[governance]http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/11/27/net-us-un-internet-idUSBRE8AQ06320121127

[michael gurstein]

You are right McTim, rereading what I wrote, I should have put "belongs" in
quotation marks because the issue isn't "ownership" in any classical sense
(I presume) but rather issues such as those we discuss all the
time--accountability, transparency, responsibility (for)--and of course, we
want those most "suitable" to have "responsibility" in their specific
(technical?) area. 

But we also have to recognize that there is a need for some overarching
agreements on processes for decision making as each of those areas may in
themselves be contentious as to definition and designation. Likely the least
contentious areas will be those that are most technical, but even there
there may be issues (as Suresh was pointing to, I believe... 

As we get into Internet related policy/practice issues that are less and
less technical things will get more and more contentious I would expect and
that to my mind is precisely the riptides that we are currently navigating
and why univocal campaigns such as the current ones are to my mind
counterproductive and why we need to be working from a rather wider base of
tolerance of difference than seems to be currently manifest.

(And just to say I do believe that in something like the UDHR we have a
bedrock of shared values (and ways of identifying clearly aberrant
behaviour) on which the normative framework necessary for building the
decision making framework(s) can (and should) be built.)

Best,

M

-----Original Message-----
From: McTim [mailto:dogwallah at gmail.com] 
Sent: Friday, November 30, 2012 10:41 AM
To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; michael gurstein
Cc: Suresh Ramasubramanian; Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Baruch
Subject: Re: [governance]
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/11/27/net-us-un-internet-idUSBRE8AQ06320
121127

On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 12:26 PM, michael gurstein <gurstein at gmail.com>
wrote:

<snip>

> maintain it in its current form.  However, the very success of the 
> Internet --it's becoming a (and very soon "the") fundamental platform 
> for life in the 21st century--has meant that it no longer (can or 
> should) belong to those who created it or even those who (technically) 
> sustain it

I think this is where you go off track in understanding my position.

I don't think that the Internet "belongs" to anyone.


--
Cheers,

McTim
"A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A route
indicates how we get there."  Jon Postel


-------------- 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