oiu=ZA@mail.gmail.com>
	<348A3391-C691-4D2E-A0F9-E09F8CCF74C3@digsys.bg>
	<77A59FC9477004489D44DE7FC6840E7B03653E@SUEX10-mbx-08.ad.syr.edu>
	<CAFabd1Kbo3byWE1mVCXWTJKn3K_j=2CQW5qU1KQ8fkTgY1gqcw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAN8jcvABYULq0Lp4q9i44mNdWrERWkyNdxsAZh_aCHp7WgZEOw@mail.gmail.com>
	<p06240817cadeaf310aa7@192.168.1.160>
Message-ID: <CAN8jcvDh3PZBpe07eK3xTxMK+N-F3sa3joBYrhLcGCHZqyMXYw@mail.gmail.com>

Hey Adam, no worries. It is good to discuss all ideas :)

You are correct that at the registration level it is easy for the
software to see the difference between ASCII and Cyrillic characters
and thereby avoid the registration. This means that the registration
restrictions are good to have, although, as far as I know, not
required by ICANN (maybe they should be, and maybe that is what you
are saying?).

The problem lies mostly at resolution, where if a user does not know
if it is Cyrillic or Latin characters then he/she might type in the
wrong one and go somewhere wrong.

I know a lot of people will say that this is very few and limited
cases and up to the registry to defend etc. I am not sure I agree, and
at the moment the issue has resulted in a careful adoption of IDNs at
the top-level, which I think is fine.

Just because we have problems today with strings being confusingly
similar does not mean we should expand upon that issue.

I am all up for trying to find solutions, and note that this is what
ICANN is trying to do to some extent in the variant groups, and
possible also the ccNSO in their policy development for the
"long-term" IDN ccTLD process.

Tina

On Tue, Nov 8, 2011 at 4:44 AM, Adam Peake <ajp at glocom.ac.jp> wrote:
> Tina, hi.
>
> Have to admit to a very weak understanding of IDN, character sets, codes,
> etc.  And as you noticed I didn't think particularly hard about my note
> before sending, if I had I wouldn't have mentioned third level :-)
>
>
>> Hi Adam, for illustration purposes, can you tell me if the attached is
>> ASCII (Latin characters) or if they are from another alphabet?
>
>
> I can't tell the difference.
>
> I'm guessing (a technically ignorant guess) that for a Bulgarian IDN ccTLD,
> registrars should be able to recognize if the string someone was trying to
> register was Cyrillic or not.  So, for example, anything that contained
> ascii could automatically be rejected.  Not correct? Not eyes that
> recognize, but software.
>
> So I am guessing it would be possible to ensure no ascii string could be
> registered under IDN .BG, and if that were so then the chance of having a
> confusing string under either .BR or IDN .BG would be remote.
>
> Best,
>
> Adam
>
>
>
>> And just to mention that it is not possible at all to control the
>> third level (for registries operating with second level registrations.
>>
>> Tina
>>
>>
>> 2011/11/7 Adam Peake <ajp at glocom.ac.jp>:
>>>
>>>  How about we suggest no ascii should be used under an idn ccTLD. If
>>>  there's cyrillic at the second, third etc level then no one's going to
>>>  confuse that with Brazil.
>>>  Still think taking this to the Ombudsman would be worthwhile. He might
>>>  not be able to make recommendations to help BG, but could provide
>>>  advice for the new gTLD round.
>>>  Adam
>>>
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> 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
>>
>>
>> Content-Type:
>> application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document;
>>        name="adampeake.docx"
>> Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="adampeake.docx"
>> X-Attachment-Id: f_gupqjagq0
>>
>> Attachment converted: Macintosh HD:adampeake 1.docx (    /    ) (00724568)
>
>
____________________________________________________________
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


From avri at acm.org  Wed Nov  9 02:23:48 2011
From: avri at acm.org (Avri Doria)
Date: Wed, 9 Nov 2011 09:23:48 +0200
Subject: [governance] Is really Bulgarian Cyrillic .?? (.bg) similar to
 other Latin ccTLDs?
In-Reply-To: <CAN8jcvDh3PZBpe07eK3xTxMK+N-F3sa3joBYrhLcGCHZqyMXYw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CADB01BA.1E008%ian.peter@ianpeter.com> <DFD576AA-245B-4E58-8B03-DD3BD60AF920@acm.org> <CAD=1OvcSDF0_UUi__iCt7Kn2H4U0bSAAhgMmt5O53f34oiu=ZA@mail.gmail.com> <348A3391-C691-4D2E-A0F9-E09F8CCF74C3@digsys.bg> <77A59FC9477004489D44DE7FC6840E7B03653E@SUEX10-mbx-08.ad.syr.edu> <CAFabd1Kbo3byWE1mVCXWTJKn3K_j=2CQW5qU1KQ8fkTgY1gqcw@mail.gmail.com> <CAN8jcvABYULq0Lp4q9i44mNdWrERWkyNdxsAZh_aCHp7WgZEOw@mail.gmail.com> <p06240817cadeaf310aa7@192.168.1.160> <CAN8jcvDh3PZBpe07eK3xTxMK+N-F3sa3joBYrhLcGCHZqyMXYw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <940E627A-A33C-4A5C-BA11-1211B0A49C02@acm.org>


On 9 Nov 2011, at 00:41, Tina Dam wrote:

> The problem lies mostly at resolution, where if a user does not know
> if it is Cyrillic or Latin characters then he/she might type in the
> wrong one and go somewhere wrong.


How does this happen with a TLD?

As I understand it, even if the Cyrillic or Greek look somewhat like an LDH Ascii (letters, digits and hyphen) typing in the LDH equivalent of a cyrillic TLD won't get resolved. So it might cause some frustration but no danger of going anywhere.  So confusions that might be a risk at the second level, are irrelevant at the top level.

Also, the criteria as far as I know where not possible frustration but deception and misdirection.

avri____________________________________________________________
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


From daniel at digsys.bg  Wed Nov  9 03:17:55 2011
From: daniel at digsys.bg (Daniel Kalchev)
Date: Wed, 09 Nov 2011 10:17:55 +0200
Subject: [governance] =?UTF-8?Q?Is_really_Bulgarian_Cyrillic_=2E=D0=B1?=
 =?UTF-8?Q?=D0=B3_=28=2Ebg=29_similar_to_other_Latin_ccTLDs=3F?=
In-Reply-To: <CAN8jcvDpZKoCgE-ekZNrA3VDyCqXxhuhso=4o2F8QOtXapMAUw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CADB01BA.1E008%ian.peter@ianpeter.com> <DFD576AA-245B-4E58-8B03-DD3BD60AF920@acm.org> <CAD=1OvcSDF0_UUi__iCt7Kn2H4U0bSAAhgMmt5O53f34oiu=ZA@mail.gmail.com> <348A3391-C691-4D2E-A0F9-E09F8CCF74C3@digsys.bg> <77A59FC9477004489D44DE7FC6840E7B03653E@SUEX10-mbx-08.ad.syr.edu> <CAFabd1Kbo3byWE1mVCXWTJKn3K_j=2CQW5qU1KQ8fkTgY1gqcw@mail.gmail.com> <CAN8jcvABYULq0Lp4q9i44mNdWrERWkyNdxsAZh_aCHp7WgZEOw@mail.gmail.com> <F9A0407D-FB4B-4B02-A7BC-582B6EDB87B2@christopherwilkinson.eu> <CAN8jcvDpZKoCgE-ekZNrA3VDyCqXxhuhso=4o2F8QOtXapMAUw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4EBA3733.3030202@digsys.bg>



On 07.11.11 20:03, Tina Dam wrote:
> Here it is in PDF. I was trying to show that by avoiding ASCII at
> second level does not mean that we get rid of confusion - as per
> Adam's suggestion.
>
> Tina

This is indeed true, however it brings few more questions:

1. If there is no way to avoid confusion, why is ICANN so obsessed to 
claim that .бг is indeed confusable, while it is not? It is apparently 
not confusable on its own standing, even less confusable attached to a 
second or third level string. (I have more to say on this, but it be too 
long and I am not sure I want to become an 'confusability' expert)

2. How come then ICANN is going to accept the ad-hoc working group 
recommendation to permit the Cyrillic (Bulgarian) and Greek versions of 
.EU where "we found out that these strings are really confusable, even 
if with their own versions, but because EURID promised they will 
register only Cyrillic under the Cyrillic version and only Greek under 
the Greek version, we are going to accept it". This, from memory from 
the last Dakar meeting.

Tina, while you are not in charge of the second recommendation, you 
certainly was in charge in the first.

Thing is, confusion exist for humans always. Some humans are easier 
confused than others, there is even medical terminology on this subject. 
But.. thing is, human confusion is not the business of ICANN as it is 
not their business to decide what is a country and what is not.
Before you say ICANN has a mission to avoid threats to stability and 
security of internet:
1. The .бг case (as I already cited) has clear opinion of the security 
panel that it will not lead to problems for the stability and security 
of the Internet.
2. I am fine with exact and obvious matches, for ALL involved 
characters. That is, a TLD consisting of Cyrillic or Greek characters 
that exactly match Latin (ASCII) characters should not be permitted. 
Such as (in Cyrillic) а, о, е, р, м, т (funny enough, this character was 
never considered a problem by ICANN until I brought it up in the 
Cyrillic VIP working group).

By the way, you speculate a bit about "Latin". It is ASCII, an alphabet, 
based on Latin, that is used for the original TLD names and therefore it 
is ASCII and not Latin that has to have "priority" if any.

Latin, just like Cyrillic and Greek should be "second grade" if it is so 
decided in the ICANN world.
According to some, it is even "third grade", at least for the IDN Fast 
Track process.

Daniel

____________________________________________________________
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


From daniel at digsys.bg  Wed Nov  9 03:28:10 2011
From: daniel at digsys.bg (Daniel Kalchev)
Date: Wed, 09 Nov 2011 10:28:10 +0200
Subject: [governance] =?KOI8-R?B?SXMgcmVhbGx5IEJ1bGdhcmlhbiBDeXJpbGxp?=
 =?KOI8-R?B?YyAuwscgKC5iZykgc2ltaWxhciB0byBvdGhlciBMYXRpbiBjY1RMRHM/?=
In-Reply-To: <!&!AAAAAAAAAAAYAAAAAAAAAFV+OJu0iddDsexbRu3QqDnCgAAAEAAAAC7BvLZ76TNOvsvIpvE7m4wBAAAAAA==@yahoo.com>
References: <CADB01BA.1E008%ian.peter@ianpeter.com>	<DFD576AA-245B-4E58-8B03-DD3BD60AF920@acm.org>	<CAD=1OvcSDF0_UUi__iCt7Kn2H4U0bSAAhgMmt5O53f34oiu=ZA@mail.gmail.com>	<348A3391-C691-4D2E-A0F9-E09F8CCF74C3@digsys.bg>	<77A59FC9477004489D44DE7FC6840E7B03653E@SUEX10-mbx-08.ad.syr.edu> <CAFabd1Kbo3byWE1mVCXWTJKn3K_j=2CQW5qU1KQ8fkTgY1gqcw@mail.gmail.com> <!&!AAAAAAAAAAAYAAAAAAAAAFV+OJu0iddDsexbRu3QqDnCgAAAEAAAAC7BvLZ76TNOvsvIpvE7m4wBAAAAAA==@yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <4EBA399A.1090302@digsys.bg>



On 07.11.11 21:35, Imran Ahmed Shah wrote:
> [IAS:] If you would like to propose only Cyrillic characters will be allowed
> for IDN.IDN (Cyrillic.бг) for Bulgaria,
> where ASCI.бг will not allowed, just to create a significant differentiation
> this is a Cyrillic IDN domain.
> 1. Please not that this is again different from the Fast Track  Program
> implementation process where 1-IDN+ASCI.IDN is allowed.

True. However, for people in Bulgaria, the only reason to request .бг is 
to be able to write everything in Cyrillic.

If this was not the case, the Bulgarian applicant would have accepted 
the advice by ICANN staff and select another IDN TLD. Then, they would 
have an IDN ccTLD registry to play with (there were voices within the 
Government that they want a pet ccTLD to play with or give whomever they 
wish -- these voices are not longer heard, especially as the latest 
Government was elected). In my opinion (and I don't expect anyone to 
share it, yet) such alternative names would not have been adopted, 
because users have choice where to create domain names already and they 
do understand them.

> 2. How the users will be educated to be able to understand that what's mean
> what.

This is an interesting question. We have been discussing a lot of 
options about this, including different pronunciation of the Cyrillic 
and ASCII 'bg' -- but I do not believe these belong to this list and in 
any case, .бг is still an project with undefined future and timeframe. 
We know only one thing about it: it will happen.

> 4. Cyrillic-IDN.bg might be allowed now or in future, so again the formula
> will not work to establish a common understanding.

Anyone can register IDN.bg since 5 September 2009.

Daniel

____________________________________________________________
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


From daniel at digsys.bg  Wed Nov  9 03:39:44 2011
From: daniel at digsys.bg (Daniel Kalchev)
Date: Wed, 09 Nov 2011 10:39:44 +0200
Subject: [governance] =?UTF-8?Q?Is_really_Bulgarian_Cyrillic_=2E=D0=B1?=
 =?UTF-8?Q?=D0=B3_=28=2Ebg=29_similar_to_other_Latin_ccTLDs=3F?=
In-Reply-To: <!&!AAAAAAAAAAAYAAAAAAAAAFV+OJu0iddDsexbRu3QqDnCgAAAEAAAABvgrIfpOKxNnxWRUfopXlQBAAAAAA==@yahoo.com>
References: <CADB01BA.1E008%ian.peter@ianpeter.com>	<DFD576AA-245B-4E58-8B03-DD3BD60AF920@acm.org>	<CAD=1OvcSDF0_UUi__iCt7Kn2H4U0bSAAhgMmt5O53f34oiu=ZA@mail.gmail.com>	<348A3391-C691-4D2E-A0F9-E09F8CCF74C3@digsys.bg>	<77A59FC9477004489D44DE7FC6840E7B03653E@SUEX10-mbx-08.ad.syr.edu> <CAFabd1Kbo3byWE1mVCXWTJKn3K_j=2CQW5qU1KQ8fkTgY1gqcw@mail.gmail.com> <!&!AAAAAAAAAAAYAAAAAAAAAFV+OJu0iddDsexbRu3QqDnCgAAAEAAAABvgrIfpOKxNnxWRUfopXlQBAAAAAA==@yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <4EBA3C50.6010703@digsys.bg>



On 07.11.11 22:08, Imran Ahmed Shah wrote:
>
> [IAS:] Till now, we have no representative from the Applicant (.бг) is
> appeared in the discussion, however I hope, Mr Daniel can bring them on IGC
> mailing list and can engage them to take next step with sharing thoughts and
> planning.

They claimed to be active many years participant in IGF on the Sofia 
meeting, but .. we will see.
>> e.	other similar examples and decisions made by the authority,
> [IAS:] as mentioned by Daniel that Greek example is same, they were allowed
> be Bulgaria is not.

The Greek application was, similar to the Bulgarian staled at the IDN 
Fast Track for the same reasons.

The Greek application is for .ελ (epsilon lambda). The so called "expert 
panel" has decided that this is utterly confusable with .ea.

In Cyrillic, that would be .ел and yes, the Cyrillic and Greek variants 
are confusable. This is simply because lots of Cyrillic letters are 
based by design on the Greek alphabet (that is history, reasonably well 
described in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyrillic)

When I originally discussed the opinion of the expert panel that .бг was 
confusable with my Greek colleague, his reaction was "what??? "beta 
gamma" confusable with ASCII letters??? These people need to find 
another job."

Daniel

____________________________________________________________
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


From daniel at digsys.bg  Wed Nov  9 04:10:49 2011
From: daniel at digsys.bg (Daniel Kalchev)
Date: Wed, 09 Nov 2011 11:10:49 +0200
Subject: [governance] Is really Bulgarian Cyrillic .?? (.bg) similar to
 other Latin ccTLDs?
In-Reply-To: <p06240817cadeaf310aa7@[192.168.1.160]>
References: <CADB01BA.1E008%ian.peter@ianpeter.com> <DFD576AA-245B-4E58-8B03-DD3BD60AF920@acm.org> <CAD=1OvcSDF0_UUi__iCt7Kn2H4U0bSAAhgMmt5O53f34oiu=ZA@mail.gmail.com> <348A3391-C691-4D2E-A0F9-E09F8CCF74C3@digsys.bg> <77A59FC9477004489D44DE7FC6840E7B03653E@SUEX10-mbx-08.ad.syr.edu> <CAFabd1Kbo3byWE1mVCXWTJKn3K_j=2CQW5qU1KQ8fkTgY1gqcw@mail.gmail.com> <CAN8jcvABYULq0Lp4q9i44mNdWrERWkyNdxsAZh_aCHp7WgZEOw@mail.gmail.com> <p06240817cadeaf310aa7@[192.168.1.160]>
Message-ID: <4EBA4399.9020602@digsys.bg>



On 08.11.11 14:44, Adam Peake wrote:
>
> I'm guessing (a technically ignorant guess) that for a Bulgarian IDN 
> ccTLD, registrars should be able to recognize if the string someone 
> was trying to register was Cyrillic or not. So, for example, anything 
> that contained ascii could automatically be rejected. Not correct? Not 
> eyes that recognize, but software.

Your guessing is correct. But... :)

It is not computers that may be confused. For computers, these are 
utterly different strings. In fact, for a computer, any string, no 
matter how 'similar' someone claims it to be, as long as it has even a 
single different bit - is different. period.

Now, about humans... I have been discussing this with a lot of people 
all the way since this saga began. Human brain works in such a way, that 
humans do not recognize individual letters, nor they care of their 
similarity to any other individual letter. Humans recognize words. Now, 
before someone jumps in to say domain names are not words (*) just hold 
on a bit.

There is this famous English saying "it all looks greek to me" 
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greek_to_me)
It says it all.

It is not only Cyrillic using users that will immediately recognize any 
text containing Cyrillic or ASCII as different, but also the typical 
America will too. They may not know that this is Cyrillic or Greek, but 
they will know it is not ASCII, or rather it is "strange characters". Or 
in our context: oh, this is one of those funny IDN domains.

