From joana at varonferraz.com Thu Jan 31 17:37:47 2013 From: joana at varonferraz.com (Joana Varon) Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2013 20:37:47 -0200 Subject: [bestbits] [governance] Multistakeholder Roles and Responsibilities In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Dear all, I think some people of the governance list felt off from this thread because people that replied were not in both lists, if so, please, refer to the exchange of mensages bellow. Basically, some of us are willing to draft to communications to ITU: 1) adaptation of the best bits statement (on the content of WTPF documents), 2) follow-up on the letter to the SG during WCIT (on process/barriers faced by civil society). With that in mind, Deborah Brown and I have drafted the following text for the item 2 (follow-up letter to SG). (Is it right that CDT is working on the first draft for number 1?) We hope that the draft bellow is useful and if you think so, could you please add comments until Monday? As Jeremy have mentioned, let us try to ask for special dispensation to contribute and try to submit both letters (or just this one) with CS signatures during next week meeting. Would those attending next week's IEG meeting (Matthew, Avri?) support this letter and agree to deliver it in Geneva? Hope it helps! Kind regards, Joana -- Joana Varon Ferraz Centro de Tecnologia e Sociedade (CTS-FGV) http://direitorio.fgv.br/cts/ www.freenetfilm.org @joana_varon -------- 31 January, 2012 Open letter to ITU in ref. World Telecommunication Policy Forum (WTPF-13) preparation process Dear Secretary General Touré, Recalling Tunis Agenda (Paragraph 35, in particular) we, the undersigned members of civil society, write to urge International Telecommunication Union (ITU) to honor previous commitments expressed by the Secretary General in order to recognize the importance of ensuring meaningful and sustainable civil society participation in the preparatory process undertaken for the World Telecommunication Policy Forum (WTPF). The few civil society representatives who were in Dubai attending WCIT welcomed the opportunity to meet with you. On that occasion, we shared with you the concerns expressed in a letterthat gained the support of over 60 members of civil society globally. At that time, main issues were: the lack of any official standing to the public comments solicited prior to WCIT at the ITU’s invitation; the lack of access to and transparency of working groups, particularly the working groups of Committee 5; and the absence of mechanisms to encourage independent civil society participation. We welcome that you included the public comments in an information note to members of the ITU, where you have recognizedthe “ *benefits from a greater civil society engagement at ITU” and have *committed “*to take stock” and provide your membership with “some important recommendations” in line with the issue that civil society representatives raised. * Yet, as preparations are underway for the WTPF, civil society finds itself facing familiar barriers to participation: 1) There is no formal mechanism for civil society to independently make contributions to the preparatory process. We recognize that you have on a number of occasions encouraged member states to form multistakeholder delegations, but as representatives of civil society has expressed to you previously, civil society participation in national delegations cannot substitute for engagement with independent members of civil society. We request the opportunity to submit comments on the SG’s report and Member State opinions, similar to the Public Views and Opinions page for the WCIT, but with the guarantee that these opinions will be entered into the formal record. We recognize that the deadline for contributions was 1 February 2013, but given these barriers. 2) There are significant barriers to entry for meaningful participation in the May 2013 WTPF meeting. While we welcome that there is a formal process to apply to attend as a “public attendant”, there is no indication that civil society representatives who attend will have speaking rights at the meeting. As previously expressed in the Best Bits statement,we call for the ITU to create spaces during WTPF for civil society to express their views, as was done during the WSIS process. We also request that the WTPF be live streamed to allow for civil society and members of the public to follow remotely. Additionally the vetting process is opaque, with no public guidelines for who is accepted as a public attendant. We call for the ITU to provide guidance on how the applications admitted. [ 3) While some members of civil society have been invited to participate in the Informal Experts Group (IEG), this notice came too late in the process-- just a few weeks before the IEG’s final meeting-- for most individuals to find the resources to travel to Geneva. Furthermore, participation in the final IEG meeting is not sufficient for meaningful participation in the WTPF process. We regret that this opportunity was not communicated earlier and more publicly, and call for civil society to be included earlier in the process in future ITU meetings.] Sincerely, *Questions:* 1) When was the IEG opened to civil society participation? Was it just that we didn’t know to ask? [We have heard that the USG had sent a letter to the IEG Chair to request CS participation, waiting to hear back if that happened and when.] 2) Do members of the IEG have speaking rights at the WTPF May meeting? i.e. if civil society is on the IEG, then do they have the right to speak at the WTPF? 3) Is it possible to participate meaningfully in the IEG without attending in person, i.e. remote participation, contributions over email, etc. On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 2:37 PM, Joana Varonferraz wrote: > Let's do it, Mathew. > > Are you already coordinating with CDT to adapt best bits statement? > > I'm between meetings but I can start a draft of the follow up on the > letter to SG. Deborah, from Access, might help. Anyone who has a little > time to help is more then welcome. We will start it in about 2 hours. > > Lets try to have both drafts by the end of the day and try not to be so > creative, just departuring from the points and views of previous consensus, > as these letters will be just follow ups from previous "achievements", > right? > > Best > > Joana > > --- ~ --- ~ --- ~ > Joana Varon Ferraz > Researcher > Centro de Tecnologia e Sociedade (CTS/FGV) > www.freenetfilm.org > > > On 31/01/2013, at 09:52, Gene Kimmelman wrote: > > I agree also on this approach > > > -------- Original message -------- > From: matthew shears > Date: > To: bestbits at lists.igcaucus.org,Jeremy Malcolm , > joana at varonferraz.com > Subject: Re: [bestbits] [governance] Multistakeholder Roles and > Responsibilities > > > > I agree with Joana and Jeremy - there are two communications we should do > pretty quickly: > > 1) take the Best Bits WCIT statement and adapt it - or at least the first > part on transparency and access, etc. - to the WTPF. I personally don't > see the participation challenges for civil society being much less than > they were at the WCIT - which is ironic because the WTPF is not a > treaty-making conference - and the IEG is not adequate by any means (I am > on the IEG and will be attending next week). I'm sure CDT would be happy > to take a first cut at this text. > > 2) follow-up on the letter to the SG and the meeting we had in Dubai in > which participation in the WTPF was discussed. > > If there is agreement on text on 1 above I can raise points from it or > read it in the IEG meeting next week for Best Bits. > > While I understand the Brazilian telecoms regulator's view there are a > number of points in the SG's 4th report that refer to multistakeholderism > in Internet governance issues and there are two opinions submitted so far > that take positions I believe are contrary to civil society's interests in > terms of stakeholder participation and enhanced cooperation. I think > civil society messaging on these issues is as important for the WTPF as it > was for the WCIT. > > And finally, who on this list is going to the UNESCO WSIS/IGF meeting at > the end of February? Thought it might be good to have a gathering during > that week to compare notes on WSIS+10/IGF and discuss WTPF? > > Best > > Matthew > > > > > On 31/01/2013 09:01, Jeremy Malcolm wrote: > > On 31/01/13 05:15, Joana Varon wrote: > > Sorry for the late reply after the sympathy some have expressed on > drafting a letter highlighting the promises of Dr Touré at the WCIT SC > meeting. I was approaching the Brazilian government for support on our > demand for space and participation of civil society organizations on ITU > processes. > > Though showing solidarity with the cause, Brazilian government (or our > telecom regulatory agency responsible for representing the country at ITU) > has signaled that WTPF is not the proper sphere to submit extensive > contribution regarding CS participation, the plenipotentiary would be so. > So, as far as I know, Brazil will submit a contribution to WTPF only > generally speaking about openness and transparency, but not presenting a > particular proposal for change in the mechanisms for civil society > participation. > > In that sense, they have also addressed the existence of Informal > Experts Group for WTPF, highlighting that: > ... > > Well, this is surely not satisfactory, so, with that in mind, I wonder if > we should go for that joined CS letter focusing on WTPF and stressing > previous commitments from the Secretary General, do we still have time? Or, > for the ones how are more aware of UN bodies internal procedures, do we > have to wait the loooong time for the plenipot? What could we grasp right > now? > > > (I'm quoting almost your whole message because I intend on forwarding my > reply to the wcit12 list too, as an almost identical discussion is going on > there.) > > The deadline for comments on the Secretary General's report is tomorrow, > so we may be hard pressed to do anything by then! Having said that, we > could ask for special dispensation to contribute a belated submission, as > was granted for the Best Bits statement to WCIT. > > Personally I am unlikely to have time to take the lead on a letter but I > am supportive of the idea and would have comments to give on a draft if say > you or Emma from CDT were to send some draft text. The IGC has not > successfully done a statement for a while, and Best Bits is in transition > (watch this space), so probably it would probably not be under either of > those umbrellas, but rather a generic civil society letter to which groups > could sign on. > > I agree that the invitation to participate in the IEG is no substitute, > though for those who can, good on them. Avri said she is on the group and > there is CDT, but unless you count ISOC (I don't), there is no other civil > society that I know of. Doubtless largely due to the lack of funding, as > always (that's why I won't be there). > > -- > > *Dr Jeremy Malcolm > Senior Policy Officer > Consumers International | the global campaigning voice for consumers* > Office for Asia-Pacific and the Middle East > Lot 5-1 Wisma WIM, 7 Jalan Abang Haji Openg, TTDI, 60000 Kuala Lumpur, > Malaysia > Tel: +60 3 7726 1599 > > *Your rights, our mission – download CI's Strategy 2015:* > http://consint.info/RightsMission > > @Consumers_Int | www.consumersinternational.org | > www.facebook.com/consumersinternational > > Read our email confidentiality notice. > Don't print this email unless necessary. > > > -- -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From gurstein at gmail.com Thu Jan 31 20:57:40 2013 From: gurstein at gmail.com (michael gurstein) Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2013 17:57:40 -0800 Subject: [governance] Worth a read: The US, WCIT and the TPP Message-ID: <180001ce001f$96c32280$c4496780$@gmail.com> http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20121204/18125521229/us-hypocrisy-supports- open-dialog-internet-governance-wcit-full-secrecy-parallel-tpp-negotiations. shtml http://tinyurl.com/c6re7wr M -------------- 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 From pouzin at well.com Thu Jan 31 22:20:47 2013 From: pouzin at well.com (Louis Pouzin (well)) Date: Fri, 1 Feb 2013 04:20:47 +0100 Subject: [governance] CETA threatens Internet, health and democracy In-Reply-To: <510AABB8.4050700@gmail.com> References: <20130131094145.GC1969@t> <510AABB8.4050700@gmail.com> Message-ID: On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 6:36 PM, Riaz K Tayob wrote: > > [ CETA / Economy / Innovation ] > ==============================CETA threatens Internet, health and democracy > ============================== > Brussels, 31 January 2013 -- A draft trade agreement between the European > Union and Canada (CETA) threatens the Internet, health > and democracy, according to the Foundation for a Free Information > Infrastructure (FFII). The agreement contains an investor-state > arbitration clause, which gives multinational > companies the right to directly sue states in international tribunals. > CETA places these arbitration tribunals above the high courts of Europe > and Canada. > [snip] - - - Hi, CISPA, TPP, CETA and CleanIT are birds of the same feather, and we'll see more of them every year. After ACTA was shot down in 2012 by the EU parliament, international IP lobbies got to cranking out a diversity of alliances limited to a few countries. It seems they surmise that public opponents won't be able to mount massive campaigns against each and every voting or approval process. Once a mere two or three alliances are approved lobbies can attract or coerce more countries to join in and eventually coalesce them all. Even though they work in secrecy, leaks reveal that they recycle ACTA provisions and more. The EU Commission, which doesn't exist politically in IG debates, is trying to play a more visible role, while being no more than a follower in the hands of IP gangs. Not all countries are as abusive as the USA on IP, but it's a convenient fig leaf for pushing other objectives, censorship, tracking political or religious opponents, security, terrorism, economic intelligence, fraud, etc. All these activities rely on sophisticated surveillance systems, secrecy, speedy reaction, hence no effective judicial control. A dream for totalitarian governments. Louis -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From avri at acm.org Thu Jan 31 23:55:03 2013 From: avri at acm.org (Avri Doria) Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2013 20:55:03 -0800 Subject: [governance] NomCom update In-Reply-To: <20130131083413.74c84db3@quill.bollow.ch> References: <20130130223533.077cea48@quill.bollow.ch> <510A04E9.6080000@ciroap.org> <20130131083413.74c84db3@quill.bollow.ch> Message-ID: <88D413C0-593A-43DF-BADC-AF88601048AC@acm.org> Hi, Yes, it was beautifully done. Not that I reran it. I wonder if anyone did? Hope so. for completeness sake. avri On 30 Jan 2013, at 23:34, Norbert Bollow wrote: > [IGC Coordinator hat on] > > Jeremy Malcolm wrote: > >> A quibble: was the numbered list of members, and that the UK National >> Lottery results would be used as the random seed, circulated ahead of >> time? > > Yes, it was: In the message titled "NomCom selection process; request > for advice", Message-ID: <20130127003621.66061f79 at quill.bollow.ch>, > Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2013 00:36:21 +0100, I had written: "The random seed > will consist of the seven numbers of the Wednesday January 30 Lotto > draw of the UK National Lottery", and I had also repeated, explicitly > for the sake of completeness, the numbered list of volunteers that Sala > had already previously posted. > > Greetings, > Norbert > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From jeremy at ciroap.org Thu Jan 31 22:20:21 2013 From: jeremy at ciroap.org (Jeremy Malcolm) Date: Fri, 1 Feb 2013 11:20:21 +0800 Subject: [governance] caucus contribution, consultation and MAG meeting In-Reply-To: <20130131125841.3dde960c@quill.bollow.ch> References: <20130127120551.1db0b299@quill.bollow.ch> <51051017.80103@itforchange.net> <20130128160554.50c4cfa4@quill.bollow.ch> <20130128152553.GA22217@hserus.net> <20130128170918.580f9cf3@quill.bollow.ch> <20130131125841.3dde960c@quill.bollow.ch> Message-ID: <08EAADBD-7AA9-4EFD-BEE6-CC5D45B8888A@ciroap.org> On 31/01/2013, at 7:58 PM, Norbert Bollow wrote: > Dear all > > Could you please have a look at Baudouin Schombe's comments on > paragraphs 4 and 5 of the draft text at > http://www.igcaucus.org/digressit/archives/79 > > Maybe someone is able to make a good specific suggestion on how to > improve our draft text on the basis of these comments? This is a bit wordy but "Main sessions and workshops should not be competing with each other, as they are not substitutes. Workshops are the best forum for self-selected groups to exchange information, opinions and experiences. These can be more productive than main sessions, but are often limited to narrow communities of interest and can therefore lack external impact. Main sessions are better for bringing the insights developed through workshops and dynamic coalition members to the broader community of IGF participants, including those with influence over or connections to processes of policy development. Main sessions have the potential to allow for high-level consensus-building and strategising on how these insights can be reflected in policy and/or technical processes elsewhere, sometimes across issue areas: for example, messages on critical Internet resources might also be relevant to those involved in security or openness issues and vice versa. Therefore main sessions should not be treated as just "big workshops" relevant only to those with topical interests, but should be for the broadest possible segment of the IGF community to attend. This means not scheduling at least some key main sessions (but perhaps fewer of them overall) that do not coincide with workshops." -- Dr Jeremy Malcolm Senior Policy Officer Consumers International | the global campaigning voice for consumers Office for Asia-Pacific and the Middle East Lot 5-1 Wisma WIM, 7 Jalan Abang Haji Openg, TTDI, 60000 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia Tel: +60 3 7726 1599 Your rights, our mission – download CI's Strategy 2015: http://consint.info/RightsMission @Consumers_Int | www.consumersinternational.org | www.facebook.com/consumersinternational Read our email confidentiality notice. Don't print this email unless necessary. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From pranesh at cis-india.org Tue Jan 1 05:01:13 2013 From: pranesh at cis-india.org (Pranesh Prakash) Date: Tue, 01 Jan 2013 15:31:13 +0530 Subject: [governance] Yes! Hands off the Internet! In-Reply-To: <50DEEB11.8030008@gmail.com> References: <023601cde551$8654aba0$92fe02e0$@gmail.com> <7E3C2C354F234F6ABA07A09298A909E2@yourh4vl8csyi6> <50DEEB11.8030008@gmail.com> Message-ID: <50E2B3E9.1060907@cis-india.org> Riaz K Tayob [2012-12-29 18:37]: > See Nader on this issue... here > . While Nader is quite relevant to the current discussion, I fail to see how this article of his pertains to this thread. > Will try to dig out something on why oligopoly is a better approach to > understand these kinds of markets than the simple competition vs > monopoly argument... Even assuming oligopoly is the better approach, what is the precise statement of the problem and what is the solution that the "oligopoly approach" provides? -- Pranesh Prakash Policy Director Centre for Internet and Society T: +91 80 40926283 | W: http://cis-india.org PGP ID: 0x1D5C5F07 | Twitter: @pranesh_prakash -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 261 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: -------------- 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 From gurstein at gmail.com Tue Jan 1 11:19:23 2013 From: gurstein at gmail.com (michael gurstein) Date: Tue, 1 Jan 2013 08:19:23 -0800 Subject: [governance] Yes! Hands off the Internet! In-Reply-To: <50E2B3E9.1060907@cis-india.org> References: <023601cde551$8654aba0$92fe02e0$@gmail.com> <7E3C2C354F234F6ABA07A09298A909E2@yourh4vl8csyi6> <50DEEB11.8030008@gmail.com> <50E2B3E9.1060907@cis-india.org> Message-ID: <005e01cde83b$c3f46260$4bdd2720$@gmail.com> Pranesh, I think the (high) relevance of the Nader article is in response to the position articulated by (I believe it was) David Conrad and Suresh, with respect to (particularly Facebook) that "ya' pays yer money and ya' takes yer chances" errr... you sign up to the service which includes "assenting" to some indecipherable contract waiver and then (according to them) you are subject to whatever whims or fancies their over-clever and over-priced lawyers and evil twin marketers come up with in their capricious privacy (or whatever) statement of the day... forevermore... M -----Original Message----- From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Pranesh Prakash Sent: Tuesday, January 01, 2013 2:01 AM To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Riaz K Tayob Subject: Re: [governance] Yes! Hands off the Internet! Riaz K Tayob [2012-12-29 18:37]: > See Nader on this issue... here > . While Nader is quite relevant to the current discussion, I fail to see how this article of his pertains to this thread. > Will try to dig out something on why oligopoly is a better approach to > understand these kinds of markets than the simple competition vs > monopoly argument... Even assuming oligopoly is the better approach, what is the precise statement of the problem and what is the solution that the "oligopoly approach" provides? -- Pranesh Prakash Policy Director Centre for Internet and Society T: +91 80 40926283 | W: http://cis-india.org PGP ID: 0x1D5C5F07 | Twitter: @pranesh_prakash -------------- 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 From suresh at hserus.net Tue Jan 1 11:33:47 2013 From: suresh at hserus.net (=?utf-8?B?U3VyZXNoIFJhbWFzdWJyYW1hbmlhbg==?=) Date: Tue, 01 Jan 2013 22:03:47 +0530 Subject: [governance] Yes! Hands off the Internet! Message-ID: Let me be frank.. It is an established fact that a contract to engage in illegal behavior is an invalid contract, ab initio. So, if a website's contract with a user was to contravene some existing law in a country where the user is located, or were it to contravene US law, it would be automatically rendered invalid. Which is, I am sure you will appreciate, the reason why any such contact and all its revisions, would go through extensive due diligence legal review. And, especially when a country's privacy, data protection, fair trade etc regulator has received complaints about the website, their lawyers would carry out an equally thorough review with a view to possible enforcement action against the website So.. This might be more difficult than simply blogging about how disrespectful of user privacy a website is, but try to find where they violate local laws in their collection and use of your personal data, and complain to the appropriate regulator --srs (htc one x) ----- Reply message ----- From: "michael gurstein" To: , "'Pranesh Prakash'" Subject: [governance] Yes! Hands off the Internet! Date: Tue, Jan 1, 2013 9:49 PM Pranesh, I think the (high) relevance of the Nader article is in response to the position articulated by (I believe it was) David Conrad and Suresh, with respect to (particularly Facebook) that "ya' pays yer money and ya' takes yer chances" errr... you sign up to the service which includes "assenting" to some indecipherable contract waiver and then (according to them) you are subject to whatever whims or fancies their over-clever and over-priced lawyers and evil twin marketers come up with in their capricious privacy (or whatever) statement of the day... forevermore... M -----Original Message----- From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Pranesh Prakash Sent: Tuesday, January 01, 2013 2:01 AM To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Riaz K Tayob Subject: Re: [governance] Yes! Hands off the Internet! Riaz K Tayob [2012-12-29 18:37]: > See Nader on this issue... here > . While Nader is quite relevant to the current discussion, I fail to see how this article of his pertains to this thread. > Will try to dig out something on why oligopoly is a better approach to > understand these kinds of markets than the simple competition vs > monopoly argument... Even assuming oligopoly is the better approach, what is the precise statement of the problem and what is the solution that the "oligopoly approach" provides? -- Pranesh Prakash Policy Director Centre for Internet and Society T: +91 80 40926283 | W: http://cis-india.org PGP ID: 0x1D5C5F07 | Twitter: @pranesh_prakash -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From pranesh at cis-india.org Tue Jan 1 11:44:51 2013 From: pranesh at cis-india.org (Pranesh Prakash) Date: Tue, 01 Jan 2013 22:14:51 +0530 Subject: [governance] Yes! Hands off the Internet! In-Reply-To: <005e01cde83b$c3f46260$4bdd2720$@gmail.com> References: <023601cde551$8654aba0$92fe02e0$@gmail.com> <7E3C2C354F234F6ABA07A09298A909E2@yourh4vl8csyi6> <50DEEB11.8030008@gmail.com> <50E2B3E9.1060907@cis-india.org> <005e01cde83b$c3f46260$4bdd2720$@gmail.com> Message-ID: <50E31283.5020605@cis-india.org> michael gurstein [2013-01-01 21:49]: > Pranesh, I think the (high) relevance of the Nader article is in > response to the position articulated by (I believe it was) David > Conrad and Suresh, with respect to (particularly Facebook) that "ya' > pays yer money and ya' takes yer chances" errr... you sign up to the > service which includes "assenting" to some indecipherable contract > waiver and then (according to them) you are subject to whatever whims > or fancies their over-clever and over-priced lawyers and evil twin > marketers come up with in their capricious privacy (or whatever) > statement of the day... forevermore... Nader's work on standard-form contracts and on unequal bargaining power is why I said "Nader is quite relevant to the current discussion". Indeed, I have argued in numerous places (including at the IGF12 in WS 141, the panel on industry self-governance) that increased network effects and lack of substitutability are grave problems that leave traditional competition law analysis problematic. In the transcript from that, see the bit that starts off with "Very briefly, two kinds of examples of what I am talking about in terms of restrictions" (warning: there are a number of errors in the transcription, but you should be able to get the gist of where I'm going): http://goo.gl/mttFp I still do not see the relevance of the article that Riaz forwarded. -- Pranesh Prakash Policy Director Centre for Internet and Society T: +91 80 40926283 | W: http://cis-india.org PGP ID: 0x1D5C5F07 | Twitter: @pranesh_prakash -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 261 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: -------------- 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 From gurstein at gmail.com Tue Jan 1 12:25:07 2013 From: gurstein at gmail.com (michael gurstein) Date: Tue, 1 Jan 2013 09:25:07 -0800 Subject: [governance] Yes! Hands off the Internet! In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <008b01cde844$f34b9750$d9e2c5f0$@gmail.com> These kinds of hrrrmph "the law is the law" arguments are to my mind just silly… Of course, the "law is the law", nobody is arguing that… the problem is that in this area as they say, the "law is (or may be) an ass" and some way of achieving order/justice needs to be found… Yesterday, I think I "assented" to two or three of these agreements… and of course, I didn't read them… I'm not a lawyer, I don't have the time or the interest and the stakes for me in those instances weren't sufficiently large for me to make much of an investment in working through the fine fine print… So, what does that mean… that the owner of those contracts can within the rather shall we say, "flexible" limits of those contracts, play fast and loose with my data, my text, my credit card information etc.etc. I guess if they egregiously break law, no, but if they skirt the edge of the law which is what seems to be happening in these kinds of cases again who has the time or resources to call them out. In fact, blogging seems to be about the best way of handling these things at this point… Conrad I think it was referred to Instagram and the apparent (I guess there is some dispute on this) significant loss of stock market value when various bloggers called them out on some of this kind of egregious behaviour. But blogging seems to be hit and miss and what Nader was calling for was some rather more systematic approach and some way of introducing some form of order/justice into these relationships. So again enough with the mock outrage… There are enough real things to be outraged about. M M From: Suresh Ramasubramanian [mailto:suresh at hserus.net] Sent: Tuesday, January 01, 2013 8:34 AM To: gurstein at gmail.com; governance at lists.igcaucus.org; pranesh at cis-india.org Subject: Re: [governance] Yes! Hands off the Internet! Let me be frank.. It is an established fact that a contract to engage in illegal behavior is an invalid contract, ab initio. So, if a website's contract with a user was to contravene some existing law in a country where the user is located, or were it to contravene US law, it would be automatically rendered invalid. Which is, I am sure you will appreciate, the reason why any such contact and all its revisions, would go through extensive due diligence legal review. And, especially when a country's privacy, data protection, fair trade etc regulator has received complaints about the website, their lawyers would carry out an equally thorough review with a view to possible enforcement action against the website So.. This might be more difficult than simply blogging about how disrespectful of user privacy a website is, but try to find where they violate local laws in their collection and use of your personal data, and complain to the appropriate regulator --srs (htc one x) ----- Reply message ----- From: "michael gurstein" To: , "'Pranesh Prakash'" Subject: [governance] Yes! Hands off the Internet! Date: Tue, Jan 1, 2013 9:49 PM Pranesh, I think the (high) relevance of the Nader article is in response to the position articulated by (I believe it was) David Conrad and Suresh, with respect to (particularly Facebook) that "ya' pays yer money and ya' takes yer chances" errr... you sign up to the service which includes "assenting" to some indecipherable contract waiver and then (according to them) you are subject to whatever whims or fancies their over-clever and over-priced lawyers and evil twin marketers come up with in their capricious privacy (or whatever) statement of the day... forevermore... M -----Original Message----- From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Pranesh Prakash Sent: Tuesday, January 01, 2013 2:01 AM To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Riaz K Tayob Subject: Re: [governance] Yes! Hands off the Internet! Riaz K Tayob [2012-12-29 18:37]: > See Nader on this issue... here > . While Nader is quite relevant to the current discussion, I fail to see how this article of his pertains to this thread. > Will try to dig out something on why oligopoly is a better approach to > understand these kinds of markets than the simple competition vs > monopoly argument... Even assuming oligopoly is the better approach, what is the precise statement of the problem and what is the solution that the "oligopoly approach" provides? -- Pranesh Prakash Policy Director Centre for Internet and Society T: +91 80 40926283 | W: http://cis-india.org PGP ID: 0x1D5C5F07 | Twitter: @pranesh_prakash -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From gurstein at gmail.com Tue Jan 1 12:54:00 2013 From: gurstein at gmail.com (michael gurstein) Date: Tue, 1 Jan 2013 09:54:00 -0800 Subject: [governance] Yes! Hands off the Internet! In-Reply-To: <50E31283.5020605@cis-india.org> References: <023601cde551$8654aba0$92fe02e0$@gmail.com> <7E3C2C354F234F6ABA07A09298A909E2@yourh4vl8csyi6> <50DEEB11.8030008@gmail.com> <50E2B3E9.1060907@cis-india.org> <005e01cde83b$c3f46260$4bdd2720$@gmail.com> <50E31283.5020605@cis-india.org> Message-ID: <00ca01cde848$fb17c220$f1474660$@gmail.com> BTW, I probably should mention that for some reason your emails are all ending up in my "junk e-mail" folder... Which I don't always check... M -----Original Message----- From: Pranesh Prakash [mailto:pranesh at cis-india.org] Sent: Tuesday, January 01, 2013 8:45 AM To: michael gurstein Cc: governance at lists.igcaucus.org Subject: Re: [governance] Yes! Hands off the Internet! michael gurstein [2013-01-01 21:49]: > Pranesh, I think the (high) relevance of the Nader article is in > response to the position articulated by (I believe it was) David > Conrad and Suresh, with respect to (particularly Facebook) that "ya' > pays yer money and ya' takes yer chances" errr... you sign up to the > service which includes "assenting" to some indecipherable contract > waiver and then (according to them) you are subject to whatever whims > or fancies their over-clever and over-priced lawyers and evil twin > marketers come up with in their capricious privacy (or whatever) > statement of the day... forevermore... Nader's work on standard-form contracts and on unequal bargaining power is why I said "Nader is quite relevant to the current discussion". Indeed, I have argued in numerous places (including at the IGF12 in WS 141, the panel on industry self-governance) that increased network effects and lack of substitutability are grave problems that leave traditional competition law analysis problematic. In the transcript from that, see the bit that starts off with "Very briefly, two kinds of examples of what I am talking about in terms of restrictions" (warning: there are a number of errors in the transcription, but you should be able to get the gist of where I'm going): http://goo.gl/mttFp I still do not see the relevance of the article that Riaz forwarded. -- Pranesh Prakash Policy Director Centre for Internet and Society T: +91 80 40926283 | W: http://cis-india.org PGP ID: 0x1D5C5F07 | Twitter: @pranesh_prakash -------------- 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 From suresh at hserus.net Tue Jan 1 17:40:11 2013 From: suresh at hserus.net (Suresh Ramasubramanian) Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2013 04:10:11 +0530 Subject: [governance] Yes! Hands off the Internet! In-Reply-To: <008b01cde844$f34b9750$d9e2c5f0$@gmail.com> References: <008b01cde844$f34b9750$d9e2c5f0$@gmail.com> Message-ID: See, blogging doesn't help unless it is egregious enough Facebook tripping themselves up with their own policies, such as the zuckerberg family photo, is certainly getting covered, with relish, in media with a rather wider coverage footprint. As civil society we can do a lot more than simply blog, post fb messages or tweet about it, about any site that egregiously violates privacy. --srs (iPad) On 01-Jan-2013, at 22:55, "michael gurstein" wrote: > These kinds of hrrrmph "the law is the law" arguments are to my mind just silly… Of course, the "law is the law", nobody is arguing that… the problem is that in this area as they say, the "law is (or may be) an ass" and some way of achieving order/justice needs to be found… > > Yesterday, I think I "assented" to two or three of these agreements… and of course, I didn't read them… I'm not a lawyer, I don't have the time or the interest and the stakes for me in those instances weren't sufficiently large for me to make much of an investment in working through the fine fine print… > > So, what does that mean… that the owner of those contracts can within the rather shall we say, "flexible" limits of those contracts, play fast and loose with my data, my text, my credit card information etc.etc. I guess if they egregiously break law, no, but if they skirt the edge of the law which is what seems to be happening in these kinds of cases again who has the time or resources to call them out. > > In fact, blogging seems to be about the best way of handling these things at this point… Conrad I think it was referred to Instagram and the apparent (I guess there is some dispute on this) significant loss of stock market value when various bloggers called them out on some of this kind of egregious behaviour. But blogging seems to be hit and miss and what Nader was calling for was some rather more systematic approach and some way of introducing some form of order/justice into these relationships. > > So again enough with the mock outrage… There are enough real things to be outraged about. > > M > > M > > From: Suresh Ramasubramanian [mailto:suresh at hserus.net] > Sent: Tuesday, January 01, 2013 8:34 AM > To: gurstein at gmail.com; governance at lists.igcaucus.org; pranesh at cis-india.org > Subject: Re: [governance] Yes! Hands off the Internet! > > Let me be frank.. It is an established fact that a contract to engage in illegal behavior is an invalid contract, ab initio. > > So, if a website's contract with a user was to contravene some existing law in a country where the user is located, or were it to contravene US law, it would be automatically rendered invalid. > > Which is, I am sure you will appreciate, the reason why any such contact and all its revisions, would go through extensive due diligence legal review. > > And, especially when a country's privacy, data protection, fair trade etc regulator has received complaints about the website, their lawyers would carry out an equally thorough review with a view to possible enforcement action against the website > > So.. This might be more difficult than simply blogging about how disrespectful of user privacy a website is, but try to find where they violate local laws in their collection and use of your personal data, and complain to the appropriate regulator > > --srs (htc one x) > > > ----- Reply message ----- > From: "michael gurstein" > To: , "'Pranesh Prakash'" > Subject: [governance] Yes! Hands off the Internet! > Date: Tue, Jan 1, 2013 9:49 PM > > > Pranesh, I think the (high) relevance of the Nader article is in response to the position articulated by (I believe it was) David Conrad and Suresh, with respect to (particularly Facebook) that "ya' pays yer money and ya' takes yer chances" errr... you sign up to the service which includes "assenting" to some indecipherable contract waiver and then (according to them) you are subject to whatever whims or fancies their over-clever and over-priced lawyers and evil twin marketers come up with in their capricious privacy (or whatever) statement of the day... forevermore... > > M > > -----Original Message----- > From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Pranesh Prakash > Sent: Tuesday, January 01, 2013 2:01 AM > To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Riaz K Tayob > Subject: Re: [governance] Yes! Hands off the Internet! > > Riaz K Tayob [2012-12-29 18:37]: > > See Nader on this issue... here > > . > > While Nader is quite relevant to the current discussion, I fail to see how this article of his pertains to this thread. > > > Will try to dig out something on why oligopoly is a better approach to > > understand these kinds of markets than the simple competition vs > > monopoly argument... > > Even assuming oligopoly is the better approach, what is the precise statement of the problem and what is the solution that the "oligopoly approach" provides? > > -- > Pranesh Prakash > Policy Director > Centre for Internet and Society > T: +91 80 40926283 | W: http://cis-india.org PGP ID: 0x1D5C5F07 | Twitter: @pranesh_prakash > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From gurstein at gmail.com Wed Jan 2 02:38:39 2013 From: gurstein at gmail.com (michael gurstein) Date: Tue, 1 Jan 2013 23:38:39 -0800 Subject: [governance] The Globe and Mail: Terms-of-service agreements are rarely read, let alone understood Message-ID: <039301cde8bc$2f306990$8d913cb0$@gmail.com> (In case anybody needs to be reminded of the reality surrounding these agreements... M Terms-of-service agreements are rarely read, let alone understood OMAR EL AKKAD - TECHNOLOGY REPORTER The Globe and Mail Published Tuesday, Jan. 01 2013, 6:43 PM EST When the creators of 500px, a popular Toronto-based photo-sharing service, came to draw up the terms-of-service agreement for the site, they wanted a document that was written in plain English, not the typical indecipherable legal jargon. But there's a reason why 500px, like countless other technology companies, can't simply write the rules of its service in words anyone can understand - even though that's something more and more consumers are angrily demanding. "We asked our lawyers, can you make the terms of service so they are human?" Evgeny Tchebotarev, one of the founders of 500px, says. "The thing is, they cannot. If you make it in plain language, it'll cost a lot more, and can be disputed in court." Instead, 500px settled for a compromise. The company's terms of use agreement is written in legalese, but each section is accompanied with a couple of sentences explaining what that legalese means, in simple terms. It is perhaps an indictment of the current state of end-user licence agreements - the documents every user must "agree" to before using a digital product or service - that even this relatively minor addition quickly made the 500px service agreement one of the most highly praised in the technology industry. Most service agreements are simply not readable - and, perhaps as a result, are rarely read. Last month, Facebook-owned photo-sharing site Instagram faced a massive public push-back when it changed its terms of service agreement. Many of the site's users took the new changes to mean that Instagram could now do anything it wanted with user photos, including selling them to third parties without compensating the original photographer. The company was so surprised by the outcry that it eventually ditched the new terms. But beyond the public outrage, the Instagram situation illustrates wider problems with the terms-of-service process. First, there was confusion about what the new terms actually meant. Second, most users didn't become aware of the changes because they had read the new agreement but because they heard about it from others. "We should ask ourselves if people don't care about their rights; or if the problem is more that people cannot read the terms before 'agreeing' to them," says Hugo Roy, head of a project called "Terms of Service; Didn't Read," which grades the service agreements on various websites and products. "In my opinion, people care about these issues, whether it's their private data or their creative work. If people don't care, then how can we explain that each time Facebook changes their terms, we've got public outcries?" Licence agreements are almost as old as commercial software itself, but there are simply far more of them around today than there were a decade or two ago. A computer user in the 1990s may have had to sign off on a few pieces of software installed on a computer, whereas today's user can have dozens of different online accounts for everything from social networks to e-mail to cloud computing, and each one comes with its own licence agreement to be read (optional) and signed (required). A paper last year by researchers at Carnegie Mellon University estimated that it would take about 76 work days to read all the licence agreements an average user comes across in a year. Such estimates don't seem very far-fetched, considering the Apple iTunes agreement alone is about 50 pages long. The iTunes software and related apps and media store agreement has become a prime example of the modern service agreement. The frequently updated document weighs in at almost 15,000 words. "With something like iTunes, you'd be hard-pressed to find anyone who actually reads it," says technology lawyer Arshia Tabrizi, who has worked on many terms of service agreements. "I don't even read it." Apple's own licence agreement has been crafted in impenetrable legalese by a phalanx of contract lawyers, but many other software and web companies take an opposite, yet still troubling approach. A quick Google search of a random string of text from LinkedIn's end-user agreement shows that dozens of other websites - from a Dubai job-finding website to a forum for malaria researchers - have simply copied much of the social network's agreement verbatim, replacing the word "LinkedIn" with the name of their own firm. Indeed, a Virginia-based law office makes the process of designing an end-user agreement fairly straightforward - simply enter the name of your company and some other details into a form on the office's website, and an algorithm instantly outputs a generic end-user agreement for you, free of charge. "It is the most boilerplate of documents," Mr. Tabrizi says of end-user agreements. "Generally, the important thing is understanding users' expectations of the service. If I write something on Facebook, I would understand that others may have access to it. But is Facebook going to take my postings, compile and sell them as an e-book? That would definitely not be in line with my expectations of the service." Most web-based services - especially ones that offer a cost-free product, such as Instagram or Facebook - tend to focus on two areas when crafting an end-user agreement. The first is liability, so as to limit the company's exposure if data is accidentally deleted, for example. The other is content - specifically, limiting what kind of content a user may post on the service. In many cases, both areas can quickly become intertwined. Public backlash like directed at Instagram shows that while many users don't fully read the terms they agree to, a growing number are starting to take a closer look at terms-of-service documents. In turn, the companies drawing up the agreements are starting to notice. Indeed, the plain English terms of service model employed by 500px quickly became so popular, the company began allowing anyone to use the model for their own websites and services. "One day, the terms-of-service page received more views than any other page on the site," says Mr. Tchebotarev. -------------- 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 From riaz.tayob at gmail.com Wed Jan 2 07:29:41 2013 From: riaz.tayob at gmail.com (Riaz K Tayob) Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2013 14:29:41 +0200 Subject: [governance] UK - DVLA: Seven staff suspended for posting "inappropriate" Facebook comments Message-ID: <50E42835.3030905@gmail.com> 2 January 2013 Last updated at 10:10 GMT DVLA: Seven staff suspended for posting "inappropriate" Facebook comments DVLA headquarters in Swansea About 5,000 people work at the DVLA's head office in Swansea Seven office workers at the DVLA in Swansea have been suspended for putting "inappropriate" comments jokes on Facebook. The staff are facing disciplinary action after being caught writing personal comments on the social networking site. The driver and vehicle licensing agency employs 5,000 in Swansea. A DVLA spokesman said: "The staff remain suspended while investigations are ongoing." The staff at the DVLA hold the records for Britain's 32 million vehicles. Continue reading the main story "Start Quote Although instances are extremely rare, any inappropriate postings by staff made outside of work will be investigated and could result in disciplinary action." Spokesman DVLA Workers are banned from accessing social networking websites on the computers they use during their shifts. But the staff are thought to have posted the remarks outside work and were later reported to management. Comments including lewd jokes are also being investigated A DVLA spokesman said: "Although instances are extremely rare, any inappropriate postings by staff made outside of work will be investigated and could result in disciplinary action. "All staff are aware of the guidance in place and are reminded on a regular basis." The DVLA is currently in the process of closing all 39 of its regional offices to try to to cut costs and drive more customers to use its online services. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: _57287781_dvla464.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 10823 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- 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 From kovenronald at aol.com Wed Jan 2 07:45:25 2013 From: kovenronald at aol.com (Koven Ronald) Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2013 07:45:25 -0500 (EST) Subject: [governance] UK - DVLA: Seven staff suspended for posting "inappropriate" Facebook comments In-Reply-To: <50E42835.3030905@gmail.com> References: <50E42835.3030905@gmail.com> Message-ID: <8CFB6FE2BB612FD-A74-771C9@webmail-d194.sysops.aol.com> What, pray, is DVLA ? (Acronymitis seems endemic on this list.) Bests, Rony Koven -----Original Message----- From: Riaz K Tayob To: governance Sent: Wed, Jan 2, 2013 1:38 pm Subject: [governance] UK - DVLA: Seven staff suspended for posting "inappropriate" Facebook comments 2 January 2013 Last updated at 10:10 GMT DVLA: Seven staff suspended for posting "inappropriate" Facebook comments About 5,000 people work at the DVLA's head office in Swansea Seven office workers at the DVLA in Swansea have been suspended for putting "inappropriate" comments jokes on Facebook. The staff are facing disciplinary action after being caught writing personal comments on the social networking site. The driver and vehicle licensing agency employs 5,000 in Swansea. A DVLA spokesman said: "The staff remain suspended while investigations are ongoing." The staff at the DVLA hold the records for Britain's 32 million vehicles. Continue reading the main story “Start Quote Although instances are extremely rare, any inappropriate postings by staff made outside of work will be investigated and could result in disciplinary action.” Spokesman DVLA Workers are banned from accessing social networking websites on the computers they use during their shifts. But the staff are thought to have posted the remarks outside work and were later reported to management. Comments including lewd jokes are also being investigated A DVLA spokesman said: "Although instances are extremely rare, any inappropriate postings by staff made outside of work will be investigated and could result in disciplinary action. "All staff are aware of the guidance in place and are reminded on a regular basis." The DVLA is currently in the process of closing all 39 of its regional offices to try to to cut costs and drive more customers to use its online services. ____________________________________________________________ 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: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: _57287781_dvla464.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 10823 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- 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 From suresh at hserus.net Wed Jan 2 07:59:03 2013 From: suresh at hserus.net (Suresh Ramasubramanian) Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2013 18:29:03 +0530 Subject: [governance] UK - DVLA: Seven staff suspended for posting "inappropriate" Facebook comments In-Reply-To: <8CFB6FE2BB612FD-A74-771C9@webmail-d194.sysops.aol.com> References: <50E42835.3030905@gmail.com> <8CFB6FE2BB612FD-A74-771C9@webmail-d194.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: <8E629E9F-9012-44C9-ABC9-E421B6BFD1B0@hserus.net> As it says later down the list, "Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency" The UK agency that gives you car license plates and driving licenses. --srs (iPad) On 02-Jan-2013, at 18:15, Koven Ronald wrote: > What, pray, is DVLA ? > > (Acronymitis seems endemic on this list.) > > Bests, Rony Koven > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Riaz K Tayob > To: governance > Sent: Wed, Jan 2, 2013 1:38 pm > Subject: [governance] UK - DVLA: Seven staff suspended for posting "inappropriate" Facebook comments > > 2 January 2013 Last updated at 10:10 GMT > > DVLA: Seven staff suspended for posting "inappropriate" Facebook comments > > <_57287781_dvla464.jpg> About 5,000 people work at the DVLA's head office in Swansea > > Seven office workers at the DVLA in Swansea have been suspended for putting "inappropriate" comments jokes on Facebook. > The staff are facing disciplinary action after being caught writing personal comments on the social networking site. > The driver and vehicle licensing agency employs 5,000 in Swansea. > A DVLA spokesman said: "The staff remain suspended while investigations are ongoing." > The staff at the DVLA hold the records for Britain's 32 million vehicles. > Continue reading the main story > “Start Quote > > Although instances are extremely rare, any inappropriate postings by staff made outside of work will be investigated and could result in disciplinary action.” > Spokesman DVLA > Workers are banned from accessing social networking websites on the computers they use during their shifts. > But the staff are thought to have posted the remarks outside work and were later reported to management. > Comments including lewd jokes are also being investigated > A DVLA spokesman said: "Although instances are extremely rare, any inappropriate postings by staff made outside of work will be investigated and could result in disciplinary action. > "All staff are aware of the guidance in place and are reminded on a regular basis." > The DVLA is currently in the process of closing all 39 of its regional offices to try to to cut costs and drive more customers to use its online services. > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From nhklein at gmx.net Wed Jan 2 08:23:06 2013 From: nhklein at gmx.net (Norbert Klein) Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2013 20:23:06 +0700 Subject: [governance] UK - DVLA: Seven staff suspended for posting "inappropriate" Facebook comments In-Reply-To: <8CFB6FE2BB612FD-A74-771C9@webmail-d194.sysops.aol.com> References: <50E42835.3030905@gmail.com> <8CFB6FE2BB612FD-A74-771C9@webmail-d194.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: <50E434BA.2060507@gmx.net> Thanks, Rony, for working towards preventing this list from being only for a small in-group (of English speakers). Norbert Klein Cambodia On 1/2/2013 7:45 PM, Koven Ronald wrote: > What, pray, is DVLA ? > > (Acronymitis seems endemic on this list.) > > Bests, Rony Koven > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Riaz K Tayob > To: governance > Sent: Wed, Jan 2, 2013 1:38 pm > Subject: [governance] UK - DVLA: Seven staff suspended for posting > "inappropriate" Facebook comments [snip] -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de Wed Jan 2 15:28:08 2013 From: wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de (=?iso-8859-1?Q?=22Kleinw=E4chter=2C_Wolfgang=22?=) Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2013 21:28:08 +0100 Subject: AW: [governance] UK - DVLA: Seven staff suspended for posting "inappropriate" Facebook comments References: <50E42835.3030905@gmail.com> <8CFB6FE2BB612FD-A74-771C9@webmail-d194.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8013313CC@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> Rony What, pray, is DVLA ? Wolfgang http://www.dft.gov.uk/dvla/ Happy new year (Acronymitis seems endemic on this list.) Bests, Rony Koven -----Original Message----- From: Riaz K Tayob To: governance Sent: Wed, Jan 2, 2013 1:38 pm Subject: [governance] UK - DVLA: Seven staff suspended for posting "inappropriate" Facebook comments 2 January 2013 Last updated at 10:10 GMT DVLA: Seven staff suspended for posting "inappropriate" Facebook comments DVLA headquarters in Swansea About 5,000 people work at the DVLA's head office in Swansea Seven office workers at the DVLA in Swansea have been suspended for putting "inappropriate" comments jokes on Facebook. The staff are facing disciplinary action after being caught writing personal comments on the social networking site. The driver and vehicle licensing agency employs 5,000 in Swansea. A DVLA spokesman said: "The staff remain suspended while investigations are ongoing." The staff at the DVLA hold the records for Britain's 32 million vehicles. Continue reading the main story "Start Quote Although instances are extremely rare, any inappropriate postings by staff made outside of work will be investigated and could result in disciplinary action." Spokesman DVLA Workers are banned from accessing social networking websites on the computers they use during their shifts. But the staff are thought to have posted the remarks outside work and were later reported to management. Comments including lewd jokes are also being investigated A DVLA spokesman said: "Although instances are extremely rare, any inappropriate postings by staff made outside of work will be investigated and could result in disciplinary action. "All staff are aware of the guidance in place and are reminded on a regular basis." The DVLA is currently in the process of closing all 39 of its regional offices to try to to cut costs and drive more customers to use its online services. ____________________________________________________________ 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: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: _57287781_dvla464.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 10823 bytes Desc: _57287781_dvla464.jpg URL: -------------- 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 From avri at ella.com Wed Jan 2 17:18:43 2013 From: avri at ella.com (Avri Doria) Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2013 17:18:43 -0500 Subject: [governance] UK - DVLA: Seven staff suspended for posting "inappropriate" Facebook comments In-Reply-To: <50E434BA.2060507@gmx.net> References: <50E42835.3030905@gmail.com> <8CFB6FE2BB612FD-A74-771C9@webmail-d194.sysops.aol.com> <50E434BA.2060507@gmx.net> Message-ID: I would assume anyone can do a search on acronyms. Even more helpful when the text contains it already. Hi, Thank your lucky stars people aren't using document numbers as the reference. When someone sends a acronym i don't know, i use the net to open it up - and often even learn something. Of course when the text already contains it, so much the better. When someone sends something to the list in a language i don't understand i use: > Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t Which is tacked on to every list message. just saying avri 1/3 On 2 Jan 2013, at 08:23, Norbert Klein wrote: > Thanks, Rony, > > for working towards preventing this list from being only for a small in-group (of English speakers). > > Norbert Klein > Cambodia > > > On 1/2/2013 7:45 PM, Koven Ronald wrote: >> What, pray, is DVLA ? >> >> (Acronymitis seems endemic on this list.) >> >> Bests, Rony Koven -------------- 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 From nhklein at gmx.net Wed Jan 2 20:28:03 2013 From: nhklein at gmx.net (Norbert Klein) Date: Thu, 03 Jan 2013 08:28:03 +0700 Subject: [governance] UK - DVLA: Seven staff suspended for posting "inappropriate" Facebook comments In-Reply-To: References: <50E42835.3030905@gmail.com> <8CFB6FE2BB612FD-A74-771C9@webmail-d194.sysops.aol.com> <50E434BA.2060507@gmx.net> Message-ID: <50E4DEA3.5010107@gmx.net> Happy New Year, Avri, and everybody else. I assure you that I have no problem Googling acronyms a lot, and I use the translation facility sometimes (though not often on this list - and the translation facility often fails on acronyms). BUT: I am also trying to extend the number of the few people involved in the discussion of Internet Governance by trying to share issues with some others - by having them read and consider what kinds of issues we are facing and dealing with. It is not much a problem for myself - but I am not sure if I am the only one who often faces negative reactions "Too difficult to catch..." and the acronym factor is often mentioned. I did not dare to tell them: "Come on, use the opportunity to educate yourself by research the acronyms!" Norbert Klein Cambodia = On 1/3/2013 5:18 AM, Avri Doria wrote: > I would assume anyone can do a search on acronyms. > Even more helpful when the text contains it already. > > Hi, > > Thank your lucky stars people aren't using document numbers as the reference. > > When someone sends a acronym i don't know, i use the net to open it up - and often even learn something. Of course when the text already contains it, so much the better. > > When someone sends something to the list in a language i don't understand i use: > >> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t > > Which is tacked on to every list message. > > just saying > > avri > 1/3 > > On 2 Jan 2013, at 08:23, Norbert Klein wrote: > >> Thanks, Rony, >> >> for working towards preventing this list from being only for a small in-group (of English speakers). >> >> Norbert Klein >> Cambodia >> >> >> On 1/2/2013 7:45 PM, Koven Ronald wrote: >>> What, pray, is DVLA ? >>> >>> (Acronymitis seems endemic on this list.) >>> >>> Bests, Rony Koven > -------------- 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 From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com Thu Jan 3 04:52:31 2013 From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro) Date: Thu, 3 Jan 2013 22:52:31 +1300 Subject: [governance] New Year's Greetings! Message-ID: Dear All, 2012 was certainly an eventful year filled with much controversy and without a doubt Internet Governance has evolved and transcended into fierce global debates in various global foras. It has certainly been an interesting year. 2013 will no doubt also have surprises in store for the world if the events in 2012 are anything to go by. All in all, I would like to take this time to wish you all a wonderful and prosperous new year! May 2013 be a productive and memorable year and may civil society continue to advocate and in the midst of such a diversity continue to find a common trajectory -an open and free internet and "access for all"!!! Have a wonderful new year! -- Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala P.O. Box 17862 Suva Fiji Twitter: @SalanietaT Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro Tel: +679 3544828 Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From bavouc at gmail.com Thu Jan 3 05:00:58 2013 From: bavouc at gmail.com (Clement Martial Aboudem Bavou) Date: Thu, 3 Jan 2013 11:00:58 +0100 Subject: [governance] New Year's Greetings! In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Thanks, Sent from my HTC ONE S Smartphone. Le 3 janv. 2013 10:53, "Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro" < salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com> a écrit : > Dear All, > > 2012 was certainly an eventful year filled with much controversy and > without a doubt Internet Governance has evolved and transcended into fierce > global debates in various global foras. It has certainly been an > interesting year. > > 2013 will no doubt also have surprises in store for the world if the > events in 2012 are anything to go by. All in all, I would like to take this > time to wish you all a wonderful and prosperous new year! May 2013 be a > productive and memorable year and may civil society continue to advocate > and in the midst of such a diversity continue to find a common trajectory > -an open and free internet and "access for all"!!! > > Have a wonderful new year! > > -- > Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala > P.O. Box 17862 > Suva > Fiji > > Twitter: @SalanietaT > Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro > Tel: +679 3544828 > Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From lmcknigh at syr.edu Thu Jan 3 10:59:38 2013 From: lmcknigh at syr.edu (Lee W McKnight) Date: Thu, 3 Jan 2013 15:59:38 +0000 Subject: [governance] FW: [IP] a 2013 resolution: defund the ITU In-Reply-To: References: <50E59141.4070800@netmagic.com>, Message-ID: <77A59FC9477004489D44DE7FC6840E7B1A16DF@SUEX10-mbx-08.ad.syr.edu> Well remember what I said about ITU carrying on...I still think it will, but echos from Dubai may shake its budgetary formula. And according to Tony's spin, Hurricane Sandy. The attachment is interesting reading. Lee ________________________________ From: DAVID J. FARBER [farber at gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, January 03, 2013 9:29 AM To: ip Subject: [IP] a 2013 resolution: defund the ITU Begin forwarded message: From: Tony Rutkowski > Subject: a 2013 resolution: defund the ITU Date: January 3, 2013 9:10:09 AM EST To: Dave Farber > Reply-To: trutkowski at netmagic.com Happy New Year, Dave. More than a few people on the IP list may have an interest in this post to the State Dept's advisory committee list. Even if a reader doesn't resonate with my advocacy, the facts here are very interesting and difficult to find. cheers, tony -------- Original Message -------- Subject: a 2013 resolution: defund the ITU Date: Thu, 03 Jan 2013 08:55:04 -0500 From: Tony Rutkowski Reply-To: trutkowski at netmagic.com Organization: NetMagic Associates To: WCIT at LMLIST.STATE.GOV What is not well known is that the ITU depends on voluntary contributions. Each member elects to give the ITU some number (or fraction of a number) of "contributory units" each year. A CU is currently equal to about $300k/yr. Thus the U.S. actually volunteers to give the ITU 30 units or about $9 million per year. It is the only country other than Japan to do so. The difficult to find official ITU contributions ledger is attached. So all those G89 countries at the WCIT that thumbed their noses at the U.S. and are trying to use the ITU to regulate the Internet and constrain information flow - they contribute almost nothing. Incredulously, they get the U.S. to help fund them to do that. Most of them even get free stipends from the ITU to go on Geneva vacations to rail against U.S. interests. That's going to increase as the WTSA-12 voted so many of them into the ITU-T leadership. What is remarkable about the ledger is that you can readily see how over the past six years, many other major countries and much of industry have shut their wallets, and in a great many cases simply walked out of the ITU-T. Yet the U.S. itself has kept paying the largest contribution amount! Indeed, as the others cut back their contributions, the U.S. pays even more to prop up the ITU bloated budget and the fine lifestyle of the ITU staff. With the 2013 Congress convening today, there is the perfect opportunity to begin defunding the ITU and send a message to those 89 countries and the duplicitous ITU officials who helped them. If the U.S. halves its contribution to fifteen units like many European countries have done, that's $45 million over ten years. Rather than flushing U.S. money down the ITU rathole to fund the G89 over the coming years to implement their extreme anti-Internet agenda, give it instead to the communities who were victims of Hurricane Sandy to re-build their broadband infrastructure. Considering the WCIT Internet resolution was unanimously adopted by Congress, that should be a no-brainer. Those companies who still remain as ITU-T members can act here as well. Renounce your membership and join all the others who have already left. -t Archives [https://www.listbox.com/images/feed-icon-10x10.jpg] | Modify Your Subscription | Unsubscribe Now [https://www.listbox.com/images/listbox-logo-small.png] -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: S11-CL-C-0041!!+C1MSW-E.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 527474 bytes Desc: S11-CL-C-0041!!+C1MSW-E.pdf URL: -------------- 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 From avri at ella.com Thu Jan 3 15:35:38 2013 From: avri at ella.com (Avri Doria) Date: Thu, 3 Jan 2013 15:35:38 -0500 Subject: [governance] UK - DVLA: Seven staff suspended for posting "inappropriate" Facebook comments In-Reply-To: <50E4DEA3.5010107@gmx.net> References: <50E42835.3030905@gmail.com> <8CFB6FE2BB612FD-A74-771C9@webmail-d194.sysops.aol.com> <50E434BA.2060507@gmx.net> <50E4DEA3.5010107@gmx.net> Message-ID: Hi, Happy New Year to you. > "Come on, use the opportunity to educate yourself by research the acronyms!" That is close to the advice I would give them. Though It might look more like: "Come on, participate, even though you will occasionally have to research an acronym or something else you never heard of before." To be dependent on others for acronym help is to be helpless in this environment. It is a mental barrier people need to get over. And the helpless messages about "whatever someone could mean by XYZ", really don't help as they enable acronym dependency, a sever Ig debilitative syndrome. Additionally the messages would produce answers that are too late for the reader, no matter how quickly the response is sent in. Sure, I prefer the writing of people who do spell a name on first use. But even when I have done so, I have had people yell at me for not explaining it again on a later page. And at what point do you start to beleive the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Aumbers is more confusing than ICANN? Finally sometimes an acronym is really just the name of something and even people who live within that organization don't know or care about the spelling out. Sometime it really does not matter what it means and that bit of knowledge-thirst can be left in abeyance. I ask myself 'do I really need to know what every acronym means'? avri 1/3 support wikipedia, someone has to provide the first clue to all answers. On 2 Jan 2013, at 20:28, Norbert Klein wrote: > Happy New Year, Avri, and everybody else. > > I assure you that I have no problem Googling acronyms a lot, and I use the translation facility sometimes (though not often on this list - and the translation facility often fails on acronyms). > > BUT: > > I am also trying to extend the number of the few people involved in the discussion of Internet Governance by trying to share issues with some others - by having them read and consider what kinds of issues we are facing and dealing with. > > It is not much a problem for myself - but I am not sure if I am the only one who often faces negative reactions "Too difficult to catch..." and the acronym factor is often mentioned. > > I did not dare to tell them: "Come on, use the opportunity to educate yourself by research the acronyms!" > > > Norbert Klein > Cambodia > > = > > On 1/3/2013 5:18 AM, Avri Doria wrote: >> I would assume anyone can do a search on acronyms. >> Even more helpful when the text contains it already. >> >> Hi, >> >> Thank your lucky stars people aren't using document numbers as the reference. >> >> When someone sends a acronym i don't know, i use the net to open it up - and often even learn something. Of course when the text already contains it, so much the better. >> >> When someone sends something to the list in a language i don't understand i use: >> >>> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t >> >> Which is tacked on to every list message. >> >> just saying >> >> avri >> 1/3 >> >> On 2 Jan 2013, at 08:23, Norbert Klein wrote: >> >>> Thanks, Rony, >>> >>> for working towards preventing this list from being only for a small in-group (of English speakers). >>> >>> Norbert Klein >>> Cambodia >>> >>> >>> On 1/2/2013 7:45 PM, Koven Ronald wrote: >>>> What, pray, is DVLA ? >>>> >>>> (Acronymitis seems endemic on this list.) >>>> >>>> Bests, Rony Koven >> > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From avri at ella.com Thu Jan 3 15:37:02 2013 From: avri at ella.com (Avri Doria) Date: Thu, 3 Jan 2013 15:37:02 -0500 Subject: [governance] [IP] a 2013 resolution: defund the ITU In-Reply-To: <77A59FC9477004489D44DE7FC6840E7B1A16DF@SUEX10-mbx-08.ad.syr.edu> References: <50E59141.4070800@netmagic.com>, <77A59FC9477004489D44DE7FC6840E7B1A16DF@SUEX10-mbx-08.ad.syr.edu> Message-ID: Yes, very interesting, As was a later message that said something to the effect of: Give the money to the IGF instead! avri On 3 Jan 2013, at 10:59, Lee W McKnight wrote: > Well remember what I said about ITU carrying on...I still think it will, but echos from Dubai may shake its budgetary formula. > > And according to Tony's spin, Hurricane Sandy. > > The attachment is interesting reading. > > Lee > > > From: DAVID J. FARBER [farber at gmail.com] > Sent: Thursday, January 03, 2013 9:29 AM > To: ip > Subject: [IP] a 2013 resolution: defund the ITU > > > > Begin forwarded message: > > From: Tony Rutkowski > Subject: a 2013 resolution: defund the ITU > Date: January 3, 2013 9:10:09 AM EST > To: Dave Farber > Reply-To: trutkowski at netmagic.com > > Happy New Year, Dave. > > More than a few people on the IP list > may have an interest in this post to the > State Dept's advisory committee list. > Even if a reader doesn't resonate with > my advocacy, the facts here are very > interesting and difficult to find. > > cheers, > tony > > > -------- Original Message -------- > Subject: a 2013 resolution: defund the ITU > Date: Thu, 03 Jan 2013 08:55:04 -0500 > From: Tony Rutkowski > Reply-To: trutkowski at netmagic.com > Organization: NetMagic Associates > To: WCIT at LMLIST.STATE.GOV > > > What is not well known is that the ITU > depends on voluntary contributions. Each > member elects to give the ITU some number (or > fraction of a number) of "contributory units" > each year. A CU is currently equal to about > $300k/yr. Thus the U.S. actually volunteers > to give the ITU 30 units or about $9 million > per year. It is the only country other than > Japan to do so. The difficult to find > official ITU contributions ledger is attached. > > So all those G89 countries at the WCIT that > thumbed their noses at the U.S. and are > trying to use the ITU to regulate the > Internet and constrain information flow - > they contribute almost nothing. > Incredulously, they get the U.S. to help fund > them to do that. Most of them even get free > stipends from the ITU to go on Geneva > vacations to rail against U.S. interests. > That's going to increase as the WTSA-12 > voted so many of them into the ITU-T leadership. > > What is remarkable about the ledger is that > you can readily see how over the past six years, > many other major countries and much of > industry have shut their wallets, and in a > great many cases simply walked out of the ITU-T. > Yet the U.S. itself has kept paying the largest > contribution amount! Indeed, as the others cut > back their contributions, the U.S. pays even > more to prop up the ITU bloated budget and the > fine lifestyle of the ITU staff. > > With the 2013 Congress convening today, there > is the perfect opportunity to begin defunding > the ITU and send a message to those 89 > countries and the duplicitous ITU officials who > helped them. If the U.S. halves its contribution > to fifteen units like many European countries > have done, that's $45 million over ten years. > > Rather than flushing U.S. money down the ITU > rathole to fund the G89 over the coming years > to implement their extreme anti-Internet > agenda, give it instead to the communities > who were victims of Hurricane Sandy to > re-build their broadband infrastructure. > Considering the WCIT Internet resolution was > unanimously adopted by Congress, that should > be a no-brainer. > > Those companies who still remain as ITU-T > members can act here as well. Renounce your > membership and join all the others who have > already left. > > -t > > > > > Archives | Modify Your Subscription | Unsubscribe Now > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From gurstein at gmail.com Thu Jan 3 15:54:11 2013 From: gurstein at gmail.com (michael gurstein) Date: Thu, 3 Jan 2013 12:54:11 -0800 Subject: [governance] FW: [IP] a 2013 resolution: defund the ITU In-Reply-To: <77A59FC9477004489D44DE7FC6840E7B1A16DF@SUEX10-mbx-08.ad.syr.edu> References: <50E59141.4070800@netmagic.com>, <77A59FC9477004489D44DE7FC6840E7B1A16DF@SUEX10-mbx-08.ad.syr.edu> Message-ID: <0a3301cde9f4$89f3f110$9ddbd330$@gmail.com> The problem with these kinds of statements/positions (and it should be noted that various folks in the US and some of their close allies have been making these kinds of statements concerning the UN, UNESCO, and any of the other agencies that aren't seen as immediately responding to and protecting US interests narrowly conceived) is that even if the ITU were to be totally defunded and disappear something somewhere would need to be created to take on most of its international coordinating functions. The end result of this kind of position would in fact be to further project the US's quite evident anti-government political/governance disfunctionality into the global sphere. That being said, the creaky goverance/administrative systems of the UN and various of its agencies need to be radically renewed to reflect the new geo-political, technological and politico-cultural realities of the 21st century rather than the post-colonial/post-WWII realities of the 1950's. M From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Lee W McKnight Sent: Thursday, January 03, 2013 8:00 AM To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org Subject: [governance] FW: [IP] a 2013 resolution: defund the ITU Well remember what I said about ITU carrying on...I still think it will, but echos from Dubai may shake its budgetary formula. And according to Tony's spin, Hurricane Sandy. The attachment is interesting reading. Lee _____ From: DAVID J. FARBER [farber at gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, January 03, 2013 9:29 AM To: ip Subject: [IP] a 2013 resolution: defund the ITU Begin forwarded message: From: Tony Rutkowski Subject: a 2013 resolution: defund the ITU Date: January 3, 2013 9:10:09 AM EST To: Dave Farber Reply-To: trutkowski at netmagic.com Happy New Year, Dave. More than a few people on the IP list may have an interest in this post to the State Dept's advisory committee list. Even if a reader doesn't resonate with my advocacy, the facts here are very interesting and difficult to find. cheers, tony -------- Original Message -------- Subject: a 2013 resolution: defund the ITU Date: Thu, 03 Jan 2013 08:55:04 -0500 From: Tony Rutkowski Reply-To: trutkowski at netmagic.com Organization: NetMagic Associates To: WCIT at LMLIST.STATE.GOV What is not well known is that the ITU depends on voluntary contributions. Each member elects to give the ITU some number (or fraction of a number) of "contributory units" each year. A CU is currently equal to about $300k/yr. Thus the U.S. actually volunteers to give the ITU 30 units or about $9 million per year. It is the only country other than Japan to do so. The difficult to find official ITU contributions ledger is attached. So all those G89 countries at the WCIT that thumbed their noses at the U.S. and are trying to use the ITU to regulate the Internet and constrain information flow - they contribute almost nothing. Incredulously, they get the U.S. to help fund them to do that. Most of them even get free stipends from the ITU to go on Geneva vacations to rail against U.S. interests. That's going to increase as the WTSA-12 voted so many of them into the ITU-T leadership. What is remarkable about the ledger is that you can readily see how over the past six years, many other major countries and much of industry have shut their wallets, and in a great many cases simply walked out of the ITU-T. Yet the U.S. itself has kept paying the largest contribution amount! Indeed, as the others cut back their contributions, the U.S. pays even more to prop up the ITU bloated budget and the fine lifestyle of the ITU staff. With the 2013 Congress convening today, there is the perfect opportunity to begin defunding the ITU and send a message to those 89 countries and the duplicitous ITU officials who helped them. If the U.S. halves its contribution to fifteen units like many European countries have done, that's $45 million over ten years. Rather than flushing U.S. money down the ITU rathole to fund the G89 over the coming years to implement their extreme anti-Internet agenda, give it instead to the communities who were victims of Hurricane Sandy to re-build their broadband infrastructure. Considering the WCIT Internet resolution was unanimously adopted by Congress, that should be a no-brainer. Those companies who still remain as ITU-T members can act here as well. Renounce your membership and join all the others who have already left. -t Archives https://www.listbox.com/images/feed-icon-10x10.jpg| Modify Your Subscription | Unsubscribe Now https://www.listbox.com/images/listbox-logo-small.png -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image005.jpg Type: application/octet-stream Size: 815 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image006.jpg Type: application/octet-stream Size: 860 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- 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 From suresh at hserus.net Thu Jan 3 17:51:26 2013 From: suresh at hserus.net (Suresh Ramasubramanian) Date: Fri, 4 Jan 2013 04:21:26 +0530 Subject: [governance] FW: [IP] a 2013 resolution: defund the ITU In-Reply-To: <0a3301cde9f4$89f3f110$9ddbd330$@gmail.com> References: <50E59141.4070800@netmagic.com> <77A59FC9477004489D44DE7FC6840E7B1A16DF@SUEX10-mbx-08.ad.syr.edu> <0a3301cde9f4$89f3f110$9ddbd330$@gmail.com> Message-ID: <21B7403D-B190-4F16-9382-9D450546179E@hserus.net> Disappear? 9 million dollars isn't a particularly large amount when it comes to a national budget, even of one of those G89 countries. Defund and further it causes a massive new slippery slope that will as Michael says target good agencies as well --srs (iPad) On 04-Jan-2013, at 2:24, "michael gurstein" wrote: > The problem with these kinds of statements/positions (and it should be noted that various folks in the US and some of their close allies have been making these kinds of statements concerning the UN, UNESCO, and any of the other agencies that aren't seen as immediately responding to and protecting US interests narrowly conceived) is that even if the ITU were to be totally defunded and disappear something somewhere would need to be created to take on most of its international coordinating functions. The end result of this kind of position would in fact be to further project the US's quite evident anti-government political/governance disfunctionality into the global sphere. > > That being said, the creaky goverance/administrative systems of the UN and various of its agencies need to be radically renewed to reflect the new geo-political, technological and politico-cultural realities of the 21st century rather than the post-colonial/post-WWII realities of the 1950's. > > M > > > From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Lee W McKnight > Sent: Thursday, January 03, 2013 8:00 AM > To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org > Subject: [governance] FW: [IP] a 2013 resolution: defund the ITU > > Well remember what I said about ITU carrying on...I still think it will, but echos from Dubai may shake its budgetary formula. > > And according to Tony's spin, Hurricane Sandy. > > The attachment is interesting reading. > > Lee > > From: DAVID J. FARBER [farber at gmail.com] > Sent: Thursday, January 03, 2013 9:29 AM > To: ip > Subject: [IP] a 2013 resolution: defund the ITU > > > > Begin forwarded message: > > From: Tony Rutkowski > Subject: a 2013 resolution: defund the ITU > Date: January 3, 2013 9:10:09 AM EST > To: Dave Farber > Reply-To: trutkowski at netmagic.com > > Happy New Year, Dave. > > More than a few people on the IP list > may have an interest in this post to the > State Dept's advisory committee list. > Even if a reader doesn't resonate with > my advocacy, the facts here are very > interesting and difficult to find. > > cheers, > tony > > > -------- Original Message -------- > Subject: > a 2013 resolution: defund the ITU > Date: > Thu, 03 Jan 2013 08:55:04 -0500 > From: > Tony Rutkowski > Reply-To: > trutkowski at netmagic.com > Organization: > NetMagic Associates > To: > WCIT at LMLIST.STATE.GOV > > > What is not well known is that the ITU > depends on voluntary contributions. Each > member elects to give the ITU some number (or > fraction of a number) of "contributory units" > each year. A CU is currently equal to about > $300k/yr. Thus the U.S. actually volunteers > to give the ITU 30 units or about $9 million > per year. It is the only country other than > Japan to do so. The difficult to find > official ITU contributions ledger is attached. > > So all those G89 countries at the WCIT that > thumbed their noses at the U.S. and are > trying to use the ITU to regulate the > Internet and constrain information flow - > they contribute almost nothing. > Incredulously, they get the U.S. to help fund > them to do that. Most of them even get free > stipends from the ITU to go on Geneva > vacations to rail against U.S. interests. > That's going to increase as the WTSA-12 > voted so many of them into the ITU-T leadership. > > What is remarkable about the ledger is that > you can readily see how over the past six years, > many other major countries and much of > industry have shut their wallets, and in a > great many cases simply walked out of the ITU-T. > Yet the U.S. itself has kept paying the largest > contribution amount! Indeed, as the others cut > back their contributions, the U.S. pays even > more to prop up the ITU bloated budget and the > fine lifestyle of the ITU staff. > > With the 2013 Congress convening today, there > is the perfect opportunity to begin defunding > the ITU and send a message to those 89 > countries and the duplicitous ITU officials who > helped them. If the U.S. halves its contribution > to fifteen units like many European countries > have done, that's $45 million over ten years. > > Rather than flushing U.S. money down the ITU > rathole to fund the G89 over the coming years > to implement their extreme anti-Internet > agenda, give it instead to the communities > who were victims of Hurricane Sandy to > re-build their broadband infrastructure. > Considering the WCIT Internet resolution was > unanimously adopted by Congress, that should > be a no-brainer. > > Those companies who still remain as ITU-T > members can act here as well. Renounce your > membership and join all the others who have > already left. > > -t > > > > Archives | Modify Your Subscription | Unsubscribe Now > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com Thu Jan 3 19:12:01 2013 From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro) Date: Fri, 4 Jan 2013 13:12:01 +1300 Subject: [governance] Google Survives US FTC Probe #FTC #EC #Google #competition Message-ID: Dear All, "The US Federal Trade Commission has announced it has closed its investigation into Google after an exhaustive 19-month review that covered millions of pages of documents and involved many hours of testimony. See:http://www.ftc.gov/opa/2013/01/google.shtm To see report by BBC, visit: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-20899032 Kind Regards, -- Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala P.O. Box 17862 Suva Fiji Twitter: @SalanietaT Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro Tel: +679 3544828 Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From gideonrop at gmail.com Fri Jan 4 07:43:49 2013 From: gideonrop at gmail.com (Gideon) Date: Fri, 4 Jan 2013 15:43:49 +0300 Subject: [governance] Google Survives US FTC Probe #FTC #EC #Google #competition In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Google Agrees to Change Its Business Practices to Resolve FTC Competition Concerns In the Markets for Devices Like Smart Phones, Games and Tablets, and in Online Search.Quite some info for the new year. Gideon Rop. On Fri, Jan 4, 2013 at 3:12 AM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro < salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com> wrote: > Dear All, > > "The US Federal Trade Commission has announced it has closed its > investigation into Google after an exhaustive 19-month review that covered > millions of pages of documents and involved many hours of testimony. > > See:http://www.ftc.gov/opa/2013/01/google.shtm > > To see report by BBC, visit: > http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-20899032 > > Kind Regards, > > -- > Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala > P.O. Box 17862 > Suva > Fiji > > Twitter: @SalanietaT > Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro > Tel: +679 3544828 > Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From gurstein at gmail.com Fri Jan 4 10:12:40 2013 From: gurstein at gmail.com (michael gurstein) Date: Fri, 4 Jan 2013 07:12:40 -0800 Subject: [governance] FW: [IP] Google's Lawyers Work Behind the Scenes to Carry the Day - NYTimes.com In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <0ce601cdea8e$00308d90$0091a8b0$@gmail.com> From: Dave Farber [mailto:dave at farber.net] Sent: Friday, January 04, 2013 5:35 AM To: ip Subject: [IP] Google's Lawyers Work Behind the Scenes to Carry the Day - NYTimes.com http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/04/technology/googles-lawyers-work-behind-the -scenes-to-carry-the-day.html?hp note last paragraph Archives | Modify Your Subscription | Unsubscribe Now -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com Fri Jan 4 18:21:03 2013 From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro) Date: Sat, 5 Jan 2013 12:21:03 +1300 Subject: [governance] Nominees for Election [IGC Coordinator Position] a Message-ID: Dear All, Thank you all for your patience. This is to confirm that we have two candidates who will be standing for the elections. They are:- - Norbert Bollow; - Imran Ahmed Shah We will be in touch with you shortly in relation to the election. For more information about the candidates, please see the attachments. Thank you. Kind Regards, Sala On Sat, Dec 15, 2012 at 8:59 AM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro < salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com> wrote: > Dear All, > > This is to advise that we have yet to receive Nominations for those > interested in standing for the Elections. As such, there is a change in > dates, and they are as follows, see Notice below. > > I may be offline for a few days depending as we have a Category 4 Cyclone > coming into Fiji which has already devastated Samoa. > > In the meantime, we encourage both men and women to apply from all parts > of the earth. For more information, see below: > > >> This is to advise that we would like to invite people to submit >> Nominations for Candidates to stand in the elections for the purposes of >> occupying the Co-Coordinator position which Izumi Aizu used to occupy. >> >> >> *Nominations* >> Those who are interested in standing for elections or in nominating >> persons to stand for the elections should submit their Nominations by *4th >> January, 2013 at 10pm UTC +12*. We would like to encourage people to >> either nominate themselves or nominate others whom you think would make >> great coordinators. Responsibilities of coordinators can be viewed in the >> IGC Charter. >> >> All Nominations are asked to submit their Nominations in the following >> format: >> >> >> >> *Nomination By:* >> >> [Self Nomination or > >> >> *Candidate:* >> >> [Full Name of Candidate] >> >> >> *Brief Bio:* >> >> [100 words and feel free to insert link to website] >> >> >> >> >> The full list of Nominees will be published on the IGC list on the 16th >> December, 2012 at 10pm UTC at 10pm UTC +12 and elections. >> >> >> *Online voting* >> * >> * >> We will begin on the *8th January, 2013.* >> >> I would like to encourage as many Nominations to be sent in to >> coordinators at igcaucus.org and by responding to this email thread. >> >> >> *Excerpts from the Charter* >> >> *Charter:* (http://igcaucus.org/charter) >> >> *Selection of Coordinators* >> >> The selection will be done by on-line voting using the voting process >> according to the following formula: >> * election of the coordinator will be held, whenever possible by >> midsummer (the summer solstice). If events prevent an election by >> midsummer, it will be held as soon after midsummer as possible. >> * the coordinator(s) who are not up for election or not standing for >> election will be responsible for running the election, subject to appeal by >> the appeal team. >> (Note: as a boot strap procedure for 2006, the interim coordinator will >> serve until the end of the first election period, during which two >> coordinators will be selected - one for one (1) year and one for two (2) >> years). >> >> *Recall of coordinators* >> >> In response to an appeal, as described in the appeals section, the >> appeals team can decide to hold a recall vote for a coordinator. In order >> to cause the recall vote, there needs to be full consensus among the appeal >> team members. >> The recall vote itself requires a 2/3 majority of voters to succeed. >> >> *Replacement of a coordinator.* >> >> If a coordinator leaves the role due to personal reasons or recall, the >> role will be refilled as quickly as possible. The role will be refilled for >> the balance of the term unless the refill occurs during the year in which >> the role was to be vacated. In this case the coordinator position will be >> for the balance of the replacement terms plus a two (2) year regular term. >> For example, if the 'even year' coordinator for 2006, leaves the role >> during an odd year, 2007, the rest of the term will be filled with a >> replacement, and a new selection will be made on schedule in 2008. If on >> the other hand the coordinator leaves the role early in 2008, then the >> replacement would complete the original term and serve the 2008-2010 term. >> >> >> *Membership* >> The members of the IGC are individuals, acting in personal capacity, >> who subscribe to the charter of the caucus. All members are equal and >> have the same rights and duties. >> >> *Voting Process* >> Each person who is subscribed to the list at least two (2) months >> before the election will be given a voter account. >> As part of the voting process the voter must personally ascertain that >> they are a member of the IGC based on membership criteria described >> elsewhere in this charter and posted as part of the voting information >> (i.e. a voter must affirm membership on the voter form in order to >> vote). The decision to self-identify as a member of the IGC is a >> personal decision based on the criteria defined. A list of the >> self-defined member-voters will be published after the election with >> the results of the election. >> >> Elections will be run by the coordinators and will be subject to the >> appeals process. >> >> All voting will be open, though at the discretion of the coordinators, >> with or without a specific request from member(s), any vote can be >> made into a secret vote. The reasons for making it a secret vote will >> be stated, and are subject to appeal. >> >> >> *Membership (http://igcaucus.org/membership)* >> * >> *Members of the Internet Governance Caucus are individuals, acting in >> personal capacity, who subscribe to the charter of the caucus. All >> members are equal and have the same rights and duties. >> >> If you wish to participate in our activities, or just observe our >> activities, you are welcome to join our mailing list. The mailing list >> is our priority working space. You can subscribe by registering on >> this Web site. If you need to change your subscription options, you >> will need to visit the separate mailing list site and follow >> instructions from there. For information on unsubscribing and >> subscribing under multiple addresses, please read here. >> >> Not all list participants are members. To determine membership, each >> person who is subscribed to the list at least two (2) months before >> any election or voting event will be given a voter account. As part of >> the voting process the voter must personally ascertain that they are a >> member of the IGC based on membership criteria described in the IGC >> charter and posted as part of the voting information (i.e. a voter >> must affirm membership on the voter form in order to vote). The >> decision to self-identify as a member of the IGC is a personal >> decision based on the criteria defined. A list of the self-defined >> member-voters will be published after any election with the results of >> the election >> >> Warm Regards, >> >> -- >> Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala >> >> * IGC Co-Coordinator* >> >> >> >> >> >> >> -- >> Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala >> P.O. Box 17862 >> Suva >> Fiji >> >> Twitter: @SalanietaT >> Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro >> Tel: +679 3544828 >> Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 >> >> >> >> >> > > > -- > Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala > P.O. Box 17862 > Suva > Fiji > > Twitter: @SalanietaT > Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro > Tel: +679 3544828 > Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 > > > > > -- Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala P.O. Box 17862 Suva Fiji Twitter: @SalanietaT Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro Tel: +679 3544828 Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Nomination for IGC Coordinator Norbert Bollow.doc Type: application/msword Size: 29696 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Nomination for IGC Coordinator Imran Ahmed Shah.doc Type: application/msword Size: 30208 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- 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 From parminder at itforchange.net Fri Jan 4 22:47:09 2013 From: parminder at itforchange.net (parminder) Date: Sat, 05 Jan 2013 09:17:09 +0530 Subject: [governance] Fwd: [igf_members] MAG Renewal for 2013 In-Reply-To: <78980604-5E4E-44A0-A235-4BAA721DA4D3@unog.ch> References: <78980604-5E4E-44A0-A235-4BAA721DA4D3@unog.ch> Message-ID: <50E7A23D.6050801@itforchange.net> IGC may want to do something about this.... parminder -------- Original Message -------- Subject: [igf_members] MAG Renewal for 2013 Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2013 13:03:57 +0100 From: Chengetai Masango To: igf Forum Dear All, Happy New year to you all. I hope you had a restful holiday season. It was a pleasure working with you all in 2012 and look forward to continuing to do so in 2013. Please find below a message from Under-Secretary-General Mr. Wu Hongbo concerning the MAG renewal. It is posted on the IGF website and I would be grateful if you could distribute it among your respective stakeholder groups. Best regards Chengetai _________________________________ The Internet Governance Forum's Multi-stakeholder Advisory Group (MAG) has been instrumental in planning the programme of the annual IGF meetings. We would like to express our gratitude to all past and present members of MAG who have donated their time, effort and valuable guidance in ensuring the smooth running of the IGF. On behalf of the United Nations Secretary-General, the Department of Economic and Social Affairs (DESA) requests nominations from all stakeholder groups, according to the established principles and practices of MAG on the rotation and selection of its members. Governments, the private sector, civil society, and technical communities should submit names of candidates from developed and developing countries as well as from economies in transition. Successful nominees will become part of MAG for a period of one year and will contribute to the multi-stakeholder consultation process, bringing the perspectives of their respective groups on Internet governance. Group nominees should be members who have actively participated in IGF meetings and activities in the past. As in previous years, stakeholder groups can resubmit the names of current MAG members for re-election and are expected to publicize the selection and nomination process. Please submit the names of nominees to the IGF Secretariat by *20 January 2013* via email:magrenewal2013 at intgovforum.org , using the attached submission template. The aim is to rotate one third of MAG members. Selection and Operation Principles: (i) MAG members are selected to achieve a balance among all stakeholder groups, while retaining regional and gender representation, according to established procedures; (ii) All MAG members serve in their personal capacity but are expected to have extensive linkages with their respective stakeholder groups; (iii) The main task of MAG is to provide advice on the programme and main themes of the next meeting of the IGF; (iv) MAG members are expected to attend two to three MAG meetings in Geneva, Switzerland, in addition to the annual IGF meeting. They should participate actively in the preparatory process throughout the year, through engagement in the online multilateral dialogue among MAG members; (v) MAG meetings are open to Intergovernmental organizations. Thank you and I look forward to the continued success of the Internet Governance Forum. (Signed) Wu Hongbo Under-Secretary-General Department of Economic and Social Affairs (UNDESA) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: MAG 2013 template .rtf Type: application/rtf Size: 8140 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- _______________________________________________ igf_members mailing list igf_members at intgovforum.org http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/igf_members_intgovforum.org -------------- 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 From ian.peter at ianpeter.com Fri Jan 4 22:54:30 2013 From: ian.peter at ianpeter.com (Ian Peter) Date: Sat, 05 Jan 2013 14:54:30 +1100 Subject: [governance] Fwd: [igf_members] MAG Renewal for 2013 Message-ID: <003mftr3o6ic873b1tt3payc.1357358070886@email.android.com> Indeed, this is very urgent parminder wrote: > >IGC may want to do something about this.... parminder > > >-------- Original Message -------- >Subject: [igf_members] MAG Renewal for 2013 >Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2013 13:03:57 +0100 >From: Chengetai Masango >To: igf Forum > > > >Dear All, > >Happy New year to you all. I hope you had a restful holiday season. It >was a pleasure working with you all in 2012 and look forward to >continuing to do so in 2013. > >Please find below a message from Under-Secretary-General Mr. Wu Hongbo >concerning the MAG renewal. It is posted on the IGF website and I would >be grateful if you could distribute it among your respective stakeholder >groups. > >Best regards > >Chengetai > >_________________________________ > > >The Internet Governance Forum's Multi-stakeholder Advisory Group (MAG) >has been instrumental in planning the programme of the annual IGF meetings. > >We would like to express our gratitude to all past and present members >of MAG who have donated their time, effort and valuable guidance in >ensuring the smooth running of the IGF. > >On behalf of the United Nations Secretary-General, the Department of >Economic and Social Affairs (DESA) requests nominations from all >stakeholder groups, according to the established principles and >practices of MAG on the rotation and selection of its members. >Governments, the private sector, civil society, and technical >communities should submit names of candidates from developed and >developing countries as well as from economies in transition. Successful >nominees will become part of MAG for a period of one year and will >contribute to the multi-stakeholder consultation process, bringing the >perspectives of their respective groups on Internet governance. Group >nominees should be members who have actively participated in IGF >meetings and activities in the past. As in previous years, stakeholder >groups can resubmit the names of current MAG members for re-election and >are expected to publicize the selection and nomination process. > >Please submit the names of nominees to the IGF Secretariat by *20 >January 2013* via email:magrenewal2013 at intgovforum.org >, using the attached submission >template. The aim is to rotate one third of MAG members. > >Selection and Operation Principles: > >(i) MAG members are selected to achieve a balance among all stakeholder >groups, while retaining regional and gender representation, according to >established procedures; > >(ii) All MAG members serve in their personal capacity but are expected >to have extensive linkages with their respective stakeholder groups; > >(iii) The main task of MAG is to provide advice on the programme and >main themes of the next meeting of the IGF; > >(iv) MAG members are expected to attend two to three MAG meetings in >Geneva, Switzerland, in addition to the annual IGF meeting. They should >participate actively in the preparatory process throughout the year, >through engagement in the online multilateral dialogue among MAG members; > >(v) MAG meetings are open to Intergovernmental organizations. > >Thank you and I look forward to the continued success of the Internet >Governance Forum. > > >(Signed) >Wu Hongbo >Under-Secretary-General >Department of Economic and Social Affairs (UNDESA) > > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From parminder at itforchange.net Sat Jan 5 05:00:25 2013 From: parminder at itforchange.net (parminder) Date: Sat, 05 Jan 2013 15:30:25 +0530 Subject: [governance] FW: [IP] Google's Lawyers Work Behind the Scenes to Carry the Day - NYTimes.com In-Reply-To: <0ce601cdea8e$00308d90$0091a8b0$@gmail.com> References: <0ce601cdea8e$00308d90$0091a8b0$@gmail.com> Message-ID: <50E7F9B9.9070308@itforchange.net> A very interesting take on FTC's decisions on google http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/05/opinion/is-google-like-gas-or-like-steel.html?_r=0 The article raises the right question - whether some parts of our digital environment deserve to be treated as public utilities - due to (1) the extent of monopoly and (2) the very important 'public function(s)' being performed. I do not agree with the conclusion of the authors that any kind of search neutrality obligations would hurt free expression objectives. To me, the contrary is true. How much ever I disagree with its conclusions, the article touches the deeper issues pertaining to search for the right paradigms that should inform Internet governance.... Most commentaries around WCIT, and even the almost solo fixation with multistakeholderism, just scratch the surface, often misleadingly. The real issues are somewhere else and, unfortunately, have not received the needed attention of civil society. parminder On Friday 04 January 2013 08:42 PM, michael gurstein wrote: > > *From:*Dave Farber [mailto:dave at farber.net] > *Sent:* Friday, January 04, 2013 5:35 AM > *To:* ip > *Subject:* [IP] Google’s Lawyers Work Behind the Scenes to Carry the > Day - NYTimes.com > > http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/04/technology/googles-lawyers-work-behind-the-scenes-to-carry-the-day.html?hp > > note last paragraph > > Archives > | > Modify > > Your Subscription | Unsubscribe Now > > > > > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From suresh at hserus.net Sat Jan 5 05:25:02 2013 From: suresh at hserus.net (Suresh Ramasubramanian) Date: Sat, 5 Jan 2013 15:55:02 +0530 Subject: [governance] FW: [IP] Google's Lawyers Work Behind the Scenes to Carry the Day - NYTimes.com In-Reply-To: <50E7F9B9.9070308@itforchange.net> References: <0ce601cdea8e$00308d90$0091a8b0$@gmail.com> <50E7F9B9.9070308@itforchange.net> Message-ID: Hardly a monopoly. Duo, tri or a few more poly. Bing for example does have a decent market share. Any non neutrality in search should be initially at any rate handled as a private litigation. Because starting to regulate google is the thin end of the wedge when it comes to regulating other Internet industry players to the extent that telcos are regulated And a precedent that other countries will seize on, with potentially worse results --srs (iPad) On 05-Jan-2013, at 15:30, parminder wrote: > > A very interesting take on FTC's decisions on google > > http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/05/opinion/is-google-like-gas-or-like-steel.html?_r=0 > > The article raises the right question - whether some parts of our digital environment deserve to be treated as public utilities - due to (1) the extent of monopoly and (2) the very important 'public function(s)' being performed. > > I do not agree with the conclusion of the authors that any kind of search neutrality obligations would hurt free expression objectives. To me, the contrary is true. > > How much ever I disagree with its conclusions, the article touches the deeper issues pertaining to search for the right paradigms that should inform Internet governance.... Most commentaries around WCIT, and even the almost solo fixation with multistakeholderism, just scratch the surface, often misleadingly. The real issues are somewhere else and, unfortunately, have not received the needed attention of civil society. > > parminder > > > On Friday 04 January 2013 08:42 PM, michael gurstein wrote: >> From: Dave Farber [mailto:dave at farber.net] >> Sent: Friday, January 04, 2013 5:35 AM >> To: ip >> Subject: [IP] Google’s Lawyers Work Behind the Scenes to Carry the Day - NYTimes.com >> >> http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/04/technology/googles-lawyers-work-behind-the-scenes-to-carry-the-day.html?hp >> >> note last paragraph >> Archives | Modify Your Subscription | Unsubscribe Now >> >> > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From rguerra at privaterra.org Sat Jan 5 11:04:45 2013 From: rguerra at privaterra.org (Robert Guerra) Date: Sat, 5 Jan 2013 11:04:45 -0500 Subject: [governance] Fwd: [igf_members] MAG Renewal for 2013 In-Reply-To: <50E7A23D.6050801@itforchange.net> References: <78980604-5E4E-44A0-A235-4BAA721DA4D3@unog.ch> <50E7A23D.6050801@itforchange.net> Message-ID: <1F1DEE75-CCC8-4547-8CAB-8394876C7B4D@privaterra.org> My quick thoughts, in no particular order, on this are as follows: - Do we know the details of the persons rotating off the MAG (ie. gender, Stakeholder groups & regions) If so, can someone share that - thanks! - The IGC needs to setup a transparent, open and inclusive process that builds on lessons learned. - If possible, civil society should coordinate among itself and send a single list of names it "recommends" to the UN. Competing lists, lessen the impact of the IGC on the decision making process regards Robert On 2013-01-04, at 10:47 PM, parminder wrote: > > IGC may want to do something about this.... parminder > > > -------- Original Message -------- > Subject: [igf_members] MAG Renewal for 2013 > Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2013 13:03:57 +0100 > From: Chengetai Masango > To: igf Forum > > Dear All, > > Happy New year to you all. I hope you had a restful holiday season. It was a pleasure working with you all in 2012 and look forward to continuing to do so in 2013. > > Please find below a message from Under-Secretary-General Mr. Wu Hongbo concerning the MAG renewal. It is posted on the IGF website and I would be grateful if you could distribute it among your respective stakeholder groups. > > Best regards > > Chengetai > > _________________________________ > > > The Internet Governance Forum's Multi-stakeholder Advisory Group (MAG) has been instrumental in planning the programme of the annual IGF meetings. > > We would like to express our gratitude to all past and present members of MAG who have donated their time, effort and valuable guidance in ensuring the smooth running of the IGF. > > On behalf of the United Nations Secretary-General, the Department of Economic and Social Affairs (DESA) requests nominations from all stakeholder groups, according to the established principles and practices of MAG on the rotation and selection of its members. Governments, the private sector, civil society, and technical communities should submit names of candidates from developed and developing countries as well as from economies in transition. Successful nominees will become part of MAG for a period of one year and will contribute to the multi-stakeholder consultation process, bringing the perspectives of their respective groups on Internet governance. Group nominees should be members who have actively participated in IGF meetings and activities in the past. As in previous years, stakeholder groups can resubmit the names of current MAG members for re-election and are expected to publicize the selection and nomination process. > > Please submit the names of nominees to the IGF Secretariat by 20 January 2013 via email:magrenewal2013 at intgovforum.org, using the attached submission template. The aim is to rotate one third of MAG members. > > Selection and Operation Principles: > > (i) MAG members are selected to achieve a balance among all stakeholder groups, while retaining regional and gender representation, according to established procedures; > > (ii) All MAG members serve in their personal capacity but are expected to have extensive linkages with their respective stakeholder groups; > > (iii) The main task of MAG is to provide advice on the programme and main themes of the next meeting of the IGF; > > (iv) MAG members are expected to attend two to three MAG meetings in Geneva, Switzerland, in addition to the annual IGF meeting. They should participate actively in the preparatory process throughout the year, through engagement in the online multilateral dialogue among MAG members; > > (v) MAG meetings are open to Intergovernmental organizations. > > Thank you and I look forward to the continued success of the Internet Governance Forum. > > > (Signed) > Wu Hongbo > Under-Secretary-General > Department of Economic and Social Affairs (UNDESA) > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From ajp at glocom.ac.jp Sat Jan 5 12:01:14 2013 From: ajp at glocom.ac.jp (Adam Peake) Date: Sun, 6 Jan 2013 02:01:14 +0900 Subject: [governance] Fwd: [igf_members] MAG Renewal for 2013 In-Reply-To: <1F1DEE75-CCC8-4547-8CAB-8394876C7B4D@privaterra.org> References: <78980604-5E4E-44A0-A235-4BAA721DA4D3@unog.ch> <50E7A23D.6050801@itforchange.net> <1F1DEE75-CCC8-4547-8CAB-8394876C7B4D@privaterra.org> Message-ID: Way I read the letter all MAG members who wish to should re-apply. Good starting point for the caucus would be if we could be reminded who among those we proposed last year were selected as MAG members. Best, Adam On Sun, Jan 6, 2013 at 1:04 AM, Robert Guerra wrote: > My quick thoughts, in no particular order, on this are as follows: > > - Do we know the details of the persons rotating off the MAG (ie. > gender, Stakeholder groups & regions) If so, can someone share that - > thanks! > - The IGC needs to setup a transparent, open and inclusive process that > builds on lessons learned. > - If possible, civil society should coordinate among itself and send a > single list of names it "recommends" to the UN. Competing lists, lessen the > impact of the IGC on the decision making process > > regards > > Robert > > > On 2013-01-04, at 10:47 PM, parminder wrote: > > > IGC may want to do something about this.... parminder > > > -------- Original Message -------- Subject: [igf_members] MAG Renewal > for 2013 Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2013 13:03:57 +0100 From: Chengetai Masango > To: igf Forum > > > Dear All, > > Happy New year to you all. I hope you had a restful holiday season. It > was a pleasure working with you all in 2012 and look forward to continuing > to do so in 2013. > > Please find below a message from Under-Secretary-General Mr. Wu Hongbo > concerning the MAG renewal. It is posted on the IGF website and I would be > grateful if you could distribute it among your respective stakeholder > groups. > > Best regards > > Chengetai > > _________________________________ > > > The Internet Governance Forum's Multi-stakeholder Advisory Group (MAG) > has been instrumental in planning the programme of the annual IGF meetings. > > We would like to express our gratitude to all past and present members > of MAG who have donated their time, effort and valuable guidance in > ensuring the smooth running of the IGF. > > On behalf of the United Nations Secretary-General, the Department of > Economic and Social Affairs (DESA) requests nominations from all > stakeholder groups, according to the established principles and practices > of MAG on the rotation and selection of its members. Governments, the > private sector, civil society, and technical communities should submit > names of candidates from developed and developing countries as well as from > economies in transition. Successful nominees will become part of MAG for a > period of one year and will contribute to the multi-stakeholder > consultation process, bringing the perspectives of their respective groups > on Internet governance. Group nominees should be members who have actively > participated in IGF meetings and activities in the past. As in previous > years, stakeholder groups can resubmit the names of current MAG members for > re-election and are expected to publicize the selection and nomination > process. > > Please submit the names of nominees to the IGF Secretariat by *20 > January 2013* via email:magrenewal2013 at intgovforum.org, > using the attached submission template. The aim is to rotate one third of > MAG members. > > Selection and Operation Principles: > > (i) MAG members are selected to achieve a balance among all stakeholder > groups, while retaining regional and gender representation, according to > established procedures; > > (ii) All MAG members serve in their personal capacity but are expected > to have extensive linkages with their respective stakeholder groups; > > (iii) The main task of MAG is to provide advice on the programme and > main themes of the next meeting of the IGF; > > (iv) MAG members are expected to attend two to three MAG meetings in > Geneva, Switzerland, in addition to the annual IGF meeting. They should > participate actively in the preparatory process throughout the year, > through engagement in the online multilateral dialogue among MAG members; > > (v) MAG meetings are open to Intergovernmental organizations. > > Thank you and I look forward to the continued success of the Internet > Governance Forum. > > > (Signed) > Wu Hongbo > Under-Secretary-General > Department of Economic and Social Affairs (UNDESA) > > > > > Part.txt>____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From ca at cafonso.ca Sat Jan 5 12:04:29 2013 From: ca at cafonso.ca (Carlos A. Afonso) Date: Sat, 05 Jan 2013 15:04:29 -0200 Subject: [governance] Fwd: [igf_members] MAG Renewal for 2013 In-Reply-To: References: <78980604-5E4E-44A0-A235-4BAA721DA4D3@unog.ch> <50E7A23D.6050801@itforchange.net> <1F1DEE75-CCC8-4547-8CAB-8394876C7B4D@privaterra.org> Message-ID: <50E85D1D.4010401@cafonso.ca> And also remind ourselves there are "new kids on the block" so as not to repeat all the same names recurrently... --c.a. On 01/05/2013 03:01 PM, Adam Peake wrote: > Way I read the letter all MAG members who wish to should re-apply. > > Good starting point for the caucus would be if we could be reminded who > among those we proposed last year were selected as MAG members. > > Best, > > Adam > > > > On Sun, Jan 6, 2013 at 1:04 AM, Robert Guerra wrote: > >> My quick thoughts, in no particular order, on this are as follows: >> >> - Do we know the details of the persons rotating off the MAG (ie. >> gender, Stakeholder groups & regions) If so, can someone share that - >> thanks! >> - The IGC needs to setup a transparent, open and inclusive process that >> builds on lessons learned. >> - If possible, civil society should coordinate among itself and send a >> single list of names it "recommends" to the UN. Competing lists, lessen the >> impact of the IGC on the decision making process >> >> regards >> >> Robert >> >> >> On 2013-01-04, at 10:47 PM, parminder wrote: >> >> >> IGC may want to do something about this.... parminder >> >> >> -------- Original Message -------- Subject: [igf_members] MAG Renewal >> for 2013 Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2013 13:03:57 +0100 From: Chengetai Masango >> To: igf Forum >> >> >> Dear All, >> >> Happy New year to you all. I hope you had a restful holiday season. It >> was a pleasure working with you all in 2012 and look forward to continuing >> to do so in 2013. >> >> Please find below a message from Under-Secretary-General Mr. Wu Hongbo >> concerning the MAG renewal. It is posted on the IGF website and I would be >> grateful if you could distribute it among your respective stakeholder >> groups. >> >> Best regards >> >> Chengetai >> >> _________________________________ >> >> >> The Internet Governance Forum's Multi-stakeholder Advisory Group (MAG) >> has been instrumental in planning the programme of the annual IGF meetings. >> >> We would like to express our gratitude to all past and present members >> of MAG who have donated their time, effort and valuable guidance in >> ensuring the smooth running of the IGF. >> >> On behalf of the United Nations Secretary-General, the Department of >> Economic and Social Affairs (DESA) requests nominations from all >> stakeholder groups, according to the established principles and practices >> of MAG on the rotation and selection of its members. Governments, the >> private sector, civil society, and technical communities should submit >> names of candidates from developed and developing countries as well as from >> economies in transition. Successful nominees will become part of MAG for a >> period of one year and will contribute to the multi-stakeholder >> consultation process, bringing the perspectives of their respective groups >> on Internet governance. Group nominees should be members who have actively >> participated in IGF meetings and activities in the past. As in previous >> years, stakeholder groups can resubmit the names of current MAG members for >> re-election and are expected to publicize the selection and nomination >> process. >> >> Please submit the names of nominees to the IGF Secretariat by *20 >> January 2013* via email:magrenewal2013 at intgovforum.org, >> using the attached submission template. The aim is to rotate one third of >> MAG members. >> >> Selection and Operation Principles: >> >> (i) MAG members are selected to achieve a balance among all stakeholder >> groups, while retaining regional and gender representation, according to >> established procedures; >> >> (ii) All MAG members serve in their personal capacity but are expected >> to have extensive linkages with their respective stakeholder groups; >> >> (iii) The main task of MAG is to provide advice on the programme and >> main themes of the next meeting of the IGF; >> >> (iv) MAG members are expected to attend two to three MAG meetings in >> Geneva, Switzerland, in addition to the annual IGF meeting. They should >> participate actively in the preparatory process throughout the year, >> through engagement in the online multilateral dialogue among MAG members; >> >> (v) MAG meetings are open to Intergovernmental organizations. >> >> Thank you and I look forward to the continued success of the Internet >> Governance Forum. >> >> >> (Signed) >> Wu Hongbo >> Under-Secretary-General >> Department of Economic and Social Affairs (UNDESA) >> >> >> >> >> > Part.txt>____________________________________________________________ >> 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 >> >> >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From ajp at glocom.ac.jp Sat Jan 5 12:08:17 2013 From: ajp at glocom.ac.jp (Adam Peake) Date: Sun, 6 Jan 2013 02:08:17 +0900 Subject: [governance] Fwd: [igf_members] MAG Renewal for 2013 In-Reply-To: <50E85D1D.4010401@cafonso.ca> References: <78980604-5E4E-44A0-A235-4BAA721DA4D3@unog.ch> <50E7A23D.6050801@itforchange.net> <1F1DEE75-CCC8-4547-8CAB-8394876C7B4D@privaterra.org> <50E85D1D.4010401@cafonso.ca> Message-ID: of course. goes without saying. but one step at a time perhaps. On Sun, Jan 6, 2013 at 2:04 AM, Carlos A. Afonso wrote: > And also remind ourselves there are "new kids on the block" so as not to > repeat all the same names recurrently... > > --c.a. > > > On 01/05/2013 03:01 PM, Adam Peake wrote: >> >> Way I read the letter all MAG members who wish to should re-apply. >> >> Good starting point for the caucus would be if we could be reminded who >> among those we proposed last year were selected as MAG members. >> >> Best, >> >> Adam >> >> >> >> On Sun, Jan 6, 2013 at 1:04 AM, Robert Guerra >> wrote: >> >>> My quick thoughts, in no particular order, on this are as follows: >>> >>> - Do we know the details of the persons rotating off the MAG (ie. >>> gender, Stakeholder groups & regions) If so, can someone share that - >>> thanks! >>> - The IGC needs to setup a transparent, open and inclusive process that >>> builds on lessons learned. >>> - If possible, civil society should coordinate among itself and send a >>> single list of names it "recommends" to the UN. Competing lists, lessen >>> the >>> impact of the IGC on the decision making process >>> >>> regards >>> >>> Robert >>> >>> >>> On 2013-01-04, at 10:47 PM, parminder wrote: >>> >>> >>> IGC may want to do something about this.... parminder >>> >>> >>> -------- Original Message -------- Subject: [igf_members] MAG Renewal >>> for 2013 Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2013 13:03:57 +0100 From: Chengetai Masango >>> To: igf Forum >>> >>> >>> >>> Dear All, >>> >>> Happy New year to you all. I hope you had a restful holiday season. It >>> was a pleasure working with you all in 2012 and look forward to >>> continuing >>> to do so in 2013. >>> >>> Please find below a message from Under-Secretary-General Mr. Wu Hongbo >>> concerning the MAG renewal. It is posted on the IGF website and I would >>> be >>> grateful if you could distribute it among your respective stakeholder >>> groups. >>> >>> Best regards >>> >>> Chengetai >>> >>> _________________________________ >>> >>> >>> The Internet Governance Forum's Multi-stakeholder Advisory Group (MAG) >>> has been instrumental in planning the programme of the annual IGF >>> meetings. >>> >>> We would like to express our gratitude to all past and present members >>> of MAG who have donated their time, effort and valuable guidance in >>> ensuring the smooth running of the IGF. >>> >>> On behalf of the United Nations Secretary-General, the Department of >>> Economic and Social Affairs (DESA) requests nominations from all >>> stakeholder groups, according to the established principles and practices >>> of MAG on the rotation and selection of its members. Governments, the >>> private sector, civil society, and technical communities should submit >>> names of candidates from developed and developing countries as well as >>> from >>> economies in transition. Successful nominees will become part of MAG for >>> a >>> period of one year and will contribute to the multi-stakeholder >>> consultation process, bringing the perspectives of their respective >>> groups >>> on Internet governance. Group nominees should be members who have >>> actively >>> participated in IGF meetings and activities in the past. As in previous >>> years, stakeholder groups can resubmit the names of current MAG members >>> for >>> re-election and are expected to publicize the selection and nomination >>> process. >>> >>> Please submit the names of nominees to the IGF Secretariat by *20 >>> January 2013* via >>> email:magrenewal2013 at intgovforum.org, >>> >>> using the attached submission template. The aim is to rotate one third of >>> MAG members. >>> >>> Selection and Operation Principles: >>> >>> (i) MAG members are selected to achieve a balance among all stakeholder >>> groups, while retaining regional and gender representation, according to >>> established procedures; >>> >>> (ii) All MAG members serve in their personal capacity but are expected >>> to have extensive linkages with their respective stakeholder groups; >>> >>> (iii) The main task of MAG is to provide advice on the programme and >>> main themes of the next meeting of the IGF; >>> >>> (iv) MAG members are expected to attend two to three MAG meetings in >>> Geneva, Switzerland, in addition to the annual IGF meeting. They should >>> participate actively in the preparatory process throughout the year, >>> through engagement in the online multilateral dialogue among MAG members; >>> >>> (v) MAG meetings are open to Intergovernmental organizations. >>> >>> Thank you and I look forward to the continued success of the Internet >>> Governance Forum. >>> >>> >>> (Signed) >>> Wu Hongbo >>> Under-Secretary-General >>> Department of Economic and Social Affairs (UNDESA) >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> Part.txt>____________________________________________________________ >>> 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 >>> >>> >>> >>> ____________________________________________________________ >>> 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From gurstein at gmail.com Sat Jan 5 14:21:50 2013 From: gurstein at gmail.com (michael gurstein) Date: Sat, 5 Jan 2013 11:21:50 -0800 Subject: [governance] FW: [IP] Google's Lawyers Work Behind the Scenes to Carry the Day - NYTimes.com In-Reply-To: <50E7F9B9.9070308@itforchange.net> References: <0ce601cdea8e$00308d90$0091a8b0$@gmail.com> <50E7F9B9.9070308@itforchange.net> Message-ID: <104701cdeb79$fcdb8ef0$f692acd0$@gmail.com> I've blogged about this at: I’m wondering though whether the issue concerning Google is rather misplaced when included under matters concerning free speech/free expression. Whether a search algorithm propelling a robotic process of information selection would be covered by free speech “rights” is something for legal scholars to ponder at their leisure. I’m wondering rather whether the appropriate rights/freedoms venue under which to assess Google’s activities might not more appropriately fall under “freedom of thought” rather than “freedom of speech” i.e. that it concerns the way we know things or our capacity to know certain things (and not have the means to know (or believe) other things). http://gurstein.wordpress.com/2013/01/05/is-google-like-gas-or-like-steel-neither-it-is-like-nernsts-third-law-of-thermodynamics-or-the-nicene-creed/ http://wp.me/pJQl5-ab M From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of parminder Sent: Saturday, January 05, 2013 2:00 AM To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org Subject: Re: [governance] FW: [IP] Google's Lawyers Work Behind the Scenes to Carry the Day - NYTimes.com A very interesting take on FTC's decisions on google http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/05/opinion/is-google-like-gas-or-like-steel.html?_r=0 The article raises the right question - whether some parts of our digital environment deserve to be treated as public utilities - due to (1) the extent of monopoly and (2) the very important 'public function(s)' being performed. I do not agree with the conclusion of the authors that any kind of search neutrality obligations would hurt free expression objectives. To me, the contrary is true. How much ever I disagree with its conclusions, the article touches the deeper issues pertaining to search for the right paradigms that should inform Internet governance.... Most commentaries around WCIT, and even the almost solo fixation with multistakeholderism, just scratch the surface, often misleadingly. The real issues are somewhere else and, unfortunately, have not received the needed attention of civil society. parminder On Friday 04 January 2013 08:42 PM, michael gurstein wrote: From: Dave Farber [mailto:dave at farber.net] Sent: Friday, January 04, 2013 5:35 AM To: ip Subject: [IP] Google’s Lawyers Work Behind the Scenes to Carry the Day - NYTimes.com http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/04/technology/googles-lawyers-work-behind-the-scenes-to-carry-the-day.html?hp note last paragraph Archives | Modify Your Subscription | Unsubscribe Now -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From parminder at itforchange.net Sat Jan 5 22:14:19 2013 From: parminder at itforchange.net (parminder) Date: Sun, 06 Jan 2013 08:44:19 +0530 Subject: [governance] Fwd: [igf_members] MAG Renewal for 2013 In-Reply-To: <1F1DEE75-CCC8-4547-8CAB-8394876C7B4D@privaterra.org> References: <78980604-5E4E-44A0-A235-4BAA721DA4D3@unog.ch> <50E7A23D.6050801@itforchange.net> <1F1DEE75-CCC8-4547-8CAB-8394876C7B4D@privaterra.org> Message-ID: <50E8EC0B.4050902@itforchange.net> Sala Since time is short I suggest that you just pick up the list of 25 or so volunteers for nom com that was used last time we built a nomcom, and give a 2-3 day opt out window while at the same time invite any other volunteer who may want to join in. May be do a draw for five names in about 5-7 days. Also give a call for potential MAG nominees right away. Otherwise it will be difficult to close this process in the 15 days that we are left with... Just a suggestion. parminder On Saturday 05 January 2013 09:34 PM, Robert Guerra wrote: > My quick thoughts, in no particular order, on this are as follows: > > - Do we know the details of the persons rotating off the MAG (ie. > gender, Stakeholder groups & regions) If so, can someone share that - > thanks! > - The IGC needs to setup a transparent, open and inclusive process > that builds on lessons learned. > - If possible, civil society should coordinate among itself and send a > single list of names it "recommends" to the UN. Competing lists, > lessen the impact of the IGC on the decision making process > > regards > > Robert > > > On 2013-01-04, at 10:47 PM, parminder wrote: > >> >> IGC may want to do something about this.... parminder >> >> >> -------- Original Message -------- >> Subject: [igf_members] MAG Renewal for 2013 >> Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2013 13:03:57 +0100 >> From: Chengetai Masango >> To: igf Forum >> >> >> >> Dear All, >> >> Happy New year to you all. I hope you had a restful holiday season. >> It was a pleasure working with you all in 2012 and look forward to >> continuing to do so in 2013. >> >> Please find below a message from Under-Secretary-General Mr. Wu >> Hongbo concerning the MAG renewal. It is posted on the IGF website >> and I would be grateful if you could distribute it among your >> respective stakeholder groups. >> >> Best regards >> >> Chengetai >> >> _________________________________ >> >> >> The Internet Governance Forum's Multi-stakeholder Advisory Group >> (MAG) has been instrumental in planning the programme of the annual >> IGF meetings. >> >> We would like to express our gratitude to all past and present >> members of MAG who have donated their time, effort and valuable >> guidance in ensuring the smooth running of the IGF. >> >> On behalf of the United Nations Secretary-General, the Department of >> Economic and Social Affairs (DESA) requests nominations from all >> stakeholder groups, according to the established principles and >> practices of MAG on the rotation and selection of its members. >> Governments, the private sector, civil society, and technical >> communities should submit names of candidates from developed and >> developing countries as well as from economies in transition. >> Successful nominees will become part of MAG for a period of one year >> and will contribute to the multi-stakeholder consultation process, >> bringing the perspectives of their respective groups on Internet >> governance. Group nominees should be members who have actively >> participated in IGF meetings and activities in the past. As in >> previous years, stakeholder groups can resubmit the names of current >> MAG members for re-election and are expected to publicize the >> selection and nomination process. >> >> Please submit the names of nominees to the IGF Secretariat by *20 >> January 2013* via email:magrenewal2013 at intgovforum.org >> , using the attached >> submission template. The aim is to rotate one third of MAG members. >> >> Selection and Operation Principles: >> >> (i) MAG members are selected to achieve a balance among all >> stakeholder groups, while retaining regional and gender >> representation, according to established procedures; >> >> (ii) All MAG members serve in their personal capacity but are >> expected to have extensive linkages with their respective stakeholder >> groups; >> >> (iii) The main task of MAG is to provide advice on the programme and >> main themes of the next meeting of the IGF; >> >> (iv) MAG members are expected to attend two to three MAG meetings in >> Geneva, Switzerland, in addition to the annual IGF meeting. They >> should participate actively in the preparatory process throughout the >> year, through engagement in the online multilateral dialogue among >> MAG members; >> >> (v) MAG meetings are open to Intergovernmental organizations. >> >> Thank you and I look forward to the continued success of the Internet >> Governance Forum. >> >> >> (Signed) >> Wu Hongbo >> Under-Secretary-General >> Department of Economic and Social Affairs (UNDESA) >> >> >> >> >> > Part.txt>____________________________________________________________ >> 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: -------------- 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 From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com Sat Jan 5 22:44:07 2013 From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro) Date: Sun, 6 Jan 2013 16:44:07 +1300 Subject: [governance] Updates on MAG 2013 Message-ID: Dear All, I have asked the former NomCom to assist in selecting the names of nominees that come in. The poll is currently being prepared for IGC elections and additional questions will be put forward to in relation to nominations for MAG etc. The list of names that come in will be asked to submit brief bios separately as well. The NomCom will deliberate and decide on the names but it is important that we get a broad selection as possible. We have yet to select the Independent Non Voting Chair for this. You will all be informed of developments soon. Kind Regards, -- Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala P.O. Box 17862 Suva Fiji Twitter: @SalanietaT Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro Tel: +679 3544828 Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From parminder at itforchange.net Sat Jan 5 23:07:48 2013 From: parminder at itforchange.net (parminder) Date: Sun, 06 Jan 2013 09:37:48 +0530 Subject: [governance] Updates on MAG 2013 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <50E8F894.8070601@itforchange.net> On Sunday 06 January 2013 09:14 AM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro wrote: > Dear All, > > I have asked the former NomCom to assist in selecting the names of > nominees that come in. Disclaimer first: I dont remember who the members of the last non com were, or even what was it constituted for. Neither do I have any interest in the outcome of the MAG nomination process.... This said, I much prefer we repeat the list of volunteers rather than repeat a nomcom. It take a few minutes to random pick a nomcom from a list of volunteers and so the time taken for the two processes is almost the same. But we have better randomness in getting a new slate every time, which is a key objective of nomcom selection. parminder > The poll is currently being prepared for IGC elections and > additional questions will be put forward to in relation to nominations > for MAG etc. The list of names that come in will be asked to submit > brief bios separately as well. > > The NomCom will deliberate and decide on the names but it is important > that we get a broad selection as possible. We have yet to select the > Independent Non Voting Chair for this. > > You will all be informed of developments soon. > > Kind Regards, > > -- > Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala > P.O. Box 17862 > Suva > Fiji > > Twitter: @SalanietaT > Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro > Tel: +679 3544828 > Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From parminder at itforchange.net Sun Jan 6 01:55:23 2013 From: parminder at itforchange.net (parminder) Date: Sun, 06 Jan 2013 12:25:23 +0530 Subject: [governance] FW: [IP] Google's Lawyers Work Behind the Scenes to Carry the Day - NYTimes.com In-Reply-To: <104701cdeb79$fcdb8ef0$f692acd0$@gmail.com> References: <0ce601cdea8e$00308d90$0091a8b0$@gmail.com> <50E7F9B9.9070308@itforchange.net> <104701cdeb79$fcdb8ef0$f692acd0$@gmail.com> Message-ID: <50E91FDB.1040308@itforchange.net> On Sunday 06 January 2013 12:51 AM, michael gurstein wrote: > > I've blogged about this at: > > /I’m wondering though whether the issue concerning Google is rather > misplaced when included under matters concerning free speech/free > expression. Whether a search algorithm propelling a robotic process > of information selection would be covered by free speech “rights” is > something for legal scholars to ponder at their leisure./ > > // > > /I’m wondering rather whether the appropriate rights/freedoms venue > under which to assess Google’s activities might not more appropriately > fall under “freedom of thought” rather than “freedom of speech” i.e. > that it concerns the way we know things or our capacity to know > certain things (and not have the means to know (or believe) other > things)./ > I agree that google with more than 90 percent control over the search segment of the Internet represents an epistemological window on the world, and thus very clearly represents a core public interest function.... And this has serious implications if google is left free to manipulate its algorithms as it wishes to. The FTC judgement is a big disappointment. But then maybe this is more of a media regulation thing rather than a trade regulation one, and FTC will obviously look only at trade issue (on which aspect too I find its judgement inadequate). Internet defines new realities, and that requires new governance paradigms.... Above is a good instance of how looking at the Internet just through one perspective (trade law) to the exclusion of others can be grossly harmful to public interest. We require neutrality principles for Internet intermediaries, and we need them now. Hope civil society can do something about it. parminder > http://gurstein.wordpress.com/2013/01/05/is-google-like-gas-or-like-steel-neither-it-is-like-nernsts-third-law-of-thermodynamics-or-the-nicene-creed/ > > http://wp.me/pJQl5-ab > > M > > *From:*governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org > [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] *On Behalf Of *parminder > *Sent:* Saturday, January 05, 2013 2:00 AM > *To:* governance at lists.igcaucus.org > *Subject:* Re: [governance] FW: [IP] Google's Lawyers Work Behind the > Scenes to Carry the Day - NYTimes.com > > > A very interesting take on FTC's decisions on google > > http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/05/opinion/is-google-like-gas-or-like-steel.html?_r=0 > > > The article raises the right question - whether some parts of our > digital environment deserve to be treated as public utilities - due to > (1) the extent of monopoly and (2) the very important 'public > function(s)' being performed. > > I do not agree with the conclusion of the authors that any kind of > search neutrality obligations would hurt free expression objectives. > To me, the contrary is true. > > How much ever I disagree with its conclusions, the article touches the > deeper issues pertaining to search for the right paradigms that should > inform Internet governance.... Most commentaries around WCIT, and even > the almost solo fixation with multistakeholderism, just scratch the > surface, often misleadingly. The real issues are somewhere else and, > unfortunately, have not received the needed attention of civil society. > > parminder > > On Friday 04 January 2013 08:42 PM, michael gurstein wrote: > > *From:*Dave Farber [mailto:dave at farber.net] > *Sent:* Friday, January 04, 2013 5:35 AM > *To:* ip > *Subject:* [IP] Google’s Lawyers Work Behind the Scenes to Carry > the Day - NYTimes.com > > http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/04/technology/googles-lawyers-work-behind-the-scenes-to-carry-the-day.html?hp > > note last paragraph > > Archives > | Modify > > Your Subscription | Unsubscribe Now > > > > > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From parminder at itforchange.net Sun Jan 6 02:19:36 2013 From: parminder at itforchange.net (parminder) Date: Sun, 06 Jan 2013 12:49:36 +0530 Subject: [governance] FW: [IP] Google's Lawyers Work Behind the Scenes to Carry the Day - NYTimes.com In-Reply-To: <50E91FDB.1040308@itforchange.net> References: <0ce601cdea8e$00308d90$0091a8b0$@gmail.com> <50E7F9B9.9070308@itforchange.net> <104701cdeb79$fcdb8ef0$f692acd0$@gmail.com> <50E91FDB.1040308@itforchange.net> Message-ID: <50E92588.3060503@itforchange.net> Interestingly, from an OECD document, 'The role Internet intermediaries in advancing public policy objectives ' "Articulating common international principles for Internet intermediary policy would be timely. Participants were cautiously optimistic that in some areas there has been enough experience and work around the topic of Internet intermediaries by policymakers, the private sector and civil society, to identify and discuss high-level policy principles for the future. Given the global nature of the Internet and the cross- border services that Internet intermediaries often provide, an international convergence of approaches for the development of policies involving Internet intermediaries was viewed as essential, to provide effective guidance to the business sector. /*The OECD was identified as being able to help the emergence of such*//**//*principles and to support their diffusion*/." Even more interestingly, this is what the US Ambassador to the OECD has to say (emphasis added, below as well as above) "Mrs. Kornbluh further noted that the /*OECD is ideally suited to discuss the role of Internet intermediaries because of its historic mandates*/ and ongoing streams of work. Recalling that the OECD is the place where regulators come to share best practices and to develop agreements, guidelines and conventions." Hope, the day will come when civil society will take time off from their preoccupation with demonizing developing countires, and call the bluff of the US and its allies with regard to such deep hypocrisies - who gave them this 'historic role' ???? And why should not a UN based CIRP like body ( which is more multistakeholder than OECD) not 'discuss the role of Internet intermediaries' rather than these self- appointed historic role bearers? parminder On Sunday 06 January 2013 12:25 PM, parminder wrote: > > On Sunday 06 January 2013 12:51 AM, michael gurstein wrote: >> >> I've blogged about this at: >> >> /I’m wondering though whether the issue concerning Google is rather >> misplaced when included under matters concerning free speech/free >> expression. Whether a search algorithm propelling a robotic process >> of information selection would be covered by free speech “rights” is >> something for legal scholars to ponder at their leisure./ >> >> // >> >> /I’m wondering rather whether the appropriate rights/freedoms venue >> under which to assess Google’s activities might not more >> appropriately fall under “freedom of thought” rather than “freedom of >> speech” i.e. that it concerns the way we know things or our capacity >> to know certain things (and not have the means to know (or believe) >> other things)./ >> > > I agree that google with more than 90 percent control over the search > segment of the Internet represents an epistemological window on the > world, and thus very clearly represents a core public interest > function.... And this has serious implications if google is left free > to manipulate its algorithms as it wishes to. The FTC judgement is a > big disappointment. But then maybe this is more of a media regulation > thing rather than a trade regulation one, and FTC will obviously look > only at trade issue (on which aspect too I find its judgement inadequate). > > Internet defines new realities, and that requires new governance > paradigms.... Above is a good instance of how looking at the Internet > just through one perspective (trade law) to the exclusion of others > can be grossly harmful to public interest. > > We require neutrality principles for Internet intermediaries, and we > need them now. Hope civil society can do something about it. > > parminder > >> http://gurstein.wordpress.com/2013/01/05/is-google-like-gas-or-like-steel-neither-it-is-like-nernsts-third-law-of-thermodynamics-or-the-nicene-creed/ >> >> http://wp.me/pJQl5-ab >> >> M >> >> *From:*governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org >> [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] *On Behalf Of *parminder >> *Sent:* Saturday, January 05, 2013 2:00 AM >> *To:* governance at lists.igcaucus.org >> *Subject:* Re: [governance] FW: [IP] Google's Lawyers Work Behind the >> Scenes to Carry the Day - NYTimes.com >> >> >> A very interesting take on FTC's decisions on google >> >> http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/05/opinion/is-google-like-gas-or-like-steel.html?_r=0 >> >> >> The article raises the right question - whether some parts of our >> digital environment deserve to be treated as public utilities - due >> to (1) the extent of monopoly and (2) the very important 'public >> function(s)' being performed. >> >> I do not agree with the conclusion of the authors that any kind of >> search neutrality obligations would hurt free expression objectives. >> To me, the contrary is true. >> >> How much ever I disagree with its conclusions, the article touches >> the deeper issues pertaining to search for the right paradigms that >> should inform Internet governance.... Most commentaries around WCIT, >> and even the almost solo fixation with multistakeholderism, just >> scratch the surface, often misleadingly. The real issues are >> somewhere else and, unfortunately, have not received the needed >> attention of civil society. >> >> parminder >> >> On Friday 04 January 2013 08:42 PM, michael gurstein wrote: >> >> *From:*Dave Farber [mailto:dave at farber.net] >> *Sent:* Friday, January 04, 2013 5:35 AM >> *To:* ip >> *Subject:* [IP] Google’s Lawyers Work Behind the Scenes to Carry >> the Day - NYTimes.com >> >> http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/04/technology/googles-lawyers-work-behind-the-scenes-to-carry-the-day.html?hp >> >> note last paragraph >> >> Archives >> | >> Modify >> >> Your Subscription | Unsubscribe Now >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From suresh at hserus.net Sun Jan 6 02:22:34 2013 From: suresh at hserus.net (Suresh Ramasubramanian) Date: Sun, 6 Jan 2013 12:52:34 +0530 Subject: [governance] FW: [IP] Google's Lawyers Work Behind the Scenes to Carry the Day - NYTimes.com In-Reply-To: <50E91FDB.1040308@itforchange.net> References: <0ce601cdea8e$00308d90$0091a8b0$@gmail.com> <50E7F9B9.9070308@itforchange.net> <104701cdeb79$fcdb8ef0$f692acd0$@gmail.com> <50E91FDB.1040308@itforchange.net> Message-ID: <09D0780A-6533-44C6-B54A-09BE1CC1293A@hserus.net> No. Certainly not. I am not sure you realize how elastic the definition of intermediary, and the scope of what can be regulated, can be, when you make this comment. --srs (iPad) On 06-Jan-2013, at 12:25, parminder wrote: > > On Sunday 06 January 2013 12:51 AM, michael gurstein wrote: >> I've blogged about this at: >> I’m wondering though whether the issue concerning Google is rather misplaced when included under matters concerning free speech/free expression. Whether a search algorithm propelling a robotic process of information selection would be covered by free speech “rights” is something for legal scholars to ponder at their leisure. >> >> I’m wondering rather whether the appropriate rights/freedoms venue under which to assess Google’s activities might not more appropriately fall under “freedom of thought” rather than “freedom of speech” i.e. that it concerns the way we know things or our capacity to know certain things (and not have the means to know (or believe) other things). > > I agree that google with more than 90 percent control over the search segment of the Internet represents an epistemological window on the world, and thus very clearly represents a core public interest function.... And this has serious implications if google is left free to manipulate its algorithms as it wishes to. The FTC judgement is a big disappointment. But then maybe this is more of a media regulation thing rather than a trade regulation one, and FTC will obviously look only at trade issue (on which aspect too I find its judgement inadequate). > > Internet defines new realities, and that requires new governance paradigms.... Above is a good instance of how looking at the Internet just through one perspective (trade law) to the exclusion of others can be grossly harmful to public interest. > > We require neutrality principles for Internet intermediaries, and we need them now. Hope civil society can do something about it. > > parminder > >> >> http://gurstein.wordpress.com/2013/01/05/is-google-like-gas-or-like-steel-neither-it-is-like-nernsts-third-law-of-thermodynamics-or-the-nicene-creed/ >> >> http://wp.me/pJQl5-ab >> >> M >> >> >> From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of parminder >> Sent: Saturday, January 05, 2013 2:00 AM >> To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org >> Subject: Re: [governance] FW: [IP] Google's Lawyers Work Behind the Scenes to Carry the Day - NYTimes.com >> >> >> A very interesting take on FTC's decisions on google >> >> http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/05/opinion/is-google-like-gas-or-like-steel.html?_r=0 >> >> The article raises the right question - whether some parts of our digital environment deserve to be treated as public utilities - due to (1) the extent of monopoly and (2) the very important 'public function(s)' being performed. >> >> I do not agree with the conclusion of the authors that any kind of search neutrality obligations would hurt free expression objectives. To me, the contrary is true. >> >> How much ever I disagree with its conclusions, the article touches the deeper issues pertaining to search for the right paradigms that should inform Internet governance.... Most commentaries around WCIT, and even the almost solo fixation with multistakeholderism, just scratch the surface, often misleadingly. The real issues are somewhere else and, unfortunately, have not received the needed attention of civil society. >> >> parminder >> >> >> On Friday 04 January 2013 08:42 PM, michael gurstein wrote: >> From: Dave Farber [mailto:dave at farber.net] >> Sent: Friday, January 04, 2013 5:35 AM >> To: ip >> Subject: [IP] Google’s Lawyers Work Behind the Scenes to Carry the Day - NYTimes.com >> >> http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/04/technology/googles-lawyers-work-behind-the-scenes-to-carry-the-day.html?hp >> >> note last paragraph >> Archives | Modify Your Subscription | Unsubscribe Now >> >> >> > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From suresh at hserus.net Sun Jan 6 02:27:15 2013 From: suresh at hserus.net (Suresh Ramasubramanian) Date: Sun, 6 Jan 2013 12:57:15 +0530 Subject: [governance] FW: [IP] Google's Lawyers Work Behind the Scenes to Carry the Day - NYTimes.com In-Reply-To: <50E92588.3060503@itforchange.net> References: <0ce601cdea8e$00308d90$0091a8b0$@gmail.com> <50E7F9B9.9070308@itforchange.net> <104701cdeb79$fcdb8ef0$f692acd0$@gmail.com> <50E91FDB.1040308@itforchange.net> <50E92588.3060503@itforchange.net> Message-ID: <8E831374-D5CF-406F-93CA-8BD31577A09C@hserus.net> Historic role is an ongoing interest in and a series of policy briefs prepared on this area Do note that this proposed model is multistakeholder in nature while what you keep calling for, regulation, most definitely is not. Why is the OECD and / or the usa hypocritical when explicitly endorsing multistakeholderism, while the idea of a civil society organization (thankfully with what appears to be zero consensus from any other than a few others) calling for increased government control and oversight of the Internet is supposed to pass unnoticed? --srs (iPad) On 06-Jan-2013, at 12:49, parminder wrote: > > Interestingly, from an OECD document, 'The role Internet intermediaries in advancing public policy objectives' > > "Articulating common international principles for Internet intermediary policy would be timely. Participants were cautiously optimistic that in some areas there has been enough experience and work around the topic of Internet intermediaries by policymakers, the private sector and civil society, to identify and discuss high-level policy principles for the future. Given the global nature of the Internet and the cross- border services that Internet intermediaries often provide, an international convergence of approaches for the development of policies involving Internet intermediaries was viewed as essential, to provide effective guidance to the business sector. The OECD was identified as being able to help the emergence of such principles and to support their diffusion." > > Even more interestingly, this is what the US Ambassador to the OECD has to say (emphasis added, below as well as above) > > "Mrs. Kornbluh further noted that the OECD is ideally suited to discuss the role of Internet intermediaries because of its historic mandates and ongoing streams of work. Recalling that the OECD is the place where regulators come to share best practices and to develop agreements, guidelines and conventions." > Hope, the day will come when civil society will take time off from their preoccupation with demonizing developing countires, and call the bluff of the US and its allies with regard to such deep hypocrisies - who gave them this 'historic role' ???? And why should not a UN based CIRP like body ( which is more multistakeholder than OECD) not 'discuss the role of Internet intermediaries' rather than these self- appointed historic role bearers? > > parminder > > > > > On Sunday 06 January 2013 12:25 PM, parminder wrote: >> >> On Sunday 06 January 2013 12:51 AM, michael gurstein wrote: >>> I've blogged about this at: >>> I’m wondering though whether the issue concerning Google is rather misplaced when included under matters concerning free speech/free expression. Whether a search algorithm propelling a robotic process of information selection would be covered by free speech “rights” is something for legal scholars to ponder at their leisure. >>> >>> I’m wondering rather whether the appropriate rights/freedoms venue under which to assess Google’s activities might not more appropriately fall under “freedom of thought” rather than “freedom of speech” i.e. that it concerns the way we know things or our capacity to know certain things (and not have the means to know (or believe) other things). >> >> I agree that google with more than 90 percent control over the search segment of the Internet represents an epistemological window on the world, and thus very clearly represents a core public interest function.... And this has serious implications if google is left free to manipulate its algorithms as it wishes to. The FTC judgement is a big disappointment. But then maybe this is more of a media regulation thing rather than a trade regulation one, and FTC will obviously look only at trade issue (on which aspect too I find its judgement inadequate). >> >> Internet defines new realities, and that requires new governance paradigms.... Above is a good instance of how looking at the Internet just through one perspective (trade law) to the exclusion of others can be grossly harmful to public interest. >> >> We require neutrality principles for Internet intermediaries, and we need them now. Hope civil society can do something about it. >> >> parminder >> >>> >>> http://gurstein.wordpress.com/2013/01/05/is-google-like-gas-or-like-steel-neither-it-is-like-nernsts-third-law-of-thermodynamics-or-the-nicene-creed/ >>> >>> http://wp.me/pJQl5-ab >>> >>> M >>> >>> >>> From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of parminder >>> Sent: Saturday, January 05, 2013 2:00 AM >>> To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org >>> Subject: Re: [governance] FW: [IP] Google's Lawyers Work Behind the Scenes to Carry the Day - NYTimes.com >>> >>> >>> A very interesting take on FTC's decisions on google >>> >>> http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/05/opinion/is-google-like-gas-or-like-steel.html?_r=0 >>> >>> The article raises the right question - whether some parts of our digital environment deserve to be treated as public utilities - due to (1) the extent of monopoly and (2) the very important 'public function(s)' being performed. >>> >>> I do not agree with the conclusion of the authors that any kind of search neutrality obligations would hurt free expression objectives. To me, the contrary is true. >>> >>> How much ever I disagree with its conclusions, the article touches the deeper issues pertaining to search for the right paradigms that should inform Internet governance.... Most commentaries around WCIT, and even the almost solo fixation with multistakeholderism, just scratch the surface, often misleadingly. The real issues are somewhere else and, unfortunately, have not received the needed attention of civil society. >>> >>> parminder >>> >>> >>> On Friday 04 January 2013 08:42 PM, michael gurstein wrote: >>> From: Dave Farber [mailto:dave at farber.net] >>> Sent: Friday, January 04, 2013 5:35 AM >>> To: ip >>> Subject: [IP] Google’s Lawyers Work Behind the Scenes to Carry the Day - NYTimes.com >>> >>> http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/04/technology/googles-lawyers-work-behind-the-scenes-to-carry-the-day.html?hp >>> >>> note last paragraph >>> Archives | Modify Your Subscription | Unsubscribe Now >>> >>> >>> > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From avri at acm.org Sun Jan 6 08:42:00 2013 From: avri at acm.org (Avri Doria) Date: Sun, 6 Jan 2013 08:42:00 -0500 Subject: [governance] Updates on MAG 2013 In-Reply-To: <50E8F894.8070601@itforchange.net> References: <50E8F894.8070601@itforchange.net> Message-ID: <2B5CB958-2BBA-4E4D-A916-74BA59ED1ED5@acm.org> Hi, While I am uncomfortable with using the old set of volunteers, I accept that posting list and of giving people time to opt out, or in for that matter. I agree with Parminder that using the same nomcom is a bad idea. Had we carried through with the suggestions to setup a nomcom for a year's worth of tasks, we might have been able to do that. But I take the inaction along this front as an indication of IGC not having support for doing this. avri On 5 Jan 2013, at 23:07, parminder wrote: > > On Sunday 06 January 2013 09:14 AM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro wrote: >> Dear All, >> >> I have asked the former NomCom to assist in selecting the names of nominees that come in. > > Disclaimer first: I dont remember who the members of the last non com were, or even what was it constituted for. Neither do I have any interest in the outcome of the MAG nomination process.... > > This said, I much prefer we repeat the list of volunteers rather than repeat a nomcom. It take a few minutes to random pick a nomcom from a list of volunteers and so the time taken for the two processes is almost the same. But we have better randomness in getting a new slate every time, which is a key objective of nomcom selection. > > parminder > > >> The poll is currently being prepared for IGC elections and additional questions will be put forward to in relation to nominations for MAG etc. The list of names that come in will be asked to submit brief bios separately as well. >> >> The NomCom will deliberate and decide on the names but it is important that we get a broad selection as possible. We have yet to select the Independent Non Voting Chair for this. >> >> You will all be informed of developments soon. >> >> Kind Regards, >> >> -- >> Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala >> P.O. Box 17862 >> Suva >> Fiji >> >> Twitter: @SalanietaT >> Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro >> Tel: +679 3544828 >> Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 >> >> >> > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From hakik at hakik.org Sun Jan 6 10:24:31 2013 From: hakik at hakik.org (Hakikur Rahman) Date: Sun, 06 Jan 2013 15:24:31 +0000 Subject: [governance] Updates on MAG 2013 In-Reply-To: <50E8F894.8070601@itforchange.net> References: <50E8F894.8070601@itforchange.net> Message-ID: Disclaimer second: I would prefer to listen as I am doing it for many years. Learning about the process and listening to the learned members of this community. Learning about MAG and issues of importance that in my opinion would have gain much momentum along these years. I am humbly withdrawing my name from this NomCom, though I have served in earlier NomComs for making them as successful. Also, please opt out my name from any random list, given that I could be in this IGCCaucas list to learn some more about IG. Best regards, Hakikur At 04:07 06-01-2013, parminder wrote: >On Sunday 06 January 2013 09:14 AM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro wrote: >>Dear All, >> >>I have asked the former NomCom to assist in >>selecting the names of nominees that come in. > >Disclaimer first: I dont remember who the >members of the last non com were, or even what >was it constituted for. Neither do I have any >interest in the outcome of the MAG nomination process.... > >This said, I much prefer we repeat the list of >volunteers rather than repeat a nomcom. It take >a few minutes to random pick a nomcom from a >list of volunteers and so the time taken for the >two processes is almost the same. But we have >better randomness in getting a new slate every >time, which is a key objective of nomcom selection. > >parminder > > >> The poll is currently being prepared for IGC >>elections and additional questions will be put >>forward to in relation to nominations for MAG >>etc. The list of names that come in will be >>asked to submit brief bios separately as well. >> >>The NomCom will deliberate and decide on the >>names but it is important that we get a broad >>selection as possible. We have yet to select >>the Independent Non Voting Chair for this. >> >>You will all be informed of developments soon. >> >>Kind Regards, >> >>-- >>Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala >>P.O. Box 17862 >>Suva >>Fiji >> >>Twitter: @SalanietaT >>Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro >>Tel: +679 3544828 >>Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 >> >> > >____________________________________________________________ >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: -------------- 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 From riaz.tayob at gmail.com Sun Jan 6 10:39:36 2013 From: riaz.tayob at gmail.com (Riaz K Tayob) Date: Sun, 06 Jan 2013 17:39:36 +0200 Subject: [governance] FW: [IP] Google's Lawyers Work Behind the Scenes to Carry the Day - NYTimes.com In-Reply-To: <104701cdeb79$fcdb8ef0$f692acd0$@gmail.com> References: <0ce601cdea8e$00308d90$0091a8b0$@gmail.com> <50E7F9B9.9070308@itforchange.net> <104701cdeb79$fcdb8ef0$f692acd0$@gmail.com> Message-ID: <50E99AB8.7080109@gmail.com> On 2013/01/05 09:21 PM, michael gurstein wrote: > /I’m wondering rather whether the appropriate rights/freedoms venue > under which to assess Google’s activities might not more appropriately > fall under “freedom of thought” rather than “freedom of speech” i.e. > that it concerns the way we know things or our capacity to know > certain things (and not have the means to know (or believe) other > things)./ This kind of purview puts the lack of an unlike button on facebook in a proper context... nice one... provocative! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From ajp at glocom.ac.jp Sun Jan 6 10:54:37 2013 From: ajp at glocom.ac.jp (Adam Peake) Date: Mon, 7 Jan 2013 00:54:37 +0900 Subject: [governance] Updates on MAG 2013 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Confirmed with the secretariat that the goal is to continue with rotation, i.e. one third each year (plus or minus a few.) How many CS MAG members are there now, about 12? Perhaps look to submit 6 names for the deadline? The members who joined last year only began at the May meeting. Hope they remain. A few of the people we suggested then were selected, in addition to the names the NomCom comes up with now, might be good to suggest that the 2012 batch also remain. Adam On Sun, Jan 6, 2013 at 12:44 PM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro wrote: > Dear All, > > I have asked the former NomCom to assist in selecting the names of nominees > that come in. The poll is currently being prepared for IGC elections and > additional questions will be put forward to in relation to nominations for > MAG etc. The list of names that come in will be asked to submit brief bios > separately as well. > > The NomCom will deliberate and decide on the names but it is important that > we get a broad selection as possible. We have yet to select the Independent > Non Voting Chair for this. > > You will all be informed of developments soon. > > Kind Regards, > > -- > Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala > P.O. Box 17862 > Suva > Fiji > > Twitter: @SalanietaT > Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro > Tel: +679 3544828 > Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From riaz.tayob at gmail.com Sun Jan 6 11:17:08 2013 From: riaz.tayob at gmail.com (Riaz K Tayob) Date: Sun, 06 Jan 2013 18:17:08 +0200 Subject: [governance] FW: [IP] Google's Lawyers Work Behind the Scenes to Carry the Day - NYTimes.com In-Reply-To: <0ce601cdea8e$00308d90$0091a8b0$@gmail.com> References: <0ce601cdea8e$00308d90$0091a8b0$@gmail.com> Message-ID: <50E9A384.4080304@gmail.com> EU Commission's Google Investigation Won't Be Affected By American Decision *Reuters* | Posted: 01/05/2013 2:49 pm EST | Updated: 01/05/2013 2:49 pm EST Follow: European Union , Google , Video , Google FTC , European Union , Eu Commission Google Investigation , Google Antitrust , Reuters , Business News (Reuters) - A decision by U.S. regulators to end a probe into whether Google Inc hurt rivals by manipulating internet searches will not affect the European Union's examination of the company. "We have taken note of the FTC (Federal Trade Commission) decision, but we don't see that it has any direct implications for our investigation, for our discussions with Google, which are ongoing," said Michael Jennings, a spokesman for the European Commission, the EU executive. U.S. regulators on Thursday ended their investigation into the giant internet company, which runs the world's most popular search engine. Other internet companies, such as Microsoft Corp, had complained about Google tweaking its search results to give prominence to its own products. But the FTC said there was not enough evidence to pursue a big search-bias case. The European Commission has for the past two years been investigating complaints against Google, including claims that it unfairly favored its own services in its search results. Google presented informal settlement proposals to the Commission in July. On December 18 the Commission gave the company a month to come up with detailed proposals to resolve the investigation. If it fails to address the complaints and is found guilty, Google could eventually be fined up to 10 percent of its revenue - a fine of up to $4 billion. (Reporting By Ethan Bilby; Editing by Sebastian Moffett and David Goodman) On 2013/01/04 05:12 PM, michael gurstein wrote: > > *From:*Dave Farber [mailto:dave at farber.net] > *Sent:* Friday, January 04, 2013 5:35 AM > *To:* ip > *Subject:* [IP] Google’s Lawyers Work Behind the Scenes to Carry the > Day - NYTimes.com > > http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/04/technology/googles-lawyers-work-behind-the-scenes-to-carry-the-day.html?hp > > note last paragraph > > Archives > | > Modify > > Your Subscription | Unsubscribe Now > > > > > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: reuters_logo.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 3973 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- 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 From gurstein at gmail.com Sun Jan 6 11:30:15 2013 From: gurstein at gmail.com (michael gurstein) Date: Sun, 6 Jan 2013 08:30:15 -0800 Subject: FW: [governance] FW: [IP] Google's Lawyers Work Behind the Scenes to Carry the Day - NYTimes.com In-Reply-To: <50E99AB8.7080109@gmail.com> References: <0ce601cdea8e$00308d90$0091a8b0$@gmail.com> <50E7F9B9.9070308@itforchange.net> <104701cdeb79$fcdb8ef0$f692acd0$@gmail.com> <50E99AB8.7080109@gmail.com> Message-ID: <129601cdec2b$2b36e860$81a4b920$@gmail.com> Thanks Riaz (and sorry for the really awkward phrasing… To put that in English… I'm wondering whether it wouldn't be better to "investigate" Google for possible "freedom of thought" violations rather than issues concerning "freedom of speech"… Google has the potential for much more serious impacts on our capacity to know (or not know) certain things, than on what we can say or not say… M From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Riaz K Tayob Sent: Sunday, January 06, 2013 7:40 AM To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org Subject: Re: [governance] FW: [IP] Google's Lawyers Work Behind the Scenes to Carry the Day - NYTimes.com On 2013/01/05 09:21 PM, michael gurstein wrote: I’m wondering rather whether the appropriate rights/freedoms venue under which to assess Google’s activities might not more appropriately fall under “freedom of thought” rather than “freedom of speech” i.e. that it concerns the way we know things or our capacity to know certain things (and not have the means to know (or believe) other things). This kind of purview puts the lack of an unlike button on facebook in a proper context... nice one... provocative! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From suresh at hserus.net Sun Jan 6 11:52:08 2013 From: suresh at hserus.net (Suresh Ramasubramanian) Date: Sun, 6 Jan 2013 22:22:08 +0530 Subject: [governance] FW: [IP] Google's Lawyers Work Behind the Scenes to Carry the Day - NYTimes.com In-Reply-To: <129601cdec2b$2b36e860$81a4b920$@gmail.com> References: <0ce601cdea8e$00308d90$0091a8b0$@gmail.com> <50E7F9B9.9070308@itforchange.net> <104701cdeb79$fcdb8ef0$f692acd0$@gmail.com> <50E99AB8.7080109@gmail.com> <129601cdec2b$2b36e860$81a4b920$@gmail.com> Message-ID: <7B42A9ED-878A-4DCA-A65C-9B8D9D555DB9@hserus.net> So do you get all your news from just news.google.com and other google search results, instead of Facebook shares, Riaz gleefully posting every article he sees about google being investigated for, say, giggling in church? And did Riaz find this news item anywhere other than google search? And does this reality distortion field google is supposed to have actually hide any search results from you that are negative to it? Like search for "google FTC" and you get the EU action, statements from Microsoft slamming the decision etc. And the last link on page 1 of the search results showing just where google got spanked by the FTC. http://www.tnr.com/blog/plank/111650/why-does-everyone-think-google-beat-the-ftc# is worth a read as a kind f counterpoint to all the commentary about how google got a get out of jail card because of intensive lobbying. Can we please 1. Have a reality check here 2. Go back to discussing Internet governance --srs (iPad) On 06-Jan-2013, at 22:00, "michael gurstein" wrote: > Thanks Riaz (and sorry for the really awkward phrasing… > > To put that in English… > > I'm wondering whether it wouldn't be better to "investigate" Google for possible "freedom of thought" violations rather than issues concerning "freedom of speech"… Google has the potential for much more serious impacts on our capacity to know (or not know) certain things, than on what we can say or not say… > > M > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From gurstein at gmail.com Sun Jan 6 12:46:18 2013 From: gurstein at gmail.com (michael gurstein) Date: Sun, 6 Jan 2013 09:46:18 -0800 Subject: [governance] FW: [IP] Google's Lawyers Work Behind the Scenes to Carry the Day - NYTimes.com In-Reply-To: <7B42A9ED-878A-4DCA-A65C-9B8D9D555DB9@hserus.net> References: <0ce601cdea8e$00308d90$0091a8b0$@gmail.com> <50E7F9B9.9070308@itforchange.net> <104701cdeb79$fcdb8ef0$f692acd0$@gmail.com> <50E99AB8.7080109@gmail.com> <129601cdec2b$2b36e860$81a4b920$@gmail.com> <7B42A9ED-878A-4DCA-A65C-9B8D9D555DB9@hserus.net> Message-ID: <12f601cdec35$bc1cd380$34567a80$@gmail.com> Perhaps before trolling on you might want to actually read the blogpost of which this was a "teaser"… http://wp.me/pJQl5-ab M From: Suresh Ramasubramanian [mailto:suresh at hserus.net] Sent: Sunday, January 06, 2013 8:52 AM To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; michael gurstein Subject: Re: [governance] FW: [IP] Google's Lawyers Work Behind the Scenes to Carry the Day - NYTimes.com So do you get all your news from just news.google.com and other google search results, instead of Facebook shares, Riaz gleefully posting every article he sees about google being investigated for, say, giggling in church? And did Riaz find this news item anywhere other than google search? And does this reality distortion field google is supposed to have actually hide any search results from you that are negative to it? Like search for "google FTC" and you get the EU action, statements from Microsoft slamming the decision etc. And the last link on page 1 of the search results showing just where google got spanked by the FTC. http://www.tnr.com/blog/plank/111650/why-does-everyone-think-google-beat-the-ftc# is worth a read as a kind f counterpoint to all the commentary about how google got a get out of jail card because of intensive lobbying. Can we please 1. Have a reality check here 2. Go back to discussing Internet governance --srs (iPad) On 06-Jan-2013, at 22:00, "michael gurstein" wrote: Thanks Riaz (and sorry for the really awkward phrasing… To put that in English… I'm wondering whether it wouldn't be better to "investigate" Google for possible "freedom of thought" violations rather than issues concerning "freedom of speech"… Google has the potential for much more serious impacts on our capacity to know (or not know) certain things, than on what we can say or not say… M -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From ian.peter at ianpeter.com Sun Jan 6 13:52:36 2013 From: ian.peter at ianpeter.com (Ian Peter) Date: Mon, 7 Jan 2013 05:52:36 +1100 Subject: [governance] Updates on MAG 2013 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <36613454AE654EB9A07DF9DB0126E547@Toshiba> I think using the previous Nomcom is the most practical path forward, but above all I think leaving the process to the (single currently) Co ordinator is what we should do. The current Nomcom is less than 12 months old, has only been used to select an Appeals Team, and operated effectively. Not all Nomcoms in the past have been effective, as most of us know, and I would prefer not to take the risk of a longer process that might give us dubious results. We will be lucky to meet the deadline even with the path of least resistance. Re numbers to put forward - I think we should be aiming at a large slate of nominees rather than a small one, to cover all contingencies. We don't know who will be rotated off, either in CS or with other stakeholder groups, and as the geographic and gender balance needs to be achieved cross-stakeholder, it is better for us to present more options ( the loss of a North American woman governmental representative may well present an opening for a civil society woman from that area, etc) So I think a larger group of nominees might be praxctical. Ian Peter -----Original Message----- From: Adam Peake Sent: Monday, January 07, 2013 2:54 AM To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org ; Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro Subject: Re: [governance] Updates on MAG 2013 Confirmed with the secretariat that the goal is to continue with rotation, i.e. one third each year (plus or minus a few.) How many CS MAG members are there now, about 12? Perhaps look to submit 6 names for the deadline? The members who joined last year only began at the May meeting. Hope they remain. A few of the people we suggested then were selected, in addition to the names the NomCom comes up with now, might be good to suggest that the 2012 batch also remain. Adam On Sun, Jan 6, 2013 at 12:44 PM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro wrote: > Dear All, > > I have asked the former NomCom to assist in selecting the names of > nominees > that come in. The poll is currently being prepared for IGC elections and > additional questions will be put forward to in relation to nominations for > MAG etc. The list of names that come in will be asked to submit brief bios > separately as well. > > The NomCom will deliberate and decide on the names but it is important > that > we get a broad selection as possible. We have yet to select the > Independent > Non Voting Chair for this. > > You will all be informed of developments soon. > > Kind Regards, > > -- > Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala > P.O. Box 17862 > Suva > Fiji > > Twitter: @SalanietaT > Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro > Tel: +679 3544828 > Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > ____________________________________________________________ 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From toml at communisphere.com Sun Jan 6 14:50:35 2013 From: toml at communisphere.com (Thomas Lowenhaupt) Date: Sun, 06 Jan 2013 14:50:35 -0500 Subject: [governance] Fwd: [igf_members] MAG Renewal for 2013 In-Reply-To: <1F1DEE75-CCC8-4547-8CAB-8394876C7B4D@privaterra.org> References: <78980604-5E4E-44A0-A235-4BAA721DA4D3@unog.ch> <50E7A23D.6050801@itforchange.net> <1F1DEE75-CCC8-4547-8CAB-8394876C7B4D@privaterra.org> Message-ID: <50E9D58B.6080602@communisphere.com> +1 especially to the suggestion > civil society should coordinate among itself and send a single list > of names it "recommends" to the UN. Competing lists, lessen the impact > of the IGC on the decision making process As the "fill-in" chair of last year's MAG nomcom, I was quite disappointed to learn that ours was just one of the lists from civil society that was submitted to the MAG. I would not advocate for the creation of an official list by a MAG designated body (a channel for self nominations by outsiders is helpful), but submissions from a scattering of civil society sources puts too much power in the hands of MAG central to pick and choose. A submission by a civil society "joint- board" seems worth considering. Tom Lowenhaupt On 1/5/2013 11:04 AM, Robert Guerra wrote: > My quick thoughts, in no particular order, on this are as follows: > > - Do we know the details of the persons rotating off the MAG (ie. > gender, Stakeholder groups & regions) If so, can someone share that - > thanks! > - The IGC needs to setup a transparent, open and inclusive process > that builds on lessons learned. > - If possible, civil society should coordinate among itself and send a > single list of names it "recommends" to the UN. Competing lists, > lessen the impact of the IGC on the decision making process > > regards > > Robert > > > On 2013-01-04, at 10:47 PM, parminder wrote: > >> >> IGC may want to do something about this.... parminder >> >> >> -------- Original Message -------- >> Subject: [igf_members] MAG Renewal for 2013 >> Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2013 13:03:57 +0100 >> From: Chengetai Masango >> To: igf Forum >> >> >> >> Dear All, >> >> Happy New year to you all. I hope you had a restful holiday season. >> It was a pleasure working with you all in 2012 and look forward to >> continuing to do so in 2013. >> >> Please find below a message from Under-Secretary-General Mr. Wu >> Hongbo concerning the MAG renewal. It is posted on the IGF website >> and I would be grateful if you could distribute it among your >> respective stakeholder groups. >> >> Best regards >> >> Chengetai >> >> _________________________________ >> >> >> The Internet Governance Forum's Multi-stakeholder Advisory Group >> (MAG) has been instrumental in planning the programme of the annual >> IGF meetings. >> >> We would like to express our gratitude to all past and present >> members of MAG who have donated their time, effort and valuable >> guidance in ensuring the smooth running of the IGF. >> >> On behalf of the United Nations Secretary-General, the Department of >> Economic and Social Affairs (DESA) requests nominations from all >> stakeholder groups, according to the established principles and >> practices of MAG on the rotation and selection of its members. >> Governments, the private sector, civil society, and technical >> communities should submit names of candidates from developed and >> developing countries as well as from economies in transition. >> Successful nominees will become part of MAG for a period of one year >> and will contribute to the multi-stakeholder consultation process, >> bringing the perspectives of their respective groups on Internet >> governance. Group nominees should be members who have actively >> participated in IGF meetings and activities in the past. As in >> previous years, stakeholder groups can resubmit the names of current >> MAG members for re-election and are expected to publicize the >> selection and nomination process. >> >> Please submit the names of nominees to the IGF Secretariat by *20 >> January 2013* via email:magrenewal2013 at intgovforum.org >> , using the attached >> submission template. The aim is to rotate one third of MAG members. >> >> Selection and Operation Principles: >> >> (i) MAG members are selected to achieve a balance among all >> stakeholder groups, while retaining regional and gender >> representation, according to established procedures; >> >> (ii) All MAG members serve in their personal capacity but are >> expected to have extensive linkages with their respective stakeholder >> groups; >> >> (iii) The main task of MAG is to provide advice on the programme and >> main themes of the next meeting of the IGF; >> >> (iv) MAG members are expected to attend two to three MAG meetings in >> Geneva, Switzerland, in addition to the annual IGF meeting. They >> should participate actively in the preparatory process throughout the >> year, through engagement in the online multilateral dialogue among >> MAG members; >> >> (v) MAG meetings are open to Intergovernmental organizations. >> >> Thank you and I look forward to the continued success of the Internet >> Governance Forum. >> >> >> (Signed) >> Wu Hongbo >> Under-Secretary-General >> Department of Economic and Social Affairs (UNDESA) >> >> >> >> >> > Part.txt>____________________________________________________________ >> 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: -------------- 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 From toml at communisphere.com Sun Jan 6 15:10:51 2013 From: toml at communisphere.com (Thomas Lowenhaupt) Date: Sun, 06 Jan 2013 15:10:51 -0500 Subject: [governance] Google's Lawyers Work Behind the Scenes to Carry the Day - NYTimes.com In-Reply-To: <12f601cdec35$bc1cd380$34567a80$@gmail.com> References: <0ce601cdea8e$00308d90$0091a8b0$@gmail.com> <50E7F9B9.9070308@itforchange.net> <104701cdeb79$fcdb8ef0$f692acd0$@gmail.com> <50E99AB8.7080109@gmail.com> <129601cdec2b$2b36e860$81a4b920$@gmail.com> <7B42A9ED-878A-4DCA-A65C-9B8D9D555DB9@hserus.net> <12f601cdec35$bc1cd380$34567a80$@gmail.com> Message-ID: <50E9DA4B.8030608@communisphere.com> Regarding "right to know" and "right to say," the following was posted on a Transparent Search wiki page we host. "Such placements need to be carefully reviewed by fairness rules of what might be called "search journalism." Here in the U.S. the First Amendment - "Congress shall make no law ... abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press..." - poses an apparent block to any regulation. "But it might be argued that there are parallels between the impact of technology on the interpretation of the First Amendment, perhaps with parallels drawn with the Second Amendment. Americans are all to familiar with a decades long controversy about that Amendment's guaranteeing a citizen's right to bare arms: Did the Founding Fathers intend that citizens be allowed to own and use powerful automatic weapons? The corresponding First Amendment question might be: Was big data, big money, and search imagined by the Founding Fathers?" "So for the immediate future, regulation of search journalism is unlikely. And with the creation of a transparent "search.nyc" vital to our city's effective operation, a trusted entity must be identified to oversee its development." Best, Tom Lowenhaupt On 1/6/2013 12:46 PM, michael gurstein wrote: > > Perhaps before trolling on you might want to actually read the > blogpost of which this was a "teaser"… http://wp.me/pJQl5-ab > > M > > *From:*Suresh Ramasubramanian [mailto:suresh at hserus.net] > *Sent:* Sunday, January 06, 2013 8:52 AM > *To:* governance at lists.igcaucus.org; michael gurstein > *Subject:* Re: [governance] FW: [IP] Google's Lawyers Work Behind the > Scenes to Carry the Day - NYTimes.com > > So do you get all your news from just news.google.com > and other google search results, instead of > Facebook shares, Riaz gleefully posting every article he sees about > google being investigated for, say, giggling in church? > > And did Riaz find this news item anywhere other than google search? > > And does this reality distortion field google is supposed to have > actually hide any search results from you that are negative to it? > Like search for "google FTC" and you get the EU action, statements > from Microsoft slamming the decision etc. > > And the last link on page 1 of the search results showing just where > google got spanked by the FTC. > http://www.tnr.com/blog/plank/111650/why-does-everyone-think-google-beat-the-ftc# > is > worth a read as a kind f counterpoint to all the commentary about how > google got a get out of jail card because of intensive lobbying. > > Can we please > > 1. Have a reality check here > > 2. Go back to discussing Internet governance > > > --srs (iPad) > > > On 06-Jan-2013, at 22:00, "michael gurstein" > wrote: > > Thanks Riaz (and sorry for the really awkward phrasing… > > To put that in English… > > /I'm wondering whether it wouldn't be better to "investigate" > Google for possible "freedom of thought" violations rather than > issues concerning "freedom of speech"… Google has the potential > for much more serious impacts on our capacity to know (or not > know) certain things, than on what we can say or not say…/ > > // > > /M/ > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From gurstein at gmail.com Sun Jan 6 15:18:05 2013 From: gurstein at gmail.com (michael gurstein) Date: Sun, 6 Jan 2013 12:18:05 -0800 Subject: [governance] FW: Toward Reducing the Greenhouse Gas Emissions of the Internet and Telecommunications In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <139701cdec4b$012dbf10$03893d30$@gmail.com> According to recent calculations the Internet is the source of some 2% of global greenhouse gas emissions (and increasing quickly). Much of this comes from the vast server farms that major Internet corporations (eg. Google, Amazon etc.) have been establishing around the world. http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/01/130102140452.htm Perhaps a topic for discussion at the next IGF? M -----Original Message----- From: davidicus [mailto:bigbluearth at gmail.com] Sent: Saturday, January 05, 2013 11:09 PM To: ciresearchers Cc: michael gurstein Subject: Toward Reducing the Greenhouse Gas Emissions of the Internet and Telecommunications This story in Science Daily may be of interest to some CI Colleagues. ~d --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Toward Reducing the Greenhouse Gas Emissions of the Internet and Telecommunications Jan. 2, 2013 — Amid growing concern over the surprisingly large amount of greenhouse gas produced by the Internet and other telecommunications activities, researchers are reporting new models of emissions and energy consumption that could help reduce their carbon footprint. Their report appears in ACS' journal Environmental Science & Technology. Researchers from the Centre for Energy-Efficient Telecommunications (CEET) and Bell Labs explain that the information communications and technology (ICT) industry, which delivers Internet, video, voice and other cloud services, produces more than 830 million tons of carbon dioxide (CO2), the main greenhouse gas, annually. That's about 2 percent of global CO2 emissions -- the same proportion as the aviation industry produces. Projections suggest that ICT sector's share is expected to double by 2020. The team notes that controlling those emissions requires more accurate but still feasible models, which take into account the data traffic, energy use and CO2 production in networks and other elements of the ICT industry. Existing assessment models are inaccurate, so they set out to develop new approaches that better account for variations in equipment and other factors in the ICT industry. They describe development and testing of two new models that better estimate the energy consumption and CO2 emissions of Internet and telecommunications services. They tested the models on a simulated network and on a deployed network that serves the majority of schools in California. Both models delivered better estimates than the current "top-down" models. The researchers suggest, based on their models, that more efficient power usage of facilities, more efficient use of energy-efficient equipment and renewable energy sources are three keys to reducing ICT emissions of CO2. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Story Source: The above story is reprinted from materials provided by American Chemical Society. Journal Reference: Chien A. Chan, André F. Gygax, Elaine Wong, Christopher A. Leckie, Ampalavanapillai Nirmalathas, Daniel C. Kilper. Methodologies for Assessing the Use-Phase Power Consumption and Greenhouse Gas Emissions of Telecommunications Network Services. Environmental Science & Technology, 2013; 47 (1): 485 DOI: 10.1021/es303384y Web address: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/01/130102140452.htm Disclaimer: Views expressed in this article do not necessarily reflect those of ScienceDaily or its staff. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ================================ D a v i d S a d o w a y BES, MRM PhD Candidate Department of Urban Planning & Design The University of Hong Kong Email: one1earth at hku.hk (852)2859.2721 -------------------------------------------------------- Visiting Associate Center for Asia-Pacific Area Studies Academia Sinica (Taipei, Taiwan) Email: bigbluearth at gmail.com (886)2929.2948 ================================ -------------- 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 From riaz.tayob at gmail.com Sun Jan 6 15:28:04 2013 From: riaz.tayob at gmail.com (Riaz K Tayob) Date: Sun, 06 Jan 2013 22:28:04 +0200 Subject: [governance] FW: Toward Reducing the Greenhouse Gas Emissions of the Internet and Telecommunications In-Reply-To: <139701cdec4b$012dbf10$03893d30$@gmail.com> References: <139701cdec4b$012dbf10$03893d30$@gmail.com> Message-ID: <50E9DE54.9030900@gmail.com> Taking my cue from my opinion of the tenor of this list, and to play devil's advocate, what proof do you have that anthropocentric activity is driving climate change, if at all it is a reality at all? Thought I would save others the bother and be a little anticipatory :) On 2013/01/06 10:18 PM, michael gurstein wrote: > According to recent calculations the Internet is the source of some 2% of global greenhouse gas emissions (and increasing quickly). Much of this comes from the vast server farms that major Internet corporations (eg. Google, Amazon etc.) have been establishing around the world. http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/01/130102140452.htm > > Perhaps a topic for discussion at the next IGF? > > M > > -----Original Message----- > From: davidicus [mailto:bigbluearth at gmail.com] > Sent: Saturday, January 05, 2013 11:09 PM > To: ciresearchers > Cc: michael gurstein > Subject: Toward Reducing the Greenhouse Gas Emissions of the Internet and Telecommunications > > This story in Science Daily may be of interest to some CI Colleagues. > ~d > > --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > Toward Reducing the Greenhouse Gas Emissions of the Internet and Telecommunications > > Jan. 2, 2013 — Amid growing concern over the surprisingly large amount of greenhouse gas produced by the Internet and other telecommunications activities, researchers are reporting new models of emissions and energy consumption that could help reduce their carbon footprint. > > Their report appears in ACS' journal Environmental Science & Technology. > > Researchers from the Centre for Energy-Efficient Telecommunications > (CEET) and Bell Labs explain that the information communications and technology (ICT) industry, which delivers Internet, video, voice and other cloud services, produces more than 830 million tons of carbon dioxide (CO2), the main greenhouse gas, annually. That's about 2 percent of global CO2 emissions -- the same proportion as the aviation industry produces. Projections suggest that ICT sector's share is expected to double by 2020. The team notes that controlling those emissions requires more accurate but still feasible models, which take into account the data traffic, energy use and CO2 production in networks and other elements of the ICT industry. Existing assessment models are inaccurate, so they set out to develop new approaches that better account for variations in equipment and other factors in the ICT industry. > > They describe development and testing of two new models that better estimate the energy consumption and CO2 emissions of Internet and telecommunications services. They tested the models on a simulated network and on a deployed network that serves the majority of schools in California. Both models delivered better estimates than the current "top-down" models. The researchers suggest, based on their models, that more efficient power usage of facilities, more efficient use of energy-efficient equipment and renewable energy sources are three keys to reducing ICT emissions of CO2. > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > Story Source: > The above story is reprinted from materials provided by American Chemical Society. > > Journal Reference: > Chien A. Chan, André F. Gygax, Elaine Wong, Christopher A. Leckie, Ampalavanapillai Nirmalathas, Daniel C. Kilper. Methodologies for Assessing the Use-Phase Power Consumption and Greenhouse Gas Emissions of Telecommunications Network Services. Environmental Science & Technology, 2013; 47 (1): 485 DOI: 10.1021/es303384y > > Web address: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/01/130102140452.htm > > Disclaimer: Views expressed in this article do not necessarily reflect those of ScienceDaily or its staff. > > --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > ================================ > D a v i d S a d o w a y BES, MRM > PhD Candidate > Department of Urban Planning & Design > The University of Hong Kong > Email: one1earth at hku.hk > (852)2859.2721 > -------------------------------------------------------- > Visiting Associate > Center for Asia-Pacific Area Studies > Academia Sinica (Taipei, Taiwan) > Email: bigbluearth at gmail.com > (886)2929.2948 > ================================ > > -------------- 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 From ian.peter at ianpeter.com Sun Jan 6 15:32:20 2013 From: ian.peter at ianpeter.com (Ian Peter) Date: Mon, 7 Jan 2013 07:32:20 +1100 Subject: [governance] FW: Toward Reducing the Greenhouse Gas Emissions of the Internet and Telecommunications In-Reply-To: <139701cdec4b$012dbf10$03893d30$@gmail.com> References: <139701cdec4b$012dbf10$03893d30$@gmail.com> Message-ID: <31C16AF2FD10499DBE15265A1BF0E31F@Toshiba> has been discussed in the past - and people like Bill St Arnaud have done excellent work in this area. But to put things simply - server farms should be relocated near renewable energy resources (in fact their is no technical reason not to relocate all large server farms to say Iceland to take advantage of their thermo resources). The good thing here is that there is good cost justification as well - for all large (including corporate) server farms energy costs are substantial, and there are immediate and substantial cost savings from relocation. But we are rather good at inertia... -----Original Message----- From: michael gurstein Sent: Monday, January 07, 2013 7:18 AM To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org Subject: [governance] FW: Toward Reducing the Greenhouse Gas Emissions of the Internet and Telecommunications According to recent calculations the Internet is the source of some 2% of global greenhouse gas emissions (and increasing quickly). Much of this comes from the vast server farms that major Internet corporations (eg. Google, Amazon etc.) have been establishing around the world. http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/01/130102140452.htm Perhaps a topic for discussion at the next IGF? M -----Original Message----- From: davidicus [mailto:bigbluearth at gmail.com] Sent: Saturday, January 05, 2013 11:09 PM To: ciresearchers Cc: michael gurstein Subject: Toward Reducing the Greenhouse Gas Emissions of the Internet and Telecommunications This story in Science Daily may be of interest to some CI Colleagues. ~d --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Toward Reducing the Greenhouse Gas Emissions of the Internet and Telecommunications Jan. 2, 2013 — Amid growing concern over the surprisingly large amount of greenhouse gas produced by the Internet and other telecommunications activities, researchers are reporting new models of emissions and energy consumption that could help reduce their carbon footprint. Their report appears in ACS' journal Environmental Science & Technology. Researchers from the Centre for Energy-Efficient Telecommunications (CEET) and Bell Labs explain that the information communications and technology (ICT) industry, which delivers Internet, video, voice and other cloud services, produces more than 830 million tons of carbon dioxide (CO2), the main greenhouse gas, annually. That's about 2 percent of global CO2 emissions -- the same proportion as the aviation industry produces. Projections suggest that ICT sector's share is expected to double by 2020. The team notes that controlling those emissions requires more accurate but still feasible models, which take into account the data traffic, energy use and CO2 production in networks and other elements of the ICT industry. Existing assessment models are inaccurate, so they set out to develop new approaches that better account for variations in equipment and other factors in the ICT industry. They describe development and testing of two new models that better estimate the energy consumption and CO2 emissions of Internet and telecommunications services. They tested the models on a simulated network and on a deployed network that serves the majority of schools in California. Both models delivered better estimates than the current "top-down" models. The researchers suggest, based on their models, that more efficient power usage of facilities, more efficient use of energy-efficient equipment and renewable energy sources are three keys to reducing ICT emissions of CO2. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Story Source: The above story is reprinted from materials provided by American Chemical Society. Journal Reference: Chien A. Chan, André F. Gygax, Elaine Wong, Christopher A. Leckie, Ampalavanapillai Nirmalathas, Daniel C. Kilper. Methodologies for Assessing the Use-Phase Power Consumption and Greenhouse Gas Emissions of Telecommunications Network Services. Environmental Science & Technology, 2013; 47 (1): 485 DOI: 10.1021/es303384y Web address: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/01/130102140452.htm Disclaimer: Views expressed in this article do not necessarily reflect those of ScienceDaily or its staff. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ================================ D a v i d S a d o w a y BES, MRM PhD Candidate Department of Urban Planning & Design The University of Hong Kong Email: one1earth at hku.hk (852)2859.2721 -------------------------------------------------------- Visiting Associate Center for Asia-Pacific Area Studies Academia Sinica (Taipei, Taiwan) Email: bigbluearth at gmail.com (886)2929.2948 ================================ ____________________________________________________________ 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From ian.peter at ianpeter.com Sun Jan 6 15:36:07 2013 From: ian.peter at ianpeter.com (Ian Peter) Date: Mon, 7 Jan 2013 07:36:07 +1100 Subject: [governance] FW: Toward Reducing the Greenhouse Gas Emissions of the Internet and Telecommunications In-Reply-To: <50E9DE54.9030900@gmail.com> References: <139701cdec4b$012dbf10$03893d30$@gmail.com> <50E9DE54.9030900@gmail.com> Message-ID: <19CF3FBA44744FC4AEBB575D04347B10@Toshiba> Riaz, a one word answer is SCIENCE! Read credible sources on this. There are plenty. They do not include Fox News. -----Original Message----- From: Riaz K Tayob Sent: Monday, January 07, 2013 7:28 AM To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org Subject: Re: [governance] FW: Toward Reducing the Greenhouse Gas Emissions of the Internet and Telecommunications Taking my cue from my opinion of the tenor of this list, and to play devil's advocate, what proof do you have that anthropocentric activity is driving climate change, if at all it is a reality at all? Thought I would save others the bother and be a little anticipatory :) On 2013/01/06 10:18 PM, michael gurstein wrote: > According to recent calculations the Internet is the source of some 2% of > global greenhouse gas emissions (and increasing quickly). Much of this > comes from the vast server farms that major Internet corporations (eg. > Google, Amazon etc.) have been establishing around the world. > http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/01/130102140452.htm > > Perhaps a topic for discussion at the next IGF? > > M > > -----Original Message----- > From: davidicus [mailto:bigbluearth at gmail.com] > Sent: Saturday, January 05, 2013 11:09 PM > To: ciresearchers > Cc: michael gurstein > Subject: Toward Reducing the Greenhouse Gas Emissions of the Internet and > Telecommunications > > This story in Science Daily may be of interest to some CI Colleagues. > ~d > > --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > Toward Reducing the Greenhouse Gas Emissions of the Internet and > Telecommunications > > Jan. 2, 2013 — Amid growing concern over the surprisingly large amount of > greenhouse gas produced by the Internet and other telecommunications > activities, researchers are reporting new models of emissions and energy > consumption that could help reduce their carbon footprint. > > Their report appears in ACS' journal Environmental Science & Technology. > > Researchers from the Centre for Energy-Efficient Telecommunications > (CEET) and Bell Labs explain that the information communications and > technology (ICT) industry, which delivers Internet, video, voice and other > cloud services, produces more than 830 million tons of carbon dioxide > (CO2), the main greenhouse gas, annually. That's about 2 percent of global > CO2 emissions -- the same proportion as the aviation industry produces. > Projections suggest that ICT sector's share is expected to double by 2020. > The team notes that controlling those emissions requires more accurate but > still feasible models, which take into account the data traffic, energy > use and CO2 production in networks and other elements of the ICT industry. > Existing assessment models are inaccurate, so they set out to develop new > approaches that better account for variations in equipment and other > factors in the ICT industry. > > They describe development and testing of two new models that better > estimate the energy consumption and CO2 emissions of Internet and > telecommunications services. They tested the models on a simulated network > and on a deployed network that serves the majority of schools in > California. Both models delivered better estimates than the current > "top-down" models. The researchers suggest, based on their models, that > more efficient power usage of facilities, more efficient use of > energy-efficient equipment and renewable energy sources are three keys to > reducing ICT emissions of CO2. > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > Story Source: > The above story is reprinted from materials provided by American Chemical > Society. > > Journal Reference: > Chien A. Chan, André F. Gygax, Elaine Wong, Christopher A. Leckie, > Ampalavanapillai Nirmalathas, Daniel C. Kilper. Methodologies for > Assessing the Use-Phase Power Consumption and Greenhouse Gas Emissions of > Telecommunications Network Services. Environmental Science & Technology, > 2013; 47 (1): 485 DOI: 10.1021/es303384y > > Web address: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/01/130102140452.htm > > Disclaimer: Views expressed in this article do not necessarily reflect > those of ScienceDaily or its staff. > > --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > ================================ > D a v i d S a d o w a y BES, MRM > PhD Candidate > Department of Urban Planning & Design > The University of Hong Kong > Email: one1earth at hku.hk > (852)2859.2721 > -------------------------------------------------------- > Visiting Associate > Center for Asia-Pacific Area Studies > Academia Sinica (Taipei, Taiwan) > Email: bigbluearth at gmail.com > (886)2929.2948 > ================================ > > ____________________________________________________________ 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From peter.hellmonds at hellmonds.eu Sun Jan 6 15:55:43 2013 From: peter.hellmonds at hellmonds.eu (Peter H. Hellmonds) Date: Sun, 6 Jan 2013 21:55:43 +0100 Subject: [governance] FW: Toward Reducing the Greenhouse Gas Emissions of the Internet and Telecommunications In-Reply-To: <1147028144.1694674.1357504792806.JavaMail.open-xchange@oxbagw18.schlund.de> References: <1147028144.1694674.1357504792806.JavaMail.open-xchange@oxbagw18.schlund.de> Message-ID: <1669912738.1695243.1357505744188.JavaMail.open-xchange@oxbagw18> Michael, To be doing the climate bill accounting right, you need to look at the total climate bill of the Internet ecosystem. This means rather than just looking at the one side of the balance (energy costs of Internet servers) you should also look at the energy savings of individuals and corporations using the Internet in more energy conscious ways. For example by reducing emissions because people can work from home over the net and need not drive to work every day. Or the savings derived from making conference calls and video conferences with application sharing instead if traveling by car or plane to meet in person. Or the savings by not requiring local off-net servers because the apps and data have been more efficiently moved into the cloud into those server farms. This would be a good subject for an academic study. And the results, if they stand up to peer review and fact and methodology checking, could well be shared and discussed at a future IGF. Regards, Peter On 06.01.2013, at 21:19, "michael gurstein" wrote: According to recent calculations the Internet is the source of some 2% of global greenhouse gas emissions (and increasing quickly). Much of this comes from the vast server farms that major Internet corporations (eg. Google, Amazon etc.) have been establishing around the world. http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/01/130102140452.htm Perhaps a topic for discussion at the next IGF? M -----Original Message----- From: davidicus [mailto:bigbluearth at gmail.com] Sent: Saturday, January 05, 2013 11:09 PM To: ciresearchers Cc: michael gurstein Subject: Toward Reducing the Greenhouse Gas Emissions of the Internet and Telecommunications This story in Science Daily may be of interest to some CI Colleagues. ~d --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Toward Reducing the Greenhouse Gas Emissions of the Internet and Telecommunications Jan. 2, 2013 — Amid growing concern over the surprisingly large amount of greenhouse gas produced by the Internet and other telecommunications activities, researchers are reporting new models of emissions and energy consumption that could help reduce their carbon footprint. Their report appears in ACS' journal Environmental Science & Technology. Researchers from the Centre for Energy-Efficient Telecommunications (CEET) and Bell Labs explain that the information communications and technology (ICT) industry, which delivers Internet, video, voice and other cloud services, produces more than 830 million tons of carbon dioxide (CO2), the main greenhouse gas, annually. That's about 2 percent of global CO2 emissions -- the same proportion as the aviation industry produces. Projections suggest that ICT sector's share is expected to double by 2020. The team notes that controlling those emissions requires more accurate but still feasible models, which take into account the data traffic, energy use and CO2 production in networks and other elements of the ICT industry. Existing assessment models are inaccurate, so they set out to develop new approaches that better account for variations in equipment and other factors in the ICT industry. They describe development and testing of two new models that better estimate the energy consumption and CO2 emissions of Internet and telecommunications services. They tested the models on a simulated network and on a deployed network that serves the majority of schools in California. Both models delivered better estimates than the current "top-down" models. The researchers suggest, based on their models, that more efficient power usage of facilities, more efficient use of energy-efficient equipment and renewable energy sources are three keys to reducing ICT emissions of CO2. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Story Source: The above story is reprinted from materials provided by American Chemical Society. Journal Reference: Chien A. Chan, André F. Gygax, Elaine Wong, Christopher A. Leckie, Ampalavanapillai Nirmalathas, Daniel C. Kilper. Methodologies for Assessing the Use-Phase Power Consumption and Greenhouse Gas Emissions of Telecommunications Network Services. Environmental Science & Technology, 2013; 47 (1): 485 DOI: 10.1021/es303384y Web address: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/01/130102140452.htm Disclaimer: Views expressed in this article do not necessarily reflect those of ScienceDaily or its staff. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ================================ D a v i d S a d o w a y BES, MRM PhD Candidate Department of Urban Planning & Design The University of Hong Kong Email: one1earth at hku.hk (852)2859.2721 -------------------------------------------------------- Visiting Associate Center for Asia-Pacific Area Studies Academia Sinica (Taipei, Taiwan) Email: bigbluearth at gmail.com (886)2929.2948 ================================ ____________________________________________________________ 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From jcurran at istaff.org Sun Jan 6 16:03:22 2013 From: jcurran at istaff.org (John Curran) Date: Sun, 6 Jan 2013 16:03:22 -0500 Subject: [governance] Toward Reducing the Greenhouse Gas Emissions of the Internet and Telecommunications In-Reply-To: <139701cdec4b$012dbf10$03893d30$@gmail.com> References: <139701cdec4b$012dbf10$03893d30$@gmail.com> Message-ID: On Jan 6, 2013, at 3:18 PM, michael gurstein wrote: > According to recent calculations the Internet is the source of some 2% of global greenhouse gas emissions (and increasing quickly). Much of this comes from the vast server farms that major Internet corporations (eg. Google, Amazon etc.) have been establishing around the world. http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/01/130102140452.htm > > Perhaps a topic for discussion at the next IGF? I would recommend reading Greenpeace's study in this area for an understanding of the efforts currently being made by some of the leading industry players in this space: http://www.greenpeace.org/international/en/publications/Campaign-reports/Climate-Reports/How-Clean-is-Your-Cloud/ There is significant attention to this problem in the Internet data center industry, even to the point of sharing of best practices and increasing level of visibility into the power utilization, sourcing, and efficiency of these facilities. It would be interesting to hear from those involved in this space regarding what, if anything, could be done to allow further improvements in efficiency and emissions. FYI, /John Disclaimers: My views alone. 100% post-consumer electrons used in this email. -------------- 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 From gurstein at gmail.com Sun Jan 6 16:25:21 2013 From: gurstein at gmail.com (michael gurstein) Date: Sun, 6 Jan 2013 13:25:21 -0800 Subject: [governance] Toward Reducing the Greenhouse Gas Emissions of the Internet and Telecommunications In-Reply-To: References: <139701cdec4b$012dbf10$03893d30$@gmail.com> Message-ID: <13f201cdec54$55b3b0e0$011b12a0$@gmail.com> Yes, and thanks to everyone (even Riaz with his tongure firmly in his cheek... This subject seems to me to be an ideal one for the IGF where some quite positive contributions could be made by including the range of stakeholders and including folks from the various policy worlds who may not have, as yet, been included in this most urgent conversation. A good place for the private sector to showcase it's responsible actions and a useful way to get some environment researchers in touch with folks on the ICT policy shop floor so that environmental concerns become one of the issue areas to be addressed when ICT policy issues are being discussed. M -----Original Message----- From: John Curran [mailto:jcurran at istaff.org] Sent: Sunday, January 06, 2013 1:03 PM To: michael gurstein Cc: governance at lists.igcaucus.org Subject: Re: [governance] Toward Reducing the Greenhouse Gas Emissions of the Internet and Telecommunications On Jan 6, 2013, at 3:18 PM, michael gurstein wrote: > According to recent calculations the Internet is the source of some 2% > of global greenhouse gas emissions (and increasing quickly). Much of > this comes from the vast server farms that major Internet corporations > (eg. Google, Amazon etc.) have been establishing around the world. > http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/01/130102140452.htm > > Perhaps a topic for discussion at the next IGF? I would recommend reading Greenpeace's study in this area for an understanding of the efforts currently being made by some of the leading industry players in this space: http://www.greenpeace.org/international/en/publications/Campaign-reports/Cli mate-Reports/How-Clean-is-Your-Cloud/ There is significant attention to this problem in the Internet data center industry, even to the point of sharing of best practices and increasing level of visibility into the power utilization, sourcing, and efficiency of these facilities. It would be interesting to hear from those involved in this space regarding what, if anything, could be done to allow further improvements in efficiency and emissions. FYI, /John Disclaimers: My views alone. 100% post-consumer electrons used in this email. -------------- 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 From avri at ella.com Sun Jan 6 18:29:44 2013 From: avri at ella.com (Avri Doria) Date: Sun, 6 Jan 2013 18:29:44 -0500 Subject: [governance] [igf_members] MAG Renewal for 2013 In-Reply-To: <1F1DEE75-CCC8-4547-8CAB-8394876C7B4D@privaterra.org> References: <78980604-5E4E-44A0-A235-4BAA721DA4D3@unog.ch> <50E7A23D.6050801@itforchange.net> <1F1DEE75-CCC8-4547-8CAB-8394876C7B4D@privaterra.org> Message-ID: On 5 Jan 2013, at 11:04, Robert Guerra wrote: > - If possible, civil society should coordinate among itself and send a single list of names it "recommends" to the UN. Competing lists, lessen the impact of the IGC on the decision making process > I do not see the point of this. There are many points of aggregation in Civil Society . It is long past time when the IGC could pretend to bea principle aggregator. I do not see any other groups else that can serve as an adequate aggregator either. Put another way, last time at least APC, Diplo, and IGC sent lists, of which I think Diplo had the most rigorous process. i am sure there were many others (anyone have a tally of how many civil society lists were submitted). I would assume that no matter how much someone tries to insist their group is the principle aggregator, others will send their own lists. Besides it is just a suggestion to DESA. It is not as if Civil society were selecting its own representatives, Various groups are just giving list of suggestions to be chosen or passed-over as UNDESA sees fit. As for processes, if the IGC can't follow its own processes and can't be bothered to amend them in time, one has to wonder about how viable the caucus remains. Working around the processes invites others to ignore the recommendations. We knew this was coming, so why weren't we prepared for it? #justsaying -------------- 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 From suresh at hserus.net Sun Jan 6 19:09:21 2013 From: suresh at hserus.net (=?utf-8?B?U3VyZXNoIFJhbWFzdWJyYW1hbmlhbg==?=) Date: Mon, 07 Jan 2013 05:39:21 +0530 Subject: [governance] FW: [IP] Google's Lawyers Work Behind the Scenes to Carry the Day - NYTimes.com Message-ID: I did. I still don't see just where this is related to igov. Did they rename this Googlebash caucus when I was asleep? --srs (htc one x) ----- Reply message ----- From: "michael gurstein" To: "'Suresh Ramasubramanian'" , Subject: [governance] FW: [IP] Google's Lawyers Work Behind the Scenes to Carry the Day - NYTimes.com Date: Sun, Jan 6, 2013 11:16 PM Perhaps before trolling on you might want to actually read the blogpost of which this was a "teaser"… http://wp.me/pJQl5-ab M From: Suresh Ramasubramanian [mailto:suresh at hserus.net] Sent: Sunday, January 06, 2013 8:52 AM To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; michael gurstein Subject: Re: [governance] FW: [IP] Google's Lawyers Work Behind the Scenes to Carry the Day - NYTimes.com So do you get all your news from just news.google.com and other google search results, instead of Facebook shares, Riaz gleefully posting every article he sees about google being investigated for, say, giggling in church? And did Riaz find this news item anywhere other than google search? And does this reality distortion field google is supposed to have actually hide any search results from you that are negative to it? Like search for "google FTC" and you get the EU action, statements from Microsoft slamming the decision etc. And the last link on page 1 of the search results showing just where google got spanked by the FTC. http://www.tnr.com/blog/plank/111650/why-does-everyone-think-google-beat-the-ftc# is worth a read as a kind f counterpoint to all the commentary about how google got a get out of jail card because of intensive lobbying. Can we please 1. Have a reality check here 2. Go back to discussing Internet governance --srs (iPad) On 06-Jan-2013, at 22:00, "michael gurstein" wrote: Thanks Riaz (and sorry for the really awkward phrasing… To put that in English… I'm wondering whether it wouldn't be better to "investigate" Google for possible "freedom of thought" violations rather than issues concerning "freedom of speech"… Google has the potential for much more serious impacts on our capacity to know (or not know) certain things, than on what we can say or not say… M -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From suresh at hserus.net Sun Jan 6 19:11:54 2013 From: suresh at hserus.net (=?utf-8?B?U3VyZXNoIFJhbWFzdWJyYW1hbmlhbg==?=) Date: Mon, 07 Jan 2013 05:41:54 +0530 Subject: [governance] Fwd: [igf_members] MAG Renewal for 2013 Message-ID: Wouldn't that argue that we certainly don't represent all of civil society? There obviously will always be organizations or people who, while not full time engaged in tracking igov, may respond to significant events such as MAG nominations. --srs (htc one x) ----- Reply message ----- From: "Thomas Lowenhaupt" To: , "Robert Guerra" Subject: [governance] Fwd: [igf_members] MAG Renewal for 2013 Date: Mon, Jan 7, 2013 1:20 AM +1 especially to the suggestion > civil society should coordinate among itself and send a single list > of names it "recommends" to the UN. Competing lists, lessen the impact > of the IGC on the decision making process As the "fill-in" chair of last year's MAG nomcom, I was quite disappointed to learn that ours was just one of the lists from civil society that was submitted to the MAG. I would not advocate for the creation of an official list by a MAG designated body (a channel for self nominations by outsiders is helpful), but submissions from a scattering of civil society sources puts too much power in the hands of MAG central to pick and choose. A submission by a civil society "joint- board" seems worth considering. Tom Lowenhaupt On 1/5/2013 11:04 AM, Robert Guerra wrote: > My quick thoughts, in no particular order, on this are as follows: > > - Do we know the details of the persons rotating off the MAG (ie. > gender, Stakeholder groups & regions) If so, can someone share that - > thanks! > - The IGC needs to setup a transparent, open and inclusive process > that builds on lessons learned. > - If possible, civil society should coordinate among itself and send a > single list of names it "recommends" to the UN. Competing lists, > lessen the impact of the IGC on the decision making process > > regards > > Robert > > > On 2013-01-04, at 10:47 PM, parminder wrote: > >> >> IGC may want to do something about this.... parminder >> >> >> -------- Original Message -------- >> Subject: [igf_members] MAG Renewal for 2013 >> Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2013 13:03:57 +0100 >> From: Chengetai Masango >> To: igf Forum >> >> >> >> Dear All, >> >> Happy New year to you all. I hope you had a restful holiday season. >> It was a pleasure working with you all in 2012 and look forward to >> continuing to do so in 2013. >> >> Please find below a message from Under-Secretary-General Mr. Wu >> Hongbo concerning the MAG renewal. It is posted on the IGF website >> and I would be grateful if you could distribute it among your >> respective stakeholder groups. >> >> Best regards >> >> Chengetai >> >> _________________________________ >> >> >> The Internet Governance Forum's Multi-stakeholder Advisory Group >> (MAG) has been instrumental in planning the programme of the annual >> IGF meetings. >> >> We would like to express our gratitude to all past and present >> members of MAG who have donated their time, effort and valuable >> guidance in ensuring the smooth running of the IGF. >> >> On behalf of the United Nations Secretary-General, the Department of >> Economic and Social Affairs (DESA) requests nominations from all >> stakeholder groups, according to the established principles and >> practices of MAG on the rotation and selection of its members. >> Governments, the private sector, civil society, and technical >> communities should submit names of candidates from developed and >> developing countries as well as from economies in transition. >> Successful nominees will become part of MAG for a period of one year >> and will contribute to the multi-stakeholder consultation process, >> bringing the perspectives of their respective groups on Internet >> governance. Group nominees should be members who have actively >> participated in IGF meetings and activities in the past. As in >> previous years, stakeholder groups can resubmit the names of current >> MAG members for re-election and are expected to publicize the >> selection and nomination process. >> >> Please submit the names of nominees to the IGF Secretariat by *20 >> January 2013* via email:magrenewal2013 at intgovforum.org >> , using the attached >> submission template. The aim is to rotate one third of MAG members. >> >> Selection and Operation Principles: >> >> (i) MAG members are selected to achieve a balance among all >> stakeholder groups, while retaining regional and gender >> representation, according to established procedures; >> >> (ii) All MAG members serve in their personal capacity but are >> expected to have extensive linkages with their respective stakeholder >> groups; >> >> (iii) The main task of MAG is to provide advice on the programme and >> main themes of the next meeting of the IGF; >> >> (iv) MAG members are expected to attend two to three MAG meetings in >> Geneva, Switzerland, in addition to the annual IGF meeting. They >> should participate actively in the preparatory process throughout the >> year, through engagement in the online multilateral dialogue among >> MAG members; >> >> (v) MAG meetings are open to Intergovernmental organizations. >> >> Thank you and I look forward to the continued success of the Internet >> Governance Forum. >> >> >> (Signed) >> Wu Hongbo >> Under-Secretary-General >> Department of Economic and Social Affairs (UNDESA) >> >> >> >> >> > Part.txt>____________________________________________________________ >> 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: -------------- 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 From suresh at hserus.net Sun Jan 6 19:13:33 2013 From: suresh at hserus.net (=?utf-8?B?U3VyZXNoIFJhbWFzdWJyYW1hbmlhbg==?=) Date: Mon, 07 Jan 2013 05:43:33 +0530 Subject: [governance] Google's Lawyers Work Behind the Scenes to Carry the Day - NYTimes.com Message-ID: If Google does get proceeded against it might be under the Sherman act for antitrust and monopoly. But they have a way to go before they get to the level of monopoly that, say, the railroads, ma bell etc enjoyed. --srs (htc one x) ----- Reply message ----- From: "Thomas Lowenhaupt" To: Cc: "michael gurstein" , "Suresh Ramasubramanian" Subject: [governance] Google's Lawyers Work Behind the Scenes to Carry the Day - NYTimes.com Date: Mon, Jan 7, 2013 1:40 AM Regarding "right to know" and "right to say," the following was posted on a Transparent Search wiki page we host. "Such placements need to be carefully reviewed by fairness rules of what might be called "search journalism." Here in the U.S. the First Amendment - "Congress shall make no law ... abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press..." - poses an apparent block to any regulation. "But it might be argued that there are parallels between the impact of technology on the interpretation of the First Amendment, perhaps with parallels drawn with the Second Amendment. Americans are all to familiar with a decades long controversy about that Amendment's guaranteeing a citizen's right to bare arms: Did the Founding Fathers intend that citizens be allowed to own and use powerful automatic weapons? The corresponding First Amendment question might be: Was big data, big money, and search imagined by the Founding Fathers?" "So for the immediate future, regulation of search journalism is unlikely. And with the creation of a transparent "search.nyc" vital to our city's effective operation, a trusted entity must be identified to oversee its development." Best, Tom Lowenhaupt On 1/6/2013 12:46 PM, michael gurstein wrote: > > Perhaps before trolling on you might want to actually read the > blogpost of which this was a "teaser"… http://wp.me/pJQl5-ab > > M > > *From:*Suresh Ramasubramanian [mailto:suresh at hserus.net] > *Sent:* Sunday, January 06, 2013 8:52 AM > *To:* governance at lists.igcaucus.org; michael gurstein > *Subject:* Re: [governance] FW: [IP] Google's Lawyers Work Behind the > Scenes to Carry the Day - NYTimes.com > > So do you get all your news from just news.google.com > and other google search results, instead of > Facebook shares, Riaz gleefully posting every article he sees about > google being investigated for, say, giggling in church? > > And did Riaz find this news item anywhere other than google search? > > And does this reality distortion field google is supposed to have > actually hide any search results from you that are negative to it? > Like search for "google FTC" and you get the EU action, statements > from Microsoft slamming the decision etc. > > And the last link on page 1 of the search results showing just where > google got spanked by the FTC. > http://www.tnr.com/blog/plank/111650/why-does-everyone-think-google-beat-the-ftc# > is > worth a read as a kind f counterpoint to all the commentary about how > google got a get out of jail card because of intensive lobbying. > > Can we please > > 1. Have a reality check here > > 2. Go back to discussing Internet governance > > > --srs (iPad) > > > On 06-Jan-2013, at 22:00, "michael gurstein" > wrote: > > Thanks Riaz (and sorry for the really awkward phrasing… > > To put that in English… > > /I'm wondering whether it wouldn't be better to "investigate" > Google for possible "freedom of thought" violations rather than > issues concerning "freedom of speech"… Google has the potential > for much more serious impacts on our capacity to know (or not > know) certain things, than on what we can say or not say…/ > > // > > /M/ > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com Sun Jan 6 19:54:19 2013 From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro) Date: Mon, 7 Jan 2013 13:54:19 +1300 Subject: [governance] Updates on MAG 2013 In-Reply-To: <36613454AE654EB9A07DF9DB0126E547@Toshiba> References: <36613454AE654EB9A07DF9DB0126E547@Toshiba> Message-ID: Dear All, Under the IGC Charter, the NomCom may be called upon to provide several functions. In this instance, the NomCom as Ian had mentioned had served previously to appoint the members of the Appeal Team. The NomCom was newly drawn to serve the IGC in appointing the Appeal Team and have existed for less than 12 months. In this instance, since we are to give our list of Nominees to the IGC by the 20th January, 2013, it becomes easier to use the existing NomCom. The election candidates will include an additional question about MAG Nominations which we will harvest and send to the NomCom, these persons will be asked to submit their brief bios to enable the NomCom to make their selections prior to the 19th January, 2013. This will then be posted to the IGC and sent to the UNDESA. Kind Regards, On Mon, Jan 7, 2013 at 7:52 AM, Ian Peter wrote: > I think using the previous Nomcom is the most practical path forward, but > above all I think leaving the process to the (single currently) Co > ordinator is what we should do. The current Nomcom is less than 12 months > old, has only been used to select an Appeals Team, and operated > effectively. Not all Nomcoms in the past have been effective, as most of us > know, and I would prefer not to take the risk of a longer process that > might give us dubious results. We will be lucky to meet the deadline even > with the path of least resistance. > > Re numbers to put forward - I think we should be aiming at a large slate > of nominees rather than a small one, to cover all contingencies. We don't > know who will be rotated off, either in CS or with other stakeholder > groups, and as the geographic and gender balance needs to be achieved > cross-stakeholder, it is better for us to present more options ( the loss > of a North American woman governmental representative may well present an > opening for a civil society woman from that area, etc) So I think a larger > group of nominees might be praxctical. > > Ian Peter > > -----Original Message----- From: Adam Peake > Sent: Monday, January 07, 2013 2:54 AM > To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org ; Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro > Subject: Re: [governance] Updates on MAG 2013 > > > Confirmed with the secretariat that the goal is to continue with > rotation, i.e. one third each year (plus or minus a few.) > > How many CS MAG members are there now, about 12? Perhaps look to > submit 6 names for the deadline? > > The members who joined last year only began at the May meeting. Hope > they remain. A few of the people we suggested then were selected, in > addition to the names the NomCom comes up with now, might be good to > suggest that the 2012 batch also remain. > > Adam > > > > On Sun, Jan 6, 2013 at 12:44 PM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro > > > wrote: > >> Dear All, >> >> I have asked the former NomCom to assist in selecting the names of >> nominees >> that come in. The poll is currently being prepared for IGC elections and >> additional questions will be put forward to in relation to nominations for >> MAG etc. The list of names that come in will be asked to submit brief bios >> separately as well. >> >> The NomCom will deliberate and decide on the names but it is important >> that >> we get a broad selection as possible. We have yet to select the >> Independent >> Non Voting Chair for this. >> >> You will all be informed of developments soon. >> >> Kind Regards, >> >> -- >> Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala >> P.O. Box 17862 >> Suva >> Fiji >> >> Twitter: @SalanietaT >> Skype:Salanieta.**Tamanikaiwaimaro >> Tel: +679 3544828 >> Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 >> >> >> >> >> ______________________________**______________________________ >> 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 >> >> > > > > > > > ______________________________**______________________________ > 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 > -- Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala P.O. Box 17862 Suva Fiji Twitter: @SalanietaT Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro Tel: +679 3544828 Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com Sun Jan 6 21:37:52 2013 From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro) Date: Mon, 7 Jan 2013 15:37:52 +1300 Subject: [governance] Toward Reducing the Greenhouse Gas Emissions of the Internet and Telecommunications In-Reply-To: <13f201cdec54$55b3b0e0$011b12a0$@gmail.com> References: <139701cdec4b$012dbf10$03893d30$@gmail.com> <13f201cdec54$55b3b0e0$011b12a0$@gmail.com> Message-ID: On Mon, Jan 7, 2013 at 10:25 AM, michael gurstein wrote: > Yes, and thanks to everyone (even Riaz with his tongure firmly in his > cheek... > > This subject seems to me to be an ideal one for the IGF where some quite > positive contributions could be made by including the range of stakeholders > and including folks from the various policy worlds who may not have, as > yet, > been included in this most urgent conversation. A good place for the > private > sector to showcase it's responsible actions and a useful way to get some > environment researchers in touch with folks on the ICT policy shop floor so > that environmental concerns become one of the issue areas to be addressed > when ICT policy issues are being discussed. > > I think this is an excellent conversation to have and environmentally friendly designs are relevant and necessary. > M > > -----Original Message----- > From: John Curran [mailto:jcurran at istaff.org] > Sent: Sunday, January 06, 2013 1:03 PM > To: michael gurstein > Cc: governance at lists.igcaucus.org > Subject: Re: [governance] Toward Reducing the Greenhouse Gas Emissions of > the Internet and Telecommunications > > On Jan 6, 2013, at 3:18 PM, michael gurstein wrote: > > > According to recent calculations the Internet is the source of some 2% > > of global greenhouse gas emissions (and increasing quickly). Much of > > this comes from the vast server farms that major Internet corporations > > (eg. Google, Amazon etc.) have been establishing around the world. > > http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/01/130102140452.htm > > > > Perhaps a topic for discussion at the next IGF? > > I would recommend reading Greenpeace's study in this area for an > understanding of the efforts currently being made by some of the leading > industry players in this space: > > > http://www.greenpeace.org/international/en/publications/Campaign-reports/Cli > mate-Reports/How-Clean-is-Your-Cloud/ > > There is significant attention to this problem in the Internet data center > industry, even to the point of sharing of best practices and increasing > level of visibility into the power utilization, sourcing, and efficiency of > these facilities. It would be interesting to hear from those involved in > this space regarding what, if anything, could be done to allow further > improvements in efficiency and emissions. > > FYI, > /John > > Disclaimers: My views alone. 100% post-consumer electrons used in this > email. > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > -- Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala P.O. Box 17862 Suva Fiji Twitter: @SalanietaT Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro Tel: +679 3544828 Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From ajp at glocom.ac.jp Sun Jan 6 22:17:54 2013 From: ajp at glocom.ac.jp (Adam Peake) Date: Mon, 7 Jan 2013 12:17:54 +0900 Subject: [governance] Toward Reducing the Greenhouse Gas Emissions of the Internet and Telecommunications In-Reply-To: References: <139701cdec4b$012dbf10$03893d30$@gmail.com> <13f201cdec54$55b3b0e0$011b12a0$@gmail.com> Message-ID: How is this Internet Governance rather than, say, ICT4D or just ICT policy. Genuine question :-) Thanks, Adam On Mon, Jan 7, 2013 at 11:37 AM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro wrote: > > > On Mon, Jan 7, 2013 at 10:25 AM, michael gurstein > wrote: >> >> Yes, and thanks to everyone (even Riaz with his tongure firmly in his >> cheek... >> >> This subject seems to me to be an ideal one for the IGF where some quite >> positive contributions could be made by including the range of >> stakeholders >> and including folks from the various policy worlds who may not have, as >> yet, >> been included in this most urgent conversation. A good place for the >> private >> sector to showcase it's responsible actions and a useful way to get some >> environment researchers in touch with folks on the ICT policy shop floor >> so >> that environmental concerns become one of the issue areas to be addressed >> when ICT policy issues are being discussed. >> > > I think this is an excellent conversation to have and environmentally > friendly designs are relevant and necessary. >> >> M >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: John Curran [mailto:jcurran at istaff.org] >> Sent: Sunday, January 06, 2013 1:03 PM >> To: michael gurstein >> Cc: governance at lists.igcaucus.org >> Subject: Re: [governance] Toward Reducing the Greenhouse Gas Emissions of >> the Internet and Telecommunications >> >> On Jan 6, 2013, at 3:18 PM, michael gurstein wrote: >> >> > According to recent calculations the Internet is the source of some 2% >> > of global greenhouse gas emissions (and increasing quickly). Much of >> > this comes from the vast server farms that major Internet corporations >> > (eg. Google, Amazon etc.) have been establishing around the world. >> > http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/01/130102140452.htm >> > >> > Perhaps a topic for discussion at the next IGF? >> >> I would recommend reading Greenpeace's study in this area for an >> understanding of the efforts currently being made by some of the leading >> industry players in this space: >> >> >> http://www.greenpeace.org/international/en/publications/Campaign-reports/Cli >> mate-Reports/How-Clean-is-Your-Cloud/ >> >> There is significant attention to this problem in the Internet data center >> industry, even to the point of sharing of best practices and increasing >> level of visibility into the power utilization, sourcing, and efficiency >> of >> these facilities. It would be interesting to hear from those involved in >> this space regarding what, if anything, could be done to allow further >> improvements in efficiency and emissions. >> >> FYI, >> /John >> >> Disclaimers: My views alone. 100% post-consumer electrons used in this >> email. >> >> >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 >> > > > > -- > Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala > P.O. Box 17862 > Suva > Fiji > > Twitter: @SalanietaT > Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro > Tel: +679 3544828 > Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From avri at ella.com Sun Jan 6 22:19:29 2013 From: avri at ella.com (=?utf-8?B?QXZyaSBEb3JpYQ==?=) Date: Sun, 06 Jan 2013 22:19:29 -0500 Subject: [governance] Appeal request Re: [] Updates on MAG 2013 Message-ID: <201301070319.r073JUE4019667@atl4mhob08.myregisteredsite.com> I believe this is an abuse of the process. If 4 or more other IGC members counter-sign this message, perhaps with a +1, we request that the appeals team review this decision by the coordinator - as defined under the charter rules. avri ----- Reply message ----- From: "Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro" To: "Ian Peter" Cc: "Adam Peake" , Subject: [governance] Updates on MAG 2013 Date: Sun, Jan 6, 2013 19:54 Dear All, Under the IGC Charter, the NomCom may be called upon to provide several functions. In this instance, the NomCom as Ian had mentioned had served previously to appoint the members of the Appeal Team. The NomCom was newly drawn to serve the IGC in appointing the Appeal Team and have existed for less than 12 months. In this instance, since we are to give our list of Nominees to the IGC by the 20th January, 2013, it becomes easier to use the existing NomCom. The election candidates will include an additional question about MAG Nominations which we will harvest and send to the NomCom, these persons will be asked to submit their brief bios to enable the NomCom to make their selections prior to the 19th January, 2013. This will then be posted to the IGC and sent to the UNDESA. Kind Regards, On Mon, Jan 7, 2013 at 7:52 AM, Ian Peter wrote: > I think using the previous Nomcom is the most practical path forward, but > above all I think leaving the process to the (single currently) Co > ordinator is what we should do. The current Nomcom is less than 12 months > old, has only been used to select an Appeals Team, and operated > effectively. Not all Nomcoms in the past have been effective, as most of us > know, and I would prefer not to take the risk of a longer process that > might give us dubious results. We will be lucky to meet the deadline even > with the path of least resistance. > > Re numbers to put forward - I think we should be aiming at a large slate > of nominees rather than a small one, to cover all contingencies. We don't > know who will be rotated off, either in CS or with other stakeholder > groups, and as the geographic and gender balance needs to be achieved > cross-stakeholder, it is better for us to present more options ( the loss > of a North American woman governmental representative may well present an > opening for a civil society woman from that area, etc) So I think a larger > group of nominees might be praxctical. > > Ian Peter > > -----Original Message----- From: Adam Peake > Sent: Monday, January 07, 2013 2:54 AM > To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org ; Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro > Subject: Re: [governance] Updates on MAG 2013 > > > Confirmed with the secretariat that the goal is to continue with > rotation, i.e. one third each year (plus or minus a few.) > > How many CS MAG members are there now, about 12? Perhaps look to > submit 6 names for the deadline? > > The members who joined last year only began at the May meeting. Hope > they remain. A few of the people we suggested then were selected, in -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From suresh at hserus.net Sun Jan 6 22:21:07 2013 From: suresh at hserus.net (Suresh Ramasubramanian) Date: Mon, 7 Jan 2013 08:51:07 +0530 Subject: [governance] Appeal request Re: [] Updates on MAG 2013 In-Reply-To: <201301070319.r073JUE4019667@atl4mhob08.myregisteredsite.com> References: <201301070319.r073JUE4019667@atl4mhob08.myregisteredsite.com> Message-ID: <164801cdec86$0a003150$1e0093f0$@hserus.net> +1 From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Avri Doria Sent: 07 January 2013 08:49 To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org Cc: Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro Subject: [governance] Appeal request Re: [] Updates on MAG 2013 I believe this is an abuse of the process. If 4 or more other IGC members counter-sign this message, perhaps with a +1, we request that the appeals team review this decision by the coordinator - as defined under the charter rules. avri ----- Reply message ----- From: "Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro" > To: "Ian Peter" > Cc: "Adam Peake" >, > Subject: [governance] Updates on MAG 2013 Date: Sun, Jan 6, 2013 19:54 Dear All, Under the IGC Charter, the NomCom may be called upon to provide several functions. In this instance, the NomCom as Ian had mentioned had served previously to appoint the members of the Appeal Team. The NomCom was newly drawn to serve the IGC in appointing the Appeal Team and have existed for less than 12 months. In this instance, since we are to give our list of Nominees to the IGC by the 20th January, 2013, it becomes easier to use the existing NomCom. The election candidates will include an additional question about MAG Nominations which we will harvest and send to the NomCom, these persons will be asked to submit their brief bios to enable the NomCom to make their selections prior to the 19th January, 2013. This will then be posted to the IGC and sent to the UNDESA. Kind Regards, On Mon, Jan 7, 2013 at 7:52 AM, Ian Peter > wrote: > I think using the previous Nomcom is the most practical path forward, but > above all I think leaving the process to the (single currently) Co > ordinator is what we should do. The current Nomcom is less than 12 months > old, has only been used to select an Appeals Team, and operated > effectively. Not all Nomcoms in the past have been effective, as most of us > know, and I would prefer not to take the risk of a longer process that > might give us dubious results. We will be lucky to meet the deadline even > with the path of least resistance. > > Re numbers to put forward - I think we should be aiming at a large slate > of nominees rather than a small one, to cover all contingencies. We don't > know who will be rotated off, either in CS or with other stakeholder > groups, and as the geographic and gender balance needs to be achieved > cross-stakeholder, it is better for us to present more options ( the loss > of a North American woman governmental representative may well present an > opening for a civil society woman from that area, etc) So I think a larger > group of nominees might be praxctical. > > Ian Peter > > -----Original Message----- From: Adam Peake > Sent: Monday, January 07, 2013 2:54 AM > To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org ; Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro > Subject: Re: [governance] Updates on MAG 2013 > > > Confirmed with the secretariat that the goal is to continue with > rotation, i.e. one third each year (plus or minus a few.) > > How many CS MAG members are there now, about 12? Perhaps look to > submit 6 names for the deadline? > > The members who joined last year only began at the May meeting. Hope > they remain. A few of the people we suggested then were selected, in -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From ajp at glocom.ac.jp Sun Jan 6 22:24:54 2013 From: ajp at glocom.ac.jp (Adam Peake) Date: Mon, 7 Jan 2013 12:24:54 +0900 Subject: [governance] Appeal request Re: [] Updates on MAG 2013 In-Reply-To: <201301070319.r073JUE4019667@atl4mhob08.myregisteredsite.com> References: <201301070319.r073JUE4019667@atl4mhob08.myregisteredsite.com> Message-ID: Hi Avri, Could you explain why an abuse. You've been something of a master of the caucus' charter, would be good to understand more before +1'ing or not. Thank you, Adam On Mon, Jan 7, 2013 at 12:19 PM, Avri Doria wrote: > I believe this is an abuse of the process. > > If 4 or more other IGC members counter-sign this message, perhaps with a > +1, we request that the appeals team review this decision by the > coordinator - as defined under the charter rules. > > > avri > > ----- Reply message ----- > From: "Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro" > To: "Ian Peter" > Cc: "Adam Peake" , > Subject: [governance] Updates on MAG 2013 > Date: Sun, Jan 6, 2013 19:54 > > > Dear All, > > Under the IGC Charter, the NomCom may be called upon to provide several > functions. In this instance, the NomCom as Ian had mentioned had served > previously to appoint the members of the Appeal Team. The NomCom was newly > drawn to serve the IGC in appointing the Appeal Team and have existed for > less than 12 months. > > In this instance, since we are to give our list of Nominees to the IGC by > the 20th January, 2013, it becomes easier to use the existing NomCom. The > election candidates will include an additional question about MAG > Nominations which we will harvest and send to the NomCom, these persons > will be asked to submit their brief bios to enable the NomCom to make their > selections prior to the 19th January, 2013. This will then be posted to the > IGC and sent to the UNDESA. > > Kind Regards, > > > > > > > On Mon, Jan 7, 2013 at 7:52 AM, Ian Peter wrote: > >> I think using the previous Nomcom is the most practical path forward, but >> above all I think leaving the process to the (single currently) Co >> ordinator is what we should do. The current Nomcom is less than 12 months >> old, has only been used to select an Appeals Team, and operated >> effectively. Not all Nomcoms in the past have been effective, as most of >> us >> know, and I would prefer not to take the risk of a longer process that >> might give us dubious results. We will be lucky to meet the deadline even >> with the path of least resistance. >> >> Re numbers to put forward - I think we should be aiming at a large slate >> of nominees rather than a small one, to cover all contingencies. We don't >> know who will be rotated off, either in CS or with other stakeholder >> groups, and as the geographic and gender balance needs to be achieved >> cross-stakeholder, it is better for us to present more options ( the loss >> of a North American woman governmental representative may well present an >> opening for a civil society woman from that area, etc) So I think a larger >> group of nominees might be praxctical. >> >> Ian Peter >> >> -----Original Message----- From: Adam Peake >> Sent: Monday, January 07, 2013 2:54 AM >> To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org ; Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro >> Subject: Re: [governance] Updates on MAG 2013 >> >> >> Confirmed with the secretariat that the goal is to continue with >> rotation, i.e. one third each year (plus or minus a few.) >> >> How many CS MAG members are there now, about 12? Perhaps look to >> submit 6 names for the deadline? >> >> The members who joined last year only began at the May meeting. Hope >> they remain. A few of the people we suggested then were selected, in > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From lmcknigh at syr.edu Sun Jan 6 22:39:06 2013 From: lmcknigh at syr.edu (Lee W McKnight) Date: Mon, 7 Jan 2013 03:39:06 +0000 Subject: [governance] Toward Reducing the Greenhouse Gas Emissions of the Internet and Telecommunications In-Reply-To: References: <139701cdec4b$012dbf10$03893d30$@gmail.com>, Message-ID: <77A59FC9477004489D44DE7FC6840E7B1A1F81@SUEX10-mbx-08.ad.syr.edu> Not to toot my own horn...Ok I will. First I should note in reply to John's query re who is doing things in this space, that SU WiGiT Lab is a member of the 'Enterprise Cloud Leadership Council' of the TM Forum, whose Frameworx industry standards are used by ~1000 of the top IT/telecom players globally. We were just presenting last month with other ECLC members on 'Workplace as a Service' on cloud ie data center to mobile applications at an industry conference. There are a few other universities in ECLC but mainly it is big banks like Commonwealth Bank of Australia, UBS, Bank of America, and usual suspect IT/telecoms players like China Mobile, Cisco, Microsoft, EMC/VMware. (Syracuse University's Green Data Center claimed to be cleanest/greenest when built a few years back, but by now maybe others hold that title.) Reason I mention all this is the ECLC's 'Workplace as a Service' will be designed to stretch to edge devices and resources, utilizing edgeware, a new class of software which among other things can be optimized for minimal energy use by the user - whether by her device, the network, the application, the data center/cloud, or any combination thereof. The reason my students and I are engaged is because of our ten years of research on wireless grids, and my invention of edgeware. I'm presenting a tutorial tomorrow at HICSS on wireless grid ad hoc network applications, which will include discussion of a few environmental and energy applications. I argued some time back as a professor/researcher theoretically wireless grids are the cleanest/greenest/most energy efficient form of networking possible. I haven't been proven wrong yet ; ) Core argument being....if you can avoid spinning up and down servers, and can avoid uploading and downloading, then you use less energy. Right? It's kind of a -Zen- serverless and centerless network. I also note that in the WiGiT v0.2 open specs we are just wrapping up, the 10 IRPs are already embedded. Meaning we are already syncing across 80+ campuses, companies, and communities, with IGC and global CS values, to the extent an underfunded NSF Partnership for Innovation project can. v0.3 will be optimized for energy/environment/smart grid/smart building applications. In 2013. Of course there are 1000 other ways for IGC to dive in to this space. But as I'll be doing what I'm doing anyway...it is easy for IGC consensus output, if any is created in this space, to get folded into new open specifications. Which can all come with Internet governance principles and processes embedded that even Parminder might approve. Since he has co-authored some, and can co-write more if he wishes ; ) For right now, if this strikes any IGCers interest, just go to http://wigit.ischool.syr.edu and check out the WiGiT v0.1 open specs and use cases there. V0.2 should be up by end of month, which syncs with enterprise cloud and mobile apps. Under research, go to publications, and there are some papers related to this too. IF IGC wants to co-lead v0.3, or 0.4, the virtual door is open. Lee PS: FYI, we are having serious discussion on not just 'reducing' emissions but in time capturing lots of bad things before they ever get in the air and converting to energy thereby - reversing - some processes which create greenhouse gases. Meaning we want not to just reduce but begin to heal the planet; aided in part by those WiGiT open specs. By then though we might be all the way to v1.0 : ) ________________________________ From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] on behalf of John Curran [jcurran at istaff.org] Sent: Sunday, January 06, 2013 4:03 PM To: michael gurstein Cc: governance at lists.igcaucus.org Subject: Re: [governance] Toward Reducing the Greenhouse Gas Emissions of the Internet and Telecommunications On Jan 6, 2013, at 3:18 PM, michael gurstein wrote: > According to recent calculations the Internet is the source of some 2% of global greenhouse gas emissions (and increasing quickly). Much of this comes from the vast server farms that major Internet corporations (eg. Google, Amazon etc.) have been establishing around the world. http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/01/130102140452.htm > > Perhaps a topic for discussion at the next IGF? I would recommend reading Greenpeace's study in this area for an understanding of the efforts currently being made by some of the leading industry players in this space: http://www.greenpeace.org/international/en/publications/Campaign-reports/Climate-Reports/How-Clean-is-Your-Cloud/ There is significant attention to this problem in the Internet data center industry, even to the point of sharing of best practices and increasing level of visibility into the power utilization, sourcing, and efficiency of these facilities. It would be interesting to hear from those involved in this space regarding what, if anything, could be done to allow further improvements in efficiency and emissions. FYI, /John Disclaimers: My views alone. 100% post-consumer electrons used in this email. ____________________________________________________________ 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: -------------- 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 From apisan at unam.mx Sun Jan 6 22:53:02 2013 From: apisan at unam.mx (Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Baruch) Date: Mon, 7 Jan 2013 03:53:02 +0000 Subject: [governance] Toward Reducing the Greenhouse Gas Emissions of the Internet and Telecommunications In-Reply-To: <77A59FC9477004489D44DE7FC6840E7B1A1F81@SUEX10-mbx-08.ad.syr.edu> References: <139701cdec4b$012dbf10$03893d30$@gmail.com>,,<77A59FC9477004489D44DE7FC6840E7B1A1F81@SUEX10-mbx-08.ad.syr.edu> Message-ID: <6DCAB3E586E6A34FB17223DF8D8F0D3D5DBF737A@W8-EXMB-DP.unam.local> Hi, I'd go back and ask Michael Gurstein if 2% (or 0.2% or 20%) of global damage by IT or the Internet is good or bad, or is there a set level that would be satisfactory, a goal that can be proposed, discussed, and agreed upon. What level of global CO2 emissions would have been deemed acceptable when the automobile industry started? It multiplied infinitely (from zero) the first time an internal-combusion engine was fired (or a steam one, a century earlier.) Metrics are the first thing to think of... IT and the Internet contribute to, what, 13% of the US's economy? with only 2% of the emissions, and a social revolution on their back? Peter Hellmonds makes a large part of the point: we have zillions times more interactions than we would have without computers and the Internet. It is not even fair to compare videoconferencing with travel to meetings, or email/chat/IM/social media to the cost of face-to-face conversations, for one simple reason: those meetings and conversations would just not take place, or would not involve the same many people, if they had to be face-to-face. So changing the face of society forever, increasing an economy's value by more than 10%, all for a meager 2% of emissions? Pretty effective... Lee: not to detract nor distract from your work. Excellent. 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 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 Lee W McKnight [lmcknigh at syr.edu] Enviado el: domingo, 06 de enero de 2013 21:39 Hasta: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; John Curran; michael gurstein Asunto: RE: [governance] Toward Reducing the Greenhouse Gas Emissions of the Internet and Telecommunications Not to toot my own horn...Ok I will. First I should note in reply to John's query re who is doing things in this space, that SU WiGiT Lab is a member of the 'Enterprise Cloud Leadership Council' of the TM Forum, whose Frameworx industry standards are used by ~1000 of the top IT/telecom players globally. We were just presenting last month with other ECLC members on 'Workplace as a Service' on cloud ie data center to mobile applications at an industry conference. There are a few other universities in ECLC but mainly it is big banks like Commonwealth Bank of Australia, UBS, Bank of America, and usual suspect IT/telecoms players like China Mobile, Cisco, Microsoft, EMC/VMware. (Syracuse University's Green Data Center claimed to be cleanest/greenest when built a few years back, but by now maybe others hold that title.) Reason I mention all this is the ECLC's 'Workplace as a Service' will be designed to stretch to edge devices and resources, utilizing edgeware, a new class of software which among other things can be optimized for minimal energy use by the user - whether by her device, the network, the application, the data center/cloud, or any combination thereof. The reason my students and I are engaged is because of our ten years of research on wireless grids, and my invention of edgeware. I'm presenting a tutorial tomorrow at HICSS on wireless grid ad hoc network applications, which will include discussion of a few environmental and energy applications. I argued some time back as a professor/researcher theoretically wireless grids are the cleanest/greenest/most energy efficient form of networking possible. I haven't been proven wrong yet ; ) Core argument being....if you can avoid spinning up and down servers, and can avoid uploading and downloading, then you use less energy. Right? It's kind of a -Zen- serverless and centerless network. I also note that in the WiGiT v0.2 open specs we are just wrapping up, the 10 IRPs are already embedded. Meaning we are already syncing across 80+ campuses, companies, and communities, with IGC and global CS values, to the extent an underfunded NSF Partnership for Innovation project can. v0.3 will be optimized for energy/environment/smart grid/smart building applications. In 2013. Of course there are 1000 other ways for IGC to dive in to this space. But as I'll be doing what I'm doing anyway...it is easy for IGC consensus output, if any is created in this space, to get folded into new open specifications. Which can all come with Internet governance principles and processes embedded that even Parminder might approve. Since he has co-authored some, and can co-write more if he wishes ; ) For right now, if this strikes any IGCers interest, just go to http://wigit.ischool.syr.edu and check out the WiGiT v0.1 open specs and use cases there. V0.2 should be up by end of month, which syncs with enterprise cloud and mobile apps. Under research, go to publications, and there are some papers related to this too. IF IGC wants to co-lead v0.3, or 0.4, the virtual door is open. Lee PS: FYI, we are having serious discussion on not just 'reducing' emissions but in time capturing lots of bad things before they ever get in the air and converting to energy thereby - reversing - some processes which create greenhouse gases. Meaning we want not to just reduce but begin to heal the planet; aided in part by those WiGiT open specs. By then though we might be all the way to v1.0 : ) ________________________________ From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] on behalf of John Curran [jcurran at istaff.org] Sent: Sunday, January 06, 2013 4:03 PM To: michael gurstein Cc: governance at lists.igcaucus.org Subject: Re: [governance] Toward Reducing the Greenhouse Gas Emissions of the Internet and Telecommunications On Jan 6, 2013, at 3:18 PM, michael gurstein wrote: > According to recent calculations the Internet is the source of some 2% of global greenhouse gas emissions (and increasing quickly). Much of this comes from the vast server farms that major Internet corporations (eg. Google, Amazon etc.) have been establishing around the world. http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/01/130102140452.htm > > Perhaps a topic for discussion at the next IGF? I would recommend reading Greenpeace's study in this area for an understanding of the efforts currently being made by some of the leading industry players in this space: http://www.greenpeace.org/international/en/publications/Campaign-reports/Climate-Reports/How-Clean-is-Your-Cloud/ There is significant attention to this problem in the Internet data center industry, even to the point of sharing of best practices and increasing level of visibility into the power utilization, sourcing, and efficiency of these facilities. It would be interesting to hear from those involved in this space regarding what, if anything, could be done to allow further improvements in efficiency and emissions. FYI, /John Disclaimers: My views alone. 100% post-consumer electrons used in this email. ____________________________________________________________ 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: -------------- 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 From Guru at ITforChange.net Mon Jan 7 00:29:20 2013 From: Guru at ITforChange.net (=?UTF-8?B?R3VydSDgpJfgpYHgpLDgpYE=?=) Date: Mon, 07 Jan 2013 10:59:20 +0530 Subject: [governance] FW: [IP] Google's Lawyers Work Behind the Scenes to Carry the Day - NYTimes.com In-Reply-To: <7B42A9ED-878A-4DCA-A65C-9B8D9D555DB9@hserus.net> References: <0ce601cdea8e$00308d90$0091a8b0$@gmail.com> <50E7F9B9.9070308@itforchange.net> <104701cdeb79$fcdb8ef0$f692acd0$@gmail.com> <50E99AB8.7080109@gmail.com> <129601cdec2b$2b36e860$81a4b920$@gmail.com> <7B42A9ED-878A-4DCA-A65C-9B8D9D555DB9@hserus.net> Message-ID: <50EA5D30.10508@ITforChange.net> On 01/06/2013 10:22 PM, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote: > So do you get all your news from just news.google.com > and other google search results, instead of > Facebook shares, Riaz gleefully posting every article he sees about > google being investigated for, say, giggling in church? > > And did Riaz find this news item anywhere other than google search? > > And does this reality distortion field google is supposed to have > actually hide any search results from you that are negative to it? > Like search for "google FTC" and you get the EU action, statements > from Microsoft slamming the decision etc. Does 'personalised search' (without your having asked for, it or having any role in such pesonalisation) not in a sense 'reality distortion' ....by offering different people different views on the same keyword search. See attached aticle (the web link is not available anymore) Guru > > And the last link on page 1 of the search results showing just where > google got spanked by the FTC. > http://www.tnr.com/blog/plank/111650/why-does-everyone-think-google-beat-the-ftc# is > worth a read as a kind f counterpoint to all the commentary about how > google got a get out of jail card because of intensive lobbying. > > Can we please > > 1. Have a reality check here > 2. Go back to discussing Internet governance > > --srs (iPad) > > On 06-Jan-2013, at 22:00, "michael gurstein" > wrote: > >> Thanks Riaz (and sorry for the really awkward phrasing… >> >> To put that in English… >> >> /I'm wondering whether it wouldn't be better to "investigate" Google >> for possible "freedom of thought" violations rather than issues >> concerning "freedom of speech"… Google has the potential for much >> more serious impacts on our capacity to know (or not know) certain >> things, than on what we can say or not say…/ >> >> // >> >> /M/ >> >> -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 4. The Filter Bubble by Eli Pariser.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 227296 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- 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 From avri at acm.org Mon Jan 7 00:32:07 2013 From: avri at acm.org (Avri Doria) Date: Mon, 7 Jan 2013 00:32:07 -0500 Subject: [governance] Appeal request Re: [] Updates on MAG 2013 Message-ID: I believe this is an abuse of the process. If 4 or more other IGC members counter-sign this message, perhaps with a +1, we request that the appeals team review this decision by the coordinator - as defined under the charter rules. avri ----- Reply message ----- From: "Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro" To: "Ian Peter" Cc: "Adam Peake" , Subject: [governance] Updates on MAG 2013 Date: Sun, Jan 6, 2013 19:54 Dear All, Under the IGC Charter, the NomCom may be called upon to provide several functions. In this instance, the NomCom as Ian had mentioned had served previously to appoint the members of the Appeal Team. The NomCom was newly drawn to serve the IGC in appointing the Appeal Team and have existed for less than 12 months. In this instance, since we are to give our list of Nominees to the IGC by the 20th January, 2013, it becomes easier to use the existing NomCom. The election candidates will include an additional question about MAG Nominations which we will harvest and send to the NomCom, these persons will be asked to submit their brief bios to enable the NomCom to make their selections prior to the 19th January, 2013. This will then be posted to the IGC and sent to the UNDESA. Kind Regards, On Mon, Jan 7, 2013 at 7:52 AM, Ian Peter wrote: > I think using the previous Nomcom is the most practical path forward, but > above all I think leaving the process to the (single currently) Co > ordinator is what we should do. The current Nomcom is less than 12 months > old, has only been used to select an Appeals Team, and operated > effectively. Not all Nomcoms in the past have been effective, as most of us > know, and I would prefer not to take the risk of a longer process that > might give us dubious results. We will be lucky to meet the deadline even > with the path of least resistance. > > Re numbers to put forward - I think we should be aiming at a large slate > of nominees rather than a small one, to cover all contingencies. We don't > know who will be rotated off, either in CS or with other stakeholder > groups, and as the geographic and gender balance needs to be achieved > cross-stakeholder, it is better for us to present more options ( the loss > of a North American woman governmental representative may well present an > opening for a civil society woman from that area, etc) So I think a larger > group of nominees might be praxctical. > > Ian Peter > > -----Original Message----- From: Adam Peake > Sent: Monday, January 07, 2013 2:54 AM > To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org ; Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro > Subject: Re: [governance] Updates on MAG 2013 > > > Confirmed with the secretariat that the goal is to continue with > rotation, i.e. one third each year (plus or minus a few.) > > How many CS MAG members are there now, about 12? Perhaps look to > submit 6 names for the deadline? > > The members who joined last year only began at the May meeting. Hope > they remain. A few of the people we suggested then were selected, in -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From suresh at hserus.net Mon Jan 7 00:35:17 2013 From: suresh at hserus.net (Suresh Ramasubramanian) Date: Mon, 7 Jan 2013 11:05:17 +0530 Subject: [governance] FW: [IP] Google's Lawyers Work Behind the Scenes to Carry the Day - NYTimes.com In-Reply-To: <50EA5D30.10508@ITforChange.net> References: <0ce601cdea8e$00308d90$0091a8b0$@gmail.com> <50E7F9B9.9070308@itforchange.net> <104701cdeb79$fcdb8ef0$f692acd0$@gmail.com> <50E99AB8.7080109@gmail.com> <129601cdec2b$2b36e860$81a4b920$@gmail.com> <7B42A9ED-878A-4DCA-A65C-9B8D9D555DB9@hserus.net> <50EA5D30.10508@ITforChange.net> Message-ID: <191c01cdec98$c898be90$59ca3bb0$@hserus.net> It is built from your browsing history and you can definitely opt out of it. As for the personalized search, is this supposed to be changing the actual news items, rather than showing one article in preference to another article, and various other articles below it .. and even more when you keep clicking? I’m not particularly interested in what moveon.org has to say, to be honest. My previous interactions with them have not left me with a very good impression. (google suresh Ramasubramanian + moveon.org for some 8..9 year old history on IP / politechbot) suresh From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Guru ???? Sent: 07 January 2013 10:59 To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org Subject: Re: [governance] FW: [IP] Google's Lawyers Work Behind the Scenes to Carry the Day - NYTimes.com On 01/06/2013 10:22 PM, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote: So do you get all your news from just news.google.com and other google search results, instead of Facebook shares, Riaz gleefully posting every article he sees about google being investigated for, say, giggling in church? And did Riaz find this news item anywhere other than google search? And does this reality distortion field google is supposed to have actually hide any search results from you that are negative to it? Like search for "google FTC" and you get the EU action, statements from Microsoft slamming the decision etc. Does 'personalised search' (without your having asked for, it or having any role in such pesonalisation) not in a sense 'reality distortion' ....by offering different people different views on the same keyword search. See attached aticle (the web link is not available anymore) Guru And the last link on page 1 of the search results showing just where google got spanked by the FTC. http://www.tnr.com/blog/plank/111650/why-does-everyone-think-google-beat-the-ftc# is worth a read as a kind f counterpoint to all the commentary about how google got a get out of jail card because of intensive lobbying. Can we please 1. Have a reality check here 2. Go back to discussing Internet governance --srs (iPad) On 06-Jan-2013, at 22:00, "michael gurstein" > wrote: Thanks Riaz (and sorry for the really awkward phrasing… To put that in English… I'm wondering whether it wouldn't be better to "investigate" Google for possible "freedom of thought" violations rather than issues concerning "freedom of speech"… Google has the potential for much more serious impacts on our capacity to know (or not know) certain things, than on what we can say or not say… M -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From avri at acm.org Mon Jan 7 01:08:34 2013 From: avri at acm.org (Avri Doria) Date: Mon, 7 Jan 2013 01:08:34 -0500 Subject: [governance] Appeal request Re: [] Updates on MAG 2013 In-Reply-To: References: <201301070319.r073JUE4019667@atl4mhob08.myregisteredsite.com> Message-ID: <0BD1D395-93D5-441B-A0B8-62F758B7657F@acm.org> On 6 Jan 2013, at 22:24, Adam Peake wrote: > Hi Avri, > > Could you explain why an abuse. You've been something of a master of > the caucus' charter, would be good to understand more before +1'ing or > not. > > Thank you, > > Adam the Nomcom process, included by reference as part of the charter says: > Each nomcom will be selected for a specific decision and will be disbanded after the decision is made.However, in special cases where several different nominating committees would need to be completed in a shortened time frame that did not allow for multiple nominating committees, the co-coordinators may jointly request one nominating committee to fill several functions. The request for a Nomcom to fulfill several tasks is an a-prioir requirement, not something that can be done a-posteriori as in "oh my, we knew we needed to set up a nomcom but dod not get around to it, so lets just make the last nomcom do it" We discussed changing to the charter to make it possible to have a nomcom per year. But we never got around to doing anything about it. To do so now on the whim of a single coordinator is an abuse of power by the coordinator. We knew that MAG nominations would be required at the beginning of the year, but we did nothing about it. We have gotten into the habit of ignoring the charter and just doing things in an ad-hoc manner when all of a sudden we realize we are very late getting ourselves into gear. This habit of ignoring the charter in favor of coordinator last minute urges is what I view as a charter abuse. Deciding to reactivate a disbanded nomcom is an ad-hoc replacement of process. Better we miss submitting names than that we bless this current regime of neglect by our coordinators with further last minute ad-hoc process. If we keep it up this way, we will be ignoring our processes as much as ICANN has begun to ignore its processes. And that is no way to participate in the IGF. In any case, that is what the Appeals team is for. If 4 members of the IGC request a review, they get one. avri BTW, with the irregularities in the last election I am not sure whether I am a member or not. Hence my request for 4 co-requestoers - just in case the powers that be decide to invalidate my request. Another issues that was never dealt with by our co-coordinators. avri -------------- 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 From jeremy at ciroap.org Mon Jan 7 01:13:51 2013 From: jeremy at ciroap.org (Jeremy Malcolm) Date: Mon, 07 Jan 2013 14:13:51 +0800 Subject: [governance] Appeal request Re: [] Updates on MAG 2013 In-Reply-To: <0BD1D395-93D5-441B-A0B8-62F758B7657F@acm.org> References: <201301070319.r073JUE4019667@atl4mhob08.myregisteredsite.com> <0BD1D395-93D5-441B-A0B8-62F758B7657F@acm.org> Message-ID: <50EA679F.9040000@ciroap.org> On 07/01/13 14:08, Avri Doria wrote: > BTW, with the irregularities in the last election I am not sure whether I am a member or not. Hence my request for 4 co-requestoers - just in case the powers that be decide to invalidate my request. Another issues that was never dealt with by our co-coordinators. The proposals that we came up with for amendment of the Charter, in part to address your concerns, are still on the table: http://igcaucus.org:9001/p/Charter_Amendment_-_Nomcom But, as you say, there was not exactly a groundswell of interest from the members, nor was it pushed very hard by anyone. Hopefully after the election is done, it can be revisited. -- *Dr Jeremy Malcolm Senior Policy Officer Consumers International | the global campaigning voice for consumers* Office for Asia-Pacific and the Middle East Lot 5-1 Wisma WIM, 7 Jalan Abang Haji Openg, TTDI, 60000 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia Tel: +60 3 7726 1599 *Your rights, our mission – download CI's Strategy 2015:* http://consint.info/RightsMission @Consumers_Int | www.consumersinternational.org | www.facebook.com/consumersinternational Read our email confidentiality notice . Don't print this email unless necessary. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From ajp at glocom.ac.jp Mon Jan 7 02:02:51 2013 From: ajp at glocom.ac.jp (Adam Peake) Date: Mon, 7 Jan 2013 16:02:51 +0900 Subject: [governance] FW: [IP] Google's Lawyers Work Behind the Scenes to Carry the Day - NYTimes.com In-Reply-To: <50EA5D30.10508@ITforChange.net> References: <0ce601cdea8e$00308d90$0091a8b0$@gmail.com> <50E7F9B9.9070308@itforchange.net> <104701cdeb79$fcdb8ef0$f692acd0$@gmail.com> <50E99AB8.7080109@gmail.com> <129601cdec2b$2b36e860$81a4b920$@gmail.com> <7B42A9ED-878A-4DCA-A65C-9B8D9D555DB9@hserus.net> <50EA5D30.10508@ITforChange.net> Message-ID: Guru, thanks for this. URL for Eli Pariser's TED Talk the article mentions is (can download.) There's an option to hide personal results on the search toolbar and I believe you can stop personalized search by either not using or logging out from any active Google account (not that many of us bother, but that's the problem with convenience.) Is interesting to see if you get different results using different browsers. A bit related: Which Websites Are Sharing Your Personal Details? From the Wall Street Journal, which itself is one of the worst of the group, and it's a pay site, so they take your money and your data (value) about methodology And from the Economist "The new politics of the Internet: Everything is connected" Adam On Mon, Jan 7, 2013 at 2:29 PM, Guru गुरु wrote: > > > On 01/06/2013 10:22 PM, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote: > > So do you get all your news from just news.google.com and other google > search results, instead of Facebook shares, Riaz gleefully posting every > article he sees about google being investigated for, say, giggling in > church? > > And did Riaz find this news item anywhere other than google search? > > And does this reality distortion field google is supposed to have actually > hide any search results from you that are negative to it? Like search for > "google FTC" and you get the EU action, statements from Microsoft slamming > the decision etc. > > > Does 'personalised search' (without your having asked for, it or having any > role in such pesonalisation) not in a sense 'reality distortion' ....by > offering different people different views on the same keyword search. > > See attached aticle (the web link is not available anymore) > > Guru > > > And the last link on page 1 of the search results showing just where google > got spanked by the FTC. > http://www.tnr.com/blog/plank/111650/why-does-everyone-think-google-beat-the-ftc# > is worth a read as a kind f counterpoint to all the commentary about how > google got a get out of jail card because of intensive lobbying. > > Can we please > > 1. Have a reality check here > 2. Go back to discussing Internet governance > > --srs (iPad) > > On 06-Jan-2013, at 22:00, "michael gurstein" wrote: > > Thanks Riaz (and sorry for the really awkward phrasing… > > > > To put that in English… > > > > I'm wondering whether it wouldn't be better to "investigate" Google for > possible "freedom of thought" violations rather than issues concerning > "freedom of speech"… Google has the potential for much more serious impacts > on our capacity to know (or not know) certain things, than on what we can > say or not say… > > > > M > > > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de Mon Jan 7 03:24:28 2013 From: wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de (=?iso-8859-1?Q?=22Kleinw=E4chter=2C_Wolfgang=22?=) Date: Mon, 07 Jan 2013 09:24:28 +0100 Subject: AW: [governance] Updates on MAG 2013 References: <36613454AE654EB9A07DF9DB0126E547@Toshiba> Message-ID: <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A801331419@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> I support to use the existing NomCom wolfgang ________________________________ Von: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org im Auftrag von Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro Gesendet: Mo 07.01.2013 01:54 An: Ian Peter Cc: Adam Peake; governance at lists.igcaucus.org Betreff: Re: [governance] Updates on MAG 2013 Dear All, Under the IGC Charter, the NomCom may be called upon to provide several functions. In this instance, the NomCom as Ian had mentioned had served previously to appoint the members of the Appeal Team. The NomCom was newly drawn to serve the IGC in appointing the Appeal Team and have existed for less than 12 months. In this instance, since we are to give our list of Nominees to the IGC by the 20th January, 2013, it becomes easier to use the existing NomCom. The election candidates will include an additional question about MAG Nominations which we will harvest and send to the NomCom, these persons will be asked to submit their brief bios to enable the NomCom to make their selections prior to the 19th January, 2013. This will then be posted to the IGC and sent to the UNDESA. Kind Regards, On Mon, Jan 7, 2013 at 7:52 AM, Ian Peter wrote: I think using the previous Nomcom is the most practical path forward, but above all I think leaving the process to the (single currently) Co ordinator is what we should do. The current Nomcom is less than 12 months old, has only been used to select an Appeals Team, and operated effectively. Not all Nomcoms in the past have been effective, as most of us know, and I would prefer not to take the risk of a longer process that might give us dubious results. We will be lucky to meet the deadline even with the path of least resistance. Re numbers to put forward - I think we should be aiming at a large slate of nominees rather than a small one, to cover all contingencies. We don't know who will be rotated off, either in CS or with other stakeholder groups, and as the geographic and gender balance needs to be achieved cross-stakeholder, it is better for us to present more options ( the loss of a North American woman governmental representative may well present an opening for a civil society woman from that area, etc) So I think a larger group of nominees might be praxctical. Ian Peter -----Original Message----- From: Adam Peake Sent: Monday, January 07, 2013 2:54 AM To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org ; Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro Subject: Re: [governance] Updates on MAG 2013 Confirmed with the secretariat that the goal is to continue with rotation, i.e. one third each year (plus or minus a few.) How many CS MAG members are there now, about 12? Perhaps look to submit 6 names for the deadline? The members who joined last year only began at the May meeting. Hope they remain. A few of the people we suggested then were selected, in addition to the names the NomCom comes up with now, might be good to suggest that the 2012 batch also remain. Adam On Sun, Jan 6, 2013 at 12:44 PM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro > wrote: Dear All, I have asked the former NomCom to assist in selecting the names of nominees that come in. The poll is currently being prepared for IGC elections and additional questions will be put forward to in relation to nominations for MAG etc. The list of names that come in will be asked to submit brief bios separately as well. The NomCom will deliberate and decide on the names but it is important that we get a broad selection as possible. We have yet to select the Independent Non Voting Chair for this. You will all be informed of developments soon. Kind Regards, -- Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala P.O. Box 17862 Suva Fiji Twitter: @SalanietaT Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro Tel: +679 3544828 Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 ____________________________________________________________ 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 ____________________________________________________________ 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 -- Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala P.O. Box 17862 Suva Fiji Twitter: @SalanietaT Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro Tel: +679 3544828 Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 -------------- 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 From parminder at itforchange.net Mon Jan 7 03:54:29 2013 From: parminder at itforchange.net (parminder) Date: Mon, 07 Jan 2013 14:24:29 +0530 Subject: [governance] Appeal request Re: [] Updates on MAG 2013 In-Reply-To: <0BD1D395-93D5-441B-A0B8-62F758B7657F@acm.org> References: <201301070319.r073JUE4019667@atl4mhob08.myregisteredsite.com> <0BD1D395-93D5-441B-A0B8-62F758B7657F@acm.org> Message-ID: <50EA8D45.40909@itforchange.net> On Monday 07 January 2013 11:38 AM, Avri Doria wrote: > On 6 Jan 2013, at 22:24, Adam Peake wrote: > >> Hi Avri, >> >> Could you explain why an abuse. You've been something of a master of >> the caucus' charter, would be good to understand more before +1'ing or >> not. >> >> Thank you, >> >> Adam > the Nomcom process, included by reference as part of the charter says: > >> Each nomcom will be selected for a specific decision and will be disbanded after the decision is made.However, in special cases where several different nominating committees would need to be completed in a shortened time frame that did not allow for multiple nominating committees, the co-coordinators may jointly request one nominating committee to fill several functions. > The request for a Nomcom to fulfill several tasks is an a-prioir requirement, not something that can be done a-posteriori as in "oh my, we knew we needed to set up a nomcom but dod not get around to it, so lets just make the last nomcom do it" I agree. and in addition there is also the need to meet the condition of their being a 'shortened time frame' that does not allow for multiple nomcoms to overrule the basic requirement that " Each nomcom will be selected for a specific decision and will be disbanded after the decision is made." With many months gone since the nomcom did its work, this condition is also not met. I know that contextual flexibilities are often required but, Sala, you have not explained to me why it takes much more time to get a new nomcom out or an existing set of volunteers, with a 2 day opt out/ out in window... The problem with arbitrariness, or taking the view that the earlier noncom worked well (or even worse, produced good results), is that at some time it can abused by those who for the wrong reason may want to continue with one or the other nomcom. Therefore, as far as possible, it is best not to build precedents that can be mis used in the future.... Also, Sala, I did not understand what is to be proposed to be included in the vote for new co-coordinator with regard to the nomcom. Can you please elaborate. parminder > We discussed changing to the charter to make it possible to have a nomcom per year. But we never got around to doing anything about it. To do so now on the whim of a single coordinator is an abuse of power by the coordinator. > > We knew that MAG nominations would be required at the beginning of the year, but we did nothing about it. > > We have gotten into the habit of ignoring the charter and just doing things in an ad-hoc manner when all of a sudden we realize we are very late getting ourselves into gear. > > This habit of ignoring the charter in favor of coordinator last minute urges is what I view as a charter abuse. Deciding to reactivate a disbanded nomcom is an ad-hoc replacement of process. Better we miss submitting names than that we bless this current regime of neglect by our coordinators with further last minute ad-hoc process. > > If we keep it up this way, we will be ignoring our processes as much as ICANN has begun to ignore its processes. > And that is no way to participate in the IGF. > > In any case, that is what the Appeals team is for. If 4 members of the IGC request a review, they get one. > > avri > > BTW, with the irregularities in the last election I am not sure whether I am a member or not. Hence my request for 4 co-requestoers - just in case the powers that be decide to invalidate my request. Another issues that was never dealt with by our co-coordinators. > > > avri > > > > > > -------------- 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 From iza at anr.org Mon Jan 7 05:41:58 2013 From: iza at anr.org (Izumi AIZU) Date: Mon, 7 Jan 2013 19:41:58 +0900 Subject: [governance] Appeal request Re: [] Updates on MAG 2013 In-Reply-To: <50EA8D45.40909@itforchange.net> References: <201301070319.r073JUE4019667@atl4mhob08.myregisteredsite.com> <0BD1D395-93D5-441B-A0B8-62F758B7657F@acm.org> <50EA8D45.40909@itforchange.net> Message-ID: Dear all, as already retired from co-co, I still feel a good deal of responsibility for some issues in this thread. I also like to point out that the current Appeals Team's term in theory is for 2012, and we are already into 2013. As we know, the selection of 2012 Appeals Team was late and only seated in late July last year. So I am in favor of making 2012 Appeals team to be in charge for another 6 months should the list, and the Team members agree with. Yet, if we agree with this flexible interpretation of the Charter for the Appeals Team, allowing the past NomCom to be in charge of MAG renewal nomination would not deserve for the Appeals team to investigate if the Coordinator's decision is abuse and in violation of the Charter. We are not doing the perfect job as a whole group, and I do understand fixing these issues are all important, but I don't think going straight to the appeal process for abuse when there is only one coordinator is not the best way forward. My suggestion is, use the past NomCom for this MAG selection, start discuss the Charter amendment right after the new coordinator is seated. best, izumi 2013/1/7 parminder : > > On Monday 07 January 2013 11:38 AM, Avri Doria wrote: >> >> On 6 Jan 2013, at 22:24, Adam Peake wrote: >> >>> Hi Avri, >>> >>> Could you explain why an abuse. You've been something of a master of >>> the caucus' charter, would be good to understand more before +1'ing or >>> not. >>> >>> Thank you, >>> >>> Adam >> >> the Nomcom process, included by reference as part of the charter says: >> >>> Each nomcom will be selected for a specific decision and will be >>> disbanded after the decision is made.However, in special cases where several >>> different nominating committees would need to be completed in a shortened >>> time frame that did not allow for multiple nominating committees, the >>> co-coordinators may jointly request one nominating committee to fill several >>> functions. >> >> The request for a Nomcom to fulfill several tasks is an a-prioir >> requirement, not something that can be done a-posteriori as in "oh my, we >> knew we needed to set up a nomcom but dod not get around to it, so lets just >> make the last nomcom do it" > > > I agree. and in addition there is also the need to meet the condition of > their being a 'shortened time frame' that does not allow for multiple > nomcoms to overrule the basic requirement that " Each nomcom will be > selected for a specific decision and will be disbanded after the decision is > made." With many months gone since the nomcom did its work, this condition > is also not met. > > I know that contextual flexibilities are often required but, Sala, you have > not explained to me why it takes much more time to get a new nomcom out or > an existing set of volunteers, with a 2 day opt out/ out in window... > > The problem with arbitrariness, or taking the view that the earlier noncom > worked well (or even worse, produced good results), is that at some time it > can abused by those who for the wrong reason may want to continue with one > or the other nomcom. Therefore, as far as possible, it is best not to build > precedents that can be mis used in the future.... > > Also, Sala, I did not understand what is to be proposed to be included in > the vote for new co-coordinator with regard to the nomcom. Can you please > elaborate. > > parminder > > > > >> We discussed changing to the charter to make it possible to have a nomcom >> per year. But we never got around to doing anything about it. To do so now >> on the whim of a single coordinator is an abuse of power by the coordinator. >> >> We knew that MAG nominations would be required at the beginning of the >> year, but we did nothing about it. >> >> We have gotten into the habit of ignoring the charter and just doing >> things in an ad-hoc manner when all of a sudden we realize we are very late >> getting ourselves into gear. >> >> This habit of ignoring the charter in favor of coordinator last minute >> urges is what I view as a charter abuse. Deciding to reactivate a disbanded >> nomcom is an ad-hoc replacement of process. Better we miss submitting names >> than that we bless this current regime of neglect by our coordinators with >> further last minute ad-hoc process. >> >> If we keep it up this way, we will be ignoring our processes as much as >> ICANN has begun to ignore its processes. >> And that is no way to participate in the IGF. >> >> In any case, that is what the Appeals team is for. If 4 members of the >> IGC request a review, they get one. >> >> avri >> >> BTW, with the irregularities in the last election I am not sure whether I >> am a member or not. Hence my request for 4 co-requestoers - just in case >> the powers that be decide to invalidate my request. Another issues that was >> never dealt with by our co-coordinators. >> >> >> avri >> >> >> >> >> >> > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > -- >> Izumi Aizu << Institute for InfoSocionomics, Tama University, Tokyo Institute for HyperNetwork Society, Oita, Japan www.anr.org -------------- 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 From iza at anr.org Mon Jan 7 05:53:06 2013 From: iza at anr.org (Izumi AIZU) Date: Mon, 7 Jan 2013 19:53:06 +0900 Subject: [governance] Fwd: [igf_members] MAG Renewal for 2013 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: While creating a well-coordinated process with other like-minded CS groups for MAG nomination might be the ideal solution, I would not push for this at the moment. Even within IGC, there are very diverse views and positions on several issues. I don't think that is our weakness, per se, but rather, could be a strength. I don't think making a single voice to represent the whole CS by IGC is, at this stage, ready and well accepted by other CS groups. izumi 2013/1/7 Suresh Ramasubramanian : > Wouldn't that argue that we certainly don't represent all of civil society? > There obviously will always be organizations or people who, while not full > time engaged in tracking igov, may respond to significant events such as MAG > nominations. > > --srs (htc one x) > > > > ----- Reply message ----- > From: "Thomas Lowenhaupt" > To: , "Robert Guerra" > > Subject: [governance] Fwd: [igf_members] MAG Renewal for 2013 > Date: Mon, Jan 7, 2013 1:20 AM > > > +1 especially to the suggestion > >> civil society should coordinate among itself and send a single list >> of names it "recommends" to the UN. Competing lists, lessen the impact >> of the IGC on the decision making process > > As the "fill-in" chair of last year's MAG nomcom, I was quite > disappointed to learn that ours was just one of the lists from civil > society that was submitted to the MAG. I would not advocate for the > creation of an official list by a MAG designated body (a channel for > self nominations by outsiders is helpful), but submissions from a > scattering of civil society sources puts too much power in the hands of > MAG central to pick and choose. A submission by a civil society "joint- > board" seems worth considering. > > Tom Lowenhaupt > > > On 1/5/2013 11:04 AM, Robert Guerra wrote: >> My quick thoughts, in no particular order, on this are as follows: >> >> - Do we know the details of the persons rotating off the MAG (ie. >> gender, Stakeholder groups & regions) If so, can someone share that - >> thanks! >> - The IGC needs to setup a transparent, open and inclusive process >> that builds on lessons learned. >> - If possible, civil society should coordinate among itself and send a >> single list of names it "recommends" to the UN. Competing lists, >> lessen the impact of the IGC on the decision making process >> >> regards >> >> Robert >> >> >> On 2013-01-04, at 10:47 PM, parminder wrote: >> >>> >>> IGC may want to do something about this.... parminder >>> >>> >>> -------- Original Message -------- >>> Subject: [igf_members] MAG Renewal for 2013 >>> Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2013 13:03:57 +0100 >>> From: Chengetai Masango >>> To: igf Forum >>> >>> >>> >>> Dear All, >>> >>> Happy New year to you all. I hope you had a restful holiday season. >>> It was a pleasure working with you all in 2012 and look forward to >>> continuing to do so in 2013. >>> >>> Please find below a message from Under-Secretary-General Mr. Wu >>> Hongbo concerning the MAG renewal. It is posted on the IGF website >>> and I would be grateful if you could distribute it among your >>> respective stakeholder groups. >>> >>> Best regards >>> >>> Chengetai >>> >>> _________________________________ >>> >>> >>> The Internet Governance Forum's Multi-stakeholder Advisory Group >>> (MAG) has been instrumental in planning the programme of the annual >>> IGF meetings. >>> >>> We would like to express our gratitude to all past and present >>> members of MAG who have donated their time, effort and valuable >>> guidance in ensuring the smooth running of the IGF. >>> >>> On behalf of the United Nations Secretary-General, the Department of >>> Economic and Social Affairs (DESA) requests nominations from all >>> stakeholder groups, according to the established principles and >>> practices of MAG on the rotation and selection of its members. >>> Governments, the private sector, civil society, and technical >>> communities should submit names of candidates from developed and >>> developing countries as well as from economies in transition. >>> Successful nominees will become part of MAG for a period of one year >>> and will contribute to the multi-stakeholder consultation process, >>> bringing the perspectives of their respective groups on Internet >>> governance. Group nominees should be members who have actively >>> participated in IGF meetings and activities in the past. As in >>> previous years, stakeholder groups can resubmit the names of current >>> MAG members for re-election and are expected to publicize the >>> selection and nomination process. >>> >>> Please submit the names of nominees to the IGF Secretariat by *20 >>> January 2013* via email:magrenewal2013 at intgovforum.org >>> , using the attached >>> submission template. The aim is to rotate one third of MAG members. >>> >>> Selection and Operation Principles: >>> >>> (i) MAG members are selected to achieve a balance among all >>> stakeholder groups, while retaining regional and gender >>> representation, according to established procedures; >>> >>> (ii) All MAG members serve in their personal capacity but are >>> expected to have extensive linkages with their respective stakeholder >>> groups; >>> >>> (iii) The main task of MAG is to provide advice on the programme and >>> main themes of the next meeting of the IGF; >>> >>> (iv) MAG members are expected to attend two to three MAG meetings in >>> Geneva, Switzerland, in addition to the annual IGF meeting. They >>> should participate actively in the preparatory process throughout the >>> year, through engagement in the online multilateral dialogue among >>> MAG members; >>> >>> (v) MAG meetings are open to Intergovernmental organizations. >>> >>> Thank you and I look forward to the continued success of the Internet >>> Governance Forum. >>> >>> >>> (Signed) >>> Wu Hongbo >>> Under-Secretary-General >>> Department of Economic and Social Affairs (UNDESA) >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> Part.txt>____________________________________________________________ >>> 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 >> > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > -- >> Izumi Aizu << Institute for InfoSocionomics, Tama University, Tokyo Institute for HyperNetwork Society, Oita, Japan www.anr.org -------------- 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 From ca at cafonso.ca Mon Jan 7 06:21:39 2013 From: ca at cafonso.ca (Carlos A. Afonso) Date: Mon, 07 Jan 2013 09:21:39 -0200 Subject: [governance] Fwd: [igf_members] MAG Renewal for 2013 In-Reply-To: <1F1DEE75-CCC8-4547-8CAB-8394876C7B4D@privaterra.org> References: <78980604-5E4E-44A0-A235-4BAA721DA4D3@unog.ch> <50E7A23D.6050801@itforchange.net> <1F1DEE75-CCC8-4547-8CAB-8394876C7B4D@privaterra.org> Message-ID: <50EAAFC3.2090508@cafonso.ca> On 01/05/2013 02:04 PM, Robert Guerra wrote: > My quick thoughts, in no particular order, on this are as follows: > > - Do we know the details of the persons rotating off the MAG (ie. gender, Stakeholder groups & regions) If so, can someone share that - thanks! Details of the current MAG members is here: http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/magabout/941-mag-2012- Of course no one knows at this point who will "rotate off". --c.a. -------------- 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 From vanda at uol.com.br Mon Jan 7 08:34:40 2013 From: vanda at uol.com.br (Vanda UOL) Date: Mon, 7 Jan 2013 11:34:40 -0200 Subject: [governance] Updates on MAG 2013 In-Reply-To: <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A801331419@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> References: <36613454AE654EB9A07DF9DB0126E547@Toshiba> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A801331419@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> Message-ID: <7624D475-F8AF-47C0-9E16-E3AA34D1BC40@uol.com.br> totally agree. use the group is already working together will bring certainly more effective results than start with a new one. at ICANN we change the NomCOM each year and have been chair of the gout once, and participated in another years, I can see the benefit having a more tuned team!. best year to all Vanda Scartezini On 07/01/2013, at 06:24, "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang" wrote: > I support to use the existing NomCom > > wolfgang > > > ________________________________ > > Von: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org im Auftrag von Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro > Gesendet: Mo 07.01.2013 01:54 > An: Ian Peter > Cc: Adam Peake; governance at lists.igcaucus.org > Betreff: Re: [governance] Updates on MAG 2013 > > > Dear All, > > Under the IGC Charter, the NomCom may be called upon to provide several functions. In this instance, the NomCom as Ian had mentioned had served previously to appoint the members of the Appeal Team. The NomCom was newly drawn to serve the IGC in appointing the Appeal Team and have existed for less than 12 months. > > In this instance, since we are to give our list of Nominees to the IGC by the 20th January, 2013, it becomes easier to use the existing NomCom. The election candidates will include an additional question about MAG Nominations which we will harvest and send to the NomCom, these persons will be asked to submit their brief bios to enable the NomCom to make their selections prior to the 19th January, 2013. This will then be posted to the IGC and sent to the UNDESA. > > Kind Regards, > > > > > > > > On Mon, Jan 7, 2013 at 7:52 AM, Ian Peter wrote: > > > I think using the previous Nomcom is the most practical path forward, but above all I think leaving the process to the (single currently) Co ordinator is what we should do. The current Nomcom is less than 12 months old, has only been used to select an Appeals Team, and operated effectively. Not all Nomcoms in the past have been effective, as most of us know, and I would prefer not to take the risk of a longer process that might give us dubious results. We will be lucky to meet the deadline even with the path of least resistance. > > Re numbers to put forward - I think we should be aiming at a large slate of nominees rather than a small one, to cover all contingencies. We don't know who will be rotated off, either in CS or with other stakeholder groups, and as the geographic and gender balance needs to be achieved cross-stakeholder, it is better for us to present more options ( the loss of a North American woman governmental representative may well present an opening for a civil society woman from that area, etc) So I think a larger group of nominees might be praxctical. > > Ian Peter > > -----Original Message----- From: Adam Peake > Sent: Monday, January 07, 2013 2:54 AM > To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org ; Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro > Subject: Re: [governance] Updates on MAG 2013 > > > Confirmed with the secretariat that the goal is to continue with > rotation, i.e. one third each year (plus or minus a few.) > > How many CS MAG members are there now, about 12? Perhaps look to > submit 6 names for the deadline? > > The members who joined last year only began at the May meeting. Hope > they remain. A few of the people we suggested then were selected, in > addition to the names the NomCom comes up with now, might be good to > suggest that the 2012 batch also remain. > > Adam > > > > On Sun, Jan 6, 2013 at 12:44 PM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro > > wrote: > > > Dear All, > > I have asked the former NomCom to assist in selecting the names of nominees > that come in. The poll is currently being prepared for IGC elections and > additional questions will be put forward to in relation to nominations for > MAG etc. The list of names that come in will be asked to submit brief bios > separately as well. > > The NomCom will deliberate and decide on the names but it is important that > we get a broad selection as possible. We have yet to select the Independent > Non Voting Chair for this. > > You will all be informed of developments soon. > > Kind Regards, > > -- > Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala > P.O. Box 17862 > Suva > Fiji > > Twitter: @SalanietaT > Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro > Tel: +679 3544828 > Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > > > > > > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > > > > > -- > > Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala > P.O. Box 17862 > Suva > Fiji > > Twitter: @SalanietaT > Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro > Tel: +679 3544828 > Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 > > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From avri at acm.org Mon Jan 7 08:53:47 2013 From: avri at acm.org (Avri Doria) Date: Mon, 7 Jan 2013 08:53:47 -0500 Subject: [governance] Appeal request Re: [] Updates on MAG 2013 In-Reply-To: References: <201301070319.r073JUE4019667@atl4mhob08.myregisteredsite.com> <0BD1D395-93D5-441B-A0B8-62F758B7657F@acm.org> <50EA8D45.40909@itforchange.net> Message-ID: Hi, If 4 voting members appeal to the team, it is ok to appeal. I think that having a single coordinator is no reason either way. If members think the rules are being abused and that the members are being ignored, they should appeal. I am trying to appeal I understand that you don't agree, and it looks like very few people do, so it may be a moot issues. As far as I know the appeals team serves until it is replaced. as i thought the co-co's did. Remind me again, why did you step down before you had been replaced? avri On 7 Jan 2013, at 05:41, Izumi AIZU wrote: > Dear all, as already retired from co-co, I still feel a good deal of > responsibility > for some issues in this thread. > > I also like to point out that the current Appeals Team's term in > theory is for 2012, > and we are already into 2013. As we know, the selection of 2012 Appeals Team > was late and only seated in late July last year. > > So I am in favor of making 2012 Appeals team to be in charge for > another 6 months > should the list, and the Team members agree with. > > Yet, if we agree with this flexible interpretation of the Charter for > the Appeals > Team, allowing the past NomCom to be in charge of MAG renewal nomination > would not deserve for the Appeals team to investigate if the > Coordinator's decision > is abuse and in violation of the Charter. > > We are not doing the perfect job as a whole group, and I do understand > fixing these > issues are all important, but I don't think going straight to the > appeal process for abuse > when there is only one coordinator is not the best way forward. > > My suggestion is, use the past NomCom for this MAG selection, start discuss the > Charter amendment right after the new coordinator is seated. > > best, > > izumi > > > 2013/1/7 parminder : >> >> On Monday 07 January 2013 11:38 AM, Avri Doria wrote: >>> >>> On 6 Jan 2013, at 22:24, Adam Peake wrote: >>> >>>> Hi Avri, >>>> >>>> Could you explain why an abuse. You've been something of a master of >>>> the caucus' charter, would be good to understand more before +1'ing or >>>> not. >>>> >>>> Thank you, >>>> >>>> Adam >>> >>> the Nomcom process, included by reference as part of the charter says: >>> >>>> Each nomcom will be selected for a specific decision and will be >>>> disbanded after the decision is made.However, in special cases where several >>>> different nominating committees would need to be completed in a shortened >>>> time frame that did not allow for multiple nominating committees, the >>>> co-coordinators may jointly request one nominating committee to fill several >>>> functions. >>> >>> The request for a Nomcom to fulfill several tasks is an a-prioir >>> requirement, not something that can be done a-posteriori as in "oh my, we >>> knew we needed to set up a nomcom but dod not get around to it, so lets just >>> make the last nomcom do it" >> >> >> I agree. and in addition there is also the need to meet the condition of >> their being a 'shortened time frame' that does not allow for multiple >> nomcoms to overrule the basic requirement that " Each nomcom will be >> selected for a specific decision and will be disbanded after the decision is >> made." With many months gone since the nomcom did its work, this condition >> is also not met. >> >> I know that contextual flexibilities are often required but, Sala, you have >> not explained to me why it takes much more time to get a new nomcom out or >> an existing set of volunteers, with a 2 day opt out/ out in window... >> >> The problem with arbitrariness, or taking the view that the earlier noncom >> worked well (or even worse, produced good results), is that at some time it >> can abused by those who for the wrong reason may want to continue with one >> or the other nomcom. Therefore, as far as possible, it is best not to build >> precedents that can be mis used in the future.... >> >> Also, Sala, I did not understand what is to be proposed to be included in >> the vote for new co-coordinator with regard to the nomcom. Can you please >> elaborate. >> >> parminder >> >> >> >> >>> We discussed changing to the charter to make it possible to have a nomcom >>> per year. But we never got around to doing anything about it. To do so now >>> on the whim of a single coordinator is an abuse of power by the coordinator. >>> >>> We knew that MAG nominations would be required at the beginning of the >>> year, but we did nothing about it. >>> >>> We have gotten into the habit of ignoring the charter and just doing >>> things in an ad-hoc manner when all of a sudden we realize we are very late >>> getting ourselves into gear. >>> >>> This habit of ignoring the charter in favor of coordinator last minute >>> urges is what I view as a charter abuse. Deciding to reactivate a disbanded >>> nomcom is an ad-hoc replacement of process. Better we miss submitting names >>> than that we bless this current regime of neglect by our coordinators with >>> further last minute ad-hoc process. >>> >>> If we keep it up this way, we will be ignoring our processes as much as >>> ICANN has begun to ignore its processes. >>> And that is no way to participate in the IGF. >>> >>> In any case, that is what the Appeals team is for. If 4 members of the >>> IGC request a review, they get one. >>> >>> avri >>> >>> BTW, with the irregularities in the last election I am not sure whether I >>> am a member or not. Hence my request for 4 co-requestoers - just in case >>> the powers that be decide to invalidate my request. Another issues that was >>> never dealt with by our co-coordinators. >>> >>> >>> avri >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 >> > > > > -- >>> Izumi Aizu << > Institute for InfoSocionomics, Tama University, Tokyo > Institute for HyperNetwork Society, Oita, > Japan > www.anr.org > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From gurstein at gmail.com Mon Jan 7 09:19:41 2013 From: gurstein at gmail.com (michael gurstein) Date: Mon, 7 Jan 2013 06:19:41 -0800 Subject: [governance] Appeal request Re: [] Updates on MAG 2013 In-Reply-To: References: <201301070319.r073JUE4019667@atl4mhob08.myregisteredsite.com> <0BD1D395-93D5-441B-A0B8-62F758B7657F@acm.org> <50EA8D45.40909@itforchange.net> Message-ID: <161901cdece2$197c1a20$4c744e60$@gmail.com> +1 M -----Original Message----- From: izumiaizu at gmail.com [mailto:izumiaizu at gmail.com] On Behalf Of Izumi AIZU Sent: Monday, January 07, 2013 2:42 AM To: governance; parminder Subject: Re: [governance] Appeal request Re: [] Updates on MAG 2013 Dear all, as already retired from co-co, I still feel a good deal of responsibility for some issues in this thread. I also like to point out that the current Appeals Team's term in theory is for 2012, and we are already into 2013. As we know, the selection of 2012 Appeals Team was late and only seated in late July last year. So I am in favor of making 2012 Appeals team to be in charge for another 6 months should the list, and the Team members agree with. Yet, if we agree with this flexible interpretation of the Charter for the Appeals Team, allowing the past NomCom to be in charge of MAG renewal nomination would not deserve for the Appeals team to investigate if the Coordinator's decision is abuse and in violation of the Charter. We are not doing the perfect job as a whole group, and I do understand fixing these issues are all important, but I don't think going straight to the appeal process for abuse when there is only one coordinator is not the best way forward. My suggestion is, use the past NomCom for this MAG selection, start discuss the Charter amendment right after the new coordinator is seated. best, izumi 2013/1/7 parminder : > > On Monday 07 January 2013 11:38 AM, Avri Doria wrote: >> >> On 6 Jan 2013, at 22:24, Adam Peake wrote: >> >>> Hi Avri, >>> >>> Could you explain why an abuse. You've been something of a master >>> of the caucus' charter, would be good to understand more before >>> +1'ing or not. >>> >>> Thank you, >>> >>> Adam >> >> the Nomcom process, included by reference as part of the charter says: >> >>> Each nomcom will be selected for a specific decision and will be >>> disbanded after the decision is made.However, in special cases where >>> several different nominating committees would need to be completed >>> in a shortened time frame that did not allow for multiple nominating >>> committees, the co-coordinators may jointly request one nominating >>> committee to fill several functions. >> >> The request for a Nomcom to fulfill several tasks is an a-prioir >> requirement, not something that can be done a-posteriori as in "oh >> my, we knew we needed to set up a nomcom but dod not get around to >> it, so lets just make the last nomcom do it" > > > I agree. and in addition there is also the need to meet the condition > of their being a 'shortened time frame' that does not allow for > multiple nomcoms to overrule the basic requirement that " Each nomcom > will be selected for a specific decision and will be disbanded after > the decision is made." With many months gone since the nomcom did its > work, this condition is also not met. > > I know that contextual flexibilities are often required but, Sala, you > have not explained to me why it takes much more time to get a new > nomcom out or an existing set of volunteers, with a 2 day opt out/ out in window... > > The problem with arbitrariness, or taking the view that the earlier > noncom worked well (or even worse, produced good results), is that at > some time it can abused by those who for the wrong reason may want to > continue with one or the other nomcom. Therefore, as far as possible, > it is best not to build precedents that can be mis used in the future.... > > Also, Sala, I did not understand what is to be proposed to be included > in the vote for new co-coordinator with regard to the nomcom. Can you > please elaborate. > > parminder > > > > >> We discussed changing to the charter to make it possible to have a >> nomcom per year. But we never got around to doing anything about it. >> To do so now on the whim of a single coordinator is an abuse of power by the coordinator. >> >> We knew that MAG nominations would be required at the beginning of >> the year, but we did nothing about it. >> >> We have gotten into the habit of ignoring the charter and just doing >> things in an ad-hoc manner when all of a sudden we realize we are >> very late getting ourselves into gear. >> >> This habit of ignoring the charter in favor of coordinator last >> minute urges is what I view as a charter abuse. Deciding to >> reactivate a disbanded nomcom is an ad-hoc replacement of process. >> Better we miss submitting names than that we bless this current >> regime of neglect by our coordinators with further last minute ad-hoc process. >> >> If we keep it up this way, we will be ignoring our processes as much >> as ICANN has begun to ignore its processes. >> And that is no way to participate in the IGF. >> >> In any case, that is what the Appeals team is for. If 4 members of >> the IGC request a review, they get one. >> >> avri >> >> BTW, with the irregularities in the last election I am not sure >> whether I am a member or not. Hence my request for 4 co-requestoers >> - just in case the powers that be decide to invalidate my request. >> Another issues that was never dealt with by our co-coordinators. >> >> >> avri >> >> >> >> >> >> > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > -- >> Izumi Aizu << Institute for InfoSocionomics, Tama University, Tokyo Institute for HyperNetwork Society, Oita, Japan www.anr.org -------------- 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 From garth.graham at telus.net Mon Jan 7 10:04:47 2013 From: garth.graham at telus.net (Garth Graham) Date: Mon, 7 Jan 2013 07:04:47 -0800 Subject: [governance] Fwd: [igf_members] MAG Renewal for 2013 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <615CEC72-9D20-4D9A-9868-24CBADABE710@telus.net> That's very wise advice. GG On 2013-01-07, at 2:53 AM, Izumi AIZU wrote: > While creating a well-coordinated process with other like-minded CS groups for > MAG nomination might be the ideal solution, I would not push for this > at the moment. > > Even within IGC, there are very diverse views and positions on several issues. > I don't think that is our weakness, per se, but rather, could be a strength. > > I don't think making a single voice to represent the whole CS by IGC > is, at this stage, > ready and well accepted by other CS groups. -------------- 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 From avri at acm.org Mon Jan 7 11:34:55 2013 From: avri at acm.org (Avri Doria) Date: Mon, 7 Jan 2013 11:34:55 -0500 Subject: [governance] Updates on MAG 2013 In-Reply-To: <7624D475-F8AF-47C0-9E16-E3AA34D1BC40@uol.com.br> References: <36613454AE654EB9A07DF9DB0126E547@Toshiba> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A801331419@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> <7624D475-F8AF-47C0-9E16-E3AA34D1BC40@uol.com.br> Message-ID: Hi, That may well be. So why didn't we change the charter half a year ago when people suggested the same thing? Doing it ad-hoc at the moment is what I object to and find to be an abuse. avri On 7 Jan 2013, at 08:34, Vanda UOL wrote: > totally agree. use the group is already working together will bring certainly more effective results than start with a new one. at ICANN we change the NomCOM each year and have been chair of the gout once, and participated in another years, I can see the benefit having a more tuned team!. > best year to all > Vanda Scartezini > On 07/01/2013, at 06:24, "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang" wrote: > >> I support to use the existing NomCom >> >> wolfgang >> >> >> ________________________________ >> >> Von: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org im Auftrag von Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro >> Gesendet: Mo 07.01.2013 01:54 >> An: Ian Peter >> Cc: Adam Peake; governance at lists.igcaucus.org >> Betreff: Re: [governance] Updates on MAG 2013 >> >> >> Dear All, >> >> Under the IGC Charter, the NomCom may be called upon to provide several functions. In this instance, the NomCom as Ian had mentioned had served previously to appoint the members of the Appeal Team. The NomCom was newly drawn to serve the IGC in appointing the Appeal Team and have existed for less than 12 months. >> >> In this instance, since we are to give our list of Nominees to the IGC by the 20th January, 2013, it becomes easier to use the existing NomCom. The election candidates will include an additional question about MAG Nominations which we will harvest and send to the NomCom, these persons will be asked to submit their brief bios to enable the NomCom to make their selections prior to the 19th January, 2013. This will then be posted to the IGC and sent to the UNDESA. >> >> Kind Regards, >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> On Mon, Jan 7, 2013 at 7:52 AM, Ian Peter wrote: >> >> >> I think using the previous Nomcom is the most practical path forward, but above all I think leaving the process to the (single currently) Co ordinator is what we should do. The current Nomcom is less than 12 months old, has only been used to select an Appeals Team, and operated effectively. Not all Nomcoms in the past have been effective, as most of us know, and I would prefer not to take the risk of a longer process that might give us dubious results. We will be lucky to meet the deadline even with the path of least resistance. >> >> Re numbers to put forward - I think we should be aiming at a large slate of nominees rather than a small one, to cover all contingencies. We don't know who will be rotated off, either in CS or with other stakeholder groups, and as the geographic and gender balance needs to be achieved cross-stakeholder, it is better for us to present more options ( the loss of a North American woman governmental representative may well present an opening for a civil society woman from that area, etc) So I think a larger group of nominees might be praxctical. >> >> Ian Peter >> >> -----Original Message----- From: Adam Peake >> Sent: Monday, January 07, 2013 2:54 AM >> To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org ; Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro >> Subject: Re: [governance] Updates on MAG 2013 >> >> >> Confirmed with the secretariat that the goal is to continue with >> rotation, i.e. one third each year (plus or minus a few.) >> >> How many CS MAG members are there now, about 12? Perhaps look to >> submit 6 names for the deadline? >> >> The members who joined last year only began at the May meeting. Hope >> they remain. A few of the people we suggested then were selected, in >> addition to the names the NomCom comes up with now, might be good to >> suggest that the 2012 batch also remain. >> >> Adam >> >> >> >> On Sun, Jan 6, 2013 at 12:44 PM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro >> > wrote: >> >> >> Dear All, >> >> I have asked the former NomCom to assist in selecting the names of nominees >> that come in. The poll is currently being prepared for IGC elections and >> additional questions will be put forward to in relation to nominations for >> MAG etc. The list of names that come in will be asked to submit brief bios >> separately as well. >> >> The NomCom will deliberate and decide on the names but it is important that >> we get a broad selection as possible. We have yet to select the Independent >> Non Voting Chair for this. >> >> You will all be informed of developments soon. >> >> Kind Regards, >> >> -- >> Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala >> P.O. Box 17862 >> Suva >> Fiji >> >> Twitter: @SalanietaT >> Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro >> Tel: +679 3544828 >> Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 >> >> >> >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 >> >> >> >> >> >> -- >> >> Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala >> P.O. Box 17862 >> Suva >> Fiji >> >> Twitter: @SalanietaT >> Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro >> Tel: +679 3544828 >> Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 >> >> >> >> >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From toml at communisphere.com Mon Jan 7 12:15:36 2013 From: toml at communisphere.com (Thomas Lowenhaupt) Date: Mon, 07 Jan 2013 12:15:36 -0500 Subject: [governance] Civic Society Membership on MAG -Toward a Joint-Board In-Reply-To: <50E9D58B.6080602@communisphere.com> References: <78980604-5E4E-44A0-A235-4BAA721DA4D3@unog.ch> <50E7A23D.6050801@itforchange.net> <1F1DEE75-CCC8-4547-8CAB-8394876C7B4D@privaterra.org> <50E9D58B.6080602@communisphere.com> Message-ID: <50EB02B8.6020808@communisphere.com> IGC List, Over the past few days several suggestions have been made that a new approach be taken by civil society toward MAG membership nominations. Robert Guerra initiated the idea, and the undersigned +1'd it adding that a "joint-board" might be a viable mechanism for implementation. Some responded as if the suggestion was that IGC oversee this joint-board. It was not my intention that this entity be overseen or controlled by the IGC. Rather, I imagined IGC as one member of the joint-board. Avri added that Diplo "had the most rigorous process" and named APC as a third organization that submitted names to MAG last year. While a list compiled by a joint-board would initially be considered "just a suggestion" to DESA, its timely formulation under a rigorous process might one day raise its status to that of a "good suggestion" or better. Over time, if such a joint-board's processes are looked upon favorably by MAG and civil society, perhaps such a joint-board could become a key clearinghouse for qualified civil society nominees. (Note: I suspect (hope) the MAG nomination process would remain open to names submitted by individuals and other organizations.) Creating such an entity will require some reflection and we are faced with a 14 day deadline for submitting names to MAG. Last year's IGC MAG selection process was less than smooth and we ended up submitting a list and endorsing the APC submissions (if I recall properly). Already 2 members of last year's NomCom have recused themselves from the proposed "extended" NomCom, and I, as the non-voting chair of that committee am not overly confident of having adequate time to add to the committee, receive nominations, and review them in two weeks. I suppose we could ask for an extension, but that highlights our predicament. Is there a mechanism for endorsing another list or lists of nominees? And what about starting on that joint-board? Best, Tom Lowenhaupt ------------------------------------------------------------------------ On 1/6/2013 2:50 PM, avri at acm.org wrote: Put another way, last time at least APC, Diplo, and IGC sent lists, of which I think Diplo had the most rigorous process. i am sure there were many others (anyone have a tally of how many civil society lists were submitted). I would assume that no matter how much someone tries to insist their group is the principle aggregator, others will send their own lists. On 1/6/2013 2:50 PM, Thomas Lowenhaupt wrote: As the "fill-in" chair of last year's MAG nomcom, I was quite disappointed to learn that ours was just one of the lists from civil society that was submitted to the MAG. I would not advocate for the creation of an official list by a MAG designated body (a channel for self nominations by outsiders is helpful), but submissions from a scattering of civil society sources puts too much power in the hands of MAG central to pick and choose. A submission by a civil society "joint- board" seems worth considering. On 1/5/2013 11:04 AM, Robert Guerra wrote: > civil society should coordinate among itself and send a single list > of names it "recommends" to the UN. Competing lists, lessen the impact > of the IGC on the decision making process -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From kabani.asif at gmail.com Mon Jan 7 12:43:23 2013 From: kabani.asif at gmail.com (Kabani) Date: Mon, 7 Jan 2013 22:43:23 +0500 Subject: [governance] Civic Society Membership on MAG -Toward a Joint-Board In-Reply-To: <50EB02B8.6020808@communisphere.com> References: <78980604-5E4E-44A0-A235-4BAA721DA4D3@unog.ch> <50E7A23D.6050801@itforchange.net> <1F1DEE75-CCC8-4547-8CAB-8394876C7B4D@privaterra.org> <50E9D58B.6080602@communisphere.com> <50EB02B8.6020808@communisphere.com> Message-ID: +1 Agree with Tom. On 7 January 2013 22:15, Thomas Lowenhaupt wrote: > IGC List, > > Over the past few days several suggestions have been made that a new > approach be taken by civil society toward MAG membership nominations. > Robert Guerra initiated the idea, and the undersigned +1'd it adding that a > "joint-board" might be a viable mechanism for implementation. > > Some responded as if the suggestion was that IGC oversee this joint-board. > It was not my intention that this entity be overseen or controlled by the > IGC. Rather, I imagined IGC as one member of the joint-board. > > Avri added that Diplo "had the most rigorous process" and named APC as a > third organization that submitted names to MAG last year. > > While a list compiled by a joint-board would initially be considered "just > a suggestion" to DESA, its timely formulation under a rigorous process > might one day raise its status to that of a "good suggestion" or better. > Over time, if such a joint-board's processes are looked upon favorably by > MAG and civil society, perhaps such a joint-board could become a key > clearinghouse for qualified civil society nominees. (Note: I suspect (hope) > the MAG nomination process would remain open to names submitted by > individuals and other organizations.) > > Creating such an entity will require some reflection and we are faced with > a 14 day deadline for submitting names to MAG. Last year's IGC MAG > selection process was less than smooth and we ended up submitting a list > and endorsing the APC submissions (if I recall properly). Already 2 members > of last year's NomCom have recused themselves from the proposed "extended" > NomCom, and I, as the non-voting chair of that committee am not overly > confident of having adequate time to add to the committee, receive > nominations, and review them in two weeks. I suppose we could ask for an > extension, but that highlights our predicament. > > Is there a mechanism for endorsing another list or lists of nominees? And > what about starting on that joint-board? > > Best, > > Tom Lowenhaupt > > ------------------------------ > On 1/6/2013 2:50 PM, avri at acm.org wrote: > > Put another way, last time at least APC, Diplo, and IGC sent lists, of which I think Diplo had the most rigorous process. i am sure there were many others (anyone have a tally of how many civil society lists were submitted). I would assume that no matter how much someone tries to insist their group is the principle aggregator, others will send their own lists. > > On 1/6/2013 2:50 PM, Thomas Lowenhaupt wrote: > > As the "fill-in" chair of last year's MAG nomcom, I was quite disappointed > to learn that ours was just one of the lists from civil society that was > submitted to the MAG. I would not advocate for the creation of an official > list by a MAG designated body (a channel for self nominations by outsiders > is helpful), but submissions from a scattering of civil society sources > puts too much power in the hands of MAG central to pick and choose. A > submission by a civil society "joint- board" seems worth considering. > > On 1/5/2013 11:04 AM, Robert Guerra wrote: > > civil society should coordinate among itself and send a single list of > names it "recommends" to the UN. Competing lists, lessen the impact of the > IGC on the decision making process > > > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > -- *Connect me* [image: Facebook] [image: Twitter] [image: Youtube] [image: LinkedIn] *Wait Before you print - Think about the** **ENVIRONMENT* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From nb at bollow.ch Mon Jan 7 14:22:18 2013 From: nb at bollow.ch (Norbert Bollow) Date: Mon, 7 Jan 2013 20:22:18 +0100 Subject: [governance] Updates on MAG 2013 In-Reply-To: <2B5CB958-2BBA-4E4D-A916-74BA59ED1ED5@acm.org> References: <50E8F894.8070601@itforchange.net> <2B5CB958-2BBA-4E4D-A916-74BA59ED1ED5@acm.org> Message-ID: <20130107202218.2ad09da2@quill.bollow.ch> +1 Greetings, Norbert Avri Doria wrote: > Hi, > > While I am uncomfortable with using the old set of volunteers, I > accept that posting list and of giving people time to opt out, or in > for that matter. > > I agree with Parminder that using the same nomcom is a bad idea. Had > we carried through with the suggestions to setup a nomcom for a > year's worth of tasks, we might have been able to do that. But I > take the inaction along this front as an indication of IGC not having > support for doing this. > > avri > > On 5 Jan 2013, at 23:07, parminder wrote: > > > > > On Sunday 06 January 2013 09:14 AM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro > > wrote: > >> Dear All, > >> > >> I have asked the former NomCom to assist in selecting the names of > >> nominees that come in. > > > > Disclaimer first: I dont remember who the members of the last non > > com were, or even what was it constituted for. Neither do I have > > any interest in the outcome of the MAG nomination process.... > > > > This said, I much prefer we repeat the list of volunteers rather > > than repeat a nomcom. It take a few minutes to random pick a nomcom > > from a list of volunteers and so the time taken for the two > > processes is almost the same. But we have better randomness in > > getting a new slate every time, which is a key objective of nomcom > > selection. > > > > parminder > > > > > >> The poll is currently being prepared for IGC elections and > >> additional questions will be put forward to in relation to > >> nominations for MAG etc. The list of names that come in will be > >> asked to submit brief bios separately as well. > >> > >> The NomCom will deliberate and decide on the names but it is > >> important that we get a broad selection as possible. We have yet > >> to select the Independent Non Voting Chair for this. > >> > >> You will all be informed of developments soon. > >> > >> Kind Regards, > >> > >> -- > >> Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala > >> P.O. Box 17862 > >> Suva > >> Fiji > >> > >> Twitter: @SalanietaT > >> Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro > >> Tel: +679 3544828 > >> Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 > >> > >> > >> > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From avri at acm.org Mon Jan 7 14:23:53 2013 From: avri at acm.org (Avri Doria) Date: Mon, 7 Jan 2013 14:23:53 -0500 Subject: [governance] Civic Society Membership on MAG -Toward a Joint-Board In-Reply-To: <50EB02B8.6020808@communisphere.com> References: <78980604-5E4E-44A0-A235-4BAA721DA4D3@unog.ch> <50E7A23D.6050801@itforchange.net> <1F1DEE75-CCC8-4547-8CAB-8394876C7B4D@privaterra.org> <50E9D58B.6080602@communisphere.com> <50EB02B8.6020808@communisphere.com> Message-ID: On 7 Jan 2013, at 12:15, Thomas Lowenhaupt wrote: > Is there a mechanism for endorsing another list or lists of nominees? And what about starting on that joint-board? Well. While the charter says: " All nominations to external bodies, e.g., the IGF multistakholder advisory group, will be made using a randomly selected nomcom process as defined here. " and while the process for how a proper nomcom is done is also defined in One can question whether endorsing a list produced by some other means is a Nomination to the IGF MAG. If it is isn't then I would think the normal list consensus process would be within charter. On the joint-board issue, that is an interesting idea and worth discussing with the participants of other Civil society recommendation producers. I think that originally the IGC tried to be that aggregator, but I agree, it is obviously no longer is, if it ever was. cheers avri -------------- 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 From nb at bollow.ch Mon Jan 7 14:45:13 2013 From: nb at bollow.ch (Norbert Bollow) Date: Mon, 7 Jan 2013 20:45:13 +0100 Subject: [governance] Civic Society Membership on MAG -Toward a Joint-Board In-Reply-To: References: <78980604-5E4E-44A0-A235-4BAA721DA4D3@unog.ch> <50E7A23D.6050801@itforchange.net> <1F1DEE75-CCC8-4547-8CAB-8394876C7B4D@privaterra.org> <50E9D58B.6080602@communisphere.com> <50EB02B8.6020808@communisphere.com> Message-ID: <20130107204513.4421997d@quill.bollow.ch> In any case, if there is going to be a list of nominees from the IGC for this round of MAG appointments, according to our present charter and also for practical reasons of shortness of time it will need to be done by a nomcom (for which at least the process is well-understood) rather than by some "joint-board" process (which even if everyone wanted it would still need to be defined precisely, and at least I would be very reluctant to endorse the idea before having specific information on how it would work). Greetings, Norbert Avri Doria wrote: > On 7 Jan 2013, at 12:15, Thomas Lowenhaupt wrote: > > > Is there a mechanism for endorsing another list or lists of > > nominees? And what about starting on that joint-board? > > Well. > > While the charter says: > > " > All nominations to external bodies, e.g., the IGF multistakholder > advisory group, will be made using a randomly selected nomcom process > as defined here. " > > and while the process for how a proper nomcom is done is also defined > in > > One can question whether endorsing a list produced by some other > means is a Nomination to the IGF MAG. > > If it is isn't then I would think the normal list consensus process > would be within charter. > > On the joint-board issue, that is an interesting idea and worth > discussing with the participants of other Civil society > recommendation producers. I think that originally the IGC tried to > be that aggregator, but I agree, it is obviously no longer is, if it > ever was. > > > cheers > avri > > -------------- 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 From mueller at syr.edu Mon Jan 7 15:13:15 2013 From: mueller at syr.edu (Milton L Mueller) Date: Mon, 7 Jan 2013 20:13:15 +0000 Subject: [governance] FW: [IP] Google's Lawyers Work Behind the Scenes to Carry the Day - NYTimes.com In-Reply-To: <50EA5D30.10508@ITforChange.net> References: <0ce601cdea8e$00308d90$0091a8b0$@gmail.com> <50E7F9B9.9070308@itforchange.net> <104701cdeb79$fcdb8ef0$f692acd0$@gmail.com> <50E99AB8.7080109@gmail.com> <129601cdec2b$2b36e860$81a4b920$@gmail.com> <7B42A9ED-878A-4DCA-A65C-9B8D9D555DB9@hserus.net> <50EA5D30.10508@ITforChange.net> Message-ID: <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD22F8237@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> Pariser's "filter bubble" thesis has very little scientific grounding. It is one of those things that has acquired credibility primarily through repetition, and the fact that some people always badly want to believe that "the media" are manipulating us. I recall seeing him on a television program when his claim was put to the test and they conducted searches using two different accounts and got virtually the same results. He was embarrassed. On the other hand, I was quite grateful this morning when using a generic professional term to search for an office and discovering that the search had been limited to Syracuse area. Guru, if you get badly personalized results from Google without asking for it, what is to stop you from not using Google? From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Guru ???? Sent: Monday, January 07, 2013 12:29 AM To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org Subject: Re: [governance] FW: [IP] Google's Lawyers Work Behind the Scenes to Carry the Day - NYTimes.com On 01/06/2013 10:22 PM, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote: So do you get all your news from just news.google.com and other google search results, instead of Facebook shares, Riaz gleefully posting every article he sees about google being investigated for, say, giggling in church? And did Riaz find this news item anywhere other than google search? And does this reality distortion field google is supposed to have actually hide any search results from you that are negative to it? Like search for "google FTC" and you get the EU action, statements from Microsoft slamming the decision etc. Does 'personalised search' (without your having asked for, it or having any role in such pesonalisation) not in a sense 'reality distortion' ....by offering different people different views on the same keyword search. See attached aticle (the web link is not available anymore) Guru And the last link on page 1 of the search results showing just where google got spanked by the FTC. http://www.tnr.com/blog/plank/111650/why-does-everyone-think-google-beat-the-ftc# is worth a read as a kind f counterpoint to all the commentary about how google got a get out of jail card because of intensive lobbying. Can we please 1. Have a reality check here 2. Go back to discussing Internet governance --srs (iPad) On 06-Jan-2013, at 22:00, "michael gurstein" > wrote: Thanks Riaz (and sorry for the really awkward phrasing… To put that in English… I'm wondering whether it wouldn't be better to "investigate" Google for possible "freedom of thought" violations rather than issues concerning "freedom of speech"… Google has the potential for much more serious impacts on our capacity to know (or not know) certain things, than on what we can say or not say… M -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From toml at communisphere.com Mon Jan 7 15:19:44 2013 From: toml at communisphere.com (Thomas Lowenhaupt) Date: Mon, 07 Jan 2013 15:19:44 -0500 Subject: [governance] Civic Society Membership on MAG -Toward a Joint-Board In-Reply-To: <20130107204513.4421997d@quill.bollow.ch> References: <78980604-5E4E-44A0-A235-4BAA721DA4D3@unog.ch> <50E7A23D.6050801@itforchange.net> <1F1DEE75-CCC8-4547-8CAB-8394876C7B4D@privaterra.org> <50E9D58B.6080602@communisphere.com> <50EB02B8.6020808@communisphere.com> <20130107204513.4421997d@quill.bollow.ch> Message-ID: <50EB2DE0.6080402@communisphere.com> Norbert, I agree that the joint-board concept is not appropriate for now. Considering the timing - 14 days, it is massively impractical. That leaves these options: 1. Create a new NomCom. 2. Refurbish the old NomCom. 3. Use the normal "list consensus" process (see Avri below) 4. Do nothing. 5. An as yet unspecified option. Best, Tom Lowenhaupt On 1/7/2013 2:45 PM, Norbert Bollow wrote: > In any case, if there is going to be a list of nominees from the IGC > for this round of MAG appointments, according to our present charter > and also for practical reasons of shortness of time it will need to be > done by a nomcom (for which at least the process is well-understood) > rather than by some "joint-board" process (which even if everyone > wanted it would still need to be defined precisely, and at least I > would be very reluctant to endorse the idea before having specific > information on how it would work). > > Greetings, > Norbert > > Avri Doria wrote: > >> On 7 Jan 2013, at 12:15, Thomas Lowenhaupt wrote: >> >>> Is there a mechanism for endorsing another list or lists of >>> nominees? And what about starting on that joint-board? >> Well. >> >> While the charter says: >> >> " >> All nominations to external bodies, e.g., the IGF multistakholder >> advisory group, will be made using a randomly selected nomcom process >> as defined here. " >> >> and while the process for how a proper nomcom is done is also defined >> in >> >> One can question whether endorsing a list produced by some other >> means is a Nomination to the IGF MAG. >> >> If it is isn't then I would think the normal list consensus process >> would be within charter. >> >> On the joint-board issue, that is an interesting idea and worth >> discussing with the participants of other Civil society >> recommendation producers. I think that originally the IGC tried to >> be that aggregator, but I agree, it is obviously no longer is, if it >> ever was. >> >> >> cheers >> avri >> >> > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From ian.peter at ianpeter.com Mon Jan 7 15:22:53 2013 From: ian.peter at ianpeter.com (Ian Peter) Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2013 07:22:53 +1100 Subject: [governance] Civic Society Membership on MAG -Toward a Joint-Board In-Reply-To: <50EB02B8.6020808@communisphere.com> References: <78980604-5E4E-44A0-A235-4BAA721DA4D3@unog.ch> <50E7A23D.6050801@itforchange.net> <1F1DEE75-CCC8-4547-8CAB-8394876C7B4D@privaterra.org> <50E9D58B.6080602@communisphere.com> <50EB02B8.6020808@communisphere.com> Message-ID: <9DD8C160E72B4B9AAB1C7EAC01386F42@Toshiba> There is nothing to stop us endorsing reps suggested by Diplo and APC if the Nomcom should choose to do so – Diplo and APC only have to get members of IGC (eg Ginger and Anriette respectively) to suggest the names for Nomcom consideration. But a joint board would have to be for another year, if ever. From: Thomas Lowenhaupt Sent: Tuesday, January 08, 2013 4:15 AM To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org Cc: Robert Guerra ; Avri Doria Subject: [governance] Civic Society Membership on MAG -Toward a Joint-Board IGC List, Over the past few days several suggestions have been made that a new approach be taken by civil society toward MAG membership nominations. Robert Guerra initiated the idea, and the undersigned +1'd it adding that a "joint-board" might be a viable mechanism for implementation. Some responded as if the suggestion was that IGC oversee this joint-board. It was not my intention that this entity be overseen or controlled by the IGC. Rather, I imagined IGC as one member of the joint-board. Avri added that Diplo "had the most rigorous process" and named APC as a third organization that submitted names to MAG last year. While a list compiled by a joint-board would initially be considered "just a suggestion" to DESA, its timely formulation under a rigorous process might one day raise its status to that of a "good suggestion" or better. Over time, if such a joint-board's processes are looked upon favorably by MAG and civil society, perhaps such a joint-board could become a key clearinghouse for qualified civil society nominees. (Note: I suspect (hope) the MAG nomination process would remain open to names submitted by individuals and other organizations.) Creating such an entity will require some reflection and we are faced with a 14 day deadline for submitting names to MAG. Last year's IGC MAG selection process was less than smooth and we ended up submitting a list and endorsing the APC submissions (if I recall properly). Already 2 members of last year's NomCom have recused themselves from the proposed "extended" NomCom, and I, as the non-voting chair of that committee am not overly confident of having adequate time to add to the committee, receive nominations, and review them in two weeks. I suppose we could ask for an extension, but that highlights our predicament. Is there a mechanism for endorsing another list or lists of nominees? And what about starting on that joint-board? Best, Tom Lowenhaupt -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- On 1/6/2013 2:50 PM, avri at acm.org wrote: Put another way, last time at least APC, Diplo, and IGC sent lists, of which I think Diplo had the most rigorous process. i am sure there were many others (anyone have a tally of how many civil society lists were submitted). I would assume that no matter how much someone tries to insist their group is the principle aggregator, others will send their own lists. On 1/6/2013 2:50 PM, Thomas Lowenhaupt wrote: As the "fill-in" chair of last year's MAG nomcom, I was quite disappointed to learn that ours was just one of the lists from civil society that was submitted to the MAG. I would not advocate for the creation of an official list by a MAG designated body (a channel for self nominations by outsiders is helpful), but submissions from a scattering of civil society sources puts too much power in the hands of MAG central to pick and choose. A submission by a civil society "joint- board" seems worth considering. On 1/5/2013 11:04 AM, Robert Guerra wrote: civil society should coordinate among itself and send a single list of names it "recommends" to the UN. Competing lists, lessen the impact of the IGC on the decision making process -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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: -------------- 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 From ian.peter at ianpeter.com Mon Jan 7 15:32:00 2013 From: ian.peter at ianpeter.com (Ian Peter) Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2013 07:32:00 +1100 Subject: [governance] Civic Society Membership on MAG -Toward a Joint-Board In-Reply-To: <50EB2DE0.6080402@communisphere.com> References: <78980604-5E4E-44A0-A235-4BAA721DA4D3@unog.ch> <50E7A23D.6050801@itforchange.net> <1F1DEE75-CCC8-4547-8CAB-8394876C7B4D@privaterra.org> <50E9D58B.6080602@communisphere.com> <50EB02B8.6020808@communisphere.com> <20130107204513.4421997d@quill.bollow.ch> <50EB2DE0.6080402@communisphere.com> Message-ID: On the nominations question below – I think it has to be one or the other of the Nomcom processes, and that decision is for the Coordinator(s) (subject of course to normal appeal processes if there is support to activate these) From: Thomas Lowenhaupt Sent: Tuesday, January 08, 2013 7:19 AM To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org ; Norbert Bollow Cc: Avri Doria Subject: Re: [governance] Civic Society Membership on MAG -Toward a Joint-Board Norbert, I agree that the joint-board concept is not appropriate for now. Considering the timing - 14 days, it is massively impractical. That leaves these options: 1. Create a new NomCom. 2. Refurbish the old NomCom. 3. Use the normal "list consensus" process (see Avri below) 4. Do nothing. 5. An as yet unspecified option. Best, Tom Lowenhaupt On 1/7/2013 2:45 PM, Norbert Bollow wrote: In any case, if there is going to be a list of nominees from the IGC for this round of MAG appointments, according to our present charter and also for practical reasons of shortness of time it will need to be done by a nomcom (for which at least the process is well-understood) rather than by some "joint-board" process (which even if everyone wanted it would still need to be defined precisely, and at least I would be very reluctant to endorse the idea before having specific information on how it would work). Greetings, Norbert Avri Doria mailto:avri at acm.org wrote: On 7 Jan 2013, at 12:15, Thomas Lowenhaupt wrote: Is there a mechanism for endorsing another list or lists of nominees? And what about starting on that joint-board? Well. While the charter says: " All nominations to external bodies, e.g., the IGF multistakholder advisory group, will be made using a randomly selected nomcom process as defined here. " and while the process for how a proper nomcom is done is also defined in One can question whether endorsing a list produced by some other means is a Nomination to the IGF MAG. If it is isn't then I would think the normal list consensus process would be within charter. On the joint-board issue, that is an interesting idea and worth discussing with the participants of other Civil society recommendation producers. I think that originally the IGC tried to be that aggregator, but I agree, it is obviously no longer is, if it ever was. cheers avri -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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: -------------- 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 From ias_pk at yahoo.com Mon Jan 7 17:12:21 2013 From: ias_pk at yahoo.com (Imran Ahmed Shah) Date: Mon, 7 Jan 2013 14:12:21 -0800 (PST) Subject: [governance] Civic Society Membership on MAG -Toward a Joint-Board Message-ID: <1357596741.90449.BPMail_high_noncarrier@web125104.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Dear Friends at IGC CS With reference to the discussion related to the selection of MAG, review and suggestions are as follows: MAG 2013 selection process: I would suggest the coordinators to start the collection of Nominations with them. I would suggest that list of IGC Nomination should not be limited to the number of But we should nominate few members from each of the stakeholder groups: Governments, The Private Sector, Civil Society, and Technical Community And to cover the 5 Regions for each group (to have a balance among all stakeholder groups), while retaining regional and gender representation, For this purpose, our list must be large enough for the secondary selection. Nomcom: According to the objection by Avri, the Nomcom has to be revised. She knocked at the door of Appeal Team, but according to coordinators Appeal Team also have to be revised. Nomcom Chair has also be revised. Well, I have two questions: 1. in this situation what is the validity of the Nomination and if any objection arises on the selection, what will be the Appeal Team? 2. Do we have sufficient time to Call for Volunteers, select them for new NomCom & Appeal Team, and then nomcom start selection of Nomination List, reviewed it by Chair, endorse it by members and if no objection is filed, submit to UN-DESA? No, I do not think so, either we have to skip the nomination for MAG 2013 or have to re-validate the current NomCom. Joint-Board: As I remember IGC NomCom & Coordinators did not endorsed APC list last year for MAG 2012, and perhaps same case for this year because the NomCom select the Internal IGC Nominations. IGC CS has the membership of individuals or representatives of other CS or Multi Stakeholder Groups, but do not have the mechanism of membership of other Civil Societies or organisations. So, NomCom may not be able to prepare two list one from Internal Members and other one from External body. If required, the provision in the Charter will be required. However, if APC or any other CS being a member of IGC submit a list of multiple names which also belong to IGC, nomcom may have to consider in its final list of nomination. Even, if a few CS groups along with IGC makes a Joint Board, IGC might be able to provide one or two board members only. The lists of candidates will be coming from different Groups and the Joint Board will again finalise single list for UN-DESA. But what is the criteria of the selection at DESA, it is not open. All of the IGC nominees were not selected for MAG 2012, because IGC nomination list was not only list with UN-DESA. Now for 2013, they initiated open call but how they select/ choose the candidate for MAG, it is not mentioned anywhere. Yes, if the UN-DESA for a Joint-Board, an open and transparent process for the selection of MAG members, that will be a very good idea and we should support by providing our selected members for the Joint-Board. UNDESA Joint-Board will have worth as the central body to select the MAG members every year. As now, we do not know that who will Now as the time is very limited, I would request the coordinators to initiate the some quick process for finalising the nomcom+chair+appeal team. Thanks and Regards Imran Ahmed Shah for IGFPak -------------- 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 From rguerra at privaterra.org Mon Jan 7 17:28:56 2013 From: rguerra at privaterra.org (Robert Guerra) Date: Mon, 7 Jan 2013 17:28:56 -0500 Subject: [governance] Civic Society Membership on MAG -Toward a Joint-Board In-Reply-To: <1357596741.90449.BPMail_high_noncarrier@web125104.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> References: <1357596741.90449.BPMail_high_noncarrier@web125104.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <13BAA24B-75DD-48D5-8775-840DBEAE71A3@privaterra.org> Imran, Suffice it to say - I'd prefer to stay on scope and limit our MAG discussions to civil society. To not do so, is well, really outside what I - personally think - is the core focus of this list. -- R. Guerra Phone/Cell: +1 202-905-2081 Twitter: twitter.com/netfreedom Email: rguerra at privaterra.org On 2013-01-07, at 5:12 PM, Imran Ahmed Shah wrote: > > Dear Friends at IGC CS > With reference to the discussion related to the selection of MAG, review and suggestions are as follows: > > MAG 2013 selection process: > I would suggest the coordinators to start the collection of Nominations with them. > > I would suggest that list of IGC Nomination should not be limited to the number of > > But we should nominate few members from each of the stakeholder groups: -------------- 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 From suresh at hserus.net Mon Jan 7 19:28:02 2013 From: suresh at hserus.net (Suresh Ramasubramanian) Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2013 05:58:02 +0530 Subject: [governance] Civic Society Membership on MAG -Toward a Joint-Board In-Reply-To: <13BAA24B-75DD-48D5-8775-840DBEAE71A3@privaterra.org> References: <1357596741.90449.BPMail_high_noncarrier@web125104.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <13BAA24B-75DD-48D5-8775-840DBEAE71A3@privaterra.org> Message-ID: <77359555-89CB-4F7F-A705-A6E1D04DE9CD@hserus.net> No harm in including the technical community and academia. In fact there isn't any difference, these are civil society with distinct skills --srs (iPad) On 08-Jan-2013, at 3:58, Robert Guerra wrote: > Imran, > > Suffice it to say - I'd prefer to stay on scope and limit our MAG discussions to civil society. > > To not do so, is well, really outside what I - personally think - is the core focus of this list. > > > > -- > R. Guerra > Phone/Cell: +1 202-905-2081 > Twitter: twitter.com/netfreedom > Email: rguerra at privaterra.org > > On 2013-01-07, at 5:12 PM, Imran Ahmed Shah wrote: > >> >> Dear Friends at IGC CS >> With reference to the discussion related to the selection of MAG, review and suggestions are as follows: >> >> MAG 2013 selection process: >> I would suggest the coordinators to start the collection of Nominations with them. >> >> I would suggest that list of IGC Nomination should not be limited to the number of >> >> But we should nominate few members from each of the stakeholder groups: > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From dogwallah at gmail.com Mon Jan 7 19:38:15 2013 From: dogwallah at gmail.com (McTim) Date: Mon, 7 Jan 2013 19:38:15 -0500 Subject: [governance] Civic Society Membership on MAG -Toward a Joint-Board In-Reply-To: <77359555-89CB-4F7F-A705-A6E1D04DE9CD@hserus.net> References: <1357596741.90449.BPMail_high_noncarrier@web125104.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <13BAA24B-75DD-48D5-8775-840DBEAE71A3@privaterra.org> <77359555-89CB-4F7F-A705-A6E1D04DE9CD@hserus.net> Message-ID: On Mon, Jan 7, 2013 at 7:28 PM, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote: > No harm in including the technical community and academia. In fact there isn't any difference, these are civil society with distinct skills +1 -- 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 From suresh at hserus.net Mon Jan 7 19:47:36 2013 From: suresh at hserus.net (Suresh Ramasubramanian) Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2013 06:17:36 +0530 Subject: [governance] FW: [IP] Google's Lawyers Work Behind the Scenes to Carry the Day - NYTimes.com In-Reply-To: <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD22F8237@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> References: <0ce601cdea8e$00308d90$0091a8b0$@gmail.com> <50E7F9B9.9070308@itforchange.net> <104701cdeb79$fcdb8ef0$f692acd0$@gmail.com> <50E99AB8.7080109@gmail.com> <129601cdec2b$2b36e860$81a4b920$@gmail.com> <7B42A9ED-878A-4DCA-A65C-9B8D9D555DB9@hserus.net> <50EA5D30.10508@ITforChange.net> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD22F8237@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> Message-ID: <99BEFE75-06CE-49AB-BD71-9FF4229A38CA@hserus.net> Well well, I agree with Milton here This fits the pattern of a typical move on campaign. Run a mailing list without bothering about best practices and land in spam filters? Simple, start a high decibel campaign claiming censorship, eavesdropping and what not. Disagree with the bush administration? Sure, we all do, but I doubt we would have the poor taste to launch full page ads like 'Petraeus Betray Us' etc. that google search 'study' or anything else they produce, has to be seen as what it is, propaganda, and taken with a truckload or two of salt. Maybe rather more salt than I would add to any paper by another civil society org whose members I keep clashing with. --srs (iPad) On 08-Jan-2013, at 1:43, Milton L Mueller wrote: > Pariser's "filter bubble" thesis has very little scientific grounding. It is one of those things that has acquired credibility primarily through repetition, and the fact that some people always badly want to believe that "the media" are manipulating us. > > I recall seeing him on a television program when his claim was put to the test and they conducted searches using two different accounts and got virtually the same results. He was embarrassed. > > CARG > > Guru, if you get badly personalized results from Google without asking for it, what is to stop you from not using Google? > > > From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Guru ???? > Sent: Monday, January 07, 2013 12:29 AM > To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org > Subject: Re: [governance] FW: [IP] Google's Lawyers Work Behind the Scenes to Carry the Day - NYTimes.com > > > > On 01/06/2013 10:22 PM, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote: > So do you get all your news from just news.google.com and other google search results, instead of Facebook shares, Riaz gleefully posting every article he sees about google being investigated for, say, giggling in church? > > And did Riaz find this news item anywhere other than google search? > > And does this reality distortion field google is supposed to have actually hide any search results from you that are negative to it? Like search for "google FTC" and you get the EU action, statements from Microsoft slamming the decision etc. > > Does 'personalised search' (without your having asked for, it or having any role in such pesonalisation) not in a sense 'reality distortion' ....by offering different people different views on the same keyword search. > > See attached aticle (the web link is not available anymore) > > Guru > > And the last link on page 1 of the search results showing just where google got spanked by the FTC. http://www.tnr.com/blog/plank/111650/why-does-everyone-think-google-beat-the-ftc# is worth a read as a kind f counterpoint to all the commentary about how google got a get out of jail card because of intensive lobbying. > > Can we please > > 1. Have a reality check here > 2. Go back to discussing Internet governance > > --srs (iPad) > > On 06-Jan-2013, at 22:00, "michael gurstein" wrote: > > Thanks Riaz (and sorry for the really awkward phrasing… > > To put that in English… > > I'm wondering whether it wouldn't be better to "investigate" Google for possible "freedom of thought" violations rather than issues concerning "freedom of speech"… Google has the potential for much more serious impacts on our capacity to know (or not know) certain things, than on what we can say or not say… > > M > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From suresh at hserus.net Mon Jan 7 19:48:00 2013 From: suresh at hserus.net (Suresh Ramasubramanian) Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2013 06:18:00 +0530 Subject: [governance] Updates on MAG 2013 In-Reply-To: <20130107202218.2ad09da2@quill.bollow.ch> References: <50E8F894.8070601@itforchange.net> <2B5CB958-2BBA-4E4D-A916-74BA59ED1ED5@acm.org> <20130107202218.2ad09da2@quill.bollow.ch> Message-ID: <8E153D85-20F0-4D96-9AA9-4A34C401D005@hserus.net> Agree --srs (iPad) On 08-Jan-2013, at 0:52, Norbert Bollow wrote: > +1 > > Greetings, > Norbert > > Avri Doria wrote: >> Hi, >> >> While I am uncomfortable with using the old set of volunteers, I >> accept that posting list and of giving people time to opt out, or in >> for that matter. >> >> I agree with Parminder that using the same nomcom is a bad idea. Had >> we carried through with the suggestions to setup a nomcom for a >> year's worth of tasks, we might have been able to do that. But I >> take the inaction along this front as an indication of IGC not having >> support for doing this. >> >> avri >> >> On 5 Jan 2013, at 23:07, parminder wrote: >> >>> >>> On Sunday 06 January 2013 09:14 AM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro >>> wrote: >>>> Dear All, >>>> >>>> I have asked the former NomCom to assist in selecting the names of >>>> nominees that come in. >>> >>> Disclaimer first: I dont remember who the members of the last non >>> com were, or even what was it constituted for. Neither do I have >>> any interest in the outcome of the MAG nomination process.... >>> >>> This said, I much prefer we repeat the list of volunteers rather >>> than repeat a nomcom. It take a few minutes to random pick a nomcom >>> from a list of volunteers and so the time taken for the two >>> processes is almost the same. But we have better randomness in >>> getting a new slate every time, which is a key objective of nomcom >>> selection. >>> >>> parminder >>> >>> >>>> The poll is currently being prepared for IGC elections and >>>> additional questions will be put forward to in relation to >>>> nominations for MAG etc. The list of names that come in will be >>>> asked to submit brief bios separately as well. >>>> >>>> The NomCom will deliberate and decide on the names but it is >>>> important that we get a broad selection as possible. We have yet >>>> to select the Independent Non Voting Chair for this. >>>> >>>> You will all be informed of developments soon. >>>> >>>> Kind Regards, >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala >>>> P.O. Box 17862 >>>> Suva >>>> Fiji >>>> >>>> Twitter: @SalanietaT >>>> Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro >>>> Tel: +679 3544828 >>>> Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 >>> >>> ____________________________________________________________ >>> 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 > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From dogwallah at gmail.com Mon Jan 7 20:03:14 2013 From: dogwallah at gmail.com (McTim) Date: Mon, 7 Jan 2013 20:03:14 -0500 Subject: [governance] FW: [IP] Google's Lawyers Work Behind the Scenes to Carry the Day - NYTimes.com In-Reply-To: <50EA5D30.10508@ITforChange.net> References: <0ce601cdea8e$00308d90$0091a8b0$@gmail.com> <50E7F9B9.9070308@itforchange.net> <104701cdeb79$fcdb8ef0$f692acd0$@gmail.com> <50E99AB8.7080109@gmail.com> <129601cdec2b$2b36e860$81a4b920$@gmail.com> <7B42A9ED-878A-4DCA-A65C-9B8D9D555DB9@hserus.net> <50EA5D30.10508@ITforChange.net> Message-ID: On Mon, Jan 7, 2013 at 12:29 AM, Guru गुरु wrote: > > > > > Does 'personalised search' (without your having asked for, it or having any > role in such pesonalisation) not in a sense 'reality distortion' ....by > offering different people different views on the same keyword search. yes, by design. It's called "relevance". -- 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 From jeremy at ciroap.org Mon Jan 7 21:40:35 2013 From: jeremy at ciroap.org (Jeremy Malcolm) Date: Tue, 08 Jan 2013 10:40:35 +0800 Subject: [governance] Coordinator election in progress Message-ID: <50EB8723.7070707@ciroap.org> Hello all, I've been helping Sala with the mechanics of the election. Everyone who has been subscribed to the list for at least two months should have just received a personal voting link. Please contact me if: * You have been subscribed for two months or more but didn't receive a voting link. * You received two or more voting links. * You have trouble voting, or have any other questions. Thanks. -- *Dr Jeremy Malcolm Senior Policy Officer Consumers International | the global campaigning voice for consumers* Office for Asia-Pacific and the Middle East Lot 5-1 Wisma WIM, 7 Jalan Abang Haji Openg, TTDI, 60000 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia Tel: +60 3 7726 1599 *Your rights, our mission -- download CI's Strategy 2015:* http://consint.info/RightsMission @Consumers_Int | www.consumersinternational.org | www.facebook.com/consumersinternational Read our email confidentiality notice . Don't print this email unless necessary. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From avri at acm.org Mon Jan 7 23:45:33 2013 From: avri at acm.org (Avri Doria) Date: Mon, 7 Jan 2013 23:45:33 -0500 Subject: [governance] Coordinator election in progress In-Reply-To: <50EB8723.7070707@ciroap.org> References: <50EB8723.7070707@ciroap.org> Message-ID: <7B0CDFC9-00D8-4E4B-AAC5-6444296ED667@acm.org> Once again the ballot forces one to choose between the two candidates. After the last election we were told that there would be a NOTA or Abstain capability. Were is it? avri On 7 Jan 2013, at 21:40, Jeremy Malcolm wrote: > Hello all, > > I've been helping Sala with the mechanics of the election. Everyone who has been subscribed to the list for at least two months should have just received a personal voting link. Please contact me if: > • You have been subscribed for two months or more but didn't receive a voting link. > • You received two or more voting links. > • You have trouble voting, or have any other questions. > Thanks. > > -- > Dr Jeremy Malcolm > Senior Policy Officer > Consumers International | the global campaigning voice for consumers > Office for Asia-Pacific and the Middle East > Lot 5-1 Wisma WIM, 7 Jalan Abang Haji Openg, TTDI, 60000 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia > Tel: +60 3 7726 1599 > > Your rights, our mission – download CI's Strategy 2015: http://consint.info/RightsMission > > @Consumers_Int | www.consumersinternational.org | www.facebook.com/consumersinternational > > Read our email confidentiality notice. Don't print this email unless necessary. > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From jeremy at ciroap.org Mon Jan 7 23:50:05 2013 From: jeremy at ciroap.org (Jeremy Malcolm) Date: Tue, 08 Jan 2013 12:50:05 +0800 Subject: [governance] Coordinator election in progress In-Reply-To: <7B0CDFC9-00D8-4E4B-AAC5-6444296ED667@acm.org> References: <50EB8723.7070707@ciroap.org> <7B0CDFC9-00D8-4E4B-AAC5-6444296ED667@acm.org> Message-ID: <50EBA57D.6010201@ciroap.org> On 08/01/13 12:45, Avri Doria wrote: > Once again the ballot forces one to choose between the two candidates. > > After the last election we were told that there would be a NOTA or Abstain capability. > > Were is it? If you don't want to vote for either, don't vote for either. A few people have already done that and they are recorded as having partially completed the ballot by affirming their membership only. I must say I don't recall committing to add a NOTA option last year, though I may be wrong. This year it's not my call whether to do so or not, though I did run the form past Sala. -- *Dr Jeremy Malcolm Senior Policy Officer Consumers International | the global campaigning voice for consumers* Office for Asia-Pacific and the Middle East Lot 5-1 Wisma WIM, 7 Jalan Abang Haji Openg, TTDI, 60000 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia Tel: +60 3 7726 1599 *Your rights, our mission – download CI's Strategy 2015:* http://consint.info/RightsMission @Consumers_Int | www.consumersinternational.org | www.facebook.com/consumersinternational Read our email confidentiality notice . Don't print this email unless necessary. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From avri at acm.org Tue Jan 8 00:04:19 2013 From: avri at acm.org (Avri Doria) Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2013 00:04:19 -0500 Subject: [governance] Coordinator election in progress In-Reply-To: <7B0CDFC9-00D8-4E4B-AAC5-6444296ED667@acm.org> References: <50EB8723.7070707@ciroap.org> <7B0CDFC9-00D8-4E4B-AAC5-6444296ED667@acm.org> Message-ID: <3B14D515-EEB8-4A57-BDC0-8CC7121346F8@acm.org> as long as it is recorded that will work. though it will mark who abstained as opposed to having it look like any other vote. in any case, it does not look like that will happen. and if NOTA, at least one should be able to abstain without having to announce to a those who count that this is what they did. avri On 7 Jan 2013, at 23:45, Avri Doria wrote: > Once again the ballot forces one to choose between the two candidates. > > After the last election we were told that there would be a NOTA or Abstain capability. > > Were is it? > > avri > > On 7 Jan 2013, at 21:40, Jeremy Malcolm wrote: > >> Hello all, >> >> I've been helping Sala with the mechanics of the election. Everyone who has been subscribed to the list for at least two months should have just received a personal voting link. Please contact me if: >> • You have been subscribed for two months or more but didn't receive a voting link. >> • You received two or more voting links. >> • You have trouble voting, or have any other questions. >> Thanks. >> >> -- >> Dr Jeremy Malcolm >> Senior Policy Officer >> Consumers International | the global campaigning voice for consumers >> Office for Asia-Pacific and the Middle East >> Lot 5-1 Wisma WIM, 7 Jalan Abang Haji Openg, TTDI, 60000 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia >> Tel: +60 3 7726 1599 >> >> Your rights, our mission – download CI's Strategy 2015: http://consint.info/RightsMission >> >> @Consumers_Int | www.consumersinternational.org | www.facebook.com/consumersinternational >> >> Read our email confidentiality notice. Don't print this email unless necessary. >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From iza at anr.org Tue Jan 8 00:11:25 2013 From: iza at anr.org (Izumi AIZU) Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2013 14:11:25 +0900 Subject: [governance] Appeal request Re: [] Updates on MAG 2013 In-Reply-To: References: <201301070319.r073JUE4019667@atl4mhob08.myregisteredsite.com> <0BD1D395-93D5-441B-A0B8-62F758B7657F@acm.org> <50EA8D45.40909@itforchange.net> Message-ID: 2013/1/7 Avri Doria : > If 4 voting members appeal to the team, it is ok to appeal. > I think that having a single coordinator is no reason either way. > > If members think the rules are being abused > and that the members are being ignored, > they should appeal. > I am trying to appeal I do understand that every member has the right to appeal. I am not denying that at all. But for this case, my personal opinion is that Sala's proposal of using the existing NomCom for MAG nomination is not a real "abuse". Given the situation, it is a practical option as some others already endorsed. I think we better focus on more productive and pragmatic or important issues now. I mean, reviewing the Charter is of course important, but can't we do so after we settle MAG selection thing? > > I understand that you don't agree, > and it looks like very few people do, > so it may be a moot issues. > > As far as I know the appeals team serves until it is replaced. > as i thought the co-co's did. If so, why not also NomCom? These are sort of "grey" areas that current Charter does not specifically address. > > Remind me again, > why did you step down before you had been replaced? I have two year terms, coordinator election should be done mid-summer or soon after according to Charter. I did not write "stepped down" though I have made clear my intention to step down earlier in November, and Call for new coordinator was already made. So, legally I might still be a coordinator until new one replaces me, but I thought it proper not to take any active action or role, being a lame duck and outgoing shortly. That's why I wrote "retired. I hope you could understand this and read between the lines. izumi > > avri > > On 7 Jan 2013, at 05:41, Izumi AIZU wrote: > >> Dear all, as already retired from co-co, I still feel a good deal of >> responsibility >> for some issues in this thread. >> >> I also like to point out that the current Appeals Team's term in >> theory is for 2012, >> and we are already into 2013. As we know, the selection of 2012 Appeals Team >> was late and only seated in late July last year. >> >> So I am in favor of making 2012 Appeals team to be in charge for >> another 6 months >> should the list, and the Team members agree with. >> >> Yet, if we agree with this flexible interpretation of the Charter for >> the Appeals >> Team, allowing the past NomCom to be in charge of MAG renewal nomination >> would not deserve for the Appeals team to investigate if the >> Coordinator's decision >> is abuse and in violation of the Charter. >> >> We are not doing the perfect job as a whole group, and I do understand >> fixing these >> issues are all important, but I don't think going straight to the >> appeal process for abuse >> when there is only one coordinator is not the best way forward. >> >> My suggestion is, use the past NomCom for this MAG selection, start discuss the >> Charter amendment right after the new coordinator is seated. >> >> best, >> >> izumi >> >> >> 2013/1/7 parminder : >>> >>> On Monday 07 January 2013 11:38 AM, Avri Doria wrote: >>>> >>>> On 6 Jan 2013, at 22:24, Adam Peake wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hi Avri, >>>>> >>>>> Could you explain why an abuse. You've been something of a master of >>>>> the caucus' charter, would be good to understand more before +1'ing or >>>>> not. >>>>> >>>>> Thank you, >>>>> >>>>> Adam >>>> >>>> the Nomcom process, included by reference as part of the charter says: >>>> >>>>> Each nomcom will be selected for a specific decision and will be >>>>> disbanded after the decision is made.However, in special cases where several >>>>> different nominating committees would need to be completed in a shortened >>>>> time frame that did not allow for multiple nominating committees, the >>>>> co-coordinators may jointly request one nominating committee to fill several >>>>> functions. >>>> >>>> The request for a Nomcom to fulfill several tasks is an a-prioir >>>> requirement, not something that can be done a-posteriori as in "oh my, we >>>> knew we needed to set up a nomcom but dod not get around to it, so lets just >>>> make the last nomcom do it" >>> >>> >>> I agree. and in addition there is also the need to meet the condition of >>> their being a 'shortened time frame' that does not allow for multiple >>> nomcoms to overrule the basic requirement that " Each nomcom will be >>> selected for a specific decision and will be disbanded after the decision is >>> made." With many months gone since the nomcom did its work, this condition >>> is also not met. >>> >>> I know that contextual flexibilities are often required but, Sala, you have >>> not explained to me why it takes much more time to get a new nomcom out or >>> an existing set of volunteers, with a 2 day opt out/ out in window... >>> >>> The problem with arbitrariness, or taking the view that the earlier noncom >>> worked well (or even worse, produced good results), is that at some time it >>> can abused by those who for the wrong reason may want to continue with one >>> or the other nomcom. Therefore, as far as possible, it is best not to build >>> precedents that can be mis used in the future.... >>> >>> Also, Sala, I did not understand what is to be proposed to be included in >>> the vote for new co-coordinator with regard to the nomcom. Can you please >>> elaborate. >>> >>> parminder >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>> We discussed changing to the charter to make it possible to have a nomcom >>>> per year. But we never got around to doing anything about it. To do so now >>>> on the whim of a single coordinator is an abuse of power by the coordinator. >>>> >>>> We knew that MAG nominations would be required at the beginning of the >>>> year, but we did nothing about it. >>>> >>>> We have gotten into the habit of ignoring the charter and just doing >>>> things in an ad-hoc manner when all of a sudden we realize we are very late >>>> getting ourselves into gear. >>>> >>>> This habit of ignoring the charter in favor of coordinator last minute >>>> urges is what I view as a charter abuse. Deciding to reactivate a disbanded >>>> nomcom is an ad-hoc replacement of process. Better we miss submitting names >>>> than that we bless this current regime of neglect by our coordinators with >>>> further last minute ad-hoc process. >>>> >>>> If we keep it up this way, we will be ignoring our processes as much as >>>> ICANN has begun to ignore its processes. >>>> And that is no way to participate in the IGF. >>>> >>>> In any case, that is what the Appeals team is for. If 4 members of the >>>> IGC request a review, they get one. >>>> >>>> avri >>>> >>>> BTW, with the irregularities in the last election I am not sure whether I >>>> am a member or not. Hence my request for 4 co-requestoers - just in case >>>> the powers that be decide to invalidate my request. Another issues that was >>>> never dealt with by our co-coordinators. >>>> >>>> >>>> avri >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -------------- 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 From fatimacambronero at gmail.com Tue Jan 8 00:32:16 2013 From: fatimacambronero at gmail.com (Fatima Cambronero) Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2013 02:32:16 -0300 Subject: [governance] Coordinator election in progress In-Reply-To: <50EBA57D.6010201@ciroap.org> References: <50EB8723.7070707@ciroap.org> <7B0CDFC9-00D8-4E4B-AAC5-6444296ED667@acm.org> <50EBA57D.6010201@ciroap.org> Message-ID: Dear Jeremy, 2013/1/8 Jeremy Malcolm > If you don't want to vote for either, don't vote for either. > It's not possible because if you don't choose any options the survey says: 3: *Please select one candidate for the next coordinator of the InternetGovernance Caucus. Choose one of the following answers * This question is mandatory.* * * Imran Ahmed Shah Norbert Bollow *“One or more mandatory questions have not been answered. You cannot proceed until these have been completed”* How it suppose the people have partially completed the ballot affirming their membership only? Sorry, but I don't understand. Best Regards, Fatima > > -- > > *Dr Jeremy Malcolm > Senior Policy Officer > Consumers International | the global campaigning voice for consumers* > Office for Asia-Pacific and the Middle East > Lot 5-1 Wisma WIM, 7 Jalan Abang Haji Openg, TTDI, 60000 Kuala Lumpur, > Malaysia > Tel: +60 3 7726 1599 > > *Your rights, our mission – download CI's Strategy 2015:* > http://consint.info/RightsMission > > @Consumers_Int | www.consumersinternational.org | > www.facebook.com/consumersinternational > > Read our email confidentiality notice. > Don't print this email unless necessary. > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > -- *Fatima Cambronero* Abogada-Argentina Phone: +54 9351 5282 668 Twitter: @facambronero Skype: fatima.cambronero *Join the LACRALO/ICANN discussions:* https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-discuss-es *Join the Diplo Internet Governance Community discussions:* http://www.diplointernetgovernance.org/ *Join to the Internet Society (ISOC): *http://www.internetsociety.org/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From jeremy at ciroap.org Tue Jan 8 00:57:10 2013 From: jeremy at ciroap.org (Jeremy Malcolm) Date: Tue, 08 Jan 2013 13:57:10 +0800 Subject: [governance] Coordinator election in progress In-Reply-To: References: <50EB8723.7070707@ciroap.org> <7B0CDFC9-00D8-4E4B-AAC5-6444296ED667@acm.org> <50EBA57D.6010201@ciroap.org> Message-ID: <50EBB536.7030503@ciroap.org> On 08/01/13 13:32, Fatima Cambronero wrote: > 2013/1/8 Jeremy Malcolm > > > If you don't want to vote for either, don't vote for either. > > > It's not possible because if you don't choose any options the survey > says: > > *“One or more mandatory questions have not been answered. You cannot > proceed until these have been completed”* True, but it still records your incomplete submission if you exit at that point. -- *Dr Jeremy Malcolm Senior Policy Officer Consumers International | the global campaigning voice for consumers* Office for Asia-Pacific and the Middle East Lot 5-1 Wisma WIM, 7 Jalan Abang Haji Openg, TTDI, 60000 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia Tel: +60 3 7726 1599 *Your rights, our mission – download CI's Strategy 2015:* http://consint.info/RightsMission @Consumers_Int | www.consumersinternational.org | www.facebook.com/consumersinternational Read our email confidentiality notice . Don't print this email unless necessary. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From toml at communisphere.com Tue Jan 8 01:07:36 2013 From: toml at communisphere.com (Thomas Lowenhaupt) Date: Tue, 08 Jan 2013 01:07:36 -0500 Subject: [governance] The Appeals Team In-Reply-To: References: <201301070319.r073JUE4019667@atl4mhob08.myregisteredsite.com> <0BD1D395-93D5-441B-A0B8-62F758B7657F@acm.org> <50EA8D45.40909@itforchange.net> Message-ID: <50EBB7A8.7070702@communisphere.com> IGC List, My records indicate the current members of the Civil Society Internet Governance Caucus Appeals Team are: * *Ginger Paque* * *Ian Peter* * *Roland Perry* * *Shaila Rao Mistry* * *Deirdre Williams* They were appointed by the NomCom on July 24, 2012. The appointment was for one year beginning on July 24, 2012. (See copy of the NomCom report below.) Sincerely, Thomas Lowenhaupt, Chair (non-voting) 2012 Appeals Team Nominating Committee P.S. The ------------------------------------------------------------------------ -------- Original Message -------- Subject: The Nominating Committee's Appeals Team Selection Report Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2012 11:31:00 -0400 From: Thomas Lowenhaupt To: governance list IG Caucus CC: Asif Kabani , Hakikur Rahman , Naveed haq , Shahid Akbar , Wilson Abigaba , Jeremy Malcolm Fellow Member of the Civil Society Internet Governance Caucus, The Appeals Team Nominating Committee is delighted to announce that the selection process for the Appeals Team has been successfully completed with the following 5 nominees receiving a majority vote from the NomCom members: * *Ginger Paque* * *Ian Peter* * *Roland Perry* * *Shaila Rao Mistry* * *Deirdre Williams* The NomCom effort began in May and included several outreach emails to the IGC list detailing the need and process for selecting an Appeals Team. As a result of this outreach effort the NomCom received 11 nominees. The Committee them confirmed with the nominees their willingness to serve. All responded positively. The 11 nominees confirming their willingness to serve were: * Ginger Paque * Gurumurthy Kasinathan * Ian Peter * Imran Ahmed Shah * Judy Okite * Michael Gurstein * Raquel Gatto * Roland Perry * Shaila Rao Mistry * Vincent Solomon Aliama * Deirdre Williams The NomCom would like to thank the nominees for stepping forward and enabling a robust review process. We also offer our thanks to Jeremy Malcolm who, having served as chair of a previous NomCom, stood by ready to provide any needed support to this committee. And we especially wish the 5 selected for the Appeals Team wisdom should their judgement be required during the term of service. Sincerely, The Appeals Team Nominating Committee, Asif Kabani Hakikur Rahman Naveed haq Shahid Akbar Wilson Abigaba Thomas Lowenhaupt (non-voting chair) On 1/8/2013 12:11 AM, Izumi AIZU wrote: > 2013/1/7 Avri Doria : > >> If 4 voting members appeal to the team, it is ok to appeal. >> I think that having a single coordinator is no reason either way. >> >> If members think the rules are being abused >> and that the members are being ignored, >> they should appeal. >> I am trying to appeal > I do understand that every member has the right to appeal. > I am not denying that at all. > > But for this case, my personal opinion is that Sala's > proposal of using the existing NomCom for MAG nomination > is not a real "abuse". Given the situation, it is a practical option > as some others already endorsed. > I think we better focus on more productive and pragmatic or important issues > now. I mean, reviewing the Charter is of course important, but can't > we do so after > we settle MAG selection thing? > >> I understand that you don't agree, >> and it looks like very few people do, >> so it may be a moot issues. >> >> As far as I know the appeals team serves until it is replaced. >> as i thought the co-co's did. > If so, why not also NomCom? These are sort of "grey" areas that > current Charter does not specifically address. > >> Remind me again, >> why did you step down before you had been replaced? > I have two year terms, coordinator election should be done mid-summer > or soon after according to Charter. > > I did not write "stepped down" though I have made clear my intention > to step down > earlier in November, and Call for new coordinator was already made. > > So, legally I might still be a coordinator until new one replaces me, > but I thought it > proper not to take any active action or role, being a lame duck and > outgoing shortly. > That's why I wrote "retired. I hope you could understand this and read > between the > lines. > > izumi > > >> avri >> >> On 7 Jan 2013, at 05:41, Izumi AIZU wrote: >> >>> Dear all, as already retired from co-co, I still feel a good deal of >>> responsibility >>> for some issues in this thread. >>> >>> I also like to point out that the current Appeals Team's term in >>> theory is for 2012, >>> and we are already into 2013. As we know, the selection of 2012 Appeals Team >>> was late and only seated in late July last year. >>> >>> So I am in favor of making 2012 Appeals team to be in charge for >>> another 6 months >>> should the list, and the Team members agree with. >>> >>> Yet, if we agree with this flexible interpretation of the Charter for >>> the Appeals >>> Team, allowing the past NomCom to be in charge of MAG renewal nomination >>> would not deserve for the Appeals team to investigate if the >>> Coordinator's decision >>> is abuse and in violation of the Charter. >>> >>> We are not doing the perfect job as a whole group, and I do understand >>> fixing these >>> issues are all important, but I don't think going straight to the >>> appeal process for abuse >>> when there is only one coordinator is not the best way forward. >>> >>> My suggestion is, use the past NomCom for this MAG selection, start discuss the >>> Charter amendment right after the new coordinator is seated. >>> >>> best, >>> >>> izumi >>> >>> >>> 2013/1/7 parminder : >>>> On Monday 07 January 2013 11:38 AM, Avri Doria wrote: >>>>> On 6 Jan 2013, at 22:24, Adam Peake wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Hi Avri, >>>>>> >>>>>> Could you explain why an abuse. You've been something of a master of >>>>>> the caucus' charter, would be good to understand more before +1'ing or >>>>>> not. >>>>>> >>>>>> Thank you, >>>>>> >>>>>> Adam >>>>> the Nomcom process, included by reference as part of the charter says: >>>>> >>>>>> Each nomcom will be selected for a specific decision and will be >>>>>> disbanded after the decision is made.However, in special cases where several >>>>>> different nominating committees would need to be completed in a shortened >>>>>> time frame that did not allow for multiple nominating committees, the >>>>>> co-coordinators may jointly request one nominating committee to fill several >>>>>> functions. >>>>> The request for a Nomcom to fulfill several tasks is an a-prioir >>>>> requirement, not something that can be done a-posteriori as in "oh my, we >>>>> knew we needed to set up a nomcom but dod not get around to it, so lets just >>>>> make the last nomcom do it" >>>> >>>> I agree. and in addition there is also the need to meet the condition of >>>> their being a 'shortened time frame' that does not allow for multiple >>>> nomcoms to overrule the basic requirement that " Each nomcom will be >>>> selected for a specific decision and will be disbanded after the decision is >>>> made." With many months gone since the nomcom did its work, this condition >>>> is also not met. >>>> >>>> I know that contextual flexibilities are often required but, Sala, you have >>>> not explained to me why it takes much more time to get a new nomcom out or >>>> an existing set of volunteers, with a 2 day opt out/ out in window... >>>> >>>> The problem with arbitrariness, or taking the view that the earlier noncom >>>> worked well (or even worse, produced good results), is that at some time it >>>> can abused by those who for the wrong reason may want to continue with one >>>> or the other nomcom. Therefore, as far as possible, it is best not to build >>>> precedents that can be mis used in the future.... >>>> >>>> Also, Sala, I did not understand what is to be proposed to be included in >>>> the vote for new co-coordinator with regard to the nomcom. Can you please >>>> elaborate. >>>> >>>> parminder >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> We discussed changing to the charter to make it possible to have a nomcom >>>>> per year. But we never got around to doing anything about it. To do so now >>>>> on the whim of a single coordinator is an abuse of power by the coordinator. >>>>> >>>>> We knew that MAG nominations would be required at the beginning of the >>>>> year, but we did nothing about it. >>>>> >>>>> We have gotten into the habit of ignoring the charter and just doing >>>>> things in an ad-hoc manner when all of a sudden we realize we are very late >>>>> getting ourselves into gear. >>>>> >>>>> This habit of ignoring the charter in favor of coordinator last minute >>>>> urges is what I view as a charter abuse. Deciding to reactivate a disbanded >>>>> nomcom is an ad-hoc replacement of process. Better we miss submitting names >>>>> than that we bless this current regime of neglect by our coordinators with >>>>> further last minute ad-hoc process. >>>>> >>>>> If we keep it up this way, we will be ignoring our processes as much as >>>>> ICANN has begun to ignore its processes. >>>>> And that is no way to participate in the IGF. >>>>> >>>>> In any case, that is what the Appeals team is for. If 4 members of the >>>>> IGC request a review, they get one. >>>>> >>>>> avri >>>>> >>>>> BTW, with the irregularities in the last election I am not sure whether I >>>>> am a member or not. Hence my request for 4 co-requestoers - just in case >>>>> the powers that be decide to invalidate my request. Another issues that was >>>>> never dealt with by our co-coordinators. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> avri >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From toml at communisphere.com Tue Jan 8 01:14:52 2013 From: toml at communisphere.com (Thomas Lowenhaupt) Date: Tue, 08 Jan 2013 01:14:52 -0500 Subject: [governance] The Appeals Team In-Reply-To: <50EBB7A8.7070702@communisphere.com> References: <201301070319.r073JUE4019667@atl4mhob08.myregisteredsite.com> <0BD1D395-93D5-441B-A0B8-62F758B7657F@acm.org> <50EA8D45.40909@itforchange.net> <50EBB7A8.7070702@communisphere.com> Message-ID: <50EBB95C.2030709@communisphere.com> +1 Appeal We need an official and focused group to opine on this issue. I believe the current Appeal Team is that entity. Tom Lowenhaupt On 1/8/2013 1:07 AM, Thomas Lowenhaupt wrote: > IGC List, > > My records indicate the current members of the Civil Society Internet > Governance Caucus Appeals Team are: > > * *Ginger Paque* > * *Ian Peter* > * *Roland Perry* > * *Shaila Rao Mistry* > * *Deirdre Williams* > > They were appointed by the NomCom on July 24, 2012. The appointment > was for one year beginning on July 24, 2012. (See copy of the NomCom > report below.) > > Sincerely, > > Thomas Lowenhaupt, Chair (non-voting) > 2012 Appeals Team Nominating Committee > > P.S. The > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > -------- Original Message -------- > Subject: The Nominating Committee's Appeals Team Selection Report > Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2012 11:31:00 -0400 > From: Thomas Lowenhaupt > > To: governance list IG Caucus > > CC: Asif Kabani > , Hakikur Rahman > , Naveed haq > , Shahid Akbar > , Wilson > Abigaba , Jeremy > Malcolm > > > > Fellow Member of the Civil Society Internet Governance Caucus, > > The Appeals Team Nominating Committee is delighted to announce that > the selection process for the Appeals Team has been successfully > completed with the following 5 nominees receiving a majority vote from > the NomCom members: > > * *Ginger Paque* > * *Ian Peter* > * *Roland Perry* > * *Shaila Rao Mistry* > * *Deirdre Williams* > > The NomCom effort began in May and included several outreach emails to > the IGC list detailing the need and process for selecting an Appeals > Team. As a result of this outreach effort the NomCom received 11 > nominees. The Committee them confirmed with the nominees their > willingness to serve. All responded positively. The 11 nominees > confirming their willingness to serve were: > > * Ginger Paque > * Gurumurthy Kasinathan > * Ian Peter > * Imran Ahmed Shah > * Judy Okite > * Michael Gurstein > * Raquel Gatto > * Roland Perry > * Shaila Rao Mistry > * Vincent Solomon Aliama > * Deirdre Williams > > The NomCom would like to thank the nominees for stepping forward and > enabling a robust review process. > > We also offer our thanks to Jeremy Malcolm who, having served as chair > of a previous NomCom, stood by ready to provide any needed support to > this committee. > > And we especially wish the 5 selected for the Appeals Team wisdom > should their judgement be required during the term of service. > > Sincerely, > > The Appeals Team Nominating Committee, > > Asif Kabani > Hakikur Rahman > Naveed haq > Shahid Akbar > Wilson Abigaba > Thomas Lowenhaupt (non-voting chair) > > > > > > > > On 1/8/2013 12:11 AM, Izumi AIZU wrote: >> 2013/1/7 Avri Doria: >> >>> If 4 voting members appeal to the team, it is ok to appeal. >>> I think that having a single coordinator is no reason either way. >>> >>> If members think the rules are being abused >>> and that the members are being ignored, >>> they should appeal. >>> I am trying to appeal >> I do understand that every member has the right to appeal. >> I am not denying that at all. >> >> But for this case, my personal opinion is that Sala's >> proposal of using the existing NomCom for MAG nomination >> is not a real "abuse". Given the situation, it is a practical option >> as some others already endorsed. >> I think we better focus on more productive and pragmatic or important issues >> now. I mean, reviewing the Charter is of course important, but can't >> we do so after >> we settle MAG selection thing? >> >>> I understand that you don't agree, >>> and it looks like very few people do, >>> so it may be a moot issues. >>> >>> As far as I know the appeals team serves until it is replaced. >>> as i thought the co-co's did. >> If so, why not also NomCom? These are sort of "grey" areas that >> current Charter does not specifically address. >> >>> Remind me again, >>> why did you step down before you had been replaced? >> I have two year terms, coordinator election should be done mid-summer >> or soon after according to Charter. >> >> I did not write "stepped down" though I have made clear my intention >> to step down >> earlier in November, and Call for new coordinator was already made. >> >> So, legally I might still be a coordinator until new one replaces me, >> but I thought it >> proper not to take any active action or role, being a lame duck and >> outgoing shortly. >> That's why I wrote "retired. I hope you could understand this and read >> between the >> lines. >> >> izumi >> >> >>> avri >>> >>> On 7 Jan 2013, at 05:41, Izumi AIZU wrote: >>> >>>> Dear all, as already retired from co-co, I still feel a good deal of >>>> responsibility >>>> for some issues in this thread. >>>> >>>> I also like to point out that the current Appeals Team's term in >>>> theory is for 2012, >>>> and we are already into 2013. As we know, the selection of 2012 Appeals Team >>>> was late and only seated in late July last year. >>>> >>>> So I am in favor of making 2012 Appeals team to be in charge for >>>> another 6 months >>>> should the list, and the Team members agree with. >>>> >>>> Yet, if we agree with this flexible interpretation of the Charter for >>>> the Appeals >>>> Team, allowing the past NomCom to be in charge of MAG renewal nomination >>>> would not deserve for the Appeals team to investigate if the >>>> Coordinator's decision >>>> is abuse and in violation of the Charter. >>>> >>>> We are not doing the perfect job as a whole group, and I do understand >>>> fixing these >>>> issues are all important, but I don't think going straight to the >>>> appeal process for abuse >>>> when there is only one coordinator is not the best way forward. >>>> >>>> My suggestion is, use the past NomCom for this MAG selection, start discuss the >>>> Charter amendment right after the new coordinator is seated. >>>> >>>> best, >>>> >>>> izumi >>>> >>>> >>>> 2013/1/7 parminder: >>>>> On Monday 07 January 2013 11:38 AM, Avri Doria wrote: >>>>>> On 6 Jan 2013, at 22:24, Adam Peake wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Hi Avri, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Could you explain why an abuse. You've been something of a master of >>>>>>> the caucus' charter, would be good to understand more before +1'ing or >>>>>>> not. