[governance] East Africa IGF - day 2, discussion of ITRs

[Louis Pouzin (well)]

Hi friends,

"Asia Pacific Regional Internet Governance Forum
http://www.APrIGF.asia"
 . . definitely smacks of a conference organized within a series of somehow
coordinated events under a common umbrella called Internet Governance Forum
(IGF).

Is Internet Governance Forum (IGF) a registered trade mark ?
Is there a reference body mandated for validating conference titles ?
Are there guidelines for conference organizers ?

Absent such constraints it is quite natural that controversies arise when a
popular title (slogan) means different things to different people. History
shows that at some point, when it reaches a successful reputation, it
usually attracts attention from dominant lobbies inclined to turn it into a
private power system. What's new ?

I am not suggesting it's the case here, only that anywhere it's a risk that
should be prevented before it's too late.

Organizations like ACM, IEEE, IFIP, and many more, lend their titles and
benign supervision to local organizers. It would be very unusual these days
to expect a potentially recurrent conference not to be organized without an
international coordinating structure. It's time for IGF & Co to trade a
certain amount of bureaucracy for a larger amount of stability, visibility,
and a protective shell.

Cheers, Louis
- - -

On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 3:54 PM, Jeremy Malcolm <jeremy at ciroap.org> wrote:

> On 19/07/2012, at 10:43 PM, Izumi AIZU wrote:
>
> A few years ago,when we are trying to organize IGF Japan, I asked Markus
> what are the criteria to host an National IGF. The answer that time was "
> There is no fixed standard nor process to recognize natoinal or regional
> IGF. Just be open and multi-stakeholder".  I have not seen any explicit
> process or even discussion about the definition of regional and national
> IGFs.
>
>
> Because of the general phobia of over-institutionalising the IGFs.  And
> like the Internet itself, this loose and bottom-up organisation has worked
> to a point, given the spread of so-called IGFs around the world (even if
> some of them don't bear much resemblance to what the IGF stands for - and
> I'm not pointing fingers at APrIGF with that comment).
>
> But now is the time to start introducing a bit of structure, to improve
> the coherence and legitimacy of the larger IGF system.  The same applies to
> the dynamic coalitions, which suffered from the same problem and should be
> replaced by working groups (by nature if not by name).
>
> If I were a civil society representative on the MAG, I would be seeking to
> add these items to its agenda, if not now then once the WGIGF report comes
> back from the GA (as I realise that the MAG Is in a sorry state to be doing
> useful things like that now).
>
>    --
>
> *Dr Jeremy Malcolm
> Senior Policy Officer*
> Consumers International
> Kuala Lumpur Office for Asia-Pacific and the Middle East
> Lot 5-1 Wisma WIM, 7 Jalan Abang Haji Openg, TTDI, 60000 Kuala Lumpur,
> Malaysia
> Tel: +60 3 7726 159 <%2B60%203%207726%201599>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20120719/9b370599/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