>
> So I am guessing it would be possible to ensure no ascii string could 
> be registered under IDN .BG, and if that were so then the chance of 
> having a confusing string under either .BR or IDN .BG would be remote.
>

It is not only possible. It is certain that there will be no ASCII 
sub-domains under .бг

Daniel

____________________________________________________________
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


From williams.deirdre at gmail.com  Wed Nov  9 06:11:51 2011
From: williams.deirdre at gmail.com (Deirdre Williams)
Date: Wed, 9 Nov 2011 07:11:51 -0400
Subject: [governance] Is really Bulgarian Cyrillic .?? (.bg) similar to
 other Latin ccTLDs?
In-Reply-To: <4EBA4399.9020602@digsys.bg>
References: <CADB01BA.1E008%ian.peter@ianpeter.com> <DFD576AA-245B-4E58-8B03-DD3BD60AF920@acm.org>
 <CAD=1OvcSDF0_UUi__iCt7Kn2H4U0bSAAhgMmt5O53f34oiu=ZA@mail.gmail.com>
 <348A3391-C691-4D2E-A0F9-E09F8CCF74C3@digsys.bg> <77A59FC9477004489D44DE7FC6840E7B03653E@SUEX10-mbx-08.ad.syr.edu>
 <CAFabd1Kbo3byWE1mVCXWTJKn3K_j=2CQW5qU1KQ8fkTgY1gqcw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAN8jcvABYULq0Lp4q9i44mNdWrERWkyNdxsAZh_aCHp7WgZEOw@mail.gmail.com>
 <p06240817cadeaf310aa7@192.168.1.160> <4EBA4399.9020602@digsys.bg>
Message-ID: <CAMz5XN4HJe+65v4F7w667M6Pye=1M_Tgvb_pgiUxv9kmt38=6Q@mail.gmail.com>

Which is what I meant by "has anyone asked us?"
It is probably no longer politically correct to describe an argument as
"jesuitical", but prevaricating, dissembling and equivocating still work.
As someone else said earlier - if there is a technical issue then it
becomes ICANN's responsibility to work towards its resolution. Human error
has to be left with humans.
The computer is dealing with a pattern of on and off - 0 and 1. That
pattern must be unique otherwise the thing won't work. If I am not paying
attention and click on the wrong link then that becomes my problem, as well
as if I don't read the signs properly when driving and turn down the wrong
road.
If the strings "behind" .$% and .@& are the same, that is ICANN's (IANA's)
function, that is what the institutions were set up for, and we rely on
them to fix it
Deirdre

On 9 November 2011 05:10, Daniel Kalchev <daniel at digsys.bg> wrote:

>
>
> On 08.11.11 14:44, Adam Peake wrote:
>
>>
>> I'm guessing (a technically ignorant guess) that for a Bulgarian IDN
>> ccTLD, registrars should be able to recognize if the string someone was
>> trying to register was Cyrillic or not. So, for example, anything that
>> contained ascii could automatically be rejected. Not correct? Not eyes that
>> recognize, but software.
>>
>
> Your guessing is correct. But... :)
>
> It is not computers that may be confused. For computers, these are utterly
> different strings. In fact, for a computer, any string, no matter how
> 'similar' someone claims it to be, as long as it has even a single
> different bit - is different. period.
>
> Now, about humans... I have been discussing this with a lot of people all
> the way since this saga began. Human brain works in such a way, that humans
> do not recognize individual letters, nor they care of their similarity to
> any other individual letter. Humans recognize words. Now, before someone
> jumps in to say domain names are not words (*) just hold on a bit.
>
> There is this famous English saying "it all looks greek to me" (
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/**Greek_to_me<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greek_to_me>
> )
> It says it all.
>
> It is not only Cyrillic using users that will immediately recognize any
> text containing Cyrillic or ASCII as different, but also the typical
> America will too. They may not know that this is Cyrillic or Greek, but
> they will know it is not ASCII, or rather it is "strange characters". Or in
> our context: oh, this is one of those funny IDN domains.
>
>
>
>> So I am guessing it would be possible to ensure no ascii string could be
>> registered under IDN .BG, and if that were so then the chance of having a
>> confusing string under either .BR or IDN .BG would be remote.
>>
>>
> It is not only possible. It is certain that there will be no ASCII
> sub-domains under .бг
>
> Daniel
>
>
> ______________________________**______________________________
> 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<http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing>
>
> For all other list information and functions, see:
>    http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/**info/governance<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<http://translate.google.com/translate_t>
>
>


-- 
“The fundamental cure for poverty is not money but knowledge" Sir William
Arthur Lewis, Nobel Prize Economics, 1979
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111109/812b9d92/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, 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


From pranesh at cis-india.org  Wed Nov  9 07:39:52 2011
From: pranesh at cis-india.org (Pranesh Prakash)
Date: Wed, 09 Nov 2011 18:09:52 +0530
Subject: [governance] Russian Internet Content Monitoring System To Go Live
 In December
Message-ID: <4EBA7498.9040807@cis-india.org>

From Techdirt: http://goo.gl/j7ZkU

# Russian Internet Content Monitoring System To Go Live In December
by Glyn Moody

Wed, Nov 9th 2011 2:33am

Back in April of this year, [the Russian government put out a tender][]:

> Last week, Roskomnadzor, Russian Federal Service for Telecoms
Supervision, announced a public tender for developing Internet
monitoring system. According to the tender, the budget for such system
is 15 million rubles (about $530,000) and the job applications should be
submitted by April 15, 2011. The system needs to be developed by August
15, 2011 and the testing period should end on December 15, 2011.

The stated purpose of the monitoring system was quite specific:

> The major target of the monitoring, at least according to the Russian
officials, is not traditional media websites or blogs, but comments at
the online media outlets (it is important to note that the monitoring
system is intended to be used for the content of the sites officially
registered as online mass media).

Here’s what it would be searching for:

> Michail Vorobiev, an assistant to the head of Roskomnadzor, [told][]
[ru] Russian information agency RIA Novosti that the system’s purpose
was to discover content recognized by the Russian law as illegal. Such
system will be based on two elements: a storage that would contain
illegal materials (some sort of “thesaurus of illegal keywords”) and the
search system that will scan through the online space and compare the
online text with the illegal content in the storage.
>
>  The description of the tender is a long and openly published
[document][] [ru], so what exactly the system should look for is not a
secret. The number and the nature of goals that the search robot should
achieve are surprising. It goes ways beyond incitement of national
hatred or appeals to violence. In includes not only terrorism, appeals
to actions that threaten constitutional order, materials that disclose
classified security information, propaganda of drugs and pornography,
but also false information about federal and regional officials, as well
as content that threatens the freedom and secrecy of choice during
elections. Another interesting goal is to discover content with hidden
embedded components that seek to influence subconsciousness. If it�s not
enough, the program would monitor not only textual, but also visual
content (photos and videos).

It’s hard to see how a system costing just half-a-million dollars could
achieve all that. And as Russian commentators have pointed out, allowing
just a few months for the development and testing is equally suspicious:

> For instance, Maksim Salomatin from Park.ru [says][] [ru] that the
fact that participants of the tender should finish the work on the
system in impossible 3 months means that, probably, Roskomnadzor has in
mind some particular organization that has already worked on this program.

In other words, perhaps the whole tendering process was a formality, and
things had already been moving forward on this front in the background
for some time. Support for that theory comes from the fact that despite
the “impossible 3 months” of development, [the system will indeed be
rolled out next month][]:

> Roskomnadzor, Russian telecommunications control body, will launch
content monitoring system in December 2011, Kommersant.ru [reports][]
[ru]. The system ordered in March, 2011 (see GV analysis [here][the
Russian government put out a tender]) is now in pre-release condition.
Its documented abilities allow the monitoring of up to 5 mln keywords
published at the websites registered as online mass media outlets. It
will also monitor user comments. The experts fear that the scale of
monitoring will extend to non-registered blogs and sites.

As that points out, the danger is that once such a system is up and
running, it will be progressively extended to include first “unofficial”
media sites like blogs, and then, eventually, everything online. That
might also explain why the tender quotes such a ridiculously small
figure: the final system would be pretty expensive, but revealing that
fact in the original tender would give away the true scope.

The question then becomes: what will the authorities do with all that
information? Since 2010, Roskomnadzor has been able to require online
mass media to remove illegal comments, so it will presumably do the same
when content is flagged up by the new system. But the very breadth of
the online search is troubling, including as it does things like “false
information about federal and regional officials”, something that could
clearly be used against whistle-blowers.

Moreover, the danger here is not just for Russian citizens. Once again
we are seeing a government striving to keep a much closer watch on key
parts of the Internet — in this case, mass media sites. Assuming it
succeeds — or at least claims to have succeeded — that is likely to
encourage other countries to do the same.

Although it would be nice to think that only “repressive” governments
would even think of doing such a thing, recent proposals by politicians
in the US and Europe regarding [blocking sites][] and [spying on
users][] indicate how naïve that would be.

Follow me @glynmoody on [Twitter][] or [identi.ca][], and on [Google+][]

## Links

  [the Russian government put out a tender]:
http://globalvoicesonline.org/2011/04/01/russia-new-government-iniative-questions-the-nature-of-online-monitoring/
  [told]:
http://www.radioportal.ru/law-club/12417/roskomnadzor-khochet-postavit-onlain-smi-pod-avtomaticheskii-kontrol
  [document]:
http://zakupki.gov.ru/pgz/public/action/orders/info/common_info/show?notificationId=258425
  [says]: http://www.cnews.ru/news/top/index.shtml?2011/03/21/432836
  [the system will indeed be rolled out next month]:
http://globalvoicesonline.org/2011/10/24/russia-government-to-launch-content-monitoring-in-december-2011/
  [reports]: http://www.kommersant.ru/doc/1800370
  [blocking sites]:
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20111102/01495216589/article-e-parasite-act-that-you-need-to-read.shtml
  [spying on users]:
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20111021/11554216450/eu-politician-wants-internet-surveillance-built-into-every-operating-system.shtml
  [Twitter]: http://twitter.com/glynmoody
  [identi.ca]: http://identi.ca/glynmoody
  [Google+]: https://plus.google.com/100647702320088380533

-- 
Pranesh Prakash
Programme Manager
Centre for Internet and Society
W: http://cis-india.org | T: +91 80 40926283

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 262 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111109/59a498f2/attachment.sig>

From pouzin at well.com  Wed Nov  9 08:11:50 2011
From: pouzin at well.com (Louis Pouzin (well))
Date: Wed, 9 Nov 2011 14:11:50 +0100
Subject: [governance] Russian Internet Content Monitoring System To Go Live
 In December
In-Reply-To: <4EBA7498.9040807@cis-india.org>
References: <4EBA7498.9040807@cis-india.org>
Message-ID: <CA+EjHYpmh=WraC0NzEsHynaNUws51SCO55h1cH2DQSJM8Ro59w@mail.gmail.com>

*It seems fashionable for a number of countries to order such sniffers.
Providers are Israel, USA, maybe New Zealand, Australia. Keep the list open.
*- - -

On Wed, Nov 9, 2011 at 13:39, Pranesh Prakash <pranesh at cis-india.org> wrote:

> From Techdirt: http://goo.gl/j7ZkU
>
> # Russian Internet Content Monitoring System To Go Live In December
> by Glyn Moody
>
> Wed, Nov 9th 2011 2:33am
>
> Back in April of this year, [the Russian government put out a tender][]:
>
> > Last week, Roskomnadzor, Russian Federal Service for Telecoms
> Supervision, announced a public tender for developing Internet
> monitoring system. According to the tender, the budget for such system
> is 15 million rubles (about $530,000) and the job applications should be
> submitted by April 15, 2011. The system needs to be developed by August
> 15, 2011 and the testing period should end on December 15, 2011.
>
> The stated purpose of the monitoring system was quite specific:
>
> > The major target of the monitoring, at least according to the Russian
> officials, is not traditional media websites or blogs, but comments at
> the online media outlets (it is important to note that the monitoring
> system is intended to be used for the content of the sites officially
> registered as online mass media).
>
> Here’s what it would be searching for:
>
> > Michail Vorobiev, an assistant to the head of Roskomnadzor, [told][]
> [ru] Russian information agency RIA Novosti that the system’s purpose
> was to discover content recognized by the Russian law as illegal. Such
> system will be based on two elements: a storage that would contain
> illegal materials (some sort of “thesaurus of illegal keywords”) and the
> search system that will scan through the online space and compare the
> online text with the illegal content in the storage.
> >
> >  The description of the tender is a long and openly published
> [document][] [ru], so what exactly the system should look for is not a
> secret. The number and the nature of goals that the search robot should
> achieve are surprising. It goes ways beyond incitement of national
> hatred or appeals to violence. In includes not only terrorism, appeals
> to actions that threaten constitutional order, materials that disclose
> classified security information, propaganda of drugs and pornography,
> but also false information about federal and regional officials, as well
> as content that threatens the freedom and secrecy of choice during
> elections. Another interesting goal is to discover content with hidden
> embedded components that seek to influence subconsciousness. If it�s not
> enough, the program would monitor not only textual, but also visual
> content (photos and videos).
>
> It’s hard to see how a system costing just half-a-million dollars could
> achieve all that. And as Russian commentators have pointed out, allowing
> just a few months for the development and testing is equally suspicious:
>
> > For instance, Maksim Salomatin from Park.ru [says][] [ru] that the
> fact that participants of the tender should finish the work on the
> system in impossible 3 months means that, probably, Roskomnadzor has in
> mind some particular organization that has already worked on this program.
>
> In other words, perhaps the whole tendering process was a formality, and
> things had already been moving forward on this front in the background
> for some time. Support for that theory comes from the fact that despite
> the “impossible 3 months” of development, [the system will indeed be
> rolled out next month][]:
>
> > Roskomnadzor, Russian telecommunications control body, will launch
> content monitoring system in December 2011, Kommersant.ru [reports][]
> [ru]. The system ordered in March, 2011 (see GV analysis [here][the
> Russian government put out a tender]) is now in pre-release condition.
> Its documented abilities allow the monitoring of up to 5 mln keywords
> published at the websites registered as online mass media outlets. It
> will also monitor user comments. The experts fear that the scale of
> monitoring will extend to non-registered blogs and sites.
>
> As that points out, the danger is that once such a system is up and
> running, it will be progressively extended to include first “unofficial”
> media sites like blogs, and then, eventually, everything online. That
> might also explain why the tender quotes such a ridiculously small
> figure: the final system would be pretty expensive, but revealing that
> fact in the original tender would give away the true scope.
>
> The question then becomes: what will the authorities do with all that
> information? Since 2010, Roskomnadzor has been able to require online
> mass media to remove illegal comments, so it will presumably do the same
> when content is flagged up by the new system. But the very breadth of
> the online search is troubling, including as it does things like “false
> information about federal and regional officials”, something that could
> clearly be used against whistle-blowers.
>
> Moreover, the danger here is not just for Russian citizens. Once again
> we are seeing a government striving to keep a much closer watch on key
> parts of the Internet — in this case, mass media sites. Assuming it
> succeeds — or at least claims to have succeeded — that is likely to
> encourage other countries to do the same.
>
> Although it would be nice to think that only “repressive” governments
> would even think of doing such a thing, recent proposals by politicians
> in the US and Europe regarding [blocking sites][] and [spying on
> users][] indicate how naïve that would be.
>
> Follow me @glynmoody on [Twitter][] or [identi.ca][], and on [Google+][]
>
> ## Links
>
>  [the Russian government put out a tender]:
>
> http://globalvoicesonline.org/2011/04/01/russia-new-government-iniative-questions-the-nature-of-online-monitoring/
>  [told]:
>
> http://www.radioportal.ru/law-club/12417/roskomnadzor-khochet-postavit-onlain-smi-pod-avtomaticheskii-kontrol
>  [document]:
>
> http://zakupki.gov.ru/pgz/public/action/orders/info/common_info/show?notificationId=258425
>  [says]: http://www.cnews.ru/news/top/index.shtml?2011/03/21/432836
>  [the system will indeed be rolled out next month]:
>
> http://globalvoicesonline.org/2011/10/24/russia-government-to-launch-content-monitoring-in-december-2011/
>  [reports]: http://www.kommersant.ru/doc/1800370
>  [blocking sites]:
>
> http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20111102/01495216589/article-e-parasite-act-that-you-need-to-read.shtml
>  [spying on users]:
>
> http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20111021/11554216450/eu-politician-wants-internet-surveillance-built-into-every-operating-system.shtml
>  [Twitter]: http://twitter.com/glynmoody
>  [identi.ca]: http://identi.ca/glynmoody
>  [Google+]: https://plus.google.com/100647702320088380533
>
> --
> Pranesh Prakash
> Programme Manager
> Centre for Internet and Society
> W: http://cis-india.org | T: +91 80 40926283
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111109/d0fea749/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, 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


From daniel at digsys.bg  Wed Nov  9 08:24:20 2011
From: daniel at digsys.bg (Daniel Kalchev)
Date: Wed, 09 Nov 2011 15:24:20 +0200
Subject: [governance] Russian Internet Content Monitoring System To Go
 Live In December
In-Reply-To: <CA+EjHYpmh=WraC0NzEsHynaNUws51SCO55h1cH2DQSJM8Ro59w@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4EBA7498.9040807@cis-india.org> <CA+EjHYpmh=WraC0NzEsHynaNUws51SCO55h1cH2DQSJM8Ro59w@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4EBA7F04.80504@digsys.bg>



On 09.11.11 15:11, Louis Pouzin (well) wrote:
> /It seems fashionable for a number of countries to order such sniffers.
> Providers are Israel, USA, maybe New Zealand, Australia. Keep the list 
> open.
> /

Curious, how this is different from what Google was going for years? 
Even if it is not official, it is pretty much obvious that Google can do 
what this system suggests it can. Similar systems have existed in Russia 
for years too.

The Google scheme is somewhat different, because the victim sites are 
offered a bait in form of revenue or various pretty statistics in return 
of Google having all their content. Guess webmasters in Russia would not 
want KGB, err.. Roskomnadzor do the same, at least they will never admin 
to have agreed to it.

But yes, perhaps we start to see the first public signs of such systems 
being sold to Governments.

Daniel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111109/713119be/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, 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


From ias_pk at yahoo.com  Wed Nov  9 09:43:32 2011
From: ias_pk at yahoo.com (Imran Ahmed Shah)
Date: Wed, 9 Nov 2011 19:43:32 +0500
Subject: [governance] Is really Bulgarian Cyrillic .?? (.bg) similar to
 other Latin ccTLDs?
In-Reply-To: <CAMz5XN4HJe+65v4F7w667M6Pye=1M_Tgvb_pgiUxv9kmt38=6Q@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CADB01BA.1E008%ian.peter@ianpeter.com> <DFD576AA-245B-4E58-8B03-DD3BD60AF920@acm.org> <CAD=1OvcSDF0_UUi__iCt7Kn2H4U0bSAAhgMmt5O53f34oiu=ZA@mail.gmail.com> <348A3391-C691-4D2E-A0F9-E09F8CCF74C3@digsys.bg> <77A59FC9477004489D44DE7FC6840E7B03653E@SUEX10-mbx-08.ad.syr.edu> <CAFabd1Kbo3byWE1mVCXWTJKn3K_j=2CQW5qU1KQ8fkTgY1gqcw@mail.gmail.com> <CAN8jcvABYULq0Lp4q9i44mNdWrERWkyNdxsAZh_aCHp7WgZEOw@mail.gmail.com> <p06240817cadeaf310aa7@192.168.1.160> <4EBA4399.9020602@digsys.bg> <CAMz5XN4HJe+65v4F7w667M6Pye=1M_Tgvb_pgiUxv9kmt38=6Q@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <!&!AAAAAAAAAAAYAAAAAAAAAFV+OJu0iddDsexbRu3QqDnCgAAAEAAAADdoTFe00wNFnY2ag4804JYBAAAAAA==@yahoo.com>

Thanks Deirdre, you are right, you have given a good statement and example.

 

So, are you agree that its ICANN function to resolve it?

 

Regards

 

Imran Ahmad Shah

 

 

From: governance at lists.cpsr.org [mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org] On Behalf Of Deirdre Williams
Sent: Wednesday, November 09, 2011 04:12 PM
To: governance at lists.cpsr.org; Daniel Kalchev
Subject: Re: [governance] Is really Bulgarian Cyrillic .?? (.bg) similar to other Latin ccTLDs?

 

Which is what I meant by "has anyone asked us?" 

It is probably no longer politically correct to describe an argument as "jesuitical", but prevaricating, dissembling and equivocating still work. As someone else said earlier - if there is a technical issue then it becomes ICANN's responsibility to work towards its resolution. Human error has to be left with humans.

The computer is dealing with a pattern of on and off - 0 and 1. That pattern must be unique otherwise the thing won't work. If I am not paying attention and click on the wrong link then that becomes my problem, as well as if I don't read the signs properly when driving and turn down the wrong road. 

If the strings "behind" .$% and .@ <mailto:.@&> & are the same, that is ICANN's (IANA's) function, that is what the institutions were set up for, and we rely on them to fix it
Deirdre

 

On 9 November 2011 05:10, Daniel Kalchev <daniel at digsys.bg> wrote:



On 08.11.11 14:44, Adam Peake wrote:


I'm guessing (a technically ignorant guess) that for a Bulgarian IDN ccTLD, registrars should be able to recognize if the string someone was trying to register was Cyrillic or not. So, for example, anything that contained ascii could automatically be rejected. Not correct? Not eyes that recognize, but software.

 

Your guessing is correct. But... :)

It is not computers that may be confused. For computers, these are utterly different strings. In fact, for a computer, any string, no matter how 'similar' someone claims it to be, as long as it has even a single different bit - is different. period.

Now, about humans... I have been discussing this with a lot of people all the way since this saga began. Human brain works in such a way, that humans do not recognize individual letters, nor they care of their similarity to any other individual letter. Humans recognize words. Now, before someone jumps in to say domain names are not words (*) just hold on a bit.

There is this famous English saying "it all looks greek to me" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greek_to_me)
It says it all.

It is not only Cyrillic using users that will immediately recognize any text containing Cyrillic or ASCII as different, but also the typical America will too. They may not know that this is Cyrillic or Greek, but they will know it is not ASCII, or rather it is "strange characters". Or in our context: oh, this is one of those funny IDN domains.

 


So I am guessing it would be possible to ensure no ascii string could be registered under IDN .BG, and if that were so then the chance of having a confusing string under either .BR or IDN .BG would be remote.

