[governance] IBSA - Tshwane Declaration

[parminder]

On Monday 24 October 2011 01:09 PM, McTim wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 10:06 AM, parminder<parminder at itforchange.net>  wrote:
>    
>> On Friday 21 October 2011 05:02 PM, William Drake wrote:
>>      
> <snip>
>    
>>   So again, if indeed IBSA has shifted, it'd be great for them to say so.
>>   And for more governments beyond Brazil and a distinct minority of other G77
>> to demonstrate that they take the IGF process seriously and will engage even
>> if it doesn't offer a path to intergovernmental control.
>>
>> This is another myth that a strong IGF will get used to pave the path to
>> inter-governmental control
>>      
> I think you have mis-read Bill's para above.
>    
I dont see how? Can you pl explain

> snip
>> As Marilia suggests, with the meeting of WG on IGF improvements coming up,
>> it is time for the civil society to stand up and say if they are for a
>> stronger and more purposive IGF or not. My submission is that anyone not
>> ready to make the necessary changes in the IGF status quo is the one really
>> against multi-stakeholder policy making.
>>      
>
> I think that there are many in Dakar this week (actually doing MS
> policy making) that might disagree with you on this.
>    

McTim, We have been over this many times. I have said often that I have 
little problem with many models of technical standards and technical 
policy making that the kind of organisations you mention do. My main 
problem is with the kind of work OECD's Internet policy making 
apparatuses do, by defualt for the whole world. They write policy 
frameworks for search engines, for social media, for IP over the 
Internet, privacy, and so on. And they do it in an undemocratic manner, 
without including developing countries. And I find this as an 
unacceptable model. Now, can you please specifically state your position 
on these kinds of larger social pulbic policy issues, instead of 
everytime responding to my emails concerning these issues with 
descriptions of technical policy making systems. That would be very 
useful to take this dialogue forward, especially since I have clearly 
stated above my broad view about existing technical policy systems. (I 
do have some problems with them, but that is not the primary burden of 
my IG related engagements.)

parminder





-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111024/99854e88/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