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Thank you, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Adam >>>>>> the Nomcom process, included by reference as part of the charter says: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Each nomcom will be selected for a specific decision and will be >>>>>>> disbanded after the decision is made.However, in special cases where several >>>>>>> different nominating committees would need to be completed in a shortened >>>>>>> time frame that did not allow for multiple nominating committees, the >>>>>>> co-coordinators may jointly request one nominating committee to fill several >>>>>>> functions. >>>>>> The request for a Nomcom to fulfill several tasks is an a-prioir >>>>>> requirement, not something that can be done a-posteriori as in "oh my, we >>>>>> knew we needed to set up a nomcom but dod not get around to it, so lets just >>>>>> make the last nomcom do it" >>>>> I agree. and in addition there is also the need to meet the condition of >>>>> their being a 'shortened time frame' that does not allow for multiple >>>>> nomcoms to overrule the basic requirement that " Each nomcom will be >>>>> selected for a specific decision and will be disbanded after the decision is >>>>> made." With many months gone since the nomcom did its work, this condition >>>>> is also not met. >>>>> >>>>> I know that contextual flexibilities are often required but, Sala, you have >>>>> not explained to me why it takes much more time to get a new nomcom out or >>>>> an existing set of volunteers, with a 2 day opt out/ out in window... >>>>> >>>>> The problem with arbitrariness, or taking the view that the earlier noncom >>>>> worked well (or even worse, produced good results), is that at some time it >>>>> can abused by those who for the wrong reason may want to continue with one >>>>> or the other nomcom. Therefore, as far as possible, it is best not to build >>>>> precedents that can be mis used in the future.... >>>>> >>>>> Also, Sala, I did not understand what is to be proposed to be included in >>>>> the vote for new co-coordinator with regard to the nomcom. Can you please >>>>> elaborate. >>>>> >>>>> parminder >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> We discussed changing to the charter to make it possible to have a nomcom >>>>>> per year. But we never got around to doing anything about it. To do so now >>>>>> on the whim of a single coordinator is an abuse of power by the coordinator. >>>>>> >>>>>> We knew that MAG nominations would be required at the beginning of the >>>>>> year, but we did nothing about it. >>>>>> >>>>>> We have gotten into the habit of ignoring the charter and just doing >>>>>> things in an ad-hoc manner when all of a sudden we realize we are very late >>>>>> getting ourselves into gear. >>>>>> >>>>>> This habit of ignoring the charter in favor of coordinator last minute >>>>>> urges is what I view as a charter abuse. Deciding to reactivate a disbanded >>>>>> nomcom is an ad-hoc replacement of process. Better we miss submitting names >>>>>> than that we bless this current regime of neglect by our coordinators with >>>>>> further last minute ad-hoc process. >>>>>> >>>>>> If we keep it up this way, we will be ignoring our processes as much as >>>>>> ICANN has begun to ignore its processes. >>>>>> And that is no way to participate in the IGF. >>>>>> >>>>>> In any case, that is what the Appeals team is for. If 4 members of the >>>>>> IGC request a review, they get one. >>>>>> >>>>>> avri >>>>>> >>>>>> BTW, with the irregularities in the last election I am not sure whether I >>>>>> am a member or not. Hence my request for 4 co-requestoers - just in case >>>>>> the powers that be decide to invalidate my request. Another issues that was >>>>>> never dealt with by our co-coordinators. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> avri >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From nb at bollow.ch Tue Jan 8 01:29:37 2013 From: nb at bollow.ch (Norbert Bollow) Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2013 07:29:37 +0100 Subject: [governance] Civic Society Membership on MAG -Toward a Joint-Board In-Reply-To: <1357596741.90449.BPMail_high_noncarrier@web125104.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> References: <1357596741.90449.BPMail_high_noncarrier@web125104.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20130108072937.761fe78f@quill.bollow.ch> Imran Ahmed Shah wrote: > I would suggest that list of IGC Nomination should not be limited to > the number of > > But we should nominate few members from each of the stakeholder > groups: Governments, > The Private Sector, > Civil Society, and > Technical Community Given that we're using the nomcom process for creating the list of IGC nominees, I would suggest that it is important to focus this list of IGC nominees on what randomly selected IGC members will have the relevant knowledge to assess, namely: Who would be a good set of persons to represent the set of Civil Society perspectives (distinct from governmental, private sector, and technical community perspectives) on the MAG? Greetings, Norbert -------------- 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 From shailam at yahoo.com Tue Jan 8 01:35:04 2013 From: shailam at yahoo.com (shaila mistry) Date: Mon, 7 Jan 2013 22:35:04 -0800 (PST) Subject: [governance] The Appeals Team Message-ID: <1357626904.78081.YahooMailMobile@web160502.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> Hi Thomas Just acknowledging that I'm here ! Shaila -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From nb at bollow.ch Tue Jan 8 01:54:52 2013 From: nb at bollow.ch (Norbert Bollow) Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2013 07:54:52 +0100 Subject: [governance] Updates on MAG 2013 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20130108075452.1afa4e15@quill.bollow.ch> Dear Sala, In view of recent discussions and the shortness of time until the Jan 20 deadline, I would like to request you to clarify asap whether or not you choose to reconsider your decision to reactivate that former nomcom for choosing the IGC nominees for the 2013 MAG renewal. Greetings, Norbert Am Sun, 6 Jan 2013 16:44:07 +1300 schrieb "Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro" : > Dear All, > > I have asked the former NomCom to assist in selecting the names of > nominees that come in. The poll is currently being prepared for IGC > elections and additional questions will be put forward to in relation > to nominations for MAG etc. The list of names that come in will be > asked to submit brief bios separately as well. > > The NomCom will deliberate and decide on the names but it is > important that we get a broad selection as possible. We have yet to > select the Independent Non Voting Chair for this. > > You will all be informed of developments soon. > > Kind Regards, > -------------- 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 From nb at bollow.ch Tue Jan 8 02:02:32 2013 From: nb at bollow.ch (Norbert Bollow) Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2013 08:02:32 +0100 Subject: [governance] Updates on MAG 2013 In-Reply-To: References: <36613454AE654EB9A07DF9DB0126E547@Toshiba> Message-ID: <20130108080232.0286a34c@quill.bollow.ch> "Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro" wrote: > The election candidates will include an additional question > about MAG Nominations which we will harvest and send to the NomCom, > these persons will be asked to submit their brief bios to enable the > NomCom to make their selections prior to the 19th January, 2013. This > will then be posted to the IGC and sent to the UNDESA. How precisely is this intended to work? There is only very little time between when that survey closes and when the nomcom is expected to have made the selections. Greetings, Norbert -------------- 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 From riaz.tayob at gmail.com Tue Jan 8 02:55:36 2013 From: riaz.tayob at gmail.com (Riaz K Tayob) Date: Tue, 08 Jan 2013 09:55:36 +0200 Subject: [governance] FW: [IP] Google's Lawyers Work Behind the Scenes to Carry the Day - NYTimes.com In-Reply-To: <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD22F8237@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> References: <0ce601cdea8e$00308d90$0091a8b0$@gmail.com> <50E7F9B9.9070308@itforchange.net> <104701cdeb79$fcdb8ef0$f692acd0$@gmail.com> <50E99AB8.7080109@gmail.com> <129601cdec2b$2b36e860$81a4b920$@gmail.com> <7B42A9ED-878A-4DCA-A65C-9B8D9D555DB9@hserus.net> <50EA5D30.10508@ITforChange.net> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD22F8237@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> Message-ID: <50EBD0F8.90507@gmail.com> On 2013/01/07 10:13 PM, Milton L Mueller wrote: > Guru, if you get badly personalized results from Google without asking > for it, what is to stop you from not using Google? The problem with this kind of analysis of "consumer choice" analysis is that it is theoretically grounded in the neo-classical and/or neoliberal economic theory. So let us look at what this says: 1. If consumers have choices, then there is not a problem 2. Consumers have choice NOT if there is a real choice (i.e. apples to apples) but if the market per se is contestable (Contestable Markets theory) - which is in part why oligopolies can be theoretically tolerated in anti-trust law (abuse of dominant position etc) 3. Government interventions are presumptively bad. Private initiatives (except for fraud and -as defined by law and action- anti-competitive behaviour). Now what is the problem with this? 1. Consumer choice is elevated as a moral/ethical good, in spite of practical realities: there may be qualitative issues related choices that are NOT available (i.e. market failures) 2. The theory has an internal contradiction. Contestable Markets are fine, but yet almost all the analysis makes use of Alfred Marshall's representative firm. What is a representative firm as compared to a "real" firm? It does not have the observable tendency to "first mover" advantage or to reap the benefits of economies of scale. In other words the theory used to justify consumer choice ab initio excludes the advantages that flow to Google from first mover (with a great algorithm) and the consequent economies of scale. Therefore, if one excludes these relevant tendencies from the analysis, well then one is not saying much. While consumer choice may be a relevant approach in the North(tactically), it has its limits in terms of theory and of context. Analogously In the UK something as banal as supermarkets were found to have a dominant market position when they controlled about 4% of the market (i.e. sufficient to have upstream and downstream negative effects). Now if one were to let reality impact on the theory/ideology, then perhaps we can chat. I mean this whole notion of consumer choice is aptly illustrated by the US crisis. Of course, you could have any Mortgage Backed Security you want - there was consumer choice - and that did not detract from the fact that the entire operation was hoopla. As spokesperson for this neoclassical theory Alan Greenspan said he was "shocked" that market participants breached their duties and took on the reputational risk (in a market governed by fides). Of course if he had been open to other ideas, then he might have seen this coming. But in the North (with my limited experience) the adage, 'in the land of the blind, the one eyed is king', more like "in the land of the blind, the one eyed is mad". Welcome to the mad world of heterodox economics... -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From riaz.tayob at gmail.com Tue Jan 8 03:05:22 2013 From: riaz.tayob at gmail.com (Riaz K Tayob) Date: Tue, 08 Jan 2013 10:05:22 +0200 Subject: [governance] FW: [IP] Google's Lawyers Work Behind the Scenes : FOR THE RECORD! In-Reply-To: <7B42A9ED-878A-4DCA-A65C-9B8D9D555DB9@hserus.net> References: <0ce601cdea8e$00308d90$0091a8b0$@gmail.com> <50E7F9B9.9070308@itforchange.net> <104701cdeb79$fcdb8ef0$f692acd0$@gmail.com> <50E99AB8.7080109@gmail.com> <129601cdec2b$2b36e860$81a4b920$@gmail.com> <7B42A9ED-878A-4DCA-A65C-9B8D9D555DB9@hserus.net> Message-ID: <50EBD342.7080705@gmail.com> SRS For the record, I note this is an ad hominem attack. But as usual "right wing" bashers like this do not provoke calls for balance and openness. So as per "eye for an eye" which is fair, given I am left to hang with this: I am open to engaging substantively, but please do not achieve your right wing obsequious ambitions be achieved at my expense. You may land a plum job or contract, but I think you have to develop not just crass but sophisticated crass like some of the status quoists on this list. In other words, you need to up your game. This is also for the record because the next time the "right" on this list bashes someone on the left I am going to trawl this out to expose double standards. This is the second time (from my recent trawling) that ad hominem attacks on the "left" has gone unnoticed. I do not do this to hold any complaints hostage or to have a chilling effect. In fact, quite the opposite, it will be used to chill those who are very quick to call for balance/peace/dialogue while spitting fire. Riaz On 2013/01/06 06:52 PM, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote: > So do you get all your news from just news.google.com > and other google search results, instead of > Facebook shares, Riaz gleefully posting every article he sees about > google being investigated for, say, giggling in church? > > And did Riaz find this news item anywhere other than google search? > > And does this reality distortion field google is supposed to have > actually hide any search results from you that are negative to it? > Like search for "google FTC" and you get the EU action, statements > from Microsoft slamming the decision etc. > > And the last link on page 1 of the search results showing just where > google got spanked by the FTC. > http://www.tnr.com/blog/plank/111650/why-does-everyone-think-google-beat-the-ftc# is > worth a read as a kind f counterpoint to all the commentary about how > google got a get out of jail card because of intensive lobbying. > > Can we please > > 1. Have a reality check here > 2. Go back to discussing Internet governance > > --srs (iPad) > > On 06-Jan-2013, at 22:00, "michael gurstein" > wrote: > >> Thanks Riaz (and sorry for the really awkward phrasing… >> >> To put that in English… >> >> /I'm wondering whether it wouldn't be better to "investigate" Google >> for possible "freedom of thought" violations rather than issues >> concerning "freedom of speech"… Google has the potential for much >> more serious impacts on our capacity to know (or not know) certain >> things, than on what we can say or not say…/ >> >> // >> >> /M/ >> >> -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From iza at anr.org Tue Jan 8 03:27:59 2013 From: iza at anr.org (Izumi AIZU) Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2013 17:27:59 +0900 Subject: [governance] Re: The Appeals Team In-Reply-To: <50EBB7A8.7070702@communisphere.com> References: <201301070319.r073JUE4019667@atl4mhob08.myregisteredsite.com> <0BD1D395-93D5-441B-A0B8-62F758B7657F@acm.org> <50EA8D45.40909@itforchange.net> <50EBB7A8.7070702@communisphere.com> Message-ID: Thanks Thomas for bringing this up and clear confirmation. So our Appeals Team 2012 actually has terms for 1 year, till next July. Sorry for overlooking that!! izumi 2013/1/8 Thomas Lowenhaupt > IGC List, > > My records indicate the current members of the Civil Society Internet > Governance Caucus Appeals Team are: > > - *Ginger Paque* > - *Ian Peter* > - *Roland Perry* > - *Shaila Rao Mistry* > - *Deirdre Williams* > > They were appointed by the NomCom on July 24, 2012. The appointment was > for one year beginning on July 24, 2012. (See copy of the NomCom report > below.) > > Sincerely, > > Thomas Lowenhaupt, Chair (non-voting) > 2012 Appeals Team Nominating Committee > > P.S. The > > ------------------------------ > > -------- Original Message -------- Subject: The Nominating Committee's > Appeals Team Selection Report Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2012 11:31:00 -0400 From: > Thomas Lowenhaupt To: governance > list IG Caucus CC: > Asif Kabani , Hakikur > Rahman , Naveed haq > , Shahid Akbar > , Wilson Abigaba > , Jeremy Malcolm > > > Fellow Member of the Civil Society Internet Governance Caucus, > > The Appeals Team Nominating Committee is delighted to announce that the > selection process for the Appeals Team has been successfully completed with > the following 5 nominees receiving a majority vote from the NomCom members: > > - *Ginger Paque* > - *Ian Peter* > - *Roland Perry* > - *Shaila Rao Mistry* > - *Deirdre Williams* > > The NomCom effort began in May and included several outreach emails to the > IGC list detailing the need and process for selecting an Appeals Team. As a > result of this outreach effort the NomCom received 11 nominees. The > Committee them confirmed with the nominees their willingness to serve. All > responded positively. The 11 nominees confirming their willingness to serve > were: > > - Ginger Paque > - Gurumurthy Kasinathan > - Ian Peter > - Imran Ahmed Shah > - Judy Okite > - Michael Gurstein > - Raquel Gatto > - Roland Perry > - Shaila Rao Mistry > - Vincent Solomon Aliama > - Deirdre Williams > > The NomCom would like to thank the nominees for stepping forward and > enabling a robust review process. > > We also offer our thanks to Jeremy Malcolm who, having served as chair of > a previous NomCom, stood by ready to provide any needed support to this > committee. > > And we especially wish the 5 selected for the Appeals Team wisdom should > their judgement be required during the term of service. > > Sincerely, > > The Appeals Team Nominating Committee, > > Asif Kabani > Hakikur Rahman > Naveed haq > Shahid Akbar > Wilson Abigaba > Thomas Lowenhaupt (non-voting chair) > > > > > > > > On 1/8/2013 12:11 AM, Izumi AIZU wrote: > > 2013/1/7 Avri Doria : > > > If 4 voting members appeal to the team, it is ok to appeal. > I think that having a single coordinator is no reason either way. > > If members think the rules are being abused > and that the members are being ignored, > they should appeal. > I am trying to appeal > > I do understand that every member has the right to appeal. > I am not denying that at all. > > But for this case, my personal opinion is that Sala's > proposal of using the existing NomCom for MAG nomination > is not a real "abuse". Given the situation, it is a practical option > as some others already endorsed. > I think we better focus on more productive and pragmatic or important issues > now. I mean, reviewing the Charter is of course important, but can't > we do so after > we settle MAG selection thing? > > > I understand that you don't agree, > and it looks like very few people do, > so it may be a moot issues. > > As far as I know the appeals team serves until it is replaced. > as i thought the co-co's did. > > If so, why not also NomCom? These are sort of "grey" areas that > current Charter does not specifically address. > > > Remind me again, > why did you step down before you had been replaced? > > I have two year terms, coordinator election should be done mid-summer > or soon after according to Charter. > > I did not write "stepped down" though I have made clear my intention > to step down > earlier in November, and Call for new coordinator was already made. > > So, legally I might still be a coordinator until new one replaces me, > but I thought it > proper not to take any active action or role, being a lame duck and > outgoing shortly. > That's why I wrote "retired. I hope you could understand this and read > between the > lines. > > izumi > > > > avri > > On 7 Jan 2013, at 05:41, Izumi AIZU wrote: > > > Dear all, as already retired from co-co, I still feel a good deal of > responsibility > for some issues in this thread. > > I also like to point out that the current Appeals Team's term in > theory is for 2012, > and we are already into 2013. As we know, the selection of 2012 Appeals Team > was late and only seated in late July last year. > > So I am in favor of making 2012 Appeals team to be in charge for > another 6 months > should the list, and the Team members agree with. > > Yet, if we agree with this flexible interpretation of the Charter for > the Appeals > Team, allowing the past NomCom to be in charge of MAG renewal nomination > would not deserve for the Appeals team to investigate if the > Coordinator's decision > is abuse and in violation of the Charter. > > We are not doing the perfect job as a whole group, and I do understand > fixing these > issues are all important, but I don't think going straight to the > appeal process for abuse > when there is only one coordinator is not the best way forward. > > My suggestion is, use the past NomCom for this MAG selection, start discuss the > Charter amendment right after the new coordinator is seated. > > best, > > izumi > > > 2013/1/7 parminder : > > On Monday 07 January 2013 11:38 AM, Avri Doria wrote: > > On 6 Jan 2013, at 22:24, Adam Peake wrote: > > > Hi Avri, > > Could you explain why an abuse. You've been something of a master of > the caucus' charter, would be good to understand more before +1'ing or > not. > > Thank you, > > Adam > > the Nomcom process, included by reference as part of the charter says: > > > Each nomcom will be selected for a specific decision and will be > disbanded after the decision is made.However, in special cases where several > different nominating committees would need to be completed in a shortened > time frame that did not allow for multiple nominating committees, the > co-coordinators may jointly request one nominating committee to fill several > functions. > > The request for a Nomcom to fulfill several tasks is an a-prioir > requirement, not something that can be done a-posteriori as in "oh my, we > knew we needed to set up a nomcom but dod not get around to it, so lets just > make the last nomcom do it" > > > I agree. and in addition there is also the need to meet the condition of > their being a 'shortened time frame' that does not allow for multiple > nomcoms to overrule the basic requirement that " Each nomcom will be > selected for a specific decision and will be disbanded after the decision is > made." With many months gone since the nomcom did its work, this condition > is also not met. > > I know that contextual flexibilities are often required but, Sala, you have > not explained to me why it takes much more time to get a new nomcom out or > an existing set of volunteers, with a 2 day opt out/ out in window... > > The problem with arbitrariness, or taking the view that the earlier noncom > worked well (or even worse, produced good results), is that at some time it > can abused by those who for the wrong reason may want to continue with one > or the other nomcom. Therefore, as far as possible, it is best not to build > precedents that can be mis used in the future.... > > Also, Sala, I did not understand what is to be proposed to be included in > the vote for new co-coordinator with regard to the nomcom. Can you please > elaborate. > > parminder > > > > > > We discussed changing to the charter to make it possible to have a nomcom > per year. But we never got around to doing anything about it. To do so now > on the whim of a single coordinator is an abuse of power by the coordinator. > > We knew that MAG nominations would be required at the beginning of the > year, but we did nothing about it. > > We have gotten into the habit of ignoring the charter and just doing > things in an ad-hoc manner when all of a sudden we realize we are very late > getting ourselves into gear. > > This habit of ignoring the charter in favor of coordinator last minute > urges is what I view as a charter abuse. Deciding to reactivate a disbanded > nomcom is an ad-hoc replacement of process. Better we miss submitting names > than that we bless this current regime of neglect by our coordinators with > further last minute ad-hoc process. > > If we keep it up this way, we will be ignoring our processes as much as > ICANN has begun to ignore its processes. > And that is no way to participate in the IGF. > > In any case, that is what the Appeals team is for. If 4 members of the > IGC request a review, they get one. > > avri > > BTW, with the irregularities in the last election I am not sure whether I > am a member or not. Hence my request for 4 co-requestoers - just in case > the powers that be decide to invalidate my request. Another issues that was > never dealt with by our co-coordinators. > > > avri > > > > > > > > -- >> Izumi Aizu << Institute for InfoSocionomics, Tama University, Tokyo Institute for HyperNetwork Society, Oita, Japan www.anr.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From suresh at hserus.net Tue Jan 8 03:47:17 2013 From: suresh at hserus.net (Suresh Ramasubramanian) Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2013 14:17:17 +0530 Subject: [governance] FW: [IP] Google's Lawyers Work Behind the Scenes : FOR THE RECORD! In-Reply-To: <50EBD342.7080705@gmail.com> References: <0ce601cdea8e$00308d90$0091a8b0$@gmail.com> <50E7F9B9.9070308@itforchange.net> <104701cdeb79$fcdb8ef0$f692acd0$@gmail.com> <50E99AB8.7080109@gmail.com> <129601cdec2b$2b36e860$81a4b920$@gmail.com> <7B42A9ED-878A-4DCA-A65C-9B8D9D555DB9@hserus.net> <50EBD342.7080705@gmail.com> Message-ID: <4748EC25-E56F-44B8-B900-59B747291BD5@hserus.net> i am willing to be corrected have you posted on anything much else recently, other than news articles about google's tax strategies or their privacy policy? --srs (iPad) On 08-Jan-2013, at 13:35, Riaz K Tayob wrote: > SRS > > For the record, I note this is an ad hominem attack. But as usual "right wing" bashers like this do not provoke calls for balance and openness. So as per "eye for an eye" which is fair, given I am left to hang with this: > > I am open to engaging substantively, but please do not achieve your right wing obsequious ambitions be achieved at my expense. You may land a plum job or contract, but I think you have to develop not just crass but sophisticated crass like some of the status quoists on this list. In other words, you need to up your game. > > This is also for the record because the next time the "right" on this list bashes someone on the left I am going to trawl this out to expose double standards. This is the second time (from my recent trawling) that ad hominem attacks on the "left" has gone unnoticed. I do not do this to hold any complaints hostage or to have a chilling effect. In fact, quite the opposite, it will be used to chill those who are very quick to call for balance/peace/dialogue while spitting fire. > > Riaz > > > On 2013/01/06 06:52 PM, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote: >> So do you get all your news from just news.google.com and other google search results, instead of Facebook shares, Riaz gleefully posting every article he sees about google being investigated for, say, giggling in church? >> >> And did Riaz find this news item anywhere other than google search? >> >> And does this reality distortion field google is supposed to have actually hide any search results from you that are negative to it? Like search for "google FTC" and you get the EU action, statements from Microsoft slamming the decision etc. >> >> And the last link on page 1 of the search results showing just where google got spanked by the FTC. http://www.tnr.com/blog/plank/111650/why-does-everyone-think-google-beat-the-ftc# is worth a read as a kind f counterpoint to all the commentary about how google got a get out of jail card because of intensive lobbying. >> >> Can we please >> >> 1. Have a reality check here >> 2. Go back to discussing Internet governance >> >> --srs (iPad) >> >> On 06-Jan-2013, at 22:00, "michael gurstein" wrote: >> >>> Thanks Riaz (and sorry for the really awkward phrasing… >>> >>> To put that in English… >>> >>> I'm wondering whether it wouldn't be better to "investigate" Google for possible "freedom of thought" violations rather than issues concerning "freedom of speech"… Google has the potential for much more serious impacts on our capacity to know (or not know) certain things, than on what we can say or not say… >>> >>> M > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com Tue Jan 8 04:29:07 2013 From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro) Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2013 22:29:07 +1300 Subject: [governance] Updates on MAG Nominations 2013 Message-ID: Dear All, This is to confirm that there is an Appeal Request underfoot that needs 4 to co-sign for it to reach the Appeal Team. The Appeal Team details can be found http://igcaucus.org/appeals-team Given that the deadline to submit names to UNDESA is on 20th January, 2013, we have created an additional question in relation to nominations for MAG members using the Ballot e voting mechanism. Whilst the IGC election of the coordinators will close on the 18th January, 2013, we will be harvesting the nominations for MAG on the 12th January, 2013 and write to these nominees to ask whether they accept the nominations and request them to submit their details in the prescribed templates to a designated email address by the 14th January, 2013. We will be preparing a designated email address where nominations for MAG members will be received. In the event that the Appeal Team are to review the Request, the work in gathering the nominations will not be impeded. In the meantime, I have asked Thomas Lowenhaupt to preside as Independent Non Voting Chair of the existing NomCom and note that Hakikur and Naveed had recused themselves from the NomCom. Thank you all for your patience. Kind Regards, Sala On Mon, Jan 7, 2013 at 1:54 PM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro < salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com> wrote: > Dear All, > > Under the IGC Charter, the NomCom may be called upon to provide several > functions. In this instance, the NomCom as Ian had mentioned had served > previously to appoint the members of the Appeal Team. The NomCom was newly > drawn to serve the IGC in appointing the Appeal Team and have existed for > less than 12 months. > > In this instance, since we are to give our list of Nominees to the IGC by > the 20th January, 2013, it becomes easier to use the existing NomCom. The > election candidates will include an additional question about MAG > Nominations which we will harvest and send to the NomCom, these persons > will be asked to submit their brief bios to enable the NomCom to make their > selections prior to the 19th January, 2013. This will then be posted to the > IGC and sent to the UNDESA. > > Kind Regards, > > > > > > > > On Mon, Jan 7, 2013 at 7:52 AM, Ian Peter wrote: > >> I think using the previous Nomcom is the most practical path forward, but >> above all I think leaving the process to the (single currently) Co >> ordinator is what we should do. The current Nomcom is less than 12 months >> old, has only been used to select an Appeals Team, and operated >> effectively. Not all Nomcoms in the past have been effective, as most of us >> know, and I would prefer not to take the risk of a longer process that >> might give us dubious results. We will be lucky to meet the deadline even >> with the path of least resistance. >> >> Re numbers to put forward - I think we should be aiming at a large slate >> of nominees rather than a small one, to cover all contingencies. We don't >> know who will be rotated off, either in CS or with other stakeholder >> groups, and as the geographic and gender balance needs to be achieved >> cross-stakeholder, it is better for us to present more options ( the loss >> of a North American woman governmental representative may well present an >> opening for a civil society woman from that area, etc) So I think a larger >> group of nominees might be praxctical. >> >> Ian Peter >> >> -----Original Message----- From: Adam Peake >> Sent: Monday, January 07, 2013 2:54 AM >> To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org ; Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro >> Subject: Re: [governance] Updates on MAG 2013 >> >> >> Confirmed with the secretariat that the goal is to continue with >> rotation, i.e. one third each year (plus or minus a few.) >> >> How many CS MAG members are there now, about 12? Perhaps look to >> submit 6 names for the deadline? >> >> The members who joined last year only began at the May meeting. Hope >> they remain. A few of the people we suggested then were selected, in >> addition to the names the NomCom comes up with now, might be good to >> suggest that the 2012 batch also remain. >> >> Adam >> >> >> >> On Sun, Jan 6, 2013 at 12:44 PM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro >> > >> wrote: >> >>> Dear All, >>> >>> I have asked the former NomCom to assist in selecting the names of >>> nominees >>> that come in. The poll is currently being prepared for IGC elections and >>> additional questions will be put forward to in relation to nominations >>> for >>> MAG etc. The list of names that come in will be asked to submit brief >>> bios >>> separately as well. >>> >>> The NomCom will deliberate and decide on the names but it is important >>> that >>> we get a broad selection as possible. We have yet to select the >>> Independent >>> Non Voting Chair for this. >>> >>> You will all be informed of developments soon. >>> >>> Kind Regards, >>> >>> -- >>> Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala >>> P.O. Box 17862 >>> Suva >>> Fiji >>> >>> Twitter: @SalanietaT >>> Skype:Salanieta.**Tamanikaiwaimaro >>> Tel: +679 3544828 >>> Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> ______________________________**______________________________ >>> 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 >>> >>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> ______________________________**______________________________ >> 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 >> > > > > -- > Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala > P.O. Box 17862 > Suva > Fiji > > Twitter: @SalanietaT > Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro > Tel: +679 3544828 > Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 > > > > -- Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala P.O. Box 17862 Suva Fiji Twitter: @SalanietaT Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro Tel: +679 3544828 Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com Tue Jan 8 04:36:14 2013 From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro) Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2013 22:36:14 +1300 Subject: [governance] 2013 Preparations for MAG In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Dear All, This is a gentle reminder that we need to work towards developing a first Draft by the 15th January, 2013. There were some of you who had taken part in throwing in ideas and suggestions in the past and Schombe and I have consolidated these and you will find the summary below. If there are additional thoughts that you would like to add please advise. At the moment, Schombe is the only volunteer and if others would like to volunteer to help prepare the first Draft, kindly let us know. In the meantime, the IGC is encouraged to share ideas, suggestions about what we should raise in our submissions. Thank you for your cooperation. Kind Regards, Sala On Sun, Dec 23, 2012 at 8:16 AM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro < salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com> wrote: > Dear All, > > This is a summary of the discussions and a general status update. The > consultations went into a recess on 26th November, 2012. I would encourage > you to continue with the discussions on the topic. I would like to thank > Baudouin Schombe for volunteering to help prepare this Summary. If there > are any other volunteers who would like to help in formulating the first > Draft, please let us know by responding to this thread. > > Kind Regards, > > Sala > * Summary > > 1. IGF should run for 5 days instead of 4 > 2. Selection of Venue [Criteria for selection] > 1. IGF Secretariat needs to call for expressions of interest from > Host countries in advance; > 2. Host countries should meet certain predetermined criteria; > 3. Criteria should include suitability of location -conference > facilities, wifi access, open environment that enables discourse; > 4. Improvements to the MAG [see CSTD discussions on IGF > improvements] > 5. Logistical support in terms of visa procurements > 6. Identification of location [accessibility challenges when held > outside the City] > > > > 1. Main Session > 1. Time spent on main sessions should be halved and reduced to a day > 2. Workshops are a sideshow, main sessions are the main event (or > should be). Workshops and main sessions should not overlap . Lessons can be > learnt from other Internet governance events such as APRICOT, which are > scheduled in this way. > 3. Every main session needs to build upon or do anything > substantive with the so-called feeder workshops. The content of > plenaries/main sessions somehow reflect and build upon what has gone on > before. > 4. Main Sessions should have deliverables such as Resolutions or > outcomes. > > > > 1. Planning for Workshops > 1. Proper Planning of pre-IGF events; > 2. Evaluation of existing criteria > 1. Focus on Quality > 2. Focus on Issues > 3. Gender balance; > 4. Regional representation; > 5. Multi-stakeholder balance; > > > > 1. Logistical Support for People from Developing Countries > 2. Logistical Visa Support > > There should be balance between balancing participants access and country > immigration policies. > > > 1. Internet Connectivity Policy (precondition for Host Countries) > 1. An onsite liaison officer from the Host Country’s ISP; > 2. Suitable redundancy plans; > 3. Dedicated Bandwidth to service 2000 people with 6000 devices > (assuming that each person has 3 devices) > 4. Dedicated Bandwidth for remote participation; > 5. Dedicated Bandwidth for remote participation; > 6. A specialised Unit -Internet Infrastructure Team whose > responsibilities should include facilitating the Policy; [Tender should be > issued and this should be outsourced to professional vendor of > conference networking services]; > 7. Service Level Agreement and standard of networking across events. > > > > 1. Shift of Venue for MAG consultations without open consultations and > impact on participation. > 2. At present, the IGF consultation and MAG are scheduled in the same > week (13-17 May) as not on only the WSIS Forum, per usual, but also the > ITU's World Telecom Policy Forum on global Internet governance. Were > stakeholders with an interest in IG were precluded from attending the WTPF > by this scheduling. > > > SCHEDULE AND STATUS UPDATE > > DateTask Status 25 Nov 2012 Issue Notice to IGC and Gather Feedback > Notice was issued and feedback is trickling in 15 Jan 2013 Formulate > first Draft 16 Jan - 30 Jan 2013Review first Draft and gather feedback 31 > Jan - 5th Feb 2013 Produce 2nd Draft 6th Feb - 10th Feb 2013 Finalise > Submissions from IGC 11th Feb 2013 Send to IGF Secretariat and > representatives to MAG > > **Volunteers > Baudouin Schombe > Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro* > * > * > *Kind Regards,* > *Sala > * > On Sun, Nov 25, 2012 at 5:00 PM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro < > salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com> wrote: > >> Dear All, >> >> We need to start preparing for issues and topics that we would like >> raised by current MAG members. >> >> The Secretariat has put up a call for contributions on the IGF website >> inviting stakeholders to submit written contributions taking stock of the >> 2012 Baku meeting and inviting suggestions on the themes and format of the >> IGF 2013 meeting. The deadline for contributions is *14 February 2012*. >> These inputs will be summarized in a synthesis paper that will act as an >> input into the discussions of the February meeting. >> >> The IGC Plan is as follows: >> >> 25 Nov 2012 - Issue Notice to IGC >> >> 25 Nov 2012 - 15 January, 2013 - Gather Feedback and formulate first draft >> >> 16-Jan -30 Jan 2013 - Review first Draft and gather feedback >> >> 31 Jan - 5th February 2013 - Produce 2nd Draft >> 6th Feb - 10th February - Finalise submissions from IGC >> 11th Feb - Send to IGF Secretariat and our representatives to the MAG >> >> >> It will be great to start discussions on what some of the themes we would >> like canvassed. >> >> Warm Regards >> >> >> -- >> Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala >> P.O. Box 17862 >> Suva >> Fiji >> >> Twitter: @SalanietaT >> Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro >> Tel: +679 3544828 >> Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 >> >> >> >> >> > > > -- > Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala > P.O. Box 17862 > Suva > Fiji > > Twitter: @SalanietaT > Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro > Tel: +679 3544828 > Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 > > > > -- Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala P.O. Box 17862 Suva Fiji Twitter: @SalanietaT Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro Tel: +679 3544828 Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From Guru at ITforChange.net Tue Jan 8 01:40:59 2013 From: Guru at ITforChange.net (=?UTF-8?B?R3VydSDgpJfgpYHgpLDgpYE=?=) Date: Tue, 08 Jan 2013 12:10:59 +0530 Subject: [governance] FW: [IP] Google's Lawyers Work Behind the Scenes to Carry the Day - NYTimes.com In-Reply-To: <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD22F8237@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> References: <0ce601cdea8e$00308d90$0091a8b0$@gmail.com> <50E7F9B9.9070308@itforchange.net> <104701cdeb79$fcdb8ef0$f692acd0$@gmail.com> <50E99AB8.7080109@gmail.com> <129601cdec2b$2b36e860$81a4b920$@gmail.com> <7B42A9ED-878A-4DCA-A65C-9B8D9D555DB9@hserus.net> <50EA5D30.10508@ITforChange.net> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD22F8237@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> Message-ID: <50EBBF7B.6070901@ITforChange.net> On 01/08/2013 01:43 AM, Milton L Mueller wrote: > > Pariser's "filter bubble" thesis has very little scientific grounding. > It is one of those things that has acquired credibility primarily > through repetition, and the fact that some people always badly want to > believe that "the media" are manipulating us. > I think the point of how Internet could have been to be a space to build bridging capital and how the 'personalisation' process will erode is something we need to ponder over. Can you elaborate on why you think "thesis has very little scientific grounding." i assume you are talking of social sciences here... also do you really believe that there is no element of manipulation in the media? that this is just what "people always badly want to believe" (perhaps weapons of mass destruction were indeed found in Iraq ...) > I recall seeing him on a television program when his claim was put to > the test and they conducted searches using two different accounts and > got virtually the same results. He was embarrassed. > otoh I am embarassed that you think a sole case like this can disprove the point! The article quotes Google as saying the search algorithm uses 57 signals about the user to provide personalised results, so you think all this is in vain? > On the other hand, I was quite grateful this morning when using a > generic professional term to search for an office and discovering that > the search had been limited to Syracuse area. > > Guru, if you get badly personalized results from Google without asking > for it, what is to stop you from not using Google? > That the only action I can take to address this is by walking away is a naive response ... the issue is not of one individual user not using google. the issue is given the market dominance of google search engine, the terms of engagement are so biased in favor of one party that it is a joke to assume contractual law (clicking the i agree button or not clicking it) will solve the problem. > *From:*governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org > [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] *On Behalf Of *Guru ???? > *Sent:* Monday, January 07, 2013 12:29 AM > *To:* governance at lists.igcaucus.org > *Subject:* Re: [governance] FW: [IP] Google's Lawyers Work Behind the > Scenes to Carry the Day - NYTimes.com > > On 01/06/2013 10:22 PM, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote: > > So do you get all your news from just news.google.com > and other google search results, instead > of Facebook shares, Riaz gleefully posting every article he sees > about google being investigated for, say, giggling in church? > > And did Riaz find this news item anywhere other than google search? > > And does this reality distortion field google is supposed to have > actually hide any search results from you that are negative to it? > Like search for "google FTC" and you get the EU action, > statements from Microsoft slamming the decision etc. > > > Does 'personalised search' (without your having asked for, it or > having any role in such pesonalisation) not in a sense 'reality > distortion' ....by offering different people different views on the > same keyword search. > > See attached aticle (the web link is not available anymore) > > Guru > > And the last link on page 1 of the search results showing just > where google got spanked by the FTC. > http://www.tnr.com/blog/plank/111650/why-does-everyone-think-google-beat-the-ftc# > is > worth a read as a kind f counterpoint to all the commentary about > how google got a get out of jail card because of intensive lobbying. > > Can we please > > 1. Have a reality check here > > 2. Go back to discussing Internet governance > > > --srs (iPad) > > > On 06-Jan-2013, at 22:00, "michael gurstein" > wrote: > > Thanks Riaz (and sorry for the really awkward phrasing… > > To put that in English… > > /I'm wondering whether it wouldn't be better to "investigate" > Google for possible "freedom of thought" violations rather > than issues concerning "freedom of speech"… Google has the > potential for much more serious impacts on our capacity to > know (or not know) certain things, than on what we can say or > not say…/ > > // > > /M/ > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From dogwallah at gmail.com Tue Jan 8 06:22:22 2013 From: dogwallah at gmail.com (McTim) Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2013 06:22:22 -0500 Subject: [governance] FW: [IP] Google's Lawyers Work Behind the Scenes : FOR THE RECORD! In-Reply-To: <50EBD342.7080705@gmail.com> References: <0ce601cdea8e$00308d90$0091a8b0$@gmail.com> <50E7F9B9.9070308@itforchange.net> <104701cdeb79$fcdb8ef0$f692acd0$@gmail.com> <50E99AB8.7080109@gmail.com> <129601cdec2b$2b36e860$81a4b920$@gmail.com> <7B42A9ED-878A-4DCA-A65C-9B8D9D555DB9@hserus.net> <50EBD342.7080705@gmail.com> Message-ID: On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 3:05 AM, Riaz K Tayob wrote: > SRS > > For the record, I note this is an ad hominem attack. But as usual "right > wing" bashers like this do not provoke calls for balance and openness. So as > per "eye for an eye" which is fair, given I am left to hang with this: I have to say that this is quite ridiculous. Pointing out that you (and others) seem to have an "anti-Google" agenda is NOT ad hominem!! What I do find much more "ad hominem" is Riaz' use of the words like "status-quoist" and "right-wing". Googlers supports a number of Democratic candidates in the USA and a lot of progressive ideas. Suresh gets booted from this list for trying to say that anti-Google campaign is boring, while those who mistakenly label folk as "right-wing" (the people in the US who normally bash Google) are seen as victims? Does anyone on this list understand the irony involved here? 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 From cveraq at gmail.com Tue Jan 8 06:34:56 2013 From: cveraq at gmail.com (Carlos Vera Quintana) Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2013 06:34:56 -0500 Subject: [governance] 2013 Preparations for MAG In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <7CA9AE5C-18AE-4A53-ACD3-2D1F0157B370@gmail.com> Dear Sala: from previous IGF is there some documents or reports about number of participants or bandwidth used and other info that helps to develop this summary? Best Carlos Vera Enviado desde mi iPhone El 08/01/2013, a las 4:36, "Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro" escribió: > Dear All, > > This is a gentle reminder that we need to work towards developing a first Draft by the 15th January, 2013. There were some of you who had taken part in throwing in ideas and suggestions in the past and Schombe and I have consolidated these and you will find the summary below. > > If there are additional thoughts that you would like to add please advise. At the moment, Schombe is the only volunteer and if others would like to volunteer to help prepare the first Draft, kindly let us know. > > In the meantime, the IGC is encouraged to share ideas, suggestions about what we should raise in our submissions. > > Thank you for your cooperation. > > Kind Regards, > Sala > > On Sun, Dec 23, 2012 at 8:16 AM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro wrote: >> Dear All, >> >> This is a summary of the discussions and a general status update. The consultations went into a recess on 26th November, 2012. I would encourage you to continue with the discussions on the topic. I would like to thank Baudouin Schombe for volunteering to help prepare this Summary. If there are any other volunteers who would like to help in formulating the first Draft, please let us know by responding to this thread. >> >> Kind Regards, >> >> Sala >> Summary >> >> >> >> IGF should run for 5 days instead of 4 >> Selection of Venue [Criteria for selection] >> IGF Secretariat needs to call for expressions of interest from Host countries in advance; >> Host countries should meet certain predetermined criteria; >> Criteria should include suitability of location -conference facilities, wifi access, open environment that enables discourse; >> Improvements to the MAG [see CSTD discussions on IGF improvements] >> Logistical support in terms of visa procurements >> Identification of location [accessibility challenges when held outside the City] >> >> Main Session >> Time spent on main sessions should be halved and reduced to a day >> Workshops are a sideshow, main sessions are the main event (or should be). Workshops and main sessions should not overlap . Lessons can be learnt from other Internet governance events such as APRICOT, which are scheduled in this way. >> Every main session needs to build upon or do anything substantive with the so-called feeder workshops. The content of plenaries/main sessions somehow reflect and build upon what has gone on before. >> Main Sessions should have deliverables such as Resolutions or outcomes. >> >> Planning for Workshops >> Proper Planning of pre-IGF events; >> Evaluation of existing criteria >> Focus on Quality >> Focus on Issues >> Gender balance; >> Regional representation; >> Multi-stakeholder balance; >> >> Logistical Support for People from Developing Countries >> Logistical Visa Support >> There should be balance between balancing participants access and country immigration policies. >> >> Internet Connectivity Policy (precondition for Host Countries) >> An onsite liaison officer from the Host Country’s ISP; >> Suitable redundancy plans; >> Dedicated Bandwidth to service 2000 people with 6000 devices (assuming that each person has 3 devices) >> Dedicated Bandwidth for remote participation; >> Dedicated Bandwidth for remote participation; >> A specialised Unit -Internet Infrastructure Team whose responsibilities should include facilitating the Policy; [Tender should be issued and this should be outsourced to professional vendor of conference networking services]; >> Service Level Agreement and standard of networking across events. >> >> Shift of Venue for MAG consultations without open consultations and impact on participation. >> At present, the IGF consultation and MAG are scheduled in the same week (13-17 May) as not on only the WSIS Forum, per usual, but also the ITU's World Telecom Policy Forum on global Internet governance. Were stakeholders with an interest in IG were precluded from attending the WTPF by this scheduling. >> >> SCHEDULE AND STATUS UPDATE >> >> Date Task Status >> 25 Nov 2012 Issue Notice to IGC and Gather Feedback >> Notice was issued and feedback is trickling in >> 15 Jan 2013 Formulate first Draft >> 16 Jan - 30 Jan 2013 Review first Draft and gather feedback >> 31 Jan - 5th Feb 2013 Produce 2nd Draft >> 6th Feb - 10th Feb 2013 Finalise Submissions from IGC >> 11th Feb 2013 Send to IGF Secretariat and representatives to MAG >> >> Volunteers >> >> >> Baudouin Schombe >> Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro >> >> >> >> Kind Regards, >> Sala >> >> >> >> On Sun, Nov 25, 2012 at 5:00 PM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro wrote: >>> Dear All, >>> >>> We need to start preparing for issues and topics that we would like raised by current MAG members. >>> >>> The Secretariat has put up a call for contributions on the IGF website inviting stakeholders to submit written contributions taking stock of the 2012 Baku meeting and inviting suggestions on the themes and format of the IGF 2013 meeting. The deadline for contributions is 14 February 2012. These inputs will be summarized in a synthesis paper that will act as an input into the discussions of the February meeting. >>> >>> The IGC Plan is as follows: >>> >>> 25 Nov 2012 - Issue Notice to IGC >>> >>> 25 Nov 2012 - 15 January, 2013 - Gather Feedback and formulate first draft >>> >>> 16-Jan -30 Jan 2013 - Review first Draft and gather feedback >>> >>> 31 Jan - 5th February 2013 - Produce 2nd Draft >>> 6th Feb - 10th February - Finalise submissions from IGC >>> 11th Feb - Send to IGF Secretariat and our representatives to the MAG >>> >>> >>> It will be great to start discussions on what some of the themes we would like canvassed. >>> >>> Warm Regards >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala >>> P.O. Box 17862 >>> Suva >>> Fiji >>> >>> Twitter: @SalanietaT >>> Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro >>> Tel: +679 3544828 >>> Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 >> >> >> >> >> -- >> Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala >> P.O. Box 17862 >> Suva >> Fiji >> >> Twitter: @SalanietaT >> Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro >> Tel: +679 3544828 >> Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 > > > > -- > Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala > P.O. Box 17862 > Suva > Fiji > > Twitter: @SalanietaT > Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro > Tel: +679 3544828 > Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From kabani.asif at gmail.com Tue Jan 8 06:46:07 2013 From: kabani.asif at gmail.com (Kabani) Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2013 16:46:07 +0500 Subject: [governance] Re: The Appeals Team In-Reply-To: References: <201301070319.r073JUE4019667@atl4mhob08.myregisteredsite.com> <0BD1D395-93D5-441B-A0B8-62F758B7657F@acm.org> <50EA8D45.40909@itforchange.net> <50EBB7A8.7070702@communisphere.com> Message-ID: Agree with Tom He has shared the details agreed by NomCom on July 24, 2012. Pl, let move forward :) Regards On 8 January 2013 13:27, Izumi AIZU wrote: > Thanks Thomas for bringing this up and clear confirmation. > > So our Appeals Team 2012 actually has terms for 1 year, till next July. > > Sorry for overlooking that!! > > izumi > > > 2013/1/8 Thomas Lowenhaupt > >> IGC List, >> >> My records indicate the current members of the Civil Society Internet >> Governance Caucus Appeals Team are: >> >> - *Ginger Paque* >> - *Ian Peter* >> - *Roland Perry* >> - *Shaila Rao Mistry* >> - *Deirdre Williams* >> >> They were appointed by the NomCom on July 24, 2012. The appointment was >> for one year beginning on July 24, 2012. (See copy of the NomCom report >> below.) >> >> Sincerely, >> >> Thomas Lowenhaupt, Chair (non-voting) >> 2012 Appeals Team Nominating Committee >> >> P.S. The >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> -------- Original Message -------- Subject: The Nominating Committee's >> Appeals Team Selection Report Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2012 11:31:00 -0400 From: >> Thomas Lowenhaupt To: governance >> list IG Caucus CC: >> Asif Kabani , Hakikur >> Rahman , Naveed haq >> , Shahid Akbar >> , Wilson Abigaba >> , Jeremy Malcolm >> >> >> Fellow Member of the Civil Society Internet Governance Caucus, >> >> The Appeals Team Nominating Committee is delighted to announce that the >> selection process for the Appeals Team has been successfully completed with >> the following 5 nominees receiving a majority vote from the NomCom members: >> >> - *Ginger Paque* >> - *Ian Peter* >> - *Roland Perry* >> - *Shaila Rao Mistry* >> - *Deirdre Williams* >> >> The NomCom effort began in May and included several outreach emails to >> the IGC list detailing the need and process for selecting an Appeals Team. >> As a result of this outreach effort the NomCom received 11 nominees. The >> Committee them confirmed with the nominees their willingness to serve. All >> responded positively. The 11 nominees confirming their willingness to serve >> were: >> >> - Ginger Paque >> - Gurumurthy Kasinathan >> - Ian Peter >> - Imran Ahmed Shah >> - Judy Okite >> - Michael Gurstein >> - Raquel Gatto >> - Roland Perry >> - Shaila Rao Mistry >> - Vincent Solomon Aliama >> - Deirdre Williams >> >> The NomCom would like to thank the nominees for stepping forward and >> enabling a robust review process. >> >> We also offer our thanks to Jeremy Malcolm who, having served as chair of >> a previous NomCom, stood by ready to provide any needed support to this >> committee. >> >> And we especially wish the 5 selected for the Appeals Team wisdom should >> their judgement be required during the term of service. >> >> Sincerely, >> >> The Appeals Team Nominating Committee, >> >> Asif Kabani >> Hakikur Rahman >> Naveed haq >> Shahid Akbar >> Wilson Abigaba >> Thomas Lowenhaupt (non-voting chair) >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> On 1/8/2013 12:11 AM, Izumi AIZU wrote: >> >> 2013/1/7 Avri Doria : >> >> >> If 4 voting members appeal to the team, it is ok to appeal. >> I think that having a single coordinator is no reason either way. >> >> If members think the rules are being abused >> and that the members are being ignored, >> they should appeal. >> I am trying to appeal >> >> I do understand that every member has the right to appeal. >> I am not denying that at all. >> >> But for this case, my personal opinion is that Sala's >> proposal of using the existing NomCom for MAG nomination >> is not a real "abuse". Given the situation, it is a practical option >> as some others already endorsed. >> I think we better focus on more productive and pragmatic or important issues >> now. I mean, reviewing the Charter is of course important, but can't >> we do so after >> we settle MAG selection thing? >> >> >> I understand that you don't agree, >> and it looks like very few people do, >> so it may be a moot issues. >> >> As far as I know the appeals team serves until it is replaced. >> as i thought the co-co's did. >> >> If so, why not also NomCom? These are sort of "grey" areas that >> current Charter does not specifically address. >> >> >> Remind me again, >> why did you step down before you had been replaced? >> >> I have two year terms, coordinator election should be done mid-summer >> or soon after according to Charter. >> >> I did not write "stepped down" though I have made clear my intention >> to step down >> earlier in November, and Call for new coordinator was already made. >> >> So, legally I might still be a coordinator until new one replaces me, >> but I thought it >> proper not to take any active action or role, being a lame duck and >> outgoing shortly. >> That's why I wrote "retired. I hope you could understand this and read >> between the >> lines. >> >> izumi >> >> >> >> avri >> >> On 7 Jan 2013, at 05:41, Izumi AIZU wrote: >> >> >> Dear all, as already retired from co-co, I still feel a good deal of >> responsibility >> for some issues in this thread. >> >> I also like to point out that the current Appeals Team's term in >> theory is for 2012, >> and we are already into 2013. As we know, the selection of 2012 Appeals Team >> was late and only seated in late July last year. >> >> So I am in favor of making 2012 Appeals team to be in charge for >> another 6 months >> should the list, and the Team members agree with. >> >> Yet, if we agree with this flexible interpretation of the Charter for >> the Appeals >> Team, allowing the past NomCom to be in charge of MAG renewal nomination >> would not deserve for the Appeals team to investigate if the >> Coordinator's decision >> is abuse and in violation of the Charter. >> >> We are not doing the perfect job as a whole group, and I do understand >> fixing these >> issues are all important, but I don't think going straight to the >> appeal process for abuse >> when there is only one coordinator is not the best way forward. >> >> My suggestion is, use the past NomCom for this MAG selection, start discuss the >> Charter amendment right after the new coordinator is seated. >> >> best, >> >> izumi >> >> >> 2013/1/7 parminder : >> >> On Monday 07 January 2013 11:38 AM, Avri Doria wrote: >> >> On 6 Jan 2013, at 22:24, Adam Peake wrote: >> >> >> Hi Avri, >> >> Could you explain why an abuse. You've been something of a master of >> the caucus' charter, would be good to understand more before +1'ing or >> not. >> >> Thank you, >> >> Adam >> >> the Nomcom process, included by reference as part of the charter says: >> >> >> Each nomcom will be selected for a specific decision and will be >> disbanded after the decision is made.However, in special cases where several >> different nominating committees would need to be completed in a shortened >> time frame that did not allow for multiple nominating committees, the >> co-coordinators may jointly request one nominating committee to fill several >> functions. >> >> The request for a Nomcom to fulfill several tasks is an a-prioir >> requirement, not something that can be done a-posteriori as in "oh my, we >> knew we needed to set up a nomcom but dod not get around to it, so lets just >> make the last nomcom do it" >> >> I agree. and in addition there is also the need to meet the condition of >> their being a 'shortened time frame' that does not allow for multiple >> nomcoms to overrule the basic requirement that " Each nomcom will be >> selected for a specific decision and will be disbanded after the decision is >> made." With many months gone since the nomcom did its work, this condition >> is also not met. >> >> I know that contextual flexibilities are often required but, Sala, you have >> not explained to me why it takes much more time to get a new nomcom out or >> an existing set of volunteers, with a 2 day opt out/ out in window... >> >> The problem with arbitrariness, or taking the view that the earlier noncom >> worked well (or even worse, produced good results), is that at some time it >> can abused by those who for the wrong reason may want to continue with one >> or the other nomcom. Therefore, as far as possible, it is best not to build >> precedents that can be mis used in the future.... >> >> Also, Sala, I did not understand what is to be proposed to be included in >> the vote for new co-coordinator with regard to the nomcom. Can you please >> elaborate. >> >> parminder >> >> >> >> >> >> We discussed changing to the charter to make it possible to have a nomcom >> per year. But we never got around to doing anything about it. To do so now >> on the whim of a single coordinator is an abuse of power by the coordinator. >> >> We knew that MAG nominations would be required at the beginning of the >> year, but we did nothing about it. >> >> We have gotten into the habit of ignoring the charter and just doing >> things in an ad-hoc manner when all of a sudden we realize we are very late >> getting ourselves into gear. >> >> This habit of ignoring the charter in favor of coordinator last minute >> urges is what I view as a charter abuse. Deciding to reactivate a disbanded >> nomcom is an ad-hoc replacement of process. Better we miss submitting names >> than that we bless this current regime of neglect by our coordinators with >> further last minute ad-hoc process. >> >> If we keep it up this way, we will be ignoring our processes as much as >> ICANN has begun to ignore its processes. >> And that is no way to participate in the IGF. >> >> In any case, that is what the Appeals team is for. If 4 members of the >> IGC request a review, they get one. >> >> avri >> >> BTW, with the irregularities in the last election I am not sure whether I >> am a member or not. Hence my request for 4 co-requestoers - just in case >> the powers that be decide to invalidate my request. Another issues that was >> never dealt with by our co-coordinators. >> >> >> avri >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > > -- > >> Izumi Aizu << > Institute for InfoSocionomics, Tama University, Tokyo > Institute for HyperNetwork Society, Oita, > Japan > www.anr.org > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > -- *Connect me* [image: Facebook] [image: Twitter] [image: Youtube] [image: LinkedIn] *Wait Before you print - Think about the** **ENVIRONMENT* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From dogwallah at gmail.com Tue Jan 8 06:47:11 2013 From: dogwallah at gmail.com (McTim) Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2013 06:47:11 -0500 Subject: [governance] a formal appeal request to the appeal team to reverse the recent ban on a Member Message-ID: All, Our charter says: "Duties of the appeals team. Any time 4 individual members of the IGC co-sign a statement on the main IGC mailing list they can appeal any decision of the coordinators. When a decision is appealed, the appeals team will review any discussions that occurred and will request comments from the IGC membership. Based on the information they collect and discussion, they will decide on the merit of the appeal. Decisions by the appeals team are based on a majority vote of the appeal team, i.e., three (3) or ore votes, except in the case of coordinator recall which requires full consensus. The decision of the appeals team will be final on every decision reviewed." I hereby call on the appeals team to activate this process on the subject of the recent decision to remove SRS from the mailing list. -- 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 From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com Tue Jan 8 07:47:03 2013 From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro) Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2013 01:47:03 +1300 Subject: [governance] a formal appeal request to the appeal team to reverse the recent ban on a Member In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Dear All, As a matter of background, there were complaints received over the blase attacks against persons and I had privately warned the "banned" subscriber more than a couple of times. The banned "subscriber" was on last warning. Kind Regards, Sala On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 12:47 AM, McTim wrote: > All, > > Our charter says: > > "Duties of the appeals team. > > Any time 4 individual members of the IGC co-sign a statement on the > main IGC mailing list they can appeal any decision of the > coordinators. When a decision is appealed, the appeals team will > review any discussions that occurred and will request comments from > the IGC membership. Based on the information they collect and > discussion, they will decide on the merit of the appeal. > Decisions by the appeals team are based on a majority vote of the > appeal team, i.e., three (3) or ore votes, except in the case of > coordinator recall which requires full consensus. > The decision of the appeals team will be final on every decision reviewed." > > I hereby call on the appeals team to activate this process on the > subject of the recent decision to remove SRS from the mailing list. > > > -- > Cheers, > > McTim > "A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A > route indicates how we get there." Jon Postel > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > -- Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala P.O. Box 17862 Suva Fiji Twitter: @SalanietaT Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro Tel: +679 3544828 Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com Tue Jan 8 07:49:42 2013 From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro) Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2013 01:49:42 +1300 Subject: [governance] 2013 Preparations for MAG In-Reply-To: <7CA9AE5C-18AE-4A53-ACD3-2D1F0157B370@gmail.com> References: <7CA9AE5C-18AE-4A53-ACD3-2D1F0157B370@gmail.com> Message-ID: Dear Carlos, That's an excellent question and one to which I do not have answers to. Does anyone have any inkling in regards to Carlos' question. My thoughts are that the information exists but remains with the IG Secretariat. Kind Regards, Sala On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 12:34 AM, Carlos Vera Quintana wrote: > Dear Sala: from previous IGF is there some documents or reports about > number of participants or bandwidth used and other info that helps to > develop this summary? > > Best > > > Carlos Vera > > Enviado desde mi iPhone > > El 08/01/2013, a las 4:36, "Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro" < > salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com> escribió: > > Dear All, > > This is a gentle reminder that we need to work towards developing a first > Draft by the 15th January, 2013. There were some of you who had taken part > in throwing in ideas and suggestions in the past and Schombe and I have > consolidated these and you will find the summary below. > > If there are additional thoughts that you would like to add please advise. > At the moment, Schombe is the only volunteer and if others would like to > volunteer to help prepare the first Draft, kindly let us know. > > In the meantime, the IGC is encouraged to share ideas, suggestions about > what we should raise in our submissions. > > Thank you for your cooperation. > > Kind Regards, > Sala > > On Sun, Dec 23, 2012 at 8:16 AM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro < > salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com> wrote: > >> Dear All, >> >> This is a summary of the discussions and a general status update. The >> consultations went into a recess on 26th November, 2012. I would encourage >> you to continue with the discussions on the topic. I would like to thank >> Baudouin Schombe for volunteering to help prepare this Summary. If there >> are any other volunteers who would like to help in formulating the first >> Draft, please let us know by responding to this thread. >> >> Kind Regards, >> >> Sala >> * Summary >> >> 1. IGF should run for 5 days instead of 4 >> 2. Selection of Venue [Criteria for selection] >> 1. IGF Secretariat needs to call for expressions of interest from >> Host countries in advance; >> 2. Host countries should meet certain predetermined criteria; >> 3. Criteria should include suitability of location -conference >> facilities, wifi access, open environment that enables discourse; >> 4. Improvements to the MAG [see CSTD discussions on IGF >> improvements] >> 5. Logistical support in terms of visa procurements >> 6. Identification of location [accessibility challenges when held >> outside the City] >> >> >> >> 1. Main Session >> 1. Time spent on main sessions should be halved and reduced to a >> day >> 2. Workshops are a sideshow, main sessions are the main event (or >> should be). Workshops and main sessions should not overlap . Lessons can be >> learnt from other Internet governance events such as APRICOT, which are >> scheduled in this way. >> 3. Every main session needs to build upon or do anything >> substantive with the so-called feeder workshops. The content of >> plenaries/main sessions somehow reflect and build upon what has gone on >> before. >> 4. Main Sessions should have deliverables such as Resolutions or >> outcomes. >> >> >> >> 1. Planning for Workshops >> 1. Proper Planning of pre-IGF events; >> 2. Evaluation of existing criteria >> 1. Focus on Quality >> 2. Focus on Issues >> 3. Gender balance; >> 4. Regional representation; >> 5. Multi-stakeholder balance; >> >> >> >> 1. Logistical Support for People from Developing Countries >> 2. Logistical Visa Support >> >> There should be balance between balancing participants access and country >> immigration policies. >> >> >> 1. Internet Connectivity Policy (precondition for Host Countries) >> 1. An onsite liaison officer from the Host Country’s ISP; >> 2. Suitable redundancy plans; >> 3. Dedicated Bandwidth to service 2000 people with 6000 devices >> (assuming that each person has 3 devices) >> 4. Dedicated Bandwidth for remote participation; >> 5. Dedicated Bandwidth for remote participation; >> 6. A specialised Unit -Internet Infrastructure Team whose >> responsibilities should include facilitating the Policy; [Tender should be >> issued and this should be outsourced to professional vendor of >> conference networking services]; >> 7. Service Level Agreement and standard of networking across >> events. >> >> >> >> 1. Shift of Venue for MAG consultations without open consultations >> and impact on participation. >> 2. At present, the IGF consultation and MAG are scheduled in the same >> week (13-17 May) as not on only the WSIS Forum, per usual, but also the >> ITU's World Telecom Policy Forum on global Internet governance. Were >> stakeholders with an interest in IG were precluded from attending the WTPF >> by this scheduling. >> >> >> SCHEDULE AND STATUS UPDATE >> >> DateTask Status 25 Nov 2012 Issue Notice to IGC and Gather Feedback >> Notice was issued and feedback is trickling in 15 Jan 2013 Formulate >> first Draft 16 Jan - 30 Jan 2013Review first Draft and gather feedback 31 >> Jan - 5th Feb 2013 Produce 2nd Draft 6th Feb - 10th Feb 2013 Finalise >> Submissions from IGC 11th Feb 2013 Send to IGF Secretariat and >> representatives to MAG >> >> **Volunteers >> Baudouin Schombe >> Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro* >> * >> * >> *Kind Regards,* >> *Sala >> * >> On Sun, Nov 25, 2012 at 5:00 PM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro < >> salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> Dear All, >>> >>> We need to start preparing for issues and topics that we would like >>> raised by current MAG members. >>> >>> The Secretariat has put up a call for contributions on the IGF website >>> inviting stakeholders to submit written contributions taking stock of the >>> 2012 Baku meeting and inviting suggestions on the themes and format of the >>> IGF 2013 meeting. The deadline for contributions is *14 February 2012*. >>> These inputs will be summarized in a synthesis paper that will act as an >>> input into the discussions of the February meeting. >>> >>> The IGC Plan is as follows: >>> >>> 25 Nov 2012 - Issue Notice to IGC >>> >>> 25 Nov 2012 - 15 January, 2013 - Gather Feedback and formulate first >>> draft >>> >>> 16-Jan -30 Jan 2013 - Review first Draft and gather feedback >>> >>> 31 Jan - 5th February 2013 - Produce 2nd Draft >>> 6th Feb - 10th February - Finalise submissions from IGC >>> 11th Feb - Send to IGF Secretariat and our representatives to the MAG >>> >>> >>> It will be great to start discussions on what some of the themes we >>> would like canvassed. >>> >>> Warm Regards >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala >>> P.O. Box 17862 >>> Suva >>> Fiji >>> >>> Twitter: @SalanietaT >>> Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro >>> Tel: +679 3544828 >>> Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> -- >> Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala >> P.O. Box 17862 >> Suva >> Fiji >> >> Twitter: @SalanietaT >> Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro >> Tel: +679 3544828 >> Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 >> >> >> >> > > > -- > Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala > P.O. Box 17862 > Suva > Fiji > > Twitter: @SalanietaT > Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro > Tel: +679 3544828 > Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > -- Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala P.O. Box 17862 Suva Fiji Twitter: @SalanietaT Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro Tel: +679 3544828 Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com Tue Jan 8 08:05:55 2013 From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro) Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2013 02:05:55 +1300 Subject: [governance] FW: [IP] Google's Lawyers Work Behind the Scenes : FOR THE RECORD! In-Reply-To: References: <0ce601cdea8e$00308d90$0091a8b0$@gmail.com> <50E7F9B9.9070308@itforchange.net> <104701cdeb79$fcdb8ef0$f692acd0$@gmail.com> <50E99AB8.7080109@gmail.com> <129601cdec2b$2b36e860$81a4b920$@gmail.com> <7B42A9ED-878A-4DCA-A65C-9B8D9D555DB9@hserus.net> <50EBD342.7080705@gmail.com> Message-ID: > Suresh gets booted from this list for > trying to say that anti-Google campaign is boring, while those who > mistakenly label folk as "right-wing" > (the people in the US who normally bash Google) are seen as victims? > Does anyone on this list understand the irony involved here? anyone?? > For the record, Suresh was not removed for his ideas but was removed for the manner in which he attacked Riaz. The spirit of the list should be where dialogue is encouraged and there is an expected level of decorum expected of lists. There was a distinct pattern and whilst I had been dealing with the matter privately with Suresh, he was placed on last warning. > > > -- > Cheers, > > McTim > "A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A > route indicates how we get there." Jon Postel > -- Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala P.O. Box 17862 Suva Fiji Twitter: @SalanietaT Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro Tel: +679 3544828 Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From cveraq at gmail.com Tue Jan 8 08:07:45 2013 From: cveraq at gmail.com (Carlos Vera Quintana) Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2013 08:07:45 -0500 Subject: [governance] 2013 Preparations for MAG In-Reply-To: References: <7CA9AE5C-18AE-4A53-ACD3-2D1F0157B370@gmail.com> Message-ID: <23460C10-3DA3-468F-B478-C4DE1DC06101@gmail.com> Dear Sala: one serious problem is related to proper dimension of requirements, where statistical or related info from past events is crucial Carlos Enviado desde mi iPhone El 08/01/2013, a las 7:49, "Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro" escribió: > Dear Carlos, > > That's an excellent question and one to which I do not have answers to. Does anyone have any inkling in regards to Carlos' question. > > My thoughts are that the information exists but remains with the IG Secretariat. > > Kind Regards, > Sala > > On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 12:34 AM, Carlos Vera Quintana wrote: >> Dear Sala: from previous IGF is there some documents or reports about number of participants or bandwidth used and other info that helps to develop this summary? >> >> Best >> >> >> Carlos Vera >> >> Enviado desde mi iPhone >> >> El 08/01/2013, a las 4:36, "Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro" escribió: >> >>> Dear All, >>> >>> This is a gentle reminder that we need to work towards developing a first Draft by the 15th January, 2013. There were some of you who had taken part in throwing in ideas and suggestions in the past and Schombe and I have consolidated these and you will find the summary below. >>> >>> If there are additional thoughts that you would like to add please advise. At the moment, Schombe is the only volunteer and if others would like to volunteer to help prepare the first Draft, kindly let us know. >>> >>> In the meantime, the IGC is encouraged to share ideas, suggestions about what we should raise in our submissions. >>> >>> Thank you for your cooperation. >>> >>> Kind Regards, >>> Sala >>> >>> On Sun, Dec 23, 2012 at 8:16 AM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro wrote: >>>> Dear All, >>>> >>>> This is a summary of the discussions and a general status update. The consultations went into a recess on 26th November, 2012. I would encourage you to continue with the discussions on the topic. I would like to thank Baudouin Schombe for volunteering to help prepare this Summary. If there are any other volunteers who would like to help in formulating the first Draft, please let us know by responding to this thread. >>>> >>>> Kind Regards, >>>> >>>> Sala >>>> Summary >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> IGF should run for 5 days instead of 4 >>>> Selection of Venue [Criteria for selection] >>>> IGF Secretariat needs to call for expressions of interest from Host countries in advance; >>>> Host countries should meet certain predetermined criteria; >>>> Criteria should include suitability of location -conference facilities, wifi access, open environment that enables discourse; >>>> Improvements to the MAG [see CSTD discussions on IGF improvements] >>>> Logistical support in terms of visa procurements >>>> Identification of location [accessibility challenges when held outside the City] >>>> >>>> Main Session >>>> Time spent on main sessions should be halved and reduced to a day >>>> Workshops are a sideshow, main sessions are the main event (or should be). Workshops and main sessions should not overlap . Lessons can be learnt from other Internet governance events such as APRICOT, which are scheduled in this way. >>>> Every main session needs to build upon or do anything substantive with the so-called feeder workshops. The content of plenaries/main sessions somehow reflect and build upon what has gone on before. >>>> Main Sessions should have deliverables such as Resolutions or outcomes. >>>> >>>> Planning for Workshops >>>> Proper Planning of pre-IGF events; >>>> Evaluation of existing criteria >>>> Focus on Quality >>>> Focus on Issues >>>> Gender balance; >>>> Regional representation; >>>> Multi-stakeholder balance; >>>> >>>> Logistical Support for People from Developing Countries >>>> Logistical Visa Support >>>> There should be balance between balancing participants access and country immigration policies. >>>> >>>> Internet Connectivity Policy (precondition for Host Countries) >>>> An onsite liaison officer from the Host Country’s ISP; >>>> Suitable redundancy plans; >>>> Dedicated Bandwidth to service 2000 people with 6000 devices (assuming that each person has 3 devices) >>>> Dedicated Bandwidth for remote participation; >>>> Dedicated Bandwidth for remote participation; >>>> A specialised Unit -Internet Infrastructure Team whose responsibilities should include facilitating the Policy; [Tender should be issued and this should be outsourced to professional vendor of conference networking services]; >>>> Service Level Agreement and standard of networking across events. >>>> >>>> Shift of Venue for MAG consultations without open consultations and impact on participation. >>>> At present, the IGF consultation and MAG are scheduled in the same week (13-17 May) as not on only the WSIS Forum, per usual, but also the ITU's World Telecom Policy Forum on global Internet governance. Were stakeholders with an interest in IG were precluded from attending the WTPF by this scheduling. >>>> >>>> SCHEDULE AND STATUS UPDATE >>>> >>>> Date Task Status >>>> 25 Nov 2012 Issue Notice to IGC and Gather Feedback >>>> Notice was issued and feedback is trickling in >>>> 15 Jan 2013 Formulate first Draft >>>> 16 Jan - 30 Jan 2013 Review first Draft and gather feedback >>>> 31 Jan - 5th Feb 2013 Produce 2nd Draft >>>> 6th Feb - 10th Feb 2013 Finalise Submissions from IGC >>>> 11th Feb 2013 Send to IGF Secretariat and representatives to MAG >>>> >>>> Volunteers >>>> >>>> >>>> Baudouin Schombe >>>> Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Kind Regards, >>>> Sala >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Sun, Nov 25, 2012 at 5:00 PM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro wrote: >>>>> Dear All, >>>>> >>>>> We need to start preparing for issues and topics that we would like raised by current MAG members. >>>>> >>>>> The Secretariat has put up a call for contributions on the IGF website inviting stakeholders to submit written contributions taking stock of the 2012 Baku meeting and inviting suggestions on the themes and format of the IGF 2013 meeting. The deadline for contributions is 14 February 2012. These inputs will be summarized in a synthesis paper that will act as an input into the discussions of the February meeting. >>>>> >>>>> The IGC Plan is as follows: >>>>> >>>>> 25 Nov 2012 - Issue Notice to IGC >>>>> >>>>> 25 Nov 2012 - 15 January, 2013 - Gather Feedback and formulate first draft >>>>> >>>>> 16-Jan -30 Jan 2013 - Review first Draft and gather feedback >>>>> >>>>> 31 Jan - 5th February 2013 - Produce 2nd Draft >>>>> 6th Feb - 10th February - Finalise submissions from IGC >>>>> 11th Feb - Send to IGF Secretariat and our representatives to the MAG >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> It will be great to start discussions on what some of the themes we would like canvassed. >>>>> >>>>> Warm Regards >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala >>>>> P.O. Box 17862 >>>>> Suva >>>>> Fiji >>>>> >>>>> Twitter: @SalanietaT >>>>> Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro >>>>> Tel: +679 3544828 >>>>> Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala >>>> P.O. Box 17862 >>>> Suva >>>> Fiji >>>> >>>> Twitter: @SalanietaT >>>> Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro >>>> Tel: +679 3544828 >>>> Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala >>> P.O. Box 17862 >>> Suva >>> Fiji >>> >>> Twitter: @SalanietaT >>> Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro >>> Tel: +679 3544828 >>> Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 >>> >>> >>> >> >>> ____________________________________________________________ >>> 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 > > > > -- > Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala > P.O. Box 17862 > Suva > Fiji > > Twitter: @SalanietaT > Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro > Tel: +679 3544828 > Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From dogwallah at gmail.com Tue Jan 8 08:08:00 2013 From: dogwallah at gmail.com (McTim) Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2013 08:08:00 -0500 Subject: [governance] a formal appeal request to the appeal team to reverse the recent ban on a Member In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Sala, On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 7:47 AM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro wrote: > Dear All, > > As a matter of background, there were complaints received over the blase > attacks against persons and I had privately warned the "banned" subscriber > more than a couple of times. > > The banned "subscriber" was on last warning. Can you point to the anything that is even suggestive of an "attack" in the following: ------begin quote----- On 2013/01/06 06:52 PM, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote: So do you get all your news from just news.google.com and other google search results, instead of Facebook shares, Riaz gleefully posting every article he sees about google being investigated for, say, giggling in church? And did Riaz find this news item anywhere other than google search? And does this reality distortion field google is supposed to have actually hide any search results from you that are negative to it? Like search for "google FTC" and you get the EU action, statements from Microsoft slamming the decision etc. And the last link on page 1 of the search results showing just where google got spanked by the FTC. http://www.tnr.com/blog/plank/111650/why-does-everyone-think-google-beat-the-ftc# is worth a read as a kind f counterpoint to all the commentary about how google got a get out of jail card because of intensive lobbying. Can we please 1. Have a reality check here 2. Go back to discussing Internet governance ----end quote-------- Suresh is correct here, your objectivity is in question. Terms like "US exceptionalism" "status-quoist" and "right-wing" are all freely used, despite it being made clear that they were insulting (as being wildly inaccurate and not applying to anyone on the list). Can you point to any specific words in the above mail that constitute an ad hominem attack? In any case, I request an appeal and ask that at least 3 other IGC members support an appeal of this decision. -- 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 From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com Tue Jan 8 08:13:33 2013 From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro) Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2013 02:13:33 +1300 Subject: [governance] a formal appeal request to the appeal team to reverse the recent ban on a Member In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: For the record, I have also from time to time had to privately address/confront subscribers/members of the IGC who hold all kinds of views and the issue was never their "views" but "personal attacks" or where there is "condescending behaviour" that detracts from constructive dialogue. It is a fine line and was not an isolated decision but one in a series of cumulative events and there have been previous complaints about the matter. Kind Regards, Sala On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 2:08 AM, McTim wrote: > Sala, > > On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 7:47 AM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro > wrote: > > Dear All, > > > > As a matter of background, there were complaints received over the blase > > attacks against persons and I had privately warned the "banned" > subscriber > > more than a couple of times. > > > > The banned "subscriber" was on last warning. > > Can you point to the anything that is even suggestive of an "attack" > in the following: > > ------begin quote----- > > On 2013/01/06 06:52 PM, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote: > So do you get all your news from just news.google.com and other google > search results, instead of Facebook shares, Riaz gleefully posting > every article he sees about google being investigated for, say, > giggling in church? > > And did Riaz find this news item anywhere other than google search? > > And does this reality distortion field google is supposed to have > actually hide any search results from you that are negative to it? > Like search for "google FTC" and you get the EU action, statements > from Microsoft slamming the decision etc. > > And the last link on page 1 of the search results showing just where > google got spanked by the FTC. > > http://www.tnr.com/blog/plank/111650/why-does-everyone-think-google-beat-the-ftc# > is worth a read as a kind f counterpoint to all the commentary about > how google got a get out of jail card because of intensive lobbying. > > Can we please > > 1. Have a reality check here > 2. Go back to discussing Internet governance > > ----end quote-------- > > Suresh is correct here, your objectivity is in question. Terms like > "US exceptionalism" "status-quoist" and "right-wing" are all freely > used, despite it being made clear that they were insulting (as being > wildly inaccurate and not applying to anyone on the list). > > Can you point to any specific words in the above mail that constitute > an ad hominem attack? > > In any case, I request an appeal and ask that at least 3 other IGC > members support an appeal of this decision. > > > -- > Cheers, > > McTim > "A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A > route indicates how we get there." Jon Postel > -- Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala P.O. Box 17862 Suva Fiji Twitter: @SalanietaT Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro Tel: +679 3544828 Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From dogwallah at gmail.com Tue Jan 8 08:18:15 2013 From: dogwallah at gmail.com (McTim) Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2013 08:18:15 -0500 Subject: [governance] FW: [IP] Google's Lawyers Work Behind the Scenes : FOR THE RECORD! In-Reply-To: References: <0ce601cdea8e$00308d90$0091a8b0$@gmail.com> <50E7F9B9.9070308@itforchange.net> <104701cdeb79$fcdb8ef0$f692acd0$@gmail.com> <50E99AB8.7080109@gmail.com> <129601cdec2b$2b36e860$81a4b920$@gmail.com> <7B42A9ED-878A-4DCA-A65C-9B8D9D555DB9@hserus.net> <50EBD342.7080705@gmail.com> Message-ID: On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 8:05 AM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro wrote: > >> Suresh gets booted from this list for >> trying to say that anti-Google campaign is boring, while those who >> mistakenly label folk as "right-wing" >> (the people in the US who normally bash Google) are seen as victims? >> Does anyone on this list understand the irony involved here? anyone?? > > > For the record, Suresh was not removed for his ideas but was removed for the > manner in which he attacked Riaz. Can you specify the manner of this "attack"? What exact words constituted an "attack"? Riaz has a history of using loaded words. This provocation is unchallenged by the coordinators. Suresh has a long history of doing actual, productive Internet governance in the technical community. The spirit of the list should be where > dialogue is encouraged and there is an expected level of decorum expected of > lists. There was a distinct pattern Yes, there is a pattern, it's not however the pattern that you see. The pattern is that one person uses provocative words. People react to those words in like manner. The provocatuer then cries "ad hominem" and you react to that. In short, you are being conned madame, and i ask that you re-consider your decision. I ask that 4 other Members of the caucus +1 the request for an appeal. -- 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 From ivarhartmann at gmail.com Tue Jan 8 08:28:02 2013 From: ivarhartmann at gmail.com (Ivar A. M. Hartmann) Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2013 11:28:02 -0200 Subject: [governance] FW: [IP] Google's Lawyers Work Behind the Scenes : FOR THE RECORD! In-Reply-To: References: <0ce601cdea8e$00308d90$0091a8b0$@gmail.com> <50E7F9B9.9070308@itforchange.net> <104701cdeb79$fcdb8ef0$f692acd0$@gmail.com> <50E99AB8.7080109@gmail.com> <129601cdec2b$2b36e860$81a4b920$@gmail.com> <7B42A9ED-878A-4DCA-A65C-9B8D9D555DB9@hserus.net> <50EBD342.7080705@gmail.com> Message-ID: The fact that one list member uses provocative words does not make it impossible for the addressee to do anything other than retort with more provocation. For one, provocative language isn't in itself a personal attack. And if it were indeed a case of personal attack, I believe most list members would call for action by the moderators rather than respond with inappropriate posts. I trust Sala is responsibly fulfilling her duties in the background, contacting list members directly and warning both provocateurs and the provoked who have gone over the line. Nevertheless, in order to relieve her of the burden of being the sole responsible for a member ban, I support your call for an appeal, McTim. Best, Ivar On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 11:18 AM, McTim wrote: > The pattern is that one person uses provocative words. > People react to those words in like manner. > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From kerry at kdbsystems.com Tue Jan 8 08:37:17 2013 From: kerry at kdbsystems.com (Kerry Brown) Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2013 13:37:17 +0000 Subject: [governance] FW: [IP] Google's Lawyers Work Behind the Scenes : FOR THE RECORD! In-Reply-To: References: <0ce601cdea8e$00308d90$0091a8b0$@gmail.com> <50E7F9B9.9070308@itforchange.net> <104701cdeb79$fcdb8ef0$f692acd0$@gmail.com> <50E99AB8.7080109@gmail.com> <129601cdec2b$2b36e860$81a4b920$@gmail.com> <7B42A9ED-878A-4DCA-A65C-9B8D9D555DB9@hserus.net> <50EBD342.7080705@gmail.com> Message-ID: In the interest of fairness I also support an appeal. As Ivar says an appeal will relieve the burden of one person being responsible for this decision. Without knowing all the details I do not know if I support returning the subscriber or not. I do support an appeal to determine if the correct decision was made. Kerry Brown From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Ivar A. M. Hartmann Sent: January-08-13 5:28 AM To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; McTim Cc: Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro Subject: Re: [governance] FW: [IP] Google's Lawyers Work Behind the Scenes : FOR THE RECORD! The fact that one list member uses provocative words does not make it impossible for the addressee to do anything other than retort with more provocation. For one, provocative language isn't in itself a personal attack. And if it were indeed a case of personal attack, I believe most list members would call for action by the moderators rather than respond with inappropriate posts. I trust Sala is responsibly fulfilling her duties in the background, contacting list members directly and warning both provocateurs and the provoked who have gone over the line. Nevertheless, in order to relieve her of the burden of being the sole responsible for a member ban, I support your call for an appeal, McTim. Best, Ivar On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 11:18 AM, McTim > wrote: The pattern is that one person uses provocative words. People react to those words in like manner. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From jeanette at wzb.eu Tue Jan 8 08:50:58 2013 From: jeanette at wzb.eu (Jeanette Hofmann) Date: Tue, 08 Jan 2013 14:50:58 +0100 Subject: [governance] banning list members In-Reply-To: References: <0ce601cdea8e$00308d90$0091a8b0$@gmail.com> <50E7F9B9.9070308@itforchange.net> <104701cdeb79$fcdb8ef0$f692acd0$@gmail.com> <50E99AB8.7080109@gmail.com> <129601cdec2b$2b36e860$81a4b920$@gmail.com> <7B42A9ED-878A-4DCA-A65C-9B8D9D555DB9@hserus.net> <50EBD342.7080705@gmail.com> Message-ID: <50EC2442.9070504@wzb.eu> Hi McTim, I fully support Sala's decision re temporary banning Suresh from this list. Whether or not a member of this caucus contributes "actual, productive Internet governance in the technical community" seems pretty irrelevant for the assessment of the communication style of this member. I've been on this list since 2003 or so and was its co-coordinator for a few years. I have always found the communication culture on this list a real pain. An enormous amount of energy among the active participants seems to be wasted on being aggressive or fending off aggressive behaviour. I have more or less given up contributing to these debates not only because I dislike this macho "if you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen" approach but also because following these endless repetitions of the same arguments is very very tiresome. While it may be true that there are more candidates than just Sala who deserves being banned from this list, Sala deserves respect for the fact that she is still trying to improve this very important communication environment. I have always felt that this cross-stakeholder platform fulfills a very important function for the interaction between civil society and the technical community and I wished that more people helped creating an atmosphere that makes this conversation a pleasure. jeanette Am 08.01.2013 14:18, schrieb McTim: > On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 8:05 AM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro > wrote: >> >>> Suresh gets booted from this list for >>> trying to say that anti-Google campaign is boring, while those who >>> mistakenly label folk as "right-wing" >>> (the people in the US who normally bash Google) are seen as victims? >>> Does anyone on this list understand the irony involved here? anyone?? >> >> >> For the record, Suresh was not removed for his ideas but was removed for the >> manner in which he attacked Riaz. > > Can you specify the manner of this "attack"? What exact words > constituted an "attack"? > > Riaz has a history of using loaded words. This provocation is > unchallenged by the coordinators. > > Suresh has a long history of doing actual, productive Internet > governance in the technical community. > > > > The spirit of the list should be where >> dialogue is encouraged and there is an expected level of decorum expected of >> lists. There was a distinct pattern > > Yes, there is a pattern, it's not however the pattern that you see. > The pattern is that one person uses provocative words. > People react to those words in like manner. The provocatuer then > cries "ad hominem" and you react to that. > > In short, you are being conned madame, and i ask that you re-consider > your decision. > > I ask that 4 other Members of the caucus +1 the request for an appeal. > -------------- 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 From parminder at itforchange.net Tue Jan 8 11:04:11 2013 From: parminder at itforchange.net (parminder) Date: Tue, 08 Jan 2013 21:34:11 +0530 Subject: [governance] Internet principles and IGF 8 In-Reply-To: <50EC4266.1020800@itforchange.net> References: <50EC4266.1020800@itforchange.net> Message-ID: <50EC437B.20904@itforchange.net> Concerning IGC's submission for IGF 8 theme, program etc, please see below the email I just now wrote to the Internet right and principles coalition. I suggest that IGC supports the IRP coalition in making these submissions - (1) of organising/ sponsoring a round table on Internet principles (which IGC can cosponsor) (2) proposing that Internet principles be considered as the overall theme of the next IGF. Maybe something more descriptive as - 'public interest principles for the Internet' or 'Shaping global principles for the Internet'. parminder -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: [IRPCoalition] Internet principles and IGF 8 Date: Tue, 08 Jan 2013 21:29:34 +0530 From: parminder To: irp at lists.internetrightsandprinciples.org Hi All Pursuant to the matter of my post Baku email below, I suggest that the IRP group makes a submission to the MAG meeting in Feb offering to sponsor a round table on Internet principles. We should also propose that Internet principles be considered as the overall theme of the next IGF. Maybe something more descriptive as - 'public interest principles for the Internet' or 'Shaping global principles for the Internet' .... parminder > > > On Sunday 11 November 2012 10:24 PM, parminder wrote: >> Dear All, >> >> During the main session on emerging issues and going aheadat the IGF, >> there was a section on developing Internet principles. (This main >> session ran at the same time as the meeting of the IRP or Internet >> Rights and Principles dynamic coalition and therefore I could not >> attend the later and am looking forward to a report of the same.) >> >> At this main session, proposals were solicited from the floor on ways >> to take forward the task of developing some kind of Internet >> principles at the IGF. I proposed a more bottom up strategy then the >> MAG centred strategy that was being proposed by many/most on the >> panel. What I proposed was as below. >> >> 1. I sought a round table on Internet principles to be held at the >> next IGF. I took the liberty to offer on the behalf of the IRP >> dynamic coalition to organise such a round table. >> >> 2. In the development of the agenda of IGF 7, significant prominence >> be given to the issue of Internet principles, including possibly >> inviting all parties early to contribute to building a Internet >> principles developing environment at the IGF. We may even seek to get >> this idea into the overall theme of the net IGF. (I am adding this >> last suggestion only now.) >> >> parminder >> >> >> > > > > _______________________________________________ > IRP mailing list > IRP at lists.internetrightsandprinciples.org > http://lists.internetrightsandprinciples.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/irp -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From ca at cafonso.ca Tue Jan 8 11:08:14 2013 From: ca at cafonso.ca (Carlos A. Afonso) Date: Tue, 08 Jan 2013 14:08:14 -0200 Subject: [governance] FW: [IP] Google's Lawyers Work Behind the Scenes to Carry the Day - NYTimes.com In-Reply-To: <50EBD0F8.90507@gmail.com> References: <0ce601cdea8e$00308d90$0091a8b0$@gmail.com> <50E7F9B9.9070308@itforchange.net> <104701cdeb79$fcdb8ef0$f692acd0$@gmail.com> <50E99AB8.7080109@gmail.com> <129601cdec2b$2b36e860$81a4b920$@gmail.com> <7B42A9ED-878A-4DCA-A65C-9B8D9D555DB9@hserus.net> <50EA5D30.10508@ITforChange.net> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD22F8237@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> <50EBD0F8.90507@gmail.com> Message-ID: <50EC446E.2010805@cafonso.ca> Hmmm... I think is more simple (yes, Milton is a neoliberal etc etc :)). If it were possible, do a survey with twitteres or facebookers and ask them whether they would leave these services if they felt their privacy was being somehow violated or they felt they had been encased in a filter bubble. I bet nearly all would not. You do not just leave Facebook -- it is not a simplistic question of choice like choosing a chocolate bar. On the other hand, the same filter bubble space may be penetrable by diverse agents. Yes, filter bubble is a quite workable concept (I liked the book) -- the main challenge is to establish what the consequences are for the myriad participants, with their diverse visions and objectives, and how these visions and activism can, say, penetrate the "what-the-user-want-to-see" flows. In the Brazilian case, until the social nets provided by these "free" private services took hold, the traditional corporate, partidarized media always had their say in electoral processes. Today, with the reach of social media and activism in this space, things have become quite different, and the opposition coalition which once relied entirely on the big traditional media juggernaut is now desperately seeking solutions to the "democratization of information" that activists manage to circulate through these social nets. We are in a quite complex terrain here. :) --c.a. On 01/08/2013 05:55 AM, Riaz K Tayob wrote: > > On 2013/01/07 10:13 PM, Milton L Mueller wrote: >> Guru, if you get badly personalized results from Google without asking >> for it, what is to stop you from not using Google? > > The problem with this kind of analysis of "consumer choice" analysis is > that it is theoretically grounded in the neo-classical and/or neoliberal > economic theory. So let us look at what this says: > > 1. If consumers have choices, then there is not a problem > 2. Consumers have choice NOT if there is a real choice (i.e. apples to > apples) but if the market per se is contestable (Contestable Markets > theory) - which is in part why oligopolies can be theoretically > tolerated in anti-trust law (abuse of dominant position etc) > 3. Government interventions are presumptively bad. Private initiatives > (except for fraud and -as defined by law and action- anti-competitive > behaviour). > > Now what is the problem with this? > > 1. Consumer choice is elevated as a moral/ethical good, in spite of > practical realities: there may be qualitative issues related choices > that are NOT available (i.e. market failures) > 2. The theory has an internal contradiction. Contestable Markets are > fine, but yet almost all the analysis makes use of Alfred Marshall's > representative firm. What is a representative firm as compared to a > "real" firm? It does not have the observable tendency to "first mover" > advantage or to reap the benefits of economies of scale. In other words > the theory used to justify consumer choice ab initio excludes the > advantages that flow to Google from first mover (with a great algorithm) > and the consequent economies of scale. > > Therefore, if one excludes these relevant tendencies from the analysis, > well then one is not saying much. > > While consumer choice may be a relevant approach in the > North(tactically), it has its limits in terms of theory and of context. > Analogously In the UK something as banal as supermarkets were found to > have a dominant market position when they controlled about 4% of the > market (i.e. sufficient to have upstream and downstream negative effects). > > Now if one were to let reality impact on the theory/ideology, then > perhaps we can chat. I mean this whole notion of consumer choice is > aptly illustrated by the US crisis. Of course, you could have any > Mortgage Backed Security you want - there was consumer choice - and that > did not detract from the fact that the entire operation was hoopla. As > spokesperson for this neoclassical theory Alan Greenspan said he was > "shocked" that market participants breached their duties and took on the > reputational risk (in a market governed by fides). Of course if he had > been open to other ideas, then he might have seen this coming. > > But in the North (with my limited experience) the adage, 'in the land of > the blind, the one eyed is king', more like "in the land of the blind, > the one eyed is mad". > > Welcome to the mad world of heterodox economics... > > > -------------- 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 From george.sadowsky at gmail.com Tue Jan 8 11:10:00 2013 From: george.sadowsky at gmail.com (George Sadowsky) Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2013 11:10:00 -0500 Subject: [governance] FW: [IP] Google's Lawyers Work Behind the Scenes : FOR THE RECORD! In-Reply-To: References: <0ce601cdea8e$00308d90$0091a8b0$@gmail.com> <50E7F9B9.9070308@itforchange.net> <104701cdeb79$fcdb8ef0$f692acd0$@gmail.com> <50E99AB8.7080109@gmail.com> <129601cdec2b$2b36e860$81a4b920$@gmail.com> <7B42A9ED-878A-4DCA-A65C-9B8D9D555DB9@hserus.net> <50EBD342.7080705@gmail.com> Message-ID: I support an appeal also. On Jan 8, 2013, at 8:37 AM, Kerry Brown wrote: > In the interest of fairness I also support an appeal. As Ivar says an appeal will relieve the burden of one person being responsible for this decision. Without knowing all the details I do not know if I support returning the subscriber or not. I do support an appeal to determine if the correct decision was made. > > Kerry Brown > > From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Ivar A. M. Hartmann > Sent: January-08-13 5:28 AM > To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; McTim > Cc: Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro > Subject: Re: [governance] FW: [IP] Google's Lawyers Work Behind the Scenes : FOR THE RECORD! > > The fact that one list member uses provocative words does not make it impossible for the addressee to do anything other than retort with more provocation. For one, provocative language isn't in itself a personal attack. And if it were indeed a case of personal attack, I believe most list members would call for action by the moderators rather than respond with inappropriate posts. > > I trust Sala is responsibly fulfilling her duties in the background, contacting list members directly and warning both provocateurs and the provoked who have gone over the line. Nevertheless, in order to relieve her of the burden of being the sole responsible for a member ban, I support your call for an appeal, McTim. > > Best, > Ivar > > > On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 11:18 AM, McTim wrote: > The pattern is that one person uses provocative words. > People react to those words in like manner. > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From ca at cafonso.ca Tue Jan 8 11:12:43 2013 From: ca at cafonso.ca (Carlos A. Afonso) Date: Tue, 08 Jan 2013 14:12:43 -0200 Subject: [governance] a formal appeal request to the appeal team to reverse the recent ban on a Member In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <50EC457B.2030101@cafonso.ca> My general impression is that if we are not fair and reasonable these restrictions may end up banning politics from the IGC discussions... let us then talk soccer, chat about Messi's polka-dot suit and things like that... --c.a. On 01/08/2013 11:08 AM, McTim wrote: > Sala, > > On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 7:47 AM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro > wrote: >> Dear All, >> >> As a matter of background, there were complaints received over the blase >> attacks against persons and I had privately warned the "banned" subscriber >> more than a couple of times. >> >> The banned "subscriber" was on last warning. > > Can you point to the anything that is even suggestive of an "attack" > in the following: > > ------begin quote----- > > On 2013/01/06 06:52 PM, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote: > So do you get all your news from just news.google.com and other google > search results, instead of Facebook shares, Riaz gleefully posting > every article he sees about google being investigated for, say, > giggling in church? > > And did Riaz find this news item anywhere other than google search? > > And does this reality distortion field google is supposed to have > actually hide any search results from you that are negative to it? > Like search for "google FTC" and you get the EU action, statements > from Microsoft slamming the decision etc. > > And the last link on page 1 of the search results showing just where > google got spanked by the FTC. > http://www.tnr.com/blog/plank/111650/why-does-everyone-think-google-beat-the-ftc# > is worth a read as a kind f counterpoint to all the commentary about > how google got a get out of jail card because of intensive lobbying. > > Can we please > > 1. Have a reality check here > 2. Go back to discussing Internet governance > > ----end quote-------- > > Suresh is correct here, your objectivity is in question. Terms like > "US exceptionalism" "status-quoist" and "right-wing" are all freely > used, despite it being made clear that they were insulting (as being > wildly inaccurate and not applying to anyone on the list). > > Can you point to any specific words in the above mail that constitute > an ad hominem attack? > > In any case, I request an appeal and ask that at least 3 other IGC > members support an appeal of this decision. > > -------------- 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 From avri at acm.org Tue Jan 8 11:26:17 2013 From: avri at acm.org (Avri Doria) Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2013 11:26:17 -0500 Subject: [governance] 2013 Preparations for MAG In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <176F1A5A-BB7A-4D74-AD86-6669AA82D1A7@acm.org> Hi, One possible easy way out is to just ask the IGC list give consensus agreement to the candidate list that was submitted last year. It is not all that long ago that a lot of work went into creating this list. This has the advantage of recommending that those on that list who were included in this year's MAG have endorsement for continuing and re-suggests the people they did not choose. Note: I suggest this as someone who was not given the honor of being included on that list and thus am not suggesting something that benefits me in any way. avri -------------- 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 From ca at cafonso.ca Tue Jan 8 11:28:47 2013 From: ca at cafonso.ca (Carlos A. Afonso) Date: Tue, 08 Jan 2013 14:28:47 -0200 Subject: [governance] 2013 Preparations for MAG In-Reply-To: <176F1A5A-BB7A-4D74-AD86-6669AA82D1A7@acm.org> References: <176F1A5A-BB7A-4D74-AD86-6669AA82D1A7@acm.org> Message-ID: <50EC493F.5020103@cafonso.ca> Avri, that list should be reposted here I guess. Several people joined IGC after that process. frt rgds --c.a. On 01/08/2013 02:26 PM, Avri Doria wrote: > Hi, > > One possible easy way out is to just ask the IGC list give consensus agreement to the candidate list that was submitted last year. It is not all that long ago that a lot of work went into creating this list. > > This has the advantage of recommending that those on that list who were included in this year's MAG have endorsement for continuing and re-suggests the people they did not choose. > > Note: I suggest this as someone who was not given the honor of being included on that list and thus am not suggesting something that benefits me in any way. > > avri > > > -------------- 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 From avri at ella.com Tue Jan 8 11:28:56 2013 From: avri at ella.com (Avri Doria) Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2013 11:28:56 -0500 Subject: [governance] FW: [IP] Google's Lawyers Work Behind the Scenes : FOR THE RECORD! In-Reply-To: References: <0ce601cdea8e$00308d90$0091a8b0$@gmail.com> <50E7F9B9.9070308@itforchange.net> <104701cdeb79$fcdb8ef0$f692acd0$@gmail.com> <50E99AB8.7080109@gmail.com> <129601cdec2b$2b36e860$81a4b920$@gmail.com> <7B42A9ED-878A-4DCA-A65C-9B8D9D555DB9@hserus.net> <50EBD342.7080705@gmail.com> Message-ID: <20287354-301A-44BF-BD42-A79CECAF8A3D@ella.com> +1 On 8 Jan 2013, at 11:10, George Sadowsky wrote: > I support an appeal also. > > > On Jan 8, 2013, at 8:37 AM, Kerry Brown wrote: > >> In the interest of fairness I also support an appeal. As Ivar says an appeal will relieve the burden of one person being responsible for this decision. Without knowing all the details I do not know if I support returning the subscriber or not. I do support an appeal to determine if the correct decision was made. >> >> Kerry Brown >> >> From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Ivar A. M. Hartmann >> Sent: January-08-13 5:28 AM >> To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; McTim >> Cc: Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro >> Subject: Re: [governance] FW: [IP] Google's Lawyers Work Behind the Scenes : FOR THE RECORD! >> >> The fact that one list member uses provocative words does not make it impossible for the addressee to do anything other than retort with more provocation. For one, provocative language isn't in itself a personal attack. And if it were indeed a case of personal attack, I believe most list members would call for action by the moderators rather than respond with inappropriate posts. >> >> I trust Sala is responsibly fulfilling her duties in the background, contacting list members directly and warning both provocateurs and the provoked who have gone over the line. Nevertheless, in order to relieve her of the burden of being the sole responsible for a member ban, I support your call for an appeal, McTim. >> >> Best, >> Ivar >> >> >> On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 11:18 AM, McTim wrote: >> The pattern is that one person uses provocative words. >> People react to those words in like manner. >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From sergioalvesjunior at gmail.com Tue Jan 8 11:29:48 2013 From: sergioalvesjunior at gmail.com (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?S=E9rgio_Alves_Jr=2E?=) Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2013 14:29:48 -0200 Subject: [governance] Fwd: ITRs/WCIT - Portuguese version In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Just noticed I sent the message to the wrong list address. Abraços, Sérgio ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Sérgio Alves Jr. Date: 2012/12/21 Subject: ITRs/WCIT - Portuguese version To: governance Dear colleagues, Find attached an unofficial version of the ITRs translated into Portuguese language by Anatel (National Telecommunication Agency), from Brazil. It might be useful for some. Abraços, Sérgio -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Regulamentos de Telecomunicações Internacionais - Portugues.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 216954 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- 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 From ajp at glocom.ac.jp Tue Jan 8 11:32:20 2013 From: ajp at glocom.ac.jp (Adam Peake) Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2013 01:32:20 +0900 Subject: [governance] 2013 Preparations for MAG In-Reply-To: <176F1A5A-BB7A-4D74-AD86-6669AA82D1A7@acm.org> References: <176F1A5A-BB7A-4D74-AD86-6669AA82D1A7@acm.org> Message-ID: I agree with this. The list is only 8 months old. And those who were selected from the list we proposed merit a bit more time. Would like to see the criteria those who accepted the caucus' nomination agreed to, and re-commitment of all to those criteria before their names are sent again. None has been particularly good at communicating to the caucus. Adam On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 1:26 AM, Avri Doria wrote: > Hi, > > One possible easy way out is to just ask the IGC list give consensus agreement to the candidate list that was submitted last year. It is not all that long ago that a lot of work went into creating this list. > > This has the advantage of recommending that those on that list who were included in this year's MAG have endorsement for continuing and re-suggests the people they did not choose. > > Note: I suggest this as someone who was not given the honor of being included on that list and thus am not suggesting something that benefits me in any way. > > avri > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From avri at acm.org Tue Jan 8 11:33:00 2013 From: avri at acm.org (Avri Doria) Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2013 11:33:00 -0500 Subject: FW: [governance] [IP] Google's Lawyers Work Behind the Scenes : FOR THE RECORD! In-Reply-To: References: <0ce601cdea8e$00308d90$0091a8b0$@gmail.com> <50E7F9B9.9070308@itforchange.net> <104701cdeb79$fcdb8ef0$f692acd0$@gmail.com> <50E99AB8.7080109@gmail.com> <129601cdec2b$2b36e860$81a4b920$@gmail.com> <7B42A9ED-878A-4DCA-A65C-9B8D9D555DB9@hserus.net> <50EBD342.7080705@gmail.com> Message-ID: <61C99C15-0ECA-45D8-9B48-8B9CC809EF3E@acm.org> +1 On 8 Jan 2013, at 11:10, George Sadowsky wrote: > I support an appeal also. > > > On Jan 8, 2013, at 8:37 AM, Kerry Brown wrote: > >> In the interest of fairness I also support an appeal. As Ivar says an appeal will relieve the burden of one person being responsible for this decision. Without knowing all the details I do not know if I support returning the subscriber or not. I do support an appeal to determine if the correct decision was made. >> >> Kerry Brown >> >> From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Ivar A. M. Hartmann >> Sent: January-08-13 5:28 AM >> To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; McTim >> Cc: Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro >> Subject: Re: [governance] FW: [IP] Google's Lawyers Work Behind the Scenes : FOR THE RECORD! >> >> The fact that one list member uses provocative words does not make it impossible for the addressee to do anything other than retort with more provocation. For one, provocative language isn't in itself a personal attack. And if it were indeed a case of personal attack, I believe most list members would call for action by the moderators rather than respond with inappropriate posts. >> >> I trust Sala is responsibly fulfilling her duties in the background, contacting list members directly and warning both provocateurs and the provoked who have gone over the line. Nevertheless, in order to relieve her of the burden of being the sole responsible for a member ban, I support your call for an appeal, McTim. >> >> Best, >> Ivar >> >> >> On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 11:18 AM, McTim wrote: >> The pattern is that one person uses provocative words. >> People react to those words in like manner. >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From gurstein at gmail.com Tue Jan 8 11:33:15 2013 From: gurstein at gmail.com (michael gurstein) Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2013 08:33:15 -0800 Subject: [governance] banning list members In-Reply-To: <50EC2442.9070504@wzb.eu> References: <0ce601cdea8e$00308d90$0091a8b0$@gmail.com> <50E7F9B9.9070308@itforchange.net> <104701cdeb79$fcdb8ef0$f692acd0$@gmail.com> <50E99AB8.7080109@gmail.com> <129601cdec2b$2b36e860$81a4b920$@gmail.com> <7B42A9ED-878A-4DCA-A65C-9B8D9D555DB9@hserus.net> <50EBD342.7080705@gmail.com> <50EC2442.9070504@wzb.eu> Message-ID: <007d01cdedbd$dccb5f50$96621df0$@gmail.com> FWIW, I host several e-lists (in the area of Community Informatics), some with up to about 1000 participants. In one form or another I've been hosting e-lists for almost 15 years. During that time I've had to warn and ban list contributors, not often but occasionally. >From my experience (and predilection) discussion and argument is good, good for the lists, generates new ideas, gets people engaged. What isn't good are personal attacks, innuendo, a condescending or snearing style of discourse, and so on. The worst form of list behaviour IMHO is for someone to repeatedly frame their interventions not in relation to the subject at hand but rather in relation to or directed against the individual who is making the intervention. In many cases those are deep personal communication styles that work okay in some environments but are deadly in others. An open multi-cultural (in the ethnic and in domain area senses) is one where they can be truly deadly. They close off rather than progress discussion, lead to tit-for-tat verbal ping pong, may be personally very hurtful or even damaging, and overall result in a reluctance by many to even participate since they don't want to subject themselves to the possibility of being the target for that kind of behaviour. In some of those instances a warning or two might lead to a change in behaviour. In others it doesn't because the temptation is too great, or the deeply engrained habits are too strong. For me, in my actions as list host, the ultimate question is whether the mode and content of participation by an individual is conducive to the long term health and well-being of the list/discussion (and ultimately of the contribution that the list is making to the subject at hand). If it isn't then I feel the need (and responsibility) to intervene. Mike -----Original Message----- From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Jeanette Hofmann Sent: Tuesday, January 08, 2013 5:51 AM To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; McTim Cc: Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro Subject: [governance] banning list members Hi McTim, I fully support Sala's decision re temporary banning Suresh from this list. Whether or not a member of this caucus contributes "actual, productive Internet governance in the technical community" seems pretty irrelevant for the assessment of the communication style of this member. I've been on this list since 2003 or so and was its co-coordinator for a few years. I have always found the communication culture on this list a real pain. An enormous amount of energy among the active participants seems to be wasted on being aggressive or fending off aggressive behaviour. I have more or less given up contributing to these debates not only because I dislike this macho "if you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen" approach but also because following these endless repetitions of the same arguments is very very tiresome. While it may be true that there are more candidates than just Sala who deserves being banned from this list, Sala deserves respect for the fact that she is still trying to improve this very important communication environment. I have always felt that this cross-stakeholder platform fulfills a very important function for the interaction between civil society and the technical community and I wished that more people helped creating an atmosphere that makes this conversation a pleasure. jeanette Am 08.01.2013 14:18, schrieb McTim: > On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 8:05 AM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro > wrote: >> >>> Suresh gets booted from this list for trying to say that >>> anti-Google campaign is boring, while those who mistakenly label >>> folk as "right-wing" >>> (the people in the US who normally bash Google) are seen as victims? >>> Does anyone on this list understand the irony involved here? anyone?? >> >> >> For the record, Suresh was not removed for his ideas but was removed >> for the manner in which he attacked Riaz. > > Can you specify the manner of this "attack"? What exact words > constituted an "attack"? > > Riaz has a history of using loaded words. This provocation is > unchallenged by the coordinators. > > Suresh has a long history of doing actual, productive Internet > governance in the technical community. > > > > The spirit of the list should be where >> dialogue is encouraged and there is an expected level of decorum >> expected of lists. There was a distinct pattern > > Yes, there is a pattern, it's not however the pattern that you see. > The pattern is that one person uses provocative words. > People react to those words in like manner. The provocatuer then > cries "ad hominem" and you react to that. > > In short, you are being conned madame, and i ask that you re-consider > your decision. > > I ask that 4 other Members of the caucus +1 the request for an appeal. > -------------- 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 From nyangkweagien at gmail.com Tue Jan 8 11:37:54 2013 From: nyangkweagien at gmail.com (Nyangkwe Agien Aaron) Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2013 17:37:54 +0100 Subject: [governance] banning list members In-Reply-To: <50EC2442.9070504@wzb.eu> References: <0ce601cdea8e$00308d90$0091a8b0$@gmail.com> <50E7F9B9.9070308@itforchange.net> <104701cdeb79$fcdb8ef0$f692acd0$@gmail.com> <50E99AB8.7080109@gmail.com> <129601cdec2b$2b36e860$81a4b920$@gmail.com> <7B42A9ED-878A-4DCA-A65C-9B8D9D555DB9@hserus.net> <50EBD342.7080705@gmail.com> <50EC2442.9070504@wzb.eu> Message-ID: I think, the decision would have been taken some 4 years ago. I quite remember Suresh unguarded language some four years ago leading to a heated debate on "intimation tactics" on this forum. Sala's is timely and merit support from all members who want convivial democratic debates not insults against fellow members. Aaron On 1/8/13, Jeanette Hofmann wrote: > Hi McTim, > > I fully support Sala's decision re temporary banning Suresh from this list. > > Whether or not a member of this caucus contributes "actual, productive > Internet governance in the technical community" seems pretty irrelevant > for the assessment of the communication style of this member. > > I've been on this list since 2003 or so and was its co-coordinator for a > few years. I have always found the communication culture on this list a > real pain. An enormous amount of energy among the active participants > seems to be wasted on being aggressive or fending off aggressive behaviour. > > I have more or less given up contributing to these debates not only > because I dislike this macho "if you can't stand the heat, get out of > the kitchen" approach but also because following these endless > repetitions of the same arguments is very very tiresome. > > While it may be true that there are more candidates than just Sala who > deserves being banned from this list, Sala deserves respect for the fact > that she is still trying to improve this very important communication > environment. I have always felt that this cross-stakeholder platform > fulfills a very important function for the interaction between civil > society and the technical community and I wished that more people helped > creating an atmosphere that makes this conversation a pleasure. > > jeanette > > > > Am 08.01.2013 14:18, schrieb McTim: >> On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 8:05 AM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro >> wrote: >>> >>>> Suresh gets booted from this list for >>>> trying to say that anti-Google campaign is boring, while those who >>>> mistakenly label folk as "right-wing" >>>> (the people in the US who normally bash Google) are seen as victims? >>>> Does anyone on this list understand the irony involved here? anyone?? >>> >>> >>> For the record, Suresh was not removed for his ideas but was removed for >>> the >>> manner in which he attacked Riaz. >> >> Can you specify the manner of this "attack"? What exact words >> constituted an "attack"? >> >> Riaz has a history of using loaded words. This provocation is >> unchallenged by the coordinators. >> >> Suresh has a long history of doing actual, productive Internet >> governance in the technical community. >> >> >> >> The spirit of the list should be where >>> dialogue is encouraged and there is an expected level of decorum expected >>> of >>> lists. There was a distinct pattern >> >> Yes, there is a pattern, it's not however the pattern that you see. >> The pattern is that one person uses provocative words. >> People react to those words in like manner. The provocatuer then >> cries "ad hominem" and you react to that. >> >> In short, you are being conned madame, and i ask that you re-consider >> your decision. >> >> I ask that 4 other Members of the caucus +1 the request for an appeal. >> > > -- Aaron Agien Nyangkwe Journalist-OutCome Mapper Special Assistant to The President ASAFE P.O.Box 5213 Douala-Cameroon Telephone +237 73 42 71 27 -------------- 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 From gpaque at gmail.com Tue Jan 8 11:39:32 2013 From: gpaque at gmail.com (Ginger Paque) Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2013 10:39:32 -0600 Subject: [governance] Internet principles and IGF 8 In-Reply-To: <50EC437B.20904@itforchange.net> References: <50EC4266.1020800@itforchange.net> <50EC437B.20904@itforchange.net> Message-ID: I think this is something we should begin work on as soon as possible, as a priority topic. gp Ginger (Virginia) Paque VirginiaP at diplomacy.edu Diplo Foundation Internet Governance Capacity Building Programme www.diplomacy.edu/ig ** ** On 8 January 2013 10:04, parminder wrote: > > Concerning IGC's submission for IGF 8 theme, program etc, please see below > the email I just now wrote to the Internet right and principles coalition. > I suggest that IGC supports the IRP coalition in making these submissions - > > (1) of organising/ sponsoring a round table on Internet principles (which > IGC can cosponsor) > > (2) proposing that Internet principles be considered as the overall theme > of the next IGF. Maybe something more descriptive as - 'public interest > principles for the Internet' or 'Shaping global principles for the > Internet'. > > parminder > > -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: [IRPCoalition] Internet > principles and IGF 8 Date: Tue, 08 Jan 2013 21:29:34 +0530 From: parminder > To: > irp at lists.internetrightsandprinciples.org > > Hi All > > Pursuant to the matter of my post Baku email below, I suggest that the IRP > group makes a submission to the MAG meeting in Feb offering to sponsor a > round table on Internet principles. We should also propose that Internet > principles be considered as the overall theme of the next IGF. Maybe > something more descriptive as - 'public interest principles for the > Internet' or 'Shaping global principles for the Internet' .... > > parminder > > > > On Sunday 11 November 2012 10:24 PM, parminder wrote: > > Dear All, > > During the main session on emerging issues and going ahead at the IGF, > there was a section on developing Internet principles. (This main session > ran at the same time as the meeting of the IRP or Internet Rights and > Principles dynamic coalition and therefore I could not attend the later and > am looking forward to a report of the same.) > > At this main session, proposals were solicited from the floor on ways to > take forward the task of developing some kind of Internet principles at the > IGF. I proposed a more bottom up strategy then the MAG centred strategy > that was being proposed by many/most on the panel. What I proposed was as > below. > > 1. I sought a round table on Internet principles to be held at the next > IGF. I took the liberty to offer on the behalf of the IRP dynamic coalition > to organise such a round table. > > 2. In the development of the agenda of IGF 7, significant prominence be > given to the issue of Internet principles, including possibly inviting all > parties early to contribute to building a Internet principles developing > environment at the IGF. We may even seek to get this idea into the overall > theme of the net IGF. (I am adding this last suggestion only now.) > > parminder > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > IRP mailing listIRP at lists.internetrightsandprinciples.orghttp://lists.internetrightsandprinciples.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/irp > > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From ca at cafonso.ca Tue Jan 8 11:46:16 2013 From: ca at cafonso.ca (Carlos A. Afonso) Date: Tue, 08 Jan 2013 14:46:16 -0200 Subject: FW: [governance] [IP] Google's Lawyers Work Behind the Scenes : FOR THE RECORD! In-Reply-To: <61C99C15-0ECA-45D8-9B48-8B9CC809EF3E@acm.org> References: <0ce601cdea8e$00308d90$0091a8b0$@gmail.com> <50E7F9B9.9070308@itforchange.net> <104701cdeb79$fcdb8ef0$f692acd0$@gmail.com> <50E99AB8.7080109@gmail.com> <129601cdec2b$2b36e860$81a4b920$@gmail.com> <7B42A9ED-878A-4DCA-A65C-9B8D9D555DB9@hserus.net> <50EBD342.7080705@gmail.com> <61C99C15-0ECA-45D8-9B48-8B9CC809EF3E@acm.org> Message-ID: <50EC4D58.9090202@cafonso.ca> +1 On 01/08/2013 02:33 PM, Avri Doria wrote: > +1 > > On 8 Jan 2013, at 11:10, George Sadowsky wrote: > >> I support an appeal also. >> >> >> On Jan 8, 2013, at 8:37 AM, Kerry Brown wrote: >> >>> In the interest of fairness I also support an appeal. As Ivar says an appeal will relieve the burden of one person being responsible for this decision. Without knowing all the details I do not know if I support returning the subscriber or not. I do support an appeal to determine if the correct decision was made. >>> >>> Kerry Brown >>> >>> From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Ivar A. M. Hartmann >>> Sent: January-08-13 5:28 AM >>> To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; McTim >>> Cc: Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro >>> Subject: Re: [governance] FW: [IP] Google's Lawyers Work Behind the Scenes : FOR THE RECORD! >>> >>> The fact that one list member uses provocative words does not make it impossible for the addressee to do anything other than retort with more provocation. For one, provocative language isn't in itself a personal attack. And if it were indeed a case of personal attack, I believe most list members would call for action by the moderators rather than respond with inappropriate posts. >>> >>> I trust Sala is responsibly fulfilling her duties in the background, contacting list members directly and warning both provocateurs and the provoked who have gone over the line. Nevertheless, in order to relieve her of the burden of being the sole responsible for a member ban, I support your call for an appeal, McTim. >>> >>> Best, >>> Ivar >>> >>> >>> On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 11:18 AM, McTim wrote: >>> The pattern is that one person uses provocative words. >>> People react to those words in like manner. >>> >>> ____________________________________________________________ >>> 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 >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From ginger at paque.net Tue Jan 8 12:12:36 2013 From: ginger at paque.net (Ginger Paque) Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2013 11:12:36 -0600 Subject: [governance] 2013 Preparations for MAG In-Reply-To: References: <176F1A5A-BB7A-4D74-AD86-6669AA82D1A7@acm.org> Message-ID: I support Avri and Adam's suggestion that we see if there is consensus to support the re-nomination of those we (the IGC) endorsed and who were chosen for the MAG in 2012. However, I do think we should limit the endorsement to those who re-nominate themselves, request the endorsement, and give a one-paragraph summary of their current intentions for the IGF process. This is a very important subject to address, and there is little time for the process. The IGC endorsement of MAG nominees is, in my opinion, a very important function of the IGC, which should have strong implications for IG and for the IGF if we choose well. In so short a time, I think it will be impossible to develop a perfect system, and we will be lucky to find one that is 'good enough'. Diplo is also seeking qualified MAG nominees and community consensus in an effort to encourage more widespread input into the MAG nomination process. Our announcement and invitation is pasted below. We encourage IGC and other nominees to join this process as well. Best regards, Ginger *Dear friends and colleagues, I wish you all a healthy and happy 2013, full of hope and the energy and inspiration to engage in Internet governance (IG). With the global events of last year, there is no doubt that the follow-up needs serious involvement by all stakeholders to maximise the resources and benefits afforded by a well-governed Internet. Many questions have been raised, few have been answered. DiploFoundation does not do advocacy work in IG; we work to strengthen informed multistakeholder participation, particularly from underrepresented groups and regions. This year, we again ask you to join us in supporting all stakeholder voices. One way to do this is to be involved in the selection of the Internet Governance Forum Multistakeholder Advisory Group (IGF MAG). UN Under-Secretary-General Mr Wu Hongbo has called for the submission of names of nominees for the renewed MAG. Full information can be found at http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/component/content/article/121-preparatory-process/1264-announcement-on-the-mag - Once again, we ask that you put your capability to use. If so inclined, volunteer to represent your countries and your communities; countries and communities that need more inclusive, multistakeholder global Internet governance. If you cannot serve yourself, please join in this process to encourage appropriate qualified people to step forward. After a short self-nomination period, we will ask this community to vote for candidates, and to vote whether to make a blanket recommendation to support those current MAG members who are eligible to, and willing to, serve again. Please note: current MAG members who are interested in continuing in the MAG are requested to re-nominate themselves to ensure their inclusion for consideration. Practically speaking, we want to encourage you to apply for a position on the IGF MAG if it is appropriate for you to do so. The deadline is short (20 January 2013), but we will again accelerate the process through an open call for inclusive governance. Here is the process: 1. Your application You are asked to submit your own application to the IGF secretariat, including a short biographical background, and the reasons why you think that you can contribute to the MAG, whom you can represent (in terms of communities, ideas, projects), and what you would like to achieve. Self-nomination is important: it indicates willingness and self-confidence; it has great legitimacy; and it is free from pressure, in the true spirit of volunteerism. If you have not already done so, you must submit your nomination by e-mail to magrenewal2013 at intgovforum.org using this submission template (also available from the IGF Secretariat’s website). You are also asked to complete the information at the bottom of this message, and post as a blog post on Diplo’s IG social community at www.diplointernetgovernance.org. 2. Community consensus All nominations posted on the community blog by midnight on 15 January, will be included in the Diplo poll which will open on January 16, following procedures to be posted soon. The entire Diplo community is encouraged to participate, to ensure the most complete community consensus possible.. Voting will close at midnight GMT on 19 January.The Diplo community results will be posted on the main blog at www.diplointernetgovernance.org (here) and sent to UN DESA on 20 January. 3. Final Diplo community recommendations (endorsements) will be calculated using the following criteria: 50% - results of poll 10% - experience in IG global policy processes, including efforts such as APC, IGC, Diplo discussions, regional work and other work. Please describe these activities in your post 10% - representation from least developed countries 10% - representation from small island states 10% - representation from countries never before represented on the MAG 10% - gender (to support gender balance and more women on the MAG) 4. Final list of five candidates We will send a final list of five candidates to the UN DESA, with the Diplo community’s recommendation/endorsement. This is independent of the possible endorsement of previous MAG members. Important: If you are selected, you will represent your organisation and your country. You will not represent Diplo. Diplo's role is simply to facilitate a more inclusive selection for the MAG. 5. Information to be posted: Full name: Gender: Nationality: Country of residence: Organisation: Stakeholder group: Background and/or experience in IG (50 words): Motivation and goals (50 words): Note: Nominees must have experience in previous WSIS/IGF processes, and have sufficient time to dedicate to duties as a MAG member. Several meetings will be held before the IGF 2013 in Bali. Discussions take place by e-mail during the whole year of tenure, and nominees must have time available to attend to this volume of discussions promptly. If you have any suggestions, feedback, or questions, please post them to www.diplointernetgovernance.org, or e-mail me at virginiap at diplomacy.edu. Good luck to all! Warm wishes, Ginger Ginger (Virginia) Paque VirginiaP at diplomacy.edu DiploFoundation * On 8 January 2013 10:32, Adam Peake wrote: > I agree with this. The list is only 8 months old. And those who were > selected from the list we proposed merit a bit more time. > > Would like to see the criteria those who accepted the caucus' > nomination agreed to, and re-commitment of all to those criteria > before their names are sent again. None has been particularly good at > communicating to the caucus. > > Adam > > > > On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 1:26 AM, Avri Doria wrote: > > Hi, > > > > One possible easy way out is to just ask the IGC list give consensus > agreement to the candidate list that was submitted last year. It is not > all that long ago that a lot of work went into creating this list. > > > > This has the advantage of recommending that those on that list who were > included in this year's MAG have endorsement for continuing and re-suggests > the people they did not choose. > > > > Note: I suggest this as someone who was not given the honor of being > included on that list and thus am not suggesting something that benefits me > in any way. > > > > avri > > > > > > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > > 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 > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From tapani.tarvainen at effi.org Tue Jan 8 12:19:39 2013 From: tapani.tarvainen at effi.org (Tapani Tarvainen) Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2013 19:19:39 +0200 Subject: [governance] banning list members In-Reply-To: <007d01cdedbd$dccb5f50$96621df0$@gmail.com> References: <104701cdeb79$fcdb8ef0$f692acd0$@gmail.com> <50E99AB8.7080109@gmail.com> <129601cdec2b$2b36e860$81a4b920$@gmail.com> <7B42A9ED-878A-4DCA-A65C-9B8D9D555DB9@hserus.net> <50EBD342.7080705@gmail.com> <50EC2442.9070504@wzb.eu> <007d01cdedbd$dccb5f50$96621df0$@gmail.com> Message-ID: <20130108171939.GA19522@tarvainen.info> On Tue, Jan 08, 2013 at 08:33:15AM -0800, michael gurstein (gurstein at gmail.com) wrote: > FWIW, I host several e-lists (in the area of Community Informatics), > some with up to about 1000 participants. In one form or another I've > been hosting e-lists for almost 15 years. During that time I've had > to warn and ban list contributors, not often but occasionally. I've been around for a while, too. Can't remember the first time I've been hosting/moderating a list, but I've been participating in them since late 1980s. And I fully agree with this: > From my experience (and predilection) discussion and argument is > good, good for the lists, generates new ideas, gets people engaged. > What isn't good are personal attacks, innuendo, a condescending or > snearing style of discourse, and so on. Exactly. > In some of those instances a warning or two might lead to a change > in behaviour. In others it doesn't because the temptation is too > great, or the deeply engrained habits are too strong. Yes. There are, however, ways of dealing with the situation besides warning and then banning from the list. In particular, I've sometimes turned moderation flag on for the offender for a while, rejecting messages with personal attacks &c with "please rephrase that more politely" or similar. On some lists I've even set moderation on by default for new members until they've learned to adjust their messages to the culture of the list. It is more work for the moderator and still doesn't always work, of course, probably not even most of the time, but sometimes it does. I'm not saying it would solve the problem here, but it might be worth keeping in mind, as another tool in the moderator's toolbox. -- Tapani Tarvainen -------------- 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 From avri at acm.org Tue Jan 8 13:03:24 2013 From: avri at acm.org (Avri Doria) Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2013 13:03:24 -0500 Subject: [governance] 2013 Preparations for MAG In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <96852223-BE8C-4A61-A49F-5C8CB2EB87F5@acm.org> Does the text below: " • Criteria should include suitability of location -conference facilities, wifi access, open environment that enables discourse; " Include the lack of Free Expression such as the problem we had in Baku with the Secretariat being forced by the Host country to stop the distribution of certain kinds of printed matter. If so, we might want to be more explicit. We do not want a repeat of Baku this year. I think it is good for the IGF to go into countries run by repressive regimes (if we didn't we would not have many places to meet), but I also think it is necessary that the IGF should be a Freedom of Association and Expression zone. So that not only are all, including locals with an opinion, invited into the meeting, but that they are free to speak their piece. The IGF and other Ig organizations lose a lot of credibility each and every time they go into a repressed country and then just meekly accept the repression and silence dissidents. I personally have no problem with rules that say the only place people can distribute propaganda is at the propaganda booths and at relevant sessions - as long as this is applied to the host as well. avri On 8 Jan 2013, at 04:36, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro wrote: > Dear All, > > This is a gentle reminder that we need to work towards developing a first Draft by the 15th January, 2013. There were some of you who had taken part in throwing in ideas and suggestions in the past and Schombe and I have consolidated these and you will find the summary below. > > If there are additional thoughts that you would like to add please advise. At the moment, Schombe is the only volunteer and if others would like to volunteer to help prepare the first Draft, kindly let us know. > > In the meantime, the IGC is encouraged to share ideas, suggestions about what we should raise in our submissions. > > Thank you for your cooperation. > > Kind Regards, > Sala > > On Sun, Dec 23, 2012 at 8:16 AM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro wrote: > Dear All, > > This is a summary of the discussions and a general status update. The consultations went into a recess on 26th November, 2012. I would encourage you to continue with the discussions on the topic. I would like to thank Baudouin Schombe for volunteering to help prepare this Summary. If there are any other volunteers who would like to help in formulating the first Draft, please let us know by responding to this thread. > > Kind Regards, > > Sala > Summary > > > > • IGF should run for 5 days instead of 4 > • Selection of Venue [Criteria for selection] > • IGF Secretariat needs to call for expressions of interest from Host countries in advance; > • Host countries should meet certain predetermined criteria; > • Criteria should include suitability of location -conference facilities, wifi access, open environment that enables discourse; > • Improvements to the MAG [see CSTD discussions on IGF improvements] > • Logistical support in terms of visa procurements > • Identification of location [accessibility challenges when held outside the City] > > • Main Session > • Time spent on main sessions should be halved and reduced to a day > • Workshops are a sideshow, main sessions are the main event (or should be). Workshops and main sessions should not overlap . Lessons can be learnt from other Internet governance events such as APRICOT, which are scheduled in this way. > • Every main session needs to build upon or do anything substantive with the so-called feeder workshops. The content of plenaries/main sessions somehow reflect and build upon what has gone on before. > • Main Sessions should have deliverables such as Resolutions or outcomes. > > • Planning for Workshops > • Proper Planning of pre-IGF events; > • Evaluation of existing criteria > • Focus on Quality > • Focus on Issues > • Gender balance; > • Regional representation; > • Multi-stakeholder balance; > > • Logistical Support for People from Developing Countries > • Logistical Visa Support > There should be balance between balancing participants access and country immigration policies. > > • Internet Connectivity Policy (precondition for Host Countries) > • An onsite liaison officer from the Host Country’s ISP; > • Suitable redundancy plans; > • Dedicated Bandwidth to service 2000 people with 6000 devices (assuming that each person has 3 devices) > • Dedicated Bandwidth for remote participation; > • Dedicated Bandwidth for remote participation; > • A specialised Unit -Internet Infrastructure Team whose responsibilities should include facilitating the Policy; [Tender should be issued and this should be outsourced to professional vendor of conference networking services]; > • Service Level Agreement and standard of networking across events. > > • Shift of Venue for MAG consultations without open consultations and impact on participation. > • At present, the IGF consultation and MAG are scheduled in the same week (13-17 May) as not on only the WSIS Forum, per usual, but also the ITU's World Telecom Policy Forum on global Internet governance. Were stakeholders with an interest in IG were precluded from attending the WTPF by this scheduling. > > SCHEDULE AND STATUS UPDATE > > Date Task Status > 25 Nov 2012 Issue Notice to IGC and Gather Feedback > Notice was issued and feedback is trickling in > 15 Jan 2013 Formulate first Draft > 16 Jan - 30 Jan 2013 Review first Draft and gather feedback > 31 Jan - 5th Feb 2013 Produce 2nd Draft > 6th Feb - 10th Feb 2013 Finalise Submissions from IGC > 11th Feb 2013 Send to IGF Secretariat and representatives to MAG > > Volunteers > > > Baudouin Schombe > Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro > > > > > Kind Regards, > Sala > > > > > On Sun, Nov 25, 2012 at 5:00 PM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro wrote: > Dear All, > > We need to start preparing for issues and topics that we would like raised by current MAG members. > > The Secretariat has put up a call for contributions on the IGF website inviting stakeholders to submit written contributions taking stock of the 2012 Baku meeting and inviting suggestions on the themes and format of the IGF 2013 meeting. The deadline for contributions is 14 February 2012. These inputs will be summarized in a synthesis paper that will act as an input into the discussions of the February meeting. > > The IGC Plan is as follows: > > 25 Nov 2012 - Issue Notice to IGC > > 25 Nov 2012 - 15 January, 2013 - Gather Feedback and formulate first draft > > 16-Jan -30 Jan 2013 - Review first Draft and gather feedback > > 31 Jan - 5th February 2013 - Produce 2nd Draft > 6th Feb - 10th February - Finalise submissions from IGC > 11th Feb - Send to IGF Secretariat and our representatives to the MAG > > > It will be great to start discussions on what some of the themes we would like canvassed. > > Warm Regards > > > -- > Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala > P.O. Box 17862 > Suva > Fiji > > Twitter: @SalanietaT > Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro > Tel: +679 3544828 > Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 > > > > > > > > -- > Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala > P.O. Box 17862 > Suva > Fiji > > Twitter: @SalanietaT > Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro > Tel: +679 3544828 > Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 > > > > > > > -- > Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala > P.O. Box 17862 > Suva > Fiji > > Twitter: @SalanietaT > Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro > Tel: +679 3544828 > Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From dogwallah at gmail.com Tue Jan 8 13:23:56 2013 From: dogwallah at gmail.com (McTim) Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2013 13:23:56 -0500 Subject: [governance] 2013 Preparations for MAG In-Reply-To: <176F1A5A-BB7A-4D74-AD86-6669AA82D1A7@acm.org> References: <176F1A5A-BB7A-4D74-AD86-6669AA82D1A7@acm.org> Message-ID: On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 11:26 AM, Avri Doria wrote: > Hi, > > One possible easy way out is to just ask the IGC list give consensus agreement to the candidate list that was submitted last year. It is not all that long ago that a lot of work went into creating this list. +1 -- 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 From gurstein at gmail.com Tue Jan 8 13:38:13 2013 From: gurstein at gmail.com (michael gurstein) Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2013 10:38:13 -0800 Subject: [governance] FW: [IP] BBC News - France tells internet service provider to end Google and other ads block Message-ID: <011901cdedcf$51aa2250$f4fe66f0$@gmail.com> Interesting sets of developments. And, (again) FWIW I should say that I would not wish my comments or posts to be taken as "Google-bashing". As a company, Google's products have made huge contributions to global well-being and dare I say, the global public interest. Including through their pursuit of their mission to be the cataloguer (and ultimately portal) through which the world organizes and accesses its information. That being said, and largely because of their success in the pursuit of their mission and their effectiveness as a company they have become a dominant agent in an area that I consider crucial to our collective global well-being--the pursuit, organization and use of knowledge. It is precisely because of that success that they need to held to account and scrutinized for their behaviours rather more than their lesser (and less significant) corporate colleagues. As well, they are now one of a small set of companies with predominant influence in the Internet economy and thus in the overall Internet ecology. Again because of that predominant role they (like the other companies in that ecology) need to be held to public account for their behaviours ethical, as well as legal. I think that it is our role and responsibility as civil society concerned from a normative perspective with the overall "governance" of the Internet to discuss and call out as necessary Google (and other similarly predominant companies or governments or multilateral institutions or whoever) when their actions or the effects of their actions would appear to be damaging or a threat to the global public interest. Isn't this precisely what civil society should be doing? Mike http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-20943779 France tells internet service provider to end ads block 8 January 2013 Last updated at 12:59 GMT Free signFree has argued that Google does not pay its fair share A major French internet service provider (ISP) has agreed to abandon its ad-blocking policy - seen as a swipe against Google - after a minister intervened. Digital Economy minister Fleur Pellerin said she persuaded Free to restore full access to all content on the internet, including Google ads. Free started blocking ads last week when it updated home router software. It was seen as forcing Google to pay its fair share to service providers. The French minister said: "No actor can jeopardise the digital ecosystem in a unilateral way." Free has argued in the past that Google does not pay its way when ISPs are forced to increase investment in running services like YouTube, which take up a lot of bandwidth. Google's AdServe online advertising software - which allows online businesses to target their audiences in exchange for a share of the advertising profits - is used on many websites. 'Cuckoo bird' Philippe Jannet, the former president of Geste, the French online publishers association, said that when operators "see Google come in like a cuckoo bird and make profit off the internet service they provide without receiving a penny in return, it's normal that they get mad". The move by Free - France's second biggest ISP with more than five million subscribers - would have cost Google up to one million euros every day, a source told news agency AFP. "That's what would push the giant to speak to the little operator," he added. Ms Pellerin said she did not have an estimate yet of the financial impact from the fallout. She has scheduled a meeting with Google about Free's actions. A Free spokeswoman declined to comment on the matter. Google spokesman Al Verney said: "We are aware of Free's actions and are investigating their impact." Archives https://www.listbox.com/images/feed-icon-10x10.jpg| Modify Your Subscription | Unsubscribe Now https://www.listbox.com/images/listbox-logo-small.png -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.jpg Type: application/octet-stream Size: 14807 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image002.jpg Type: application/octet-stream Size: 465 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image003.png Type: application/octet-stream Size: 3173 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- 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 From ian.peter at ianpeter.com Tue Jan 8 13:55:29 2013 From: ian.peter at ianpeter.com (Ian Peter) Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2013 05:55:29 +1100 Subject: [governance] 2013 Preparations for MAG - Nominations In-Reply-To: <176F1A5A-BB7A-4D74-AD86-6669AA82D1A7@acm.org> References: <176F1A5A-BB7A-4D74-AD86-6669AA82D1A7@acm.org> Message-ID: <4EEDF2C25B164578811316212A87417E@Toshiba> (just changing the topic slightly as this topic was considering a more general document) While I agree with Avri and others that nominating all last years slate again is a good idea, the last MAG nominations were about 12 months ago and there appears to be a requirement for up to one third to be rotated off. So I do think we need to nominate additional names as well and don't see it as impossible to do so. However, as there seems to be support for all current members, I would like to nominate them all. Thomas, are you reading or should I separately send a nomination of the members to you as Chair of the Nomcom? (I have already completed my co ordinator ballot form so cannot use that for nominations - is there another process I should follow or Thomas can you just pick this up as a nomination of the existing CS members? Ian Peter -----Original Message----- From: Avri Doria Sent: Wednesday, January 09, 2013 3:26 AM To: IGC Subject: Re: [governance] 2013 Preparations for MAG Hi, One possible easy way out is to just ask the IGC list give consensus agreement to the candidate list that was submitted last year. It is not all that long ago that a lot of work went into creating this list. This has the advantage of recommending that those on that list who were included in this year's MAG have endorsement for continuing and re-suggests the people they did not choose. Note: I suggest this as someone who was not given the honor of being included on that list and thus am not suggesting something that benefits me in any way. avri ____________________________________________________________ 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From ian.peter at ianpeter.com Tue Jan 8 14:07:47 2013 From: ian.peter at ianpeter.com (Ian Peter) Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2013 06:07:47 +1100 Subject: [governance] banning list members In-Reply-To: <20130108171939.GA19522@tarvainen.info> References: <104701cdeb79$fcdb8ef0$f692acd0$@gmail.com> <50E99AB8.7080109@gmail.com> <129601cdec2b$2b36e860$81a4b920$@gmail.com> <7B42A9ED-878A-4DCA-A65C-9B8D9D555DB9@hserus.net> <50EBD342.7080705@gmail.com> <50EC2442.9070504@wzb.eu> <007d01cdedbd$dccb5f50$96621df0$@gmail.com> <20130108171939.GA19522@tarvainen.info> Message-ID: <6567DE12773047CFA2D03025709BDF42@Toshiba> As a member of the appeals team, I have seen more than 4 list contributors say they think there should be an appeal against the decision to ban SRS, (and a number of others express different opinions) but I havent yet seen a wording of an appeal including grounds for an appeal. I think if there is to be an appeal the requirement is for four people to "co-sign a statement" If that happens, and I guess the form could be quite minimal, the appeals team will need to consider this matter. But currently, I think we are waiting for something more structured than disagreement with the co-ordinators decision before the appeals team can consider the matter (just my personal opinion, perhaps if other appeals team members think there is a valid appeal already we should convene but I think we are not there yet) Ian Peter -----Original Message----- From: Tapani Tarvainen Sent: Wednesday, January 09, 2013 4:19 AM To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org Subject: Re: [governance] banning list members On Tue, Jan 08, 2013 at 08:33:15AM -0800, michael gurstein (gurstein at gmail.com) wrote: > FWIW, I host several e-lists (in the area of Community Informatics), > some with up to about 1000 participants. In one form or another I've > been hosting e-lists for almost 15 years. During that time I've had > to warn and ban list contributors, not often but occasionally. I've been around for a while, too. Can't remember the first time I've been hosting/moderating a list, but I've been participating in them since late 1980s. And I fully agree with this: > From my experience (and predilection) discussion and argument is > good, good for the lists, generates new ideas, gets people engaged. > What isn't good are personal attacks, innuendo, a condescending or > snearing style of discourse, and so on. Exactly. > In some of those instances a warning or two might lead to a change > in behaviour. In others it doesn't because the temptation is too > great, or the deeply engrained habits are too strong. Yes. There are, however, ways of dealing with the situation besides warning and then banning from the list. In particular, I've sometimes turned moderation flag on for the offender for a while, rejecting messages with personal attacks &c with "please rephrase that more politely" or similar. On some lists I've even set moderation on by default for new members until they've learned to adjust their messages to the culture of the list. It is more work for the moderator and still doesn't always work, of course, probably not even most of the time, but sometimes it does. I'm not saying it would solve the problem here, but it might be worth keeping in mind, as another tool in the moderator's toolbox. -- Tapani Tarvainen ____________________________________________________________ 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From dogwallah at gmail.com Tue Jan 8 14:35:41 2013 From: dogwallah at gmail.com (McTim) Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2013 14:35:41 -0500 Subject: [governance] Re: a formal appeal request to the appeal team to reverse the recent ban on a Member In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Ian (and all), Our charter does not specify that "grounds" for an appeal need to be listed AFAICS, but here is one:: There was no "ad hominem" attack in the email that caused the complainant to complain. Our charter says: Posting Rules for the IGC Messages to any IGC list must be in line with the mission of the IGC, particularly its purpose to provide an open and effective forum for civil society to share opinion, policy options and expertise on Internet governance issues, and to provide a mechanism for coordination of advocacy for agreed upon policies and to enhance the utilization and influence of Civil Society (CS) and the IGC in relevant policy processes of organizations or fora dealing with Internet Governance issues. Appropriate messages to an IGC list contribute to the objectives and tasks of the IGC, particularly: * To inform civil society and other progressive groups or actors on significant developments impacting on Internet governance policies. * To anticipate, identify and address emerging issues in the areas of Internet governance and help shape issues and perspectives in a manner that is informed by the stated vision of the IGC * To develop common positions on issues relating to Internet governance policies, and make outreach efforts both for informing and for creating broad-based support among other CS groups and individuals for such positions. The messages must observe a minimum of decorum, including:  refrain from personal attacks, insults or slander  refrain from offensive or discriminating language  refrain from threats , including threats of legal action, on list or off list  refrain from excessive and repetitive posting Inappropriate postings to the IGC list include  Unsolicited bulk e-mail  Discussion of subjects unrelated to the IGC mission and objectives  Unprofessional or discourteous commentary, regardless of the general subject  Sequences of messages by one or more participants that cause an IGC list to become a hostile environment The actions of the banned member did not breach any of the above, in fact, IIRC, he was trying to keep us on the IG track, and not to get us OT. I hope that the 4 people who supported the call for an appeal earlier today (and others) can support these grounds. -- Cheers, McTim "A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A route indicates how we get there." Jon Postel On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 6:47 AM, McTim wrote: > All, > > Our charter says: > > "Duties of the appeals team. > > Any time 4 individual members of the IGC co-sign a statement on the > main IGC mailing list they can appeal any decision of the > coordinators. When a decision is appealed, the appeals team will > review any discussions that occurred and will request comments from > the IGC membership. Based on the information they collect and > discussion, they will decide on the merit of the appeal. > Decisions by the appeals team are based on a majority vote of the > appeal team, i.e., three (3) or ore votes, except in the case of > coordinator recall which requires full consensus. > The decision of the appeals team will be final on every decision reviewed." > > I hereby call on the appeals team to activate this process on the > subject of the recent decision to remove SRS from the mailing list. > > > -- > 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 From ivarhartmann at gmail.com Tue Jan 8 14:41:43 2013 From: ivarhartmann at gmail.com (Ivar A. M. Hartmann) Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2013 17:41:43 -0200 Subject: [governance] Re: a formal appeal request to the appeal team to reverse the recent ban on a Member In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I support these grounds for appeal. Ivar On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 5:35 PM, McTim wrote: > There was no "ad hominem" attack in the email that caused the > complainant to complain. > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com Tue Jan 8 14:57:14 2013 From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro) Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2013 08:57:14 +1300 Subject: FW: [governance] [IP] Google's Lawyers Work Behind the Scenes : FOR THE RECORD! In-Reply-To: <50EC4D58.9090202@cafonso.ca> References: <0ce601cdea8e$00308d90$0091a8b0$@gmail.com> <50E7F9B9.9070308@itforchange.net> <104701cdeb79$fcdb8ef0$f692acd0$@gmail.com> <50E99AB8.7080109@gmail.com> <129601cdec2b$2b36e860$81a4b920$@gmail.com> <7B42A9ED-878A-4DCA-A65C-9B8D9D555DB9@hserus.net> <50EBD342.7080705@gmail.com> <61C99C15-0ECA-45D8-9B48-8B9CC809EF3E@acm.org> <50EC4D58.9090202@cafonso.ca> Message-ID: This is to advise that since this is now officially in the hands of the Appeal Team. On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 5:46 AM, Carlos A. Afonso wrote: > +1 > > > On 01/08/2013 02:33 PM, Avri Doria wrote: > >> +1 >> >> On 8 Jan 2013, at 11:10, George Sadowsky wrote: >> >> I support an appeal also. >>> >>> >>> On Jan 8, 2013, at 8:37 AM, Kerry Brown wrote: >>> >>> In the interest of fairness I also support an appeal. As Ivar says an >>>> appeal will relieve the burden of one person being responsible for this >>>> decision. Without knowing all the details I do not know if I support >>>> returning the subscriber or not. I do support an appeal to determine if the >>>> correct decision was made. >>>> >>>> Kerry Brown >>>> >>>> From: governance-request at lists.**igcaucus.org[mailto: >>>> governance-request@**lists.igcaucus.org] >>>> On Behalf Of Ivar A. M. Hartmann >>>> Sent: January-08-13 5:28 AM >>>> To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; McTim >>>> Cc: Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro >>>> Subject: Re: [governance] FW: [IP] Google's Lawyers Work Behind the >>>> Scenes : FOR THE RECORD! >>>> >>>> The fact that one list member uses provocative words does not make it >>>> impossible for the addressee to do anything other than retort with more >>>> provocation. For one, provocative language isn't in itself a personal >>>> attack. And if it were indeed a case of personal attack, I believe most >>>> list members would call for action by the moderators rather than respond >>>> with inappropriate posts. >>>> >>>> I trust Sala is responsibly fulfilling her duties in the background, >>>> contacting list members directly and warning both provocateurs and the >>>> provoked who have gone over the line. Nevertheless, in order to relieve her >>>> of the burden of being the sole responsible for a member ban, I support >>>> your call for an appeal, McTim. >>>> >>>> Best, >>>> Ivar >>>> >>>> >>>> On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 11:18 AM, McTim wrote: >>>> The pattern is that one person uses provocative words. >>>> People react to those words in like manner. >>>> >>>> ______________________________**______________________________ >>>> 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 >>>> >>> >>> ______________________________**______________________________ >>> 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 >>> >> >> >> > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > -- Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala P.O. Box 17862 Suva Fiji Twitter: @SalanietaT Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro Tel: +679 3544828 Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From avri at ella.com Tue Jan 8 15:21:52 2013 From: avri at ella.com (Avri Doria) Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2013 15:21:52 -0500 Subject: [governance] a formal appeal request to the appeal team to reverse the recent ban on a Member In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: support avri On 8 Jan 2013, at 14:41, Ivar A. M. Hartmann wrote: > I support these grounds for appeal. > > Ivar > > On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 5:35 PM, McTim wrote: > There was no "ad hominem" attack in the email that caused the > complainant to complain. > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From avri at acm.org Tue Jan 8 15:25:31 2013 From: avri at acm.org (Avri Doria) Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2013 15:25:31 -0500 Subject: [governance] Coordinator election in progress In-Reply-To: <50EBB536.7030503@ciroap.org> References: <50EB8723.7070707@ciroap.org> <7B0CDFC9-00D8-4E4B-AAC5-6444296ED667@acm.org> <50EBA57D.6010201@ciroap.org> <50EBB536.7030503@ciroap.org> Message-ID: On 8 Jan 2013, at 00:57, Jeremy Malcolm wrote: > On 08/01/13 13:32, Fatima Cambronero wrote: >> 2013/1/8 Jeremy Malcolm >> If you don't want to vote for either, don't vote for either. >> >> It's not possible because if you don't choose any options the survey says: >> >> “One or more mandatory questions have not been answered. You cannot proceed until these have been completed” > > True, but it still records your incomplete submission if you exit at that point. > I assume this is only if you exit choosing the 'resume' later field. and not if you exit and clear the survey. In any case, I really beleive we need at least an abstain option. or maybe just a choice of whether one wants to proceed to the election. something more than overwhelming ambiguity that seems to force people to choose one or another of the candidates. avri -------------- 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 From kerry at kdbsystems.com Tue Jan 8 15:35:31 2013 From: kerry at kdbsystems.com (Kerry Brown) Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2013 20:35:31 +0000 Subject: [governance] Re: a formal appeal request to the appeal team to reverse the recent ban on a Member In-Reply-To: Message-ID: I support this. Kerry Brown On 2013-01-08 11:35 AM, "McTim" wrote: >Ian (and all), > >Our charter does not specify that "grounds" for an appeal need to be >listed AFAICS, but here is one:: > >There was no "ad hominem" attack in the email that caused the >complainant to complain. > > >Our charter says: > >Posting Rules for the IGC > >Messages to any IGC list must be in line with the mission of the IGC, >particularly its purpose to provide an open and effective forum for >civil society to share opinion, policy options and expertise on >Internet governance issues, and to provide a mechanism for >coordination of advocacy for agreed upon policies and to enhance the >utilization and influence of Civil Society (CS) and the IGC in >relevant policy processes of organizations or fora dealing with >Internet Governance issues. >Appropriate messages to an IGC list contribute to the objectives and >tasks of the IGC, particularly: > >* To inform civil society and other progressive groups or actors on >significant developments impacting on Internet governance policies. >* To anticipate, identify and address emerging issues in the areas of >Internet governance and help shape issues and perspectives in a manner >that is informed by the stated vision of the IGC >* To develop common positions on issues relating to Internet >governance policies, and make outreach efforts both for informing and >for creating broad-based support among other CS groups and individuals >for such positions. > >The messages must observe a minimum of decorum, including: > refrain from personal attacks, insults or slander > refrain from offensive or discriminating language > refrain from threats , including threats of legal action, on list or >off list > refrain from excessive and repetitive posting > >Inappropriate postings to the IGC list include > Unsolicited bulk e-mail > Discussion of subjects unrelated to the IGC mission and objectives > Unprofessional or discourteous commentary, regardless of the general >subject > Sequences of messages by one or more participants that cause an IGC >list to become a hostile environment > > >The actions of the banned member did not breach any of the above, in >fact, IIRC, he was trying to >keep us on the IG track, and not to get us OT. > >I hope that the 4 people who supported the call for an appeal earlier >today (and others) can support these grounds. > > >-- >Cheers, > >McTim >"A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A >route indicates how we get there." Jon Postel >On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 6:47 AM, McTim wrote: >> All, >> >> Our charter says: >> >> "Duties of the appeals team. >> >> Any time 4 individual members of the IGC co-sign a statement on the >> main IGC mailing list they can appeal any decision of the >> coordinators. When a decision is appealed, the appeals team will >> review any discussions that occurred and will request comments from >> the IGC membership. Based on the information they collect and >> discussion, they will decide on the merit of the appeal. >> Decisions by the appeals team are based on a majority vote of the >> appeal team, i.e., three (3) or ore votes, except in the case of >> coordinator recall which requires full consensus. >> The decision of the appeals team will be final on every decision >>reviewed." >> >> I hereby call on the appeals team to activate this process on the >> subject of the recent decision to remove SRS from the mailing list. >> >> >> -- >> 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 From toml at communisphere.com Tue Jan 8 16:34:05 2013 From: toml at communisphere.com (Thomas Lowenhaupt) Date: Tue, 08 Jan 2013 16:34:05 -0500 Subject: [governance] 2013 Preparations for MAG - Nominations In-Reply-To: <4EEDF2C25B164578811316212A87417E@Toshiba> References: <176F1A5A-BB7A-4D74-AD86-6669AA82D1A7@acm.org> <4EEDF2C25B164578811316212A87417E@Toshiba> Message-ID: <50EC90CD.1000303@communisphere.com> Ian, My records indicate that the MAG nominees as selected on February 24, 2012 were: * Izumi Aizu (Mr) - Japan * Fouad Bajwa (Mr) (current MAG member) - Pakistan * Fatima Cambronero (Ms) - Argentina * Bill Drake (Mr) - North American (Lives in Geneva) * Robert Guerra (Mr) - Canadian & European (Spain) * Michael Gurstein (Mr) - Canada * Lillian Nalwoga (Ms.) - Uganda with: * Izumi Aizu (Mr) - Japan * Bill Drake (Mr) - North American (Lives in Geneva) * Lillian Nalwoga (Ms.) - Uganda serving on the 2012 MAG. As per http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/magabout/941-mag-2012- the 2012 MAG members were. Multistakeholder Advisory Group - List of Members - 2012 * *Mr. Aizu, Izumi * Tokyo, Japan - Senior Research Fellow and Professor, Institute for InfoSocionomics, Tama University * *Ms. Aguerre, Carolina * Buenos Aires, Argentina - General Manager, Latin America and Carribean TLD Association (LACTLD) * *Mr. Al Shatti, Qusai * Kuwait City, Kuwait - Deputy Chairman, Kuwait Information Technology Society * *Mr. Ataho, Collins * Kampala, Uganda - Internet Technical Support, Orange Uganda * *Ms. Betancourt, Valeria * Quito, Ecuador - Communication and Information Policy Programme Manager, Association for Progressive Communications (APC) * *Ms. Bommelaer, Constance * Geneva, Switzerland- Director, Public Policy, Internet Society (ISOC) * *Mr. Brueggeman, Jeff * Washington DC, USA - Vice President - Public Policy and deputy Chief Privacy Officer, AT&T * *Ms. Cavalli, Olga del Carmen* Buenos Aires, Argentina - Adviser for technology, Ministry of Foreign Affairs * *Mr. Carvell, Mark * London, United Kingdom - Special Adviser and Executive Coordinator, Global Internet Governance Policy, Department for Culture, Media and Sport * *Ms. Cretu, Veronica * Chisinau, Moldova – President, CMB Training Center * *Mr. Dengo, Manuel* Geneva, Switzerland - Ambassador Permanent Representative, Permanent Mission of Costa Rica to the United Nations Office at Geneva * *Mr. Dewapura, Reshan * Colombo, Sri Lanka - Chief Executive Officer, ICT Agency of Sri Lanka * *Mr. Disspain, Chris* Carlton, Australia - Chief Executive Officer, .AU Registry * *Mr. Drake, William * Geneva, Switzerland - International Fellow and Lecturer, Media Change and Innovation Division, IPMZ, University Zurich * *Ms. Dryden, Heather * Ottawa, Canada - Senior Policy Advisor, International Telecommunications Policy and Coordination Directorate, Canadian Department of Industry * *Mr. Echeberría, Raúl * Montevideo, Uruguay - Executive Director/CEO, Latin America and Caribbean Internet Addresses Registry (LACNIC) * *Mr. Esmat, Baher * Cairo, Egypt - Manager - Regional Relations Middle East, Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) * *Ms. Esterhuysen, Anriette * Johannesburg, South Africa - Executive Director, Association for Progressive Communications (APC) * *Ms. Fell, Lucinda * London, United Kingdom - Director of Policy and Communication, Childnet * *Mr. Filip, Ondřej * České Budějovice, Czech Republic - Chief Executive Officer, CZ.NIC * *Mr. Guo, Liang * Beijing, China - Director of the China Internet Project and Associate Professor, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences (CASS) * *Ms. Hassan, Ayesha * Paris, France - Senior Policy Manager, Digital Economy, Executive in charge of ICT Policy, International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) * *Mr. Hilali, Abdelaziz* Rabat, Morocco - Professor, Institut Supérieur des Télécommunications de Rabat; President, Internet Society Morocco * *Mr. Jamil, Zahid U. * Karachi, Pakistan - Senior Partner and Barrister-at-Law, Jamil and Jamil; Chairman, Domain Name Dispute Resolution Centre * *Mr. Katoh, Masanobu * Tokyo, Japan - Executive Vice-president and Executive Director, Country Head of Japan, Intellectual Ventures * *Ms. Kelly, Sanja * New York, USA - Project Director, Freedom on the Net, Freedom House * *Mr. Khimchenko, Igor* Moscow, Russia - Deputy Director for Scientific, Technical and Strategy Development Department, Ministry of Telecom and Mass Communication * *Ms. Kultamaa, Mervi * Helsinki, Finland - Counsellor, Department for External Economic Relations, Ministry for Foreign Affairs of Finland * *Mr. Major, Peter * Geneva, Switzerland - Special Adviser, Permanent Mission of Hungary to the United Nations Office at Geneva * *Ms. Mangal, Anju * Suva, Fiji - Information and Knowledge Management Specialist/Coordinator, Secretariat of the Pacific Community (SPC) * *Mr. McCain, Cecil * Kingston, Jamaica - Director of Post and Telecommunications, Office of the Prime Minister * *Mr. Moedjiono, Sardjoeni * Jakarta, Indonesia - National ICT Council Executive Team Member, Indonesia * *Ms. Morenets, Yuliya * Strasbourg, France - Founder and Representative, TaC -Together against Cybercrime * *Mr. Mustala, Tero * Tuusula, Finland - Principal Consultant, Nokia Siemens Networks * *Ms. Nalwoga, Lillian * Kampala, Uganda - President, Internet Society Uganda/Collaboration on International IT Policy in East and Southern Africa * *Ms. Neves Amoroso, Ana Crist*ina Lisbon, Portugal - Director of the Information Society Department at the Science and Technology Foundation, Ministry of Education and Science in Portugal * *Ms. Nimpuno, Nurani * Stockholm, Sweden - Head of Outreach and Communications, Netnod * *Ms. Okite, Judith * Nairobi, Kenya - Internet Governance Coordinator, Free Software and Open Source Foundation for Africa Dynamic Coalitions on Disability and Accessibility * *Mr. Ostrowski, Igor * Warsaw, Poland - Undersecretary of State and Deputy of the Minister of Administration and Digitization, Ministry of Administration and Digitization * *Mr. Olufuye, Jimson * Abuja, Nigeria - CEO Kontemporary/ Vice-Chairman WITSA * *Mr. Pedraza Barrios, Ricardo * Bogota, Colombia - Director Business Development - Global Public Policy and Government Relations, VeriSign Colombia SAS * *Ms. Piñeiro, Lorena* Santiago, Chile - Head of International Affairs Department, Undersecretariate of Telecommunications * *Mr. Philippot, Jean Paul * Brussels, Belgium - President, European Broadcasting Union (EBU); CEO, Radio Télévision Belge de la Communauté Française (RTBF) * *Mr. Quaynor, Nii * Accra, Ghana - Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, Network Computer Systems; President, Internet Society Ghana * *Mr. Radunovic, Vladimir * Belgrade, Serbia - Coordinator, Internet Governance Programmes, DiploFoundation * *Mr. Rendek, Paul * Dubai, United Arab Emirates - Director of External Relations, Réseaux IP Européens Network Coordination Centre (RIPE NCC) * *Mr. Samakande, Felix * New York, USA - Second Secretary, Permanent Mission of Zimbabwe to the United Nations Office at New York * *Ms. Selaimen, Graciela * Rio de Janeiro, Brazil - Executive Coordinator, Núcleo de Pesquisas, Estudos e Formação (NUPEF) * *Ms. Seltzer, Wendy * New Haven, USA - Technical Team Privacy Identity policy, World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) * *Mr. Sha'ban, Charles * Amman, Jordan - Executive Director, Regional Office, Abu-Ghazaleh Intellectual Property * *Mr. Spiller, Thomas * Brussels, Belgium - Vice President, Global Public Policy, Europe, Middle East and Africa, The Walt Disney Company * *Ms. Swinehart, Theresa * Washington, DC, United States - Executive Director, Global Internet Policy, Verizon Communications * *Ms. Warren, Jennifer A.* Alexandria, VA, United States - Vice President, Technology Policy & Regulation, Lockheed Martin Corporation * *Mr. Wilson, Paul * Brisbane, Australia - Director General, Asia Pacific Network Information Centre (APNIC) * *Mr. Zhao, Chunlu * Beijing, China - Deputy Director for International Organizations, Department of International Cooperation, Ministry of Industry and Information Technology If the idea is to create a ballot with the 2012 nominees (and enable the addition of others?), I'm in agreement. If that's the case, we should contact the above 7 nominees from 2012 and ascertain their continued availability. Best, Tom Lowenhaupt On 1/8/2013 1:55 PM, Ian Peter wrote: > (just changing the topic slightly as this topic was considering a more > general document) > > While I agree with Avri and others that nominating all last years > slate again is a good idea, the last MAG nominations were about 12 > months ago and there appears to be a requirement for up to one third > to be rotated off. So I do think we need to nominate additional names > as well and don't see it as impossible to do so. > > However, as there seems to be support for all current members, I would > like to nominate them all. Thomas, are you reading or should I > separately send a nomination of the members to you as Chair of the > Nomcom? > > (I have already completed my co ordinator ballot form so cannot use > that for nominations - is there another process I should follow or > Thomas can you just pick this up as a nomination of the existing CS > members? > > Ian Peter > > > -----Original Message----- From: Avri Doria > Sent: Wednesday, January 09, 2013 3:26 AM > To: IGC > Subject: Re: [governance] 2013 Preparations for MAG > > Hi, > > One possible easy way out is to just ask the IGC list give consensus > agreement to the candidate list that was submitted last year. It is > not all that long ago that a lot of work went into creating this list. > > This has the advantage of recommending that those on that list who > were included in this year's MAG have endorsement for continuing and > re-suggests the people they did not choose. > > Note: I suggest this as someone who was not given the honor of being > included on that list and thus am not suggesting something that > benefits me in any way. > > avri > > > > > > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From avri at acm.org Tue Jan 8 16:43:36 2013 From: avri at acm.org (Avri Doria) Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2013 16:43:36 -0500 Subject: [governance] 2013 Preparations for MAG - Nominations In-Reply-To: <50EC90CD.1000303@communisphere.com> References: <176F1A5A-BB7A-4D74-AD86-6669AA82D1A7@acm.org> <4EEDF2C25B164578811316212A87417E@Toshiba> <50EC90CD.1000303@communisphere.com> Message-ID: Hi, I do not understand a ballot. We do not have provisions for voting on representatives such as this and I would argue that selection by voting is counter to the charter that demands a nomcom. Whereas endorsing the previous years list would just be an act of endorsement that could be done using the consensus mechanism as it is not a new selection. I am very much against turning the selection of MAG or anything else into a vote without charter changes. avri On 8 Jan 2013, at 16:34, Thomas Lowenhaupt wrote: > Ian, > > My records indicate that the MAG nominees as selected on February 24, 2012 were: > • Izumi Aizu (Mr) - Japan > • Fouad Bajwa (Mr) (current MAG member) - Pakistan > • Fatima Cambronero (Ms) - Argentina > • Bill Drake (Mr) - North American (Lives in Geneva) > • Robert Guerra (Mr) - Canadian & European (Spain) > • Michael Gurstein (Mr) - Canada > • Lillian Nalwoga (Ms.) - Uganda > with: > • Izumi Aizu (Mr) - Japan > • Bill Drake (Mr) - North American (Lives in Geneva) > • Lillian Nalwoga (Ms.) - Uganda > serving on the 2012 MAG. > > As per http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/magabout/941-mag-2012- the 2012 MAG members were. > > Multistakeholder Advisory Group - List of Members - 2012 > > • Mr. Aizu, Izumi > Tokyo, Japan - Senior Research Fellow and Professor, Institute for InfoSocionomics, Tama University > • Ms. Aguerre, Carolina > Buenos Aires, Argentina - General Manager, Latin America and Carribean TLD Association (LACTLD) > • Mr. Al Shatti, Qusai > Kuwait City, Kuwait - Deputy Chairman, Kuwait Information Technology Society > • Mr. Ataho, Collins > Kampala, Uganda - Internet Technical Support, Orange Uganda > • Ms. Betancourt, Valeria > Quito, Ecuador - Communication and Information Policy Programme Manager, Association for Progressive Communications (APC) > • Ms. Bommelaer, Constance > Geneva, Switzerland- Director, Public Policy, Internet Society (ISOC) > • Mr. Brueggeman, Jeff > Washington DC, USA - Vice President - Public Policy and deputy Chief Privacy Officer, AT&T > • Ms. Cavalli, Olga del Carmen > Buenos Aires, Argentina - Adviser for technology, Ministry of Foreign Affairs > • Mr. Carvell, Mark > London, United Kingdom - Special Adviser and Executive Coordinator, Global Internet Governance Policy, Department for Culture, Media and Sport > • Ms. Cretu, Veronica > Chisinau, Moldova – President, CMB Training Center > • Mr. Dengo, Manuel > Geneva, Switzerland - Ambassador Permanent Representative, Permanent Mission of Costa Rica to the United Nations Office at Geneva > • Mr. Dewapura, Reshan > Colombo, Sri Lanka - Chief Executive Officer, ICT Agency of Sri Lanka > • Mr. Disspain, Chris > Carlton, Australia - Chief Executive Officer, .AU Registry > • Mr. Drake, William > Geneva, Switzerland - International Fellow and Lecturer, Media Change and Innovation Division, IPMZ, University Zurich > • Ms. Dryden, Heather > Ottawa, Canada - Senior Policy Advisor, International Telecommunications Policy and Coordination Directorate, Canadian Department of Industry > • Mr. Echeberría, Raúl > Montevideo, Uruguay - Executive Director/CEO, Latin America and Caribbean Internet Addresses Registry (LACNIC) > • Mr. Esmat, Baher > Cairo, Egypt - Manager - Regional Relations Middle East, Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) > • Ms. Esterhuysen, Anriette > Johannesburg, South Africa - Executive Director, Association for Progressive Communications (APC) > • Ms. Fell, Lucinda > London, United Kingdom - Director of Policy and Communication, Childnet > • Mr. Filip, Ondřej > České Budějovice, Czech Republic - Chief Executive Officer, CZ.NIC > • Mr. Guo, Liang > Beijing, China - Director of the China Internet Project and Associate Professor, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences (CASS) > • Ms. Hassan, Ayesha > Paris, France - Senior Policy Manager, Digital Economy, Executive in charge of ICT Policy, International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) > • Mr. Hilali, Abdelaziz > Rabat, Morocco - Professor, Institut Supérieur des Télécommunications de Rabat; President, Internet Society Morocco > • Mr. Jamil, Zahid U. > Karachi, Pakistan - Senior Partner and Barrister-at-Law, Jamil and Jamil; Chairman, Domain Name Dispute Resolution Centre > • Mr. Katoh, Masanobu > Tokyo, Japan - Executive Vice-president and Executive Director, Country Head of Japan, Intellectual Ventures > • Ms. Kelly, Sanja > New York, USA - Project Director, Freedom on the Net, Freedom House > • Mr. Khimchenko, Igor > Moscow, Russia - Deputy Director for Scientific, Technical and Strategy Development Department, Ministry of Telecom and Mass Communication > • Ms. Kultamaa, Mervi > Helsinki, Finland - Counsellor, Department for External Economic Relations, Ministry for Foreign Affairs of Finland > • Mr. Major, Peter > Geneva, Switzerland - Special Adviser, Permanent Mission of Hungary to the United Nations Office at Geneva > • Ms. Mangal, Anju > Suva, Fiji - Information and Knowledge Management Specialist/Coordinator, Secretariat of the Pacific Community (SPC) > • Mr. McCain, Cecil > Kingston, Jamaica - Director of Post and Telecommunications, Office of the Prime Minister > • Mr. Moedjiono, Sardjoeni > Jakarta, Indonesia - National ICT Council Executive Team Member, Indonesia > • Ms. Morenets, Yuliya > Strasbourg, France - Founder and Representative, TaC -Together against Cybercrime > • Mr. Mustala, Tero > Tuusula, Finland - Principal Consultant, Nokia Siemens Networks > • Ms. Nalwoga, Lillian > Kampala, Uganda - President, Internet Society Uganda/Collaboration on International IT Policy in East and Southern Africa > • Ms. Neves Amoroso, Ana Cristina > Lisbon, Portugal - Director of the Information Society Department at the Science and Technology Foundation, Ministry of Education and Science in Portugal > • Ms. Nimpuno, Nurani > Stockholm, Sweden - Head of Outreach and Communications, Netnod > • Ms. Okite, Judith > Nairobi, Kenya - Internet Governance Coordinator, Free Software and Open Source Foundation for Africa Dynamic Coalitions on Disability and Accessibility > • Mr. Ostrowski, Igor > Warsaw, Poland - Undersecretary of State and Deputy of the Minister of Administration and Digitization, Ministry of Administration and Digitization > • Mr. Olufuye, Jimson > Abuja, Nigeria - CEO Kontemporary/ Vice-Chairman WITSA > • Mr. Pedraza Barrios, Ricardo > Bogota, Colombia - Director Business Development - Global Public Policy and Government Relations, VeriSign Colombia SAS > • Ms. Piñeiro, Lorena > Santiago, Chile - Head of International Affairs Department, Undersecretariate of Telecommunications > • Mr. Philippot, Jean Paul > Brussels, Belgium - President, European Broadcasting Union (EBU); CEO, Radio Télévision Belge de la Communauté Française (RTBF) > • Mr. Quaynor, Nii > Accra, Ghana - Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, Network Computer Systems; President, Internet Society Ghana > • Mr. Radunovic, Vladimir > Belgrade, Serbia - Coordinator, Internet Governance Programmes, DiploFoundation > • Mr. Rendek, Paul > Dubai, United Arab Emirates - Director of External Relations, Réseaux IP Européens Network Coordination Centre (RIPE NCC) > • Mr. Samakande, Felix > New York, USA - Second Secretary, Permanent Mission of Zimbabwe to the United Nations Office at New York > • Ms. Selaimen, Graciela > Rio de Janeiro, Brazil - Executive Coordinator, Núcleo de Pesquisas, Estudos e Formação (NUPEF) > • Ms. Seltzer, Wendy > New Haven, USA - Technical Team Privacy Identity policy, World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) > • Mr. Sha'ban, Charles > Amman, Jordan - Executive Director, Regional Office, Abu-Ghazaleh Intellectual Property > • Mr. Spiller, Thomas > Brussels, Belgium - Vice President, Global Public Policy, Europe, Middle East and Africa, The Walt Disney Company > • Ms. Swinehart, Theresa > Washington, DC, United States - Executive Director, Global Internet Policy, Verizon Communications > • Ms. Warren, Jennifer A. > Alexandria, VA, United States - Vice President, Technology Policy & Regulation, Lockheed Martin Corporation > • Mr. Wilson, Paul > Brisbane, Australia - Director General, Asia Pacific Network Information Centre (APNIC) > • Mr. Zhao, Chunlu > Beijing, China - Deputy Director for International Organizations, Department of International Cooperation, Ministry of Industry and Information Technology > > If the idea is to create a ballot with the 2012 nominees (and enable the addition of others?), I'm in agreement. If that's the case, we should contact the above 7 nominees from 2012 and ascertain their continued availability. > > Best, > > Tom Lowenhaupt > > > On 1/8/2013 1:55 PM, Ian Peter wrote: >> (just changing the topic slightly as this topic was considering a more general document) >> >> While I agree with Avri and others that nominating all last years slate again is a good idea, the last MAG nominations were about 12 months ago and there appears to be a requirement for up to one third to be rotated off. So I do think we need to nominate additional names as well and don't see it as impossible to do so. >> >> However, as there seems to be support for all current members, I would like to nominate them all. Thomas, are you reading or should I separately send a nomination of the members to you as Chair of the Nomcom? >> >> (I have already completed my co ordinator ballot form so cannot use that for nominations - is there another process I should follow or Thomas can you just pick this up as a nomination of the existing CS members? >> >> Ian Peter >> >> >> -----Original Message----- From: Avri Doria >> Sent: Wednesday, January 09, 2013 3:26 AM >> To: IGC >> Subject: Re: [governance] 2013 Preparations for MAG >> >> Hi, >> >> One possible easy way out is to just ask the IGC list give consensus agreement to the candidate list that was submitted last year. It is not all that long ago that a lot of work went into creating this list. >> >> This has the advantage of recommending that those on that list who were included in this year's MAG have endorsement for continuing and re-suggests the people they did not choose. >> >> Note: I suggest this as someone who was not given the honor of being included on that list and thus am not suggesting something that benefits me in any way. >> >> avri >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 >> > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com Tue Jan 8 16:49:27 2013 From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro) Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2013 10:49:27 +1300 Subject: [governance] 2013 Preparations for MAG - Nominations In-Reply-To: References: <176F1A5A-BB7A-4D74-AD86-6669AA82D1A7@acm.org> <4EEDF2C25B164578811316212A87417E@Toshiba> <50EC90CD.1000303@communisphere.com> Message-ID: On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 10:43 AM, Avri Doria wrote: > Hi, > > I do not understand a ballot. > There is no ballot. The NomCom will review the list of Nominations and Expressions of Interest. There have been suggestions on the list about endorsing the selection made by previous NomCom. The option to nominate someone for the MAG was included in the electronic ballot/poll papers but these are just a means of capturing peoples' nominations and are not "selection" per say. These people will be asked whether they accept these nominations and if they do required to submit their information to the NomCom through a designated email which the NomCom will draw from as they make their review and selection. > > We do not have provisions for voting on representatives such as this and I > would argue that selection by voting is counter to the charter that demands > a nomcom. > > Whereas endorsing the previous years list would just be an act of > endorsement that could be done using the consensus mechanism as it is not a > new selection. > > I am very much against turning the selection of MAG or anything else into > a vote without charter changes. > > avri > > > On 8 Jan 2013, at 16:34, Thomas Lowenhaupt wrote: > > > Ian, > > > > My records indicate that the MAG nominees as selected on February 24, > 2012 were: > > • Izumi Aizu (Mr) - Japan > > • Fouad Bajwa (Mr) (current MAG member) - Pakistan > > • Fatima Cambronero (Ms) - Argentina > > • Bill Drake (Mr) - North American (Lives in Geneva) > > • Robert Guerra (Mr) - Canadian & European (Spain) > > • Michael Gurstein (Mr) - Canada > > • Lillian Nalwoga (Ms.) - Uganda > > with: > > • Izumi Aizu (Mr) - Japan > > • Bill Drake (Mr) - North American (Lives in Geneva) > > • Lillian Nalwoga (Ms.) - Uganda > > serving on the 2012 MAG. > > > > As per http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/magabout/941-mag-2012- the 2012 > MAG members were. > > > > Multistakeholder Advisory Group - List of Members - 2012 > > > > • Mr. Aizu, Izumi > > Tokyo, Japan - Senior Research Fellow and Professor, Institute for > InfoSocionomics, Tama University > > • Ms. Aguerre, Carolina > > Buenos Aires, Argentina - General Manager, Latin America and Carribean > TLD Association (LACTLD) > > • Mr. Al Shatti, Qusai > > Kuwait City, Kuwait - Deputy Chairman, Kuwait Information Technology > Society > > • Mr. Ataho, Collins > > Kampala, Uganda - Internet Technical Support, Orange Uganda > > • Ms. Betancourt, Valeria > > Quito, Ecuador - Communication and Information Policy Programme Manager, > Association for Progressive Communications (APC) > > • Ms. Bommelaer, Constance > > Geneva, Switzerland- Director, Public Policy, Internet Society (ISOC) > > • Mr. Brueggeman, Jeff > > Washington DC, USA - Vice President - Public Policy and deputy Chief > Privacy Officer, AT&T > > • Ms. Cavalli, Olga del Carmen > > Buenos Aires, Argentina - Adviser for technology, Ministry of Foreign > Affairs > > • Mr. Carvell, Mark > > London, United Kingdom - Special Adviser and Executive Coordinator, > Global Internet Governance Policy, Department for Culture, Media and Sport > > • Ms. Cretu, Veronica > > Chisinau, Moldova – President, CMB Training Center > > • Mr. Dengo, Manuel > > Geneva, Switzerland - Ambassador Permanent Representative, Permanent > Mission of Costa Rica to the United Nations Office at Geneva > > • Mr. Dewapura, Reshan > > Colombo, Sri Lanka - Chief Executive Officer, ICT Agency of Sri Lanka > > • Mr. Disspain, Chris > > Carlton, Australia - Chief Executive Officer, .AU Registry > > • Mr. Drake, William > > Geneva, Switzerland - International Fellow and Lecturer, Media Change > and Innovation Division, IPMZ, University Zurich > > • Ms. Dryden, Heather > > Ottawa, Canada - Senior Policy Advisor, International Telecommunications > Policy and Coordination Directorate, Canadian Department of Industry > > • Mr. Echeberría, Raúl > > Montevideo, Uruguay - Executive Director/CEO, Latin America and > Caribbean Internet Addresses Registry (LACNIC) > > • Mr. Esmat, Baher > > Cairo, Egypt - Manager - Regional Relations Middle East, Internet > Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) > > • Ms. Esterhuysen, Anriette > > Johannesburg, South Africa - Executive Director, Association for > Progressive Communications (APC) > > • Ms. Fell, Lucinda > > London, United Kingdom - Director of Policy and Communication, Childnet > > • Mr. Filip, Ondřej > > České Budějovice, Czech Republic - Chief Executive Officer, CZ.NIC > > • Mr. Guo, Liang > > Beijing, China - Director of the China Internet Project and Associate > Professor, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences (CASS) > > • Ms. Hassan, Ayesha > > Paris, France - Senior Policy Manager, Digital Economy, Executive in > charge of ICT Policy, International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) > > • Mr. Hilali, Abdelaziz > > Rabat, Morocco - Professor, Institut Supérieur des Télécommunications de > Rabat; President, Internet Society Morocco > > • Mr. Jamil, Zahid U. > > Karachi, Pakistan - Senior Partner and Barrister-at-Law, Jamil and > Jamil; Chairman, Domain Name Dispute Resolution Centre > > • Mr. Katoh, Masanobu > > Tokyo, Japan - Executive Vice-president and Executive Director, Country > Head of Japan, Intellectual Ventures > > • Ms. Kelly, Sanja > > New York, USA - Project Director, Freedom on the Net, Freedom House > > • Mr. Khimchenko, Igor > > Moscow, Russia - Deputy Director for Scientific, Technical and Strategy > Development Department, Ministry of Telecom and Mass Communication > > • Ms. Kultamaa, Mervi > > Helsinki, Finland - Counsellor, Department for External Economic > Relations, Ministry for Foreign Affairs of Finland > > • Mr. Major, Peter > > Geneva, Switzerland - Special Adviser, Permanent Mission of Hungary to > the United Nations Office at Geneva > > • Ms. Mangal, Anju > > Suva, Fiji - Information and Knowledge Management > Specialist/Coordinator, Secretariat of the Pacific Community (SPC) > > • Mr. McCain, Cecil > > Kingston, Jamaica - Director of Post and Telecommunications, Office of > the Prime Minister > > • Mr. Moedjiono, Sardjoeni > > Jakarta, Indonesia - National ICT Council Executive Team Member, > Indonesia > > • Ms. Morenets, Yuliya > > Strasbourg, France - Founder and Representative, TaC -Together against > Cybercrime > > • Mr. Mustala, Tero > > Tuusula, Finland - Principal Consultant, Nokia Siemens Networks > > • Ms. Nalwoga, Lillian > > Kampala, Uganda - President, Internet Society Uganda/Collaboration on > International IT Policy in East and Southern Africa > > • Ms. Neves Amoroso, Ana Cristina > > Lisbon, Portugal - Director of the Information Society Department at the > Science and Technology Foundation, Ministry of Education and Science in > Portugal > > • Ms. Nimpuno, Nurani > > Stockholm, Sweden - Head of Outreach and Communications, Netnod > > • Ms. Okite, Judith > > Nairobi, Kenya - Internet Governance Coordinator, Free Software and Open > Source Foundation for Africa Dynamic Coalitions on Disability and > Accessibility > > • Mr. Ostrowski, Igor > > Warsaw, Poland - Undersecretary of State and Deputy of the Minister of > Administration and Digitization, Ministry of Administration and Digitization > > • Mr. Olufuye, Jimson > > Abuja, Nigeria - CEO Kontemporary/ Vice-Chairman WITSA > > • Mr. Pedraza Barrios, Ricardo > > Bogota, Colombia - Director Business Development - Global Public Policy > and Government Relations, VeriSign Colombia SAS > > • Ms. Piñeiro, Lorena > > Santiago, Chile - Head of International Affairs Department, > Undersecretariate of Telecommunications > > • Mr. Philippot, Jean Paul > > Brussels, Belgium - President, European Broadcasting Union (EBU); CEO, > Radio Télévision Belge de la Communauté Française (RTBF) > > • Mr. Quaynor, Nii > > Accra, Ghana - Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, Network Computer > Systems; President, Internet Society Ghana > > • Mr. Radunovic, Vladimir > > Belgrade, Serbia - Coordinator, Internet Governance Programmes, > DiploFoundation > > • Mr. Rendek, Paul > > Dubai, United Arab Emirates - Director of External Relations, Réseaux IP > Européens Network Coordination Centre (RIPE NCC) > > • Mr. Samakande, Felix > > New York, USA - Second Secretary, Permanent Mission of Zimbabwe to the > United Nations Office at New York > > • Ms. Selaimen, Graciela > > Rio de Janeiro, Brazil - Executive Coordinator, Núcleo de Pesquisas, > Estudos e Formação (NUPEF) > > • Ms. Seltzer, Wendy > > New Haven, USA - Technical Team Privacy Identity policy, World Wide Web > Consortium (W3C) > > • Mr. Sha'ban, Charles > > Amman, Jordan - Executive Director, Regional Office, Abu-Ghazaleh > Intellectual Property > > • Mr. Spiller, Thomas > > Brussels, Belgium - Vice President, Global Public Policy, Europe, Middle > East and Africa, The Walt Disney Company > > • Ms. Swinehart, Theresa > > Washington, DC, United States - Executive Director, Global Internet > Policy, Verizon Communications > > • Ms. Warren, Jennifer A. > > Alexandria, VA, United States - Vice President, Technology Policy & > Regulation, Lockheed Martin Corporation > > • Mr. Wilson, Paul > > Brisbane, Australia - Director General, Asia Pacific Network Information > Centre (APNIC) > > • Mr. Zhao, Chunlu > > Beijing, China - Deputy Director for International Organizations, > Department of International Cooperation, Ministry of Industry and > Information Technology > > > > If the idea is to create a ballot with the 2012 nominees (and enable the > addition of others?), I'm in agreement. If that's the case, we should > contact the above 7 nominees from 2012 and ascertain their continued > availability. > > > > Best, > > > > Tom Lowenhaupt > > > > > > On 1/8/2013 1:55 PM, Ian Peter wrote: > >> (just changing the topic slightly as this topic was considering a more > general document) > >> > >> While I agree with Avri and others that nominating all last years slate > again is a good idea, the last MAG nominations were about 12 months ago and > there appears to be a requirement for up to one third to be rotated off. So > I do think we need to nominate additional names as well and don't see it as > impossible to do so. > >> > >> However, as there seems to be support for all current members, I would > like to nominate them all. Thomas, are you reading or should I separately > send a nomination of the members to you as Chair of the Nomcom? > >> > >> (I have already completed my co ordinator ballot form so cannot use > that for nominations - is there another process I should follow or Thomas > can you just pick this up as a nomination of the existing CS members? > >> > >> Ian Peter > >> > >> > >> -----Original Message----- From: Avri Doria > >> Sent: Wednesday, January 09, 2013 3:26 AM > >> To: IGC > >> Subject: Re: [governance] 2013 Preparations for MAG > >> > >> Hi, > >> > >> One possible easy way out is to just ask the IGC list give consensus > agreement to the candidate list that was submitted last year. It is not > all that long ago that a lot of work went into creating this list. > >> > >> This has the advantage of recommending that those on that list who were > included in this year's MAG have endorsement for continuing and re-suggests > the people they did not choose. > >> > >> Note: I suggest this as someone who was not given the honor of being > included on that list and thus am not suggesting something that benefits me > in any way. > >> > >> avri > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> ____________________________________________________________ > >> 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 > >> > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > > 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 > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > -- Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala P.O. Box 17862 Suva Fiji Twitter: @SalanietaT Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro Tel: +679 3544828 Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From george.sadowsky at gmail.com Tue Jan 8 16:57:37 2013 From: george.sadowsky at gmail.com (George Sadowsky) Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2013 16:57:37 -0500 Subject: [governance] Re: a formal appeal request to the appeal team to reverse the recent ban on a Member In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <6B54234D-2587-45E5-A3F5-CD67D2D493CF@gmail.com> I support them also. On Jan 8, 2013, at 2:41 PM, Ivar A. M. Hartmann wrote: > I support these grounds for appeal. > > Ivar > > On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 5:35 PM, McTim wrote: > There was no "ad hominem" attack in the email that caused the > complainant to complain. > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From avri at acm.org Tue Jan 8 17:00:47 2013 From: avri at acm.org (Avri Doria) Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2013 17:00:47 -0500 Subject: [governance] 2013 Preparations for MAG - Nominations In-Reply-To: <50EC90CD.1000303@communisphere.com> References: <176F1A5A-BB7A-4D74-AD86-6669AA82D1A7@acm.org> <4EEDF2C25B164578811316212A87417E@Toshiba> <50EC90CD.1000303@communisphere.com> Message-ID: So in other words this is still using the old, non existent nomcom. And it is doing it in a way that does not allow for new candidates. Even worse abuse of the process. Can I check on the status of the appeal on this. And for clarity sake, the appeal was: Overturn the decision of the co-ordiantor to use a previous Nomcom for selection of 2013 MAG candidates. I think there were at least 4 co-signers, but the thing got so confused I am not sure. thank you avri On 8 Jan 2013, at 16:34, Thomas Lowenhaupt wrote: > Ian, > > My records indicate that the MAG nominees as selected on February 24, 2012 were: > • Izumi Aizu (Mr) - Japan > • Fouad Bajwa (Mr) (current MAG member) - Pakistan > • Fatima Cambronero (Ms) - Argentina > • Bill Drake (Mr) - North American (Lives in Geneva) > • Robert Guerra (Mr) - Canadian & European (Spain) > • Michael Gurstein (Mr) - Canada > • Lillian Nalwoga (Ms.) - Uganda > with: > • Izumi Aizu (Mr) - Japan > • Bill Drake (Mr) - North American (Lives in Geneva) > • Lillian Nalwoga (Ms.) - Uganda > serving on the 2012 MAG. > > As per http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/magabout/941-mag-2012- the 2012 MAG members were. > > Multistakeholder Advisory Group - List of Members - 2012 > > • Mr. Aizu, Izumi > Tokyo, Japan - Senior Research Fellow and Professor, Institute for InfoSocionomics, Tama University > • Ms. Aguerre, Carolina > Buenos Aires, Argentina - General Manager, Latin America and Carribean TLD Association (LACTLD) > • Mr. Al Shatti, Qusai > Kuwait City, Kuwait - Deputy Chairman, Kuwait Information Technology Society > • Mr. Ataho, Collins > Kampala, Uganda - Internet Technical Support, Orange Uganda > • Ms. Betancourt, Valeria > Quito, Ecuador - Communication and Information Policy Programme Manager, Association for Progressive Communications (APC) > • Ms. Bommelaer, Constance > Geneva, Switzerland- Director, Public Policy, Internet Society (ISOC) > • Mr. Brueggeman, Jeff > Washington DC, USA - Vice President - Public Policy and deputy Chief Privacy Officer, AT&T > • Ms. Cavalli, Olga del Carmen > Buenos Aires, Argentina - Adviser for technology, Ministry of Foreign Affairs > • Mr. Carvell, Mark > London, United Kingdom - Special Adviser and Executive Coordinator, Global Internet Governance Policy, Department for Culture, Media and Sport > • Ms. Cretu, Veronica > Chisinau, Moldova – President, CMB Training Center > • Mr. Dengo, Manuel > Geneva, Switzerland - Ambassador Permanent Representative, Permanent Mission of Costa Rica to the United Nations Office at Geneva > • Mr. Dewapura, Reshan > Colombo, Sri Lanka - Chief Executive Officer, ICT Agency of Sri Lanka > • Mr. Disspain, Chris > Carlton, Australia - Chief Executive Officer, .AU Registry > • Mr. Drake, William > Geneva, Switzerland - International Fellow and Lecturer, Media Change and Innovation Division, IPMZ, University Zurich > • Ms. Dryden, Heather > Ottawa, Canada - Senior Policy Advisor, International Telecommunications Policy and Coordination Directorate, Canadian Department of Industry > • Mr. Echeberría, Raúl > Montevideo, Uruguay - Executive Director/CEO, Latin America and Caribbean Internet Addresses Registry (LACNIC) > • Mr. Esmat, Baher > Cairo, Egypt - Manager - Regional Relations Middle East, Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) > • Ms. Esterhuysen, Anriette > Johannesburg, South Africa - Executive Director, Association for Progressive Communications (APC) > • Ms. Fell, Lucinda > London, United Kingdom - Director of Policy and Communication, Childnet > • Mr. Filip, Ondřej > České Budějovice, Czech Republic - Chief Executive Officer, CZ.NIC > • Mr. Guo, Liang > Beijing, China - Director of the China Internet Project and Associate Professor, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences (CASS) > • Ms. Hassan, Ayesha > Paris, France - Senior Policy Manager, Digital Economy, Executive in charge of ICT Policy, International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) > • Mr. Hilali, Abdelaziz > Rabat, Morocco - Professor, Institut Supérieur des Télécommunications de Rabat; President, Internet Society Morocco > • Mr. Jamil, Zahid U. > Karachi, Pakistan - Senior Partner and Barrister-at-Law, Jamil and Jamil; Chairman, Domain Name Dispute Resolution Centre > • Mr. Katoh, Masanobu > Tokyo, Japan - Executive Vice-president and Executive Director, Country Head of Japan, Intellectual Ventures > • Ms. Kelly, Sanja > New York, USA - Project Director, Freedom on the Net, Freedom House > • Mr. Khimchenko, Igor > Moscow, Russia - Deputy Director for Scientific, Technical and Strategy Development Department, Ministry of Telecom and Mass Communication > • Ms. Kultamaa, Mervi > Helsinki, Finland - Counsellor, Department for External Economic Relations, Ministry for Foreign Affairs of Finland > • Mr. Major, Peter > Geneva, Switzerland - Special Adviser, Permanent Mission of Hungary to the United Nations Office at Geneva > • Ms. Mangal, Anju > Suva, Fiji - Information and Knowledge Management Specialist/Coordinator, Secretariat of the Pacific Community (SPC) > • Mr. McCain, Cecil > Kingston, Jamaica - Director of Post and Telecommunications, Office of the Prime Minister > • Mr. Moedjiono, Sardjoeni > Jakarta, Indonesia - National ICT Council Executive Team Member, Indonesia > • Ms. Morenets, Yuliya > Strasbourg, France - Founder and Representative, TaC -Together against Cybercrime > • Mr. Mustala, Tero > Tuusula, Finland - Principal Consultant, Nokia Siemens Networks > • Ms. Nalwoga, Lillian > Kampala, Uganda - President, Internet Society Uganda/Collaboration on International IT Policy in East and Southern Africa > • Ms. Neves Amoroso, Ana Cristina > Lisbon, Portugal - Director of the Information Society Department at the Science and Technology Foundation, Ministry of Education and Science in Portugal > • Ms. Nimpuno, Nurani > Stockholm, Sweden - Head of Outreach and Communications, Netnod > • Ms. Okite, Judith > Nairobi, Kenya - Internet Governance Coordinator, Free Software and Open Source Foundation for Africa Dynamic Coalitions on Disability and Accessibility > • Mr. Ostrowski, Igor > Warsaw, Poland - Undersecretary of State and Deputy of the Minister of Administration and Digitization, Ministry of Administration and Digitization > • Mr. Olufuye, Jimson > Abuja, Nigeria - CEO Kontemporary/ Vice-Chairman WITSA > • Mr. Pedraza Barrios, Ricardo > Bogota, Colombia - Director Business Development - Global Public Policy and Government Relations, VeriSign Colombia SAS > • Ms. Piñeiro, Lorena > Santiago, Chile - Head of International Affairs Department, Undersecretariate of Telecommunications > • Mr. Philippot, Jean Paul > Brussels, Belgium - President, European Broadcasting Union (EBU); CEO, Radio Télévision Belge de la Communauté Française (RTBF) > • Mr. Quaynor, Nii > Accra, Ghana - Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, Network Computer Systems; President, Internet Society Ghana > • Mr. Radunovic, Vladimir > Belgrade, Serbia - Coordinator, Internet Governance Programmes, DiploFoundation > • Mr. Rendek, Paul > Dubai, United Arab Emirates - Director of External Relations, Réseaux IP Européens Network Coordination Centre (RIPE NCC) > • Mr. Samakande, Felix > New York, USA - Second Secretary, Permanent Mission of Zimbabwe to the United Nations Office at New York > • Ms. Selaimen, Graciela > Rio de Janeiro, Brazil - Executive Coordinator, Núcleo de Pesquisas, Estudos e Formação (NUPEF) > • Ms. Seltzer, Wendy > New Haven, USA - Technical Team Privacy Identity policy, World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) > • Mr. Sha'ban, Charles > Amman, Jordan - Executive Director, Regional Office, Abu-Ghazaleh Intellectual Property > • Mr. Spiller, Thomas > Brussels, Belgium - Vice President, Global Public Policy, Europe, Middle East and Africa, The Walt Disney Company > • Ms. Swinehart, Theresa > Washington, DC, United States - Executive Director, Global Internet Policy, Verizon Communications > • Ms. Warren, Jennifer A. > Alexandria, VA, United States - Vice President, Technology Policy & Regulation, Lockheed Martin Corporation > • Mr. Wilson, Paul > Brisbane, Australia - Director General, Asia Pacific Network Information Centre (APNIC) > • Mr. Zhao, Chunlu > Beijing, China - Deputy Director for International Organizations, Department of International Cooperation, Ministry of Industry and Information Technology > > If the idea is to create a ballot with the 2012 nominees (and enable the addition of others?), I'm in agreement. If that's the case, we should contact the above 7 nominees from 2012 and ascertain their continued availability. > > Best, > > Tom Lowenhaupt > > > On 1/8/2013 1:55 PM, Ian Peter wrote: >> (just changing the topic slightly as this topic was considering a more general document) >> >> While I agree with Avri and others that nominating all last years slate again is a good idea, the last MAG nominations were about 12 months ago and there appears to be a requirement for up to one third to be rotated off. So I do think we need to nominate additional names as well and don't see it as impossible to do so. >> >> However, as there seems to be support for all current members, I would like to nominate them all. Thomas, are you reading or should I separately send a nomination of the members to you as Chair of the Nomcom? >> >> (I have already completed my co ordinator ballot form so cannot use that for nominations - is there another process I should follow or Thomas can you just pick this up as a nomination of the existing CS members? >> >> Ian Peter >> >> >> -----Original Message----- From: Avri Doria >> Sent: Wednesday, January 09, 2013 3:26 AM >> To: IGC >> Subject: Re: [governance] 2013 Preparations for MAG >> >> Hi, >> >> One possible easy way out is to just ask the IGC list give consensus agreement to the candidate list that was submitted last year. It is not all that long ago that a lot of work went into creating this list. >> >> This has the advantage of recommending that those on that list who were included in this year's MAG have endorsement for continuing and re-suggests the people they did not choose. >> >> Note: I suggest this as someone who was not given the honor of being included on that list and thus am not suggesting something that benefits me in any way. >> >> avri >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 >> > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com Tue Jan 8 17:02:52 2013 From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro) Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2013 11:02:52 +1300 Subject: [governance] 2013 Preparations for MAG - Nominations In-Reply-To: References: <176F1A5A-BB7A-4D74-AD86-6669AA82D1A7@acm.org> <4EEDF2C25B164578811316212A87417E@Toshiba> <50EC90CD.1000303@communisphere.com> Message-ID: On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 11:00 AM, Avri Doria wrote: > So in other words this is still using the old, non existent nomcom. > And it is doing it in a way that does not allow for new candidates. > Even worse abuse of the process. > > Can I check on the status of the appeal on this. > I will leave this to the Appeal Team to respond to you. > > And for clarity sake, the appeal was: > > Overturn the decision of the co-ordiantor to use a previous Nomcom for > selection of 2013 MAG candidates. > > I think there were at least 4 co-signers, but the thing got so confused I > am not sure. > > thank you > > avri > > > On 8 Jan 2013, at 16:34, Thomas Lowenhaupt wrote: > > > Ian, > > > > My records indicate that the MAG nominees as selected on February 24, > 2012 were: > > • Izumi Aizu (Mr) - Japan > > • Fouad Bajwa (Mr) (current MAG member) - Pakistan > > • Fatima Cambronero (Ms) - Argentina > > • Bill Drake (Mr) - North American (Lives in Geneva) > > • Robert Guerra (Mr) - Canadian & European (Spain) > > • Michael Gurstein (Mr) - Canada > > • Lillian Nalwoga (Ms.) - Uganda > > with: > > • Izumi Aizu (Mr) - Japan > > • Bill Drake (Mr) - North American (Lives in Geneva) > > • Lillian Nalwoga (Ms.) - Uganda > > serving on the 2012 MAG. > > > > As per http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/magabout/941-mag-2012- the 2012 > MAG members were. > > > > Multistakeholder Advisory Group - List of Members - 2012 > > > > • Mr. Aizu, Izumi > > Tokyo, Japan - Senior Research Fellow and Professor, Institute for > InfoSocionomics, Tama University > > • Ms. Aguerre, Carolina > > Buenos Aires, Argentina - General Manager, Latin America and Carribean > TLD Association (LACTLD) > > • Mr. Al Shatti, Qusai > > Kuwait City, Kuwait - Deputy Chairman, Kuwait Information Technology > Society > > • Mr. Ataho, Collins > > Kampala, Uganda - Internet Technical Support, Orange Uganda > > • Ms. Betancourt, Valeria > > Quito, Ecuador - Communication and Information Policy Programme Manager, > Association for Progressive Communications (APC) > > • Ms. Bommelaer, Constance > > Geneva, Switzerland- Director, Public Policy, Internet Society (ISOC) > > • Mr. Brueggeman, Jeff > > Washington DC, USA - Vice President - Public Policy and deputy Chief > Privacy Officer, AT&T > > • Ms. Cavalli, Olga del Carmen > > Buenos Aires, Argentina - Adviser for technology, Ministry of Foreign > Affairs > > • Mr. Carvell, Mark > > London, United Kingdom - Special Adviser and Executive Coordinator, > Global Internet Governance Policy, Department for Culture, Media and Sport > > • Ms. Cretu, Veronica > > Chisinau, Moldova – President, CMB Training Center > > • Mr. Dengo, Manuel > > Geneva, Switzerland - Ambassador Permanent Representative, Permanent > Mission of Costa Rica to the United Nations Office at Geneva > > • Mr. Dewapura, Reshan > > Colombo, Sri Lanka - Chief Executive Officer, ICT Agency of Sri Lanka > > • Mr. Disspain, Chris > > Carlton, Australia - Chief Executive Officer, .AU Registry > > • Mr. Drake, William > > Geneva, Switzerland - International Fellow and Lecturer, Media Change > and Innovation Division, IPMZ, University Zurich > > • Ms. Dryden, Heather > > Ottawa, Canada - Senior Policy Advisor, International Telecommunications > Policy and Coordination Directorate, Canadian Department of Industry > > • Mr. Echeberría, Raúl > > Montevideo, Uruguay - Executive Director/CEO, Latin America and > Caribbean Internet Addresses Registry (LACNIC) > > • Mr. Esmat, Baher > > Cairo, Egypt - Manager - Regional Relations Middle East, Internet > Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) > > • Ms. Esterhuysen, Anriette > > Johannesburg, South Africa - Executive Director, Association for > Progressive Communications (APC) > > • Ms. Fell, Lucinda > > London, United Kingdom - Director of Policy and Communication, Childnet > > • Mr. Filip, Ondřej > > České Budějovice, Czech Republic - Chief Executive Officer, CZ.NIC > > • Mr. Guo, Liang > > Beijing, China - Director of the China Internet Project and Associate > Professor, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences (CASS) > > • Ms. Hassan, Ayesha > > Paris, France - Senior Policy Manager, Digital Economy, Executive in > charge of ICT Policy, International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) > > • Mr. Hilali, Abdelaziz > > Rabat, Morocco - Professor, Institut Supérieur des Télécommunications de > Rabat; President, Internet Society Morocco > > • Mr. Jamil, Zahid U. > > Karachi, Pakistan - Senior Partner and Barrister-at-Law, Jamil and > Jamil; Chairman, Domain Name Dispute Resolution Centre > > • Mr. Katoh, Masanobu > > Tokyo, Japan - Executive Vice-president and Executive Director, Country > Head of Japan, Intellectual Ventures > > • Ms. Kelly, Sanja > > New York, USA - Project Director, Freedom on the Net, Freedom House > > • Mr. Khimchenko, Igor > > Moscow, Russia - Deputy Director for Scientific, Technical and Strategy > Development Department, Ministry of Telecom and Mass Communication > > • Ms. Kultamaa, Mervi > > Helsinki, Finland - Counsellor, Department for External Economic > Relations, Ministry for Foreign Affairs of Finland > > • Mr. Major, Peter > > Geneva, Switzerland - Special Adviser, Permanent Mission of Hungary to > the United Nations Office at Geneva > > • Ms. Mangal, Anju > > Suva, Fiji - Information and Knowledge Management > Specialist/Coordinator, Secretariat of the Pacific Community (SPC) > > • Mr. McCain, Cecil > > Kingston, Jamaica - Director of Post and Telecommunications, Office of > the Prime Minister > > • Mr. Moedjiono, Sardjoeni > > Jakarta, Indonesia - National ICT Council Executive Team Member, > Indonesia > > • Ms. Morenets, Yuliya > > Strasbourg, France - Founder and Representative, TaC -Together against > Cybercrime > > • Mr. Mustala, Tero > > Tuusula, Finland - Principal Consultant, Nokia Siemens Networks > > • Ms. Nalwoga, Lillian > > Kampala, Uganda - President, Internet Society Uganda/Collaboration on > International IT Policy in East and Southern Africa > > • Ms. Neves Amoroso, Ana Cristina > > Lisbon, Portugal - Director of the Information Society Department at the > Science and Technology Foundation, Ministry of Education and Science in > Portugal > > • Ms. Nimpuno, Nurani > > Stockholm, Sweden - Head of Outreach and Communications, Netnod > > • Ms. Okite, Judith > > Nairobi, Kenya - Internet Governance Coordinator, Free Software and Open > Source Foundation for Africa Dynamic Coalitions on Disability and > Accessibility > > • Mr. Ostrowski, Igor > > Warsaw, Poland - Undersecretary of State and Deputy of the Minister of > Administration and Digitization, Ministry of Administration and Digitization > > • Mr. Olufuye, Jimson > > Abuja, Nigeria - CEO Kontemporary/ Vice-Chairman WITSA > > • Mr. Pedraza Barrios, Ricardo > > Bogota, Colombia - Director Business Development - Global Public Policy > and Government Relations, VeriSign Colombia SAS > > • Ms. Piñeiro, Lorena > > Santiago, Chile - Head of International Affairs Department, > Undersecretariate of Telecommunications > > • Mr. Philippot, Jean Paul > > Brussels, Belgium - President, European Broadcasting Union (EBU); CEO, > Radio Télévision Belge de la Communauté Française (RTBF) > > • Mr. Quaynor, Nii > > Accra, Ghana - Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, Network Computer > Systems; President, Internet Society Ghana > > • Mr. Radunovic, Vladimir > > Belgrade, Serbia - Coordinator, Internet Governance Programmes, > DiploFoundation > > • Mr. Rendek, Paul > > Dubai, United Arab Emirates - Director of External Relations, Réseaux IP > Européens Network Coordination Centre (RIPE NCC) > > • Mr. Samakande, Felix > > New York, USA - Second Secretary, Permanent Mission of Zimbabwe to the > United Nations Office at New York > > • Ms. Selaimen, Graciela > > Rio de Janeiro, Brazil - Executive Coordinator, Núcleo de Pesquisas, > Estudos e Formação (NUPEF) > > • Ms. Seltzer, Wendy > > New Haven, USA - Technical Team Privacy Identity policy, World Wide Web > Consortium (W3C) > > • Mr. Sha'ban, Charles > > Amman, Jordan - Executive Director, Regional Office, Abu-Ghazaleh > Intellectual Property > > • Mr. Spiller, Thomas > > Brussels, Belgium - Vice President, Global Public Policy, Europe, Middle > East and Africa, The Walt Disney Company > > • Ms. Swinehart, Theresa > > Washington, DC, United States - Executive Director, Global Internet > Policy, Verizon Communications > > • Ms. Warren, Jennifer A. > > Alexandria, VA, United States - Vice President, Technology Policy & > Regulation, Lockheed Martin Corporation > > • Mr. Wilson, Paul > > Brisbane, Australia - Director General, Asia Pacific Network Information > Centre (APNIC) > > • Mr. Zhao, Chunlu > > Beijing, China - Deputy Director for International Organizations, > Department of International Cooperation, Ministry of Industry and > Information Technology > > > > If the idea is to create a ballot with the 2012 nominees (and enable the > addition of others?), I'm in agreement. If that's the case, we should > contact the above 7 nominees from 2012 and ascertain their continued > availability. > > > > Best, > > > > Tom Lowenhaupt > > > > > > On 1/8/2013 1:55 PM, Ian Peter wrote: > >> (just changing the topic slightly as this topic was considering a more > general document) > >> > >> While I agree with Avri and others that nominating all last years slate > again is a good idea, the last MAG nominations were about 12 months ago and > there appears to be a requirement for up to one third to be rotated off. So > I do think we need to nominate additional names as well and don't see it as > impossible to do so. > >> > >> However, as there seems to be support for all current members, I would > like to nominate them all. Thomas, are you reading or should I separately > send a nomination of the members to you as Chair of the Nomcom? > >> > >> (I have already completed my co ordinator ballot form so cannot use > that for nominations - is there another process I should follow or Thomas > can you just pick this up as a nomination of the existing CS members? > >> > >> Ian Peter > >> > >> > >> -----Original Message----- From: Avri Doria > >> Sent: Wednesday, January 09, 2013 3:26 AM > >> To: IGC > >> Subject: Re: [governance] 2013 Preparations for MAG > >> > >> Hi, > >> > >> One possible easy way out is to just ask the IGC list give consensus > agreement to the candidate list that was submitted last year. It is not > all that long ago that a lot of work went into creating this list. > >> > >> This has the advantage of recommending that those on that list who were > included in this year's MAG have endorsement for continuing and re-suggests > the people they did not choose. > >> > >> Note: I suggest this as someone who was not given the honor of being > included on that list and thus am not suggesting something that benefits me > in any way. > >> > >> avri > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> ____________________________________________________________ > >> 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 > >> > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > > 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 > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > -- Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala P.O. Box 17862 Suva Fiji Twitter: @SalanietaT Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro Tel: +679 3544828 Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From ian.peter at ianpeter.com Tue Jan 8 17:12:27 2013 From: ian.peter at ianpeter.com (Ian Peter) Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2013 09:12:27 +1100 Subject: [governance] 2013 Preparations for MAG - Nominations In-Reply-To: References: <176F1A5A-BB7A-4D74-AD86-6669AA82D1A7@acm.org> <4EEDF2C25B164578811316212A87417E@Toshiba> <50EC90CD.1000303@communisphere.com> Message-ID: <355D129A091C400FB01005DA7CD444A3@Toshiba> To date the only cosigners re MAG appeal I am aware of are Thomas Lowenhaupt and SRS. But yes it would be good to clarify this -----Original Message----- From: Avri Doria Sent: Wednesday, January 09, 2013 9:00 AM To: IGC Subject: Re: [governance] 2013 Preparations for MAG - Nominations So in other words this is still using the old, non existent nomcom. And it is doing it in a way that does not allow for new candidates. Even worse abuse of the process. Can I check on the status of the appeal on this. And for clarity sake, the appeal was: Overturn the decision of the co-ordiantor to use a previous Nomcom for selection of 2013 MAG candidates. I think there were at least 4 co-signers, but the thing got so confused I am not sure. thank you avri On 8 Jan 2013, at 16:34, Thomas Lowenhaupt wrote: > Ian, > > My records indicate that the MAG nominees as selected on February 24, 2012 > were: > • Izumi Aizu (Mr) - Japan > • Fouad Bajwa (Mr) (current MAG member) - Pakistan > • Fatima Cambronero (Ms) - Argentina > • Bill Drake (Mr) - North American (Lives in Geneva) > • Robert Guerra (Mr) - Canadian & European (Spain) > • Michael Gurstein (Mr) - Canada > • Lillian Nalwoga (Ms.) - Uganda > with: > • Izumi Aizu (Mr) - Japan > • Bill Drake (Mr) - North American (Lives in Geneva) > • Lillian Nalwoga (Ms.) - Uganda > serving on the 2012 MAG. > > As per http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/magabout/941-mag-2012- the 2012 MAG > members were. > > Multistakeholder Advisory Group - List of Members - 2012 > > • Mr. Aizu, Izumi > Tokyo, Japan - Senior Research Fellow and Professor, Institute for > InfoSocionomics, Tama University > • Ms. Aguerre, Carolina > Buenos Aires, Argentina - General Manager, Latin America and Carribean TLD > Association (LACTLD) > • Mr. Al Shatti, Qusai > Kuwait City, Kuwait - Deputy Chairman, Kuwait Information Technology > Society > • Mr. Ataho, Collins > Kampala, Uganda - Internet Technical Support, Orange Uganda > • Ms. Betancourt, Valeria > Quito, Ecuador - Communication and Information Policy Programme Manager, > Association for Progressive Communications (APC) > • Ms. Bommelaer, Constance > Geneva, Switzerland- Director, Public Policy, Internet Society (ISOC) > • Mr. Brueggeman, Jeff > Washington DC, USA - Vice President - Public Policy and deputy Chief > Privacy Officer, AT&T > • Ms. Cavalli, Olga del Carmen > Buenos Aires, Argentina - Adviser for technology, Ministry of Foreign > Affairs > • Mr. Carvell, Mark > London, United Kingdom - Special Adviser and Executive Coordinator, Global > Internet Governance Policy, Department for Culture, Media and Sport > • Ms. Cretu, Veronica > Chisinau, Moldova – President, CMB Training Center > • Mr. Dengo, Manuel > Geneva, Switzerland - Ambassador Permanent Representative, Permanent > Mission of Costa Rica to the United Nations Office at Geneva > • Mr. Dewapura, Reshan > Colombo, Sri Lanka - Chief Executive Officer, ICT Agency of Sri Lanka > • Mr. Disspain, Chris > Carlton, Australia - Chief Executive Officer, .AU Registry > • Mr. Drake, William > Geneva, Switzerland - International Fellow and Lecturer, Media Change and > Innovation Division, IPMZ, University Zurich > • Ms. Dryden, Heather > Ottawa, Canada - Senior Policy Advisor, International Telecommunications > Policy and Coordination Directorate, Canadian Department of Industry > • Mr. Echeberría, Raúl > Montevideo, Uruguay - Executive Director/CEO, Latin America and Caribbean > Internet Addresses Registry (LACNIC) > • Mr. Esmat, Baher > Cairo, Egypt - Manager - Regional Relations Middle East, Internet > Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) > • Ms. Esterhuysen, Anriette > Johannesburg, South Africa - Executive Director, Association for > Progressive Communications (APC) > • Ms. Fell, Lucinda > London, United Kingdom - Director of Policy and Communication, Childnet > • Mr. Filip, Ondřej > České Budějovice, Czech Republic - Chief Executive Officer, CZ.NIC > • Mr. Guo, Liang > Beijing, China - Director of the China Internet Project and Associate > Professor, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences (CASS) > • Ms. Hassan, Ayesha > Paris, France - Senior Policy Manager, Digital Economy, Executive in > charge of ICT Policy, International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) > • Mr. Hilali, Abdelaziz > Rabat, Morocco - Professor, Institut Supérieur des Télécommunications de > Rabat; President, Internet Society Morocco > • Mr. Jamil, Zahid U. > Karachi, Pakistan - Senior Partner and Barrister-at-Law, Jamil and Jamil; > Chairman, Domain Name Dispute Resolution Centre > • Mr. Katoh, Masanobu > Tokyo, Japan - Executive Vice-president and Executive Director, Country > Head of Japan, Intellectual Ventures > • Ms. Kelly, Sanja > New York, USA - Project Director, Freedom on the Net, Freedom House > • Mr. Khimchenko, Igor > Moscow, Russia - Deputy Director for Scientific, Technical and Strategy > Development Department, Ministry of Telecom and Mass Communication > • Ms. Kultamaa, Mervi > Helsinki, Finland - Counsellor, Department for External Economic > Relations, Ministry for Foreign Affairs of Finland > • Mr. Major, Peter > Geneva, Switzerland - Special Adviser, Permanent Mission of Hungary to the > United Nations Office at Geneva > • Ms. Mangal, Anju > Suva, Fiji - Information and Knowledge Management Specialist/Coordinator, > Secretariat of the Pacific Community (SPC) > • Mr. McCain, Cecil > Kingston, Jamaica - Director of Post and Telecommunications, Office of the > Prime Minister > • Mr. Moedjiono, Sardjoeni > Jakarta, Indonesia - National ICT Council Executive Team Member, Indonesia > • Ms. Morenets, Yuliya > Strasbourg, France - Founder and Representative, TaC -Together against > Cybercrime > • Mr. Mustala, Tero > Tuusula, Finland - Principal Consultant, Nokia Siemens Networks > • Ms. Nalwoga, Lillian > Kampala, Uganda - President, Internet Society Uganda/Collaboration on > International IT Policy in East and Southern Africa > • Ms. Neves Amoroso, Ana Cristina > Lisbon, Portugal - Director of the Information Society Department at the > Science and Technology Foundation, Ministry of Education and Science in > Portugal > • Ms. Nimpuno, Nurani > Stockholm, Sweden - Head of Outreach and Communications, Netnod > • Ms. Okite, Judith > Nairobi, Kenya - Internet Governance Coordinator, Free Software and Open > Source Foundation for Africa Dynamic Coalitions on Disability and > Accessibility > • Mr. Ostrowski, Igor > Warsaw, Poland - Undersecretary of State and Deputy of the Minister of > Administration and Digitization, Ministry of Administration and > Digitization > • Mr. Olufuye, Jimson > Abuja, Nigeria - CEO Kontemporary/ Vice-Chairman WITSA > • Mr. Pedraza Barrios, Ricardo > Bogota, Colombia - Director Business Development - Global Public Policy > and Government Relations, VeriSign Colombia SAS > • Ms. Piñeiro, Lorena > Santiago, Chile - Head of International Affairs Department, > Undersecretariate of Telecommunications > • Mr. Philippot, Jean Paul > Brussels, Belgium - President, European Broadcasting Union (EBU); CEO, > Radio Télévision Belge de la Communauté Française (RTBF) > • Mr. Quaynor, Nii > Accra, Ghana - Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, Network Computer > Systems; President, Internet Society Ghana > • Mr. Radunovic, Vladimir > Belgrade, Serbia - Coordinator, Internet Governance Programmes, > DiploFoundation > • Mr. Rendek, Paul > Dubai, United Arab Emirates - Director of External Relations, Réseaux IP > Européens Network Coordination Centre (RIPE NCC) > • Mr. Samakande, Felix > New York, USA - Second Secretary, Permanent Mission of Zimbabwe to the > United Nations Office at New York > • Ms. Selaimen, Graciela > Rio de Janeiro, Brazil - Executive Coordinator, Núcleo de Pesquisas, > Estudos e Formação (NUPEF) > • Ms. Seltzer, Wendy > New Haven, USA - Technical Team Privacy Identity policy, World Wide Web > Consortium (W3C) > • Mr. Sha'ban, Charles > Amman, Jordan - Executive Director, Regional Office, Abu-Ghazaleh > Intellectual Property > • Mr. Spiller, Thomas > Brussels, Belgium - Vice President, Global Public Policy, Europe, Middle > East and Africa, The Walt Disney Company > • Ms. Swinehart, Theresa > Washington, DC, United States - Executive Director, Global Internet > Policy, Verizon Communications > • Ms. Warren, Jennifer A. > Alexandria, VA, United States - Vice President, Technology Policy & > Regulation, Lockheed Martin Corporation > • Mr. Wilson, Paul > Brisbane, Australia - Director General, Asia Pacific Network Information > Centre (APNIC) > • Mr. Zhao, Chunlu > Beijing, China - Deputy Director for International Organizations, > Department of International Cooperation, Ministry of Industry and > Information Technology > > If the idea is to create a ballot with the 2012 nominees (and enable the > addition of others?), I'm in agreement. If that's the case, we should > contact the above 7 nominees from 2012 and ascertain their continued > availability. > > Best, > > Tom Lowenhaupt > > > On 1/8/2013 1:55 PM, Ian Peter wrote: >> (just changing the topic slightly as this topic was considering a more >> general document) >> >> While I agree with Avri and others that nominating all last years slate >> again is a good idea, the last MAG nominations were about 12 months ago >> and there appears to be a requirement for up to one third to be rotated >> off. So I do think we need to nominate additional names as well and don't >> see it as impossible to do so. >> >> However, as there seems to be support for all current members, I would >> like to nominate them all. Thomas, are you reading or should I separately >> send a nomination of the members to you as Chair of the Nomcom? >> >> (I have already completed my co ordinator ballot form so cannot use that >> for nominations - is there another process I should follow or Thomas can >> you just pick this up as a nomination of the existing CS members? >> >> Ian Peter >> >> >> -----Original Message----- From: Avri Doria >> Sent: Wednesday, January 09, 2013 3:26 AM >> To: IGC >> Subject: Re: [governance] 2013 Preparations for MAG >> >> Hi, >> >> One possible easy way out is to just ask the IGC list give consensus >> agreement to the candidate list that was submitted last year. It is not >> all that long ago that a lot of work went into creating this list. >> >> This has the advantage of recommending that those on that list who were >> included in this year's MAG have endorsement for continuing and >> re-suggests the people they did not choose. >> >> Note: I suggest this as someone who was not given the honor of being >> included on that list and thus am not suggesting something that benefits >> me in any way. >> >> avri >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 >> > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 ____________________________________________________________ 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From ian.peter at ianpeter.com Tue Jan 8 17:16:24 2013 From: ian.peter at ianpeter.com (Ian Peter) Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2013 09:16:24 +1100 Subject: [governance] Re: a formal appeal request to the appeal team to reverse the recent ban on a Member In-Reply-To: <6B54234D-2587-45E5-A3F5-CD67D2D493CF@gmail.com> References: <6B54234D-2587-45E5-A3F5-CD67D2D493CF@gmail.com> Message-ID: <1F75C508145945EAB639809F1AB161BF@Toshiba> OK, we have an appeal re suspension (at least from the viewpoint of this Appeals team member. The appeal is to reverse the recent ban on a member (SRS). This Appeals Team will gather and advise. I would imagine this will include a formal call for further inputs from list members, and requests to both Sala and SRS to give their input. But the Appeals Team now needs to determine its approach in accordance with requirements. Ian Peter From: George Sadowsky Sent: Wednesday, January 09, 2013 8:57 AM To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org ; Ivar A. M. Hartmann Cc: McTim ; Ian Peter Subject: Re: [governance] Re: a formal appeal request to the appeal team to reverse the recent ban on a Member I support them also. On Jan 8, 2013, at 2:41 PM, Ivar A. M. Hartmann wrote: I support these grounds for appeal. Ivar On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 5:35 PM, McTim wrote: There was no "ad hominem" attack in the email that caused the complainant to complain. ____________________________________________________________ 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 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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: -------------- 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 From ian.peter at ianpeter.com Tue Jan 8 17:43:42 2013 From: ian.peter at ianpeter.com (Ian Peter) Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2013 09:43:42 +1100 Subject: [governance] 2013 Preparations for MAG - Nominations In-Reply-To: <50EC90CD.1000303@communisphere.com> References: <176F1A5A-BB7A-4D74-AD86-6669AA82D1A7@acm.org> <4EEDF2C25B164578811316212A87417E@Toshiba> <50EC90CD.1000303@communisphere.com> Message-ID: <28F5E396833E437B926E3293FA610323@Toshiba> Thanks Thomas. There are also other names there we should consider supporting, eg Anriette Esterhuysen, a regular contributor here and long standing member. There are I am sure others. I will personally nominate from this list once the procedures for additional nominations are clear (hopefully within 24 hours) Ian Peter From: Thomas Lowenhaupt Sent: Wednesday, January 09, 2013 8:34 AM To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org ; Ian Peter Cc: Avri Doria Subject: Re: [governance] 2013 Preparations for MAG - Nominations Ian, My records indicate that the MAG nominees as selected on February 24, 2012 were: a.. Izumi Aizu (Mr) - Japan b.. Fouad Bajwa (Mr) (current MAG member) - Pakistan c.. Fatima Cambronero (Ms) - Argentina d.. Bill Drake (Mr) - North American (Lives in Geneva) e.. Robert Guerra (Mr) - Canadian & European (Spain) f.. Michael Gurstein (Mr) - Canada g.. Lillian Nalwoga (Ms.) - Uganda with: a.. Izumi Aizu (Mr) - Japan b.. Bill Drake (Mr) - North American (Lives in Geneva) c.. Lillian Nalwoga (Ms.) - Uganda serving on the 2012 MAG. As per http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/magabout/941-mag-2012- the 2012 MAG members were. Multistakeholder Advisory Group - List of Members - 2012 a.. Mr. Aizu, Izumi Tokyo, Japan - Senior Research Fellow and Professor, Institute for InfoSocionomics, Tama University b.. Ms. Aguerre, Carolina Buenos Aires, Argentina - General Manager, Latin America and Carribean TLD Association (LACTLD) c.. Mr. Al Shatti, Qusai Kuwait City, Kuwait - Deputy Chairman, Kuwait Information Technology Society d.. Mr. Ataho, Collins Kampala, Uganda - Internet Technical Support, Orange Uganda e.. Ms. Betancourt, Valeria Quito, Ecuador - Communication and Information Policy Programme Manager, Association for Progressive Communications (APC) f.. Ms. Bommelaer, Constance Geneva, Switzerland- Director, Public Policy, Internet Society (ISOC) g.. Mr. Brueggeman, Jeff Washington DC, USA - Vice President - Public Policy and deputy Chief Privacy Officer, AT&T h.. Ms. Cavalli, Olga del Carmen Buenos Aires, Argentina - Adviser for technology, Ministry of Foreign Affairs i.. Mr. Carvell, Mark London, United Kingdom - Special Adviser and Executive Coordinator, Global Internet Governance Policy, Department for Culture, Media and Sport j.. Ms. Cretu, Veronica Chisinau, Moldova – President, CMB Training Center k.. Mr. Dengo, Manuel Geneva, Switzerland - Ambassador Permanent Representative, Permanent Mission of Costa Rica to the United Nations Office at Geneva l.. Mr. Dewapura, Reshan Colombo, Sri Lanka - Chief Executive Officer, ICT Agency of Sri Lanka m.. Mr. Disspain, Chris Carlton, Australia - Chief Executive Officer, .AU Registry n.. Mr. Drake, William Geneva, Switzerland - International Fellow and Lecturer, Media Change and Innovation Division, IPMZ, University Zurich o.. Ms. Dryden, Heather Ottawa, Canada - Senior Policy Advisor, International Telecommunications Policy and Coordination Directorate, Canadian Department of Industry p.. Mr. Echeberría, Raúl Montevideo, Uruguay - Executive Director/CEO, Latin America and Caribbean Internet Addresses Registry (LACNIC) q.. Mr. Esmat, Baher Cairo, Egypt - Manager - Regional Relations Middle East, Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) r.. Ms. Esterhuysen, Anriette Johannesburg, South Africa - Executive Director, Association for Progressive Communications (APC) s.. Ms. Fell, Lucinda London, United Kingdom - Director of Policy and Communication, Childnet t.. Mr. Filip, Ondřej České Budějovice, Czech Republic - Chief Executive Officer, CZ.NIC u.. Mr. Guo, Liang Beijing, China - Director of the China Internet Project and Associate Professor, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences (CASS) v.. Ms. Hassan, Ayesha Paris, France - Senior Policy Manager, Digital Economy, Executive in charge of ICT Policy, International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) w.. Mr. Hilali, Abdelaziz Rabat, Morocco - Professor, Institut Supérieur des Télécommunications de Rabat; President, Internet Society Morocco x.. Mr. Jamil, Zahid U. Karachi, Pakistan - Senior Partner and Barrister-at-Law, Jamil and Jamil; Chairman, Domain Name Dispute Resolution Centre y.. Mr. Katoh, Masanobu Tokyo, Japan - Executive Vice-president and Executive Director, Country Head of Japan, Intellectual Ventures z.. Ms. Kelly, Sanja New York, USA - Project Director, Freedom on the Net, Freedom House aa.. Mr. Khimchenko, Igor Moscow, Russia - Deputy Director for Scientific, Technical and Strategy Development Department, Ministry of Telecom and Mass Communication ab.. Ms. Kultamaa, Mervi Helsinki, Finland - Counsellor, Department for External Economic Relations, Ministry for Foreign Affairs of Finland ac.. Mr. Major, Peter Geneva, Switzerland - Special Adviser, Permanent Mission of Hungary to the United Nations Office at Geneva ad.. Ms. Mangal, Anju Suva, Fiji - Information and Knowledge Management Specialist/Coordinator, Secretariat of the Pacific Community (SPC) ae.. Mr. McCain, Cecil Kingston, Jamaica - Director of Post and Telecommunications, Office of the Prime Minister af.. Mr. Moedjiono, Sardjoeni Jakarta, Indonesia - National ICT Council Executive Team Member, Indonesia ag.. Ms. Morenets, Yuliya Strasbourg, France - Founder and Representative, TaC -Together against Cybercrime ah.. Mr. Mustala, Tero Tuusula, Finland - Principal Consultant, Nokia Siemens Networks ai.. Ms. Nalwoga, Lillian Kampala, Uganda - President, Internet Society Uganda/Collaboration on International IT Policy in East and Southern Africa aj.. Ms. Neves Amoroso, Ana Cristina Lisbon, Portugal - Director of the Information Society Department at the Science and Technology Foundation, Ministry of Education and Science in Portugal ak.. Ms. Nimpuno, Nurani Stockholm, Sweden - Head of Outreach and Communications, Netnod al.. Ms. Okite, Judith Nairobi, Kenya - Internet Governance Coordinator, Free Software and Open Source Foundation for Africa Dynamic Coalitions on Disability and Accessibility am.. Mr. Ostrowski, Igor Warsaw, Poland - Undersecretary of State and Deputy of the Minister of Administration and Digitization, Ministry of Administration and Digitization an.. Mr. Olufuye, Jimson Abuja, Nigeria - CEO Kontemporary/ Vice-Chairman WITSA ao.. Mr. Pedraza Barrios, Ricardo Bogota, Colombia - Director Business Development - Global Public Policy and Government Relations, VeriSign Colombia SAS ap.. Ms. Piñeiro, Lorena Santiago, Chile - Head of International Affairs Department, Undersecretariate of Telecommunications aq.. Mr. Philippot, Jean Paul Brussels, Belgium - President, European Broadcasting Union (EBU); CEO, Radio Télévision Belge de la Communauté Française (RTBF) ar.. Mr. Quaynor, Nii Accra, Ghana - Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, Network Computer Systems; President, Internet Society Ghana as.. Mr. Radunovic, Vladimir Belgrade, Serbia - Coordinator, Internet Governance Programmes, DiploFoundation at.. Mr. Rendek, Paul Dubai, United Arab Emirates - Director of External Relations, Réseaux IP Européens Network Coordination Centre (RIPE NCC) au.. Mr. Samakande, Felix New York, USA - Second Secretary, Permanent Mission of Zimbabwe to the United Nations Office at New York av.. Ms. Selaimen, Graciela Rio de Janeiro, Brazil - Executive Coordinator, Núcleo de Pesquisas, Estudos e Formação (NUPEF) aw.. Ms. Seltzer, Wendy New Haven, USA - Technical Team Privacy Identity policy, World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) ax.. Mr. Sha'ban, Charles Amman, Jordan - Executive Director, Regional Office, Abu-Ghazaleh Intellectual Property ay.. Mr. Spiller, Thomas Brussels, Belgium - Vice President, Global Public Policy, Europe, Middle East and Africa, The Walt Disney Company az.. Ms. Swinehart, Theresa Washington, DC, United States - Executive Director, Global Internet Policy, Verizon Communications ba.. Ms. Warren, Jennifer A. Alexandria, VA, United States - Vice President, Technology Policy & Regulation, Lockheed Martin Corporation bb.. Mr. Wilson, Paul Brisbane, Australia - Director General, Asia Pacific Network Information Centre (APNIC) bc.. Mr. Zhao, Chunlu Beijing, China - Deputy Director for International Organizations, Department of International Cooperation, Ministry of Industry and Information Technology If the idea is to create a ballot with the 2012 nominees (and enable the addition of others?), I'm in agreement. If that's the case, we should contact the above 7 nominees from 2012 and ascertain their continued availability. Best, Tom Lowenhaupt On 1/8/2013 1:55 PM, Ian Peter wrote: (just changing the topic slightly as this topic was considering a more general document) While I agree with Avri and others that nominating all last years slate again is a good idea, the last MAG nominations were about 12 months ago and there appears to be a requirement for up to one third to be rotated off. So I do think we need to nominate additional names as well and don't see it as impossible to do so. However, as there seems to be support for all current members, I would like to nominate them all. Thomas, are you reading or should I separately send a nomination of the members to you as Chair of the Nomcom? (I have already completed my co ordinator ballot form so cannot use that for nominations - is there another process I should follow or Thomas can you just pick this up as a nomination of the existing CS members? Ian Peter -----Original Message----- From: Avri Doria Sent: Wednesday, January 09, 2013 3:26 AM To: IGC Subject: Re: [governance] 2013 Preparations for MAG Hi, One possible easy way out is to just ask the IGC list give consensus agreement to the candidate list that was submitted last year. It is not all that long ago that a lot of work went into creating this list. This has the advantage of recommending that those on that list who were included in this year's MAG have endorsement for continuing and re-suggests the people they did not choose. Note: I suggest this as someone who was not given the honor of being included on that list and thus am not suggesting something that benefits me in any way. avri ____________________________________________________________ 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 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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: -------------- 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 From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com Tue Jan 8 19:26:06 2013 From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro) Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2013 13:26:06 +1300 Subject: [governance] U.S. Ambassador-at-Large for Global Women's Issues Melanne S. Verveer To Co-Host Inaugural International Forum on Women, Information and Communication Technologies, and Development Message-ID: Dear All, I had the privilege of being invited by Melanne S Verveer to a lunch that she hosted at the State Department in Washington DC last year. There is an interesting 2 day Forum which some of you may be interested in as they are hosting the Inaugural International Forum on Women, ICT and Development. You can also pre-register for the event, see below for details: U.S. Ambassador-at-Large for Global Women's Issues Melanne S. Verveer To Co-Host Inaugural International Forum on Women, Information and Communication Technologies, and Development Notice to the Press Office of the Spokesperson Washington, DC January 8, 2013 ------------------------------ On January 10, at 9:00 a.m. Ambassador-at-Large for Global Women’s Issues Melanne Verveer will convene and deliver remarks at the first international Working Forum on Women, Information and Communication Technologies and Development (WICTAD) at the Institute for International Education (IIE) in Washington, DC. Co-hosted by the Department of State’s Office of Global Women’s Issues and UN Women, WICTAD will bring together representatives from civil society, academia, government, the private sector, and the UN to assess the social, economic, and political implications of the gender gap in Internet access. Participants in the two-day forum will explore opportunities for increased collaboration as well as identify quantifiable goals and strategies for expanding women’s and girls’ access to information and communication technologies (ICTs), related services, and opportunities in the ICT field. Following the WICTAD opening plenary from 9:15 to 10:00 a.m., Intel Corporation will unveil its “Women and the Web” report, a groundbreaking study providing concrete data on the Internet gender gap in the developing world. Following the report launch, Ambassador Verveer will speak on a discussion panel on “The Internet Gender Gap,” beginning at 10:20 a.m. Other WICTAD speakers and panelists include UN Women representative Gulden Turkoz-Cosslet; Shelley Esque, President of Intel Foundation; Lawrence Yanovitch, CEO of GSMA; Gary Fowlie, Head of the International Telecommunications (IT) Liaison Office to the UN; and Minerva Novero-Belec, Policy Specialist with the UN Development Programme; Maura O’Neill, U.S. Agency for International Development Senior Counselor and Chief Innovation Officer, and representatives from the UN Foundation, World Bank, and Grameen Foundation. The remarks, open plenary, report release, and discussion panel will be open to the press. Final access time for press: 8:45 a.m. at IIE offices at 1400 K Street NW, Suite 700. Media representatives may attend this event upon presentation of one of the following: (1) A U.S. Government-issued identification card (Department of State, White House, Congress, Department of Defense, or Foreign Press Center), (2) a media-issued photo identification card, or (3) a letter from their employer on letterhead verifying their employment as a journalist, accompanied by an official photo identification card (driver's license, passport). For further information or to pre-register, please contact SGWI_PA at state.gov . Follow the Forum discussion on Twitter @S_GWI or at #WICTAD and #WomenWeb. PRN: 2013/0011 -- Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala P.O. Box 17862 Suva Fiji Twitter: @SalanietaT Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro Tel: +679 3544828 Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From gurstein at gmail.com Tue Jan 8 22:05:41 2013 From: gurstein at gmail.com (michael gurstein) Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2013 19:05:41 -0800 Subject: [governance] FW: [Dewayne-Net] Vint Cerf: Internet competition has "evaporated" Message-ID: <02c201cdee16$35837030$a08a5090$@gmail.com> Interesting discussion pointed to below... but I'm wondering why "competition" should be the only legitimate basis for regulation... Doesn't the public interest extend rather beyond the functioning of the marketplace? M -----Original Message----- From: dewayne-net at warpspeed.com [mailto:dewayne-net at warpspeed.com] On Behalf Of Dewayne Hendricks Sent: Tuesday, January 08, 2013 1:37 PM To: Multiple recipients of Dewayne-Net Subject: [Dewayne-Net] Vint Cerf: Internet competition has "evaporated" Vint Cerf: Internet competition has "evaporated" since dial-up Zero regulation for telcos could endanger neutrality, Internet co-creator says. By Jon Brodkin Jan 8 2013 Vint Cerf, co-creator of the Internet, said today he is troubled by the prospect of companies like AT&T avoiding government regulation after the transition from traditional phone technology to all-IP networks. Already, he said, competition was decimated when the Internet moved from dial-up providers to cable companies and telcos. Cerf-who made the Internet possible by co-developing the Internet protocol and Transmission Control Protocol technology 40 years ago-was speaking at the Consumer Electronics Show's "Silvers Summit" on technology geared toward the older population. "Some people think silver surfers don't know how to use technology. I have news for you: some of us invented this stuff," the 69-year-old Cerf noted. This happened to be just one day after AT&T described its plans to retire the traditional Public Switched Telephone Network and become an all-IP telco. As we reported, AT&T wants to make this transition without being subject to what it calls "monopoly-era regulatory obligations," which AT&T thinks are unjustified in the Internet age. Who better to weigh in on that topic than Vint Cerf? He took questions after his talk, and I got the chance to ask Cerf to address AT&T's plan and comment on whether he thinks extensive regulation of all-IP telcos is necessary. Here's what he said: I'm not allowed to use foul language, right? My first observation is that it is vital that we maintain openness and neutral access to the Internet's capabilities. The fact that you can carry voice over the Internet is almost incidental to the fact that you can carry any digital content over the Internet. I would not wish to see the question of regulation turn on the notion that Voice over IP is PSTN or is a replacement for PSTN. It is a replacement for almost everything we can do, all of the old network functions can be done on the Internet. Cerf went on to say network neutrality is important, that we must preserve the right of Internet users to choose what applications and websites they are able to access: [snip] Dewayne-Net RSS Feed: -------------- 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 From jeremy at ciroap.org Tue Jan 8 22:29:33 2013 From: jeremy at ciroap.org (Jeremy Malcolm) Date: Wed, 09 Jan 2013 11:29:33 +0800 Subject: [governance] 2013 Preparations for MAG In-Reply-To: <96852223-BE8C-4A61-A49F-5C8CB2EB87F5@acm.org> References: <96852223-BE8C-4A61-A49F-5C8CB2EB87F5@acm.org> Message-ID: <50ECE41D.6040801@ciroap.org> On 09/01/2013, at 2:03 AM, Avri Doria wrote: > Does the text below: > > • Criteria should include suitability of location -conference > facilities, wifi access, open environment that enables discourse; > > Include the lack of Free Expression such as the problem we had in Baku > with the Secretariat being forced by the Host country to stop the > distribution of certain kinds of printed matter. If so, we might want > to be more explicit. We do not want a repeat of Baku this year. It wasn't the host country's doing, from what I understood, but the Secretariat proactively removing material. But maybe you are closer to it than I was and might know better. In any case, I strongly agree. Chengatai gave me a personal commitment to provide a transparent written disclosure for all IGF participants of the rules that apply to distribution of material at the IGF. So far we still haven't seen this. -- *Dr Jeremy Malcolm Senior Policy Officer Consumers International | the global campaigning voice for consumers* Office for Asia-Pacific and the Middle East Lot 5-1 Wisma WIM, 7 Jalan Abang Haji Openg, TTDI, 60000 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia Tel: +60 3 7726 1599 *Your rights, our mission – download CI's Strategy 2015:* http://consint.info/RightsMission @Consumers_Int | www.consumersinternational.org | www.facebook.com/consumersinternational Read our email confidentiality notice . Don't print this email unless necessary. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From ajp at glocom.ac.jp Tue Jan 8 23:30:56 2013 From: ajp at glocom.ac.jp (Adam Peake) Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2013 13:30:56 +0900 Subject: [governance] Coordinator election in progress In-Reply-To: References: <50EB8723.7070707@ciroap.org> <7B0CDFC9-00D8-4E4B-AAC5-6444296ED667@acm.org> <50EBA57D.6010201@ciroap.org> <50EBB536.7030503@ciroap.org> Message-ID: Sorry to again forget our rules... but do we have to vote to show interest as continuing members? Thanks, Adam On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 5:25 AM, Avri Doria wrote: > > On 8 Jan 2013, at 00:57, Jeremy Malcolm wrote: > >> On 08/01/13 13:32, Fatima Cambronero wrote: >>> 2013/1/8 Jeremy Malcolm >>> If you don't want to vote for either, don't vote for either. >>> >>> It's not possible because if you don't choose any options the survey says: >>> >>> “One or more mandatory questions have not been answered. You cannot proceed until these have been completed” >> >> True, but it still records your incomplete submission if you exit at that point. >> > > I assume this is only if you exit choosing the 'resume' later field. and not if you exit and clear the survey. > > In any case, I really beleive we need at least an abstain option. > or maybe just a choice of whether one wants to proceed to the election. > > something more than overwhelming ambiguity that seems to force people to choose one or another of the candidates. > > > avri > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From parminder at itforchange.net Tue Jan 8 23:37:05 2013 From: parminder at itforchange.net (parminder) Date: Wed, 09 Jan 2013 10:07:05 +0530 Subject: [governance] Coordinator election in progress In-Reply-To: References: <50EB8723.7070707@ciroap.org> <7B0CDFC9-00D8-4E4B-AAC5-6444296ED667@acm.org> <50EBA57D.6010201@ciroap.org> <50EBB536.7030503@ciroap.org> Message-ID: <50ECF3F1.4060301@itforchange.net> i think it needs to be explicitly mentioned on the ballot and otherwise on the list just before the elections that participation in voting is required (even if excercising a no preference option) to be eligible to vote for charter amendments (but not for other purposes) - and thus for what can in a way be called as the full membership of IGC.... On Wednesday 09 January 2013 10:00 AM, Adam Peake wrote: > Sorry to again forget our rules... but do we have to vote to show > interest as continuing members? > > Thanks, > > Adam > > > On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 5:25 AM, Avri Doria wrote: >> On 8 Jan 2013, at 00:57, Jeremy Malcolm wrote: >> >>> On 08/01/13 13:32, Fatima Cambronero wrote: >>>> 2013/1/8 Jeremy Malcolm >>>> If you don't want to vote for either, don't vote for either. >>>> >>>> It's not possible because if you don't choose any options the survey says: >>>> >>>> “One or more mandatory questions have not been answered. You cannot proceed until these have been completed” >>> True, but it still records your incomplete submission if you exit at that point. >>> >> I assume this is only if you exit choosing the 'resume' later field. and not if you exit and clear the survey. >> >> In any case, I really beleive we need at least an abstain option. >> or maybe just a choice of whether one wants to proceed to the election. >> >> something more than overwhelming ambiguity that seems to force people to choose one or another of the candidates. >> >> >> avri >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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: -------------- 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 From jeremy at ciroap.org Tue Jan 8 23:45:33 2013 From: jeremy at ciroap.org (Jeremy Malcolm) Date: Wed, 09 Jan 2013 12:45:33 +0800 Subject: [governance] Coordinator election in progress In-Reply-To: <50ECF3F1.4060301@itforchange.net> References: <50EB8723.7070707@ciroap.org> <7B0CDFC9-00D8-4E4B-AAC5-6444296ED667@acm.org> <50EBA57D.6010201@ciroap.org> <50EBB536.7030503@ciroap.org> <50ECF3F1.4060301@itforchange.net> Message-ID: <50ECF5ED.5030302@ciroap.org> On 09/01/13 12:37, parminder wrote: > > i think it needs to be explicitly mentioned on the ballot and > otherwise on the list just before the elections that participation in > voting is required (even if excercising a no preference option) to be > eligible to vote for charter amendments (but not for other purposes) - > and thus for what can in a way be called as the full membership of > IGC.... The charter doesn't say that exercising a no preference option is sufficient. This is where Avri and I have a disagreement. I come from a country with a compulsory preferential voting system, so being forced to vote doesn't seem so obnoxious to me. According to the former Chief Justice of the High Court, even handing in a blank ballot paper is not allowed in Australia (though this is debatable). In the context of the IGC, I feel it is better if everyone who wants to count themselves as a "full" member of the IGC expresses a preference. This is one reason for amending the charter, to make the requirements clearer. -- *Dr Jeremy Malcolm Senior Policy Officer Consumers International | the global campaigning voice for consumers* Office for Asia-Pacific and the Middle East Lot 5-1 Wisma WIM, 7 Jalan Abang Haji Openg, TTDI, 60000 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia Tel: +60 3 7726 1599 *Your rights, our mission – download CI's Strategy 2015:* http://consint.info/RightsMission @Consumers_Int | www.consumersinternational.org | www.facebook.com/consumersinternational Read our email confidentiality notice . Don't print this email unless necessary. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From william.drake at uzh.ch Wed Jan 9 02:49:38 2013 From: william.drake at uzh.ch (William Drake) Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2013 08:49:38 +0100 Subject: [governance] Re: a formal appeal request to the appeal team to reverse the recent ban on a Member In-Reply-To: <6B54234D-2587-45E5-A3F5-CD67D2D493CF@gmail.com> References: <6B54234D-2587-45E5-A3F5-CD67D2D493CF@gmail.com> Message-ID: <882B5E43-30B7-4FB2-A2F2-1353CBE8B496@uzh.ch> Me too Bill On Jan 8, 2013, at 22:57, George Sadowsky wrote: > I support them also. > > On Jan 8, 2013, at 2:41 PM, Ivar A. M. Hartmann wrote: > >> I support these grounds for appeal. >> >> Ivar >> >> On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 5:35 PM, McTim wrote: >>> There was no "ad hominem" attack in the email that caused the >>> complainant to complain. >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From daniel at digsys.bg Wed Jan 9 05:01:32 2013 From: daniel at digsys.bg (Daniel Kalchev) Date: Wed, 09 Jan 2013 12:01:32 +0200 Subject: [governance] FW: [Dewayne-Net] Vint Cerf: Internet competition has "evaporated" In-Reply-To: <02c201cdee16$35837030$a08a5090$@gmail.com> References: <02c201cdee16$35837030$a08a5090$@gmail.com> Message-ID: <50ED3FFC.4020104@digsys.bg> This is an very interesting an funny topic. What is the "public interest" and how does it relate to regulation? The concept of regulation is simple: "We give you monopoly access to limited resource, in exchange you promise to abide by these rules." Anything outside that is abuse. So, what is the public interest with relation to Internet? "Free, fast Internet for everyone"? If so, then most Government will fall victims of "I can promise you things nobody else can do". Companies of all sorts will promise this in exchange for something.. a monopoly here and there, Government protection, state guarantees etc. The trouble with the Internet is that there is choice. Internet grew bottom up before those folks figured out what it is all about. Now, those bribing companies are just some of the many and they usually follow. The public interest in my opinion is to avoid any kind of monopoly deals. Any monopoly deal bring regulation and any regulation bring monopoly deals. Daniel On 09.01.13 05:05, michael gurstein wrote: > Interesting discussion pointed to below... but I'm wondering why > "competition" should be the only legitimate basis for regulation... Doesn't > the public interest extend rather beyond the functioning of the marketplace? > > M > > -----Original Message----- > From: dewayne-net at warpspeed.com [mailto:dewayne-net at warpspeed.com] On Behalf > Of Dewayne Hendricks > Sent: Tuesday, January 08, 2013 1:37 PM > To: Multiple recipients of Dewayne-Net > Subject: [Dewayne-Net] Vint Cerf: Internet competition has "evaporated" > > Vint Cerf: Internet competition has "evaporated" since dial-up Zero > regulation for telcos could endanger neutrality, Internet co-creator says. > By Jon Brodkin > Jan 8 2013 > as-evaporated-since-dial-up/> > > Vint Cerf, co-creator of the Internet, said today he is troubled by the > prospect of companies like AT&T avoiding government regulation after the > transition from traditional phone technology to all-IP networks. Already, he > said, competition was decimated when the Internet moved from dial-up > providers to cable companies and telcos. > > Cerf-who made the Internet possible by co-developing the Internet protocol > and Transmission Control Protocol technology 40 years ago-was speaking at > the Consumer Electronics Show's "Silvers Summit" on technology geared toward > the older population. "Some people think silver surfers don't know how to > use technology. I have news for you: some of us invented this stuff," the > 69-year-old Cerf noted. > > This happened to be just one day after AT&T described its plans to retire > the traditional Public Switched Telephone Network and become an all-IP > telco. As we reported, AT&T wants to make this transition without being > subject to what it calls "monopoly-era regulatory obligations," which AT&T > thinks are unjustified in the Internet age. > > Who better to weigh in on that topic than Vint Cerf? He took questions after > his talk, and I got the chance to ask Cerf to address AT&T's plan and > comment on whether he thinks extensive regulation of all-IP telcos is > necessary. Here's what he said: > > I'm not allowed to use foul language, right? > > My first observation is that it is vital that we maintain openness and > neutral access to the Internet's capabilities. The fact that you can carry > voice over the Internet is almost incidental to the fact that you can carry > any digital content over the Internet. I would not wish to see the question > of regulation turn on the notion that Voice over IP is PSTN or is a > replacement for PSTN. It is a replacement for almost everything we can do, > all of the old network functions can be done on the Internet. > > Cerf went on to say network neutrality is important, that we must preserve > the right of Internet users to choose what applications and websites they > are able to access: > > [snip] > > Dewayne-Net RSS Feed: > > > > -------------- 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 From avri at acm.org Wed Jan 9 08:03:57 2013 From: avri at acm.org (Avri Doria) Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2013 08:03:57 -0500 Subject: [governance] Coordinator election in progress In-Reply-To: <50ECF5ED.5030302@ciroap.org> References: <50EB8723.7070707@ciroap.org> <7B0CDFC9-00D8-4E4B-AAC5-6444296ED667@acm.org> <50EBA57D.6010201@ciroap.org> <50EBB536.7030503@ciroap.org> <50ECF3F1.4060301@itforchange.net> <50ECF5ED.5030302@ciroap.org> Message-ID: <578DD3EF-72F7-47F9-A6D7-EDB07AB8D2D2@acm.org> Hi, This is why I have been requesting a NOTA, None of the Above, option. That is a vote. As I read the charter one has to participate in the voting event. One should not be forced to pick a candidate they may not support. We should probably even have the option of writing someone in. Abstain, to my mind is also a vote. It is not really appropriate that you have substituted your opinion, or that of Australia, for a discussion and agreement among the members. avri On 8 Jan 2013, at 23:45, Jeremy Malcolm wrote: > On 09/01/13 12:37, parminder wrote: >> >> i think it needs to be explicitly mentioned on the ballot and otherwise on the list just before the elections that participation in voting is required (even if excercising a no preference option) to be eligible to vote for charter amendments (but not for other purposes) - and thus for what can in a way be called as the full membership of IGC.... > > The charter doesn't say that exercising a no preference option is sufficient. This is where Avri and I have a disagreement. I come from a country with a compulsory preferential voting system, so being forced to vote doesn't seem so obnoxious to me. According to the former Chief Justice of the High Court, even handing in a blank ballot paper is not allowed in Australia (though this is debatable). In the context of the IGC, I feel it is better if everyone who wants to count themselves as a "full" member of the IGC expresses a preference. This is one reason for amending the charter, to make the requirements clearer. > > -- > Dr Jeremy Malcolm > Senior Policy Officer > Consumers International | the global campaigning voice for consumers > Office for Asia-Pacific and the Middle East > Lot 5-1 Wisma WIM, 7 Jalan Abang Haji Openg, TTDI, 60000 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia > Tel: +60 3 7726 1599 > > Your rights, our mission – download CI's Strategy 2015: http://consint.info/RightsMission > > @Consumers_Int | www.consumersinternational.org | www.facebook.com/consumersinternational > > Read our email confidentiality notice. Don't print this email unless necessary. > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From tracyhackshaw at gmail.com Wed Jan 9 08:46:40 2013 From: tracyhackshaw at gmail.com (Tracy F. Hackshaw @ Google) Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2013 09:46:40 -0400 Subject: [governance] Coordinator election in progress In-Reply-To: <578DD3EF-72F7-47F9-A6D7-EDB07AB8D2D2@acm.org> References: <50EB8723.7070707@ciroap.org> <7B0CDFC9-00D8-4E4B-AAC5-6444296ED667@acm.org> <50EBA57D.6010201@ciroap.org> <50EBB536.7030503@ciroap.org> <50ECF3F1.4060301@itforchange.net> <50ECF5ED.5030302@ciroap.org> <578DD3EF-72F7-47F9-A6D7-EDB07AB8D2D2@acm.org> Message-ID: In my country's electoral system, submitting what is referred to as a "spoilt ballot" (e.g. not ticking any of the candidates. writing in None of the Above, writing in your own candidate, scratching off any or all of the names) counts as you participating in the democratic process, even if it doesn't count as a "vote", per se. In other words, because it is a secret ballot, you have been counted as "voting", even if your vote does not eventually count. Some people use it as a "protest vote" I must say that I treasure that flexibility as part of the democratic process. From: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spoilt_vote#Intentional_spoiling: "Spoiled votes may be the result of a deliberate act by the voter; some proportion are likely to be protest votes, especially in systems where voting is compulsory ." "However, in countries such as the UK where spoilt ballots are counted, some voters will deliberately spoil their ballot paper to show disapproval of the candidates available whilst still taking part in the electoral process. This may include signing or printing the voter's name on the ballot slip." On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 9:03 AM, Avri Doria wrote: > Hi, > > This is why I have been requesting a NOTA, None of the Above, option. > > That is a vote. > > As I read the charter one has to participate in the voting event. One > should not be forced to pick a candidate they may not support. We should > probably even have the option of writing someone in. > > Abstain, to my mind is also a vote. > > It is not really appropriate that you have substituted your opinion, or > that of Australia, for a discussion and agreement among the members. > > avri > > > > On 8 Jan 2013, at 23:45, Jeremy Malcolm wrote: > > > On 09/01/13 12:37, parminder wrote: > >> > >> i think it needs to be explicitly mentioned on the ballot and > otherwise on the list just before the elections that participation in > voting is required (even if excercising a no preference option) to be > eligible to vote for charter amendments (but not for other purposes) - and > thus for what can in a way be called as the full membership of IGC.... > > > > The charter doesn't say that exercising a no preference option is > sufficient. This is where Avri and I have a disagreement. I come from a > country with a compulsory preferential voting system, so being forced to > vote doesn't seem so obnoxious to me. According to the former Chief > Justice of the High Court, even handing in a blank ballot paper is not > allowed in Australia (though this is debatable). In the context of the > IGC, I feel it is better if everyone who wants to count themselves as a > "full" member of the IGC expresses a preference. This is one reason for > amending the charter, to make the requirements clearer. > > > > -- > > Dr Jeremy Malcolm > > Senior Policy Officer > > Consumers International | the global campaigning voice for consumers > > Office for Asia-Pacific and the Middle East > > Lot 5-1 Wisma WIM, 7 Jalan Abang Haji Openg, TTDI, 60000 Kuala Lumpur, > Malaysia > > Tel: +60 3 7726 1599 > > > > Your rights, our mission – download CI's Strategy 2015: > http://consint.info/RightsMission > > > > @Consumers_Int | www.consumersinternational.org | > www.facebook.com/consumersinternational > > > > Read our email confidentiality notice. Don't print this email unless > necessary. > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > > 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 > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From jeremy at ciroap.org Wed Jan 9 09:23:19 2013 From: jeremy at ciroap.org (Jeremy Malcolm) Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2013 22:23:19 +0800 Subject: [governance] Coordinator election in progress In-Reply-To: References: <50EB8723.7070707@ciroap.org> <7B0CDFC9-00D8-4E4B-AAC5-6444296ED667@acm.org> <50EBA57D.6010201@ciroap.org> <50EBB536.7030503@ciroap.org> <50ECF3F1.4060301@itforchange.net> <50ECF5ED.5030302@ciroap.org> <578DD3EF-72F7-47F9-A6D7-EDB07AB8D2D2@acm.org> Message-ID: On 09/01/2013, at 9:46 PM, Tracy F. Hackshaw @ Google wrote: > In my country's electoral system, submitting what is referred to as a "spoilt ballot" (e.g. not ticking any of the candidates. writing in None of the Above, writing in your own candidate, scratching off any or all of the names) counts as you participating in the democratic process, even if it doesn't count as a "vote", per se. My point exactly, the charter doesn't talk about "participating in the democratic process", it talks about "voting". But anyway, so far 16 out of 111 respondents have decided to participate in the democratic process without voting, ie. bailed out before choosing a coordinator. So that's the option that you have if you want to affirm your membership but don't want to vote. Begin answering, then bail out (without choosing the option to clear your answers) before casting your vote. I can't add in a NOTA option now, even if I accepted that it was a good idea (which I don't), because the questions can't be changed while the ballot is already in progress. -- Dr Jeremy Malcolm Senior Policy Officer Consumers International | the global campaigning voice for consumers Office for Asia-Pacific and the Middle East Lot 5-1 Wisma WIM, 7 Jalan Abang Haji Openg, TTDI, 60000 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia Tel: +60 3 7726 1599 Your rights, our mission – download CI's Strategy 2015: http://consint.info/RightsMission @Consumers_Int | www.consumersinternational.org | www.facebook.com/consumersinternational Read our email confidentiality notice. Don't print this email unless necessary. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From williams.deirdre at gmail.com Wed Jan 9 10:29:44 2013 From: williams.deirdre at gmail.com (Deirdre Williams) Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2013 10:29:44 -0500 Subject: [governance] Coordinator election in progress In-Reply-To: References: <50EB8723.7070707@ciroap.org> <7B0CDFC9-00D8-4E4B-AAC5-6444296ED667@acm.org> <50EBA57D.6010201@ciroap.org> <50EBB536.7030503@ciroap.org> <50ECF3F1.4060301@itforchange.net> <50ECF5ED.5030302@ciroap.org> <578DD3EF-72F7-47F9-A6D7-EDB07AB8D2D2@acm.org> Message-ID: I agree with Avri and Tracy. My perception (personal opinion) is that the important thing is to exercise one's right to vote, rather than to make a specific choice, and my reading of the charter (personal opinion) is that the requirement is for demonstration of sufficient interest in the process to take part in it, rather than for the indication of which, among the listed candidates, is the "voter's" choice.Anyway, I interpret "to vote" to mean to make a formal indication of choice; that choice can be a name from the list or "none of the above". This is how I see it anyway. Deirdre On 9 January 2013 08:46, Tracy F. Hackshaw @ Google wrote: > In my country's electoral system, submitting what is referred to as a > "spoilt ballot" (e.g. not ticking any of the candidates. writing in None of > the Above, writing in your own candidate, scratching off any or all of the > names) counts as you participating in the democratic process, even if it > doesn't count as a "vote", per se. In other words, because it is a secret > ballot, you have been counted as "voting", even if your vote does not > eventually count. > > Some people use it as a "protest vote" > > I must say that I treasure that flexibility as part of the democratic > process. > > From: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spoilt_vote#Intentional_spoiling: > > "Spoiled votes may be the result of a deliberate act by the voter; some > proportion are likely to be protest votes, > especially in systems where voting is compulsory > ." > > "However, in countries such as the UK where > spoilt ballots are counted, some voters will deliberately spoil their > ballot paper to show disapproval of the candidates available whilst still > taking part in the electoral process. This may include signing or printing > the voter's name on the ballot slip." > > > > > On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 9:03 AM, Avri Doria wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> This is why I have been requesting a NOTA, None of the Above, option. >> >> That is a vote. >> >> As I read the charter one has to participate in the voting event. One >> should not be forced to pick a candidate they may not support. We should >> probably even have the option of writing someone in. >> >> Abstain, to my mind is also a vote. >> >> It is not really appropriate that you have substituted your opinion, or >> that of Australia, for a discussion and agreement among the members. >> >> avri >> >> >> >> On 8 Jan 2013, at 23:45, Jeremy Malcolm wrote: >> >> > On 09/01/13 12:37, parminder wrote: >> >> >> >> i think it needs to be explicitly mentioned on the ballot and >> otherwise on the list just before the elections that participation in >> voting is required (even if excercising a no preference option) to be >> eligible to vote for charter amendments (but not for other purposes) - and >> thus for what can in a way be called as the full membership of IGC.... >> > >> > The charter doesn't say that exercising a no preference option is >> sufficient. This is where Avri and I have a disagreement. I come from a >> country with a compulsory preferential voting system, so being forced to >> vote doesn't seem so obnoxious to me. According to the former Chief >> Justice of the High Court, even handing in a blank ballot paper is not >> allowed in Australia (though this is debatable). In the context of the >> IGC, I feel it is better if everyone who wants to count themselves as a >> "full" member of the IGC expresses a preference. This is one reason for >> amending the charter, to make the requirements clearer. >> > >> > -- >> > Dr Jeremy Malcolm >> > Senior Policy Officer >> > Consumers International | the global campaigning voice for consumers >> > Office for Asia-Pacific and the Middle East >> > Lot 5-1 Wisma WIM, 7 Jalan Abang Haji Openg, TTDI, 60000 Kuala Lumpur, >> Malaysia >> > Tel: +60 3 7726 1599 >> > >> > Your rights, our mission – download CI's Strategy 2015: >> http://consint.info/RightsMission >> > >> > @Consumers_Int | www.consumersinternational.org | >> www.facebook.com/consumersinternational >> > >> > Read our email confidentiality notice. Don't print this email unless >> necessary. >> > >> > ____________________________________________________________ >> > 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 >> >> >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 >> >> > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > -- “The fundamental cure for poverty is not money but knowledge" Sir William Arthur Lewis, Nobel Prize Economics, 1979 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From isolatedn at gmail.com Wed Jan 9 10:43:33 2013 From: isolatedn at gmail.com (Sivasubramanian M) Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2013 21:13:33 +0530 Subject: [governance] Re: a formal appeal request to the appeal team to reverse the recent ban on a Member In-Reply-To: <882B5E43-30B7-4FB2-A2F2-1353CBE8B496@uzh.ch> References: <6B54234D-2587-45E5-A3F5-CD67D2D493CF@gmail.com> <882B5E43-30B7-4FB2-A2F2-1353CBE8B496@uzh.ch> Message-ID: I support the appeal request. Sivasubramanian M On Jan 9, 2013 1:19 PM, "William Drake" wrote: > Me too > > Bill > > On Jan 8, 2013, at 22:57, George Sadowsky > wrote: > > I support them also. > > On Jan 8, 2013, at 2:41 PM, Ivar A. M. Hartmann wrote: > > I support these grounds for appeal. > > Ivar > > On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 5:35 PM, McTim wrote: > >> There was no "ad hominem" attack in the email that caused the >> complainant to complain. >> > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From isolatedn at gmail.com Wed Jan 9 10:54:16 2013 From: isolatedn at gmail.com (Sivasubramanian M) Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2013 21:24:16 +0530 Subject: [governance] Coordinator election in progress In-Reply-To: <578DD3EF-72F7-47F9-A6D7-EDB07AB8D2D2@acm.org> References: <50EB8723.7070707@ciroap.org> <7B0CDFC9-00D8-4E4B-AAC5-6444296ED667@acm.org> <50EBA57D.6010201@ciroap.org> <50EBB536.7030503@ciroap.org> <50ECF3F1.4060301@itforchange.net> <50ECF5ED.5030302@ciroap.org> <578DD3EF-72F7-47F9-A6D7-EDB07AB8D2D2@acm.org> Message-ID: I agree. None of the above / abstain needs to be included as one of the options, and this needs to count as a vote. On Jan 9, 2013 6:34 PM, "Avri Doria" wrote: > Hi, > > This is why I have been requesting a NOTA, None of the Above, option. > > That is a vote. > > As I read the charter one has to participate in the voting event. One > should not be forced to pick a candidate they may not support. We should > probably even have the option of writing someone in. > > Abstain, to my mind is also a vote. > > It is not really appropriate that you have substituted your opinion, or > that of Australia, for a discussion and agreement among the members. > > avri > > > > On 8 Jan 2013, at 23:45, Jeremy Malcolm wrote: > > > On 09/01/13 12:37, parminder wrote: > >> > >> i think it needs to be explicitly mentioned on the ballot and > otherwise on the list just before the elections that participation in > voting is required (even if excercising a no preference option) to be > eligible to vote for charter amendments (but not for other purposes) - and > thus for what can in a way be called as the full membership of IGC.... > > > > The charter doesn't say that exercising a no preference option is > sufficient. This is where Avri and I have a disagreement. I come from a > country with a compulsory preferential voting system, so being forced to > vote doesn't seem so obnoxious to me. According to the former Chief > Justice of the High Court, even handing in a blank ballot paper is not > allowed in Australia (though this is debatable). In the context of the > IGC, I feel it is better if everyone who wants to count themselves as a > "full" member of the IGC expresses a preference. This is one reason for > amending the charter, to make the requirements clearer. > > > > -- > > Dr Jeremy Malcolm > > Senior Policy Officer > > Consumers International | the global campaigning voice for consumers > > Office for Asia-Pacific and the Middle East > > Lot 5-1 Wisma WIM, 7 Jalan Abang Haji Openg, TTDI, 60000 Kuala Lumpur, > Malaysia > > Tel: +60 3 7726 1599 > > > > Your rights, our mission – download CI's Strategy 2015: > http://consint.info/RightsMission > > > > @Consumers_Int | www.consumersinternational.org | > www.facebook.com/consumersinternational > > > > Read our email confidentiality notice. Don't print this email unless > necessary. > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > > 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 > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From avri at acm.org Wed Jan 9 11:24:30 2013 From: avri at acm.org (Avri Doria) Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2013 11:24:30 -0500 Subject: [governance] Suggested amendment for the charter. Needs signatories Message-ID: <7E9B2FE7-631E-48EA-8FE9-A50886EF107F@acm.org> Amendments to the Charter This charter can be amended at any time as proposed by no fewer than ten (10) members and as approved by no less than two-thirds (2/3) of the members of the IGC. The membership requirements for amending the charter are based on the most currently available voters list. In amending the charter, everyone who voted in the previous election will be deemed a member for amending the charter. ---------- Amendment 1: Currently the charter reads as: " Any such request will require a public response from the coordinators' within a week indicating the action taken and with an explanation of the reasons for the action. All nominations to external bodies, e.g., the IGF multistakholder advisory group, will be made using a randomly selected nomcom process as defined here. " Add Heading to Nominations section. New text: " Any such request will require a public response from the coordinators' within a week indicating the action taken and with an explanation of the reasons for the action. All nominations to external bodies, e.g., the IGF multistakholder advisory group, will be made using a randomly selected nomcom process as defined here. " Amendment 2: Currently the Nomcom process reads as: " 8. Each nomcom will be selected for a specific decision and will be disbanded after the decision is made.However, in special cases where several different nominating committees would need to be completed in a shortened time frame that did not allow for multiple nominating committees, the co-coordinators may jointly request one nominating committee to fill several functions. 9. There is no limit on the number of nomcoms an individual may serve on. " Proposed changes 1. Change to 1 Nomcom per year 2. Restrict members of Nomcom to 2 consecutive terms Change text to: " 8. Each Nomcom will serve for one year. 9. Nomcom Volunteers and non-voting chairs may serve a maximum of two consecutive terms. An intervening year is required before any term limited volunteer may volunteer for the random process. An intervening two (2) intervening year are required beofe a non-voting chair may serve again as either a volunteer or a non-voting chair. A term -limited volunteer may serve as non-voting chair. " -------------- 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 From avri at acm.org Wed Jan 9 11:25:02 2013 From: avri at acm.org (Avri Doria) Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2013 11:25:02 -0500 Subject: [governance] Suggested amendment for the charter. Nomcom Issue. Needs signatories Message-ID: <520DA55E-F2AA-4A25-B99F-2F86C90B6CBA@acm.org> Amendments to the Charter This charter can be amended at any time as proposed by no fewer than ten (10) members and as approved by no less than two-thirds (2/3) of the members of the IGC. The membership requirements for amending the charter are based on the most currently available voters list. In amending the charter, everyone who voted in the previous election will be deemed a member for amending the charter. ---------- Amendment 1: Currently the charter reads as: " Any such request will require a public response from the coordinators' within a week indicating the action taken and with an explanation of the reasons for the action. All nominations to external bodies, e.g., the IGF multistakholder advisory group, will be made using a randomly selected nomcom process as defined here. " Add Heading to Nominations section. New text: " Any such request will require a public response from the coordinators' within a week indicating the action taken and with an explanation of the reasons for the action. All nominations to external bodies, e.g., the IGF multistakholder advisory group, will be made using a randomly selected nomcom process as defined here. " Amendment 2: Currently the Nomcom process reads as: " 8. Each nomcom will be selected for a specific decision and will be disbanded after the decision is made.However, in special cases where several different nominating committees would need to be completed in a shortened time frame that did not allow for multiple nominating committees, the co-coordinators may jointly request one nominating committee to fill several functions. 9. There is no limit on the number of nomcoms an individual may serve on. " Proposed changes 1. Change to 1 Nomcom per year 2. Restrict members of Nomcom to 2 consecutive terms Change text to: " 8. Each Nomcom will serve for one year. 9. Nomcom Volunteers and non-voting chairs may serve a maximum of two consecutive terms. An intervening year is required before any term limited volunteer may volunteer for the random process. An intervening two (2) intervening year are required beofe a non-voting chair may serve again as either a volunteer or a non-voting chair. A term -limited volunteer may serve as non-voting chair. " -------------- 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 From avri at acm.org Wed Jan 9 11:33:25 2013 From: avri at acm.org (Avri Doria) Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2013 11:33:25 -0500 Subject: [governance] Suggested amendment for the charter. Voting. Needs signatories Message-ID: <71DE6F37-0C23-4CF2-9984-98FB3688F224@acm.org> Amendments to the Charter This charter can be amended at any time as proposed by no fewer than ten (10) members and as approved by no less than two-thirds (2/3) of the members of the IGC. The membership requirements for amending the charter are based on the most currently available voters list. In amending the charter, everyone who voted in the previous election will be deemed a member for amending the charter. ---------- Currently the charter reads as: " As part of the voting process the voter must personally ascertain that they are a member of the IGC based on membership criteria described elsewhere in this charter and posted as part of the voting information (i.e. a voter must affirm membership on the voter form in order to vote). The decision to self-identify as a member of the IGC is a personal decision based on the criteria defined. A list of the self-defined member-voters will be published after the election with the results of the election. " Changes proposed: 1. Indicate that the affirmation is prior to the vote and not part of the vote. 2. require that all ballot include the ability to abstain. " Prior to voting the prospective voter must personally ascertain that they are a member of the IGC based on membership criteria described elsewhere in this charter and posted as part of the voting information (i.e. a voter must affirm membership on the voter form prior to voting). The decision to self-identify as a member of the IGC is a personal decision based on the criteria defined. A list of the self-defined member-voters will be published after the election with the results of the election. All ballots will include the ability for voters to abstain on any choice included on the ballot. " -------------- 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 From nb at bollow.ch Wed Jan 9 11:36:13 2013 From: nb at bollow.ch (Norbert Bollow) Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2013 17:36:13 +0100 Subject: [governance] Suggested amendment for the charter. Needs signatories In-Reply-To: <7E9B2FE7-631E-48EA-8FE9-A50886EF107F@acm.org> References: <7E9B2FE7-631E-48EA-8FE9-A50886EF107F@acm.org> Message-ID: <20130109173613.5b43c4e2@quill.bollow.ch> Hi Avri Could you please clarify what exactly you propose to change as per the proposed "Amendment 1"? Greetings, Norbert Avri Doria wrote: > Amendments to the Charter > > This charter can be amended at any time as proposed by no fewer than > ten (10) members and as approved by no less than two-thirds (2/3) of > the members of the IGC. The membership requirements for amending the > charter are based on the most currently available voters list. In > amending the charter, everyone who voted in the previous election > will be deemed a member for amending the charter. > > ---------- > > Amendment 1: > > Currently the charter reads as: > > " > Any such request will require a public response from the > coordinators' within a week indicating the action taken and with an > explanation of the reasons for the action. > > All nominations to external bodies, e.g., the IGF multistakholder > advisory group, will be made using a randomly selected nomcom process > as defined here. " > > > > Add Heading to Nominations section. New text: > > " > Any such request will require a public response from the > coordinators' within a week indicating the action taken and with an > explanation of the reasons for the action. > > All nominations to external bodies, e.g., the IGF multistakholder > advisory group, will be made using a randomly selected nomcom process > as defined here. " > > > Amendment 2: > > Currently the Nomcom process reads > as: > > " > 8. Each nomcom will be selected for a specific decision and will be > disbanded after the decision is made.However, in special cases where > several different nominating committees would need to be completed in > a shortened time frame that did not allow for multiple nominating > committees, the co-coordinators may jointly request one nominating > committee to fill several functions. > > 9. There is no limit on the number of nomcoms an individual may serve > on. " > > Proposed changes > > 1. Change to 1 Nomcom per year > 2. Restrict members of Nomcom to 2 consecutive terms > > Change text to: > > " > 8. Each Nomcom will serve for one year. > > 9. Nomcom Volunteers and non-voting chairs may serve a maximum of two > consecutive terms. An intervening year is required before any term > limited volunteer may volunteer for the random process. An > intervening two (2) intervening year are required beofe a non-voting > chair may serve again as either a volunteer or a non-voting chair. A > term -limited volunteer may serve as non-voting chair. " > > -------------- 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 From dogwallah at gmail.com Wed Jan 9 11:44:01 2013 From: dogwallah at gmail.com (McTim) Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2013 11:44:01 -0500 Subject: [governance] Suggested amendment for the charter. Needs signatories In-Reply-To: <20130109173613.5b43c4e2@quill.bollow.ch> References: <7E9B2FE7-631E-48EA-8FE9-A50886EF107F@acm.org> <20130109173613.5b43c4e2@quill.bollow.ch> Message-ID: On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 11:36 AM, Norbert Bollow wrote: > Hi Avri > > Could you please clarify what exactly you propose to change as per the > proposed "Amendment 1"? I can't see the difference tween the 2 sets of text either. -- 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 From avri at acm.org Wed Jan 9 11:49:54 2013 From: avri at acm.org (Avri Doria) Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2013 11:49:54 -0500 Subject: [governance] Suggested amendment for the charter. Needs signatories In-Reply-To: <7E9B2FE7-631E-48EA-8FE9-A50886EF107F@acm.org> References: <7E9B2FE7-631E-48EA-8FE9-A50886EF107F@acm.org> Message-ID: <7A95D3C2-A054-43B1-A618-5C4308996EF8@acm.org> Thanks for point out that I neglected to Include the heading I meant to add. On 9 Jan 2013, at 11:24, Avri Doria wrote: > Amendments to the Charter This charter can be amended at any time as proposed by no fewer than ten (10) members and as approved by no less than two-thirds (2/3) of the members of the IGC. The membership requirements for amending the charter are based on the most currently available voters list. In amending the charter, everyone who voted in the previous election will be deemed a member for amending the charter. ---------- Amendment 1: Currently the charter reads as: " Any such request will require a public response from the coordinators' within a week indicating the action taken and with an explanation of the reasons for the action. All nominations to external bodies, e.g., the IGF multistakholder advisory group, will be made using a randomly selected nomcom process as defined here. " Add Heading to Nominations section. New text: " Any such request will require a public response from the coordinators' within a week indicating the action taken and with an explanation of the reasons for the action. Nominations to External Bodies All nominations to external bodies, e.g., the IGF multistakholder advisory group, will be made using a randomly selected nomcom process as defined here. " Amendment 2: Currently the Nomcom process reads as: " 8. Each nomcom will be selected for a specific decision and will be disbanded after the decision is made.However, in special cases where several different nominating committees would need to be completed in a shortened time frame that did not allow for multiple nominating committees, the co-coordinators may jointly request one nominating committee to fill several functions. 9. There is no limit on the number of nomcoms an individual may serve on. " Proposed changes 1. Change to 1 Nomcom per year 2. Restrict members of Nomcom to 2 consecutive terms Change text to: " 8. Each Nomcom will serve for one year. 9. Nomcom Volunteers and non-voting chairs may serve a maximum of two consecutive terms. An intervening year is required before any term limited volunteer may volunteer for the random process. An intervening two (2) intervening year are required beofe a non-voting chair may serve again as either a volunteer or a non-voting chair. A term -limited volunteer may serve as non-voting chair. " ____________________________________________________________ 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From nb at bollow.ch Wed Jan 9 12:45:14 2013 From: nb at bollow.ch (Norbert Bollow) Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2013 18:45:14 +0100 Subject: [governance] Typo corrected amendments suggestion (adding a heading, nomcom) (was Re: Suggested amendment...) In-Reply-To: <7A95D3C2-A054-43B1-A618-5C4308996EF8@acm.org> References: <7E9B2FE7-631E-48EA-8FE9-A50886EF107F@acm.org> <7A95D3C2-A054-43B1-A618-5C4308996EF8@acm.org> Message-ID: <20130109184514.161a2e18@quill.bollow.ch> I support the two amendment proposals below, subject to the noted typo corrections... Greetings, Norbert Avri Doria wrote: > Thanks for point out that I neglected to Include the heading I meant > to add. > > On 9 Jan 2013, at 11:24, Avri Doria wrote: > > > Amendments to the Charter > > This charter can be amended at any time as proposed by no fewer than > ten (10) members and as approved by no less than two-thirds (2/3) of > the members of the IGC. The membership requirements for amending the > charter are based on the most currently available voters list. In > amending the charter, everyone who voted in the previous election > will be deemed a member for amending the charter. > > ---------- > > Amendment 1: > > Currently the charter reads as: > > " > Any such request will require a public response from the > coordinators' within a week indicating the action taken and with an > explanation of the reasons for the action. > > All nominations to external bodies, e.g., the IGF multistakholder > advisory group, will be made using a randomly selected nomcom process > as defined here. " > > > > Add Heading to Nominations section. New text: > > " > Any such request will require a public response from the > coordinators' within a week indicating the action taken and with an > explanation of the reasons for the action. > > Nominations to External Bodies > > > All nominations to external bodies, e.g., the IGF multistakholder "multistakholder" -> "multistakeholder" > advisory group, will be made using a randomly selected nomcom process > as defined here. " > > > Amendment 2: > > Currently the Nomcom process reads > as: > > " > 8. Each nomcom will be selected for a specific decision and will be > disbanded after the decision is made.However, in special cases where > several different nominating committees would need to be completed in > a shortened time frame that did not allow for multiple nominating > committees, the co-coordinators may jointly request one nominating > committee to fill several functions. > > 9. There is no limit on the number of nomcoms an individual may serve > on. " > > Proposed changes > > 1. Change to 1 Nomcom per year > 2. Restrict members of Nomcom to 2 consecutive terms > > Change text to: > > " > 8. Each Nomcom will serve for one year. > > 9. Nomcom Volunteers and non-voting chairs may serve a maximum of two > consecutive terms. An intervening year is required before any term > limited volunteer may volunteer for the random process. An > intervening two (2) intervening year are required beofe a non-voting "beofe" -> "before" "intervening year" -> "years" (this change corrects the accidental duplication of the word "intervening" and the omission of the plural-s after "year") > chair may serve again as either a volunteer or a non-voting chair. A > term -limited volunteer may serve as non-voting chair. " -------------- 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 From pranesh at cis-india.org Wed Jan 9 15:46:24 2013 From: pranesh at cis-india.org (Pranesh Prakash) Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2013 02:16:24 +0530 Subject: [governance] Typo corrected amendments suggestion (adding a heading, nomcom) (was Re: Suggested amendment...) In-Reply-To: <20130109184514.161a2e18@quill.bollow.ch> References: <7E9B2FE7-631E-48EA-8FE9-A50886EF107F@acm.org> <7A95D3C2-A054-43B1-A618-5C4308996EF8@acm.org> <20130109184514.161a2e18@quill.bollow.ch> Message-ID: <50EDD720.3090303@cis-india.org> I can't think of any good reasons against the proposed amendments, and support both Amendment 1, and Amendment 2 (both parts). Minor corrections: "term limited" -> "term-limited" "term -limited" -> "term-limited" / "limited-term" ~ Pranesh Norbert Bollow [2013-01-09 23:15]: > I support the two amendment proposals below, subject to the > noted typo corrections... > > Greetings, > Norbert > > Avri Doria wrote: >> Thanks for point out that I neglected to Include the heading I meant >> to add. >> >> On 9 Jan 2013, at 11:24, Avri Doria wrote: >> >>> Amendments to the Charter >> >> This charter can be amended at any time as proposed by no fewer than >> ten (10) members and as approved by no less than two-thirds (2/3) of >> the members of the IGC. The membership requirements for amending the >> charter are based on the most currently available voters list. In >> amending the charter, everyone who voted in the previous election >> will be deemed a member for amending the charter. >> >> ---------- >> >> Amendment 1: >> >> Currently the charter reads as: >> >> " >> Any such request will require a public response from the >> coordinators' within a week indicating the action taken and with an >> explanation of the reasons for the action. >> >> All nominations to external bodies, e.g., the IGF multistakholder >> advisory group, will be made using a randomly selected nomcom process >> as defined here. " >> >> >> >> Add Heading to Nominations section. New text: >> >> " >> Any such request will require a public response from the >> coordinators' within a week indicating the action taken and with an >> explanation of the reasons for the action. >> >> Nominations to External Bodies >> >> >> All nominations to external bodies, e.g., the IGF multistakholder > > "multistakholder" -> "multistakeholder" > >> advisory group, will be made using a randomly selected nomcom process >> as defined here. " >> >> >> Amendment 2: >> >> Currently the Nomcom process reads >> as: >> >> " >> 8. Each nomcom will be selected for a specific decision and will be >> disbanded after the decision is made.However, in special cases where >> several different nominating committees would need to be completed in >> a shortened time frame that did not allow for multiple nominating >> committees, the co-coordinators may jointly request one nominating >> committee to fill several functions. >> >> 9. There is no limit on the number of nomcoms an individual may serve >> on. " >> >> Proposed changes >> >> 1. Change to 1 Nomcom per year >> 2. Restrict members of Nomcom to 2 consecutive terms >> >> Change text to: >> >> " >> 8. Each Nomcom will serve for one year. >> >> 9. Nomcom Volunteers and non-voting chairs may serve a maximum of two >> consecutive terms. An intervening year is required before any term >> limited volunteer may volunteer for the random process. An >> intervening two (2) intervening year are required beofe a non-voting > > "beofe" -> "before" > > "intervening year" -> "years" (this change corrects the accidental > duplication of the word "intervening" and the omission of the plural-s > after "year") > >> chair may serve again as either a volunteer or a non-voting chair. A >> term -limited volunteer may serve as non-voting chair. " > -- Pranesh Prakash Policy Director Centre for Internet and Society T: +91 80 40926283 | W: http://cis-india.org PGP ID: 0x1D5C5F07 | Twitter: @pranesh_prakash -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 261 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: -------------- 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 From langdonorr at gmail.com Wed Jan 9 16:01:19 2013 From: langdonorr at gmail.com (Cheryl Langdon-Orr) Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2013 08:01:19 +1100 Subject: [governance] Suggested amendment for the charter. Voting. Needs signatories In-Reply-To: <71DE6F37-0C23-4CF2-9984-98FB3688F224@acm.org> References: <71DE6F37-0C23-4CF2-9984-98FB3688F224@acm.org> Message-ID: Happy to sign to support these proposed changes to the Charter going to the IGC Membership for fiscussion/vote and possible ratification if the 2/3rds in support requirement is met for the change. Cheryl Langdon-Orr On 10/01/2013 3:33 AM, "Avri Doria" wrote: > > Amendments to the Charter > > This charter can be amended at any time as proposed by no fewer than ten > (10) members and as approved by no less than two-thirds (2/3) of the > members of the IGC. The membership requirements for amending the charter > are based on the most currently available voters list. In amending the > charter, everyone who voted in the previous election will be deemed a > member for amending the charter. > > ---------- > > Currently the charter reads as: > > " > As part of the voting process the voter must personally ascertain that > they are a member of the IGC based on membership criteria described > elsewhere in this charter and posted as part of the voting information > (i.e. a voter must affirm membership on the voter form in order to vote). > The decision to self-identify as a member of the IGC is a personal decision > based on the criteria defined. A list of the self-defined member-voters > will be published after the election with the results of the election. > > " > Changes proposed: > > 1. Indicate that the affirmation is prior to the vote and not part of the > vote. > 2. require that all ballot include the ability to abstain. > > > " > > Prior to voting the prospective voter must personally ascertain that they > are a member of the IGC based on membership criteria described elsewhere in > this charter and posted as part of the voting information (i.e. a voter > must affirm membership on the voter form prior to voting). The decision to > self-identify as a member of the IGC is a personal decision based on the > criteria defined. A list of the self-defined member-voters will be > published after the election with the results of the election. > > All ballots will include the ability for voters to abstain on any choice > included on the ballot. > > " > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From fouadbajwa at gmail.com Wed Jan 9 16:02:16 2013 From: fouadbajwa at gmail.com (Fouad Bajwa) Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2013 02:02:16 +0500 Subject: [governance] Typo corrected amendments suggestion (adding a heading, nomcom) (was Re: Suggested amendment...) In-Reply-To: <20130109184514.161a2e18@quill.bollow.ch> References: <7E9B2FE7-631E-48EA-8FE9-A50886EF107F@acm.org> <7A95D3C2-A054-43B1-A618-5C4308996EF8@acm.org> <20130109184514.161a2e18@quill.bollow.ch> Message-ID: +1 -- Foo On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 10:45 PM, Norbert Bollow wrote: > I support the two amendment proposals below, subject to the > noted typo corrections... > > Greetings, > Norbert > > Avri Doria wrote: >> Thanks for point out that I neglected to Include the heading I meant >> to add. >> >> On 9 Jan 2013, at 11:24, Avri Doria wrote: >> >> > Amendments to the Charter >> >> This charter can be amended at any time as proposed by no fewer than >> ten (10) members and as approved by no less than two-thirds (2/3) of >> the members of the IGC. The membership requirements for amending the >> charter are based on the most currently available voters list. In >> amending the charter, everyone who voted in the previous election >> will be deemed a member for amending the charter. >> >> ---------- >> >> Amendment 1: >> >> Currently the charter reads as: >> >> " >> Any such request will require a public response from the >> coordinators' within a week indicating the action taken and with an >> explanation of the reasons for the action. >> >> All nominations to external bodies, e.g., the IGF multistakholder >> advisory group, will be made using a randomly selected nomcom process >> as defined here. " >> >> >> >> Add Heading to Nominations section. New text: >> >> " >> Any such request will require a public response from the >> coordinators' within a week indicating the action taken and with an >> explanation of the reasons for the action. >> >> Nominations to External Bodies >> >> >> All nominations to external bodies, e.g., the IGF multistakholder > > "multistakholder" -> "multistakeholder" > >> advisory group, will be made using a randomly selected nomcom process >> as defined here. " >> >> >> Amendment 2: >> >> Currently the Nomcom process reads >> as: >> >> " >> 8. Each nomcom will be selected for a specific decision and will be >> disbanded after the decision is made.However, in special cases where >> several different nominating committees would need to be completed in >> a shortened time frame that did not allow for multiple nominating >> committees, the co-coordinators may jointly request one nominating >> committee to fill several functions. >> >> 9. There is no limit on the number of nomcoms an individual may serve >> on. " >> >> Proposed changes >> >> 1. Change to 1 Nomcom per year >> 2. Restrict members of Nomcom to 2 consecutive terms >> >> Change text to: >> >> " >> 8. Each Nomcom will serve for one year. >> >> 9. Nomcom Volunteers and non-voting chairs may serve a maximum of two >> consecutive terms. An intervening year is required before any term >> limited volunteer may volunteer for the random process. An >> intervening two (2) intervening year are required beofe a non-voting > > "beofe" -> "before" > > "intervening year" -> "years" (this change corrects the accidental > duplication of the word "intervening" and the omission of the plural-s > after "year") > >> chair may serve again as either a volunteer or a non-voting chair. A >> term -limited volunteer may serve as non-voting chair. " > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From fouadbajwa at gmail.com Wed Jan 9 16:06:24 2013 From: fouadbajwa at gmail.com (Fouad Bajwa) Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2013 02:06:24 +0500 Subject: [governance] Suggested amendment for the charter. Voting. Needs signatories In-Reply-To: <71DE6F37-0C23-4CF2-9984-98FB3688F224@acm.org> References: <71DE6F37-0C23-4CF2-9984-98FB3688F224@acm.org> Message-ID: I support the amendments made below. I am also in favor of encouraging improvements to meet the demand of present and future needs. -- best Fouad On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 9:33 PM, Avri Doria wrote: > > Amendments to the Charter > > This charter can be amended at any time as proposed by no fewer than ten (10) members and as approved by no less than two-thirds (2/3) of the members of the IGC. The membership requirements for amending the charter are based on the most currently available voters list. In amending the charter, everyone who voted in the previous election will be deemed a member for amending the charter. > > ---------- > > Currently the charter reads as: > > " > As part of the voting process the voter must personally ascertain that they are a member of the IGC based on membership criteria described elsewhere in this charter and posted as part of the voting information (i.e. a voter must affirm membership on the voter form in order to vote). The decision to self-identify as a member of the IGC is a personal decision based on the criteria defined. A list of the self-defined member-voters will be published after the election with the results of the election. > > " > Changes proposed: > > 1. Indicate that the affirmation is prior to the vote and not part of the vote. > 2. require that all ballot include the ability to abstain. > > > " > > Prior to voting the prospective voter must personally ascertain that they are a member of the IGC based on membership criteria described elsewhere in this charter and posted as part of the voting information (i.e. a voter must affirm membership on the voter form prior to voting). The decision to self-identify as a member of the IGC is a personal decision based on the criteria defined. A list of the self-defined member-voters will be published after the election with the results of the election. > > All ballots will include the ability for voters to abstain on any choice included on the ballot. > > " > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From ginger at paque.net Wed Jan 9 16:15:47 2013 From: ginger at paque.net (Ginger Paque) Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2013 15:15:47 -0600 Subject: [governance] Suggested amendment for the charter. Voting. Needs signatories In-Reply-To: References: <71DE6F37-0C23-4CF2-9984-98FB3688F224@acm.org> Message-ID: I support these amendments as well. Thanks Avri. Ginger On 9 January 2013 15:06, Fouad Bajwa wrote: > I support the amendments made below. I am also in favor of encouraging > improvements to meet the demand of present and future needs. > > -- best > > Fouad > > On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 9:33 PM, Avri Doria wrote: > > > > Amendments to the Charter > > > > This charter can be amended at any time as proposed by no fewer than ten > (10) members and as approved by no less than two-thirds (2/3) of the > members of the IGC. The membership requirements for amending the charter > are based on the most currently available voters list. In amending the > charter, everyone who voted in the previous election will be deemed a > member for amending the charter. > > > > ---------- > > > > Currently the charter reads as: > > > > " > > As part of the voting process the voter must personally ascertain that > they are a member of the IGC based on membership criteria described > elsewhere in this charter and posted as part of the voting information > (i.e. a voter must affirm membership on the voter form in order to vote). > The decision to self-identify as a member of the IGC is a personal decision > based on the criteria defined. A list of the self-defined member-voters > will be published after the election with the results of the election. > > > > " > > Changes proposed: > > > > 1. Indicate that the affirmation is prior to the vote and not part of > the vote. > > 2. require that all ballot include the ability to abstain. > > > > > > " > > > > Prior to voting the prospective voter must personally ascertain that > they are a member of the IGC based on membership criteria described > elsewhere in this charter and posted as part of the voting information > (i.e. a voter must affirm membership on the voter form prior to voting). > The decision to self-identify as a member of the IGC is a personal decision > based on the criteria defined. A list of the self-defined member-voters > will be published after the election with the results of the election. > > > > All ballots will include the ability for voters to abstain on any choice > included on the ballot. > > > > " > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > > 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 > > > > > > -- > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From ian.peter at ianpeter.com Wed Jan 9 16:24:02 2013 From: ian.peter at ianpeter.com (Ian Peter) Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2013 08:24:02 +1100 Subject: [governance] Suggested amendment for the charter. Voting. Needs signatories In-Reply-To: References: <71DE6F37-0C23-4CF2-9984-98FB3688F224@acm.org> Message-ID: <0511151AED814DE3AF5DB1CB035A3A21@Toshiba> while I having no problem with this wording, I would prefer if we are going through charter amendments that we do so taking into account the charter reform group recommendations as well (as mentioned by Jeremy recently). In other words, lets do the whole package. From: Ginger Paque Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2013 8:15 AM To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org Cc: Avri Doria Subject: Re: [governance] Suggested amendment for the charter. Voting. Needs signatories I support these amendments as well. Thanks Avri. Ginger On 9 January 2013 15:06, Fouad Bajwa wrote: I support the amendments made below. I am also in favor of encouraging improvements to meet the demand of present and future needs. -- best Fouad On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 9:33 PM, Avri Doria wrote: > > Amendments to the Charter > > This charter can be amended at any time as proposed by no fewer than ten (10) members and as approved by no less than two-thirds (2/3) of the members of the IGC. The membership requirements for amending the charter are based on the most currently available voters list. In amending the charter, everyone who voted in the previous election will be deemed a member for amending the charter. > > ---------- > > Currently the charter reads as: > > " > As part of the voting process the voter must personally ascertain that they are a member of the IGC based on membership criteria described elsewhere in this charter and posted as part of the voting information (i.e. a voter must affirm membership on the voter form in order to vote). The decision to self-identify as a member of the IGC is a personal decision based on the criteria defined. A list of the self-defined member-voters will be published after the election with the results of the election. > > " > Changes proposed: > > 1. Indicate that the affirmation is prior to the vote and not part of the vote. > 2. require that all ballot include the ability to abstain. > > > " > > Prior to voting the prospective voter must personally ascertain that they are a member of the IGC based on membership criteria described elsewhere in this charter and posted as part of the voting information (i.e. a voter must affirm membership on the voter form prior to voting). The decision to self-identify as a member of the IGC is a personal decision based on the criteria defined. A list of the self-defined member-voters will be published after the election with the results of the election. > > All ballots will include the ability for voters to abstain on any choice included on the ballot. > > " > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > -- ____________________________________________________________ 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 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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: -------------- 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 From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com Wed Jan 9 16:35:39 2013 From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro) Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2013 10:35:39 +1300 Subject: [governance] WSIS 2013 [Call for Feedback for Official Contribution] Message-ID: Dear All, This is a general call to the IGC about whether there are issues that you would like to raise to form part of our official contribution to the WSIS. If there are issues that you would like to see please respond to this thread. Thank you. Kind Regards, Sala On Sun, Dec 23, 2012 at 8:42 AM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro < salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com> wrote: > Dear All, > > The World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS) Forum 2013 will be > jointly organized by UNESCO, ITU, UNCTAD and UNDP in Geneva, Switzerland, > from 13 to 17 May 2013. It would be good to ascertain how many from the > IGC plan on attending the WSIS 2013 and will be hosting Workshops? > > We will also begin preparations of preparing an Official Contribution > prior to 21st January 2013. As such I would like to make an open call for > volunteers who are interested in a Working Group that will comprise of > those who will attend physically and those who will participate remotely in > the WSIS. > > The Working Group will be responsible in consolidating ideas from the IGC > and preparing for the WSIS, hosting workshops and also submitting the > Official documents for the IGC. The deadline for the official contributions > and binding requests for workshops will need to be finalised before 10th > January, 2012 at 10.00pm UTC +12and put to the IGC for open consultations > till 14th January, 2012 at 10.00pm UTC+12 . The Working Group will have 48 > hours to prepare a Draft by 16th January, 2012. This will then be put > again to the IGC for final review and edits. The Chairs will be expected to > provide a short brief report and submit the Official Contribution on behalf > of the IGC to the WSIS 2013. > > > > See: > http://www.unesco.org/new/en/unesco/events/all-events/?tx_browser_pi1%5BshowUid%5D=5560&cHash=04dad58b71 > or http://www.itu.int/wsis/implementation/2013/forum/ > > *WSIS 2013 Schedule* > * > * > Phase I - 8 October 2012 > > - Opening of the Open Consultations > > • Online Dialogues > > • Official Submissions Form > > Phase II - 16 November 2012 > > - > > First Physical Meeting, > 15h00-18h00, Room H, ITU Headquarters, Geneva > > Phase III - 21 January 2013 > > - Deadline for the submission of the Official Contributions and > binding requests for Workshops > > Phase IV - 15 February 2013 > > - Final Review Meeting > > Phase V - 16 April 2013 > > - Final Brief > > > -- > Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala > P.O. Box 17862Suva > Fiji > > Twitter: @SalanietaT > Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro > Tel: +679 3544828 > Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 > > > > -- Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala P.O. Box 17862 Suva Fiji Twitter: @SalanietaT Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro Tel: +679 3544828 Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From ginger at paque.net Wed Jan 9 16:49:53 2013 From: ginger at paque.net (Ginger Paque) Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2013 15:49:53 -0600 Subject: [governance] Suggested amendment for the charter. Voting. Needs signatories In-Reply-To: <0511151AED814DE3AF5DB1CB035A3A21@Toshiba> References: <71DE6F37-0C23-4CF2-9984-98FB3688F224@acm.org> <0511151AED814DE3AF5DB1CB035A3A21@Toshiba> Message-ID: I agree with you in principle, Ian, but I think we are more likely to get progress and agreement if we go piece by piece, than if we try to do it as a complete reform package. I suggest that we continue to gather support for these amendments, and then continue the process. Ginger On 9 January 2013 15:24, Ian Peter wrote: > while I having no problem with this wording, I would prefer if we are > going through charter amendments that we do so taking into account the > charter reform group recommendations as well (as mentioned by Jeremy > recently). In other words, lets do the whole package. > > > > *From:* Ginger Paque > *Sent:* Thursday, January 10, 2013 8:15 AM > *To:* governance at lists.igcaucus.org > *Cc:* Avri Doria > *Subject:* Re: [governance] Suggested amendment for the charter. Voting. > Needs signatories > > I support these amendments as well. Thanks Avri. > Ginger > > > On 9 January 2013 15:06, Fouad Bajwa wrote: > >> I support the amendments made below. I am also in favor of encouraging >> improvements to meet the demand of present and future needs. >> >> -- best >> >> Fouad >> >> On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 9:33 PM, Avri Doria wrote: >> > >> > Amendments to the Charter >> > >> > This charter can be amended at any time as proposed by no fewer than >> ten (10) members and as approved by no less than two-thirds (2/3) of the >> members of the IGC. The membership requirements for amending the charter >> are based on the most currently available voters list. In amending the >> charter, everyone who voted in the previous election will be deemed a >> member for amending the charter. >> > >> > ---------- >> > >> > Currently the charter reads as: >> > >> > " >> > As part of the voting process the voter must personally ascertain that >> they are a member of the IGC based on membership criteria described >> elsewhere in this charter and posted as part of the voting information >> (i.e. a voter must affirm membership on the voter form in order to vote). >> The decision to self-identify as a member of the IGC is a personal decision >> based on the criteria defined. A list of the self-defined member-voters >> will be published after the election with the results of the election. >> > >> > " >> > Changes proposed: >> > >> > 1. Indicate that the affirmation is prior to the vote and not part of >> the vote. >> > 2. require that all ballot include the ability to abstain. >> > >> > >> > " >> > >> > Prior to voting the prospective voter must personally ascertain that >> they are a member of the IGC based on membership criteria described >> elsewhere in this charter and posted as part of the voting information >> (i.e. a voter must affirm membership on the voter form prior to voting). >> The decision to self-identify as a member of the IGC is a personal decision >> based on the criteria defined. A list of the self-defined member-voters >> will be published after the election with the results of the election. >> > >> > All ballots will include the ability for voters to abstain on any >> choice included on the ballot. >> > >> > " >> > >> > ____________________________________________________________ >> > 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 >> > >> >> >> >> -- >> >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 >> >> > > ------------------------------ > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From dogwallah at gmail.com Wed Jan 9 17:40:19 2013 From: dogwallah at gmail.com (McTim) Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2013 17:40:19 -0500 Subject: [governance] Suggested amendment for the charter. Voting. Needs signatories In-Reply-To: References: <71DE6F37-0C23-4CF2-9984-98FB3688F224@acm.org> Message-ID: On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 4:01 PM, Cheryl Langdon-Orr wrote: > Happy to sign to support these proposed changes to the Charter going to the > IGC Membership for fiscussion/vote and possible ratification if the 2/3rds > in support requirement is met for the change. +1 -- 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 From sonigituekpe at CROSSRIVERSTATE.GOV.NG Wed Jan 9 18:15:48 2013 From: sonigituekpe at CROSSRIVERSTATE.GOV.NG (Sonigitu Ekpe) Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2013 23:15:48 +0000 Subject: [governance] Suggested amendment for the charter. Voting. Needs signatories Message-ID: <2uk60qxjs24d0kkveib741u7.1357771863694@email.android.com> +1 Ginger is very direct. And that is the diplomatic approach. Bless her each time. Best regards from, Sonigitu Ekpe Committee Secretary, State Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development on Flood Food Recovery and Double-Up Food Production Programme. 3 Barracks Road Calabar - Nigeria. +234 8050232469 Ginger Paque wrote: I agree with you in principle, Ian, but I think we are more likely to get progress and agreement if we go piece by piece, than if we try to do it as a complete reform package. I suggest that we continue to gather support for these amendments, and then continue the process. Ginger On 9 January 2013 15:24, Ian Peter > wrote: while I having no problem with this wording, I would prefer if we are going through charter amendments that we do so taking into account the charter reform group recommendations as well (as mentioned by Jeremy recently). In other words, lets do the whole package. From: Ginger Paque Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2013 8:15 AM To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org Cc: Avri Doria Subject: Re: [governance] Suggested amendment for the charter. Voting. Needs signatories I support these amendments as well. Thanks Avri. Ginger On 9 January 2013 15:06, Fouad Bajwa > wrote: I support the amendments made below. I am also in favor of encouraging improvements to meet the demand of present and future needs. -- best Fouad On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 9:33 PM, Avri Doria > wrote: > > Amendments to the Charter > > This charter can be amended at any time as proposed by no fewer than ten (10) members and as approved by no less than two-thirds (2/3) of the members of the IGC. The membership requirements for amending the charter are based on the most currently available voters list. In amending the charter, everyone who voted in the previous election will be deemed a member for amending the charter. > > ---------- > > Currently the charter reads as: > > " > As part of the voting process the voter must personally ascertain that they are a member of the IGC based on membership criteria described elsewhere in this charter and posted as part of the voting information (i.e. a voter must affirm membership on the voter form in order to vote). The decision to self-identify as a member of the IGC is a personal decision based on the criteria defined. A list of the self-defined member-voters will be published after the election with the results of the election. > > " > Changes proposed: > > 1. Indicate that the affirmation is prior to the vote and not part of the vote. > 2. require that all ballot include the ability to abstain. > > > " > > Prior to voting the prospective voter must personally ascertain that they are a member of the IGC based on membership criteria described elsewhere in this charter and posted as part of the voting information (i.e. a voter must affirm membership on the voter form prior to voting). The decision to self-identify as a member of the IGC is a personal decision based on the criteria defined. A list of the self-defined member-voters will be published after the election with the results of the election. > > All ballots will include the ability for voters to abstain on any choice included on the ballot. > > " > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > -- ____________________________________________________________ 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 ________________________________ ____________________________________________________________ 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: -------------- 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 From shailam at yahoo.com Wed Jan 9 18:37:02 2013 From: shailam at yahoo.com (shaila mistry) Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2013 15:37:02 -0800 (PST) Subject: [governance] Suggested amendment for the charter. Voting. Needs signatories In-Reply-To: References: <71DE6F37-0C23-4CF2-9984-98FB3688F224@acm.org> <0511151AED814DE3AF5DB1CB035A3A21@Toshiba> Message-ID: <1357774622.28613.YahooMailNeo@web160506.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> I agree with Ginger. Option one may raise many questions. We may have support for only one or other amendments ! Shaila   >Changes proposed: >> 1. Indicate that the affirmation is prior to the vote and not part of the vote. > 2. require that all ballot include the ability to abstain. The journey begins sooner than you anticipate ! ..................... the renaissance of composure ! ________________________________ From: Ginger Paque To: Ian Peter Cc: "governance at lists.igcaucus.org" ; Avri Doria Sent: Wednesday, January 9, 2013 1:49 PM Subject: Re: [governance] Suggested amendment for the charter. Voting. Needs signatories I agree with you in principle, Ian, but I think we are more likely to get progress and agreement if we go piece by piece, than if we try to do it as a complete reform package. I suggest that we continue to gather support for these amendments, and then continue the process. Ginger On 9 January 2013 15:24, Ian Peter wrote: while I having no problem with this wording, I would prefer if we are going through charter amendments that we do so taking into account the charter reform group recommendations as well (as mentioned by Jeremy recently). In other words, lets do the whole package. >  >   >From: Ginger Paque >Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2013 8:15 AM >To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org >Cc: Avri Doria >Subject: Re: [governance] Suggested amendment for the charter. Voting. Needs signatories >  I support these amendments as well. Thanks Avri. >Ginger > > > > >On 9 January 2013 15:06, Fouad Bajwa wrote: > >I support the amendments made below. I am also in favor of encouraging >>improvements to meet the demand of present and future needs. >> >>-- best >> >>Fouad >> >>On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 9:33 PM, Avri Doria wrote: >>> >>> Amendments to the Charter >>> >>> This charter can be amended at any time as proposed by no fewer than ten (10) members and as approved by no less than two-thirds (2/3) of the members of the IGC. The membership requirements for amending the charter are based on the most currently available voters list. In amending the charter, everyone who voted in the previous election will be deemed a member for amending the charter. >>> >>> ---------- >>> >>> Currently the charter   reads as: >>> >>> " >>> As part of the voting process the voter must personally ascertain that they are a member of the IGC based on membership criteria described elsewhere in this charter and posted as part of the voting information (i.e. a voter must affirm membership on the voter form in order to vote). The decision to self-identify as a member of the IGC is a personal decision based on the criteria defined. A list of the self-defined member-voters will be published after the election with the results of the election. >>> >>> " >>> Changes proposed: >>> >>> 1. Indicate that the affirmation is prior to the vote and not part of the vote. >>> 2. require that all ballot include the ability to abstain. >>> >>> >>> " >>> >>> Prior to voting the prospective voter must personally ascertain that they are a member of the IGC based on membership criteria described elsewhere in this charter and posted as part of the voting information (i.e. a voter must affirm membership on the voter form prior to voting). The decision to self-identify as a member of the IGC is a personal decision based on the criteria defined. A list of the self-defined member-voters will be published after the election with the results of the election. >>> >>> All ballots will include the ability for voters to abstain on any choice included on the ballot. >>> >>> " >>> >>> ____________________________________________________________ >>> 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 >>> >> >> >> >>-- >> >> >>____________________________________________________________ >>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 >> >> >  >________________________________ > ____________________________________________________________ >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 > ____________________________________________________________ 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: -------------- 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 From tracyhackshaw at gmail.com Wed Jan 9 19:19:56 2013 From: tracyhackshaw at gmail.com (Tracy F. Hackshaw @ Google) Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2013 20:19:56 -0400 Subject: [governance] Suggested amendment for the charter. Voting. Needs signatories In-Reply-To: References: <71DE6F37-0C23-4CF2-9984-98FB3688F224@acm.org> <0511151AED814DE3AF5DB1CB035A3A21@Toshiba> Message-ID: +1 Avri, Ginger. On Jan 9, 2013 5:50 PM, "Ginger Paque" wrote: > I agree with you in principle, Ian, but I think we are more likely to get > progress and agreement if we go piece by piece, than if we try to do it as > a complete reform package. I suggest that we continue to gather support for > these amendments, and then continue the process. > Ginger > > > On 9 January 2013 15:24, Ian Peter wrote: > >> while I having no problem with this wording, I would prefer if we are >> going through charter amendments that we do so taking into account the >> charter reform group recommendations as well (as mentioned by Jeremy >> recently). In other words, lets do the whole package. >> >> >> >> *From:* Ginger Paque >> *Sent:* Thursday, January 10, 2013 8:15 AM >> *To:* governance at lists.igcaucus.org >> *Cc:* Avri Doria >> *Subject:* Re: [governance] Suggested amendment for the charter. Voting. >> Needs signatories >> >> I support these amendments as well. Thanks Avri. >> Ginger >> >> >> On 9 January 2013 15:06, Fouad Bajwa wrote: >> >>> I support the amendments made below. I am also in favor of encouraging >>> improvements to meet the demand of present and future needs. >>> >>> -- best >>> >>> Fouad >>> >>> On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 9:33 PM, Avri Doria wrote: >>> > >>> > Amendments to the Charter >>> > >>> > This charter can be amended at any time as proposed by no fewer than >>> ten (10) members and as approved by no less than two-thirds (2/3) of the >>> members of the IGC. The membership requirements for amending the charter >>> are based on the most currently available voters list. In amending the >>> charter, everyone who voted in the previous election will be deemed a >>> member for amending the charter. >>> > >>> > ---------- >>> > >>> > Currently the charter reads as: >>> > >>> > " >>> > As part of the voting process the voter must personally ascertain that >>> they are a member of the IGC based on membership criteria described >>> elsewhere in this charter and posted as part of the voting information >>> (i.e. a voter must affirm membership on the voter form in order to vote). >>> The decision to self-identify as a member of the IGC is a personal decision >>> based on the criteria defined. A list of the self-defined member-voters >>> will be published after the election with the results of the election. >>> > >>> > " >>> > Changes proposed: >>> > >>> > 1. Indicate that the affirmation is prior to the vote and not part of >>> the vote. >>> > 2. require that all ballot include the ability to abstain. >>> > >>> > >>> > " >>> > >>> > Prior to voting the prospective voter must personally ascertain that >>> they are a member of the IGC based on membership criteria described >>> elsewhere in this charter and posted as part of the voting information >>> (i.e. a voter must affirm membership on the voter form prior to voting). >>> The decision to self-identify as a member of the IGC is a personal decision >>> based on the criteria defined. A list of the self-defined member-voters >>> will be published after the election with the results of the election. >>> > >>> > All ballots will include the ability for voters to abstain on any >>> choice included on the ballot. >>> > >>> > " >>> > >>> > ____________________________________________________________ >>> > 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 >>> > >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> >>> >>> ____________________________________________________________ >>> 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 >>> >>> >> >> ------------------------------ >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 >> >> > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From ian.peter at ianpeter.com Wed Jan 9 19:25:34 2013 From: ian.peter at ianpeter.com (Ian Peter) Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2013 11:25:34 +1100 Subject: [governance] Suggested amendment for the charter. Voting. Needs signatories In-Reply-To: <1357774622.28613.YahooMailNeo@web160506.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> References: <71DE6F37-0C23-4CF2-9984-98FB3688F224@acm.org> <0511151AED814DE3AF5DB1CB035A3A21@Toshiba> <1357774622.28613.YahooMailNeo@web160506.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: no worries, I am happy with the approach Ginger suggests if thats how people want to proceed. Cc: Avri Doria Subject: Re: [governance] Suggested amendment for the charter. Voting. Needs signatories I agree with Ginger. Option one may raise many questions. We may have support for only one or other amendments ! Shaila >Changes proposed: >> 1. Indicate that the affirmation is prior to the vote and not part of the vote. > 2. require that all ballot include the ability to abstain. The journey begins sooner than you anticipate ! ..................... the renaissance of composure ! -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Ginger Paque To: Ian Peter Cc: "governance at lists.igcaucus.org" ; Avri Doria Sent: Wednesday, January 9, 2013 1:49 PM Subject: Re: [governance] Suggested amendment for the charter. Voting. Needs signatories I agree with you in principle, Ian, but I think we are more likely to get progress and agreement if we go piece by piece, than if we try to do it as a complete reform package. I suggest that we continue to gather support for these amendments, and then continue the process. Ginger On 9 January 2013 15:24, Ian Peter wrote: while I having no problem with this wording, I would prefer if we are going through charter amendments that we do so taking into account the charter reform group recommendations as well (as mentioned by Jeremy recently). In other words, lets do the whole package. From: Ginger Paque Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2013 8:15 AM To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org Cc: Avri Doria Subject: Re: [governance] Suggested amendment for the charter. Voting. Needs signatories I support these amendments as well. Thanks Avri. Ginger On 9 January 2013 15:06, Fouad Bajwa wrote: I support the amendments made below. I am also in favor of encouraging improvements to meet the demand of present and future needs. -- best Fouad On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 9:33 PM, Avri Doria wrote: > > Amendments to the Charter > > This charter can be amended at any time as proposed by no fewer than ten (10) members and as approved by no less than two-thirds (2/3) of the members of the IGC. The membership requirements for amending the charter are based on the most currently available voters list. In amending the charter, everyone who voted in the previous election will be deemed a member for amending the charter. > > ---------- > > Currently the charter reads as: > > " > As part of the voting process the voter must personally ascertain that they are a member of the IGC based on membership criteria described elsewhere in this charter and posted as part of the voting information (i.e. a voter must affirm membership on the voter form in order to vote). The decision to self-identify as a member of the IGC is a personal decision based on the criteria defined. A list of the self-defined member-voters will be published after the election with the results of the election. > > " > Changes proposed: > > 1. Indicate that the affirmation is prior to the vote and not part of the vote. > 2. require that all ballot include the ability to abstain. > > > " > > Prior to voting the prospective voter must personally ascertain that they are a member of the IGC based on membership criteria described elsewhere in this charter and posted as part of the voting information (i.e. a voter must affirm membership on the voter form prior to voting). The decision to self-identify as a member of the IGC is a personal decision based on the criteria defined. A list of the self-defined member-voters will be published after the election with the results of the election. > > All ballots will include the ability for voters to abstain on any choice included on the ballot. > > " > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > -- ____________________________________________________________ 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 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ____________________________________________________________ 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 ____________________________________________________________ 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 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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: -------------- 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 From rudi.vansnick at isoc.be Wed Jan 9 19:25:58 2013 From: rudi.vansnick at isoc.be (Rudi Vansnick) Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2013 01:25:58 +0100 Subject: [governance] Suggested amendment for the charter. Voting. Needs signatories In-Reply-To: References: <71DE6F37-0C23-4CF2-9984-98FB3688F224@acm.org> Message-ID: <3C24FC9C-297E-4CC2-9D90-7D4131F1DADF@isoc.be> +1 Rudi Vansnick On 10/01/2013 3:33 AM, "Avri Doria" wrote: Amendments to the Charter This charter can be amended at any time as proposed by no fewer than ten (10) members and as approved by no less than two-thirds (2/3) of the members of the IGC. The membership requirements for amending the charter are based on the most currently available voters list. In amending the charter, everyone who voted in the previous election will be deemed a member for amending the charter. ---------- Currently the charter reads as: " As part of the voting process the voter must personally ascertain that they are a member of the IGC based on membership criteria described elsewhere in this charter and posted as part of the voting information (i.e. a voter must affirm membership on the voter form in order to vote). The decision to self-identify as a member of the IGC is a personal decision based on the criteria defined. A list of the self-defined member-voters will be published after the election with the results of the election. " Changes proposed: 1. Indicate that the affirmation is prior to the vote and not part of the vote. 2. require that all ballot include the ability to abstain. " Prior to voting the prospective voter must personally ascertain that they are a member of the IGC based on membership criteria described elsewhere in this charter and posted as part of the voting information (i.e. a voter must affirm membership on the voter form prior to voting). The decision to self-identify as a member of the IGC is a personal decision based on the criteria defined. A list of the self-defined member-voters will be published after the election with the results of the election. All ballots will include the ability for voters to abstain on any choice included on the ballot. " ____________________________________________________________ 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: -------------- 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 From chaitanyabd at gmail.com Wed Jan 9 20:56:19 2013 From: chaitanyabd at gmail.com (Chaitanya Dhareshwar) Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2013 07:26:19 +0530 Subject: [governance] Typo corrected amendments suggestion (adding a heading, nomcom) (was Re: Suggested amendment...) In-Reply-To: <50EDD720.3090303@cis-india.org> References: <7E9B2FE7-631E-48EA-8FE9-A50886EF107F@acm.org> <7A95D3C2-A054-43B1-A618-5C4308996EF8@acm.org> <20130109184514.161a2e18@quill.bollow.ch> <50EDD720.3090303@cis-india.org> Message-ID: +1 On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 2:16 AM, Pranesh Prakash wrote: > I can't think of any good reasons against the proposed amendments, and > support both Amendment 1, and Amendment 2 (both parts). > > Minor corrections: > "term limited" -> "term-limited" > "term -limited" -> "term-limited" / "limited-term" > > ~ Pranesh > > Norbert Bollow [2013-01-09 23:15]: > > I support the two amendment proposals below, subject to the > > noted typo corrections... > > > > Greetings, > > Norbert > > > > Avri Doria wrote: > >> Thanks for point out that I neglected to Include the heading I meant > >> to add. > >> > >> On 9 Jan 2013, at 11:24, Avri Doria wrote: > >> > >>> Amendments to the Charter > >> > >> This charter can be amended at any time as proposed by no fewer than > >> ten (10) members and as approved by no less than two-thirds (2/3) of > >> the members of the IGC. The membership requirements for amending the > >> charter are based on the most currently available voters list. In > >> amending the charter, everyone who voted in the previous election > >> will be deemed a member for amending the charter. > >> > >> ---------- > >> > >> Amendment 1: > >> > >> Currently the charter reads as: > >> > >> " > >> Any such request will require a public response from the > >> coordinators' within a week indicating the action taken and with an > >> explanation of the reasons for the action. > >> > >> All nominations to external bodies, e.g., the IGF multistakholder > >> advisory group, will be made using a randomly selected nomcom process > >> as defined here. " > >> > >> > >> > >> Add Heading to Nominations section. New text: > >> > >> " > >> Any such request will require a public response from the > >> coordinators' within a week indicating the action taken and with an > >> explanation of the reasons for the action. > >> > >> Nominations to External Bodies > >> > >> > >> All nominations to external bodies, e.g., the IGF multistakholder > > > > "multistakholder" -> "multistakeholder" > > > >> advisory group, will be made using a randomly selected nomcom process > >> as defined here. " > >> > >> > >> Amendment 2: > >> > >> Currently the Nomcom process reads > >> as: > >> > >> " > >> 8. Each nomcom will be selected for a specific decision and will be > >> disbanded after the decision is made.However, in special cases where > >> several different nominating committees would need to be completed in > >> a shortened time frame that did not allow for multiple nominating > >> committees, the co-coordinators may jointly request one nominating > >> committee to fill several functions. > >> > >> 9. There is no limit on the number of nomcoms an individual may serve > >> on. " > >> > >> Proposed changes > >> > >> 1. Change to 1 Nomcom per year > >> 2. Restrict members of Nomcom to 2 consecutive terms > >> > >> Change text to: > >> > >> " > >> 8. Each Nomcom will serve for one year. > >> > >> 9. Nomcom Volunteers and non-voting chairs may serve a maximum of two > >> consecutive terms. An intervening year is required before any term > >> limited volunteer may volunteer for the random process. An > >> intervening two (2) intervening year are required beofe a non-voting > > > > "beofe" -> "before" > > > > "intervening year" -> "years" (this change corrects the accidental > > duplication of the word "intervening" and the omission of the plural-s > > after "year") > > > >> chair may serve again as either a volunteer or a non-voting chair. A > >> term -limited volunteer may serve as non-voting chair. " > > > > > -- > Pranesh Prakash > Policy Director > Centre for Internet and Society > T: +91 80 40926283 | W: http://cis-india.org > PGP ID: 0x1D5C5F07 | Twitter: @pranesh_prakash > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From nhklein at gmx.net Wed Jan 9 21:22:18 2013 From: nhklein at gmx.net (Norbert Klein) Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2013 09:22:18 +0700 Subject: [governance] Suggested amendment for the charter. Voting. Needs signatories In-Reply-To: References: <71DE6F37-0C23-4CF2-9984-98FB3688F224@acm.org> <0511151AED814DE3AF5DB1CB035A3A21@Toshiba> Message-ID: <50EE25DA.2040909@gmx.net> In this sense I also support the presently suggested amendments. Norbert Klein On 10 1.2013 4:49, Ginger Paque wrote: > I agree with you in principle, Ian, but I think we are more likely to > get progress and agreement if we go piece by piece, than if we try to > do it as a complete reform package. I suggest that we continue to > gather support for these amendments, and then continue the process. > Ginger > > > On 9 January 2013 15:24, Ian Peter > wrote: > > while I having no problem with this wording, I would prefer if we > are going through charter amendments that we do so taking into > account the charter reform group recommendations as well (as > mentioned by Jeremy recently). In other words, lets do the whole > package. > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From aizu at anr.org Wed Jan 9 21:58:51 2013 From: aizu at anr.org (Izumi AIZU) Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2013 11:58:51 +0900 Subject: [governance] Coordinator election in progress In-Reply-To: References: <50EB8723.7070707@ciroap.org> <7B0CDFC9-00D8-4E4B-AAC5-6444296ED667@acm.org> <50EBA57D.6010201@ciroap.org> <50EBB536.7030503@ciroap.org> <50ECF3F1.4060301@itforchange.net> <50ECF5ED.5030302@ciroap.org> <578DD3EF-72F7-47F9-A6D7-EDB07AB8D2D2@acm.org> Message-ID: In Japan, for formal voting, we usually vote without writing any name, making a blank ballot and put them into the box. (we are still hand writing the names of the candidates). Likewise, it looks natural to me to prepare a choice - Abstain/non of the above, in addition to the explicit names of the candidates. I accept that this time it is too late, but hope that make sure to reach consensus for Charter and actual voting system before our next vote. (ah, Charter change requires the voting as well ;-). izumi 2013/1/10 Sivasubramanian M : > I agree. None of the above / abstain needs to be included as one of the > options, and this needs to count as a vote. > > On Jan 9, 2013 6:34 PM, "Avri Doria" wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> This is why I have been requesting a NOTA, None of the Above, option. >> >> That is a vote. >> >> As I read the charter one has to participate in the voting event. One >> should not be forced to pick a candidate they may not support. We should >> probably even have the option of writing someone in. >> >> Abstain, to my mind is also a vote. >> >> It is not really appropriate that you have substituted your opinion, or >> that of Australia, for a discussion and agreement among the members. >> >> avri >> >> >> >> On 8 Jan 2013, at 23:45, Jeremy Malcolm wrote: >> >> > On 09/01/13 12:37, parminder wrote: >> >> >> >> i think it needs to be explicitly mentioned on the ballot and >> >> otherwise on the list just before the elections that participation in >> >> voting is required (even if excercising a no preference option) to be >> >> eligible to vote for charter amendments (but not for other purposes) - and >> >> thus for what can in a way be called as the full membership of IGC.... >> > >> > The charter doesn't say that exercising a no preference option is >> > sufficient. This is where Avri and I have a disagreement. I come from a >> > country with a compulsory preferential voting system, so being forced to >> > vote doesn't seem so obnoxious to me. According to the former Chief Justice >> > of the High Court, even handing in a blank ballot paper is not allowed in >> > Australia (though this is debatable). In the context of the IGC, I feel it >> > is better if everyone who wants to count themselves as a "full" member of >> > the IGC expresses a preference. This is one reason for amending the >> > charter, to make the requirements clearer. >> > >> > -- >> > Dr Jeremy Malcolm >> > Senior Policy Officer >> > Consumers International | the global campaigning voice for consumers >> > Office for Asia-Pacific and the Middle East >> > Lot 5-1 Wisma WIM, 7 Jalan Abang Haji Openg, TTDI, 60000 Kuala Lumpur, >> > Malaysia >> > Tel: +60 3 7726 1599 >> > >> > Your rights, our mission – download CI's Strategy 2015: >> > http://consint.info/RightsMission >> > >> > @Consumers_Int | www.consumersinternational.org | >> > www.facebook.com/consumersinternational >> > >> > Read our email confidentiality notice. Don't print this email unless >> > necessary. >> > >> > ____________________________________________________________ >> > 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 >> >> >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 >> > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > -- >> Izumi Aizu << Institute for InfoSocionomics, Tama University, Tokyo Institute for HyperNetwork Society, Oita, Japan * * * * * << Writing the Future of the History >> www.anr.org -------------- 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 From aizu at anr.org Wed Jan 9 22:05:27 2013 From: aizu at anr.org (Izumi AIZU) Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2013 12:05:27 +0900 Subject: [governance] Suggested amendment for the charter. Voting. Needs signatories In-Reply-To: <50EE25DA.2040909@gmx.net> References: <71DE6F37-0C23-4CF2-9984-98FB3688F224@acm.org> <0511151AED814DE3AF5DB1CB035A3A21@Toshiba> <50EE25DA.2040909@gmx.net> Message-ID: Me too. agree with going forward for Avri/Ginger proposal. izumi 2013/1/10 Norbert Klein : > In this sense I also support the presently suggested amendments. > > > Norbert Klein > > > > On 10 1.2013 4:49, Ginger Paque wrote: > > I agree with you in principle, Ian, but I think we are more likely to get > progress and agreement if we go piece by piece, than if we try to do it as a > complete reform package. I suggest that we continue to gather support for > these amendments, and then continue the process. > Ginger > > > On 9 January 2013 15:24, Ian Peter wrote: >> >> while I having no problem with this wording, I would prefer if we are >> going through charter amendments that we do so taking into account the >> charter reform group recommendations as well (as mentioned by Jeremy >> recently). In other words, lets do the whole package. >> >> >> >> > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > -- >> Izumi Aizu << Institute for InfoSocionomics, Tama University, Tokyo Institute for HyperNetwork Society, Oita, Japan * * * * * << Writing the Future of the History >> www.anr.org -------------- 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 From pouzin at well.com Wed Jan 9 22:16:30 2013 From: pouzin at well.com (Louis Pouzin (well)) Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2013 04:16:30 +0100 Subject: [governance] Typo corrected amendments suggestion (adding a heading, nomcom) (was Re: Suggested amendment...) In-Reply-To: References: <7E9B2FE7-631E-48EA-8FE9-A50886EF107F@acm.org> <7A95D3C2-A054-43B1-A618-5C4308996EF8@acm.org> <20130109184514.161a2e18@quill.bollow.ch> <50EDD720.3090303@cis-india.org> Message-ID: ## +1 ## - - - On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 2:56 AM, Chaitanya Dhareshwar wrote: > +1 > > On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 2:16 AM, Pranesh Prakash wrote: > >> I can't think of any good reasons against the proposed amendments, and >> support both Amendment 1, and Amendment 2 (both parts). >> >> Minor corrections: >> "term limited" -> "term-limited" >> "term -limited" -> "term-limited" / "limited-term" >> >> ~ Pranesh >> >> Norbert Bollow [2013-01-09 23:15]: >> > I support the two amendment proposals below, subject to the >> > noted typo corrections... >> > >> > Greetings, >> > Norbert >> > >> > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From isolatedn at gmail.com Wed Jan 9 23:17:04 2013 From: isolatedn at gmail.com (Sivasubramanian M) Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2013 09:47:04 +0530 Subject: [governance] Suggested amendment for the charter. Voting. Needs signatories In-Reply-To: <71DE6F37-0C23-4CF2-9984-98FB3688F224@acm.org> References: <71DE6F37-0C23-4CF2-9984-98FB3688F224@acm.org> Message-ID: +1 On Jan 9, 2013 10:03 PM, "Avri Doria" wrote: > > Amendments to the Charter > > This charter can be amended at any time as proposed by no fewer than ten > (10) members and as approved by no less than two-thirds (2/3) of the > members of the IGC. The membership requirements for amending the charter > are based on the most currently available voters list. In amending the > charter, everyone who voted in the previous election will be deemed a > member for amending the charter. > > ---------- > > Currently the charter reads as: > > " > As part of the voting process the voter must personally ascertain that > they are a member of the IGC based on membership criteria described > elsewhere in this charter and posted as part of the voting information > (i.e. a voter must affirm membership on the voter form in order to vote). > The decision to self-identify as a member of the IGC is a personal decision > based on the criteria defined. A list of the self-defined member-voters > will be published after the election with the results of the election. > > " > Changes proposed: > > 1. Indicate that the affirmation is prior to the vote and not part of the > vote. > 2. require that all ballot include the ability to abstain. > > > " > > Prior to voting the prospective voter must personally ascertain that they > are a member of the IGC based on membership criteria described elsewhere in > this charter and posted as part of the voting information (i.e. a voter > must affirm membership on the voter form prior to voting). The decision to > self-identify as a member of the IGC is a personal decision based on the > criteria defined. A list of the self-defined member-voters will be > published after the election with the results of the election. > > All ballots will include the ability for voters to abstain on any choice > included on the ballot. > > " > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From ajp at glocom.ac.jp Thu Jan 10 00:56:52 2013 From: ajp at glocom.ac.jp (Adam Peake) Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2013 14:56:52 +0900 Subject: [governance] WSIS 2013 [Call for Feedback for Official Contribution] In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Thanks Sala. A few comments for the February/March consultation. Public archive of MAG mailing list needed, not been updated for a year. Workshops: too many. Cut to between 80 and 100. Make this target number known when the call for applications is published, might be the first time quite a large number of proposals are rejected (might think about implications of this for the IGF), people should expect to be disappointed.  Minimum of 50% of MAG members must complete assessment of all workshops.  Clarify rules for other sessions (open forums, dynamic coalition, etc.) No reason an initial call to prepare proposals can't be made before the Feb meeting (more time better and the meetings a little later than usual). A reminder to MAG members to ready their stakeholders.  For workshops, keep the current themes (access, SOP, IG4D, CIR, emerging issues). Have the MAG better define Internet Governance, how it must be considered in workshop proposals (there are other spaces in WSIS follow-up for non-IG issues). Use an evaluation form for workshops (at the moment don't even know if a room was empty or overflowing, simple count a good idea.) However, indications are that while there were too many workshops in Baku many were strong in content, well received. MAG should not cut what looks like a success to favor the floundering main sessions.  Merging not the always the solution, it's too easy an answer for MAG in their evaluation to say merge simply because proposals have similar words in the titl. If merging proposed then the new workshop needs support or tendency to end up with 2 workshops in the same space (merge in name only). Overall theme for 2013: "enhanced cooperation -- meaningful participation of developing countries in Internet governance". Main sessions. Mix up the formats, 3 hours generally too long, some poorly attended in Baku and many grumbled complaints about poor content, poor preparation, repeating issues from previous years, etc. Some main sessions need better preparation (and some were good - transcripts illustrate the differences, MAG needs to be aware they have a role to complete, not last minute for a meeting of the IGF's importance.) Invite speakers early. Use (look for) funds to support speakers. Taking stock and emerging issues: mix the two sessions, then justifies 3 hours. Probably best held on the final morning (i.e. emerging issues become issues the IGF thinks emerging as important for the coming year(s)). Final afternoon: session on outcomes (1 hour), followed by closing. Critical Internet Resources (strong session in Baku, justifies 3 hours). Keep as before. New theme: Enhanced Cooperation. Sessions in mixed formats over 1 day, e.g. Morning expert panel session 2 hours. Follow by a long break where people encouraged to join self-organizing small groups to discuss a few set questions and ideas from the morning panel. Afternoon, 2 hour moderated session with audience only, no panel/experts etc. Bring back comments from the small groups. New theme: Internet principles. One day, perhaps same format as suggested for enhanced cooperation. Try something different. Development aspect of IG always overlooked and too often "governance" lost as discussion focuses on IT for development. Open specific public comment on design/scope of IG4D session. Bring back to the May meeting to decide on topics and format. Time to drop access and SOP as main sessions, but keep as workshops and perhaps round-tables. Adam >Dear All, > >This is a general call to the IGC about whether >there are issues that you would like to raise to >form part of our official contribution to the >WSIS. > >If there are issues that you would like to see please respond to this thread. > >Thank you. > >Kind Regards, >Sala > >On Sun, Dec 23, 2012 at 8:42 AM, Salanieta T. >Tamanikaiwaimaro ><salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com> >wrote: > >Dear All, > >The World Summit on the Information Society >(WSIS) Forum 2013 will be jointly organized by >UNESCO, ITU, UNCTAD and UNDP in Geneva, >Switzerland, from 13 to 17 May 2013. It would be >good to ascertain how many from the IGC plan on >attending the WSIS 2013 and will be hosting >Workshops? > >We will also begin preparations of preparing an >Official Contribution prior to 21st January >2013. As such I would like to make an open call >for volunteers who are interested in a Working >Group that will comprise of those who will >attend physically and those who will participate >remotely in the WSIS. > >The Working Group will be responsible in >consolidating ideas from the IGC and preparing >for the WSIS, hosting workshops and also >submitting the Official documents for the IGC. >The deadline for the official contributions and >binding requests for workshops will need to be >finalised before 10th January, 2012 at 10.00pm >UTC +12and put to the IGC for open consultations >till 14th January, 2012 at 10.00pm UTC+12 . The >Working Group will have 48 hours to prepare a >Draft by 16th January, 2012. This will then be >put again to the IGC for final review and edits. >The Chairs will be expected to provide a short >brief report and submit the Official >Contribution on behalf of the IGC to the WSIS >2013. > > > >See: >http://www.unesco.org/new/en/unesco/events/all-events/?tx_browser_pi1%5BshowUid%5D=5560&cHash=04dad58b71 >or >http://www.itu.int/wsis/implementation/2013/forum/ > >WSIS 2013 Schedule > >Phase I - 8 October 2012 > >Opening of the Open Consultations >€ >Online >Dialogues > >€ >Official >Submissions Form > >Phase II - 16 November 2012 > >First >Physical Meeting, 15h00-18h00, Room H, ITU >Headquarters, Geneva > >Phase III - 21 January 2013 > >Deadline >for the submission of the Official Contributions >and binding requests for Workshops >Phase IV - 15 February 2013 > >Final >Review Meeting >Phase V - 16 April 2013 > >Final >Brief > >-- > >Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala >P.O. Box 17862Suva >Fiji > >Twitter: @SalanietaT >Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro >Tel: +679 3544828 >Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 > > > > > >-- > >Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala >P.O. Box 17862 >Suva >Fiji > >Twitter: @SalanietaT >Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro >Tel: +679 3544828 >Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 > > > >____________________________________________________________ >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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From nb at bollow.ch Thu Jan 10 01:29:10 2013 From: nb at bollow.ch (Norbert Bollow) Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2013 07:29:10 +0100 Subject: [governance] Suggested amendment for the charter. Voting. Needs signatories In-Reply-To: References: <71DE6F37-0C23-4CF2-9984-98FB3688F224@acm.org> Message-ID: <20130110072910.584279d5@quill.bollow.ch> After a bit of reflection, I now also support this proposed amendment. I have come to the conclusion that our coordinator elections will be more reliable in choosing a good coordinator if the votes that count towards one or the other candidate are votes that are based on an actual preference, rather than votes that are only cast with the objective of fulfilling a requirement of having voted. Greetings, Norbert Ginger Paque wrote: > I support these amendments as well. Thanks Avri. > Ginger > > > On 9 January 2013 15:06, Fouad Bajwa wrote: > > > I support the amendments made below. I am also in favor of > > encouraging improvements to meet the demand of present and future > > needs. > > > > -- best > > > > Fouad > > > > On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 9:33 PM, Avri Doria wrote: > > > > > > Amendments to the Charter > > > > > > This charter can be amended at any time as proposed by no fewer > > > than ten > > (10) members and as approved by no less than two-thirds (2/3) of the > > members of the IGC. The membership requirements for amending the > > charter are based on the most currently available voters list. In > > amending the charter, everyone who voted in the previous election > > will be deemed a member for amending the charter. > > > > > > ---------- > > > > > > Currently the charter reads as: > > > > > > " > > > As part of the voting process the voter must personally ascertain > > > that > > they are a member of the IGC based on membership criteria described > > elsewhere in this charter and posted as part of the voting > > information (i.e. a voter must affirm membership on the voter form > > in order to vote). The decision to self-identify as a member of the > > IGC is a personal decision based on the criteria defined. A list of > > the self-defined member-voters will be published after the election > > with the results of the election. > > > > > > " > > > Changes proposed: > > > > > > 1. Indicate that the affirmation is prior to the vote and not > > > part of > > the vote. > > > 2. require that all ballot include the ability to abstain. > > > > > > > > > " > > > > > > Prior to voting the prospective voter must personally ascertain > > > that > > they are a member of the IGC based on membership criteria described > > elsewhere in this charter and posted as part of the voting > > information (i.e. a voter must affirm membership on the voter form > > prior to voting). The decision to self-identify as a member of the > > IGC is a personal decision based on the criteria defined. A list of > > the self-defined member-voters will be published after the election > > with the results of the election. > > > > > > All ballots will include the ability for voters to abstain on any > > > choice > > included on the ballot. > > > > > > " > > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > > > 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 > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From nb at bollow.ch Thu Jan 10 02:08:02 2013 From: nb at bollow.ch (Norbert Bollow) Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2013 08:08:02 +0100 Subject: [governance] IGF consultation (was Re: WSIS 2013...) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20130110080802.0495d3a8@quill.bollow.ch> Good thoughts from Adam here (although it seems to me that they apply to a different consultation than what Sala was talking about.) I would add: * Remote participation: Increase emphasis on ensuring the reliability of being able to participate interactively, even in the face of potential Internet-related challenges or disability-related challenges. At least for workshops that have remote panelists, the possibility to connect via telephone and the possibility to communicate with the remote moderator via irc should be engineered for having at least 99.99% reliability. Also supporting remote participation by video conferencing (for those who have plenty of bandwidth available) should be treated as a "nice to have" feature with lower priority. The basics must be assured first. * Assure good on-site IPv4/IPv6 dual-stack Internet connectivity. Greetings, Norbert Am Thu, 10 Jan 2013 14:56:52 +0900 schrieb Adam Peake : > Thanks Sala. > > A few comments for the February/March consultation. > > Public archive of MAG mailing list needed, not been updated for a > year. > > Workshops: too many. Cut to between 80 and 100. > Make this target number known when the call for > applications is published, might be the first > time quite a large number of proposals are > rejected (might think about implications of this > for the IGF), people should expect to be > disappointed.  > > Minimum of 50% of MAG members must complete assessment of all > workshops.  > > Clarify rules for other sessions (open forums, dynamic coalition, > etc.) > > No reason an initial call to prepare proposals > can't be made before the Feb meeting (more time > better and the meetings a little later than > usual). A reminder to MAG members to ready their > stakeholders.  > > For workshops, keep the current themes (access, > SOP, IG4D, CIR, emerging issues). Have the MAG > better define Internet Governance, how it must be > considered in workshop proposals (there are other > spaces in WSIS follow-up for non-IG issues). Use > an evaluation form for workshops (at the moment > don't even know if a room was empty or > overflowing, simple count a good idea.) However, > indications are that while there were too many > workshops in Baku many were strong in content, > well received. MAG should not cut what looks > like a success to favor the floundering main > sessions.  > > Merging not the always the solution, it's too > easy an answer for MAG in their evaluation to say > merge simply because proposals have similar words > in the titl. If merging proposed then the new > workshop needs support or tendency to end up with > 2 workshops in the same space (merge in name > only). > > Overall theme for 2013: "enhanced cooperation -- > meaningful participation of developing countries > in Internet governance". > > Main sessions. Mix up the formats, 3 hours > generally too long, some poorly attended in Baku > and many grumbled complaints about poor content, > poor preparation, repeating issues from previous > years, etc. Some main sessions need better > preparation (and some were good - transcripts > illustrate the differences, MAG needs to be aware > they have a role to complete, not last minute for > a meeting of the IGF's importance.) Invite > speakers early. Use (look for) funds to support > speakers. > > Taking stock and emerging issues: mix the two > sessions, then justifies 3 hours. Probably best > held on the final morning (i.e. emerging issues > become issues the IGF thinks emerging as > important for the coming year(s)). > > Final afternoon: session on outcomes (1 hour), followed by closing. > > Critical Internet Resources (strong session in > Baku, justifies 3 hours). Keep as before. > > New theme: Enhanced Cooperation. Sessions in > mixed formats over 1 day, e.g. Morning expert > panel session 2 hours. Follow by a long break > where people encouraged to join self-organizing > small groups to discuss a few set questions and > ideas from the morning panel. Afternoon, 2 hour > moderated session with audience only, no > panel/experts etc. Bring back comments from the > small groups. > > New theme: Internet principles. One day, perhaps > same format as suggested for enhanced > cooperation. Try something different. > > Development aspect of IG always overlooked and > too often "governance" lost as discussion focuses > on IT for development. Open specific public > comment on design/scope of IG4D session. Bring > back to the May meeting to decide on topics and > format. > > Time to drop access and SOP as main sessions, but > keep as workshops and perhaps round-tables. > > Adam > > > > >Dear All, > > > >This is a general call to the IGC about whether > >there are issues that you would like to raise to > >form part of our official contribution to the > >WSIS. > > > >If there are issues that you would like to see please respond to > >this thread. > > > >Thank you. > > > >Kind Regards, > >Sala > > > >On Sun, Dec 23, 2012 at 8:42 AM, Salanieta T. > >Tamanikaiwaimaro > ><salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com> > >wrote: > > > >Dear All, > > > >The World Summit on the Information Society > >(WSIS) Forum 2013 will be jointly organized by > >UNESCO, ITU, UNCTAD and UNDP in Geneva, > >Switzerland, from 13 to 17 May 2013. It would be > >good to ascertain how many from the IGC plan on > >attending the WSIS 2013 and will be hosting > >Workshops? > > > >We will also begin preparations of preparing an > >Official Contribution prior to 21st January > >2013. As such I would like to make an open call > >for volunteers who are interested in a Working > >Group that will comprise of those who will > >attend physically and those who will participate > >remotely in the WSIS. > > > >The Working Group will be responsible in > >consolidating ideas from the IGC and preparing > >for the WSIS, hosting workshops and also > >submitting the Official documents for the IGC. > >The deadline for the official contributions and > >binding requests for workshops will need to be > >finalised before 10th January, 2012 at 10.00pm > >UTC +12and put to the IGC for open consultations > >till 14th January, 2012 at 10.00pm UTC+12 . The > >Working Group will have 48 hours to prepare a > >Draft by 16th January, 2012. This will then be > >put again to the IGC for final review and edits. > >The Chairs will be expected to provide a short > >brief report and submit the Official > >Contribution on behalf of the IGC to the WSIS > >2013. > > > > > > > >See: > >http://www.unesco.org/new/en/unesco/events/all-events/?tx_browser_pi1%5BshowUid%5D=5560&cHash=04dad58b71 > >or > >http://www.itu.int/wsis/implementation/2013/forum/ > > > >WSIS 2013 Schedule > > > >Phase I - 8 October 2012 > > > >Opening of the Open Consultations > >€ > >Online > >Dialogues > > > >€ > >Official > >Submissions Form > > > >Phase II - 16 November 2012 > > > >First > >Physical Meeting, 15h00-18h00, Room H, ITU > >Headquarters, Geneva > > > >Phase III - 21 January 2013 > > > >Deadline > >for the submission of the Official Contributions > >and binding requests for Workshops > >Phase IV - 15 February 2013 > > > >Final > >Review Meeting > >Phase V - 16 April 2013 > > > >Final > >Brief > > > >-- > > > >Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala > >P.O. Box 17862Suva > >Fiji > > > >Twitter: @SalanietaT > >Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro > >Tel: +679 3544828 > >Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 > > > > > > > > > > > >-- > > > >Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala > >P.O. Box 17862 > >Suva > >Fiji > > > >Twitter: @SalanietaT > >Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro > >Tel: +679 3544828 > >Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 > > > > > > > >____________________________________________________________ > >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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From hakik at hakik.org Thu Jan 10 06:24:12 2013 From: hakik at hakik.org (Hakikur Rahman) Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2013 11:24:12 +0000 Subject: [governance] Suggested amendment for the charter. Voting. Needs signatories In-Reply-To: <2uk60qxjs24d0kkveib741u7.1357771863694@email.android.com> References: <2uk60qxjs24d0kkveib741u7.1357771863694@email.android.com> Message-ID: +1 Hakikur At 23:15 09-01-2013, Sonigitu Ekpe wrote: >Content-Language: en-US >Content-Type: multipart/alternative; > boundary="_000_2uk60qxjs24d0kkveib741u71357771863694emailandroidcom_" > >+1 >Ginger is very direct. And that is the diplomatic approach. > >Bless her each time. >Best regards from, > >Sonigitu Ekpe >Committee Secretary, >State Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development on Flood Food >Recovery and Double-Up Food Production Programme. >3 Barracks Road >Calabar - Nigeria. > >+234 8050232469 > > > >Ginger Paque wrote: > > >I agree with you in principle, Ian, but I think we are more likely >to get progress and agreement if we go piece by piece, than if we >try to do it as a complete reform package. I suggest that we >continue to gather support for these amendments, and then continue the process. >Ginger > > >On 9 January 2013 15:24, Ian Peter ><ian.peter at ianpeter.com> wrote: >while I having no problem with this wording, I would prefer if we >are going through charter amendments that we do so taking into >account the charter reform group recommendations as well (as >mentioned by Jeremy recently). In other words, lets do the whole package. > > > >From: Ginger Paque >Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2013 8:15 AM >To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org >Cc: Avri Doria >Subject: Re: [governance] Suggested amendment for the charter. >Voting. Needs signatories > >I support these amendments as well. Thanks Avri. >Ginger > > >On 9 January 2013 15:06, Fouad Bajwa ><fouadbajwa at gmail.com> wrote: >I support the amendments made below. I am also in favor of encouraging >improvements to meet the demand of present and future needs. > >-- best > >Fouad > >On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 9:33 PM, Avri Doria ><avri at acm.org> wrote: > > > > Amendments to the Charter > > > > This charter can be amended at any time as proposed by no fewer > than ten (10) members and as approved by no less than two-thirds > (2/3) of the members of the IGC. The membership requirements for > amending the charter are based on the most currently available > voters list. In amending the charter, everyone who voted in the > previous election will be deemed a member for amending the charter. > > > > ---------- > > > > Currently the charter > <http://igcaucus.org/charter> reads as: > > > > " > > As part of the voting process the voter must personally ascertain > that they are a member of the IGC based on membership criteria > described elsewhere in this charter and posted as part of the > voting information (i.e. a voter must affirm membership on the > voter form in order to vote). The decision to self-identify as a > member of the IGC is a personal decision based on the criteria > defined. A list of the self-defined member-voters will be published > after the election with the results of the election. > > > > " > > Changes proposed: > > > > 1. Indicate that the affirmation is prior to the vote and not > part of the vote. > > 2. require that all ballot include the ability to abstain. > > > > > > " > > > > Prior to voting the prospective voter must personally ascertain > that they are a member of the IGC based on membership criteria > described elsewhere in this charter and posted as part of the > voting information (i.e. a voter must affirm membership on the > voter form prior to voting). The decision to self-identify as a > member of the IGC is a personal decision based on the criteria > defined. A list of the self-defined member-voters will be published > after the election with the results of the election. > > > > All ballots will include the ability for voters to abstain on any > choice included on the ballot. > > > > " > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > > 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 > > > > > >-- > > >____________________________________________________________ >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 > > > > >---------- >____________________________________________________________ >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 > > >____________________________________________________________ >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: -------------- 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 From kabani.asif at gmail.com Thu Jan 10 06:53:09 2013 From: kabani.asif at gmail.com (Kabani) Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2013 16:53:09 +0500 Subject: [governance] Suggested amendment for the charter. Voting. Needs signatories In-Reply-To: References: <2uk60qxjs24d0kkveib741u7.1357771863694@email.android.com> Message-ID: +1 On 10 January 2013 16:24, Hakikur Rahman wrote: > +1 > > Hakikur > > At 23:15 09-01-2013, Sonigitu Ekpe wrote: > > Content-Language: en-US > Content-Type: multipart/alternative; > ** **boundary="_000_2uk60qxjs24d0kkveib741u71357771863694emailandroidcom_" > > +1 > Ginger is very direct. And that is the diplomatic approach. > > Bless her each time. > Best regards from, > > Sonigitu Ekpe > Committee Secretary, > State Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development on Flood Food > Recovery and Double-Up Food Production Programme. > 3 Barracks Road > Calabar - Nigeria. > > +234 8050232469 > > > > Ginger Paque wrote: > > > I agree with you in principle, Ian, but I think we are more likely to get > progress and agreement if we go piece by piece, than if we try to do it as > a complete reform package. I suggest that we continue to gather support for > these amendments, and then continue the process. > Ginger > > > On 9 January 2013 15:24, Ian Peter wrote: > while I having no problem with this wording, I would prefer if we are > going through charter amendments that we do so taking into account the > charter reform group recommendations as well (as mentioned by Jeremy > recently). In other words, lets do the whole package. > > > > From: Ginger Paque > Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2013 8:15 AM > To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org > Cc: Avri Doria > Subject: Re: [governance] Suggested amendment for the charter. Voting. > Needs signatories > > I support these amendments as well. Thanks Avri. > Ginger > > > On 9 January 2013 15:06, Fouad Bajwa wrote: > I support the amendments made below. I am also in favor of encouraging > improvements to meet the demand of present and future needs. > > -- best > > Fouad > > On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 9:33 PM, Avri Doria wrote: > > > > Amendments to the Charter > > > > This charter can be amended at any time as proposed by no fewer than ten > (10) members and as approved by no less than two-thirds (2/3) of the > members of the IGC. The membership requirements for amending the charter > are based on the most currently available voters list. In amending the > charter, everyone who voted in the previous election will be deemed a > member for amending the charter. > > > > ---------- > > > > Currently the charter reads as: > > > > " > > As part of the voting process the voter must personally ascertain that > they are a member of the IGC based on membership criteria described > elsewhere in this charter and posted as part of the voting information > (i.e. a voter must affirm membership on the voter form in order to vote). > The decision to self-identify as a member of the IGC is a personal decision > based on the criteria defined. A list of the self-defined member-voters > will be published after the election with the results of the election. > > > > " > > Changes proposed: > > > > 1. Indicate that the affirmation is prior to the vote and not part of > the vote. > > 2. require that all ballot include the ability to abstain. > > > > > > " > > > > Prior to voting the prospective voter must personally ascertain that > they are a member of the IGC based on membership criteria described > elsewhere in this charter and posted as part of the voting information > (i.e. a voter must affirm membership on the voter form prior to voting). > The decision to self-identify as a member of the IGC is a personal decision > based on the criteria defined. A list of the self-defined member-voters > will be published after the election with the results of the election. > > > > All ballots will include the ability for voters to abstain on any choice > included on the ballot. > > > > " > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > > 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 > > > > > > -- > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > > > ------------------------------ > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > -- *Connect me* [image: Facebook] [image: Twitter] [image: Youtube] [image: LinkedIn] *Wait Before you print - Think about the** **ENVIRONMENT* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From gideonrop at gmail.com Thu Jan 10 07:14:09 2013 From: gideonrop at gmail.com (Gideon) Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2013 15:14:09 +0300 Subject: [governance] Suggested amendment for the charter. Voting. Needs signatories In-Reply-To: <20130110072910.584279d5@quill.bollow.ch> References: <71DE6F37-0C23-4CF2-9984-98FB3688F224@acm.org> <20130110072910.584279d5@quill.bollow.ch> Message-ID: +1 Bollow, that is indeed a valid point. Gideon Rop DotConnectAfrica On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 9:29 AM, Norbert Bollow wrote: > After a bit of reflection, I now also support this proposed amendment. > I have come to the conclusion that our coordinator elections will be > more reliable in choosing a good coordinator if the votes that count > towards one or the other candidate are votes that are based on an > actual preference, rather than votes that are only cast with the > objective of fulfilling a requirement of having voted. > > Greetings, > Norbert > > > Ginger Paque wrote: > > > I support these amendments as well. Thanks Avri. > > Ginger > > > > > > On 9 January 2013 15:06, Fouad Bajwa wrote: > > > > > I support the amendments made below. I am also in favor of > > > encouraging improvements to meet the demand of present and future > > > needs. > > > > > > -- best > > > > > > Fouad > > > > > > On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 9:33 PM, Avri Doria wrote: > > > > > > > > Amendments to the Charter > > > > > > > > This charter can be amended at any time as proposed by no fewer > > > > than ten > > > (10) members and as approved by no less than two-thirds (2/3) of the > > > members of the IGC. The membership requirements for amending the > > > charter are based on the most currently available voters list. In > > > amending the charter, everyone who voted in the previous election > > > will be deemed a member for amending the charter. > > > > > > > > ---------- > > > > > > > > Currently the charter reads as: > > > > > > > > " > > > > As part of the voting process the voter must personally ascertain > > > > that > > > they are a member of the IGC based on membership criteria described > > > elsewhere in this charter and posted as part of the voting > > > information (i.e. a voter must affirm membership on the voter form > > > in order to vote). The decision to self-identify as a member of the > > > IGC is a personal decision based on the criteria defined. A list of > > > the self-defined member-voters will be published after the election > > > with the results of the election. > > > > > > > > " > > > > Changes proposed: > > > > > > > > 1. Indicate that the affirmation is prior to the vote and not > > > > part of > > > the vote. > > > > 2. require that all ballot include the ability to abstain. > > > > > > > > > > > > " > > > > > > > > Prior to voting the prospective voter must personally ascertain > > > > that > > > they are a member of the IGC based on membership criteria described > > > elsewhere in this charter and posted as part of the voting > > > information (i.e. a voter must affirm membership on the voter form > > > prior to voting). The decision to self-identify as a member of the > > > IGC is a personal decision based on the criteria defined. A list of > > > the self-defined member-voters will be published after the election > > > with the results of the election. > > > > > > > > All ballots will include the ability for voters to abstain on any > > > > choice > > > included on the ballot. > > > > > > > > " > > > > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > > > > 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 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > > > 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 > > > > > > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com Thu Jan 10 07:22:23 2013 From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro) Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2013 01:22:23 +1300 Subject: [governance] European Commission on Google Investigation Was Google Survives US FTC Probe #FTC #EC #Google #competition Message-ID: Dear All, On 18th December, 2012 the Vice President of the European Commission responsible for Competition Policy met with Google's Executive Chairman Eric Schmidt in relation to coming into an Agreement based on Article 9 of the EU Anti Trust Regulation. You can see the Press Release here: http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_SPEECH-12-967_en.htm#PR_metaPressRelease_bottom The concerns are in relation to the competition concerns raised by the EC and they include:- - the way in which Google's vertical search services are displayed within general search results as compared to services of competitors; - the way Google may use and display third party content on its vertical search services; - exclusivity agreements for the delivery of Google search advertisements on other websites; and - restrictions in the portability of AdWords advertising campaigns. To see the Press Release, visit: http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_SPEECH-12-967_en.htm#PR_metaPressRelease_bottom It will be interesting to see the detailed commitment text by Google this month and I would be grateful if anyone has any knowledge about this that they could share. Thank you. Kind Regards, Sala On Fri, Jan 4, 2013 at 1:12 PM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro < salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com> wrote: > Dear All, > > "The US Federal Trade Commission has announced it has closed its > investigation into Google after an exhaustive 19-month review that covered > millions of pages of documents and involved many hours of testimony. > > See:http://www.ftc.gov/opa/2013/01/google.shtm > > To see report by BBC, visit: > http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-20899032 > > Kind Regards, > > -- > Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala > P.O. Box 17862 > Suva > Fiji > > Twitter: @SalanietaT > Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro > Tel: +679 3544828 > Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 > > > > -- Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala P.O. Box 17862 Suva Fiji Twitter: @SalanietaT Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro Tel: +679 3544828 Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From angelacdaly at gmail.com Thu Jan 10 07:27:27 2013 From: angelacdaly at gmail.com (Angela Daly) Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2013 23:27:27 +1100 Subject: [governance] European Commission on Google Investigation Was Google Survives US FTC Probe #FTC #EC #Google #competition In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I don't have any insider knowledge on this but Google and competition law is forming one chapter of my PhD thesis which should be finished soon! Angela On 10 January 2013 23:22, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro wrote: > Dear All, > > On 18th December, 2012 the Vice President of the European Commission > responsible for Competition Policy met with Google's Executive Chairman Eric > Schmidt in relation to coming into an Agreement based on Article 9 of the EU > Anti Trust Regulation. You can see the Press Release here: > > http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_SPEECH-12-967_en.htm#PR_metaPressRelease_bottom > > The concerns are in relation to the competition concerns raised by the EC > and they include:- > > the way in which Google's vertical search services are displayed within > general search results as compared to services of competitors; > > the way Google may use and display third party content on its vertical > search services; > > exclusivity agreements for the delivery of Google search advertisements on > other websites; and > > restrictions in the portability of AdWords advertising campaigns. > > To see the Press Release, visit: > http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_SPEECH-12-967_en.htm#PR_metaPressRelease_bottom > > It will be interesting to see the detailed commitment text by Google this > month and I would be grateful if anyone has any knowledge about this that > they could share. > > > Thank you. > > > Kind Regards, > > Sala > > > On Fri, Jan 4, 2013 at 1:12 PM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro > wrote: >> >> Dear All, >> >> "The US Federal Trade Commission has announced it has closed its >> investigation into Google after an exhaustive 19-month review that covered >> millions of pages of documents and involved many hours of testimony. >> >> See:http://www.ftc.gov/opa/2013/01/google.shtm >> >> To see report by BBC, visit: >> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-20899032 >> >> Kind Regards, >> >> -- >> Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala >> P.O. Box 17862 >> Suva >> Fiji >> >> Twitter: @SalanietaT >> Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro >> Tel: +679 3544828 >> Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 >> >> >> > > > > -- > Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala > P.O. Box 17862 > Suva > Fiji > > Twitter: @SalanietaT > Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro > Tel: +679 3544828 > Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From baudouin.schombe at gmail.com Thu Jan 10 10:20:32 2013 From: baudouin.schombe at gmail.com (Baudouin Schombe) Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2013 16:20:32 +0100 Subject: [governance] Suggested amendment for the charter. Voting. Needs signatories In-Reply-To: <71DE6F37-0C23-4CF2-9984-98FB3688F224@acm.org> References: <71DE6F37-0C23-4CF2-9984-98FB3688F224@acm.org> Message-ID: very good proposal + 1 2013/1/9 Avri Doria > > Amendments to the Charter > > This charter can be amended at any time as proposed by no fewer than ten > (10) members and as approved by no less than two-thirds (2/3) of the > members of the IGC. The membership requirements for amending the charter > are based on the most currently available voters list. In amending the > charter, everyone who voted in the previous election will be deemed a > member for amending the charter. > > ---------- > > Currently the charter reads as: > > " > As part of the voting process the voter must personally ascertain that > they are a member of the IGC based on membership criteria described > elsewhere in this charter and posted as part of the voting information > (i.e. a voter must affirm membership on the voter form in order to vote). > The decision to self-identify as a member of the IGC is a personal decision > based on the criteria defined. A list of the self-defined member-voters > will be published after the election with the results of the election. > > " > Changes proposed: > > 1. Indicate that the affirmation is prior to the vote and not part of the > vote. > 2. require that all ballot include the ability to abstain. > > > " > > Prior to voting the prospective voter must personally ascertain that they > are a member of the IGC based on membership criteria described elsewhere in > this charter and posted as part of the voting information (i.e. a voter > must affirm membership on the voter form prior to voting). The decision to > self-identify as a member of the IGC is a personal decision based on the > criteria defined. A list of the self-defined member-voters will be > published after the election with the results of the election. > > All ballots will include the ability for voters to abstain on any choice > included on the ballot. > > " > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > -- SCHOMBE BAUDOUIN CENTRE AFRICAIN D'ECHANGE CULTUREL/ ACADEMIE DES TIC At-Large Member NCSG Member email:baudouin.schombe at gmail.com Baudouin.Schombe at ticafrica.net tél:+243998983491 skype:b.schombe wite web:http://webmail.ticafrica.net blog:http://akimambo.unblog.fr -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From avri at acm.org Thu Jan 10 10:41:35 2013 From: avri at acm.org (Avri Doria) Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2013 10:41:35 -0500 Subject: [governance] Suggested amendment for the charter. Voting. In-Reply-To: <71DE6F37-0C23-4CF2-9984-98FB3688F224@acm.org> References: <71DE6F37-0C23-4CF2-9984-98FB3688F224@acm.org> Message-ID: <6C563956-CB7B-4167-8570-03F55C2BC906@acm.org> I beleive that the following has been proposed by the following IGC members: Avri Doria Baudouin Schombe Cheryl Langdon-Orr Fouad Bajwa Gideon Rop Ginger Paque Hakikur Rahman Ian Peter Izumi AIZU Kabani Asif McTim Norbert Bollow Norbert Klein Rudi Vansnick Shaila Mistry Sivasubramanian M Sonigitu Ekpe Tracy F. Hackshaw Please let me know if I have either left your name off the list, or have included it in error. While the Nomcom amendment I proposed had errors that needed to be corrected, I did not see any for this one. If I missed them, please let the list know. At this point, I request that the co-ordinator(s) schedule a discussion and subsequent vote on this amendment as defined in the charter. Amendments to the Charter This charter can be amended at any time as proposed by no fewer than ten (10) members and as approved by no less than two-thirds (2/3) of the members of the IGC. The membership requirements for amending the charter are based on the most currently available voters list. In amending the charter, everyone who voted in the previous election will be deemed a member for amending the charter. ---------- Currently the charter reads as: " As part of the voting process the voter must personally ascertain that they are a member of the IGC based on membership criteria described elsewhere in this charter and posted as part of the voting information (i.e. a voter must affirm membership on the voter form in order to vote). The decision to self-identify as a member of the IGC is a personal decision based on the criteria defined. A list of the self-defined member-voters will be published after the election with the results of the election. " Changes proposed: 1. Indicate that the affirmation is prior to the vote and not part of the vote. 2. require that all ballot include the ability to abstain. " Prior to voting the prospective voter must personally ascertain that they are a member of the IGC based on membership criteria described elsewhere in this charter and posted as part of the voting information (i.e. a voter must affirm membership on the voter form prior to voting). The decision to self-identify as a member of the IGC is a personal decision based on the criteria defined. A list of the self-defined member-voters will be published after the election with the results of the election. All ballots will include the ability for voters to abstain on any choice included on the ballot. " -------------- 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 From avri at acm.org Thu Jan 10 10:52:57 2013 From: avri at acm.org (Avri Doria) Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2013 10:52:57 -0500 Subject: [governance] Suggested amendment for the charter. Nomcom. Still needs signatories In-Reply-To: <7A95D3C2-A054-43B1-A618-5C4308996EF8@acm.org> References: <7E9B2FE7-631E-48EA-8FE9-A50886EF107F@acm.org> <7A95D3C2-A054-43B1-A618-5C4308996EF8@acm.org> Message-ID: <379D244F-6C95-4046-8795-7A61114F6715@acm.org> Hi, At this point, 6 people have signed on as proposers of this amendment. Avri Doria Chaitanya Dhareshwar Fouad Bajwa Louis Pouzin Norbert Bollow Pranesh Prakash Please let me know if your name is included in error, or if I forgot to include your name. I think I have caught the editorial changes that were requested. Thanks to those who found them. Please let me know if I missed something or messed something up anew. thanks avri ----- Amendments to the Charter This charter can be amended at any time as proposed by no fewer than ten (10) members and as approved by no less than two-thirds (2/3) of the members of the IGC. The membership requirements for amending the charter are based on the most currently available voters list. In amending the charter, everyone who voted in the previous election will be deemed a member for amending the charter. ---------- Amendment 1: Currently the charter reads as: " Any such request will require a public response from the coordinators' within a week indicating the action taken and with an explanation of the reasons for the action. All nominations to external bodies, e.g., the IGF multistakholder advisory group, will be made using a randomly selected nomcom process as defined here. " Add missing heading to Nominations section. New text: " Any such request will require a public response from the coordinators' within a week indicating the action taken and with an explanation of the reasons for the action. Nominations to External Bodies All nominations to external bodies, e.g., the IGF multistakholder advisory group, will be made using a randomly selected nomcom process as defined here. " Amendment 2: Currently the Nomcom process reads as: " 8. Each nomcom will be selected for a specific decision and will be disbanded after the decision is made.However, in special cases where several different nominating committees would need to be completed in a shortened time frame that did not allow for multiple nominating committees, the co-coordinators may jointly request one nominating committee to fill several functions. 9. There is no limit on the number of nomcoms an individual may serve on. " Proposed changes 1. Change to 1 Nomcom per year 2. Restrict members of Nomcom to 2 consecutive terms Change text to: " 8. Each Nomcom will serve for one year. 9. Nomcom Volunteers and non-voting chairs may serve a maximum of two consecutive terms. An intervening year is required before any term-limited volunteer may volunteer for the random process. An intervening two (2) years are required before a non-voting chair may serve again as either a volunteer or a non-voting chair. A term-limited volunteer may serve as non-voting chair. " -------------- 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 From ajp at glocom.ac.jp Thu Jan 10 10:58:12 2013 From: ajp at glocom.ac.jp (Adam Peake) Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2013 00:58:12 +0900 Subject: [governance] Suggested amendment for the charter. Voting. In-Reply-To: <6C563956-CB7B-4167-8570-03F55C2BC906@acm.org> References: <71DE6F37-0C23-4CF2-9984-98FB3688F224@acm.org> <6C563956-CB7B-4167-8570-03F55C2BC906@acm.org> Message-ID: and a +1 from me. Adam On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 12:41 AM, Avri Doria wrote: > > I beleive that the following has been proposed by the following IGC members: > > Avri Doria > Baudouin Schombe > Cheryl Langdon-Orr > Fouad Bajwa > Gideon Rop > Ginger Paque > Hakikur Rahman > Ian Peter > Izumi AIZU > Kabani Asif > McTim > Norbert Bollow > Norbert Klein > Rudi Vansnick > Shaila Mistry > Sivasubramanian M > Sonigitu Ekpe > Tracy F. Hackshaw > > Please let me know if I have either left your name off the list, or have included it in error. > > While the Nomcom amendment I proposed had errors that needed to be corrected, I did not see any for this one. If I missed them, please let the list know. > > At this point, I request that the co-ordinator(s) schedule a discussion and subsequent vote on this amendment as defined in the charter. > > > Amendments to the Charter > > This charter can be amended at any time as proposed by no fewer than ten (10) members and as approved by no less than two-thirds (2/3) of the members of the IGC. The membership requirements for amending the charter are based on the most currently available voters list. In amending the charter, everyone who voted in the previous election will be deemed a member for amending the charter. > > ---------- > > Currently the charter reads as: > > " > As part of the voting process the voter must personally ascertain that they are a member of the IGC based on membership criteria described elsewhere in this charter and posted as part of the voting information (i.e. a voter must affirm membership on the voter form in order to vote). The decision to self-identify as a member of the IGC is a personal decision based on the criteria defined. A list of the self-defined member-voters will be published after the election with the results of the election. > > " > Changes proposed: > > 1. Indicate that the affirmation is prior to the vote and not part of the vote. > 2. require that all ballot include the ability to abstain. > > > " > > Prior to voting the prospective voter must personally ascertain that they are a member of the IGC based on membership criteria described elsewhere in this charter and posted as part of the voting information (i.e. a voter must affirm membership on the voter form prior to voting). The decision to self-identify as a member of the IGC is a personal decision based on the criteria defined. A list of the self-defined member-voters will be published after the election with the results of the election. > > All ballots will include the ability for voters to abstain on any choice included on the ballot. > > " > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From dogwallah at gmail.com Thu Jan 10 11:02:59 2013 From: dogwallah at gmail.com (McTim) Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2013 11:02:59 -0500 Subject: [governance] Suggested amendment for the charter. Nomcom. Still needs signatories In-Reply-To: <379D244F-6C95-4046-8795-7A61114F6715@acm.org> References: <7E9B2FE7-631E-48EA-8FE9-A50886EF107F@acm.org> <7A95D3C2-A054-43B1-A618-5C4308996EF8@acm.org> <379D244F-6C95-4046-8795-7A61114F6715@acm.org> Message-ID: Avri, I can sign on toi this one too! rgds, McTim On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 10:52 AM, Avri Doria wrote: > Hi, > > At this point, 6 people have signed on as proposers of this amendment. > > Avri Doria > Chaitanya Dhareshwar > Fouad Bajwa > Louis Pouzin > Norbert Bollow > Pranesh Prakash > > Please let me know if your name is included in error, or if I forgot to include your name. > > I think I have caught the editorial changes that were requested. Thanks to those who found them. Please let me know if I missed something or messed something up anew. > > thanks > > avri > ----- > > > Amendments to the Charter > > This charter can be amended at any time as proposed by no fewer than ten (10) members and as approved by no less than two-thirds (2/3) of the members of the IGC. The membership requirements for amending the charter are based on the most currently available voters list. In amending the charter, everyone who voted in the previous election will be deemed a member for amending the charter. > > ---------- > > Amendment 1: > > Currently the charter reads as: > > " > Any such request will require a public response from the coordinators' within a week indicating the action taken and with an explanation of the reasons for the action. > > All nominations to external bodies, e.g., the IGF multistakholder advisory group, will be made using a randomly selected nomcom process as defined here. > " > > > > Add missing heading to Nominations section. > New text: > > " > Any such request will require a public response from the coordinators' within a week indicating the action taken and with an explanation of the reasons for the action. > > Nominations to External Bodies > > All nominations to external bodies, e.g., the IGF multistakholder advisory group, will be made using a randomly selected nomcom process as defined here. > " > > > Amendment 2: > > Currently the Nomcom process reads as: > > " > 8. Each nomcom will be selected for a specific decision and will be disbanded after the decision is made.However, in special cases where several different nominating committees would need to be completed in a shortened time frame that did not allow for multiple nominating committees, the co-coordinators may jointly request one nominating committee to fill several functions. > > 9. There is no limit on the number of nomcoms an individual may serve on. > " > > Proposed changes > > 1. Change to 1 Nomcom per year > 2. Restrict members of Nomcom to 2 consecutive terms > > Change text to: > > " > 8. Each Nomcom will serve for one year. > > 9. Nomcom Volunteers and non-voting chairs may serve a maximum of two consecutive terms. An intervening year is required before any term-limited volunteer may volunteer for the random process. An intervening two (2) years are required before a non-voting chair may serve again as either a volunteer or a non-voting chair. A term-limited volunteer may serve as non-voting chair. > " > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From nb at bollow.ch Thu Jan 10 11:08:29 2013 From: nb at bollow.ch (Norbert Bollow) Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2013 17:08:29 +0100 Subject: [governance] Suggested amendment for the charter. Nomcom. Still needs signatories In-Reply-To: <379D244F-6C95-4046-8795-7A61114F6715@acm.org> References: <7E9B2FE7-631E-48EA-8FE9-A50886EF107F@acm.org> <7A95D3C2-A054-43B1-A618-5C4308996EF8@acm.org> <379D244F-6C95-4046-8795-7A61114F6715@acm.org> Message-ID: <20130110170829.6eae3466@quill.bollow.ch> Avri Doria wrote: > I think I have caught the editorial changes that were requested. I also requested the change "multistakholder" -> "multistakeholder" at the following point in Amendment 1: > All nominations to external bodies, e.g., the IGF multistakholder (That typo is part of the current charter; since we're trying to amend that part of the charter anyway, it IMO is appropriate to also fix that typo while we're at it.) Thanks for you work on these amendments! Greetings, Norbert -------------- 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 From isolatedn at gmail.com Thu Jan 10 11:16:07 2013 From: isolatedn at gmail.com (Sivasubramanian M) Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2013 21:46:07 +0530 Subject: [governance] Suggested amendment for the charter. Nomcom. Still needs signatories In-Reply-To: <379D244F-6C95-4046-8795-7A61114F6715@acm.org> References: <7E9B2FE7-631E-48EA-8FE9-A50886EF107F@acm.org> <7A95D3C2-A054-43B1-A618-5C4308996EF8@acm.org> <379D244F-6C95-4046-8795-7A61114F6715@acm.org> Message-ID: I have supported this, so please count a +1 from me. Sivasubramanian M On Jan 10, 2013 9:23 PM, "Avri Doria" wrote: > Hi, > > At this point, 6 people have signed on as proposers of this amendment. > > Avri Doria > Chaitanya Dhareshwar > Fouad Bajwa > Louis Pouzin > Norbert Bollow > Pranesh Prakash > > Please let me know if your name is included in error, or if I forgot to > include your name. > > I think I have caught the editorial changes that were requested. Thanks > to those who found them. Please let me know if I missed something or messed > something up anew. > > thanks > > avri > ----- > > > Amendments to the Charter > > This charter can be amended at any time as proposed by no fewer than ten > (10) members and as approved by no less than two-thirds (2/3) of the > members of the IGC. The membership requirements for amending the charter > are based on the most currently available voters list. In amending the > charter, everyone who voted in the previous election will be deemed a > member for amending the charter. > > ---------- > > Amendment 1: > > Currently the charter reads as: > > " > Any such request will require a public response from the coordinators' > within a week indicating the action taken and with an explanation of the > reasons for the action. > > All nominations to external bodies, e.g., the IGF multistakholder advisory > group, will be made using a randomly selected nomcom process as defined > here. > " > > > > Add missing heading to Nominations section. > New text: > > " > Any such request will require a public response from the coordinators' > within a week indicating the action taken and with an explanation of the > reasons for the action. > > Nominations to External Bodies > > All nominations to external bodies, e.g., the IGF multistakholder advisory > group, will be made using a randomly selected nomcom process as defined > here. > " > > > Amendment 2: > > Currently the Nomcom process reads as: > > " > 8. Each nomcom will be selected for a specific decision and will be > disbanded after the decision is made.However, in special cases where > several different nominating committees would need to be completed in a > shortened time frame that did not allow for multiple nominating committees, > the co-coordinators may jointly request one nominating committee to fill > several functions. > > 9. There is no limit on the number of nomcoms an individual may serve on. > " > > Proposed changes > > 1. Change to 1 Nomcom per year > 2. Restrict members of Nomcom to 2 consecutive terms > > Change text to: > > " > 8. Each Nomcom will serve for one year. > > 9. Nomcom Volunteers and non-voting chairs may serve a maximum of two > consecutive terms. An intervening year is required before any term-limited > volunteer may volunteer for the random process. An intervening two (2) > years are required before a non-voting chair may serve again as either a > volunteer or a non-voting chair. A term-limited volunteer may serve as > non-voting chair. > " > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From tracyhackshaw at gmail.com Thu Jan 10 11:28:25 2013 From: tracyhackshaw at gmail.com (Tracy F. Hackshaw @ Google) Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2013 12:28:25 -0400 Subject: [governance] Suggested amendment for the charter. Nomcom. Still needs signatories In-Reply-To: References: <7E9B2FE7-631E-48EA-8FE9-A50886EF107F@acm.org> <7A95D3C2-A054-43B1-A618-5C4308996EF8@acm.org> <379D244F-6C95-4046-8795-7A61114F6715@acm.org> Message-ID: +1 On Jan 10, 2013 12:17 PM, "Sivasubramanian M" wrote: > > I have supported this, so please count a +1 from me. > > Sivasubramanian M > On Jan 10, 2013 9:23 PM, "Avri Doria" wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> At this point, 6 people have signed on as proposers of this amendment. >> >> Avri Doria >> Chaitanya Dhareshwar >> Fouad Bajwa >> Louis Pouzin >> Norbert Bollow >> Pranesh Prakash >> >> Please let me know if your name is included in error, or if I forgot to >> include your name. >> >> I think I have caught the editorial changes that were requested. Thanks >> to those who found them. Please let me know if I missed something or messed >> something up anew. >> >> thanks >> >> avri >> ----- >> >> >> Amendments to the Charter >> >> This charter can be amended at any time as proposed by no fewer than ten >> (10) members and as approved by no less than two-thirds (2/3) of the >> members of the IGC. The membership requirements for amending the charter >> are based on the most currently available voters list. In amending the >> charter, everyone who voted in the previous election will be deemed a >> member for amending the charter. >> >> ---------- >> >> Amendment 1: >> >> Currently the charter reads as: >> >> " >> Any such request will require a public response from the coordinators' >> within a week indicating the action taken and with an explanation of the >> reasons for the action. >> >> All nominations to external bodies, e.g., the IGF multistakholder >> advisory group, will be made using a randomly selected nomcom process as >> defined here. >> " >> >> >> >> Add missing heading to Nominations section. >> New text: >> >> " >> Any such request will require a public response from the coordinators' >> within a week indicating the action taken and with an explanation of the >> reasons for the action. >> >> Nominations to External Bodies >> >> All nominations to external bodies, e.g., the IGF multistakholder >> advisory group, will be made using a randomly selected nomcom process as >> defined here. >> " >> >> >> Amendment 2: >> >> Currently the Nomcom process reads as: >> >> " >> 8. Each nomcom will be selected for a specific decision and will be >> disbanded after the decision is made.However, in special cases where >> several different nominating committees would need to be completed in a >> shortened time frame that did not allow for multiple nominating committees, >> the co-coordinators may jointly request one nominating committee to fill >> several functions. >> >> 9. There is no limit on the number of nomcoms an individual may serve on. >> " >> >> Proposed changes >> >> 1. Change to 1 Nomcom per year >> 2. Restrict members of Nomcom to 2 consecutive terms >> >> Change text to: >> >> " >> 8. Each Nomcom will serve for one year. >> >> 9. Nomcom Volunteers and non-voting chairs may serve a maximum of two >> consecutive terms. An intervening year is required before any term-limited >> volunteer may volunteer for the random process. An intervening two (2) >> years are required before a non-voting chair may serve again as either a >> volunteer or a non-voting chair. A term-limited volunteer may serve as >> non-voting chair. >> " >> >> >> >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 >> >> > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From gpaque at gmail.com Thu Jan 10 11:46:57 2013 From: gpaque at gmail.com (Ginger Paque) Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2013 10:46:57 -0600 Subject: [governance] Suggested amendment for the charter. Nomcom. Still needs signatories In-Reply-To: References: <7E9B2FE7-631E-48EA-8FE9-A50886EF107F@acm.org> <7A95D3C2-A054-43B1-A618-5C4308996EF8@acm.org> <379D244F-6C95-4046-8795-7A61114F6715@acm.org> Message-ID: +1 gp Ginger (Virginia) Paque VirginiaP at diplomacy.edu Diplo Foundation Internet Governance Capacity Building Programme www.diplomacy.edu/ig ** ** On 10 January 2013 10:28, Tracy F. Hackshaw @ Google < tracyhackshaw at gmail.com> wrote: > +1 > On Jan 10, 2013 12:17 PM, "Sivasubramanian M" wrote: > >> >> I have supported this, so please count a +1 from me. >> >> Sivasubramanian M >> On Jan 10, 2013 9:23 PM, "Avri Doria" wrote: >> >>> Hi, >>> >>> At this point, 6 people have signed on as proposers of this amendment. >>> >>> Avri Doria >>> Chaitanya Dhareshwar >>> Fouad Bajwa >>> Louis Pouzin >>> Norbert Bollow >>> Pranesh Prakash >>> >>> Please let me know if your name is included in error, or if I forgot to >>> include your name. >>> >>> I think I have caught the editorial changes that were requested. Thanks >>> to those who found them. Please let me know if I missed something or messed >>> something up anew. >>> >>> thanks >>> >>> avri >>> ----- >>> >>> >>> Amendments to the Charter >>> >>> This charter can be amended at any time as proposed by no fewer than ten >>> (10) members and as approved by no less than two-thirds (2/3) of the >>> members of the IGC. The membership requirements for amending the charter >>> are based on the most currently available voters list. In amending the >>> charter, everyone who voted in the previous election will be deemed a >>> member for amending the charter. >>> >>> ---------- >>> >>> Amendment 1: >>> >>> Currently the charter reads as: >>> >>> " >>> Any such request will require a public response from the coordinators' >>> within a week indicating the action taken and with an explanation of the >>> reasons for the action. >>> >>> All nominations to external bodies, e.g., the IGF multistakholder >>> advisory group, will be made using a randomly selected nomcom process as >>> defined here. >>> " >>> >>> >>> >>> Add missing heading to Nominations section. >>> New text: >>> >>> " >>> Any such request will require a public response from the coordinators' >>> within a week indicating the action taken and with an explanation of the >>> reasons for the action. >>> >>> Nominations to External Bodies >>> >>> All nominations to external bodies, e.g., the IGF multistakholder >>> advisory group, will be made using a randomly selected nomcom process as >>> defined here. >>> " >>> >>> >>> Amendment 2: >>> >>> Currently the Nomcom process reads as: >>> >>> " >>> 8. Each nomcom will be selected for a specific decision and will be >>> disbanded after the decision is made.However, in special cases where >>> several different nominating committees would need to be completed in a >>> shortened time frame that did not allow for multiple nominating committees, >>> the co-coordinators may jointly request one nominating committee to fill >>> several functions. >>> >>> 9. There is no limit on the number of nomcoms an individual may serve on. >>> " >>> >>> Proposed changes >>> >>> 1. Change to 1 Nomcom per year >>> 2. Restrict members of Nomcom to 2 consecutive terms >>> >>> Change text to: >>> >>> " >>> 8. Each Nomcom will serve for one year. >>> >>> 9. Nomcom Volunteers and non-voting chairs may serve a maximum of two >>> consecutive terms. An intervening year is required before any term-limited >>> volunteer may volunteer for the random process. An intervening two (2) >>> years are required before a non-voting chair may serve again as either a >>> volunteer or a non-voting chair. A term-limited volunteer may serve as >>> non-voting chair. >>> " >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> ____________________________________________________________ >>> 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 >>> >>> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 >> >> > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From jeanette at wzb.eu Thu Jan 10 11:51:59 2013 From: jeanette at wzb.eu (Jeanette Hofmann) Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2013 17:51:59 +0100 Subject: [governance] Suggested amendment for the charter. Nomcom. Still needs signatories In-Reply-To: References: <7E9B2FE7-631E-48EA-8FE9-A50886EF107F@acm.org> <7A95D3C2-A054-43B1-A618-5C4308996EF8@acm.org> <379D244F-6C95-4046-8795-7A61114F6715@acm.org> Message-ID: <50EEF1AF.8080707@wzb.eu> +1, jeanette Am 10.01.2013 17:46, schrieb Ginger Paque: > +1 gp > > Ginger (Virginia) Paque > > VirginiaP at diplomacy.edu > Diplo Foundation > Internet Governance Capacity Building Programme > www.diplomacy.edu/ig > // > *//* > > > On 10 January 2013 10:28, Tracy F. Hackshaw @ Google > > wrote: > > +1 > > On Jan 10, 2013 12:17 PM, "Sivasubramanian M" > wrote: > > > I have supported this, so please count a +1 from me. > > Sivasubramanian M > > On Jan 10, 2013 9:23 PM, "Avri Doria" > wrote: > > Hi, > > At this point, 6 people have signed on as proposers of this > amendment. > > Avri Doria > Chaitanya Dhareshwar > Fouad Bajwa > Louis Pouzin > Norbert Bollow > Pranesh Prakash > > Please let me know if your name is included in error, or if > I forgot to include your name. > > I think I have caught the editorial changes that were > requested. Thanks to those who found them. Please let me > know if I missed something or messed something up anew. > > thanks > > avri > ----- > > > Amendments to the Charter > > This charter can be amended at any time as proposed by no > fewer than ten (10) members and as approved by no less than > two-thirds (2/3) of the members of the IGC. The membership > requirements for amending the charter are based on the most > currently available voters list. In amending the charter, > everyone who voted in the previous election will be deemed a > member for amending the charter. > > ---------- > > Amendment 1: > > Currently the charter reads as: > > " > Any such request will require a public response from the > coordinators' within a week indicating the action taken and > with an explanation of the reasons for the action. > > All nominations to external bodies, e.g., the IGF > multistakholder advisory group, will be made using a > randomly selected nomcom process as defined here. > " > > > > Add missing heading to Nominations section. > New text: > > " > Any such request will require a public response from the > coordinators' within a week indicating the action taken and > with an explanation of the reasons for the action. > > Nominations to External Bodies > > All nominations to external bodies, e.g., the IGF > multistakholder advisory group, will be made using a > randomly selected nomcom process as defined here. > " > > > Amendment 2: > > Currently the Nomcom process > reads as: > > " > 8. Each nomcom will be selected for a specific decision and > will be disbanded after the decision is made.However, in > special cases where several different nominating committees > would need to be completed in a shortened time frame that > did not allow for multiple nominating committees, the > co-coordinators may jointly request one nominating committee > to fill several functions. > > 9. There is no limit on the number of nomcoms an individual > may serve on. > " > > Proposed changes > > 1. Change to 1 Nomcom per year > 2. Restrict members of Nomcom to 2 consecutive terms > > Change text to: > > " > 8. Each Nomcom will serve for one year. > > 9. Nomcom Volunteers and non-voting chairs may serve a > maximum of two consecutive terms. An intervening year is > required before any term-limited volunteer may volunteer for > the random process. An intervening two (2) years are > required before a non-voting chair may serve again as either > a volunteer or a non-voting chair. A term-limited volunteer > may serve as non-voting chair. > " > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From bavouc at gmail.com Thu Jan 10 12:07:55 2013 From: bavouc at gmail.com (Martial Bavou[Private Business Account]) Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2013 18:07:55 +0100 Subject: [governance] =?ISO-8859-1?Q?=28ISC=29=B2_Security_Congress_2013_-?= =?ISO-8859-1?Q?_Call_for_Speakers_-?= Message-ID: Dear, Kindly follow this link to submit your proposal: https://www.isc2.org/congress2013/Default.aspx (ISC)² Security Congress Categories: * Compliance, Regulation & Governance * Threats - Inside and Out * Cloud Security * Swiss Army Knife - General topics of interest in Information Security * Application Security * Mobile Security/Social Networking * Software Assurance * Malware * Government Security Thanks -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From mueller at syr.edu Thu Jan 10 13:35:48 2013 From: mueller at syr.edu (Milton L Mueller) Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2013 18:35:48 +0000 Subject: [governance] Suggested amendment for the charter. Nomcom. Still needs signatories In-Reply-To: <379D244F-6C95-4046-8795-7A61114F6715@acm.org> References: <7E9B2FE7-631E-48EA-8FE9-A50886EF107F@acm.org> <7A95D3C2-A054-43B1-A618-5C4308996EF8@acm.org> <379D244F-6C95-4046-8795-7A61114F6715@acm.org> Message-ID: <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD22FA54D@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> I would support the amendment, but since I did not propose it would not want to be included on that list. From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Avri Doria Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2013 10:53 AM To: IGC Subject: Re: [governance] Suggested amendment for the charter. Nomcom. Still needs signatories Hi, At this point, 6 people have signed on as proposers of this amendment. Avri Doria Chaitanya Dhareshwar Fouad Bajwa Louis Pouzin Norbert Bollow Pranesh Prakash Please let me know if your name is included in error, or if I forgot to include your name. I think I have caught the editorial changes that were requested. Thanks to those who found them. Please let me know if I missed something or messed something up anew. thanks avri ----- Amendments to the Charter This charter can be amended at any time as proposed by no fewer than ten (10) members and as approved by no less than two-thirds (2/3) of the members of the IGC. The membership requirements for amending the charter are based on the most currently available voters list. In amending the charter, everyone who voted in the previous election will be deemed a member for amending the charter. ---------- Amendment 1: Currently the charter reads as: " Any such request will require a public response from the coordinators' within a week indicating the action taken and with an explanation of the reasons for the action. All nominations to external bodies, e.g., the IGF multistakholder advisory group, will be made using a randomly selected nomcom process as defined here. " Add missing heading to Nominations section. New text: " Any such request will require a public response from the coordinators' within a week indicating the action taken and with an explanation of the reasons for the action. Nominations to External Bodies All nominations to external bodies, e.g., the IGF multistakholder advisory group, will be made using a randomly selected nomcom process as defined here. " Amendment 2: Currently the Nomcom process reads as: " 8. Each nomcom will be selected for a specific decision and will be disbanded after the decision is made.However, in special cases where several different nominating committees would need to be completed in a shortened time frame that did not allow for multiple nominating committees, the co-coordinators may jointly request one nominating committee to fill several functions. 9. There is no limit on the number of nomcoms an individual may serve on. " Proposed changes 1. Change to 1 Nomcom per year 2. Restrict members of Nomcom to 2 consecutive terms Change text to: " 8. Each Nomcom will serve for one year. 9. Nomcom Volunteers and non-voting chairs may serve a maximum of two consecutive terms. An intervening year is required before any term-limited volunteer may volunteer for the random process. An intervening two (2) years are required before a non-voting chair may serve again as either a volunteer or a non-voting chair. A term-limited volunteer may serve as non-voting chair. " ____________________________________________________________ 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: -------------- 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 From nb at bollow.ch Thu Jan 10 13:46:13 2013 From: nb at bollow.ch (Norbert Bollow) Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2013 19:46:13 +0100 Subject: [governance] Suggested amendment for the charter. Nomcom. Still needs signatories In-Reply-To: <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD22FA54D@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> References: <7E9B2FE7-631E-48EA-8FE9-A50886EF107F@acm.org> <7A95D3C2-A054-43B1-A618-5C4308996EF8@acm.org> <379D244F-6C95-4046-8795-7A61114F6715@acm.org> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD22FA54D@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> Message-ID: <20130110194613.4d471c2f@quill.bollow.ch> Milton L Mueller wrote: > I would support the amendment, but since I did not propose it would > not want to be included on that list. Hi Milton I don't understand how you mean this. According to our charter, any proposal to amend it needs ten proposers. Therefore, at the current stage, the way to support the amendment is to sign on as co-proposer. Greetings, Norbert Avri had written: > Hi, > > At this point, 6 people have signed on as proposers of this amendment. > > Avri Doria > Chaitanya Dhareshwar > Fouad Bajwa > Louis Pouzin > Norbert Bollow > Pranesh Prakash > > Please let me know if your name is included in error, or if I forgot > to include your name. > > I think I have caught the editorial changes that were requested. > Thanks to those who found them. Please let me know if I missed > something or messed something up anew. > > thanks > > avri > ----- > > > Amendments to the Charter > > This charter can be amended at any time as proposed by no fewer than > ten (10) members and as approved by no less than two-thirds (2/3) of > the members of the IGC. The membership requirements for amending the > charter are based on the most currently available voters list. In > amending the charter, everyone who voted in the previous election > will be deemed a member for amending the charter. > > ---------- > > Amendment 1: > > Currently the charter reads as: > > " > Any such request will require a public response from the > coordinators' within a week indicating the action taken and with an > explanation of the reasons for the action. > > All nominations to external bodies, e.g., the IGF multistakholder > advisory group, will be made using a randomly selected nomcom process > as defined here. " > > > > Add missing heading to Nominations section. > New text: > > " > Any such request will require a public response from the > coordinators' within a week indicating the action taken and with an > explanation of the reasons for the action. > > Nominations to External Bodies > > All nominations to external bodies, e.g., the IGF multistakholder > advisory group, will be made using a randomly selected nomcom process > as defined here. " > > > Amendment 2: > > Currently the Nomcom process reads > as: > > " > 8. Each nomcom will be selected for a specific decision and will be > disbanded after the decision is made.However, in special cases where > several different nominating committees would need to be completed in > a shortened time frame that did not allow for multiple nominating > committees, the co-coordinators may jointly request one nominating > committee to fill several functions. > > 9. There is no limit on the number of nomcoms an individual may serve > on. " > > Proposed changes > > 1. Change to 1 Nomcom per year > 2. Restrict members of Nomcom to 2 consecutive terms > > Change text to: > > " > 8. Each Nomcom will serve for one year. > > 9. Nomcom Volunteers and non-voting chairs may serve a maximum of two > consecutive terms. An intervening year is required before any > term-limited volunteer may volunteer for the random process. An > intervening two (2) years are required before a non-voting chair may > serve again as either a volunteer or a non-voting chair. A > term-limited volunteer may serve as non-voting chair. " > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From rguerra at privaterra.org Thu Jan 10 13:45:21 2013 From: rguerra at privaterra.org (Robert Guerra) Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2013 13:45:21 -0500 Subject: [governance] Suggested amendment for the charter. Nomcom. Still needs signatories In-Reply-To: References: <7E9B2FE7-631E-48EA-8FE9-A50886EF107F@acm.org> <7A95D3C2-A054-43B1-A618-5C4308996EF8@acm.org> <379D244F-6C95-4046-8795-7A61114F6715@acm.org> Message-ID: <0458A1B6-A768-44AD-9DD5-669F6AB10E83@privaterra.org> count me in as well -- R. Guerra Phone/Cell: +1 202-905-2081 Twitter: twitter.com/netfreedom Email: rguerra at privaterra.org On 2013-01-10, at 11:02 AM, McTim wrote: > Avri, > > I can sign on toi this one too! > > rgds, > McTim > > On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 10:52 AM, Avri Doria wrote: >> Hi, >> >> At this point, 6 people have signed on as proposers of this amendment. >> >> Avri Doria >> Chaitanya Dhareshwar >> Fouad Bajwa >> Louis Pouzin >> Norbert Bollow >> Pranesh Prakash >> >> Please let me know if your name is included in error, or if I forgot to include your name. >> >> I think I have caught the editorial changes that were requested. Thanks to those who found them. Please let me know if I missed something or messed something up anew. >> >> thanks >> >> avri >> ----- >> >> >> Amendments to the Charter >> >> This charter can be amended at any time as proposed by no fewer than ten (10) members and as approved by no less than two-thirds (2/3) of the members of the IGC. The membership requirements for amending the charter are based on the most currently available voters list. In amending the charter, everyone who voted in the previous election will be deemed a member for amending the charter. >> >> ---------- >> >> Amendment 1: >> >> Currently the charter reads as: >> >> " >> Any such request will require a public response from the coordinators' within a week indicating the action taken and with an explanation of the reasons for the action. >> >> All nominations to external bodies, e.g., the IGF multistakholder advisory group, will be made using a randomly selected nomcom process as defined here. >> " >> >> >> >> Add missing heading to Nominations section. >> New text: >> >> " >> Any such request will require a public response from the coordinators' within a week indicating the action taken and with an explanation of the reasons for the action. >> >> Nominations to External Bodies >> >> All nominations to external bodies, e.g., the IGF multistakholder advisory group, will be made using a randomly selected nomcom process as defined here. >> " >> >> >> Amendment 2: >> >> Currently the Nomcom process reads as: >> >> " >> 8. Each nomcom will be selected for a specific decision and will be disbanded after the decision is made.However, in special cases where several different nominating committees would need to be completed in a shortened time frame that did not allow for multiple nominating committees, the co-coordinators may jointly request one nominating committee to fill several functions. >> >> 9. There is no limit on the number of nomcoms an individual may serve on. >> " >> >> Proposed changes >> >> 1. Change to 1 Nomcom per year >> 2. Restrict members of Nomcom to 2 consecutive terms >> >> Change text to: >> >> " >> 8. Each Nomcom will serve for one year. >> >> 9. Nomcom Volunteers and non-voting chairs may serve a maximum of two consecutive terms. An intervening year is required before any term-limited volunteer may volunteer for the random process. An intervening two (2) years are required before a non-voting chair may serve again as either a volunteer or a non-voting chair. A term-limited volunteer may serve as non-voting chair. >> " >> >> >> >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 >> > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From shailam at yahoo.com Thu Jan 10 14:06:09 2013 From: shailam at yahoo.com (shaila mistry) Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2013 11:06:09 -0800 (PST) Subject: [governance] Suggested amendment for the charter. Nomcom. Still needs signatories In-Reply-To: <0458A1B6-A768-44AD-9DD5-669F6AB10E83@privaterra.org> References: <7E9B2FE7-631E-48EA-8FE9-A50886EF107F@acm.org> <7A95D3C2-A054-43B1-A618-5C4308996EF8@acm.org> <379D244F-6C95-4046-8795-7A61114F6715@acm.org> <0458A1B6-A768-44AD-9DD5-669F6AB10E83@privaterra.org> Message-ID: <1357844769.74782.YahooMailNeo@web160506.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> +1 Shaila Rao Mistry   The journey begins sooner than you anticipate ! ..................... the renaissance of composure ! ________________________________ From: Robert Guerra To: Internet Governance Caucus Cc: Avri Doria Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2013 10:45 AM Subject: Re: [governance] Suggested amendment for the charter. Nomcom. Still needs signatories count me in as well -- R. Guerra Phone/Cell: +1 202-905-2081 Twitter: twitter.com/netfreedom Email: rguerra at privaterra.org On 2013-01-10, at 11:02 AM, McTim wrote: > Avri, > > I can sign on toi this one too! > > rgds, > McTim > > On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 10:52 AM, Avri Doria wrote: >> Hi, >> >> At this point, 6 people have signed on as proposers of this amendment. >> >> Avri Doria >> Chaitanya Dhareshwar >> Fouad Bajwa >> Louis Pouzin >> Norbert Bollow >> Pranesh Prakash >> >> Please let me know if your name is included in error, or if I forgot to include your name. >> >> I think I have caught the editorial changes that were requested.  Thanks to those who found them. Please let me know if I missed something or messed something up anew. >> >> thanks >> >> avri >> ----- >> >> >> Amendments to the Charter >> >> This charter can be amended at any time as proposed by no fewer than ten (10) members and as approved by no less than two-thirds (2/3) of the members of the IGC. The membership requirements for amending the charter are based on the most currently available voters list. In amending the charter, everyone who voted in the previous election will be deemed a member for amending the charter. >> >> ---------- >> >> Amendment 1: >> >> Currently the charter reads as: >> >> " >> Any such request will require a public response from the coordinators' within a week indicating the action taken and with an explanation of the reasons for the action. >> >> All nominations to external bodies, e.g., the IGF multistakholder advisory group, will be made using a randomly selected nomcom process as defined here. >> " >> >> >> >> Add missing heading to Nominations section. >> New text: >> >> " >> Any such request will require a public response from the coordinators' within a week indicating the action taken and with an explanation of the reasons for the action. >> >> Nominations to External Bodies >> >> All nominations to external bodies, e.g., the IGF multistakholder advisory group, will be made using a randomly selected nomcom process as defined here. >> " >> >> >> Amendment 2: >> >> Currently the Nomcom process reads as: >> >> " >> 8. Each nomcom will be selected for a specific decision and will be disbanded after the decision is made.However, in special cases where several different nominating committees would need to be completed in a shortened time frame that did not allow for multiple nominating committees, the co-coordinators may jointly request one nominating committee to fill several functions. >> >> 9. There is no limit on the number of nomcoms an individual may serve on. >> " >> >> Proposed changes >> >> 1. Change to 1 Nomcom per year >> 2. Restrict members of Nomcom to 2 consecutive terms >> >> Change text to: >> >> " >> 8.  Each Nomcom will serve for one year. >> >> 9. Nomcom Volunteers and non-voting chairs may serve a maximum of two consecutive terms.  An intervening year is required before any term-limited volunteer may volunteer for the random process.  An intervening two (2) years are required before a non-voting chair may serve again as either a volunteer or a non-voting chair.  A term-limited volunteer may serve as non-voting chair. >> " >> >> >> >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 >> > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 ____________________________________________________________ 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: -------------- 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 From gurstein at gmail.com Thu Jan 10 14:06:00 2013 From: gurstein at gmail.com (michael gurstein) Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2013 11:06:00 -0800 Subject: [governance] FW: [Dewayne-Net] Future Internet Architectures Aim to Better Serve Billions of Tablets and Smartphones In-Reply-To: <4C815FF6-9E38-4447-BC09-6B2C63DD31A1@warpspeed.com> References: <4C815FF6-9E38-4447-BC09-6B2C63DD31A1@warpspeed.com> Message-ID: <05ad01cdef65$8834a7e0$989df7a0$@gmail.com> -----Original Message----- From: dewayne-net at warpspeed.com [mailto:dewayne-net at warpspeed.com] On Behalf Of Dewayne Hendricks Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2013 10:40 AM To: Multiple recipients of Dewayne-Net Subject: [Dewayne-Net] Future Internet Architectures Aim to Better Serve Billions of Tablets and Smartphones [Note: This item comes from friend Mike Cheponis. DLH] From: Michael Cheponis Subject: Future Internet Architectures Aim to Better Serve Billions of Tablets and Smartphones | MIT Technology Review Date: January 10, 2013 10:12:30 AM PST To: dewayne at warpspeed.com Your Gadgets Are Slowly Breaking the Internet The Internet isn't robust enough for the ongoing explosion of connected devices. Now labs around the country are scrambling for solutions. By David Talbot January 9, 2013 Behind all the dazzling mobile-ready electronics products on display at the Consumer Electronics Show in Las Vegas this week is a looming problem: how to make the networks that support all these wireless devices function robustly and efficiently. With less fanfare than you'd see in Vegas, potential solutions are arising in labs in Pittsburgh, Los Angeles, and New Brunswick, New Jersey. The grand challenge is to overhaul the Internet to better serve an expected flood of 15 billion network-connected devices by 2015-many of them mobile-up from five billion today, according to Intel estimates. The Internet was designed in the 1960s to dispatch data to fixed addresses of static PCs connected to a single network, but today it connects a riot of diverse gadgets that can zip from place to place and connect to many different networks. As the underlying networks have been reworked to make way for new technologies, some serious inefficiencies and security problems have arisen (see "The Internet is Broken"). "Nobody really expects the network to crash when you add one more device," says Peter Steenkiste, computer scientist at Carnegie Mellon University. "But I do have a sense this is more of a creeping problem of complexity." Over the past year, fundamentally new network designs have taken shape and are being tested at universities around the United States under the National Science Foundation's Future Internet Architecture Program, launched in 2010. One key idea is that users should be able to obtain data from the nearest location-not seek it from some specific data center at a fixed address. "Today I have on my desk a smartphone, a tablet, and a Mac computer. To move data between them, the request goes all the way to the cloud-God knows where that is-so it can come back here to another device that is two feet away," says Lixia Zhang, a computer scientist at the University of California, Los Angeles. "That is wrong, it is simply wrong." Things would work quite differently under the Named Data Networking (NDN) project that Zhang heads. Under NDN, users request desired data by their names, instead of the IP address where they can be found. Using data names could, among other things, allow easy sharing of data directly between devices. "In the end, I think we can improve the speed, throughput and overall efficiency. Today you have many data centers that can have thousands of people asking for same piece of data. An NDN network just find the nearest copy of that data," says Zhang. "Conceptually this is pretty simple, but it is really a revolution." [snip] Dewayne-Net RSS Feed: -------------- 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 From gurstein at gmail.com Thu Jan 10 14:06:00 2013 From: gurstein at gmail.com (michael gurstein) Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2013 11:06:00 -0800 Subject: [governance] Suggested amendment for the charter. Nomcom. Still needs signatories In-Reply-To: <0458A1B6-A768-44AD-9DD5-669F6AB10E83@privaterra.org> References: <7E9B2FE7-631E-48EA-8FE9-A50886EF107F@acm.org> <7A95D3C2-A054-43B1-A618-5C4308996EF8@acm.org> <379D244F-6C95-4046-8795-7A61114F6715@acm.org> <0458A1B6-A768-44AD-9DD5-669F6AB10E83@privaterra.org> Message-ID: <05ae01cdef65$934fac60$b9ef0520$@gmail.com> +1 M -----Original Message----- From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Robert Guerra Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2013 10:45 AM To: Internet Governance Caucus Cc: Avri Doria Subject: Re: [governance] Suggested amendment for the charter. Nomcom. Still needs signatories count me in as well -- R. Guerra Phone/Cell: +1 202-905-2081 Twitter: twitter.com/netfreedom Email: rguerra at privaterra.org On 2013-01-10, at 11:02 AM, McTim wrote: > Avri, > > I can sign on toi this one too! > > rgds, > McTim > > On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 10:52 AM, Avri Doria wrote: >> Hi, >> >> At this point, 6 people have signed on as proposers of this amendment. >> >> Avri Doria >> Chaitanya Dhareshwar >> Fouad Bajwa >> Louis Pouzin >> Norbert Bollow >> Pranesh Prakash >> >> Please let me know if your name is included in error, or if I forgot to include your name. >> >> I think I have caught the editorial changes that were requested. Thanks to those who found them. Please let me know if I missed something or messed something up anew. >> >> thanks >> >> avri >> ----- >> >> >> Amendments to the Charter >> >> This charter can be amended at any time as proposed by no fewer than ten (10) members and as approved by no less than two-thirds (2/3) of the members of the IGC. The membership requirements for amending the charter are based on the most currently available voters list. In amending the charter, everyone who voted in the previous election will be deemed a member for amending the charter. >> >> ---------- >> >> Amendment 1: >> >> Currently the charter reads as: >> >> " >> Any such request will require a public response from the coordinators' within a week indicating the action taken and with an explanation of the reasons for the action. >> >> All nominations to external bodies, e.g., the IGF multistakholder advisory group, will be made using a randomly selected nomcom process as defined here. >> " >> >> >> >> Add missing heading to Nominations section. >> New text: >> >> " >> Any such request will require a public response from the coordinators' within a week indicating the action taken and with an explanation of the reasons for the action. >> >> Nominations to External Bodies >> >> All nominations to external bodies, e.g., the IGF multistakholder advisory group, will be made using a randomly selected nomcom process as defined here. >> " >> >> >> Amendment 2: >> >> Currently the Nomcom process reads as: >> >> " >> 8. Each nomcom will be selected for a specific decision and will be disbanded after the decision is made.However, in special cases where several different nominating committees would need to be completed in a shortened time frame that did not allow for multiple nominating committees, the co-coordinators may jointly request one nominating committee to fill several functions. >> >> 9. There is no limit on the number of nomcoms an individual may serve on. >> " >> >> Proposed changes >> >> 1. Change to 1 Nomcom per year >> 2. Restrict members of Nomcom to 2 consecutive terms >> >> Change text to: >> >> " >> 8. Each Nomcom will serve for one year. >> >> 9. Nomcom Volunteers and non-voting chairs may serve a maximum of two consecutive terms. An intervening year is required before any term-limited volunteer may volunteer for the random process. An intervening two (2) years are required before a non-voting chair may serve again as either a volunteer or a non-voting chair. A term-limited volunteer may serve as non-voting chair. >> " >> >> >> >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 >> > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From judyokite at gmail.com Thu Jan 10 14:07:38 2013 From: judyokite at gmail.com (Judy Okite) Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2013 22:07:38 +0300 Subject: [governance] Suggested amendment for the charter. Voting. Needs signatories In-Reply-To: References: <71DE6F37-0C23-4CF2-9984-98FB3688F224@acm.org> Message-ID: +1to Avri/Ginger proposal Kind Regards, *“Don't undertake a project unless it is manifestly important and nearly impossible” Edwin Land* On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 6:20 PM, Baudouin Schombe < baudouin.schombe at gmail.com> wrote: > very good proposal + 1 > > > 2013/1/9 Avri Doria > >> >> Amendments to the Charter >> >> This charter can be amended at any time as proposed by no fewer than ten >> (10) members and as approved by no less than two-thirds (2/3) of the >> members of the IGC. The membership requirements for amending the charter >> are based on the most currently available voters list. In amending the >> charter, everyone who voted in the previous election will be deemed a >> member for amending the charter. >> >> ---------- >> >> Currently the charter reads as: >> >> " >> As part of the voting process the voter must personally ascertain that >> they are a member of the IGC based on membership criteria described >> elsewhere in this charter and posted as part of the voting information >> (i.e. a voter must affirm membership on the voter form in order to vote). >> The decision to self-identify as a member of the IGC is a personal decision >> based on the criteria defined. A list of the self-defined member-voters >> will be published after the election with the results of the election. >> >> " >> Changes proposed: >> >> 1. Indicate that the affirmation is prior to the vote and not part of the >> vote. >> 2. require that all ballot include the ability to abstain. >> >> >> " >> >> Prior to voting the prospective voter must personally ascertain that they >> are a member of the IGC based on membership criteria described elsewhere in >> this charter and posted as part of the voting information (i.e. a voter >> must affirm membership on the voter form prior to voting). The decision to >> self-identify as a member of the IGC is a personal decision based on the >> criteria defined. A list of the self-defined member-voters will be >> published after the election with the results of the election. >> >> All ballots will include the ability for voters to abstain on any choice >> included on the ballot. >> >> " >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 >> >> > > > -- > SCHOMBE BAUDOUIN > CENTRE AFRICAIN D'ECHANGE CULTUREL/ > ACADEMIE DES TIC > At-Large Member > NCSG Member > > email:baudouin.schombe at gmail.com > Baudouin.Schombe at ticafrica.net > tél:+243998983491 > skype:b.schombe > wite web:http://webmail.ticafrica.net > blog:http://akimambo.unblog.fr > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com Thu Jan 10 15:06:54 2013 From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro) Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2013 09:06:54 +1300 Subject: [governance] European Commission on Google Investigation Was Google Survives US FTC Probe #FTC #EC #Google #competition In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Thanks Angela, I look forward to reading your thesis when you finish. Sala On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 1:27 AM, Angela Daly wrote: > I don't have any insider knowledge on this but Google and competition > law is forming one chapter of my PhD thesis which should be finished > soon! > > Angela > > On 10 January 2013 23:22, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro > wrote: > > Dear All, > > > > On 18th December, 2012 the Vice President of the European Commission > > responsible for Competition Policy met with Google's Executive Chairman > Eric > > Schmidt in relation to coming into an Agreement based on Article 9 of > the EU > > Anti Trust Regulation. You can see the Press Release here: > > > > > http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_SPEECH-12-967_en.htm#PR_metaPressRelease_bottom > > > > The concerns are in relation to the competition concerns raised by the EC > > and they include:- > > > > the way in which Google's vertical search services are displayed within > > general search results as compared to services of competitors; > > > > the way Google may use and display third party content on its vertical > > search services; > > > > exclusivity agreements for the delivery of Google search advertisements > on > > other websites; and > > > > restrictions in the portability of AdWords advertising campaigns. > > > > To see the Press Release, visit: > > > http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_SPEECH-12-967_en.htm#PR_metaPressRelease_bottom > > > > It will be interesting to see the detailed commitment text by Google this > > month and I would be grateful if anyone has any knowledge about this that > > they could share. > > > > > > Thank you. > > > > > > Kind Regards, > > > > Sala > > > > > > On Fri, Jan 4, 2013 at 1:12 PM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro > > wrote: > >> > >> Dear All, > >> > >> "The US Federal Trade Commission has announced it has closed its > >> investigation into Google after an exhaustive 19-month review that > covered > >> millions of pages of documents and involved many hours of testimony. > >> > >> See:http://www.ftc.gov/opa/2013/01/google.shtm > >> > >> To see report by BBC, visit: > >> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-20899032 > >> > >> Kind Regards, > >> > >> -- > >> Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala > >> P.O. Box 17862 > >> Suva > >> Fiji > >> > >> Twitter: @SalanietaT > >> Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro > >> Tel: +679 3544828 > >> Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 > >> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > -- > > Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala > > P.O. Box 17862 > > Suva > > Fiji > > > > Twitter: @SalanietaT > > Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro > > Tel: +679 3544828 > > Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 > > > > > > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > > 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 > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > -- Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala P.O. Box 17862 Suva Fiji Twitter: @SalanietaT Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro Tel: +679 3544828 Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com Thu Jan 10 15:18:56 2013 From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro) Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2013 09:18:56 +1300 Subject: [governance] NomCom Message-ID: Dear All, I had requested the previous NomCom to receive the expressions of interest from those wishing to represent Civil Society by serving on the MAG and to carry out the process of selection. Two members from the previous NomCom had recused themselves and the reserve members have volunteered to serve on the NomCom. As such, this is a Notice to the IGC that the NomCom comprises of the following people:- *Voting members* 1. Wilson Abigaba 2. Shahid Akbar 3. Devon Blake 4. Dixie Hawtin 5. Asif Kabani *Non-voting chair, Thomas Lowenhaupt* Their task is not easy and I trust that we will give them our support and cooperation. Thank you. Kind Regards, -- Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala P.O. Box 17862 Suva Fiji Twitter: @SalanietaT Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro Tel: +679 3544828 Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From nb at bollow.ch Thu Jan 10 15:24:49 2013 From: nb at bollow.ch (Norbert Bollow) Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2013 21:24:49 +0100 Subject: Fw: [governance] Suggested amendment for the charter. Nomcom. Still needs signatories Message-ID: <20130110212449.7c1c5a6b@quill.bollow.ch> Milton, the proposal will get voted on if and only of the number of co-proposers reaches at least ten. Thanks and greetings, Norbert Milton L Mueller wrote: Oh. I thought there was going to be a vote. Then you can list me as a "proposer" Consider yourself propositioned. > -----Original Message----- > From: Norbert Bollow [mailto:nb at bollow.ch] > > I don't understand how you mean this. According to our charter, any > proposal to amend it needs ten proposers. Therefore, at the current > stage, the way to support the amendment is to sign on as co-proposer. > > Greetings, > Norbert > -------------- 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 From isolatedn at gmail.com Thu Jan 10 21:00:02 2013 From: isolatedn at gmail.com (Sivasubramanian M) Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2013 07:30:02 +0530 Subject: [governance] Suggested amendment for the charter. Nomcom. Still needs signatories In-Reply-To: References: <7E9B2FE7-631E-48EA-8FE9-A50886EF107F@acm.org> <7A95D3C2-A054-43B1-A618-5C4308996EF8@acm.org> <379D244F-6C95-4046-8795-7A61114F6715@acm.org> Message-ID: On Jan 10, 2013 9:46 PM, "Sivasubramanian M" wrote: > > > I have supported this, so please count a +1 from me. Since this requires 10 proposers, please count me as a co-proposer. > > Sivasubramanian M > > On Jan 10, 2013 9:23 PM, "Avri Doria" wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> At this point, 6 people have signed on as proposers of this amendment. >> >> Avri Doria >> Chaitanya Dhareshwar >> Fouad Bajwa >> Louis Pouzin >> Norbert Bollow >> Pranesh Prakash >> >> Please let me know if your name is included in error, or if I forgot to include your name. >> >> I think I have caught the editorial changes that were requested. Thanks to those who found them. Please let me know if I missed something or messed something up anew. >> >> thanks >> >> avri >> ----- >> >> >> Amendments to the Charter >> >> This charter can be amended at any time as proposed by no fewer than ten (10) members and as approved by no less than two-thirds (2/3) of the members of the IGC. The membership requirements for amending the charter are based on the most currently available voters list. In amending the charter, everyone who voted in the previous election will be deemed a member for amending the charter. >> >> ---------- >> >> Amendment 1: >> >> Currently the charter reads as: >> >> " >> Any such request will require a public response from the coordinators' within a week indicating the action taken and with an explanation of the reasons for the action. >> >> All nominations to external bodies, e.g., the IGF multistakholder advisory group, will be made using a randomly selected nomcom process as defined here. >> " >> >> >> >> Add missing heading to Nominations section. >> New text: >> >> " >> Any such request will require a public response from the coordinators' within a week indicating the action taken and with an explanation of the reasons for the action. >> >> Nominations to External Bodies >> >> All nominations to external bodies, e.g., the IGF multistakholder advisory group, will be made using a randomly selected nomcom process as defined here. >> " >> >> >> Amendment 2: >> >> Currently the Nomcom process reads as: >> >> " >> 8. Each nomcom will be selected for a specific decision and will be disbanded after the decision is made.However, in special cases where several different nominating committees would need to be completed in a shortened time frame that did not allow for multiple nominating committees, the co-coordinators may jointly request one nominating committee to fill several functions. >> >> 9. There is no limit on the number of nomcoms an individual may serve on. >> " >> >> Proposed changes >> >> 1. Change to 1 Nomcom per year >> 2. Restrict members of Nomcom to 2 consecutive terms >> >> Change text to: >> >> " >> 8. Each Nomcom will serve for one year. >> >> 9. Nomcom Volunteers and non-voting chairs may serve a maximum of two consecutive terms. An intervening year is required before any term-limited volunteer may volunteer for the random process. An intervening two (2) years are required before a non-voting chair may serve again as either a volunteer or a non-voting chair. A term-limited volunteer may serve as non-voting chair. >> " >> >> >> >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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: -------------- 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 From iza at anr.org Thu Jan 10 21:52:36 2013 From: iza at anr.org (Izumi AIZU) Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2013 11:52:36 +0900 Subject: [governance] Suggested amendment for the charter. Nomcom. Still needs signatories In-Reply-To: <379D244F-6C95-4046-8795-7A61114F6715@acm.org> References: <7E9B2FE7-631E-48EA-8FE9-A50886EF107F@acm.org> <7A95D3C2-A054-43B1-A618-5C4308996EF8@acm.org> <379D244F-6C95-4046-8795-7A61114F6715@acm.org> Message-ID: Thanks Avri, and please include me as well. izumi 2013/1/11 Avri Doria : > Hi, > > At this point, 6 people have signed on as proposers of this amendment. > > Avri Doria > Chaitanya Dhareshwar > Fouad Bajwa > Louis Pouzin > Norbert Bollow > Pranesh Prakash > > Please let me know if your name is included in error, or if I forgot to include your name. > > I think I have caught the editorial changes that were requested. Thanks to those who found them. Please let me know if I missed something or messed something up anew. > > thanks > > avri > ----- > > > Amendments to the Charter > > This charter can be amended at any time as proposed by no fewer than ten (10) members and as approved by no less than two-thirds (2/3) of the members of the IGC. The membership requirements for amending the charter are based on the most currently available voters list. In amending the charter, everyone who voted in the previous election will be deemed a member for amending the charter. > > ---------- > > Amendment 1: > > Currently the charter reads as: > > " > Any such request will require a public response from the coordinators' within a week indicating the action taken and with an explanation of the reasons for the action. > > All nominations to external bodies, e.g., the IGF multistakholder advisory group, will be made using a randomly selected nomcom process as defined here. > " > > > > Add missing heading to Nominations section. > New text: > > " > Any such request will require a public response from the coordinators' within a week indicating the action taken and with an explanation of the reasons for the action. > > Nominations to External Bodies > > All nominations to external bodies, e.g., the IGF multistakholder advisory group, will be made using a randomly selected nomcom process as defined here. > " > > > Amendment 2: > > Currently the Nomcom process reads as: > > " > 8. Each nomcom will be selected for a specific decision and will be disbanded after the decision is made.However, in special cases where several different nominating committees would need to be completed in a shortened time frame that did not allow for multiple nominating committees, the co-coordinators may jointly request one nominating committee to fill several functions. > > 9. There is no limit on the number of nomcoms an individual may serve on. > " > > Proposed changes > > 1. Change to 1 Nomcom per year > 2. Restrict members of Nomcom to 2 consecutive terms > > Change text to: > > " > 8. Each Nomcom will serve for one year. > > 9. Nomcom Volunteers and non-voting chairs may serve a maximum of two consecutive terms. An intervening year is required before any term-limited volunteer may volunteer for the random process. An intervening two (2) years are required before a non-voting chair may serve again as either a volunteer or a non-voting chair. A term-limited volunteer may serve as non-voting chair. > " > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > -- >> Izumi Aizu << Institute for InfoSocionomics, Tama University, Tokyo Institute for HyperNetwork Society, Oita, Japan www.anr.org -------------- 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 From avri at acm.org Thu Jan 10 22:51:44 2013 From: avri at acm.org (Avri Doria) Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2013 22:51:44 -0500 Subject: [governance] Suggested amendment for the charter. Nomcom. In-Reply-To: <7A95D3C2-A054-43B1-A618-5C4308996EF8@acm.org> References: <7E9B2FE7-631E-48EA-8FE9-A50886EF107F@acm.org> <7A95D3C2-A054-43B1-A618-5C4308996EF8@acm.org> Message-ID: <9F9FFE68-44EF-476E-A8D3-73C07CE0587C@acm.org> I beleive that the following has been proposed by the following IGC members: Avri Doria Chaitanya Dhareshwar Fouad Bajwa Ginger Paque Izumi Aizu Jeanette Hofmann Louis Pouzin McTim Michael Gurstein Milton L Mueller Norbert Bollow Pranesh Prakash Robert Guerra Shaila Rao Mistry Sivasubramanian M Tracy F. Hackshaw Please let the list know if your name is included in error, or if I forgot to include your name. I think I have now caught allthe editorial changes that were requested. Thanks to those who found them. Thanks to Norbert for finding one the second time. At this point, I request that the co-ordinator(s) schedule a discussion and subsequent vote on this amendment as defined in the charter. ----- Amendments to the Charter This charter can be amended at any time as proposed by no fewer than ten (10) members and as approved by no less than two-thirds (2/3) of the members of the IGC. The membership requirements for amending the charter are based on the most currently available voters list. In amending the charter, everyone who voted in the previous election will be deemed a member for amending the charter. ---------- Amendment 1: Currently the charter reads as: " Any such request will require a public response from the coordinators' within a week indicating the action taken and with an explanation of the reasons for the action. All nominations to external bodies, e.g., the IGF multistakholder advisory group, will be made using a randomly selected nomcom process as defined here. " Add missing heading to Nominations section. New text: " Any such request will require a public response from the coordinators' within a week indicating the action taken and with an explanation of the reasons for the action. Nominations to External Bodies All nominations to external bodies, e.g., the IGF multistakeholder advisory group, will be made using a randomly selected nomcom process as defined here. " Amendment 2: Currently the Nomcom process reads as: " 8. Each nomcom will be selected for a specific decision and will be disbanded after the decision is made.However, in special cases where several different nominating committees would need to be completed in a shortened time frame that did not allow for multiple nominating committees, the co-coordinators may jointly request one nominating committee to fill several functions. 9. There is no limit on the number of nomcoms an individual may serve on. " Proposed changes 1. Change to 1 Nomcom per year 2. Restrict members of Nomcom to 2 consecutive terms Change text to: " 8. Each Nomcom will serve for one year. 9. Nomcom Volunteers and non-voting chairs may serve a maximum of two consecutive terms. An intervening year is required before any term-limited volunteer may volunteer for the random process. An intervening two (2) years are required before a non-voting chair may serve again as either a volunteer or a non-voting chair. A term-limited volunteer may serve as non-voting chair. " -------------- 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 From langdonorr at gmail.com Thu Jan 10 23:03:23 2013 From: langdonorr at gmail.com (Cheryl Langdon-Orr) Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2013 15:03:23 +1100 Subject: [governance] Suggested amendment for the charter. Nomcom. In-Reply-To: <9F9FFE68-44EF-476E-A8D3-73C07CE0587C@acm.org> References: <7E9B2FE7-631E-48EA-8FE9-A50886EF107F@acm.org> <7A95D3C2-A054-43B1-A618-5C4308996EF8@acm.org> <9F9FFE68-44EF-476E-A8D3-73C07CE0587C@acm.org> Message-ID: My name should be added... On 11/01/2013 2:52 PM, "Avri Doria" wrote: > > I beleive that the following has been proposed by the following IGC > members: > > Avri Doria > Chaitanya Dhareshwar > Fouad Bajwa > Ginger Paque > Izumi Aizu > Jeanette Hofmann > Louis Pouzin > McTim > Michael Gurstein > Milton L Mueller > Norbert Bollow > Pranesh Prakash > Robert Guerra > Shaila Rao Mistry > Sivasubramanian M > Tracy F. Hackshaw > > Please let the list know if your name is included in error, or if I forgot > to include your name. > > I think I have now caught allthe editorial changes that were requested. > Thanks to those who found them. > Thanks to Norbert for finding one the second time. > > At this point, I request that the co-ordinator(s) schedule a discussion > and subsequent vote on this amendment as defined in the charter. > > ----- > > > Amendments to the Charter > > This charter can be amended at any time as proposed by no fewer than ten > (10) members and as approved by no less than two-thirds (2/3) of the > members of the IGC. The membership requirements for amending the charter > are based on the most currently available voters list. In amending the > charter, everyone who voted in the previous election will be deemed a > member for amending the charter. > > ---------- > > Amendment 1: > > Currently the charter reads as: > > " > Any such request will require a public response from the coordinators' > within a week indicating the action taken and with an explanation of the > reasons for the action. > > All nominations to external bodies, e.g., the IGF multistakholder advisory > group, will be made using a randomly selected nomcom process as defined > here. > " > > Add missing heading to Nominations section. > New text: > > " > Any such request will require a public response from the coordinators' > within a week indicating the action taken and with an explanation of the > reasons for the action. > > Nominations to External Bodies > > All nominations to external bodies, e.g., the IGF multistakeholder > advisory group, will be made using a randomly selected nomcom process as > defined here. > " > > > Amendment 2: > > Currently the Nomcom process reads as: > > " > 8. Each nomcom will be selected for a specific decision and will be > disbanded after the decision is made.However, in special cases where > several different nominating committees would need to be completed in a > shortened time frame that did not allow for multiple nominating committees, > the co-coordinators may jointly request one nominating committee to fill > several functions. > > 9. There is no limit on the number of nomcoms an individual may serve on. > " > > Proposed changes > > 1. Change to 1 Nomcom per year > 2. Restrict members of Nomcom to 2 consecutive terms > > Change text to: > > " > 8. Each Nomcom will serve for one year. > > 9. Nomcom Volunteers and non-voting chairs may serve a maximum of two > consecutive terms. An intervening year is required before any term-limited > volunteer may volunteer for the random process. An intervening two (2) > years are required before a non-voting chair may serve again as either a > volunteer or a non-voting chair. A term-limited volunteer may serve as > non-voting chair. > " > > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From gideonrop at gmail.com Fri Jan 11 01:16:30 2013 From: gideonrop at gmail.com (Gideon) Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2013 09:16:30 +0300 Subject: [governance] Suggested amendment for the charter. Nomcom. Still needs signatories In-Reply-To: References: <7E9B2FE7-631E-48EA-8FE9-A50886EF107F@acm.org> <7A95D3C2-A054-43B1-A618-5C4308996EF8@acm.org> <379D244F-6C95-4046-8795-7A61114F6715@acm.org> Message-ID: Dear Sala or Avri, Could you also include my name on the list as i was the early supporter of the group proposal. Best regards, Gideon Rop. On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 5:52 AM, Izumi AIZU wrote: > Thanks Avri, and please include me as well. > > izumi > > 2013/1/11 Avri Doria : > > Hi, > > > > At this point, 6 people have signed on as proposers of this amendment. > > > > Avri Doria > > Chaitanya Dhareshwar > > Fouad Bajwa > > Louis Pouzin > > Norbert Bollow > > Pranesh Prakash > > > > Please let me know if your name is included in error, or if I forgot to > include your name. > > > > I think I have caught the editorial changes that were requested. Thanks > to those who found them. Please let me know if I missed something or messed > something up anew. > > > > thanks > > > > avri > > ----- > > > > > > Amendments to the Charter > > > > This charter can be amended at any time as proposed by no fewer than ten > (10) members and as approved by no less than two-thirds (2/3) of the > members of the IGC. The membership requirements for amending the charter > are based on the most currently available voters list. In amending the > charter, everyone who voted in the previous election will be deemed a > member for amending the charter. > > > > ---------- > > > > Amendment 1: > > > > Currently the charter reads as: > > > > " > > Any such request will require a public response from the coordinators' > within a week indicating the action taken and with an explanation of the > reasons for the action. > > > > All nominations to external bodies, e.g., the IGF multistakholder > advisory group, will be made using a randomly selected nomcom process as > defined here. > > " > > > > > > > > Add missing heading to Nominations section. > > New text: > > > > " > > Any such request will require a public response from the coordinators' > within a week indicating the action taken and with an explanation of the > reasons for the action. > > > > Nominations to External Bodies > > > > All nominations to external bodies, e.g., the IGF multistakholder > advisory group, will be made using a randomly selected nomcom process as > defined here. > > " > > > > > > Amendment 2: > > > > Currently the Nomcom process reads as: > > > > " > > 8. Each nomcom will be selected for a specific decision and will be > disbanded after the decision is made.However, in special cases where > several different nominating committees would need to be completed in a > shortened time frame that did not allow for multiple nominating committees, > the co-coordinators may jointly request one nominating committee to fill > several functions. > > > > 9. There is no limit on the number of nomcoms an individual may serve on. > > " > > > > Proposed changes > > > > 1. Change to 1 Nomcom per year > > 2. Restrict members of Nomcom to 2 consecutive terms > > > > Change text to: > > > > " > > 8. Each Nomcom will serve for one year. > > > > 9. Nomcom Volunteers and non-voting chairs may serve a maximum of two > consecutive terms. An intervening year is required before any term-limited > volunteer may volunteer for the random process. An intervening two (2) > years are required before a non-voting chair may serve again as either a > volunteer or a non-voting chair. A term-limited volunteer may serve as > non-voting chair. > > " > > > > > > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > > 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 > > > > > > -- > >> Izumi Aizu << > Institute for InfoSocionomics, Tama University, Tokyo > Institute for HyperNetwork Society, Oita, > Japan > www.anr.org > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From shailam at yahoo.com Fri Jan 11 01:53:19 2013 From: shailam at yahoo.com (shaila mistry) Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2013 22:53:19 -0800 (PST) Subject: [governance] Suggested amendment for the charter. Nomcom. Message-ID: <1357887199.30427.YahooMailMobile@web160506.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> My name should be added Thanks Shaila -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From tapani.tarvainen at effi.org Fri Jan 11 02:05:53 2013 From: tapani.tarvainen at effi.org (Tapani Tarvainen) Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2013 09:05:53 +0200 Subject: [governance] Suggested amendment for the charter. Voting. In-Reply-To: <6C563956-CB7B-4167-8570-03F55C2BC906@acm.org> References: <71DE6F37-0C23-4CF2-9984-98FB3688F224@acm.org> <6C563956-CB7B-4167-8570-03F55C2BC906@acm.org> Message-ID: <20130111070553.GA3586@thorion.it.jyu.fi> If you're still collecting proposers, count me in. -- Tapani Tarvainen On Jan 10 10:41, Avri Doria (avri at acm.org) wrote: > > I beleive that the following has been proposed by the following IGC members: > > Avri Doria > Baudouin Schombe > Cheryl Langdon-Orr > Fouad Bajwa > Gideon Rop > Ginger Paque > Hakikur Rahman > Ian Peter > Izumi AIZU > Kabani Asif > McTim > Norbert Bollow > Norbert Klein > Rudi Vansnick > Shaila Mistry > Sivasubramanian M > Sonigitu Ekpe > Tracy F. Hackshaw > > Please let me know if I have either left your name off the list, or have included it in error. > > While the Nomcom amendment I proposed had errors that needed to be corrected, I did not see any for this one. If I missed them, please let the list know. > > At this point, I request that the co-ordinator(s) schedule a discussion and subsequent vote on this amendment as defined in the charter. > > > Amendments to the Charter > > This charter can be amended at any time as proposed by no fewer than ten (10) members and as approved by no less than two-thirds (2/3) of the members of the IGC. The membership requirements for amending the charter are based on the most currently available voters list. In amending the charter, everyone who voted in the previous election will be deemed a member for amending the charter. > > ---------- > > Currently the charter reads as: > > " > As part of the voting process the voter must personally ascertain that they are a member of the IGC based on membership criteria described elsewhere in this charter and posted as part of the voting information (i.e. a voter must affirm membership on the voter form in order to vote). The decision to self-identify as a member of the IGC is a personal decision based on the criteria defined. A list of the self-defined member-voters will be published after the election with the results of the election. > > " > Changes proposed: > > 1. Indicate that the affirmation is prior to the vote and not part of the vote. > 2. require that all ballot include the ability to abstain. > > > " > > Prior to voting the prospective voter must personally ascertain that they are a member of the IGC based on membership criteria described elsewhere in this charter and posted as part of the voting information (i.e. a voter must affirm membership on the voter form prior to voting). The decision to self-identify as a member of the IGC is a personal decision based on the criteria defined. A list of the self-defined member-voters will be published after the election with the results of the election. > > All ballots will include the ability for voters to abstain on any choice included on the ballot. > > " -------------- 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 From gideonrop at gmail.com Fri Jan 11 02:29:49 2013 From: gideonrop at gmail.com (Gideon) Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2013 10:29:49 +0300 Subject: [governance] Google rolls out Kenya Elections Hub Message-ID: Sorry i did not mean to digress from the current topic but i thought this was interesting news http://www.cio.co.ke/news/main-stories/google-rolls-out-kenya-elections-hub -The Internet is playing increasingly an important role in transforming the way citizens participate and engage in the elections across Africa. Now its Kenya’s turn, and expectations are high both for a peaceful transition and a deepening of democracy under the new constitution. Voters are already turning to the internet for information: according to Google Zeitgeist, the IEBC (Independent Boundaries and Electoral Commission) was the top trending search in Kenya in 2012, and all the major candidates have a strong presence across the various social media outlets. Gideon Rop DotConnectAfrica On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 3:27 PM, Angela Daly wrote: > I don't have any insider knowledge on this but Google and competition > law is forming one chapter of my PhD thesis which should be finished > soon! > > Angela > > On 10 January 2013 23:22, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro > wrote: > > Dear All, > > > > On 18th December, 2012 the Vice President of the European Commission > > responsible for Competition Policy met with Google's Executive Chairman > Eric > > Schmidt in relation to coming into an Agreement based on Article 9 of > the EU > > Anti Trust Regulation. You can see the Press Release here: > > > > > http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_SPEECH-12-967_en.htm#PR_metaPressRelease_bottom > > > > The concerns are in relation to the competition concerns raised by the EC > > and they include:- > > > > the way in which Google's vertical search services are displayed within > > general search results as compared to services of competitors; > > > > the way Google may use and display third party content on its vertical > > search services; > > > > exclusivity agreements for the delivery of Google search advertisements > on > > other websites; and > > > > restrictions in the portability of AdWords advertising campaigns. > > > > To see the Press Release, visit: > > > http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_SPEECH-12-967_en.htm#PR_metaPressRelease_bottom > > > > It will be interesting to see the detailed commitment text by Google this > > month and I would be grateful if anyone has any knowledge about this that > > they could share. > > > > > > Thank you. > > > > > > Kind Regards, > > > > Sala > > > > > > On Fri, Jan 4, 2013 at 1:12 PM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro > > wrote: > >> > >> Dear All, > >> > >> "The US Federal Trade Commission has announced it has closed its > >> investigation into Google after an exhaustive 19-month review that > covered > >> millions of pages of documents and involved many hours of testimony. > >> > >> See:http://www.ftc.gov/opa/2013/01/google.shtm > >> > >> To see report by BBC, visit: > >> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-20899032 > >> > >> Kind Regards, > >> > >> -- > >> Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala > >> P.O. Box 17862 > >> Suva > >> Fiji > >> > >> Twitter: @SalanietaT > >> Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro > >> Tel: +679 3544828 > >> Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 > >> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > -- > > Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala > > P.O. Box 17862 > > Suva > > Fiji > > > > Twitter: @SalanietaT > > Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro > > Tel: +679 3544828 > > Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 > > > > > > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > > 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 > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From rudi.vansnick at isoc.be Fri Jan 11 02:50:56 2013 From: rudi.vansnick at isoc.be (Rudi Vansnick) Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2013 08:50:56 +0100 Subject: [governance] Suggested amendment for the charter. Nomcom. In-Reply-To: <9F9FFE68-44EF-476E-A8D3-73C07CE0587C@acm.org> References: <7E9B2FE7-631E-48EA-8FE9-A50886EF107F@acm.org> <7A95D3C2-A054-43B1-A618-5C4308996EF8@acm.org> <9F9FFE68-44EF-476E-A8D3-73C07CE0587C@acm.org> Message-ID: <95DE9E97-DE41-40DF-8783-C9623094633B@isoc.be> Avri, I've not seen my name on the list, so please add my name too. Rudi Vansnick Op 11-jan-2013, om 04:51 heeft Avri Doria het volgende geschreven: > > I beleive that the following has been proposed by the following IGC members: > > Avri Doria > Chaitanya Dhareshwar > Fouad Bajwa > Ginger Paque > Izumi Aizu > Jeanette Hofmann > Louis Pouzin > McTim > Michael Gurstein > Milton L Mueller > Norbert Bollow > Pranesh Prakash > Robert Guerra > Shaila Rao Mistry > Sivasubramanian M > Tracy F. Hackshaw > > Please let the list know if your name is included in error, or if I forgot to include your name. > > I think I have now caught allthe editorial changes that were requested. > Thanks to those who found them. > Thanks to Norbert for finding one the second time. > > At this point, I request that the co-ordinator(s) schedule a discussion and subsequent vote on this amendment as defined in the charter. > > ----- > > > Amendments to the Charter > > This charter can be amended at any time as proposed by no fewer than ten (10) members and as approved by no less than two-thirds (2/3) of the members of the IGC. The membership requirements for amending the charter are based on the most currently available voters list. In amending the charter, everyone who voted in the previous election will be deemed a member for amending the charter. > > ---------- > > Amendment 1: > > Currently the charter reads as: > > " > Any such request will require a public response from the coordinators' within a week indicating the action taken and with an explanation of the reasons for the action. > > All nominations to external bodies, e.g., the IGF multistakholder advisory group, will be made using a randomly selected nomcom process as defined here. > " > > Add missing heading to Nominations section. > New text: > > " > Any such request will require a public response from the coordinators' within a week indicating the action taken and with an explanation of the reasons for the action. > > Nominations to External Bodies > > All nominations to external bodies, e.g., the IGF multistakeholder advisory group, will be made using a randomly selected nomcom process as defined here. > " > > > Amendment 2: > > Currently the Nomcom process reads as: > > " > 8. Each nomcom will be selected for a specific decision and will be disbanded after the decision is made.However, in special cases where several different nominating committees would need to be completed in a shortened time frame that did not allow for multiple nominating committees, the co-coordinators may jointly request one nominating committee to fill several functions. > > 9. There is no limit on the number of nomcoms an individual may serve on. > " > > Proposed changes > > 1. Change to 1 Nomcom per year > 2. Restrict members of Nomcom to 2 consecutive terms > > Change text to: > > " > 8. Each Nomcom will serve for one year. > > 9. Nomcom Volunteers and non-voting chairs may serve a maximum of two consecutive terms. An intervening year is required before any term-limited volunteer may volunteer for the random process. An intervening two (2) years are required before a non-voting chair may serve again as either a volunteer or a non-voting chair. A term-limited volunteer may serve as non-voting chair. > " > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com Fri Jan 11 02:54:12 2013 From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro) Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2013 20:54:12 +1300 Subject: [governance] European Commission on Google Investigation Was Google Survives US FTC Probe #FTC #EC #Google #competition In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi, It has been reported through Tech Crunch and the Financial Times that Google still may be diverting traffic and abusing the dominant market position and whilst it got a slap on the wrist by the FTC (as reported by the Financial Times) and FTC link was furnished in an earlier post, it seems that the EC will not back down. http://techcrunch.com/2013/01/10/report-european-commission-may-force-google-to-change-how-it-presents-its-search-results/ Interesting evolution taking place as far as service providers go in the global net and interesting (not surprising) divergent applications by two of the world's powerful regulators for antitrust and competition. Kind Regards, Sala On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 1:27 AM, Angela Daly wrote: > I don't have any insider knowledge on this but Google and competition > law is forming one chapter of my PhD thesis which should be finished > soon! > > Angela > > On 10 January 2013 23:22, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro > wrote: > > Dear All, > > > > On 18th December, 2012 the Vice President of the European Commission > > responsible for Competition Policy met with Google's Executive Chairman > Eric > > Schmidt in relation to coming into an Agreement based on Article 9 of > the EU > > Anti Trust Regulation. You can see the Press Release here: > > > > > http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_SPEECH-12-967_en.htm#PR_metaPressRelease_bottom > > > > The concerns are in relation to the competition concerns raised by the EC > > and they include:- > > > > the way in which Google's vertical search services are displayed within > > general search results as compared to services of competitors; > > > > the way Google may use and display third party content on its vertical > > search services; > > > > exclusivity agreements for the delivery of Google search advertisements > on > > other websites; and > > > > restrictions in the portability of AdWords advertising campaigns. > > > > To see the Press Release, visit: > > > http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_SPEECH-12-967_en.htm#PR_metaPressRelease_bottom > > > > It will be interesting to see the detailed commitment text by Google this > > month and I would be grateful if anyone has any knowledge about this that > > they could share. > > > > > > Thank you. > > > > > > Kind Regards, > > > > Sala > > > > > > On Fri, Jan 4, 2013 at 1:12 PM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro > > wrote: > >> > >> Dear All, > >> > >> "The US Federal Trade Commission has announced it has closed its > >> investigation into Google after an exhaustive 19-month review that > covered > >> millions of pages of documents and involved many hours of testimony. > >> > >> See:http://www.ftc.gov/opa/2013/01/google.shtm > >> > >> To see report by BBC, visit: > >> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-20899032 > >> > >> Kind Regards, > >> > >> -- > >> Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala > >> P.O. Box 17862 > >> Suva > >> Fiji > >> > >> Twitter: @SalanietaT > >> Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro > >> Tel: +679 3544828 > >> Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 > >> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > -- > > Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala > > P.O. Box 17862 > > Suva > > Fiji > > > > Twitter: @SalanietaT > > Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro > > Tel: +679 3544828 > > Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 > > > > > > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > > 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 > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > -- Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala P.O. Box 17862 Suva Fiji Twitter: @SalanietaT Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro Tel: +679 3544828 Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com Fri Jan 11 03:00:47 2013 From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro) Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2013 21:00:47 +1300 Subject: [governance] Google rolls out Kenya Elections Hub In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 8:29 PM, Gideon wrote: > http://www.cio.co.ke/news/main-stories/google-rolls-out-kenya-elections-hub I read the article and is a really cool initiative by Kenya and Google. -- Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala P.O. Box 17862 Suva Fiji Twitter: @SalanietaT Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro Tel: +679 3544828 Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From nhklein at gmx.net Fri Jan 11 03:50:14 2013 From: nhklein at gmx.net (Norbert Klein) Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2013 15:50:14 +0700 Subject: [governance] Suggested amendment for the charter. Nomcom. In-Reply-To: <95DE9E97-DE41-40DF-8783-C9623094633B@isoc.be> References: <7E9B2FE7-631E-48EA-8FE9-A50886EF107F@acm.org> <7A95D3C2-A054-43B1-A618-5C4308996EF8@acm.org> <9F9FFE68-44EF-476E-A8D3-73C07CE0587C@acm.org> <95DE9E97-DE41-40DF-8783-C9623094633B@isoc.be> Message-ID: <50EFD246.5070809@gmx.net> Please add my name. Norbert Klein >> I beleive that the following has been proposed by the following IGC members: >> >> Avri Doria >> Chaitanya Dhareshwar >> Fouad Bajwa >> Ginger Paque >> Izumi Aizu >> Jeanette Hofmann >> Louis Pouzin >> McTim >> Michael Gurstein >> Milton L Mueller >> Norbert Bollow >> Pranesh Prakash >> Robert Guerra >> Shaila Rao Mistry >> Sivasubramanian M >> Tracy F. Hackshaw >> >> Please let the list know if your name is included in error, or if I forgot to include your name. >> >> I think I have now caught allthe editorial changes that were requested. >> Thanks to those who found them. >> Thanks to Norbert for finding one the second time. >> >> At this point, I request that the co-ordinator(s) schedule a discussion and subsequent vote on this amendment as defined in the charter. >> >> ----- >> >> >> Amendments to the Charter >> >> This charter can be amended at any time as proposed by no fewer than ten (10) members and as approved by no less than two-thirds (2/3) of the members of the IGC. The membership requirements for amending the charter are based on the most currently available voters list. In amending the charter, everyone who voted in the previous election will be deemed a member for amending the charter. >> >> ---------- >> >> Amendment 1: >> >> Currently the charter reads as: >> >> " >> Any such request will require a public response from the coordinators' within a week indicating the action taken and with an explanation of the reasons for the action. >> >> All nominations to external bodies, e.g., the IGF multistakholder advisory group, will be made using a randomly selected nomcom process as defined here. >> " >> >> Add missing heading to Nominations section. >> New text: >> >> " >> Any such request will require a public response from the coordinators' within a week indicating the action taken and with an explanation of the reasons for the action. >> >> Nominations to External Bodies >> >> All nominations to external bodies, e.g., the IGF multistakeholder advisory group, will be made using a randomly selected nomcom process as defined here. >> " >> >> >> Amendment 2: >> >> Currently the Nomcom process reads as: >> >> " >> 8. Each nomcom will be selected for a specific decision and will be disbanded after the decision is made.However, in special cases where several different nominating committees would need to be completed in a shortened time frame that did not allow for multiple nominating committees, the co-coordinators may jointly request one nominating committee to fill several functions. >> >> 9. There is no limit on the number of nomcoms an individual may serve on. >> " >> >> Proposed changes >> >> 1. Change to 1 Nomcom per year >> 2. Restrict members of Nomcom to 2 consecutive terms >> >> Change text to: >> >> " >> 8. Each Nomcom will serve for one year. >> >> 9. Nomcom Volunteers and non-voting chairs may serve a maximum of two consecutive terms. An intervening year is required before any term-limited volunteer may volunteer for the random process. An intervening two (2) years are required before a non-voting chair may serve again as either a volunteer or a non-voting chair. A term-limited volunteer may serve as non-voting chair. >> " >> >> >> >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From kabani.asif at gmail.com Fri Jan 11 04:42:06 2013 From: kabani.asif at gmail.com (Kabani) Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2013 14:42:06 +0500 Subject: [governance] Suggested amendment for the charter. Nomcom. In-Reply-To: <9F9FFE68-44EF-476E-A8D3-73C07CE0587C@acm.org> References: <7E9B2FE7-631E-48EA-8FE9-A50886EF107F@acm.org> <7A95D3C2-A054-43B1-A618-5C4308996EF8@acm.org> <9F9FFE68-44EF-476E-A8D3-73C07CE0587C@acm.org> Message-ID: My name is missing from the list. Add pl On 11 January 2013 08:51, Avri Doria wrote: > > I beleive that the following has been proposed by the following IGC > members: > > Avri Doria > Chaitanya Dhareshwar > Fouad Bajwa > Ginger Paque > Izumi Aizu > Jeanette Hofmann > Louis Pouzin > McTim > Michael Gurstein > Milton L Mueller > Norbert Bollow > Pranesh Prakash > Robert Guerra > Shaila Rao Mistry > Sivasubramanian M > Tracy F. Hackshaw > > Please let the list know if your name is included in error, or if I forgot > to include your name. > > I think I have now caught allthe editorial changes that were requested. > Thanks to those who found them. > Thanks to Norbert for finding one the second time. > > At this point, I request that the co-ordinator(s) schedule a discussion > and subsequent vote on this amendment as defined in the charter. > > ----- > > > Amendments to the Charter > > This charter can be amended at any time as proposed by no fewer than ten > (10) members and as approved by no less than two-thirds (2/3) of the > members of the IGC. The membership requirements for amending the charter > are based on the most currently available voters list. In amending the > charter, everyone who voted in the previous election will be deemed a > member for amending the charter. > > ---------- > > Amendment 1: > > Currently the charter reads as: > > " > Any such request will require a public response from the coordinators' > within a week indicating the action taken and with an explanation of the > reasons for the action. > > All nominations to external bodies, e.g., the IGF multistakholder advisory > group, will be made using a randomly selected nomcom process as defined > here. > " > > Add missing heading to Nominations section. > New text: > > " > Any such request will require a public response from the coordinators' > within a week indicating the action taken and with an explanation of the > reasons for the action. > > Nominations to External Bodies > > All nominations to external bodies, e.g., the IGF multistakeholder > advisory group, will be made using a randomly selected nomcom process as > defined here. > " > > > Amendment 2: > > Currently the Nomcom process reads as: > > " > 8. Each nomcom will be selected for a specific decision and will be > disbanded after the decision is made.However, in special cases where > several different nominating committees would need to be completed in a > shortened time frame that did not allow for multiple nominating committees, > the co-coordinators may jointly request one nominating committee to fill > several functions. > > 9. There is no limit on the number of nomcoms an individual may serve on. > " > > Proposed changes > > 1. Change to 1 Nomcom per year > 2. Restrict members of Nomcom to 2 consecutive terms > > Change text to: > > " > 8. Each Nomcom will serve for one year. > > 9. Nomcom Volunteers and non-voting chairs may serve a maximum of two > consecutive terms. An intervening year is required before any term-limited > volunteer may volunteer for the random process. An intervening two (2) > years are required before a non-voting chair may serve again as either a > volunteer or a non-voting chair. A term-limited volunteer may serve as > non-voting chair. > " > > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > -- *Connect me* [image: Facebook] [image: Twitter] [image: Youtube] [image: LinkedIn] *Wait Before you print - Think about the** **ENVIRONMENT* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From tapani.tarvainen at effi.org Fri Jan 11 05:02:43 2013 From: tapani.tarvainen at effi.org (Tapani Tarvainen) Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2013 12:02:43 +0200 Subject: [governance] Re: a formal appeal request to the appeal team to reverse the recent ban on a Member In-Reply-To: References: <6B54234D-2587-45E5-A3F5-CD67D2D493CF@gmail.com> <882B5E43-30B7-4FB2-A2F2-1353CBE8B496@uzh.ch> Message-ID: <20130111100243.GG3586@thorion.it.jyu.fi> Ditto. I would like to add that I wish the appeals committee would not consider this as an either-or situation, but more fine-grained, what kind of sanctions could and should be used in general and what (if any) in this case in particular. That is, things like how many warnings would be appropriate; should warnings be public or private; if someone is banned from a list, should it be permanent or temporary and if the latter, how long; could just temporary suspension of posting privileges work (so they could read the list but not post anything themselves); or could individual moderation be used. -- Tapani Tarvainen On Jan 09 21:13, Sivasubramanian M (isolatedn at gmail.com) wrote: > I support the appeal request. > > Sivasubramanian M > On Jan 9, 2013 1:19 PM, "William Drake" wrote: > > > Me too > > > > Bill > > > > On Jan 8, 2013, at 22:57, George Sadowsky > > wrote: > > > > I support them also. > > > > On Jan 8, 2013, at 2:41 PM, Ivar A. M. Hartmann wrote: > > > > I support these grounds for appeal. > > > > Ivar > > > > On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 5:35 PM, McTim wrote: > > > >> There was no "ad hominem" attack in the email that caused the > >> complainant to complain. -------------- 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 From gideonrop at gmail.com Fri Jan 11 07:34:26 2013 From: gideonrop at gmail.com (Gideon) Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2013 15:34:26 +0300 Subject: [governance] Google rolls out Kenya Elections Hub In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: +1 Sala, Yes its an interesting initiative that will ensure that technology is used to monitor developments in real time. Way to go...and especially for Africa. Gideon Rop, DotConnectAfrica On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 11:00 AM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro < salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com> wrote: > > On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 8:29 PM, Gideon wrote: > >> >> http://www.cio.co.ke/news/main-stories/google-rolls-out-kenya-elections-hub > > > I read the article and is a really cool initiative by Kenya and Google. > > > > -- > Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala > P.O. Box 17862 > Suva > Fiji > > Twitter: @SalanietaT > Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro > Tel: +679 3544828 > Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 > > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From hakik at hakik.org Fri Jan 11 07:46:09 2013 From: hakik at hakik.org (Hakikur Rahman) Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2013 12:46:09 +0000 Subject: [governance] Suggested amendment for the charter. Nomcom. In-Reply-To: <9F9FFE68-44EF-476E-A8D3-73C07CE0587C@acm.org> References: <7E9B2FE7-631E-48EA-8FE9-A50886EF107F@acm.org> <7A95D3C2-A054-43B1-A618-5C4308996EF8@acm.org> <9F9FFE68-44EF-476E-A8D3-73C07CE0587C@acm.org> Message-ID: Please add my name. Hakikur Rahman At 03:51 AM 1/11/2013, Avri Doria wrote: >I beleive that the following has been proposed by the following IGC members: > >Avri Doria >Chaitanya Dhareshwar >Fouad Bajwa >Ginger Paque >Izumi Aizu >Jeanette Hofmann >Louis Pouzin >McTim >Michael Gurstein >Milton L Mueller >Norbert Bollow >Pranesh Prakash >Robert Guerra >Shaila Rao Mistry >Sivasubramanian M >Tracy F. Hackshaw > >Please let the list know if your name is included in error, or if I >forgot to include your name. > >I think I have now caught allthe editorial changes that were requested. >Thanks to those who found them. >Thanks to Norbert for finding one the second time. > >At this point, I request that the co-ordinator(s) schedule a >discussion and subsequent vote on this amendment as defined in the charter. > >----- > > >Amendments to the Charter > >This charter can be amended at any time as proposed by no fewer than >ten (10) members and as approved by no less than two-thirds (2/3) of >the members of the IGC. The membership requirements for amending the >charter are based on the most currently available voters list. In >amending the charter, everyone who voted in the previous election >will be deemed a member for amending the charter. > >---------- > >Amendment 1: > >Currently the charter reads as: > >" >Any such request will require a public response from the >coordinators' within a week indicating the action taken and with an >explanation of the reasons for the action. > >All nominations to external bodies, e.g., the IGF multistakholder >advisory group, will be made using a randomly selected nomcom >process as defined here. >" > >Add missing heading to Nominations section. >New text: > >" >Any such request will require a public response from the >coordinators' within a week indicating the action taken and with an >explanation of the reasons for the action. > >Nominations to External Bodies > >All nominations to external bodies, e.g., the IGF multistakeholder >advisory group, will be made using a randomly selected nomcom >process as defined here. >" > > >Amendment 2: > >Currently the Nomcom process reads as: > >" >8. Each nomcom will be selected for a specific decision and will be >disbanded after the decision is made.However, in special cases where >several different nominating committees would need to be completed >in a shortened time frame that did not allow for multiple nominating >committees, the co-coordinators may jointly request one nominating >committee to fill several functions. > >9. There is no limit on the number of nomcoms an individual may serve on. >" > >Proposed changes > >1. Change to 1 Nomcom per year >2. Restrict members of Nomcom to 2 consecutive terms > >Change text to: > >" >8. Each Nomcom will serve for one year. > >9. Nomcom Volunteers and non-voting chairs may serve a maximum of >two consecutive terms. An intervening year is required before any >term-limited volunteer may volunteer for the random process. An >intervening two (2) years are required before a non-voting chair may >serve again as either a volunteer or a non-voting chair. A >term-limited volunteer may serve as non-voting chair. >" > > > > > >____________________________________________________________ >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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From baudouin.schombe at gmail.com Fri Jan 11 08:02:48 2013 From: baudouin.schombe at gmail.com (Baudouin Schombe) Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2013 14:02:48 +0100 Subject: [governance] NomCom In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: ok +1 2013/1/10 Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro < salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com> > Dear All, > > I had requested the previous NomCom to receive the expressions of interest > from those wishing to represent Civil Society by serving on the MAG and to > carry out the process of selection. Two members from the previous NomCom > had recused themselves and the reserve members have volunteered to serve on > the NomCom. As such, this is a Notice to the IGC that the NomCom comprises > of the following people:- > > *Voting members* > > 1. Wilson Abigaba > 2. Shahid Akbar > 3. Devon Blake > 4. Dixie Hawtin > 5. Asif Kabani > > *Non-voting chair, Thomas Lowenhaupt* > > Their task is not easy and I trust that we will give them our support and > cooperation. > > Thank you. > > Kind Regards, > > -- > Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala > P.O. Box 17862 > Suva > Fiji > > Twitter: @SalanietaT > Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro > Tel: +679 3544828 > Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > -- SCHOMBE BAUDOUIN CENTRE AFRICAIN D'ECHANGE CULTUREL/ ACADEMIE DES TIC At-Large Member NCSG Member email:baudouin.schombe at gmail.com Baudouin.Schombe at ticafrica.net tél:+243998983491 skype:b.schombe wite web:http://webmail.ticafrica.net blog:http://akimambo.unblog.fr -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From jaryn56 at gmail.com Fri Jan 11 09:37:18 2013 From: jaryn56 at gmail.com (=?UTF-8?B?Sm9zw6kgRsOpbGl4IEFyaWFzIFluY2hl?=) Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2013 09:37:18 -0500 Subject: [governance] Suggested amendment for the charter. Nomcom. In-Reply-To: References: <7E9B2FE7-631E-48EA-8FE9-A50886EF107F@acm.org> <7A95D3C2-A054-43B1-A618-5C4308996EF8@acm.org> <9F9FFE68-44EF-476E-A8D3-73C07CE0587C@acm.org> Message-ID: Mi nombre se debe de agregar... Estoy por la enmienda 1 *Cordialmente: José Félix Arias Ynche* * Investigador Social Para El Desarrollo* 2013/1/11 Hakikur Rahman > Please add my name. > > Hakikur Rahman > > > At 03:51 AM 1/11/2013, Avri Doria wrote: > > I beleive that the following has been proposed by the following IGC >> members: >> >> Avri Doria >> Chaitanya Dhareshwar >> Fouad Bajwa >> Ginger Paque >> Izumi Aizu >> Jeanette Hofmann >> Louis Pouzin >> McTim >> Michael Gurstein >> Milton L Mueller >> Norbert Bollow >> Pranesh Prakash >> Robert Guerra >> Shaila Rao Mistry >> Sivasubramanian M >> Tracy F. Hackshaw >> >> Please let the list know if your name is included in error, or if I >> forgot to include your name. >> >> I think I have now caught allthe editorial changes that were requested. >> Thanks to those who found them. >> Thanks to Norbert for finding one the second time. >> >> At this point, I request that the co-ordinator(s) schedule a discussion >> and subsequent vote on this amendment as defined in the charter. >> >> ----- >> >> >> Amendments to the Charter >> >> This charter can be amended at any time as proposed by no fewer than ten >> (10) members and as approved by no less than two-thirds (2/3) of the >> members of the IGC. The membership requirements for amending the charter >> are based on the most currently available voters list. In amending the >> charter, everyone who voted in the previous election will be deemed a >> member for amending the charter. >> >> ---------- >> >> Amendment 1: >> >> Currently the charter reads as: >> >> " >> Any such request will require a public response from the coordinators' >> within a week indicating the action taken and with an explanation of the >> reasons for the action. >> >> All nominations to external bodies, e.g., the IGF multistakholder >> advisory group, will be made using a randomly selected nomcom process as >> defined here. >> " >> >> Add missing heading to Nominations section. >> New text: >> >> " >> Any such request will require a public response from the coordinators' >> within a week indicating the action taken and with an explanation of the >> reasons for the action. >> >> Nominations to External Bodies >> >> All nominations to external bodies, e.g., the IGF multistakeholder >> advisory group, will be made using a randomly selected nomcom process as >> defined here. >> " >> >> >> Amendment 2: >> >> Currently the Nomcom process > >> reads as: >> >> " >> 8. Each nomcom will be selected for a specific decision and will be >> disbanded after the decision is made.However, in special cases where >> several different nominating committees would need to be completed in a >> shortened time frame that did not allow for multiple nominating committees, >> the co-coordinators may jointly request one nominating committee to fill >> several functions. >> >> 9. There is no limit on the number of nomcoms an individual may serve on. >> " >> >> Proposed changes >> >> 1. Change to 1 Nomcom per year >> 2. Restrict members of Nomcom to 2 consecutive terms >> >> Change text to: >> >> " >> 8. Each Nomcom will serve for one year. >> >> 9. Nomcom Volunteers and non-voting chairs may serve a maximum of two >> consecutive terms. An intervening year is required before any term-limited >> volunteer may volunteer for the random process. An intervening two (2) >> years are required before a non-voting chair may serve again as either a >> volunteer or a non-voting chair. A term-limited volunteer may serve as >> non-voting chair. >> " >> >> >> >> >> >> ______________________________**______________________________ >> 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 >> > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From gurstein at gmail.com Fri Jan 11 11:57:55 2013 From: gurstein at gmail.com (michael gurstein) Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2013 08:57:55 -0800 Subject: [governance] Re: a formal appeal request to the appeal team to reverse the recent ban on a Member In-Reply-To: <20130111100243.GG3586@thorion.it.jyu.fi> References: <6B54234D-2587-45E5-A3F5-CD67D2D493CF@gmail.com> <882B5E43-30B7-4FB2-A2F2-1353CBE8B496@uzh.ch> <20130111100243.GG3586@thorion.it.jyu.fi> Message-ID: <091d01cdf01c$df9a14e0$9ece3ea0$@gmail.com> I agree but I'm not sure how this fits with the charter... it is an appeal concerning a specific decision, I believe... i.e. whether the actions of the coordinator were appropriate under the circumstances, (which I believe contra some who have commented on the list should be seen as a response not to a single intervention by the individual under sanction, but rather as part of an extended pattern of communication to this list of which the particular incident in question was only one element. M -----Original Message----- From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Tapani Tarvainen Sent: Friday, January 11, 2013 2:03 AM To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org Subject: Re: [governance] Re: a formal appeal request to the appeal team to reverse the recent ban on a Member Ditto. I would like to add that I wish the appeals committee would not consider this as an either-or situation, but more fine-grained, what kind of sanctions could and should be used in general and what (if any) in this case in particular. That is, things like how many warnings would be appropriate; should warnings be public or private; if someone is banned from a list, should it be permanent or temporary and if the latter, how long; could just temporary suspension of posting privileges work (so they could read the list but not post anything themselves); or could individual moderation be used. -- Tapani Tarvainen On Jan 09 21:13, Sivasubramanian M (isolatedn at gmail.com) wrote: > I support the appeal request. > > Sivasubramanian M > On Jan 9, 2013 1:19 PM, "William Drake" wrote: > > > Me too > > > > Bill > > > > On Jan 8, 2013, at 22:57, George Sadowsky > > > > wrote: > > > > I support them also. > > > > On Jan 8, 2013, at 2:41 PM, Ivar A. M. Hartmann wrote: > > > > I support these grounds for appeal. > > > > Ivar > > > > On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 5:35 PM, McTim wrote: > > > >> There was no "ad hominem" attack in the email that caused the > >> complainant to complain. -------------- 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 From gurstein at gmail.com Fri Jan 11 12:42:26 2013 From: gurstein at gmail.com (michael gurstein) Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2013 09:42:26 -0800 Subject: [governance] FW: [IP] Google's Lawyers Work Behind the Scenes to Carry the Day - NYTimes.com In-Reply-To: <50EBBF7B.6070901@ITforChange.net> References: <0ce601cdea8e$00308d90$0091a8b0$@gmail.com> <50E7F9B9.9070308@itforchange.net> <104701cdeb79$fcdb8ef0$f692acd0$@gmail.com> <50E99AB8.7080109@gmail.com> <129601cdec2b$2b36e860$81a4b920$@gmail.com> <7B42A9ED-878A-4DCA-A65C-9B8D9D555DB9@hserus.net> <50EA5D30.10508@ITforChange.net> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD22F8237@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> <50EBBF7B.6070901@ITforChange.net> Message-ID: <095401cdf023$10038480$300a8d80$@gmail.com> Further to this interesting discussion which appears to have been quite active in various venues in recent times… (and very much moving beyond concerns re: simple competition and "freedom of speech" issues… http://www.furtherfield.org/features/algorithms-and-control M From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Guru ???? Sent: Monday, January 07, 2013 10:41 PM To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org Subject: Re: [governance] FW: [IP] Google's Lawyers Work Behind the Scenes to Carry the Day - NYTimes.com On 01/08/2013 01:43 AM, Milton L Mueller wrote: Pariser's "filter bubble" thesis has very little scientific grounding. It is one of those things that has acquired credibility primarily through repetition, and the fact that some people always badly want to believe that "the media" are manipulating us. I think the point of how Internet could have been to be a space to build bridging capital and how the 'personalisation' process will erode is something we need to ponder over. Can you elaborate on why you think "thesis has very little scientific grounding." i assume you are talking of social sciences here... also do you really believe that there is no element of manipulation in the media? that this is just what "people always badly want to believe" (perhaps weapons of mass destruction were indeed found in Iraq ...) I recall seeing him on a television program when his claim was put to the test and they conducted searches using two different accounts and got virtually the same results. He was embarrassed. otoh I am embarassed that you think a sole case like this can disprove the point! The article quotes Google as saying the search algorithm uses 57 signals about the user to provide personalised results, so you think all this is in vain? On the other hand, I was quite grateful this morning when using a generic professional term to search for an office and discovering that the search had been limited to Syracuse area. Guru, if you get badly personalized results from Google without asking for it, what is to stop you from not using Google? That the only action I can take to address this is by walking away is a naive response ... the issue is not of one individual user not using google. the issue is given the market dominance of google search engine, the terms of engagement are so biased in favor of one party that it is a joke to assume contractual law (clicking the i agree button or not clicking it) will solve the problem. From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Guru ???? Sent: Monday, January 07, 2013 12:29 AM To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org Subject: Re: [governance] FW: [IP] Google's Lawyers Work Behind the Scenes to Carry the Day - NYTimes.com On 01/06/2013 10:22 PM, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote: So do you get all your news from just news.google.com and other google search results, instead of Facebook shares, Riaz gleefully posting every article he sees about google being investigated for, say, giggling in church? And did Riaz find this news item anywhere other than google search? And does this reality distortion field google is supposed to have actually hide any search results from you that are negative to it? Like search for "google FTC" and you get the EU action, statements from Microsoft slamming the decision etc. Does 'personalised search' (without your having asked for, it or having any role in such pesonalisation) not in a sense 'reality distortion' ....by offering different people different views on the same keyword search. See attached aticle (the web link is not available anymore) Guru And the last link on page 1 of the search results showing just where google got spanked by the FTC. http://www.tnr.com/blog/plank/111650/why-does-everyone-think-google-beat-the-ftc# is worth a read as a kind f counterpoint to all the commentary about how google got a get out of jail card because of intensive lobbying. Can we please 1. Have a reality check here 2. Go back to discussing Internet governance --srs (iPad) On 06-Jan-2013, at 22:00, "michael gurstein" wrote: Thanks Riaz (and sorry for the really awkward phrasing… To put that in English… I'm wondering whether it wouldn't be better to "investigate" Google for possible "freedom of thought" violations rather than issues concerning "freedom of speech"… Google has the potential for much more serious impacts on our capacity to know (or not know) certain things, than on what we can say or not say… " http://gurstein.wordpress.com/2013/01/05/is-google-like-gas-or-like-steel-neither-it-is-like-nernsts-third-law-of-thermodynamics-or-the-nicene-creed/or http://tinyurl.com/aokqzsl M -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From gurstein at gmail.com Fri Jan 11 14:10:00 2013 From: gurstein at gmail.com (michael gurstein) Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2013 11:10:00 -0800 Subject: [governance] Google rolls out Kenya Elections Hub In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <09c801cdf02f$41ed1cc0$c5c75640$@gmail.com> 34% of Kenyans have Internet access (among the highest in Africa. http://www.capitalfm.co.ke/business/2012/01/14m-kenyans-have-access-to-the-i nternet/ Only 5% of those in Rural Kenya have Internet access. also probably among the highest in Africa.. http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/indepth/2012-03/27/c_131492795.htm M From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Gideon Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2013 11:30 PM To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Angela Daly Subject: [governance] Google rolls out Kenya Elections Hub Sorry i did not mean to digress from the current topic but i thought this was interesting news http://www.cio.co.ke/news/main-stories/google-rolls-out-kenya-elections-hub -The Internet is playing increasingly an important role in transforming the way citizens participate and engage in the elections across Africa. Now its Kenya's turn, and expectations are high both for a peaceful transition and a deepening of democracy under the new constitution. Voters are already turning to the internet for information: according to Google Zeitgeist, the IEBC (Independent Boundaries and Electoral Commission) was the top trending search in Kenya in 2012, and all the major candidates have a strong presence across the various social media outlets. Gideon Rop DotConnectAfrica On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 3:27 PM, Angela Daly wrote: I don't have any insider knowledge on this but Google and competition law is forming one chapter of my PhD thesis which should be finished soon! Angela On 10 January 2013 23:22, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro wrote: > Dear All, > > On 18th December, 2012 the Vice President of the European Commission > responsible for Competition Policy met with Google's Executive Chairman Eric > Schmidt in relation to coming into an Agreement based on Article 9 of the EU > Anti Trust Regulation. You can see the Press Release here: > > http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_SPEECH-12-967_en.htm#PR_metaPressReleas e_bottom > > The concerns are in relation to the competition concerns raised by the EC > and they include:- > > the way in which Google's vertical search services are displayed within > general search results as compared to services of competitors; > > the way Google may use and display third party content on its vertical > search services; > > exclusivity agreements for the delivery of Google search advertisements on > other websites; and > > restrictions in the portability of AdWords advertising campaigns. > > To see the Press Release, visit: > http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_SPEECH-12-967_en.htm#PR_metaPressReleas e_bottom > > It will be interesting to see the detailed commitment text by Google this > month and I would be grateful if anyone has any knowledge about this that > they could share. > > > Thank you. > > > Kind Regards, > > Sala > > > On Fri, Jan 4, 2013 at 1:12 PM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro > wrote: >> >> Dear All, >> >> "The US Federal Trade Commission has announced it has closed its >> investigation into Google after an exhaustive 19-month review that covered >> millions of pages of documents and involved many hours of testimony. >> >> See:http://www.ftc.gov/opa/2013/01/google.shtm >> >> To see report by BBC, visit: >> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-20899032 >> >> Kind Regards, >> >> -- >> Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala >> P.O. Box 17862 >> Suva >> Fiji >> >> Twitter: @SalanietaT >> Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro >> Tel: +679 3544828 >> Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 >> >> >> > > > > -- > Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala > P.O. Box 17862 > Suva > Fiji > > Twitter: @SalanietaT > Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro > Tel: +679 3544828 > Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > ____________________________________________________________ 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: -------------- 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 From tapani.tarvainen at effi.org Fri Jan 11 15:56:23 2013 From: tapani.tarvainen at effi.org (Tapani Tarvainen) Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2013 22:56:23 +0200 Subject: [governance] Re: a formal appeal request to the appeal team to reverse the recent ban on a Member In-Reply-To: <091d01cdf01c$df9a14e0$9ece3ea0$@gmail.com> References: <6B54234D-2587-45E5-A3F5-CD67D2D493CF@gmail.com> <882B5E43-30B7-4FB2-A2F2-1353CBE8B496@uzh.ch> <20130111100243.GG3586@thorion.it.jyu.fi> <091d01cdf01c$df9a14e0$9ece3ea0$@gmail.com> Message-ID: <20130111205623.GA7800@kursori.vrl.jyu.fi> I think you are right in the narrow sense that the appeals team's actual decision must be simple, either overriding or approving the specific action. But I don't think the charter prohibits the appeals team from explaining the grounds for its decision, or from expressing an opinion as to which of possible actions in the situation would have been acceptable, Any such explanation of their reasoning of course would have no formal power as such, it would be "just talk", but it would still be valuable, just as courts' explanations of their reasoning and interpretation of the law are. -- Tapani Tarvainen On Jan 11 08:57, michael gurstein (gurstein at gmail.com) wrote: > I agree but I'm not sure how this fits with the charter... it is an appeal > concerning a specific decision, I believe... i.e. whether the actions of the > coordinator were appropriate under the circumstances, (which I believe > contra some who have commented on the list should be seen as a response not > to a single intervention by the individual under sanction, but rather as > part of an extended pattern of communication to this list of which the > particular incident in question was only one element. > > M > > -----Original Message----- > From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org > [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Tapani Tarvainen > Sent: Friday, January 11, 2013 2:03 AM > To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org > Subject: Re: [governance] Re: a formal appeal request to the appeal team to > reverse the recent ban on a Member > > Ditto. > > I would like to add that I wish the appeals committee would not consider > this as an either-or situation, but more fine-grained, what kind of > sanctions could and should be used in general and what (if any) in this case > in particular. > > That is, things like how many warnings would be appropriate; should warnings > be public or private; if someone is banned from a list, should it be > permanent or temporary and if the latter, how long; could just temporary > suspension of posting privileges work (so they could read the list but not > post anything themselves); or could individual moderation be used. > > -- > Tapani Tarvainen > > On Jan 09 21:13, Sivasubramanian M (isolatedn at gmail.com) wrote: > > > I support the appeal request. > > > > Sivasubramanian M > > On Jan 9, 2013 1:19 PM, "William Drake" wrote: > > > > > Me too > > > > > > Bill > > > > > > On Jan 8, 2013, at 22:57, George Sadowsky > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > I support them also. > > > > > > On Jan 8, 2013, at 2:41 PM, Ivar A. M. Hartmann wrote: > > > > > > I support these grounds for appeal. > > > > > > Ivar > > > > > > On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 5:35 PM, McTim wrote: > > > > > >> There was no "ad hominem" attack in the email that caused the > > >> complainant to complain. > > -------------- 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 From dogwallah at gmail.com Fri Jan 11 17:03:58 2013 From: dogwallah at gmail.com (McTim) Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2013 17:03:58 -0500 Subject: [governance] European Commission on Google Investigation Was Google Survives US FTC Probe #FTC #EC #Google #competition In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 2:54 AM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro wrote: > > Hi, > > It has been reported through Tech Crunch and the Financial Times that Google > still may be diverting traffic how is this accomplished? The actual diversion of actual traffic (by routing or DNS hijacking for example) is a pretty major accusation. How is Google "diverting" traffic? I would be shocked if they are. -- 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 From sonigituekpe at crossriverstate.gov.ng Fri Jan 11 17:41:14 2013 From: sonigituekpe at crossriverstate.gov.ng (Sonigitu Ekpe) Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2013 23:41:14 +0100 Subject: [governance] Suggested amendment for the charter. Nomcom. Still needs signatories In-Reply-To: References: <7E9B2FE7-631E-48EA-8FE9-A50886EF107F@acm.org> <7A95D3C2-A054-43B1-A618-5C4308996EF8@acm.org> <379D244F-6C95-4046-8795-7A61114F6715@acm.org> Message-ID: Greetings great friends and fellows, Avri please, sign me in as a co-proposer to the amendment. Thank you, Sonigitu Ekpe On Jan 11, 2013 7:17 AM, "Gideon" wrote: > Dear Sala or Avri, > > Could you also include my name on the list as i was the early supporter > of the group proposal. > > Best regards, > Gideon Rop. > > On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 5:52 AM, Izumi AIZU wrote: > >> Thanks Avri, and please include me as well. >> >> izumi >> >> 2013/1/11 Avri Doria : >> > Hi, >> > >> > At this point, 6 people have signed on as proposers of this amendment. >> > >> > Avri Doria >> > Chaitanya Dhareshwar >> > Fouad Bajwa >> > Louis Pouzin >> > Norbert Bollow >> > Pranesh Prakash >> > >> > Please let me know if your name is included in error, or if I forgot to >> include your name. >> > >> > I think I have caught the editorial changes that were requested. >> Thanks to those who found them. Please let me know if I missed something >> or messed something up anew. >> > >> > thanks >> > >> > avri >> > ----- >> > >> > >> > Amendments to the Charter >> > >> > This charter can be amended at any time as proposed by no fewer than >> ten (10) members and as approved by no less than two-thirds (2/3) of the >> members of the IGC. The membership requirements for amending the charter >> are based on the most currently available voters list. In amending the >> charter, everyone who voted in the previous election will be deemed a >> member for amending the charter. >> > >> > ---------- >> > >> > Amendment 1: >> > >> > Currently the charter reads as: >> > >> > " >> > Any such request will require a public response from the coordinators' >> within a week indicating the action taken and with an explanation of the >> reasons for the action. >> > >> > All nominations to external bodies, e.g., the IGF multistakholder >> advisory group, will be made using a randomly selected nomcom process as >> defined here. >> > " >> > >> > >> > >> > Add missing heading to Nominations section. >> > New text: >> > >> > " >> > Any such request will require a public response from the coordinators' >> within a week indicating the action taken and with an explanation of the >> reasons for the action. >> > >> > Nominations to External Bodies >> > >> > All nominations to external bodies, e.g., the IGF multistakholder >> advisory group, will be made using a randomly selected nomcom process as >> defined here. >> > " >> > >> > >> > Amendment 2: >> > >> > Currently the Nomcom process reads as: >> > >> > " >> > 8. Each nomcom will be selected for a specific decision and will be >> disbanded after the decision is made.However, in special cases where >> several different nominating committees would need to be completed in a >> shortened time frame that did not allow for multiple nominating committees, >> the co-coordinators may jointly request one nominating committee to fill >> several functions. >> > >> > 9. There is no limit on the number of nomcoms an individual may serve >> on. >> > " >> > >> > Proposed changes >> > >> > 1. Change to 1 Nomcom per year >> > 2. Restrict members of Nomcom to 2 consecutive terms >> > >> > Change text to: >> > >> > " >> > 8. Each Nomcom will serve for one year. >> > >> > 9. Nomcom Volunteers and non-voting chairs may serve a maximum of two >> consecutive terms. An intervening year is required before any term-limited >> volunteer may volunteer for the random process. An intervening two (2) >> years are required before a non-voting chair may serve again as either a >> volunteer or a non-voting chair. A term-limited volunteer may serve as >> non-voting chair. >> > " >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > ____________________________________________________________ >> > 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 >> > >> >> >> >> -- >> >> Izumi Aizu << >> Institute for InfoSocionomics, Tama University, Tokyo >> Institute for HyperNetwork Society, Oita, >> Japan >> www.anr.org >> >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 >> >> > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com Fri Jan 11 17:57:10 2013 From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro) Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2013 11:57:10 +1300 Subject: [governance] European Commission on Google Investigation Was Google Survives US FTC Probe #FTC #EC #Google #competition In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Sat, Jan 12, 2013 at 11:03 AM, McTim wrote: > On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 2:54 AM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro > wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > It has been reported through Tech Crunch and the Financial Times that > Google > > still may be diverting traffic > > how is this accomplished? > > The actual diversion of actual traffic (by routing or DNS hijacking > for example) is a pretty major accusation. > > How is Google "diverting" traffic? I would be shocked if they are. > I would be too which is why I am curious with how the European Commission is conducting their investigation/analysis and would be interested to read their Reports on the matter so if anyone on the EC or follows anti-trust matters pertaining to this subject knows anything, grateful if it could be shared on this list. It is interesting for me because traditionally Freedom of Expression has often been around civil/political/religious issues etc. However with trade and commerce, there are perhaps new threats to Freedom of Expression. If traffic is diverted and if you have 2 billion internet users on the planet and majority of them rely on the dominant search engines - it would be interesting from the end user's perspective to know if the immediate results to your search queries were influenced in some way and it would be interesting to know what those influences are. Sometimes, there is no smoke without fire. The fact that both the FTC and the EC were both querying this at more or less the same time means that someone or some people or organisations have raised this as an issue. > > -- > Cheers, > > McTim > "A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A > route indicates how we get there." Jon Postel > -- Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala P.O. Box 17862 Suva Fiji Twitter: @SalanietaT Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro Tel: +679 3544828 Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From dogwallah at gmail.com Fri Jan 11 19:07:50 2013 From: dogwallah at gmail.com (McTim) Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2013 19:07:50 -0500 Subject: [governance] Re: a formal appeal request to the appeal team to reverse the recent ban on a Member In-Reply-To: <091d01cdf01c$df9a14e0$9ece3ea0$@gmail.com> References: <6B54234D-2587-45E5-A3F5-CD67D2D493CF@gmail.com> <882B5E43-30B7-4FB2-A2F2-1353CBE8B496@uzh.ch> <20130111100243.GG3586@thorion.it.jyu.fi> <091d01cdf01c$df9a14e0$9ece3ea0$@gmail.com> Message-ID: On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 11:57 AM, michael gurstein wrote: rather as > part of an extended pattern of communication to this list of which the > particular incident in question was only one element. Agreed. Riaz and Parminder and others throw around tags like "neo-liberal" and "neo-con" and "American Exceptionalism" where they do not apply. They are insulting to those who they are aimed at, mostly becuase they are wildly inaccurate. They don't get called on it, but when SRS says "gleefully posting", those words get him banned? That's the pattern. -- 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 From vinsolo15 at yahoo.co.uk Sat Jan 12 02:28:56 2013 From: vinsolo15 at yahoo.co.uk (vincent solomon) Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2013 07:28:56 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [governance] NomCom In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1357975736.99676.YahooMailNeo@web172502.mail.ir2.yahoo.com> I agree , I would be very willing not just to cooperate but to support them as well and to but to do much more if called for . Plus 1 to that .   “Limitations live only in our minds. But if we use our imaginations, our possibilities become limitless” NAME: VINCENT SOLOMON ALIAMA CONTACT: +256 773307045 / +256 713307045 / +256 753307045 EMAIL:aliama.vincent at cit.mak.ac.ug / vinsolo15 at yahoo.co.uk /vinsoloster at gmail.com Skype : vinsolo2 ________________________________ From: Baudouin Schombe To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro Sent: Friday, 11 January 2013, 16:02 Subject: Re: [governance] NomCom ok +1 2013/1/10 Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro Dear All, > >I had requested the previous NomCom to receive the expressions of interest from those wishing to represent Civil Society by serving on the MAG and to carry out the process of selection. Two members from the previous NomCom had recused themselves and the reserve members have volunteered to serve on the NomCom. As such, this is a Notice to the IGC that the NomCom comprises of the following people:- > >Voting members > > 1. Wilson Abigaba > 2. Shahid Akbar > > 3. Devon Blake > 4. Dixie Hawtin > 5. Asif Kabani  Non-voting chair, Thomas Lowenhaupt > >Their task is not easy and I trust that we will give them our support and cooperation. > >Thank you. > >Kind Regards, > >-- > >Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala >P.O. Box 17862 >Suva >Fiji > > >Twitter: @SalanietaT >Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro >Tel: +679 3544828 >Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 > > >  > > >____________________________________________________________ >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 > > -- SCHOMBE BAUDOUIN CENTRE AFRICAIN D'ECHANGE CULTUREL/ ACADEMIE DES TIC At-Large Member NCSG Member email:baudouin.schombe at gmail.com          Baudouin.Schombe at ticafrica.net tél:+243998983491 skype:b.schombe wite web:http://webmail.ticafrica.net blog:http://akimambo.unblog.fr ____________________________________________________________ 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: -------------- 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 From vinsolo15 at yahoo.co.uk Sat Jan 12 03:36:32 2013 From: vinsolo15 at yahoo.co.uk (vincent solomon) Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2013 08:36:32 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [governance] Suggested amendment for the charter. Voting. In-Reply-To: <20130111070553.GA3586@thorion.it.jyu.fi> References: <71DE6F37-0C23-4CF2-9984-98FB3688F224@acm.org> <6C563956-CB7B-4167-8570-03F55C2BC906@acm.org> <20130111070553.GA3586@thorion.it.jyu.fi> Message-ID: <1357979792.19641.YahooMailNeo@web172506.mail.ir2.yahoo.com> If still proposing count me in .   “Limitations live only in our minds. But if we use our imaginations, our possibilities become limitless” NAME: VINCENT SOLOMON ALIAMA CONTACT: +256 773307045 / +256 713307045 / +256 753307045 EMAIL:aliama.vincent at cit.mak.ac.ug / vinsolo15 at yahoo.co.uk /vinsoloster at gmail.com Skype : vinsolo2 ________________________________ From: Tapani Tarvainen To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org Sent: Friday, 11 January 2013, 10:05 Subject: Re: [governance] Suggested amendment for the charter. Voting. If you're still collecting proposers, count me in. -- Tapani Tarvainen On Jan 10 10:41, Avri Doria (avri at acm.org) wrote: > > I beleive that the following has been proposed by the following IGC members: > > Avri Doria > Baudouin Schombe > Cheryl Langdon-Orr > Fouad Bajwa > Gideon Rop > Ginger Paque > Hakikur Rahman > Ian Peter > Izumi AIZU > Kabani Asif > McTim > Norbert Bollow > Norbert Klein > Rudi Vansnick > Shaila Mistry > Sivasubramanian M > Sonigitu Ekpe > Tracy F. Hackshaw > > Please let me know if I have either left your name off the list, or have included it in error. > > While the Nomcom amendment I proposed had errors that needed to be corrected, I did not see any for this one.  If I missed them, please let the list know. > > At this point, I request that the co-ordinator(s) schedule a discussion and subsequent vote on this amendment as defined in the charter. > > > Amendments to the Charter > > This charter can be amended at any time as proposed by no fewer than ten (10) members and as approved by no less than two-thirds (2/3) of the members of the IGC. The membership requirements for amending the charter are based on the most currently available voters list. In amending the charter, everyone who voted in the previous election will be deemed a member for amending the charter. > > ---------- > > Currently the charter   reads as: > > " > As part of the voting process the voter must personally ascertain that they are a member of the IGC based on membership criteria described elsewhere in this charter and posted as part of the voting information (i.e. a voter must affirm membership on the voter form in order to vote). The decision to self-identify as a member of the IGC is a personal decision based on the criteria defined. A list of the self-defined member-voters will be published after the election with the results of the election. > > " > Changes proposed: > > 1. Indicate that the affirmation is prior to the vote and not part of the vote. > 2. require that all ballot include the ability to abstain. > > > " > > Prior to voting the prospective voter must personally ascertain that they are a member of the IGC based on membership criteria described elsewhere in this charter and posted as part of the voting information (i.e. a voter must affirm membership on the voter form prior to voting). The decision to self-identify as a member of the IGC is a personal decision based on the criteria defined. A list of the self-defined member-voters will be published after the election with the results of the election. > > All ballots will include the ability for voters to abstain on any choice included on the ballot. > > " ____________________________________________________________ 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: -------------- 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 From nb at bollow.ch Sat Jan 12 07:20:55 2013 From: nb at bollow.ch (Norbert Bollow) Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2013 13:20:55 +0100 Subject: [governance] European Commission on Google Investigation Was Google Survives US FTC Probe #FTC #EC #Google #competition In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20130112132055.5b012c82@quill.bollow.ch> Sala wrote: > Sometimes, there is no smoke without fire. The fact that both the FTC > and the EC were both querying this at more or less the same time > means that someone or some people or organisations have raised this > as an issue. What I know is that Microsoft has been pushing for these investigations, and my impression (based to a large extent on interactions with Microsoft people) was that this was mainly motivated by envy about Google's success and about Google having a better reputation than Microsoft. That said, even if I'm right that the *motivation* for the complaints was envy rather than a substantial perception of wrongdoing, the complaints might still have merit. It just means in that this case, the smoke should not be taken as evidence for the existence of a fire. In forming our opinion of the matter, we need to be careful to avoid being unduly influenced by either side's rhetorics or money. Greetings, Norbert -------------- 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 From nb at bollow.ch Sat Jan 12 08:07:43 2013 From: nb at bollow.ch (Norbert Bollow) Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2013 14:07:43 +0100 Subject: [governance] Re: a formal appeal request to the appeal team to reverse the recent ban on a Member In-Reply-To: References: <6B54234D-2587-45E5-A3F5-CD67D2D493CF@gmail.com> <882B5E43-30B7-4FB2-A2F2-1353CBE8B496@uzh.ch> <20130111100243.GG3586@thorion.it.jyu.fi> <091d01cdf01c$df9a14e0$9ece3ea0$@gmail.com> Message-ID: <20130112140743.442f22da@quill.bollow.ch> McTim wrote (with specific names where I've substituted the placeholder "XXX" and "YYY"): > On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 11:57 AM, michael gurstein > wrote: > > > rather as > > part of an extended pattern of communication to this list of which > > the particular incident in question was only one element. > > Agreed. > > XXX and YYY and others throw around tags like "neo-liberal" and > "neo-con" and "American Exceptionalism" where they do not apply. They > are insulting to those who they are aimed at, mostly becuase they are > wildly inaccurate. > > They don't get called on it, but when SRS says "gleefully posting", > those words get him banned? > > That's the pattern. I would suggest that there have been several very unhealthy patterns of interaction. The patterns which Michael Gurstein and McTim are pointing to are both unhealthy. Neither side in the conflict has made a claim to sainthood (and if such a claim were to be made, it would not be believed, in view of all the evidence to the contrary). In the absence of sainthood, people tend to react to what I've called "unhealthy patterns of interaction" by themselves engaging in (similar or different) unhealthy patterns of interaction. This is human nature. I have also observed myself slipping into unhealthy patterns of interaction when at the receiving end of mobbing-like group dynamic processes. The question is: What is the best way forward for our Caucus, in order to break this vicious circle as much as possible, without losing the diversity of perspectives that makes this Internet Governance Caucus valuable in the first place? I'm looking forward to see whether the Appeals Team will be able to shed some light on this question. On the basis of my (rather substantial) experience in managing discussion mailing lists on topics that are not primarily technical, my view is that the kind of unhealthy pattern that Michael Gurstein describes can only be effectively addressed by excluding the people who cannot be dissuaded from communicating in a troll-like manner, and the end result of reaching that point is independent of whether you have a policy of taking action after the second warning or whether this action is taken only after a dozen warnings or more. (Lists on specific technical topics are different in that some of them fulfil their intended purpose even in the presence of flamewars.) By contrast, I think that the unhealthy pattern that McTim is pointing to is one that can be effectively addressed in a different way, through discussion and building a shared understanding of what the different viewpoints are (and what the appropriate ways are to reference them). Greetings, Norbert -------------- 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 From parminder at itforchange.net Sat Jan 12 09:55:29 2013 From: parminder at itforchange.net (parminder) Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2013 20:25:29 +0530 Subject: [governance] Re: a formal appeal request to the appeal team to reverse the recent ban on a Member In-Reply-To: References: <6B54234D-2587-45E5-A3F5-CD67D2D493CF@gmail.com> <882B5E43-30B7-4FB2-A2F2-1353CBE8B496@uzh.ch> <20130111100243.GG3586@thorion.it.jyu.fi> <091d01cdf01c$df9a14e0$9ece3ea0$@gmail.com> Message-ID: <50F17961.4010104@itforchange.net> I had hoped to stay out of this unfortunate morass. My response to personally nasty people normally is to avoid interacting with them, and this mostly works. But, it is apparent that there are considerable political overtones to this 'morass' and I normally do make the due political response to such political things. On Saturday 12 January 2013 05:37 AM, McTim wrote: > > > > Riaz and Parminder and others throw around tags like "neo-liberal" and > "neo-con" and "American Exceptionalism" Although everything I say here applies to Riaz as well, I will speak for myself especially because I am going to make specific claims and challenge McTim to disprove them. The terms you mention. McTim, are very regularly used in contemporary political literature. If we are to disallow these terms from political discussions and discourse then we will have to ban some of the best current political literature, especially coming from the South. I use these terms only to refer to set of political views, and that is how these are supposed to be used. I dont use them to label a particular person. In addition, every time I use these terms I go into considerable detail explaining their use. On a very very few occasions, I have indeed responded to the use of specific political labels, with a counter-label.... Without exception, and I repeat, /without exception/, every such usage responds to a specific, personalised reference/ label made by someone. (I understand that there could be considerable sanctimonious advice by some that one can just ignore such labels, but when in the middle of a political contestation there often is a clear requirement - to be effective at what one is doing - not to ignore such a labelling. I welcome a separate discussion on this issue.) Having made these claims, McTim, since you have specifically used my name to make an accusation,/*I challenge you prove my above claims wrong. And if you cannot, then do the gentlemanly thing and withdraw your comments and apologize. */ > where they do not apply. Now, we can hardly go by McTim's judgement as to where terms like neolib and American exceptionalism apply or dont apply. But, well, you do seem to agree that there terms do apply to some kind of views. That is encouraging. Well, let me repeat the act for what you accuse me - I have not the least doubt that these terms - neolib, US exceptionalism - strongly apply to some of the views routinely presented on this list. And now that I have done it again, why dont you seek that I be called for such an insolent behaviour. It would be apparent to everyone that the IGC elist is a site of deep political contestations - which is not necessarily a bad thing . The terms you refer to are central to some of the key political contestations of current times. IF we ban them, then as Carlos says, maybe we can discuss football and pop music on this list. > They > are insulting to those who they are aimed at, mostly becuase they are > wildly inaccurate. McTim, as above, you dont seem to be the best judge of the accuracy of these terms at all, but I will take a chance - tell me what is the accurate meaning / usage of these terms. It may help my political learning. > > They don't get called on it, but when SRS says "gleefully posting", > those words get him banned? Characterising political positions, in the middle of a political discussion, with due elaborations, is not to be compared with what has been routine, extra-ordinarily routine, spilling of personal and personalised contempt on this list. No, it was not just the one phrase 'gleefully posting' - which did in fact have no purpose in the concerned email other than to express deep personal contempt//- that got your friend called for. And this was certainly not the most contemptuous expression he has made, far from it. In fact it falls quite below his normal standard. The concerned email just capped a series of events that made the coordinator do what she did. parminder > > That's the pattern. > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From ian.peter at ianpeter.com Sat Jan 12 13:38:29 2013 From: ian.peter at ianpeter.com (Ian Peter) Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2013 05:38:29 +1100 Subject: [governance] Re: a formal appeal request to the appeal team to reverse the recent ban on a Member In-Reply-To: <50F17961.4010104@itforchange.net> References: <6B54234D-2587-45E5-A3F5-CD67D2D493CF@gmail.com> <882B5E43-30B7-4FB2-A2F2-1353CBE8B496@uzh.ch> <20130111100243.GG3586@thorion.it.jyu.fi> <091d01cdf01c$df9a14e0$9ece3ea0$@gmail.com> <50F17961.4010104@itforchange.net> Message-ID: <41D6AC7A93FE4697A541C56972D0E071@Toshiba> People, as you know this matter is now actively under consideration by the appeals team. As part of that process, we will be calling for public comments in due course. In order to make comments more meaningful to the appeals process, it might be better to wait for that call and respond in that context. We should be in a position to make that call fairly soon. Ian Peter From: parminder Sent: Sunday, January 13, 2013 1:55 AM To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org Subject: Re: [governance] Re: a formal appeal request to the appeal team to reverse the recent ban on a Member I had hoped to stay out of this unfortunate morass. My response to personally nasty people normally is to avoid interacting with them, and this mostly works. But, it is apparent that there are considerable political overtones to this 'morass' and I normally do make the due political response to such political things. On Saturday 12 January 2013 05:37 AM, McTim wrote: Riaz and Parminder and others throw around tags like "neo-liberal" and "neo-con" and "American Exceptionalism" Although everything I say here applies to Riaz as well, I will speak for myself especially because I am going to make specific claims and challenge McTim to disprove them. The terms you mention. McTim, are very regularly used in contemporary political literature. If we are to disallow these terms from political discussions and discourse then we will have to ban some of the best current political literature, especially coming from the South. I use these terms only to refer to set of political views, and that is how these are supposed to be used. I dont use them to label a particular person. In addition, every time I use these terms I go into considerable detail explaining their use. On a very very few occasions, I have indeed responded to the use of specific political labels, with a counter-label.... Without exception, and I repeat, without exception, every such usage responds to a specific, personalised reference/ label made by someone. (I understand that there could be considerable sanctimonious advice by some that one can just ignore such labels, but when in the middle of a political contestation there often is a clear requirement - to be effective at what one is doing - not to ignore such a labelling. I welcome a separate discussion on this issue.) Having made these claims, McTim, since you have specifically used my name to make an accusation, I challenge you prove my above claims wrong. And if you cannot, then do the gentlemanly thing and withdraw your comments and apologize. where they do not apply. Now, we can hardly go by McTim's judgement as to where terms like neolib and American exceptionalism apply or dont apply. But, well, you do seem to agree that there terms do apply to some kind of views. That is encouraging. Well, let me repeat the act for what you accuse me - I have not the least doubt that these terms - neolib, US exceptionalism - strongly apply to some of the views routinely presented on this list. And now that I have done it again, why dont you seek that I be called for such an insolent behaviour. It would be apparent to everyone that the IGC elist is a site of deep political contestations - which is not necessarily a bad thing . The terms you refer to are central to some of the key political contestations of current times. IF we ban them, then as Carlos says, maybe we can discuss football and pop music on this list. They are insulting to those who they are aimed at, mostly becuase they are wildly inaccurate.McTim, as above, you dont seem to be the best judge of the accuracy of these terms at all, but I will take a chance - tell me what is the accurate meaning / usage of these terms. It may help my political learning. They don't get called on it, but when SRS says "gleefully posting", those words get him banned?Characterising political positions, in the middle of a political discussion, with due elaborations, is not to be compared with what has been routine, extra-ordinarily routine, spilling of personal and personalised contempt on this list. No, it was not just the one phrase 'gleefully posting' - which did in fact have no purpose in the concerned email other than to express deep personal contempt - that got your friend called for. And this was certainly not the most contemptuous expression he has made, far from it. In fact it falls quite below his normal standard. The concerned email just capped a series of events that made the coordinator do what she did. parminder That's the pattern. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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: -------------- 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 From avri at acm.org Sat Jan 12 14:56:11 2013 From: avri at acm.org (Avri Doria) Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2013 14:56:11 -0500 Subject: [governance] Suggested amendments for the charter. Nomcom & Voting In-Reply-To: <1357979792.19641.YahooMailNeo@web172506.mail.ir2.yahoo.com> References: <71DE6F37-0C23-4CF2-9984-98FB3688F224@acm.org> <6C563956-CB7B-4167-8570-03F55C2BC906@acm.org> <20130111070553.GA3586@thorion.it.jyu.fi> <1357979792.19641.YahooMailNeo@web172506.mail.ir2.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <854EDDF0-EFD9-464F-BDA2-560A1A591972@acm.org> Hi, On both sets of amendments, once I had 10+ names I submitted the request. I hope preparations for the vote are already in the works. Since I already submitted the proposals for amendment, I do not want to resubmit with additional names. I am hoping we will see action from the co-ordinator(s) real soon now on schedules for discussion and the vote. I ask, however, the co-ordinator(s) notice that names are still coming in of those who would propose these amendments. As far as I can tell the names I missed in the original submissions were: A. For the amendments related to Nomcom : Asif Kabani Cheryl Langdon-Orr Hakikur Rahman Gideon Rop José Félix Arias Ynche Norbert Klein Rudi Vansnick Sonigitu Ekpe B. For the amendments related to Voting: Adam Peake Judy Okite Tapani Tarvainen Vincent Solomon I apologize to anyone whose name I am still missing. I thank everyone who joined me in proposing the amendments and who made it possible to reach the threshold required for get a vote on the changes. avri -------------- 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 From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com Sat Jan 12 15:04:38 2013 From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro) Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2013 09:04:38 +1300 Subject: [governance] Suggested amendments for the charter. Nomcom & Voting In-Reply-To: <854EDDF0-EFD9-464F-BDA2-560A1A591972@acm.org> References: <71DE6F37-0C23-4CF2-9984-98FB3688F224@acm.org> <6C563956-CB7B-4167-8570-03F55C2BC906@acm.org> <20130111070553.GA3586@thorion.it.jyu.fi> <1357979792.19641.YahooMailNeo@web172506.mail.ir2.yahoo.com> <854EDDF0-EFD9-464F-BDA2-560A1A591972@acm.org> Message-ID: Hi Avri, We have been monitoring the discussions and the joint proposal and will revert in due course. Kind Regards, Sala On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 8:56 AM, Avri Doria wrote: > > Hi, > > On both sets of amendments, once I had 10+ names I submitted the request. > I hope preparations for the vote are already in the works. > > Since I already submitted the proposals for amendment, I do not want to > resubmit with additional names. I am hoping we will see action from the > co-ordinator(s) real soon now on schedules for discussion and the vote. > > I ask, however, the co-ordinator(s) notice that names are still coming in > of those who would propose these amendments. > > As far as I can tell the names I missed in the original submissions were: > > A. For the amendments related to Nomcom : > > Asif Kabani > Cheryl Langdon-Orr > Hakikur Rahman > Gideon Rop > José Félix Arias Ynche > Norbert Klein > Rudi Vansnick > Sonigitu Ekpe > > B. For the amendments related to Voting: > > Adam Peake > Judy Okite > Tapani Tarvainen > Vincent Solomon > > I apologize to anyone whose name I am still missing. > > I thank everyone who joined me in proposing the amendments and who made it > possible to reach the threshold required for get a vote on the changes. > > avri > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > -- Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala P.O. Box 17862 Suva Fiji Twitter: @SalanietaT Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro Tel: +679 3544828 Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From jcurran at istaff.org Sat Jan 12 15:42:51 2013 From: jcurran at istaff.org (John Curran) Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2013 12:42:51 -0800 Subject: [governance] Aaron Swartz passing Message-ID: <516EA786-21A2-4D96-A213-9E0FEE427722@istaff.org> Some of you may be aware of Aaron Swartz and his efforts in open access to information. Alas, no more: http://blog.archive.org/2013/01/12/aaron-swartz-hero-of-the-open-world-rip/ /John -------------- 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 From ian.peter at ianpeter.com Sat Jan 12 15:44:52 2013 From: ian.peter at ianpeter.com (Ian Peter) Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2013 07:44:52 +1100 Subject: [governance] Sad death of Aaron Schwartz Message-ID: <05BEFB274AE54FFCA3F2ACF8813AEC60@Toshiba> I am posting below a few links reporting on the sad death by suicide of young Internet activist, Aaron Schwatrz. Aaron was a complex figure who made very substantial contributions to the Internet, including the initial RSS specification, Reddit, and the founding of Creative Commons, and who suffered from depression. Cory Doctorow reports on that here. http://boingboing.net/2013/01/12/rip-aaron-swartz.html Aaron had been indicted in US for 13 counts of felony, and faced a long imprisonment term, for releasing articles from academic journals to the public domain. Last September, Tim Berners-Lee commented on the severity of these charges as follows http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2012/09/feds-go-overboard-in-prosecuting-information-activist/ And in recent hours Electronic Frontier Foundation has posted the following https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2013/01/farewell-aaron-swartz “Moreover, the situation Aaron found himself in highlights the injustice of U.S. computer crime laws, and particularly their punishment regimes. Aaron's act was undoubtedly political activism, and taking such an act in the physical world would, at most, have a meant he faced light penalties akin to trespassing as part of a political protest. Because he used a computer, he instead faced long-term incarceration. “ This is a sad time. Although the laws are not directly responsible for his death, It is very sad that an already complex person of great individual brilliance found his life further complicated by reactive laws. Thank you Aaron Schwartz for your contribution to the Internet and to internet freedom. Ian Peter -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com Sat Jan 12 16:04:38 2013 From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro) Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2013 10:04:38 +1300 Subject: [governance] Aaron Swartz passing In-Reply-To: <516EA786-21A2-4D96-A213-9E0FEE427722@istaff.org> References: <516EA786-21A2-4D96-A213-9E0FEE427722@istaff.org> Message-ID: On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 9:42 AM, John Curran wrote: > Some of you may be aware of Aaron Swartz and his efforts in open access to > information. > > Alas, no more: > http://blog.archive.org/2013/01/12/aaron-swartz-hero-of-the-open-world-rip/ > /John > > It is sad to hear when an advocate for an open world passes. The desire to > make knowledge available and accessible to the public is noble and his > legacy will leave on. Rest in peace Aaron Swartz. > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > -- Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala P.O. Box 17862 Suva Fiji Twitter: @SalanietaT Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro Tel: +679 3544828 Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From avri at acm.org Sat Jan 12 16:14:46 2013 From: avri at acm.org (Avri Doria) Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2013 16:14:46 -0500 Subject: [governance] Suggested amendments for the charter. Nomcom & Voting In-Reply-To: References: <71DE6F37-0C23-4CF2-9984-98FB3688F224@acm.org> <6C563956-CB7B-4167-8570-03F55C2BC906@acm.org> <20130111070553.GA3586@thorion.it.jyu.fi> <1357979792.19641.YahooMailNeo@web172506.mail.ir2.yahoo.com> <854EDDF0-EFD9-464F-BDA2-560A1A591972@acm.org> Message-ID: I thank you and eagerly await 'due course' avri On 12 Jan 2013, at 15:04, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro wrote: > Hi Avri, > > We have been monitoring the discussions and the joint proposal and will revert in due course. > > Kind Regards, > Sala > > On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 8:56 AM, Avri Doria wrote: > > Hi, > > On both sets of amendments, once I had 10+ names I submitted the request. I hope preparations for the vote are already in the works. > > Since I already submitted the proposals for amendment, I do not want to resubmit with additional names. I am hoping we will see action from the co-ordinator(s) real soon now on schedules for discussion and the vote. > > I ask, however, the co-ordinator(s) notice that names are still coming in of those who would propose these amendments. > > As far as I can tell the names I missed in the original submissions were: > > A. For the amendments related to Nomcom : > > Asif Kabani > Cheryl Langdon-Orr > Hakikur Rahman > Gideon Rop > José Félix Arias Ynche > Norbert Klein > Rudi Vansnick > Sonigitu Ekpe > > B. For the amendments related to Voting: > > Adam Peake > Judy Okite > Tapani Tarvainen > Vincent Solomon > > I apologize to anyone whose name I am still missing. > > I thank everyone who joined me in proposing the amendments and who made it possible to reach the threshold required for get a vote on the changes. > > avri > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > > > > -- > Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala > P.O. Box 17862 > Suva > Fiji > > Twitter: @SalanietaT > Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro > Tel: +679 3544828 > Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com Sat Jan 12 16:25:58 2013 From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro) Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2013 10:25:58 +1300 Subject: [governance] European Commission on Google Investigation Was Google Survives US FTC Probe #FTC #EC #Google #competition In-Reply-To: <20130112132055.5b012c82@quill.bollow.ch> References: <20130112132055.5b012c82@quill.bollow.ch> Message-ID: In > forming our opinion of the matter, we need to be careful to avoid being > unduly influenced by either side's rhetorics or money. > > Greetings, > Norbert > I agree which is why getting our hands on the actual reports whether by the FTC or the European Commission will be useful. So far, the only case law from the EC I saw were ones from 2010 but am interested in the current investigation and reports by the EC. -- Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala P.O. Box 17862 Suva Fiji Twitter: @SalanietaT Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro Tel: +679 3544828 Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From ian.peter at ianpeter.com Sat Jan 12 20:52:12 2013 From: ian.peter at ianpeter.com (Ian Peter) Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2013 12:52:12 +1100 Subject: [governance] Sad death of Aaron Schwartz In-Reply-To: <05BEFB274AE54FFCA3F2ACF8813AEC60@Toshiba> References: <05BEFB274AE54FFCA3F2ACF8813AEC60@Toshiba> Message-ID: <4D7680ABD19D46B2A2F96E1AF28232B6@Toshiba> sorry for two typos – both different I should have been saying Aaron Swartz. There is widespread grief and feeling about this and doubtless we will hear more as the news spreads and is digested. From: Ian Peter Sent: Sunday, January 13, 2013 7:44 AM To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org Subject: [governance] Sad death of Aaron Schwartz I am posting below a few links reporting on the sad death by suicide of young Internet activist, Aaron Schwatrz. Aaron was a complex figure who made very substantial contributions to the Internet, including the initial RSS specification, Reddit, and the founding of Creative Commons, and who suffered from depression. Cory Doctorow reports on that here. http://boingboing.net/2013/01/12/rip-aaron-swartz.html Aaron had been indicted in US for 13 counts of felony, and faced a long imprisonment term, for releasing articles from academic journals to the public domain. Last September, Tim Berners-Lee commented on the severity of these charges as follows http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2012/09/feds-go-overboard-in-prosecuting-information-activist/ And in recent hours Electronic Frontier Foundation has posted the following https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2013/01/farewell-aaron-swartz “Moreover, the situation Aaron found himself in highlights the injustice of U.S. computer crime laws, and particularly their punishment regimes. Aaron's act was undoubtedly political activism, and taking such an act in the physical world would, at most, have a meant he faced light penalties akin to trespassing as part of a political protest. Because he used a computer, he instead faced long-term incarceration. “ This is a sad time. Although the laws are not directly responsible for his death, It is very sad that an already complex person of great individual brilliance found his life further complicated by reactive laws. Thank you Aaron Schwartz for your contribution to the Internet and to internet freedom. Ian Peter -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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: -------------- 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 From jstyre at jstyre.com Sat Jan 12 21:16:50 2013 From: jstyre at jstyre.com (James S. Tyre) Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2013 18:16:50 -0800 Subject: [governance] Sad death of Aaron Schwartz In-Reply-To: <4D7680ABD19D46B2A2F96E1AF28232B6@Toshiba> References: <05BEFB274AE54FFCA3F2ACF8813AEC60@Toshiba> <4D7680ABD19D46B2A2F96E1AF28232B6@Toshiba> Message-ID: <003101cdf134$0ca29f30$25e7dd90$@jstyre.com> Among many others: Brewster Kahle - http://blog.archive.org/2013/01/12/aaron-swartz-hero-of-the-open-world-rip/ Larry Lessig - http://lessig.tumblr.com/post/40347463044/prosecutor-as-bully James Grimmelmann - http://laboratorium.net/archive/2013/01/12/aaron_swartz_was_26 Carl Malamud - https://public.resource.org/aaron/ (Incredibly elegant in its stark simplicity.) Danny O’Brien - http://www.oblomovka.com/wp/2013/01/12/he-was-funny/ Quinn Norton - http://www.quinnnorton.com/said/?p=644 (Danny and Quinn both talk about Ada, the daughter they had when they were married. Aaron, being barely more than a child himself, had a childlike relationship with Ada.) -- James S. Tyre Law Offices of James S. Tyre 10736 Jefferson Blvd., #512 Culver City, CA 90230-4969 310-839-4114/310-839-4602(fax) jstyre at jstyre.com Policy Fellow, Electronic Frontier Foundation https://www.eff.org From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Ian Peter Sent: Saturday, January 12, 2013 5:52 PM To: Ian Peter; governance at lists.igcaucus.org Subject: Re: [governance] Sad death of Aaron Schwartz sorry for two typos – both different I should have been saying Aaron Swartz. There is widespread grief and feeling about this and doubtless we will hear more as the news spreads and is digested. From: Ian Peter Sent: Sunday, January 13, 2013 7:44 AM To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org Subject: [governance] Sad death of Aaron Schwartz I am posting below a few links reporting on the sad death by suicide of young Internet activist, Aaron Schwatrz. Aaron was a complex figure who made very substantial contributions to the Internet, including the initial RSS specification, Reddit, and the founding of Creative Commons, and who suffered from depression. Cory Doctorow reports on that here. http://boingboing.net/2013/01/12/rip-aaron-swartz.html Aaron had been indicted in US for 13 counts of felony, and faced a long imprisonment term, for releasing articles from academic journals to the public domain. Last September, Tim Berners-Lee commented on the severity of these charges as follows http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2012/09/feds-go-overboard-in-prosecuting-information-activist/ And in recent hours Electronic Frontier Foundation has posted the following https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2013/01/farewell-aaron-swartz “Moreover, the situation Aaron found himself in highlights the injustice of U.S. computer crime laws, and particularly their punishment regimes. Aaron's act was undoubtedly political activism, and taking such an act in the physical world would, at most, have a meant he faced light penalties akin to trespassing as part of a political protest. Because he used a computer, he instead faced long-term incarceration. “ This is a sad time. Although the laws are not directly responsible for his death, It is very sad that an already complex person of great individual brilliance found his life further complicated by reactive laws. Thank you Aaron Schwartz for your contribution to the Internet and to internet freedom. Ian Peter _____ ____________________________________________________________ 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: -------------- 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 From gideonrop at gmail.com Sat Jan 12 23:33:02 2013 From: gideonrop at gmail.com (Gideon) Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2013 07:33:02 +0300 Subject: [governance] Sad death of Aaron Schwartz In-Reply-To: <05BEFB274AE54FFCA3F2ACF8813AEC60@Toshiba> References: <05BEFB274AE54FFCA3F2ACF8813AEC60@Toshiba> Message-ID: Indeed a sad time on the passing of an inspiring, incredible person who had courageously achieved what many at that tender age wouldnt have. Sad he has passed on when the vibrant internet constituency is working hard to fight for free internet. RIP Aaron Schwartz and thank you for what you were able to achieve. http://edition.cnn.com/2013/01/12/us/new-york-reddit-founder-suicide/index.html Gideon Rop, DotConnectAfrica On Sat, Jan 12, 2013 at 11:44 PM, Ian Peter wrote: > I am posting below a few links reporting on the sad death by suicide of > young Internet activist, Aaron Schwatrz. Aaron was a complex figure who > made very substantial contributions to the Internet, including the initial > RSS specification, Reddit, and the founding of Creative Commons, and who > suffered from depression. Cory Doctorow reports on that here. > > http://boingboing.net/2013/01/12/rip-aaron-swartz.html > > > Aaron had been indicted in US for 13 counts of felony, and faced a long > imprisonment term, for releasing articles from academic journals to the > public domain. Last September, Tim Berners-Lee commented on the severity of > these charges as follows > > > http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2012/09/feds-go-overboard-in-prosecuting-information-activist/ > > And in recent hours Electronic Frontier Foundation has posted the following > > > https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2013/01/farewell-aaron-swartz > > > “Moreover, the situation Aaron found himself in highlights the injustice > of U.S. computer crime laws, and particularly their punishment regimes. > Aaron's act was undoubtedly political activism, and taking such an act in > the physical world would, at most, have a meant he faced light penalties > akin to trespassing as part of a political protest. Because he used a > computer, he instead faced long-term incarceration. “ > > This is a sad time. Although the laws are not directly responsible for his > death, It is very sad that an already complex person of great individual > brilliance found his life further complicated by reactive laws. > > Thank you Aaron Schwartz for your contribution to the Internet and to > internet freedom. > > Ian Peter > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de Sun Jan 13 04:36:05 2013 From: wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de (=?iso-8859-1?Q?=22Kleinw=E4chter=2C_Wolfgang=22?=) Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2013 10:36:05 +0100 Subject: [governance] The Fractured Internet References: <05BEFB274AE54FFCA3F2ACF8813AEC60@Toshiba> <4D7680ABD19D46B2A2F96E1AF28232B6@Toshiba> Message-ID: <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A80133147C@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> This is an interesting snippet from Top Ten Internet Law Developments of 2012 by Eric Goldman #2: ITU/WCIT's Attempted Internet Takeover. I really didn't understand what happened in Dubai at the ITU/WCIT meeting. All I know is that nothing good could have happened there, so preserving the status quo is a win, as ironic as that sounds. However, there has been some teeth-gnashing that the meeting exposed looming fault lines between pro-censorship and anti-censorship governments. I don't understand that angst for at least two reasons. First, all governments are pro-censorship, and that certainly includes the United States. Indeed, the US has exhibited some awkward duality as it rails against foreign attempts to censor the Internet even as both Congress and the Obama Administration exhibit a never-ending pursuit of controlling the Internet themselves. Second, the Internet has already fractured into multiple "Internets." The Internet in the United States increasingly bears little resemblance to the Internet in foreign countries, both because local regulators simply block certain websites and because websites localize their services to accommodate local regulation. Plus, it's been proven that countries can simply "unplug" from the Internet. Thus, we don't have a single unified Internet; we have many partially-overlapping Internets. I will say more about this in a future post. http://www.circleid.com/posts/20130111_top_ten_internet_law_developments_of_2012/ Wolfgang -------------- 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 From cveraq at gmail.com Sun Jan 13 04:47:14 2013 From: cveraq at gmail.com (Carlos Vera Quintana) Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2013 04:47:14 -0500 Subject: [governance] Sad death of Aaron Schwartz In-Reply-To: <05BEFB274AE54FFCA3F2ACF8813AEC60@Toshiba> References: <05BEFB274AE54FFCA3F2ACF8813AEC60@Toshiba> Message-ID: <28E87E8F-4F6D-487D-84A6-7379E3F8EC43@gmail.com> Really sad. I quoted your last sentence on my twitter account @cveraq Enviado desde mi iPhone El 12/01/2013, a las 15:44, "Ian Peter" escribió: > I am posting below a few links reporting on the sad death by suicide of young Internet activist, Aaron Schwatrz. Aaron was a complex figure who made very substantial contributions to the Internet, including the initial RSS specification, Reddit, and the founding of Creative Commons, and who suffered from depression. Cory Doctorow reports on that here. > > http://boingboing.net/2013/01/12/rip-aaron-swartz.html > > > Aaron had been indicted in US for 13 counts of felony, and faced a long imprisonment term, for releasing articles from academic journals to the public domain. Last September, Tim Berners-Lee commented on the severity of these charges as follows > > http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2012/09/feds-go-overboard-in-prosecuting-information-activist/ > > And in recent hours Electronic Frontier Foundation has posted the following > > > https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2013/01/farewell-aaron-swartz > > > “Moreover, the situation Aaron found himself in highlights the injustice of U.S. computer crime laws, and particularly their punishment regimes. Aaron's act was undoubtedly political activism, and taking such an act in the physical world would, at most, have a meant he faced light penalties akin to trespassing as part of a political protest. Because he used a computer, he instead faced long-term incarceration. “ > > This is a sad time. Although the laws are not directly responsible for his death, It is very sad that an already complex person of great individual brilliance found his life further complicated by reactive laws. > > Thank you Aaron Schwartz for your contribution to the Internet and to internet freedom. > > Ian Peter > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From riaz.tayob at gmail.com Sun Jan 13 05:22:57 2013 From: riaz.tayob at gmail.com (riaz.tayob at gmail.com) Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2013 12:22:57 +0200 Subject: [governance] Hamba kahle Aaron Swartz References: <50F23860.6070500@mail.ngo.za> Message-ID: > > http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/jan/12/aaron-swartz-heroism-suicide1 > > The Guardian 12 January 2013 > > The inspiring heroism of Aaron Swartz > > The internet freedom activist committed suicide on Friday at age 26, but his life was driven by courage and passion > > Glenn Greenwald > > The internet activist Aaron Swartz, seen here in January 2009, has died at the age of 26. Photograph: Michael Francis Mcelroy/AP > (updated below) > > Aaron Swartz, the computer programmer and internet freedom activist, committed suicide on Friday in New York at the age of 26. As the incredibly moving remembrances from his friends such as Cory Doctorow and Larry Lessig attest, he was unquestionably brilliant but also - like most everyone - a complex human being plagued by demons and flaws. For many reasons, I don't believe in whitewashing someone's life or beatifying them upon death. But, to me, much of Swartz's tragically short life was filled with acts that are genuinely and, in the most literal and noble sense, heroic. I think that's really worth thinking about today. > > At the age of 14, Swartz played a key role in developing the RSS software that is still widely used to enable people to manage what they read on the internet. As a teenager, he also played a vital role in the creation of Reddit, the wildly popular social networking news site. When Conde Nast purchased Reddit, Swartz received a substantial sum of money at a very young age. He became something of a legend in the internet and programming world before he was 18. His path to internet mogul status and the great riches it entails was clear, easy and virtually guaranteed: a path which so many other young internet entrepreneurs have found irresistible, monomaniacally devoting themselves to making more and more money long after they have more than they could ever hope to spend. > > But rather obviously, Swartz had little interest in devoting his life to his own material enrichment, despite how easy it would have been for him. As Lessig wrote: "Aaron had literally done nothing in his life 'to make money' . . . Aaron was always and only working for (at least his conception of) the public good." > > Specifically, he committed himself to the causes in which he so passionately believed: internet freedom, civil liberties, making information and knowledge as available as possible. Here he is in his May, 2012 keynote address at the Freedom To Connect conference discussing the role he played in stopping SOPA, the movie-industry-demanded legislation that would have vested the government with dangerous censorship powers over the internet. > > Critically, Swartz didn't commit himself to these causes merely by talking about them or advocating for them. He repeatedly sacrificed his own interests, even his liberty, in order to defend these values and challenge and subvert the most powerful factions that were their enemies. That's what makes him, in my view, so consummately heroic. > > In 2008, Swartz targeted Pacer, the online service that provides access to court documents for a per-page fee. What offended Swartz and others was that people were forced to pay for access to public court documents that were created at public expense. Along with a friend, Swartz created a program to download millions of those documents and then, as Doctorow wrote, "spent a small fortune fetching a titanic amount of data and putting it into the public domain." For that act of civil disobedience, he was investigated and harassed by the FBI, but never charged. > > But in July 2011, Swartz was arrested for allegedly targeting JSTOR, the online publishing company that digitizes and distributes scholarly articles written by academics and then sells them, often at a high price, to subscribers. As Maria Bustillos detailed, none of the money goes to the actual writers (usually professors) who wrote the scholarly articles - they are usually not paid for writing them - but instead goes to the publishers. > > This system offended Swartz (and many other free-data activists) for two reasons: it charged large fees for access to these articles but did not compensate the authors, and worse, it ensured that huge numbers of people are denied access to the scholarship produced by America's colleges and universities. The indictment filed against Swartz alleged that he used his access as a Harvard fellow to the JSTOR system to download millions of articles with the intent to distribute them online for free; when he was detected and his access was cut off, the indictment claims he then trespassed into an MIT computer-wiring closet in order to physically download the data directly onto his laptop. > > Swartz never distributed any of these downloaded articles. He never intended to profit even a single penny from anything he did, and never did profit in any way. He had every right to download the articles as an authorized JSTOR user; at worst, he intended to violate the company's "terms of service" by making the articles available to the public. Once arrested, he returned all copies of everything he downloaded and vowed not to use them. JSTOR told federal prosecutors that it had no intent to see him prosecuted, though MIT remained ambiguous about its wishes. > > But federal prosecutors ignored the wishes of the alleged "victims". Led by a federal prosecutor in Boston notorious for her overzealous prosecutions, the DOJ threw the book at him, charging Swartz with multiple felonies which carried a total sentence of several decades in prison and $1 million in fines. > > Swartz's trial on these criminal charges was scheduled to begin in two months. He adamantly refused to plead guilty to a felony because he did not want to spend the rest of his life as a convicted felon with all the stigma and rights-denials that entails. The criminal proceedings, as Lessig put it, already put him in a predicament where "his wealth [was] bled dry, yet unable to appeal openly to us for the financial help he needed to fund his defense, at least without risking the ire of a district court judge." > > To say that the DOJ's treatment of Swartz was excessive and vindictive is an extreme understatement. When I wrote about Swartz's plight last August, I wrote that he was "being prosecuted by the DOJ with obscene over-zealousness". Timothy Lee wrote the definitive article in 2011 explaining why, even if all the allegations in the indictment are true, the only real crime committed by Swartz was basic trespassing, for which people are punished, at most, with 30 days in jail and a $100 fine, about which Lee wrote: "That seems about right: if he's going to serve prison time, it should be measured in days rather than years." > > Nobody knows for sure why federal prosecutors decided to pursue Swartz so vindictively, as though he had committed some sort of major crime that deserved many years in prison and financial ruin. Some theorized that the DOJ hated him for his serial activism and civil disobedience. Others speculated that, as Doctorow put it, "the feds were chasing down all the Cambridge hackers who had any connection to Bradley Manning in the hopes of turning one of them." > > I believe it has more to do with what I told the New York Times' Noam Cohen for an article he wrote on Swartz's case. Swartz's activism, I argued, was waged as part of one of the most vigorously contested battles - namely, the war over how the internet is used and who controls the information that flows on it - and that was his real crime in the eyes of the US government: challenging its authority and those of corporate factions to maintain a stranglehold on that information. In that above-referenced speech on SOPA, Swartz discussed the grave dangers to internet freedom and free expression and assembly posed by the government's efforts to control the internet with expansive interpretations of copyright law and other weapons to limit access to information. > > That's a major part of why I consider him heroic. He wasn't merely sacrificing himself for a cause. It was a cause of supreme importance to people and movements around the world - internet freedom - and he did it by knowingly confronting the most powerful state and corporate factions because he concluded that was the only way to achieve these ends. > > Suicide is an incredibly complicated phenomenon. I didn't know Swartz nearly well enough even to form an opinion about what drove him to do this; I had a handful of exchanges with him online in which we said nice things about each other's work and I truly admired him. I'm sure even his closest friends and family are struggling to understand exactly what caused him to defy his will to live by taking his own life. > > But, despite his public and very sad writings about battling depression, it only stands to reason that a looming criminal trial that could send him to prison for decades played some role in this; even if it didn't, this persecution by the DOJ is an outrage and an offense against all things decent, for the reasons Lessig wrote today: > > "Here is where we need a better sense of justice, and shame. For the outrageousness in this story is not just Aaron. It is also the absurdity of the prosecutor's behavior. From the beginning, the government worked as hard as it could to characterize what Aaron did in the most extreme and absurd way. The 'property' Aaron had 'stolen', we were told, was worth 'millions of dollars' — with the hint, and then the suggestion, that his aim must have been to profit from his crime. But anyone who says that there is money to be made in a stash of ACADEMIC ARTICLES is either an idiot or a liar. It was clear what this was not, yet our government continued to push as if it had caught the 9/11 terrorists red-handed. > > "A kid genius. A soul, a conscience, the source of a question I have asked myself a million times: What would Aaron think? That person is gone today, driven to the edge by what a decent society would only call bullying. I get wrong. But I also get proportionality. And if you don't get both, you don't deserve to have the power of the United States government behind you. > > "For remember, we live in a world where the architects of the financial crisis regularly dine at the White House — and where even those brought to 'justice' never even have to admit any wrongdoing, let alone be labeled 'felons'." > > Whatever else is true, Swartz was destroyed by a "justice" system that fully protects the most egregious criminals as long as they are members of or useful to the nation's most powerful factions, but punishes with incomparable mercilessness and harshness those who lack power and, most of all, those who challenge power. > > Swartz knew all of this. But he forged ahead anyway. He could have easily opted for a life of great personal wealth, status, prestige and comfort. He chose instead to fight - selflessly, with conviction and purpose, and at great risk to himself - for noble causes to which he was passionately devoted. That, to me, isn't an example of heroism; it's the embodiment of it, its purest expression. It's the attribute our country has been most lacking. > > I always found it genuinely inspiring to watch Swartz exude this courage and commitment at such a young age. His death had better prompt some serious examination of the DOJ's behavior - both in his case and its warped administration of justice generally. But his death will also hopefully strengthen the inspirational effects of thinking about and understanding the extraordinary acts he undertook in his short life. > > UPDATE > > From the official statement of Swartz's family: > > "Aaron's death is not simply a personal tragedy. It is the product of a criminal justice system rife with intimidation and prosecutorial overreach. Decisions made by officials in the Massachusetts US Attorney's office and at MIT contributed to his death. The US Attorney's office pursued an exceptionally harsh array of charges, carrying potentially over 30 years in prison, to punish an alleged crime that had no victims. Meanwhile, unlike JSTOR, MIT refused to stand up for Aaron and its own community's most cherished principles." > > This sort of unrestrained prosecutorial abuse is, unfortunately, far from uncommon. It usually destroys people without attention or notice. Let's hope - and work to ensure that - the attention generated by Swartz's case prompts some movement toward accountability and reform. > > *** > > The Tech’s coverage of Aaron Swartz > > Posted on January 12, 2013 by Joanna Kao > 26-year old Aaron Swartz was an accomplished man — it’s not difficult to see his influence on today’s web. He co-authored the specification for RSS 1.0 at age 14 and was a prominent internet activist throughout his life. Hacker News went ablaze with comments of support for his work. > > The Tech was informed of Swartz’s suicide by his uncle Michael Wolf and confirmed the news with his lawyer early this morning. The Tech has covered Aaron Swartz’s case since August 2011, and we’ve compiled our coverage below. > > September 2010: > Swartz began mass downloading JSTOR documents around September 24. JSTOR blocked his access for the first time on September 26. This repeated on October 2, December 26, and January 4. Swartz was apprehended on January 6, 2011. > > July 11, 2011: > Swartz indicted on four counts by the Federal District Court for wire fraud, computer fraud, unlawfully obtaining information from a protected computer, and recklessly damaging a protected computer. > > August 3, 2011: Swartz indicted for JSTOR theft > In The Tech’s first article following Swartz’s indictment and arrest, The Tech describes the alleged events that led up to his indictment, including details on the laptop Swartz used to allegedly download 4.8 million documents from JSTOR, the wiring closet that Swartz accessed in the basement of Building 16 on MIT’s campus, his arrest, and legal ramifications. > > November 18, 2011: Swartz indicted for breaking and entering > Swartz was indicted a second time on November 17, 2011 for breaking and entering, larceny over $250, and unauthorized access to a computer network. He was indicted this time in the Middlesex Superior Court — previously, he was indicted in the Federal District Court. > > December 2, 2011: Swartz arraigned > Swartz was arraigned in Middlesex Superior Court on November 30, 2011, where he pleaded not guilty. > > March 16, 2012: State drops charges against Swartz; federal charges remain > Middlesex Superior Court dropped all six charges against Swartz on March 8, 2012 — two counts of breaking and entering, one count of larceny over $250, and three counts of unauthorized access to a computer system. The four federal charges against Swartz remained — wire fraud, computer fraud, unlawfully obtaining information from a protected computer, and recklessly damaging a protected computer. > > September 12, 2012 > The federal indictment with four counts against Swartz was superseded. The revised indictment was for thirteen counts. > > September 24, 2012: Swartz arraigned on a superseding indictment > Aaron Swartz pleaded not guilty to all 13 counts during his arraignment on a superseding indictment. > > October 19, 2012: Aaron Swartz asks court to suppress data from MIT > According to a court document filed by Swartz and his legal team on October 5, MIT provided the Secret Service with details and logs of Swartz’s activity on MIT’s network without a warrant or subpoena. Swartz’s filings said that this release violated MIT’s policy. MIT said that its actions were necessary to “protect its network.” > > November 2, 2012: Swartz gets high-powered attorneys > Swartz hired new legal representation — Keker and Van Nest, a top law firm in San Francisco, to represent him. Elliot R. Peters led his legal team. Swartz was previously represented by Martin Weinberg. > > November 20, 2012: Swartz hid behind helmet, but only after he was already photographed > The government filed a response to several motions by Swartz’s legal team to suppress evidence on November 16. The government replied with 22 exhibits, including several photographs showing Swartz as he entered Building 16 and his attempt to cover his face with his helmet. The government’s response attempted to justify the FBI’s copying of Swartz’s RAM without a search warrant. > > December 7, 2012: Aaron Swartz trial may be delayed > Attorneys for Swartz asked the federal district court to delay Swartz’s trial from February 4, 2013 to June and responded to the government’s replies from November 16. At the status conference scheduled for the following Friday, the judge decided to have an evidentiary hearing for 3 hours on January 25 and trial on April 1. > > January 11, 2013: Aaron Swartz commits suicide > On January 12, 2013, The Tech published a short article after hearing from Swartz’s uncle and confirming Swartz’s suicide with his attorney Elliot Peters. Upon hearing of his death, many people posted on Hacker News and Reddit as well as in comments on the New York Times article on Swartz’s death and other prominent blogs. Cory Doctorow, an author and friend of Swartz, published a remembrance on BoingBoing. Larry Lessig, a professor at Harvard and friend, posted Aaron and prosecutorial bullying. Swartz’s girlfriend Quinn Norton wrote about him on her own blog. > *** > http://lessig.tumblr.com/post/40347463044/prosecutor-as-bully > Prosecutor as bully > > <3835494997_edc2e1dc12.jpg> > > (Some will say this is not the time. I disagree. This is the time when every mixed emotion needs to find voice.) > > Since his arrest in January, 2011, I have known more about the events that began this spiral than I have wanted to know. Aaron consulted me as a friend and lawyer. He shared with me what went down and why, and I worked with him to get help. When my obligations to Harvard created a conflict that made it impossible for me to continue as a lawyer, I continued as a friend. Not a good enough friend, no doubt, but nothing was going to draw that friendship into doubt. > > The billions of snippets of sadness and bewilderment spinning across the Net confirm who this amazing boy was to all of us. But as I’ve read these aches, there’s one strain I wish we could resist: > > Please don’t pathologize this story. > > No doubt it is a certain crazy that brings a person as loved as Aaron was loved (and he was surrounded in NY by people who loved him) to do what Aaron did. It angers me that he did what he did. But if we’re going to learn from this, we can’t let slide what brought him here. > > First, of course, Aaron brought Aaron here. As I said when I wrote about the case (when obligations required I say something publicly), if what the government alleged was true — and I say “if” because I am not revealing what Aaron said to me then — then what he did was wrong. And if not legally wrong, then at least morally wrong. The causes that Aaron fought for are my causes too. But as much as I respect those who disagree with me about this, these means are not mine. > > But all this shows is that if the government proved its case, some punishment was appropriate. So what was that appropriate punishment? Was Aaron a terrorist? Or a cracker trying to profit from stolen goods? Or was this something completely different? > > Early on, and to its great credit, JSTOR figured “appropriate” out: They declined to pursue their own action against Aaron, and they asked the government to drop its. MIT, to its great shame, was not as clear, and so the prosecutor had the excuse he needed to continue his war against the “criminal” who we who loved him knew as Aaron. > > Here is where we need a better sense of justice, and shame. For the outrageousness in this story is not just Aaron. It is also the absurdity of the prosecutor’s behavior. From the beginning, the government worked as hard as it could to characterize what Aaron did in the most extreme and absurd way. The “property” Aaron had “stolen,” we were told, was worth “millions of dollars” — with the hint, and then the suggestion, that his aim must have been to profit from his crime. But anyone who says that there is money to be made in a stash of ACADEMIC ARTICLES is either an idiot or a liar. It was clear what this was not, yet our government continued to push as if it had caught the 9/11 terrorists red-handed. > > Aaron had literally done nothing in his life “to make money.” He was fortunate Reddit turned out as it did, but from his work building the RSS standard, to his work architecting Creative Commons, to his work liberating public records, to his work building a free public library, to his work supporting Change Congress/FixCongressFirst/Rootstrikers, and then Demand Progress, Aaron was always and only working for (at least his conception of) the public good. He was brilliant, and funny. A kid genius. A soul, a conscience, the source of a question I have asked myself a million times: What would Aaron think? That person is gone today, driven to the edge by what a decent society would only call bullying. I get wrong. But I also get proportionality. And if you don’t get both, you don’t deserve to have the power of the United States government behind you. > > For remember, we live in a world where the architects of the financial crisis regularly dine at the White House — and where even those brought to “justice” never even have to admit any wrongdoing, let alone be labeled “felons.” > > In that world, the question this government needs to answer is why it was so necessary that Aaron Swartz be labeled a “felon.” For in the 18 months of negotiations, that was what he was not willing to accept, and so that was the reason he was facing a million dollar trial in April — his wealth bled dry, yet unable to appeal openly to us for the financial help he needed to fund his defense, at least without risking the ire of a district court judge. And so as wrong and misguided and fucking sad as this is, I get how the prospect of this fight, defenseless, made it make sense to this brilliant but troubled boy to end it. > > Fifty years in jail, charges our government. Somehow, we need to get beyond the “I’m right so I’m right to nuke you” ethics that dominates our time. That begins with one word: Shame. > > One word, and endless tears. > > *** > > The inspiring heroism of Aaron Swartz > > The internet freedom activist committed suicide on Friday at age 26, but his life was driven by courage and passion > > Share 2574 > > > inShare9 > Email > > Glenn Greenwald > guardian.co.uk, Saturday 12 January 2013 21.25 GMT > Jump to comments (129) > > The internet activist Aaron Swartz, seen here in January 2009, has died at the age of 26. Photograph: Michael Francis Mcelroy/AP > (updated below) > > Aaron Swartz, the computer programmer and internet freedom activist, committed suicide on Friday in New York at the age of 26. As the incredibly moving remembrances from his friends such as Cory Doctorow and Larry Lessig attest, he was unquestionably brilliant but also - like most everyone - a complex human being plagued by demons and flaws. For many reasons, I don't believe in whitewashing someone's life or beatifying them upon death. But, to me, much of Swartz's tragically short life was filled with acts that are genuinely and, in the most literal and noble sense, heroic. I think that's really worth thinking about today. > > At the age of 14, Swartz played a key role in developing the RSS software that is still widely used to enable people to manage what they read on the internet. As a teenager, he also played a vital role in the creation of Reddit, the wildly popular social networking news site. When Conde Nast purchased Reddit, Swartz received a substantial sum of money at a very young age. He became something of a legend in the internet and programming world before he was 18. His path to internet mogul status and the great riches it entails was clear, easy and virtually guaranteed: a path which so many other young internet entrepreneurs have found irresistible, monomaniacally devoting themselves to making more and more money long after they have more than they could ever hope to spend. > > But rather obviously, Swartz had little interest in devoting his life to his own material enrichment, despite how easy it would have been for him. As Lessig wrote: "Aaron had literally done nothing in his life 'to make money' . . . Aaron was always and only working for (at least his conception of) the public good." > > Specifically, he committed himself to the causes in which he so passionately believed: internet freedom, civil liberties, making information and knowledge as available as possible. Here he is in his May, 2012 keynote address at the Freedom To Connect conference discussing the role he played in stopping SOPA, the movie-industry-demanded legislation that would have vested the government with dangerous censorship powers over the internet. > > Critically, Swartz didn't commit himself to these causes merely by talking about them or advocating for them. He repeatedly sacrificed his own interests, even his liberty, in order to defend these values and challenge and subvert the most powerful factions that were their enemies. That's what makes him, in my view, so consummately heroic. > > In 2008, Swartz targeted Pacer, the online service that provides access to court documents for a per-page fee. What offended Swartz and others was that people were forced to pay for access to public court documents that were created at public expense. Along with a friend, Swartz created a program to download millions of those documents and then, as Doctorow wrote, "spent a small fortune fetching a titanic amount of data and putting it into the public domain." For that act of civil disobedience, he was investigated and harassed by the FBI, but never charged. > > But in July 2011, Swartz was arrested for allegedly targeting JSTOR, the online publishing company that digitizes and distributes scholarly articles written by academics and then sells them, often at a high price, to subscribers. As Maria Bustillos detailed, none of the money goes to the actual writers (usually professors) who wrote the scholarly articles - they are usually not paid for writing them - but instead goes to the publishers. > > This system offended Swartz (and many other free-data activists) for two reasons: it charged large fees for access to these articles but did not compensate the authors, and worse, it ensured that huge numbers of people are denied access to the scholarship produced by America's colleges and universities. The indictment filed against Swartz alleged that he used his access as a Harvard fellow to the JSTOR system to download millions of articles with the intent to distribute them online for free; when he was detected and his access was cut off, the indictment claims he then trespassed into an MIT computer-wiring closet in order to physically download the data directly onto his laptop. > > Swartz never distributed any of these downloaded articles. He never intended to profit even a single penny from anything he did, and never did profit in any way. He had every right to download the articles as an authorized JSTOR user; at worst, he intended to violate the company's "terms of service" by making the articles available to the public. Once arrested, he returned all copies of everything he downloaded and vowed not to use them. JSTOR told federal prosecutors that it had no intent to see him prosecuted, though MIT remained ambiguous about its wishes. > > But federal prosecutors ignored the wishes of the alleged "victims". Led by a federal prosecutor in Boston notorious for her overzealous prosecutions, the DOJ threw the book at him, charging Swartz with multiple felonies which carried a total sentence of several decades in prison and $1 million in fines. > > Swartz's trial on these criminal charges was scheduled to begin in two months. He adamantly refused to plead guilty to a felony because he did not want to spend the rest of his life as a convicted felon with all the stigma and rights-denials that entails. The criminal proceedings, as Lessig put it, already put him in a predicament where "his wealth [was] bled dry, yet unable to appeal openly to us for the financial help he needed to fund his defense, at least without risking the ire of a district court judge." > > To say that the DOJ's treatment of Swartz was excessive and vindictive is an extreme understatement. When I wrote about Swartz's plight last August, I wrote that he was "being prosecuted by the DOJ with obscene over-zealousness". Timothy Lee wrote the definitive article in 2011 explaining why, even if all the allegations in the indictment are true, the only real crime committed by Swartz was basic trespassing, for which people are punished, at most, with 30 days in jail and a $100 fine, about which Lee wrote: "That seems about right: if he's going to serve prison time, it should be measured in days rather than years." > > Nobody knows for sure why federal prosecutors decided to pursue Swartz so vindictively, as though he had committed some sort of major crime that deserved many years in prison and financial ruin. Some theorized that the DOJ hated him for his serial activism and civil disobedience. Others speculated that, as Doctorow put it, "the feds were chasing down all the Cambridge hackers who had any connection to Bradley Manning in the hopes of turning one of them." > > I believe it has more to do with what I told the New York Times' Noam Cohen for an article he wrote on Swartz's case. Swartz's activism, I argued, was waged as part of one of the most vigorously contested battles - namely, the war over how the internet is used and who controls the information that flows on it - and that was his real crime in the eyes of the US government: challenging its authority and those of corporate factions to maintain a stranglehold on that information. In that above-referenced speech on SOPA, Swartz discussed the grave dangers to internet freedom and free expression and assembly posed by the government's efforts to control the internet with expansive interpretations of copyright law and other weapons to limit access to information. > > That's a major part of why I consider him heroic. He wasn't merely sacrificing himself for a cause. It was a cause of supreme importance to people and movements around the world - internet freedom - and he did it by knowingly confronting the most powerful state and corporate factions because he concluded that was the only way to achieve these ends. > > Suicide is an incredibly complicated phenomenon. I didn't know Swartz nearly well enough even to form an opinion about what drove him to do this; I had a handful of exchanges with him online in which we said nice things about each other's work and I truly admired him. I'm sure even his closest friends and family are struggling to understand exactly what caused him to defy his will to live by taking his own life. > > But, despite his public and very sad writings about battling depression, it only stands to reason that a looming criminal trial that could send him to prison for decades played some role in this; even if it didn't, this persecution by the DOJ is an outrage and an offense against all things decent, for the reasons Lessig wrote today: > > "Here is where we need a better sense of justice, and shame. For the outrageousness in this story is not just Aaron. It is also the absurdity of the prosecutor's behavior. From the beginning, the government worked as hard as it could to characterize what Aaron did in the most extreme and absurd way. The 'property' Aaron had 'stolen', we were told, was worth 'millions of dollars' — with the hint, and then the suggestion, that his aim must have been to profit from his crime. But anyone who says that there is money to be made in a stash of ACADEMIC ARTICLES is either an idiot or a liar. It was clear what this was not, yet our government continued to push as if it had caught the 9/11 terrorists red-handed. > > "A kid genius. A soul, a conscience, the source of a question I have asked myself a million times: What would Aaron think? That person is gone today, driven to the edge by what a decent society would only call bullying. I get wrong. But I also get proportionality. And if you don't get both, you don't deserve to have the power of the United States government behind you. > > "For remember, we live in a world where the architects of the financial crisis regularly dine at the White House — and where even those brought to 'justice' never even have to admit any wrongdoing, let alone be labeled 'felons'." > > Whatever else is true, Swartz was destroyed by a "justice" system that fully protects the most egregious criminals as long as they are members of or useful to the nation's most powerful factions, but punishes with incomparable mercilessness and harshness those who lack power and, most of all, those who challenge power. > > Swartz knew all of this. But he forged ahead anyway. He could have easily opted for a life of great personal wealth, status, prestige and comfort. He chose instead to fight - selflessly, with conviction and purpose, and at great risk to himself - for noble causes to which he was passionately devoted. That, to me, isn't an example of heroism; it's the embodiment of it, its purest expression. It's the attribute our country has been most lacking. > > I always found it genuinely inspiring to watch Swartz exude this courage and commitment at such a young age. His death had better prompt some serious examination of the DOJ's behavior - both in his case and its warped administration of justice generally. But his death will also hopefully strengthen the inspirational effects of thinking about and understanding the extraordinary acts he undertook in his short life. > > UPDATE > > From the official statement of Swartz's family: > > "Aaron's death is not simply a personal tragedy. It is the product of a criminal justice system rife with intimidation and prosecutorial overreach. Decisions made by officials in the Massachusetts US Attorney's office and at MIT contributed to his death. The US Attorney's office pursued an exceptionally harsh array of charges, carrying potentially over 30 years in prison, to punish an alleged crime that had no victims. Meanwhile, unlike JSTOR, MIT refused to stand up for Aaron and its own community's most cherished principles." > > This sort of unrestrained prosecutorial abuse is, unfortunately, far from uncommon. It usually destroys people without attention or notice. Let's hope - and work to ensure that - the attention generated by Swartz's case prompts some movement -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From sonigituekpe at crossriverstate.gov.ng Sun Jan 13 06:09:42 2013 From: sonigituekpe at crossriverstate.gov.ng (Sonigitu Ekpe) Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2013 12:09:42 +0100 Subject: [governance] Aaron Swartz passing In-Reply-To: <516EA786-21A2-4D96-A213-9E0FEE427722@istaff.org> References: <516EA786-21A2-4D96-A213-9E0FEE427722@istaff.org> Message-ID: Hi John, A great one is down. To mother nature we accept all it offers. To almighty Father be the glory. Sea On Jan 12, 2013 9:43 PM, "John Curran" wrote: > > Some of you may be aware of Aaron Swartz and his efforts in open access to information. > > Alas, no more: http://blog.archive.org/2013/01/12/aaron-swartz-hero-of-the-open-world-rip/ > > /John > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From riaz.tayob at gmail.com Sun Jan 13 07:53:56 2013 From: riaz.tayob at gmail.com (Riaz K Tayob) Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2013 14:53:56 +0200 Subject: [governance] =?WINDOWS-1252?Q?Verizon=92s_=93Six_Strikes=94_Anti-?= =?WINDOWS-1252?Q?Piracy_Measures_Unveiled?= Message-ID: <50F2AE64.8090008@gmail.com> [Any confirmations of this?] Verizon’s “Six Strikes” Anti-Piracy Measures Unveiled * Ernesto * January 11, 2013 * https://torrentfreak.com/verizons-six-strikes-anti-piracy-measures-unveiled-130111/ During the coming weeks the controversial “six-strikes” anti-piracy system will kick off in the U.S. While none of the participating ISPs have officially announced how they will handle repeat infringers, TorrentFreak has obtained a copy of Verizon’s full policy. Among other things, offenders will have to watch a video about the consequences of online piracy, before their speeds are reduced to 256kbps. Also worth mentioning is that the copyright alert system will also apply to business customers. verizonIn 2011 the MPAA and RIAA teamed up with five major Internet providers in the United States to launch the Center for Copyright Information (CCI). The parties agreed to implement a system through which subscribers are warned that their copyright infringements have been monitored by rightsholders. After several warnings ISPs may then take a variety of repressive measures against alleged infringers. After more than a year of delays the plan will officially roll out in the first weeks of this year. One of the ISPs taking part is Verizon. Previously, the ISP made some remarks about the various punishments it would hand out to subscribers but in common with other participating providers the company has not yet announced the full details. Today, we can do this for them. TorrentFreak has obtained a complete overview of how Verizon’s alert scheme will work and details of the mitigation measures they intend to put in place. The document is stored on Verizon’s web server but due to its placement is currently unfindable using Google. 6-verizon When the IP-address of a Verizon customer is caught sharing copyrighted works on BitTorrent, the responsible account holder will first get two notification alerts. These inform the customer about the alleged copyright infringements and also explain how file-sharing software can be removed from their computer. *Alert 1 and 2* /“Are delivered by email and automatic voicemail to the telephone number we have on file for you. Notify you that one or more copyright owners have reported that they believe your account has been involved in possible copyright infringement activity.”/ /“Provide a link to information on how to check to see if file sharing software is operating on your computer (and how to remove it) and tell you where to find information on obtaining content legally.”/ If more infringements are found after the first two alerts then the account holder is moved on to the acknowledgment phase where “popups” appear on-screen. Customers will have to acknowledge that they received the new alert and will be instructed to watch a video about the consequences of online piracy. *Alert 3 and 4* /“Redirect your browser to a special web page where you can review and acknowledge receiving the alerts. Provide a short video about copyright law and the consequences of copyright infringement.”/ /“Require you to click on an “acknowledgement” button before you will be able to freely browse the Internet. Clicking the acknowledgement button does not require you to admit that you or anyone else actually engaged in any infringing activity, only that you have received the alert.”/ If the infringements continue after the fourth alert the subscriber will move on to the mitigation phase. Here, the customer can either ask for a review by the American Arbitration Association or undergo a temporary speed reduction to 256kbps. *Alert 5 and 6* /“Redirect your browser to a special web page where you will be given several options. You can: Agree to an immediate temporary (2 or 3 day) reduction in the speed of your Internet access service to 256kbps (a little faster than typical dial-up speed); Agree to the same temporary (2 or 3 day) speed reduction but delay it for a period of 14 days; or Ask for a review of the validity of your alerts by the American Arbitration Association.”/ If more infringements are found after the sixth alert “nothing” will happen. The user will receive no more alerts and can continue using his or her Internet connection at full speed. However – and this is not mentioned by Verizon – the MPAA and RIAA may obtain the IP-addresses of such repeat infringers in order to take legal action against them. While the ISPs will not voluntarily share the name and address linked to the IP-address, they can obtain a subpoena to demand this information from the provider. The potential for copyright holders to use the alert system as solid evidence gathering for lawsuits remains one of the most problematic aspects of the six-strikes scheme. Finally, TorrentFreak also confirmed that the alerts outlined above will also apply to business customers. This means that coffee shops and other small businesses will have to be very careful over who they allow on their company networks. It could mean the end of free WiFi in many places. Aside from Verizon we previously received some details on the measures AT&T and Time Warner Cable will take. Leaked AT&T documents showed that they will block users’ access to some of the most frequently-visited websites on the Internet, until they complete a copyright course. Time Warner Cable will temporarily interrupt people’s ability to browse the Internet. It’s expected that the two remaining providers, Cablevison and Comcast, will take similar measures. None of the ISPs will permanently disconnect repeat infringers as part of the plan. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: verizon-progress.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 6010 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 6-verizon.png Type: image/png Size: 25542 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- 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 From gurstein at gmail.com Sun Jan 13 12:58:55 2013 From: gurstein at gmail.com (michael gurstein) Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2013 09:58:55 -0800 Subject: [governance] RIP: Aaron H. Swartz (November 8, 1986 -- January 11, 2013) Message-ID: <040701cdf1b7$a82a5c30$f87f1490$@gmail.com> Amidst the widespread public grief concerning the tragic and untimely demise of open information activist Aaron Swartz perhaps a moment might be given to reflect on http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2013-01-12/mangalore/36295357_1_ rti-activist-land-dispute-police-station http://tinyurl.com/ag3gpkp http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attacks_on_RTI_activists_in_India http://tinyurl.com/b8vhdr8 M -------------- 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 From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com Sun Jan 13 16:40:21 2013 From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro) Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2013 10:40:21 +1300 Subject: [governance] Notice to the IGC on Proposed Charter Amendments Message-ID: Dear All, Firstly, I would like to thank Imran Ahmed Shah for helping prepare this Summary. Kindly find herewith the following notice in relation to the proposal for Charter Amendments. *Notice to Internet Governance Caucus (IGC) on Proposed Charter Amendments* 1. On January 10, 2013, Avri Doria (hereafter referred to as "Initiator") proposed a Charter Amendment. 2. At the material time, the initiator was not a Voting Member under the definitions of the Charter, however the number of support for the proposal is more than the required 10 members. 3. The amendment proposal is accepted for Voting. 4. Voting electronic ballot ( hereafter referred to as "eBallot") on the matter will be issued strictly to Voting Members. 5. Before the initiation of the Voting eBallot, all voting members are requested to inform the IGC if they feel that there are other necessary amendments to be made to the Charter and a period of 48 hours is given to allow members to respond. 6. If voting for the amendment commences post 18th January, 2013, the Voting members will be re-evaluated as per the current open Election for one of the coordinators of the IGC. A summary is enclosed within this email, see below and also attached. *Internet Governance Caucus CS* *Charter Amendment Initiative Jan 2013 - Support Summary* 13/01/2013**** Support Shown for Proposed Amendments**** Voting Options**** Nomcom Terms**** **** *Membership Type* *Total* *Proposed by* … prior to vote**** ..Abstain**** ..missing heading**** ..nomcom**** *Required Votes (2/3)* *1* *Voting Members* *103* *10=<* *16* *16* *16* *16* *68.7* *2* *Qualified Members* *205* * * 4**** 4**** 8**** 8**** * * *308* *20* *20* *24* *24* **** Kind Regards, -- Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala P.O. Box 17862 Suva Fiji Twitter: @SalanietaT Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro Tel: +679 3544828 Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Charter Amendment Initiative Jan 2013 - Support Summary.docx Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document Size: 17333 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- 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 From williams.deirdre at gmail.com Sun Jan 13 17:47:17 2013 From: williams.deirdre at gmail.com (Deirdre Williams) Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2013 17:47:17 -0500 Subject: [governance] Notice to the IGC on Proposed Charter Amendments In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: My comment refers to point 5 below: "Before the initiation of the Voting eBallot, all voting members are requested to inform the IGC if they feel that there are other necessary amendments to be made to the Charter and a period of 48 hours is given to allow members to respond." Is there any reason that we cannot deal with these amendments piecemeal? Avri has made a powerful and convincing proposal that has received a good deal of support. I propose therefore that we should vote on this amendment to this section of the Charter now. As other amendments are proposed we can deal with them. Attempts to review the whole Charter together have been unsuccessful. Perhaps making a review section by section will work better. What do others think? Deirdre On 13 January 2013 16:40, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro < salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com> wrote: > Dear All, > > Firstly, I would like to thank Imran Ahmed Shah for helping prepare this > Summary. Kindly find herewith the following notice in relation to the > proposal for Charter Amendments. > > *Notice to Internet Governance Caucus (IGC) on Proposed Charter Amendments > * > > > > 1. On January 10, 2013, Avri Doria (hereafter referred to as > "Initiator") proposed a Charter Amendment. > 2. At the material time, the initiator was not a Voting Member under > the definitions of the Charter, however the number of support for the > proposal is more than the required 10 members. > 3. The amendment proposal is accepted for Voting. > 4. Voting electronic ballot ( hereafter referred to as "eBallot") on > the matter will be issued strictly to Voting Members. > 5. Before the initiation of the Voting eBallot, all voting members are > requested to inform the IGC if they feel that there are other necessary > amendments to be made to the Charter and a period of 48 hours is given to > allow members to respond. > 6. If voting for the amendment commences post 18th January, 2013, the > Voting members will be re-evaluated as per the current open Election for > one of the coordinators of the IGC. > > > A summary is enclosed within this email, see below and also attached. > > *Internet Governance Caucus CS* > *Charter Amendment Initiative Jan 2013 - Support Summary* > 13/01/2013**** > Support Shown for Proposed Amendments**** > Voting Options**** > Nomcom Terms**** > **** > *Membership Type* > *Total* > *Proposed by* > … prior to vote**** > ..Abstain**** > ..missing heading**** > ..nomcom**** > *Required Votes (2/3)* > > *1* > *Voting Members* *103* > *10=<* > *16* > *16* > *16* > *16* > *68.7* > *2* > *Qualified Members* > *205* > * * > 4**** > 4**** > 8**** > 8**** > * * > *308* > *20* > *20* > *24* > *24* > **** > Kind Regards, > > > > -- > Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala > P.O. Box 17862 > Suva > Fiji > > Twitter: @SalanietaT > Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro > Tel: +679 3544828 > Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > -- “The fundamental cure for poverty is not money but knowledge" Sir William Arthur Lewis, Nobel Prize Economics, 1979 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From jeremy at ciroap.org Sun Jan 13 23:54:38 2013 From: jeremy at ciroap.org (Jeremy Malcolm) Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2013 12:54:38 +0800 Subject: [governance] Notice to the IGC on Proposed Charter Amendments In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <50F38F8E.3090106@ciroap.org> On 14/01/13 06:47, Deirdre Williams wrote: > My comment refers to point 5 below: > "Before the initiation of the Voting eBallot, all voting members are > requested to inform the IGC if they feel that there are other > necessary amendments to be made to the Charter and a period of 48 > hours is given to allow members to respond." > Is there any reason that we cannot deal with these amendments piecemeal? > Avri has made a powerful and convincing proposal that has received a > good deal of support. > I propose therefore that we should vote on this amendment to this > section of the Charter now. > As other amendments are proposed we can deal with them. > Attempts to review the whole Charter together have been unsuccessful. > Perhaps making a review section by section will work better. > What do others think? I think that other amendments should be considered at the same time. Here are the other amendments that I would like to propose be added to the ballot: * Under "Selection of Coordinators", regarding when elections are held, change "by midsummer (the summer solstice) to "within 15 months of the previous election". Also in "If events prevent an election by midsummer, it will be held as soon after midsummer as possible," change the word "midsummer" to "then" in both places. * Under "Working methods", update the address of the mailing list from governance at lists.cpsr.org to governance at lists.igcaucus.org. The last of these, in particular, should be a no-brainer. -- *Dr Jeremy Malcolm Senior Policy Officer Consumers International | the global campaigning voice for consumers* Office for Asia-Pacific and the Middle East Lot 5-1 Wisma WIM, 7 Jalan Abang Haji Openg, TTDI, 60000 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia Tel: +60 3 7726 1599 *Your rights, our mission – download CI's Strategy 2015:* http://consint.info/RightsMission @Consumers_Int | www.consumersinternational.org | www.facebook.com/consumersinternational Read our email confidentiality notice . Don't print this email unless necessary. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From parminder at itforchange.net Mon Jan 14 00:41:01 2013 From: parminder at itforchange.net (parminder) Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2013 11:11:01 +0530 Subject: [governance] WG on enhanced cooperation Message-ID: <50F39A6D.2060609@itforchange.net> Sala, It is expected that civil society may soon be asked to contribute nominees for the working group on enhanced cooperation (WGEC). So maybe the elborate nomcom process could be started early in this case. parminder -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From parminder at itforchange.net Mon Jan 14 00:51:47 2013 From: parminder at itforchange.net (parminder) Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2013 11:21:47 +0530 Subject: [governance] Notice to the IGC on Proposed Charter Amendments In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <50F39CF3.1010609@itforchange.net> Is a discussion period period being scheduled before voting? Avri's emails asking for taking action on her proposal have also asked for a discussion period. In any case, it is a key democratic imperative as well as tradition to hold discussions before important voting. parminder On Monday 14 January 2013 04:17 AM, Deirdre Williams wrote: > My comment refers to point 5 below: > "Before the initiation of the Voting eBallot, all voting members are > requested to inform the IGC if they feel that there are other > necessary amendments to be made to the Charter and a period of 48 > hours is given to allow members to respond." > Is there any reason that we cannot deal with these amendments piecemeal? > Avri has made a powerful and convincing proposal that has received a > good deal of support. > I propose therefore that we should vote on this amendment to this > section of the Charter now. > As other amendments are proposed we can deal with them. > Attempts to review the whole Charter together have been unsuccessful. > Perhaps making a review section by section will work better. > What do others think? > Deirdre > > On 13 January 2013 16:40, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro > > wrote: > > Dear All, > > Firstly, I would like to thank Imran Ahmed Shah for helping > prepare this Summary. Kindly find herewith the following notice in > relation to the proposal for Charter Amendments. > > *_Notice to Internet Governance Caucus (IGC) on Proposed Charter > Amendments_* > > > 1. On January 10, 2013, Avri Doria (hereafter referred to as > "Initiator") proposed a Charter Amendment. > 2. At the material time, the initiator was not a Voting Member > under the definitions of the Charter, however the number of > support for the proposal is more than the required 10 members. > 3. The amendment proposal is accepted for Voting. > 4. Voting electronic ballot ( hereafter referred to as "eBallot") > on the matter will be issued strictly to Voting Members. > 5. Before the initiation of the Voting eBallot, all voting > members are requested to inform the IGC if they feel that > there are other necessary amendments to be made to the > Charter and a period of 48 hours is given to allow members to > respond. > 6. If voting for the amendment commences post 18th January, 2013, > the Voting members will be re-evaluated as per the current > open Election for one of the coordinators of the IGC. > > > A summary is enclosed within this email, see below and also attached. > > *Internet Governance Caucus CS* > > > > > > > > > > > > > *Charter Amendment Initiative Jan 2013 - Support Summary* > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 13/01/2013 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Support Shown for Proposed Amendments > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Voting Options > > > Nomcom Terms > > > > > > > *Membership Type* > > > *Total* > > > *Proposed by* > > > … prior to vote > > > ..Abstain > > > ..missing heading > > > ..nomcom > > > *Required Votes (2/3)* > > > *1* > > *Voting Members* > *103* > > *10=<* > > > *16* > > > *16* > > > *16* > > > *16* > > > *68.7* > > > *2* > > *Qualified Members* > > *205* > > > ** > > > 4 > > > 4 > > > 8 > > > 8 > > > ** > > > > > > > > *308* > > > > > *20* > > > *20* > > > *24* > > > *24* > > > > > > Kind Regards, > > > > -- > Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala > P.O. Box 17862 > Suva > Fiji > > Twitter: @SalanietaT > Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro > Tel: +679 3544828 > Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > > > > -- > “The fundamental cure for poverty is not money but knowledge" Sir > William Arthur Lewis, Nobel Prize Economics, 1979 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From ias_pk at yahoo.com Mon Jan 14 02:05:06 2013 From: ias_pk at yahoo.com (Imran Ahmed Shah) Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2013 23:05:06 -0800 (PST) Subject: [governance] Notice to the IGC on Proposed Charter Amendments In-Reply-To: <50F39CF3.1010609@itforchange.net> References: <50F39CF3.1010609@itforchange.net> Message-ID: <1358147106.83479.YahooMailNeo@web125102.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> I support Sala and Jeremy for such provisioning to make the things/ activities/ processes more clearly defined by the Charter document, if possible quickly, without delaying the already accepted amendments for voting. As the Charter amendment is in not a common and regular activity and requires completion of processes, as described in the charter in related section: "Any options that may remain in the draft charter after thirty (30) days, will also be voted on as part of the charter acceptance process. In the case that there are options, the vote will be organized to first ask for acceptance, as described above, of the basic charter with options left unresolved. The same ballot will also include a vote on the options. For each case where there are options, the option that receives the most votes will be selected. Thanks   Imran >________________________________ > From: parminder >To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org >Sent: Monday, 14 January 2013, 10:51 >Subject: Re: [governance] Notice to the IGC on Proposed Charter Amendments > > Is a discussion period period being scheduled before voting? Avri's emails asking for taking action on her proposal have also asked for a discussion period. In any case, it is a key democratic imperative as well as tradition to hold discussions before important voting. parminder > > > >On Monday 14 January 2013 04:17 AM, Deirdre Williams wrote: > >My comment refers to point 5 below: >>"Before the initiation of the Voting eBallot, all voting members are requested to inform the IGC if they feel that there are other necessary amendments to be made to the  Charter and a period of 48 hours is given to allow members to respond." >>Is there any reason that we cannot deal with these amendments piecemeal? >>Avri has made a powerful and convincing proposal that has received a good deal of support. >>I propose therefore that we should vote on this amendment to this section of the Charter now. >>As other amendments are proposed we can deal with them. >>Attempts to review the whole Charter together have been unsuccessful. Perhaps making a review section by section will work better. >>What do others think? >>Deirdre >> >>On 13 January 2013 16:40, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro wrote: >>Dear All, >>> >>>Firstly, I would like to thank Imran Ahmed Shah for helping prepare this Summary. Kindly find herewith the following notice in relation to the proposal for Charter Amendments. >>> >>>Notice to Internet Governance Caucus (IGC) on Proposed Charter Amendments >>> >>> >>> 1. On January 10, 2013, Avri Doria (hereafter referred to as "Initiator") proposed a Charter Amendment. >>> 2. At the material time, the initiator was not a Voting Member under the definitions of the Charter, however the number of support for the proposal is more than the required 10 members. >>> 3. The amendment proposal is accepted for Voting. >>> 4. Voting electronic ballot ( hereafter referred to as "eBallot") on the matter will be issued strictly to Voting Members. >>> 5. Before the initiation of the Voting eBallot, all voting members are requested to inform the IGC if they feel that there are other necessary amendments to be made to the  Charter and a period of 48 hours is given to allow members to respond. >>> 6. If voting for the amendment commences post 18th January, 2013, the Voting members will be re-evaluated as per the current open Election for one of the coordinators of the IGC. >>> A summary is enclosed within this email, see below and also attached. >>>  >>> >>> >>> >>>Internet Governance Caucus CS >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>Charter Amendment Initiative Jan 2013 - Support Summary >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>13/01/2013 >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>Support Shown for Proposed Amendments >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>Voting Options >>> >>>Nomcom Terms >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>  >>> >>>Membership Type >>> >>>Total >>> >>>Proposed by >>> >>>… prior to vote >>> >>>..Abstain >>> >>>..missing heading >>> >>>..nomcom >>> >>>Required Votes (2/3)   >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>1 >>> Voting Members >>>  103 >>> >>>10=< >>> >>>16 >>> >>>16 >>> >>>16 >>> >>>16 >>> >>>68.7 >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>2 >>> Qualified Members >>>  205 >>> >>>  >>> >>>4 >>> >>>4 >>> >>>8 >>> >>>8 >>> >>>  >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>308 >>> >>> >>> >>>20 >>> >>>20 >>> >>>24 >>> >>>24 >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> Kind Regards, >>> >>> >>> >>>-- >>> >>>Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala >>>P.O. Box 17862 >>>Suva >>>Fiji >>>Twitter: @SalanietaT >>>Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro >>>Tel: +679 3544828 >>>Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 >>> >>> >>> >>>____________________________________________________________ >>>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 >>> >>> -- “The fundamental cure for poverty is not money but knowledge" Sir William Arthur Lewis, Nobel Prize Economics, 1979 ____________________________________________________________You received this message as a subscriber on the list:    governance at lists.igcaucus.orgTo be removed from the list, visit:    http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribingFor all other list information and functions, see:    http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governanceTo 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: -------------- 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 From ias_pk at yahoo.com Mon Jan 14 02:08:13 2013 From: ias_pk at yahoo.com (Imran Ahmed Shah) Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2013 23:08:13 -0800 (PST) Subject: [governance] Notice to the IGC on Proposed Charter Amendments In-Reply-To: <50F38F8E.3090106@ciroap.org> References: <50F38F8E.3090106@ciroap.org> Message-ID: <1358147293.89595.YahooMailNeo@web125102.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Dear Jeremy, I support your proposed amendment. However, technically, at any time, the last election that represents the election for the last coordinator, but actually a every next election will replace the previously elected coordinator. So, we have to consider the term period completion of the previous coordinator. In addition to this, there may be some cases such as any coordinator term may be for one year (as described in the Charter) the coordinators election may be required earlier. So, I would suggest to review '15 months of the previous election' and rephrase it accordingly. Currently the charter reads as: "The selection will be done by on-line voting using the voting process according to the following formula: * election of the coordinator will be held, whenever possible by midsummer (the summer solstice). If events prevent an election by midsummer, it will be held as soon after midsummer as possible." It may be amended as: "The selection will be done by on-line voting using the voting process according to the following formula: * election of the coordinator will be held, whenever possible by the ending of the term period of the "outgoing coordinator". If events prevent an election by the completion of term, it will be held as soon after then." Regards   Imran Ahmed Shah >________________________________ > From: Jeremy Malcolm >To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org >Sent: Monday, 14 January 2013, 9:54 >Subject: Re: [governance] Notice to the IGC on Proposed Charter Amendments > > >On 14/01/13 06:47, Deirdre Williams wrote: > >My comment refers to point 5 below: >>"Before the initiation of the Voting eBallot, all voting members are requested to inform the IGC if they feel that there are other necessary amendments to be made to the  Charter and a period of 48 hours is given to allow members to respond." >>Is there any reason that we cannot deal with these amendments piecemeal? >>Avri has made a powerful and convincing proposal that has received a good deal of support. >>I propose therefore that we should vote on this amendment to this section of the Charter now. >>As other amendments are proposed we can deal with them. >>Attempts to review the whole Charter together have been unsuccessful. Perhaps making a review section by section will work better. >>What do others think? >I think that other amendments should be considered at the same time.  Here are the other amendments that I would like to propose be added to the ballot: > > * Under "Selection of Coordinators", regarding when elections are held, change "by midsummer (the summer solstice) to "within 15 months of the previous election".  Also in "If events prevent an election by midsummer, it will be held as soon after midsummer as possible," change the word "midsummer" to "then" in both places. > * Under "Working methods", update the address of the mailing list from governance at lists.cpsr.org to governance at lists.igcaucus.org. >The last of these, in particular, should be a no-brainer. > > >-- > >Dr Jeremy Malcolm >Senior Policy Officer >Consumers International | the global campaigning voice for consumers >Office for Asia-Pacific and the Middle East >Lot 5-1 Wisma WIM, 7 Jalan Abang Haji Openg, TTDI, 60000 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia >Tel: +60 3 7726 1599 >Your rights, our mission – download CI's Strategy 2015: http://consint.info/RightsMission >@Consumers_Int | http://www.consumersinternational.org/ | www.facebook.com/consumersinternational >Read our email confidentiality notice. Don't print this email unless necessary. >____________________________________________________________ >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: -------------- 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 From sonigituekpe at crossriverstate.gov.ng Mon Jan 14 02:19:54 2013 From: sonigituekpe at crossriverstate.gov.ng (Sonigitu Ekpe) Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2013 08:19:54 +0100 Subject: [governance] Notice to the IGC on Proposed Charter Amendments In-Reply-To: <50F39CF3.1010609@itforchange.net> References: <50F39CF3.1010609@itforchange.net> Message-ID: I think I support Parminder's view on holding important discussion before voting time. This amendments can be made in piece meal as we progress. Sonigitu On Jan 14, 2013 6:52 AM, "parminder" wrote: > > Is a discussion period period being scheduled before voting? Avri's emails > asking for taking action on her proposal have also asked for a discussion > period. In any case, it is a key democratic imperative as well as tradition > to hold discussions before important voting. parminder > > > On Monday 14 January 2013 04:17 AM, Deirdre Williams wrote: > > My comment refers to point 5 below: > "Before the initiation of the Voting eBallot, all voting members are > requested to inform the IGC if they feel that there are other necessary > amendments to be made to the Charter and a period of 48 hours is given to > allow members to respond." > Is there any reason that we cannot deal with these amendments piecemeal? > Avri has made a powerful and convincing proposal that has received a good > deal of support. > I propose therefore that we should vote on this amendment to this section > of the Charter now. > As other amendments are proposed we can deal with them. > Attempts to review the whole Charter together have been unsuccessful. > Perhaps making a review section by section will work better. > What do others think? > Deirdre > > On 13 January 2013 16:40, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro < > salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com> wrote: > >> Dear All, >> >> Firstly, I would like to thank Imran Ahmed Shah for helping prepare this >> Summary. Kindly find herewith the following notice in relation to the >> proposal for Charter Amendments. >> >> *Notice to Internet Governance Caucus (IGC) on Proposed Charter >> Amendments* >> >> >> >> 1. On January 10, 2013, Avri Doria (hereafter referred to as >> "Initiator") proposed a Charter Amendment. >> 2. At the material time, the initiator was not a Voting Member under >> the definitions of the Charter, however the number of support for the >> proposal is more than the required 10 members. >> 3. The amendment proposal is accepted for Voting. >> 4. Voting electronic ballot ( hereafter referred to as "eBallot") on >> the matter will be issued strictly to Voting Members. >> 5. Before the initiation of the Voting eBallot, all voting members >> are requested to inform the IGC if they feel that there are other necessary >> amendments to be made to the Charter and a period of 48 hours is given to >> allow members to respond. >> 6. If voting for the amendment commences post 18th January, 2013, the >> Voting members will be re-evaluated as per the current open Election for >> one of the coordinators of the IGC. >> >> >> A summary is enclosed within this email, see below and also attached. >> >> >> *Internet Governance Caucus CS* >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> *Charter Amendment Initiative Jan 2013 - Support Summary* >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> 13/01/2013 >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Support Shown for Proposed Amendments >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Voting Options >> >> Nomcom Terms >> >> >> >> >> >> >> *Membership Type* >> >> *Total* >> >> *Proposed by* >> >> … prior to vote >> >> ..Abstain >> >> ..missing heading >> >> ..nomcom >> >> *Required Votes (2/3)* >> >> >> *1* >> >> *Voting Members* >> *103* >> *10=<* >> >> *16* >> >> *16* >> >> *16* >> >> *16* >> >> *68.7* >> >> >> *2* >> >> *Qualified Members* >> *205* >> >> * * >> >> 4 >> >> 4 >> >> 8 >> >> 8 >> >> * * >> >> >> >> >> >> >> *308* >> >> >> >> *20* >> >> *20* >> >> *24* >> >> *24* >> >> >> >> >> >> Kind Regards, >> >> >> >> -- >> Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala >> P.O. Box 17862 >> Suva >> Fiji >> >> Twitter: @SalanietaT >> Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro >> Tel: +679 3544828 >> Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 >> >> >> >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 >> >> > > > -- > “The fundamental cure for poverty is not money but knowledge" Sir William > Arthur Lewis, Nobel Prize Economics, 1979 > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From parminder at itforchange.net Mon Jan 14 02:26:19 2013 From: parminder at itforchange.net (parminder) Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2013 12:56:19 +0530 Subject: [governance] Notice to the IGC on Proposed Charter Amendments In-Reply-To: <50F38F8E.3090106@ciroap.org> References: <50F38F8E.3090106@ciroap.org> Message-ID: <50F3B31B.4090406@itforchange.net> On Monday 14 January 2013 10:24 AM, Jeremy Malcolm wrote: > > I think that other amendments should be considered at the same time. > Here are the other amendments that I would like to propose be added to > the ballot: > > * Under "Selection of Coordinators", regarding when elections are > held, change "by midsummer (the summer solstice) to "within 15 > months of the previous election". Also in "If events prevent an > election by midsummer, it will be held as soon after midsummer as > possible," change the word "midsummer" to "then" in both places. > If the charter says 'within 15 months', there would almost always be a tendency towards delaying and the election would go to the 15th month, and I am not sure this is the best thing to do. I think we should simply change "by midsummer (the summer solstice)" to "by midwinter (the winter solstice in the Northern hemisphere) " or better still to avoid any valorisation of the North over South :), to "by the December solstice" Because we have got into this post IGF elections cycle which is quite appropriate given the intensive engagement that IGC has with the IGF... However, I dont insist that this amendment is considered at the same time as the other proposed ones. parminder > * Under "Working methods", update the address of the mailing list > from governance at lists.cpsr.org to governance at lists.igcaucus.org. > > The last of these, in particular, should be a no-brainer. > > -- > > *Dr Jeremy Malcolm > Senior Policy Officer > Consumers International | the global campaigning voice for consumers* > Office for Asia-Pacific and the Middle East > Lot 5-1 Wisma WIM, 7 Jalan Abang Haji Openg, TTDI, 60000 Kuala Lumpur, > Malaysia > Tel: +60 3 7726 1599 > > *Your rights, our mission – download CI's Strategy 2015:* > http://consint.info/RightsMission > > @Consumers_Int | www.consumersinternational.org > | > www.facebook.com/consumersinternational > > > Read our email confidentiality notice > . Don't > print this email unless necessary. > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From jeremy at ciroap.org Mon Jan 14 02:30:43 2013 From: jeremy at ciroap.org (Jeremy Malcolm) Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2013 15:30:43 +0800 Subject: [governance] Notice to the IGC on Proposed Charter Amendments In-Reply-To: <50F3B31B.4090406@itforchange.net> References: <50F38F8E.3090106@ciroap.org> <50F3B31B.4090406@itforchange.net> Message-ID: <50F3B423.1070901@ciroap.org> On 14/01/13 15:26, parminder wrote: > If the charter says 'within 15 months', there would almost always be a > tendency towards delaying and the election would go to the 15th month, > and I am not sure this is the best thing to do. > > I think we should simply change "by midsummer (the summer solstice)" > to "by midwinter (the winter solstice in the Northern hemisphere) " > > or better still to avoid any valorisation of the North over South :), to > > "by the December solstice" In that case (because what are we, druids?) we could just say "by the end of the calendar year". That would be even simpler. -- *Dr Jeremy Malcolm Senior Policy Officer Consumers International | the global campaigning voice for consumers* Office for Asia-Pacific and the Middle East Lot 5-1 Wisma WIM, 7 Jalan Abang Haji Openg, TTDI, 60000 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia Tel: +60 3 7726 1599 *Your rights, our mission – download CI's Strategy 2015:* http://consint.info/RightsMission @Consumers_Int | www.consumersinternational.org | www.facebook.com/consumersinternational Read our email confidentiality notice . Don't print this email unless necessary. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From parminder at itforchange.net Mon Jan 14 02:35:32 2013 From: parminder at itforchange.net (parminder) Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2013 13:05:32 +0530 Subject: [governance] Notice to the IGC on Proposed Charter Amendments In-Reply-To: <50F3B423.1070901@ciroap.org> References: <50F38F8E.3090106@ciroap.org> <50F3B31B.4090406@itforchange.net> <50F3B423.1070901@ciroap.org> Message-ID: <50F3B544.3080409@itforchange.net> On Monday 14 January 2013 01:00 PM, Jeremy Malcolm wrote: > On 14/01/13 15:26, parminder wrote: >> >> or better still to avoid any valorisation of the North over South :), to >> >> "by the December solstice" > > In that case (because what are we, druids?) we could just say "by the > end of the calendar year". That would be even simpler. yes, absolutely. > > -- > > *Dr Jeremy Malcolm > Senior Policy Officer > Consumers International | the global campaigning voice for consumers* > Office for Asia-Pacific and the Middle East > Lot 5-1 Wisma WIM, 7 Jalan Abang Haji Openg, TTDI, 60000 Kuala Lumpur, > Malaysia > Tel: +60 3 7726 1599 > > *Your rights, our mission – download CI's Strategy 2015:* > http://consint.info/RightsMission > > @Consumers_Int | www.consumersinternational.org > | > www.facebook.com/consumersinternational > > > Read our email confidentiality notice > . Don't > print this email unless necessary. > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From ias_pk at yahoo.com Mon Jan 14 03:05:30 2013 From: ias_pk at yahoo.com (Imran Ahmed Shah) Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2013 00:05:30 -0800 (PST) Subject: [governance] Notice to the IGC on Proposed Charter Amendments In-Reply-To: <50F3B544.3080409@itforchange.net> References: <50F38F8E.3090106@ciroap.org> <50F3B31B.4090406@itforchange.net> <50F3B423.1070901@ciroap.org> <50F3B544.3080409@itforchange.net> Message-ID: <1358150730.66129.YahooMailNeo@web125106.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Current election was delayed, but previous two elections results were announced in the month of Oct. Two months over, elections are being held in Jan. If we use only "by the end of calendar year" in some cases, elections will be held again in the January, so, why not cover both options? It may be amended as": * election of the coordinator will be held, whenever possible by the ending of the term period of the "outgoing coordinator". If events prevent an election by the completion of term, it will be held as soon as by the end of the calendar year".   Regards, Imran >________________________________ > From: parminder >To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Jeremy Malcolm >Sent: Monday, 14 January 2013, 12:35 >Subject: Re: [governance] Notice to the IGC on Proposed Charter Amendments > > > > >On Monday 14 January 2013 01:00 PM, Jeremy Malcolm wrote: > >On 14/01/13 15:26, parminder wrote: >> >> >>>or better still to avoid any valorisation of the North over South :), to >>> >>>"by the December solstice" >>> >>In that case (because what are we, druids?) we could just say "by the end of the calendar year".  That would be even simpler. >> >yes, absolutely. > > >> >>-- >> >>Dr Jeremy Malcolm >>Senior Policy Officer >>Consumers International | the global campaigning voice for consumers >>Office for Asia-Pacific and the Middle East >>Lot 5-1 Wisma WIM, 7 Jalan Abang Haji Openg, TTDI, 60000 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia >>Tel: +60 3 7726 1599 >>Your rights, our mission – download CI's Strategy 2015: http://consint.info/RightsMission >>@Consumers_Int | http://www.consumersinternational.org/ | www.facebook.com/consumersinternational >>Read our email confidentiality notice. Don't print this email unless necessary. > >____________________________________________________________ >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: -------------- 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 From parminder at itforchange.net Mon Jan 14 03:54:04 2013 From: parminder at itforchange.net (parminder) Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2013 14:24:04 +0530 Subject: [governance] Notice to the IGC on Proposed Charter Amendments In-Reply-To: <1358150730.66129.YahooMailNeo@web125106.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> References: <50F38F8E.3090106@ciroap.org> <50F3B31B.4090406@itforchange.net> <50F3B423.1070901@ciroap.org> <50F3B544.3080409@itforchange.net> <1358150730.66129.YahooMailNeo@web125106.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <50F3C7AC.4080009@itforchange.net> Imran The clause '"If events prevent an election by the , it will be held as soon after the as possible,"' is already there in the charter and takes care of the issue that you are mentioning.... parminder On Monday 14 January 2013 01:35 PM, Imran Ahmed Shah wrote: > Current election was delayed, but previous two elections results were > announced in the month of Oct. Two months over, elections are being > held in Jan. If we use only "by the end of calendar year" in some > cases, elections will be held again in the January, so, why not cover > both options? > It may be amended as": > * election of the coordinator will be held, whenever possible by the > ending of the term period of the "outgoing coordinator". If events > prevent an election by the completion of term, it will be held as soon > as by the end of the calendar year". > Regards, Imran > > *From:* parminder > *To:* governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Jeremy Malcolm > > *Sent:* Monday, 14 January 2013, 12:35 > *Subject:* Re: [governance] Notice to the IGC on Proposed Charter > Amendments > > > On Monday 14 January 2013 01:00 PM, Jeremy Malcolm wrote: >> On 14/01/13 15:26, parminder wrote: >>> >>> or better still to avoid any valorisation of the North over >>> South :), to >>> >>> "by the December solstice" >> >> In that case (because what are we, druids?) we could just say "by >> the end of the calendar year". That would be even simpler. > > yes, absolutely. >> >> -- >> *Dr Jeremy Malcolm >> Senior Policy Officer >> Consumers International | the global campaigning voice for consumers* >> Office for Asia-Pacific and the Middle East >> Lot 5-1 Wisma WIM, 7 Jalan Abang Haji Openg, TTDI, 60000 Kuala >> Lumpur, Malaysia >> Tel: +60 3 7726 1599 >> *Your rights, our mission – download CI's Strategy 2015:* >> http://consint.info/RightsMission >> @Consumers_Int | http://www.consumersinternational.org/ | >> www.facebook.com/consumersinternational >> >> Read our email confidentiality notice >> . >> Don't print this email unless necessary. > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From william.drake at uzh.ch Mon Jan 14 03:59:19 2013 From: william.drake at uzh.ch (William Drake) Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2013 09:59:19 +0100 Subject: [governance] Notice to the IGC on Proposed Charter Amendments In-Reply-To: <50F3B544.3080409@itforchange.net> References: <50F38F8E.3090106@ciroap.org> <50F3B31B.4090406@itforchange.net> <50F3B423.1070901@ciroap.org> <50F3B544.3080409@itforchange.net> Message-ID: <1FC731B2-FE70-41AC-B97D-52979AFFAE05@uzh.ch> On Jan 14, 2013, at 8:35, parminder wrote: > > On Monday 14 January 2013 01:00 PM, Jeremy Malcolm wrote: >> On 14/01/13 15:26, parminder wrote: >>> >>> or better still to avoid any valorisation of the North over South :), to >>> >>> "by the December solstice" >> >> In that case (because what are we, druids?) we could just say "by the end of the calendar year". That would be even simpler. > > yes, absolutely. But wouldn't this represent a valorisation of the Gregorian calendar over other calendars? :-) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From ias_pk at yahoo.com Mon Jan 14 04:53:17 2013 From: ias_pk at yahoo.com (Imran Ahmed Shah) Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2013 01:53:17 -0800 (PST) Subject: [governance] Notice to the IGC on Proposed Charter Amendments In-Reply-To: <1FC731B2-FE70-41AC-B97D-52979AFFAE05@uzh.ch> References: <50F38F8E.3090106@ciroap.org> <50F3B31B.4090406@itforchange.net> <50F3B423.1070901@ciroap.org> <50F3B544.3080409@itforchange.net> <1FC731B2-FE70-41AC-B97D-52979AFFAE05@uzh.ch> Message-ID: <1358157197.55375.YahooMailNeo@web125106.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Dear All, With reference to the recently proposed amendment for the Voting Options by adding "Abstain", whereas the abstention traditionally used for an active & protest gesture and beneficial for the sake of protesting against the system or candidates. I have some reservations to use one "Abstain" option for the coordinators elections where the candidate offers contribution to serve CS voluntarily. I think that due to fear of abstention (protesting votes), that will reduce the fair participation and voluntarily contributions in the IGC CS progressive activities. So, there are three options, if the abstention vote is required..: a.     to protest against all of the voluntarily candidates, (with apology), why the preferred candidate was not nominated (or self-nomination submitted) for the election? So, being a member of the caucus it is our prime responsibility to either nominate our best candidate or submit self-nomination, upon any call for the nominations. If the candidate(s) are more than one, should elect one of them through election. b.     for protesting against the system, when we are going to edit the charter and amendment process is on the way, it is right time to suggest the better system for the election and to manage the activities involved in it. c.     for the membership status, to remain a qualified and voting member (as otherwise, charter restrict to vote in the next election), it is better either to rephrase the text and rule defined in the charter, or if it is still mandatory to have the abstention option (for the reasons of a+b+c), it is proposed to also add the option for Blank Vote; that mean you have used your right to vote but not against the system or candidate, and still remain as a voting member. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From kabani.asif at gmail.com Mon Jan 14 06:33:01 2013 From: kabani.asif at gmail.com (Kabani) Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2013 16:33:01 +0500 Subject: [governance] Notice to the IGC on Proposed Charter Amendments In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Sala, Many thanks for sharing the details, and thanks to Imran for the hard work. Some discussion, before voting can be fruitful. Thanks & Regards On 14 January 2013 02:40, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro < salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com> wrote: > Dear All, > > Firstly, I would like to thank Imran Ahmed Shah for helping prepare this > Summary. Kindly find herewith the following notice in relation to the > proposal for Charter Amendments. > > *Notice to Internet Governance Caucus (IGC) on Proposed Charter Amendments > * > > > > 1. On January 10, 2013, Avri Doria (hereafter referred to as > "Initiator") proposed a Charter Amendment. > 2. At the material time, the initiator was not a Voting Member under > the definitions of the Charter, however the number of support for the > proposal is more than the required 10 members. > 3. The amendment proposal is accepted for Voting. > 4. Voting electronic ballot ( hereafter referred to as "eBallot") on > the matter will be issued strictly to Voting Members. > 5. Before the initiation of the Voting eBallot, all voting members are > requested to inform the IGC if they feel that there are other necessary > amendments to be made to the Charter and a period of 48 hours is given to > allow members to respond. > 6. If voting for the amendment commences post 18th January, 2013, the > Voting members will be re-evaluated as per the current open Election for > one of the coordinators of the IGC. > > > A summary is enclosed within this email, see below and also attached. > > *Internet Governance Caucus CS* > *Charter Amendment Initiative Jan 2013 - Support Summary* > 13/01/2013**** > Support Shown for Proposed Amendments**** > Voting Options**** > Nomcom Terms**** > **** > *Membership Type* > *Total* > *Proposed by* > … prior to vote**** > ..Abstain**** > ..missing heading**** > ..nomcom**** > *Required Votes (2/3)* > > *1* > *Voting Members* *103* > *10=<* > *16* > *16* > *16* > *16* > *68.7* > *2* > *Qualified Members* > *205* > * * > 4**** > 4**** > 8**** > 8**** > * * > *308* > *20* > *20* > *24* > *24* > **** > Kind Regards, > > > > -- > Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala > P.O. Box 17862 > Suva > Fiji > > Twitter: @SalanietaT > Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro > Tel: +679 3544828 > Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > -- *Connect me* [image: Facebook] [image: Twitter] [image: Youtube] [image: LinkedIn] *Wait Before you print - Think about the** **ENVIRONMENT* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From nb at bollow.ch Mon Jan 14 07:17:06 2013 From: nb at bollow.ch (Norbert Bollow) Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2013 13:17:06 +0100 Subject: [governance] WG on enhanced cooperation In-Reply-To: <50F39A6D.2060609@itforchange.net> References: <50F39A6D.2060609@itforchange.net> Message-ID: <20130114131706.654a175c@quill.bollow.ch> Parminder wrote: > It is expected that civil society may soon be asked to contribute > nominees for the working group on enhanced cooperation (WGEC). So > maybe the elborate nomcom process could be started early in this case. Hmm... how soon is this "soon"? I'm asking because of the pending charter amendment vote that will, if it passes, replace the per-selection-task nomcom process with a yearly nomcom. So - is this so urgent that it would be appropriate to initiate the process for creating a per-selection-task nomcom immediately, without waiting for the results of the charter amendment vote? Greetings, Norbert -------------- 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 From iza at anr.org Mon Jan 14 07:30:12 2013 From: iza at anr.org (Izumi AIZU) Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2013 21:30:12 +0900 Subject: [governance] Notice to the IGC on Proposed Charter Amendments In-Reply-To: <50F3B544.3080409@itforchange.net> References: <50F38F8E.3090106@ciroap.org> <50F3B31B.4090406@itforchange.net> <50F3B423.1070901@ciroap.org> <50F3B544.3080409@itforchange.net> Message-ID: I also support this. izumi 2013/1/14 parminder : > > On Monday 14 January 2013 01:00 PM, Jeremy Malcolm wrote: > > On 14/01/13 15:26, parminder wrote: > > > > or better still to avoid any valorisation of the North over South :), to > > "by the December solstice" > > > In that case (because what are we, druids?) we could just say "by the end of > the calendar year". That would be even simpler. > > > yes, absolutely. > > > -- > > Dr Jeremy Malcolm -------------- 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 From avri at acm.org Mon Jan 14 07:31:11 2013 From: avri at acm.org (Avri Doria) Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2013 07:31:11 -0500 Subject: [governance] Notice to the IGC on Proposed Charter Amendments In-Reply-To: <50F38F8E.3090106@ciroap.org> References: <50F38F8E.3090106@ciroap.org> Message-ID: <5CE73F97-0915-4977-A078-0B83BDD47BC6@acm.org> hi, If I were a qualified voter under the charter rules as interpreted by some*, I would join you in proposing these. Should you still be looking for endorsers after the 18th, count me in. avri * note: i bailed out of the vote last time, just as is being suggested this time, and yet was marked as a non-voter by our co-ordinator. I am considering an appeal if I am not given a vote in the charter revision. On 13 Jan 2013, at 23:54, Jeremy Malcolm wrote: > On 14/01/13 06:47, Deirdre Williams wrote: >> My comment refers to point 5 below: >> "Before the initiation of the Voting eBallot, all voting members are requested to inform the IGC if they feel that there are other necessary amendments to be made to the Charter and a period of 48 hours is given to allow members to respond." >> Is there any reason that we cannot deal with these amendments piecemeal? >> Avri has made a powerful and convincing proposal that has received a good deal of support. >> I propose therefore that we should vote on this amendment to this section of the Charter now. >> As other amendments are proposed we can deal with them. >> Attempts to review the whole Charter together have been unsuccessful. Perhaps making a review section by section will work better. >> What do others think? > > I think that other amendments should be considered at the same time. Here are the other amendments that I would like to propose be added to the ballot: > • Under "Selection of Coordinators", regarding when elections are held, change "by midsummer (the summer solstice) to "within 15 months of the previous election". Also in "If events prevent an election by midsummer, it will be held as soon after midsummer as possible," change the word "midsummer" to "then" in both places. > • Under "Working methods", update the address of the mailing list from governance at lists.cpsr.org to governance at lists.igcaucus.org. > The last of these, in particular, should be a no-brainer. > > -- > Dr Jeremy Malcolm > Senior Policy Officer > Consumers International | the global campaigning voice for consumers > Office for Asia-Pacific and the Middle East > Lot 5-1 Wisma WIM, 7 Jalan Abang Haji Openg, TTDI, 60000 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia > Tel: +60 3 7726 1599 > > Your rights, our mission – download CI's Strategy 2015: http://consint.info/RightsMission > > @Consumers_Int | www.consumersinternational.org | www.facebook.com/consumersinternational > > Read our email confidentiality notice. Don't print this email unless necessary. > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From nb at bollow.ch Mon Jan 14 07:32:24 2013 From: nb at bollow.ch (Norbert Bollow) Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2013 13:32:24 +0100 Subject: [governance] Notice to the IGC on Proposed Charter Amendments In-Reply-To: <50F38F8E.3090106@ciroap.org> References: <50F38F8E.3090106@ciroap.org> Message-ID: <20130114133224.5af3f0a2@quill.bollow.ch> Jeremy Malcolm wrote: > I think that other amendments should be considered at the same time. The downside here is related to the situation that there appears to be some urgency in regard to nomcom creation. > Here are the other amendments that I would like to propose be added to > the ballot: > > * Under "Selection of Coordinators", regarding when elections are > held, change "by midsummer (the summer solstice) to "within 15 > months of the previous election". Also in "If events prevent an > election by midsummer, it will be held as soon after midsummer as > possible," change the word "midsummer" to "then" in both places. This proposal would require further changes to the charter, as it would likely lead to no election at all taking place in some calender years. So I think that this proposal is not yet ripe for putting it to a vote. > * Under "Working methods", update the address of the mailing list > from governance at lists.cpsr.org to governance at lists.igcaucus.org. I support this amendment proposal. Greetings, Norbert -------------- 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 From David_Allen_AB63 at post.harvard.edu Mon Jan 14 07:48:20 2013 From: David_Allen_AB63 at post.harvard.edu (David Allen) Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2013 07:48:20 -0500 Subject: [governance] WG on enhanced cooperation In-Reply-To: <20130114131706.654a175c@quill.bollow.ch> References: <50F39A6D.2060609@itforchange.net> <20130114131706.654a175c@quill.bollow.ch> Message-ID: The InterSessional of the CSTD, held in Lima last week, made clear that there will be new WG on enhanced cooperation. David On Jan 14, 2013, at 7:17 AM, Norbert Bollow wrote: > Parminder wrote: > >> It is expected that civil society may soon be asked to contribute >> nominees for the working group on enhanced cooperation (WGEC). So >> maybe the elborate nomcom process could be started early in this >> case. > > Hmm... how soon is this "soon"? > > I'm asking because of the pending charter amendment vote that will, if > it passes, replace the per-selection-task nomcom process with a yearly > nomcom. > > So - is this so urgent that it would be appropriate to initiate the > process for creating a per-selection-task nomcom immediately, without > waiting for the results of the charter amendment vote? > > Greetings, > Norbert > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From fouadbajwa at gmail.com Mon Jan 14 08:12:41 2013 From: fouadbajwa at gmail.com (Fouad Bajwa) Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2013 18:12:41 +0500 Subject: [governance] WG on enhanced cooperation In-Reply-To: References: <50F39A6D.2060609@itforchange.net> <20130114131706.654a175c@quill.bollow.ch> Message-ID: Keeping in mind what Parminder and David have shared, an extraordinary committee should be created that comprises of: A. The IGC members that have been actively pursuing the issue of Enhanced Cooperation during the past two years including but not limited to Parminder, Bill Drake, Avri, Izumi etc..and those members that can actively participate in these meetings as well have a grip on the sender issue. B. This committee can then also help in carrying forward the nomcom process once the charter has been appended to the new amendments. C. There should be no delays to respond to and participate an upcoming issue that we are already in a position to cater to as its a specialized area of intervention and we have already been engaging on it with a certain degree of concern. Fouad Bajwa On Jan 14, 2013 5:49 PM, "David Allen" wrote: > The InterSessional of the CSTD, held in Lima last week, made clear that > there will be new WG on enhanced cooperation. > > David > > On Jan 14, 2013, at 7:17 AM, Norbert Bollow wrote: > > Parminder wrote: >> >> It is expected that civil society may soon be asked to contribute >>> nominees for the working group on enhanced cooperation (WGEC). So >>> maybe the elborate nomcom process could be started early in this case. >>> >> >> Hmm... how soon is this "soon"? >> >> I'm asking because of the pending charter amendment vote that will, if >> it passes, replace the per-selection-task nomcom process with a yearly >> nomcom. >> >> So - is this so urgent that it would be appropriate to initiate the >> process for creating a per-selection-task nomcom immediately, without >> waiting for the results of the charter amendment vote? >> >> Greetings, >> Norbert >> >> ______________________________**______________________________ >> 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 >> > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From nb at bollow.ch Mon Jan 14 08:32:35 2013 From: nb at bollow.ch (Norbert Bollow) Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2013 14:32:35 +0100 Subject: [governance] WG on enhanced cooperation In-Reply-To: References: <50F39A6D.2060609@itforchange.net> <20130114131706.654a175c@quill.bollow.ch> Message-ID: <20130114143235.5f71c9b2@quill.bollow.ch> David Allen wrote: > The InterSessional of the CSTD, held in Lima last week, made clear > that there will be new WG on enhanced cooperation. Actually that was decided by the UN General Assembly last year, as part of the resolution titled “Information and communications technologies for development” (A/RES/67/195). The key paragraphs of that resolution read: Reiterating the significance and urgency of the process towards enhanced cooperation in full consistency with the mandate provided in the Tunis Agenda and the need for enhanced cooperation to enable Governments, on an equal footing, to carry out their roles and responsibilities in respect of international public policy issues pertaining to the Internet, but not in respect of the day-to-day technical and operational matters that have no impact on those issues, Reaffirming that the outcomes of the World Summit on the Information Society related to Internet governance, namely, the process towards enhanced cooperation and the convening of the Internet Governance Forum, are to be pursued by the Secretary-General through two distinct processes, and recognizing that the two processes may be complementary, 23. Decides to create a working group on enhanced cooperation, within the framework of the Commission on Science and Technology for Development, to examine the mandate of the World Summit on the Information Society regarding enhanced cooperation, as contained in paragraphs 68 to 71 of the Tunis Agenda, and recommends necessary steps to operationalize it; the Working Group should submit its report to the Commission, at its seventeenth session, in 2014, as part of the preparations for the high-level review conference; 24. Also decides, in that regard, that the membership of the working group shall comprise four members each from the five regional groups of the membership of the Commission on Science and Technology for Development and four participants each, to be decided by the Commission, from the private sector, civil society, the technical and academic community and intergovernmental organizations; How quickly will they move forward with creating that commission, which implies inter alia selecting the four civil society invitees? We need to have a valid nomcom in place for making recommendations for those four civil society spots. Given that the target date by which that WG is intended to be able to deliver its results seems to be something like May 2014, I would expect them to want to move forward quickly. Anyone who has attended the Lima CSTD Intersessional might be able to tell us more about the specific plans. Since I don't know about anyone from Civil Society having been there, I'll ask the Swiss government. In any case I think that it would be best to initiate the nomcom selection process immediately, with a specific-task-nomcom so that this doesn't have to wait until after the charter amendment ballot has been held and has ended. Greetings, Norbert -------------- 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 From gideonrop at gmail.com Mon Jan 14 08:40:05 2013 From: gideonrop at gmail.com (Gideon) Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2013 16:40:05 +0300 Subject: [governance] WG on enhanced cooperation In-Reply-To: <20130114143235.5f71c9b2@quill.bollow.ch> References: <50F39A6D.2060609@itforchange.net> <20130114131706.654a175c@quill.bollow.ch> <20130114143235.5f71c9b2@quill.bollow.ch> Message-ID: The sooner the decisions are made the better, for the future discussions and structure. Gideon Rop, DotConnectafrica On Mon, Jan 14, 2013 at 4:32 PM, Norbert Bollow wrote: > David Allen wrote: > > > The InterSessional of the CSTD, held in Lima last week, made clear > > that there will be new WG on enhanced cooperation. > > Actually that was decided by the UN General Assembly last year, > as part of the resolution titled “Information and communications > technologies for development” (A/RES/67/195). > > The key paragraphs of that resolution read: > > Reiterating the significance and urgency of the process towards > enhanced cooperation in full consistency with the mandate provided > in the Tunis Agenda and the need for enhanced cooperation to enable > Governments, on an equal footing, to carry out their roles and > responsibilities in respect of international public policy issues > pertaining to the Internet, but not in respect of the day-to-day > technical and operational matters that have no impact on those > issues, > > Reaffirming that the outcomes of the World Summit on the > Information Society related to Internet governance, namely, the > process towards enhanced cooperation and the convening of the > Internet Governance Forum, are to be pursued by the > Secretary-General through two distinct processes, and recognizing > that the two processes may be complementary, > > 23. Decides to create a working group on enhanced cooperation, > within the framework of the Commission on Science and Technology > for Development, to examine the mandate of the World Summit on the > Information Society regarding enhanced cooperation, as contained in > paragraphs 68 to 71 of the Tunis Agenda, and recommends necessary > steps to operationalize it; the Working Group should submit its > report to the Commission, at its seventeenth session, in 2014, as > part of the preparations for the high-level review conference; > > 24. Also decides, in that regard, that the membership of the > working group shall comprise four members each from the five > regional groups of the membership of the Commission on Science and > Technology for Development and four participants each, to be > decided by the Commission, from the private sector, civil society, > the technical and academic community and intergovernmental > organizations; > > How quickly will they move forward with creating that commission, which > implies inter alia selecting the four civil society invitees? > > We need to have a valid nomcom in place for making recommendations for > those four civil society spots. > > Given that the target date by which that WG is intended to be able to > deliver its results seems to be something like May 2014, I would expect > them to want to move forward quickly. > > Anyone who has attended the Lima CSTD Intersessional might be able to > tell us more about the specific plans. Since I don't know about anyone > from Civil Society having been there, I'll ask the Swiss government. > > In any case I think that it would be best to initiate the nomcom > selection process immediately, with a specific-task-nomcom so that this > doesn't have to wait until after the charter amendment ballot has > been held and has ended. > > Greetings, > Norbert > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From jeremy at ciroap.org Mon Jan 14 08:42:00 2013 From: jeremy at ciroap.org (Jeremy Malcolm) Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2013 21:42:00 +0800 Subject: [governance] WG on enhanced cooperation In-Reply-To: <20130114143235.5f71c9b2@quill.bollow.ch> References: <50F39A6D.2060609@itforchange.net> <20130114131706.654a175c@quill.bollow.ch> <20130114143235.5f71c9b2@quill.bollow.ch> Message-ID: On 14/01/2013, at 9:32 PM, Norbert Bollow wrote: > In any case I think that it would be best to initiate the nomcom > selection process immediately, with a specific-task-nomcom so that this > doesn't have to wait until after the charter amendment ballot has > been held and has ended. Agreed, this will mean calling for another set of nominees for the random selection. Wondering if we can legitimately shortcut this process by asking the coordinator to email all those who volunteered for the pool last time (I can provide that list), and asking them if they're still willing to serve. The charter doesn't seem to prohibit such a thing, provided that we open it up for new volunteers also. -- Dr Jeremy Malcolm Senior Policy Officer Consumers International | the global campaigning voice for consumers Office for Asia-Pacific and the Middle East Lot 5-1 Wisma WIM, 7 Jalan Abang Haji Openg, TTDI, 60000 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia Tel: +60 3 7726 1599 Your rights, our mission – download CI's Strategy 2015: http://consint.info/RightsMission @Consumers_Int | www.consumersinternational.org | www.facebook.com/consumersinternational Read our email confidentiality notice. Don't print this email unless necessary. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From nb at bollow.ch Mon Jan 14 09:34:37 2013 From: nb at bollow.ch (Norbert Bollow) Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2013 15:34:37 +0100 Subject: [governance] WG on enhanced cooperation In-Reply-To: References: <50F39A6D.2060609@itforchange.net> <20130114131706.654a175c@quill.bollow.ch> <20130114143235.5f71c9b2@quill.bollow.ch> Message-ID: <20130114153437.351fe909@quill.bollow.ch> Jeremy Malcolm wrote: > On 14/01/2013, at 9:32 PM, Norbert Bollow wrote: > > > In any case I think that it would be best to initiate the nomcom > > selection process immediately, with a specific-task-nomcom so that > > this doesn't have to wait until after the charter amendment ballot > > has been held and has ended. > > > Agreed, this will mean calling for another set of nominees for the > random selection. Wondering if we can legitimately shortcut this > process by asking the coordinator to email all those who volunteered > for the pool last time (I can provide that list), and asking them if > they're still willing to serve. The charter doesn't seem to prohibit > such a thing, provided that we open it up for new volunteers also. I don't see a reason why it would be inappropriate to ask them directly whether they're willing to volunteer again. However I think that the words "At least 25 volunteers, i.e. 5 volunteers for each nomcom seat, are required for running the random process" imply volunteering specifically for being part of a specific nomcom with a particular statement of purpose. Greetings, Norbert -------------- 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 From David_Allen_AB63 at post.harvard.edu Mon Jan 14 09:34:36 2013 From: David_Allen_AB63 at post.harvard.edu (David Allen) Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2013 09:34:36 -0500 Subject: [governance] WG on enhanced cooperation In-Reply-To: <20130114143235.5f71c9b2@quill.bollow.ch> References: <50F39A6D.2060609@itforchange.net> <20130114131706.654a175c@quill.bollow.ch> <20130114143235.5f71c9b2@quill.bollow.ch> Message-ID: <8C928F0D-4225-49E3-8103-D3AB2F4F765C@post.harvard.edu> Indeed. And useful to have GA text. The InterSessional made clear the active planning for it - detail thinking underway David On Jan 14, 2013, at 8:32 AM, Norbert Bollow wrote: > David Allen wrote: > >> The InterSessional of the CSTD, held in Lima last week, made clear >> that there will be new WG on enhanced cooperation. > > Actually that was decided by the UN General Assembly last year, > as part of the resolution titled “Information and communications > technologies for development” (A/RES/67/195). > > The key paragraphs of that resolution read: > > Reiterating the significance and urgency of the process towards > enhanced cooperation in full consistency with the mandate provided > in the Tunis Agenda and the need for enhanced cooperation to enable > Governments, on an equal footing, to carry out their roles and > responsibilities in respect of international public policy issues > pertaining to the Internet, but not in respect of the day-to-day > technical and operational matters that have no impact on those > issues, > > Reaffirming that the outcomes of the World Summit on the > Information Society related to Internet governance, namely, the > process towards enhanced cooperation and the convening of the > Internet Governance Forum, are to be pursued by the > Secretary-General through two distinct processes, and recognizing > that the two processes may be complementary, > > 23. Decides to create a working group on enhanced cooperation, > within the framework of the Commission on Science and Technology > for Development, to examine the mandate of the World Summit on the > Information Society regarding enhanced cooperation, as contained in > paragraphs 68 to 71 of the Tunis Agenda, and recommends necessary > steps to operationalize it; the Working Group should submit its > report to the Commission, at its seventeenth session, in 2014, as > part of the preparations for the high-level review conference; > > 24. Also decides, in that regard, that the membership of the > working group shall comprise four members each from the five > regional groups of the membership of the Commission on Science and > Technology for Development and four participants each, to be > decided by the Commission, from the private sector, civil society, > the technical and academic community and intergovernmental > organizations; > > How quickly will they move forward with creating that commission, > which > implies inter alia selecting the four civil society invitees? > > We need to have a valid nomcom in place for making recommendations for > those four civil society spots. > > Given that the target date by which that WG is intended to be able to > deliver its results seems to be something like May 2014, I would > expect > them to want to move forward quickly. > > Anyone who has attended the Lima CSTD Intersessional might be able to > tell us more about the specific plans. Since I don't know about anyone > from Civil Society having been there, I'll ask the Swiss government. > > In any case I think that it would be best to initiate the nomcom > selection process immediately, with a specific-task-nomcom so that > this > doesn't have to wait until after the charter amendment ballot has > been held and has ended. > > Greetings, > Norbert > -------------- 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 From nb at bollow.ch Mon Jan 14 09:59:29 2013 From: nb at bollow.ch (Norbert Bollow) Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2013 15:59:29 +0100 Subject: [governance] WG on enhanced cooperation In-Reply-To: <20130114143235.5f71c9b2@quill.bollow.ch> References: <50F39A6D.2060609@itforchange.net> <20130114131706.654a175c@quill.bollow.ch> <20130114143235.5f71c9b2@quill.bollow.ch> Message-ID: <20130114155929.34a65edb@quill.bollow.ch> Ouch... I just noticed that the document http://www.un.org/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=A/67/434 which is linked from http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs//2012/ga11332.doc.htm which in turn is linked from https://www.un.org/en/ga/67/resolutions.shtml contains two versions of the draft resolution, and I mistakenly quoted from the first of these, while the second is the operative one. Sorry! I'll post excerpts from the correct version shortly. Greetings, Norbert Am Mon, 14 Jan 2013 14:32:35 +0100 schrieb Norbert Bollow : > David Allen wrote: > > > The InterSessional of the CSTD, held in Lima last week, made clear > > that there will be new WG on enhanced cooperation. > > Actually that was decided by the UN General Assembly last year, > as part of the resolution titled “Information and communications > technologies for development” (A/RES/67/195). > > The key paragraphs of that resolution read: > > Reiterating the significance and urgency of the process towards > enhanced cooperation in full consistency with the mandate provided > in the Tunis Agenda and the need for enhanced cooperation to > enable Governments, on an equal footing, to carry out their roles and > responsibilities in respect of international public policy issues > pertaining to the Internet, but not in respect of the day-to-day > technical and operational matters that have no impact on those > issues, > > Reaffirming that the outcomes of the World Summit on the > Information Society related to Internet governance, namely, the > process towards enhanced cooperation and the convening of the > Internet Governance Forum, are to be pursued by the > Secretary-General through two distinct processes, and recognizing > that the two processes may be complementary, > > 23. Decides to create a working group on enhanced cooperation, > within the framework of the Commission on Science and Technology > for Development, to examine the mandate of the World Summit on the > Information Society regarding enhanced cooperation, as contained > in paragraphs 68 to 71 of the Tunis Agenda, and recommends necessary > steps to operationalize it; the Working Group should submit its > report to the Commission, at its seventeenth session, in 2014, as > part of the preparations for the high-level review conference; > > 24. Also decides, in that regard, that the membership of the > working group shall comprise four members each from the five > regional groups of the membership of the Commission on Science and > Technology for Development and four participants each, to be > decided by the Commission, from the private sector, civil society, > the technical and academic community and intergovernmental > organizations; > > How quickly will they move forward with creating that commission, > which implies inter alia selecting the four civil society invitees? > > We need to have a valid nomcom in place for making recommendations for > those four civil society spots. > > Given that the target date by which that WG is intended to be able to > deliver its results seems to be something like May 2014, I would > expect them to want to move forward quickly. > > Anyone who has attended the Lima CSTD Intersessional might be able to > tell us more about the specific plans. Since I don't know about anyone > from Civil Society having been there, I'll ask the Swiss government. > > In any case I think that it would be best to initiate the nomcom > selection process immediately, with a specific-task-nomcom so that > this doesn't have to wait until after the charter amendment ballot has > been held and has ended. > > Greetings, > Norbert > -------------- 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 From nb at bollow.ch Mon Jan 14 10:21:57 2013 From: nb at bollow.ch (Norbert Bollow) Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2013 16:21:57 +0100 Subject: [governance] WG on enhanced cooperation In-Reply-To: <20130114155929.34a65edb@quill.bollow.ch> References: <50F39A6D.2060609@itforchange.net> <20130114131706.654a175c@quill.bollow.ch> <20130114143235.5f71c9b2@quill.bollow.ch> <20130114155929.34a65edb@quill.bollow.ch> Message-ID: <20130114162157.2e2b3409@quill.bollow.ch> Norbert Bollow wrote: > I'll post excerpts from the correct version shortly. Here: Reiterating the significance and urgency of the process towards enhanced cooperation in full consistency with the mandate provided in the Tunis Agenda and the need for enhanced cooperation to enable Governments, on an equal footing, to carry out their roles and responsibilities in respect of international public policy issues pertaining to the Internet but not in respect of the day-to-day technical and operational matters that have no impact on those issues, Reaffirming that the outcomes of the World Summit on the Information Society related to Internet governance, namely, the process towards enhanced cooperation and the convening of the Internet Governance Forum, are to be pursued by the Secretary-General through two distinct processes, and recognizing that the two processes may be complementary, 20. Invites the Chair of the Commission on Science and Technology for Development to establish a working group on enhanced cooperation to examine the mandate of the World Summit on the Information Society regarding enhanced cooperation as contained in the Tunis Agenda, through seeking, compiling and reviewing inputs from all Member States and all other stakeholders, and to make recommendations on how to fully implement this mandate; when convening the working group, the Chair should also take into consideration the meetings already scheduled on the calendar of the Commission, and the working group should report to the Commission at its seventeenth session, in 2014, as an input to the overall review of the outcomes of the World Summit on the Information Society; 21. Requests the Chair of the Commission on Science and Technology for Development to ensure that the working group on enhanced cooperation has balanced representation between Governments, from the five regional groups of the Commission, and invitees from all other stakeholders, namely, the private sector, civil society, technical and academic communities, and intergovernmental and international organizations, drawn equally from developing and developed countries; (Source: http://www.un.org/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=A/67/434 which is linked from http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs//2012/ga11332.doc.htm which in turn is linked from https://www.un.org/en/ga/67/resolutions.shtml and specifically the second version of the draft resolution in that document, which is the operative one.) The target date for the WG's report remains unchanged the 17th CSTD session in 2014. The language regarding invitees from the various non-governmental stakeholder groupings has however changed significantly. Greetings, Norbert -------------- 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 From jaryn56 at gmail.com Mon Jan 14 10:38:56 2013 From: jaryn56 at gmail.com (=?UTF-8?B?Sm9zw6kgRsOpbGl4IEFyaWFzIFluY2hl?=) Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2013 10:38:56 -0500 Subject: [governance] WG on enhanced cooperation In-Reply-To: <20130114155929.34a65edb@quill.bollow.ch> References: <50F39A6D.2060609@itforchange.net> <20130114131706.654a175c@quill.bollow.ch> <20130114143235.5f71c9b2@quill.bollow.ch> <20130114155929.34a65edb@quill.bollow.ch> Message-ID: Estoy de acuerdo en que lo mejor sería iniciar el NomCom, para el proceso de selección inmediata. Y no se tenga que pedir una nueva lista, se puede iniciar con los que ya se ofrecieron. La pregunta es; si se puede legítimamente abreviar este proceso, de pedir al coordinador responsable que envié por correo electrónico a todos los que se ofrecieron para la última vez y preguntarles si están todavía dispuestos a servir. La carta no parece prohibir tal cosa. *Cordialmente: José Félix Arias Ynche* * Investigador Social Para El Desarrollo* 2013/1/14 Norbert Bollow > Ouch... I just noticed that the document > http://www.un.org/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=A/67/434 which is > linked from http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs//2012/ga11332.doc.htm > which in turn is linked from > https://www.un.org/en/ga/67/resolutions.shtml contains two versions > of the draft resolution, and I mistakenly quoted from the first of > these, while the second is the operative one. > > Sorry! > > I'll post excerpts from the correct version shortly. > > Greetings, > Norbert > > > > > Am Mon, 14 Jan 2013 14:32:35 +0100 > schrieb Norbert Bollow : > > > David Allen wrote: > > > > > The InterSessional of the CSTD, held in Lima last week, made clear > > > that there will be new WG on enhanced cooperation. > > > > Actually that was decided by the UN General Assembly last year, > > as part of the resolution titled “Information and communications > > technologies for development” (A/RES/67/195). > > > > The key paragraphs of that resolution read: > > > > Reiterating the significance and urgency of the process towards > > enhanced cooperation in full consistency with the mandate provided > > in the Tunis Agenda and the need for enhanced cooperation to > > enable Governments, on an equal footing, to carry out their roles and > > responsibilities in respect of international public policy issues > > pertaining to the Internet, but not in respect of the day-to-day > > technical and operational matters that have no impact on those > > issues, > > > > Reaffirming that the outcomes of the World Summit on the > > Information Society related to Internet governance, namely, the > > process towards enhanced cooperation and the convening of the > > Internet Governance Forum, are to be pursued by the > > Secretary-General through two distinct processes, and recognizing > > that the two processes may be complementary, > > > > 23. Decides to create a working group on enhanced cooperation, > > within the framework of the Commission on Science and Technology > > for Development, to examine the mandate of the World Summit on the > > Information Society regarding enhanced cooperation, as contained > > in paragraphs 68 to 71 of the Tunis Agenda, and recommends necessary > > steps to operationalize it; the Working Group should submit its > > report to the Commission, at its seventeenth session, in 2014, as > > part of the preparations for the high-level review conference; > > > > 24. Also decides, in that regard, that the membership of the > > working group shall comprise four members each from the five > > regional groups of the membership of the Commission on Science and > > Technology for Development and four participants each, to be > > decided by the Commission, from the private sector, civil society, > > the technical and academic community and intergovernmental > > organizations; > > > > How quickly will they move forward with creating that commission, > > which implies inter alia selecting the four civil society invitees? > > > > We need to have a valid nomcom in place for making recommendations for > > those four civil society spots. > > > > Given that the target date by which that WG is intended to be able to > > deliver its results seems to be something like May 2014, I would > > expect them to want to move forward quickly. > > > > Anyone who has attended the Lima CSTD Intersessional might be able to > > tell us more about the specific plans. Since I don't know about anyone > > from Civil Society having been there, I'll ask the Swiss government. > > > > In any case I think that it would be best to initiate the nomcom > > selection process immediately, with a specific-task-nomcom so that > > this doesn't have to wait until after the charter amendment ballot has > > been held and has ended. > > > > Greetings, > > Norbert > > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From gpaque at gmail.com Mon Jan 14 12:46:44 2013 From: gpaque at gmail.com (Ginger Paque) Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2013 11:46:44 -0600 Subject: [governance] NY Times on 'hactivitst' and Aaron Swartz/Techdirt on Anonymou and DDOSs Message-ID: I found both of these articles to be interesting as we search for effective means of communication. I have pasted the full NYT article below because some might find access to be difficult. http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/01/13/what-is-a-hacktivist/?nl=opinion&emc=edit_ty_20130114 The Techdirt article speaks to DDOS as a form of protest... and the interesting technique of asking that DDOS be recognized as a valid form of protest. http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130111/08053821642/anonymous-launches-white-house-petition-saying-ddos-should-be-recognized-as-valid-form-protest.shtml gp [image: Opinionator - A Gathering of Opinion From Around the Web] January 13, 2013, 8:30 pmWhat is a ‘Hacktivist’?By PETER LUDLOW The untimely death of the young Internet activist Aaron Swartz, apparently by suicide, has prompted an outpouring of reaction in the digital world. Foremost among the debates being reheated - one which had already grown in the wake of larger and more daring data breaches in the past few years - is whether Swartz's activities as a "hacktivist" were being unfairly defined as malicious or criminal. In particular, critics (as well as Swartz's family in a formal statement) have focused on the federal government's indictment of Swartz for downloading millions of documents from the scholarly database JSTOR, an action which JSTOR itself had declined to prosecute. I believe the debate itself is far broader than the specifics of this unhappy case, for if there was prosecutorial overreach it raises the question of whether we as a society created the enabling condition for this sort of overreach by letting the demonization of hacktivists go unanswered. Prosecutors do not work in a vacuum, after all; they are more apt to pursue cases where public discourse supports their actions. The debate thus raises an issue that, as philosopher of language, I have spent time considering: the impact of how words and terms are defined in the public sphere. "Lexical Warfare" is a phrase that I like to use for battles over how a term is to be understood. Our political discourse is full of such battles; it is pretty routine to find discussions of who gets to be called "Republican" (as opposed to RINO - Republican in Name Only), what "freedom" should mean, what legitimately gets to be called "rape" -and the list goes on. Lexical warfare is important because it can be a device to marginalize individuals within their self-identified political affiliation (for example, branding RINO's defines them as something other than true Republicans), or it can beguile us into ignoring true threats to freedom (focusing on threats from government while being blind to threats from corporations, religion and custom), and in cases in which the word in question is "rape," the definition can have far reaching consequences for the rights of women and social policy. Lexical warfare is not exclusively concerned with changing the definitions of words and terms - it can also work to attach either a negative or positive affect to a term. Ronald Reagan and other conservatives successfully loaded the word "liberal" with negative connotations, while enhancing the positive aura of terms like "patriot" (few today would reject the label "patriotic," but rather argue for why they are entitled to it). Over the past few years we've watched a lexical warfare battle slowly unfold in the treatment of the term "hacktivism." There has been an effort to redefine what the word means and what kinds of activities it describes; at the same time there has been an effort to tarnish the hacktivist label so that anyone who chooses to label themselves as such does so at their peril. In the simplest and broadest sense, a hacktivist is someone who uses technology hacking to effect social change. The conflict now is between those who want to change the meaning of the word to denote immoral, sinister activities and those who want to defend the broader, more inclusive understanding of hacktivist. Let's start with those who are trying to change the meaning so that it denotes sinister activities. Over the past year several newspapers and blogs have cited Verizon's 2012 Data Breach Investigations Report, which claimed that 58 percent of all data leaked in 2011 was owing to the actions of "ideologically motivated hacktivists." An example of the concern was an articlein Infosecurity Magazine: The year 2011 is renowned for being the year that hacktivists out-stole cybercriminals to take top honors according to the Verizon data breach report. Of the 174 million stolen records it tracked in 2011, 100 million were taken by hacktivist groups. Suddenly, things are looking black and white again. Regardless of political motivation or intent, if there are victims of the attacks they perpetrate, then hacktivism has crossed the line. Not OK. Meanwhile an articlein ThreatPost proclaimed "Anonymous: Hacktivists Steal Most Data in 2011." The first thing to note is that both of these media sources are written by and for members of the information security business - it is in their interest to manufacture a threat, for the simple reason that threats mean business for these groups. But is it fair to say that the threat is being "manufactured"? What of the Verizon report that they cite? The problem is that the headlines and articles, designed to tar hacktivists and make us fear them, did not reflect what the Verizon report actually said. According to page 19 of the report only 3 percent of the data breaches in the survey were by hacktivists - the bulk of them were by routine cybercriminals, disgruntled employees and nation states (83 percent were by organized criminals). The "most data" claim, while accurate, gives a skewed picture. According to Chris Novak, the Managing Principal of Investigative Response on Verizon's RISK Team, interviewed in ThreatPost, 2 percent of the 90 actions analyzed in the report accounted for 58 percent of the data released. The interview with Novak suggests that this data loss came from precisely two hacktivist actions - both by spin-offs of the well-known hacktivist group Anonymous - and that these large data dumps stemmed from the actions against the security firm HB Gary Federal, which had publicly announced their efforts to expose Anonymous, and a computer security firm called Stratfor). That means that in 2011 if you were worried about an intrusion into your system it was 33 times more likely that the perpetrator would be a criminal, nation state or disgruntled employee than a hacktivist. If you weren't picking fights with Anonymous the chances would have dropped to zero - at least according to the cases analyzed in the report. In effect, these infosecurity media outlets cited two actions by Anonymous spin-offs, implicated that actions like this were a principle project of hacktivism, and thereby implicated a larger, imminent threat of hacktivism. Meanwhile, the meaning of hacktivist was being narrowed from people who use technology in support of social causes to meaning individuals principally concerned with infiltrating and releasing the data of almost anyone. Now let's turn to an attempt to maintain the broader understanding of hacktivism. Several months ago I attended a birthday party in Germany for Daniel Domscheit-Berg, who was turning 34. As it happened, Domscheit-Berg had also been the spokesperson for Wikileaks and, after Julian Assange, the group's most visible person. He had left the organization in 2010, and now he had a new venture, OpenLeaks. The party was also meant to be a coming out party for OpenLeaks. The party was to be held in the new headquarters and training center for OpenLeaks - a large house in a small town about an hour outside of Berlin. I was half-expecting to find a bunker full of hackers probing Web sites with SQL injections and sifting through State Department cables, but what I found was something else altogether. When I arrived at the house the first thing I noticed was a large vegetable garden outside. The second thing I noticed was that a tree out front had been fitted out with a colorful knit wool sweater. This was the effort of Daniel's wife Anke - "knit hacking," she called it. And around the small town I saw evidence of her guerilla knit hacking. The steel poles of nearby street signs had also been fitted with woolen sweaters. Most impressively, though, a World War II tank, sitting outside a nearby former Nazi concentration camp for women had also been knit-hacked; the entire barrel of the tank's gun had been fit with a tight colorful wool sweater and adorned with some woolen flowers for good measure. I interpreted these knit-hackings as counteractions to the attempts to define hacktivist as something sinister; they serve as ostensive definitions of what hacktivism is and what hacktivists do. Of course the birthday party had elements of hackerdom understood more narrowly. There were some members of the Chaos Computer Club (a legendary hacker group), and there was a healthy supply of Club Mate - the energy drink of choice of European hackers, but the main message being delivered was something else: a do-it-yourself aesthetic - planting your own garden, knitting your own sweaters, foraging for mushrooms and counting on a local friend to bag you some venison. What part of this lifestyle was the hacktivism part? Daniel and his friends would like to say that all of it is. The intention here was clear: an attempt to defend the traditional, less sinister understanding of hacktivism and perhaps broaden it a bit, adding some positive affect to boot; more specifically, that hacking is fundamentally about refusing to be intimidated or cowed into submission by any technology, about understanding the technology and acquiring the power to repurpose it to our individual needs, and for the good of the many. Moreover, they were saying that a true hacktivist doesn't favor new technology over old - what is critical is that the technologies be in our hands rather than out of our control. This ideal, theoretically, should extend to beyond computer use, to technologies for food production, shelter and clothing, and of course, to all the means we use to communicate with one another. It would also, of course, extend to access to knowledge more generally - a value that was inherent in Aaron Swartz's hacking of the JSTOR data base. Our responsibility in this particular episode of lexical warfare is to be critical and aware of the public uses of language, and to be alert to what is at stake - whether the claims made by the infosecurity industry or the government, or the gestures by the hacktivists, are genuine, misleading or correct. We are not passive observers in this dispute. The meaning of words is determined by those of us who use language, and it has consequences. Whether or not Aaron Swartz suffered because of the manipulation of the public discourse surrounding hacking, his case is a reminder that it is important that we be attuned to attempts to change the meanings of words in consequential ways. It is important because we are the ones who will decide who will win. *Peter Ludlow is professor of philosophy at Northwestern University. His most recent book is "The Philosophy of Generative Linguistics." * Ginger (Virginia) Paque VirginiaP at diplomacy.edu Diplo Foundation Internet Governance Capacity Building Programme www.diplomacy.edu/ig ** ** -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From ivarhartmann at gmail.com Mon Jan 14 13:03:18 2013 From: ivarhartmann at gmail.com (Ivar A. M. Hartmann) Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2013 16:03:18 -0200 Subject: [governance] NY Times on 'hactivitst' and Aaron Swartz/Techdirt on Anonymou and DDOSs In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: "if there was prosecutorial overreach it raises the question of whether we as a society created the enabling condition for this sort of overreach by letting the demonization of hacktivists go unanswered. Prosecutors do not work in a vacuum, after all; they are more apt to pursue cases where public discourse supports their actions." On the prosecution strategy of the US gov - correctly labeled as 'bullying' by Lessig: this attitude doesn't reflect "public discourse support[ing] their actions." Not by a long shot. It reflects the kind of indirect corruption the working of which Lessig himself explained so well in Republic, Lost. The copyright industry - better yet, the legacy IP industry - captured the US gov, both the Legislative and the Executive branches. With money, not sound policy ideas. This capture has been so complete that absurds such as SOPA were able to almost pass and an IP Czar was created. One which obviously sees its role as being one of "protecting legacy industry jobs". The prosecutors weren't pushed to the ludicrous pursuit of Swartz by 'public discourse'. They were pushed by the copyright industry's lobby - indirectly, therefore, by its money. Best, Ivar On Mon, Jan 14, 2013 at 3:46 PM, Ginger Paque wrote: > I found both of these articles to be interesting as we search for > effective means of communication. I have pasted the full NYT article below > because some might find access to be difficult. > > > http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/01/13/what-is-a-hacktivist/?nl=opinion&emc=edit_ty_20130114 > > The Techdirt article speaks to DDOS as a form of protest... and the > interesting technique of asking that DDOS be recognized as a valid form of > protest. > > > http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130111/08053821642/anonymous-launches-white-house-petition-saying-ddos-should-be-recognized-as-valid-form-protest.shtml > > gp > [image: Opinionator - A Gathering of Opinion From Around the Web] > January 13, 2013, 8:30 pmWhat is a ‘Hacktivist’?By PETER LUDLOW > > The untimely death of the young Internet activist Aaron Swartz, apparently > by suicide, has prompted an outpouring of reaction in the digital world. > Foremost among the debates being reheated - one which had already grown in > the wake of larger and more daring data breaches in the past few years - is > whether Swartz's activities as a "hacktivist" were being unfairly defined > as malicious or criminal. In particular, critics (as well as Swartz's > family in a formal statement) > have focused on the federal government's indictment of Swartz for > downloading millions of documents from the scholarly database JSTOR, an > action which JSTOR itself had declined to prosecute. > > I believe the debate itself is far broader than the specifics of this > unhappy case, for if there was prosecutorial overreach it raises the > question of whether we as a society created the enabling condition for this > sort of overreach by letting the demonization of hacktivists go unanswered. > Prosecutors do not work in a vacuum, after all; they are more apt to pursue > cases where public discourse supports their actions. The debate thus raises > an issue that, as philosopher of language, I have spent time considering: > the impact of how words and terms are defined in the public sphere. > > "Lexical Warfare" is a phrase that I like to use for battles over how a > term is to be understood. Our political discourse is full of such battles; > it is pretty routine to find discussions of who gets to be called > "Republican" (as opposed to RINO - Republican in Name Only), what "freedom" > should mean, what legitimately gets to be called "rape" -and the list goes > on. > > Lexical warfare is important because it can be a device to marginalize > individuals within their self-identified political affiliation (for > example, branding RINO's defines them as something other than true > Republicans), or it can beguile us into ignoring true threats to freedom > (focusing on threats from government while being blind to threats from > corporations, religion and custom), and in cases in which the word in > question is "rape," the definition can have far reaching consequences for > the rights of women and social policy. > > Lexical warfare is not exclusively concerned with changing the definitions > of words and terms - it can also work to attach either a negative or > positive affect to a term. Ronald Reagan and other conservatives > successfully loaded the word "liberal" with negative connotations, while > enhancing the positive aura of terms like "patriot" (few today would reject > the label "patriotic," but rather argue for why they are entitled to it). > > Over the past few years we've watched a lexical warfare battle slowly > unfold in the treatment of the term "hacktivism." There has been an effort > to redefine what the word means and what kinds of activities it describes; > at the same time there has been an effort to tarnish the hacktivist label > so that anyone who chooses to label themselves as such does so at their > peril. > > In the simplest and broadest sense, a hacktivist is someone who uses > technology hacking to effect social change. The conflict now is between > those who want to change the meaning of the word to denote immoral, > sinister activities and those who want to defend the broader, more > inclusive understanding of hacktivist. Let's start with those who are > trying to change the meaning so that it denotes sinister activities. > > Over the past year several newspapers and blogs have cited Verizon's 2012 > Data Breach Investigations Report, > which claimed that 58 percent of all data leaked in 2011 was owing to the > actions of "ideologically motivated hacktivists." An example of the concern > was an articlein Infosecurity Magazine: > > The year 2011 is renowned for being the year that hacktivists out-stole > cybercriminals to take top honors according to the Verizon data breach > report. Of the 174 million stolen records it tracked in 2011, 100 million > were taken by hacktivist groups. > > Suddenly, things are looking black and white again. Regardless of > political motivation or intent, if there are victims of the attacks they > perpetrate, then hacktivism has crossed the line. Not OK. > > Meanwhile an articlein ThreatPost proclaimed "Anonymous: Hacktivists Steal Most Data in 2011." > > The first thing to note is that both of these media sources are written by > and for members of the information security business - it is in their > interest to manufacture a threat, for the simple reason that threats mean > business for these groups. But is it fair to say that the threat is being > "manufactured"? What of the Verizon report that they cite? > > The problem is that the headlines and articles, designed to tar > hacktivists and make us fear them, did not reflect what the Verizon report > actually said. According to page 19 of the report only 3 percent of the > data breaches in the survey were by hacktivists - the bulk of them were by > routine cybercriminals, disgruntled employees and nation states (83 percent > were by organized criminals). > > The "most data" claim, while accurate, gives a skewed picture. According > to Chris Novak, the Managing Principal of Investigative Response on > Verizon's RISK Team, interviewed in ThreatPost, 2 percent of the 90 actions > analyzed in the report accounted for 58 percent of the data released. The > interview with Novak suggests that this data loss came from precisely two > hacktivist actions - both by spin-offs of the well-known hacktivist group > Anonymous - and that these large data dumps stemmed from the actions > against the security firm HB Gary Federal, which had publicly announced > their efforts to expose Anonymous, and a computer security firm called > Stratfor). That means that in 2011 if you were worried about an intrusion > into your system it was 33 times more likely that the perpetrator would be > a criminal, nation state or disgruntled employee than a hacktivist. If you > weren't picking fights with Anonymous the chances would have dropped to > zero - at least according to the cases analyzed in the report. > > In effect, these infosecurity media outlets cited two actions by Anonymous > spin-offs, implicated that actions like this were a principle project of > hacktivism, and thereby implicated a larger, imminent threat of hacktivism. > Meanwhile, the meaning of hacktivist was being narrowed from people who use > technology in support of social causes to meaning individuals principally > concerned with infiltrating and releasing the data of almost anyone. > > Now let's turn to an attempt to maintain the broader understanding of > hacktivism. Several months ago I attended a birthday party in Germany for > Daniel Domscheit-Berg, who was turning 34. As it happened, Domscheit-Berg > had also been the spokesperson for Wikileaks and, after Julian Assange, the > group's most visible person. He had left the organization in 2010, and now > he had a new venture, OpenLeaks. The party was also meant to be a coming > out party for OpenLeaks. > > The party was to be held in the new headquarters and training center for > OpenLeaks - a large house in a small town about an hour outside of Berlin. > I was half-expecting to find a bunker full of hackers probing Web sites > with SQL injections and sifting through State Department cables, but what I > found was something else altogether. > > When I arrived at the house the first thing I noticed was a large > vegetable garden outside. The second thing I noticed was that a tree out > front had been fitted out with a colorful knit wool sweater. This was the > effort of Daniel's wife Anke - "knit hacking," she called it. And around > the small town I saw evidence of her guerilla knit hacking. The steel poles > of nearby street signs had also been fitted with woolen sweaters. Most > impressively, though, a World War II tank, sitting outside a nearby former > Nazi concentration camp for women had also been knit-hacked; the entire > barrel of the tank's gun had been fit with a tight colorful wool sweater > and adorned with some woolen flowers for good measure. I interpreted these > knit-hackings as counteractions to the attempts to define hacktivist as > something sinister; they serve as ostensive definitions of what hacktivism > is and what hacktivists do. > > Of course the birthday party had elements of hackerdom understood more > narrowly. There were some members of the Chaos Computer Club (a legendary > hacker group), and there was a healthy supply of Club Mate - the energy > drink of choice of European hackers, but the main message being delivered > was something else: a do-it-yourself aesthetic - planting your own garden, > knitting your own sweaters, foraging for mushrooms and counting on a local > friend to bag you some venison. What part of this lifestyle was the > hacktivism part? Daniel and his friends would like to say that all of it is. > > The intention here was clear: an attempt to defend the traditional, less > sinister understanding of hacktivism and perhaps broaden it a bit, adding > some positive affect to boot; more specifically, that hacking is > fundamentally about refusing to be intimidated or cowed into submission by > any technology, about understanding the technology and acquiring the power > to repurpose it to our individual needs, and for the good of the many. > Moreover, they were saying that a true hacktivist doesn't favor new > technology over old - what is critical is that the technologies be in our > hands rather than out of our control. This ideal, theoretically, should > extend to beyond computer use, to technologies for food production, shelter > and clothing, and of course, to all the means we use to communicate with > one another. It would also, of course, extend to access to knowledge more > generally - a value that was inherent in Aaron Swartz's hacking of the > JSTOR data base. > > Our responsibility in this particular episode of lexical warfare is to be > critical and aware of the public uses of language, and to be alert to what > is at stake - whether the claims made by the infosecurity industry or the > government, or the gestures by the hacktivists, are genuine, misleading or > correct. We are not passive observers in this dispute. The meaning of words > is determined by those of us who use language, and it has consequences. > Whether or not Aaron Swartz suffered because of the manipulation of the > public discourse surrounding hacking, his case is a reminder that it is > important that we be attuned to attempts to change the meanings of words in > consequential ways. It is important because we are the ones who will decide > who will win. > > *Peter Ludlow is professor of philosophy at Northwestern University. His > most recent book is "The Philosophy of Generative Linguistics." > * > > > Ginger (Virginia) Paque > > VirginiaP at diplomacy.edu > Diplo Foundation > Internet Governance Capacity Building Programme > www.diplomacy.edu/ig > ** > ** > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From gurstein at gmail.com Mon Jan 14 13:18:24 2013 From: gurstein at gmail.com (michael gurstein) Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2013 10:18:24 -0800 Subject: [governance] Notice to the IGC on Proposed Charter Amendments In-Reply-To: <1358157197.55375.YahooMailNeo@web125106.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> References: <50F38F8E.3090106@ciroap.org> <50F3B31B.4090406@itforchange.net> <50F3B423.1070901@ciroap.org> <50F3B544.3080409@itforchange.net> <1FC731B2-FE70-41AC-B97D-52979AFFAE05@uzh.ch> <1358157197.55375.YahooMailNeo@web125106.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <020a01cdf283$98dfbe10$ca9f3a30$@gmail.com> Imran is raising a very good point about the "abstain" option. A "none of the above" vote is usually a protest against "the system" which is (the abstainer is asserting) somehow structured in such a way as to not allow for choices sufficient to the abstainer's taste. In our case, who would the abstainer be protesting against and what are the structures that are in place to prevent the inclusion of a candidate to the taste of the abstainer i.e. what does the abstainer want and who do they expect to do this? M From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Imran Ahmed Shah Sent: Monday, January 14, 2013 1:53 AM To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org Subject: Re: [governance] Notice to the IGC on Proposed Charter Amendments Dear All, With reference to the recently proposed amendment for the Voting Options by adding "Abstain", whereas the abstention traditionally used for an active & protest gesture and beneficial for the sake of protesting against the system or candidates. I have some reservations to use one "Abstain" option for the coordinators elections where the candidate offers contribution to serve CS voluntarily. I think that due to fear of abstention (protesting votes), that will reduce the fair participation and voluntarily contributions in the IGC CS progressive activities. So, there are three options, if the abstention vote is required..: a. to protest against all of the voluntarily candidates, (with apology), why the preferred candidate was not nominated (or self-nomination submitted) for the election? So, being a member of the caucus it is our prime responsibility to either nominate our best candidate or submit self-nomination, upon any call for the nominations. If the candidate(s) are more than one, should elect one of them through election. b. for protesting against the system, when we are going to edit the charter and amendment process is on the way, it is right time to suggest the better system for the election and to manage the activities involved in it. c. for the membership status, to remain a qualified and voting member (as otherwise, charter restrict to vote in the next election), it is better either to rephrase the text and rule defined in the charter, or if it is still mandatory to have the abstention option (for the reasons of a+b+c), it is proposed to also add the option for Blank Vote; that mean you have used your right to vote but not against the system or candidate, and still remain as a voting member. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From nb at bollow.ch Mon Jan 14 14:56:10 2013 From: nb at bollow.ch (Norbert Bollow) Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2013 20:56:10 +0100 Subject: [governance] WG on enhanced cooperation In-Reply-To: References: <50F39A6D.2060609@itforchange.net> <20130114131706.654a175c@quill.bollow.ch> <20130114143235.5f71c9b2@quill.bollow.ch> <20130114155929.34a65edb@quill.bollow.ch> Message-ID: <20130114205610.32343e74@quill.bollow.ch> José Félix Arias Ynche wrote: > Estoy de acuerdo en que lo mejor sería iniciar el NomCom, para el > proceso de selección inmediata. Y no se tenga que pedir una nueva > lista, se puede iniciar con los que ya se ofrecieron. > > La pregunta es; si se puede legítimamente abreviar este proceso, de > pedir al coordinador responsable que envié por correo electrónico a > todos los que se ofrecieron para la última vez y preguntarles si > están todavía dispuestos a servir. > > La carta no parece prohibir tal cosa. Sorry, I don't understand the language that you used. Greetings, Norbert -------------- 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 From nb at bollow.ch Mon Jan 14 15:22:17 2013 From: nb at bollow.ch (Norbert Bollow) Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2013 21:22:17 +0100 Subject: [governance] Notice to the IGC on Proposed Charter Amendments In-Reply-To: <020a01cdf283$98dfbe10$ca9f3a30$@gmail.com> References: <50F38F8E.3090106@ciroap.org> <50F3B31B.4090406@itforchange.net> <50F3B423.1070901@ciroap.org> <50F3B544.3080409@itforchange.net> <1FC731B2-FE70-41AC-B97D-52979AFFAE05@uzh.ch> <1358157197.55375.YahooMailNeo@web125106.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <020a01cdf283$98dfbe10$ca9f3a30$@gmail.com> Message-ID: <20130114212217.7f43bbc9@quill.bollow.ch> Imran Ahmed Shah wrote: > With reference to the recently proposed amendment for the Voting > Options by adding "Abstain", whereas the abstention traditionally used > for an active & protest gesture and beneficial for the sake of > protesting against the system or candidates. In the IGC context, I would interpret an "abstain" vote not as a protest vote but rather as saying "I care, but don't know the candidates well enough to be able to express a preference". Our situation here is different from elections systems where it's difficult to become a candidate and/or where it's difficult to communicate dissatisfaction by means other than "protest votes". In the IGC, if people want to protest against something, they can simply post to the mailing list and explain the grievance. Therefore I don't see any reason why someone would want to use the voting process as a means of protesting. Greetings, Norbert -------------- 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 From pranesh at cis-india.org Mon Jan 14 15:23:07 2013 From: pranesh at cis-india.org (Pranesh Prakash) Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2013 02:23:07 +0600 Subject: [governance] WG on enhanced cooperation In-Reply-To: <20130114205610.32343e74@quill.bollow.ch> References: <50F39A6D.2060609@itforchange.net> <20130114131706.654a175c@quill.bollow.ch> <20130114143235.5f71c9b2@quill.bollow.ch> <20130114155929.34a65edb@quill.bollow.ch> <20130114205610.32343e74@quill.bollow.ch> Message-ID: <50F4692B.7020602@cis-india.org> Norbert Bollow [2013-01-15 01:56]: > José Félix Arias Ynche wrote: > >> Estoy de acuerdo en que lo mejor sería iniciar el NomCom, para el >> proceso de selección inmediata. Y no se tenga que pedir una nueva >> lista, se puede iniciar con los que ya se ofrecieron. >> >> La pregunta es; si se puede legítimamente abreviar este proceso, de >> pedir al coordinador responsable que envié por correo electrónico a >> todos los que se ofrecieron para la última vez y preguntarles si >> están todavía dispuestos a servir. >> >> La carta no parece prohibir tal cosa. > > Sorry, I don't understand the language that you used. Evil-Google Tran$late to the rescue: I agree it would be best to start the NomCom, for the process immediate selection. And not have to ask for a new list, you can starting with those already offered. The question is, if you can legitimately shorten this process of asking coordinator responsible emailed to everyone who offered for the last time and ask if they are still willing to serve. The charter does not seem to prohibit such a thing. -- Pranesh Prakash Policy Director Centre for Internet and Society T: +91 80 40926283 | W: http://cis-india.org PGP ID: 0x1D5C5F07 | Twitter: @pranesh_prakash -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 263 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: -------------- 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 From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com Mon Jan 14 16:45:14 2013 From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro) Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2013 10:45:14 +1300 Subject: [governance] Call for Volunteers for New NomCom Message-ID: Dear All, This is an open call for volunteers for a New Nominating Committee (NomCom). For more information about IGC's NomCom, kindly visit http://www.igcaucus.org/nomcom-process. Kind Regards, -- Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala P.O. Box 17862 Suva Fiji Twitter: @SalanietaT Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro Tel: +679 3544828 Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From nne75 at yahoo.com Mon Jan 14 17:31:38 2013 From: nne75 at yahoo.com (Nnenna) Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2013 14:31:38 -0800 (PST) Subject: [governance] US court drops charges against Aaron Swartz Message-ID: <1358202698.62101.YahooMailNeo@web120104.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> US court drops charges on Aaron Swartz days after his suicide — RT  http://rt.com/usa/news/swartz-suicide-court-drops-charges-997/   Nnenna  Nwakanma |  Founder and CEO, NNENNA.ORG  |  Consultants Information | Communications | Technology and Events | for Development Cote d'Ivoire (+225)| Tel: 225 27144 | Fax  224 26471 |Mob. 07416820 Ghana: +233 249561345| Nigeria: +234 8101887065| http://www.nnenna.org nnenna at nnenna.org| @nnenna | Skype - nnenna75 | nnennaorg.blogspot.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From nne75 at yahoo.com Mon Jan 14 17:34:41 2013 From: nne75 at yahoo.com (Nnenna) Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2013 14:34:41 -0800 (PST) Subject: [governance] US court drops charges against Aaron Swartz In-Reply-To: <1358202698.62101.YahooMailNeo@web120104.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> References: <1358202698.62101.YahooMailNeo@web120104.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1358202881.72200.YahooMailNeo@web120104.mail.ne1.yahoo.com>   Dismissal as signed by Carmen Ortiz and Stephen Haymann Nnenna  Nwakanma |  Founder and CEO, NNENNA.ORG  |  Consultants Information | Communications | Technology and Events | for Development Cote d'Ivoire (+225)| Tel: 225 27144 | Fax  224 26471 |Mob. 07416820 Ghana: +233 249561345| Nigeria: +234 8101887065| http://www.nnenna.org nnenna at nnenna.org| @nnenna | Skype - nnenna75 | nnennaorg.blogspot.com ________________________________ From: Nnenna To: IG Caucus Sent: Monday, January 14, 2013 10:31 PM Subject: [governance] US court drops charges against Aaron Swartz US court drops charges on Aaron Swartz days after his suicide — RT  http://rt.com/usa/news/swartz-suicide-court-drops-charges-997/   Nnenna  Nwakanma |  Founder and CEO, NNENNA.ORG  |  Consultants Information | Communications | Technology and Events | for Development Cote d'Ivoire (+225)| Tel: 225 27144 | Fax  224 26471 |Mob. 07416820 Ghana: +233 249561345| Nigeria: +234 8101887065| http://www.nnenna.org nnenna at nnenna.org| @nnenna | Skype - nnenna75 | nnennaorg.blogspot.com ____________________________________________________________ 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: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Swartz.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 56498 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- 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 From jstyre at jstyre.com Mon Jan 14 17:54:09 2013 From: jstyre at jstyre.com (James S. Tyre) Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2013 14:54:09 -0800 Subject: [governance] US court drops charges against Aaron Swartz In-Reply-To: <1358202881.72200.YahooMailNeo@web120104.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> References: <1358202698.62101.YahooMailNeo@web120104.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <1358202881.72200.YahooMailNeo@web120104.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <029601cdf2aa$109b7cc0$31d27640$@jstyre.com> Please don’t read too much into the dismissal, it’s nothing more than a procedural formality. Some (not all) civil lawsuits can continue against the estate of someone who had died. But criminal prosecutions are purely personal to the individual defendant, they cannot be continued against the estate. If the prosecutors hadn’t dismissed, Aaron’s lawyers would have gotten it done, or the court would have done it on its own. This does not in any way signify that the prosecutors had any change of heart, it’s just a required formality. -- James S. Tyre Law Offices of James S. Tyre 10736 Jefferson Blvd., #512 Culver City, CA 90230-4969 310-839-4114/310-839-4602(fax) jstyre at jstyre.com Policy Fellow, Electronic Frontier Foundation https://www.eff.org From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Nnenna Sent: Monday, January 14, 2013 2:35 PM To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org Subject: Re: [governance] US court drops charges against Aaron Swartz Dismissal as signed by Carmen Ortiz and Stephen Haymann Nnenna Nwakanma | Founder and CEO, NNENNA.ORG | Consultants Information | Communications | Technology and Events | for Development Cote d'Ivoire (+225)| Tel: 225 27144 | Fax 224 26471 |Mob. 07416820 Ghana: +233 249561345| Nigeria: +234 8101887065| http://www.nnenna.org nnenna at nnenna.org| @nnenna | Skype - nnenna75 | nnennaorg.blogspot.com _____ From: Nnenna To: IG Caucus Sent: Monday, January 14, 2013 10:31 PM Subject: [governance] US court drops charges against Aaron Swartz US court drops charges on Aaron Swartz days after his suicide — RT http://rt.com/usa/news/swartz-suicide-court-drops-charges-997/ Nnenna Nwakanma | Founder and CEO, NNENNA.ORG | Consultants Information | Communications | Technology and Events | for Development Cote d'Ivoire (+225)| Tel: 225 27144 | Fax 224 26471 |Mob. 07416820 Ghana: +233 249561345| Nigeria: +234 8101887065| http://www.nnenna.org nnenna at nnenna.org| @nnenna | Skype - nnenna75 | nnennaorg.blogspot.com ____________________________________________________________ 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: -------------- 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 From hindenburgo at gmail.com Mon Jan 14 17:55:57 2013 From: hindenburgo at gmail.com (Hindenburgo Pires) Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2013 20:55:57 -0200 Subject: [governance] US court drops charges against Aaron Swartz In-Reply-To: <1358202698.62101.YahooMailNeo@web120104.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> References: <1358202698.62101.YahooMailNeo@web120104.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: Too late for that! 2013/1/14 Nnenna > > US court drops charges on Aaron Swartz days after his suicide — RT > http://rt.com/usa/news/swartz-suicide-court-drops-charges-997/ > > > > Nnenna Nwakanma | Founder and CEO, NNENNA.ORG | Consultants > Information | Communications | Technology and Events | for Development > Cote d'Ivoire (+225)| Tel: 225 27144 | Fax 224 26471 |Mob. 07416820 > Ghana: +233 249561345| Nigeria: +234 8101887065| http://www.nnenna.org > nnenna at nnenna.org| @nnenna | Skype - nnenna75 | nnennaorg.blogspot.com > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > -- Hindenburgo F. Pires http://www.cibergeo.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From kerry at kdbsystems.com Mon Jan 14 18:20:30 2013 From: kerry at kdbsystems.com (Kerry Brown) Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2013 23:20:30 +0000 Subject: [governance] Call for Volunteers for New NomCom In-Reply-To: Message-ID: I am volunteering to serve on this noncom. Kerry Brown From: Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro > Reply-To: "governance at lists.igcaucus.org" >, Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro > Date: Monday, 14 January, 2013 1:45 PM To: "governance at lists.igcaucus.org" > Subject: [governance] Call for Volunteers for New NomCom Dear All, This is an open call for volunteers for a New Nominating Committee (NomCom). For more information about IGC's NomCom, kindly visit http://www.igcaucus.org/nomcom-process. Kind Regards, -- Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala P.O. Box 17862 Suva Fiji Twitter: @SalanietaT Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro Tel: +679 3544828 Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From ian.peter at ianpeter.com Mon Jan 14 18:23:30 2013 From: ian.peter at ianpeter.com (Ian Peter) Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2013 10:23:30 +1100 Subject: [governance] Call for Volunteers for New NomCom In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <52ADF8FE3AB24A0696701E11B8344CC7@Toshiba> Just so this is entirely clear to everyone - what is needed here is a minimum of 25 volunteers to activate the process defined in the Charter. Of the 25 volunteers, only 5 will be selected to be nomcom members, using a random process. So really, everyone who is a member should volunteer to be part of this process, and as soon as possible (I cannot volunteer because I am a member of the appeals team, but only 5 of us have that excuse). Really, you should volunteer to be part of this pool if you are qualified! Ian Peter From: Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro Sent: Tuesday, January 15, 2013 8:45 AM To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org Subject: [governance] Call for Volunteers for New NomCom Dear All, This is an open call for volunteers for a New Nominating Committee (NomCom). For more information about IGC's NomCom, kindly visit http://www.igcaucus.org/nomcom-process. Kind Regards, -- Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala P.O. Box 17862 Suva Fiji Twitter: @SalanietaT Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro Tel: +679 3544828 Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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: -------------- 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 From kichango at gmail.com Mon Jan 14 18:37:25 2013 From: kichango at gmail.com (Mawaki Chango) Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2013 18:37:25 -0500 Subject: [governance] Call for Volunteers for New NomCom In-Reply-To: <52ADF8FE3AB24A0696701E11B8344CC7@Toshiba> References: <52ADF8FE3AB24A0696701E11B8344CC7@Toshiba> Message-ID: I am volunteering to be included in the pool for the NomCom selection. Thanks Mawaki On Mon, Jan 14, 2013 at 6:23 PM, Ian Peter wrote: > Just so this is entirely clear to everyone - > > what is needed here is a minimum of 25 volunteers to activate the process > defined in the Charter. Of the 25 volunteers, only 5 will be selected to be > nomcom members, using a random process. > > So really, everyone who is a member should volunteer to be part of this > process, and as soon as possible (I cannot volunteer because I am a member > of the appeals team, but only 5 of us have that excuse). Really, you should > volunteer to be part of this pool if you are qualified! > > Ian Peter > > From: Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro > Sent: Tuesday, January 15, 2013 8:45 AM > To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org > Subject: [governance] Call for Volunteers for New NomCom > > Dear All, > > This is an open call for volunteers for a New Nominating Committee (NomCom). > For more information about IGC's NomCom, kindly visit > http://www.igcaucus.org/nomcom-process. > > Kind Regards, > > > -- > Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala > P.O. Box 17862 > Suva > Fiji > > Twitter: @SalanietaT > Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro > Tel: +679 3544828 > Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 > > > > ________________________________ > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From ca at cafonso.ca Mon Jan 14 18:40:44 2013 From: ca at cafonso.ca (Carlos A. Afonso) Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2013 21:40:44 -0200 Subject: [governance] US court drops charges against Aaron Swartz In-Reply-To: <1358202698.62101.YahooMailNeo@web120104.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> References: <1358202698.62101.YahooMailNeo@web120104.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <50F4977C.7080201@cafonso.ca> Meaning: "we got what we wanted"? Each step of the agents involved (JSTOR, MIT, DOJ) seems to make things worse for all of them... Amazing... this happening in the supposedly grand democracy of the West. --c.a. On 01/14/2013 08:31 PM, Nnenna wrote: > > > US court drops charges on Aaron Swartz days after his suicide — RT > http://rt.com/usa/news/swartz-suicide-court-drops-charges-997/ > > > > > Nnenna Nwakanma | Founder and CEO, NNENNA.ORG | Consultants > Information | Communications | Technology and Events | for Development > Cote d'Ivoire (+225)| Tel: 225 27144 | Fax 224 26471 |Mob. 07416820 > Ghana: +233 249561345| Nigeria: +234 8101887065| http://www.nnenna.org > nnenna at nnenna.org| @nnenna | Skype - nnenna75 | nnennaorg.blogspot.com > -------------- 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 From tapani.tarvainen at effi.org Mon Jan 14 23:54:45 2013 From: tapani.tarvainen at effi.org (Tapani Tarvainen) Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2013 06:54:45 +0200 Subject: [governance] Call for Volunteers for New NomCom In-Reply-To: <52ADF8FE3AB24A0696701E11B8344CC7@Toshiba> References: <52ADF8FE3AB24A0696701E11B8344CC7@Toshiba> Message-ID: <20130115045445.GC29175@tarvainen.info> Count me in. -- Tapani Tarvainen On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 10:23:30AM +1100, Ian Peter (ian.peter at ianpeter.com) wrote: > Just so this is entirely clear to everyone - > > what is needed here is a minimum of 25 volunteers to activate the process defined in the Charter. Of the 25 volunteers, only 5 will be selected to be nomcom members, using a random process. > > So really, everyone who is a member should volunteer to be part of this process, and as soon as possible (I cannot volunteer because I am a member of the appeals team, but only 5 of us have that excuse). Really, you should volunteer to be part of this pool if you are qualified! > > Ian Peter > > From: Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro > Sent: Tuesday, January 15, 2013 8:45 AM > To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org > Subject: [governance] Call for Volunteers for New NomCom > > Dear All, > > This is an open call for volunteers for a New Nominating Committee (NomCom). For more information about IGC's NomCom, kindly visit http://www.igcaucus.org/nomcom-process. > > Kind Regards, > > > -- > > Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala > P.O. Box 17862 > Suva > Fiji > > Twitter: @SalanietaT > Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro > Tel: +679 3544828 > Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 -------------- 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 From fouadbajwa at gmail.com Tue Jan 15 00:01:41 2013 From: fouadbajwa at gmail.com (Fouad Bajwa) Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2013 10:01:41 +0500 Subject: [governance] Call for Volunteers for New NomCom In-Reply-To: <20130115045445.GC29175@tarvainen.info> References: <52ADF8FE3AB24A0696701E11B8344CC7@Toshiba> <20130115045445.GC29175@tarvainen.info> Message-ID: I would like to volunteer to help. Fouad On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 9:54 AM, Tapani Tarvainen wrote: > Count me in. > > -- > Tapani Tarvainen > > On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 10:23:30AM +1100, Ian Peter (ian.peter at ianpeter.com) wrote: > >> Just so this is entirely clear to everyone - >> >> what is needed here is a minimum of 25 volunteers to activate the process defined in the Charter. Of the 25 volunteers, only 5 will be selected to be nomcom members, using a random process. >> >> So really, everyone who is a member should volunteer to be part of this process, and as soon as possible (I cannot volunteer because I am a member of the appeals team, but only 5 of us have that excuse). Really, you should volunteer to be part of this pool if you are qualified! >> >> Ian Peter >> >> From: Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro >> Sent: Tuesday, January 15, 2013 8:45 AM >> To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org >> Subject: [governance] Call for Volunteers for New NomCom >> >> Dear All, >> >> This is an open call for volunteers for a New Nominating Committee (NomCom). For more information about IGC's NomCom, kindly visit http://www.igcaucus.org/nomcom-process. >> >> Kind Regards, >> >> >> -- >> >> Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala >> P.O. Box 17862 >> Suva >> Fiji >> >> Twitter: @SalanietaT >> Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro >> Tel: +679 3544828 >> Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From ajp at glocom.ac.jp Tue Jan 15 00:13:54 2013 From: ajp at glocom.ac.jp (Adam Peake) Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2013 14:13:54 +0900 Subject: [governance] Call for Volunteers for New NomCom In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi Sala, Is this NomCom for the MAG or for MAG and possible CSTD working group on enhanced cooperation? Thanks, Adam On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 6:45 AM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro wrote: > Dear All, > > This is an open call for volunteers for a New Nominating Committee (NomCom). > For more information about IGC's NomCom, kindly visit > http://www.igcaucus.org/nomcom-process. > > Kind Regards, > > > -- > Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala > P.O. Box 17862 > Suva > Fiji > > Twitter: @SalanietaT > Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro > Tel: +679 3544828 > Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From ian.peter at ianpeter.com Tue Jan 15 00:29:21 2013 From: ian.peter at ianpeter.com (Ian Peter) Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2013 16:29:21 +1100 Subject: [governance] Call for Volunteers for New NomCom Message-ID: Hi Adam, I imagine this is about CSTD and perhaps other tasks as per Parminders recent warning as MAG nomcom was announced some time ago Adam Peake wrote: >Hi Sala, > >Is this NomCom for the MAG or for MAG and possible CSTD working group >on enhanced cooperation? > >Thanks, > >Adam > > > >On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 6:45 AM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro > wrote: >> Dear All, >> >> This is an open call for volunteers for a New Nominating Committee (NomCom). >> For more information about IGC's NomCom, kindly visit >> http://www.igcaucus.org/nomcom-process. >> >> Kind Regards, >> >> >> -- >> Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala >> P.O. Box 17862 >> Suva >> Fiji >> >> Twitter: @SalanietaT >> Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro >> Tel: +679 3544828 >> Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 >> >> >> >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From ias_pk at yahoo.com Tue Jan 15 00:27:41 2013 From: ias_pk at yahoo.com (Imran Ahmed Shah) Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2013 21:27:41 -0800 (PST) Subject: [governance] Notice to the IGC on Proposed Charter Amendments In-Reply-To: <20130114212217.7f43bbc9@quill.bollow.ch> References: <50F38F8E.3090106@ciroap.org> <50F3B31B.4090406@itforchange.net> <50F3B423.1070901@ciroap.org> <50F3B544.3080409@itforchange.net> <1FC731B2-FE70-41AC-B97D-52979AFFAE05@uzh.ch> <1358157197.55375.YahooMailNeo@web125106.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <020a01cdf283$98dfbe10$ca9f3a30$@gmail.com> <20130114212217.7f43bbc9@quill.bollow.ch> Message-ID: <1358227661.77969.YahooMailNeo@web125105.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> >In the IGC context, I would interpret an "abstain" vote not as a protest vote but rather as saying "I care, but don't know the candidates well enough to be able to express a preference". If some don't know the candidates well enough, "Blank Vote" is the right substitute to cast a vote in favor/against or 'Abstain'.   >Our situation here is different from elections systems where it's difficult to become a candidate and/or where it's difficult to communicate dissatisfaction by means other than "protest votes". In the IGC, if people want to protest against something, they can simply post to the mailing list and explain the grievance. Therefore I don't see any reason why someone would want to use the voting process as a means of protesting.   Yes, I agree with you and could not understand that why someone would require 'abstain' voting option just to show any kinf of 'grievance' or 'to protest' against the system or candidates? Instead of the provisioning of 'abstain', the 'blank vote' may serve the purpose.    Regards   Imran >________________________________ > From: Norbert Bollow >To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org >Cc: 'Imran Ahmed Shah' >Sent: Tuesday, 15 January 2013, 1:22 >Subject: Re: [governance] Notice to the IGC on Proposed Charter Amendments > >Imran Ahmed Shah wrote: > >> With reference to the recently proposed amendment for the Voting >> Options by adding "Abstain", whereas the abstention traditionally used >> for an active & protest gesture and beneficial for the sake of >> protesting against the system or candidates. > >In the IGC context, I would interpret an "abstain" vote not as a >protest vote but rather as saying "I care, but don't know the >candidates well enough to be able to express a preference". > >Our situation here is different from elections systems where it's >difficult to become a candidate and/or where it's difficult to >communicate dissatisfaction by means other than "protest votes". In the >IGC, if people want to protest against something, they can simply post >to the mailing list and explain the grievance. Therefore I don't see any >reason why someone would want to use the voting process as a means of >protesting. > >Greetings, >Norbert > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From kerry at kdbsystems.com Tue Jan 15 01:11:22 2013 From: kerry at kdbsystems.com (Kerry Brown) Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2013 06:11:22 +0000 Subject: [governance] Notice to the IGC on Proposed Charter Amendments In-Reply-To: <1358227661.77969.YahooMailNeo@web125105.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> References: <50F38F8E.3090106@ciroap.org> <50F3B31B.4090406@itforchange.net> <50F3B423.1070901@ciroap.org> <50F3B544.3080409@itforchange.net> <1FC731B2-FE70-41AC-B97D-52979AFFAE05@uzh.ch> <1358157197.55375.YahooMailNeo@web125106.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <020a01cdf283$98dfbe10$ca9f3a30$@gmail.com> <20130114212217.7f43bbc9@quill.bollow.ch> <1358227661.77969.YahooMailNeo@web125105.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abstain Abstain or a blank vote can mean different things or the same thing depending on the context. I don't think the actual wording on the ballot is important. In this context I take it that either wording is not a protest vote. In this context I take it to mean that for some reason I wish it to be recorded that I voted but I have no preference for a winner. Kerry brown From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Imran Ahmed Shah Sent: January-14-13 9:28 PM To: Norbert Bollow; governance at lists.igcaucus.org Subject: Re: [governance] Notice to the IGC on Proposed Charter Amendments >In the IGC context, I would interpret an "abstain" vote not as a protest vote but rather as saying "I care, but don't know the candidates well enough to be able to express a preference". If some don't know the candidates well enough, "Blank Vote" is the right substitute to cast a vote in favor/against or 'Abstain'. >Our situation here is different from elections systems where it's difficult to become a candidate and/or where it's difficult to communicate dissatisfaction by means other than "protest votes". In the IGC, if people want to protest against something, they can simply post to the mailing list and explain the grievance. Therefore I don't see any reason why someone would want to use the voting process as a means of protesting. Yes, I agree with you and could not understand that why someone would require 'abstain' voting option just to show any kinf of 'grievance' or 'to protest' against the system or candidates? Instead of the provisioning of 'abstain', the 'blank vote' may serve the purpose. Regards Imran From: Norbert Bollow > To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org Cc: 'Imran Ahmed Shah' > Sent: Tuesday, 15 January 2013, 1:22 Subject: Re: [governance] Notice to the IGC on Proposed Charter Amendments Imran Ahmed Shah > wrote: > With reference to the recently proposed amendment for the Voting > Options by adding "Abstain", whereas the abstention traditionally used > for an active & protest gesture and beneficial for the sake of > protesting against the system or candidates. In the IGC context, I would interpret an "abstain" vote not as a protest vote but rather as saying "I care, but don't know the candidates well enough to be able to express a preference". Our situation here is different from elections systems where it's difficult to become a candidate and/or where it's difficult to communicate dissatisfaction by means other than "protest votes". In the IGC, if people want to protest against something, they can simply post to the mailing list and explain the grievance. Therefore I don't see any reason why someone would want to use the voting process as a means of protesting. Greetings, Norbert -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From gideonrop at gmail.com Tue Jan 15 01:24:05 2013 From: gideonrop at gmail.com (Gideon) Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2013 09:24:05 +0300 Subject: [governance] Call for Volunteers for New NomCom In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I am volunteering to be included in the NomCom, Kind Regards Gideon Rop. On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 8:29 AM, Ian Peter wrote: > Hi Adam, I imagine this is about CSTD and perhaps other tasks as per > Parminders recent warning as MAG nomcom was announced some time ago > > > Adam Peake wrote: > > >Hi Sala, > > > >Is this NomCom for the MAG or for MAG and possible CSTD working group > >on enhanced cooperation? > > > >Thanks, > > > >Adam > > > > > > > >On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 6:45 AM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro > > wrote: > >> Dear All, > >> > >> This is an open call for volunteers for a New Nominating Committee > (NomCom). > >> For more information about IGC's NomCom, kindly visit > >> http://www.igcaucus.org/nomcom-process. > >> > >> Kind Regards, > >> > >> > >> -- > >> Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala > >> P.O. Box 17862 > >> Suva > >> Fiji > >> > >> Twitter: @SalanietaT > >> Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro > >> Tel: +679 3544828 > >> Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> ____________________________________________________________ > >> 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 > >> > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From toml at communisphere.com Tue Jan 15 01:32:03 2013 From: toml at communisphere.com (Thomas Lowenhaupt) Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2013 01:32:03 -0500 Subject: [governance] Preliminary List of Nominees for the 2013 MAG - REQUIRES IMMEDIATE ATTENTION Message-ID: <50F4F7E3.70903@communisphere.com> IGC List Members, The below 36 people have been self nominated or were nominated by another IGC member to be on the 2013 MAG (the Internet Governance Forum's Multistakeholder Advisory Group). It's a far larger list than any previous one with which I am familiar. And the Nominating Committee has very little time to make a selection. So that we may properly review all eligible candidates, the Nominating Committee would greatly appreciate your addressing the following as soon as practicable. * If you are*not on this* list and were inadvertently left off, please inform the NomCom immediately. * If you are *on the list* and wish to be removed - that is, you do not wish to serve on the 2013 MAG - please inform the NomCom as soon as possible. * Those indicating an interest in serving on the MAG and wishing to send supporting documents, or having others send supporting documents to their nominations, should assure their arrival by c.o.b. Thursday. This is extremely tight but we must have the final decision completed by Saturday with nominations to IGF by January 21. The preliminary full list of nominees are: 1. Anriette Esterhuysen 2. Baudouin SCHOMBE 3. Brenden Kuerbis 4. Chaitanya Dhareshwar 5. Cheryl Langdon-Orr 6. Excel Asama Abel 7. Fatima Cambronero 8. Fouad Bajwa 9. Francis Augusto Medeiros 10. Gideon Rop 11. Ginger Paque 12. Graciela Selaimen 13. Hempal Shrestha 14. Imran Ahmed Shah 15. Izumi Aizu 16. Jamil Goheer 17. Jean-Yves Gatete 18. Jeremy Malcolm 19. Joao Carlos Caribe 20. José Félix Arias Ynche 21. Jose Francisco Callo Romero 22. Juan Manuel Rojas 23. Karim ATTOUMANI MOHAMED 24. Kossi AMESSINOU 25. Michael Gurstein 26. Mohamed Zahran 27. Mohamed Tijani BEN JEMAA 28. Robert Guerra 29. Robin Cross 30. Rudi Vansnick 31. Shahid Akbar 32. Shaila Mistry 33. Sonigitu Ekpe 34. Susan Chalmers 35. Tijani BEN JEMAA 36. Tim McGinnis Sincerely, Thomas Lowenhaupt, Non-voting chair The Nominating Committee Voting Members of the NomCom: Wilson Abigaba Shahid Akbar Devon Blake Dixie Hawtin Asif Kabani -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From fouadbajwa at gmail.com Tue Jan 15 01:35:40 2013 From: fouadbajwa at gmail.com (Fouad Bajwa) Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2013 11:35:40 +0500 Subject: [governance] Preliminary List of Nominees for the 2013 MAG - REQUIRES IMMEDIATE ATTENTION In-Reply-To: <50F4F7E3.70903@communisphere.com> References: <50F4F7E3.70903@communisphere.com> Message-ID: Hi Thomas, Kindly remove my name from the list. I have already served once on the MAG and was amongst the rotated. Fouad Bajwa On Jan 15, 2013 11:32 AM, "Thomas Lowenhaupt" wrote: > IGC List Members, > > The below 36 people have been self nominated or were nominated by another > IGC member to be on the 2013 MAG (the Internet Governance Forum's > Multistakeholder Advisory Group). > > It's a far larger list than any previous one with which I am familiar. And > the Nominating Committee has very little time to make a selection. > > So that we may properly review all eligible candidates, the Nominating > Committee would greatly appreciate your addressing the following as soon as > practicable. > > - If you are* not on this* list and were inadvertently left off, > please inform the NomCom immediately. > - If you are *on the list* and wish to be removed - that is, you do > not wish to serve on the 2013 MAG - please inform the NomCom as soon as > possible. > - Those indicating an interest in serving on the MAG and wishing to > send supporting documents, or having others send supporting documents to > their nominations, should assure their arrival by c.o.b. Thursday. This is > extremely tight but we must have the final decision completed by Saturday > with nominations to IGF by January 21. > > The preliminary full list of nominees are: > > 1. Anriette Esterhuysen > 2. Baudouin SCHOMBE > 3. Brenden Kuerbis > 4. Chaitanya Dhareshwar > 5. Cheryl Langdon-Orr > 6. Excel Asama Abel > 7. Fatima Cambronero > 8. Fouad Bajwa > 9. Francis Augusto Medeiros > 10. Gideon Rop > 11. Ginger Paque > 12. Graciela Selaimen > 13. Hempal Shrestha > 14. Imran Ahmed Shah > 15. Izumi Aizu > 16. Jamil Goheer > 17. Jean-Yves Gatete > 18. Jeremy Malcolm > 19. Joao Carlos Caribe > 20. José Félix Arias Ynche > 21. Jose Francisco Callo Romero > 22. Juan Manuel Rojas > 23. Karim ATTOUMANI MOHAMED > 24. Kossi AMESSINOU > 25. Michael Gurstein > 26. Mohamed Zahran > 27. Mohamed Tijani BEN JEMAA > 28. Robert Guerra > 29. Robin Cross > 30. Rudi Vansnick > 31. Shahid Akbar > 32. Shaila Mistry > 33. Sonigitu Ekpe > 34. Susan Chalmers > 35. Tijani BEN JEMAA > 36. Tim McGinnis > > Sincerely, > > Thomas Lowenhaupt, Non-voting chair > The Nominating Committee > > Voting Members of the NomCom: > > Wilson Abigaba > Shahid Akbar > Devon Blake > Dixie Hawtin > Asif Kabani > > > > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From vinsolo15 at yahoo.co.uk Tue Jan 15 04:49:17 2013 From: vinsolo15 at yahoo.co.uk (vincent solomon) Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2013 09:49:17 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [governance] Call for Volunteers for New NomCom In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1358243357.45427.YahooMailNeo@web172505.mail.ir2.yahoo.com>  I am volunteering to be included in the NomCom too . “Limitations live only in our minds. But if we use our imaginations, our possibilities become limitless” NAME: VINCENT SOLOMON ALIAMA CONTACT: +256 773307045 / +256 713307045 / +256 753307045 EMAIL:aliama.vincent at cit.mak.ac.ug / vinsolo15 at yahoo.co.uk /vinsoloster at gmail.com Skype : vinsolo2 ________________________________ From: Gideon To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro Sent: Tuesday, 15 January 2013, 9:24 Subject: Re: [governance] Call for Volunteers for New NomCom I am volunteering to be included in the NomCom, Kind Regards Gideon Rop. On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 8:29 AM, Ian Peter wrote: Hi Adam, I imagine this is about CSTD and perhaps other tasks as per Parminders recent warning as MAG nomcom was announced some time ago > > > >Adam Peake wrote: > >>Hi Sala, >> >>Is this NomCom for the MAG or for MAG and possible CSTD working group >>on enhanced cooperation? >> >>Thanks, >> >>Adam >> >> >> >>On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 6:45 AM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro >> wrote: >>> Dear All, >>> >>> This is an open call for volunteers for a New Nominating Committee (NomCom). >>> For more information about IGC's NomCom, kindly visit >>> http://www.igcaucus.org/nomcom-process. >>> >>> Kind Regards, >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala >>> P.O. Box 17862 >>> Suva >>> Fiji >>> >>> Twitter: @SalanietaT >>> Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro >>> Tel: +679 3544828 >>> Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> ____________________________________________________________ >>> 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 >>> >> > >____________________________________________________________ >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 > > ____________________________________________________________ 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: -------------- 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 From vinsolo15 at yahoo.co.uk Tue Jan 15 05:19:32 2013 From: vinsolo15 at yahoo.co.uk (vincent solomon) Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2013 10:19:32 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [governance] Call for Volunteers for New NomCom In-Reply-To: References: <52ADF8FE3AB24A0696701E11B8344CC7@Toshiba> Message-ID: <1358245172.62079.YahooMailNeo@web172502.mail.ir2.yahoo.com> I am volunteering to be included in the pool for the NomCom selection. Thanks   “Limitations live only in our minds. But if we use our imaginations, our possibilities become limitless” NAME: VINCENT SOLOMON ALIAMA CONTACT: +256 773307045 / +256 713307045 / +256 753307045 EMAIL:aliama.vincent at cit.mak.ac.ug / vinsolo15 at yahoo.co.uk /vinsoloster at gmail.com Skype : vinsolo2 ----- Original Message ----- From: Mawaki Chango To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org Cc: Sent: Tuesday, 15 January 2013, 2:37 Subject: Re: [governance] Call for Volunteers for New NomCom I am volunteering to be included in the pool for the NomCom selection. Thanks Mawaki On Mon, Jan 14, 2013 at 6:23 PM, Ian Peter wrote: > Just so this is entirely clear to everyone - > > what is needed here is a minimum of 25 volunteers to activate the process > defined in the Charter. Of the 25 volunteers, only 5 will be selected to be > nomcom members, using a random process. > > So really, everyone who is a member should volunteer to be part of this > process, and as soon as possible (I cannot volunteer because I am a member > of the appeals team, but only 5 of us have that excuse). Really, you should > volunteer to be part of this pool if you are qualified! > > Ian Peter > > From: Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro > Sent: Tuesday, January 15, 2013 8:45 AM > To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org > Subject: [governance] Call for Volunteers for New NomCom > > Dear All, > > This is an open call for volunteers for a New Nominating Committee (NomCom). > For more information about IGC's NomCom, kindly visit > http://www.igcaucus.org/nomcom-process. > > Kind Regards, > > > -- > Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala > P.O. Box 17862 > Suva > Fiji > > Twitter: @SalanietaT > Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro > Tel: +679 3544828 > Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 > > > > ________________________________ > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > ____________________________________________________________ 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: -------------- 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 From zads911 at msn.com Tue Jan 15 05:25:46 2013 From: zads911 at msn.com (Mohamed zahran) Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2013 10:25:46 +0000 Subject: [governance] Call for Volunteers for New NomCom In-Reply-To: <1358245172.62079.YahooMailNeo@web172502.mail.ir2.yahoo.com> References: <52ADF8FE3AB24A0696701E11B8344CC7@Toshiba> ,<1358245172.62079.YahooMailNeo@web172502.mail.ir2.yahoo.com> Message-ID: I am volunteering to be included in the pool for the NomCom selection. NAME: Mohamed Samir Zahran CONTACT: +201229614467/ +201000716698 EMAIL:zads911 at msn.com/ mzahran at outlook.com/mohamed.zahran at zadsdev.com Skype : Dr.zads Regards, Mohamed Zahran Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2013 10:19:32 +0000 From: vinsolo15 at yahoo.co.uk To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; kichango at gmail.com Subject: Re: [governance] Call for Volunteers for New NomCom I am volunteering to be included in the pool for the NomCom selection.Thanks “Limitations live only in our minds. But if we use our imaginations, our possibilities become limitless” NAME: VINCENT SOLOMON ALIAMA CONTACT: +256 773307045 / +256 713307045 / +256 753307045 EMAIL:aliama.vincent at cit.mak.ac.ug / vinsolo15 at yahoo.co.uk /vinsoloster at gmail.com Skype : vinsolo2 ----- Original Message ----- From: Mawaki Chango To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org Cc: Sent: Tuesday, 15 January 2013, 2:37 Subject: Re: [governance] Call for Volunteers for New NomCom I am volunteering to be included in the pool for the NomCom selection. Thanks Mawaki On Mon, Jan 14, 2013 at 6:23 PM, Ian Peter wrote: > Just so this is entirely clear to everyone - > > what is needed here is a minimum of 25 volunteers to activate the process > defined in the Charter. Of the 25 volunteers, only 5 will be selected to be > nomcom members, using a random process. > > So really, everyone who is a member should volunteer to be part of this > process, and as soon as possible (I cannot volunteer because I am a member > of the appeals team, but only 5 of us have that excuse). Really, you should > volunteer to be part of this pool if you are qualified! > > Ian Peter > > From: Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro > Sent: Tuesday, January 15, 2013 8:45 AM > To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org > Subject: [governance] Call for Volunteers for New NomCom > > Dear All, > > This is an open call for volunteers for a New Nominating Committee (NomCom). > For more information about IGC's NomCom, kindly visit > http://www.igcaucus.org/nomcom-process. > > Kind Regards, > > > -- > Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala > P.O. Box 17862 > Suva > Fiji > > Twitter: @SalanietaT > Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro > Tel: +679 3544828 > Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 > > > > ________________________________ > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > ____________________________________________________________ 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: -------------- 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 From bavouc at gmail.com Tue Jan 15 05:40:44 2013 From: bavouc at gmail.com (Clement Martial Aboudem Bavou) Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2013 11:40:44 +0100 Subject: [governance] Call for Volunteers for New NomCom In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi I am volunteering to serve on this noncom. Martial Bavou Sent from my HTC ONE S Smartphone. Le 14 janv. 2013 22:46, "Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro" < salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com> a écrit : > Dear All, > > This is an open call for volunteers for a New Nominating Committee > (NomCom). For more information about IGC's NomCom, kindly visit > http://www.igcaucus.org/nomcom-process. > > Kind Regards, > > > -- > Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala > P.O. Box 17862 > Suva > Fiji > > Twitter: @SalanietaT > Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro > Tel: +679 3544828 > Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From cveraq at gmail.com Tue Jan 15 05:50:45 2013 From: cveraq at gmail.com (Carlos Vera Quintana) Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2013 05:50:45 -0500 Subject: [governance] Call for Volunteers for New NomCom In-Reply-To: <20130115045445.GC29175@tarvainen.info> References: <52ADF8FE3AB24A0696701E11B8344CC7@Toshiba> <20130115045445.GC29175@tarvainen.info> Message-ID: Count on me Carlos Vera El 14/01/2013, a las 23:54, Tapani Tarvainen escribió: > Count me in. > > -- > Tapani Tarvainen > > On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 10:23:30AM +1100, Ian Peter (ian.peter at ianpeter.com) wrote: > >> Just so this is entirely clear to everyone - >> >> what is needed here is a minimum of 25 volunteers to activate the process defined in the Charter. Of the 25 volunteers, only 5 will be selected to be nomcom members, using a random process. >> >> So really, everyone who is a member should volunteer to be part of this process, and as soon as possible (I cannot volunteer because I am a member of the appeals team, but only 5 of us have that excuse). Really, you should volunteer to be part of this pool if you are qualified! >> >> Ian Peter >> >> From: Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro >> Sent: Tuesday, January 15, 2013 8:45 AM >> To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org >> Subject: [governance] Call for Volunteers for New NomCom >> >> Dear All, >> >> This is an open call for volunteers for a New Nominating Committee (NomCom). For more information about IGC's NomCom, kindly visit http://www.igcaucus.org/nomcom-process. >> >> Kind Regards, >> >> >> -- >> >> Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala >> P.O. Box 17862 >> Suva >> Fiji >> >> Twitter: @SalanietaT >> Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro >> Tel: +679 3544828 >> Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From Kivuva at transworldafrica.com Tue Jan 15 06:01:54 2013 From: Kivuva at transworldafrica.com (Kivuva) Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2013 14:01:54 +0300 Subject: [governance] Call for Volunteers for New NomCom In-Reply-To: References: <52ADF8FE3AB24A0696701E11B8344CC7@Toshiba> <1358245172.62079.YahooMailNeo@web172502.mail.ir2.yahoo.com> Message-ID: I am also volunteering to be considered for the New NomCom Regards -- ______________________ Mwendwa Kivuva For Business Development Transworld Computer Channels Cel: 0722402248 twitter.com/lordmwesh transworldAfrica.com | Fluent in computing kenya.or.ke | The Kenya we know -------------- 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 From tracey at traceynaughton.com Tue Jan 15 07:36:22 2013 From: tracey at traceynaughton.com (Tracey Naughton) Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2013 23:36:22 +1100 Subject: [governance] Preliminary List of Nominees for the 2013 MAG - REQUIRES IMMEDIATE ATTENTION In-Reply-To: <50F4F7E3.70903@communisphere.com> References: <50F4F7E3.70903@communisphere.com> Message-ID: <2EB0F8D2-8724-4318-B1BF-0E04B7B3E62F@traceynaughton.com> Mohamed Tijani BEN JEMAA appears twice on the list at 27 and 35. Tracey Naughton On 15 Jan 2013, at 5:32 PM, Thomas Lowenhaupt wrote: IGC List Members, The below 36 people have been self nominated or were nominated by another IGC member to be on the 2013 MAG (the Internet Governance Forum's Multistakeholder Advisory Group). It's a far larger list than any previous one with which I am familiar. And the Nominating Committee has very little time to make a selection. So that we may properly review all eligible candidates, the Nominating Committee would greatly appreciate your addressing the following as soon as practicable. If you are not on this list and were inadvertently left off, please inform the NomCom immediately. If you are on the list and wish to be removed - that is, you do not wish to serve on the 2013 MAG - please inform the NomCom as soon as possible. Those indicating an interest in serving on the MAG and wishing to send supporting documents, or having others send supporting documents to their nominations, should assure their arrival by c.o.b. Thursday. This is extremely tight but we must have the final decision completed by Saturday with nominations to IGF by January 21. The preliminary full list of nominees are: Anriette Esterhuysen Baudouin SCHOMBE Brenden Kuerbis Chaitanya Dhareshwar Cheryl Langdon-Orr Excel Asama Abel Fatima Cambronero Fouad Bajwa Francis Augusto Medeiros Gideon Rop Ginger Paque Graciela Selaimen Hempal Shrestha Imran Ahmed Shah Izumi Aizu Jamil Goheer Jean-Yves Gatete Jeremy Malcolm Joao Carlos Caribe José Félix Arias Ynche Jose Francisco Callo Romero Juan Manuel Rojas Karim ATTOUMANI MOHAMED Kossi AMESSINOU Michael Gurstein Mohamed Zahran Mohamed Tijani BEN JEMAA Robert Guerra Robin Cross Rudi Vansnick Shahid Akbar Shaila Mistry Sonigitu Ekpe Susan Chalmers Tijani BEN JEMAA Tim McGinnis Sincerely, Thomas Lowenhaupt, Non-voting chair The Nominating Committee Voting Members of the NomCom: Wilson Abigaba Shahid Akbar Devon Blake Dixie Hawtin Asif Kabani ____________________________________________________________ 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: -------------- 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 From norbertglakpe at yahoo.fr Tue Jan 15 07:45:23 2013 From: norbertglakpe at yahoo.fr (norbert GLAKPE) Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2013 12:45:23 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [governance] Call for Volunteers for New NomCom In-Reply-To: <1358243357.45427.YahooMailNeo@web172505.mail.ir2.yahoo.com> References: <1358243357.45427.YahooMailNeo@web172505.mail.ir2.