[governance] IBSA - Tshwane Declaration

[McTim]

On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 11:18 AM, parminder <parminder at itforchange.net> wrote:

>
>  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
>
> 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

Bill said: it would be great if more governments "took the IGF process
seriously and will engage even if it doesn't offer a path to
intergovernmental control.

You said:

"This is another myth that a strong IGF will get used to pave the path
to  inter-governmental control"

sounds like a non-sequitur to me.



>
> 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,

Well what you actually wrote was:

"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 was reacting to that.

I am not generally in favor of any intergovernmental-only policy
making in re: Internet things whether public policy large or small,
technical or more 'social'.


-- 
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