IETF WAS Re: [governance] Enhanced Cooperation (was Re: reality check on economics)

Wed May 30 09:58:41 EDT 2012

Riaz,

the fellowship program is not a travel program. It is capacity building. Therefore Fellows are chosen who can do the hard work that Adam has described, and will continue to contribute to the community in whatever of many different roles. Engineers/lawyers/activists/policy-makers, people working independently, civil servants, NGO militants, all have been Fellows and gained the ability to influence events and decisions in their environment with full, grounded knowledge of ICANN's subject matter and mechanisms.

Yours,

Alejandro Pisanty

! !! !!! !!!!
NEW PHONE NUMBER - NUEVO NÚMERO DE TELÉFONO

+52-1-5541444475 FROM ABROAD

+525541444475 DESDE MÉXICO

SMS +525541444475
     Dr. Alejandro Pisanty
UNAM, Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico

Tels. +52-(1)-55-5105-6044, +52-(1)-55-5418-3732

Blog: http://pisanty.blogspot.com
LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/pisanty
Unete al grupo UNAM en LinkedIn, http://www.linkedin.com/e/gis/22285/4A106C0C8614
Twitter: http://twitter.com/apisanty
---->> Unete a ISOC Mexico, http://www.isoc.org
.  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .

________________________________
Desde: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] en nombre de Riaz K Tayob [riaz.tayob at gmail.com]
Enviado el: miércoles, 30 de mayo de 2012 05:37
Hasta: Adam Peake
CC: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Guru गुरु
Asunto: Re: IETF WAS Re: [governance] Enhanced Cooperation (was Re: reality check on economics)

Thanks.

Not sure what "Recipients are expected to actively participate in and contribute to ICANN processes, both at the meeting and in the future." means though...

But lets see...

On 2012/05/29 01:47 PM, Adam Peake wrote:

Riaz, hi.

Copied from another list:

ICANN's Fellowship programme has now opened
for applications for travel funding to the Toronto
meeting:<http://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-23may12-en.htm>
Applications are welcome until 8 July.

Try it?  Though fellowships tend to slightly favor applicants from the
region where the meeting's being held.

Adam

On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 6:22 PM, Riaz K Tayob <riaz.tayob at gmail.com> wrote:

Guru

The questions you pose are important and not adequately addressed under this
header, especially as regards principled positions. There is adequate
attention paid to reform (which is essentially about "effectiveness") but
less about principled (or dare I say it on this list "radical") positions.
International law, or governance, is both about effectiveness AND
legitimacy. Without this parallax view, these discussions become mired in
convolutions as the subject matter (and/or goal) is not clearly articulated
- i.e. terrain specificity.

It is NOT possible to argue or intimate that ICANN is legitimate, even
though some try to do so. It may be effective, like IETF, but legitimacy
will always be elusive, given current arrangements. Inadequacies abound
about the lack of legitimacy, gTlds, intellectual property and also the
thwarting of the will of many poor countries to have some legitimate control
over CIR. Unless one has ideological (or pay check) blinkers this ought to
be a moot point. For many on this list, it is not, and will not in the
foreseeable future.

On reform, there are many avenues to follow, often dictated by the realm of
possibility that is severely constrained given current predilections. And
more attention needs to be given to these elements from a principled stance
as Gurstein has ventured. What I would really like to hear more about is the
problem of marrying the technical with the non-technical as there is a
dialectical relationship between the two (tech is tech, but tech is also law
as Lessig puts it). But the debate would need to move away from the
pedestrian one, "if it aint broke don't fix it" or "where is your
alternative" as if these cannot be created, as if ICANN et al have not
reinvented themselves to make themselves seem more legitimate dolling out
dosh and following the Iraq & Afghanistan pacification strategy post
invasion.

There are improvements that need to be made, but I am not sure the
imagination has been sufficiently decolonised (in general) to even pursue
some of the inquiries you pose and perhaps some more reality is needed on
these matters...

On 2012/05/25 04:26 AM, Guru गुरु wrote:

  ask ourselves how we can make the current IG more democratic.

Who pays the price for the current IG regimes and lack of its accountability
to the "global society"? Conversely, who does it benefit disproportionately?

____________________________________________________________
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

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20120530/590a4f3b/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