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1358253923.643.YahooMailNeo@web172404.mail.ir2.yahoo.com> Hi Sala, I am volunteer too. Thanks. Norbert Komlan GLAKPE 00228 99 45 37 45 skype: norbertglakpe twitter: @norbertglakpe ________________________________ De : vincent solomon À : "governance at lists.igcaucus.org" ; Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro ; Gideon Envoyé le : Mardi 15 janvier 2013 9h49 Objet : Re: [governance] Call for Volunteers for New NomCom  I am volunteering to be included in the NomCom too . “Limitations live only in our minds. But if we use our imaginations, our possibilities become limitless” NAME: VINCENT SOLOMON ALIAMA CONTACT: +256 773307045 / +256 713307045 / +256 753307045 EMAIL:aliama.vincent at cit.mak.ac.ug / vinsolo15 at yahoo.co.uk /vinsoloster at gmail.com Skype : vinsolo2 ________________________________ From: Gideon To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro Sent: Tuesday, 15 January 2013, 9:24 Subject: Re: [governance] Call for Volunteers for New NomCom I am volunteering to be included in the NomCom, Kind Regards Gideon Rop. On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 8:29 AM, Ian Peter wrote: Hi Adam, I imagine this is about CSTD and perhaps other tasks as per Parminders recent warning as MAG nomcom was announced some time ago > > > >Adam Peake wrote: > >>Hi Sala, >> >>Is this NomCom for the MAG or for MAG and possible CSTD working group >>on enhanced cooperation? >> >>Thanks, >> >>Adam >> >> >> >>On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 6:45 AM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro >> wrote: >>> Dear All, >>> >>> This is an open call for volunteers for a New Nominating Committee (NomCom). >>> For more information about IGC's NomCom, kindly visit >>> http://www.igcaucus.org/nomcom-process. >>> >>> Kind Regards, >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala >>> P.O. Box 17862 >>> Suva >>> Fiji >>> >>> Twitter: @SalanietaT >>> Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro >>> Tel: +679 3544828 >>> Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> ____________________________________________________________ >>> 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 >>> >> > >____________________________________________________________ >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 > > ____________________________________________________________ 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 ____________________________________________________________ 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: -------------- 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 From gpaque at gmail.com Tue Jan 15 08:33:42 2013 From: gpaque at gmail.com (Ginger Paque) Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2013 07:33:42 -0600 Subject: [governance] Preliminary List of Nominees for the 2013 MAG - REQUIRES IMMEDIATE ATTENTION In-Reply-To: <50F4F7E3.70903@communisphere.com> References: <50F4F7E3.70903@communisphere.com> Message-ID: Hi Thomas, Thanks for all of your work. My name is on this list in error. gp Ginger (Virginia) Paque VirginiaP at diplomacy.edu Diplo Foundation Internet Governance Capacity Building Programme www.diplomacy.edu/ig ** ** On 15 January 2013 00:32, Thomas Lowenhaupt wrote: > IGC List Members, > > The below 36 people have been self nominated or were nominated by another > IGC member to be on the 2013 MAG (the Internet Governance Forum's > Multistakeholder Advisory Group). > > It's a far larger list than any previous one with which I am familiar. And > the Nominating Committee has very little time to make a selection. > > So that we may properly review all eligible candidates, the Nominating > Committee would greatly appreciate your addressing the following as soon as > practicable. > > - If you are* not on this* list and were inadvertently left off, > please inform the NomCom immediately. > - If you are *on the list* and wish to be removed - that is, you do > not wish to serve on the 2013 MAG - please inform the NomCom as soon as > possible. > - Those indicating an interest in serving on the MAG and wishing to > send supporting documents, or having others send supporting documents to > their nominations, should assure their arrival by c.o.b. Thursday. This is > extremely tight but we must have the final decision completed by Saturday > with nominations to IGF by January 21. > > The preliminary full list of nominees are: > > 1. Anriette Esterhuysen > 2. Baudouin SCHOMBE > 3. Brenden Kuerbis > 4. Chaitanya Dhareshwar > 5. Cheryl Langdon-Orr > 6. Excel Asama Abel > 7. Fatima Cambronero > 8. Fouad Bajwa > 9. Francis Augusto Medeiros > 10. Gideon Rop > 11. Ginger Paque > 12. Graciela Selaimen > 13. Hempal Shrestha > 14. Imran Ahmed Shah > 15. Izumi Aizu > 16. Jamil Goheer > 17. Jean-Yves Gatete > 18. Jeremy Malcolm > 19. Joao Carlos Caribe > 20. José Félix Arias Ynche > 21. Jose Francisco Callo Romero > 22. Juan Manuel Rojas > 23. Karim ATTOUMANI MOHAMED > 24. Kossi AMESSINOU > 25. Michael Gurstein > 26. Mohamed Zahran > 27. Mohamed Tijani BEN JEMAA > 28. Robert Guerra > 29. Robin Cross > 30. Rudi Vansnick > 31. Shahid Akbar > 32. Shaila Mistry > 33. Sonigitu Ekpe > 34. Susan Chalmers > 35. Tijani BEN JEMAA > 36. Tim McGinnis > > Sincerely, > > Thomas Lowenhaupt, Non-voting chair > The Nominating Committee > > Voting Members of the NomCom: > > Wilson Abigaba > Shahid Akbar > Devon Blake > Dixie Hawtin > Asif Kabani > > > > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From julian at colnodo.apc.org Tue Jan 15 09:33:53 2013 From: julian at colnodo.apc.org (Julian Casasbuenas G.) Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2013 09:33:53 -0500 Subject: [governance] Call for Volunteers for New NomCom In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <50F568D1.6090705@colnodo.apc.org> I am volunteering to be included in the pool for the NomCom selection. Julián Casasbuenas G. El 14/01/13 16:45, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro escribió: > Dear All, > > This is an open call for volunteers for a New Nominating Committee > (NomCom). For more information about IGC's NomCom, kindly visit > http://www.igcaucus.org/nomcom-process. > > Kind Regards, > > > -- > Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala > P.O. Box 17862 > Suva > Fiji > > Twitter: @SalanietaT > Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro > Tel: +679 3544828 > Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 > > > -- Julian Casasbuenas G. Director Colnodo Diagonal 40A (Antigua Av. 39) No. 14-75, Bogota, Colombia Tel: 57-1-2324246, Cel. 57-315-3339099 Fax: 57-1-3380264 Twitter @jcasasbuenas www.colnodo.apc.org - Uso Estratégico de Internet para el Desarrollo Miembro de la Asociacion para el Progreso de las Comunicaciones -APC- www.apc.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From gate.one205 at yahoo.fr Tue Jan 15 09:38:35 2013 From: gate.one205 at yahoo.fr (Jean-Yves GATETE) Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2013 14:38:35 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [governance] Preliminary List of Nominees for the 2013 MAG - REQUIRES IMMEDIATE ATTENTION In-Reply-To: References: <50F4F7E3.70903@communisphere.com> Message-ID: <1358260715.39927.YahooMailNeo@web172502.mail.ir2.yahoo.com> Dear Thomas,  I am kindly requesting to remove my name in the list of nominees. Regards, Gatete ________________________________ De : Fouad Bajwa À : governance at lists.igcaucus.org Envoyé le : Mardi 15 janvier 2013 7h35 Objet : Re: [governance] Preliminary List of Nominees for the 2013 MAG - REQUIRES IMMEDIATE ATTENTION Hi Thomas, Kindly remove my name from the list. I have already served once on the MAG and was amongst the rotated.  Fouad Bajwa On Jan 15, 2013 11:32 AM, "Thomas Lowenhaupt" wrote: IGC List Members, > >The below 36 people have been self nominated or were nominated by another IGC member to be on the 2013 MAG (the Internet Governance Forum's Multistakeholder Advisory Group). > >It's a far larger list than any previous one with which I am familiar. And the Nominating Committee has very little time to make a selection. > >So that we may properly review all eligible candidates, the Nominating Committee would greatly appreciate your addressing the following as soon as practicable. > > * If you arenot on this list and were inadvertently left off, please inform the NomCom immediately. > * If you are on the list and wish to be removed - that is, you do not wish to serve on the 2013 MAG - please inform the NomCom as soon as possible. > * Those indicating an interest in serving on the MAG and wishing to send supporting documents, or having others send supporting documents to their nominations, should assure their arrival by c.o.b. Thursday.  This is extremely tight but we must have the final decision completed by Saturday with nominations to IGF by January 21. > The preliminary full list of nominees are: > > 1. Anriette Esterhuysen > 2. Baudouin SCHOMBE > 3. Brenden Kuerbis > 4. Chaitanya Dhareshwar > 5. Cheryl Langdon-Orr > 6. Excel Asama Abel > 7. Fatima Cambronero > 8. Fouad Bajwa > 9. Francis Augusto Medeiros > 10. Gideon Rop > 11. Ginger Paque > 12. Graciela Selaimen > 13. Hempal Shrestha > 14. Imran Ahmed  Shah > 15. Izumi Aizu > 16. Jamil Goheer > 17. Jean-Yves Gatete > 18. Jeremy Malcolm > 19. Joao Carlos Caribe > 20. José Félix Arias Ynche > 21. Jose Francisco Callo Romero > 22. Juan Manuel  Rojas > 23. Karim ATTOUMANI MOHAMED > 24. Kossi AMESSINOU > 25. Michael Gurstein > 26. Mohamed Zahran > 27. Mohamed Tijani BEN JEMAA > 28. Robert  Guerra > 29. Robin Cross > 30. Rudi Vansnick > 31. Shahid Akbar > 32. Shaila Mistry > 33. Sonigitu Ekpe > 34. Susan Chalmers > 35. Tijani BEN JEMAA > 36. Tim  McGinnis >Sincerely, > >Thomas Lowenhaupt, Non-voting chair >The Nominating Committee >Voting Members of the NomCom: > >Wilson Abigaba >Shahid Akbar >Devon Blake >Dixie Hawtin >Asif Kabani > > > > > > > > > > >____________________________________________________________ >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 > > ____________________________________________________________ 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: -------------- 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 From amedinagomez at gmail.com Tue Jan 15 09:46:55 2013 From: amedinagomez at gmail.com (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Antonio_Medina_G=F3mez?=) Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2013 09:46:55 -0500 Subject: [governance] Call for Volunteers for New NomCom In-Reply-To: <50F568D1.6090705@colnodo.apc.org> References: <50F568D1.6090705@colnodo.apc.org> Message-ID: Count on me Antonio Medina Gómez 2013/1/15 Julian Casasbuenas G. > > I am volunteering to be included in the pool for the NomCom selection. > > Julián Casasbuenas G. > > El 14/01/13 16:45, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro escribió: > > Dear All, > > This is an open call for volunteers for a New Nominating Committee > (NomCom). For more information about IGC's NomCom, kindly visit > http://www.igcaucus.org/nomcom-process. > > Kind Regards, > > > -- > Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala > P.O. Box 17862 > Suva > Fiji > > Twitter: @SalanietaT > Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro > Tel: +679 3544828 > Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 > > > > > -- > > Julian Casasbuenas G. > Director Colnodo > Diagonal 40A (Antigua Av. 39) No. 14-75, Bogota, Colombia > Tel: 57-1-2324246, Cel. 57-315-3339099 Fax: 57-1-3380264 > Twitter @jcasasbuenaswww.colnodo.apc.org - Uso Estratégico de Internet para el Desarrollo > Miembro de la Asociacion para el Progreso de las Comunicaciones -APC-www.apc.org > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From jaryn56 at gmail.com Tue Jan 15 10:54:18 2013 From: jaryn56 at gmail.com (=?UTF-8?B?Sm9zw6kgRsOpbGl4IEFyaWFzIFluY2hl?=) Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2013 10:54:18 -0500 Subject: [governance] Notice to the IGC on Proposed Charter Amendments In-Reply-To: References: <50F38F8E.3090106@ciroap.org> <50F3B31B.4090406@itforchange.net> <50F3B423.1070901@ciroap.org> <50F3B544.3080409@itforchange.net> <1FC731B2-FE70-41AC-B97D-52979AFFAE05@uzh.ch> <1358157197.55375.YahooMailNeo@web125106.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <020a01cdf283$98dfbe10$ca9f3a30$@gmail.com> <20130114212217.7f43bbc9@quill.bollow.ch> <1358227661.77969.YahooMailNeo@web125105.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No votar o votar en blanco, es rehuir responsabilidades con lo que propone esta comunidad... Quizás no se este de acuerdo pero hay mecanismos como: la sustentación del porque no se esta de acuerdo...Mas me parece que se han infiltrado ideas en contra de la libre información por Internet... *Cordialmente: José Félix Arias Ynche* * Investigador Social Para El Desarrollo* 2013/1/15 Kerry Brown > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abstain**** > > ** ** > > Abstain or a blank vote can mean different things or the same thing > depending on the context. I don’t think the actual wording on the ballot is > important. In this context I take it that either wording is not a protest > vote. In this context I take it to mean that for some reason I wish it to > be recorded that I voted but I have no preference for a winner.**** > > ** ** > > Kerry brown**** > > ** ** > > *From:* governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto: > governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] *On Behalf Of *Imran Ahmed Shah > *Sent:* January-14-13 9:28 PM > *To:* Norbert Bollow; governance at lists.igcaucus.org > > *Subject:* Re: [governance] Notice to the IGC on Proposed Charter > Amendments**** > > ** ** > > >In the IGC context, I would interpret an "abstain" vote not as a > protest vote but rather as saying "I care, but don't know the > candidates well enough to be able to express a preference".**** > > If some don't know the candidates well enough, "Blank Vote" is the right > substitute to cast a vote in favor/against or 'Abstain'.**** > > **** > > >Our situation here is different from elections systems where it's > difficult to become a candidate and/or where it's difficult to > communicate dissatisfaction by means other than "protest votes". In the > IGC, if people want to protest against something, they can simply post > to the mailing list and explain the grievance. Therefore I don't see any > reason why someone would want to use the voting process as a means of > protesting.**** > > **** > > Yes, I agree with you and could not understand that why someone would > require 'abstain' voting option just to show any kinf of 'grievance' or 'to > protest' against the system or candidates? Instead of the provisioning of > 'abstain', the 'blank vote' may serve the purpose. **** > > **** > > Regards**** > > **** > > Imran**** > > ** ** > > *From:* Norbert Bollow > *To:* governance at lists.igcaucus.org > *Cc:* 'Imran Ahmed Shah' > *Sent:* Tuesday, 15 January 2013, 1:22 > *Subject:* Re: [governance] Notice to the IGC on Proposed Charter > Amendments**** > > > Imran Ahmed Shah wrote: > > > With reference to the recently proposed amendment for the Voting > > Options by adding "Abstain", whereas the abstention traditionally used > > for an active & protest gesture and beneficial for the sake of > > protesting against the system or candidates. > > In the IGC context, I would interpret an "abstain" vote not as a > protest vote but rather as saying "I care, but don't know the > candidates well enough to be able to express a preference". > > Our situation here is different from elections systems where it's > difficult to become a candidate and/or where it's difficult to > communicate dissatisfaction by means other than "protest votes". In the > IGC, if people want to protest against something, they can simply post > to the mailing list and explain the grievance. Therefore I don't see any > reason why someone would want to use the voting process as a means of > protesting. > > Greetings, > Norbert > > **** > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From william.drake at uzh.ch Tue Jan 15 11:01:51 2013 From: william.drake at uzh.ch (William Drake) Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2013 17:01:51 +0100 Subject: [governance] Preliminary List of Nominees for the 2013 MAG - REQUIRES IMMEDIATE ATTENTION In-Reply-To: <50F4F7E3.70903@communisphere.com> References: <50F4F7E3.70903@communisphere.com> Message-ID: <619E02E9-F3CF-4C65-8B86-799156F81A01@uzh.ch> Hi Thanks for this, Thomas. In light of the complexities of the discussions here around MAG rotation and names, and in the hope of reducing unnecessary cycles, I decided to make a local call to the IGF secretariat and ask for clarification of what DESA is looking for. Bear in mind they are only looking to rotate out 1/3rd of the MAG, e.g. long-serving (and I would guess, comparatively inactive) members. Not the people selected less than a year ago. And that CS is just one of four SG groups among which this 1/3rd would be divided. And that the IGC cannot claim to be the sole representative of global civil society. Put all that together, and the recommendation was: come up with like five new names that are not already on the MAG. Names on a smaller list have a higher probability of being viewed as strongly supported and eventually picked than names on a big long list. The noncom's task will be easier if you skip adding steps DESA didn't ask for like re-certifying extant members, and work off a shorter list with new names… Cheers, Bill On Jan 15, 2013, at 7:32 AM, Thomas Lowenhaupt wrote: > IGC List Members, > > The below 36 people have been self nominated or were nominated by another IGC member to be on the 2013 MAG (the Internet Governance Forum's Multistakeholder Advisory Group). > > It's a far larger list than any previous one with which I am familiar. And the Nominating Committee has very little time to make a selection. > > So that we may properly review all eligible candidates, the Nominating Committee would greatly appreciate your addressing the following as soon as practicable. > If you are not on this list and were inadvertently left off, please inform the NomCom immediately. > If you are on the list and wish to be removed - that is, you do not wish to serve on the 2013 MAG - please inform the NomCom as soon as possible. > Those indicating an interest in serving on the MAG and wishing to send supporting documents, or having others send supporting documents to their nominations, should assure their arrival by c.o.b. Thursday. This is extremely tight but we must have the final decision completed by Saturday with nominations to IGF by January 21. > The preliminary full list of nominees are: > Anriette Esterhuysen > Baudouin SCHOMBE > Brenden Kuerbis > Chaitanya Dhareshwar > Cheryl Langdon-Orr > Excel Asama Abel > Fatima Cambronero > Fouad Bajwa > Francis Augusto Medeiros > Gideon Rop > Ginger Paque > Graciela Selaimen > Hempal Shrestha > Imran Ahmed Shah > Izumi Aizu > Jamil Goheer > Jean-Yves Gatete > Jeremy Malcolm > Joao Carlos Caribe > José Félix Arias Ynche > Jose Francisco Callo Romero > Juan Manuel Rojas > Karim ATTOUMANI MOHAMED > Kossi AMESSINOU > Michael Gurstein > Mohamed Zahran > Mohamed Tijani BEN JEMAA > Robert Guerra > Robin Cross > Rudi Vansnick > Shahid Akbar > Shaila Mistry > Sonigitu Ekpe > Susan Chalmers > Tijani BEN JEMAA > Tim McGinnis > Sincerely, > Thomas Lowenhaupt, Non-voting chair > The Nominating Committee > > Voting Members of the NomCom: > > Wilson Abigaba > Shahid Akbar > Devon Blake > Dixie Hawtin > Asif Kabani > > > > > > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From gpaque at gmail.com Tue Jan 15 11:23:41 2013 From: gpaque at gmail.com (Ginger Paque) Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2013 10:23:41 -0600 Subject: [governance] Preliminary List of Nominees for the 2013 MAG - REQUIRES IMMEDIATE ATTENTION In-Reply-To: <619E02E9-F3CF-4C65-8B86-799156F81A01@uzh.ch> References: <50F4F7E3.70903@communisphere.com> <619E02E9-F3CF-4C65-8B86-799156F81A01@uzh.ch> Message-ID: This is an important clarification that we should take into account. Thanks! gp Ginger (Virginia) Paque VirginiaP at diplomacy.edu Diplo Foundation Internet Governance Capacity Building Programme www.diplomacy.edu/ig ** ** On 15 January 2013 10:01, William Drake wrote: > Hi > > Thanks for this, Thomas. In light of the complexities of the discussions > here around MAG rotation and names, and in the hope of reducing unnecessary > cycles, I decided to make a local call to the IGF secretariat and ask for > clarification of what DESA is looking for. > > Bear in mind they are only looking to rotate out 1/3rd of the MAG, e.g. > long-serving (and I would guess, comparatively inactive) members. Not the > people selected less than a year ago. And that CS is just one of four SG > groups among which this 1/3rd would be divided. And that the IGC cannot > claim to be the sole representative of global civil society. > > Put all that together, and the recommendation was: come up with like five > new names that are not already on the MAG. Names on a smaller list have a > higher probability of being viewed as strongly supported and eventually > picked than names on a big long list. > > The noncom's task will be easier if you skip adding steps DESA didn't ask > for like re-certifying extant members, and work off a shorter list with new > names… > > Cheers, > > Bill > > > On Jan 15, 2013, at 7:32 AM, Thomas Lowenhaupt > wrote: > > IGC List Members, > > The below 36 people have been self nominated or were nominated by another > IGC member to be on the 2013 MAG (the Internet Governance Forum's > Multistakeholder Advisory Group). > > It's a far larger list than any previous one with which I am familiar. And > the Nominating Committee has very little time to make a selection. > > So that we may properly review all eligible candidates, the Nominating > Committee would greatly appreciate your addressing the following as soon as > practicable. > > - If you are* not on this* list and were inadvertently left off, > please inform the NomCom immediately. > - If you are *on the list* and wish to be removed - that is, you do > not wish to serve on the 2013 MAG - please inform the NomCom as soon as > possible. > - Those indicating an interest in serving on the MAG and wishing to > send supporting documents, or having others send supporting documents to > their nominations, should assure their arrival by c.o.b. Thursday. This is > extremely tight but we must have the final decision completed by Saturday > with nominations to IGF by January 21. > > The preliminary full list of nominees are: > > 1. Anriette Esterhuysen > 2. Baudouin SCHOMBE > 3. Brenden Kuerbis > 4. Chaitanya Dhareshwar > 5. Cheryl Langdon-Orr > 6. Excel Asama Abel > 7. Fatima Cambronero > 8. Fouad Bajwa > 9. Francis Augusto Medeiros > 10. Gideon Rop > 11. Ginger Paque > 12. Graciela Selaimen > 13. Hempal Shrestha > 14. Imran Ahmed Shah > 15. Izumi Aizu > 16. Jamil Goheer > 17. Jean-Yves Gatete > 18. Jeremy Malcolm > 19. Joao Carlos Caribe > 20. José Félix Arias Ynche > 21. Jose Francisco Callo Romero > 22. Juan Manuel Rojas > 23. Karim ATTOUMANI MOHAMED > 24. Kossi AMESSINOU > 25. Michael Gurstein > 26. Mohamed Zahran > 27. Mohamed Tijani BEN JEMAA > 28. Robert Guerra > 29. Robin Cross > 30. Rudi Vansnick > 31. Shahid Akbar > 32. Shaila Mistry > 33. Sonigitu Ekpe > 34. Susan Chalmers > 35. Tijani BEN JEMAA > 36. Tim McGinnis > > Sincerely, > > Thomas Lowenhaupt, Non-voting chair > The Nominating Committee > > Voting Members of the NomCom: > > Wilson Abigaba > Shahid Akbar > Devon Blake > Dixie Hawtin > Asif Kabani > > > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From jfcallo at ciencitec.com Tue Jan 15 11:51:15 2013 From: jfcallo at ciencitec.com (jfcallo at ciencitec.com) Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2013 11:51:15 -0500 Subject: [governance] Preliminary List of Nominees for the 2013 MAG - REQUIRES IMMEDIATE ATTENTION In-Reply-To: References: <50F4F7E3.70903@communisphere.com> <619E02E9-F3CF-4C65-8B86-799156F81A01@uzh.ch> Message-ID: <20130115115115.6325335skpw7lp1f@www.ciencitec.com> Thank you for considering the list. I'm ready to work on what I assigned. Greetings from Lima, Peru. José F. Callo Romero CEO ciencitec.com Ginger Paque escribió: > This is an important clarification that we should take into account. Thanks! > > gp > > Ginger (Virginia) Paque > > VirginiaP at diplomacy.edu > Diplo Foundation > Internet Governance Capacity Building Programme > www.diplomacy.edu/ig > ** > ** > > > On 15 January 2013 10:01, William Drake wrote: > >> Hi >> >> Thanks for this, Thomas. In light of the complexities of the discussions >> here around MAG rotation and names, and in the hope of reducing unnecessary >> cycles, I decided to make a local call to the IGF secretariat and ask for >> clarification of what DESA is looking for. >> >> Bear in mind they are only looking to rotate out 1/3rd of the MAG, e.g. >> long-serving (and I would guess, comparatively inactive) members. Not the >> people selected less than a year ago. And that CS is just one of four SG >> groups among which this 1/3rd would be divided. And that the IGC cannot >> claim to be the sole representative of global civil society. >> >> Put all that together, and the recommendation was: come up with like five >> new names that are not already on the MAG. Names on a smaller list have a >> higher probability of being viewed as strongly supported and eventually >> picked than names on a big long list. >> >> The noncom's task will be easier if you skip adding steps DESA didn't ask >> for like re-certifying extant members, and work off a shorter list with new >> names… >> >> Cheers, >> >> Bill >> >> >> On Jan 15, 2013, at 7:32 AM, Thomas Lowenhaupt >> wrote: >> >> IGC List Members, >> >> The below 36 people have been self nominated or were nominated by another >> IGC member to be on the 2013 MAG (the Internet Governance Forum's >> Multistakeholder Advisory Group). >> >> It's a far larger list than any previous one with which I am familiar. And >> the Nominating Committee has very little time to make a selection. >> >> So that we may properly review all eligible candidates, the Nominating >> Committee would greatly appreciate your addressing the following as soon as >> practicable. >> >> - If you are* not on this* list and were inadvertently left off, >> please inform the NomCom immediately. >> - If you are *on the list* and wish to be removed - that is, you do >> not wish to serve on the 2013 MAG - please inform the NomCom as soon as >> possible. >> - Those indicating an interest in serving on the MAG and wishing to >> send supporting documents, or having others send supporting documents to >> their nominations, should assure their arrival by c.o.b. >> Thursday. This is >> extremely tight but we must have the final decision completed by Saturday >> with nominations to IGF by January 21. >> >> The preliminary full list of nominees are: >> >> 1. Anriette Esterhuysen >> 2. Baudouin SCHOMBE >> 3. Brenden Kuerbis >> 4. Chaitanya Dhareshwar >> 5. Cheryl Langdon-Orr >> 6. Excel Asama Abel >> 7. Fatima Cambronero >> 8. Fouad Bajwa >> 9. Francis Augusto Medeiros >> 10. Gideon Rop >> 11. Ginger Paque >> 12. Graciela Selaimen >> 13. Hempal Shrestha >> 14. Imran Ahmed Shah >> 15. Izumi Aizu >> 16. Jamil Goheer >> 17. Jean-Yves Gatete >> 18. Jeremy Malcolm >> 19. Joao Carlos Caribe >> 20. José Félix Arias Ynche >> 21. Jose Francisco Callo Romero >> 22. Juan Manuel Rojas >> 23. Karim ATTOUMANI MOHAMED >> 24. Kossi AMESSINOU >> 25. Michael Gurstein >> 26. Mohamed Zahran >> 27. Mohamed Tijani BEN JEMAA >> 28. Robert Guerra >> 29. Robin Cross >> 30. Rudi Vansnick >> 31. Shahid Akbar >> 32. Shaila Mistry >> 33. Sonigitu Ekpe >> 34. Susan Chalmers >> 35. Tijani BEN JEMAA >> 36. Tim McGinnis >> >> Sincerely, >> >> Thomas Lowenhaupt, Non-voting chair >> The Nominating Committee >> >> Voting Members of the NomCom: >> >> Wilson Abigaba >> Shahid Akbar >> Devon Blake >> Dixie Hawtin >> Asif Kabani >> >> >> >> >> >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 >> >> >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From jfcallo at ciencitec.com Tue Jan 15 12:00:39 2013 From: jfcallo at ciencitec.com (jfcallo at ciencitec.com) Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2013 12:00:39 -0500 Subject: [governance] Call for Volunteers for New NomCom In-Reply-To: References: <50F568D1.6090705@colnodo.apc.org> Message-ID: <20130115120039.131526zvkai1zh9z@www.ciencitec.com> Ratify my volunteering Nomcom list. thanks José F. Callo Romero CEO ciencitec.com Antonio Medina Gómez escribió: > Count on me > > Antonio Medina Gómez > > > 2013/1/15 Julian Casasbuenas G. > >> >> I am volunteering to be included in the pool for the NomCom selection. >> >> Julián Casasbuenas G. >> >> El 14/01/13 16:45, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro escribió: >> >> Dear All, >> >> This is an open call for volunteers for a New Nominating Committee >> (NomCom). For more information about IGC's NomCom, kindly visit >> http://www.igcaucus.org/nomcom-process. >> >> Kind Regards, >> >> >> -- >> Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala >> P.O. Box 17862 >> Suva >> Fiji >> >> Twitter: @SalanietaT >> Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro >> Tel: +679 3544828 >> Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 >> >> >> >> >> -- >> >> Julian Casasbuenas G. >> Director Colnodo >> Diagonal 40A (Antigua Av. 39) No. 14-75, Bogota, Colombia >> Tel: 57-1-2324246, Cel. 57-315-3339099 Fax: 57-1-3380264 >> Twitter @jcasasbuenaswww.colnodo.apc.org - Uso Estratégico de >> Internet para el Desarrollo >> Miembro de la Asociacion para el Progreso de las Comunicaciones >> -APC-www.apc.org >> >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From valeriab at apc.org Tue Jan 15 12:10:00 2013 From: valeriab at apc.org (Valeria Betancourt) Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2013 12:10:00 -0500 Subject: [governance] Preliminary List of Nominees for the 2013 MAG - REQUIRES IMMEDIATE ATTENTION In-Reply-To: <619E02E9-F3CF-4C65-8B86-799156F81A01@uzh.ch> References: <50F4F7E3.70903@communisphere.com> <619E02E9-F3CF-4C65-8B86-799156F81A01@uzh.ch> Message-ID: <6F130A1E-ABC5-472D-881F-B59C85D69F69@apc.org> Thanks Bill. This is such an important clarification to be taken into account by IGC. Valeria On 15/01/2013, at 11:01, William Drake wrote: > Hi > > Thanks for this, Thomas. In light of the complexities of the > discussions here around MAG rotation and names, and in the hope of > reducing unnecessary cycles, I decided to make a local call to the > IGF secretariat and ask for clarification of what DESA is looking for. > > Bear in mind they are only looking to rotate out 1/3rd of the MAG, > e.g. long-serving (and I would guess, comparatively inactive) > members. Not the people selected less than a year ago. And that CS > is just one of four SG groups among which this 1/3rd would be > divided. And that the IGC cannot claim to be the sole > representative of global civil society. > > Put all that together, and the recommendation was: come up with like > five new names that are not already on the MAG. Names on a smaller > list have a higher probability of being viewed as strongly supported > and eventually picked than names on a big long list. > > The noncom's task will be easier if you skip adding steps DESA > didn't ask for like re-certifying extant members, and work off a > shorter list with new names… > > Cheers, > > Bill > > > On Jan 15, 2013, at 7:32 AM, Thomas Lowenhaupt > wrote: > >> IGC List Members, >> >> The below 36 people have been self nominated or were nominated by >> another IGC member to be on the 2013 MAG (the Internet Governance >> Forum's Multistakeholder Advisory Group). >> >> It's a far larger list than any previous one with which I am >> familiar. And the Nominating Committee has very little time to make >> a selection. >> >> So that we may properly review all eligible candidates, the >> Nominating Committee would greatly appreciate your addressing the >> following as soon as practicable. >> If you are not on this list and were inadvertently left off, please >> inform the NomCom immediately. >> If you are on the list and wish to be removed - that is, you do not >> wish to serve on the 2013 MAG - please inform the NomCom as soon as >> possible. >> Those indicating an interest in serving on the MAG and wishing to >> send supporting documents, or having others send supporting >> documents to their nominations, should assure their arrival by >> c.o.b. Thursday. This is extremely tight but we must have the >> final decision completed by Saturday with nominations to IGF by >> January 21. >> The preliminary full list of nominees are: >> Anriette Esterhuysen >> Baudouin SCHOMBE >> Brenden Kuerbis >> Chaitanya Dhareshwar >> Cheryl Langdon-Orr >> Excel Asama Abel >> Fatima Cambronero >> Fouad Bajwa >> Francis Augusto Medeiros >> Gideon Rop >> Ginger Paque >> Graciela Selaimen >> Hempal Shrestha >> Imran Ahmed Shah >> Izumi Aizu >> Jamil Goheer >> Jean-Yves Gatete >> Jeremy Malcolm >> Joao Carlos Caribe >> José Félix Arias Ynche >> Jose Francisco Callo Romero >> Juan Manuel Rojas >> Karim ATTOUMANI MOHAMED >> Kossi AMESSINOU >> Michael Gurstein >> Mohamed Zahran >> Mohamed Tijani BEN JEMAA >> Robert Guerra >> Robin Cross >> Rudi Vansnick >> Shahid Akbar >> Shaila Mistry >> Sonigitu Ekpe >> Susan Chalmers >> Tijani BEN JEMAA >> Tim McGinnis >> Sincerely, >> Thomas Lowenhaupt, Non-voting chair >> The Nominating Committee >> >> Voting Members of the NomCom: >> >> Wilson Abigaba >> Shahid Akbar >> Devon Blake >> Dixie Hawtin >> Asif Kabani >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 ------------- Valeria Betancourt Directora / Manager Programa de Políticas de Information y Comunicación / Communication and Information Policy Programme Asociación para el Progreso de las Comunicaciones / Association for Progressive Communications, APC http://www.apc.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From hakik at hakik.org Tue Jan 15 12:11:56 2013 From: hakik at hakik.org (Hakikur Rahman) Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2013 17:11:56 +0000 Subject: [governance] Preliminary List of Nominees for the 2013 MAG - REQUIRES IMMEDIATE ATTENTION In-Reply-To: <50F4F7E3.70903@communisphere.com> References: <50F4F7E3.70903@communisphere.com> Message-ID: Dear Thomas, It was an honor to be working with you as a voting NomCom member and also pleased to serve two earlier terms. It sets me back after reading a comment on the list and that was the reason I withdraw mtself from the NomCom (no heartbreaking). If I may (without making your life more difficult), like to be included in the list this year. Best regards, Hakikur Hakikur Rahman At 06:32 15-01-2013, Thomas Lowenhaupt wrote: >IGC List Members, > >The below 36 people have been self nominated or >were nominated by another IGC member to be on >the 2013 MAG (the Internet Governance Forum's >Multistakeholder Advisory Group). > >It's a far larger list than any previous one >with which I am familiar. And the Nominating >Committee has very little time to make a selection. > >So that we may properly review all eligible >candidates, the Nominating Committee would >greatly appreciate your addressing the following as soon as practicable. > * If you are not on this list and were > inadvertently left off, please inform the NomCom immediately. > * If you are on the list and wish to be > removed - that is, you do not wish to serve on > the 2013 MAG - please inform the NomCom as soon as possible. > * Those indicating an interest in serving on > the MAG and wishing to send supporting > documents, or having others send supporting > documents to their nominations, should assure > their arrival by c.o.b. Thursday. This is > extremely tight but we must have the final > decision completed by Saturday with nominations to IGF by January 21. >The preliminary full list of nominees are: > * Anriette Esterhuysen > * Baudouin SCHOMBE > * Brenden Kuerbis > * Chaitanya Dhareshwar > * Cheryl Langdon-Orr > * Excel Asama Abel > * Fatima Cambronero > * Fouad Bajwa > * Francis Augusto Medeiros > * Gideon Rop > * Ginger Paque > * Graciela Selaimen > * Hempal Shrestha > * Imran Ahmed Shah > * Izumi Aizu > * Jamil Goheer > * Jean-Yves Gatete > * Jeremy Malcolm > * Joao Carlos Caribe > * José Félix Arias Ynche > * Jose Francisco Callo Romero > * Juan Manuel Rojas > * Karim ATTOUMANI MOHAMED > * Kossi AMESSINOU > * Michael Gurstein > * Mohamed Zahran > * Mohamed Tijani BEN JEMAA > * Robert Guerra > * Robin Cross > * Rudi Vansnick > * Shahid Akbar > * Shaila Mistry > * Sonigitu Ekpe > * Susan Chalmers > * Tijani BEN JEMAA > * Tim McGinnis > >Sincerely, > >Thomas Lowenhaupt, Non-voting chair >The Nominating Committee > >Voting Members of the NomCom: > >Wilson Abigaba >Shahid Akbar >Devon Blake >Dixie Hawtin >Asif Kabani > > > > > > >____________________________________________________________ >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: -------------- 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 From toml at communisphere.com Tue Jan 15 12:45:25 2013 From: toml at communisphere.com (Thomas Lowenhaupt) Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2013 12:45:25 -0500 Subject: [governance] Scoping the Work of the current MAG NomCom - was... Preliminary List of Nominees for the 2013 MAG - REQUIRES IMMEDIATE ATTENTION In-Reply-To: <619E02E9-F3CF-4C65-8B86-799156F81A01@uzh.ch> References: <619E02E9-F3CF-4C65-8B86-799156F81A01@uzh.ch> Message-ID: <50F595B5.50702@communisphere.com> Valeria, You said: Dear Thomas, Just a brief note to inform you (and the rest of NomCom members) that I do not see my name included in the list. I have expressed my interest to continue serving in the MAG in 2013. Please find attached the nomination template. Best, Valeria Betancourt Thank you for that question as it was one we had during the last MAG NomCom. I do believe some clarity was recently added to the situation by Bill Drake - see below. I'd say the NomCom's responsibility is to provide a set of names to IGF that they may use should they desire to rotate out existing members. As you are a current MAG members, you need not be concerned about the current NomCom activities. I hope this answers you question satisfactorily. Best, Tom Lowenhaupt ------------------------------------------------------------------------ -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: [governance] Preliminary List of Nominees for the 2013 MAG - REQUIRES IMMEDIATE ATTENTION Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2013 17:01:51 +0100 From: William Drake To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org, Thomas Lowenhaupt Hi Thanks for this, Thomas. In light of the complexities of the discussions here around MAG rotation and names, and in the hope of reducing unnecessary cycles, I decided to make a local call to the IGF secretariat and ask for clarification of what DESA is looking for. Bear in mind they are only looking to rotate out 1/3rd of the MAG, e.g. long-serving (and I would guess, comparatively inactive) members. Not the people selected less than a year ago. And that CS is just one of four SG groups among which this 1/3rd would be divided. And that the IGC cannot claim to be the sole representative of global civil society. Put all that together, and the recommendation was: come up with like five new names that are not already on the MAG. Names on a smaller list have a higher probability of being viewed as strongly supported and eventually picked than names on a big long list. The noncom's task will be easier if you skip adding steps DESA didn't ask for like re-certifying extant members, and work off a shorter list with new names… Cheers, Bill On Jan 15, 2013, at 7:32 AM, Thomas Lowenhaupt > wrote: > IGC List Members, > > The below 36 people have been self nominated or were nominated by > another IGC member to be on the 2013 MAG (the Internet Governance > Forum's Multistakeholder Advisory Group). > > It's a far larger list than any previous one with which I am familiar. > And the Nominating Committee has very little time to make a selection. > > So that we may properly review all eligible candidates, the Nominating > Committee would greatly appreciate your addressing the following as > soon as practicable. > > * If you are*not on this* list and were inadvertently left off, > please inform the NomCom immediately. > * If you are *on the list* and wish to be removed - that is, you do > not wish to serve on the 2013 MAG - please inform the NomCom as > soon as possible. > * Those indicating an interest in serving on the MAG and wishing to > send supporting documents, or having others send supporting > documents to their nominations, should assure their arrival by > c.o.b. Thursday. This is extremely tight but we must have the > final decision completed by Saturday with nominations to IGF by > January 21. > > The preliminary full list of nominees are: > > 1. Anriette Esterhuysen > 2. Baudouin SCHOMBE > 3. Brenden Kuerbis > 4. Chaitanya Dhareshwar > 5. Cheryl Langdon-Orr > 6. Excel Asama Abel > 7. Fatima Cambronero > 8. Fouad Bajwa > 9. Francis Augusto Medeiros > 10. Gideon Rop > 11. Ginger Paque > 12. Graciela Selaimen > 13. Hempal Shrestha > 14. Imran Ahmed Shah > 15. Izumi Aizu > 16. Jamil Goheer > 17. Jean-Yves Gatete > 18. Jeremy Malcolm > 19. Joao Carlos Caribe > 20. José Félix Arias Ynche > 21. Jose Francisco Callo Romero > 22. Juan Manuel Rojas > 23. Karim ATTOUMANI MOHAMED > 24. Kossi AMESSINOU > 25. Michael Gurstein > 26. Mohamed Zahran > 27. Mohamed Tijani BEN JEMAA > 28. Robert Guerra > 29. Robin Cross > 30. Rudi Vansnick > 31. Shahid Akbar > 32. Shaila Mistry > 33. Sonigitu Ekpe > 34. Susan Chalmers > 35. Tijani BEN JEMAA > 36. Tim McGinnis > > Sincerely, > > Thomas Lowenhaupt, Non-voting chair > The Nominating Committee > > Voting Members of the NomCom: > > Wilson Abigaba > Shahid Akbar > Devon Blake > Dixie Hawtin > Asif Kabani > > > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From shailam at yahoo.com Tue Jan 15 12:51:58 2013 From: shailam at yahoo.com (shaila mistry) Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2013 09:51:58 -0800 (PST) Subject: [governance] Preliminary List of Nominees for the 2013 MAG - REQUIRES IMMEDIATE ATTENTION In-Reply-To: References: <50F4F7E3.70903@communisphere.com> Message-ID: <1358272318.139.YahooMailNeo@web160504.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> I would like to be included on this list Shaila Rao Mistry   The journey begins sooner than you anticipate ! ..................... the renaissance of composure ! ________________________________ From: Hakikur Rahman To: Thomas Lowenhaupt ; governance list IG Caucus Sent: Tuesday, January 15, 2013 9:11 AM Subject: Re: [governance] Preliminary List of Nominees for the 2013 MAG - REQUIRES IMMEDIATE ATTENTION Dear Thomas, It was an honor to be working with you as a voting NomCom member and also pleased to serve two earlier terms. It sets me back after reading a comment on the list and that was the reason I withdraw mtself from the NomCom (no heartbreaking). If I may (without making your life more difficult), like to be included in the list this year. Best regards, Hakikur Hakikur Rahman At 06:32 15-01-2013, Thomas Lowenhaupt wrote: IGC List Members, > >The below 36 people have been self nominated or were nominated by another IGC member to be on the 2013 MAG (the Internet Governance Forum's Multistakeholder Advisory Group). > >It's a far larger list than any previous one with which I am familiar. And the Nominating Committee has very little time to make a selection. > >So that we may properly review all eligible candidates, the Nominating Committee would greatly appreciate your addressing the following as soon as practicable. > * If you arenot on this list and were inadvertently left off, please inform the NomCom immediately. > * If you are on the list and wish to be removed - that is, you do not wish to serve on the 2013 MAG - please inform the NomCom as soon as possible. > * Those indicating an interest in serving on the MAG and wishing to send supporting documents, or having others send supporting documents to their nominations, should assure their arrival by c.o.b. Thursday.  This is extremely tight but we must have the final decision completed by Saturday with nominations to IGF by January 21. The preliminary full list of nominees are: > 1. Anriette Esterhuysen > 2. Baudouin SCHOMBE > 3. Brenden Kuerbis > 4. Chaitanya Dhareshwar > 5. Cheryl Langdon-Orr > 6. Excel Asama Abel > 7. Fatima Cambronero > 8. Fouad Bajwa > 9. Francis Augusto Medeiros > 10. Gideon Rop > 11. Ginger Paque > 12. Graciela Selaimen > 13. Hempal Shrestha > 14. Imran Ahmed  Shah > 15. Izumi Aizu > 16. Jamil Goheer > 17. Jean-Yves Gatete > 18. Jeremy Malcolm > 19. Joao Carlos Caribe > 20. José Félix Arias Ynche > 21. Jose Francisco Callo Romero > 22. Juan Manuel  Rojas > 23. Karim ATTOUMANI MOHAMED > 24. Kossi AMESSINOU > 25. Michael Gurstein > 26. Mohamed Zahran > 27. Mohamed Tijani BEN JEMAA > 28. Robert  Guerra > 29. Robin Cross > 30. Rudi Vansnick > 31. Shahid Akbar > 32. Shaila Mistry > 33. Sonigitu Ekpe > 34. Susan Chalmers > 35. Tijani BEN JEMAA > 36. Tim  McGinnis >Sincerely, > >Thomas Lowenhaupt, Non-voting chair >The Nominating Committee > >Voting Members of the NomCom: > >Wilson Abigaba >Shahid Akbar >Devon Blake >Dixie Hawtin >Asif Kabani > > > > > > >____________________________________________________________ >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 ____________________________________________________________ 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: -------------- 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 From ivarhartmann at gmail.com Tue Jan 15 12:52:20 2013 From: ivarhartmann at gmail.com (Ivar A. M. Hartmann) Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2013 15:52:20 -0200 Subject: [governance] =?WINDOWS-1252?Q?Verizon=92s_=93Six_Strikes=94_A?= =?WINDOWS-1252?Q?nti-Piracy_Measures_Unveiled?= In-Reply-To: <50F2AE64.8090008@gmail.com> References: <50F2AE64.8090008@gmail.com> Message-ID: In order for this all to work, ISPs will have to engage in systematic privacy violation, of course. What's most shocking to me about all of this isn't their intent to do so - and the copyright industry's support of the invasion of personal correspondence. Rather, it's the fact that such absurd requirement is seen by the designers and executioners of the plan as completely normal and valid, both legally and morally. So much so that they don't even bother to acknowledge it! Best, Ivar On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 10:53 AM, Riaz K Tayob wrote: > ** ** ** [Any confirmations of this?] > Verizon’s “Six Strikes” Anti-Piracy Measures Unveiled > ** > > - Ernesto > - January 11, 2013 > - > https://torrentfreak.com/verizons-six-strikes-anti-piracy-measures-unveiled-130111/ > > During the coming weeks the controversial “six-strikes” anti-piracy system > will kick off in the U.S. While none of the participating ISPs have > officially announced how they will handle repeat infringers, TorrentFreak > has obtained a copy of Verizon’s full policy. Among other things, offenders > will have to watch a video about the consequences of online piracy, before > their speeds are reduced to 256kbps. Also worth mentioning is that the > copyright alert system will also apply to business customers. > > [image: verizon]In 2011 the MPAA and RIAA teamed up with five major > Internet providers in the United States to launch the Center for Copyright > Information (CCI). > > The parties agreed to implement a system through which subscribers are > warned that their copyright infringements have been monitored by > rightsholders. After several warnings ISPs may then take a variety of > repressive measures against alleged infringers. > > After more than a year of delaysthe plan will officially roll out in the first weeks of this year. > > One of the ISPs taking part is Verizon. Previously, the ISP made some > remarks about the various punishments it would hand out to subscribers but > in common with other participating providers the company has not yet > announced the full details. Today, we can do this for them. > > TorrentFreak has obtained a complete overview of how Verizon’s alert > scheme will work and details of the mitigation measures they intend to put > in place. The documentis stored on Verizon’s web server but due to its placement is currently > unfindable using Google. > [image: 6-verizon] > > When the IP-address of a Verizon customer is caught sharing copyrighted > works on BitTorrent, the responsible account holder will first get two > notification alerts. These inform the customer about the alleged copyright > infringements and also explain how file-sharing software can be removed > from their computer. > > *Alert 1 and 2* > > *“Are delivered by email and automatic voicemail to the telephone number > we have on file for you. Notify you that one or more copyright owners have > reported that they believe your account has been involved in possible > copyright infringement activity.”* > > *“Provide a link to information on how to check to see if file sharing > software is operating on your computer (and how to remove it) and tell you > where to find information on obtaining content legally.”* > > If more infringements are found after the first two alerts then the > account holder is moved on to the acknowledgment phase where “popups” > appear on-screen. Customers will have to acknowledge that they received the > new alert and will be instructed to watch a video about the consequences of > online piracy. > > *Alert 3 and 4* > > *“Redirect your browser to a special web page where you can review and > acknowledge receiving the alerts. Provide a short video about copyright law > and the consequences of copyright infringement.”* > > *“Require you to click on an “acknowledgement” button before you will be > able to freely browse the Internet. Clicking the acknowledgement button > does not require you to admit that you or anyone else actually engaged in > any infringing activity, only that you have received the alert.”* > > If the infringements continue after the fourth alert the subscriber will > move on to the mitigation phase. Here, the customer can either ask for a > review by the American Arbitration Association or undergo a temporary speed > reduction to 256kbps. > > *Alert 5 and 6* > > *“Redirect your browser to a special web page where you will be given > several options. You can: Agree to an immediate temporary (2 or 3 day) > reduction in the speed of your Internet access service to 256kbps (a little > faster than typical dial-up speed); Agree to the same temporary (2 or 3 > day) speed reduction but delay it for a period of 14 days; or Ask for a > review of the validity of your alerts by the American Arbitration > Association.”* > > If more infringements are found after the sixth alert “nothing” will > happen. The user will receive no more alerts and can continue using his or > her Internet connection at full speed. > > However – and this is not mentioned by Verizon – the MPAA and RIAA may > obtain the IP-addresses of such repeat infringers in order to take legal > action against them. While the ISPs will not voluntarily share the name and > address linked to the IP-address, they can obtain a subpoena to demand this > information from the provider. > > The potential for copyright holders to use the alert system as solid > evidence gathering for lawsuits remains one of the most problematic aspects > of the six-strikes scheme. > > Finally, TorrentFreak also confirmed that the alerts outlined above will > also apply to business customers. This means that coffee shops and other > small businesses will have to be very careful over who they allow on their > company networks. It could mean the end of free WiFi in many places. > > Aside from Verizon we previously received some details on the measures > AT&T and Time Warner Cable will take. > > Leaked AT&T documents showed that they will block users’ accessto some of the most frequently-visited websites on the Internet, until they > complete a copyright course. Time Warner Cable will temporarily interruptpeople’s ability to browse the Internet. > > It’s expected that the two remaining providers, Cablevison and Comcast, > will take similar measures. None of the ISPs will permanently disconnect > repeat infringers as part of the plan. > ** ** > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: verizon-progress.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 6010 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 6-verizon.png Type: image/png Size: 25542 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- 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 From valeriab at apc.org Tue Jan 15 12:53:04 2013 From: valeriab at apc.org (Valeria Betancourt) Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2013 12:53:04 -0500 Subject: [governance] Scoping the Work of the current MAG NomCom - was... Preliminary List of Nominees for the 2013 MAG - REQUIRES IMMEDIATE ATTENTION In-Reply-To: <50F595B5.50702@communisphere.com> References: <619E02E9-F3CF-4C65-8B86-799156F81A01@uzh.ch> <50F595B5.50702@communisphere.com> Message-ID: <9500914F-9FE4-41E5-9CE4-9A11156B1F3E@apc.org> Absolutely!! I only saw Bill's clarification after sending my message in response to your initial one. A shorter list with new names is a very straight forward and strategic step. Wishing the NomCom all the best for this endeavor. Best, Valeria On 15/01/2013, at 12:45, Thomas Lowenhaupt wrote: > Valeria, > > You said: > Dear Thomas, > > Just a brief note to inform you (and the rest of NomCom members) > that I do not see my name included in the list. I have expressed my > interest to continue serving in the MAG in 2013. > > Please find attached the nomination template. > > Best, > Valeria Betancourt > Thank you for that question as it was one we had during the last MAG > NomCom. > > I do believe some clarity was recently added to the situation by > Bill Drake - see below. > > I'd say the NomCom's responsibility is to provide a set of names to > IGF that they may use should they desire to rotate out existing > members. As you are a current MAG members, you need not be concerned > about the current NomCom activities. > > I hope this answers you question satisfactorily. > > Best, > > Tom Lowenhaupt > > > -------- Original Message -------- > Subject: Re: [governance] Preliminary List of Nominees for the 2013 > MAG - REQUIRES IMMEDIATE ATTENTION > Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2013 17:01:51 +0100 > From: William Drake > To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org, Thomas Lowenhaupt > > > Hi > > Thanks for this, Thomas. In light of the complexities of the > discussions here around MAG rotation and names, and in the hope of > reducing unnecessary cycles, I decided to make a local call to the > IGF secretariat and ask for clarification of what DESA is looking for. > > Bear in mind they are only looking to rotate out 1/3rd of the MAG, > e.g. long-serving (and I would guess, comparatively inactive) > members. Not the people selected less than a year ago. And that CS > is just one of four SG groups among which this 1/3rd would be > divided. And that the IGC cannot claim to be the sole > representative of global civil society. > > Put all that together, and the recommendation was: come up with like > five new names that are not already on the MAG. Names on a smaller > list have a higher probability of being viewed as strongly supported > and eventually picked than names on a big long list. > > The noncom's task will be easier if you skip adding steps DESA > didn't ask for like re-certifying extant members, and work off a > shorter list with new names… > > Cheers, > > Bill > > > On Jan 15, 2013, at 7:32 AM, Thomas Lowenhaupt > wrote: > >> IGC List Members, >> >> The below 36 people have been self nominated or were nominated by >> another IGC member to be on the 2013 MAG (the Internet Governance >> Forum's Multistakeholder Advisory Group). >> >> It's a far larger list than any previous one with which I am >> familiar. And the Nominating Committee has very little time to make >> a selection. >> >> So that we may properly review all eligible candidates, the >> Nominating Committee would greatly appreciate your addressing the >> following as soon as practicable. >> If you are not on this list and were inadvertently left off, please >> inform the NomCom immediately. >> If you are on the list and wish to be removed - that is, you do not >> wish to serve on the 2013 MAG - please inform the NomCom as soon as >> possible. >> Those indicating an interest in serving on the MAG and wishing to >> send supporting documents, or having others send supporting >> documents to their nominations, should assure their arrival by >> c.o.b. Thursday. This is extremely tight but we must have the >> final decision completed by Saturday with nominations to IGF by >> January 21. >> The preliminary full list of nominees are: >> Anriette Esterhuysen >> Baudouin SCHOMBE >> Brenden Kuerbis >> Chaitanya Dhareshwar >> Cheryl Langdon-Orr >> Excel Asama Abel >> Fatima Cambronero >> Fouad Bajwa >> Francis Augusto Medeiros >> Gideon Rop >> Ginger Paque >> Graciela Selaimen >> Hempal Shrestha >> Imran Ahmed Shah >> Izumi Aizu >> Jamil Goheer >> Jean-Yves Gatete >> Jeremy Malcolm >> Joao Carlos Caribe >> José Félix Arias Ynche >> Jose Francisco Callo Romero >> Juan Manuel Rojas >> Karim ATTOUMANI MOHAMED >> Kossi AMESSINOU >> Michael Gurstein >> Mohamed Zahran >> Mohamed Tijani BEN JEMAA >> Robert Guerra >> Robin Cross >> Rudi Vansnick >> Shahid Akbar >> Shaila Mistry >> Sonigitu Ekpe >> Susan Chalmers >> Tijani BEN JEMAA >> Tim McGinnis >> Sincerely, >> Thomas Lowenhaupt, Non-voting chair >> The Nominating Committee >> >> Voting Members of the NomCom: >> >> Wilson Abigaba >> Shahid Akbar >> Devon Blake >> Dixie Hawtin >> Asif Kabani >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 ------------- Valeria Betancourt Directora / Manager Programa de Políticas de Information y Comunicación / Communication and Information Policy Programme Asociación para el Progreso de las Comunicaciones / Association for Progressive Communications, APC http://www.apc.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From riaz.tayob at gmail.com Tue Jan 15 16:38:23 2013 From: riaz.tayob at gmail.com (Riaz K Tayob) Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2013 23:38:23 +0200 Subject: [governance] Aaron Swartz's Politics Message-ID: <50F5CC4F.3080303@gmail.com> Aaron Swartz's Politics Tuesday, 15 January 2013 14:22 By Matt Stoller , Naked Capitalism | Op-Ed * 3 Aaron Swartz was my friend, and I will always miss him. I think it's important that, as we remember him, we remember that Aaron had a much broader agenda than the information freedom fights for which he had become known. Most people have focused on Aaron's work as an advocate for more open information systems, because that's what the Feds went after him for, and because he's well-understood as a technologist who founded Reddit and invented RSS. But I knew a different side of him. I knew Aaron as a political activist interested in health care, financial corruption, and the drug war (we were working on a project on that just before he died). He was a great technologist, for sure, but when we were working together that was not all I saw. In 2009, I was working in Rep. Alan Grayson's office as a policy advisor. We were engaged in fights around the health care bill that eventually became Obamacare, as well as a much narrower but significant fight on auditing the Federal Reserve that eventually became a provision in Dodd-Frank. Aaron came into our office to intern for a few weeks to learn about Congress and how bills were put together. He worked with me on organizing the campaign within the Financial Services Committee to pass the amendment sponsored by Ron Paul and Alan Grayson on transparency at the Fed. He helped with the website NamesOfTheDead.com, a site dedicated to publicizing the 44,000 Americans that die every year because they don't have health insurance. Aaron learned about Congress by just spending time there, which seems like an obvious thing to do. Many activists prefer to keep their distance from policymakers, because they are afraid of the complexity of the system and believe that it is inherently corrupting. Aaron, as with much of his endeavors, simply let his curiosity , which he saw as synonymous with brilliance, drive him. Aaron also spent a lot of time learning how advocacy and electoral politics works from outside of Congress. He helped found the Progressive Change Campaign Committee, a group that sought to replace existing political consulting machinery in the Democratic Party. At the PCCC, he worked on stopping Ben Bernanke's reconfirmation (the email Aaron wrote called him "Bailout Ben"), auditing the Fed and passing health care reform. I remember he sent me this video of Financial Services Committee Chairman Barney Frank, on Reddit, offering his support to Grayson's provision. A very small piece of the victory on Fed openness belongs to Aaron. By the time I met and became friends with Aaron, he had already helped create RSS and co-founded and sold Reddit. He didn't have to act with intellectual humility when confronting the political system, but he did. Rather than approach politics as so many successful entrepreneurs do, which is to say, try to meet top politicians and befriend them, Aaron sought to understand the system itself. He read political blogs, what I can only presume are gobs of history books (like Tom Ferguson's Golden Rule, one of the most important books on politics that almost no one under 40 has read), and began talking to organizers and political advocates. He wanted, first and foremost, to know. He learned about elections, political advertising, the data behind voting, and grassroots organizing. He began understanding policy, by learning about Congressional process, its intersection with politics, and how staff and influence networks work on the Hill and through agencies. He analyzed money. He analyzed corruption. And he understood how it worked. In November of 2008, Aaron emailed me the following: "apologies if you've already seen it, but check out this mash note to Rubin from Lay. ahh, politics." This was attached to the message. This note, from Enron CEO Ken Lay to Treasury Secretary Bob Rubin, perfectly encapsulates the closed and corroded nature of our political system -- two corporate good ole boys, one running Treasury and one running Enron, passing mash notes. This was everything Aaron hated, and fought against. What I respected about Aaron is that he burned with a desire for justice, but also felt a profound desire to understand the system he was attempting to reorganize. He didn't throw up his hands lazily and curse at corruption, he spent enormous amounts of time and energy learning about and working the political system. From founding Reddit, to fighting the Fed. That was Aaron. Aaron approached politics like he approached technology . His method was as follows - (1) Learn (2) Try (3) Gab (4) Build . He was methodical about his work, and his approach to life - this essay on procrastination will give you a good window into his mind. Aaron liked to "lean in" to difficult problems, work at them until he could break them down and solve them. He had no illusions about politics, which is why he eventually became so good at it. He didn't disdain the political process the way so many choose to, but he also didn't engage in flowery lazy thoughts about the glory of checks and balances. He broke politics down and systematically attempted to understand the system. Aaron learned, tried, gabbed, and then built. This is a note I got from him years ago, when we were trying to put together flow charts of corporate PAC money and where it went. "Been playing around with the numbers tonight. Turns out corporate PAC money explains 45% of the variance in ProgressivePunch scores among Dems. Scatterplot attached. Right is progressive, down is no corporate PAC money. So you can see how all the people with less than 80% progressive punch scores get more than 20% of their money from PACs." This is a chart of power, one of many Aaron put together to educate himself (and in this case, me). Most geeks hate the political system, and are at the same time awed by it. They don't actually approach it with any respect for the underlying architecture of power, but at the same time, they are impressed by political figures with titles. Aaron recognized that politics is a corrupt money driven system, but also that it could be cracked if you spent the time to understand the moving parts. He figured out that business alliances, grassroots organizing, and direct lobbying to build coalitions was powerful, whereas access alone was a mirage. He worked very hard to understand how policy changes work, which ultimately culminated in his successful campaign to stop SOPA in 2011. This took many years of work and a remarkable amount of humility on his part. But he was driven by a desire for justice, and not just for open information. He wanted an end to the drug war, he wanted a financial system not dominated by Bob Rubin, and he wanted monetary policy run to help ordinary people. Some of his last tweets are on monetary policy, and the platinum coin option for raising the debt ceiling (which is a round-about way of preventing cuts to social welfare programs for the elderly). Aaron was a liberal who saw class and race as core driving forces in American politics. In a lovely essay on how he organized his career, he made this clear in a very charming but pointed way. So how did I get a job like mine? Undoubtedly, the first step is to choose the right genes: I was born white, male, American. My family was fairly well-off and my father worked in the computer industry. Unfortunately, I don't know of any way of choosing these things, so that probably isn't much help to you. But, on the other hand, when I started I was a very young kid stuck in a small town in the middle of the country. So I did have to figure out some tricks for getting out of that. In the hopes of making life a little less unfair, I thought I'd share them with you. Making "life a little less unfair." Those aren't the words of a techno-utopianist, those are the words of a liberal political organizer. They remind me of how Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren has described her own work. Aaron knew life would always be unfair, but that was no reason not to try to make society better. He had no illusions about power but maintained hope for our society if, I suppose, not always for himself. This is a very difficult way to approach the world, but it's why he was so heroic in how he acted. I want people to understand that Aaron sought not open information systems, but justice. Aaron believed passionately in the scientific method as a guide for organizing our society, and in that open-minded but powerful critique, he was a technocratic liberal. His leanings sometimes moved him towards more radical postures because he recognized that our governing institutions had become malevolent, but he was not an anarchist. I am very angry Aaron is dead. I've been crying off and on for a few days, as it hits me that he's gone forever. Aaron accomplished more in 13 than nearly everyone I know will get done in their entire lives, and his breadth of knowledge and creativity in politics were stunning, all the more so since he was equally well-versed in many other fields. But what I respected was his curiosity and open-mindedness. He truly loved knowledge, and loved people who would share it. We used to argue about politics, him a hopeful and intellectually honest technocratic liberal and me as someone who had lost faith in our social institutions. We made each other really angry sometimes, because I thought he was too sympathetic to establishment norms, and he thought I couldn't emotionally acknowledge when technocrats had useful things to say. But I respected him, and he frequently changed my mind. I saw that what looked like stubbornness was just intellectual honesty and a deep thirst for evidence. He wanted to understand politics, because he thought that understanding, and then action, was the key to justice. As I said, I am very angry that he is dead. I don't want to get into the specifics of his case, because others have discussed it and the political elements of it more eloquently than I ever could. His family and partner have put out a powerful statement placing blame appropriately. Aaron's death is not simply a personal tragedy. It is the product of a criminal justice system rife with intimidation and prosecutorial overreach. Decisions made by officials in the Massachusetts U.S. Attorney's office and at MIT contributed to his death. The US Attorney's office pursued an exceptionally harsh array of charges, carrying potentially over 30 years in prison, to punish an alleged crime that had no victims. Meanwhile, unlike JSTOR, MIT refused to stand up for Aaron and its own community's most cherished principles. I want to make a few points about why it's not just sad that he is gone, but a tragedy, a symbol for all of us, and a call to action. Aaron suffered from depression, but that is not why he died. Aaron is dead because the institutions that govern our society have decided that it is more important to target geniuses like Aaron than nurture them, because the values he sought -- openness, justice, curiosity -- are values these institutions now oppose. In previous generations, people like Aaron would have been treasured and recognized as the remarkable gifts they are. We do not live in a world like that today. And Aaron would be the first to point out, if he could observe the discussion happening now, that the pressure he felt from the an oppressive government is felt by millions of people, every year. I'm glad his family have not let the justice system off the hook, and have not allowed this suicide to be medicalized, or the fault of one prosecutor. What happened to Aaron is not isolated to Aaron, but is the flip side of the corruption he hated. As we think about what happened to Aaron, we need to recognize that it was not just prosecutorial overreach that killed him. That's too easy, because that implies it's one bad apple. We know that's not true. What killed him was corruption. Corruption isn't just people profiting from betraying the public interest. It's also people being punished for upholding the public interest. In our institutions of power, when you do the right thing and challenge abusive power, you end up destroying a job prospect, an economic opportunity, a political or social connection, or an opportunity for media. Or if you are truly dangerous and brilliantly subversive, as Aaron was, you are bankrupted and destroyed. There's a reason whistleblowers get fired. There's a reason Bradley Manning is in jail. There's a reason the only CIA official who has gone to jail for torture is the person -- John Kiriako - who told the world it was going on. There's a reason those who destroyed the financial system "dine at the White House", as Lawrence Lessig put it. There's a reason former Senator Russ Feingold is a college professor whereas former Senator Chris Dodd is now a multi-millionaire. There's a reason DOJ officials do not go after bankers who illegally foreclose, and then get jobs as partners in white collar criminal defense. There's a reason no one has been held accountable for decisions leading to the financial crisis, or the war in Iraq. This reason is the modern ethic in American society that defines success as climbing up the ladder, consequences be damned. Corrupt self-interest, when it goes systemwide, demands that it protect rentiers from people like Aaron, that it intimidate, co-opt, humiliate, fire, destroy, and/or bankrupt those who stand for justice. More prosaically, the person who warned about the downside in a meeting gets cut out of the loop, or the former politician who tries to reform an industry sector finds his or her job opportunities sparse and unappealing next to his soon to be millionaire go along get along colleagues. I've seen this happen to high level former officials who have done good, and among students who challenge power as their colleagues go to become junior analysts on Wall Street. And now we've seen these same forces kill our friend. It's important for us to recognize that Aaron is just an extreme example of a force that targets all of us. He eschewed the traditional paths to wealth and power, dropping out of college after a year because it wasn't intellectually stimulating. After co-founding and selling Reddit, and establishing his own financial security, he wandered and acted, calling himself an "applied sociologist." He helped in small personal ways, offering encouragement to journalists like Mike Elk after Elk had broken a significant story and gotten pushback from colleagues. In my inbox, every birthday, I got a lovely note from Aaron offering me encouragement and telling me how much he admired my voice. He was a profoundly kind man, and I will now never be able to repay him for the love and kindness he showed me. There's no medal of honor for someone like this, no Oscar, no institutional way of saying "here's someone who did a lot of good for a lot of people." This is because our institutions are corrupt, and wanted to quelch the Aaron Swartz's of the world. Ultimately, they killed him. I hope that we remember Aaron in the way he should be remembered, as a hero and an inspiration. In six days, on January 18th, it's the one year anniversary of the blackout of Wikipedia, and some have discussed celebrating it as Internet Freedom Day. Maybe we should call this Aaron Swartz Day, in honor of this heroic figure. While what happened that day was technically about the internet, it should be remembered, and Aaron should be remembered, in the context of social justice. That day was about a call for a different world, not just protecting our ability to access web sites. And we should remember these underlying values. It would help people understand that justice can be extremely costly, and that we risk much when we allow those who do the right thing to be punished. Somehow, we need to rebuild a culture that respects people like Aaron and turns away from the greed and rent-extraction that he hated. There's a cycle in American history, of religious "Great Awakenings", where new cultural systems emerge in the form of religion, often sweeping through communities of young people dissatisfied with the society they see around them. Perhaps that is what we see in the Slow Food movement, or gay rights movement, or the spread of walkable communities and decline of vehicle miles , or maker movement, or the increasing acceptance of meditation and therapy, or any number of other cultural changes in our society. I don't know. I'm sure many of these can be subverted. What I do know is that if we are to honor Aaron's life, we will recognize him as a broad social justice activist who cared about transforming our society, and acted to do so. And we will take up his fight as our own. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: warm-memo-from-lay-to-rubin.gif Type: image/gif Size: 24118 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Picture-3.png Type: image/png Size: 5165 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- 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 From jeanette at wzb.eu Tue Jan 15 16:42:33 2013 From: jeanette at wzb.eu (Jeanette Hofmann) Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2013 22:42:33 +0100 Subject: [governance] Notice to the IGC on Proposed Charter Amendments In-Reply-To: <5CE73F97-0915-4977-A078-0B83BDD47BC6@acm.org> References: <50F38F8E.3090106@ciroap.org> <5CE73F97-0915-4977-A078-0B83BDD47BC6@acm.org> Message-ID: <50F5CD49.5030903@wzb.eu> Am 14.01.13 13:31, schrieb Avri Doria: > hi, > > If I were a qualified voter under the charter rules as interpreted by > some*, I would join you in proposing these. > > Should you still be looking for endorsers after the 18th, count me > in. > > avri > > * note: i bailed out of the vote last time, just as is being > suggested this time, and yet was marked as a non-voter by our > co-ordinator. I am considering an appeal if I am not given a vote in > the charter revision. Same is true for me. I want to vote on the charter without having to support any of the candidates. jeanette > > On 13 Jan 2013, at 23:54, Jeremy Malcolm wrote: > >> On 14/01/13 06:47, Deirdre Williams wrote: >>> My comment refers to point 5 below: "Before the initiation of the >>> Voting eBallot, all voting members are requested to inform the >>> IGC if they feel that there are other necessary amendments to be >>> made to the Charter and a period of 48 hours is given to allow >>> members to respond." Is there any reason that we cannot deal with >>> these amendments piecemeal? Avri has made a powerful and >>> convincing proposal that has received a good deal of support. I >>> propose therefore that we should vote on this amendment to this >>> section of the Charter now. As other amendments are proposed we >>> can deal with them. Attempts to review the whole Charter together >>> have been unsuccessful. Perhaps making a review section by >>> section will work better. What do others think? >> >> I think that other amendments should be considered at the same >> time. Here are the other amendments that I would like to propose >> be added to the ballot: • Under "Selection of Coordinators", >> regarding when elections are held, change "by midsummer (the summer >> solstice) to "within 15 months of the previous election". Also in >> "If events prevent an election by midsummer, it will be held as >> soon after midsummer as possible," change the word "midsummer" to >> "then" in both places. • Under "Working methods", update the >> address of the mailing list from governance at lists.cpsr.org to >> governance at lists.igcaucus.org. The last of these, in particular, >> should be a no-brainer. >> >> -- Dr Jeremy Malcolm Senior Policy Officer Consumers International >> | the global campaigning voice for consumers Office for >> Asia-Pacific and the Middle East Lot 5-1 Wisma WIM, 7 Jalan Abang >> Haji Openg, TTDI, 60000 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia Tel: +60 3 7726 >> 1599 >> >> Your rights, our mission – download CI's Strategy 2015: >> http://consint.info/RightsMission >> >> @Consumers_Int | www.consumersinternational.org | >> www.facebook.com/consumersinternational >> >> Read our email confidentiality notice. Don't print this email >> unless necessary. >> >> ____________________________________________________________ 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com Tue Jan 15 19:03:37 2013 From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro) Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2013 13:03:37 +1300 Subject: [governance] Re: Call for Volunteers for New NomCom In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Dear All, I encourage all those who subscribe to the list to volunteer for the new NomCom. We need 25 names before we can run the selection. So far we have the following persons who have volunteered: 1. Kerry Brown 2. Mawaki Chango 3. Jeremy Malcolm 4. Tapani Tarvainen 5. Fouad Bajwa 6. Gideon Rop 7. Vincent Solomon Aliama 8. Mohamed Samir Zahran 9. Clement Martial Aboudem Bavou 10. Carlos Vera Quintana 11. Mwendwa Kivuva 12. Norbert Komlan Glakpe 13. Julián Casasbuenas G 14. Antonio Medina Gómez 15. José F. Callo Romero On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 10:45 AM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro < salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com> wrote: > Dear All, > > This is an open call for volunteers for a New Nominating Committee > (NomCom). For more information about IGC's NomCom, kindly visit > http://www.igcaucus.org/nomcom-process. > > Kind Regards, > > > -- > Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala > P.O. Box 17862 > Suva > Fiji > > Twitter: @SalanietaT > Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro > Tel: +679 3544828 > Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 > > > > -- Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala P.O. Box 17862 Suva Fiji Twitter: @SalanietaT Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro Tel: +679 3544828 Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From devonrb at gmail.com Tue Jan 15 20:38:09 2013 From: devonrb at gmail.com (Devon Blake) Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2013 20:38:09 -0500 Subject: [governance] Re: Call for Volunteers for New NomCom In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I am volunteering if accepted. On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 7:03 PM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro < salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com> wrote: > Dear All, > > I encourage all those who subscribe to the list to volunteer for the new > NomCom. We need 25 names before we can run the selection. So far we have > the following persons who have volunteered: > > 1. Kerry Brown > > 2. Mawaki Chango > > 3. Jeremy Malcolm > > 4. Tapani Tarvainen > > 5. Fouad Bajwa > > 6. Gideon Rop > > 7. Vincent Solomon Aliama > > 8. Mohamed Samir Zahran > > 9. Clement Martial Aboudem Bavou > > 10. Carlos Vera Quintana > > 11. Mwendwa Kivuva > > 12. Norbert Komlan Glakpe > > 13. Julián Casasbuenas G > > 14. Antonio Medina Gómez > > 15. José F. Callo Romero > > > On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 10:45 AM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro < > salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com> wrote: > >> Dear All, >> >> This is an open call for volunteers for a New Nominating Committee >> (NomCom). For more information about IGC's NomCom, kindly visit >> http://www.igcaucus.org/nomcom-process. >> >> Kind Regards, >> >> >> -- >> Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala >> P.O. Box 17862 >> Suva >> Fiji >> >> Twitter: @SalanietaT >> Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro >> Tel: +679 3544828 >> Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 >> >> >> >> > > > -- > Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala > P.O. Box 17862 > Suva > Fiji > > Twitter: @SalanietaT > Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro > Tel: +679 3544828 > Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > -- Devon Blake Special Projects Director Earthwise Solutions Limited 29 Dominica Drive Kgn 5 ,Phone: Office 876-968-4534, Mobile, 876-483-2632 To be kind, To be helpful, To network *Earthwise ... For Life!* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From tracey at traceynaughton.com Tue Jan 15 20:44:45 2013 From: tracey at traceynaughton.com (Tracey Naughton) Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2013 12:44:45 +1100 Subject: [governance] Call for Volunteers for New NomCom In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Happy to volunteer. Tracey Naughton On 16/01/2013, at 11:03 AM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro wrote: Dear All, I encourage all those who subscribe to the list to volunteer for the new NomCom. We need 25 names before we can run the selection. So far we have the following persons who have volunteered: 1. Kerry Brown 2. Mawaki Chango 3. Jeremy Malcolm 4. Tapani Tarvainen 5. Fouad Bajwa 6. Gideon Rop 7. Vincent Solomon Aliama 8. Mohamed Samir Zahran 9. Clement Martial Aboudem Bavou 10. Carlos Vera Quintana 11. Mwendwa Kivuva 12. Norbert Komlan Glakpe 13. Julián Casasbuenas G 14. Antonio Medina Gómez 15. José F. Callo Romero On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 10:45 AM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro wrote: Dear All, This is an open call for volunteers for a New Nominating Committee (NomCom). For more information about IGC's NomCom, kindly visit http://www.igcaucus.org/nomcom-process. Kind Regards, -- Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala P.O. Box 17862 Suva Fiji Twitter: @SalanietaT Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro Tel: +679 3544828 Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 -- Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala P.O. Box 17862 Suva Fiji Twitter: @SalanietaT Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro Tel: +679 3544828 Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 ____________________________________________________________ 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: -------------- 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 From ias_pk at yahoo.com Wed Jan 16 00:08:10 2013 From: ias_pk at yahoo.com (Imran Ahmed Shah) Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2013 21:08:10 -0800 (PST) Subject: [governance] Preliminary List of Nominees for the 2013 MAG - REQUIRES IMMEDIATE ATTENTION Message-ID: <1358312890.71656.BPMail_high_noncarrier@web125106.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Dear Thomos, I would like to remain in the list of volunteers for MAG 2013 and for the review of Nomcom. Regards Imran ------------------------------ On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 21:23 PKT Ginger Paque wrote: >This is an important clarification that we should take into account. Thanks! > >gp > >Ginger (Virginia) Paque > >VirginiaP at diplomacy.edu >Diplo Foundation >Internet Governance Capacity Building Programme >www.diplomacy.edu/ig >** >** > > >On 15 January 2013 10:01, William Drake wrote: > >> Hi >> >> Thanks for this, Thomas. In light of the complexities of the discussions >> here around MAG rotation and names, and in the hope of reducing unnecessary >> cycles, I decided to make a local call to the IGF secretariat and ask for >> clarification of what DESA is looking for. >> >> Bear in mind they are only looking to rotate out 1/3rd of the MAG, e.g. >> long-serving (and I would guess, comparatively inactive) members. Not the >> people selected less than a year ago. And that CS is just one of four SG >> groups among which this 1/3rd would be divided. And that the IGC cannot >> claim to be the sole representative of global civil society. >> >> Put all that together, and the recommendation was: come up with like five >> new names that are not already on the MAG. Names on a smaller list have a >> higher probability of being viewed as strongly supported and eventually >> picked than names on a big long list. >> >> The noncom's task will be easier if you skip adding steps DESA didn't ask >> for like re-certifying extant members, and work off a shorter list with new >> names… >> >> Cheers, >> >> Bill >> >> >> On Jan 15, 2013, at 7:32 AM, Thomas Lowenhaupt >> wrote: >> >> IGC List Members, >> >> The below 36 people have been self nominated or were nominated by another >> IGC member to be on the 2013 MAG (the Internet Governance Forum's >> Multistakeholder Advisory Group). >> >> It's a far larger list than any previous one with which I am familiar. And >> the Nominating Committee has very little time to make a selection. >> >> So that we may properly review all eligible candidates, the Nominating >> Committee would greatly appreciate your addressing the following as soon as >> practicable. >> >> - If you are* not on this* list and were inadvertently left off, >> please inform the NomCom immediately. >> - If you are *on the list* and wish to be removed - that is, you do >> not wish to serve on the 2013 MAG - please inform the NomCom as soon as >> possible. >> - Those indicating an interest in serving on the MAG and wishing to >> send supporting documents, or having others send supporting documents to >> their nominations, should assure their arrival by c.o.b. Thursday. This is >> extremely tight but we must have the final decision completed by Saturday >> with nominations to IGF by January 21. >> >> The preliminary full list of nominees are: >> >> 1. Anriette Esterhuysen >> 2. Baudouin SCHOMBE >> 3. Brenden Kuerbis >> 4. Chaitanya Dhareshwar >> 5. Cheryl Langdon-Orr >> 6. Excel Asama Abel >> 7. Fatima Cambronero >> 8. Fouad Bajwa >> 9. Francis Augusto Medeiros >> 10. Gideon Rop >> 11. Ginger Paque >> 12. Graciela Selaimen >> 13. Hempal Shrestha >> 14. Imran Ahmed Shah >> 15. Izumi Aizu >> 16. Jamil Goheer >> 17. Jean-Yves Gatete >> 18. Jeremy Malcolm >> 19. Joao Carlos Caribe >> 20. José Félix Arias Ynche >> 21. Jose Francisco Callo Romero >> 22. Juan Manuel Rojas >> 23. Karim ATTOUMANI MOHAMED >> 24. Kossi AMESSINOU >> 25. Michael Gurstein >> 26. Mohamed Zahran >> 27. Mohamed Tijani BEN JEMAA >> 28. Robert Guerra >> 29. Robin Cross >> 30. Rudi Vansnick >> 31. Shahid Akbar >> 32. Shaila Mistry >> 33. Sonigitu Ekpe >> 34. Susan Chalmers >> 35. Tijani BEN JEMAA >> 36. Tim McGinnis >> >> Sincerely, >> >> Thomas Lowenhaupt, Non-voting chair >> The Nominating Committee >> >> Voting Members of the NomCom: >> >> Wilson Abigaba >> Shahid Akbar >> Devon Blake >> Dixie Hawtin >> Asif Kabani >> >> >> >> >> >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 >> >> >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From anriette at apc.org Wed Jan 16 02:01:09 2013 From: anriette at apc.org (Anriette Esterhuysen) Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2013 09:01:09 +0200 Subject: [governance] Aaron Swartz's Politics In-Reply-To: <50F5CC4F.3080303@gmail.com> References: <50F5CC4F.3080303@gmail.com> Message-ID: <50F65035.1010600@apc.org> Thanks for posting this Riaz. I have been thinking and reading a lot about Aaron in the last few days. I met Aaron in 2008 when we were both part of a small group who were helping a network working with libraries and open access publishing think through their long term strategies. We were in a kind of 'retreat' space so interaction was quite intense. He made a great impression on me. He was honest, challenging and tough. He asked very hard questions about the relevance of libraries - I remember him saying they are no longer needed as repositories of books or data, but that they are important as spaces for people to hang out, talk, learn, network etc.. Aaron also recognised and tackled some of the 'conservatism' in the tech and hacker community - he is one of the few techies I know who spoke out loudly and clearly on how bad attitudes to women are at tech and hacker camps. Very sad loss to the progressive tech community. Anriette On 15/01/2013 23:38, Riaz K Tayob wrote: > Aaron Swartz's Politics > > Tuesday, 15 January 2013 14:22 By Matt Stoller > , Naked Capitalism > | Op-Ed > > * > 3 > > Aaron Swartz was my friend, and I will always miss him. I think it’s important > that, as we remember him, we remember that Aaron had a much broader agenda than > the information freedom fights for which he had become known. Most people have > focused on Aaron’s work as an advocate for more open information systems, > because that’s what the Feds went after him for, and because he’s > well-understood as a technologist who founded Reddit and invented RSS. But I > knew a different side of him. I knew Aaron as a political activist interested in > health care, financial corruption, and the drug war (we were working on a > project on that just before he died). He was a great technologist, for sure, but > when we were working together that was not all I saw. > > In 2009, I was working in Rep. Alan Grayson’s office as a policy advisor. We > were engaged in fights around the health care bill that eventually became > Obamacare, as well as a much narrower but significant fight on auditing the > Federal Reserve > that > eventually became a provision in Dodd-Frank. Aaron came into our office to > intern for a few weeks to learn about Congress and how bills were put together. > He worked with me on organizing the campaign > within > the Financial Services Committee to pass the amendment sponsored by Ron Paul and > Alan Grayson on transparency at the Fed. He helped with the website > NamesOfTheDead.com, a site dedicated to publicizing the 44,000 Americans that > die every year because they don’t have health insurance. Aaron learned about > Congress by just spending time there, which seems like an obvious thing to do. > Many activists prefer to keep their distance from policymakers, because they are > afraid of the complexity of the system and believe that it is inherently > corrupting. Aaron, as with much of his endeavors, simply let his curiosity > , which he saw as synonymous with > brilliance, drive him. > > Aaron also spent a lot of time learning how advocacy and electoral politics > works from outside of Congress. He helped found the Progressive Change Campaign > Committee, a group that sought to replace existing political consulting > machinery in the Democratic Party. At the PCCC, he worked on stopping Ben > Bernanke’s reconfirmation (the email Aaron wrote called him “Bailout Ben”), > auditing the Fed and passing health care reform. I remember he sent me this > video of Financial Services > Committee Chairman Barney Frank, on Reddit, offering his support to Grayson’s > provision. A very small piece of the victory on Fed openness belongs to Aaron. > > By the time I met and became friends with Aaron, he had already helped create > RSS and co-founded and sold Reddit. He didn’t have to act with intellectual > humility when confronting the political system, but he did. Rather than approach > politics as so many successful entrepreneurs do, which is to say, try to meet > top politicians and befriend them, Aaron sought to understand the system itself. > He read political blogs, what I can only presume are gobs of history books (like > Tom Ferguson’s Golden Rule, one of the most important books on politics that > almost no one under 40 has read), and began talking to organizers and political > advocates. He wanted, first and foremost, to know. He learned about elections, > political advertising, the data behind voting, and grassroots organizing. He > began understanding policy, by learning about Congressional process, its > intersection with politics, and how staff and influence networks work on the > Hill and through agencies. He analyzed money. He analyzed corruption. > > And he understood how it worked. In November of 2008, Aaron emailed me the > following: “apologies if you’ve already seen it, but check out this mash note > to Rubin from Lay. ahh, politics.” This was attached to the message. > > > > This note, from Enron CEO Ken Lay to Treasury Secretary Bob Rubin, perfectly > encapsulates the closed and corroded nature of our political system – two > corporate good ole boys, one running Treasury and one running Enron, passing > mash notes. This was everything Aaron hated, and fought against. What I > respected about Aaron is that he burned with a desire for justice, but also felt > a profound desire to understand the system he was attempting to reorganize. He > didn’t throw up his hands lazily and curse at corruption, he spent enormous > amounts of time and energy learning about and working the political system. From > founding Reddit, to fighting the Fed. That was Aaron. > > Aaron approached politics like he approached technology > . His method was as follows - (1) Learn (2) > Try (3) Gab (4) Build . He was methodical > about his work, and his approach to life - this essay on procrastination > will give you a good window into his mind. > Aaron liked to “lean in” to difficult problems, work at them until he could > break them down and solve them. He had no illusions about politics, which is why > he eventually became so good at it. He didn’t disdain the political process the > way so many choose to, but he also didn’t engage in flowery lazy thoughts about > the glory of checks and balances. He broke politics down and systematically > attempted to understand the system. Aaron learned, tried, gabbed, and then built. > > This is a note I got from him years ago, when we were trying to put together > flow charts of corporate PAC money and where it went. > > “Been playing around with the numbers tonight. Turns out corporate PAC money > explains 45% of the variance in ProgressivePunch scores > among Dems. Scatterplot attached. Right is progressive, down is no corporate > PAC money. So you can see how all the people with less than 80% progressive > punch scores get more than 20% of their money from PACs.” > > > > This is a chart of power, one of many Aaron put together to educate himself (and > in this case, me). Most geeks hate the political system, and are at the same > time awed by it. They don’t actually approach it with any respect for the > underlying architecture of power, but at the same time, they are impressed by > political figures with titles. Aaron recognized that politics is a corrupt money > driven system, but also that it could be cracked if you spent the time to > understand the moving parts. He figured out that business alliances, grassroots > organizing, and direct lobbying to build coalitions was powerful, whereas access > alone was a mirage. He worked very hard to understand how policy changes work, > which ultimately culminated in his successful campaign to stop SOPA in 2011. > This took many years of work and a remarkable amount of humility on his part. > > But he was driven by a desire for justice, and not just for open information. He > wanted an end to the drug war, he wanted a financial system not dominated by Bob > Rubin, and he wanted monetary policy run to help ordinary people. Some of his > last tweets are on monetary policy, and the > platinum coin option for raising the debt ceiling (which is a round-about way of > preventing cuts to social welfare programs for the elderly). Aaron was a liberal > who saw class and race as core driving forces > in American politics. In a lovely essay on > how he organized his career, he made this clear in a very charming but pointed way. > > So how did I get a job like mine? Undoubtedly, the first step is to choose > the right genes: I was born white, male, American. My family was fairly > well-off and my father worked in the computer industry. Unfortunately, I > don’t know of any way of choosing these things, so that probably isn’t much > help to you. > > But, on the other hand, when I started I was a very young kid stuck in a > small town in the middle of the country. So I did have to figure out some > tricks for getting out of that. In the hopes of making life a little less > unfair, I thought I’d share them with you. > > Making “life a little less unfair.” Those aren’t the words of a > techno-utopianist, those are the words of a liberal political organizer. They > remind me of how Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren has described her own > work. Aaron knew life would always be unfair, but that was no reason not to try > to make society better. He had no illusions about power but maintained hope for > our society if, I suppose, not always for himself. This is a very difficult way > to approach the world, but it’s why he was so heroic in how he acted. I want > people to understand that Aaron sought not open information systems, but > justice. Aaron believed passionately in the scientific method as a guide for > organizing our society, and in that open-minded but powerful critique, he was a > technocratic liberal. His leanings sometimes moved him towards more radical > postures because he recognized that our governing institutions had become > malevolent, but he was not an anarchist. > > I am very angry Aaron is dead. I’ve been crying off and on for a few days, as it > hits me that he’s gone forever. Aaron accomplished more in 13 than nearly > everyone I know will get done in their entire lives, and his breadth of > knowledge and creativity in politics were stunning, all the more so since he was > equally well-versed in many other fields. But what I respected was his curiosity > and open-mindedness. He truly loved knowledge, and loved people who would share > it. We used to argue about politics, him a hopeful and intellectually honest > technocratic liberal and me as someone who had lost faith in our social > institutions. We made each other really angry sometimes, because I thought he > was too sympathetic to establishment norms, and he thought I couldn’t > emotionally acknowledge when technocrats had useful things to say. But I > respected him, and he frequently changed my mind. I saw that what looked like > stubbornness was just intellectual honesty and a deep thirst for evidence. He > wanted to understand politics, because he thought that understanding, and then > action, was the key to justice. > > As I said, I am very angry that he is dead. I don’t want to get into the > specifics of his case, because others have discussed it and the political > elements of it more eloquently than I ever could. His family and partner have > put out a powerful statement placing blame > appropriately. > > Aaron’s death is not simply a personal tragedy. It is the product of a > criminal justice system rife with intimidation and prosecutorial overreach. > Decisions made by officials in the Massachusetts U.S. Attorney’s office and > at MIT contributed to his death. The US Attorney’s office pursued an > exceptionally harsh array of charges, carrying potentially over 30 years in > prison, to punish an alleged crime that had no victims. Meanwhile, unlike > JSTOR, MIT refused to stand up for Aaron and its own community’s most > cherished principles. > > I want to make a few points about why it’s not just sad that he is gone, but a > tragedy, a symbol for all of us, and a call to action. > > Aaron suffered from depression, but that is not why he died. Aaron is dead > because the institutions that govern our society have decided that it is more > important to target geniuses like Aaron than nurture them, because the values he > sought – openness, justice, curiosity – are values these institutions now > oppose. In previous generations, people like Aaron would have been treasured and > recognized as the remarkable gifts they are. We do not live in a world like that > today. And Aaron would be the first to point out, if he could observe the > discussion happening now, that the pressure he felt from the an oppressive > government is felt by millions of people, every year. I’m glad his family have > not let the justice system off the hook, and have not allowed this suicide to be > medicalized, or the fault of one prosecutor. What happened to Aaron is not > isolated to Aaron, but is the flip side of the corruption he hated. > > As we think about what happened to Aaron, we need to recognize that it was not > just prosecutorial overreach that killed him. That’s too easy, because that > implies it’s one bad apple. We know that’s not true. What killed him was > corruption. Corruption isn’t just people profiting from betraying the public > interest. It’s also people being punished for upholding the public interest. In > our institutions of power, when you do the right thing and challenge abusive > power, you end up destroying a job prospect, an economic opportunity, a > political or social connection, or an opportunity for media. Or if you are truly > dangerous and brilliantly subversive, as Aaron was, you are bankrupted and > destroyed. There’s a reason whistleblowers get fired. There’s a reason Bradley > Manning is in jail. There’s a reason the only CIA official who has gone to jail > for torture is the person – John Kiriako - who told the world it was going on. > There’s a reason those who destroyed the financial system “dine at the White > House”, as Lawrence Lessig put it. There’s a reason former Senator Russ Feingold > is a college professor whereas former Senator Chris Dodd is now a > multi-millionaire. There’s a reason DOJ officials do not go after bankers who > illegally foreclose, and then get jobs as partners in white collar criminal > defense. There’s a reason no one has been held accountable for decisions leading > to the financial crisis, or the war in Iraq. This reason is the modern ethic in > American society that defines success as climbing up the ladder, consequences be > damned. Corrupt self-interest, when it goes systemwide, demands that it protect > rentiers from people like Aaron, that it intimidate, co-opt, humiliate, fire, > destroy, and/or bankrupt those who stand for justice. > > More prosaically, the person who warned about the downside in a meeting gets cut > out of the loop, or the former politician who tries to reform an industry sector > finds his or her job opportunities sparse and unappealing next to his soon to be > millionaire go along get along colleagues. I’ve seen this happen to high level > former officials who have done good, and among students who challenge power as > their colleagues go to become junior analysts on Wall Street. And now we’ve seen > these same forces kill our friend. > > It’s important for us to recognize that Aaron is just an extreme example of a > force that targets all of us. He eschewed the traditional paths to wealth and > power, dropping out of college after a year because it wasn’t intellectually > stimulating. After co-founding and selling Reddit, and establishing his own > financial security, he wandered and acted, calling himself an “applied > sociologist.” He helped in small personal ways, offering encouragement to > journalists like Mike Elk after Elk had broken a significant story and gotten > pushback from colleagues. In my inbox, every birthday, I got a lovely note from > Aaron offering me encouragement and telling me how much he admired my voice. He > was a profoundly kind man, and I will now never be able to repay him for the > love and kindness he showed me. There’s no medal of honor for someone like this, > no Oscar, no institutional way of saying “here’s someone who did a lot of good > for a lot of people.” This is because our institutions are corrupt, and wanted > to quelch the Aaron Swartz’s of the world. Ultimately, they killed him. I hope > that we remember Aaron in the way he should be remembered, as a hero and an > inspiration. > > In six days, on January 18th, it’s the one year anniversary of the blackout of > Wikipedia, and some have discussed celebrating it as Internet Freedom Day. Maybe > we should call this Aaron Swartz Day, in honor of this heroic figure. While what > happened that day was technically about the internet, it should be remembered, > and Aaron should be remembered, in the context of social justice. That day was > about a call for a different world, not just protecting our ability to access > web sites. And we should remember these underlying values. It would help people > understand that justice can be extremely costly, and that we risk much when we > allow those who do the right thing to be punished. Somehow, we need to rebuild a > culture that respects people like Aaron and turns away from the greed and > rent-extraction that he hated. There’s a cycle in American history, of religious > “Great Awakenings”, where new cultural systems emerge in the form of religion, > often sweeping through communities of young people dissatisfied with the society > they see around them. Perhaps that is what we see in the Slow Food movement, or > gay rights movement, or the spread of walkable communities and decline of > vehicle miles , or > maker movement, or the increasing acceptance of meditation and therapy, or any > number of other cultural changes in our society. I don’t know. I’m sure many of > these can be subverted. What I do know is that if we are to honor Aaron’s life, > we will recognize him as a broad social justice activist who cared about > transforming our society, and acted to do so. And we will take up his fight as > our own. > -- ------------------------------------------------------ anriette esterhuysen anriette at apc.org executive director, association for progressive communications www.apc.org po box 29755, melville 2109 south africa tel/fax +27 11 726 1692 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From riaz.tayob at gmail.com Wed Jan 16 03:56:49 2013 From: riaz.tayob at gmail.com (Riaz K Tayob) Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2013 10:56:49 +0200 Subject: [governance] Aaron Swartz's Politics In-Reply-To: <50F65035.1010600@apc.org> References: <50F5CC4F.3080303@gmail.com> <50F65035.1010600@apc.org> Message-ID: <50F66B51.7020809@gmail.com> You are lucky to have met this selfless being. I simply cannot imagine what it must be like for his parents, particularly his mom. This is such a tragedy - this guy ran both radical and reform and seems to have been clear on so many issues - managing the contradictions... Funny (not from you) but personally I was expecting list members to climb in and tear him apart like they did with Julian Assange who exposed war crimes etc. I guess the best we can do is keep his spirit alive by pushing the public rather than the rentier interest... Riaz On 2013/01/16 09:01 AM, Anriette Esterhuysen wrote: > I have been thinking and reading a lot about Aaron in the last few > days. I met Aaron in 2008 when we were both part of a small group Aaron Swartz at Risk Posted: 15 Jan 2013 03:15 AM PST /These are, as I began, cumbersome ways to kill a man. Simpler, direct, and much more neat is to see that he is living somewhere in the middle of the twentieth century, and leave him there./ –Edwin Brock Twenty-/first/ century. As Matt Stoller shows, Aaron Swartz was killed by corruption . His destroyers were placeholders in a weak, vicious, and corrupt rentier state. Immanuel Wallerstein describes such a state in /World-Systems Analysis/: [W]hat does it mean to be a strong state internally? Strength certainly is not indicated by the degree of arbitrariness or ruthlessness of the central authority. … Dictatorial behavior by state authorities is more often a sign of weakness than of strength. … The weaker the state, the less wealth can be accumulated through economically productive activities. This consequently makes the state machinery itself a prime locus, perhaps the prime locus, of wealth accumulation—through larceny and bribery, at high and low levels. It is not that this does not occur in strong states—it does—but that in weak [e.g. ] states it becomes the preferred means of capital accumulation ["savvy businessmen" ], which in turn weakens the ability of the state to perform its other tasks. … In states that have raw materials which are very lucrative on the world market (such as oil [or some forms of intellectual property]), the income available to the state is essentially rent, and here too the actual control of the machinery guarantees that much of the rent can be siphoned off into private hands. Sound familiar?For our rentier state then, siphoning rents on intellectual property into private hands is central to mission. Swartz stopped SOPA because his mission (or vision) was radically different : There is no justice in following unjust laws. It’s time to come into the light and, in the grand tradition of civil disobedience, declare our opposition to this private theft of public culture. We need to take information, wherever it is stored, make our copies and share them with the world. We need to take stuff that’s out of copyright and add it to the archive. We need to buy secret databases and put them on the Web. We need to download scientific journals and upload them to file sharing networks. We need to fight for Guerilla Open Access. Which is what Swartz did, and for which he was punished . (empty wheel points to the procedural sloppiness of the charges , but that’s hardly the point when a rentier’s rice bowl is broken, and weak states are lousy at law anyhow.) This isn’t a post about intellectual property rights, so I’ll merely present an example of the good that Swartz’s vision can do. As is well known, Swartz wrote the spec for RSS (Really Simple Syndication). At age 14. And so : *RSS changed our lives* I need to let the people who knew and loved Aaron know that his work changed my son’s life for the better, forever. Diagnosed with autism at age 2, My son’s best help came from the RSS feeds and papers that I could get access to that offered the truth and science about autism. Every morning I read the RSS feeds from academic journals world wide to find out more about my son’s regressive autism, fragile X premutation (which is only known in scientific academic circles) the MTHFR gene and new and critical treatments. Because of his work I was able to find out about UC Davis, about current scientific treatment, and research studies to get us this treatment. My son is now four and his is doing great… BECAUSE of the scientific information I had access to. I have an MLIS. I interned at Elsevier. I have seen all sides of the academic pay wall and I have felt my ignorance around my neck like a boulder, at great cost to my son’s health. But Aaron, you helped us. Thank you. Until we see that the populace will never be scientifically aware UNLESS we have access to the information we will not be able to go from a people of belief to a people of ideas [not a bug]. In other words, Swartz helped this woman and her son by removing information from the grasp of rentiers. That’s what “open access” means, operationally.(See also on PACER , where Swartz provided open access to the law.) I would now like to dolly back from Swartz’s views on open access, and show how three overlapping lethal systems, each one structured for its own corrupt purposes by our rentier state, narrowed his life chances by piling on risk factors, and set him up for an untimely death. First, I’ll look at the health care system, then at health in the tech community, and finally at health in the technical activist community. In each system, Aaron Swartz was at risk — or the nature of our current arrangements in political economy put him at risk. *Risk Factors from the Health Care System* As Swartz wrote in “How to Get a Job Like Mine” : Undoubtedly, the first step is to choose the right genes: I was born white, male, American. Unfortunately for Swartz, he should also have chosen to be born in a different generation: My own, for example. Check out this chart from the New York Times : Clearly, we are failing millions of our young people — of whom Swartz, 26, was one — in the most basic way imaginable, by shortening their lives! Of course, I don’t claim that there was a linear relation between Swartz’s death and health care he would have gotten under a humane system, had he needed it (although depression , though often treatable, is hard to treat). What I do claim, and what the chart shows, is that Swartz, because of his age, was at risk of dying younger than I will (drawing me into collusion as a rentier, come to think of it; I didn’t do anything to this life chance). And of course, our system of health-care-for profit is both uniquely profitable and uniquely bad at delivering health , dominated as it is by health insurance companies — rentiers — who contribute no value to any of the transactions in which they participate , and who have corruptly used the power of the state to entrench themselves (shocker, I know). I’d also note that suicide * is a problem our health care system seems unable to address . *Risk Factors in the Tech Community* Zooming in to civil society, Swartz was not the only tech genius to commit suicide**. Two examples; see if you can find a common factor with Swartz. First, Ilya Zhitomirskiy (22) . His project was Diaspora : Instead of creating a central database like Facebook’s, where information about hundreds of millions of members is stored and mined for advertising and marketing purposes, their idea was to develop freely shared software that would allow every member of the network to ‘own’ his or her personal information. Second, Len Sassaman (36) . His project was Mixmaster: Len Sassaman, [was] a highly-regarded 31 year-old cryptographer who helped create secure communication systems. … The former engineer for Anonymizer, which obscures a user’s IP address, was a well-known “cypherpunk” who maintained the open source Mixmaster remailer software. The Mixmaster protocol was designed to protect against traffic analysis and offer users a way to send email anonymously.Sassaman’s work focussed on ‘attacking and defending anonymous communication systems, exploring the applicability of information-theoretic secure systems for privacy solutions, and designing protocols which satisfy the specific needs of the use case for which they are applied’, according to his profile at the computer security and industrial cryptography research department of Belgium’s Leuven University. Before you ask, Sassaman, like Swartz, suffered from depression , and Zhitomirskiy was bipolar . However, if you look again at their work, you will also see that both men had an additional risk factor in common with Swartz: They too were directly assaulting the interests of rentiers with a vision of open access, Zhitomirskiy with the radical notion that users should own their own data (the nerve!), and Sassaman with the equally radical notion that people should be able to communicate without having their own byte streams monetized. Adding to the risk factors for Swartz in the tech community, entrepreneurs suffer massive stress — and Swartz, a co-founder of Reddit, was an entrepreneur. From commenter debasishbera in a long thread at YCombinator , the entrepreneurial incubator: As a startup owner I feel like I am a sinking man and each floating wood chip around is a hope – Learning to float between moving from one wood chip to other is the key to me. I guess I will fail that day when I will conclude that I am too tired of trying (not really, really tried — and still failed). I don’t believe “The truth is … that it takes a special and lucky person”. The truth is we need one or two hands on our shoulder and someone to stand during the darkest hours and say “darkest hours are always before the sun comes” And a final risk factor Swartz shared with other tech entrepreneurs is being on the wrong side of the law (however righteously). From a long thread on Reddit : Most people should check out just how most people in Tech start out their careers. Every person I know that starts a successful company, has to do illegal things at the start. Why? Because being legitimate isn’t profitable for a small business in the US… you cannot make it through the first year without skating that line. In other words, corruption is part of the bootstrapping process, beyond the corruption imposed by rentiers. I could tell a story about my entrepreneurial grandfather, but Steve Jobs is a better example . The “blue box” is a device, back in the analog days, that was widely used for making free—and illegal—phone calls. “Open access” again: [Jobs] told me about how the blue box article had inspired him and Wozniak. How they’d taken down the cycles-per-second of the tones AT&T used to translate phone numbers into audio signals, some of which I’d disclosed in the article, and how they’d found the others in some obscure technical journals and had begun building their own blue boxes, hoping to sell them on the underground market. (Gamblers and mobsters liked to use them to keep their communications outside the system.) Mobsters? Well, alrighty. Today’s Steve Jobs would have been thrown in jail and tortured by solitary confinement: No Apple! (But as Wallerstein says, weak states aren’t really about economically productive activities.) I’m not equating Swartz’s community service-level offense with being mobbed up, but pointing out that getting on the wrong side of the law is yet another tech stressor, and hence a risk factor for anyone fragile (not the first word that comes to mind when thinking of Steve Jobs). *Risk Factors in the Activist Community* Zooming in to Swartz’s associates, friends, and family, we find additional risk factors when the power of the state *** was brought to bear on him. Stoller explains : Corruption isn’t just people profiting from betraying the public interest. It’s also people being punished for upholding the public interest. In our institutions of power, when you do the right thing and challenge abusive power, you end up destroying a job prospect, an economic opportunity, a political or social connection, or an opportunity for media. Or … you are bankrupted and destroyed. … Corrupt self-interest, when it goes systemwide, demands that it protect rentiers from people like Aaron, that it intimidate, co-opt, humiliate, fire, destroy, and/or bankrupt those who stand for justice. … [T]he person who warned about the downside in a meeting gets cut out of the loop, or the former politician who tries to reform an industry sector finds his or her job opportunities sparse and unappealing next to his soon to be millionaire go along get along colleagues. I’ve seen this happen to high level former officials who have done good, and among students who challenge power as their colleagues go to become junior analysts on Wall Street. And such an additional stressor — and I’m sure there were many others besides this one — put Swartz at risk. Quinn Norton’s howl of pain : We were destroyed by the investigation, and by enduring so much together in the five years of the difficult love affair of difficult people. In the end he told me he needed to get away from me. I let him go, and waited for the day he’d come back. I knew that one day we’d have a day to be together again, though probably not as lovers. Together, as something that doesn’t have a word. He went on to another relationship, and I know he touched her like he did me, because that’s how he touched people. *Conclusion* I don’t have the right word for the way that the rentier state zeroed in on Swartz until he cracked: How it piled a rentier-directed health care system on top of a rentier-optimized technical ecology on top of a rentier-driven justice system. But perhaps I have a metaphor: The Salem Witch trials, where those convicted by the justice system of that time were “pressed” to death with stone after stone after stone: Depression. Oppression. Repression. Simple, direct, neat. However, I am hopeful because I believe that our state acts as it does because it is weak, not strong. And I expect to have a way to use the cold and burning anger I too feel in the service of justice. NOTE *,** If you or anyone you know is considering suicide, do, /please/, seek help (for example ). Multiple asterisks for emphasis! NOTE *** Ortiz was a leader in collecting fines for lawbreaking : Ortiz and her office have won attention for taking on a number of high-profile cases, including the ongoing murder prosecution of notorious mob boss James “Whitey” Bulger. Her office also announced in December that it was the largest contributor to the $13.1 billion in criminal and civil fines recoveredin 2012 by the nation’s 94 U.S. Attorney’s offices. Ortiz’s office collected $8.8 billion during the fiscal year, accounting for almost 67 percent of the total collection. These cost-of-doing-business fines are corrupt, as Yves points out . They are the precise equivalent of shell game operators passing the cop on the beat a fiver while they continue to rope in the shills. Ortiz is, as one would expect, a rising star in the Democratic party, and she’s not spending more time with her family. Yet. NOTE *** One very, very obvious thing the left should be seeking to redress is the different life expectancies shown in Chart 1. Single payer health care would be of great help to the Aaron Swartz’s of this world who are still alive. And we shouldn’t be fighting merely to “save” Social Security, but to make the benefits age neutral. How the elites must laugh among themselves for having inveigled us into selling out our own children! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: health.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 195529 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: aaron-ada.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 24558 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- 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 From parminder at itforchange.net Wed Jan 16 05:27:24 2013 From: parminder at itforchange.net (parminder) Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2013 15:57:24 +0530 Subject: [governance] Preliminary List of Nominees for the 2013 MAG - REQUIRES IMMEDIATE ATTENTION In-Reply-To: <619E02E9-F3CF-4C65-8B86-799156F81A01@uzh.ch> References: <50F4F7E3.70903@communisphere.com> <619E02E9-F3CF-4C65-8B86-799156F81A01@uzh.ch> Message-ID: <50F6808C.5070408@itforchange.net> On Tuesday 15 January 2013 09:31 PM, William Drake wrote: > Hi > > Put all that together, and the recommendation was: come up with like > five new names that are not already on the MAG. Names on a smaller > list have a higher probability of being viewed as strongly supported > and eventually picked than names on a big long list. > > The noncom's task will be easier if you skip adding steps DESA didn't > ask for like re-certifying extant members, and work off a shorter list > with new names… However the fact is that DESA did ask for, to use your words 're-certifying extant members', Below is an excerpt from the call for renewal ( http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/component/content/article/121-preparatory-process/1264-announcement-on-the-mag- ) "As in previous years, stakeholder groups can resubmit the names of current MAG members for re-election......" This to me is clearly asking for recertifying extant members. And I think it is a healthy practice.... Not that I have anything against any extant member. Accordingly, I think extant members, on their own nomination or of other people, should also be considered for nomination, as is the express desire of UNDESA. And this has always been the practice. parminder > > Cheers, > > Bill > > > On Jan 15, 2013, at 7:32 AM, Thomas Lowenhaupt > wrote: > >> IGC List Members, >> >> The below 36 people have been self nominated or were nominated by >> another IGC member to be on the 2013 MAG (the Internet Governance >> Forum's Multistakeholder Advisory Group). >> >> It's a far larger list than any previous one with which I am >> familiar. And the Nominating Committee has very little time to make a >> selection. >> >> So that we may properly review all eligible candidates, the >> Nominating Committee would greatly appreciate your addressing the >> following as soon as practicable. >> >> * If you are*not on this* list and were inadvertently left off, >> please inform the NomCom immediately. >> * If you are *on the list* and wish to be removed - that is, you do >> not wish to serve on the 2013 MAG - please inform the NomCom as >> soon as possible. >> * Those indicating an interest in serving on the MAG and wishing to >> send supporting documents, or having others send supporting >> documents to their nominations, should assure their arrival by >> c.o.b. Thursday. This is extremely tight but we must have the >> final decision completed by Saturday with nominations to IGF by >> January 21. >> >> The preliminary full list of nominees are: >> >> 1. Anriette Esterhuysen >> 2. Baudouin SCHOMBE >> 3. Brenden Kuerbis >> 4. Chaitanya Dhareshwar >> 5. Cheryl Langdon-Orr >> 6. Excel Asama Abel >> 7. Fatima Cambronero >> 8. Fouad Bajwa >> 9. Francis Augusto Medeiros >> 10. Gideon Rop >> 11. Ginger Paque >> 12. Graciela Selaimen >> 13. Hempal Shrestha >> 14. Imran Ahmed Shah >> 15. Izumi Aizu >> 16. Jamil Goheer >> 17. Jean-Yves Gatete >> 18. Jeremy Malcolm >> 19. Joao Carlos Caribe >> 20. José Félix Arias Ynche >> 21. Jose Francisco Callo Romero >> 22. Juan Manuel Rojas >> 23. Karim ATTOUMANI MOHAMED >> 24. Kossi AMESSINOU >> 25. Michael Gurstein >> 26. Mohamed Zahran >> 27. Mohamed Tijani BEN JEMAA >> 28. Robert Guerra >> 29. Robin Cross >> 30. Rudi Vansnick >> 31. Shahid Akbar >> 32. Shaila Mistry >> 33. Sonigitu Ekpe >> 34. Susan Chalmers >> 35. Tijani BEN JEMAA >> 36. Tim McGinnis >> >> Sincerely, >> >> Thomas Lowenhaupt, Non-voting chair >> The Nominating Committee >> >> Voting Members of the NomCom: >> >> Wilson Abigaba >> Shahid Akbar >> Devon Blake >> Dixie Hawtin >> Asif Kabani >> >> >> >> >> >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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: -------------- 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 From parminder at itforchange.net Wed Jan 16 05:39:44 2013 From: parminder at itforchange.net (parminder) Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2013 16:09:44 +0530 Subject: [governance] Preliminary List of Nominees for the 2013 MAG - REQUIRES IMMEDIATE ATTENTION In-Reply-To: <50F6808C.5070408@itforchange.net> References: <50F4F7E3.70903@communisphere.com> <619E02E9-F3CF-4C65-8B86-799156F81A01@uzh.ch> <50F6808C.5070408@itforchange.net> Message-ID: <50F68370.3030206@itforchange.net> That reminds me. I do think that there has been a great slack in the reporting back from the MAG by selected CS members to different civil society constituencies, especially the IGC. It used to be much better earlier. Also, if I remember right, appllicant nominees from IGC had to give an express undertaking of regular reporting back from the MAG to the IGC. I think which should do so this time as well. BTW, there was a rather controversial meeting of the MAG during the IGF Baku. Much less have a report from it from MAG's CS members, most people even do not know that such a meeting took place, and that it was rather controversial n many aspects. parminder On Wednesday 16 January 2013 03:57 PM, parminder wrote: > > On Tuesday 15 January 2013 09:31 PM, William Drake wrote: >> Hi > >> >> Put all that together, and the recommendation was: come up with like >> five new names that are not already on the MAG. Names on a smaller >> list have a higher probability of being viewed as strongly supported >> and eventually picked than names on a big long list. >> >> The noncom's task will be easier if you skip adding steps DESA didn't >> ask for like re-certifying extant members, and work off a shorter >> list with new names… > > However the fact is that DESA did ask for, to use your words > 're-certifying extant members', > > Below is an excerpt from the call for renewal ( > http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/component/content/article/121-preparatory-process/1264-announcement-on-the-mag- > ) > > "As in previous years, stakeholder groups can resubmit the names of > current MAG members for re-election......" > > This to me is clearly asking for recertifying extant members. And I > think it is a healthy practice.... Not that I have anything against > any extant member. > > Accordingly, I think extant members, on their own nomination or of > other people, should also be considered for nomination, as is the > express desire of UNDESA. And this has always been the practice. > > parminder > > > >> >> Cheers, >> >> Bill >> >> >> On Jan 15, 2013, at 7:32 AM, Thomas Lowenhaupt >> > wrote: >> >>> IGC List Members, >>> >>> The below 36 people have been self nominated or were nominated by >>> another IGC member to be on the 2013 MAG (the Internet Governance >>> Forum's Multistakeholder Advisory Group). >>> >>> It's a far larger list than any previous one with which I am >>> familiar. And the Nominating Committee has very little time to make >>> a selection. >>> >>> So that we may properly review all eligible candidates, the >>> Nominating Committee would greatly appreciate your addressing the >>> following as soon as practicable. >>> >>> * If you are*not on this* list and were inadvertently left off, >>> please inform the NomCom immediately. >>> * If you are *on the list* and wish to be removed - that is, you >>> do not wish to serve on the 2013 MAG - please inform the NomCom >>> as soon as possible. >>> * Those indicating an interest in serving on the MAG and wishing >>> to send supporting documents, or having others send supporting >>> documents to their nominations, should assure their arrival by >>> c.o.b. Thursday. This is extremely tight but we must have the >>> final decision completed by Saturday with nominations to IGF by >>> January 21. >>> >>> The preliminary full list of nominees are: >>> >>> 1. Anriette Esterhuysen >>> 2. Baudouin SCHOMBE >>> 3. Brenden Kuerbis >>> 4. Chaitanya Dhareshwar >>> 5. Cheryl Langdon-Orr >>> 6. Excel Asama Abel >>> 7. Fatima Cambronero >>> 8. Fouad Bajwa >>> 9. Francis Augusto Medeiros >>> 10. Gideon Rop >>> 11. Ginger Paque >>> 12. Graciela Selaimen >>> 13. Hempal Shrestha >>> 14. Imran Ahmed Shah >>> 15. Izumi Aizu >>> 16. Jamil Goheer >>> 17. Jean-Yves Gatete >>> 18. Jeremy Malcolm >>> 19. Joao Carlos Caribe >>> 20. José Félix Arias Ynche >>> 21. Jose Francisco Callo Romero >>> 22. Juan Manuel Rojas >>> 23. Karim ATTOUMANI MOHAMED >>> 24. Kossi AMESSINOU >>> 25. Michael Gurstein >>> 26. Mohamed Zahran >>> 27. Mohamed Tijani BEN JEMAA >>> 28. Robert Guerra >>> 29. Robin Cross >>> 30. Rudi Vansnick >>> 31. Shahid Akbar >>> 32. Shaila Mistry >>> 33. Sonigitu Ekpe >>> 34. Susan Chalmers >>> 35. Tijani BEN JEMAA >>> 36. Tim McGinnis >>> >>> Sincerely, >>> >>> Thomas Lowenhaupt, Non-voting chair >>> The Nominating Committee >>> >>> Voting Members of the NomCom: >>> >>> Wilson Abigaba >>> Shahid Akbar >>> Devon Blake >>> Dixie Hawtin >>> Asif Kabani >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> ____________________________________________________________ >>> 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: -------------- 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 From jeremy at ciroap.org Wed Jan 16 05:44:25 2013 From: jeremy at ciroap.org (Jeremy Malcolm) Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2013 18:44:25 +0800 Subject: [governance] Preliminary List of Nominees for the 2013 MAG - REQUIRES IMMEDIATE ATTENTION In-Reply-To: <50F68370.3030206@itforchange.net> References: <50F4F7E3.70903@communisphere.com> <619E02E9-F3CF-4C65-8B86-799156F81A01@uzh.ch> <50F6808C.5070408@itforchange.net> <50F68370.3030206@itforchange.net> Message-ID: <50F68489.9010805@ciroap.org> On 16/01/13 18:39, parminder wrote: > > That reminds me. I do think that there has been a great slack in the > reporting back from the MAG by selected CS members to different civil > society constituencies, especially the IGC. It used to be much better > earlier. Also, if I remember right, appllicant nominees from IGC had > to give an express undertaking of regular reporting back from the MAG > to the IGC. I think which should do so this time as well. > > BTW, there was a rather controversial meeting of the MAG during the > IGF Baku. Much less have a report from it from MAG's CS members, most > people even do not know that such a meeting took place, and that it > was rather controversial n many aspects. Izumi did report it. -- *Dr Jeremy Malcolm Senior Policy Officer Consumers International | the global campaigning voice for consumers* Office for Asia-Pacific and the Middle East Lot 5-1 Wisma WIM, 7 Jalan Abang Haji Openg, TTDI, 60000 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia Tel: +60 3 7726 1599 *Your rights, our mission – download CI's Strategy 2015:* http://consint.info/RightsMission @Consumers_Int | www.consumersinternational.org | www.facebook.com/consumersinternational Read our email confidentiality notice . Don't print this email unless necessary. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From parminder at itforchange.net Wed Jan 16 05:45:38 2013 From: parminder at itforchange.net (parminder) Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2013 16:15:38 +0530 Subject: [governance] Preliminary List of Nominees for the 2013 MAG - REQUIRES IMMEDIATE ATTENTION In-Reply-To: <50F68370.3030206@itforchange.net> References: <50F4F7E3.70903@communisphere.com> <619E02E9-F3CF-4C65-8B86-799156F81A01@uzh.ch> <50F6808C.5070408@itforchange.net> <50F68370.3030206@itforchange.net> Message-ID: <50F684D2.2050404@itforchange.net> Another thing, the noncom or the coordinator will have to send nominations as per the enclosed format. Dont know whether it has sufficient information to fill in these formats... parminder On Wednesday 16 January 2013 04:09 PM, parminder wrote: > > That reminds me. I do think that there has been a great slack in the > reporting back from the MAG by selected CS members to different civil > society constituencies, especially the IGC. It used to be much better > earlier. Also, if I remember right, appllicant nominees from IGC had > to give an express undertaking of regular reporting back from the MAG > to the IGC. I think which should do so this time as well. > > BTW, there was a rather controversial meeting of the MAG during the > IGF Baku. Much less have a report from it from MAG's CS members, most > people even do not know that such a meeting took place, and that it > was rather controversial n many aspects. > > parminder > > > > On Wednesday 16 January 2013 03:57 PM, parminder wrote: >> >> On Tuesday 15 January 2013 09:31 PM, William Drake wrote: >>> Hi >> >>> >>> Put all that together, and the recommendation was: come up with like >>> five new names that are not already on the MAG. Names on a smaller >>> list have a higher probability of being viewed as strongly supported >>> and eventually picked than names on a big long list. >>> >>> The noncom's task will be easier if you skip adding steps DESA >>> didn't ask for like re-certifying extant members, and work off a >>> shorter list with new names… >> >> However the fact is that DESA did ask for, to use your words >> 're-certifying extant members', >> >> Below is an excerpt from the call for renewal ( >> http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/component/content/article/121-preparatory-process/1264-announcement-on-the-mag- >> ) >> >> "As in previous years, stakeholder groups can resubmit the names of >> current MAG members for re-election......" >> >> This to me is clearly asking for recertifying extant members. And I >> think it is a healthy practice.... Not that I have anything against >> any extant member. >> >> Accordingly, I think extant members, on their own nomination or of >> other people, should also be considered for nomination, as is the >> express desire of UNDESA. And this has always been the practice. >> >> parminder >> >> >> >>> >>> Cheers, >>> >>> Bill >>> >>> >>> On Jan 15, 2013, at 7:32 AM, Thomas Lowenhaupt >>> > wrote: >>> >>>> IGC List Members, >>>> >>>> The below 36 people have been self nominated or were nominated by >>>> another IGC member to be on the 2013 MAG (the Internet Governance >>>> Forum's Multistakeholder Advisory Group). >>>> >>>> It's a far larger list than any previous one with which I am >>>> familiar. And the Nominating Committee has very little time to make >>>> a selection. >>>> >>>> So that we may properly review all eligible candidates, the >>>> Nominating Committee would greatly appreciate your addressing the >>>> following as soon as practicable. >>>> >>>> * If you are*not on this* list and were inadvertently left off, >>>> please inform the NomCom immediately. >>>> * If you are *on the list* and wish to be removed - that is, you >>>> do not wish to serve on the 2013 MAG - please inform the NomCom >>>> as soon as possible. >>>> * Those indicating an interest in serving on the MAG and wishing >>>> to send supporting documents, or having others send supporting >>>> documents to their nominations, should assure their arrival by >>>> c.o.b. Thursday. This is extremely tight but we must have the >>>> final decision completed by Saturday with nominations to IGF by >>>> January 21. >>>> >>>> The preliminary full list of nominees are: >>>> >>>> 1. Anriette Esterhuysen >>>> 2. Baudouin SCHOMBE >>>> 3. Brenden Kuerbis >>>> 4. Chaitanya Dhareshwar >>>> 5. Cheryl Langdon-Orr >>>> 6. Excel Asama Abel >>>> 7. Fatima Cambronero >>>> 8. Fouad Bajwa >>>> 9. Francis Augusto Medeiros >>>> 10. Gideon Rop >>>> 11. Ginger Paque >>>> 12. Graciela Selaimen >>>> 13. Hempal Shrestha >>>> 14. Imran Ahmed Shah >>>> 15. Izumi Aizu >>>> 16. Jamil Goheer >>>> 17. Jean-Yves Gatete >>>> 18. Jeremy Malcolm >>>> 19. Joao Carlos Caribe >>>> 20. José Félix Arias Ynche >>>> 21. Jose Francisco Callo Romero >>>> 22. Juan Manuel Rojas >>>> 23. Karim ATTOUMANI MOHAMED >>>> 24. Kossi AMESSINOU >>>> 25. Michael Gurstein >>>> 26. Mohamed Zahran >>>> 27. Mohamed Tijani BEN JEMAA >>>> 28. Robert Guerra >>>> 29. Robin Cross >>>> 30. Rudi Vansnick >>>> 31. Shahid Akbar >>>> 32. Shaila Mistry >>>> 33. Sonigitu Ekpe >>>> 34. Susan Chalmers >>>> 35. Tijani BEN JEMAA >>>> 36. Tim McGinnis >>>> >>>> Sincerely, >>>> >>>> Thomas Lowenhaupt, Non-voting chair >>>> The Nominating Committee >>>> >>>> Voting Members of the NomCom: >>>> >>>> Wilson Abigaba >>>> Shahid Akbar >>>> Devon Blake >>>> Dixie Hawtin >>>> Asif Kabani >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> ____________________________________________________________ >>>> 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: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: MAG 2013 template .rtf Type: application/rtf Size: 14918 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- 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 From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com Wed Jan 16 05:46:51 2013 From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro) Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2013 23:46:51 +1300 Subject: [governance] Preliminary List of Nominees for the 2013 MAG - REQUIRES IMMEDIATE ATTENTION In-Reply-To: <50F68489.9010805@ciroap.org> References: <50F4F7E3.70903@communisphere.com> <619E02E9-F3CF-4C65-8B86-799156F81A01@uzh.ch> <50F6808C.5070408@itforchange.net> <50F68370.3030206@itforchange.net> <50F68489.9010805@ciroap.org> Message-ID: > > BTW, there was a rather controversial meeting of the MAG during the IGF > Baku. Much less have a report from it from MAG's CS members, most people > even do not know that such a meeting took place, and that it was rather > controversial n many aspects. > > > Izumi did report it. > Yes, Izumi has consistently been reporting all the meetings that he attends to the IGC. MAG meetings included. > > -- > > *Dr Jeremy Malcolm > Senior Policy Officer > Consumers International | the global campaigning voice for consumers* > Office for Asia-Pacific and the Middle East > Lot 5-1 Wisma WIM, 7 Jalan Abang Haji Openg, TTDI, 60000 Kuala Lumpur, > Malaysia > Tel: +60 3 7726 1599 > > *Your rights, our mission – download CI's Strategy 2015:* > http://consint.info/RightsMission > > @Consumers_Int | www.consumersinternational.org | > www.facebook.com/consumersinternational > > Read our email confidentiality notice. > Don't print this email unless necessary. > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > -- Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala P.O. Box 17862 Suva Fiji Twitter: @SalanietaT Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro Tel: +679 3544828 Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From parminder at itforchange.net Wed Jan 16 06:03:21 2013 From: parminder at itforchange.net (parminder) Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2013 16:33:21 +0530 Subject: [governance] Preliminary List of Nominees for the 2013 MAG - REQUIRES IMMEDIATE ATTENTION In-Reply-To: <50F68489.9010805@ciroap.org> References: <50F4F7E3.70903@communisphere.com> <619E02E9-F3CF-4C65-8B86-799156F81A01@uzh.ch> <50F6808C.5070408@itforchange.net> <50F68370.3030206@itforchange.net> <50F68489.9010805@ciroap.org> Message-ID: <50F688F9.3020607@itforchange.net> On Wednesday 16 January 2013 04:14 PM, Jeremy Malcolm wrote: > On 16/01/13 18:39, parminder wrote: >> >> >> BTW, there was a rather controversial meeting of the MAG during the >> IGF Baku. Much less have a report from it from MAG's CS members, most >> people even do not know that such a meeting took place, and that it >> was rather controversial n many aspects. > > Izumi did report it. Well, then you know that it was a very controversial meeting . Or perhaps you dont :) More on it in a while... A little busy now to get into details. parminder > > -- > > *Dr Jeremy Malcolm > Senior Policy Officer > Consumers International | the global campaigning voice for consumers* > Office for Asia-Pacific and the Middle East > Lot 5-1 Wisma WIM, 7 Jalan Abang Haji Openg, TTDI, 60000 Kuala Lumpur, > Malaysia > Tel: +60 3 7726 1599 > > *Your rights, our mission – download CI's Strategy 2015:* > http://consint.info/RightsMission > > @Consumers_Int | www.consumersinternational.org > | > www.facebook.com/consumersinternational > > > Read our email confidentiality notice > . Don't > print this email unless necessary. > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From capdasiege at gmail.com Wed Jan 16 06:04:14 2013 From: capdasiege at gmail.com (CAPDA CAPDA) Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2013 12:04:14 +0100 Subject: [governance] Call for Volunteers for New NomCom In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi all, I am volunteering to be included in the pool for the NomCom selection 2013. Best, -- *Michel TCHONANG LINZE* Coordinateur Général Coordonnateur Régional Afrique Centrale Réseau Panafricain Société Civile (ACSIS) *ÉVÈNEMENTS SUR LES TIC** ! * - *Forum SMSI *du 13 au 17 Mai 2013 Genève Suisse - *SYMPOSIUM TIC AFRIQUE* du 30 juillet au 02 Août 2013 Yaoundé Cameroun. *«Face à l’enjeu de la Cybersécurité-Cybercriminalité et d**u phénomène de croissance exponentielle de la téléphonie mobile**, quelles solutions pour des Villes Numériques, la Protection des Droits des Personnes et des Entreprises ? »* CAPDA (Consortium d'Appui aux Actions pour la Promotion et le Développement de l'Afrique) BP : 15 151 DOUALA - CAMEROUN Tél. : (237) 7775-39-63 / 2212-9493/ 3340-46-49 Fax : (237) 3340-46-49 Email : capdasiege at gmail.com / forumtic2005 at yahoo.fr Site : www.ict-forum.org ; www.ict-africa.org ; *www.tic-afrique.org* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From hakik at hakik.org Wed Jan 16 06:06:33 2013 From: hakik at hakik.org (Hakikur Rahman) Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2013 11:06:33 +0000 Subject: [governance] Preliminary List of Nominees for the 2013 MAG - REQUIRES IMMEDIATE ATTENTION In-Reply-To: References: <50F4F7E3.70903@communisphere.com> <619E02E9-F3CF-4C65-8B86-799156F81A01@uzh.ch> <50F6808C.5070408@itforchange.net> <50F68370.3030206@itforchange.net> <50F68489.9010805@ciroap.org> Message-ID: Izumi has been reporting minute details of all the meetings that he has attended and they were very much helpful for us who could not attend or who are interested in the IGF events (my interest is mainly on IG research in developing nations). Hakikur At 10:46 AM 1/16/2013, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro wrote: >>BTW, there was a rather controversial meeting >>of the MAG during the IGF Baku. Much less have >>a report from it from MAG's CS members, most >>people even do not know that such a meeting >>took place, and that it was rather controversial n many aspects. > >Izumi did report it. > > >Yes, Izumi has consistently been reporting all >the meetings that he attends to the IGC. MAG meetings included. > >-- > >Dr Jeremy Malcolm >Senior Policy Officer >Consumers International | the global campaigning voice for consumers >Office for Asia-Pacific and the Middle East >Lot 5-1 Wisma WIM, 7 Jalan Abang Haji Openg, >TTDI, 60000 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia >Tel: +60 3 7726 1599 > >Your rights, our mission – download CI's >Strategy 2015: >http://consint.info/RightsMission > >@Consumers_Int | >www.consumersinternational.org >| www.facebook.com/consumersinternational > >Read our >email >confidentiality notice. Don't print this email unless necessary. > >____________________________________________________________ >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 > > > > >-- >Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala >P.O. Box 17862 >Suva >Fiji > >Twitter: @SalanietaT >Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro >Tel: +679 3544828 >Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 > > > >____________________________________________________________ >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: -------------- 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 From ajp at glocom.ac.jp Wed Jan 16 06:14:10 2013 From: ajp at glocom.ac.jp (Adam Peake) Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2013 20:14:10 +0900 Subject: [governance] Preliminary List of Nominees for the 2013 MAG - REQUIRES IMMEDIATE ATTENTION In-Reply-To: <50F6808C.5070408@itforchange.net> References: <50F4F7E3.70903@communisphere.com> <619E02E9-F3CF-4C65-8B86-799156F81A01@uzh.ch> <50F6808C.5070408@itforchange.net> Message-ID: Hi, It says "Can..." So rather than doing something that as Bill says just makes DESA's job harder, how about asking the NomCom to come up with five new names, and in add a covering note saying we support the continuation of the CS members selected in May 2012 (I think three we proposed, Izumi, Bill and Lillian were selected from the names the NomCom selected in 2012, and apologies if I missed anyone). An endorsement. And ask that in their next full year they each report back (or they could coordinate and one report back). Seems the MAGs not been too busy. But would be very good if the digest of MAG mailing list could be updated again. Adam On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 7:27 PM, parminder wrote: > > On Tuesday 15 January 2013 09:31 PM, William Drake wrote: > > Hi > > > > > Put all that together, and the recommendation was: come up with like five > new names that are not already on the MAG. Names on a smaller list have a > higher probability of being viewed as strongly supported and eventually > picked than names on a big long list. > > The noncom's task will be easier if you skip adding steps DESA didn't ask > for like re-certifying extant members, and work off a shorter list with new > names… > > > However the fact is that DESA did ask for, to use your words 're-certifying > extant members', > > Below is an excerpt from the call for renewal ( > http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/component/content/article/121-preparatory-process/1264-announcement-on-the-mag- > ) > > "As in previous years, stakeholder groups can resubmit the names of current > MAG members for re-election......" > > This to me is clearly asking for recertifying extant members. And I think it > is a healthy practice.... Not that I have anything against any extant > member. > > Accordingly, I think extant members, on their own nomination or of other > people, should also be considered for nomination, as is the express desire > of UNDESA. And this has always been the practice. > > parminder > > > > > Cheers, > > Bill > > > On Jan 15, 2013, at 7:32 AM, Thomas Lowenhaupt > wrote: > > IGC List Members, > > The below 36 people have been self nominated or were nominated by another > IGC member to be on the 2013 MAG (the Internet Governance Forum's > Multistakeholder Advisory Group). > > It's a far larger list than any previous one with which I am familiar. And > the Nominating Committee has very little time to make a selection. > > So that we may properly review all eligible candidates, the Nominating > Committee would greatly appreciate your addressing the following as soon as > practicable. > > If you are not on this list and were inadvertently left off, please inform > the NomCom immediately. > If you are on the list and wish to be removed - that is, you do not wish to > serve on the 2013 MAG - please inform the NomCom as soon as possible. > Those indicating an interest in serving on the MAG and wishing to send > supporting documents, or having others send supporting documents to their > nominations, should assure their arrival by c.o.b. Thursday. This is > extremely tight but we must have the final decision completed by Saturday > with nominations to IGF by January 21. > > The preliminary full list of nominees are: > > Anriette Esterhuysen > Baudouin SCHOMBE > Brenden Kuerbis > Chaitanya Dhareshwar > Cheryl Langdon-Orr > Excel Asama Abel > Fatima Cambronero > Fouad Bajwa > Francis Augusto Medeiros > Gideon Rop > Ginger Paque > Graciela Selaimen > Hempal Shrestha > Imran Ahmed Shah > Izumi Aizu > Jamil Goheer > Jean-Yves Gatete > Jeremy Malcolm > Joao Carlos Caribe > José Félix Arias Ynche > Jose Francisco Callo Romero > Juan Manuel Rojas > Karim ATTOUMANI MOHAMED > Kossi AMESSINOU > Michael Gurstein > Mohamed Zahran > Mohamed Tijani BEN JEMAA > Robert Guerra > Robin Cross > Rudi Vansnick > Shahid Akbar > Shaila Mistry > Sonigitu Ekpe > Susan Chalmers > Tijani BEN JEMAA > Tim McGinnis > > Sincerely, > > Thomas Lowenhaupt, Non-voting chair > The Nominating Committee > > Voting Members of the NomCom: > > Wilson Abigaba > Shahid Akbar > Devon Blake > Dixie Hawtin > Asif Kabani > > > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From william.drake at uzh.ch Wed Jan 16 07:44:39 2013 From: william.drake at uzh.ch (William Drake) Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2013 13:44:39 +0100 Subject: [governance] Preliminary List of Nominees for the 2013 MAG - REQUIRES IMMEDIATE ATTENTION In-Reply-To: References: <50F4F7E3.70903@communisphere.com> <619E02E9-F3CF-4C65-8B86-799156F81A01@uzh.ch> <50F6808C.5070408@itforchange.net> Message-ID: Hi Parminder you are right, I was reporting what I was told but had not looked again at DESA statement. I would think that in saying SGs can resubmit the names of current MAG members for "re-election," they're saying that those who might normally be subject to rotation based on length of service might be retained anyway if a SG expresses continuing support for them (as we know there are people who've been on MAG since the beginning). I would not think that the statement means, e.g., that people who were just put on the MAG in the last cycle and hence wouldn't be subject to rotation based on length of service need to be re-endorsed. But who knows, it's UNacracy, one could spend days trying to deconstruct whether the word craft has precise but unstated meanings or was just quickly without deep contemplation…the "re-election" wording would seem consistent with the latter interpretation. In either scenario, I would think Adam's solution is a sensible way to get this done promptly and focus the noncom's effort on what really needs doing. On Jan 16, 2013, at 12:14 PM, Adam Peake wrote: > Hi, > > It says "Can..." > > So rather than doing something that as Bill says just makes DESA's job > harder, how about asking the NomCom to come up with five new names, > and in add a covering note saying we support the continuation of the > CS members selected in May 2012 (I think three we proposed, Izumi, > Bill and Lillian were selected from the names the NomCom selected in > 2012, and apologies if I missed anyone). An endorsement. And ask > that in their next full year they each report back (or they could > coordinate and one report back). > > Seems the MAGs not been too busy. But would be very good if the > digest of MAG mailing list > could be > updated again. Well, debate is starting again on the interim chair position, but until the various SGs complete their own internal off line dialogues and express their preferences (due the 20th) it will be relatively slow… Bill > > > > > > On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 7:27 PM, parminder wrote: >> >> On Tuesday 15 January 2013 09:31 PM, William Drake wrote: >> >> Hi >> >> >> >> >> Put all that together, and the recommendation was: come up with like five >> new names that are not already on the MAG. Names on a smaller list have a >> higher probability of being viewed as strongly supported and eventually >> picked than names on a big long list. >> >> The noncom's task will be easier if you skip adding steps DESA didn't ask >> for like re-certifying extant members, and work off a shorter list with new >> names… >> >> >> However the fact is that DESA did ask for, to use your words 're-certifying >> extant members', >> >> Below is an excerpt from the call for renewal ( >> http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/component/content/article/121-preparatory-process/1264-announcement-on-the-mag- >> ) >> >> "As in previous years, stakeholder groups can resubmit the names of current >> MAG members for re-election......" >> >> This to me is clearly asking for recertifying extant members. And I think it >> is a healthy practice.... Not that I have anything against any extant >> member. >> >> Accordingly, I think extant members, on their own nomination or of other >> people, should also be considered for nomination, as is the express desire >> of UNDESA. And this has always been the practice. >> >> parminder >> >> >> >> >> Cheers, >> >> Bill >> >> >> On Jan 15, 2013, at 7:32 AM, Thomas Lowenhaupt >> wrote: >> >> IGC List Members, >> >> The below 36 people have been self nominated or were nominated by another >> IGC member to be on the 2013 MAG (the Internet Governance Forum's >> Multistakeholder Advisory Group). >> >> It's a far larger list than any previous one with which I am familiar. And >> the Nominating Committee has very little time to make a selection. >> >> So that we may properly review all eligible candidates, the Nominating >> Committee would greatly appreciate your addressing the following as soon as >> practicable. >> >> If you are not on this list and were inadvertently left off, please inform >> the NomCom immediately. >> If you are on the list and wish to be removed - that is, you do not wish to >> serve on the 2013 MAG - please inform the NomCom as soon as possible. >> Those indicating an interest in serving on the MAG and wishing to send >> supporting documents, or having others send supporting documents to their >> nominations, should assure their arrival by c.o.b. Thursday. This is >> extremely tight but we must have the final decision completed by Saturday >> with nominations to IGF by January 21. >> >> The preliminary full list of nominees are: >> >> Anriette Esterhuysen >> Baudouin SCHOMBE >> Brenden Kuerbis >> Chaitanya Dhareshwar >> Cheryl Langdon-Orr >> Excel Asama Abel >> Fatima Cambronero >> Fouad Bajwa >> Francis Augusto Medeiros >> Gideon Rop >> Ginger Paque >> Graciela Selaimen >> Hempal Shrestha >> Imran Ahmed Shah >> Izumi Aizu >> Jamil Goheer >> Jean-Yves Gatete >> Jeremy Malcolm >> Joao Carlos Caribe >> José Félix Arias Ynche >> Jose Francisco Callo Romero >> Juan Manuel Rojas >> Karim ATTOUMANI MOHAMED >> Kossi AMESSINOU >> Michael Gurstein >> Mohamed Zahran >> Mohamed Tijani BEN JEMAA >> Robert Guerra >> Robin Cross >> Rudi Vansnick >> Shahid Akbar >> Shaila Mistry >> Sonigitu Ekpe >> Susan Chalmers >> Tijani BEN JEMAA >> Tim McGinnis >> >> Sincerely, >> >> Thomas Lowenhaupt, Non-voting chair >> The Nominating Committee >> >> Voting Members of the NomCom: >> >> Wilson Abigaba >> Shahid Akbar >> Devon Blake >> Dixie Hawtin >> Asif Kabani >> >> >> >> >> >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 >> >> >> >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 >> > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From aizu at anr.org Wed Jan 16 07:43:43 2013 From: aizu at anr.org (Izumi AIZU) Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2013 21:43:43 +0900 Subject: [governance] Call for Volunteers for New NomCom In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I am also happy to be one o the 25 for NomCom on CSTD WG on enhanced cooperation and other tasks. izumi 2013/1/15 Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro : > Dear All, > > This is an open call for volunteers for a New Nominating Committee (NomCom). > For more information about IGC's NomCom, kindly visit > http://www.igcaucus.org/nomcom-process. > > Kind Regards, > > > -- > Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala > P.O. Box 17862 > Suva > Fiji > > Twitter: @SalanietaT > Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro > Tel: +679 3544828 > Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > -- >> Izumi Aizu << Institute for InfoSocionomics, Tama University, Tokyo Institute for HyperNetwork Society, Oita, Japan * * * * * << Writing the Future of the History >> www.anr.org -------------- 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 From iza at anr.org Wed Jan 16 07:47:16 2013 From: iza at anr.org (Izumi AIZU) Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2013 21:47:16 +0900 Subject: [governance] Preliminary List of Nominees for the 2013 MAG - REQUIRES IMMEDIATE ATTENTION In-Reply-To: <50F68489.9010805@ciroap.org> References: <50F4F7E3.70903@communisphere.com> <619E02E9-F3CF-4C65-8B86-799156F81A01@uzh.ch> <50F6808C.5070408@itforchange.net> <50F68370.3030206@itforchange.net> <50F68489.9010805@ciroap.org> Message-ID: Thanks Jeremy, and yes, I did report it and I don't understand what is "controversial" as Parminder wrote. There were some confusion, so to speak, but no controversy as I remember. thanks, izumi 2013/1/16 Jeremy Malcolm : > On 16/01/13 18:39, parminder wrote: > > > That reminds me. I do think that there has been a great slack in the > reporting back from the MAG by selected CS members to different civil > society constituencies, especially the IGC. It used to be much better > earlier. Also, if I remember right, appllicant nominees from IGC had to give > an express undertaking of regular reporting back from the MAG to the IGC. I > think which should do so this time as well. > > BTW, there was a rather controversial meeting of the MAG during the IGF > Baku. Much less have a report from it from MAG's CS members, most people > even do not know that such a meeting took place, and that it was rather > controversial n many aspects. > > > Izumi did report it. > > -- > > Dr Jeremy Malcolm > Senior Policy Officer > Consumers International | the global campaigning voice for consumers > Office for Asia-Pacific and the Middle East > Lot 5-1 Wisma WIM, 7 Jalan Abang Haji Openg, TTDI, 60000 Kuala Lumpur, > Malaysia > Tel: +60 3 7726 1599 > > Your rights, our mission – download CI's Strategy 2015: > http://consint.info/RightsMission > > @Consumers_Int | www.consumersinternational.org | > www.facebook.com/consumersinternational > > Read our email confidentiality notice. Don't print this email unless > necessary. > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > -- >> Izumi Aizu << Institute for InfoSocionomics, Tama University, Tokyo Institute for HyperNetwork Society, Oita, Japan www.anr.org -------------- 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 From anriette at apc.org Wed Jan 16 07:51:51 2013 From: anriette at apc.org (Anriette Esterhuysen) Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2013 14:51:51 +0200 Subject: [governance] Preliminary List of Nominees for the 2013 MAG - REQUIRES IMMEDIATE ATTENTION In-Reply-To: <50F688F9.3020607@itforchange.net> References: <50F4F7E3.70903@communisphere.com> <619E02E9-F3CF-4C65-8B86-799156F81A01@uzh.ch> <50F6808C.5070408@itforchange.net> <50F68370.3030206@itforchange.net> <50F68489.9010805@ciroap.org> <50F688F9.3020607@itforchange.net> Message-ID: <50F6A267.9060605@apc.org> Dear all On the'controversial' MAG meeting that took place in Baku... If it was the meeting that I attended, for some of the time anyway, it was not really controversial and yes, Izumi did report on it. There was some discussion in the MAG list after the meeting about the formal legitimacy of the meeting and the validity of recommendations it made. Some MAG members put forward a position to say that as the meeting was not formally constituted, or called in good time, its recommendations regarding the chairing of the MAGshould be seen as informal. When Izumi called the meeting he made it clear it would be informal, so this was not really controversial. I think it is a pity that the rest of the MAG did not accept that 'informal' meetings proposals with regard to having an interim chair, and co-chairs, but I would not really call this controversial. This is not to say that the issue of identifying a chair for the MAG is without controversy :) But then again there might have been some other MAG meeting in Baku, that was really controversial, that I do now know about :) What this allaffirms frommy perspective is that MAG working proceduresare still quite open and unclear, and the absence of the special advisor is felt quite strongly. Someof us are still very new (I only joined in May 2012as did Bill Drake, Lillian, Judy and others) but even for those CS members that have been around for a while I think that getting to grips with being effective in the MAG is not easy. I am not opposing rotation, it is very important, but please also do give those CS people that are active in the MAG time to strengthen our participation and effectiveness. Best Anriette On 16/01/2013 13:03, parminder wrote: > > On Wednesday 16 January 2013 04:14 PM, Jeremy Malcolm wrote: >> On 16/01/13 18:39, parminder wrote: >>> >>> >>> BTW, there was a rather controversial meeting of the MAG during the >>> IGF Baku. Much less have a report from it from MAG's CS members, >>> most people even do not know that such a meeting took place, and >>> that it was rather controversial n many aspects. >> >> Izumi did report it. > > Well, then you know that it was a very controversial meeting . Or > perhaps you dont :) > > More on it in a while... A little busy now to get into details. parminder >> >> -- >> >> *Dr Jeremy Malcolm >> Senior Policy Officer >> Consumers International | the global campaigning voice for consumers* >> Office for Asia-Pacific and the Middle East >> Lot 5-1 Wisma WIM, 7 Jalan Abang Haji Openg, TTDI, 60000 Kuala >> Lumpur, Malaysia >> Tel: +60 3 7726 1599 >> >> *Your rights, our mission – download CI's Strategy 2015:* >> http://consint.info/RightsMission >> >> @Consumers_Int | www.consumersinternational.org >> | >> www.facebook.com/consumersinternational >> >> >> Read our email confidentiality notice >> . Don't >> print this email unless necessary. >> > > -- ------------------------------------------------------ anriette esterhuysen anriette at apc.org executive director, association for progressive communications www.apc.org po box 29755, melville 2109 south africa tel/fax +27 11 726 1692 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From william.drake at uzh.ch Wed Jan 16 07:52:55 2013 From: william.drake at uzh.ch (William Drake) Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2013 13:52:55 +0100 Subject: [governance] Preliminary List of Nominees for the 2013 MAG - REQUIRES IMMEDIATE ATTENTION In-Reply-To: References: <50F4F7E3.70903@communisphere.com> <619E02E9-F3CF-4C65-8B86-799156F81A01@uzh.ch> <50F6808C.5070408@itforchange.net> <50F68370.3030206@itforchange.net> <50F68489.9010805@ciroap.org> Message-ID: <5A12097F-E02D-449D-89F9-5D546B4EEAFD@uzh.ch> On Jan 16, 2013, at 11:46 AM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro wrote: > >> >> BTW, there was a rather controversial meeting of the MAG during the IGF Baku. Much less have a report from it from MAG's CS members, most people even do not know that such a meeting took place, and that it was rather controversial n many aspects. > > Izumi did report it. > > Yes, Izumi has consistently been reporting all the meetings that he attends to the IGC. MAG meetings included. Yes, given that he was co-coordinator of the caucus and seemed to enjoy providing ample reportage, I think the MAG CS members sort of deferred to Izumi's reporting and thought he had this function covered. But if people feel they'd like more reportage the MAG CS members can figure out an approach, whether multiple individual reports in parallel or consolidated. BTW Parminder, what did you think was so controversial about the non-official MAG gathering in Baku? It didn't take any decisions, people were acutely aware that we couldn't. It was an exchange of views with the intention of stimulating some re-engagement that could feed back into the larger group…. Thanks, BIll -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From anriette at apc.org Wed Jan 16 07:56:49 2013 From: anriette at apc.org (Anriette Esterhuysen) Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2013 14:56:49 +0200 Subject: [governance] Preliminary List of Nominees for the 2013 MAG - REQUIRES IMMEDIATE ATTENTION In-Reply-To: <50F6A267.9060605@apc.org> References: <50F4F7E3.70903@communisphere.com> <619E02E9-F3CF-4C65-8B86-799156F81A01@uzh.ch> <50F6808C.5070408@itforchange.net> <50F68370.3030206@itforchange.net> <50F68489.9010805@ciroap.org> <50F688F9.3020607@itforchange.net> <50F6A267.9060605@apc.org> Message-ID: <50F6A391.2070702@apc.org> Oh dear.. typos in my mail.. apologies. This: "But then again there might have been some other MAG meeting in Baku, that was really controversial, that I do now know about :) " Should have been: But then again there might have been some other MAG meeting in Baku, that was really controversial, that I do NOT know about :) " Anriette On 16/01/2013 14:51, Anriette Esterhuysen wrote: > Dear all > > On the'controversial' MAG meeting that took place in Baku... > > If it was the meeting that I attended, for some of the time anyway, it > was not really controversial and yes, Izumi did report on it. > > There was some discussion in the MAG list after the meeting about the > formal legitimacy of the meeting and the validity of recommendations it > made. > > Some MAG members put forward a position to say that as the meeting was > not formally constituted, or called in good time, its recommendations > regarding the chairing of the MAGshould be seen as informal. > > When Izumi called the meeting he made it clear it would be informal, so > this was not really controversial. I think it is a pity that the rest of > the MAG did not accept that 'informal' meetings proposals with regard to > having an interim chair, and co-chairs, but I would not really call this > controversial. > > This is not to say that the issue of identifying a chair for the MAG is > without controversy :) > > But then again there might have been some other MAG meeting in Baku, > that was really controversial, that I do now know about :) > > What this allaffirms frommy perspective is that MAG working > proceduresare still quite open and unclear, and the absence of the > special advisor is felt quite strongly. Someof us are still very new (I > only joined in May 2012as did Bill Drake, Lillian, Judy and others) but > even for those CS members that have been around for a while I think that > getting to grips with being effective in the MAG is not easy. > > I am not opposing rotation, it is very important, but please also do > give those CS people that are active in the MAG time to strengthen our > participation and effectiveness. > > Best > > Anriette > > On 16/01/2013 13:03, parminder wrote: >> On Wednesday 16 January 2013 04:14 PM, Jeremy Malcolm wrote: >>> On 16/01/13 18:39, parminder wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> BTW, there was a rather controversial meeting of the MAG during the >>>> IGF Baku. Much less have a report from it from MAG's CS members, >>>> most people even do not know that such a meeting took place, and >>>> that it was rather controversial n many aspects. >>> Izumi did report it. >> Well, then you know that it was a very controversial meeting . Or >> perhaps you dont :) >> >> More on it in a while... A little busy now to get into details. parminder >>> -- >>> >>> *Dr Jeremy Malcolm >>> Senior Policy Officer >>> Consumers International | the global campaigning voice for consumers* >>> Office for Asia-Pacific and the Middle East >>> Lot 5-1 Wisma WIM, 7 Jalan Abang Haji Openg, TTDI, 60000 Kuala >>> Lumpur, Malaysia >>> Tel: +60 3 7726 1599 >>> >>> *Your rights, our mission – download CI's Strategy 2015:* >>> http://consint.info/RightsMission >>> >>> @Consumers_Int | www.consumersinternational.org >>> | >>> www.facebook.com/consumersinternational >>> >>> >>> Read our email confidentiality notice >>> . Don't >>> print this email unless necessary. >>> >> -- ------------------------------------------------------ anriette esterhuysen anriette at apc.org executive director, association for progressive communications www.apc.org po box 29755, melville 2109 south africa tel/fax +27 11 726 1692 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From ca at cafonso.ca Wed Jan 16 08:08:56 2013 From: ca at cafonso.ca (Carlos A. Afonso) Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2013 11:08:56 -0200 Subject: [governance] Preliminary List of Nominees for the 2013 MAG - REQUIRES IMMEDIATE ATTENTION In-Reply-To: <50F4F7E3.70903@communisphere.com> References: <50F4F7E3.70903@communisphere.com> Message-ID: <50F6A668.5070403@cafonso.ca> Dear people, The Latin American and Caribbean IG caucus (list alc-cmsi) proposes (by rough consensus, no voting, just several expressions of agreement and no one disagreed) the following names from the region: Fátima Cambronero (Ageia/Densi - Argentina) Graciela Selaimen (Nupef - Brasil) Valeria Betancourt (APC - Ecuador) Please make sure they are included in the list. fraternal regards --c.a. On 01/15/2013 04:32 AM, Thomas Lowenhaupt wrote: > IGC List Members, > > The below 36 people have been self nominated or were nominated by > another IGC member to be on the 2013 MAG (the Internet Governance > Forum's Multistakeholder Advisory Group). > > It's a far larger list than any previous one with which I am familiar. > And the Nominating Committee has very little time to make a selection. > > So that we may properly review all eligible candidates, the Nominating > Committee would greatly appreciate your addressing the following as soon > as practicable. > > * If you are*not on this* list and were inadvertently left off, please > inform the NomCom immediately. > * If you are *on the list* and wish to be removed - that is, you do > not wish to serve on the 2013 MAG - please inform the NomCom as soon > as possible. > * Those indicating an interest in serving on the MAG and wishing to > send supporting documents, or having others send supporting > documents to their nominations, should assure their arrival by > c.o.b. Thursday. This is extremely tight but we must have the final > decision completed by Saturday with nominations to IGF by January 21. > > The preliminary full list of nominees are: > > 1. Anriette Esterhuysen > 2. Baudouin SCHOMBE > 3. Brenden Kuerbis > 4. Chaitanya Dhareshwar > 5. Cheryl Langdon-Orr > 6. Excel Asama Abel > 7. Fatima Cambronero > 8. Fouad Bajwa > 9. Francis Augusto Medeiros > 10. Gideon Rop > 11. Ginger Paque > 12. Graciela Selaimen > 13. Hempal Shrestha > 14. Imran Ahmed Shah > 15. Izumi Aizu > 16. Jamil Goheer > 17. Jean-Yves Gatete > 18. Jeremy Malcolm > 19. Joao Carlos Caribe > 20. José Félix Arias Ynche > 21. Jose Francisco Callo Romero > 22. Juan Manuel Rojas > 23. Karim ATTOUMANI MOHAMED > 24. Kossi AMESSINOU > 25. Michael Gurstein > 26. Mohamed Zahran > 27. Mohamed Tijani BEN JEMAA > 28. Robert Guerra > 29. Robin Cross > 30. Rudi Vansnick > 31. Shahid Akbar > 32. Shaila Mistry > 33. Sonigitu Ekpe > 34. Susan Chalmers > 35. Tijani BEN JEMAA > 36. Tim McGinnis > > Sincerely, > > Thomas Lowenhaupt, Non-voting chair > The Nominating Committee > > Voting Members of the NomCom: > > Wilson Abigaba > Shahid Akbar > Devon Blake > Dixie Hawtin > Asif Kabani > > > > > > > -------------- 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 From carlos at ie9s.com Wed Jan 16 08:12:04 2013 From: carlos at ie9s.com (carlos watson) Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2013 07:12:04 -0600 Subject: [governance] Call for Volunteers for New NomCom In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Could you add me as a volunteer !!!!! regards c On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 6:43 AM, Izumi AIZU wrote: > I am also happy to be one o the 25 for NomCom on CSTD WG on enhanced > cooperation and other tasks. > > izumi > > > 2013/1/15 Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro < > salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com>: > > Dear All, > > > > This is an open call for volunteers for a New Nominating Committee > (NomCom). > > For more information about IGC's NomCom, kindly visit > > http://www.igcaucus.org/nomcom-process. > > > > Kind Regards, > > > > > > -- > > Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala > > P.O. Box 17862 > > Suva > > Fiji > > > > Twitter: @SalanietaT > > Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro > > Tel: +679 3544828 > > Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 > > > > > > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > > 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 > > > > > > -- > >> Izumi Aizu << > > Institute for InfoSocionomics, Tama University, Tokyo > > Institute for HyperNetwork Society, Oita, > Japan > * * * * * > << Writing the Future of the History >> > www.anr.org > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From jaryn56 at gmail.com Wed Jan 16 10:32:28 2013 From: jaryn56 at gmail.com (=?UTF-8?B?Sm9zw6kgRsOpbGl4IEFyaWFzIFluY2hl?=) Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2013 10:32:28 -0500 Subject: [governance] Call for Volunteers for New NomCom In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Me pueden agregar como voluntario... *Cordialmente: José Félix Arias Ynche* * Investigador Social Para El Desarrollo* 2013/1/16 carlos watson > Could you add me as a volunteer !!!!! > > > regards > > c > > > On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 6:43 AM, Izumi AIZU wrote: > >> I am also happy to be one o the 25 for NomCom on CSTD WG on enhanced >> cooperation and other tasks. >> >> izumi >> >> >> 2013/1/15 Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro < >> salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com>: >> > Dear All, >> > >> > This is an open call for volunteers for a New Nominating Committee >> (NomCom). >> > For more information about IGC's NomCom, kindly visit >> > http://www.igcaucus.org/nomcom-process. >> > >> > Kind Regards, >> > >> > >> > -- >> > Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala >> > P.O. Box 17862 >> > Suva >> > Fiji >> > >> > Twitter: @SalanietaT >> > Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro >> > Tel: +679 3544828 >> > Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > ____________________________________________________________ >> > 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 >> > >> >> >> >> -- >> >> Izumi Aizu << >> >> Institute for InfoSocionomics, Tama University, Tokyo >> >> Institute for HyperNetwork Society, Oita, >> Japan >> * * * * * >> << Writing the Future of the History >> >> www.anr.org >> >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 >> >> > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From nb at bollow.ch Wed Jan 16 11:25:39 2013 From: nb at bollow.ch (Norbert Bollow) Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2013 17:25:39 +0100 Subject: [governance] MAG interim chair question (was Re: Preliminary List of Nominees...) In-Reply-To: <50F6A267.9060605@apc.org> References: <50F4F7E3.70903@communisphere.com> <619E02E9-F3CF-4C65-8B86-799156F81A01@uzh.ch> <50F6808C.5070408@itforchange.net> <50F68370.3030206@itforchange.net> <50F68489.9010805@ciroap.org> <50F688F9.3020607@itforchange.net> <50F6A267.9060605@apc.org> Message-ID: <20130116172539.06140748@quill.bollow.ch> Anriette Esterhuysen wrote: > Some MAG members put forward a position to say that as the meeting was > not formally constituted, or called in good time, its recommendations > regarding the chairing of the MAGshould be seen as informal. > > When Izumi called the meeting he made it clear it would be informal, > so this was not really controversial. I think it is a pity that the > rest of the MAG did not accept that 'informal' meetings proposals > with regard to having an interim chair, and co-chairs, but I would > not really call this controversial. What is the current state of things regarding this issue? Is there now a de facto interim chair? Or a process to appoint one? Greetings, Norbert -------------- 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 From wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de Wed Jan 16 11:38:14 2013 From: wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de (=?iso-8859-1?Q?=22Kleinw=E4chter=2C_Wolfgang=22?=) Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2013 17:38:14 +0100 Subject: AW: [governance] MAG interim chair question (was Re: Preliminary List of Nominees...) References: <50F4F7E3.70903@communisphere.com> <619E02E9-F3CF-4C65-8B86-799156F81A01@uzh.ch> <50F6808C.5070408@itforchange.net> <50F68370.3030206@itforchange.net> <50F68489.9010805@ciroap.org> <50F688F9.3020607@itforchange.net> <50F6A267.9060605@apc.org> <20130116172539.06140748@quill.bollow.ch> Message-ID: <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8013314A5@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> If I recollect correctly there was a proposal to ask Peter Major, the chair of the UNCSTD IGF Improvement WG, to act as an Interim Chair until the Paris meeting but nothing was decided because it was an "informal" MAG meeting and only half of the MAG members were present. However there was a clear call for a solution along the lines "if the UN Secretary General does not act than the MAG itself - in a bottom up process - should take the initiative and elect an (Interim) chair itself". wolfgang ________________________________ Von: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org im Auftrag von Norbert Bollow Gesendet: Mi 16.01.2013 17:25 An: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Anriette Esterhuysen Betreff: [governance] MAG interim chair question (was Re: Preliminary List of Nominees...) Anriette Esterhuysen wrote: > Some MAG members put forward a position to say that as the meeting was > not formally constituted, or called in good time, its recommendations > regarding the chairing of the MAGshould be seen as informal. > > When Izumi called the meeting he made it clear it would be informal, > so this was not really controversial. I think it is a pity that the > rest of the MAG did not accept that 'informal' meetings proposals > with regard to having an interim chair, and co-chairs, but I would > not really call this controversial. What is the current state of things regarding this issue? Is there now a de facto interim chair? Or a process to appoint one? Greetings, Norbert -------------- 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 From rguerra at privaterra.org Wed Jan 16 11:53:07 2013 From: rguerra at privaterra.org (Robert Guerra) Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2013 11:53:07 -0500 Subject: AW: [governance] MAG interim chair question (was Re: Preliminary List of Nominees...) In-Reply-To: <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8013314A5@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> References: <50F4F7E3.70903@communisphere.com> <619E02E9-F3CF-4C65-8B86-799156F81A01@uzh.ch> <50F6808C.5070408@itforchange.net> <50F68370.3030206@itforchange.net> <50F68489.9010805@ciroap.org> <50F688F9.3020607@itforchange.net> <50F6A267.9060605@apc.org> <20130116172539.06140748@quill.bollow.ch> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8013314A5@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> Message-ID: <92EADB8B-9769-426D-A81A-D9704CD6C0CB@privaterra.org> MAG folks on this list, Has there been a departure from having the upcoming host country co-chair the MAG meetings? Robert On 2013-01-16, at 11:38 AM, Kleinwächter, Wolfgang wrote: > If I recollect correctly there was a proposal to ask Peter Major, the chair of the UNCSTD IGF Improvement WG, to act as an Interim Chair until the Paris meeting but nothing was decided because it was an "informal" MAG meeting and only half of the MAG members were present. However there was a clear call for a solution along the lines "if the UN Secretary General does not act than the MAG itself - in a bottom up process - should take the initiative and elect an (Interim) chair itself". > > wolfgang > > > ________________________________ > > Von: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org im Auftrag von Norbert Bollow > Gesendet: Mi 16.01.2013 17:25 > An: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Anriette Esterhuysen > Betreff: [governance] MAG interim chair question (was Re: Preliminary List of Nominees...) > > > > Anriette Esterhuysen wrote: > >> Some MAG members put forward a position to say that as the meeting was >> not formally constituted, or called in good time, its recommendations >> regarding the chairing of the MAGshould be seen as informal. >> >> When Izumi called the meeting he made it clear it would be informal, >> so this was not really controversial. I think it is a pity that the >> rest of the MAG did not accept that 'informal' meetings proposals >> with regard to having an interim chair, and co-chairs, but I would >> not really call this controversial. > > What is the current state of things regarding this issue? > > Is there now a de facto interim chair? Or a process to appoint one? > > Greetings, > Norbert > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From toml at communisphere.com Wed Jan 16 12:21:15 2013 From: toml at communisphere.com (Thomas Lowenhaupt) Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2013 12:21:15 -0500 Subject: [governance] From Geneva on 2013 MAG selection process In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <50F6E18B.7090302@communisphere.com> Here's an email from Chengetai Masango in Geneva about the state of the MAG nominations. Best, Tom Lowenhaupt P.S. Not sure why the reference to NY is there. Perhaps we're underrepresented? -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: Questions about 2013 MAG selection process Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2013 14:17:45 +0100 From: Chengetai Masango To: Thomas Lowenhaupt CC: Farzaneh BADII , Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro HI Thomas Civil Society is one of the stakeholder groups that are most up to date as far as the rotation is concerned. The majority seem to have been renewed during the last rotation. I think if you send three or four names (to give NY a choice) that should be more than enough. Best regards Chengetai On Jan 15, 2013, at 11:38 PM, Thomas Lowenhaupt > wrote: > I am the Chair of the Civil Society Internet Governance Caucus > Nominating Committee charged with selecting names of IGC members to > put forth for selection to the 2013 MAG. Thirty five (35) IGC members > have been nominated. Our review and selection process would be aided > if you would provide some insight into the process you will be > following in selecting 2013 MAG members. > > We have been advised that DESA might rotate 1/3 of the MAG's 55 > members this year, roughly 18 members. That those appointed to the MAG > last year are more than likely to remain, and that their reapplication > at this point would be unnecessary. > > It is expected that more than one civil society organization is likely > to provide DESA with MAG nominees. The IGC has over 30 applicants for > what looks to be a possible 18 vacant MAG seats. > > The IGC's Nominating Committee members are well aware of the > credentials and suitability of our nominees and in the best position > to select the cream from amongst them. This would provide DESA with a > highly qualified group of nominees from which to choose its MAG > appointees. We are prepared to take the difficult task of narrowing > down the applicant pool from 35 as appropriate. > > We would greatly appreciate your providing some guidance as to the > number of nominees from IGC that would most fruitfully meet the needs > of DESA. > > Sincerely, > > Thomas Lowenhaupt, Non Voting Chair > Internet Governance Caucus Nominating Committee > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From gurstein at gmail.com Wed Jan 16 12:27:40 2013 From: gurstein at gmail.com (michael gurstein) Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2013 09:27:40 -0800 Subject: [governance] ZDNet: UN plans Internet governance amid outcry to defund ITU + Message-ID: <06f401cdf40e$d0ff8aa0$72fe9fe0$@gmail.com> http://www.zdnet.com/un-plans-internet-governance-amid-outcry-to-defund-itu- 7000009882/ (with multiple links). UN plans Internet governance amid outcry to defund ITU Summary: U.N. telecom arm ITU coordinates new internet governance plans; a petition demands ITU's U.S. funding stop, including donors Apple, Verizon, Cisco and more. Violet Blue By Violet Blue for Pulp Tech | January 16, 2013 -- 11:35 GMT (03:35 PST) A petition to de-fund the U.N.'s telecom arm emerges just as the ITU readies to hammer out internet governance plans at the World Telecommunication Information and Communication Technology Policy Forum meetings in February and May 2013. The website De-fund the ITU surfaced on the January NANOG (North American Network Operators' Group) email list. Its Whitehouse.gov petition De-fund the ITU demands the U.S. government stop its financial contributions to the ITU. It comes after the ITU's recent attempt at internet governance and monetization through tolls at its WCIT-12 summit in Dubai last month. The U.N. debacle prompted widespread internet outrage, an unprecedented unanimous U.S. House of Representatives vote in opposition, and refusal from 55 countries to sign the ITU's treaty. No matter - as usual, the ITU has its own plans. Five days ago ITU's Secretary-General Hamadoun Touré released the fourth and final ITU/WTPF-13 report outlining groundwork for internet governance (and internet regulatory topics) at upcoming meetings on February 6-8 and May 14-16. Discussions at WTPF-13 will be based on this report and will serve as the sole working document of the Forum. The ITU/WTPF-13 report explicitly includes the creation of "Global Principles for the governance and use of the Internet" and resolving issues pertaining to "use of Internet resources for purposes that are inconsistent with international peace, stability and security." The Report explains the current multistakeholder model of internet governance is "under discussion" and acknowledges that members Cisco, U.K., U.S., and ISOC view the current governance of the Internet as "sufficient." However, "with regards to international Internet-related public policy, the role of one stakeholder – Governments – has not been allowed to evolve." For the Policy Forum, the ITU also has 64 "informal Experts" weighing in. The "experts" are comprised mostly of Member State telecom representatives (UAE, Saudi Arabia, Iran, others), plus individuals representing the interests and opinions of Verizon, Cisco Systems, British Telecom, the FCC, The Internet Society, ARIN, ICANN, and PayPal. Who funds the ITU? The website promoting the petition, defundtheitu.org, provides details and ITU funding summaries showing which countries contribute to the ITU and the tech companies (Member Sectors) that provide millions to continue the ITU (and its subgroups) respective missions. According to The ITU’s 2012-2015 membership roll and dues one Contributory Unit is equivalent to CHF 318,000 (1 Swiss Franc equals $1.10). Currently the US pays 30 Contributory Units (nearly $11 million per year) to the ITU as does Japan, making the two countries its top donors. Other big contributors include Germany at 25 units, Italy: 15, Saudi Arabia: 13, China: 12, UK: 10, Russia: 10. Member Sector donations contribute additional monies to ITU subgroups. American Member Sector companies include Apple, AT&T, Cisco, Intel, Motorola, Sprint, Verizon and many more. (Member Sector entities pay self-elected Contributory Units for ITU-T, R and D participation currently set at one-tenth what Member States pay - 31,800 Swiss Francs per "member" contributory unit per sector.) Financial support for ITU is also provided by the U.S. in that international organizations - namely the ITU and its employees - are exempted from U.S. Federal tax withholding (Exhibit 5.19.11-13: International Organizations Exempt from Federal Withholding Requirements). WCIT-12 outrage, ITU duplicity, and aftermath One month ago the U.N.'s ITU held its World Conference on International Telecommunications (WCIT-12) in Dubai, where Member States proposed revisions to the International Telecommunication Regulations (ITR) - to expand jurisdiction over the Internet, such as creating pay-per-use tolls, heightening surveillance, and to give nation states increased control over the Internet. Global opposition created an epic backlash, fueled by the ITU's insistence to keep conference documents from the public - despite ITU's insistence its process was transparent. In response to ITU's secretive processes researchers at George Mason University created WCITLeaks, a website that solicited and shared copies of leaked WCIT/ITU documents. As WCIT-12 unfolded, leaked proposals revealed plans from Russia, China, and similar regimes for an ITU-supported play at WCIT-12 to define the internet as a system of government-controlled networks, among other deeply disturbing intents. Democratic and free speech organizations joined internet giants in the outcry, such as Google with its Take Action campaign, and the formation of country blocs included the U.S., the European Parliament, Canada, Mexico and more. See also: U.N. readies for protests on eve of secret Internet regulation treaty At WCIT conference end, the ITU went back on its specific promises that the treaty would not be about the internet and would not be put to a vote. Eli Dourado is a co-founder of WCITLeaks and was a member of the US delegation to WCIT-12. In Behind closed doors at the U.N.’s attempted "takeover of the Internet" Dourado wrote, The purpose of the meeting, claimed ITU Secretary-General Hamadoun Touré, was simply to update the treaty that governs international phone calls; it had last been revised in 1988, when most phone companies were state-owned monopolies. Claims that the conference would implicate the Internet were part of a misinformation campaign pursued by unnamed opponents of the ITU, Touré said. Dourado described how the ITU forced its treaty agreement with a vote that it insisted was not a vote: (...) What followed was surreal. The Chairman calmly said that he had a long list of countries wishing to speak, and that in lieu of going through the list, he was going to take the “feel of the room” by asking countries to hold up their voting boards if they supported the resolution as amended by the Secretary-General. After also asking for those against, the Chairman said simply, “The majority is with having the resolution in.” After some applause, he added, “Thank you. Now we can go to Corrigendum 2.” There were immediate inquiries from the UK and Spain as to whether we had just decided the issue by a vote. We had been promised, after all, that there would be no votes, that all decisions would be decided by consensus. In response to the UK’s inquiry, the Chairman replied, “The majority agreed to adopt the resolution as amended.” In response to Spain’s, the Chairman answered, “No, it was not a vote, and I was clear about it. Thank you, Spain.” De-fund the ITU claims, Their goal was a coup: to overthrow the open and transparent system of Internet governance that ensures the Internet’s freedom and accessibility, and replace it with their own central point of absolute control, through which policies of censorship and repression could be enacted. The U.S. and 54 countries revolted and refused to sign. This prompted subsequent headlines that claimed the ITU had failed its attempt at an Internet power-grab, and that the treaty was defeated. Meanwhile, some the 89 signing countries hurried home to begin implementation of the problematic new treaty. At The Internet Society's Post-WCIT Roundtable panel on December 21, U.S. Ambassador Terry Kramer, head of Delegation WCIT-12, expressed serious concern about what will happen as the 89 governments move toward treaty implementation. Amb. Kramer unequivocally stated that, "the ITU needs to step back from governance and content." He cautioned the room that America may have taken a stand against the treaty, but that "the U.S. does not own the internet." Kramer said, "The internet must be left alone." If the De-Fund The ITU petition and movement is successful in the U.S., the ITU stands to lose 7.7% of its budget. It could indeed hurt the slippery organization, which has had to increase the dollar amount of Contributory Units as membership and elected contributions have dwindled over the past decade. And if Secretary-General Hamadoun Touré's ITU/WTPF-13 far-reaching internet governance report is any indication, ITU needs the internet now more than ever. One thing is certain: the internet does not need the ITU. https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/de-fund-itu/mSJ49QcV?utm_source=wh .gov &utm_medium=shorturl&utm_campaign=shorturl Created: Jan 11, 2013 Issues: Budget and Taxes, Foreign Policy, Technology and Telecommunications Signatures needed by February 10, 2013 to reach goal of 25,000 24,709 Total signatures on this petition 291 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From gurstein at gmail.com Wed Jan 16 12:38:50 2013 From: gurstein at gmail.com (michael gurstein) Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2013 09:38:50 -0800 Subject: [governance] From Geneva on 2013 MAG selection process In-Reply-To: <50F6E18B.7090302@communisphere.com> References: <50F6E18B.7090302@communisphere.com> Message-ID: <072f01cdf410$5914ec90$0b3ec5b0$@gmail.com> Tom, :). "NY" is intra-UN lingo for UN-HQ, which, although uneasily, from time to time, is based in NY-C. :) - from whence of course, come the decisions concerning the composition of the MAG. M From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Thomas Lowenhaupt Sent: Wednesday, January 16, 2013 9:21 AM To: governance list IG Caucus Subject: [governance] From Geneva on 2013 MAG selection process Here's an email from Chengetai Masango in Geneva about the state of the MAG nominations. Best, Tom Lowenhaupt P.S. Not sure why the reference to NY is there. Perhaps we're underrepresented? -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: Questions about 2013 MAG selection process Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2013 14:17:45 +0100 From: Chengetai Masango To: Thomas Lowenhaupt CC: Farzaneh BADII , Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro HI Thomas Civil Society is one of the stakeholder groups that are most up to date as far as the rotation is concerned. The majority seem to have been renewed during the last rotation. I think if you send three or four names (to give NY a choice) that should be more than enough. Best regards Chengetai On Jan 15, 2013, at 11:38 PM, Thomas Lowenhaupt wrote: I am the Chair of the Civil Society Internet Governance Caucus Nominating Committee charged with selecting names of IGC members to put forth for selection to the 2013 MAG. Thirty five (35) IGC members have been nominated. Our review and selection process would be aided if you would provide some insight into the process you will be following in selecting 2013 MAG members. We have been advised that DESA might rotate 1/3 of the MAG's 55 members this year, roughly 18 members. That those appointed to the MAG last year are more than likely to remain, and that their reapplication at this point would be unnecessary. It is expected that more than one civil society organization is likely to provide DESA with MAG nominees. The IGC has over 30 applicants for what looks to be a possible 18 vacant MAG seats. The IGC's Nominating Committee members are well aware of the credentials and suitability of our nominees and in the best position to select the cream from amongst them. This would provide DESA with a highly qualified group of nominees from which to choose its MAG appointees. We are prepared to take the difficult task of narrowing down the applicant pool from 35 as appropriate. We would greatly appreciate your providing some guidance as to the number of nominees from IGC that would most fruitfully meet the needs of DESA. Sincerely, Thomas Lowenhaupt, Non Voting Chair Internet Governance Caucus Nominating Committee -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From rguerra at privaterra.org Wed Jan 16 12:44:15 2013 From: rguerra at privaterra.org (Robert Guerra) Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2013 12:44:15 -0500 Subject: [governance] ZDNet: UN plans Internet governance amid outcry to defund ITU + In-Reply-To: <06f401cdf40e$d0ff8aa0$72fe9fe0$@gmail.com> References: <06f401cdf40e$d0ff8aa0$72fe9fe0$@gmail.com> Message-ID: <84031F12-8063-4638-9AB1-646D387DD8AA@privaterra.org> Have to take the petitions with a grain of salt... A recent petition asked for the US to construct a Space based Star-wars type Death star... http://theweek.com/article/index/238746/the-white-houses-nerd-delighting-death-star-petition-response Anyone with an agenda and 25,000 signatures can elicit an official response from the White House's "We the People" website. This being the internet and all, requests naturally tilt toward the edges: A petition for President Obama's impeachment, federally legalized marijuana, secession appeals, and a nationalized Twinkie industry. Over the weekend, the White House indulged Star Wars fans by issuing an official response to a popular request — that the U.S. government begin construction on a Death Star to be completed by 2016. Total signatures amassed: 34,435. .... -- R. Guerra Phone/Cell: +1 202-905-2081 Twitter: twitter.com/netfreedom Email: rguerra at privaterra.org On 2013-01-16, at 12:27 PM, michael gurstein wrote: > http://www.zdnet.com/un-plans-internet-governance-amid-outcry-to-defund-itu-7000009882/ (with multiple links). > > UN plans Internet governance amid outcry to defund ITU > > Summary: U.N. telecom arm ITU coordinates new internet governance plans; a petition demands ITU's U.S. funding stop, including donors Apple, Verizon, Cisco and more. > Violet Blue > > By Violet Blue for Pulp Tech | January 16, 2013 -- 11:35 GMT (03:35 PST) > > A petition to de-fund the U.N.'s telecom arm emerges just as the ITU readies to hammer out internet governance plans at the World Telecommunication Information and Communication Technology Policy Forum meetings in February and May 2013. > > The website De-fund the ITU surfaced on the January NANOG (North American Network Operators' Group) email list. > > Its Whitehouse.gov petition De-fund the ITU demands the U.S. government stop its financial contributions to the ITU. > > It comes after the ITU's recent attempt at internet governance and monetization through tolls at its WCIT-12 summit in Dubai last month. > > The U.N. debacle prompted widespread internet outrage, an unprecedented unanimous U.S. House of Representatives vote in opposition, and refusal from 55 countries to sign the ITU's treaty. > > No matter - as usual, the ITU has its own plans. > > Five days ago ITU's Secretary-General Hamadoun Touré released the fourth and final ITU/WTPF-13 report outlining groundwork for internet governance (and internet regulatory topics) at upcoming meetings on February 6-8 and May 14-16. > > Discussions at WTPF-13 will be based on this report and will serve as the sole working document of the Forum. > > The ITU/WTPF-13 report explicitly includes the creation of "Global Principles for the governance and use of the Internet" and resolving issues pertaining to "use of Internet resources for purposes that are inconsistent with international peace, stability and security." > > The Report explains the current multistakeholder model of internet governance is "under discussion" and acknowledges that members Cisco, U.K., U.S., and ISOC view the current governance of the Internet as "sufficient." > > However, "with regards to international Internet-related public policy, the role of one stakeholder – Governments – has not been allowed to evolve." > > For the Policy Forum, the ITU also has 64 "informal Experts" weighing in. > > The "experts" are comprised mostly of Member State telecom representatives (UAE, Saudi Arabia, Iran, others), plus individuals representing the interests and opinions of Verizon, Cisco Systems, British Telecom, the FCC, The Internet Society, ARIN, ICANN, and PayPal. > > Who funds the ITU? > > The website promoting the petition, defundtheitu.org, provides details and ITU funding summaries showing which countries contribute to the ITU and the tech companies (Member Sectors) that provide millions to continue the ITU (and its subgroups) respective missions. > > According to The ITU’s 2012-2015 membership roll and dues one Contributory Unit is equivalent to CHF 318,000 (1 Swiss Franc equals $1.10). > > Currently the US pays 30 Contributory Units (nearly $11 million per year) to the ITU as does Japan, making the two countries its top donors. Other big contributors include Germany at 25 units, Italy: 15, Saudi Arabia: 13, China: 12, UK: 10, Russia: 10. > > Member Sector donations contribute additional monies to ITU subgroups. American Member Sector companies include Apple, AT&T, Cisco, Intel, Motorola, Sprint, Verizon and many more. > > (Member Sector entities pay self-elected Contributory Units for ITU-T, R and D participation currently set at one-tenth what Member States pay - 31,800 Swiss Francs per "member" contributory unit per sector.) > > Financial support for ITU is also provided by the U.S. in that international organizations - namely the ITU and its employees - are exempted from U.S. Federal tax withholding (Exhibit 5.19.11-13: International Organizations Exempt from Federal Withholding Requirements). > > WCIT-12 outrage, ITU duplicity, and aftermath > > One month ago the U.N.'s ITU held its World Conference on International Telecommunications (WCIT-12) in Dubai, where Member States proposed revisions to the International Telecommunication Regulations (ITR) - to expand jurisdiction over the Internet, such as creating pay-per-use tolls, heightening surveillance, and to give nation states increased control over the Internet. > > Global opposition created an epic backlash, fueled by the ITU's insistence to keep conference documents from the public - despite ITU's insistence its process was transparent. > > In response to ITU's secretive processes researchers at George Mason University created WCITLeaks, a website that solicited and shared copies of leaked WCIT/ITU documents. > > As WCIT-12 unfolded, leaked proposals revealed plans from Russia, China, and similar regimes for an ITU-supported play at WCIT-12 to define the internet as a system of government-controlled networks, among other deeply disturbing intents. > > Democratic and free speech organizations joined internet giants in the outcry, such as Google with its Take Action campaign, and the formation of country blocs included the U.S., the European Parliament, Canada, Mexico and more. > > See also: U.N. readies for protests on eve of secret Internet regulation treaty > > At WCIT conference end, the ITU went back on its specific promises that the treaty would not be about the internet and would not be put to a vote. > > Eli Dourado is a co-founder of WCITLeaks and was a member of the US delegation to WCIT-12. In Behind closed doors at the U.N.’s attempted "takeover of the Internet" Dourado wrote, > > The purpose of the meeting, claimed ITU Secretary-General Hamadoun Touré, was simply to update the treaty that governs international phone calls; it had last been revised in 1988, when most phone companies were state-owned monopolies. Claims that the conference would implicate the Internet were part of a misinformation campaign pursued by unnamed opponents of the ITU, Touré said. > > Dourado described how the ITU forced its treaty agreement with a vote that it insisted was not a vote: > > (...) What followed was surreal. The Chairman calmly said that he had a long list of countries wishing to speak, and that in lieu of going through the list, he was going to take the “feel of the room” by asking countries to hold up their voting boards if they supported the resolution as amended by the Secretary-General. After also asking for those against, the Chairman said simply, “The majority is with having the resolution in.” After some applause, he added, “Thank you. Now we can go to Corrigendum 2.” > > There were immediate inquiries from the UK and Spain as to whether we had just decided the issue by a vote. We had been promised, after all, that there would be no votes, that all decisions would be decided by consensus. In response to the UK’s inquiry, the Chairman replied, “The majority agreed to adopt the resolution as amended.” In response to Spain’s, the Chairman answered, “No, it was not a vote, and I was clear about it. Thank you, Spain.” > > De-fund the ITU claims, > > Their goal was a coup: to overthrow the open and transparent system of Internet governance that ensures the Internet’s freedom and accessibility, and replace it with their own central point of absolute control, through which policies of censorship and repression could be enacted. > > The U.S. and 54 countries revolted and refused to sign. This prompted subsequent headlines that claimed the ITU had failed its attempt at an Internet power-grab, and that the treaty was defeated. > > Meanwhile, some the 89 signing countries hurried home to begin implementation of the problematic new treaty. > > At The Internet Society's Post-WCIT Roundtable panel on December 21, U.S. Ambassador Terry Kramer, head of Delegation WCIT-12, expressed serious concern about what will happen as the 89 governments move toward treaty implementation. > > Amb. Kramer unequivocally stated that, "the ITU needs to step back from governance and content." He cautioned the room that America may have taken a stand against the treaty, but that "the U.S. does not own the internet." > > Kramer said, "The internet must be left alone." > > If the De-Fund The ITU petition and movement is successful in the U.S., the ITU stands to lose 7.7% of its budget. > > It could indeed hurt the slippery organization, which has had to increase the dollar amount of Contributory Units as membership and elected contributions have dwindled over the past decade. > > And if Secretary-General Hamadoun Touré's ITU/WTPF-13 far-reaching internet governance report is any indication, ITU needs the internet now more than ever. > > One thing is certain: the internet does not need the ITU. > > > https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/de-fund-itu/mSJ49QcV?utm_source=wh.gov&utm_medium=shorturl&utm_campaign=shorturl > > Created: Jan 11, 2013 > Issues: Budget and Taxes, Foreign Policy, Technology and Telecommunications > > Signatures needed by February 10, 2013 to reach goal of 25,000 > 24,709 > > Total signatures on this petition > 291 > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From ivarhartmann at gmail.com Wed Jan 16 12:49:00 2013 From: ivarhartmann at gmail.com (Ivar A. M. Hartmann) Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2013 15:49:00 -0200 Subject: [governance] ZDNet: UN plans Internet governance amid outcry to defund ITU + In-Reply-To: <84031F12-8063-4638-9AB1-646D387DD8AA@privaterra.org> References: <06f401cdf40e$d0ff8aa0$72fe9fe0$@gmail.com> <84031F12-8063-4638-9AB1-646D387DD8AA@privaterra.org> Message-ID: On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 3:44 PM, Robert Guerra wrote: > Anyone with an agenda and 25,000 signatures It's actually 100,000 since yesterday. http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2013/01/15/why-we-re-raising-signature-threshold-we-people http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2013/01/100k-signatures-now-needed-before-white-house-comments-on-death-star-plans/ Old petitions still have the 25,000 threshold, however. That includes the De-fund ITU one. Best, Ivar -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From gurstein at gmail.com Wed Jan 16 12:55:26 2013 From: gurstein at gmail.com (michael gurstein) Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2013 09:55:26 -0800 Subject: [governance] ZDNet: UN plans Internet governance amid outcry to defund ITU + In-Reply-To: <84031F12-8063-4638-9AB1-646D387DD8AA@privaterra.org> References: <06f401cdf40e$d0ff8aa0$72fe9fe0$@gmail.com> <84031F12-8063-4638-9AB1-646D387DD8AA@privaterra.org> Message-ID: <076901cdf412$aae90900$00bb1b00$@gmail.com> Folks who read to the bottom of the article I posted might have noticed that I also posted the current status of the petition... M > https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/de-fund-itu/mSJ49QcV?utm_source=wh .gov&utm_medium=shorturl&utm_campaign=shorturl > > Created: Jan 11, 2013 > Issues: Budget and Taxes, Foreign Policy, Technology and Telecommunications > > Signatures needed by February 10, 2013 to reach goal of 25,000 > 24,709 > > Total signatures on this petition > 291 -----Original Message----- From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Robert Guerra Sent: Wednesday, January 16, 2013 9:44 AM To: Internet Governance Caucus Subject: Re: [governance] ZDNet: UN plans Internet governance amid outcry to defund ITU + Have to take the petitions with a grain of salt... A recent petition asked for the US to construct a Space based Star-wars type Death star... http://theweek.com/article/index/238746/the-white-houses-nerd-delighting-dea th-star-petition-response Anyone with an agenda and 25,000 signatures can elicit an official response from the White House's "We the People" website. This being the internet and all, requests naturally tilt toward the edges: A petition for President Obama's impeachment, federally legalized marijuana, secession appeals, and a nationalized Twinkie industry. Over the weekend, the White House indulged Star Wars fans by issuing an official response to a popular request — that the U.S. government begin construction on a Death Star to be completed by 2016. Total signatures amassed: 34,435. .... -- R. Guerra Phone/Cell: +1 202-905-2081 Twitter: twitter.com/netfreedom Email: rguerra at privaterra.org On 2013-01-16, at 12:27 PM, michael gurstein wrote: > http://www.zdnet.com/un-plans-internet-governance-amid-outcry-to-defund-itu- 7000009882/ (with multiple links). > > UN plans Internet governance amid outcry to defund ITU > > Summary: U.N. telecom arm ITU coordinates new internet governance plans; a petition demands ITU's U.S. funding stop, including donors Apple, Verizon, Cisco and more. > Violet Blue > > By Violet Blue for Pulp Tech | January 16, 2013 -- 11:35 GMT (03:35 PST) > > A petition to de-fund the U.N.'s telecom arm emerges just as the ITU readies to hammer out internet governance plans at the World Telecommunication Information and Communication Technology Policy Forum meetings in February and May 2013. > > The website De-fund the ITU surfaced on the January NANOG (North American Network Operators' Group) email list. > > Its Whitehouse.gov petition De-fund the ITU demands the U.S. government stop its financial contributions to the ITU. > > It comes after the ITU's recent attempt at internet governance and monetization through tolls at its WCIT-12 summit in Dubai last month. > > The U.N. debacle prompted widespread internet outrage, an unprecedented unanimous U.S. House of Representatives vote in opposition, and refusal from 55 countries to sign the ITU's treaty. > > No matter - as usual, the ITU has its own plans. > > Five days ago ITU's Secretary-General Hamadoun Touré released the fourth and final ITU/WTPF-13 report outlining groundwork for internet governance (and internet regulatory topics) at upcoming meetings on February 6-8 and May 14-16. > > Discussions at WTPF-13 will be based on this report and will serve as the sole working document of the Forum. > > The ITU/WTPF-13 report explicitly includes the creation of "Global Principles for the governance and use of the Internet" and resolving issues pertaining to "use of Internet resources for purposes that are inconsistent with international peace, stability and security." > > The Report explains the current multistakeholder model of internet governance is "under discussion" and acknowledges that members Cisco, U.K., U.S., and ISOC view the current governance of the Internet as "sufficient." > > However, "with regards to international Internet-related public policy, the role of one stakeholder – Governments – has not been allowed to evolve." > > For the Policy Forum, the ITU also has 64 "informal Experts" weighing in. > > The "experts" are comprised mostly of Member State telecom representatives (UAE, Saudi Arabia, Iran, others), plus individuals representing the interests and opinions of Verizon, Cisco Systems, British Telecom, the FCC, The Internet Society, ARIN, ICANN, and PayPal. > > Who funds the ITU? > > The website promoting the petition, defundtheitu.org, provides details and ITU funding summaries showing which countries contribute to the ITU and the tech companies (Member Sectors) that provide millions to continue the ITU (and its subgroups) respective missions. > > According to The ITU’s 2012-2015 membership roll and dues one Contributory Unit is equivalent to CHF 318,000 (1 Swiss Franc equals $1.10). > > Currently the US pays 30 Contributory Units (nearly $11 million per year) to the ITU as does Japan, making the two countries its top donors. Other big contributors include Germany at 25 units, Italy: 15, Saudi Arabia: 13, China: 12, UK: 10, Russia: 10. > > Member Sector donations contribute additional monies to ITU subgroups. American Member Sector companies include Apple, AT&T, Cisco, Intel, Motorola, Sprint, Verizon and many more. > > (Member Sector entities pay self-elected Contributory Units for ITU-T, R and D participation currently set at one-tenth what Member States pay - 31,800 Swiss Francs per "member" contributory unit per sector.) > > Financial support for ITU is also provided by the U.S. in that international organizations - namely the ITU and its employees - are exempted from U.S. Federal tax withholding (Exhibit 5.19.11-13: International Organizations Exempt from Federal Withholding Requirements). > > WCIT-12 outrage, ITU duplicity, and aftermath > > One month ago the U.N.'s ITU held its World Conference on International Telecommunications (WCIT-12) in Dubai, where Member States proposed revisions to the International Telecommunication Regulations (ITR) - to expand jurisdiction over the Internet, such as creating pay-per-use tolls, heightening surveillance, and to give nation states increased control over the Internet. > > Global opposition created an epic backlash, fueled by the ITU's insistence to keep conference documents from the public - despite ITU's insistence its process was transparent. > > In response to ITU's secretive processes researchers at George Mason University created WCITLeaks, a website that solicited and shared copies of leaked WCIT/ITU documents. > > As WCIT-12 unfolded, leaked proposals revealed plans from Russia, China, and similar regimes for an ITU-supported play at WCIT-12 to define the internet as a system of government-controlled networks, among other deeply disturbing intents. > > Democratic and free speech organizations joined internet giants in the outcry, such as Google with its Take Action campaign, and the formation of country blocs included the U.S., the European Parliament, Canada, Mexico and more. > > See also: U.N. readies for protests on eve of secret Internet regulation treaty > > At WCIT conference end, the ITU went back on its specific promises that the treaty would not be about the internet and would not be put to a vote. > > Eli Dourado is a co-founder of WCITLeaks and was a member of the US delegation to WCIT-12. In Behind closed doors at the U.N.’s attempted "takeover of the Internet" Dourado wrote, > > The purpose of the meeting, claimed ITU Secretary-General Hamadoun Touré, was simply to update the treaty that governs international phone calls; it had last been revised in 1988, when most phone companies were state-owned monopolies. Claims that the conference would implicate the Internet were part of a misinformation campaign pursued by unnamed opponents of the ITU, Touré said. > > Dourado described how the ITU forced its treaty agreement with a vote that it insisted was not a vote: > > (...) What followed was surreal. The Chairman calmly said that he had a long list of countries wishing to speak, and that in lieu of going through the list, he was going to take the “feel of the room” by asking countries to hold up their voting boards if they supported the resolution as amended by the Secretary-General. After also asking for those against, the Chairman said simply, “The majority is with having the resolution in.” After some applause, he added, “Thank you. Now we can go to Corrigendum 2.” > > There were immediate inquiries from the UK and Spain as to whether we had just decided the issue by a vote. We had been promised, after all, that there would be no votes, that all decisions would be decided by consensus. In response to the UK’s inquiry, the Chairman replied, “The majority agreed to adopt the resolution as amended.” In response to Spain’s, the Chairman answered, “No, it was not a vote, and I was clear about it. Thank you, Spain.” > > De-fund the ITU claims, > > Their goal was a coup: to overthrow the open and transparent system of Internet governance that ensures the Internet’s freedom and accessibility, and replace it with their own central point of absolute control, through which policies of censorship and repression could be enacted. > > The U.S. and 54 countries revolted and refused to sign. This prompted subsequent headlines that claimed the ITU had failed its attempt at an Internet power-grab, and that the treaty was defeated. > > Meanwhile, some the 89 signing countries hurried home to begin implementation of the problematic new treaty. > > At The Internet Society's Post-WCIT Roundtable panel on December 21, U.S. Ambassador Terry Kramer, head of Delegation WCIT-12, expressed serious concern about what will happen as the 89 governments move toward treaty implementation. > > Amb. Kramer unequivocally stated that, "the ITU needs to step back from governance and content." He cautioned the room that America may have taken a stand against the treaty, but that "the U.S. does not own the internet." > > Kramer said, "The internet must be left alone." > > If the De-Fund The ITU petition and movement is successful in the U.S., the ITU stands to lose 7.7% of its budget. > > It could indeed hurt the slippery organization, which has had to increase the dollar amount of Contributory Units as membership and elected contributions have dwindled over the past decade. > > And if Secretary-General Hamadoun Touré's ITU/WTPF-13 far-reaching internet governance report is any indication, ITU needs the internet now more than ever. > > One thing is certain: the internet does not need the ITU. > > > https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/de-fund-itu/mSJ49QcV?utm_source=wh .gov&utm_medium=shorturl&utm_campaign=shorturl > > Created: Jan 11, 2013 > Issues: Budget and Taxes, Foreign Policy, Technology and Telecommunications > > Signatures needed by February 10, 2013 to reach goal of 25,000 > 24,709 > > Total signatures on this petition > 291 > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From ca at cafonso.ca Wed Jan 16 13:04:10 2013 From: ca at cafonso.ca (Carlos A. Afonso) Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2013 16:04:10 -0200 Subject: [governance] ZDNet: UN plans Internet governance amid outcry to defund ITU + In-Reply-To: <84031F12-8063-4638-9AB1-646D387DD8AA@privaterra.org> References: <06f401cdf40e$d0ff8aa0$72fe9fe0$@gmail.com> <84031F12-8063-4638-9AB1-646D387DD8AA@privaterra.org> Message-ID: <50F6EB9A.3010209@cafonso.ca> The Death Star petition might be more successful than the one trying to defund the ITU :) --c.a. On 01/16/2013 03:44 PM, Robert Guerra wrote: > Have to take the petitions with a grain of salt... A recent petition asked for the US to construct a Space based Star-wars type Death star... > > http://theweek.com/article/index/238746/the-white-houses-nerd-delighting-death-star-petition-response > > Anyone with an agenda and 25,000 signatures can elicit an official response from the White House's "We the People" website. This being the internet and all, requests naturally tilt toward the edges: A petition for President Obama's impeachment, federally legalized marijuana, secession appeals, and a nationalized Twinkie industry. > > Over the weekend, the White House indulged Star Wars fans by issuing an official response to a popular request — that the U.S. government begin construction on a Death Star to be completed by 2016. Total signatures amassed: 34,435. > > > .... > > > -- > R. Guerra > Phone/Cell: +1 202-905-2081 > Twitter: twitter.com/netfreedom > Email: rguerra at privaterra.org > > On 2013-01-16, at 12:27 PM, michael gurstein wrote: > >> http://www.zdnet.com/un-plans-internet-governance-amid-outcry-to-defund-itu-7000009882/ (with multiple links). >> >> UN plans Internet governance amid outcry to defund ITU >> >> Summary: U.N. telecom arm ITU coordinates new internet governance plans; a petition demands ITU's U.S. funding stop, including donors Apple, Verizon, Cisco and more. >> Violet Blue >> >> By Violet Blue for Pulp Tech | January 16, 2013 -- 11:35 GMT (03:35 PST) >> >> A petition to de-fund the U.N.'s telecom arm emerges just as the ITU readies to hammer out internet governance plans at the World Telecommunication Information and Communication Technology Policy Forum meetings in February and May 2013. >> >> The website De-fund the ITU surfaced on the January NANOG (North American Network Operators' Group) email list. >> >> Its Whitehouse.gov petition De-fund the ITU demands the U.S. government stop its financial contributions to the ITU. >> >> It comes after the ITU's recent attempt at internet governance and monetization through tolls at its WCIT-12 summit in Dubai last month. >> >> The U.N. debacle prompted widespread internet outrage, an unprecedented unanimous U.S. House of Representatives vote in opposition, and refusal from 55 countries to sign the ITU's treaty. >> >> No matter - as usual, the ITU has its own plans. >> >> Five days ago ITU's Secretary-General Hamadoun Touré released the fourth and final ITU/WTPF-13 report outlining groundwork for internet governance (and internet regulatory topics) at upcoming meetings on February 6-8 and May 14-16. >> >> Discussions at WTPF-13 will be based on this report and will serve as the sole working document of the Forum. >> >> The ITU/WTPF-13 report explicitly includes the creation of "Global Principles for the governance and use of the Internet" and resolving issues pertaining to "use of Internet resources for purposes that are inconsistent with international peace, stability and security." >> >> The Report explains the current multistakeholder model of internet governance is "under discussion" and acknowledges that members Cisco, U.K., U.S., and ISOC view the current governance of the Internet as "sufficient." >> >> However, "with regards to international Internet-related public policy, the role of one stakeholder – Governments – has not been allowed to evolve." >> >> For the Policy Forum, the ITU also has 64 "informal Experts" weighing in. >> >> The "experts" are comprised mostly of Member State telecom representatives (UAE, Saudi Arabia, Iran, others), plus individuals representing the interests and opinions of Verizon, Cisco Systems, British Telecom, the FCC, The Internet Society, ARIN, ICANN, and PayPal. >> >> Who funds the ITU? >> >> The website promoting the petition, defundtheitu.org, provides details and ITU funding summaries showing which countries contribute to the ITU and the tech companies (Member Sectors) that provide millions to continue the ITU (and its subgroups) respective missions. >> >> According to The ITU’s 2012-2015 membership roll and dues one Contributory Unit is equivalent to CHF 318,000 (1 Swiss Franc equals $1.10). >> >> Currently the US pays 30 Contributory Units (nearly $11 million per year) to the ITU as does Japan, making the two countries its top donors. Other big contributors include Germany at 25 units, Italy: 15, Saudi Arabia: 13, China: 12, UK: 10, Russia: 10. >> >> Member Sector donations contribute additional monies to ITU subgroups. American Member Sector companies include Apple, AT&T, Cisco, Intel, Motorola, Sprint, Verizon and many more. >> >> (Member Sector entities pay self-elected Contributory Units for ITU-T, R and D participation currently set at one-tenth what Member States pay - 31,800 Swiss Francs per "member" contributory unit per sector.) >> >> Financial support for ITU is also provided by the U.S. in that international organizations - namely the ITU and its employees - are exempted from U.S. Federal tax withholding (Exhibit 5.19.11-13: International Organizations Exempt from Federal Withholding Requirements). >> >> WCIT-12 outrage, ITU duplicity, and aftermath >> >> One month ago the U.N.'s ITU held its World Conference on International Telecommunications (WCIT-12) in Dubai, where Member States proposed revisions to the International Telecommunication Regulations (ITR) - to expand jurisdiction over the Internet, such as creating pay-per-use tolls, heightening surveillance, and to give nation states increased control over the Internet. >> >> Global opposition created an epic backlash, fueled by the ITU's insistence to keep conference documents from the public - despite ITU's insistence its process was transparent. >> >> In response to ITU's secretive processes researchers at George Mason University created WCITLeaks, a website that solicited and shared copies of leaked WCIT/ITU documents. >> >> As WCIT-12 unfolded, leaked proposals revealed plans from Russia, China, and similar regimes for an ITU-supported play at WCIT-12 to define the internet as a system of government-controlled networks, among other deeply disturbing intents. >> >> Democratic and free speech organizations joined internet giants in the outcry, such as Google with its Take Action campaign, and the formation of country blocs included the U.S., the European Parliament, Canada, Mexico and more. >> >> See also: U.N. readies for protests on eve of secret Internet regulation treaty >> >> At WCIT conference end, the ITU went back on its specific promises that the treaty would not be about the internet and would not be put to a vote. >> >> Eli Dourado is a co-founder of WCITLeaks and was a member of the US delegation to WCIT-12. In Behind closed doors at the U.N.’s attempted "takeover of the Internet" Dourado wrote, >> >> The purpose of the meeting, claimed ITU Secretary-General Hamadoun Touré, was simply to update the treaty that governs international phone calls; it had last been revised in 1988, when most phone companies were state-owned monopolies. Claims that the conference would implicate the Internet were part of a misinformation campaign pursued by unnamed opponents of the ITU, Touré said. >> >> Dourado described how the ITU forced its treaty agreement with a vote that it insisted was not a vote: >> >> (...) What followed was surreal. The Chairman calmly said that he had a long list of countries wishing to speak, and that in lieu of going through the list, he was going to take the “feel of the room” by asking countries to hold up their voting boards if they supported the resolution as amended by the Secretary-General. After also asking for those against, the Chairman said simply, “The majority is with having the resolution in.” After some applause, he added, “Thank you. Now we can go to Corrigendum 2.” >> >> There were immediate inquiries from the UK and Spain as to whether we had just decided the issue by a vote. We had been promised, after all, that there would be no votes, that all decisions would be decided by consensus. In response to the UK’s inquiry, the Chairman replied, “The majority agreed to adopt the resolution as amended.” In response to Spain’s, the Chairman answered, “No, it was not a vote, and I was clear about it. Thank you, Spain.” >> >> De-fund the ITU claims, >> >> Their goal was a coup: to overthrow the open and transparent system of Internet governance that ensures the Internet’s freedom and accessibility, and replace it with their own central point of absolute control, through which policies of censorship and repression could be enacted. >> >> The U.S. and 54 countries revolted and refused to sign. This prompted subsequent headlines that claimed the ITU had failed its attempt at an Internet power-grab, and that the treaty was defeated. >> >> Meanwhile, some the 89 signing countries hurried home to begin implementation of the problematic new treaty. >> >> At The Internet Society's Post-WCIT Roundtable panel on December 21, U.S. Ambassador Terry Kramer, head of Delegation WCIT-12, expressed serious concern about what will happen as the 89 governments move toward treaty implementation. >> >> Amb. Kramer unequivocally stated that, "the ITU needs to step back from governance and content." He cautioned the room that America may have taken a stand against the treaty, but that "the U.S. does not own the internet." >> >> Kramer said, "The internet must be left alone." >> >> If the De-Fund The ITU petition and movement is successful in the U.S., the ITU stands to lose 7.7% of its budget. >> >> It could indeed hurt the slippery organization, which has had to increase the dollar amount of Contributory Units as membership and elected contributions have dwindled over the past decade. >> >> And if Secretary-General Hamadoun Touré's ITU/WTPF-13 far-reaching internet governance report is any indication, ITU needs the internet now more than ever. >> >> One thing is certain: the internet does not need the ITU. >> >> >> https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/de-fund-itu/mSJ49QcV?utm_source=wh.gov&utm_medium=shorturl&utm_campaign=shorturl >> >> Created: Jan 11, 2013 >> Issues: Budget and Taxes, Foreign Policy, Technology and Telecommunications >> >> Signatures needed by February 10, 2013 to reach goal of 25,000 >> 24,709 >> >> Total signatures on this petition >> 291 >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From nne75 at yahoo.com Wed Jan 16 13:15:33 2013 From: nne75 at yahoo.com (Nnenna) Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2013 10:15:33 -0800 (PST) Subject: [governance] ZDNet: UN plans Internet governance amid outcry to defund ITU + In-Reply-To: <50F6EB9A.3010209@cafonso.ca> References: <06f401cdf40e$d0ff8aa0$72fe9fe0$@gmail.com> <84031F12-8063-4638-9AB1-646D387DD8AA@privaterra.org> <50F6EB9A.3010209@cafonso.ca> Message-ID: <1358360133.69616.YahooMailNeo@web120101.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> +1.  The petition does not look like it will go anywhere. Plus the USA does not have a "huge de-funding" influence on the ITU. Did the US not defund UNESCO some time ago? Just saying..   ________________________________ From: Carlos A. Afonso To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org Sent: Wednesday, January 16, 2013 6:04 PM Subject: Re: [governance] ZDNet: UN plans Internet governance amid outcry to defund ITU + The Death Star petition might be more successful than the one trying to defund the ITU :) --c.a. On 01/16/2013 03:44 PM, Robert Guerra wrote: > Have to take the petitions with a grain of salt... A recent petition asked for the US to construct a Space based Star-wars type Death star... > > http://theweek.com/article/index/238746/the-white-houses-nerd-delighting-death-star-petition-response > > Anyone with an agenda and 25,000 signatures can elicit an official response from the White House's "We the People" website. This being the internet and all, requests naturally tilt toward the edges: A petition for President Obama's impeachment, federally legalized marijuana, secession appeals, and a nationalized Twinkie industry. > > Over the weekend, the White House indulged Star Wars fans by issuing an official response to a popular request — that the U.S. government begin construction on a Death Star to be completed by 2016. Total signatures amassed: 34,435. > > > .... > > > -- > R. Guerra > Phone/Cell: +1 202-905-2081 > Twitter: twitter.com/netfreedom > Email: rguerra at privaterra.org > > On 2013-01-16, at 12:27 PM, michael gurstein wrote: > >> http://www.zdnet.com/un-plans-internet-governance-amid-outcry-to-defund-itu-7000009882/ (with multiple links). >> >> UN plans Internet governance amid outcry to defund ITU >> >> Summary: U.N. telecom arm ITU coordinates new internet governance plans; a petition demands ITU's U.S. funding stop, including donors Apple, Verizon, Cisco and more. >> Violet Blue >> >> By Violet Blue for Pulp Tech | January 16, 2013 -- 11:35 GMT (03:35 PST) >> >> A petition to de-fund the U.N.'s telecom arm emerges just as the ITU readies to hammer out internet governance plans at the World Telecommunication Information and Communication Technology Policy Forum meetings in February and May 2013. >> >> The website De-fund the ITU surfaced on the January NANOG (North American Network Operators' Group) email list. >> >> Its Whitehouse.gov petition De-fund the ITU demands the U.S. government stop its financial contributions to the ITU. >> >> It comes after the ITU's recent attempt at internet governance and monetization through tolls at its WCIT-12 summit in Dubai last month. >> >> The U.N. debacle prompted widespread internet outrage, an unprecedented unanimous U.S. House of Representatives vote in opposition, and refusal from 55 countries to sign the ITU's treaty. >> >> No matter - as usual, the ITU has its own plans. >> >> Five days ago ITU's Secretary-General Hamadoun Touré released the fourth and final ITU/WTPF-13 report outlining groundwork for internet governance (and internet regulatory topics) at upcoming meetings on February 6-8 and May 14-16. >> >> Discussions at WTPF-13 will be based on this report and will serve as the sole working document of the Forum. >> >> The ITU/WTPF-13 report explicitly includes the creation of "Global Principles for the governance and use of the Internet" and resolving issues pertaining to "use of Internet resources for purposes that are inconsistent with international peace, stability and security." >> >> The Report explains the current multistakeholder model of internet governance is "under discussion" and acknowledges that members Cisco, U.K., U.S., and ISOC view the current governance of the Internet as "sufficient." >> >> However, "with regards to international Internet-related public policy, the role of one stakeholder – Governments – has not been allowed to evolve." >> >> For the Policy Forum, the ITU also has 64 "informal Experts" weighing in. >> >> The "experts" are comprised mostly of Member State telecom representatives (UAE, Saudi Arabia, Iran, others), plus individuals representing the interests and opinions of Verizon, Cisco Systems, British Telecom, the FCC, The Internet Society, ARIN, ICANN, and PayPal. >> >> Who funds the ITU? >> >> The website promoting the petition, defundtheitu.org, provides details and ITU funding summaries showing which countries contribute to the ITU and the tech companies (Member Sectors) that provide millions to continue the ITU (and its subgroups) respective missions. >> >> According to The ITU’s 2012-2015 membership roll and dues one Contributory Unit is equivalent to CHF 318,000 (1 Swiss Franc equals $1.10). >> >> Currently the US pays 30 Contributory Units (nearly $11 million per year) to the ITU as does Japan, making the two countries its top donors. Other big contributors include Germany at 25 units, Italy: 15, Saudi Arabia: 13, China: 12, UK: 10, Russia: 10. >> >> Member Sector donations contribute additional monies to ITU subgroups. American Member Sector companies include Apple, AT&T, Cisco, Intel, Motorola, Sprint, Verizon and many more. >> >> (Member Sector entities pay self-elected Contributory Units for ITU-T, R and D participation currently set at one-tenth what Member States pay - 31,800 Swiss Francs per "member" contributory unit per sector.) >> >> Financial support for ITU is also provided by the U.S. in that international organizations - namely the ITU and its employees - are exempted from U.S. Federal tax withholding (Exhibit 5.19.11-13: International Organizations Exempt from Federal Withholding Requirements). >> >> WCIT-12 outrage, ITU duplicity, and aftermath >> >> One month ago the U.N.'s ITU held its World Conference on International Telecommunications (WCIT-12) in Dubai, where Member States proposed revisions to the International Telecommunication Regulations (ITR) - to expand jurisdiction over the Internet, such as creating pay-per-use tolls, heightening surveillance, and to give nation states increased control over the Internet. >> >> Global opposition created an epic backlash, fueled by the ITU's insistence to keep conference documents from the public - despite ITU's insistence its process was transparent. >> >> In response to ITU's secretive processes researchers at George Mason University created WCITLeaks, a website that solicited and shared copies of leaked WCIT/ITU documents. >> >> As WCIT-12 unfolded, leaked proposals revealed plans from Russia, China, and similar regimes for an ITU-supported play at WCIT-12 to define the internet as a system of government-controlled networks, among other deeply disturbing intents. >> >> Democratic and free speech organizations joined internet giants in the outcry, such as Google with its Take Action campaign, and the formation of country blocs included the U.S., the European Parliament, Canada, Mexico and more. >> >>      See also: U.N. readies for protests on eve of secret Internet regulation treaty >> >> At WCIT conference end, the ITU went back on its specific promises that the treaty would not be about the internet and would not be put to a vote. >> >> Eli Dourado is a co-founder of WCITLeaks and was a member of the US delegation to WCIT-12. In Behind closed doors at the U.N.’s attempted "takeover of the Internet" Dourado wrote, >> >>      The purpose of the meeting, claimed ITU Secretary-General Hamadoun Touré, was simply to update the treaty that governs international phone calls; it had last been revised in 1988, when most phone companies were state-owned monopolies. Claims that the conference would implicate the Internet were part of a misinformation campaign pursued by unnamed opponents of the ITU, Touré said. >> >> Dourado described how the ITU forced its treaty agreement with a vote that it insisted was not a vote: >> >>      (...) What followed was surreal. The Chairman calmly said that he had a long list of countries wishing to speak, and that in lieu of going through the list, he was going to take the “feel of the room” by asking countries to hold up their voting boards if they supported the resolution as amended by the Secretary-General. After also asking for those against, the Chairman said simply, “The majority is with having the resolution in.” After some applause, he added, “Thank you. Now we can go to Corrigendum 2.” >> >>      There were immediate inquiries from the UK and Spain as to whether we had just decided the issue by a vote. We had been promised, after all, that there would be no votes, that all decisions would be decided by consensus. In response to the UK’s inquiry, the Chairman replied, “The majority agreed to adopt the resolution as amended.” In response to Spain’s, the Chairman answered, “No, it was not a vote, and I was clear about it. Thank you, Spain.” >> >> De-fund the ITU claims, >> >>      Their goal was a coup: to overthrow the open and transparent system of Internet governance that ensures the Internet’s freedom and accessibility, and replace it with their own central point of absolute control, through which policies of censorship and repression could be enacted. >> >> The U.S. and 54 countries revolted and refused to sign. This prompted subsequent headlines that claimed the ITU had failed its attempt at an Internet power-grab, and that the treaty was defeated. >> >> Meanwhile, some the 89 signing countries hurried home to begin implementation of the problematic new treaty. >> >> At The Internet Society's Post-WCIT Roundtable panel on December 21, U.S. Ambassador Terry Kramer, head of Delegation WCIT-12, expressed serious concern about what will happen as the 89 governments move toward treaty implementation. >> >> Amb. Kramer unequivocally stated that, "the ITU needs to step back from governance and content." He cautioned the room that America may have taken a stand against the treaty, but that "the U.S. does not own the internet." >> >> Kramer said, "The internet must be left alone." >> >> If the De-Fund The ITU petition and movement is successful in the U.S., the ITU stands to lose 7.7% of its budget. >> >> It could indeed hurt the slippery organization, which has had to increase the dollar amount of Contributory Units as membership and elected contributions have dwindled over the past decade. >> >> And if Secretary-General Hamadoun Touré's ITU/WTPF-13 far-reaching internet governance report is any indication, ITU needs the internet now more than ever. >> >> One thing is certain: the internet does not need the ITU. >> >> >> https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/de-fund-itu/mSJ49QcV?utm_source=wh.gov&utm_medium=shorturl&utm_campaign=shorturl >> >> Created: Jan 11, 2013 >> Issues: Budget and Taxes, Foreign Policy, Technology and Telecommunications >> >> Signatures needed by February 10, 2013 to reach goal of 25,000 >> 24,709 >> >> Total signatures on this petition >> 291 >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 > > ____________________________________________________________ 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: -------------- 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 From lmcknigh at syr.edu Wed Jan 16 13:27:05 2013 From: lmcknigh at syr.edu (Lee W McKnight) Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2013 18:27:05 +0000 Subject: [governance] FW: [IP] UN plans Internet governance amid outcry to defund ITU In-Reply-To: References: , Message-ID: <77A59FC9477004489D44DE7FC6840E7B1AFCB3@SUEX10-mbx-08.ad.syr.edu> fyi. All I got to say is - now that the ITU has Violet Blue and Steve Jobs from beyond the grave (see the comments on the Zdnet story) coming after them - well best of luck to my ITU friends getting through WTPF with their budget intact. On the 'defund the ITU' petition itself, I would take that only slightly more seriously than the 'build the death star' petition which the White House recently declined to act on. Lee ________________________________ From: Dave Farber [dave at farber.net] Sent: Wednesday, January 16, 2013 12:20 PM To: ip Subject: [IP] UN plans Internet governance amid outcry to defund ITU ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: "Dewayne Hendricks" > Date: Jan 16, 2013 12:06 PM Subject: [Dewayne-Net] UN plans Internet governance amid outcry to defund ITU To: "Multiple recipients of Dewayne-Net" > Cc: [Note: This item comes from friend Steve Goldstein. DLH] From: Steve Goldstein > Subject: UN plans Internet governance amid outcry to defund ITU | ZDNet Date: January 16, 2013 8:36:02 AM PST To: Hendricks Dewayne > UN plans Internet governance amid outcry to defund ITU By Violet Blue Jan 16, 2013 A petition to de-fund the U.N.'s telecom arm emerges just as the ITU readies to hammer out internet governance plans at the World Telecommunication Information and Communication Technology Policy Forum meetings in February and May 2013. The website De-fund the ITU surfaced on the January NANOG (North American Network Operators' Group) email list. Its Whitehouse.gov petition De-fund the ITU demands the U.S. government stop its financial contributions to the ITU. It comes after the ITU's recent attempt at internet governance and monetization through tolls at its WCIT-12 summit in Dubai last month. The U.N. debacle prompted widespread internet outrage, an unprecedented unanimous U.S. House of Representatives vote in opposition, and refusal from 55 countries to sign the ITU's treaty. No matter - as usual, the ITU has its own plans. Five days ago ITU's Secretary-General Hamadoun Touré released the fourth and final ITU/WTPF-13 report outlining groundwork for internet governance (and internet regulatory topics) at upcoming meetings on February 6-8 and May 14-16. Discussions at WTPF-13 will be based on this report and will serve as the sole working document of the Forum. ITU re-defines "multistakeholder" The ITU/WTPF-13 report explicitly includes the creation of "Global Principles for the governance and use of the Internet" and resolving issues pertaining to "use of Internet resources for purposes that are inconsistent with international peace, stability and security." The Report explains the current multistakeholder model of internet governance is "under discussion" and acknowledges that members Cisco, U.K., U.S., and ISOC view the current governance of the Internet as "sufficient." However, "with regards to international Internet-related public policy, the role of one stakeholder – Governments – has not been allowed to evolve." For the Policy Forum, the ITU also has 64 "informal Experts" weighing in. The "experts" are comprised mostly of Member State telecom representatives (UAE, Saudi Arabia, Iran, others), plus individuals representing the interests and opinions of Verizon, Cisco Systems, British Telecom, the FCC, The Internet Society, ARIN, ICANN, and PayPal. Who funds the ITU? The website promoting the petition, defundtheitu.org, provides details and ITU funding summaries showing which countries contribute to the ITU and the tech companies (Member Sectors) that provide millions to continue the ITU (and its subgroups) respective missions. According to The ITU’s 2012-2015 membership roll and dues one Contributory Unit is equivalent to CHF 318,000 (1 Swiss Franc equals $1.10). [snip] Dewayne-Net RSS Feed: Archives [https://www.listbox.com/images/feed-icon-10x10.jpg] | Modify Your Subscription | Unsubscribe Now [https://www.listbox.com/images/listbox-logo-small.png] -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.igcaucus.org To be removed from the list, visit: http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing For all other list information and functions, see: http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see: http://www.igcaucus.org/ Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t From ca at cafonso.ca Wed Jan 16 13:51:19 2013 From: ca at cafonso.ca (Carlos A. Afonso) Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2013 16:51:19 -0200 Subject: [governance] ZDNet: UN plans Internet governance amid outcry to defund ITU + In-Reply-To: <1358360133.69616.YahooMailNeo@web120101.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> References: <06f401cdf40e$d0ff8aa0$72fe9fe0$@gmail.com> <84031F12-8063-4638-9AB1-646D387DD8AA@privaterra.org> <50F6EB9A.3010209@cafonso.ca> <1358360133.69616.YahooMailNeo@web120101.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <50F6F6A7.3040205@cafonso.ca> Yes, they did and almost broke Unesco. --c.a. On 01/16/2013 04:15 PM, Nnenna wrote: > +1. The petition does not look like it will go anywhere. > Plus the USA does not have a "huge de-funding" influence on the ITU. > > Did the US not defund UNESCO some time ago? > > Just saying.. > > > > > > > > ________________________________ > From: Carlos A. Afonso > To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org > Sent: Wednesday, January 16, 2013 6:04 PM > Subject: Re: [governance] ZDNet: UN plans Internet governance amid outcry to defund ITU + > > The Death Star petition might be more successful than the one trying to > defund the ITU :) > > --c.a. > > On 01/16/2013 03:44 PM, Robert Guerra wrote: >> Have to take the petitions with a grain of salt... A recent petition asked for the US to construct a Space based Star-wars type Death star... >> >> http://theweek.com/article/index/238746/the-white-houses-nerd-delighting-death-star-petition-response >> >> Anyone with an agenda and 25,000 signatures can elicit an official response from the White House's "We the People" website. This being the internet and all, requests naturally tilt toward the edges: A petition for President Obama's impeachment, federally legalized marijuana, secession appeals, and a nationalized Twinkie industry. >> >> Over the weekend, the White House indulged Star Wars fans by issuing an official response to a popular request — that the U.S. government begin construction on a Death Star to be completed by 2016. Total signatures amassed: 34,435. >> >> >> .... >> >> >> -- >> R. Guerra >> Phone/Cell: +1 202-905-2081 >> Twitter: twitter.com/netfreedom >> Email: rguerra at privaterra.org >> >> On 2013-01-16, at 12:27 PM, michael gurstein wrote: >> >>> http://www.zdnet.com/un-plans-internet-governance-amid-outcry-to-defund-itu-7000009882/ (with multiple links). >>> >>> UN plans Internet governance amid outcry to defund ITU >>> >>> Summary: U.N. telecom arm ITU coordinates new internet governance plans; a petition demands ITU's U.S. funding stop, including donors Apple, Verizon, Cisco and more. >>> Violet Blue >>> >>> By Violet Blue for Pulp Tech | January 16, 2013 -- 11:35 GMT (03:35 PST) >>> >>> A petition to de-fund the U.N.'s telecom arm emerges just as the ITU readies to hammer out internet governance plans at the World Telecommunication Information and Communication Technology Policy Forum meetings in February and May 2013. >>> >>> The website De-fund the ITU surfaced on the January NANOG (North American Network Operators' Group) email list. >>> >>> Its Whitehouse.gov petition De-fund the ITU demands the U.S. government stop its financial contributions to the ITU. >>> >>> It comes after the ITU's recent attempt at internet governance and monetization through tolls at its WCIT-12 summit in Dubai last month. >>> >>> The U.N. debacle prompted widespread internet outrage, an unprecedented unanimous U.S. House of Representatives vote in opposition, and refusal from 55 countries to sign the ITU's treaty. >>> >>> No matter - as usual, the ITU has its own plans. >>> >>> Five days ago ITU's Secretary-General Hamadoun Touré released the fourth and final ITU/WTPF-13 report outlining groundwork for internet governance (and internet regulatory topics) at upcoming meetings on February 6-8 and May 14-16. >>> >>> Discussions at WTPF-13 will be based on this report and will serve as the sole working document of the Forum. >>> >>> The ITU/WTPF-13 report explicitly includes the creation of "Global Principles for the governance and use of the Internet" and resolving issues pertaining to "use of Internet resources for purposes that are inconsistent with international peace, stability and security." >>> >>> The Report explains the current multistakeholder model of internet governance is "under discussion" and acknowledges that members Cisco, U.K., U.S., and ISOC view the current governance of the Internet as "sufficient." >>> >>> However, "with regards to international Internet-related public policy, the role of one stakeholder – Governments – has not been allowed to evolve." >>> >>> For the Policy Forum, the ITU also has 64 "informal Experts" weighing in. >>> >>> The "experts" are comprised mostly of Member State telecom representatives (UAE, Saudi Arabia, Iran, others), plus individuals representing the interests and opinions of Verizon, Cisco Systems, British Telecom, the FCC, The Internet Society, ARIN, ICANN, and PayPal. >>> >>> Who funds the ITU? >>> >>> The website promoting the petition, defundtheitu.org, provides details and ITU funding summaries showing which countries contribute to the ITU and the tech companies (Member Sectors) that provide millions to continue the ITU (and its subgroups) respective missions. >>> >>> According to The ITU’s 2012-2015 membership roll and dues one Contributory Unit is equivalent to CHF 318,000 (1 Swiss Franc equals $1.10). >>> >>> Currently the US pays 30 Contributory Units (nearly $11 million per year) to the ITU as does Japan, making the two countries its top donors. Other big contributors include Germany at 25 units, Italy: 15, Saudi Arabia: 13, China: 12, UK: 10, Russia: 10. >>> >>> Member Sector donations contribute additional monies to ITU subgroups. American Member Sector companies include Apple, AT&T, Cisco, Intel, Motorola, Sprint, Verizon and many more. >>> >>> (Member Sector entities pay self-elected Contributory Units for ITU-T, R and D participation currently set at one-tenth what Member States pay - 31,800 Swiss Francs per "member" contributory unit per sector.) >>> >>> Financial support for ITU is also provided by the U.S. in that international organizations - namely the ITU and its employees - are exempted from U.S. Federal tax withholding (Exhibit 5.19.11-13: International Organizations Exempt from Federal Withholding Requirements). >>> >>> WCIT-12 outrage, ITU duplicity, and aftermath >>> >>> One month ago the U.N.'s ITU held its World Conference on International Telecommunications (WCIT-12) in Dubai, where Member States proposed revisions to the International Telecommunication Regulations (ITR) - to expand jurisdiction over the Internet, such as creating pay-per-use tolls, heightening surveillance, and to give nation states increased control over the Internet. >>> >>> Global opposition created an epic backlash, fueled by the ITU's insistence to keep conference documents from the public - despite ITU's insistence its process was transparent. >>> >>> In response to ITU's secretive processes researchers at George Mason University created WCITLeaks, a website that solicited and shared copies of leaked WCIT/ITU documents. >>> >>> As WCIT-12 unfolded, leaked proposals revealed plans from Russia, China, and similar regimes for an ITU-supported play at WCIT-12 to define the internet as a system of government-controlled networks, among other deeply disturbing intents. >>> >>> Democratic and free speech organizations joined internet giants in the outcry, such as Google with its Take Action campaign, and the formation of country blocs included the U.S., the European Parliament, Canada, Mexico and more. >>> >>> See also: U.N. readies for protests on eve of secret Internet regulation treaty >>> >>> At WCIT conference end, the ITU went back on its specific promises that the treaty would not be about the internet and would not be put to a vote. >>> >>> Eli Dourado is a co-founder of WCITLeaks and was a member of the US delegation to WCIT-12. In Behind closed doors at the U.N.’s attempted "takeover of the Internet" Dourado wrote, >>> >>> The purpose of the meeting, claimed ITU Secretary-General Hamadoun Touré, was simply to update the treaty that governs international phone calls; it had last been revised in 1988, when most phone companies were state-owned monopolies. Claims that the conference would implicate the Internet were part of a misinformation campaign pursued by unnamed opponents of the ITU, Touré said. >>> >>> Dourado described how the ITU forced its treaty agreement with a vote that it insisted was not a vote: >>> >>> (...) What followed was surreal. The Chairman calmly said that he had a long list of countries wishing to speak, and that in lieu of going through the list, he was going to take the “feel of the room” by asking countries to hold up their voting boards if they supported the resolution as amended by the Secretary-General. After also asking for those against, the Chairman said simply, “The majority is with having the resolution in.” After some applause, he added, “Thank you. Now we can go to Corrigendum 2.” >>> >>> There were immediate inquiries from the UK and Spain as to whether we had just decided the issue by a vote. We had been promised, after all, that there would be no votes, that all decisions would be decided by consensus. In response to the UK’s inquiry, the Chairman replied, “The majority agreed to adopt the resolution as amended.” In response to Spain’s, the Chairman answered, “No, it was not a vote, and I was clear about it. Thank you, Spain.” >>> >>> De-fund the ITU claims, >>> >>> Their goal was a coup: to overthrow the open and transparent system of Internet governance that ensures the Internet’s freedom and accessibility, and replace it with their own central point of absolute control, through which policies of censorship and repression could be enacted. >>> >>> The U.S. and 54 countries revolted and refused to sign. This prompted subsequent headlines that claimed the ITU had failed its attempt at an Internet power-grab, and that the treaty was defeated. >>> >>> Meanwhile, some the 89 signing countries hurried home to begin implementation of the problematic new treaty. >>> >>> At The Internet Society's Post-WCIT Roundtable panel on December 21, U.S. Ambassador Terry Kramer, head of Delegation WCIT-12, expressed serious concern about what will happen as the 89 governments move toward treaty implementation. >>> >>> Amb. Kramer unequivocally stated that, "the ITU needs to step back from governance and content." He cautioned the room that America may have taken a stand against the treaty, but that "the U.S. does not own the internet." >>> >>> Kramer said, "The internet must be left alone." >>> >>> If the De-Fund The ITU petition and movement is successful in the U.S., the ITU stands to lose 7.7% of its budget. >>> >>> It could indeed hurt the slippery organization, which has had to increase the dollar amount of Contributory Units as membership and elected contributions have dwindled over the past decade. >>> >>> And if Secretary-General Hamadoun Touré's ITU/WTPF-13 far-reaching internet governance report is any indication, ITU needs the internet now more than ever. >>> >>> One thing is certain: the internet does not need the ITU. >>> >>> >>> https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/de-fund-itu/mSJ49QcV?utm_source=wh.gov&utm_medium=shorturl&utm_campaign=shorturl >>> >>> Created: Jan 11, 2013 >>> Issues: Budget and Taxes, Foreign Policy, Technology and Telecommunications >>> >>> Signatures needed by February 10, 2013 to reach goal of 25,000 >>> 24,709 >>> >>> Total signatures on this petition >>> 291 >>> ____________________________________________________________ >>> 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 >> >> > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From ajp at glocom.ac.jp Wed Jan 16 13:59:22 2013 From: ajp at glocom.ac.jp (Adam Peake) Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2013 03:59:22 +0900 Subject: [governance] ZDNet: UN plans Internet governance amid outcry to defund ITU + In-Reply-To: <50F6F6A7.3040205@cafonso.ca> References: <06f401cdf40e$d0ff8aa0$72fe9fe0$@gmail.com> <84031F12-8063-4638-9AB1-646D387DD8AA@privaterra.org> <50F6EB9A.3010209@cafonso.ca> <1358360133.69616.YahooMailNeo@web120101.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <50F6F6A7.3040205@cafonso.ca> Message-ID: The US and UNESCO's an on/off kind of thing. They don't fund, they do, they don't. Currently they don't UNESCO would be a good counter against the ITU's Internet policy ambitions (but the ITU's much cheaper.) Adam On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 3:51 AM, Carlos A. Afonso wrote: > Yes, they did and almost broke Unesco. > > --c.a. > > > On 01/16/2013 04:15 PM, Nnenna wrote: >> >> +1. The petition does not look like it will go anywhere. >> Plus the USA does not have a "huge de-funding" influence on the ITU. >> >> Did the US not defund UNESCO some time ago? >> >> Just saying.. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> ________________________________ >> From: Carlos A. Afonso >> To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org >> Sent: Wednesday, January 16, 2013 6:04 PM >> Subject: Re: [governance] ZDNet: UN plans Internet governance amid outcry >> to defund ITU + >> >> The Death Star petition might be more successful than the one trying to >> defund the ITU :) >> >> --c.a. >> >> On 01/16/2013 03:44 PM, Robert Guerra wrote: >>> >>> Have to take the petitions with a grain of salt... A recent petition >>> asked for the US to construct a Space based Star-wars type Death star... >>> >>> >>> http://theweek.com/article/index/238746/the-white-houses-nerd-delighting-death-star-petition-response >>> >>> Anyone with an agenda and 25,000 signatures can elicit an official >>> response from the White House's "We the People" website. This being the >>> internet and all, requests naturally tilt toward the edges: A petition for >>> President Obama's impeachment, federally legalized marijuana, secession >>> appeals, and a nationalized Twinkie industry. >>> >>> Over the weekend, the White House indulged Star Wars fans by issuing an >>> official response to a popular request — that the U.S. government begin >>> construction on a Death Star to be completed by 2016. Total signatures >>> amassed: 34,435. >>> >>> >>> .... >>> >>> >>> -- >>> R. Guerra >>> Phone/Cell: +1 202-905-2081 >>> Twitter: twitter.com/netfreedom >>> Email: rguerra at privaterra.org >>> >>> On 2013-01-16, at 12:27 PM, michael gurstein wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> http://www.zdnet.com/un-plans-internet-governance-amid-outcry-to-defund-itu-7000009882/ >>>> (with multiple links). >>>> >>>> UN plans Internet governance amid outcry to defund ITU >>>> >>>> Summary: U.N. telecom arm ITU coordinates new internet governance plans; >>>> a petition demands ITU's U.S. funding stop, including donors Apple, Verizon, >>>> Cisco and more. >>>> Violet Blue >>>> >>>> By Violet Blue for Pulp Tech | January 16, 2013 -- 11:35 GMT (03:35 PST) >>>> >>>> A petition to de-fund the U.N.'s telecom arm emerges just as the ITU >>>> readies to hammer out internet governance plans at the World >>>> Telecommunication Information and Communication Technology Policy Forum >>>> meetings in February and May 2013. >>>> >>>> The website De-fund the ITU surfaced on the January NANOG (North >>>> American Network Operators' Group) email list. >>>> >>>> Its Whitehouse.gov petition De-fund the ITU demands the U.S. government >>>> stop its financial contributions to the ITU. >>>> >>>> It comes after the ITU's recent attempt at internet governance and >>>> monetization through tolls at its WCIT-12 summit in Dubai last month. >>>> >>>> The U.N. debacle prompted widespread internet outrage, an unprecedented >>>> unanimous U.S. House of Representatives vote in opposition, and refusal from >>>> 55 countries to sign the ITU's treaty. >>>> >>>> No matter - as usual, the ITU has its own plans. >>>> >>>> Five days ago ITU's Secretary-General Hamadoun Touré released the fourth >>>> and final ITU/WTPF-13 report outlining groundwork for internet governance >>>> (and internet regulatory topics) at upcoming meetings on February 6-8 and >>>> May 14-16. >>>> >>>> Discussions at WTPF-13 will be based on this report and will serve as >>>> the sole working document of the Forum. >>>> >>>> The ITU/WTPF-13 report explicitly includes the creation of "Global >>>> Principles for the governance and use of the Internet" and resolving issues >>>> pertaining to "use of Internet resources for purposes that are inconsistent >>>> with international peace, stability and security." >>>> >>>> The Report explains the current multistakeholder model of internet >>>> governance is "under discussion" and acknowledges that members Cisco, U.K., >>>> U.S., and ISOC view the current governance of the Internet as "sufficient." >>>> >>>> However, "with regards to international Internet-related public policy, >>>> the role of one stakeholder – Governments – has not been allowed to evolve." >>>> >>>> For the Policy Forum, the ITU also has 64 "informal Experts" weighing >>>> in. >>>> >>>> The "experts" are comprised mostly of Member State telecom >>>> representatives (UAE, Saudi Arabia, Iran, others), plus individuals >>>> representing the interests and opinions of Verizon, Cisco Systems, British >>>> Telecom, the FCC, The Internet Society, ARIN, ICANN, and PayPal. >>>> >>>> Who funds the ITU? >>>> >>>> The website promoting the petition, defundtheitu.org, provides details >>>> and ITU funding summaries showing which countries contribute to the ITU and >>>> the tech companies (Member Sectors) that provide millions to continue the >>>> ITU (and its subgroups) respective missions. >>>> >>>> According to The ITU’s 2012-2015 membership roll and dues one >>>> Contributory Unit is equivalent to CHF 318,000 (1 Swiss Franc equals $1.10). >>>> >>>> Currently the US pays 30 Contributory Units (nearly $11 million per >>>> year) to the ITU as does Japan, making the two countries its top donors. >>>> Other big contributors include Germany at 25 units, Italy: 15, Saudi Arabia: >>>> 13, China: 12, UK: 10, Russia: 10. >>>> >>>> Member Sector donations contribute additional monies to ITU subgroups. >>>> American Member Sector companies include Apple, AT&T, Cisco, Intel, >>>> Motorola, Sprint, Verizon and many more. >>>> >>>> (Member Sector entities pay self-elected Contributory Units for ITU-T, R >>>> and D participation currently set at one-tenth what Member States pay - >>>> 31,800 Swiss Francs per "member" contributory unit per sector.) >>>> >>>> Financial support for ITU is also provided by the U.S. in that >>>> international organizations - namely the ITU and its employees - are >>>> exempted from U.S. Federal tax withholding (Exhibit 5.19.11-13: >>>> International Organizations Exempt from Federal Withholding Requirements). >>>> >>>> WCIT-12 outrage, ITU duplicity, and aftermath >>>> >>>> One month ago the U.N.'s ITU held its World Conference on International >>>> Telecommunications (WCIT-12) in Dubai, where Member States proposed >>>> revisions to the International Telecommunication Regulations (ITR) - to >>>> expand jurisdiction over the Internet, such as creating pay-per-use tolls, >>>> heightening surveillance, and to give nation states increased control over >>>> the Internet. >>>> >>>> Global opposition created an epic backlash, fueled by the ITU's >>>> insistence to keep conference documents from the public - despite ITU's >>>> insistence its process was transparent. >>>> >>>> In response to ITU's secretive processes researchers at George Mason >>>> University created WCITLeaks, a website that solicited and shared copies of >>>> leaked WCIT/ITU documents. >>>> >>>> As WCIT-12 unfolded, leaked proposals revealed plans from Russia, China, >>>> and similar regimes for an ITU-supported play at WCIT-12 to define the >>>> internet as a system of government-controlled networks, among other deeply >>>> disturbing intents. >>>> >>>> Democratic and free speech organizations joined internet giants in the >>>> outcry, such as Google with its Take Action campaign, and the formation of >>>> country blocs included the U.S., the European Parliament, Canada, Mexico and >>>> more. >>>> >>>> See also: U.N. readies for protests on eve of secret Internet >>>> regulation treaty >>>> >>>> At WCIT conference end, the ITU went back on its specific promises that >>>> the treaty would not be about the internet and would not be put to a vote. >>>> >>>> Eli Dourado is a co-founder of WCITLeaks and was a member of the US >>>> delegation to WCIT-12. In Behind closed doors at the U.N.’s attempted >>>> "takeover of the Internet" Dourado wrote, >>>> >>>> The purpose of the meeting, claimed ITU Secretary-General >>>> Hamadoun Touré, was simply to update the treaty that governs international >>>> phone calls; it had last been revised in 1988, when most phone companies >>>> were state-owned monopolies. Claims that the conference would implicate the >>>> Internet were part of a misinformation campaign pursued by unnamed opponents >>>> of the ITU, Touré said. >>>> >>>> Dourado described how the ITU forced its treaty agreement with a vote >>>> that it insisted was not a vote: >>>> >>>> (...) What followed was surreal. The Chairman calmly said that he >>>> had a long list of countries wishing to speak, and that in lieu of going >>>> through the list, he was going to take the “feel of the room” by asking >>>> countries to hold up their voting boards if they supported the resolution as >>>> amended by the Secretary-General. After also asking for those against, the >>>> Chairman said simply, “The majority is with having the resolution in.” After >>>> some applause, he added, “Thank you. Now we can go to Corrigendum 2.” >>>> >>>> There were immediate inquiries from the UK and Spain as to >>>> whether we had just decided the issue by a vote. We had been promised, after >>>> all, that there would be no votes, that all decisions would be decided by >>>> consensus. In response to the UK’s inquiry, the Chairman replied, “The >>>> majority agreed to adopt the resolution as amended.” In response to Spain’s, >>>> the Chairman answered, “No, it was not a vote, and I was clear about it. >>>> Thank you, Spain.” >>>> >>>> De-fund the ITU claims, >>>> >>>> Their goal was a coup: to overthrow the open and transparent >>>> system of Internet governance that ensures the Internet’s freedom and >>>> accessibility, and replace it with their own central point of absolute >>>> control, through which policies of censorship and repression could be >>>> enacted. >>>> >>>> The U.S. and 54 countries revolted and refused to sign. This prompted >>>> subsequent headlines that claimed the ITU had failed its attempt at an >>>> Internet power-grab, and that the treaty was defeated. >>>> >>>> Meanwhile, some the 89 signing countries hurried home to begin >>>> implementation of the problematic new treaty. >>>> >>>> At The Internet Society's Post-WCIT Roundtable panel on December 21, >>>> U.S. Ambassador Terry Kramer, head of Delegation WCIT-12, expressed serious >>>> concern about what will happen as the 89 governments move toward treaty >>>> implementation. >>>> >>>> Amb. Kramer unequivocally stated that, "the ITU needs to step back from >>>> governance and content." He cautioned the room that America may have taken a >>>> stand against the treaty, but that "the U.S. does not own the internet." >>>> >>>> Kramer said, "The internet must be left alone." >>>> >>>> If the De-Fund The ITU petition and movement is successful in the U.S., >>>> the ITU stands to lose 7.7% of its budget. >>>> >>>> It could indeed hurt the slippery organization, which has had to >>>> increase the dollar amount of Contributory Units as membership and elected >>>> contributions have dwindled over the past decade. >>>> >>>> And if Secretary-General Hamadoun Touré's ITU/WTPF-13 far-reaching >>>> internet governance report is any indication, ITU needs the internet now >>>> more than ever. >>>> >>>> One thing is certain: the internet does not need the ITU. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/de-fund-itu/mSJ49QcV?utm_source=wh.gov&utm_medium=shorturl&utm_campaign=shorturl >>>> >>>> Created: Jan 11, 2013 >>>> Issues: Budget and Taxes, Foreign Policy, Technology and >>>> Telecommunications >>>> >>>> Signatures needed by February 10, 2013 to reach goal of 25,000 >>>> 24,709 >>>> >>>> Total signatures on this petition >>>> 291 >>>> ____________________________________________________________ >>>> 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 >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 >> > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From gurstein at gmail.com Wed Jan 16 14:17:15 2013 From: gurstein at gmail.com (michael gurstein) Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2013 11:17:15 -0800 Subject: [governance] List of Experts Giving Advice on Draft ITU Paper for the WTPF Message-ID: <080901cdf41e$1ecf7100$5c6e5300$@gmail.com> http://www.itu.int/md/S12-WTPF13IEG1-C-0003/en Probably worthwhile to note that included in this list of 119 there is one person (from LAC) who is clearly identifiable as Civil Society. NGO-Civil Society dealing with Telecom Regulation for Latin America Mr Gustavo PEÑA-QUIÑONES, NGO-Civil Society dealing with Telecom Regulation for Latin America M -------------- 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 From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com Wed Jan 16 15:19:00 2013 From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro) Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2013 09:19:00 +1300 Subject: [governance] Call for Volunteers for New NomCom In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Dear All, This is to advise that so far we have 21 Volunteers for the new Nominating Committee. We need 4 more volunteers to be able to run the selection process under the Charter. Thank you for all those that have volunteered and we welcome your participation. List of Current Volunteers as at 17th January, 2013 9:18am UTC+12 1. Kerry Brown 2. Mawaki Chango 3. Jeremy Malcolm 4. Tapani Tarvainen 5. Fouad Bajwa 6. Gideon Rop 7. Vincent Solomon Aliama 8. Mohamed Samir Zahran 9. Clement Martial Aboudem Bavou 10. Carlos Vera Quintana 11. Mwendwa Kivuva 12. Norbert Komlan Glakpe 13. Julián Casasbuenas G 14. Antonio Medina Gómez 15. José F. Callo Romero 16. Devon Blake 17. Tracey Naughton 18. Michel Tchonang Linze 19. Izumi Aizu 20. Carlos Watson 21. Jose Felix Arias Ynche -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com Wed Jan 16 15:40:23 2013 From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro) Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2013 09:40:23 +1300 Subject: [governance] Disappearance of Lao Civil Society Leader Message-ID: Dear All, I was sad to hear that Lao civil society leader Sombath Somphone, disappeared one month ago. Reports indicate that Mr. Sombath went missing on December 15, 2012 after being stopped at a police checkpoint in the capital city of Vientiane. Our thoughts are with Sombath Somphone and for others like him who are victimized for activism. Kind Regards, -- Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala P.O. Box 17862 Suva Fiji Twitter: @SalanietaT Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro Tel: +679 3544828 Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From skiden at gmail.com Wed Jan 16 15:43:13 2013 From: skiden at gmail.com (Sarah Kiden) Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2013 23:43:13 +0300 Subject: [governance] Call for Volunteers for New NomCom In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Dear Sala, I would like to volunteer too. Regards, Sarah On 1/16/13, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro wrote: > Dear All, > > This is to advise that so far we have 21 Volunteers for the new Nominating > Committee. We need 4 more volunteers to be able to run the selection > process under the Charter. Thank you for all those that have volunteered > and we welcome your participation. > > List of Current Volunteers as at 17th January, 2013 9:18am UTC+12 > > 1. Kerry Brown > > 2. Mawaki Chango > > 3. Jeremy Malcolm > > 4. Tapani Tarvainen > > 5. Fouad Bajwa > > 6. Gideon Rop > > 7. Vincent Solomon Aliama > > 8. Mohamed Samir Zahran > > 9. Clement Martial Aboudem Bavou > > 10. Carlos Vera Quintana > > 11. Mwendwa Kivuva > > 12. Norbert Komlan Glakpe > > 13. Julián Casasbuenas G > > 14. Antonio Medina Gómez > > 15. José F. Callo Romero > > 16. Devon Blake > > 17. Tracey Naughton > > 18. Michel Tchonang Linze > > 19. Izumi Aizu > > 20. Carlos Watson > > 21. Jose Felix Arias Ynche > -------------- 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 From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com Wed Jan 16 16:16:22 2013 From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro) Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2013 10:16:22 +1300 Subject: [governance] Has Facebook just unfriended its users? [new Graph Search #Joe Privacy] Message-ID: Interesting article on the news today, see below: Has Facebook just unfriended its users? Posted By TelecomTV One, 16 January 2013 | 0 Comments| (1) Tags: *Facebook * *social media * *Advertising * *Google * * bing * * Microsoft * *search * Facebook spooked many of its users within minutes of its “major” announcement yesterday of the company’s new Graph Search, which will delight advertisers but risk scaring the hell out of Joe Public. Guy Daniels reports. Facebook needed to do something. It was facing increasing criticism that it was no longer cool, whilst also trying to appease shareholders post-IPO over its revenue generating potential. And so it made its move. Could it satisfy both camps – its users and its shareholders? The answer appears to be “no”. During a press event yesterday evening, which (based on the countless live tweets and blogs) veered from baffling to incredulous and then to underwhelming, Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg took to the stage to inject some coolness back into the social networking site. His definition of cool: graphs. That’s right, graphs. Social graphs to be precise, which were lapped upped by the math nerds who instantly understood the power of this new search tool – it’s not web search, it’s Graph Search. It’s like a gigantic SQL query right there in your Facebook page. Orgasmic! But hang on, this ability to search and filter your friends likes, photos, locations, timeline – heck, entire social history – is a little bit intrusive, isn’t it? It certainly is, but Facebook was at pains to highlight that only information that you share with your friends will be included in searches. Still, best to check your privacy settings just in case… Of course, you and I won’t be the only ones using the social graph for filtering our connections – it will also be used by advertisers to hit us with extremely targeted advertising. It’s an incredibly powerful, and potentially lucrative, tool. But will Facebook users really want multi-national corporations knowing so much about you? The only way to truly prevent this is to close your account and go elsewhere, which is too much of a doomsday option for most users – for now. At least, that will be what Facebook is hoping. There’s no point having the world’s most powerful ad service if there’s no-one left to reach. There’s also not much point having this advanced functionality if users only spend part of their time on Facebook. What’s needed is for them to spend 100 per cent of their time on the site. Everything they do, from messaging to photo sharing, and even browsing, must be done on Facebook for this to truly be effective. Yes, I added browsing. This after all was one of the identified areas that Facebook needed to address if it was to compete better with Google, and now they have finally done it – sort of. Facebook was signed a deal with Microsoft to add its Bing search engine to the site. This was Zuckerberg’s attempt to steal Steve Job’s “one more thing” moment away from Apple – as towards the end of the press conference he uttered that famous phrase and the fans went wild with expectation. Could it be the Facebook Phone? Don’t be silly, it was only Bing. And great as Bing is, a partnership announcement is simply not cool. Zuckerberg is many things, but he is not the heir to Steve Jobs. As for those wild predictions about a Facebook phone – baseless. Zuckerberg had gone on record to say there wouldn’t be one. Do analysts really believe there is room in the market for another phone OS? Certainly not one that could hope to challenge Apple and Google in the short term. It’s not happening, Facebook didn’t make a hardware announcement, so get over it. Richard Windsor was one of the few analysts to guess right, commenting on his blog before the launch that: “Whatever Facebook announces today, the chances are that most commentators will get the wrong end of the stick. I do not believe for a second that Facebook wants to be like Apple. Instead I think this is about directing and keeping internet traffic for the benefit of its ability to sell targeted advertising.” Despite yesterday’s announcement, Facebook remains uncool to many of its users, especially the influential ones. They will no doubt have uttered a socially-correct “Meh” at the news. But does it matter? Even if Facebook doesn’t grow any larger than its current billion-strong community of active users. Even if many of its users wise up to the privacy issues and start purging old timeline data, or refuse to relax their privacy settings, does it matter? Facebook can start to capitalise financially on those who remain, and that’s still a huge community of users. Make cash while you can? It badly needs to improve on last year’s $4.2bn of revenues. The markets didn’t appear that impressed though, closing after hours trading down 2.7 per cent at $30.10 (remember, it opened back in May at a disappointing $38.23). Looks like the recent uptick since Christmas has come to an end. Here is how Zuckerberg described social graph during the event: “This is one of the neatest things we've done in awhile. Graph Search is a completely new way to search for information.” He added that: “it’s going to take years and years to index the whole Graph,” and that there would be a limited beta launch now, rolling out slowly in the months to come. He also very briefly touched on mobile, but only in the sense that social graph needs to expand from its English-only and website-only launch: “In the future there are obvious things we need to get to, like mobile.” Bottom line of all this – is this the right way for Facebook to encourage its users to increase its use of the site, by searching and divulging more information? The more they use the site, the more the social graph will learn about them and their habits, and the more the results of Graph Search will appeal to advertisers. So Google. If it can persuade its users that there are no privacy concerns, then maybe it will succeed. Does it have to be “cool”? Google isn’t all that cool (Google+ anyone?), but that doesn’t bother it. Cool is over-rated – but try telling that to a teenager. And there’s the rub – Facebook still thinks it needs to be cool and appealing to teens. If this target group starts to think it’s being exploited, then that’s not cool and they will walk away from the service. In attempting to encourage (force?) its users to do more on the site (“more” being activity that is advertiser-friendly of course), Facebook risks shooting itself in the foot. This could backfire badly. Time to unfriend. Source: http://www.telecomtv.com/comspace_newsDetail.aspx?n=49873&id=e9381817-0593-417a-8639-c4c53e2a2a10&utm_campaign=DailyNews160113HasFBJustUnfriended&utm_medium=email&utm_source=TTV-Daily-News-Alert -- Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala P.O. Box 17862 Suva Fiji Twitter: @SalanietaT Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro Tel: +679 3544828 Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From jcurran at istaff.org Wed Jan 16 16:43:35 2013 From: jcurran at istaff.org (John Curran) Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2013 11:43:35 -1000 Subject: [governance] Potential changes w.r.t EULA violations as felony (was: Aaron Swartz passing) In-Reply-To: <516EA786-21A2-4D96-A213-9E0FEE427722@istaff.org> References: <516EA786-21A2-4D96-A213-9E0FEE427722@istaff.org> Message-ID: On Jan 12, 2013, at 10:42 AM, John Curran wrote: > Some of you may be aware of Aaron Swartz and his efforts in open access to information. > Alas, no more: http://blog.archive.org/2013/01/12/aaron-swartz-hero-of-the-open-world-rip/ FYI, /John -------------- 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 From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com Wed Jan 16 16:57:46 2013 From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro) Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2013 10:57:46 +1300 Subject: [governance] Potential changes w.r.t EULA violations as felony (was: Aaron Swartz passing) In-Reply-To: References: <516EA786-21A2-4D96-A213-9E0FEE427722@istaff.org> Message-ID: On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 10:43 AM, John Curran wrote: > On Jan 12, 2013, at 10:42 AM, John Curran wrote: > > > Some of you may be aware of Aaron Swartz and his efforts in open access > to information. > > Alas, no more: > http://blog.archive.org/2013/01/12/aaron-swartz-hero-of-the-open-world-rip/ > > < > http://business.time.com/2013/01/16/aaron-swartzs-suicide-triggers-response-from-us-lawmakers/ > > > > FYI, > /John > > Thanks John. It's really good to see the developments with shifts in > social consciousness as espoused within Representative Zoe Logfren led > reforms inspired by Aaron and the distinction between a Terms of Service > violation and Federal Data theft. > See: > http://www.lofgren.house.gov/images/stories/pdf/draft%20lofgren%20bill%20to%20exclude%20terms%20of%20service%20violations%20from%20cfaa%20%20wre%20fraud%20011513.pdf > > It will be great to get as much support over social media as possible and awareness. Sala > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > -- Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala P.O. Box 17862 Suva Fiji Twitter: @SalanietaT Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro Tel: +679 3544828 Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From devonrb at gmail.com Wed Jan 16 17:21:02 2013 From: devonrb at gmail.com (Devon Blake) Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2013 17:21:02 -0500 Subject: [governance] From Geneva on 2013 MAG selection process In-Reply-To: <072f01cdf410$5914ec90$0b3ec5b0$@gmail.com> References: <50F6E18B.7090302@communisphere.com> <072f01cdf410$5914ec90$0b3ec5b0$@gmail.com> Message-ID: Tom, So our focus now is to select four ...or five persons from the list to send to the appropriate authority. next steps? dB On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 12:38 PM, michael gurstein wrote: > Tom,**** > > ** ** > > :)… **** > > ** ** > > "NY" is intra-UN lingo for UN-HQ, which, although uneasily, from time to > time, is based in NY-C. :) - from whence of course, come the decisions > concerning the composition of the MAG. **** > > ** ** > > M**** > > ** ** > > ** ** > > *From:* governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto: > governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] *On Behalf Of *Thomas Lowenhaupt > *Sent:* Wednesday, January 16, 2013 9:21 AM > *To:* governance list IG Caucus > *Subject:* [governance] From Geneva on 2013 MAG selection process**** > > ** ** > > Here's an email from Chengetai Masango in Geneva about the state of the > MAG nominations. > > Best, > > Tom Lowenhaupt > > P.S. Not sure why the reference to NY is there. Perhaps we're > underrepresented? **** > > > > -------- Original Message -------- **** > > *Subject: * > > Re: Questions about 2013 MAG selection process**** > > *Date: * > > Wed, 16 Jan 2013 14:17:45 +0100**** > > *From: * > > Chengetai Masango **** > > *To: * > > Thomas Lowenhaupt **** > > *CC: * > > Farzaneh BADII , Salanieta T. > Tamanikaiwaimaro > **** > > > > HI Thomas **** > > ** ** > > Civil Society is one of the stakeholder groups that are most up to date as > far as the rotation is concerned.**** > > ** ** > > The majority seem to have been renewed during the last rotation.**** > > ** ** > > I think if you send three or four names (to give NY a choice) that should > be more than enough.**** > > ** ** > > Best regards **** > > ** ** > > Chengetai **** > > ** ** > > ** ** > > ** ** > > On Jan 15, 2013, at 11:38 PM, Thomas Lowenhaupt > wrote:**** > > ** ** > > I am the Chair of the Civil Society Internet Governance Caucus Nominating > Committee charged with selecting names of IGC members to put forth for > selection to the 2013 MAG. Thirty five (35) IGC members have been > nominated. Our review and selection process would be aided if you would > provide some insight into the process you will be following in selecting > 2013 MAG members. > > We have been advised that DESA might rotate 1/3 of the MAG's 55 members > this year, roughly 18 members. That those appointed to the MAG last year > are more than likely to remain, and that their reapplication at this point > would be unnecessary. > > It is expected that more than one civil society organization is likely to > provide DESA with MAG nominees. The IGC has over 30 applicants for what > looks to be a possible 18 vacant MAG seats. > > The IGC's Nominating Committee members are well aware of the credentials > and suitability of our nominees and in the best position to select the > cream from amongst them. This would provide DESA with a highly qualified > group of nominees from which to choose its MAG appointees. We are prepared > to take the difficult task of narrowing down the applicant pool from 35 as > appropriate. > > We would greatly appreciate your providing some guidance as to the number > of nominees from IGC that would most fruitfully meet the needs of DESA. > > Sincerely,**** > > ** ** > > Thomas Lowenhaupt, Non Voting Chair > Internet Governance Caucus Nominating Committee**** > > ** ** > > ** ** > > ** ** > > ** ** > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > -- Devon Blake Special Projects Director Earthwise Solutions Limited 29 Dominica Drive Kgn 5 ,Phone: Office 876-968-4534, Mobile, 876-483-2632 To be kind, To be helpful, To network *Earthwise ... For Life!* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From ian.peter at ianpeter.com Wed Jan 16 17:34:32 2013 From: ian.peter at ianpeter.com (Ian Peter) Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2013 09:34:32 +1100 Subject: [governance] From Geneva on 2013 MAG selection process In-Reply-To: References: <50F6E18B.7090302@communisphere.com><072f01cdf410$5914ec90$0b3ec5b0$@gmail.com> Message-ID: <2B55D8D39C084EC88659530F68397418@Toshiba> my personal feeling is not to restrict the nomcom to a particular number. it doesnt matter if its a little larger than that, and in fact that might be useful when decisions are made across stakeholder groups as regards geographic and gender balance. Ian Peter From: Devon Blake Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2013 9:21 AM To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org ; michael gurstein Cc: Thomas Lowenhaupt Subject: Re: [governance] From Geneva on 2013 MAG selection process Tom, So our focus now is to select four ...or five persons from the list to send to the appropriate authority. next steps? dB On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 12:38 PM, michael gurstein wrote: Tom, :)… "NY" is intra-UN lingo for UN-HQ, which, although uneasily, from time to time, is based in NY-C. :) - from whence of course, come the decisions concerning the composition of the MAG. M From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Thomas Lowenhaupt Sent: Wednesday, January 16, 2013 9:21 AM To: governance list IG Caucus Subject: [governance] From Geneva on 2013 MAG selection process Here's an email from Chengetai Masango in Geneva about the state of the MAG nominations. Best, Tom Lowenhaupt P.S. Not sure why the reference to NY is there. Perhaps we're underrepresented? -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: Questions about 2013 MAG selection process Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2013 14:17:45 +0100 From: Chengetai Masango mailto:cmasango at unog.ch To: Thomas Lowenhaupt mailto:toml at communisphere.com CC: Farzaneh BADII mailto:FBADII at unog.ch, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro mailto:salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com HI Thomas Civil Society is one of the stakeholder groups that are most up to date as far as the rotation is concerned. The majority seem to have been renewed during the last rotation. I think if you send three or four names (to give NY a choice) that should be more than enough. Best regards Chengetai On Jan 15, 2013, at 11:38 PM, Thomas Lowenhaupt wrote: I am the Chair of the Civil Society Internet Governance Caucus Nominating Committee charged with selecting names of IGC members to put forth for selection to the 2013 MAG. Thirty five (35) IGC members have been nominated. Our review and selection process would be aided if you would provide some insight into the process you will be following in selecting 2013 MAG members. We have been advised that DESA might rotate 1/3 of the MAG's 55 members this year, roughly 18 members. That those appointed to the MAG last year are more than likely to remain, and that their reapplication at this point would be unnecessary. It is expected that more than one civil society organization is likely to provide DESA with MAG nominees. The IGC has over 30 applicants for what looks to be a possible 18 vacant MAG seats. The IGC's Nominating Committee members are well aware of the credentials and suitability of our nominees and in the best position to select the cream from amongst them. This would provide DESA with a highly qualified group of nominees from which to choose its MAG appointees. We are prepared to take the difficult task of narrowing down the applicant pool from 35 as appropriate. We would greatly appreciate your providing some guidance as to the number of nominees from IGC that would most fruitfully meet the needs of DESA. Sincerely, Thomas Lowenhaupt, Non Voting Chair Internet Governance Caucus Nominating Committee ____________________________________________________________ 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 -- Devon Blake Special Projects Director Earthwise Solutions Limited 29 Dominica Drive Kgn 5 ,Phone: Office 876-968-4534, Mobile, 876-483-2632 To be kind, To be helpful, To network Earthwise ... For Life! -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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: -------------- 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 From gurstein at gmail.com Wed Jan 16 21:11:20 2013 From: gurstein at gmail.com (michael gurstein) Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2013 18:11:20 -0800 Subject: [governance] Multistakeholder Roles and Responsibilities Message-ID: <01c801cdf457$f76a3fc0$e63ebf40$@gmail.com> In going through the FOURTH DRAFT OF THE SECRETARY-GENERAL'S REPORT for the Fifth World Telecommunication/Information and Communication Technology Policy Forum 2013 (WTPF) http://www.itu.int/en/wtpf-13/Pages/report-sg.aspx I came across this, below as the definition of multi-stakeholderism as (presumably) currently understood in various UN fora (it is what was used, I believe at WSIS... note particularly d) iii. below... d) The roles and responsibilities of each stakeholder group are specified in para. 35 of the Tunis Agenda, which states that: "The management of the Internet encompasses both technical and public policy issues and should involve all stakeholders and relevant intergovernmental and international organizations. In this respect, it is recognized that: i. Policy authority for Internet-related public policy issues is the sovereign right of States. They have rights and responsibilities for international Internet-related public policy issues, complemented by relevant legislation being enacted by appropriate law-making bodies (including Parliaments, etc.). ii. The private sector has had, and should continue to have, an important role in the development of the Internet, both in the technical and economic fields. iii. Civil society has also played an important role on Internet matters, especially at community level, and should continue to play such a role. iv. Intergovernmental organizations have had, and should continue to have, a facilitating role in the coordination of Internet-related public policy issues. v. International organizations have also had and should continue to have an important role in the development of Internet-related technical standards and relevant policies". -------------- 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 From jeremy at ciroap.org Wed Jan 16 21:36:48 2013 From: jeremy at ciroap.org (Jeremy Malcolm) Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2013 10:36:48 +0800 Subject: [governance] Multistakeholder Roles and Responsibilities In-Reply-To: <01c801cdf457$f76a3fc0$e63ebf40$@gmail.com> References: <01c801cdf457$f76a3fc0$e63ebf40$@gmail.com> Message-ID: <50F763C0.5070907@ciroap.org> On 17/01/13 10:11, michael gurstein wrote: > In going through the FOURTH DRAFT OF THE SECRETARY-GENERAL'S REPORT for the > Fifth World Telecommunication/Information and Communication Technology > Policy Forum 2013 (WTPF) http://www.itu.int/en/wtpf-13/Pages/report-sg.aspx > I came across this, below as the definition of multi-stakeholderism as > (presumably) currently understood in various UN fora (it is what was used, I > believe at WSIS... note particularly d) iii. below... That part is all well and good, but the part that worries me (sorry if you already heard from me about this on another list) is the treatment of "The Multi-stakeholder Model" in the draft, in which it is correctly stated that "A divergence in opinion is observed in the implementation of the WSIS multistakeholder model in the current Internet governance ecosystem", but that this is a divergence between only two views, one of which is that "the current governance of the Internet is sufficiently multistakeholder and inclusive in terms of involvement of all stakeholder groups" (attributed to Cisco, UK, USA and ISOC), and the second (attributed to Saudi Arabia and Sudan and Algeria!) that "with regards to international Internet-related public policy, the role of one stakeholder – Governments – has not been allowed to evolve according to WSIS principles". What about the third, missing view - that the current governance of the Internet is NOT sufficiently multistakeholder and inclusive in terms of involvement of all stakeholder groups, but that rather than governments being left out, it is civil society! We can point to so many examples of this, beginning at the ITU itself. I think the report needs to be changed to correct this erroneous characteristion of the multi-stakeholder model of Internet governance. However the ITU is only receiving submissions from members (there is an open platform for general comments, but they won't be received as direct inputs to the SG's report). We will therefore need to put in our submission either through a friendly government (those who were members of delegations at WCIT will already have these connections), or through a sector member. Consumers International has applied for sector membership, but our application does not come up for consideration until June. We do have a CI member who is a sector member, but is there anyone else on this list who also is (and who is less status-quoist than ISOC)? If not I will work with my member on some text. -- *Dr Jeremy Malcolm Senior Policy Officer Consumers International | the global campaigning voice for consumers* Office for Asia-Pacific and the Middle East Lot 5-1 Wisma WIM, 7 Jalan Abang Haji Openg, TTDI, 60000 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia Tel: +60 3 7726 1599 *Your rights, our mission – download CI's Strategy 2015:* http://consint.info/RightsMission @Consumers_Int | www.consumersinternational.org | www.facebook.com/consumersinternational Read our email confidentiality notice . Don't print this email unless necessary. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From jstyre at jstyre.com Wed Jan 16 21:40:22 2013 From: jstyre at jstyre.com (James S. Tyre) Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2013 18:40:22 -0800 Subject: [governance] Potential changes w.r.t EULA violations as felony (was: Aaron Swartz passing) In-Reply-To: References: <516EA786-21A2-4D96-A213-9E0FEE427722@istaff.org> Message-ID: <033301cdf45b$fff1f260$ffd5d720$@jstyre.com> Lofgren's bill, if passed, would solve some (not all) of the problems with CFAA. The flip side is that there are two other bills pending in Congress which, if passed, would expand the scope of CFAA, not narrow it, and would increase the penalties for violating CFAA. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c112:S.3569: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c112:H.R.4263: -- James S. Tyre Law Offices of James S. Tyre 10736 Jefferson Blvd., #512 Culver City, CA 90230-4969 310-839-4114/310-839-4602(fax) jstyre at jstyre.com Policy Fellow, Electronic Frontier Foundation https://www.eff.org From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro Sent: Wednesday, January 16, 2013 1:58 PM To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; John Curran Subject: Re: [governance] Potential changes w.r.t EULA violations as felony (was: Aaron Swartz passing) On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 10:43 AM, John Curran wrote: On Jan 12, 2013, at 10:42 AM, John Curran wrote: > Some of you may be aware of Aaron Swartz and his efforts in open access to information. > Alas, no more: http://blog.archive.org/2013/01/12/aaron-swartz-hero-of-the-open-world-rip/ FYI, /John Thanks John. It's really good to see the developments with shifts in social consciousness as espoused within Representative Zoe Logfren led reforms inspired by Aaron and the distinction between a Terms of Service violation and Federal Data theft. See: http://www.lofgren.house.gov/images/stories/pdf/draft%20lofgren%20bill%20to%20exclude%20te rms%20of%20service%20violations%20from%20cfaa%20%20wre%20fraud%20011513.pdf It will be great to get as much support over social media as possible and awareness. Sala ____________________________________________________________ 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 -- Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala P.O. Box 17862 Suva Fiji Twitter: @SalanietaT Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro Tel: +679 3544828 Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From omomeji at gmail.com Wed Jan 16 22:00:15 2013 From: omomeji at gmail.com (Abdul Jaleel Shittu) Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2013 11:00:15 +0800 Subject: [governance] Multistakeholder Roles and Responsibilities In-Reply-To: <01c801cdf457$f76a3fc0$e63ebf40$@gmail.com> References: <01c801cdf457$f76a3fc0$e63ebf40$@gmail.com> Message-ID: thanks for sharing this piece of info... Me and my colleagues are working on how to sustain Telecenter using stakeholder theory. This info really come handy Thanks On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 10:11 AM, michael gurstein wrote: > In going through the FOURTH DRAFT OF THE SECRETARY-GENERAL'S REPORT for the > Fifth World Telecommunication/Information and Communication Technology > Policy Forum 2013 (WTPF) http://www.itu.int/en/wtpf-13/Pages/report-sg.aspx > I came across this, below as the definition of multi-stakeholderism as > (presumably) currently understood in various UN fora (it is what was used, I > believe at WSIS... note particularly d) iii. below... > > d) The roles and responsibilities of each stakeholder group are > specified in para. 35 of the Tunis Agenda, which states that: > "The management of the Internet encompasses both technical and public policy > issues and should involve all stakeholders and relevant intergovernmental > and international organizations. In this respect, it is recognized that: > i. Policy authority for Internet-related public policy issues > is the sovereign right of States. They have rights and responsibilities for > international Internet-related public policy issues, complemented by > relevant legislation being enacted by appropriate law-making bodies > (including Parliaments, etc.). > ii. The private sector has had, and should continue to have, an > important role in the development of the Internet, both in the technical and > economic fields. > iii. Civil society has also played an important role on Internet > matters, especially at community level, and should continue to play such a > role. > iv. Intergovernmental organizations have had, and should > continue to have, a facilitating role in the coordination of > Internet-related public policy issues. > v. International organizations have also had and should > continue to have an important role in the development of Internet-related > technical standards and relevant policies". > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > -- .................................................. Abdul Jaleel Kehinde Shittu (PhD) Senior Lecturer School of Computing College of Arts and Sciences University Utara Malaysia (Nothern University Malaysia) -------------- 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 From parminder at itforchange.net Wed Jan 16 22:21:05 2013 From: parminder at itforchange.net (parminder) Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2013 08:51:05 +0530 Subject: [governance] Preliminary List of Nominees for the 2013 MAG - REQUIRES IMMEDIATE ATTENTION In-Reply-To: References: <50F4F7E3.70903@communisphere.com> <619E02E9-F3CF-4C65-8B86-799156F81A01@uzh.ch> <50F6808C.5070408@itforchange.net> Message-ID: <50F76E21.3030308@itforchange.net> On Wednesday 16 January 2013 06:14 PM, William Drake wrote: > Hi > > Parminder you are right, I was reporting what I was told but had not looked again at DESA statement. I would think that in saying SGs can resubmit the names of current MAG members for "re-election," they're saying that those who might normally be subject to rotation based on length of service might be retained anyway if a SG expresses continuing support for them (as we know there are people who've been on MAG since the beginning). I would not think that the statement means, e.g., that people who were just put on the MAG in the last cycle and hence wouldn't be subject to rotation based on length of service need to be re-endorsed. I see the UNDESA statement to mean that existing candidates also be renominated, in the sense of, using your term, being re-certified. It is well known that the MAG is freshly appointed every year, all its members. While there is an unwritten consensus that the number of years that any MAG member serves should be limited to three, this cannot be taken to mean that MAG members are appointed for a term of three years. They are appointed for one year at a time. Normally there should be no reason not to allow any member to do 3 years in a row, which kind of consistency has its value. However, it is obviously possible that due to whatever reasons any MAG member may not be reappointed after one or two year term. Now, renomination of MAG members should be a decision coming mostly from the stakeholder community that s/he represents. It certainly serves civil society to undertake a process of specifically renewing (or not) the nomination of any of the MAG members nominated by it. Such a process builds in accountability, a key civil society value. To repeat. I have nothing against any existing member, and I am almost 100 percent sure that all of them will be reconfirmed. But this is a specific decision that the nomcom should take on merit. And a regular process of always doing such 'recertifying' should become established in the IGC. (By the way, decertifying should extend not to just 1 year old MAG members but to all extant IGC nominated members. For instance, the LAC IG Caucus has done the right thing in renominating some names. ) > > > In either scenario, I would think Adam's solution is a sensible way to get this done promptly and focus the noncom's effort on what really needs doing. I do however find it rather odd that an existing IGC nominated MAG member should insist that either the matter of recertifying not be taken up at all, or that noncom simple issues a blanket endorsement without at all going into the merit of the case, that too without appending any disclaimer :). parminder > > On Jan 16, 2013, at 12:14 PM, Adam Peake wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> It says "Can..." >> >> So rather than doing something that as Bill says just makes DESA's job >> harder, how about asking the NomCom to come up with five new names, >> and in add a covering note saying we support the continuation of the >> CS members selected in May 2012 (I think three we proposed, Izumi, >> Bill and Lillian were selected from the names the NomCom selected in >> 2012, and apologies if I missed anyone). An endorsement. And ask >> that in their next full year they each report back (or they could >> coordinate and one report back). >> >> Seems the MAGs not been too busy. But would be very good if the >> digest of MAG mailing list >> could be >> updated again. > Well, debate is starting again on the interim chair position, but until the various SGs complete their own internal off line dialogues and express their preferences (due the 20th) it will be relatively slow… > > Bill >> >> >> >> >> On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 7:27 PM, parminder wrote: >>> On Tuesday 15 January 2013 09:31 PM, William Drake wrote: >>> >>> Hi >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> Put all that together, and the recommendation was: come up with like five >>> new names that are not already on the MAG. Names on a smaller list have a >>> higher probability of being viewed as strongly supported and eventually >>> picked than names on a big long list. >>> >>> The noncom's task will be easier if you skip adding steps DESA didn't ask >>> for like re-certifying extant members, and work off a shorter list with new >>> names… >>> >>> >>> However the fact is that DESA did ask for, to use your words 're-certifying >>> extant members', >>> >>> Below is an excerpt from the call for renewal ( >>> http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/component/content/article/121-preparatory-process/1264-announcement-on-the-mag- >>> ) >>> >>> "As in previous years, stakeholder groups can resubmit the names of current >>> MAG members for re-election......" >>> >>> This to me is clearly asking for recertifying extant members. And I think it >>> is a healthy practice.... Not that I have anything against any extant >>> member. >>> >>> Accordingly, I think extant members, on their own nomination or of other >>> people, should also be considered for nomination, as is the express desire >>> of UNDESA. And this has always been the practice. >>> >>> parminder >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> Cheers, >>> >>> Bill >>> >>> >>> On Jan 15, 2013, at 7:32 AM, Thomas Lowenhaupt >>> wrote: >>> >>> IGC List Members, >>> >>> The below 36 people have been self nominated or were nominated by another >>> IGC member to be on the 2013 MAG (the Internet Governance Forum's >>> Multistakeholder Advisory Group). >>> >>> It's a far larger list than any previous one with which I am familiar. And >>> the Nominating Committee has very little time to make a selection. >>> >>> So that we may properly review all eligible candidates, the Nominating >>> Committee would greatly appreciate your addressing the following as soon as >>> practicable. >>> >>> If you are not on this list and were inadvertently left off, please inform >>> the NomCom immediately. >>> If you are on the list and wish to be removed - that is, you do not wish to >>> serve on the 2013 MAG - please inform the NomCom as soon as possible. >>> Those indicating an interest in serving on the MAG and wishing to send >>> supporting documents, or having others send supporting documents to their >>> nominations, should assure their arrival by c.o.b. Thursday. This is >>> extremely tight but we must have the final decision completed by Saturday >>> with nominations to IGF by January 21. >>> >>> The preliminary full list of nominees are: >>> >>> Anriette Esterhuysen >>> Baudouin SCHOMBE >>> Brenden Kuerbis >>> Chaitanya Dhareshwar >>> Cheryl Langdon-Orr >>> Excel Asama Abel >>> Fatima Cambronero >>> Fouad Bajwa >>> Francis Augusto Medeiros >>> Gideon Rop >>> Ginger Paque >>> Graciela Selaimen >>> Hempal Shrestha >>> Imran Ahmed Shah >>> Izumi Aizu >>> Jamil Goheer >>> Jean-Yves Gatete >>> Jeremy Malcolm >>> Joao Carlos Caribe >>> José Félix Arias Ynche >>> Jose Francisco Callo Romero >>> Juan Manuel Rojas >>> Karim ATTOUMANI MOHAMED >>> Kossi AMESSINOU >>> Michael Gurstein >>> Mohamed Zahran >>> Mohamed Tijani BEN JEMAA >>> Robert Guerra >>> Robin Cross >>> Rudi Vansnick >>> Shahid Akbar >>> Shaila Mistry >>> Sonigitu Ekpe >>> Susan Chalmers >>> Tijani BEN JEMAA >>> Tim McGinnis >>> >>> Sincerely, >>> >>> Thomas Lowenhaupt, Non-voting chair >>> The Nominating Committee >>> >>> Voting Members of the NomCom: >>> >>> Wilson Abigaba >>> Shahid Akbar >>> Devon Blake >>> Dixie Hawtin >>> Asif Kabani >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> ____________________________________________________________ >>> 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 >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> ____________________________________________________________ >>> 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 >>> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From parminder at itforchange.net Wed Jan 16 22:25:17 2013 From: parminder at itforchange.net (parminder) Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2013 08:55:17 +0530 Subject: [governance] From Geneva on 2013 MAG selection process In-Reply-To: <50F6E18B.7090302@communisphere.com> References: <50F6E18B.7090302@communisphere.com> Message-ID: <50F76F1D.6060908@itforchange.net> On Wednesday 16 January 2013 10:51 PM, Thomas Lowenhaupt wrote: > Here's an email from Chengetai Masango in Geneva about the state of > the MAG nominations. Not sure why he is saying something contrary to what UNDESA statement clearly says (and has always said in earlier years) about renominating names if so desired. In the sense that every MAG is a fresh appointment for all its members. > > P.S. Not sure why the reference to NY is there. Perhaps we're > underrepresented? Simply because UNDESA at NY makes the decision..... parminder > > > -------- Original Message -------- > Subject: Re: Questions about 2013 MAG selection process > Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2013 14:17:45 +0100 > From: Chengetai Masango > To: Thomas Lowenhaupt > CC: Farzaneh BADII , Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro > > > > > HI Thomas > > Civil Society is one of the stakeholder groups that are most up to > date as far as the rotation is concerned. > > The majority seem to have been renewed during the last rotation. > > I think if you send three or four names (to give NY a choice) that > should be more than enough. > > Best regards > > Chengetai > > > > On Jan 15, 2013, at 11:38 PM, Thomas Lowenhaupt > > wrote: > >> I am the Chair of the Civil Society Internet Governance Caucus >> Nominating Committee charged with selecting names of IGC members to >> put forth for selection to the 2013 MAG. Thirty five (35) IGC members >> have been nominated. Our review and selection process would be aided >> if you would provide some insight into the process you will be >> following in selecting 2013 MAG members. >> >> We have been advised that DESA might rotate 1/3 of the MAG's 55 >> members this year, roughly 18 members. That those appointed to the >> MAG last year are more than likely to remain, and that their >> reapplication at this point would be unnecessary. >> >> It is expected that more than one civil society organization is >> likely to provide DESA with MAG nominees. The IGC has over 30 >> applicants for what looks to be a possible 18 vacant MAG seats. >> >> The IGC's Nominating Committee members are well aware of the >> credentials and suitability of our nominees and in the best position >> to select the cream from amongst them. This would provide DESA with a >> highly qualified group of nominees from which to choose its MAG >> appointees. We are prepared to take the difficult task of narrowing >> down the applicant pool from 35 as appropriate. >> >> We would greatly appreciate your providing some guidance as to the >> number of nominees from IGC that would most fruitfully meet the needs >> of DESA. >> >> Sincerely, >> >> Thomas Lowenhaupt, Non Voting Chair >> Internet Governance Caucus Nominating Committee >> >> > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From joana at varonferraz.com Wed Jan 16 22:55:18 2013 From: joana at varonferraz.com (Joana Varon) Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2013 01:55:18 -0200 Subject: [governance] Multistakeholder Roles and Responsibilities In-Reply-To: <50F763C0.5070907@ciroap.org> References: <01c801cdf457$f76a3fc0$e63ebf40$@gmail.com> <50F763C0.5070907@ciroap.org> Message-ID: Dear Jeremy and all, Regarding your observation and the fact that a couple of civil society representatives were able to have a meeting with Mr Toure during the WCIT and managed to deliver to him our statement that reinforced some points of the best bits statement, including demands for an open participation of CS in ITU processes, isn't it the time to recall him of our *"Civil Society statement on the new ITRs and the future of multi-stakeholder engagement*" and try to ask for the changes he has promised to try to make during our meeting? Please, correct me if it seams too naive, but if we go again through these alternative channels to submit our comments and so on( such as CS being part of government delegation - it's own or other "friendly" governements, or just engaging with sector members), we will just repeat the quite frustrating (lack of) participation scenery of WCIT at WTPF. Maybe Wolfgang, Avri or other fellows that have attended WCIT could have some thoughts to add on this. best, joana -- Joana Varon Ferraz Centro de Tecnologia e Sociedade (CTS-FGV) http://direitorio.fgv.br/cts/ www.freenetfilm.org @joana_varon ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Jeremy Malcolm Date: Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 12:36 AM Subject: Re: [governance] Multistakeholder Roles and Responsibilities To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org Cc: "" On 17/01/13 10:11, michael gurstein wrote: In going through the FOURTH DRAFT OF THE SECRETARY-GENERAL'S REPORT for the Fifth World Telecommunication/Information and Communication Technology Policy Forum 2013 (WTPF) http://www.itu.int/en/wtpf-13/Pages/report-sg.aspx I came across this, below as the definition of multi-stakeholderism as (presumably) currently understood in various UN fora (it is what was used, I believe at WSIS... note particularly d) iii. below... That part is all well and good, but the part that worries me (sorry if you already heard from me about this on another list) is the treatment of "The Multi-stakeholder Model" in the draft, in which it is correctly stated that "A divergence in opinion is observed in the implementation of the WSIS multistakeholder model in the current Internet governance ecosystem", but that this is a divergence between only two views, one of which is that "the current governance of the Internet is sufficiently multistakeholder and inclusive in terms of involvement of all stakeholder groups" (attributed to Cisco, UK, USA and ISOC), and the second (attributed to Saudi Arabia and Sudan and Algeria!) that "with regards to international Internet-related public policy, the role of one stakeholder – Governments – has not been allowed to evolve according to WSIS principles". What about the third, missing view - that the current governance of the Internet is NOT sufficiently multistakeholder and inclusive in terms of involvement of all stakeholder groups, but that rather than governments being left out, it is civil society! We can point to so many examples of this, beginning at the ITU itself. I think the report needs to be changed to correct this erroneous characteristion of the multi-stakeholder model of Internet governance. However the ITU is only receiving submissions from members (there is an open platform for general comments, but they won't be received as direct inputs to the SG's report). We will therefore need to put in our submission either through a friendly government (those who were members of delegations at WCIT will already have these connections), or through a sector member. Consumers International has applied for sector membership, but our application does not come up for consideration until June. We do have a CI member who is a sector member, but is there anyone else on this list who also is (and who is less status-quoist than ISOC)? If not I will work with my member on some text. -- *Dr Jeremy Malcolm Senior Policy Officer Consumers International | the global campaigning voice for consumers* Office for Asia-Pacific and the Middle East Lot 5-1 Wisma WIM, 7 Jalan Abang Haji Openg, TTDI, 60000 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia Tel: +60 3 7726 1599 *Your rights, our mission – download CI's Strategy 2015:* http://consint.info/RightsMission @Consumers_Int | www.consumersinternational.org | www.facebook.com/consumersinternational Read our email confidentiality notice. Don't print this email unless necessary. ____________________________________________________________ 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: -------------- 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 -------------- 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 From ajp at glocom.ac.jp Thu Jan 17 02:05:47 2013 From: ajp at glocom.ac.jp (Adam Peake) Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2013 16:05:47 +0900 Subject: [governance] CSTD Working Group on Enhanced Cooperation Message-ID: My understanding is CSTD will make a call for nominations sometime in late February. First, member states will propose their members (4 from each region plus representatives of Tunisia and Switzerland as WSIS host countries). Once the govt members are decided, there will be a call to find 5 representatives from business, civil society, technical and academic community and from intergovernmental organizations. So the caucus NomCom should be in place by mid-February. And we can think about criteria. Hope above accurate. Adam -------------- 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 From lnalwoga at gmail.com Thu Jan 17 02:09:00 2013 From: lnalwoga at gmail.com (Lillian Nalwoga) Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2013 10:09:00 +0300 Subject: [governance] Call for Volunteers for New NomCom In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hello Sala, Please add me to the list. thanks, Lillian On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 11:43 PM, Sarah Kiden wrote: > Dear Sala, > > I would like to volunteer too. > > Regards, > Sarah > > On 1/16/13, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro > wrote: > > Dear All, > > > > This is to advise that so far we have 21 Volunteers for the new > Nominating > > Committee. We need 4 more volunteers to be able to run the selection > > process under the Charter. Thank you for all those that have volunteered > > and we welcome your participation. > > > > List of Current Volunteers as at 17th January, 2013 9:18am UTC+12 > > > > 1. Kerry Brown > > > > 2. Mawaki Chango > > > > 3. Jeremy Malcolm > > > > 4. Tapani Tarvainen > > > > 5. Fouad Bajwa > > > > 6. Gideon Rop > > > > 7. Vincent Solomon Aliama > > > > 8. Mohamed Samir Zahran > > > > 9. Clement Martial Aboudem Bavou > > > > 10. Carlos Vera Quintana > > > > 11. Mwendwa Kivuva > > > > 12. Norbert Komlan Glakpe > > > > 13. Julián Casasbuenas G > > > > 14. Antonio Medina Gómez > > > > 15. José F. Callo Romero > > > > 16. Devon Blake > > > > 17. Tracey Naughton > > > > 18. Michel Tchonang Linze > > > > 19. Izumi Aizu > > > > 20. Carlos Watson > > > > 21. Jose Felix Arias Ynche > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From sonigituekpe at crossriverstate.gov.ng Thu Jan 17 03:33:40 2013 From: sonigituekpe at crossriverstate.gov.ng (Sonigitu Ekpe) Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2013 09:33:40 +0100 Subject: [governance] Multistakeholder Roles and Responsibilities In-Reply-To: References: <01c801cdf457$f76a3fc0$e63ebf40$@gmail.com> <50F763C0.5070907@ciroap.org> Message-ID: I think Joana is putting a good opinion to fastening processes. Thank you. Sonigitu On Jan 17, 2013 4:56 AM, "Joana Varon" wrote: > > Dear Jeremy and all, > > Regarding your observation and the fact that a couple of civil society representatives were able to have a meeting with Mr Toure during the WCIT and managed to deliver to him our statement that reinforced some points of the best bits statement, including demands for an open participation of CS in ITU processes, isn't it the time to recall him of our "Civil Society statement on the new ITRs and the future of multi-stakeholder engagement" and try to ask for the changes he has promised to try to make during our meeting? > > Please, correct me if it seams too naive, but if we go again through these alternative channels to submit our comments and so on( such as CS being part of government delegation - it's own or other "friendly" governements, or just engaging with sector members), we will just repeat the quite frustrating (lack of) participation scenery of WCIT at WTPF. > > Maybe Wolfgang, Avri or other fellows that have attended WCIT could have some thoughts to add on this. > > best, > > joana > > > > -- > > Joana Varon Ferraz > Centro de Tecnologia e Sociedade (CTS-FGV) > http://direitorio.fgv.br/cts/ > www.freenetfilm.org > @joana_varon > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: Jeremy Malcolm > Date: Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 12:36 AM > Subject: Re: [governance] Multistakeholder Roles and Responsibilities > To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org > Cc: "" > > > On 17/01/13 10:11, michael gurstein wrote: >> >> In going through the FOURTH DRAFT OF THE SECRETARY-GENERAL'S REPORT for the >> Fifth World Telecommunication/Information and Communication Technology >> Policy Forum 2013 (WTPF) http://www.itu.int/en/wtpf-13/Pages/report-sg.aspx >> I came across this, below as the definition of multi-stakeholderism as >> (presumably) currently understood in various UN fora (it is what was used, I >> believe at WSIS... note particularly d) iii. below... > > > That part is all well and good, but the part that worries me (sorry if you already heard from me about this on another list) is the treatment of "The Multi-stakeholder Model" in the draft, in which it is correctly stated that "A divergence in opinion is observed in the implementation of the WSIS multistakeholder model in the current Internet governance ecosystem", but that this is a divergence between only two views, one of which is that "the current governance of the Internet is sufficiently multistakeholder and inclusive in terms of involvement of all stakeholder groups" (attributed to Cisco, UK, USA and ISOC), and the second (attributed to Saudi Arabia and Sudan and Algeria!) that "with regards to international Internet-related public policy, the role of one stakeholder – Governments – has not been allowed to evolve according to WSIS principles". > > What about the third, missing view - that the current governance of the Internet is NOT sufficiently multistakeholder and inclusive in terms of involvement of all stakeholder groups, but that rather than governments being left out, it is civil society! We can point to so many examples of this, beginning at the ITU itself. > > I think the report needs to be changed to correct this erroneous characteristion of the multi-stakeholder model of Internet governance. However the ITU is only receiving submissions from members (there is an open platform for general comments, but they won't be received as direct inputs to the SG's report). We will therefore need to put in our submission either through a friendly government (those who were members of delegations at WCIT will already have these connections), or through a sector member. Consumers International has applied for sector membership, but our application does not come up for consideration until June. We do have a CI member who is a sector member, but is there anyone else on this list who also is (and who is less status-quoist than ISOC)? If not I will work with my member on some text. > > -- > > Dr Jeremy Malcolm > Senior Policy Officer > Consumers International | the global campaigning voice for consumers > Office for Asia-Pacific and the Middle East > Lot 5-1 Wisma WIM, 7 Jalan Abang Haji Openg, TTDI, 60000 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia > Tel: +60 3 7726 1599 > > Your rights, our mission – download CI's Strategy 2015: http://consint.info/RightsMission > > @Consumers_Int | www.consumersinternational.org | www.facebook.com/consumersinternational > > Read our email confidentiality notice. Don't print this email unless necessary. > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From Kivuva at transworldafrica.com Thu Jan 17 03:41:26 2013 From: Kivuva at transworldafrica.com (Kivuva) Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2013 11:41:26 +0300 Subject: [governance] From Geneva on 2013 MAG selection process In-Reply-To: <2B55D8D39C084EC88659530F68397418@Toshiba> References: <50F6E18B.7090302@communisphere.com> <072f01cdf410$5914ec90$0b3ec5b0$@gmail.com> <2B55D8D39C084EC88659530F68397418@Toshiba> Message-ID: On 17 January 2013 01:34, Ian Peter wrote: > my personal feeling is not to restrict the nomcom to a particular > number. it doesnt matter if its a little larger than that, and in fact that > might be useful when decisions are made across stakeholder groups as > regards geographic and gender balance. > Thank you Ian. Affirmative action is very important. > Ian Peter > > *From:* Devon Blake > *Sent:* Thursday, January 17, 2013 9:21 AM > *To:* governance at lists.igcaucus.org ; michael gurstein > *Cc:* Thomas Lowenhaupt > *Subject:* Re: [governance] From Geneva on 2013 MAG selection process > > Tom, > So our focus now is to select four ...or five persons from the list to > send to the appropriate authority. next steps? > dB > On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 12:38 PM, michael gurstein wrote: > >> Tom,**** >> >> **** >> >> :)… **** >> >> **** >> >> "NY" is intra-UN lingo for UN-HQ, which, although uneasily, from time to >> time, is based in NY-C. :) - from whence of course, come the decisions >> concerning the composition of the MAG. **** >> >> **** >> >> M**** >> >> **** >> >> **** >> >> *From:* governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto: >> governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] *On Behalf Of *Thomas Lowenhaupt >> *Sent:* Wednesday, January 16, 2013 9:21 AM >> *To:* governance list IG Caucus >> *Subject:* [governance] From Geneva on 2013 MAG selection process**** >> >> **** >> >> Here's an email from Chengetai Masango in Geneva about the state of the >> MAG nominations. >> >> Best, >> >> Tom Lowenhaupt >> >> P.S. Not sure why the reference to NY is there. Perhaps we're >> underrepresented? **** >> >> >> >> -------- Original Message -------- **** >> >> *Subject: * >> >> Re: Questions about 2013 MAG selection process**** >> >> *Date: * >> >> Wed, 16 Jan 2013 14:17:45 +0100**** >> >> *From: * >> >> Chengetai Masango mailto:cmasango at unog.ch **** >> >> *To: * >> >> Thomas Lowenhaupt mailto:toml at communisphere.com * >> *** >> >> *CC: * >> >> Farzaneh BADII mailto:FBADII at unog.ch , Salanieta T. >> Tamanikaiwaimaro mailto:salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com >> **** >> >> >> >> HI Thomas **** >> >> **** >> >> Civil Society is one of the stakeholder groups that are most up to date >> as far as the rotation is concerned.**** >> >> **** >> >> The majority seem to have been renewed during the last rotation.**** >> >> **** >> >> I think if you send three or four names (to give NY a choice) that should >> be more than enough.**** >> >> **** >> >> Best regards **** >> >> **** >> >> Chengetai **** >> >> **** >> >> **** >> >> **** >> >> On Jan 15, 2013, at 11:38 PM, Thomas Lowenhaupt >> wrote:**** >> >> **** >> >> I am the Chair of the Civil Society Internet Governance Caucus Nominating >> Committee charged with selecting names of IGC members to put forth for >> selection to the 2013 MAG. Thirty five (35) IGC members have been >> nominated. Our review and selection process would be aided if you would >> provide some insight into the process you will be following in selecting >> 2013 MAG members. >> >> We have been advised that DESA might rotate 1/3 of the MAG's 55 members >> this year, roughly 18 members. That those appointed to the MAG last year >> are more than likely to remain, and that their reapplication at this point >> would be unnecessary. >> >> It is expected that more than one civil society organization is likely to >> provide DESA with MAG nominees. The IGC has over 30 applicants for what >> looks to be a possible 18 vacant MAG seats. >> >> The IGC's Nominating Committee members are well aware of the credentials >> and suitability of our nominees and in the best position to select the >> cream from amongst them. This would provide DESA with a highly qualified >> group of nominees from which to choose its MAG appointees. We are prepared >> to take the difficult task of narrowing down the applicant pool from 35 as >> appropriate. >> >> We would greatly appreciate your providing some guidance as to the number >> of nominees from IGC that would most fruitfully meet the needs of DESA. >> >> Sincerely,**** >> >> **** >> >> Thomas Lowenhaupt, Non Voting Chair >> Internet Governance Caucus Nominating Committee**** >> >> **** >> >> **** >> >> **** >> >> **** >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 >> >> > > > -- > Devon Blake > Special Projects Director > Earthwise Solutions Limited > 29 Dominica Drive > Kgn 5 > ,Phone: Office 876-968-4534, Mobile, 876-483-2632 > > To be kind, To be helpful, To network > *Earthwise ... For Life!* > > ------------------------------ > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > -- ______________________ Mwendwa Kivuva For Business Development Transworld Computer Channels Cel: 0722402248 twitter.com/lordmwesh www.transworldAfrica.com | Fluent in computing kenya.or.ke | The Kenya we know -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From riaz.tayob at gmail.com Thu Jan 17 04:05:00 2013 From: riaz.tayob at gmail.com (Riaz K Tayob) Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2013 11:05:00 +0200 Subject: [governance] US 2nd on Internet Freedom Message-ID: <50F7BEBC.9060600@gmail.com> U.S. Ranks Second in Internet Freedom, Behind Estonia /1.3k/ Shares Share Tweet +1 Ads by Google *nSense konsultointi* - Tietoturvan konsultointipalvelut Testaa, tarkasta, kehitä, hallitse. www.nsense.fi U-s-ranks-second-in-internet-freedom-behind-estonia-4bc8aa4e79 Alex Fitzpatrick Sep 27, 2012 The United States has the second highest degree of Internet freedom in the world, according to a new study from Freedom House. What country's ahead of America? Estonia, a country of 1.29 million in northeast Europe. Estonia Why does Estonia top the list? According to Freedom House, it "ranks among the most wired and technologically advanced countries in the world." "With a high internet penetration rate and widespread e-commerce and e-government services embedded into the daily lives of individuals and organizations, Estonia has become a model for free internet access as a development engine for society," reads the report. Estonia's commitment to technological innovation in government is especially remarkable considering the former Soviet state's weak economy following the breakup of the Soviet Union in the early 1990s. Freedom House credits the country's first independent leaders with putting the country on a track towards economic development through technology and innovation. "The country's new leadership. . .perceived the expansion of information and communication technologies (ICTs) as a key to economic growth and invested heavily in their development," reads the report. /Update:/ As a /Mashable/ reader pointed out, NATO's Cooperative Cyber Defense Centre of Excellence was built in Estonia in 2008, resulting in the funneling of funds to improve the country's IT infrastructure. Freedom House ranks countries' "Internet Freedom Status" in three main ways: obstacles to access, limits on content and violations of users' rights. It also factors in tertiary factors, including internet penetration and blogger arrests. Estonia got high marks in almost every category. The United States The United States got nearly as excellent marks, with 78% internet penetration and no notable arrests of bloggers. However, the debate over the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) and the PROTECT IP Act (PIPA), two bills considered a threat by many Internet free speech advocates, raised some eyebrows. "Internet access in the United States remains open and fairly free compared with the rest of the world," reads the report. "Courts have consistently held that prohibitions against government regulation of speech apply to material published on the internet, but the government's surveillance powers are cause for some concern. In early 2012, campaigns by civil society and technology companies helped to halt passage of the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) and the Protect IP Act (PIPA), which were criticized for their potentially negative effects on free speech." Freedom House also warned of greater U.S. government interference in the open Internet. "Several developments in recent years, however, have placed the government and internet freedom advocates at odds over aspects of internet regulation as well as issues surrounding online surveillance and privacy. The United States lags behind many major industrialized countries in terms of broadband penetration, and network operators have challenged recent rules concerning network neutrality. The current administration appears committed to maintaining broad surveillance powers with the aim of combating terrorism, child pornography, and other criminal activity. Moreover, reports have emerged that the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) is seeking expanded authority to control the design of internet services to ensure that communications can be intercepted when necessary." At the bottom of the list were Iran, Cuba and China, while Belarus, Saudi Arabia, Uzbekistan, Thailand and seven other countries received a rating of "Not Free." To read the full report, visit Freedom House . Are you surprised Estonia topped the list? Should the United States be where it is, higher or lower? Share your thoughts in the comments. /Image courtesy of iStockphoto , Olena_T / -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: u-s-ranks-second-in-internet-freedom-behind-estonia-4bc8aa4e79.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 94476 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 1337c6a6 Type: image/jpeg Size: 528524 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- 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 From william.drake at uzh.ch Thu Jan 17 04:40:54 2013 From: william.drake at uzh.ch (William Drake) Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2013 10:40:54 +0100 Subject: [governance] Preliminary List of Nominees for the 2013 MAG - REQUIRES IMMEDIATE ATTENTION In-Reply-To: <50F76E21.3030308@itforchange.net> References: <50F4F7E3.70903@communisphere.com> <619E02E9-F3CF-4C65-8B86-799156F81A01@uzh.ch> <50F6808C.5070408@itforchange.net> <50F76E21.3030308@itforchange.net> Message-ID: Hi Parminder On Jan 17, 2013, at 4:21 AM, parminder wrote: >> In either scenario, I would think Adam's solution is a sensible way to get this done promptly and focus the noncom's effort on what really needs doing. > > I do however find it rather odd that an existing IGC nominated MAG member should insist that either the matter of recertifying not be taken up at all, or that noncom simple issues a blanket endorsement without at all going into the merit of the case, that too without appending any disclaimer :). And I find it rather odd that you would make this claim when a) in the very next sentence of my message I refer to discussions we are having in the MAG; b) in another message sent to you and the list seven minutes later I ask you what you thought was controversial about our informal MAG meeting in Baku and note that we on the MAG have sort of deferred to Izumi's reporting but could do something else if people wanted; and c) the composition of the MAG CS contingent has been discussed in the thread and is hardly a secret. I also find it ironic given the high standards of disclosure demonstrated when you were telling the IGC to support the Indian government's CIRP proposal without mentioning your role in it, and so on. :-) Games aside, I remain curious about your insistence the nomcom spend time on an extra procedure that the Secretariat has made clear is unnecessary, particularly when the discussion here was about the tight time frame and urgent need to complete the process. What purpose would it serve? I don't really care much either way and would of course roll with whatever IGC members have consensus on, but it seems like silly bureaucracy to me. [Disclaimer: I am on the MAG, nominated by IGC and APC] Cheers Bill -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From ivissioninternational at yahoo.fr Thu Jan 17 04:54:27 2013 From: ivissioninternational at yahoo.fr (International Ivission) Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2013 09:54:27 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [governance] Call for Volunteers for New NomCom In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <1358416467.32252.YahooMailClassic@web171301.mail.ir2.yahoo.com> Hi Salanieta, Kindly add me to the list of NomCom Volunteers for the seletion. Regards, ___________________________________ Asama Abel Excel President and CEO I-VISSION INTERNATIONAL Box 13040 Blvd de la rep., Feu Rouge BessenguéDouala Cameroon E: ivissioninternational at yahoo.fr / excelasama at yahoo.fr : info at ivission.net T (bur): +237 33 76 55 76 / T (Mob): 99 44 43 91 / 76 14 26 23Skype (office): i-vission (personal): excelasama Web: www.ivission.net  Web album: www.flickr.com/ivission Facebook: ivission.internationlTwitter: www.twitter.com/ivission  NWK: www.meetup.com/ivission --- En date de : Mer 16.1.13, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro a écrit : De: Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro Objet: [governance] Call for Volunteers for New NomCom À: governance at lists.igcaucus.org Date: Mercredi 16 janvier 2013, 20h19 Dear All, This is to advise that so far we have 21 Volunteers for the new Nominating Committee. We need 4 more volunteers to be able to run the selection process under the Charter. Thank you for all those that have volunteered and we welcome your participation. List of Current Volunteers as at 17th January, 2013 9:18am UTC+12 1.    Kerry Brown 2.    Mawaki Chango 3.    Jeremy Malcolm 4.    Tapani Tarvainen 5.    Fouad Bajwa 6.    Gideon Rop 7.    Vincent Solomon Aliama 8.    Mohamed Samir Zahran 9.    Clement Martial Aboudem Bavou 10. Carlos Vera Quintana 11. Mwendwa Kivuva 12. Norbert Komlan Glakpe 13. Julián Casasbuenas G 14. Antonio Medina Gómez 15. José F. Callo Romero 16. Devon Blake 17. Tracey Naughton 18. Michel Tchonang Linze 19. Izumi Aizu 20. Carlos Watson 21. Jose Felix Arias Ynche -----La pièce jointe associée suit----- ____________________________________________________________ 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: -------------- 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 From william.drake at uzh.ch Thu Jan 17 05:24:32 2013 From: william.drake at uzh.ch (William Drake) Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2013 11:24:32 +0100 Subject: [bestbits] [governance] Multistakeholder Roles and Responsibilities In-Reply-To: <50F763C0.5070907@ciroap.org> References: <01c801cdf457$f76a3fc0$e63ebf40$@gmail.com> <50F763C0.5070907@ciroap.org> Message-ID: Hi Jeremy > On Jan 17, 2013, at 3:36 AM, Jeremy Malcolm wrote: > What about the third, missing view - that the current governance of the Internet is NOT sufficiently multistakeholder and inclusive in terms of involvement of all stakeholder groups, but that rather than governments being left out, it is civil society! We can point to so many examples of this, beginning at the ITU itself. > > I think the report needs to be changed to correct this erroneous characteristion of the multi-stakeholder model of Internet governance. However the ITU is only receiving submissions from members (there is an open platform for general comments, but they won't be received as direct inputs to the SG's report). We will therefore need to put in our submission either through a friendly government (those who were members of delegations at WCIT will already have these connections), or through a sector member. Consumers International has applied for sector membership, but our application does not come up for consideration until June. We do have a CI member who is a sector member, but is there anyone else on this list who also is (and who is less status-quoist than ISOC)? If not I will work with my member on some text. The US State Dept. held a long call yesterday preparing for the WTPF Informal Group of Experts meeting 6-8 February. Among the things we discussed was the draft report's game playing with regard to multistakeholderism, e.g. the conflation by definition of MS and the "WSIS model" of MS, the assertions that the ITU is thereby fully MS, etc., and there was agreement that these concerns should be raised in the IEG with an eye to the next round of edits. As to CS being left out of the current governance of the Internet, if you could specify which institutions and issues you mean and maybe even suggest a sentence, this could be raised as well on next week's call. If anyone can be in Geneva then, I'd encourage applying to join the IEG. There's been no CS participation, and while ITU approved me it looks like I can't change a flight to attend. There's a number of points in the draft report where independently stated CS perspectives would be helpful. This is even more true of the draft Opinions that will be negotiated at the WTPF itself (including the Saudi proposal putting ITU in charge of enhanced cooperation), although these apparently won't be dissected in the IEG in detail. BTW I still think IGC and other CS networks should write a letter to ITU seeking the right to participate at the WTPF without having to do the staff vetted beauty contest... Cheers Bill -------------- 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 From johnsonpf1 at yahoo.com Thu Jan 17 05:36:43 2013 From: johnsonpf1 at yahoo.com (philip fomba johnson) Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2013 02:36:43 -0800 (PST) Subject: [governance] Call for Volunteers for New NomCom In-Reply-To: <1358416467.32252.YahooMailClassic@web171301.mail.ir2.yahoo.com> References: <1358416467.32252.YahooMailClassic@web171301.mail.ir2.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1358419003.51094.YahooMailNeo@web161805.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> I am interesting in volunteering. Please add me to the list. ________________________________ From: International Ivission To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2013 9:54 AM Subject: Re : [governance] Call for Volunteers for New NomCom Hi Salanieta, Kindly add me to the list of NomCom Volunteers for the seletion. Regards, ___________________________________ Asama Abel Excel President and CEO I-VISSION INTERNATIONAL Box 13040 Blvd de la rep., Feu Rouge Bessengué Douala Cameroon E: ivissioninternational at yahoo.fr / excelasama at yahoo.fr : info at ivission.net T (bur): +237 33 76 55 76 / T (Mob): 99 44 43 91 / 76 14 26 23Skype (office): i-vission (personal): excelasama Web: www.ivission.net  Web album: www.flickr.com/ivission Facebook: ivission.internationl Twitter: www.twitter.com/ivission  NWK: www.meetup.com/ivission --- En date de : Mer 16.1.13, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro a écrit : >De: Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro >Objet: [governance] Call for Volunteers for New NomCom >À: governance at lists.igcaucus.org >Date: Mercredi 16 janvier 2013, 20h19 > > >Dear All, > >This is to advise that so far we have 21 Volunteers for the new Nominating Committee. We need 4 more volunteers to be able to run the selection process under the Charter. Thank you for all those that have volunteered and we welcome your participation. > >List of Current Volunteers as at 17th January, 2013 9:18am UTC+12 > >1.    Kerry Brown >2.    Mawaki Chango >3.    Jeremy Malcolm >4.    Tapani Tarvainen >5.    Fouad Bajwa >6.    Gideon Rop >7.    Vincent Solomon Aliama >8.    Mohamed Samir Zahran >9.    Clement Martial Aboudem Bavou >10. Carlos Vera Quintana >11. Mwendwa Kivuva >12. Norbert Komlan Glakpe >13. Julián Casasbuenas G >14. Antonio Medina Gómez >15. José F. Callo Romero >16. Devon Blake >17. Tracey Naughton >18. Michel Tchonang Linze >19. Izumi Aizu >20. Carlos Watson >21. Jose Felix Arias Ynche > > > >-----La pièce jointe associée suit----- > > >____________________________________________________________ >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 > ____________________________________________________________ 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: -------------- 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 From wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de Thu Jan 17 05:43:04 2013 From: wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de (=?iso-8859-1?Q?=22Kleinw=E4chter=2C_Wolfgang=22?=) Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2013 11:43:04 +0100 Subject: AW: [governance] Multistakeholder Roles and Responsibilities References: <01c801cdf457$f76a3fc0$e63ebf40$@gmail.com> <50F763C0.5070907@ciroap.org> Message-ID: <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8013314B4@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> Hi Joana and all there is another PrepMeeting for the WTPF in February in Geneva. http://www.itu.int/en/wtpf-13/Pages/ieg.aspx It is important to raise this question in this meeting. I have no idea whether this meeting (February 6 - 8, 2013 in the ITU HQ) is open. If not we should send a letter to like minded governments and to the ITU SG before February 6 and to push for a clear response to our request for equal participation in the WTPF, independent from national governmental delegations. Wolfgang ________________________________ Von: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org im Auftrag von Joana Varon Gesendet: Do 17.01.2013 04:55 An: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Jeremy Malcolm Cc: Betreff: Re: [governance] Multistakeholder Roles and Responsibilities Dear Jeremy and all, Regarding your observation and the fact that a couple of civil society representatives were able to have a meeting with Mr Toure during the WCIT and managed to deliver to him our statement that reinforced some points of the best bits statement, including demands for an open participation of CS in ITU processes, isn't it the time to recall him of our "Civil Society statement on the new ITRs and the future of multi-stakeholder engagement" and try to ask for the changes he has promised to try to make during our meeting? Please, correct me if it seams too naive, but if we go again through these alternative channels to submit our comments and so on( such as CS being part of government delegation - it's own or other "friendly" governements, or just engaging with sector members), we will just repeat the quite frustrating (lack of) participation scenery of WCIT at WTPF. Maybe Wolfgang, Avri or other fellows that have attended WCIT could have some thoughts to add on this. best, joana -- Joana Varon Ferraz Centro de Tecnologia e Sociedade (CTS-FGV) http://direitorio.fgv.br/cts/ www.freenetfilm.org @joana_varon ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Jeremy Malcolm Date: Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 12:36 AM Subject: Re: [governance] Multistakeholder Roles and Responsibilities To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org Cc: "" On 17/01/13 10:11, michael gurstein wrote: In going through the FOURTH DRAFT OF THE SECRETARY-GENERAL'S REPORT for the Fifth World Telecommunication/Information and Communication Technology Policy Forum 2013 (WTPF) http://www.itu.int/en/wtpf-13/Pages/report-sg.aspx I came across this, below as the definition of multi-stakeholderism as (presumably) currently understood in various UN fora (it is what was used, I believe at WSIS... note particularly d) iii. below... That part is all well and good, but the part that worries me (sorry if you already heard from me about this on another list) is the treatment of "The Multi-stakeholder Model" in the draft, in which it is correctly stated that "A divergence in opinion is observed in the implementation of the WSIS multistakeholder model in the current Internet governance ecosystem", but that this is a divergence between only two views, one of which is that "the current governance of the Internet is sufficiently multistakeholder and inclusive in terms of involvement of all stakeholder groups" (attributed to Cisco, UK, USA and ISOC), and the second (attributed to Saudi Arabia and Sudan and Algeria!) that "with regards to international Internet-related public policy, the role of one stakeholder - Governments - has not been allowed to evolve according to WSIS principles". What about the third, missing view - that the current governance of the Internet is NOT sufficiently multistakeholder and inclusive in terms of involvement of all stakeholder groups, but that rather than governments being left out, it is civil society! We can point to so many examples of this, beginning at the ITU itself. I think the report needs to be changed to correct this erroneous characteristion of the multi-stakeholder model of Internet governance. However the ITU is only receiving submissions from members (there is an open platform for general comments, but they won't be received as direct inputs to the SG's report). We will therefore need to put in our submission either through a friendly government (those who were members of delegations at WCIT will already have these connections), or through a sector member. Consumers International has applied for sector membership, but our application does not come up for consideration until June. We do have a CI member who is a sector member, but is there anyone else on this list who also is (and who is less status-quoist than ISOC)? If not I will work with my member on some text. -- Dr Jeremy Malcolm Senior Policy Officer Consumers International | the global campaigning voice for consumers Office for Asia-Pacific and the Middle East Lot 5-1 Wisma WIM, 7 Jalan Abang Haji Openg, TTDI, 60000 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia Tel: +60 3 7726 1599 Your rights, our mission - download CI's Strategy 2015: http://consint.info/RightsMission @Consumers_Int | www.consumersinternational.org | www.facebook.com/consumersinternational Read our email confidentiality notice . Don't print this email unless necessary. ____________________________________________________________ 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From caribe at entropia.blog.br Thu Jan 17 05:49:01 2013 From: caribe at entropia.blog.br (Joao Carlos Caribe) Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2013 08:49:01 -0200 Subject: [governance] Call for Volunteers for New NomCom In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <51EFE3EC-775E-4047-A306-A4547548AD38@entropia.blog.br> Please I would like to volunteer too. Em 16/01/2013, às 18:19, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro escreveu: > Dear All, > > This is to advise that so far we have 21 Volunteers for the new Nominating Committee. We need 4 more volunteers to be able to run the selection process under the Charter. Thank you for all those that have volunteered and we welcome your participation. > > List of Current Volunteers as at 17th January, 2013 9:18am UTC+12 > 1. Kerry Brown > > 2. Mawaki Chango > > 3. Jeremy Malcolm > > 4. Tapani Tarvainen > > 5. Fouad Bajwa > > 6. Gideon Rop > > 7. Vincent Solomon Aliama > > 8. Mohamed Samir Zahran > > 9. Clement Martial Aboudem Bavou > > 10. Carlos Vera Quintana > > 11. Mwendwa Kivuva > > 12. Norbert Komlan Glakpe > > 13. Julián Casasbuenas G > > 14. Antonio Medina Gómez > > 15. José F. Callo Romero > > 16. Devon Blake > > 17. Tracey Naughton > > 18. Michel Tchonang Linze > > 19. Izumi Aizu > > 20. Carlos Watson > > 21. Jose Felix Arias Ynche > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 -- João Carlos Caribé Publicitário e Consultor de mídias sociais http://entropia.blog.br caribe at entropia.blog.br twitter @caribe / skype joaocaribe (21) 8761 1967 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From caribe at entropia.blog.br Thu Jan 17 05:50:44 2013 From: caribe at entropia.blog.br (Joao Carlos Caribe) Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2013 08:50:44 -0200 Subject: [governance] Preliminary List of Nominees for the 2013 MAG - REQUIRES IMMEDIATE ATTENTION In-Reply-To: <50F4F7E3.70903@communisphere.com> References: <50F4F7E3.70903@communisphere.com> Message-ID: I decline my self nominee to support Graciela Selaimen nomination. Em 15/01/2013, às 04:32, Thomas Lowenhaupt escreveu: > Graciela Selaimen -- João Carlos Caribé Publicitário e Consultor de mídias sociais http://entropia.blog.br caribe at entropia.blog.br twitter @caribe / skype joaocaribe (21) 8761 1967 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From kabani.asif at gmail.com Thu Jan 17 07:03:38 2013 From: kabani.asif at gmail.com (Kabani) Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2013 17:03:38 +0500 Subject: [governance] From Geneva on 2013 MAG selection process In-Reply-To: <50F6E18B.7090302@communisphere.com> References: <50F6E18B.7090302@communisphere.com> Message-ID: Tom. Many thanks for sharing the email of CM. So let us be clear how many people should Nomcom select for MAG Time is short, pl guide us Nomcom Regards On 16 January 2013 22:21, Thomas Lowenhaupt wrote: > Here's an email from Chengetai Masango in Geneva about the state of the > MAG nominations. > > Best, > > Tom Lowenhaupt > > P.S. Not sure why the reference to NY is there. Perhaps we're > underrepresented? > > > -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: Questions about 2013 MAG > selection process Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2013 14:17:45 +0100 From: Chengetai > Masango To: Thomas Lowenhaupt > CC: Farzaneh BADII > , Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro > > > HI Thomas > > Civil Society is one of the stakeholder groups that are most up to date > as far as the rotation is concerned. > > The majority seem to have been renewed during the last rotation. > > I think if you send three or four names (to give NY a choice) that > should be more than enough. > > Best regards > > Chengetai > > > > On Jan 15, 2013, at 11:38 PM, Thomas Lowenhaupt > wrote: > > I am the Chair of the Civil Society Internet Governance Caucus > Nominating Committee charged with selecting names of IGC members to put > forth for selection to the 2013 MAG. Thirty five (35) IGC members have been > nominated. Our review and selection process would be aided if you would > provide some insight into the process you will be following in selecting > 2013 MAG members. > > We have been advised that DESA might rotate 1/3 of the MAG's 55 members > this year, roughly 18 members. That those appointed to the MAG last year > are more than likely to remain, and that their reapplication at this point > would be unnecessary. > > It is expected that more than one civil society organization is likely to > provide DESA with MAG nominees. The IGC has over 30 applicants for what > looks to be a possible 18 vacant MAG seats. > > The IGC's Nominating Committee members are well aware of the credentials > and suitability of our nominees and in the best position to select the > cream from amongst them. This would provide DESA with a highly qualified > group of nominees from which to choose its MAG appointees. We are prepared > to take the difficult task of narrowing down the applicant pool from 35 as > appropriate. > > We would greatly appreciate your providing some guidance as to the number > of nominees from IGC that would most fruitfully meet the needs of DESA. > > Sincerely, > > Thomas Lowenhaupt, Non Voting Chair > Internet Governance Caucus Nominating Committee > >> > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > -- *Connect me* [image: Facebook] [image: Twitter] [image: Youtube] [image: LinkedIn] *Wait Before you print - Think about the** **ENVIRONMENT* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From lehto.paul at gmail.com Thu Jan 17 07:35:27 2013 From: lehto.paul at gmail.com (Paul Lehto) Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2013 07:35:27 -0500 Subject: [governance] US 2nd on Internet Freedom In-Reply-To: <50F7BEBC.9060600@gmail.com> References: <50F7BEBC.9060600@gmail.com> Message-ID: On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 4:05 AM, Riaz K Tayob wrote: > no notable arrests of bloggers [in the USA qualifies the USA as second > most friendly country to the Internet] > I guess Aaron Swartz does not count as a "blogger" since he was so much more than just a blogger? (The piece does mention SOPA/PIPA) Congratulations to Estonia, but the USA is ranked too high at second, and there are so many countries in Africa, South America and Asia (and even Canada) for which the study's graphic says the study has "no data." What? Estonia seems to be selected from a sea of countries for which the study claims "no data" including all the surrounding countries of Lithuania, Poland, Sweden, Norway and Finland. Finland, especially, would probably equal or eclipse Estonia for all of the reasons cited in favor of Estonia, and some more. And I would appreciate hearing from others more familiar than I with other parts of the world in terms of what countries they think are "best" - and what standard(s) they use to make that judgment, if they care to share. -- Paul R Lehto, J.D. P.O. Box 1 Ishpeming, MI 49849 lehto.paul at gmail.com 906-204-4965 (cell) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From andrespiazza at gmail.com Thu Jan 17 07:39:00 2013 From: andrespiazza at gmail.com (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Andr=E9s_Piazza?=) Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2013 10:39:00 -0200 Subject: [governance] CSTD Working Group on Enhanced Cooperation In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Dear Adam I was in Peru. That is my understanding also. Regards, Andrés Piazza 2013/1/17 Adam Peake > My understanding is CSTD will make a call for nominations sometime in > late February. > > First, member states will propose their members (4 from each region > plus representatives of Tunisia and Switzerland as WSIS host > countries). Once the govt members are decided, there will be a call > to find 5 representatives from business, civil society, technical and > academic community and from intergovernmental organizations. > > So the caucus NomCom should be in place by mid-February. And we can > think about criteria. > > Hope above accurate. > > Adam > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > -- *Andrés Piazza* www.andrespiazza.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From tapani.tarvainen at effi.org Thu Jan 17 07:47:21 2013 From: tapani.tarvainen at effi.org (Tapani Tarvainen) Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2013 14:47:21 +0200 Subject: [governance] US 2nd on Internet Freedom In-Reply-To: References: <50F7BEBC.9060600@gmail.com> Message-ID: <20130117124721.GC17517@thorion.it.jyu.fi> On Jan 17 07:35, Paul Lehto (lehto.paul at gmail.com) wrote: > On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 4:05 AM, Riaz K Tayob wrote: > > > no notable arrests of bloggers [in the USA qualifies the USA as second > > most friendly country to the Internet] > Congratulations to Estonia, but the USA is ranked too high at > second, and there are so many countries in Africa, South America and > Asia (and even Canada) for which the study's graphic says the study > has "no data." What? The report does not claim to cover all countries or even attempt to, rather it's a deliberately selective sample. The aim was to be thorough with a limited set of countries rather than covering as many countries as possible. So it does not claim Estonia is the most Internet-friendly country in the world, or USA as the second - those rankings are only among the sample studied. -- Tapani Tarvainen -------------- 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 From Guru at ITforChange.net Thu Jan 17 08:21:00 2013 From: Guru at ITforChange.net (=?UTF-8?B?R3VydSDgpJfgpYHgpLDgpYE=?=) Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2013 18:51:00 +0530 Subject: [governance] US 2nd on Internet Freedom In-Reply-To: <50F7BEBC.9060600@gmail.com> References: <50F7BEBC.9060600@gmail.com> Message-ID: <50F7FABC.3050600@ITforChange.net> The study has been done by Freedom House. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_House says "As of 2010, grants awarded from the US government accounted for most of Freedom House's funding ..." I suppose that helps to discount the wikileaks episode, cyber warfare on nations, sopa/pipa .. regards, Guru On 01/17/2013 02:35 PM, Riaz K Tayob wrote: > > > U.S. Ranks Second in Internet Freedom, Behind Estonia > > Alex Fitzpatrick > Sep 27, 2012 > > The United States has the second highest degree of Internet freedom in > the world, according to a new study from Freedom House. What country's > ahead of America? Estonia, a country of 1.29 million in northeast Europe. > > > > Estonia > > Why does Estonia top the list? According to Freedom House, it "ranks > among the most wired and technologically advanced countries in the world." > > "With a high internet penetration rate and widespread e-commerce and > e-government services embedded into the daily lives of individuals and > organizations, Estonia has become a model for free internet access as > a development engine for society," reads the report. > > Estonia's commitment to technological innovation in government is > especially remarkable considering the former Soviet state's weak > economy following the breakup of the Soviet Union in the early 1990s. > Freedom House credits the country's first independent leaders with > putting the country on a track towards economic development through > technology and innovation. > > "The country’s new leadership. . .perceived the expansion of > information and communication technologies (ICTs) as a key to economic > growth and invested heavily in their development," reads the report. > > /Update:/ As a /Mashable/ reader pointed out, NATO's Cooperative Cyber > Defense Centre of Excellence was built in Estonia in 2008, resulting > in the funneling of funds to improve the country's IT infrastructure. > > Freedom House ranks countries' "Internet Freedom Status" in three main > ways: obstacles to access, limits on content and violations of users' > rights. It also factors in tertiary factors, including internet > penetration and blogger arrests. Estonia got high marks in almost > every category. > > > The United States > > The United States got nearly as excellent marks, with 78% internet > penetration and no notable arrests of bloggers. However, the debate > over the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) and the PROTECT IP Act (PIPA), > two bills considered a threat by many Internet free speech advocates, > raised some eyebrows. > > "Internet access in the United States remains open and fairly free > compared with the rest of the world," reads the report. "Courts > have consistently held that prohibitions against government > regulation of speech apply to material published on the internet, > but the government’s surveillance powers are cause for some > concern. In early 2012, campaigns by civil society and technology > companies helped to halt passage of the Stop Online Piracy Act > (SOPA) and the Protect IP Act (PIPA), which were criticized for > their potentially negative effects on free speech." > > Freedom House also warned of greater U.S. government interference in > the open Internet. > > "Several developments in recent years, however, have placed the > government and internet freedom advocates at odds over aspects of > internet regulation as well as issues surrounding online > surveillance and privacy. The United States lags behind many major > industrialized countries in terms of broadband penetration, and > network operators have challenged recent rules concerning network > neutrality. The current administration appears committed to > maintaining broad surveillance powers with the aim of combating > terrorism, child pornography, and other criminal activity. > Moreover, reports have emerged that the Federal Bureau of > Investigation (FBI) is seeking expanded authority to control the > design of internet services to ensure that communications can be > intercepted when necessary." > > At the bottom of the list were Iran, Cuba and China, while Belarus, > Saudi Arabia, Uzbekistan, Thailand and seven other countries received > a rating of "Not Free." > > To read the full report, visit Freedom House > . Are > you surprised Estonia topped the list? Should the United States be > where it is, higher or lower? Share your thoughts in the comments. > > /Image courtesy of iStockphoto > , Olena_T > / > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From anriette at apc.org Thu Jan 17 08:44:11 2013 From: anriette at apc.org (Anriette Esterhuysen) Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2013 15:44:11 +0200 Subject: [governance] List of Experts Giving Advice on Draft ITU Paper for the WTPF In-Reply-To: <080901cdf41e$1ecf7100$5c6e5300$@gmail.com> References: <080901cdf41e$1ecf7100$5c6e5300$@gmail.com> Message-ID: <50F8002B.6000406@apc.org> Dear Michael Thanks for bringing this up. I looked at this list last year and noticed the absence of CS people, and flagged it for attention. But this is because the list is, as far as I know, made up of representatives from ITU sector members and member states. Definitely worth following up onnevertheless. Anriette On 16/01/2013 21:17, michael gurstein wrote: > http://www.itu.int/md/S12-WTPF13IEG1-C-0003/en > > Probably worthwhile to note that included in this list of 119 there is one > person (from LAC) who is clearly identifiable as Civil Society. > > NGO-Civil Society dealing with Telecom Regulation > for Latin America > Mr Gustavo PEÑA-QUIÑONES, NGO-Civil Society dealing with Telecom Regulation > for Latin America > > M > > -- ------------------------------------------------------ anriette esterhuysen anriette at apc.org executive director, association for progressive communications www.apc.org po box 29755, melville 2109 south africa tel/fax +27 11 726 1692 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From anriette at apc.org Thu Jan 17 08:53:17 2013 From: anriette at apc.org (Anriette Esterhuysen) Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2013 15:53:17 +0200 Subject: AW: [governance] Multistakeholder Roles and Responsibilities In-Reply-To: <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8013314B4@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> References: <01c801cdf457$f76a3fc0$e63ebf40$@gmail.com> <50F763C0.5070907@ciroap.org> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8013314B4@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> Message-ID: <50F8024D.1010306@apc.org> Agree, and I think that Jeremy and Joana and Wolfgang's suggestions are not mutually exclusive. We can send a letter, and ask member-states and sector members to also raise this issue and make sure that our letter is discussed. Best Anriette On 17/01/2013 12:43, "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang" wrote: > Hi Joana and all > > there is another PrepMeeting for the WTPF in February in Geneva. > http://www.itu.int/en/wtpf-13/Pages/ieg.aspx > > It is important to raise this question in this meeting. I have no idea whether this meeting (February 6 - 8, 2013 in the ITU HQ) is open. If not we should send a letter to like minded governments and to the ITU SG before February 6 and to push for a clear response to our request for equal participation in the WTPF, independent from national governmental delegations. > > Wolfgang > > ________________________________ > > Von: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org im Auftrag von Joana Varon > Gesendet: Do 17.01.2013 04:55 > An: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Jeremy Malcolm > Cc: > Betreff: Re: [governance] Multistakeholder Roles and Responsibilities > > > Dear Jeremy and all, > > Regarding your observation and the fact that a couple of civil society representatives were able to have a meeting with Mr Toure during the WCIT and managed to deliver to him our statement that reinforced some points of the best bits statement, including demands for an open participation of CS in ITU processes, isn't it the time to recall him of our "Civil Society statement on the new ITRs and the future of multi-stakeholder engagement" and try to ask for the changes he has promised to try to make during our meeting? > > Please, correct me if it seams too naive, but if we go again through these alternative channels to submit our comments and so on( such as CS being part of government delegation - it's own or other "friendly" governements, or just engaging with sector members), we will just repeat the quite frustrating (lack of) participation scenery of WCIT at WTPF. > > Maybe Wolfgang, Avri or other fellows that have attended WCIT could have some thoughts to add on this. > > best, > > joana > > > -- ------------------------------------------------------ anriette esterhuysen anriette at apc.org executive director, association for progressive communications www.apc.org po box 29755, melville 2109 south africa tel/fax +27 11 726 1692 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From omomeji at gmail.com Thu Jan 17 09:28:10 2013 From: omomeji at gmail.com (Abdul Jaleel Shittu) Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2013 22:28:10 +0800 Subject: [governance] Call for Volunteers for New NomCom In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hello Sala, May I know if I can join the list, if yes kindly add me On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 3:09 PM, Lillian Nalwoga wrote: > Hello Sala, > > Please add me to the list. > > thanks, > Lillian > > On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 11:43 PM, Sarah Kiden wrote: >> >> Dear Sala, >> >> I would like to volunteer too. >> >> Regards, >> Sarah >> >> On 1/16/13, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro >> wrote: >> > Dear All, >> > >> > This is to advise that so far we have 21 Volunteers for the new >> > Nominating >> > Committee. We need 4 more volunteers to be able to run the selection >> > process under the Charter. Thank you for all those that have volunteered >> > and we welcome your participation. >> > >> > List of Current Volunteers as at 17th January, 2013 9:18am UTC+12 >> > >> > 1. Kerry Brown >> > >> > 2. Mawaki Chango >> > >> > 3. Jeremy Malcolm >> > >> > 4. Tapani Tarvainen >> > >> > 5. Fouad Bajwa >> > >> > 6. Gideon Rop >> > >> > 7. Vincent Solomon Aliama >> > >> > 8. Mohamed Samir Zahran >> > >> > 9. Clement Martial Aboudem Bavou >> > >> > 10. Carlos Vera Quintana >> > >> > 11. Mwendwa Kivuva >> > >> > 12. Norbert Komlan Glakpe >> > >> > 13. Julián Casasbuenas G >> > >> > 14. Antonio Medina Gómez >> > >> > 15. José F. Callo Romero >> > >> > 16. Devon Blake >> > >> > 17. Tracey Naughton >> > >> > 18. Michel Tchonang Linze >> > >> > 19. Izumi Aizu >> > >> > 20. Carlos Watson >> > >> > 21. Jose Felix Arias Ynche >> > >> >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 >> > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > -- .................................................. Abdul Jaleel Kehinde Shittu (PhD) Senior Lecturer School of Computing College of Arts and Sciences University Utara Malaysia (Nothern University Malaysia) +6012-3052075 +6010-3814470 http://about.me/abduljaleelshittu. "It is one attitude, not one aptitude, that determines one altitude in life". "In the presence of greatness, pettiness disappears. In the absence of a great dream, pettiness prevails." -------------- 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 From deborah at accessnow.org Thu Jan 17 09:58:43 2013 From: deborah at accessnow.org (Deborah Brown) Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2013 09:58:43 -0500 Subject: AW: [governance] Multistakeholder Roles and Responsibilities In-Reply-To: <50F8024D.1010306@apc.org> References: <01c801cdf457$f76a3fc0$e63ebf40$@gmail.com> <50F763C0.5070907@ciroap.org> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8013314B4@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> <50F8024D.1010306@apc.org> Message-ID: +1 In addition to the commitments that the SG made during the meeting with civil society at WCIT that Joana mentioned, the ITU issued the following statement in response to a 10 December civil society letterto WCIT. • We recognize that the current institutional structures do not facilitate independent civil society participation in the work of the ITU. Given that it is unlikely that institutional changes can be implemented during the WCIT, we ask that the two above issues be addressed immediately and that the ITU commit to reviewing and putting in place mechanisms that will encourage a more flexible approach to participation by civil society. *[From 10 December letter]* Only the Plenipotentiary Conference of the ITU – the highest governing body of the organization – can change institutional rules and procedures or effect changes to the ITU Constitution.* I believe post-WCIT-12 we will have time to take stock and provide our membership with some important recommendations in line with what you raise. I* would also take the opportunity to remind you that all civil society organizations, who are international in nature and who are working in the area of ICTs are welcome to join the ITU and apply for exemption of fees. I believe we will all benefit from a greater civil society engagement at ITU and in line with this I recently invited the International Trade Union Movement to join. The document is available on WCITLeaks, but (ironically) is locked behind a TIES log in: http://files.wcitleaks.org/public/S12-WCIT12-INF-0005!!MSW-E.pdf I don't think seeking the right to participate at the WTPF would require changes at the plenipotentiary level (please do correct me if this assumption is wrong) so if we decide to go ahead with a letter, we might want to cite the sentence I highlighted above. Best, Deborah On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 8:53 AM, Anriette Esterhuysen wrote: > Agree, and I think that Jeremy and Joana and Wolfgang's suggestions are > not mutually exclusive. > > We can send a letter, and ask member-states and sector members to also > raise this issue and make sure that our letter is discussed. > > Best > > Anriette > > On 17/01/2013 12:43, "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang" wrote: > > Hi Joana and all > > there is another PrepMeeting for the WTPF in February in Geneva.http://www.itu.int/en/wtpf-13/Pages/ieg.aspx > > It is important to raise this question in this meeting. I have no idea whether this meeting (February 6 - 8, 2013 in the ITU HQ) is open. If not we should send a letter to like minded governments and to the ITU SG before February 6 and to push for a clear response to our request for equal participation in the WTPF, independent from national governmental delegations. > > Wolfgang > > ________________________________ > > Von: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org im Auftrag von Joana Varon > Gesendet: Do 17.01.2013 04:55 > An: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Jeremy Malcolm > Cc: > Betreff: Re: [governance] Multistakeholder Roles and Responsibilities > > > Dear Jeremy and all, > > Regarding your observation and the fact that a couple of civil society representatives were able to have a meeting with Mr Toure during the WCIT and managed to deliver to him our statement that reinforced some points of the best bits statement, including demands for an open participation of CS in ITU processes, isn't it the time to recall him of our "Civil Society statement on the new ITRs and the future of multi-stakeholder engagement" and try to ask for the changes he has promised to try to make during our meeting? > > Please, correct me if it seams too naive, but if we go again through these alternative channels to submit our comments and so on( such as CS being part of government delegation - it's own or other "friendly" governements, or just engaging with sector members), we will just repeat the quite frustrating (lack of) participation scenery of WCIT at WTPF. > > Maybe Wolfgang, Avri or other fellows that have attended WCIT could have some thoughts to add on this. > > best, > > joana > > > > > > -- > ------------------------------------------------------ > anriette esterhuysen anriette at apc.org > executive director, association for progressive communicationswww.apc.org > po box 29755, melville 2109 > south africa > tel/fax +27 11 726 1692 > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > -- Deborah Brown Policy Analyst Access | AccessNow.org E. deborah at accessnow.org S. deborah.l.brown T. deblebrown PGP 0x5EB4727D -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From rguerra at privaterra.org Thu Jan 17 10:24:42 2013 From: rguerra at privaterra.org (Robert Guerra) Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2013 10:24:42 -0500 Subject: [governance] US 2nd on Internet Freedom In-Reply-To: <50F7FABC.3050600@ITforChange.net> References: <50F7BEBC.9060600@gmail.com> <50F7FABC.3050600@ITforChange.net> Message-ID: <81A05D3E-F477-454C-88AD-95705E9DDA73@privaterra.org> Guru, Just because Freedom House gets its funding for the report from the US State Department (as well as other foreign govts may I add) isn't , I believe, sufficient grounds to summarily dismiss the report findings. If you or others have issues with the report, then the most strategic way to challenge the findings is with actual data. For instance, it would be interesting to see if a 3rd party using their same methodology would achieve the same aggregate scores for the countries surveyed. My personal view is that the scores for the US & UK would, in an independent review, would be far lower - indicating a far more contested digital rights environment. regards Robert On 2013-01-17, at 8:21 AM, Guru गुरु wrote: > The study has been done by Freedom House. > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_House says > > "As of 2010, grants awarded from the US government accounted for most of Freedom House's funding ..." > > I suppose that helps to discount the wikileaks episode, cyber warfare on nations, sopa/pipa .. > > regards, > Guru > > > On 01/17/2013 02:35 PM, Riaz K Tayob wrote: >> U.S. Ranks Second in Internet Freedom, Behind Estonia >> >> Alex Fitzpatrick >> Sep 27, 2012 >> The United States has the second highest degree of Internet freedom in the world, according to a new study from Freedom House. What country's ahead of America? Estonia, a country of 1.29 million in northeast Europe. >> >> >> >> >> >> Estonia >> >> Why does Estonia top the list? According to Freedom House, it "ranks among the most wired and technologically advanced countries in the world." >> >> "With a high internet penetration rate and widespread e-commerce and e-government services embedded into the daily lives of individuals and organizations, Estonia has become a model for free internet access as a development engine for society," reads the report. >> >> Estonia's commitment to technological innovation in government is especially remarkable considering the former Soviet state's weak economy following the breakup of the Soviet Union in the early 1990s. Freedom House credits the country's first independent leaders with putting the country on a track towards economic development through technology and innovation. >> >> "The country’s new leadership. . .perceived the expansion of information and communication technologies (ICTs) as a key to economic growth and invested heavily in their development," reads the report. >> >> Update: As a Mashable reader pointed out, NATO's Cooperative Cyber Defense Centre of Excellence was built in Estonia in 2008, resulting in the funneling of funds to improve the country's IT infrastructure. >> >> Freedom House ranks countries' "Internet Freedom Status" in three main ways: obstacles to access, limits on content and violations of users' rights. It also factors in tertiary factors, including internet penetration and blogger arrests. Estonia got high marks in almost every category. >> >> The United States >> >> The United States got nearly as excellent marks, with 78% internet penetration and no notable arrests of bloggers. However, the debate over the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) and the PROTECT IP Act (PIPA), two bills considered a threat by many Internet free speech advocates, raised some eyebrows. >> >> "Internet access in the United States remains open and fairly free compared with the rest of the world," reads the report. "Courts have consistently held that prohibitions against government regulation of speech apply to material published on the internet, but the government’s surveillance powers are cause for some concern. In early 2012, campaigns by civil society and technology companies helped to halt passage of the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) and the Protect IP Act (PIPA), which were criticized for their potentially negative effects on free speech." >> >> Freedom House also warned of greater U.S. government interference in the open Internet. >> >> "Several developments in recent years, however, have placed the government and internet freedom advocates at odds over aspects of internet regulation as well as issues surrounding online surveillance and privacy. The United States lags behind many major industrialized countries in terms of broadband penetration, and network operators have challenged recent rules concerning network neutrality. The current administration appears committed to maintaining broad surveillance powers with the aim of combating terrorism, child pornography, and other criminal activity. Moreover, reports have emerged that the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) is seeking expanded authority to control the design of internet services to ensure that communications can be intercepted when necessary." >> >> At the bottom of the list were Iran, Cuba and China, while Belarus, Saudi Arabia, Uzbekistan, Thailand and seven other countries received a rating of "Not Free." >> >> To read the full report, visit Freedom House. Are you surprised Estonia topped the list? Should the United States be where it is, higher or lower? Share your thoughts in the comments. >> >> Image courtesy of iStockphoto, Olena_T >> > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From riaz.tayob at gmail.com Thu Jan 17 10:22:15 2013 From: riaz.tayob at gmail.com (Riaz K Tayob) Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2013 17:22:15 +0200 Subject: [governance] US 2nd on Internet Freedom In-Reply-To: <50F7FABC.3050600@ITforChange.net> References: <50F7BEBC.9060600@gmail.com> <50F7FABC.3050600@ITforChange.net> Message-ID: <50F81727.30309@gmail.com> Well these kinds of metrics and systems are useful, up to a point only, and who pays the piper often calls the tune. Of course, with some it is the ideology that shapes the "success" factors. If one looks at Transparency Intl ratings, Iceland that had a financial fraud of 3 x its GDP, was rated as the least corrupt. After the financial crisis, and the lack of prosecutions for fraud etc, with few exceptions, not much has changed... of course these kinds of things do help "discipline" poor countries... Riaz On 2013/01/17 03:21 PM, Guru गुरु wrote: > The study has been done by Freedom House. > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_House says > > "As of 2010, grants awarded from the US government > accounted for > most of Freedom House's funding ..." > > I suppose that helps to discount the wikileaks episode, cyber warfare > on nations, sopa/pipa .. > > regards, > Guru > > > On 01/17/2013 02:35 PM, Riaz K Tayob wrote: >> >> >> U.S. Ranks Second in Internet Freedom, Behind Estonia >> >> Alex Fitzpatrick >> Sep 27, 2012 >> >> The United States has the second highest degree of Internet freedom >> in the world, according to a new study from Freedom House. What >> country's ahead of America? Estonia, a country of 1.29 million in >> northeast Europe. >> >> >> >> Estonia >> >> Why does Estonia top the list? According to Freedom House, it "ranks >> among the most wired and technologically advanced countries in the >> world." >> >> "With a high internet penetration rate and widespread e-commerce and >> e-government services embedded into the daily lives of individuals >> and organizations, Estonia has become a model for free internet >> access as a development engine for society," reads the report. >> >> Estonia's commitment to technological innovation in government is >> especially remarkable considering the former Soviet state's weak >> economy following the breakup of the Soviet Union in the early 1990s. >> Freedom House credits the country's first independent leaders with >> putting the country on a track towards economic development through >> technology and innovation. >> >> "The country’s new leadership. . .perceived the expansion of >> information and communication technologies (ICTs) as a key to >> economic growth and invested heavily in their development," reads the >> report. >> >> /Update:/ As a /Mashable/ reader pointed out, NATO's Cooperative >> Cyber Defense Centre of Excellence was built in Estonia in 2008, >> resulting in the funneling of funds to improve the country's IT >> infrastructure. >> >> Freedom House ranks countries' "Internet Freedom Status" in three >> main ways: obstacles to access, limits on content and violations of >> users' rights. It also factors in tertiary factors, including >> internet penetration and blogger arrests. Estonia got high marks in >> almost every category. >> >> >> The United States >> >> The United States got nearly as excellent marks, with 78% internet >> penetration and no notable arrests of bloggers. However, the debate >> over the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) and the PROTECT IP Act (PIPA), >> two bills considered a threat by many Internet free speech advocates, >> raised some eyebrows. >> >> "Internet access in the United States remains open and fairly >> free compared with the rest of the world," reads the report. >> "Courts have consistently held that prohibitions against >> government regulation of speech apply to material published on >> the internet, but the government’s surveillance powers are cause >> for some concern. In early 2012, campaigns by civil society and >> technology companies helped to halt passage of the Stop Online >> Piracy Act (SOPA) and the Protect IP Act (PIPA), which were >> criticized for their potentially negative effects on free speech." >> >> Freedom House also warned of greater U.S. government interference in >> the open Internet. >> >> "Several developments in recent years, however, have placed the >> government and internet freedom advocates at odds over aspects of >> internet regulation as well as issues surrounding online >> surveillance and privacy. The United States lags behind many >> major industrialized countries in terms of broadband penetration, >> and network operators have challenged recent rules concerning >> network neutrality. The current administration appears committed >> to maintaining broad surveillance powers with the aim of >> combating terrorism, child pornography, and other criminal >> activity. Moreover, reports have emerged that the Federal Bureau >> of Investigation (FBI) is seeking expanded authority to control >> the design of internet services to ensure that communications can >> be intercepted when necessary." >> >> At the bottom of the list were Iran, Cuba and China, while Belarus, >> Saudi Arabia, Uzbekistan, Thailand and seven other countries received >> a rating of "Not Free." >> >> To read the full report, visit Freedom House >> . >> Are you surprised Estonia topped the list? Should the United States >> be where it is, higher or lower? Share your thoughts in the comments. >> >> /Image courtesy of iStockphoto >> , Olena_T >> / >> > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From riaz.tayob at gmail.com Thu Jan 17 10:36:18 2013 From: riaz.tayob at gmail.com (Riaz K Tayob) Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2013 17:36:18 +0200 Subject: [governance] Aaron Swartz prosecutor 'drove another hacker to suicide in 2008 after he named him in a cyber crime case' In-Reply-To: <50F77BD2.8080507@mail.ngo.za> References: <50F77BD2.8080507@mail.ngo.za> Message-ID: <50F81A72.4040107@gmail.com> Revealed: Aaron Swartz prosecutor 'drove another hacker to suicide in 2008 after he named him in a cyber crime case' * Jonathan James committed suicide two weeks after Secret Service raided his home in a case led by U.S. attorney Stephen Heymann * Internet activist Swartz, 26, committed suicide on January 11 at his Brooklyn home as he faced 30 years in jail * Prosecutors turned down Swartz's lawyer over plea deal on January 9 * Internet activist faced decades in prison over hacking charges for allegedly downloading more than four million academic journals * Hundreds of academics post copyright-protected journals for free in tribute to Swartz * Hacker group Anonymous crash MIT website over prosecution of Swartz, described as a 'grotesque miscarriage of justice' By Helen Pow , James Nye and Rachel Quigley *PUBLISHED:* 16:19 GMT, 15 January 2013 | *UPDATED:* 17:32 GMT, 15 January 2013 The prosecutor who is being accused of acting 'over zealously' in his pursuit of online pioneer Aaron Swartz, who killed himself at the weekend, played a role in another young hacker's suicide in 2008, it was claimed today. Assistant United States Attorney Stephen Heymann had reportedly been insisting on jail time for Swartz and was refusing to negotiate a plea deal on the30 years in jail he faced for stealing academic papers. In 2008, another young hacker also committed suicide after being named in a case Heymann was leading. Jonathan James killed himself aged 24 two weeks after the Secret Service raided his house as part of its investigation into the TJX Hacker case - which is known as the largest identity hack in history. aaron swartz jonathan james aaron swartz jonathan james Victims: Both Aaron Swartz, left, and Jonathan James killed themselves in the middle of cases led by assistant U.S. attorney Stephen Heymann His friend Christopher Scott was charged with breaching retail networks, and James was reportedly the co-conspirator 'J.J.' mentioned in the indictment. James said he had nothing to do with the retail hack but believed that the feds would try to pin it on him, according to Buzz Feed. In his suicide note, James said he had no faith in the justice system, which he believed were trying to tie him to a crime he did not commit. 'I have no faith in the "justice" system. Perhaps my actions today, and this letter, will send a stronger message to the public. 'Either way, I have lost control over this situation, and this is my only way to regain control. 'Remember, it's not whether you win or lose, it's whether I win or lose, and sitting in jail for 20, ten, or even five years for a crime I didn't commit is not me winning. I die free.' James was the first juvenile put into confinement for a federal cyber crime case. Aaron Swartz was charged last September with wire fraud, computer fraud and unlawfully obtaining information from a protected computer after he allegedly tried to steal millions of scholarly papers from Massachusetts Institute of Technology in January 2011. It is thought that the stress and strain of the looming federal trial contributed to the depression which is being blamed for Swartz taking his own life on January 11 at his Brooklyn, New York apartment. Swartz's lawyer had originally approached federal prosecutors in fall 2012 about a deal and was turned down even though JSTOR - the online database Swarts hacked into - declined to pursue charges. His friends have accused Heymann of contributing to Swartz's suicide, with his unwillingness to compromise on his prosecution. Scroll down to watch video and full statement from family Remorse: MIT president L Rafael Reif said he was pained to think that the school had any role in Swartz's tragic death Remorse: MIT president L Rafael Reif said he was pained to think that the school had any role in Swartz's tragic death Defiance: Anonymous publicizes the move by hundreds of academics to post their copyright-protected articles online for free following the suicide of Internet activist Aaron Swartz Defiance: Anonymous publicizes the move by hundreds of academics to post their copyright-protected articles online for free following the suicide of Internet activist Aaron Swartz 'Aaron's death is not simply a personal tragedy. It is the product of a criminal justice system rife with intimidation and prosecutorial overreach,' his family said in a statement. 'Decisions made by officials in the Massachusetts U.S. attorney's office and at MIT contributed to his death.' Speaking to Huffington Post yesterday, Swartz's attorney Elliot Peters accused Massachusetts assistant U.S. attorney Stephen Heymann of pursuing federal charges against Swartz to gain publicity. He said Heymann was looking for 'some juicy looking computer crime cases and Aaron's case, sadly for Aaron, fit the bill. He thought he was going to receive press and he was going to be a tough guy and read his name in the newspaper.' Peters said Heymann was threatening Swartz with potentially longer prison sentences if Swartz didn't accept his plea deal offers. 'He was very intransigent,' Peters said of Heymann. 'It was his philosophy that as you got closer to trial the plea offers only got worse. But the offer he was making was so unreasonable that having it get worse didn't concern me much.' Heymann did not respond to requests for comment. More... * Anthony Bourdain launches Twitter rant against American Airlines after man defecates on plane seat and causes two-hour delay * Oprah Winfrey says she was 'surprised and mesmerized' by Lance Armstrong's belated doping confession A petition has been put up online demanding that Heymann be fired because of his 'overzealous prosecution of an allegedly minor and non-violent electronic crime led to the suicide of Aaron Swartz'. Heymann and colleague Carmen Ortiz filed to dismiss the charges against Mr Swartz in a Boston court yesterday. The three-line notice says the case is being dismissed because of Swartz's death. Such filings are routine when a defendant dies before trial. The Massachusetts U.S. attorney's office told MailOnline that they would not discuss the case out of respect for the family's privacy. Massachusetts Institute of Technology's president spoke of his sadness over Swartz's suicide and said there would be 'thorough analysis' into the school's role in the federal case against the 26-year-old computer programmer. MIT president L. Rafael Reif said: 'I want to express very clearly that I and all of us at MIT are extremely saddened by the death of this promising young man, who touched the lives of so many. 'It pains me to think that MIT played any role in a series of events that have ended in tragedy.' 'A GROTESQUE MISCARRIAGE OF JUSTICE': ANONYMOUS HACKS MIT WEBSITE IN SUPPORT OF AARON SWARTZ Anonymous crashed MIT's website on Sunday evening in a defiant move over the prosecution of Swartz which the hacker group described as 'a grotesque miscarriage of justice'. The entire university network reportedly faltered after the move by Anonymous. According to the wrap.com , the red and black message which appeared in place of the site, read: 'Whether or not the government contributed to his suicide, the government's prosecution of Swartz was a grotesque miscarriage of justice, a distorted and perverse shadow of the justice that Aaron died fighting for - freeing the publicly-funded scientific literature from a publishing system that makes it inaccessible to most of those who paid for it - enabling the collective betterment of the world through the facilitation of sharing - an ideal that we should all support.' Kimberly Allen, media relations manager at MIT, could not be reached for comment by MailOnline. The statement came as hundreds of academics posted links to copyright-protected journals online in tribute to Internet activist Swartz. The movement appears to have started on Swartz's own site Reddit and was echoed by Anonymous on Twitter, who wrote: 'Please share: Academics posting their papers online in tribute to Aaron Swartz using hashtag #pdftribute #ICYMI.' The 26-year-old's funeral is to be held on Tuesday at the Central Avenue Synagogue in his home town of Highland Park, Illinois. Even officials at JSTOR - an archive of academic journals to which universities, including MIT, pay large amounts of money for access- slammed the harsh tactics of the U.S. Attorney's Office in Boston. Prosecutors had released incriminating images which allegedly showed Swartz illegally downloading material from JSTOR in 2011. Cameras were installed after investigators at MIT began to suspect that someone was illegally downloading material - which they traced to a basement wiring closet where a laptop and external hard drive were found hooked up directly to a network. The laptop and the hard drive were hidden from view by a cardboard box. Swartz can be seen entering the closet three days in a row. Using his white bicycle helmet as a mask on January 6, 2011, Swartz attempts to cover his face from the cameras as he tries to retrieve the computer equipment that he left weeks before. Aaron Swartz covers his face with his bicycle helmet as he enters a small electrical closet at the MIT to retrieve his computer hardware Aaron Swartz covers his face with his bicycle helmet as he enters a small electrical closet at the MIT to retrieve his computer hardware Aaron Swartz was caught soon afterwards this video was recorded on January 6th 2011 with a laptop and a hard drive that contained secured and lucrative academic journals that had been hacked Aaron Swartz was caught soon afterwards this video was recorded on January 6th 2011 with a laptop and a hard drive that contained secured and lucrative academic journals that had been hacked At 2.11 pm, Swartz was ID'd on a bicycle on Massachusetts Avenue by an MIT police officer, according to his report. That report states that when he encountered Captain Albert Pierce of the MIT Police Department, Swartz jumped off his bike and ran down Lee Street. He made it approximately 400 feet before being handcuffed and charged with breaking and entering. According to an indictment last July, Swartz's laptop had been using MIT's network to rapidly download articles from JSTOR. The indictment describes these events as the final phase of Swartz's three-month JSTOR downloading operation, bringing his total count of acquired articles to 4.8 million. MIT valued that information at $50,000, according to the Cambridge Police incident report. Aaron Swartz was found hanging from his belt near his bedroom window, sources in Crown Heights, Brooklyn, New York said. The death was pronounced as a suicide by the city's medical examiner Aaron Swartz was found hanging from his belt near his bedroom window, sources in Crown Heights, Brooklyn, New York said. The death was pronounced as a suicide by the city's medical examiner Swartz's intention, the indictment claimed, was to upload all of the documents to a peer-to-peer file-sharing site, where anyone could access them for free. Before his suicide Swartz faced up to 35-years in prison and was out on $100,000 bail. His legal team still were holding out hope for a crucial hearing which they hoped could still halt proceedings of 13-felony counts against him. Swartz's friend Larry Lessig, a Harvard University professor and internet law expert, blamed the federal prosecutor, who he called a 'bully,' on his blog and said that Swartz had been 'driven to the edge' by the government's aggressive and disproportionate handling of the case. Intimidated: The family of Aaron Swartz, left, and his partner Taren Stinebricker-Kaufmann, right, blame MIT and federal prosecutors for his death Intimidated: The family of Aaron Swartz, left, and his partner Taren Stinebricker-Kaufmann, right, blame MIT and federal prosecutors for his death Intimidated: The family of Aaron Swartz, left, and his partner Taren Stinebricker-Kaufmann, right, blame MIT and federal prosecutors for his death 'Our government continued to push as if it had caught the 9/11 terrorists red-handed,' Lessig wrote. In the statement, Swartz' family described him as 'extraordinary and irreplaceable.' They said his 'insatiable curiosity, creativity, and brilliance; his reflexive empathy and capacity for selfless, boundless love; his refusal to accept injustice as inevitable' made the world and their lives 'far brighter.' The online activist and co-founder of the popular social media site Reddit took his life just weeks before going on trial for the federal hacking charges. The news of Swartz's untimely death was confirmed to MIT's The Tech by both his uncle and his lawyer on Saturday morning. Tragic end: Aaron Swartz, a programmer and Internet activist who co-founded a company that would eventually grow into Reddit, committed suicide Friday in New York City Tragic end: Aaron Swartz, a programmer and Internet activist who co-founded a company that would eventually grow into Reddit, committed suicide Friday in New York City Swartz's uncle, Michael Wolf, told the New York Times that the programmer's body was discovered by his girlfriend at his home in the Crown Heights section of Brooklyn at around 9.30am. He left no suicide note. Swartz was a gifted programmer who helped develop the RSS at the age of 14. He then went on to start a company that would eventually merge with Reddit, as well as Demand Progress, a political action group that campaigns against internet censorship. In the past, Swartz hinted at a battle with depression, according to Gawker . In a 2007 speech, the internet advocate described himself as being 'miserable' after moving to San Francisco when his company was purchased by the publishing giant Conde Nast. 