[governance] Google's Fight the ITU/WCIT website
Riaz K Tayob
riaz.tayob at gmail.com
Thu Nov 22 09:23:31 EST 2012
Haha, sometimes irony is just lost on this list... Thanks Gurstein!
Irony does not translate well on the internet indeed...
It does however flush out some rather interesting verbiage from our
rather eloquent interlocutors : )
People in glass houses should not get undressed in the dark and all that...
On 2012/11/21 06:47 PM, michael gurstein wrote:
>
> FWIW, it is probably good to point out that Riaz` original comments on
> Parminder`s post were meant ironically (and supportively…
>
> Which suggests Internet Communicativity Rule #2* /Irony doesn`t
> translate well on the (multilingual/multicultural) Internet…/
>
> *Internet Communicativity Rule #1, /there are no Communicativity Rules
> on the Internet/./Whatever you say in whatever language will always be
> misinterpreted by someone somewhere. /:) (including this message, see
> rule #2.
>
> Best,
>
> M
>
> *From:*sama.digitalpolicy at gmail.com
> [mailto:sama.digitalpolicy at gmail.com] *On Behalf Of *Andrea Glorioso
> *Sent:* Wednesday, November 21, 2012 7:07 AM
> *To:* governance at lists.igcaucus.org
> *Subject:* Re: [governance] Google's Fight the ITU/WCIT website
>
> I do not often intervene in this mailing list, although I follow it
> with great attention.
>
> But I must say that independently from any substantive opinion one
> might have on Google, the ITU, WCIT or anything else, I find the tone
> of recent emails concerning the mental state and/or other personal
> characteristics of people extremely distasteful and very unhelpful to
> foster dialogue, which I thought was one of the main objectives of the
> the multi-stakeholder model.
>
> Civil society's main strength lies in its diversity. In my view such
> diversity should be nurtured. I never believed in fake notions of
> "consensus", nor am I shy to express my or the European Commission's
> disagreement when need be; but one can do so, even quite strongly,
> focusing on the substance rather than other elements.
>
> Best,
>
> Andrea
>
> On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 3:25 PM, Sivasubramanian M
> <isolatedn at gmail.com <mailto:isolatedn at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> On Nov 21, 2012 2:10 PM, "Suresh Ramasubramanian" <suresh at hserus.net
> <mailto:suresh at hserus.net>> wrote:
> >
> > I fail to see how google selling email, collaboration etc services to
> > telcos has anything to do with the free and open internet here.
> >
> > Remember something - even if google sells something to the telcos, the
> > users are the telco's users, and the law that's followed will be the
> law of
> > whichever country those users are in, and the telco does business in.
> >
> > And as for asking whether parminder is crazy .. well, I will confess
> that I
> > don't quite have to ask myself that question at all.
>
> That is too emphatic an assertion. I would not agree with the idea
> that Parminder is crazy. Parminder is sane, intelligent, calculative
> and his responses to any thing said or done for the good of the
> Internet is strategically constructed, sometimes incoherently, this
> again with a calculated purpose.
>
> It requires a person of Parminder's distorted intelligence to come
> with a response to something so good as Google's campaign to preserve
> the free and open Internet.
>
> His strategy: "Don't find fault with the ideas expressed in the Google
> campaign (because you can't). Find fault with Google (it is easier,
> and definitely distracts attention away from the arguments presented
> to the arguer, Google)". This is 'argumentum ad hominem'
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem
>
> Parminder is quite intelligent, but his liver, brain and heart are
> contaminated by a misplaced passion for the ITU.
>
> Sivasubramanian M.
>
> >
> > Riaz K Tayob [21/11/12 09:54 +0200]:
> >
> >> Are you crazy Parminder?
> >>
> >> Rule no. 1 The "free market" is always right
> >>
> >> Rule no. 2 If not, consult rule number 1.
> >>
> >> Rule no. 3 If you feel let down by rule no. 1 consult rule no. 2
> >>
> >> Apologies if this seems self-referential... but that is how it IS
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On 2012/11/21 09:49 AM, parminder wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> From Google's sign-on campaign
> >>>
> >>> “A free and open world depends on a free and open
> >>> Internet. Governments alone, working behind closed doors,
> >>> should not direct its future. The billions of people
> >>> around the globe who use the Internet should have a voice.”
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> https://www.google.com/takeaction/?utm_source=google&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=112012freeandopen#make-your-voice-heard
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Dear Google; Yes, the world indeed needs an open Internet, for
> which reason it is rather awful to note that you, meaning, Google;
> >>>
> >>> 1) Sold the entire net neutrality campaign down the drain in the
> US, by first assuming its leadership and then entering into a
> self-serving agreement with Verizon, whereby the main means of
> accessing the Internet in the future - mobiles - are exempted from net
> neutrality provisions.
