[governance] Internet as a commons/ public good

[Riaz K Tayob]

Agree fully Izumi.

The issue is simple, we can debate and discuss and sharpen our ideas here.

If necessary 'factions' can be formed around particular ideas, something 
Third Worldists ought to have done to deal with the single rooters. 
Perhaps these different positions will allow groups within IGC to deepen 
their positions, and use it as a platform for consensus positions, but 
from a base that is at least well interrogated by the 'other side' so to 
speak.

This will perhaps deepen the use of IGC for broadening, while at the 
same time allowing like minded people to deepen their analysis and views.

Riaz

On 2013/04/26 07:01 AM, Izumi AIZU wrote:
> Defining what the Internet is may be a good starting point, but may 
> not be the final product.
>
> However, reaching one consensus for what the Internet ought to be may 
> not be so easily reachable as we see very diverse views even among IGC 
> members if not within CS at WSIS process.
>
> Still, I think trying to articulate what we want it to be and take 
> notes to different views is a valuable exercise and so far so good or 
> at least I am learning a lot.
>
> Let's not to be too pessimistic!
>
> Izumi
>
> 2013年4月25日木曜日 Milton L Mueller mueller at syr.edu 
> <mailto:mueller at syr.edu>:
>
>     Is this an attempt to “define what the internet is” or is it an
>     attempt to force the internet into someone’s pre-conceived
>     ideological mold as a ‘public good’? If it is the former, it might
>     have some value for the WGEC. If the latter, it should be called off.
>
>     *From:*Carlos A. Afonso [mailto:ca at cafonso.ca <javascript:_e({},
>     'cvml', 'ca at cafonso.ca');>]
>     *Sent:* Thursday, April 25, 2013 9:02 AM
>     *To:* Milton L Mueller; Izumi AIZU; governance
>     *Subject:* RE: [governance] Internet as a commons/ public good
>
>     This discussion thread reminds me of the Wgig effort to arrive at
>     a "operational" definition of the Internet. I would not call it
>     off as it provides plenty of arguments to help us in the upcoming
>     WGEC. I have a feeling that a good summary of these arguments will
>     serve as a good dos-and-donts synthesis for the WG.
>
>     frt rgds
>
>     --c.a.
>
>     ------------
>
>     C. A. Afonso
>
>
>
>
>     -------- Original message --------
>     From: Milton L Mueller <mueller at syr.edu>
>     Date: 25/04/2013 09:29 (GMT-03:00)
>     To: Izumi AIZU <iza at anr.org>,governance
>     <governance at lists.igcaucus.org>
>     Subject: RE: [governance] Internet as a commons/ public good
>
>     Izumi’s comment clinches my feeling that this whole effort is
>     misdirected and should be called off. First, there is obviously
>     nothing near consensus on this; it is yet another attempt by one
>     faction to impose their own peculiar ideological fixation on the
>     rest of us, while ignoring more important and consensual values.
>
>     There is no well-defined problem that this statement addresses.
>     There is a vague reference to “the growing danger for the Internet
>     experience to be reduced to closed or proprietary online spaces.”
>     I challenge the truth of this assertion. I think it’s just false.
>     I see no such trend, no such danger. Proponents of that must
>     provide evidence of a “growing” trend, and show how it constitutes
>     something systemic and something that end users really don’t want.
>
>     Note that there IS a massive amount of evidence of a growing trend
>     toward content regulation and censorship in many countries. But
>     somehow, we don’t seem interested in addressing that. There is a
>     growing danger of securitization. We don’t address that. By the
>     way, how does this attack on closed online spaces relate to the
>     agenda of privacy advocates? A lot of people WANT to close off
>     some of the information shared on the internet (although this is
>     not an agenda I share). No one seems to have given that problem a
>     moment’s thought.
>
>     Finally, those who have chosen to prioritize “public good”
>     concepts over everything else have shown a clear misunderstanding
>     of the concept of public goods. They have inaccurately
>     characterized the internet as a whole as a public good when it has
>     clear that many features of it are private goods and that much of
>     the value we associate with the internet comes from allowing
>     private actors to create and maintain private spaces within the
>     global internet. Any statement that fails to recognize this is
>     both factually inaccurate and unlikely to get widespread support.
>
>     I hope IGC does not waste further time on this statement, and be
>     forewarned that if it does I will not allow anyone to misrepresent
>     it as a civil society position.
>
>     --MM
>
>
>
> -- 
> Izumi Aizu - sent from Mobile
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20130426/c366f2dd/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