'I couldn't stand San Francisco. I couldn't stand office life,' he said at the time. 'I took a long Christmas vacation. I got sick. I thought of suicide. I ran from the police. And when I got back on Monday morning, I was asked to resign.' In a blog post from later that year, Swartz went into further detail regarding his bout with depression. 'Your face falls. Perhaps you cry. You feel worthless. You wonder whether it's worth going on,' he wrote. 'Everything you think about seems bleak - the things you've done, the things you hope to do, the people around you. 'You want to lie in bed and keep the lights off. Depressed mood is like that, only it doesn't come for any reason and it doesn't go for any either. Go outside and get some fresh air or cuddle with a loved one and you don't feel any better, only more upset at being unable to feel the joy that everyone else seems to feel. Everything gets colored by the sadness.' Big business: Reddit was later sold to the publishing giant Conde Nast, but in 2011 it became operationally independent again Big business: Reddit was later sold to the publishing giant Conde Nast, but in 2011 it became operationally independent again In September 2012, Swartz was charged with 13 counts of felony hacking stemming from his July 2011 arrest and subsequent indictment by the Department of Justice for allegedly stealing MIT papers from JSTOR. Two years earlier, Swartz allegedly connected a laptop to MIT's systems through a basement network wiring cupboard. He registered as a guest under the fictitious name, Gary Host - a hacking in-joke in which the first initial and last name spell 'ghost.' He then used a software program to 'rapidly download an extraordinary volume of articles from JSTOR,' according to the indictment. In the following months, MIT and JSTOR tried to block the recurring and massive downloads, on occasion denying all MIT users access to JSTOR. But Swartz allegedly got around it, in part, by disguising the computer source of the demands for data. In November and December, Swartz is said to have made 2 million downloads from JSTOR, 100 times the number made during the same period by all legitimate JSTOR users at MIT. Whiz kid: At age 14, Swartz co-authored an early version of RSS and later he started Infogami, a company that would eventually merge with Reddit Whiz kid: At age 14, Swartz, right, co-authored an early version of RSS and later he started Infogami, a company that would eventually merge with Reddit It is alleged that on January 6, Swartz went to the wiring closet to remove the laptop, attempting to shield his identity by holding a bike helmet in front of his face and seeing his way through its ventilation holes. He fled when MIT police tried to question him that day, it is claimed. The Internet wunderkind pleaded not guilty to the charges against him, but spent the next several months struggling to come up with the money to cover legal fees and continue his fight against the Justice Department, the site ZDnet reported. Ironically, Swartz's suicide came just two days after JSTOR announced that ii will be releasing more than 4.5 million articles to the public. 'Our goal is for everyone around the world to be able to use the content we have put online and are preserving,' JSTOR Managing Director Laura Brown said in a statement. On Saturday, Swartz's mother has posted a statement on the site YCombinator: 'Thank you all for your kind words and thoughts. Aaron has been depressed about his case/upcoming trial, but we had no idea what he was going through was this painful. Legal troubles: In 2011, the Reddit co-founder was arrested and charged with hacking into MIT's JSTOR online journal archive and stealing more than four million academic papers Legal troubles: In 2011, the Reddit co-founder was arrested and charged with hacking into MIT's JSTOR online journal archive and stealing more than four million academic papers 'Aaron was a terrific young man. He contributed a lot to the world in his short life and I regret the loss of all the things he had yet to accomplish. As you can imagine, we all miss him dearly. The grief is unfathomable.' Swartz's friend Cory Doctorow, of Boing Boing, published a touching tribute in his honor early a tribute early Saturday morning after learning of his death. 'I'm so sorry for Aaron, and sorry about Aaron. My sincere condolences to his parents, whom I never met, but who loved their brilliant, magnificently weird son and made sure he always had chaperonage when he went abroad on his adventures,' he wrote in part. 'We have all lost someone today who had more work to do, and who made the world a better place when he did it.' In his piece, Doctorow speculated that it is possible that what drove his friend to suicide is the prospect of incarceration, and all that comes with it. 'Imprisonment is one of my most visceral terrors, and it's at least credible that fear of losing his liberty, of being subjected to violence (and perhaps sexual violence) in prison, was what drove Aaron to take this step,' he wrote. 'AARON'S DEATH IS NOT JUST A PERSONAL TRAGEDY': FAMILY CLAIM 'EXTRAORDINARY' WEB PIONEER WAS BULLIED BY AUTHORITIES Our beloved brother, son, friend, and partner Aaron Swartz hanged himself on Friday in his Brooklyn apartment. We are in shock, and have not yet come to terms with his passing. Aaron's insatiable curiosity, creativity, and brilliance; his reflexive empathy and capacity for selfless, boundless love; his refusal to accept injustice as inevitable - these gifts made the world, and our lives, far brighter. We're grateful for our time with him, to those who loved him and stood with him, and to all of those who continue his work for a better world. Aaron's commitment to social justice was profound, and defined his life. He was instrumental to the defeat of an Internet censorship bill; he fought for a more democratic, open, and accountable political system; and he helped to create, build, and preserve a dizzying range of scholarly projects that extended the scope and accessibility of human knowledge. He used his prodigious skills as a programmer and technologist not to enrich himself but to make the Internet and the world a fairer, better place. His deeply humane writing touched minds and hearts across generations and continents. He earned the friendship of thousands and the respect and support of millions more. Aaron's death is not simply a personal tragedy. It is the product of a criminal justice system rife with intimidation and prosecutorial overreach. Decisions made by officials in the Massachusetts U.S. Attorney's office and at MIT contributed to his death. The US Attorney's office pursued an exceptionally harsh array of charges, carrying potentially over 30 years in prison, to punish an alleged crime that had no victims. Meanwhile, unlike JSTOR, MIT refused to stand up for Aaron and its own community's most cherished principles. Today, we grieve for the extraordinary and irreplaceable man that we have lost. Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2262831/Revealed-Aaron-Swartz-prosecutor-drove-hacker-suicide-2008-named-cyber-crime-case.html#ixzz2I9qhWtwV Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/jpeg Size: 32176 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/jpeg Size: 24317 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/jpeg Size: 51117 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/jpeg Size: 41884 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/jpeg Size: 64451 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/jpeg Size: 49594 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/jpeg Size: 71857 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/jpeg Size: 19746 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/jpeg Size: 24906 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/jpeg Size: 63229 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/jpeg Size: 87684 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/jpeg Size: 69919 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/jpeg Size: 67429 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- 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 From rguerra at privaterra.org Thu Jan 17 10:15:10 2013 From: rguerra at privaterra.org (Robert Guerra) Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2013 10:15:10 -0500 Subject: [governance] US 2nd on Internet Freedom In-Reply-To: <20130117124721.GC17517@thorion.it.jyu.fi> References: <50F7BEBC.9060600@gmail.com> <20130117124721.GC17517@thorion.it.jyu.fi> Message-ID: Paul & Tapani, The larger question is how verifiable, objective and replicable the results of the report are - or are not. While the methodology and aggregate scores are public, the individual scores aren't released. There is a bit of subjective basis - much more so then the authors of the report care to mention. For example, the scores for the UK & US, in my opinion are far higher then would be expected given the serious violations of privacy, widespread surveillance and over criminalization of "computer crimes" that exists in the two countries. It would be interesting to have an independent 3rd party use the same methodology and see if the same scores are achieved. Perhaps something that could be crowd-sourced.The results of such an independent review would provide quite constructive feedback not just to the report authors, but to the larger community that is involved in the area of digital rights metrics and methodologies. regards Robert -- R. Guerra Phone/Cell: +1 202-905-2081 Twitter: twitter.com/netfreedom Email: rguerra at privaterra.org On 2013-01-17, at 7:47 AM, Tapani Tarvainen wrote: > On Jan 17 07:35, Paul Lehto (lehto.paul at gmail.com) wrote: > >> On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 4:05 AM, Riaz K Tayob wrote: >> >>> no notable arrests of bloggers [in the USA qualifies the USA as second >>> most friendly country to the Internet] > >> Congratulations to Estonia, but the USA is ranked too high at >> second, and there are so many countries in Africa, South America and >> Asia (and even Canada) for which the study's graphic says the study >> has "no data." What? > > The report does not claim to cover all countries or even attempt to, > rather it's a deliberately selective sample. The aim was to be > thorough with a limited set of countries rather than covering > as many countries as possible. > > So it does not claim Estonia is the most Internet-friendly country > in the world, or USA as the second - those rankings are only among > the sample studied. > > -- > Tapani Tarvainen > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From kovenronald at aol.com Thu Jan 17 10:51:32 2013 From: kovenronald at aol.com (Koven Ronald) Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2013 10:51:32 -0500 (EST) Subject: [governance] US 2nd on Internet Freedom In-Reply-To: <50F81727.30309@gmail.com> References: <50F7BEBC.9060600@gmail.com> <50F7FABC.3050600@ITforChange.net> <50F81727.30309@gmail.com> Message-ID: <8CFC2E1A7EEC5C8-1E10-43B9D@webmail-m003.sysops.aol.com> See the IREX and CIMA studies questioning the scientific bases of the methodologies of all the major rating systems -- described as highly subjective and generally confirming of the predelictions of the raters, who are chosen on a hit or miss basis (as I can personally attest, having served as a Freedom House rater). Rony Koven -----Original Message----- From: Riaz K Tayob To: governance Sent: Thu, Jan 17, 2013 4:37 pm Subject: Re: [governance] US 2nd on Internet Freedom Well these kinds of metrics and systems are useful, up to a point only, and who pays the piper often calls the tune. Of course, with some it is the ideology that shapes the "success" factors. If one looks at Transparency Intl ratings, Iceland that had a financial fraud of 3 x its GDP, was rated as the least corrupt. After the financial crisis, and the lack of prosecutions for fraud etc, with few exceptions, not much has changed... of course these kinds of things do help "discipline" poor countries... Riaz On 2013/01/17 03:21 PM, Guru गुरु wrote: The study has been done by Freedom House. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_House says "As of 2010, grants awarded from the US government accounted for most of Freedom House's funding ..." I suppose that helps to discount the wikileaks episode, cyber warfare on nations, sopa/pipa .. regards, Guru On 01/17/2013 02:35 PM, Riaz K Tayob wrote: U.S. Ranks Second in Internet Freedom, Behind Estonia Alex Fitzpatrick Sep 27, 2012 The United States has the second highest degree of Internet freedom in the world, according to a new study from Freedom House. What country's ahead of America? Estonia, a country of 1.29 million in northeast Europe. Estonia Why does Estonia top the list? According to Freedom House, it "ranks among the most wired and technologically advanced countries in the world." "With a high internet penetration rate and widespread e-commerce and e-government services embedded into the daily lives of individuals and organizations, Estonia has become a model for free internet access as a development engine for society," reads the report. Estonia's commitment to technological innovation in government is especially remarkable considering the former Soviet state's weak economy following the breakup of the Soviet Union in the early 1990s. Freedom House credits the country's first independent leaders with putting the country on a track towards economic development through technology and innovation. "The country’s new leadership. . .perceived the expansion of information and communication technologies (ICTs) as a key to economic growth and invested heavily in their development," reads the report. Update: As a Mashable reader pointed out, NATO's Cooperative Cyber Defense Centre of Excellence was built in Estonia in 2008, resulting in the funneling of funds to improve the country's IT infrastructure. Freedom House ranks countries' "Internet Freedom Status" in three main ways: obstacles to access, limits on content and violations of users' rights. It also factors in tertiary factors, including internet penetration and blogger arrests. Estonia got high marks in almost every category. The United States The United States got nearly as excellent marks, with 78% internet penetration and no notable arrests of bloggers. However, the debate over the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) and the PROTECT IP Act (PIPA), two bills considered a threat by many Internet free speech advocates, raised some eyebrows. "Internet access in the United States remains open and fairly free compared with the rest of the world," reads the report. "Courts have consistently held that prohibitions against government regulation of speech apply to material published on the internet, but the government’s surveillance powers are cause for some concern. In early 2012, campaigns by civil society and technology companies helped to halt passage of the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) and the Protect IP Act (PIPA), which were criticized for their potentially negative effects on free speech." Freedom House also warned of greater U.S. government interference in the open Internet. "Several developments in recent years, however, have placed the government and internet freedom advocates at odds over aspects of internet regulation as well as issues surrounding online surveillance and privacy. The United States lags behind many major industrialized countries in terms of broadband penetration, and network operators have challenged recent rules concerning network neutrality. The current administration appears committed to maintaining broad surveillance powers with the aim of combating terrorism, child pornography, and other criminal activity. Moreover, reports have emerged that the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) is seeking expanded authority to control the design of internet services to ensure that communications can be intercepted when necessary." At the bottom of the list were Iran, Cuba and China, while Belarus, Saudi Arabia, Uzbekistan, Thailand and seven other countries received a rating of "Not Free." To read the full report, visit Freedom House. Are you surprised Estonia topped the list? Should the United States be where it is, higher or lower? Share your thoughts in the comments. Image courtesy of iStockphoto, Olena_T ____________________________________________________________ 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: -------------- 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 From kichango at gmail.com Thu Jan 17 10:59:35 2013 From: kichango at gmail.com (Mawaki Chango) Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2013 10:59:35 -0500 Subject: AW: [governance] Multistakeholder Roles and Responsibilities In-Reply-To: References: <01c801cdf457$f76a3fc0$e63ebf40$@gmail.com> <50F763C0.5070907@ciroap.org> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8013314B4@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> <50F8024D.1010306@apc.org> Message-ID: Great point, Deborah! I think we need always to follow-up and build on the formal outcomes of our previous interactions with the structures and authorities we're dealing with. Some of us who in various capacities have various experiences with those entities may be skeptical or even attempted to be cynical. I'd favor the following principle: Be cynical all you want, but act hopeful. Which does not prevent anyone from strategizing with or petitioning other actors and potential allies. Just my 2 cents mawaki On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 9:58 AM, Deborah Brown wrote: > +1 > > In addition to the commitments that the SG made during the meeting with > civil society at WCIT that Joana mentioned, the ITU issued the following > statement in response to a 10 December civil society letter to WCIT. > > • We recognize that the current institutional structures do not > facilitate independent civil society participation in the work of the ITU. > Given that it is unlikely that institutional changes can be implemented > during the WCIT, we ask that the two above issues be addressed immediately > and that the ITU commit to reviewing and putting in place mechanisms that > will encourage a more flexible approach to participation by civil society. > [From 10 December letter] > > Only the Plenipotentiary Conference of the ITU – the highest governing body > of the organization – can change institutional rules and procedures or > effect changes to the ITU Constitution. I believe post-WCIT-12 we will have > time to take stock and provide our membership with some important > recommendations in line with what you raise. I would also take the > opportunity to remind you that all civil society organizations, who are > international in nature and who are working in the area of ICTs are welcome > to join the ITU and apply for exemption of fees. I believe we will all > benefit from a greater civil society engagement at ITU and in line with this > I recently invited the International Trade Union Movement to join. > > The document is available on WCITLeaks, but (ironically) is locked behind a > TIES log in: > http://files.wcitleaks.org/public/S12-WCIT12-INF-0005!!MSW-E.pdf > > I don't think seeking the right to participate at the WTPF would require > changes at the plenipotentiary level (please do correct me if this > assumption is wrong) so if we decide to go ahead with a letter, we might > want to cite the sentence I highlighted above. > > Best, > Deborah > > > On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 8:53 AM, Anriette Esterhuysen > wrote: >> >> Agree, and I think that Jeremy and Joana and Wolfgang's suggestions are >> not mutually exclusive. >> >> We can send a letter, and ask member-states and sector members to also >> raise this issue and make sure that our letter is discussed. >> >> Best >> >> Anriette >> >> On 17/01/2013 12:43, "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang" wrote: >> >> Hi Joana and all >> >> there is another PrepMeeting for the WTPF in February in Geneva. >> http://www.itu.int/en/wtpf-13/Pages/ieg.aspx >> >> It is important to raise this question in this meeting. I have no idea >> whether this meeting (February 6 - 8, 2013 in the ITU HQ) is open. If not we >> should send a letter to like minded governments and to the ITU SG before >> February 6 and to push for a clear response to our request for equal >> participation in the WTPF, independent from national governmental >> delegations. >> >> Wolfgang >> >> ________________________________ >> >> Von: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org im Auftrag von Joana Varon >> Gesendet: Do 17.01.2013 04:55 >> An: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Jeremy Malcolm >> Cc: >> Betreff: Re: [governance] Multistakeholder Roles and Responsibilities >> >> >> Dear Jeremy and all, >> >> Regarding your observation and the fact that a couple of civil society >> representatives were able to have a meeting with Mr Toure during the WCIT >> and managed to deliver to him our statement that reinforced some points of >> the best bits statement, including demands for an open participation of CS >> in ITU processes, isn't it the time to recall him of our "Civil Society >> statement on the new ITRs and the future of multi-stakeholder engagement" >> and try to ask for the changes he has promised to try to make during our >> meeting? >> >> Please, correct me if it seams too naive, but if we go again through these >> alternative channels to submit our comments and so on( such as CS being part >> of government delegation - it's own or other "friendly" governements, or >> just engaging with sector members), we will just repeat the quite >> frustrating (lack of) participation scenery of WCIT at WTPF. >> >> Maybe Wolfgang, Avri or other fellows that have attended WCIT could have >> some thoughts to add on this. >> >> best, >> >> joana >> >> >> >> >> -- >> ------------------------------------------------------ >> anriette esterhuysen anriette at apc.org >> executive director, association for progressive communications >> www.apc.org >> po box 29755, melville 2109 >> south africa >> tel/fax +27 11 726 1692 >> >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 >> > > > > -- > Deborah Brown > Policy Analyst > Access | AccessNow.org > E. deborah at accessnow.org > S. deborah.l.brown > T. deblebrown > PGP 0x5EB4727D > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From ivarhartmann at gmail.com Thu Jan 17 11:07:13 2013 From: ivarhartmann at gmail.com (Ivar A. M. Hartmann) Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2013 14:07:13 -0200 Subject: [governance] US 2nd on Internet Freedom In-Reply-To: <8CFC2E1A7EEC5C8-1E10-43B9D@webmail-m003.sysops.aol.com> References: <50F7BEBC.9060600@gmail.com> <50F7FABC.3050600@ITforChange.net> <50F81727.30309@gmail.com> <8CFC2E1A7EEC5C8-1E10-43B9D@webmail-m003.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: As co-author of the 2012 report for Brazil, I can attest that the rating is mostly subjective. The author attributes scores for different elements, all determined by Freedom House. Also, and this is perhaps more troubling, the published scores aren't always those determined by the authors. Best, Ivar On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 1:51 PM, Koven Ronald wrote: > See the IREX and CIMA studies questioning the scientific bases of the > methodologies of all the major rating systems -- described as highly > subjective and generally confirming of the predelictions of the raters, who > are chosen on a hit or miss basis (as I can personally attest, having > served as a Freedom House rater). > > Rony Koven > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Riaz K Tayob > To: governance > Sent: Thu, Jan 17, 2013 4:37 pm > Subject: Re: [governance] US 2nd on Internet Freedom > > Well these kinds of metrics and systems are useful, up to a point only, > and who pays the piper often calls the tune. Of course, with some it is the > ideology that shapes the "success" factors. > > If one looks at Transparency Intl ratings, Iceland that had a financial > fraud of 3 x its GDP, was rated as the least corrupt. After the financial > crisis, and the lack of prosecutions for fraud etc, with few exceptions, > not much has changed... of course these kinds of things do help > "discipline" poor countries... > > Riaz > > > > On 2013/01/17 03:21 PM, Guru गुरु wrote: > > The study has been done by Freedom House. > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_House says > > "As of 2010, grants awarded from the US governmentaccounted for most of Freedom House's funding ..." > > I suppose that helps to discount the wikileaks episode, cyber warfare on > nations, sopa/pipa .. > > regards, > Guru > > > On 01/17/2013 02:35 PM, Riaz K Tayob wrote: > > U.S. Ranks Second in Internet Freedom, Behind Estonia > Alex Fitzpatrick > Sep 27, 2012 > The United States has the second highest degree of Internet freedom in the > world, according to a new study from Freedom House. What country's ahead of > America? Estonia, a country of 1.29 million in northeast Europe. > > > Estonia > Why does Estonia top the list? According to Freedom House, it "ranks among > the most wired and technologically advanced countries in the world." > "With a high internet penetration rate and widespread e-commerce and > e-government services embedded into the daily lives of individuals and > organizations, Estonia has become a model for free internet access as a > development engine for society," reads the report. > Estonia's commitment to technological innovation in government is > especially remarkable considering the former Soviet state's weak economy > following the breakup of the Soviet Union in the early 1990s. Freedom House > credits the country's first independent leaders with putting the country on > a track towards economic development through technology and innovation. > "The country’s new leadership. . .perceived the expansion of information > and communication technologies (ICTs) as a key to economic growth and > invested heavily in their development," reads the report. > *Update:* As a *Mashable* reader pointed out, NATO's Cooperative Cyber > Defense Centre of Excellence was built in Estonia in 2008, resulting in the > funneling of funds to improve the country's IT infrastructure. > Freedom House ranks countries' "Internet Freedom Status" in three main > ways: obstacles to access, limits on content and violations of users' > rights. It also factors in tertiary factors, including internet penetration > and blogger arrests. Estonia got high marks in almost every category. > The United States > The United States got nearly as excellent marks, with 78% internet > penetration and no notable arrests of bloggers. However, the debate over > the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) and the PROTECT IP Act (PIPA), two bills > considered a threat by many Internet free speech advocates, raised some > eyebrows. > > "Internet access in the United States remains open and fairly free > compared with the rest of the world," reads the report. "Courts have > consistently held that prohibitions against government regulation of speech > apply to material published on the internet, but the government’s > surveillance powers are cause for some concern. In early 2012, campaigns by > civil society and technology companies helped to halt passage of the Stop > Online Piracy Act (SOPA) and the Protect IP Act (PIPA), which were > criticized for their potentially negative effects on free speech." > > Freedom House also warned of greater U.S. government interference in the > open Internet. > > "Several developments in recent years, however, have placed the government > and internet freedom advocates at odds over aspects of internet regulation > as well as issues surrounding online surveillance and privacy. The United > States lags behind many major industrialized countries in terms of > broadband penetration, and network operators have challenged recent rules > concerning network neutrality. The current administration appears committed > to maintaining broad surveillance powers with the aim of combating > terrorism, child pornography, and other criminal activity. Moreover, > reports have emerged that the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) is > seeking expanded authority to control the design of internet services to > ensure that communications can be intercepted when necessary." > > At the bottom of the list were Iran, Cuba and China, while Belarus, Saudi > Arabia, Uzbekistan, Thailand and seven other countries received a rating of > "Not Free." > To read the full report, visit Freedom House. > Are you surprised Estonia topped the list? Should the United States be > where it is, higher or lower? Share your thoughts in the comments. > *Image courtesy of iStockphoto, > Olena_T > * > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From ca at cafonso.ca Thu Jan 17 11:08:50 2013 From: ca at cafonso.ca (Carlos A. Afonso) Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2013 14:08:50 -0200 Subject: [governance] US 2nd on Internet Freedom In-Reply-To: <81A05D3E-F477-454C-88AD-95705E9DDA73@privaterra.org> References: <50F7BEBC.9060600@gmail.com> <50F7FABC.3050600@ITforChange.net> <81A05D3E-F477-454C-88AD-95705E9DDA73@privaterra.org> Message-ID: <50F82212.4030209@cafonso.ca> Yes, I guess to get this kind of funding they have to adopt proper terminology to identify foes of the USA. Like "strongman Chávez" etc. Strange, contrary to several US allies, Venezuela is a representative democracy, with all its imperfections. And the paragraph on "the Americas" seems to find Chávez the only "big issue" to report. Incredibly biased... --c.a. On 01/17/2013 01:24 PM, Robert Guerra wrote: > Guru, > > Just because Freedom House gets its funding for the report from the US State Department (as well as other foreign govts may I add) isn't , I believe, sufficient grounds to summarily dismiss the report findings. > > If you or others have issues with the report, then the most strategic way to challenge the findings is with actual data. For instance, it would be interesting to see if a 3rd party using their same methodology would achieve the same aggregate scores for the countries surveyed. > > My personal view is that the scores for the US & UK would, in an independent review, would be far lower - indicating a far more contested digital rights environment. > > regards > > Robert > > > On 2013-01-17, at 8:21 AM, Guru गुरु wrote: > >> The study has been done by Freedom House. >> >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_House says >> >> "As of 2010, grants awarded from the US government accounted for most of Freedom House's funding ..." >> >> I suppose that helps to discount the wikileaks episode, cyber warfare on nations, sopa/pipa .. >> >> regards, >> Guru >> >> >> On 01/17/2013 02:35 PM, Riaz K Tayob wrote: >>> U.S. Ranks Second in Internet Freedom, Behind Estonia >>> >>> Alex Fitzpatrick >>> Sep 27, 2012 >>> The United States has the second highest degree of Internet freedom in the world, according to a new study from Freedom House. What country's ahead of America? Estonia, a country of 1.29 million in northeast Europe. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> Estonia >>> >>> Why does Estonia top the list? According to Freedom House, it "ranks among the most wired and technologically advanced countries in the world." >>> >>> "With a high internet penetration rate and widespread e-commerce and e-government services embedded into the daily lives of individuals and organizations, Estonia has become a model for free internet access as a development engine for society," reads the report. >>> >>> Estonia's commitment to technological innovation in government is especially remarkable considering the former Soviet state's weak economy following the breakup of the Soviet Union in the early 1990s. Freedom House credits the country's first independent leaders with putting the country on a track towards economic development through technology and innovation. >>> >>> "The country’s new leadership. . .perceived the expansion of information and communication technologies (ICTs) as a key to economic growth and invested heavily in their development," reads the report. >>> >>> Update: As a Mashable reader pointed out, NATO's Cooperative Cyber Defense Centre of Excellence was built in Estonia in 2008, resulting in the funneling of funds to improve the country's IT infrastructure. >>> >>> Freedom House ranks countries' "Internet Freedom Status" in three main ways: obstacles to access, limits on content and violations of users' rights. It also factors in tertiary factors, including internet penetration and blogger arrests. Estonia got high marks in almost every category. >>> >>> The United States >>> >>> The United States got nearly as excellent marks, with 78% internet penetration and no notable arrests of bloggers. However, the debate over the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) and the PROTECT IP Act (PIPA), two bills considered a threat by many Internet free speech advocates, raised some eyebrows. >>> >>> "Internet access in the United States remains open and fairly free compared with the rest of the world," reads the report. "Courts have consistently held that prohibitions against government regulation of speech apply to material published on the internet, but the government’s surveillance powers are cause for some concern. In early 2012, campaigns by civil society and technology companies helped to halt passage of the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) and the Protect IP Act (PIPA), which were criticized for their potentially negative effects on free speech." >>> >>> Freedom House also warned of greater U.S. government interference in the open Internet. >>> >>> "Several developments in recent years, however, have placed the government and internet freedom advocates at odds over aspects of internet regulation as well as issues surrounding online surveillance and privacy. The United States lags behind many major industrialized countries in terms of broadband penetration, and network operators have challenged recent rules concerning network neutrality. The current administration appears committed to maintaining broad surveillance powers with the aim of combating terrorism, child pornography, and other criminal activity. Moreover, reports have emerged that the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) is seeking expanded authority to control the design of internet services to ensure that communications can be intercepted when necessary." >>> >>> At the bottom of the list were Iran, Cuba and China, while Belarus, Saudi Arabia, Uzbekistan, Thailand and seven other countries received a rating of "Not Free." >>> >>> To read the full report, visit Freedom House. Are you surprised Estonia topped the list? Should the United States be where it is, higher or lower? Share your thoughts in the comments. >>> >>> Image courtesy of iStockphoto, Olena_T >>> >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From riaz.tayob at gmail.com Thu Jan 17 10:49:04 2013 From: riaz.tayob at gmail.com (Riaz K Tayob) Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2013 17:49:04 +0200 Subject: [governance] US 2nd on Internet Freedom In-Reply-To: <81A05D3E-F477-454C-88AD-95705E9DDA73@privaterra.org> References: <50F7BEBC.9060600@gmail.com> <50F7FABC.3050600@ITforChange.net> <81A05D3E-F477-454C-88AD-95705E9DDA73@privaterra.org> Message-ID: <50F81D70.6030407@gmail.com> Fair incisive point. But one can also make rough determinations from political positioning, kinda like single rooters used to do, despite the technical capability... On 2013/01/17 05:24 PM, Robert Guerra wrote: > Guru, > > Just because Freedom House gets its funding for the report from the US > State Department (as well as other foreign govts may I add) isn't , I > believe, sufficient grounds to summarily dismiss the report findings. > > If you or others have issues with the report, then the most strategic > way to challenge the findings is with actual data. For instance, it > would be interesting to see if a 3rd party using their same > methodology would achieve the same aggregate scores for the countries > surveyed. > > My personal view is that the scores for the US & UK would, in an > independent review, would be far lower - indicating a far more > contested digital rights environment. > > regards > > Robert > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From gurstein at gmail.com Thu Jan 17 13:30:26 2013 From: gurstein at gmail.com (michael gurstein) Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2013 10:30:26 -0800 Subject: [governance] US 2nd on Internet Freedom In-Reply-To: <81A05D3E-F477-454C-88AD-95705E9DDA73@privaterra.org> References: <50F7BEBC.9060600@gmail.com> <50F7FABC.3050600@ITforChange.net> <81A05D3E-F477-454C-88AD-95705E9DDA73@privaterra.org> Message-ID: <013a01cdf4e0$bee7db10$3cb79130$@gmail.com> For those with an interest, it is worth taking the time to download the Freedom House: Freedom on the Internet report (662 pages) and going to the "Methodology" section on page 640 and following. The "methodology" appears to be as follows: · A series of questions associated somehow (this is not explained) with a very high level definition of "freedom" loosely associated with the UNDHR have somehow been formulated but no evidence of pre-test or independent assessment of these questions is provided. · These questions include multiple sub-questions -- some of which are mutually exclusive even internally contradictory, and most of which in turn require significant and in many cases somewhat technical definitions (e.g. "DoS attack) for which no definition or referencing is provided. · These "questions" are in turn given for assessment to "experts" (no justification is given for how these "experts" are chosen, what their specific area of expertise might be, their independence relative to the subject, their standing among their peers as for example through lists of peer reviewed publication in the field and so on, is provided); · These "experts" in turn are required to assign a single numerical score for each question to their designated countries. These scores are then compiled on a national basis and provided to a series of meetings of Freedom House staff and a range of "local experts, scholars, and civil society representatives from the countries under study" for a preliminary assignment of an "Internet Freedom" score. · The outcome of this process is then provided to Freedom House staff (who) do "a final review of all scores to ensure their comparative reliability and integrity". Right… Please note that there is no referencing in the methodology (at least in the most recent report); nor is there an indication of any independent (peer) review, verification or assessment at any stage in the process. Sadly, if not surprisingly, this "methodology" wouldn't pass muster in any reputable Master's (let alone Ph.D.) program that I have had any experience with and would be laughed out of the room in any peer reviewed publication or independent research funding program. As a case study in using pseudo science as a way to manifest and justify researcher bias or as an exercise in applied ideology it might I think, be quite useful and I would recommend this to any suitable undergraduate program in social science methodology as a case in how not to do independent research. As a research study which this claims to be (the term "research" is used 5 time in the first three paragrapsh of the acknowledgements), this should be an embarrassment to both the host organization and the funders. Best, M Michael Gurstein, Ph.D. Executive Director: Centre for Community Informatics Research, Development and Training (CCIRDT) Vancouver, BC CANADA tel/fax: +1-604-602-0624 email: gurstein at gmail.com web: http://communityinformatics.net blog: http://gurstein.wordpress.com twitter: #michaelgurstein From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Robert Guerra Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2013 7:25 AM To: Internet Governance Caucus Subject: Re: [governance] US 2nd on Internet Freedom Guru, Just because Freedom House gets its funding for the report from the US State Department (as well as other foreign govts may I add) isn't , I believe, sufficient grounds to summarily dismiss the report findings. If you or others have issues with the report, then the most strategic way to challenge the findings is with actual data. For instance, it would be interesting to see if a 3rd party using their same methodology would achieve the same aggregate scores for the countries surveyed. My personal view is that the scores for the US & UK would, in an independent review, would be far lower - indicating a far more contested digital rights environment. regards Robert On 2013-01-17, at 8:21 AM, Guru गुरु wrote: The study has been done by Freedom House. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_House says "As of 2010, grants awarded from the US government accounted for most of Freedom House's funding ..." I suppose that helps to discount the wikileaks episode, cyber warfare on nations, sopa/pipa .. regards, Guru On 01/17/2013 02:35 PM, Riaz K Tayob wrote: U.S. Ranks Second in Internet Freedom, Behind Estonia Alex Fitzpatrick Sep 27, 2012 The United States has the second highest degree of Internet freedom in the world, according to a new study from Freedom House. What country's ahead of America? Estonia, a country of 1.29 million in northeast Europe. Estonia Why does Estonia top the list? According to Freedom House, it "ranks among the most wired and technologically advanced countries in the world." "With a high internet penetration rate and widespread e-commerce and e-government services embedded into the daily lives of individuals and organizations, Estonia has become a model for free internet access as a development engine for society," reads the report. Estonia's commitment to technological innovation in government is especially remarkable considering the former Soviet state's weak economy following the breakup of the Soviet Union in the early 1990s. Freedom House credits the country's first independent leaders with putting the country on a track towards economic development through technology and innovation. "The country’s new leadership. . .perceived the expansion of information and communication technologies (ICTs) as a key to economic growth and invested heavily in their development," reads the report. Update: As a Mashable reader pointed out, NATO's Cooperative Cyber Defense Centre of Excellence was built in Estonia in 2008, resulting in the funneling of funds to improve the country's IT infrastructure. Freedom House ranks countries' "Internet Freedom Status" in three main ways: obstacles to access, limits on content and violations of users' rights. It also factors in tertiary factors, including internet penetration and blogger arrests. Estonia got high marks in almost every category. The United States The United States got nearly as excellent marks, with 78% internet penetration and no notable arrests of bloggers. However, the debate over the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) and the PROTECT IP Act (PIPA), two bills considered a threat by many Internet free speech advocates, raised some eyebrows. "Internet access in the United States remains open and fairly free compared with the rest of the world," reads the report. "Courts have consistently held that prohibitions against government regulation of speech apply to material published on the internet, but the government’s surveillance powers are cause for some concern. In early 2012, campaigns by civil society and technology companies helped to halt passage of the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) and the Protect IP Act (PIPA), which were criticized for their potentially negative effects on free speech." Freedom House also warned of greater U.S. government interference in the open Internet. "Several developments in recent years, however, have placed the government and internet freedom advocates at odds over aspects of internet regulation as well as issues surrounding online surveillance and privacy. The United States lags behind many major industrialized countries in terms of broadband penetration, and network operators have challenged recent rules concerning network neutrality. The current administration appears committed to maintaining broad surveillance powers with the aim of combating terrorism, child pornography, and other criminal activity. Moreover, reports have emerged that the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) is seeking expanded authority to control the design of internet services to ensure that communications can be intercepted when necessary." At the bottom of the list were Iran, Cuba and China, while Belarus, Saudi Arabia, Uzbekistan, Thailand and seven other countries received a rating of "Not Free." To read the full report, visit Freedom House . Are you surprised Estonia topped the list? Should the United States be where it is, higher or lower? Share your thoughts in the comments. Image courtesy of iStockphoto , Olena_T ____________________________________________________________ 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: -------------- 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 From devonrb at gmail.com Thu Jan 17 16:40:28 2013 From: devonrb at gmail.com (Devon Blake) Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2013 16:40:28 -0500 Subject: [governance] From Geneva on 2013 MAG selection process In-Reply-To: References: <50F6E18B.7090302@communisphere.com> Message-ID: In looking at the submissions on this and an associated thread. There are two issues which seem to be of some concern; How many new names should be submitted to DESA and whether or not those who are already MAG members should be renominated. On the first issue, seeing we are nominating members to be a part of the 1/3 of members being rotated, and the fact that we have so many qualified people, we should give DESA enough names to make proper choices, so why not submit 7 names. On the second issue, given that each appointment is for one year, this alone suggests to me that best practice is to renominate each IGC delegate, whether they have been there for a year, or from the start. I do understand that there is an unwritten understanding that barring the extraordinary each MAG member we nominate, we expect them to stay for a minimum of three years. We however should not forget that a critical element of democracy, is that we endorse incumbents based on good performance ....or should. Devon n 17, 2013 at 7:03 AM, Kabani wrote: > Tom. > > Many thanks for sharing the email of CM. > > So let us be clear how many people should Nomcom select for MAG > > Time is short, pl guide us Nomcom > > Regards > > On 16 January 2013 22:21, Thomas Lowenhaupt wrote: > >> Here's an email from Chengetai Masango in Geneva about the state of the >> MAG nominations. >> >> Best, >> >> Tom Lowenhaupt >> >> P.S. Not sure why the reference to NY is there. Perhaps we're >> underrepresented? >> >> >> -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: Questions about 2013 >> MAG selection process Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2013 14:17:45 +0100 From: Chengetai >> Masango To: Thomas Lowenhaupt >> CC: Farzaneh BADII >> , Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro >> >> >> HI Thomas >> >> Civil Society is one of the stakeholder groups that are most up to date >> as far as the rotation is concerned. >> >> The majority seem to have been renewed during the last rotation. >> >> I think if you send three or four names (to give NY a choice) that >> should be more than enough. >> >> Best regards >> >> Chengetai >> >> >> >> On Jan 15, 2013, at 11:38 PM, Thomas Lowenhaupt >> wrote: >> >> I am the Chair of the Civil Society Internet Governance Caucus >> Nominating Committee charged with selecting names of IGC members to put >> forth for selection to the 2013 MAG. Thirty five (35) IGC members have been >> nominated. Our review and selection process would be aided if you would >> provide some insight into the process you will be following in selecting >> 2013 MAG members. >> >> We have been advised that DESA might rotate 1/3 of the MAG's 55 members >> this year, roughly 18 members. That those appointed to the MAG last year >> are more than likely to remain, and that their reapplication at this point >> would be unnecessary. >> >> It is expected that more than one civil society organization is likely to >> provide DESA with MAG nominees. The IGC has over 30 applicants for what >> looks to be a possible 18 vacant MAG seats. >> >> The IGC's Nominating Committee members are well aware of the credentials >> and suitability of our nominees and in the best position to select the >> cream from amongst them. This would provide DESA with a highly qualified >> group of nominees from which to choose its MAG appointees. We are prepared >> to take the difficult task of narrowing down the applicant pool from 35 as >> appropriate. >> >> We would greatly appreciate your providing some guidance as to the number >> of nominees from IGC that would most fruitfully meet the needs of DESA. >> >> Sincerely, >> >> Thomas Lowenhaupt, Non Voting Chair >> Internet Governance Caucus Nominating Committee >> >>> >> >> >> >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 >> >> > > > -- > *Connect me* > [image: Facebook] [image: Twitter] > [image: Youtube] [image: > LinkedIn] > > *Wait Before you print - Think about the** **ENVIRONMENT* > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > -- Devon Blake Special Projects Director Earthwise Solutions Limited 29 Dominica Drive Kgn 5 ,Phone: Office 876-968-4534, Mobile, 876-483-2632 To be kind, To be helpful, To network *Earthwise ... For Life!* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From ian.peter at ianpeter.com Thu Jan 17 18:25:21 2013 From: ian.peter at ianpeter.com (Ian Peter) Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2013 10:25:21 +1100 Subject: [governance] Appeals Team - Call for Comments and Interim Findings Message-ID: <99B5B12AE95441728A797F79FC884BD5@Toshiba> In accordance with the IGC Charter, the Appeals team is now requesting comments from the IGC membership as regards the appeal against the removal from the IGC list of Suresh Ramasubramanian. Comments should be sent to appealsteam at lists.igcaucus.org In doing so, we announce that our interim finding is that Suresh’s removal from the IGC list was not in accordance with the IGC Charter. The Charter offers a specific set of procedures which must be followed before such removal takes place. In this case, the previous private and public warnings given to Suresh needed to be followed by a one month suspension, not removal from the list. As Suresh has not previously served a one month suspension, we have no option but to find the appeal is upheld. Therefore we intend to recommend that, when we publish our final findings, as soon as possible after the public comments period ends 48 hours after this posting, Suresh should be reinstated to the list. We do suggest that, should you wish to comment, you first acquaint yourself with the very specific provisions outlined in the IGC charter, which can be found at http://www.igcaucus.org/charter. It is those provisions, and whether they have been followed or not, that must determine whether the appeal should be upheld, not our personal opinions on the decision made by our elected co-ordinator. Please comment within 48 hours. After the comments period has ended, we will post our findings with appropriate recommendations. The Appeals Team Shaila Mistry, Ginger Paque, Roland Perry , Ian Peter and Deidre Williams. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From kelly at freedomhouse.org Thu Jan 17 19:17:28 2013 From: kelly at freedomhouse.org (Sanja Kelly) Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2013 00:17:28 +0000 Subject: FW: Re: [governance] US 2nd on Internet Freedom In-Reply-To: <50F8197C.4030109@wzb.eu> References: <81A05D3E-F477-454C-88AD-95705E9DDA73@privaterra.org> <50F8197C.4030109@wzb.eu> Message-ID: Hi everyone, A colleague mentioned to me that Freedom House’s index of internet freedom was being discussed on the list, so I wanted to jump in and offer a few explanations for those who may not be familiar with our methodology (for those who don’t know me, I direct the Freedom on the Net project at Freedom House). Freedom House evaluates internet freedom through a series of questions ranging from obstacles to access, content regulation, to surveillance and censorship practices, attacks on bloggers, and so on. The methodology is posted on our website and the questions can be found here (p 642): http://www.freedomhouse.org/sites/default/files/resources/FOTN%202012%20-%20Full%20Report.pdf . I think that some people perceive that FH staff gets together behind the closed door and arbitrarily decides on the scores:-), but the project is actually a collaborative effort of 60 independent researchers from the countries under study who act as primary report authors and additional 90-100 independent advisors who act as report and scores reviewers. The contributors are typically scholars, journalists, and civil society representatives who live in the country, but due to repressive political environment at home (China, Saudi Arabia, etc), many have requested to remain anonymous. We apply the same methodology to every country around the world and in most instances the metrics are quite precise (e.g. if a country blocks, let’s say, 100 political websites, it’s going to get the same score on that particular question regardless of where it is or what kind of political system it has). While no metric is perfect, I think the project is quite unique and effective in measuring various aspects of internet freedom around the world. We also acknowledge that various audiences may have different definition of internet freedom, but that is true with many concepts in social science (just look at definitions of “democracy”). Regarding some of the questions that were raised in previous comments: • Yes, the United States scored 2nd on our evaluation; however, it is incorrect to say that we think that the U.S. is the second most free country in the world. As you will notice on our website and in the book, the United States scored 2nd among 47 countries that we evaluated last year. Since the project covered only 47 countries, it is very likely that had we included places such as Iceland, Finland, the Netherlands, and a few others, most of them would have scored higher that the U.S. Currently our country coverage is limited due to funding (I think you all can related to that!), but we are hoping to be able to gradually expand to the rest of the world. Unfortunately, media can often misrepresent numbers, thus you see the headlines like the one you cited earlier in the thread. • Regarding SOPA, PIPA, etc. Our methodology and research process take a meticulous look at the existence and implementation of laws relating to various aspect of internet freedom. However, we only lower the score when proposed legislation actually becomes a law and is implemented. Had SOPA/PIPA passed in Congress and been signed into law, the United States scores would have dramatically worsened. Although you may disagree with this approach, it is the method we use when scoring any country around the world, which makes the index quite effective in comparing the developments internationally. I am currently travelling, but would be happy to chat next week with anyone who is interested to provide constructive feedback, learn more, or get involved with the project (we are always looking for country contributors, and then advisors who independently evaluate the scores and reports written by the country contributors). Feel free to drop me a line (Kelly at freedomhouse.org) or schedule a Skype call. I don’t follow this forum, so it’s more effective to get in touch directly. Cheers, Sanja Sanja Tatic Kelly Project Director, Freedom on the Net Freedom House -------- Original-Nachricht -------- Betreff: Re: [governance] US 2nd on Internet Freedom Datum: Thu, 17 Jan 2013 10:24:42 -0500 Von: Robert Guerra > Antwort an: governance at lists.igcaucus.org,Robert Guerra > An: Internet Governance Caucus > Guru, Just because Freedom House gets its funding for the report from the US State Department (as well as other foreign govts may I add) isn't , I believe, sufficient grounds to summarily dismiss the report findings. If you or others have issues with the report, then the most strategic way to challenge the findings is with actual data. For instance, it would be interesting to see if a 3rd party using their same methodology would achieve the same aggregate scores for the countries surveyed. My personal view is that the scores for the US & UK would, in an independent review, would be far lower - indicating a far more contested digital rights environment. regards Robert On 2013-01-17, at 8:21 AM, Guru गुरु wrote: > The study has been done by Freedom House. > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_House says > > "As of 2010, grants awarded from the US government > accounted for > most of Freedom House's funding ..." > > I suppose that helps to discount the wikileaks episode, cyber warfare > on nations, sopa/pipa .. > > regards, > Guru > > > On 01/17/2013 02:35 PM, Riaz K Tayob wrote: >> >> >> U.S. Ranks Second in Internet Freedom, Behind Estonia >> >> Alex Fitzpatrick >> Sep 27, 2012 >> >> The United States has the second highest degree of Internet freedom >> in the world, according to a new study from Freedom House. What >> country's ahead of America? Estonia, a country of 1.29 million in >> northeast Europe. >> >> >> >> Estonia >> >> Why does Estonia top the list? According to Freedom House, it "ranks >> among the most wired and technologically advanced countries in the >> world." >> >> "With a high internet penetration rate and widespread e-commerce and >> e-government services embedded into the daily lives of individuals >> and organizations, Estonia has become a model for free internet >> access as a development engine for society," reads the report. >> >> Estonia's commitment to technological innovation in government is >> especially remarkable considering the former Soviet state's weak >> economy following the breakup of the Soviet Union in the early 1990s. >> Freedom House credits the country's first independent leaders with >> putting the country on a track towards economic development through >> technology and innovation. >> >> "The country’s new leadership. . .perceived the expansion of >> information and communication technologies (ICTs) as a key to >> economic growth and invested heavily in their development," reads the >> report. >> >> /Update:/ As a /Mashable/ reader pointed out, NATO's Cooperative >> Cyber Defense Centre of Excellence was built in Estonia in 2008, >> resulting in the funneling of funds to improve the country's IT >> infrastructure. >> >> Freedom House ranks countries' "Internet Freedom Status" in three >> main ways: obstacles to access, limits on content and violations of >> users' rights. It also factors in tertiary factors, including >> internet penetration and blogger arrests. Estonia got high marks in >> almost every category. >> >> >> The United States >> >> The United States got nearly as excellent marks, with 78% internet >> penetration and no notable arrests of bloggers. However, the debate >> over the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) and the PROTECT IP Act (PIPA), >> two bills considered a threat by many Internet free speech advocates, >> raised some eyebrows. >> >> "Internet access in the United States remains open and fairly >> free compared with the rest of the world," reads the report. >> "Courts have consistently held that prohibitions against >> government regulation of speech apply to material published on >> the internet, but the government’s surveillance powers are cause >> for some concern. In early 2012, campaigns by civil society and >> technology companies helped to halt passage of the Stop Online >> Piracy Act (SOPA) and the Protect IP Act (PIPA), which were >> criticized for their potentially negative effects on free speech." >> >> Freedom House also warned of greater U.S. government interference in >> the open Internet. >> >> "Several developments in recent years, however, have placed the >> government and internet freedom advocates at odds over aspects of >> internet regulation as well as issues surrounding online >> surveillance and privacy. The United States lags behind many >> major industrialized countries in terms of broadband penetration, >> and network operators have challenged recent rules concerning >> network neutrality. The current administration appears committed >> to maintaining broad surveillance powers with the aim of >> combating terrorism, child pornography, and other criminal >> activity. Moreover, reports have emerged that the Federal Bureau >> of Investigation (FBI) is seeking expanded authority to control >> the design of internet services to ensure that communications can >> be intercepted when necessary." >> >> At the bottom of the list were Iran, Cuba and China, while Belarus, >> Saudi Arabia, Uzbekistan, Thailand and seven other countries received >> a rating of "Not Free." >> >> To read the full report, visit Freedom House >> . >> Are you surprised Estonia topped the list? Should the United States >> be where it is, higher or lower? Share your thoughts in the comments. >> >> /Image courtesy of iStockphoto >> , Olena_T >> > s-america.php?st=089de8e>/ >> > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- next part -------------- An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: message-footer.txt URL: -------------- 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 From gurstein at gmail.com Thu Jan 17 19:39:32 2013 From: gurstein at gmail.com (michael gurstein) Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2013 16:39:32 -0800 Subject: [governance] US 2nd on Internet Freedom In-Reply-To: References: <81A05D3E-F477-454C-88AD-95705E9DDA73@privaterra.org> <50F8197C.4030109@wzb.eu> Message-ID: <030601cdf514$4e294150$ea7bc3f0$@gmail.com> I've turned my earlier comments into a blogpost… http://gurstein.wordpress.com/2013/01/17/with-friends-like-these-freedom-houses-freedom-on-the-internet-report-an-exercise-in-applied-ideology/ M From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Sanja Kelly Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2013 4:17 PM To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org Subject: FW: Re: [governance] US 2nd on Internet Freedom Hi everyone, A colleague mentioned to me that Freedom House’s index of internet freedom was being discussed on the list, so I wanted to jump in and offer a few explanations for those who may not be familiar with our methodology (for those who don’t know me, I direct the Freedom on the Net project at Freedom House). Freedom House evaluates internet freedom through a series of questions ranging from obstacles to access, content regulation, to surveillance and censorship practices, attacks on bloggers, and so on. The methodology is posted on our website and the questions can be found here (p 642): http://www.freedomhouse.org/sites/default/files/resources/FOTN%202012%20-%20Full%20Report.pdf . I think that some people perceive that FH staff gets together behind the closed door and arbitrarily decides on the scores:-), but the project is actually a collaborative effort of 60 independent researchers from the countries under study who act as primary report authors and additional 90-100 independent advisors who act as report and scores reviewers. The contributors are typically scholars, journalists, and civil society representatives who live in the country, but due to repressive political environment at home (China, Saudi Arabia, etc), many have requested to remain anonymous. We apply the same methodology to every country around the world and in most instances the metrics are quite precise (e.g. if a country blocks, let’s say, 100 political websites, it’s going to get the same score on that particular question regardless of where it is or what kind of political system it has). While no metric is perfect, I think the project is quite unique and effective in measuring various aspects of internet freedom around the world. We also acknowledge that various audiences may have different definition of internet freedom, but that is true with many concepts in social science (just look at definitions of “democracy”). Regarding some of the questions that were raised in previous comments: • Yes, the United States scored 2nd on our evaluation; however, it is incorrect to say that we think that the U.S. is the second most free country in the world. As you will notice on our website and in the book, the United States scored 2nd among 47 countries that we evaluated last year. Since the project covered only 47 countries, it is very likely that had we included places such as Iceland, Finland, the Netherlands, and a few others, most of them would have scored higher that the U.S. Currently our country coverage is limited due to funding (I think you all can related to that!), but we are hoping to be able to gradually expand to the rest of the world. Unfortunately, media can often misrepresent numbers, thus you see the headlines like the one you cited earlier in the thread. • Regarding SOPA, PIPA, etc. Our methodology and research process take a meticulous look at the existence and implementation of laws relating to various aspect of internet freedom. However, we only lower the score when proposed legislation actually becomes a law and is implemented. Had SOPA/PIPA passed in Congress and been signed into law, the United States scores would have dramatically worsened. Although you may disagree with this approach, it is the method we use when scoring any country around the world, which makes the index quite effective in comparing the developments internationally. I am currently travelling, but would be happy to chat next week with anyone who is interested to provide constructive feedback, learn more, or get involved with the project (we are always looking for country contributors, and then advisors who independently evaluate the scores and reports written by the country contributors). Feel free to drop me a line (Kelly at freedomhouse.org) or schedule a Skype call. I don’t follow this forum, so it’s more effective to get in touch directly. Cheers, Sanja Sanja Tatic Kelly Project Director, Freedom on the Net Freedom House -------- Original-Nachricht -------- Betreff: Re: [governance] US 2nd on Internet Freedom Datum: Thu, 17 Jan 2013 10:24:42 -0500 Von: Robert Guerra < rguerra at privaterra.org> Antwort an: governance at lists.igcaucus.org,Robert Guerra < rguerra at privaterra.org> An: Internet Governance Caucus < governance at lists.igcaucus.org> Guru, Just because Freedom House gets its funding for the report from the US State Department (as well as other foreign govts may I add) isn't , I believe, sufficient grounds to summarily dismiss the report findings. If you or others have issues with the report, then the most strategic way to challenge the findings is with actual data. For instance, it would be interesting to see if a 3rd party using their same methodology would achieve the same aggregate scores for the countries surveyed. My personal view is that the scores for the US & UK would, in an independent review, would be far lower - indicating a far more contested digital rights environment. regards Robert On 2013-01-17, at 8:21 AM, Guru गुरु wrote: > The study has been done by Freedom House. > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_House says > > "As of 2010, grants awarded from the US government > < http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/US_federal_government> accounted for > most of Freedom House's funding ..." > > I suppose that helps to discount the wikileaks episode, cyber warfare > on nations, sopa/pipa .. > > regards, > Guru > > > On 01/17/2013 02:35 PM, Riaz K Tayob wrote: >> >> >> U.S. Ranks Second in Internet Freedom, Behind Estonia >> >> Alex Fitzpatrick >> Sep 27, 2012 >> >> The United States has the second highest degree of Internet freedom >> in the world, according to a new study from Freedom House. What >> country's ahead of America? Estonia, a country of 1.29 million in >> northeast Europe. >> >> >> >> Estonia >> >> Why does Estonia top the list? According to Freedom House, it "ranks >> among the most wired and technologically advanced countries in the >> world." >> >> "With a high internet penetration rate and widespread e-commerce and >> e-government services embedded into the daily lives of individuals >> and organizations, Estonia has become a model for free internet >> access as a development engine for society," reads the report. >> >> Estonia's commitment to technological innovation in government is >> especially remarkable considering the former Soviet state's weak >> economy following the breakup of the Soviet Union in the early 1990s. >> Freedom House credits the country's first independent leaders with >> putting the country on a track towards economic development through >> technology and innovation. >> >> "The country’s new leadership. . .perceived the expansion of >> information and communication technologies (ICTs) as a key to >> economic growth and invested heavily in their development," reads the >> report. >> >> /Update:/ As a /Mashable/ reader pointed out, NATO's Cooperative >> Cyber Defense Centre of Excellence was built in Estonia in 2008, >> resulting in the funneling of funds to improve the country's IT >> infrastructure. >> >> Freedom House ranks countries' "Internet Freedom Status" in three >> main ways: obstacles to access, limits on content and violations of >> users' rights. It also factors in tertiary factors, including >> internet penetration and blogger arrests. Estonia got high marks in >> almost every category. >> >> >> The United States >> >> The United States got nearly as excellent marks, with 78% internet >> penetration and no notable arrests of bloggers. However, the debate >> over the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) and the PROTECT IP Act (PIPA), >> two bills considered a threat by many Internet free speech advocates, >> raised some eyebrows. >> >> "Internet access in the United States remains open and fairly >> free compared with the rest of the world," reads the report. >> "Courts have consistently held that prohibitions against >> government regulation of speech apply to material published on >> the internet, but the government’s surveillance powers are cause >> for some concern. In early 2012, campaigns by civil society and >> technology companies helped to halt passage of the Stop Online >> Piracy Act (SOPA) and the Protect IP Act (PIPA), which were >> criticized for their potentially negative effects on free speech." >> >> Freedom House also warned of greater U.S. government interference in >> the open Internet. >> >> "Several developments in recent years, however, have placed the >> government and internet freedom advocates at odds over aspects of >> internet regulation as well as issues surrounding online >> surveillance and privacy. The United States lags behind many >> major industrialized countries in terms of broadband penetration, >> and network operators have challenged recent rules concerning >> network neutrality. The current administration appears committed >> to maintaining broad surveillance powers with the aim of >> combating terrorism, child pornography, and other criminal >> activity. Moreover, reports have emerged that the Federal Bureau >> of Investigation (FBI) is seeking expanded authority to control >> the design of internet services to ensure that communications can >> be intercepted when necessary." >> >> At the bottom of the list were Iran, Cuba and China, while Belarus, >> Saudi Arabia, Uzbekistan, Thailand and seven other countries received >> a rating of "Not Free." >> >> To read the full report, visit Freedom House >> < http://www.freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-net/freedom-net-2012>. >> Are you surprised Estonia topped the list? Should the United States >> be where it is, higher or lower? Share your thoughts in the comments. >> >> /Image courtesy of iStockphoto >> < http://www.istockphoto.com/mashableoffer.php>, Olena_T >> > s-america.php?st=089de8e>/ >> > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From dogwallah at gmail.com Thu Jan 17 20:29:42 2013 From: dogwallah at gmail.com (McTim) Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2013 20:29:42 -0500 Subject: [governance] Appeals Team - Call for Comments and Interim Findings In-Reply-To: <99B5B12AE95441728A797F79FC884BD5@Toshiba> References: <99B5B12AE95441728A797F79FC884BD5@Toshiba> Message-ID: Dear Ian, Many thanks to you and the entire appeals team for your work. Best Regards, McTim On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 6:25 PM, Ian Peter wrote: > In accordance with the IGC Charter, the Appeals team is now requesting > comments from the IGC membership as regards the appeal against the removal > from the IGC list of Suresh Ramasubramanian. Comments should be sent to > appealsteam at lists.igcaucus.org > > In doing so, we announce that our interim finding is that Suresh’s removal > from the IGC list was not in accordance with the IGC Charter. The Charter > offers a specific set of procedures which must be followed before such > removal takes place. In this case, the previous private and public warnings > given to Suresh needed to be followed by a one month suspension, not removal > from the list. As Suresh has not previously served a one month suspension, > we have no option but to find the appeal is upheld. Therefore we intend to > recommend that, when we publish our final findings, as soon as possible > after the public comments period ends 48 hours after this posting, Suresh > should be reinstated to the list. > > We do suggest that, should you wish to comment, you first acquaint yourself > with the very specific provisions outlined in the IGC charter, which can be > found at http://www.igcaucus.org/charter. It is those provisions, and > whether they have been followed or not, that must determine whether the > appeal should be upheld, not our personal opinions on the decision made by > our elected co-ordinator. > > Please comment within 48 hours. After the comments period has ended, we will > post our findings with appropriate recommendations. > > The Appeals Team > > Shaila Mistry, Ginger Paque, Roland Perry , Ian Peter and Deidre Williams. > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From kstouray at gmail.com Thu Jan 17 21:15:25 2013 From: kstouray at gmail.com (Katim S. Touray) Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2013 02:15:25 +0000 Subject: [governance] Multistakeholder Roles and Responsibilities In-Reply-To: <50F763C0.5070907@ciroap.org> References: <01c801cdf457$f76a3fc0$e63ebf40$@gmail.com> <50F763C0.5070907@ciroap.org> Message-ID: Dear all, Happy New Year! This is perhaps a good point to introduce myself to the list, and jump into your discussions. I am Gambian, an international development consultant, a Free and Open Source Software advocate, an ICT for development guy, and a former ICANN board member (2008-2011). Multistakeholderism is an issue that's of interest to me, and last Oct., I wrote a CircleID article on ICANN and multistakeholderism from an African perspective. You can access it here: http://www.circleid.com/posts/20121009_multi_stakeholderism_revisited_icann_we_can_do_better/ The basic thrust of my article is that the multistakeholder model is not working well, and we need to fix that. I'm presently working on another article on WCIT 2012 meeting which ended last month in Dubai, and will provide you a link to it when its done. That's about it for now. Have a great weekend, and best wishes! Sincerely, Katim On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 2:36 AM, Jeremy Malcolm wrote: > On 17/01/13 10:11, michael gurstein wrote: > > In going through the FOURTH DRAFT OF THE SECRETARY-GENERAL'S REPORT for the > Fifth World Telecommunication/Information and Communication Technology > Policy Forum 2013 (WTPF) http://www.itu.int/en/wtpf-13/Pages/report-sg.aspx > I came across this, below as the definition of multi-stakeholderism as > (presumably) currently understood in various UN fora (it is what was used, I > believe at WSIS... note particularly d) iii. below... > > > That part is all well and good, but the part that worries me (sorry if you > already heard from me about this on another list) is the treatment of "The > Multi-stakeholder Model" in the draft, in which it is correctly stated that > "A divergence in opinion is observed in the implementation of the WSIS > multistakeholder model in the current Internet governance ecosystem", but > that this is a divergence between only two views, one of which is that "the > current governance of the Internet is sufficiently multistakeholder and > inclusive in terms of involvement of all stakeholder groups" (attributed to > Cisco, UK, USA and ISOC), and the second (attributed to Saudi Arabia and > Sudan and Algeria!) that "with regards to international Internet-related > public policy, the role of one stakeholder – Governments – has not been > allowed to evolve according to WSIS principles". > > What about the third, missing view - that the current governance of the > Internet is NOT sufficiently multistakeholder and inclusive in terms of > involvement of all stakeholder groups, but that rather than governments > being left out, it is civil society! We can point to so many examples of > this, beginning at the ITU itself. > > I think the report needs to be changed to correct this erroneous > characteristion of the multi-stakeholder model of Internet governance. > However the ITU is only receiving submissions from members (there is an > open platform for general comments, but they won't be received as direct > inputs to the SG's report). We will therefore need to put in our > submission either through a friendly government (those who were members of > delegations at WCIT will already have these connections), or through a > sector member. Consumers International has applied for sector membership, > but our application does not come up for consideration until June. We do > have a CI member who is a sector member, but is there anyone else on this > list who also is (and who is less status-quoist than ISOC)? If not I will > work with my member on some text. > > -- > > *Dr Jeremy Malcolm > Senior Policy Officer > Consumers International | the global campaigning voice for consumers* > Office for Asia-Pacific and the Middle East > Lot 5-1 Wisma WIM, 7 Jalan Abang Haji Openg, TTDI, 60000 Kuala Lumpur, > Malaysia > Tel: +60 3 7726 1599 > > *Your rights, our mission – download CI's Strategy 2015:* > http://consint.info/RightsMission > > @Consumers_Int | www.consumersinternational.org | > www.facebook.com/consumersinternational > > Read our email confidentiality notice. > Don't print this email unless necessary. > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From avri at acm.org Thu Jan 17 22:13:33 2013 From: avri at acm.org (Avri Doria) Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2013 22:13:33 -0500 Subject: [governance] Appeals Team - Call for Comments and Interim Findings In-Reply-To: References: <99B5B12AE95441728A797F79FC884BD5@Toshiba> Message-ID: <631843D7-0A3D-4DF0-8E15-1A284C50E846@acm.org> +1 On 17 Jan 2013, at 20:29, McTim wrote: > Dear Ian, > > Many thanks to you and the entire appeals team for your work. > > Best Regards, > > McTim > -------------- 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 From jeremy at ciroap.org Thu Jan 17 23:35:23 2013 From: jeremy at ciroap.org (Jeremy Malcolm) Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2013 12:35:23 +0800 Subject: [bestbits] [governance] Multistakeholder Roles and Responsibilities In-Reply-To: References: <01c801cdf457$f76a3fc0$e63ebf40$@gmail.com> <50F763C0.5070907@ciroap.org> Message-ID: <50F8D10B.3010109@ciroap.org> On 17/01/2013, at 10:11 PM, Gene Kimmelman wrote: > These important points remind me that it may be useful to ensure we > have a process/system for sharing all important information (are > people comfortable that just posting to the list is the best way?); > and it also reminds me that it would bve most useful to know who plans > on attending which upcoming meetings -- I'm thinking particularly > about the Paris WSIS+10, but it would be great to have a list for all > major meetings. Some of us have to decide where to invest money for > travel, and knowing who will attend may indicate particular gaps in CS > presence, or meetings where we'll have a critical mass attending who > can discuss broader policy issues. Actually I put together a system that is meant to achieve that: http://a2knetwork.org/meetings/ Anyone who registers can list a meeting there and say whether they are attending, and can post a short report there. It supports multiple reports, too, in the case that more than one delegation is attending. The main purpose is to identify where there are gaps - important meetings that nobody is covering. But it only works if enough people use it, so please do. There is also a very nice (nicer than mine, which was done on the cheap) public calendar that American University has put up, but it only covers IP meetings, and it doesn't have as much functionality in terms of showing who is attending. But anyway, it is useful for showing what is coming up: http://infojustice-calendar.org/ Both calendars have the ability to subscribe in your calendar software such as Lightning, iCal, Outlook, Google Calendar, etc. -- *Dr Jeremy Malcolm Senior Policy Officer Consumers International | the global campaigning voice for consumers* Office for Asia-Pacific and the Middle East Lot 5-1 Wisma WIM, 7 Jalan Abang Haji Openg, TTDI, 60000 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia Tel: +60 3 7726 1599 *Your rights, our mission – download CI's Strategy 2015:* http://consint.info/RightsMission @Consumers_Int | www.consumersinternational.org | www.facebook.com/consumersinternational Read our email confidentiality notice . Don't print this email unless necessary. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From anriette at apc.org Fri Jan 18 02:13:27 2013 From: anriette at apc.org (Anriette Esterhuysen) Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2013 09:13:27 +0200 Subject: AW: [governance] Multistakeholder Roles and Responsibilities In-Reply-To: References: <01c801cdf457$f76a3fc0$e63ebf40$@gmail.com> <50F763C0.5070907@ciroap.org> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8013314B4@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> <50F8024D.1010306@apc.org> Message-ID: <50F8F617.4000209@apc.org> Strong support here for Mawaki and Deborah's input. We should also keep in mind that if our long term goal is institutional reform at the ITU to enable more effective and sustainable participation from civil society we need to be patient and persistent. And we need to work towards CS participation not just in Geneva, but in regional telecommunications unions and in national regulators. Anriette On 17/01/2013 17:59, Mawaki Chango wrote: > Great point, Deborah! I think we need always to follow-up and build on > the formal outcomes of our previous interactions with the structures > and authorities we're dealing with. Some of us who in various > capacities have various experiences with those entities may be > skeptical or even attempted to be cynical. I'd favor the following > principle: Be cynical all you want, but act hopeful. Which does not > prevent anyone from strategizing with or petitioning other actors and > potential allies. > > Just my 2 cents > > mawaki > > On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 9:58 AM, Deborah Brown wrote: >> +1 >> >> In addition to the commitments that the SG made during the meeting with >> civil society at WCIT that Joana mentioned, the ITU issued the following >> statement in response to a 10 December civil society letter to WCIT. >> >> • We recognize that the current institutional structures do not >> facilitate independent civil society participation in the work of the ITU. >> Given that it is unlikely that institutional changes can be implemented >> during the WCIT, we ask that the two above issues be addressed immediately >> and that the ITU commit to reviewing and putting in place mechanisms that >> will encourage a more flexible approach to participation by civil society. >> [From 10 December letter] >> >> Only the Plenipotentiary Conference of the ITU – the highest governing body >> of the organization – can change institutional rules and procedures or >> effect changes to the ITU Constitution. I believe post-WCIT-12 we will have >> time to take stock and provide our membership with some important >> recommendations in line with what you raise. I would also take the >> opportunity to remind you that all civil society organizations, who are >> international in nature and who are working in the area of ICTs are welcome >> to join the ITU and apply for exemption of fees. I believe we will all >> benefit from a greater civil society engagement at ITU and in line with this >> I recently invited the International Trade Union Movement to join. >> >> The document is available on WCITLeaks, but (ironically) is locked behind a >> TIES log in: >> http://files.wcitleaks.org/public/S12-WCIT12-INF-0005!!MSW-E.pdf >> >> I don't think seeking the right to participate at the WTPF would require >> changes at the plenipotentiary level (please do correct me if this >> assumption is wrong) so if we decide to go ahead with a letter, we might >> want to cite the sentence I highlighted above. >> >> Best, >> Deborah >> >> >> On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 8:53 AM, Anriette Esterhuysen >> wrote: >>> Agree, and I think that Jeremy and Joana and Wolfgang's suggestions are >>> not mutually exclusive. >>> >>> We can send a letter, and ask member-states and sector members to also >>> raise this issue and make sure that our letter is discussed. >>> >>> Best >>> >>> Anriette >>> >>> On 17/01/2013 12:43, "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang" wrote: >>> >>> Hi Joana and all >>> >>> there is another PrepMeeting for the WTPF in February in Geneva. >>> http://www.itu.int/en/wtpf-13/Pages/ieg.aspx >>> >>> It is important to raise this question in this meeting. I have no idea >>> whether this meeting (February 6 - 8, 2013 in the ITU HQ) is open. If not we >>> should send a letter to like minded governments and to the ITU SG before >>> February 6 and to push for a clear response to our request for equal >>> participation in the WTPF, independent from national governmental >>> delegations. >>> >>> Wolfgang >>> >>> ________________________________ >>> >>> Von: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org im Auftrag von Joana Varon >>> Gesendet: Do 17.01.2013 04:55 >>> An: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Jeremy Malcolm >>> Cc: >>> Betreff: Re: [governance] Multistakeholder Roles and Responsibilities >>> >>> >>> Dear Jeremy and all, >>> >>> Regarding your observation and the fact that a couple of civil society >>> representatives were able to have a meeting with Mr Toure during the WCIT >>> and managed to deliver to him our statement that reinforced some points of >>> the best bits statement, including demands for an open participation of CS >>> in ITU processes, isn't it the time to recall him of our "Civil Society >>> statement on the new ITRs and the future of multi-stakeholder engagement" >>> and try to ask for the changes he has promised to try to make during our >>> meeting? >>> >>> Please, correct me if it seams too naive, but if we go again through these >>> alternative channels to submit our comments and so on( such as CS being part >>> of government delegation - it's own or other "friendly" governements, or >>> just engaging with sector members), we will just repeat the quite >>> frustrating (lack of) participation scenery of WCIT at WTPF. >>> >>> Maybe Wolfgang, Avri or other fellows that have attended WCIT could have >>> some thoughts to add on this. >>> >>> best, >>> >>> joana >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> ------------------------------------------------------ >>> anriette esterhuysen anriette at apc.org >>> executive director, association for progressive communications >>> www.apc.org >>> po box 29755, melville 2109 >>> south africa >>> tel/fax +27 11 726 1692 >>> >>> >>> ____________________________________________________________ >>> 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 >>> >> >> >> -- >> Deborah Brown >> Policy Analyst >> Access | AccessNow.org >> E. deborah at accessnow.org >> S. deborah.l.brown >> T. deblebrown >> PGP 0x5EB4727D >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 >> -- ------------------------------------------------------ anriette esterhuysen anriette at apc.org executive director, association for progressive communications www.apc.org po box 29755, melville 2109 south africa tel/fax +27 11 726 1692 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From daniel at digsys.bg Fri Jan 18 02:35:39 2013 From: daniel at digsys.bg (Daniel Kalchev) Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2013 09:35:39 +0200 Subject: [governance] Multistakeholder Roles and Responsibilities In-Reply-To: <01c801cdf457$f76a3fc0$e63ebf40$@gmail.com> References: <01c801cdf457$f76a3fc0$e63ebf40$@gmail.com> Message-ID: I am bit worried about the definition of "multi-stakeholder model" --- which is basically defined as "we agree to can this cooperation, as long as your recognise I am responsible for and have the ultimate say in XYZ, and you are responsible for ABC." This is not cooperation, at best it is synergy. Why should not (for example) the private sector and the civil society have any say in policy? Policy is something different from politics, after all -- and in real world, both the private sector and civil society do design and implement policies of many kinds. Just asking :) Daniel On Jan 17, 2013, at 4:11 AM, michael gurstein wrote: > In going through the FOURTH DRAFT OF THE SECRETARY-GENERAL'S REPORT for the > Fifth World Telecommunication/Information and Communication Technology > Policy Forum 2013 (WTPF) http://www.itu.int/en/wtpf-13/Pages/report-sg.aspx > I came across this, below as the definition of multi-stakeholderism as > (presumably) currently understood in various UN fora (it is what was used, I > believe at WSIS... note particularly d) iii. below... > > d) The roles and responsibilities of each stakeholder group are > specified in para. 35 of the Tunis Agenda, which states that: > "The management of the Internet encompasses both technical and public policy > issues and should involve all stakeholders and relevant intergovernmental > and international organizations. In this respect, it is recognized that: > i. Policy authority for Internet-related public policy issues > is the sovereign right of States. They have rights and responsibilities for > international Internet-related public policy issues, complemented by > relevant legislation being enacted by appropriate law-making bodies > (including Parliaments, etc.). > ii. The private sector has had, and should continue to have, an > important role in the development of the Internet, both in the technical and > economic fields. > iii. Civil society has also played an important role on Internet > matters, especially at community level, and should continue to play such a > role. > iv. Intergovernmental organizations have had, and should > continue to have, a facilitating role in the coordination of > Internet-related public policy issues. > v. International organizations have also had and should > continue to have an important role in the development of Internet-related > technical standards and relevant policies". > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From jeremy at ciroap.org Fri Jan 18 02:44:09 2013 From: jeremy at ciroap.org (Jeremy Malcolm) Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2013 15:44:09 +0800 Subject: [governance] Multistakeholder Roles and Responsibilities In-Reply-To: References: <01c801cdf457$f76a3fc0$e63ebf40$@gmail.com> Message-ID: <50F8FD49.2080206@ciroap.org> On 18/01/13 15:35, Daniel Kalchev wrote: > I am bit worried about the definition of "multi-stakeholder model" --- which is basically defined as "we agree to can this cooperation, as long as your recognise I am responsible for and have the ultimate say in XYZ, and you are responsible for ABC." This is not cooperation, at best it is synergy. > > Why should not (for example) the private sector and the civil society have any say in policy? Policy is something different from politics, after all -- and in real world, both the private sector and civil society do design and implement policies of many kinds. > > Just asking :) You're right of course, and this was one of the areas of compromise at WSIS in which civil society lost ground. WGIG had proposed a more expansive definition of the role of civil society which included: * Mobilizing citizens in democratic processes. * Bringing perspectives of marginalized groups, including, for example, excluded communities and grass-roots activists. * Engaging in policy processes. * Contributing expertise, skills, experience and knowledge in a range of ICT policy areas. * Contributing to policy processes and policies that are more bottom-up, people-centred and inclusive. * Helping to ensure that political and market forces are accountable to the needs of all members of society. etc (I won't recite it all, but the WGIG report is at http://www.wgig.org/WGIG-Report.html). The Tunis Agenda narrowed this down, and the ITU is just reciting the narrower formulation. -- *Dr Jeremy Malcolm Senior Policy Officer Consumers International | the global campaigning voice for consumers* Office for Asia-Pacific and the Middle East Lot 5-1 Wisma WIM, 7 Jalan Abang Haji Openg, TTDI, 60000 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia Tel: +60 3 7726 1599 *Your rights, our mission – download CI's Strategy 2015:* http://consint.info/RightsMission @Consumers_Int | www.consumersinternational.org | www.facebook.com/consumersinternational Read our email confidentiality notice . Don't print this email unless necessary. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From baudouin.schombe at gmail.com Fri Jan 18 04:11:28 2013 From: baudouin.schombe at gmail.com (Baudouin Schombe) Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2013 10:11:28 +0100 Subject: [governance] Preliminary List of Nominees for the 2013 MAG - REQUIRES IMMEDIATE ATTENTION In-Reply-To: <50F4F7E3.70903@communisphere.com> References: <50F4F7E3.70903@communisphere.com> Message-ID: Hello Thomas, to which email address should I send the info complementary requirements for candidates who want to serve the MAG 2013? Baudouin 2013/1/15 Thomas Lowenhaupt > IGC List Members, > > The below 36 people have been self nominated or were nominated by another > IGC member to be on the 2013 MAG (the Internet Governance Forum's > Multistakeholder Advisory Group). > > It's a far larger list than any previous one with which I am familiar. And > the Nominating Committee has very little time to make a selection. > > So that we may properly review all eligible candidates, the Nominating > Committee would greatly appreciate your addressing the following as soon as > practicable. > > - If you are* not on this* list and were inadvertently left off, > please inform the NomCom immediately. > - If you are *on the list* and wish to be removed - that is, you do > not wish to serve on the 2013 MAG - please inform the NomCom as soon as > possible. > - Those indicating an interest in serving on the MAG and wishing to > send supporting documents, or having others send supporting documents to > their nominations, should assure their arrival by c.o.b. Thursday. This is > extremely tight but we must have the final decision completed by Saturday > with nominations to IGF by January 21. > > The preliminary full list of nominees are: > > 1. Anriette Esterhuysen > 2. Baudouin SCHOMBE > 3. Brenden Kuerbis > 4. Chaitanya Dhareshwar > 5. Cheryl Langdon-Orr > 6. Excel Asama Abel > 7. Fatima Cambronero > 8. Fouad Bajwa > 9. Francis Augusto Medeiros > 10. Gideon Rop > 11. Ginger Paque > 12. Graciela Selaimen > 13. Hempal Shrestha > 14. Imran Ahmed Shah > 15. Izumi Aizu > 16. Jamil Goheer > 17. Jean-Yves Gatete > 18. Jeremy Malcolm > 19. Joao Carlos Caribe > 20. José Félix Arias Ynche > 21. Jose Francisco Callo Romero > 22. Juan Manuel Rojas > 23. Karim ATTOUMANI MOHAMED > 24. Kossi AMESSINOU > 25. Michael Gurstein > 26. Mohamed Zahran > 27. Mohamed Tijani BEN JEMAA > 28. Robert Guerra > 29. Robin Cross > 30. Rudi Vansnick > 31. Shahid Akbar > 32. Shaila Mistry > 33. Sonigitu Ekpe > 34. Susan Chalmers > 35. Tijani BEN JEMAA > 36. Tim McGinnis > > Sincerely, > > Thomas Lowenhaupt, Non-voting chair > The Nominating Committee > > Voting Members of the NomCom: > > Wilson Abigaba > Shahid Akbar > Devon Blake > Dixie Hawtin > Asif Kabani > > > > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > -- SCHOMBE BAUDOUIN CENTRE AFRICAIN D'ECHANGE CULTUREL/ ACADEMIE DES TIC At-Large Member NCSG Member email:baudouin.schombe at gmail.com Baudouin.Schombe at ticafrica.net tél:+243998983491 skype:b.schombe wite web:http://webmail.ticafrica.net blog:http://akimambo.unblog.fr -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From riaz.tayob at gmail.com Fri Jan 18 04:42:51 2013 From: riaz.tayob at gmail.com (Riaz K Tayob) Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2013 11:42:51 +0200 Subject: [governance] Bradley Manning denied chance to make whistleblower defence In-Reply-To: <50F9187E.2030506@gmail.com> References: <50F9187E.2030506@gmail.com> Message-ID: <50F9191B.2090108@gmail.com> Bradley Manning denied chance to make whistleblower defence Judge rules that Manning will not be allowed to present evidence about his motives for the leak -- a key plank of his defence * * Ed Pilkington in New York * guardian.co.uk , Thursday 17 January 2013 18.22 GMT * Bradley Manning Colonel Denise Lind ruled that general issues of motive were not relevant to the trial stage of the court martial. Photograph: Patrick Semansky/AP Bradley Manning , the US soldier accused of being behind the largest leak of state secrets in America's history, has been denied the chance to make a whistleblower defence in his upcoming court martial in which he faces possible life in military custody with no chance of parole. The judge presiding over Manning's prosecution by the US government for allegedly transmitting confidential material to WikiLeaks ruled in a pre-trial hearing that Manning will largely be barred from presenting evidence about his motives in leaking the documents and videos. In an earlier hearing, Manning's lead defence lawyer, David Coombs, had argued that his motive was key to proving that he had no intention to harm US interests or to pass information to the enemy. The judge, Colonel Denise Lind, ruled that general issues of motive were not relevant to the trial stage of the court martial, and must be held back until Manning either entered a plea or was found guilty, at which point it could be used in mitigation to lessen the sentence. The ruling is a blow to the defence as it will make it harder for the soldier's legal team to argue he was acting as a whistleblower and not as someone who knowingly damaged US interests at a time of war. "This is another effort to attack the whistleblower defence," said Nathan Fuller, a spokesman for the Bradley Manning support network, after the hearing. The judge also blocked the defence from presenting evidence designed to show that WikiLeaks caused little or no damage to US national security. Coombs has devoted considerable time and energy trying to extract from US government agencies their official assessments of the impact of WikiLeaks around the world, only to find that he is now prevented from using any of the information he has obtained. The 25-year-old intelligence analyst faces 22 charges relating to the leaking of hundreds of thousands of classified diplomatic cables, war logs from the Afghan and Iraq wars, and videos of US military actions. The most serious charge, "aiding the enemy", which carries the life sentence, accuses him of arranging for state secrets to be published via WikiLeaks on the internet knowing that al-Qaida would have access to it. The US government is expected at trial to present evidence that allegedly shows that Osama bin Laden personally requested to see some of the WikiLeaks publications attributed to Manning and that documents were found on his computer following the US navy Seals raid that killed him. In a limited victory for the defence, Coombs and the defence team will be allowed to talk about the soldier's motives on two narrow counts: where it can be used to show that he did not know that his leaks would be seen by al-Qaida; and as evidence that he consciously selected certain documents or types of documents in order to ensure they would not harm the US or benefit any foreign nation. Lind's ruling means that some of the most impassioned statements by Manning about why he embarked on the massive transfer of information to WikiLeaks will now not be heard at trial. In the course of a now famous web chat he had with the hacker-turned-informer Adrian Lamo, Manning wrote : "information should be free / it belongs in the public domain / because another state would just take advantage of the information ... try and get some edge / if its out in the open ... it should be a public good." -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/jpeg Size: 21140 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- 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 From wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de Fri Jan 18 06:14:12 2013 From: wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de (=?iso-8859-1?Q?=22Kleinw=E4chter=2C_Wolfgang=22?=) Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2013 12:14:12 +0100 Subject: AW: AW: [governance] Multistakeholder Roles and Responsibilities References: <01c801cdf457$f76a3fc0$e63ebf40$@gmail.com> <50F763C0.5070907@ciroap.org> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8013314B4@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> <50F8024D.1010306@apc.org> <50F8F617.4000209@apc.org> Message-ID: <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8013314C9@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> Hi Anriette and others, you are right to think more in mid-term categories and general strategies linked to an institutional reform of the ITU (BTW, I have my doubts that ITU member states are ready for this in Busan in 2014). A key process will be WTDC 2014. There will bis SIX regional PrepCom meetings in 2013. And as you know, the ITU has decided to merge the WTDC process with the WSIS 10+ Follow up. With other words, in all of the six WTDC regional PrepComs they will discuss on two or three extra days implementation of WSIS, including (regional) Internet Governance. The WSIS 10+ Hihg Level meeting will be done now in conjunction with WTDC 14in Egypt, propbably in Sharm el Sheikh, in spring 2014. ITUs Plenipotentiary Conference is in Busan in October 2014. If we write a letter to ITU and liked minded ITU member states with regard to WTPF, we should raise kn the same letter also CS participation in the WTDC process. Wolfgang http://www.itu.int/en/ITU-D/Conferences/WTDC/WTDC14/Pages/rpm.aspx ________________________________ Von: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org im Auftrag von Anriette Esterhuysen Gesendet: Fr 18.01.2013 08:13 An: governance at lists.igcaucus.org Betreff: Re: AW: [governance] Multistakeholder Roles and Responsibilities Strong support here for Mawaki and Deborah's input. We should also keep in mind that if our long term goal is institutional reform at the ITU to enable more effective and sustainable participation from civil society we need to be patient and persistent. And we need to work towards CS participation not just in Geneva, but in regional telecommunications unions and in national regulators. Anriette On 17/01/2013 17:59, Mawaki Chango wrote: Great point, Deborah! I think we need always to follow-up and build on the formal outcomes of our previous interactions with the structures and authorities we're dealing with. Some of us who in various capacities have various experiences with those entities may be skeptical or even attempted to be cynical. I'd favor the following principle: Be cynical all you want, but act hopeful. Which does not prevent anyone from strategizing with or petitioning other actors and potential allies. Just my 2 cents mawaki On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 9:58 AM, Deborah Brown wrote: +1 In addition to the commitments that the SG made during the meeting with civil society at WCIT that Joana mentioned, the ITU issued the following statement in response to a 10 December civil society letter to WCIT. * We recognize that the current institutional structures do not facilitate independent civil society participation in the work of the ITU. Given that it is unlikely that institutional changes can be implemented during the WCIT, we ask that the two above issues be addressed immediately and that the ITU commit to reviewing and putting in place mechanisms that will encourage a more flexible approach to participation by civil society. [From 10 December letter] Only the Plenipotentiary Conference of the ITU - the highest governing body of the organization - can change institutional rules and procedures or effect changes to the ITU Constitution. I believe post-WCIT-12 we will have time to take stock and provide our membership with some important recommendations in line with what you raise. I would also take the opportunity to remind you that all civil society organizations, who are international in nature and who are working in the area of ICTs are welcome to join the ITU and apply for exemption of fees. I believe we will all benefit from a greater civil society engagement at ITU and in line with this I recently invited the International Trade Union Movement to join. The document is available on WCITLeaks, but (ironically) is locked behind a TIES log in: http://files.wcitleaks.org/public/S12-WCIT12-INF-0005!!MSW-E.pdf I don't think seeking the right to participate at the WTPF would require changes at the plenipotentiary level (please do correct me if this assumption is wrong) so if we decide to go ahead with a letter, we might want to cite the sentence I highlighted above. Best, Deborah On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 8:53 AM, Anriette Esterhuysen wrote: Agree, and I think that Jeremy and Joana and Wolfgang's suggestions are not mutually exclusive. We can send a letter, and ask member-states and sector members to also raise this issue and make sure that our letter is discussed. Best Anriette On 17/01/2013 12:43, "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang" wrote: Hi Joana and all there is another PrepMeeting for the WTPF in February in Geneva. http://www.itu.int/en/wtpf-13/Pages/ieg.aspx It is important to raise this question in this meeting. I have no idea whether this meeting (February 6 - 8, 2013 in the ITU HQ) is open. If not we should send a letter to like minded governments and to the ITU SG before February 6 and to push for a clear response to our request for equal participation in the WTPF, independent from national governmental delegations. Wolfgang ________________________________ Von: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org im Auftrag von Joana Varon Gesendet: Do 17.01.2013 04:55 An: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Jeremy Malcolm Cc: Betreff: Re: [governance] Multistakeholder Roles and Responsibilities Dear Jeremy and all, Regarding your observation and the fact that a couple of civil society representatives were able to have a meeting with Mr Toure during the WCIT and managed to deliver to him our statement that reinforced some points of the best bits statement, including demands for an open participation of CS in ITU processes, isn't it the time to recall him of our "Civil Society statement on the new ITRs and the future of multi-stakeholder engagement" and try to ask for the changes he has promised to try to make during our meeting? Please, correct me if it seams too naive, but if we go again through these alternative channels to submit our comments and so on( such as CS being part of government delegation - it's own or other "friendly" governements, or just engaging with sector members), we will just repeat the quite frustrating (lack of) participation scenery of WCIT at WTPF. Maybe Wolfgang, Avri or other fellows that have attended WCIT could have some thoughts to add on this. best, joana -- ------------------------------------------------------ anriette esterhuysen anriette at apc.org executive director, association for progressive communications www.apc.org po box 29755, melville 2109 south africa tel/fax +27 11 726 1692 ____________________________________________________________ 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 -- Deborah Brown Policy Analyst Access | AccessNow.org E. deborah at accessnow.org S. deborah.l.brown T. deblebrown PGP 0x5EB4727D ____________________________________________________________ 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 -- ------------------------------------------------------ anriette esterhuysen anriette at apc.org executive director, association for progressive communications www.apc.org po box 29755, melville 2109 south africa tel/fax +27 11 726 1692 -------------- 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 From toml at communisphere.com Fri Jan 18 06:45:10 2013 From: toml at communisphere.com (Thomas Lowenhaupt) Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:45:10 -0500 Subject: [governance] 2013 MAG Nominees - REQUIRES IMMEDIATE ATTENTION In-Reply-To: References: <50F4F7E3.70903@communisphere.com> Message-ID: <50F935C6.8030909@communisphere.com> Baudouin, I've attached a/MAG Nomination Submission Template:/that will ultimately be sent with each of the IGC NomCom's selections to MAG. Please complete and send this to TomL at communisphere.com _/as soon as possible/_. Other information is also welcome. I will share it with the NomCom. *Note: the voting members are actively considering the cohort of 2013 nominees. A decision must be made within 24 hours to meet the MAG deadline of January 21 submission. *Best, Tom Lowenhaupt On 1/18/2013 4:11 AM, Baudouin Schombe wrote: > Hello Thomas, > > to which email address should I send the info complementary > requirements for candidates who want to serve the MAG 2013? > > Baudouin > > > 2013/1/15 Thomas Lowenhaupt > > > IGC List Members, > > The below 36 people have been self nominated or were nominated by > another IGC member to be on the 2013 MAG (the Internet Governance > Forum's Multistakeholder Advisory Group). > > It's a far larger list than any previous one with which I am > familiar. And the Nominating Committee has very little time to > make a selection. > > So that we may properly review all eligible candidates, the > Nominating Committee would greatly appreciate your addressing the > following as soon as practicable. > > * If you are*not on this* list and were inadvertently left off, > please inform the NomCom immediately. > * If you are *on the list* and wish to be removed - that is, you > do not wish to serve on the 2013 MAG - please inform the > NomCom as soon as possible. > * Those indicating an interest in serving on the MAG and wishing > to send supporting documents, or having others send supporting > documents to their nominations, should assure their arrival by > c.o.b. Thursday. This is extremely tight but we must have the > final decision completed by Saturday with nominations to IGF > by January 21. > > The preliminary full list of nominees are: > > 1. Anriette Esterhuysen > 2. Baudouin SCHOMBE > 3. Brenden Kuerbis > 4. Chaitanya Dhareshwar > 5. Cheryl Langdon-Orr > 6. Excel Asama Abel > 7. Fatima Cambronero > 8. Fouad Bajwa > 9. Francis Augusto Medeiros > 10. Gideon Rop > 11. Ginger Paque > 12. Graciela Selaimen > 13. Hempal Shrestha > 14. Imran Ahmed Shah > 15. Izumi Aizu > 16. Jamil Goheer > 17. Jean-Yves Gatete > 18. Jeremy Malcolm > 19. Joao Carlos Caribe > 20. José Félix Arias Ynche > 21. Jose Francisco Callo Romero > 22. Juan Manuel Rojas > 23. Karim ATTOUMANI MOHAMED > 24. Kossi AMESSINOU > 25. Michael Gurstein > 26. Mohamed Zahran > 27. Mohamed Tijani BEN JEMAA > 28. Robert Guerra > 29. Robin Cross > 30. Rudi Vansnick > 31. Shahid Akbar > 32. Shaila Mistry > 33. Sonigitu Ekpe > 34. Susan Chalmers > 35. Tijani BEN JEMAA > 36. Tim McGinnis > > Sincerely, > > Thomas Lowenhaupt, Non-voting chair > The Nominating Committee > > Voting Members of the NomCom: > > Wilson Abigaba > Shahid Akbar > Devon Blake > Dixie Hawtin > Asif Kabani > > > > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > > > > -- > SCHOMBE BAUDOUIN > CENTRE AFRICAIN D'ECHANGE CULTUREL/ > ACADEMIE DES TIC > At-Large Member > NCSG Member > > email:baudouin.schombe at gmail.com > > Baudouin.Schombe at ticafrica.net > tél:+243998983491 > skype:b.schombe > wite web:http://webmail.ticafrica.net > blog:http://akimambo.unblog.fr -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: MAG 2013 template -1.rtf Type: application/rtf Size: 11989 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- 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 From toml at communisphere.com Fri Jan 18 06:52:37 2013 From: toml at communisphere.com (Thomas Lowenhaupt) Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:52:37 -0500 Subject: [governance] CORRECTION Re: 2013 MAG Nominees - REQUIRES IMMEDIATE ATTENTION In-Reply-To: <50F935C6.8030909@communisphere.com> References: <50F4F7E3.70903@communisphere.com> <50F935C6.8030909@communisphere.com> Message-ID: <50F93785.5060906@communisphere.com> *Correction: The Deadline to get info to IGF staff is January 20 not as noted below. We need you info NOW.* On 1/18/2013 6:45 AM, Thomas Lowenhaupt wrote: > Baudouin, > I've attached a/MAG Nomination Submission Template:/that will > ultimately be sent with each of the IGC NomCom's selections to MAG. > Please complete and send this to TomL at communisphere.com _/as soon as > possible/_. Other information is also welcome. I will share it with > the NomCom. *Note: the voting members are actively considering the > cohort of 2013 nominees. A decision must be made within 24 hours to > meet the MAG deadline of January 21 submission. > > *Best, > > Tom Lowenhaupt > > > On 1/18/2013 4:11 AM, Baudouin Schombe wrote: >> Hello Thomas, >> >> to which email address should I send the info complementary >> requirements for candidates who want to serve the MAG 2013? >> >> Baudouin >> >> >> 2013/1/15 Thomas Lowenhaupt > > >> >> IGC List Members, >> >> The below 36 people have been self nominated or were nominated by >> another IGC member to be on the 2013 MAG (the Internet Governance >> Forum's Multistakeholder Advisory Group). >> >> It's a far larger list than any previous one with which I am >> familiar. And the Nominating Committee has very little time to >> make a selection. >> >> So that we may properly review all eligible candidates, the >> Nominating Committee would greatly appreciate your addressing the >> following as soon as practicable. >> >> * If you are*not on this* list and were inadvertently left off, >> please inform the NomCom immediately. >> * If you are *on the list* and wish to be removed - that is, >> you do not wish to serve on the 2013 MAG - please inform the >> NomCom as soon as possible. >> * Those indicating an interest in serving on the MAG and >> wishing to send supporting documents, or having others send >> supporting documents to their nominations, should assure >> their arrival by c.o.b. Thursday. This is extremely tight >> but we must have the final decision completed by Saturday >> with nominations to IGF by January 21. >> >> The preliminary full list of nominees are: >> >> 1. Anriette Esterhuysen >> 2. Baudouin SCHOMBE >> 3. Brenden Kuerbis >> 4. Chaitanya Dhareshwar >> 5. Cheryl Langdon-Orr >> 6. Excel Asama Abel >> 7. Fatima Cambronero >> 8. Fouad Bajwa >> 9. Francis Augusto Medeiros >> 10. Gideon Rop >> 11. Ginger Paque >> 12. Graciela Selaimen >> 13. Hempal Shrestha >> 14. Imran Ahmed Shah >> 15. Izumi Aizu >> 16. Jamil Goheer >> 17. Jean-Yves Gatete >> 18. Jeremy Malcolm >> 19. Joao Carlos Caribe >> 20. José Félix Arias Ynche >> 21. Jose Francisco Callo Romero >> 22. Juan Manuel Rojas >> 23. Karim ATTOUMANI MOHAMED >> 24. Kossi AMESSINOU >> 25. Michael Gurstein >> 26. Mohamed Zahran >> 27. Mohamed Tijani BEN JEMAA >> 28. Robert Guerra >> 29. Robin Cross >> 30. Rudi Vansnick >> 31. Shahid Akbar >> 32. Shaila Mistry >> 33. Sonigitu Ekpe >> 34. Susan Chalmers >> 35. Tijani BEN JEMAA >> 36. Tim McGinnis >> >> Sincerely, >> >> Thomas Lowenhaupt, Non-voting chair >> The Nominating Committee >> >> Voting Members of the NomCom: >> >> Wilson Abigaba >> Shahid Akbar >> Devon Blake >> Dixie Hawtin >> Asif Kabani >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 >> >> >> >> >> -- >> SCHOMBE BAUDOUIN >> CENTRE AFRICAIN D'ECHANGE CULTUREL/ >> ACADEMIE DES TIC >> At-Large Member >> NCSG Member >> >> email:baudouin.schombe at gmail.com >> >> Baudouin.Schombe at ticafrica.net >> tél:+243998983491 >> skype:b.schombe >> wite web:http://webmail.ticafrica.net >> blog:http://akimambo.unblog.fr > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From parminder at itforchange.net Fri Jan 18 07:00:26 2013 From: parminder at itforchange.net (parminder) Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2013 17:30:26 +0530 Subject: [governance] CORRECTION Re: 2013 MAG Nominees - REQUIRES IMMEDIATE ATTENTION In-Reply-To: <50F93785.5060906@communisphere.com> References: <50F4F7E3.70903@communisphere.com> <50F935C6.8030909@communisphere.com> <50F93785.5060906@communisphere.com> Message-ID: <50F9395A.8080906@itforchange.net> Tom Maybe you can also ask potential nominees to add a line whereby they express their commitment to keep up close interactions with the IGC, and to report back extensively. IN fact the UNDESA announcement says that MAG nominees are "expected to have extensive linkages with their respective stakeholder groups". CS's norms for accountability and interactiveness should be even higher than normal ones. So it is important that we get such a commitment. It used to be the practice in the IGC to get such a commitment from nominees.. parminder On Friday 18 January 2013 05:22 PM, Thomas Lowenhaupt wrote: > *Correction: The Deadline to get info to IGF staff is January 20 not > as noted below. We need you info NOW.* > > > On 1/18/2013 6:45 AM, Thomas Lowenhaupt wrote: >> Baudouin, >> I've attached a/MAG Nomination Submission Template:/that will >> ultimately be sent with each of the IGC NomCom's selections to MAG. >> Please complete and send this to TomL at communisphere.com _/as soon as >> possible/_. Other information is also welcome. I will share it with >> the NomCom. *Note: the voting members are actively considering the >> cohort of 2013 nominees. A decision must be made within 24 hours to >> meet the MAG deadline of January 21 submission. >> >> *Best, >> >> Tom Lowenhaupt >> >> >> On 1/18/2013 4:11 AM, Baudouin Schombe wrote: >>> Hello Thomas, >>> >>> to which email address should I send the info complementary >>> requirements for candidates who want to serve the MAG 2013? >>> >>> Baudouin >>> >>> >>> 2013/1/15 Thomas Lowenhaupt >> > >>> >>> IGC List Members, >>> >>> The below 36 people have been self nominated or were nominated >>> by another IGC member to be on the 2013 MAG (the Internet >>> Governance Forum's Multistakeholder Advisory Group). >>> >>> It's a far larger list than any previous one with which I am >>> familiar. And the Nominating Committee has very little time to >>> make a selection. >>> >>> So that we may properly review all eligible candidates, the >>> Nominating Committee would greatly appreciate your addressing >>> the following as soon as practicable. >>> >>> * If you are*not on this* list and were inadvertently left >>> off, please inform the NomCom immediately. >>> * If you are *on the list* and wish to be removed - that is, >>> you do not wish to serve on the 2013 MAG - please inform the >>> NomCom as soon as possible. >>> * Those indicating an interest in serving on the MAG and >>> wishing to send supporting documents, or having others send >>> supporting documents to their nominations, should assure >>> their arrival by c.o.b. Thursday. This is extremely tight >>> but we must have the final decision completed by Saturday >>> with nominations to IGF by January 21. >>> >>> The preliminary full list of nominees are: >>> >>> 1. Anriette Esterhuysen >>> 2. Baudouin SCHOMBE >>> 3. Brenden Kuerbis >>> 4. Chaitanya Dhareshwar >>> 5. Cheryl Langdon-Orr >>> 6. Excel Asama Abel >>> 7. Fatima Cambronero >>> 8. Fouad Bajwa >>> 9. Francis Augusto Medeiros >>> 10. Gideon Rop >>> 11. Ginger Paque >>> 12. Graciela Selaimen >>> 13. Hempal Shrestha >>> 14. Imran Ahmed Shah >>> 15. Izumi Aizu >>> 16. Jamil Goheer >>> 17. Jean-Yves Gatete >>> 18. Jeremy Malcolm >>> 19. Joao Carlos Caribe >>> 20. José Félix Arias Ynche >>> 21. Jose Francisco Callo Romero >>> 22. Juan Manuel Rojas >>> 23. Karim ATTOUMANI MOHAMED >>> 24. Kossi AMESSINOU >>> 25. Michael Gurstein >>> 26. Mohamed Zahran >>> 27. Mohamed Tijani BEN JEMAA >>> 28. Robert Guerra >>> 29. Robin Cross >>> 30. Rudi Vansnick >>> 31. Shahid Akbar >>> 32. Shaila Mistry >>> 33. Sonigitu Ekpe >>> 34. Susan Chalmers >>> 35. Tijani BEN JEMAA >>> 36. Tim McGinnis >>> >>> Sincerely, >>> >>> Thomas Lowenhaupt, Non-voting chair >>> The Nominating Committee >>> >>> Voting Members of the NomCom: >>> >>> Wilson Abigaba >>> Shahid Akbar >>> Devon Blake >>> Dixie Hawtin >>> Asif Kabani >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> ____________________________________________________________ >>> 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 >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> SCHOMBE BAUDOUIN >>> CENTRE AFRICAIN D'ECHANGE CULTUREL/ >>> ACADEMIE DES TIC >>> At-Large Member >>> NCSG Member >>> >>> email:baudouin.schombe at gmail.com >>> >>> Baudouin.Schombe at ticafrica.net >>> tél:+243998983491 >>> skype:b.schombe >>> wite web:http://webmail.ticafrica.net >>> blog:http://akimambo.unblog.fr >> > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de Fri Jan 18 07:15:57 2013 From: wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de (=?iso-8859-1?Q?=22Kleinw=E4chter=2C_Wolfgang=22?=) Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2013 13:15:57 +0100 Subject: [governance] ITU Report 2012 References: <50F4F7E3.70903@communisphere.com> <50F935C6.8030909@communisphere.com> <50F93785.5060906@communisphere.com> <50F9395A.8080906@itforchange.net> Message-ID: <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8013314D2@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> FYI http://www.itu.int/ITU-D/ict/publications/idi/material/2012/MIS2012_without_Annex_4.pdf wolfgang -------------- 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 From parminder at itforchange.net Fri Jan 18 07:18:55 2013 From: parminder at itforchange.net (parminder) Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2013 17:48:55 +0530 Subject: [governance] Preliminary List of Nominees for the 2013 MAG - REQUIRES IMMEDIATE ATTENTION In-Reply-To: References: <50F4F7E3.70903@communisphere.com> <619E02E9-F3CF-4C65-8B86-799156F81A01@uzh.ch> <50F6808C.5070408@itforchange.net> <50F76E21.3030308@itforchange.net> Message-ID: <50F93DAF.10702@itforchange.net> Hi Bill On Thursday 17 January 2013 03:10 PM, William Drake wrote: > Hi Parminder > > On Jan 17, 2013, at 4:21 AM, parminder > wrote: > >>> In either scenario, I would think Adam's solution is a sensible way >>> to get this done promptly and focus the noncom's effort on what >>> really needs doing. >> >> I do however find it rather odd that an existing IGC nominated MAG >> member should insist that either the matter of recertifying not be >> taken up at all, or that noncom simple issues a blanket endorsement >> without at all going into the merit of the case, that too without >> appending any disclaimer :). > > And I find it rather odd that you would make this claim when a) in the > very next sentence of my message I refer to discussions we are having > in the MAG; I did not understand. What do any discussions in the MAG have to do with my request that all existing members also be considered for renomination? (By the way, what discussions are you having in the MAG?) > b) in another message sent to you and the list seven minutes later I > ask you what you thought was controversial about our informal MAG > meeting in Baku I will related my views on this in rather details very soon.. watch this space :) > and note that we on the MAG have sort of deferred to Izumi's reporting > but could do something else if people wanted; That is very fine.. I have no problem with it. Generally I do seek better and closer interactions. Many have said the same thing about out MAG reps over the years on the IGC list... > and c) the composition of the MAG CS contingent has been discussed in > the thread and is hardly a secret. Yes, everyone knows it. That still makes it odd for an extant member to repeated assert that extant members should not recertified. > I also find it ironic given the high standards of disclosure > demonstrated when you were telling the IGC to support the Indian > government's CIRP proposal without mentioning your role in it, and so > on. :-) > > Games aside, I remain curious about your insistence the nomcom spend > time on an extra procedure that the Secretariat has made clear is > unnecessary, Secretariat seems to think so... but not the real decision maker - the UNDESA. right! > particularly when the discussion here was about the tight time frame > and urgent need to complete the process. It should take a few minutes only. I expect everyone to be renominated, maybe with a short discussion about some being more interactive than others, but maybe the nomcom will also observe that they expect/ request continued or greater interaction with IGC... That is all. > What purpose would it serve? The biggest purposes of all - accountability.... Why are so giving it such a short shrift. > I don't really care much either way and would of course roll with > whatever IGC members have consensus on, but it seems like silly > bureaucracy to me. For a nominating group to reassess an earlier nominated candidate is 'silly bureaucracy' for you ! That surprises me. I really dont where are you coming from. Would it look rather less silly if at some time an IGC nomcom conspicuously refused to renominate an extant MAG member, while renominating all others, because it were a widely held belief that, since the earleir nomination, the concerned member had clearly conducted him/her-self in a manner that maked him/her not worthy of an IGC nomination. Is such a situation in your view entirely inconceivable? There are countries that have right-to-recall provisions. India has them now in some local bodies. And you are against a re-assessment even when there is clearly a fresh appointment involved. parminder > [Disclaimer: I am on the MAG, nominated by IGC and APC] > > Cheers > > Bill > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From jeremy at ciroap.org Fri Jan 18 07:32:58 2013 From: jeremy at ciroap.org (Jeremy Malcolm) Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2013 20:32:58 +0800 Subject: [governance] Notice to the IGC on Proposed Charter Amendments In-Reply-To: References: <50F38F8E.3090106@ciroap.org> <50F3B31B.4090406@itforchange.net> <50F3B423.1070901@ciroap.org> <50F3B544.3080409@itforchange.net> <1FC731B2-FE70-41AC-B97D-52979AFFAE05@uzh.ch> <1358157197.55375.YahooMailNeo@web125106.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <020a01cdf283$98dfbe10$ca9f3a30$@gmail.com> <20130114212217.7f43bbc9@quill.bollow.ch> <1358227661.77969.YahooMailNeo@web125105.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <735AC965-1DFD-4A66-BFF6-3E828E71D72E@ciroap.org> I almost let this slip. Sala asked me to call the charter amendment poll by today, unless we need more time for discussion. So let's just confirm, are we ready to call a poll on any or all of these proposed amendments? I think I have the latest/preferred text for each below, but correct me if I'm wrong: 1. On selection of coordinators, add after "As part of the voting process the voter must personally ascertain that they are a member of the IGC based on membership criteria described elsewhere in this charter and posted as part of the voting information (i.e. a voter must affirm membership on the voter form in order to vote)." ...this text... "Prior to voting the prospective voter must personally ascertain that they are a member of the IGC based on membership criteria described elsewhere in this charter and posted as part of the voting information (i.e. a voter must affirm membership on the voter form prior to voting)." ...then it continues as at present, "The decision to self-identify as a member of the IGC is a personal decision based on the criteria defined. A list of the self-defined member-voters will be published after the election with the results of the election", then another new addition... "All ballots will include the ability for voters to abstain on any choice included on the ballot." 2. Under "Selection of Coordinators", regarding when elections are held, change "by midsummer (the summer solstice) to "by the end of that calendar year". Also in "If events prevent an election by midsummer, it will be held as soon after midsummer as possible," change the word "midsummer" to "then" in both places. 3. Under "Working methods", update the address of the mailing list from governance at lists.cpsr.org to governance at lists.igcaucus.org. -- Dr Jeremy Malcolm Senior Policy Officer Consumers International | the global campaigning voice for consumers Office for Asia-Pacific and the Middle East Lot 5-1 Wisma WIM, 7 Jalan Abang Haji Openg, TTDI, 60000 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia Tel: +60 3 7726 1599 Your rights, our mission – download CI's Strategy 2015: http://consint.info/RightsMission @Consumers_Int | www.consumersinternational.org | www.facebook.com/consumersinternational Read our email confidentiality notice. Don't print this email unless necessary. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From jeremy at ciroap.org Fri Jan 18 07:50:37 2013 From: jeremy at ciroap.org (Jeremy Malcolm) Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2013 20:50:37 +0800 Subject: [governance] Notice to the IGC on Proposed Charter Amendments In-Reply-To: <735AC965-1DFD-4A66-BFF6-3E828E71D72E@ciroap.org> References: <50F38F8E.3090106@ciroap.org> <50F3B31B.4090406@itforchange.net> <50F3B423.1070901@ciroap.org> <50F3B544.3080409@itforchange.net> <1FC731B2-FE70-41AC-B97D-52979AFFAE05@uzh.ch> <1358157197.55375.YahooMailNeo@web125106.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <020a01cdf283$98dfbe10$ca9f3a30$@gmail.com> <20130114212217.7f43bbc9@quill.bollow.ch> <1358227661.77969.YahooMailNeo@web125105.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <735AC965-1DFD-4A66-BFF6-3E828E71D72E@ciroap.org> Message-ID: <02EB5DC1-5B10-43BD-B8C4-C81F4E528DA3@ciroap.org> On 18/01/2013, at 8:32 PM, Jeremy Malcolm wrote: > I almost let this slip. Sala asked me to call the charter amendment poll by today, unless we need more time for discussion. So let's just confirm, are we ready to call a poll on any or all of these proposed amendments? I think I have the latest/preferred text for each below, but correct me if I'm wrong: > > 1. ... "Prior to voting the prospective voter must personally ascertain that they are a member of the IGC based on membership criteria described elsewhere in this charter and posted as part of the voting information (i.e. a voter must affirm membership on the voter form prior to voting)." ... "All ballots will include the ability for voters to abstain on any choice included on the ballot." This has > ten proposers. > 2. Under "Selection of Coordinators", regarding when elections are held, change "by midsummer (the summer solstice) to "by the end of that calendar year". Also in "If events prevent an election by midsummer, it will be held as soon after midsummer as possible," change the word "midsummer" to "then" in both places. I think this has three so far (me, Parminder and Izumi), so would need seven more if we are to put it to the vote with the other one. Norbert spoke against, already, and Imran supported a slightly different wording. > 3. Under "Working methods", update the address of the mailing list from governance at lists.cpsr.org to governance at lists.igcaucus.org. This has two (me and Norbert; the others didn't expressly mention it), so it needs eight more if we are to put it to the vote at the same time. -- Dr Jeremy Malcolm Senior Policy Officer Consumers International | the global campaigning voice for consumers Office for Asia-Pacific and the Middle East Lot 5-1 Wisma WIM, 7 Jalan Abang Haji Openg, TTDI, 60000 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia Tel: +60 3 7726 1599 Your rights, our mission – download CI's Strategy 2015: http://consint.info/RightsMission @Consumers_Int | www.consumersinternational.org | www.facebook.com/consumersinternational Read our email confidentiality notice. Don't print this email unless necessary. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From parminder at itforchange.net Fri Jan 18 08:03:23 2013 From: parminder at itforchange.net (parminder) Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2013 18:33:23 +0530 Subject: [governance] Preliminary List of Nominees for the 2013 MAG - REQUIRES IMMEDIATE ATTENTION In-Reply-To: References: <50F4F7E3.70903@communisphere.com> <619E02E9-F3CF-4C65-8B86-799156F81A01@uzh.ch> <50F6808C.5070408@itforchange.net> <50F76E21.3030308@itforchange.net> Message-ID: <50F9481B.6000807@itforchange.net> On Thursday 17 January 2013 03:10 PM, William Drake wrote: > Hi Parminder > I also find it ironic given the high standards of disclosure > demonstrated when you were telling the IGC to support the Indian > government's CIRP proposal without mentioning your role in it, and so > on. :-) Interesting accusation. Now that you have made it, I hope you will not run away from pursuing it, and provide the sought clarifications. (1) What do you mean by 'my role in the CIRP proposal' - what role you see I had in the CIRP proposal? (2) What do you mean by 'without mentioning your role in it' YOu know it pretty well that ITfC presented its version of CIRP proposal first in dec 2010 during UN DESA consultation on EC, which were public, and our submission was also separately submitted to this elist, and had limited but harsh criticism from the likes of Adam. The second time ITfC's proposal was publicly discussed was during the Rio meeting in Sept 2011, and the concerned paper we wrote also submitted to the IGC. What better transparency do you expect. Of course, we advocate actively about all our IG and other proposals with all the concerned actors. That is what every advocacy organisation does, isnt it. Now if India liked our proposal and submitted a (considerably) modified version of it as its own - where does 'disclosure' issue comes in. Can you think of an NGO adopting greater transparency. ITfC has always boldly stood up for whatever we believe in... it is always all out there, even at the risk of being unpopular. While all the above was always very public, when a Daily Mail article made dark hints about CIRP proposal and the role of various actors in it, and I think McTim asked us to respond on this list - I wrote a 7-8 pager with all the details, about what happened and how... Because we at ITfC do believe that such transparency and accountability is the very basis of whatever legitimacy civil society has... Every question that is publicly asked must be fully responded to. And we always do... BTW, apart from answering the above two questions, can you also remind me when did I ask IGC to support the CIRP proposal? I of course often did try and expose the hypocrisy behind much of the opposition to the CIRP proposal, mainly in terms of the close engagement of many of the critics with a very similar structure at the OECD level doing similar work that CIRP was supposed to do. And then there is the unfortunate 'look who is talking' aspect to all this... Michael earlier raised the issue of the deep and systematic nexus between US delegation and civil society at the WCIT meeting. I am not against one off strategic linkages between CS and govs, including being on official delegations, and preparing statements/ drafts for govs, in order to obtain outcomes that a set of civil society actors in any case believe in. However, what happened at WCIT was rather, as I said, systematic and deep, and for a big range of CS actors. And, well, there has been no reporting on how this was all managed by CS actors. Bill, you were coordinating CS statements (at the BestBits meeting) at the same time as you were sworn to protect US national interests. Or am I mistaken... You were also all along active on IGC list mouthing the exact US positions.... Even when Mike spoke about the CS and US delegation issue, even if you were sure about where you stood and being right and unsullied, like I gave CIRP related explanations so many times on this list - including now, maybe you also should have responded with something (Avri did make a response). parminder > > Games aside, I remain curious about your insistence the nomcom spend > time on an extra procedure that the Secretariat has made clear is > unnecessary, particularly when the discussion here was about the tight > time frame and urgent need to complete the process. What purpose > would it serve? I don't really care much either way and would of > course roll with whatever IGC members have consensus on, but it seems > like silly bureaucracy to me. [Disclaimer: I am on the MAG, nominated > by IGC and APC] > > Cheers > > Bill > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From jeanette at wzb.eu Fri Jan 18 08:04:13 2013 From: jeanette at wzb.eu (Jeanette Hofmann) Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2013 14:04:13 +0100 Subject: [governance] Notice to the IGC on Proposed Charter Amendments In-Reply-To: <02EB5DC1-5B10-43BD-B8C4-C81F4E528DA3@ciroap.org> References: <50F38F8E.3090106@ciroap.org> <50F3B31B.4090406@itforchange.net> <50F3B423.1070901@ciroap.org> <50F3B544.3080409@itforchange.net> <1FC731B2-FE70-41AC-B97D-52979AFFAE05@uzh.ch> <1358157197.55375.YahooMailNeo@web125106.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <020a01cdf283$98dfbe10$ca9f3a30$@gmail.com> <20130114212217.7f43bbc9@quill.bollow.ch> <1358227661.77969.YahooMailNeo@web125105.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <735AC965-1DFD-4A66-BFF6-3E828E71D72E@ciroap.org> <02EB5DC1-5B10-43BD-B8C4-C81F4E528DA3@ciroap.org> Message-ID: <50F9484D.50800@wzb.eu> I support all amendments. jeanette Am 18.01.13 13:50, schrieb Jeremy Malcolm: > On 18/01/2013, at 8:32 PM, Jeremy Malcolm > wrote: > >> I almost let this slip. Sala asked me to call the charter amendment >> poll by today, unless we need more time for discussion. So let's just >> confirm, are we ready to call a poll on any or all of these proposed >> amendments? I think I have the latest/preferred text for each below, >> but correct me if I'm wrong: >> >> 1. ... "Prior to voting the prospective voter must personally >> ascertain that they are a member of the IGC based on membership >> criteria described elsewhere in this charter and posted as part of the >> voting information (i.e. a voter must affirm membership on the voter >> form prior to voting)." ... "All ballots will include the ability for >> voters to abstain on any choice included on the ballot." > > This has > ten proposers. > >> 2. Under "Selection of Coordinators", regarding when elections >> are held, change "by midsummer (the summer solstice) to "by the end of >> that calendar year". Also in "If events prevent an election by >> midsummer, it will be held as soon after midsummer as possible," >> change the word "midsummer" to "then" in both places. > > I think this has three so far (me, Parminder and Izumi), so would need > seven more if we are to put it to the vote with the other one. Norbert > spoke against, already, and Imran supported a slightly different wording. > >> 3. Under "Working methods", update the address of the mailing >> list from governance at lists.cpsr.org >> to governance at lists.igcaucus.org >> . > > This has two (me and Norbert; the others didn't expressly mention it), > so it needs eight more if we are to put it to the vote at the same time. > > -- > > *Dr Jeremy Malcolm > Senior Policy Officer > Consumers International | the global campaigning voice for consumers* > Office for Asia-Pacific and the Middle East > Lot 5-1 Wisma WIM, 7 Jalan Abang Haji Openg, TTDI, 60000 Kuala Lumpur, > Malaysia > Tel: +60 3 7726 1599 > > *Your rights, our mission – download CI's Strategy 2015:* > http://consint.info/RightsMission > > @Consumers_Int | www.consumersinternational.org > | > www.facebook.com/consumersinternational > > > Read our email confidentiality notice > . Don't > print this email unless necessary. > > -------------- 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 From ias_pk at yahoo.com Fri Jan 18 08:10:05 2013 From: ias_pk at yahoo.com (Imran Ahmed Shah) Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2013 05:10:05 -0800 (PST) Subject: [governance] Notice to the IGC on Proposed Charter Amendments In-Reply-To: <02EB5DC1-5B10-43BD-B8C4-C81F4E528DA3@ciroap.org> References: <50F38F8E.3090106@ciroap.org> <50F3B31B.4090406@itforchange.net> <50F3B423.1070901@ciroap.org> <50F3B544.3080409@itforchange.net> <1FC731B2-FE70-41AC-B97D-52979AFFAE05@uzh.ch> <1358157197.55375.YahooMailNeo@web125106.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <020a01cdf283$98dfbe10$ca9f3a30$@gmail.com> <20130114212217.7f43bbc9@quill.bollow.ch> <1358227661.77969.YahooMailNeo@web125105.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <735AC965-1DFD-4A66-BFF6-3E828E71D72E@ciroap.org> <02EB5DC1-5B10-43BD-B8C4-C81F4E528DA3@ciroap.org> Message-ID: <1358514605.33387.YahooMailNeo@web125103.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Dear Jeremy, Please include me as Co-Proposer for the Section # 2 and Section # 3: 2. Under "Selection of Coordinators",.....calendar year.... +1 3. Under "Working methods", .....to governance at lists.igcaucus.or +1 Regards Imran Ahmed Shah >________________________________ > From: Jeremy Malcolm >To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org >Sent: Friday, 18 January 2013, 17:50 >Subject: Re: [governance] Notice to the IGC on Proposed Charter Amendments > > >On 18/01/2013, at 8:32 PM, Jeremy Malcolm wrote: > >I almost let this slip.  Sala asked me to call the charter amendment poll by today, unless we need more time for discussion.  So let's just confirm, are we ready to call a poll on any or all of these proposed amendments?  I think I have the latest/preferred text for each below, but correct me if I'm wrong: >> >> >>1. ... "Prior to voting the prospective voter must personally ascertain that they are a member of the IGC based on membership criteria described elsewhere in this charter and posted as part of the voting information (i.e. a voter must affirm membership on the voter form prior to voting)." ... "All ballots will include the ability for voters to abstain on any choice included on the ballot." > > >This has > ten proposers. > >2. Under "Selection of Coordinators", regarding when elections are held, change "by midsummer (the summer solstice) to "by the end of that calendar year".  Also in "If events prevent an election by midsummer, it will be held as soon after midsummer as possible," change the word "midsummer" to "then" in both places. > > >I think this has three so far (me, Parminder and Izumi), so would need seven more if we are to put it to the vote with the other one.  Norbert spoke against, already, and Imran supported a slightly different wording. > >3. Under "Working methods", update the address of the mailing list from governance at lists.cpsr.org to governance at lists.igcaucus.org. > > >This has two (me and Norbert; the others didn't expressly mention it), so it needs eight more if we are to put it to the vote at the same time. > > >--  > >Dr Jeremy Malcolm >Senior Policy Officer >Consumers International | the global campaigning voice for consumers >Office for Asia-Pacific and the Middle East >Lot 5-1 Wisma WIM, 7 Jalan Abang Haji Openg, TTDI, 60000 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia >Tel: +60 3 7726 1599 >Your rights, our mission – download CI's Strategy 2015: http://consint.info/RightsMission >@Consumers_Int | www.consumersinternational.org | www.facebook.com/consumersinternational >Read our email confidentiality notice. Don't print this email unless necessary. > >____________________________________________________________ >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: -------------- 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 From nb at bollow.ch Fri Jan 18 08:45:13 2013 From: nb at bollow.ch (Norbert Bollow) Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2013 14:45:13 +0100 Subject: [governance] Appeals Team - Call for Comments and Interim Findings In-Reply-To: References: <99B5B12AE95441728A797F79FC884BD5@Toshiba> Message-ID: <20130118144513.51999375@quill.bollow.ch> McTim wrote: > Dear Ian, > > Many thanks to you and the entire appeals team for your work. +1 Greetings, Norbert -------------- 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 From william.drake at uzh.ch Fri Jan 18 08:46:49 2013 From: william.drake at uzh.ch (William Drake) Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2013 14:46:49 +0100 Subject: [governance] Preliminary List of Nominees for the 2013 MAG - REQUIRES IMMEDIATE ATTENTION In-Reply-To: <50F93DAF.10702@itforchange.net> References: <50F4F7E3.70903@communisphere.com> <619E02E9-F3CF-4C65-8B86-799156F81A01@uzh.ch> <50F6808C.5070408@itforchange.net> <50F76E21.3030308@itforchange.net> <50F93DAF.10702@itforchange.net> Message-ID: Hi Parminder On Jan 18, 2013, at 1:18 PM, parminder wrote: > > Hi Bill > > On Thursday 17 January 2013 03:10 PM, William Drake wrote: >> Hi Parminder >> >> On Jan 17, 2013, at 4:21 AM, parminder wrote: >> >>>> In either scenario, I would think Adam's solution is a sensible way to get this done promptly and focus the noncom's effort on what really needs doing. >>> >>> I do however find it rather odd that an existing IGC nominated MAG member should insist that either the matter of recertifying not be taken up at all, or that noncom simple issues a blanket endorsement without at all going into the merit of the case, that too without appending any disclaimer :). >> >> And I find it rather odd that you would make this claim when a) in the very next sentence of my message I refer to discussions we are having in the MAG; > > I did not understand. What do any discussions in the MAG have to do with my request that all existing members also be considered for renomination? (By the way, what discussions are you having in the MAG?) Sorry, you had two accusations in one sentence and I was responding to the second, that it was somehow suspect that I didn't append a disclaimer saying that I'm on the MAG. So I noted this was clear from the rest of the message etc. > >> b) in another message sent to you and the list seven minutes later I ask you what you thought was controversial about our informal MAG meeting in Baku > > I will related my views on this in rather details very soon.. watch this space :) We await with bated breath :-) >> and note that we on the MAG have sort of deferred to Izumi's reporting but could do something else if people wanted; > > That is very fine.. I have no problem with it. Generally I do seek better and closer interactions. Many have said the same thing about out MAG reps over the years on the IGC list... > >> and c) the composition of the MAG CS contingent has been discussed in the thread and is hardly a secret. > > Yes, everyone knows it. That still makes it odd for an extant member to repeated assert that extant members should not recertified. I don't follow the logic that makes it odd for me to note that the UN says it doesn't want this. > >> I also find it ironic given the high standards of disclosure demonstrated when you were telling the IGC to support the Indian government's CIRP proposal without mentioning your role in it, and so on. :-) >> >> Games aside, I remain curious about your insistence the nomcom spend time on an extra procedure that the Secretariat has made clear is unnecessary, > > Secretariat seems to think so... but not the real decision maker - the UNDESA. right! You have some interesting ideas of how all this works. You know what DESA wants and the secretariat doesn't. > >> particularly when the discussion here was about the tight time frame and urgent need to complete the process. > > It should take a few minutes only. I expect everyone to be renominated, maybe with a short discussion about some being more interactive than others, but maybe the nomcom will also observe that they expect/ request continued or greater interaction with IGC... That is all. > >> What purpose would it serve? > > The biggest purposes of all - accountability.... Why are so giving it such a short shrift. So you've decided that unless each extant MAG member is re-examined and recertified there's no accountability? Then why didn't you propose this long ago so the caucus could have a rational discussion of the idea and come to some consensus, rather throw it out there a couple days before the nomcom is supposed to deliver? Or for that matter, years ago, like when you were on the MAG? > >> I don't really care much either way and would of course roll with whatever IGC members have consensus on, but it seems like silly bureaucracy to me. > > For a nominating group to reassess an earlier nominated candidate is 'silly bureaucracy' for you ! That surprises me. I really dont where are you coming from. I was trying to help Thomas and the nomcom do their thing by asking the Secretariat what they wanted. I relayed what I was told, and now here I am being grilled by police interrogator Parminder (I admit, you must have been good!). I can handle a round or two of this if we can dispense with insinuations about missing disclaimers etc. > > Would it look rather less silly if at some time an IGC nomcom conspicuously refused to renominate an extant MAG member, while renominating all others, because it were a widely held belief that, since the earleir nomination, the concerned member had clearly conducted him/her-self in a manner that maked him/her not worthy of an IGC nomination. Is such a situation in your view entirely inconceivable? > > There are countries that have right-to-recall provisions. India has them now in some local bodies. And you are against a re-assessment even when there is clearly a fresh appointment involved. Ok so now I understand. I thought we were trying to help the caucus solve the subject line---Preliminary List of Nominees for the 2013 MAG - REQUIRES IMMEDIATE ATTENTION---and so pointed out we don't need to invent new steps nobody is asking us to take. But your purpose is not the short-term, getting it done, but rather the long term, establishing rules for the IGC, including the option to recall MAG members based on some sort of interrogation of their performance. So the search for something in the universe to regulate continues. Fair enough, I trust you regard this as fair minded institution building and will ignore the personalized accusatory way you started. So if caucus members think this is important, want to discuss the pros and cons, and come to a consensus on a course of action—whether formalized in the charter nomcom bits or more informally—great, I'm sure all MAG members will happily comply. But that means a collective decision, not you unilaterally pronouncing at the 11th hour. > >> [Disclaimer: I am on the MAG, nominated by IGC and APC] >> >> Cheers >> >> Bill -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From toml at communisphere.com Fri Jan 18 08:49:51 2013 From: toml at communisphere.com (Thomas Lowenhaupt) Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2013 08:49:51 -0500 Subject: [governance] CORRECTION Re: 2013 MAG Nominees - REQUIRES IMMEDIATE ATTENTION In-Reply-To: <50F9395A.8080906@itforchange.net> References: <50F4F7E3.70903@communisphere.com> <50F935C6.8030909@communisphere.com> <50F93785.5060906@communisphere.com> <50F9395A.8080906@itforchange.net> Message-ID: <50F952FF.5020307@communisphere.com> Thanks for the suggestion. Tom On 1/18/2013 7:00 AM, parminder wrote: > > Tom > > Maybe you can also ask potential nominees to add a line whereby they > express their commitment to keep up close interactions with the IGC, > and to report back extensively. > > IN fact the UNDESA announcement says that MAG nominees are "expected > to have extensive linkages with their respective stakeholder groups". > > CS's norms for accountability and interactiveness should be even > higher than normal ones. So it is important that we get such a > commitment. It used to be the practice in the IGC to get such a > commitment from nominees.. > > parminder > > > On Friday 18 January 2013 05:22 PM, Thomas Lowenhaupt wrote: >> *Correction: The Deadline to get info to IGF staff is January 20 not >> as noted below. We need you info NOW.* >> >> >> On 1/18/2013 6:45 AM, Thomas Lowenhaupt wrote: >>> Baudouin, >>> I've attached a/MAG Nomination Submission Template:/that will >>> ultimately be sent with each of the IGC NomCom's selections to MAG. >>> Please complete and send this to TomL at communisphere.com _/as soon as >>> possible/_. Other information is also welcome. I will share it with >>> the NomCom. *Note: the voting members are actively considering the >>> cohort of 2013 nominees. A decision must be made within 24 hours to >>> meet the MAG deadline of January 21 submission. >>> >>> *Best, >>> >>> Tom Lowenhaupt >>> >>> >>> On 1/18/2013 4:11 AM, Baudouin Schombe wrote: >>>> Hello Thomas, >>>> >>>> to which email address should I send the info complementary >>>> requirements for candidates who want to serve the MAG 2013? >>>> >>>> Baudouin >>>> >>>> >>>> 2013/1/15 Thomas Lowenhaupt >>> > >>>> >>>> IGC List Members, >>>> >>>> The below 36 people have been self nominated or were nominated >>>> by another IGC member to be on the 2013 MAG (the Internet >>>> Governance Forum's Multistakeholder Advisory Group). >>>> >>>> It's a far larger list than any previous one with which I am >>>> familiar. And the Nominating Committee has very little time to >>>> make a selection. >>>> >>>> So that we may properly review all eligible candidates, the >>>> Nominating Committee would greatly appreciate your addressing >>>> the following as soon as practicable. >>>> >>>> * If you are*not on this* list and were inadvertently left >>>> off, please inform the NomCom immediately. >>>> * If you are *on the list* and wish to be removed - that is, >>>> you do not wish to serve on the 2013 MAG - please inform >>>> the NomCom as soon as possible. >>>> * Those indicating an interest in serving on the MAG and >>>> wishing to send supporting documents, or having others send >>>> supporting documents to their nominations, should assure >>>> their arrival by c.o.b. Thursday. This is extremely tight >>>> but we must have the final decision completed by Saturday >>>> with nominations to IGF by January 21. >>>> >>>> The preliminary full list of nominees are: >>>> >>>> 1. Anriette Esterhuysen >>>> 2. Baudouin SCHOMBE >>>> 3. Brenden Kuerbis >>>> 4. Chaitanya Dhareshwar >>>> 5. Cheryl Langdon-Orr >>>> 6. Excel Asama Abel >>>> 7. Fatima Cambronero >>>> 8. Fouad Bajwa >>>> 9. Francis Augusto Medeiros >>>> 10. Gideon Rop >>>> 11. Ginger Paque >>>> 12. Graciela Selaimen >>>> 13. Hempal Shrestha >>>> 14. Imran Ahmed Shah >>>> 15. Izumi Aizu >>>> 16. Jamil Goheer >>>> 17. Jean-Yves Gatete >>>> 18. Jeremy Malcolm >>>> 19. Joao Carlos Caribe >>>> 20. José Félix Arias Ynche >>>> 21. Jose Francisco Callo Romero >>>> 22. Juan Manuel Rojas >>>> 23. Karim ATTOUMANI MOHAMED >>>> 24. Kossi AMESSINOU >>>> 25. Michael Gurstein >>>> 26. Mohamed Zahran >>>> 27. Mohamed Tijani BEN JEMAA >>>> 28. Robert Guerra >>>> 29. Robin Cross >>>> 30. Rudi Vansnick >>>> 31. Shahid Akbar >>>> 32. Shaila Mistry >>>> 33. Sonigitu Ekpe >>>> 34. Susan Chalmers >>>> 35. Tijani BEN JEMAA >>>> 36. Tim McGinnis >>>> >>>> Sincerely, >>>> >>>> Thomas Lowenhaupt, Non-voting chair >>>> The Nominating Committee >>>> >>>> Voting Members of the NomCom: >>>> >>>> Wilson Abigaba >>>> Shahid Akbar >>>> Devon Blake >>>> Dixie Hawtin >>>> Asif Kabani >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> ____________________________________________________________ >>>> 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 >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> SCHOMBE BAUDOUIN >>>> CENTRE AFRICAIN D'ECHANGE CULTUREL/ >>>> ACADEMIE DES TIC >>>> At-Large Member >>>> NCSG Member >>>> >>>> email:baudouin.schombe at gmail.com >>>> >>>> Baudouin.Schombe at ticafrica.net >>>> tél:+243998983491 >>>> skype:b.schombe >>>> wite web:http://webmail.ticafrica.net >>>> blog:http://akimambo.unblog.fr >>> >> > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From riaz.tayob at gmail.com Fri Jan 18 09:00:05 2013 From: riaz.tayob at gmail.com (Riaz K Tayob) Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2013 16:00:05 +0200 Subject: [governance] Appeals Team - Call for Comments and Interim Findings In-Reply-To: <20130118144513.51999375@quill.bollow.ch> References: <99B5B12AE95441728A797F79FC884BD5@Toshiba> <20130118144513.51999375@quill.bollow.ch> Message-ID: <50F95565.1000807@gmail.com> +1 On 2013/01/18 03:45 PM, Norbert Bollow wrote: > McTim wrote: > >> Dear Ian, >> >> Many thanks to you and the entire appeals team for your work. > +1 > > Greetings, > Norbert > -------------- 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 From Philipp.Mirtl at oiip.ac.at Fri Jan 18 09:11:39 2013 From: Philipp.Mirtl at oiip.ac.at (Philipp Mirtl) Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2013 15:11:39 +0100 Subject: AW: [governance] ITU Report 2012 Message-ID: <45460B8AE6CC454F846577DC3E9B38A07602DB@srvsbs01.OIIP.local> That looks very interesting, thank you! Another interesting contribution to the broader field of the measurement agenda within the Internet Economy is a recently published OECD study called "Improving the Evidence Base for Information Security and Privacy Policies" http://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/docserver/download/5k4dq3rkb19n.pdf?expires=1358514461&id=id&accname=guest&checksum=F9C54BF65D26C7A5184E288940EC00ED Best, philipp -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- Von: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] Im Auftrag von "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang" Gesendet: Freitag, 18. Jänner 2013 13:16 An: governance at lists.igcaucus.org Betreff: [governance] ITU Report 2012 FYI http://www.itu.int/ITU-D/ict/publications/idi/material/2012/MIS2012_without_Annex_4.pdf wolfgang -------------- 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 From kerry at kdbsystems.com Fri Jan 18 09:13:01 2013 From: kerry at kdbsystems.com (Kerry Brown) Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2013 14:13:01 +0000 Subject: [governance] Appeals Team - Call for Comments and Interim Findings In-Reply-To: <50F95565.1000807@gmail.com> References: <99B5B12AE95441728A797F79FC884BD5@Toshiba> <20130118144513.51999375@quill.bollow.ch> <50F95565.1000807@gmail.com> Message-ID: I'd also like to thank the appeals team for their work. It is not fun, either for the team or the person that made the decision. It is however a necessary part of good governance. Thank you to the team for considering this appeal and to Sala for making a hard decision. I have administered many forums, newsgroups, and mailing lists. It is not an easy job. Kerry Brown > -----Original Message----- > From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance- > request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Riaz K Tayob > Sent: January-18-13 6:00 AM > To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Norbert Bollow > Subject: Re: [governance] Appeals Team - Call for Comments and Interim > Findings > > +1 > On 2013/01/18 03:45 PM, Norbert Bollow wrote: > > McTim wrote: > > > >> Dear Ian, > >> > >> Many thanks to you and the entire appeals team for your work. > > +1 > > > > Greetings, > > Norbert > > > -------------- 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 From william.drake at uzh.ch Fri Jan 18 09:14:34 2013 From: william.drake at uzh.ch (William Drake) Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2013 15:14:34 +0100 Subject: [governance] Preliminary List of Nominees for the 2013 MAG - REQUIRES IMMEDIATE ATTENTION In-Reply-To: <50F9481B.6000807@itforchange.net> References: <50F4F7E3.70903@communisphere.com> <619E02E9-F3CF-4C65-8B86-799156F81A01@uzh.ch> <50F6808C.5070408@itforchange.net> <50F76E21.3030308@itforchange.net> <50F9481B.6000807@itforchange.net> Message-ID: <43A9E5E7-1B37-42E5-BD7F-18DF3B6BF415@uzh.ch> Hi parminder On Jan 18, 2013, at 2:03 PM, parminder wrote: > > On Thursday 17 January 2013 03:10 PM, William Drake wrote: >> Hi Parminder > >> I also find it ironic given the high standards of disclosure demonstrated when you were telling the IGC to support the Indian government's CIRP proposal without mentioning your role in it, and so on. :-) > > Interesting accusation. Now that you have made it, I hope you will not run away from pursuing it, and provide the sought clarifications. You're right, it was wrong to have teased you without expecting an extended interrogation in response. So I withdraw my remark and apologize for making it. Anyone who cares and has time can look through the list archives and make what they will of things. > > (1) What do you mean by 'my role in the CIRP proposal' - what role you see I had in the CIRP proposal? > > (2) What do you mean by 'without mentioning your role in it' > > YOu know it pretty well that ITfC presented its version of CIRP proposal first in dec 2010 during UN DESA consultation on EC, which were public, and our submission was also separately submitted to this elist, and had limited but harsh criticism from the likes of Adam. The second time ITfC's proposal was publicly discussed was during the Rio meeting in Sept 2011, and the concerned paper we wrote also submitted to the IGC. What better transparency do you expect. Of course, we advocate actively about all our IG and other proposals with all the concerned actors. That is what every advocacy organisation does, isnt it. Now if India liked our proposal and submitted a (considerably) modified version of it as its own - where does 'disclosure' issue comes in. Can you think of an NGO adopting greater transparency. ITfC has always boldly stood up for whatever we believe in... it is always all out there, even at the risk of being unpopular. > > While all the above was always very public, when a Daily Mail article made dark hints about CIRP proposal and the role of various actors in it, and I think McTim asked us to respond on this list - I wrote a 7-8 pager with all the details, about what happened and how... Because we at ITfC do believe that such transparency and accountability is the very basis of whatever legitimacy civil society has... Every question that is publicly asked must be fully responded to. And we always do... > > BTW, apart from answering the above two questions, can you also remind me when did I ask IGC to support the CIRP proposal? I of course often did try and expose the hypocrisy behind much of the opposition to the CIRP proposal, mainly in terms of the close engagement of many of the critics with a very similar structure at the OECD level doing similar work that CIRP was supposed to do. > > And then there is the unfortunate 'look who is talking' aspect to all this... Michael earlier raised the issue of the deep and systematic nexus between US delegation and civil society at the WCIT meeting. I am not against one off strategic linkages between CS and govs, including being on official delegations, and preparing statements/ drafts for govs, in order to obtain outcomes that a set of civil society actors in any case believe in. However, what happened at WCIT was rather, as I said, systematic and deep, and for a big range of CS actors. And, well, there has been no reporting on how this was all managed by CS actors. Bill, you were coordinating CS statements (at the BestBits meeting) at the same time as you were sworn to protect US national interests. Or am I mistaken... You were also all along active on IGC list mouthing the exact US positions…. I "mouth" my positions. On WCIT, these overlapped with the US positions to comfortably serve on the delegation. There were also points on which I didn't agree with the USG view. I did not draft the US text or encourage the IGC to support the US text. I did oppose the ill-intended or ill-conceived WCIT proposals like most others. I don't think our two engagements are terribly comparable. > Even when Mike spoke about the CS and US delegation issue, even if you were sure about where you stood and being right and unsullied, like I gave CIRP related explanations so many times on this list - including now, maybe you also should have responded with something (Avri did make a response). I didn't read whatever was said. Cheers Bill -------------- 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 From Philipp.Mirtl at oiip.ac.at Fri Jan 18 09:17:09 2013 From: Philipp.Mirtl at oiip.ac.at (Philipp Mirtl) Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2013 15:17:09 +0100 Subject: AW: [governance] ITU Report 2012 Message-ID: <45460B8AE6CC454F846577DC3E9B38A07602DC@srvsbs01.OIIP.local> Sorry, obviously that was the wrong link, so here is the correct one.. http://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/science-and-technology/improving-the-evidence-base-for-information-security-and-privacy-policies_5k4dq3rkb19n-en -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- Von: Philipp Mirtl Gesendet: Freitag, 18. Jänner 2013 15:12 An: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; '"Kleinwächter, Wolfgang"' Betreff: AW: [governance] ITU Report 2012 That looks very interesting, thank you! Another interesting contribution to the broader field of the measurement agenda within the Internet Economy is a recently published OECD study called "Improving the Evidence Base for Information Security and Privacy Policies" http://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/docserver/download/5k4dq3rkb19n.pdf?expires=1358514461&id=id&accname=guest&checksum=F9C54BF65D26C7A5184E288940EC00ED Best, philipp -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- Von: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] Im Auftrag von "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang" Gesendet: Freitag, 18. Jänner 2013 13:16 An: governance at lists.igcaucus.org Betreff: [governance] ITU Report 2012 FYI http://www.itu.int/ITU-D/ict/publications/idi/material/2012/MIS2012_without_Annex_4.pdf wolfgang -------------- 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 From riaz.tayob at gmail.com Fri Jan 18 09:19:47 2013 From: riaz.tayob at gmail.com (Riaz K Tayob) Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2013 16:19:47 +0200 Subject: [governance] A 2008 manifesto penned by Aaron Swartz In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <50F95A03.6090602@gmail.com> http://archive.org/stream/GuerillaOpenAccessManifesto/Goamjuly2008_djvu.txt -------------- 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 From ivarhartmann at gmail.com Fri Jan 18 09:27:16 2013 From: ivarhartmann at gmail.com (Ivar A. M. Hartmann) Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2013 12:27:16 -0200 Subject: [governance] Appeals Team - Call for Comments and Interim Findings In-Reply-To: References: <99B5B12AE95441728A797F79FC884BD5@Toshiba> <20130118144513.51999375@quill.bollow.ch> <50F95565.1000807@gmail.com> Message-ID: Thank you, appeals team and thank you, Sala! Ivar On Jan 18, 2013 11:15 AM, "Kerry Brown" wrote: > I'd also like to thank the appeals team for their work. It is not fun, > either for the team or the person that made the decision. It is however a > necessary part of good governance. Thank you to the team for considering > this appeal and to Sala for making a hard decision. I have administered > many forums, newsgroups, and mailing lists. It is not an easy job. > > Kerry Brown > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance- > > request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Riaz K Tayob > > Sent: January-18-13 6:00 AM > > To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Norbert Bollow > > Subject: Re: [governance] Appeals Team - Call for Comments and Interim > > Findings > > > > +1 > > On 2013/01/18 03:45 PM, Norbert Bollow wrote: > > > McTim wrote: > > > > > >> Dear Ian, > > >> > > >> Many thanks to you and the entire appeals team for your work. > > > +1 > > > > > > Greetings, > > > Norbert > > > > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From nb at bollow.ch Fri Jan 18 10:55:47 2013 From: nb at bollow.ch (Norbert Bollow) Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2013 16:55:47 +0100 Subject: [governance] Notice to the IGC on Proposed Charter Amendments In-Reply-To: <735AC965-1DFD-4A66-BFF6-3E828E71D72E@ciroap.org> References: <50F38F8E.3090106@ciroap.org> <50F3B31B.4090406@itforchange.net> <50F3B423.1070901@ciroap.org> <50F3B544.3080409@itforchange.net> <1FC731B2-FE70-41AC-B97D-52979AFFAE05@uzh.ch> <1358157197.55375.YahooMailNeo@web125106.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <020a01cdf283$98dfbe10$ca9f3a30$@gmail.com> <20130114212217.7f43bbc9@quill.bollow.ch> <1358227661.77969.YahooMailNeo@web125105.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <735AC965-1DFD-4A66-BFF6-3E828E71D72E@ciroap.org> Message-ID: <20130118165547.472e8ec7@quill.bollow.ch> Hi Jeremy In addition there's the amendments proposal by Avri from the thread "Suggested amendment for the charter. Nomcom." with more than ten co-proposers. Greetings, Norbert Am Fri, 18 Jan 2013 20:32:58 +0800 schrieb Jeremy Malcolm : > I almost let this slip. Sala asked me to call the charter amendment > poll by today, unless we need more time for discussion. So let's > just confirm, are we ready to call a poll on any or all of these > proposed amendments? I think I have the latest/preferred text for > each below, but correct me if I'm wrong: > > 1. On selection of coordinators, add after "As part of the voting > process the voter must personally ascertain that they are a member of > the IGC based on membership criteria described elsewhere in this > charter and posted as part of the voting information (i.e. a voter > must affirm membership on the voter form in order to vote)." > > ...this text... > > "Prior to voting the prospective voter must personally ascertain that > they are a member of the IGC based on membership criteria described > elsewhere in this charter and posted as part of the voting > information (i.e. a voter must affirm membership on the voter form > prior to voting)." > > ...then it continues as at present, "The decision to self-identify as > a member of the IGC is a personal decision based on the criteria > defined. A list of the self-defined member-voters will be published > after the election with the results of the election", then another > new addition... > > "All ballots will include the ability for voters to abstain on any > choice included on the ballot." > > 2. Under "Selection of Coordinators", regarding when elections are > held, change "by midsummer (the summer solstice) to "by the end of > that calendar year". Also in "If events prevent an election by > midsummer, it will be held as soon after midsummer as possible," > change the word "midsummer" to "then" in both places. > > 3. Under "Working methods", update the address of the mailing list > from governance at lists.cpsr.org to governance at lists.igcaucus.org. > -------------- 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 From nb at bollow.ch Fri Jan 18 11:04:18 2013 From: nb at bollow.ch (Norbert Bollow) Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2013 17:04:18 +0100 Subject: [governance] dates of coordinators votes (was Re: Notice to the IGC...) In-Reply-To: <02EB5DC1-5B10-43BD-B8C4-C81F4E528DA3@ciroap.org> References: <50F38F8E.3090106@ciroap.org> <50F3B31B.4090406@itforchange.net> <50F3B423.1070901@ciroap.org> <50F3B544.3080409@itforchange.net> <1FC731B2-FE70-41AC-B97D-52979AFFAE05@uzh.ch> <1358157197.55375.YahooMailNeo@web125106.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <020a01cdf283$98dfbe10$ca9f3a30$@gmail.com> <20130114212217.7f43bbc9@quill.bollow.ch> <1358227661.77969.YahooMailNeo@web125105.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <735AC965-1DFD-4A66-BFF6-3E828E71D72E@ciroap.org> <02EB5DC1-5B10-43BD-B8C4-C81F4E528DA3@ciroap.org> Message-ID: <20130118170418.08d41168@quill.bollow.ch> Jeremy Malcolm wrote: > > 2. Under "Selection of Coordinators", regarding when elections are > > held, change "by midsummer (the summer solstice) to "by the end of > > that calendar year". Also in "If events prevent an election by > > midsummer, it will be held as soon after midsummer as possible," > > change the word "midsummer" to "then" in both places. > > I think this has three so far (me, Parminder and Izumi), so would > need seven more if we are to put it to the vote with the other one. > Norbert spoke against, already, and Imran supported a slightly > different wording. Actually the one that spoke against is a different proposal that contained the words "within 15 months of the previous election". I think that this one is better. I'd like to request a clarification though: How does this affect the terms of office of the coordinators who are serving at the time when the charter is changed? Greetings, Norbert -------------- 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 From parminder at itforchange.net Fri Jan 18 12:09:18 2013 From: parminder at itforchange.net (parminder) Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2013 22:39:18 +0530 Subject: [governance] Preliminary List of Nominees for the 2013 MAG - REQUIRES IMMEDIATE ATTENTION In-Reply-To: References: <50F4F7E3.70903@communisphere.com> <619E02E9-F3CF-4C65-8B86-799156F81A01@uzh.ch> <50F6808C.5070408@itforchange.net> <50F76E21.3030308@itforchange.net> <50F93DAF.10702@itforchange.net> Message-ID: <50F981BE.1070202@itforchange.net> Bill You are wrong on many counts. (Bill) One, UN DESA has clearly asked for existing members to be renominated. I dont know why you keep insisting they havent. It is in the UNDESA call for nomination from which I had quoted earlier, and I cant keep re-quoting it. Second, it has been a tradition to re-certify extant members and so there is no "unilaterally pronouncing at the 11th hour" of anything as you allege. Quoting from the email by Chair of the last nomcom that nominated MAG nominees (email by Jacqueline Morris of Jan 10, 2012... "Current MAG members are encouraged to re-apply, but in the interests of diversity, we would like to limit to those who have already served 2 consecutive terms." and "Those who are already on the MAG should also briefly mention how they carried out their responsibilities in the last term(s), in advocating and pushing IGC’s positions as well as the larger CS positions. We would also like to hear what they have contributed, what they intend to contribute and why they want to continue in the role. Their level and manner of engagement with the IGC, and the wider CS constituencies, may also be mentioned. " <..... rather throw it out there a couple days before the nomcom is supposed to deliver? Or for that matter, years ago, like when you were on the MAG?> (Bill) Thirdly, I was never on the MAG, and never nominated by IGC, and so there was no question of renomination. I was a Special Advisor to the MAG Chair picked directly by the chair and in position at his pleasure. Perhaps you can get your basic facts right before making your arguments rather than accusing the other to be too hard an interrogator... parminder On Friday 18 January 2013 07:16 PM, William Drake wrote: > Hi Parminder > > On Jan 18, 2013, at 1:18 PM, parminder > wrote: > >> >> Hi Bill >> >> On Thursday 17 January 2013 03:10 PM, William Drake wrote: >>> Hi Parminder >>> >>> On Jan 17, 2013, at 4:21 AM, parminder >> > wrote: >>> >>>>> In either scenario, I would think Adam's solution is a sensible >>>>> way to get this done promptly and focus the noncom's effort on >>>>> what really needs doing. >>>> >>>> I do however find it rather odd that an existing IGC nominated MAG >>>> member should insist that either the matter of recertifying not be >>>> taken up at all, or that noncom simple issues a blanket endorsement >>>> without at all going into the merit of the case, that too without >>>> appending any disclaimer :). >>> >>> And I find it rather odd that you would make this claim when a) in >>> the very next sentence of my message I refer to discussions we are >>> having in the MAG; >> >> I did not understand. What do any discussions in the MAG have to do >> with my request that all existing members also be considered for >> renomination? (By the way, what discussions are you having in the MAG?) > > Sorry, you had two accusations in one sentence and I was responding to > the second, that it was somehow suspect that I didn't append a > disclaimer saying that I'm on the MAG. So I noted this was clear from > the rest of the message etc. >> >>> b) in another message sent to you and the list seven minutes later I >>> ask you what you thought was controversial about our informal MAG >>> meeting in Baku >> >> I will related my views on this in rather details very soon.. watch >> this space :) > > We await with bated breath :-) > >>> and note that we on the MAG have sort of deferred to Izumi's >>> reporting but could do something else if people wanted; >> >> That is very fine.. I have no problem with it. Generally I do seek >> better and closer interactions. Many have said the same thing about >> out MAG reps over the years on the IGC list... >> >>> and c) the composition of the MAG CS contingent has been discussed >>> in the thread and is hardly a secret. >> >> Yes, everyone knows it. That still makes it odd for an extant member >> to repeated assert that extant members should not recertified. > > I don't follow the logic that makes it odd for me to note that the UN > says it doesn't want this. >> >>> I also find it ironic given the high standards of disclosure >>> demonstrated when you were telling the IGC to support the Indian >>> government's CIRP proposal without mentioning your role in it, and >>> so on. :-) >>> >>> Games aside, I remain curious about your insistence the nomcom spend >>> time on an extra procedure that the Secretariat has made clear is >>> unnecessary, >> >> Secretariat seems to think so... but not the real decision maker - >> the UNDESA. right! > > You have some interesting ideas of how all this works. You know what > DESA wants and the secretariat doesn't. >> >>> particularly when the discussion here was about the tight time frame >>> and urgent need to complete the process. >> >> It should take a few minutes only. I expect everyone to be >> renominated, maybe with a short discussion about some being more >> interactive than others, but maybe the nomcom will also observe that >> they expect/ request continued or greater interaction with IGC... >> That is all. >> >>> What purpose would it serve? >> >> The biggest purposes of all - accountability.... Why are so giving it >> such a short shrift. > > So you've decided that unless each extant MAG member is re-examined > and recertified there's no accountability? Then why didn't you > propose this long ago so the caucus could have a rational discussion > of the idea and come to some consensus, rather throw it out there a > couple days before the nomcom is supposed to deliver? Or for that > matter, years ago, like when you were on the MAG? >> >>> I don't really care much either way and would of course roll with >>> whatever IGC members have consensus on, but it seems like silly >>> bureaucracy to me. >> >> For a nominating group to reassess an earlier nominated candidate is >> 'silly bureaucracy' for you ! That surprises me. I really dont where >> are you coming from. > > I was trying to help Thomas and the nomcom do their thing by asking > the Secretariat what they wanted. I relayed what I was told, and now > here I am being grilled by police interrogator Parminder (I admit, you > must have been good!). I can handle a round or two of this if we can > dispense with insinuations about missing disclaimers etc. >> >> Would it look rather less silly if at some time an IGC nomcom >> conspicuously refused to renominate an extant MAG member, while >> renominating all others, because it were a widely held belief that, >> since the earleir nomination, the concerned member had clearly >> conducted him/her-self in a manner that maked him/her not worthy of >> an IGC nomination. Is such a situation in your view entirely >> inconceivable? >> >> There are countries that have right-to-recall provisions. India has >> them now in some local bodies. And you are against a re-assessment >> even when there is clearly a fresh appointment involved. > > Ok so now I understand. I thought we were trying to help the caucus > solve the subject line---Preliminary List of Nominees for the 2013 MAG > - REQUIRES IMMEDIATE ATTENTION---and so pointed out we don't need to > invent new steps nobody is asking us to take. But your purpose is not > the short-term, getting it done, but rather the long term, > establishing rules for the IGC, including the option to recall MAG > members based on some sort of interrogation of their performance. So > the search for something in the universe to regulate continues. Fair > enough, I trust you regard this as fair minded institution building > and will ignore the personalized accusatory way you started. So if > caucus members think this is important, want to discuss the pros and > cons, and come to a consensus on a course of action—whether formalized > in the charter nomcom bits or more informally—great, I'm sure all MAG > members will happily comply. But that means a collective decision, > not you unilaterally pronouncing at the 11th hour. >> >>> [Disclaimer: I am on the MAG, nominated by IGC and APC] >>> >>> Cheers >>> >>> Bill > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From nb at bollow.ch Fri Jan 18 12:10:25 2013 From: nb at bollow.ch (Norbert Bollow) Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2013 18:10:25 +0100 Subject: [governance] Alternative amendment proposal on coordinator election dates In-Reply-To: <02EB5DC1-5B10-43BD-B8C4-C81F4E528DA3@ciroap.org> References: <50F38F8E.3090106@ciroap.org> <50F3B31B.4090406@itforchange.net> <50F3B423.1070901@ciroap.org> <50F3B544.3080409@itforchange.net> <1FC731B2-FE70-41AC-B97D-52979AFFAE05@uzh.ch> <1358157197.55375.YahooMailNeo@web125106.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <020a01cdf283$98dfbe10$ca9f3a30$@gmail.com> <20130114212217.7f43bbc9@quill.bollow.ch> <1358227661.77969.YahooMailNeo@web125105.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <735AC965-1DFD-4A66-BFF6-3E828E71D72E@ciroap.org> <02EB5DC1-5B10-43BD-B8C4-C81F4E528DA3@ciroap.org> Message-ID: <20130118181025.4d826231@quill.bollow.ch> Dear all As an alternative to the other proposals to change our Charter with regard to the dates of coordinator elections, I'd like to make the proposal below. I view it as seeking to implement the same objective as the other proposals on this topic, but without the problems that could potentially result from updating what the Charter says about election dates without also updating what it says about terms of office. As per the rules on charter amendments, this proposal will proceed to a vote only if there are some co-proposers (The precise language is: “This charter can be amended at any time as proposed by no fewer than ten (10) members and as approved by no less than two-thirds (2/3) of the members of the IGC”); if you agree to be a co-proposer, please reply with text like "I support this" or "+1". I propose to change the IGC charter as follows: Change 1: (Clarify terms of office and align with calender years) Old text: "The IGC will select two (2) coordinators, each for a two (2) year term. One coordinator will be elected in the even years, (e.g. 2006, 2008) and one will be elected in the odd years (e.g., 2007, 2009)." Proposed new text: "The IGC will select two (2) coordinators, each for a two (2) year term. Except under special circumstances (see the section “Replacement of a coordinator” below), one coordinator will serve for an even year and then an odd year (e.g. January 2014 through December 2015) and one coordinator will serve for an odd year and then an even year (e.g. January 2015 through December 2016)." Change 2: (Hold coordinator elections before year-end) Old text: "The selection will be done by on-line voting using the voting process according to the following formula: * election of the coordinator will be held, whenever possible by midsummer (the summer solstice). If events prevent an election by midsummer, it will be held as soon after midsummer as possible. * the coordinator(s) who are not up for election or not standing for election will be responsible for running the election, subject to appeal by the appeal team. (Note: as a boot strap procedure for 2006, the interim coordinator will serve until the end of the first election period, during which two coordinators will be selected - one for one (1) year and one for two (2) years)." Proposed new text: "The selection will be done by on-line voting as per the following: * The election of the coordinator will be held, whenever possible, before the corresponding term of office is scheduled to start. If events prevent an election by then, the election shall be held as soon as possible, with the actual term of office starting on the day after election results have been announced, and ending as scheduled. * The coordinator(s) who are not up for election or not standing for election will be responsible for running the election, subject to appeal by the appeal team. * In the case of an appeal of an election result, the person who was announced as having won the election shall provisionally serve as coordinator until the Appeal Team has decided on the appeal. " Change 3: (Update example on coordinator replacement) Old text: "For example, if the 'even year' coordinator for 2006, leaves the role during an odd year, 2007, the rest of the term will be filled with a replacement, and a new selection will be made on schedule in 2008. If on the other hand the coordinator leaves the role early in 2008, then the replacement would complete the original term and serve the 2008-2010 term." Proposed new text: "For example, if the coordinator for the years 2014-2015 leaves the role during the first year, 2014, the rest of the term will be filled with a replacement, and a new selection will be made on schedule for the 2016-2017 term. If on the other hand the coordinator leaves the role during the second year, 2015, then the replacement would complete the original term and also serve the 2014-2015 term." [end of charter amendment proposal] Disclosure of personal interest: Since I'm a candidate in the current coordinator elections, I have a personal interest in (a) having clarity on what the term of office will be if I should get elected, and (b) having rules in place that support electing a successor who can seamlessly take over after my term of office (if I should get elected) ends. In particular, it seems to me that the charter currently does not support (b) for coordinators who get elected shortly after the beginning of a calendar year. Greetings, Norbert -------------- 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 From parminder at itforchange.net Fri Jan 18 12:20:15 2013 From: parminder at itforchange.net (parminder) Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2013 22:50:15 +0530 Subject: [governance] Preliminary List of Nominees for the 2013 MAG - REQUIRES IMMEDIATE ATTENTION In-Reply-To: <43A9E5E7-1B37-42E5-BD7F-18DF3B6BF415@uzh.ch> References: <50F4F7E3.70903@communisphere.com> <619E02E9-F3CF-4C65-8B86-799156F81A01@uzh.ch> <50F6808C.5070408@itforchange.net> <50F76E21.3030308@itforchange.net> <50F9481B.6000807@itforchange.net> <43A9E5E7-1B37-42E5-BD7F-18DF3B6BF415@uzh.ch> Message-ID: <50F9844F.2030809@itforchange.net> On Friday 18 January 2013 07:44 PM, William Drake wrote: > Hi parminder > > On Jan 18, 2013, at 2:03 PM, parminder wrote: > >> On Thursday 17 January 2013 03:10 PM, William Drake wrote: >>> Hi Parminder >> >>> I also find it ironic given the high standards of disclosure demonstrated when you were telling the IGC to support the Indian government's CIRP proposal without mentioning your role in it, and so on. :-) >> Interesting accusation. Now that you have made it, I hope you will not run away from pursuing it, and provide the sought clarifications. > You're right, it was wrong to have teased you without expecting an extended interrogation in response. My dear Bill, You responded to my teaser on an implicated party stressing that extant MAG members should note be re-certified, and that too without a disclaimer, with an elaborate (a) so and so, (b) thus, and (c) so..... Now that is not interrogation to you, right. When I respond to what you said, which was a much deeper accusation, with a history on this list, you want me just to let it pass...... Why and how so? Hope you will learn to give equal treatment to those with whom you engage in a discussion as you will yourself want it. A basic tenet of civil discussion. parminder > So I withdraw my remark and apologize for making it. > Anyone who cares and has time can look through the list archives and make what they will of things. >> (1) What do you mean by 'my role in the CIRP proposal' - what role you see I had in the CIRP proposal? >> >> (2) What do you mean by 'without mentioning your role in it' >> >> YOu know it pretty well that ITfC presented its version of CIRP proposal first in dec 2010 during UN DESA consultation on EC, which were public, and our submission was also separately submitted to this elist, and had limited but harsh criticism from the likes of Adam. The second time ITfC's proposal was publicly discussed was during the Rio meeting in Sept 2011, and the concerned paper we wrote also submitted to the IGC. What better transparency do you expect. Of course, we advocate actively about all our IG and other proposals with all the concerned actors. That is what every advocacy organisation does, isnt it. Now if India liked our proposal and submitted a (considerably) modified version of it as its own - where does 'disclosure' issue comes in. Can you think of an NGO adopting greater transparency. ITfC has always boldly stood up for whatever we believe in... it is always all out there, even at the risk of being unpopular. >> >> While all the above was always very public, when a Daily Mail article made dark hints about CIRP proposal and the role of various actors in it, and I think McTim asked us to respond on this list - I wrote a 7-8 pager with all the details, about what happened and how... Because we at ITfC do believe that such transparency and accountability is the very basis of whatever legitimacy civil society has... Every question that is publicly asked must be fully responded to. And we always do... >> >> BTW, apart from answering the above two questions, can you also remind me when did I ask IGC to support the CIRP proposal? I of course often did try and expose the hypocrisy behind much of the opposition to the CIRP proposal, mainly in terms of the close engagement of many of the critics with a very similar structure at the OECD level doing similar work that CIRP was supposed to do. >> >> And then there is the unfortunate 'look who is talking' aspect to all this... Michael earlier raised the issue of the deep and systematic nexus between US delegation and civil society at the WCIT meeting. I am not against one off strategic linkages between CS and govs, including being on official delegations, and preparing statements/ drafts for govs, in order to obtain outcomes that a set of civil society actors in any case believe in. However, what happened at WCIT was rather, as I said, systematic and deep, and for a big range of CS actors. And, well, there has been no reporting on how this was all managed by CS actors. Bill, you were coordinating CS statements (at the BestBits meeting) at the same time as you were sworn to protect US national interests. Or am I mistaken... You were also all along active on IGC list mouthing the exact US positions…. > I "mouth" my positions. On WCIT, these overlapped with the US positions to comfortably serve on the delegation. There were also points on which I didn't agree with the USG view. I did not draft the US text or encourage the IGC to support the US text. I did oppose the ill-intended or ill-conceived WCIT proposals like most others. I don't think our two engagements are terribly comparable. > >> Even when Mike spoke about the CS and US delegation issue, even if you were sure about where you stood and being right and unsullied, like I gave CIRP related explanations so many times on this list - including now, maybe you also should have responded with something (Avri did make a response). > I didn't read whatever was said. > > Cheers > > Bill > > > > > > > > > -------------- 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 From gurstein at gmail.com Fri Jan 18 12:36:05 2013 From: gurstein at gmail.com (michael gurstein) Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2013 09:36:05 -0800 Subject: [governance] Preliminary List of Nominees for the 2013 MAG - REQUIRES IMMEDIATE ATTENTION In-Reply-To: References: <50F4F7E3.70903@communisphere.com> <619E02E9-F3CF-4C65-8B86-799156F81A01@uzh.ch> <50F6808C.5070408@itforchange.net> <50F76E21.3030308@itforchange.net> <50F93DAF.10702@itforchange.net> Message-ID: <05e501cdf5a2$58932dc0$09b98940$@gmail.com> It would be very good if, in this discussion, the various parties would make some effort to clearly differentiate their contribution from those that have gone before. >>>There are various ways of doing this as you know.<<< (I believe that many people, including myself, read their mail in some type of ASCII format which means that reformatting including through using italics or alternative character sets does not come through and some other procedure is required. In the absence of attention being paid to this, the result is highly confusing including especially in attributing comments to one or another party. Tks, M From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of William Drake Sent: Friday, January 18, 2013 5:47 AM To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; parminder Subject: Re: [governance] Preliminary List of Nominees for the 2013 MAG - REQUIRES IMMEDIATE ATTENTION Hi Parminder On Jan 18, 2013, at 1:18 PM, parminder wrote: Hi Bill On Thursday 17 January 2013 03:10 PM, William Drake wrote: Hi Parminder On Jan 17, 2013, at 4:21 AM, parminder wrote: In either scenario, I would think Adam's solution is a sensible way to get this done promptly and focus the noncom's effort on what really needs doing. I do however find it rather odd that an existing IGC nominated MAG member should insist that either the matter of recertifying not be taken up at all, or that noncom simple issues a blanket endorsement without at all going into the merit of the case, that too without appending any disclaimer :). And I find it rather odd that you would make this claim when a) in the very next sentence of my message I refer to discussions we are having in the MAG; I did not understand. What do any discussions in the MAG have to do with my request that all existing members also be considered for renomination? (By the way, what discussions are you having in the MAG?) Sorry, you had two accusations in one sentence and I was responding to the second, that it was somehow suspect that I didn't append a disclaimer saying that I'm on the MAG. So I noted this was clear from the rest of the message etc. b) in another message sent to you and the list seven minutes later I ask you what you thought was controversial about our informal MAG meeting in Baku I will related my views on this in rather details very soon.. watch this space :) We await with bated breath :-) and note that we on the MAG have sort of deferred to Izumi's reporting but could do something else if people wanted; That is very fine.. I have no problem with it. Generally I do seek better and closer interactions. Many have said the same thing about out MAG reps over the years on the IGC list... and c) the composition of the MAG CS contingent has been discussed in the thread and is hardly a secret. Yes, everyone knows it. That still makes it odd for an extant member to repeated assert that extant members should not recertified. I don't follow the logic that makes it odd for me to note that the UN says it doesn't want this. I also find it ironic given the high standards of disclosure demonstrated when you were telling the IGC to support the Indian government's CIRP proposal without mentioning your role in it, and so on. :-) Games aside, I remain curious about your insistence the nomcom spend time on an extra procedure that the Secretariat has made clear is unnecessary, Secretariat seems to think so... but not the real decision maker - the UNDESA. right! You have some interesting ideas of how all this works. You know what DESA wants and the secretariat doesn't. particularly when the discussion here was about the tight time frame and urgent need to complete the process. It should take a few minutes only. I expect everyone to be renominated, maybe with a short discussion about some being more interactive than others, but maybe the nomcom will also observe that they expect/ request continued or greater interaction with IGC... That is all. What purpose would it serve? The biggest purposes of all - accountability.... Why are so giving it such a short shrift. So you've decided that unless each extant MAG member is re-examined and recertified there's no accountability? Then why didn't you propose this long ago so the caucus could have a rational discussion of the idea and come to some consensus, rather throw it out there a couple days before the nomcom is supposed to deliver? Or for that matter, years ago, like when you were on the MAG? I don't really care much either way and would of course roll with whatever IGC members have consensus on, but it seems like silly bureaucracy to me. For a nominating group to reassess an earlier nominated candidate is 'silly bureaucracy' for you ! That surprises me. I really dont where are you coming from. I was trying to help Thomas and the nomcom do their thing by asking the Secretariat what they wanted. I relayed what I was told, and now here I am being grilled by police interrogator Parminder (I admit, you must have been good!). I can handle a round or two of this if we can dispense with insinuations about missing disclaimers etc. Would it look rather less silly if at some time an IGC nomcom conspicuously refused to renominate an extant MAG member, while renominating all others, because it were a widely held belief that, since the earleir nomination, the concerned member had clearly conducted him/her-self in a manner that maked him/her not worthy of an IGC nomination. Is such a situation in your view entirely inconceivable? There are countries that have right-to-recall provisions. India has them now in some local bodies. And you are against a re-assessment even when there is clearly a fresh appointment involved. Ok so now I understand. I thought we were trying to help the caucus solve the subject line---Preliminary List of Nominees for the 2013 MAG - REQUIRES IMMEDIATE ATTENTION---and so pointed out we don't need to invent new steps nobody is asking us to take. But your purpose is not the short-term, getting it done, but rather the long term, establishing rules for the IGC, including the option to recall MAG members based on some sort of interrogation of their performance. So the search for something in the universe to regulate continues. Fair enough, I trust you regard this as fair minded institution building and will ignore the personalized accusatory way you started. So if caucus members think this is important, want to discuss the pros and cons, and come to a consensus on a course of action-whether formalized in the charter nomcom bits or more informally-great, I'm sure all MAG members will happily comply. But that means a collective decision, not you unilaterally pronouncing at the 11th hour. [Disclaimer: I am on the MAG, nominated by IGC and APC] Cheers Bill -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From gurstein at gmail.com Fri Jan 18 12:45:44 2013 From: gurstein at gmail.com (michael gurstein) Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2013 09:45:44 -0800 Subject: [governance] Open Letter re: Skype Privacy: CALL FOR SIGNATORIES Message-ID: <05f301cdf5a3$aab47540$001d5fc0$@gmail.com> This sign-on letter is the result of confusing information concerning the privacy/security situation of Skype voice and messaging following it's purchase by Microsoft. M From: liberationtech-bounces at lists.stanford.edu [mailto:liberationtech-bounces at lists.stanford.edu] On Behalf Of Christopher Soghoian Sent: Friday, January 18, 2013 9:14 AM To: liberationtech Subject: Re: [liberationtech] Skype Open Letter: CALL FOR SIGNATORIES . On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 11:26 AM, Nadim Kobeissi wrote: Okay everyone,[MG>] the final draft has been posted online, with the gracious collaboration of the EFF. Please take a look at it, make sure you want to keep your signature there (or add it!) http://www.skypeopenletter.com/draft/ We'll be publishing next week. NK -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From riaz.tayob at gmail.com Fri Jan 18 13:09:07 2013 From: riaz.tayob at gmail.com (Riaz K Tayob) Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2013 20:09:07 +0200 Subject: [governance] Different Rules for Plutocrats - more on Swartz (RIP) Message-ID: <50F98FC3.9010301@gmail.com> [Equality before the law? An exceptional country by any standards . . . ] Different Rules for Plutocrats By Carl Gibson, Reader Supported News 18 January 13 Reader Supported News | Perspective n feudal societies, the king and his barons lord over the serfs, whom devote their lives to toiling for their masters' gain. The serfs live by one harsh set of rules, and the lords live by another. A serf who steals from a lord would face a serious prison sentence or death, while a lord could simply buy off anyone he needed to convince of his innocence should he ever commit a crime. In that respect, the United States is one of the world's most true-to-life examples of a feudal system. 26-year-old Reddit co-founder Aaron Swartz faced up to 35 years in federal prison for the "crime" of downloading academic files from the JSTOR database, with the intent of publicizing the research for anyone to have free of charge. In addition to his prison sentence, he faced up to $1 million in fines. This didn't include any money that Swartz, a man of modest means, would have to raise to pay for his legal fees and court costs in a battle of attrition with the federal judicial system. After Swartz' suicide, his dad told the media his son "was killed by the government. " The federal prosecutor, Steve Heymann, along with US Attorney Carmen Ortiz, believed in punishing hackers to the fullest extent of the law, and relentlessly pursued him despite knowing he was a suicide risk . Contrast that with the recent news of JPMorgan CEO Jamie Dimon, who was on the hot seat for gambling with and losing $6 billion in other people's money in a high-risk trading scheme. Or with executives at HSBC, whom were found to have been laundering money for drug cartels and terrorists. Or with executives at UBS Bank, who pled guilty to rigging the LIBOR interest rate, needlessly bleeding millions of debtors dry on hefty student loan interest payments and mortgage payments. Both HSBC and UBS paid fines that amounted to several weeks of income for the banks. Jamie Dimon had his salary cut from $23 million to $11 million. Jail wasn't even considered for these titans of high finance, despite their open complicity in bilking millions of people out of their hard-earned money, and aiding criminals. While federal prosecutors sought to throw the book at a 26-year-old hacker who tried to distribute information for free, federal regulators are sitting on their thumbs when it comes to community drinking-water supplies. The Obama EPA recently silenced their own report that detailed how hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, made groundwater supplies in Texas undrinkable once the oil and shale gas companies caught wind of it. After the fossil fuel industry threw enough of a fit, the EPA halted the investigation dead in its tracks. The scales of Lady Justice have been tilted in favor of the corporate elite for decades now, regardless of which party is in power or the person in the White House. There are reforms ready to ease the harshness of federal prosecution of computer crimes, like Zoe Lofgren's "Aaron's Law. " There is already legislation on the books to reinstate the Glass-Steagall Act of 1937 that would break up the big banks. Countries like Iceland, Argentina and Germany have already taken criminal action against bankers that ruined economies and upended lives with their destructive greed. But the cold, hard fact is that those laws won't be passed, and those bankers won't be arrested until we pressure our elected officials to do so. And if this current crop won't, then let's overrun the Congressional midterms in 2014 and refuse to elect anyone running for office unless they vow to do so. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ /Carl Gibson, 25, is co-founder of US Uncut, a nationwide creative direct-action movement that mobilized tens of thousands of activists against corporate tax avoidance and budget cuts in the months leading up to the Occupy Wall Street movement. Carl and other US Uncut activists are featured in the documentary "We're Not Broke ," which premiered at the 2012 Sundance Film Festival. He currently lives in Old Lyme, Connecticut. You can contact Carl at carl at rsnorg.org ./ Reader Supported News is the Publication of Origin for this work. Permission to republish is freely granted with credit and a link back to Reader Supported News. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: rsn-I.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 461 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- 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 From nb at bollow.ch Fri Jan 18 16:49:41 2013 From: nb at bollow.ch (Norbert Bollow) Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2013 22:49:41 +0100 Subject: [bestbits] [governance] Multistakeholder Roles and Responsibilities In-Reply-To: <50F8D10B.3010109@ciroap.org> References: <01c801cdf457$f76a3fc0$e63ebf40$@gmail.com> <50F763C0.5070907@ciroap.org> <50F8D10B.3010109@ciroap.org> Message-ID: <20130118224941.556b0653@quill.bollow.ch> Jeremy Malcolm wrote: > On 17/01/2013, at 10:11 PM, Gene Kimmelman > wrote: > > Some of us have to decide where to > > invest money for travel, and knowing who will attend may indicate > > particular gaps in CS presence, or meetings where we'll have a > > critical mass attending who can discuss broader policy issues. > > Actually I put together a system that is meant to achieve that: > > http://a2knetwork.org/meetings/ > > Anyone who registers can list a meeting there and say whether they are > attending, and can post a short report there. It supports multiple > reports, too, in the case that more than one delegation is attending. > The main purpose is to identify where there are gaps - important > meetings that nobody is covering. But it only works if enough people > use it, so please do. So this is intended for all of civil society, rather than just the Consumer Movement, to use? If yes, then I would suggest that that should be made clearer on the website. Greetings, Norbert -------------- 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 From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com Fri Jan 18 19:13:45 2013 From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro) Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2013 13:13:45 +1300 Subject: [governance] Message to New Subscribers! Message-ID: Greetings! It is with great pleasure that we warmly welcome you to the IGC Mailing list. The list serves as a platform for civil society actors that are actively engaged in the promotion of global public interest objectives in Internet Governance Policy making. The IGC is governed by its Charter which is accessible via http://igcaucus.org/charter *Updates and General Information* - A NomCom chaired by Independent non-Voting Thomas Lowenhaupt is in the process of selecting a list of Nominees for the selection of MAG. - A Call for Volunteers to sit on a new NomCom is underfoot. - MAG Consultations are still underfoot for IGC Submissions; - ITRs Review and Analysis - post WCIT is underfoot; - Call for comments on WSIS submissions and working group; - The Appeal Team is in the middle of an interim decision involving the removal of a subscriber from the list; - The Charter will following discussions on the IGC list be put to the Polls for votes. In the meantime, we warmly welcome you to the IGC and trust that you have new ideas, new ways of looking at things and bring your experience to make our collaboration on the mailing list a more productive and fruitful one. Feel free to initiate new threads on Internet Governance matters or emerging issues that you feel is significant for the community to be aware of and be informed and involved. *Coordinators* The IGC has two Coordinators and we are currently concluding the election of one of the Coordinators and should you have any questions for them, feel free to email them directly on coordinators at igcaucus.org Their roles are described within the Charter. *Appeal Team* The Appeal Team exists to hear complaints to review decisions made by the Coordinators and its rules are prescribed within the Charter and here: http://igcaucus.org/appeals-team *Posting Rules for the IGC* Messages to any IGC list must be in line with the mission of the IGC, particularly its purpose to provide an open and effective forum for civil society to share opinion, policy options and expertise on Internet governance issues, and to provide a mechanism for coordination of advocacy for agreed upon policies and to enhance the utilization and influence of Civil Society (CS) and the IGC in relevant policy processes of organizations or fora dealing with Internet Governance issues. Appropriate messages to an IGC list contribute to the objectives and tasks of the IGC, particularly: * To inform civil society and other progressive groups or actors on significant developments impacting on Internet governance policies. * To anticipate, identify and address emerging issues in the areas of Internet governance and help shape issues and perspectives in a manner that is informed by the stated vision of the IGC * To develop common positions on issues relating to Internet governance policies, and make outreach efforts both for informing and for creating broad-based support among other CS groups and individuals for such positions. The messages must observe a minimum of decorum, including:  refrain from personal attacks, insults or slander  refrain from offensive or discriminating language  refrain from threats , including threats of legal action, on list or off list  refrain from excessive and repetitive posting Inappropriate postings to the IGC list include  Unsolicited bulk e-mail  Discussion of subjects unrelated to the IGC mission and objectives  Unprofessional or discourteous commentary, regardless of the general subject  Sequences of messages by one or more participants that cause an IGC list to become a hostile environment For More Information, please visit: http://igcaucus.org/charter Kind Regards, -- Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala P.O. Box 17862 Suva Fiji Twitter: @SalanietaT Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro Tel: +679 3544828 Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From jeremy at ciroap.org Fri Jan 18 19:42:47 2013 From: jeremy at ciroap.org (Jeremy Malcolm) Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2013 08:42:47 +0800 Subject: [governance] Coordinator election results Message-ID: <5FB29FA5-F87D-4F98-BDAC-E5BB066C0CC9@ciroap.org> The elections for the next co-coordinator of the IGC have just closed. As this year's returning officer I am pleased to present the results. There were 129 people who commenced the survey. One of them self-identified as not being a member of the Internet Governance Caucus, and one of them bailed out when asked that question. This leaves 127 people who self-identified. Of those, six people claimed that they had already voted in this year's election, so they were not offered the opportunity to vote again. Of the remaining 121, 106 took that opportunity. Both candidates polled well. In the end, Imran Ahmed Shah came second with 45 votes in his favour. Norbert Bollow came first with 61 votes. Congratulations Norbert, our new co-coordinator - and thanks to you too Imran. I will post the full details to our website as soon as I get an opportunity, and with Sala and Izumi's position will brief Norbert on the technical aspects of his new role. I will also update the list of voters on our website, and will consult with Sala about that. If anyone has any questions in the meantime, please let me know. -- Dr Jeremy Malcolm Senior Policy Officer Consumers International | the global campaigning voice for consumers Office for Asia-Pacific and the Middle East Lot 5-1 Wisma WIM, 7 Jalan Abang Haji Openg, TTDI, 60000 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia Tel: +60 3 7726 1599 Your rights, our mission – download CI's Strategy 2015: http://consint.info/RightsMission @Consumers_Int | www.consumersinternational.org | www.facebook.com/consumersinternational Read our email confidentiality notice. Don't print this email unless necessary. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From ian.peter at ianpeter.com Fri Jan 18 20:19:47 2013 From: ian.peter at ianpeter.com (Ian Peter) Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2013 12:19:47 +1100 Subject: [governance] Coordinator election results In-Reply-To: <5FB29FA5-F87D-4F98-BDAC-E5BB066C0CC9@ciroap.org> References: <5FB29FA5-F87D-4F98-BDAC-E5BB066C0CC9@ciroap.org> Message-ID: <2308C25EF6E84FD98E6EA13DDDD7A6EC@Toshiba> Congratulations to Norbert – IGC is blessed to have two such strong candidates as Imran and Norbert willing to offer their time and talents to help IGC. Good to know that we are back to having two co ordinators, and thanks to Sala for her hard work in difficult circumstances in recent months. Good news! Ian Peter From: Jeremy Malcolm Sent: Saturday, January 19, 2013 11:42 AM To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org Subject: [governance] Coordinator election results The elections for the next co-coordinator of the IGC have just closed. As this year's returning officer I am pleased to present the results. There were 129 people who commenced the survey. One of them self-identified as not being a member of the Internet Governance Caucus, and one of them bailed out when asked that question. This leaves 127 people who self-identified. Of those, six people claimed that they had already voted in this year's election, so they were not offered the opportunity to vote again. Of the remaining 121, 106 took that opportunity. Both candidates polled well. In the end, Imran Ahmed Shah came second with 45 votes in his favour. Norbert Bollow came first with 61 votes. Congratulations Norbert, our new co-coordinator - and thanks to you too Imran. I will post the full details to our website as soon as I get an opportunity, and with Sala and Izumi's position will brief Norbert on the technical aspects of his new role. I will also update the list of voters on our website, and will consult with Sala about that. If anyone has any questions in the meantime, please let me know. -- Dr Jeremy Malcolm Senior Policy Officer Consumers International | the global campaigning voice for consumers Office for Asia-Pacific and the Middle East Lot 5-1 Wisma WIM, 7 Jalan Abang Haji Openg, TTDI, 60000 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia Tel: +60 3 7726 1599 Your rights, our mission – download CI's Strategy 2015: http://consint.info/RightsMission @Consumers_Int | www.consumersinternational.org | www.facebook.com/consumersinternational Read our email confidentiality notice. Don't print this email unless necessary. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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: -------------- 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 From nyangkweagien at gmail.com Fri Jan 18 20:39:51 2013 From: nyangkweagien at gmail.com (Nyangkwe Agien Aaron) Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2013 02:39:51 +0100 Subject: [governance] Coordinator election results In-Reply-To: <2308C25EF6E84FD98E6EA13DDDD7A6EC@Toshiba> References: <5FB29FA5-F87D-4F98-BDAC-E5BB066C0CC9@ciroap.org> <2308C25EF6E84FD98E6EA13DDDD7A6EC@Toshiba> Message-ID: Congratulation Imran and Norbert. I know the cap will fit both of you well. Aaron On 1/19/13, Ian Peter wrote: > Congratulations to Norbert – IGC is blessed to have two such strong > candidates as Imran and Norbert willing to offer their time and talents to > help IGC. Good to know that we are back to having two co ordinators, and > thanks to Sala for her hard work in difficult circumstances in recent > months. Good news! > > Ian Peter > > From: Jeremy Malcolm > Sent: Saturday, January 19, 2013 11:42 AM > To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org > Subject: [governance] Coordinator election results > > The elections for the next co-coordinator of the IGC have just closed. As > this year's returning officer I am pleased to present the results. > > There were 129 people who commenced the survey. One of them self-identified > as not being a member of the Internet Governance Caucus, and one of them > bailed out when asked that question. This leaves 127 people who > self-identified. Of those, six people claimed that they had already voted > in this year's election, so they were not offered the opportunity to vote > again. Of the remaining 121, 106 took that opportunity. > > Both candidates polled well. In the end, Imran Ahmed Shah came second with > 45 votes in his favour. Norbert Bollow came first with 61 votes. > > Congratulations Norbert, our new co-coordinator - and thanks to you too > Imran. I will post the full details to our website as soon as I get an > opportunity, and with Sala and Izumi's position will brief Norbert on the > technical aspects of his new role. I will also update the list of voters on > our website, and will consult with Sala about that. > > If anyone has any questions in the meantime, please let me know. > > -- > > Dr Jeremy Malcolm > Senior Policy Officer > Consumers International | the global campaigning voice for consumers > Office for Asia-Pacific and the Middle East > Lot 5-1 Wisma WIM, 7 Jalan Abang Haji Openg, TTDI, 60000 Kuala Lumpur, > Malaysia > Tel: +60 3 7726 1599 > > Your rights, our mission – download CI's Strategy 2015: > http://consint.info/RightsMission > > @Consumers_Int | www.consumersinternational.org | > www.facebook.com/consumersinternational > > Read our email confidentiality notice. Don't print this email unless > necessary. > > > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > -- Aaron Agien Nyangkwe Journalist-OutCome Mapper Special Assistant to The President ASAFE P.O.Box 5213 Douala-Cameroon Telephone +237 73 42 71 27 -------------- 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 From iza at anr.org Fri Jan 18 21:31:17 2013 From: iza at anr.org (Izumi AIZU) Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2013 11:31:17 +0900 Subject: [governance] Coordinator election results In-Reply-To: References: <5FB29FA5-F87D-4F98-BDAC-E5BB066C0CC9@ciroap.org> <2308C25EF6E84FD98E6EA13DDDD7A6EC@Toshiba> Message-ID: Congratulations to Norbert and also to Imran for your dedication, passion and willingness. I am sure that IGC will become stronger and more focused than before. Many thanks to Sala for your hard work and consistent energy while I was almost retired. It's been a real pleasure working with you! Now that we have new co-co, I am happy to retire from that position officially, but will try to remain active as one member. Thanks also to Jeremy for your continued support even after stepping down from the co-co, which I really admire, and without your technical and reasoned assistance, we could not have this result. Many thanks to all the members of IGC for supporting my activities as co-co. I was honored and also very happy to work for IGC. It has given me many lessons, ideas and directions to go. I really like the diversity within IGC, which could sometimes look like our weakness, but indeed they are our rich asset I believe. We have many more tasks ahead, and I sincerely hope that with the new coordinator team, we will make step by step progress. izumi 2013/1/19 Nyangkwe Agien Aaron : > Congratulation Imran and Norbert. > I know the cap will fit both of you well. > > Aaron > > On 1/19/13, Ian Peter wrote: >> Congratulations to Norbert – IGC is blessed to have two such strong >> candidates as Imran and Norbert willing to offer their time and talents to >> help IGC. Good to know that we are back to having two co ordinators, and >> thanks to Sala for her hard work in difficult circumstances in recent >> months. Good news! >> >> Ian Peter >> >> From: Jeremy Malcolm >> Sent: Saturday, January 19, 2013 11:42 AM >> To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org >> Subject: [governance] Coordinator election results >> >> The elections for the next co-coordinator of the IGC have just closed. As >> this year's returning officer I am pleased to present the results. >> >> There were 129 people who commenced the survey. One of them self-identified >> as not being a member of the Internet Governance Caucus, and one of them >> bailed out when asked that question. This leaves 127 people who >> self-identified. Of those, six people claimed that they had already voted >> in this year's election, so they were not offered the opportunity to vote >> again. Of the remaining 121, 106 took that opportunity. >> >> Both candidates polled well. In the end, Imran Ahmed Shah came second with >> 45 votes in his favour. Norbert Bollow came first with 61 votes. >> >> Congratulations Norbert, our new co-coordinator - and thanks to you too >> Imran. I will post the full details to our website as soon as I get an >> opportunity, and with Sala and Izumi's position will brief Norbert on the >> technical aspects of his new role. I will also update the list of voters on >> our website, and will consult with Sala about that. >> >> If anyone has any questions in the meantime, please let me know. >> >> -- >> >> Dr Jeremy Malcolm >> Senior Policy Officer >> Consumers International | the global campaigning voice for consumers >> Office for Asia-Pacific and the Middle East >> Lot 5-1 Wisma WIM, 7 Jalan Abang Haji Openg, TTDI, 60000 Kuala Lumpur, >> Malaysia >> Tel: +60 3 7726 1599 >> >> Your rights, our mission – download CI's Strategy 2015: >> http://consint.info/RightsMission >> >> @Consumers_Int | www.consumersinternational.org | >> www.facebook.com/consumersinternational >> >> Read our email confidentiality notice. Don't print this email unless >> necessary. >> >> >> >> >> >> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 >> > > > -- > Aaron Agien Nyangkwe > Journalist-OutCome Mapper > Special Assistant to The President > ASAFE > P.O.Box 5213 > Douala-Cameroon > Telephone +237 73 42 71 27 > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > -- >> Izumi Aizu << Institute for InfoSocionomics, Tama University, Tokyo Institute for HyperNetwork Society, Oita, Japan www.anr.org -------------- 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 From iza at anr.org Fri Jan 18 22:45:40 2013 From: iza at anr.org (Izumi AIZU) Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2013 12:45:40 +0900 Subject: [governance] Alternative amendment proposal on coordinator election dates In-Reply-To: <20130118181025.4d826231@quill.bollow.ch> References: <50F38F8E.3090106@ciroap.org> <50F3B31B.4090406@itforchange.net> <50F3B423.1070901@ciroap.org> <50F3B544.3080409@itforchange.net> <1FC731B2-FE70-41AC-B97D-52979AFFAE05@uzh.ch> <1358157197.55375.YahooMailNeo@web125106.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <020a01cdf283$98dfbe10$ca9f3a30$@gmail.com> <20130114212217.7f43bbc9@quill.bollow.ch> <1358227661.77969.YahooMailNeo@web125105.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <735AC965-1DFD-4A66-BFF6-3E828E71D72E@ciroap.org> <02EB5DC1-5B10-43BD-B8C4-C81F4E528DA3@ciroap.org> <20130118181025.4d826231@quill.bollow.ch> Message-ID: I support this proposal. In addition, current Charter does not specify the limit of terms if I remember/interpret correctly. I mean how many terms a coordinator could serve is not limited nor defined. The convention is one term, 2 year. But if one wishes, she or he can run for another, right? My suggestion is to limit to 2 terms, max. I don't have the capacity now to describe this idea into Charter text, and welcome anyone to draft such one. Thanks, izumi . 2013/1/19 Norbert Bollow : > Dear all > > As an alternative to the other proposals to change our Charter with > regard to the dates of coordinator elections, I'd like to make the > proposal below. I view it as seeking to implement the same objective > as the other proposals on this topic, but without the problems > that could potentially result from updating what the Charter > says about election dates without also updating what it says > about terms of office. > > As per the rules on charter amendments, this proposal will proceed to a > vote only if there are some co-proposers (The precise language is: “This > charter can be amended at any time as proposed by no fewer than ten (10) > members and as approved by no less than two-thirds (2/3) of the members > of the IGC”); if you agree to be a co-proposer, please reply with text > like "I support this" or "+1". > > > I propose to change the IGC charter as follows: > > > Change 1: (Clarify terms of office and align with calender years) > > Old text: "The IGC will select two (2) coordinators, each for a two (2) > year term. One coordinator will be elected in the even years, (e.g. > 2006, 2008) and one will be elected in the odd years (e.g., 2007, > 2009)." > > Proposed new text: "The IGC will select two (2) coordinators, each for > a two (2) year term. Except under special circumstances (see the > section “Replacement of a coordinator” below), one coordinator will > serve for an even year and then an odd year (e.g. January 2014 through > December 2015) and one coordinator will serve for an odd year and then > an even year (e.g. January 2015 through December 2016)." > > > Change 2: (Hold coordinator elections before year-end) > > Old text: "The selection will be done by on-line voting using the > voting process according to the following formula: > * election of the coordinator will be held, whenever possible by > midsummer (the summer solstice). If events prevent an election by > midsummer, it will be held as soon after midsummer as possible. > * the coordinator(s) who are not up for election or not standing for > election will be responsible for running the election, subject to > appeal by the appeal team. > (Note: as a boot strap procedure for 2006, the interim coordinator will > serve until the end of the first election period, during which two > coordinators will be selected - one for one (1) year and one for two > (2) years)." > > Proposed new text: "The selection will be done by on-line voting as > per the following: > * The election of the coordinator will be held, whenever possible, > before the corresponding term of office is scheduled to start. If > events prevent an election by then, the election shall be held as > soon as possible, with the actual term of office starting on the day > after election results have been announced, and ending as scheduled. > * The coordinator(s) who are not up for election or not standing for > election will be responsible for running the election, subject to > appeal by the appeal team. > * In the case of an appeal of an election result, the person who was > announced as having won the election shall provisionally serve as > coordinator until the Appeal Team has decided on the appeal. > " > > > Change 3: (Update example on coordinator replacement) > > Old text: "For example, if the 'even year' coordinator for 2006, leaves > the role during an odd year, 2007, the rest of the term will be filled > with a replacement, and a new selection will be made on schedule in > 2008. If on the other hand the coordinator leaves the role early in > 2008, then the replacement would complete the original term and serve > the 2008-2010 term." > > Proposed new text: "For example, if the coordinator for the years > 2014-2015 leaves the role during the first year, 2014, the rest of the > term will be filled with a replacement, and a new selection will be > made on schedule for the 2016-2017 term. If on the other hand the > coordinator leaves the role during the second year, 2015, then the > replacement would complete the original term and also serve the > 2014-2015 term." > > > [end of charter amendment proposal] > > > Disclosure of personal interest: Since I'm a candidate in the current > coordinator elections, I have a personal interest in > (a) having clarity on what the term of office will be if I should get > elected, and > (b) having rules in place that support electing a successor who can > seamlessly take over after my term of office (if I should get elected) > ends. > > In particular, it seems to me that the charter currently does not > support (b) for coordinators who get elected shortly after the > beginning of a calendar year. > > Greetings, > Norbert > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > -- >> Izumi Aizu << Institute for InfoSocionomics, Tama University, Tokyo Institute for HyperNetwork Society, Oita, Japan www.anr.org -------------- 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 From iza at anr.org Fri Jan 18 22:50:14 2013 From: iza at anr.org (Izumi AIZU) Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2013 12:50:14 +0900 Subject: [governance] Appeals Team - Call for Comments and Interim Findings In-Reply-To: References: <99B5B12AE95441728A797F79FC884BD5@Toshiba> <20130118144513.51999375@quill.bollow.ch> <50F95565.1000807@gmail.com> Message-ID: I also like to thank Ian and Appeals Team, as well as, especially to Sala who was left alone after my semi-retirement from the co-co position and made difficult decision. And thank all who made lively discussion, and hope that we will continue to comply with our posting rules and respect the spirit behind them. izumi 2013/1/18 Ivar A. M. Hartmann : > Thank you, appeals team and thank you, Sala! > Ivar > > On Jan 18, 2013 11:15 AM, "Kerry Brown" wrote: >> >> I'd also like to thank the appeals team for their work. It is not fun, >> either for the team or the person that made the decision. It is however a >> necessary part of good governance. Thank you to the team for considering >> this appeal and to Sala for making a hard decision. I have administered many >> forums, newsgroups, and mailing lists. It is not an easy job. >> >> Kerry Brown >> >> > -----Original Message----- >> > From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance- >> > request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Riaz K Tayob >> > Sent: January-18-13 6:00 AM >> > To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Norbert Bollow >> > Subject: Re: [governance] Appeals Team - Call for Comments and Interim >> > Findings >> > >> > +1 >> > On 2013/01/18 03:45 PM, Norbert Bollow wrote: >> > > McTim wrote: >> > > >> > >> Dear Ian, >> > >> >> > >> Many thanks to you and the entire appeals team for your work. >> > > +1 >> > > >> > > Greetings, >> > > Norbert >> > > >> > >> >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 >> > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > -- >> Izumi Aizu << Institute for InfoSocionomics, Tama University, Tokyo Institute for HyperNetwork Society, Oita, Japan www.anr.org -------------- 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 From tracey at traceynaughton.com Sat Jan 19 00:25:07 2013 From: tracey at traceynaughton.com (Tracey Naughton) Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2013 16:25:07 +1100 Subject: [governance] Notice to the IGC on Proposed Charter Amendments In-Reply-To: <02EB5DC1-5B10-43BD-B8C4-C81F4E528DA3@ciroap.org> References: <50F38F8E.3090106@ciroap.org> <50F3B31B.4090406@itforchange.net> <50F3B423.1070901@ciroap.org> <50F3B544.3080409@itforchange.net> <1FC731B2-FE70-41AC-B97D-52979AFFAE05@uzh.ch> <1358157197.55375.YahooMailNeo@web125106.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <020a01cdf283$98dfbe10$ca9f3a30$@gmail.com> <20130114212217.7f43bbc9@quill.bollow.ch> <1358227661.77969.YahooMailNeo@web125105.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <735AC965-1DFD-4A66-BFF6-3E828E71D72E@ciroap.org> <02EB5DC1-5B10-43BD-B8C4-C81F4E528DA3@ciroap.org> Message-ID: <09519B89-ACAD-425A-8149-7F2B19B182B7@traceynaughton.com> I support amendments 2 & 3 Tracey Naughton Castlemaine Australia Landline: +(613) 5470 6853 Mobile: +(61) 0413 019707 Skype: tnaughton9999 On 18 Jan 2013, at 11:50 PM, Jeremy Malcolm wrote: On 18/01/2013, at 8:32 PM, Jeremy Malcolm wrote: > I almost let this slip. Sala asked me to call the charter amendment poll by today, unless we need more time for discussion. So let's just confirm, are we ready to call a poll on any or all of these proposed amendments? I think I have the latest/preferred text for each below, but correct me if I'm wrong: > > 1. ... "Prior to voting the prospective voter must personally ascertain that they are a member of the IGC based on membership criteria described elsewhere in this charter and posted as part of the voting information (i.e. a voter must affirm membership on the voter form prior to voting)." ... "All ballots will include the ability for voters to abstain on any choice included on the ballot." This has > ten proposers. > 2. Under "Selection of Coordinators", regarding when elections are held, change "by midsummer (the summer solstice) to "by the end of that calendar year". Also in "If events prevent an election by midsummer, it will be held as soon after midsummer as possible," change the word "midsummer" to "then" in both places. I think this has three so far (me, Parminder and Izumi), so would need seven more if we are to put it to the vote with the other one. Norbert spoke against, already, and Imran supported a slightly different wording. > 3. Under "Working methods", update the address of the mailing list from governance at lists.cpsr.org to governance at lists.igcaucus.org. This has two (me and Norbert; the others didn't expressly mention it), so it needs eight more if we are to put it to the vote at the same time. -- Dr Jeremy Malcolm Senior Policy Officer Consumers International | the global campaigning voice for consumers Office for Asia-Pacific and the Middle East Lot 5-1 Wisma WIM, 7 Jalan Abang Haji Openg, TTDI, 60000 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia Tel: +60 3 7726 1599 Your rights, our mission – download CI's Strategy 2015: http://consint.info/RightsMission @Consumers_Int | www.consumersinternational.org | www.facebook.com/consumersinternational Read our email confidentiality notice. Don't print this email unless necessary. ____________________________________________________________ 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: -------------- 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 From nhklein at gmx.net Sat Jan 19 01:06:36 2013 From: nhklein at gmx.net (Norbert Klein) Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2013 13:06:36 +0700 Subject: [governance] Coordinator election results In-Reply-To: <5FB29FA5-F87D-4F98-BDAC-E5BB066C0CC9@ciroap.org> References: <5FB29FA5-F87D-4F98-BDAC-E5BB066C0CC9@ciroap.org> Message-ID: <50FA37EC.60905@gmx.net> Congratulations to Norbert Bollow and Imran Ahmed Shah - and best wishes for the work to come. Norbert Klein Phnom Penh Cambodia On 19 1.2013 7:42, Jeremy Malcolm wrote: > The elections for the next co-coordinator of the IGC have just closed. > As this year's returning officer I am pleased to present the results. > > There were 129 people who commenced the survey. One of them > self-identified as not being a member of the Internet Governance > Caucus, and one of them bailed out when asked that question. This > leaves 127 people who self-identified. Of those, six people claimed > that they had already voted in this year's election, so they were not > offered the opportunity to vote again. Of the remaining 121, 106 took > that opportunity. > > Both candidates polled well. In the end, Imran Ahmed Shah came second > with 45 votes in his favour. Norbert Bollow came first with 61 votes. > > Congratulations Norbert, our new co-coordinator - and thanks to you > too Imran. I will post the full details to our website as soon as I > get an opportunity, and with Sala and Izumi's position will brief > Norbert on the technical aspects of his new role. I will also update > the list of voters on our website, and will consult with Sala about that. > > If anyone has any questions in the meantime, please let me know. > > -- > > *Dr Jeremy Malcolm* > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From nyangkweagien at gmail.com Sat Jan 19 02:12:21 2013 From: nyangkweagien at gmail.com (Nyangkwe Agien Aaron) Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2013 08:12:21 +0100 Subject: [governance] SOS; Get Me Liberated from This Building!!!!! Message-ID: Please getmy colleugue Mr Raoul Fonkoua tel. 237 77 42 20 05 to come and open th door for me or else I will rot here this Sunday. His offioce is in the down floor and he locked the main door and went home leaving me inside. My batteries ran down Thank you On 19 1.2013 7:42, Jeremy Malcolm wrote: > The elections for the next co-coordinator of the IGC have just closed. > As this year's returning officer I am pleased to present the results. > > There were 129 people who commenced the survey. One of them > self-identified as not being a member of the Internet Governance > Caucus, and one of them bailed out when asked that question. This > leaves 127 people who self-identified. Of those, six people claimed > that they had already voted in this year's election, so they were not > offered the opportunity to vote again. Of the remaining 121, 106 took > that opportunity. > > Both candidates polled well. In the end, Imran Ahmed Shah came second > with 45 votes in his favour. Norbert Bollow came first with 61 votes. > > Congratulations Norbert, our new co-coordinator - and thanks to you > too Imran. I will post the full details to our website as soon as I > get an opportunity, and with Sala and Izumi's position will brief > Norbert on the technical aspects of his new role. I will also update > the list of voters on our website, and will consult with Sala about that. > > If anyone has any questions in the meantime, please let me know. > > -- > > *Dr Jeremy Malcolm* > -- Aaron Agien Nyangkwe Journalist-OutCome Mapper Special Assistant to The president P.O.Box 5213 Douala-Cameroon Telephone +237 73 42 71 27 -------------- 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 -------------- 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 From parminder at itforchange.net Sat Jan 19 03:00:13 2013 From: parminder at itforchange.net (parminder) Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2013 13:30:13 +0530 Subject: [governance] ISOC/USG WCIT Post Mortem In-Reply-To: <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD22E5B4B@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> References: <009b01cde14b$b51966b0$1f4c3410$@gmail.com> <009c01cde14b$f5c9c3d0$e15d4b70$@gmail.com> <50D93269.2060605@itforchange.net> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD22E5B4B@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> Message-ID: <50FA528D.4000704@itforchange.net> On Thursday 27 December 2012 10:34 PM, Milton L Mueller wrote: > > */Dr, Mueller here, to administer some ideological antidotes…/* > > */ /* > > */However, in one sense internet interconnection is and always has > been in the ITRs, and that is through Article 9 Special Arrangements, > which says they are deregulated and to be left to commercial > negotiations. /* > So, you do agree that Internet is already there in existing ITRs... That is an important point for the Internet exceptionalists - a major CS constituency in the ITU/ WCIT debate. (Does not matter whether it call for deregulation or regulation. We are speaking of jurisdictional competence here.) > *//* > > *//* > > */[Milton L Mueller] Many people did openly call for ITU to die. See > Andrew McLaughlin’s comments at the NAF event, for one, which were > well-received. I have openly stated for months that the ITRs are not > needed /* > Do you think FCC is needed, and if so, for what.. > > *//* > > *//* > > */Anyway, once again one has to be aware of the rhetorical ploy here. > To want the ITU to die does not necessarily mean one wants all > regulatory regimes around the internet to die, nor does it mean that > one wants all national regulatory regimes to die with it. > /* > I think there is an important ideological as well as practical connection between the two.. parminder > *//* > > *//* > > > > */[Milton L Mueller] Are you seriously suggesting that ITU could > become a force for global net neutrality?/* > > */Well, at least you are being consistent. As a pro-regulatory guy, a > person who seems to have never met an economic regulation he didn’t > like, you should indeed view the ITU as something not to be thrown > away casually. If only you and your friends could get ahold of it, > surely it could become a progressive force, right? /* > > *//* > > */Anyway, tell me again why we should care about whether the ITU > survives? That would be an interesting conversation for “we CS people” > to have. /* > > Why did we allow ourselves to so blatantly take sides in the intense > ideological struggle taking place around the remit and powers of the > FCC in the US, where the struggle for net neutrality is now all but > lost. A game which is going to soon visit our own national regulatory > systems very soon. Just watch out! > > */[Milton L Mueller] Here I have no idea what you are talking about – > when did “we” (a term that generally excludes me in your lexicon but > nevertheless strives to embrace the entire IGC) take sides on the FCC? > And how was this struggle lost? The FCC passed its Open Internet rules > and has actually applied them in a couple of cases. /* > > > > > > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From ajp at glocom.ac.jp Sat Jan 19 03:22:24 2013 From: ajp at glocom.ac.jp (Adam Peake) Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2013 17:22:24 +0900 Subject: AW: [governance] Multistakeholder Roles and Responsibilities In-Reply-To: <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8013314C9@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> References: <01c801cdf457$f76a3fc0$e63ebf40$@gmail.com> <50F763C0.5070907@ciroap.org> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8013314B4@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> <50F8024D.1010306@apc.org> <50F8F617.4000209@apc.org> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8013314C9@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> Message-ID: How can the ITU hope to merge World Telecommunication Development Conference (WTDC) with WSIS+10 when most information about WTDC is, as usual, behind TIES account and does not seem to be multi-stakeholder. Prep meetings are not open. Step back even from WSIS in 2002. Adam On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 8:14 PM, "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang" < wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de> wrote: > Hi Anriette and others, > > you are right to think more in mid-term categories and general strategies > linked to an institutional reform of the ITU (BTW, I have my doubts that > ITU member states are ready for this in Busan in 2014). A key process will > be WTDC 2014. There will bis SIX regional PrepCom meetings in 2013. And as > you know, the ITU has decided to merge the WTDC process with the WSIS 10+ > Follow up. With other words, in all of the six WTDC regional PrepComs they > will discuss on two or three extra days implementation of WSIS, including > (regional) Internet Governance. The WSIS 10+ Hihg Level meeting will be > done now in conjunction with WTDC 14in Egypt, propbably in Sharm el Sheikh, > in spring 2014. ITUs Plenipotentiary Conference is in Busan in October 2014. > > If we write a letter to ITU and liked minded ITU member states with regard > to WTPF, we should raise kn the same letter also CS participation in the > WTDC process. > > Wolfgang > > http://www.itu.int/en/ITU-D/Conferences/WTDC/WTDC14/Pages/rpm.aspx > > > ________________________________ > > Von: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org im Auftrag von Anriette > Esterhuysen > Gesendet: Fr 18.01.2013 08:13 > An: governance at lists.igcaucus.org > Betreff: Re: AW: [governance] Multistakeholder Roles and Responsibilities > > > Strong support here for Mawaki and Deborah's input. > > We should also keep in mind that if our long term goal is institutional > reform at the ITU to enable more effective and sustainable participation > from civil society we need to be patient and persistent. > > And we need to work towards CS participation not just in Geneva, but in > regional telecommunications unions and in national regulators. > > Anriette > > > > On 17/01/2013 17:59, Mawaki Chango wrote: > > > Great point, Deborah! I think we need always to follow-up and > build on > the formal outcomes of our previous interactions with the > structures > and authorities we're dealing with. Some of us who in various > capacities have various experiences with those entities may be > skeptical or even attempted to be cynical. I'd favor the following > principle: Be cynical all you want, but act hopeful. Which does not > prevent anyone from strategizing with or petitioning other actors > and > potential allies. > > Just my 2 cents > > mawaki > > On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 9:58 AM, Deborah Brown < > deborah at accessnow.org> wrote: > > +1 > > In addition to the commitments that the SG made during the > meeting with > civil society at WCIT that Joana mentioned, the ITU issued > the following > statement in response to a 10 December civil society > letter to WCIT. > > * We recognize that the current institutional > structures do not > facilitate independent civil society participation in the > work of the ITU. > Given that it is unlikely that institutional changes can > be implemented > during the WCIT, we ask that the two above issues be > addressed immediately > and that the ITU commit to reviewing and putting in place > mechanisms that > will encourage a more flexible approach to participation > by civil society. > [From 10 December letter] > > Only the Plenipotentiary Conference of the ITU - the > highest governing body > of the organization - can change institutional rules and > procedures or > effect changes to the ITU Constitution. I believe > post-WCIT-12 we will have > time to take stock and provide our membership with some > important > recommendations in line with what you raise. I would also > take the > opportunity to remind you that all civil society > organizations, who are > international in nature and who are working in the area of > ICTs are welcome > to join the ITU and apply for exemption of fees. I believe > we will all > benefit from a greater civil society engagement at ITU and > in line with this > I recently invited the International Trade Union Movement > to join. > > The document is available on WCITLeaks, but (ironically) > is locked behind a > TIES log in: > > http://files.wcitleaks.org/public/S12-WCIT12-INF-0005!!MSW-E.pdf > > I don't think seeking the right to participate at the WTPF > would require > changes at the plenipotentiary level (please do correct me > if this > assumption is wrong) so if we decide to go ahead with a > letter, we might > want to cite the sentence I highlighted above. > > Best, > Deborah > > > On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 8:53 AM, Anriette Esterhuysen < > anriette at apc.org> > wrote: > > Agree, and I think that Jeremy and Joana and > Wolfgang's suggestions are > not mutually exclusive. > > We can send a letter, and ask member-states and > sector members to also > raise this issue and make sure that our letter is > discussed. > > Best > > Anriette > > On 17/01/2013 12:43, "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang" > wrote: > > Hi Joana and all > > there is another PrepMeeting for the WTPF in > February in Geneva. > http://www.itu.int/en/wtpf-13/Pages/ieg.aspx > > It is important to raise this question in this > meeting. I have no idea > whether this meeting (February 6 - 8, 2013 in the > ITU HQ) is open. If not we > should send a letter to like minded governments > and to the ITU SG before > February 6 and to push for a clear response to our > request for equal > participation in the WTPF, independent from > national governmental > delegations. > > Wolfgang > > ________________________________ > > Von: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org im > Auftrag von Joana Varon > Gesendet: Do 17.01.2013 04:55 > An: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Jeremy Malcolm > Cc: bestbits at lists.igcaucus.org> > Betreff: Re: [governance] Multistakeholder Roles > and Responsibilities > > > Dear Jeremy and all, > > Regarding your observation and the fact that a > couple of civil society > representatives were able to have a meeting with > Mr Toure during the WCIT > and managed to deliver to him our statement that > reinforced some points of > the best bits statement, including demands for an > open participation of CS > in ITU processes, isn't it the time to recall him > of our "Civil Society > statement on the new ITRs and the future of > multi-stakeholder engagement" > and try to ask for the changes he has promised to > try to make during our > meeting? > > Please, correct me if it seams too naive, but if > we go again through these > alternative channels to submit our comments and so > on( such as CS being part > of government delegation - it's own or other > "friendly" governements, or > just engaging with sector members), we will just > repeat the quite > frustrating (lack of) participation scenery of > WCIT at WTPF. > > Maybe Wolfgang, Avri or other fellows that have > attended WCIT could have > some thoughts to add on this. > > best, > > joana > > > > > -- > > ------------------------------------------------------ > anriette esterhuysen anriette at apc.org > executive director, association for progressive > communications > www.apc.org > po box 29755, melville 2109 > south africa > tel/fax +27 11 726 1692 > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > > > -- > Deborah Brown > Policy Analyst > Access | AccessNow.org > E. deborah at accessnow.org > S. deborah.l.brown > T. deblebrown > PGP 0x5EB4727D > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > > > > > -- > ------------------------------------------------------ > anriette esterhuysen anriette at apc.org > executive director, association for progressive communications > www.apc.org > po box 29755, melville 2109 > south africa > tel/fax +27 11 726 1692 > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From parminder at itforchange.net Sat Jan 19 03:28:56 2013 From: parminder at itforchange.net (parminder) Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2013 13:58:56 +0530 Subject: [governance] ISOC/USG WCIT Post Mortem In-Reply-To: <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD22E5B4B@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> References: <009b01cde14b$b51966b0$1f4c3410$@gmail.com> <009c01cde14b$f5c9c3d0$e15d4b70$@gmail.com> <50D93269.2060605@itforchange.net> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD22E5B4B@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> Message-ID: <50FA5948.2040806@itforchange.net> On Thursday 27 December 2012 10:34 PM, Milton L Mueller wrote: > > > */[Milton L Mueller] Are you seriously suggesting that ITU could > become a force for global net neutrality? Well, at least you are being > consistent. /* > Yes, I am seriously suggesting that. See my recent article in the 'The Global Journal' on 'Safeguarding Net Neutrality' http://theglobaljournal.net/article/view/976/ . IF there is something called global net neutrality then one of course needs a global forum to deal with it. What other forum than ITU can do it? OECD? And if you think there is nothing called 'global net neutrality' then you may need to talk to CoE, and to Wolfgang and Bertrand, who were members of the Experts Group that listed 'global net neutrality' as a key cross border (real international) issue. parminder > */As a pro-regulatory guy, a person who seems to have never met an > economic regulation he didn’t like,/* > In response, can I characterise you as a person who never met an economic regulation that he liked..... where was it that you advised me not to go for such extreme characterisations... oh, well, in the same email in fact... So, basically you are saying you can do extreme characterisations, but other may not do any thing that you may take fancy to labelling as extreme characterisation. > */you should indeed view the ITU as something not to be thrown away > casually. /* > I think it shouldnt anything other than deal with the physical layer, but yes, it should not be thrown away casually. I have serious belief in global governance. On the other hand, those who really want to throw away ITU, should clearly make that case and advocate it as such - plainly and hoestly. However, I find so many, including on this list, who were so solidly against the Internet resolution appended to the new ITRs, which merely reasserted the activities that ITU already does in IG space and nothing more, are now getting very energetically ready to participate in the ITU's WTPF, which will deal with nothing other than Internet Governance. This is a real paradox for me. > */If only you and your friends could get ahold of it, surely it could > become a progressive force, right? /* > Yes, may be. Governance cannot be killed just because the system is not being worked/ manned well in current circumstances. Because if we were to do so, almost all governments will b folded up and we can give our societies to the big corporates to run. > > *//* > > *//* > > */Anyway, tell me again why we should care about whether the ITU > survives? That would be an interesting conversation for “we CS people” > to have. /* > Yes, we should have that conversation here. > > > > > */[Milton L Mueller] Here I have no idea what you are talking about – > when did “we” (a term that generally excludes me in your lexicon but > nevertheless strives to embrace the entire IGC) take sides on the FCC? > And how was this struggle lost? The FCC passed its Open Internet rules > and has actually applied them in a couple of cases. /* > The struggle is lost because the mobile Internet has been exempted from NN rules and it is here that most of Internet growth is taking place. Somehow the current US administration has extraordinary sensitivity to Google's interests. Google was made on basis of a neutral Internet, but now that it is made and further growth lies on the mobile, it doesnt want a neutral mobile Internet. It has starting violating NN principle on mobiles, having launched its "Google free zone' in Philippines. parminder > > *//* > > > > > > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de Sat Jan 19 04:33:52 2013 From: wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de (=?iso-8859-1?Q?=22Kleinw=E4chter=2C_Wolfgang=22?=) Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2013 10:33:52 +0100 Subject: AW: [governance] ISOC/USG WCIT Post Mortem References: <009b01cde14b$b51966b0$1f4c3410$@gmail.com> <009c01cde14b$f5c9c3d0$e15d4b70$@gmail.com> <50D93269.2060605@itforchange.net> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD22E5B4B@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> <50FA5948.2040806@itforchange.net> Message-ID: <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8013314DB@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> Parminder: I find so many, including on this list, who were so solidly against the Internet resolution appended to the new ITRs, which merely reasserted the activities that ITU already does in IG space and nothing more, are now getting very energetically ready to participate in the ITU's WTPF, which will deal with nothing other than Internet Governance. This is a real paradox for me. Wolfgang: This is no paradox. The problem with the WCIT resolution and the WTPF agenda (and the WTDC road map) is that there are obviously ambitions by some ITU member states to build an alternative "multistakeholder" Internet Governance mechanism under ITU (governmental) leadership. If you read carefully the references in the ITU documents than they go back to the Geneva 2003 declaration which gives the governments the "only" role to decide on public policy issues related to the Internet by just "consulting" non-governmental stakeholders. This approach ignores widely the WGIG report and the Tunis Agenda which goes beyond Geneva and proposed "shared" policy development and decision making procedures. It would be much wiser for the ITU to implement more seriously its Resolutions 102 and 103 from Guadalajara which invites ITU to enhance cooperation with ICANN, RIRs, W3C, ISOC etc. and to identify what the role of the ITU in the global IG Ecosystem could and should be. Nearly nothing has been done (with the exception of the Baku breakfest between Hammdoun and Fadi and the invitation to Fadi to give a welcome speech in Dubai). There is an impression that ITU does not like to be one unit among other IG organisations in this networked ecosystem where policies are developed bottom up by all stakeholders. Some ITU member states want that the ITU is a "leader" in a hierarchical system where governments make decicions (in the best case after "informal consultations" with non-govenrmental stakeholders) and the non-govenrmental stakeholders has just to implement what was decided by the governments (in intergovernmental negotiations behind closed doors). But the Internet does not need "leadership" it needs communication, coordination and collaboration of all involved parties. The engagement of non-govenrmetal stakehooders, including civil society, in WCIT, WTPF and WTDC is needed to bring the ITU down to earth and to help them to find its role in the networkde IG ecosystem. Infrastructure development and frequency coordination is one of the key roles where ITU is needed and where neither ICANN nor the RIRs should play a role. But there is no need to develop within the ITU capacities for DNS management or IP address allocation. Wolfgang Here is what I wrote in my article about the WCIT Resolution: "The text (of the WCIT Resolution) has two parts. Part 1 just refers to a number of documents adopted by WSIS and ITU at previous conferences. Part 2 invites the ITU member states and the ITU Secretary General to engage in Internet related public policy issues by using the multistakeholder model. What was wrong with this language? The six preamble paragraphs look rather harmless, but if you go to the references in the WSIS documents, you discover a one-sided approach. Para. 35 is language from the Geneva summit in 2003 which refers to the role of the various stakeholders in Internet Governance. It includes the statement that "policy authority for Internet-related public policy issues is the sovereign right of States". This was before the WGIG report which defined Internet Governance as "shared principles, norms, rules, decision-making procedures, and programmes that shape the evolution and use of the Internet" on the basis of the multistakeholder model (Tunis Agenda para. 34). Para. 35 was also enriched in the Tunis Agenda by para. 55, which recognized "that the existing arrangements for Internet governance have worked effectively to make the Internet the highly robust, dynamic and geographically diverse medium that it is today, with the private sector taking the lead in day-to-day operations, and with innovation and value creation at the edges." Would a sole reference to para. 35 mean to go back to a pre-Tunis time? Why the authors of the resolution did not refer to para. 34 and para. 55? A similar unbalanced approach can be found in the second part of the Resolution. It just invites ITU Member States and instructs the ITU Secretary General to develop public policies for the Internet within the ITU by ignoring the existing Internet Governance mechanisms outside ITU. Was this omission intentionally? Was the "broader Tunis approach" just forgotten? The imbalances in the two parts of the resolution could have been easily repaired. One could have just added * a reference to para. 34 and 55 of the Tunis Agenda into the Preamble; * an invitation to ITU member states to be more active in ICANNs Governmental Advisory Committee and * an instruction to the ITU Secretary General to enhance cooperation with ICANN and to strengthen his communication, coordination and collaboration with IETF, RIRs, W3C and other non-governmental members of the global Internet Governance Eco-System. If the proposed compromise would have been based on a clear and honest understanding of the limited role of the ITU in Internet Governance and that the ITU is just a part of the global Internet Governance Eco System making valuable contributions to the global governance of the Internet by promoting first of all infrastructure development and recognizing that for other issues, including naming and numbering of Internet resources, other organizations have a leading role to play, such additional language should not have created a problem. But this was obviously not the case. When the chair started the discussion of the resolution in the plenary long after midnight on Wednesday, the doubt was growing that this constructive expectation did not meet the reality. Already the first proposal to include para. 55 into paragraph d) of the preamble faced strong opposition from Saudi Arabia. And Russia said if the resolution is changed they come back with Document No. 47 as something like a "nuclear option". http://www.circleid.com/posts/20121217_wcit_and_internet_governance_harmless_resolution_or_trojan_horse/ -------------- 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 From wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de Sat Jan 19 04:34:54 2013 From: wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de (=?iso-8859-1?Q?=22Kleinw=E4chter=2C_Wolfgang=22?=) Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2013 10:34:54 +0100 Subject: AW: AW: [governance] Multistakeholder Roles and Responsibilities References: <01c801cdf457$f76a3fc0$e63ebf40$@gmail.com> <50F763C0.5070907@ciroap.org> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8013314B4@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> <50F8024D.1010306@apc.org> <50F8F617.4000209@apc.org> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8013314C9@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> Message-ID: <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8013314DD@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> Adam you are right. All the proposals for the Chisinau emeting which takes place in early February 2013 in Moldova (a regional WTDC prepmeeting for CIS countries) are behind TIES. Our letter should raise this question. wolfgang ________________________________ Von: apeake at gmail.com im Auftrag von Adam Peake Gesendet: Sa 19.01.2013 09:22 An: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Kleinwächter, Wolfgang Cc: Anriette Esterhuysen Betreff: Re: AW: [governance] Multistakeholder Roles and Responsibilities How can the ITU hope to merge World Telecommunication Development Conference (WTDC) with WSIS+10 when most information about WTDC is, as usual, behind TIES account and does not seem to be multi-stakeholder. Prep meetings are not open. Step back even from WSIS in 2002. Adam On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 8:14 PM, "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang" wrote: Hi Anriette and others, you are right to think more in mid-term categories and general strategies linked to an institutional reform of the ITU (BTW, I have my doubts that ITU member states are ready for this in Busan in 2014). A key process will be WTDC 2014. There will bis SIX regional PrepCom meetings in 2013. And as you know, the ITU has decided to merge the WTDC process with the WSIS 10+ Follow up. With other words, in all of the six WTDC regional PrepComs they will discuss on two or three extra days implementation of WSIS, including (regional) Internet Governance. The WSIS 10+ Hihg Level meeting will be done now in conjunction with WTDC 14in Egypt, propbably in Sharm el Sheikh, in spring 2014. ITUs Plenipotentiary Conference is in Busan in October 2014. If we write a letter to ITU and liked minded ITU member states with regard to WTPF, we should raise kn the same letter also CS participation in the WTDC process. Wolfgang http://www.itu.int/en/ITU-D/Conferences/WTDC/WTDC14/Pages/rpm.aspx ________________________________ Von: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org im Auftrag von Anriette Esterhuysen Gesendet: Fr 18.01.2013 08:13 An: governance at lists.igcaucus.org Betreff: Re: AW: [governance] Multistakeholder Roles and Responsibilities Strong support here for Mawaki and Deborah's input. We should also keep in mind that if our long term goal is institutional reform at the ITU to enable more effective and sustainable participation from civil society we need to be patient and persistent. And we need to work towards CS participation not just in Geneva, but in regional telecommunications unions and in national regulators. Anriette On 17/01/2013 17:59, Mawaki Chango wrote: Great point, Deborah! I think we need always to follow-up and build on the formal outcomes of our previous interactions with the structures and authorities we're dealing with. Some of us who in various capacities have various experiences with those entities may be skeptical or even attempted to be cynical. I'd favor the following principle: Be cynical all you want, but act hopeful. Which does not prevent anyone from strategizing with or petitioning other actors and potential allies. Just my 2 cents mawaki On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 9:58 AM, Deborah Brown wrote: +1 In addition to the commitments that the SG made during the meeting with civil society at WCIT that Joana mentioned, the ITU issued the following statement in response to a 10 December civil society letter to WCIT. * We recognize that the current institutional structures do not facilitate independent civil society participation in the work of the ITU. Given that it is unlikely that institutional changes can be implemented during the WCIT, we ask that the two above issues be addressed immediately and that the ITU commit to reviewing and putting in place mechanisms that will encourage a more flexible approach to participation by civil society. [From 10 December letter] Only the Plenipotentiary Conference of the ITU - the highest governing body of the organization - can change institutional rules and procedures or effect changes to the ITU Constitution. I believe post-WCIT-12 we will have time to take stock and provide our membership with some important recommendations in line with what you raise. I would also take the opportunity to remind you that all civil society organizations, who are international in nature and who are working in the area of ICTs are welcome to join the ITU and apply for exemption of fees. I believe we will all benefit from a greater civil society engagement at ITU and in line with this I recently invited the International Trade Union Movement to join. The document is available on WCITLeaks, but (ironically) is locked behind a TIES log in: http://files.wcitleaks.org/public/S12-WCIT12-INF-0005!!MSW-E.pdf I don't think seeking the right to participate at the WTPF would require changes at the plenipotentiary level (please do correct me if this assumption is wrong) so if we decide to go ahead with a letter, we might want to cite the sentence I highlighted above. Best, Deborah On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 8:53 AM, Anriette Esterhuysen wrote: Agree, and I think that Jeremy and Joana and Wolfgang's suggestions are not mutually exclusive. We can send a letter, and ask member-states and sector members to also raise this issue and make sure that our letter is discussed. Best Anriette On 17/01/2013 12:43, "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang" wrote: Hi Joana and all there is another PrepMeeting for the WTPF in February in Geneva. http://www.itu.int/en/wtpf-13/Pages/ieg.aspx It is important to raise this question in this meeting. I have no idea whether this meeting (February 6 - 8, 2013 in the ITU HQ) is open. If not we should send a letter to like minded governments and to the ITU SG before February 6 and to push for a clear response to our request for equal participation in the WTPF, independent from national governmental delegations. Wolfgang ________________________________ Von: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org im Auftrag von Joana Varon Gesendet: Do 17.01.2013 04:55 An: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Jeremy Malcolm Cc: Betreff: Re: [governance] Multistakeholder Roles and Responsibilities Dear Jeremy and all, Regarding your observation and the fact that a couple of civil society representatives were able to have a meeting with Mr Toure during the WCIT and managed to deliver to him our statement that reinforced some points of the best bits statement, including demands for an open participation of CS in ITU processes, isn't it the time to recall him of our "Civil Society statement on the new ITRs and the future of multi-stakeholder engagement" and try to ask for the changes he has promised to try to make during our meeting? Please, correct me if it seams too naive, but if we go again through these alternative channels to submit our comments and so on( such as CS being part of government delegation - it's own or other "friendly" governements, or just engaging with sector members), we will just repeat the quite frustrating (lack of) participation scenery of WCIT at WTPF. Maybe Wolfgang, Avri or other fellows that have attended WCIT could have some thoughts to add on this. best, joana -- ------------------------------------------------------ anriette esterhuysen anriette at apc.org executive director, association for progressive communications www.apc.org po box 29755, melville 2109 south africa tel/fax +27 11 726 1692 ____________________________________________________________ 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 -- Deborah Brown Policy Analyst Access | AccessNow.org E. deborah at accessnow.org S. deborah.l.brown T. deblebrown PGP 0x5EB4727D ____________________________________________________________ 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 -- ------------------------------------------------------ anriette esterhuysen anriette at apc.org executive director, association for progressive communications www.apc.org po box 29755, melville 2109 south africa tel/fax +27 11 726 1692 ____________________________________________________________ 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de Sat Jan 19 04:41:51 2013 From: wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de (=?iso-8859-1?Q?=22Kleinw=E4chter=2C_Wolfgang=22?=) Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2013 10:41:51 +0100 Subject: AW: [governance] Coordinator election results References: <5FB29FA5-F87D-4F98-BDAC-E5BB066C0CC9@ciroap.org> Message-ID: <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8013314DF@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> Congratulations to Norbert, respect for Imran and thanks to Jeremy as the manager and Izumi as the outgoing co-chair. Great work. We are good positioned for the next challenges (WSIS 10+, WTPF, WTDC, IGF/MAG and UNCSDT WG on Enhanced Coooperation). And please Jeremy, keep going, and please Izumi, keep reporting. We need you. Wolfgang ________________________________ Von: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org im Auftrag von Jeremy Malcolm Gesendet: Sa 19.01.2013 01:42 An: governance at lists.igcaucus.org Betreff: [governance] Coordinator election results The elections for the next co-coordinator of the IGC have just closed. As this year's returning officer I am pleased to present the results. There were 129 people who commenced the survey. One of them self-identified as not being a member of the Internet Governance Caucus, and one of them bailed out when asked that question. This leaves 127 people who self-identified. Of those, six people claimed that they had already voted in this year's election, so they were not offered the opportunity to vote again. Of the remaining 121, 106 took that opportunity.. Both candidates polled well. In the end, Imran Ahmed Shah came second with 45 votes in his favour. Norbert Bollow came first with 61 votes. Congratulations Norbert, our new co-coordinator - and thanks to you too Imran. I will post the full details to our website as soon as I get an opportunity, and with Sala and Izumi's position will brief Norbert on the technical aspects of his new role. I will also update the list of voters on our website, and will consult with Sala about that. If anyone has any questions in the meantime, please let me know. -- Dr Jeremy Malcolm Senior Policy Officer Consumers International | the global campaigning voice for consumers Office for Asia-Pacific and the Middle East Lot 5-1 Wisma WIM, 7 Jalan Abang Haji Openg, TTDI, 60000 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia Tel: +60 3 7726 1599 Your rights, our mission - download CI's Strategy 2015: http://consint.info/RightsMission @Consumers_Int | www.consumersinternational.org | www.facebook.com/consumersinternational Read our email confidentiality notice . Don't print this email unless necessary. -------------- 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 From tijani.benjemaa at planet.tn Sat Jan 19 05:02:13 2013 From: tijani.benjemaa at planet.tn (Tijani BEN JEMAA) Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2013 11:02:13 +0100 Subject: [governance] Coordinator election results In-Reply-To: <5FB29FA5-F87D-4F98-BDAC-E5BB066C0CC9@ciroap.org> References: <5FB29FA5-F87D-4F98-BDAC-E5BB066C0CC9@ciroap.org> Message-ID: <006901cdf62c$0f600f80$2e202e80$@benjemaa@planet.tn> Congratulation to Norbert. I’m sure you will do the job properly together with Sala for more efficiency and more impact of the civil society in the field of Internet Governance. Again, thank you Izumi for the huge work you did during your term. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- Tijani BEN JEMAA Executive Director Mediterranean Federation of Internet Associations (FMAI) Phone: + 216 41 649 605 Mobile: + 216 98 330 114 Fax: + 216 70 853 376 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- De : governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] De la part de Jeremy Malcolm Envoyé : samedi 19 janvier 2013 01:43 À : governance at lists.igcaucus.org Objet : [governance] Coordinator election results The elections for the next co-coordinator of the IGC have just closed. As this year's returning officer I am pleased to present the results. There were 129 people who commenced the survey. One of them self-identified as not being a member of the Internet Governance Caucus, and one of them bailed out when asked that question. This leaves 127 people who self-identified. Of those, six people claimed that they had already voted in this year's election, so they were not offered the opportunity to vote again. Of the remaining 121, 106 took that opportunity. Both candidates polled well. In the end, Imran Ahmed Shah came second with 45 votes in his favour. Norbert Bollow came first with 61 votes. Congratulations Norbert, our new co-coordinator - and thanks to you too Imran. I will post the full details to our website as soon as I get an opportunity, and with Sala and Izumi's position will brief Norbert on the technical aspects of his new role. I will also update the list of voters on our website, and will consult with Sala about that. If anyone has any questions in the meantime, please let me know. -- Dr Jeremy Malcolm Senior Policy Officer Consumers International | the global campaigning voice for consumers Office for Asia-Pacific and the Middle East Lot 5-1 Wisma WIM, 7 Jalan Abang Haji Openg, TTDI, 60000 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia Tel: +60 3 7726 1599 Your rights, our mission – download CI's Strategy 2015: http://consint.info/RightsMission @Consumers_Int | www.consumersinternational.org | www.facebook.com/consumersinternational Read our email confidentiality notice . Don't print this email unless necessary. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From kabani.asif at gmail.com Sat Jan 19 06:32:27 2013 From: kabani.asif at gmail.com (Kabani) Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2013 16:32:27 +0500 Subject: [governance] Coordinator election results In-Reply-To: <5FB29FA5-F87D-4F98-BDAC-E5BB066C0CC9@ciroap.org> References: <5FB29FA5-F87D-4F98-BDAC-E5BB066C0CC9@ciroap.org> Message-ID: Norbert - Congratulations also Imran for Runner up All the best On 19 January 2013 05:42, Jeremy Malcolm wrote: > The elections for the next co-coordinator of the IGC have just closed. As > this year's returning officer I am pleased to present the results. > > There were 129 people who commenced the survey. One of them > self-identified as not being a member of the Internet Governance Caucus, > and one of them bailed out when asked that question. This leaves 127 > people who self-identified. Of those, six people claimed that they had > already voted in this year's election, so they were not offered the > opportunity to vote again. Of the remaining 121, 106 took that opportunity. > > Both candidates polled well. In the end, Imran Ahmed Shah came second > with 45 votes in his favour. Norbert Bollow came first with 61 votes. > > Congratulations Norbert, our new co-coordinator - and thanks to you too > Imran. I will post the full details to our website as soon as I get an > opportunity, and with Sala and Izumi's position will brief Norbert on the > technical aspects of his new role. I will also update the list of voters > on our website, and will consult with Sala about that. > > If anyone has any questions in the meantime, please let me know. > > -- > > *Dr Jeremy Malcolm > Senior Policy Officer > Consumers International | the global campaigning voice for consumers* > Office for Asia-Pacific and the Middle East > Lot 5-1 Wisma WIM, 7 Jalan Abang Haji Openg, TTDI, 60000 Kuala Lumpur, > Malaysia > Tel: +60 3 7726 1599 > > *Your rights, our mission – download CI's Strategy 2015:* > http://consint.info/RightsMission > > @Consumers_Int | www.consumersinternational.org | > www.facebook.com/consumersinternational > > Read our email confidentiality notice. > Don't print this email unless necessary. > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > -- *Connect me* [image: Facebook] [image: Twitter] [image: Youtube] [image: LinkedIn] *Wait Before you print - Think about the** **ENVIRONMENT* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From parminder at itforchange.net Sat Jan 19 06:35:44 2013 From: parminder at itforchange.net (parminder) Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2013 17:05:44 +0530 Subject: [governance] Appeals Team - Call for Comments and Interim Findings In-Reply-To: <99B5B12AE95441728A797F79FC884BD5@Toshiba> References: <99B5B12AE95441728A797F79FC884BD5@Toshiba> Message-ID: <50FA8510.1080301@itforchange.net> A few comments for the consideration of the appeals team. Although an id to send these comments directly to the appeals commitee is provided, I much prefer to make this comments publicly. 1. I think Suresh should be reinstated immediately because the conditions of his 'removal from the list' are not met. 2. However, I will caution the appeals team against summarily overturning a decision of a co-coordinator merely on technical grounds without making any comments whatsoever on the substantive issues involved. The problem is that there very often isnt a strict meeting of all the required provisions for so many activities of the IGC. For instance, even for the current Noncom process for selection of MAG nominees, it is an indisputable fact that all the laid down technical conditions for setting up the nomcom were not met. Does it mean that if 4 people were to appeal against the setting up of the nomcom, the decision to set up the nomcom, and its subsequent outputs will be struck down? 3. In the case of Suresh, technical conditions of 'removal from the list' may not have been met. But a point for the appeals committee to make a judgement on also is 'whether conditions of suspension from the list are met or not'. Because, /in practical terms/, if Suresh is to be reinstated within a month, the action of co-coordinator has, till now, only amounted to his suspension from the list. It may not be right for the appeal committee to take too narrow a construction of the fact that the co-coordinator pronounced the decision of 'removal from the list', and simply judge it as wrong, doing nothing more. The committee needs to address, and judge, the context fully of the efforts of the co-coodinator to impose the necessary minimum decorum and orderliness on the elist in this particular case, and corresponding the conduct of the member against whom the 'removal' decision was given. 4. Accordingly, if on substance, and not merely on technical grounds, the disciplining efforts of the co-coordinator are found appropriate, the merit of the intent of her decision may still be salvaged by turning the 'removal' decision to 'suspension' decision, whereby Suresh is immediately put back on the list. parminder On Friday 18 January 2013 04:55 AM, Ian Peter wrote: > > In accordance with the IGC Charter, the Appeals team is now requesting > comments from the IGC membership as regards the appeal against the > removal from the IGC list of Suresh Ramasubramanian. Comments should > be sent to appealsteam at lists.igcaucus.org > > > In doing so, we announce that our interim finding is that Suresh’s > removal from the IGC list was not in accordance with the IGC Charter. > The Charter offers a specific set of procedures which must be followed > before such removal takes place. In this case, the previous private > and public warnings given to Suresh needed to be followed by a one > month suspension, not removal from the list. As Suresh has not > previously served a one month suspension, we have no option but to > find the appeal is upheld. Therefore we intend to recommend that, when > we publish our final findings, as soon as possible after the public > comments period ends 48 hours after this posting, Suresh should be > reinstated to the list. > > We do suggest that, should you wish to comment, you first acquaint > yourself with the very specific provisions outlined in the IGC > charter, which can be found at http://www.igcaucus.org/charter. It is > those provisions, and whether they have been followed or not, that > must determine whether the appeal should be upheld, not our personal > opinions on the decision made by our elected co-ordinator. > > Please comment within 48 hours. After the comments period has ended, > we will post our findings with appropriate recommendations. > > TheAppeals Team > > Shaila Mistry, Ginger Paque, Roland Perry , Ian Peter and Deidre Williams. > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From fouadbajwa at gmail.com Sat Jan 19 07:19:47 2013 From: fouadbajwa at gmail.com (Fouad Bajwa) Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2013 17:19:47 +0500 Subject: [governance] Coordinator election results In-Reply-To: <50fa710c.6513c20a.3361.ffffba7bSMTPIN_ADDED_BROKEN@mx.google.com> References: <5FB29FA5-F87D-4F98-BDAC-E5BB066C0CC9@ciroap.org> <50fa710c.6513c20a.3361.ffffba7bSMTPIN_ADDED_BROKEN@mx.google.com> Message-ID: A very big congratulations to Norbert! A very capable selection and timely election for the IGC Co-coordinator position. I look forward to a progressive term for you Norbert! Fouad Bajwa On Jan 19, 2013 3:10 PM, "Tijani BEN JEMAA" wrote: > Congratulation to Norbert. I’m sure you will do the job properly > together with Sala for more efficiency and more impact of the civil society > in the field of Internet Governance.**** > > ** ** > > Again, thank you Izumi for the huge work you did during your term. **** > > ** ** > > * * > > * * > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > **** > > *Tijani BEN JEMAA* > > Executive Director**** > > Mediterranean Federation of Internet Associations (*FMAI*)**** > > Phone: + 216 41 649 605**** > > Mobile: + 216 98 330 114**** > > Fax: + 216 70 853 376**** > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > **** > > **** > > ** ** > > **** > > ** ** > > *De :* governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto: > governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] *De la part de* Jeremy Malcolm > *Envoyé :* samedi 19 janvier 2013 01:43 > *À :* governance at lists.igcaucus.org > *Objet :* [governance] Coordinator election results**** > > ** ** > > The elections for the next co-coordinator of the IGC have just closed. As > this year's returning officer I am pleased to present the results. **** > > ** ** > > There were 129 people who commenced the survey. One of them > self-identified as not being a member of the Internet Governance Caucus, > and one of them bailed out when asked that question. This leaves 127 > people who self-identified. Of those, six people claimed that they had > already voted in this year's election, so they were not offered the > opportunity to vote again. Of the remaining 121, 106 took that opportunity. > **** > > ** ** > > Both candidates polled well. In the end, Imran Ahmed Shah came second > with 45 votes in his favour. Norbert Bollow came first with 61 votes.**** > > ** ** > > Congratulations Norbert, our new co-coordinator - and thanks to you too > Imran. I will post the full details to our website as soon as I get an > opportunity, and with Sala and Izumi's position will brief Norbert on the > technical aspects of his new role. I will also update the list of voters > on our website, and will consult with Sala about that.**** > > ** ** > > If anyone has any questions in the meantime, please let me know.**** > > ** ** > > -- **** > > *Dr Jeremy Malcolm > Senior Policy Officer > Consumers International | the global campaigning voice for consumers* > Office for Asia-Pacific and the Middle East > Lot 5-1 Wisma WIM, 7 Jalan Abang Haji Openg, TTDI, 60000 Kuala Lumpur, > Malaysia > Tel: +60 3 7726 1599**** > > *Your rights, our mission – download CI's Strategy 2015:* > http://consint.info/RightsMission**** > > @Consumers_Int | www.consumersinternational.org | > www.facebook.com/consumersinternational**** > > Read our email confidentiality notice. > Don't print this email unless necessary.**** > > ** ** > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From riaz.tayob at gmail.com Sat Jan 19 08:59:53 2013 From: riaz.tayob at gmail.com (Riaz K Tayob) Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2013 15:59:53 +0200 Subject: [governance] Kim Dotcom plans 'Mega' comeback with new cloud storage service Message-ID: <50FAA6D9.10408@gmail.com> {Are prosecutors going to be outsmarted by technology...?] Kim Dotcom plans 'Mega' comeback with new cloud storage service 19 Jan 2013 13:32 - Naomi Tajitsu * * Kim Dotcom, founder of the outlawed Megaupload, said his new "cyberlocker" was not revenge on US authorities who have charged him with online piracy. More Coverage * New Zealand allows Megaupload's Dotcom access to spy records * NZ judge rules Kim Dotcom raids were illegal * Bail bid fails: Jail for Dotcom as pirate hunters nail Megaupload Dotcom said his new offering, Mega.co.nz, which will launch on Sunday even as he and three colleagues await extradition from New Zealand to the United States, complied with the law and warned that attempts to take it down would be futile. "This is not some kind of finger to the US government or to Hollywood," Dotcom told Reuters at his sprawling estate in the bucolic hills of Coatesville, just outside Auckland, New Zealand, a country known more for sheep, rugby and the Hobbit than flamboyant tech tycoons. "Legally, there's just nothing there that could be used to shut us down. This site is just as legitimate and has the right to exist as Dropbox, Boxnet and other competitors," he said, referring to other popular cloud storage services. His lawyer, Ira Rothken, added that launching the site was compliant with the terms of Dotcom's bail conditions. US prosecutors argue that Dotcom in a statement said he had no intention of starting a new internet business until his extradition was resolved. Dotcom said Mega was a different beast to Megaupload, as the new site enables users to control exactly which users can access uploaded files, in contrast to its predecessor, which allowed users to search files, some of which contained copyrighted content allegedly without permission. A sophisticated encryption system will allow users to encode their files before they upload them on to the site's servers, which Dotcom said were located in New Zealand and overseas. Each file will then be issued a unique, sophisticated decryption key which only the file holder will control, allowing them to share the file as they choose. As a result, the site's operators would have no access to the files, which they say would strip them from any possible liability for knowingly enabling users to distribute copyright-infringing content, which Washington says is illegal. "Even if we wanted to, we can't go into your file and snoop and see what you have in there," the burly Dotcom said. Dotcom said Mega would comply with orders from copyright holders to remove infringing material, which will afford it the "safe harbour" legal provision, which minimises liability on the condition that a party acted in good faith to comply. But some legal experts say it may be difficult to claim the protection if they do not know what users have stored. The Motion Pictures Association of America said encrypting files alone would not protect Dotcom from liability. "We'll reserve final judgment until we have a chance to analyse the new project," a spokesperson told Reuters. "But given Kim Dotcom's history, count us as sceptical." The German national, who also goes by Kim Schmitz, expects huge interest in its first month of operation, which would be a far cry from when Megaupload went live in 2005. "I would be surprised if we had less than one million users," Dotcom said. *A year on* Mega's launch starts the next chapter of the Dotcom narrative, dotted with previous cyber crime-related arrests and whose twists and turns have been scrutinised by all facets of the entertainment industry, from film studios and record labels to internet service companies and teenage gamers. The copyright infringement case, billed as the largest to date given that Megaupload in its heyday commanded around four percent of global online traffic, could set a precedent for internet liability laws and depending on its outcome, may force entertainment companies to rethink their distribution methods. A year on, the extradition hearing has been delayed until August, complicated by illegal arrest warrants and the New Zealand government's admission that it had illegally spied on Dotcom, who has residency status in the country. Last January, New Zealand's elite special tactics forces landed by helicopter at dawn in the grounds of Dotcom's mansion, worth roughly NZ$30 million ($25.05 million) and featuring a servants' wing, hedge maze and life-size statues of giraffes and a rhinoceros, to arrest him and his colleagues at the request of the FBI. Police armed with semi-automatic weapons found Dotcom cowering alone in a panic room in the attic, while outside, a convoy of police cars and vans pulled up in the driveway. Around 70 officers took part in the raid. They left with computers, files and some of Dotcom's fleet of Rolls-Royces, Mercedes and a vintage pink Cadillac tricked with personalised licence plates screaming "HACKER", "EVIL", and "MAFIA". "Every time you hear a helicopter, you automatically think, 'Oh, another raid', so it's something that stays with you for a long time," said Dotcom, who says he and his wife still panic when they hear sudden, loud noises in the house. Dotcom was coy about the details of the launch party as builders put the finishing touches to a festival-sized concert stage in the mansion's grounds, while two helicopters circled overhead. But if the impromptu, Willy Wonka-styled ice cream social he threw in Auckland earlier in the week is any indication, the party could be a more wholesome affair compared with the well-documented soirees of Dotcom's past, where nightclubs, hot tubs and scantily clad women were a common fixture. "I had to grow up, you know, I was a big baby," he said. "Big baby with too much money usually leads to baby craziness. "I am going to be more of a person that wants to help to make things better and help Internet innovation to take off without all these restrictions by governments. That is going to be my primary goal if this business is successful." -- Reuters. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/jpeg Size: 43506 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: dot.gif Type: image/gif Size: 43 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- 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 From riaz.tayob at gmail.com Sat Jan 19 09:18:17 2013 From: riaz.tayob at gmail.com (Riaz K Tayob) Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2013 16:18:17 +0200 Subject: [governance] Britons Hope Obama Will Address Controversial U.S.-UK Extradition Treaty Message-ID: <50FAAB29.9050206@gmail.com> [The Exceptional US has perhaps upset some parts of the "Special relationship" to the UK... or in the words of Conan O'Brian, the little poochie is a little upset...] Dina.Rickman at huffingtonpost.com Britons Hope Obama Will Address Controversial U.S.-UK Extradition Treaty Posted: 19/01/2013 04:02 GMT LONDON -- Last October, shortly after midday, Theresa May, Britain's Home Secretary, stood up in the House of Commons and made an announcement that, in the words of Gary McKinnon's mother, required "guts". May announced that she was withdrawing the extradition order against McKinnon on computer hacking charges in the United States, a contentious issue that she and her government had inherited more than a decade after the systems administrator and his family were first told he faced trial abroad for hacking into U.S. military and NASA computers between 2001 and 2002. "As soon as Theresa May had the guts to reject Gary's extradition, you had [U.S. Attorney General] Eric Holder saying 'this is not on'," McKinnon's mother, Janis Sharp, told The Huffington Post UK. Holder has admitted he was "disappointed" with the decision -- he reportedly refused to take May's calls immediately after she declined to extradite McKinnon on health grounds -- but has memorably denied feeling "completely screwed" by the Home Secretary's decision not to send the 46-year-old Brit, who has Asperger's syndrome, to the U.S. for trial. Tony Blair's Labour government created the 2003 U.S.-UK Extradition Act in the wake of the 9/11 terrorist attacks in the United States. The law allows the U.S. to extradite UK citizens for breaking American laws, even if the offence was committed in Britain -- even if it was committed in Britain by a UK citizen. British politicians and the families of Britons facing trial abroad have criticized the act as unworthy of the "special relationship" the U.S. and Britain arguably share. According to Home Office figures, 95 British citizens have been taken to the U.S. for trial under the 2003 law, while 44 people in America have been released for trial in Britain. British anti-extradition campaigners question those figures, arguing that they overcount the number of people extradited from the U.S. to the UK because some of those suspects have dual nationality. Regardless of the exact numbers involved, how President Barack Obama plans to address concerns in the UK about the act in particular and extraditions more generally is of great interest here. A ComRes poll, conducted on behalf of the British human rights group Liberty, found in September 2010 that 83 percent of British MPs surveyed agreed or agreed strongly that changes should be made to extradition laws , and 66 percent agreed or agreed strongly that extradition should occur only if the requesting country first provides evidence in a UK court. Hundreds of thousands of people in the UK have signed petitions supporting individual fights against extradition, with 149,000 signing the petition against the extradition of one British citizen, Talha Ahsan, and 250,000 against the extradition of another, Richard O'Dwyer. There is much support for change across all parties in the House of Commons, most recently with the Home Affairs select committee voting to support a change in extradition arrangements in March. For her part, Sharp said she has lived with 10 years of very real fear for her son, who she said has withdrawn "further and further" into himself under the cloud of a possible extradition. "Gary has never gone abroad," she said. "The fear of your son being taken to me reminds me of how Jewish people must have felt when they were dragged away by the Germans. "How slaves must have felt. You can be dragged away from your own country, your own people, without any evidence. You lose your flat, you lose your job, you lose everything you've ever known. You are suddenly in a country when you don't know anyone, you are an enemy of the state," said Sharp. Others subject to the act's mandates have faced similar hardships. Talha Ahsan and his family fought for six years before he was sent to the U.S. to face terrorism charges in October 2012. Ahsan also has Asperger's syndrome, and was arrested in July 2006 for allegedly being involved with Azzam Publications between 1997 and 2004. Azzam, according to the U.S. Attorney's Office for the District of Connecticut , "allegedly provided material support to the Taliban and the Chechen Mujahideen through various means, including the administration and operation of various web sites promoting violent jihad." Ahsan is accused of "providing, and conspiring to provide, material support and resources to persons engaged in acts of terrorism in Afghanistan, Chechnya and elsewhere ... through the creation and use of various internet websites, e-mail communications, and other means," according to the indictment . One of those websites was located on a server in Connecticut. Ahsan has never visited the U.S., but is accused of conspiring to provide material support to terrorists and to kill, kidnap, maim or injure persons in a foreign country. "It's like a collective punishment for the whole family, before anyone's been convicted of anything. It's psychological hell," said his brother, London-based art curator Hamja Ahsan. "The UK is not the 51st state of America and should be respected as such." Even the most pro-American MPs, such as Dominic Raab, a Conservative member of Parliament's Joint Committee on Human Rights, see the flaws in the extradition arrangement. Raab has spoken out against the extradition of UK citizens who commit crimes on British soil to America. While he believes the Obama administration has shown "modest but welcome flexibility", there's more to be done, he said. "Ironing out the creases so it operates more fairly is important for Britain, won't harm U.S. law enforcement, and removes a diplomatic thorn in the side of the special relationship," Raab told HuffPost UK. Specifically, the MP wants a subtle change that wouldn't require an amendment to the act, just Obama's agreement. "The critical change is to allow the UK to introduce a 'forum' clause, so in cross-border cases where the alleged criminal activity all took place here, a judge has grounds to deny extradition in the interests of justice," said Raab. "We wouldn't need to amend the UK-U.S. treaty for that; we just need acquiescence. The Home Secretary has announced this change, and I haven't heard any public objection [from the U.S. government]." Even so, for some British families like the O'Dwyers, Obama has simply not done enough. Julia O'Dwyer's son Richard was accused of setting up a website that violated copyright laws by offering free access to films and TV shows, and American authorities sought to extradite him in May 2011. Richard O'Dwyer avoided trial in the U.S. by making a deal in which he agreed to travel to New York in November 2012 under a deferred-prosecution agreement, which required him to pay a small fine and agree to never infringe again on a copyright. He has not been convicted of any crime. Julia O'Dwyer had petitioned the White House since 2010 to save her son from the personal burdens and legal implications of extradition. Her son was also the subject of an online petition against his extradition, launched by Wikipedia founder Jimmy Wales. More than 253,000 people signed it. O'Dwyer said the White House has remained silent about her son's case, as did the president himself when he was asked directly about it during a Google hangout early last year. The president said that he did not get personally involved , but added, "We want to make sure that intellectual property is protected, we want to make sure that the creative works of people in this country aren't expropriated, but we want to do it in a way that's consistent with internet freedom. We're going to keep on working on it." "Obama has done nothing on extradition, and he stated at the Google hangout when asked about Richard 'the president doesn't get involved'," Julia O'Dwyer told HuffPost UK via email. Not all see the extradition act as one-sided. In October 2011 an independent legal committee appointed by the Home Secretary found the laws governing the extradition of Brits to be fair, according to former Court of Appeal judge Sir Scott Baker. Baker, who led the review, said that the laws were "misunderstood" and the treaty "does not operate in an unbalanced manner". In the wake of the Baker review and prior to a debate in the House of Commons over extradition, Louis Susman, the U.S. ambassador to the UK, wrote in an op-ed in The Daily Telegraph that "the existing U.S.-UK Extradition Treaty works, is fair and balanced, promotes justice in both countries, and does not need to be changed." Susman said that UK citizens were protected by the "probable cause" standard in the U.S. He also noted that "In all extradition cases, the UK authorities always begin by considering whether an individual can and should be tried in the UK instead of being extradited. Once the UK authorities decide that the case should be tried in the U.S., all extradition hearings are then held in UK courts -- as are subsequent appeals. It is only when these avenues have been exhausted -- when UK prosecutors, the courts, and the Home Secretary have all affirmed that the request is proper -- that an extradition goes ahead." Still, for many here, extradition remains a hot-button issue, and some think action from Obama would enhance his stature internationally -- especially in comparison to his predecessor, George W. Bush, who had low popularity ratings overseas. Karl Watkin MBE, a wealthy and prominent British entrepreneur, said the average cost for families fighting trial abroad is around $200,000 to $300,000 (£124,000 to £186,000), and he has invested £250,000 (about $401,000) of his money to fight extradition cases. "Obama needs to decide if he is a leader or does he share the same values as Bush," Watkin said. "If he is truly a leader, he should start by agreeing to tear up the insidious extradition treaty with the UK. "Obama was sold to the world as the first president with a truly international perspective. Currently he will go down in history as even more myopic than his predecessor." The British government has recently taken efforts to review extradition cases more closely. In October 2012, Home Secretary May announced the extradition treaty would be changed to require a court hearing to decide whether a person should stand trial in the UK or abroad. Melanie Riley, co-ordinator of the anti-extradition activist group Friends Extradited, said that "warm words about the importance of cross-border cooperation" don't help defendants taken thousands of miles away from home or their families. "President Obama, as a lawyer himself, may recognize the irrationality of seeking the extradition to the U.S. of British citizens on allegations of criminal conduct in the UK, rather than allowing a British trial under British law," she told HuffPost UK. "He may also reflect that the reverse scenario is highly improbable. If the UK were to seek the extradition of an American for alleged criminal conduct on American soil, Obama might well concede the U.S. authorities would not authorise the extradition request -- so why does the Department of Justice consider it so wrong for the UK to prosecute our own?" And Sharp, McKinnon's mother, said, "A bit of compassion from the government across the pond wouldn't go amiss." /This article is part of a series produced by The Huffington Post that closely examines the most pressing challenges facing President Obama in his second term. To read other posts in the series, click here /. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From tijani.benjemaa at planet.tn Sat Jan 19 09:24:43 2013 From: tijani.benjemaa at planet.tn (Tijani BEN JEMAA) Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2013 15:24:43 +0100 Subject: [governance] Notice to the IGC on Proposed Charter Amendments In-Reply-To: <02EB5DC1-5B10-43BD-B8C4-C81F4E528DA3@ciroap.org> References: <50F38F8E.3090106@ciroap.org> <50F3B31B.4090406@itforchange.net> <50F3B423.1070901@ciroap.org> <50F3B544.3080409@itforchange.net> <1FC731B2-FE70-41AC-B97D-52979AFFAE05@uzh.ch> <1358157197.55375.YahooMailNeo@web125106.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <020a01cdf283$98dfbe10$ca9f3a30$@gmail.com> <20130114212217.7f43bbc9@quill.bollow.ch> <1358227661.77969.YahooMailNeo@web125105.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <735AC965-1DFD-4A66-BFF6-3E828E71D72E@ciroap.org> <02EB5DC1-5B10-43BD-B8C4-C81F4E528DA3@ciroap.org> Message-ID: <009001cdf650$bb5c0900$32141b00$@benjemaa@planet.tn> I support the 3 proposals. My address tijani.benjemaa at fmai.org is not working properly any more. Please use one of the 2 following addresses: tijani.benjemaa at topnet.tn or tijani.benjemaa at planet.tn ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- Tijani BEN JEMAA Executive Director Mediterranean Federation of Internet Associations (FMAI) Phone: + 216 41 649 605 Mobile: + 216 98 330 114 Fax: + 216 70 853 376 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- De : governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] De la part de Jeremy Malcolm Envoyé : vendredi 18 janvier 2013 13:51 À : governance at lists.igcaucus.org Objet : Re: [governance] Notice to the IGC on Proposed Charter Amendments On 18/01/2013, at 8:32 PM, Jeremy Malcolm wrote: I almost let this slip. Sala asked me to call the charter amendment poll by today, unless we need more time for discussion. So let's just confirm, are we ready to call a poll on any or all of these proposed amendments? I think I have the latest/preferred text for each below, but correct me if I'm wrong: 1. ... "Prior to voting the prospective voter must personally ascertain that they are a member of the IGC based on membership criteria described elsewhere in this charter and posted as part of the voting information (i.e. a voter must affirm membership on the voter form prior to voting)." ... "All ballots will include the ability for voters to abstain on any choice included on the ballot." This has > ten proposers. 2. Under "Selection of Coordinators", regarding when elections are held, change "by midsummer (the summer solstice) to "by the end of that calendar year". Also in "If events prevent an election by midsummer, it will be held as soon after midsummer as possible," change the word "midsummer" to "then" in both places. I think this has three so far (me, Parminder and Izumi), so would need seven more if we are to put it to the vote with the other one. Norbert spoke against, already, and Imran supported a slightly different wording. 3. Under "Working methods", update the address of the mailing list from governance at lists.cpsr.org to governance at lists.igcaucus.org. This has two (me and Norbert; the others didn't expressly mention it), so it needs eight more if we are to put it to the vote at the same time. -- Dr Jeremy Malcolm Senior Policy Officer Consumers International | the global campaigning voice for consumers Office for Asia-Pacific and the Middle East Lot 5-1 Wisma WIM, 7 Jalan Abang Haji Openg, TTDI, 60000 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia Tel: +60 3 7726 1599 Your rights, our mission – download CI's Strategy 2015: http://consint.info/RightsMission @Consumers_Int | www.consumersinternational.org | www.facebook.com/consumersinternational Read our email confidentiality notice . Don't print this email unless necessary. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From capdasiege at gmail.com Sat Jan 19 09:36:01 2013 From: capdasiege at gmail.com (CAPDA CAPDA) Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2013 15:36:01 +0100 Subject: [governance] Coordinator election results In-Reply-To: References: <5FB29FA5-F87D-4F98-BDAC-E5BB066C0CC9@ciroap.org> Message-ID: Congratulation Norbert, Sala you do a good job for civil society. Best, -- *Michel TCHONANG LINZE* Coordinateur Général Coordonnateur Régional Afrique Centrale Réseau Panafricain Société Civile (ACSIS) *ÉVÈNEMENTS SUR LES TIC** ! * - *Forum SMSI *du 13 au 17 Mai 2013 Genève Suisse - *SYMPOSIUM TIC AFRIQUE* du 30 juillet au 02 Août 2013 Yaoundé Cameroun. *«Face à l’enjeu de la Cybersécurité-Cybercriminalité et d**u phénomène de croissance exponentielle de la téléphonie mobile**, quelles solutions pour des Villes Numériques, la Protection des Droits des Personnes et des Entreprises ? »* CAPDA (Consortium d'Appui aux Actions pour la Promotion et le Développement de l'Afrique) BP : 15 151 DOUALA - CAMEROUN Tél. : (237) 7775-39-63 / 2212-9493/ 3340-46-49 Fax : (237) 3340-46-49 Email : capdasiege at gmail.com / forumtic2005 at yahoo.fr Site : www.ict-forum.org ; www.ict-africa.org ; *www.tic-afrique.org* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From kabani.asif at gmail.com Sat Jan 19 09:53:40 2013 From: kabani.asif at gmail.com (Kabani) Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2013 19:53:40 +0500 Subject: [governance] Notice to the IGC on Proposed Charter Amendments In-Reply-To: <735AC965-1DFD-4A66-BFF6-3E828E71D72E@ciroap.org> References: <50F38F8E.3090106@ciroap.org> <50F3B31B.4090406@itforchange.net> <50F3B423.1070901@ciroap.org> <50F3B544.3080409@itforchange.net> <1FC731B2-FE70-41AC-B97D-52979AFFAE05@uzh.ch> <1358157197.55375.YahooMailNeo@web125106.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <020a01cdf283$98dfbe10$ca9f3a30$@gmail.com> <20130114212217.7f43bbc9@quill.bollow.ch> <1358227661.77969.YahooMailNeo@web125105.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <735AC965-1DFD-4A66-BFF6-3E828E71D72E@ciroap.org> Message-ID: Jeremy I support all amendments proposed here. Thanks and Regards Asif Kabani On 18 January 2013 17:32, Jeremy Malcolm wrote: > I almost let this slip. Sala asked me to call the charter amendment poll > by today, unless we need more time for discussion. So let's just confirm, > are we ready to call a poll on any or all of these proposed amendments? I > think I have the latest/preferred text for each below, but correct me if > I'm wrong: > > 1. On selection of coordinators, add after "As part of the voting process > the voter must personally ascertain that they are a member of the IGC based > on membership criteria described elsewhere in this charter and posted as > part of the voting information (i.e. a voter must affirm membership on the > voter form in order to vote)." > > ...this text... > > "Prior to voting the prospective voter must personally ascertain that they > are a member of the IGC based on membership criteria described elsewhere in > this charter and posted as part of the voting information (i.e. a voter > must affirm membership on the voter form prior to voting)." > > ...then it continues as at present, "The decision to self-identify as a > member of the IGC is a personal decision based on the criteria defined. A > list of the self-defined member-voters will be published after the election > with the results of the election", then another new addition... > > "All ballots will include the ability for voters to abstain on any choice > included on the ballot." > > 2. Under "Selection of Coordinators", regarding when elections are held, > change "by midsummer (the summer solstice) to "by the end of that calendar > year". Also in "If events prevent an election by midsummer, it will be > held as soon after midsummer as possible," change the word "midsummer" to > "then" in both places. > > 3. Under "Working methods", update the address of the mailing list from > governance at lists.cpsr.org to governance at lists.igcaucus.org. > > -- > > *Dr Jeremy Malcolm > Senior Policy Officer > Consumers International | the global campaigning voice for consumers* > Office for Asia-Pacific and the Middle East > Lot 5-1 Wisma WIM, 7 Jalan Abang Haji Openg, TTDI, 60000 Kuala Lumpur, > Malaysia > Tel: +60 3 7726 1599 > > *Your rights, our mission – download CI's Strategy 2015:* > http://consint.info/RightsMission > > @Consumers_Int | www.consumersinternational.org | > www.facebook.com/consumersinternational > > Read our email confidentiality notice. > Don't print this email unless necessary. > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > -- *Connect me* [image: Facebook] [image: Twitter] [image: Youtube] [image: LinkedIn] *Wait Before you print - Think about the** **ENVIRONMENT* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From capdasiege at gmail.com Sat Jan 19 09:56:31 2013 From: capdasiege at gmail.com (CAPDA CAPDA) Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2013 15:56:31 +0100 Subject: [governance] Notice to the IGC on Proposed Charter Amendments In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi Sala, I support amendments 2 and 3 thank. Regards, 2013/1/13 Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro < salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com> > Dear All, > > Firstly, I would like to thank Imran Ahmed Shah for helping prepare this > Summary. Kindly find herewith the following notice in relation to the > proposal for Charter Amendments. > > *Notice to Internet Governance Caucus (IGC) on Proposed Charter Amendments > * > > > > 1. On January 10, 2013, Avri Doria (hereafter referred to as > "Initiator") proposed a Charter Amendment. > 2. At the material time, the initiator was not a Voting Member under > the definitions of the Charter, however the number of support for the > proposal is more than the required 10 members. > 3. The amendment proposal is accepted for Voting. > 4. Voting electronic ballot ( hereafter referred to as "eBallot") on > the matter will be issued strictly to Voting Members. > 5. Before the initiation of the Voting eBallot, all voting members are > requested to inform the IGC if they feel that there are other necessary > amendments to be made to the Charter and a period of 48 hours is given to > allow members to respond. > 6. If voting for the amendment commences post 18th January, 2013, the > Voting members will be re-evaluated as per the current open Election for > one of the coordinators of the IGC. > > > A summary is enclosed within this email, see below and also attached. > > *Internet Governance Caucus CS* > *Charter Amendment Initiative Jan 2013 - Support Summary* > 13/01/2013**** > Support Shown for Proposed Amendments**** > Voting Options**** > Nomcom Terms**** > **** > *Membership Type* > *Total* > *Proposed by* > … prior to vote**** > ..Abstain**** > ..missing heading**** > ..nomcom**** > *Required Votes (2/3)* > > *1* > *Voting Members* *103* > *10=<* > *16* > *16* > *16* > *16* > *68.7* > *2* > *Qualified Members* > *205* > * * > 4**** > 4**** > 8**** > 8**** > * * > *308* > *20* > *20* > *24* > *24* > **** > Kind Regards, > > > > -- > Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala > P.O. Box 17862 > Suva > Fiji > > Twitter: @SalanietaT > Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro > Tel: +679 3544828 > Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > -- *Michel TCHONANG LINZE* Coordinateur Général Coordonnateur Régional Afrique Centrale Réseau Panafricain Société Civile (ACSIS) *ÉVÈNEMENTS SUR LES TIC** ! * - *Forum SMSI *du 13 au 17 Mai 2013 Genève Suisse - *SYMPOSIUM TIC AFRIQUE* du 30 juillet au 02 Août 2013 Yaoundé Cameroun. *«Face à l’enjeu de la Cybersécurité-Cybercriminalité et d**u phénomène de croissance exponentielle de la téléphonie mobile**, quelles solutions pour des Villes Numériques, la Protection des Droits des Personnes et des Entreprises ? »* CAPDA (Consortium d'Appui aux Actions pour la Promotion et le Développement de l'Afrique) BP : 15 151 DOUALA - CAMEROUN Tél. : (237) 7775-39-63 / 2212-9493/ 3340-46-49 Fax : (237) 3340-46-49 Email : capdasiege at gmail.com / forumtic2005 at yahoo.fr Site : www.ict-forum.org ; www.ict-africa.org ; *www.tic-afrique.org* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From nyangkweagien at gmail.com Sat Jan 19 10:20:56 2013 From: nyangkweagien at gmail.com (Nyangkwe Agien Aaron) Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2013 16:20:56 +0100 Subject: [governance] Thank You all, I have been saved!!! Message-ID: I want to thank the members of the caucus who enabled me get out from the hell I went through for the past 12 hours. Your SMS got me liberated early today morning and only poower failure here delayed this message of recognition. Without internet and IG Caucuse, I don't know what would have been my fate at the fourth floor of this building. Jump myself to the other world like the fately of the New York building or just sit on my desk and wait for miracle. I did the second and you did performed the miracle to enable me reunite with my family and enjoy a week end. Thank you so much once more Aaron On 1/19/13, Nyangkwe Agien Aaron wrote: > Please getmy colleugue Mr Raoul Fonkoua tel. 237 77 42 20 05 to come and > open th > door for me or else I will rot here this Sunday. His offioce is in the > down floor and he locked the main door and went home leaving me > inside. > > My batteries ran down > > Thank you > > > > > > > > On 19 1.2013 7:42, Jeremy Malcolm wrote: >> The elections for the next co-coordinator of the IGC have just closed. >> As this year's returning officer I am pleased to present the results. >> >> There were 129 people who commenced the survey. One of them >> self-identified as not being a member of the Internet Governance >> Caucus, and one of them bailed out when asked that question. This >> leaves 127 people who self-identified. Of those, six people claimed >> that they had already voted in this year's election, so they were not >> offered the opportunity to vote again. Of the remaining 121, 106 took >> that opportunity. >> >> Both candidates polled well. In the end, Imran Ahmed Shah came second >> with 45 votes in his favour. Norbert Bollow came first with 61 votes. >> >> Congratulations Norbert, our new co-coordinator - and thanks to you >> too Imran. I will post the full details to our website as soon as I >> get an opportunity, and with Sala and Izumi's position will brief >> Norbert on the technical aspects of his new role. I will also update >> the list of voters on our website, and will consult with Sala about that. >> >> If anyone has any questions in the meantime, please let me know. >> >> -- >> >> *Dr Jeremy Malcolm* >> > > > > > -- -- Aaron Agien Nyangkwe Journalist-OutCome Mapper Special Assistant to The president ASAFE P.O.Box 5213 Douala-Cameroon Telephone +237 73 42 71 27 -------------- 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 From riaz.tayob at gmail.com Sat Jan 19 11:18:26 2013 From: riaz.tayob at gmail.com (Riaz K Tayob) Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2013 18:18:26 +0200 Subject: [governance] Bloomberg - The Overzealous Prosecution of Aaron Swartz Message-ID: <50FAC752.5090502@gmail.com> [The Panglossian world of US Exceptionalism.... of course these matters are discussed and debated, but dare to do anything about it and then those will be put in their place, or no?] The Overzealous Prosecution of Aaron Swartz By Stephen L. Carter Jan 18, 2013 1:30 AM GMT+0200 The tragic suicide last week of Aaron Swartz, the visionary Internet activist who helped create Reddit, is being blamed in part on the zeal of the U.S. attorney whose office was prosecuting him for supposed computer crimes. Professor Lawrence Lessig of Harvard Law School described his close friend Swartz as having been "driven to the edge by what a decent society would only call bullying." Others pointed out that Swartz's alleged offense -- downloading scholarly papers without paying for them -- was essentially victimless. The owner of the database from which the papers were taken chose not to pursue the matter. The critics have a point. The prosecution of Swartz was ridiculous. But it's a small part of a larger problem. There's far too much prosecution in the U.S. And as the philosopher Douglas Husak points out in his book "Overcriminalization ," the reason we have too much prosecution is that we call too many things crimes. By one common estimate, Congress creates new federal felonies at the rate of one a week. Husak argues that criminal liability has become less the outcome of deliberation than a habit, a bizarre bit of boilerplate tacked onto the end of statutes or regulations without a second thought. Criminal defense lawyers are fond of claiming that the average American commits two or three punishable crimes every day. Overbroad Statutes Here is the nub of the problem, as Husak describes it: "Experts in the criminal law cannot make accurate predictions about potential offenders because the fate of such persons is not a function of the law at all. The real criminal law, as Holmes would construe it, is formulated by police and prosecutors. The realization that police and prosecutors wield such discretion is nothing new. What is new is the power to arrest and prosecute nearly everyone -- a power that derives from the ever-expanding scope of criminal statutes as written." The Computer Fraud and Abuse Act -- the principal statute under which Swartz was charged -- is a good example of Husak's point. Enacted in the 1980s, before the Internet explosion, the statute makes a criminal of anyone who "intentionally accesses a computer without authorization or exceeds authorized access" and, in the process, obtains financial information, government information or "information from any protected computer." What's wrong with this language? Consider: You're sitting in your office, when suddenly you remember that you forgot to pay your Visa bill. You take a moment to log on to your bank account, and you pay the bill. Then you go back to work. If your employer has a policy prohibiting personal use of office computers, then you have exceeded your authorized access; since you went to your bank website, you have obtained financial information. Believe it or not, you're now a felon. The likelihood of prosecution might be small, but you've still committed a crime. Aware of this risk, some federal courts have given the statute's language a narrow construction, but others have read it broadly, and the Obama administration has opposed efforts in Congress to narrow its scope. Alex Kozinski, chief judge of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, warned in an opinion last spring that the government's position "would make criminals of large groups of people who would have little reason to suspect they are committing a federal crime." The statute isn't unique, either in its vagueness or in its scope. In both parties there are people who believe that because they can make something illegal, they should; that somehow they're not showing how much they care unless they're thinking up new reasons to lock people up. Overzealous Prosecutors A traditional check on the absurd breadth of the law has been the discretion of prosecutors not to prosecute. Yet as law Professor Angela J. Davis of the American University Washington College of Law notes, this discretion is too rarely exercised. In her thoughtful book "Arbitrary Justice ," reflecting on her own days as a prosecutor, Davis writes that although some colleagues "saw themselves as ministers of justice and measured their decisions carefully, very few were humbled by the power they held." Further, she writes, there's no real check on abuse: "The judicial branch has failed to check prosecutorial overreaching, and the legislative branch traditionally has passed laws that increase prosecutorial power." In a better world, prosecutors, like other functionaries of government, would indeed be humbled rather than emboldened by the authority placed in their hands. Too often, they're not. The question is what to do about it. When corporate titans begin to swagger, the response of our political branches is to burden them with layer upon layer of regulation -- including, in many cases, criminal liability. When government officials abuse their authority, even when they cause enormous injury, the usual response is -- nothing. Errors of judgment by private citizens are occasion for new laws; errors by public servants, which can be equally if not more costly, are unfortunate incidents. Here criminal prosecution presents a particular dilemma. On the one hand, prosecutors need to be able to do their difficult and often dangerous work without constantly looking over their shoulders, worrying about the legal consequences to themselves. On the other, given the penchant of government to criminalize more and more behavior, those who prosecute the law have to display enough common sense and humility to show that they remember they work for us -- not the other way around. Uncontrolled prosecutors shouldn't necessarily be thrown in jail. But if we believe our own rhetoric about the treatment of others who abuse power, a heightened degree of civil liability would help them to do their jobs better. Right now, prosecutors are protected from most lawsuits by what's called qualified immunity. Prosecutors have to make hard decisions about going after dangerous people. They shouldn't have to worry overmuch about being sued. The immunity of prosecutors should indeed be high. It just shouldn't be as high as it is now. Unconcerned Judges *And how high is that? High enough that the **Supreme Court **recently **rejected **a lawsuit against a prosecutor whose office deliberately failed to turn over exculpatory material to a defendant who was subsequently convicted twice, both times wrongly -- first of armed robbery, then of murder -- and came within a month of execution before the hidden reports turned up. Oh, well, wrote the justices: It was a single incident, not a pattern, and so didn't rise to a violation of the Constitution. * Critics excoriated the decision, but the true problem isn't judicial. It's legislative. Congress could abrogate the immunity of federal prosecutors any time it likes; state legislatures could do the same for their own state's attorneys. Working out a more nuanced system, protecting discretion while allowing lawsuits in cases of clear abuse, would be difficult. But that's no excuse for not trying. Yes, the potential for liability would make the work of the prosecutor harder -- but surgeons and chief executive officers seem to manage. Prosecutors do need immunity. They just need a little less of it. (Stephen L. Carter is a Bloomberg View columnist and a professor of law at Yale University . He is the author of "The Violence of Peace: America's Wars in the Age of Obama," and the novel "The Impeachment of Abraham Lincoln ." The opinions expressed are his own.) To contact the writer of this article: Stephen L. Carter at stephen.carter at yale.edu or @StepCarter on Twitter. To contact the editor responsible for this article: Michael Newman at mnewman43 at bloomberg.net . -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From avri at acm.org Sat Jan 19 11:50:26 2013 From: avri at acm.org (Avri Doria) Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2013 11:50:26 -0500 Subject: [governance] Appeals Team - Call for Comments and Interim Findings In-Reply-To: <50FA8510.1080301@itforchange.net> References: <99B5B12AE95441728A797F79FC884BD5@Toshiba> <50FA8510.1080301@itforchange.net> Message-ID: On 19 Jan 2013, at 06:35, parminder wrote: > > A few comments for the consideration of the appeals team. Although an id to send these comments directly to the appeals commitee is provided, I much prefer to make this comments publicly. > > 1. I think Suresh should be reinstated immediately because the conditions of his 'removal from the list' are not met. On this we agree. > > 2. However, I will caution the appeals team against summarily overturning a decision of a co-coordinator merely on technical grounds without making any comments whatsoever on the substantive issues involved. The problem is that there very often isnt a strict meeting of all the required provisions for so many activities of the IGC. For instance, even for the current Noncom process for selection of MAG nominees, it is an indisputable fact that all the laid down technical conditions for setting up the nomcom were not met. Does it mean that if 4 people were to appeal against the setting up of the nomcom, the decision to set up the nomcom, and its subsequent outputs will be struck down? Seems reasonable to me. They would then have to decide whether they thought that the Coordinator(s) had sufficient popular support for the change and that it had been properly discussed on the list. They would have something to weigh it against. I think the technicalities are sufficient cause for an appeal and that they should prevail unless there is proof that some process intervened. This case, any case of a coordinator going against the charter without proper list discussion before doing so, should be remedied. > > 3. In the case of Suresh, technical conditions of 'removal from the list' may not have been met. But a point for the appeals committee to make a judgement on also is 'whether conditions of suspension from the list are met or not'. Because, in practical terms, if Suresh is to be reinstated within a month, the action of co-coordinator has, till now, only amounted to his suspension from the list. It may not be right for the appeal committee to take too narrow a construction of the fact that the co-coordinator pronounced the decision of 'removal from the list', and simply judge it as wrong, doing nothing more. The committee needs to address, and judge, the context fully of the efforts of the co-coodinator to impose the necessary minimum decorum and orderliness on the elist in this particular case, and corresponding the conduct of the member against whom the 'removal' decision was given. Certainly, but only in the case that the community of the IGC was included. > > 4. Accordingly, if on substance, and not merely on technical grounds, the disciplining efforts of the co-coordinator are found appropriate, the merit of the intent of her decision may still be salvaged by turning the 'removal' decision to 'suspension' decision, whereby Suresh is immediately put back on the list. I disagree. I support the appeals team using extenuating circumstance and list discussion to go beyond the charter. I do not accept them substituting their views on the substance for the charter. > > parminder avri -------------- 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 From avri at acm.org Sat Jan 19 11:54:09 2013 From: avri at acm.org (Avri Doria) Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2013 11:54:09 -0500 Subject: [governance] Notice to the IGC on Proposed Charter Amendments In-Reply-To: <20130118165547.472e8ec7@quill.bollow.ch> References: <50F38F8E.3090106@ciroap.org> <50F3B31B.4090406@itforchange.net> <50F3B423.1070901@ciroap.org> <50F3B544.3080409@itforchange.net> <1FC731B2-FE70-41AC-B97D-52979AFFAE05@uzh.ch> <1358157197.55375.YahooMailNeo@web125106.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <020a01cdf283$98dfbe10$ca9f3a30$@gmail.com> <20130114212217.7f43bbc9@quill.bollow.ch> <1358227661.77969.YahooMailNeo@web125105.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <735AC965-1DFD-4A66-BFF6-3E828E71D72E@ciroap.org> <20130118165547.472e8ec7@quill.bollow.ch> Message-ID: <675E6D8C-1408-4724-A3B3-107B7F807F07@acm.org> Hi, Have the amendments that I co-proposed been lost. I am totally confused about what is going on with this process. I do not know what 1, 2, 3 are. Is on line somewhere? Is the vote to wait until every amendment everyone has ever wanted also gets discussed and put on the ballot? avri On 18 Jan 2013, at 10:55, Norbert Bollow wrote: > Hi Jeremy > > In addition there's the amendments proposal by Avri from the > thread "Suggested amendment for the charter. Nomcom." with more than > ten co-proposers. > > Greetings, > Norbert > > Am Fri, 18 Jan 2013 20:32:58 +0800 > schrieb Jeremy Malcolm : > >> I almost let this slip. Sala asked me to call the charter amendment >> poll by today, unless we need more time for discussion. So let's >> just confirm, are we ready to call a poll on any or all of these >> proposed amendments? I think I have the latest/preferred text for >> each below, but correct me if I'm wrong: >> >> 1. On selection of coordinators, add after "As part of the voting >> process the voter must personally ascertain that they are a member of >> the IGC based on membership criteria described elsewhere in this >> charter and posted as part of the voting information (i.e. a voter >> must affirm membership on the voter form in order to vote)." >> >> ...this text... >> >> "Prior to voting the prospective voter must personally ascertain that >> they are a member of the IGC based on membership criteria described >> elsewhere in this charter and posted as part of the voting >> information (i.e. a voter must affirm membership on the voter form >> prior to voting)." >> >> ...then it continues as at present, "The decision to self-identify as >> a member of the IGC is a personal decision based on the criteria >> defined. A list of the self-defined member-voters will be published >> after the election with the results of the election", then another >> new addition... >> >> "All ballots will include the ability for voters to abstain on any >> choice included on the ballot." >> >> 2. Under "Selection of Coordinators", regarding when elections are >> held, change "by midsummer (the summer solstice) to "by the end of >> that calendar year". Also in "If events prevent an election by >> midsummer, it will be held as soon after midsummer as possible," >> change the word "midsummer" to "then" in both places. >> >> 3. Under "Working methods", update the address of the mailing list >> from governance at lists.cpsr.org to governance at lists.igcaucus.org. >> > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From sonigituekpe at crossriverstate.gov.ng Sat Jan 19 12:27:29 2013 From: sonigituekpe at crossriverstate.gov.ng (Sonigitu Ekpe) Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2013 18:27:29 +0100 Subject: [governance] Coordinator election results In-Reply-To: References: <5FB29FA5-F87D-4F98-BDAC-E5BB066C0CC9@ciroap.org> Message-ID: Great results. Congratulations for the two contestants. To Norbert Bollow, I welcome you to the new responsibility with the freedom the Internet has offered the Universe. Hope you will excel greatly in the task lying ahead. Congratulations at the poll! Thank you Dr. Jeremy, Sala and Izumi for the efforts. Hope to see the full integration of the Civil Society on all aspect of Internet governance. Keep the great work going. Best regards to you all. Sonigitu Ekpe -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From jcurran at istaff.org Sat Jan 19 13:16:10 2013 From: jcurran at istaff.org (John Curran) Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2013 08:16:10 -1000 Subject: [governance] Bloomberg - The Overzealous Prosecution of Aaron Swartz In-Reply-To: <50FAC752.5090502@gmail.com> References: <50FAC752.5090502@gmail.com> Message-ID: On Jan 19, 2013, at 6:18 AM, Riaz K Tayob wrote: > [The Panglossian world of US Exceptionalism.... of course these matters are discussed and debated, but dare to do anything about it and then those will be put in their place, or no?] > > The Overzealous Prosecution of Aaron Swartz > By Stephen L. Carter Jan 18, 2013 1:30 AM GMT+0200 > ... Riaz - A very good question; I personally don't subscribe to a view of US Exceptionalism (that's likely because I've travelled a bit and can more readily make comparisons), but do see a system that excels at incremental improvement. In this particular case, I do believe that the particular statute used in Swartz's prosecution will be amended to be more reasonable (see my earlier ICG posting reference to Time's article on same by Sam Gustin) Regarding the larger question raised by Carter's article, it is a bit more complex than depicted, since lowering the qualified immunity for prosecutors (as a way of raising the threshold to pursue cases), may also, if not very carefully done, incidentally raise the threshold for being able to _drop a case_ (i.e. the potential result where some form of conviction must be obtained less the prosecutor face increased personal liability) Change in this area would definitely benefit from informed discourse, and to the extent that one can claim that happens among US lawmakers, then perhaps someday there will be some productive outcome on this larger question as well... FYI, /John Disclaimers: My personal views alone. No pursuit of action against anyone is intended by this email; parties feeling overly prosecuted as a result should seek medical care for potential mental health issues. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From shailam at yahoo.com Sat Jan 19 14:05:05 2013 From: shailam at yahoo.com (shaila mistry) Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2013 11:05:05 -0800 (PST) Subject: AW: [governance] Coordinator election results In-Reply-To: <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8013314DF@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> References: <5FB29FA5-F87D-4F98-BDAC-E5BB066C0CC9@ciroap.org> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8013314DF@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> Message-ID: <1358622305.49010.YahooMailNeo@web160503.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> Congratulations Nobert Look forward to working with you . Shaila Rao Mistry   The journey begins sooner than you anticipate ! ..................... the renaissance of composure ! ________________________________ From: ""Kleinwächter, Wolfgang"" To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Jeremy Malcolm ; governance at lists.igcaucus.org Sent: Saturday, January 19, 2013 1:41 AM Subject: AW: [governance] Coordinator election results Congratulations to Norbert, respect for Imran and thanks to Jeremy as the manager and Izumi as the outgoing co-chair. Great work. We are good positioned for the next challenges (WSIS 10+, WTPF, WTDC, IGF/MAG and UNCSDT WG on Enhanced Coooperation). And please Jeremy, keep going, and please Izumi, keep reporting. We need you. Wolfgang  ________________________________ Von: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org im Auftrag von Jeremy Malcolm Gesendet: Sa 19.01.2013 01:42 An: governance at lists.igcaucus.org Betreff: [governance] Coordinator election results The elections for the next co-coordinator of the IGC have just closed.  As this year's returning officer I am pleased to present the results. There were 129 people who commenced the survey.  One of them self-identified as not being a member of the Internet Governance Caucus, and one of them bailed out when asked that question.  This leaves 127 people who self-identified.  Of those, six people claimed that they had already voted in this year's election, so they were not offered the opportunity to vote again.  Of the remaining 121, 106 took that opportunity.. Both candidates polled well.  In the end, Imran Ahmed Shah came second with 45 votes in his favour.  Norbert Bollow came first with 61 votes. Congratulations Norbert, our new co-coordinator - and thanks to you too Imran.  I will post the full details to our website as soon as I get an opportunity, and with Sala and Izumi's position will brief Norbert on the technical aspects of his new role.  I will also update the list of voters on our website, and will consult with Sala about that. If anyone has any questions in the meantime, please let me know. -- Dr Jeremy Malcolm Senior Policy Officer Consumers International | the global campaigning voice for consumers Office for Asia-Pacific and the Middle East Lot 5-1 Wisma WIM, 7 Jalan Abang Haji Openg, TTDI, 60000 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia Tel: +60 3 7726 1599 Your rights, our mission - download CI's Strategy 2015: http://consint.info/RightsMission @Consumers_Int | www.consumersinternational.org   | www.facebook.com/consumersinternational Read our email confidentiality notice . Don't print this email unless necessary. ____________________________________________________________ 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: -------------- 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 From lehto.paul at gmail.com Sat Jan 19 14:06:37 2013 From: lehto.paul at gmail.com (Paul Lehto) Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2013 14:06:37 -0500 Subject: [governance] Bloomberg - The Overzealous Prosecution of Aaron Swartz In-Reply-To: References: <50FAC752.5090502@gmail.com> Message-ID: Perhaps some of the best evidence of prosecutorial overreach in the USA - generally speaking amongst all classes of alleged offenders - is the number of federal cases that actually go to trial versus the number resolved by plea bargains. Data available from US court administration agencies show quite clearly that the number of actual trials is dropping every year to a present vanishingly small percentage of cases. As a former litigator, this indicates fairly clearly to me that defendants and their attorneys perceive far too much risk in going to trial because the sentences and the average number of charges are so high, it makes taking a plea bargain for a ten or fifteen year sentence pretty darn attractive compared to rolling the dice and getting 35 years (a life sentence for many people not quite young) if found guilty at trial under the typically VERY broad statutes available in every area of the criminal law including the copyright "crimes" at issue in the Aaron Swartz case. This severe reduction in the number of criminal cases going to trial (something the defendant, by the way, has a constitutional right to) also indicates to me that a sizable percentage of people who are in fact not guilty are nevertheless pleading guilty because of the risks of trial (unless one can show that prosecutors have gotten much much better at charging only guilty people relative to prosecutors only ten years ago, which is a quite unlikely proposition). Although prosecutorial immunity is indeed a problem, and this immunity is often considered absolute or quasi-absolute when the activity in question is the filing of charges or things that take place in court, not all actions of prosecutors are so immune. A somewhat lower standard applies when prosecutors act in an investigatory function. If a complaint can be styled regarding the improper investigation of a charged crime and it can be shown that the prosecutor was directing the investigation (which they usually do, provided they are involved at that point) then there is a better chance of making a claim. But here, note that the prosecutor's choice to file overzealous charges in court would still be subject to the near-absolute immunity standard. Paul Lehto, J.D. On Sat, Jan 19, 2013 at 1:16 PM, John Curran wrote: > On Jan 19, 2013, at 6:18 AM, Riaz K Tayob wrote: > > [The Panglossian world of US Exceptionalism.... of course these matters > are discussed and debated, but dare to do anything about it and then those > will be put in their place, or no?] > > > The Overzealous Prosecution of Aaron Swartz > By Stephen L. Carter Jan > 18, 2013 1:30 AM GMT+0200 > > ... > > > Riaz - > > A very good question; I personally don't subscribe to a view of US > Exceptionalism > (that's likely because I've travelled a bit and can more readily make > comparisons), > but do see a system that excels at incremental improvement. In this > particular > case, I do believe that the particular statute used in Swartz's > prosecution will be > amended to be more reasonable (see my earlier ICG posting reference to > Time's > article on same by Sam Gustin) > > Regarding the larger question raised by Carter's article, it is a > bit more complex than > depicted, since lowering the qualified immunity for prosecutors (as a way > of raising the > threshold to pursue cases), may also, if not very carefully done, > incidentally raise the > threshold for being able to _drop a case_ (i.e. the potential result where > some form > of conviction must be obtained less the prosecutor face increased personal > liability) > Change in this area would definitely benefit from informed discourse, and > to the extent > that one can claim that happens among US lawmakers, then perhaps someday > there > will be some productive outcome on this larger question as well... > > FYI, > /John > > Disclaimers: My personal views alone. No pursuit of action against > anyone is intended > by this email; parties feeling overly prosecuted as a result should seek > medical care for > potential mental health issues. > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > -- Paul R Lehto, J.D. P.O. Box 1 Ishpeming, MI 49849 lehto.paul at gmail.com 906-204-4965 (cell) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From riaz.tayob at gmail.com Sat Jan 19 14:16:15 2013 From: riaz.tayob at gmail.com (riaz.tayob at gmail.com) Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2013 21:16:15 +0200 Subject: [governance] Bloomberg - The Overzealous Prosecution of Aaron Swartz In-Reply-To: References: <50FAC752.5090502@gmail.com> Message-ID: Overall, as in patent law, the US has not been able to resolve the tensions between the new and dynamic ict sector and the old industries like pharma and Hollywood... And this plays out in various fora... This has been going for ages and the 'can do' incremental changes have been stuck in a dialectical cul de sac for a while... And power then is determinant rather that a predictable principle or approach... On prosecutorial immunity, that is difficult to judge for me... What is worrying about the case though is that reform actions are treated this way... And to have a university behind it at that... ...,... On 19 Jan 2013, at 8:16 PM, John Curran wrote: > On Jan 19, 2013, at 6:18 AM, Riaz K Tayob wrote: > >> [The Panglossian world of US Exceptionalism.... of course these matters are discussed and debated, but dare to do anything about it and then those will be put in their place, or no?] >> >> The Overzealous Prosecution of Aaron Swartz >> By Stephen L. Carter Jan 18, 2013 1:30 AM GMT+0200 >> ... > > > Riaz - > > A very good question; I personally don't subscribe to a view of US Exceptionalism > (that's likely because I've travelled a bit and can more readily make comparisons), > but do see a system that excels at incremental improvement. In this particular > case, I do believe that the particular statute used in Swartz's prosecution will be > amended to be more reasonable (see my earlier ICG posting reference to Time's > article on same by Sam Gustin) > > Regarding the larger question raised by Carter's article, it is a bit more complex than > depicted, since lowering the qualified immunity for prosecutors (as a way of raising the > threshold to pursue cases), may also, if not very carefully done, incidentally raise the > threshold for being able to _drop a case_ (i.e. the potential result where some form > of conviction must be obtained less the prosecutor face increased personal liability) > Change in this area would definitely benefit from informed discourse, and to the extent > that one can claim that happens among US lawmakers, then perhaps someday there > will be some productive outcome on this larger question as well... > > FYI, > /John > > Disclaimers: My personal views alone. No pursuit of action against anyone is intended > by this email; parties feeling overly prosecuted as a result should seek medical care for > potential mental health issues. > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From shailam at yahoo.com Sat Jan 19 14:32:53 2013 From: shailam at yahoo.com (shaila mistry) Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2013 11:32:53 -0800 (PST) Subject: [governance] Notice to the IGC on Proposed Charter Amendments In-Reply-To: <675E6D8C-1408-4724-A3B3-107B7F807F07@acm.org> References: <50F38F8E.3090106@ciroap.org> <50F3B31B.4090406@itforchange.net> <50F3B423.1070901@ciroap.org> <50F3B544.3080409@itforchange.net> <1FC731B2-FE70-41AC-B97D-52979AFFAE05@uzh.ch> <1358157197.55375.YahooMailNeo@web125106.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <020a01cdf283$98dfbe10$ca9f3a30$@gmail.com> <20130114212217.7f43bbc9@quill.bollow.ch> <1358227661.77969.YahooMailNeo@web125105.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <735AC965-1DFD-4A66-BFF6-3E828E71D72E@ciroap.org> <20130118165547.472e8ec7@quill.bollow.ch> <675E6D8C-1408-4724-A3B3-107B7F807F07@acm.org> Message-ID: <1358623973.38250.YahooMailNeo@web160504.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> Can the coordinator  please  re-post the final version of the proposals for the three amendments. We have had a fair amount of dissection so it would be helpful to get a clean version. Many thanks  Shaila   The journey begins sooner than you anticipate ! ..................... the renaissance of composure ! ________________________________ From: Avri Doria To: IGC Sent: Saturday, January 19, 2013 8:54 AM Subject: Re: [governance] Notice to the IGC on Proposed Charter Amendments Hi, Have the amendments that I co-proposed been lost. I am totally confused about what is going on with this process.  I do not know what 1, 2, 3 are.  Is on line somewhere? Is the vote to wait until every amendment everyone has ever wanted also gets discussed and put on the ballot? avri On 18 Jan 2013, at 10:55, Norbert Bollow wrote: > Hi Jeremy > > In addition there's the amendments proposal by Avri from the > thread "Suggested amendment for the charter. Nomcom." with more than > ten co-proposers. > > Greetings, > Norbert > > Am Fri, 18 Jan 2013 20:32:58 +0800 > schrieb Jeremy Malcolm : > >> I almost let this slip.  Sala asked me to call the charter amendment >> poll by today, unless we need more time for discussion.  So let's >> just confirm, are we ready to call a poll on any or all of these >> proposed amendments?  I think I have the latest/preferred text for >> each below, but correct me if I'm wrong: >> >> 1. On selection of coordinators, add after "As part of the voting >> process the voter must personally ascertain that they are a member of >> the IGC based on membership criteria described elsewhere in this >> charter and posted as part of the voting information (i.e. a voter >> must affirm membership on the voter form in order to vote)." >> >> ...this text... >> >> "Prior to voting the prospective voter must personally ascertain that >> they are a member of the IGC based on membership criteria described >> elsewhere in this charter and posted as part of the voting >> information (i.e. a voter must affirm membership on the voter form >> prior to voting)." >> >> ...then it continues as at present, "The decision to self-identify as >> a member of the IGC is a personal decision based on the criteria >> defined. A list of the self-defined member-voters will be published >> after the election with the results of the election", then another >> new addition... >> >> "All ballots will include the ability for voters to abstain on any >> choice included on the ballot." >> >> 2. Under "Selection of Coordinators", regarding when elections are >> held, change "by midsummer (the summer solstice) to "by the end of >> that calendar year".  Also in "If events prevent an election by >> midsummer, it will be held as soon after midsummer as possible," >> change the word "midsummer" to "then" in both places. >> >> 3. Under "Working methods", update the address of the mailing list >> from governance at lists.cpsr.org to governance at lists.igcaucus.org. >> > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 ____________________________________________________________ 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: -------------- 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 From riaz.tayob at gmail.com Sat Jan 19 14:49:07 2013 From: riaz.tayob at gmail.com (Riaz K Tayob) Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2013 21:49:07 +0200 Subject: [governance] =?WINDOWS-1252?Q?Remembering_Aaron_Swartz=2C_=93Alph?= =?WINDOWS-1252?Q?a_Geek=94_and_Defender_of_Online_Freedom_-_US_systemical?= =?WINDOWS-1252?Q?ly_corrupt=2E=2E=2E?= Message-ID: <50FAF8B3.2000102@gmail.com> Snip: He once wrote me: My core argument is that the problem with our government is not specific misdeeds but systemic corruption. Thus pointing out problems with specific Congresspeople—whether through wiki pages, pop-up windows, or campaign finance data—is going to be ineffective, perhaps even counterproductive, because every time you whack at a corruption scandal over here, a dozen more will pop up over there, and interested people will burn out from the impossibility of the task. The problem is not that Congressman X takes money from the credit card companies and votes for the bankruptcy bill; the problem is that he has to do that to get elected. Forcing him to stop will just force him to be more subtle about it, just as each new campaign finance reform bill sprouts more loopholes. Structural fixes are needed to solve the system problem; fixes like Clean Elections, more independent media, and a more democratic citizenry. Remembering Aaron Swartz, “Alpha Geek” and Defender of Online Freedom Aaron Swartz took his own life at the age of 26, after years of legal trouble over academic articles he downloaded and intended to share. He leaves behind a legacy of thinking about the power of the internet to shape our political lives. by Micah L. Sifry posted Jan 17, 2013 This article was originally published at TechPresident.com . / Aaron Swartz Photo by Daniel J. Sieradski . / // //Aaron is dead.// Wanderers in this crazy world, we have lost a mentor, a wise elder. Hackers for right, we are one down, we have lost one of our own. Nurtures, careers, listeners, feeders, parents all, we have lost a child. Let us all weep. —Sir Tim Berners Lee, January 11, 2013 Aaron worked closely on the early architecting of Creative Commons, an immense gift to all kinds of sharing of culture. Aaron Swartz, a leading activist for open information, internet freedom, and democracy, died at his own hand Friday January 11. He was 26 years old. There is no single comprehensive list of his good works, but here are some of them: At the age of 14 he co-authored the RSS 1.0 spec—taking brilliant advantage of the fact that internet working groups didn't care if someone was 14, they only cared if their code worked. Then he met Larry Lessig and worked closely with him on the early architecting of Creative Commons, an immense gift to all kinds of sharing of culture. He also was the architect and first coder of the Internet Archive's OpenLibrary.org, which now has made more than one million books freely available to anyone with an internet connection. "We couldn't have come this far without his crucial expertise," Open Library says on its about page . He also co-founded Reddit.com, the social news site, and Demand Progress, an online progressive action group that played a vital role in the anti-SOPA/PIPA fight. He also contributed occasionally to Personal Democracy Forum, writing this article on why wikis work and this essay on "parpolity " or the idea that nested councils of elected representatives could be used to represent a whole country, for our 2008 book, Rebooting America. He was a fellow traveler. Aaron also made gifts of websites the way others might make a friend a plate of brownies. One of his lesser-known legacies, in fact, is a do-it-yourself web platform called Jottit.com, which he built to make it as a simple as possible for anyone to create and publish their own site—or, as he put it, "as easy as filling in a textbox." On it, you can read his explanation on how to become someone like him , a self-made, self-taught disturber of the peace. We first met in the fall of 2004, when he was 18. I was in San Francisco for a conference and went downtown one evening with my smarter little brother David, who was hosting a Technorati developers hackathon. The idea was to get people working with Technorati's API. At the beginning of the meeting, I spoke up and said that I was looking for someone who could hack together a directory showing which members of Congress were currently most being mentioned or linked to on blogs. I offered $100 cash to anyone who felt like taking on the challenge. Moments later, there was Aaron, with an impish grin on his face: "I think I can do that." Two hours later, he was done. He was a wizard. Aaron several times wrote blog posts arguing that open data and government transparency weren't enoumgh to make things change for the better. Two years later, we crossed paths in Boston. The Sunlight Foundation, which we had just helped get started earlier that year, was hosting a party for the Wikimania conference, and several of us went out for Indian food together. If memory serves, Aaron was on some crazy diet, limiting his calorie intake to somehow increase his life expectancy. It doesn't matter now. What I do remember more clearly is that it was the start of an attempt at a formal working relationship between Sunlight and Aaron, since his interest in open information as a force for good seemed in close alignment with Sunlight's vision. That relationship led to a six-month grant for him to develop Watchdog.net, a noble but incomplete effort at merging campaign finance data with lobbyist information to find the intersections where a lobbyist's intervention appeared to match with an earmark or other special congressional favor. We never quite saw eye-to-eye about how best to reform or transform politics, and Aaron several times wrote critical blog posts arguing that open data and government transparency weren't enough to make things change for the better. We'd go back and forth by email after each of these posts. He once wrote me: My core argument is that the problem with our government is not specific misdeeds but systemic corruption. Thus pointing out problems with specific Congresspeople—whether through wiki pages, pop-up windows, or campaign finance data—is going to be ineffective, perhaps even counterproductive, because every time you whack at a corruption scandal over here, a dozen more will pop up over there, and interested people will burn out from the impossibility of the task. The problem is not that Congressman X takes money from the credit card companies and votes for the bankruptcy bill; the problem is that he has to do that to get elected. Forcing him to stop will just force him to be more subtle about it, just as each new campaign finance reform bill sprouts more loopholes. Structural fixes are needed to solve the system problem; fixes like Clean Elections, more independent media, and a more democratic citizenry. This doesn't mean that forcing him to stop is a bad thing—if you have to spend resources on individualized projects like this, it's better than not spending them at all. But why constrain yourself in this way? Why not harness the power of the Internet to work on the larger-scale problems? Think bigger, - Aaron This isn't the place to go back over those arguments; they're moot. The point is that that was Aaron—pushing everyone he knew to do more with what they had. I don't know where he got the bug, but I understood it. If you have "change the world" disease, there is only one cure. And he tried mightily to change the world using every tool at his disposal, as Cory Doctorow eloquently wrote on BoingBoing , even if it meant being an outspoken critic of allies and mentors. And that was fine. An icon smasher, he twice took on the content cartel; first in 2009 by releasing a trove of legal documents from the PACER database of U.S. federal court documents, for which all charges were dropped; and a second time in 2011, when he set up a server in an MIT closet and downloaded about 4 million academic documents from the J-STOR library, for which he was charged with wire fraud and computer fraud and faced a potential sentence of up to 30 years. He was arrested on January 6, 2011, just over two years before he took his life. Lessig, one of his closest friends and mentors, writes on his blog that Aaron was fighting to get the government to drop the felony charges—no doubt because he didn't believe he had caused anyone any harm; besides J-STOR itself had declined to press charges. Lessig: For in the 18 months of negotiations, that was what he was not willing to accept, and so that was the reason he was facing a million dollar trial in April—his wealth bled dry, yet unable to appeal openly to us for the financial help he needed to fund his defense, at least without risking the ire of a district court judge. And so as wrong and misguided and fucking sad as this is, I get how the prospect of this fight, defenseless, made it make sense to this brilliant but troubled boy to end it. If coders are the unacknowledged legislators of our new digital age, then Aaron was our Thomas Paine—an alpha geek who didn't use his skills just to get more people to click on ads, but tried to figure out how to change the system at the deepest levels available to him. He accomplished much in his 26 years, but he had so much more promise. Aaron's parents Robert and Susan Swartz, and partner Taren Stinebrickner-Kauffman, have set up this memorial website for him. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Micah L. Sifry is a co-founder executive editor of the Personal Democracy Forum , which covers the ways technology is changing politics. Sifry was also a writer and former editor for The Nation magazine for thirteen years. He is the author or editor of four books, the most recent being Is That a Politician in Your Pocket? , written with Nancy Watzman. His personal blog is at micah.sifry.com. This article was originally published at TechPresident.com where Sifry is a frequent blogger. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image Type: image/jpeg Size: 40427 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- 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 From riaz.tayob at gmail.com Sat Jan 19 14:45:35 2013 From: riaz.tayob at gmail.com (Riaz K Tayob) Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2013 21:45:35 +0200 Subject: [governance] Bloomberg - The Overzealous Prosecution of Aaron Swartz In-Reply-To: References: <50FAC752.5090502@gmail.com> Message-ID: <50FAF7DF.7000607@gmail.com> Thanks for this info, very interesting take... If one looks at what Bush tried to do for BigPharma - it was to reduce liability for safety of their patented products. So "immunity" can move in multiple directions... including like 3 strikes for ISPs etc... which plays out again the old industries vs the new... riaz On 2013/01/19 09:06 PM, Paul Lehto wrote: > gotten much much better at charging only guilty people relative to > prosecutors only ten years ago, which is a quite unlikely proposition). > > Although prosecutorial immunity is indeed a problem, and this immunity > is often considered absolute or quasi-absolute when the activity in > question is the filing of charges or things that take place in court, > not all actions of prosecutors are so immune. A somewhat lower > standard applies when prosecutors act in an investigatory function. > If a complaint can be styled regarding the improper investigation of a > charged crime and it can be shown that the prosecutor was directing > the investigation (which they usually do, provided they are involved > at that point) then there is a better chance of making a claim. But > here, note that the prosecutor's choice to file overzealous charges in > court would still be subject to the near-absolute immunity standard. -------------- 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 From suresh at hserus.net Sat Jan 19 16:27:25 2013 From: suresh at hserus.net (Suresh Ramasubramanian) Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2013 02:57:25 +0530 Subject: [governance] Aaron Swartz - a bit of a meta reply Message-ID: Hi again (especially, greetings Riaz) Is there anything relevant that we can bring from this unfortunate incident into the igov arena, or vice versa? Lessons that igov can learn from the situation, or that it can contribute? Preferably, i would appreciate an answer that avoids the use of the usual cliches such as "exceptionalism", political positioning or characterization of this as a north vs south issue. In some countries of the south the poor fellow would have faced custodial torture, judges and prosecutors whose only exposure to computers is gmail and ms office, at best .. so please let us not get into that, I agree with paul in his recent post, that prosecutorial immunity here is absolute, with the only caveat that US attorneys are elected / appointed and can be removed by the president, while assistant US attorneys are civil servants. Any sanctions against the US attorney Ms Ortiz would be balanced against her previous track record of successfully putting behind bars several politicians and city officials for corruption and bribery. The assistant US attorneys on her staff who pushed for wire fraud charges and a plea bargain, if sanctioned for mishandling this case, would at the most end up facing administrative sanctions nd/or being reassigned to other cases where their aggressiveness may be more appropriate. Prosecution, Trial and sentencing guidelines in computer crime cases will definitely evolve. Changing the actual laws in question may not be appropriate, given that most computer crime in this day is carried out by gangs with ties to organized crime, and is unorecedented in the number of victims affected and the quantum of loss that they face. This case has been going on since several months and I have heard multiple people say that civil society has actually failed Aaron, first by encouraging him into committing an act of Gandhian civil disobedience, perhaps not even expecting federal charges to be slapped on him for whst could have been tried in a local magistrates court as petty trespass, especially not expecting MIT, with its famed ethos, to prosecute, and then not giving him the massive amount of support he would need both as someone facing a protracted trial in federal court and the even more onerous trial of mental depression. Mahatma Gandhi faced decades in prison, being charged by riot police etc during his struggle. Aaron, being human and even more vulnerable by having his will sapped by depression, had neither the popular support when he was alive, nor the fortitude Gandhi had to bear the suffering imposed on him. --srs (iPad) -------------- 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 From ian.peter at ianpeter.com Sat Jan 19 18:46:29 2013 From: ian.peter at ianpeter.com (Ian Peter) Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2013 10:46:29 +1100 Subject: [governance] Appeals Team - Call for Comments and Interim Findings In-Reply-To: References: <99B5B12AE95441728A797F79FC884BD5@Toshiba> <50FA8510.1080301@itforchange.net> Message-ID: <14ECDC4BA301492286F329A009BC0A46@Toshiba> Thanks everyone for the comments, both on list and off list. We are now preparing our final report, which is likely to contain a few relevant recommendations. That might take a couple of days to finalise. Ian Peter -----Original Message----- From: Avri Doria Sent: Sunday, January 20, 2013 3:50 AM To: IGC Subject: Re: [governance] Appeals Team - Call for Comments and Interim Findings On 19 Jan 2013, at 06:35, parminder wrote: > > A few comments for the consideration of the appeals team. Although an id > to send these comments directly to the appeals commitee is provided, I > much prefer to make this comments publicly. > > 1. I think Suresh should be reinstated immediately because the conditions > of his 'removal from the list' are not met. On this we agree. > > 2. However, I will caution the appeals team against summarily overturning > a decision of a co-coordinator merely on technical grounds without making > any comments whatsoever on the substantive issues involved. The problem is > that there very often isnt a strict meeting of all the required provisions > for so many activities of the IGC. For instance, even for the current > Noncom process for selection of MAG nominees, it is an indisputable fact > that all the laid down technical conditions for setting up the nomcom were > not met. Does it mean that if 4 people were to appeal against the setting > up of the nomcom, the decision to set up the nomcom, and its subsequent > outputs will be struck down? Seems reasonable to me. They would then have to decide whether they thought that the Coordinator(s) had sufficient popular support for the change and that it had been properly discussed on the list. They would have something to weigh it against. I think the technicalities are sufficient cause for an appeal and that they should prevail unless there is proof that some process intervened. This case, any case of a coordinator going against the charter without proper list discussion before doing so, should be remedied. > > 3. In the case of Suresh, technical conditions of 'removal from the list' > may not have been met. But a point for the appeals committee to make a > judgement on also is 'whether conditions of suspension from the list are > met or not'. Because, in practical terms, if Suresh is to be reinstated > within a month, the action of co-coordinator has, till now, only amounted > to his suspension from the list. It may not be right for the appeal > committee to take too narrow a construction of the fact that the > co-coordinator pronounced the decision of 'removal from the list', and > simply judge it as wrong, doing nothing more. The committee needs to > address, and judge, the context fully of the efforts of the co-coodinator > to impose the necessary minimum decorum and orderliness on the elist in > this particular case, and corresponding the conduct of the member against > whom the 'removal' decision was given. Certainly, but only in the case that the community of the IGC was included. > > 4. Accordingly, if on substance, and not merely on technical grounds, the > disciplining efforts of the co-coordinator are found appropriate, the > merit of the intent of her decision may still be salvaged by turning the > 'removal' decision to 'suspension' decision, whereby Suresh is immediately > put back on the list. I disagree. I support the appeals team using extenuating circumstance and list discussion to go beyond the charter. I do not accept them substituting their views on the substance for the charter. > > parminder avri ____________________________________________________________ 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From suresh at hserus.net Sat Jan 19 20:20:11 2013 From: suresh at hserus.net (=?utf-8?B?U3VyZXNoIFJhbWFzdWJyYW1hbmlhbg==?=) Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2013 06:50:11 +0530 Subject: [governance] Appeals Team - Call for Comments and Interim Findings Message-ID: I thank the appeals team for their efforts to bring clarity to this situation --srs (htc one x) ----- Reply message ----- From: "Ian Peter" To: "IGC" Subject: [governance] Appeals Team - Call for Comments and Interim Findings Date: Sun, Jan 20, 2013 5:16 AM Thanks everyone for the comments, both on list and off list. We are now preparing our final report, which is likely to contain a few relevant recommendations. That might take a couple of days to finalise. Ian Peter -----Original Message----- From: Avri Doria Sent: Sunday, January 20, 2013 3:50 AM To: IGC Subject: Re: [governance] Appeals Team - Call for Comments and Interim Findings On 19 Jan 2013, at 06:35, parminder wrote: > > A few comments for the consideration of the appeals team. Although an id > to send these comments directly to the appeals commitee is provided, I > much prefer to make this comments publicly. > > 1. I think Suresh should be reinstated immediately because the conditions > of his 'removal from the list' are not met. On this we agree. > > 2. However, I will caution the appeals team against summarily overturning > a decision of a co-coordinator merely on technical grounds without making > any comments whatsoever on the substantive issues involved. The problem is > that there very often isnt a strict meeting of all the required provisions > for so many activities of the IGC. For instance, even for the current > Noncom process for selection of MAG nominees, it is an indisputable fact > that all the laid down technical conditions for setting up the nomcom were > not met. Does it mean that if 4 people were to appeal against the setting > up of the nomcom, the decision to set up the nomcom, and its subsequent > outputs will be struck down? Seems reasonable to me. They would then have to decide whether they thought that the Coordinator(s) had sufficient popular support for the change and that it had been properly discussed on the list. They would have something to weigh it against. I think the technicalities are sufficient cause for an appeal and that they should prevail unless there is proof that some process intervened. This case, any case of a coordinator going against the charter without proper list discussion before doing so, should be remedied. > > 3. In the case of Suresh, technical conditions of 'removal from the list' > may not have been met. But a point for the appeals committee to make a > judgement on also is 'whether conditions of suspension from the list are > met or not'. Because, in practical terms, if Suresh is to be reinstated > within a month, the action of co-coordinator has, till now, only amounted > to his suspension from the list. It may not be right for the appeal > committee to take too narrow a construction of the fact that the > co-coordinator pronounced the decision of 'removal from the list', and > simply judge it as wrong, doing nothing more. The committee needs to > address, and judge, the context fully of the efforts of the co-coodinator > to impose the necessary minimum decorum and orderliness on the elist in > this particular case, and corresponding the conduct of the member against > whom the 'removal' decision was given. Certainly, but only in the case that the community of the IGC was included. > > 4. Accordingly, if on substance, and not merely on technical grounds, the > disciplining efforts of the co-coordinator are found appropriate, the > merit of the intent of her decision may still be salvaged by turning the > 'removal' decision to 'suspension' decision, whereby Suresh is immediately > put back on the list. I disagree. I support the appeals team using extenuating circumstance and list discussion to go beyond the charter. I do not accept them substituting their views on the substance for the charter. > > parminder avri ____________________________________________________________ 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: -------------- 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 From parminder at itforchange.net Sat Jan 19 22:55:19 2013 From: parminder at itforchange.net (parminder) Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2013 09:25:19 +0530 Subject: [governance] Appeals Team - Call for Comments and Interim Findings In-Reply-To: References: <99B5B12AE95441728A797F79FC884BD5@Toshiba> <50FA8510.1080301@itforchange.net> Message-ID: <50FB6AA7.6030301@itforchange.net> On Saturday 19 January 2013 10:20 PM, Avri Doria wrote: > On 19 Jan 2013, at 06:35, parminder wrote: > > 2. However, I will caution the appeals team against summarily overturning a decision of a co-coordinator merely on technical grounds without making any comments whatsoever on the substantive issues involved. The problem is that there very often isnt a strict meeting of all the required provisions for so many activities of the IGC. For instance, even for the current Noncom process for selection of MAG nominees, it is an indisputable fact that all the laid down technical conditions for setting up the nomcom were not met. Does it mean that if 4 people were to appeal against the setting up of the nomcom, the decision to set up the nomcom, and its subsequent outputs will be struck down? > Seems reasonable to me. There is absolutely no doubt that at least some technical requirements of setting up the nomcom were not met. If nothing else, the one month time period and so on (whether there were attenuating circumstances or mere oversight or whatever, which factors should also be commented upon by any appeals committee).... So, are you saying that since such technical deficiencies are certainly there in the process of setting up the present nomcom, the appeals team should 1. strike down the decision of setting up the nomcom, and along with it 2. all substantive outputs from the nomcom, whereby we will have to write to UNDESA withdrawing the list of IGC nominees for the MAG which the nomcom is expected to send today. I do not agree with doing this... Accordingly. I am seeking an equivalent procedure to be applied by the appeals committee in the case of the coordinator's decision of 'removal from list' of a member, whereby there is a separate judgement on the technicalities of the decision making process, and on its substantive output/ outcome, and how the two can possibly be reconciled. parminder > > They would then have to decide whether they thought that the Coordinator(s) had sufficient popular support for the change and that it had been properly discussed on the list. They would have something to weigh it against. > > I think the technicalities are sufficient cause for an appeal and that they should prevail unless there is proof that some process intervened. This case, any case of a coordinator going against the charter without proper list discussion before doing so, should be remedied. > >> 3. In the case of Suresh, technical conditions of 'removal from the list' may not have been met. But a point for the appeals committee to make a judgement on also is 'whether conditions of suspension from the list are met or not'. Because, in practical terms, if Suresh is to be reinstated within a month, the action of co-coordinator has, till now, only amounted to his suspension from the list. It may not be right for the appeal committee to take too narrow a construction of the fact that the co-coordinator pronounced the decision of 'removal from the list', and simply judge it as wrong, doing nothing more. The committee needs to address, and judge, the context fully of the efforts of the co-coodinator to impose the necessary minimum decorum and orderliness on the elist in this particular case, and corresponding the conduct of the member against whom the 'removal' decision was given. > Certainly, but only in the case that the community of the IGC was included. > >> 4. Accordingly, if on substance, and not merely on technical grounds, the disciplining efforts of the co-coordinator are found appropriate, the merit of the intent of her decision may still be salvaged by turning the 'removal' decision to 'suspension' decision, whereby Suresh is immediately put back on the list. > I disagree. I support the appeals team using extenuating circumstance and list discussion to go beyond the charter. I do not accept them substituting their views on the substance for the charter. > >> parminder > avri > > -------------- 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 From suresh at hserus.net Sat Jan 19 23:28:32 2013 From: suresh at hserus.net (Suresh Ramasubramanian) Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2013 09:58:32 +0530 Subject: [governance] Appeals Team - Call for Comments and Interim Findings In-Reply-To: <50FB6AA7.6030301@itforchange.net> References: <99B5B12AE95441728A797F79FC884BD5@Toshiba> <50FA8510.1080301@itforchange.net> <50FB6AA7.6030301@itforchange.net> Message-ID: Unfortunately Parminder, the point you are making, however sophistically presented, is moot. In case you missed avri's point .. 4 people appeal and it is referred to an appeals committee, which, I sincerely hope, tends to consider the issue from a broader perspective than merely nitpicking on the bylaws of the IGC. Like, on the subject of the MAG, we have here, in my personal opinion, as pragmatic a solution as could be found in the short time possible.. and I hope we agree that this is an exceptional case, which we must be prepared to anticipate and prevent from recurring during the next time we are expected to select a MAG. Noteithstanding my above opinion, if four members of this caucus were to object to some aspect of this current process, yes it would go before the appeals committee. Presumably the objection would have been voiced much earlier given the extensive discussion and, ultimately, a degree of consensus, that took place on this issue. In the case of removing members from the list, I won't comment further than to say that sufficient members apparently disagreed with the coordinator's decision, to trigger the appeals process, and the appeals team reached a decision to reinstate. Speaking for myself, I remain opposed to political maneuvring and anti Americanism largely substituting for actual Internet governance related discussion on this list, and hope that this situation changes sufficiently for productive discussions on actual igov issues to resume without continuing to be vitiated by individual agendas. --srs (iPad) On 20-Jan-2013, at 9:25, parminder wrote: > > On Saturday 19 January 2013 10:20 PM, Avri Doria wrote: >> On 19 Jan 2013, at 06:35, parminder wrote: >> >> 2. However, I will caution the appeals team against summarily overturning a decision of a co-coordinator merely on technical grounds without making any comments whatsoever on the substantive issues involved. The problem is that there very often isnt a strict meeting of all the required provisions for so many activities of the IGC. For instance, even for the current Noncom process for selection of MAG nominees, it is an indisputable fact that all the laid down technical conditions for setting up the nomcom were not met. Does it mean that if 4 people were to appeal against the setting up of the nomcom, the decision to set up the nomcom, and its subsequent outputs will be struck down? >> Seems reasonable to me. > > There is absolutely no doubt that at least some technical requirements of setting up the nomcom were not met. If nothing else, the one month time period and so on (whether there were attenuating circumstances or mere oversight or whatever, which factors should also be commented upon by any appeals committee).... > > So, are you saying that since such technical deficiencies are certainly there in the process of setting up the present nomcom, the appeals team should > > 1. strike down the decision of setting up the nomcom, and along with it > 2. all substantive outputs from the nomcom, whereby we will have to write to UNDESA withdrawing the list of IGC nominees for the MAG which the nomcom is expected to send today. > > I do not agree with doing this... > > Accordingly. I am seeking an equivalent procedure to be applied by the appeals committee in the case of the coordinator's decision of 'removal from list' of a member, whereby there is a separate judgement on the technicalities of the decision making process, and on its substantive output/ outcome, and how the two can possibly be reconciled. > > parminder > >> >> They would then have to decide whether they thought that the Coordinator(s) had sufficient popular support for the change and that it had been properly discussed on the list. They would have something to weigh it against. >> >> I think the technicalities are sufficient cause for an appeal and that they should prevail unless there is proof that some process intervened. This case, any case of a coordinator going against the charter without proper list discussion before doing so, should be remedied. >> >>> 3. In the case of Suresh, technical conditions of 'removal from the list' may not have been met. But a point for the appeals committee to make a judgement on also is 'whether conditions of suspension from the list are met or not'. Because, in practical terms, if Suresh is to be reinstated within a month, the action of co-coordinator has, till now, only amounted to his suspension from the list. It may not be right for the appeal committee to take too narrow a construction of the fact that the co-coordinator pronounced the decision of 'removal from the list', and simply judge it as wrong, doing nothing more. The committee needs to address, and judge, the context fully of the efforts of the co-coodinator to impose the necessary minimum decorum and orderliness on the elist in this particular case, and corresponding the conduct of the member against whom the 'removal' decision was given. >> Certainly, but only in the case that the community of the IGC was included. >> >>> 4. Accordingly, if on substance, and not merely on technical grounds, the disciplining efforts of the co-coordinator are found appropriate, the merit of the intent of her decision may still be salvaged by turning the 'removal' decision to 'suspension' decision, whereby Suresh is immediately put back on the list. >> I disagree. I support the appeals team using extenuating circumstance and list discussion to go beyond the charter. I do not accept them substituting their views on the substance for the charter. >> >>> parminder >> avri > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From parminder at itforchange.net Sun Jan 20 00:09:07 2013 From: parminder at itforchange.net (parminder) Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2013 10:39:07 +0530 Subject: [governance] Appeals Team - Call for Comments and Interim Findings In-Reply-To: References: <99B5B12AE95441728A797F79FC884BD5@Toshiba> <50FA8510.1080301@itforchange.net> <50FB6AA7.6030301@itforchange.net> Message-ID: <50FB7BF3.30209@itforchange.net> On Sunday 20 January 2013 09:58 AM, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote: > Unfortunately Parminder, the point you are making, however sophistically presented, is moot. > > In case you missed avri's point .. 4 people appeal and it is referred to an appeals committee, which, I sincerely hope, tends to consider the issue from a broader perspective than merely nitpicking on the bylaws of the IGC. And perhaps you have missed the point that I have asked for nothing more from the appeals team - other than to take a fuller/ broader perspective with regard to the coordinator's decision to remove a member from the list, and not just go by technicalities (which are independently quite important)... > Like, on the subject of the MAG, we have here, in my personal opinion, as pragmatic a solution as could be found in the short time possible.. Which would make it rather strange that you expressly supported Avri's assertion calling the setting up of the present nomcom process as an 'abuse of process' and seconded her appeal for review of the decision. parminder > and I hope we agree that this is an exceptional case, which we must be prepared to anticipate and prevent from recurring during the next time we are expected to select a MAG. > > Noteithstanding my above opinion, if four members of this caucus were to object to some aspect of this current process, yes it would go before the appeals committee. Presumably the objection would have been voiced much earlier given the extensive discussion and, ultimately, a degree of consensus, that took place on this issue. > > In the case of removing members from the list, I won't comment further than to say that sufficient members apparently disagreed with the coordinator's decision, to trigger the appeals process, and the appeals team reached a decision to reinstate. > > Speaking for myself, I remain opposed to political maneuvring and anti Americanism largely substituting for actual Internet governance related discussion on this list, and hope that this situation changes sufficiently for productive discussions on actual igov issues to resume without continuing to be vitiated by individual agendas. > > --srs (iPad) > > On 20-Jan-2013, at 9:25, parminder wrote: > >> On Saturday 19 January 2013 10:20 PM, Avri Doria wrote: >>> On 19 Jan 2013, at 06:35, parminder wrote: >>> >>> 2. However, I will caution the appeals team against summarily overturning a decision of a co-coordinator merely on technical grounds without making any comments whatsoever on the substantive issues involved. The problem is that there very often isnt a strict meeting of all the required provisions for so many activities of the IGC. For instance, even for the current Noncom process for selection of MAG nominees, it is an indisputable fact that all the laid down technical conditions for setting up the nomcom were not met. Does it mean that if 4 people were to appeal against the setting up of the nomcom, the decision to set up the nomcom, and its subsequent outputs will be struck down? >>> Seems reasonable to me. >> There is absolutely no doubt that at least some technical requirements of setting up the nomcom were not met. If nothing else, the one month time period and so on (whether there were attenuating circumstances or mere oversight or whatever, which factors should also be commented upon by any appeals committee).... >> >> So, are you saying that since such technical deficiencies are certainly there in the process of setting up the present nomcom, the appeals team should >> >> 1. strike down the decision of setting up the nomcom, and along with it >> 2. all substantive outputs from the nomcom, whereby we will have to write to UNDESA withdrawing the list of IGC nominees for the MAG which the nomcom is expected to send today. >> >> I do not agree with doing this... >> >> Accordingly. I am seeking an equivalent procedure to be applied by the appeals committee in the case of the coordinator's decision of 'removal from list' of a member, whereby there is a separate judgement on the technicalities of the decision making process, and on its substantive output/ outcome, and how the two can possibly be reconciled. >> >> parminder >> >>> They would then have to decide whether they thought that the Coordinator(s) had sufficient popular support for the change and that it had been properly discussed on the list. They would have something to weigh it against. >>> >>> I think the technicalities are sufficient cause for an appeal and that they should prevail unless there is proof that some process intervened. This case, any case of a coordinator going against the charter without proper list discussion before doing so, should be remedied. >>> >>>> 3. In the case of Suresh, technical conditions of 'removal from the list' may not have been met. But a point for the appeals committee to make a judgement on also is 'whether conditions of suspension from the list are met or not'. Because, in practical terms, if Suresh is to be reinstated within a month, the action of co-coordinator has, till now, only amounted to his suspension from the list. It may not be right for the appeal committee to take too narrow a construction of the fact that the co-coordinator pronounced the decision of 'removal from the list', and simply judge it as wrong, doing nothing more. The committee needs to address, and judge, the context fully of the efforts of the co-coodinator to impose the necessary minimum decorum and orderliness on the elist in this particular case, and corresponding the conduct of the member against whom the 'removal' decision was given. >>> Certainly, but only in the case that the community of the IGC was included. >>> >>>> 4. Accordingly, if on substance, and not merely on technical grounds, the disciplining efforts of the co-coordinator are found appropriate, the merit of the intent of her decision may still be salvaged by turning the 'removal' decision to 'suspension' decision, whereby Suresh is immediately put back on the list. >>> I disagree. I support the appeals team using extenuating circumstance and list discussion to go beyond the charter. I do not accept them substituting their views on the substance for the charter. >>> >>>> parminder >>> avri >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From suresh at hserus.net Sun Jan 20 00:27:36 2013 From: suresh at hserus.net (Suresh Ramasubramanian) Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2013 10:57:36 +0530 Subject: [governance] Appeals Team - Call for Comments and Interim Findings In-Reply-To: <50FB7BF3.30209@itforchange.net> References: <99B5B12AE95441728A797F79FC884BD5@Toshiba> <50FA8510.1080301@itforchange.net> <50FB6AA7.6030301@itforchange.net> <50FB7BF3.30209@itforchange.net> Message-ID: <8B27943E-B40D-46A3-A6C6-377FBFCEB423@hserus.net> Are you saying the appeals team hasn't taken a broader perspective? or are you saying that their perspective differs from yours? If it is the first, do cite reasons. If it is the second, well, my commiserations. Yes I did agree to avri's proposal to review the current mag nomination. If only because it is definitely wrong, and should never have occurred. And a mag nominee panel constituted in such a hurry risks questions of its legitimacy. I did see the general consensus on the list to proceed with this current, though imperfect arrangement, which is why I said it was pragmatic given the circumstances, and the consensus, but it must not recur. Open question whether the delay was the result of carelessness rather than an "abuse" which would imply a deliberate attempt to subvert the process, and I am not going into that. My support was to review the suggestion first. Which got adequate review from extensive on list discussion and consensus. Clear enough now? --srs (iPad) On 20-Jan-2013, at 10:39, parminder wrote: > > On Sunday 20 January 2013 09:58 AM, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote: >> Unfortunately Parminder, the point you are making, however sophistically presented, is moot. >> >> In case you missed avri's point .. 4 people appeal and it is referred to an appeals committee, which, I sincerely hope, tends to consider the issue from a broader perspective than merely nitpicking on the bylaws of the IGC. > And perhaps you have missed the point that I have asked for nothing more from the appeals team - other than to take a fuller/ broader perspective with regard to the coordinator's decision to remove a member from the list, and not just go by technicalities (which are independently quite important)... > >> Like, on the subject of the MAG, we have here, in my personal opinion, as pragmatic a solution as could be found in the short time possible.. > > Which would make it rather strange that you expressly supported Avri's assertion calling the setting up of the present nomcom process as an 'abuse of process' and seconded her appeal for review of the decision. > > parminder > >> and I hope we agree that this is an exceptional case, which we must be prepared to anticipate and prevent from recurring during the next time we are expected to select a MAG. >> >> Noteithstanding my above opinion, if four members of this caucus were to object to some aspect of this current process, yes it would go before the appeals committee. Presumably the objection would have been voiced much earlier given the extensive discussion and, ultimately, a degree of consensus, that took place on this issue. >> >> In the case of removing members from the list, I won't comment further than to say that sufficient members apparently disagreed with the coordinator's decision, to trigger the appeals process, and the appeals team reached a decision to reinstate. >> >> Speaking for myself, I remain opposed to political maneuvring and anti Americanism largely substituting for actual Internet governance related discussion on this list, and hope that this situation changes sufficiently for productive discussions on actual igov issues to resume without continuing to be vitiated by individual agendas. >> --srs (iPad) >> >> On 20-Jan-2013, at 9:25, parminder wrote: >> >>> On Saturday 19 January 2013 10:20 PM, Avri Doria wrote: >>>> On 19 Jan 2013, at 06:35, parminder wrote: >>>> >>>> 2. However, I will caution the appeals team against summarily overturning a decision of a co-coordinator merely on technical grounds without making any comments whatsoever on the substantive issues involved. The problem is that there very often isnt a strict meeting of all the required provisions for so many activities of the IGC. For instance, even for the current Noncom process for selection of MAG nominees, it is an indisputable fact that all the laid down technical conditions for setting up the nomcom were not met. Does it mean that if 4 people were to appeal against the setting up of the nomcom, the decision to set up the nomcom, and its subsequent outputs will be struck down? >>>> Seems reasonable to me. >>> There is absolutely no doubt that at least some technical requirements of setting up the nomcom were not met. If nothing else, the one month time period and so on (whether there were attenuating circumstances or mere oversight or whatever, which factors should also be commented upon by any appeals committee).... >>> >>> So, are you saying that since such technical deficiencies are certainly there in the process of setting up the present nomcom, the appeals team should >>> >>> 1. strike down the decision of setting up the nomcom, and along with it >>> 2. all substantive outputs from the nomcom, whereby we will have to write to UNDESA withdrawing the list of IGC nominees for the MAG which the nomcom is expected to send today. >>> >>> I do not agree with doing this... >>> >>> Accordingly. I am seeking an equivalent procedure to be applied by the appeals committee in the case of the coordinator's decision of 'removal from list' of a member, whereby there is a separate judgement on the technicalities of the decision making process, and on its substantive output/ outcome, and how the two can possibly be reconciled. >>> >>> parminder >>> >>>> They would then have to decide whether they thought that the Coordinator(s) had sufficient popular support for the change and that it had been properly discussed on the list. They would have something to weigh it against. >>>> >>>> I think the technicalities are sufficient cause for an appeal and that they should prevail unless there is proof that some process intervened. This case, any case of a coordinator going against the charter without proper list discussion before doing so, should be remedied. >>>> >>>>> 3. In the case of Suresh, technical conditions of 'removal from the list' may not have been met. But a point for the appeals committee to make a judgement on also is 'whether conditions of suspension from the list are met or not'. Because, in practical terms, if Suresh is to be reinstated within a month, the action of co-coordinator has, till now, only amounted to his suspension from the list. It may not be right for the appeal committee to take too narrow a construction of the fact that the co-coordinator pronounced the decision of 'removal from the list', and simply judge it as wrong, doing nothing more. The committee needs to address, and judge, the context fully of the efforts of the co-coodinator to impose the necessary minimum decorum and orderliness on the elist in this particular case, and corresponding the conduct of the member against whom the 'removal' decision was given. >>>> Certainly, but only in the case that the community of the IGC was included. >>>> >>>>> 4. Accordingly, if on substance, and not merely on technical grounds, the disciplining efforts of the co-coordinator are found appropriate, the merit of the intent of her decision may still be salvaged by turning the 'removal' decision to 'suspension' decision, whereby Suresh is immediately put back on the list. >>>> I disagree. I support the appeals team using extenuating circumstance and list discussion to go beyond the charter. I do not accept them substituting their views on the substance for the charter. >>>> >>>>> parminder >>>> avri >>> >>> ____________________________________________________________ >>> 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 > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From parminder at itforchange.net Sun Jan 20 01:10:27 2013 From: parminder at itforchange.net (parminder) Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2013 11:40:27 +0530 Subject: [governance] Appeals Team - Call for Comments and Interim Findings In-Reply-To: <8B27943E-B40D-46A3-A6C6-377FBFCEB423@hserus.net> References: <99B5B12AE95441728A797F79FC884BD5@Toshiba> <50FA8510.1080301@itforchange.net> <50FB6AA7.6030301@itforchange.net> <50FB7BF3.30209@itforchange.net> <8B27943E-B40D-46A3-A6C6-377FBFCEB423@hserus.net> Message-ID: <50FB8A53.1090704@itforchange.net> On Sunday 20 January 2013 10:57 AM, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote: > Are you saying the appeals team hasn't taken a broader perspective? I dont know. that is what I am asking the appeals team if they have. Their interim finding indicated only technical considerations. Good that you as an important party to the issue also want a fuller/ broader consideration of the issues to be take, beyond technical elements, which I am sure the appeals team will duly note. > or are you saying that their perspective differs from yours? If it is the first, do cite reasons. If it is the second, well, my commiserations. > > Yes I did agree to avri's proposal to review the current mag nomination. If only because it is definitely wrong, and should never have occurred. And a mag nominee panel constituted in such a hurry risks questions of its legitimacy. I did see the general consensus on the list to proceed with this current, though imperfect arrangement, which is why I said it was pragmatic given the circumstances, and the consensus, but it must not recur. > > Open question whether the delay was the result of carelessness rather than an "abuse" which would imply a deliberate attempt to subvert the process, and I am not going into that. My support was to review the suggestion first. Which got adequate review from extensive on list discussion and consensus. Clear enough now? > > --srs (iPad) > > On 20-Jan-2013, at 10:39, parminder wrote: > >> On Sunday 20 January 2013 09:58 AM, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote: >>> Unfortunately Parminder, the point you are making, however sophistically presented, is moot. >>> >>> In case you missed avri's point .. 