> >>>
> >>> 2) Have recently entered into exclusive arrangements with telecos
> to provide Gmail, Google + and Google Search for free in some
> developing countries (Philippines) , and as a special low cost package
> exclusively of a few Internet services (and not the full, public
> Internet) in others (India), which makes a mockery of an open and net
> neutral Internet.
> >>>
> >>> 3) Tweak your search results, which is increasingly the main way
> of accessing locations on the Internet, in non-transparent ways, with
> increasing evidence that this is done in a manner that merely serves
> your own commercial interests and goes against consumer/ public
> interest, and for which reasons Google is currently subject to
> regulatory investigations in the US and EU.
> >>>
> >>> ( There are hundreds of other outrages, big and small, including
> the fact that today I suddenly see my default browser getting set for
> "Chrome' when I prefer and have always used Mozilla Firefox and never
> asked for the change of default.)
> >>>
> >>> I cannot see anything other than effective regulation of the
> Internet to be able to check such excesses by Internet companies that
> are deeply compromising the openness of the Internet (sticking here to
> only to the subject of openness of the Internet, used in above appeal
> by Google).
> >>>
> >>> So, lets be honest, it is not about people versus ITU, not even,
> Google versus ITU, or even Google versus content regulation; it is
> Google versus any regulation of the Internet space so that Google, and
> similarly positioned dominant players, can have a free run over the
> economic, social and political resources of the world.
> >>>
> >>> It is very important to wage the needed struggles to keep
> Internet's content free from undue statist controls. But one needs to
> be careful about whom one chooses as partners, nay, leaders of the
> campaign. Remember, the lessons from the net neutrality campaign in
> the US which was sold cheap by those who assumed its leadership. Also,
> have no doubt whatsoever that ACTAs and PIPAs will come back in new
> forms, accommodating the interests of the big Internet companies that
> led the opposition in the first round. (Anyone wanting to take a bet
> on this! :) ) And. when the second round happens, since 'our leaders'
> would have crossed over, there wouldnt be much fight left to give.
> >>>
> >>> For sure, make opportunistic, tactical, alliances, but civil
> society needs to be careful not to abandon leadership of public
> interest causes to players who cannot but become turncoat and, well,
> betray, - sooner or later getting into bed with whoever is
> economically and politically powerful around to help their business
> prosper. Such is the structural logic of big business. Let them stick
> to what they do best - organise productive forces of the world. Leave
> public interest causes to public interest players - civil society and
> governments. However, if the sentiment is simply overflowing, maybe
> just donate some money to such causes, in an arms- lenght /hands-off
> approach vis a vis managing the precise activities involved. I simply
> dont fancy corporate-led 'public interest' campaigns.
> >>>
> >>> One was stuck by the number of Google organised panels at the Baku
> IGF, where they openly took part and gave their policy pitch. As a
> participant from Pakistan said at a workshop ' I find a Google
> representative at every panel that I am at'. Such brash presence at
> policy forums and taking strong policy positions by corporates is a
> relatively new game, and to my mind not a welcome thing for our
> democracies. I keep hoping that civil society would give this
> phenomenon a deeper thought and analysis, rather than just riding the
> bandwagon.
> >>>
> >>> parminder
> >>>
> >>> On Wednesday 21 November 2012 04:47 AM, Fouad Bajwa wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> Just saw Google's Fight the ITU/WCIT website
> >>>>
> >>>> https://www.google.com/intl/en/takeaction/
> >>>> https://www.google.com/intl/fr/takeaction/
> >>>> https://www.google.com/intl/es/takeaction/
> >>>> https://www.google.com/intl/ar/takeaction/
> >>>> https://www.google.com/intl/zh-CN/takeaction/
> >>>> https://www.google.com/intl/pt-BR/takeaction/
> >>>> https://www.google.com/intl/ru/takeaction/
> >>>>
> >>>> (thanks to a colleague for sharing!)
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>
> >
> >> ____________________________________________________________
> >> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
> >> governance at lists.igcaucus.org <mailto: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
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ____________________________________________________________
> > You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
> > governance at lists.igcaucus.org <mailto: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
> >
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
> governance at lists.igcaucus.org <mailto: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
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> --
> I speak only for myself. Sometimes I do not even agree with myself.
> Keep it in mind.
> Twitter: @andreaglorioso
> Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/andrea.glorioso
> LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/profile/view?id=1749288&trk=tab_pro
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20121122/c74cfa27/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
More information about the Governance
mailing list