 

It is not only possible. It is certain that there will be no ASCII sub-domains under .бг

Daniel



____________________________________________________________
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





 

-- 
“The fundamental cure for poverty is not money but knowledge" Sir William Arthur Lewis, Nobel Prize Economics, 1979

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111109/fa3bb70f/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, 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


From tracyhackshaw at gmail.com  Wed Nov  9 09:48:31 2011
From: tracyhackshaw at gmail.com (Tracy F. Hackshaw @ Google)
Date: Wed, 9 Nov 2011 10:48:31 -0400
Subject: [governance] Obama threatens to veto law to repeal Net Neutrality
Message-ID: <CAC0JwGMm1ieUq3p-keyLCgP_bEZpzMiMpkdtMLo_mC_ro0Fi5g@mail.gmail.com>

http://mashable.com/2011/11/08/net-neutrality-veto/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111109/1ec01218/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, 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


From wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de  Wed Nov  9 10:06:16 2011
From: wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de (=?iso-8859-1?Q?=22Kleinw=E4chter=2C_Wolfgang=22?=)
Date: Wed, 09 Nov 2011 16:06:16 +0100
Subject: AW: [governance] Is really Bulgarian Cyrillic .?? (.bg) similar to
 other Latin ccTLDs?
References: <CADB01BA.1E008%ian.peter@ianpeter.com>
 <DFD576AA-245B-4E58-8B03-DD3BD60AF920@acm.org>
 <CAD=1OvcSDF0_UUi__iCt7Kn2H4U0bSAAhgMmt5O53f34oiu=ZA@mail.gmail.com>
 <348A3391-C691-4D2E-A0F9-E09F8CCF74C3@digsys.bg>
 <77A59FC9477004489D44DE7FC6840E7B03653E@SUEX10-mbx-08.ad.syr.edu>
 <CAFabd1Kbo3byWE1mVCXWTJKn3K_j=2CQW5qU1KQ8fkTgY1gqcw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAN8jcvABYULq0Lp4q9i44mNdWrERWkyNdxsAZh_aCHp7WgZEOw@mail.gmail.com>
 <F9A0407D-FB4B-4B02-A7BC-582B6EDB87B2@christopherwilkinson.eu>
 <CAN8jcvDpZKoCgE-ekZNrA3VDyCqXxhuhso=4o2F8QOtXapMAUw@mail.gmail.com>
 <4EBA3733.3030202@digsys.bg>
Message-ID:  <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8D2C720@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>

As I can see from the ICANN website, ICANNs Rod Beckstrom had a meeting with the Bulgarian president Mr. Parvanow, the day before yesterday (November 7). Did the Bulgarian president raise the issue of .bg and what was Beckstroem response?
 
Thanks
 
wolfgang
____________________________________________________________
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


From williams.deirdre at gmail.com  Wed Nov  9 10:35:52 2011
From: williams.deirdre at gmail.com (Deirdre Williams)
Date: Wed, 9 Nov 2011 11:35:52 -0400
Subject: [governance] Is really Bulgarian Cyrillic .?? (.bg) similar to
 other Latin ccTLDs?
In-Reply-To: <!&!AAAAAAAAAAAYAAAAAAAAAFV+OJu0iddDsexbRu3QqDnCgAAAEAAAADdoTFe00wNFnY2ag4804JYBAAAAAA==@yahoo.com>
References: <CADB01BA.1E008%ian.peter@ianpeter.com> <DFD576AA-245B-4E58-8B03-DD3BD60AF920@acm.org>
 <CAD=1OvcSDF0_UUi__iCt7Kn2H4U0bSAAhgMmt5O53f34oiu=ZA@mail.gmail.com>
 <348A3391-C691-4D2E-A0F9-E09F8CCF74C3@digsys.bg> <77A59FC9477004489D44DE7FC6840E7B03653E@SUEX10-mbx-08.ad.syr.edu>
 <CAFabd1Kbo3byWE1mVCXWTJKn3K_j=2CQW5qU1KQ8fkTgY1gqcw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAN8jcvABYULq0Lp4q9i44mNdWrERWkyNdxsAZh_aCHp7WgZEOw@mail.gmail.com>
 <p06240817cadeaf310aa7@192.168.1.160> <4EBA4399.9020602@digsys.bg>
 <CAMz5XN4HJe+65v4F7w667M6Pye=1M_Tgvb_pgiUxv9kmt38=6Q@mail.gmail.com> <!&!AAAAAAAAAAAYAAAAAAAAAFV+OJu0iddDsexbRu3QqDnCgAAAEAAAADdoTFe00wNFnY2ag4804JYBAAAAAA==@yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <CAMz5XN7J4sAsSA53ZiM3mTm95QDnCw4_3CQ-Rn9tJjhQe-QmLg@mail.gmail.com>

It appears to me, as the (wo)man in the street, with perhaps a little more
technical knowledge than average but with no claim at all on technical
expertise, that this is not a specifically technical problem. Further, from
the explanations that everyone is offering, the risk involved is a risk
associated with individual human error and is a comparatively minor risk.
And finally - my own personal agenda - within a global context it makes me
uncomfortable that the Latin script should be allowed preferential
treatment. I understand that Latin script/ascii code was where it all
began. I understand that, that being the case, if the identical symbol is
used in more than one script then for practical reasons the "second" script
will have to defer to the first, and it seems that people already agree
about that necessity. Otherwise than that I think that "the benefit of the
doubt" should be exercised on the side of the non-Latin scripts.
Power needs to be exercised with balance. ICANN has the power, "we" provide
the balance.
Unless ICANN can demonstrate that EITHER this is a technical problem OR
that it has carried out a wide survey of a couple of billion people like me
and the majority claims to be confused by the two strings, then it seems to
me that Bulgaria should get what it is asking for.
I dislike having 3 person expert panels deciding for me what confuses me :-)
Based on the knowledge I currently have I would suggest that Bulgaria be
given .бг
I hope I have answered your question. Sorry to be so wordy.
Deirdre



On 9 November 2011 10:43, Imran Ahmed Shah <ias_pk at yahoo.com> wrote:

> Thanks Deirdre, you are right, you have given a good statement and example.
> ****
>
> ** **
>
> So, are you agree that its ICANN function to resolve it?****
>
> ** **
>
> Regards****
>
> ** **
>
> Imran Ahmad Shah****
>
> ** **
>
> ** **
>
> *From:* governance at lists.cpsr.org [mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org] *On
> Behalf Of *Deirdre Williams
> *Sent:* Wednesday, November 09, 2011 04:12 PM
> *To:* governance at lists.cpsr.org; Daniel Kalchev
>
> *Subject:* Re: [governance] Is really Bulgarian Cyrillic .?? (.bg)
> similar to other Latin ccTLDs?****
>
> ** **
>
> Which is what I meant by "has anyone asked us?" ****
>
> It is probably no longer politically correct to describe an argument as
> "jesuitical", but prevaricating, dissembling and equivocating still work.
> As someone else said earlier - if there is a technical issue then it
> becomes ICANN's responsibility to work towards its resolution. Human error
> has to be left with humans.****
>
> The computer is dealing with a pattern of on and off - 0 and 1. That
> pattern must be unique otherwise the thing won't work. If I am not paying
> attention and click on the wrong link then that becomes my problem, as well
> as if I don't read the signs properly when driving and turn down the wrong
> road. ****
>
> If the strings "behind" .$% and .@& are the same, that is ICANN's
> (IANA's) function, that is what the institutions were set up for, and we
> rely on them to fix it
> Deirdre****
>
> ** **
>
> On 9 November 2011 05:10, Daniel Kalchev <daniel at digsys.bg> wrote:****
>
>
>
> On 08.11.11 14:44, Adam Peake wrote:****
>
>
> I'm guessing (a technically ignorant guess) that for a Bulgarian IDN
> ccTLD, registrars should be able to recognize if the string someone was
> trying to register was Cyrillic or not. So, for example, anything that
> contained ascii could automatically be rejected. Not correct? Not eyes that
> recognize, but software.****
>
> ** **
>
> Your guessing is correct. But... :)
>
> It is not computers that may be confused. For computers, these are utterly
> different strings. In fact, for a computer, any string, no matter how
> 'similar' someone claims it to be, as long as it has even a single
> different bit - is different. period.
>
> Now, about humans... I have been discussing this with a lot of people all
> the way since this saga began. Human brain works in such a way, that humans
> do not recognize individual letters, nor they care of their similarity to
> any other individual letter. Humans recognize words. Now, before someone
> jumps in to say domain names are not words (*) just hold on a bit.
>
> There is this famous English saying "it all looks greek to me" (
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greek_to_me)
> It says it all.
>
> It is not only Cyrillic using users that will immediately recognize any
> text containing Cyrillic or ASCII as different, but also the typical
> America will too. They may not know that this is Cyrillic or Greek, but
> they will know it is not ASCII, or rather it is "strange characters". Or in
> our context: oh, this is one of those funny IDN domains.****
>
> ** **
>
>
> So I am guessing it would be possible to ensure no ascii string could be
> registered under IDN .BG, and if that were so then the chance of having a
> confusing string under either .BR or IDN .BG would be remote.****
>
> ** **
>
> It is not only possible. It is certain that there will be no ASCII
> sub-domains under .бг
>
> Daniel****
>
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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****
>
>
>
> ****
>
> ** **
>
> --
> “The fundamental cure for poverty is not money but knowledge" Sir William
> Arthur Lewis, Nobel Prize Economics, 1979****
>



-- 
“The fundamental cure for poverty is not money but knowledge" Sir William
Arthur Lewis, Nobel Prize Economics, 1979
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111109/6d479a32/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, 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


From parminder at itforchange.net  Wed Nov  9 11:10:07 2011
From: parminder at itforchange.net (parminder)
Date: Wed, 09 Nov 2011 21:40:07 +0530
Subject: [governance] Obama threatens to veto law to repeal Net
 Neutrality
In-Reply-To: <CAC0JwGMm1ieUq3p-keyLCgP_bEZpzMiMpkdtMLo_mC_ro0Fi5g@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAC0JwGMm1ieUq3p-keyLCgP_bEZpzMiMpkdtMLo_mC_ro0Fi5g@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4EBAA5DF.1080604@itforchange.net>



On Wednesday 09 November 2011 08:18 PM, Tracy F. Hackshaw @ Google wrote:
>
> http://mashable.com/2011/11/08/net-neutrality-veto/
>

It is a travesty of a supposed global internet, that in some people's 
fantasy is supposed to be shaped by (equal) participation of all, that 
whether the world will have net neutrality, and if so, what model of net 
neutrality, will largely be decided by US politics. And net neutrality 
is at the very core of what kind of Internet we will have in the future; 
it denotes a full paradigm.

As a person who values his freedom and political rights, this situation 
bothers me rather deeply, which is the reason for efforts towards a more 
democratic regime for political shaping of the Internet.

parminder


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111109/e6c34d73/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, 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


From vanda at uol.com.br  Wed Nov  9 11:28:55 2011
From: vanda at uol.com.br (Vanda UOL)
Date: Wed, 9 Nov 2011 14:28:55 -0200
Subject: RES: [governance] From the Google Policy Blog
In-Reply-To: <779DA2F8-DF5A-4194-A8CA-D68781541B61@consensus.pro>
References: <CACAaNxirbJKjtzqWb8SyT9Kvrrnc=7XSNQm32pDn4+x-ZMuMhg@mail.gmail.com> <4EB5AFDC.9040904@uni-graz.at> <CACTo+v9pEOyA1-W3mS13VEOU2k806kCf-MHiu7qHbAdXq6gDag@mail.gmail.com> <779DA2F8-DF5A-4194-A8CA-D68781541B61@consensus.pro>
Message-ID: <002801cc9efc$b1036a40$130a3ec0$@uol.com.br>

Nick
 Totally agree. The reasons to convince countries to keep internet open can be many and all are perfectly valid. This is one rare case where the say "the ends justify the means" has a reason to exist. 
Best,
-----Mensagem original-----
De: governance at lists.cpsr.org [mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org] Em nome de Nick Ashton-Hart
Enviada em: sábado, 5 de novembro de 2011 21:05
Para: governance at lists.cpsr.org; Mawaki Chango
Assunto: Re: [governance] From the Google Policy Blog

Dear Matthias and Mawaki:

I think you can either see the glass as half full or half empty. 

Companies are declaring that they have a stake in the Internet being open, and not closed. Given that there are many voices who want the internet to be the opposite, it seems to me that you have more in common with these companies on this issue than you do differences. 

Being completely frank, there are many countries that aren't interested in human rights at all - but they are interested in economic arguments. If an economic argument for the open Internet helps countries with weak human rights records to see that they have an interest in keeping the Internet open for economic reasons, that's helpful to the overall goal, it seems to me. Do you really care if the open Internet facilitates commerce as well as free speech?

I think we all recognise that the Internet as we know it is under threat from many quarters; those of us who want to keep it open and free need to focus on what we have in common rather than on differences in how the message is put by different stakeholders.

Regards, Nick 

PS: anything I ever say here is entirely personal and unrelated to my professional life.

On 5 Nov 2011, at 15:23, Mawaki Chango wrote:

> I do not see Facebook among the endorsers! Talking about cross-border 
> data flows in this day and age, and the nb. 1 online social networking 
> company is missing? Perhaps if you throw in there a single positive 
> mention of human rights you may end up with even less endorsers. Is 
> this (intended to be) anything more than a coalition of companies 
> petitioning their government to secure predictable --and friendly, 
> while at it-- environment for their business to thrive worldwide?
> Best,
> 
> Mawaki
> 
> On Sat, Nov 5, 2011 at 5:51 PM, Matthias C. Kettemann 
> <matthias.kettemann at uni-graz.at> wrote:
>> It's actually quite disappointing that the six-page principles 
>> outlining "priorities for the business community" do not contain a 
>> single reference to "human rights".
>> 
>> When the document refers to the need of establishing "international 
>> commitments" on, inter alia, "expressly prohibit[ing] restrictions on 
>> legitimate cross‐border information flows", the narrow focus becomes 
>> very much apparent. These commitments already largely exist: they are 
>> called human rights.
>> 
>> Clearly, a business case can be (also) made for human rights diplomacy.
>> Relying on existing human rights law and calling states to account 
>> for violations of information and communication freedoms is the 
>> shared responsiblity of all stakeholders, including companies.
>> 
>> The business community has shown that it is sometimes not afraid to 
>> call human rights by their name, as does for example the Global 
>> Network Initiative.
>> 
>> Kind regards
>> 
>> Matthias
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Am 05.11.2011 13:56, schrieb McTim:
>> 
>> Advancing the free flow of information
>> 
>> Friday, November 4, 2011 at 12:28 PM ET
>> 
>> Posted by Winter Casey, Senior Policy Analyst, Google
>> 
>> The global economy relies on the free flow of information more than 
>> ever before. Companies large and small can use the Internet to reach 
>> new markets, which contributes to economic growth, job creation, and 
>> increased trade around the world.
>> 
>> But as companies and individuals are transmitting more information 
>> online, some governments are seeking to impose limits on the free 
>> flow of information. More than 40 governments now block or restrict 
>> information and data available on the Internet.
>> 
>> Last year, we released a white paper demonstrating that governments 
>> which block the free flow of information on the Internet are also 
>> blocking trade and economic growth. For example, when companies can’t 
>> confidentially and confidently transmit the files and information 
>> that are necessary to keep their business running, their ability to export goods and services is hurt.
>> The thesis is simple: when countries support the free flow of 
>> information, they will see more economic growth.
>> 
>> That’s why we joined companies like Citi, Microsoft, IBM, GE and 
>> others to endorse a new set of principles endorsing the free flow of 
>> information across borders. The principles, written under the 
>> leadership of the National Foreign Trade Council, outline several 
>> priorities for the U.S. business community which will promote 
>> transparent, fair, and secure cross-border data flows.
>> 
>> Individuals and businesses will benefit from a more consistent and 
>> transparent framework for the treatment of cross-border flows of 
>> goods, services and information. We look forward to continued work 
>> with governments and industry to advance the free flow of information online.
>> 
>> ------------------
>> Principles are here:
>> http://www.nftc.org/default/Innovation/PromotingCrossBorderDataFlowsN
>> FTC.pdf
>> 
>> --
>> 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, 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
> 

____________________________________________________________
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


From ias_pk at yahoo.com  Wed Nov  9 12:01:54 2011
From: ias_pk at yahoo.com (Imran Ahmed Shah)
Date: Wed, 9 Nov 2011 22:01:54 +0500
Subject: [governance] Is really Bulgarian Cyrillic .?? (.bg) similar to
 other Latin ccTLDs?
In-Reply-To: <CAMz5XN7J4sAsSA53ZiM3mTm95QDnCw4_3CQ-Rn9tJjhQe-QmLg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CADB01BA.1E008%ian.peter@ianpeter.com> <DFD576AA-245B-4E58-8B03-DD3BD60AF920@acm.org> <CAD=1OvcSDF0_UUi__iCt7Kn2H4U0bSAAhgMmt5O53f34oiu=ZA@mail.gmail.com> <348A3391-C691-4D2E-A0F9-E09F8CCF74C3@digsys.bg> <77A59FC9477004489D44DE7FC6840E7B03653E@SUEX10-mbx-08.ad.syr.edu> <CAFabd1Kbo3byWE1mVCXWTJKn3K_j=2CQW5qU1KQ8fkTgY1gqcw@mail.gmail.com> <CAN8jcvABYULq0Lp4q9i44mNdWrERWkyNdxsAZh_aCHp7WgZEOw@mail.gmail.com> <p06240817cadeaf310aa7@192.168.1.160> <4EBA4399.9020602@digsys.bg> <CAMz5XN4HJe+65v4F7w667M6Pye=1M_Tgvb_pgiUxv9kmt38=6Q@mail.gmail.com> <!&!AAAAAAAAAAAYAAAAAAAAAFV+OJu0iddDsexbRu3QqDnCgAAAEAAAADdoTFe00wNFnY2ag4804JYBAAAAAA==@yahoo.com> <CAMz5XN7J4sAsSA53ZiM3mTm95QDnCw4_3CQ-Rn9tJjhQe-QmLg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <!&!AAAAAAAAAAAYAAAAAAAAAFV+OJu0iddDsexbRu3QqDnCgAAAEAAAAAePa+wUAlxKnjUGFaHSZqQBAAAAAA==@yahoo.com>

> Unless ICANN can demonstrate that EITHER this is a technical problem 

 

Under the Fast Track program, there is no template or frame of work was given to ICANN to demonstrate to justify the DNS Panel recommendation and its own rejection.

We have to develop a proposal for ICANN to review the issue of lacking of the dispute resolution mechanism. 

 

> problem OR that it has carried out a wide survey of a couple of billion people like me and the majority claims to be confused by the two strings 

 

We should not assume that ICANN has need to justify his decision or its power need balance, and if we want to resolve the issue in favor of applicant, we should follow some good governance.

 

[IAS:] What do we think about the competency of the technical experts of the panels or the working groups. Even they are competent enough of some degree, what is their own experience with the specific problem and willingness to study the problem to resolve it or just to refuse them. A medical doctor diagnoses disease-A of a person and prescribe antibiotic while second doctor says that we should avoid antibiotic, and at the same time the third doctor give his statement that this patient has disease-B not the disease-A and recommends antibiotic-D and next doctor rejects all other’s diagnosis and prescriptions and advise the needs immediate surgery otherwise refuse the patient and return him at home that dieses is at the stage that is beyond any treatment, just pray for him. 

 

It is fact that these examples of the issues are new to the Internet for the world and for the world most prime brains as well. But the problem is becoming critical because there is no relaxation or appeal procedure available in the Fast Track Program to address the string re-evaluation request before its delegations or after the declaration of the results mid of the way.

 

Imran

 

From: Deirdre Williams [mailto:williams.deirdre at gmail.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, November 09, 2011 08:36 PM
To: ias_pk at yahoo.com
Cc: governance at lists.cpsr.org; Daniel Kalchev
Subject: Re: [governance] Is really Bulgarian Cyrillic .?? (.bg) similar to other Latin ccTLDs?