4 people appeal and it is referred to an appeals committee, which, I sincerely hope, tends to consider the issue from a broader perspective than merely nitpicking on the bylaws of the IGC. >> And perhaps you have missed the point that I have asked for nothing more from the appeals team - other than to take a fuller/ broader perspective with regard to the coordinator's decision to remove a member from the list, and not just go by technicalities (which are independently quite important)... >> >>> Like, on the subject of the MAG, we have here, in my personal opinion, as pragmatic a solution as could be found in the short time possible.. >> Which would make it rather strange that you expressly supported Avri's assertion calling the setting up of the present nomcom process as an 'abuse of process' and seconded her appeal for review of the decision. >> >> parminder >> >>> and I hope we agree that this is an exceptional case, which we must be prepared to anticipate and prevent from recurring during the next time we are expected to select a MAG. >>> >>> Noteithstanding my above opinion, if four members of this caucus were to object to some aspect of this current process, yes it would go before the appeals committee. Presumably the objection would have been voiced much earlier given the extensive discussion and, ultimately, a degree of consensus, that took place on this issue. >>> >>> In the case of removing members from the list, I won't comment further than to say that sufficient members apparently disagreed with the coordinator's decision, to trigger the appeals process, and the appeals team reached a decision to reinstate. >>> >>> Speaking for myself, I remain opposed to political maneuvring and anti Americanism largely substituting for actual Internet governance related discussion on this list, and hope that this situation changes sufficiently for productive discussions on actual igov issues to resume without continuing to be vitiated by individual agendas. >>> --srs (iPad) >>> >>> On 20-Jan-2013, at 9:25, parminder wrote: >>> >>>> On Saturday 19 January 2013 10:20 PM, Avri Doria wrote: >>>>> On 19 Jan 2013, at 06:35, parminder wrote: >>>>> >>>>> 2. However, I will caution the appeals team against summarily overturning a decision of a co-coordinator merely on technical grounds without making any comments whatsoever on the substantive issues involved. The problem is that there very often isnt a strict meeting of all the required provisions for so many activities of the IGC. For instance, even for the current Noncom process for selection of MAG nominees, it is an indisputable fact that all the laid down technical conditions for setting up the nomcom were not met. Does it mean that if 4 people were to appeal against the setting up of the nomcom, the decision to set up the nomcom, and its subsequent outputs will be struck down? >>>>> Seems reasonable to me. >>>> There is absolutely no doubt that at least some technical requirements of setting up the nomcom were not met. If nothing else, the one month time period and so on (whether there were attenuating circumstances or mere oversight or whatever, which factors should also be commented upon by any appeals committee).... >>>> >>>> So, are you saying that since such technical deficiencies are certainly there in the process of setting up the present nomcom, the appeals team should >>>> >>>> 1. strike down the decision of setting up the nomcom, and along with it >>>> 2. all substantive outputs from the nomcom, whereby we will have to write to UNDESA withdrawing the list of IGC nominees for the MAG which the nomcom is expected to send today. >>>> >>>> I do not agree with doing this... >>>> >>>> Accordingly. I am seeking an equivalent procedure to be applied by the appeals committee in the case of the coordinator's decision of 'removal from list' of a member, whereby there is a separate judgement on the technicalities of the decision making process, and on its substantive output/ outcome, and how the two can possibly be reconciled. >>>> >>>> parminder >>>> >>>>> They would then have to decide whether they thought that the Coordinator(s) had sufficient popular support for the change and that it had been properly discussed on the list. They would have something to weigh it against. >>>>> >>>>> I think the technicalities are sufficient cause for an appeal and that they should prevail unless there is proof that some process intervened. This case, any case of a coordinator going against the charter without proper list discussion before doing so, should be remedied. >>>>> >>>>>> 3. In the case of Suresh, technical conditions of 'removal from the list' may not have been met. But a point for the appeals committee to make a judgement on also is 'whether conditions of suspension from the list are met or not'. Because, in practical terms, if Suresh is to be reinstated within a month, the action of co-coordinator has, till now, only amounted to his suspension from the list. It may not be right for the appeal committee to take too narrow a construction of the fact that the co-coordinator pronounced the decision of 'removal from the list', and simply judge it as wrong, doing nothing more. The committee needs to address, and judge, the context fully of the efforts of the co-coodinator to impose the necessary minimum decorum and orderliness on the elist in this particular case, and corresponding the conduct of the member against whom the 'removal' decision was given. >>>>> Certainly, but only in the case that the community of the IGC was included. >>>>> >>>>>> 4. Accordingly, if on substance, and not merely on technical grounds, the disciplining efforts of the co-coordinator are found appropriate, the merit of the intent of her decision may still be salvaged by turning the 'removal' decision to 'suspension' decision, whereby Suresh is immediately put back on the list. >>>>> I disagree. I support the appeals team using extenuating circumstance and list discussion to go beyond the charter. I do not accept them substituting their views on the substance for the charter. >>>>> >>>>>> parminder >>>>> avri >>>> ____________________________________________________________ >>>> 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 >> >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From suresh at hserus.net Sun Jan 20 01:31:47 2013 From: suresh at hserus.net (Suresh Ramasubramanian) Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2013 12:01:47 +0530 Subject: [governance] Appeals Team - Call for Comments and Interim Findings In-Reply-To: <50FB8A53.1090704@itforchange.net> References: <99B5B12AE95441728A797F79FC884BD5@Toshiba> <50FA8510.1080301@itforchange.net> <50FB6AA7.6030301@itforchange.net> <50FB7BF3.30209@itforchange.net> <8B27943E-B40D-46A3-A6C6-377FBFCEB423@hserus.net> <50FB8A53.1090704@itforchange.net> Message-ID: <77CE3575-35DD-4208-BCA3-1E488DA4CA90@hserus.net> Good, then I am sure they will give every consideration to addressing the growing problem of politicking and hostility to america as a substitute for internet governance. --srs (iPad) On 20-Jan-2013, at 11:40, parminder wrote: > > On Sunday 20 January 2013 10:57 AM, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote: >> Are you saying the appeals team hasn't taken a broader perspective? > > I dont know. that is what I am asking the appeals team if they have. Their interim finding indicated only technical considerations. > > Good that you as an important party to the issue also want a fuller/ broader consideration of the issues to be take, beyond technical elements, which I am sure the appeals team will duly note. > >> or are you saying that their perspective differs from yours? If it is the first, do cite reasons. If it is the second, well, my commiserations. >> >> Yes I did agree to avri's proposal to review the current mag nomination. If only because it is definitely wrong, and should never have occurred. And a mag nominee panel constituted in such a hurry risks questions of its legitimacy. I did see the general consensus on the list to proceed with this current, though imperfect arrangement, which is why I said it was pragmatic given the circumstances, and the consensus, but it must not recur. >> >> Open question whether the delay was the result of carelessness rather than an "abuse" which would imply a deliberate attempt to subvert the process, and I am not going into that. My support was to review the suggestion first. Which got adequate review from extensive on list discussion and consensus. Clear enough now? >> >> --srs (iPad) >> >> On 20-Jan-2013, at 10:39, parminder wrote: >> >>> On Sunday 20 January 2013 09:58 AM, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote: >>>> Unfortunately Parminder, the point you are making, however sophistically presented, is moot. >>>> >>>> In case you missed avri's point .. 4 people appeal and it is referred to an appeals committee, which, I sincerely hope, tends to consider the issue from a broader perspective than merely nitpicking on the bylaws of the IGC. >>> And perhaps you have missed the point that I have asked for nothing more from the appeals team - other than to take a fuller/ broader perspective with regard to the coordinator's decision to remove a member from the list, and not just go by technicalities (which are independently quite important)... >>> >>>> Like, on the subject of the MAG, we have here, in my personal opinion, as pragmatic a solution as could be found in the short time possible.. >>> Which would make it rather strange that you expressly supported Avri's assertion calling the setting up of the present nomcom process as an 'abuse of process' and seconded her appeal for review of the decision. >>> >>> parminder >>> >>>> and I hope we agree that this is an exceptional case, which we must be prepared to anticipate and prevent from recurring during the next time we are expected to select a MAG. >>>> >>>> Noteithstanding my above opinion, if four members of this caucus were to object to some aspect of this current process, yes it would go before the appeals committee. Presumably the objection would have been voiced much earlier given the extensive discussion and, ultimately, a degree of consensus, that took place on this issue. >>>> >>>> In the case of removing members from the list, I won't comment further than to say that sufficient members apparently disagreed with the coordinator's decision, to trigger the appeals process, and the appeals team reached a decision to reinstate. >>>> >>>> Speaking for myself, I remain opposed to political maneuvring and anti Americanism largely substituting for actual Internet governance related discussion on this list, and hope that this situation changes sufficiently for productive discussions on actual igov issues to resume without continuing to be vitiated by individual agendas. >>>> --srs (iPad) >>>> >>>> On 20-Jan-2013, at 9:25, parminder wrote: >>>> >>>>> On Saturday 19 January 2013 10:20 PM, Avri Doria wrote: >>>>>> On 19 Jan 2013, at 06:35, parminder wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> 2. However, I will caution the appeals team against summarily overturning a decision of a co-coordinator merely on technical grounds without making any comments whatsoever on the substantive issues involved. The problem is that there very often isnt a strict meeting of all the required provisions for so many activities of the IGC. For instance, even for the current Noncom process for selection of MAG nominees, it is an indisputable fact that all the laid down technical conditions for setting up the nomcom were not met. Does it mean that if 4 people were to appeal against the setting up of the nomcom, the decision to set up the nomcom, and its subsequent outputs will be struck down? >>>>>> Seems reasonable to me. >>>>> There is absolutely no doubt that at least some technical requirements of setting up the nomcom were not met. If nothing else, the one month time period and so on (whether there were attenuating circumstances or mere oversight or whatever, which factors should also be commented upon by any appeals committee).... >>>>> >>>>> So, are you saying that since such technical deficiencies are certainly there in the process of setting up the present nomcom, the appeals team should >>>>> >>>>> 1. strike down the decision of setting up the nomcom, and along with it >>>>> 2. all substantive outputs from the nomcom, whereby we will have to write to UNDESA withdrawing the list of IGC nominees for the MAG which the nomcom is expected to send today. >>>>> >>>>> I do not agree with doing this... >>>>> >>>>> Accordingly. I am seeking an equivalent procedure to be applied by the appeals committee in the case of the coordinator's decision of 'removal from list' of a member, whereby there is a separate judgement on the technicalities of the decision making process, and on its substantive output/ outcome, and how the two can possibly be reconciled. >>>>> >>>>> parminder >>>>> >>>>>> They would then have to decide whether they thought that the Coordinator(s) had sufficient popular support for the change and that it had been properly discussed on the list. They would have something to weigh it against. >>>>>> >>>>>> I think the technicalities are sufficient cause for an appeal and that they should prevail unless there is proof that some process intervened. This case, any case of a coordinator going against the charter without proper list discussion before doing so, should be remedied. >>>>>> >>>>>>> 3. In the case of Suresh, technical conditions of 'removal from the list' may not have been met. But a point for the appeals committee to make a judgement on also is 'whether conditions of suspension from the list are met or not'. Because, in practical terms, if Suresh is to be reinstated within a month, the action of co-coordinator has, till now, only amounted to his suspension from the list. It may not be right for the appeal committee to take too narrow a construction of the fact that the co-coordinator pronounced the decision of 'removal from the list', and simply judge it as wrong, doing nothing more. The committee needs to address, and judge, the context fully of the efforts of the co-coodinator to impose the necessary minimum decorum and orderliness on the elist in this particular case, and corresponding the conduct of the member against whom the 'removal' decision was given. >>>>>> Certainly, but only in the case that the community of the IGC was included. >>>>>> >>>>>>> 4. Accordingly, if on substance, and not merely on technical grounds, the disciplining efforts of the co-coordinator are found appropriate, the merit of the intent of her decision may still be salvaged by turning the 'removal' decision to 'suspension' decision, whereby Suresh is immediately put back on the list. >>>>>> I disagree. I support the appeals team using extenuating circumstance and list discussion to go beyond the charter. I do not accept them substituting their views on the substance for the charter. >>>>>> >>>>>>> parminder >>>>>> avri >>>>> ____________________________________________________________ >>>>> 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 >>> >>> >>> ____________________________________________________________ >>> 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 > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From nb at bollow.ch Sun Jan 20 03:00:56 2013 From: nb at bollow.ch (Norbert Bollow) Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2013 09:00:56 +0100 Subject: [governance] Notice to the IGC on Proposed Charter Amendments In-Reply-To: <675E6D8C-1408-4724-A3B3-107B7F807F07@acm.org> References: <50F38F8E.3090106@ciroap.org> <50F3B31B.4090406@itforchange.net> <50F3B423.1070901@ciroap.org> <50F3B544.3080409@itforchange.net> <1FC731B2-FE70-41AC-B97D-52979AFFAE05@uzh.ch> <1358157197.55375.YahooMailNeo@web125106.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <020a01cdf283$98dfbe10$ca9f3a30$@gmail.com> <20130114212217.7f43bbc9@quill.bollow.ch> <1358227661.77969.YahooMailNeo@web125105.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <735AC965-1DFD-4A66-BFF6-3E828E71D72E@ciroap.org> <20130118165547.472e8ec7@quill.bollow.ch> <675E6D8C-1408-4724-A3B3-107B7F807F07@acm.org> Message-ID: <20130120090056.55de3068@quill.bollow.ch> Avri Doria wrote: > Have the amendments that I co-proposed been lost. [with my shiny new IGF coordinator hat on] Hi Avri I assure you that they have not been lost. Sala and I have decided that I'm going to manage the process of handling the charter amendment proposals, which includes bringing those to a vote that have a sufficient number of co-proposers. I'd like to request a small quantity of patience so that I can get my bearings, then I will make sure that the charter amendment proposals get addressed without undue delay. Greetings, Norbert -------------- 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 From Guru at ITforChange.net Sun Jan 20 03:43:40 2013 From: Guru at ITforChange.net (=?UTF-8?B?R3VydSDgpJfgpYHgpLDgpYE=?=) Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2013 15:43:40 +0700 Subject: [governance] Bloomberg - The Overzealous Prosecution of Aaron Swartz In-Reply-To: References: <50FAC752.5090502@gmail.com> Message-ID: <50FBAE3C.8010600@ITforChange.net> On 01/20/2013 01:16 AM, John Curran wrote: > On Jan 19, 2013, at 6:18 AM, Riaz K Tayob > wrote: > >> [The Panglossian world of US Exceptionalism.... of course these >> matters are discussed and debated, but dare to do anything about it >> and then those will be put in their place, or no?] >> >> The Overzealous Prosecution of Aaron Swartz >> By Stephen L. Carter >> Jan 18, 2013 >> 1:30 AM GMT+0200 >> ... > > Riaz - > A very good question; I personally don't subscribe to a view of US > Exceptionalism > (that's likely because I've travelled a bit and can more readily make > comparisons), > John, Do you mean you do not think US is exceptional / it is wrong to believe that the US is exceptional or Do you mean that there is no belief prevalent about US exceptionalism Can you elaborate on this remark thanks, Guru -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From avri at acm.org Sun Jan 20 04:10:41 2013 From: avri at acm.org (Avri Doria) Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2013 04:10:41 -0500 Subject: [governance] Notice to the IGC on Proposed Charter Amendments In-Reply-To: <20130120090056.55de3068@quill.bollow.ch> References: <50F38F8E.3090106@ciroap.org> <50F3B31B.4090406@itforchange.net> <50F3B423.1070901@ciroap.org> <50F3B544.3080409@itforchange.net> <1FC731B2-FE70-41AC-B97D-52979AFFAE05@uzh.ch> <1358157197.55375.YahooMailNeo@web125106.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <020a01cdf283$98dfbe10$ca9f3a30$@gmail.com> <20130114212217.7f43bbc9@quill.bollow.ch> <1358227661.77969.YahooMailNeo@web125105.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <735AC965-1DFD-4A66-BFF6-3E828E71D72E@ciroap.org> <20130118165547.472e8ec7@quill.bollow.ch> <675E6D8C-1408-4724-A3B3-107B7F807F07@acm.org> <20130120090056.55de3068@quill.bollow.ch> Message-ID: Thanks Norbert, and Congratulations. No worries. I will be patient and have faith that you will help get the coordination of this Caucus back on track. avri On 20 Jan 2013, at 03:00, Norbert Bollow wrote: > Avri Doria wrote: > >> Have the amendments that I co-proposed been lost. > > [with my shiny new IGF coordinator hat on] > > Hi Avri > > I assure you that they have not been lost. > > Sala and I have decided that I'm going to manage the process of > handling the charter amendment proposals, which includes bringing > those to a vote that have a sufficient number of co-proposers. > > I'd like to request a small quantity of patience so that I can get my > bearings, then I will make sure that the charter amendment proposals > get addressed without undue delay. > > Greetings, > Norbert > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From ajp at glocom.ac.jp Sun Jan 20 04:30:09 2013 From: ajp at glocom.ac.jp (Adam Peake) Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2013 18:30:09 +0900 Subject: [governance] Bloomberg - The Overzealous Prosecution of Aaron Swartz In-Reply-To: <50FBAE3C.8010600@ITforChange.net> References: <50FAC752.5090502@gmail.com> <50FBAE3C.8010600@ITforChange.net> Message-ID: I understood the term "US Exceptionalism" to mean something along the lines that US culture was in some what superior. Guru, your comment encouraged a search, and finding a result on wikipedia "American exceptionalism is the proposition that the United States is different from other countries in that it has a specific world mission to spread liberty and democracy." And this would fit with Riaz's use, given the context. To the first, hard to think how US culture is superior (special and often great, and often not so great). Second, idea that the US has some god given mission to spread liberty and democracy does seem to live on in the US State department and they seem blind of the hyprocacry of (etc etc) Bradley Manning, SOPA, Guantanamo Bay... and (IG/IGF context) sale by US companies of software/hardware that enables repressive regimes to block/track/monitor etc (as discussed at the 1st IGF, when Google and Cisco were criticized.) I don't recall support the notion of US Exceptionalism from anyone on this list. Adam On Sun, Jan 20, 2013 at 5:43 PM, Guru गुरु wrote: > On 01/20/2013 01:16 AM, John Curran wrote: > > On Jan 19, 2013, at 6:18 AM, Riaz K Tayob wrote: > > [The Panglossian world of US Exceptionalism.... of course these matters > are discussed and debated, but dare to do anything about it and then those > will be put in their place, or no?] > > > The Overzealous Prosecution of Aaron Swartz > By Stephen L. Carter Jan > 18, 2013 1:30 AM GMT+0200 > > ... > > > Riaz - > > A very good question; I personally don't subscribe to a view of US > Exceptionalism > (that's likely because I've travelled a bit and can more readily make > comparisons), > > John, > > Do you mean you do not think US is exceptional / it is wrong to believe > that the US is exceptional > or > Do you mean that there is no belief prevalent about US exceptionalism > > Can you elaborate on this remark > > thanks, > Guru > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From ias_pk at yahoo.com Sun Jan 20 04:42:25 2013 From: ias_pk at yahoo.com (Imran Ahmed Shah) Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2013 01:42:25 -0800 (PST) Subject: [governance] Coordinator election results In-Reply-To: <5FB29FA5-F87D-4F98-BDAC-E5BB066C0CC9@ciroap.org> References: <5FB29FA5-F87D-4F98-BDAC-E5BB066C0CC9@ciroap.org> Message-ID: <1358674945.89765.YahooMailNeo@web125106.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Congratulation Norbert. and Thank you Jeremy and Sala for your efforts and support in conducting the recent elections.   Best Regards   Imran Ahmed Shah >________________________________ > From: Jeremy Malcolm >To: "governance at lists.igcaucus.org" >Sent: Saturday, 19 January 2013, 5:42 >Subject: [governance] Coordinator election results > > >The elections for the next co-coordinator of the IGC have just closed.  As this year's returning officer I am pleased to present the results. > > >There were 129 people who commenced the survey.  One of them self-identified as not being a member of the Internet Governance Caucus, and one of them bailed out when asked that question.  This leaves 127 people who self-identified.  Of those, six people claimed that they had already voted in this year's election, so they were not offered the opportunity to vote again.  Of the remaining 121, 106 took that opportunity. > > >Both candidates polled well.  In the end, Imran Ahmed Shah came second with 45 votes in his favour.  Norbert Bollow came first with 61 votes. > > >Congratulations Norbert, our new co-coordinator - and thanks to you too Imran.  I will post the full details to our website as soon as I get an opportunity, and with Sala and Izumi's position will brief Norbert on the technical aspects of his new role.  I will also update the list of voters on our website, and will consult with Sala about that. > > >If anyone has any questions in the meantime, please let me know. > >--  > >Dr Jeremy Malcolm >Senior Policy Officer >Consumers International | the global campaigning voice for consumers >Office for Asia-Pacific and the Middle East >Lot 5-1 Wisma WIM, 7 Jalan Abang Haji Openg, TTDI, 60000 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia >Tel: +60 3 7726 1599 >Your rights, our mission – download CI's Strategy 2015: http://consint.info/RightsMission >@Consumers_Int | http://www.consumersinternational.org/ | www.facebook.com/consumersinternational >Read our email confidentiality notice. Don't print this email unless necessary. > >____________________________________________________________ >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: -------------- 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 From parminder at itforchange.net Sun Jan 20 05:08:31 2013 From: parminder at itforchange.net (parminder) Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2013 15:38:31 +0530 Subject: [governance] Bloomberg - The Overzealous Prosecution of Aaron Swartz In-Reply-To: References: <50FAC752.5090502@gmail.com> <50FBAE3C.8010600@ITforChange.net> Message-ID: <50FBC21F.8030401@itforchange.net> On Sunday 20 January 2013 03:00 PM, Adam Peake wrote: > > > I don't recall support the notion of US Exceptionalism from anyone on > this list. No one will profess that term for oneself. However, clearly it is US Exceptionalism being practised when: 1. anyone agrees or shows strong sympathy with the view that US has (not just 'had') a 'historic role' in the evolution of the Internet (and perhaps in protection of its 'basic principles', whatever it may mean) and /therefore/ some degree of continued pre-eminence of the US government in some key IG arrangements, including of the CIRs, is fine/ acceptable... 2. anyone is fine with US laws/ courts/ executive/ statutory authorities (FCC, FTC etc) determine much of how the Internet's architecture develops, whether through US law/ jurisdiction’s application on the ICANN, or on most of the monopoly global Internet mega-corporates.... In fact, if the IGC can agree that such US exceptionalism is /wrong and unacceptable/, and sincerely begins to make political proposals to come out of it, we would have reconciled a lot of political differences among the members of IGC, and also made a great contribution to the area of global governance of the Internet. parminder > > Adam > > > > > On Sun, Jan 20, 2013 at 5:43 PM, Guru गुरु > wrote: > > On 01/20/2013 01:16 AM, John Curran wrote: >> On Jan 19, 2013, at 6:18 AM, Riaz K Tayob > > wrote: >> >>> [The Panglossian world of US Exceptionalism.... of course these >>> matters are discussed and debated, but dare to do anything about >>> it and then those will be put in their place, or no?] >>> >>> The Overzealous Prosecution of Aaron Swartz >>> By Stephen L. Carter >>> Jan 18, >>> 2013 1:30 AM GMT+0200 >>> ... >> >> Riaz - >> A very good question; I personally don't subscribe to a view of >> US Exceptionalism >> (that's likely because I've travelled a bit and can more readily >> make comparisons), >> > John, > > Do you mean you do not think US is exceptional / it is wrong to > believe that the US is exceptional > or > Do you mean that there is no belief prevalent about US exceptionalism > > Can you elaborate on this remark > > thanks, > Guru > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From suresh at hserus.net Sun Jan 20 05:39:07 2013 From: suresh at hserus.net (Suresh Ramasubramanian) Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2013 16:09:07 +0530 Subject: [governance] Bloomberg - The Overzealous Prosecution of Aaron Swartz In-Reply-To: <50FBC21F.8030401@itforchange.net> References: <50FAC752.5090502@gmail.com> <50FBAE3C.8010600@ITforChange.net> <50FBC21F.8030401@itforchange.net> Message-ID: <986AAC8E-3F81-46CD-BA02-0B3FD6AAFF72@hserus.net> So, exceptionalism is a thinly disguised phrase for the grossest type of national chauvinism. Thanks for spraining it in such excruciating detail, And here, we see that anybody at all who supports the existing multistakeholder bodies and their historic origins is branded an exceptionalist. I am afraid that the days are long past when naming a person or group as an "evil running dog of caplitalism", or similar pleasantries, was thought to be an effective and accepted form of argument. If you simply try to fit an obscure catchphrase to describe and dismiss a complex system of people and institutions that are actually multistakeholder in nature, you demonstrate an unwillingness to actually engage in rationed argument, and a contempt for the other side's ideas. You can't complain of a lack of civil discourse by others while throwing around cant phrases thst show a casual disrespect for what they advocate. If you say this is a "political" discussion and these are appropriate words to use in such a discussion, my reply would be to ask why you keep trying to engage in politics rather than trying to engage constructively with others on the caucus. --srs (iPad) On 20-Jan-2013, at 15:38, parminder wrote: > > On Sunday 20 January 2013 03:00 PM, Adam Peake wrote: >> >> >> I don't recall support the notion of US Exceptionalism from anyone on this list. > > No one will profess that term for oneself. However, clearly it is US Exceptionalism being practised when: > > 1. anyone agrees or shows strong sympathy with the view that US has (not just 'had') a 'historic role' in the evolution of the Internet (and perhaps in protection of its 'basic principles', whatever it may mean) and therefore some degree of continued pre-eminence of the US government in some key IG arrangements, including of the CIRs, is fine/ acceptable... > > 2. anyone is fine with US laws/ courts/ executive/ statutory authorities (FCC, FTC etc) determine much of how the Internet's architecture develops, whether through US law/ jurisdiction’s application on the ICANN, or on most of the monopoly global Internet mega-corporates.... > > In fact, if the IGC can agree that such US exceptionalism is wrong and unacceptable, and sincerely begins to make political proposals to come out of it, we would have reconciled a lot of political differences among the members of IGC, and also made a great contribution to the area of global governance of the Internet. > > parminder > >> >> Adam >> >> >> >> >> On Sun, Jan 20, 2013 at 5:43 PM, Guru गुरु wrote: >>> On 01/20/2013 01:16 AM, John Curran wrote: >>>> On Jan 19, 2013, at 6:18 AM, Riaz K Tayob wrote: >>>> >>>>> [The Panglossian world of US Exceptionalism.... of course these matters are discussed and debated, but dare to do anything about it and then those will be put in their place, or no?] >>>>> The Overzealous Prosecution of Aaron Swartz >>>>> By Stephen L. Carter Jan 18, 2013 1:30 AM GMT+0200 >>>>> ... >>>> >>>> >>>> Riaz - >>>> >>>> A very good question; I personally don't subscribe to a view of US Exceptionalism >>>> (that's likely because I've travelled a bit and can more readily make comparisons), >>> John, >>> >>> Do you mean you do not think US is exceptional / it is wrong to believe that the US is exceptional >>> or >>> Do you mean that there is no belief prevalent about US exceptionalism >>> >>> Can you elaborate on this remark >>> >>> thanks, >>> Guru >>> >>> >>> >>> ____________________________________________________________ >>> 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 > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com Sun Jan 20 05:43:48 2013 From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro) Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2013 22:43:48 +1200 Subject: [governance] Message to IGC Re: Coordinator election results Message-ID: Dear All, I would like to thank both candidates for being willing to stand in the IGC elections for Coordinator. Thank you Imran Ahmed Shah and Norbert Bollow. It takes courage and strength to put yourself out there and stand and we in turn are grateful. Thank you for standing! I would also like to thank the voter turnout this year and it was really good to see people participating. Thank you for taking the time to vote. Special thanks goes out to Jeremy Malcolm who has continued to serve as Technical Administrator for the IGC and for creating the Polls. Thank you Jeremy for your energy, commitment and diligence. Special thanks goes out to Izumi Aizu for his incredible commitment, diligence and for the service rendered to the IGC as Coordinator. Thank you very much. The election of a new coordinator represents a new season in the IGC and it means fresh insight, energy for the IGC and is an exciting time. As such, it is with great pleasure that I formally welcome Norbert Bollow into his role as Coordinator. With every best wish, Sala On Sat, Jan 19, 2013 at 12:42 PM, Jeremy Malcolm wrote: > The elections for the next co-coordinator of the IGC have just closed. As > this year's returning officer I am pleased to present the results. > > There were 129 people who commenced the survey. One of them > self-identified as not being a member of the Internet Governance Caucus, > and one of them bailed out when asked that question. This leaves 127 > people who self-identified. Of those, six people claimed that they had > already voted in this year's election, so they were not offered the > opportunity to vote again. Of the remaining 121, 106 took that opportunity. > > Both candidates polled well. In the end, Imran Ahmed Shah came second > with 45 votes in his favour. Norbert Bollow came first with 61 votes. > > Congratulations Norbert, our new co-coordinator - and thanks to you too > Imran. I will post the full details to our website as soon as I get an > opportunity, and with Sala and Izumi's position will brief Norbert on the > technical aspects of his new role. I will also update the list of voters > on our website, and will consult with Sala about that. > > If anyone has any questions in the meantime, please let me know. > > -- > > *Dr Jeremy Malcolm > Senior Policy Officer > Consumers International | the global campaigning voice for consumers* > Office for Asia-Pacific and the Middle East > Lot 5-1 Wisma WIM, 7 Jalan Abang Haji Openg, TTDI, 60000 Kuala Lumpur, > Malaysia > Tel: +60 3 7726 1599 > > *Your rights, our mission – download CI's Strategy 2015:* > http://consint.info/RightsMission > > @Consumers_Int | www.consumersinternational.org | > www.facebook.com/consumersinternational > > Read our email confidentiality notice. > Don't print this email unless necessary. > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > -- Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala P.O. Box 17862 Suva Fiji Twitter: @SalanietaT Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro Tel: +679 3544828 Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From riaz.tayob at gmail.com Sun Jan 20 05:59:32 2013 From: riaz.tayob at gmail.com (Riaz K Tayob) Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2013 12:59:32 +0200 Subject: [governance] Bloomberg - The Overzealous Prosecution of Aaron Swartz In-Reply-To: References: <50FAC752.5090502@gmail.com> <50FBAE3C.8010600@ITforChange.net> Message-ID: <50FBCE14.7010901@gmail.com> This is the interpretation we make (and we are entitled to make it) when for instance: 1. Some argue for ICANN etc to be regulated by US laws (state or otherwise) - and that this is sufficient. 2. Others argue that legitimacy of the current structure of governance is not an issue, and that work ought rather to be done within the system. And that it is a none issue. I recall that I and others were asked why the Assange issue was relevant to Internet Governance. To respond to that, I said, well if US Exceptionalism (as explained above, but I will try to dig out some of the more plum quotes on this issue when/if I have time) as defined by me (I recall I even had to explain that I reserve the right 'to determine the terms of the terms' of my engagement - and legitimacy is an issue) is allowed on this list then so is interrogation of it. And if you don't like the terms/labels, then perhaps we can look at the discourse of how the 'single rooters' characterised the "multi-rooters" (or break the internet brigade) which should give us an inkling of the appropriate balance of how to determine the 'terms of the terms' of the engagement. And what term would you prefer? ICANN supporters, US fans, Status Quoists, or do you find these too constricting and that every issue should simply be qualitatively assessed? Riaz On 2013/01/20 11:30 AM, Adam Peake wrote: > I don't recall support the notion of US Exceptionalism from anyone on > this list. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From parminder at itforchange.net Sun Jan 20 06:03:56 2013 From: parminder at itforchange.net (parminder) Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2013 16:33:56 +0530 Subject: [governance] Bloomberg - The Overzealous Prosecution of Aaron Swartz In-Reply-To: <986AAC8E-3F81-46CD-BA02-0B3FD6AAFF72@hserus.net> References: <50FAC752.5090502@gmail.com> <50FBAE3C.8010600@ITforChange.net> <50FBC21F.8030401@itforchange.net> <986AAC8E-3F81-46CD-BA02-0B3FD6AAFF72@hserus.net> Message-ID: <50FBCF1C.5080701@itforchange.net> On Sunday 20 January 2013 04:09 PM, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote: > So, exceptionalism is a thinly disguised phrase for the grossest type > of national chauvinism. Thanks for spraining it in such excruciating > detail, > > And here, we see that anybody at all who supports the existing > multistakeholder bodies and their historic origins is branded an > exceptionalist. > > I am afraid that the days are long past when naming a person or group > as an "evil running dog of caplitalism", or similar pleasantries, was > thought to be an effective and accepted form of argument. > > If you simply try to fit an obscure catchphrase to describe and > dismiss a complex system of people and institutions that are actually > multistakeholder in nature, you demonstrate an unwillingness to > actually engage in rationed argument, and a contempt for the other > side's ideas. > > You can't complain of a lack of civil discourse by others while > throwing around cant phrases thst show a casual disrespect for what > they advocate. If you say this is a "political" discussion and these > are appropriate words to use in such a discussion, my reply would be > to ask why you keep trying to engage in politics rather than trying to > engage constructively with others on the caucus. > Just one last comment which may throw some light for you on what this group is. And if you are so contemptuous of political processes, you must look to be in other groups than this. This group is POLITICAL. From the IGC charter The mission of the Internet Governance Caucus (IGC) is to provide a forum for discussion, /*advocacy*/, action, .... From wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advocacy *Advocacy**is a**__**political process **__*by an individual or group which aims to influence public-policy and resource allocation decisions within political, economic, and social systems and institutions. parminder > --srs (iPad) > > On 20-Jan-2013, at 15:38, parminder > wrote: > >> >> On Sunday 20 January 2013 03:00 PM, Adam Peake wrote: >>> >>> >>> I don't recall support the notion of US Exceptionalism from anyone >>> on this list. >> >> No one will profess that term for oneself. However, clearly it is US >> Exceptionalism being practised when: >> >> 1. anyone agrees or shows strong sympathy with the view that US has >> (not just 'had') a 'historic role' in the evolution of the Internet >> (and perhaps in protection of its 'basic principles', whatever it may >> mean) and /therefore/ some degree of continued pre-eminence of the US >> government in some key IG arrangements, including of the CIRs, is >> fine/ acceptable... >> >> 2. anyone is fine with US laws/ courts/ executive/ statutory >> authorities (FCC, FTC etc) determine much of how the Internet's >> architecture develops, whether through US law/ jurisdiction’s >> application on the ICANN, or on most of the monopoly global Internet >> mega-corporates.... >> >> In fact, if the IGC can agree that such US exceptionalism is /wrong >> and unacceptable/, and sincerely begins to make political proposals >> to come out of it, we would have reconciled a lot of political >> differences among the members of IGC, and also made a great >> contribution to the area of global governance of the Internet. >> >> parminder >> >>> >>> Adam >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On Sun, Jan 20, 2013 at 5:43 PM, Guru गुरु >> > wrote: >>> >>> On 01/20/2013 01:16 AM, John Curran wrote: >>>> On Jan 19, 2013, at 6:18 AM, Riaz K Tayob >>> > wrote: >>>> >>>>> [The Panglossian world of US Exceptionalism.... of course >>>>> these matters are discussed and debated, but dare to do >>>>> anything about it and then those will be put in their place, >>>>> or no?] >>>>> >>>>> The Overzealous Prosecution of Aaron Swartz >>>>> By Stephen L. Carter >>>>> Jan 18, >>>>> 2013 1:30 AM GMT+0200 >>>>> ... >>>> >>>> Riaz - >>>> A very good question; I personally don't subscribe to a view of >>>> US Exceptionalism >>>> (that's likely because I've travelled a bit and can more >>>> readily make comparisons), >>>> >>> John, >>> >>> Do you mean you do not think US is exceptional / it is wrong to >>> believe that the US is exceptional >>> or >>> Do you mean that there is no belief prevalent about US >>> exceptionalism >>> >>> Can you elaborate on this remark >>> >>> thanks, >>> Guru >>> >>> >>> >>> ____________________________________________________________ >>> 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 >>> >>> >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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: -------------- 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 From suresh at hserus.net Sun Jan 20 06:21:40 2013 From: suresh at hserus.net (Suresh Ramasubramanian) Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2013 16:51:40 +0530 Subject: [governance] Bloomberg - The Overzealous Prosecution of Aaron Swartz In-Reply-To: <50FBCE14.7010901@gmail.com> References: <50FAC752.5090502@gmail.com> <50FBAE3C.8010600@ITforChange.net> <50FBCE14.7010901@gmail.com> Message-ID: Why do you persist in confusing technical issues versus purely political ones? The single root (system of root servers under a wide range of control) setup is a result of architecture, not politics. Alternate roots are technically not feasible, and where they do exist, they either require their small number of believers to set up a complete new set of resolvers without which the particular set of alternate roots they require won't resolve. This scenario only works by design in say a corporate environment where internal servers are available in their private DNS servers and not resolvable over the Internet. Were it is made to seamlessly work in the internet, as in national governments providing a different, censored view of DNS for their citizens, runs the risk of breaking DNS worldwide, as several ISPs in South America and elsewhere started getting redirected to Chinese controlled websites when they tried to access, say, google or the bbc. http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9174278/After_DNS_problem_Chinese_root_server_is_shut_down I see they want to try and institutionalize their own system of alternate roots though .. as this interesting pre wcit technical proposal shows. And you dont actually need an ietf mandate to deploy running code, so the political aspects of this are actually much more interesting, taking alt root beyond the purview of a few cranks and making it an instrument of state policy to split the internet. http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/06/18/china_firewall_dns_proposal/ So when it comes to trying to bring politics into technology, civil society actors using canting terminology in petty arguments on a mailing list are actually the least of our worries. It is when you run into people who are capable and willing to operationalize those politics that the real danger begins. --srs (iPad) On 20-Jan-2013, at 16:29, Riaz K Tayob wrote: > This is the interpretation we make (and we are entitled to make it) when for instance: > > 1. Some argue for ICANN etc to be regulated by US laws (state or otherwise) - and that this is sufficient. > > 2. Others argue that legitimacy of the current structure of governance is not an issue, and that work ought rather to be done within the system. And that it is a none issue. > > I recall that I and others were asked why the Assange issue was relevant to Internet Governance. To respond to that, I said, well if US Exceptionalism (as explained above, but I will try to dig out some of the more plum quotes on this issue when/if I have time) as defined by me (I recall I even had to explain that I reserve the right 'to determine the terms of the terms' of my engagement - and legitimacy is an issue) is allowed on this list then so is interrogation of it. > > And if you don't like the terms/labels, then perhaps we can look at the discourse of how the 'single rooters' characterised the "multi-rooters" (or break the internet brigade) which should give us an inkling of the appropriate balance of how to determine the 'terms of the terms' of the engagement. > > And what term would you prefer? ICANN supporters, US fans, Status Quoists, or do you find these too constricting and that every issue should simply be qualitatively assessed? > > Riaz > > > On 2013/01/20 11:30 AM, Adam Peake wrote: >> I don't recall support the notion of US Exceptionalism from anyone on this list. > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From suresh at hserus.net Sun Jan 20 06:34:56 2013 From: suresh at hserus.net (Suresh Ramasubramanian) Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2013 17:04:56 +0530 Subject: [governance] Bloomberg - The Overzealous Prosecution of Aaron Swartz In-Reply-To: <50FBCF1C.5080701@itforchange.net> References: <50FAC752.5090502@gmail.com> <50FBAE3C.8010600@ITforChange.net> <50FBC21F.8030401@itforchange.net> <986AAC8E-3F81-46CD-BA02-0B3FD6AAFF72@hserus.net> <50FBCF1C.5080701@itforchange.net> Message-ID: <2BAD5D82-358C-4490-9DBD-273F286A116F@hserus.net> I am afraid quoting Wikipedia as a primary source is just not on. And you are still wrong to practice a divisive brand of politics in this community to the exclusion of pretty much everything else. You can advocate a wide range of issues without descending into the realm of politics where the goal is a battle for control rather than constructive engagement and mutual assistance. There is a huge difference in approach when you start out with a development viewpoint as opposed to a political viewpoint. While this is from organizations you have previously expressed a great deal of contempt for (the OECD, world bank etc) this link is worth reading. http://www.publicprivatedialogue.org/ --srs (iPad) On 20-Jan-2013, at 16:33, parminder wrote: > > On Sunday 20 January 2013 04:09 PM, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote: >> So, exceptionalism is a thinly disguised phrase for the grossest type of national chauvinism. Thanks for spraining it in such excruciating detail, >> >> And here, we see that anybody at all who supports the existing multistakeholder bodies and their historic origins is branded an exceptionalist. >> >> I am afraid that the days are long past when naming a person or group as an "evil running dog of caplitalism", or similar pleasantries, was thought to be an effective and accepted form of argument. >> >> If you simply try to fit an obscure catchphrase to describe and dismiss a complex system of people and institutions that are actually multistakeholder in nature, you demonstrate an unwillingness to actually engage in rationed argument, and a contempt for the other side's ideas. >> >> You can't complain of a lack of civil discourse by others while throwing around cant phrases thst show a casual disrespect for what they advocate. If you say this is a "political" discussion and these are appropriate words to use in such a discussion, my reply would be to ask why you keep trying to engage in politics rather than trying to engage constructively with others on the caucus. > Just one last comment which may throw some light for you on what this group is. And if you are so contemptuous of political processes, you must look to be in other groups than this. This group is POLITICAL. > > From the IGC charter > > The mission of the Internet Governance Caucus (IGC) is to provide a forum for discussion, advocacy, action, .... > > From wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advocacy > > Advocacy is a political process by an individual or group which aims to influence public-policy and resource allocation decisions within political, economic, and social systems and institutions. > > parminder > > >> --srs (iPad) >> >> On 20-Jan-2013, at 15:38, parminder wrote: >> >>> >>> On Sunday 20 January 2013 03:00 PM, Adam Peake wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> I don't recall support the notion of US Exceptionalism from anyone on this list. >>> >>> No one will profess that term for oneself. However, clearly it is US Exceptionalism being practised when: >>> >>> 1. anyone agrees or shows strong sympathy with the view that US has (not just 'had') a 'historic role' in the evolution of the Internet (and perhaps in protection of its 'basic principles', whatever it may mean) and therefore some degree of continued pre-eminence of the US government in some key IG arrangements, including of the CIRs, is fine/ acceptable... >>> >>> 2. anyone is fine with US laws/ courts/ executive/ statutory authorities (FCC, FTC etc) determine much of how the Internet's architecture develops, whether through US law/ jurisdiction’s application on the ICANN, or on most of the monopoly global Internet mega-corporates.... >>> >>> In fact, if the IGC can agree that such US exceptionalism is wrong and unacceptable, and sincerely begins to make political proposals to come out of it, we would have reconciled a lot of political differences among the members of IGC, and also made a great contribution to the area of global governance of the Internet. >>> >>> parminder >>> >>>> >>>> Adam >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Sun, Jan 20, 2013 at 5:43 PM, Guru गुरु wrote: >>>>> On 01/20/2013 01:16 AM, John Curran wrote: >>>>>> On Jan 19, 2013, at 6:18 AM, Riaz K Tayob wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> [The Panglossian world of US Exceptionalism.... of course these matters are discussed and debated, but dare to do anything about it and then those will be put in their place, or no?] >>>>>>> The Overzealous Prosecution of Aaron Swartz >>>>>>> By Stephen L. Carter Jan 18, 2013 1:30 AM GMT+0200 >>>>>>> ... >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Riaz - >>>>>> >>>>>> A very good question; I personally don't subscribe to a view of US Exceptionalism >>>>>> (that's likely because I've travelled a bit and can more readily make comparisons), >>>>> John, >>>>> >>>>> Do you mean you do not think US is exceptional / it is wrong to believe that the US is exceptional >>>>> or >>>>> Do you mean that there is no belief prevalent about US exceptionalism >>>>> >>>>> Can you elaborate on this remark >>>>> >>>>> thanks, >>>>> Guru >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> ____________________________________________________________ >>>>> 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 >>> ____________________________________________________________ >>> 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 > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From william.drake at uzh.ch Sun Jan 20 07:44:46 2013 From: william.drake at uzh.ch (William Drake) Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2013 13:44:46 +0100 Subject: [governance] Bloomberg - The Overzealous Prosecution of Aaron Swartz In-Reply-To: References: <50FAC752.5090502@gmail.com> <50FBAE3C.8010600@ITforChange.net> Message-ID: <2FF29726-86DC-4F81-83CF-664A4ABABFAD@uzh.ch> Hi Adam On Jan 20, 2013, at 10:30 AM, Adam Peake wrote: > I understood the term "US Exceptionalism" to mean something along the lines that US culture was in some what superior. Guru, your comment encouraged a search, and finding a result on wikipedia "American exceptionalism is the proposition that the United States is different from other countries in that it has a specific world mission to spread liberty and democracy." And this would fit with Riaz's use, given the context. > > To the first, hard to think how US culture is superior (special and often great, and often not so great). Second, idea that the US has some god given mission to spread liberty and democracy does seem to live on in the US State department and they seem blind of the hyprocacry of (etc etc) Bradley Manning, SOPA, Guantanamo Bay... and (IG/IGF context) sale by US companies of software/hardware that enables repressive regimes to block/track/monitor etc (as discussed at the 1st IGF, when Google and Cisco were criticized.) > > I don't recall support the notion of US Exceptionalism from anyone on this list. The first sentence you quote from the Wikipedia article is a reductionist misrepresentation of not only the actual history of the concept but the rest of the article itself. The piece moves back and forth between distinctly different uses of the term without comment---it could use more editing and integration—and that sentence picks up on just one of them. For social theorists from de Tocqueville and Tom Paine to Louis Hartz and Seymour Martin Lipset, the concern was to understand why the US appeared not to follow some high-level generalizable patterns of social organization and development found particularly in Europe, e.g. with respect to property rights, money making, the balance between groups and individuals, state/society relations, soccer and socialism, etc. As the article notes, factors like the lack of a transition from feudalism to capitalism, republicanism and the revolutionary rejection of the British model (sorry), puritanism and the frontier (real and imagined) have been among the proposed causal variables, depending on the analysis, but the core concept is an attempt to explain an 'exception from a pattern'. Then you have all the agenda-based misappropriations by various analysts and political actors that take you further and further from the original concern. One step taken by some was to add on the normative judgement of not only different, but 'better'. Another was to draw the programmatic implication that exceptionalism had to be protected from the meddling 'old world' and its wars and social upheavals via an isolationist foreign policy. Yet another was to draw the opposite programmatic implication that exceptionalism provided a mandate and even a moral responsibility to promote US values and visions of social order around the world through an expansionist foreign policy. There have been liberal (in the US sense of the word—another instance an exception from the pattern) and conservative versions of this notion, as well as multilateralist and unilateralist versions, etc. In the past decade or so, the neocon foreign policy establishment took another step farther out with this totalizing construct where expansionism is wedded to gun toting preemptive warring world changing hubris. So that's one agenda-driven misappropriation. The jaw dropping assertion that everyone around the world who supports multistakeholderism a la ICANN or is skeptical that UN-based alternatives would be better is a proponent of US exceptionalism (whatever that means) is just another, and one you can only get here, so enjoy. It's a fair bet though that de Tocqueville might be a little confused… Bill -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From william.drake at uzh.ch Sun Jan 20 07:58:13 2013 From: william.drake at uzh.ch (William Drake) Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2013 13:58:13 +0100 Subject: [governance] Appeals Team - Call for Comments and Interim Findings In-Reply-To: References: <99B5B12AE95441728A797F79FC884BD5@Toshiba> <50FA8510.1080301@itforchange.net> <50FB6AA7.6030301@itforchange.net> Message-ID: Hi Suresh On Jan 20, 2013, at 5:28 AM, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote: > Speaking for myself, I remain opposed to political maneuvring and anti Americanism largely substituting for actual Internet governance related discussion on this list, and hope that this situation changes sufficiently for productive discussions on actual igov issues to resume without continuing to be vitiated by individual agendas. Going forward, your disappointment is 'exceptionally' likely. Going backward would be work better; in particular, check out the discussions from 2003 − 2005 http://lists.igcaucus.org/arc/governance. Cheers Bill -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From suresh at hserus.net Sun Jan 20 08:11:10 2013 From: suresh at hserus.net (Suresh Ramasubramanian) Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2013 05:11:10 -0800 Subject: [governance] Appeals Team - Call for Comments and Interim Findings In-Reply-To: References: <99B5B12AE95441728A797F79FC884BD5@Toshiba> <50FA8510.1080301@itforchange.net> <50FB6AA7.6030301@itforchange.net> Message-ID: <20130120131110.GA14037@hserus.net> William Drake [20/01/13 13:58 +0100]: >Going forward, your disappointment is 'exceptionally' likely. Going >backward would be work better; in particular, check out the discussions >from 2003 − 2005 http://lists.igcaucus.org/arc/governance. Are they materially different from the discussions that were prevalent around say the first IGF? We have most of the same actors, with viewpoints that haven't materially changed - and outside our community, the actual threats we face are fast evolving. So, while it remains important for me to rebut some things here, the actual threats we face, and the work that gets done to address them, seems to be getting done elsewhere. Here, meanwhile, we have a rhetorical tale full of sound and fury, signifying nothing much at all. -------------- 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 From avri at acm.org Sun Jan 20 09:05:17 2013 From: avri at acm.org (Avri Doria) Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2013 09:05:17 -0500 Subject: techno-politics was Re: [governance] Bloomberg - The Overzealous In-Reply-To: References: <50FAC752.5090502@gmail.com> <50FBAE3C.8010600@ITforChange.net> <50FBCE14.7010901@gmail.com> Message-ID: <87FDA724-9919-447F-BF8F-8F0E84142A12@acm.org> On 20 Jan 2013, at 06:21, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote: > The single root (system of root servers under a wide range of control) setup is a result of architecture, not politics. Alternate roots are technically not feasible, and where they do exist, they either require their small number of believers to set up a complete new set of resolvers without which the particular set of alternate roots they require won't resolve. > I contend that this is a techno-political statement I know this is just an example in this discussions, but let me explore this just a little. In the beginning, as far as I recall when DNS was first being discussed in the IETF, there were those who felt that DNS should allow for multiple roots. But it was hard to do and was deemed to be unnecessary by most at the time. the decision that it was unnecessary was political the decision that it was hard was technical. The overall decsion was a techno-political decsion. Today many people feel that it is necessary. That is still a political decision. Today some beleive it is technically possible and not so hard. That is technical Still techno-political There are those who feel that while it may be possible, won't know until it is studied and undergoes a technical development process, but who also beleive that to allow the IETF or other organizations to study and work on that possibility would sanction multiple roots, which they see as a bad thing. Again, a techno-political decision, one where the technical and the politics cannot be separated. I think a lot of the discussions where we have where there 'is it technical' or 'is it political' tussle can be analyzed this way and that in many many cases, things people call solely technical or solely political are really techno-political where both aspects, and maybe others, need simultaneous analysis. avri -------------- 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 From tracyhackshaw at gmail.com Sun Jan 20 09:10:59 2013 From: tracyhackshaw at gmail.com (Tracy F. Hackshaw @ Google) Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2013 10:10:59 -0400 Subject: [governance] Notice to the IGC on Proposed Charter Amendments In-Reply-To: <1358623973.38250.YahooMailNeo@web160504.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> References: <50F38F8E.3090106@ciroap.org> <50F3B31B.4090406@itforchange.net> <50F3B423.1070901@ciroap.org> <50F3B544.3080409@itforchange.net> <1FC731B2-FE70-41AC-B97D-52979AFFAE05@uzh.ch> <1358157197.55375.YahooMailNeo@web125106.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <020a01cdf283$98dfbe10$ca9f3a30$@gmail.com> <20130114212217.7f43bbc9@quill.bollow.ch> <1358227661.77969.YahooMailNeo@web125105.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <735AC965-1DFD-4A66-BFF6-3E828E71D72E@ciroap.org> <20130118165547.472e8ec7@quill.bollow.ch> <675E6D8C-1408-4724-A3B3-107B7F807F07@acm.org> <1358623973.38250.YahooMailNeo@web160504.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: +1 re: @Shalia Misty suggestion. On Jan 19, 2013 3:33 PM, "shaila mistry" wrote: > Can the coordinator please re-post the final version of the proposals > for the three amendments. > We have had a fair amount of dissection so it would be helpful to get a > clean version. > Many thanks > Shaila > > > *The journey begins sooner than you anticipate !* > *..................... the renaissance of composure ! > * > > ------------------------------ > *From:* Avri Doria > *To:* IGC > *Sent:* Saturday, January 19, 2013 8:54 AM > *Subject:* Re: [governance] Notice to the IGC on Proposed Charter > Amendments > > Hi, > > Have the amendments that I co-proposed been lost. > > I am totally confused about what is going on with this process. > I do not know what 1, 2, 3 are. Is on line somewhere? > > Is the vote to wait until every amendment everyone has ever wanted also > gets discussed and put on the ballot? > > avri > > On 18 Jan 2013, at 10:55, Norbert Bollow wrote: > > > Hi Jeremy > > > > In addition there's the amendments proposal by Avri from the > > thread "Suggested amendment for the charter. Nomcom." with more than > > ten co-proposers. > > > > Greetings, > > Norbert > > > > Am Fri, 18 Jan 2013 20:32:58 +0800 > > schrieb Jeremy Malcolm : > > > >> I almost let this slip. Sala asked me to call the charter amendment > >> poll by today, unless we need more time for discussion. So let's > >> just confirm, are we ready to call a poll on any or all of these > >> proposed amendments? I think I have the latest/preferred text for > >> each below, but correct me if I'm wrong: > >> > >> 1. On selection of coordinators, add after "As part of the voting > >> process the voter must personally ascertain that they are a member of > >> the IGC based on membership criteria described elsewhere in this > >> charter and posted as part of the voting information (i.e. a voter > >> must affirm membership on the voter form in order to vote)." > >> > >> ...this text... > >> > >> "Prior to voting the prospective voter must personally ascertain that > >> they are a member of the IGC based on membership criteria described > >> elsewhere in this charter and posted as part of the voting > >> information (i.e. a voter must affirm membership on the voter form > >> prior to voting)." > >> > >> ...then it continues as at present, "The decision to self-identify as > >> a member of the IGC is a personal decision based on the criteria > >> defined. A list of the self-defined member-voters will be published > >> after the election with the results of the election", then another > >> new addition... > >> > >> "All ballots will include the ability for voters to abstain on any > >> choice included on the ballot." > >> > >> 2. Under "Selection of Coordinators", regarding when elections are > >> held, change "by midsummer (the summer solstice) to "by the end of > >> that calendar year". Also in "If events prevent an election by > >> midsummer, it will be held as soon after midsummer as possible," > >> change the word "midsummer" to "then" in both places. > >> > >> 3. Under "Working methods", update the address of the mailing list > >> from governance at lists.cpsr.org to governance at lists.igcaucus.org. > >> > > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > > 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 > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From suresh at hserus.net Sun Jan 20 09:28:06 2013 From: suresh at hserus.net (Suresh Ramasubramanian) Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2013 06:28:06 -0800 Subject: techno-politics was Re: [governance] Bloomberg - The Overzealous In-Reply-To: <87FDA724-9919-447F-BF8F-8F0E84142A12@acm.org> References: <50FAC752.5090502@gmail.com> <50FBAE3C.8010600@ITforChange.net> <50FBCE14.7010901@gmail.com> <87FDA724-9919-447F-BF8F-8F0E84142A12@acm.org> Message-ID: <20130120142806.GB14477@hserus.net> It is techno political to the extent that otherwise it is entirely difficult to ensure that the lists.igcaucus.org we all know and love is the actual lists.igcaucus.org we expect to get, and not some alternative provided by a third party that thinks they are the ig caucus, or some sinister government plot to snoop on their civil society I tend to disagree with lessig's "code is law" as an overly broad generalization, but sometimes engineering and security are hard considerations of reality that we can't get away from, politically expedient or not. If there is an atlernate political theory there are two ways out - 1. An engineering model that scales worldwide to back it. if you espouse an alternate system 2. Work from within the system to change what you feel is wrong with it #1 has been proposed multiple times, but I am afraid it has failed to actually work beyond being an interesting hobbyist theory. Or where it is done at scale, it is definitely not transparent, and even sinister in nature (dnschanger trojans, government sponsored alternate roots for censorship ..) The root hierarchy that is available now is also a valuable tool to address any security threats as a global, coordinated technical community. Avri Doria [20/01/13 09:05 -0500]: > >On 20 Jan 2013, at 06:21, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote: > >> The single root (system of root servers under a wide range of control) setup is a result of architecture, not politics. Alternate roots are technically not feasible, and where they do exist, they either require their small number of believers to set up a complete new set of resolvers without which the particular set of alternate roots they require won't resolve. >> > > >I contend that this is a techno-political statement > >I know this is just an example in this discussions, but let me explore this just a little. > >In the beginning, as far as I recall when DNS was first being discussed in the IETF, there were those who felt that DNS should allow for multiple roots. But it was hard to do and was deemed to be unnecessary by most at the time. > >the decision that it was unnecessary was political >the decision that it was hard was technical. >The overall decsion was a techno-political decsion. > >Today many people feel that it is necessary. That is still a political decision. >Today some beleive it is technically possible and not so hard. That is technical >Still techno-political > >There are those who feel that while it may be possible, won't know until it is studied and undergoes a technical development process, but who also beleive that to allow the IETF or other organizations to study and work on that possibility would sanction multiple roots, which they see as a bad thing. Again, a techno-political decision, one where the technical and the politics cannot be separated. > >I think a lot of the discussions where we have where there 'is it technical' or 'is it political' tussle can be analyzed this way and that in many many cases, things people call solely technical or solely political are really techno-political where both aspects, and maybe others, need simultaneous analysis. > >avri > > > > > > > >____________________________________________________________ >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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From nb at bollow.ch Sun Jan 20 09:41:28 2013 From: nb at bollow.ch (Norbert Bollow) Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2013 15:41:28 +0100 Subject: [governance] Deadline reminder: WSIS Forum 2013 Message-ID: <20130120154128.1e03c118@quill.bollow.ch> [with IGC Coordinator hat on] There's a deadline tomorrow Jan 21 related to the WSIS Forum 2013 (13 to 17 May 2013 in Geneva): "All WSIS Stakeholders are invited to make official submissions to the WSIS Secretariat for the Open Consultation Process on the Thematic Aspects and New Innovative Format. The official submissions phase will begin on 8 October 2012 and the deadline for submission will be 21 January 2013." http://www.itu.int/wsis/implementation/2013/forum/ocp/submissions.html The "binding requests for Workshops" deadline is also tomorrow. We're not going to have any submission from the IGC, but maybe some Caucus members are able to contribute. If so, please keep us informed. Greetings, Norbert -------------- 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 From dogwallah at gmail.com Sun Jan 20 09:50:29 2013 From: dogwallah at gmail.com (McTim) Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2013 09:50:29 -0500 Subject: [governance] Bloomberg - The Overzealous Prosecution of Aaron Swartz In-Reply-To: <50FBC21F.8030401@itforchange.net> References: <50FAC752.5090502@gmail.com> <50FBAE3C.8010600@ITforChange.net> <50FBC21F.8030401@itforchange.net> Message-ID: On Sun, Jan 20, 2013 at 5:08 AM, parminder wrote: > > On Sunday 20 January 2013 03:00 PM, Adam Peake wrote: > > > > I don't recall support the notion of US Exceptionalism from anyone on this > list. > > > No one will profess that term for oneself. However, clearly it is US > Exceptionalism being practised when: No one on the list you mean? > > 1. anyone agrees or shows strong sympathy with the view that US has (not > just 'had') a 'historic role' in the evolution of the Internet this is factual, I would expect people to have strong sympathy towards it. (and perhaps > in protection of its 'basic principles', whatever it may mean) and therefore > some degree of continued pre-eminence of the US government in some key IG > arrangements, including of the CIRs, is fine/ acceptable... Well it is what we have and there are significant barriers to overcome to eliminate this (US Congress for one) that makes working on this issue very low down on the priority list for many of us. > > 2. anyone is fine with US laws/ courts/ executive/ statutory authorities > (FCC, FTC etc) determine much of how the Internet's architecture develops, > whether through US law/ jurisdiction’s application on the ICANN, or on most > of the monopoly global Internet mega-corporates.... Again there is no feasible alternative (except my bitBoat or Internetistan idea maybe). Would you like FB, Google, Yahoo!, all the tier 1's etc, etc to be regulated by a UN CIRP? There is no way you will get any significant number of nations to give up sovereignty in this way. > > In fact, if the IGC can agree that such US exceptionalism is wrong and > unacceptable What is wrong and unacceptable is the labeling of recognition of a pretty fixed reality as "wrong and unacceptable"! What is also wrong and unacceptable is the notion that those of us who advocate for a single unified Internet are somehow suspect. -- 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 From nb at bollow.ch Sun Jan 20 10:18:23 2013 From: nb at bollow.ch (Norbert Bollow) Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2013 16:18:23 +0100 Subject: [governance] "US Exceptionalism" (was Re: Bloomberg - The Overzealous Prosecution...) In-Reply-To: References: <50FAC752.5090502@gmail.com> <50FBAE3C.8010600@ITforChange.net> Message-ID: <20130120161823.3d510425@quill.bollow.ch> John Curran wrote: > On Jan 19, 2013, at 6:18 AM, Riaz K Tayob > wrote: > > [The Panglossian world of US Exceptionalism.... of course these > matters are discussed and debated, but dare to do anything about it > and then those will be put in their place, or no?] > > A very good question; I personally don't subscribe to a view of US > Exceptionalism > (that's likely because I've travelled a bit and can more readily > make comparisons), [With IGC Coordinator hat on] The "US exceptionalism" discussion is one that has been going around in circles on this list for a while. At the same time I would suggest that it is an important issue in the sense that it is deeply linked to concerns and fears that hinder progress on many substantive topics of Internet governance. I propose that in order to start making a bit more progress towards a common understanding, it will be helpful to discuss what is a reasonable set of complementary categories. For example, we might attempt to use the following two categories of viewpoints: "demand of equality among governments in information society governance" - the view that all national governments should have same kind of roles or not in Internet governance and global information society governance in general. "acceptance of US exceptionalism in information society governance" - the view that it is acceptable for the US government to have some special role(s) or power(s) in Internet governance and global information society governance in general. Is this a reasonable categorization of viewpoints? Or would it bring more clarity to introduce three or more complementary categories? Does someone here have an opinion that fits neither of the two categories proposed above? Greetings, Norbert -------------- 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 From dogwallah at gmail.com Sun Jan 20 10:41:41 2013 From: dogwallah at gmail.com (McTim) Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2013 10:41:41 -0500 Subject: [governance] "US Exceptionalism" (was Re: Bloomberg - The Overzealous Prosecution...) In-Reply-To: <20130120161823.3d510425@quill.bollow.ch> References: <50FAC752.5090502@gmail.com> <50FBAE3C.8010600@ITforChange.net> <20130120161823.3d510425@quill.bollow.ch> Message-ID: HI Norbert, (and Congratulations on your election) On Sun, Jan 20, 2013 at 10:18 AM, Norbert Bollow wrote: > John Curran wrote: >> On Jan 19, 2013, at 6:18 AM, Riaz K Tayob >> wrote: >> >> [The Panglossian world of US Exceptionalism.... of course these >> matters are discussed and debated, but dare to do anything about it >> and then those will be put in their place, or no?] >> >> A very good question; I personally don't subscribe to a view of US >> Exceptionalism >> (that's likely because I've travelled a bit and can more readily >> make comparisons), > > [With IGC Coordinator hat on] > > The "US exceptionalism" discussion is one that has been going around > in circles on this list for a while. At the same time I would suggest > that it is an important issue in the sense that it is deeply linked to > concerns and fears that hinder progress on many substantive topics of > Internet governance. I propose that in order to start making a bit more > progress towards a common understanding, it will be helpful to discuss > what is a reasonable set of complementary categories. > > For example, we might attempt to use the following two categories of > viewpoints: > > "demand of equality among governments in information society governance" > - the view that all national governments should have same kind of roles > or not in Internet governance and global information society > governance in general. > > "acceptance of US exceptionalism in information society governance" > - the view that it is acceptable for the US government to have some > special role(s) or power(s) in Internet governance and global > information society governance in general. > > Is this a reasonable categorization of viewpoints? > > Or would it bring more clarity to introduce three or more complementary > categories? > > Does someone here have an opinion that fits neither of the two > categories proposed above? Well I (and I think MM and perhaps others) would like to see the "denationalisation" of IG. -- 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 From avri at acm.org Sun Jan 20 10:52:09 2013 From: avri at acm.org (Avri Doria) Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2013 10:52:09 -0500 Subject: [governance] "US Exceptionalism" (was Re: Bloomberg - The Overzealous Prosecution...) In-Reply-To: References: <50FAC752.5090502@gmail.com> <50FBAE3C.8010600@ITforChange.net> <20130120161823.3d510425@quill.bollow.ch> Message-ID: On 20 Jan 2013, at 10:41, McTim wrote: >> Does someone here have an opinion that fits neither of the two >> categories proposed above? > > Well I (and I think MM and perhaps others) would like to see the > "denationalisation" of IG. I certainly fall into that camp. As the multi-stakeholder models becomes more understood and better applied, it will continue to happen. Moreover, I think it is already in progress, thought perhaps more slowly than some would like. avri -------------- 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 From avri at acm.org Sun Jan 20 10:56:33 2013 From: avri at acm.org (Avri Doria) Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2013 10:56:33 -0500 Subject: techno-politics was Re: [governance] Bloomberg - The Overzealous In-Reply-To: <20130120142806.GB14477@hserus.net> References: <50FAC752.5090502@gmail.com> <50FBAE3C.8010600@ITforChange.net> <50FBCE14.7010901@gmail.com> <87FDA724-9919-447F-BF8F-8F0E84142A12@acm.org> <20130120142806.GB14477@hserus.net> Message-ID: > 2. Work from within the system to change what you feel is wrong with it Yes and no.. The systems by and large excludes this, and other topics, as a matter of faith and will not allow work to be done as a matter of political faith. And accountability as well as advocacy often requires doing political, or technical work, in outside groups in order to get the system to take on a challenges the system calls too hard or against our morality. avri On 20 Jan 2013, at 09:28, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote: > It is techno political to the extent that otherwise it is entirely > difficult to ensure that the lists.igcaucus.org we all know and love is the > actual lists.igcaucus.org we expect to get, and not some alternative > provided by a third party that thinks they are the ig caucus, or some > sinister government plot to snoop on their civil society > > I tend to disagree with lessig's "code is law" as an overly broad > generalization, but sometimes engineering and security are hard > considerations of reality that we can't get away from, politically > expedient or not. > > If there is an atlernate political theory there are two ways out - > > 1. An engineering model that scales worldwide to back it. if you espouse an > alternate system > > 2. Work from within the system to change what you feel is wrong with it > > #1 has been proposed multiple times, but I am afraid it has failed to > actually work beyond being an interesting hobbyist theory. Or where it is > done at scale, it is definitely not transparent, and even sinister in > nature (dnschanger trojans, government sponsored alternate roots for > censorship ..) > > The root hierarchy that is available now is also a valuable tool to address > any security threats as a global, coordinated technical community. -------------- 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 From suresh at hserus.net Sun Jan 20 11:05:58 2013 From: suresh at hserus.net (Suresh Ramasubramanian) Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2013 21:35:58 +0530 Subject: techno-politics was Re: [governance] Bloomberg - The Overzealous In-Reply-To: References: <50FAC752.5090502@gmail.com> <50FBAE3C.8010600@ITforChange.net> <50FBCE14.7010901@gmail.com> <87FDA724-9919-447F-BF8F-8F0E84142A12@acm.org> <20130120142806.GB14477@hserus.net> Message-ID: <92E8CA49-2E96-4616-B810-490E753A622A@hserus.net> It is of course a complex system and one where change must be slow, steady and incremental Any Big Bang change of any description would require a sufficiently large stimulus or threat to the stability of the DNS as a whole. Otherwise, attempting to fix something that is not broken, and that carries very real risks of breaking in unknown ways once tinkered with, is not a matter of political or technical faith. It is a matter of engineering and architecture, neither of which believes in blind faith as much as it believes in science and mathematics. Meanwhile, the most active proponents of alternate roots are currently either criminal elements or totalitarian regime censors, rather than advocates of liberty and freedom from US exceptionalism. --srs (iPad) On 20-Jan-2013, at 21:26, Avri Doria wrote: > > >> 2. Work from within the system to change what you feel is wrong with it > > Yes and no.. > > The systems by and large excludes this, and other topics, as a matter of faith and will not allow work to be done as a matter of political faith. > > And accountability as well as advocacy often requires doing political, or technical work, in outside groups in order to get the system to take on a challenges the system calls too hard or against our morality. > > avri > > -------------- 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 From kerry at kdbsystems.com Sun Jan 20 11:10:15 2013 From: kerry at kdbsystems.com (Kerry Brown) Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2013 16:10:15 +0000 Subject: [governance] "US Exceptionalism" (was Re: Bloomberg - The Overzealous Prosecution...) In-Reply-To: References: <50FAC752.5090502@gmail.com> <50FBAE3C.8010600@ITforChange.net> <20130120161823.3d510425@quill.bollow.ch> Message-ID: > > - the view that all national governments should have same kind of roles > > or not in Internet governance and global information society > > governance in general. > > > > "acceptance of US exceptionalism in information society governance" > > - the view that it is acceptable for the US government to have some > > special role(s) or power(s) in Internet governance and global > > information society governance in general. > > For me it is not US exceptionalism. It is something more nuanced. As a Canadian I would like to see less control by the US. As a citizen of, for lack of a better term, a "western democracy" I would not like to see what I think of as "repressive regimes" get more control. It is a dichotomy I am unable to resolve in my own mind which makes it very hard to debate usefully. I think many people have the same internal struggle. Kerry Brown -------------- 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 From avri at acm.org Sun Jan 20 11:34:31 2013 From: avri at acm.org (Avri Doria) Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2013 11:34:31 -0500 Subject: techno-politics was Re: [governance] Bloomberg - The Overzealous In-Reply-To: <92E8CA49-2E96-4616-B810-490E753A622A@hserus.net> References: <50FAC752.5090502@gmail.com> <50FBAE3C.8010600@ITforChange.net> <50FBCE14.7010901@gmail.com> <87FDA724-9919-447F-BF8F-8F0E84142A12@acm.org> <20130120142806.GB14477@hserus.net> <92E8CA49-2E96-4616-B810-490E753A622A@hserus.net> Message-ID: Hi, Re; > attempting to fix something that is not broken I beleive, that everything has some degree of breakage. Everything needs some degree of fixing. I also tend to beleive in continuous recognition, discussion and fixing of that breakage. On the DNS, I think we already have split root, in a system that does not support a split root, we just don't admit it. I think we should be fixing that, not insisting that the old ways are still the only ways and that all must stay in the fold. also I remember the credo as a notion of global, nay - universal, interconnection. the "one root" variant of that credo is a political aberration in my opinion. But this is about the specific topic and not the general notion that agrees with you in that > It is of course a complex system and one where change must be slow, steady and incremental and i would add, takes many conversations and many types of conversations in many fora. avri On 20 Jan 2013, at 11:05, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote: > It is of course a complex system and one where change must be slow, steady and incremental > > Any Big Bang change of any description would require a sufficiently large stimulus or threat to the stability of the DNS as a whole. Otherwise, attempting to fix something that is not broken, and that carries very real risks of breaking in unknown ways once tinkered with, is not a matter of political or technical faith. It is a matter of engineering and architecture, neither of which believes in blind faith as much as it believes in science and mathematics. > > Meanwhile, the most active proponents of alternate roots are currently either criminal elements or totalitarian regime censors, rather than advocates of liberty and freedom from US exceptionalism. > > --srs (iPad) > > On 20-Jan-2013, at 21:26, Avri Doria wrote: > >> >> >>> 2. Work from within the system to change what you feel is wrong with it >> >> Yes and no.. >> >> The systems by and large excludes this, and other topics, as a matter of faith and will not allow work to be done as a matter of political faith. >> >> And accountability as well as advocacy often requires doing political, or technical work, in outside groups in order to get the system to take on a challenges the system calls too hard or against our morality. >> >> avri >> >> > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From garth.graham at telus.net Sun Jan 20 11:40:25 2013 From: garth.graham at telus.net (Garth Graham) Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2013 08:40:25 -0800 Subject: [governance] "US Exceptionalism" (was Re: Bloomberg - The Overzealous Prosecution...) In-Reply-To: <20130120161823.3d510425@quill.bollow.ch> References: <50FAC752.5090502@gmail.com> <50FBAE3C.8010600@ITforChange.net> <20130120161823.3d510425@quill.bollow.ch> Message-ID: <184587ED-0328-429A-AF60-7B17A4778E8C@telus.net> On 2013-01-20, at 7:18 AM, Norbert Bollow wrote: > Does someone here have an opinion that fits neither of the two categories proposed above? >From time to time, I've attempted an argument for re-framing the context of the debate that's at right angles to most of the content of the IGC list. I haven't succeeded in breaking many icons, but here's a synthesis. A digital culture now exists. It emerged from a relational worldview founded on the principles governing self-organizing systems. Because of that worldview, digital culture holds a different perspective on governance and Internet Governance, one that does not include the industrial age social construction of society as divided into three groups – governments, the private sector and civil society. In digital culture, the primary unit of social organization is the self-organizing community. But it’s a community that does not transcend or submerge autonomous individuals into some kind of collective. Dwellers in digital culture will not allow themselves to be mobilized. And they are not concerned to reform or globalize existing structural arrangements. Within those communities, the functions of structural organization are "distributed," and power resides in a shift in the norms and patterns of individual behavior towards interdependent learning through practice. There are community-based change agents now working to realize that understanding of how the world works. The way forward involves sharing what those agents are learning rather than step-by step reform of global institutions via a “multistakeholder model” that identifies stakeholders in the wrong way. GG -------------- 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 From gurstein at gmail.com Sun Jan 20 12:02:15 2013 From: gurstein at gmail.com (michael gurstein) Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2013 09:02:15 -0800 Subject: Clarifying the arguments: -->RE: [governance] Bloomberg - The Overzealous Prosecution of Aaron Swartz Message-ID: <02c801cdf72f$ec583620$c508a260$@gmail.com> Following on from Norbert's very useful attempt to shift the grounds of the discussion away from a discussion of political terminology/political rhetoric and towards the more (and quite real) differences of perception/values underlying these... (and please be aware that I'm not arguing for one position or another in the below, I'm simply trying to clarify underlying assumptions/expectations.bare with me, the point I'm trying to make needs the fairly convoluted run up but I think it is one that goes to the very heart of our collective enterprise here in the IGC. McTim in the below says Well it is what we have (talking about the root servers issue) and there are significant barriers to overcome to eliminate this (US Congress for one) that makes working on this issue very low down on the priority list for many of us. 1. McTim's argument here is that because there are "significant barriers" (as for example the political stance of a particular national legislative body) to what might otherwise be normatively desireable then the issue has (should have?) a relatively low priority i.e. because something is politically unfeasible therefore it should not have priority in our discussions Again there is no feasible alternative (except my bitBoat or Internetistan idea maybe). Would you like FB, Google, Yahoo!, all the tier 1's etc, etc to be regulated by a UN CIRP? There is no way you will get any significant number of nations to give up sovereignty in this way. 2. that is because of the above, a number of potentially (normatively) desirable "technical" options are foreclosed. This leaves the status quo as not only the only "technical" option but also the only "political" option (in terms of "sovereignty") for some countries (Therefore) What is wrong and unacceptable is the labeling of recognition of a pretty fixed reality as "wrong and unacceptable"! What is also wrong and unacceptable is the notion that those of us who advocate for a single unified Internet are somehow suspect. 3. that is because of the political stance of a particular national legislative body something has become accepted as the necessary technical option and this in turn has now been accepted as the necessary "political" option by certain countries. This has now become a "pretty fixed reality" and thus what started out as a "political" position has now become a necessary and uncontestable "reality". As a "reality" it is of course, not subject to reasonable challenge. I can understand the train of logic that McTim is following above. In philosophical terms this is usually called "pragmatism" (wikipedia: Pragmatism is a philosophical tradition centered on the linking of practice and theory. It describes a process where theory is extracted from practice, and applied back to practice to form what is called intelligent practice.. Pragmatism as a philosophical movement began in the United States in the 1870s.) To make some extremely gross generalizations, Pragmatism is about problem solving. Norms (values) emerge out of the solving of problems. Not surprisingly pragmatism is highly identified with technical thinking and for example, an engineering/problem solving approach to larger philosophical and other issues (including political ones). This differs from the position of most schools of thought (not surprisingly since not many philosophers or political/normative thinkers are engineers) where norms are established first and then those are used as the basis on which problems are solved. I leave it to my distinguished colleagues in the IGC to assess the relative significance that should be given to a "pragmatic" approach to the questions we typically address as compared for example, to a "normative" approach. As an aside based on the above we might see a number of the disputes in the IGC as reflecting the broader growing pains of the Internet as it transitions from a technical phenomenon to a socio-political one. Mike -----Original Message----- From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of McTim Sent: Sunday, January 20, 2013 6:50 AM To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; parminder Subject: Re: [governance] Bloomberg - The Overzealous Prosecution of Aaron Swartz (and perhaps > in protection of its 'basic principles', whatever it may mean) and > therefore some degree of continued pre-eminence of the US government > in some key IG arrangements, including of the CIRs, is fine/ acceptable... Well it is what we have and there are significant barriers to overcome to eliminate this (US Congress for one) that makes working on this issue very low down on the priority list for many of us. > > 2. anyone is fine with US laws/ courts/ executive/ statutory > authorities (FCC, FTC etc) determine much of how the Internet's > architecture develops, whether through US law/ jurisdiction's > application on the ICANN, or on most of the monopoly global Internet mega-corporates.... Again there is no feasible alternative (except my bitBoat or Internetistan idea maybe). Would you like FB, Google, Yahoo!, all the tier 1's etc, etc to be regulated by a UN CIRP? There is no way you will get any significant number of nations to give up sovereignty in this way. > > In fact, if the IGC can agree that such US exceptionalism is wrong and > unacceptable What is wrong and unacceptable is the labeling of recognition of a pretty fixed reality as "wrong and unacceptable"! What is also wrong and unacceptable is the notion that those of us who advocate for a single unified Internet are somehow suspect. -- 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 -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From gurstein at gmail.com Sun Jan 20 13:35:04 2013 From: gurstein at gmail.com (michael gurstein) Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2013 10:35:04 -0800 Subject: [governance] "US Exceptionalism" (was Re: Bloomberg - The Overzealous Prosecution...) In-Reply-To: References: <50FAC752.5090502@gmail.com> <50FBAE3C.8010600@ITforChange.net> <20130120161823.3d510425@quill.bollow.ch> Message-ID: <031501cdf73c$e40c6b50$ac2541f0$@gmail.com> +1 (and only to add... "hard" but necessary... M -----Original Message----- From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Kerry Brown Sent: Sunday, January 20, 2013 8:10 AM To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; McTim Subject: RE: [governance] "US Exceptionalism" (was Re: Bloomberg - The Overzealous Prosecution...) > > - the view that all national governments should have same kind of roles > > or not in Internet governance and global information society > > governance in general. > > > > "acceptance of US exceptionalism in information society governance" > > - the view that it is acceptable for the US government to have some > > special role(s) or power(s) in Internet governance and global > > information society governance in general. > > For me it is not US exceptionalism. It is something more nuanced. As a Canadian I would like to see less control by the US. As a citizen of, for lack of a better term, a "western democracy" I would not like to see what I think of as "repressive regimes" get more control. It is a dichotomy I am unable to resolve in my own mind which makes it very hard to debate usefully. I think many people have the same internal struggle. Kerry Brown -------------- 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 From jcurran at istaff.org Sun Jan 20 13:44:13 2013 From: jcurran at istaff.org (John Curran) Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2013 08:44:13 -1000 Subject: [governance] Bloomberg - The Overzealous Prosecution of Aaron Swartz In-Reply-To: <50FBCE14.7010901@gmail.com> References: <50FAC752.5090502@gmail.com> <50FBAE3C.8010600@ITforChange.net> <50FBCE14.7010901@gmail.com> Message-ID: <1DF7E37C-A5C6-4DEE-912C-93B57A8744DA@istaff.org> On Jan 20, 2013, at 12:59 AM, Riaz K Tayob wrote: > This is the interpretation we make (and we are entitled to make it) when for instance: > > 1. Some argue for ICANN etc to be regulated by US laws (state or otherwise) - and that this is sufficient. > > 2. Others argue that legitimacy of the current structure of governance is not an issue, and that work ought rather to be done within the system. And that it is a none issue. Alas, my comment on your mention of "US Exceptionalism" was simply to note that I do not consider it inevitable that the situation (in particular, with respect to overzealous prosecution nor the specific laws used against Aaron) will improve simply because of discussion and some presumed inherently superior nature of the US structures in these areas... This doesn't mean that it won't get better, but simply that there is no automatic reason to presume that it will simply due to discussion in the wonderful U.S. of A. (note - I do believe it will result in improvements to to the specific provisions of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, but that's because of the acts of specific folks like Rep. Zoe Lofgren and should not otherwise be considered inevitable) Similarly, I do not consider that structures used for governance of critical Internet resources (e.g. name and number identifiers) to be inherently superior simply due to the particular circumstances of origin. In fact, I completely discount the origin and simply consider the structures on their demonstrated merits and weaknesses (i.e. good ideas are good ideas regardless of origin) The bias towards the status quo is not a ringing endorsement of the existing structures, nor a heartfelt belief that the structures must be superior because of US origin and exceptionlism, but simply reflect the reality that there is an existing functional system which has enabled the growth and success of the Internet to date, and an absence of any alternative described in sufficient detail to be demonstrably superior. FYI, /John Disclaimers: My views alone. Supporting or contrary viewpoints are welcomed from all individuals regardless of race, religion, national origin, sexual orientation or disability and will be considered on their merits to the best of my ability. -------------- 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 From vanda at uol.com.br Sun Jan 20 14:15:35 2013 From: vanda at uol.com.br (Vanda UOL) Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2013 17:15:35 -0200 Subject: [governance] Alternative amendment proposal on coordinator election dates In-Reply-To: References: <50F38F8E.3090106@ciroap.org> <50F3B31B.4090406@itforchange.net> <50F3B423.1070901@ciroap.org> <50F3B544.3080409@itforchange.net> <1FC731B2-FE70-41AC-B97D-52979AFFAE05@uzh.ch> <1358157197.55375.YahooMailNeo@web125106.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <020a01cdf283$98dfbe10$ca9f3a30$@gmail.com> <20130114212217.7f43bbc9@quill.bollow.ch> <1358227661.77969.YahooMailNeo@web125105.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <735AC965-1DFD-4A66-BFF6-3E828E71D72E@ciroap.org> <02EB5DC1-5B10-43BD-B8C4-C81F4E528DA3@ciroap.org> <20130118181025.4d826231@quill.bollow.ch> Message-ID: This proposal makes clearer and I also support it. Congrats Norbert! Vanda Scartezini Sent from my iPad On 19/01/2013, at 01:45, Izumi AIZU wrote: > I support this proposal. > > In addition, current Charter does not specify the limit of terms > if I remember/interpret correctly. > > I mean how many terms a coordinator could serve is not limited > nor defined. The convention is one term, 2 year. But if one wishes, > she or he can run for another, right? My suggestion is to limit > to 2 terms, max. > > I don't have the capacity now to describe this idea into Charter > text, and welcome anyone to draft such one. Thanks, > > izumi > > . > > > > 2013/1/19 Norbert Bollow : >> Dear all >> >> As an alternative to the other proposals to change our Charter with >> regard to the dates of coordinator elections, I'd like to make the >> proposal below. I view it as seeking to implement the same objective >> as the other proposals on this topic, but without the problems >> that could potentially result from updating what the Charter >> says about election dates without also updating what it says >> about terms of office. >> >> As per the rules on charter amendments, this proposal will proceed to a >> vote only if there are some co-proposers (The precise language is: “This >> charter can be amended at any time as proposed by no fewer than ten (10) >> members and as approved by no less than two-thirds (2/3) of the members >> of the IGC”); if you agree to be a co-proposer, please reply with text >> like "I support this" or "+1". >> >> >> I propose to change the IGC charter as follows: >> >> >> Change 1: (Clarify terms of office and align with calender years) >> >> Old text: "The IGC will select two (2) coordinators, each for a two (2) >> year term. One coordinator will be elected in the even years, (e.g. >> 2006, 2008) and one will be elected in the odd years (e.g., 2007, >> 2009)." >> >> Proposed new text: "The IGC will select two (2) coordinators, each for >> a two (2) year term. Except under special circumstances (see the >> section “Replacement of a coordinator” below), one coordinator will >> serve for an even year and then an odd year (e.g. January 2014 through >> December 2015) and one coordinator will serve for an odd year and then >> an even year (e.g. January 2015 through December 2016)." >> >> >> Change 2: (Hold coordinator elections before year-end) >> >> Old text: "The selection will be done by on-line voting using the >> voting process according to the following formula: >> * election of the coordinator will be held, whenever possible by >> midsummer (the summer solstice). If events prevent an election by >> midsummer, it will be held as soon after midsummer as possible. >> * the coordinator(s) who are not up for election or not standing for >> election will be responsible for running the election, subject to >> appeal by the appeal team. >> (Note: as a boot strap procedure for 2006, the interim coordinator will >> serve until the end of the first election period, during which two >> coordinators will be selected - one for one (1) year and one for two >> (2) years)." >> >> Proposed new text: "The selection will be done by on-line voting as >> per the following: >> * The election of the coordinator will be held, whenever possible, >> before the corresponding term of office is scheduled to start. If >> events prevent an election by then, the election shall be held as >> soon as possible, with the actual term of office starting on the day >> after election results have been announced, and ending as scheduled. >> * The coordinator(s) who are not up for election or not standing for >> election will be responsible for running the election, subject to >> appeal by the appeal team. >> * In the case of an appeal of an election result, the person who was >> announced as having won the election shall provisionally serve as >> coordinator until the Appeal Team has decided on the appeal. >> " >> >> >> Change 3: (Update example on coordinator replacement) >> >> Old text: "For example, if the 'even year' coordinator for 2006, leaves >> the role during an odd year, 2007, the rest of the term will be filled >> with a replacement, and a new selection will be made on schedule in >> 2008. If on the other hand the coordinator leaves the role early in >> 2008, then the replacement would complete the original term and serve >> the 2008-2010 term." >> >> Proposed new text: "For example, if the coordinator for the years >> 2014-2015 leaves the role during the first year, 2014, the rest of the >> term will be filled with a replacement, and a new selection will be >> made on schedule for the 2016-2017 term. If on the other hand the >> coordinator leaves the role during the second year, 2015, then the >> replacement would complete the original term and also serve the >> 2014-2015 term." >> >> >> [end of charter amendment proposal] >> >> >> Disclosure of personal interest: Since I'm a candidate in the current >> coordinator elections, I have a personal interest in >> (a) having clarity on what the term of office will be if I should get >> elected, and >> (b) having rules in place that support electing a successor who can >> seamlessly take over after my term of office (if I should get elected) >> ends. >> >> In particular, it seems to me that the charter currently does not >> support (b) for coordinators who get elected shortly after the >> beginning of a calendar year. >> >> Greetings, >> Norbert >> >> >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 >> > > > > -- >>> Izumi Aizu << > Institute for InfoSocionomics, Tama University, Tokyo > Institute for HyperNetwork Society, Oita, > Japan > www.anr.org > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From dogwallah at gmail.com Sun Jan 20 14:38:51 2013 From: dogwallah at gmail.com (McTim) Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2013 14:38:51 -0500 Subject: Clarifying the arguments: -->RE: [governance] Bloomberg - The Overzealous Prosecution of Aaron Swartz In-Reply-To: <02c801cdf72f$ec583620$c508a260$@gmail.com> References: <02c801cdf72f$ec583620$c508a260$@gmail.com> Message-ID: Michael, You misunderstand (or simply mistate) my position, at least partially; On Sun, Jan 20, 2013 at 12:02 PM, michael gurstein wrote: > Following on from Norbert's very useful attempt to shift the grounds of the > discussion away from a discussion of political terminology/political > rhetoric and towards the more (and quite real) differences of > perception/values underlying these... > > (and please be aware that I'm not arguing for one position or another in the > below, I'm simply trying to clarify underlying assumptions/expectations…bare > with me, the point I'm trying to make needs the fairly convoluted run up but > I think it is one that goes to the very heart of our collective enterprise > here in the IGC… > > > > McTim in the below says > > > > Well it is what we have (talking about the root servers issue) I'm not talking about the root-servers at all. and there are > significant barriers to overcome to eliminate this (US Congress for one) > that makes working on this issue very low down on the priority list for many > of us. > > 1. McTim's argument here is that because there are > "significant barriers" (as for example the political stance of a particular > national legislative body) to what might otherwise be normatively desireable > then the issue has (should have?) a relatively low priority i.e. because > something is politically unfeasible therefore it should not have priority in > our discussions > I've argued before (many times) that we should actually engage in IG fora, but instead we refuse this, and spend all of our time talking about shape of the table issues or "meta-IG" (read IGF/UN). While we might want the sky to be pink at all times, it is blue, and we can't change that. We do however seek to change that which seems unlikely to change. So you are correct, it is partly pragmatic. > > > Again there is no feasible alternative (except my bitBoat or Internetistan > idea maybe). Would you like FB, Google, Yahoo!, all the tier 1's etc, etc > to be regulated by a UN CIRP? There is no way you will get any significant > number of nations to give up sovereignty in this way. > > 2. that is because of the above, a number of potentially > (normatively) desirable "technical" options are foreclosed. This leaves the > status quo as not only the only "technical" option but also the only > "political" option (in terms of "sovereignty") for some countries not really, they are separate issues. Neither is technical at all. > > > > (Therefore) What is wrong and unacceptable is the labeling of recognition > of a pretty fixed reality as "wrong and unacceptable"! What is also wrong > and unacceptable is the notion that those of us who advocate for a single > unified Internet are somehow suspect. > > 3. that is because of the political stance of a particular > national legislative body something has become accepted as the necessary > technical option How is this "technical"? and this in turn has now been accepted as the necessary > "political" option by certain countries. This has now become a "pretty > fixed reality" and thus what started out as a "political" position has now > become a necessary and uncontestable "reality". Not neccessary at all, but not likely to change either. As a "reality" it is of > course, not subject to reasonable challenge. It is subject to challenge, it's just very, very unlikely to happen. > > > > I can understand the train of logic that McTim is following above… In > philosophical terms this is usually called "pragmatism" (wikipedia: > Pragmatism is a philosophical tradition centered on the linking of practice > and theory. It describes a process where theory is extracted from practice, > and applied back to practice to form what is called intelligent practice…. > Pragmatism as a philosophical movement began in the United States in the > 1870s.) > > > > To make some extremely gross generalizations, Pragmatism is about problem > solving. Norms (values) emerge out of the solving of problems. Not > surprisingly pragmatism is highly identified with technical thinking and for > example, an engineering/problem solving approach to larger philosophical and > other issues (including political ones). This differs from the position of > most schools of thought (not surprisingly since not many philosophers or > political/normative thinkers are engineers) where norms are established > first and then those are used as the basis on which problems are solved. > > > > I leave it to my distinguished colleagues in the IGC to assess the relative > significance that should be given to a "pragmatic" approach to the questions > we typically address as compared for example, to a "normative" approach. I have given my normative option as well, de-nationalisation. -- 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 From gurstein at gmail.com Sun Jan 20 14:49:30 2013 From: gurstein at gmail.com (michael gurstein) Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2013 11:49:30 -0800 Subject: Clarifying the arguments: -->RE: [governance] Bloomberg - The Overzealous Prosecution of Aaron Swartz In-Reply-To: References: <02c801cdf72f$ec583620$c508a260$@gmail.com> Message-ID: <035e01cdf747$4932b110$db981330$@gmail.com> As with any discussion of this kind readers are encouraged to read both sides and decide on which interpretation they feel is the strongest/most appropriate. M -----Original Message----- From: McTim [mailto:dogwallah at gmail.com] Sent: Sunday, January 20, 2013 11:39 AM To: michael gurstein Cc: governance at lists.igcaucus.org Subject: Re: Clarifying the arguments: -->RE: [governance] Bloomberg - The Overzealous Prosecution of Aaron Swartz Michael, You misunderstand (or simply mistate) my position, at least partially; On Sun, Jan 20, 2013 at 12:02 PM, michael gurstein wrote: > Following on from Norbert's very useful attempt to shift the grounds > of the discussion away from a discussion of political > terminology/political rhetoric and towards the more (and quite real) > differences of perception/values underlying these... > > (and please be aware that I'm not arguing for one position or another > in the below, I'm simply trying to clarify underlying > assumptions/expectations.bare with me, the point I'm trying to make > needs the fairly convoluted run up but I think it is one that goes to > the very heart of our collective enterprise here in the IGC. > > > > McTim in the below says > > > > Well it is what we have (talking about the root servers issue) I'm not talking about the root-servers at all. and there are > significant barriers to overcome to eliminate this (US Congress for > one) that makes working on this issue very low down on the priority > list for many of us. > > 1. McTim's argument here is that because there are > "significant barriers" (as for example the political stance of a > particular national legislative body) to what might otherwise be > normatively desireable then the issue has (should have?) a relatively > low priority i.e. because something is politically unfeasible > therefore it should not have priority in our discussions > I've argued before (many times) that we should actually engage in IG fora, but instead we refuse this, and spend all of our time talking about shape of the table issues or "meta-IG" (read IGF/UN). While we might want the sky to be pink at all times, it is blue, and we can't change that. We do however seek to change that which seems unlikely to change. So you are correct, it is partly pragmatic. > > > Again there is no feasible alternative (except my bitBoat or > Internetistan idea maybe). Would you like FB, Google, Yahoo!, all the > tier 1's etc, etc to be regulated by a UN CIRP? There is no way you > will get any significant number of nations to give up sovereignty in this way. > > 2. that is because of the above, a number of > potentially > (normatively) desirable "technical" options are foreclosed. This > leaves the status quo as not only the only "technical" option but also > the only "political" option (in terms of "sovereignty") for some > countries not really, they are separate issues. Neither is technical at all. > > > > (Therefore) What is wrong and unacceptable is the labeling of > recognition of a pretty fixed reality as "wrong and unacceptable"! > What is also wrong and unacceptable is the notion that those of us who > advocate for a single unified Internet are somehow suspect. > > 3. that is because of the political stance of a > particular national legislative body something has become accepted as > the necessary technical option How is this "technical"? and this in turn has now been accepted as the necessary > "political" option by certain countries. This has now become a > "pretty fixed reality" and thus what started out as a "political" > position has now become a necessary and uncontestable "reality". Not neccessary at all, but not likely to change either. As a "reality" it is of > course, not subject to reasonable challenge. It is subject to challenge, it's just very, very unlikely to happen. > > > > I can understand the train of logic that McTim is following above. In > philosophical terms this is usually called "pragmatism" (wikipedia: > Pragmatism is a philosophical tradition centered on the linking of > practice and theory. It describes a process where theory is extracted > from practice, and applied back to practice to form what is called intelligent practice.. > Pragmatism as a philosophical movement began in the United States in > the > 1870s.) > > > > To make some extremely gross generalizations, Pragmatism is about > problem solving. Norms (values) emerge out of the solving of > problems. Not surprisingly pragmatism is highly identified with > technical thinking and for example, an engineering/problem solving > approach to larger philosophical and other issues (including political > ones). This differs from the position of most schools of thought (not > surprisingly since not many philosophers or political/normative > thinkers are engineers) where norms are established first and then those are used as the basis on which problems are solved. > > > > I leave it to my distinguished colleagues in the IGC to assess the > relative significance that should be given to a "pragmatic" approach > to the questions we typically address as compared for example, to a "normative" approach. I have given my normative option as well, de-nationalisation. -- 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 From lehto.paul at gmail.com Sun Jan 20 15:11:24 2013 From: lehto.paul at gmail.com (Paul Lehto) Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2013 15:11:24 -0500 Subject: [governance] Bloomberg - The Overzealous Prosecution of Aaron Swartz In-Reply-To: <2FF29726-86DC-4F81-83CF-664A4ABABFAD@uzh.ch> References: <50FAC752.5090502@gmail.com> <50FBAE3C.8010600@ITforChange.net> <2FF29726-86DC-4F81-83CF-664A4ABABFAD@uzh.ch> Message-ID: On Sun, Jan 20, 2013 at 7:44 AM, William Drake wrote: > [...] For social theorists from de Tocqueville and Tom Paine to Louis > Hartz and Seymour Martin Lipset, the concern was to understand why the US > appeared not to follow some high-level generalizable patterns of social > organization and development found particularly in Europe, e.g. with > respect to property rights, money making, [etc...]. As the article notes, > factors like the lack of a transition from feudalism to capitalism, > republicanism and the revolutionary rejection of the British model (sorry), > puritanism and the frontier (real and imagined) have been among the > proposed causal variables, depending on the analysis, but the core concept > is an attempt to explain an 'exception from a pattern'. > Without claiming that no other factors would also help to explain why the US departs from social organization and development in Europe, I would suggest that the following are quite important in understanding this departure, as well as a significant part of the force behind US exceptionalism when understood in the sense of its export (hypocritical or not) of democracy and empire-tendencies: 1. The USA was the first and biggest example *of a country founded* NOT on geography (that keeps changing), or race, or hereditary lineage, etc., but instead *on the assertion (hypocritical or not) of IDEAS*. * IDEAS are intrinsically without borders, that is why it would seem so natural and perhaps even necessary for the USA to export itself in various ways*because what the USA "is" is inherently intangible and mobile because it is a set of ideas and cultural practices. In some contrast, the "French", just for one example, are much more of a race/nationality (recent multiculturalism notwithstanding), with a history in basically one general geographical place and so it is more readily seen as unseemly for the French to export their practices or ideas for the English, etc. In other words, a nation founded upon certain Ideas will tend very much to be highly "colonial" with respect to those ideals, especially in cases where those ideals are expressly framed as they are in the Declaration of Independence as applying to all of "mankind." 2. Like it or not, legitimate or not, the USA is the world's sole military superpower and world's largest economy. Those 'on the top' in ways like this are extremely unlikely to be humble about using their power from time to time, and when they are humbled they are soon no longer considered to be 'on top.' Paul Lehto, J.D. > Then you have all the agenda-based misappropriations by various analysts > and political actors that take you further and further from the original > concern. One step taken by some was to add on the normative judgement of > not only different, but 'better'. Another was to draw the programmatic > implication that exceptionalism had to be protected from the meddling 'old > world' and its wars and social upheavals via an isolationist foreign > policy. Yet another was to draw the opposite programmatic implication that > exceptionalism provided a mandate and even a moral responsibility to > promote US values and visions of social order around the world through an > expansionist foreign policy. There have been liberal (in the US sense of > the word—another instance an exception from the pattern) and conservative > versions of this notion, as well as multilateralist and unilateralist > versions, etc. In the past decade or so, the neocon foreign policy > establishment took another step farther out with this totalizing construct > where expansionism is wedded to gun toting preemptive warring world > changing hubris. So that's one agenda-driven misappropriation. The jaw > dropping assertion that everyone around the world who supports > multistakeholderism a la ICANN or is skeptical that UN-based alternatives > would be better is a proponent of US exceptionalism (whatever that means) > is just another, and one you can only get here, so enjoy. It's a fair bet > though that de Tocqueville might be a little confused… > > Bill > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > -- Paul R Lehto, J.D. P.O. Box 1 Ishpeming, MI 49849 lehto.paul at gmail.com 906-204-4965 (cell) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From sandra.hoferichter at freenet.de Sun Jan 20 15:29:28 2013 From: sandra.hoferichter at freenet.de (sandra hoferichter) Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2013 21:29:28 +0100 Subject: [governance] European Summer School on Internet governance - Call for application out now! Message-ID: <005601cdf74c$d8da1b00$8a8e5100$@hoferichter@freenet.de> EuroSSIG - apply now! Do you want to know what the political, economic, social and legal implications of Internet Governance are? Do you want to learn what is behind acronyms like ICANN, RIR, DNS, ccTLD, gTLD, iDN, IPv6, ISP, IETF, WHOIS, IGF, and WSIS? Do want to get detailed information about Internet standards, protocols, codes, domain names, IP addresses, registries and registrars? Are you interested to look deeper into the opportunities and risks of the emerging global Internet economy? Then you should apply for the "2013 European Summer School on Internet Governance" (EuroSSIG) and become a member of the SSIG alumni. The 7th EuroSSIG course is taking place in Meissen / Germany, on 04.-10. August 2013. Details can be found on: www.euro-ssig.eu We would be very thankful if you spread the message within your networks. Best Wolfgang and Sandra _____________________________________________________________________ s a n d r a h o f e r i c h t e r management and communication European Summer School on Internet Governance (EuroSSIG) medienstadt leipzig e.v. / netcom institute pf 650 107 d-04189 leipzig fon: +49.341.301 28 27 fax: +49.341.945 60 11 mobile: +49.163.380 87 85 info at hoferichter.eu www.euro-ssig.eu This e-mail may contain confidential and/or privileged information. If you are not the intendet recipient (or have received this e-mail in error) please notify the sender immediately and destroy this mail. Any unauthorized copying, disclosure or distribution of material in this e-mail is strictly forbidden. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: EuroSSIG_2013_small.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 1233230 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- 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 From riaz.tayob at gmail.com Sun Jan 20 17:14:33 2013 From: riaz.tayob at gmail.com (riaz.tayob at gmail.com) Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2013 00:14:33 +0200 Subject: [governance] Bloomberg - The Overzealous Prosecution of Aaron Swartz In-Reply-To: <1DF7E37C-A5C6-4DEE-912C-93B57A8744DA@istaff.org> References: <50FAC752.5090502@gmail.com> <50FBAE3C.8010600@ITforChange.net> <50FBCE14.7010901@gmail.com> <1DF7E37C-A5C6-4DEE-912C-93B57A8744DA@istaff.org> Message-ID: <2ABDEA69-5BFA-41F0-9155-2EC61510F042@gmail.com> Apologies John. You are correct... And my point was perhaps meant in general and not in particular to your input. Yours is an evolutionary approach, even if we differ somewhat.... ...,... On 20 Jan 2013, at 8:44 PM, John Curran wrote: > On Jan 20, 2013, at 12:59 AM, Riaz K Tayob wrote: > >> This is the interpretation we make (and we are entitled to make it) when for instance: >> >> 1. Some argue for ICANN etc to be regulated by US laws (state or otherwise) - and that this is sufficient. >> >> 2. Others argue that legitimacy of the current structure of governance is not an issue, and that work ought rather to be done within the system. And that it is a none issue. > > Alas, my comment on your mention of "US Exceptionalism" was simply to note > that I do not consider it inevitable that the situation (in particular, with respect to > overzealous prosecution nor the specific laws used against Aaron) will improve > simply because of discussion and some presumed inherently superior nature of > the US structures in these areas... This doesn't mean that it won't get better, > but simply that there is no automatic reason to presume that it will simply due > to discussion in the wonderful U.S. of A. (note - I do believe it will result in > improvements to to the specific provisions of the Computer Fraud and Abuse > Act, but that's because of the acts of specific folks like Rep. Zoe Lofgren and > should not otherwise be considered inevitable) > > Similarly, I do not consider that structures used for governance of critical Internet > resources (e.g. name and number identifiers) to be inherently superior simply due > to the particular circumstances of origin. In fact, I completely discount the origin > and simply consider the structures on their demonstrated merits and weaknesses > (i.e. good ideas are good ideas regardless of origin) The bias towards the status > quo is not a ringing endorsement of the existing structures, nor a heartfelt belief > that the structures must be superior because of US origin and exceptionlism, > but simply reflect the reality that there is an existing functional system which > has enabled the growth and success of the Internet to date, and an absence > of any alternative described in sufficient detail to be demonstrably superior. > > FYI, > /John > > Disclaimers: My views alone. Supporting or contrary viewpoints are welcomed > from all individuals regardless of race, religion, national origin, sexual orientation > or disability and will be considered on their merits to the best of my ability. > > -------------- 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 From pouzin at well.com Sun Jan 20 18:28:27 2013 From: pouzin at well.com (Louis Pouzin (well)) Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2013 00:28:27 +0100 Subject: [governance] Bloomberg - The Overzealous Prosecution of Aaron Swartz In-Reply-To: <1DF7E37C-A5C6-4DEE-912C-93B57A8744DA@istaff.org> References: <50FAC752.5090502@gmail.com> <50FBAE3C.8010600@ITforChange.net> <50FBCE14.7010901@gmail.com> <1DF7E37C-A5C6-4DEE-912C-93B57A8744DA@istaff.org> Message-ID: On Sun, Jan 20, 2013 at 7:44 PM, John Curran wrote: > [snip] > > Similarly, I do not consider that structures used for governance of > critical Internet resources (e.g. name and number identifiers) to be > inherently superior simply due to the particular circumstances of origin. > In fact, I completely discount the origin and simply consider the > structures on their demonstrated merits and weaknesses > (i.e. good ideas are good ideas regardless of origin) The bias towards > the status quo is not a ringing endorsement of the existing structures, nor > a heartfelt belief that the structures must be superior because of US > origin and exceptionlism, but simply reflect the reality that there is an > existing functional system which has enabled the growth and success of the > Internet to date, and *an absence of any alternative described in > sufficient detail to be demonstrably superior.* > > FYI, > /John > - - - > This *final argument *is customarily used to discard methods or technologies carrying the potential to derail, disrupt, replace, .. some older ones considered as proven, and usually feeding strong vested interests (read lobbies). Were automobiles superior to oxcarts, roads superior to railways, airplanes superior to airships ? Surely not when they were first engineered. Lobbies never have enough details when the real issue is to defend their turf. Thus we should not worry too much about such a tactic. Critical internet resources are names, numbers, routes, and now data. The internet scale has outgrown its 40-year old design. Overpatching is not a solution, it just increases complexity. There is not much improvement to expect from revamping existing structures, they have plainly revealed their limits. It's time to think of manageable components and build on subsidiarity. Cheers, Louis. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From jcurran at istaff.org Sun Jan 20 19:28:58 2013 From: jcurran at istaff.org (John Curran) Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2013 14:28:58 -1000 Subject: [governance] Bloomberg - The Overzealous Prosecution of Aaron Swartz In-Reply-To: References: <50FAC752.5090502@gmail.com> <50FBAE3C.8010600@ITforChange.net> <50FBCE14.7010901@gmail.com> <1DF7E37C-A5C6-4DEE-912C-93B57A8744DA@istaff.org> Message-ID: On Jan 20, 2013, at 1:28 PM, "Louis Pouzin (well)" wrote: > There is not much improvement to expect from revamping existing structures, they have plainly revealed their limits. Louis - I'm not sure that I'd agree with the above point, and would welcome further exploration. What limits do you perceive in the current structures? > It's time to think of manageable components and build on subsidiarity. Full agreement with that principle, but I don't find it at all incompatible with the existing structures... Can you elaborate on why you feel that existing structures can't be revamped along these principles? /John Disclaimer: My views alone. Warning: Mental Choking hazard - Email message contains many small thoughts. -------------- 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 From parminder at itforchange.net Sun Jan 20 21:26:19 2013 From: parminder at itforchange.net (parminder) Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2013 07:56:19 +0530 Subject: [governance] Bloomberg - The Overzealous Prosecution of Aaron Swartz In-Reply-To: References: <50FAC752.5090502@gmail.com> <50FBAE3C.8010600@ITforChange.net> <50FBC21F.8030401@itforchange.net> Message-ID: <50FCA74B.6000406@itforchange.net> McTim Actually I should thank you for your email. I find it to perfectly expound what I call US Exceptionalism in the context of global IG. You say that the US /'continues'/ to have a legitimate 'historic role' in the global governance of the Internet, which I understand to certainly mean as special and being different and higher than of any other country/ government. However, in the next sentence you suggest that since it is difficult to change the status quo, it is low priority for you and many others..... Here you still do not explicitly say that you think it is wrong that US should have a higher role than other governments. You simply casually say, it is difficult to change things and so.... Do you think it is easier to change China's authoritarian policies vis a vis the Internet, which consideration never seems to come in our way of criticising them and seeking change.... Why then this special favour to the US, is the question. (you also say that there is no alternative but to let the global Internet corporations be subject basically to the US jurisdiction, because in your view any multi-lateral alternative is worse .) In the next para however you are rather blunt. You say that " What is wrong and unacceptable is the labeling of recognition of a pretty fixed reality as "wrong and unacceptable"! " I havent heard a clearer status quoist statement. You are telling us that 'a pretty fixed reality' is best to recognised as such, whereby it is useless to protest and seek change. (People can actually say such things on CS lists which are supposed to do advocacy for political change!!) McTim, you have rather clearly described the politics of US exceptionalism and status quo-ism which is indirectly practised by many on this list . As to your comment " What is also wrong and unacceptable is the notion that those of us who advocate for a single unified Internet are somehow suspect. " (McTim) This is a complete red herring. I have no doubt that I am as much a supporter for a single unified Internet as you may be. parminder On Sunday 20 January 2013 08:20 PM, McTim wrote: > On Sun, Jan 20, 2013 at 5:08 AM, parminder wrote: >> On Sunday 20 January 2013 03:00 PM, Adam Peake wrote: >> >> >> >> I don't recall support the notion of US Exceptionalism from anyone on this >> list. >> >> >> No one will profess that term for oneself. However, clearly it is US >> Exceptionalism being practised when: > No one on the list you mean? > > >> 1. anyone agrees or shows strong sympathy with the view that US has (not >> just 'had') a 'historic role' in the evolution of the Internet > this is factual, I would expect people to have strong sympathy towards it. > > > (and perhaps >> in protection of its 'basic principles', whatever it may mean) and therefore >> some degree of continued pre-eminence of the US government in some key IG >> arrangements, including of the CIRs, is fine/ acceptable... > Well it is what we have and there are significant barriers to overcome > to eliminate this (US Congress for one) that makes working on this > issue very low down on the priority list for many of us. > > >> 2. anyone is fine with US laws/ courts/ executive/ statutory authorities >> (FCC, FTC etc) determine much of how the Internet's architecture develops, >> whether through US law/ jurisdiction’s application on the ICANN, or on most >> of the monopoly global Internet mega-corporates.... > Again there is no feasible alternative (except my bitBoat or > Internetistan idea maybe). Would you like FB, Google, Yahoo!, all the > tier 1's etc, etc to be regulated by a UN CIRP? There is no way you > will get any significant number of nations to give up sovereignty in > this way. > > >> In fact, if the IGC can agree that such US exceptionalism is wrong and >> unacceptable > What is wrong and unacceptable is the labeling of recognition of a > pretty fixed reality as "wrong and unacceptable"! > > What is also wrong and unacceptable is the notion that those of us who > advocate for a single unified Internet are somehow suspect. > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From parminder at itforchange.net Sun Jan 20 21:27:04 2013 From: parminder at itforchange.net (parminder) Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2013 07:57:04 +0530 Subject: [governance] Bloomberg - The Overzealous Prosecution of Aaron Swartz In-Reply-To: <2FF29726-86DC-4F81-83CF-664A4ABABFAD@uzh.ch> References: <50FAC752.5090502@gmail.com> <50FBAE3C.8010600@ITforChange.net> <2FF29726-86DC-4F81-83CF-664A4ABABFAD@uzh.ch> Message-ID: <50FCA778.9010908@itforchange.net> Bill The history of the term "US exceptionalism" that you relate is truly illuminating (no irony intended). However, I have to disagree with you when you come to the contemporary moment and the contextual space (global IG). " The jaw dropping assertion that everyone around the world who supports multistakeholderism a la ICANN or is skeptical that UN-based alternatives would be better is a proponent of US exceptionalism (whatever that means) is just another, and one you can only get here, so enjoy. " (Bill) No one has called support to ICANN multistakeholderism as US exceptionalism. (Please show one instance.) Only the ICANN oversight model attracts the label of US exceptionalism. Why would you want to confuse/ conflate the two. (I do however understand why the US government works overtime to confuse/ conflate the two.) They are very different things - the ICANN's multistakeholder model and ICANN's oversight model. Dont you think they are very different. I am hundred percent sure that US exceptionalism has never been mentioned on this list in relation to ICANN multistakeholder model. However, it has often been applied to the ICANN oversight model, and to those who support it. I support ICANN's multistakeholder model, and have in fact often, on this list, called for it to be institutionalised through a treaty. I consider support to ICANN oversight model as supporting US exceptionalism. In principle, it is no differnet than supporting US's global expansionism and unilateral actions in other areas that you describe. Also, when you speak of 'sceptical that UN based alternatives will be better' again you need to explain whether you are talking of 1. UN based alternatives for running the domain name systems, and Internet technical standard systems (something which a 'very few countries' want ITU to do, and an overwhelming majority does not) or 2. UN based alternatives to US oversight of the ICANN. (almost all non US countries really seek some kind of a non US, multilateral oversight of ICANN, whether UN based or not) Again, ICANN own work and its oversight have to be seen as two very distinct issues. I think if we undertake a category and 'boundaries of an issue' clarification exercise first, something that Norbert seems to be attempting, we can actually do a useful discussion on these issues. Who knows, maybe we can even agree on some issues, and make valuable contribution to the evolution of global IG. parminder On Sunday 20 January 2013 06:14 PM, William Drake wrote: > Hi Adam > > On Jan 20, 2013, at 10:30 AM, Adam Peake > wrote: > >> I understood the term "US Exceptionalism" to mean something along the >> lines that US culture was in some what superior. Guru, your comment >> encouraged a search, and finding a result on wikipedia "American >> exceptionalism is the proposition that the United States is different >> from other countries in that it has a specific world mission to >> spread liberty and democracy." And this would fit with Riaz's use, >> given the context. >> >> To the first, hard to think how US culture is superior (special and >> often great, and often not so great). Second, idea that the US has >> some god given mission to spread liberty and democracy does seem to >> live on in the US State department and they seem blind of the >> hyprocacry of (etc etc) Bradley Manning, SOPA, Guantanamo Bay... and >> (IG/IGF context) sale by US companies of software/hardware that >> enables repressive regimes to block/track/monitor etc (as discussed >> at the 1st IGF, when Google and Cisco were criticized.) >> >> I don't recall support the notion of US Exceptionalism from anyone on >> this list. > > > The first sentence you quote from the Wikipedia article is a > reductionist misrepresentation of not only the actual history of the > concept but the rest of the article itself. The piece moves back and > forth between distinctly different uses of the term without > comment---it could use more editing and integration—and that sentence > picks up on just one of them. For social theorists from de > Tocqueville and Tom Paine to Louis Hartz and Seymour Martin Lipset, > the concern was to understand why the US appeared not to follow some > high-level generalizable patterns of social organization and > development found particularly in Europe, e.g. with respect to > property rights, money making, the balance between groups and > individuals, state/society relations, soccer and socialism, etc. As > the article notes, factors like the lack of a transition from > feudalism to capitalism, republicanism and the revolutionary rejection > of the British model (sorry), puritanism and the frontier (real and > imagined) have been among the proposed causal variables, depending on > the analysis, but the core concept is an attempt to explain an > 'exception from a pattern'. > > Then you have all the agenda-based misappropriations by various > analysts and political actors that take you further and further from > the original concern. One step taken by some was to add on the > normative judgement of not only different, but 'better'. Another was > to draw the programmatic implication that exceptionalism had to be > protected from the meddling 'old world' and its wars and social > upheavals via an isolationist foreign policy. Yet another was to draw > the opposite programmatic implication that exceptionalism provided a > mandate and even a moral responsibility to promote US values and > visions of social order around the world through an expansionist > foreign policy. There have been liberal (in the US sense of the > word—another instance an exception from the pattern) and conservative > versions of this notion, as well as multilateralist and unilateralist > versions, etc. In the past decade or so, the neocon foreign policy > establishment took another step farther out with this totalizing > construct where expansionism is wedded to gun toting preemptive > warring world changing hubris. So that's one agenda-driven > misappropriation. The jaw dropping assertion that everyone around the > world who supports multistakeholderism a la ICANN or is skeptical that > UN-based alternatives would be better is a proponent of US > exceptionalism (whatever that means) is just another, and one you can > only get here, so enjoy. It's a fair bet though that de Tocqueville > might be a little confused… > > Bill > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From karl at cavebear.com Sun Jan 20 21:52:24 2013 From: karl at cavebear.com (Karl Auerbach) Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2013 18:52:24 -0800 Subject: techno-politics was Re: [governance] Bloomberg - The Overzealous In-Reply-To: <87FDA724-9919-447F-BF8F-8F0E84142A12@acm.org> References: <50FAC752.5090502@gmail.com> <50FBAE3C.8010600@ITforChange.net> <50FBCE14.7010901@gmail.com> <87FDA724-9919-447F-BF8F-8F0E84142A12@acm.org> Message-ID: <50FCAD68.5060500@cavebear.com> On 01/20/2013 06:05 AM, Avri Doria wrote: >> The single root (system of root servers under a wide range of >> control) setup is a result of architecture, not politics. >> Alternate roots are technically not feasible, and where they do >> exist, they either require their small number of believers to set >> up a complete new set of resolvers without which the particular set >> of alternate roots they require won't resolve. > I contend that this is a techno-political statement I agree. And it is a self-interested techno-political statement; there are several bodies - such as ISOC, IETF, ICANN - that benefit from cash flows derived from the belief that the internet requires a singular, catholic (lower case 'c') DNS root. For many years there have been competing root systems. It is very true that many of them have been run by people who care little for adherence to written and broadly practiced internet technical standards. And many of them have been run with no concern for availability. But that is not true for all - for example there was the ORSN in Europe (which even had some of the legacy root operators among its members.) An interesting twist to its rules was that it promised not to remove any ccTLD even if ICANN did - this was in deference to the question whether .su should continue to exist even though the Soviet Union has itself ceased. And for many years both ISPs and individuals have run roots for their own benefit or to control the quality of root-level resolutions for their customers. Well run competing roots delegate to TLDs with exactly the same set of NS and glue records as do the legacy roots. So all that a root system really is is a portal into an array of TLD servers. The big issue is not SINGULARITY of DNS roots but rather CONSISTENCY. Inconsistent roots - ones that surprise users - are going to get the same kind of user reaction as was seen in Monty Python's Tobacconist sketch - in which there as a rather surprising Hungarian-English dictionary. Users will reject root systems that lead to surprising results. And the laws of trademark and fraud will insure that that rejection would be backed by lawyers and law enforcement. The definition of "consistency" is an interesting one. Roots such as the ORSN defined "consistency" as being "same as the ICANN/NTIA/Verisign root zone" with the exception of the root servers themselves (and with the proviso about .su that I mentioned above.) But there is a more broad definition, which is that two roots are consistent if: - For each TLD in common between the two roots the delegation (NS and glue) records are the same. This definition allows roots to differ at the edges, i.e. in the "boutique" TLDs that they chose to carry. But for those TLDs that are in common this definition demands that those TLDs resolve in the same way. There is no doubt in my mind that all sensible and self-interested root operators would include as a core the set of TLDs approved by ICANN. (Although I can imagine root systems run by some religious groups or fundamentalist governments eliding some entries such as .xxx, as is within their power to do.) And sensible and self-interested root operators would probably not look with favor on any boutique TLDs that have the same name as other boutique TLDs, in other words use of a name is contested. Root operators, knowing that their set of users could walk away, would want to avoid spoiling their offering by including TLDs that could surprise users. (The same thing would hold true to TLDs that have been found to be likely to be in violation of trademark or other laws.) What I find particularly interesting about this approach is that it provides a natural way to walk around ICANN's new TLD process. I mentioned those "boutique" TLDs - well those are TLDs that are aspiring for user acceptance. What is a more natural form of "bottom up" choice than letting users decide what boutique TLDs they like and what ones they ignore? Those boutique TLDs that get user acceptance will find their way into other root systems and perhaps eventually become "must have" items for all root operators to put into their core offerings. This is how most products - and TLDs are nothing but products - achieve market share. The internet need not be unique in this regard. There are, of course, business model questions about how and why one might want to run a competing root. It might be because one wants to serve a community that wants to shape its view of the internet landscape for those of its members who agree to that view. Or it might be because one is doing data mining of the queries to generate market data (does one really think that Verisign or the US government root operators are not today data mining the root query stream?) In any case, our own lack of imagination why one might want to run a competing root ought not to cause us to deny to others the right to try out their own ideas. The internet is all about the end-to-end principle and innovation at the edges. And what is more end-to-end and edge innovation than letting people set up their own DNS roots an inviting people to voluntarily use them? --karl-- -------------- 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 From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com Sun Jan 20 23:10:43 2013 From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro) Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2013 16:10:43 +1200 Subject: [governance] 2013 Mag NomCom Vote Results In-Reply-To: <50FC0D6E.4040702@communisphere.com> References: <50FC0D6E.4040702@communisphere.com> Message-ID: Dear Members of the IGC, The MAG NomCom concluded their voting on MAG Nominees for the attention of the Under Secretary General of UNDESA who had invited Nominees for the selection of the MAG as it commences the rotation process. We would like to thank all the Nominees who sent in their Expressions of Interest. We would also like to thank the MAG NomCom for its service to the IGC. The MAG NomCom comprised of the following- Thomas Lowenhaupt (NomCom Independent Non-Voting Chair) Wilson Abigaba (NomCom) -voting member Shahid Akbar (NomCom) -voting member Devon Blake (NomCom) -voting member Dixie Hawtin (NomCom) -voting member Asif Kabani (NomCom)-voting member The following were selected by the MAG, see below: - Fatima Cambronero - Robert Guerra - Michael Gurstein - Brenden Kuerbis - Jeremy Malcolm - Tim McGinnis - Baudouin Schombe The MAG NomCom will be submitting a report which will be published on the mailing list within the next 14 days. Kind Regards, Sala (on behalf of the Coordinators) ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Thomas Lowenhaupt Date: Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 3:29 AM Subject: 2013 Mag NomCom Vote Results To: "Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro" , Norbert Bollow Cc: Wilson Abigaba , Shahid Akbar < shahid.akbar at biid.org.bd>, Devon Blake , Dixie Hawtin < Dixie at global-partners.co.uk>, Asif Kabani Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro, Co-coordinator Norbert Bollow, Co-coordinator Dear Sala and Norbert, The vote of the Nominating Committee was completed a short while ago with the following 7 nominees selected: - Fatima Cambronero - Robert Guerra - Michael Gurstein - Brenden Kuerbis - Jeremy Malcolm - Tim McGinnis - Baudouin Schombe A detailed report on the selection will be forthcoming. Sincerely, Thomas Lowenhaupt, Non Voting Chair for the IGC 2013 MAG Nominating Committee Voting members: Wilson Abigaba, Shahid Akbar, Devon Blake, Dixie Hawtin, Asif Kabani -- Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala P.O. Box 17862 Suva Fiji Twitter: @SalanietaT Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro Tel: +679 3544828 Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com Sun Jan 20 23:11:47 2013 From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro) Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2013 16:11:47 +1200 Subject: [governance] Re: 2013 Mag NomCom Vote Results In-Reply-To: References: <50FC0D6E.4040702@communisphere.com> Message-ID: correction "the following were selected by the MAG" should read by the "MAG NomCom" On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 4:10 PM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro < salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com> wrote: > Dear Members of the IGC, > > The MAG NomCom concluded their voting on MAG Nominees for the attention of > the Under Secretary General of UNDESA who had invited Nominees for the > selection of the MAG as it commences the rotation process. > > We would like to thank all the Nominees who sent in their Expressions of > Interest. We would also like to thank the MAG NomCom for its service to the > IGC. > > The MAG NomCom comprised of the following- > > > Thomas Lowenhaupt (NomCom Independent Non-Voting Chair) > Wilson Abigaba (NomCom) -voting member > Shahid Akbar (NomCom) -voting member > Devon Blake (NomCom) -voting member > Dixie Hawtin (NomCom) -voting member > Asif Kabani (NomCom)-voting member > > The following were selected by the MAG, see below: > > > - Fatima Cambronero > - Robert Guerra > - Michael Gurstein > - Brenden Kuerbis > - Jeremy Malcolm > - Tim McGinnis > - Baudouin Schombe > > The MAG NomCom will be submitting a report which will be published on the > mailing list within the next 14 days. > Kind Regards, > Sala (on behalf of the Coordinators) > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: Thomas Lowenhaupt > Date: Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 3:29 AM > Subject: 2013 Mag NomCom Vote Results > To: "Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro" , > Norbert Bollow > Cc: Wilson Abigaba , Shahid Akbar < > shahid.akbar at biid.org.bd>, Devon Blake , Dixie Hawtin < > Dixie at global-partners.co.uk>, Asif Kabani > > > Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro, Co-coordinator > Norbert Bollow, Co-coordinator > > Dear Sala and Norbert, > > The vote of the Nominating Committee was completed a short while ago with > the following 7 nominees selected: > > - Fatima Cambronero > - Robert Guerra > - Michael Gurstein > - Brenden Kuerbis > - Jeremy Malcolm > - Tim McGinnis > - Baudouin Schombe > > A detailed report on the selection will be forthcoming. > > Sincerely, > > Thomas Lowenhaupt, Non Voting Chair > for the IGC 2013 MAG Nominating Committee > > Voting members: Wilson Abigaba, Shahid Akbar, Devon Blake, Dixie Hawtin, > Asif Kabani > > > > -- > Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala > P.O. Box 17862 > Suva > Fiji > > Twitter: @SalanietaT > Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro > Tel: +679 3544828 > Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 > > > > -- Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala P.O. Box 17862 Suva Fiji Twitter: @SalanietaT Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro Tel: +679 3544828 Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From suresh at hserus.net Sun Jan 20 23:33:06 2013 From: suresh at hserus.net (Suresh Ramasubramanian) Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2013 20:33:06 -0800 Subject: [governance] 2013 Mag NomCom Vote Results In-Reply-To: References: <50FC0D6E.4040702@communisphere.com> Message-ID: <20130121043306.GA19021@hserus.net> Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro [21/01/13 16:10 +1200]: > - Fatima Cambronero > - Robert Guerra > - Michael Gurstein > - Brenden Kuerbis > - Jeremy Malcolm > - Tim McGinnis > - Baudouin Schombe Congratulations to all, and to the nomcom -------------- 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 From suresh at hserus.net Sun Jan 20 23:35:05 2013 From: suresh at hserus.net (Suresh Ramasubramanian) Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2013 20:35:05 -0800 Subject: techno-politics was Re: [governance] Bloomberg - The Overzealous In-Reply-To: <50FCAD68.5060500@cavebear.com> References: <50FAC752.5090502@gmail.com> <50FBAE3C.8010600@ITforChange.net> <50FBCE14.7010901@gmail.com> <87FDA724-9919-447F-BF8F-8F0E84142A12@acm.org> <50FCAD68.5060500@cavebear.com> Message-ID: <20130121043505.GB19021@hserus.net> Karl Auerbach [20/01/13 18:52 -0800]: >The big issue is not SINGULARITY of DNS roots but rather CONSISTENCY. once you open that can of worms, what you get is 1. Anybody - consistent or not - can set up a root server 2. You can't guarantee intent -------------- 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 From toml at communisphere.com Sun Jan 20 23:57:41 2013 From: toml at communisphere.com (Thomas Lowenhaupt) Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2013 23:57:41 -0500 Subject: [governance] Re: 2013 Mag NomCom Vote Results In-Reply-To: References: <50FC0D6E.4040702@communisphere.com> Message-ID: <50FCCAC5.50304@communisphere.com> Sala, Please note that one of the NomCom's selections, Brenden Kuerbis, notified me earlier today that he was unable to serve at this time. This decision by Mr. Kuerbis was reflected in the document forwarded by Norbert Bollow to the IGF Secretariat indicating the IGC's nominees. Sincerely, Tom Lowenhaupt On 1/20/2013 11:11 PM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro wrote: > correction "the following were selected by the MAG" should read by the > "MAG NomCom" > > On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 4:10 PM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro > > wrote: > > Dear Members of the IGC, > > The MAG NomCom concluded their voting on MAG Nominees for the > attention of the Under Secretary General of UNDESA who had invited > Nominees for the selection of the MAG as it commences the rotation > process. > > We would like to thank all the Nominees who sent in their > Expressions of Interest. We would also like to thank the MAG > NomCom for its service to the IGC. > > The MAG NomCom comprised of the following- > > > Thomas Lowenhaupt (NomCom Independent Non-Voting Chair) > Wilson Abigaba (NomCom) -voting member > Shahid Akbar (NomCom) -voting member > Devon Blake (NomCom) -voting member > Dixie Hawtin (NomCom) -voting member > Asif Kabani (NomCom)-voting member > > The following were selected by the MAG, see below: > > * Fatima Cambronero > * Robert Guerra > * Michael Gurstein > * Brenden Kuerbis > * Jeremy Malcolm > * Tim McGinnis > * Baudouin Schombe > > The MAG NomCom will be submitting a report which will be published > on the mailing list within the next 14 days. > > Kind Regards, > Sala (on behalf of the Coordinators) > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: *Thomas Lowenhaupt* > > Date: Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 3:29 AM > Subject: 2013 Mag NomCom Vote Results > To: "Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro" > >, Norbert Bollow > > > Cc: Wilson Abigaba >, Shahid Akbar > >, > Devon Blake >, Dixie > Hawtin >, Asif Kabani > > > > > Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro, Co-coordinator > Norbert Bollow, Co-coordinator > > Dear Sala and Norbert, > > The vote of the Nominating Committee was completed a short while > ago with the following 7 nominees selected: > > * Fatima Cambronero > * Robert Guerra > * Michael Gurstein > * Brenden Kuerbis > * Jeremy Malcolm > * Tim McGinnis > * Baudouin Schombe > > A detailed report on the selection will be forthcoming. > > Sincerely, > > Thomas Lowenhaupt, Non Voting Chair > for the IGC 2013 MAG Nominating Committee > > Voting members: Wilson Abigaba, Shahid Akbar, Devon Blake, Dixie > Hawtin, Asif Kabani > > > > -- > Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala > P.O. Box 17862 > Suva > Fiji > > Twitter: @SalanietaT > Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro > Tel: +679 3544828 > Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 > > > > > > -- > Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala > P.O. Box 17862 > Suva > Fiji > > Twitter: @SalanietaT > Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro > Tel: +679 3544828 > Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com Sun Jan 20 23:59:07 2013 From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro) Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2013 16:59:07 +1200 Subject: [governance] Re: 2013 Mag NomCom Vote Results In-Reply-To: <50FCCAC5.50304@communisphere.com> References: <50FC0D6E.4040702@communisphere.com> <50FCCAC5.50304@communisphere.com> Message-ID: Thank you Tom for pointing that out. Kind Regards, Sala On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 4:57 PM, Thomas Lowenhaupt wrote: > Sala, > > Please note that one of the NomCom's selections, Brenden Kuerbis, notified > me earlier today that he was unable to serve at this time. > > This decision by Mr. Kuerbis was reflected in the document forwarded by > Norbert Bollow to the IGF Secretariat indicating the IGC's nominees. > > Sincerely, > > Tom Lowenhaupt > > > > On 1/20/2013 11:11 PM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro wrote: > > correction "the following were selected by the MAG" should read by the > "MAG NomCom" > > On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 4:10 PM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro < > salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com> wrote: > >> Dear Members of the IGC, >> >> The MAG NomCom concluded their voting on MAG Nominees for the attention >> of the Under Secretary General of UNDESA who had invited Nominees for the >> selection of the MAG as it commences the rotation process. >> >> We would like to thank all the Nominees who sent in their Expressions of >> Interest. We would also like to thank the MAG NomCom for its service to the >> IGC. >> >> The MAG NomCom comprised of the following- >> >> >> Thomas Lowenhaupt (NomCom Independent Non-Voting Chair) >> Wilson Abigaba (NomCom) -voting member >> Shahid Akbar (NomCom) -voting member >> Devon Blake (NomCom) -voting member >> Dixie Hawtin (NomCom) -voting member >> Asif Kabani (NomCom)-voting member >> >> The following were selected by the MAG, see below: >> >> >> - Fatima Cambronero >> - Robert Guerra >> - Michael Gurstein >> - Brenden Kuerbis >> - Jeremy Malcolm >> - Tim McGinnis >> - Baudouin Schombe >> >> The MAG NomCom will be submitting a report which will be published on >> the mailing list within the next 14 days. >> Kind Regards, >> Sala (on behalf of the Coordinators) >> >> >> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- >> From: Thomas Lowenhaupt >> Date: Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 3:29 AM >> Subject: 2013 Mag NomCom Vote Results >> To: "Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro" , >> Norbert Bollow >> Cc: Wilson Abigaba , Shahid Akbar < >> shahid.akbar at biid.org.bd>, Devon Blake , Dixie Hawtin >> , Asif Kabani >> >> >> Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro, Co-coordinator >> Norbert Bollow, Co-coordinator >> >> Dear Sala and Norbert, >> >> The vote of the Nominating Committee was completed a short while ago with >> the following 7 nominees selected: >> >> - Fatima Cambronero >> - Robert Guerra >> - Michael Gurstein >> - Brenden Kuerbis >> - Jeremy Malcolm >> - Tim McGinnis >> - Baudouin Schombe >> >> A detailed report on the selection will be forthcoming. >> >> Sincerely, >> >> Thomas Lowenhaupt, Non Voting Chair >> for the IGC 2013 MAG Nominating Committee >> >> Voting members: Wilson Abigaba, Shahid Akbar, Devon Blake, Dixie Hawtin, >> Asif Kabani >> >> >> >> -- >> Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala >> P.O. Box 17862 >> Suva >> Fiji >> >> Twitter: @SalanietaT >> Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro >> Tel: +679 3544828 >> Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 >> >> >> >> > > > -- > Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala > P.O. Box 17862 > Suva > Fiji > > Twitter: @SalanietaT > Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro > Tel: +679 3544828 > Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 > > > > > -- Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala P.O. Box 17862 Suva Fiji Twitter: @SalanietaT Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro Tel: +679 3544828 Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From jstyre at jstyre.com Mon Jan 21 00:06:13 2013 From: jstyre at jstyre.com (James S. Tyre) Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2013 21:06:13 -0800 Subject: [governance] Guest Memo (Jermy Malcolm): Copyright in Malaysia and the Fight For a Positive International IP Agenda Message-ID: <019801cdf795$0a47d540$1ed77fc0$@jstyre.com> (This might interest some.) https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2013/01/guest-memo-copyright-malaysia-and-positive-ip-agenda JANUARY 19, 2013 | BY MAIRA SUTTON Guest Memo: Copyright in Malaysia and the Fight For a Positive International IP Agenda We asked leading digital rights activists who have been involved in Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) negotiations to discuss copyright law and their advocacy work in the countries where they are based. This week, Jeremy Malcolm of Consumers International explains recent changes to Malaysia's copyright law, and his current work in pushing for positive global standards that would protect the rights of users against abusive copyright policies. Jeremy is the Project Coordinator for Intellectual Property and Communications. He is based in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. ~ Malaysia's copyright law changed last year with the Copyright (Amendment) Act 2012, and the changes were a mixed bag. On the positive side, the existing fair dealing exception to copyright-the more narrowly defined counterpart to "fair use" in US law-was broadened, and a specific exception for temporary electronic copies was added. But in exchange, infringers are now liable for much tougher penalties, including six-figure statutory damages. Tougher protections for digital locks are included too, including a crackdown on the sale of circumvention devices - though unlike in the US, you are free to break a digital lock that restricts you from exercising your fair dealing rights. There were some copyright changes that Malaysia was pressured to adopt by the United States, but which didn't find their way into these latest amendments. It was proposed to make the possession of even a single copy of infringing content a criminal offence, and to make landlords of premises where it was sold liable too. Since most Malaysians possess at least one pirated DVD, this caused an uproar in the local newspapers, and the proposal was dropped. Though I don't condone piracy, their reaction is understandable when you consider just how expensive legitimate content is here. Malaysia's favourite breakfast dish is called nasi lemak, and you could buy 90 plates of it for the cost of one original Blu-ray disc. One of the big problems is that copyright is a pretty invisible issue politically-except perhaps in the United States and Europe, in the wake of the successful protests over ACTA, SOPA and PIPA. Elsewhere in the world, people don't think about copyright, and newspapers don't report on it. Therefore, there is little political risk for the government in, for example, extending the term of copyright protection by 20 years in exchange for increased market access. Even if the value lost to the local economy from the extension of copyright outweighs the value gained from new exports of local goods, the new exports are much more newsworthy and will gain the government more votes than it loses from the extension of copyright. Although I am based in Malaysia, the work that I do for Consumers International is global. We see it as important to promote some global standards for access to knowledge that can offset the push from rights-holders for ever-increasing levels of copyright protection and enforcement. Some of this we have already seen happening through the good work being done at the World Intellectual Property Organisation (WIPO) to introduce new minimum copyright exceptions for the blind and visually impaired, and for libraries. The problem is that historically WIPO has been an organisation for the promotion of intellectual property rights, and so having to balance these rights against other interests does not come naturally. It is made all the harder by the fact that the majority of the NGOs who participate in WIPO are themselves rights-holder organisations, leaving the voice of consumers sidelined. Therefore our approach has been to try a different venue, and we have settled on UNCTAD, the UN Conference on Trade and Development. It too has a mandate over intellectual property issues, but from a development perspective, which makes it more favourable towards the promotion of access to knowledge. We have developed some proposals for UNCTAD to update the UN Guidelines for Consumer Protection to protect consumers from abuse by rights-holders: for example, preventing the use of digital locks to cut out your fair use or fair dealing rights, stopping them from pushing updates to your digital devices that take away functionality, and requiring that if you're sold a digital product such as an e-book, it should come by default with all of the same rights that you'd have if you purchased a hard-copy. We are now reviewing and drafting our proposed text for amendments to the UN Guidelines, and will have final proposals this March. Before the proposals finally come before governments in July this year, we will need your help to support these proactive amendments that assert the rights of users over the single-minded interests of the content industry. -- James S. Tyre Law Offices of James S. Tyre 10736 Jefferson Blvd., #512 Culver City, CA 90230-4969 310-839-4114/310-839-4602(fax) jstyre at jstyre.com Policy Fellow, Electronic Frontier Foundation https://www.eff.org -------------- 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 From jstyre at jstyre.com Mon Jan 21 00:10:03 2013 From: jstyre at jstyre.com (James S. Tyre) Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2013 21:10:03 -0800 Subject: [governance] Guest Memo (Jermy Malcolm): Copyright in Malaysia and the Fight For a Positive International IP Agenda In-Reply-To: <019801cdf795$0a47d540$1ed77fc0$@jstyre.com> References: <019801cdf795$0a47d540$1ed77fc0$@jstyre.com> Message-ID: <019f01cdf795$92c7d550$b8577ff0$@jstyre.com> Argh. My apologies to Jeremy for omitting a letter in the subject header. -- James S. Tyre Law Offices of James S. Tyre 10736 Jefferson Blvd., #512 Culver City, CA 90230-4969 310-839-4114/310-839-4602(fax) jstyre at jstyre.com Policy Fellow, Electronic Frontier Foundation https://www.eff.org > -----Original Message----- > From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance- > request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of James S. Tyre > Sent: Sunday, January 20, 2013 9:06 PM > To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org > Subject: [governance] Guest Memo (Jermy Malcolm): Copyright in Malaysia and the Fight > For a Positive International IP Agenda > > (This might interest some.) > > https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2013/01/guest-memo-copyright-malaysia-and-positive-ip- > agenda > > > JANUARY 19, 2013 | BY MAIRA SUTTON > Guest Memo: Copyright in Malaysia and the Fight For a Positive International IP Agenda > > We asked leading digital rights activists who have been involved in Trans-Pacific > Partnership (TPP) negotiations to discuss copyright law and their advocacy work in the > countries where they are based. > > This week, Jeremy Malcolm of Consumers International explains recent changes to > Malaysia's copyright law, and his current work in pushing for positive global > standards that would protect the rights of users against abusive copyright policies. > Jeremy is the Project Coordinator for Intellectual Property and Communications. He is > based in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. > > ~ > > Malaysia's copyright law changed last year with the Copyright (Amendment) Act 2012, > and the changes were a mixed bag. On the positive side, the existing fair dealing > exception to copyright-the more narrowly defined counterpart to "fair use" in US law- > was broadened, and a specific exception for temporary electronic copies was added. But > in exchange, infringers are now liable for much tougher penalties, including six- > figure statutory damages. Tougher protections for digital locks are included too, > including a crackdown on the sale of circumvention devices - though unlike in the US, > you are free to break a digital lock that restricts you from exercising your fair > dealing rights. > > There were some copyright changes that Malaysia was pressured to adopt by the United > States, but which didn't find their way into these latest amendments. It was proposed > to make the possession of even a single copy of infringing content a criminal offence, > and to make landlords of premises where it was sold liable too. Since most Malaysians > possess at least one pirated DVD, this caused an uproar in the local newspapers, and > the proposal was dropped. Though I don't condone piracy, their reaction is > understandable when you consider just how expensive legitimate content is here. > Malaysia's favourite breakfast dish is called nasi lemak, and you could buy 90 plates > of it for the cost of one original Blu-ray disc. > > One of the big problems is that copyright is a pretty invisible issue politically- > except perhaps in the United States and Europe, in the wake of the successful protests > over ACTA, SOPA and PIPA. Elsewhere in the world, people don't think about copyright, > and newspapers don't report on it. Therefore, there is little political risk for the > government in, for example, extending the term of copyright protection by 20 years in > exchange for increased market access. Even if the value lost to the local economy from > the extension of copyright outweighs the value gained from new exports of local goods, > the new exports are much more newsworthy and will gain the government more votes than > it loses from the extension of copyright. > > Although I am based in Malaysia, the work that I do for Consumers International is > global. > We see it as important to promote some global standards for access to knowledge that > can offset the push from rights-holders for ever-increasing levels of copyright > protection and enforcement. > > Some of this we have already seen happening through the good work being done at the > World Intellectual Property Organisation (WIPO) to introduce new minimum copyright > exceptions for the blind and visually impaired, and for libraries. The problem is that > historically WIPO has been an organisation for the promotion of intellectual property > rights, and so having to balance these rights against other interests does not come > naturally. It is made all the harder by the fact that the majority of the NGOs who > participate in WIPO are themselves rights-holder organisations, leaving the voice of > consumers sidelined. > > Therefore our approach has been to try a different venue, and we have settled on > UNCTAD, the UN Conference on Trade and Development. It too has a mandate over > intellectual property issues, but from a development perspective, which makes it more > favourable towards the promotion of access to knowledge. > > We have developed some proposals for UNCTAD to update the UN Guidelines for Consumer > Protection to protect consumers from abuse by rights-holders: for example, preventing > the use of digital locks to cut out your fair use or fair dealing rights, stopping > them from pushing updates to your digital devices that take away functionality, and > requiring that if you're sold a digital product such as an e-book, it should come by > default with all of the same rights that you'd have if you purchased a hard-copy. > > We are now reviewing and drafting our proposed text for amendments to the UN > Guidelines, and will have final proposals this March. Before the proposals finally > come before governments in July this year, we will need your help to support these > proactive amendments that assert the rights of users over the single-minded interests > of the content industry. > -- > James S. Tyre > Law Offices of James S. Tyre > 10736 Jefferson Blvd., #512 > Culver City, CA 90230-4969 > 310-839-4114/310-839-4602(fax) > jstyre at jstyre.com > Policy Fellow, Electronic Frontier Foundation https://www.eff.org > > > -------------- 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 From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com Mon Jan 21 00:13:10 2013 From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro) Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2013 17:13:10 +1200 Subject: [governance] European Summer School on Internet governance - Call for application out now! In-Reply-To: <50fc59f2.05adc20a.600c.ffffa75bSMTPIN_ADDED_BROKEN@mx.google.com> References: <50fc59f2.05adc20a.600c.ffffa75bSMTPIN_ADDED_BROKEN@mx.google.com> Message-ID: Dear All, I would really recommend the EuroSSIG for people to attend, interact and participate. It will give participants an opportunity to spend time with professionals who are engaged in the cutting edge of their professions from diverse spheres in a small community setting in beautiful Meissen where there is no distraction but pure engagement on issues and emerging issues on Internet Governance. Plus you can engage and ask as many questions from various experts who will be facilitating during class and outside class as well. The class is carefully tailored to ensure that attendees are exposed to various dimensions of Internet Governance. Kindly contact Sandra directly should you need more information about the training. Kind Regards, Sala On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 8:29 AM, sandra hoferichter < sandra.hoferichter at freenet.de> wrote: > *EuroSSIG – apply now!* > > ** ** > > Do you want to know what the political, economic, social and legal > implications of Internet Governance are? Do you want to learn what is > behind acronyms like ICANN, RIR, DNS, ccTLD, gTLD, iDN, IPv6, ISP, IETF, > WHOIS, IGF, and WSIS? Do want to get detailed information about Internet > standards, protocols, codes, domain names, IP addresses, registries and > registrars? Are you interested to look deeper into the opportunities and > risks of the emerging global Internet economy? **** > > ** ** > > Then you should apply for the “2013 European Summer School on Internet > Governance” (EuroSSIG) and become a member of the SSIG alumni.**** > > * * > > *The 7th EuroSSIG course is taking place in Meissen / Germany, on 04.-10. > August 2013. * > > * * > > *Details can be found on:* > > * * > > *www.euro-ssig.eu*** > > ** ** > > ** ** > > We would be very thankful if you spread the message within your networks.* > *** > > ** ** > > Best Wolfgang and Sandra**** > > ** ** > > ** ** > > *_____________________________________________________________________* > > ** ** > > s a n d r a h o f e r i c h t e r**** > > management and communication**** > > ** ** > > *European Summer School on Internet Governance (EuroSSIG)* > > medienstadt leipzig e.v. / netcom institute**** > > pf 650 107**** > > d-04189 leipzig**** > > ** ** > > fon: +49.341.301 28 27**** > > fax: +49.341.945 60 11**** > > mobile: +49.163.380 87 85**** > > ** ** > > info at hoferichter.eu**** > > www.euro-ssig.eu**** > > ** ** > > > This e-mail may contain confidential and/or privileged information. If you > are not the intendet recipient (or have received this e-mail in error) > please notify the sender immediately and destroy this mail. Any > unauthorized copying, disclosure or distribution of material in this e-mail > is strictly forbidden.**** > > ** ** > > ** ** > > ** ** > > ** ** > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > -- Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala P.O. Box 17862 Suva Fiji Twitter: @SalanietaT Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro Tel: +679 3544828 Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From pouzin at well.com Mon Jan 21 00:20:23 2013 From: pouzin at well.com (Louis Pouzin (well)) Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2013 06:20:23 +0100 Subject: techno-politics was Re: [governance] Bloomberg - The Overzealous In-Reply-To: <20130121043505.GB19021@hserus.net> References: <50FAC752.5090502@gmail.com> <50FBAE3C.8010600@ITforChange.net> <50FBCE14.7010901@gmail.com> <87FDA724-9919-447F-BF8F-8F0E84142A12@acm.org> <50FCAD68.5060500@cavebear.com> <20130121043505.GB19021@hserus.net> Message-ID: On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 5:35 AM, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote: > Karl Auerbach [20/01/13 18:52 -0800]: > > The big issue is not SINGULARITY of DNS roots but rather CONSISTENCY. >> > > once you open that can of worms, what you get is > 1. Anybody - consistent or not - can set up a root server > 2. You can't guarantee intent > > - - - Sure, Replace 'root' by 'web' and repeat. What difference ? Louis - - - -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From dogwallah at gmail.com Mon Jan 21 00:24:04 2013 From: dogwallah at gmail.com (McTim) Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2013 00:24:04 -0500 Subject: [governance] Bloomberg - The Overzealous Prosecution of Aaron Swartz In-Reply-To: <50FCA74B.6000406@itforchange.net> References: <50FAC752.5090502@gmail.com> <50FBAE3C.8010600@ITforChange.net> <50FBC21F.8030401@itforchange.net> <50FCA74B.6000406@itforchange.net> Message-ID: On Sun, Jan 20, 2013 at 9:26 PM, parminder wrote: > McTim > > Actually I should thank you for your email. I find it to perfectly expound > what I call US Exceptionalism in the context of global IG. then you should re-read it. > > You say that the US 'continues' to have a legitimate 'historic role' in the > global governance of the Internet, which I understand to certainly mean as > special and being different and higher than of any other country/ > government. those are not my words. I did not use the words legitimate or special or higher. I have in the past used historical however, which only reflects reality. > > However, in the next sentence you suggest that since it is difficult to > change the status quo, it is low priority for you and many others..... Here > you still do not explicitly say that you think it is wrong that US should > have a higher role than other governments. No, I didn't say it is wrong. Nor did I say it was right. I would like, at some point in the evolution of the process to remove the NTIA from the root changing procedure. You simply casually say, it is > difficult to change things and so.... Do you think it is easier to change > China's authoritarian policies vis a vis the Internet, which consideration > never seems to come in our way of criticising them and seeking change.... Have we ever sought to change or eradicate the Great Firewall? I don't recall that being part of any statements we have made. > Why then this special favour to the US, is the question. > I am not granting any favours. > (you also say that there is no alternative but to let the global Internet > corporations be subject basically to the US jurisdiction, because in your > view any multi-lateral alternative is worse .) No, I did not say that either. I did acknowledge that many large Internet companies are based in the USA, and thus subject to US laws. I don't think that can be denied. > > In the next para however you are rather blunt. You say that " What is wrong > and unacceptable is the labeling of recognition of a pretty fixed reality as > "wrong and unacceptable"! " Yes, ignoring reality is not acceptable. calling those who recognise said reality as "less than" is also unacceptable. > > I havent heard a clearer status quoist statement. You are telling us that 'a > pretty fixed reality' is best to recognised as such, whereby it is useless > to protest and seek change. A clearer status quo statement would be that "The US governmet paid for the early Internet and thus should continue it's role in regards to the NTIA/IANA contract in perpetuity" But I've never said any such thing. (People can actually say such things on CS lists > which are supposed to do advocacy for political change!!) If you want to form a political party in the USA, get hundreds of millions of people to join and elect a majority in the House and Senate (and a President), please do that. I think that is rather a long row to hoe, and so will pass on that effort. > > McTim, you have rather clearly described the politics of US exceptionalism > and status quo-ism which is indirectly practised by many on this list . > > As to your comment > > " What is also wrong and unacceptable is the notion that those of us who > advocate for a single unified Internet are somehow suspect. " (McTim) > > This is a complete red herring. I have no doubt that I am as much a > supporter for a single unified Internet as you may be. That was in response to Riaz "single rooter" comments. It's not a red herring. -- 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 From suresh at hserus.net Mon Jan 21 00:30:42 2013 From: suresh at hserus.net (Suresh Ramasubramanian) Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2013 11:00:42 +0530 Subject: techno-politics was Re: [governance] Bloomberg - The Overzealous In-Reply-To: References: <50FAC752.5090502@gmail.com> <50FBAE3C.8010600@ITforChange.net> <50FBCE14.7010901@gmail.com> <87FDA724-9919-447F-BF8F-8F0E84142A12@acm.org> <50FCAD68.5060500@cavebear.com> <20130121043505.GB19021@hserus.net> Message-ID: <26B5765D-AF86-4653-B282-907C654821FD@hserus.net> The common factor in both is "DNS consistency". So, would you mind restating your point? Or are you actually agreeing with me here? --srs (iPad) On 21-Jan-2013, at 10:50, "Louis Pouzin (well)" wrote: > On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 5:35 AM, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote: >> Karl Auerbach [20/01/13 18:52 -0800]: >> >>> The big issue is not SINGULARITY of DNS roots but rather CONSISTENCY. >> >> once you open that can of worms, what you get is >> 1. Anybody - consistent or not - can set up a root server >> 2. You can't guarantee intent >> > - - - > > Sure, > > Replace 'root' by 'web' and repeat. > > What difference ? > > Louis > - - - > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com Mon Jan 21 00:47:09 2013 From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro) Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2013 17:47:09 +1200 Subject: [governance] Update:Call for Volunteers for New NomCom Message-ID: Dear All, On January 15, 2013 there was an open call for volunteers for a new Nominating Committee. I would like to thank all those who have expressed their interest to being part of the pool within which the selection of the new NomCom can take place. This is the final list of Volunteers. Thank you to all those that have volunteered. 1. Kerry Brown 2. Mawaki Chango 3. Jeremy Malcolm 4. Tapani Tarvainen 5. Fouad Bajwa 6. Gideon Rop 7. Vincent Solomon Aliama 8. Mohamed Samir Zahran 9. Clement Martial Aboudem Bavou 10. Carlos Vera Quintana 11. Mwendwa Kivuva 12. Norbert Komlan Glakpe 13. Julián Casasbuenas G 14. Antonio Medina Gómez 15. José F. Callo Romero 16. Devon Blake 17. Tracey Naughton 18. Michel Tchonang Linze 19. Izumi Aizu 20. Carlos Watson 21. Jose Felix Arias Ynche 22.Sarah Kiden 23. Lillian Nalwoga 24.Asama Abel Excel 25.Philip Fomba Johnson 26. Joao Carlos Caribe 27. Abdul Jaleel Shittu Kind Regards, On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 9:45 AM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro < salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com> wrote: > Dear All, > > This is an open call for volunteers for a New Nominating Committee > (NomCom). For more information about IGC's NomCom, kindly visit > http://www.igcaucus.org/nomcom-process. > > Kind Regards, > > > -- > Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala > P.O. Box 17862 > Suva > Fiji > > Twitter: @SalanietaT > Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro > Tel: +679 3544828 > Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 > > > > -- Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala P.O. Box 17862 Suva Fiji Twitter: @SalanietaT Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro Tel: +679 3544828 Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From gideonrop at gmail.com Mon Jan 21 00:56:31 2013 From: gideonrop at gmail.com (Gideon) Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2013 08:56:31 +0300 Subject: [governance] Coordinator election results In-Reply-To: <5FB29FA5-F87D-4F98-BDAC-E5BB066C0CC9@ciroap.org> References: <5FB29FA5-F87D-4F98-BDAC-E5BB066C0CC9@ciroap.org> Message-ID: Congratulations Norbert, our new co-coordinator - and thanks to you too Imran, We wish you well in your responsibilities . Gideon Rop, DotConnectAfrica. On Sat, Jan 19, 2013 at 3:42 AM, Jeremy Malcolm wrote: > Congratulations Norbert, our new co-coordinator - and thanks to you too > Imran > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From pouzin at well.com Mon Jan 21 01:20:34 2013 From: pouzin at well.com (Louis Pouzin (well)) Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2013 07:20:34 +0100 Subject: techno-politics was Re: [governance] Bloomberg - The Overzealous In-Reply-To: <26B5765D-AF86-4653-B282-907C654821FD@hserus.net> References: <50FAC752.5090502@gmail.com> <50FBAE3C.8010600@ITforChange.net> <50FBCE14.7010901@gmail.com> <87FDA724-9919-447F-BF8F-8F0E84142A12@acm.org> <50FCAD68.5060500@cavebear.com> <20130121043505.GB19021@hserus.net> <26B5765D-AF86-4653-B282-907C654821FD@hserus.net> Message-ID: On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 6:30 AM, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote: > The common factor in both is "DNS consistency". So, would you mind > restating your point? Or are you actually agreeing with me here? > > --srs (iPad) > - - - I agree with both Karl's statement and yours. Although we may think of different interpretations of DNS consistency. What I meant in addition is: anybody can set up an xyz server, as well as a fake xyz server. Since intelligence is on the edge of the net, it does not guarantee against leprechauns. Nothing new here. Louis - - - > > On 21-Jan-2013, at 10:50, "Louis Pouzin (well)" wrote: > > On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 5:35 AM, Suresh Ramasubramanian > wrote: > >> Karl Auerbach [20/01/13 18:52 -0800]: >> >> The big issue is not SINGULARITY of DNS roots but rather CONSISTENCY. >>> >> >> once you open that can of worms, what you get is >> 1. Anybody - consistent or not - can set up a root server >> 2. You can't guarantee intent >> >> - - - > > Sure, > > Replace 'root' by 'web' and repeat. > > What difference ? > > Louis > - - - > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From suresh at hserus.net Mon Jan 21 01:43:59 2013 From: suresh at hserus.net (Suresh Ramasubramanian) Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2013 22:43:59 -0800 Subject: techno-politics was Re: [governance] Bloomberg - The Overzealous In-Reply-To: References: <50FBAE3C.8010600@ITforChange.net> <50FBCE14.7010901@gmail.com> <87FDA724-9919-447F-BF8F-8F0E84142A12@acm.org> <50FCAD68.5060500@cavebear.com> <20130121043505.GB19021@hserus.net> <26B5765D-AF86-4653-B282-907C654821FD@hserus.net> Message-ID: <20130121064359.GA21791@hserus.net> With dns, there is additional assurance where deployed (dnssec, dkim and adsp for email ..) - and moreover, if you have a unique set of roots, and by definition a unique nameserver set for a domain xyz, you can't really set up a fake domain on another nameserver host and expect people to resolve xyz on that nameserver host .. e&oe deliberate redirection due to dns proxying (great firewall etc) or trojans altering your resolver (dnschanger and friends) Louis Pouzin (well) [21/01/13 07:20 +0100]: >I agree with both Karl's statement and yours. >Although we may think of different interpretations of DNS consistency. > >What I meant in addition is: > >anybody can set up an xyz server, >as well as a fake xyz server. > >Since intelligence is on the edge of the net, it does not guarantee against >leprechauns. >Nothing new here. > >Louis >- - - > >> >> On 21-Jan-2013, at 10:50, "Louis Pouzin (well)" wrote: >> >> On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 5:35 AM, Suresh Ramasubramanian > > wrote: >> >>> Karl Auerbach [20/01/13 18:52 -0800]: >>> >>> The big issue is not SINGULARITY of DNS roots but rather CONSISTENCY. >>>> >>> >>> once you open that can of worms, what you get is >>> 1. Anybody - consistent or not - can set up a root server >>> 2. You can't guarantee intent >>> >>> - - - >> >> Sure, >> >> Replace 'root' by 'web' and repeat. >> >> What difference ? >> >> Louis >> - - - >> >> >> -------------- 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 From drc at virtualized.org Mon Jan 21 01:48:55 2013 From: drc at virtualized.org (David Conrad) Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2013 22:48:55 -0800 Subject: techno-politics was Re: [governance] Bloomberg - The Overzealous In-Reply-To: <50FCAD68.5060500@cavebear.com> References: <50FAC752.5090502@gmail.com> <50FBAE3C.8010600@ITforChange.net> <50FBCE14.7010901@gmail.com> <87FDA724-9919-447F-BF8F-8F0E84142A12@acm.org> <50FCAD68.5060500@cavebear.com> Message-ID: <0118952A-B07D-47D9-BF85-242D4100E02A@virtualized.org> Karl, On Jan 20, 2013, at 6:52 PM, Karl Auerbach wrote: > I agree. And it is a self-interested techno-political statement; there > are several bodies - such as ISOC, IETF, ICANN - that benefit from cash > flows derived from the belief that the internet requires a singular, > catholic (lower case 'c') DNS root. In order to maintain a coherent (that is, non-conflicting) namespace, the DNS protocol itself requires a single root. Really. Your suggesting otherwise is merely confusing folks who don't understand the technical details. I presume you understand the technical details. I don't understand why you persist in trying to spread confusion. How that single root is implemented, whether it is done via single organization or some sort of consortia of cooperative entities that agree to some mechanism by which collisions are avoided, is of course up for debate but the DNS _protocol_ really truly does require a single root in order to maintain a collision-free namespace. > For many years there have been competing root systems. There have been "_alternate_ root systems" (consisting of both an alternate set of root servers along with an alternate namespace) since the first split DNS implementation was fielded back around 1986 or so to deal with internal vs. external domain names. ISC BIND version 9, the development of which I had a small role, included configuration language called "views" that made this easy to deploy, but the key factor in these alternate root systems are that the namespaces represented by different views are explicitly understood to be disjoint. There have also been folks who have tried to field "_competitive_ root systems", typically using browser plug-ins but also different sets of root name servers, to present a different namespace than the actual root, but as far as I am aware, they have been failures (at least in the business sense -- I'm sure some feel they have been political successes). > But that is not true for all - for example there was the ORSN in Europe > (which even had some of the legacy root operators among its members.) As I mentioned back when you raised ORSN on this list previously, they were an alternative root _name service_ provider which mirrored the actual root _namespace_. ORSN reserved for themselves the right to refuse to accept a change of the actual root, but they never actually did this and never described what would happen to the folks who used their service if that situation came to pass. > An interesting twist to its rules was that it promised not to remove any > ccTLD even if ICANN did - this was in deference to the question whether > .su should continue to exist even though the Soviet Union has itself ceased. And you believe it appropriate that the fact that the ISO-3166 Maintenance Agency, you know, the UN agency the defines what the 2 letter code points actually are, had explicitly stated "Code element deleted from ISO 3166-1; stop using ASAP" should be completely irrelevant? And what would happen in the DNS if sometime after SU was removed from ISO-3166 when ISO-3166/MA _reallocated_ the code point like what happened with CS? In your world, should IANA refuse to delegate the new SU? Should IANA revoke SU from the folks who held the ISO-3166/MA deleted code point and then give it to the new delegatee? For very good reasons that should be obvious now after the new gTLD applications, Jon Postel and others decided to use ISO-3166 as the basis for ccTLDs which means they put control of that particular namespace in the hands of others who could be deemed authoritative. You seem to be suggesting that ICANN should decide what is or is not a country. This doesn't seem like a very good idea to me. > And for many years both ISPs and individuals have run roots for their > own benefit or to control the quality of root-level resolutions for > their customers. Yes, and there are two cases: 1) where the ISP or individuals mirror the actual DNS _namespace_ so the only change is a reduction in need to go to the 13 root server IP addresses; _or_ 2) where the ISP or individual make modifications to the DNS _namespace_, typically in the form of redirection for purposes of inserting/modifying content or advertisements. I personally believe the former case is a great idea as it improves performance and resiliency and, in fact, when it is pushed down to the individual machine is the only way to ensure DNS responses have not been modified in flight (even with DNSSEC since DNSSEC only protects to the validating resolver, not from the validating resolver to the application). ORSN was a form of (1), albeit they did not agree to fully mirror the namespace and if they had actually carried through with their refusal, the idea is less great. The latter case however is deemed by most to be more problematic, particularly by those who feel censorship of Internet content by ISPs is inappropriate. Not sure why you think it is such a good idea. > Well run competing roots delegate to TLDs with exactly the same set of > NS and glue records as do the legacy roots. So all that a root system > really is is a portal into an array of TLD servers. This is _not_ a "competing root" in any meaningful sense. This is alternate root name service. > The big issue is not SINGULARITY of DNS roots but rather CONSISTENCY. To be specific, the big issue is _NAMESPACE CONSISTENCY_. Particularly with DNSSEC, it simply does not matter from where you get your TLD referrals. What matters is that for a given name and at a given point in time (sequence number) _everyone gets consistent referrals_. In practice, even consistent referrals are less important these days since glue consistency is less critical as long as the underlying namespace is consistent. That is, it doesn't matter if a name server is at 10.1.1.1 or 192.164.1.53 as long as the answers returned for example.com lead to identical services. > Users will reject root systems that lead to surprising > results. And the laws of trademark and fraud will insure that that > rejection would be backed by lawyers and law enforcement. Right, because that has worked so well in the world of cache poisoning, phishing, and spamming. > The definition of "consistency" is an interesting one. Roots such as > the ORSN defined "consistency" as being "same as the ICANN/NTIA/Verisign > root zone" with the exception of the root servers themselves (and with > the proviso about .su that I mentioned above.) It is worth noting that ORSN shut down before ever exercising their self-proclaimed editorial right. You may also note that SU was moved by ISO-3166/MA from "transitionally reserved" to "exceptionally reserved" and .SU continues to exist in the root zone (whether one thinks this is a good idea or not is another matter). > But there is a more broad definition, which is that two roots are > consistent if: > > - For each TLD in common between the two roots the delegation (NS and > glue) records are the same. Your version of "consistent" would fail where content delivery networks provide different name servers based on geographic location for performance/load-balancing reasons. > This definition allows roots to differ at the edges, i.e. in the > "boutique" TLDs that they chose to carry. And what happens when the ICANN new gTLD program after a year or two allocates the "boutique" TLD string to a different entity than the one that runs the TLD "at the edge"? Regards, -drc -------------- 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 From drc at virtualized.org Mon Jan 21 02:05:00 2013 From: drc at virtualized.org (David Conrad) Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2013 23:05:00 -0800 Subject: techno-politics was Re: [governance] Bloomberg - The Overzealous In-Reply-To: References: <50FAC752.5090502@gmail.com> <50FBAE3C.8010600@ITforChange.net> <50FBCE14.7010901@gmail.com> <87FDA724-9919-447F-BF8F-8F0E84142A12@acm.org> <50FCAD68.5060500@cavebear.com> <20130121043505.GB19021@hserus.net> <26B5765D-AF86-4653-B282-907C654821FD@hserus.net> Message-ID: <38CBE411-C0BC-4D31-9B1C-5F597B0F0125@virtualized.org> Louis, On Jan 20, 2013, at 10:20 PM, "Louis Pouzin (well)" wrote: > What I meant in addition is: > > anybody can set up an xyz server, > as well as a fake xyz server. OK, I'll bite. I have an SSH server running on virtualized.org. Please set up a fake SSH server at that domain name. Note that I'm not even using DNSSEC on that zone right now (sigh, some day I'll get around to fixing my signing infrastructure), so half the battle is already over... More seriously, the reality is that folks realized some time ago that the Internet security infrastructure needs to be improved and there are various efforts underway to implement those improvements. SSL-all-the-time, SMTPS, IMAPS, DNSSEC, RPKI, etc., are all examples and they actually do work at the edge, no leprechauns required. Regards, -drc -------------- 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 From jeremy at ciroap.org Mon Jan 21 02:35:33 2013 From: jeremy at ciroap.org (Jeremy Malcolm) Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2013 15:35:33 +0800 Subject: [bestbits] [governance] Multistakeholder Roles and Responsibilities In-Reply-To: <20130118224941.556b0653@quill.bollow.ch> References: <01c801cdf457$f76a3fc0$e63ebf40$@gmail.com> <50F763C0.5070907@ciroap.org> <50F8D10B.3010109@ciroap.org> <20130118224941.556b0653@quill.bollow.ch> Message-ID: <50FCEFC5.8010008@ciroap.org> On 19/01/13 05:49, Norbert Bollow wrote: > Jeremy Malcolm wrote: >> Actually I put together a system that is meant to achieve that: >> >> http://a2knetwork.org/meetings/ >> >> Anyone who registers can list a meeting there and say whether they are >> attending, and can post a short report there. It supports multiple >> reports, too, in the case that more than one delegation is attending. >> The main purpose is to identify where there are gaps - important >> meetings that nobody is covering. But it only works if enough people >> use it, so please do. > So this is intended for all of civil society, rather than just the > Consumer Movement, to use? > > If yes, then I would suggest that that should be made clearer on the > website. It was originally mainly for CI's consumer group members, but it is clear that it won't be useful unless it is open to others. In the longer term I need to look at spinning it off to a more broadly based network, and making it much nicer like the infojustice-calendar one. I already put in place a simple Internet governance calendar system for the IGC (http://www.igcaucus.org/calendar), but it hasn't been much used and could also be wrapped into the above. I am trying to get funding to support the Best Bits network, mainly as a travel fund for events, but some Web development work such as this will also be included. -- *Dr Jeremy Malcolm Senior Policy Officer Consumers International | the global campaigning voice for consumers* Office for Asia-Pacific and the Middle East Lot 5-1 Wisma WIM, 7 Jalan Abang Haji Openg, TTDI, 60000 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia Tel: +60 3 7726 1599 *Your rights, our mission -- download CI's Strategy 2015:* http://consint.info/RightsMission @Consumers_Int | www.consumersinternational.org | www.facebook.com/consumersinternational Read our email confidentiality notice . Don't print this email unless necessary. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From karl at cavebear.com Mon Jan 21 03:16:37 2013 From: karl at cavebear.com (Karl Auerbach) Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2013 00:16:37 -0800 Subject: techno-politics was Re: [governance] Bloomberg - The Overzealous In-Reply-To: <20130121043505.GB19021@hserus.net> References: <50FAC752.5090502@gmail.com> <50FBAE3C.8010600@ITforChange.net> <50FBCE14.7010901@gmail.com> <87FDA724-9919-447F-BF8F-8F0E84142A12@acm.org> <50FCAD68.5060500@cavebear.com> <20130121043505.GB19021@hserus.net> Message-ID: <50FCF965.4000901@cavebear.com> On 01/20/2013 08:35 PM, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote: > Karl Auerbach [20/01/13 18:52 -0800]: >> The big issue is not SINGULARITY of DNS roots but rather CONSISTENCY. > > once you open that can of worms, what you get is > 1. Anybody - consistent or not - can set up a root server "can of worms" - reminds me of the "can of worms" called "anycast" that was adopted despite ICANN? It was certainly a good can of worms to adopt, it is not without potential complications and risks, but it added a lot of value to the internet. To put it another way, what may be a can of worms to one may be a useful solution to another. One may toss aside idea just because some may find it contains some potential risks; but one should not coerce others to also toss aside that idea - those others may be more capable, may be willing to accept the risks, or may find the risks to be fanciful. Anybody can, today, establish a root without asking any questions or permission. As a test I ran my own root for several years; I found absolutely no problems. I even tried to induce problems. (As you may know, my business is to create tools to put internet protocols under stress so that implementors can create better systems.) A few years back when I was on the ICANN board of directors I dredged around and discovered that the Taiwan was using competing roots. They didn't know they were - they had run a test (much like Jon Postel wanted to do) and kind of fumbled the return to the status quo ante and thus left the experimental competing root in place for many months. The interesting part was that users did not notice. Consistency means just that - consistency; if you (or your agent, i.e. your ISP) uses a root that gives you surprises, then you can switch - and the ICANN/NTIA/Verisign root will always be there if you want to use it. No one is compelled to use a competing root; and no one should be compelled to refrain from using a competing root. Otherwise the claim that the internet allows innovation at the edges becomes a mere fairy tail told to children. There are a lot of people who don't want anyone to change the internet status quo. It is rather like when the old AT&T spread Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt - and downright faux technical claims - to try to ban a passive plastic widget that people could attach to their telephones - the Hush-a-Phone - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hush-A-Phone_v._United_States --karl-- -------------- 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 From karl at cavebear.com Mon Jan 21 03:39:40 2013 From: karl at cavebear.com (Karl Auerbach) Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2013 00:39:40 -0800 Subject: techno-politics was Re: [governance] Bloomberg - The Overzealous In-Reply-To: <0118952A-B07D-47D9-BF85-242D4100E02A@virtualized.org> References: <50FAC752.5090502@gmail.com> <50FBAE3C.8010600@ITforChange.net> <50FBCE14.7010901@gmail.com> <87FDA724-9919-447F-BF8F-8F0E84142A12@acm.org> <50FCAD68.5060500@cavebear.com> <0118952A-B07D-47D9-BF85-242D4100E02A@virtualized.org> Message-ID: <50FCFECC.4050401@cavebear.com> On 01/20/2013 10:48 PM, David Conrad wrote: > In order to maintain a coherent (that is, non-conflicting) namespace, > the DNS protocol itself requires a single root. Really. Yes, and yet even with that "yes" it does not matter. That is because you are conflating an algorithm specification (the DNS protocols) with use of that algorithm on a concrete data structure. You may as well argue that because an textbook algorithm to descend a binary tree requires a single root to that tree - which is true - that therefore all binary trees everywhere must descend from one global, singular root node, which is decidedly not true. When you choose your root you get your name space. When I chose my root I get my name space. Consistency means that those name spaces give the same answers to the same queries, at least with respect to queries that are based on TLDs that are found in both of the roots being compared. As it turns out the DNS protocol machinery allows delegated-to name servers to operate the same no matter whether the delegation comes from your root or my root. DNSSEC adds an interesting twist. But fortunately for the way DNSSEC works it is agnostic in the sense that for you to use your root you prime your resolving tools with your root keyset and I prime my mine with my root keyset. The DNSSEC above-the-cut/below-the-cut relationship is such that it you still can get proof that you are getting a valid zone image no matter which root you started with. If DNS/DNSSEC technology were so fragile that would crumble if people do what people can easily do - which is to set up their own roots - then that technology would be unsafe and open to trivial denial of service attacks. Fortunately DNS/DNSSEC is not unsafe in the presence of competing roots. --karl-- -------------- 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 From riaz.tayob at gmail.com Mon Jan 21 04:39:44 2013 From: riaz.tayob at gmail.com (Riaz K Tayob) Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2013 11:39:44 +0200 Subject: [governance] France Proposes an Internet Tax In-Reply-To: <50FD0871.7040301@bluewin.ch> References: <50FD0871.7040301@bluewin.ch> Message-ID: <50FD0CE0.6010603@gmail.com> France Proposes an Internet Tax By ERIC PFANNER PARIS --- France, seeking fresh ways to raise funds and frustrated that American technology companies that dominate its digital economy are largely beyond the reach of French fiscal authorities, has proposed a new levy: an Internet tax on the collection of personal data. The idea surfaced Friday in a report commissioned by President François Hollande, which described various measures his government was taking to address what the French see as tax avoidance by Internet companies like Google, Amazon and Facebook. These companies gather vast reams of information about their users, harnessing it to tailor their services to individuals' interests or to direct customized advertising to them. So extensive is the collection of personal details, and so promising the business opportunities linked to it, that the report described data as the "raw material" of the digital economy. "They have a distinct value, poorly reflected in economic science or official statistics," the report said. Google generates more than $30 billion a year in advertising revenue, including an estimated EUR1.5 billion, or $2 billion, in France. Yet, like other American Internet companies, it pays almost no taxes in France. That state of affairs upsets France's policy makers, as public finances have been stretched thin and French Internet companies struggle to gain traction. "We want to work to ensure that Europe is not a tax haven for a certain number of Internet giants," the digital economy minister, Fleur Pellerin, told reporters in Paris on Friday. But getting Google and other U.S. technology companies to pay more corporate taxes on their profits in France could take a long time, the report acknowledges, because this will require international cooperation. In the meantime, France has discussed a variety of other taxes. Under the predecessor to Mr. Hollande, Nicolas Sarkozy, the government proposed a levy on Internet advertising. But that idea languished after local companies complained that it would affect them more than Google. Mr. Hollande's government is also overseeing talks between Google and French online publishers, who want the search engine to pay them for linking to their content. The report published Friday said a tax on data collection was justified on grounds that users of services like Google and Facebook are, in effect, working for these companies without pay by providing the personal information that lets them sell advertising. The report says tax rates would be based on the number of users an Internet firm tracked, to be verified by outside auditors. The authors did not recommend tax rates or estimate how much money such a levy could raise. Google said in a statement that it was reviewing the nearly 200-page report. "The Internet offers huge opportunities for economic growth and employment in Europe, and we believe public policies should encourage that growth," the company said. The new tax would require legislation, which the government said could be introduced by the end of the year. But other revenue-generating proposals championed by Mr. Hollande have encountered difficulty. A plan for a 75 percent income tax rate on earnings of more than EUR1 million a year was rejected by the highest court in France, which called it discriminatory. Any proposal to generate taxes from the gathering of personal information could also draw scrutiny from the French privacy regulator, which has raised concerns about the amount of data that companies like Google and Facebook collecT NYT -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com Mon Jan 21 05:32:05 2013 From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro) Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2013 22:32:05 +1200 Subject: [governance] France Proposes an Internet Tax In-Reply-To: <50FD0CE0.6010603@gmail.com> References: <50FD0871.7040301@bluewin.ch> <50FD0CE0.6010603@gmail.com> Message-ID: On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 9:39 PM, Riaz K Tayob wrote: > > France Proposes an Internet Tax > By ERIC PFANNER > > PARIS — France, seeking fresh ways to raise funds and frustrated that > American technology companies that dominate its digital economy are largely > beyond the reach of French fiscal authorities, has proposed a new levy: an > Internet tax on the collection of personal data. > > The idea surfaced Friday in a report commissioned by President François > Hollande, which described various measures his government was taking to > address what the French see as tax avoidance by Internet companies like > Google, Amazon and Facebook. > Well it not new that the US has always maintained that the Internet should be a tax free zone as per the US Congress's Tax Freedom Act 1998 (*authored by Representative Christopher Cox and Senator Ron Wyden and signed into law on October 21 1998 by then President Clinton*) which following expiry continued to be reauthorised and it most recent re-authorisation (legal speak for extension) was in October 2007 where this has been extended till 2014. The OECD and the EU have been holding the opposite view (Kurbalija,J. 2010) - see their Ottawa Principles where they find that there is no difference between traditional and e taxation that would require special regulations. It followed that in 2003 when the EU introduced a regulation requesting non EU e commerce companies to pay value added tax (VAT) if they sold goods within the EU. The main driver or motivation was that non-EU companies (many of whom are US companies) had an edge over European companies. See one of the Reports - http://www.oecd.org/tax/taxadministration/20499630.pdf What is interesting is in light of the pressure on the economic systems in Europe triggered by the Greek economy and reliance on the Euro and aggravated by other external triggers such as food, energy and water crisis and even with the Indonesian and US Trade disputes will together with a host of other triggers have a cumulative effect that will force the outcome of tomorrow's Internet and tomorrow's regulations. Each country will ultimately exercise their sovereignty in how they regulate within their own turfs. For countries like France where their is high expenditure within their national budgets, in the midst of a depressed economic region will no doubt look for potential sources of revenue. Discussions on taxing the internet is not new, what will be interesting however is the "how" and to "what extent"? > > These companies gather vast reams of information about their users, > harnessing it to tailor their services to individuals’ interests or to > direct customized advertising to them. So extensive is the collection of > personal details, and so promising the business opportunities linked to it, > that the report described data as the “raw material” of the digital economy. > > “They have a distinct value, poorly reflected in economic science or > official statistics,” the report said. > > Google generates more than $30 billion a year in advertising revenue, > including an estimated €1.5 billion, or $2 billion, in France. Yet, like > other American Internet companies, it pays almost no taxes in France. That > state of affairs upsets France’s policy makers, as public finances have > been stretched thin and French Internet companies struggle to gain traction. > > “We want to work to ensure that Europe is not a tax haven for a certain > number of Internet giants,” the digital economy minister, Fleur Pellerin, > told reporters in Paris on Friday. > > But getting Google and other U.S. technology companies to pay more > corporate taxes on their profits in France could take a long time, the > report acknowledges, because this will require international cooperation. > > In the meantime, France has discussed a variety of other taxes. Under the > predecessor to Mr. Hollande, Nicolas Sarkozy, the government proposed a > levy on Internet advertising. But that idea languished after local > companies complained that it would affect them more than Google. Mr. > Hollande’s government is also overseeing talks between Google and French > online publishers, who want the search engine to pay them for linking to > their content. > > The report published Friday said a tax on data collection was justified on > grounds that users of services like Google and Facebook are, in effect, > working for these companies without pay by providing the personal > information that lets them sell advertising. > > Does anyone have a link to this Report? It would be useful to read. > The report says tax rates would be based on the number of users an > Internet firm tracked, to be verified by outside auditors. The authors did > not recommend tax rates or estimate how much money such a levy could raise. > > Google said in a statement that it was reviewing the nearly 200-page > report. > > “The Internet offers huge opportunities for economic growth and employment > in Europe, and we believe public policies should encourage that growth,” > the company said. > > The new tax would require legislation, which the government said could be > introduced by the end of the year. But other revenue-generating proposals > championed by Mr. Hollande have encountered difficulty. A plan for a 75 > percent income tax rate on earnings of more than €1 million a year was > rejected by the highest court in France, which called it discriminatory. > > Any proposal to generate taxes from the gathering of personal information > could also draw scrutiny from the French privacy regulator, which has > raised concerns about the amount of data that companies like Google and > Facebook collecT > NYT > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > -- Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala P.O. Box 17862 Suva Fiji Twitter: @SalanietaT Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro Tel: +679 3544828 Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From andrea at digitalpolicy.it Mon Jan 21 06:22:04 2013 From: andrea at digitalpolicy.it (Andrea Glorioso) Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2013 12:22:04 +0100 Subject: [governance] France Proposes an Internet Tax In-Reply-To: References: <50FD0871.7040301@bluewin.ch> <50FD0CE0.6010603@gmail.com> Message-ID: Dear Sala, dear all, On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 11:32 AM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro < salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 9:39 PM, Riaz K Tayob wrote: > >> > The report published Friday said a tax on data collection was justified on >> grounds that users of services like Google and Facebook are, in effect, >> working for these companies without pay by providing the personal >> information that lets them sell advertising. >> >> Does anyone have a link to this Report? It would be useful to read. > The report is available at http://www.redressement-productif.gouv.fr/files/rapport-fiscalite-du-numerique_2013.pdf . Best, Andrea -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com Mon Jan 21 06:29:19 2013 From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro) Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2013 23:29:19 +1200 Subject: [governance] France Proposes an Internet Tax In-Reply-To: References: <50FD0871.7040301@bluewin.ch> <50FD0CE0.6010603@gmail.com> Message-ID: On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 11:22 PM, Andrea Glorioso wrote: > Dear Sala, dear all, > > On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 11:32 AM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro < > salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com> wrote: > >> >> >> On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 9:39 PM, Riaz K Tayob wrote: >> >>> > >> The report published Friday said a tax on data collection was justified >>> on grounds that users of services like Google and Facebook are, in effect, >>> working for these companies without pay by providing the personal >>> information that lets them sell advertising. >>> >>> Does anyone have a link to this Report? It would be useful to read. >> > > The report is available at > http://www.redressement-productif.gouv.fr/files/rapport-fiscalite-du-numerique_2013.pdf > . > > Fascinating report. > Best, > > Andrea > -- Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala P.O. Box 17862 Suva Fiji Twitter: @SalanietaT Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro Tel: +679 3544828 Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From nb at bollow.ch Mon Jan 21 06:53:14 2013 From: nb at bollow.ch (Norbert Bollow) Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2013 12:53:14 +0100 Subject: [governance] Notice to the IGC on Proposed Charter Amendments In-Reply-To: <675E6D8C-1408-4724-A3B3-107B7F807F07@acm.org> References: <50F38F8E.3090106@ciroap.org> <50F3B31B.4090406@itforchange.net> <50F3B423.1070901@ciroap.org> <50F3B544.3080409@itforchange.net> <1FC731B2-FE70-41AC-B97D-52979AFFAE05@uzh.ch> <1358157197.55375.YahooMailNeo@web125106.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <020a01cdf283$98dfbe10$ca9f3a30$@gmail.com> <20130114212217.7f43bbc9@quill.bollow.ch> <1358227661.77969.YahooMailNeo@web125105.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <735AC965-1DFD-4A66-BFF6-3E828E71D72E@ciroap.org> <20130118165547.472e8ec7@quill.bollow.ch> <675E6D8C-1408-4724-A3B3-107B7F807F07@acm.org> Message-ID: <20130121125314.5b6306e7@quill.bollow.ch> Avri Doria wrote: > I do not know what 1, 2, 3 are. Is on line somewhere? [IGC Coordinator hat on] Those numbers got assigned pretty much accidentally to specific amendment proposals over the course of this thread. I have now set up the following pages that list the amendment proposals that have either been already formally proposed or that are currently in the stage of solicitation of co-proposers: http://igcaucus.org/formally-proposed-charter-amendments http://igcaucus.org/informally-discussed-charter-amendments I have put notes on those pages indicating which are the amendment proposals that have been referred to as "1", "2", "3" in this thread, but I'd rather discourage further use of that numbering scheme. I'd suggest that going forward, the titles used on those pages can serve as a better way of referencing amendment proposals. I may have missed something or may have made copy-and-paste errors, in that case I will appreciate if someone points the errors out. Greetings, Norbert -------------- 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 From gideonrop at gmail.com Mon Jan 21 07:13:27 2013 From: gideonrop at gmail.com (Gideon) Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2013 15:13:27 +0300 Subject: [governance] =?WINDOWS-1252?Q?Early_Warnings=85=2Eof_Corruption_i?= =?WINDOWS-1252?Q?n_ICANN=92s_GAC?= Message-ID: Interesting article, Early Warnings….of Corruption in ICANN’s GAC New top level domain (TLD) applications raise high financial stakes for the applicants. Those seeking new TLDs will have invested at least half a million dollars to prepare and submit their proposal, and many of the companies involved have raised millions more in backing from investors or venture capital firms. In aggregate, applicants plunked down about $250 million in application fees alone. http://www.internetgovernance.org/2013/01/11/early-warnings-of-corruption-in-icann/ Gideon Rop, DotConnectAfrica -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From suresh at hserus.net Mon Jan 21 08:03:33 2013 From: suresh at hserus.net (Suresh Ramasubramanian) Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2013 18:33:33 +0530 Subject: [governance] =?UTF-8?Q?Early_Warnings=E2=80=A6=2Eof_Corruptio?= =?UTF-8?Q?n_in_ICANN=E2=80=99s_GAC?= In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Well, I am not quite sure the IGP blog author intended to use .africa as an example in his article, but you never know. Milton or someone from IGP might want to comment. --srs (iPad) On 21-Jan-2013, at 17:43, Gideon wrote: > Interesting article, > > > > Early Warnings….of Corruption in ICANN’s GAC > > New top level domain (TLD) applications raise high financial stakes for the applicants. Those seeking new TLDs will have invested at least half a million dollars to prepare and submit their proposal, and many of the companies involved have raised millions more in backing from investors or venture capital firms. In aggregate, applicants plunked down about $250 million in application fees alone. > > http://www.internetgovernance.org/2013/01/11/early-warnings-of-corruption-in-icann/ > > > > Gideon Rop, > DotConnectAfrica -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From drc at virtualized.org Mon Jan 21 10:45:17 2013 From: drc at virtualized.org (David Conrad) Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2013 07:45:17 -0800 Subject: techno-politics was Re: [governance] Bloomberg - The Overzealous In-Reply-To: <50FCF965.4000901@cavebear.com> References: <50FAC752.5090502@gmail.com> <50FBAE3C.8010600@ITforChange.net> <50FBCE14.7010901@gmail.com> <87FDA724-9919-447F-BF8F-8F0E84142A12@acm.org> <50FCAD68.5060500@cavebear.com> <20130121043505.GB19021@hserus.net> <50FCF965.4000901@cavebear.com> Message-ID: <3B6F4BBB-61A0-4A00-8302-A2600BFF82A4@virtualized.org> Karl, On Jan 21, 2013, at 12:16 AM, Karl Auerbach wrote: >> once you open that can of worms, what you get is >> 1. Anybody - consistent or not - can set up a root server > > "can of worms" - reminds me of the "can of worms" called "anycast" that > was adopted despite ICANN? ICANN has a say in how any root server (other than "L") is operated? This will be news to the root server operators and they'll no doubt enjoy your assertion. Regards, -drc -------------- 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 From suresh at hserus.net Mon Jan 21 10:52:38 2013 From: suresh at hserus.net (Suresh Ramasubramanian) Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2013 21:22:38 +0530 Subject: techno-politics was Re: [governance] Bloomberg - The Overzealous In-Reply-To: <3B6F4BBB-61A0-4A00-8302-A2600BFF82A4@virtualized.org> References: <50FAC752.5090502@gmail.com> <50FBAE3C.8010600@ITforChange.net> <50FBCE14.7010901@gmail.com> <87FDA724-9919-447F-BF8F-8F0E84142A12@acm.org> <50FCAD68.5060500@cavebear.com> <20130121043505.GB19021@hserus.net> <50FCF965.4000901@cavebear.com> <3B6F4BBB-61A0-4A00-8302-A2600BFF82A4@virtualized.org> Message-ID: <7E2EEE2B-AD55-4C88-BD73-15ECEE9E13E3@hserus.net> On 21-Jan-2013, at 21:15, David Conrad wrote: > > ICANN has a say in how any root server (other than "L") is operated? This will be news to the root server operators and they'll no doubt enjoy your assertion. > This is starting to get interesting. I fully expect civil society actiors that only have an outside view of these processes, and / or wrong information coupled with ideological opinion (such as the "single rooters" comment) to fall into such errors, but Karl, I'm for sure missing something when you say icann was opposing anycast, and it got implemented despite them. -------------- 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 From drc at virtualized.org Mon Jan 21 11:35:12 2013 From: drc at virtualized.org (David Conrad) Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2013 08:35:12 -0800 Subject: techno-politics was Re: [governance] Bloomberg - The Overzealous In-Reply-To: <50FCFECC.4050401@cavebear.com> References: <50FAC752.5090502@gmail.com> <50FBAE3C.8010600@ITforChange.net> <50FBCE14.7010901@gmail.com> <87FDA724-9919-447F-BF8F-8F0E84142A12@acm.org> <50FCAD68.5060500@cavebear.com> <0118952A-B07D-47D9-BF85-242D4100E02A@virtualized.org> <50FCFECC.4050401@cavebear.com> Message-ID: <2ED55E88-089B-4F0D-AC88-4C0F98796A65@virtualized.org> Karl, On Jan 21, 2013, at 12:39 AM, Karl Auerbach wrote: > On 01/20/2013 10:48 PM, David Conrad wrote: >> In order to maintain a coherent (that is, non-conflicting) namespace, >> the DNS protocol itself requires a single root. Really. > > Yes, and yet even with that "yes" it does not matter. _Of course_ it matters. The whole point of a single root is to ensure a consistent namespace. > Consistency means that those name spaces give the same answers to the > same queries, at least with respect to queries that are based on TLDs > that are found in both of the roots being compared. You are suggesting that existence of a name in one name space and lack of the same name in another namespace is consistent. This is obviously and blatantly wrong. > Fortunately DNS/DNSSEC is not unsafe in the presence of competing roots. It is unsafe (regardless of the use of DNSSEC) in the sense that if the namespaces differs between roots, you have broken namespace consistency. An obvious example: In my root, I point ".APPLE" to a small company in Cupertino. In your root, you point ".APPLE" to a consortium of round fruit growers. Someone's grandmother in the touring the wilds of Tajikistan by motorbike is trying to send a snapshot to her grandson in California at tim at mail.apple using her cellphone. Where does her snapshot go? As far as I can tell, you are arguing that the fact that Tim's grandmother cannot know where her snapshot will go is a good thing (!) because it will encourage you and I to work together to ensure that .APPLE points to the same place. How is that going to work exactly? I suppose it'll be fine from my perspective if you break your contract with the round fruit growers because I'm not going to break my contract with the small company in Cupertino and I'm certainly not going to give you any of the money they gave me. You also are ignoring the fact that namespaces change over time. I note you didn't bother responding to my question: >> And what happens when the ICANN new gTLD program after a year or two allocates the "boutique" TLD string to a different entity than the one that runs the TLD "at the edge"? I also note you didn't bother responding to my related question regarding ORSN: >> And you believe it appropriate that the fact that the ISO-3166 Maintenance Agency, you know, the UN agency the defines what the 2 letter code points actually are, had explicitly stated "Code element deleted from ISO 3166-1; stop using ASAP" should be completely irrelevant? >> >> And what would happen in the DNS if sometime after SU was removed from ISO-3166 when ISO-3166/MA _reallocated_ the code point like what happened with CS? In your world, should IANA refuse to delegate the new SU? Should IANA revoke SU from the folks who held the ISO-3166/MA deleted code point and then give it to the new delegatee? I am honestly curious about your responses. Regards, -drc -------------- 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 From nb at bollow.ch Mon Jan 21 12:45:46 2013 From: nb at bollow.ch (Norbert Bollow) Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2013 18:45:46 +0100 Subject: [governance] Civic Society Membership on MAG -Toward a Joint-Board In-Reply-To: <50EB02B8.6020808@communisphere.com> References: <78980604-5E4E-44A0-A235-4BAA721DA4D3@unog.ch> <50E7A23D.6050801@itforchange.net> <1F1DEE75-CCC8-4547-8CAB-8394876C7B4D@privaterra.org> <50E9D58B.6080602@communisphere.com> <50EB02B8.6020808@communisphere.com> Message-ID: <20130121184546.7fa98c40@quill.bollow.ch> Thomas Lowenhaupt wrote: > And what about starting on that joint-board? Hi Tom I've tried to think of a reasonable way to go forward in regard to this idea... alas I've come up empty. So I don't think that I'll be pursuing this any further unless you can provide some concrete promising ideas. Greetings, Norbert -------------- 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 From rudi.vansnick at isoc.be Mon Jan 21 13:02:45 2013 From: rudi.vansnick at isoc.be (Rudi Vansnick) Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2013 19:02:45 +0100 Subject: [governance] 2013 Mag NomCom Vote Results In-Reply-To: References: <50FC0D6E.4040702@communisphere.com> Message-ID: <45C7E88C-35BF-44E3-9600-632BA5CD0147@isoc.be> Congratulations to all elected members. I wish you all success. Rudi Vansnick Op 21-jan-2013, om 05:10 heeft Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro het volgende geschreven: > Dear Members of the IGC, > > The MAG NomCom concluded their voting on MAG Nominees for the attention of the Under Secretary General of UNDESA who had invited Nominees for the selection of the MAG as it commences the rotation process. > > We would like to thank all the Nominees who sent in their Expressions of Interest. We would also like to thank the MAG NomCom for its service to the IGC. > > The MAG NomCom comprised of the following- > > Thomas Lowenhaupt (NomCom Independent Non-Voting Chair) > Wilson Abigaba (NomCom) -voting member > Shahid Akbar (NomCom) -voting member > Devon Blake (NomCom) -voting member > Dixie Hawtin (NomCom) -voting member > Asif Kabani (NomCom)-voting member > > The following were selected by the MAG, see below: > Fatima Cambronero > Robert Guerra > Michael Gurstein > Brenden Kuerbis > Jeremy Malcolm > Tim McGinnis > Baudouin Schombe > The MAG NomCom will be submitting a report which will be published on the mailing list within the next 14 days. > Kind Regards, > Sala (on behalf of the Coordinators) > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: Thomas Lowenhaupt > Date: Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 3:29 AM > Subject: 2013 Mag NomCom Vote Results > To: "Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro" , Norbert Bollow > Cc: Wilson Abigaba , Shahid Akbar , Devon Blake , Dixie Hawtin , Asif Kabani > > > Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro, Co-coordinator > Norbert Bollow, Co-coordinator > > Dear Sala and Norbert, > > The vote of the Nominating Committee was completed a short while ago with the following 7 nominees selected: > Fatima Cambronero > Robert Guerra > Michael Gurstein > Brenden Kuerbis > Jeremy Malcolm > Tim McGinnis > Baudouin Schombe > A detailed report on the selection will be forthcoming. > > Sincerely, > > Thomas Lowenhaupt, Non Voting Chair > for the IGC 2013 MAG Nominating Committee > > Voting members: Wilson Abigaba, Shahid Akbar, Devon Blake, Dixie Hawtin, Asif Kabani > > > > -- > Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala > P.O. Box 17862 > Suva > Fiji > > Twitter: @SalanietaT > Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro > Tel: +679 3544828 > Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From gideonrop at gmail.com Mon Jan 21 13:54:33 2013 From: gideonrop at gmail.com (Gideon) Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2013 21:54:33 +0300 Subject: [governance] =?WINDOWS-1252?Q?Early_Warnings=85=2Eof_Corrupti?= =?WINDOWS-1252?Q?on_in_ICANN=92s_GAC?= In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Is there anywhere I said this related to .africa? It is not always the case that I post on .africa. Maybe you missed my posts while you were exiled; we have moved on from .africa a while back. Here is also another interesting one... http://www.bna.com/race-toward-new-b17179871911/?goback=.gde_110405_member_206339583#skipbanner Gideon Rop DotConnectAfrica On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 4:03 PM, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote: > Well, I am not quite sure the IGP blog author intended to use .africa as > an example in his article, but you never know. Milton or someone from IGP > might want to comment. > > --srs (iPad) > > On 21-Jan-2013, at 17:43, Gideon wrote: > > Interesting article, > > > Early Warnings….of Corruption in ICANN’s GAC > > New top level domain (TLD) applications raise high financial stakes for the applicants. Those seeking new TLDs will > have invested at least half a million dollars to prepare and submit their > proposal, and many of the companies involved have raised millions more in > backing from investors or venture capital firms. In aggregate, applicants > plunked down about $250 million in application fees alone. > > > http://www.internetgovernance.org/2013/01/11/early-warnings-of-corruption-in-icann/ > > > > > > Gideon Rop, > DotConnectAfrica > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From nb at bollow.ch Mon Jan 21 14:01:15 2013 From: nb at bollow.ch (Norbert Bollow) Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2013 20:01:15 +0100 Subject: [governance] ISO-3166/MA (was Re: techno-politics) In-Reply-To: <0118952A-B07D-47D9-BF85-242D4100E02A@virtualized.org> References: <50FAC752.5090502@gmail.com> <50FBAE3C.8010600@ITforChange.net> <50FBCE14.7010901@gmail.com> <87FDA724-9919-447F-BF8F-8F0E84142A12@acm.org> <50FCAD68.5060500@cavebear.com> <0118952A-B07D-47D9-BF85-242D4100E02A@virtualized.org> Message-ID: <20130121200115.7fd724a9@quill.bollow.ch> David Conrad wrote: > On Jan 20, 2013, at 6:52 PM, Karl Auerbach wrote: > > An interesting twist to its rules was that it promised not to > > remove any ccTLD even if ICANN did - this was in deference to the > > question whether .su should continue to exist even though the > > Soviet Union has itself ceased. > > And you believe it appropriate that the fact that the ISO-3166 > Maintenance Agency, you know, the UN agency the defines what the 2 > letter code points actually are, had explicitly stated "Code element > deleted from ISO 3166-1; stop using ASAP" should be completely > irrelevant? I can't refrain from nitpicking here, although it's entirely irrelevant to the substance of this discussion thread. The ISO-3166 Maintenance Agency is not a UN agency. It's a sui generis body with the following composition: """ The composition of the ISO 3166/MA reflects the two stakeholder groups which were primarily involved in the development of ISO 3166 in the early 1970s: national standards organizations, members of ISO, and United Nations agencies. Of the ten experts with voting rights on the ISO 3166/MA five are representatives of the following national standards organizations: * Association française de normalisation AFNOR (France) * American National Standards Institute ANSI (United States) * British Standards Institution BSI (United Kingdom) * Deutsches Institut für Normung DIN (Germany) * Swedish Standards Institute SIS (Sweden) The other five are representatives of major UN or other international organizations who are all users of ISO 3166-1: * International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) * Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) * Universal Postal Union (UPU) * United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE) The ISO 3166/MA has further associated members who do not participate in the votes but who - through their expertise - have significant influence on the decision taking procedure in the maintenance agency. The members can be contacted through the secretariat of the ISO 3166/MA. """ Source: http://www.iso.org/iso/country_codes.htm Greetings, Norbert -------------- 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 From drc at virtualized.org Mon Jan 21 14:06:13 2013 From: drc at virtualized.org (David Conrad) Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2013 11:06:13 -0800 Subject: [governance] ISO-3166/MA (was Re: techno-politics) In-Reply-To: <20130121200115.7fd724a9@quill.bollow.ch> References: <50FAC752.5090502@gmail.com> <50FBAE3C.8010600@ITforChange.net> <50FBCE14.7010901@gmail.com> <87FDA724-9919-447F-BF8F-8F0E84142A12@acm.org> <50FCAD68.5060500@cavebear.com> <0118952A-B07D-47D9-BF85-242D4100E02A@virtualized.org> <20130121200115.7fd724a9@quill.bollow.ch> Message-ID: On Jan 21, 2013, at 11:01 AM, Norbert Bollow wrote: > David Conrad wrote: >> the ISO-3166 Maintenance Agency, you know, the UN agency > The ISO-3166 Maintenance Agency is not a UN agency. True. Mea culpa. Apologies for the mischaracterization. Regards, -drc -------------- 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 From nb at bollow.ch Mon Jan 21 14:22:11 2013 From: nb at bollow.ch (Norbert Bollow) Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2013 20:22:11 +0100 Subject: [governance] "US Exceptionalism" (was Re: Bloomberg - The Overzealous Prosecution...) In-Reply-To: <031501cdf73c$e40c6b50$ac2541f0$@gmail.com> References: <50FAC752.5090502@gmail.com> <50FBAE3C.8010600@ITforChange.net> <20130120161823.3d510425@quill.bollow.ch> <031501cdf73c$e40c6b50$ac2541f0$@gmail.com> Message-ID: <20130121202211.79bb5a0b@quill.bollow.ch> Michael Gurstein wrote: > +1 > (and only to add... "hard" but necessary... Kerry Brown had written: >> > > - the view that all national governments should have same kind of >> > > roles or not in Internet governance and global information >> > > society governance in general. >> > > >> > > "acceptance of US exceptionalism in information society >> > > governance" >> > > - the view that it is acceptable for the US government to have >> > > some special role(s) or power(s) in Internet governance and >> > > global information society governance in general. >> >> For me it is not US exceptionalism. It is something more nuanced. As >> a Canadian I would like to see less control by the US. As a citizen >> of, for lack of a better term, a "western democracy" I would not like >> to see what I think of as "repressive regimes" get more control. It >> is a dichotomy I am unable to resolve in my own mind which makes it >> very hard to debate usefully. I think many people have the same >> internal struggle. Another related, and also hard but necessary, internal struggle is to have hope that meaningful positive change is actually achievable. Are you able to propose some kind of set of criteria that from your perspective governments should be required to fulfil before they're qualified to join a group of governments that could be trusted to have some role in global Internet governance? Greetings, Norbert -------------- 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 From dogwallah at gmail.com Mon Jan 21 14:55:18 2013 From: dogwallah at gmail.com (McTim) Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2013 14:55:18 -0500 Subject: [governance] today's Wash Post editorial Message-ID: "The United States has maintained that Internet governance should rest, as it does now, with a loose group of organizations, including the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers, which manages domain names and addresses under contract with the U.S. Commerce Department. There are suspicions aplenty in the rest of the world that this is the equivalent of U.S. control — suspicions that should not be ignored. While the Internet cannot fall into the hands of those who would censor and restrict it, the United States should put more effort into remaking the current model so that it can serve what has become a global infrastructure." http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/keeping-the-internet-free/2013/01/20/48c7fdb8-4fa1-11e2-8b49-64675006147f_story.html -- 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 From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com Mon Jan 21 16:25:12 2013 From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro) Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2013 09:25:12 +1200 Subject: [governance] "US Exceptionalism" (was Re: Bloomberg - The Overzealous Prosecution...) In-Reply-To: References: <50FAC752.5090502@gmail.com> <50FBAE3C.8010600@ITforChange.net> <20130120161823.3d510425@quill.bollow.ch> Message-ID: On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 4:10 AM, Kerry Brown wrote: > > > - the view that all national governments should have same kind of roles > > > or not in Internet governance and global information society > > > governance in general. > > > > > > "acceptance of US exceptionalism in information society governance" > > > - the view that it is acceptable for the US government to have some > > > special role(s) or power(s) in Internet governance and global > > > information society governance in general. > > > > > For me it is not US exceptionalism. It is something more nuanced. As a > Canadian I would like to see less control by the US. As a citizen of, for > lack of a better term, a "western democracy" I would not like to see what I > think of as "repressive regimes" get more control. It is a dichotomy I am > unable to resolve in my own mind which makes it very hard to debate > usefully. I think many people have the same internal struggle. > > Kerry Brown > There is an interesting article from 2005 that illustrates this, see: http://www.circleid.com/posts/if_its_about_to_break_fix_it/ > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > -- Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala P.O. Box 17862 Suva Fiji Twitter: @SalanietaT Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro Tel: +679 3544828 Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From lmcknigh at syr.edu Mon Jan 21 16:39:34 2013 From: lmcknigh at syr.edu (Lee W McKnight) Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2013 21:39:34 +0000 Subject: [governance] Yet another new -strategy - thread title: It may be broke - politically - but how to fix it, technopolitically? ; ) Message-ID: <77A59FC9477004489D44DE7FC6840E7B1B1C3A@SUEX10-mbx-08.ad.syr.edu> Hi, First, my condolences to Norbert for his new headache; my congrats to Imran for being spared (at least this year); and also congrats to Sala for us all now having someone else to complain about daring to attempt to - coordinate - this list. ; ) Second, excerpting from John Curran, re: "...an existing functional system which has enabled the growth and success of the Internet to date, and an absence of any alternative described in sufficient detail to be demonstrably superior." Now my comments: I don't think there's many on the list who would disagree that the - global politics - of Internet governance remain broken/unstable. This was exemplified most recently by WCIT, even as the Internet as a functional system we may all agree, remains very cool. And useful/essential to global and national economies and societies. Unsurprisingly, given the high stakes involved in changing the plumbing or core infrastructure of the world economy, the barrier to implementing thought experiments in real world policy processes, remains high. And yes of course that (cyber-)infrastructure is not equally or equitably distributed, we may also all agree. Still with me so far, whether a running dog capitalist or - whatever? : ) As one who tried without luck over the past year to move the thread to discuss approaches which could lead to a possible consensus on a new approach toward technical/institutional changes in Internet governance, post WCIT; that remains the ~5 billion people + XXX billion devices question for 2013 and beyond. (Meaning, how to govern/manage for the rest of the world and all our devices and resources not already on the Internet.) One track of discussion quickly gets into technical/political nitty-gritty for example of the root, and alternatives whether competing or cooperating, as Avri, Louis, Suresh, David and Karl etc have been discussing. Good luck with that. Another, which I am yet again advocating as perhaps a new year's resolution for - most - all of us in IGC to explore, takes a different track. That is, we - assume - the Internet as it exists today. With its legacy protocols, systems, and processes, and duly note much of that leads back not just to the US government, but specifically originated out of DARPA contracts and contractors. (Except cough cough, for the world wide web which is the level most businesses and people interact with the net day to day, which of course is a European invention, tossed to MIT to manage/evolve with global big biz support by CERN back in the day.) Anyway, enough history, that's the old news and not the point today. Instead, I am suggesting IGC should focus for 2013 on - what if any new institutions, processes, and/or principles are needed for a future Internet, to benefit global civil society. (I don't claim novelty, am just advocating a strategic focus for IGC in 2013-201x) If that leads back to changes in existing institutions and processes, great. However,my editorial comment is that the debacle in Dubai highlights that new Internet operational responsibilities for UN agencies as part of that mix aren't likely to gain sufficient support to fly, this decade I submit. More editorial comments below. On the other hand, 'enhanced cooperation' via 1) a UNDESA committee is in nascent/not yet adequate stages (inadequate = the embarrassing mess of 2012), but is happening; 2) while WSIS processes unfold as well. Not too many loud voices raised against those discussions. 2)a Meaning, we can observe global discussions on internet governance ongoing this year in and around ITU WTPF which managed in 2012 to paint a big target on their back, essentially rendering them - speechless/actionless in 2013 I suggest. Since any move to assert authority will just turn them into a bigger target for eg both Google and Anonymous, a mean feat); 2)b to be very specific, I suggest taking WTPF too seriously is a distraction for IGC since nothing much can come of it, due to the errors of 2012. 3) UNESCO on other hand is so far under the public radar because without pretense to get their hands close to core Internet functions, they may possibly make positive contributions. Which would IGC prefer most to strengthen, or assist? Or are all efforts of equal value? Or equally absent of merit? or, 4) Should the richer elephant in the room, ICANN, thanks to those new gTLD fees, be recognized as the de facto if not de jure center of all action, and the UN agencies left principally to their own devices by IGC? IGC assisting ICANN in thinking through how to -further globalize - itself, can be done from the inside; and the outside. Or do they all have their 'respective role' to play and the IGC should prepare to comment/coordinate with them all more or less equally? Or, 5) do we/cs need to instead start picking more on WIPO to lighten up on copyright over-enforcement treaties which cascade into national law, in honor of Aron Swartz? How about 6) WTO which is really the writer of the global rules of all business/government trade in services games? Most cs players have not attempted to engage equally in all of these, if only for lack of resources. Perhaps Bertrand, Parminder and others can share some opinions on these jurisdictional/strategy questions for global civil society? Since I suggest otherwise if we don't have much of a strategy, we can't help grow the Internet governance forest, for all of the trees and distractions all around us. My 5 cents for the New Year. Lee ________________________________ From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] on behalf of John Curran [jcurran at istaff.org] Sent: Sunday, January 20, 2013 1:44 PM To: Riaz K Tayob Cc: governance at lists.igcaucus.org Subject: Re: [governance] Bloomberg - The Overzealous Prosecution of Aaron Swartz On Jan 20, 2013, at 12:59 AM, Riaz K Tayob wrote: > This is the interpretation we make (and we are entitled to make it) when for instance: > > 1. Some argue for ICANN etc to be regulated by US laws (state or otherwise) - and that this is sufficient. > > 2. Others argue that legitimacy of the current structure of governance is not an issue, and that work ought rather to be done within the system. And that it is a none issue. Alas, my comment on your mention of "US Exceptionalism" was simply to note that I do not consider it inevitable that the situation (in particular, with respect to overzealous prosecution nor the specific laws used against Aaron) will improve simply because of discussion and some presumed inherently superior nature of the US structures in these areas... This doesn't mean that it won't get better, but simply that there is no automatic reason to presume that it will simply due to discussion in the wonderful U.S. of A. (note - I do believe it will result in improvements to to the specific provisions of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, but that's because of the acts of specific folks like Rep. Zoe Lofgren and should not otherwise be considered inevitable) Similarly, I do not consider that structures used for governance of critical Internet resources (e.g. name and number identifiers) to be inherently superior simply due to the particular circumstances of origin. In fact, I completely discount the origin and simply consider the structures on their demonstrated merits and weaknesses (i.e. good ideas are good ideas regardless of origin) The bias towards the status quo is not a ringing endorsement of the existing structures, nor a heartfelt belief that the structures must be superior because of US origin and exceptionlism, but simply reflect the reality that there is an existing functional system which has enabled the growth and success of the Internet to date, and an absence of any alternative described in sufficient detail to be demonstrably superior. FYI, /John Disclaimers: My views alone. Supporting or contrary viewpoints are welcomed from all individuals regardless of race, religion, national origin, sexual orientation or disability and will be considered on their merits to the best of my ability. ____________________________________________________________ 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: -------------- 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 From jcurran at istaff.org Mon Jan 21 17:03:44 2013 From: jcurran at istaff.org (John Curran) Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2013 12:03:44 -1000 Subject: [governance] Yet another new -strategy - thread title: It may be broke - politically - but how to fix it, technopolitically? ; ) In-Reply-To: <77A59FC9477004489D44DE7FC6840E7B1B1C3A@SUEX10-mbx-08.ad.syr.edu> References: <77A59FC9477004489D44DE7FC6840E7B1B1C3A@SUEX10-mbx-08.ad.syr.edu> Message-ID: Lee - A most excellent "call to arms" for the IGC community... May your deliberations on direction for the year be fruitful, and to the extent that you have any questions regarding the existing structures for management of Internet number resources that will aid in your discussions, I'll be lurking on the list as a resource to your efforts. Best wishes! /John Disclaimers: My views alone. 100% post-elemental particles used in this email. On Jan 21, 2013, at 11:39 AM, Lee W McKnight wrote: > Hi, > > First, my condolences to Norbert for his new headache; my congrats to Imran for being spared (at least this year); and also congrats to Sala for us all now having someone else to complain about daring to attempt to - coordinate - this list. ; ) > > Second, excerpting from John Curran, re: > > "...an existing functional system which has enabled the growth and success of the Internet to date, and an absence of any alternative described in sufficient detail to be demonstrably superior." > > Now my comments: > > I don't think there's many on the list who would disagree that the - global politics - of Internet governance remain broken/unstable. This was exemplified most recently by WCIT, even as the Internet as a functional system we may all agree, remains very cool. And useful/essential to global and national economies and societies. > > Unsurprisingly, given the high stakes involved in changing the plumbing or core infrastructure of the world economy, the barrier to implementing thought experiments in real world policy processes, remains high. And yes of course that (cyber-)infrastructure is not equally or equitably distributed, we may also all agree. > > Still with me so far, whether a running dog capitalist or - whatever? : ) > > As one who tried without luck over the past year to move the thread to discuss approaches which could lead to a possible consensus on a new approach toward technical/institutional changes in Internet governance, post WCIT; that remains the ~5 billion people + XXX billion devices question for 2013 and beyond. > > (Meaning, how to govern/manage for the rest of the world and all our devices and resources not already on the Internet.) > > One track of discussion quickly gets into technical/political nitty-gritty for example of the root, and alternatives whether competing or cooperating, as Avri, Louis, Suresh, David and Karl etc have been discussing. > > Good luck with that. > > Another, which I am yet again advocating as perhaps a new year's resolution for - most - all of us in IGC to explore, takes a different track. > > That is, we - assume - the Internet as it exists today. With its legacy protocols, systems, and processes, and duly note much of that leads back not just to the US government, but specifically originated out of DARPA contracts and contractors. (Except cough cough, for the world wide web which is the level most businesses and people interact with the net day to day, which of course is a European invention, tossed to MIT to manage/evolve with global big biz support by CERN back in the day.) Anyway, enough history, that's the old news and not the point today. > > Instead, I am suggesting IGC should focus for 2013 on - what if any new institutions, processes, and/or principles are needed for a future Internet, to benefit global civil society. (I don't claim novelty, am just advocating a strategic focus for IGC in 2013-201x) > > If that leads back to changes in existing institutions and processes, great. > > However,my editorial comment is that the debacle in Dubai highlights that new Internet operational responsibilities for UN agencies as part of that mix aren't likely to gain sufficient support to fly, this decade I submit. More editorial comments below. > > On the other hand, 'enhanced cooperation' via > > 1) a UNDESA committee is in nascent/not yet adequate stages (inadequate = the embarrassing mess of 2012), but is happening; > > 2) while WSIS processes unfold as well. Not too many loud voices raised against those discussions. > > 2)a Meaning, we can observe global discussions on internet governance ongoing this year in and around ITU WTPF which managed in 2012 to paint a big target on their back, essentially rendering them - speechless/actionless in 2013 I suggest. Since any move to assert authority will just turn them into a bigger target for eg both Google and Anonymous, a mean feat); > 2)b to be very specific, I suggest taking WTPF too seriously is a distraction for IGC since nothing much can come of it, due to the errors of 2012. > > 3) UNESCO on other hand is so far under the public radar because without pretense to get their hands close to core Internet functions, they may possibly make positive contributions. > > Which would IGC prefer most to strengthen, or assist? Or are all efforts of equal value? Or equally absent of merit? > > or, > > 4) Should the richer elephant in the room, ICANN, thanks to those new gTLD fees, be recognized as the de facto if not de jure center of all action, and the UN agencies left principally to their own devices by IGC? IGC assisting ICANN in thinking through how to -further globalize - itself, can be done from the inside; and the outside. > > Or do they all have their 'respective role' to play and the IGC should prepare to comment/coordinate with them all more or less equally? > > Or, 5) do we/cs need to instead start picking more on WIPO to lighten up on copyright over-enforcement treaties which cascade into national law, in honor of Aron Swartz? > > How about 6) WTO which is really the writer of the global rules of all business/government trade in services games? > > Most cs players have not attempted to engage equally in all of these, if only for lack of resources. > > Perhaps Bertrand, Parminder and others can share some opinions on these jurisdictional/strategy questions for global civil society? > > Since I suggest otherwise if we don't have much of a strategy, we can't help grow the Internet governance forest, for all of the trees and distractions all around us. > > My 5 cents for the New Year. > > Lee > > > > From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] on behalf of John Curran [jcurran at istaff.org] > Sent: Sunday, January 20, 2013 1:44 PM > To: Riaz K Tayob > Cc: governance at lists.igcaucus.org > Subject: Re: [governance] Bloomberg - The Overzealous Prosecution of Aaron Swartz > > On Jan 20, 2013, at 12:59 AM, Riaz K Tayob wrote: > > > This is the interpretation we make (and we are entitled to make it) when for instance: > > > > 1. Some argue for ICANN etc to be regulated by US laws (state or otherwise) - and that this is sufficient. > > > > 2. Others argue that legitimacy of the current structure of governance is not an issue, and that work ought rather to be done within the system. And that it is a none issue. > > Alas, my comment on your mention of "US Exceptionalism" was simply to note > that I do not consider it inevitable that the situation (in particular, with respect to > overzealous prosecution nor the specific laws used against Aaron) will improve > simply because of discussion and some presumed inherently superior nature of > the US structures in these areas... This doesn't mean that it won't get better, > but simply that there is no automatic reason to presume that it will simply due > to discussion in the wonderful U.S. of A. (note - I do believe it will result in > improvements to to the specific provisions of the Computer Fraud and Abuse > Act, but that's because of the acts of specific folks like Rep. Zoe Lofgren and > should not otherwise be considered inevitable) > > Similarly, I do not consider that structures used for governance of critical Internet > resources (e.g. name and number identifiers) to be inherently superior simply due > to the particular circumstances of origin. In fact, I completely discount the origin > and simply consider the structures on their demonstrated merits and weaknesses > (i.e. good ideas are good ideas regardless of origin) The bias towards the status > quo is not a ringing endorsement of the existing structures, nor a heartfelt belief > that the structures must be superior because of US origin and exceptionlism, > but simply reflect the reality that there is an existing functional system which > has enabled the growth and success of the Internet to date, and an absence > of any alternative described in sufficient detail to be demonstrably superior. > > FYI, > /John > > Disclaimers: My views alone. Supporting or contrary viewpoints are welcomed > from all individuals regardless of race, religion, national origin, sexual orientation > or disability and will be considered on their merits to the best of my ability. > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From suresh at hserus.net Mon Jan 21 17:12:43 2013 From: suresh at hserus.net (Suresh Ramasubramanian) Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2013 03:42:43 +0530 Subject: [governance] =?UTF-8?Q?Early_Warnings=E2=80=A6=2Eof_Corruptio?= =?UTF-8?Q?n_in_ICANN=E2=80=99s_GAC?= In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Moved on from .africa? Interesting news. I did catch most of the discussions on the list archives by the way, I must have missed this bulletin. Thank you for the information --srs (iPad) On 22-Jan-2013, at 0:24, Gideon wrote: > Is there anywhere I said this related to .africa? It is not always the case that I post on .africa. Maybe you missed my posts while you were exiled; we have moved on from .africa a while back. > > > > Here is also another interesting one... > > http://www.bna.com/race-toward-new-b17179871911/?goback=.gde_110405_member_206339583#skipbanner > > > > Gideon Rop > > DotConnectAfrica > > > > > On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 4:03 PM, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote: >> Well, I am not quite sure the IGP blog author intended to use .africa as an example in his article, but you never know. Milton or someone from IGP might want to comment. >> >> --srs (iPad) >> >> On 21-Jan-2013, at 17:43, Gideon wrote: >> >>> Interesting article, >>> >>> >>> >>> Early Warnings….of Corruption in ICANN’s GAC >>> >>> New top level domain (TLD) applications raise high financial stakes for the applicants. Those seeking new TLDs will have invested at least half a million dollars to prepare and submit their proposal, and many of the companies involved have raised millions more in backing from investors or venture capital firms. In aggregate, applicants plunked down about $250 million in application fees alone. >>> >>> http://www.internetgovernance.org/2013/01/11/early-warnings-of-corruption-in-icann/ >>> >>> >>> >>> Gideon Rop, >>> DotConnectAfrica >>> > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com Mon Jan 21 17:48:58 2013 From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro) Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2013 10:48:58 +1200 Subject: [governance] Yet another new -strategy - thread title: It may be broke - politically - but how to fix it, technopolitically? ; ) In-Reply-To: References: <77A59FC9477004489D44DE7FC6840E7B1B1C3A@SUEX10-mbx-08.ad.syr.edu> Message-ID: Lee, Those are excellent suggestions in relation on the need to identify areas to focus on. This was one of the reasons why last year, we started on identifying specific policy areas and volunteers etc where the IGC can advocate strategically as per our mandate within the Charter etc. There is a need for clear focal groups on specific Internet Governance issues which the IGC can draw from in relation to raising and mobilizing its resources for strategic and targeted advocacy. Norbert's past work will be useful in the preparation of the Strategy etc. Thank you Lee for raising this very important aspect. I would encourage the IGC to continue discussions on the same. Warm Regards, On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 10:03 AM, John Curran wrote: > Lee - > > A most excellent "call to arms" for the IGC community... May your > deliberations > on direction for the year be fruitful, and to the extent that you have any > questions > regarding the existing structures for management of Internet number > resources > that will aid in your discussions, I'll be lurking on the list as a > resource to your > efforts. > > Best wishes! > /John > > Disclaimers: My views alone. 100% post-elemental particles used in this > email. > > On Jan 21, 2013, at 11:39 AM, Lee W McKnight wrote: > > Hi, > > First, my condolences to Norbert for his new headache; my congrats to > Imran for being spared (at least this year); and also congrats to Sala for > us all now having someone else to complain about daring to attempt to - > coordinate - this list. ; ) > > Second, excerpting from John Curran, re: > > "...an existing functional system which has enabled the growth and > success of the Internet to date, and an absence of any alternative > described in sufficient detail to be demonstrably superior." > > Now my comments: > > I don't think there's many on the list who would disagree that the - > global politics - of Internet governance remain broken/unstable. This was > exemplified most recently by WCIT, even as the Internet as a functional > system we may all agree, remains very cool. And useful/essential to global > and national economies and societies. > > Unsurprisingly, given the high stakes involved in changing the plumbing or > core infrastructure of the world economy, the barrier to implementing > thought experiments in real world policy processes, remains high. And yes > of course that (cyber-)infrastructure is not equally or equitably > distributed, we may also all agree. > > Still with me so far, whether a running dog capitalist or - whatever? : ) > > As one who tried without luck over the past year to move the thread to > discuss approaches which could lead to a possible consensus on a new > approach toward technical/institutional changes in Internet governance, > post WCIT; that remains the ~5 billion people + XXX billion devices > question for 2013 and beyond. > > (Meaning, how to govern/manage for the rest of the world and all our > devices and resources not already on the Internet.) > > One track of discussion quickly gets into technical/political nitty-gritty > for example of the root, and alternatives whether competing or cooperating, > as Avri, Louis, Suresh, David and Karl etc have been discussing. > > Good luck with that. > > Another, which I am yet again advocating as perhaps a new year's > resolution for - most - all of us in IGC to explore, takes a different > track. > > That is, we - assume - the Internet as it exists today. With its legacy > protocols, systems, and processes, and duly note much of that leads back > not just to the US government, but specifically originated out of DARPA > contracts and contractors. (Except cough cough, for the world wide web > which is the level most businesses and people interact with the net day to > day, which of course is a European invention, tossed to MIT to > manage/evolve with global big biz support by CERN back in the day.) Anyway, > enough history, that's the old news and not the point today. > > Instead, I am suggesting IGC should focus for 2013 on - what if any new > institutions, processes, and/or principles are needed for a future > Internet, to benefit global civil society. (I don't claim novelty, am just > advocating a strategic focus for IGC in 2013-201x) > > If that leads back to changes in existing institutions and processes, > great. > > However,my editorial comment is that the debacle in Dubai highlights that > new Internet operational responsibilities for UN agencies as part of that > mix aren't likely to gain sufficient support to fly, this decade I submit. > More editorial comments below. > > On the other hand, 'enhanced cooperation' via > > 1) a UNDESA committee is in nascent/not yet adequate stages (inadequate = > the embarrassing mess of 2012), but is happening; > > 2) while WSIS processes unfold as well. Not too many loud voices raised > against those discussions. > > 2)a Meaning, we can observe global discussions on internet governance > ongoing this year in and around ITU WTPF which managed in 2012 to paint a > big target on their back, essentially rendering them - > speechless/actionless in 2013 I suggest. Since any move to assert authority > will just turn them into a bigger target for eg both Google and Anonymous, > a mean feat); > 2)b to be very specific, I suggest taking WTPF too seriously is a > distraction for IGC since nothing much can come of it, due to the errors of > 2012. > > 3) UNESCO on other hand is so far under the public radar because without > pretense to get their hands close to core Internet functions, they may > possibly make positive contributions. > > Which would IGC prefer most to strengthen, or assist? Or are all efforts > of equal value? Or equally absent of merit? > > or, > > 4) Should the richer elephant in the room, ICANN, thanks to those new gTLD > fees, be recognized as the de facto if not de jure center of all action, > and the UN agencies left principally to their own devices by IGC? IGC > assisting ICANN in thinking through how to -further globalize - itself, can > be done from the inside; and the outside. > > Or do they all have their 'respective role' to play and the IGC should > prepare to comment/coordinate with them all more or less equally? > > Or, 5) do we/cs need to instead start picking more on WIPO to lighten up > on copyright over-enforcement treaties which cascade into national law, in > honor of Aron Swartz? > > How about 6) WTO which is really the writer of the global rules of all > business/government trade in services games? > > Most cs players have not attempted to engage equally in all of these, if > only for lack of resources. > > Perhaps Bertrand, Parminder and others can share some opinions on these > jurisdictional/strategy questions for global civil society? > > Since I suggest otherwise if we don't have much of a strategy, we can't > help grow the Internet governance forest, for all of the trees and > distractions all around us. > > My 5 cents for the New Year. > > Lee > > > > ------------------------------ > *From:* governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [ > governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] on behalf of John Curran [ > jcurran at istaff.org] > *Sent:* Sunday, January 20, 2013 1:44 PM > *To:* Riaz K Tayob > *Cc:* governance at lists.igcaucus.org > *Subject:* Re: [governance] Bloomberg - The Overzealous Prosecution of > Aaron Swartz > > On Jan 20, 2013, at 12:59 AM, Riaz K Tayob wrote: > > > This is the interpretation we make (and we are entitled to make it) when > for instance: > > > > 1. Some argue for ICANN etc to be regulated by US laws (state or > otherwise) - and that this is sufficient. > > > > 2. Others argue that legitimacy of the current structure of governance > is not an issue, and that work ought rather to be done within the system. > And that it is a none issue. > > Alas, my comment on your mention of "US Exceptionalism" was simply to note > that I do not consider it inevitable that the situation (in particular, > with respect to > overzealous prosecution nor the specific laws used against Aaron) will > improve > simply because of discussion and some presumed inherently superior nature > of > the US structures in these areas... This doesn't mean that it won't get > better, > but simply that there is no automatic reason to presume that it will > simply due > to discussion in the wonderful U.S. of A. (note - I do believe it will > result in > improvements to to the specific provisions of the Computer Fraud and Abuse > Act, but that's because of the acts of specific folks like Rep. Zoe > Lofgren and > should not otherwise be considered inevitable) > > Similarly, I do not consider that structures used for governance of > critical Internet > resources (e.g. name and number identifiers) to be inherently superior > simply due > to the particular circumstances of origin. In fact, I completely discount > the origin > and simply consider the structures on their demonstrated merits and > weaknesses > (i.e. good ideas are good ideas regardless of origin) The bias towards > the status > quo is not a ringing endorsement of the existing structures, nor a > heartfelt belief > that the structures must be superior because of US origin and > exceptionlism, > but simply reflect the reality that there is an existing functional system > which > has enabled the growth and success of the Internet to date, and an absence > of any alternative described in sufficient detail to be demonstrably > superior. > > FYI, > /John > > Disclaimers: My views alone. Supporting or contrary viewpoints are > welcomed > from all individuals regardless of race, religion, national origin, sexual > orientation > or disability and will be considered on their merits to the best of my > ability. > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > -- Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala P.O. Box 17862 Suva Fiji Twitter: @SalanietaT Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro Tel: +679 3544828 Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From lmcknigh at syr.edu Mon Jan 21 18:26:36 2013 From: lmcknigh at syr.edu (Lee W McKnight) Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2013 23:26:36 +0000 Subject: [governance] Yet another new -strategy - thread title: It may be broke - politically - but how to fix it, technopolitically? ; ) In-Reply-To: References: <77A59FC9477004489D44DE7FC6840E7B1B1C3A@SUEX10-mbx-08.ad.syr.edu> , Message-ID: <77A59FC9477004489D44DE7FC6840E7B1B1D1B@SUEX10-mbx-08.ad.syr.edu> Thanks Sala and John. How to get organized to interact with various entities is one issue for sure; what exactly we collectively are trying to accomplish/advocate this year is the -strategic - issue I hope we can make some progress on as well. Lee ________________________________ From: Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro [salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com] Sent: Monday, January 21, 2013 5:48 PM To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; John Curran Cc: Lee W McKnight Subject: Re: [governance] Yet another new -strategy - thread title: It may be broke - politically - but how to fix it, technopolitically? ; ) Lee, Those are excellent suggestions in relation on the need to identify areas to focus on. This was one of the reasons why last year, we started on identifying specific policy areas and volunteers etc where the IGC can advocate strategically as per our mandate within the Charter etc. There is a need for clear focal groups on specific Internet Governance issues which the IGC can draw from in relation to raising and mobilizing its resources for strategic and targeted advocacy. Norbert's past work will be useful in the preparation of the Strategy etc. Thank you Lee for raising this very important aspect. I would encourage the IGC to continue discussions on the same. Warm Regards, On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 10:03 AM, John Curran > wrote: Lee - A most excellent "call to arms" for the IGC community... May your deliberations on direction for the year be fruitful, and to the extent that you have any questions regarding the existing structures for management of Internet number resources that will aid in your discussions, I'll be lurking on the list as a resource to your efforts. Best wishes! /John Disclaimers: My views alone. 100% post-elemental particles used in this email. On Jan 21, 2013, at 11:39 AM, Lee W McKnight > wrote: Hi, First, my condolences to Norbert for his new headache; my congrats to Imran for being spared (at least this year); and also congrats to Sala for us all now having someone else to complain about daring to attempt to - coordinate - this list. ; ) Second, excerpting from John Curran, re: "...an existing functional system which has enabled the growth and success of the Internet to date, and an absence of any alternative described in sufficient detail to be demonstrably superior." Now my comments: I don't think there's many on the list who would disagree that the - global politics - of Internet governance remain broken/unstable. This was exemplified most recently by WCIT, even as the Internet as a functional system we may all agree, remains very cool. And useful/essential to global and national economies and societies. Unsurprisingly, given the high stakes involved in changing the plumbing or core infrastructure of the world economy, the barrier to implementing thought experiments in real world policy processes, remains high. And yes of course that (cyber-)infrastructure is not equally or equitably distributed, we may also all agree. Still with me so far, whether a running dog capitalist or - whatever? : ) As one who tried without luck over the past year to move the thread to discuss approaches which could lead to a possible consensus on a new approach toward technical/institutional changes in Internet governance, post WCIT; that remains the ~5 billion people + XXX billion devices question for 2013 and beyond. (Meaning, how to govern/manage for the rest of the world and all our devices and resources not already on the Internet.) One track of discussion quickly gets into technical/political nitty-gritty for example of the root, and alternatives whether competing or cooperating, as Avri, Louis, Suresh, David and Karl etc have been discussing. Good luck with that. Another, which I am yet again advocating as perhaps a new year's resolution for - most - all of us in IGC to explore, takes a different track. That is, we - assume - the Internet as it exists today. With its legacy protocols, systems, and processes, and duly note much of that leads back not just to the US government, but specifically originated out of DARPA contracts and contractors. (Except cough cough, for the world wide web which is the level most businesses and people interact with the net day to day, which of course is a European invention, tossed to MIT to manage/evolve with global big biz support by CERN back in the day.) Anyway, enough history, that's the old news and not the point today. Instead, I am suggesting IGC should focus for 2013 on - what if any new institutions, processes, and/or principles are needed for a future Internet, to benefit global civil society. (I don't claim novelty, am just advocating a strategic focus for IGC in 2013-201x) If that leads back to changes in existing institutions and processes, great. However,my editorial comment is that the debacle in Dubai highlights that new Internet operational responsibilities for UN agencies as part of that mix aren't likely to gain sufficient support to fly, this decade I submit. More editorial comments below. On the other hand, 'enhanced cooperation' via 1) a UNDESA committee is in nascent/not yet adequate stages (inadequate = the embarrassing mess of 2012), but is happening; 2) while WSIS processes unfold as well. Not too many loud voices raised against those discussions. 2)a Meaning, we can observe global discussions on internet governance ongoing this year in and around ITU WTPF which managed in 2012 to paint a big target on their back, essentially rendering them - speechless/actionless in 2013 I suggest. Since any move to assert authority will just turn them into a bigger target for eg both Google and Anonymous, a mean feat); 2)b to be very specific, I suggest taking WTPF too seriously is a distraction for IGC since nothing much can come of it, due to the errors of 2012. 3) UNESCO on other hand is so far under the public radar because without pretense to get their hands close to core Internet functions, they may possibly make positive contributions. Which would IGC prefer most to strengthen, or assist? Or are all efforts of equal value? Or equally absent of merit? or, 4) Should the richer elephant in the room, ICANN, thanks to those new gTLD fees, be recognized as the de facto if not de jure center of all action, and the UN agencies left principally to their own devices by IGC? IGC assisting ICANN in thinking through how to -further globalize - itself, can be done from the inside; and the outside. Or do they all have their 'respective role' to play and the IGC should prepare to comment/coordinate with them all more or less equally? Or, 5) do we/cs need to instead start picking more on WIPO to lighten up on copyright over-enforcement treaties which cascade into national law, in honor of Aron Swartz? How about 6) WTO which is really the writer of the global rules of all business/government trade in services games? Most cs players have not attempted to engage equally in all of these, if only for lack of resources. Perhaps Bertrand, Parminder and others can share some opinions on these jurisdictional/strategy questions for global civil society? Since I suggest otherwise if we don't have much of a strategy, we can't help grow the Internet governance forest, for all of the trees and distractions all around us. My 5 cents for the New Year. Lee ________________________________ From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] on behalf of John Curran [jcurran at istaff.org] Sent: Sunday, January 20, 2013 1:44 PM To: Riaz K Tayob Cc: governance at lists.igcaucus.org Subject: Re: [governance] Bloomberg - The Overzealous Prosecution of Aaron Swartz On Jan 20, 2013, at 12:59 AM, Riaz K Tayob > wrote: > This is the interpretation we make (and we are entitled to make it) when for instance: > > 1. Some argue for ICANN etc to be regulated by US laws (state or otherwise) - and that this is sufficient. > > 2. Others argue that legitimacy of the current structure of governance is not an issue, and that work ought rather to be done within the system. And that it is a none issue. Alas, my comment on your mention of "US Exceptionalism" was simply to note that I do not consider it inevitable that the situation (in particular, with respect to overzealous prosecution nor the specific laws used against Aaron) will improve simply because of discussion and some presumed inherently superior nature of the US structures in these areas... This doesn't mean that it won't get better, but simply that there is no automatic reason to presume that it will simply due to discussion in the wonderful U.S. of A. (note - I do believe it will result in improvements to to the specific provisions of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, but that's because of the acts of specific folks like Rep. Zoe Lofgren and should not otherwise be considered inevitable) Similarly, I do not consider that structures used for governance of critical Internet resources (e.g. name and number identifiers) to be inherently superior simply due to the particular circumstances of origin. In fact, I completely discount the origin and simply consider the structures on their demonstrated merits and weaknesses (i.e. good ideas are good ideas regardless of origin) The bias towards the status quo is not a ringing endorsement of the existing structures, nor a heartfelt belief that the structures must be superior because of US origin and exceptionlism, but simply reflect the reality that there is an existing functional system which has enabled the growth and success of the Internet to date, and an absence of any alternative described in sufficient detail to be demonstrably superior. FYI, /John Disclaimers: My views alone. Supporting or contrary viewpoints are welcomed from all individuals regardless of race, religion, national origin, sexual orientation or disability and will be considered on their merits to the best of my ability. ____________________________________________________________ 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 ____________________________________________________________ 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 ____________________________________________________________ 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 -- Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala P.O. Box 17862 Suva Fiji Twitter: @SalanietaT Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro Tel: +679 3544828 Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From avri at acm.org Mon Jan 21 18:39:28 2013 From: avri at acm.org (Avri Doria) Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2013 18:39:28 -0500 Subject: [governance] Yet another new -strategy - thread title: It may be broke - politically - but how to fix it, technopolitically? ; ) In-Reply-To: <77A59FC9477004489D44DE7FC6840E7B1B1C3A@SUEX10-mbx-08.ad.syr.edu> References: <77A59FC9477004489D44DE7FC6840E7B1B1C3A@SUEX10-mbx-08.ad.syr.edu> Message-ID: hi, I think we often/alwasy have conversations of the type: > what if any new institutions, processes, and/or principles are needed for a future Internet, to benefit global civil society. (I don't claim novelty, am just advocating a strategic focus for IGC in 2013-201x) I just think they quickly branch off into more specific topics. In any case I noticed that you neither mentioned the IGF, unless it was under the rather unflattering of "UNDESA committee is in nascent/not yet adequate stages" metaphor. In any case do you not think the IGF has a role in your search. Also the CSTD has been given/taken on the task of Enhanced Cooperation. You did not mention them either. I think this is an important topic for the IGC. Do you see no role for the CSTD within your thread? Also, I was really trying to talk about the intricate and abiding link between technology and policy using a specific example - as happens on IGC, it then took off toward the specific topic. avri On 21 Jan 2013, at 16:39, Lee W McKnight wrote: > Hi, > > First, my condolences to Norbert for his new headache; my congrats to Imran for being spared (at least this year); and also congrats to Sala for us all now having someone else to complain about daring to attempt to - coordinate - this list. ; ) > > Second, excerpting from John Curran, re: > > "...an existing functional system which has enabled the growth and success of the Internet to date, and an absence of any alternative described in sufficient detail to be demonstrably superior." > > Now my comments: > > I don't think there's many on the list who would disagree that the - global politics - of Internet governance remain broken/unstable. This was exemplified most recently by WCIT, even as the Internet as a functional system we may all agree, remains very cool. And useful/essential to global and national economies and societies. > > Unsurprisingly, given the high stakes involved in changing the plumbing or core infrastructure of the world economy, the barrier to implementing thought experiments in real world policy processes, remains high. And yes of course that (cyber-)infrastructure is not equally or equitably distributed, we may also all agree. > > Still with me so far, whether a running dog capitalist or - whatever? : ) > > As one who tried without luck over the past year to move the thread to discuss approaches which could lead to a possible consensus on a new approach toward technical/institutional changes in Internet governance, post WCIT; that remains the ~5 billion people + XXX billion devices question for 2013 and beyond. > > (Meaning, how to govern/manage for the rest of the world and all our devices and resources not already on the Internet.) > > One track of discussion quickly gets into technical/political nitty-gritty for example of the root, and alternatives whether competing or cooperating, as Avri, Louis, Suresh, David and Karl etc have been discussing. > > Good luck with that. > > Another, which I am yet again advocating as perhaps a new year's resolution for - most - all of us in IGC to explore, takes a different track. > > That is, we - assume - the Internet as it exists today. With its legacy protocols, systems, and processes, and duly note much of that leads back not just to the US government, but specifically originated out of DARPA contracts and contractors. (Except cough cough, for the world wide web which is the level most businesses and people interact with the net day to day, which of course is a European invention, tossed to MIT to manage/evolve with global big biz support by CERN back in the day.) Anyway, enough history, that's the old news and not the point today. > > Instead, I am suggesting IGC should focus for 2013 on - what if any new institutions, processes, and/or principles are needed for a future Internet, to benefit global civil society. (I don't claim novelty, am just advocating a strategic focus for IGC in 2013-201x) > > If that leads back to changes in existing institutions and processes, great. > > However,my editorial comment is that the debacle in Dubai highlights that new Internet operational responsibilities for UN agencies as part of that mix aren't likely to gain sufficient support to fly, this decade I submit. More editorial comments below. > > On the other hand, 'enhanced cooperation' via > > 1) a UNDESA committee is in nascent/not yet adequate stages (inadequate = the embarrassing mess of 2012), but is happening; > > 2) while WSIS processes unfold as well. Not too many loud voices raised against those discussions. > > 2)a Meaning, we can observe global discussions on internet governance ongoing this year in and around ITU WTPF which managed in 2012 to paint a big target on their back, essentially rendering them - speechless/actionless in 2013 I suggest. Since any move to assert authority will just turn them into a bigger target for eg both Google and Anonymous, a mean feat); > 2)b to be very specific, I suggest taking WTPF too seriously is a distraction for IGC since nothing much can come of it, due to the errors of 2012. > > 3) UNESCO on other hand is so far under the public radar because without pretense to get their hands close to core Internet functions, they may possibly make positive contributions. > > Which would IGC prefer most to strengthen, or assist? Or are all efforts of equal value? Or equally absent of merit? > > or, > > 4) Should the richer elephant in the room, ICANN, thanks to those new gTLD fees, be recognized as the de facto if not de jure center of all action, and the UN agencies left principally to their own devices by IGC? IGC assisting ICANN in thinking through how to -further globalize - itself, can be done from the inside; and the outside. > > Or do they all have their 'respective role' to play and the IGC should prepare to comment/coordinate with them all more or less equally? > > Or, 5) do we/cs need to instead start picking more on WIPO to lighten up on copyright over-enforcement treaties which cascade into national law, in honor of Aron Swartz? > > How about 6) WTO which is really the writer of the global rules of all business/government trade in services games? > > Most cs players have not attempted to engage equally in all of these, if only for lack of resources. > > Perhaps Bertrand, Parminder and others can share some opinions on these jurisdictional/strategy questions for global civil society? > > Since I suggest otherwise if we don't have much of a strategy, we can't help grow the Internet governance forest, for all of the trees and distractions all around us. > > My 5 cents for the New Year. > > Lee > > > -------------- 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 From lmcknigh at syr.edu Mon Jan 21 20:30:29 2013 From: lmcknigh at syr.edu (Lee W McKnight) Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2013 01:30:29 +0000 Subject: [governance] Yet another new -strategy - thread title: It may be broke - politically - but how to fix it, technopolitically? ; ) In-Reply-To: References: <77A59FC9477004489D44DE7FC6840E7B1B1C3A@SUEX10-mbx-08.ad.syr.edu>, Message-ID: <77A59FC9477004489D44DE7FC6840E7B1B1D80@SUEX10-mbx-08.ad.syr.edu> Avri, Sorry for the IGF slight/oversight in my rambling -start - of a IGC strategic review. IGF remains, appropriately, a key accomplishment and a central focus of course for IGC as the forum to push - whatever strategy/objectives we might have. Unfortunately imho IGF remains blocked - by various forces - from growing up further into whatever it might be. Certainly worth another push/further effort on how to - unstick it? But yes I have no problems with continued IGC engagement/agenda-setting/pushing/advocacy efforts there. Re CSTD, forgive also my oversight, thanks for adding that to the list of UN groups we may have - some strategic objectives for. I don't have a strong position on its relative merits and priorities for IGC for 2013. To add another UN org we IGCers usually pretty much ignore to the list, if we really did manage to come to a - IG strategic consensus - then I would suggest we think about skipping by all of the groups on the expanding list, and take it straight to the UN GA, via sympathetic states. Who dares vote against cs? ; ) Just to be clear, I don't claim to be the final arbiter on any of this, and merely express my own views and not those of my employers blah blah. Finally yes I know a 'strategic consensus on the igc list' may be an oxymoron, but on occasion we come up with consensus statements, so I remain eternally optimistic : ) Anyway, I invite others to comment/elaborate/critique, as well. Lee ________________________________ From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] on behalf of Avri Doria [avri at acm.org] Sent: Monday, January 21, 2013 6:39 PM To: IGC Subject: Re: [governance] Yet another new -strategy - thread title: It may be broke - politically - but how to fix it, technopolitically? ; ) hi, I think we often/alwasy have conversations of the type: > what if any new institutions, processes, and/or principles are needed for a future Internet, to benefit global civil society. (I don't claim novelty, am just advocating a strategic focus for IGC in 2013-201x) I just think they quickly branch off into more specific topics. In any case I noticed that you neither mentioned the IGF, unless it was under the rather unflattering of "UNDESA committee is in nascent/not yet adequate stages" metaphor. In any case do you not think the IGF has a role in your search. Also the CSTD has been given/taken on the task of Enhanced Cooperation. You did not mention them either. I think this is an important topic for the IGC. Do you see no role for the CSTD within your thread? Also, I was really trying to talk about the intricate and abiding link between technology and policy using a specific example - as happens on IGC, it then took off toward the specific topic. avri On 21 Jan 2013, at 16:39, Lee W McKnight wrote: > Hi, > > First, my condolences to Norbert for his new headache; my congrats to Imran for being spared (at least this year); and also congrats to Sala for us all now having someone else to complain about daring to attempt to - coordinate - this list. ; ) > > Second, excerpting from John Curran, re: > > "...an existing functional system which has enabled the growth and success of the Internet to date, and an absence of any alternative described in sufficient detail to be demonstrably superior." > > Now my comments: > > I don't think there's many on the list who would disagree that the - global politics - of Internet governance remain broken/unstable. This was exemplified most recently by WCIT, even as the Internet as a functional system we may all agree, remains very cool. And useful/essential to global and national economies and societies. > > Unsurprisingly, given the high stakes involved in changing the plumbing or core infrastructure of the world economy, the barrier to implementing thought experiments in real world policy processes, remains high. And yes of course that (cyber-)infrastructure is not equally or equitably distributed, we may also all agree. > > Still with me so far, whether a running dog capitalist or - whatever? : ) > > As one who tried without luck over the past year to move the thread to discuss approaches which could lead to a possible consensus on a new approach toward technical/institutional changes in Internet governance, post WCIT; that remains the ~5 billion people + XXX billion devices question for 2013 and beyond. > > (Meaning, how to govern/manage for the rest of the world and all our devices and resources not already on the Internet.) > > One track of discussion quickly gets into technical/political nitty-gritty for example of the root, and alternatives whether competing or cooperating, as Avri, Louis, Suresh, David and Karl etc have been discussing. > > Good luck with that. > > Another, which I am yet again advocating as perhaps a new year's resolution for - most - all of us in IGC to explore, takes a different track. > > That is, we - assume - the Internet as it exists today. With its legacy protocols, systems, and processes, and duly note much of that leads back not just to the US government, but specifically originated out of DARPA contracts and contractors. (Except cough cough, for the world wide web which is the level most businesses and people interact with the net day to day, which of course is a European invention, tossed to MIT to manage/evolve with global big biz support by CERN back in the day.) Anyway, enough history, that's the old news and not the point today. > > Instead, I am suggesting IGC should focus for 2013 on - what if any new institutions, processes, and/or principles are needed for a future Internet, to benefit global civil society. (I don't claim novelty, am just advocating a strategic focus for IGC in 2013-201x) > > If that leads back to changes in existing institutions and processes, great. > > However,my editorial comment is that the debacle in Dubai highlights that new Internet operational responsibilities for UN agencies as part of that mix aren't likely to gain sufficient support to fly, this decade I submit. More editorial comments below. > > On the other hand, 'enhanced cooperation' via > > 1) a UNDESA committee is in nascent/not yet adequate stages (inadequate = the embarrassing mess of 2012), but is happening; > > 2) while WSIS processes unfold as well. Not too many loud voices raised against those discussions. > > 2)a Meaning, we can observe global discussions on internet governance ongoing this year in and around ITU WTPF which managed in 2012 to paint a big target on their back, essentially rendering them - speechless/actionless in 2013 I suggest. Since any move to assert authority will just turn them into a bigger target for eg both Google and Anonymous, a mean feat); > 2)b to be very specific, I suggest taking WTPF too seriously is a distraction for IGC since nothing much can come of it, due to the errors of 2012. > > 3) UNESCO on other hand is so far under the public radar because without pretense to get their hands close to core Internet functions, they may possibly make positive contributions. > > Which would IGC prefer most to strengthen, or assist? Or are all efforts of equal value? Or equally absent of merit? > > or, > > 4) Should the richer elephant in the room, ICANN, thanks to those new gTLD fees, be recognized as the de facto if not de jure center of all action, and the UN agencies left principally to their own devices by IGC? IGC assisting ICANN in thinking through how to -further globalize - itself, can be done from the inside; and the outside. > > Or do they all have their 'respective role' to play and the IGC should prepare to comment/coordinate with them all more or less equally? > > Or, 5) do we/cs need to instead start picking more on WIPO to lighten up on copyright over-enforcement treaties which cascade into national law, in honor of Aron Swartz? > > How about 6) WTO which is really the writer of the global rules of all business/government trade in services games? > > Most cs players have not attempted to engage equally in all of these, if only for lack of resources. > > Perhaps Bertrand, Parminder and others can share some opinions on these jurisdictional/strategy questions for global civil society? > > Since I suggest otherwise if we don't have much of a strategy, we can't help grow the Internet governance forest, for all of the trees and distractions all around us. > > My 5 cents for the New Year. > > Lee > > > ____________________________________________________________ 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: -------------- 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 From suresh at hserus.net Mon Jan 21 21:06:12 2013 From: suresh at hserus.net (=?utf-8?B?U3VyZXNoIFJhbWFzdWJyYW1hbmlhbg==?=) Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2013 07:36:12 +0530 Subject: [governance] Yet another new -strategy - thread title: It may be broke - politically - but how to fix it, technopolitically? ; ) Message-ID: It would be interesting to see cs here focus on something more development oriented than is currently the case. We have essentially the same community for a long time, which essentially remains unchanged and is not quite representative of civil society at large. Which shows in our submissions not being joined and us not joining submissions by the larger civil society groups active in this space. Meanwhile civil society groups unrelated to the Internet, such as large trade unions and environmental ngos, manage to get together cogent proposals to take before the UN GA, entirely without the (dubious given lack of consensus here) benefit of any help from our community. What's wrong in this picture? Have we got into a rut, bogged down by individual agendas and fundamental differences between different groups here, which seem to widen rather than anything else with each successive thread about exceptionalism and the like? So far, this series of statements from a small but vocal rump of the community has, besides bogging us down in a morass of our own making (such as the cirp proposal and the need to counter that self goal) has led to the alienation of your natural allies in the technical community here, several of whom, like mctim have a long record of hands on ict development and capacity building in developing countries (please excuse me for refusing to use 'the south' as it is a divisive and politically loaded term) and that is entirely not ideal. --srs (htc one x) ----- Reply message ----- From: "Lee W McKnight" To: "governance at lists.igcaucus.org" , "Avri Doria" Subject: [governance] Yet another new -strategy - thread title: It may be broke - politically - but how to fix it, technopolitically? ; ) Date: Tue, Jan 22, 2013 7:00 AM Avri, Sorry for the IGF slight/oversight in my rambling -start - of a IGC strategic review. IGF remains, appropriately, a key accomplishment and a central focus of course for IGC as the forum to push - whatever strategy/objectives we might have. Unfortunately imho IGF remains blocked - by various forces - from growing up further into whatever it might be. Certainly worth another push/further effort on how to - unstick it? But yes I have no problems with continued IGC engagement/agenda-setting/pushing/advocacy efforts there. Re CSTD, forgive also my oversight, thanks for adding that to the list of UN groups we may have - some strategic objectives for. I don't have a strong position on its relative merits and priorities for IGC for 2013. To add another UN org we IGCers usually pretty much ignore to the list, if we really did manage to come to a - IG strategic consensus - then I would suggest we think about skipping by all of the groups on the expanding list, and take it straight to the UN GA, via sympathetic states. Who dares vote against cs? ; ) Just to be clear, I don't claim to be the final arbiter on any of this, and merely express my own views and not those of my employers blah blah. Finally yes I know a 'strategic consensus on the igc list' may be an oxymoron, but on occasion we come up with consensus statements, so I remain eternally optimistic : ) Anyway, I invite others to comment/elaborate/critique, as well. Lee ________________________________ From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] on behalf of Avri Doria [avri at acm.org] Sent: Monday, January 21, 2013 6:39 PM To: IGC Subject: Re: [governance] Yet another new -strategy - thread title: It may be broke - politically - but how to fix it, technopolitically? ; ) hi, I think we often/alwasy have conversations of the type: > what if any new institutions, processes, and/or principles are needed for a future Internet, to benefit global civil society. (I don't claim novelty, am just advocating a strategic focus for IGC in 2013-201x) I just think they quickly branch off into more specific topics. In any case I noticed that you neither mentioned the IGF, unless it was under the rather unflattering of "UNDESA committee is in nascent/not yet adequate stages" metaphor. In any case do you not think the IGF has a role in your search. Also the CSTD has been given/taken on the task of Enhanced Cooperation. You did not mention them either. I think this is an important topic for the IGC. Do you see no role for the CSTD within your thread? Also, I was really trying to talk about the intricate and abiding link between technology and policy using a specific example - as happens on IGC, it then took off toward the specific topic. avri On 21 Jan 2013, at 16:39, Lee W McKnight wrote: > Hi, > > First, my condolences to Norbert for his new headache; my congrats to Imran for being spared (at least this year); and also congrats to Sala for us all now having someone else to complain about daring to attempt to - coordinate - this list. ; ) > > Second, excerpting from John Curran, re: > > "...an existing functional system which has enabled the growth and success of the Internet to date, and an absence of any alternative described in sufficient detail to be demonstrably superior." > > Now my comments: > > I don't think there's many on the list who would disagree that the - global politics - of Internet governance remain broken/unstable. This was exemplified most recently by WCIT, even as the Internet as a functional system we may all agree, remains very cool. And useful/essential to global and national economies and societies. > > Unsurprisingly, given the high stakes involved in changing the plumbing or core infrastructure of the world economy, the barrier to implementing thought experiments in real world policy processes, remains high. And yes of course that (cyber-)infrastructure is not equally or equitably distributed, we may also all agree. > > Still with me so far, whether a running dog capitalist or - whatever? : ) > > As one who tried without luck over the past year to move the thread to discuss approaches which could lead to a possible consensus on a new approach toward technical/institutional changes in Internet governance, post WCIT; that remains the ~5 billion people + XXX billion devices question for 2013 and beyond. > > (Meaning, how to govern/manage for the rest of the world and all our devices and resources not already on the Internet.) > > One track of discussion quickly gets into technical/political nitty-gritty for example of the root, and alternatives whether competing or cooperating, as Avri, Louis, Suresh, David and Karl etc have been discussing. > > Good luck with that. > > Another, which I am yet again advocating as perhaps a new year's resolution for - most - all of us in IGC to explore, takes a different track. > > That is, we - assume - the Internet as it exists today. With its legacy protocols, systems, and processes, and duly note much of that leads back not just to the US government, but specifically originated out of DARPA contracts and contractors. (Except cough cough, for the world wide web which is the level most businesses and people interact with the net day to day, which of course is a European invention, tossed to MIT to manage/evolve with global big biz support by CERN back in the day.) Anyway, enough history, that's the old news and not the point today. > > Instead, I am suggesting IGC should focus for 2013 on - what if any new institutions, processes, and/or principles are needed for a future Internet, to benefit global civil society. (I don't claim novelty, am just advocating a strategic focus for IGC in 2013-201x) > > If that leads back to changes in existing institutions and processes, great. > > However,my editorial comment is that the debacle in Dubai highlights that new Internet operational responsibilities for UN agencies as part of that mix aren't likely to gain sufficient support to fly, this decade I submit. More editorial comments below. > > On the other hand, 'enhanced cooperation' via > > 1) a UNDESA committee is in nascent/not yet adequate stages (inadequate = the embarrassing mess of 2012), but is happening; > > 2) while WSIS processes unfold as well. Not too many loud voices raised against those discussions. > > 2)a Meaning, we can observe global discussions on internet governance ongoing this year in and around ITU WTPF which managed in 2012 to paint a big target on their back, essentially rendering them - speechless/actionless in 2013 I suggest. Since any move to assert authority will just turn them into a bigger target for eg both Google and Anonymous, a mean feat); > 2)b to be very specific, I suggest taking WTPF too seriously is a distraction for IGC since nothing much can come of it, due to the errors of 2012. > > 3) UNESCO on other hand is so far under the public radar because without pretense to get their hands close to core Internet functions, they may possibly make positive contributions. > > Which would IGC prefer most to strengthen, or assist? Or are all efforts of equal value? Or equally absent of merit? > > or, > > 4) Should the richer elephant in the room, ICANN, thanks to those new gTLD fees, be recognized as the de facto if not de jure center of all action, and the UN agencies left principally to their own devices by IGC? IGC assisting ICANN in thinking through how to -further globalize - itself, can be done from the inside; and the outside. > > Or do they all have their 'respective role' to play and the IGC should prepare to comment/coordinate with them all more or less equally? > > Or, 5) do we/cs need to instead start picking more on WIPO to lighten up on copyright over-enforcement treaties which cascade into national law, in honor of Aron Swartz? > > How about 6) WTO which is really the writer of the global rules of all business/government trade in services games? > > Most cs players have not attempted to engage equally in all of these, if only for lack of resources. > > Perhaps Bertrand, Parminder and others can share some opinions on these jurisdictional/strategy questions for global civil society? > > Since I suggest otherwise if we don't have much of a strategy, we can't help grow the Internet governance forest, for all of the trees and distractions all around us. > > My 5 cents for the New Year. > > Lee > > > ____________________________________________________________ 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: -------------- 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 From ian.peter at ianpeter.com Mon Jan 21 22:09:48 2013 From: ian.peter at ianpeter.com (Ian Peter) Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2013 14:09:48 +1100 Subject: [governance] Appeals Team Final Report Message-ID: <8642774A0A714ABB9847E6EDA8B3ABC5@Toshiba> FINAL REPORT, FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS With the comments period completed, the Appeals Team can now present its final report and recommendations as regards the appeal against the removal from the IGC list of Suresh Ramasubramanian. OUR FINDINGS ON THE APPEAL We confirm our finding is that Suresh’s removal from the IGC list was not in accordance with the IGC Charter, for reasons contained in our interim findings and repeated later in this report. We therefore request that Suresh be reinstated to the list immediately. (this has already taken place) OUR RECOMMENDATIONS We also make the following recommendations for consideration by all IGC members. Recommendation 1. The IGC Charter includes the following recommendation,. “The coordinators may, at their discretion, appoint an advisory team of at least three individuals to assist them in making the determination of when someone has breached the posting rules defined in this charter. While all decisions remain the coordinators' responsibility, any such recommendation from an advisory team will be made public at the time of either suspension or removal from the list.” In the case before us which took place while there was only one active coordinator, we think this advisory team would have been particularly valuable. Recommendation 2. We recommend that in future reasons be given for any removal or suspension, referencing the charter provisions which were breached and led to the suspension. This is currently not a requirement in the Charter, but we feel strongly that any suspension, removal, or warning, should state clearly why this is so, in accordance with the IGC charter provisions. These are listed below and are quite broad. Recommendation 3. We recommend that in future all removal/suspensions also be communicated to the list with reasons, not only to the person concerned. Again this is not a current Charter requirement, but we believe that in the interests of good communication with the list this should always be followed. Recommendation 4. We recommend that, should the co-coordinators choose to review the situation as regards the suspension of Suresh Ramasubramanian, the number of days already suspended from the list prior to being reinstated during this appeals process should be deducted from any 30 day suspension. Recommendation 5. Finally, we recommend that all list participants, including those who have been warned in the past, focus their contributions on the issues being discussed, and not the personalities. If IGC ever degrades to a forum which does not have a wide range of cultural differences, political opinions, perspectives, interests,sensitivities, and differing interests in the broad field of internet governance, it would be a great pity. However, within this diverse group, all members have a right to discuss what they feel is pertinent, and all members have a right to disagree. But none of this should include statements which could be construed by a reasonable person as being outside of the IGC Charter’s definition of reasonable conduct, which includes (to quote from the charter) The messages must observe a minimum of decorum, including: · refrain from personal attacks, insults or slander · refrain from offensive or discriminating language · refrain from threats , including threats of legal action, on list or off list · refrain from excessive and repetitive posting Inappropriate postings to the IGC list include · Unsolicited bulk e-mail · Discussion of subjects unrelated to the IGC mission and objectives · Unprofessional or discourteous commentary, regardless of the general subject · Sequences of messages by one or more participants that cause an IGC list to become a hostile environment It is only appropriate that action should be taken, should co - coordinators in their best judgement (and where appropriate with consultation) feel that participants are acting outside of these guidelines. As members of this list, we feel that there have been a number of cases recently, involving not only those who have been warned but cases where people have not been warned, where these guidelines have been broken. It is in the interests of what we are trying to achieve as civil society that our discourse remains civil, polite, and courteous. We reject the notion that, because other lists do not closely moderate or demand reasonable behaviour, this list should not pursue the standards set in its charter. Lastly, we wish to record our thanks to Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro for her patience and co-operation during this appeal period, and her dedication to keeping the Internet Governance Caucus functioning during a difficult time. We trust that our recommendations are useful in assisting future co-coordinators in dealing with such situations, and in clarifying the behaviour that can reasonably be expected from all participants on this mailing list. Thanks also to those who submitted comments. This appeal is now closed. The Appeals Team will not be responding formally to any further comments on this particular matter. The Appeals Team Shaila Mistry, Ginger Paque, Roland Perry , Ian Peter and Deidre Williams BACKGROUND INFORMATION Reasons for our finding. The Charter outlines a specific process that must take place before removal on any person from the list, as follows Suspension of posting rights Failure to abide by posting rules may result in suspension or removal from the IGC list according to the following process: · The coordinators will first warn a subscriber privately of the problem · If the problem persists the coordinators will notify the subscriber publicly on the list of impending suspension from the list. Suspension will include only posting rights. · If the problem persists the subscriber's posting rights will be suspended for one (1) month. · Once the subscriber's posting rights are restored, any further problem will result in another public warning. · If the problem continues to persist after suspension and a second public warning, the coordinators will be permitted to either suspend the posting rights for three (3) months or to remove the subscriber from the list. · Any decision for suspension can be appealed. Any decision to remove someone from the list will call for an automatic appeal by the appeals team. In this case, the previous private and public warnings given to Suresh needed to be followed by a one month suspension, not removal from the list. It has been confirmed in correspondence with both the Coordinator and with the person removed from the list that the word used in the private letter advising removal was “removal”, and this was confirmed by the co ordinator as being the intention. It was this action outside of the process outlined in the IGC Charter that led to our decision. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From jeremy at ciroap.org Tue Jan 22 02:41:29 2013 From: jeremy at ciroap.org (Jeremy Malcolm) Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2013 15:41:29 +0800 Subject: [governance] Re: Coordinator election results In-Reply-To: <5FB29FA5-F87D-4F98-BDAC-E5BB066C0CC9@ciroap.org> References: <5FB29FA5-F87D-4F98-BDAC-E5BB066C0CC9@ciroap.org> Message-ID: <50FE42A9.9080204@ciroap.org> On 19/01/13 08:42, Jeremy Malcolm wrote: > The elections for the next co-coordinator of the IGC have just closed. > As this year's returning officer I am pleased to present the results. > > There were 129 people who commenced the survey. One of them > self-identified as not being a member of the Internet Governance > Caucus, and one of them bailed out when asked that question. This > leaves 127 people who self-identified. Of those, six people claimed > that they had already voted in this year's election, so they were not > offered the opportunity to vote again. Of the remaining 121, 106 took > that opportunity. A slight correction to this. Of the 129 people above, four of them were voters who bailed out and then returned to the poll a second time (one of these was the person who bailed out on the self-identification question). Therefore there were actually only 125 unique voters, not 129, and 124 of them self-identified as IGC members. I have updated the permanent record of the election on the IGC website accordingly (http://igcaucus.org/2012-2014-co-ordinator-election-results). Thanks to Norbert for helping to find the discrepancy. There is no change to the figures of those who voted for Norbert and Imran, and therefore the election result doesn't change. As to whether those who voted informally are to be counted as voting members this year, Norbert and Sala have made a decision on this and will be announcing it on the list shortly, if they haven't done so already. -- *Dr Jeremy Malcolm Senior Policy Officer Consumers International | the global campaigning voice for consumers* Office for Asia-Pacific and the Middle East Lot 5-1 Wisma WIM, 7 Jalan Abang Haji Openg, TTDI, 60000 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia Tel: +60 3 7726 1599 *Your rights, our mission – download CI's Strategy 2015:* http://consint.info/RightsMission @Consumers_Int | www.consumersinternational.org | www.facebook.com/consumersinternational Read our email confidentiality notice . Don't print this email unless necessary. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From b.schombe at gmail.com Tue Jan 22 03:42:40 2013 From: b.schombe at gmail.com (Baudouin SCHOMBE) Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2013 09:42:40 +0100 Subject: [governance] Coordinator election results In-Reply-To: <5FB29FA5-F87D-4F98-BDAC-E5BB066C0CC9@ciroap.org> References: <5FB29FA5-F87D-4F98-BDAC-E5BB066C0CC9@ciroap.org> Message-ID: Hello, Recognizing that all human work is never perfect, it is necessary to congratulate our body facilitation of the IGC. This election is unwound in the democratic rules acceptable. Congratulations to both candidates Imran and Norbert. SCHOMBE BAUDOUIN Téléphone mobile:+243998983491 email : b.schombe at gmail.com skype : b.schombe blog : http://akimambo.unblog.fr Site Web : www.ticafrica.net 2013/1/19 Jeremy Malcolm > The elections for the next co-coordinator of the IGC have just closed. As > this year's returning officer I am pleased to present the results. > > There were 129 people who commenced the survey. One of them > self-identified as not being a member of the Internet Governance Caucus, > and one of them bailed out when asked that question. This leaves 127 > people who self-identified. Of those, six people claimed that they had > already voted in this year's election, so they were not offered the > opportunity to vote again. Of the remaining 121, 106 took that opportunity. > > Both candidates polled well. In the end, Imran Ahmed Shah came second > with 45 votes in his favour. Norbert Bollow came first with 61 votes. > > Congratulations Norbert, our new co-coordinator - and thanks to you too > Imran. I will post the full details to our website as soon as I get an > opportunity, and with Sala and Izumi's position will brief Norbert on the > technical aspects of his new role. I will also update the list of voters > on our website, and will consult with Sala about that. > > If anyone has any questions in the meantime, please let me know. > > -- > > *Dr Jeremy Malcolm > Senior Policy Officer > Consumers International | the global campaigning voice for consumers* > Office for Asia-Pacific and the Middle East > Lot 5-1 Wisma WIM, 7 Jalan Abang Haji Openg, TTDI, 60000 Kuala Lumpur, > Malaysia > Tel: +60 3 7726 1599 > > *Your rights, our mission – download CI's Strategy 2015:* > http://consint.info/RightsMission > > @Consumers_Int | www.consumersinternational.org | > www.facebook.com/consumersinternational > > Read our email confidentiality notice. > Don't print this email unless necessary. > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com Tue Jan 22 04:20:05 2013 From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro) Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2013 21:20:05 +1200 Subject: [governance] Appeals Team Final Report In-Reply-To: <8642774A0A714ABB9847E6EDA8B3ABC5@Toshiba> References: <8642774A0A714ABB9847E6EDA8B3ABC5@Toshiba> Message-ID: Thank you to the Appeal Team for the work done in this matter. Kind Regards, Sala On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 3:09 PM, Ian Peter wrote: > FINAL REPORT, FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS > > With the comments period completed, the Appeals Team can now present its > final report and recommendations as regards the appeal against the removal > from the IGC list of Suresh Ramasubramanian. > > OUR FINDINGS ON THE APPEAL > > We confirm our finding is that Suresh’s removal from the IGC list was not > in accordance with the IGC Charter, for reasons contained in our interim > findings and repeated later in this report. We therefore request that > Suresh be reinstated to the list immediately. (this has already taken place) > > OUR RECOMMENDATIONS > > We also make the following recommendations for consideration by all IGC > members. > > Recommendation 1. The IGC Charter includes the following recommendation,. “The > coordinators may, at their discretion, appoint an advisory team of at least > three individuals to assist them in making the determination of when > someone has breached the posting rules defined in this charter. While all > decisions remain the coordinators' responsibility, any such recommendation > from an advisory team will be made public at the time of either suspension > or removal from the list.” > > In the case before us which took place while there was only one active > coordinator, we think this advisory team would have been particularly > valuable. > > > > Recommendation 2. We recommend that in future reasons be given for any > removal or suspension, referencing the charter provisions which were > breached and led to the suspension. This is currently not a requirement in > the Charter, but we feel strongly that any suspension, removal, or warning, > should state clearly why this is so, in accordance with the IGC charter > provisions. These are listed below and are quite broad. > > > > Recommendation 3. We recommend that in future all removal/suspensions also > be communicated to the list with reasons, not only to the person concerned. > Again this is not a current Charter requirement, but we believe that in the > interests of good communication with the list this should always be > followed. > > > > Recommendation 4. We recommend that, should the co-coordinators choose to > review the situation as regards the suspension of Suresh Ramasubramanian, > the number of days already suspended from the list prior to being > reinstated during this appeals process should be deducted from any 30 day > suspension. > > > > Recommendation 5. Finally, we recommend that all list participants, > including those who have been warned in the past, focus their contributions > on the issues being discussed, and not the personalities. If IGC ever > degrades to a forum which does not have a wide range of cultural > differences, political opinions, perspectives, interests,sensitivities, and > differing interests in the broad field of internet governance, it would be > a great pity. However, within this diverse group, all members have a right > to discuss what they feel is pertinent, and all members have a right to > disagree. But none of this should include statements which could be > construed by a reasonable person as being outside of the IGC Charter’s > definition of reasonable conduct, which includes (to quote from the charter) > > The messages must observe a minimum of decorum, including: > · refrain from personal attacks, insults or slander > · refrain from offensive or discriminating language > · refrain from threats , including threats of legal action, on list or > off list > · refrain from excessive and repetitive posting > > Inappropriate postings to the IGC list include > · Unsolicited bulk e-mail > · Discussion of subjects unrelated to the IGC mission and objectives > · Unprofessional or discourteous commentary, regardless of the general > subject > · Sequences of messages by one or more participants that cause an IGC > list to become a hostile environment > > It is only appropriate that action should be taken, should co - > coordinators in their best judgement (and where appropriate with > consultation) feel that participants are acting outside of these > guidelines. As members of this list, we feel that there have been a number > of cases recently, involving not only those who have been warned but cases > where people have not been warned, where these guidelines have been broken. > It is in the interests of what we are trying to achieve as civil society > that our discourse remains civil, polite, and courteous. We reject the > notion that, because other lists do not closely moderate or demand > reasonable behaviour, this list should not pursue the standards set in its > charter. > > > > Lastly, we wish to record our thanks to Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro for > her patience and co-operation during this appeal period, and her dedication > to keeping the Internet Governance Caucus functioning during a difficult > time. We trust that our recommendations are useful in assisting future > co-coordinators in dealing with such situations, and in clarifying the > behaviour that can reasonably be expected from all participants on this > mailing list. > > > > Thanks also to those who submitted comments. This appeal is now closed. > The Appeals Team will not be responding formally to any further comments on > this particular matter. > > > > The Appeals Team > > Shaila Mistry, Ginger Paque, Roland Perry , Ian Peter and Deidre Williams > > > > BACKGROUND INFORMATION > > Reasons for our finding. > > The Charter outlines a specific process that must take place before > removal on any person from the list, as follows > > *Suspension of posting rights* > > Failure to abide by posting rules may result in suspension or removal from > the IGC list according to the following process: > > · The coordinators will first warn a subscriber privately of the problem > · If the problem persists the coordinators will notify the subscriber > publicly on the list of impending suspension from the list. Suspension will > include only posting rights. > · If the problem persists the subscriber's posting rights will be > suspended for one (1) month. > · Once the subscriber's posting rights are restored, any further problem > will result in another public warning. > · If the problem continues to persist after suspension and a second > public warning, the coordinators will be permitted to either suspend the > posting rights for three (3) months or to remove the subscriber from the > list. > · Any decision for suspension can be appealed. Any decision to remove > someone from the list will call for an automatic appeal by the appeals team > . > > In this case, the previous private and public warnings given to Suresh > needed to be followed by a one month suspension, not removal from the list. > It has been confirmed in correspondence with both the Coordinator and with > the person removed from the list that the word used in the private letter > advising removal was “removal”, and this was confirmed by the co ordinator > as being the intention. It was this action outside of the process outlined > in the IGC Charter that led to our decision. > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > -- Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala P.O. Box 17862 Suva Fiji Twitter: @SalanietaT Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro Tel: +679 3544828 Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From baudouin.schombe at gmail.com Tue Jan 22 04:39:30 2013 From: baudouin.schombe at gmail.com (Baudouin Schombe) Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2013 10:39:30 +0100 Subject: [governance] Appeals Team Final Report In-Reply-To: <8642774A0A714ABB9847E6EDA8B3ABC5@Toshiba> References: <8642774A0A714ABB9847E6EDA8B3ABC5@Toshiba> Message-ID: Hello, Congratulations and thank you for providing elements of good quality to allow us to remain in compliance with the principles of our Charter. 2013/1/22 Ian Peter > FINAL REPORT, FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS > > With the comments period completed, the Appeals Team can now present its > final report and recommendations as regards the appeal against the removal > from the IGC list of Suresh Ramasubramanian. > > OUR FINDINGS ON THE APPEAL > > We confirm our finding is that Suresh’s removal from the IGC list was not > in accordance with the IGC Charter, for reasons contained in our interim > findings and repeated later in this report. We therefore request that > Suresh be reinstated to the list immediately. (this has already taken place) > > OUR RECOMMENDATIONS > > We also make the following recommendations for consideration by all IGC > members. > > Recommendation 1. The IGC Charter includes the following recommendation,. “The > coordinators may, at their discretion, appoint an advisory team of at least > three individuals to assist them in making the determination of when > someone has breached the posting rules defined in this charter. While all > decisions remain the coordinators' responsibility, any such recommendation > from an advisory team will be made public at the time of either suspension > or removal from the list.” > > In the case before us which took place while there was only one active > coordinator, we think this advisory team would have been particularly > valuable. > > > > Recommendation 2. We recommend that in future reasons be given for any > removal or suspension, referencing the charter provisions which were > breached and led to the suspension. This is currently not a requirement in > the Charter, but we feel strongly that any suspension, removal, or warning, > should state clearly why this is so, in accordance with the IGC charter > provisions. These are listed below and are quite broad. > > > > Recommendation 3. We recommend that in future all removal/suspensions also > be communicated to the list with reasons, not only to the person concerned. > Again this is not a current Charter requirement, but we believe that in the > interests of good communication with the list this should always be > followed. > > > > Recommendation 4. We recommend that, should the co-coordinators choose to > review the situation as regards the suspension of Suresh Ramasubramanian, > the number of days already suspended from the list prior to being > reinstated during this appeals process should be deducted from any 30 day > suspension. > > > > Recommendation 5. Finally, we recommend that all list participants, > including those who have been warned in the past, focus their contributions > on the issues being discussed, and not the personalities. If IGC ever > degrades to a forum which does not have a wide range of cultural > differences, political opinions, perspectives, interests,sensitivities, and > differing interests in the broad field of internet governance, it would be > a great pity. However, within this diverse group, all members have a right > to discuss what they feel is pertinent, and all members have a right to > disagree. But none of this should include statements which could be > construed by a reasonable person as being outside of the IGC Charter’s > definition of reasonable conduct, which includes (to quote from the charter) > > The messages must observe a minimum of decorum, including: > · refrain from personal attacks, insults or slander > · refrain from offensive or discriminating language > · refrain from threats , including threats of legal action, on list or > off list > · refrain from excessive and repetitive posting > > Inappropriate postings to the IGC list include > · Unsolicited bulk e-mail > · Discussion of subjects unrelated to the IGC mission and objectives > · Unprofessional or discourteous commentary, regardless of the general > subject > · Sequences of messages by one or more participants that cause an IGC > list to become a hostile environment > > It is only appropriate that action should be taken, should co - > coordinators in their best judgement (and where appropriate with > consultation) feel that participants are acting outside of these > guidelines. As members of this list, we feel that there have been a number > of cases recently, involving not only those who have been warned but cases > where people have not been warned, where these guidelines have been broken. > It is in the interests of what we are trying to achieve as civil society > that our discourse remains civil, polite, and courteous. We reject the > notion that, because other lists do not closely moderate or demand > reasonable behaviour, this list should not pursue the standards set in its > charter. > > > > Lastly, we wish to record our thanks to Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro for > her patience and co-operation during this appeal period, and her dedication > to keeping the Internet Governance Caucus functioning during a difficult > time. We trust that our recommendations are useful in assisting future > co-coordinators in dealing with such situations, and in clarifying the > behaviour that can reasonably be expected from all participants on this > mailing list. > > > > Thanks also to those who submitted comments. This appeal is now closed. > The Appeals Team will not be responding formally to any further comments on > this particular matter. > > > > The Appeals Team > > Shaila Mistry, Ginger Paque, Roland Perry , Ian Peter and Deidre Williams > > > > BACKGROUND INFORMATION > > Reasons for our finding. > > The Charter outlines a specific process that must take place before > removal on any person from the list, as follows > > *Suspension of posting rights* > > Failure to abide by posting rules may result in suspension or removal from > the IGC list according to the following process: > > · The coordinators will first warn a subscriber privately of the problem > · If the problem persists the coordinators will notify the subscriber > publicly on the list of impending suspension from the list. Suspension will > include only posting rights. > · If the problem persists the subscriber's posting rights will be > suspended for one (1) month. > · Once the subscriber's posting rights are restored, any further problem > will result in another public warning. > · If the problem continues to persist after suspension and a second > public warning, the coordinators will be permitted to either suspend the > posting rights for three (3) months or to remove the subscriber from the > list. > · Any decision for suspension can be appealed. Any decision to remove > someone from the list will call for an automatic appeal by the appeals team > . > > In this case, the previous private and public warnings given to Suresh > needed to be followed by a one month suspension, not removal from the list. > It has been confirmed in correspondence with both the Coordinator and with > the person removed from the list that the word used in the private letter > advising removal was “removal”, and this was confirmed by the co ordinator > as being the intention. It was this action outside of the process outlined > in the IGC Charter that led to our decision. > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > -- SCHOMBE BAUDOUIN CENTRE AFRICAIN D'ECHANGE CULTUREL/ ACADEMIE DES TIC At-Large Member NCSG Member email:baudouin.schombe at gmail.com Baudouin.Schombe at ticafrica.net tél:+243998983491 skype:b.schombe wite web:http://webmail.ticafrica.net blog:http://akimambo.unblog.fr -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From suresh at hserus.net Tue Jan 22 04:40:36 2013 From: suresh at hserus.net (=?utf-8?B?U3VyZXNoIFJhbWFzdWJyYW1hbmlhbg==?=) Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2013 15:10:36 +0530 Subject: [governance] Appeals Team Final Report Message-ID: Thanks to the committee for a detailed and painstaking description of their reasoning. --srs (htc one x) ----- Reply message ----- From: "Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro" To: , "Ian Peter" Subject: [governance] Appeals Team Final Report Date: Tue, Jan 22, 2013 2:50 PM Thank you to the Appeal Team for the work done in this matter. Kind Regards, Sala On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 3:09 PM, Ian Peter wrote: > FINAL REPORT, FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS > > With the comments period completed, the Appeals Team can now present its > final report and recommendations as regards the appeal against the removal > from the IGC list of Suresh Ramasubramanian. > > OUR FINDINGS ON THE APPEAL > > We confirm our finding is that Suresh’s removal from the IGC list was not > in accordance with the IGC Charter, for reasons contained in our interim > findings and repeated later in this report. We therefore request that > Suresh be reinstated to the list immediately. (this has already taken place) > > OUR RECOMMENDATIONS > > We also make the following recommendations for consideration by all IGC > members. > > Recommendation 1. The IGC Charter includes the following recommendation,. “The > coordinators may, at their discretion, appoint an advisory team of at least > three individuals to assist them in making the determination of when > someone has breached the posting rules defined in this charter. While all > decisions remain the coordinators' responsibility, any such recommendation > from an advisory team will be made public at the time of either suspension > or removal from the list.” > > In the case before us which took place while there was only one active > coordinator, we think this advisory team would have been particularly > valuable. > > > > Recommendation 2. We recommend that in future reasons be given for any > removal or suspension, referencing the charter provisions which were > breached and led to the suspension. This is currently not a requirement in > the Charter, but we feel strongly that any suspension, removal, or warning, > should state clearly why this is so, in accordance with the IGC charter > provisions. These are listed below and are quite broad. > > > > Recommendation 3. We recommend that in future all removal/suspensions also > be communicated to the list with reasons, not only to the person concerned. > Again this is not a current Charter requirement, but we believe that in the > interests of good communication with the list this should always be > followed. > > > > Recommendation 4. We recommend that, should the co-coordinators choose to > review the situation as regards the suspension of Suresh Ramasubramanian, > the number of days already suspended from the list prior to being > reinstated during this appeals process should be deducted from any 30 day > suspension. > > > > Recommendation 5. Finally, we recommend that all list participants, > including those who have been warned in the past, focus their contributions > on the issues being discussed, and not the personalities. If IGC ever > degrades to a forum which does not have a wide range of cultural > differences, political opinions, perspectives, interests,sensitivities, and > differing interests in the broad field of internet governance, it would be > a great pity. However, within this diverse group, all members have a right > to discuss what they feel is pertinent, and all members have a right to > disagree. But none of this should include statements which could be > construed by a reasonable person as being outside of the IGC Charter’s > definition of reasonable conduct, which includes (to quote from the charter) > > The messages must observe a minimum of decorum, including: > · refrain from personal attacks, insults or slander > · refrain from offensive or discriminating language > · refrain from threats , including threats of legal action, on list or > off list > · refrain from excessive and repetitive posting > > Inappropriate postings to the IGC list include > · Unsolicited bulk e-mail > · Discussion of subjects unrelated to the IGC mission and objectives > · Unprofessional or discourteous commentary, regardless of the general > subject > · Sequences of messages by one or more participants that cause an IGC > list to become a hostile environment > > It is only appropriate that action should be taken, should co - > coordinators in their best judgement (and where appropriate with > consultation) feel that participants are acting outside of these > guidelines. As members of this list, we feel that there have been a number > of cases recently, involving not only those who have been warned but cases > where people have not been warned, where these guidelines have been broken. > It is in the interests of what we are trying to achieve as civil society > that our discourse remains civil, polite, and courteous. We reject the > notion that, because other lists do not closely moderate or demand > reasonable behaviour, this list should not pursue the standards set in its > charter. > > > > Lastly, we wish to record our thanks to Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro for > her patience and co-operation during this appeal period, and her dedication > to keeping the Internet Governance Caucus functioning during a difficult > time. We trust that our recommendations are useful in assisting future > co-coordinators in dealing with such situations, and in clarifying the > behaviour that can reasonably be expected from all participants on this > mailing list. > > > > Thanks also to those who submitted comments. This appeal is now closed. > The Appeals Team will not be responding formally to any further comments on > this particular matter. > > > > The Appeals Team > > Shaila Mistry, Ginger Paque, Roland Perry , Ian Peter and Deidre Williams > > > > BACKGROUND INFORMATION > > Reasons for our finding. > > The Charter outlines a specific process that must take place before > removal on any person from the list, as follows > > *Suspension of posting rights* > > Failure to abide by posting rules may result in suspension or removal from > the IGC list according to the following process: > > · The coordinators will first warn a subscriber privately of the problem > · If the problem persists the coordinators will notify the subscriber > publicly on the list of impending suspension from the list. Suspension will > include only posting rights. > · If the problem persists the subscriber's posting rights will be > suspended for one (1) month. > · Once the subscriber's posting rights are restored, any further problem > will result in another public warning. > · If the problem continues to persist after suspension and a second > public warning, the coordinators will be permitted to either suspend the > posting rights for three (3) months or to remove the subscriber from the > list. > · Any decision for suspension can be appealed. Any decision to remove > someone from the list will call for an automatic appeal by the appeals team > . > > In this case, the previous private and public warnings given to Suresh > needed to be followed by a one month suspension, not removal from the list. > It has been confirmed in correspondence with both the Coordinator and with > the person removed from the list that the word used in the private letter > advising removal was “removal”, and this was confirmed by the co ordinator > as being the intention. It was this action outside of the process outlined > in the IGC Charter that led to our decision. > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > -- Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala P.O. Box 17862 Suva Fiji Twitter: @SalanietaT Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro Tel: +679 3544828 Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From ca at cafonso.ca Tue Jan 22 06:53:39 2013 From: ca at cafonso.ca (Carlos A. Afonso) Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2013 09:53:39 -0200 Subject: [governance] Appeals Team Final Report In-Reply-To: <8642774A0A714ABB9847E6EDA8B3ABC5@Toshiba> References: <8642774A0A714ABB9847E6EDA8B3ABC5@Toshiba> Message-ID: <50FE7DC3.5080402@cafonso.ca> Excellent, very careful and detailed recommendations. Especially taking into account that in this list we have a nice mix of distinct cultures, and what sometimes seems innocuous for some might mean a big deal for others in terms of how we relate with each other. I recall a lunch meeting between several Brazilians and people from different countries from Asia at a World Bank venue many years ago. Brazilians as usual are a bit irreverent and tell jokes, and these jokes in English (for us Brazilians) sounded ok. But none of our fellow Asians found them funny. So we asked our friends from Asia to tell us some jokes -- the same thing happened as we did not think they qualified as jokes at all! :) But at the end we found some "universal" ones which passed the test unanimously. frt rgds --c.a. On 01/22/2013 01:09 AM, Ian Peter wrote: > FINAL REPORT, FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS > > With the comments period completed, the Appeals Team can now present its final report and recommendations as regards the appeal against the removal from the IGC list of Suresh Ramasubramanian. > > OUR FINDINGS ON THE APPEAL > > We confirm our finding is that Suresh’s removal from the IGC list was not in accordance with the IGC Charter, for reasons contained in our interim findings and repeated later in this report. We therefore request that Suresh be reinstated to the list immediately. (this has already taken place) > > OUR RECOMMENDATIONS > > We also make the following recommendations for consideration by all IGC members. > > Recommendation 1. The IGC Charter includes the following recommendation,. “The coordinators may, at their discretion, appoint an advisory team of at least three individuals to assist them in making the determination of when someone has breached the posting rules defined in this charter. While all decisions remain the coordinators' responsibility, any such recommendation from an advisory team will be made public at the time of either suspension or removal from the list.” > > > In the case before us which took place while there was only one active coordinator, we think this advisory team would have been particularly valuable. > > > > > Recommendation 2. We recommend that in future reasons be given for any removal or suspension, referencing the charter provisions which were breached and led to the suspension. This is currently not a requirement in the Charter, but we feel strongly that any suspension, removal, or warning, should state clearly why this is so, in accordance with the IGC charter provisions. These are listed below and are quite broad. > > > > > Recommendation 3. We recommend that in future all removal/suspensions also be communicated to the list with reasons, not only to the person concerned. Again this is not a current Charter requirement, but we believe that in the interests of good communication with the list this should always be followed. > > > > > Recommendation 4. We recommend that, should the co-coordinators choose to review the situation as regards the suspension of Suresh Ramasubramanian, the number of days already suspended from the list prior to being reinstated during this appeals process should be deducted from any 30 day suspension. > > > > > Recommendation 5. Finally, we recommend that all list participants, including those who have been warned in the past, focus their contributions on the issues being discussed, and not the personalities. If IGC ever degrades to a forum which does not have a wide range of cultural differences, political opinions, perspectives, interests,sensitivities, and differing interests in the broad field of internet governance, it would be a great pity. However, within this diverse group, all members have a right to discuss what they feel is pertinent, and all members have a right to disagree. But none of this should include statements which could be construed by a reasonable person as being outside of the IGC Charter’s definition of reasonable conduct, which includes (to quote from the charter) > > > The messages must observe a minimum of decorum, including: > · refrain from personal attacks, insults or slander > · refrain from offensive or discriminating language > · refrain from threats , including threats of legal action, on list or off list > · refrain from excessive and repetitive posting > > Inappropriate postings to the IGC list include > · Unsolicited bulk e-mail > · Discussion of subjects unrelated to the IGC mission and objectives > · Unprofessional or discourteous commentary, regardless of the general subject > · Sequences of messages by one or more participants that cause an IGC list to become a hostile environment > > > It is only appropriate that action should be taken, should co - coordinators in their best judgement (and where appropriate with consultation) feel that participants are acting outside of these guidelines. As members of this list, we feel that there have been a number of cases recently, involving not only those who have been warned but cases where people have not been warned, where these guidelines have been broken. It is in the interests of what we are trying to achieve as civil society that our discourse remains civil, polite, and courteous. We reject the notion that, because other lists do not closely moderate or demand reasonable behaviour, this list should not pursue the standards set in its charter. > > > > > > Lastly, we wish to record our thanks to Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro for her patience and co-operation during this appeal period, and her dedication to keeping the Internet Governance Caucus functioning during a difficult time. We trust that our recommendations are useful in assisting future co-coordinators in dealing with such situations, and in clarifying the behaviour that can reasonably be expected from all participants on this mailing list. > > > > > Thanks also to those who submitted comments. This appeal is now closed. The Appeals Team will not be responding formally to any further comments on this particular matter. > > > > > The Appeals Team > > > Shaila Mistry, Ginger Paque, Roland Perry , Ian Peter and Deidre Williams > > > > > > BACKGROUND INFORMATION > > > Reasons for our finding. > > > The Charter outlines a specific process that must take place before removal on any person from the list, as follows > > Suspension of posting rights > > Failure to abide by posting rules may result in suspension or removal from the IGC list according to the following process: > > · The coordinators will first warn a subscriber privately of the problem > · If the problem persists the coordinators will notify the subscriber publicly on the list of impending suspension from the list. Suspension will include only posting rights. > · If the problem persists the subscriber's posting rights will be suspended for one (1) month. > · Once the subscriber's posting rights are restored, any further problem will result in another public warning. > · If the problem continues to persist after suspension and a second public warning, the coordinators will be permitted to either suspend the posting rights for three (3) months or to remove the subscriber from the list. > · Any decision for suspension can be appealed. Any decision to remove someone from the list will call for an automatic appeal by the appeals team. > > In this case, the previous private and public warnings given to Suresh needed to be followed by a one month suspension, not removal from the list. It has been confirmed in correspondence with both the Coordinator and with the person removed from the list that the word used in the private letter advising removal was “removal”, and this was confirmed by the co ordinator as being the intention. It was this action outside of the process outlined in the IGC Charter that led to our decision. > -------------- 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 From nb at bollow.ch Tue Jan 22 07:05:31 2013 From: nb at bollow.ch (Norbert Bollow) Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2013 13:05:31 +0100 Subject: [governance] Preparing for the vote on charter amendment proposals (was Re: Coordinator election results) In-Reply-To: <50FE42A9.9080204@ciroap.org> References: <5FB29FA5-F87D-4F98-BDAC-E5BB066C0CC9@ciroap.org> <50FE42A9.9080204@ciroap.org> Message-ID: <20130122130531.7934ccf3@quill.bollow.ch> [IGC Coordinator hat on] On the timeline for bringing the charter amendment proposals to a vote: Let's allow ourselves five more days, until the evening of January 27, to see if some of the currently informal proposals (see [1]) will get formally proposed by at least ten Caucus members. [1] http://igcaucus.org/informally-discussed-charter-amendments Let's then have a formal discussion period of again five days before the actual voting starts. (As was pointed out not long ago by Parminder, it is good democratic practice to always schedule a discussion period before important decisions are made.) This will be followed by a ten days voting period. The remainder of this posting discusses the question (on which there have been differences of opinion) of how precisely the exact list of IGC members who will be invited to vote on the charter amendments is to be determined. Jeremy Malcolm wrote: > I have updated the permanent record of the election on the IGC website > accordingly > (http://igcaucus.org/2012-2014-co-ordinator-election-results). Thanks > to Norbert for helping to find the discrepancy. There is no change to > the figures of those who voted for Norbert and Imran, and therefore > the election result doesn't change. > > As to whether those who voted informally are to be counted as voting > members this year, Norbert and Sala have made a decision on this and > will be announcing it on the list shortly, if they haven't done so > already. Many thanks to Jeremy for double-checking so that we can now feel assured that we have reliable data allowing to compile the "IGC members who are entitled to vote on amendments to the Charter" list. Our charter specifies that "In amending the charter, everyone who voted in the previous election will be deemed a member for amending the charter." In the view of the IGC coordinators, there is some ambiguity here on whether persons who have self-identified as a Caucus member and then bailed out before actually casting a vote for a specific candidate should be considered as "having voted" for the purpose of that provision. Evidence for the presence of ambiguity in this provision can be found in the well-documented long-standing disagreements on what the appropriate interpretation of this provision is. For the purposes of the upcoming vote on charter amendment proposals, we resolve this ambiguity by considering those who bailed out after self-identifying as a charter member to have effectively voted "abstain", and therefore as "having voted" for the purpose of that provision. The reasons for this are that (1) it appears appropriate to rather err on the side of greater inclusiveness in case of doubt, and (2) during the actual voting period this advice was given: "So that's the option that you have if you want to affirm your membership but don't want to vote. Begin answering, then bail out (without choosing the option to clear your answers) before casting your vote." (That in itself isn't absolutely decisive, since according to the charter IGC membership doesn't imply being "deemed a member for amending the charter", but there's at least sufficient room for misunderstanding here that it wouldn't be fair to now exclude people from voting on the charter amendments who may have followed that suggestion specifically with the goal of being able to participate in the charter amendment process.) The resulting list of "IGC members who are entitled to vote on amendments to the Charter", compiled according to this inclusive interpretation of "having voted", has been kindly made available by Jeremy on http://igcaucus.org/list-members Using this list, I have verified that both of Avri's amendment proposals (see [2]) (these are the only ones that have been formally proposed so far) have a sufficient number of co-proposers. [2] http://igcaucus.org/formally-proposed-charter-amendments Greetings, Norbert -------------- 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 From parminder at itforchange.net Tue Jan 22 09:46:34 2013 From: parminder at itforchange.net (parminder) Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2013 20:16:34 +0530 Subject: [governance] today's Wash Post editorial In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <50FEA64A.4090805@itforchange.net> On Tuesday 22 January 2013 01:25 AM, McTim wrote: > > > http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/keeping-the-internet-free/2013/01/20/48c7fdb8-4fa1-11e2-8b49-64675006147f_story.html > So, the Washington Post thinks that the US did not sign the ITRs because, to quote the paper, "The United States objected to a resolution appended to the treaty saying that “all governments should have an equal role and responsibility for international Internet governance.” " US signed on precisely this sentence (it is from the Tunis Agenda) in 2005 at the WSIS summit. (And it was Bush administration then!) I would think, now with many weeks past since the WCIT, as big and important a newspaper as the Washington Post would have the means to find out exactly why did the US not sign the ITRs. Why is it that even those who support US's decision not to sign the ITRs are not able to agree/ decide on exactly why did the US not sign the ITRs. More than a bit strange, isnt it. parminder > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From dogwallah at gmail.com Tue Jan 22 10:13:14 2013 From: dogwallah at gmail.com (McTim) Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2013 10:13:14 -0500 Subject: [governance] today's Wash Post editorial In-Reply-To: <50FEA64A.4090805@itforchange.net> References: <50FEA64A.4090805@itforchange.net> Message-ID: On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 9:46 AM, parminder wrote: > > > On Tuesday 22 January 2013 01:25 AM, McTim wrote: > > > > http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/keeping-the-internet-free/2013/01/20/48c7fdb8-4fa1-11e2-8b49-64675006147f_story.html > > So, the Washington Post thinks that the US did not sign the ITRs because, to > quote the paper, > > "The United States objected to a resolution appended to the treaty saying > that “all governments should have an equal role and responsibility for > international Internet governance.” " > > US signed on precisely this sentence (it is from the Tunis Agenda) in 2005 > at the WSIS summit. (And it was Bush administration then!) I would think, > now with many weeks past since the WCIT, as big and important a newspaper as > the Washington Post would have the means to find out exactly why did the US > not sign the ITRs. > > Why is it that even those who support US's decision not to sign the ITRs are > not able to agree/ decide on exactly why did the US not sign the ITRs. More > than a bit strange, isnt it. > I think this is a red-herring. I would have thought you would have been pleased that a neo-liberal institution like the WashPost acknowledged that: "There are suspicions aplenty in the rest of the world that this is the equivalent of U.S. control — suspicions that should not be ignored. While the Internet cannot fall into the hands of those who would censor and restrict it, the United States should put more effort into remaking the current model so that it can serve what has become a global infrastructure." I think this is actually a very accurate description of the consensus of this Caucus. -- 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 From mueller at syr.edu Tue Jan 22 10:24:55 2013 From: mueller at syr.edu (Milton L Mueller) Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2013 15:24:55 +0000 Subject: [governance] France Proposes an Internet Tax In-Reply-To: References: <50FD0871.7040301@bluewin.ch> <50FD0CE0.6010603@gmail.com> Message-ID: <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD231DE6D@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> The report published Friday said a tax on data collection was justified on grounds that users of services like Google and Facebook are, in effect, working for these companies without pay by providing the personal information that lets them sell advertising. [Milton L Mueller] Good deal. In order to compensate and protect us from "working without pay" we will work for the government of France without pay as well. Cartesian logic at work. Or perhaps they will use the revenues to subsidize access to Facebook and Google, since they charge their users so much that...um, well, some of them, um, can't afford... oh, never mind. Of course, this is just a tax on the advertisers, in the end. It will simply increase the costs of Google/Facebook and be recovered from advertisers. It wouldn't be France however unless you threw a soupcon of anti-Americanism and trade protectionism into the pot as well (will the same tax will be applied to all commercial broadcasters in France, whose viewers are sold to advertisers "without pay"?) How about French newspapers with ads - their poor customers even have to pay for the newspaper, and then are sold to advertisers. Merde! Interestingly, this whole line of argument presumes that the services users receive in return for their data are worthless. Remember that next time you hear someone claim that Google and Facebook are "essential facilities" that no one can live without. It's sad that governments that just want more money have to strain to come up with trendy rationalizations. What happened to the good old days when they just sent in armed thugs to appropriate a bunch of your pigs and cows? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From avri at acm.org Tue Jan 22 11:18:46 2013 From: avri at acm.org (Avri Doria) Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2013 11:18:46 -0500 Subject: [governance] Appeals Team Final Report In-Reply-To: <50FE7DC3.5080402@cafonso.ca> References: <8642774A0A714ABB9847E6EDA8B3ABC5@Toshiba> <50FE7DC3.5080402@cafonso.ca> Message-ID: <15C6CACD-CCC7-45A7-BAC2-777FB405279F@acm.org> wonderful job by the Appeals Team. and a great email from Carlos cheers avri On 22 Jan 2013, at 06:53, Carlos A. Afonso wrote: > Excellent, very careful and detailed recommendations. > > Especially taking into account that in this list we have a nice mix of distinct cultures, and what sometimes seems innocuous for some might mean a big deal for others in terms of how we relate with each other. > > I recall a lunch meeting between several Brazilians and people from different countries from Asia at a World Bank venue many years ago. Brazilians as usual are a bit irreverent and tell jokes, and these jokes in English (for us Brazilians) sounded ok. But none of our fellow Asians found them funny. > > So we asked our friends from Asia to tell us some jokes -- the same thing happened as we did not think they qualified as jokes at all! :) But at the end we found some "universal" ones which passed the test unanimously. > > frt rgds > > --c.a. > > On 01/22/2013 01:09 AM, Ian Peter wrote: >> FINAL REPORT, FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS >> >> With the comments period completed, the Appeals Team can now present its final report and recommendations as regards the appeal against the removal from the IGC list of Suresh Ramasubramanian. >> >> OUR FINDINGS ON THE APPEAL >> >> We confirm our finding is that Suresh’s removal from the IGC list was not in accordance with the IGC Charter, for reasons contained in our interim findings and repeated later in this report. We therefore request that Suresh be reinstated to the list immediately. (this has already taken place) >> >> OUR RECOMMENDATIONS >> >> We also make the following recommendations for consideration by all IGC members. >> >> Recommendation 1. The IGC Charter includes the following recommendation,. “The coordinators may, at their discretion, appoint an advisory team of at least three individuals to assist them in making the determination of when someone has breached the posting rules defined in this charter. While all decisions remain the coordinators' responsibility, any such recommendation from an advisory team will be made public at the time of either suspension or removal from the list.” >> >> >> In the case before us which took place while there was only one active coordinator, we think this advisory team would have been particularly valuable. >> >> >> >> >> Recommendation 2. We recommend that in future reasons be given for any removal or suspension, referencing the charter provisions which were breached and led to the suspension. This is currently not a requirement in the Charter, but we feel strongly that any suspension, removal, or warning, should state clearly why this is so, in accordance with the IGC charter provisions. These are listed below and are quite broad. >> >> >> >> >> Recommendation 3. We recommend that in future all removal/suspensions also be communicated to the list with reasons, not only to the person concerned. Again this is not a current Charter requirement, but we believe that in the interests of good communication with the list this should always be followed. >> >> >> >> >> Recommendation 4. We recommend that, should the co-coordinators choose to review the situation as regards the suspension of Suresh Ramasubramanian, the number of days already suspended from the list prior to being reinstated during this appeals process should be deducted from any 30 day suspension. >> >> >> >> >> Recommendation 5. Finally, we recommend that all list participants, including those who have been warned in the past, focus their contributions on the issues being discussed, and not the personalities. If IGC ever degrades to a forum which does not have a wide range of cultural differences, political opinions, perspectives, interests,sensitivities, and differing interests in the broad field of internet governance, it would be a great pity. However, within this diverse group, all members have a right to discuss what they feel is pertinent, and all members have a right to disagree. But none of this should include statements which could be construed by a reasonable person as being outside of the IGC Charter’s definition of reasonable conduct, which includes (to quote from the charter) >> >> >> The messages must observe a minimum of decorum, including: >> · refrain from personal attacks, insults or slander >> · refrain from offensive or discriminating language >> · refrain from threats , including threats of legal action, on list or off list >> · refrain from excessive and repetitive posting >> >> Inappropriate postings to the IGC list include >> · Unsolicited bulk e-mail >> · Discussion of subjects unrelated to the IGC mission and objectives >> · Unprofessional or discourteous commentary, regardless of the general subject >> · Sequences of messages by one or more participants that cause an IGC list to become a hostile environment >> >> >> It is only appropriate that action should be taken, should co - coordinators in their best judgement (and where appropriate with consultation) feel that participants are acting outside of these guidelines. As members of this list, we feel that there have been a number of cases recently, involving not only those who have been warned but cases where people have not been warned, where these guidelines have been broken. It is in the interests of what we are trying to achieve as civil society that our discourse remains civil, polite, and courteous. We reject the notion that, because other lists do not closely moderate or demand reasonable behaviour, this list should not pursue the standards set in its charter. >> >> >> >> >> >> Lastly, we wish to record our thanks to Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro for her patience and co-operation during this appeal period, and her dedication to keeping the Internet Governance Caucus functioning during a difficult time. We trust that our recommendations are useful in assisting future co-coordinators in dealing with such situations, and in clarifying the behaviour that can reasonably be expected from all participants on this mailing list. >> >> >> >> >> Thanks also to those who submitted comments. This appeal is now closed. The Appeals Team will not be responding formally to any further comments on this particular matter. >> >> >> >> >> The Appeals Team >> >> >> Shaila Mistry, Ginger Paque, Roland Perry , Ian Peter and Deidre Williams >> >> >> >> >> >> BACKGROUND INFORMATION >> >> >> Reasons for our finding. >> >> >> The Charter outlines a specific process that must take place before removal on any person from the list, as follows >> >> Suspension of posting rights >> >> Failure to abide by posting rules may result in suspension or removal from the IGC list according to the following process: >> >> · The coordinators will first warn a subscriber privately of the problem >> · If the problem persists the coordinators will notify the subscriber publicly on the list of impending suspension from the list. Suspension will include only posting rights. >> · If the problem persists the subscriber's posting rights will be suspended for one (1) month. >> · Once the subscriber's posting rights are restored, any further problem will result in another public warning. >> · If the problem continues to persist after suspension and a second public warning, the coordinators will be permitted to either suspend the posting rights for three (3) months or to remove the subscriber from the list. >> · Any decision for suspension can be appealed. Any decision to remove someone from the list will call for an automatic appeal by the appeals team. >> >> In this case, the previous private and public warnings given to Suresh needed to be followed by a one month suspension, not removal from the list. It has been confirmed in correspondence with both the Coordinator and with the person removed from the list that the word used in the private letter advising removal was “removal”, and this was confirmed by the co ordinator as being the intention. It was this action outside of the process outlined in the IGC Charter that led to our decision. >> > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From roland at internetpolicyagency.com Tue Jan 22 11:27:29 2013 From: roland at internetpolicyagency.com (Roland Perry) Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2013 16:27:29 +0000 Subject: [governance] today's Wash Post editorial In-Reply-To: <50FEA64A.4090805@itforchange.net> References: <50FEA64A.4090805@itforchange.net> Message-ID: In message <50FEA64A.4090805 at itforchange.net>, at 20:16:34 on Tue, 22 Jan 2013, parminder writes >Why is it that even those who support US's decision not to sign the >ITRs are not able to agree/ decide on exactly why did the US not sign >the ITRs. It seems highly unlikely to me that there was just one easily explained paragraph in the ITRs that caused this. -- Roland Perry -------------- 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 From jaryn56 at gmail.com Tue Jan 22 11:39:55 2013 From: jaryn56 at gmail.com (=?UTF-8?B?Sm9zw6kgRsOpbGl4IEFyaWFzIFluY2hl?=) Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2013 11:39:55 -0500 Subject: [governance] Appeals Team Final Report In-Reply-To: <15C6CACD-CCC7-45A7-BAC2-777FB405279F@acm.org> References: <8642774A0A714ABB9847E6EDA8B3ABC5@Toshiba> <50FE7DC3.5080402@cafonso.ca> <15C6CACD-CCC7-45A7-BAC2-777FB405279F@acm.org> Message-ID: Felicitaciones al Equipo de Apelaciones...buen trabajo *Cordialmente: José Félix Arias Ynche* * Investigador Social Para El Desarrollo* 2013/1/22 Avri Doria > > > wonderful job by the Appeals Team. > and a great email from Carlos > > cheers > avri > > On 22 Jan 2013, at 06:53, Carlos A. Afonso wrote: > > > Excellent, very careful and detailed recommendations. > > > > Especially taking into account that in this list we have a nice mix of > distinct cultures, and what sometimes seems innocuous for some might mean a > big deal for others in terms of how we relate with each other. > > > > I recall a lunch meeting between several Brazilians and people from > different countries from Asia at a World Bank venue many years ago. > Brazilians as usual are a bit irreverent and tell jokes, and these jokes in > English (for us Brazilians) sounded ok. But none of our fellow Asians found > them funny. > > > > So we asked our friends from Asia to tell us some jokes -- the same > thing happened as we did not think they qualified as jokes at all! :) But > at the end we found some "universal" ones which passed the test unanimously. > > > > frt rgds > > > > --c.a. > > > > On 01/22/2013 01:09 AM, Ian Peter wrote: > >> FINAL REPORT, FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS > >> > >> With the comments period completed, the Appeals Team can now present > its final report and recommendations as regards the appeal against the > removal from the IGC list of Suresh Ramasubramanian. > >> > >> OUR FINDINGS ON THE APPEAL > >> > >> We confirm our finding is that Suresh’s removal from the IGC list was > not in accordance with the IGC Charter, for reasons contained in our > interim findings and repeated later in this report. We therefore request > that Suresh be reinstated to the list immediately. (this has already taken > place) > >> > >> OUR RECOMMENDATIONS > >> > >> We also make the following recommendations for consideration by all IGC > members. > >> > >> Recommendation 1. The IGC Charter includes the following > recommendation,. “The coordinators may, at their discretion, appoint an > advisory team of at least three individuals to assist them in making the > determination of when someone has breached the posting rules defined in > this charter. While all decisions remain the coordinators' responsibility, > any such recommendation from an advisory team will be made public at the > time of either suspension or removal from the list.” > >> > >> > >> In the case before us which took place while there was only one active > coordinator, we think this advisory team would have been particularly > valuable. > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> Recommendation 2. We recommend that in future reasons be given for any > removal or suspension, referencing the charter provisions which were > breached and led to the suspension. This is currently not a requirement in > the Charter, but we feel strongly that any suspension, removal, or warning, > should state clearly why this is so, in accordance with the IGC charter > provisions. These are listed below and are quite broad. > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> Recommendation 3. We recommend that in future all removal/suspensions > also be communicated to the list with reasons, not only to the person > concerned. Again this is not a current Charter requirement, but we believe > that in the interests of good communication with the list this should > always be followed. > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> Recommendation 4. We recommend that, should the co-coordinators choose > to review the situation as regards the suspension of Suresh > Ramasubramanian, the number of days already suspended from the list prior > to being reinstated during this appeals process should be deducted from any > 30 day suspension. > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> Recommendation 5. Finally, we recommend that all list participants, > including those who have been warned in the past, focus their contributions > on the issues being discussed, and not the personalities. If IGC ever > degrades to a forum which does not have a wide range of cultural > differences, political opinions, perspectives, interests,sensitivities, and > differing interests in the broad field of internet governance, it would be > a great pity. However, within this diverse group, all members have a right > to discuss what they feel is pertinent, and all members have a right to > disagree. But none of this should include statements which could be > construed by a reasonable person as being outside of the IGC Charter’s > definition of reasonable conduct, which includes (to quote from the charter) > >> > >> > >> The messages must observe a minimum of decorum, including: > >> · refrain from personal attacks, insults or slander > >> · refrain from offensive or discriminating language > >> · refrain from threats , including threats of legal action, on list or > off list > >> · refrain from excessive and repetitive posting > >> > >> Inappropriate postings to the IGC list include > >> · Unsolicited bulk e-mail > >> · Discussion of subjects unrelated to the IGC mission and objectives > >> · Unprofessional or discourteous commentary, regardless of the general > subject > >> · Sequences of messages by one or more participants that cause an IGC > list to become a hostile environment > >> > >> > >> It is only appropriate that action should be taken, should co - > coordinators in their best judgement (and where appropriate with > consultation) feel that participants are acting outside of these > guidelines. As members of this list, we feel that there have been a number > of cases recently, involving not only those who have been warned but cases > where people have not been warned, where these guidelines have been broken. > It is in the interests of what we are trying to achieve as civil society > that our discourse remains civil, polite, and courteous. We reject the > notion that, because other lists do not closely moderate or demand > reasonable behaviour, this list should not pursue the standards set in its > charter. > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> Lastly, we wish to record our thanks to Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro for > her patience and co-operation during this appeal period, and her dedication > to keeping the Internet Governance Caucus functioning during a difficult > time. We trust that our recommendations are useful in assisting future > co-coordinators in dealing with such situations, and in clarifying the > behaviour that can reasonably be expected from all participants on this > mailing list. > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> Thanks also to those who submitted comments. This appeal is now closed. > The Appeals Team will not be responding formally to any further comments on > this particular matter. > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> The Appeals Team > >> > >> > >> Shaila Mistry, Ginger Paque, Roland Perry , Ian Peter and Deidre > Williams > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> BACKGROUND INFORMATION > >> > >> > >> Reasons for our finding. > >> > >> > >> The Charter outlines a specific process that must take place before > removal on any person from the list, as follows > >> > >> Suspension of posting rights > >> > >> Failure to abide by posting rules may result in suspension or removal > from the IGC list according to the following process: > >> > >> · The coordinators will first warn a subscriber privately of the problem > >> · If the problem persists the coordinators will notify the subscriber > publicly on the list of impending suspension from the list. Suspension will > include only posting rights. > >> · If the problem persists the subscriber's posting rights will be > suspended for one (1) month. > >> · Once the subscriber's posting rights are restored, any further > problem will result in another public warning. > >> · If the problem continues to persist after suspension and a second > public warning, the coordinators will be permitted to either suspend the > posting rights for three (3) months or to remove the subscriber from the > list. > >> · Any decision for suspension can be appealed. Any decision to remove > someone from the list will call for an automatic appeal by the appeals team. > >> > >> In this case, the previous private and public warnings given to Suresh > needed to be followed by a one month suspension, not removal from the list. > It has been confirmed in correspondence with both the Coordinator and with > the person removed from the list that the word used in the private letter > advising removal was “removal”, and this was confirmed by the co ordinator > as being the intention. It was this action outside of the process outlined > in the IGC Charter that led to our decision. > >> > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > > 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 > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From gurstein at gmail.com Tue Jan 22 11:42:17 2013 From: gurstein at gmail.com (michael gurstein) Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2013 08:42:17 -0800 Subject: [governance] France Proposes an Internet Tax In-Reply-To: <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD231DE6D@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> References: <50FD0871.7040301@bluewin.ch> <50FD0CE0.6010603@gmail.com> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD231DE6D@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> Message-ID: <01a001cdf8bf$77f85da0$67e918e0$@gmail.com> Milton, is it that you don't like this particular tax or that you don't like taxes in general. If the former I'ld be interested to know in some more detail what it is about this particular tax you don't like (apart from the fact that it is a tax being introduced by the French) and what you would replace it with to obtain revenues from this emerging sector assuming that you think folks like Google and their Internet compatriots should pay their fair share as very many are now insisting. If it is the latter I would be curious to know how you see responsible states being able to meet the challenge of reponding to the collective challenges/responsibilities of the modern state so ably articulated last evening by your President. MG From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Milton L Mueller Sent: Tuesday, January 22, 2013 7:25 AM To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Andrea Glorioso Subject: RE: [governance] France Proposes an Internet Tax The report published Friday said a tax on data collection was justified on grounds that users of services like Google and Facebook are, in effect, working for these companies without pay by providing the personal information that lets them sell advertising. [Milton L Mueller] Good deal. In order to compensate and protect us from "working without pay" we will work for the government of France without pay as well. Cartesian logic at work. Or perhaps they will use the revenues to subsidize access to Facebook and Google, since they charge their users so much that.um, well, some of them, um, can't afford. oh, never mind. Of course, this is just a tax on the advertisers, in the end. It will simply increase the costs of Google/Facebook and be recovered from advertisers. It wouldn't be France however unless you threw a soupcon of anti-Americanism and trade protectionism into the pot as well (will the same tax will be applied to all commercial broadcasters in France, whose viewers are sold to advertisers "without pay"?) How about French newspapers with ads - their poor customers even have to pay for the newspaper, and then are sold to advertisers. Merde! Interestingly, this whole line of argument presumes that the services users receive in return for their data are worthless. Remember that next time you hear someone claim that Google and Facebook are "essential facilities" that no one can live without. It's sad that governments that just want more money have to strain to come up with trendy rationalizations. What happened to the good old days when they just sent in armed thugs to appropriate a bunch of your pigs and cows? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From suresh at hserus.net Tue Jan 22 11:53:46 2013 From: suresh at hserus.net (Suresh Ramasubramanian) Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2013 22:23:46 +0530 Subject: [governance] France Proposes an Internet Tax In-Reply-To: <01a001cdf8bf$77f85da0$67e918e0$@gmail.com> References: <50FD0871.7040301@bluewin.ch> <50FD0CE0.6010603@gmail.com> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD231DE6D@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> <01a001cdf8bf$77f85da0$67e918e0$@gmail.com> Message-ID: I think his point is sauce bonne pour l'oie, est bon pour le jars, with google being the heavily taxed goose and local french internet portals, news sites etc that carry ads being the gander that, he fears, will go scot free, if this law is targeted solely at google / fb type foreign sites. --srs (iPad) On 22-Jan-2013, at 22:12, "michael gurstein" wrote: > Milton, is it that you don't like this particular tax or that you don't like taxes in general. > > If the former I'ld be interested to know in some more detail what it is about this particular tax you don't like (apart from the fact that it is a tax being introduced by the French) and what you would replace it with to obtain revenues from this emerging sector assuming that you think folks like Google and their Internet compatriots should pay their fair share as very many are now insisting. > > If it is the latter I would be curious to know how you see responsible states being able to meet the challenge of reponding to the collective challenges/responsibilities of the modern state so ably articulated last evening by your President. > > MG > > From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Milton L Mueller > Sent: Tuesday, January 22, 2013 7:25 AM > To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Andrea Glorioso > Subject: RE: [governance] France Proposes an Internet Tax > > > > > The report published Friday said a tax on data collection was justified on grounds that users of services like Google and Facebook are, in effect, working for these companies without pay by providing the personal information that lets them sell advertising. > > [Milton L Mueller] Good deal. In order to compensate and protect us from “working without pay” we will work for the government of France without pay as well. Cartesian logic at work. > > Or perhaps they will use the revenues to subsidize access to Facebook and Google, since they charge their users so much that…um, well, some of them, um, can’t afford… oh, never mind. > > Of course, this is just a tax on the advertisers, in the end. It will simply increase the costs of Google/Facebook and be recovered from advertisers. > > It wouldn’t be France however unless you threw a soupcon of anti-Americanism and trade protectionism into the pot as well (will the same tax will be applied to all commercial broadcasters in France, whose viewers are sold to advertisers “without pay”?) How about French newspapers with ads – their poor customers even have to pay for the newspaper, and then are sold to advertisers. Merde! > > Interestingly, this whole line of argument presumes that the services users receive in return for their data are worthless. Remember that next time you hear someone claim that Google and Facebook are “essential facilities” that no one can live without. > > It’s sad that governments that just want more money have to strain to come up with trendy rationalizations. What happened to the good old days when they just sent in armed thugs to appropriate a bunch of your pigs and cows? > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From anriette at apc.org Tue Jan 22 13:01:05 2013 From: anriette at apc.org (Anriette Esterhuysen) Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2013 20:01:05 +0200 Subject: [governance] Appeals Team Final Report In-Reply-To: <8642774A0A714ABB9847E6EDA8B3ABC5@Toshiba> References: <8642774A0A714ABB9847E6EDA8B3ABC5@Toshiba> Message-ID: <50FED3E1.9040007@apc.org> Thanks for this clear and helpful report Ian and the rest of the appeals team (Deirdre, Roland, Ginger and Shaila). And very good recommendations - they have my support. Anriette On 22/01/2013 05:09, Ian Peter wrote: > FINAL REPORT, FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS > > With the comments period completed, the Appeals Team can now present its final report and recommendations as regards the appeal against the removal from the IGC list of Suresh Ramasubramanian. > > OUR FINDINGS ON THE APPEAL > > We confirm our finding is that Suresh’s removal from the IGC list was not in accordance with the IGC Charter, for reasons contained in our interim findings and repeated later in this report. We therefore request that Suresh be reinstated to the list immediately. (this has already taken place) > > OUR RECOMMENDATIONS > > We also make the following recommendations for consideration by all IGC members. > > Recommendation 1. The IGC Charter includes the following recommendation,. “The coordinators may, at their discretion, appoint an advisory team of at least three individuals to assist them in making the determination of when someone has breached the posting rules defined in this charter. While all decisions remain the coordinators' responsibility, any such recommendation from an advisory team will be made public at the time of either suspension or removal from the list.” > > > In the case before us which took place while there was only one active coordinator, we think this advisory team would have been particularly valuable. > > > > > Recommendation 2. We recommend that in future reasons be given for any removal or suspension, referencing the charter provisions which were breached and led to the suspension. This is currently not a requirement in the Charter, but we feel strongly that any suspension, removal, or warning, should state clearly why this is so, in accordance with the IGC charter provisions. These are listed below and are quite broad. > > > > > Recommendation 3. We recommend that in future all removal/suspensions also be communicated to the list with reasons, not only to the person concerned. Again this is not a current Charter requirement, but we believe that in the interests of good communication with the list this should always be followed. > > > > > Recommendation 4. We recommend that, should the co-coordinators choose to review the situation as regards the suspension of Suresh Ramasubramanian, the number of days already suspended from the list prior to being reinstated during this appeals process should be deducted from any 30 day suspension. > > > > > Recommendation 5. Finally, we recommend that all list participants, including those who have been warned in the past, focus their contributions on the issues being discussed, and not the personalities. If IGC ever degrades to a forum which does not have a wide range of cultural differences, political opinions, perspectives, interests,sensitivities, and differing interests in the broad field of internet governance, it would be a great pity. However, within this diverse group, all members have a right to discuss what they feel is pertinent, and all members have a right to disagree. But none of this should include statements which could be construed by a reasonable person as being outside of the IGC Charter’s definition of reasonable conduct, which includes (to quote from the charter) > > > The messages must observe a minimum of decorum, including: > · refrain from personal attacks, insults or slander > · refrain from offensive or discriminating language > · refrain from threats , including threats of legal action, on list or off list > · refrain from excessive and repetitive posting > > Inappropriate postings to the IGC list include > · Unsolicited bulk e-mail > · Discussion of subjects unrelated to the IGC mission and objectives > · Unprofessional or discourteous commentary, regardless of the general subject > · Sequences of messages by one or more participants that cause an IGC list to become a hostile environment > > > It is only appropriate that action should be taken, should co - coordinators in their best judgement (and where appropriate with consultation) feel that participants are acting outside of these guidelines. As members of this list, we feel that there have been a number of cases recently, involving not only those who have been warned but cases where people have not been warned, where these guidelines have been broken. It is in the interests of what we are trying to achieve as civil society that our discourse remains civil, polite, and courteous. We reject the notion that, because other lists do not closely moderate or demand reasonable behaviour, this list should not pursue the standards set in its charter. > > > > > > Lastly, we wish to record our thanks to Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro for her patience and co-operation during this appeal period, and her dedication to keeping the Internet Governance Caucus functioning during a difficult time. We trust that our recommendations are useful in assisting future co-coordinators in dealing with such situations, and in clarifying the behaviour that can reasonably be expected from all participants on this mailing list. > > > > > Thanks also to those who submitted comments. This appeal is now closed. The Appeals Team will not be responding formally to any further comments on this particular matter. > > > > > The Appeals Team > > > Shaila Mistry, Ginger Paque, Roland Perry , Ian Peter and Deidre Williams > > > > > > BACKGROUND INFORMATION > > > Reasons for our finding. > > > The Charter outlines a specific process that must take place before removal on any person from the list, as follows > > Suspension of posting rights > > Failure to abide by posting rules may result in suspension or removal from the IGC list according to the following process: > > · The coordinators will first warn a subscriber privately of the problem > · If the problem persists the coordinators will notify the subscriber publicly on the list of impending suspension from the list. Suspension will include only posting rights. > · If the problem persists the subscriber's posting rights will be suspended for one (1) month. > · Once the subscriber's posting rights are restored, any further problem will result in another public warning. > · If the problem continues to persist after suspension and a second public warning, the coordinators will be permitted to either suspend the posting rights for three (3) months or to remove the subscriber from the list. > · Any decision for suspension can be appealed. Any decision to remove someone from the list will call for an automatic appeal by the appeals team. > > In this case, the previous private and public warnings given to Suresh needed to be followed by a one month suspension, not removal from the list. It has been confirmed in correspondence with both the Coordinator and with the person removed from the list that the word used in the private letter advising removal was “removal”, and this was confirmed by the co ordinator as being the intention. It was this action outside of the process outlined in the IGC Charter that led to our decision. > -- ------------------------------------------------------ anriette esterhuysen anriette at apc.org executive director, association for progressive communications www.apc.org po box 29755, melville 2109 south africa tel/fax +27 11 726 1692 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From jaryn56 at gmail.com Tue Jan 22 13:04:21 2013 From: jaryn56 at gmail.com (=?UTF-8?B?Sm9zw6kgRsOpbGl4IEFyaWFzIFluY2hl?=) Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2013 13:04:21 -0500 Subject: [bestbits] [governance] Multistakeholder Roles and Responsibilities In-Reply-To: <50FCEFC5.8010008@ciroap.org> References: <01c801cdf457$f76a3fc0$e63ebf40$@gmail.com> <50F763C0.5070907@ciroap.org> <50F8D10B.3010109@ciroap.org> <20130118224941.556b0653@quill.bollow.ch> <50FCEFC5.8010008@ciroap.org> Message-ID: Y porque no se habré delegaciones de IGCAUCUS, en los países que un afiliado o afiliados estén en la lista, para que así sea más Democrático...