[governance] Should Internet based two-sided markers be regulated by countries or govts

[Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro]

>
> Whether it is developed/ developing or North/South, it is a difference of
> accent.
>
> Sala: I hear you but we can agree to disagree.  Developing has different
> connotations, to use a very simple analogy using a human, imagine a
> toddler, an adolescent and an adult. The term "developing" has these
> connotations which is why there are terms such as LDCs and graduations to
> imply levels of growth. When one uses "South" it's like a blanket
> categorisation.
>

Snip

> I merely asked you, if you indeed think this is a problem, and you further
> quoted the specific issue of taxes on the Internet, what is your proposed
> solution to it.
>

Countries are free to assess how they want to deal with them and if through
their assessments and counsel from their internal stakeholders decide how
they wish to deal with, then this is their right as sovereign countries.

Why would not a all-country platform to discuss such issues qualify.... You
> havent answered other than to say, the solution is to build capacity of
> developing countries to participate.... participate in what?!
>

 Development of Policies, Laws etc whether in-country or international
forums. If two people were playing golf where one was a professional golfer
and the other with a handicap of 300 or say a professional tennis player
and one who is just given a racquet to play the game of their life.
Similarly, building capacity means to empower people to be aware of the
issues and meaningfully participate in policy processes whether this is
giving feedback to the Security Stability and Advisory Committee within
ICANN or participating within the WTO/WIPO etc. The WGIG 2005 Report
mentions "meaningful participation" and one common ground that I see with
all the stakeholders within the Internet Universe is that they all have
some element of "development aspects".

While there are indeed limitation of capacity, it is very unfair to
> developing country to deny them legitimate avenues where participation will
> be meaningful to produce the necessary policy outcomes (which ones do you
> suggest?),
>

[Please refer to my analogy -the developing world is invited to participate
and their systems in place to enable that. On the other hand the ability
and capacity to participate and understand the core issues can be a
challenge. The issue is not denial of legitimate avenue, the issue is
providing a mechanism in order to facilitate contributions.

and blame it on their capacity.... People and countries do not need to have
> capacity to claim equality of place on the policy table.
>
> Again the issue is not equality of place, the issue is "meaningful
> participation"
>

> On the CIRP - I promise to find the time to read it and revert with my
> specific comments (can't promise when but I will).
>
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20120819/b0d0f62d/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

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

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