 

It appears to me, as the (wo)man in the street, with perhaps a little more technical knowledge than average but with no claim at all on technical expertise, that this is not a specifically technical problem. Further, from the explanations that everyone is offering, the risk involved is a risk associated with individual human error and is a comparatively minor risk. And finally - my own personal agenda - within a global context it makes me uncomfortable that the Latin script should be allowed preferential treatment. I understand that Latin script/ascii code was where it all began. I understand that, that being the case, if the identical symbol is used in more than one script then for practical reasons the "second" script will have to defer to the first, and it seems that people already agree about that necessity. Otherwise than that I think that "the benefit of the doubt" should be exercised on the side of the non-Latin scripts.

Power needs to be exercised with balance. ICANN has the power, "we" provide the balance. 

Unless ICANN can demonstrate that EITHER this is a technical problem OR that it has carried out a wide survey of a couple of billion people like me and the majority claims to be confused by the two strings, then it seems to me that Bulgaria should get what it is asking for.

I dislike having 3 person expert panels deciding for me what confuses me :-)

Based on the knowledge I currently have I would suggest that Bulgaria be given .бг 

I hope I have answered your question. Sorry to be so wordy.

Deirdre

 

 

On 9 November 2011 10:43, Imran Ahmed Shah <ias_pk at yahoo.com> wrote:

Thanks Deirdre, you are right, you have given a good statement and example.

 

So, are you agree that its ICANN function to resolve it?

 

Regards

 

Imran Ahmad Shah

 

 

From: governance at lists.cpsr.org [mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org] On Behalf Of Deirdre Williams
Sent: Wednesday, November 09, 2011 04:12 PM
To: governance at lists.cpsr.org; Daniel Kalchev


Subject: Re: [governance] Is really Bulgarian Cyrillic .?? (.bg) similar to other Latin ccTLDs?

 

Which is what I meant by "has anyone asked us?" 

It is probably no longer politically correct to describe an argument as "jesuitical", but prevaricating, dissembling and equivocating still work. As someone else said earlier - if there is a technical issue then it becomes ICANN's responsibility to work towards its resolution. Human error has to be left with humans.

The computer is dealing with a pattern of on and off - 0 and 1. That pattern must be unique otherwise the thing won't work. If I am not paying attention and click on the wrong link then that becomes my problem, as well as if I don't read the signs properly when driving and turn down the wrong road. 

If the strings "behind" .$% and .@ <mailto:.@&> & are the same, that is ICANN's (IANA's) function, that is what the institutions were set up for, and we rely on them to fix it
Deirdre

 

On 9 November 2011 05:10, Daniel Kalchev <daniel at digsys.bg> wrote:



On 08.11.11 14:44, Adam Peake wrote:


I'm guessing (a technically ignorant guess) that for a Bulgarian IDN ccTLD, registrars should be able to recognize if the string someone was trying to register was Cyrillic or not. So, for example, anything that contained ascii could automatically be rejected. Not correct? Not eyes that recognize, but software.

 

Your guessing is correct. But... :)

It is not computers that may be confused. For computers, these are utterly different strings. In fact, for a computer, any string, no matter how 'similar' someone claims it to be, as long as it has even a single different bit - is different. period.

Now, about humans... I have been discussing this with a lot of people all the way since this saga began. Human brain works in such a way, that humans do not recognize individual letters, nor they care of their similarity to any other individual letter. Humans recognize words. Now, before someone jumps in to say domain names are not words (*) just hold on a bit.

There is this famous English saying "it all looks greek to me" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greek_to_me)
It says it all.

It is not only Cyrillic using users that will immediately recognize any text containing Cyrillic or ASCII as different, but also the typical America will too. They may not know that this is Cyrillic or Greek, but they will know it is not ASCII, or rather it is "strange characters". Or in our context: oh, this is one of those funny IDN domains.

 


So I am guessing it would be possible to ensure no ascii string could be registered under IDN .BG, and if that were so then the chance of having a confusing string under either .BR or IDN .BG would be remote.

 

It is not only possible. It is certain that there will be no ASCII sub-domains under .бг

Daniel



____________________________________________________________
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





 

-- 
“The fundamental cure for poverty is not money but knowledge" Sir William Arthur Lewis, Nobel Prize Economics, 1979





 

-- 
“The fundamental cure for poverty is not money but knowledge" Sir William Arthur Lewis, Nobel Prize Economics, 1979

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111109/6de27495/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, 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


From daniel at digsys.bg  Wed Nov  9 12:52:08 2011
From: daniel at digsys.bg (Daniel Kalchev)
Date: Wed, 9 Nov 2011 19:52:08 +0200
Subject: [governance] Is really Bulgarian Cyrillic .?? (.bg) similar to
 other Latin ccTLDs?
In-Reply-To: <!&!AAAAAAAAAAAYAAAAAAAAAFV+OJu0iddDsexbRu3QqDnCgAAAEAAAAAePa+wUAlxKnjUGFaHSZqQBAAAAAA==@yahoo.com>
References: <CADB01BA.1E008%ian.peter@ianpeter.com> <DFD576AA-245B-4E58-8B03-DD3BD60AF920@acm.org> <CAD=1OvcSDF0_UUi__iCt7Kn2H4U0bSAAhgMmt5O53f34oiu=ZA@mail.gmail.com> <348A3391-C691-4D2E-A0F9-E09F8CCF74C3@digsys.bg> <77A59FC9477004489D44DE7FC6840E7B03653E@SUEX10-mbx-08.ad.syr.edu> <CAFabd1Kbo3byWE1mVCXWTJKn3K_j=2CQW5qU1KQ8fkTgY1gqcw@mail.gmail.com> <CAN8jcvABYULq0Lp4q9i44mNdWrERWkyNdxsAZh_aCHp7WgZEOw@mail.gmail.com> <p06240817cadeaf310aa7@192.168.1.160> <4EBA4399.9020602@digsys.bg> <CAMz5XN4HJe+65v4F7w667M6Pye=1M_Tgvb_pgiUxv9kmt38=6Q@mail.gmail.com> <!&!AAAAAAAAAAAYAAAAAAAAAFV+OJu0iddDsexbRu3QqDnCgAAAEAAAADdoTFe00wNFnY2ag4804JYBAAAAAA==@yahoo.com> <CAMz5XN7J4sAsSA53ZiM3mTm95QDnCw4_3CQ-Rn9tJjhQe-QmLg@mail.gmail.com> <!&!AAAAAAAAAAAYAAAAAAAAAFV+OJu0iddDsexbRu3QqDnCgAAAEAAAAAePa+wUAlxKnjUGFaHSZqQBAAAAAA==@yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <5F8B9339-3CE4-4E50-BE6B-52A0B57085C2@digsys.bg>


On Nov 9, 2011, at 7:01 PM, Imran Ahmed Shah wrote:

> > Unless ICANN can demonstrate that EITHER this is a technical problem
>  
> Under the Fast Track program, there is no template or frame of work was given to ICANN to demonstrate to justify the DNS Panel recommendation and its own rejection.
> We have to develop a proposal for ICANN to review the issue of lacking of the dispute resolution mechanism.

In the IDN Fast Track documentation, there is flowchart and comments to the effect that if the panel has negative opinion of a string, ICANN staff can engage 3 member review panel to review this opinion.

My interpretation of this part of the process is that it exists as a corrective tool should the panel make any error in their findings. This panel is made of humans and humans do make errors. Further, whatever this panel decides is clearly no scientifically provable, or they could have proved their opinion so far -- this is yet another source of error, because they cannot rely on their colleagues linguists to correct their opinion.

ICANNs interpretation of this three member panel option is that it should only be invoked if the original panel decides it lacks necessary expertise and it is obvious that panel has so far claimed to be well aware that ".бг is confusingly similar. period."

I am curious as to what the opinion of Tina Dam is with regards to this option. Why it was not applied to the Bulgarian application and why everyone at ICANN thinks it need not be used.

It is very simple. ICANN does not have to admin any mistake. ICANN just needs to follow the IDN Fast Track process, to the letter, and request secondary review of the string.

Same for the Greek case, of course.

>  
> > problem OR that it has carried out a wide survey of a couple of billion people like me and the majority claims to be confused by the two strings
>  
> We should not assume that ICANN has need to justify his decision or its power need balance, and if we want to resolve the issue in favor of applicant, we should follow some good governance.

Unfortunately (for ICANN), they are not divine. Their "power" comes from two sources: the US Government and the Internet community. Displeasing either of these and ICANN may pretty much be forcibly dethroned. 

Therefore ICANN has to justify any and all of their actions or inactions.

>  
> It is fact that these examples of the issues are new to the Internet for the world and for the world most prime brains as well. But the problem is becoming critical because there is no relaxation or appeal procedure available in the Fast Track Program to address the string re-evaluation request before its delegations or after the declaration of the results mid of the way.

The Fast Track process is fine. There is nothing wrong with the process. The IDN Fast Track process needs not be fixed.

It is the way ICANN implements it, that is wrong. At least the following things are necessary to be fixed:

- ICANN should stop arguing and invoke the three member panels for both the Bulgarian and Greek applications. And for any further application that comes to similar situation.
- ICANN should follow the IDN Fast Track process as designed. In particular, as it relates to these issues, the procedure clearly says that it should loop after a 'confusability finding' with communication between the applicant, ICANN staff and the panel (presumably, this three member review panel) until either the application is successful or the applicant withdraws it.
- Any proceedings by the stability panel MUST be made public for review by the community and for the benefit of other applicants (to not make the same mistakes).

Daniel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111109/c3d42edc/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, 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


From daniel at digsys.bg  Wed Nov  9 12:54:13 2011
From: daniel at digsys.bg (Daniel Kalchev)
Date: Wed, 9 Nov 2011 19:54:13 +0200
Subject: [governance] Is really Bulgarian Cyrillic .?? (.bg) similar to
 other Latin ccTLDs?
In-Reply-To: <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8D2C720@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
References: <CADB01BA.1E008%ian.peter@ianpeter.com> <DFD576AA-245B-4E58-8B03-DD3BD60AF920@acm.org> <CAD=1OvcSDF0_UUi__iCt7Kn2H4U0bSAAhgMmt5O53f34oiu=ZA@mail.gmail.com> <348A3391-C691-4D2E-A0F9-E09F8CCF74C3@digsys.bg> <77A59FC9477004489D44DE7FC6840E7B03653E@SUEX10-mbx-08.ad.syr.edu> <CAFabd1Kbo3byWE1mVCXWTJKn3K_j=2CQW5qU1KQ8fkTgY1gqcw@mail.gmail.com> <CAN8jcvABYULq0Lp4q9i44mNdWrERWkyNdxsAZh_aCHp7WgZEOw@mail.gmail.com> <F9A0407D-FB4B-4B02-A7BC-582B6EDB87B2@christopherwilkinson.eu> <CAN8jcvDpZKoCgE-ekZNrA3VDyCqXxhuhso=4o2F8QOtXapMAUw@mail.gmail.com> <4EBA3733.3030202@digsys.bg> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8D2C720@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
Message-ID: <1F770536-CCC3-4E20-9702-CA2C01E4E1F0@digsys.bg>

That meeting was pretty much private, no publicity on it in any form. 
Rod also had a meeting with the new deputy minister, but we haven't had chance to discuss the outcome yet.

Daniel

On Nov 9, 2011, at 5:06 PM, Kleinwächter, Wolfgang wrote:

> As I can see from the ICANN website, ICANNs Rod Beckstrom had a meeting with the Bulgarian president Mr. Parvanow, the day before yesterday (November 7). Did the Bulgarian president raise the issue of .bg and what was Beckstroem response?
> 
> Thanks
> 
> wolfgang

____________________________________________________________
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


From ias_pk at yahoo.com  Wed Nov  9 13:02:51 2011
From: ias_pk at yahoo.com (Imran Ahmed Shah)
Date: Wed, 9 Nov 2011 23:02:51 +0500
Subject: [governance] =?UTF-8?Q?Is_really_Bulgarian_Cyrillic_=2E=D0=B1?=
 =?UTF-8?Q?=D0=B3_=28=2Ebg=29_similar_to_other_Latin_ccTLDs=3F?=
In-Reply-To: <4EBA3733.3030202@digsys.bg>
References: <CADB01BA.1E008%ian.peter@ianpeter.com> <DFD576AA-245B-4E58-8B03-DD3BD60AF920@acm.org> <CAD=1OvcSDF0_UUi__iCt7Kn2H4U0bSAAhgMmt5O53f34oiu=ZA@mail.gmail.com> <348A3391-C691-4D2E-A0F9-E09F8CCF74C3@digsys.bg> <77A59FC9477004489D44DE7FC6840E7B03653E@SUEX10-mbx-08.ad.syr.edu> <CAFabd1Kbo3byWE1mVCXWTJKn3K_j=2CQW5qU1KQ8fkTgY1gqcw@mail.gmail.com> <CAN8jcvABYULq0Lp4q9i44mNdWrERWkyNdxsAZh_aCHp7WgZEOw@mail.gmail.com> <F9A0407D-FB4B-4B02-A7BC-582B6EDB87B2@christopherwilkinson.eu> <CAN8jcvDpZKoCgE-ekZNrA3VDyCqXxhuhso=4o2F8QOtXapMAUw@mail.gmail.com> <4EBA3733.3030202@digsys.bg>
Message-ID: <!&!AAAAAAAAAAAYAAAAAAAAAFV+OJu0iddDsexbRu3QqDnCgAAAEAAAAAOIOnMSYyxKmZiSny2He1IBAAAAAA==@yahoo.com>

Hi Tina and Daniel
The main problem in controlling the human's brain, the computer problem may be resolved as it is programmed by the human brain.

Following is an important example:
Just like TM, TM and ™ all examples are visually similar and identification was confusing, however, the people have learned about it after usage. Now the computer recognizes these first two examples are combination of two letter of ASCII character set and differentiate (superscript the positioning as well) them T as Decimal Code 84 and M as Decimal Character 77, while the third one Symbol used for an unregistered trademark (code =0153). 

However, the user human may be confused in between ASCI two letter combination TM (superscript) and the Symbol ™. Human Brain has support of six senses and memory expands with learning through the experiments as well. 

Now, it is understood that the IDN ccTLD Fast Track program was launched only for the communities of a non-latin official language countries that understand that language exclusively. And as once upon of time (Soul workshop), you have said that the string evaluation is a matter of the country itself, so, ICANN has to delegate this IDN ccTLD without gaining the margin to apply in the new gTLD (IDN) program or the waiting for the ccNSO “long-term” policy development for IDN ccTLD. I am believe that ICANN will allow all existing TLDs to create apply for their identical IDN strings in its next program but I strongly recommend that the Fast Track issue should be resolved with in the Fast Track itself, because the ICANN is an organization to which the users of Internet depends on and ICANN would never like to leave space for the users to seek alternate pole.

Thanks

Imran Ahmed Shah
> -----Original Message-----
> From: governance at lists.cpsr.org [mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org] On
> Behalf Of Daniel Kalchev
> Sent: Wednesday, November 09, 2011 01:18 PM
> To: governance at lists.cpsr.org
> Subject: Re: [governance] Is really Bulgarian Cyrillic .бг (.bg) similar to other
> Latin ccTLDs?
> 
> 
> 
> On 07.11.11 20:03, Tina Dam wrote:
> > Here it is in PDF. I was trying to show that by avoiding ASCII at
> > second level does not mean that we get rid of confusion - as per
> > Adam's suggestion.
> >
> > Tina
> 
> This is indeed true, however it brings few more questions:
> 
> 1. If there is no way to avoid confusion, why is ICANN so obsessed to claim
> that .бг is indeed confusable, while it is not? It is apparently not confusable
> on its own standing, even less confusable attached to a second or third level
> string. (I have more to say on this, but it be too long and I am not sure I want
> to become an 'confusability' expert)
> 
> 2. How come then ICANN is going to accept the ad-hoc working group
> recommendation to permit the Cyrillic (Bulgarian) and Greek versions of .EU
> where "we found out that these strings are really confusable, even if with
> their own versions, but because EURID promised they will register only
> Cyrillic under the Cyrillic version and only Greek under the Greek version, we
> are going to accept it". This, from memory from the last Dakar meeting.
> 
> Tina, while you are not in charge of the second recommendation, you
> certainly was in charge in the first.
> 
> Thing is, confusion exist for humans always. Some humans are easier
> confused than others, there is even medical terminology on this subject.
> But.. thing is, human confusion is not the business of ICANN as it is not their
> business to decide what is a country and what is not.
> Before you say ICANN has a mission to avoid threats to stability and security
> of internet:
> 1. The .бг case (as I already cited) has clear opinion of the security panel that
> it will not lead to problems for the stability and security of the Internet.
> 2. I am fine with exact and obvious matches, for ALL involved characters. That
> is, a TLD consisting of Cyrillic or Greek characters that exactly match Latin
> (ASCII) characters should not be permitted.
> Such as (in Cyrillic) а, о, е, р, м, т (funny enough, this character was never
> considered a problem by ICANN until I brought it up in the Cyrillic VIP working
> group).
> 
> By the way, you speculate a bit about "Latin". It is ASCII, an alphabet, based
> on Latin, that is used for the original TLD names and therefore it is ASCII and
> not Latin that has to have "priority" if any.
> 
> Latin, just like Cyrillic and Greek should be "second grade" if it is so decided in
> the ICANN world.
> According to some, it is even "third grade", at least for the IDN Fast Track
> process.
> 
> Daniel
> 
> __________________________________________________________
> __
> 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


From tinadam at gmail.com  Wed Nov  9 17:03:39 2011
From: tinadam at gmail.com (Tina Dam)
Date: Wed, 9 Nov 2011 14:03:39 -0800
Subject: [governance] =?UTF-8?Q?Is_really_Bulgarian_Cyrillic_=2E=D0=B1?=
 =?UTF-8?Q?=D0=B3_=28=2Ebg=29_similar_to_other_Latin_ccTLDs=3F?=
In-Reply-To: <4EBA3733.3030202@digsys.bg>
References: <CADB01BA.1E008%ian.peter@ianpeter.com>
	<DFD576AA-245B-4E58-8B03-DD3BD60AF920@acm.org>
	<CAD=1OvcSDF0_UUi__iCt7Kn2H4U0bSAAhgMmt5O53f34oiu=ZA@mail.gmail.com>
	<348A3391-C691-4D2E-A0F9-E09F8CCF74C3@digsys.bg>
	<77A59FC9477004489D44DE7FC6840E7B03653E@SUEX10-mbx-08.ad.syr.edu>
	<CAFabd1Kbo3byWE1mVCXWTJKn3K_j=2CQW5qU1KQ8fkTgY1gqcw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAN8jcvABYULq0Lp4q9i44mNdWrERWkyNdxsAZh_aCHp7WgZEOw@mail.gmail.com>
	<F9A0407D-FB4B-4B02-A7BC-582B6EDB87B2@christopherwilkinson.eu>
	<CAN8jcvDpZKoCgE-ekZNrA3VDyCqXxhuhso=4o2F8QOtXapMAUw@mail.gmail.com>
	<4EBA3733.3030202@digsys.bg>
Message-ID: <CAN8jcvCDgNnNHArdwDP1aDWJri3mNhmxiCAs6Rzq2pGY84enYQ@mail.gmail.com>

Hey Daniel, sorry but I said before, I cannot speak on behalf of icann, nor
about the specific case.

What I was doing was providing general information for both limitations and
options.

By the way, is the applicant from Bulgaria part of this list? Maybe they
would be able to provide more information, as it is, in any event their
decision on what to disclose.