¿porque solamente tenemos que confiar en una representación, cuando se puede tener opiniones de diversos sectores del mundo, creo que es hora de que se flexibilice IGCAUCUS o que quede atrasada de los demás organismos...se necesita saber la opinión de los demás... *Cordialmente: José Félix Arias Ynche* * Investigador Social Para El Desarrollo* 2013/1/21 Jeremy Malcolm > On 19/01/13 05:49, Norbert Bollow wrote: > > Jeremy Malcolm wrote: > > Actually I put together a system that is meant to achieve that: > http://a2knetwork.org/meetings/ > > Anyone who registers can list a meeting there and say whether they are > attending, and can post a short report there. It supports multiple > reports, too, in the case that more than one delegation is attending. > The main purpose is to identify where there are gaps - important > meetings that nobody is covering. But it only works if enough people > use it, so please do. > > So this is intended for all of civil society, rather than just the > Consumer Movement, to use? > > If yes, then I would suggest that that should be made clearer on the > website. > > > It was originally mainly for CI's consumer group members, but it is clear > that it won't be useful unless it is open to others. In the longer term I > need to look at spinning it off to a more broadly based network, and making > it much nicer like the infojustice-calendar one. I already put in place a > simple Internet governance calendar system for the IGC ( > http://www.igcaucus.org/calendar), but it hasn't been much used and could > also be wrapped into the above. I am trying to get funding to support the > Best Bits network, mainly as a travel fund for events, but some Web > development work such as this will also be included. > > > -- > > *Dr Jeremy Malcolm > Senior Policy Officer > Consumers International | the global campaigning voice for consumers* > Office for Asia-Pacific and the Middle East > Lot 5-1 Wisma WIM, 7 Jalan Abang Haji Openg, TTDI, 60000 Kuala Lumpur, > Malaysia > Tel: +60 3 7726 1599 > > *Your rights, our mission – download CI's Strategy 2015:* > http://consint.info/RightsMission > > @Consumers_Int | www.consumersinternational.org | > www.facebook.com/consumersinternational > > Read our email confidentiality notice. > Don't print this email unless necessary. > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From nb at bollow.ch Tue Jan 22 13:07:22 2013 From: nb at bollow.ch (Norbert Bollow) Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2013 19:07:22 +0100 Subject: [governance] Appeals Team Final Report In-Reply-To: <15C6CACD-CCC7-45A7-BAC2-777FB405279F@acm.org> References: <8642774A0A714ABB9847E6EDA8B3ABC5@Toshiba> <50FE7DC3.5080402@cafonso.ca> <15C6CACD-CCC7-45A7-BAC2-777FB405279F@acm.org> Message-ID: <20130122190722.2789eb35@quill.bollow.ch> Avri Doria wrote: > wonderful job by the Appeals Team. > and a great email from Carlos Agreed. Here's another few thoughts that I'd like to add: Sometimes what another participant of the list writes will be really irritating. Sometimes what someone else writes is irritating even if it not that bad that the Coordinators have to step in (or at least they think so). (It's a responsibility of the Coordinators to take action when the rules are breached, but conversations can get unpleasant and even irritating well before that point.) In those moments it is helpful to assume that even if what that other participant wrote is irritating and in some respects wrong, there will likely be a valid concern and a worthwhile insight hidden somewhere in those irritating and inaccurate words. One of the most valuable things that can happen in a conversation is what I call “whistleblowing”, which I'd define as someone pointing out untruths in the ideology which underlies whatever is in the group the dominant pattern of discourse. That of course tends to be uncomfortable and irritating to most of the participants in the conversation. We will all benefit more from our conversations if we focus more on cooperatively digging out and clarifying those valid concerns and worthwhile insights, and less on arguing out about those irritating words being somehow wrong and/or inappropriate. Such constructive discourse takes time. Therefore it requires setting priorities. I would suggest to all who have a habit of sometimes criticizing others that there is wisdom in avoiding to trade mutual criticism over *minor* points. This applies especially when the other participant's personality is very incompatible with yours. (But “let's avoid the unpleasant conversation” does not apply to what from your perspective are the truly important issues. Those issues deserve and need to be treated in a proper discourse, and if that discourse requires criticizing opposing viewpoints, so be it, as long as the criticizing is done in a civil manner.) Greetings, Norbert > On 22 Jan 2013, at 06:53, Carlos A. Afonso wrote: > > > Excellent, very careful and detailed recommendations. > > > > Especially taking into account that in this list we have a nice mix > > of distinct cultures, and what sometimes seems innocuous for some > > might mean a big deal for others in terms of how we relate with > > each other. > > > > I recall a lunch meeting between several Brazilians and people from > > different countries from Asia at a World Bank venue many years ago. > > Brazilians as usual are a bit irreverent and tell jokes, and these > > jokes in English (for us Brazilians) sounded ok. But none of our > > fellow Asians found them funny. > > > > So we asked our friends from Asia to tell us some jokes -- the same > > thing happened as we did not think they qualified as jokes at > > all! :) But at the end we found some "universal" ones which passed > > the test unanimously. > > > > frt rgds > > > > --c.a. > > > > On 01/22/2013 01:09 AM, Ian Peter wrote: > >> FINAL REPORT, FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS > >> > >> With the comments period completed, the Appeals Team can now > >> present its final report and recommendations as regards the appeal > >> against the removal from the IGC list of Suresh Ramasubramanian. > >> > >> OUR FINDINGS ON THE APPEAL > >> > >> We confirm our finding is that Suresh’s removal from the IGC list > >> was not in accordance with the IGC Charter, for reasons contained > >> in our interim findings and repeated later in this report. We > >> therefore request that Suresh be reinstated to the list > >> immediately. (this has already taken place) > >> > >> OUR RECOMMENDATIONS > >> > >> We also make the following recommendations for consideration by > >> all IGC members. > >> > >> Recommendation 1. The IGC Charter includes the following > >> recommendation,. “The coordinators may, at their discretion, > >> appoint an advisory team of at least three individuals to assist > >> them in making the determination of when someone has breached the > >> posting rules defined in this charter. While all decisions remain > >> the coordinators' responsibility, any such recommendation from an > >> advisory team will be made public at the time of either suspension > >> or removal from the list.” > >> > >> > >> In the case before us which took place while there was only one > >> active coordinator, we think this advisory team would have been > >> particularly valuable. > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> Recommendation 2. We recommend that in future reasons be given for > >> any removal or suspension, referencing the charter provisions > >> which were breached and led to the suspension. This is currently > >> not a requirement in the Charter, but we feel strongly that any > >> suspension, removal, or warning, should state clearly why this is > >> so, in accordance with the IGC charter provisions. These are > >> listed below and are quite broad. > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> Recommendation 3. We recommend that in future all > >> removal/suspensions also be communicated to the list with reasons, > >> not only to the person concerned. Again this is not a current > >> Charter requirement, but we believe that in the interests of good > >> communication with the list this should always be followed. > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> Recommendation 4. We recommend that, should the co-coordinators > >> choose to review the situation as regards the suspension of Suresh > >> Ramasubramanian, the number of days already suspended from the > >> list prior to being reinstated during this appeals process should > >> be deducted from any 30 day suspension. > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> Recommendation 5. Finally, we recommend that all list > >> participants, including those who have been warned in the past, > >> focus their contributions on the issues being discussed, and not > >> the personalities. If IGC ever degrades to a forum which does not > >> have a wide range of cultural differences, political opinions, > >> perspectives, interests,sensitivities, and differing interests in > >> the broad field of internet governance, it would be a great pity. > >> However, within this diverse group, all members have a right to > >> discuss what they feel is pertinent, and all members have a right > >> to disagree. But none of this should include statements which > >> could be construed by a reasonable person as being outside of the > >> IGC Charter’s definition of reasonable conduct, which includes (to > >> quote from the charter) > >> > >> > >> The messages must observe a minimum of decorum, including: > >> · refrain from personal attacks, insults or slander > >> · refrain from offensive or discriminating language > >> · refrain from threats , including threats of legal action, on > >> list or off list · refrain from excessive and repetitive posting > >> > >> Inappropriate postings to the IGC list include > >> · Unsolicited bulk e-mail > >> · Discussion of subjects unrelated to the IGC mission and > >> objectives · Unprofessional or discourteous commentary, regardless > >> of the general subject · Sequences of messages by one or more > >> participants that cause an IGC list to become a hostile environment > >> > >> > >> It is only appropriate that action should be taken, should co - > >> coordinators in their best judgement (and where appropriate with > >> consultation) feel that participants are acting outside of these > >> guidelines. As members of this list, we feel that there have been > >> a number of cases recently, involving not only those who have been > >> warned but cases where people have not been warned, where these > >> guidelines have been broken. It is in the interests of what we are > >> trying to achieve as civil society that our discourse remains > >> civil, polite, and courteous. We reject the notion that, because > >> other lists do not closely moderate or demand reasonable > >> behaviour, this list should not pursue the standards set in its > >> charter. > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> Lastly, we wish to record our thanks to Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro > >> for her patience and co-operation during this appeal period, and > >> her dedication to keeping the Internet Governance Caucus > >> functioning during a difficult time. We trust that our > >> recommendations are useful in assisting future co-coordinators in > >> dealing with such situations, and in clarifying the behaviour that > >> can reasonably be expected from all participants on this mailing > >> list. > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> Thanks also to those who submitted comments. This appeal is now > >> closed. The Appeals Team will not be responding formally to any > >> further comments on this particular matter. > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> The Appeals Team > >> > >> > >> Shaila Mistry, Ginger Paque, Roland Perry , Ian Peter and Deidre > >> Williams > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> BACKGROUND INFORMATION > >> > >> > >> Reasons for our finding. > >> > >> > >> The Charter outlines a specific process that must take place > >> before removal on any person from the list, as follows > >> > >> Suspension of posting rights > >> > >> Failure to abide by posting rules may result in suspension or > >> removal from the IGC list according to the following process: > >> > >> · The coordinators will first warn a subscriber privately of the > >> problem · If the problem persists the coordinators will notify the > >> subscriber publicly on the list of impending suspension from the > >> list. Suspension will include only posting rights. · If the > >> problem persists the subscriber's posting rights will be suspended > >> for one (1) month. · Once the subscriber's posting rights are > >> restored, any further problem will result in another public > >> warning. · If the problem continues to persist after suspension > >> and a second public warning, the coordinators will be permitted to > >> either suspend the posting rights for three (3) months or to > >> remove the subscriber from the list. · Any decision for suspension > >> can be appealed. Any decision to remove someone from the list will > >> call for an automatic appeal by the appeals team. > >> > >> In this case, the previous private and public warnings given to > >> Suresh needed to be followed by a one month suspension, not > >> removal from the list. It has been confirmed in correspondence > >> with both the Coordinator and with the person removed from the > >> list that the word used in the private letter advising removal was > >> “removal”, and this was confirmed by the co ordinator as being the > >> intention. It was this action outside of the process outlined in > >> the IGC Charter that led to our decision. > >> > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From william.drake at uzh.ch Tue Jan 22 14:37:08 2013 From: william.drake at uzh.ch (William Drake) Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2013 20:37:08 +0100 Subject: [governance] today's Wash Post editorial In-Reply-To: References: <50FEA64A.4090805@itforchange.net> Message-ID: <4B49FA27-7CAB-4419-A515-DFA6674EC484@uzh.ch> On Jan 22, 2013, at 5:27 PM, Roland Perry wrote: > In message <50FEA64A.4090805 at itforchange.net>, at 20:16:34 on Tue, 22 Jan 2013, parminder writes > >> Why is it that even those who support US's decision not to sign the ITRs are not able to agree/ decide on exactly why did the US not sign the ITRs. Some people were in the room and some people were not. The ones professing to know beyond a shadow of a doubt what happened have invariably been in the second category. > > It seems highly unlikely to me that there was just one easily explained > paragraph in the ITRs that caused this. Indeed. Bill -------------- 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 From william.drake at uzh.ch Tue Jan 22 14:45:24 2013 From: william.drake at uzh.ch (William Drake) Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2013 20:45:24 +0100 Subject: [governance] France Proposes an Internet Tax In-Reply-To: <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD231DE6D@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> References: <50FD0871.7040301@bluewin.ch> <50FD0CE0.6010603@gmail.com> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD231DE6D@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> Message-ID: On Jan 22, 2013, at 4:24 PM, Milton L Mueller wrote: > > The report published Friday said a tax on data collection was justified on grounds that users of services like Google and Facebook are, in effect, working for these companies without pay by providing the personal information that lets them sell advertising. > [Milton L Mueller] Good deal. In order to compensate and protect us from “working without pay” we will work for the government of France without pay as well. Cartesian logic at work. > Well, maybe because the labor is not sufficiently alienated, the state deserves the money as an expression of solidarity from the workers? Whereas the sender pays/fair compensation proposals claimed it was the carriers, not the customers, who were working without compensation. It's all so confusing... > Or perhaps they will use the revenues to subsidize access to Facebook and Google, since they charge their users so much that…um, well, some of them, um, can’t afford… oh, never mind. > > Of course, this is just a tax on the advertisers, in the end. It will simply increase the costs of Google/Facebook and be recovered from advertisers. > > It wouldn’t be France however unless you threw a soupcon of anti-Americanism and trade protectionism into the pot as well (will the same tax will be applied to all commercial broadcasters in France, whose viewers are sold to advertisers “without pay”?) How about French newspapers with ads – their poor customers even have to pay for the newspaper, and then are sold to advertisers. Merde! > > Interestingly, this whole line of argument presumes that the services users receive in return for their data are worthless. Remember that next time you hear someone claim that Google and Facebook are “essential facilities” that no one can live without. > > It’s sad that governments that just want more money have to strain to come up with trendy rationalizations. What happened to the good old days when they just sent in armed thugs to appropriate a bunch of your pigs and cows? > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From nashton at ccianet.org Tue Jan 22 15:18:46 2013 From: nashton at ccianet.org (Nick Ashton-Hart) Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2013 21:18:46 +0100 Subject: [governance] France Proposes an Internet Tax In-Reply-To: References: <50FD0871.7040301@bluewin.ch> <50FD0CE0.6010603@gmail.com> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD231DE6D@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> <01a001cdf8bf$77f85da0$67e918e0$@gmail.com> Message-ID: <-8780130916361342250@unknownmsgid> It would not be possible for a measure to target foreign companies only - that would breach France's WTO obligations (and that of many other countries were they to try to do the same thing). -- Regards, Nick Ashton-Hart Geneva Representative Computer & Communications Industry Assocation (CCIA) Tel: +41 (22) 534 99 45 Fax: : +41 (22) 594-85-44 Mobile: +41 79 595 5468 USA DID: +1 (202) 640-5430 *Need to meet with me? Schedule the time that suits us both here: http://meetme.so/nashton* Sent from my one of my handheld thingies, please excuse linguistic mangling. On 22 Jan 2013, at 17:54, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote: I think his point is sauce bonne pour l'oie, est bon pour le jars, with google being the heavily taxed goose and local french internet portals, news sites etc that carry ads being the gander that, he fears, will go scot free, if this law is targeted solely at google / fb type foreign sites. --srs (iPad) On 22-Jan-2013, at 22:12, "michael gurstein" wrote: Milton, is it that you don't like this particular tax or that you don't like taxes in general. If the former I'ld be interested to know in some more detail what it is about this particular tax you don't like (apart from the fact that it is a tax being introduced by the French) and what you would replace it with to obtain revenues from this emerging sector assuming that you think folks like Google and their Internet compatriots should pay their fair share as very many are now insisting. If it is the latter I would be curious to know how you see responsible states being able to meet the challenge of reponding to the collective challenges/responsibilities of the modern state so ably articulated last evening by your President. MG *From:* governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [ mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] *On Behalf Of *Milton L Mueller *Sent:* Tuesday, January 22, 2013 7:25 AM *To:* governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Andrea Glorioso *Subject:* RE: [governance] France Proposes an Internet Tax The report published Friday said a tax on data collection was justified on grounds that users of services like Google and Facebook are, in effect, working for these companies without pay by providing the personal information that lets them sell advertising. *[Milton L Mueller] Good deal. In order to compensate and protect us from “working without pay” we will work for the government of France without pay as well. Cartesian logic at work.* *Or perhaps they will use the revenues to subsidize access to Facebook and Google, since they charge their users so much that…um, well, some of them, um, can’t afford… oh, never mind.* *Of course, this is just a tax on the advertisers, in the end. It will simply increase the costs of Google/Facebook and be recovered from advertisers. * *It wouldn’t be France however unless you threw a soupcon of anti-Americanism and trade protectionism into the pot as well (will the same tax will be applied to all commercial broadcasters in France, whose viewers are sold to advertisers “without pay”?) How about French newspapers with ads – their poor customers even have to pay for the newspaper, and then are sold to advertisers. Merde!* *Interestingly, this whole line of argument presumes that the services users receive in return for their data are worthless. Remember that next time you hear someone claim that Google and Facebook are “essential facilities” that no one can live without.* *It’s sad that governments that just want more money have to strain to come up with trendy rationalizations. What happened to the good old days when they just sent in armed thugs to appropriate a bunch of your pigs and cows?* ____________________________________________________________ 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 ____________________________________________________________ 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: -------------- 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 From william.drake at uzh.ch Tue Jan 22 15:22:43 2013 From: william.drake at uzh.ch (William Drake) Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2013 21:22:43 +0100 Subject: [governance] France Proposes an Internet Tax In-Reply-To: <-8780130916361342250@unknownmsgid> References: <50FD0871.7040301@bluewin.ch> <50FD0CE0.6010603@gmail.com> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD231DE6D@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> <01a001cdf8bf$77f85da0$67e918e0$@gmail.com> <-8780130916361342250@unknownmsgid> Message-ID: <69A5BEA8-35C3-429D-AD8A-E1F2D9071D72@uzh.ch> On Jan 22, 2013, at 9:18 PM, Nick Ashton-Hart wrote: > It would not be possible for a measure to target foreign companies only - that would breach France's WTO obligations (and that of many other countries were they to try to do the same thing). A small problem that seemed to receive zero discussion among the proponents in Dubai -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From gurstein at gmail.com Tue Jan 22 15:35:19 2013 From: gurstein at gmail.com (michael gurstein) Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2013 12:35:19 -0800 Subject: [governance] France Proposes an Internet Tax In-Reply-To: <69A5BEA8-35C3-429D-AD8A-E1F2D9071D72@uzh.ch> References: <50FD0871.7040301@bluewin.ch> <50FD0CE0.6010603@gmail.com> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD231DE6D@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> <01a001cdf8bf$77f85da0$67e918e0$@gmail.com> <-8780130916361342250@unknownmsgid> <69A5BEA8-35C3-429D-AD8A-E1F2D9071D72@uzh.ch> Message-ID: <033201cdf8e0$0717dea0$15479be0$@gmail.com> Bill I'm very curious as to the specifics of your assertion below. Could you provide? Tks, M From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of William Drake Sent: Tuesday, January 22, 2013 12:23 PM To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Nick Ashton-Hart Subject: Re: [governance] France Proposes an Internet Tax On Jan 22, 2013, at 9:18 PM, Nick Ashton-Hart wrote: It would not be possible for a measure to target foreign companies only - that would breach France's WTO obligations (and that of many other countries were they to try to do the same thing). A small problem that seemed to receive zero discussion among the proponents in Dubai -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From mueller at syr.edu Tue Jan 22 15:49:55 2013 From: mueller at syr.edu (Milton L Mueller) Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2013 20:49:55 +0000 Subject: [governance] France Proposes an Internet Tax In-Reply-To: <01a001cdf8bf$77f85da0$67e918e0$@gmail.com> References: <50FD0871.7040301@bluewin.ch> <50FD0CE0.6010603@gmail.com> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD231DE6D@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> <01a001cdf8bf$77f85da0$67e918e0$@gmail.com> Message-ID: <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD231E387@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> Milton, is it that you don't like this particular tax or that you don't like taxes in general. [Milton L Mueller] My message makes it abundantly clear what I don't like about it: the rationale is phony (work without pay); it's a political attempt to capitalize on anti-Google/FB sentiment (tax them because we don't like them); it looks suspiciously like an attempt at discrimination based on national origin; it is stupidly conceived (it taxes advertisers, the customers of Google/FB, which does not help users who allegedly work without pay.) what you would replace it with to obtain revenues from this emerging sector assuming that you think folks like Google and their Internet compatriots should pay their fair share as very many are now insisting. If it is the latter I would be curious to know how you see responsible states being able to meet the challenge of reponding to the collective challenges/responsibilities of the modern state so ably articulated last evening by your President. [Milton L Mueller] A corporate income tax, a personal income tax and a VAT - all of which Europe already has - capture growth in any "emerging sector." Or are you advocating taxing things just for the sake of taxing them? Frankly, that wouldn't surprise me. [Milton L Mueller] Besides, no case has been made that the French government really needs more money, or that social media impose costs on it that need to be recovered. But if it does need additional revenues for legitimate purposes, then they can increase the rate of neutral taxes and not target them on specific types of businesses based on misconceptions about the underlying bargain behind social media. Unless, of course, you think social media, like alcohol and tobacco, are inherently bad and need to be taxed to discourage their use. (Do you? Then come out and say it.) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com Tue Jan 22 16:02:26 2013 From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro) Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2013 09:02:26 +1200 Subject: [governance] France Proposes an Internet Tax In-Reply-To: <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD231E387@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> References: <50FD0871.7040301@bluewin.ch> <50FD0CE0.6010603@gmail.com> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD231DE6D@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> <01a001cdf8bf$77f85da0$67e918e0$@gmail.com> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD231E387@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> Message-ID: On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 8:49 AM, Milton L Mueller wrote: > ** ** > > ** ** > > Milton, is it that you don't like this particular tax or that you don't > like taxes in general.**** > > * * > > *[Milton L Mueller] My message makes it abundantly clear what I don’t > like about it: the rationale is phony (work without pay); it’s a political > attempt to capitalize on anti-Google/FB sentiment (tax them because we > don’t like them); it looks suspiciously like an attempt at discrimination > based on national origin; it is stupidly conceived (it taxes advertisers, > the customers of Google/FB, which does not help users who allegedly work > without pay.)* > > ** ** > > what you would replace it with to obtain revenues from this emerging > sector assuming that you think folks like Google and their Internet > compatriots should pay their fair share as very many are now insisting. * > *** > > If it is the latter I would be curious to know how you see responsible > states being able to meet the challenge of reponding to the collective > challenges/responsibilities of the modern state so ably articulated last > evening by your President.**** > > * * > > *[Milton L Mueller] **A corporate income tax, a personal income tax and a > VAT – all of which Europe already has – capture growth in any “emerging > sector.” Or are you advocating taxing things just for the sake of taxing > them? Frankly, that wouldn’t surprise me.* > > ** > Transfer pricing was mentioned in the French Proposal and I assume that on products/services that VAT would be apply. What makes me curious is the methodology that will be used precisely? On a similar note, there is an interesting article published on July 2012 called Carriage vrs Content by Geoff Huston, see: http://www.potaroo.net/ispcol/2012-07/carriagevcontent.html > ** > > *[Milton L Mueller] Besides, no case has been made that the French > government really needs more money, or that social media impose costs on it > that need to be recovered.* > *But if it does need additional revenues for legitimate purposes, then they > can increase the rate of neutral taxes and not target them on specific > types of businesses based on misconceptions about the underlying bargain > behind social media. Unless, of course, you think social media, like > alcohol and tobacco, are inherently bad and need to be taxed to discourage > their use. (Do you? Then come out and say it.)* > > * * > > * * > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > -- Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala P.O. Box 17862 Suva Fiji Twitter: @SalanietaT Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro Tel: +679 3544828 Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From gurstein at gmail.com Tue Jan 22 16:17:15 2013 From: gurstein at gmail.com (michael gurstein) Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2013 13:17:15 -0800 Subject: [governance] France Proposes an Internet Tax In-Reply-To: <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD231E387@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> References: <50FD0871.7040301@bluewin.ch> <50FD0CE0.6010603@gmail.com> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD231DE6D@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> <01a001cdf8bf$77f85da0$67e918e0$@gmail.com> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD231E387@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> Message-ID: <037d01cdf8e5$e0b15650$a21402f0$@gmail.com> Milton< From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Milton L Mueller Sent: Tuesday, January 22, 2013 12:50 PM To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org Subject: RE: [governance] France Proposes an Internet Tax Milton, is it that you don't like this particular tax or that you don't like taxes in general. [Milton L Mueller] My message makes it abundantly clear what I don't like about it: the rationale is phony (work without pay); [MG>] I would very much like to see the underlying argument here before I made any judgement. the 200 page document that accompanied the announcement was unforunately only in French and I won't have the time to look through it in any detail until the earliest next week. I think the argument itself is possibly a very interesting and novel one and is attempting to get at the underlying structure of new social media--whether they've got it right or not is another question on which I personally will hold off judgement (i.e. I won't react to headlines on what I think is a complex discussion it's a political attempt to capitalize on anti-Google/FB sentiment (tax them because we don't like them); [MG>] I don't see that at all. if they are looking to find a way of taxing a category of activity and that activity is dominated (effectively monopolized) by one or another corporation that doesn't mean that they are "capitaliz(ing) on anti-Google/FB sentiment (tax them because we don't like them) it simply means that those subject to that particular tax are those companies in that monopoly position. it looks suspiciously like an attempt at discrimination based on national origin; [MG>] see above it is stupidly conceived (it taxes advertisers, the customers of Google/FB, which does not help users who allegedly work without pay.) [MG>] see above. taxes are levied in one place and ultimately change cost/revenue structures somewhere else, that's how the system works isn't it. what you would replace it with to obtain revenues from this emerging sector assuming that you think folks like Google and their Internet compatriots should pay their fair share as very many are now insisting. If it is the latter I would be curious to know how you see responsible states being able to meet the challenge of reponding to the collective challenges/responsibilities of the modern state so ably articulated last evening by your President. [Milton L Mueller] A corporate income tax, a personal income tax and a VAT - all of which Europe already has - capture growth in any "emerging sector." Or are you advocating taxing things just for the sake of taxing them? [MG>] see above. however, it seems that for whatever reason the French (and a whole posse of other governments) are finding it very difficult under current legislation/regulation to get a fair share of taxation from the Internet giants and are trying to figure out how to do that. I'm guessing that the French proposal is one experiment in that direction and if it succeeds it will be copied by that posse and others Frankly, that wouldn't surprise me. [MG>] this is ad hominen [Milton L Mueller] Besides, no case has been made that the French government really needs more money, [MG>] I'm not sure that that is for you to decide. or that social media impose costs on it that need to be recovered. [MG>] The position that taxes are somehow only to be levied as a means to cover related costs is a political stance promoted by mostly fringe libertarian ideologists and is not one that appears consistent with most current perspectives on public finance. But if it does need additional revenues for legitimate purposes, then they can increase the rate of neutral taxes and not target them on specific types of businesses based on misconceptions about the underlying bargain behind social media. [MG>] see above Unless, of course, you think social media, like alcohol and tobacco, are inherently bad and need to be taxed to discourage their use. (Do you? Then come out and say it.) [MG>] that's just silly M -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From nashton at ccianet.org Tue Jan 22 17:17:01 2013 From: nashton at ccianet.org (Nick Ashton-Hart) Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2013 23:17:01 +0100 Subject: [governance] France Proposes an Internet Tax In-Reply-To: <69A5BEA8-35C3-429D-AD8A-E1F2D9071D72@uzh.ch> References: <50FD0871.7040301@bluewin.ch> <50FD0CE0.6010603@gmail.com> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD231DE6D@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> <01a001cdf8bf$77f85da0$67e918e0$@gmail.com> <-8780130916361342250@unknownmsgid> <69A5BEA8-35C3-429D-AD8A-E1F2D9071D72@uzh.ch> Message-ID: <-6350004158362121174@unknownmsgid> We've found that there's a need for much more coordination and consultation between ministries responsible for ITU matters and trade ministries. -- Regards, Nick Ashton-Hart Geneva Representative Computer & Communications Industry Assocation (CCIA) Tel: +41 (22) 534 99 45 Fax: : +41 (22) 594-85-44 Mobile: +41 79 595 5468 USA DID: +1 (202) 640-5430 *Need to meet with me? Schedule the time that suits us both here: http://meetme.so/nashton* Sent from my one of my handheld thingies, please excuse linguistic mangling. On 22 Jan 2013, at 21:22, William Drake wrote: On Jan 22, 2013, at 9:18 PM, Nick Ashton-Hart wrote: It would not be possible for a measure to target foreign companies only - that would breach France's WTO obligations (and that of many other countries were they to try to do the same thing). A small problem that seemed to receive zero discussion among the proponents in Dubai -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From gurstein at gmail.com Tue Jan 22 17:38:48 2013 From: gurstein at gmail.com (michael gurstein) Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2013 14:38:48 -0800 Subject: [governance] France Proposes an Internet Tax In-Reply-To: <-6350004158362121174@unknownmsgid> References: <50FD0871.7040301@bluewin.ch> <50FD0CE0.6010603@gmail.com> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD231DE6D@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> <01a001cdf8bf$77f85da0$67e918e0$@gmail.com> <-8780130916361342250@unknownmsgid> <69A5BEA8-35C3-429D-AD8A-E1F2D9071D72@uzh.ch> <-6350004158362121174@unknownmsgid> Message-ID: <03c901cdf8f1$48cca3b0$da65eb10$@gmail.com> As an aside and addressed to no one in particular, it occurs to me that for those who are truly concerned about maintaining the technical integrity and global seamlessness of the Internet should be looking to find appropriate and globally equitable means for taxation of Internet related activities rather than presenting ideologically based anti-tax posturing. France may or may not succeed with this particular initiative, but behind them are most of the other OECD countries and behind them is the rest of the world looking to get some fair share from rapidly escalating Internet based revenues. Better to my mind to have a reasonable and technically compliant plan in place than to attempt to play catch up as every country thunders forward with its own national taxation scheme and chaos in some form ensues. (Anyone want to bet that the clever boffins in the OECD aren't already working in this direction? M From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Nick Ashton-Hart Sent: Tuesday, January 22, 2013 2:17 PM To: William Drake Cc: governance at lists.igcaucus.org Subject: Re: [governance] France Proposes an Internet Tax We've found that there's a need for much more coordination and consultation between ministries responsible for ITU matters and trade ministries. -- Regards, Nick Ashton-Hart Geneva Representative Computer & Communications Industry Assocation (CCIA) Tel: +41 (22) 534 99 45 Fax: : +41 (22) 594-85-44 Mobile: +41 79 595 5468 USA DID: +1 (202) 640-5430 Need to meet with me? Schedule the time that suits us both here: http://meetme.so/nashton Sent from my one of my handheld thingies, please excuse linguistic mangling. On 22 Jan 2013, at 21:22, William Drake wrote: On Jan 22, 2013, at 9:18 PM, Nick Ashton-Hart wrote: It would not be possible for a measure to target foreign companies only - that would breach France's WTO obligations (and that of many other countries were they to try to do the same thing). A small problem that seemed to receive zero discussion among the proponents in Dubai -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From vanda at uol.com.br Tue Jan 22 17:44:33 2013 From: vanda at uol.com.br (Vanda UOL) Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2013 20:44:33 -0200 Subject: [governance] France Proposes an Internet Tax In-Reply-To: <-8780130916361342250@unknownmsgid> References: <50FD0871.7040301@bluewin.ch> <50FD0CE0.6010603@gmail.com> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD231DE6D@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> <01a001cdf8bf$77f85da0$67e918e0$@gmail.com> <-8780130916361342250@unknownmsgid> Message-ID: Hi Nick they probably not aware of this side of the problem but I do agree. Best, Vanda Scartezini Sent from my iPhone On 22/01/2013, at 18:18, Nick Ashton-Hart wrote: > It would not be possible for a measure to target foreign companies only - that would breach France's WTO obligations (and that of many other countries were they to try to do the same thing). > > -- > Regards, > > Nick Ashton-Hart > Geneva Representative > Computer & Communications Industry Assocation (CCIA) > Tel: +41 (22) 534 99 45 > Fax: : +41 (22) 594-85-44 > Mobile: +41 79 595 5468 > USA DID: +1 (202) 640-5430 > > Need to meet with me? Schedule the time that suits us both here: http://meetme.so/nashton > > Sent from my one of my handheld thingies, please excuse linguistic mangling. > > On 22 Jan 2013, at 17:54, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote: > >> I think his point is sauce bonne pour l'oie, est bon pour le jars, with google being the heavily taxed goose and local french internet portals, news sites etc that carry ads being the gander that, he fears, will go scot free, if this law is targeted solely at google / fb type foreign sites. >> >> --srs (iPad) >> >> On 22-Jan-2013, at 22:12, "michael gurstein" wrote: >> >>> Milton, is it that you don't like this particular tax or that you don't like taxes in general. >>> >>> If the former I'ld be interested to know in some more detail what it is about this particular tax you don't like (apart from the fact that it is a tax being introduced by the French) and what you would replace it with to obtain revenues from this emerging sector assuming that you think folks like Google and their Internet compatriots should pay their fair share as very many are now insisting. >>> >>> If it is the latter I would be curious to know how you see responsible states being able to meet the challenge of reponding to the collective challenges/responsibilities of the modern state so ably articulated last evening by your President. >>> >>> MG >>> >>> From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Milton L Mueller >>> Sent: Tuesday, January 22, 2013 7:25 AM >>> To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Andrea Glorioso >>> Subject: RE: [governance] France Proposes an Internet Tax >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> The report published Friday said a tax on data collection was justified on grounds that users of services like Google and Facebook are, in effect, working for these companies without pay by providing the personal information that lets them sell advertising. >>> >>> [Milton L Mueller] Good deal. In order to compensate and protect us from “working without pay” we will work for the government of France without pay as well. Cartesian logic at work. >>> >>> Or perhaps they will use the revenues to subsidize access to Facebook and Google, since they charge their users so much that…um, well, some of them, um, can’t afford… oh, never mind. >>> >>> Of course, this is just a tax on the advertisers, in the end. It will simply increase the costs of Google/Facebook and be recovered from advertisers. >>> >>> It wouldn’t be France however unless you threw a soupcon of anti-Americanism and trade protectionism into the pot as well (will the same tax will be applied to all commercial broadcasters in France, whose viewers are sold to advertisers “without pay”?) How about French newspapers with ads – their poor customers even have to pay for the newspaper, and then are sold to advertisers. Merde! >>> >>> Interestingly, this whole line of argument presumes that the services users receive in return for their data are worthless. Remember that next time you hear someone claim that Google and Facebook are “essential facilities” that no one can live without. >>> >>> It’s sad that governments that just want more money have to strain to come up with trendy rationalizations. What happened to the good old days when they just sent in armed thugs to appropriate a bunch of your pigs and cows? >>> >>> ____________________________________________________________ >>> 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 >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From nne75 at yahoo.com Tue Jan 22 18:27:21 2013 From: nne75 at yahoo.com (Nnenna) Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2013 15:27:21 -0800 (PST) Subject: [governance] MIT site hacked.. for Aaron Swartz Message-ID: <1358897241.84088.YahooMailNeo@web120101.mail.ne1.yahoo.com>  Really brave move.. though it lasted on 5 minutes.. N -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Aaron Swartz hack.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 119803 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- 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 From apisan at unam.mx Tue Jan 22 18:37:48 2013 From: apisan at unam.mx (Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Baruch) Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2013 23:37:48 +0000 Subject: [governance] France Proposes an Internet Tax In-Reply-To: <03c901cdf8f1$48cca3b0$da65eb10$@gmail.com> References: <50FD0871.7040301@bluewin.ch> <50FD0CE0.6010603@gmail.com> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD231DE6D@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> <01a001cdf8bf$77f85da0$67e918e0$@gmail.com> <-8780130916361342250@unknownmsgid> <69A5BEA8-35C3-429D-AD8A-E1F2D9071D72@uzh.ch> <-6350004158362121174@unknownmsgid>,<03c901cdf8f1$48cca3b0$da65eb10$@gmail.com> Message-ID: <6DCAB3E586E6A34FB17223DF8D8F0D3D5DC1E941@W8-EX10MB.unam.local> Michael, in the same "what if" vein... what if the clever boffins in the OECD have realized that there is nothing exceptional about money made over the Internet, and leave it to each country to continue to try to exact taxes from income, profits and rents, as the countries' laws, regional arrangements, multipartite and global treaties mandate and allow? Wouldn't they be even more keen in stopping gaps and diversion schemes than any participant in these discussions is? (you said they are clever, they are boffins, and they are in the OECD... the rest is my second guessing.) They may also be truly concerned about maintaining the technical integrity and global seamlessness of the Internet. I know a few people who share all these characteristics. Anyone talking to them to find out directly? Yours, Alejandro Pisanty - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Facultad de Química UNAM Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico +52-1-5541444475 FROM ABROAD +525541444475 DESDE MÉXICO SMS +525541444475 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 michael gurstein [gurstein at gmail.com] Enviado el: martes, 22 de enero de 2013 16:38 Hasta: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; 'Nick Ashton-Hart' Asunto: RE: [governance] France Proposes an Internet Tax As an aside and addressed to no one in particular, it occurs to me that for those who are truly concerned about maintaining the technical integrity and global seamlessness of the Internet should be looking to find appropriate and globally equitable means for taxation of Internet related activities rather than presenting ideologically based anti-tax posturing. France may or may not succeed with this particular initiative, but behind them are most of the other OECD countries and behind them is the rest of the world looking to get some fair share from rapidly escalating Internet based revenues. Better to my mind to have a reasonable and technically compliant plan in place than to attempt to play catch up as every country thunders forward with its own national taxation scheme and chaos in some form ensues… (Anyone want to bet that the clever boffins in the OECD aren't already working in this direction? M From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Nick Ashton-Hart Sent: Tuesday, January 22, 2013 2:17 PM To: William Drake Cc: governance at lists.igcaucus.org Subject: Re: [governance] France Proposes an Internet Tax We've found that there's a need for much more coordination and consultation between ministries responsible for ITU matters and trade ministries. -- Regards, Nick Ashton-Hart Geneva Representative Computer & Communications Industry Assocation (CCIA) Tel: +41 (22) 534 99 45 Fax: : +41 (22) 594-85-44 Mobile: +41 79 595 5468 USA DID: +1 (202) 640-5430 Need to meet with me? Schedule the time that suits us both here: http://meetme.so/nashton Sent from my one of my handheld thingies, please excuse linguistic mangling. On 22 Jan 2013, at 21:22, William Drake > wrote: On Jan 22, 2013, at 9:18 PM, Nick Ashton-Hart > wrote: It would not be possible for a measure to target foreign companies only - that would breach France's WTO obligations (and that of many other countries were they to try to do the same thing). A small problem that seemed to receive zero discussion among the proponents in Dubai -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com Tue Jan 22 18:57:38 2013 From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro) Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2013 11:57:38 +1200 Subject: [governance] France Proposes an Internet Tax In-Reply-To: <6DCAB3E586E6A34FB17223DF8D8F0D3D5DC1E941@W8-EX10MB.unam.local> References: <50FD0871.7040301@bluewin.ch> <50FD0CE0.6010603@gmail.com> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD231DE6D@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> <01a001cdf8bf$77f85da0$67e918e0$@gmail.com> <-8780130916361342250@unknownmsgid> <69A5BEA8-35C3-429D-AD8A-E1F2D9071D72@uzh.ch> <-6350004158362121174@unknownmsgid> <03c901cdf8f1$48cca3b0$da65eb10$@gmail.com> <6DCAB3E586E6A34FB17223DF8D8F0D3D5DC1E941@W8-EX10MB.unam.local> Message-ID: > > > > > (Anyone want to bet that the clever boffins in the OECD aren't already > working in this direction? > > > > M > http://www.oecd.org/ctp/transferpricing/ http://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/taxation/dealing-effectively-with-the-challenges-of-transfer-pricing_9789264169463-en http://www.oecd.org/ctp/transferpricing/transferpricingguidelinesformultinationalenterprisesandtaxadministrations.htm > > > > > *From:* governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto: > governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] *On Behalf Of *Nick Ashton-Hart > *Sent:* Tuesday, January 22, 2013 2:17 PM > *To:* William Drake > *Cc:* governance at lists.igcaucus.org > *Subject:* Re: [governance] France Proposes an Internet Tax > > > > We've found that there's a need for much more coordination and > consultation between ministries responsible for ITU matters and trade > ministries. > > -- > > Regards, > > > > Nick Ashton-Hart > > Geneva Representative > > Computer & Communications Industry Assocation (CCIA) > > Tel: +41 (22) 534 99 45 > > Fax: : +41 (22) 594-85-44 > > Mobile: +41 79 595 5468 > > USA DID: +1 (202) 640-5430 > > > > *Need to meet with me? Schedule the time that suits us both here: > http://meetme.so/nashton* > > > > Sent from my one of my handheld thingies, please excuse linguistic > mangling. > > > On 22 Jan 2013, at 21:22, William Drake wrote: > > > > On Jan 22, 2013, at 9:18 PM, Nick Ashton-Hart wrote: > > > > It would not be possible for a measure to target foreign companies only > - that would breach France's WTO obligations (and that of many other > countries were they to try to do the same thing). > > > > A small problem that seemed to receive zero discussion among the > proponents in Dubai > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > -- Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala P.O. Box 17862 Suva Fiji Twitter: @SalanietaT Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro Tel: +679 3544828 Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From suresh at hserus.net Tue Jan 22 18:57:56 2013 From: suresh at hserus.net (Suresh Ramasubramanian) Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2013 05:27:56 +0530 Subject: [governance] MIT site hacked.. for Aaron Swartz In-Reply-To: <1358897241.84088.YahooMailNeo@web120101.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> References: <1358897241.84088.YahooMailNeo@web120101.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <683A2CEA-6FCE-493E-8B56-9A414963BFDE@hserus.net> Given that sabu is currently in supervised release pending sentencing, that remains temporarily deferred as long as he cooperates with law enforcement (free for six months from aug 2012 is the latest.. http://nakedsecurity.sophos.com/2012/08/23/sabu-lulzsec-freedom/) ... I seriously doubt it is him. Law enforcement knows where it can get him. And please don't call ddos and site defacement brave. Especially when you compare it to the true bravery that Aaron Swartz started out with in his civil disobeidience before his depression got the better of him. --srs (iPad) On 23-Jan-2013, at 4:57, Nnenna wrote: > > Really brave move.. though it lasted on 5 minutes.. > > N > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From suresh at hserus.net Tue Jan 22 19:05:14 2013 From: suresh at hserus.net (Suresh Ramasubramanian) Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2013 05:35:14 +0530 Subject: [governance] France Proposes an Internet Tax In-Reply-To: <-6350004158362121174@unknownmsgid> References: <50FD0871.7040301@bluewin.ch> <50FD0CE0.6010603@gmail.com> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD231DE6D@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> <01a001cdf8bf$77f85da0$67e918e0$@gmail.com> <-8780130916361342250@unknownmsgid> <69A5BEA8-35C3-429D-AD8A-E1F2D9071D72@uzh.ch> <-6350004158362121174@unknownmsgid> Message-ID: On 23-Jan-2013, at 3:47, Nick Ashton-Hart wrote: > We've found that there's a need for much more coordination and consultation between ministries responsible for ITU matters and trade ministries. WTO and GATT obligations will trump saying in the ITRs was one of the caveats that several countries added when either signing on, or taking the ITRs back home for further consultation. Even for those ministries that weren't as aware of GATT and WTO, they will find out the hard way I expect, if they try to introduce any tariff or tax that is seen to be discriminatory on national origin, -------------- 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 From suresh at hserus.net Tue Jan 22 19:14:48 2013 From: suresh at hserus.net (Suresh Ramasubramanian) Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2013 05:44:48 +0530 Subject: [governance] France Proposes an Internet Tax In-Reply-To: References: <50FD0871.7040301@bluewin.ch> <50FD0CE0.6010603@gmail.com> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD231DE6D@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> <01a001cdf8bf$77f85da0$67e918e0$@gmail.com> <-8780130916361342250@unknownmsgid> <69A5BEA8-35C3-429D-AD8A-E1F2D9071D72@uzh.ch> <-6350004158362121174@unknownmsgid> <03c901cdf8f1$48cca3b0$da65eb10$@gmail.com> <6DCAB3E586E6A34FB17223DF8D8F0D3D5DC1E941@W8-EX10MB.unam.local> Message-ID: <81F2FCBD-B8D5-4F5F-93B4-333D96FAC848@hserus.net> Not really amenable to transfer pricing models of taxation .. which do get avoided to a large extent. A very similar but domestic US case is Amazon, which till 2012 was taking aggressive measures to avoid becoming subject to state sales tax in most US states where it did not have a physical presence (large shipping warehouses in some strategically located cities that were also cheap in terms of operating costs). Quite aggressively but in several opinions, legally under current law, http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424053111904772304576468753564916130.html In 2012, after several US states moved aggressively on this avoidance, amazon is setting up warehouses in each state to make themselves subject to state sales taxes. http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/12/technology/amazon-forced-to-collect-sales-tax-aims-to-keep-its-competitive-edge.html?_r=0 --srs (iPad) On 23-Jan-2013, at 5:27, "Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro" wrote: >> >> >> >> (Anyone want to bet that the clever boffins in the OECD aren't already working in this direction? >> >> >> >> M >> > > http://www.oecd.org/ctp/transferpricing/ > > http://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/taxation/dealing-effectively-with-the-challenges-of-transfer-pricing_9789264169463-en > > http://www.oecd.org/ctp/transferpricing/transferpricingguidelinesformultinationalenterprisesandtaxadministrations.htm >> >> >> >> >> From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Nick Ashton-Hart >> Sent: Tuesday, January 22, 2013 2:17 PM >> To: William Drake >> Cc: governance at lists.igcaucus.org >> Subject: Re: [governance] France Proposes an Internet Tax >> >> >> >> We've found that there's a need for much more coordination and consultation between ministries responsible for ITU matters and trade ministries. >> >> -- >> >> Regards, >> >> >> >> Nick Ashton-Hart >> >> Geneva Representative >> >> Computer & Communications Industry Assocation (CCIA) >> >> Tel: +41 (22) 534 99 45 >> >> Fax: : +41 (22) 594-85-44 >> >> Mobile: +41 79 595 5468 >> >> USA DID: +1 (202) 640-5430 >> >> >> >> Need to meet with me? Schedule the time that suits us both here: http://meetme.so/nashton >> >> >> >> Sent from my one of my handheld thingies, please excuse linguistic mangling. >> >> >> On 22 Jan 2013, at 21:22, William Drake wrote: >> >> >> >> On Jan 22, 2013, at 9:18 PM, Nick Ashton-Hart wrote: >> >> >> >> It would not be possible for a measure to target foreign companies only - that would breach France's WTO obligations (and that of many other countries were they to try to do the same thing). >> >> >> >> A small problem that seemed to receive zero discussion among the proponents in Dubai >> >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 > > > > -- > Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala > P.O. Box 17862 > Suva > Fiji > > Twitter: @SalanietaT > Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro > Tel: +679 3544828 > Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com Tue Jan 22 19:17:12 2013 From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro) Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2013 12:17:12 +1200 Subject: [governance] France Proposes an Internet Tax In-Reply-To: <6DCAB3E586E6A34FB17223DF8D8F0D3D5DC1E941@W8-EX10MB.unam.local> References: <50FD0871.7040301@bluewin.ch> <50FD0CE0.6010603@gmail.com> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD231DE6D@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> <01a001cdf8bf$77f85da0$67e918e0$@gmail.com> <-8780130916361342250@unknownmsgid> <69A5BEA8-35C3-429D-AD8A-E1F2D9071D72@uzh.ch> <-6350004158362121174@unknownmsgid> <03c901cdf8f1$48cca3b0$da65eb10$@gmail.com> <6DCAB3E586E6A34FB17223DF8D8F0D3D5DC1E941@W8-EX10MB.unam.local> Message-ID: On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 11:37 AM, Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Baruch < apisan at unam.mx> wrote: > Michael, > > in the same "what if" vein... what if the clever boffins in the OECD > have realized that there is nothing exceptional about money made over the > Internet, and leave it to each country to continue to try to exact taxes > from income, profits and rents, as the countries' laws, regional > arrangements, multipartite and global treaties mandate and allow? Wouldn't > they be even more keen in stopping gaps and diversion schemes than any > participant in these discussions is? (you said they are clever, they are > boffins, and they are in the OECD... the rest is my second guessing.) > Of relevance in this instance would be the *OECD Technology Advisory Group*that comprises of Tax (Revenue Authorities) that conduct the Professional Data Assessment and members from the Technology community namely: - USA (IRS) - UK (Inland Revenue) - Canada - Ireland - Australia - France - British Telecom - CISCO - Ernst & Young - Eurobit - European Certification Forum - Hewlett Packard Labs (UK) - Hitachi - IBM - ICANN - Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) - Mondex - National Association of Software and Services Companies (NASSCOM) - India - Nippon - Telegraph and Telecom - Oracle They may also be truly concerned about maintaining the technical integrity > and global seamlessness of the Internet. I know a few people who share all > these characteristics. Anyone talking to them to find out directly? > > Yours, > > Alejandro Pisanty > > > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - > Dr. Alejandro Pisanty > Facultad de Química UNAM > Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico > > > > +52-1-5541444475 FROM ABROAD > > +525541444475 DESDE MÉXICO SMS +525541444475 > 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 michael gurstein [ > gurstein at gmail.com] > *Enviado el:* martes, 22 de enero de 2013 16:38 > *Hasta:* governance at lists.igcaucus.org; 'Nick Ashton-Hart' > *Asunto:* RE: [governance] France Proposes an Internet Tax > > As an aside and addressed to no one in particular, it occurs to me that > for those who are truly concerned about maintaining the technical integrity > and global seamlessness of the Internet should be looking to find > appropriate and globally equitable means for taxation of Internet related > activities rather than presenting ideologically based anti-tax posturing. > > > > France may or may not succeed with this particular initiative, but behind > them are most of the other OECD countries and behind them is the rest of > the world looking to get some fair share from rapidly escalating Internet > based revenues. Better to my mind to have a reasonable and technically > compliant plan in place than to attempt to play catch up as every country > thunders forward with its own national taxation scheme and chaos in some > form ensues… > > > > (Anyone want to bet that the clever boffins in the OECD aren't already > working in this direction? > > > > M > > > > > > *From:* governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto: > governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] *On Behalf Of *Nick Ashton-Hart > *Sent:* Tuesday, January 22, 2013 2:17 PM > *To:* William Drake > *Cc:* governance at lists.igcaucus.org > *Subject:* Re: [governance] France Proposes an Internet Tax > > > > We've found that there's a need for much more coordination and > consultation between ministries responsible for ITU matters and trade > ministries. > > -- > > Regards, > > > > Nick Ashton-Hart > > Geneva Representative > > Computer & Communications Industry Assocation (CCIA) > > Tel: +41 (22) 534 99 45 > > Fax: : +41 (22) 594-85-44 > > Mobile: +41 79 595 5468 > > USA DID: +1 (202) 640-5430 > > > > *Need to meet with me? Schedule the time that suits us both here: > http://meetme.so/nashton* > > > > Sent from my one of my handheld thingies, please excuse linguistic > mangling. > > > On 22 Jan 2013, at 21:22, William Drake wrote: > > > > On Jan 22, 2013, at 9:18 PM, Nick Ashton-Hart wrote: > > > > It would not be possible for a measure to target foreign companies only > - that would breach France's WTO obligations (and that of many other > countries were they to try to do the same thing). > > > > A small problem that seemed to receive zero discussion among the > proponents in Dubai > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > -- Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala P.O. Box 17862 Suva Fiji Twitter: @SalanietaT Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro Tel: +679 3544828 Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From gurstein at gmail.com Tue Jan 22 19:17:52 2013 From: gurstein at gmail.com (michael gurstein) Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2013 16:17:52 -0800 Subject: [governance] France Proposes an Internet Tax In-Reply-To: References: <50FD0871.7040301@bluewin.ch> <50FD0CE0.6010603@gmail.com> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD231DE6D@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> <01a001cdf8bf$77f85da0$67e918e0$@gmail.com> <-8780130916361342250@unknownmsgid> <69A5BEA8-35C3-429D-AD8A-E1F2D9071D72@uzh.ch> <-6350004158362121174@unknownmsgid> <03c901cdf8f1$48cca3b0$da65eb10$@gmail.com> <6DCAB3E586E6A34FB17223DF8D8F0D3D5DC1E941@W8-EX10MB.unam.local> Message-ID: <042e01cdf8ff$21a569d0$64f03d70$@gmail.com> :) M From: Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro [mailto:salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, January 22, 2013 3:58 PM To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Baruch Cc: michael gurstein; Nick Ashton-Hart Subject: Re: [governance] France Proposes an Internet Tax (Anyone want to bet that the clever boffins in the OECD aren't already working in this direction? M http://www.oecd.org/ctp/transferpricing/ http://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/taxation/dealing-effectively-with-the-challenge s-of-transfer-pricing_9789264169463-en http://www.oecd.org/ctp/transferpricing/transferpricingguidelinesformultinat ionalenterprisesandtaxadministrations.htm From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Nick Ashton-Hart Sent: Tuesday, January 22, 2013 2:17 PM To: William Drake Cc: governance at lists.igcaucus.org Subject: Re: [governance] France Proposes an Internet Tax We've found that there's a need for much more coordination and consultation between ministries responsible for ITU matters and trade ministries. -- Regards, Nick Ashton-Hart Geneva Representative Computer & Communications Industry Assocation (CCIA) Tel: +41 (22) 534 99 45 Fax: : +41 (22) 594-85-44 Mobile: +41 79 595 5468 USA DID: +1 (202) 640-5430 Need to meet with me? Schedule the time that suits us both here: http://meetme.so/nashton Sent from my one of my handheld thingies, please excuse linguistic mangling. On 22 Jan 2013, at 21:22, William Drake wrote: On Jan 22, 2013, at 9:18 PM, Nick Ashton-Hart wrote: It would not be possible for a measure to target foreign companies only - that would breach France's WTO obligations (and that of many other countries were they to try to do the same thing). A small problem that seemed to receive zero discussion among the proponents in Dubai ____________________________________________________________ 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 -- Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala P.O. Box 17862 Suva Fiji Twitter: @SalanietaT Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro Tel: +679 3544828 Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From lmcknigh at syr.edu Tue Jan 22 19:18:45 2013 From: lmcknigh at syr.edu (Lee W McKnight) Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2013 00:18:45 +0000 Subject: [governance] France Proposes an Internet Tax In-Reply-To: <6DCAB3E586E6A34FB17223DF8D8F0D3D5DC1E941@W8-EX10MB.unam.local> References: <50FD0871.7040301@bluewin.ch> <50FD0CE0.6010603@gmail.com> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD231DE6D@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> <01a001cdf8bf$77f85da0$67e918e0$@gmail.com> <-8780130916361342250@unknownmsgid> <69A5BEA8-35C3-429D-AD8A-E1F2D9071D72@uzh.ch> <-6350004158362121174@unknownmsgid>,<03c901cdf8f1$48cca3b0$da65eb10$@gmail.com>,<6DCAB3E586E6A34FB17223DF8D8F0D3D5DC1E941@W8-EX10MB.unam.local> Message-ID: <77A59FC9477004489D44DE7FC6840E7B1B21AD@SUEX10-mbx-08.ad.syr.edu> Hi, To refresh folks historical memories....in early e-commerce days the US, Europe and elsewhere put a moratorium on - sales taxes - on online transactions. The US also entered into many bilateral trade deals that either focused on or included an e-commerce section. Later, as online biz grew, the argument for treating online transactions distinct from off-line faded; except for Amazon, which gamed US law for more than decade pretending that they could not tell who they were truly transacting with nor where they lived; so therefore they could not be expected to collect sales taxes. Then when that argument broke down, they said they could not be expected to collect sales taxes where they had no employees; and would promptly fire people - some to be rehired by 'independent third parties' in any state that tried to force Amazon to collect sales taxes on transactions in that (US) state. That included all their California employees. Finally, in 2012, I believe Amazon finally ended this charade; more or less. (To be fair, this whole 'nexus' issue ties back to Supreme Court cases from the 19th century and Sears Roebuck catalogs being delivered to folks in the middle of nowhere; where there was no 'state' agent on hand to collect the tax anyway. We might reasonably think of Amazon as this century's equivalent of that fat print catalog from the past; certainly the US Supreme Court has. Anyway, yes I can assure you all that OECD has been discussing tax policy and international trade in services issues since the earliest ecommerce days; this next generation set of issues re serving ads on free services are somewhat distinct but governed by the same general provisions of WTO trade in services agreements when the firm does not have a 'nexus' in a particular country; and by domestic law and tax policy when it does. Which still must conform to general WTO policies. OECD's most recent push has been to attempt to shut down various - tax and finance havens - which obviously have had only limited effect, but do explain why the Swiss bank secrecy laws finally changed/caved to rest of OECD pressure, about 4 years ago. All of this however is generally not handled by the OECD's ICCP committee, but by a whole different set of discussions and players at OECD including as Nick noted, trade and finance ministry folks. My own bit part in this was sending one of my internet- and finance-savvy students to OECD as an intern to help out their tax folks back in those early early days; I have not kept up on all the latest I confess. Attaining global harmonization on treatment of online transactions,and cross-border trade in services, would perhaps be further along already if the WTO's Doha Round wasn't stuck in neutral for the past couple decades. Meaning, Michael, should cs/igc wish to see or encourage further progress in harmonization of Internet taxation, we would necessarily ally with the businesses and governments pressing for further globalization of the world economy; to date unsuccessfully. Many emerging market and developing nations have resisted pressure to permit further liberalization of international trade in services. Just as many OECD member states have resisted dropping various protectionist measures for their agricultural sectors in particular. Hence the stalemate from Doha to Seattle to South Africa to Vancouver if I recall the various failed WTO meeting locales correctly. I confess I am enjoying imagining Michael as the surprise spokesperson for a revived Doha Round! ; ) (And Bill - did I misstate or miss anything significant here in my quickie summary?) Lee ________________________________ From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] on behalf of Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Baruch [apisan at unam.mx] Sent: Tuesday, January 22, 2013 6:37 PM To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; michael gurstein; 'Nick Ashton-Hart' Subject: RE: [governance] France Proposes an Internet Tax Michael, in the same "what if" vein... what if the clever boffins in the OECD have realized that there is nothing exceptional about money made over the Internet, and leave it to each country to continue to try to exact taxes from income, profits and rents, as the countries' laws, regional arrangements, multipartite and global treaties mandate and allow? Wouldn't they be even more keen in stopping gaps and diversion schemes than any participant in these discussions is? (you said they are clever, they are boffins, and they are in the OECD... the rest is my second guessing.) They may also be truly concerned about maintaining the technical integrity and global seamlessness of the Internet. I know a few people who share all these characteristics. Anyone talking to them to find out directly? Yours, Alejandro Pisanty - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Facultad de Química UNAM Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico +52-1-5541444475 FROM ABROAD +525541444475 DESDE MÉXICO SMS +525541444475 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 michael gurstein [gurstein at gmail.com] Enviado el: martes, 22 de enero de 2013 16:38 Hasta: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; 'Nick Ashton-Hart' Asunto: RE: [governance] France Proposes an Internet Tax As an aside and addressed to no one in particular, it occurs to me that for those who are truly concerned about maintaining the technical integrity and global seamlessness of the Internet should be looking to find appropriate and globally equitable means for taxation of Internet related activities rather than presenting ideologically based anti-tax posturing. France may or may not succeed with this particular initiative, but behind them are most of the other OECD countries and behind them is the rest of the world looking to get some fair share from rapidly escalating Internet based revenues. Better to my mind to have a reasonable and technically compliant plan in place than to attempt to play catch up as every country thunders forward with its own national taxation scheme and chaos in some form ensues… (Anyone want to bet that the clever boffins in the OECD aren't already working in this direction? M From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Nick Ashton-Hart Sent: Tuesday, January 22, 2013 2:17 PM To: William Drake Cc: governance at lists.igcaucus.org Subject: Re: [governance] France Proposes an Internet Tax We've found that there's a need for much more coordination and consultation between ministries responsible for ITU matters and trade ministries. -- Regards, Nick Ashton-Hart Geneva Representative Computer & Communications Industry Assocation (CCIA) Tel: +41 (22) 534 99 45 Fax: : +41 (22) 594-85-44 Mobile: +41 79 595 5468 USA DID: +1 (202) 640-5430 Need to meet with me? Schedule the time that suits us both here: http://meetme.so/nashton Sent from my one of my handheld thingies, please excuse linguistic mangling. On 22 Jan 2013, at 21:22, William Drake > wrote: On Jan 22, 2013, at 9:18 PM, Nick Ashton-Hart > wrote: It would not be possible for a measure to target foreign companies only - that would breach France's WTO obligations (and that of many other countries were they to try to do the same thing). A small problem that seemed to receive zero discussion among the proponents in Dubai -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From kstouray at gmail.com Tue Jan 22 21:29:44 2013 From: kstouray at gmail.com (Katim S. Touray) Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2013 02:29:44 +0000 Subject: [bestbits] [governance] Multistakeholder Roles and Responsibilities In-Reply-To: <50FCEFC5.8010008@ciroap.org> References: <01c801cdf457$f76a3fc0$e63ebf40$@gmail.com> <50F763C0.5070907@ciroap.org> <50F8D10B.3010109@ciroap.org> <20130118224941.556b0653@quill.bollow.ch> <50FCEFC5.8010008@ciroap.org> Message-ID: Dear all, As promised a few days ago, here's the link to my CircleID article on WCIT-12 and multi-stakeholderism: http://www.circleid.com/posts/20130122_much_ado_about_wcit_12_and_multi_stakeholderism/ Katim On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 7:35 AM, Jeremy Malcolm wrote: > On 19/01/13 05:49, Norbert Bollow wrote: > > Jeremy Malcolm wrote: > > Actually I put together a system that is meant to achieve that: > http://a2knetwork.org/meetings/ > > Anyone who registers can list a meeting there and say whether they are > attending, and can post a short report there. It supports multiple > reports, too, in the case that more than one delegation is attending. > The main purpose is to identify where there are gaps - important > meetings that nobody is covering. But it only works if enough people > use it, so please do. > > So this is intended for all of civil society, rather than just the > Consumer Movement, to use? > > If yes, then I would suggest that that should be made clearer on the > website. > > > It was originally mainly for CI's consumer group members, but it is clear > that it won't be useful unless it is open to others. In the longer term I > need to look at spinning it off to a more broadly based network, and making > it much nicer like the infojustice-calendar one. I already put in place a > simple Internet governance calendar system for the IGC ( > http://www.igcaucus.org/calendar), but it hasn't been much used and could > also be wrapped into the above. I am trying to get funding to support the > Best Bits network, mainly as a travel fund for events, but some Web > development work such as this will also be included. > > > -- > > *Dr Jeremy Malcolm > Senior Policy Officer > Consumers International | the global campaigning voice for consumers* > Office for Asia-Pacific and the Middle East > Lot 5-1 Wisma WIM, 7 Jalan Abang Haji Openg, TTDI, 60000 Kuala Lumpur, > Malaysia > Tel: +60 3 7726 1599 > > *Your rights, our mission – download CI's Strategy 2015:* > http://consint.info/RightsMission > > @Consumers_Int | www.consumersinternational.org | > www.facebook.com/consumersinternational > > Read our email confidentiality notice. > Don't print this email unless necessary. > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From suresh at hserus.net Tue Jan 22 22:26:49 2013 From: suresh at hserus.net (Suresh Ramasubramanian) Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2013 19:26:49 -0800 Subject: [bestbits] [governance] Multistakeholder Roles and Responsibilities In-Reply-To: References: <01c801cdf457$f76a3fc0$e63ebf40$@gmail.com> <50F763C0.5070907@ciroap.org> <50F8D10B.3010109@ciroap.org> <20130118224941.556b0653@quill.bollow.ch> <50FCEFC5.8010008@ciroap.org> Message-ID: <20130123032649.GA16191@hserus.net> Katim S. Touray [23/01/13 02:29 +0000]: >As promised a few days ago, here's the link to my CircleID article on >WCIT-12 and multi-stakeholderism: >http://www.circleid.com/posts/20130122_much_ado_about_wcit_12_and_multi_stakeholderism/ Thanks. There are a few issues here I would differ with. Some of the problem here doesn't involve the fact that governments have a role in internet governance - it involves an objection to the ITU allowing scope creep into its mandate, to cover issues that more countries than just the USA (so hardly "exceptionalism" or "unilateralism") have differed with. As for Africa and its lack of participation in internet governance structures, part of it has to do with capacity building for government, industry and civil society stakeholders, while monopoly and competition policy issues some due to geography, given africa's landlocked nature and difficult terrain that makes slow and expensive satellite connectivity a necessity, some due to government monopolies on the Internet and telecom, while others can be laid to the door of various other factors, such as a lack of stable government, cutting off the Internet to prevent opponents from organizing themselves using it (as in Syria, and before that in Qaddafi's Libya ..). I am afraid this can't all be blamed on US exceptionalism, and while there is a substantial amount of aid in material, capacity building etc that can be (and is) provided by local and international NGOs who set up ISP exchange points, hold training workshops etc, a substantial local effort is also needed before you will see the situation improve. On the DoC / NTIA oversight of ICANN / IANA, it has been mostly hands off, only stepping in where there have been cases where DoC appears to feel that there are governance issues involved. Or have you seen them try to revoke .cu, .sy, .kp just because Cuba, Syria and North Korea are in the state department's OFAC blacklist of entities American firms are forbidden to trade with? I'll post the same thing on circleid to kickstart the discussion there. thanks suresh -------------- 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 From gideonrop at gmail.com Wed Jan 23 01:15:01 2013 From: gideonrop at gmail.com (Gideon) Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2013 09:15:01 +0300 Subject: [governance] Appeals Team Final Report In-Reply-To: <15C6CACD-CCC7-45A7-BAC2-777FB405279F@acm.org> References: <8642774A0A714ABB9847E6EDA8B3ABC5@Toshiba> <50FE7DC3.5080402@cafonso.ca> <15C6CACD-CCC7-45A7-BAC2-777FB405279F@acm.org> Message-ID: May I commend Sala for her leadership and sensitivity that brought this great debate to a peaceful end. I also the appreciate and congratulate the appeals team for the great manner in which they handled the matter as well as educating the entire membership about the code of conduct that is needed. The recommendations are concise and excellent. I hope that we have learnt a lesson on the rules of engagement in the email forum. Looking forward to insightful discussions every one. Gideon Rop, DotConnectAfrica On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 7:18 PM, Avri Doria wrote: > > > wonderful job by the Appeals Team. > and a great email from Carlos > > cheers > avri > > On 22 Jan 2013, at 06:53, Carlos A. Afonso wrote: > > > Excellent, very careful and detailed recommendations. > > > > Especially taking into account that in this list we have a nice mix of > distinct cultures, and what sometimes seems innocuous for some might mean a > big deal for others in terms of how we relate with each other. > > > > I recall a lunch meeting between several Brazilians and people from > different countries from Asia at a World Bank venue many years ago. > Brazilians as usual are a bit irreverent and tell jokes, and these jokes in > English (for us Brazilians) sounded ok. But none of our fellow Asians found > them funny. > > > > So we asked our friends from Asia to tell us some jokes -- the same > thing happened as we did not think they qualified as jokes at all! :) But > at the end we found some "universal" ones which passed the test unanimously. > > > > frt rgds > > > > --c.a. > > > > On 01/22/2013 01:09 AM, Ian Peter wrote: > >> FINAL REPORT, FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS > >> > >> With the comments period completed, the Appeals Team can now present > its final report and recommendations as regards the appeal against the > removal from the IGC list of Suresh Ramasubramanian. > >> > >> OUR FINDINGS ON THE APPEAL > >> > >> We confirm our finding is that Suresh’s removal from the IGC list was > not in accordance with the IGC Charter, for reasons contained in our > interim findings and repeated later in this report. We therefore request > that Suresh be reinstated to the list immediately. (this has already taken > place) > >> > >> OUR RECOMMENDATIONS > >> > >> We also make the following recommendations for consideration by all IGC > members. > >> > >> Recommendation 1. The IGC Charter includes the following > recommendation,. “The coordinators may, at their discretion, appoint an > advisory team of at least three individuals to assist them in making the > determination of when someone has breached the posting rules defined in > this charter. While all decisions remain the coordinators' responsibility, > any such recommendation from an advisory team will be made public at the > time of either suspension or removal from the list.” > >> > >> > >> In the case before us which took place while there was only one active > coordinator, we think this advisory team would have been particularly > valuable. > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> Recommendation 2. We recommend that in future reasons be given for any > removal or suspension, referencing the charter provisions which were > breached and led to the suspension. This is currently not a requirement in > the Charter, but we feel strongly that any suspension, removal, or warning, > should state clearly why this is so, in accordance with the IGC charter > provisions. These are listed below and are quite broad. > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> Recommendation 3. We recommend that in future all removal/suspensions > also be communicated to the list with reasons, not only to the person > concerned. Again this is not a current Charter requirement, but we believe > that in the interests of good communication with the list this should > always be followed. > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> Recommendation 4. We recommend that, should the co-coordinators choose > to review the situation as regards the suspension of Suresh > Ramasubramanian, the number of days already suspended from the list prior > to being reinstated during this appeals process should be deducted from any > 30 day suspension. > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> Recommendation 5. Finally, we recommend that all list participants, > including those who have been warned in the past, focus their contributions > on the issues being discussed, and not the personalities. If IGC ever > degrades to a forum which does not have a wide range of cultural > differences, political opinions, perspectives, interests,sensitivities, and > differing interests in the broad field of internet governance, it would be > a great pity. However, within this diverse group, all members have a right > to discuss what they feel is pertinent, and all members have a right to > disagree. But none of this should include statements which could be > construed by a reasonable person as being outside of the IGC Charter’s > definition of reasonable conduct, which includes (to quote from the charter) > >> > >> > >> The messages must observe a minimum of decorum, including: > >> · refrain from personal attacks, insults or slander > >> · refrain from offensive or discriminating language > >> · refrain from threats , including threats of legal action, on list or > off list > >> · refrain from excessive and repetitive posting > >> > >> Inappropriate postings to the IGC list include > >> · Unsolicited bulk e-mail > >> · Discussion of subjects unrelated to the IGC mission and objectives > >> · Unprofessional or discourteous commentary, regardless of the general > subject > >> · Sequences of messages by one or more participants that cause an IGC > list to become a hostile environment > >> > >> > >> It is only appropriate that action should be taken, should co - > coordinators in their best judgement (and where appropriate with > consultation) feel that participants are acting outside of these > guidelines. As members of this list, we feel that there have been a number > of cases recently, involving not only those who have been warned but cases > where people have not been warned, where these guidelines have been broken. > It is in the interests of what we are trying to achieve as civil society > that our discourse remains civil, polite, and courteous. We reject the > notion that, because other lists do not closely moderate or demand > reasonable behaviour, this list should not pursue the standards set in its > charter. > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> Lastly, we wish to record our thanks to Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro for > her patience and co-operation during this appeal period, and her dedication > to keeping the Internet Governance Caucus functioning during a difficult > time. We trust that our recommendations are useful in assisting future > co-coordinators in dealing with such situations, and in clarifying the > behaviour that can reasonably be expected from all participants on this > mailing list. > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> Thanks also to those who submitted comments. This appeal is now closed. > The Appeals Team will not be responding formally to any further comments on > this particular matter. > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> The Appeals Team > >> > >> > >> Shaila Mistry, Ginger Paque, Roland Perry , Ian Peter and Deidre > Williams > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> BACKGROUND INFORMATION > >> > >> > >> Reasons for our finding. > >> > >> > >> The Charter outlines a specific process that must take place before > removal on any person from the list, as follows > >> > >> Suspension of posting rights > >> > >> Failure to abide by posting rules may result in suspension or removal > from the IGC list according to the following process: > >> > >> · The coordinators will first warn a subscriber privately of the problem > >> · If the problem persists the coordinators will notify the subscriber > publicly on the list of impending suspension from the list. Suspension will > include only posting rights. > >> · If the problem persists the subscriber's posting rights will be > suspended for one (1) month. > >> · Once the subscriber's posting rights are restored, any further > problem will result in another public warning. > >> · If the problem continues to persist after suspension and a second > public warning, the coordinators will be permitted to either suspend the > posting rights for three (3) months or to remove the subscriber from the > list. > >> · Any decision for suspension can be appealed. Any decision to remove > someone from the list will call for an automatic appeal by the appeals team. > >> > >> In this case, the previous private and public warnings given to Suresh > needed to be followed by a one month suspension, not removal from the list. > It has been confirmed in correspondence with both the Coordinator and with > the person removed from the list that the word used in the private letter > advising removal was “removal”, and this was confirmed by the co ordinator > as being the intention. It was this action outside of the process outlined > in the IGC Charter that led to our decision. > >> > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > > 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 > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From gurstein at gmail.com Wed Jan 23 01:23:57 2013 From: gurstein at gmail.com (michael gurstein) Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2013 22:23:57 -0800 Subject: [governance] France Proposes an Internet Tax In-Reply-To: <77A59FC9477004489D44DE7FC6840E7B1B21AD@SUEX10-mbx-08.ad.syr.edu> References: <50FD0871.7040301@bluewin.ch> <50FD0CE0.6010603@gmail.com> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD231DE6D@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> <01a001cdf8bf$77f85da0$67e918e0$@gmail.com> <-8780130916361342250@unknownmsgid> <69A5BEA8-35C3-429D-AD8A-E1F2D9071D72@uzh.ch> <-6350004158362121174@unknownmsgid>,<03c901cdf8f1$48cca3b0$da65eb10$@gmail.com>,<6DCAB3E586E6A34FB17223DF8D8F0D3D5DC1E941@W8-EX10MB.unam.local> <77A59FC9477004489D44DE7FC6840E7B1B21AD@SUEX10-mbx-08.ad.syr.edu> Message-ID: <04e901cdf932$3faa5160$befef420$@gmail.com> Thanks for this Lee, very informative But just to say that I would have assumed that any initiative as proposed by France would have taken the WTO etc.etc. into account--and in matters of fiscal urgency which is what one is beginning to detect in these areas, where there is a will there is a way (or at least ask Amazon And I'm rather more interested in animating a parade towards a prudent revocation of the Washington Consensus (abandoned now by even the WB) than I am in exploring the depths of another attempt at a Doha round M From: Lee W McKnight [mailto:lmcknigh at syr.edu] Sent: Tuesday, January 22, 2013 4:19 PM To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Baruch; michael gurstein; 'Nick Ashton-Hart' Subject: RE: [governance] France Proposes an Internet Tax Hi, To refresh folks historical memories....in early e-commerce days the US, Europe and elsewhere put a moratorium on - sales taxes - on online transactions. The US also entered into many bilateral trade deals that either focused on or included an e-commerce section. Later, as online biz grew, the argument for treating online transactions distinct from off-line faded; except for Amazon, which gamed US law for more than decade pretending that they could not tell who they were truly transacting with nor where they lived; so therefore they could not be expected to collect sales taxes. Then when that argument broke down, they said they could not be expected to collect sales taxes where they had no employees; and would promptly fire people - some to be rehired by 'independent third parties' in any state that tried to force Amazon to collect sales taxes on transactions in that (US) state. That included all their California employees. Finally, in 2012, I believe Amazon finally ended this charade; more or less. (To be fair, this whole 'nexus' issue ties back to Supreme Court cases from the 19th century and Sears Roebuck catalogs being delivered to folks in the middle of nowhere; where there was no 'state' agent on hand to collect the tax anyway. We might reasonably think of Amazon as this century's equivalent of that fat print catalog from the past; certainly the US Supreme Court has. Anyway, yes I can assure you all that OECD has been discussing tax policy and international trade in services issues since the earliest ecommerce days; this next generation set of issues re serving ads on free services are somewhat distinct but governed by the same general provisions of WTO trade in services agreements when the firm does not have a 'nexus' in a particular country; and by domestic law and tax policy when it does. Which still must conform to general WTO policies. OECD's most recent push has been to attempt to shut down various - tax and finance havens - which obviously have had only limited effect, but do explain why the Swiss bank secrecy laws finally changed/caved to rest of OECD pressure, about 4 years ago. All of this however is generally not handled by the OECD's ICCP committee, but by a whole different set of discussions and players at OECD including as Nick noted, trade and finance ministry folks. My own bit part in this was sending one of my internet- and finance-savvy students to OECD as an intern to help out their tax folks back in those early early days; I have not kept up on all the latest I confess. Attaining global harmonization on treatment of online transactions,and cross-border trade in services, would perhaps be further along already if the WTO's Doha Round wasn't stuck in neutral for the past couple decades. Meaning, Michael, should cs/igc wish to see or encourage further progress in harmonization of Internet taxation, we would necessarily ally with the businesses and governments pressing for further globalization of the world economy; to date unsuccessfully. Many emerging market and developing nations have resisted pressure to permit further liberalization of international trade in services. Just as many OECD member states have resisted dropping various protectionist measures for their agricultural sectors in particular. Hence the stalemate from Doha to Seattle to South Africa to Vancouver if I recall the various failed WTO meeting locales correctly. I confess I am enjoying imagining Michael as the surprise spokesperson for a revived Doha Round! ; ) (And Bill - did I misstate or miss anything significant here in my quickie summary?) Lee _____ From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] on behalf of Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Baruch [apisan at unam.mx] Sent: Tuesday, January 22, 2013 6:37 PM To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; michael gurstein; 'Nick Ashton-Hart' Subject: RE: [governance] France Proposes an Internet Tax Michael, in the same "what if" vein... what if the clever boffins in the OECD have realized that there is nothing exceptional about money made over the Internet, and leave it to each country to continue to try to exact taxes from income, profits and rents, as the countries' laws, regional arrangements, multipartite and global treaties mandate and allow? Wouldn't they be even more keen in stopping gaps and diversion schemes than any participant in these discussions is? (you said they are clever, they are boffins, and they are in the OECD... the rest is my second guessing.) They may also be truly concerned about maintaining the technical integrity and global seamlessness of the Internet. I know a few people who share all these characteristics. Anyone talking to them to find out directly? Yours, Alejandro Pisanty - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Facultad de Química UNAM Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico +52-1-5541444475 FROM ABROAD +525541444475 DESDE MÉXICO SMS +525541444475 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 michael gurstein [gurstein at gmail.com] Enviado el: martes, 22 de enero de 2013 16:38 Hasta: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; 'Nick Ashton-Hart' Asunto: RE: [governance] France Proposes an Internet Tax As an aside and addressed to no one in particular, it occurs to me that for those who are truly concerned about maintaining the technical integrity and global seamlessness of the Internet should be looking to find appropriate and globally equitable means for taxation of Internet related activities rather than presenting ideologically based anti-tax posturing. France may or may not succeed with this particular initiative, but behind them are most of the other OECD countries and behind them is the rest of the world looking to get some fair share from rapidly escalating Internet based revenues. Better to my mind to have a reasonable and technically compliant plan in place than to attempt to play catch up as every country thunders forward with its own national taxation scheme and chaos in some form ensues (Anyone want to bet that the clever boffins in the OECD aren't already working in this direction? M From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Nick Ashton-Hart Sent: Tuesday, January 22, 2013 2:17 PM To: William Drake Cc: governance at lists.igcaucus.org Subject: Re: [governance] France Proposes an Internet Tax We've found that there's a need for much more coordination and consultation between ministries responsible for ITU matters and trade ministries. -- Regards, Nick Ashton-Hart Geneva Representative Computer & Communications Industry Assocation (CCIA) Tel: +41 (22) 534 99 45 Fax: : +41 (22) 594-85-44 Mobile: +41 79 595 5468 USA DID: +1 (202) 640-5430 Need to meet with me? Schedule the time that suits us both here: http://meetme.so/nashton Sent from my one of my handheld thingies, please excuse linguistic mangling. On 22 Jan 2013, at 21:22, William Drake wrote: On Jan 22, 2013, at 9:18 PM, Nick Ashton-Hart wrote: It would not be possible for a measure to target foreign companies only - that would breach France's WTO obligations (and that of many other countries were they to try to do the same thing). A small problem that seemed to receive zero discussion among the proponents in Dubai -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From nb at bollow.ch Wed Jan 23 05:04:54 2013 From: nb at bollow.ch (Norbert Bollow) Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2013 11:04:54 +0100 Subject: [governance] "US Exceptionalism" (was Re: Bloomberg - The Overzealous Prosecution...) In-Reply-To: References: <50FAC752.5090502@gmail.com> <50FBAE3C.8010600@ITforChange.net> <20130120161823.3d510425@quill.bollow.ch> Message-ID: <20130123110454.0349cf0f@quill.bollow.ch> McTim wrote: > Well I (and I think MM and perhaps others) would like to see the > "denationalisation" of IG. I'd be interested if you could describe this concept of "denationalisation" in a bit more detail please. Greetings, Norbert -------------- 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 From suresh at hserus.net Wed Jan 23 05:54:50 2013 From: suresh at hserus.net (Suresh Ramasubramanian) Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2013 16:24:50 +0530 Subject: [governance] "US Exceptionalism" (was Re: Bloomberg - The Overzealous Prosecution...) In-Reply-To: <20130123110454.0349cf0f@quill.bollow.ch> References: <50FAC752.5090502@gmail.com> <50FBAE3C.8010600@ITforChange.net> <20130120161823.3d510425@quill.bollow.ch> <20130123110454.0349cf0f@quill.bollow.ch> Message-ID: <4BF7B62A-94A6-4F41-9E3D-983BDAD957E1@hserus.net> The problem being that nature abhors a vacuum. There will be SOME power structure that will rise following this denationalization - and I am not at all sure we're going to like the alternative any more than we would like say the ITU taking things over. Like Norbert I'd be interested in hearing what McTim has to suggest. --srs (iPad) On 23-Jan-2013, at 15:34, Norbert Bollow wrote: > McTim wrote: > >> Well I (and I think MM and perhaps others) would like to see the >> "denationalisation" of IG. > > I'd be interested if you could describe this concept of > "denationalisation" in a bit more detail please. > > Greetings, Norbert -------------- 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 From dogwallah at gmail.com Wed Jan 23 06:46:03 2013 From: dogwallah at gmail.com (McTim) Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2013 06:46:03 -0500 Subject: [governance] "US Exceptionalism" (was Re: Bloomberg - The Overzealous Prosecution...) In-Reply-To: <4BF7B62A-94A6-4F41-9E3D-983BDAD957E1@hserus.net> References: <50FAC752.5090502@gmail.com> <50FBAE3C.8010600@ITforChange.net> <20130120161823.3d510425@quill.bollow.ch> <20130123110454.0349cf0f@quill.bollow.ch> <4BF7B62A-94A6-4F41-9E3D-983BDAD957E1@hserus.net> Message-ID: Hi, On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 5:54 AM, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote: > The problem being that nature abhors a vacuum. There will be SOME power structure that will rise following this denationalization - and I am not at all sure we're going to like the alternative any more than we would like say the ITU taking things over. Like Norbert I'd be interested in hearing what McTim has to suggest. I can't speak for Avri or Milton, but what I would prefer is zero nation states providing oversight over ICANN rather than one (or 195). I think ICANN can stand alone without an overseer (besides it's own Board). Of course, I don't think it likely to happen, but it is my preference. -- 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 From suresh at hserus.net Wed Jan 23 06:56:23 2013 From: suresh at hserus.net (Suresh Ramasubramanian) Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2013 17:26:23 +0530 Subject: [governance] "US Exceptionalism" (was Re: Bloomberg - The Overzealous Prosecution...) In-Reply-To: References: <50FAC752.5090502@gmail.com> <50FBAE3C.8010600@ITforChange.net> <20130120161823.3d510425@quill.bollow.ch> <20130123110454.0349cf0f@quill.bollow.ch> <4BF7B62A-94A6-4F41-9E3D-983BDAD957E1@hserus.net> Message-ID: Occasionally, just occasionally - like the .com contract - a layer of oversight over the icann board seems fairly appropriate. Else, sed quis custodiet ipsos custodes, with a multiplicity of custodes each with their own agenda. Sounds like fun? --srs (iPad) On 23-Jan-2013, at 17:16, McTim wrote: > Hi, > > On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 5:54 AM, Suresh Ramasubramanian > wrote: >> The problem being that nature abhors a vacuum. There will be SOME power structure that will rise following this denationalization - and I am not at all sure we're going to like the alternative any more than we would like say the ITU taking things over. Like Norbert I'd be interested in hearing what McTim has to suggest. > > > I can't speak for Avri or Milton, but what I would prefer is zero > nation states providing oversight over ICANN rather than one (or 195). > > I think ICANN can stand alone without an overseer (besides it's own > Board). Of course, I don't think it likely to happen, but it is my > preference. > -------------- 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 From ca at cafonso.ca Wed Jan 23 07:05:46 2013 From: ca at cafonso.ca (Carlos A. Afonso) Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2013 10:05:46 -0200 Subject: [governance] "US Exceptionalism" (was Re: Bloomberg - The Overzealous Prosecution...) In-Reply-To: References: <50FAC752.5090502@gmail.com> <50FBAE3C.8010600@ITforChange.net> <20130120161823.3d510425@quill.bollow.ch> <20130123110454.0349cf0f@quill.bollow.ch> <4BF7B62A-94A6-4F41-9E3D-983BDAD957E1@hserus.net> Message-ID: <50FFD21A.2080201@cafonso.ca> Regarding forms of multilateral and/or multistakeholder IG I think it would be interesting to recall Jeremy Malcolm's proposals in this article, published about six months ago: http://igfwatch.org/discussion-board/picking-up-where-the-igf-left-off-our-role-in-the-future-of-internet-governance frt rgds --c.a. On 01/23/2013 09:56 AM, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote: > Occasionally, just occasionally - like the .com contract - a layer of oversight over the icann board seems fairly appropriate. Else, sed quis custodiet ipsos custodes, with a multiplicity of custodes each with their own agenda. Sounds like fun? > > --srs (iPad) > > On 23-Jan-2013, at 17:16, McTim wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 5:54 AM, Suresh Ramasubramanian >> wrote: >>> The problem being that nature abhors a vacuum. There will be SOME power structure that will rise following this denationalization - and I am not at all sure we're going to like the alternative any more than we would like say the ITU taking things over. Like Norbert I'd be interested in hearing what McTim has to suggest. >> >> >> I can't speak for Avri or Milton, but what I would prefer is zero >> nation states providing oversight over ICANN rather than one (or 195). >> >> I think ICANN can stand alone without an overseer (besides it's own >> Board). Of course, I don't think it likely to happen, but it is my >> preference. >> > -------------- 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 From william.drake at uzh.ch Wed Jan 23 08:30:24 2013 From: william.drake at uzh.ch (William Drake) Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2013 14:30:24 +0100 Subject: [governance] France Proposes an Internet Tax In-Reply-To: <033201cdf8e0$0717dea0$15479be0$@gmail.com> References: <50FD0871.7040301@bluewin.ch> <50FD0CE0.6010603@gmail.com> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD231DE6D@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> <01a001cdf8bf$77f85da0$67e918e0$@gmail.com> <-8780130916361342250@unknownmsgid> <69A5BEA8-35C3-429D-AD8A-E1F2D9071D72@uzh.ch> <033201cdf8e0$0717dea0$15479be0$@gmail.com> Message-ID: <2A68A15D-C5DF-49AE-8963-EF1A0B7C3F84@uzh.ch> Hi Mike The GATS has 15 General Obligations and Disciplines (GODs). Absent waivers or other limitations, the key GODs of MFN and national treatment apply to their scheduled services, and the EC schedule is quite liberalizing and covers information services, which presumably includes the targeted "over the top" services. If instead you wanted to argue for a narrowly content-based categorization, I've not looked at it in a decade but the EC schedule is probably more restrictive regarding advertising services; however, in this it's probably typical in not being reflective of contemporary web-based transactions like what Google, FB etc. are up to (could look on the WTO site). And of course, one could debate whether that simple category would suffice here. In any event, despite all the intensive debate and rule making of the 1990s, com ministries don't generally appear to be all that attentive to the GATS, at least until the national trade ministries call and tell them there's a complaint etc. I've not detected much attention to it in the ITU in some time, and certainly did not hear anyone talk about it or suggest it mattered to what they were proposing in Dubai. Bill On Jan 22, 2013, at 9:35 PM, michael gurstein wrote: > Bill I'm very curious as to the specifics of your assertion below. > > Could you provide? > > Tks, > > M > > From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of William Drake > Sent: Tuesday, January 22, 2013 12:23 PM > To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Nick Ashton-Hart > Subject: Re: [governance] France Proposes an Internet Tax > > > On Jan 22, 2013, at 9:18 PM, Nick Ashton-Hart wrote: > > > It would not be possible for a measure to target foreign companies only - that would breach France's WTO obligations (and that of many other countries were they to try to do the same thing). > > A small problem that seemed to receive zero discussion among the proponents in Dubai > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de Wed Jan 23 10:10:08 2013 From: wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de (=?iso-8859-1?Q?=22Kleinw=E4chter=2C_Wolfgang=22?=) Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2013 16:10:08 +0100 Subject: AW: [governance] "US Exceptionalism" (was Re: Bloomberg - The Overzealous Prosecution...) References: <50FAC752.5090502@gmail.com> <50FBAE3C.8010600@ITforChange.net> <20130120161823.3d510425@quill.bollow.ch> <20130123110454.0349cf0f@quill.bollow.ch> <4BF7B62A-94A6-4F41-9E3D-983BDAD957E1@hserus.net> Message-ID: <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8013314FB@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> In my eyes, the AoC has opend the door for an innovation in the "oversight issue". The review process has the potential to become a oversighr mechanism. The good thing with the review is that it is first not centralized in one body/team/process but in four issue based processes and second it uis multistakehooder with a stong governmental involvement. Unfoirtunately the first round was done in a hurry with no model in place and the results had been not so impressive. However there is potential in the process. Insofar the 2nd ATRT which will start soon, couod take a big step forward filling the gap a lot of people feel that some sort of oversight is needed. And AoC/ATRT is indeed better than to have a governmental oversight of 1 (as it was under the MoU/JPA), 11 (as proposed three years agi by the EU) or 159 (UNITU) governments. wolfgang ________________________________ Von: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org im Auftrag von McTim Gesendet: Mi 23.01.2013 12:46 An: Suresh Ramasubramanian Cc: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Norbert Bollow Betreff: Re: [governance] "US Exceptionalism" (was Re: Bloomberg - The Overzealous Prosecution...) Hi, On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 5:54 AM, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote: > The problem being that nature abhors a vacuum. There will be SOME power structure that will rise following this denationalization - and I am not at all sure we're going to like the alternative any more than we would like say the ITU taking things over. Like Norbert I'd be interested in hearing what McTim has to suggest. I can't speak for Avri or Milton, but what I would prefer is zero nation states providing oversight over ICANN rather than one (or 195). I think ICANN can stand alone without an overseer (besides it's own Board). Of course, I don't think it likely to happen, but it is my preference. -- 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 From nb at bollow.ch Wed Jan 23 11:25:02 2013 From: nb at bollow.ch (Norbert Bollow) Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2013 17:25:02 +0100 Subject: [governance] Yet another new -strategy - thread title: It may be broke - politically - but how to fix it, technopolitically? ; ) In-Reply-To: <77A59FC9477004489D44DE7FC6840E7B1B1C3A@SUEX10-mbx-08.ad.syr.edu> References: <77A59FC9477004489D44DE7FC6840E7B1B1C3A@SUEX10-mbx-08.ad.syr.edu> Message-ID: <20130123172502.6de4259e@quill.bollow.ch> Lee W McKnight wrote: > Instead, I am suggesting IGC should focus for 2013 on - what if any > new institutions, processes, and/or principles are needed for a > future Internet, to benefit global civil society. (I don't claim > novelty, am just advocating a strategic focus for IGC in 2013-201x) Well said. What are the goals that we would want to pursue by means of such new institutions, processes, and/or principles? From my perspective, I'm inclined to suggest that the key goal should be to solve the problems of eradicating involuntary poverty and sufficiently limiting greenhouse gas emissions. In any strategy for achieving this goal, the Internet will play key roles. We need to build an understanding of what is needed for the Internet to be able to make these key contributions effectively. Greetings, Norbert -------------- 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 From gurstein at gmail.com Wed Jan 23 11:33:02 2013 From: gurstein at gmail.com (michael gurstein) Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2013 08:33:02 -0800 Subject: [governance] France Proposes an Internet Tax In-Reply-To: <2A68A15D-C5DF-49AE-8963-EF1A0B7C3F84@uzh.ch> References: <50FD0871.7040301@bluewin.ch> <50FD0CE0.6010603@gmail.com> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD231DE6D@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> <01a001cdf8bf$77f85da0$67e918e0$@gmail.com> <-8780130916361342250@unknownmsgid> <69A5BEA8-35C3-429D-AD8A-E1F2D9071D72@uzh.ch> <033201cdf8e0$0717dea0$15479be0$@gmail.com> <2A68A15D-C5DF-49AE-8963-EF1A0B7C3F84@uzh.ch> Message-ID: <06da01cdf987$518eb2e0$f4ac18a0$@gmail.com> Thanks Bill, also very informative. As an aside I'm wondering if we as a group might not want to try to avoid specialized jargon and acronyms. I know that I'm guilty of this as well from time to time but we need to recognize that we are a multi-lingual, multi-cultural group with a lot of people whose first language isn't Tech, International Relations, International Trade and that's apart from those who aren't able to communicate here in their other first languages :) M From: William Drake [mailto:william.drake at uzh.ch] Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2013 5:30 AM To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; michael gurstein Subject: Re: [governance] France Proposes an Internet Tax Hi Mike The GATS has 15 General Obligations and Disciplines (GODs). Absent waivers or other limitations, the key GODs of MFN and national treatment apply to their scheduled services, and the EC schedule is quite liberalizing and covers information services, which presumably includes the targeted "over the top" services. If instead you wanted to argue for a narrowly content-based categorization, I've not looked at it in a decade but the EC schedule is probably more restrictive regarding advertising services; however, in this it's probably typical in not being reflective of contemporary web-based transactions like what Google, FB etc. are up to (could look on the WTO site). And of course, one could debate whether that simple category would suffice here. In any event, despite all the intensive debate and rule making of the 1990s, com ministries don't generally appear to be all that attentive to the GATS, at least until the national trade ministries call and tell them there's a complaint etc. I've not detected much attention to it in the ITU in some time, and certainly did not hear anyone talk about it or suggest it mattered to what they were proposing in Dubai. Bill On Jan 22, 2013, at 9:35 PM, michael gurstein wrote: Bill I'm very curious as to the specifics of your assertion below. Could you provide? Tks, M From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance- request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of William Drake Sent: Tuesday, January 22, 2013 12:23 PM To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Nick Ashton-Hart Subject: Re: [governance] France Proposes an Internet Tax On Jan 22, 2013, at 9:18 PM, Nick Ashton-Hart < nashton at ccianet.org> wrote: It would not be possible for a measure to target foreign companies only - that would breach France's WTO obligations (and that of many other countries were they to try to do the same thing). A small problem that seemed to receive zero discussion among the proponents in Dubai ____________________________________________________________ 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: -------------- 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 From wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de Wed Jan 23 12:09:03 2013 From: wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de (=?iso-8859-1?Q?=22Kleinw=E4chter=2C_Wolfgang=22?=) Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2013 18:09:03 +0100 Subject: AW: [governance] Yet another new -strategy - thread title: It may be broke - politically - but how to fix it, technopolitically? ; ) References: <77A59FC9477004489D44DE7FC6840E7B1B1C3A@SUEX10-mbx-08.ad.syr.edu> <20130123172502.6de4259e@quill.bollow.ch> Message-ID: <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A80133150D@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> Norbert: >From my perspective, I'm inclined to suggest that the key goal should be to solve the problems of eradicating involuntary poverty and sufficiently limiting greenhouse gas emissions. Wolfgang: Good issues. However we have to link this to the Internet related aspects and we have to continue with our main priorities as human rights, consumer rights, bridging the digital divde, infrastructure development, privacy, (free) access, further conceptual enhancement of the multistakehoder IG model in ongoing international Internet negotiations in 2013 (WSIS 10+, WTPF, UNCSTD, WTDC, UNGA, HRC, IGF, ICAAN etc.) among others. -------------- 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 From suresh at hserus.net Wed Jan 23 12:18:24 2013 From: suresh at hserus.net (Suresh Ramasubramanian) Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2013 09:18:24 -0800 Subject: [governance] Yet another new -strategy - thread title: It may be broke - politically - but how to fix it, technopolitically? ; ) In-Reply-To: <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A80133150D@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> References: <77A59FC9477004489D44DE7FC6840E7B1B1C3A@SUEX10-mbx-08.ad.syr.edu> <20130123172502.6de4259e@quill.bollow.ch> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A80133150D@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> Message-ID: <20130123171824.GA23274@hserus.net> "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang" [23/01/13 18:09 +0100]: >model in ongoing international Internet negotiations in 2013 (WSIS 10+, >WTPF, UNCSTD, WTDC, UNGA, HRC, IGF, ICAAN etc.) among others. Which last sounds like a fulltime job for the group, without even going near traditional ICT topics such as the others you mention. -------------- 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 From vanda at uol.com.br Wed Jan 23 12:23:53 2013 From: vanda at uol.com.br (Vanda UOL) Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2013 15:23:53 -0200 Subject: RES: [bestbits] [governance] Multistakeholder Roles and Responsibilities In-Reply-To: References: <01c801cdf457$f76a3fc0$e63ebf40$@gmail.com> <50F763C0.5070907@ciroap.org> <50F8D10B.3010109@ciroap.org> <20130118224941.556b0653@quill.bollow.ch> <50FCEFC5.8010008@ciroap.org> Message-ID: <00c501cdf98e$6cade3a0$4609aae0$@uol.com.br> Hi Katim nice to hear from you! I have register my name too on Jeremy´s kisses Vanda Scartezini Polo Consultores Associados IT Trend Avenida Paulista 1159 cj 1004 01311-200 São Paulo,SP, Brasil Tel + 5511 3266.6253 Mob + 5511 98181.1464 De: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] Em nome de Katim S. Touray Enviada em: quarta-feira, 23 de janeiro de 2013 00:30 Para: governance at lists.igcaucus.org Cc: Assunto: Re: [bestbits] [governance] Multistakeholder Roles and Responsibilities Dear all, As promised a few days ago, here's the link to my CircleID article on WCIT-12 and multi-stakeholderism: http://www.circleid.com/posts/20130122_much_ado_about_wcit_12_and_multi_stak eholderism/ Katim On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 7:35 AM, Jeremy Malcolm wrote: On 19/01/13 05:49, Norbert Bollow wrote: Jeremy Malcolm wrote: Actually I put together a system that is meant to achieve that: http://a2knetwork.org/meetings/ Anyone who registers can list a meeting there and say whether they are attending, and can post a short report there. It supports multiple reports, too, in the case that more than one delegation is attending. The main purpose is to identify where there are gaps - important meetings that nobody is covering. But it only works if enough people use it, so please do. So this is intended for all of civil society, rather than just the Consumer Movement, to use? If yes, then I would suggest that that should be made clearer on the website. It was originally mainly for CI's consumer group members, but it is clear that it won't be useful unless it is open to others. In the longer term I need to look at spinning it off to a more broadly based network, and making it much nicer like the infojustice-calendar one. I already put in place a simple Internet governance calendar system for the IGC (http://www.igcaucus.org/calendar), but it hasn't been much used and could also be wrapped into the above. I am trying to get funding to support the Best Bits network, mainly as a travel fund for events, but some Web development work such as this will also be included. -- Dr Jeremy Malcolm Senior Policy Officer Consumers International | the global campaigning voice for consumers Office for Asia-Pacific and the Middle East Lot 5-1 Wisma WIM, 7 Jalan Abang Haji Openg, TTDI, 60000 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia Tel: +60 3 7726 1599 Your rights, our mission – download CI's Strategy 2015: http://consint.info/RightsMission @Consumers_Int | www.consumersinternational.org | www.facebook.com/consumersinternational Read our email confidentiality notice . Don't print this email unless necessary. ____________________________________________________________ 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: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 2817 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image002.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 1020 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- 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 From nb at bollow.ch Wed Jan 23 12:57:54 2013 From: nb at bollow.ch (Norbert Bollow) Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2013 18:57:54 +0100 Subject: [governance] Yet another new -strategy - thread title: It may be broke - politically - but how to fix it, technopolitically? ; ) In-Reply-To: <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A80133150D@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> References: <77A59FC9477004489D44DE7FC6840E7B1B1C3A@SUEX10-mbx-08.ad.syr.edu> <20130123172502.6de4259e@quill.bollow.ch> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A80133150D@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> Message-ID: <20130123185754.0baadc7b@quill.bollow.ch> Wolfgang Kleinwächter wrote: > Norbert: >> From my perspective, I'm inclined to suggest that the key goal >> should be to solve the problems of eradicating involuntary poverty >> and sufficiently limiting greenhouse gas emissions. > > Wolfgang: > Good issues. However we have to link this to the Internet related > aspects and we have to continue with our main priorities as human > rights, consumer rights, bridging the digital divde, infrastructure > development, privacy, (free) access, further conceptual enhancement > of the multistakehoder IG model in ongoing international Internet > negotiations in 2013 (WSIS 10+, WTPF, UNCSTD, WTDC, UNGA, HRC, IGF, > ICAAN etc.) among others. Here's some linkage: - A key area of linkage is ensuring that the Internet is an enabler for democracy--clearly democratic processes are key to solving the above-mentioned problems. This ties in particular to privacy, freedom of expression and communication, and other human rights. - Eradicating involuntary poverty requires bridging the digital divide and infrastructure development. - A further area of linkage is the issue of taxation in the context of Internet based business processes. Governments are not able to do fulfill their responsibilities if they can't fund themselves. - Last but not least, what we have learned and are learning in Internet governance on multistakeholder governance can contribute to informing the formation of legitimate and effective governance structures for facilitating the necessary international coordination for solving the above-mentioned problems. Greetings, Norbert -------------- 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 From kovenronald at aol.com Wed Jan 23 13:37:00 2013 From: kovenronald at aol.com (Koven Ronald) Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2013 13:37:00 -0500 (EST) Subject: [governance] France Proposes an Internet Tax In-Reply-To: <06da01cdf987$518eb2e0$f4ac18a0$@gmail.com> References: <50FD0871.7040301@bluewin.ch> <50FD0CE0.6010603@gmail.com> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD231DE6D@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> <01a001cdf8bf$77f85da0$67e918e0$@gmail.com> <-8780130916361342250@unknownmsgid> <69A5BEA8-35C3-429D-AD8A-E1F2D9071D72@uzh.ch> <033201cdf8e0$0717dea0$15479be0$@gmail.com> <2A68A15D-C5DF-49AE-8963-EF1A0B7C3F84@uzh.ch> <06da01cdf987$518eb2e0$f4ac18a0$@gmail.com> Message-ID: <8CFC7AFC3D2EFD0-17B0-34F1C@Webmail-m124.sysops.aol.com> As an aside I'm wondering if we as a group might not want to try to avoid specialized jargon and acronyms. I know that I'm guilty of this as well from time to time but we need to recognize that we are a multi-lingual, multi-cultural group with a lot of people whose first language isn't Tech, International Relations, International Trade and that's apart from those who aren't able to communicate here in their other first languages :) + 1 with feeling! -----Original Message----- From: michael gurstein To: 'William Drake' ; governance Sent: Wed, Jan 23, 2013 5:34 pm Subject: RE: [governance] France Proposes an Internet Tax Thanks Bill, also very informative… As an aside I'm wondering if we as a group might not want to try to avoid specialized jargon and acronyms. I know that I'm guilty of this as well from time to time but we need to recognize that we are a multi-lingual, multi-cultural group with a lot of people whose first language isn't Tech, International Relations, International Trade and that's apart from those who aren't able to communicate here in their other first languages :) M From: William Drake [mailto:william.drake at uzh.ch] Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2013 5:30 AM To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; michael gurstein Subject: Re: [governance] France Proposes an Internet Tax Hi Mike The GATS has 15 General Obligations and Disciplines (GODs). Absent waivers or other limitations, the key GODs of MFN and national treatment apply to their scheduled services, and the EC schedule is quite liberalizing and covers information services, which presumably includes the targeted "over the top" services. If instead you wanted to argue for a narrowly content-based categorization, I've not looked at it in a decade but the EC schedule is probably more restrictive regarding advertising services; however, in this it's probably typical in not being reflective of contemporary web-based transactions like what Google, FB etc. are up to (could look on the WTO site). And of course, one could debate whether that simple category would suffice here. In any event, despite all the intensive debate and rule making of the 1990s, com ministries don't generally appear to be all that attentive to the GATS, at least until the national trade ministries call and tell them there's a complaint etc. I've not detected much attention to it in the ITU in some time, and certainly did not hear anyone talk about it or suggest it mattered to what they were proposing in Dubai. Bill On Jan 22, 2013, at 9:35 PM, michael gurstein wrote: Bill I'm very curious as to the specifics of your assertion below. Could you provide? Tks, M From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of William Drake Sent: Tuesday, January 22, 2013 12:23 PM To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Nick Ashton-Hart Subject: Re: [governance] France Proposes an Internet Tax On Jan 22, 2013, at 9:18 PM, Nick Ashton-Hart wrote: It would not be possible for a measure to target foreign companies only - that would breach France's WTO obligations (and that of many other countries were they to try to do the same thing). A small problem that seemed to receive zero discussion among the proponents in Dubai ____________________________________________________________ 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 ____________________________________________________________ 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: -------------- 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 From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com Wed Jan 23 14:05:47 2013 From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro) Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2013 07:05:47 +1200 Subject: [governance] France Proposes an Internet Tax In-Reply-To: <8CFC7AFC3D2EFD0-17B0-34F1C@Webmail-m124.sysops.aol.com> References: <50FD0871.7040301@bluewin.ch> <50FD0CE0.6010603@gmail.com> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD231DE6D@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> <01a001cdf8bf$77f85da0$67e918e0$@gmail.com> <-8780130916361342250@unknownmsgid> <69A5BEA8-35C3-429D-AD8A-E1F2D9071D72@uzh.ch> <033201cdf8e0$0717dea0$15479be0$@gmail.com> <2A68A15D-C5DF-49AE-8963-EF1A0B7C3F84@uzh.ch> <06da01cdf987$518eb2e0$f4ac18a0$@gmail.com> <8CFC7AFC3D2EFD0-17B0-34F1C@Webmail-m124.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: Here is a handy URL for Trade Acronyms: http://resources.alibaba.com/topic/11870/List_of_International_Trade_Acronyms.htm On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 6:37 AM, Koven Ronald wrote: > > As an aside I'm wondering if we as a group might not want to try to avoid > specialized jargon and acronyms. I know that I'm guilty of this as well > from time to time but we need to recognize that we are a multi-lingual, > multi-cultural group with a lot of people whose first language isn't Tech, > International Relations, International Trade and that's apart from those > who aren't able to communicate here in their other first languages :) > > + 1 with feeling! > > > -----Original Message----- > From: michael gurstein > To: 'William Drake' ; governance < > governance at lists.igcaucus.org> > Sent: Wed, Jan 23, 2013 5:34 pm > Subject: RE: [governance] France Proposes an Internet Tax > > Thanks Bill, also very informative… > > As an aside I'm wondering if we as a group might not want to try to avoid > specialized jargon and acronyms. I know that I'm guilty of this as well > from time to time but we need to recognize that we are a multi-lingual, > multi-cultural group with a lot of people whose first language isn't Tech, > International Relations, International Trade and that's apart from those > who aren't able to communicate here in their other first languages :) > > M > > *From:* William Drake [mailto:william.drake at uzh.ch] > > *Sent:* Wednesday, January 23, 2013 5:30 AM > *To:* governance at lists.igcaucus.org; michael gurstein > *Subject:* Re: [governance] France Proposes an Internet Tax > > Hi Mike > > The GATS has 15 General Obligations and Disciplines (GODs). Absent > waivers or other limitations, the key GODs of MFN and national treatment > apply to their scheduled services, and the EC schedule is quite > liberalizing and covers information services, which presumably includes the > targeted "over the top" services. If instead you wanted to argue for a > narrowly content-based categorization, I've not looked at it in a decade > but the EC schedule is probably more restrictive regarding advertising > services; however, in this it's probably typical in not being reflective of > contemporary web-based transactions like what Google, FB etc. are up to > (could look on the WTO site). And of course, one could debate whether that > simple category would suffice here. > > In any event, despite all the intensive debate and rule making of the > 1990s, com ministries don't generally appear to be all that attentive to > the GATS, at least until the national trade ministries call and tell them > there's a complaint etc. I've not detected much attention to it in the ITU > in some time, and certainly did not hear anyone talk about it or suggest it > mattered to what they were proposing in Dubai. > > Bill > > On Jan 22, 2013, at 9:35 PM, michael gurstein wrote: > > Bill I'm very curious as to the specifics of your assertion below. > > Could you provide? > > Tks, > > M > > *From:* governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance- > request at lists.igcaucus.org] *On Behalf Of *William Drake > *Sent:* Tuesday, January 22, 2013 12:23 PM > *To:* governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Nick Ashton-Hart > *Subject:* Re: [governance] France Proposes an Internet Tax > > > On Jan 22, 2013, at 9:18 PM, Nick Ashton-Hart > wrote: > > It would not be possible for a measure to target foreign companies only > - that would breach France's WTO obligations (and that of many other > countries were they to try to do the same thing). > > A small problem that seemed to receive zero discussion among the > proponents in Dubai > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > -- Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala P.O. Box 17862 Suva Fiji Twitter: @SalanietaT Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro Tel: +679 3544828 Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From apisan at unam.mx Wed Jan 23 14:36:01 2013 From: apisan at unam.mx (Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Baruch) Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2013 19:36:01 +0000 Subject: [governance] Yet another new -strategy - thread title: It may be broke - politically - but how to fix it, technopolitically? ; ) In-Reply-To: <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A80133150D@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> References: <77A59FC9477004489D44DE7FC6840E7B1B1C3A@SUEX10-mbx-08.ad.syr.edu> <20130123172502.6de4259e@quill.bollow.ch>,<2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A80133150D@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> Message-ID: <6DCAB3E586E6A34FB17223DF8D8F0D3D5DC2619E@W8-EX10MB.unam.local> Wolfgang, "and world peace", from the eminent and much admired philosopher Sandra Bullock. Sala-now-Norbert, disclaimer, this is meant as a sort of joke containing irony with a tongue-in-cheek gesture and some eye-rolling as a humor-intended framework for a call to focus on the more approachable problems of Internet Governance. It may not be understood by some and may not be liked by others. Dismiss me from posting at will. Alejandro Pisanty - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Facultad de Química UNAM Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico +52-1-5541444475 FROM ABROAD +525541444475 DESDE MÉXICO SMS +525541444475 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 "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang" [wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de] Enviado el: miércoles, 23 de enero de 2013 11:09 Hasta: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Norbert Bollow; governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Lee W McKnight Asunto: AW: [governance] Yet another new -strategy - thread title: It may be broke - politically - but how to fix it, technopolitically? ; ) Norbert: >From my perspective, I'm inclined to suggest that the key goal should be to solve the problems of eradicating involuntary poverty and sufficiently limiting greenhouse gas emissions. Wolfgang: Good issues. However we have to link this to the Internet related aspects and we have to continue with our main priorities as human rights, consumer rights, bridging the digital divde, infrastructure development, privacy, (free) access, further conceptual enhancement of the multistakehoder IG model in ongoing international Internet negotiations in 2013 (WSIS 10+, WTPF, UNCSTD, WTDC, UNGA, HRC, IGF, ICAAN etc.) among others. -------------- 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 From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com Wed Jan 23 14:36:57 2013 From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro) Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2013 07:36:57 +1200 Subject: [governance] Google breaks the $50bn revenue barrier Message-ID: inSha Google breaks the $50bn revenue barrier Posted By TelecomTV One, 23 January 2013 | 0 Comments| (0) Tags: *Google * *financial * *Motorola * *Advertising * *mobile * * search * * corporate * Fourth quarter and full year results from Google showed that the company is in good shape, with a significant increase in revenue and a more modest rise in income. But advertising acquisition costs are on the up and Motorola continues to disappoint. Guy Daniels reports. Google yesterday published its financial results for the fourth quarter of 2012 and full year performance. The search giant reported consolidated revenues of $14.4bn for the fourth quarter ended December 31, 2012. However, its traffic acquisition costs (advertising revenues are reported gross without deducting this) for the period were $3.1bn, equivalent to 25 per cent of advertising revenue. In other words, advertising netted the company $12.9bn. The remaining $1.5bn of revenue came from Motorola (which Google acquired in late 2011 for the princely sum of $12.5bn). Mind you, the Motorola business also cost Google $1.3bn – in all, Google reported a $152m quarterly loss from Motorola Mobile. Of Google’s quarterly $12.9bn of advertising revenues, $8.6bn of this came from Google-owned websites, $3.4bn came from partner websites (so-called ‘network revenue’), whilst the remaining $829m are listed simple as “other”. Google reported that 54 per cent ($6.9bn) of its total revenue now comes from outside the US, which is up slightly from 53 per cent in Q4 last year. The UK is its largest overseas territory for deriving revenue, with a reported $1.3bn or 10 per cent of the total. Mind you, regular readers will know all about Google’s highly controversialand ethically dubious“double Irish Dutch sandwich” corporate tax mitigation scheme for maximising its profit… Not surprisingly, there was no mention of this in yesterday’s news. However, it did state “our effective tax rate was 18 per cent for the fourth quarter of 2012”. Drilling down into more specifics, Google gave some details as to the make up of its advertising revenues. Aggregate paid clicks, which include clicks related to ads served on Google sites and the sites of its network members, increased by 24 per cent over the fourth quarter of 2011. Average cost-per-click decreased approximately 6 per cent year-on-year. Traffic acquisition costs (as previously mentioned) increased by 25 per cent from Q4 2011. Google says the majority of this is related to amounts paid to its network members, as well as to “certain distribution partners and others who direct traffic to our website”. Nice and cryptic. Net income in Q4 for Google as a whole was $2.9bn, up from the reported $2.7bn in Q4 2011. For the year as a whole, Google reported unaudited total revenues of $50.2bn and net income of $10.7bn – significantly higher than 2011’s full year results of $37.9bn revenue and $9.7bn net income. Google’s CEO Larry Page said that his company ended 2012 with a strong quarter: “Revenues were up 36 per cent year-on-year, and 8 per cent quarter-on-quarter. And we hit $50bn in revenues for the first time last year – not a bad achievement in just a decade and a half. In today’s multi-screen world we face tremendous opportunities as a technology company focused on user benefit. It’s an incredibly exciting time to be at Google.” Finally, Google reported free cash of $48.1bn and a total worldwide headcount of 53,861 full-time employees (11,113 of which are currently part of Motorola Mobile). Google also notes that its December agreement with Arris Group to sell the Motorola Home business should net the firm around $2.35bn when it completes later this year. Ends -- Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala P.O. Box 17862 Suva Fiji Twitter: @SalanietaT Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro Tel: +679 3544828 Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From ian.peter at ianpeter.com Wed Jan 23 14:46:46 2013 From: ian.peter at ianpeter.com (Ian Peter) Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2013 06:46:46 +1100 Subject: [governance] Yet another new -strategy - thread title: It may be broke - politically - but how to fix it, technopolitically? ; ) In-Reply-To: <6DCAB3E586E6A34FB17223DF8D8F0D3D5DC2619E@W8-EX10MB.unam.local> References: <77A59FC9477004489D44DE7FC6840E7B1B1C3A@SUEX10-mbx-08.ad.syr.edu> <20130123172502.6de4259e@quill.bollow.ch>,<2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A80133150D@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> <6DCAB3E586E6A34FB17223DF8D8F0D3D5DC2619E@W8-EX10MB.unam.local> Message-ID: Alx, I'm all for quick wins if we can find them - what are the "more approachable problems of internet governance" on which you think we should focus? Ian Peter -----Original Message----- From: Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Baruch Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2013 6:36 AM To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org ; "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang" ; Norbert Bollow ; Lee W McKnight Subject: RE: [governance] Yet another new -strategy - thread title: It may be broke - politically - but how to fix it, technopolitically? ; ) Wolfgang, "and world peace", from the eminent and much admired philosopher Sandra Bullock. Sala-now-Norbert, disclaimer, this is meant as a sort of joke containing irony with a tongue-in-cheek gesture and some eye-rolling as a humor-intended framework for a call to focus on the more approachable problems of Internet Governance. It may not be understood by some and may not be liked by others. Dismiss me from posting at will. Alejandro Pisanty - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Facultad de Química UNAM Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico +52-1-5541444475 FROM ABROAD +525541444475 DESDE MÉXICO SMS +525541444475 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 "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang" [wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de] Enviado el: miércoles, 23 de enero de 2013 11:09 Hasta: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Norbert Bollow; governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Lee W McKnight Asunto: AW: [governance] Yet another new -strategy - thread title: It may be broke - politically - but how to fix it, technopolitically? ; ) Norbert: >From my perspective, I'm inclined to suggest that the key goal should be to solve the problems of eradicating involuntary poverty and sufficiently limiting greenhouse gas emissions. Wolfgang: Good issues. However we have to link this to the Internet related aspects and we have to continue with our main priorities as human rights, consumer rights, bridging the digital divde, infrastructure development, privacy, (free) access, further conceptual enhancement of the multistakehoder IG model in ongoing international Internet negotiations in 2013 (WSIS 10+, WTPF, UNCSTD, WTDC, UNGA, HRC, IGF, ICAAN etc.) among others. ____________________________________________________________ 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From nne75 at yahoo.com Wed Jan 23 15:18:29 2013 From: nne75 at yahoo.com (Nnenna) Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2013 12:18:29 -0800 (PST) Subject: [governance] 3rd meeting of the WTPF Informal Expert Group (IEG) Message-ID: <1358972309.47521.YahooMailNeo@web120105.mail.ne1.yahoo.com>  Did anyone else get this? === I would like to inform you, that the 3rd meeting of the WTPF Informal Expert Group (IEG) will take place on 6-8 February 2013 at ITU Headquarters in Geneva, Switzerland (see attached letter). For further details and instructions on how to participate please see the following link: http://www.itu.int/en/wtpf-13/Pages/ieg.aspx === Best N Nnenna  Nwakanma |  Founder and CEO, NNENNA.ORG  |  Consultants Information | Communications | Technology and Events | for Development Cote d'Ivoire (+225)| Tel: 225 27144 | Fax  224 26471 |Mob. 07416820 Ghana: +233 249561345| Nigeria: +234 8101887065| http://www.nnenna.org nnenna at nnenna.org| @nnenna | Skype - nnenna75 | nnennaorg.blogspot.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com Wed Jan 23 15:26:37 2013 From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro) Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2013 08:26:37 +1200 Subject: [governance] NZNOG Livestream Message-ID: Hi All, For those interested: New Zealand Network Operators Group (NZNOG) live stream is available here: http://www.r2.co.nz/20130124/ Kind Regards, -- Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala P.O. Box 17862 Suva Fiji Twitter: @SalanietaT Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro Tel: +679 3544828 Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From rpelletier at isoc.org Wed Jan 23 15:29:35 2013 From: rpelletier at isoc.org (Ray Pelletier) Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2013 15:29:35 -0500 Subject: [governance] NZNOG Livestream In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <80A59BB5-1CFC-4490-917B-624FEA1EC830@isoc.org> what software/service is being used to stream? On Jan 23, 2013, at 3:26 PM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro wrote: > Hi All, > > For those interested: > New Zealand Network Operators Group (NZNOG) live stream is available here: http://www.r2.co.nz/20130124/ > > > Kind Regards, > -- > Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala > P.O. Box 17862 > Suva > Fiji > > Twitter: @SalanietaT > Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro > Tel: +679 3544828 > Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com Wed Jan 23 15:38:48 2013 From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro) Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2013 08:38:48 +1200 Subject: [governance] NZNOG Livestream In-Reply-To: <80A59BB5-1CFC-4490-917B-624FEA1EC830@isoc.org> References: <80A59BB5-1CFC-4490-917B-624FEA1EC830@isoc.org> Message-ID: On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 8:29 AM, Ray Pelletier wrote: > what software/service is being used to stream? > I have asked them but no response yet. > > On Jan 23, 2013, at 3:26 PM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro wrote: > > Hi All, > > For those interested: > New Zealand Network Operators Group (NZNOG) live stream is available here: > http://www.r2.co.nz/20130124/ > > > Kind Regards, > -- > Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala > P.O. Box 17862 > Suva > Fiji > > Twitter: @SalanietaT > Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro > Tel: +679 3544828 > Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > > -- Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala P.O. Box 17862 Suva Fiji Twitter: @SalanietaT Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro Tel: +679 3544828 Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From apisan at unam.mx Wed Jan 23 15:46:52 2013 From: apisan at unam.mx (Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Baruch) Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2013 20:46:52 +0000 Subject: [governance] Yet another new -strategy - thread title: It may be broke - politically - but how to fix it, technopolitically? ; ) In-Reply-To: References: <77A59FC9477004489D44DE7FC6840E7B1B1C3A@SUEX10-mbx-08.ad.syr.edu> <20130123172502.6de4259e@quill.bollow.ch>,<2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A80133150D@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> <6DCAB3E586E6A34FB17223DF8D8F0D3D5DC2619E@W8-EX10MB.unam.local>, Message-ID: <6DCAB3E586E6A34FB17223DF8D8F0D3D5DC27249@W8-EX10MB.unam.local> Ian, let's start by trimming and paring... involuntary poverty, greenhous emissions, and taxation have so far eluded the IGC's grasp. What are the problems, say on the WGIG list of 40, where you see the IGC has had more success? Yours, Alejandro Pisanty - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Facultad de Química UNAM Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico +52-1-5541444475 FROM ABROAD +525541444475 DESDE MÉXICO SMS +525541444475 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: Ian Peter [ian.peter at ianpeter.com] Enviado el: miércoles, 23 de enero de 2013 13:46 Hasta: Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Baruch; governance at lists.igcaucus.org; "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang"; Norbert Bollow; Lee W McKnight Asunto: Re: [governance] Yet another new -strategy - thread title: It may be broke - politically - but how to fix it, technopolitically? ; ) Alx, I'm all for quick wins if we can find them - what are the "more approachable problems of internet governance" on which you think we should focus? Ian Peter -----Original Message----- From: Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Baruch Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2013 6:36 AM To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org ; "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang" ; Norbert Bollow ; Lee W McKnight Subject: RE: [governance] Yet another new -strategy - thread title: It may be broke - politically - but how to fix it, technopolitically? ; ) Wolfgang, "and world peace", from the eminent and much admired philosopher Sandra Bullock. Sala-now-Norbert, disclaimer, this is meant as a sort of joke containing irony with a tongue-in-cheek gesture and some eye-rolling as a humor-intended framework for a call to focus on the more approachable problems of Internet Governance. It may not be understood by some and may not be liked by others. Dismiss me from posting at will. Alejandro Pisanty - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Facultad de Química UNAM Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico +52-1-5541444475 FROM ABROAD +525541444475 DESDE MÉXICO SMS +525541444475 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 "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang" [wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de] Enviado el: miércoles, 23 de enero de 2013 11:09 Hasta: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Norbert Bollow; governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Lee W McKnight Asunto: AW: [governance] Yet another new -strategy - thread title: It may be broke - politically - but how to fix it, technopolitically? ; ) Norbert: >From my perspective, I'm inclined to suggest that the key goal should be to solve the problems of eradicating involuntary poverty and sufficiently limiting greenhouse gas emissions. Wolfgang: Good issues. However we have to link this to the Internet related aspects and we have to continue with our main priorities as human rights, consumer rights, bridging the digital divde, infrastructure development, privacy, (free) access, further conceptual enhancement of the multistakehoder IG model in ongoing international Internet negotiations in 2013 (WSIS 10+, WTPF, UNCSTD, WTDC, UNGA, HRC, IGF, ICAAN etc.) among others. ____________________________________________________________ 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From anriette at apc.org Wed Jan 23 15:45:32 2013 From: anriette at apc.org (Anriette Esterhuysen) Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2013 22:45:32 +0200 Subject: [governance] 3rd meeting of the WTPF Informal Expert Group (IEG) In-Reply-To: <1358972309.47521.YahooMailNeo@web120105.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> References: <1358972309.47521.YahooMailNeo@web120105.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <51004BEC.7090706@apc.org> Dear Nnenna Yes, received this with a letter inviting us to nominate people for the WTPF Informal Expert Group. The ITU has made a request form available for people who want to participate in the work of the Informal Expert Group. It is available here: http://www.itu.int/en/wtpf-13/Documents/request%20form.docx Anriette On 23/01/2013 22:18, Nnenna wrote: > > Did anyone else get this? > > === > > I would like to inform you, that the 3rd meeting of the WTPF Informal > Expert Group (IEG) will take place on 6-8 February 2013 at ITU > Headquarters in Geneva, Switzerland (see attached letter). For further details and instructions on how to participate please see the following link: http://www.itu.int/en/wtpf-13/Pages/ieg.aspx > > === > > Best > > N > > > Nnenna Nwakanma | Founder and CEO, NNENNA.ORG | Consultants > Information | Communications | Technology and Events | for Development > Cote d'Ivoire (+225)| Tel: 225 27144 | Fax 224 26471 |Mob. 07416820 > Ghana: +233 249561345| Nigeria: +234 8101887065| http://www.nnenna.org > nnenna at nnenna.org| @nnenna | Skype - nnenna75 | nnennaorg.blogspot.com > -- ------------------------------------------------------ anriette esterhuysen anriette at apc.org executive director, association for progressive communications www.apc.org po box 29755, melville 2109 south africa tel/fax +27 11 726 1692 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From mueller at syr.edu Wed Jan 23 16:38:29 2013 From: mueller at syr.edu (Milton L Mueller) Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2013 21:38:29 +0000 Subject: [governance] "US Exceptionalism" (was Re: Bloomberg - The Overzealous Prosecution...) In-Reply-To: <20130123110454.0349cf0f@quill.bollow.ch> References: <50FAC752.5090502@gmail.com> <50FBAE3C.8010600@ITforChange.net> <20130120161823.3d510425@quill.bollow.ch> <20130123110454.0349cf0f@quill.bollow.ch> Message-ID: <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD231ED21@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> The options most people put forward are: - oversight by one nation-state (the status quo) - oversight by all nation-states on the basis of sovereign parity, as in the UN system - or some hybrid, such as the EU proposal to create what was in effect an IG "security council" of a few privileged states to provide oversight. Advocates of denationalization reject all those options and believe ICANN creates an opportunity for a new form of global governance organic to the internet. They want ICANN's policy making processes to be accountable to global community of internet users directly. > -----Original Message----- > From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance- > request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Norbert Bollow > Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2013 5:05 AM > To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; McTim > Subject: Re: [governance] "US Exceptionalism" (was Re: Bloomberg - The > Overzealous Prosecution...) > > McTim wrote: > > > Well I (and I think MM and perhaps others) would like to see the > > "denationalisation" of IG. > > I'd be interested if you could describe this concept of > "denationalisation" in a bit more detail please. > > Greetings, > Norbert -------------- 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 From dogwallah at gmail.com Wed Jan 23 16:50:01 2013 From: dogwallah at gmail.com (McTim) Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2013 16:50:01 -0500 Subject: [governance] interesting infographic Message-ID: http://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_GAC_InnovationEngine_2013.pdf -- 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 From gurstein at gmail.com Wed Jan 23 17:47:10 2013 From: gurstein at gmail.com (michael gurstein) Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2013 14:47:10 -0800 Subject: [governance] "US Exceptionalism" (was Re: Bloomberg - The Overzealous Prosecution...) In-Reply-To: <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8013314FB@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> References: <50FAC752.5090502@gmail.com> <50FBAE3C.8010600@ITforChange.net> <20130120161823.3d510425@quill.bollow.ch> <20130123110454.0349cf0f@quill.bollow.ch> <4BF7B62A-94A6-4F41-9E3D-983BDAD957E1@hserus.net> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8013314FB@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> Message-ID: <004501cdf9bb$a118f3a0$e34adae0$@gmail.com> !!!!!!!! AoC ? ATRT ? JPA ? !!!!!!!! M -----Original Message----- From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang" Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2013 7:10 AM To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; McTim; Suresh Ramasubramanian Cc: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Norbert Bollow Subject: AW: [governance] "US Exceptionalism" (was Re: Bloomberg - The Overzealous Prosecution...) In my eyes, the AoC has opend the door for an innovation in the "oversight issue". The review process has the potential to become a oversighr mechanism. The good thing with the review is that it is first not centralized in one body/team/process but in four issue based processes and second it uis multistakehooder with a stong governmental involvement. Unfoirtunately the first round was done in a hurry with no model in place and the results had been not so impressive. However there is potential in the process. Insofar the 2nd ATRT which will start soon, couod take a big step forward filling the gap a lot of people feel that some sort of oversight is needed. And AoC/ATRT is indeed better than to have a governmental oversight of 1 (as it was under the MoU/JPA), 11 (as proposed three years agi by the EU) or 159 (UNITU) governments. wolfgang ________________________________ Von: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org im Auftrag von McTim Gesendet: Mi 23.01.2013 12:46 An: Suresh Ramasubramanian Cc: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Norbert Bollow Betreff: Re: [governance] "US Exceptionalism" (was Re: Bloomberg - The Overzealous Prosecution...) Hi, On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 5:54 AM, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote: > The problem being that nature abhors a vacuum. There will be SOME power structure that will rise following this denationalization - and I am not at all sure we're going to like the alternative any more than we would like say the ITU taking things over. Like Norbert I'd be interested in hearing what McTim has to suggest. I can't speak for Avri or Milton, but what I would prefer is zero nation states providing oversight over ICANN rather than one (or 195). I think ICANN can stand alone without an overseer (besides it's own Board). Of course, I don't think it likely to happen, but it is my preference. -- 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 From ian.peter at ianpeter.com Wed Jan 23 19:42:41 2013 From: ian.peter at ianpeter.com (Ian Peter) Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2013 11:42:41 +1100 Subject: [governance] Yet another new -strategy - thread title: It may be broke - politically - but how to fix it, technopolitically? ; ) In-Reply-To: <6DCAB3E586E6A34FB17223DF8D8F0D3D5DC27249@W8-EX10MB.unam.local> References: <77A59FC9477004489D44DE7FC6840E7B1B1C3A@SUEX10-mbx-08.ad.syr.edu> <20130123172502.6de4259e@quill.bollow.ch>,<2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A80133150D@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> <6DCAB3E586E6A34FB17223DF8D8F0D3D5DC2619E@W8-EX10MB.unam.local>, <6DCAB3E586E6A34FB17223DF8D8F0D3D5DC27249@W8-EX10MB.unam.local> Message-ID: Alx, perhaps the compelling question over and above all of these issues, particularly for those who praise and promote the multistakeholder model as a guiding principle of internet governance, is what can we do to make the IGC more effective in dealing with all of these issues? Ian Peter PS while agreeing that involuntary poverty and greenhouse emissions have better places to be discussed, internet can do things as regards these issues. As regards tax - again there are probably wider fora that are better for discussing this issue, but we need to acknowledge that the tax implication of significant volumes of internet based trade are a new and significant problems for nation states. Best we try to address these in a multistakeholder forum, perhaps? -----Original Message----- From: Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Baruch Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2013 7:46 AM To: Ian Peter ; governance at lists.igcaucus.org ; "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang" ; Norbert Bollow ; Lee W McKnight Subject: RE: [governance] Yet another new -strategy - thread title: It may be broke - politically - but how to fix it, technopolitically? ; ) Ian, let's start by trimming and paring... involuntary poverty, greenhous emissions, and taxation have so far eluded the IGC's grasp. What are the problems, say on the WGIG list of 40, where you see the IGC has had more success? Yours, Alejandro Pisanty - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Facultad de Química UNAM Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico +52-1-5541444475 FROM ABROAD +525541444475 DESDE MÉXICO SMS +525541444475 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: Ian Peter [ian.peter at ianpeter.com] Enviado el: miércoles, 23 de enero de 2013 13:46 Hasta: Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Baruch; governance at lists.igcaucus.org; "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang"; Norbert Bollow; Lee W McKnight Asunto: Re: [governance] Yet another new -strategy - thread title: It may be broke - politically - but how to fix it, technopolitically? ; ) Alx, I'm all for quick wins if we can find them - what are the "more approachable problems of internet governance" on which you think we should focus? Ian Peter -----Original Message----- From: Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Baruch Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2013 6:36 AM To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org ; "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang" ; Norbert Bollow ; Lee W McKnight Subject: RE: [governance] Yet another new -strategy - thread title: It may be broke - politically - but how to fix it, technopolitically? ; ) Wolfgang, "and world peace", from the eminent and much admired philosopher Sandra Bullock. Sala-now-Norbert, disclaimer, this is meant as a sort of joke containing irony with a tongue-in-cheek gesture and some eye-rolling as a humor-intended framework for a call to focus on the more approachable problems of Internet Governance. It may not be understood by some and may not be liked by others. Dismiss me from posting at will. Alejandro Pisanty - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Facultad de Química UNAM Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico +52-1-5541444475 FROM ABROAD +525541444475 DESDE MÉXICO SMS +525541444475 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 "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang" [wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de] Enviado el: miércoles, 23 de enero de 2013 11:09 Hasta: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Norbert Bollow; governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Lee W McKnight Asunto: AW: [governance] Yet another new -strategy - thread title: It may be broke - politically - but how to fix it, technopolitically? ; ) Norbert: >From my perspective, I'm inclined to suggest that the key goal should be to solve the problems of eradicating involuntary poverty and sufficiently limiting greenhouse gas emissions. Wolfgang: Good issues. However we have to link this to the Internet related aspects and we have to continue with our main priorities as human rights, consumer rights, bridging the digital divde, infrastructure development, privacy, (free) access, further conceptual enhancement of the multistakehoder IG model in ongoing international Internet negotiations in 2013 (WSIS 10+, WTPF, UNCSTD, WTDC, UNGA, HRC, IGF, ICAAN etc.) among others. ____________________________________________________________ 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 ____________________________________________________________ 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From Guru at ITforChange.net Wed Jan 23 19:56:30 2013 From: Guru at ITforChange.net (=?UTF-8?B?R3VydSDgpJfgpYHgpLDgpYE=?=) Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2013 07:56:30 +0700 Subject: [governance] Facebook spent $4 million to lobby U.S. lawmakers in 2012 Message-ID: <510086BE.6010100@ITforChange.net> "Tech companies are spending exorbitant sums to advance their agendas in Washington. In 2012, Google spent $16.48 million and Microsoft spent $8.09 million to lobby U.S. lawmakers."... I wonder what are the implications for democratic internet governance and democracy?? ... regards Guru Facebook spent $4 million to lobby U.S. lawmakers in 2012 The social network is spending millions to advance a pro-Facebook agenda in the nation's capital. Cue the cynicism. Jennifer Van Grove January 23, 2013 1:58 PM PST Facebook wined and dined U.S. lawmakers and racked up a tab close to $4 million during 2012, an increase of 196 percent over its courting costs in the previous year. According to disclosure forms, Facebook spent $1.4 million in the fourth quarter to lobby government officials on foreign relations matters, online privacy issues, data security, immigration reform, and online advertising. The fourth-quarter lobby spend is Facebook's first $1 million-plus quarter; the $1.4 million figure is just $200,000 less than the company's combined lobbying costs for the first and second quarters of 2012. The bigger-by-the-month spending trend is sure to continue as the company pushes to expand its user base to kids under the age of 13, experiments with facial recognition technology, and gets more aggressive with its online and mobile advertising tactics. "Our presence and growth in Washington reflect our commitment to explaining how our service works, the actions we take to protect the billion plus people who use our service, the importance of preserving an open Internet, and the value of innovation to our economy," a Facebook representative told CNET. The more cynical view, of course, is that Facebook is buying its way to favorable laws that will allow it to do more with more member data. Consumer Watchdog, a nonprofit organization that exposes political injustice, holds this more extreme perspective. "Google and Facebook would have you believe that they are different from other corporations. They are not. They are following the corrupt corporate tradition in Washington: buying what you want," the organization's privacy project director, John M. Simpson, said in a statement. Simpson's right about one thing: tech companies are spending exorbitant sums to advance their agendas in Washington. In 2012, Google spent $16.48 million and Microsoft spent $8.09 million to lobby U.S. lawmakers. source - http://news.cnet.com/8301-1023_3-57565507-93/facebook-spent-$4-million-to-lobby-u.s-lawmakers-in-2012/?part=rss&subj=news&tag=title -- Gurumurthy Kasinathan Director, IT for Change /In Special Consultative Status with the United Nations ECOSOC /www.ITforChange.Net | Cell:91 9845437730 | Tel:91 80 26654134, 26536890 How ICTs can transform teacher education - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D-kgSW_o9z8&feature=youtu.be -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: itfc_logo.png Type: image/png Size: 6531 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- 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 From gurstein at gmail.com Wed Jan 23 20:03:09 2013 From: gurstein at gmail.com (michael gurstein) Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2013 17:03:09 -0800 Subject: [governance] "US Exceptionalism" (was Re: Bloomberg - The Overzealous Prosecution...) In-Reply-To: <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD231ED21@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> References: <50FAC752.5090502@gmail.com> <50FBAE3C.8010600@ITforChange.net> <20130120161823.3d510425@quill.bollow.ch> <20130123110454.0349cf0f@quill.bollow.ch> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD231ED21@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> Message-ID: <020301cdf9ce$9cfeb5d0$d6fc2170$@gmail.com> So what might this look like in the real world... " ICANN's policy making processes to be accountable to global community of internet users directly... including an assessment of the experience with the ALAC's etc.etc.? M -----Original Message----- From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Milton L Mueller Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2013 1:38 PM To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; 'Norbert Bollow'; McTim Subject: RE: [governance] "US Exceptionalism" (was Re: Bloomberg - The Overzealous Prosecution...) The options most people put forward are: - oversight by one nation-state (the status quo) - oversight by all nation-states on the basis of sovereign parity, as in the UN system - or some hybrid, such as the EU proposal to create what was in effect an IG "security council" of a few privileged states to provide oversight. Advocates of denationalization reject all those options and believe ICANN creates an opportunity for a new form of global governance organic to the internet. They want ICANN's policy making processes to be accountable to global community of internet users directly. > -----Original Message----- > From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance- > request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Norbert Bollow > Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2013 5:05 AM > To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; McTim > Subject: Re: [governance] "US Exceptionalism" (was Re: Bloomberg - The > Overzealous Prosecution...) > > McTim wrote: > > > Well I (and I think MM and perhaps others) would like to see the > > "denationalisation" of IG. > > I'd be interested if you could describe this concept of > "denationalisation" in a bit more detail please. > > Greetings, > Norbert -------------- 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 From dogwallah at gmail.com Wed Jan 23 20:42:56 2013 From: dogwallah at gmail.com (McTim) Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2013 20:42:56 -0500 Subject: [governance] Facebook spent $4 million to lobby U.S. lawmakers in 2012 In-Reply-To: <510086BE.6010100@ITforChange.net> References: <510086BE.6010100@ITforChange.net> Message-ID: HI, Just some observations from someone who lived in DC for a while: On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 7:56 PM, Guru गुरु wrote: > "Tech companies are spending exorbitant sums to advance their agendas in > Washington. In 2012, Google spent $16.48 million and Microsoft spent $8.09 > million to lobby U.S. lawmakers." > These are not "exorbitant sums" by any stretch of the imagination in terms of lobbying in DC. > ... I wonder what are the implications for democratic internet governance > and democracy?? ... > > Isn't this democracy in action? a citizen (or business owner) wants to shape policy and they spend time and effort to get the attention of policymakers. > regards > Guru > > Facebook spent $4 million to lobby U.S. lawmakers in 2012 > > The social network is spending millions to advance a pro-Facebook agenda > in the nation's capital. Cue the cynicism. > Jennifer Van Grove > January 23, 2013 1:58 PM PST > Facebook wined and dined U.S. lawmakers and racked up a tab close to $4 > million during 2012 > The reality is that you can't buy U.S. lawmakers a meal anymore (or a drink) without them having to file extensive reports on such contacts. For most, it's just not worth a free meal to spend an hour or more doing the paperwork on it. The culture has changed dramatically in Washington in the last 2 decades. The tech companies spend these large sums mostly on staff, offices and events. there is one this week: http://www.netcaucus.org/conference/ sponsors at http://www.netcaucus.org/conference/ -- 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 -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From suresh at hserus.net Wed Jan 23 21:13:17 2013 From: suresh at hserus.net (Suresh Ramasubramanian) Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2013 07:43:17 +0530 Subject: [governance] Facebook spent $4 million to lobby U.S. lawmakers in 2012 In-Reply-To: <510086BE.6010100@ITforChange.net> References: <510086BE.6010100@ITforChange.net> Message-ID: What does that compare to the cost that well funded NGOs spend on lobbying? --srs (iPad) On 24-Jan-2013, at 6:26, Guru गुरु wrote: > "Tech companies are spending exorbitant sums to advance their agendas in Washington. In 2012, Google spent $16.48 million and Microsoft spent $8.09 million to lobby U.S. lawmakers."... I wonder what are the implications for democratic internet governance and democracy?? ... > > regards > Guru > -------------- next part -------------- ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.igcaucus.org To be removed from the list, visit: http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing For all other list information and functions, see: http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see: http://www.igcaucus.org/ Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t From suresh at hserus.net Wed Jan 23 21:17:58 2013 From: suresh at hserus.net (Suresh Ramasubramanian) Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2013 07:47:58 +0530 Subject: [governance] "US Exceptionalism" (was Re: Bloomberg - The Overzealous Prosecution...) In-Reply-To: <004501cdf9bb$a118f3a0$e34adae0$@gmail.com> References: <50FAC752.5090502@gmail.com> <50FBAE3C.8010600@ITforChange.net> <20130120161823.3d510425@quill.bollow.ch> <20130123110454.0349cf0f@quill.bollow.ch> <4BF7B62A-94A6-4F41-9E3D-983BDAD957E1@hserus.net> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8013314FB@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> <004501cdf9bb$a118f3a0$e34adae0$@gmail.com> Message-ID: If this is in the context of Norbert's requesting that we all use less acronyms, this is somewhat like saying we need to teach maths without using confusing terms like, say, pi, sigma etc which are, to be honest, all greek to most people that first encounter them. Maybe work with Diplo or someone to conduct some sort of capacity building for civil society? --srs (iPad) On 24-Jan-2013, at 4:17, "michael gurstein" wrote: > !!!!!!!! > > AoC ? > ATRT ? > JPA ? > > !!!!!!!! > -------------- 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 From suresh at hserus.net Wed Jan 23 21:20:52 2013 From: suresh at hserus.net (Suresh Ramasubramanian) Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2013 07:50:52 +0530 Subject: [governance] Yet another new -strategy - thread title: It may be broke - politically - but how to fix it, technopolitically? ; ) In-Reply-To: References: <77A59FC9477004489D44DE7FC6840E7B1B1C3A@SUEX10-mbx-08.ad.syr.edu> <20130123172502.6de4259e@quill.bollow.ch> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A80133150D@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> <6DCAB3E586E6A34FB17223DF8D8F0D3D5DC2619E@W8-EX10MB.unam.local> <6DCAB3E586E6A34FB17223DF8D8F0D3D5DC27249@W8-EX10MB.unam.local> Message-ID: <169EC611-7496-45E5-8615-6E8793E5E087@hserus.net> Most anything can be made to have a bearing on the Internet, but those would fall under a related but slightly different topic, e-governance, or possibly ICT related development. Can we remain focused on Internet governance here? There is a multiplicity of UN, ICANN and other policy focused conferences that can and will demand our full attention, or at least our full attemtion at times when we aren't sniping at each other over words of ideology of course :) --srs (iPad) On 24-Jan-2013, at 6:12, "Ian Peter" wrote: > Alx, perhaps the compelling question over and above all of these issues, particularly for those who praise and promote the multistakeholder model as a guiding principle of internet governance, is what can we do to make the IGC more effective in dealing with all of these issues? > > Ian Peter > > PS while agreeing that involuntary poverty and greenhouse emissions have better places to be discussed, internet can do things as regards these issues. As regards tax - again there are probably wider fora that are better for discussing this issue, but we need to acknowledge that the tax implication of significant volumes of internet based trade are a new and significant problems for nation states. Best we try to address these in a multistakeholder forum, perhaps? > > -----Original Message----- From: Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Baruch > Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2013 7:46 AM > To: Ian Peter ; governance at lists.igcaucus.org ; "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang" ; Norbert Bollow ; Lee W McKnight > Subject: RE: [governance] Yet another new -strategy - thread title: It may be broke - politically - but how to fix it, technopolitically? ; ) > > Ian, > > let's start by trimming and paring... involuntary poverty, greenhous emissions, and taxation have so far eluded the IGC's grasp. > > What are the problems, say on the WGIG list of 40, where you see the IGC has had more success? > > Yours, > > Alejandro Pisanty > > > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - > Dr. Alejandro Pisanty > Facultad de Química UNAM > Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico > > > > +52-1-5541444475 FROM ABROAD > > +525541444475 DESDE MÉXICO SMS +525541444475 > 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: Ian Peter [ian.peter at ianpeter.com] > Enviado el: miércoles, 23 de enero de 2013 13:46 > Hasta: Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Baruch; governance at lists.igcaucus.org; "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang"; Norbert Bollow; Lee W McKnight > Asunto: Re: [governance] Yet another new -strategy - thread title: It may be broke - politically - but how to fix it, technopolitically? ; ) > > Alx, I'm all for quick wins if we can find them - what are the "more > approachable problems of internet governance" on which you think we should > focus? > > Ian Peter > > -----Original Message----- > From: Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Baruch > Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2013 6:36 AM > To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org ; "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang" ; Norbert > Bollow ; Lee W McKnight > Subject: RE: [governance] Yet another new -strategy - thread title: It may > be broke - politically - but how to fix it, technopolitically? ; ) > > Wolfgang, > > "and world peace", from the eminent and much admired philosopher Sandra > Bullock. > > Sala-now-Norbert, disclaimer, this is meant as a sort of joke containing > irony with a tongue-in-cheek gesture and some eye-rolling as a > humor-intended framework for a call to focus on the more approachable > problems of Internet Governance. It may not be understood by some and may > not be liked by others. Dismiss me from posting at will. > > Alejandro Pisanty > > > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - > Dr. Alejandro Pisanty > Facultad de Química UNAM > Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico > > > > +52-1-5541444475 FROM ABROAD > > +525541444475 DESDE MÉXICO SMS +525541444475 > 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 "Kleinwächter, > Wolfgang" [wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de] > Enviado el: miércoles, 23 de enero de 2013 11:09 > Hasta: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Norbert Bollow; > governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Lee W McKnight > Asunto: AW: [governance] Yet another new -strategy - thread title: It may be > broke - politically - but how to fix it, technopolitically? ; ) > > Norbert: > From my perspective, I'm inclined to suggest that the key goal should be to > solve the problems of eradicating involuntary poverty and > sufficiently limiting greenhouse gas emissions. > > Wolfgang: > Good issues. However we have to link this to the Internet related aspects > and we have to continue with our main priorities as human rights, consumer > rights, bridging the digital divde, infrastructure development, privacy, > (free) access, further conceptual enhancement of the multistakehoder IG > model in ongoing international Internet negotiations in 2013 (WSIS 10+, > WTPF, UNCSTD, WTDC, UNGA, HRC, IGF, ICAAN etc.) among others. > > > > > > > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > > > > > > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com Wed Jan 23 22:13:17 2013 From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro) Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2013 15:13:17 +1200 Subject: [governance] NZNOG Livestream In-Reply-To: <80A59BB5-1CFC-4490-917B-624FEA1EC830@isoc.org> References: <80A59BB5-1CFC-4490-917B-624FEA1EC830@isoc.org> Message-ID: On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 8:29 AM, Ray Pelletier wrote: > what software/service is being used to stream? > > http://www.longtailvideo.com/jw-player/about/ > On Jan 23, 2013, at 3:26 PM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro wrote: > > Hi All, > > For those interested: > New Zealand Network Operators Group (NZNOG) live stream is available here: > http://www.r2.co.nz/20130124/ > > > Kind Regards, > -- > Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala > P.O. Box 17862 > Suva > Fiji > > Twitter: @SalanietaT > Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro > Tel: +679 3544828 > Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > > -- Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala P.O. Box 17862 Suva Fiji Twitter: @SalanietaT Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro Tel: +679 3544828 Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From suresh at hserus.net Wed Jan 23 22:45:21 2013 From: suresh at hserus.net (Suresh Ramasubramanian) Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2013 19:45:21 -0800 Subject: [governance] Yet another Google article Message-ID: <5100ae51.eMDGmJWyTbkwlt9f%suresh@hserus.net> I wonder if, after all the negativity about google, what would be the reaction if a more positive piece about them were to be posted. http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2013/01/google-stands-up-for-gmail-users-requires-cops-to-get-a-warrant/ -------------- 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 From chaitanyabd at gmail.com Wed Jan 23 22:57:25 2013 From: chaitanyabd at gmail.com (Chaitanya Dhareshwar) Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2013 09:27:25 +0530 Subject: [governance] Yet another Google article In-Reply-To: <5100ae51.eMDGmJWyTbkwlt9f%suresh@hserus.net> References: <5100ae51.eMDGmJWyTbkwlt9f%suresh@hserus.net> Message-ID: Naturally; it would be Google in legal trouble if they complied with a request that is not legally compliant. At least one can be sure that one's email is not an open book; there is some security in place. -C On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 9:15 AM, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote: > I wonder if, after all the negativity about google, what would be the > reaction > if a more positive piece about them were to be posted. > > > http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2013/01/google-stands-up-for-gmail-users-requires-cops-to-get-a-warrant/ > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From suresh at hserus.net Wed Jan 23 23:24:12 2013 From: suresh at hserus.net (Suresh Ramasubramanian) Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2013 09:54:12 +0530 Subject: [governance] Yet another Google article In-Reply-To: References: <5100ae51.eMDGmJWyTbkwlt9f%suresh@hserus.net> Message-ID: <34257816-BC61-457A-B042-38222A6505FD@hserus.net> You mistake me. The situation is that legally compliant warrants in the USA - and even more so in other countries (such as India) are structured to be extremely easy to issue, and broad in what they can demand. At least the USA follows some amount of process - even that is quite vaguely defined in India, with stiffer penalties for non compliance with a warrant. I need hardly point out that China has an even worse situation, and a much broader range of issues (political dissidence etc) that they will issue warrants for. Google is working to raise the bar on legal compliance, make it more specific and better defined. --srs (iPad) On 24-Jan-2013, at 9:27, Chaitanya Dhareshwar wrote: > Naturally; it would be Google in legal trouble if they complied with a request that is not legally compliant. At least one can be sure that one's email is not an open book; there is some security in place. > > -C > > On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 9:15 AM, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote: >> I wonder if, after all the negativity about google, what would be the reaction >> if a more positive piece about them were to be posted. >> >> http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2013/01/google-stands-up-for-gmail-users-requires-cops-to-get-a-warrant/ >> >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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: -------------- 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 From parminder at itforchange.net Wed Jan 23 23:54:00 2013 From: parminder at itforchange.net (parminder) Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2013 10:24:00 +0530 Subject: [governance] France Proposes an Internet Tax In-Reply-To: <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD231DE6D@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> References: <50FD0871.7040301@bluewin.ch> <50FD0CE0.6010603@gmail.com> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD231DE6D@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> Message-ID: <5100BE68.3060203@itforchange.net> The proposition that governments should collect a tax because companies gather personal information prima facie does not appeal very much to me. It seems to raise a number of difficult questions - for instance, in collecting such a tax what kind of blanket permission may be taken to have been granted for what kind of practices.. One will however have to read the whole report to be able to give an informed comment on the proposal which I reserve for the present. What is important to stress here however is the larger issue that these kinds of news and reports bring up, and increasingly so. Some of us have been trying to raise the issue for a long time on this list and other global IG fora; that IG centrally implicated a huge number of very important issues of economic distribution and social justice. It not just a matter of civil and political rights. We need to raise, understand and analyse these issues and possible ways to address them. This is something the global civil society engaged in the IG area has completely failed to so do, which has affected its credibility among the political actors in the South. And also among the global civil society groups active in issues of economic and social justice. IGC must look for ways to create the needed bridges with these constituencies and groups, for it to emerge as a credible/ premier civil society group in the area of global IG... parminder On Tuesday 22 January 2013 08:54 PM, Milton L Mueller wrote: > > The report published Friday said a tax on data collection was > justified on grounds that users of services like Google and > Facebook are, in effect, working for these companies without > pay by providing the personal information that lets them sell > advertising. > > */[Milton L Mueller] Good deal. In order to compensate and > protect us from “working without pay” we will work for the > government of France without pay as well. Cartesian logic at > work./* > > */Or perhaps they will use the revenues to subsidize access to > Facebook and Google, since they charge their users so much > that…um, well, some of them, um, can’t afford… oh, never mind./* > > */Of course, this is just a tax on the advertisers, in the > end. It will simply increase the costs of Google/Facebook and > be recovered from advertisers. /* > > */It wouldn’t be France however unless you threw a soupcon of > anti-Americanism and trade protectionism into the pot as well > (will the same tax will be applied to all commercial > broadcasters in France, whose viewers are sold to advertisers > “without pay”?) How about French newspapers with ads – their > poor customers even have to pay for the newspaper, and then > are sold to advertisers. Merde!/* > > */Interestingly, this whole line of argument presumes that the > services users receive in return for their data are worthless. > Remember that next time you hear someone claim that Google and > Facebook are “essential facilities” that no one can live > without./* > > */It’s sad that governments that just want more money have to > strain to come up with trendy rationalizations. What happened > to the good old days when they just sent in armed thugs to > appropriate a bunch of your pigs and cows?/* > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From tapani.tarvainen at effi.org Wed Jan 23 23:56:15 2013 From: tapani.tarvainen at effi.org (Tapani Tarvainen) Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2013 06:56:15 +0200 Subject: [governance] Facebook spent $4 million to lobby U.S. lawmakers in 2012 In-Reply-To: References: <510086BE.6010100@ITforChange.net> Message-ID: <20130124045615.GC17987@tarvainen.info> On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 08:42:56PM -0500, McTim (dogwallah at gmail.com) wrote: > On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 7:56 PM, Guru गुरु wrote: > > > "Tech companies are spending exorbitant sums to advance their agendas in > > Washington. In 2012, Google spent $16.48 million and Microsoft spent $8.09 > > million to lobby U.S. lawmakers." > > These are not "exorbitant sums" by any stretch of the imagination in terms > of lobbying in DC. I guess exactly that is the problem. I remember the time I was lobbying agains the software patent directive in Brussels, the budgets of NGOs (= everybody on our side I know of) were smaller than that by about three orders of magnitude. > > ... I wonder what are the implications for democratic internet governance > > and democracy?? ... > Isn't this democracy in action? a citizen (or business owner) wants to > shape policy and they spend time and effort to get the attention of > policymakers. When "time and effort" there is replaced by "money", what you have is called plutocracy. -- Tapani Tarvainen -------------- 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 From parminder at itforchange.net Thu Jan 24 00:15:20 2013 From: parminder at itforchange.net (parminder) Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2013 10:45:20 +0530 Subject: [governance] Yet another new -strategy - thread title: It may be broke - politically - but how to fix it, technopolitically? ; ) In-Reply-To: References: <77A59FC9477004489D44DE7FC6840E7B1B1C3A@SUEX10-mbx-08.ad.syr.edu> <20130123172502.6de4259e@quill.bollow.ch>,<2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A80133150D@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> <6DCAB3E586E6A34FB17223DF8D8F0D3D5DC2619E@W8-EX10MB.unam.local>, <6DCAB3E586E6A34FB17223DF8D8F0D3D5DC27249@W8-EX10MB.unam.local> Message-ID: <5100C368.6060706@itforchange.net> On Thursday 24 January 2013 06:12 AM, Ian Peter wrote: > Alx, perhaps the compelling question over and above all of these > issues, particularly for those who praise and promote the > multistakeholder model as a guiding principle of internet governance, > is what can we do to make the IGC more effective in dealing with all > of these issues? > > Ian Peter > > PS while agreeing that involuntary poverty and greenhouse emissions > have better places to be discussed, internet can do things as regards > these issues. As regards tax - again there are probably wider fora > that are better for discussing this issue, but we need to acknowledge > that the tax implication of significant volumes of internet based > trade are a new and significant problems for nation states. Best we > try to address these in a multistakeholder forum, perhaps? I would strongly object to any formulation that suggests that civil and political rights/ justice issues somehow belong to core of Internet governance, and social/ economic rights/ justice issues either do not belong to IG or belong to its peripheries. Why, to make the above point explicit, for instance, dont we argue that there are other forums to discuss issues like freedom of expression or the nature of our governance systems (MSism etc) rather than do it as a part of IG. What is so inherently IG about FoE or about how our collective political decisions are taken? These issues can very well be discussed in forums devoted specifically to these issues. Let IG remain confined to core technical areas... Unthinkable right! Similarly, new paradigms and manners of economic distribution and social justice are tied to core socio-technical architectural decisions about the Internet, which is what IG is all about. Any kind of negation or even 'accommodative language' regarding social and economic rights/ justice issues - yes, poverty, taxations and such - in the IG space is not acceptable. It is core IG, period. Parminder PS: I also take strong objection to the ideology implied in the use of the term 'voluntary poverty' in such global political discussions as the present one. > > -----Original Message----- From: Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Baruch > Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2013 7:46 AM > To: Ian Peter ; governance at lists.igcaucus.org ; "Kleinwächter, > Wolfgang" ; Norbert Bollow ; Lee W McKnight > Subject: RE: [governance] Yet another new -strategy - thread title: It > may be broke - politically - but how to fix it, technopolitically? ; ) > > Ian, > > let's start by trimming and paring... involuntary poverty, greenhous > emissions, and taxation have so far eluded the IGC's grasp. > > What are the problems, say on the WGIG list of 40, where you see the > IGC has had more success? > > Yours, > > Alejandro Pisanty > > > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - > Dr. Alejandro Pisanty > Facultad de Química UNAM > Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico > > > > +52-1-5541444475 FROM ABROAD > > +525541444475 DESDE MÉXICO SMS +525541444475 > 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: Ian Peter [ian.peter at ianpeter.com] > Enviado el: miércoles, 23 de enero de 2013 13:46 > Hasta: Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Baruch; governance at lists.igcaucus.org; > "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang"; Norbert Bollow; Lee W McKnight > Asunto: Re: [governance] Yet another new -strategy - thread title: It > may be broke - politically - but how to fix it, technopolitically? ; ) > > Alx, I'm all for quick wins if we can find them - what are the "more > approachable problems of internet governance" on which you think we > should > focus? > > Ian Peter > > -----Original Message----- > From: Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Baruch > Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2013 6:36 AM > To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org ; "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang" ; Norbert > Bollow ; Lee W McKnight > Subject: RE: [governance] Yet another new -strategy - thread title: It > may > be broke - politically - but how to fix it, technopolitically? ; ) > > Wolfgang, > > "and world peace", from the eminent and much admired philosopher Sandra > Bullock. > > Sala-now-Norbert, disclaimer, this is meant as a sort of joke containing > irony with a tongue-in-cheek gesture and some eye-rolling as a > humor-intended framework for a call to focus on the more approachable > problems of Internet Governance. It may not be understood by some and may > not be liked by others. Dismiss me from posting at will. > > Alejandro Pisanty > > > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - > Dr. Alejandro Pisanty > Facultad de Química UNAM > Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico > > > > +52-1-5541444475 FROM ABROAD > > +525541444475 DESDE MÉXICO SMS +525541444475 > 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 "Kleinwächter, > Wolfgang" [wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de] > Enviado el: miércoles, 23 de enero de 2013 11:09 > Hasta: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Norbert Bollow; > governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Lee W McKnight > Asunto: AW: [governance] Yet another new -strategy - thread title: It > may be > broke - politically - but how to fix it, technopolitically? ; ) > > Norbert: >> From my perspective, I'm inclined to suggest that the key goal should >> be to > solve the problems of eradicating involuntary poverty and > sufficiently limiting greenhouse gas emissions. > > Wolfgang: > Good issues. However we have to link this to the Internet related aspects > and we have to continue with our main priorities as human rights, > consumer > rights, bridging the digital divde, infrastructure development, privacy, > (free) access, further conceptual enhancement of the multistakehoder IG > model in ongoing international Internet negotiations in 2013 (WSIS 10+, > WTPF, UNCSTD, WTDC, UNGA, HRC, IGF, ICAAN etc.) among others. > > > > > > > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > > > > > > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From apisan at unam.mx Thu Jan 24 00:27:15 2013 From: apisan at unam.mx (Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Baruch) Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2013 05:27:15 +0000 Subject: [governance] Yet another new -strategy - thread title: It may be broke - politically - but how to fix it, technopolitically? ; ) In-Reply-To: <5100C368.6060706@itforchange.net> References: <77A59FC9477004489D44DE7FC6840E7B1B1C3A@SUEX10-mbx-08.ad.syr.edu> <20130123172502.6de4259e@quill.bollow.ch>,<2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A80133150D@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> <6DCAB3E586E6A34FB17223DF8D8F0D3D5DC2619E@W8-EX10MB.unam.local>, <6DCAB3E586E6A34FB17223DF8D8F0D3D5DC27249@W8-EX10MB.unam.local> ,<5100C368.6060706@itforchange.net> Message-ID: <6DCAB3E586E6A34FB17223DF8D8F0D3D5DC2B69F@W8-EX10MB.unam.local> Parminder, thanks. At least we have a choice to follow you or Sandra Bullock in our search for world peace. Please, though, help me: who has used the term "voluntary poverty"? Yours, Alejandro Pisanty - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Facultad de Química UNAM Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico +52-1-5541444475 FROM ABROAD +525541444475 DESDE MÉXICO SMS +525541444475 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 parminder [parminder at itforchange.net] Enviado el: miércoles, 23 de enero de 2013 23:15 Hasta: governance at lists.igcaucus.org Asunto: Re: [governance] Yet another new -strategy - thread title: It may be broke - politically - but how to fix it, technopolitically? ; ) On Thursday 24 January 2013 06:12 AM, Ian Peter wrote: > Alx, perhaps the compelling question over and above all of these > issues, particularly for those who praise and promote the > multistakeholder model as a guiding principle of internet governance, > is what can we do to make the IGC more effective in dealing with all > of these issues? > > Ian Peter > > PS while agreeing that involuntary poverty and greenhouse emissions > have better places to be discussed, internet can do things as regards > these issues. As regards tax - again there are probably wider fora > that are better for discussing this issue, but we need to acknowledge > that the tax implication of significant volumes of internet based > trade are a new and significant problems for nation states. Best we > try to address these in a multistakeholder forum, perhaps? I would strongly object to any formulation that suggests that civil and political rights/ justice issues somehow belong to core of Internet governance, and social/ economic rights/ justice issues either do not belong to IG or belong to its peripheries. Why, to make the above point explicit, for instance, dont we argue that there are other forums to discuss issues like freedom of expression or the nature of our governance systems (MSism etc) rather than do it as a part of IG. What is so inherently IG about FoE or about how our collective political decisions are taken? These issues can very well be discussed in forums devoted specifically to these issues. Let IG remain confined to core technical areas... Unthinkable right! Similarly, new paradigms and manners of economic distribution and social justice are tied to core socio-technical architectural decisions about the Internet, which is what IG is all about. Any kind of negation or even 'accommodative language' regarding social and economic rights/ justice issues - yes, poverty, taxations and such - in the IG space is not acceptable. It is core IG, period. Parminder PS: I also take strong objection to the ideology implied in the use of the term 'voluntary poverty' in such global political discussions as the present one. > > -----Original Message----- From: Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Baruch > Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2013 7:46 AM > To: Ian Peter ; governance at lists.igcaucus.org ; "Kleinwächter, > Wolfgang" ; Norbert Bollow ; Lee W McKnight > Subject: RE: [governance] Yet another new -strategy - thread title: It > may be broke - politically - but how to fix it, technopolitically? ; ) > > Ian, > > let's start by trimming and paring... involuntary poverty, greenhous > emissions, and taxation have so far eluded the IGC's grasp. > > What are the problems, say on the WGIG list of 40, where you see the > IGC has had more success? > > Yours, > > Alejandro Pisanty > > > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - > Dr. Alejandro Pisanty > Facultad de Química UNAM > Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico > > > > +52-1-5541444475 FROM ABROAD > > +525541444475 DESDE MÉXICO SMS +525541444475 > 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: Ian Peter [ian.peter at ianpeter.com] > Enviado el: miércoles, 23 de enero de 2013 13:46 > Hasta: Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Baruch; governance at lists.igcaucus.org; > "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang"; Norbert Bollow; Lee W McKnight > Asunto: Re: [governance] Yet another new -strategy - thread title: It > may be broke - politically - but how to fix it, technopolitically? ; ) > > Alx, I'm all for quick wins if we can find them - what are the "more > approachable problems of internet governance" on which you think we > should > focus? > > Ian Peter > > -----Original Message----- > From: Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Baruch > Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2013 6:36 AM > To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org ; "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang" ; Norbert > Bollow ; Lee W McKnight > Subject: RE: [governance] Yet another new -strategy - thread title: It > may > be broke - politically - but how to fix it, technopolitically? ; ) > > Wolfgang, > > "and world peace", from the eminent and much admired philosopher Sandra > Bullock. > > Sala-now-Norbert, disclaimer, this is meant as a sort of joke containing > irony with a tongue-in-cheek gesture and some eye-rolling as a > humor-intended framework for a call to focus on the more approachable > problems of Internet Governance. It may not be understood by some and may > not be liked by others. Dismiss me from posting at will. > > Alejandro Pisanty > > > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - > Dr. Alejandro Pisanty > Facultad de Química UNAM > Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico > > > > +52-1-5541444475 FROM ABROAD > > +525541444475 DESDE MÉXICO SMS +525541444475 > 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 "Kleinwächter, > Wolfgang" [wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de] > Enviado el: miércoles, 23 de enero de 2013 11:09 > Hasta: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Norbert Bollow; > governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Lee W McKnight > Asunto: AW: [governance] Yet another new -strategy - thread title: It > may be > broke - politically - but how to fix it, technopolitically? ; ) > > Norbert: >> From my perspective, I'm inclined to suggest that the key goal should >> be to > solve the problems of eradicating involuntary poverty and > sufficiently limiting greenhouse gas emissions. > > Wolfgang: > Good issues. However we have to link this to the Internet related aspects > and we have to continue with our main priorities as human rights, > consumer > rights, bridging the digital divde, infrastructure development, privacy, > (free) access, further conceptual enhancement of the multistakehoder IG > model in ongoing international Internet negotiations in 2013 (WSIS 10+, > WTPF, UNCSTD, WTDC, UNGA, HRC, IGF, ICAAN etc.) among others. > > > > > > > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > > > > > > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From avri at acm.org Thu Jan 24 00:29:18 2013 From: avri at acm.org (Avri Doria) Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2013 00:29:18 -0500 Subject: [governance] "US Exceptionalism" (was Re: Bloomberg - The Overzealous Prosecution...) In-Reply-To: <004501cdf9bb$a118f3a0$e34adae0$@gmail.com> References: <50FAC752.5090502@gmail.com> <50FBAE3C.8010600@ITforChange.net> <20130120161823.3d510425@quill.bollow.ch> <20130123110454.0349cf0f@quill.bollow.ch> <4BF7B62A-94A6-4F41-9E3D-983BDAD957E1@hserus.net> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8013314FB@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> <004501cdf9bb$a118f3a0$e34adae0$@gmail.com> Message-ID: <314FC233-1EBF-4CA1-B3AD-C0C925E203E0@acm.org> hi, Do you really not know what these are in the Internet governance (Ig) context? Or where you just trying to make a point? avri On 23 Jan 2013, at 17:47, michael gurstein wrote: > !!!!!!!! > > AoC ? > ATRT ? > JPA ? > > !!!!!!!! > > M -------------- next part -------------- ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.igcaucus.org To be removed from the list, visit: http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing For all other list information and functions, see: http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see: http://www.igcaucus.org/ Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t From gurstein at gmail.com Thu Jan 24 00:44:30 2013 From: gurstein at gmail.com (michael gurstein) Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2013 21:44:30 -0800 Subject: [governance] "US Exceptionalism" (was Re: Bloomberg - The Overzealous Prosecution...) In-Reply-To: <314FC233-1EBF-4CA1-B3AD-C0C925E203E0@acm.org> References: <50FAC752.5090502@gmail.com> <50FBAE3C.8010600@ITforChange.net> <20130120161823.3d510425@quill.bollow.ch> <20130123110454.0349cf0f@quill.bollow.ch> <4BF7B62A-94A6-4F41-9E3D-983BDAD957E1@hserus.net> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8013314FB@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> <004501cdf9bb$a118f3a0$e34adae0$@gmail.com> <314FC233-1EBF-4CA1-B3AD-C0C925E203E0@acm.org> Message-ID: <030201cdf9f5$e7ec01c0$b7c40540$@gmail.com> I don't think it matters... M -----Original Message----- From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Avri Doria Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2013 9:29 PM To: IGC Subject: Re: [governance] "US Exceptionalism" (was Re: Bloomberg - The Overzealous Prosecution...) hi, Do you really not know what these are in the Internet governance (Ig) context? Or where you just trying to make a point? avri On 23 Jan 2013, at 17:47, michael gurstein wrote: > !!!!!!!! > > AoC ? > ATRT ? > JPA ? > > !!!!!!!! > > M -------------- 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 From suresh at hserus.net Thu Jan 24 00:49:06 2013 From: suresh at hserus.net (Suresh Ramasubramanian) Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2013 11:19:06 +0530 Subject: [governance] Yet another new -strategy - thread title: It may be broke - politically - but how to fix it, technopolitically? ; ) In-Reply-To: <5100C368.6060706@itforchange.net> References: <77A59FC9477004489D44DE7FC6840E7B1B1C3A@SUEX10-mbx-08.ad.syr.edu> <20130123172502.6de4259e@quill.bollow.ch> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A80133150D@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> <6DCAB3E586E6A34FB17223DF8D8F0D3D5DC2619E@W8-EX10MB.unam.local> <6DCAB3E586E6A34FB17223DF8D8F0D3D5DC27249@W8-EX10MB.unam.local> <5100C368.6060706@itforchange.net> Message-ID: IG should stick to technical and policy (as opposed to 'political') issues of *internet* *governance* FoE, or any other topic if and only if it has an impact on these governance structures [and the intersection of the two does exist, but does not cover all of FoE, all of development etc] And no, this effort isn't about politics, and none of these issues have any service done to them by casting them in political terms. --srs (iPad) On 24-Jan-2013, at 10:45, parminder wrote: > > On Thursday 24 January 2013 06:12 AM, Ian Peter wrote: >> Alx, perhaps the compelling question over and above all of these issues, particularly for those who praise and promote the multistakeholder model as a guiding principle of internet governance, is what can we do to make the IGC more effective in dealing with all of these issues? >> >> Ian Peter >> >> PS while agreeing that involuntary poverty and greenhouse emissions have better places to be discussed, internet can do things as regards these issues. As regards tax - again there are probably wider fora that are better for discussing this issue, but we need to acknowledge that the tax implication of significant volumes of internet based trade are a new and significant problems for nation states. Best we try to address these in a multistakeholder forum, perhaps? > > I would strongly object to any formulation that suggests that civil and political rights/ justice issues somehow belong to core of Internet governance, and social/ economic rights/ justice issues either do not belong to IG or belong to its peripheries. > > Why, to make the above point explicit, for instance, dont we argue that there are other forums to discuss issues like freedom of expression or the nature of our governance systems (MSism etc) rather than do it as a part of IG. > > What is so inherently IG about FoE or about how our collective political decisions are taken? These issues can very well be discussed in forums devoted specifically to these issues. Let IG remain confined to core technical areas... Unthinkable right! Similarly, new paradigms and manners of economic distribution and social justice are tied to core socio-technical architectural decisions about the Internet, which is what IG is all about. > > Any kind of negation or even 'accommodative language' regarding social and economic rights/ justice issues - yes, poverty, taxations and such - in the IG space is not acceptable. It is core IG, period. > > Parminder > > PS: I also take strong objection to the ideology implied in the use of the term 'voluntary poverty' in such global political discussions as the present one. > > >> >> -----Original Message----- From: Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Baruch >> Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2013 7:46 AM >> To: Ian Peter ; governance at lists.igcaucus.org ; "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang" ; Norbert Bollow ; Lee W McKnight >> Subject: RE: [governance] Yet another new -strategy - thread title: It may be broke - politically - but how to fix it, technopolitically? ; ) >> >> Ian, >> >> let's start by trimming and paring... involuntary poverty, greenhous emissions, and taxation have so far eluded the IGC's grasp. >> >> What are the problems, say on the WGIG list of 40, where you see the IGC has had more success? >> >> Yours, >> >> Alejandro Pisanty >> >> >> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - >> Dr. Alejandro Pisanty >> Facultad de Química UNAM >> Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico >> >> >> >> +52-1-5541444475 FROM ABROAD >> >> +525541444475 DESDE MÉXICO SMS +525541444475 >> 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: Ian Peter [ian.peter at ianpeter.com] >> Enviado el: miércoles, 23 de enero de 2013 13:46 >> Hasta: Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Baruch; governance at lists.igcaucus.org; "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang"; Norbert Bollow; Lee W McKnight >> Asunto: Re: [governance] Yet another new -strategy - thread title: It may be broke - politically - but how to fix it, technopolitically? ; ) >> >> Alx, I'm all for quick wins if we can find them - what are the "more >> approachable problems of internet governance" on which you think we should >> focus? >> >> Ian Peter >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Baruch >> Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2013 6:36 AM >> To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org ; "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang" ; Norbert >> Bollow ; Lee W McKnight >> Subject: RE: [governance] Yet another new -strategy - thread title: It may >> be broke - politically - but how to fix it, technopolitically? ; ) >> >> Wolfgang, >> >> "and world peace", from the eminent and much admired philosopher Sandra >> Bullock. >> >> Sala-now-Norbert, disclaimer, this is meant as a sort of joke containing >> irony with a tongue-in-cheek gesture and some eye-rolling as a >> humor-intended framework for a call to focus on the more approachable >> problems of Internet Governance. It may not be understood by some and may >> not be liked by others. Dismiss me from posting at will. >> >> Alejandro Pisanty >> >> >> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - >> Dr. Alejandro Pisanty >> Facultad de Química UNAM >> Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico >> >> >> >> +52-1-5541444475 FROM ABROAD >> >> +525541444475 DESDE MÉXICO SMS +525541444475 >> 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 "Kleinwächter, >> Wolfgang" [wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de] >> Enviado el: miércoles, 23 de enero de 2013 11:09 >> Hasta: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Norbert Bollow; >> governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Lee W McKnight >> Asunto: AW: [governance] Yet another new -strategy - thread title: It may be >> broke - politically - but how to fix it, technopolitically? ; ) >> >> Norbert: >>> From my perspective, I'm inclined to suggest that the key goal should be to >> solve the problems of eradicating involuntary poverty and >> sufficiently limiting greenhouse gas emissions. >> >> Wolfgang: >> Good issues. However we have to link this to the Internet related aspects >> and we have to continue with our main priorities as human rights, consumer >> rights, bridging the digital divde, infrastructure development, privacy, >> (free) access, further conceptual enhancement of the multistakehoder IG >> model in ongoing international Internet negotiations in 2013 (WSIS 10+, >> WTPF, UNCSTD, WTDC, UNGA, HRC, IGF, ICAAN etc.) among others. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From suresh at hserus.net Thu Jan 24 00:50:55 2013 From: suresh at hserus.net (Suresh Ramasubramanian) Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2013 11:20:55 +0530 Subject: [governance] Yet another new -strategy - thread title: It may be broke - politically - but how to fix it, technopolitically? ; ) In-Reply-To: <6DCAB3E586E6A34FB17223DF8D8F0D3D5DC2B69F@W8-EX10MB.unam.local> References: <77A59FC9477004489D44DE7FC6840E7B1B1C3A@SUEX10-mbx-08.ad.syr.edu> <20130123172502.6de4259e@quill.bollow.ch> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A80133150D@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> <6DCAB3E586E6A34FB17223DF8D8F0D3D5DC2619E@W8-EX10MB.unam.local> <6DCAB3E586E6A34FB17223DF8D8F0D3D5DC27249@W8-EX10MB.unam.local> <5100C368.6060706@itforchange.net> <6DCAB3E586E6A34FB17223DF8D8F0D3D5DC2B69F@W8-EX10MB.unam.local> Message-ID: Come to think of it, the phrase used was "involuntary poverty". Which does exist in that people can suddenly become poor due to no fault of theirs (economic recession, layoffs ...) Voluntary poverty might actually exist - as in cases where you become a monk and decide to cast away all your worldly goods and attachments. But I fail to see where that has a bearing on this issue, or where it suddenly becomes "politically sensitive". --srs (iPad) On 24-Jan-2013, at 10:57, "Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Baruch" wrote: > Parminder, > > thanks. At least we have a choice to follow you or Sandra Bullock in our search for world peace. > > Please, though, help me: who has used the term "voluntary poverty"? > > Yours, > > Alejandro Pisanty > > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - > Dr. Alejandro Pisanty > Facultad de Química UNAM > Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico > > > > +52-1-5541444475 FROM ABROAD > > +525541444475 DESDE MÉXICO SMS +525541444475 > 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 parminder [parminder at itforchange.net] > Enviado el: miércoles, 23 de enero de 2013 23:15 > Hasta: governance at lists.igcaucus.org > Asunto: Re: [governance] Yet another new -strategy - thread title: It may be broke - politically - but how to fix it, technopolitically? ; ) > > On Thursday 24 January 2013 06:12 AM, Ian Peter wrote: >> Alx, perhaps the compelling question over and above all of these >> issues, particularly for those who praise and promote the >> multistakeholder model as a guiding principle of internet governance, >> is what can we do to make the IGC more effective in dealing with all >> of these issues? >> >> Ian Peter >> >> PS while agreeing that involuntary poverty and greenhouse emissions >> have better places to be discussed, internet can do things as regards >> these issues. As regards tax - again there are probably wider fora >> that are better for discussing this issue, but we need to acknowledge >> that the tax implication of significant volumes of internet based >> trade are a new and significant problems for nation states. Best we >> try to address these in a multistakeholder forum, perhaps? > > I would strongly object to any formulation that suggests that civil and > political rights/ justice issues somehow belong to core of Internet > governance, and social/ economic rights/ justice issues either do not > belong to IG or belong to its peripheries. > > Why, to make the above point explicit, for instance, dont we argue that > there are other forums to discuss issues like freedom of expression or > the nature of our governance systems (MSism etc) rather than do it as a > part of IG. > > What is so inherently IG about FoE or about how our collective political > decisions are taken? These issues can very well be discussed in forums > devoted specifically to these issues. Let IG remain confined to core > technical areas... Unthinkable right! Similarly, new paradigms and > manners of economic distribution and social justice are tied to core > socio-technical architectural decisions about the Internet, which is > what IG is all about. > > Any kind of negation or even 'accommodative language' regarding social > and economic rights/ justice issues - yes, poverty, taxations and such - > in the IG space is not acceptable. It is core IG, period. > > Parminder > > PS: I also take strong objection to the ideology implied in the use of > the term 'voluntary poverty' in such global political discussions as the > present one. > > >> >> -----Original Message----- From: Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Baruch >> Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2013 7:46 AM >> To: Ian Peter ; governance at lists.igcaucus.org ; "Kleinwächter, >> Wolfgang" ; Norbert Bollow ; Lee W McKnight >> Subject: RE: [governance] Yet another new -strategy - thread title: It >> may be broke - politically - but how to fix it, technopolitically? ; ) >> >> Ian, >> >> let's start by trimming and paring... involuntary poverty, greenhous >> emissions, and taxation have so far eluded the IGC's grasp. >> >> What are the problems, say on the WGIG list of 40, where you see the >> IGC has had more success? >> >> Yours, >> >> Alejandro Pisanty >> >> >> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - >> Dr. Alejandro Pisanty >> Facultad de Química UNAM >> Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico >> >> >> >> +52-1-5541444475 FROM ABROAD >> >> +525541444475 DESDE MÉXICO SMS +525541444475 >> 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: Ian Peter [ian.peter at ianpeter.com] >> Enviado el: miércoles, 23 de enero de 2013 13:46 >> Hasta: Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Baruch; governance at lists.igcaucus.org; >> "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang"; Norbert Bollow; Lee W McKnight >> Asunto: Re: [governance] Yet another new -strategy - thread title: It >> may be broke - politically - but how to fix it, technopolitically? ; ) >> >> Alx, I'm all for quick wins if we can find them - what are the "more >> approachable problems of internet governance" on which you think we >> should >> focus? >> >> Ian Peter >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Baruch >> Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2013 6:36 AM >> To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org ; "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang" ; Norbert >> Bollow ; Lee W McKnight >> Subject: RE: [governance] Yet another new -strategy - thread title: It >> may >> be broke - politically - but how to fix it, technopolitically? ; ) >> >> Wolfgang, >> >> "and world peace", from the eminent and much admired philosopher Sandra >> Bullock. >> >> Sala-now-Norbert, disclaimer, this is meant as a sort of joke containing >> irony with a tongue-in-cheek gesture and some eye-rolling as a >> humor-intended framework for a call to focus on the more approachable >> problems of Internet Governance. It may not be understood by some and may >> not be liked by others. Dismiss me from posting at will. >> >> Alejandro Pisanty >> >> >> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - >> Dr. Alejandro Pisanty >> Facultad de Química UNAM >> Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico >> >> >> >> +52-1-5541444475 FROM ABROAD >> >> +525541444475 DESDE MÉXICO SMS +525541444475 >> 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 "Kleinwächter, >> Wolfgang" [wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de] >> Enviado el: miércoles, 23 de enero de 2013 11:09 >> Hasta: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Norbert Bollow; >> governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Lee W McKnight >> Asunto: AW: [governance] Yet another new -strategy - thread title: It >> may be >> broke - politically - but how to fix it, technopolitically? ; ) >> >> Norbert: >>> From my perspective, I'm inclined to suggest that the key goal should >>> be to >> solve the problems of eradicating involuntary poverty and >> sufficiently limiting greenhouse gas emissions. >> >> Wolfgang: >> Good issues. However we have to link this to the Internet related aspects >> and we have to continue with our main priorities as human rights, >> consumer >> rights, bridging the digital divde, infrastructure development, privacy, >> (free) access, further conceptual enhancement of the multistakehoder IG >> model in ongoing international Internet negotiations in 2013 (WSIS 10+, >> WTPF, UNCSTD, WTDC, UNGA, HRC, IGF, ICAAN etc.) among others. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From suresh at hserus.net Thu Jan 24 00:54:28 2013 From: suresh at hserus.net (Suresh Ramasubramanian) Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2013 11:24:28 +0530 Subject: [governance] France Proposes an Internet Tax In-Reply-To: <5100BE68.3060203@itforchange.net> References: <50FD0871.7040301@bluewin.ch> <50FD0CE0.6010603@gmail.com> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD231DE6D@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> <5100BE68.3060203@itforchange.net> Message-ID: I completely agree with only the first paragraph that Parminder wrote. The tax as such is infeasible, and creates a perverse sort of balance between information gathered and amount of tax levied. It also pays absolutely no attention to the privacy aspects of information gathering. The second paragraph, casting this in a broader context .. well, I disagree. We need to stick to a narrow and focused scope of definition for IG, without which we squander our efforts and limited resources. --srs (iPad) On 24-Jan-2013, at 10:24, parminder wrote: > > The proposition that governments should collect a tax because companies gather personal information prima facie does not appeal very much to me. It seems to raise a number of difficult questions - for instance, in collecting such a tax what kind of blanket permission may be taken to have been granted for what kind of practices.. One will however have to read the whole report to be able to give an informed comment on the proposal which I reserve for the present. > > What is important to stress here however is the larger issue that these kinds of news and reports bring up, and increasingly so. Some of us have been trying to raise the issue for a long time on this list and other global IG fora; that IG centrally implicated a huge number of very important issues of economic distribution and social justice. It not just a matter of civil and political rights. We need to raise, understand and analyse these issues and possible ways to address them. This is something the global civil society engaged in the IG area has completely failed to so do, which has affected its credibility among the political actors in the South. And also among the global civil society groups active in issues of economic and social justice. IGC must look for ways to create the needed bridges with these constituencies and groups, for it to emerge as a credible/ premier civil society group in the area of global IG... > > parminder > > > > > On Tuesday 22 January 2013 08:54 PM, Milton L Mueller wrote: >> >> >> >> The report published Friday said a tax on data collection was justified on grounds that users of services like Google and Facebook are, in effect, working for these companies without pay by providing the personal information that lets them sell advertising. >> >> [Milton L Mueller] Good deal. In order to compensate and protect us from “working without pay” we will work for the government of France without pay as well. Cartesian logic at work. >> >> Or perhaps they will use the revenues to subsidize access to Facebook and Google, since they charge their users so much that…um, well, some of them, um, can’t afford… oh, never mind. >> >> Of course, this is just a tax on the advertisers, in the end. It will simply increase the costs of Google/Facebook and be recovered from advertisers. >> >> It wouldn’t be France however unless you threw a soupcon of anti-Americanism and trade protectionism into the pot as well (will the same tax will be applied to all commercial broadcasters in France, whose viewers are sold to advertisers “without pay”?) How about French newspapers with ads – their poor customers even have to pay for the newspaper, and then are sold to advertisers. Merde! >> >> Interestingly, this whole line of argument presumes that the services users receive in return for their data are worthless. Remember that next time you hear someone claim that Google and Facebook are “essential facilities” that no one can live without. >> >> It’s sad that governments that just want more money have to strain to come up with trendy rationalizations. What happened to the good old days when they just sent in armed thugs to appropriate a bunch of your pigs and cows? >> > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From dogwallah at gmail.com Thu Jan 24 01:26:43 2013 From: dogwallah at gmail.com (McTim) Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2013 01:26:43 -0500 Subject: [governance] Facebook spent $4 million to lobby U.S. lawmakers in 2012 In-Reply-To: References: <510086BE.6010100@ITforChange.net> Message-ID: On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 9:13 PM, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote: > What does that compare to the cost that well funded NGOs spend on lobbying? I don't know, but 16 Million is .032 % of 50 Billion (what Google spent on "lobbying") vs last year's revenue. -- Cheers, McTim "A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A route indicates how we get there." Jon Postel -------------- next part -------------- ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.igcaucus.org To be removed from the list, visit: http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing For all other list information and functions, see: http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see: http://www.igcaucus.org/ Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t From william.drake at uzh.ch Thu Jan 24 02:27:01 2013 From: william.drake at uzh.ch (William Drake) Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2013 08:27:01 +0100 Subject: [governance] "US Exceptionalism" (was Re: Bloomberg - The Overzealous Prosecution...) In-Reply-To: <030201cdf9f5$e7ec01c0$b7c40540$@gmail.com> References: <50FAC752.5090502@gmail.com> <50FBAE3C.8010600@ITforChange.net> <20130120161823.3d510425@quill.bollow.ch> <20130123110454.0349cf0f@quill.bollow.ch> <4BF7B62A-94A6-4F41-9E3D-983BDAD957E1@hserus.net> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8013314FB@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> <004501cdf9bb$a118f3a0$e34adae0$@gmail.com> <314FC233-1EBF-4CA1-B3AD-C0C925E203E0@acm.org> <030201cdf9f5$e7ec01c0$b7c40540$@gmail.com> Message-ID: <4A3C8319-9999-4B57-AFC1-8BAE1903D1A7@uzh.ch> LOL. WTF? On Jan 24, 2013, at 6:44, "michael gurstein" wrote: > I don't think it matters... > > M > > -----Original Message----- > From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org > [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Avri Doria > Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2013 9:29 PM > To: IGC > Subject: Re: [governance] "US Exceptionalism" (was Re: Bloomberg - The > Overzealous Prosecution...) > > hi, > > Do you really not know what these are in the Internet governance (Ig) > context? > Or where you just trying to make a point? > > avri > > > On 23 Jan 2013, at 17:47, michael gurstein wrote: > >> !!!!!!!! >> >> AoC ? >> ATRT ? >> JPA ? >> >> !!!!!!!! >> >> M > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From ajp at glocom.ac.jp Thu Jan 24 02:54:25 2013 From: ajp at glocom.ac.jp (Adam Peake) Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2013 16:54:25 +0900 Subject: [governance] Facebook spent $4 million to lobby U.S. lawmakers in 2012 In-Reply-To: References: <510086BE.6010100@ITforChange.net> Message-ID: $4 million for a company of it's size, with legislation that would directly effect its business always around doesn't seem that much < https://www.opensecrets.org/lobby/top.php?showYear=2012&indexType=s> Not saying it's good, just that it doesn't seem large in the scheme of things. Adam On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 3:26 PM, McTim wrote: > On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 9:13 PM, Suresh Ramasubramanian > wrote: > > What does that compare to the cost that well funded NGOs spend on > lobbying? > > I don't know, but 16 Million is .032 % of 50 Billion (what Google > spent on "lobbying") vs last year's revenue. > > > > -- > Cheers, > > McTim > "A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A > route indicates how we get there." Jon Postel > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From nb at bollow.ch Thu Jan 24 05:52:46 2013 From: nb at bollow.ch (Norbert Bollow) Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2013 11:52:46 +0100 Subject: [governance] "US Exceptionalism" (was Re: Bloomberg - The Overzealous Prosecution...) In-Reply-To: References: <50FAC752.5090502@gmail.com> <50FBAE3C.8010600@ITforChange.net> <20130120161823.3d510425@quill.bollow.ch> <20130123110454.0349cf0f@quill.bollow.ch> <4BF7B62A-94A6-4F41-9E3D-983BDAD957E1@hserus.net> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8013314FB@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> <004501cdf9bb$a118f3a0$e34adae0$@gmail.com> Message-ID: <20130124115246.4c44ac6e@quill.bollow.ch> [IGC Coordinator hat on] Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote: > If this is in the context of Norbert's requesting that we all use > less acronyms I don't recall having requested that, but I do think that it's good to be aware that for every acronym, there's probably some readers of the list who are not familiar with it. So I do think that it's good practice to include the full English text for each acronym from time to time, at least the first time in a give discussion thread that each acronym is used. > this is somewhat like saying we need to teach maths > without using confusing terms like, say, pi, sigma etc which are, to > be honest, all greek to most people that first encounter them. And consequently it is appropriate to explain these symbols to people when they encounter them for the first time. > Maybe work with Diplo or someone to conduct some sort of capacity > building for civil society? That may well be a good idea, but it wouldn't discharge us from the responsibility to be aware of the need for inclusiveness. Greetings, Norbert > On 24-Jan-2013, at 4:17, "michael gurstein" > wrote: > > > !!!!!!!! > > > > AoC ? > > ATRT ? > > JPA ? > > > > !!!!!!!! -------------- 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 From suresh at hserus.net Thu Jan 24 06:01:03 2013 From: suresh at hserus.net (Suresh Ramasubramanian) Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2013 16:31:03 +0530 Subject: [governance] "US Exceptionalism" (was Re: Bloomberg - The Overzealous Prosecution...) In-Reply-To: <20130124115246.4c44ac6e@quill.bollow.ch> References: <50FAC752.5090502@gmail.com> <50FBAE3C.8010600@ITforChange.net> <20130120161823.3d510425@quill.bollow.ch> <20130123110454.0349cf0f@quill.bollow.ch> <4BF7B62A-94A6-4F41-9E3D-983BDAD957E1@hserus.net> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8013314FB@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> <004501cdf9bb$a118f3a0$e34adae0$@gmail.com> <20130124115246.4c44ac6e@quill.bollow.ch> Message-ID: <0EE69335-F8F0-4588-987A-6E99A2042EFF@hserus.net> Inclusiveness can sometimes only be achieved by capacity building The UN has a small org in Bangkok called APT, Asia Pacific Telecommunity, which has been set up to build capacity among telecom ministry and regulator officials from smaller countries in the asiapac region, to enable them to effectively participate in ITU activities. Something similar for civil society activists would be ideal. The environment we are in is complex and will not benefit from simplifying the conversation to such an extent that commonly used acronyms are suppressed. I agree with you about not using slang or idiom as it may confuse other participants, but OECD, ITU, ICANN etc nomenclature is the same regardless of the mother tongue of the participant interested in it. --srs (iPad) On 24-Jan-2013, at 16:22, Norbert Bollow wrote: > [IGC Coordinator hat on] > > Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote: > >> If this is in the context of Norbert's requesting that we all use >> less acronyms > > I don't recall having requested that, but I do think that it's good to > be aware that for every acronym, there's probably some readers of the > list who are not familiar with it. So I do think that it's good > practice to include the full English text for each acronym from > time to time, at least the first time in a give discussion thread > that each acronym is used. > >> this is somewhat like saying we need to teach maths >> without using confusing terms like, say, pi, sigma etc which are, to >> be honest, all greek to most people that first encounter them. > > And consequently it is appropriate to explain these symbols to people > when they encounter them for the first time. > >> Maybe work with Diplo or someone to conduct some sort of capacity >> building for civil society? > > That may well be a good idea, but it wouldn't discharge us from the > responsibility to be aware of the need for inclusiveness. > > Greetings, > Norbert > >> On 24-Jan-2013, at 4:17, "michael gurstein" >> wrote: >> >>> !!!!!!!! >>> >>> AoC ? >>> ATRT ? >>> JPA ? >>> >>> !!!!!!!! -------------- 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 From nashton at ccianet.org Thu Jan 24 06:01:21 2013 From: nashton at ccianet.org (Nick Ashton-Hart) Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2013 12:01:21 +0100 Subject: [governance] "US Exceptionalism" (was Re: Bloomberg - The Overzealous Prosecution...) In-Reply-To: <20130124115246.4c44ac6e@quill.bollow.ch> References: <50FAC752.5090502@gmail.com> <50FBAE3C.8010600@ITforChange.net> <20130120161823.3d510425@quill.bollow.ch> <20130123110454.0349cf0f@quill.bollow.ch> <4BF7B62A-94A6-4F41-9E3D-983BDAD957E1@hserus.net> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8013314FB@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> <004501cdf9bb$a118f3a0$e34adae0$@gmail.com> <20130124115246.4c44ac6e@quill.bollow.ch> Message-ID: <2983360630403124974@unknownmsgid> +1 to everything Norbert has said. If we are to preach inclusiveness we had ought to practice it linguistically IMHO Sent from one of my handheld thingies, please forgive linguistic mangling On 24 Jan 2013, at 11:53, Norbert Bollow wrote: > [IGC Coordinator hat on] > > Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote: > >> If this is in the context of Norbert's requesting that we all use >> less acronyms > > I don't recall having requested that, but I do think that it's good to > be aware that for every acronym, there's probably some readers of the > list who are not familiar with it. So I do think that it's good > practice to include the full English text for each acronym from > time to time, at least the first time in a give discussion thread > that each acronym is used. > >> this is somewhat like saying we need to teach maths >> without using confusing terms like, say, pi, sigma etc which are, to >> be honest, all greek to most people that first encounter them. > > And consequently it is appropriate to explain these symbols to people > when they encounter them for the first time. > >> Maybe work with Diplo or someone to conduct some sort of capacity >> building for civil society? > > That may well be a good idea, but it wouldn't discharge us from the > responsibility to be aware of the need for inclusiveness. > > Greetings, > Norbert > >> On 24-Jan-2013, at 4:17, "michael gurstein" >> wrote: >> >>> !!!!!!!! >>> >>> AoC ? >>> ATRT ? >>> JPA ? >>> >>> !!!!!!!! > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From nb at bollow.ch Thu Jan 24 06:14:37 2013 From: nb at bollow.ch (Norbert Bollow) Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2013 12:14:37 +0100 Subject: [governance] Yet another new -strategy - thread title: It may be broke - politically - but how to fix it, technopolitically? ; ) In-Reply-To: References: <77A59FC9477004489D44DE7FC6840E7B1B1C3A@SUEX10-mbx-08.ad.syr.edu> <20130123172502.6de4259e@quill.bollow.ch> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A80133150D@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> <6DCAB3E586E6A34FB17223DF8D8F0D3D5DC2619E@W8-EX10MB.unam.local> <6DCAB3E586E6A34FB17223DF8D8F0D3D5DC27249@W8-EX10MB.unam.local> <5100C368.6060706@itforchange.net> <6DCAB3E586E6A34FB17223DF8D8F0D3D5DC2B69F@W8-EX10MB.unam.local> Message-ID: <20130124121437.31178dec@quill.bollow.ch> > Alejandro Pisanty Baruch wrote: > > Please, though, help me: who has used the term "voluntary poverty"? I'll admit to having proposed that "eradicating involuntary poverty" should be part of our goal. In fact I would even assert that it is a human right of every poor person to demand this of us and of everyone else who is in some way working in the realm of governance. Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote: > Come to think of it, the phrase used was "involuntary poverty". > Which does exist in that people can suddenly become poor due to no > fault of theirs (economic recession, layoffs ...) or being born in a "developing country" to any but the few very privileged families. > Voluntary poverty might actually exist - as in cases where you become > a monk and decide to cast away all your worldly goods and > attachments. That's exactly the example that I had in mind - I don't think that such voluntary poverty, rare as it is, needs to be eradicated. It's the involuntary kind of poverty that is a problem, and in view of how widespread it is, it's a huge problem. > But I fail to see where that has a bearing on this > issue, or where it suddenly becomes "politically sensitive". Are there better ways to express what I had in mind? Greetings, Norbert -------------- 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 From nb at bollow.ch Thu Jan 24 06:27:38 2013 From: nb at bollow.ch (Norbert Bollow) Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2013 12:27:38 +0100 Subject: [governance] 3rd meeting of the WTPF Informal Expert Group (IEG) In-Reply-To: <51004BEC.7090706@apc.org> References: <1358972309.47521.YahooMailNeo@web120105.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <51004BEC.7090706@apc.org> Message-ID: <20130124122738.0ad6c4c2@quill.bollow.ch> Dear all How does this work in practice? Is it reasonable to expect that all civil society people who want to participate in this Informal Expert Group will be able to do so? Greetings, Norbert Anriette Esterhuysen wrote: > Dear Nnenna > > Yes, received this with a letter inviting us to nominate people for > the WTPF Informal Expert Group. > > The ITU has made a request form available for people who want to > participate in the work of the Informal Expert Group. > > It is available here: > > http://www.itu.int/en/wtpf-13/Documents/request%20form.docx > > Anriette > > > On 23/01/2013 22:18, Nnenna wrote: > > > > Did anyone else get this? > > > > === > > > > I would like to inform you, that the 3rd meeting of the WTPF > > Informal Expert Group (IEG) will take place on 6-8 February 2013 at > > ITU Headquarters in Geneva, Switzerland (see attached letter). For > > further details and instructions on how to participate please see > > the following link: http://www.itu.int/en/wtpf-13/Pages/ieg.aspx > > > > === > > > > Best > > > > N > > > > > > Nnenna Nwakanma | Founder and CEO, NNENNA.ORG | Consultants > > Information | Communications | Technology and Events | for > > Development Cote d'Ivoire (+225)| Tel: 225 27144 | Fax 224 26471 > > |Mob. 07416820 Ghana: +233 249561345| Nigeria: +234 8101887065| > > http://www.nnenna.org nnenna at nnenna.org| @nnenna | Skype - nnenna75 > > | nnennaorg.blogspot.com > > > -------------- 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 From suresh at hserus.net Thu Jan 24 06:41:37 2013 From: suresh at hserus.net (Suresh Ramasubramanian) Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2013 17:11:37 +0530 Subject: [governance] Yet another new -strategy - thread title: It may be broke - politically - but how to fix it, technopolitically? ; ) In-Reply-To: <20130124121437.31178dec@quill.bollow.ch> References: <77A59FC9477004489D44DE7FC6840E7B1B1C3A@SUEX10-mbx-08.ad.syr.edu> <20130123172502.6de4259e@quill.bollow.ch> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A80133150D@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> <6DCAB3E586E6A34FB17223DF8D8F0D3D5DC2619E@W8-EX10MB.unam.local> <6DCAB3E586E6A34FB17223DF8D8F0D3D5DC27249@W8-EX10MB.unam.local> <5100C368.6060706@itforchange.net> <6DCAB3E586E6A34FB17223DF8D8F0D3D5DC2B69F@W8-EX10MB.unam.local> <20130124121437.31178dec@quill.bollow.ch> Message-ID: On 24-Jan-2013, at 16:44, Norbert Bollow wrote: > Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote: > >> Come to think of it, the phrase used was "involuntary poverty". >> Which does exist in that people can suddenly become poor due to no >> fault of theirs (economic recession, layoffs ...) > > or being born in a "developing country" to any but the few very > privileged families. > Not many of those would come under the heading of internet governance. Sociology, sure. And development work that's engaged in by a wide variety of NGOs, sure. >> But I fail to see where that has a bearing on this >> issue, or where it suddenly becomes "politically sensitive". > > Are there better ways to express what I had in mind? > Not really. While I disagree with the contention that this needs to be part of this list's mandate, I see nothing politically sensitive or rating vehement objections about your statement. --srs -------------- 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 From vanda at uol.com.br Thu Jan 24 06:44:17 2013 From: vanda at uol.com.br (Vanda UOL) Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2013 09:44:17 -0200 Subject: [governance] "US Exceptionalism" (was Re: Bloomberg - The Overzealous Prosecution...) In-Reply-To: <2983360630403124974@unknownmsgid> References: <50FAC752.5090502@gmail.com> <50FBAE3C.8010600@ITforChange.net> <20130120161823.3d510425@quill.bollow.ch> <20130123110454.0349cf0f@quill.bollow.ch> <4BF7B62A-94A6-4F41-9E3D-983BDAD957E1@hserus.net> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8013314FB@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> <004501cdf9bb$a118f3a0$e34adae0$@gmail.com> <20130124115246.4c44ac6e@quill.bollow.ch> <2983360630403124974@unknownmsgid> Message-ID: <35E85042-0B6D-44D8-B0EC-9F34269704F6@uol.com.br> Indeed in our Icann at large community list, at leat latin america and caribbean area, we are using this approach and communication and understanding of sevral context have improved a lot. Best, Vanda Scartezini Sent from my iPad On 24/01/2013, at 09:01, Nick Ashton-Hart wrote: > +1 to everything Norbert has said. If we are to preach inclusiveness > we had ought to practice it linguistically IMHO > > Sent from one of my handheld thingies, please forgive linguistic mangling > > On 24 Jan 2013, at 11:53, Norbert Bollow wrote: > >> [IGC Coordinator hat on] >> >> Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote: >> >>> If this is in the context of Norbert's requesting that we all use >>> less acronyms >> >> I don't recall having requested that, but I do think that it's good to >> be aware that for every acronym, there's probably some readers of the >> list who are not familiar with it. So I do think that it's good >> practice to include the full English text for each acronym from >> time to time, at least the first time in a give discussion thread >> that each acronym is used. >> >>> this is somewhat like saying we need to teach maths >>> without using confusing terms like, say, pi, sigma etc which are, to >>> be honest, all greek to most people that first encounter them. >> >> And consequently it is appropriate to explain these symbols to people >> when they encounter them for the first time. >> >>> Maybe work with Diplo or someone to conduct some sort of capacity >>> building for civil society? >> >> That may well be a good idea, but it wouldn't discharge us from the >> responsibility to be aware of the need for inclusiveness. >> >> Greetings, >> Norbert >> >>> On 24-Jan-2013, at 4:17, "michael gurstein" >>> wrote: >>> >>>> !!!!!!!! >>>> >>>> AoC ? >>>> ATRT ? >>>> JPA ? >>>> >>>> !!!!!!!! >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From suresh at hserus.net Thu Jan 24 06:47:39 2013 From: suresh at hserus.net (Suresh Ramasubramanian) Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2013 17:17:39 +0530 Subject: [governance] 3rd meeting of the WTPF Informal Expert Group (IEG) In-Reply-To: <20130124122738.0ad6c4c2@quill.bollow.ch> References: <1358972309.47521.YahooMailNeo@web120105.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <51004BEC.7090706@apc.org> <20130124122738.0ad6c4c2@quill.bollow.ch> Message-ID: <06A4E330-AC19-4E18-A32B-F187CFE76F34@hserus.net> --srs (iPad) On 24-Jan-2013, at 16:57, Norbert Bollow wrote: > How does this work in practice? Is it reasonable to expect that all > civil society people who want to participate in this Informal Expert > Group will be able to do so? In practice you need to be ready and willing to travel to Geneva, at your expense, besides participating in email discussions and conference calls. If the group thinks it makes sense to nominate someone to go there, who isn't already based in Geneva, it might have to look around for an NGO to fund the individual nominated with a fellowship. Else, as Bill Drake among others are actually based in Geneva (correct me if I am wrong) it might be expedient to let them represent our interests there. That is, if there is consensus that we need to participate in the IEG. It is a significant commitment of time to the individual concerned and Geneva isn't exactly a very inexpensive city (though there are substantial discounts for hotel rooms at ITU rates, and even cheaper accomodation and prices across the French border in Ferney). --srs -------------- 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 From ajp at glocom.ac.jp Thu Jan 24 07:10:02 2013 From: ajp at glocom.ac.jp (Adam Peake) Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2013 21:10:02 +0900 Subject: [governance] 3rd meeting of the WTPF Informal Expert Group (IEG) In-Reply-To: <51004BEC.7090706@apc.org> References: <1358972309.47521.YahooMailNeo@web120105.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <51004BEC.7090706@apc.org> Message-ID: http://www.itu.int/en/wtpf-13/Pages/report-sg.aspx 4th draft of the Secretary-General's report for World Telecommunication Policy Forum (WTPF) is open for comment until Feb 1. I guess this document and comments will be the basis for discussions of the expert group meeting on Feb 6-8. Adam On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 5:45 AM, Anriette Esterhuysen wrote: > Dear Nnenna > > Yes, received this with a letter inviting us to nominate people for the > WTPF Informal Expert Group. > > The ITU has made a request form available for people who want to > participate in the work of the Informal Expert Group. > > It is available here: > > http://www.itu.int/en/wtpf-13/Documents/request%20form.docx > > Anriette > > > On 23/01/2013 22:18, Nnenna wrote: > > Did anyone else get this? > > === > > I would like to inform you, that the 3rd meeting of the WTPF Informal > Expert Group (IEG) will take place on 6-8 February 2013 at ITU > Headquarters in Geneva, Switzerland (see attached letter). For further details and instructions on how to participate please see the following link: http://www.itu.int/en/wtpf-13/Pages/ieg.aspx > > === > > Best > > N > > > Nnenna Nwakanma | Founder and CEO, NNENNA.ORG | Consultants > Information | Communications | Technology and Events | for Development > Cote d'Ivoire (+225)| Tel: 225 27144 | Fax 224 26471 |Mob. 07416820 > Ghana: +233 249561345| Nigeria: +234 8101887065| http://www.nnenna.org nnenna at nnenna.org| @nnenna | Skype - nnenna75 | nnennaorg.blogspot.com > > > -- > ------------------------------------------------------ > anriette esterhuysen anriette at apc.org > executive director, association for progressive communicationswww.apc.org > po box 29755, melville 2109 > south africa > tel/fax +27 11 726 1692 > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From nne75 at yahoo.com Thu Jan 24 07:28:47 2013 From: nne75 at yahoo.com (Nnenna) Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2013 04:28:47 -0800 (PST) Subject: [governance] 3rd meeting of the WTPF Informal Expert Group (IEG) In-Reply-To: <06A4E330-AC19-4E18-A32B-F187CFE76F34@hserus.net> References: <1358972309.47521.YahooMailNeo@web120105.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <51004BEC.7090706@apc.org> <20130124122738.0ad6c4c2@quill.bollow.ch> <06A4E330-AC19-4E18-A32B-F187CFE76F34@hserus.net> Message-ID: <1359030527.39956.YahooMailNeo@web120103.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Clearly there is an internal ITU selection process.  It appears the invite was sent to an already "selected" group. I think the "Have you been to any ITU meeting recently" will be crucial. I am sending an expression of interest. To the ITU-meeting question above, I answered yes, with IGF Baku and WCIT Dubai. I do not have funding to go.. but I'd rather be accepted first and get funding last minute, then get funding and have to start pushing to get "entrance". This is one lesson I learned from attending WCIT.  Not registering early cost me a whole lot. If there is a consensus for Bill and the Geneva folks to speak on behalf of the CS, which I will strongly support, then I will channel my contributions directly to Bill.  Will begin work on the draft doc... Nnenna   ________________________________ From: Suresh Ramasubramanian To: "governance at lists.igcaucus.org" ; Norbert Bollow Cc: IGC Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2013 11:47 AM Subject: Re: [governance] 3rd meeting of the WTPF Informal Expert Group (IEG) --srs (iPad) On 24-Jan-2013, at 16:57, Norbert Bollow wrote: > How does this work in practice? Is it reasonable to expect that all > civil society people who want to participate in this Informal Expert > Group will be able to do so? In practice you need to be ready and willing to travel to Geneva, at your expense, besides participating in email discussions and conference calls. If the group thinks it makes sense to nominate someone to go there, who isn't already based in Geneva, it might have to look around for an NGO to fund the individual nominated with a fellowship.  Else, as Bill Drake among others are actually based in Geneva (correct me if I am wrong) it might be expedient to let them represent our interests there. That is, if there is consensus that we need to participate in the IEG.  It is a significant commitment of time to the individual concerned and Geneva isn't exactly a very inexpensive city (though there are substantial discounts for hotel rooms at ITU rates, and even cheaper accomodation and prices across the French border in Ferney). --srs ____________________________________________________________ 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: -------------- 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 From avri at acm.org Thu Jan 24 07:46:52 2013 From: avri at acm.org (Avri Doria) Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2013 07:46:52 -0500 Subject: [governance] 3rd meeting of the WTPF Informal Expert Group (IEG) In-Reply-To: <1359030527.39956.YahooMailNeo@web120103.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> References: <1358972309.47521.YahooMailNeo@web120105.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <51004BEC.7090706@apc.org> <20130124122738.0ad6c4c2@quill.bollow.ch> <06A4E330-AC19-4E18-A32B-F187CFE76F34@hserus.net> <1359030527.39956.YahooMailNeo@web120103.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: Hi, I got accepted as on of the IEG. And that is the last I heard from the ITU. To get the full WTPF site, I think you need a TIES account. And I do not beleive it actually gains you admission to the May meeting. For that, at the moment, it still appears as if one needs to get a Government to tuck you under their wing. I am trying to find out who in the US is willing and able to let me onto the delegation. There is, to my knowledge, no provision made for attendance by those who are neither government nor sector members. avri On 24 Jan 2013, at 07:28, Nnenna wrote: > Clearly there is an internal ITU selection process. It appears the invite was sent to an already "selected" group. I think the "Have you been to any ITU meeting recently" will be crucial. > > I am sending an expression of interest. To the ITU-meeting question above, I answered yes, with IGF Baku and WCIT Dubai. I do not have funding to go.. but I'd rather be accepted first and get funding last minute, then get funding and have to start pushing to get "entrance". > > This is one lesson I learned from attending WCIT. Not registering early cost me a whole lot. > > If there is a consensus for Bill and the Geneva folks to speak on behalf of the CS, which I will strongly support, then I will channel my contributions directly to Bill. > > Will begin work on the draft doc... > > Nnenna > -------------- 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 From rguerra at privaterra.org Thu Jan 24 07:53:41 2013 From: rguerra at privaterra.org (Robert Guerra) Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2013 07:53:41 -0500 Subject: [governance] 3rd meeting of the WTPF Informal Expert Group (IEG) In-Reply-To: References: <1358972309.47521.YahooMailNeo@web120105.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <51004BEC.7090706@apc.org> <20130124122738.0ad6c4c2@quill.bollow.ch> <06A4E330-AC19-4E18-A32B-F187CFE76F34@hserus.net> <1359030527.39956.YahooMailNeo@web120103.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <29E950FF-3AEB-44DA-B87B-841CC98B1140@privaterra.org> Avri, You ask an interesting question, that being what are the registration requirements to not only attend the IEG meeting in early Feb as well as the WTPF in May. I have a sense, but it is only open to sector members and perhaps some "special" invited guests. As it is, after all an ITU meeting it is likely that their - quite restrictive and expensive - existing rules of participation unfortunately apply. I hope I'm wrong on this one.. robert On 2013-01-24, at 7:46 AM, Avri Doria wrote: > Hi, > > I got accepted as on of the IEG. And that is the last I heard from the ITU. > > To get the full WTPF site, I think you need a TIES account. > > And I do not beleive it actually gains you admission to the May meeting. For that, at the moment, it still appears as if one needs to get a Government to tuck you under their wing. I am trying to find out who in the US is willing and able to let me onto the delegation. > > There is, to my knowledge, no provision made for attendance by those who are neither government nor sector members. > > avri > > > > On 24 Jan 2013, at 07:28, Nnenna wrote: > >> Clearly there is an internal ITU selection process. It appears the invite was sent to an already "selected" group. I think the "Have you been to any ITU meeting recently" will be crucial. >> >> I am sending an expression of interest. To the ITU-meeting question above, I answered yes, with IGF Baku and WCIT Dubai. I do not have funding to go.. but I'd rather be accepted first and get funding last minute, then get funding and have to start pushing to get "entrance". >> >> This is one lesson I learned from attending WCIT. Not registering early cost me a whole lot. >> >> If there is a consensus for Bill and the Geneva folks to speak on behalf of the CS, which I will strongly support, then I will channel my contributions directly to Bill. >> >> Will begin work on the draft doc... >> >> Nnenna >> > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From william.drake at uzh.ch Thu Jan 24 07:56:08 2013 From: william.drake at uzh.ch (William Drake) Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2013 13:56:08 +0100 Subject: [governance] 3rd meeting of the WTPF Informal Expert Group (IEG) In-Reply-To: <1359030527.39956.YahooMailNeo@web120103.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> References: <1358972309.47521.YahooMailNeo@web120105.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <51004BEC.7090706@apc.org> <20130124122738.0ad6c4c2@quill.bollow.ch> <06A4E330-AC19-4E18-A32B-F187CFE76F34@hserus.net> <1359030527.39956.YahooMailNeo@web120103.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: Hi Nnena and Suresh As I said previously in response to Jeremy On Jan 17, 2013, at 11:24 AM, William Drake wrote: > The US State Dept. held a long call yesterday preparing for the WTPF Informal Group of Experts meeting 6-8 February. Among the things we discussed was the draft report's game playing with regard to multistakeholderism, e.g. the conflation by definition of MS and the "WSIS model" of MS, the assertions that the ITU is thereby fully MS, etc., and there was agreement that these concerns should be raised in the IEG with an eye to the next round of edits. As to CS being left out of the current governance of the Internet, if you could specify which institutions and issues you mean and maybe even suggest a sentence, this could be raised as well on next week's call. > > If anyone can be in Geneva then, I'd encourage applying to join the IEG. There's been no CS participation, and while ITU approved me it looks like I can't change a flight to attend. There's a number of points in the draft report where independently stated CS perspectives would be helpful. This is even more true of the draft Opinions that will be negotiated at the WTPF itself (including the Saudi proposal putting ITU in charge of enhanced cooperation), although these apparently won't be dissected in the IEG in detail. > > BTW I still think IGC and other CS networks should write a letter to ITU seeking the right to participate at the WTPF without having to do the staff vetted beauty contest... Would definitely encourage anyone who can be there to apply, and for CS to consider saying something encouraging open WTPF participation. I assume a lot of folks will be in town those two weeks in May for WTPF, WSIS Forum, and the IGF consultation/MAG, and it not be ideal if ITU makes participation difficult compared to what everyone's used to. cheers Bill On Jan 24, 2013, at 1:28 PM, Nnenna wrote: > Clearly there is an internal ITU selection process. It appears the invite was sent to an already "selected" group. I think the "Have you been to any ITU meeting recently" will be crucial. > > I am sending an expression of interest. To the ITU-meeting question above, I answered yes, with IGF Baku and WCIT Dubai. I do not have funding to go.. but I'd rather be accepted first and get funding last minute, then get funding and have to start pushing to get "entrance". > > This is one lesson I learned from attending WCIT. Not registering early cost me a whole lot. > > If there is a consensus for Bill and the Geneva folks to speak on behalf of the CS, which I will strongly support, then I will channel my contributions directly to Bill. > > Will begin work on the draft doc... > > Nnenna > > > > From: Suresh Ramasubramanian > To: "governance at lists.igcaucus.org" ; Norbert Bollow > Cc: IGC > Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2013 11:47 AM > Subject: Re: [governance] 3rd meeting of the WTPF Informal Expert Group (IEG) > > > > --srs (iPad) > > On 24-Jan-2013, at 16:57, Norbert Bollow wrote: > > > How does this work in practice? Is it reasonable to expect that all > > civil society people who want to participate in this Informal Expert > > Group will be able to do so? > > In practice you need to be ready and willing to travel to Geneva, at your expense, besides participating in email discussions and conference calls. > > If the group thinks it makes sense to nominate someone to go there, who isn't already based in Geneva, it might have to look around for an NGO to fund the individual nominated with a fellowship. Else, as Bill Drake among others are actually based in Geneva (correct me if I am wrong) it might be expedient to let them represent our interests there. > > That is, if there is consensus that we need to participate in the IEG. It is a significant commitment of time to the individual concerned and Geneva isn't exactly a very inexpensive city (though there are substantial discounts for hotel rooms at ITU rates, and even cheaper accomodation and prices across the French border in Ferney). > > --srs > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From avri at acm.org Thu Jan 24 07:56:10 2013 From: avri at acm.org (Avri Doria) Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2013 07:56:10 -0500 Subject: [governance] 3rd meeting of the WTPF Informal Expert Group (IEG) In-Reply-To: References: <1358972309.47521.YahooMailNeo@web120105.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <51004BEC.7090706@apc.org> <20130124122738.0ad6c4c2@quill.bollow.ch> <06A4E330-AC19-4E18-A32B-F187CFE76F34@hserus.net> <1359030527.39956.YahooMailNeo@web120103.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <718640A6-DD56-4E46-9651-95E368F89060@acm.org> Oh Yeah, forgot to include the acronym glossary: IEG - informal experts group IGC - Internet Governance Caucus ITU - International Telecommunication Union TIES - Telecom Information Exchange Services. of the ITU US - United States WTPF - World Telecommunication Policy Forum. On 24 Jan 2013, at 07:46, Avri Doria wrote: > Hi, > > I got accepted as on of the IEG. And that is the last I heard from the ITU. > > To get the full WTPF site, I think you need a TIES account. > > And I do not beleive it actually gains you admission to the May meeting. For that, at the moment, it still appears as if one needs to get a Government to tuck you under their wing. I am trying to find out who in the US is willing and able to let me onto the delegation. > > There is, to my knowledge, no provision made for attendance by those who are neither government nor sector members. > > avri > > > > On 24 Jan 2013, at 07:28, Nnenna wrote: > >> Clearly there is an internal ITU selection process. It appears the invite was sent to an already "selected" group. I think the "Have you been to any ITU meeting recently" will be crucial. >> >> I am sending an expression of interest. To the ITU-meeting question above, I answered yes, with IGF Baku and WCIT Dubai. I do not have funding to go.. but I'd rather be accepted first and get funding last minute, then get funding and have to start pushing to get "entrance". >> >> This is one lesson I learned from attending WCIT. Not registering early cost me a whole lot. >> >> If there is a consensus for Bill and the Geneva folks to speak on behalf of the CS, which I will strongly support, then I will channel my contributions directly to Bill. >> >> Will begin work on the draft doc... >> >> Nnenna >> > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From deborah at accessnow.org Thu Jan 24 08:04:11 2013 From: deborah at accessnow.org (Deborah Brown) Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2013 08:04:11 -0500 Subject: [governance] 3rd meeting of the WTPF Informal Expert Group (IEG) In-Reply-To: <718640A6-DD56-4E46-9651-95E368F89060@acm.org> References: <1358972309.47521.YahooMailNeo@web120105.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <51004BEC.7090706@apc.org> <20130124122738.0ad6c4c2@quill.bollow.ch> <06A4E330-AC19-4E18-A32B-F187CFE76F34@hserus.net> <1359030527.39956.YahooMailNeo@web120103.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <718640A6-DD56-4E46-9651-95E368F89060@acm.org> Message-ID: Hi all- I found this info on the ITU's WTPF site: http://www.itu.int/en/wtpf-13/Pages/participation.aspx * * *WTPF-13 public access* The public may attend WTPF-13. Public attendants are required to have a proven interest in matters related to the WTPF, along with expertise and experience in International Internet-related public policy matters. To assess involvement in these issues, those wishing to attend WTPF-13 are invited to complete this questionnaire[image: expression-of-interest.docx] and to return it via e-mail to the WTPF Registration Service at sg-registration (@) itu.int. Due to limited room capacity, approval of requests from the public to attend the Forum will be based on the above-mentioned criteria and will be carried out on first come, first served basis. Upon successful completion of requirements, you will receive confirmation of pre-registration for WTPF-13 from ITU. The questionnaire is two pages and consists of rather basic questions. I wonder how this compares to systems in past years and what level of participation "public attendants" are entitled to. Deborah On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 7:56 AM, Avri Doria wrote: > Oh Yeah, forgot to include the acronym glossary: > > IEG - informal experts group > IGC - Internet Governance Caucus > ITU - International Telecommunication Union > TIES - Telecom Information Exchange Services. of the ITU > US - United States > WTPF - World Telecommunication Policy Forum. > > On 24 Jan 2013, at 07:46, Avri Doria wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > I got accepted as on of the IEG. And that is the last I heard from the > ITU. > > > > To get the full WTPF site, I think you need a TIES account. > > > > And I do not beleive it actually gains you admission to the May meeting. > For that, at the moment, it still appears as if one needs to get a > Government to tuck you under their wing. I am trying to find out who in > the US is willing and able to let me onto the delegation. > > > > There is, to my knowledge, no provision made for attendance by those who > are neither government nor sector members. > > > > avri > > > > > > > > On 24 Jan 2013, at 07:28, Nnenna wrote: > > > >> Clearly there is an internal ITU selection process. It appears the > invite was sent to an already "selected" group. I think the "Have you been > to any ITU meeting recently" will be crucial. > >> > >> I am sending an expression of interest. To the ITU-meeting question > above, I answered yes, with IGF Baku and WCIT Dubai. I do not have funding > to go.. but I'd rather be accepted first and get funding last minute, then > get funding and have to start pushing to get "entrance". > >> > >> This is one lesson I learned from attending WCIT. Not registering > early cost me a whole lot. > >> > >> If there is a consensus for Bill and the Geneva folks to speak on > behalf of the CS, which I will strongly support, then I will channel my > contributions directly to Bill. > >> > >> Will begin work on the draft doc... > >> > >> Nnenna > >> > > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > > 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 > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > -- Deborah Brown Policy Analyst Access | AccessNow.org E. deborah at accessnow.org S. deborah.l.brown T. deblebrown PGP 0x5EB4727D -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From william.drake at uzh.ch Thu Jan 24 08:09:06 2013 From: william.drake at uzh.ch (William Drake) Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2013 14:09:06 +0100 Subject: [governance] 3rd meeting of the WTPF Informal Expert Group (IEG) In-Reply-To: References: <1358972309.47521.YahooMailNeo@web120105.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <51004BEC.7090706@apc.org> <20130124122738.0ad6c4c2@quill.bollow.ch> <06A4E330-AC19-4E18-A32B-F187CFE76F34@hserus.net> <1359030527.39956.YahooMailNeo@web120103.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <9E2260F2-C6DC-4509-9874-6862C5911F53@uzh.ch> Hi a, On Jan 24, 2013, at 1:46 PM, Avri Doria wrote: > > I got accepted as on of the IEG. Forgot to mention in the message just sent > And that is the last I heard from the ITU. > > To get the full WTPF site, I think you need a TIES account. > > And I do not beleive it actually gains you admission to the May meeting. No > For that, at the moment, it still appears as if one needs to get a Government to tuck you under their wing. I am trying to find out who in the US is willing and able to let me onto the delegation. > > There is, to my knowledge, no provision made for attendance by those who are neither government nor sector members. Given the post WCIT-environment, I can't imagine they'd actually make it worse than last time. Per some previous threads, to attend the Lisbon WTPF, one had to apply and be vetted by the secretariat, convince them that you are worthy. If I remember correctly, the CS contingent consisted of Wolfgang, Tapani, and myself. No right to intervention, up to the session chair, so Wolfgang asked Abdullah (the Internet governor of KSA) and was told no. But there was a very nice moment where about 50-60 Portuguese children came marching in playing drums, samba-style. This was an improvement on previous WTPFs where if memory serves being on a del was indeed the only option. I attended the 1998 and 2001 WTPFs on the US del. The latter was about the Internet telephony, and I think about 50 governments said at the time they had some restrictions or a ban in place. One of the highlights of that meeting was a delegate from a non-democratic country pleading at the 12th hour that his editorial proposal to a piece of text be included because otherwise he couldn't go home. Bill -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From william.drake at uzh.ch Thu Jan 24 08:20:01 2013 From: william.drake at uzh.ch (William Drake) Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2013 14:20:01 +0100 Subject: [governance] 3rd meeting of the WTPF Informal Expert Group (IEG) In-Reply-To: References: <1358972309.47521.YahooMailNeo@web120105.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <51004BEC.7090706@apc.org> <20130124122738.0ad6c4c2@quill.bollow.ch> <06A4E330-AC19-4E18-A32B-F187CFE76F34@hserus.net> <1359030527.39956.YahooMailNeo@web120103.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <718640A6-DD56-4E46-9651-95E368F89060@acm.org> Message-ID: <022C2A2E-D808-48C4-A071-DB7D94459CBE@uzh.ch> Thanks Deborah, I didn't know they'd decided and announced, when last we discussed it was TBD. So that's the deal then—all non-members who are planning on coming to Geneva for those two weeks and would like to be admitted to a meeting of this taxpayer/ratepayer supported public intergovernmental organization needs to do their homework in advance. I wonder if they would actually turn someone down if, for ex, their answer to "How are you involved in issues relating to the theme of WTPF-13?" was deemed inadequate, etc. It'd be an interesting proposition to test... Bill On Jan 24, 2013, at 2:04 PM, Deborah Brown wrote: > Hi all- I found this info on the ITU's WTPF site: > > http://www.itu.int/en/wtpf-13/Pages/participation.aspx > > WTPF-13 public access > The public may attend WTPF-13. Public attendants are required to have a proven interest in matters related to the WTPF, along with expertise and experience in International Internet-related public policy matters. To assess involvement in these issues, those wishing to attend WTPF-13 are invited to complete this questionnaire and to return it via e-mail to the WTPF Registration Service at sg-registration (@) itu.int. > > Due to limited room capacity, approval of requests from the public to attend the Forum will be based on the above-mentioned criteria and will be carried out on first come, first served basis. Upon successful completion of requirements, you will receive confirmation of pre-registration for WTPF-13 from ITU. > > The questionnaire is two pages and consists of rather basic questions. I wonder how this compares to systems in past years and what level of participation "public attendants" are entitled to. > > Deborah > > On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 7:56 AM, Avri Doria wrote: > Oh Yeah, forgot to include the acronym glossary: > > IEG - informal experts group > IGC - Internet Governance Caucus > ITU - International Telecommunication Union > TIES - Telecom Information Exchange Services. of the ITU > US - United States > WTPF - World Telecommunication Policy Forum. > > On 24 Jan 2013, at 07:46, Avri Doria wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > I got accepted as on of the IEG. And that is the last I heard from the ITU. > > > > To get the full WTPF site, I think you need a TIES account. > > > > And I do not beleive it actually gains you admission to the May meeting. For that, at the moment, it still appears as if one needs to get a Government to tuck you under their wing. I am trying to find out who in the US is willing and able to let me onto the delegation. > > > > There is, to my knowledge, no provision made for attendance by those who are neither government nor sector members. > > > > avri > > > > > > > > On 24 Jan 2013, at 07:28, Nnenna wrote: > > > >> Clearly there is an internal ITU selection process. It appears the invite was sent to an already "selected" group. I think the "Have you been to any ITU meeting recently" will be crucial. > >> > >> I am sending an expression of interest. To the ITU-meeting question above, I answered yes, with IGF Baku and WCIT Dubai. I do not have funding to go.. but I'd rather be accepted first and get funding last minute, then get funding and have to start pushing to get "entrance". > >> > >> This is one lesson I learned from attending WCIT. Not registering early cost me a whole lot. > >> > >> If there is a consensus for Bill and the Geneva folks to speak on behalf of the CS, which I will strongly support, then I will channel my contributions directly to Bill. > >> > >> Will begin work on the draft doc... > >> > >> Nnenna > >> > > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > > 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 > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > > > > -- > Deborah Brown > Policy Analyst > Access | AccessNow.org > E. deborah at accessnow.org > S. deborah.l.brown > T. deblebrown > PGP 0x5EB4727D > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From kichango at gmail.com Thu Jan 24 08:45:55 2013 From: kichango at gmail.com (Mawaki Chango) Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2013 13:45:55 +0000 Subject: [governance] 3rd meeting of the WTPF Informal Expert Group (IEG) In-Reply-To: References: <1358972309.47521.YahooMailNeo@web120105.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <51004BEC.7090706@apc.org> <20130124122738.0ad6c4c2@quill.bollow.ch> <06A4E330-AC19-4E18-A32B-F187CFE76F34@hserus.net> <1359030527.39956.YahooMailNeo@web120103.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <718640A6-DD56-4E46-9651-95E368F89060@acm.org> Message-ID: Thank you Deb for that instrumental piece of information! ;-) mawaki On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 1:04 PM, Deborah Brown wrote: > Hi all- I found this info on the ITU's WTPF site: > > http://www.itu.int/en/wtpf-13/Pages/participation.aspx > * > * > *WTPF-13 public access* > The public may attend WTPF-13. Public attendants are required to have a > proven interest in matters related to the WTPF, along with expertise and > experience in International Internet-related public policy matters. To > assess involvement in these issues, those wishing to attend WTPF-13 are > invited to complete this questionnaire[image: > expression-of-interest.docx] and > to return it via e-mail to the WTPF Registration Service at sg-registration > (@) itu.int. > > Due to limited room capacity, approval of requests from the public to > attend the Forum will be based on the above-mentioned criteria and will be > carried out on first come, first served basis. Upon successful completion > of requirements, you will receive confirmation of pre-registration for > WTPF-13 from ITU. > > The questionnaire is two pages and consists of rather basic questions. I > wonder how this compares to systems in past years and what level of > participation "public attendants" are entitled to. > > Deborah > > On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 7:56 AM, Avri Doria wrote: > >> Oh Yeah, forgot to include the acronym glossary: >> >> IEG - informal experts group >> IGC - Internet Governance Caucus >> ITU - International Telecommunication Union >> TIES - Telecom Information Exchange Services. of the ITU >> US - United States >> WTPF - World Telecommunication Policy Forum. >> >> On 24 Jan 2013, at 07:46, Avri Doria wrote: >> >> > Hi, >> > >> > I got accepted as on of the IEG. And that is the last I heard from the >> ITU. >> > >> > To get the full WTPF site, I think you need a TIES account. >> > >> > And I do not beleive it actually gains you admission to the May >> meeting. For that, at the moment, it still appears as if one needs to get >> a Government to tuck you under their wing. I am trying to find out who in >> the US is willing and able to let me onto the delegation. >> > >> > There is, to my knowledge, no provision made for attendance by those >> who are neither government nor sector members. >> > >> > avri >> > >> > >> > >> > On 24 Jan 2013, at 07:28, Nnenna wrote: >> > >> >> Clearly there is an internal ITU selection process. It appears the >> invite was sent to an already "selected" group. I think the "Have you been >> to any ITU meeting recently" will be crucial. >> >> >> >> I am sending an expression of interest. To the ITU-meeting question >> above, I answered yes, with IGF Baku and WCIT Dubai. I do not have funding >> to go.. but I'd rather be accepted first and get funding last minute, then >> get funding and have to start pushing to get "entrance". >> >> >> >> This is one lesson I learned from attending WCIT. Not registering >> early cost me a whole lot. >> >> >> >> If there is a consensus for Bill and the Geneva folks to speak on >> behalf of the CS, which I will strongly support, then I will channel my >> contributions directly to Bill. >> >> >> >> Will begin work on the draft doc... >> >> >> >> Nnenna >> >> >> > >> > >> > ____________________________________________________________ >> > 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 >> >> >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 >> >> > > > -- > Deborah Brown > Policy Analyst > Access | AccessNow.org > E. deborah at accessnow.org > S. deborah.l.brown > T. deblebrown > PGP 0x5EB4727D > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From kovenronald at aol.com Thu Jan 24 09:03:52 2013 From: kovenronald at aol.com (Koven Ronald) Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2013 09:03:52 -0500 (EST) Subject: [governance] "US Exceptionalism" (was Re: Bloomberg - The Overzealous Prosecution...) Message-ID: <8CFC852C6378919-24A0-515E@webmail-d191.sysops.aol.com> Dear All -- I really don't understand the clubbish attachment to jargonesque acronymism. Avri may consider it cute to spell out US, but someone who doesn't spontaneously know what WCIT stands for isn't necessarily stupid or unworthy of participation in the IGC, whatever that stands for. In the journalism world, it is standard that the first time an organization is mentioned in an article its acronym is spelled out. I don't think anyone tosses aside the NYTimes because it makes itself accessible to a larger segment of its readership than the inside dopester cognoscenti. Bests, Rony Koven -----Original Message----- From: Suresh Ramasubramanian To: governance ; michael gurstein Cc: ; "Kleinwächter, Wolf gang" ; McTim ; Norbert Bollow Sent: Thu, Jan 24, 2013 3:18 am Subject: Re: [governance] "US Exceptionalism" (was Re: Bloomberg - The Overzealous Prosecution...) If this is in the context of Norbert's requesting that we all use less acronyms, this is somewhat like saying we need to teach maths without using confusing terms like, say, pi, sigma etc which are, to be honest, all greek to most people that first encounter them. Maybe work with Diplo or someone to conduct some sort of capacity building for civil society? --srs (iPad) On 24-Jan-2013, at 4:17, "michael gurstein" wrote: > !!!!!!!! > > AoC ? > ATRT ? > JPA ? > > !!!!!!!! > ____________________________________________________________ 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: -------------- 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 From Michael.Kende at analysysmason.com Thu Jan 24 09:08:56 2013 From: Michael.Kende at analysysmason.com (Michael Kende) Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2013 14:08:56 +0000 Subject: [governance] "US Exceptionalism" (was Re: Bloomberg - The Overzealous Prosecution...) In-Reply-To: <8CFC852C6378919-24A0-515E@webmail-d191.sysops.aol.com> References: <8CFC852C6378919-24A0-515E@webmail-d191.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: <3B0BA8A4C396324FA545DC0CCDCF271D046F28C0@DB3PRD0511MB602.eurprd05.prod.outlook.com> I did not know that North Yorkshire had a newspaper called the Times… ☺ From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Koven Ronald Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2013 3:04 PM To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org Cc: KovenRonald at aol.com Subject: Re: [governance] "US Exceptionalism" (was Re: Bloomberg - The Overzealous Prosecution...) Dear All -- I really don't understand the clubbish attachment to jargonesque acronymism. Avri may consider it cute to spell out US, but someone who doesn't spontaneously know what WCIT stands for isn't necessarily stupid or unworthy of participation in the IGC, whatever that stands for. In the journalism world, it is standard that the first time an organization is mentioned in an article its acronym is spelled out. I don't think anyone tosses aside the NYTimes because it makes itself accessible to a larger segment of its readership than the inside dopester cognoscenti. Bests, Rony Koven -----Original Message----- From: Suresh Ramasubramanian To: governance ; michael gurstein Cc: ; "Kleinwächter, Wolf gang" ; McTim ; Norbert Bollow Sent: Thu, Jan 24, 2013 3:18 am Subject: Re: [governance] "US Exceptionalism" (was Re: Bloomberg - The Overzealous Prosecution...) If this is in the context of Norbert's requesting that we all use less acronyms, this is somewhat like saying we need to teach maths without using confusing terms like, say, pi, sigma etc which are, to be honest, all greek to most people that first encounter them. Maybe work with Diplo or someone to conduct some sort of capacity building for civil society? --srs (iPad) On 24-Jan-2013, at 4:17, "michael gurstein" > wrote: > !!!!!!!! > > AoC ? > ATRT ? > JPA ? > > !!!!!!!! > ____________________________________________________________ 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 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- This email message has been delivered safely and archived online by Mimecast. A true SaaS solution, Mimecast provides the security, continuity and archiving for millions of emails, across thousands of customers every day. For more information please visit http://www.mimecast.co.uk ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From kovenronald at aol.com Thu Jan 24 09:14:33 2013 From: kovenronald at aol.com (Koven Ronald) Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2013 09:14:33 -0500 (EST) Subject: [governance] "US Exceptionalism" (was Re: Bloomberg - The Overzealous Prosecution...) In-Reply-To: <3B0BA8A4C396324FA545DC0CCDCF271D046F28C0@DB3PRD0511MB602.eurprd05.prod.outlook.com> References: <8CFC852C6378919-24A0-515E@webmail-d191.sysops.aol.com> <3B0BA8A4C396324FA545DC0CCDCF271D046F28C0@DB3PRD0511MB602.eurprd05.prod.outlook.com> Message-ID: <8CFC85444616A25-24A0-528C@webmail-d191.sysops.aol.com> Hilariously funny -- at least, I suppose that was the intention. -----Original Message----- From: Michael Kende To: governance ; Koven Ronald Sent: Thu, Jan 24, 2013 3:09 pm Subject: RE: [governance] "US Exceptionalism" (was Re: Bloomberg - The Overzealous Prosecution...) I did not know that North Yorkshire had a newspaper called the Times…J From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org]On Behalf Of Koven Ronald Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2013 3:04 PM To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org Cc: KovenRonald at aol.com Subject: Re: [governance] "US Exceptionalism" (was Re: Bloomberg - The Overzealous Prosecution...) Dear All -- I really don't understand the clubbish attachment to jargonesque acronymism. Avri may consider it cute to spell out US, but someone who doesn't spontaneously know what WCIT stands for isn't necessarily stupid or unworthy of participation in the IGC, whatever that stands for. In the journalism world, it is standard that the first time an organization is mentioned in an article its acronym is spelled out. I don't think anyone tosses aside the NYTimes because it makes itself accessible to a larger segment of its readership than the inside dopester cognoscenti. Bests, Rony Koven -----Original Message----- From: Suresh Ramasubramanian To: governance ; michael gurstein Cc: ; "Kleinwächter, Wolf gang" ; McTim ; Norbert Bollow Sent: Thu, Jan 24, 2013 3:18 am Subject: Re: [governance] "US Exceptionalism" (was Re: Bloomberg - The Overzealous Prosecution...) If this is in the context of Norbert's requesting that we all use less acronyms, this is somewhat like saying we need to teach maths without using confusing terms like, say, pi, sigma etc which are, to be honest, all greek to most people that first encounter them. Maybe work with Diplo or someone to conduct some sort of capacity building for civil society? --srs (iPad) On 24-Jan-2013, at 4:17, "michael gurstein" wrote: > !!!!!!!! > > AoC ? > ATRT ? > JPA ? > > !!!!!!!! > ____________________________________________________________ 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 This email is confidential and is protected by copyright. When addressed to our clients it is subject to our terms and conditions of business. Analysys Mason Limited is registered in England and Wales. Registered office: Bush House, North West Wing, London WC2B 4PJ, UK. Registered number 05177472. Tel +44 845 600 5244. Email enquiries at analysysmason.com or visit www.analysysmason.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From suresh at hserus.net Thu Jan 24 09:42:22 2013 From: suresh at hserus.net (Suresh Ramasubramanian) Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2013 06:42:22 -0800 Subject: [governance] "US Exceptionalism" (was Re: Bloomberg - The Overzealous Prosecution...) In-Reply-To: <8CFC85444616A25-24A0-528C@webmail-d191.sysops.aol.com> References: <8CFC852C6378919-24A0-515E@webmail-d191.sysops.aol.com> <3B0BA8A4C396324FA545DC0CCDCF271D046F28C0@DB3PRD0511MB602.eurprd05.prod.outlook.com> <8CFC85444616A25-24A0-528C@webmail-d191.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: <20130124144222.GA1326@hserus.net> Koven Ronald [24/01/13 09:14 -0500]: >Hilariously funny -- at least, I suppose that was the intention. of course. except - do we really have to compare a newspaper, where the article is supposed to be self contained, with an ongoing discussion on a mailing list? -------------- 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 From dogwallah at gmail.com Thu Jan 24 10:32:29 2013 From: dogwallah at gmail.com (McTim) Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2013 10:32:29 -0500 Subject: [governance] Facebook spent $4 million to lobby U.S. lawmakers in 2012 In-Reply-To: References: <510086BE.6010100@ITforChange.net> Message-ID: On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 2:54 AM, Adam Peake wrote: > $4 million for a company of it's size, with legislation that would directly > effect its business always around doesn't seem that much > > > Not saying it's good, just that it doesn't seem large in the scheme of > things. right, not large at all: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/24/business-lobbying-2012-fiscal-cliff_n_2539236.html -- 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 From gurstein at gmail.com Thu Jan 24 10:35:13 2013 From: gurstein at gmail.com (michael gurstein) Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2013 07:35:13 -0800 Subject: [governance] "US Exceptionalism" (was Re: Bloomberg - The Overzealous Prosecution...) In-Reply-To: <8CFC85444616A25-24A0-528C@webmail-d191.sysops.aol.com> References: <8CFC852C6378919-24A0-515E@webmail-d191.sysops.aol.com> <3B0BA8A4C396324FA545DC0CCDCF271D046F28C0@DB3PRD0511MB602.eurprd05.prod.outlook.com> <8CFC85444616A25-24A0-528C@webmail-d191.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: <055901cdfa48$6defe500$49cfaf00$@gmail.com> I think all this is a symptom of the discomfort some are feeling at the transition in "Internet Governance" from a techie club to a space where broader issues impacting on and from the "global governance of the Internet" (and the "governance of the global internet") are examined. Some may be finding the evolution to a multi-lingual, multi-cultural environment more difficult than others. Mike From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Koven Ronald Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2013 6:15 AM To: Michael.Kende at analysysmason.com; governance at lists.igcaucus.org Subject: Re: [governance] "US Exceptionalism" (was Re: Bloomberg - The Overzealous Prosecution...) Hilariously funny -- at least, I suppose that was the intention. -----Original Message----- From: Michael Kende To: governance ; Koven Ronald Sent: Thu, Jan 24, 2013 3:09 pm Subject: RE: [governance] "US Exceptionalism" (was Re: Bloomberg - The Overzealous Prosecution...) I did not know that North Yorkshire had a newspaper called the Times… J From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org ] On Behalf Of Koven Ronald Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2013 3:04 PM To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org Cc: KovenRonald at aol.com Subject: Re: [governance] "US Exceptionalism" (was Re: Bloomberg - The Overzealous Prosecution...) Dear All -- I really don't understand the clubbish attachment to jargonesque acronymism. Avri may consider it cute to spell out US, but someone who doesn't spontaneously know what WCIT stands for isn't necessarily stupid or unworthy of participation in the IGC, whatever that stands for. In the journalism world, it is standard that the first time an organization is mentioned in an article its acronym is spelled out. I don't think anyone tosses aside the NYTimes because it makes itself accessible to a larger segment of its readership than the inside dopester cognoscenti. Bests, Rony Koven -----Original Message----- From: Suresh Ramasubramanian To: governance ; michael gurstein Cc: ; "Kleinwächter, Wolf gang" ; McTim ; Norbert Bollow Sent: Thu, Jan 24, 2013 3:18 am Subject: Re: [governance] "US Exceptionalism" (was Re: Bloomberg - The Overzealous Prosecution...) If this is in the context of Norbert's requesting that we all use less acronyms, this is somewhat like saying we need to teach maths without using confusing terms like, say, pi, sigma etc which are, to be honest, all greek to most people that first encounter them. Maybe work with Diplo or someone to conduct some sort of capacity building for civil society? --srs (iPad) On 24-Jan-2013, at 4:17, "michael gurstein" wrote: > !!!!!!!! > > AoC ? > ATRT ? > JPA ? > > !!!!!!!! > ____________________________________________________________ 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 _____ This email is confidential and is protected by copyright. When addressed to our clients it is subject to our terms and conditions of business. Analysys Mason Limited is registered in England and Wales. Registered office: Bush House, North West Wing, London WC2B 4PJ, UK. Registered number 05177472. Tel +44 845 600 5244. Email enquiries at analysysmason.com or visit www.analysysmason.com _____ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From gurstein at gmail.com Thu Jan 24 10:40:51 2013 From: gurstein at gmail.com (michael gurstein) Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2013 07:40:51 -0800 Subject: [governance] Facebook spent $4 million to lobby U.S. lawmakers in 2012 In-Reply-To: References: <510086BE.6010100@ITforChange.net> Message-ID: <056f01cdfa49$375b4f60$a611ee20$@gmail.com> Yes, but still shocking and disturbing to many outside of the US and particularly since the US is so frequently held up as a model of democratic governance. M -----Original Message----- From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of McTim Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2013 7:32 AM To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Adam Peake Subject: Re: [governance] Facebook spent $4 million to lobby U.S. lawmakers in 2012 On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 2:54 AM, Adam Peake wrote: > $4 million for a company of it's size, with legislation that would > directly effect its business always around doesn't seem that much > > > Not saying it's good, just that it doesn't seem large in the scheme of > things. right, not large at all: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/24/business-lobbying-2012-fiscal-cliff _n_2539236.html -- 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 From nb at bollow.ch Thu Jan 24 10:42:46 2013 From: nb at bollow.ch (Norbert Bollow) Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2013 16:42:46 +0100 Subject: [governance] "US Exceptionalism" (was Re: Bloomberg - The Overzealous Prosecution...) In-Reply-To: <20130124144222.GA1326@hserus.net> References: <8CFC852C6378919-24A0-515E@webmail-d191.sysops.aol.com> <3B0BA8A4C396324FA545DC0CCDCF271D046F28C0@DB3PRD0511MB602.eurprd05.prod.outlook.com> <8CFC85444616A25-24A0-528C@webmail-d191.sysops.aol.com> <20130124144222.GA1326@hserus.net> Message-ID: <20130124164246.3a0e03e1@quill.bollow.ch> [with IGC coordinator hat on] Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote: > Koven Ronald [24/01/13 09:14 -0500]: > >Hilariously funny -- at least, I suppose that was the intention. > > of course. except - do we really have to compare a newspaper, where > the article is supposed to be self contained, with an ongoing > discussion on a mailing list? We do have people joining in who haven't been around forever. That's why it is desirable give the meaning of acronyms when first used in a given discussion thread. That won't be too tedious, and it'll be significantly helpful to newcomers. Greetings, Norbert -------------- 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 From lmcknigh at syr.edu Thu Jan 24 10:43:05 2013 From: lmcknigh at syr.edu (Lee W McKnight) Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2013 15:43:05 +0000 Subject: [governance] "US Exceptionalism" (was Re: Bloomberg - The Overzealous Prosecution...) In-Reply-To: <055901cdfa48$6defe500$49cfaf00$@gmail.com> References: <8CFC852C6378919-24A0-515E@webmail-d191.sysops.aol.com> <3B0BA8A4C396324FA545DC0CCDCF271D046F28C0@DB3PRD0511MB602.eurprd05.prod.outlook.com> <8CFC85444616A25-24A0-528C@webmail-d191.sysops.aol.com>,<055901cdfa48$6defe500$49cfaf00$@gmail.com> Message-ID: <77A59FC9477004489D44DE7FC6840E7B1B2843@SUEX10-mbx-08.ad.syr.edu> On that note, see the broad array of issues highlighted in this Internet as Innovation Engine infographic released by the World Economic Forum today. With taxes and multistakeholder processes both mentioned, in an Internet governance for dummies/aka world leaders fashion ; ) http://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_GAC_InnovationEngine_2013.pdf ________________________________ From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] on behalf of michael gurstein [gurstein at gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2013 10:35 AM To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; 'Koven Ronald' Subject: RE: [governance] "US Exceptionalism" (was Re: Bloomberg - The Overzealous Prosecution...) I think all this is a symptom of the discomfort some are feeling at the transition in "Internet Governance" from a techie club to a space where broader issues impacting on and from the "global governance of the Internet" (and the "governance of the global internet") are examined. Some may be finding the evolution to a multi-lingual, multi-cultural environment more difficult than others. Mike From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Koven Ronald Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2013 6:15 AM To: Michael.Kende at analysysmason.com; governance at lists.igcaucus.org Subject: Re: [governance] "US Exceptionalism" (was Re: Bloomberg - The Overzealous Prosecution...) Hilariously funny -- at least, I suppose that was the intention. -----Original Message----- From: Michael Kende > To: governance >; Koven Ronald > Sent: Thu, Jan 24, 2013 3:09 pm Subject: RE: [governance] "US Exceptionalism" (was Re: Bloomberg - The Overzealous Prosecution...) I did not know that North Yorkshire had a newspaper called the Times… :) From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Koven Ronald Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2013 3:04 PM To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org Cc: KovenRonald at aol.com Subject: Re: [governance] "US Exceptionalism" (was Re: Bloomberg - The Overzealous Prosecution...) Dear All -- I really don't understand the clubbish attachment to jargonesque acronymism. Avri may consider it cute to spell out US, but someone who doesn't spontaneously know what WCIT stands for isn't necessarily stupid or unworthy of participation in the IGC, whatever that stands for. In the journalism world, it is standard that the first time an organization is mentioned in an article its acronym is spelled out. I don't think anyone tosses aside the NYTimes because it makes itself accessible to a larger segment of its readership than the inside dopester cognoscenti. Bests, Rony Koven -----Original Message----- From: Suresh Ramasubramanian > To: governance >; michael gurstein > Cc: > >; "Kleinwächter, Wolf gang" >; McTim >; Norbert Bollow > Sent: Thu, Jan 24, 2013 3:18 am Subject: Re: [governance] "US Exceptionalism" (was Re: Bloomberg - The Overzealous Prosecution...) If this is in the context of Norbert's requesting that we all use less acronyms, this is somewhat like saying we need to teach maths without using confusing terms like, say, pi, sigma etc which are, to be honest, all greek to most people that first encounter them. Maybe work with Diplo or someone to conduct some sort of capacity building for civil society? --srs (iPad) On 24-Jan-2013, at 4:17, "michael gurstein" > wrote: > !!!!!!!! > > AoC ? > ATRT ? > JPA ? > > !!!!!!!! > ____________________________________________________________ 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 ________________________________ This email is confidential and is protected by copyright. When addressed to our clients it is subject to our terms and conditions of business. Analysys Mason Limited is registered in England and Wales. Registered office: Bush House, North West Wing, London WC2B 4PJ, UK. Registered number 05177472. Tel +44 845 600 5244. Email enquiries at analysysmason.com or visit www.analysysmason.com ________________________________ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From dogwallah at gmail.com Thu Jan 24 10:50:55 2013 From: dogwallah at gmail.com (McTim) Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2013 10:50:55 -0500 Subject: [governance] Facebook spent $4 million to lobby U.S. lawmakers in 2012 In-Reply-To: <056f01cdfa49$375b4f60$a611ee20$@gmail.com> References: <510086BE.6010100@ITforChange.net> <056f01cdfa49$375b4f60$a611ee20$@gmail.com> Message-ID: http://www.google.com/publicpolicy/transparency.html This shows that Google is giving a good deal of support to CS entities. That's probably a significant chunk of the 16 M. On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 10:40 AM, michael gurstein wrote: > Yes, but still shocking and disturbing to many outside of the US and > particularly since the US is so frequently held up as a model of democratic > governance. > > M > > -----Original Message----- > From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org > [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of McTim > Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2013 7:32 AM > To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Adam Peake > Subject: Re: [governance] Facebook spent $4 million to lobby U.S. lawmakers > in 2012 > > On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 2:54 AM, Adam Peake wrote: >> $4 million for a company of it's size, with legislation that would >> directly effect its business always around doesn't seem that much >> >> >> Not saying it's good, just that it doesn't seem large in the scheme of >> things. > > right, not large at all: > > > http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/24/business-lobbying-2012-fiscal-cliff > _n_2539236.html > > > > -- > Cheers, > > McTim > "A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A route > indicates how we get there." Jon Postel > > -- 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 From roland at internetpolicyagency.com Thu Jan 24 10:52:22 2013 From: roland at internetpolicyagency.com (Roland Perry) Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2013 15:52:22 +0000 Subject: [governance] Facebook spent $4 million to lobby U.S. lawmakers in 2012 In-Reply-To: <056f01cdfa49$375b4f60$a611ee20$@gmail.com> References: <510086BE.6010100@ITforChange.net> <056f01cdfa49$375b4f60$a611ee20$@gmail.com> Message-ID: In message <056f01cdfa49$375b4f60$a611ee20$@gmail.com>, at 07:40:51 on Thu, 24 Jan 2013, michael gurstein writes >Yes, but still shocking and disturbing to many outside of the US and >particularly since the US is so frequently held up as a model of democratic >governance. Given that it's not democracy (in the Athenian sense), rather it's "representative democracy"; what's the problem with people telling/reminding their representatives what views they should be representing for them? -- Roland Perry -------------- 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 From ajp at glocom.ac.jp Thu Jan 24 11:01:28 2013 From: ajp at glocom.ac.jp (Adam Peake) Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2013 01:01:28 +0900 Subject: [governance] Facebook spent $4 million to lobby U.S. lawmakers in 2012 In-Reply-To: <056f01cdfa49$375b4f60$a611ee20$@gmail.com> References: <510086BE.6010100@ITforChange.net> <056f01cdfa49$375b4f60$a611ee20$@gmail.com> Message-ID: On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 12:40 AM, michael gurstein wrote: > Yes, but still shocking and disturbing to many outside of the US and > particularly since the US is so frequently held up as a model of democratic > governance. > Yes, a surprise. But it's how laws are made and not made. Good that we actually get to see the money flow, records of ex parte meetings, information about "revolving door" of employment (which also seems to be a feature of public service). Much clearer than many countries, Adam > M > > -----Original Message----- > From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org > [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of McTim > Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2013 7:32 AM > To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Adam Peake > Subject: Re: [governance] Facebook spent $4 million to lobby U.S. lawmakers > in 2012 > > On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 2:54 AM, Adam Peake wrote: >> $4 million for a company of it's size, with legislation that would >> directly effect its business always around doesn't seem that much >> >> >> Not saying it's good, just that it doesn't seem large in the scheme of >> things. > > right, not large at all: > > > http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/24/business-lobbying-2012-fiscal-cliff > _n_2539236.html > > > > -- > Cheers, > > McTim > "A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A route > indicates how we get there." Jon Postel > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From deborah at accessnow.org Thu Jan 24 11:12:55 2013 From: deborah at accessnow.org (Deborah Brown) Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2013 11:12:55 -0500 Subject: [governance] 3rd meeting of the WTPF Informal Expert Group (IEG) In-Reply-To: <022C2A2E-D808-48C4-A071-DB7D94459CBE@uzh.ch> References: <1358972309.47521.YahooMailNeo@web120105.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <51004BEC.7090706@apc.org> <20130124122738.0ad6c4c2@quill.bollow.ch> <06A4E330-AC19-4E18-A32B-F187CFE76F34@hserus.net> <1359030527.39956.YahooMailNeo@web120103.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <718640A6-DD56-4E46-9651-95E368F89060@acm.org> <022C2A2E-D808-48C4-A071-DB7D94459CBE@uzh.ch> Message-ID: Glad to help. Good point Bill on the lack of criteria. The form provides just a few lines for responses, but it sounds like they required a lot of information the last time around... On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 8:20 AM, William Drake wrote: > Thanks Deborah, I didn't know they'd decided and announced, when last we > discussed it was TBD. > > So that's the deal then—all non-members who are planning on coming to > Geneva for those two weeks and would like to be admitted to a meeting of > this taxpayer/ratepayer supported public intergovernmental organization > needs to do their homework in advance. > > I wonder if they would actually turn someone down if, for ex, their answer > to "How are you involved in issues relating to the theme of WTPF-13?" was > deemed inadequate, etc. It'd be an interesting proposition to test... > > Bill > > > > On Jan 24, 2013, at 2:04 PM, Deborah Brown wrote: > > Hi all- I found this info on the ITU's WTPF site: > > http://www.itu.int/en/wtpf-13/Pages/participation.aspx > * > * > *WTPF-13 public access* > The public may attend WTPF-13. Public attendants are required to have a > proven interest in matters related to the WTPF, along with expertise and > experience in International Internet-related public policy matters. To > assess involvement in these issues, those wishing to attend WTPF-13 are > invited to complete this questionnaire[image: > expression-of-interest.docx] and > to return it via e-mail to the WTPF Registration Service at sg-registration > (@) itu.int. > > Due to limited room capacity, approval of requests from the public to > attend the Forum will be based on the above-mentioned criteria and will be > carried out on first come, first served basis. Upon successful completion > of requirements, you will receive confirmation of pre-registration for > WTPF-13 from ITU. > > The questionnaire is two pages and consists of rather basic questions. I > wonder how this compares to systems in past years and what level of > participation "public attendants" are entitled to. > > Deborah > > On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 7:56 AM, Avri Doria wrote: > >> Oh Yeah, forgot to include the acronym glossary: >> >> IEG - informal experts group >> IGC - Internet Governance Caucus >> ITU - International Telecommunication Union >> TIES - Telecom Information Exchange Services. of the ITU >> US - United States >> WTPF - World Telecommunication Policy Forum. >> >> On 24 Jan 2013, at 07:46, Avri Doria wrote: >> >> > Hi, >> > >> > I got accepted as on of the IEG. And that is the last I heard from the >> ITU. >> > >> > To get the full WTPF site, I think you need a TIES account. >> > >> > And I do not beleive it actually gains you admission to the May >> meeting. For that, at the moment, it still appears as if one needs to get >> a Government to tuck you under their wing. I am trying to find out who in >> the US is willing and able to let me onto the delegation. >> > >> > There is, to my knowledge, no provision made for attendance by those >> who are neither government nor sector members. >> > >> > avri >> > >> > >> > >> > On 24 Jan 2013, at 07:28, Nnenna wrote: >> > >> >> Clearly there is an internal ITU selection process. It appears the >> invite was sent to an already "selected" group. I think the "Have you been >> to any ITU meeting recently" will be crucial. >> >> >> >> I am sending an expression of interest. To the ITU-meeting question >> above, I answered yes, with IGF Baku and WCIT Dubai. I do not have funding >> to go.. but I'd rather be accepted first and get funding last minute, then >> get funding and have to start pushing to get "entrance". >> >> >> >> This is one lesson I learned from attending WCIT. Not registering >> early cost me a whole lot. >> >> >> >> If there is a consensus for Bill and the Geneva folks to speak on >> behalf of the CS, which I will strongly support, then I will channel my >> contributions directly to Bill. >> >> >> >> Will begin work on the draft doc... >> >> >> >> Nnenna >> >> >> > >> > >> > ____________________________________________________________ >> > 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 >> >> >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 >> >> > > > -- > Deborah Brown > Policy Analyst > Access | AccessNow.org > E. deborah at accessnow.org > S. deborah.l.brown > T. deblebrown > PGP 0x5EB4727D > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > > -- Deborah Brown Policy Analyst Access | AccessNow.org E. deborah at accessnow.org S. deborah.l.brown T. deblebrown PGP 0x5EB4727D -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From riaz.tayob at gmail.com Thu Jan 24 11:13:35 2013 From: riaz.tayob at gmail.com (Riaz K Tayob) Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2013 18:13:35 +0200 Subject: [governance] Facebook spent $4 million to lobby U.S. lawmakers in 2012 In-Reply-To: References: <510086BE.6010100@ITforChange.net> <056f01cdfa49$375b4f60$a611ee20$@gmail.com> Message-ID: <51015DAF.1020501@gmail.com> The Corporate European Observatory makes the same point as Peake makes regarding Europe in Brussels and Strasbourg. However, the EU has no equivalent of the Citizens United decision in the US (in which corporates can donate freely to their candidates, which is constitutionally protected). Formal (liberal) equality has its uses and abuses I suppose. On 2013/01/24 06:01 PM, Adam Peake wrote: > But it's how laws are made and not made. Good that > we actually get to see the money flow, records of ex parte meetings, > information about "revolving door" of employment (which also seems to > be a feature of public service). Much clearer than many countries, > > Adam -------------- 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 From riaz.tayob at gmail.com Thu Jan 24 11:14:48 2013 From: riaz.tayob at gmail.com (Riaz K Tayob) Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2013 18:14:48 +0200 Subject: [governance] Facebook spent $4 million to lobby U.S. lawmakers in 2012 In-Reply-To: References: <510086BE.6010100@ITforChange.net> <056f01cdfa49$375b4f60$a611ee20$@gmail.com> Message-ID: <51015DF8.6070803@gmail.com> On 2013/01/24 05:52 PM, Roland Perry wrote: > Given that it's not democracy (in the Athenian sense), rather > it's "representative democracy"; what's the problem with people > telling/reminding their representatives what views they should be > representing for them? Nothing if one relies on formal equality between people and corporations as the US Supreme (?) court found in Citizens United, that has caused a flurry of concern amongst some segments of civil society... -------------- 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 From riaz.tayob at gmail.com Thu Jan 24 11:20:39 2013 From: riaz.tayob at gmail.com (Riaz K Tayob) Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2013 18:20:39 +0200 Subject: [governance] We need a new formulation of end-to-end analysis Message-ID: <51015F57.5050602@gmail.com> [what do others think?] We need a new formulation of end-to-end analysis End-to-end analysis is the major theoretization of the Internet that was proposed by Jerome Saltzer, David Reed and David Clark from 1981. In their seminal paper and later ones, they formulated what became known as the end-to-end principle , interpreted often as "application-specific functions ought to reside in the end hosts of a network rather than in intermediary nodes -- provided they can be implemented 'completely and correctly' in the end hosts". Ths principle is much quoted by proponents of strong network neutrality requirements, including myself. In reality, Saltzer, Reed and Clark derive this "networks better be dumb or at least not too smart" approach from an underlying analysis of what happens when bits travel from an end (a computer connected to a network) to another end in a network. However both network neutrality and the end-to-end principle capture only part of what we try to make them say. What we have in mind is that the analysis of what happens in a network should be conducted by considering what happens between the human using one device and another human using another device or between one such human and a remote device, such as a distant storage device, server or peer computer. We need an end-to-end analysis which is understood as /human-to-human/ or /human-to-remote computer/. What will it change? One must first acknowledge that with this extended approach, one can't hope to extend the probabilistic model which makes the original formulation of Saltzer, Clark & Reed so compelling. The new formulation can't replace the old one, it can only provide a qualitative extension to it.^1 In the early 1980s, the reference model of a computer connected to the Internet was that it was a general-purpose computer (small mainframe, workstation or personal computer) controlled by the user, a trusted person acting on his behalf or a user organization (such as the MIT Laboratory for Computer Science). This is unfortunately not a realistic assumption today, at least until we succeed in recreating this situation. Smartphone or tablet manufacturers or OS providers severely restrict what users can run as software or control as parameters on their devices. Multifunction ADSL or optical fiber boxes are considered by many ISPs as part of their infrastructure and not the user's property under her control. EBook readers consider not only the device, but the entire collection of eBooks on it to be their own. Many of the real-life impediments to having a non-discriminatory human-controlled decentralized Internet arise from the non-openness/non-freedom (to run the software of one's choice) of either terminal devices or "spaces", "slices" or "machines" used in "cloud" storage and other forms of centralized servers. If we want a much greater share of citizens to understand what is at stake when we speak of network neutrality we must make it clear that it is human-to-human and human-to-personal data activities that we want to be under decentralized human control. 1. The two sentences added for clarification on 24 January 2013. [? ] http://paigrain.debatpublic.net/?p=6418&lang=en -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From roland at internetpolicyagency.com Thu Jan 24 11:33:42 2013 From: roland at internetpolicyagency.com (Roland Perry) Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2013 16:33:42 +0000 Subject: [governance] Facebook spent $4 million to lobby U.S. lawmakers in 2012 In-Reply-To: <51015DF8.6070803@gmail.com> References: <510086BE.6010100@ITforChange.net> <056f01cdfa49$375b4f60$a611ee20$@gmail.com> <51015DF8.6070803@gmail.com> Message-ID: In message <51015DF8.6070803 at gmail.com>, at 18:14:48 on Thu, 24 Jan 2013, Riaz K Tayob writes >> Given that it's not democracy (in the Athenian sense), rather >> it's "representative democracy"; what's the problem with people >>telling/reminding their representatives what views they should be >> representing for them? > >Nothing if one relies on formal equality between people and >corporations as the US Supreme (?) court found in Citizens United, that >has caused a flurry of concern amongst some segments of civil society... There are always going to be people more skilled at approaching their representatives than others. One of the things which I like about the UK's version of representative democracy is that anyone can get a local appointment[1] with their MP (often on a Friday afternoon or Saturday) irrespective of their individual "convening power". It's the latter which large corporations pay very large sums to achieve in the Capital (Monday to Thursday). [1] Whether they can be persuasive in that appointment is another thing. -- Roland Perry -------------- 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 From ivarhartmann at gmail.com Thu Jan 24 12:04:35 2013 From: ivarhartmann at gmail.com (Ivar A. M. Hartmann) Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2013 15:04:35 -0200 Subject: [governance] We need a new formulation of end-to-end analysis In-Reply-To: <51015F57.5050602@gmail.com> References: <51015F57.5050602@gmail.com> Message-ID: If we're talking about about *network* neutrality, then the status of the device/terminal, whether free or closed, isn't relevant. That would be trying to load the notion that has been described, among other things, as * generativity*, into network neutrality. I know the cloud makes the distinction between the terminal and the network even foggier these days, but I believe it remains workable and relevant. Best, Ivar On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 2:20 PM, Riaz K Tayob wrote: > [what do others think?] > We need a new formulation of end-to-end analysis > > End-to-end analysis is the major theoretization of the Internet that was proposed > by Jerome Saltzer, David Reed and David Clarkfrom 1981. In their seminal paper and later ones, they formulated what > became known as the end-to-end principle, > interpreted often as “application-specific functions ought to reside in the > end hosts of a network rather than in intermediary nodes – provided they > can be implemented ‘completely and correctly’ in the end hosts”. Ths > principle is much quoted by proponents of strong network neutrality > requirements, including myself. In reality, Saltzer, Reed and Clark derive > this “networks better be dumb or at least not too smart” approach from an > underlying analysis of what happens when bits travel from an end (a > computer connected to a network) to another end in a network. > > However both network neutrality and the end-to-end principle capture only > part of what we try to make them say. What we have in mind is that the > analysis of what happens in a network should be conducted by considering > what happens between the human using one device and another human using > another device or between one such human and a remote device, such as a > distant storage device, server or peer computer. We need an end-to-end > analysis which is understood as *human-to-human* or *human-to-remote > computer*. What will it change? One must first acknowledge that with this > extended approach, one can’t hope to extend the probabilistic model which > makes the original formulation of Saltzer, Clark & Reed so compelling. The > new formulation can’t replace the old one, it can only provide a > qualitative extension to it.1In the early 1980s, the reference model of a computer connected to the > Internet was that it was a general-purpose computer (small mainframe, > workstation or personal computer) controlled by the user, a trusted person > acting on his behalf or a user organization (such as the MIT Laboratory for > Computer Science). This is unfortunately not a realistic assumption today, > at least until we succeed in recreating this situation. Smartphone or > tablet manufacturers or OS providers severely restrict what users can run > as software or control as parameters on their devices. Multifunction ADSL > or optical fiber boxes are considered by many ISPs as part of their > infrastructure and not the user’s property under her control. EBook readers > consider not only the device, but the entire collection of eBooks on it to > be their own. Many of the real-life impediments to having a > non-discriminatory human-controlled decentralized Internet arise from the > non-openness/non-freedom (to run the software of one’s choice) of either > terminal devices or “spaces”, “slices” or “machines” used in “cloud” > storage and other forms of centralized servers. > > If we want a much greater share of citizens to understand what is at stake > when we speak of network neutrality we must make it clear that it is > human-to-human and human-to-personal data activities that we want to be > under decentralized human control. > > 1. The two sentences added for clarification on 24 January 2013. [↩ > ] > > http://paigrain.debatpublic.net/?p=6418&lang=en > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From gurstein at gmail.com Thu Jan 24 12:41:02 2013 From: gurstein at gmail.com (michael gurstein) Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2013 09:41:02 -0800 Subject: [governance] Facebook spent $4 million to lobby U.S. lawmakers in 2012 In-Reply-To: References: <510086BE.6010100@ITforChange.net> <056f01cdfa49$375b4f60$a611ee20$@gmail.com> <51015DF8.6070803@gmail.com> Message-ID: <066a01cdfa5a$01b28610$05179230$@gmail.com> I think the issue is whether or not the outcome is in the (general) public interest or rather serves narrow sectional (corporate) private interests. http://articles.latimes.com/2012/apr/22/local/la-me-att-20120422 The US system appears skewed towards the latter and this is shocking and disturbing to those (including many in the US) who find this to be a form of corruption and as undermining democracy. Arguably, as in the recent WCIT, we are seeing an extension of these processes into the global Internet sphere, in this instance not to direct governance oversight and regulation but to prevent it altogether. This is not about your gran meeting with her MP to discuss the euthanasia or not, of feral cats. M -----Original Message----- From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Roland Perry Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2013 8:34 AM To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org Subject: Re: [governance] Facebook spent $4 million to lobby U.S. lawmakers in 2012 In message <51015DF8.6070803 at gmail.com>, at 18:14:48 on Thu, 24 Jan 2013, Riaz K Tayob writes >> Given that it's not democracy (in the Athenian sense), rather it's >>"representative democracy"; what's the problem with people >>telling/reminding their representatives what views they should be >>representing for them? > >Nothing if one relies on formal equality between people and >corporations as the US Supreme (?) court found in Citizens United, that >has caused a flurry of concern amongst some segments of civil society... There are always going to be people more skilled at approaching their representatives than others. One of the things which I like about the UK's version of representative democracy is that anyone can get a local appointment[1] with their MP (often on a Friday afternoon or Saturday) irrespective of their individual "convening power". It's the latter which large corporations pay very large sums to achieve in the Capital (Monday to Thursday). [1] Whether they can be persuasive in that appointment is another thing. -- Roland Perry -------------- 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 From ajp at glocom.ac.jp Thu Jan 24 12:50:04 2013 From: ajp at glocom.ac.jp (Adam Peake) Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2013 02:50:04 +0900 Subject: [governance] Facebook spent $4 million to lobby U.S. lawmakers in 2012 In-Reply-To: <066a01cdfa5a$01b28610$05179230$@gmail.com> References: <510086BE.6010100@ITforChange.net> <056f01cdfa49$375b4f60$a611ee20$@gmail.com> <51015DF8.6070803@gmail.com> <066a01cdfa5a$01b28610$05179230$@gmail.com> Message-ID: On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 2:41 AM, michael gurstein wrote: > I think the issue is whether or not the outcome is in the (general) public > interest or rather serves narrow sectional (corporate) private interests. > > http://articles.latimes.com/2012/apr/22/local/la-me-att-20120422 > > The US system appears skewed towards the latter and this is shocking and > disturbing to those (including many in the US) who find this to be a form of > corruption and as undermining democracy. > > Arguably, as in the recent WCIT, we are seeing an extension of these > processes into the global Internet sphere, in this instance not to direct > governance oversight and regulation but to prevent it altogether. > Arguably, in WCIT, how so? (Intergovernmental process, partly funded by private sector, most of the none treaty work --core work-- done by non-governmental actors) > This is not about your gran meeting with her MP to discuss the euthanasia or > not, of feral cats. > Search for "cash for questions" Adam > M > > -----Original Message----- > From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org > [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Roland Perry > Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2013 8:34 AM > To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org > Subject: Re: [governance] Facebook spent $4 million to lobby U.S. lawmakers > in 2012 > > In message <51015DF8.6070803 at gmail.com>, at 18:14:48 on Thu, 24 Jan 2013, > Riaz K Tayob writes > >>> Given that it's not democracy (in the Athenian sense), rather it's >>>"representative democracy"; what's the problem with people >>>telling/reminding their representatives what views they should be >>>representing for them? >> >>Nothing if one relies on formal equality between people and >>corporations as the US Supreme (?) court found in Citizens United, that >>has caused a flurry of concern amongst some segments of civil society... > > There are always going to be people more skilled at approaching their > representatives than others. > > One of the things which I like about the UK's version of representative > democracy is that anyone can get a local appointment[1] with their MP (often > on a Friday afternoon or Saturday) irrespective of their individual > "convening power". > > It's the latter which large corporations pay very large sums to achieve in > the Capital (Monday to Thursday). > > [1] Whether they can be persuasive in that appointment is another thing. > -- > Roland Perry > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From avri at acm.org Thu Jan 24 13:50:09 2013 From: avri at acm.org (Avri Doria) Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2013 13:50:09 -0500 Subject: [governance] "US Exceptionalism" (was Re: Bloomberg - The Overzealous Prosecution...) In-Reply-To: <8CFC852C6378919-24A0-515E@webmail-d191.sysops.aol.com> References: <8CFC852C6378919-24A0-515E@webmail-d191.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: <57F9CA02-6292-44C8-AE76-5261752FA17C@acm.org> On 24 Jan 2013, at 09:03, Koven Ronald wrote: > it is standard that the first time an organization is mentioned in an article its acronym is spelled out. A postion I totally agree with, even if at times I disagree. My problem is, knowing where the barrier is. Was I trying to be cute translating Unite States (US)? Perhaps. what about International Telecommunication Union (ITU) - less ITU-R? Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES)? BTW< is that enough to explain it, or should I also ention that it is the ITU Email etc system. My other problem is the attack one gets when they forget to do first use explanation. Or when they don't realize that ICANN, ITU, or ISOC-NY is not understood by everyone. So yeah, I think it is a subject that is well treated with a little light-handedness. avri -------------- 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 From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com Thu Jan 24 14:03:37 2013 From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro) Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2013 07:03:37 +1200 Subject: [governance] "US Exceptionalism" (was Re: Bloomberg - The Overzealous Prosecution...) In-Reply-To: <004501cdf9bb$a118f3a0$e34adae0$@gmail.com> References: <50FAC752.5090502@gmail.com> <50FBAE3C.8010600@ITforChange.net> <20130120161823.3d510425@quill.bollow.ch> <20130123110454.0349cf0f@quill.bollow.ch> <4BF7B62A-94A6-4F41-9E3D-983BDAD957E1@hserus.net> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8013314FB@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> <004501cdf9bb$a118f3a0$e34adae0$@gmail.com> Message-ID: On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 10:47 AM, michael gurstein wrote: > !!!!!!!! > > AoC ? may mean many things but if it is said in the context of the > Internet means Affirmation of Commitment. For more information, visit: > http://www.icann.org/en/about/aoc-review > > ATRT ? may mean many things but in ICANN it means Accountability, > Transparency and Review Team. You can read about it here: > http://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-05oct12-en.htm > > JPA ? usually refers to Joint Project Agreement but may mean other things > etc > > !!!!!!!! > You can find ICANN Acronyms here: - http://www.icann.org/en/about/learning/glossary - http://www.icann.org/en/resources/idn/glossary > > M > > -----Original Message----- > From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org > [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of "Kleinwächter, > Wolfgang" > Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2013 7:10 AM > To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; McTim; Suresh Ramasubramanian > Cc: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Norbert Bollow > Subject: AW: [governance] "US Exceptionalism" (was Re: Bloomberg - The > Overzealous Prosecution...) > > In my eyes, the AoC has opend the door for an innovation in the "oversight > issue". The review process has the potential to become a oversighr > mechanism. The good thing with the review is that it is first not > centralized in one body/team/process but in four issue based processes and > second it uis multistakehooder with a stong governmental involvement. > Unfoirtunately the first round was done in a hurry with no model in place > and the results had been not so impressive. However there is potential in > the process. Insofar the 2nd ATRT which will start soon, couod take a big > step forward filling the gap a lot of people feel that some sort of > oversight is needed. > > And AoC/ATRT is indeed better than to have a governmental oversight of 1 > (as > it was under the MoU/JPA), 11 (as proposed three years agi by the EU) or > 159 > (UNITU) governments. > > wolfgang > > ________________________________ > > Von: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org im Auftrag von McTim > Gesendet: Mi 23.01.2013 12:46 > An: Suresh Ramasubramanian > Cc: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Norbert Bollow > Betreff: Re: [governance] "US Exceptionalism" (was Re: Bloomberg - The > Overzealous Prosecution...) > > > > Hi, > > On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 5:54 AM, Suresh Ramasubramanian > > wrote: > > The problem being that nature abhors a vacuum. There will be SOME power > structure that will rise following this denationalization - and I am not at > all sure we're going to like the alternative any more than we would like > say > the ITU taking things over. Like Norbert I'd be interested in hearing > what > McTim has to suggest. > > > I can't speak for Avri or Milton, but what I would prefer is zero nation > states providing oversight over ICANN rather than one (or 195). > > I think ICANN can stand alone without an overseer (besides it's own > Board). Of course, I don't think it likely to happen, but it is my > preference. > > > -- > Cheers, > > McTim > "A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A route > indicates how we get there." Jon Postel > > > > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > -- Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala P.O. Box 17862 Suva Fiji Twitter: @SalanietaT Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro Tel: +679 3544828 Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From gurstein at gmail.com Thu Jan 24 14:06:18 2013 From: gurstein at gmail.com (michael gurstein) Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2013 11:06:18 -0800 Subject: [governance] FW: [governace] Facebook spent $4 million to lobby U.S. lawmakers in 2012 Message-ID: <06af01cdfa65$e4d975b0$ae8c6110$@gmail.com> For a great deal of info on what sectors, companies, industries, etc spend on advocacy/lobbying in the US, see http://www.opensecrets.org/lobby/index.php. Facebook of course is peanuts, but remember they are just getting started and at this point they are just getting themselves known around town. the issues where lobbying will pay off don't seem to have yet really started to emerge for FB, but I would guess to them it's a bit of setting up a "profile. and getting a few "likes. :) M -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From karl at cavebear.com Fri Jan 25 03:32:39 2013 From: karl at cavebear.com (Karl Auerbach) Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2013 00:32:39 -0800 Subject: [governance] We need a new formulation of end-to-end analysis In-Reply-To: <51015F57.5050602@gmail.com> References: <51015F57.5050602@gmail.com> Message-ID: <51024327.2060406@cavebear.com> On 01/24/2013 08:20 AM, Riaz K Tayob wrote: > We need a new formulation of end-to-end analysis > > End-to-end analysis is the major theoretization of the Internet that was > proposed by Jerome Saltzer, David Reed and David Clark > Less on topic and more of a question about internet history... I had always attributed the idea of moving intelligence out of the packet switches and into the attached hosts came from Cyclades (from our friend on this list Louis Pouzin). Is my understanding incorrect? --karl-- -------------- 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 From roland at internetpolicyagency.com Fri Jan 25 03:35:23 2013 From: roland at internetpolicyagency.com (Roland Perry) Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2013 08:35:23 +0000 Subject: [governance] Facebook spent $4 million to lobby U.S. lawmakers in 2012 In-Reply-To: <066a01cdfa5a$01b28610$05179230$@gmail.com> References: <510086BE.6010100@ITforChange.net> <056f01cdfa49$375b4f60$a611ee20$@gmail.com> <51015DF8.6070803@gmail.com> <066a01cdfa5a$01b28610$05179230$@gmail.com> Message-ID: In message <066a01cdfa5a$01b28610$05179230$@gmail.com>, at 09:41:02 on Thu, 24 Jan 2013, michael gurstein writes >I think the issue is whether or not the outcome is in the (general) public >interest or rather serves narrow sectional (corporate) private interests. > >http://articles.latimes.com/2012/apr/22/local/la-me-att-20120422 > >The US system appears skewed towards the latter and this is shocking and >disturbing to those (including many in the US) who find this to be a form of >corruption and as undermining democracy. What I was trying to point out is that the general public can influence lawmakers completely free of charge. They may not be very persuasive one at a time (either because they aren't a very good advocate or they don't have a very good cause) but lots of them added up can have an effect. As for the issue of private funding for political parties (and individual candidates) there are some democracies that place limits on the amount that can be raised (and spent) and I believe there are some where that limit is zero and campaign funds are allocated from a national fund for the purpose. But that's a bigger discussion of how different countries implement different forms of democracy, and somewhat outside the scope of this list. -- Roland Perry -------------- 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 From nb at bollow.ch Fri Jan 25 05:51:27 2013 From: nb at bollow.ch (Norbert Bollow) Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2013 11:51:27 +0100 Subject: [governance] Re: Charter amendment proposals in need of more co-proposers Message-ID: <20130125115127.00edd288@quill.bollow.ch> I wrote: > among the charter amendment proposals listed on > http://igcaucus.org/informally-discussed-charter-amendments > I think it would be good to bring the following two to a vote together > with Avri's two amendment proposals (which have already achieved the > requirement of a sufficient number of co-proposers). > > Proposal of Jeremy and co-proposers on updating the reference to the > mailing list > > Proposal of Norbert and co-proposers on coordinator election dates Are these proposals really not getting any further co-proposers??? If someone doubts that the clarification of coordinator election dates has some importance, please try to explain how the current text of our charter is consistent with Sala's election having taken place in October 2011 and mine in January 2013. Greetings, Norbert -------------- 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 From tracey at traceynaughton.com Fri Jan 25 07:22:25 2013 From: tracey at traceynaughton.com (Tracey Naughton) Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2013 23:22:25 +1100 Subject: [governance] "US Exceptionalism" (was Re: Bloomberg - The Overzealous Prosecution...) In-Reply-To: <20130124164246.3a0e03e1@quill.bollow.ch> References: <8CFC852C6378919-24A0-515E@webmail-d191.sysops.aol.com> <3B0BA8A4C396324FA545DC0CCDCF271D046F28C0@DB3PRD0511MB602.eurprd05.prod.outlook.com> <8CFC85444616A25-24A0-528C@webmail-d191.sysops.aol.com> <20130124144222.GA1326@hserus.net> <20130124164246.3a0e03e1@quill.bollow.ch> Message-ID: I wish I could #like# this thread. Tracey Naughton On 25 Jan 2013, at 2:42 AM, Norbert Bollow wrote: [with IGC coordinator hat on] Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote: > Koven Ronald [24/01/13 09:14 -0500]: >> Hilariously funny -- at least, I suppose that was the intention. > > of course. except - do we really have to compare a newspaper, where > the article is supposed to be self contained, with an ongoing > discussion on a mailing list? We do have people joining in who haven't been around forever. That's why it is desirable give the meaning of acronyms when first used in a given discussion thread. That won't be too tedious, and it'll be significantly helpful to newcomers. Greetings, Norbert ____________________________________________________________ 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From gurstein at gmail.com Fri Jan 25 08:43:20 2013 From: gurstein at gmail.com (michael gurstein) Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2013 05:43:20 -0800 Subject: [governance] Re: Charter amendment proposals in need of more co-proposers In-Reply-To: <20130125115127.00edd288@quill.bollow.ch> References: <20130125115127.00edd288@quill.bollow.ch> Message-ID: <09eb01cdfb01$f883d1e0$e98b75a0$@gmail.com> I'll co-propose. M -----Original Message----- From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Norbert Bollow Sent: Friday, January 25, 2013 2:51 AM To: IGC Subject: [governance] Re: Charter amendment proposals in need of more co-proposers I wrote: > among the charter amendment proposals listed on > http://igcaucus.org/informally-discussed-charter-amendments > I think it would be good to bring the following two to a vote together > with Avri's two amendment proposals (which have already achieved the > requirement of a sufficient number of co-proposers). > > Proposal of Jeremy and co-proposers on updating the reference to the > mailing list > > Proposal of Norbert and co-proposers on coordinator election dates Are these proposals really not getting any further co-proposers??? If someone doubts that the clarification of coordinator election dates has some importance, please try to explain how the current text of our charter is consistent with Sala's election having taken place in October 2011 and mine in January 2013. Greetings, Norbert -------------- next part -------------- ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.igcaucus.org To be removed from the list, visit: http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing For all other list information and functions, see: http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see: http://www.igcaucus.org/ Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t From avri at acm.org Fri Jan 25 09:06:50 2013 From: avri at acm.org (Avri Doria) Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2013 09:06:50 -0500 Subject: [governance] Charter amendment proposals in need of more co-proposers In-Reply-To: <09eb01cdfb01$f883d1e0$e98b75a0$@gmail.com> References: <20130125115127.00edd288@quill.bollow.ch> <09eb01cdfb01$f883d1e0$e98b75a0$@gmail.com> Message-ID: On 25 Jan 2013, at 08:43, michael gurstein wrote: > Are these proposals really not getting any further co-proposers??? --- 3. Proposal of Jeremy and co-proposers on updating the reference to the mailing list Note: This proposal has been referred to as "amendment 3" in the "Notice to the IGC on Proposed CharterAmendments" thread. Under "Working methods", update the address of the mailing list from governance at lists.cpsr.org togovernance at lists.igcaucus.org. co-propose --- -------------- 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 From parminder at itforchange.net Fri Jan 25 09:10:08 2013 From: parminder at itforchange.net (parminder) Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2013 19:40:08 +0530 Subject: [governance] today's Wash Post editorial In-Reply-To: References: <50FEA64A.4090805@itforchange.net> Message-ID: <51029240.5020209@itforchange.net> On Tuesday 22 January 2013 08:43 PM, McTim wrote: > On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 9:46 AM, parminder wrote: >> >> On Tuesday 22 January 2013 01:25 AM, McTim wrote: >> >> >> >> >> I would have thought you would have been pleased that a neo-liberal >> institution like the WashPost acknowledged that: >> >> "There are suspicions aplenty in the rest of the world that >> this is the equivalent of U.S. control — suspicions that should not be >> ignored. While the Internet cannot fall into the hands of those who >> would censor and restrict it, the United States should put more effort >> into remaking the current model so that it can serve what has become a >> global infrastructure." In politics pious statements count only for pious statement, unless one has something to back them up - something like a real proposal for action. >> >> >> I think this is actually a very accurate description of the consensus >> of this Caucus. Still, let me build on this. So, you agree that IGC has consensus on making the current governance systems for CIRs such that "it can serve what has become a global infrastructure". In a previous email, McTim, you had said that you would like "at some point in the evolution of the process to remove the NTIA (US gov agency) from the root changing procedure". I have a simple proposal for doing so. Lets see if you and the IGC can agree on it. Every time ICANN makes a root change decision - which as the global Internet names and number agency, it is its job to do - it does not communicate it to the NTIA for authentication to then be forwarded to the Verisign to make the necessary changes to what is called as the authoritative root server, as is the current procedure. ICANN simply communicates the root change decision simultaneously to all the 13 root servers, and also designates a specific time period in which the root change exercise should be done. Lets see if the US gov does or does not follow the instructions from the legitimate bottom up multistakeholder etc etc governance body to make the required changes in the the 3 root servers that it owns. In any case, since it has been often argued on this list that the non US gov owned 10 servers, 4 (or is it 3) of them outside the US, are rather independent in their decision making, we can certainly expect these 10 servers to religiously follow the 'legitimate' instructions form the 'legitimate' CIR governance body. That should be enough to keep the global Internet up and running. Through this simple change of process, very much in ICANN hands to do (no existing US law can stop it from doing this) all the power and authority in CIR governance would shift completely to ICANN, and away from the US, gov, something which is such a big sticking point in global IG discussions. As a by-product, we will also immediately know how much is the US really committed to multistakeholderism in global IG, a tune that it never ceases to play in public, and which seem to have impressed a lot of people who seem to completely believe US's words in this matter. (There may be some DNSEC related issues, which I am sure can easily be sorted out by an alternative DNS security architecture.) Parminder >> >> -------------- 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 From drc at virtualized.org Fri Jan 25 09:35:26 2013 From: drc at virtualized.org (David Conrad) Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2013 15:35:26 +0100 Subject: [governance] today's Wash Post editorial In-Reply-To: <51029240.5020209@itforchange.net> References: <50FEA64A.4090805@itforchange.net> <51029240.5020209@itforchange.net> Message-ID: Parminder, On Jan 25, 2013, at 3:10 PM, parminder wrote: > ICANN simply communicates the root change decision simultaneously to all the 13 root servers, and also designates a specific time period in which the root change exercise should be done. Ignoring everything else, I have some doubt that the current root server operators would be at all interested in taking on the role (and liabilities) you're proposing. > (There may be some DNSEC related issues, Yes there are. > which I am sure can easily be sorted out by an alternative DNS security architecture.) You'd probably first need to convince the root server operators that there is a problem that coming up with an "alternative DNS security architecture" (by which I presume you mean "alternative key management processes") would solve. This might be challenging. Regards, -drc -------------- 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 From suresh at hserus.net Fri Jan 25 09:55:39 2013 From: suresh at hserus.net (Suresh Ramasubramanian) Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2013 20:25:39 +0530 Subject: [governance] today's Wash Post editorial In-Reply-To: References: <50FEA64A.4090805@itforchange.net> <51029240.5020209@itforchange.net> Message-ID: <76BE75B0-1B7C-4214-895C-493E34E1FB8C@hserus.net> I agree. As for an alternate security architecture .. please do come up with one, if you are interested in replacing the current architecture. Or if you have specific proposals to incrementally change the current architecture, those would be great too. --srs (iPad) On 25-Jan-2013, at 20:05, David Conrad wrote: > Parminder, > > On Jan 25, 2013, at 3:10 PM, parminder wrote: >> ICANN simply communicates the root change decision simultaneously to all the 13 root servers, and also designates a specific time period in which the root change exercise should be done. > > Ignoring everything else, I have some doubt that the current root server operators would be at all interested in taking on the role (and liabilities) you're proposing. > >> (There may be some DNSEC related issues, > > Yes there are. > >> which I am sure can easily be sorted out by an alternative DNS security architecture.) > > You'd probably first need to convince the root server operators that there is a problem that coming up with an "alternative DNS security architecture" (by which I presume you mean "alternative key management processes") would solve. This might be challenging. > > Regards, > -drc > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From nhklein at gmx.net Fri Jan 25 10:06:21 2013 From: nhklein at gmx.net (Norbert Klein) Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2013 22:06:21 +0700 Subject: [governance] "US Exceptionalism" (was Re: Bloomberg - The Overzealous Prosecution...) In-Reply-To: References: <8CFC852C6378919-24A0-515E@webmail-d191.sysops.aol.com> <3B0BA8A4C396324FA545DC0CCDCF271D046F28C0@DB3PRD0511MB602.eurprd05.prod.outlook.com> <8CFC85444616A25-24A0-528C@webmail-d191.sysops.aol.com> <20130124144222.GA1326@hserus.net> <20130124164246.3a0e03e1@quill.bollow.ch> Message-ID: <51029F6D.9000604@gmx.net> On 1/25/2013 7:22 PM, Tracey Naughton wrote: > I wish I could #like# this thread. > > Tracey Naughton > > On 25 Jan 2013, at 2:42 AM, Norbert Bollow wrote: > > [with IGC coordinator hat on] > [snip] > We do have people joining in who haven't been around forever. > > That's why it is desirable give the meaning of acronyms when first used > in a given discussion thread. That won't be too tedious, and it'll > be significantly helpful to newcomers. > > Greetings, > Norbert And the other Norbert supports this suggestion also fully - thanks also for the #like# by Tracey. I say so, though I have been around here for quite some years, but I try time and again to get other people interested in Internet governance - and it is often VERY difficult to excerpt and quote some section of this list and be understood. Norbert Klein Phnom Penh Cambodia -------------- 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 From gpaque at gmail.com Fri Jan 25 10:18:37 2013 From: gpaque at gmail.com (Ginger Paque) Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2013 09:18:37 -0600 Subject: [governance] Charter amendment proposals in need of more co-proposers In-Reply-To: References: <20130125115127.00edd288@quill.bollow.ch> <09eb01cdfb01$f883d1e0$e98b75a0$@gmail.com> Message-ID: Please add me. Tx. gp Ginger (Virginia) Paque VirginiaP at diplomacy.edu Diplo Foundation Internet Governance Capacity Building Programme www.diplomacy.edu/ig ** ** On 25 January 2013 08:06, Avri Doria wrote: > > On 25 Jan 2013, at 08:43, michael gurstein wrote: > > > Are these proposals really not getting any further co-proposers??? > > > --- > 3. Proposal of Jeremy and co-proposers on updating the reference to the > mailing list > > Note: This proposal has been referred to as "amendment 3" in the "Notice > to the IGC on Proposed CharterAmendments" thread. > > Under "Working methods", update the address of the mailing list from > governance at lists.cpsr.org togovernance at lists.igcaucus.org. > > > co-propose > --- > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From dogwallah at gmail.com Fri Jan 25 10:18:38 2013 From: dogwallah at gmail.com (McTim) Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2013 10:18:38 -0500 Subject: [governance] today's Wash Post editorial In-Reply-To: References: <50FEA64A.4090805@itforchange.net> <51029240.5020209@itforchange.net> Message-ID: On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 9:35 AM, David Conrad wrote: > Parminder, > > On Jan 25, 2013, at 3:10 PM, parminder wrote: >> ICANN simply communicates the root change decision simultaneously to all the 13 root servers, and also designates a specific time period in which the root change exercise should be done. > > Ignoring everything else, I have some doubt that the current root server operators would be at all interested in taking on the role (and liabilities) you're proposing. right, clear that hurdle, then convince ICANN to violate the contract that gives them their raison d'être and I am on board! -- 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 From parminder at itforchange.net Fri Jan 25 09:52:52 2013 From: parminder at itforchange.net (parminder) Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2013 20:22:52 +0530 Subject: [governance] today's Wash Post editorial In-Reply-To: References: <50FEA64A.4090805@itforchange.net> <51029240.5020209@itforchange.net> Message-ID: <51029C44.9050501@itforchange.net> On Friday 25 January 2013 08:05 PM, David Conrad wrote: > Parminder, > >> which I am sure can easily be sorted out by an alternative DNS security architecture.) > You'd probably first need to convince the root server operators that there is a problem that coming up with an "alternative DNS security architecture" (by which I presume you mean "alternative key management processes") would solve. This might be challenging. My general proposal assumes widespread agreement among an overwhelming majority of actors in the global IG space that the US oversight of ICANN is essentially illegitimate and must be replaced. (This is what I have been led to believe from discussions on this list.) If this assumption holds, I would presume that at least 10 of the 13 root servers operators (non US gov), whom I consider trustees for global Internet public, would be among such actors who ultimately seek global legitimacy for a global infrastructures. Indeed, I think even you (David) have argued that these non US gov root server operators are expected to take decisions in conformity with global public interest, and are not tied to the apron strings of the US gov, and its narrow interests. Even if these root server operators are themselves not so democratically inclined, I would hope that the moral persuasive power of the mentioned overwhelming majority of actors can turn them around towards seeking real movement towards what Washington Post described as " remaking the current model so that it can serve what has become a global infrastructure". Perhaps, we should start with a meeting between ICANN and the root operators, convened by public interest actors, like maybe the IGC, to kickstart the process that my proposal seeks to establish. regards, parminder > > Regards, > -drc > > -------------- 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 From parminder at itforchange.net Fri Jan 25 10:44:30 2013 From: parminder at itforchange.net (parminder) Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2013 21:14:30 +0530 Subject: [governance] today's Wash Post editorial In-Reply-To: References: <50FEA64A.4090805@itforchange.net> <51029240.5020209@itforchange.net> Message-ID: <5102A85E.8080000@itforchange.net> On Friday 25 January 2013 08:48 PM, McTim wrote: > On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 9:35 AM, David Conrad wrote: >> Parminder, >> >> On Jan 25, 2013, at 3:10 PM, parminder wrote: >>> ICANN simply communicates the root change decision simultaneously to all the 13 root servers, and also designates a specific time period in which the root change exercise should be done. >> Ignoring everything else, I have some doubt that the current root server operators would be at all interested in taking on the role (and liabilities) you're proposing. This is to say that root operators do not see themselves in any kind of public interest role, and do what they do entirely for their own private reasons and interests. Well, if this is the case, when an argument is made that US can indeed do an inappropriate changes in the root, hopefully we will from now on never be confronted with this argument that root operators simply wont comply (I think both David and McTim have made this argument.). This is the point that such a discussion always reaches and stalls at. If root operators cannot be trusted to follow public interest, then they are illegitimate occupiers of key nodes of a public infrastructure and we should seek to dislodge them. At least take an advocacy position against them, since advocacy preceded civil and political action. > right, clear that hurdle, I am asking for us all to try and clear all such hurdles, starting with agreeing to a common advocacy position and sharing it with all key actors. My question is: do you agree to sign on it or not. > then convince ICANN to violate the contract > that gives them their raison d'être As above, it is a proposal for the IGC, including you.... to take up a position on this matter and advocate it. > and I am on board! That is too convenient. You need to tell us whether you are on board at the start of this process or not.... and not at the end of it.. parminder > -------------- 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 From rballeste at stu.edu Fri Jan 25 10:47:30 2013 From: rballeste at stu.edu (Balleste, Roy) Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2013 15:47:30 +0000 Subject: [governance] today's Wash Post editorial In-Reply-To: <51029C44.9050501@itforchange.net> References: <50FEA64A.4090805@itforchange.net> <51029240.5020209@itforchange.net> <51029C44.9050501@itforchange.net> Message-ID: <06EF7F5E019BB34DB01EDC2DB0588A9F0F2B24B5@BL2PRD0810MB349.namprd08.prod.outlook.com> Any legitimate model of internet governance that sets aside ICANN would probably fail. Roy Balleste, J.S.D. Professor of Law Law Library Director St. Thomas University 16401 NW 37th Avenue Miami Gardens, FL 33054 USA 1-305-623-2341 -----Original Message----- From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of parminder Sent: Friday, January 25, 2013 9:53 AM To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org Subject: Re: [governance] today's Wash Post editorial On Friday 25 January 2013 08:05 PM, David Conrad wrote: > Parminder, > >> which I am sure can easily be sorted out by an alternative DNS >> security architecture.) > You'd probably first need to convince the root server operators that there is a problem that coming up with an "alternative DNS security architecture" (by which I presume you mean "alternative key management processes") would solve. This might be challenging. My general proposal assumes widespread agreement among an overwhelming majority of actors in the global IG space that the US oversight of ICANN is essentially illegitimate and must be replaced. (This is what I have been led to believe from discussions on this list.) If this assumption holds, I would presume that at least 10 of the 13 root servers operators (non US gov), whom I consider trustees for global Internet public, would be among such actors who ultimately seek global legitimacy for a global infrastructures. Indeed, I think even you (David) have argued that these non US gov root server operators are expected to take decisions in conformity with global public interest, and are not tied to the apron strings of the US gov, and its narrow interests. Even if these root server operators are themselves not so democratically inclined, I would hope that the moral persuasive power of the mentioned overwhelming majority of actors can turn them around towards seeking real movement towards what Washington Post described as " remaking the current model so that it can serve what has become a global infrastructure". Perhaps, we should start with a meeting between ICANN and the root operators, convened by public interest actors, like maybe the IGC, to kickstart the process that my proposal seeks to establish. regards, parminder > > Regards, > -drc > > -------------- 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 From suresh at hserus.net Fri Jan 25 10:49:13 2013 From: suresh at hserus.net (Suresh Ramasubramanian) Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2013 21:19:13 +0530 Subject: [governance] today's Wash Post editorial In-Reply-To: <51029C44.9050501@itforchange.net> References: <50FEA64A.4090805@itforchange.net> <51029240.5020209@itforchange.net> <51029C44.9050501@itforchange.net> Message-ID: On 25-Jan-2013, at 20:22, parminder wrote: > My general proposal assumes widespread agreement among an overwhelming majority of actors in the global IG space that the US oversight of ICANN is essentially illegitimate and must be replaced. (This is what I have been led to believe from discussions on this list.) > > If this assumption holds, Assume that it doesn't. In fact, it doesn't. Then? -------------- 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 From parminder at itforchange.net Fri Jan 25 10:50:44 2013 From: parminder at itforchange.net (parminder) Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2013 21:20:44 +0530 Subject: [governance] today's Wash Post editorial In-Reply-To: References: <50FEA64A.4090805@itforchange.net> <51029240.5020209@itforchange.net> Message-ID: <5102A9D4.3070704@itforchange.net> On Friday 25 January 2013 08:48 PM, McTim wrote: > > right, clear that hurdle, then convince ICANN to violate the contract > that gives them their raison d'être and I am on board! The whole point of what I am proposing is that ICANN raison d'etre must be its bottom up global legitimacy, and not the contract with the US gov... And ICANN has to take a stand on favour of one against the other possible raison d'etre. There is an obvious tension between the two, and my proposal invites us, and finally the ICANN, to take a clear stand on what ICANN's raison d'etre really is. It is however intersting to note that you seem to consider the US contract being ICANN's raison d'etre rather than its bottom up global legitimacy. parminder > -------------- 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 From parminder at itforchange.net Fri Jan 25 10:55:19 2013 From: parminder at itforchange.net (parminder) Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2013 21:25:19 +0530 Subject: [governance] today's Wash Post editorial In-Reply-To: <06EF7F5E019BB34DB01EDC2DB0588A9F0F2B24B5@BL2PRD0810MB349.namprd08.prod.outlook.com> References: <50FEA64A.4090805@itforchange.net> <51029240.5020209@itforchange.net> <51029C44.9050501@itforchange.net> <06EF7F5E019BB34DB01EDC2DB0588A9F0F2B24B5@BL2PRD0810MB349.namprd08.prod.outlook.com> Message-ID: <5102AAE7.6010109@itforchange.net> On Friday 25 January 2013 09:17 PM, Balleste, Roy wrote: > Any legitimate model of internet governance that sets aside ICANN would probably fail. Prof Balleste, you are completely misreading my proposal. It doesnt set ICANN aside, it makes ICANN the all powerful authority in the CIR (critical Internet resources) space, freeing it from the yoke of US's oversight... parminder > > Roy Balleste, J.S.D. > Professor of Law > Law Library Director > St. Thomas University > 16401 NW 37th Avenue > Miami Gardens, FL 33054 USA > 1-305-623-2341 > > > -----Original Message----- > From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of parminder > Sent: Friday, January 25, 2013 9:53 AM > To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org > Subject: Re: [governance] today's Wash Post editorial > > > On Friday 25 January 2013 08:05 PM, David Conrad wrote: >> Parminder, >> >>> which I am sure can easily be sorted out by an alternative DNS >>> security architecture.) >> You'd probably first need to convince the root server operators that there is a problem that coming up with an "alternative DNS security architecture" (by which I presume you mean "alternative key management processes") would solve. This might be challenging. > My general proposal assumes widespread agreement among an overwhelming majority of actors in the global IG space that the US oversight of ICANN is essentially illegitimate and must be replaced. (This is what I have been led to believe from discussions on this list.) > > If this assumption holds, I would presume that at least 10 of the 13 root servers operators (non US gov), whom I consider trustees for global Internet public, would be among such actors who ultimately seek global legitimacy for a global infrastructures. Indeed, I think even you > (David) have argued that these non US gov root server operators are expected to take decisions in conformity with global public interest, and are not tied to the apron strings of the US gov, and its narrow interests. > > Even if these root server operators are themselves not so democratically inclined, I would hope that the moral persuasive power of the mentioned overwhelming majority of actors can turn them around towards seeking real movement towards what Washington Post described as " remaking the current model so that it can serve what has become a global infrastructure". > > Perhaps, we should start with a meeting between ICANN and the root operators, convened by public interest actors, like maybe the IGC, to kickstart the process that my proposal seeks to establish. > > regards, parminder >> Regards, >> -drc >> >> > -------------- 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 From Guru at ITforChange.net Fri Jan 25 11:04:56 2013 From: Guru at ITforChange.net (=?UTF-8?B?R3VydSDgpJfgpYHgpLDgpYE=?=) Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2013 23:04:56 +0700 Subject: [governance] Facebook spent $4 million to lobby U.S. lawmakers in 2012 In-Reply-To: References: <510086BE.6010100@ITforChange.net> <056f01cdfa49$375b4f60$a611ee20$@gmail.com> <51015DF8.6070803@gmail.com> <066a01cdfa5a$01b28610$05179230$@gmail.com> Message-ID: <5102AD28.9090901@ITforChange.net> On 01/25/2013 03:35 PM, Roland Perry wrote: > In message <066a01cdfa5a$01b28610$05179230$@gmail.com>, at 09:41:02 on > Thu, 24 Jan 2013, michael gurstein writes >> I think the issue is whether or not the outcome is in the (general) >> public >> interest or rather serves narrow sectional (corporate) private >> interests. >> >> http://articles.latimes.com/2012/apr/22/local/la-me-att-20120422 >> >> The US system appears skewed towards the latter and this is shocking and >> disturbing to those (including many in the US) who find this to be a >> form of >> corruption and as undermining democracy. > > What I was trying to point out is that the general public can > influence lawmakers completely free of charge. They may not be very > persuasive one at a time (either because they aren't a very good > advocate or they don't have a very good cause) but lots of them added > up can have an effect. > > As for the issue of private funding for political parties (and > individual candidates) there are some democracies that place limits on > the amount that can be raised (and spent) and I believe there are some > where that limit is zero and campaign funds are allocated from a > national fund for the purpose. > > But that's a bigger discussion of how different countries implement > different forms of democracy, and somewhat outside the scope of this > list. ============= Dear Roland, When large IT companies (and IT sector is indeed conspicuous for the its global and largely oligopolistic nature which means the companies are really huge) use their revenues to lobby; citizen groups/communities by and large, will not be able to hold a candle to it. And comparing FB lobbying monies to its revenues (as Adam does) is a red herring, the comparision ought to be of lobbying power of these IT corporates (which would push their private/commercial interests) vis-a-vis those of public interest groups. Such lobbying efforts will impact the nature of policy making as well as policies made, and many of these policies will be critical to IG. Such as the acceptance of net neutrality principle, digital rights management, copyright law, privacy of user data etc etc. We are seeing how policy is being made to favor corporate interests and which is detrimental to public interest (for instance see https://www.eff.org/issues/tpp for the extension of copyright laws). Also it would be naive to believe that these corporates would support public interest (it is basic economic logic for them to promote their shareholder interests/private interests).. For sometime Google (there we go again!!) was a leader for net neutrality movement and one day announced with Verizon that net neutrality would not be applicable to mobile internet! Hence the distortion due to highly disproportionate influence, will affect the nature of democracy and of internet governance and hence clearly IT corporate lobbying is an important issue for IGC to consider. Guru (you say 'different forms of democracy', is plutocracy another form of democracy?) -------------- 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 From kovenronald at aol.com Fri Jan 25 11:17:10 2013 From: kovenronald at aol.com (Koven Ronald) Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2013 11:17:10 -0500 (EST) Subject: [governance] today's Wash Post editorial In-Reply-To: <5102AAE7.6010109@itforchange.net> References: <50FEA64A.4090805@itforchange.net> <51029240.5020209@itforchange.net> <51029C44.9050501@itforchange.net> <06EF7F5E019BB34DB01EDC2DB0588A9F0F2B24B5@BL2PRD0810MB349.namprd08.prod.outlook.com> <5102AAE7.6010109@itforchange.net> Message-ID: <8CFC92E8FE2B559-241C-104DC@webmail-d146.sysops.aol.com> In what, precisely, does the "yoke of US's oversight" consist ? May we have concrete examples, please, of the exercise of this yoke ? It has seemed to me for some time that the obsession with getting rid of the Americans is a reflex built on a prejudice, rather than a reflection of experienced reality, at least as concerns Internet governance as such. The chances of reaching some sort of consensus on the future of Internet governance seem minimal if the basis for action is simply automatic dislike of American influence. Why should any US government, or the US public, agree to revamping Internet governance simply because there are those who resent America and the Americans ? I'm an American and critical of US policies and actions in a goodly number of specific instances. Yet the kind of generalized dislike of America and the Americans so blithely expressed in the discussions on this list doesn't, however, "speak to my condition" (as my Quaker teachers would put it). Bests, Rony Koven the yoke of US's oversight... parminder -----Original Message----- From: parminder To: Balleste, Roy ; governance Sent: Fri, Jan 25, 2013 4:56 pm Subject: Re: [governance] today's Wash Post editorial On Friday 25 January 2013 09:17 PM, Balleste, Roy wrote: > Any legitimate model of internet governance that sets aside ICANN would probably fail. Prof Balleste, you are completely misreading my proposal. It doesnt set ICANN aside, it makes ICANN the all powerful authority in the CIR (critical Internet resources) space, freeing it from the yoke of US's oversight... parminder > > Roy Balleste, J.S.D. > Professor of Law > Law Library Director > St. Thomas University > 16401 NW 37th Avenue > Miami Gardens, FL 33054 USA > 1-305-623-2341 > > > -----Original Message----- > From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of parminder > Sent: Friday, January 25, 2013 9:53 AM > To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org > Subject: Re: [governance] today's Wash Post editorial > > > On Friday 25 January 2013 08:05 PM, David Conrad wrote: >> Parminder, >> >>> which I am sure can easily be sorted out by an alternative DNS >>> security architecture.) >> You'd probably first need to convince the root server operators that there is a problem that coming up with an "alternative DNS security architecture" (by which I presume you mean "alternative key management processes") would solve. This might be challenging. > My general proposal assumes widespread agreement among an overwhelming majority of actors in the global IG space that the US oversight of ICANN is essentially illegitimate and must be replaced. (This is what I have been led to believe from discussions on this list.) > > If this assumption holds, I would presume that at least 10 of the 13 root servers operators (non US gov), whom I consider trustees for global Internet public, would be among such actors who ultimately seek global legitimacy for a global infrastructures. Indeed, I think even you > (David) have argued that these non US gov root server operators are expected to take decisions in conformity with global public interest, and are not tied to the apron strings of the US gov, and its narrow interests. > > Even if these root server operators are themselves not so democratically inclined, I would hope that the moral persuasive power of the mentioned overwhelming majority of actors can turn them around towards seeking real movement towards what Washington Post described as " remaking the current model so that it can serve what has become a global infrastructure". > > Perhaps, we should start with a meeting between ICANN and the root operators, convened by public interest actors, like maybe the IGC, to kickstart the process that my proposal seeks to establish. > > regards, parminder >> Regards, >> -drc >> >> > ____________________________________________________________ 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: -------------- 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 From dogwallah at gmail.com Fri Jan 25 11:23:21 2013 From: dogwallah at gmail.com (McTim) Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2013 11:23:21 -0500 Subject: [governance] today's Wash Post editorial In-Reply-To: <5102A85E.8080000@itforchange.net> References: <50FEA64A.4090805@itforchange.net> <51029240.5020209@itforchange.net> <5102A85E.8080000@itforchange.net> Message-ID: On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 10:44 AM, parminder wrote: > > On Friday 25 January 2013 08:48 PM, McTim wrote: >> >> On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 9:35 AM, David Conrad wrote: >>> >>> Parminder, >>> >>> On Jan 25, 2013, at 3:10 PM, parminder wrote: >>>> >>>> ICANN simply communicates the root change decision simultaneously to all >>>> the 13 root servers, and also designates a specific time period in which the >>>> root change exercise should be done. >>> >>> Ignoring everything else, I have some doubt that the current root server >>> operators would be at all interested in taking on the role (and liabilities) >>> you're proposing. > > > This is to say that root operators do not see themselves in any kind of > public interest role I think this is an overstatement, as is denoting as "illegitimate" the US role. I wold say the latter is perhaps suboptimal, given the global nature of Internetworking. , and do what they do entirely for their own private > reasons and interests. Well, if this is the case, when an argument is made > that US can indeed do an inappropriate changes in the root but they simply, physically can't as they are not the zone admin. , hopefully we > will from now on never be confronted with this argument that root operators > simply wont comply (I think both David and McTim have made this argument.). > This is the point that such a discussion always reaches and stalls at. > > If root operators cannot be trusted to follow public interest They may have a different view of what the "global public interest" means. Keeping the Internet working, for example, may be a greater value to them than changing the US role. , then they > are illegitimate occupiers of key nodes of a public infrastructure and we > should seek to dislodge them. and how do you propose to do that? At least take an advocacy position against > them, since advocacy preceded civil and political action. oh yes, by all means, let's take an advocacy position against a group of highly competent folk who VOLUNTEER their time and large amounts of cash to serve the global DNS, and who do it well. >> right, clear that hurdle, > > > I am asking for us all to try and clear all such hurdles, starting with > agreeing to a common advocacy position and sharing it with all key actors. > My question is: do you agree to sign on it or not. no. Asking ICANN to violate a contract is a non-starter. > > >> then convince ICANN to violate the contract >> that gives them their raison d'être > > > As above, it is a proposal for the IGC, including you.... to take up a > position on this matter and advocate it. > >> and I am on board! > > > That is too convenient. You need to tell us whether you are on board at the > start of this process or not.... and not at the end of it.. see above. and I appreciate Ronny's comments about "yoke" downthread. The Caucus is in danger of becoming the Anti-American Internet Governance Caucus. -- 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 From parminder at itforchange.net Fri Jan 25 11:32:57 2013 From: parminder at itforchange.net (parminder) Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2013 22:02:57 +0530 Subject: [governance] today's Wash Post editorial In-Reply-To: <8CFC92E8FE2B559-241C-104DC@webmail-d146.sysops.aol.com> References: <50FEA64A.4090805@itforchange.net> <51029240.5020209@itforchange.net> <51029C44.9050501@itforchange.net> <06EF7F5E019BB34DB01EDC2DB0588A9F0F2B24B5@BL2PRD0810MB349.namprd08.prod.outlook.com> <5102AAE7.6010109@itforchange.net> <8CFC92E8FE2B559-241C-104DC@webmail-d146.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: <5102B3B9.504@itforchange.net> Rony As a self respecting American, would you for instance accept an arrangement that any law passed by representative bodies of the US will have to be signed by the UK monarch to take force .... By the way, that reminds me, wasnt republicanism in the US all about that! Have you forgotten your own history, and the cherished values of the founders of your indisputably great nation... Similarly for the Internet users of the world; they dont want the monarch of the US to sign governance decisions that effect everyone equally, throughout the world. And the burden of proof to show 'concrete examples' of how such a system affects them adversely, in practice, is not upon the people of the world. The basic value of democracy and equality is enough reason. It is such a pity that on a */*global civil society forum* */these basic issues of democracy and rights need to be revisted. It is in fact awful. parminder On Friday 25 January 2013 09:47 PM, Koven Ronald wrote: > In what, precisely, does the "yoke of US's oversight" consist ? May we > have concrete examples, please, of the exercise of this yoke ? > > It has seemed to me for some time that the obsession with getting rid > of the Americans is a reflex built on a prejudice, rather than a > reflection of experienced reality, at least as concerns Internet > governance as such. > > The chances of reaching some sort of consensus on the future of > Internet governance seem minimal if the basis for action is simply > automatic dislike of American influence. Why should any US government, > or the US public, agree to revamping Internet governance simply > because there are those who resent America and the Americans ? > > I'm an American and critical of US policies and actions in a goodly > number of specific instances. Yet the kind of generalized dislike of > America and the Americans so blithely expressed in the discussions on > this list doesn't, however, "speak to my condition" (as my Quaker > teachers would put it). > > Bests, Rony Koven > > the yoke of US's > oversight... parminder > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: parminder > To: Balleste, Roy ; governance > > Sent: Fri, Jan 25, 2013 4:56 pm > Subject: Re: [governance] today's Wash Post editorial > > > On Friday 25 January 2013 09:17 PM, Balleste, Roy wrote: > > Any legitimate model of internet governance that sets aside ICANN would > probably fail. > > Prof Balleste, you are completely misreading my proposal. It doesnt set > ICANN aside, it makes ICANN the all powerful authority in the CIR > (critical Internet resources) space, freeing it from the yoke of US's > oversight... parminder > > > > > Roy Balleste, J.S.D. > > Professor of Law > > Law Library Director > > St. Thomas University > > 16401 NW 37th Avenue > > Miami Gardens, FL 33054 USA > > 1-305-623-2341 > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org ] > On Behalf Of parminder > > Sent: Friday, January 25, 2013 9:53 AM > > To:governance at lists.igcaucus.org > > Subject: Re: [governance] today's Wash Post editorial > > > > > > On Friday 25 January 2013 08:05 PM, David Conrad wrote: > >> Parminder, > >> > >>> which I am sure can easily be sorted out by an alternative DNS > >>> security architecture.) > >> You'd probably first need to convince the root server operators that there is > a problem that coming up with an "alternative DNS security architecture" (by > which I presume you mean "alternative key management processes") would solve. > This might be challenging. > > My general proposal assumes widespread agreement among an overwhelming > majority of actors in the global IG space that the US oversight of ICANN is > essentially illegitimate and must be replaced. (This is what I have been led to > believe from discussions on this list.) > > > > If this assumption holds, I would presume that at least 10 of the 13 root > servers operators (non US gov), whom I consider trustees for global Internet > public, would be among such actors who ultimately seek global legitimacy for a > global infrastructures. Indeed, I think even you > > (David) have argued that these non US gov root server operators are expected > to take decisions in conformity with global public interest, and are not tied to > the apron strings of the US gov, and its narrow interests. > > > > Even if these root server operators are themselves not so democratically > inclined, I would hope that the moral persuasive power of the mentioned > overwhelming majority of actors can turn them around towards seeking real > movement towards what Washington Post described as " remaking the current model > so that it can serve what has become a global infrastructure". > > > > Perhaps, we should start with a meeting between ICANN and the root operators, > convened by public interest actors, like maybe the IGC, to kickstart the process > that my proposal seeks to establish. > > > > regards, parminder > >> Regards, > >> -drc > >> > >> > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From suresh at hserus.net Fri Jan 25 11:38:03 2013 From: suresh at hserus.net (=?utf-8?B?U3VyZXNoIFJhbWFzdWJyYW1hbmlhbg==?=) Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2013 22:08:03 +0530 Subject: [governance] today's Wash Post editorial Message-ID: Can you please speak for yourself and your ngo rather than for the internet users of the world? There is unfortunately no consensus on some things that you assume as a given and then build the rest of your argument on those assumptions. --srs (htc one x) ----- Reply message ----- From: "parminder" To: "Koven Ronald" , Subject: [governance] today's Wash Post editorial Date: Fri, Jan 25, 2013 10:02 PM Rony As a self respecting American, would you for instance accept an arrangement that any law passed by representative bodies of the US will have to be signed by the UK monarch to take force .... By the way, that reminds me, wasnt republicanism in the US all about that! Have you forgotten your own history, and the cherished values of the founders of your indisputably great nation... Similarly for the Internet users of the world; they dont want the monarch of the US to sign governance decisions that effect everyone equally, throughout the world. And the burden of proof to show 'concrete examples' of how such a system affects them adversely, in practice, is not upon the people of the world. The basic value of democracy and equality is enough reason. It is such a pity that on a */*global civil society forum* */these basic issues of democracy and rights need to be revisted. It is in fact awful. parminder On Friday 25 January 2013 09:47 PM, Koven Ronald wrote: > In what, precisely, does the "yoke of US's oversight" consist ? May we > have concrete examples, please, of the exercise of this yoke ? > > It has seemed to me for some time that the obsession with getting rid > of the Americans is a reflex built on a prejudice, rather than a > reflection of experienced reality, at least as concerns Internet > governance as such. > > The chances of reaching some sort of consensus on the future of > Internet governance seem minimal if the basis for action is simply > automatic dislike of American influence. Why should any US government, > or the US public, agree to revamping Internet governance simply > because there are those who resent America and the Americans ? > > I'm an American and critical of US policies and actions in a goodly > number of specific instances. Yet the kind of generalized dislike of > America and the Americans so blithely expressed in the discussions on > this list doesn't, however, "speak to my condition" (as my Quaker > teachers would put it). > > Bests, Rony Koven > > the yoke of US's > oversight... parminder > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: parminder > To: Balleste, Roy ; governance > > Sent: Fri, Jan 25, 2013 4:56 pm > Subject: Re: [governance] today's Wash Post editorial > > > On Friday 25 January 2013 09:17 PM, Balleste, Roy wrote: > > Any legitimate model of internet governance that sets aside ICANN would > probably fail. > > Prof Balleste, you are completely misreading my proposal. It doesnt set > ICANN aside, it makes ICANN the all powerful authority in the CIR > (critical Internet resources) space, freeing it from the yoke of US's > oversight... parminder > > > > > Roy Balleste, J.S.D. > > Professor of Law > > Law Library Director > > St. Thomas University > > 16401 NW 37th Avenue > > Miami Gardens, FL 33054 USA > > 1-305-623-2341 > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org ] > On Behalf Of parminder > > Sent: Friday, January 25, 2013 9:53 AM > > To:governance at lists.igcaucus.org > > Subject: Re: [governance] today's Wash Post editorial > > > > > > On Friday 25 January 2013 08:05 PM, David Conrad wrote: > >> Parminder, > >> > >>> which I am sure can easily be sorted out by an alternative DNS > >>> security architecture.) > >> You'd probably first need to convince the root server operators that there is > a problem that coming up with an "alternative DNS security architecture" (by > which I presume you mean "alternative key management processes") would solve. > This might be challenging. > > My general proposal assumes widespread agreement among an overwhelming > majority of actors in the global IG space that the US oversight of ICANN is > essentially illegitimate and must be replaced. (This is what I have been led to > believe from discussions on this list.) > > > > If this assumption holds, I would presume that at least 10 of the 13 root > servers operators (non US gov), whom I consider trustees for global Internet > public, would be among such actors who ultimately seek global legitimacy for a > global infrastructures. Indeed, I think even you > > (David) have argued that these non US gov root server operators are expected > to take decisions in conformity with global public interest, and are not tied to > the apron strings of the US gov, and its narrow interests. > > > > Even if these root server operators are themselves not so democratically > inclined, I would hope that the moral persuasive power of the mentioned > overwhelming majority of actors can turn them around towards seeking real > movement towards what Washington Post described as " remaking the current model > so that it can serve what has become a global infrastructure". -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From drc at virtualized.org Fri Jan 25 11:38:22 2013 From: drc at virtualized.org (David Conrad) Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2013 17:38:22 +0100 Subject: [governance] today's Wash Post editorial In-Reply-To: <51029C44.9050501@itforchange.net> References: <50FEA64A.4090805@itforchange.net> <51029240.5020209@itforchange.net> <51029C44.9050501@itforchange.net> Message-ID: <5B88E240-8CD6-440D-8DB7-CB32EA248FC3@virtualized.org> Parminder, On Jan 25, 2013, at 3:52 PM, parminder wrote: > My general proposal assumes widespread agreement among an overwhelming majority of actors in the global IG space that the US oversight of ICANN is essentially illegitimate and must be replaced. (This is what I have been led to believe from discussions on this list.) I have not seen any surveys of the 'global IG space' to inform me as to whether the "overwhelming majority of actors" views US oversight of ICANN as illegitimate (can you provide a pointer?), however for sake of argument... > If this assumption holds, I would presume that at least 10 of the 13 root servers operators (non US gov), whom I consider trustees for global Internet public,would be among such actors who ultimately seek global legitimacy for a global infrastructures. The folks who run root servers do so for their own reasons. It is possible that some might "seek global legitimacy" beyond just doing their job competently, but to be honest, I'd be surprised. My guess is that most (all?) of the root server operators feel that running a mirrored secondary for the root is a good thing to do as long as the benefits outweigh the costs. When you require the root server operators to take an active role in the maintenance of the root zone, I suspect the costs (at least in the view of their legal staff) will vastly outweigh the benefit. > Indeed, I think even you (David) have argued that these non US gov root server operators are expected to take decisions in conformity with global public interest, and are not tied to the apron strings of the US gov, and its narrow interests. Not exactly. I stated that the root servers operator are independent actors and if they (individually) feel a violation of process has occurred sufficient to justify a significant disruption to Internet governance, they have the ability to refuse that inappropriate change. Note that this is a very different scenario than being directly involved in day-to-day changes of the root zone. > Perhaps, we should start with a meeting between ICANN and the root operators, convened by public interest actors, like maybe the IGC, to kickstart the process that my proposal seeks to establish. I think you vastly overestimate the unhappiness of (at least) the technical community in general and the root server operators in particular with the status quo. What incentive does the root server operators have to change the way things are being done? To try to bring this back to reality, if the issue is unhappiness with the NTIA role in root changes (which is, AFAIK, primarily oversight to ensure ICANN hasn't violated its own processes), then I'd think a better approach than re-architecting the entire root zone management (and security) structure would be to replace the NTIA role. Regards, -drc -------------- 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 From drc at virtualized.org Fri Jan 25 11:55:47 2013 From: drc at virtualized.org (David Conrad) Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2013 17:55:47 +0100 Subject: [governance] today's Wash Post editorial In-Reply-To: <5102A85E.8080000@itforchange.net> References: <50FEA64A.4090805@itforchange.net> <51029240.5020209@itforchange.net> <5102A85E.8080000@itforchange.net> Message-ID: Parminder, On Jan 25, 2013, at 4:44 PM, parminder wrote: > This is to say that root operators do not see themselves in any kind of public interest role, and do what they do entirely for their own private reasons and interests. I have no idea what role each individual root server operator sees themselves in, however I know that they do what they do for their own private reasons and interests. > Well, if this is the case, when an argument is made that US can indeed do an inappropriate changes in the root, hopefully we will from now on never be confronted with this argument that root operators simply wont comply Interesting logic. It is well within the realm of possibility that a root server operator might view refusing to accept the outcome of the USG violating documented processes as in their "own private reasons and interests". > If root operators cannot be trusted to follow public interest, then they are illegitimate occupiers of key nodes of a public infrastructure and we should seek to dislodge them. "Illegitimate" according to whom? > At least take an advocacy position against them, since advocacy preceded civil and political action. An interesting viewpoint. Regards, -drc -------------- 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 From riaz.tayob at gmail.com Fri Jan 25 11:55:54 2013 From: riaz.tayob at gmail.com (Riaz K Tayob) Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2013 18:55:54 +0200 Subject: [governance] today's Wash Post editorial In-Reply-To: <8CFC92E8FE2B559-241C-104DC@webmail-d146.sysops.aol.com> References: <50FEA64A.4090805@itforchange.net> <51029240.5020209@itforchange.net> <51029C44.9050501@itforchange.net> <06EF7F5E019BB34DB01EDC2DB0588A9F0F2B24B5@BL2PRD0810MB349.namprd08.prod.outlook.com> <5102AAE7.6010109@itforchange.net> <8CFC92E8FE2B559-241C-104DC@webmail-d146.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: <5102B91A.8090703@gmail.com> 'tis a pity that the reposte to a claim for legitimacy in the governance of what is now a global resource is the same or similar to the Global War on Terror - 'they hate our freedoms'. It is nothing like that at all, the claim to legitimacy is a value in and of itself. Some may feel this is not important, and others not. We can agree to disagree. And the blithe anti-Americanism is not quite that, it is kinda like a Boston Tea party saying no taxation without representation... if that is anti-British, then so be it... but the point is far more subtle than it is made out to be... And some of us third worldists do reserve the right to determine the terms of the terms of the debate... and if aint broke dont fix it nor impossibility does not cut it... despite US support for Apartheid in my country, black people won their freedom, and so did Rosa Parks.... There are numerous instances of problems with current arrangements, but the Cavebear (Karl Auerbach) speaks to that more eloquently than I ever could, but for instance the conflation of web addys with intellectual property rights for instance - kind of like a lex mercatoria, making law in the absence of law. On 2013/01/25 06:17 PM, Koven Ronald wrote: > Yet the kind of generalized dislike of America and the Americans so > blithely expressed in the discussions on this list doesn't, however, > "speak to my condition" (as my Quaker teachers would put it). -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From mueller at syr.edu Fri Jan 25 12:15:35 2013 From: mueller at syr.edu (Milton L Mueller) Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2013 17:15:35 +0000 Subject: [governance] today's Wash Post editorial In-Reply-To: <5102A9D4.3070704@itforchange.net> References: <50FEA64A.4090805@itforchange.net> <51029240.5020209@itforchange.net> <5102A9D4.3070704@itforchange.net> Message-ID: <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD2322F6F@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> Any change model needs to take the role of VeriSign, which operates the root server currently recognized as "authoritative", into account. The system, like Cerberus, is a three-headed dog. (USG, ICANN, VRSN) Generally, I am surprised that Parminder would opt for a change mechanism that would rely on unilateral action by RS operators and ICANN rather than one with more democratic legitimacy. Probably he hasn't thought this through very well. Any precipitous change in IG arrangements that occurred without at least the passive assent of a broad public AND the key stakeholders would create a lot of risks of counter-actions and disruptions that might undo whatever temporary gains were achieved. > -----Original Message----- > From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance- > request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of parminder > Sent: Friday, January 25, 2013 10:51 AM > To: McTim > Cc: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; David Conrad > Subject: Re: [governance] today's Wash Post editorial > > > On Friday 25 January 2013 08:48 PM, McTim wrote: > > > > right, clear that hurdle, then convince ICANN to violate the contract > > that gives them their raison d'être and I am on board! > > The whole point of what I am proposing is that ICANN raison d'etre must > be its bottom up global legitimacy, and not the contract with the US > gov... And ICANN has to take a stand on favour of one against the other > possible raison d'etre. There is an obvious tension between the two, and > my proposal invites us, and finally the ICANN, to take a clear stand on > what ICANN's raison d'etre really is. > > It is however intersting to note that you seem to consider the US > contract being ICANN's raison d'etre rather than its bottom up global > legitimacy. > > parminder > > > -------------- 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 From apisan at unam.mx Fri Jan 25 12:57:57 2013 From: apisan at unam.mx (Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Baruch) Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2013 17:57:57 +0000 Subject: [governance] today's Wash Post editorial In-Reply-To: <5102AAE7.6010109@itforchange.net> References: <50FEA64A.4090805@itforchange.net> <51029240.5020209@itforchange.net> <51029C44.9050501@itforchange.net> <06EF7F5E019BB34DB01EDC2DB0588A9F0F2B24B5@BL2PRD0810MB349.namprd08.prod.outlook.com>,<5102AAE7.6010109@itforchange.net> Message-ID: <6DCAB3E586E6A34FB17223DF8D8F0D3D5DC34814@W8-EX10MB.unam.local> Parminder, this new exercise is yet again based on flawed assumptions, once again about how things actually work, the incentives and principles that drive people (in this round the suspects are the root server operators.) Further, your proposal does not match the way the multistakeholder mentality and processes actually work, esp. in a context like ICANN which involves real decision-making, risk management, error-correction, fail-safe outcomes, robustness, resilience, transparency, accountability and mechanisms to review and redress decisions. David Conrad and McTim are again making a good-faith effort to educate you. What I've seen them write in the last day is would have earned them about a thousand dollars for the online tutoring, with the incentive that they could actually flunk a student who doesn't read, doesn't study, doesn't listen and doesn't learn. Milton has added his voice and the eloquent silence of many others is one more sign. To move away from the next step which would be likely considered ad hominem and beyond Netiquette and list rules, may I suggest you attend the upcoming ICANN meeting in Beijing and talk to some of the root-server operator community directly? I offer to broker at least one such meeting to the extent that they accept it. I confess I've looked around to see if we could put together funds to defray your expenses but found no takers. But do go. Of course an alternative is to apply for a Fellowship for a later meeting if ITforChange continues to think that your attendance to an ICANN meeting is not strategic enough to spend the organization's own money for it. Yours, Alejandro Pisanty - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Facultad de Química UNAM Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico +52-1-5541444475 FROM ABROAD +525541444475 DESDE MÉXICO SMS +525541444475 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 parminder [parminder at itforchange.net] Enviado el: viernes, 25 de enero de 2013 09:55 Hasta: Balleste, Roy; governance at lists.igcaucus.org Asunto: Re: [governance] today's Wash Post editorial On Friday 25 January 2013 09:17 PM, Balleste, Roy wrote: > Any legitimate model of internet governance that sets aside ICANN would probably fail. Prof Balleste, you are completely misreading my proposal. It doesnt set ICANN aside, it makes ICANN the all powerful authority in the CIR (critical Internet resources) space, freeing it from the yoke of US's oversight... parminder > > Roy Balleste, J.S.D. > Professor of Law > Law Library Director > St. Thomas University > 16401 NW 37th Avenue > Miami Gardens, FL 33054 USA > 1-305-623-2341 > > > -----Original Message----- > From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of parminder > Sent: Friday, January 25, 2013 9:53 AM > To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org > Subject: Re: [governance] today's Wash Post editorial > > > On Friday 25 January 2013 08:05 PM, David Conrad wrote: >> Parminder, >> >>> which I am sure can easily be sorted out by an alternative DNS >>> security architecture.) >> You'd probably first need to convince the root server operators that there is a problem that coming up with an "alternative DNS security architecture" (by which I presume you mean "alternative key management processes") would solve. This might be challenging. > My general proposal assumes widespread agreement among an overwhelming majority of actors in the global IG space that the US oversight of ICANN is essentially illegitimate and must be replaced. (This is what I have been led to believe from discussions on this list.) > > If this assumption holds, I would presume that at least 10 of the 13 root servers operators (non US gov), whom I consider trustees for global Internet public, would be among such actors who ultimately seek global legitimacy for a global infrastructures. Indeed, I think even you > (David) have argued that these non US gov root server operators are expected to take decisions in conformity with global public interest, and are not tied to the apron strings of the US gov, and its narrow interests. > > Even if these root server operators are themselves not so democratically inclined, I would hope that the moral persuasive power of the mentioned overwhelming majority of actors can turn them around towards seeking real movement towards what Washington Post described as " remaking the current model so that it can serve what has become a global infrastructure". > > Perhaps, we should start with a meeting between ICANN and the root operators, convened by public interest actors, like maybe the IGC, to kickstart the process that my proposal seeks to establish. > > regards, parminder >> Regards, >> -drc >> >> > -------------- 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 From nb at bollow.ch Fri Jan 25 13:16:49 2013 From: nb at bollow.ch (Norbert Bollow) Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2013 19:16:49 +0100 Subject: [governance] today's Wash Post editorial In-Reply-To: <8CFC92E8FE2B559-241C-104DC@webmail-d146.sysops.aol.com> References: <50FEA64A.4090805@itforchange.net> <51029240.5020209@itforchange.net> <51029C44.9050501@itforchange.net> <06EF7F5E019BB34DB01EDC2DB0588A9F0F2B24B5@BL2PRD0810MB349.namprd08.prod.outlook.com> <5102AAE7.6010109@itforchange.net> <8CFC92E8FE2B559-241C-104DC@webmail-d146.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: <20130125191649.1d5adc7d@quill.bollow.ch> Koven Ronald wrote: > In what, precisely, does the "yoke of US's oversight" consist ? May > we have concrete examples, please, of the exercise of this yoke ? One example is the Rojadirecta case, in which U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) took down, by means of a simple warrant (obtained domestically within the U.S. without any need to involve Spanish authorities), a Spanish website directed at customers in Spain even though that website had been judged, by Spanish courts, to be legal according to Spanish law. I'm a European, and that kind of thing upsets me. Does that make me guilty of "Anti-Americanism"? I don't think so. I think that it is more accurate to call me a human rights advocate. The right of peoples to democratic self-government is after all an internationally recognized human right, no matter which government violates it. Greetings, Norbert -------------- 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 From dogwallah at gmail.com Fri Jan 25 13:35:04 2013 From: dogwallah at gmail.com (McTim) Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2013 13:35:04 -0500 Subject: [governance] today's Wash Post editorial In-Reply-To: <20130125191649.1d5adc7d@quill.bollow.ch> References: <50FEA64A.4090805@itforchange.net> <51029240.5020209@itforchange.net> <51029C44.9050501@itforchange.net> <06EF7F5E019BB34DB01EDC2DB0588A9F0F2B24B5@BL2PRD0810MB349.namprd08.prod.outlook.com> <5102AAE7.6010109@itforchange.net> <8CFC92E8FE2B559-241C-104DC@webmail-d146.sysops.aol.com> <20130125191649.1d5adc7d@quill.bollow.ch> Message-ID: On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 1:16 PM, Norbert Bollow wrote: > Koven Ronald wrote: > >> In what, precisely, does the "yoke of US's oversight" consist ? May >> we have concrete examples, please, of the exercise of this yoke ? > > One example is the Rojadirecta case, in which U.S. Immigration and > Customs Enforcement (ICE) took down, by means of a simple warrant > (obtained domestically within the U.S. without any need to involve > Spanish authorities), a Spanish website directed at customers in Spain > even though that website had been judged, by Spanish courts, to be > legal according to Spanish law. You are conflating 2 entirely different things. One is the role that NTIA has in re: rootzone authorisation. The other has nothing to do with ICANN. -- 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 From ian.peter at ianpeter.com Fri Jan 25 14:19:54 2013 From: ian.peter at ianpeter.com (Ian Peter) Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2013 06:19:54 +1100 Subject: [governance] Charter amendment proposals in need of more co-proposers In-Reply-To: References: <20130125115127.00edd288@quill.bollow.ch> <09eb01cdfb01$f883d1e0$e98b75a0$@gmail.com> Message-ID: <74DFBF7E12D44C8DBDDD4FBD93419D01@Toshiba> add me too From: Ginger Paque Sent: Saturday, January 26, 2013 2:18 AM To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org ; Avri Doria Subject: Re: [governance] Charter amendment proposals in need of more co-proposers Please add me. Tx. gp Ginger (Virginia) Paque VirginiaP at diplomacy.edu Diplo Foundation Internet Governance Capacity Building Programme www.diplomacy.edu/ig On 25 January 2013 08:06, Avri Doria wrote: On 25 Jan 2013, at 08:43, michael gurstein wrote: > Are these proposals really not getting any further co-proposers??? --- 3. Proposal of Jeremy and co-proposers on updating the reference to the mailing list Note: This proposal has been referred to as "amendment 3" in the "Notice to the IGC on Proposed CharterAmendments" thread. Under "Working methods", update the address of the mailing list from governance at lists.cpsr.org togovernance at lists.igcaucus.org. co-propose --- ____________________________________________________________ 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 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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: -------------- 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 From ian.peter at ianpeter.com Fri Jan 25 14:22:01 2013 From: ian.peter at ianpeter.com (Ian Peter) Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2013 06:22:01 +1100 Subject: [governance] Re: Charter amendment proposals in need of more co-proposers In-Reply-To: <09eb01cdfb01$f883d1e0$e98b75a0$@gmail.com> References: <20130125115127.00edd288@quill.bollow.ch> <09eb01cdfb01$f883d1e0$e98b75a0$@gmail.com> Message-ID: <0771BBBD35944216AF374BFBAC65BCBE@Toshiba> me too -----Original Message----- From: michael gurstein Sent: Saturday, January 26, 2013 12:43 AM To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org ; 'Norbert Bollow' Subject: RE: [governance] Re: Charter amendment proposals in need of more co-proposers I'll co-propose. M -----Original Message----- From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Norbert Bollow Sent: Friday, January 25, 2013 2:51 AM To: IGC Subject: [governance] Re: Charter amendment proposals in need of more co-proposers I wrote: > among the charter amendment proposals listed on > http://igcaucus.org/informally-discussed-charter-amendments > I think it would be good to bring the following two to a vote together > with Avri's two amendment proposals (which have already achieved the > requirement of a sufficient number of co-proposers). > > Proposal of Jeremy and co-proposers on updating the reference to the > mailing list > > Proposal of Norbert and co-proposers on coordinator election dates Are these proposals really not getting any further co-proposers??? If someone doubts that the clarification of coordinator election dates has some importance, please try to explain how the current text of our charter is consistent with Sala's election having taken place in October 2011 and mine in January 2013. Greetings, Norbert ____________________________________________________________ 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From nb at bollow.ch Fri Jan 25 14:31:37 2013 From: nb at bollow.ch (Norbert Bollow) Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2013 20:31:37 +0100 Subject: [governance] today's Wash Post editorial In-Reply-To: References: <50FEA64A.4090805@itforchange.net> <51029240.5020209@itforchange.net> <51029C44.9050501@itforchange.net> <06EF7F5E019BB34DB01EDC2DB0588A9F0F2B24B5@BL2PRD0810MB349.namprd08.prod.outlook.com> <5102AAE7.6010109@itforchange.net> <8CFC92E8FE2B559-241C-104DC@webmail-d146.sysops.aol.com> <20130125191649.1d5adc7d@quill.bollow.ch> Message-ID: <20130125203137.45b9cdfc@quill.bollow.ch> McTim wrote: > On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 1:16 PM, Norbert Bollow wrote: > > Koven Ronald wrote: > > > >> In what, precisely, does the "yoke of US's oversight" consist ? May > >> we have concrete examples, please, of the exercise of this yoke ? > > > > One example is the Rojadirecta case, in which U.S. Immigration and > > Customs Enforcement (ICE) took down, by means of a simple warrant > > (obtained domestically within the U.S. without any need to involve > > Spanish authorities), a Spanish website directed at customers in > > Spain even though that website had been judged, by Spanish courts, > > to be legal according to Spanish law. > > You are conflating 2 entirely different things. > > One is the role that NTIA has in re: rootzone authorisation. > > The other has nothing to do with ICANN. The US government has multiple roles and potential roles in relation to the rootzone. One is the NTIA (National Telecommunications and Information Administration) role in rootzone authorisation. Another is that both ICANN and Verisign Inc. are incorporated in the US and (since there is no special international statute that would exempt them) thereby obligated, if served the same kind of warrant that took Rojadirecta down, to obey the warrant. The scenario is this: "ICE decides that one foreign TLD registrar is in the business of directing users to websites violating the US understanding of what copyright law should say, and further decides to treat that TLD registrar analogously to how Rojadirecta was treated". I don't pretend to know whether ICE would seek to serve the warrant to be served to ICANN (as IANA operator) or Verisign (as root zone maintainer) or both, nor whether NTIA might somehow intervene to stop the madness. I also don't pretend to know how realistic or unrealistic that kind of scenario might be. Furthermore, I also don't pretend to have even a guesstimate about how many of the root server operators would thereafter actually serve the modified root zone (in which the TLD is missing which is in this scenario the subject of that warrant). The only point that I was trying to make is that the concerns about potential actions of the US government are not mere prejudice, but are based, at least to some extent, on actual actions of the US government. Greetings, Norbert -------------- 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 From tracyhackshaw at gmail.com Fri Jan 25 15:10:15 2013 From: tracyhackshaw at gmail.com (Tracy F. Hackshaw @ Google) Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2013 16:10:15 -0400 Subject: [governance] Re: Charter amendment proposals in need of more co-proposers In-Reply-To: <0771BBBD35944216AF374BFBAC65BCBE@Toshiba> References: <20130125115127.00edd288@quill.bollow.ch> <09eb01cdfb01$f883d1e0$e98b75a0$@gmail.com> <0771BBBD35944216AF374BFBAC65BCBE@Toshiba> Message-ID: +1 On Jan 25, 2013 3:22 PM, "Ian Peter" wrote: > me too > > -----Original Message----- From: michael gurstein > Sent: Saturday, January 26, 2013 12:43 AM > To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org ; 'Norbert Bollow' > Subject: RE: [governance] Re: Charter amendment proposals in need of more > co-proposers > > I'll co-propose. > > M > > -----Original Message----- > From: governance-request at lists.