[governance] Government involvement in Internet governance on November 4

[John Curran]

On Oct 26, 2011, at 2:28 PM, Norbert Bollow wrote:

> From my perspective, the key problem with involving governments in
> core technical Internet governance and management is that they don't
> understand the technical and architectural concerns nor the processes
> for building technical consensus. I'd very much like to see government
> representatives with this important background knowledge becoming
> involved in all the various Internet governance institutions.

Full agreement.

> In fact, with the exception of ICANN where the government representatives
> are fenced into their own little walled garden called GAC, in all the
> other core Internet governance fora there's nothing to hinder the
> effective participation of government representatives besides their
> lack of knowledge and capacity, i.e. the goverments' failure to hire
> people as their representatives who are able to interact in these fora
> competently and effectively.

While ICANN does have GAC, I believe that government participation within
ICANN is not "fenced in" solely to that committee, i.e. participants from 
government are free to comment throughout the policy development process
(aside from being Director) and are hindered only by their own constraints.   

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