Tina
On Nov 9, 2011 12:18 AM, "Daniel Kalchev" <daniel at digsys.bg> wrote:

>
>
> On 07.11.11 20:03, Tina Dam wrote:
>
>> Here it is in PDF. I was trying to show that by avoiding ASCII at
>> second level does not mean that we get rid of confusion - as per
>> Adam's suggestion.
>>
>> Tina
>>
>
> This is indeed true, however it brings few more questions:
>
> 1. If there is no way to avoid confusion, why is ICANN so obsessed to
> claim that .бг is indeed confusable, while it is not? It is apparently not
> confusable on its own standing, even less confusable attached to a second
> or third level string. (I have more to say on this, but it be too long and
> I am not sure I want to become an 'confusability' expert)
>
> 2. How come then ICANN is going to accept the ad-hoc working group
> recommendation to permit the Cyrillic (Bulgarian) and Greek versions of .EU
> where "we found out that these strings are really confusable, even if with
> their own versions, but because EURID promised they will register only
> Cyrillic under the Cyrillic version and only Greek under the Greek version,
> we are going to accept it". This, from memory from the last Dakar meeting.
>
> Tina, while you are not in charge of the second recommendation, you
> certainly was in charge in the first.
>
> Thing is, confusion exist for humans always. Some humans are easier
> confused than others, there is even medical terminology on this subject.
> But.. thing is, human confusion is not the business of ICANN as it is not
> their business to decide what is a country and what is not.
> Before you say ICANN has a mission to avoid threats to stability and
> security of internet:
> 1. The .бг case (as I already cited) has clear opinion of the security
> panel that it will not lead to problems for the stability and security of
> the Internet.
> 2. I am fine with exact and obvious matches, for ALL involved characters.
> That is, a TLD consisting of Cyrillic or Greek characters that exactly
> match Latin (ASCII) characters should not be permitted. Such as (in
> Cyrillic) а, о, е, р, м, т (funny enough, this character was never
> considered a problem by ICANN until I brought it up in the Cyrillic VIP
> working group).
>
> By the way, you speculate a bit about "Latin". It is ASCII, an alphabet,
> based on Latin, that is used for the original TLD names and therefore it is
> ASCII and not Latin that has to have "priority" if any.
>
> Latin, just like Cyrillic and Greek should be "second grade" if it is so
> decided in the ICANN world.
> According to some, it is even "third grade", at least for the IDN Fast
> Track process.
>
> Daniel
>
> ______________________________**______________________________
> 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<http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing>
>
> For all other list information and functions, see:
>    http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/**info/governance<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<http://translate.google.com/translate_t>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111109/3bb8a62d/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, 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


From tinadam at gmail.com  Wed Nov  9 17:56:43 2011
From: tinadam at gmail.com (Tina Dam)
Date: Wed, 9 Nov 2011 14:56:43 -0800
Subject: [governance] =?WINDOWS-1251?Q?Is_really_Bulgarian_Cyrillic_?=
 =?WINDOWS-1251?Q?=2E=E1=E3_=28=2Ebg=29_similar_to_other_Latin_ccTLDs=3F?=
In-Reply-To: <!&!AAAAAAAAAAAYAAAAAAAAAFV+OJu0iddDsexbRu3QqDnCgAAAEAAAAAOIOnMSYyxKmZiSny2He1IBAAAAAA==@yahoo.com>
References: <CADB01BA.1E008%ian.peter@ianpeter.com>
	<DFD576AA-245B-4E58-8B03-DD3BD60AF920@acm.org>
	<CAD=1OvcSDF0_UUi__iCt7Kn2H4U0bSAAhgMmt5O53f34oiu=ZA@mail.gmail.com>
	<348A3391-C691-4D2E-A0F9-E09F8CCF74C3@digsys.bg>
	<77A59FC9477004489D44DE7FC6840E7B03653E@SUEX10-mbx-08.ad.syr.edu>
	<CAFabd1Kbo3byWE1mVCXWTJKn3K_j=2CQW5qU1KQ8fkTgY1gqcw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAN8jcvABYULq0Lp4q9i44mNdWrERWkyNdxsAZh_aCHp7WgZEOw@mail.gmail.com>
	<F9A0407D-FB4B-4B02-A7BC-582B6EDB87B2@christopherwilkinson.eu>
	<CAN8jcvDpZKoCgE-ekZNrA3VDyCqXxhuhso=4o2F8QOtXapMAUw@mail.gmail.com>
	<4EBA3733.3030202@digsys.bg>
	<!&!AAAAAAAAAAAYAAAAAAAAAFV+OJu0iddDsexbRu3QqDnCgAAAEAAAAAOIOnMSYyxKmZiSny2He1IBAAAAAA==@yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <CAN8jcvBD4-i4HdOE=dMPJq=PRksUaN_ac6oXiGmhHQbQ7dQzoA@mail.gmail.com>

Hi Imran, I am afraid we disagree. I don't think there is a problem
with the Fast Track. But of course ICANN will continue the required
review of the process in which you can disucss anything you find that
is a problem with it.

It was launched as limited and it functions limited.

My view is to work on other processes and/or selct another string. I
understand this is not a great solution, and maybe not a solution at
all, but it is what is available at the moment.

Tina

On Wed, Nov 9, 2011 at 10:02 AM, Imran Ahmed Shah <ias_pk at yahoo.com> wrote:
> Hi Tina and Daniel
> The main problem in controlling the human's brain, the computer problem may be resolved as it is programmed by the human brain.
>
> Following is an important example:
> Just like TM, TM and ™ all examples are visually similar and identification was confusing, however, the people have learned about it after usage. Now the computer recognizes these first two examples are combination of two letter of ASCII character set and differentiate (superscript the positioning as well) them T as Decimal Code 84 and M as Decimal Character 77, while the third one Symbol used for an unregistered trademark (code =0153).
>
> However, the user human may be confused in between ASCI two letter combination TM (superscript) and the Symbol ™. Human Brain has support of six senses and memory expands with learning through the experiments as well.
>
> Now, it is understood that the IDN ccTLD Fast Track program was launched only for the communities of a non-latin official language countries that understand that language exclusively. And as once upon of time (Soul workshop), you have said that the string evaluation is a matter of the country itself, so, ICANN has to delegate this IDN ccTLD without gaining the margin to apply in the new gTLD (IDN) program or the waiting for the ccNSO “long-term” policy development for IDN ccTLD. I am believe that ICANN will allow all existing TLDs to create apply for their identical IDN strings in its next program but I strongly recommend that the Fast Track issue should be resolved with in the Fast Track itself, because the ICANN is an organization to which the users of Internet depends on and ICANN would never like to leave space for the users to seek alternate pole.
>
> Thanks
>
> Imran Ahmed Shah
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: governance at lists.cpsr.org [mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org] On
>> Behalf Of Daniel Kalchev
>> Sent: Wednesday, November 09, 2011 01:18 PM
>> To: governance at lists.cpsr.org
>> Subject: Re: [governance] Is really Bulgarian Cyrillic .бг (.bg) similar to other
>> Latin ccTLDs?
>>
>>
>>
>> On 07.11.11 20:03, Tina Dam wrote:
>> > Here it is in PDF. I was trying to show that by avoiding ASCII at
>> > second level does not mean that we get rid of confusion - as per
>> > Adam's suggestion.
>> >
>> > Tina
>>
>> This is indeed true, however it brings few more questions:
>>
>> 1. If there is no way to avoid confusion, why is ICANN so obsessed to claim
>> that .бг is indeed confusable, while it is not? It is apparently not confusable
>> on its own standing, even less confusable attached to a second or third level
>> string. (I have more to say on this, but it be too long and I am not sure I want
>> to become an 'confusability' expert)
>>
>> 2. How come then ICANN is going to accept the ad-hoc working group
>> recommendation to permit the Cyrillic (Bulgarian) and Greek versions of .EU
>> where "we found out that these strings are really confusable, even if with
>> their own versions, but because EURID promised they will register only
>> Cyrillic under the Cyrillic version and only Greek under the Greek version, we
>> are going to accept it". This, from memory from the last Dakar meeting.
>>
>> Tina, while you are not in charge of the second recommendation, you
>> certainly was in charge in the first.
>>
>> Thing is, confusion exist for humans always. Some humans are easier
>> confused than others, there is even medical terminology on this subject.
>> But.. thing is, human confusion is not the business of ICANN as it is not their
>> business to decide what is a country and what is not.
>> Before you say ICANN has a mission to avoid threats to stability and security
>> of internet:
>> 1. The .бг case (as I already cited) has clear opinion of the security panel that
>> it will not lead to problems for the stability and security of the Internet.
>> 2. I am fine with exact and obvious matches, for ALL involved characters. That
>> is, a TLD consisting of Cyrillic or Greek characters that exactly match Latin
>> (ASCII) characters should not be permitted.
>> Such as (in Cyrillic) а, о, е, р, м, т (funny enough, this character was never
>> considered a problem by ICANN until I brought it up in the Cyrillic VIP working
>> group).
>>
>> By the way, you speculate a bit about "Latin". It is ASCII, an alphabet, based
>> on Latin, that is used for the original TLD names and therefore it is ASCII and
>> not Latin that has to have "priority" if any.
>>
>> Latin, just like Cyrillic and Greek should be "second grade" if it is so decided in
>> the ICANN world.
>> According to some, it is even "third grade", at least for the IDN Fast Track
>> process.
>>
>> Daniel
>>
>> __________________________________________________________
>> __
>> 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
>
>
____________________________________________________________
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


From ias_pk at yahoo.com  Wed Nov  9 18:23:41 2011
From: ias_pk at yahoo.com (Imran Ahmed Shah)
Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2011 04:23:41 +0500
Subject: [governance] =?KOI8-R?B?SXMgcmVhbGx5IEJ1bGdhcmlhbiBDeXJpbGxp?=
 =?KOI8-R?B?YyAuwscgKC5iZykgc2ltaWxhciB0byBvdGhlciBMYXRpbiBjY1RMRHM/?=
In-Reply-To: <CAN8jcvBD4-i4HdOE=dMPJq=PRksUaN_ac6oXiGmhHQbQ7dQzoA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CADB01BA.1E008%ian.peter@ianpeter.com>	<DFD576AA-245B-4E58-8B03-DD3BD60AF920@acm.org>	<CAD=1OvcSDF0_UUi__iCt7Kn2H4U0bSAAhgMmt5O53f34oiu=ZA@mail.gmail.com>	<348A3391-C691-4D2E-A0F9-E09F8CCF74C3@digsys.bg>	<77A59FC9477004489D44DE7FC6840E7B03653E@SUEX10-mbx-08.ad.syr.edu>	<CAFabd1Kbo3byWE1mVCXWTJKn3K_j=2CQW5qU1KQ8fkTgY1gqcw@mail.gmail.com>	<CAN8jcvABYULq0Lp4q9i44mNdWrERWkyNdxsAZh_aCHp7WgZEOw@mail.gmail.com>	<F9A0407D-FB4B-4B02-A7BC-582B6EDB87B2@christopherwilkinson.eu>	<CAN8jcvDpZKoCgE-ekZNrA3VDyCqXxhuhso=4o2F8QOtXapMAUw@mail.gmail.com>	<4EBA3733.3030202@digsys.bg>	<!&!AAAAAAAAAAAYAAAAAAAAAFV+OJu0iddDsexbRu3QqDnCgAAAEAAAAAOIOnMSYyxKmZiSny2He1IBAAAAAA==@yahoo.com> <CAN8jcvBD4-i4HdOE=dMPJq=PRksUaN_ac6oXiGmhHQbQ7dQzoA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <!&!AAAAAAAAAAAYAAAAAAAAAFV+OJu0iddDsexbRu3QqDnCgAAAEAAAAG3t1aJi7y1LpNo1mEGjgQwBAAAAAA==@yahoo.com>

> -----Original Message-----
> From: governance at lists.cpsr.org [mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org] On
> Behalf Of Tina Dam
> Sent: Thursday, November 10, 2011 03:57 AM
> To: governance at lists.cpsr.org; Imran Ahmed Shah
> Cc: Daniel Kalchev
> Subject: Re: [governance] Is really Bulgarian Cyrillic .бг (.bg) similar
to other
> Latin ccTLDs?
> 
> Hi Imran, I am afraid we disagree. ....
[IAS:] Disagree with what, the suggestion of resolving issue with in Fast
Track?

>I don't think there is a problem with the
> Fast Track. But of course ICANN will continue the required review of the
> process in which you can disucss anything you find that is a problem with
it.
> 
[IAS:] I understand that public comments will be collected in second year
review, but the same problem was discussed in the first review of Fast Track
program and even ICANN committed that a study will be made on this issue of
Bulgaria but nothing happened since last 1 year. And once may others would
have submitted new gTLDs applications, the problem will become more
complicated.

> It was launched as limited and it functions limited.
> 
> My view is to work on other processes and/or selct another string. I
> understand this is not a great solution, and maybe not a solution at all,
but it
> is what is available at the moment.
> 
> Tina
> 
> On Wed, Nov 9, 2011 at 10:02 AM, Imran Ahmed Shah <ias_pk at yahoo.com>
> wrote:
> > Hi Tina and Daniel
> > The main problem in controlling the human's brain, the computer problem
> may be resolved as it is programmed by the human brain.
> >
> > Following is an important example:
> > Just like TM, TM and T all examples are visually similar and
identification
> was confusing, however, the people have learned about it after usage. Now
> the computer recognizes these first two examples are combination of two
> letter of ASCII character set and differentiate (superscript the
positioning as
> well) them T as Decimal Code 84 and M as Decimal Character 77, while the
> third one Symbol used for an unregistered trademark (code =0153).
> >
> > However, the user human may be confused in between ASCI two letter
> combination TM (superscript) and the Symbol T. Human Brain has support of
> six senses and memory expands with learning through the experiments as
> well.
> >
> > Now, it is understood that the IDN ccTLD Fast Track program was launched
> only for the communities of a non-latin official language countries that
> understand that language exclusively. And as once upon of time (Soul
> workshop), you have said that the string evaluation is a matter of the
country
> itself, so, ICANN has to delegate this IDN ccTLD without gaining the
margin to
> apply in the new gTLD (IDN) program or the waiting for the ccNSO "long-
> term" policy development for IDN ccTLD. I am believe that ICANN will allow
> all existing TLDs to create apply for their identical IDN strings in its
next
> program but I strongly recommend that the Fast Track issue should be
> resolved with in the Fast Track itself, because the ICANN is an
organization to
> which the users of Internet depends on and ICANN would never like to leave
> space for the users to seek alternate pole.
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> > Imran Ahmed Shah
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: governance at lists.cpsr.org [mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org] On
> >> Behalf Of Daniel Kalchev
> >> Sent: Wednesday, November 09, 2011 01:18 PM
> >> To: governance at lists.cpsr.org
> >> Subject: Re: [governance] Is really Bulgarian Cyrillic .бг (.bg)
> >> similar to other Latin ccTLDs?
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On 07.11.11 20:03, Tina Dam wrote:
> >> > Here it is in PDF. I was trying to show that by avoiding ASCII at
> >> > second level does not mean that we get rid of confusion - as per
> >> > Adam's suggestion.
> >> >
> >> > Tina
> >>
> >> This is indeed true, however it brings few more questions:
> >>
> >> 1. If there is no way to avoid confusion, why is ICANN so obsessed to
> >> claim that .бг is indeed confusable, while it is not? It is
> >> apparently not confusable on its own standing, even less confusable
> >> attached to a second or third level string. (I have more to say on
> >> this, but it be too long and I am not sure I want to become an
> >> 'confusability' expert)
> >>
> >> 2. How come then ICANN is going to accept the ad-hoc working group
> >> recommendation to permit the Cyrillic (Bulgarian) and Greek versions
> >> of .EU where "we found out that these strings are really confusable,
> >> even if with their own versions, but because EURID promised they will
> >> register only Cyrillic under the Cyrillic version and only Greek
> >> under the Greek version, we are going to accept it". This, from memory
> from the last Dakar meeting.
> >>
> >> Tina, while you are not in charge of the second recommendation, you
> >> certainly was in charge in the first.
> >>
> >> Thing is, confusion exist for humans always. Some humans are easier
> >> confused than others, there is even medical terminology on this
subject.
> >> But.. thing is, human confusion is not the business of ICANN as it is
> >> not their business to decide what is a country and what is not.
> >> Before you say ICANN has a mission to avoid threats to stability and
> >> security of internet:
> >> 1. The .бг case (as I already cited) has clear opinion of the
> >> security panel that it will not lead to problems for the stability and
security
> of the Internet.
> >> 2. I am fine with exact and obvious matches, for ALL involved
> >> characters. That is, a TLD consisting of Cyrillic or Greek characters
> >> that exactly match Latin
> >> (ASCII) characters should not be permitted.
> >> Such as (in Cyrillic) а, о, е, р, м, т (funny enough, this character
> >> was never considered a problem by ICANN until I brought it up in the
> >> Cyrillic VIP working group).
> >>
> >> By the way, you speculate a bit about "Latin". It is ASCII, an
> >> alphabet, based on Latin, that is used for the original TLD names and
> >> therefore it is ASCII and not Latin that has to have "priority" if any.
> >>
> >> Latin, just like Cyrillic and Greek should be "second grade" if it is
> >> so decided in the ICANN world.
> >> According to some, it is even "third grade", at least for the IDN
> >> Fast Track process.
> >>
> >> Daniel
> >>
> >>
> __________________________________________________________
> >> __
> >> 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
> >
> >
> __________________________________________________________
> __
> 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


From daniel at digsys.bg  Thu Nov 10 02:20:52 2011
From: daniel at digsys.bg (Daniel Kalchev)
Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2011 09:20:52 +0200
Subject: [governance] =?UTF-8?Q?Is_really_Bulgarian_Cyrillic_=2E=D0=B1?=
 =?UTF-8?Q?=D0=B3_=28=2Ebg=29_similar_to_other_Latin_ccTLDs=3F?=
In-Reply-To: <CAN8jcvCDgNnNHArdwDP1aDWJri3mNhmxiCAs6Rzq2pGY84enYQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CADB01BA.1E008%ian.peter@ianpeter.com> <DFD576AA-245B-4E58-8B03-DD3BD60AF920@acm.org> <CAD=1OvcSDF0_UUi__iCt7Kn2H4U0bSAAhgMmt5O53f34oiu=ZA@mail.gmail.com> <348A3391-C691-4D2E-A0F9-E09F8CCF74C3@digsys.bg> <77A59FC9477004489D44DE7FC6840E7B03653E@SUEX10-mbx-08.ad.syr.edu> <CAFabd1Kbo3byWE1mVCXWTJKn3K_j=2CQW5qU1KQ8fkTgY1gqcw@mail.gmail.com> <CAN8jcvABYULq0Lp4q9i44mNdWrERWkyNdxsAZh_aCHp7WgZEOw@mail.gmail.com> <F9A0407D-FB4B-4B02-A7BC-582B6EDB87B2@christopherwilkinson.eu> <CAN8jcvDpZKoCgE-ekZNrA3VDyCqXxhuhso=4o2F8QOtXapMAUw@mail.gmail.com> <4EBA3733.3030202@digsys.bg> <CAN8jcvCDgNnNHArdwDP1aDWJri3mNhmxiCAs6Rzq2pGY84enYQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4EBB7B54.9040902@digsys.bg>

Tina,

I believe my questions below are in no way related to the '.бг case'. If 
the use of .бг confuses you, let's use .ελ as an example. Does that help 
to avoid 'disclosure' of the case?

We hope the applicant from Bulgaria will soon be on the list or if they 
already are reading, will decide to participate.
I have made it clear several times, that it was never my intention to 
speak on their behalf. I really do not want to speak on their behalf, 
for many different reasons.

But, you see, I am part of the Bulgarian Internet community, in several 
of my.. "capacities", such as, but not limited to - the individual 
responsible for introduction of Internet in Bulgaria some 20+ years ago, 
the individual responsible for the creation and operation of the BG 
ccTLD for the past 20 years, an active participant in the local 
consultation process within Bulgaria involved specifically with this 
case. Member of various ICANN working groups. I am not going to list any 
ISOC etc memberships, because you see, that is strictly irrelevant to 
this topic. By the way, I also pretend to understand the specifics of 
the Cyrillic script and it's relation to other scripts such as Greek or 
Latin.
I have also some other knowledge, related to this issue, that I have 
decided to remain untold. For now.

I am aware there are several other members of the Bulgarian Internet 
community who actively follow this discussion here. I have confirmed 
this in several discussions we had already, including at the recent 
domain.forum. It is their choice to speak here or not.

By the way, this 'secrecy' is one of the indeed serious flaws in the 
implementation of the IDN Fast Track process by ICANN. It serves no 
other purpose but to ruin the trust ICANN has with the community.

