[governance] Internet as a commons/ public good; was, Conflicts in Internet Governance

[McTim]

On Tue, Apr 16, 2013 at 5:33 AM, Norbert Bollow <nb at bollow.ch> wrote:
> Parminder <parminder at itforchange.net> wrote:
>
>> or maybe
>>
>>     We recognise the Internet to be an emergent and emerging reality.
>>     As a global network of networks, it is an its intricate
>>     combination of hardware, software, protocols, human intentionality
>>     and a new kind of social spatiality, brought together by a common
>>     set of design principles, and constrained by policies established
>>     by due democratic processes. We consider the Internet as a global
>>     commons and a global public good. The design principles and
>>     policies that constitute its governance should, therefore, flow
>>     from such recognition of the Internet as a commons and public
>>     good.
>
> Minor grammar nitpick / typo correction: delete "its" in the second
> line, resulting in:
>
>     We recognise the Internet to be an emergent and emerging reality.
>     As a global network of networks, it is an intricate combination of
>     hardware, software, protocols, human intentionality and a new kind
>     of social spatiality, brought together by a common set of design
>     principles, and constrained by policies established by due
>     democratic processes. We consider the Internet as a global commons
>     and a global public good. The design principles and policies that
>     constitute its governance should, therefore, flow from such
>     recognition of the Internet as a commons and public good.
>
> How about simplifying "social spatiality" to "social space"?
>
>     We recognise the Internet to be an emergent and emerging reality.
>     As a global network of networks, it is an intricate combination of
>     hardware, software, protocols, human intentionality and a new kind
>     of social space, brought together by a common set of design
>     principles, and constrained by policies established by due
>     democratic processes. We consider the Internet as a global commons
>     and a global public good. The design principles and policies that
>     constitute its governance should, therefore, flow from such
>     recognition of the Internet as a commons and public good.
>
> In any case I think we're getting close to the point where a formal
> consensus process can be launched with the goal of formally approving
> some version of this as a formal IGC statement.

Very premature I think.

I would be opposed to this statement as it currently stands.

I meant to use the definition at Wikipedia (or some version of it) in
place of the current text, not in addition to it.

As it stands, we are calling it a new reality.  I don't understand
what that means.

Nor do I understand "specificity" or "spatiality" in this context.

Again, what I object to most is that I think we are defining a thing
by its epiphenomenal characteristics.

-- 
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