Daniel

On 10.11.11 00:03, Tina Dam wrote:
>
> Hey Daniel, sorry but I said before, I cannot speak on behalf of 
> icann, nor about the specific case.
>
> What I was doing was providing general information for both 
> limitations and options.
>
> By the way, is the applicant from Bulgaria part of this list? Maybe 
> they would be able to provide more information, as it is, in any event 
> their decision on what to disclose.
>
> Tina
>
> On Nov 9, 2011 12:18 AM, "Daniel Kalchev" <daniel at digsys.bg 
> <mailto:daniel at digsys.bg>> wrote:
>
>
>
>     On 07.11.11 20:03, Tina Dam wrote:
>
>         Here it is in PDF. I was trying to show that by avoiding ASCII at
>         second level does not mean that we get rid of confusion - as per
>         Adam's suggestion.
>
>         Tina
>
>
>     This is indeed true, however it brings few more questions:
>
>     1. If there is no way to avoid confusion, why is ICANN so obsessed
>     to claim that .бг is indeed confusable, while it is not? It is
>     apparently not confusable on its own standing, even less
>     confusable attached to a second or third level string. (I have
>     more to say on this, but it be too long and I am not sure I want
>     to become an 'confusability' expert)
>
>     2. How come then ICANN is going to accept the ad-hoc working group
>     recommendation to permit the Cyrillic (Bulgarian) and Greek
>     versions of .EU where "we found out that these strings are really
>     confusable, even if with their own versions, but because EURID
>     promised they will register only Cyrillic under the Cyrillic
>     version and only Greek under the Greek version, we are going to
>     accept it". This, from memory from the last Dakar meeting.
>
>     Tina, while you are not in charge of the second recommendation,
>     you certainly was in charge in the first.
>
>     Thing is, confusion exist for humans always. Some humans are
>     easier confused than others, there is even medical terminology on
>     this subject. But.. thing is, human confusion is not the business
>     of ICANN as it is not their business to decide what is a country
>     and what is not.
>     Before you say ICANN has a mission to avoid threats to stability
>     and security of internet:
>     1. The .бг case (as I already cited) has clear opinion of the
>     security panel that it will not lead to problems for the stability
>     and security of the Internet.
>     2. I am fine with exact and obvious matches, for ALL involved
>     characters. That is, a TLD consisting of Cyrillic or Greek
>     characters that exactly match Latin (ASCII) characters should not
>     be permitted. Such as (in Cyrillic) а, о, е, р, м, т (funny
>     enough, this character was never considered a problem by ICANN
>     until I brought it up in the Cyrillic VIP working group).
>
>     By the way, you speculate a bit about "Latin". It is ASCII, an
>     alphabet, based on Latin, that is used for the original TLD names
>     and therefore it is ASCII and not Latin that has to have
>     "priority" if any.
>
>     Latin, just like Cyrillic and Greek should be "second grade" if it
>     is so decided in the ICANN world.
>     According to some, it is even "third grade", at least for the IDN
>     Fast Track process.
>
>     Daniel
>
>     ____________________________________________________________
>     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, 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
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111110/eed7a062/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, 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


From daniel at digsys.bg  Thu Nov 10 02:37:17 2011
From: daniel at digsys.bg (Daniel Kalchev)
Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2011 09:37:17 +0200
Subject: [governance] =?WINDOWS-1251?Q?Is_really_Bulgarian_Cyrillic_?=
 =?WINDOWS-1251?Q?=2E=E1=E3_=28=2Ebg=29_similar_to_other_Latin_ccTLDs=3F?=
In-Reply-To: <CAN8jcvBD4-i4HdOE=dMPJq=PRksUaN_ac6oXiGmhHQbQ7dQzoA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CADB01BA.1E008%ian.peter@ianpeter.com> <DFD576AA-245B-4E58-8B03-DD3BD60AF920@acm.org> <CAD=1OvcSDF0_UUi__iCt7Kn2H4U0bSAAhgMmt5O53f34oiu=ZA@mail.gmail.com> <348A3391-C691-4D2E-A0F9-E09F8CCF74C3@digsys.bg> <77A59FC9477004489D44DE7FC6840E7B03653E@SUEX10-mbx-08.ad.syr.edu> <CAFabd1Kbo3byWE1mVCXWTJKn3K_j=2CQW5qU1KQ8fkTgY1gqcw@mail.gmail.com> <CAN8jcvABYULq0Lp4q9i44mNdWrERWkyNdxsAZh_aCHp7WgZEOw@mail.gmail.com> <F9A0407D-FB4B-4B02-A7BC-582B6EDB87B2@christopherwilkinson.eu> <CAN8jcvDpZKoCgE-ekZNrA3VDyCqXxhuhso=4o2F8QOtXapMAUw@mail.gmail.com> <4EBA3733.3030202@digsys.bg> <!&!AAAAAAAAAAAYAAAAAAAAAFV+OJu0iddDsexbRu3QqDnCgAAAEAAAAAOIOnMSYyxKmZiSny2He1IBAAAAAA==@yahoo.com> <CAN8jcvBD4-i4HdOE=dMPJq=PRksUaN_ac6oXiGmhHQbQ7dQzoA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4EBB7F2D.7070309@digsys.bg>



On 10.11.11 00:56, Tina Dam wrote:
> My view is to work on other processes and/or selct another string. I
> understand this is not a great solution, and maybe not a solution at
> all, but it is what is available at the moment.
>

Ok, let's be more specific and public then. A question to both you and 
other participants:

What follows is an excerpt from the IDN Fast Track Implementation Plan, 
19 september 2009.

How would you interpret the following table (5.5).

According to my understanding, we are sitting now, for about 20 months 
at the stage marked (B).

Now my question to you Tina, as the person at ICANN who used to be 
responsible for the design and implementation of the IDN Fast Track: 
please note, without considering ANY specific application. Please.

What follows after "Evaluation not successful, issues encountered"?

1. ICANN staff tells the applicant that they should either chose another 
string or abandon the application.
or
2. ICANN staff forms "3-member panel is formed and request listed for 
extended evaluation".


I have asked our Government to order the applicant (who happens to be 
Government employee), and they confirmed they have done this --- to ask 
"ICANN staff" (at this time, Tina Dam) to asnwer the question: "why is 
this 3-member panel not engaged to resolve the issue and more 
specifically to follow the process ICANN was instructed to follow".

Tina, I believe this Internet Governance forum deserves your explanation 
of the process.

Please, prove my interpretation of the process wrong.

Daniel

PS: Just to write it one more time: I do not see the IDN Fast Track 
process as defective or wrong. It is how ICANN implements it, that is 
utterly worrying. It has in fact demonstrated that it can deny the right 
to two (important in cultural and therefore IDN area) countries like 
Bulgaria and Greece to have the IDN TLD of their choice.

PPS: By the way, my Greek colleagues share that same view. But I do hope 
they can express it on their own.


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111110/5fdf5f07/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: hcaibejh.png
Type: image/png
Size: 154501 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111110/5fdf5f07/attachment.png>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
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


From wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de  Thu Nov 10 04:35:16 2011
From: wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de (=?iso-8859-1?Q?=22Kleinw=E4chter=2C_Wolfgang=22?=)
Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2011 10:35:16 +0100
Subject: [governance] IGC Principles
References:  <CAJwbTiA8AOK7NqTjBKLq0LSnnS=ikAGYgy+C4BUZuW8BXwtDfw@mail.gmail.com>
 <ED6D3E90-1984-4243-A83B-025C0B7896E4@acm.org>
 <CAJwbTiBVGVNKitMv1Cbi8w8gnsOm8p7dgiOvg-5nkYRGTz68Lg@mail.gmail.com>
 <4EB3C3D2.1070801@wzb.eu>
 <CAJwbTiABbQJW1wF4R6tiWYGSbHBEzL40Oy13nbv6HjhTcaWxNQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <4EBB9481.1000707@itforchange.net>
Message-ID:  <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8D2C725@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>

Parminder:
 
It is in this regard that I had hoped that some focussed outreach activity could put us in an ongoing contact with other civil society groups and coalitions. I right now see know no practical way to go ahead with this, but that does put the responsibility of maintaining some kind of such outreach on the coordinators. 

Wolfgang:
The letter to the president of the 66th UN General Assembly with regard to the China-Russia Code of Conduct proposal was a good restart to reach out to other CS groups. In Nairobi we discussed that the IGC should start a discussion on its own set of IG principles; "inspired" by the principles proposed by COE, OECD, OSCE, NATO, G 8, IBSA, Shanghai Group, EU, US etc. As you have probably noticed some private sector groups have now also presented a list of principles. And the British Foreign Minister Hague has reinvented the wheel recently in London when he proposed "seven principles" and launched a "London Agenda" which will probably duplicate the IGF/EURODIG/IGFAsP/... process. I see that the start of such a "Civil Society Memorandum of Understanding on Internet Governance Principles" (CS-MoU-IGP) could become a useful excersise which at a certain stage would allow us also outreach to other CS organisations. Remember the succesful CS collaboration around the Geneva Declaration in 2003. I do not see any reason why we should not achieve a reasonable document - supported by 50+ CS organisations, which could be presented as a preliminary draft in May 2012 to the WSIS week in Geneva and on September 2012 to the 7th IGF in Baku.
 
Wolfgang
 
 
BTW, there was no (visible or documented) discussion around the Internet at the recent G 20 meeting in Cannes, althoug a number of G 20 participants have tabled global Internet initiatives in the previous months. Here is an article from a G 20 publication from Ronald Deibert from Toronto (who was also a speaker in a previous GIGANET meeting)
http://citizenlab.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/g20cannes2011-deibert.pdf
 
 
____________________________________________________________
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


From b.schombe at gmail.com  Thu Nov 10 05:07:30 2011
From: b.schombe at gmail.com (Baudouin SCHOMBE)
Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2011 11:07:30 +0100
Subject: [governance] IGC Principles
In-Reply-To: <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8D2C725@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
References: <CAJwbTiA8AOK7NqTjBKLq0LSnnS=ikAGYgy+C4BUZuW8BXwtDfw@mail.gmail.com>
 <ED6D3E90-1984-4243-A83B-025C0B7896E4@acm.org> <CAJwbTiBVGVNKitMv1Cbi8w8gnsOm8p7dgiOvg-5nkYRGTz68Lg@mail.gmail.com>
 <4EB3C3D2.1070801@wzb.eu> <CAJwbTiABbQJW1wF4R6tiWYGSbHBEzL40Oy13nbv6HjhTcaWxNQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <4EBB9481.1000707@itforchange.net> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8D2C725@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
Message-ID: <CAHj_20gkWofou_GE0eEhT4Nq-UPF+Agut+Cp7SsEa9upnfdc9Q@mail.gmail.com>

Dear Wolf and Parminder,
Can you give me the link of these documents on the approaches to the
principles proposed by Coe, OECD, OSCE, NATO, G8, IBSA, Shanghai Group, EU,
U.S. and the agenda of London launched by the Minister of Foreign Affairs of
the United Kingdom.

I must present them at our next national meeting of IGF.


SCHOMBE BAUDOUIN

Téléphone mobile:+243998983491
email                  : b.schombe at gmail.com
skype                 : b.schombe
blog                    : http://akimambo.unblog.fr
Site Web             : www.ticafrica.net





2011/11/10 "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang" <
wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de>

> Parminder:
>
> It is in this regard that I had hoped that some focussed outreach activity
> could put us in an ongoing contact with other civil society groups and
> coalitions. I right now see know no practical way to go ahead with this,
> but that does put the responsibility of maintaining some kind of such
> outreach on the coordinators.
>
> Wolfgang:
> The letter to the president of the 66th UN General Assembly with regard to
> the China-Russia Code of Conduct proposal was a good restart to reach out
> to other CS groups. In Nairobi we discussed that the IGC should start a
> discussion on its own set of IG principles; "inspired" by the principles
> proposed by COE, OECD, OSCE, NATO, G 8, IBSA, Shanghai Group, EU, US etc.
> As you have probably noticed some private sector groups have now also
> presented a list of principles. And the British Foreign Minister Hague has
> reinvented the wheel recently in London when he proposed "seven principles"
> and launched a "London Agenda" which will probably duplicate the
> IGF/EURODIG/IGFAsP/... process. I see that the start of such a "Civil
> Society Memorandum of Understanding on Internet Governance Principles"
> (CS-MoU-IGP) could become a useful excersise which at a certain stage would
> allow us also outreach to other CS organisations. Remember the succesful CS
> collaboration around the Geneva Declaration in 2003. I do not see any
> reason why we should not achieve a reasonable document - supported by 50+
> CS organisations, which could be presented as a preliminary draft in May
> 2012 to the WSIS week in Geneva and on September 2012 to the 7th IGF in
> Baku.
>
> Wolfgang
>
>
> BTW, there was no (visible or documented) discussion around the Internet
> at the recent G 20 meeting in Cannes, althoug a number of G 20 participants
> have tabled global Internet initiatives in the previous months. Here is an
> article from a G 20 publication from Ronald Deibert from Toronto (who was
> also a speaker in a previous GIGANET meeting)
> http://citizenlab.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/g20cannes2011-deibert.pdf
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111110/93b1b1d7/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, 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


From pouzin at well.com  Thu Nov 10 06:02:41 2011
From: pouzin at well.com (Louis Pouzin (well))
Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2011 12:02:41 +0100
Subject: [governance] =?WINDOWS-1251?Q?Is_really_Bulgarian_Cyrillic_=2E=E1?=
 =?WINDOWS-1251?Q?=E3_=28=2Ebg=29_similar_to_other_Latin_ccTLDs=3F?=
In-Reply-To: <4EBA399A.1090302@digsys.bg>
References: <CADB01BA.1E008%ian.peter@ianpeter.com> <DFD576AA-245B-4E58-8B03-DD3BD60AF920@acm.org>
 <CAD=1OvcSDF0_UUi__iCt7Kn2H4U0bSAAhgMmt5O53f34oiu=ZA@mail.gmail.com>
 <348A3391-C691-4D2E-A0F9-E09F8CCF74C3@digsys.bg> <77A59FC9477004489D44DE7FC6840E7B03653E@SUEX10-mbx-08.ad.syr.edu>
 <CAFabd1Kbo3byWE1mVCXWTJKn3K_j=2CQW5qU1KQ8fkTgY1gqcw@mail.gmail.com>
 <!&!AAAAAAAAAAAYAAAAAAAAAFV+OJu0iddDsexbRu3QqDnCgAAAEAAAAC7BvLZ76TNOvsvIpvE7m4wBAAAAAA==@yahoo.com>
 <4EBA399A.1090302@digsys.bg>
Message-ID: <CA+EjHYpUMf55WjeJQpNwyjvnzvhb2fJLJcqWyQBUjVy81H1Fnw@mail.gmail.com>

2011/11/9 Daniel Kalchev <daniel at digsys.bg>

>
> > However, for people in Bulgaria, the only reason to request .бг is to be
> able to write everything in Cyrillic.
>

Indeed, a dire need. Presumably for Bulgarians  *СОВЕТ.бг**  *is perfectly
clear,

while *COBET.bg*  and  *СОВЕТ.bg*  look *"confusingly identical"*.

(N.B. for ascians: COBET.bg  is cyrillic.ascii,  while  COBET.bg  is
ascii.ascii.)

> We have been discussing a lot of options about this, including different
> pronunciation of the Cyrillic and ASCII 'bg' -- but I do not believe these
> belong to this list and in any case, .бг is still an project with undefined
> future and timeframe. We know only one thing about it: it will happen.
>

I would guess it already happened in some root in Bulgaria. Anyway, it did
happen somewhere.
By adding 78.47.115.194 on top of one's DNS list, the page
*правителство.бг*pops up in a browser.
But this is out of ICANN walled garden.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111110/8cf8e212/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, 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


From williams.deirdre at gmail.com  Thu Nov 10 07:50:15 2011
From: williams.deirdre at gmail.com (Deirdre Williams)
Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2011 08:50:15 -0400
Subject: [governance] =?WINDOWS-1251?Q?Is_really_Bulgarian_Cyrillic_?=
 =?WINDOWS-1251?Q?=2E=E1=E3_=28=2Ebg=29_similar_to_other_Latin_ccTLDs=3F?=
In-Reply-To: <CA+EjHYpUMf55WjeJQpNwyjvnzvhb2fJLJcqWyQBUjVy81H1Fnw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CADB01BA.1E008%ian.peter@ianpeter.com> <DFD576AA-245B-4E58-8B03-DD3BD60AF920@acm.org>
 <CAD=1OvcSDF0_UUi__iCt7Kn2H4U0bSAAhgMmt5O53f34oiu=ZA@mail.gmail.com>
 <348A3391-C691-4D2E-A0F9-E09F8CCF74C3@digsys.bg> <77A59FC9477004489D44DE7FC6840E7B03653E@SUEX10-mbx-08.ad.syr.edu>
 <CAFabd1Kbo3byWE1mVCXWTJKn3K_j=2CQW5qU1KQ8fkTgY1gqcw@mail.gmail.com>
 <!&!AAAAAAAAAAAYAAAAAAAAAFV+OJu0iddDsexbRu3QqDnCgAAAEAAAAC7BvLZ76TNOvsvIpvE7m4wBAAAAAA==@yahoo.com>
 <4EBA399A.1090302@digsys.bg> <CA+EjHYpUMf55WjeJQpNwyjvnzvhb2fJLJcqWyQBUjVy81H1Fnw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAMz5XN7Zse2jcU=_Rav4nOEapHiM_tK+X865KZQCXaS92wquPg@mail.gmail.com>

It is often claimed that one of the great riches of the Internet is its
diversity and potential for inclusion. Do we really believe that? Perhaps
the time has come to stand up and be counted on that issue. Believing in
diversity and inclusion means supporting for other people what you would
like to have for yourself, even if that thing is of no particular benefit
to you.
ICANN's public face advertises diversity and inclusion.
ICANN claims to be concerned with facilitation, rather than being concerned
with control.
Facilitation means that you work hard to make things happen unless you can
show a cogent reason why the thing happening would be unwise or unsafe.
Control means that you stop things from happening unless you, or someone
else, can find a cogent reason that the thing should occur.
If you have taken on responsibility for acting for the world then you need
to demonstrate an ability to put yourself into the mind-set of each
constituent part and consider the issues from their perspective as well.

Deirdre

2011/11/10 Louis Pouzin (well) <pouzin at well.com>

>
> 2011/11/9 Daniel Kalchev <daniel at digsys.bg>
>
>>
>> > However, for people in Bulgaria, the only reason to request .бг is to
>> be able to write everything in Cyrillic.
>>
>
> Indeed, a dire need. Presumably for Bulgarians  *СОВЕТ.бг**  *is
> perfectly clear,
>
> while *COBET.bg*  and  *СОВЕТ.bg*  look *"confusingly identical"*.
>
> (N.B. for ascians: COBET.bg  is cyrillic.ascii,  while  COBET.bg  is
> ascii.ascii.)
>
> > We have been discussing a lot of options about this, including different
>> pronunciation of the Cyrillic and ASCII 'bg' -- but I do not believe these
>> belong to this list and in any case, .бг is still an project with undefined
>> future and timeframe. We know only one thing about it: it will happen.
>>
>
> I would guess it already happened in some root in Bulgaria. Anyway, it did
> happen somewhere.
> By adding 78.47.115.194 on top of one's DNS list, the page *
> правителство.бг* pops up in a browser.
> But this is out of ICANN walled garden.
>
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
>
>
>


-- 
“The fundamental cure for poverty is not money but knowledge" Sir William
Arthur Lewis, Nobel Prize Economics, 1979
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111110/6a8b86b1/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, 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


From avri at acm.org  Thu Nov 10 08:27:50 2011
From: avri at acm.org (Avri Doria)
Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2011 08:27:50 -0500
Subject: [governance] Is really Bulgarian Cyrillic .?? (.bg) similar to
 other Latin ccTLDs?
In-Reply-To: <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8D2C720@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
References: <CADB01BA.1E008%ian.peter@ianpeter.com> <DFD576AA-245B-4E58-8B03-DD3BD60AF920@acm.org> <CAD=1OvcSDF0_UUi__iCt7Kn2H4U0bSAAhgMmt5O53f34oiu=ZA@mail.gmail.com> <348A3391-C691-4D2E-A0F9-E09F8CCF74C3@digsys.bg> <77A59FC9477004489D44DE7FC6840E7B03653E@SUEX10-mbx-08.ad.syr.edu> <CAFabd1Kbo3byWE1mVCXWTJKn3K_j=2CQW5qU1KQ8fkTgY1gqcw@mail.gmail.com> <CAN8jcvABYULq0Lp4q9i44mNdWrERWkyNdxsAZh_aCHp7WgZEOw@mail.gmail.com> <F9A0407D-FB4B-4B02-A7BC-582B6EDB87B2@christopherwilkinson.eu> <CAN8jcvDpZKoCgE-ekZNrA3VDyCqXxhuhso=4o2F8QOtXapMAUw@mail.gmail.com> <4EBA3733.3030202@digsys.bg> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8D2C720@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
Message-ID: <AC107A91-B05F-43EB-B291-25A3F884B216@acm.org>

Hi,

I was in Bulgaria for the domain.forun at which Rod spoke.

Of course I do not know what Rod and Parvanov spoke about.  But in other statements Rod, and Veni both made, they hid behind the bottom-up process and stated that it was rejected because of the bottom-up process and said that if the Bulgarians and Greeks wanted to change the rules they needed to go back to the ccNSO.  It is amazing how many time they invoked bottom-up process to defend unpopular Staff decisions - it was the mantra of the day. 

Of course they never spoke of what bottom-up decisions they were talking about.  Was there a bottom-up decision about what sort of things were confusing similar?  Was there a bottom-up decision about a lack of transparency and the absence of an appeal of an arbitrary decision or an extended review procedure?  No, these are ICANN implementation details.  I was an observer of the ccNSO group that made recommendations, and these issues never came up.  And for the GNSO, no matter how much the bottom-up process has requested an extended review for confusing similarity, it has been rejected by the ICANN Staff.  ICANN Staff has decided on its own that it is supreme when it comes to harmful confusing similarity.  I remember no bottom-up decisions giving ICANN staff supremacy in any topic, let alone this one.

Another disturbing thing came up during these meetings.  There was a new notion introduced by those who spoke for ICANN.  I must note that I may have misunderstood it because some of it came from ICANN Staffers speaking in Bulgarian so I only heard a translation, but it sounded like the following:

In any review of Cyrillic or Greek characters, not only do they have to  worry about existing LDH (letter digit hyphen) ASCII TLDs, but also myst complete with potential LDH ASCII that might be applied for some day.  This notion was extend not only to un-allocated ISO 2 character designations but to any Cyrillic or Greek TLD that may look similar to LDH characters.  

I.e. the notion I got out was that if the Cyrillic or Greek looks anything like ASCII, they can't have it.  ASCII trumps all. While this is bad, considering the stretch ICANN Staff makes when making these decision (б looks like b - really???), it is really awful. From the discussions I understood this would apply in gTLDS as much as it does in ccTLDs.

If I understood correctly, this is a bad thing, and this issue of .бг is just the tip of the iceberg of a really serious defect in the ICANN process for new TLDs.

avri




On 9 Nov 2011, at 10:06, Kleinwächter, Wolfgang wrote:

> As I can see from the ICANN website, ICANNs Rod Beckstrom had a meeting with the Bulgarian president Mr. Parvanow, the day before yesterday (November 7). Did the Bulgarian president raise the issue of .bg and what was Beckstroem response?
> 
> Thanks
> 
> wolfgang
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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


From nhklein at gmx.net  Thu Nov 10 08:34:52 2011
From: nhklein at gmx.net (nhklein)
Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2011 20:34:52 +0700
Subject: [governance] Is really Bulgarian Cyrillic .?? (.bg) similar to
 other Latin ccTLDs?
In-Reply-To: <AC107A91-B05F-43EB-B291-25A3F884B216@acm.org>
References: <CADB01BA.1E008%ian.peter@ianpeter.com> <DFD576AA-245B-4E58-8B03-DD3BD60AF920@acm.org> <CAD=1OvcSDF0_UUi__iCt7Kn2H4U0bSAAhgMmt5O53f34oiu=ZA@mail.gmail.com> <348A3391-C691-4D2E-A0F9-E09F8CCF74C3@digsys.bg> <77A59FC9477004489D44DE7FC6840E7B03653E@SUEX10-mbx-08.ad.syr.edu> <CAFabd1Kbo3byWE1mVCXWTJKn3K_j=2CQW5qU1KQ8fkTgY1gqcw@mail.gmail.com> <CAN8jcvABYULq0Lp4q9i44mNdWrERWkyNdxsAZh_aCHp7WgZEOw@mail.gmail.com> <F9A0407D-FB4B-4B02-A7BC-582B6EDB87B2@christopherwilkinson.eu> <CAN8jcvDpZKoCgE-ekZNrA3VDyCqXxhuhso=4o2F8QOtXapMAUw@mail.gmail.com> <4EBA3733.3030202@digsys.bg> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8D2C720@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> <AC107A91-B05F-43EB-B291-25A3F884B216@acm.org>
Message-ID: <4EBBD2FC.6040606@gmx.net>

Thanks, Avri,

for your good report and your excellent observations about a terribly 
screwed up situation.


Norbert Klein
Phnom Penh/Cambodia


On 11/10/2011 08:27 PM, Avri Doria wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I was in Bulgaria for the domain.forun at which Rod spoke.
>
> Of course I do not know what Rod and Parvanov spoke about.  But in other statements Rod, and Veni both made, they hid behind the bottom-up process and stated that it was rejected because of the bottom-up process and said that if the Bulgarians and Greeks wanted to change the rules they needed to go back to the ccNSO.  It is amazing how many time they invoked bottom-up process to defend unpopular Staff decisions - it was the mantra of the day.
>
> Of course they never spoke of what bottom-up decisions they were talking about.  Was there a bottom-up decision about what sort of things were confusing similar?  Was there a bottom-up decision about a lack of transparency and the absence of an appeal of an arbitrary decision or an extended review procedure?  No, these are ICANN implementation details.  I was an observer of the ccNSO group that made recommendations, and these issues never came up.  And for the GNSO, no matter how much the bottom-up process has requested an extended review for confusing similarity, it has been rejected by the ICANN Staff.  ICANN Staff has decided on its own that it is supreme when it comes to harmful confusing similarity.  I remember no bottom-up decisions giving ICANN staff supremacy in any topic, let alone this one.
>
> Another disturbing thing came up during these meetings.  There was a new notion introduced by those who spoke for ICANN.  I must note that I may have misunderstood it because some of it came from ICANN Staffers speaking in Bulgarian so I only heard a translation, but it sounded like the following:
>
> In any review of Cyrillic or Greek characters, not only do they have to  worry about existing LDH (letter digit hyphen) ASCII TLDs, but also myst complete with potential LDH ASCII that might be applied for some day.  This notion was extend not only to un-allocated ISO 2 character designations but to any Cyrillic or Greek TLD that may look similar to LDH characters.
>
> I.e. the notion I got out was that if the Cyrillic or Greek looks anything like ASCII, they can't have it.  ASCII trumps all. While this is bad, considering the stretch ICANN Staff makes when making these decision (б looks like b - really???), it is really awful. From the discussions I understood this would apply in gTLDS as much as it does in ccTLDs.
>
> If I understood correctly, this is a bad thing, and this issue of .бг is just the tip of the iceberg of a really serious defect in the ICANN process for new TLDs.
>
> avri
-- 
A while ago, I started a new blog:

...thinking it over... after 21 years in Cambodia
http://www.thinking21.org/

continuing to share reports and comments from Cambodia.

Norbert Klein
nhklein at gmx.net
Phnom Penh / Cambodia


____________________________________________________________
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


From nhklein at gmx.net  Thu Nov 10 08:41:33 2011
From: nhklein at gmx.net (nhklein)
Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2011 20:41:33 +0700
Subject: [governance] =?WINDOWS-1251?Q?Is_really_Bulgarian_Cyrillic_?=
 =?WINDOWS-1251?Q?=2E=E1=E3_=28=2Ebg=29_similar_to_other_Latin_ccTLDs=3F?=
In-Reply-To: <CAMz5XN7Zse2jcU=_Rav4nOEapHiM_tK+X865KZQCXaS92wquPg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CADB01BA.1E008%ian.peter@ianpeter.com> <DFD576AA-245B-4E58-8B03-DD3BD60AF920@acm.org> <CAD=1OvcSDF0_UUi__iCt7Kn2H4U0bSAAhgMmt5O53f34oiu=ZA@mail.gmail.com> <348A3391-C691-4D2E-A0F9-E09F8CCF74C3@digsys.bg> <77A59FC9477004489D44DE7FC6840E7B03653E@SUEX10-mbx-08.ad.syr.edu> <CAFabd1Kbo3byWE1mVCXWTJKn3K_j=2CQW5qU1KQ8fkTgY1gqcw@mail.gmail.com> <!&!AAAAAAAAAAAYAAAAAAAAAFV+OJu0iddDsexbRu3QqDnCgAAAEAAAAC7BvLZ76TNOvsvIpvE7m4wBAAAAAA==@yahoo.com> <4EBA399A.1090302@digsys.bg> <CA+EjHYpUMf55WjeJQpNwyjvnzvhb2fJLJcqWyQBUjVy81H1Fnw@mail.gmail.com> <CAMz5XN7Zse2jcU=_Rav4nOEapHiM_tK+X865KZQCXaS92wquPg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4EBBD48D.8090103@gmx.net>

On 11/10/2011 07:50 PM, Deirdre Williams wrote:
> It is often claimed that one of the great riches of the Internet is 
> its diversity and potential for inclusion. Do we really believe that? 
> Perhaps the time has come to stand up and be counted on that issue. 
> Believing in diversity and inclusion means supporting for other people 
> what you would like to have for yourself, even if that thing is of no 
> particular benefit to you.
> ICANN's public face advertises diversity and inclusion.
> ICANN claims to be concerned with facilitation, rather than being 
> concerned with control.
> Facilitation means that you work hard to make things happen unless you 
> can show a cogent reason why the thing happening would be unwise or 
> unsafe.
> Control means that you stop things from happening unless you, or 
> someone else, can find a cogent reason that the thing should occur.
> If you have taken on responsibility for acting for the world then you 
> need to demonstrate an ability to put yourself into the mind-set of 
> each constituent part and consider the issues from their perspective 
> as well.
>
> Deirdre
> *
> *
*"If you have taken on responsibility for acting for the world then you 
need to demonstrate an ability to put yourself into the mind-set of each 
constituent part and consider the issues from their perspective as well."*

Yes.

Thanks.


Norbert

-- 
A while ago, I started a new blog:

...thinking it over... after 21 years in Cambodia
http://www.thinking21.org/

continuing to share reports and comments from Cambodia.

Norbert Klein
nhklein at gmx.net
Phnom Penh / Cambodia


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111110/ce856e92/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, 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


From ca at cafonso.ca  Thu Nov 10 08:42:47 2011
From: ca at cafonso.ca (Carlos A. Afonso)
Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2011 11:42:47 -0200
Subject: [governance] Is really Bulgarian Cyrillic .?? (.bg) similar to
 other Latin ccTLDs?
In-Reply-To: <AC107A91-B05F-43EB-B291-25A3F884B216@acm.org>
References: <CADB01BA.1E008%ian.peter@ianpeter.com> <DFD576AA-245B-4E58-8B03-DD3BD60AF920@acm.org> <CAD=1OvcSDF0_UUi__iCt7Kn2H4U0bSAAhgMmt5O53f34oiu=ZA@mail.gmail.com> <348A3391-C691-4D2E-A0F9-E09F8CCF74C3@digsys.bg> <77A59FC9477004489D44DE7FC6840E7B03653E@SUEX10-mbx-08.ad.syr.edu> <CAFabd1Kbo3byWE1mVCXWTJKn3K_j=2CQW5qU1KQ8fkTgY1gqcw@mail.gmail.com> <CAN8jcvABYULq0Lp4q9i44mNdWrERWkyNdxsAZh_aCHp7WgZEOw@mail.gmail.com> <F9A0407D-FB4B-4B02-A7BC-582B6EDB87B2@christopherwilkinson.eu> <CAN8jcvDpZKoCgE-ekZNrA3VDyCqXxhuhso=4o2F8QOtXapMAUw@mail.gmail.com> <4EBA3733.3030202@digsys.bg> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8D2C720@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> <AC107A91-B05F-43EB-B291-25A3F884B216@acm.org>
Message-ID: <4EBBD4D7.3070404@cafonso.ca>

Avri, very revealing report! Thank you.

frt rgds

--c.a.

On 11/10/2011 11:27 AM, Avri Doria wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> I was in Bulgaria for the domain.forun at which Rod spoke.
> 
> Of course I do not know what Rod and Parvanov spoke about.  But in
> other statements Rod, and Veni both made, they hid behind the
> bottom-up process and stated that it was rejected because of the
> bottom-up process and said that if the Bulgarians and Greeks wanted
> to change the rules they needed to go back to the ccNSO.  It is
> amazing how many time they invoked bottom-up process to defend
> unpopular Staff decisions - it was the mantra of the day.
> 
> Of course they never spoke of what bottom-up decisions they were
> talking about.  Was there a bottom-up decision about what sort of
> things were confusing similar?  Was there a bottom-up decision about
> a lack of transparency and the absence of an appeal of an arbitrary
> decision or an extended review procedure?  No, these are ICANN
> implementation details.  I was an observer of the ccNSO group that
> made recommendations, and these issues never came up.  And for the
> GNSO, no matter how much the bottom-up process has requested an
> extended review for confusing similarity, it has been rejected by the
> ICANN Staff.  ICANN Staff has decided on its own that it is supreme
> when it comes to harmful confusing similarity.  I remember no
> bottom-up decisions giving ICANN staff supremacy in any topic, let
> alone this one.
> 
> Another disturbing thing came up during these meetings.  There was a
> new notion introduced by those who spoke for ICANN.  I must note that
> I may have misunderstood it because some of it came from ICANN
> Staffers speaking in Bulgarian so I only heard a translation, but it
> sounded like the following:
> 
> In any review of Cyrillic or Greek characters, not only do they have
> to  worry about existing LDH (letter digit hyphen) ASCII TLDs, but
> also myst complete with potential LDH ASCII that might be applied for
> some day.  This notion was extend not only to un-allocated ISO 2
> character designations but to any Cyrillic or Greek TLD that may look
> similar to LDH characters.
> 
> I.e. the notion I got out was that if the Cyrillic or Greek looks
> anything like ASCII, they can't have it.  ASCII trumps all. While
> this is bad, considering the stretch ICANN Staff makes when making
> these decision (б looks like b - really???), it is really awful. From
> the discussions I understood this would apply in gTLDS as much as it
> does in ccTLDs.
> 
> If I understood correctly, this is a bad thing, and this issue of .бг
> is just the tip of the iceberg of a really serious defect in the
> ICANN process for new TLDs.
> 
> avri
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On 9 Nov 2011, at 10:06, Kleinwächter, Wolfgang wrote:
> 
>> As I can see from the ICANN website, ICANNs Rod Beckstrom had a
>> meeting with the Bulgarian president Mr. Parvanow, the day before
>> yesterday (November 7). Did the Bulgarian president raise the issue
>> of .bg and what was Beckstroem response?
>> 
>> Thanks
>> 
>> wolfgang 
>> ____________________________________________________________ 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
> 
> 
____________________________________________________________
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


From daniel at digsys.bg  Thu Nov 10 09:08:22 2011
From: daniel at digsys.bg (Daniel Kalchev)
Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2011 16:08:22 +0200
Subject: [governance] Is really Bulgarian Cyrillic .?? (.bg) similar to
 other Latin ccTLDs?
In-Reply-To: <AC107A91-B05F-43EB-B291-25A3F884B216@acm.org>
References: <CADB01BA.1E008%ian.peter@ianpeter.com> <DFD576AA-245B-4E58-8B03-DD3BD60AF920@acm.org> <CAD=1OvcSDF0_UUi__iCt7Kn2H4U0bSAAhgMmt5O53f34oiu=ZA@mail.gmail.com> <348A3391-C691-4D2E-A0F9-E09F8CCF74C3@digsys.bg> <77A59FC9477004489D44DE7FC6840E7B03653E@SUEX10-mbx-08.ad.syr.edu> <CAFabd1Kbo3byWE1mVCXWTJKn3K_j=2CQW5qU1KQ8fkTgY1gqcw@mail.gmail.com> <CAN8jcvABYULq0Lp4q9i44mNdWrERWkyNdxsAZh_aCHp7WgZEOw@mail.gmail.com> <F9A0407D-FB4B-4B02-A7BC-582B6EDB87B2@christopherwilkinson.eu> <CAN8jcvDpZKoCgE-ekZNrA3VDyCqXxhuhso=4o2F8QOtXapMAUw@mail.gmail.com> <4EBA3733.3030202@digsys.bg> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8D2C720@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> <AC107A91-B05F-43EB-B291-25A3F884B216@acm.org>
Message-ID: <4EBBDAD6.4050007@digsys.bg>



On 10.11.11 15:27, Avri Doria wrote:
> If I understood correctly, this is a bad thing, and this issue of .бг is just the tip of the iceberg of a really serious defect in the ICANN process for new TLDs.

As I commented during the event, while the .бг and .ελ applications are 
non-commercial in nature and do not expect any monetary returns, that 
is, anything spent is for the good of the community --- this will not be 
so in the new gTLD process.
Not only the new gTLD process is very expensive for applicants, but it 
may turn out that they have wasted all that funds and effort in vain, 
with an anonymous panel to decide if they may have their string or it is 
'confusing' someone.

Perhaps, as one fellow said long ago during the COCOM times "Whatever 
you cannot buy with money, you can buy with more money". Commissioner 
times ahead?

Daniel

____________________________________________________________
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


From ias_pk at yahoo.com  Thu Nov 10 09:26:06 2011
From: ias_pk at yahoo.com (Imran Ahmed Shah)
Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2011 19:26:06 +0500
Subject: [governance] Is really Bulgarian Cyrillic .?? (.bg) similar to
 other Latin ccTLDs?
In-Reply-To: <AC107A91-B05F-43EB-B291-25A3F884B216@acm.org>
References: <CADB01BA.1E008%ian.peter@ianpeter.com> <DFD576AA-245B-4E58-8B03-DD3BD60AF920@acm.org> <CAD=1OvcSDF0_UUi__iCt7Kn2H4U0bSAAhgMmt5O53f34oiu=ZA@mail.gmail.com> <348A3391-C691-4D2E-A0F9-E09F8CCF74C3@digsys.bg> <77A59FC9477004489D44DE7FC6840E7B03653E@SUEX10-mbx-08.ad.syr.edu> <CAFabd1Kbo3byWE1mVCXWTJKn3K_j=2CQW5qU1KQ8fkTgY1gqcw@mail.gmail.com> <CAN8jcvABYULq0Lp4q9i44mNdWrERWkyNdxsAZh_aCHp7WgZEOw@mail.gmail.com> <F9A0407D-FB4B-4B02-A7BC-582B6EDB87B2@christopherwilkinson.eu> <CAN8jcvDpZKoCgE-ekZNrA3VDyCqXxhuhso=4o2F8QOtXapMAUw@mail.gmail.com> <4EBA3733.3030202@digsys.bg> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8D2C720@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> <AC107A91-B05F-43EB-B291-25A3F884B216@acm.org>
Message-ID: <!&!AAAAAAAAAAAYAAAAAAAAAFV+OJu0iddDsexbRu3QqDnCgAAAEAAAAJsF+yeWMd1AlwMhPQOtg9MBAAAAAA==@yahoo.com>

Hi Avri,

With reference to bottom-up decision and support, I would say that first bottom up decision made by the DNS Stability Panel, and forwarded it to ICANN, and Second bottom-up support is ccNSO about FT Review, see the following document, where this point has been detained with the arguments of ccNSO. 

The public voices were unable to hear after ccNSO comments.

Thanks

Imran Ahmed Shah

-----------------------------------------------------------

 

2. Summary of Comments 

ICANN received input on the IDN ccTLD Fast Track Review from individual Internet users, the 

DNS technical community, APRALO, the Hong Kong Internet Registration Corporation 

(HKIRC) and the Country Code Names Supporting Organization (ccNSO). An analysis of these 

comments along with ICANN recommendations is provided below.  

 

Main Themes 

 

1. A large number of comments were received from individuals and entities in the Bulgarian 

Internet community, asking that ICANN re-evaluate the Bulgarian IDN ccTLD request for 

.bg in Cyrillic. Many questioned the transparency of the decision that found the applied for 

Bulgarian string was too similar to .br. Several commenters proposed that the requested 

string is not confusable with “.br.” The commenters further proposed that because the 

proposed string is not confusable with .br, the applied-for string should be accepted by 

ICANN within the Fast Track Process. Alternatively, the Country Code Names Supporting 

Organization (ccNSO) stated that disputes and objection/re-evaluation are policy issues that 

should not be addressed through an amendment to the Fast Track Process. 

 

2. The ccNSO, APRALO, HKIRC and Jothan Frakes commended the successful launch of the 

Fast Track process. The ccNSO and HKIRC noted that the transparency in the process was 

appropriate and maintaining confidentiality during string evaluation allows requesting 

countries and territories to resolve issues of public authority and community-support without 

undue politicization of the process. 

 

3. Several members of the DNS technical community noted issues with the treatment of IDN 

tables. One comment suggested that it was time for ICANN to stop publishing the IANA

 

Repository. Several noted that this inserts ICANN into registry naming policy. The ccNSO 

stated that this was a policy issue not appropriately addressed in ICANN implementation 

processes. One comment stated that ICANN should not engage in or actively foster the 

management of IDN tables. 

 

4. Several commenters noted that the Fast Track was intended to be for clear cases and noncontroversial requests. 
If the Fast Track process is to continue, issues with confusable strings 

as mentioned in the comments, will continue to arise. 

 

5. Several commenters raised the issue of variants.  

The comment forum can be viewed at http://forum.icann.org/lists/fast-track-review-2010/.

 



 

> -----Original Message-----

> From: governance at lists.cpsr.org [mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org] On

> Behalf Of Avri Doria

> Sent: Thursday, November 10, 2011 06:28 PM

> To: IGC

> Subject: Re: [governance] Is really Bulgarian Cyrillic .?? (.bg) similar to other

> Latin ccTLDs?

> 

> Hi,

> 

> I was in Bulgaria for the domain.forun at which Rod spoke.

> 

> Of course I do not know what Rod and Parvanov spoke about.  But in other

> statements Rod, and Veni both made, they hid behind the bottom-up

> process and stated that it was rejected because of the bottom-up process

> and said that if the Bulgarians and Greeks wanted to change the rules they

> needed to go back to the ccNSO.  It is amazing how many time they invoked

> bottom-up process to defend unpopular Staff decisions - it was the mantra

> of the day.

> 

> Of course they never spoke of what bottom-up decisions they were talking

> about.  Was there a bottom-up decision about what sort of things were

> confusing similar?  Was there a bottom-up decision about a lack of

> transparency and the absence of an appeal of an arbitrary decision or an

> extended review procedure?  No, these are ICANN implementation details.  I

> was an observer of the ccNSO group that made recommendations, and these

> issues never came up.  And for the GNSO, no matter how much the bottom-

> up process has requested an extended review for confusing similarity, it has

> been rejected by the ICANN Staff.  ICANN Staff has decided on its own that it

> is supreme when it comes to harmful confusing similarity.  I remember no

> bottom-up decisions giving ICANN staff supremacy in any topic, let alone this

> one.

> 

> Another disturbing thing came up during these meetings.  There was a new

> notion introduced by those who spoke for ICANN.  I must note that I may

> have misunderstood it because some of it came from ICANN Staffers

> speaking in Bulgarian so I only heard a translation, but it sounded like the

> following:

> 

> In any review of Cyrillic or Greek characters, not only do they have to  worry

> about existing LDH (letter digit hyphen) ASCII TLDs, but also myst complete

> with potential LDH ASCII that might be applied for some day.  This notion was

> extend not only to un-allocated ISO 2 character designations but to any

> Cyrillic or Greek TLD that may look similar to LDH characters.

> 

> I.e. the notion I got out was that if the Cyrillic or Greek looks anything like

> ASCII, they can't have it.  ASCII trumps all. While this is bad, considering the

> stretch ICANN Staff makes when making these decision (б looks like b -

> really???), it is really awful. From the discussions I understood this would

> apply in gTLDS as much as it does in ccTLDs.

> 

> If I understood correctly, this is a bad thing, and this issue of .бг is just the tip

> of the iceberg of a really serious defect in the ICANN process for new TLDs.

> 

> avri

> 

> 

> 

> 

> On 9 Nov 2011, at 10:06, Kleinwächter, Wolfgang wrote:

> 

> > As I can see from the ICANN website, ICANNs Rod Beckstrom had a

> meeting with the Bulgarian president Mr. Parvanow, the day before

> yesterday (November 7). Did the Bulgarian president raise the issue of .bg

> and what was Beckstroem response?

> >

> > Thanks

> >

> > wolfgang

> >

> __________________________________________________________

> __

> > You received this message as a subscriber on the list:

> >      <mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org> governance at lists.cpsr.org

> > To be removed from the list, visit:

> >      <http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing> http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

> >

> > For all other list information and functions, see:

> >      <http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance> http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance

> > To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:

> >      <http://www.igcaucus.org/> http://www.igcaucus.org/

> >

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

> >

> 

> __________________________________________________________

> __

> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:

>       <mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org> governance at lists.cpsr.org

> To be removed from the list, visit:

>       <http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing> http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

> 

> For all other list information and functions, see:

>       <http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance> http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance

> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:

>       <http://www.igcaucus.org/> http://www.igcaucus.org/

> 

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

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111110/331a25b3/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: image/png
Size: 70673 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111110/331a25b3/attachment.png>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
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


From williams.deirdre at gmail.com  Thu Nov 10 09:27:18 2011
From: williams.deirdre at gmail.com (Deirdre Williams)
Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2011 10:27:18 -0400
Subject: [governance] Is really Bulgarian Cyrillic .?? (.bg) similar to
 other Latin ccTLDs?
In-Reply-To: <AC107A91-B05F-43EB-B291-25A3F884B216@acm.org>
References: <CADB01BA.1E008%ian.peter@ianpeter.com> <DFD576AA-245B-4E58-8B03-DD3BD60AF920@acm.org>
 <CAD=1OvcSDF0_UUi__iCt7Kn2H4U0bSAAhgMmt5O53f34oiu=ZA@mail.gmail.com>
 <348A3391-C691-4D2E-A0F9-E09F8CCF74C3@digsys.bg> <77A59FC9477004489D44DE7FC6840E7B03653E@SUEX10-mbx-08.ad.syr.edu>
 <CAFabd1Kbo3byWE1mVCXWTJKn3K_j=2CQW5qU1KQ8fkTgY1gqcw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAN8jcvABYULq0Lp4q9i44mNdWrERWkyNdxsAZh_aCHp7WgZEOw@mail.gmail.com>
 <F9A0407D-FB4B-4B02-A7BC-582B6EDB87B2@christopherwilkinson.eu>
 <CAN8jcvDpZKoCgE-ekZNrA3VDyCqXxhuhso=4o2F8QOtXapMAUw@mail.gmail.com>
 <4EBA3733.3030202@digsys.bg> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8D2C720@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
 <AC107A91-B05F-43EB-B291-25A3F884B216@acm.org>
Message-ID: <CAMz5XN4SMe6wPoZxn0aJwaG3d7B2aqzSLMLEaRN8HD6z+4qdjA@mail.gmail.com>

So is there anything to be done?
I'm not very enthusiastic about "finger-voting" but would a loud display of
enthusiasm from somewhere like Avaaz or Access Now be likely to have any
effect?
This is the second time in the same hour that I'm quoting Bob Marley "Get
up, stand up: *stand up for your rights*!" although on different issues.
It might also be useful to remember Martin Niemoller. I had occasion to
quote him yesterday on a third issue.

First they came for the communists <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communist>,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a communist.

Then they came for the trade
unionists<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trade_unionist>
,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a trade unionist.

Then they came for the Jews <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jews>,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a Jew.

Then they came for me
and there was no one left to speak out for me.


My mother tongue is English. I use Latin script. I neither read, nor write,
nor understand Cyrillic or Greek script. I believe that this issue is
relevant and important to me and to others like me.

Deirdre



On 10 November 2011 09:27, Avri Doria <avri at acm.org> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I was in Bulgaria for the domain.forun at which Rod spoke.
>
> Of course I do not know what Rod and Parvanov spoke about.  But in other
> statements Rod, and Veni both made, they hid behind the bottom-up process
> and stated that it was rejected because of the bottom-up process and said
> that if the Bulgarians and Greeks wanted to change the rules they needed to
> go back to the ccNSO.  It is amazing how many time they invoked bottom-up
> process to defend unpopular Staff decisions - it was the mantra of the day.
>
> Of course they never spoke of what bottom-up decisions they were talking
> about.  Was there a bottom-up decision about what sort of things were
> confusing similar?  Was there a bottom-up decision about a lack of
> transparency and the absence of an appeal of an arbitrary decision or an
> extended review procedure?  No, these are ICANN implementation details.  I
> was an observer of the ccNSO group that made recommendations, and these
> issues never came up.  And for the GNSO, no matter how much the bottom-up
> process has requested an extended review for confusing similarity, it has
> been rejected by the ICANN Staff.  ICANN Staff has decided on its own that
> it is supreme when it comes to harmful confusing similarity.  I remember no
> bottom-up decisions giving ICANN staff supremacy in any topic, let alone
> this one.
>
> Another disturbing thing came up during these meetings.  There was a new
> notion introduced by those who spoke for ICANN.  I must note that I may
> have misunderstood it because some of it came from ICANN Staffers speaking
> in Bulgarian so I only heard a translation, but it sounded like the
> following:
>
> In any review of Cyrillic or Greek characters, not only do they have to
>  worry about existing LDH (letter digit hyphen) ASCII TLDs, but also myst
> complete with potential LDH ASCII that might be applied for some day.  This
> notion was extend not only to un-allocated ISO 2 character designations but
> to any Cyrillic or Greek TLD that may look similar to LDH characters.
>
> I.e. the notion I got out was that if the Cyrillic or Greek looks anything
> like ASCII, they can't have it.  ASCII trumps all. While this is bad,
> considering the stretch ICANN Staff makes when making these decision (б
> looks like b - really???), it is really awful. From the discussions I
> understood this would apply in gTLDS as much as it does in ccTLDs.
>
> If I understood correctly, this is a bad thing, and this issue of .бг is
> just the tip of the iceberg of a really serious defect in the ICANN process
> for new TLDs.
>
> avri
>
>
>
>
> On 9 Nov 2011, at 10:06, Kleinwächter, Wolfgang wrote:
>
> > As I can see from the ICANN website, ICANNs Rod Beckstrom had a meeting
> with the Bulgarian president Mr. Parvanow, the day before yesterday
> (November 7). Did the Bulgarian president raise the issue of .bg and what
> was Beckstroem response?
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> > wolfgang
> > ____________________________________________________________
> > 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
>
>


-- 
“The fundamental cure for poverty is not money but knowledge" Sir William
Arthur Lewis, Nobel Prize Economics, 1979
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111110/6931a681/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, 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


From daniel at digsys.bg  Thu Nov 10 09:42:07 2011
From: daniel at digsys.bg (Daniel Kalchev)
Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2011 16:42:07 +0200
Subject: [governance] Is really Bulgarian Cyrillic .?? (.bg) similar to
 other Latin ccTLDs?
In-Reply-To: <!&!AAAAAAAAAAAYAAAAAAAAAFV+OJu0iddDsexbRu3QqDnCgAAAEAAAAJsF+yeWMd1AlwMhPQOtg9MBAAAAAA==@yahoo.com>
References: <CADB01BA.1E008%ian.peter@ianpeter.com> <DFD576AA-245B-4E58-8B03-DD3BD60AF920@acm.org> <CAD=1OvcSDF0_UUi__iCt7Kn2H4U0bSAAhgMmt5O53f34oiu=ZA@mail.gmail.com> <348A3391-C691-4D2E-A0F9-E09F8CCF74C3@digsys.bg> <77A59FC9477004489D44DE7FC6840E7B03653E@SUEX10-mbx-08.ad.syr.edu> <CAFabd1Kbo3byWE1mVCXWTJKn3K_j=2CQW5qU1KQ8fkTgY1gqcw@mail.gmail.com> <CAN8jcvABYULq0Lp4q9i44mNdWrERWkyNdxsAZh_aCHp7WgZEOw@mail.gmail.com> <F9A0407D-FB4B-4B02-A7BC-582B6EDB87B2@christopherwilkinson.eu> <CAN8jcvDpZKoCgE-ekZNrA3VDyCqXxhuhso=4o2F8QOtXapMAUw@mail.gmail.com> <4EBA3733.3030202@digsys.bg> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8D2C720@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> <AC107A91-B05F-43EB-B291-25A3F884B216@acm.org> <!&!AAAAAAAAAAAYAAAAAAAAAFV+OJu0iddDsexbRu3QqDnCgAAAEAAAAJsF+yeWMd1AlwMhPQOtg9MBAAAAAA==@yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <4EBBE2BF.8010204@digsys.bg>



On 10.11.11 16:26, Imran Ahmed Shah wrote:
>
>
> Alternatively, the Country Code Names Supporting
>
> Organization (ccNSO) stated that disputes and objection/re-evaluation 
> are policy issues that
>
> should not be addressed through an amendment to the Fast Track Process.
>
>

There is no need to amend the IDN Fast Track process. The process by 
itself is fine.

It is how the process is implemented by ICANN and how ICANN is refusing 
any publicity on this process, except what suits them (success stories).
By the way, ccNSO did not say, that disputes and 
objections/re-evaluation should not be addressed.

What is funny, is that this opinion of the ccNSO is not an 'alternative' 
to the raised questions

> 1. A large number of comments were received from individuals and 
> entities in the Bulgarian
>
> Internet community, asking that ICANN re-evaluate the Bulgarian IDN 
> ccTLD request for
>
> .bg in Cyrillic. Many questioned the transparency of the decision that 
> found the applied for
>
> Bulgarian string was too similar to .br. Several commenters proposed 
> that the requested
>
> string is not confusable with “.br.” The commenters further proposed 
> that because the
>
> proposed string is not confusable with .br, the applied-for string 
> should be accepted by
>
> ICANN within the Fast Track Process. 

Someone is trying to alienate those two concerned groups.

Daniel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111110/4a5d6c5f/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, 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


From ias_pk at yahoo.com  Thu Nov 10 09:56:12 2011
From: ias_pk at yahoo.com (Imran Ahmed Shah)
Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2011 19:56:12 +0500
Subject: [governance] Is really Bulgarian Cyrillic .?? (.bg) similar to
 other Latin ccTLDs?
In-Reply-To: <4EBBDAD6.4050007@digsys.bg>
References: <CADB01BA.1E008%ian.peter@ianpeter.com> <DFD576AA-245B-4E58-8B03-DD3BD60AF920@acm.org> <CAD=1OvcSDF0_UUi__iCt7Kn2H4U0bSAAhgMmt5O53f34oiu=ZA@mail.gmail.com> <348A3391-C691-4D2E-A0F9-E09F8CCF74C3@digsys.bg> <77A59FC9477004489D44DE7FC6840E7B03653E@SUEX10-mbx-08.ad.syr.edu> <CAFabd1Kbo3byWE1mVCXWTJKn3K_j=2CQW5qU1KQ8fkTgY1gqcw@mail.gmail.com> <CAN8jcvABYULq0Lp4q9i44mNdWrERWkyNdxsAZh_aCHp7WgZEOw@mail.gmail.com> <F9A0407D-FB4B-4B02-A7BC-582B6EDB87B2@christopherwilkinson.eu> <CAN8jcvDpZKoCgE-ekZNrA3VDyCqXxhuhso=4o2F8QOtXapMAUw@mail.gmail.com> <4EBA3733.3030202@digsys.bg> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8D2C720@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> <AC107A91-B05F-43EB-B291-25A3F884B216@acm.org> <4EBBDAD6.4050007@digsys.bg>
Message-ID: <!&!AAAAAAAAAAAYAAAAAAAAAFV+OJu0iddDsexbRu3QqDnCgAAAEAAAAJB4aP+nswhGjXClU8PzDgkBAAAAAA==@yahoo.com>

The .бг and .ελ are non-commercial being a ccTLD, and they are confusingly similar with the .br and .EA, and so, rejected once.

.бг and .ελ
.br and .EA

What if they will be applied from the same applicants in new gTLD program, it will remain non-commercial unless the applicants are swap or changed.
New study tells that instead of changing the consumer minds, change of the ownership of the products or services or command may give you better results.
So, applying this new approach, will give following results:

.бг to .br  
.ελ  to .EA
(consumers will  be offered to enjoy the Visual Similarity, even the .bg users will also be able to get their domain registered Блгария.Бг)

Now, read it again and smile, it has become a commercial model. New gTLD have no concern, what IDN Language do you select.

But the hindrance or limitations in implementation of my Commercial Business model is these two small units, that are have applied the same strings for useless IDN ccLTDs under fast track. So, how to slide this obstacle/barrier off the road. There is again method one, as Daniel quoted, spend more money. Otherwise method to study the new approaching formulation. That tells a common formula of stamina to assess the holding power, just create confusions.

And that has been created with a small two words "confusingly similar".

:)

Imran Ahmad Shah

> -----Original Message-----
> From: governance at lists.cpsr.org [mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org] On
> Behalf Of Daniel Kalchev
> Sent: Thursday, November 10, 2011 07:08 PM
> To: governance at lists.cpsr.org
> Subject: Re: [governance] Is really Bulgarian Cyrillic .?? (.bg) similar to other
> Latin ccTLDs?
> 
> 
> 
> On 10.11.11 15:27, Avri Doria wrote:
> > If I understood correctly, this is a bad thing, and this issue of .бг is just the
> tip of the iceberg of a really serious defect in the ICANN process for new
> TLDs.
> 
> As I commented during the event, while the .бг and .ελ applications are non-
> commercial in nature and do not expect any monetary returns, that is,
> anything spent is for the good of the community --- this will not be so in the
> new gTLD process.
> Not only the new gTLD process is very expensive for applicants, but it may
> turn out that they have wasted all that funds and effort in vain, with an
> anonymous panel to decide if they may have their string or it is 'confusing'
> someone.
> 
> Perhaps, as one fellow said long ago during the COCOM times "Whatever you
> cannot buy with money, you can buy with more money". Commissioner
> times ahead?
> 
> Daniel
> 
> __________________________________________________________
> __
> 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


From tinadam at gmail.com  Thu Nov 10 09:58:35 2011
From: tinadam at gmail.com (Tina Dam)
Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2011 06:58:35 -0800
Subject: [governance] Is really Bulgarian Cyrillic .?? (.bg) similar to
 other Latin ccTLDs?
In-Reply-To: <AC107A91-B05F-43EB-B291-25A3F884B216@acm.org>
References: <CADB01BA.1E008%ian.peter@ianpeter.com>
	<DFD576AA-245B-4E58-8B03-DD3BD60AF920@acm.org>
	<CAD=1OvcSDF0_UUi__iCt7Kn2H4U0bSAAhgMmt5O53f34oiu=ZA@mail.gmail.com>
	<348A3391-C691-4D2E-A0F9-E09F8CCF74C3@digsys.bg>
	<77A59FC9477004489D44DE7FC6840E7B03653E@SUEX10-mbx-08.ad.syr.edu>
	<CAFabd1Kbo3byWE1mVCXWTJKn3K_j=2CQW5qU1KQ8fkTgY1gqcw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAN8jcvABYULq0Lp4q9i44mNdWrERWkyNdxsAZh_aCHp7WgZEOw@mail.gmail.com>
	<F9A0407D-FB4B-4B02-A7BC-582B6EDB87B2@christopherwilkinson.eu>
	<CAN8jcvDpZKoCgE-ekZNrA3VDyCqXxhuhso=4o2F8QOtXapMAUw@mail.gmail.com>
	<4EBA3733.3030202@digsys.bg>
	<2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8D2C720@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
	<AC107A91-B05F-43EB-B291-25A3F884B216@acm.org>
Message-ID: <CAN8jcvCe__g0pwuW6tbttr0714U3P7WPo-tPPK+4eB=SXRjj7w@mail.gmail.com>

Hi Avri, thanks for the report from me as well.

But, I must say though that I am very surprised about your bashing of
ICANN Staff. I obviously really do not like that and I don't find it
useful at all. If that is what this list is for then it certainly is
not for me.

Avri, you of all people must know how hard ICANN staff works to follow
processes and work with all the different stakeholder groups to ensure
fair implementation - yes that is, through the bottom-up processes.

In terms of implementing the Fast Track Process this was done via
countless meetings and online public forums etc discussing and
reviewing several proposed implementation plans that follows the
policy papers and reports provided by the community. You were in
several of those meetings.

Certainly it is never possible to fulfill every single persons
requests, but I think we got really really close and so did others.
Alternatively the implementation would have not been approved.

About the restriction against any 2-char that resembles ASCII
characters - this has to do