**igcaucus.org > [mailto:governance-request@**lists.igcaucus.org] > On Behalf Of Norbert Bollow > Sent: Friday, January 25, 2013 2:51 AM > To: IGC > Subject: [governance] Re: Charter amendment proposals in need of more > co-proposers > > I wrote: > > among the charter amendment proposals listed on >> http://igcaucus.org/**informally-discussed-charter-**amendments >> I think it would be good to bring the following two to a vote together >> with Avri's two amendment proposals (which have already achieved the >> requirement of a sufficient number of co-proposers). >> >> Proposal of Jeremy and co-proposers on updating the reference to the >> mailing list >> >> Proposal of Norbert and co-proposers on coordinator election dates >> > > Are these proposals really not getting any further co-proposers??? > > If someone doubts that the clarification of coordinator election dates has > some importance, please try to explain how the current text of our charter > is consistent with Sala's election having taken place in October 2011 and > mine in January 2013. > > Greetings, > Norbert > > > > > > > > > > ______________________________**______________________________ > 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 > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From dogwallah at gmail.com Fri Jan 25 15:47:49 2013 From: dogwallah at gmail.com (McTim) Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2013 15:47:49 -0500 Subject: [governance] today's Wash Post editorial In-Reply-To: <20130125203137.45b9cdfc@quill.bollow.ch> References: <50FEA64A.4090805@itforchange.net> <51029240.5020209@itforchange.net> <51029C44.9050501@itforchange.net> <06EF7F5E019BB34DB01EDC2DB0588A9F0F2B24B5@BL2PRD0810MB349.namprd08.prod.outlook.com> <5102AAE7.6010109@itforchange.net> <8CFC92E8FE2B559-241C-104DC@webmail-d146.sysops.aol.com> <20130125191649.1d5adc7d@quill.bollow.ch> <20130125203137.45b9cdfc@quill.bollow.ch> Message-ID: Hi Norbert, On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 2:31 PM, Norbert Bollow wrote: > McTim wrote: > >> On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 1:16 PM, Norbert Bollow wrote: >> > Koven Ronald wrote: >> > >> >> In what, precisely, does the "yoke of US's oversight" consist ? May >> >> we have concrete examples, please, of the exercise of this yoke ? >> > >> > One example is the Rojadirecta case, in which U.S. Immigration and >> > Customs Enforcement (ICE) took down, by means of a simple warrant >> > (obtained domestically within the U.S. without any need to involve >> > Spanish authorities), a Spanish website directed at customers in >> > Spain even though that website had been judged, by Spanish courts, >> > to be legal according to Spanish law. >> >> You are conflating 2 entirely different things. >> >> One is the role that NTIA has in re: rootzone authorisation. >> >> The other has nothing to do with ICANN. > > The US government has multiple roles and potential roles in relation to > the rootzone. One is the NTIA (National Telecommunications and > Information Administration) role in rootzone authorisation. Another > is that both ICANN and Verisign Inc. are incorporated in the US and > (since there is no special international statute that would exempt > them) thereby obligated, if served the same kind of warrant that > took Rojadirecta down, to obey the warrant. The scenario is this: "ICE > decides that one foreign TLD registrar I think you mean "registry" here. is in the business of directing > users to websites violating the US understanding of what copyright > law should say, and further decides to treat that TLD registrar > analogously to how Rojadirecta was treated". I don't pretend to know > whether ICE would seek to serve the warrant to be served to ICANN (as > IANA operator) or Verisign (as root zone maintainer) neither to the IANA operator or rootzone maintainer. As they did in the rojadirecta case, they would go to the registry (but I think they should have gone to the registrar in that case...well what I really think is that they shouldn't have bothered). Another caveat of course is that VRSN is the registry for .net and .com. or both, nor > whether NTIA might somehow intervene to stop the madness. I also don't > pretend to know how realistic or unrealistic that kind of scenario > might be. Furthermore, I also don't pretend to have even a guesstimate > about how many of the root server operators would thereafter actually > serve the modified root zone (in which the TLD is missing which is in > this scenario the subject of that warrant). So you are hypothesizing that if for example ICE took exception to mega.nz (or mega.co.nz), they would go to ICANN or VRSN to take .nz from the root? Neither body acting alone (or in conceert with each other could accomplish that. They would both tell ICE (politely) to bugger off, that what ICE wants they can't have, as it is not possible for either party to complete the request. > > The only point that I was trying to make is that the concerns about > potential actions of the US government are not mere prejudice, but are > based, at least to some extent, on actual actions of the US government. right, and the point I was making is that this thread has been mostly about rootzone changes, and you brought in rojadirecta, 2 things which really have little in common. So to remove the US "yoke", we would not only need to remove the US role in root changes, but remove ALL registries and registrars from US territories AND force Google and FB, etc to relocate all of their offices to a country where they would not be subject to any laws?? In other words, a place that doesn't exist. In other words, Internetistan!! -- 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 From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com Fri Jan 25 15:53:34 2013 From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro) Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2013 08:53:34 +1200 Subject: [governance] New Cyber Security Bill in US Senate Message-ID: Dear All, The US Senate has introduced a new Cybersecurity Bill through Senators John D. (Jay) Rockefeller IV, Chairman of the Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee, Tom Carper, incoming Chairman of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, and Dianne Feinstein, Chairman of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence where they made a Press Release, see: http://commerce.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?p=PressReleases&ContentRecord_id=7a7124d7-190c-4160-abf3-4012c2db737c To see the Bill, visit: http://commerce.senate.gov/public/?a=Files.Serve&File_id=b678eb9a-b5c1-4540-aca3-3e857c7627da This is interesting and relevant as far as it pertains to critical information infrastructure that the US considers to be part of the US Infrastructure. Whilst the models point to public private collaboration which makes sense because it is the private sector that controls much of the infrastructure anyway except in situations where if there were a State of Emergency and the rights to control/access infrastructure by the State and it has its challenges. Aside from the public private model there should be room for civil society in the equation as someone has to speak out and act as a watchdog in times when it is needed. Kind Regards, -- Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala P.O. Box 17862 Suva Fiji Twitter: @SalanietaT Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro Tel: +679 3544828 Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From roland at internetpolicyagency.com Fri Jan 25 15:58:04 2013 From: roland at internetpolicyagency.com (Roland Perry) Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2013 20:58:04 +0000 Subject: [governance] Facebook spent $4 million to lobby U.S. lawmakers in 2012 In-Reply-To: <5102AD28.9090901@ITforChange.net> References: <510086BE.6010100@ITforChange.net> <056f01cdfa49$375b4f60$a611ee20$@gmail.com> <51015DF8.6070803@gmail.com> <066a01cdfa5a$01b28610$05179230$@gmail.com> <5102AD28.9090901@ITforChange.net> Message-ID: In message <5102AD28.9090901 at ITforChange.net>, at 23:04:56 on Fri, 25 Jan 2013, =?UTF-8?B?R3VydSDgpJfgpYHgpLDgpYE=?= writes >you say 'different forms of democracy', is plutocracy another form of >democracy? Only if everyone in the country in question is wealthy. So Monaco, perhaps? -- Roland Perry -------------- 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 From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com Fri Jan 25 16:17:56 2013 From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro) Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2013 09:17:56 +1200 Subject: [governance] Re: New Cyber Security Bill in US Senate In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Further to this particular Bill, I thought that Riaz's post last year (14th March, 2012) would be relevant particularly in light of what information state agencies can access, see: March 09, 2012 DOJ Asks Court To Keep Secret Any Partnership Between Google, NSA The Justice Department is defending the government's refusal to discuss—or even acknowledge the existence of—any cooperative research and development agreement between Google and the National Security Agency. The Washington based advocacy group Electronic Privacy Information Center sued in federal district court here to obtain documents about any such agreement between the Internet search giant and the security agency. The NSA responded to the suit with a so-called “Glomar” response in which the agency said it could neither confirm nor deny whether any responsive records exist. U.S. District Judge Richard Leon in Washington sided with the governmentlast July. A three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit is scheduled to hear the dispute March 20. EPIC filed a Freedom of Information Act request in early 2010, noting media reports at the time that the NSA and Google had agreed to a partnership following the cyber attacks in China that year against Google. EPIC asked for, among other things, communication between the NSA and Google about Gmail and Google’s “decision to fail to routinely encrypt” messages before Jan. 13, 2010. The NSA’s response to the request for records noted that the agency “works with a broad range of commercial partners and research associations” to ensure the availability of secure information systems. The agency, however, refused to confirm or deny any partnership with Google. The security agency said it routinely monitors vulnerabilities in commercial technology and cryptographic products because the government relies heavily on private companies for word processing systems and e-mail software. “If NSA determines that certain security vulnerabilities or malicious attacks pose a threat to U.S. government information systems, NSA may take action,” DOJ Civil Division lawyers Catherine Hancock and Douglas Letter said in a brief in the D.C. Circuit in January. DOJ’s legal team said that acknowledging whether NSA and Google formed a partnership from a cyber attack would illuminate whether the government “considered the alleged attack to be of consequence for critical U.S. government information systems.” NSA said it cannot provide documents—or confirm their existence—because the information would alert adversaries about the security agency’s priorities, threat assessments and countermeasures. DOJ said media reports about the alleged Google partnership with NSA do not constitute official acknowledgement. *The Washington Post* and *The New York Times* both reported that Google contacted the NSA after the Jan. 2010 cyber attack, which the company said was rooted in China and targeted access to accounts of Chinese human rights activists. *The Wall Street Journal* said NSA’s general counsel worked out a cooperative research and development agreement with Google. EPIC’s attorneys, including Marc Rotenberg, the group’s president, said in court papers that the document request includes records that are not relevant to the NSA’s information assurance mission. “The NSA mischaracterizes EPIC’s FOIA Request by stating that responsive documents would reveal ‘information about a potential Google-NSA relationship,’” Rotenberg said. The crux of the records request, Rotenberg said, is Google’s switch to application encryption by default for Gmail accounts soon after the cyberattack. Google in 2008 began allowing users to encrypt mail passing through the company servers, EPIC said in its brief, but encryption was not provided by default. EPIC’s brief said the failure of the NSA to conduct a search for records “deprives the court of the ability to meaningfully assess the propriety” of the agency’s response that it can neither confirm nor deny the existence of responsive records. “Without first conducting the search, not even the agency can know whether there is a factual basis for its legal position,” Rotenberg said. EPIC said its records request does not seek documents about NSA’s role to secure government computer networks. “Google provides cloud-based services to consumers, not critical infrastructure services to the government,” Rotenberg said. Posted by Mike Scarcella on March 09, 2012 at 12:29 PM in Balancing Act, Crime and Punishment, Current Affairs , Justice Department , Legal Business , Lobbying, Politics and Government, Travel , Web/Tech | Permalink Digg This | Save to del.icio.us On Sat, Jan 26, 2013 at 8:53 AM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro < salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com> wrote: > Dear All, > > The US Senate has introduced a new Cybersecurity Bill through Senators > John D. (Jay) Rockefeller IV, Chairman of the Senate Commerce, Science, and > Transportation Committee, Tom Carper, incoming Chairman of the Senate > Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, and Dianne Feinstein, > Chairman of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence where they made a > Press Release, see: > http://commerce.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?p=PressReleases&ContentRecord_id=7a7124d7-190c-4160-abf3-4012c2db737c > > To see the Bill, visit: > http://commerce.senate.gov/public/?a=Files.Serve&File_id=b678eb9a-b5c1-4540-aca3-3e857c7627da > > This is interesting and relevant as far as it pertains to critical > information infrastructure that the US considers to be part of the US > Infrastructure. Whilst the models point to public private collaboration > which makes sense because it is the private sector that controls much of > the infrastructure anyway except in situations where if there were a State > of Emergency and the rights to control/access infrastructure by the State > and it has its challenges. Aside from the public private model there should > be room for civil society in the equation as someone has to speak out and > act as a watchdog in times when it is needed. > > Kind Regards, > > -- > Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala > P.O. Box 17862 > Suva > Fiji > > Twitter: @SalanietaT > Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro > Tel: +679 3544828 > Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 > > > > -- Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala P.O. Box 17862 Suva Fiji Twitter: @SalanietaT Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro Tel: +679 3544828 Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From nb at bollow.ch Fri Jan 25 18:04:16 2013 From: nb at bollow.ch (Norbert Bollow) Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2013 00:04:16 +0100 Subject: [governance] today's Wash Post editorial In-Reply-To: References: <50FEA64A.4090805@itforchange.net> <51029240.5020209@itforchange.net> <51029C44.9050501@itforchange.net> <06EF7F5E019BB34DB01EDC2DB0588A9F0F2B24B5@BL2PRD0810MB349.namprd08.prod.outlook.com> <5102AAE7.6010109@itforchange.net> <8CFC92E8FE2B559-241C-104DC@webmail-d146.sysops.aol.com> <20130125191649.1d5adc7d@quill.bollow.ch> <20130125203137.45b9cdfc@quill.bollow.ch> Message-ID: <20130126000416.5b6abeed@quill.bollow.ch> McTim wrote: > > warrant. The scenario is this: "ICE decides that one foreign TLD > > registrar > > I think you mean "registry" here. Yes. > is in the business of directing > > users to websites violating the US understanding of what copyright > > law should say, and further decides to treat that TLD registrar > > analogously to how Rojadirecta was treated". I don't pretend to know > > whether ICE would seek to serve the warrant to be served to ICANN > > (as IANA operator) or Verisign (as root zone maintainer) > > neither to the IANA operator or rootzone maintainer. > > As they did in the rojadirecta case, they would go to the registry If the registry is outside the US, like Rojadirecta was, how would they "go to the registry"? > So you are hypothesizing that if for example ICE took exception to > mega.nz (or mega.co.nz), they would go to ICANN or VRSN to take .nz > from the root? No... that's totally unplausible - .nz is too high profile and in addition ccTLDs have at least some degree of protection against this kind of scenario on the basis of para 63 of the Tunis agenda. But what if one of the new gtlds were considered by ICE to be "rogue" in the sense of attracting a high percentage of websites violating the US understanding of what copyright law should say, and being unresponsive to US takedown demands? For example, .gratis has two applicants, one in the US and one outside. Suppose the non-US applicant wins .gratis, and the domain then attracts lots of gratis services which are legal in the country where the .gratis registry is based but in violation of the US understanding of what "intellectual property law" should be like. In such a scenario I could imagine ICE trying to get .gratis out of the root zone. > Neither body acting alone (or in conceert with each other could > accomplish that. They would both tell ICE (politely) to bugger off, > that what ICE wants they can't have, as it is not possible for either > party to complete the request. Sorry I don't follow you here. If they serve Verisign a warrant that says: "Effective tomorrow, all servers which you operate that serve copies of the root zone shall serve copies that have the entries for the '.gratis' domain deleted", how could Verisign argue that they're unable to comply? (They could, quite reasonably, argue that the request is unwise, and that quite possibly the only result is for the US to massively lose trust and goodwill. In fact, due to the likely inability of Verisign to get the modified root zone signed in a way that the worldwide technical community would respect, that argument would be much stronger than the equivalent argument would have been for rojadirecta.com, if they had made that argument there. As far as I know they didn't, so they have already demonstrated their willingness to comply with this kind of warrants. Anyway, assuming the demand is phrased in a way that makes it possible for Verisign to comply, I wouldn't bet anything on Verisign refusing to comply. The case of a warrant served to ICANN is marginally more complicated but I think essentially equivalent unless NTIA exercises its oversight function to stop the madness before Verisign would act on it. > > The only point that I was trying to make is that the concerns about > > potential actions of the US government are not mere prejudice, but > > are based, at least to some extent, on actual actions of the US > > government. > > right, and the point I was making is that this thread has been mostly > about rootzone changes, and you brought in rojadirecta, 2 things which > really have little in common. Note though that I have not been replying to you but to Koven Ronald who had written, in a message that did not explicitly reference any of your postings: : In what, precisely, does the "yoke of US's oversight" consist ? : May we have concrete examples, please, of the exercise of this : yoke ? It has seemed to me for some time that the obsession with : getting rid of the Americans is a reflex built on a prejudice, : rather than a reflection of experienced reality, at least as : concerns Internet governance as such. I agree that Rojadirecta is not an example of rootzone changes. It is however an example of experienced reality. An experienced reality where I would expect culturally sensitive Americans to understand that this kind of thing will likely trigger a reaction, especially if those who are reacting (not only to this instance of extraterritorial abuse of US government power, but to the whole pattern of such abuses) are then accused of being prejudiced. > So to remove the US "yoke", we would not only need to remove the US > role in root changes, but remove ALL registries and registrars from US > territories AND force Google and FB, etc to relocate all of their > offices to a country where they would not be subject to any laws?? In > other words, a place that doesn't exist. > > In other words, Internetistan!! It is definitely possible to create administrative structures that avoid giving an exceptional role, or the appearance of exceptional power over anything of importance, to any particular country's government. The UN shows that this can be done. Maybe ICANN could eventually become a "UN specialized agency"? I'd expect that to resolve the concerns around the "yoke of US's oversight" with regard to ICANN and the root zone. I'd insist though that the UN would need some serious reforms first. Maybe a constructive way to take this discussion forward would be to ask ourselves: What reforms of the UN would we insist are necessary before we would consider it acceptable to make ICANN a UN agency? Greetings, Norbert -------------- 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 From suresh at hserus.net Fri Jan 25 18:20:57 2013 From: suresh at hserus.net (Suresh Ramasubramanian) Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2013 04:50:57 +0530 Subject: [governance] Re: Charter amendment proposals in need of more co-proposers In-Reply-To: <0771BBBD35944216AF374BFBAC65BCBE@Toshiba> References: <20130125115127.00edd288@quill.bollow.ch> <09eb01cdfb01$f883d1e0$e98b75a0$@gmail.com> <0771BBBD35944216AF374BFBAC65BCBE@Toshiba> Message-ID: <6D7951EE-649E-4356-99F7-86402F77955A@hserus.net> Co propose --srs (iPad) On 26-Jan-2013, at 0:52, "Ian Peter" wrote: > me too > > -----Original Message----- From: michael gurstein > Sent: Saturday, January 26, 2013 12:43 AM > To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org ; 'Norbert Bollow' > Subject: RE: [governance] Re: Charter amendment proposals in need of more co-proposers > > I'll co-propose. > > M > > -----Original Message----- > From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org > [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Norbert Bollow > Sent: Friday, January 25, 2013 2:51 AM > To: IGC > Subject: [governance] Re: Charter amendment proposals in need of more > co-proposers > > I wrote: > >> among the charter amendment proposals listed on >> http://igcaucus.org/informally-discussed-charter-amendments >> I think it would be good to bring the following two to a vote together >> with Avri's two amendment proposals (which have already achieved the >> requirement of a sufficient number of co-proposers). >> >> Proposal of Jeremy and co-proposers on updating the reference to the >> mailing list >> >> Proposal of Norbert and co-proposers on coordinator election dates > > Are these proposals really not getting any further co-proposers??? > > If someone doubts that the clarification of coordinator election dates has > some importance, please try to explain how the current text of our charter > is consistent with Sala's election having taken place in October 2011 and > mine in January 2013. > > Greetings, > Norbert > > > > > > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From dogwallah at gmail.com Fri Jan 25 20:27:42 2013 From: dogwallah at gmail.com (McTim) Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2013 20:27:42 -0500 Subject: [governance] today's Wash Post editorial In-Reply-To: <20130126000416.5b6abeed@quill.bollow.ch> References: <50FEA64A.4090805@itforchange.net> <51029240.5020209@itforchange.net> <51029C44.9050501@itforchange.net> <06EF7F5E019BB34DB01EDC2DB0588A9F0F2B24B5@BL2PRD0810MB349.namprd08.prod.outlook.com> <5102AAE7.6010109@itforchange.net> <8CFC92E8FE2B559-241C-104DC@webmail-d146.sysops.aol.com> <20130125191649.1d5adc7d@quill.bollow.ch> <20130125203137.45b9cdfc@quill.bollow.ch> <20130126000416.5b6abeed@quill.bollow.ch> Message-ID: On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 6:04 PM, Norbert Bollow wrote: > McTim wrote: >> > warrant. The scenario is this: "ICE decides that one foreign TLD >> > registrar >> >> I think you mean "registry" here. > Yes. >> is in the business of directing >> > users to websites violating the US understanding of what copyright >> > law should say, and further decides to treat that TLD registrar >> > analogously to how Rojadirecta was treated". I don't pretend to know >> > whether ICE would seek to serve the warrant to be served to ICANN >> > (as IANA operator) or Verisign (as root zone maintainer) >> >> neither to the IANA operator or rootzone maintainer. >> >> As they did in the rojadirecta case, they would go to the registry > If the registry is outside the US, like Rojadirecta was, how would they > "go to the registry"? the registries were in the U.S. in the rojadirecta case!! > >> So you are hypothesizing that if for example ICE took exception to >> mega.nz (or mega.co.nz), they would go to ICANN or VRSN to take .nz >> from the root? > > No... that's totally unplausible no more implausible than your hypothetical. Speculating further on either doesn't seem to be helpful at this point. -- 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 From diegocanabarro at gmail.com Fri Jan 25 20:55:11 2013 From: diegocanabarro at gmail.com (Diego Rafael Canabarro) Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2013 20:55:11 -0500 Subject: [governance] Fwd: Unlocking Your Phone Is Illegal Starting Tomorrow In-Reply-To: <251e609e1dba3888b86c21cc83674f7de16.20130125230048@mail32.us1.rsgsv.net> References: <251e609e1dba3888b86c21cc83674f7de16.20130125230048@mail32.us1.rsgsv.net> Message-ID: ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Gizmodo Date: Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 6:02 PM Subject: Unlocking Your Phone Is Illegal Starting Tomorrow To: diegocanabarro at gmail.com ** January 25th, 2013Top Story Unlocking Your Phone Is Illegal Starting Tomorrow - - - - By Eric Limer [image: Unlocking Your Phone Is Illegal Starting Tomorrow]You may remember that last year, the DMCA exemption on unlocking phones was smacked down. Well it's going into effect this Saturday. So starting tomorrow, unlocking your phone will be officially illegal. Yay. Unlocking phones without the express consent of the carrier who locked them became illegal thanks to edits to DMCA exemptions back in October, but it's only now that the 90-day grace period is running out. Locked phones purchased in the 90 days after the ruling are still game to be unlocked, but from here on out, for an unlocked phone to be legitimate, it'll have to have been bought that way or come with a permission slip from your carrier. It's not the first time retracted DMCA exemptions have threatened to mess with your ability to mess with your phone. Jailbreaking and rooting almost became illegal againbecause of DMCA exemption changes. Fortunately, the same batch of modifications that illegalized unlocking will also protect phone jailbreakingfor another three years. But it's still not allowed on tablets. Not than anyone is likely notice that particular indiscretion. These changes won't, of course, limit you ability to unlock phones anyway, but it will give carriers a bit of a heavier stick to wave at you if they catch you using an unlocked phone they didn't authorize; they can tell. There are also a few technical loopholes. Legacy phones, i.e. "used (or perhaps unused) phones previously purchased or otherwise acquired by a consumer" are still cool to unlock, and that definition has a little bit of play in it. But the practice of unlocking your carrier-discounted phone is still going to be a crime, so get ready to deal with this brave new world, or live the life of an outlaw. [image: Number of comments] - [image: Unlocking Your Phone Is Illegal Starting Tomorrow] Unlocking Your Phone Is Illegal Starting Tomorrow - [image: Can Apple's Stock Recover Without Steve Jobs?] Can Apple's Stock Recover Without Steve Jobs? - [image: US Military Will Install Laser Turrets on Bombers and Fighter Jets] US Military Will Install Laser Turrets on Bombers and Fighter Jets - [image: 21 Amazing Off-the-Grid Houses] 21 Amazing Off-the-Grid Houses - [image: The Math Formula That Tells Us How Long Everything Will Live] The Math Formula That Tells Us How Long Everything Will Live - [image: The No-Hire Emails That Incriminate Apple, Google, Adobe and More] The No-Hire Emails That Incriminate Apple, Google, Adobe and More - [image: Study Says It Can Track NFL Brain Injuries with PET Scans] Study Says It Can Track NFL Brain Injuries with PET Scans More Stories on Gizmodo » diegocanabarro at gmail.com: Change your e-mail address| Unsubscribe Gawker Media, 210 Elizabeth Street, Floor 4, New York, NY 10012 Terms of use | Mailing List Policy -- Diego R. Canabarro http://lattes.cnpq.br/4980585945314597 -- diego.canabarro [at] ufrgs.br diego [at] pubpol.umass.edu MSN: diegocanabarro [at] gmail.com Skype: diegocanabarro Cell # +55-51-9244-3425 (Brasil) / +1-413-362-0133 (USA) -- -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From suresh at hserus.net Fri Jan 25 21:36:51 2013 From: suresh at hserus.net (Suresh Ramasubramanian) Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2013 08:06:51 +0530 Subject: [governance] today's Wash Post editorial In-Reply-To: References: <50FEA64A.4090805@itforchange.net> <51029240.5020209@itforchange.net> <51029C44.9050501@itforchange.net> <06EF7F5E019BB34DB01EDC2DB0588A9F0F2B24B5@BL2PRD0810MB349.namprd08.prod.outlook.com> <5102AAE7.6010109@itforchange.net> <8CFC92E8FE2B559-241C-104DC@webmail-d146.sysops.aol.com> <20130125191649.1d5adc7d@quill.bollow.ch> <20130125203137.45b9cdfc@quill.bollow.ch> <20130126000416.5b6abeed@quill.bollow.ch> Message-ID: <13c74b6e18b.2728.4f968dcf8ecd56c9cb8acab6370fcfe0@hserus.net> This is one of those situations where a nation can and will exert it's sovereignty on entities located in its jurisdiction. If they had used say a es domain and somehow fallen foul of Spanish law this would have happened to them there too, or if it were compliant with Spanish law they would typically not face this issue. At least not without the doj having to deal with their counterparts in Spain --srs (htc one x) On 26 January 2013 6:57:42 AM McTim wrote: > On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 6:04 PM, Norbert Bollow wrote: > > McTim wrote: > >> > warrant. The scenario is this: "ICE decides that one foreign TLD > >> > registrar > >> > >> I think you mean "registry" here. > > Yes. > >> is in the business of directing > >> > users to websites violating the US understanding of what copyright > >> > law should say, and further decides to treat that TLD registrar > >> > analogously to how Rojadirecta was treated". I don't pretend to know > >> > whether ICE would seek to serve the warrant to be served to ICANN > >> > (as IANA operator) or Verisign (as root zone maintainer) > >> > >> neither to the IANA operator or rootzone maintainer. > >> > >> As they did in the rojadirecta case, they would go to the registry > > If the registry is outside the US, like Rojadirecta was, how would they > > "go to the registry"? > > > the registries were in the U.S. in the rojadirecta case!! > > > > > >> So you are hypothesizing that if for example ICE took exception to > >> mega.nz (or mega.co.nz), they would go to ICANN or VRSN to take .nz > >> from the root? > > > > No... that's totally unplausible > > > no more implausible than your hypothetical. > > Speculating further on either doesn't seem to be helpful at this point. > > > -- > 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 From Guru at ITforChange.net Fri Jan 25 22:38:20 2013 From: Guru at ITforChange.net (=?UTF-8?B?R3VydSDgpJfgpYHgpLDgpYE=?=) Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2013 10:38:20 +0700 Subject: [governance] Facebook spent $4 million to lobby U.S. lawmakers in 2012 In-Reply-To: References: <510086BE.6010100@ITforChange.net> <056f01cdfa49$375b4f60$a611ee20$@gmail.com> <51015DF8.6070803@gmail.com> <066a01cdfa5a$01b28610$05179230$@gmail.com> <5102AD28.9090901@ITforChange.net> Message-ID: <51034FAC.4040605@ITforChange.net> On 01/26/2013 03:58 AM, Roland Perry wrote: > In message <5102AD28.9090901 at ITforChange.net>, at 23:04:56 on Fri, 25 > Jan 2013, =?UTF-8?B?R3VydSDgpJfgpYHgpLDgpYE=?= > writes >> you say 'different forms of democracy', is plutocracy another form of >> democracy? > > Only if everyone in the country in question is wealthy. So Monaco, > perhaps? Ronald, then can you explain what you mean by 'different forms of democracy' in which the lobbying power of money varies across countries? Also "The word plutocracy is almost always used as a pejorative to describe or warn against an undesirable condition,^[2] ^[3] and throughout history political thinkers such as Winston Churchill , 19th-century French sociologist and historian Alexis de Tocqueville and 19th-century Spanish monarchist Juan Donoso Cortés have condemned those they characterize as plutocrats for ignoring their social responsibilities to the poor, _*using their power to serve their own purposes*_ and thereby increasing poverty and nurturing class conflict , and corrupting their societies with greed and hedonism .^[4] ^[5] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plutocracy) *This seems to be the direction that US seems to be moving towards, with the vastly disproportionate influence of the monied in policy making.* This phenomenon is also true for most other countries including India, but with most large IT transnationals being head quartered in the US and with US domestic law unfortunately* the defacto global law, the need/scope for policy lobbying/corruption is much higher in the US. regards, Guru * I would think it axiomatic that global democracy will require a league of nations and nationalities and not any one having any pre-eminent position, so it is disappointing (though not surprising) that we get responses on the list about 'US eminent role/ US exceptionalism' being good or inevitable. To quote that great American, Abraham Lincoln "No man is good enough to govern another man without that other man’s consent", something many Americans on this list and other nationals favoring US eminence in IG, may want to ponder about. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From Guru at ITforChange.net Fri Jan 25 22:48:41 2013 From: Guru at ITforChange.net (=?UTF-8?B?R3VydSDgpJfgpYHgpLDgpYE=?=) Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2013 10:48:41 +0700 Subject: [governance] Facebook spent $4 million to lobby U.S. lawmakers in 2012 In-Reply-To: <51034FAC.4040605@ITforChange.net> References: <510086BE.6010100@ITforChange.net> <056f01cdfa49$375b4f60$a611ee20$@gmail.com> <51015DF8.6070803@gmail.com> <066a01cdfa5a$01b28610$05179230$@gmail.com> <5102AD28.9090901@ITforChange.net> <51034FAC.4040605@ITforChange.net> Message-ID: <51035219.9070200@ITforChange.net> On 01/26/2013 10:38 AM, Guru गुरु wrote: > > On 01/26/2013 03:58 AM, Roland Perry wrote: >> In message <5102AD28.9090901 at ITforChange.net>, at 23:04:56 on Fri, 25 >> Jan 2013, =?UTF-8?B?R3VydSDgpJfgpYHgpLDgpYE=?= >> writes >>> you say 'different forms of democracy', is plutocracy another form >>> of democracy? >> >> Only if everyone in the country in question is wealthy. So Monaco, >> perhaps? > > Ronald, > then can you explain what you mean by 'different forms of democracy' > in which the lobbying power of money varies across countries? > > Also > "The word plutocracy is almost always used as a pejorative to describe > or warn against an undesirable condition,^[2] > ^[3] > and throughout > history political thinkers such as Winston Churchill > , 19th-century French > sociologist and historian > Alexis de Tocqueville > and 19th-century > Spanish monarchist Juan > Donoso Cortés > have condemned those they characterize as plutocrats for ignoring > their social responsibilities > to the poor, > _*using their power to serve their own purposes*_ and thereby > increasing poverty and nurturing class conflict > , and corrupting their > societies with greed and hedonism > .^[4] > ^[5] > > (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plutocracy) > > *This seems to be the direction that US seems to be moving towards, > with the vastly disproportionate influence of the monied in policy > making.* This phenomenon is also true for most other countries > including India, but with most large IT transnationals being head > quartered in the US and with US domestic law unfortunately* the > defacto global law, the need/scope for policy lobbying/corruption is > much higher in the US. > > regards, > Guru > * I would think it axiomatic that global democracy will require a > league of nations and nationalities and not any one having any > pre-eminent position, so it is disappointing (though not surprising) > that we get responses on the list about 'US eminent role/ US > exceptionalism' being good or inevitable. To quote that great > American, Abraham Lincoln "No man is good enough to govern another man > without that other man’s consent", something many Americans on this > list and other nationals favoring US eminence in IG, may want to > ponder about. also on the same wiki page - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plutocracy " When the Nobel-Prize winning economist Joseph Stiglitz wrote the 2011 Vanity Fair magazine article entitled “Of the 1%, by the 1%, for the 1%”, the title as well as the content pointed to evidence that the United States is increasingly ruled by the wealthiest 1%. ..... elites like to think of themselves as acting in the collective interest, even as they act in their personal vested interest. And so what I think you'll end up seeing is social mobility, which is already ;decreasing in the United States, being increasingly squeezed. You see particularly powerful sectors, finance, oil. *I would say the technology sector is going to be next in line, getting lots of government subsidies.* The scandalously low effective tax rates of the IT transnationals can also be seen as some kind of implicit subsidy ... and measures/experiments like that of the French Govt are required to help correct this situation - by reducing the lobbying power of these corporates and also getting the funding required by governments to support basic societal infrastructure, including soft infrastructure like public education and public health.. regards, Guru -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From suresh at hserus.net Fri Jan 25 23:08:09 2013 From: suresh at hserus.net (Suresh Ramasubramanian) Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2013 09:38:09 +0530 Subject: [governance] Facebook spent $4 million to lobby U.S. lawmakers in 2012 In-Reply-To: <51035219.9070200@ITforChange.net> References: <510086BE.6010100@ITforChange.net> <056f01cdfa49$375b4f60$a611ee20$@gmail.com> <51015DF8.6070803@gmail.com> <066a01cdfa5a$01b28610$05179230$@gmail.com> <5102AD28.9090901@ITforChange.net> <51034FAC.4040605@ITforChange.net> <51035219.9070200@ITforChange.net> Message-ID: <13c750a6a65.2728.4f968dcf8ecd56c9cb8acab6370fcfe0@hserus.net> Guru, even if the corporation is taxed on its previously untaxed activities it would still have more than enough to spend 15 to 20 million dollars on lobbying activities. These tend to go towards staff salaries, funding ngos and organizing conferences rather than wining and dining senators, whereas in other countries like say our very own india, the same amount, deposited anonymously in a minister or bureaucrat's numbered account in a swiss bank would be the alternative for firms that don't care about the US foreign corrupt practices act, which has some serious teeth. --srs (htc one x) On 26 January 2013 9:18:41 AM Guru गुरु wrote: > On 01/26/2013 10:38 AM, Guru गुरु wrote: > > > > On 01/26/2013 03:58 AM, Roland Perry wrote: > >> In message <5102AD28.9090901 at ITforChange.net>, at 23:04:56 on Fri, 25 > >> Jan 2013, =?UTF-8?B?R3VydSDgpJfgpYHgpLDgpYE=?= > >> writes > >>> you say 'different forms of democracy', is plutocracy another form > >>> of democracy? > >> > >> Only if everyone in the country in question is wealthy. So Monaco, > >> perhaps? > > > > Ronald, > > then can you explain what you mean by 'different forms of democracy' > > in which the lobbying power of money varies across countries? > > > > Also > > "The word plutocracy is almost always used as a pejorative to describe > > or warn against an undesirable condition,^[2] > > ^[3] > > and throughout > > history political thinkers such as Winston Churchill > > , 19th-century French > > sociologist and historian > > Alexis de Tocqueville > > and 19th-century > > Spanish monarchist Juan > > Donoso Cortés > > have condemned those they characterize as plutocrats for ignoring > > their social responsibilities > > to the poor, > > _*using their power to serve their own purposes*_ and thereby > > increasing poverty and nurturing class conflict > > , and corrupting their > > societies with greed and hedonism > > .^[4] > > ^[5] > > > > (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plutocracy) > > > > *This seems to be the direction that US seems to be moving towards, > > with the vastly disproportionate influence of the monied in policy > > making.* This phenomenon is also true for most other countries > > including India, but with most large IT transnationals being head > > quartered in the US and with US domestic law unfortunately* the > > defacto global law, the need/scope for policy lobbying/corruption is > > much higher in the US. > > > > regards, > > Guru > > * I would think it axiomatic that global democracy will require a > > league of nations and nationalities and not any one having any > > pre-eminent position, so it is disappointing (though not surprising) > > that we get responses on the list about 'US eminent role/ US > > exceptionalism' being good or inevitable. To quote that great > > American, Abraham Lincoln "No man is good enough to govern another man > > without that other man’s consent", something many Americans on this > > list and other nationals favoring US eminence in IG, may want to > > ponder about. > > also on the same wiki page - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plutocracy > > " When the Nobel-Prize winning economist Joseph Stiglitz > wrote the 2011 Vanity > Fair magazine article entitled “Of the 1%, by the 1%, for the 1%”, the > title as well as the content pointed to evidence that the United States > is increasingly ruled by the wealthiest 1%. ..... elites like to think > of themselves as acting in the collective interest, even as they act in > their personal vested interest. And so what I think you'll end up seeing > is social mobility, which is already ;decreasing in the United States, > being increasingly squeezed. You see particularly powerful sectors, > finance, oil. *I would say the technology sector is going to be next in > line, getting lots of government subsidies.* > > The scandalously low effective tax rates of the IT transnationals can > also be seen as some kind of implicit subsidy ... and > measures/experiments like that of the French Govt are required to help > correct this situation - by reducing the lobbying power of these > corporates and also getting the funding required by governments to > support basic societal infrastructure, including soft infrastructure > like public education and public health.. > > regards, > Guru -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From dogwallah at gmail.com Sat Jan 26 00:18:24 2013 From: dogwallah at gmail.com (McTim) Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2013 00:18:24 -0500 Subject: [governance] Facebook spent $4 million to lobby U.S. lawmakers in 2012 In-Reply-To: <51034FAC.4040605@ITforChange.net> References: <510086BE.6010100@ITforChange.net> <056f01cdfa49$375b4f60$a611ee20$@gmail.com> <51015DF8.6070803@gmail.com> <066a01cdfa5a$01b28610$05179230$@gmail.com> <5102AD28.9090901@ITforChange.net> <51034FAC.4040605@ITforChange.net> Message-ID: On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 10:38 PM, Guru गुरु wrote: > so it is disappointing (though not surprising) that we get responses on the > list about 'US eminent role/ US exceptionalism' being good or inevitable. on the contrary, no one on this list has said any such thing, rather some of us have pointed out the reality of the situation and the unlikelyhood of it changing. I spoke to a senior US IG person some years back who "was there" back in the Green/White paper days, who told me that "the US never intended to give it up", meaning the root. To > quote that great American, Abraham Lincoln "No man is good enough to govern > another man without that other man’s consent", something many Americans on > this list and other nationals favoring US eminence in IG, may want to ponder > about. The thing that I find most frustrating about this is that y'all have forgotten (or never knew) that the nation state is NOT supposed to be the agent of IG, the enduser is supposed to be in that role. Too many of us want nations states in charge IMHO. -- 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 From apisan at unam.mx Sat Jan 26 01:02:10 2013 From: apisan at unam.mx (Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Baruch) Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2013 06:02:10 +0000 Subject: [governance] today's Wash Post editorial In-Reply-To: <20130126000416.5b6abeed@quill.bollow.ch> References: <50FEA64A.4090805@itforchange.net> <51029240.5020209@itforchange.net> <51029C44.9050501@itforchange.net> <06EF7F5E019BB34DB01EDC2DB0588A9F0F2B24B5@BL2PRD0810MB349.namprd08.prod.outlook.com> <5102AAE7.6010109@itforchange.net> <8CFC92E8FE2B559-241C-104DC@webmail-d146.sysops.aol.com> <20130125191649.1d5adc7d@quill.bollow.ch> <20130125203137.45b9cdfc@quill.bollow.ch> ,<20130126000416.5b6abeed@quill.bollow.ch> Message-ID: <6DCAB3E586E6A34FB17223DF8D8F0D3D5DC366DC@W8-EX10MB.unam.local> Norbert, "Maybe a constructive way to take this discussion forward would be to ask ourselves: What reforms of the UN would we insist are necessary before we would consider it acceptable to make ICANN a UN agency?" And how to achieve them, as well? Multistakeholder General Assembly dealing with domain names, AAAA records and glue over IPv6, spam, hunger, the bellicous situation in Mali, nuclear disarmament? And world peace? Do we include that in the agenda as well or leave it to the Sandra Bullock Council? Yours, Alejandro Pisanty - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Facultad de Química UNAM Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico +52-1-5541444475 FROM ABROAD +525541444475 DESDE MÉXICO SMS +525541444475 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 Norbert Bollow [nb at bollow.ch] Enviado el: viernes, 25 de enero de 2013 17:04 Hasta: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; McTim CC: Koven Ronald; parminder at itforchange.net Asunto: Re: [governance] today's Wash Post editorial McTim wrote: > > warrant. The scenario is this: "ICE decides that one foreign TLD > > registrar > > I think you mean "registry" here. Yes. > is in the business of directing > > users to websites violating the US understanding of what copyright > > law should say, and further decides to treat that TLD registrar > > analogously to how Rojadirecta was treated". I don't pretend to know > > whether ICE would seek to serve the warrant to be served to ICANN > > (as IANA operator) or Verisign (as root zone maintainer) > > neither to the IANA operator or rootzone maintainer. > > As they did in the rojadirecta case, they would go to the registry If the registry is outside the US, like Rojadirecta was, how would they "go to the registry"? > So you are hypothesizing that if for example ICE took exception to > mega.nz (or mega.co.nz), they would go to ICANN or VRSN to take .nz > from the root? No... that's totally unplausible - .nz is too high profile and in addition ccTLDs have at least some degree of protection against this kind of scenario on the basis of para 63 of the Tunis agenda. But what if one of the new gtlds were considered by ICE to be "rogue" in the sense of attracting a high percentage of websites violating the US understanding of what copyright law should say, and being unresponsive to US takedown demands? For example, .gratis has two applicants, one in the US and one outside. Suppose the non-US applicant wins .gratis, and the domain then attracts lots of gratis services which are legal in the country where the .gratis registry is based but in violation of the US understanding of what "intellectual property law" should be like. In such a scenario I could imagine ICE trying to get .gratis out of the root zone. > Neither body acting alone (or in conceert with each other could > accomplish that. They would both tell ICE (politely) to bugger off, > that what ICE wants they can't have, as it is not possible for either > party to complete the request. Sorry I don't follow you here. If they serve Verisign a warrant that says: "Effective tomorrow, all servers which you operate that serve copies of the root zone shall serve copies that have the entries for the '.gratis' domain deleted", how could Verisign argue that they're unable to comply? (They could, quite reasonably, argue that the request is unwise, and that quite possibly the only result is for the US to massively lose trust and goodwill. In fact, due to the likely inability of Verisign to get the modified root zone signed in a way that the worldwide technical community would respect, that argument would be much stronger than the equivalent argument would have been for rojadirecta.com, if they had made that argument there. As far as I know they didn't, so they have already demonstrated their willingness to comply with this kind of warrants. Anyway, assuming the demand is phrased in a way that makes it possible for Verisign to comply, I wouldn't bet anything on Verisign refusing to comply. The case of a warrant served to ICANN is marginally more complicated but I think essentially equivalent unless NTIA exercises its oversight function to stop the madness before Verisign would act on it. > > The only point that I was trying to make is that the concerns about > > potential actions of the US government are not mere prejudice, but > > are based, at least to some extent, on actual actions of the US > > government. > > right, and the point I was making is that this thread has been mostly > about rootzone changes, and you brought in rojadirecta, 2 things which > really have little in common. Note though that I have not been replying to you but to Koven Ronald who had written, in a message that did not explicitly reference any of your postings: : In what, precisely, does the "yoke of US's oversight" consist ? : May we have concrete examples, please, of the exercise of this : yoke ? It has seemed to me for some time that the obsession with : getting rid of the Americans is a reflex built on a prejudice, : rather than a reflection of experienced reality, at least as : concerns Internet governance as such. I agree that Rojadirecta is not an example of rootzone changes. It is however an example of experienced reality. An experienced reality where I would expect culturally sensitive Americans to understand that this kind of thing will likely trigger a reaction, especially if those who are reacting (not only to this instance of extraterritorial abuse of US government power, but to the whole pattern of such abuses) are then accused of being prejudiced. > So to remove the US "yoke", we would not only need to remove the US > role in root changes, but remove ALL registries and registrars from US > territories AND force Google and FB, etc to relocate all of their > offices to a country where they would not be subject to any laws?? In > other words, a place that doesn't exist. > > In other words, Internetistan!! It is definitely possible to create administrative structures that avoid giving an exceptional role, or the appearance of exceptional power over anything of importance, to any particular country's government. The UN shows that this can be done. Maybe ICANN could eventually become a "UN specialized agency"? I'd expect that to resolve the concerns around the "yoke of US's oversight" with regard to ICANN and the root zone. I'd insist though that the UN would need some serious reforms first. Maybe a constructive way to take this discussion forward would be to ask ourselves: What reforms of the UN would we insist are necessary before we would consider it acceptable to make ICANN a UN agency? Greetings, Norbert -------------- 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 From nashton at ccianet.org Sat Jan 26 03:35:50 2013 From: nashton at ccianet.org (Nick Ashton-Hart) Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2013 09:35:50 +0100 Subject: [governance] Facebook spent $4 million to lobby U.S. lawmakers in 2012 In-Reply-To: <51035219.9070200@ITforChange.net> References: <510086BE.6010100@ITforChange.net> <056f01cdfa49$375b4f60$a611ee20$@gmail.com> <51015DF8.6070803@gmail.com> <066a01cdfa5a$01b28610$05179230$@gmail.com> <5102AD28.9090901@ITforChange.net> <51034FAC.4040605@ITforChange.net> <51035219.9070200@ITforChange.net> Message-ID: <-8558355287633436504@unknownmsgid> Guru said: The scandalously low effective tax rates of the IT transnationals can also be seen as some kind of implicit subsidy ... and measures/experiments like that of the French Govt are required to help correct this situation - by reducing the lobbying power of these corporates and also getting the funding required by governments to support basic societal infrastructure, including soft infrastructure like public education and public health.. My reply: The rates being paid by IT companies are not different than other types of companies. For example, I believe GE paid effectively 14% tax globally last year. Corporate tax rates overall do not differentiate by sector - though, of course, some vertical markets do get exemptions and credits designed to encourage certain activities by them. If you believe that companies should pay more, that's fine - but to suggest that IT companies are particularly bad in some way does a disservice, I think, to the overall objective which many seek: reforming the tax system so that companies, in general, pay a larger share of tax. This is, by the way, extremely complex and there are powerful incentives for countries to incentivise FDI by, among other measures, favourable tax regimes. It will be incredibly difficult to get enough countries that are desirable markets for industry to sign up to a broad range of measures to synchronise taxes to produce the desired end - the incentives to attract FDI are simply very powerful. What the French are proposing (not for the first time) is not going to help anything; it is soapbox policy, designed for an internal audience of French people. Like the 75% tax on wealthy individuals they propose, it wouldn't raise enough money to solve France's real deficit issues; it would just make France even less competitive an economy than it already is. Folks, is tax policy really what people are interested in having an effect on in the IGC list? Is this a battle you really want to enter into, given the very real threats the open Internet faces today? -- Regards, Nick Ashton-Hart *Need to meet with me? Schedule the time that suits us both here: http://meetme.so/nashton* Sent from my one of my handheld thingies, please excuse linguistic mangling. On 26 Jan 2013, at 04:49, "Guru गुरु" wrote: The scandalously low effective tax rates of the IT transnationals can also be seen as some kind of implicit subsidy ... and measures/experiments like that of the French Govt are required to help correct this situation - by reducing the lobbying power of these corporates and also getting the funding required by governments to support basic societal infrastructure, including soft infrastructure like public education and public health.. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From nhklein at gmx.net Sat Jan 26 03:52:38 2013 From: nhklein at gmx.net (Norbert Klein) Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2013 15:52:38 +0700 Subject: [governance] Facebook spent $4 million to lobby U.S. lawmakers in 2012 In-Reply-To: <51035219.9070200@ITforChange.net> References: <510086BE.6010100@ITforChange.net> <056f01cdfa49$375b4f60$a611ee20$@gmail.com> <51015DF8.6070803@gmail.com> <066a01cdfa5a$01b28610$05179230$@gmail.com> <5102AD28.9090901@ITforChange.net> <51034FAC.4040605@ITforChange.net> <51035219.9070200@ITforChange.net> Message-ID: <51039956.8060104@gmx.net> On 26 1.2013 10:48, Guru गुरु wrote: > On 01/26/2013 10:38 AM, Guru गुरु wrote: >> [snip] >> * I would think it axiomatic that global democracy will require a >> league of nations and nationalities and not any one having any >> pre-eminent position, so it is disappointing (though not surprising) >> that we get responses on the list about 'US eminent role/ US >> exceptionalism' being good or inevitable. To quote that great >> American, Abraham Lincoln "No man is good enough to govern another >> man without that other man’s consent", something many Americans on >> this list and other nationals favoring US eminence in IG, may want to >> ponder about. > > also on the same wiki page - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plutocracy > > " When the Nobel-Prize winning economist Joseph Stiglitz > wrote the 2011 Vanity > Fair magazine article entitled “Of the 1%, by the 1%, for the 1%”, the > title as well as the content pointed to evidence that the United > States is increasingly ruled by the wealthiest 1%. ..... elites like > to think of themselves as acting in the collective interest, even as > they act in their personal vested interest. See also: *Davos 2013: Joseph Stiglitz attacks US 'inequality'* *Stiglitz: 'Most citizens have not taken part in even mild growth'* *The richest 1% of Americans now hold 25% of the country's wealth and more needs to be done to boost equality, Nobel Prize winning US economist Joseph Stiglitz has said. * *http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-21183987* Norbert Klein > And so what I think you'll end up seeing is social mobility, which is > already ;decreasing in the United States, being increasingly squeezed. > You see particularly powerful sectors, finance, oil. *I would say the > technology sector is going to be next in line, getting lots of > government subsidies.* > > The scandalously low effective tax rates of the IT transnationals can > also be seen as some kind of implicit subsidy ... and > measures/experiments like that of the French Govt are required to help > correct this situation - by reducing the lobbying power of these > corporates and also getting the funding required by governments to > support basic societal infrastructure, including soft infrastructure > like public education and public health.. > > regards, > Guru -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From roland at internetpolicyagency.com Sat Jan 26 06:46:48 2013 From: roland at internetpolicyagency.com (Roland Perry) Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2013 11:46:48 +0000 Subject: [governance] Facebook spent $4 million to lobby U.S. lawmakers in 2012 In-Reply-To: <51034FAC.4040605@ITforChange.net> References: <510086BE.6010100@ITforChange.net> <056f01cdfa49$375b4f60$a611ee20$@gmail.com> <51015DF8.6070803@gmail.com> <066a01cdfa5a$01b28610$05179230$@gmail.com> <5102AD28.9090901@ITforChange.net> <51034FAC.4040605@ITforChange.net> Message-ID: In message <51034FAC.4040605 at ITforChange.net>, at 10:38:20 on Sat, 26 Jan 2013, =?UTF-8?B?R3VydSDgpJfgpYHgpLDgpYE=?= writes >then can you explain what you mean by 'different forms of democracy' in >which the lobbying power of money varies across countries The extent to which money can be used to influence politicians varies in different countries. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Campaign_finance for an introduction to how private money is allowed to influence election campaigns in different countries, for example. -- Roland Perry -------------- 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 From nhklein at gmx.net Sat Jan 26 07:04:47 2013 From: nhklein at gmx.net (Norbert Klein) Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2013 19:04:47 +0700 Subject: [governance] Facebook spent $4 million to lobby U.S. lawmakers in 2012 In-Reply-To: References: <510086BE.6010100@ITforChange.net> <056f01cdfa49$375b4f60$a611ee20$@gmail.com> <51015DF8.6070803@gmail.com> <066a01cdfa5a$01b28610$05179230$@gmail.com> <5102AD28.9090901@ITforChange.net> <51034FAC.4040605@ITforChange.net> Message-ID: <5103C65F.7000404@gmx.net> On 26 1.2013 18:46, Roland Perry wrote: > In message <51034FAC.4040605 at ITforChange.net>, at 10:38:20 on Sat, 26 > Jan 2013, =?UTF-8?B?R3VydSDgpJfgpYHgpLDgpYE=?= > writes >> then can you explain what you mean by 'different forms of democracy' >> in which the lobbying power of money varies across countries > > The extent to which money can be used to influence politicians varies > in different countries. See > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Campaign_finance for an introduction to > how private money is allowed to influence election campaigns in > different countries, for example. "In early 2010, the United States Supreme Court ruled in /Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission / that corporate funding of independent political broadcasts in candidate elections cannot be limited pursuant to the right of these entities to free speech ." (Wikipedia) So corporates in the USA with a lot of resources have the same right to free speech like a citizen of the USA has. Legal? So says the Supreme Court. Legitimate? A question. Norbert Klein -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From roland at internetpolicyagency.com Sat Jan 26 08:45:30 2013 From: roland at internetpolicyagency.com (Roland Perry) Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2013 13:45:30 +0000 Subject: [governance] Facebook spent $4 million to lobby U.S. lawmakers in 2012 In-Reply-To: <5103C65F.7000404@gmx.net> References: <510086BE.6010100@ITforChange.net> <056f01cdfa49$375b4f60$a611ee20$@gmail.com> <51015DF8.6070803@gmail.com> <066a01cdfa5a$01b28610$05179230$@gmail.com> <5102AD28.9090901@ITforChange.net> <51034FAC.4040605@ITforChange.net> <5103C65F.7000404@gmx.net> Message-ID: In message <5103C65F.7000404 at gmx.net>, at 19:04:47 on Sat, 26 Jan 2013, Norbert Klein writes >>The extent to which money can be used to influence politicians varies >>in different countries. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Campaign_finance >>for an introduction to how private money is allowed to influence >>election campaigns in different countries, for example. > >"In early 2010, the United States Supreme Court ruled in Citizens United >v. Federal Election Commission that corporate funding of independent >political broadcasts in candidate elections cannot be limited pursuant to >the right of these entities to free speech." (Wikipedia) > >So corporates in the USA with a lot of resources have the same right to >free speech like a citizen of the USA has. Legal? So says the Supreme >Court. Legitimate? A question That's an example of the different ways democracy is implemented. Here in the UK, no candidate can spend more than £30,000 on their election campaign for MP, irrespective of where the funds came from; and a party can't spend more than £19m nationally in a General Election. Compare that with the $985m that Obama apparently spent getting re-elected, and the $992m Romney spent on not getting elected [figures from NY Times]. And I presume these independent broadcasts you mention don't count towards that total? Different countries, different rules. Isn't it a matter for each country to decide how they conduct their political campaigning? -- Roland Perry -------------- 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 From bortzmeyer at internatif.org Sat Jan 26 09:12:34 2013 From: bortzmeyer at internatif.org (Stephane Bortzmeyer) Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2013 15:12:34 +0100 Subject: [governance] RFC 6852: Affirmation of the Modern Paradigm for Standards Message-ID: <20130126141234.GA21789@sources.org> http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc6852.txt (It is the OpenStand declaration, republished as a RFC. Key words: standards, IETF, ITU, IEEE, W3C...) -------------- 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 From jaryn56 at gmail.com Sat Jan 26 11:36:01 2013 From: jaryn56 at gmail.com (=?UTF-8?B?Sm9zw6kgRsOpbGl4IEFyaWFzIFluY2hl?=) Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2013 11:36:01 -0500 Subject: [governance] Re: Charter amendment proposals in need of more co-proposers In-Reply-To: <6D7951EE-649E-4356-99F7-86402F77955A@hserus.net> References: <20130125115127.00edd288@quill.bollow.ch> <09eb01cdfb01$f883d1e0$e98b75a0$@gmail.com> <0771BBBD35944216AF374BFBAC65BCBE@Toshiba> <6D7951EE-649E-4356-99F7-86402F77955A@hserus.net> Message-ID: Co-proponer y actualizar de acuerdo a las políticas mundiales... No veo a nadie que proponga nuevos aspectos y que defienda la libre información por la Internet... *Cordialmente: José Félix Arias Ynche* * Investigador Social Para El Desarrollo* 2013/1/25 Suresh Ramasubramanian > Co propose > > --srs (iPad) > > On 26-Jan-2013, at 0:52, "Ian Peter" wrote: > > > me too > > > > -----Original Message----- From: michael gurstein > > Sent: Saturday, January 26, 2013 12:43 AM > > To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org ; 'Norbert Bollow' > > Subject: RE: [governance] Re: Charter amendment proposals in need of > more co-proposers > > > > I'll co-propose. > > > > M > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org > > [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Norbert > Bollow > > Sent: Friday, January 25, 2013 2:51 AM > > To: IGC > > Subject: [governance] Re: Charter amendment proposals in need of more > > co-proposers > > > > I wrote: > > > >> among the charter amendment proposals listed on > >> http://igcaucus.org/informally-discussed-charter-amendments > >> I think it would be good to bring the following two to a vote together > >> with Avri's two amendment proposals (which have already achieved the > >> requirement of a sufficient number of co-proposers). > >> > >> Proposal of Jeremy and co-proposers on updating the reference to the > >> mailing list > >> > >> Proposal of Norbert and co-proposers on coordinator election dates > > > > Are these proposals really not getting any further co-proposers??? > > > > If someone doubts that the clarification of coordinator election dates > has > > some importance, please try to explain how the current text of our > charter > > is consistent with Sala's election having taken place in October 2011 and > > mine in January 2013. > > > > Greetings, > > Norbert > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > > 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 > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > > 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 > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From avri at acm.org Sat Jan 26 11:49:30 2013 From: avri at acm.org (Avri Doria) Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2013 11:49:30 -0500 Subject: [governance] RFC 6852: Affirmation of the Modern Paradigm for Standards In-Reply-To: <20130126141234.GA21789@sources.org> References: <20130126141234.GA21789@sources.org> Message-ID: On 26 Jan 2013, at 09:12, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote: > http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc6852.txt > > (It is the OpenStand declaration, republished as a RFC. Key words: > standards, IETF, ITU, IEEE, W3C...) It is a good document. At end thee is a call: " 4. Call for Endorsement We invite other standards organizations, governments, corporations and technology innovators globally to support these principles. You can publicly show your support at . " While the IGC is not among the : " standards organizations, governments, corporations and technology innovators" and while it is unfortunate that they neglected to call for support from civil society (a blind spot which I beleive often gets in way of getting civil society support and cooperation) Perhaps we should discuss supporting, or at least finding, a broad IGC consensus on this document. avri -------------- 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 From apisan at unam.mx Sat Jan 26 12:23:14 2013 From: apisan at unam.mx (Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Baruch) Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2013 17:23:14 +0000 Subject: [governance] Facebook spent $4 million to lobby U.S. lawmakers in 2012 In-Reply-To: <-8558355287633436504@unknownmsgid> References: <510086BE.6010100@ITforChange.net> <056f01cdfa49$375b4f60$a611ee20$@gmail.com> <51015DF8.6070803@gmail.com> <066a01cdfa5a$01b28610$05179230$@gmail.com> <5102AD28.9090901@ITforChange.net> <51034FAC.4040605@ITforChange.net> <51035219.9070200@ITforChange.net>,<-8558355287633436504@unknownmsgid> Message-ID: <6DCAB3E586E6A34FB17223DF8D8F0D3D5DC37165@W8-EX10MB.unam.local> Nick, "Folks, is tax policy really what people are interested in having an effect on in the IGC list? Is this a battle you really want to enter into, given the very real threats the open Internet faces today?" And world peace. Alejandro Pisanty - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Facultad de Química UNAM Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico +52-1-5541444475 FROM ABROAD +525541444475 DESDE MÉXICO SMS +525541444475 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 Nick Ashton-Hart [nashton at ccianet.org] Enviado el: sábado, 26 de enero de 2013 02:35 Hasta: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Guru गुरु Asunto: Re: [governance] Facebook spent $4 million to lobby U.S. lawmakers in 2012 Guru said: The scandalously low effective tax rates of the IT transnationals can also be seen as some kind of implicit subsidy ... and measures/experiments like that of the French Govt are required to help correct this situation - by reducing the lobbying power of these corporates and also getting the funding required by governments to support basic societal infrastructure, including soft infrastructure like public education and public health.. My reply: The rates being paid by IT companies are not different than other types of companies. For example, I believe GE paid effectively 14% tax globally last year. Corporate tax rates overall do not differentiate by sector - though, of course, some vertical markets do get exemptions and credits designed to encourage certain activities by them. If you believe that companies should pay more, that's fine - but to suggest that IT companies are particularly bad in some way does a disservice, I think, to the overall objective which many seek: reforming the tax system so that companies, in general, pay a larger share of tax. This is, by the way, extremely complex and there are powerful incentives for countries to incentivise FDI by, among other measures, favourable tax regimes. It will be incredibly difficult to get enough countries that are desirable markets for industry to sign up to a broad range of measures to synchronise taxes to produce the desired end - the incentives to attract FDI are simply very powerful. What the French are proposing (not for the first time) is not going to help anything; it is soapbox policy, designed for an internal audience of French people. Like the 75% tax on wealthy individuals they propose, it wouldn't raise enough money to solve France's real deficit issues; it would just make France even less competitive an economy than it already is. Folks, is tax policy really what people are interested in having an effect on in the IGC list? Is this a battle you really want to enter into, given the very real threats the open Internet faces today? -- Regards, Nick Ashton-Hart Need to meet with me? Schedule the time that suits us both here: http://meetme.so/nashton Sent from my one of my handheld thingies, please excuse linguistic mangling. On 26 Jan 2013, at 04:49, "Guru गुरु" > wrote: The scandalously low effective tax rates of the IT transnationals can also be seen as some kind of implicit subsidy ... and measures/experiments like that of the French Govt are required to help correct this situation - by reducing the lobbying power of these corporates and also getting the funding required by governments to support basic societal infrastructure, including soft infrastructure like public education and public health.. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From kerry at kdbsystems.com Sat Jan 26 12:26:47 2013 From: kerry at kdbsystems.com (Kerry Brown) Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2013 17:26:47 +0000 Subject: [governance] Facebook spent $4 million to lobby U.S. lawmakers in 2012 In-Reply-To: <6DCAB3E586E6A34FB17223DF8D8F0D3D5DC37165@W8-EX10MB.unam.local> References: <510086BE.6010100@ITforChange.net> <056f01cdfa49$375b4f60$a611ee20$@gmail.com> <51015DF8.6070803@gmail.com> <066a01cdfa5a$01b28610$05179230$@gmail.com> <5102AD28.9090901@ITforChange.net> <51034FAC.4040605@ITforChange.net> <51035219.9070200@ITforChange.net>,<-8558355287633436504@unknownmsgid> <6DCAB3E586E6A34FB17223DF8D8F0D3D5DC37165@W8-EX10MB.unam.local> Message-ID: +1 "Folks, is tax policy really what people are interested in having an effect on in the IGC list? Is this a battle you really want to enter into, given the very real threats the open Internet faces today?" And world peace. Alejandro Pisanty -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From kerry at kdbsystems.com Sat Jan 26 12:34:11 2013 From: kerry at kdbsystems.com (Kerry Brown) Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2013 17:34:11 +0000 Subject: [governance] RFC 6852: Affirmation of the Modern Paradigm for Standards In-Reply-To: <20130126141234.GA21789@sources.org> References: <20130126141234.GA21789@sources.org> Message-ID: I'd like to urge everyone to support this important statement. http://open-stand.org/ Kerry Brown > -----Original Message----- > From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance- > request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Stephane Bortzmeyer > Sent: January-26-13 6:13 AM > To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org > Subject: [governance] RFC 6852: Affirmation of the Modern Paradigm for > Standards > > http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc6852.txt > > (It is the OpenStand declaration, republished as a RFC. Key words: > standards, IETF, ITU, IEEE, W3C...) -------------- 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 From gurstein at gmail.com Sat Jan 26 12:34:52 2013 From: gurstein at gmail.com (michael gurstein) Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2013 09:34:52 -0800 Subject: [governance] RFC 6852: Affirmation of the Modern Paradigm for Standards--Some Comments Message-ID: <02cf01cdfbeb$73fed7e0$5bfc87a0$@gmail.com> Avri and Stephane, and all I gather that this is a "take it or leave it" i.e. no possibility for having input into the document? If there is a possibiity I would like to contribute my comments as interspersed below to a further revision of this document. Please note my comments as a to a document which I would otherwise be pleased to support... Affirmation of the Modern Paradigm for Standards Abstract On 29 August 2012, the leaders of the IEEE Standards Association, the IAB, the IETF, the Internet Society, and the W3C signed a statement affirming the importance of a jointly developed set of principles establishing a modern paradigm for global, open standards. These principles have become known as the "OpenStand" principles. This document contains the text of the affirmation that was signed. Status of This Memo This document is not an Internet Standards Track specification; it is published for informational purposes. This document is a product of the Internet Architecture Board (IAB) and represents information that the IAB has deemed valuable to provide for permanent record. It represents the consensus of the Internet Architecture Board (IAB). Documents approved for publication by the IAB are not a candidate for any level of Internet Standard; see Section 2 of RFC 5741. Information about the current status of this document, any errata, and how to provide feedback on it may be obtained at http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6852. RFC 6852 Modern Paradigm for Standards January 2013 Copyright Notice Copyright (c) 2013 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the document authors. All rights reserved. This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of publication of this document. Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect to this document. 1. Introduction On 29 August 2012, the leaders of the IEEE Standards Association, the IAB, the IETF, the Internet Society, and the W3C signed a statement affirming the importance of a jointly developed set of principles establishing a modern paradigm for global, open standards. These principles have become known as the "OpenStand" principles. Section 2 of this document describes the five OpenStand principles. Section 3 of this document contains the text of the signed affirmation of the five OpenStand principles. Section 4 contains a call for others to support the five OpenStand principles. 2. Modern Paradigm for Standards Over the past several decades, the global economy has realized a huge bounty due to the Internet and the World Wide Web. These could not have been possible without the innovations and standardization of many underlying technologies. This standardization occurred with great speed and effectiveness only because of key characteristics of a modern global standards paradigm. The affirmation below characterizes the principles that have led to this success as a means to ensure acceptance of standards activities that adhere to the principles. MG: AGREED... We embrace a modern paradigm for standards where the economics of global markets, fueled by technological advancements, drive global deployment of standards regardless of their formal status. MG: AGREED In this paradigm standards support interoperability, foster global competition, are developed through an open participatory process, and are voluntarily adopted globally. MG: AGREED These voluntary standards serve as building blocks for products and services targeted at meeting the needs of the market and consumer, thereby driving innovation. Innovation in turn contributes to the creation of new markets and the growth and expansion of existing markets. MG: DON'T THE STANDARDS ALSO AND PERHAPS MORE IMPORTANTLY, PROVIDE THE BUILDING BLOCK FOR PUBLIC SERVICES, SUPPORT THE PUBLIC INTEREST AND ENABLE THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE INTERNET AS A GLOBAL PUBLIC GOOD? Participation in the modern paradigm demands: 1. Cooperation. Respectful cooperation between standards organizations, whereby each respects the autonomy, integrity, processes, and intellectual property rules of the others. MG: AGREED 2. Adherence to principles. Adherence to the five fundamental principles of standards development: * Due process. Decisions are made with equity and fairness among participants. No one party dominates or guides standards development. Standards processes are transparent and opportunities exist to appeal decisions. Processes for periodic standards review and updating are well defined. * Broad consensus. Processes allow for all views to be considered and addressed, such that agreement can be found across a range of interests. * Transparency. Standards organizations provide advance public notice of proposed standards development activities, the scope of work to be undertaken, and conditions for participation. Easily accessible records of decisions and the materials used in reaching those decisions are provided. Public comment periods are provided before final standards approval and adoption. * Balance. Standards activities are not exclusively dominated by any particular person, company or interest group. * Openness. Standards processes are open to all interested and informed parties. MG: AGREED 3. Collective empowerment. Commitment by affirming standards organizations and their participants to collective empowerment by striving for standards that: * are chosen and defined based on technical merit, as judged by the contributed expertise of each participant; * provide global interoperability, scalability, stability, and resiliency; * enable global competition; MG: WHAT ABOUT ENABLING GLOBAL COOPERATION AS WELL AS COMPETITION? * serve as building blocks for further innovation; and * contribute to the creation of global communities, benefiting humanity. MG: WHAT ABOUT CONTRIBUTING TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST AND TO ENABLING THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE INTERNET AS A GLOBAL PUBLIC GOOD? 4. Availability. Standards specifications are made accessible to all for implementation and deployment. Affirming standards organizations have defined procedures to develop specifications that can be implemented under fair terms. Given market diversity, fair terms may vary from royalty-free to fair, reasonable, and non-discriminatory terms (FRAND). MG: WHAT ABOUT NON-MARKET BASED FORMS OF IMPLEMENTATION? 5. Voluntary adoption. Standards are voluntarily adopted and success is determined by the market. MG: IS SUCCESS IN THE MARKET THE ONLY POSSIBLE MEANS OF VALIDATION OF STANDARDS--HAVE THEIR POSSIBLE CONTRIBUTION TO ENHANCING THE GLOBAL PUBLIC GOOD/GLOBAL PUBLIC WELL-BEING BEEN CONSIDERED AS WELL? 3. Affirmation We embrace a modern paradigm for standards where the economics of global markets, fueled by technological advancements, drive global deployment of standards regardless of their formal status. MG: COULDN'T THE REALIZATION OF THE STANDARDS IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST BE EQUALLY, IF NOT MORE IMPORTANT, AS A PARADIGM DETERMINING DEPLOYMENT? In this paradigm standards support interoperability, foster global competition, are developed through an open participatory process, and are voluntarily adopted globally. These voluntary standards serve as building blocks for products and services targeted at meeting the needs of the market and consumer, thereby driving innovation. Innovation in turn contributes to the creation of new markets and the growth and expansion of existing markets. MG: COULD THIS PARADIGM NOT INCLUDE SUPPORTING GLOBAL COOPERATION AND PROVIDING BUILDING BLOCKS FOR DEVELOPMENTS IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST AND SUPPORTIVE OF THE PUBLIC GOOD. MG: SHOULD NOT THE SIGNIFICANCE OF STANDARDS AS SUPPORTIVE OF BROAD BASED INLUSION BE INCLUDED AS A FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLE--INCLUDING INCLUSION OF THOSE WITH PHYSICAL DISABILITIES, THOSE IN RURAL AND REMOTE LOCATION, THOSE WHO ARE SOCIALLY AND ECONOMICALLY MARGINALIZED? MIKE GURSTEIN By signing this statement, we affirm our support for and adherence to these principles. Lynn St.Amour President and CEO Internet Society Russ Housley Chair Internet Engineering Task Force Bernard Aboba Chair Internet Architecture Board Jeff Jaffe CEO W3C Steve Mills President IEEE Standards Association Housley, et al. Informational [Page 4] RFC 6852 Modern Paradigm for Standards January 2013 4. Call for Endorsement We invite other standards organizations, governments, corporations and technology innovators globally to support these principles. You can publicly show your support at . 5. Security Considerations Nothing in this document directly affects the security of the Internet. 6. IAB Members at Time of Approval Internet Architecture Board Members at the time this document was approved were: Bernard Aboba Jari Arkko Marc Blanchet Ross Callon Alissa Cooper Spencer Dawkins Joel Halpern Russ Housley David Kessens Danny McPherson Jon Peterson Dave Thaler Hannes Tschofenig Authors' Addresses Russ Housley EMail: housley at vigilsec.com Steve Mills EMail: s.mills at ieee.org Jeff Jaffe EMail: jeff at w3.org Bernard Aboba EMail: bernard_aboba at hotmail.com Lynn St.Amour EMail: st.amour at isoc.org -----Original Message----- From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Avri Doria Sent: Saturday, January 26, 2013 8:50 AM To: IGC Subject: Re: [governance] RFC 6852: Affirmation of the Modern Paradigm for Standards On 26 Jan 2013, at 09:12, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote: > http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc6852.txt > > (It is the OpenStand declaration, republished as a RFC. Key words: > standards, IETF, ITU, IEEE, W3C...) It is a good document. At end thee is a call: " 4. Call for Endorsement We invite other standards organizations, governments, corporations and technology innovators globally to support these principles. You can publicly show your support at < http://www.open-stand.org>. " While the IGC is not among the : " standards organizations, governments, corporations and technology innovators" and while it is unfortunate that they neglected to call for support from civil society (a blind spot which I beleive often gets in way of getting civil society support and cooperation) Perhaps we should discuss supporting, or at least finding, a broad IGC consensus on this document. avri -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From nashton at ccianet.org Sat Jan 26 12:39:43 2013 From: nashton at ccianet.org (Nick Ashton-Hart) Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2013 18:39:43 +0100 Subject: [governance] Facebook spent $4 million to lobby U.S. lawmakers in 2012 In-Reply-To: <6DCAB3E586E6A34FB17223DF8D8F0D3D5DC37165@W8-EX10MB.unam.local> References: <510086BE.6010100@ITforChange.net> <056f01cdfa49$375b4f60$a611ee20$@gmail.com> <51015DF8.6070803@gmail.com> <066a01cdfa5a$01b28610$05179230$@gmail.com> <5102AD28.9090901@ITforChange.net> <51034FAC.4040605@ITforChange.net> <51035219.9070200@ITforChange.net>,<-8558355287633436504@unknownmsgid> <6DCAB3E586E6A34FB17223DF8D8F0D3D5DC37165@W8-EX10MB.unam.local> Message-ID: <9D6A1F3E-A25B-4EB4-9DE1-4D774600D40E@ccianet.org> Well, if we are going for world peace, then that's a whole different story, count me in! ;) On 26 Jan 2013, at 18:23, "Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Baruch" wrote: > Nick, > > "Folks, is tax policy really what people are interested in having an effect on in the IGC list? Is this a battle you really want to enter into, given the very real threats the open Internet faces today?" > > And world peace. > > Alejandro Pisanty > > > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - > Dr. Alejandro Pisanty > Facultad de Química UNAM > Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico > > +52-1-5541444475 FROM ABROAD > > +525541444475 DESDE MÉXICO SMS +525541444475 > 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 Nick Ashton-Hart [nashton at ccianet.org] > Enviado el: sábado, 26 de enero de 2013 02:35 > Hasta: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Guru गुरु > Asunto: Re: [governance] Facebook spent $4 million to lobby U.S. lawmakers in 2012 > > Guru said: > > The scandalously low effective tax rates of the IT transnationals can also be seen as some kind of implicit subsidy ... and measures/experiments like that of the French Govt are required to help correct this situation - by reducing the lobbying power of these corporates and also getting the funding required by governments to support basic societal infrastructure, including soft infrastructure like public education and public health.. > > My reply: > > The rates being paid by IT companies are not different than other types of companies. For example, I believe GE paid effectively 14% tax globally last year. Corporate tax rates overall do not differentiate by sector - though, of course, some vertical markets do get exemptions and credits designed to encourage certain activities by them. > > If you believe that companies should pay more, that's fine - but to suggest that IT companies are particularly bad in some way does a disservice, I think, to the overall objective which many seek: reforming the tax system so that companies, in general, pay a larger share of tax. > > This is, by the way, extremely complex and there are powerful incentives for countries to incentivise FDI by, among other measures, favourable tax regimes. It will be incredibly difficult to get enough countries that are desirable markets for industry to sign up to a broad range of measures to synchronise taxes to produce the desired end - the incentives to attract FDI are simply very powerful. > > What the French are proposing (not for the first time) is not going to help anything; it is soapbox policy, designed for an internal audience of French people. Like the 75% tax on wealthy individuals they propose, it wouldn't raise enough money to solve France's real deficit issues; it would just make France even less competitive an economy than it already is. > > Folks, is tax policy really what people are interested in having an effect on in the IGC list? Is this a battle you really want to enter into, given the very real threats the open Internet faces today? > > -- > Regards, > > Nick Ashton-Hart > > Need to meet with me? Schedule the time that suits us both here: http://meetme.so/nashton > > Sent from my one of my handheld thingies, please excuse linguistic mangling. > > On 26 Jan 2013, at 04:49, "Guru गुरु" wrote: > >> The scandalously low effective tax rates of the IT transnationals can also be seen as some kind of implicit subsidy ... and measures/experiments like that of the French Govt are required to help correct this situation - by reducing the lobbying power of these corporates and also getting the funding required by governments to support basic societal infrastructure, including soft infrastructure like public education and public health.. > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From dogwallah at gmail.com Sat Jan 26 12:39:17 2013 From: dogwallah at gmail.com (McTim) Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2013 12:39:17 -0500 Subject: [governance] RFC 6852: Affirmation of the Modern Paradigm for Standards In-Reply-To: References: <20130126141234.GA21789@sources.org> Message-ID: On Sat, Jan 26, 2013 at 12:34 PM, Kerry Brown wrote: > I'd like to urge everyone to support this important statement. I've already signed on, I hope IGC can as well. -- 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 From gurstein at gmail.com Sat Jan 26 12:47:10 2013 From: gurstein at gmail.com (michael gurstein) Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2013 09:47:10 -0800 Subject: [governance] Facebook spent $4 million to lobby U.S. lawmakers in 2012 In-Reply-To: <6DCAB3E586E6A34FB17223DF8D8F0D3D5DC37165@W8-EX10MB.unam.local> References: <510086BE.6010100@ITforChange.net> <056f01cdfa49$375b4f60$a611ee20$@gmail.com> <51015DF8.6070803@gmail.com> <066a01cdfa5a$01b28610$05179230$@gmail.com> <5102AD28.9090901@ITforChange.net> <51034FAC.4040605@ITforChange.net> <51035219.9070200@ITforChange.net>,<-8558355287633436504@unknownmsgid> <6DCAB3E586E6A34FB17223DF8D8F0D3D5DC37165@W8-EX10MB.unam.local> Message-ID: <02d401cdfbed$2b918370$82b48a50$@gmail.com> These continuing sniggering comments concerning "world peace" are to my mind unbecoming… And in fact, without using those exact terms (did anyone in fact, directly refer to "world peace") issues of the governing the Internet in the global public interest (or not) are very very much issues of concern to this group and if anyone questions whether they are directly pertinent to our immediate discussion I would refer you to my comments on the document that Stephane and Avri have just now circulated for sign-on to the IGC. M From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Baruch Sent: Saturday, January 26, 2013 9:23 AM To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Nick Ashton-Hart; Guru गुरु Subject: RE: [governance] Facebook spent $4 million to lobby U.S. lawmakers in 2012 Nick, "Folks, is tax policy really what people are interested in having an effect on in the IGC list? Is this a battle you really want to enter into, given the very real threats the open Internet faces today?" And world peace. Alejandro Pisanty - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Facultad de Química UNAM Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico +52-1-5541444475 FROM ABROAD +525541444475 DESDE MÉXICO SMS +525541444475 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 Nick Ashton-Hart [nashton at ccianet.org] Enviado el: sábado, 26 de enero de 2013 02:35 Hasta: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Guru गुरु Asunto: Re: [governance] Facebook spent $4 million to lobby U.S. lawmakers in 2012 Guru said: The scandalously low effective tax rates of the IT transnationals can also be seen as some kind of implicit subsidy ... and measures/experiments like that of the French Govt are required to help correct this situation - by reducing the lobbying power of these corporates and also getting the funding required by governments to support basic societal infrastructure, including soft infrastructure like public education and public health.. My reply: The rates being paid by IT companies are not different than other types of companies. For example, I believe GE paid effectively 14% tax globally last year. Corporate tax rates overall do not differentiate by sector - though, of course, some vertical markets do get exemptions and credits designed to encourage certain activities by them. If you believe that companies should pay more, that's fine - but to suggest that IT companies are particularly bad in some way does a disservice, I think, to the overall objective which many seek: reforming the tax system so that companies, in general, pay a larger share of tax. This is, by the way, extremely complex and there are powerful incentives for countries to incentivise FDI by, among other measures, favourable tax regimes. It will be incredibly difficult to get enough countries that are desirable markets for industry to sign up to a broad range of measures to synchronise taxes to produce the desired end - the incentives to attract FDI are simply very powerful. What the French are proposing (not for the first time) is not going to help anything; it is soapbox policy, designed for an internal audience of French people. Like the 75% tax on wealthy individuals they propose, it wouldn't raise enough money to solve France's real deficit issues; it would just make France even less competitive an economy than it already is. Folks, is tax policy really what people are interested in having an effect on in the IGC list? Is this a battle you really want to enter into, given the very real threats the open Internet faces today? -- Regards, Nick Ashton-Hart Need to meet with me? Schedule the time that suits us both here: http://meetme.so/nashton Sent from my one of my handheld thingies, please excuse linguistic mangling. On 26 Jan 2013, at 04:49, "Guru गुरु" wrote: The scandalously low effective tax rates of the IT transnationals can also be seen as some kind of implicit subsidy ... and measures/experiments like that of the French Govt are required to help correct this situation - by reducing the lobbying power of these corporates and also getting the funding required by governments to support basic societal infrastructure, including soft infrastructure like public education and public health.. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From dogwallah at gmail.com Sat Jan 26 12:52:41 2013 From: dogwallah at gmail.com (McTim) Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2013 12:52:41 -0500 Subject: [governance] Facebook spent $4 million to lobby U.S. lawmakers in 2012 In-Reply-To: <02d401cdfbed$2b918370$82b48a50$@gmail.com> References: <510086BE.6010100@ITforChange.net> <056f01cdfa49$375b4f60$a611ee20$@gmail.com> <51015DF8.6070803@gmail.com> <066a01cdfa5a$01b28610$05179230$@gmail.com> <5102AD28.9090901@ITforChange.net> <51034FAC.4040605@ITforChange.net> <51035219.9070200@ITforChange.net> <-8558355287633436504@unknownmsgid> <6DCAB3E586E6A34FB17223DF8D8F0D3D5DC37165@W8-EX10MB.unam.local> <02d401cdfbed$2b918370$82b48a50$@gmail.com> Message-ID: Do we have a definition of global public interest? On Sat, Jan 26, 2013 at 12:47 PM, michael gurstein wrote: > These continuing sniggering comments concerning "world peace" are to my mind > unbecoming… > > > > And in fact, without using those exact terms (did anyone in fact, directly > refer to "world peace") issues of the governing the Internet in the global > public interest (or not) are very very much issues of concern to this group > and if anyone questions whether they are directly pertinent to our immediate > discussion I would refer you to my comments on the document that Stephane > and Avri have just now circulated for sign-on to the IGC. > > > > M > > > > From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org > [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Dr. Alejandro > Pisanty Baruch > Sent: Saturday, January 26, 2013 9:23 AM > To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Nick Ashton-Hart; Guru गुरु > Subject: RE: [governance] Facebook spent $4 million to lobby U.S. lawmakers > in 2012 > > > > Nick, > > > > "Folks, is tax policy really what people are interested in having an effect > on in the IGC list? Is this a battle you really want to enter into, given > the very real threats the open Internet faces today?" > > > > And world peace. > > > > Alejandro Pisanty > > > > > > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - > Dr. Alejandro Pisanty > Facultad de Química UNAM > > Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico > > > > +52-1-5541444475 FROM ABROAD > > +525541444475 DESDE MÉXICO SMS +525541444475 > 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 Nick Ashton-Hart > [nashton at ccianet.org] > Enviado el: sábado, 26 de enero de 2013 02:35 > Hasta: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Guru गुरु > Asunto: Re: [governance] Facebook spent $4 million to lobby U.S. lawmakers > in 2012 > > Guru said: > > > > The scandalously low effective tax rates of the IT transnationals can also > be seen as some kind of implicit subsidy ... and measures/experiments like > that of the French Govt are required to help correct this situation - by > reducing the lobbying power of these corporates and also getting the funding > required by governments to support basic societal infrastructure, including > soft infrastructure like public education and public health.. > > > > My reply: > > > > The rates being paid by IT companies are not different than other types of > companies. For example, I believe GE paid effectively 14% tax globally last > year. Corporate tax rates overall do not differentiate by sector - though, > of course, some vertical markets do get exemptions and credits designed to > encourage certain activities by them. > > > > If you believe that companies should pay more, that's fine - but to suggest > that IT companies are particularly bad in some way does a disservice, I > think, to the overall objective which many seek: reforming the tax system so > that companies, in general, pay a larger share of tax. > > > > This is, by the way, extremely complex and there are powerful incentives for > countries to incentivise FDI by, among other measures, favourable tax > regimes. It will be incredibly difficult to get enough countries that are > desirable markets for industry to sign up to a broad range of measures to > synchronise taxes to produce the desired end - the incentives to attract FDI > are simply very powerful. > > > > What the French are proposing (not for the first time) is not going to help > anything; it is soapbox policy, designed for an internal audience of French > people. Like the 75% tax on wealthy individuals they propose, it wouldn't > raise enough money to solve France's real deficit issues; it would just make > France even less competitive an economy than it already is. > > > > Folks, is tax policy really what people are interested in having an effect > on in the IGC list? Is this a battle you really want to enter into, given > the very real threats the open Internet faces today? > > -- > > Regards, > > > > Nick Ashton-Hart > > > > Need to meet with me? Schedule the time that suits us both here: > http://meetme.so/nashton > > > > Sent from my one of my handheld thingies, please excuse linguistic mangling. > > > On 26 Jan 2013, at 04:49, "Guru गुरु" wrote: > > The scandalously low effective tax rates of the IT transnationals can also > be seen as some kind of implicit subsidy ... and measures/experiments like > that of the French Govt are required to help correct this situation - by > reducing the lobbying power of these corporates and also getting the funding > required by governments to support basic societal infrastructure, including > soft infrastructure like public education and public health.. > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > -- 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 From nashton at ccianet.org Sat Jan 26 13:39:06 2013 From: nashton at ccianet.org (Nick Ashton-Hart) Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2013 19:39:06 +0100 Subject: [governance] Facebook spent $4 million to lobby U.S. lawmakers in 2012 In-Reply-To: <02d401cdfbed$2b918370$82b48a50$@gmail.com> References: <510086BE.6010100@ITforChange.net> <056f01cdfa49$375b4f60$a611ee20$@gmail.com> <51015DF8.6070803@gmail.com> <066a01cdfa5a$01b28610$05179230$@gmail.com> <5102AD28.9090901@ITforChange.net> <51034FAC.4040605@ITforChange.net> <51035219.9070200@ITforChange.net>,<-8558355287633436504@unknownmsgid> <6DCAB3E586E6A34FB17223DF8D8F0D3D5DC37165@W8-EX10MB.unam.local> <02d401cdfbed$2b918370$82b48a50$@gmail.com> Message-ID: <2D8BACA7-7373-47FF-A871-DC98FD31085D@ccianet.org> A little levity never hurt anyone - especially on a Saturday night :) On 26 Jan 2013, at 18:47, "michael gurstein" wrote: > These continuing sniggering comments concerning "world peace" are to my mind unbecoming… > > And in fact, without using those exact terms (did anyone in fact, directly refer to "world peace") issues of the governing the Internet in the global public interest (or not) are very very much issues of concern to this group and if anyone questions whether they are directly pertinent to our immediate discussion I would refer you to my comments on the document that Stephane and Avri have just now circulated for sign-on to the IGC. > > M > > From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Baruch > Sent: Saturday, January 26, 2013 9:23 AM > To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Nick Ashton-Hart; Guru गुरु > Subject: RE: [governance] Facebook spent $4 million to lobby U.S. lawmakers in 2012 > > Nick, > > "Folks, is tax policy really what people are interested in having an effect on in the IGC list? Is this a battle you really want to enter into, given the very real threats the open Internet faces today?" > > And world peace. > > Alejandro Pisanty > > > > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - > Dr. Alejandro Pisanty > Facultad de Química UNAM > Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico > > > +52-1-5541444475 FROM ABROAD > > +525541444475 DESDE MÉXICO SMS +525541444475 > 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 Nick Ashton-Hart [nashton at ccianet.org] > Enviado el: sábado, 26 de enero de 2013 02:35 > Hasta: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Guru गुरु > Asunto: Re: [governance] Facebook spent $4 million to lobby U.S. lawmakers in 2012 > > Guru said: > > The scandalously low effective tax rates of the IT transnationals can also be seen as some kind of implicit subsidy ... and measures/experiments like that of the French Govt are required to help correct this situation - by reducing the lobbying power of these corporates and also getting the funding required by governments to support basic societal infrastructure, including soft infrastructure like public education and public health.. > > My reply: > > The rates being paid by IT companies are not different than other types of companies. For example, I believe GE paid effectively 14% tax globally last year. Corporate tax rates overall do not differentiate by sector - though, of course, some vertical markets do get exemptions and credits designed to encourage certain activities by them. > > If you believe that companies should pay more, that's fine - but to suggest that IT companies are particularly bad in some way does a disservice, I think, to the overall objective which many seek: reforming the tax system so that companies, in general, pay a larger share of tax. > > This is, by the way, extremely complex and there are powerful incentives for countries to incentivise FDI by, among other measures, favourable tax regimes. It will be incredibly difficult to get enough countries that are desirable markets for industry to sign up to a broad range of measures to synchronise taxes to produce the desired end - the incentives to attract FDI are simply very powerful. > > What the French are proposing (not for the first time) is not going to help anything; it is soapbox policy, designed for an internal audience of French people. Like the 75% tax on wealthy individuals they propose, it wouldn't raise enough money to solve France's real deficit issues; it would just make France even less competitive an economy than it already is. > > Folks, is tax policy really what people are interested in having an effect on in the IGC list? Is this a battle you really want to enter into, given the very real threats the open Internet faces today? > > -- > Regards, > > Nick Ashton-Hart > > Need to meet with me? Schedule the time that suits us both here: http://meetme.so/nashton > > Sent from my one of my handheld thingies, please excuse linguistic mangling. > > On 26 Jan 2013, at 04:49, "Guru गुरु" wrote: > > The scandalously low effective tax rates of the IT transnationals can also be seen as some kind of implicit subsidy ... and measures/experiments like that of the French Govt are required to help correct this situation - by reducing the lobbying power of these corporates and also getting the funding required by governments to support basic societal infrastructure, including soft infrastructure like public education and public health.. > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From avri at acm.org Sat Jan 26 14:03:02 2013 From: avri at acm.org (Avri Doria) Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2013 14:03:02 -0500 Subject: [governance] RFC 6852: Affirmation of the Modern Paradigm for Standards--Some Comments In-Reply-To: <02cf01cdfbeb$73fed7e0$5bfc87a0$@gmail.com> References: <02cf01cdfbeb$73fed7e0$5bfc87a0$@gmail.com> Message-ID: <8AEFBDCD-9F80-487D-AB4E-C7FE71DDFF46@acm.org> (removed the cc list) On 26 Jan 2013, at 12:34, michael gurstein wrote: > I gather that this is a "take it or leave it" i.e. no possibility for having input into the document? If there is a possibiity I would like to contribute my comments as interspersed below to a further revision of this document. > Well i think "take it or leave it" is a rather negative way to put it, but that statement is indeed published as an unchangeable RFC (though, for completeness sake, I suppose an errata could be published). And I certainly was not saying "take it or leave it", nor do I expect that the authors were. I have not had time to study your comments yet, but I suppose the IGC could do anything it pleased ranging from: - ignore it completely - they ignored us, we can ignore them - put out a statement saying we support but ... - and not sign - put out a statement saying we support but ... - and sign - sign on though we have some minor reservations - lots of other possible actions I noticed that the signing place has: " Voice Your Support There are two ways to support OpenStand. You maypublicly express your support by filling out our "stand with us" form. You may also submit a quote as a formal endorsement from your organization. " I am sure IGC could voice its support but ... So no, I don't think it is a "take it or leave it" avri -------------- 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 From nb at bollow.ch Sat Jan 26 14:19:57 2013 From: nb at bollow.ch (Norbert Bollow) Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2013 20:19:57 +0100 Subject: [governance] today's Wash Post editorial In-Reply-To: References: <50FEA64A.4090805@itforchange.net> <51029240.5020209@itforchange.net> <51029C44.9050501@itforchange.net> <06EF7F5E019BB34DB01EDC2DB0588A9F0F2B24B5@BL2PRD0810MB349.namprd08.prod.outlook.com> <5102AAE7.6010109@itforchange.net> <8CFC92E8FE2B559-241C-104DC@webmail-d146.sysops.aol.com> <20130125191649.1d5adc7d@quill.bollow.ch> <20130125203137.45b9cdfc@quill.bollow.ch> <20130126000416.5b6abeed@quill.bollow.ch> Message-ID: <20130126201957.7624eea1@quill.bollow.ch> McTim wrote: > On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 6:04 PM, Norbert Bollow wrote: > > McTim wrote: > >> As they did in the rojadirecta case, they would go to the registry > > If the registry is outside the US, like Rojadirecta was, how would > > they "go to the registry"? > > the registries were in the U.S. in the rojadirecta case!! That's exactly the point. In the Rojadirecta case, the US government wanted to take action against a Spanish company that was acting in a way that was legal in Spain. But rojadirecta.com needs entries in a dns zone (specifically, the .com zone) maintained by a US company (Verisign). So the US government served Verisign with a warrant that had the effect of disabling rojadirecta.com. In the hypothetical, a gtld registry, say for .gratis, is outside the US, operating legally under the rules of the country where it is based, but the US government comes to the conclusion that the business of that gtld registry consists to a significant part in benefiting from infringements on "intellectual property rights" of US corporations. In that kind of situation, I'd definitely expect the US government to at least consider serving a warrant intended to disable .gratis to whoever in their view is in charge of maintaining the root zone! As the number of gtlds will be increasing dramatically, maintenance of the root zone will become much more like operating a registry than it used to be. And I'm not aware of any reason to assume that the US government wouldn't expect to have at least the same kind of rights with regard to the root zone that they successfully exercised with regard to the .com zone. Greetings, Norbert -------------- 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 From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com Sat Jan 26 14:35:25 2013 From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro) Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2013 07:35:25 +1200 Subject: [governance] Re: New Cyber Security Bill in US Senate In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Dear All, I wrote an opinion piece on this, see: http://www.circleid.com/posts/20130126_pandoras_box_new_us_cyber_security_bills_worm_hole_internet/ Kind Regards, Sala On Sat, Jan 26, 2013 at 8:53 AM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro < salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com> wrote: > Dear All, > > The US Senate has introduced a new Cybersecurity Bill through Senators > John D. (Jay) Rockefeller IV, Chairman of the Senate Commerce, Science, and > Transportation Committee, Tom Carper, incoming Chairman of the Senate > Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, and Dianne Feinstein, > Chairman of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence where they made a > Press Release, see: > http://commerce.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?p=PressReleases&ContentRecord_id=7a7124d7-190c-4160-abf3-4012c2db737c > > To see the Bill, visit: > http://commerce.senate.gov/public/?a=Files.Serve&File_id=b678eb9a-b5c1-4540-aca3-3e857c7627da > > This is interesting and relevant as far as it pertains to critical > information infrastructure that the US considers to be part of the US > Infrastructure. Whilst the models point to public private collaboration > which makes sense because it is the private sector that controls much of > the infrastructure anyway except in situations where if there were a State > of Emergency and the rights to control/access infrastructure by the State > and it has its challenges. Aside from the public private model there should > be room for civil society in the equation as someone has to speak out and > act as a watchdog in times when it is needed. > > Kind Regards, > > -- > Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala > P.O. Box 17862 > Suva > Fiji > > Twitter: @SalanietaT > Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro > Tel: +679 3544828 > Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 > > > > -- Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala P.O. Box 17862 Suva Fiji Twitter: @SalanietaT Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro Tel: +679 3544828 Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From drc at virtualized.org Sat Jan 26 14:44:50 2013 From: drc at virtualized.org (David Conrad) Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2013 20:44:50 +0100 Subject: [governance] today's Wash Post editorial In-Reply-To: <20130126201957.7624eea1@quill.bollow.ch> References: <50FEA64A.4090805@itforchange.net> <51029240.5020209@itforchange.net> <51029C44.9050501@itforchange.net> <06EF7F5E019BB34DB01EDC2DB0588A9F0F2B24B5@BL2PRD0810MB349.namprd08.prod.outlook.com> <5102AAE7.6010109@itforchange.net> <8CFC92E8FE2B559-241C-104DC@webmail-d146.sysops.aol.com> <20130125191649.1d5adc7d@quill.bollow.ch> <20130125203137.45b9cdfc@quill.bollow.ch> <20130126000416.5b6abeed@quill.bollow.ch> <20130126201957.7624eea1@quill.bollow.ch> Message-ID: Norbert, On Jan 26, 2013, at 8:19 PM, Norbert Bollow wrote: > In the Rojadirecta case, the US government wanted to take action > against a Spanish company that was acting in a way that was legal in > Spain. But in violation of the law in the US. > But rojadirecta.com needs entries in a dns zone (specifically, > the .com zone) Why did Rojadirecta need a name in .COM and thereby subject themselves to US law? There are a number of TLDs that clearly are not subject to US law, including .ES. > In > that kind of situation, I'd definitely expect the US government to at > least consider serving a warrant intended to disable .gratis to whoever > in their view is in charge of maintaining the root zone! Why hasn't the USG removed entries for .KP, .SY, .IR, etc? > And I'm not aware of any reason to assume that the US > government wouldn't expect to have at least the same kind of rights with > regard to the root zone that they successfully exercised with regard > to the .com zone. Any reason other than the fact the USG hasn't treated the root zone the same as .COM in the past and if they did so, they would be undermining pretty much every position they've taken on Internet governance since the creation of the white/green paper? Regards, -drc -------------- 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 From lmcknigh at syr.edu Sat Jan 26 15:12:11 2013 From: lmcknigh at syr.edu (Lee W McKnight) Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2013 20:12:11 +0000 Subject: [governance] RFC 6852: Affirmation of the Modern Paradigm for Standards--Some Comments In-Reply-To: <02cf01cdfbeb$73fed7e0$5bfc87a0$@gmail.com> References: <02cf01cdfbeb$73fed7e0$5bfc87a0$@gmail.com> Message-ID: <77A59FC9477004489D44DE7FC6840E7B1B2F58@SUEX10-mbx-08.ad.syr.edu> Hey Michael, Points well taken, as are Avri's comments. There is also a Third Way ; ) For IGC's position, I might suggest we support RFC 6852 since it is better than its absence; perhaps taking time to follow whatever procedure to try to formally include some of Michael's language. An offer of a quote from a standards-knowledgable co-coordinator like Norbert on behalf of IGC might be well-received, eve if it includes some form of 'but...' along the lines of Michael's additions. Finally, fyi WiGiT v0.2 open spec draft already folds in the 'official' open standards statement; which we will refine as Michael suggests. I will share v0.2 with the list upon its Feb. 1 or latest Feb. 4 release. Lee ________________________________ From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] on behalf of michael gurstein [gurstein at gmail.com] Sent: Saturday, January 26, 2013 12:34 PM To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; 'Avri Doria' Cc: housley at vigilsec.com; s.mills at ieee.org; jeff at w3.org; bernard_aboba at hotmail.com; st.amour at isoc.org Subject: RE: [governance] RFC 6852: Affirmation of the Modern Paradigm for Standards--Some Comments Avri and Stephane, and all I gather that this is a "take it or leave it" i.e. no possibility for having input into the document? If there is a possibiity I would like to contribute my comments as interspersed below to a further revision of this document. Please note my comments as a to a document which I would otherwise be pleased to support... Affirmation of the Modern Paradigm for Standards Abstract On 29 August 2012, the leaders of the IEEE Standards Association, the IAB, the IETF, the Internet Society, and the W3C signed a statement affirming the importance of a jointly developed set of principles establishing a modern paradigm for global, open standards. These principles have become known as the "OpenStand" principles. This document contains the text of the affirmation that was signed. Status of This Memo This document is not an Internet Standards Track specification; it is published for informational purposes. This document is a product of the Internet Architecture Board (IAB) and represents information that the IAB has deemed valuable to provide for permanent record. It represents the consensus of the Internet Architecture Board (IAB). Documents approved for publication by the IAB are not a candidate for any level of Internet Standard; see Section 2 of RFC 5741. Information about the current status of this document, any errata, and how to provide feedback on it may be obtained at http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6852. RFC 6852 Modern Paradigm for Standards January 2013 Copyright Notice Copyright (c) 2013 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the document authors. All rights reserved. This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of publication of this document. Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect to this document. 1. Introduction On 29 August 2012, the leaders of the IEEE Standards Association, the IAB, the IETF, the Internet Society, and the W3C signed a statement affirming the importance of a jointly developed set of principles establishing a modern paradigm for global, open standards. These principles have become known as the "OpenStand" principles. Section 2 of this document describes the five OpenStand principles. Section 3 of this document contains the text of the signed affirmation of the five OpenStand principles. Section 4 contains a call for others to support the five OpenStand principles. 2. Modern Paradigm for Standards Over the past several decades, the global economy has realized a huge bounty due to the Internet and the World Wide Web. These could not have been possible without the innovations and standardization of many underlying technologies. This standardization occurred with great speed and effectiveness only because of key characteristics of a modern global standards paradigm. The affirmation below characterizes the principles that have led to this success as a means to ensure acceptance of standards activities that adhere to the principles. MG: AGREED... We embrace a modern paradigm for standards where the economics of global markets, fueled by technological advancements, drive global deployment of standards regardless of their formal status. MG: AGREED In this paradigm standards support interoperability, foster global competition, are developed through an open participatory process, and are voluntarily adopted globally. MG: AGREED These voluntary standards serve as building blocks for products and services targeted at meeting the needs of the market and consumer, thereby driving innovation. Innovation in turn contributes to the creation of new markets and the growth and expansion of existing markets. MG: DON'T THE STANDARDS ALSO AND PERHAPS MORE IMPORTANTLY, PROVIDE THE BUILDING BLOCK FOR PUBLIC SERVICES, SUPPORT THE PUBLIC INTEREST AND ENABLE THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE INTERNET AS A GLOBAL PUBLIC GOOD? Participation in the modern paradigm demands: 1. Cooperation. Respectful cooperation between standards organizations, whereby each respects the autonomy, integrity, processes, and intellectual property rules of the others. MG: AGREED 2. Adherence to principles. Adherence to the five fundamental principles of standards development: * Due process. Decisions are made with equity and fairness among participants. No one party dominates or guides standards development. Standards processes are transparent and opportunities exist to appeal decisions. Processes for periodic standards review and updating are well defined. * Broad consensus. Processes allow for all views to be considered and addressed, such that agreement can be found across a range of interests. * Transparency. Standards organizations provide advance public notice of proposed standards development activities, the scope of work to be undertaken, and conditions for participation. Easily accessible records of decisions and the materials used in reaching those decisions are provided. Public comment periods are provided before final standards approval and adoption. * Balance. Standards activities are not exclusively dominated by any particular person, company or interest group. * Openness. Standards processes are open to all interested and informed parties. MG: AGREED 3. Collective empowerment. Commitment by affirming standards organizations and their participants to collective empowerment by striving for standards that: * are chosen and defined based on technical merit, as judged by the contributed expertise of each participant; * provide global interoperability, scalability, stability, and resiliency; * enable global competition; MG: WHAT ABOUT ENABLING GLOBAL COOPERATION AS WELL AS COMPETITION? * serve as building blocks for further innovation; and * contribute to the creation of global communities, benefiting humanity. MG: WHAT ABOUT CONTRIBUTING TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST AND TO ENABLING THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE INTERNET AS A GLOBAL PUBLIC GOOD? 4. Availability. Standards specifications are made accessible to all for implementation and deployment. Affirming standards organizations have defined procedures to develop specifications that can be implemented under fair terms. Given market diversity, fair terms may vary from royalty-free to fair, reasonable, and non-discriminatory terms (FRAND). MG: WHAT ABOUT NON-MARKET BASED FORMS OF IMPLEMENTATION? 5. Voluntary adoption. Standards are voluntarily adopted and success is determined by the market. MG: IS SUCCESS IN THE MARKET THE ONLY POSSIBLE MEANS OF VALIDATION OF STANDARDS--HAVE THEIR POSSIBLE CONTRIBUTION TO ENHANCING THE GLOBAL PUBLIC GOOD/GLOBAL PUBLIC WELL-BEING BEEN CONSIDERED AS WELL? 3. Affirmation We embrace a modern paradigm for standards where the economics of global markets, fueled by technological advancements, drive global deployment of standards regardless of their formal status. MG: COULDN'T THE REALIZATION OF THE STANDARDS IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST BE EQUALLY, IF NOT MORE IMPORTANT, AS A PARADIGM DETERMINING DEPLOYMENT? In this paradigm standards support interoperability, foster global competition, are developed through an open participatory process, and are voluntarily adopted globally. These voluntary standards serve as building blocks for products and services targeted at meeting the needs of the market and consumer, thereby driving innovation. Innovation in turn contributes to the creation of new markets and the growth and expansion of existing markets. MG: COULD THIS PARADIGM NOT INCLUDE SUPPORTING GLOBAL COOPERATION AND PROVIDING BUILDING BLOCKS FOR DEVELOPMENTS IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST AND SUPPORTIVE OF THE PUBLIC GOOD. MG: SHOULD NOT THE SIGNIFICANCE OF STANDARDS AS SUPPORTIVE OF BROAD BASED INLUSION BE INCLUDED AS A FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLE--INCLUDING INCLUSION OF THOSE WITH PHYSICAL DISABILITIES, THOSE IN RURAL AND REMOTE LOCATION, THOSE WHO ARE SOCIALLY AND ECONOMICALLY MARGINALIZED? MIKE GURSTEIN By signing this statement, we affirm our support for and adherence to these principles. Lynn St.Amour President and CEO Internet Society Russ Housley Chair Internet Engineering Task Force Bernard Aboba Chair Internet Architecture Board Jeff Jaffe CEO W3C Steve Mills President IEEE Standards Association Housley, et al. Informational [Page 4] RFC 6852 Modern Paradigm for Standards January 2013 4. Call for Endorsement We invite other standards organizations, governments, corporations and technology innovators globally to support these principles. You can publicly show your support at . 5. Security Considerations Nothing in this document directly affects the security of the Internet. 6. IAB Members at Time of Approval Internet Architecture Board Members at the time this document was approved were: Bernard Aboba Jari Arkko Marc Blanchet Ross Callon Alissa Cooper Spencer Dawkins Joel Halpern Russ Housley David Kessens Danny McPherson Jon Peterson Dave Thaler Hannes Tschofenig Authors' Addresses Russ Housley EMail: housley at vigilsec.com Steve Mills EMail: s.mills at ieee.org Jeff Jaffe EMail: jeff at w3.org Bernard Aboba EMail: bernard_aboba at hotmail.com Lynn St.Amour EMail: st.amour at isoc.org -----Original Message----- From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Avri Doria Sent: Saturday, January 26, 2013 8:50 AM To: IGC Subject: Re: [governance] RFC 6852: Affirmation of the Modern Paradigm for Standards On 26 Jan 2013, at 09:12, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote: > http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc6852.txt > > (It is the OpenStand declaration, republished as a RFC. Key words: > standards, IETF, ITU, IEEE, W3C...) It is a good document. At end thee is a call: " 4. Call for Endorsement We invite other standards organizations, governments, corporations and technology innovators globally to support these principles. You can publicly show your support at . " While the IGC is not among the : " standards organizations, governments, corporations and technology innovators" and while it is unfortunate that they neglected to call for support from civil society (a blind spot which I beleive often gets in way of getting civil society support and cooperation) Perhaps we should discuss supporting, or at least finding, a broad IGC consensus on this document. avri -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From dogwallah at gmail.com Sat Jan 26 15:23:26 2013 From: dogwallah at gmail.com (McTim) Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2013 15:23:26 -0500 Subject: [governance] today's Wash Post editorial In-Reply-To: <20130126201957.7624eea1@quill.bollow.ch> References: <50FEA64A.4090805@itforchange.net> <51029240.5020209@itforchange.net> <51029C44.9050501@itforchange.net> <06EF7F5E019BB34DB01EDC2DB0588A9F0F2B24B5@BL2PRD0810MB349.namprd08.prod.outlook.com> <5102AAE7.6010109@itforchange.net> <8CFC92E8FE2B559-241C-104DC@webmail-d146.sysops.aol.com> <20130125191649.1d5adc7d@quill.bollow.ch> <20130125203137.45b9cdfc@quill.bollow.ch> <20130126000416.5b6abeed@quill.bollow.ch> <20130126201957.7624eea1@quill.bollow.ch> Message-ID: On Sat, Jan 26, 2013 at 2:19 PM, Norbert Bollow wrote: > McTim wrote: >> On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 6:04 PM, Norbert Bollow wrote: >> > McTim wrote: >> >> As they did in the rojadirecta case, they would go to the registry >> > If the registry is outside the US, like Rojadirecta was, how would >> > they "go to the registry"? >> >> the registries were in the U.S. in the rojadirecta case!! > > That's exactly the point. > > In the Rojadirecta case, the US government wanted to take action > against a Spanish company that was acting in a way that was legal in > Spain. But rojadirecta.com needs entries in a dns zone (specifically, > the .com zone) maintained by a US company (Verisign). So the US > government served Verisign with a warrant that had the effect of > disabling rojadirecta.com. They couldn't possibly accede to such a hypothetical warrant, as MM pointed out, rootzone changes involve 3 parties. All change requests start at IANA, neither the NTIA nor VRSN can initiate such a change. > > In the hypothetical, a gtld registry, say for .gratis I chose .nz (because of the mega website), which is NOT hypothetical, and .nz has NOT been removed from the root. A TLD is a TLD is a TLD. ICE or any other clueless agency is not going to split hairs over if a TLD is a ccTLD or not. If they haven't gone after .nz, they won't be going after one that does not yet exist. , is outside the > US, operating legally under the rules of the country where it is > based, but the US government comes to the conclusion that the business > of that gtld registry consists to a significant part in benefiting from > infringements on "intellectual property rights" of US corporations. In > that kind of situation, I'd definitely expect the US government to at > least consider serving a warrant intended to disable .gratis to whoever > in their view is in charge of maintaining the root zone! > > As the number of gtlds will be increasing dramatically, maintenance of > the root zone will become much more like operating a registry than it > used to be. No, it will be exactly the same as it is currently. A registry is a registry, no matter if it has a zonefile with 300 entries or 3000 entries. -- 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 From avri at acm.org Sat Jan 26 15:27:01 2013 From: avri at acm.org (Avri Doria) Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2013 15:27:01 -0500 Subject: [governance] today's Wash Post editorial In-Reply-To: <20130126201957.7624eea1@quill.bollow.ch> References: <50FEA64A.4090805@itforchange.net> <51029240.5020209@itforchange.net> <51029C44.9050501@itforchange.net> <06EF7F5E019BB34DB01EDC2DB0588A9F0F2B24B5@BL2PRD0810MB349.namprd08.prod.outlook.com> <5102AAE7.6010109@itforchange.net> <8CFC92E8FE2B559-241C-104DC@webmail-d146.sysops.aol.com> <20130125191649.1d5adc7d@quill.bollow.ch> <20130125203137.45b9cdfc@quill.bollow.ch> <20130126000416.5b6abeed@quill.bollow.ch> <20130126201957.7624eea1@quill.bollow.ch> Message-ID: hi, At least in terms of ccTLDs*, they have guaranteed not to and the global protest might be dissuasive. While I have spent a lot of time working on gTLDs, my view is that is anyone wants to do anything Human Rights related, should get their domain name from a safe country's ccTLD. In terms of Copyright etc, though, no country can be trusted completely when if comes to pressure from wealthy 'property' owners. avri * ccTLD - Country code Top Level Domain, e.g. .is or .fi On 26 Jan 2013, at 14:19, Norbert Bollow wrote: > As the number of gtlds will be increasing dramatically, maintenance of > the root zone will become much more like operating a registry than it > used to be. And I'm not aware of any reason to assume that the US > government wouldn't expect to have at least the same kind of rights with > regard to the root zone that they successfully exercised with regard > to the .com zone. -------------- 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 From avri at acm.org Sat Jan 26 15:48:19 2013 From: avri at acm.org (Avri Doria) Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2013 15:48:19 -0500 Subject: [governance] Facebook spent $4 million to lobby U.S. lawmakers in 2012 In-Reply-To: <02d401cdfbed$2b918370$82b48a50$@gmail.com> References: <510086BE.6010100@ITforChange.net> <056f01cdfa49$375b4f60$a611ee20$@gmail.com> <51015DF8.6070803@gmail.com> <066a01cdfa5a$01b28610$05179230$@gmail.com> <5102AD28.9090901@ITforChange.net> <51034FAC.4040605@ITforChange.net> <51035219.9070200@ITforChange.net>,<-8558355287633436504@unknownmsgid> <6DCAB3E586E6A34FB17223DF8D8F0D3D5DC37165@W8-EX10MB.unam.local> <02d401cdfbed$2b918370$82b48a50$@gmail.com> Message-ID: On 26 Jan 2013, at 12:47, michael gurstein wrote: > These continuing sniggering comments concerning "world peace" are to my mind unbecoming… > Not being one who is want to defend Alejandro, I think the comment is more a reference to a Beauty Queen contestant image of IGC. A group, myself included, that cannot come to agreement on the simplest things. It would be just like us to claim we were working for World Peace when we could not figure out a definition of our Ig* goals or even how to deal with acronyms in email. Just as the Beauty Queen contestant would say that is what she wanted to work on while wearing her crown. avri * Ig - Internet governance -------------- 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 From avri at acm.org Sat Jan 26 15:53:03 2013 From: avri at acm.org (Avri Doria) Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2013 15:53:03 -0500 Subject: [governance] Facebook spent $4 million to lobby U.S. lawmakers in 2012 In-Reply-To: References: <510086BE.6010100@ITforChange.net> <056f01cdfa49$375b4f60$a611ee20$@gmail.com> <51015DF8.6070803@gmail.com> <066a01cdfa5a$01b28610$05179230$@gmail.com> <5102AD28.9090901@ITforChange.net> <51034FAC.4040605@ITforChange.net> <51035219.9070200@ITforChange.net> <-8558355287633436504@unknownmsgid> <6DCAB3E586E6A34FB17223DF8D8F0D3D5DC37165@W8-EX10MB.unam.local> <02d401cdfbed$2b918370$82b48a50$@gmail.com> Message-ID: <0B53F524-5B68-487B-BBD7-622E20EAEED9@acm.org> On 26 Jan 2013, at 12:52, McTim wrote: > Do we have a definition of global public interest? We, as in IGC? I don't think so. I have a semi-tautological definition I use personally that works for me: That which the multistakeholders in a process determine by broad/rough/near consensus to be in the global public interest, is the global public interest. avri -------------- 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 From gurstein at gmail.com Sat Jan 26 15:54:14 2013 From: gurstein at gmail.com (michael gurstein) Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2013 12:54:14 -0800 Subject: [governance] Facebook spent $4 million to lobby U.S. lawmakers in 2012 In-Reply-To: References: <510086BE.6010100@ITforChange.net> <056f01cdfa49$375b4f60$a611ee20$@gmail.com> <51015DF8.6070803@gmail.com> <066a01cdfa5a$01b28610$05179230$@gmail.com> <5102AD28.9090901@ITforChange.net> <51034FAC.4040605@ITforChange.net> <51035219.9070200@ITforChange.net> <-8558355287633436504@unknownmsgid> <6DCAB3E586E6A34FB17223DF8D8F0D3D5DC37165@W8-EX10MB.unam.local> <02d401cdfbed$2b918370$82b48a50$@gmail.com> Message-ID: <036701cdfc07$4de471c0$e9ad5540$@gmail.com> Well, I thought that was in part what we were supposed to be doing i.e. helping to define what is meant by the global public interest in the context of Internet governance. One thing I do know, is that it does not include signing on to documents that as currently formulated are effectively exclusive of at least 4/5ths of the global population such as the document that I just commented on. M -----Original Message----- From: McTim [mailto:dogwallah at gmail.com] Sent: Saturday, January 26, 2013 9:53 AM To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; michael gurstein Cc: Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Baruch Subject: Re: [governance] Facebook spent $4 million to lobby U.S. lawmakers in 2012 Do we have a definition of global public interest? On Sat, Jan 26, 2013 at 12:47 PM, michael gurstein wrote: > These continuing sniggering comments concerning "world peace" are to > my mind unbecoming… > > > > And in fact, without using those exact terms (did anyone in fact, > directly refer to "world peace") issues of the governing the Internet > in the global public interest (or not) are very very much issues of > concern to this group and if anyone questions whether they are > directly pertinent to our immediate discussion I would refer you to my > comments on the document that Stephane and Avri have just now circulated for sign-on to the IGC. > > > > M > > > > From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org > [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Dr. > Alejandro Pisanty Baruch > Sent: Saturday, January 26, 2013 9:23 AM > To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Nick Ashton-Hart; Guru गुरु > Subject: RE: [governance] Facebook spent $4 million to lobby U.S. > lawmakers in 2012 > > > > Nick, > > > > "Folks, is tax policy really what people are interested in having an > effect on in the IGC list? Is this a battle you really want to enter > into, given the very real threats the open Internet faces today?" > > > > And world peace. > > > > Alejandro Pisanty > > > > > > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - > Dr. Alejandro Pisanty > Facultad de Química UNAM > > Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico > > > > +52-1-5541444475 FROM ABROAD > > +525541444475 DESDE MÉXICO SMS +525541444475 > 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 Nick Ashton-Hart > [nashton at ccianet.org] Enviado el: sábado, 26 de enero de 2013 02:35 > Hasta: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Guru गुरु > Asunto: Re: [governance] Facebook spent $4 million to lobby U.S. > lawmakers in 2012 > > Guru said: > > > > The scandalously low effective tax rates of the IT transnationals can > also be seen as some kind of implicit subsidy ... and > measures/experiments like that of the French Govt are required to help > correct this situation - by reducing the lobbying power of these > corporates and also getting the funding required by governments to > support basic societal infrastructure, including soft infrastructure like public education and public health.. > > > > My reply: > > > > The rates being paid by IT companies are not different than other > types of companies. For example, I believe GE paid effectively 14% tax > globally last year. Corporate tax rates overall do not differentiate > by sector - though, of course, some vertical markets do get exemptions > and credits designed to encourage certain activities by them. > > > > If you believe that companies should pay more, that's fine - but to > suggest that IT companies are particularly bad in some way does a > disservice, I think, to the overall objective which many seek: > reforming the tax system so that companies, in general, pay a larger share of tax. > > > > This is, by the way, extremely complex and there are powerful > incentives for countries to incentivise FDI by, among other measures, > favourable tax regimes. It will be incredibly difficult to get enough > countries that are desirable markets for industry to sign up to a > broad range of measures to synchronise taxes to produce the desired > end - the incentives to attract FDI are simply very powerful. > > > > What the French are proposing (not for the first time) is not going to > help anything; it is soapbox policy, designed for an internal audience > of French people. Like the 75% tax on wealthy individuals they > propose, it wouldn't raise enough money to solve France's real deficit > issues; it would just make France even less competitive an economy than it already is. > > > > Folks, is tax policy really what people are interested in having an > effect on in the IGC list? Is this a battle you really want to enter > into, given the very real threats the open Internet faces today? > > -- > > Regards, > > > > Nick Ashton-Hart > > > > Need to meet with me? Schedule the time that suits us both here: > http://meetme.so/nashton > > > > Sent from my one of my handheld thingies, please excuse linguistic mangling. > > > On 26 Jan 2013, at 04:49, "Guru गुरु" wrote: > > The scandalously low effective tax rates of the IT transnationals can > also be seen as some kind of implicit subsidy ... and > measures/experiments like that of the French Govt are required to help > correct this situation - by reducing the lobbying power of these > corporates and also getting the funding required by governments to > support basic societal infrastructure, including soft infrastructure like public education and public health.. > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > -- 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 From dogwallah at gmail.com Sat Jan 26 15:58:30 2013 From: dogwallah at gmail.com (McTim) Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2013 15:58:30 -0500 Subject: [governance] Facebook spent $4 million to lobby U.S. lawmakers in 2012 In-Reply-To: <036701cdfc07$4de471c0$e9ad5540$@gmail.com> References: <510086BE.6010100@ITforChange.net> <056f01cdfa49$375b4f60$a611ee20$@gmail.com> <51015DF8.6070803@gmail.com> <066a01cdfa5a$01b28610$05179230$@gmail.com> <5102AD28.9090901@ITforChange.net> <51034FAC.4040605@ITforChange.net> <51035219.9070200@ITforChange.net> <-8558355287633436504@unknownmsgid> <6DCAB3E586E6A34FB17223DF8D8F0D3D5DC37165@W8-EX10MB.unam.local> <02d401cdfbed$2b918370$82b48a50$@gmail.com> <036701cdfc07$4de471c0$e9ad5540$@gmail.com> Message-ID: On Sat, Jan 26, 2013 at 3:54 PM, michael gurstein wrote: > Well, I thought that was in part what we were supposed to be doing i.e. helping to define what is meant by the global public interest in the context of Internet governance. > > One thing I do know, is that it does not include signing on to documents that as currently formulated are effectively exclusive of at least 4/5ths of the global population such as the document that I just commented I read the doc and your comments. I see no words that exclude anyone, let alone 4/5 of the world. Can you point out the exclusionary text please? -- 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 From gurstein at gmail.com Sat Jan 26 16:01:46 2013 From: gurstein at gmail.com (michael gurstein) Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2013 13:01:46 -0800 Subject: [governance] Facebook spent $4 million to lobby U.S. lawmakers in 2012 In-Reply-To: <2D8BACA7-7373-47FF-A871-DC98FD31085D@ccianet.org> References: <510086BE.6010100@ITforChange.net> <056f01cdfa49$375b4f60$a611ee20$@gmail.com> <51015DF8.6070803@gmail.com> <066a01cdfa5a$01b28610$05179230$@gmail.com> <5102AD28.9090901@ITforChange.net> <51034FAC.4040605@ITforChange.net> <51035219.9070200@ITforChange.net>,<-8558355287633436504@unknownmsgid> <6DCAB3E586E6A34FB17223DF8D8F0D3D5DC37165@W8-EX10MB.unam.local> <02d401cdfbed$2b918370$82b48a50$@gmail.com> <2D8BACA7-7373-47FF-A871-DC98FD31085D@ccianet.org> Message-ID: <037001cdfc08$5b2c9a00$1185ce00$@gmail.com> Hmmm… what is Saturday for some is Sunday morning for others… M From: Nick Ashton-Hart [mailto:nashton at ccianet.org] Sent: Saturday, January 26, 2013 10:39 AM To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; michael gurstein Cc: 'Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Baruch' Subject: Re: [governance] Facebook spent $4 million to lobby U.S. lawmakers in 2012 A little levity never hurt anyone - especially on a Saturday night :) On 26 Jan 2013, at 18:47, "michael gurstein" wrote: These continuing sniggering comments concerning "world peace" are to my mind unbecoming… And in fact, without using those exact terms (did anyone in fact, directly refer to "world peace") issues of the governing the Internet in the global public interest (or not) are very very much issues of concern to this group and if anyone questions whether they are directly pertinent to our immediate discussion I would refer you to my comments on the document that Stephane and Avri have just now circulated for sign-on to the IGC. M From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance- request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Baruch Sent: Saturday, January 26, 2013 9:23 AM To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Nick Ashton-Hart; Guru गुरु Subject: RE: [governance] Facebook spent $4 million to lobby U.S. lawmakers in 2012 Nick, "Folks, is tax policy really what people are interested in having an effect on in the IGC list? Is this a battle you really want to enter into, given the very real threats the open Internet faces today?" And world peace. Alejandro Pisanty - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Facultad de Química UNAM Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico +52-1-5541444475 FROM ABROAD +525541444475 DESDE MÉXICO SMS +525541444475 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 Nick Ashton-Hart [ nashton at ccianet.org] Enviado el: sábado, 26 de enero de 2013 02:35 Hasta: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Guru गुरु Asunto: Re: [governance] Facebook spent $4 million to lobby U.S. lawmakers in 2012 Guru said: The scandalously low effective tax rates of the IT transnationals can also be seen as some kind of implicit subsidy ... and measures/experiments like that of the French Govt are required to help correct this situation - by reducing the lobbying power of these corporates and also getting the funding required by governments to support basic societal infrastructure, including soft infrastructure like public education and public health.. My reply: The rates being paid by IT companies are not different than other types of companies. For example, I believe GE paid effectively 14% tax globally last year. Corporate tax rates overall do not differentiate by sector - though, of course, some vertical markets do get exemptions and credits designed to encourage certain activities by them. If you believe that companies should pay more, that's fine - but to suggest that IT companies are particularly bad in some way does a disservice, I think, to the overall objective which many seek: reforming the tax system so that companies, in general, pay a larger share of tax. This is, by the way, extremely complex and there are powerful incentives for countries to incentivise FDI by, among other measures, favourable tax regimes. It will be incredibly difficult to get enough countries that are desirable markets for industry to sign up to a broad range of measures to synchronise taxes to produce the desired end - the incentives to attract FDI are simply very powerful. What the French are proposing (not for the first time) is not going to help anything; it is soapbox policy, designed for an internal audience of French people. Like the 75% tax on wealthy individuals they propose, it wouldn't raise enough money to solve France's real deficit issues; it would just make France even less competitive an economy than it already is. Folks, is tax policy really what people are interested in having an effect on in the IGC list? Is this a battle you really want to enter into, given the very real threats the open Internet faces today? -- Regards, Nick Ashton-Hart Need to meet with me? Schedule the time that suits us both here: http://meetme.so/nashton Sent from my one of my handheld thingies, please excuse linguistic mangling. On 26 Jan 2013, at 04:49, "Guru गुरु" < Guru at itforchange.net> wrote: The scandalously low effective tax rates of the IT transnationals can also be seen as some kind of implicit subsidy ... and measures/experiments like that of the French Govt are required to help correct this situation - by reducing the lobbying power of these corporates and also getting the funding required by governments to support basic societal infrastructure, including soft infrastructure like public education and public health.. ____________________________________________________________ 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: -------------- 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 From apisan at unam.mx Sat Jan 26 16:19:01 2013 From: apisan at unam.mx (Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Baruch) Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2013 21:19:01 +0000 Subject: [governance] Facebook spent $4 million to lobby U.S. lawmakers in 2012 In-Reply-To: <037001cdfc08$5b2c9a00$1185ce00$@gmail.com> References: <510086BE.6010100@ITforChange.net> <056f01cdfa49$375b4f60$a611ee20$@gmail.com> <51015DF8.6070803@gmail.com> <066a01cdfa5a$01b28610$05179230$@gmail.com> <5102AD28.9090901@ITforChange.net> <51034FAC.4040605@ITforChange.net> <51035219.9070200@ITforChange.net>,<-8558355287633436504@unknownmsgid> <6DCAB3E586E6A34FB17223DF8D8F0D3D5DC37165@W8-EX10MB.unam.local> <02d401cdfbed$2b918370$82b48a50$@gmail.com> <2D8BACA7-7373-47FF-A871-DC98FD31085D@ccianet.org>,<037001cdfc08$5b2c9a00$1185ce00$@gmail.com> Message-ID: <6DCAB3E586E6A34FB17223DF8D8F0D3D5DC376E2@W8-EX10MB.unam.local> Michael, thanks a lot for your valuable feedback. I will refrain fast enough that no-one has a chance to consider your comments as a manifestation of "thought police." For my edification I will be thankful for a proposal you could make. There may be a need for a code that provides list-acceptable expressions for the following: 1. I enthusiastically agree with what was said (we already have "+1") 2. I find this statement incorrect/false/outrageous but don't want to discuss it further as doing so would totally derail the conversation. ... and so on. If you do believe as many do that "manners is morals", let those willing spend some cycles codifying manners further. I will come back to the track you propose on RFC 6852. Yours, Alejandro Pisanty - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Facultad de Química UNAM Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico +52-1-5541444475 FROM ABROAD +525541444475 DESDE MÉXICO SMS +525541444475 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: michael gurstein [gurstein at gmail.com] Enviado el: sábado, 26 de enero de 2013 15:01 Hasta: 'Nick Ashton-Hart'; governance at lists.igcaucus.org CC: Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Baruch Asunto: RE: [governance] Facebook spent $4 million to lobby U.S. lawmakers in 2012 Hmmm… what is Saturday for some is Sunday morning for others… M From: Nick Ashton-Hart [mailto:nashton at ccianet.org] Sent: Saturday, January 26, 2013 10:39 AM To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; michael gurstein Cc: 'Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Baruch' Subject: Re: [governance] Facebook spent $4 million to lobby U.S. lawmakers in 2012 A little levity never hurt anyone - especially on a Saturday night :) On 26 Jan 2013, at 18:47, "michael gurstein" > wrote: These continuing sniggering comments concerning "world peace" are to my mind unbecoming… And in fact, without using those exact terms (did anyone in fact, directly refer to "world peace") issues of the governing the Internet in the global public interest (or not) are very very much issues of concern to this group and if anyone questions whether they are directly pertinent to our immediate discussion I would refer you to my comments on the document that Stephane and Avri have just now circulated for sign-on to the IGC. M From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Baruch Sent: Saturday, January 26, 2013 9:23 AM To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Nick Ashton-Hart; Guru गुरु Subject: RE: [governance] Facebook spent $4 million to lobby U.S. lawmakers in 2012 Nick, "Folks, is tax policy really what people are interested in having an effect on in the IGC list? Is this a battle you really want to enter into, given the very real threats the open Internet faces today?" And world peace. Alejandro Pisanty - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Facultad de Química UNAM Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico +52-1-5541444475 FROM ABROAD +525541444475 DESDE MÉXICO SMS +525541444475 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 Nick Ashton-Hart [nashton at ccianet.org] Enviado el: sábado, 26 de enero de 2013 02:35 Hasta: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Guru गुरु Asunto: Re: [governance] Facebook spent $4 million to lobby U.S. lawmakers in 2012 Guru said: The scandalously low effective tax rates of the IT transnationals can also be seen as some kind of implicit subsidy ... and measures/experiments like that of the French Govt are required to help correct this situation - by reducing the lobbying power of these corporates and also getting the funding required by governments to support basic societal infrastructure, including soft infrastructure like public education and public health.. My reply: The rates being paid by IT companies are not different than other types of companies. For example, I believe GE paid effectively 14% tax globally last year. Corporate tax rates overall do not differentiate by sector - though, of course, some vertical markets do get exemptions and credits designed to encourage certain activities by them. If you believe that companies should pay more, that's fine - but to suggest that IT companies are particularly bad in some way does a disservice, I think, to the overall objective which many seek: reforming the tax system so that companies, in general, pay a larger share of tax. This is, by the way, extremely complex and there are powerful incentives for countries to incentivise FDI by, among other measures, favourable tax regimes. It will be incredibly difficult to get enough countries that are desirable markets for industry to sign up to a broad range of measures to synchronise taxes to produce the desired end - the incentives to attract FDI are simply very powerful. What the French are proposing (not for the first time) is not going to help anything; it is soapbox policy, designed for an internal audience of French people. Like the 75% tax on wealthy individuals they propose, it wouldn't raise enough money to solve France's real deficit issues; it would just make France even less competitive an economy than it already is. Folks, is tax policy really what people are interested in having an effect on in the IGC list? Is this a battle you really want to enter into, given the very real threats the open Internet faces today? -- Regards, Nick Ashton-Hart Need to meet with me? Schedule the time that suits us both here: http://meetme.so/nashton Sent from my one of my handheld thingies, please excuse linguistic mangling. On 26 Jan 2013, at 04:49, "Guru गुरु" > wrote: The scandalously low effective tax rates of the IT transnationals can also be seen as some kind of implicit subsidy ... and measures/experiments like that of the French Govt are required to help correct this situation - by reducing the lobbying power of these corporates and also getting the funding required by governments to support basic societal infrastructure, including soft infrastructure like public education and public health.. ____________________________________________________________ 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: -------------- 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 From apisan at unam.mx Sat Jan 26 16:28:53 2013 From: apisan at unam.mx (Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Baruch) Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2013 21:28:53 +0000 Subject: [governance] Facebook spent $4 million to lobby U.S. lawmakers in 2012 In-Reply-To: <036701cdfc07$4de471c0$e9ad5540$@gmail.com> References: <510086BE.6010100@ITforChange.net> <056f01cdfa49$375b4f60$a611ee20$@gmail.com> <51015DF8.6070803@gmail.com> <066a01cdfa5a$01b28610$05179230$@gmail.com> <5102AD28.9090901@ITforChange.net> <51034FAC.4040605@ITforChange.net> <51035219.9070200@ITforChange.net> <-8558355287633436504@unknownmsgid> <6DCAB3E586E6A34FB17223DF8D8F0D3D5DC37165@W8-EX10MB.unam.local> <02d401cdfbed$2b918370$82b48a50$@gmail.com> ,<036701cdfc07$4de471c0$e9ad5540$@gmail.com> Message-ID: <6DCAB3E586E6A34FB17223DF8D8F0D3D5DC37718@W8-EX10MB.unam.local> Michael, how does the RFC on Open Standards exclude 4/5 of the global population? I read your comments and thnk that most of the criteria you wish to append are already enabled by the RFC (inclusion, cooperation, etc.); going further could begin to constitute a gross layer violation and, by introducing criteria whose validity and interpretation are highly diversified, reduce the universality of the RFC and therefore its reach. As to the "take it or leave it" character, the five signatory organizations have spent a lot of time developing this document, with (varying degrees of) consultation to all sorts of communities. While I as many others may wish for improvements here and there, we should recognize they may be opposite to what others consider an improvement. My take from the document is more to now work on national/local/regional, not only global, standards-developing organizations (SDOs) and incide on their processes to make them more compliant with the RFC. Many of the criteria you are proposing are less subject to controversy at the national level. It would be very interesting to see how those within your reach a. comply and b. can be influenced to comply. Yours, Alejandro Pisanty - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Facultad de Química UNAM Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico +52-1-5541444475 FROM ABROAD +525541444475 DESDE MÉXICO SMS +525541444475 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 michael gurstein [gurstein at gmail.com] Enviado el: sábado, 26 de enero de 2013 14:54 Hasta: 'McTim'; governance at lists.igcaucus.org CC: Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Baruch Asunto: RE: [governance] Facebook spent $4 million to lobby U.S. lawmakers in 2012 Well, I thought that was in part what we were supposed to be doing i.e. helping to define what is meant by the global public interest in the context of Internet governance. One thing I do know, is that it does not include signing on to documents that as currently formulated are effectively exclusive of at least 4/5ths of the global population such as the document that I just commented on. M -----Original Message----- From: McTim [mailto:dogwallah at gmail.com] Sent: Saturday, January 26, 2013 9:53 AM To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; michael gurstein Cc: Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Baruch Subject: Re: [governance] Facebook spent $4 million to lobby U.S. lawmakers in 2012 Do we have a definition of global public interest? On Sat, Jan 26, 2013 at 12:47 PM, michael gurstein wrote: > These continuing sniggering comments concerning "world peace" are to > my mind unbecoming… > > > > And in fact, without using those exact terms (did anyone in fact, > directly refer to "world peace") issues of the governing the Internet > in the global public interest (or not) are very very much issues of > concern to this group and if anyone questions whether they are > directly pertinent to our immediate discussion I would refer you to my > comments on the document that Stephane and Avri have just now circulated for sign-on to the IGC. > > > > M > > > > From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org > [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Dr. > Alejandro Pisanty Baruch > Sent: Saturday, January 26, 2013 9:23 AM > To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Nick Ashton-Hart; Guru गुरु > Subject: RE: [governance] Facebook spent $4 million to lobby U.S. > lawmakers in 2012 > > > > Nick, > > > > "Folks, is tax policy really what people are interested in having an > effect on in the IGC list? Is this a battle you really want to enter > into, given the very real threats the open Internet faces today?" > > > > And world peace. > > > > Alejandro Pisanty > > > > > > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - > Dr. Alejandro Pisanty > Facultad de Química UNAM > > Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico > > > > +52-1-5541444475 FROM ABROAD > > +525541444475 DESDE MÉXICO SMS +525541444475 > 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 Nick Ashton-Hart > [nashton at ccianet.org] Enviado el: sábado, 26 de enero de 2013 02:35 > Hasta: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Guru गुरु > Asunto: Re: [governance] Facebook spent $4 million to lobby U.S. > lawmakers in 2012 > > Guru said: > > > > The scandalously low effective tax rates of the IT transnationals can > also be seen as some kind of implicit subsidy ... and > measures/experiments like that of the French Govt are required to help > correct this situation - by reducing the lobbying power of these > corporates and also getting the funding required by governments to > support basic societal infrastructure, including soft infrastructure like public education and public health.. > > > > My reply: > > > > The rates being paid by IT companies are not different than other > types of companies. For example, I believe GE paid effectively 14% tax > globally last year. Corporate tax rates overall do not differentiate > by sector - though, of course, some vertical markets do get exemptions > and credits designed to encourage certain activities by them. > > > > If you believe that companies should pay more, that's fine - but to > suggest that IT companies are particularly bad in some way does a > disservice, I think, to the overall objective which many seek: > reforming the tax system so that companies, in general, pay a larger share of tax. > > > > This is, by the way, extremely complex and there are powerful > incentives for countries to incentivise FDI by, among other measures, > favourable tax regimes. It will be incredibly difficult to get enough > countries that are desirable markets for industry to sign up to a > broad range of measures to synchronise taxes to produce the desired > end - the incentives to attract FDI are simply very powerful. > > > > What the French are proposing (not for the first time) is not going to > help anything; it is soapbox policy, designed for an internal audience > of French people. Like the 75% tax on wealthy individuals they > propose, it wouldn't raise enough money to solve France's real deficit > issues; it would just make France even less competitive an economy than it already is. > > > > Folks, is tax policy really what people are interested in having an > effect on in the IGC list? Is this a battle you really want to enter > into, given the very real threats the open Internet faces today? > > -- > > Regards, > > > > Nick Ashton-Hart > > > > Need to meet with me? Schedule the time that suits us both here: > http://meetme.so/nashton > > > > Sent from my one of my handheld thingies, please excuse linguistic mangling. > > > On 26 Jan 2013, at 04:49, "Guru गुरु" wrote: > > The scandalously low effective tax rates of the IT transnationals can > also be seen as some kind of implicit subsidy ... and > measures/experiments like that of the French Govt are required to help > correct this situation - by reducing the lobbying power of these > corporates and also getting the funding required by governments to > support basic societal infrastructure, including soft infrastructure like public education and public health.. > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > -- 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 From avri at acm.org Sat Jan 26 20:57:39 2013 From: avri at acm.org (Avri Doria) Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2013 20:57:39 -0500 Subject: [governance] RFC 6852: Affirmation of the Modern Paradigm for Standards In-Reply-To: <20130126224714.GA21920@sources.org> References: <20130126141234.GA21789@sources.org> <20130126224714.GA21920@sources.org> Message-ID: <57C6D3B4-DF64-4889-84D9-7F47EDD87C90@acm.org> On 26 Jan 2013, at 17:47, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote: > > It refers to open and transparent processes but the IETF members > discovered this document when it was already signed, and impossible to > modify. The IETF did not release it, the IAB and RFC editor did. And if I remember the IAB has no requirement for IETF approval on its documents. Though it does have a requirement for a public IETF last call. Which it had starting Oct 1, 2012 and extending for a month. So while you may dislike its content, its provenance seems fine. avri -------------- 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 From suresh at hserus.net Sat Jan 26 19:20:10 2013 From: suresh at hserus.net (Suresh Ramasubramanian) Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2013 05:50:10 +0530 Subject: [bestbits] [governance] Multistakeholder Roles and Responsibilities In-Reply-To: References: <01c801cdf457$f76a3fc0$e63ebf40$@gmail.com> <50F763C0.5070907@ciroap.org> <50F8D10B.3010109@ciroap.org> <20130118224941.556b0653@quill.bollow.ch> <50FCEFC5.8010008@ciroap.org> <20130123032649.GA16191@hserus.net> Message-ID: Thanks! It is good to open e discussion on circled as it attracts a larger audience that is informed on these issues. I thank you for taking the time to p your thoughts there, and to respond. --srs (iPad) On 27-Jan-2013, at 4:58, "Katim S. Touray" wrote: > Hi Suresh, > > I just posted a response to your comments on my CircleID article. Here's the link to my response: > http://www.circleid.com/posts/20130122_much_ado_about_wcit_12_and_multi_stakeholderism/#9232 > > Thanks, and have a great weekend! > > Katim > > > On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 3:26 AM, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote: >> Katim S. Touray [23/01/13 02:29 +0000]: >> >>> As promised a few days ago, here's the link to my CircleID article on >>> WCIT-12 and multi-stakeholderism: >>> http://www.circleid.com/posts/20130122_much_ado_about_wcit_12_and_multi_stakeholderism/ >> >> Thanks. There are a few issues here I would differ with. >> >> Some of the problem here doesn't involve the fact that governments have a >> role in internet governance - it involves an objection to the ITU allowing >> scope creep into its mandate, to cover issues that more countries than just >> the USA (so hardly "exceptionalism" or "unilateralism") have differed with. >> >> As for Africa and its lack of participation in internet governance >> structures, part of it has to do with capacity building for government, >> industry and civil society stakeholders, while monopoly and competition >> policy issues some due to geography, given africa's landlocked nature and >> difficult terrain that makes slow and expensive satellite connectivity a >> necessity, some due to government monopolies on the Internet and telecom, >> while others can be laid to the door of various other factors, such as a >> lack of stable government, cutting off the Internet to prevent opponents >> from organizing themselves using it (as in Syria, and before that in >> Qaddafi's Libya ..). >> I am afraid this can't all be blamed on US exceptionalism, and while there >> is a substantial amount of aid in material, capacity building etc that can >> be (and is) provided by local and international NGOs who set up ISP >> exchange points, hold training workshops etc, a substantial local effort is >> also needed before you will see the situation improve. >> >> On the DoC / NTIA oversight of ICANN / IANA, it has been mostly hands off, >> only stepping in where there have been cases where DoC appears to feel that >> there are governance issues involved. Or have you seen them try to revoke >> .cu, .sy, .kp just because Cuba, Syria and North Korea are in the state >> department's OFAC blacklist of entities American firms are forbidden to >> trade with? >> >> I'll post the same thing on circleid to kickstart the discussion there. >> >> thanks >> suresh >> > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From nb at bollow.ch Sat Jan 26 18:36:21 2013 From: nb at bollow.ch (Norbert Bollow) Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2013 00:36:21 +0100 Subject: [governance] NomCom selection process; request for advice Message-ID: <20130127003621.66061f79@quill.bollow.ch> [IGC Coordinator hat on] Dear all As previously discussed, we need a Nominating Committee (NomCom) [1] that will recommend five Civil Society representatives for the planned CSTD [2] Working Group on Enhanced Cooperation [3]. (Notes: [1] http://igcaucus.org/nomcom-process [2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commission_on_Science_and_Technology_for_Development [3] the relevant parts of the UN General Assembly resolution requesting the creation of this Working Group are quoted on http://enhanced-cooperation.org ) In accordance with what the charter currently says, this NomCom will be selected for this specific decision and will be disbanded after the decision is made. (In other words, if the charter amendment passes which introduces a yearly NomCom, that change will not yet affect this NomCom which we will, in accordance with the current charter text, select for a specific decision.) By going ahead with the NomCom selection already now we intend to ensure that the NomCom has sufficient time to discuss and define selection criteria etc. Five voting NomCom members plus two reserves will be randomly selected from the pool of volunteers. In addition, the NomCom needs a non-voting chairperson. The charter says about this: “A non voting chair will be appointed by the coordinators for each nomcom with the advice of the IGC membership. In order to serve as a chair, it is recommended that a person has served in at least one nomcom previously.” Consequently, we hereby invite the Internet Governance Caucus membership to give advice on who would be a good chairperson for the NomCom. Please give your advice by Wednesday January 30. The remainder of this message announces the details of the random selection process that will be used, so that it will be possible to verify afterwards that this process was not manipulated. The selection will be carried out by means of the reference program code "Publicly Verifiable Random Selection" from RFC 3797 [4], as downloaded from [5]. The file pvrs-0.3.tgz has SHA-1 hash [6] bf68909204174dbb3a9b76b3fc6392b6576fb5f1. The random seed will consist of the seven numbers of the Wednesday January 30 Lotto draw of the UK National Lottery [7] (the six "ball numbers" followed by the number of the "bonus ball"). [4] http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3797.txt [5] http://www.malcolm.id.au/files/software/unix/pvrs/pvrs-0.3.tgz [6] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SHA-1 [7] https://www.national-lottery.co.uk/player/p/drawHistory.do For the sake of completeness, here is again the numbered list of NomCom volunteers (this had been announced before.) 1. Kerry Brown 2. Mawaki Chango 3. Jeremy Malcolm 4. Tapani Tarvainen 5. Fouad Bajwa 6. Gideon Rop 7. Vincent Solomon Aliama 8. Mohamed Samir Zahran 9. Clement Martial Aboudem Bavou 10. Carlos Vera Quintana 11. Mwendwa Kivuva 12. Norbert Komlan Glakpe 13. Julián Casasbuenas G 14. Antonio Medina Gómez 15. José F. Callo Romero 16. Devon Blake 17. Tracey Naughton 18. Michel Tchonang Linze 19. Izumi Aizu 20. Carlos Watson 21. Jose Felix Arias Ynche 22. Sarah Kiden 23. Lillian Nalwoga 24. Asama Abel Excel 25. Philip Fomba Johnson 26. Joao Carlos Caribe 27. Abdul Jaleel Shittu Greetings, Norbert -------------- 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 From suresh at hserus.net Sat Jan 26 19:18:02 2013 From: suresh at hserus.net (Suresh Ramasubramanian) Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2013 05:48:02 +0530 Subject: [governance] Re: RFC 6852: Affirmation of the Modern Paradigm for Standards In-Reply-To: References: <20130126141234.GA21789@sources.org> <20130126224714.GA21920@sources.org> Message-ID: <79C1E490-2800-4AB1-84A9-186C84946BE6@hserus.net> I agree with Stephane here. --srs (iPad) On 27-Jan-2013, at 5:31, "Ian Peter" wrote: > Stephane's comments are enough to suggest to me that sign on is unwarranted. > > -----Original Message----- From: Stephane Bortzmeyer > Sent: Sunday, January 27, 2013 9:47 AM > To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org > Subject: [governance] Re: RFC 6852: Affirmation of the Modern Paradigm for Standards > > On Sat, Jan 26, 2013 at 11:49:30AM -0500, > Avri Doria wrote > a message of 62 lines which said: > >> It is a good document. > > No, it's not. > > It refers only to business uses of the Internet, as if the Internet > were not used for many other things. It was recorded as a comment by > some IETF members > but was > ignored. > > It calls for access to the standard documents but it is > hypocritical since one of the signers, IEEE, does not allow it > (ITU, the main > target of this RFC, does distribute its standards online for a few > years.) > > It refers to open and transparent processes but the IETF members > discovered this document when it was already signed, and impossible to > modify. > > > > > > > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From ian.peter at ianpeter.com Sat Jan 26 19:01:17 2013 From: ian.peter at ianpeter.com (Ian Peter) Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2013 11:01:17 +1100 Subject: [governance] Re: RFC 6852: Affirmation of the Modern Paradigm for Standards In-Reply-To: <20130126224714.GA21920@sources.org> References: <20130126141234.GA21789@sources.org> <20130126224714.GA21920@sources.org> Message-ID: Stephane's comments are enough to suggest to me that sign on is unwarranted. -----Original Message----- From: Stephane Bortzmeyer Sent: Sunday, January 27, 2013 9:47 AM To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org Subject: [governance] Re: RFC 6852: Affirmation of the Modern Paradigm for Standards On Sat, Jan 26, 2013 at 11:49:30AM -0500, Avri Doria wrote a message of 62 lines which said: > It is a good document. No, it's not. It refers only to business uses of the Internet, as if the Internet were not used for many other things. It was recorded as a comment by some IETF members but was ignored. It calls for access to the standard documents but it is hypocritical since one of the signers, IEEE, does not allow it (ITU, the main target of this RFC, does distribute its standards online for a few years.) It refers to open and transparent processes but the IETF members discovered this document when it was already signed, and impossible to modify. ____________________________________________________________ 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From bortzmeyer at internatif.org Sat Jan 26 17:47:14 2013 From: bortzmeyer at internatif.org (Stephane Bortzmeyer) Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2013 23:47:14 +0100 Subject: [governance] Re: RFC 6852: Affirmation of the Modern Paradigm for Standards In-Reply-To: References: <20130126141234.GA21789@sources.org> Message-ID: <20130126224714.GA21920@sources.org> On Sat, Jan 26, 2013 at 11:49:30AM -0500, Avri Doria wrote a message of 62 lines which said: > It is a good document. No, it's not. It refers only to business uses of the Internet, as if the Internet were not used for many other things. It was recorded as a comment by some IETF members but was ignored. It calls for access to the standard documents but it is hypocritical since one of the signers, IEEE, does not allow it (ITU, the main target of this RFC, does distribute its standards online for a few years.) It refers to open and transparent processes but the IETF members discovered this document when it was already signed, and impossible to modify. -------------- 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 From parminder at itforchange.net Sun Jan 27 02:24:45 2013 From: parminder at itforchange.net (parminder) Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2013 12:54:45 +0530 Subject: [governance] today's Wash Post editorial In-Reply-To: <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD2322F6F@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> References: <50FEA64A.4090805@itforchange.net> <51029240.5020209@itforchange.net> <5102A9D4.3070704@itforchange.net> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD2322F6F@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> Message-ID: <5104D63D.70809@itforchange.net> Milton On Friday 25 January 2013 10:45 PM, Milton L Mueller wrote: > Any change model needs to take the role of VeriSign, which operates the root server currently recognized as "authoritative", into account. The system, like Cerberus, is a three-headed dog. (USG, ICANN, VRSN) Isnt Verisign just an agent of the US gov in operating the root server currently recognised as "authoritative"? That is why I did not take Verisign into account as an independent actor here. I am sure Verisign's actions will be legally constrained and cant go beyond what it is instructed to do by the US gov. > > Generally, I am surprised that Parminder would opt for a change mechanism that would rely on unilateral action by RS operators and ICANN rather than one with more democratic legitimacy. Interesting! And what is that option you suggest with "more democratic legitimacy". Please be explicit. My proposal was based on the claims often made on this list by ICANN supporters that 1. ICANN has global legitimacy due to its global multistakeholder model, and can be trusted to act in global public interest. (I take it that global democracy is certainly a global public interest.) 2. They all (or, at least most of them) prefer a free float ICANN model whereby ICANN does not have to take anyone's permission to effect root changes. (My proposal simply presents a plausible way to go forward on establishing a freefloat ICANN model. In absence of a clear model, and clear proposals on how to go forward on it, and what role can/ should IGC play, pious statements, as I said, are just pious statements and do not behove IGC which claims to ba platform not only for discussion, but also for advocacy and action) (BTW, I know, you, Milton, do not advocate a free-float ICANN model. However, I remain unclear on what model you advocate.) 3. If US ever does any hanky panky business with the "authoritative" root zone, the non US gov owned root operators (10 of them) can be trusted simply not to follow suit. They were credited with such a keen global public interest minded-ness. Any and all of our discussions on this list about the problem with US authority over root changes always always hit this dead-end.... It was difficult to "prove" before-hand that root server operators are most likely to follow suit to any US mandated root changes, such is the geo-eco-political scenario of the world today. (I am surprised now when I am approaching the issue from the opposite end - people like McTim and David who stone-walled any earlier discussion on this list about the problem with the US oversight role over root changes with the argument that "other root server operators would simply not comply" now disclaim any reason to believe that "other" root server operators can be expected to behave in any manner other than of their private interests. I think we need to get a fix on what "other" root servers can or cannot be expected to do and cannot keep it moving as per our convenience, depending on what argument one is pursuing.) > Probably he hasn't thought this through very well. > > Any precipitous change in IG arrangements that occurred without at least the passive assent of a broad public AND the key stakeholders I am not asking for this change to take place without assent of 'a broad public AND the key stakeholders'... My proposal is for the global stakeholders represented in the ICANN, and giving it legitimacy, to rise in one voice and seek ICANN's independence from illegitimate US control. I seek it to be a bottom up process, and therefore propose the IGC to start it. And for the technical community (and inter alia I put root server operators in that category) to finally put their money where their mouth is (with all this talk of 'we are for a free-float ICANN'). And if ICANN's constituent stakeholders and the technical community refuses to do all this, then they should simply stop saying, "well, in principle, we are against US/ NTIA role in root changes, we want ICANN to be a free float agency". Partly, the purpose of my proposal was to expose this above hypocrisy (i.e. only if it exists :) ). I took it to have only an outside chance that my proposal will indeed be taken up by this group. But yes I did give it an outside chance :), what with the WG on Enhanced Cooperation coming up and hopefully we will shake off our collective sloth and get on to the task that the IGC was constituted for - to seek and push for progressive change in global IG architecture, and policies.. > would create a lot of risks of counter-actions and disruptions that might undo whatever temporary gains were achieved. That kind is a regular excuse against any change - however positive and progressive it may be . And whether global legitimacy and democracy is a temporary and unimportant gain is a political choice we have to make. It is evident that we make it differently.. parminder > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance- >> request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of parminder >> Sent: Friday, January 25, 2013 10:51 AM >> To: McTim >> Cc: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; David Conrad >> Subject: Re: [governance] today's Wash Post editorial >> >> >> On Friday 25 January 2013 08:48 PM, McTim wrote: >>> >>> right, clear that hurdle, then convince ICANN to violate the contract >>> that gives them their raison d'être and I am on board! >> The whole point of what I am proposing is that ICANN raison d'etre must >> be its bottom up global legitimacy, and not the contract with the US >> gov... And ICANN has to take a stand on favour of one against the other >> possible raison d'etre. There is an obvious tension between the two, and >> my proposal invites us, and finally the ICANN, to take a clear stand on >> what ICANN's raison d'etre really is. >> >> It is however intersting to note that you seem to consider the US >> contract being ICANN's raison d'etre rather than its bottom up global >> legitimacy. >> >> parminder > -------------- 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 From nb at bollow.ch Sun Jan 27 03:10:03 2013 From: nb at bollow.ch (Norbert Bollow) Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2013 09:10:03 +0100 Subject: [governance] Towards an IGC Statement on RFC 6852 "Affirmation of the Modern Paradigm for Standards" In-Reply-To: <20130126224714.GA21920@sources.org> References: <20130126141234.GA21789@sources.org> <20130126224714.GA21920@sources.org> Message-ID: <20130127091003.2e5d7640@quill.bollow.ch> [with IGC Coordinator hat on] Let's develop an IGC Statement on this RFC 6852 "Affirmation of the Modern Paradigm for Standards" [1]. [1] http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6852 I'll be willing to serve as editor if no-one else volunteers, but I'd prefer for someone else to take on this role. Who would like to volunteer? Greetings, Norbert Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote: > > It is a good document. > > No, it's not. > > It refers only to business uses of the Internet, as if the Internet > were not used for many other things. It was recorded as a comment by > some IETF members > but was > ignored. > > It calls for access to the standard documents but it is > hypocritical since one of the signers, IEEE, does not allow it > (ITU, the main > target of this RFC, does distribute its standards online for a few > years.) > > It refers to open and transparent processes but the IETF members > discovered this document when it was already signed, and impossible to > modify. > > > > -------------- 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 From daniel at digsys.bg Sun Jan 27 03:09:55 2013 From: daniel at digsys.bg (Daniel Kalchev) Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2013 10:09:55 +0200 Subject: techno-politics was Re: [governance] Bloomberg - The Overzealous In-Reply-To: <0118952A-B07D-47D9-BF85-242D4100E02A@virtualized.org> References: <50FAC752.5090502@gmail.com> <50FBAE3C.8010600@ITforChange.net> <50FBCE14.7010901@gmail.com> <87FDA724-9919-447F-BF8F-8F0E84142A12@acm.org> <50FCAD68.5060500@cavebear.com> <0118952A-B07D-47D9-BF85-242D4100E02A@virtualized.org> Message-ID: This argument inspired some comments from me: On Jan 21, 2013, at 8:48 AM, David Conrad wrote: > Karl, > > On Jan 20, 2013, at 6:52 PM, Karl Auerbach wrote: > >> For many years there have been competing root systems. > > There have been "_alternate_ root systems" (consisting of both an alternate set of root servers along with an alternate namespace) since the first split DNS implementation was fielded back around 1986 or so to deal with internal vs. external domain names. ISC BIND version 9, the development of which I had a small role, included configuration language called "views" that made this easy to deploy, but the key factor in these alternate root systems are that the namespaces represented by different views are explicitly understood to be disjoint. > > There have also been folks who have tried to field "_competitive_ root systems", typically using browser plug-ins but also different sets of root name servers, to present a different namespace than the actual root, but as far as I am aware, they have been failures (at least in the business sense -- I'm sure some feel they have been political successes). Today, we call the software that modifies the DNS resolver behaviour "malware". This type of malware is quite popular and in fact, most of it is based on the "alternative root" concept. We fight this stuff fiercely. Why should we otherwise encourage the same behaviour? Imagine, your ISP's name servers (those who they suggested you use) suddenly start resolving using a different root. How is this any different? How can you tell, whether their name servers are - misconfigured; - intentionally configured this way; - infected with malware? In any case, you, the user is cheated. You have the option to either tell your ISP, send the police their way, or just switch ISPs. > >> And for many years both ISPs and individuals have run roots for their >> own benefit or to control the quality of root-level resolutions for >> their customers. > > Yes, and there are two cases: > > 1) where the ISP or individuals mirror the actual DNS _namespace_ so the only change is a reduction in need to go to the 13 root server IP addresses; _or_ > > 2) where the ISP or individual make modifications to the DNS _namespace_, typically in the form of redirection for purposes of inserting/modifying content or advertisements. > > I personally believe the former case is a great idea as it improves performance and resiliency and, in fact, when it is pushed down to the individual machine is the only way to ensure DNS responses have not been modified in flight (even with DNSSEC since DNSSEC only protects to the validating resolver, not from the validating resolver to the application). ORSN was a form of (1), albeit they did not agree to fully mirror the namespace and if they had actually carried through with their refusal, the idea is less great. This reminded me of… For years, the FreeBSD named (BIND) configuration, has this common section: // The traditional root hints mechanism. Use this, OR the slave zones below. zone "." { type hint; file "/etc/namedb/named.root"; }; /* Slaving the following zones from the root name servers has some significant advantages: 1. Faster local resolution for your users 2. No spurious traffic will be sent from your network to the roots 3. Greater resilience to any potential root server failure/DDoS On the other hand, this method requires more monitoring than the hints file to be sure that an unexpected failure mode has not incapacitated your server. Name servers that are serving a lot of clients will benefit more from this approach than individual hosts. Use with caution. To use this mechanism, uncomment the entries below, and comment the hint zone above. As documented at http://dns.icann.org/services/axfr/ these zones: "." (the root), ARPA, IN-ADDR.ARPA, IP6.ARPA, and ROOT-SERVERS.NET are availble for AXFR from these servers on IPv4 and IPv6: xfr.lax.dns.icann.org, xfr.cjr.dns.icann.org */ This is essentially suggesting, that instead of relying on a text file to list the root servers, you should actually become secondary for the root zone. That is, one of the root servers. Imagine, today, each FreeBSD server, or workstation (and these are *plenty*) is an actual, up to date root server for the network it serves. I believe we can thank Doug Barton for this. Hi Doug. :) So yes, alternative root servers is a technology practiced for years, for very good reasons and with very good results. But those alternative root servers resolve the same, singular root. The case of alternative root servers, that provide different result from the "official" root just creates more burden on everyone. With DNSSEC, that burden increases significantly. This all, provided you know what you are doing -- most Internet users don't and would not care much. Daniel -------------- 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 From gurstein at gmail.com Sat Jan 26 18:22:14 2013 From: gurstein at gmail.com (michael gurstein) Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2013 15:22:14 -0800 Subject: [governance] RFC 6852: Affirmation of the Modern Paradigm for Standards--Some Comments In-Reply-To: <77A59FC9477004489D44DE7FC6840E7B1B2F58@SUEX10-mbx-08.ad.syr.edu> References: <02cf01cdfbeb$73fed7e0$5bfc87a0$@gmail.com> <77A59FC9477004489D44DE7FC6840E7B1B2F58@SUEX10-mbx-08.ad.syr.edu> Message-ID: <03b701cdfc1b$faf725b0$f0e57110$@gmail.com> Lee, Normally I would agree with position but this one is such a shoddy and ideologically situated document that I, quite honestly, can't see how anyone in civil society can with any conscience sign on to this in its current form. If we are not in support of the "public interest" and in support of the broadest base of inclusion as opposed ,for example, to "competitive" interests and documents that don't reference either inclusion or support for those who are currently excluded, then what could we conceivably stand for as civil society. M From: Lee W McKnight [mailto:lmcknigh at syr.edu] Sent: Saturday, January 26, 2013 12:12 PM To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; michael gurstein; 'Avri Doria' Cc: housley at vigilsec.com; s.mills at ieee.org; jeff at w3.org; bernard_aboba at hotmail.com; st.amour at isoc.org; ylu22 at syr.edu Subject: RE: [governance] RFC 6852: Affirmation of the Modern Paradigm for Standards--Some Comments Hey Michael, Points well taken, as are Avri's comments. There is also a Third Way ; ) For IGC's position, I might suggest we support RFC 6852 since it is better than its absence; perhaps taking time to follow whatever procedure to try to formally include some of Michael's language. An offer of a quote from a standards-knowledgable co-coordinator like Norbert on behalf of IGC might be well-received, eve if it includes some form of 'but...' along the lines of Michael's additions. Finally, fyi WiGiT v0.2 open spec draft already folds in the 'official' open standards statement; which we will refine as Michael suggests. I will share v0.2 with the list upon its Feb. 1 or latest Feb. 4 release. Lee _____ From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] on behalf of michael gurstein [gurstein at gmail.com] Sent: Saturday, January 26, 2013 12:34 PM To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; 'Avri Doria' Cc: housley at vigilsec.com; s.mills at ieee.org; jeff at w3.org; bernard_aboba at hotmail.com; st.amour at isoc.org Subject: RE: [governance] RFC 6852: Affirmation of the Modern Paradigm for Standards--Some Comments Avri and Stephane, and all I gather that this is a "take it or leave it" i.e. no possibility for having input into the document? If there is a possibiity I would like to contribute my comments as interspersed below to a further revision of this document. Please note my comments as a to a document which I would otherwise be pleased to support... Affirmation of the Modern Paradigm for Standards Abstract On 29 August 2012, the leaders of the IEEE Standards Association, the IAB, the IETF, the Internet Society, and the W3C signed a statement affirming the importance of a jointly developed set of principles establishing a modern paradigm for global, open standards. These principles have become known as the "OpenStand" principles. This document contains the text of the affirmation that was signed. Status of This Memo This document is not an Internet Standards Track specification; it is published for informational purposes. This document is a product of the Internet Architecture Board (IAB) and represents information that the IAB has deemed valuable to provide for permanent record. It represents the consensus of the Internet Architecture Board (IAB). Documents approved for publication by the IAB are not a candidate for any level of Internet Standard; see Section 2 of RFC 5741. Information about the current status of this document, any errata, and how to provide feedback on it may be obtained at http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6852. RFC 6852 Modern Paradigm for Standards January 2013 Copyright Notice Copyright (c) 2013 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the document authors. All rights reserved. This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of publication of this document. Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect to this document. 1. Introduction On 29 August 2012, the leaders of the IEEE Standards Association, the IAB, the IETF, the Internet Society, and the W3C signed a statement affirming the importance of a jointly developed set of principles establishing a modern paradigm for global, open standards. These principles have become known as the "OpenStand" principles. Section 2 of this document describes the five OpenStand principles. Section 3 of this document contains the text of the signed affirmation of the five OpenStand principles. Section 4 contains a call for others to support the five OpenStand principles. 2. Modern Paradigm for Standards Over the past several decades, the global economy has realized a huge bounty due to the Internet and the World Wide Web. These could not have been possible without the innovations and standardization of many underlying technologies. This standardization occurred with great speed and effectiveness only because of key characteristics of a modern global standards paradigm. The affirmation below characterizes the principles that have led to this success as a means to ensure acceptance of standards activities that adhere to the principles. MG: AGREED... We embrace a modern paradigm for standards where the economics of global markets, fueled by technological advancements, drive global deployment of standards regardless of their formal status. MG: AGREED In this paradigm standards support interoperability, foster global competition, are developed through an open participatory process, and are voluntarily adopted globally. MG: AGREED These voluntary standards serve as building blocks for products and services targeted at meeting the needs of the market and consumer, thereby driving innovation. Innovation in turn contributes to the creation of new markets and the growth and expansion of existing markets. MG: DON'T THE STANDARDS ALSO AND PERHAPS MORE IMPORTANTLY, PROVIDE THE BUILDING BLOCK FOR PUBLIC SERVICES, SUPPORT THE PUBLIC INTEREST AND ENABLE THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE INTERNET AS A GLOBAL PUBLIC GOOD? Participation in the modern paradigm demands: 1. Cooperation. Respectful cooperation between standards organizations, whereby each respects the autonomy, integrity, processes, and intellectual property rules of the others. MG: AGREED 2. Adherence to principles. Adherence to the five fundamental principles of standards development: * Due process. Decisions are made with equity and fairness among participants. No one party dominates or guides standards development. Standards processes are transparent and opportunities exist to appeal decisions. Processes for periodic standards review and updating are well defined. * Broad consensus. Processes allow for all views to be considered and addressed, such that agreement can be found across a range of interests. * Transparency. Standards organizations provide advance public notice of proposed standards development activities, the scope of work to be undertaken, and conditions for participation. Easily accessible records of decisions and the materials used in reaching those decisions are provided. Public comment periods are provided before final standards approval and adoption. * Balance. Standards activities are not exclusively dominated by any particular person, company or interest group. * Openness. Standards processes are open to all interested and informed parties. MG: AGREED 3. Collective empowerment. Commitment by affirming standards organizations and their participants to collective empowerment by striving for standards that: * are chosen and defined based on technical merit, as judged by the contributed expertise of each participant; * provide global interoperability, scalability, stability, and resiliency; * enable global competition; MG: WHAT ABOUT ENABLING GLOBAL COOPERATION AS WELL AS COMPETITION? * serve as building blocks for further innovation; and * contribute to the creation of global communities, benefiting humanity. MG: WHAT ABOUT CONTRIBUTING TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST AND TO ENABLING THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE INTERNET AS A GLOBAL PUBLIC GOOD? 4. Availability. Standards specifications are made accessible to all for implementation and deployment. Affirming standards organizations have defined procedures to develop specifications that can be implemented under fair terms. Given market diversity, fair terms may vary from royalty-free to fair, reasonable, and non-discriminatory terms (FRAND). MG: WHAT ABOUT NON-MARKET BASED FORMS OF IMPLEMENTATION? 5. Voluntary adoption. Standards are voluntarily adopted and success is determined by the market. MG: IS SUCCESS IN THE MARKET THE ONLY POSSIBLE MEANS OF VALIDATION OF STANDARDS--HAVE THEIR POSSIBLE CONTRIBUTION TO ENHANCING THE GLOBAL PUBLIC GOOD/GLOBAL PUBLIC WELL-BEING BEEN CONSIDERED AS WELL? 3. Affirmation We embrace a modern paradigm for standards where the economics of global markets, fueled by technological advancements, drive global deployment of standards regardless of their formal status. MG: COULDN'T THE REALIZATION OF THE STANDARDS IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST BE EQUALLY, IF NOT MORE IMPORTANT, AS A PARADIGM DETERMINING DEPLOYMENT? In this paradigm standards support interoperability, foster global competition, are developed through an open participatory process, and are voluntarily adopted globally. These voluntary standards serve as building blocks for products and services targeted at meeting the needs of the market and consumer, thereby driving innovation. Innovation in turn contributes to the creation of new markets and the growth and expansion of existing markets. MG: COULD THIS PARADIGM NOT INCLUDE SUPPORTING GLOBAL COOPERATION AND PROVIDING BUILDING BLOCKS FOR DEVELOPMENTS IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST AND SUPPORTIVE OF THE PUBLIC GOOD. MG: SHOULD NOT THE SIGNIFICANCE OF STANDARDS AS SUPPORTIVE OF BROAD BASED INLUSION BE INCLUDED AS A FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLE--INCLUDING INCLUSION OF THOSE WITH PHYSICAL DISABILITIES, THOSE IN RURAL AND REMOTE LOCATION, THOSE WHO ARE SOCIALLY AND ECONOMICALLY MARGINALIZED? MIKE GURSTEIN By signing this statement, we affirm our support for and adherence to these principles. Lynn St.Amour President and CEO Internet Society Russ Housley Chair Internet Engineering Task Force Bernard Aboba Chair Internet Architecture Board Jeff Jaffe CEO W3C Steve Mills President IEEE Standards Association Housley, et al. Informational [Page 4] RFC 6852 Modern Paradigm for Standards January 2013 4. Call for Endorsement We invite other standards organizations, governments, corporations and technology innovators globally to support these principles. You can publicly show your support at . 5. Security Considerations Nothing in this document directly affects the security of the Internet. 6. IAB Members at Time of Approval Internet Architecture Board Members at the time this document was approved were: Bernard Aboba Jari Arkko Marc Blanchet Ross Callon Alissa Cooper Spencer Dawkins Joel Halpern Russ Housley David Kessens Danny McPherson Jon Peterson Dave Thaler Hannes Tschofenig Authors' Addresses Russ Housley EMail: housley at vigilsec.com Steve Mills EMail: s.mills at ieee.org Jeff Jaffe EMail: jeff at w3.org Bernard Aboba EMail: bernard_aboba at hotmail.com Lynn St.Amour EMail: st.amour at isoc.org -----Original Message----- From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Avri Doria Sent: Saturday, January 26, 2013 8:50 AM To: IGC Subject: Re: [governance] RFC 6852: Affirmation of the Modern Paradigm for Standards On 26 Jan 2013, at 09:12, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote: > http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc6852.txt > > (It is the OpenStand declaration, republished as a RFC. Key words: > standards, IETF, ITU, IEEE, W3C...) It is a good document. At end thee is a call: " 4. Call for Endorsement We invite other standards organizations, governments, corporations and technology innovators globally to support these principles. You can publicly show your support at < http://www.open-stand.org>. " While the IGC is not among the : " standards organizations, governments, corporations and technology innovators" and while it is unfortunate that they neglected to call for support from civil society (a blind spot which I beleive often gets in way of getting civil society support and cooperation) Perhaps we should discuss supporting, or at least finding, a broad IGC consensus on this document. avri -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From nb at bollow.ch Sun Jan 27 04:02:59 2013 From: nb at bollow.ch (Norbert Bollow) Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2013 10:02:59 +0100 Subject: [governance] Re: Charter amendment proposals in need of more co-proposers In-Reply-To: <09eb01cdfb01$f883d1e0$e98b75a0$@gmail.com> References: <20130125115127.00edd288@quill.bollow.ch> <09eb01cdfb01$f883d1e0$e98b75a0$@gmail.com> Message-ID: <20130127100259.4af934fc@quill.bollow.ch> Here's a quick update: The "proposal of Jeremy and co-proposers on updating the reference to the mailing list" has just reached the threshold of 10 co-proposers who are voting members. The "proposal of Norbert and co-proposers on coordinator election dates" currently has seven, and will hence not reach the point of getting voted on unless at least three more sign on. Greetings, Norbert I wrote: > > > among the charter amendment proposals listed on > > http://igcaucus.org/informally-discussed-charter-amendments > > I think it would be good to bring the following two to a vote > > together with Avri's two amendment proposals (which have already > > achieved the requirement of a sufficient number of co-proposers). > > > > Proposal of Jeremy and co-proposers on updating the reference to > > the mailing list > > > > Proposal of Norbert and co-proposers on coordinator election dates > > Are these proposals really not getting any further co-proposers??? > > If someone doubts that the clarification of coordinator election > dates has some importance, please try to explain how the current text > of our charter is consistent with Sala's election having taken place > in October 2011 and mine in January 2013. > > Greetings, > Norbert > > -------------- 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 From kstouray at gmail.com Sat Jan 26 18:28:09 2013 From: kstouray at gmail.com (Katim S. Touray) Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2013 23:28:09 +0000 Subject: [bestbits] [governance] Multistakeholder Roles and Responsibilities In-Reply-To: <20130123032649.GA16191@hserus.net> References: <01c801cdf457$f76a3fc0$e63ebf40$@gmail.com> <50F763C0.5070907@ciroap.org> <50F8D10B.3010109@ciroap.org> <20130118224941.556b0653@quill.bollow.ch> <50FCEFC5.8010008@ciroap.org> <20130123032649.GA16191@hserus.net> Message-ID: Hi Suresh, I just posted a response to your comments on my CircleID article. Here's the link to my response: http://www.circleid.com/posts/20130122_much_ado_about_wcit_12_and_multi_stakeholderism/#9232 Thanks, and have a great weekend! Katim On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 3:26 AM, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote: > Katim S. Touray [23/01/13 02:29 +0000]: > > As promised a few days ago, here's the link to my CircleID article on >> WCIT-12 and multi-stakeholderism: >> http://www.circleid.com/posts/**20130122_much_ado_about_wcit_** >> 12_and_multi_stakeholderism/ >> > > Thanks. There are a few issues here I would differ with. > > Some of the problem here doesn't involve the fact that governments have a > role in internet governance - it involves an objection to the ITU allowing > scope creep into its mandate, to cover issues that more countries than just > the USA (so hardly "exceptionalism" or "unilateralism") have differed with. > > As for Africa and its lack of participation in internet governance > structures, part of it has to do with capacity building for government, > industry and civil society stakeholders, while monopoly and competition > policy issues some due to geography, given africa's landlocked nature and > difficult terrain that makes slow and expensive satellite connectivity a > necessity, some due to government monopolies on the Internet and telecom, > while others can be laid to the door of various other factors, such as a > lack of stable government, cutting off the Internet to prevent opponents > from organizing themselves using it (as in Syria, and before that in > Qaddafi's Libya ..). > I am afraid this can't all be blamed on US exceptionalism, and while there > is a substantial amount of aid in material, capacity building etc that can > be (and is) provided by local and international NGOs who set up ISP > exchange points, hold training workshops etc, a substantial local effort is > also needed before you will see the situation improve. > > On the DoC / NTIA oversight of ICANN / IANA, it has been mostly hands off, > only stepping in where there have been cases where DoC appears to feel that > there are governance issues involved. Or have you seen them try to revoke > .cu, .sy, .kp just because Cuba, Syria and North Korea are in the state > department's OFAC blacklist of entities American firms are forbidden to > trade with? > > I'll post the same thing on circleid to kickstart the discussion there. > > thanks > suresh > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From ajp at glocom.ac.jp Sun Jan 27 05:39:51 2013 From: ajp at glocom.ac.jp (Adam Peake) Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2013 19:39:51 +0900 Subject: [governance] Towards an IGC Statement on RFC 6852 "Affirmation of the Modern Paradigm for Standards" In-Reply-To: <20130127091003.2e5d7640@quill.bollow.ch> References: <20130126141234.GA21789@sources.org> <20130126224714.GA21920@sources.org> <20130127091003.2e5d7640@quill.bollow.ch> Message-ID: Norbert, thanks for trying, but to be frank, why bother? In the couple of days since RFC 6852 was mentioned we've seen almost equal support/opposition for statement. And if the caucus does produce something will it make any difference? Very likely no. But we do have a few days in which to submit a statement for the IGF open consultation and to (hopefully) support CS MAG members in their discussions. Could we please focus on core issues. Thanks, Adam On Sun, Jan 27, 2013 at 5:10 PM, Norbert Bollow wrote: > [with IGC Coordinator hat on] > > Let's develop an IGC Statement on this RFC 6852 "Affirmation of the > Modern Paradigm for Standards" [1]. > [1] http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6852 > > I'll be willing to serve as editor if no-one else volunteers, but I'd > prefer for someone else to take on this role. > > Who would like to volunteer? > > Greetings, > Norbert > > > Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote: > >> > It is a good document. >> >> No, it's not. >> >> It refers only to business uses of the Internet, as if the Internet >> were not used for many other things. It was recorded as a comment by >> some IETF members >> but was >> ignored. >> >> It calls for access to the standard documents but it is >> hypocritical since one of the signers, IEEE, does not allow it >> (ITU, the main >> target of this RFC, does distribute its standards online for a few >> years.) >> >> It refers to open and transparent processes but the IETF members >> discovered this document when it was already signed, and impossible to >> modify. >> >> >> >> > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From fouadbajwa at gmail.com Sun Jan 27 04:45:40 2013 From: fouadbajwa at gmail.com (Fouad Bajwa) Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2013 14:45:40 +0500 Subject: [governance] Re: Charter amendment proposals in need of more co-proposers In-Reply-To: <20130127100259.4af934fc@quill.bollow.ch> References: <20130125115127.00edd288@quill.bollow.ch> <09eb01cdfb01$f883d1e0$e98b75a0$@gmail.com> <20130127100259.4af934fc@quill.bollow.ch> Message-ID: +1 from me. Best Fouad On Sun, Jan 27, 2013 at 2:02 PM, Norbert Bollow wrote: > Here's a quick update: The "proposal of Jeremy and co-proposers on > updating the reference to the mailing list" has just reached the > threshold of 10 co-proposers who are voting members. The "proposal of > Norbert and co-proposers on coordinator election dates" currently has > seven, and will hence not reach the point of getting voted on unless > at least three more sign on. > > Greetings, > Norbert > > > I wrote: >> >> > among the charter amendment proposals listed on >> > http://igcaucus.org/informally-discussed-charter-amendments >> > I think it would be good to bring the following two to a vote >> > together with Avri's two amendment proposals (which have already >> > achieved the requirement of a sufficient number of co-proposers). >> > >> > Proposal of Jeremy and co-proposers on updating the reference to >> > the mailing list >> > >> > Proposal of Norbert and co-proposers on coordinator election dates >> >> Are these proposals really not getting any further co-proposers??? >> >> If someone doubts that the clarification of coordinator election >> dates has some importance, please try to explain how the current text >> of our charter is consistent with Sala's election having taken place >> in October 2011 and mine in January 2013. >> >> Greetings, >> Norbert >> >> > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > -- Regards. -------------------------- Fouad Bajwa ICT4D and Internet Governance Advisor My Blog: Internet's Governance: http://internetsgovernance.blogspot.com/ Follow my Tweets: http://twitter.com/fouadbajwa -------------- 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 From nb at bollow.ch Sun Jan 27 06:33:08 2013 From: nb at bollow.ch (Norbert Bollow) Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2013 12:33:08 +0100 Subject: [governance] Towards an IGC Statement on RFC 6852 "Affirmation of the Modern Paradigm for Standards" In-Reply-To: References: <20130126141234.GA21789@sources.org> <20130126224714.GA21920@sources.org> <20130127091003.2e5d7640@quill.bollow.ch> Message-ID: <20130127123308.689639f3@quill.bollow.ch> [with IGC coordinator hat on] Adam Peake wrote: > Norbert, thanks for trying, but to be frank, why bother? Because standards development is very much at the core of Internet governance, and it is important for IGC to engage, to the extent that consensus is possible, also on such core issues, and not just on more peripheral questions like e.g. the choice of discussion topics for the next Internet Governance Forum. > In the couple of days since RFC 6852 was mentioned we've seen almost > equal support/opposition for statement. That is not accurate. We have seen praise for RFC 6852 as well as criticism. This is no reason to not at least try to incorporate both in a statement. > And if the caucus does produce something will it make any difference? That will depend on the actual content of the statement, and on how convincing it is written, and on whether it will get promoted in contexts where it can make a difference. The Caucus has several members who have the right kind of contacts. > Could we please focus on core issues. This is a core issue. Greetings, Norbert > On Sun, Jan 27, 2013 at 5:10 PM, Norbert Bollow wrote: > > [with IGC Coordinator hat on] > > > > Let's develop an IGC Statement on this RFC 6852 "Affirmation of the > > Modern Paradigm for Standards" [1]. > > [1] http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6852 > > > > I'll be willing to serve as editor if no-one else volunteers, but > > I'd prefer for someone else to take on this role. > > > > Who would like to volunteer? > > > > Greetings, > > Norbert > > > > > > Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote: > > > >> > It is a good document. > >> > >> No, it's not. > >> > >> It refers only to business uses of the Internet, as if the Internet > >> were not used for many other things. It was recorded as a comment > >> by some IETF members > >> but was > >> ignored. > >> > >> It calls for access to the standard documents but it is > >> hypocritical since one of the signers, IEEE, does not allow it > >> (ITU, the > >> main target of this RFC, does distribute its standards online for > >> a few years.) > >> > >> It refers to open and transparent processes but the IETF members > >> discovered this document when it was already signed, and > >> impossible to modify. > >> > >> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From ajp at glocom.ac.jp Sun Jan 27 06:59:00 2013 From: ajp at glocom.ac.jp (Adam Peake) Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2013 20:59:00 +0900 Subject: [governance] caucus contribution, consultation and MAG meeting In-Reply-To: <51051017.80103@itforchange.net> References: <20130127120551.1db0b299@quill.bollow.ch> <51051017.80103@itforchange.net> Message-ID: I don't agree with Internet principles as the overall theme, but do agree it's a topic that needs significant focus. I think it's clear after 7 IGFs that a session of 2 or 3 hours and a few scattered workshops doesn't begin to scratch the surface of an issue. So how could we use a day? Would more depth of discussion be more likely to lead to some form of outcome? Just a thought: Structured discussion on the morning (might be a panel or a round table in a plenary setting). Free, small group discussion middle of the day (working in small ad-hoc groups to address issues and or questions identified during the morning) Back to "plenary" for shared discussion? (use moderators to manage the flow: some are getting very good at this role. For example, I think Bill Drake and Jeanette Hofmann have been excellent. Better than the "professionals".) But just a thought, how else might a full day be used to develop a useful dialogue about one topic? Schedule might look like: Day 1. AM: Opening ceremony. Day 1. PM: Critical Internet Resources (3 hours) Day 2. Enhanced Cooperation (2 hours sessions, work over "lunch") Day 3. Internet Principles (2 hours sessions, work over "lunch") Day 4. AM: Taking Stock and Emerging Issues (3 hours) Day 4. PM: Outcomes (1 hour). Closing Ceremony My opinion, 3 hours is a long time and takes a good subject or it drags. Only CIR from Baku worked the 3 hours well. (IMHO etc etc) Adam On Sun, Jan 27, 2013 at 8:31 PM, parminder wrote: > > I may also remind that I had proposed that IGC supports the Internet Rights > and Principles (IRP) Group which is likely to propose that > > (1) Internet principles in some form be the overall theme of the next IGF - > Maybe something more descriptive as - 'public interest principles for the > Internet' or 'Shaping global principles for the Internet' > > (2) A round table on Internet Principles be held at the next IGF. > > I am developing a first draft for the IRP Group, if IGC so wants I can share > it with IGC as well. > > parminder > > > On Sunday 27 January 2013 04:46 PM, Adam Peake wrote: > > Hi Norbert, > > No, sorry, no time to work on a draft. But look forward to discussion > and hopefully some consensus. > > Adam > > > > > > On Sun, Jan 27, 2013 at 8:05 PM, Norbert Bollow wrote: > > [with IGC Coordinator hat on] > > Adam Peake wrote: > > Resending email sent to the list on Jan 10. Deadline for > contributions is Feb 14. > > Just over two weeks to agree any contribution. > > Thanks for reminding us! This is urgent and imporant. > > Adam, are you willing and able to take the time to quickly produce a > first draft? > > Greetings, > Norbert > > > A few comments for the February/March consultation. > > Public archive of MAG mailing list needed, not been updated for a > year. > > Workshops: too many. Cut to between 80 and 100. Make this target > number known when the call for applications is published, might be the > first time quite a large number of proposals are rejected (might think > about implications of this for the IGF), people should expect to be > disappointed. > > Minimum of 50% of MAG members must complete assessment of all > workshops. > > Clarify rules for other sessions (open forums, dynamic coalition, > etc.) > > No reason an initial call to prepare proposals can't be made before > the Feb meeting (more time better and the meetings a little later than > usual). A reminder to MAG members to ready their stakeholders. > > For workshops, keep the current themes (access, SOP > [security/openness/privacy], IG4D [Internet governance for > development], CIR [critical Internet resources], emerging issues). > Have the MAG better define Internet Governance, how it must be > considered in workshop proposals (there are other spaces in WSIS > follow-up for non-IG issues). Use an evaluation form for workshops > (at the moment don't even know if a room was empty or overflowing, > simple count a good idea.) However, indications are that while there > were too many workshops in Baku many were strong in content, well > received. MAG should not cut what looks like a success to favor the > floundering main sessions. > > Merging not the always the solution, it's too easy an answer for MAG > in their evaluation to say merge simply because proposals have similar > words in the title. If merging proposed then the new workshop needs > support or tendency to end up with 2 workshops in the same space > (merge in name only). > > Overall theme for 2013: "enhanced cooperation -- meaningful > participation of developing countries in Internet governance". > > Main sessions. Mix up the formats, 3 hours generally too long, some > poorly attended in Baku and many grumbled complaints about poor > content, poor preparation, repeating issues from previous years, etc. > Some main sessions need better preparation (and some were good - > transcripts illustrate the differences, MAG needs to be aware they > have a role to complete, not last minute for a meeting of the IGF's > importance.) Invite speakers early. Use (look for) funds to support > speakers. > > Taking stock and emerging issues: mix the two sessions, then > justifies 3 hours. Probably best held on the final morning (i.e. > emerging issues become issues the IGF thinks emerging as important for > the coming year(s)). > > Final afternoon: session on outcomes (1 hour), followed by closing. > > Critical Internet Resources (strong session in Baku, justifies 3 > hours). Keep as before. > > New theme: Enhanced Cooperation. Sessions in mixed formats over 1 day, > e.g. Morning expert panel session 2 hours. Follow by a long break > where people encouraged to join self-organizing small groups to > discuss a few set questions and ideas from the morning panel. > Afternoon, 2 hour moderated session with audience only, no > panel/experts etc. Bring back comments from the small groups. > > New theme: Internet principles. One day, perhaps same format as > suggested for enhanced cooperation. Try something different. > > Development aspect of IG always overlooked and too often "governance" > lost as discussion focuses on IT for development. Open specific > public comment on design/scope of IG4D session. Bring back to the May > meeting to decide on topics and format. > > Time to drop access and SOP as main sessions, but keep as workshops > and perhaps round-tables. > > Adam > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From ajp at glocom.ac.jp Sun Jan 27 07:01:35 2013 From: ajp at glocom.ac.jp (Adam Peake) Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2013 21:01:35 +0900 Subject: [governance] Towards an IGC Statement on RFC 6852 "Affirmation of the Modern Paradigm for Standards" In-Reply-To: <20130127123308.689639f3@quill.bollow.ch> References: <20130126141234.GA21789@sources.org> <20130126224714.GA21920@sources.org> <20130127091003.2e5d7640@quill.bollow.ch> <20130127123308.689639f3@quill.bollow.ch> Message-ID: Please, just focus. There's a hard deadline for a contribution to the IGF (which we missed last year). Meet that and come back to the RFC. Adam On Sun, Jan 27, 2013 at 8:33 PM, Norbert Bollow wrote: > [with IGC coordinator hat on] > > Adam Peake wrote: > >> Norbert, thanks for trying, but to be frank, why bother? > > Because standards development is very much at the core of Internet > governance, and it is important for IGC to engage, to the extent that > consensus is possible, also on such core issues, and not just on more > peripheral questions like e.g. the choice of discussion topics for the > next Internet Governance Forum. > >> In the couple of days since RFC 6852 was mentioned we've seen almost >> equal support/opposition for statement. > > That is not accurate. We have seen praise for RFC 6852 as well as > criticism. This is no reason to not at least try to incorporate both in > a statement. > >> And if the caucus does produce something will it make any difference? > > That will depend on the actual content of the statement, and on how > convincing it is written, and on whether it will get promoted in > contexts where it can make a difference. The Caucus has several members > who have the right kind of contacts. > >> Could we please focus on core issues. > > This is a core issue. > > Greetings, > Norbert > >> On Sun, Jan 27, 2013 at 5:10 PM, Norbert Bollow wrote: >> > [with IGC Coordinator hat on] >> > >> > Let's develop an IGC Statement on this RFC 6852 "Affirmation of the >> > Modern Paradigm for Standards" [1]. >> > [1] http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6852 >> > >> > I'll be willing to serve as editor if no-one else volunteers, but >> > I'd prefer for someone else to take on this role. >> > >> > Who would like to volunteer? >> > >> > Greetings, >> > Norbert >> > >> > >> > Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote: >> > >> >> > It is a good document. >> >> >> >> No, it's not. >> >> >> >> It refers only to business uses of the Internet, as if the Internet >> >> were not used for many other things. It was recorded as a comment >> >> by some IETF members >> >> but was >> >> ignored. >> >> >> >> It calls for access to the standard documents but it is >> >> hypocritical since one of the signers, IEEE, does not allow it >> >> (ITU, the >> >> main target of this RFC, does distribute its standards online for >> >> a few years.) >> >> >> >> It refers to open and transparent processes but the IETF members >> >> discovered this document when it was already signed, and >> >> impossible to modify. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > >> > >> > >> > ____________________________________________________________ >> > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From parminder at itforchange.net Sun Jan 27 06:31:35 2013 From: parminder at itforchange.net (parminder) Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2013 17:01:35 +0530 Subject: [governance] caucus contribution, consultation and MAG meeting In-Reply-To: References: <20130127120551.1db0b299@quill.bollow.ch> Message-ID: <51051017.80103@itforchange.net> I may also remind that I had proposed that IGC supports the Internet Rights and Principles (IRP) Group which is likely to propose that (1) Internet principles in some form be the overall theme of the next IGF - Maybe something more descriptive as - 'public interest principles for the Internet' or 'Shaping global principles for the Internet' (2) A round table on Internet Principles be held at the next IGF. I am developing a first draft for the IRP Group, if IGC so wants I can share it with IGC as well. parminder On Sunday 27 January 2013 04:46 PM, Adam Peake wrote: > Hi Norbert, > > No, sorry, no time to work on a draft. But look forward to discussion > and hopefully some consensus. > > Adam > > > > > > On Sun, Jan 27, 2013 at 8:05 PM, Norbert Bollow wrote: >> [with IGC Coordinator hat on] >> >> Adam Peake wrote: >> >>> Resending email sent to the list on Jan 10. Deadline for >>> contributions is Feb 14. >>> >>> Just over two weeks to agree any contribution. >> Thanks for reminding us! This is urgent and imporant. >> >> Adam, are you willing and able to take the time to quickly produce a >> first draft? >> >> Greetings, >> Norbert >> >> >>> A few comments for the February/March consultation. >>> >>> Public archive of MAG mailing list needed, not been updated for a >>> year. >>> >>> Workshops: too many. Cut to between 80 and 100. Make this target >>> number known when the call for applications is published, might be the >>> first time quite a large number of proposals are rejected (might think >>> about implications of this for the IGF), people should expect to be >>> disappointed. >>> >>> Minimum of 50% of MAG members must complete assessment of all >>> workshops. >>> >>> Clarify rules for other sessions (open forums, dynamic coalition, >>> etc.) >>> >>> No reason an initial call to prepare proposals can't be made before >>> the Feb meeting (more time better and the meetings a little later than >>> usual). A reminder to MAG members to ready their stakeholders. >>> >>> For workshops, keep the current themes (access, SOP >>> [security/openness/privacy], IG4D [Internet governance for >>> development], CIR [critical Internet resources], emerging issues). >>> Have the MAG better define Internet Governance, how it must be >>> considered in workshop proposals (there are other spaces in WSIS >>> follow-up for non-IG issues). Use an evaluation form for workshops >>> (at the moment don't even know if a room was empty or overflowing, >>> simple count a good idea.) However, indications are that while there >>> were too many workshops in Baku many were strong in content, well >>> received. MAG should not cut what looks like a success to favor the >>> floundering main sessions. >>> >>> Merging not the always the solution, it's too easy an answer for MAG >>> in their evaluation to say merge simply because proposals have similar >>> words in the title. If merging proposed then the new workshop needs >>> support or tendency to end up with 2 workshops in the same space >>> (merge in name only). >>> >>> Overall theme for 2013: "enhanced cooperation -- meaningful >>> participation of developing countries in Internet governance". >>> >>> Main sessions. Mix up the formats, 3 hours generally too long, some >>> poorly attended in Baku and many grumbled complaints about poor >>> content, poor preparation, repeating issues from previous years, etc. >>> Some main sessions need better preparation (and some were good - >>> transcripts illustrate the differences, MAG needs to be aware they >>> have a role to complete, not last minute for a meeting of the IGF's >>> importance.) Invite speakers early. Use (look for) funds to support >>> speakers. >>> >>> Taking stock and emerging issues: mix the two sessions, then >>> justifies 3 hours. Probably best held on the final morning (i.e. >>> emerging issues become issues the IGF thinks emerging as important for >>> the coming year(s)). >>> >>> Final afternoon: session on outcomes (1 hour), followed by closing. >>> >>> Critical Internet Resources (strong session in Baku, justifies 3 >>> hours). Keep as before. >>> >>> New theme: Enhanced Cooperation. Sessions in mixed formats over 1 day, >>> e.g. Morning expert panel session 2 hours. Follow by a long break >>> where people encouraged to join self-organizing small groups to >>> discuss a few set questions and ideas from the morning panel. >>> Afternoon, 2 hour moderated session with audience only, no >>> panel/experts etc. Bring back comments from the small groups. >>> >>> New theme: Internet principles. One day, perhaps same format as >>> suggested for enhanced cooperation. Try something different. >>> >>> Development aspect of IG always overlooked and too often "governance" >>> lost as discussion focuses on IT for development. Open specific >>> public comment on design/scope of IG4D session. Bring back to the May >>> meeting to decide on topics and format. >>> >>> Time to drop access and SOP as main sessions, but keep as workshops >>> and perhaps round-tables. >>> >>> Adam >>> -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From suresh at hserus.net Sun Jan 27 06:39:39 2013 From: suresh at hserus.net (Suresh Ramasubramanian) Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2013 17:09:39 +0530 Subject: [governance] Towards an IGC Statement on RFC 6852 "Affirmation of the Modern Paradigm for Standards" In-Reply-To: References: <20130126141234.GA21789@sources.org> <20130126224714.GA21920@sources.org> <20130127091003.2e5d7640@quill.bollow.ch> Message-ID: <13c7bce25f7.2728.4f968dcf8ecd56c9cb8acab6370fcfe0@hserus.net> +1 to adam --srs (htc one x) On 27 January 2013 4:09:51 PM Adam Peake wrote: > Norbert, thanks for trying, but to be frank, why bother? > > In the couple of days since RFC 6852 was mentioned we've seen almost > equal support/opposition for statement. And if the caucus does > produce something will it make any difference? Very likely no. > > But we do have a few days in which to submit a statement for the IGF > open consultation and to (hopefully) support CS MAG members in their > discussions. Could we please focus on core issues. > > Thanks, > > Adam > > > > > > On Sun, Jan 27, 2013 at 5:10 PM, Norbert Bollow wrote: > > [with IGC Coordinator hat on] > > > > Let's develop an IGC Statement on this RFC 6852 "Affirmation of the > > Modern Paradigm for Standards" [1]. > > [1] http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6852 > > > > I'll be willing to serve as editor if no-one else volunteers, but I'd > > prefer for someone else to take on this role. > > > > Who would like to volunteer? > > > > Greetings, > > Norbert > > > > > > Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote: > > > >> > It is a good document. > >> > >> No, it's not. > >> > >> It refers only to business uses of the Internet, as if the Internet > >> were not used for many other things. It was recorded as a comment by > >> some IETF members > >> but was > >> ignored. > >> > >> It calls for access to the standard documents but it is > >> hypocritical since one of the signers, IEEE, does not allow it > >> (ITU, the main > >> target of this RFC, does distribute its standards online for a few > >> years.) > >> > >> It refers to open and transparent processes but the IETF members > >> discovered this document when it was already signed, and impossible to > >> modify. > >> > >> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From ajp at glocom.ac.jp Sun Jan 27 06:16:20 2013 From: ajp at glocom.ac.jp (Adam Peake) Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2013 20:16:20 +0900 Subject: [governance] caucus contribution, consultation and MAG meeting In-Reply-To: <20130127120551.1db0b299@quill.bollow.ch> References: <20130127120551.1db0b299@quill.bollow.ch> Message-ID: Hi Norbert, No, sorry, no time to work on a draft. But look forward to discussion and hopefully some consensus. Adam On Sun, Jan 27, 2013 at 8:05 PM, Norbert Bollow wrote: > [with IGC Coordinator hat on] > > Adam Peake wrote: > >> Resending email sent to the list on Jan 10. Deadline for >> contributions is Feb 14. >> >> Just over two weeks to agree any contribution. > > Thanks for reminding us! This is urgent and imporant. > > Adam, are you willing and able to take the time to quickly produce a > first draft? > > Greetings, > Norbert > > >> A few comments for the February/March consultation. >> >> Public archive of MAG mailing list needed, not been updated for a >> year. >> >> Workshops: too many. Cut to between 80 and 100. Make this target >> number known when the call for applications is published, might be the >> first time quite a large number of proposals are rejected (might think >> about implications of this for the IGF), people should expect to be >> disappointed. >> >> Minimum of 50% of MAG members must complete assessment of all >> workshops. >> >> Clarify rules for other sessions (open forums, dynamic coalition, >> etc.) >> >> No reason an initial call to prepare proposals can't be made before >> the Feb meeting (more time better and the meetings a little later than >> usual). A reminder to MAG members to ready their stakeholders. >> >> For workshops, keep the current themes (access, SOP >> [security/openness/privacy], IG4D [Internet governance for >> development], CIR [critical Internet resources], emerging issues). >> Have the MAG better define Internet Governance, how it must be >> considered in workshop proposals (there are other spaces in WSIS >> follow-up for non-IG issues). Use an evaluation form for workshops >> (at the moment don't even know if a room was empty or overflowing, >> simple count a good idea.) However, indications are that while there >> were too many workshops in Baku many were strong in content, well >> received. MAG should not cut what looks like a success to favor the >> floundering main sessions. >> >> Merging not the always the solution, it's too easy an answer for MAG >> in their evaluation to say merge simply because proposals have similar >> words in the title. If merging proposed then the new workshop needs >> support or tendency to end up with 2 workshops in the same space >> (merge in name only). >> >> Overall theme for 2013: "enhanced cooperation -- meaningful >> participation of developing countries in Internet governance". >> >> Main sessions. Mix up the formats, 3 hours generally too long, some >> poorly attended in Baku and many grumbled complaints about poor >> content, poor preparation, repeating issues from previous years, etc. >> Some main sessions need better preparation (and some were good - >> transcripts illustrate the differences, MAG needs to be aware they >> have a role to complete, not last minute for a meeting of the IGF's >> importance.) Invite speakers early. Use (look for) funds to support >> speakers. >> >> Taking stock and emerging issues: mix the two sessions, then >> justifies 3 hours. Probably best held on the final morning (i.e. >> emerging issues become issues the IGF thinks emerging as important for >> the coming year(s)). >> >> Final afternoon: session on outcomes (1 hour), followed by closing. >> >> Critical Internet Resources (strong session in Baku, justifies 3 >> hours). Keep as before. >> >> New theme: Enhanced Cooperation. Sessions in mixed formats over 1 day, >> e.g. Morning expert panel session 2 hours. Follow by a long break >> where people encouraged to join self-organizing small groups to >> discuss a few set questions and ideas from the morning panel. >> Afternoon, 2 hour moderated session with audience only, no >> panel/experts etc. Bring back comments from the small groups. >> >> New theme: Internet principles. One day, perhaps same format as >> suggested for enhanced cooperation. Try something different. >> >> Development aspect of IG always overlooked and too often "governance" >> lost as discussion focuses on IT for development. Open specific >> public comment on design/scope of IG4D session. Bring back to the May >> meeting to decide on topics and format. >> >> Time to drop access and SOP as main sessions, but keep as workshops >> and perhaps round-tables. >> >> Adam >> > -------------- 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 From parminder at itforchange.net Sun Jan 27 05:34:59 2013 From: parminder at itforchange.net (parminder) Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2013 16:04:59 +0530 Subject: [governance] Facebook spent $4 million to lobby U.S. lawmakers in 2012 In-Reply-To: <0B53F524-5B68-487B-BBD7-622E20EAEED9@acm.org> References: <510086BE.6010100@ITforChange.net> <056f01cdfa49$375b4f60$a611ee20$@gmail.com> <51015DF8.6070803@gmail.com> <066a01cdfa5a$01b28610$05179230$@gmail.com> <5102AD28.9090901@ITforChange.net> <51034FAC.4040605@ITforChange.net> <51035219.9070200@ITforChange.net> <-8558355287633436504@unknownmsgid> <6DCAB3E586E6A34FB17223DF8D8F0D3D5DC37165@W8-EX10MB.unam.local> <02d401cdfbed$2b918370$82b48a50$@gmail.com> <0B53F524-5B68-487B-BBD7-622E20EAEED9@acm.org> Message-ID: <510502D3.2030702@itforchange.net> On Sunday 27 January 2013 02:23 AM, Avri Doria wrote: > On 26 Jan 2013, at 12:52, McTim wrote: > >> Do we have a definition of global public interest? > > We, as in IGC? I don't think so. > > I have a semi-tautological definition I use personally that works for me: > > That which the multistakeholders Multistakeholders are who? Definition of MSism (multistakeholderism) is by many orders less known and clear than of public interest. The 'public interest' term has so much theory and practice behind it over decades if not centuries. > in a process determine by broad/rough/near consensus to be in the global public interest, is the global public interest. How is this definition of public interest is better than say "public interest is that which the public or people in a process determined by broad/rough/near consensus (like national constitutional processes are considered to be) to be in the global public interest, is the global public interest. And who determines whether ICANN is the process determined by broad/rough/near consensus (among whom,when did it happen) or the UN is the process determined by broad/rough/near consensus, or both partially are, but then in what parts? parminder > > avri > > > -------------- 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 From nb at bollow.ch Sun Jan 27 06:05:51 2013 From: nb at bollow.ch (Norbert Bollow) Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2013 12:05:51 +0100 Subject: [governance] caucus contribution, consultation and MAG meeting In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20130127120551.1db0b299@quill.bollow.ch> [with IGC Coordinator hat on] Adam Peake wrote: > Resending email sent to the list on Jan 10. Deadline for > contributions is Feb 14. > > Just over two weeks to agree any contribution. Thanks for reminding us! This is urgent and imporant. Adam, are you willing and able to take the time to quickly produce a first draft? Greetings, Norbert > A few comments for the February/March consultation. > > Public archive of MAG mailing list needed, not been updated for a > year. > > Workshops: too many. Cut to between 80 and 100. Make this target > number known when the call for applications is published, might be the > first time quite a large number of proposals are rejected (might think > about implications of this for the IGF), people should expect to be > disappointed. > > Minimum of 50% of MAG members must complete assessment of all > workshops. > > Clarify rules for other sessions (open forums, dynamic coalition, > etc.) > > No reason an initial call to prepare proposals can't be made before > the Feb meeting (more time better and the meetings a little later than > usual). A reminder to MAG members to ready their stakeholders. > > For workshops, keep the current themes (access, SOP > [security/openness/privacy], IG4D [Internet governance for > development], CIR [critical Internet resources], emerging issues). > Have the MAG better define Internet Governance, how it must be > considered in workshop proposals (there are other spaces in WSIS > follow-up for non-IG issues). Use an evaluation form for workshops > (at the moment don't even know if a room was empty or overflowing, > simple count a good idea.) However, indications are that while there > were too many workshops in Baku many were strong in content, well > received. MAG should not cut what looks like a success to favor the > floundering main sessions. > > Merging not the always the solution, it's too easy an answer for MAG > in their evaluation to say merge simply because proposals have similar > words in the title. If merging proposed then the new workshop needs > support or tendency to end up with 2 workshops in the same space > (merge in name only). > > Overall theme for 2013: "enhanced cooperation -- meaningful > participation of developing countries in Internet governance". > > Main sessions. Mix up the formats, 3 hours generally too long, some > poorly attended in Baku and many grumbled complaints about poor > content, poor preparation, repeating issues from previous years, etc. > Some main sessions need better preparation (and some were good - > transcripts illustrate the differences, MAG needs to be aware they > have a role to complete, not last minute for a meeting of the IGF's > importance.) Invite speakers early. Use (look for) funds to support > speakers. > > Taking stock and emerging issues: mix the two sessions, then > justifies 3 hours. Probably best held on the final morning (i.e. > emerging issues become issues the IGF thinks emerging as important for > the coming year(s)). > > Final afternoon: session on outcomes (1 hour), followed by closing. > > Critical Internet Resources (strong session in Baku, justifies 3 > hours). Keep as before. > > New theme: Enhanced Cooperation. Sessions in mixed formats over 1 day, > e.g. Morning expert panel session 2 hours. Follow by a long break > where people encouraged to join self-organizing small groups to > discuss a few set questions and ideas from the morning panel. > Afternoon, 2 hour moderated session with audience only, no > panel/experts etc. Bring back comments from the small groups. > > New theme: Internet principles. One day, perhaps same format as > suggested for enhanced cooperation. Try something different. > > Development aspect of IG always overlooked and too often "governance" > lost as discussion focuses on IT for development. Open specific > public comment on design/scope of IG4D session. Bring back to the May > meeting to decide on topics and format. > > Time to drop access and SOP as main sessions, but keep as workshops > and perhaps round-tables. > > Adam > -------------- 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 From nb at bollow.ch Sun Jan 27 06:42:02 2013 From: nb at bollow.ch (Norbert Bollow) Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2013 12:42:02 +0100 Subject: [governance] internet principles (was Re: caucus contribution, consultation and MAG meeting) In-Reply-To: <51051017.80103@itforchange.net> References: <20130127120551.1db0b299@quill.bollow.ch> <51051017.80103@itforchange.net> Message-ID: <20130127124202.58154281@quill.bollow.ch> Parminder wrote: > I may also remind that I had proposed that IGC supports the Internet > Rights and Principles (IRP) Group which is likely to propose that > > (1) Internet principles in some form be the overall theme of the next > IGF - Maybe something more descriptive as - 'public interest > principles for the Internet' or 'Shaping global principles for the > Internet' > > (2) A round table on Internet Principles be held at the next IGF. > > I am developing a first draft for the IRP Group, if IGC so wants I > can share it with IGC as well. [with IGC Coordinator hat on] Please do share your draft... then we'll see whether consensus is achievable to support it. Greetings, Norbert -------------- 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 From ajp at glocom.ac.jp Sun Jan 27 05:43:29 2013 From: ajp at glocom.ac.jp (Adam Peake) Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2013 19:43:29 +0900 Subject: [governance] caucus contribution, consultation and MAG meeting Message-ID: Resending email sent to the list on Jan 10. Deadline for contributions is Feb 14. Just over two weeks to agree any contribution. Adam A few comments for the February/March consultation. Public archive of MAG mailing list needed, not been updated for a year. Workshops: too many. Cut to between 80 and 100. Make this target number known when the call for applications is published, might be the first time quite a large number of proposals are rejected (might think about implications of this for the IGF), people should expect to be disappointed. Minimum of 50% of MAG members must complete assessment of all workshops. Clarify rules for other sessions (open forums, dynamic coalition, etc.) No reason an initial call to prepare proposals can't be made before the Feb meeting (more time better and the meetings a little later than usual). A reminder to MAG members to ready their stakeholders. For workshops, keep the current themes (access, SOP [security/openness/privacy], IG4D [Internet governance for development], CIR [critical Internet resources], emerging issues). Have the MAG better define Internet Governance, how it must be considered in workshop proposals (there are other spaces in WSIS follow-up for non-IG issues). Use an evaluation form for workshops (at the moment don't even know if a room was empty or overflowing, simple count a good idea.) However, indications are that while there were too many workshops in Baku many were strong in content, well received. MAG should not cut what looks like a success to favor the floundering main sessions. Merging not the always the solution, it's too easy an answer for MAG in their evaluation to say merge simply because proposals have similar words in the title. If merging proposed then the new workshop needs support or tendency to end up with 2 workshops in the same space (merge in name only). Overall theme for 2013: "enhanced cooperation -- meaningful participation of developing countries in Internet governance". Main sessions. Mix up the formats, 3 hours generally too long, some poorly attended in Baku and many grumbled complaints about poor content, poor preparation, repeating issues from previous years, etc. Some main sessions need better preparation (and some were good - transcripts illustrate the differences, MAG needs to be aware they have a role to complete, not last minute for a meeting of the IGF's importance.) Invite speakers early. Use (look for) funds to support speakers. Taking stock and emerging issues: mix the two sessions, then justifies 3 hours. Probably best held on the final morning (i.e. emerging issues become issues the IGF thinks emerging as important for the coming year(s)). Final afternoon: session on outcomes (1 hour), followed by closing. Critical Internet Resources (strong session in Baku, justifies 3 hours). Keep as before. New theme: Enhanced Cooperation. Sessions in mixed formats over 1 day, e.g. Morning expert panel session 2 hours. Follow by a long break where people encouraged to join self-organizing small groups to discuss a few set questions and ideas from the morning panel. Afternoon, 2 hour moderated session with audience only, no panel/experts etc. Bring back comments from the small groups. New theme: Internet principles. One day, perhaps same format as suggested for enhanced cooperation. Try something different. Development aspect of IG always overlooked and too often "governance" lost as discussion focuses on IT for development. Open specific public comment on design/scope of IG4D session. Bring back to the May meeting to decide on topics and format. Time to drop access and SOP as main sessions, but keep as workshops and perhaps round-tables. Adam -------------- 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 From gurstein at gmail.com Sun Jan 27 06:27:26 2013 From: gurstein at gmail.com (michael gurstein) Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2013 03:27:26 -0800 Subject: [governance] Towards an IGC Statement on RFC 6852 "Affirmation of the Modern Paradigm for Standards" In-Reply-To: <20130127091003.2e5d7640@quill.bollow.ch> References: <20130126141234.GA21789@sources.org> <20130126224714.GA21920@sources.org> <20130127091003.2e5d7640@quill.bollow.ch> Message-ID: <006201cdfc81$51e909a0$f5bb1ce0$@gmail.com> I'll work with you on this Norbert... Contra Adam I think framing a letter here might be of significant value if only to highlight certain of the limitations in those current global Internet governance processes so highly praised and often referred to by certain members of this list and others. M -----Original Message----- From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Norbert Bollow Sent: Sunday, January 27, 2013 12:10 AM To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Stephane Bortzmeyer Subject: [governance] Towards an IGC Statement on RFC 6852 "Affirmation of the Modern Paradigm for Standards" [with IGC Coordinator hat on] Let's develop an IGC Statement on this RFC 6852 "Affirmation of the Modern Paradigm for Standards" [1]. [1] http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6852 I'll be willing to serve as editor if no-one else volunteers, but I'd prefer for someone else to take on this role. Who would like to volunteer? Greetings, Norbert Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote: > > It is a good document. > > No, it's not. > > It refers only to business uses of the Internet, as if the Internet > were not used for many other things. It was recorded as a comment by > some IETF members > but was > ignored. > > It calls for access to the standard documents but it is hypocritical > since one of the signers, IEEE, does not allow it > (ITU, the main > target of this RFC, does distribute its standards online for a few > years.) > > It refers to open and transparent processes but the IETF members > discovered this document when it was already signed, and impossible to > modify. > > > > -------------- 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 From gurstein at gmail.com Sat Jan 26 18:22:14 2013 From: gurstein at gmail.com (michael gurstein) Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2013 15:22:14 -0800 Subject: [governance] Facebook spent $4 million to lobby U.S. lawmakers in 2012 In-Reply-To: References: <510086BE.6010100@ITforChange.net> <056f01cdfa49$375b4f60$a611ee20$@gmail.com> <51015DF8.6070803@gmail.com> <066a01cdfa5a$01b28610$05179230$@gmail.com> <5102AD28.9090901@ITforChange.net> <51034FAC.4040605@ITforChange.net> <51035219.9070200@ITforChange.net> <-8558355287633436504@unknownmsgid> <6DCAB3E586E6A34FB17223DF8D8F0D3D5DC37165@W8-EX10MB.unam.local> <02d401cdfbed$2b918370$82b48a50$@gmail.com> <036701cdfc07$4de471c0$e9ad5540$@gmail.com> Message-ID: <03bc01cdfc1b$fc7169a0$f5543ce0$@gmail.com> McTim, In my comments I was pointing to a "sin of omission" rather than a "sin of commission" SHOULD NOT THE SIGNIFICANCE OF STANDARDS AS SUPPORTIVE OF BROAD BASED INLUSION BE INCLUDED AS A FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLE--INCLUDING INCLUSION OF THOSE WITH PHYSICAL DISABILITIES, THOSE IN RURAL AND REMOTE LOCATION, THOSE WHO ARE SOCIALLY AND ECONOMICALLY MARGINALIZED? M -----Original Message----- From: McTim [mailto:dogwallah at gmail.com] Sent: Saturday, January 26, 2013 12:59 PM To: michael gurstein Cc: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Baruch Subject: Re: [governance] Facebook spent $4 million to lobby U.S. lawmakers in 2012 On Sat, Jan 26, 2013 at 3:54 PM, michael gurstein wrote: > Well, I thought that was in part what we were supposed to be doing i.e. helping to define what is meant by the global public interest in the context of Internet governance. > > One thing I do know, is that it does not include signing on to > documents that as currently formulated are effectively exclusive of at > least 4/5ths of the global population such as the document that I just > commented I read the doc and your comments. I see no words that exclude anyone, let alone 4/5 of the world. Can you point out the exclusionary text please? -- 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 From avri at acm.org Sat Jan 26 16:52:44 2013 From: avri at acm.org (Avri Doria) Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2013 16:52:44 -0500 Subject: acronyms, again was Re: [governance] Facebook ... In-Reply-To: References: <510086BE.6010100@ITforChange.net> <056f01cdfa49$375b4f60$a611ee20$@gmail.com> <51015DF8.6070803@gmail.com> <066a01cdfa5a$01b28610$05179230$@gmail.com> <5102AD28.9090901@ITforChange.net> <51034FAC.4040605@ITforChange.net> <51035219.9070200@ITforChange.net>,<-8558355287633436504@unknownmsgid> <6DCAB3E586E6A34FB17223DF8D8F0D3D5DC37165@W8-EX10MB.unam.local> <02d401cdfbed$2b918370$82b48a50$@gmail.com> Message-ID: On 26 Jan 2013, at 15:48, Avri Doria wrote: > how to deal with acronyms in email. speaking of which it would be useful to: - include a glossary app on the IGC website, that could include not only translations of acronyms but also capacity raising xrefs* to the fundamental explanatory docs - to include a reference to that glossary in the coda* that is added on to all list messages - and super cool to have a grammar and app, that would pick out the glossary additions that message writers added to the bottom of their messages and automatically add them to the glossary. These would probably need to be moderated otherwise some prankster might become merry. avri * xrefs - cross references used in HTML to allow one to follow a thread * coda - the ending text of all IGC mailing list messages. Ie. " ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: " -------------- 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 From nb at bollow.ch Sun Jan 27 11:01:01 2013 From: nb at bollow.ch (Norbert Bollow) Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2013 17:01:01 +0100 Subject: [governance] caucus contribution, consultation and MAG meeting In-Reply-To: References: <20130127120551.1db0b299@quill.bollow.ch> Message-ID: <20130127170101.4c2cfce2@quill.bollow.ch> [with IGC Coordinator hat on] Dear all There's an initial draft text (consisting essentially of a collation of the various textual suggestions that have been posted so far) online now at http://www.igcaucus.org/digressit/archives/79 . Please comment. Greetings, Norbert -------------- 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 From rguerra at privaterra.org Sun Jan 27 11:20:49 2013 From: rguerra at privaterra.org (Robert Guerra) Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2013 11:20:49 -0500 Subject: [governance] caucus contribution, consultation and MAG meeting In-Reply-To: References: <20130127120551.1db0b299@quill.bollow.ch> <51051017.80103@itforchange.net> Message-ID: Quick thoughts: - Call for proposals: Should be done in an open and transparent fashion. I am of the opinion that the call should be done after the open consultation/MAG meeting in Feb. That's been how it has been done in the past, and works well. To not do so, would give the appearance that the MAG has already decided on issues/topics and is trying to impose them. That, is not acceptable. - We seem to be still stuck on the same nomenclature for overall themes that were developed years ago. As I proposed at last year's IGF MAG consultations, we might want to see if the frame of "Stewardship" that is used in international relations discussions might be helpful - In the proposed schedule below I don't see where issues such as Cyber Security, Openness, Surveillance, Rights & privacy would feed into. Yes, they have been part of IGF's in the past, but they are still key issues of concern for all stakeholders. - If we want experiment with different formats for discussion and dialogue at the IGF, I would highly suggest we borrow approaches taken at other highly successful meetings. Let's borrow from the success of a variety of informal/ad-hoc/Discussion Presentation formats (such as TED, "Davos Style" , unconfererence, lightning talks, BOF's) are used successfully at other conferences such as the IETF, Davos, Tech at State and TEDx. More informal styles of engagement might prove to be a bit challenging to some stakeholder groups - such as governments - who aren't accustomed to them. Success will require an experienced moderator/facilitator. Refs: Unconference Format http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unconference TEDx http://www.ted.com/tedx NTEN - Nonprofit Tech Conference http://www.nten.org/ntc Robert -- R. Guerra Phone/Cell: +1 202-905-2081 Twitter: twitter.com/netfreedom Email: rguerra at privaterra.org On 2013-01-27, at 6:59 AM, Adam Peake wrote: > I don't agree with Internet principles as the overall theme, but do > agree it's a topic that needs significant focus. I think it's clear > after 7 IGFs that a session of 2 or 3 hours and a few scattered > workshops doesn't begin to scratch the surface of an issue. So how > could we use a day? Would more depth of discussion be more likely to > lead to some form of outcome? > > Just a thought: > Structured discussion on the morning (might be a panel or a round > table in a plenary setting). > Free, small group discussion middle of the day (working in small > ad-hoc groups to address issues and or questions identified during the > morning) > Back to "plenary" for shared discussion? (use moderators to manage > the flow: some are getting very good at this role. For example, I > think Bill Drake and Jeanette Hofmann have been excellent. Better than > the "professionals".) > > But just a thought, how else might a full day be used to develop a > useful dialogue about one topic? > > Schedule might look like: > > Day 1. AM: Opening ceremony. > Day 1. PM: Critical Internet Resources (3 hours) > Day 2. Enhanced Cooperation (2 hours sessions, work over "lunch") > Day 3. Internet Principles (2 hours sessions, work over "lunch") > Day 4. AM: Taking Stock and Emerging Issues (3 hours) > Day 4. PM: Outcomes (1 hour). Closing Ceremony > > My opinion, 3 hours is a long time and takes a good subject or it > drags. Only CIR from Baku worked the 3 hours well. (IMHO etc etc) > > Adam > > > > On Sun, Jan 27, 2013 at 8:31 PM, parminder wrote: >> >> I may also remind that I had proposed that IGC supports the Internet Rights >> and Principles (IRP) Group which is likely to propose that >> >> (1) Internet principles in some form be the overall theme of the next IGF - >> Maybe something more descriptive as - 'public interest principles for the >> Internet' or 'Shaping global principles for the Internet' >> >> (2) A round table on Internet Principles be held at the next IGF. >> >> I am developing a first draft for the IRP Group, if IGC so wants I can share >> it with IGC as well. >> >> parminder >> >> >> On Sunday 27 January 2013 04:46 PM, Adam Peake wrote: >> >> Hi Norbert, >> >> No, sorry, no time to work on a draft. But look forward to discussion >> and hopefully some consensus. >> >> Adam >> >> >> >> >> >> On Sun, Jan 27, 2013 at 8:05 PM, Norbert Bollow wrote: >> >> [with IGC Coordinator hat on] >> >> Adam Peake wrote: >> >> Resending email sent to the list on Jan 10. Deadline for >> contributions is Feb 14. >> >> Just over two weeks to agree any contribution. >> >> Thanks for reminding us! This is urgent and imporant. >> >> Adam, are you willing and able to take the time to quickly produce a >> first draft? >> >> Greetings, >> Norbert >> >> >> A few comments for the February/March consultation. >> >> Public archive of MAG mailing list needed, not been updated for a >> year. >> >> Workshops: too many. Cut to between 80 and 100. Make this target >> number known when the call for applications is published, might be the >> first time quite a large number of proposals are rejected (might think >> about implications of this for the IGF), people should expect to be >> disappointed. >> >> Minimum of 50% of MAG members must complete assessment of all >> workshops. >> >> Clarify rules for other sessions (open forums, dynamic coalition, >> etc.) >> >> No reason an initial call to prepare proposals can't be made before >> the Feb meeting (more time better and the meetings a little later than >> usual). A reminder to MAG members to ready their stakeholders. >> >> For workshops, keep the current themes (access, SOP >> [security/openness/privacy], IG4D [Internet governance for >> development], CIR [critical Internet resources], emerging issues). >> Have the MAG better define Internet Governance, how it must be >> considered in workshop proposals (there are other spaces in WSIS >> follow-up for non-IG issues). Use an evaluation form for workshops >> (at the moment don't even know if a room was empty or overflowing, >> simple count a good idea.) However, indications are that while there >> were too many workshops in Baku many were strong in content, well >> received. MAG should not cut what looks like a success to favor the >> floundering main sessions. >> >> Merging not the always the solution, it's too easy an answer for MAG >> in their evaluation to say merge simply because proposals have similar >> words in the title. If merging proposed then the new workshop needs >> support or tendency to end up with 2 workshops in the same space >> (merge in name only). >> >> Overall theme for 2013: "enhanced cooperation -- meaningful >> participation of developing countries in Internet governance". >> >> Main sessions. Mix up the formats, 3 hours generally too long, some >> poorly attended in Baku and many grumbled complaints about poor >> content, poor preparation, repeating issues from previous years, etc. >> Some main sessions need better preparation (and some were good - >> transcripts illustrate the differences, MAG needs to be aware they >> have a role to complete, not last minute for a meeting of the IGF's >> importance.) Invite speakers early. Use (look for) funds to support >> speakers. >> >> Taking stock and emerging issues: mix the two sessions, then >> justifies 3 hours. Probably best held on the final morning (i.e. >> emerging issues become issues the IGF thinks emerging as important for >> the coming year(s)). >> >> Final afternoon: session on outcomes (1 hour), followed by closing. >> >> Critical Internet Resources (strong session in Baku, justifies 3 >> hours). Keep as before. >> >> New theme: Enhanced Cooperation. Sessions in mixed formats over 1 day, >> e.g. Morning expert panel session 2 hours. Follow by a long break >> where people encouraged to join self-organizing small groups to >> discuss a few set questions and ideas from the morning panel. >> Afternoon, 2 hour moderated session with audience only, no >> panel/experts etc. Bring back comments from the small groups. >> >> New theme: Internet principles. One day, perhaps same format as >> suggested for enhanced cooperation. Try something different. >> >> Development aspect of IG always overlooked and too often "governance" >> lost as discussion focuses on IT for development. Open specific >> public comment on design/scope of IG4D session. Bring back to the May >> meeting to decide on topics and format. >> >> Time to drop access and SOP as main sessions, but keep as workshops >> and perhaps round-tables. >> >> Adam >> >> >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 >> > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From dogwallah at gmail.com Sun Jan 27 11:42:09 2013 From: dogwallah at gmail.com (McTim) Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2013 11:42:09 -0500 Subject: [governance] today's Wash Post editorial In-Reply-To: <5104D63D.70809@itforchange.net> References: <50FEA64A.4090805@itforchange.net> <51029240.5020209@itforchange.net> <5102A9D4.3070704@itforchange.net> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD2322F6F@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> <5104D63D.70809@itforchange.net> Message-ID: On Sun, Jan 27, 2013 at 2:24 AM, parminder wrote: > > Milton > > > On Friday 25 January 2013 10:45 PM, Milton L Mueller wrote: >> >> Any change model needs to take the role of VeriSign, which operates the >> root server currently recognized as "authoritative", into account. The >> system, like Cerberus, is a three-headed dog. (USG, ICANN, VRSN) > > > Isnt Verisign just an agent of the US gov in operating the root server > currently recognised as "authoritative"? That is why I did not take Verisign > into account as an independent actor here. I am sure Verisign's actions will > be legally constrained and cant go beyond what it is instructed to do by the > US gov. > >> >> Generally, I am surprised that Parminder would opt for a change mechanism >> that would rely on unilateral action by RS operators and ICANN rather than >> one with more democratic legitimacy. > > > Interesting! And what is that option you suggest with "more democratic > legitimacy". Please be explicit. > > My proposal was based on the claims often made on this list by ICANN > supporters that > > 1. ICANN has global legitimacy due to its global multistakeholder model, and > can be trusted to act in global public interest. (I take it that global > democracy is certainly a global public interest.) Can you point to statements made by anybody on this list that quote the above? I think you are again putting words in people's mouths (so to speak). > > 2. They all (or, at least most of them) prefer a free float ICANN model > whereby ICANN does not have to take anyone's permission to effect root > changes. You make it sound like an organisation, acting alone can do whatever it wants. It's a policy secretariat that does what it's policy community tells it to do. (My proposal simply presents a plausible way to go forward on > establishing a freefloat ICANN model. Your proposal is revolution, where most of us prefer evolution. In absence of a clear model, and > clear proposals on how to go forward on it, and what role can/ should IGC > play, pious statements, as I said, are just pious statements and do not > behove IGC which claims to ba platform not only for discussion, but also for > advocacy and action) (BTW, I know, you, Milton, do not advocate a free-float > ICANN model. However, I remain unclear on what model you advocate.) I'm sorry to call you out on this, but the IGC is not at all interested in doing ICANN work (as a body). We seem ONLY to be interested in IGF/UN related work. > > 3. If US ever does any hanky panky business with the "authoritative" root > zone, the non US gov owned root operators (10 of them) can be trusted simply > not to follow suit. They were credited with such a keen global public > interest minded-ness. Well, they DO voluntary provide many millions of dollars worth of name resolution services every year without charging anyone for these services, I don't think you can expect much more of them. Any and all of our discussions on this list about the > problem with US authority over root changes always always hit this > dead-end.... It was difficult to "prove" before-hand that root server > operators are most likely to follow suit to any US mandated root changes, As Alejandro says, you seem incapable of listening/learning. The US CANNOT mandate root changes, they only check to see if the IANA has followed their own procedures. > such is the geo-eco-political scenario of the world today. (I am surprised > now when I am approaching the issue from the opposite end - people like > McTim and David who stone-walled any earlier discussion on this list about > the problem with the US oversight role over root changes with the argument > that "other root server operators would simply not comply" now disclaim any > reason to believe that "other" root server operators can be expected to > behave in any manner other than of their private interests. I think we need > to get a fix on what "other" root servers can or cannot be expected to do > and cannot keep it moving as per our convenience, depending on what argument > one is pursuing.) There are 12 of these orgs, I suspect their interests do not always dove-tail. You could ask them, I am not sure you will get answers that satisfy you. > > >> Probably he hasn't thought this through very well. >> >> Any precipitous change in IG arrangements that occurred without at least >> the passive assent of a broad public AND the key stakeholders > > > I am not asking for this change to take place without assent of 'a broad > public AND the key stakeholders'... My proposal is for the global > stakeholders represented in the ICANN, and giving it legitimacy, to rise in > one voice and seek ICANN's independence from illegitimate US control. I seek > it to be a bottom up process, and therefore propose the IGC to start it. > > And for the technical community (and inter alia I put root server operators > in that category) to finally put their money where their mouth is (with all > this talk of 'we are for a free-float ICANN'). I am not sure the Technical community has that position, can you point to a statement put out by them to that effect? And if ICANN's constituent > stakeholders and the technical community refuses to do all this, then they > should simply stop saying, "well, in principle, we are against US/ NTIA role > in root changes, we want ICANN to be a free float agency". > > Partly, the purpose of my proposal was to expose this above hypocrisy (i.e. > only if it exists :) ). I don't see it existing. I took it to have only an outside chance that my > proposal will indeed be taken up by this group. But yes I did give it an > outside chance :), what with the WG on Enhanced Cooperation coming up and > hopefully we will shake off our collective sloth and get on to the task that > the IGC was constituted for - to seek and push for progressive change in > global IG architecture, and policies.. > I submit that cooperating with the "Enahnced Cooperation" agenda may not be in the global public interest, as I see the EC folks pushing a governmental agenda with CS and other groupings being sidelined. -- 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 From ajp at glocom.ac.jp Sun Jan 27 12:26:33 2013 From: ajp at glocom.ac.jp (Adam Peake) Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2013 02:26:33 +0900 Subject: [governance] caucus contribution, consultation and MAG meeting In-Reply-To: References: <20130127120551.1db0b299@quill.bollow.ch> <51051017.80103@itforchange.net> Message-ID: On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 1:20 AM, Robert Guerra wrote: > Quick thoughts: > > - Call for proposals: Should be done in an open and transparent fashion. I am of the opinion that the call should be done after the open consultation/MAG meeting in Feb. That's been how it has been done in the past, and works well. > Think you're wrong. The first meeting typically proposes themes for the year. IGF website now says: "Call for Contributions Stakeholders are invited to submit written contributions taking stock of the Baku 2012 IGF meeting and looking forward - suggestions on themes and format, for the IGF 2013 meeting. Contributions should be emailed to igf at unog.ch before 14 February 2013." Nothing new about this. The MAG should respond to contributions from stakeholders. The first program paper will come soon after the Feb/March meeting. It will layout themes for the year. For the main themes, my suggestion is all five should remain as guides for workshops, but security openness privacy, access, Internet governance for development were poor in Baku and should be dropped as main sessions. Taking stock and emerging issues should merge as a single session so that a review of the week tells us which issues have 'emerged' as important and provide pointers for themes for the next year (it makes little sense to have emerging issues as anything other than a response to what we've learned over the previous 3 days). Such a session might also help inform recommendations/suggestions from the IGF. Adam > To not do so, would give the appearance that the MAG has already decided on issues/topics and is trying to impose them. That, is not acceptable. > > - We seem to be still stuck on the same nomenclature for overall themes that were developed years ago. As I proposed at last year's IGF MAG consultations, we might want to see if the frame of "Stewardship" that is used in international relations discussions might be helpful > > - In the proposed schedule below I don't see where issues such as Cyber Security, Openness, Surveillance, Rights & privacy would feed into. Yes, they have been part of IGF's in the past, but they are still key issues of concern for all stakeholders. > > - If we want experiment with different formats for discussion and dialogue at the IGF, I would highly suggest we borrow approaches taken at other highly successful meetings. > > Let's borrow from the success of a variety of informal/ad-hoc/Discussion Presentation formats (such as TED, "Davos Style" , unconfererence, lightning talks, BOF's) are used successfully at other conferences such as the IETF, Davos, Tech at State and TEDx. > > More informal styles of engagement might prove to be a bit challenging to some stakeholder groups - such as governments - who aren't accustomed to them. Success will require an experienced moderator/facilitator. > > > Refs: > > > Unconference Format > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unconference > > TEDx > http://www.ted.com/tedx > > NTEN - Nonprofit Tech Conference > http://www.nten.org/ntc > > Robert > > -- > R. Guerra > Phone/Cell: +1 202-905-2081 > Twitter: twitter.com/netfreedom > Email: rguerra at privaterra.org > > On 2013-01-27, at 6:59 AM, Adam Peake wrote: > >> I don't agree with Internet principles as the overall theme, but do >> agree it's a topic that needs significant focus. I think it's clear >> after 7 IGFs that a session of 2 or 3 hours and a few scattered >> workshops doesn't begin to scratch the surface of an issue. So how >> could we use a day? Would more depth of discussion be more likely to >> lead to some form of outcome? >> >> Just a thought: >> Structured discussion on the morning (might be a panel or a round >> table in a plenary setting). >> Free, small group discussion middle of the day (working in small >> ad-hoc groups to address issues and or questions identified during the >> morning) >> Back to "plenary" for shared discussion? (use moderators to manage >> the flow: some are getting very good at this role. For example, I >> think Bill Drake and Jeanette Hofmann have been excellent. Better than >> the "professionals".) >> >> But just a thought, how else might a full day be used to develop a >> useful dialogue about one topic? >> >> Schedule might look like: >> >> Day 1. AM: Opening ceremony. >> Day 1. PM: Critical Internet Resources (3 hours) >> Day 2. Enhanced Cooperation (2 hours sessions, work over "lunch") >> Day 3. Internet Principles (2 hours sessions, work over "lunch") >> Day 4. AM: Taking Stock and Emerging Issues (3 hours) >> Day 4. PM: Outcomes (1 hour). Closing Ceremony >> >> My opinion, 3 hours is a long time and takes a good subject or it >> drags. Only CIR from Baku worked the 3 hours well. (IMHO etc etc) >> >> Adam >> >> >> >> On Sun, Jan 27, 2013 at 8:31 PM, parminder wrote: >>> >>> I may also remind that I had proposed that IGC supports the Internet Rights >>> and Principles (IRP) Group which is likely to propose that >>> >>> (1) Internet principles in some form be the overall theme of the next IGF - >>> Maybe something more descriptive as - 'public interest principles for the >>> Internet' or 'Shaping global principles for the Internet' >>> >>> (2) A round table on Internet Principles be held at the next IGF. >>> >>> I am developing a first draft for the IRP Group, if IGC so wants I can share >>> it with IGC as well. >>> >>> parminder >>> >>> >>> On Sunday 27 January 2013 04:46 PM, Adam Peake wrote: >>> >>> Hi Norbert, >>> >>> No, sorry, no time to work on a draft. But look forward to discussion >>> and hopefully some consensus. >>> >>> Adam >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On Sun, Jan 27, 2013 at 8:05 PM, Norbert Bollow wrote: >>> >>> [with IGC Coordinator hat on] >>> >>> Adam Peake wrote: >>> >>> Resending email sent to the list on Jan 10. Deadline for >>> contributions is Feb 14. >>> >>> Just over two weeks to agree any contribution. >>> >>> Thanks for reminding us! This is urgent and imporant. >>> >>> Adam, are you willing and able to take the time to quickly produce a >>> first draft? >>> >>> Greetings, >>> Norbert >>> >>> >>> A few comments for the February/March consultation. >>> >>> Public archive of MAG mailing list needed, not been updated for a >>> year. >>> >>> Workshops: too many. Cut to between 80 and 100. Make this target >>> number known when the call for applications is published, might be the >>> first time quite a large number of proposals are rejected (might think >>> about implications of this for the IGF), people should expect to be >>> disappointed. >>> >>> Minimum of 50% of MAG members must complete assessment of all >>> workshops. >>> >>> Clarify rules for other sessions (open forums, dynamic coalition, >>> etc.) >>> >>> No reason an initial call to prepare proposals can't be made before >>> the Feb meeting (more time better and the meetings a little later than >>> usual). A reminder to MAG members to ready their stakeholders. >>> >>> For workshops, keep the current themes (access, SOP >>> [security/openness/privacy], IG4D [Internet governance for >>> development], CIR [critical Internet resources], emerging issues). >>> Have the MAG better define Internet Governance, how it must be >>> considered in workshop proposals (there are other spaces in WSIS >>> follow-up for non-IG issues). Use an evaluation form for workshops >>> (at the moment don't even know if a room was empty or overflowing, >>> simple count a good idea.) However, indications are that while there >>> were too many workshops in Baku many were strong in content, well >>> received. MAG should not cut what looks like a success to favor the >>> floundering main sessions. >>> >>> Merging not the always the solution, it's too easy an answer for MAG >>> in their evaluation to say merge simply because proposals have similar >>> words in the title. If merging proposed then the new workshop needs >>> support or tendency to end up with 2 workshops in the same space >>> (merge in name only). >>> >>> Overall theme for 2013: "enhanced cooperation -- meaningful >>> participation of developing countries in Internet governance". >>> >>> Main sessions. Mix up the formats, 3 hours generally too long, some >>> poorly attended in Baku and many grumbled complaints about poor >>> content, poor preparation, repeating issues from previous years, etc. >>> Some main sessions need better preparation (and some were good - >>> transcripts illustrate the differences, MAG needs to be aware they >>> have a role to complete, not last minute for a meeting of the IGF's >>> importance.) Invite speakers early. Use (look for) funds to support >>> speakers. >>> >>> Taking stock and emerging issues: mix the two sessions, then >>> justifies 3 hours. Probably best held on the final morning (i.e. >>> emerging issues become issues the IGF thinks emerging as important for >>> the coming year(s)). >>> >>> Final afternoon: session on outcomes (1 hour), followed by closing. >>> >>> Critical Internet Resources (strong session in Baku, justifies 3 >>> hours). Keep as before. >>> >>> New theme: Enhanced Cooperation. Sessions in mixed formats over 1 day, >>> e.g. Morning expert panel session 2 hours. Follow by a long break >>> where people encouraged to join self-organizing small groups to >>> discuss a few set questions and ideas from the morning panel. >>> Afternoon, 2 hour moderated session with audience only, no >>> panel/experts etc. Bring back comments from the small groups. >>> >>> New theme: Internet principles. One day, perhaps same format as >>> suggested for enhanced cooperation. Try something different. >>> >>> Development aspect of IG always overlooked and too often "governance" >>> lost as discussion focuses on IT for development. Open specific >>> public comment on design/scope of IG4D session. Bring back to the May >>> meeting to decide on topics and format. >>> >>> Time to drop access and SOP as main sessions, but keep as workshops >>> and perhaps round-tables. >>> >>> Adam >>> >>> >>> >>> ____________________________________________________________ >>> 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 >>> >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From riaz.tayob at gmail.com Sun Jan 27 12:53:10 2013 From: riaz.tayob at gmail.com (Riaz K Tayob) Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2013 19:53:10 +0200 Subject: [governance] today's Wash Post editorial In-Reply-To: References: <50FEA64A.4090805@itforchange.net> <51029240.5020209@itforchange.net> <5102A9D4.3070704@itforchange.net> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD2322F6F@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> <5104D63D.70809@itforchange.net> Message-ID: <51056986.3070402@gmail.com> On 2013/01/27 06:42 PM, McTim wrote: > they DO voluntary provide many millions of dollars worth of name > resolution services every year What other metrics do you think are relevant in this vein? -------------- 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 From gurstein at gmail.com Sun Jan 27 13:38:25 2013 From: gurstein at gmail.com (michael gurstein) Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2013 10:38:25 -0800 Subject: [governance] Re: Charter amendment proposals in need of more co-proposers In-Reply-To: <20130127100259.4af934fc@quill.bollow.ch> References: <20130125115127.00edd288@quill.bollow.ch> <09eb01cdfb01$f883d1e0$e98b75a0$@gmail.com> <20130127100259.4af934fc@quill.bollow.ch> Message-ID: <00ff01cdfcbd$898dc300$9ca94900$@gmail.com> I'll sign on... M -----Original Message----- From: Norbert Bollow [mailto:nb at bollow.ch] Sent: Sunday, January 27, 2013 1:03 AM To: michael gurstein Cc: governance at lists.igcaucus.org Subject: Re: [governance] Re: Charter amendment proposals in need of more co-proposers Here's a quick update: The "proposal of Jeremy and co-proposers on updating the reference to the mailing list" has just reached the threshold of 10 co-proposers who are voting members. The "proposal of Norbert and co-proposers on coordinator election dates" currently has seven, and will hence not reach the point of getting voted on unless at least three more sign on. Greetings, Norbert I wrote: > > > among the charter amendment proposals listed on > > http://igcaucus.org/informally-discussed-charter-amendments > > I think it would be good to bring the following two to a vote > > together with Avri's two amendment proposals (which have already > > achieved the requirement of a sufficient number of co-proposers). > > > > Proposal of Jeremy and co-proposers on updating the reference to the > > mailing list > > > > Proposal of Norbert and co-proposers on coordinator election dates > > Are these proposals really not getting any further co-proposers??? > > If someone doubts that the clarification of coordinator election dates > has some importance, please try to explain how the current text of our > charter is consistent with Sala's election having taken place in > October 2011 and mine in January 2013. > > Greetings, > Norbert > > -------------- 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 From gurstein at gmail.com Sun Jan 27 13:38:25 2013 From: gurstein at gmail.com (michael gurstein) Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2013 10:38:25 -0800 Subject: [governance] caucus contribution, consultation and MAG meeting In-Reply-To: References: <20130127120551.1db0b299@quill.bollow.ch> <51051017.80103@itforchange.net> Message-ID: <010701cdfcbd$8a697d00$9f3c7700$@gmail.com> In addition to a focus on Internet Rights and Principles (R&P) for IGF-Bali, there should also I believe, be a focus on WSIS +10 (upcoming in 2015) and rather than de-emphasizing Internet Governance for Development (IG4D) it should be re-oriented and revivified (if for no other reason than a natural association with the LDC location of IGF-Bali) with an emphasis on the WSIS declaration and how it might be updated in light of rapidly changing circumstances. The admittedly stale IG4D plenary sessions could be replaced by bringing to the fore some of the emerging experiences (and new actors) in IG4D (in mobiles and broadband for example) and then reflecting on the IG issues/opportunities/gaps that are emerging. And of course, there is a link between the R&P issue and WSIS +10 at least through the WSIS Declaration's concern for an "inclusive Information Society" (one of the reasons why it is so astonishing and disappointing that the ISOC, IETF, IAB statement on standards recently noted on this list omitted any mention or concern for "inclusion" as one of the principles on which standards should be assessed). M -----Original Message----- From: apeake at gmail.com [mailto:apeake at gmail.com] On Behalf Of Adam Peake Sent: Sunday, January 27, 2013 9:27 AM To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Robert Guerra Subject: Re: [governance] caucus contribution, consultation and MAG meeting On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 1:20 AM, Robert Guerra wrote: > Quick thoughts: > > - Call for proposals: Should be done in an open and transparent fashion. I am of the opinion that the call should be done after the open consultation/MAG meeting in Feb. That's been how it has been done in the past, and works well. > Think you're wrong. The first meeting typically proposes themes for the year. IGF website now says: "Call for Contributions Stakeholders are invited to submit written contributions taking stock of the Baku 2012 IGF meeting and looking forward - suggestions on themes and format, for the IGF 2013 meeting. Contributions should be emailed to igf at unog.ch before 14 February 2013." Nothing new about this. The MAG should respond to contributions from stakeholders. The first program paper will come soon after the Feb/March meeting. It will layout themes for the year. For the main themes, my suggestion is all five should remain as guides for workshops, but security openness privacy, access, Internet governance for development were poor in Baku and should be dropped as main sessions. Taking stock and emerging issues should merge as a single session so that a review of the week tells us which issues have 'emerged' as important and provide pointers for themes for the next year (it makes little sense to have emerging issues as anything other than a response to what we've learned over the previous 3 days). Such a session might also help inform recommendations/suggestions from the IGF. Adam > To not do so, would give the appearance that the MAG has already decided on issues/topics and is trying to impose them. That, is not acceptable. > > - We seem to be still stuck on the same nomenclature for overall > themes that were developed years ago. As I proposed at last year's IGF > MAG consultations, we might want to see if the frame of "Stewardship" > that is used in international relations discussions might be helpful > > - In the proposed schedule below I don't see where issues such as Cyber Security, Openness, Surveillance, Rights & privacy would feed into. Yes, they have been part of IGF's in the past, but they are still key issues of concern for all stakeholders. > > - If we want experiment with different formats for discussion and dialogue at the IGF, I would highly suggest we borrow approaches taken at other highly successful meetings. > > Let's borrow from the success of a variety of informal/ad-hoc/Discussion Presentation formats (such as TED, "Davos Style" , unconfererence, lightning talks, BOF's) are used successfully at other conferences such as the IETF, Davos, Tech at State and TEDx. > > More informal styles of engagement might prove to be a bit challenging to some stakeholder groups - such as governments - who aren't accustomed to them. Success will require an experienced moderator/facilitator. > > > Refs: > > > Unconference Format > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unconference > > TEDx > http://www.ted.com/tedx > > NTEN - Nonprofit Tech Conference > http://www.nten.org/ntc > > Robert > > -- > R. Guerra > Phone/Cell: +1 202-905-2081 > Twitter: twitter.com/netfreedom > Email: rguerra at privaterra.org > > On 2013-01-27, at 6:59 AM, Adam Peake wrote: > >> I don't agree with Internet principles as the overall theme, but do >> agree it's a topic that needs significant focus. I think it's clear >> after 7 IGFs that a session of 2 or 3 hours and a few scattered >> workshops doesn't begin to scratch the surface of an issue. So how >> could we use a day? Would more depth of discussion be more likely to >> lead to some form of outcome? >> >> Just a thought: >> Structured discussion on the morning (might be a panel or a round >> table in a plenary setting). >> Free, small group discussion middle of the day (working in small >> ad-hoc groups to address issues and or questions identified during >> the >> morning) >> Back to "plenary" for shared discussion? (use moderators to manage >> the flow: some are getting very good at this role. For example, I >> think Bill Drake and Jeanette Hofmann have been excellent. Better >> than the "professionals".) >> >> But just a thought, how else might a full day be used to develop a >> useful dialogue about one topic? >> >> Schedule might look like: >> >> Day 1. AM: Opening ceremony. >> Day 1. PM: Critical Internet Resources (3 hours) Day 2. Enhanced >> Cooperation (2 hours sessions, work over "lunch") Day 3. Internet >> Principles (2 hours sessions, work over "lunch") Day 4. AM: Taking >> Stock and Emerging Issues (3 hours) Day 4. PM: Outcomes (1 hour). >> Closing Ceremony >> >> My opinion, 3 hours is a long time and takes a good subject or it >> drags. Only CIR from Baku worked the 3 hours well. (IMHO etc etc) >> >> Adam >> >> >> >> On Sun, Jan 27, 2013 at 8:31 PM, parminder wrote: >>> >>> I may also remind that I had proposed that IGC supports the Internet >>> Rights and Principles (IRP) Group which is likely to propose that >>> >>> (1) Internet principles in some form be the overall theme of the >>> next IGF - Maybe something more descriptive as - 'public interest >>> principles for the Internet' or 'Shaping global principles for the Internet' >>> >>> (2) A round table on Internet Principles be held at the next IGF. >>> >>> I am developing a first draft for the IRP Group, if IGC so wants I >>> can share it with IGC as well. >>> >>> parminder >>> >>> >>> On Sunday 27 January 2013 04:46 PM, Adam Peake wrote: >>> >>> Hi Norbert, >>> >>> No, sorry, no time to work on a draft. But look forward to >>> discussion and hopefully some consensus. >>> >>> Adam >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On Sun, Jan 27, 2013 at 8:05 PM, Norbert Bollow wrote: >>> >>> [with IGC Coordinator hat on] >>> >>> Adam Peake wrote: >>> >>> Resending email sent to the list on Jan 10. Deadline for >>> contributions is Feb 14. >>> >>> Just over two weeks to agree any contribution. >>> >>> Thanks for reminding us! This is urgent and imporant. >>> >>> Adam, are you willing and able to take the time to quickly produce a >>> first draft? >>> >>> Greetings, >>> Norbert >>> >>> >>> A few comments for the February/March consultation. >>> >>> Public archive of MAG mailing list needed, not been updated for a >>> year. >>> >>> Workshops: too many. Cut to between 80 and 100. Make this target >>> number known when the call for applications is published, might be >>> the first time quite a large number of proposals are rejected (might >>> think about implications of this for the IGF), people should expect >>> to be disappointed. >>> >>> Minimum of 50% of MAG members must complete assessment of all >>> workshops. >>> >>> Clarify rules for other sessions (open forums, dynamic coalition, >>> etc.) >>> >>> No reason an initial call to prepare proposals can't be made before >>> the Feb meeting (more time better and the meetings a little later >>> than usual). A reminder to MAG members to ready their stakeholders. >>> >>> For workshops, keep the current themes (access, SOP >>> [security/openness/privacy], IG4D [Internet governance for >>> development], CIR [critical Internet resources], emerging issues). >>> Have the MAG better define Internet Governance, how it must be >>> considered in workshop proposals (there are other spaces in WSIS >>> follow-up for non-IG issues). Use an evaluation form for workshops >>> (at the moment don't even know if a room was empty or overflowing, >>> simple count a good idea.) However, indications are that while >>> there were too many workshops in Baku many were strong in content, >>> well received. MAG should not cut what looks like a success to >>> favor the floundering main sessions. >>> >>> Merging not the always the solution, it's too easy an answer for MAG >>> in their evaluation to say merge simply because proposals have >>> similar words in the title. If merging proposed then the new >>> workshop needs support or tendency to end up with 2 workshops in the >>> same space (merge in name only). >>> >>> Overall theme for 2013: "enhanced cooperation -- meaningful >>> participation of developing countries in Internet governance". >>> >>> Main sessions. Mix up the formats, 3 hours generally too long, some >>> poorly attended in Baku and many grumbled complaints about poor >>> content, poor preparation, repeating issues from previous years, etc. >>> Some main sessions need better preparation (and some were good - >>> transcripts illustrate the differences, MAG needs to be aware they >>> have a role to complete, not last minute for a meeting of the IGF's >>> importance.) Invite speakers early. Use (look for) funds to >>> support speakers. >>> >>> Taking stock and emerging issues: mix the two sessions, then >>> justifies 3 hours. Probably best held on the final morning (i.e. >>> emerging issues become issues the IGF thinks emerging as important >>> for the coming year(s)). >>> >>> Final afternoon: session on outcomes (1 hour), followed by closing. >>> >>> Critical Internet Resources (strong session in Baku, justifies 3 >>> hours). Keep as before. >>> >>> New theme: Enhanced Cooperation. Sessions in mixed formats over 1 >>> day, e.g. Morning expert panel session 2 hours. Follow by a long >>> break where people encouraged to join self-organizing small groups >>> to discuss a few set questions and ideas from the morning panel. >>> Afternoon, 2 hour moderated session with audience only, no >>> panel/experts etc. Bring back comments from the small groups. >>> >>> New theme: Internet principles. One day, perhaps same format as >>> suggested for enhanced cooperation. Try something different. >>> >>> Development aspect of IG always overlooked and too often "governance" >>> lost as discussion focuses on IT for development. Open specific >>> public comment on design/scope of IG4D session. Bring back to the >>> May meeting to decide on topics and format. >>> >>> Time to drop access and SOP as main sessions, but keep as workshops >>> and perhaps round-tables. >>> >>> Adam >>> >>> >>> >>> ____________________________________________________________ >>> 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 >>> >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From gurstein at gmail.com Sun Jan 27 13:55:13 2013 From: gurstein at gmail.com (michael gurstein) Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2013 10:55:13 -0800 Subject: [governance] AUDIO: State of the Net 2013 WCIT Panel Message-ID: <010f01cdfcbf$de583c10$9b08b430$@gmail.com> Some of you may have missed this invitation... M ------------------------------------------- http://www.netcaucus.org/conference/2013/wcit.shtml No Rest for the WCIT*: Charting An Affirmative Plan to Safeguarding Internet Freedom! Tuesday, January 22 2013 AUDIO : http://www.netcaucus.org/audio/2013/20130122sotn-wcit.mp3 Panelists: - Fiona Alexander, Associate Administrator, Office of International Affairs, National Telecommunications & Information Administration (NTIA) - Colin Crowell, Head of Global Public Policy, Twitter - Jamie Hedlund, Vice President, Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) - Andrew McLaughlin, Chairman of the Board, Access - Thomas O'Toole, Managing Editor, Electronic Commerce & Law Report, Bloomberg BNA - Moderator It remains to be seen whether Internet stakeholders have prevented the UN from seizing control of the Internet at last month's ITU World Conference on International Telecommunications (WCIT). Regardless, for weary negotiators it appears that the battle to keep the Internet free will be protracted. There will ne no rest in the foreseeable future. On December 13, 2012 FCC Commissioner McDowell direly predicted that while many of the "anti-freedom" WCIT proposals were turned back "the worst is yet to come." More than ever Congress must become a more involved stakeholder. Any substantive changes to the ITU treaty governing the Internet hopefully would need to be ratified by the U.S. Senate. But threats to Internet freedom could come from a variety of vectors. A panel of experts will outline the long-term prospects for the Internet freedom fight and how Congress can play a more consistent and constructive role. -------------- 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 From wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de Sun Jan 27 14:04:16 2013 From: wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de (=?iso-8859-1?Q?=22Kleinw=E4chter=2C_Wolfgang=22?=) Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2013 20:04:16 +0100 Subject: AW: [governance] caucus contribution, consultation and MAG meeting References: <20130127120551.1db0b299@quill.bollow.ch> <51051017.80103@itforchange.net> Message-ID: <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A801331538@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> One key issue should be "principles". There was a proposal in Baku to summarize all (national/regional/sectoral) "IG Declarations on Principles" (25+) of the last three years and to produce a "compendium" as a first step towards somethink like a multistakeholder framework of commitments on Internet Governance Principles. Bali has to take the next step and the MAG should pave the way for a more comprehensive and analytical approach. wolfgang ________________________________ Von: apeake at gmail.com im Auftrag von Adam Peake Gesendet: So 27.01.2013 18:26 An: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Robert Guerra Betreff: Re: [governance] caucus contribution, consultation and MAG meeting On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 1:20 AM, Robert Guerra wrote: > Quick thoughts: > > - Call for proposals: Should be done in an open and transparent fashion. I am of the opinion that the call should be done after the open consultation/MAG meeting in Feb. That's been how it has been done in the past, and works well. > Think you're wrong. The first meeting typically proposes themes for the year. IGF website now says: "Call for Contributions Stakeholders are invited to submit written contributions taking stock of the Baku 2012 IGF meeting and looking forward - suggestions on themes and format, for the IGF 2013 meeting. Contributions should be emailed to igf at unog.ch before 14 February 2013." Nothing new about this. The MAG should respond to contributions from stakeholders. The first program paper will come soon after the Feb/March meeting. It will layout themes for the year. For the main themes, my suggestion is all five should remain as guides for workshops, but security openness privacy, access, Internet governance for development were poor in Baku and should be dropped as main sessions. Taking stock and emerging issues should merge as a single session so that a review of the week tells us which issues have 'emerged' as important and provide pointers for themes for the next year (it makes little sense to have emerging issues as anything other than a response to what we've learned over the previous 3 days). Such a session might also help inform recommendations/suggestions from the IGF. Adam > To not do so, would give the appearance that the MAG has already decided on issues/topics and is trying to impose them. That, is not acceptable. > > - We seem to be still stuck on the same nomenclature for overall themes that were developed years ago. As I proposed at last year's IGF MAG consultations, we might want to see if the frame of "Stewardship" that is used in international relations discussions might be helpful > > - In the proposed schedule below I don't see where issues such as Cyber Security, Openness, Surveillance, Rights & privacy would feed into. Yes, they have been part of IGF's in the past, but they are still key issues of concern for all stakeholders. > > - If we want experiment with different formats for discussion and dialogue at the IGF, I would highly suggest we borrow approaches taken at other highly successful meetings. > > Let's borrow from the success of a variety of informal/ad-hoc/Discussion Presentation formats (such as TED, "Davos Style" , unconfererence, lightning talks, BOF's) are used successfully at other conferences such as the IETF, Davos, Tech at State and TEDx. > > More informal styles of engagement might prove to be a bit challenging to some stakeholder groups - such as governments - who aren't accustomed to them. Success will require an experienced moderator/facilitator. > > > Refs: > > > Unconference Format > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unconference > > TEDx > http://www.ted.com/tedx > > NTEN - Nonprofit Tech Conference > http://www.nten.org/ntc > > Robert > > -- > R. Guerra > Phone/Cell: +1 202-905-2081 > Twitter: twitter.com/netfreedom > Email: rguerra at privaterra.org > > On 2013-01-27, at 6:59 AM, Adam Peake wrote: > >> I don't agree with Internet principles as the overall theme, but do >> agree it's a topic that needs significant focus. I think it's clear >> after 7 IGFs that a session of 2 or 3 hours and a few scattered >> workshops doesn't begin to scratch the surface of an issue. So how >> could we use a day? Would more depth of discussion be more likely to >> lead to some form of outcome? >> >> Just a thought: >> Structured discussion on the morning (might be a panel or a round >> table in a plenary setting). >> Free, small group discussion middle of the day (working in small >> ad-hoc groups to address issues and or questions identified during the >> morning) >> Back to "plenary" for shared discussion? (use moderators to manage >> the flow: some are getting very good at this role. For example, I >> think Bill Drake and Jeanette Hofmann have been excellent. Better than >> the "professionals".) >> >> But just a thought, how else might a full day be used to develop a >> useful dialogue about one topic? >> >> Schedule might look like: >> >> Day 1. AM: Opening ceremony. >> Day 1. PM: Critical Internet Resources (3 hours) >> Day 2. Enhanced Cooperation (2 hours sessions, work over "lunch") >> Day 3. Internet Principles (2 hours sessions, work over "lunch") >> Day 4. AM: Taking Stock and Emerging Issues (3 hours) >> Day 4. PM: Outcomes (1 hour). Closing Ceremony >> >> My opinion, 3 hours is a long time and takes a good subject or it >> drags. Only CIR from Baku worked the 3 hours well. (IMHO etc etc) >> >> Adam >> >> >> >> On Sun, Jan 27, 2013 at 8:31 PM, parminder wrote: >>> >>> I may also remind that I had proposed that IGC supports the Internet Rights >>> and Principles (IRP) Group which is likely to propose that >>> >>> (1) Internet principles in some form be the overall theme of the next IGF - >>> Maybe something more descriptive as - 'public interest principles for the >>> Internet' or 'Shaping global principles for the Internet' >>> >>> (2) A round table on Internet Principles be held at the next IGF. >>> >>> I am developing a first draft for the IRP Group, if IGC so wants I can share >>> it with IGC as well. >>> >>> parminder >>> >>> >>> On Sunday 27 January 2013 04:46 PM, Adam Peake wrote: >>> >>> Hi Norbert, >>> >>> No, sorry, no time to work on a draft. But look forward to discussion >>> and hopefully some consensus. >>> >>> Adam >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On Sun, Jan 27, 2013 at 8:05 PM, Norbert Bollow wrote: >>> >>> [with IGC Coordinator hat on] >>> >>> Adam Peake wrote: >>> >>> Resending email sent to the list on Jan 10. Deadline for >>> contributions is Feb 14. >>> >>> Just over two weeks to agree any contribution. >>> >>> Thanks for reminding us! This is urgent and imporant. >>> >>> Adam, are you willing and able to take the time to quickly produce a >>> first draft? >>> >>> Greetings, >>> Norbert >>> >>> >>> A few comments for the February/March consultation. >>> >>> Public archive of MAG mailing list needed, not been updated for a >>> year. >>> >>> Workshops: too many. Cut to between 80 and 100. Make this target >>> number known when the call for applications is published, might be the >>> first time quite a large number of proposals are rejected (might think >>> about implications of this for the IGF), people should expect to be >>> disappointed. >>> >>> Minimum of 50% of MAG members must complete assessment of all >>> workshops. >>> >>> Clarify rules for other sessions (open forums, dynamic coalition, >>> etc.) >>> >>> No reason an initial call to prepare proposals can't be made before >>> the Feb meeting (more time better and the meetings a little later than >>> usual). A reminder to MAG members to ready their stakeholders. >>> >>> For workshops, keep the current themes (access, SOP >>> [security/openness/privacy], IG4D [Internet governance for >>> development], CIR [critical Internet resources], emerging issues). >>> Have the MAG better define Internet Governance, how it must be >>> considered in workshop proposals (there are other spaces in WSIS >>> follow-up for non-IG issues). Use an evaluation form for workshops >>> (at the moment don't even know if a room was empty or overflowing, >>> simple count a good idea.) However, indications are that while there >>> were too many workshops in Baku many were strong in content, well >>> received. MAG should not cut what looks like a success to favor the >>> floundering main sessions. >>> >>> Merging not the always the solution, it's too easy an answer for MAG >>> in their evaluation to say merge simply because proposals have similar >>> words in the title. If merging proposed then the new workshop needs >>> support or tendency to end up with 2 workshops in the same space >>> (merge in name only). >>> >>> Overall theme for 2013: "enhanced cooperation -- meaningful >>> participation of developing countries in Internet governance". >>> >>> Main sessions. Mix up the formats, 3 hours generally too long, some >>> poorly attended in Baku and many grumbled complaints about poor >>> content, poor preparation, repeating issues from previous years, etc. >>> Some main sessions need better preparation (and some were good - >>> transcripts illustrate the differences, MAG needs to be aware they >>> have a role to complete, not last minute for a meeting of the IGF's >>> importance.) Invite speakers early. Use (look for) funds to support >>> speakers. >>> >>> Taking stock and emerging issues: mix the two sessions, then >>> justifies 3 hours. Probably best held on the final morning (i.e. >>> emerging issues become issues the IGF thinks emerging as important for >>> the coming year(s)). >>> >>> Final afternoon: session on outcomes (1 hour), followed by closing. >>> >>> Critical Internet Resources (strong session in Baku, justifies 3 >>> hours). Keep as before. >>> >>> New theme: Enhanced Cooperation. Sessions in mixed formats over 1 day, >>> e.g. Morning expert panel session 2 hours. Follow by a long break >>> where people encouraged to join self-organizing small groups to >>> discuss a few set questions and ideas from the morning panel. >>> Afternoon, 2 hour moderated session with audience only, no >>> panel/experts etc. Bring back comments from the small groups. >>> >>> New theme: Internet principles. One day, perhaps same format as >>> suggested for enhanced cooperation. Try something different. >>> >>> Development aspect of IG always overlooked and too often "governance" >>> lost as discussion focuses on IT for development. Open specific >>> public comment on design/scope of IG4D session. Bring back to the May >>> meeting to decide on topics and format. >>> >>> Time to drop access and SOP as main sessions, but keep as workshops >>> and perhaps round-tables. >>> >>> Adam >>> >>> >>> >>> ____________________________________________________________ >>> 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 >>> >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From gurstein at gmail.com Sun Jan 27 14:28:15 2013 From: gurstein at gmail.com (michael gurstein) Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2013 11:28:15 -0800 Subject: [governance] Towards an IGC Statement on RFC 6852 "Affirmation of the Modern Paradigm for Standards" In-Reply-To: References: <20130126141234.GA21789@sources.org> <20130126224714.GA21920@sources.org> <20130127091003.2e5d7640@quill.bollow.ch> <006201cdfc81$51e909a0$f5bb1ce0$@gmail.com> Message-ID: <012c01cdfcc4$7c6cd830$75468890$@gmail.com> Alejandro, I'm not quite sure why pointing out that the organizations many here point to as the foundation for Internet governance are promoting a very significant statement (concerning standards) which more or less completely ignores key elements of the foundation document for global Internet governance i.e. the WSIS declaration http://www.itu.int/wsis/docs/geneva/official/dop.html is "spite"... surprised, disappointed, irritated certainly, but not spiteful... M -----Original Message----- From: Alejandro Pisanty [mailto:apisan at servidor.unam.mx] Sent: Sunday, January 27, 2013 11:15 AM To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; michael gurstein Cc: 'Norbert Bollow' Subject: RE: [governance] Towards an IGC Statement on RFC 6852 "Affirmation of the Modern Paradigm for Standards" Michael, that sounds close to functionally indistinguishable from the motivation called "spite." As good as any but worth the footnote. Alejandro Pisanty ! --- !! --- !!! --- !!!! --- !!!! --- !!! --- !! --- ! NEW PHONE NUMBER - NUEVO NUMERO DE TELEFONO 5541444475 LOCAL +52-1-5541444475 FROM ABROAD +525541444475 DESDE MEXICO SMS +525541444475 Dr. Alejandro Pisanty UNAM, Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico 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 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . On Sun, 27 Jan 2013, michael gurstein wrote: > Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2013 05:27:26 -0600 > From: michael gurstein > Reply-To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org, michael gurstein > > To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org, 'Norbert Bollow' > Subject: RE: [governance] Towards an IGC Statement on RFC 6852 > "Affirmation of the Modern Paradigm for Standards" > > I'll work with you on this Norbert... > > Contra Adam I think framing a letter here might be of significant > value if only to highlight certain of the limitations in those current > global Internet governance processes so highly praised and often > referred to by certain members of this list and others. > > M > > -----Original Message----- > From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org > [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Norbert > Bollow > Sent: Sunday, January 27, 2013 12:10 AM > To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Stephane Bortzmeyer > Subject: [governance] Towards an IGC Statement on RFC 6852 > "Affirmation of the Modern Paradigm for Standards" > > [with IGC Coordinator hat on] > > Let's develop an IGC Statement on this RFC 6852 "Affirmation of the > Modern Paradigm for Standards" [1]. > [1] http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6852 > > I'll be willing to serve as editor if no-one else volunteers, but I'd > prefer for someone else to take on this role. > > Who would like to volunteer? > > Greetings, > Norbert > > > Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote: > >>> It is a good document. >> >> No, it's not. >> >> It refers only to business uses of the Internet, as if the Internet >> were not used for many other things. It was recorded as a comment by >> some IETF members >> but was >> ignored. >> >> It calls for access to the standard documents but it is hypocritical >> since one of the signers, IEEE, does not allow it >> (ITU, the main >> target of this RFC, does distribute its standards online for a few >> years.) >> >> It refers to open and transparent processes but the IETF members >> discovered this document when it was already signed, and impossible >> to modify. >> >> >> >> > > > > > -------------- 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 From lmcknigh at syr.edu Sun Jan 27 14:53:19 2013 From: lmcknigh at syr.edu (Lee W McKnight) Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2013 19:53:19 +0000 Subject: [governance] Towards an IGC Statement on RFC 6852 "Affirmation of the Modern Paradigm for Standards" In-Reply-To: References: <20130126141234.GA21789@sources.org> <20130126224714.GA21920@sources.org> <20130127091003.2e5d7640@quill.bollow.ch>, Message-ID: <77A59FC9477004489D44DE7FC6840E7B1B3148@SUEX10-mbx-08.ad.syr.edu> Re: we do have a few days in which to submit a statement for the IGF open consultation and to (hopefully) support CS MAG members in their discussions. What is the plan/who is drafting that statement? Did I hear Adam volunteer? ; ) Re an IGC standards statement, I will pitch in to a (2nd) draft, especially since as noted I have my own motivations and uses for a coherent IGC statement. As to who is the fairest of them all/most open and transparent standards org; traditionally IETF would be first by a mile or several kilometers. But it isn't really a beauty context and as the statement itself notes there are various aspects to be considered. thanks, Lee ________________________________________ From: apeake at gmail.com [apeake at gmail.com] on behalf of Adam Peake [ajp at glocom.ac.jp] Sent: Sunday, January 27, 2013 5:39 AM To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org Subject: Re: [governance] Towards an IGC Statement on RFC 6852 "Affirmation of the Modern Paradigm for Standards" Norbert, thanks for trying, but to be frank, why bother? In the couple of days since RFC 6852 was mentioned we've seen almost equal support/opposition for statement. And if the caucus does produce something will it make any difference? Very likely no. But we do have a few days in which to submit a statement for the IGF open consultation and to (hopefully) support CS MAG members in their discussions. Could we please focus on core issues. Thanks, Adam On Sun, Jan 27, 2013 at 5:10 PM, Norbert Bollow wrote: > [with IGC Coordinator hat on] > > Let's develop an IGC Statement on this RFC 6852 "Affirmation of the > Modern Paradigm for Standards" [1]. > [1] http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6852 > > I'll be willing to serve as editor if no-one else volunteers, but I'd > prefer for someone else to take on this role. > > Who would like to volunteer? > > Greetings, > Norbert > > > Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote: > >> > It is a good document. >> >> No, it's not. >> >> It refers only to business uses of the Internet, as if the Internet >> were not used for many other things. It was recorded as a comment by >> some IETF members >> but was >> ignored. >> >> It calls for access to the standard documents but it is >> hypocritical since one of the signers, IEEE, does not allow it >> (ITU, the main >> target of this RFC, does distribute its standards online for a few >> years.) >> >> It refers to open and transparent processes but the IETF members >> discovered this document when it was already signed, and impossible to >> modify. >> >> >> >> > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From jaryn56 at gmail.com Sun Jan 27 14:57:19 2013 From: jaryn56 at gmail.com (=?UTF-8?B?Sm9zw6kgRsOpbGl4IEFyaWFzIFluY2hl?=) Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2013 14:57:19 -0500 Subject: [governance] Re: Charter amendment proposals in need of more co-proposers In-Reply-To: <00ff01cdfcbd$898dc300$9ca94900$@gmail.com> References: <20130125115127.00edd288@quill.bollow.ch> <09eb01cdfb01$f883d1e0$e98b75a0$@gmail.com> <20130127100259.4af934fc@quill.bollow.ch> <00ff01cdfcbd$898dc300$9ca94900$@gmail.com> Message-ID: + 1 Voy a firmar *Cordialmente: José Félix Arias Ynche* * Investigador Social Para El Desarrollo* 2013/1/27 michael gurstein > I'll sign on... > > M > > -----Original Message----- > From: Norbert Bollow [mailto:nb at bollow.ch] > Sent: Sunday, January 27, 2013 1:03 AM > To: michael gurstein > Cc: governance at lists.igcaucus.org > Subject: Re: [governance] Re: Charter amendment proposals in need of more > co-proposers > > Here's a quick update: The "proposal of Jeremy and co-proposers on updating > the reference to the mailing list" has just reached the threshold of 10 > co-proposers who are voting members. The "proposal of Norbert and > co-proposers on coordinator election dates" currently has seven, and will > hence not reach the point of getting voted on unless at least three more > sign on. > > Greetings, > Norbert > > > I wrote: > > > > > among the charter amendment proposals listed on > > > http://igcaucus.org/informally-discussed-charter-amendments > > > I think it would be good to bring the following two to a vote > > > together with Avri's two amendment proposals (which have already > > > achieved the requirement of a sufficient number of co-proposers). > > > > > > Proposal of Jeremy and co-proposers on updating the reference to the > > > mailing list > > > > > > Proposal of Norbert and co-proposers on coordinator election dates > > > > Are these proposals really not getting any further co-proposers??? > > > > If someone doubts that the clarification of coordinator election dates > > has some importance, please try to explain how the current text of our > > charter is consistent with Sala's election having taken place in > > October 2011 and mine in January 2013. > > > > Greetings, > > Norbert > > > > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From devonrb at gmail.com Sun Jan 27 16:03:49 2013 From: devonrb at gmail.com (Devon Blake) Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2013 16:03:49 -0500 Subject: [governance] Re: Charter amendment proposals in need of more co-proposers In-Reply-To: References: <20130125115127.00edd288@quill.bollow.ch> <09eb01cdfb01$f883d1e0$e98b75a0$@gmail.com> <20130127100259.4af934fc@quill.bollow.ch> <00ff01cdfcbd$898dc300$9ca94900$@gmail.com> Message-ID: I co -propose On Sun, Jan 27, 2013 at 2:57 PM, José Félix Arias Ynche wrote: > + 1 Voy a firmar > > > > *Cordialmente: José Félix Arias Ynche* > * Investigador Social Para El Desarrollo* > > > 2013/1/27 michael gurstein > >> I'll sign on... >> >> M >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Norbert Bollow [mailto:nb at bollow.ch] >> Sent: Sunday, January 27, 2013 1:03 AM >> To: michael gurstein >> Cc: governance at lists.igcaucus.org >> Subject: Re: [governance] Re: Charter amendment proposals in need of more >> co-proposers >> >> Here's a quick update: The "proposal of Jeremy and co-proposers on >> updating >> the reference to the mailing list" has just reached the threshold of 10 >> co-proposers who are voting members. The "proposal of Norbert and >> co-proposers on coordinator election dates" currently has seven, and will >> hence not reach the point of getting voted on unless at least three more >> sign on. >> >> Greetings, >> Norbert >> >> >> I wrote: >> > >> > > among the charter amendment proposals listed on >> > > http://igcaucus.org/informally-discussed-charter-amendments >> > > I think it would be good to bring the following two to a vote >> > > together with Avri's two amendment proposals (which have already >> > > achieved the requirement of a sufficient number of co-proposers). >> > > >> > > Proposal of Jeremy and co-proposers on updating the reference to the >> > > mailing list >> > > >> > > Proposal of Norbert and co-proposers on coordinator election dates >> > >> > Are these proposals really not getting any further co-proposers??? >> > >> > If someone doubts that the clarification of coordinator election dates >> > has some importance, please try to explain how the current text of our >> > charter is consistent with Sala's election having taken place in >> > October 2011 and mine in January 2013. >> > >> > Greetings, >> > Norbert >> > >> > >> >> >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 >> >> > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > -- Devon Blake Special Projects Director Earthwise Solutions Limited 29 Dominica Drive Kgn 5 ,Phone: Office 876-968-4534, Mobile, 876-483-2632 To be kind, To be helpful, To network *Earthwise ... For Life!* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From nb at bollow.ch Sun Jan 27 16:42:56 2013 From: nb at bollow.ch (Norbert Bollow) Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2013 22:42:56 +0100 Subject: [governance] Re: Charter amendment proposals in need of more co-proposers In-Reply-To: References: <20130125115127.00edd288@quill.bollow.ch> <09eb01cdfb01$f883d1e0$e98b75a0$@gmail.com> <20130127100259.4af934fc@quill.bollow.ch> <00ff01cdfcbd$898dc300$9ca94900$@gmail.com> Message-ID: <20130127224256.6f14cba1@quill.bollow.ch> Thanks for your support... however, as far as the formal requirement to reach 10 voting members who jointly propose is concerned, we're still at only 8. (I have only been able to add Fouad Bajwa to the list of co-proposers recently - thank you Fouad! I had Michael Gurstein on the list of co-proposers already. Neither José Félix Arias Ynche nor Devon Blake seems to be on the list of "voting members", i.e. people who voted at the Coordinators election, http://igcaucus.org/list-members ) Anyone else willing to co-propose? Greetings, Norbert Am Sun, 27 Jan 2013 16:03:49 -0500 schrieb Devon Blake : > I co -propose > > On Sun, Jan 27, 2013 at 2:57 PM, José Félix Arias Ynche > wrote: > > > + 1 Voy a firmar > > > > > > > > *Cordialmente: José Félix Arias Ynche* > > * Investigador Social Para El Desarrollo* > > > > > > 2013/1/27 michael gurstein > > > >> I'll sign on... > >> > >> M > >> > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: Norbert Bollow [mailto:nb at bollow.ch] > >> Sent: Sunday, January 27, 2013 1:03 AM > >> To: michael gurstein > >> Cc: governance at lists.igcaucus.org > >> Subject: Re: [governance] Re: Charter amendment proposals in need > >> of more co-proposers > >> > >> Here's a quick update: The "proposal of Jeremy and co-proposers on > >> updating > >> the reference to the mailing list" has just reached the threshold > >> of 10 co-proposers who are voting members. The "proposal of > >> Norbert and co-proposers on coordinator election dates" currently > >> has seven, and will hence not reach the point of getting voted on > >> unless at least three more sign on. > >> > >> Greetings, > >> Norbert > >> > >> > >> I wrote: > >> > > >> > > among the charter amendment proposals listed on > >> > > http://igcaucus.org/informally-discussed-charter-amendments > >> > > I think it would be good to bring the following two to a vote > >> > > together with Avri's two amendment proposals (which have > >> > > already achieved the requirement of a sufficient number of > >> > > co-proposers). > >> > > > >> > > Proposal of Jeremy and co-proposers on updating the reference > >> > > to the mailing list > >> > > > >> > > Proposal of Norbert and co-proposers on coordinator election > >> > > dates > >> > > >> > Are these proposals really not getting any further > >> > co-proposers??? > >> > > >> > If someone doubts that the clarification of coordinator election > >> > dates has some importance, please try to explain how the current > >> > text of our charter is consistent with Sala's election having > >> > taken place in October 2011 and mine in January 2013. > >> > > >> > Greetings, > >> > Norbert > >> > > >> > > >> > >> > >> > >> ____________________________________________________________ > >> 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 > >> > >> > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From hindenburgo at gmail.com Sun Jan 27 16:46:37 2013 From: hindenburgo at gmail.com (Hindenburgo Pires) Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2013 19:46:37 -0200 Subject: [governance] Re: Charter amendment proposals in need of more co-proposers In-Reply-To: <20130125115127.00edd288@quill.bollow.ch> References: <20130125115127.00edd288@quill.bollow.ch> Message-ID: Please add me too. 2013/1/25 Norbert Bollow > I wrote: > > > among the charter amendment proposals listed on > > http://igcaucus.org/informally-discussed-charter-amendments > > I think it would be good to bring the following two to a vote together > > with Avri's two amendment proposals (which have already achieved the > > requirement of a sufficient number of co-proposers). > > > > Proposal of Jeremy and co-proposers on updating the reference to the > > mailing list > > > > Proposal of Norbert and co-proposers on coordinator election dates > > Are these proposals really not getting any further co-proposers??? > > If someone doubts that the clarification of coordinator election dates > has some importance, please try to explain how the current text of our > charter is consistent with Sala's election having taken place in > October 2011 and mine in January 2013. > > Greetings, > Norbert > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > -- Hindenburgo F. Pires Professor do Instituto de Geografia da UERJ Pesquisador de Produtividade do CNPq http://www.cibergeo.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From william.drake at uzh.ch Sun Jan 27 17:37:36 2013 From: william.drake at uzh.ch (William Drake) Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2013 14:37:36 -0800 Subject: [governance] Towards an IGC Statement on RFC 6852 "Affirmation of the Modern Paradigm for Standards" In-Reply-To: References: <20130126141234.GA21789@sources.org> <20130126224714.GA21920@sources.org> <20130127091003.2e5d7640@quill.bollow.ch> <20130127123308.689639f3@quill.bollow.ch> Message-ID: <61E2D1C7-09E5-4358-B5BD-B362A084EDF5@uzh.ch> Hi I agree with Adam. The IGC was created to provide input into the WSIS and then the IGF. If it runs off and chases other agendas of interest to co-cos or others (cybersecurity, IETF etc.) while neglecting its original reason for being, isn't that sort of doing a disservice to all those who've put a lot of time and energy in over the years trying to get the IGF to work and bake in civil society participation? And if the IGC doesn't consistently provide solid inputs to the IGF consultations, why should governments and other stakeholder groups think it's a player they need to work with when making deals, including in the MAG? In fact, why shouldn't the UN look to other organizations and networks to provide more civil society nominees etc. If the IGC makes itself look irrelevant to the IGF, it will increasingly be treated as such. Bill On Jan 27, 2013, at 4:01 AM, Adam Peake wrote: > Please, just focus. There's a hard deadline for a contribution to the > IGF (which we missed last year). Meet that and come back to the RFC. > > Adam > > > > On Sun, Jan 27, 2013 at 8:33 PM, Norbert Bollow wrote: >> [with IGC coordinator hat on] >> >> Adam Peake wrote: >> >>> Norbert, thanks for trying, but to be frank, why bother? >> >> Because standards development is very much at the core of Internet >> governance, and it is important for IGC to engage, to the extent that >> consensus is possible, also on such core issues, and not just on more >> peripheral questions like e.g. the choice of discussion topics for the >> next Internet Governance Forum. >> >>> In the couple of days since RFC 6852 was mentioned we've seen almost >>> equal support/opposition for statement. >> >> That is not accurate. We have seen praise for RFC 6852 as well as >> criticism. This is no reason to not at least try to incorporate both in >> a statement. >> >>> And if the caucus does produce something will it make any difference? >> >> That will depend on the actual content of the statement, and on how >> convincing it is written, and on whether it will get promoted in >> contexts where it can make a difference. The Caucus has several members >> who have the right kind of contacts. >> >>> Could we please focus on core issues. >> >> This is a core issue. >> >> Greetings, >> Norbert >> >>> On Sun, Jan 27, 2013 at 5:10 PM, Norbert Bollow wrote: >>>> [with IGC Coordinator hat on] >>>> >>>> Let's develop an IGC Statement on this RFC 6852 "Affirmation of the >>>> Modern Paradigm for Standards" [1]. >>>> [1] http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6852 >>>> >>>> I'll be willing to serve as editor if no-one else volunteers, but >>>> I'd prefer for someone else to take on this role. >>>> >>>> Who would like to volunteer? >>>> >>>> Greetings, >>>> Norbert >>>> >>>> >>>> Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote: >>>> >>>>>> It is a good document. >>>>> >>>>> No, it's not. >>>>> >>>>> It refers only to business uses of the Internet, as if the Internet >>>>> were not used for many other things. It was recorded as a comment >>>>> by some IETF members >>>>> but was >>>>> ignored. >>>>> >>>>> It calls for access to the standard documents but it is >>>>> hypocritical since one of the signers, IEEE, does not allow it >>>>> (ITU, the >>>>> main target of this RFC, does distribute its standards online for >>>>> a few years.) >>>>> >>>>> It refers to open and transparent processes but the IETF members >>>>> discovered this document when it was already signed, and >>>>> impossible to modify. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> ____________________________________________________________ >>>> 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 >>>> >>> >> > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From charityg at diplomacy.edu Sun Jan 27 23:29:04 2013 From: charityg at diplomacy.edu (Charity Gamboa) Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2013 22:29:04 -0600 Subject: [governance] Fwd: Unlocking Your Phone Is Illegal Starting Tomorrow In-Reply-To: References: <251e609e1dba3888b86c21cc83674f7de16.20130125230048@mail32.us1.rsgsv.net> Message-ID: I am on the impression that once you are done with your contract with a telecom, say for 2 years with AT&T, you can call their tech support and have your phone unlocked. You have paid for that phone and without a contract they can unlock that for you. Another contract means you can upgrade. I've done it so I would think that the issue lies on the premise that if you are locked into a contract, unlocking your phone is not allowed. Once you are through with your contract, I would assume that your phone is paid for and technically yours. Charity On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 7:55 PM, Diego Rafael Canabarro < diegocanabarro at gmail.com> wrote: > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: Gizmodo > Date: Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 6:02 PM > Subject: Unlocking Your Phone Is Illegal Starting Tomorrow > To: diegocanabarro at gmail.com > > > ** > January > 25th, 2013Top Story Unlocking Your Phone Is Illegal Starting Tomorrow > > - > - > - > - > > By Eric Limer > > > [image: > Unlocking Your Phone Is Illegal Starting Tomorrow]You may remember that last year, the DMCA exemption on unlocking phones was > smacked down. > Well it's going into effect this Saturday. So starting tomorrow, unlocking > your phone will be officially illegal. Yay. > > Unlocking phones without the express consent of the carrier who locked > them became illegal thanks to edits to DMCA exemptions back in October, but > it's only now that the 90-day grace period is running out. Locked phones > purchased in the 90 days after the ruling are still game to be unlocked, > but from here on out, for an unlocked phone to be legitimate, it'll have to > have been bought that way or come with a permission slip from your carrier. > > It's not the first time retracted DMCA exemptions have threatened to mess > with your ability to mess with your phone. Jailbreaking and rooting almost > became illegal againbecause of DMCA exemption changes. Fortunately, the same batch of > modifications that illegalized unlocking will also protect phone > jailbreakingfor another three years. But it's still not allowed on tablets. Not than > anyone is likely notice that particular indiscretion. > > These changes won't, of course, limit you ability to unlock phones anyway, > but it will give carriers a bit of a heavier stick to wave at you if they > catch you using an unlocked phone they didn't authorize; they can tell. > There are also a few technical loopholes. Legacy phones, i.e. "used (or > perhaps unused) phones previously purchased or otherwise acquired by a > consumer" are still cool to unlock, and that definition has a little bit of > play in it. But the practice of unlocking your carrier-discounted phone is > still going to be a crime, so get ready to deal with this brave new world, > or live the life of an outlaw. > [image: Number of comments] > > - [image: Unlocking Your Phone Is Illegal Starting Tomorrow] Unlocking > Your Phone Is Illegal Starting Tomorrow > - [image: Can Apple's Stock Recover Without Steve Jobs?] Can > Apple's Stock Recover Without Steve Jobs? > - [image: US Military Will Install Laser Turrets on Bombers and > Fighter Jets] US > Military Will Install Laser Turrets on Bombers and Fighter Jets > - [image: 21 Amazing Off-the-Grid Houses] 21 > Amazing Off-the-Grid Houses > - [image: The Math Formula That Tells Us How Long Everything Will > Live] The > Math Formula That Tells Us How Long Everything Will Live > - [image: The No-Hire Emails That Incriminate Apple, Google, Adobe > and More] The > No-Hire Emails That Incriminate Apple, Google, Adobe and More > - [image: Study Says It Can Track NFL Brain Injuries with PET Scans] Study > Says It Can Track NFL Brain Injuries with PET Scans > > More Stories on Gizmodo » > diegocanabarro at gmail.com: Change your e-mail address| > Unsubscribe > Gawker Media, 210 Elizabeth Street, Floor 4, New York, NY 10012 > Terms of use > | Mailing List Policy > > > > -- > Diego R. Canabarro > http://lattes.cnpq.br/4980585945314597 > > -- > diego.canabarro [at] ufrgs.br > diego [at] pubpol.umass.edu > MSN: diegocanabarro [at] gmail.com > Skype: diegocanabarro > Cell # +55-51-9244-3425 (Brasil) / +1-413-362-0133 (USA) > -- > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From suresh at hserus.net Sun Jan 27 23:41:21 2013 From: suresh at hserus.net (Suresh Ramasubramanian) Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2013 20:41:21 -0800 Subject: [governance] Fwd: Unlocking Your Phone Is Illegal Starting Tomorrow In-Reply-To: References: <251e609e1dba3888b86c21cc83674f7de16.20130125230048@mail32.us1.rsgsv.net> Message-ID: <20130128044121.GA6059@hserus.net> Charity Gamboa [27/01/13 22:29 -0600]: >upgrade. I've done it so I would think that the issue lies on the premise >that if you are locked into a contract, unlocking your phone is not >allowed. Once you are through with your contract, I would assume that your >phone is paid for and technically yours. That premise is correct. Jailbreaking your phone when you buy it cheap on contract is the issue here. Several people are doing this not for the freedom of installing new apps, but to simply export the phone out and sell it at a profit in the second hand market in developing countries. There was an excellent article on how this underground economy operates, though it doesn't specifically mention iphones. How Chungking Mansions, a dilapidated commercial building in the tourist heart of hong kong, is a major centre for the phone gray market in emerging economies. http://caravanmagazine.in/reportage/upwardly-mobile -------------- 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 From jstyre at jstyre.com Mon Jan 28 00:13:54 2013 From: jstyre at jstyre.com (James S. Tyre) Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2013 21:13:54 -0800 Subject: [governance] Fwd: Unlocking Your Phone Is Illegal Starting Tomorrow In-Reply-To: <20130128044121.GA6059@hserus.net> References: <251e609e1dba3888b86c21cc83674f7de16.20130125230048@mail32.us1.rsgsv.net> <20130128044121.GA6059@hserus.net> Message-ID: <016701cdfd16$48766940$d9633bc0$@jstyre.com> Suresh, Please don't confuse unlocking and jailbreaking. Both as a matter of technology and under U.S. law, they are completely different. -- James S. Tyre Law Offices of James S. Tyre 10736 Jefferson Blvd., #512 Culver City, CA 90230-4969 310-839-4114/310-839-4602(fax) jstyre at jstyre.com Policy Fellow, Electronic Frontier Foundation https://www.eff.org > -----Original Message----- > From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance- > request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Suresh Ramasubramanian > Sent: Sunday, January 27, 2013 8:41 PM > To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Charity Gamboa > Cc: Diego Rafael Canabarro > Subject: Re: [governance] Fwd: Unlocking Your Phone Is Illegal Starting Tomorrow > > Charity Gamboa [27/01/13 22:29 -0600]: > >upgrade. I've done it so I would think that the issue lies on the > >premise that if you are locked into a contract, unlocking your phone is > >not allowed. Once you are through with your contract, I would assume > >that your phone is paid for and technically yours. > > That premise is correct. Jailbreaking your phone when you buy it cheap on contract is > the issue here. Several people are doing this not for the freedom of installing new > apps, but to simply export the phone out and sell it at a profit in the second hand > market in developing countries. > > There was an excellent article on how this underground economy operates, though it > doesn't specifically mention iphones. How Chungking Mansions, a dilapidated commercial > building in the tourist heart of hong kong, is a major centre for the phone gray > market in emerging economies. > > http://caravanmagazine.in/reportage/upwardly-mobile > -------------- 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 From suresh at hserus.net Mon Jan 28 00:22:03 2013 From: suresh at hserus.net (Suresh Ramasubramanian) Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2013 10:52:03 +0530 Subject: [governance] Fwd: Unlocking Your Phone Is Illegal Starting Tomorrow In-Reply-To: <016701cdfd16$48766940$d9633bc0$@jstyre.com> References: <251e609e1dba3888b86c21cc83674f7de16.20130125230048@mail32.us1.rsgsv.net> <20130128044121.GA6059@hserus.net> <016701cdfd16$48766940$d9633bc0$@jstyre.com> Message-ID: <8E597112-3128-4C14-8667-6D8FE810F3FE@hserus.net> I agree they are both different. Jailbreaking to install additional apps / a third party firmware image is entirely different from unlocking from your carrier's SIM to get out of a contract. I need some coffee - it was wrong to use the term jailbreaking for this particular activity beign discussed in the thread. --srs (iPad) On 28-Jan-2013, at 10:43, "James S. Tyre" wrote: > Suresh, > > Please don't confuse unlocking and jailbreaking. Both as a matter of technology and under > U.S. law, they are completely different. > > -- > James S. Tyre > Law Offices of James S. Tyre > 10736 Jefferson Blvd., #512 > Culver City, CA 90230-4969 > 310-839-4114/310-839-4602(fax) > jstyre at jstyre.com > Policy Fellow, Electronic Frontier Foundation > https://www.eff.org > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance- >> request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Suresh Ramasubramanian >> Sent: Sunday, January 27, 2013 8:41 PM >> To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Charity Gamboa >> Cc: Diego Rafael Canabarro >> Subject: Re: [governance] Fwd: Unlocking Your Phone Is Illegal Starting Tomorrow >> >> Charity Gamboa [27/01/13 22:29 -0600]: >>> upgrade. I've done it so I would think that the issue lies on the >>> premise that if you are locked into a contract, unlocking your phone is >>> not allowed. Once you are through with your contract, I would assume >>> that your phone is paid for and technically yours. >> >> That premise is correct. Jailbreaking your phone when you buy it cheap on contract is >> the issue here. Several people are doing this not for the freedom of installing new >> apps, but to simply export the phone out and sell it at a profit in the second hand >> market in developing countries. >> >> There was an excellent article on how this underground economy operates, though it >> doesn't specifically mention iphones. How Chungking Mansions, a dilapidated commercial >> building in the tourist heart of hong kong, is a major centre for the phone gray >> market in emerging economies. >> >> http://caravanmagazine.in/reportage/upwardly-mobile > > -------------- 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 From gurstein at gmail.com Mon Jan 28 01:04:29 2013 From: gurstein at gmail.com (michael gurstein) Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2013 22:04:29 -0800 Subject: [governance] Towards an IGC Statement on RFC 6852 "Affirmation of the Modern Paradigm for Standards" In-Reply-To: <61E2D1C7-09E5-4358-B5BD-B362A084EDF5@uzh.ch> References: <20130126141234.GA21789@sources.org> <20130126224714.GA21920@sources.org> <20130127091003.2e5d7640@quill.bollow.ch> <20130127123308.689639f3@quill.bollow.ch> <61E2D1C7-09E5-4358-B5BD-B362A084EDF5@uzh.ch> Message-ID: <02a801cdfd1d$5ce43130$16ac9390$@gmail.com> Hmmm I must admit to finding the document RFC 6852 astonishing and (now that I've been made aware of some of the background) quite shameful. Not only does it completely ignore the public interest background and continued value and significance of the Internet, omit any mention of inclusion as a consideration at all levels of Internet design and development, but it overall ignores the WSIS declaration even when there is urging on the part of various interlocutors in the various signatory organizations to address these range of issues. That civil society was not consulted was clearly not an accident nor an oversight but an attempt to create a fact on the ground leaving those with concerns to, as Alejandro so blithely suggests, see about achieving some sort of modifications after the fact and within an already determined framework during downstream implementations (which I'm assuming he knows as well as I do makes little if any sense if the issues are significant and central such as for example issues concerning design for inclusion)--take it or leave it. This behaviour goes to the very core of what might be meant by "multi-stakeholderism", who precisely are the "stakeholders" and what (and on whose behalf) are these stakeholders "holding" the "stakes". And further, this puts into significant question the necessary trust which would be a fundamental pre-condition of the kind of global Internet governance regime which advocates of multi-stakeholderism have been so vociferously advocating. Finally, following on from Bill and Adam's suggestions I can think of no more important topic to be considered at the next IGF than a consideration of the significance of RFC 6852 in the context of the WSIS declaration and overall Internet governance in the global public interest. Mike -----Original Message----- From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of William Drake Sent: Sunday, January 27, 2013 2:38 PM To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Adam Peake Subject: Re: [governance] Towards an IGC Statement on RFC 6852 "Affirmation of the Modern Paradigm for Standards" Hi I agree with Adam. The IGC was created to provide input into the WSIS and then the IGF. If it runs off and chases other agendas of interest to co-cos or others (cybersecurity, IETF etc.) while neglecting its original reason for being, isn't that sort of doing a disservice to all those who've put a lot of time and energy in over the years trying to get the IGF to work and bake in civil society participation? And if the IGC doesn't consistently provide solid inputs to the IGF consultations, why should governments and other stakeholder groups think it's a player they need to work with when making deals, including in the MAG? In fact, why shouldn't the UN look to other organizations and networks to provide more civil society nominees etc. If the IGC makes itself look irrelevant to the IGF, it will increasingly be treated as such. Bill On Jan 27, 2013, at 4:01 AM, Adam Peake wrote: > Please, just focus. There's a hard deadline for a contribution to the > IGF (which we missed last year). Meet that and come back to the RFC. > > Adam > > > > On Sun, Jan 27, 2013 at 8:33 PM, Norbert Bollow wrote: >> [with IGC coordinator hat on] >> >> Adam Peake wrote: >> >>> Norbert, thanks for trying, but to be frank, why bother? >> >> Because standards development is very much at the core of Internet >> governance, and it is important for IGC to engage, to the extent that >> consensus is possible, also on such core issues, and not just on more >> peripheral questions like e.g. the choice of discussion topics for >> the next Internet Governance Forum. >> >>> In the couple of days since RFC 6852 was mentioned we've seen almost >>> equal support/opposition for statement. >> >> That is not accurate. We have seen praise for RFC 6852 as well as >> criticism. This is no reason to not at least try to incorporate both >> in a statement. >> >>> And if the caucus does produce something will it make any difference? >> >> That will depend on the actual content of the statement, and on how >> convincing it is written, and on whether it will get promoted in >> contexts where it can make a difference. The Caucus has several >> members who have the right kind of contacts. >> >>> Could we please focus on core issues. >> >> This is a core issue. >> >> Greetings, >> Norbert >> >>> On Sun, Jan 27, 2013 at 5:10 PM, Norbert Bollow wrote: >>>> [with IGC Coordinator hat on] >>>> >>>> Let's develop an IGC Statement on this RFC 6852 "Affirmation of the >>>> Modern Paradigm for Standards" [1]. >>>> [1] http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6852 >>>> >>>> I'll be willing to serve as editor if no-one else volunteers, but >>>> I'd prefer for someone else to take on this role. >>>> >>>> Who would like to volunteer? >>>> >>>> Greetings, >>>> Norbert >>>> >>>> >>>> Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote: >>>> >>>>>> It is a good document. >>>>> >>>>> No, it's not. >>>>> >>>>> It refers only to business uses of the Internet, as if the >>>>> Internet were not used for many other things. It was recorded as a >>>>> comment by some IETF members >>>>> but was >>>>> ignored. >>>>> >>>>> It calls for access to the standard documents but it is >>>>> hypocritical since one of the signers, IEEE, does not allow it >>>>> (ITU, the >>>>> main target of this RFC, does distribute its standards online for >>>>> a few years.) >>>>> >>>>> It refers to open and transparent processes but the IETF members >>>>> discovered this document when it was already signed, and >>>>> impossible to modify. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> ____________________________________________________________ >>>> 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 >>>> >>> >> > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From parminder at itforchange.net Mon Jan 28 01:12:13 2013 From: parminder at itforchange.net (parminder) Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2013 11:42:13 +0530 Subject: [governance] Re: Charter amendment proposals in need of more co-proposers In-Reply-To: <20130127224256.6f14cba1@quill.bollow.ch> References: <20130125115127.00edd288@quill.bollow.ch> <09eb01cdfb01$f883d1e0$e98b75a0$@gmail.com> <20130127100259.4af934fc@quill.bollow.ch> <00ff01cdfcbd$898dc300$9ca94900$@gmail.com> <20130127224256.6f14cba1@quill.bollow.ch> Message-ID: <510616BD.60501@itforchange.net> I co-propose. So, now one more is needed... Those who may want to consider the matter, the co-proposal refers to taking a vote on charter amendment that is listed as "Proposal of Norbert and co-proposers on coordinator election dates" at http://igcaucus.org/informally-discussed-charter-amendments Basically it just rationalises the charter text on the time-periods for which a co-coordinator holds office, and timetable for their elections, removing some current ambiguities. parminder On Monday 28 January 2013 03:12 AM, Norbert Bollow wrote: > Thanks for your support... however, as far as the formal requirement to > reach 10 voting members who jointly propose is concerned, we're still > at only 8. (I have only been able to add Fouad Bajwa to the list of > co-proposers recently - thank you Fouad! I had Michael Gurstein on the > list of co-proposers already. Neither José Félix Arias Ynche nor Devon > Blake seems to be on the list of "voting members", i.e. people who > voted at the Coordinators election, http://igcaucus.org/list-members ) > > Anyone else willing to co-propose? > > Greetings, > Norbert > > Am Sun, 27 Jan 2013 16:03:49 -0500 > schrieb Devon Blake : > >> I co -propose >> >> On Sun, Jan 27, 2013 at 2:57 PM, José Félix Arias Ynche >> wrote: >> >>> + 1 Voy a firmar >>> >>> >>> >>> *Cordialmente: José Félix Arias Ynche* >>> * Investigador Social Para El Desarrollo* >>> >>> >>> 2013/1/27 michael gurstein >>> >>>> I'll sign on... >>>> >>>> M >>>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: Norbert Bollow [mailto:nb at bollow.ch] >>>> Sent: Sunday, January 27, 2013 1:03 AM >>>> To: michael gurstein >>>> Cc: governance at lists.igcaucus.org >>>> Subject: Re: [governance] Re: Charter amendment proposals in need >>>> of more co-proposers >>>> >>>> Here's a quick update: The "proposal of Jeremy and co-proposers on >>>> updating >>>> the reference to the mailing list" has just reached the threshold >>>> of 10 co-proposers who are voting members. The "proposal of >>>> Norbert and co-proposers on coordinator election dates" currently >>>> has seven, and will hence not reach the point of getting voted on >>>> unless at least three more sign on. >>>> >>>> Greetings, >>>> Norbert >>>> >>>> >>>> I wrote: >>>>>> among the charter amendment proposals listed on >>>>>> http://igcaucus.org/informally-discussed-charter-amendments >>>>>> I think it would be good to bring the following two to a vote >>>>>> together with Avri's two amendment proposals (which have >>>>>> already achieved the requirement of a sufficient number of >>>>>> co-proposers). >>>>>> >>>>>> Proposal of Jeremy and co-proposers on updating the reference >>>>>> to the mailing list >>>>>> >>>>>> Proposal of Norbert and co-proposers on coordinator election >>>>>> dates >>>>> Are these proposals really not getting any further >>>>> co-proposers??? >>>>> >>>>> If someone doubts that the clarification of coordinator election >>>>> dates has some importance, please try to explain how the current >>>>> text of our charter is consistent with Sala's election having >>>>> taken place in October 2011 and mine in January 2013. >>>>> >>>>> Greetings, >>>>> Norbert >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> ____________________________________________________________ >>>> 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 >>>> >>>> >>> ____________________________________________________________ >>> 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: -------------- 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 From daniel at digsys.bg Mon Jan 28 02:56:53 2013 From: daniel at digsys.bg (Daniel Kalchev) Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2013 09:56:53 +0200 Subject: [governance] Fwd: Unlocking Your Phone Is Illegal Starting Tomorrow In-Reply-To: <20130128044121.GA6059@hserus.net> References: <251e609e1dba3888b86c21cc83674f7de16.20130125230048@mail32.us1.rsgsv.net> <20130128044121.GA6059@hserus.net> Message-ID: <51062F45.70204@digsys.bg> On 28.01.13 06:41, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote: > Charity Gamboa [27/01/13 22:29 -0600]: >> upgrade. I've done it so I would think that the issue lies on the >> premise >> that if you are locked into a contract, unlocking your phone is not >> allowed. Once you are through with your contract, I would assume that >> your >> phone is paid for and technically yours. > > That premise is correct. Jailbreaking your phone when you buy it cheap on > contract is the issue here. Several people are doing this not for the > freedom of installing new apps, but to simply export the phone out and > sell > it at a profit in the second hand market in developing countries. > I don't really get it. Are people indeed *that* dumb? Buying an "subsidized" phone on contract is essentially leasing the phone. You pay "small" price initially, which is essentially the initial payment in the leasing contract and you pay your monthly installments with your monthly services bill. How legal is that is another question. So why should the operator care at all, what you do with your handset? Whether you "unlock" it, sell it "cheaply" to someone "abroad", smash it with a hammer or drop it in your bathtub... does it really matter, as long as you pay your lease in form of monthly fees? Modifying the device in such a way that it becomes incompatible with, or dangerous to the (shared) carrier network is something entirely different that that should be prosecuted under existing laws. As for the "cheap" subsidized phones, the carries have long and boring contracts that cover these things and they will always get their money. Doesn't matter if you unlock the phone or not. My opinion is that carrier locking should be forbidden by law and not locking phones to the carrier should become an strict requirement for obtaining license to become public telecommunications operator. Remember how AT&T got split? Daniel -------------- 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 From roland at internetpolicyagency.com Mon Jan 28 03:03:07 2013 From: roland at internetpolicyagency.com (Roland Perry) Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2013 08:03:07 +0000 Subject: [governance] Norbert's hat In-Reply-To: <20130127170101.4c2cfce2@quill.bollow.ch> References: <20130127120551.1db0b299@quill.bollow.ch> <20130127170101.4c2cfce2@quill.bollow.ch> Message-ID: In message <20130127170101.4c2cfce2 at quill.bollow.ch>, at 17:01:01 on Sun, 27 Jan 2013, Norbert Bollow writes >[with IGC Coordinator hat on] Perhaps it would help if everyone you assumed you had your hat on at all times, unless you specifically say something is a personal comment. I think that's been the understanding re co-ordinators in the past. -- Roland Perry -------------- 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 From paulitrix at gmail.com Mon Jan 28 03:04:56 2013 From: paulitrix at gmail.com (Paul M) Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2013 11:04:56 +0300 Subject: [governance] Wikipedia Article on the IGF Needs Updating Message-ID: Hope this is the right forum to discuss this matter. The Wikipedia article on the Internet Governance Forum (IGF), is wanting and in dire need of updating. A lot has happened since Vilnius 2010 but the article has little to show for it. I would be delighted to work with anyone who cares to spruce up the wiki page. -- :-) Paul M -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From Kivuva at transworldafrica.com Mon Jan 28 03:27:46 2013 From: Kivuva at transworldafrica.com (Kivuva) Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2013 11:27:46 +0300 Subject: [governance] Fwd: Unlocking Your Phone Is Illegal Starting Tomorrow In-Reply-To: <51062F45.70204@digsys.bg> References: <251e609e1dba3888b86c21cc83674f7de16.20130125230048@mail32.us1.rsgsv.net> <20130128044121.GA6059@hserus.net> <51062F45.70204@digsys.bg> Message-ID: In Kenya, its is illegal to unlock your network specific phone, even if you purchased it with no plan. That law is offensive. On 28 January 2013 10:56, Daniel Kalchev wrote: > > > On 28.01.13 06:41, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote: > >> Charity Gamboa [27/01/13 22:29 -0600]: >> >>> upgrade. I've done it so I would think that the issue lies on the premise >>> that if you are locked into a contract, unlocking your phone is not >>> allowed. Once you are through with your contract, I would assume that >>> your >>> phone is paid for and technically yours. >>> >> >> That premise is correct. Jailbreaking your phone when you buy it cheap on >> contract is the issue here. Several people are doing this not for the >> freedom of installing new apps, but to simply export the phone out and >> sell >> it at a profit in the second hand market in developing countries. >> >> > I don't really get it. Are people indeed *that* dumb? > > Buying an "subsidized" phone on contract is essentially leasing the phone. > You pay "small" price initially, which is essentially the initial payment > in the leasing contract and you pay your monthly installments with your > monthly services bill. How legal is that is another question. > > So why should the operator care at all, what you do with your handset? > Whether you "unlock" it, sell it "cheaply" to someone "abroad", smash it > with a hammer or drop it in your bathtub... does it really matter, as long > as you pay your lease in form of monthly fees? > > Modifying the device in such a way that it becomes incompatible with, or > dangerous to the (shared) carrier network is something entirely different > that that should be prosecuted under existing laws. > > As for the "cheap" subsidized phones, the carries have long and boring > contracts that cover these things and they will always get their money. > Doesn't matter if you unlock the phone or not. > > My opinion is that carrier locking should be forbidden by law and not > locking phones to the carrier should become an strict requirement for > obtaining license to become public telecommunications operator. Remember > how AT&T got split? > > Daniel > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > -- ______________________ Mwendwa Kivuva For Business Development Transworld Computer Channels Cel: 0722402248 twitter.com/lordmwesh www.transworldAfrica.com | Fluent in computing kenya.or.ke | The Kenya we know -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From tracyhackshaw at gmail.com Mon Jan 28 03:48:01 2013 From: tracyhackshaw at gmail.com (Tracy F. Hackshaw @ Google) Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2013 04:48:01 -0400 Subject: [governance] Wikipedia Article on the IGF Needs Updating In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi Paul, I can volunteer to assist. Rgds, Tracy On Jan 28, 2013 4:05 AM, "Paul M" wrote: > Hope this is the right forum to discuss this matter. The Wikipedia > article on the Internet Governance Forum (IGF), is > wanting and in dire need of updating. A lot has happened since Vilnius 2010 > but the article has little to show for it. I would be delighted to work > with anyone who cares to spruce up the wiki page. > > > -- > :-) Paul M > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From fouadbajwa at gmail.com Mon Jan 28 04:41:21 2013 From: fouadbajwa at gmail.com (Fouad Bajwa) Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2013 14:41:21 +0500 Subject: [governance] Wikipedia Article on the IGF Needs Updating In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: One the wikipedia resource pages that I have requested people to regularly contribute to. Needs a bit of peer review every now and then. Best Fouad On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 1:48 PM, Tracy F. Hackshaw @ Google wrote: > Hi Paul, > > I can volunteer to assist. > > Rgds, > > Tracy > > On Jan 28, 2013 4:05 AM, "Paul M" wrote: >> >> Hope this is the right forum to discuss this matter. The Wikipedia article >> on the Internet Governance Forum (IGF), is wanting and in dire need of >> updating. A lot has happened since Vilnius 2010 but the article has little >> to show for it. I would be delighted to work with anyone who cares to spruce >> up the wiki page. >> >> >> -- >> :-) Paul M >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 >> > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From nb at bollow.ch Mon Jan 28 05:10:03 2013 From: nb at bollow.ch (Norbert Bollow) Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2013 11:10:03 +0100 Subject: [governance] Towards an IGC Statement on RFC 6852 "Affirmation of the Modern Paradigm for Standards" In-Reply-To: <02a801cdfd1d$5ce43130$16ac9390$@gmail.com> References: <20130126141234.GA21789@sources.org> <20130126224714.GA21920@sources.org> <20130127091003.2e5d7640@quill.bollow.ch> <20130127123308.689639f3@quill.bollow.ch> <61E2D1C7-09E5-4358-B5BD-B362A084EDF5@uzh.ch> <02a801cdfd1d$5ce43130$16ac9390$@gmail.com> Message-ID: <20130128111003.18a48260@quill.bollow.ch> Hi Michael Thanks for your comments! Right now I'm focusing (for the same kind of reasons as Bill has mentioned) on our need as a Caucus to respond to the "Stakeholders are invited to submit written contributions taking stock of the Baku 2012 IGF meeting and looking forward - suggestions on themes and format, for the IGF 2013 meeting." call for contributions with a deadline of February 14. Do you think that the RFC 6852 issue should be mentioned there? Or would it be sufficient to develop a separate IGC statement on RFC 6852 (after we've finished the IGF taking stock and looking forward statement), possibly supplemented with a workshop proposal when the time for that comes? Greetings, Norbert Am Sun, 27 Jan 2013 22:04:29 -0800 schrieb "michael gurstein" : > Hmmm I must admit to finding the document RFC 6852 astonishing and > (now that I've been made aware of some of the background) quite > shameful. > > Not only does it completely ignore the public interest background and > continued value and significance of the Internet, omit any mention of > inclusion as a consideration at all levels of Internet design and > development, but it overall ignores the WSIS declaration even when > there is urging on the part of various interlocutors in the various > signatory organizations to address these range of issues. > > That civil society was not consulted was clearly not an accident nor > an oversight but an attempt to create a fact on the ground leaving > those with concerns to, as Alejandro so blithely suggests, see about > achieving some sort of modifications after the fact and within an > already determined framework during downstream implementations (which > I'm assuming he knows as well as I do makes little if any sense if > the issues are significant and central such as for example issues > concerning design for inclusion)--take it or leave it. This > behaviour goes to the very core of what might be meant by > "multi-stakeholderism", who precisely are the "stakeholders" and what > (and on whose behalf) are these stakeholders "holding" the "stakes". > > And further, this puts into significant question the necessary trust > which would be a fundamental pre-condition of the kind of global > Internet governance regime which advocates of multi-stakeholderism > have been so vociferously advocating. > > Finally, following on from Bill and Adam's suggestions I can think of > no more important topic to be considered at the next IGF than a > consideration of the significance of RFC 6852 in the context of the > WSIS declaration and overall Internet governance in the global public > interest. > > Mike > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org > [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of William > Drake Sent: Sunday, January 27, 2013 2:38 PM > To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Adam Peake > Subject: Re: [governance] Towards an IGC Statement on RFC 6852 > "Affirmation of the Modern Paradigm for Standards" > > Hi > > I agree with Adam. The IGC was created to provide input into the > WSIS and then the IGF. If it runs off and chases other agendas of > interest to co-cos or others (cybersecurity, IETF etc.) while > neglecting its original reason for being, isn't that sort of doing a > disservice to all those who've put a lot of time and energy in over > the years trying to get the IGF to work and bake in civil society > participation? And if the IGC doesn't consistently provide solid > inputs to the IGF consultations, why should governments and other > stakeholder groups think it's a player they need to work with when > making deals, including in the MAG? In fact, why shouldn't the UN > look to other organizations and networks to provide more civil > society nominees etc. If the IGC makes itself look irrelevant to the > IGF, it will increasingly be treated as such. > > Bill > > > > > On Jan 27, 2013, at 4:01 AM, Adam Peake wrote: > > > Please, just focus. There's a hard deadline for a contribution to > > the IGF (which we missed last year). Meet that and come back to > > the RFC. > > > > Adam > > > > > > > > On Sun, Jan 27, 2013 at 8:33 PM, Norbert Bollow > > wrote: > >> [with IGC coordinator hat on] > >> > >> Adam Peake wrote: > >> > >>> Norbert, thanks for trying, but to be frank, why bother? > >> > >> Because standards development is very much at the core of Internet > >> governance, and it is important for IGC to engage, to the extent > >> that consensus is possible, also on such core issues, and not just > >> on more peripheral questions like e.g. the choice of discussion > >> topics for the next Internet Governance Forum. > >> > >>> In the couple of days since RFC 6852 was mentioned we've seen > >>> almost equal support/opposition for statement. > >> > >> That is not accurate. We have seen praise for RFC 6852 as well as > >> criticism. This is no reason to not at least try to incorporate > >> both in a statement. > >> > >>> And if the caucus does produce something will it make any > >>> difference? > >> > >> That will depend on the actual content of the statement, and on > >> how convincing it is written, and on whether it will get promoted > >> in contexts where it can make a difference. The Caucus has several > >> members who have the right kind of contacts. > >> > >>> Could we please focus on core issues. > >> > >> This is a core issue. > >> > >> Greetings, > >> Norbert > >> > >>> On Sun, Jan 27, 2013 at 5:10 PM, Norbert Bollow > >>> wrote: > >>>> [with IGC Coordinator hat on] > >>>> > >>>> Let's develop an IGC Statement on this RFC 6852 "Affirmation of > >>>> the Modern Paradigm for Standards" [1]. > >>>> [1] http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6852 > >>>> > >>>> I'll be willing to serve as editor if no-one else volunteers, > >>>> but I'd prefer for someone else to take on this role. > >>>> > >>>> Who would like to volunteer? > >>>> > >>>> Greetings, > >>>> Norbert > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote: > >>>> > >>>>>> It is a good document. > >>>>> > >>>>> No, it's not. > >>>>> > >>>>> It refers only to business uses of the Internet, as if the > >>>>> Internet were not used for many other things. It was recorded > >>>>> as a comment by some IETF members > >>>>> but was > >>>>> ignored. > >>>>> > >>>>> It calls for access to the standard documents but it is > >>>>> hypocritical since one of the signers, IEEE, does not allow it > >>>>> (ITU, > >>>>> the main target of this RFC, does distribute its standards > >>>>> online for a few years.) > >>>>> > >>>>> It refers to open and transparent processes but the IETF > >>>>> members discovered this document when it was already signed, > >>>>> and impossible to modify. > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> ____________________________________________________________ > >>>> 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 > >>>> > >>> > >> > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From nb at bollow.ch Mon Jan 28 05:29:17 2013 From: nb at bollow.ch (Norbert Bollow) Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2013 11:29:17 +0100 Subject: [governance] Re: Charter amendment proposals in need of more co-proposers In-Reply-To: <510616BD.60501@itforchange.net> References: <20130125115127.00edd288@quill.bollow.ch> <09eb01cdfb01$f883d1e0$e98b75a0$@gmail.com> <20130127100259.4af934fc@quill.bollow.ch> <00ff01cdfcbd$898dc300$9ca94900$@gmail.com> <20130127224256.6f14cba1@quill.bollow.ch> <510616BD.60501@itforchange.net> Message-ID: <20130128112917.72178ba1@quill.bollow.ch> parminder wrote: > I co-propose. Thank you! > So, now one more is needed... Actually with Hindenburgo Pires and Parminder we have reached the threshold now. I am hereby formally submitting to the IGC the following charter amendment proposals: * "Proposal of Norbert and co-proposers on coordinator election dates", proposed by the voting members 1) Norbert Bollow, 2) Izumi AIZU, 3) Jeremy Malcolm, 4) Michael Gurstein, 5) Ian Peter, 6) Tracy F. Hackshaw, 7) Suresh Ramasubramanian, 8) Fouad Bajwa, 9) Hindenburgo Pires, 10) Parminder, and others. * "Proposal of Jeremy and co-proposers on updating the reference to the mailing list", proposed by the voting members 1) Jeremy Malcolm, 2) Imran Ahmed Shah, 3) Avri Doria, 4) Norbert Bollow, 5) Tracey Naughton, 6) Michael Gurstein, 7) Ginger Paque, 8) Ian Peter, 9) Tracy F. Hackshaw, 10) Suresh Ramasubramanian, and others. Thanks to all co-proposers! As soon as I've sent and received this message, I'll get that Coordinator hat out and move those two proposals to http://igcaucus.org/formally-proposed-charter-amendments Greetings, Norbert -------------- 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 From ca at cafonso.ca Mon Jan 28 05:41:16 2013 From: ca at cafonso.ca (Carlos A. Afonso) Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2013 08:41:16 -0200 Subject: [governance] Fwd: Unlocking Your Phone Is Illegal Starting Tomorrow In-Reply-To: References: <251e609e1dba3888b86c21cc83674f7de16.20130125230048@mail32.us1.rsgsv.net> Message-ID: <510655CC.70702@cafonso.ca> Same in BR. --c.a. On 01/28/2013 02:29 AM, Charity Gamboa wrote: > I am on the impression that once you are done with your contract with a > telecom, say for 2 years with AT&T, you can call their tech support and > have your phone unlocked. You have paid for that phone and without a > contract they can unlock that for you. Another contract means you can > upgrade. I've done it so I would think that the issue lies on the > premise that if you are locked into a contract, unlocking your phone is > not allowed. Once you are through with your contract, I would assume > that your phone is paid for and technically yours. > > Charity > > On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 7:55 PM, Diego Rafael Canabarro > > wrote: > > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: *Gizmodo* > > Date: Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 6:02 PM > Subject: Unlocking Your Phone Is Illegal Starting Tomorrow > To: diegocanabarro at gmail.com > > > __ > > > > > January 25th, 2013Top Story > > > Unlocking Your Phone Is Illegal Starting Tomorrow > > > * > > * > > * > > * > > > By Eric Limer > > Unlocking > Your Phone Is Illegal Starting Tomorrow > > You may remember that last year, the DMCA exemption on unlocking > phones was smacked down > . > Well it's going into effect this Saturday. So starting tomorrow, > unlocking your phone will be officially illegal. Yay. > > Unlocking phones without the express consent of the carrier who > locked them became illegal thanks to edits to DMCA exemptions back > in October, but it's only now that the 90-day grace period is > running out. Locked phones purchased in the 90 days after the ruling > are still game to be unlocked, but from here on out, for an unlocked > phone to be legitimate, it'll have to have been bought that way or > come with a permission slip from your carrier. > > It's not the first time retracted DMCA exemptions have threatened to > mess with your ability to mess with your phone. Jailbreaking and > rooting almost became illegal again > > because of DMCA exemption changes. Fortunately, the same batch of > modifications that illegalized unlocking will also protect phone > jailbreaking > > for another three years. But it's still not allowed on tablets. Not > than anyone is likely notice that particular indiscretion. > > These changes won't, of course, limit you ability to unlock phones > anyway, but it will give carriers a bit of a heavier stick to wave > at you if they catch you using an unlocked phone they didn't > authorize; they can tell. There are also a few technical loopholes. > Legacy phones, i.e. "used (or perhaps unused) phones previously > purchased or otherwise acquired by a consumer" are still cool to > unlock, and that definition has a little bit of play in it. But the > practice of unlocking your carrier-discounted phone is still going > to be a crime, so get ready to deal with this brave new world, or > live the life of an outlaw. > > Number of comments > > > > > * Unlocking Your Phone Is Illegal Starting Tomorrow > > > > > Unlocking Your Phone Is Illegal Starting Tomorrow > > > * Can Apple's Stock Recover Without Steve Jobs? > > > > > Can Apple's Stock Recover Without Steve Jobs? > > > * US Military Will Install Laser Turrets on Bombers and Fighter > Jets > > > > > US Military Will Install Laser Turrets on Bombers and > Fighter Jets > > > * 21 Amazing Off-the-Grid Houses > > > > > 21 Amazing Off-the-Grid Houses > > > * The Math Formula That Tells Us How Long Everything Will Live > > > > > The Math Formula That Tells Us How Long Everything Will > Live > > > * The No-Hire Emails That Incriminate Apple, Google, Adobe and > More > > > > > The No-Hire Emails That Incriminate Apple, Google, Adobe > and More > > > * Study Says It Can Track NFL Brain Injuries with PET Scans > > > > > Study Says It Can Track NFL Brain Injuries with PET Scans > > > More Stories on Gizmodo » > > > > > diegocanabarro at gmail.com : > Change your e-mail address > > | Unsubscribe > > > Gawker Media, 210 Elizabeth Street, Floor 4, New York, NY 10012 > Terms of use > | > Mailing List Policy > > > > > > -- > Diego R. Canabarro > http://lattes.cnpq.br/4980585945314597 > > -- > diego.canabarro [at] ufrgs.br > diego [at] pubpol.umass.edu > MSN: diegocanabarro [at] gmail.com > Skype: diegocanabarro > Cell # +55-51-9244-3425 (Brasil) / > +1-413-362-0133 (USA) > -- > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From gurstein at gmail.com Mon Jan 28 06:19:29 2013 From: gurstein at gmail.com (michael gurstein) Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2013 03:19:29 -0800 Subject: [governance] Towards an IGC Statement on RFC 6852 "Affirmation of the Modern Paradigm for Standards" In-Reply-To: <20130128111003.18a48260@quill.bollow.ch> References: <20130126141234.GA21789@sources.org> <20130126224714.GA21920@sources.org> <20130127091003.2e5d7640@quill.bollow.ch> <20130127123308.689639f3@quill.bollow.ch> <61E2D1C7-09E5-4358-B5BD-B362A084EDF5@uzh.ch> <02a801cdfd1d$5ce43130$16ac9390$@gmail.com> <20130128111003.18a48260@quill.bollow.ch> Message-ID: <034801cdfd49$5f76e600$1e64b200$@gmail.com> Hi Norbert, I think that the issue warrants both--a session at the IGF and a sign on letter from the IGC (which I've agreed to co-draft with you... M -----Original Message----- From: Norbert Bollow [mailto:nb at bollow.ch] Sent: Monday, January 28, 2013 2:10 AM To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; michael gurstein Cc: 'William Drake'; 'Adam Peake'; Alejandro Pisanty Subject: Re: [governance] Towards an IGC Statement on RFC 6852 "Affirmation of the Modern Paradigm for Standards" Hi Michael Thanks for your comments! Right now I'm focusing (for the same kind of reasons as Bill has mentioned) on our need as a Caucus to respond to the "Stakeholders are invited to submit written contributions taking stock of the Baku 2012 IGF meeting and looking forward - suggestions on themes and format, for the IGF 2013 meeting." call for contributions with a deadline of February 14. Do you think that the RFC 6852 issue should be mentioned there? Or would it be sufficient to develop a separate IGC statement on RFC 6852 (after we've finished the IGF taking stock and looking forward statement), possibly supplemented with a workshop proposal when the time for that comes? Greetings, Norbert Am Sun, 27 Jan 2013 22:04:29 -0800 schrieb "michael gurstein" : > Hmmm I must admit to finding the document RFC 6852 astonishing and > (now that I've been made aware of some of the background) quite > shameful. > > Not only does it completely ignore the public interest background and > continued value and significance of the Internet, omit any mention of > inclusion as a consideration at all levels of Internet design and > development, but it overall ignores the WSIS declaration even when > there is urging on the part of various interlocutors in the various > signatory organizations to address these range of issues. > > That civil society was not consulted was clearly not an accident nor > an oversight but an attempt to create a fact on the ground leaving > those with concerns to, as Alejandro so blithely suggests, see about > achieving some sort of modifications after the fact and within an > already determined framework during downstream implementations (which > I'm assuming he knows as well as I do makes little if any sense if the > issues are significant and central such as for example issues > concerning design for inclusion)--take it or leave it. This behaviour > goes to the very core of what might be meant by > "multi-stakeholderism", who precisely are the "stakeholders" and what > (and on whose behalf) are these stakeholders "holding" the "stakes". > > And further, this puts into significant question the necessary trust > which would be a fundamental pre-condition of the kind of global > Internet governance regime which advocates of multi-stakeholderism > have been so vociferously advocating. > > Finally, following on from Bill and Adam's suggestions I can think of > no more important topic to be considered at the next IGF than a > consideration of the significance of RFC 6852 in the context of the > WSIS declaration and overall Internet governance in the global public > interest. > > Mike > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org > [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of William > Drake Sent: Sunday, January 27, 2013 2:38 PM > To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Adam Peake > Subject: Re: [governance] Towards an IGC Statement on RFC 6852 > "Affirmation of the Modern Paradigm for Standards" > > Hi > > I agree with Adam. The IGC was created to provide input into the WSIS > and then the IGF. If it runs off and chases other agendas of interest > to co-cos or others (cybersecurity, IETF etc.) while neglecting its > original reason for being, isn't that sort of doing a disservice to > all those who've put a lot of time and energy in over the years trying > to get the IGF to work and bake in civil society participation? And > if the IGC doesn't consistently provide solid inputs to the IGF > consultations, why should governments and other stakeholder groups > think it's a player they need to work with when making deals, > including in the MAG? In fact, why shouldn't the UN look to other > organizations and networks to provide more civil society nominees etc. > If the IGC makes itself look irrelevant to the IGF, it will > increasingly be treated as such. > > Bill > > > > > On Jan 27, 2013, at 4:01 AM, Adam Peake wrote: > > > Please, just focus. There's a hard deadline for a contribution to > > the IGF (which we missed last year). Meet that and come back to > > the RFC. > > > > Adam > > > > > > > > On Sun, Jan 27, 2013 at 8:33 PM, Norbert Bollow > > wrote: > >> [with IGC coordinator hat on] > >> > >> Adam Peake wrote: > >> > >>> Norbert, thanks for trying, but to be frank, why bother? > >> > >> Because standards development is very much at the core of Internet > >> governance, and it is important for IGC to engage, to the extent > >> that consensus is possible, also on such core issues, and not just > >> on more peripheral questions like e.g. the choice of discussion > >> topics for the next Internet Governance Forum. > >> > >>> In the couple of days since RFC 6852 was mentioned we've seen > >>> almost equal support/opposition for statement. > >> > >> That is not accurate. We have seen praise for RFC 6852 as well as > >> criticism. This is no reason to not at least try to incorporate > >> both in a statement. > >> > >>> And if the caucus does produce something will it make any > >>> difference? > >> > >> That will depend on the actual content of the statement, and on how > >> convincing it is written, and on whether it will get promoted in > >> contexts where it can make a difference. The Caucus has several > >> members who have the right kind of contacts. > >> > >>> Could we please focus on core issues. > >> > >> This is a core issue. > >> > >> Greetings, > >> Norbert > >> > >>> On Sun, Jan 27, 2013 at 5:10 PM, Norbert Bollow > >>> wrote: > >>>> [with IGC Coordinator hat on] > >>>> > >>>> Let's develop an IGC Statement on this RFC 6852 "Affirmation of > >>>> the Modern Paradigm for Standards" [1]. > >>>> [1] http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6852 > >>>> > >>>> I'll be willing to serve as editor if no-one else volunteers, but > >>>> I'd prefer for someone else to take on this role. > >>>> > >>>> Who would like to volunteer? > >>>> > >>>> Greetings, > >>>> Norbert > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote: > >>>> > >>>>>> It is a good document. > >>>>> > >>>>> No, it's not. > >>>>> > >>>>> It refers only to business uses of the Internet, as if the > >>>>> Internet were not used for many other things. It was recorded as > >>>>> a comment by some IETF members > >>>>> but was > >>>>> ignored. > >>>>> > >>>>> It calls for access to the standard documents but it is > >>>>> hypocritical since one of the signers, IEEE, does not allow it > >>>>> (ITU, the > >>>>> main target of this RFC, does distribute its standards online > >>>>> for a few years.) > >>>>> > >>>>> It refers to open and transparent processes but the IETF members > >>>>> discovered this document when it was already signed, and > >>>>> impossible to modify. > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> ____________________________________________________________ > >>>> 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 > >>>> > >>> > >> > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From paulitrix at gmail.com Mon Jan 28 06:27:05 2013 From: paulitrix at gmail.com (Paul M) Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2013 14:27:05 +0300 Subject: [governance] Wikipedia Article on the IGF Needs Updating In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Thanks Fouad and Tracy. We could start by updating and writing articles from Vilnius to Baku. I can give input on both the Nairobi and Baku IGF meetings. Indeed Fouad I agree a peer review will be needed once any changes are made any suggestions on who to bring on board? On 28/01/2013, at 12:41 PM, Fouad Bajwa wrote: > One the wikipedia resource pages that I have requested people to > regularly contribute to. Needs a bit of peer review every now and > then. > > Best > > Fouad > > On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 1:48 PM, Tracy F. Hackshaw @ Google > wrote: >> Hi Paul, >> >> I can volunteer to assist. >> >> Rgds, >> >> Tracy >> >> On Jan 28, 2013 4:05 AM, "Paul M" wrote: >>> >>> Hope this is the right forum to discuss this matter. The Wikipedia article >>> on the Internet Governance Forum (IGF), is wanting and in dire need of >>> updating. A lot has happened since Vilnius 2010 but the article has little >>> to show for it. I would be delighted to work with anyone who cares to spruce >>> up the wiki page. >>> >>> >>> -- >>> :-) Paul M >>> >>> ____________________________________________________________ >>> 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 >>> >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 >> > > > > -- > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From ajp at glocom.ac.jp Mon Jan 28 06:37:34 2013 From: ajp at glocom.ac.jp (Adam Peake) Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2013 20:37:34 +0900 Subject: [governance] Towards an IGC Statement on RFC 6852 "Affirmation of the Modern Paradigm for Standards" In-Reply-To: <034801cdfd49$5f76e600$1e64b200$@gmail.com> References: <20130126141234.GA21789@sources.org> <20130126224714.GA21920@sources.org> <20130127091003.2e5d7640@quill.bollow.ch> <20130127123308.689639f3@quill.bollow.ch> <61E2D1C7-09E5-4358-B5BD-B362A084EDF5@uzh.ch> <02a801cdfd1d$5ce43130$16ac9390$@gmail.com> <20130128111003.18a48260@quill.bollow.ch> <034801cdfd49$5f76e600$1e64b200$@gmail.com> Message-ID: It would be a good subject for a workshop. And can imagine it might be a topic raised in both sessions on enhanced cooperation and Internet principles. But not a stand alone session given the other priorities. Adam On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 8:19 PM, michael gurstein wrote: > Hi Norbert, > > I think that the issue warrants both--a session at the IGF and a sign on > letter from the IGC (which I've agreed to co-draft with you... > > M > > -----Original Message----- > From: Norbert Bollow [mailto:nb at bollow.ch] > Sent: Monday, January 28, 2013 2:10 AM > To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; michael gurstein > Cc: 'William Drake'; 'Adam Peake'; Alejandro Pisanty > Subject: Re: [governance] Towards an IGC Statement on RFC 6852 "Affirmation > of the Modern Paradigm for Standards" > > Hi Michael > Thanks for your comments! Right now I'm focusing (for the same kind of > reasons as Bill has mentioned) on our need as a Caucus to respond to the > "Stakeholders are invited to submit written contributions taking stock of > the Baku 2012 IGF meeting and looking forward - suggestions on themes and > format, for the IGF 2013 meeting." call for contributions with a deadline of > February 14. Do you think that the RFC 6852 issue should be mentioned there? > Or would it be sufficient to develop a separate IGC statement on RFC 6852 > (after we've finished the IGF taking stock and looking forward statement), > possibly supplemented with a workshop proposal when the time for that comes? > Greetings, > Norbert > > > Am Sun, 27 Jan 2013 22:04:29 -0800 > schrieb "michael gurstein" : > >> Hmmm I must admit to finding the document RFC 6852 astonishing and >> (now that I've been made aware of some of the background) quite >> shameful. >> >> Not only does it completely ignore the public interest background and >> continued value and significance of the Internet, omit any mention of >> inclusion as a consideration at all levels of Internet design and >> development, but it overall ignores the WSIS declaration even when >> there is urging on the part of various interlocutors in the various >> signatory organizations to address these range of issues. >> >> That civil society was not consulted was clearly not an accident nor >> an oversight but an attempt to create a fact on the ground leaving >> those with concerns to, as Alejandro so blithely suggests, see about >> achieving some sort of modifications after the fact and within an >> already determined framework during downstream implementations (which >> I'm assuming he knows as well as I do makes little if any sense if the >> issues are significant and central such as for example issues >> concerning design for inclusion)--take it or leave it. This behaviour >> goes to the very core of what might be meant by >> "multi-stakeholderism", who precisely are the "stakeholders" and what >> (and on whose behalf) are these stakeholders "holding" the "stakes". >> >> And further, this puts into significant question the necessary trust >> which would be a fundamental pre-condition of the kind of global >> Internet governance regime which advocates of multi-stakeholderism >> have been so vociferously advocating. >> >> Finally, following on from Bill and Adam's suggestions I can think of >> no more important topic to be considered at the next IGF than a >> consideration of the significance of RFC 6852 in the context of the >> WSIS declaration and overall Internet governance in the global public >> interest. >> >> Mike >> >> >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org >> [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of William >> Drake Sent: Sunday, January 27, 2013 2:38 PM >> To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Adam Peake >> Subject: Re: [governance] Towards an IGC Statement on RFC 6852 >> "Affirmation of the Modern Paradigm for Standards" >> >> Hi >> >> I agree with Adam. The IGC was created to provide input into the WSIS >> and then the IGF. If it runs off and chases other agendas of interest >> to co-cos or others (cybersecurity, IETF etc.) while neglecting its >> original reason for being, isn't that sort of doing a disservice to >> all those who've put a lot of time and energy in over the years trying >> to get the IGF to work and bake in civil society participation? And >> if the IGC doesn't consistently provide solid inputs to the IGF >> consultations, why should governments and other stakeholder groups >> think it's a player they need to work with when making deals, >> including in the MAG? In fact, why shouldn't the UN look to other >> organizations and networks to provide more civil society nominees etc. >> If the IGC makes itself look irrelevant to the IGF, it will >> increasingly be treated as such. >> >> Bill >> >> >> >> >> On Jan 27, 2013, at 4:01 AM, Adam Peake wrote: >> >> > Please, just focus. There's a hard deadline for a contribution to >> > the IGF (which we missed last year). Meet that and come back to >> > the RFC. >> > >> > Adam >> > >> > >> > >> > On Sun, Jan 27, 2013 at 8:33 PM, Norbert Bollow >> > wrote: >> >> [with IGC coordinator hat on] >> >> >> >> Adam Peake wrote: >> >> >> >>> Norbert, thanks for trying, but to be frank, why bother? >> >> >> >> Because standards development is very much at the core of Internet >> >> governance, and it is important for IGC to engage, to the extent >> >> that consensus is possible, also on such core issues, and not just >> >> on more peripheral questions like e.g. the choice of discussion >> >> topics for the next Internet Governance Forum. >> >> >> >>> In the couple of days since RFC 6852 was mentioned we've seen >> >>> almost equal support/opposition for statement. >> >> >> >> That is not accurate. We have seen praise for RFC 6852 as well as >> >> criticism. This is no reason to not at least try to incorporate >> >> both in a statement. >> >> >> >>> And if the caucus does produce something will it make any >> >>> difference? >> >> >> >> That will depend on the actual content of the statement, and on how >> >> convincing it is written, and on whether it will get promoted in >> >> contexts where it can make a difference. The Caucus has several >> >> members who have the right kind of contacts. >> >> >> >>> Could we please focus on core issues. >> >> >> >> This is a core issue. >> >> >> >> Greetings, >> >> Norbert >> >> >> >>> On Sun, Jan 27, 2013 at 5:10 PM, Norbert Bollow >> >>> wrote: >> >>>> [with IGC Coordinator hat on] >> >>>> >> >>>> Let's develop an IGC Statement on this RFC 6852 "Affirmation of >> >>>> the Modern Paradigm for Standards" [1]. >> >>>> [1] http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6852 >> >>>> >> >>>> I'll be willing to serve as editor if no-one else volunteers, but >> >>>> I'd prefer for someone else to take on this role. >> >>>> >> >>>> Who would like to volunteer? >> >>>> >> >>>> Greetings, >> >>>> Norbert >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote: >> >>>> >> >>>>>> It is a good document. >> >>>>> >> >>>>> No, it's not. >> >>>>> >> >>>>> It refers only to business uses of the Internet, as if the >> >>>>> Internet were not used for many other things. It was recorded as >> >>>>> a comment by some IETF members >> >>>>> but was >> >>>>> ignored. >> >>>>> >> >>>>> It calls for access to the standard documents but it is >> >>>>> hypocritical since one of the signers, IEEE, does not allow it >> >>>>> (ITU, the >> >>>>> main target of this RFC, does distribute its standards online >> >>>>> for a few years.) >> >>>>> >> >>>>> It refers to open and transparent processes but the IETF members >> >>>>> discovered this document when it was already signed, and >> >>>>> impossible to modify. >> >>>>> >> >>>>> >> >>>>> >> >>>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> ____________________________________________________________ >> >>>> 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 >> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >> > >> > ____________________________________________________________ >> > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From nb at bollow.ch Mon Jan 28 06:44:18 2013 From: nb at bollow.ch (Norbert Bollow) Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2013 12:44:18 +0100 Subject: [governance] Norbert's hat In-Reply-To: References: <20130127120551.1db0b299@quill.bollow.ch> <20130127170101.4c2cfce2@quill.bollow.ch> Message-ID: <20130128124418.2efb1a52@quill.bollow.ch> Roland Perry wrote: > In message <20130127170101.4c2cfce2 at quill.bollow.ch>, at 17:01:01 on > Sun, 27 Jan 2013, Norbert Bollow writes > > >[with IGC Coordinator hat on] > > Perhaps it would help if everyone you assumed you had your hat on at > all times, unless you specifically say something is a personal > comment. I think that's been the understanding re co-ordinators in > the past. Perhaps I should have explained the history behind my habit of using bracketed headings to formally differentiate between roles in contexts where I have different roles with different responsibilities. This goes back to when in the Swiss mirror committee for ISO/IEC JTC1 SC34 (which covers in particular the standardization of document formats) I was elected as Convenor (that's how the chairperson gets called in that context). Microsoft was very concerned about that because since I had previously made some impact as a critic of their OOXML document format and of the way in which the approval as an ISO standard of the description of that format had been pursued. So they requested that I be very careful to distinguish between my role as representative of an open source organization and the role of Convenor. This worked out really well, and helped reduce the tension to a minimum so that constructive work became possible after it was clearly seen that in the Convenor role I was treating them very fairly. Here in the Caucus the tensions have never been as strong as they had been in that mirror committee, but some tensions exist also. For example, Bill Drake hinted in a recent message about a risk of someone pursuing personal interests like security topics or the IETF while neglecting the needs of the Caucus in relation to the IGF. Very obviously that was a dig directed at me personally. In any case I'd like the default to be that if something is not explicitly marked as being part of the Coordinator role, I'd like it to be taken as not more than a personal opinion that (beyond what whatever arguments I may have presented to support it) does not claim to have any more weight than the opinion of any other member of the Caucus. I wouldn't mind exchanging the "coordinator hat" for "coordinator socks" or "coordinator sandals" though :-) Greetings, Norbert -------------- 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 From gurstein at gmail.com Mon Jan 28 06:50:25 2013 From: gurstein at gmail.com (michael gurstein) Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2013 03:50:25 -0800 Subject: [governance] Towards an IGC Statement on RFC 6852 "Affirmation of the Modern Paradigm for Standards" In-Reply-To: References: <20130126141234.GA21789@sources.org> <20130126224714.GA21920@sources.org> <20130127091003.2e5d7640@quill.bollow.ch> <20130127123308.689639f3@quill.bollow.ch> <61E2D1C7-09E5-4358-B5BD-B362A084EDF5@uzh.ch> <02a801cdfd1d$5ce43130$16ac9390$@gmail.com> <20130128111003.18a48260@quill.bollow.ch> <034801cdfd49$5f76e600$1e64b200$@gmail.com> Message-ID: <036201cdfd4d$aa0b7880$fe226980$@gmail.com> Hmmm... an attempt to unilaterally hardwire a deeply flawed and highly questionable ideological position into the DNA of the Internet and in the process raising serious issues about the nature of multi-stakeholderism and and the future of Internet governance overall doesn't warrant "a stand alone session given other priorities"... What other priority could possibly be higher? M -----Original Message----- From: apeake at gmail.com [mailto:apeake at gmail.com] On Behalf Of Adam Peake Sent: Monday, January 28, 2013 3:38 AM To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org Subject: Re: [governance] Towards an IGC Statement on RFC 6852 "Affirmation of the Modern Paradigm for Standards" It would be a good subject for a workshop. And can imagine it might be a topic raised in both sessions on enhanced cooperation and Internet principles. But not a stand alone session given the other priorities. Adam On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 8:19 PM, michael gurstein wrote: > Hi Norbert, > > I think that the issue warrants both--a session at the IGF and a sign > on letter from the IGC (which I've agreed to co-draft with you... > > M > > -----Original Message----- > From: Norbert Bollow [mailto:nb at bollow.ch] > Sent: Monday, January 28, 2013 2:10 AM > To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; michael gurstein > Cc: 'William Drake'; 'Adam Peake'; Alejandro Pisanty > Subject: Re: [governance] Towards an IGC Statement on RFC 6852 > "Affirmation of the Modern Paradigm for Standards" > > Hi Michael > Thanks for your comments! Right now I'm focusing (for the same kind of > reasons as Bill has mentioned) on our need as a Caucus to respond to > the "Stakeholders are invited to submit written contributions taking > stock of the Baku 2012 IGF meeting and looking forward - suggestions > on themes and format, for the IGF 2013 meeting." call for > contributions with a deadline of February 14. Do you think that the RFC 6852 issue should be mentioned there? > Or would it be sufficient to develop a separate IGC statement on RFC > 6852 (after we've finished the IGF taking stock and looking forward > statement), possibly supplemented with a workshop proposal when the time for that comes? > Greetings, > Norbert > > > Am Sun, 27 Jan 2013 22:04:29 -0800 > schrieb "michael gurstein" : > >> Hmmm I must admit to finding the document RFC 6852 astonishing and >> (now that I've been made aware of some of the background) quite >> shameful. >> >> Not only does it completely ignore the public interest background and >> continued value and significance of the Internet, omit any mention of >> inclusion as a consideration at all levels of Internet design and >> development, but it overall ignores the WSIS declaration even when >> there is urging on the part of various interlocutors in the various >> signatory organizations to address these range of issues. >> >> That civil society was not consulted was clearly not an accident nor >> an oversight but an attempt to create a fact on the ground leaving >> those with concerns to, as Alejandro so blithely suggests, see about >> achieving some sort of modifications after the fact and within an >> already determined framework during downstream implementations (which >> I'm assuming he knows as well as I do makes little if any sense if >> the issues are significant and central such as for example issues >> concerning design for inclusion)--take it or leave it. This >> behaviour goes to the very core of what might be meant by >> "multi-stakeholderism", who precisely are the "stakeholders" and what >> (and on whose behalf) are these stakeholders "holding" the "stakes". >> >> And further, this puts into significant question the necessary trust >> which would be a fundamental pre-condition of the kind of global >> Internet governance regime which advocates of multi-stakeholderism >> have been so vociferously advocating. >> >> Finally, following on from Bill and Adam's suggestions I can think of >> no more important topic to be considered at the next IGF than a >> consideration of the significance of RFC 6852 in the context of the >> WSIS declaration and overall Internet governance in the global public >> interest. >> >> Mike >> >> >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org >> [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of William >> Drake Sent: Sunday, January 27, 2013 2:38 PM >> To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Adam Peake >> Subject: Re: [governance] Towards an IGC Statement on RFC 6852 >> "Affirmation of the Modern Paradigm for Standards" >> >> Hi >> >> I agree with Adam. The IGC was created to provide input into the >> WSIS and then the IGF. If it runs off and chases other agendas of >> interest to co-cos or others (cybersecurity, IETF etc.) while >> neglecting its original reason for being, isn't that sort of doing a >> disservice to all those who've put a lot of time and energy in over >> the years trying to get the IGF to work and bake in civil society >> participation? And if the IGC doesn't consistently provide solid >> inputs to the IGF consultations, why should governments and other >> stakeholder groups think it's a player they need to work with when >> making deals, including in the MAG? In fact, why shouldn't the UN >> look to other organizations and networks to provide more civil society nominees etc. >> If the IGC makes itself look irrelevant to the IGF, it will >> increasingly be treated as such. >> >> Bill >> >> >> >> >> On Jan 27, 2013, at 4:01 AM, Adam Peake wrote: >> >> > Please, just focus. There's a hard deadline for a contribution to >> > the IGF (which we missed last year). Meet that and come back to >> > the RFC. >> > >> > Adam >> > >> > >> > >> > On Sun, Jan 27, 2013 at 8:33 PM, Norbert Bollow >> > wrote: >> >> [with IGC coordinator hat on] >> >> >> >> Adam Peake wrote: >> >> >> >>> Norbert, thanks for trying, but to be frank, why bother? >> >> >> >> Because standards development is very much at the core of Internet >> >> governance, and it is important for IGC to engage, to the extent >> >> that consensus is possible, also on such core issues, and not just >> >> on more peripheral questions like e.g. the choice of discussion >> >> topics for the next Internet Governance Forum. >> >> >> >>> In the couple of days since RFC 6852 was mentioned we've seen >> >>> almost equal support/opposition for statement. >> >> >> >> That is not accurate. We have seen praise for RFC 6852 as well as >> >> criticism. This is no reason to not at least try to incorporate >> >> both in a statement. >> >> >> >>> And if the caucus does produce something will it make any >> >>> difference? >> >> >> >> That will depend on the actual content of the statement, and on >> >> how convincing it is written, and on whether it will get promoted >> >> in contexts where it can make a difference. The Caucus has several >> >> members who have the right kind of contacts. >> >> >> >>> Could we please focus on core issues. >> >> >> >> This is a core issue. >> >> >> >> Greetings, >> >> Norbert >> >> >> >>> On Sun, Jan 27, 2013 at 5:10 PM, Norbert Bollow >> >>> wrote: >> >>>> [with IGC Coordinator hat on] >> >>>> >> >>>> Let's develop an IGC Statement on this RFC 6852 "Affirmation of >> >>>> the Modern Paradigm for Standards" [1]. >> >>>> [1] http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6852 >> >>>> >> >>>> I'll be willing to serve as editor if no-one else volunteers, >> >>>> but I'd prefer for someone else to take on this role. >> >>>> >> >>>> Who would like to volunteer? >> >>>> >> >>>> Greetings, >> >>>> Norbert >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote: >> >>>> >> >>>>>> It is a good document. >> >>>>> >> >>>>> No, it's not. >> >>>>> >> >>>>> It refers only to business uses of the Internet, as if the >> >>>>> Internet were not used for many other things. It was recorded >> >>>>> as a comment by some IETF members >> >>>>> but was >> >>>>> ignored. >> >>>>> >> >>>>> It calls for access to the standard documents but it is >> >>>>> hypocritical since one of the signers, IEEE, does not allow it >> >>>>> (ITU, >> >>>>> the main target of this RFC, does distribute its standards >> >>>>> online for a few years.) >> >>>>> >> >>>>> It refers to open and transparent processes but the IETF >> >>>>> members discovered this document when it was already signed, >> >>>>> and impossible to modify. >> >>>>> >> >>>>> >> >>>>> >> >>>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> ____________________________________________________________ >> >>>> 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 >> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >> > >> > ____________________________________________________________ >> > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From roland at internetpolicyagency.com Mon Jan 28 07:09:01 2013 From: roland at internetpolicyagency.com (Roland Perry) Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2013 12:09:01 +0000 Subject: [governance] Norbert's hat In-Reply-To: <20130128124418.2efb1a52@quill.bollow.ch> References: <20130127120551.1db0b299@quill.bollow.ch> <20130127170101.4c2cfce2@quill.bollow.ch> <20130128124418.2efb1a52@quill.bollow.ch> Message-ID: In message <20130128124418.2efb1a52 at quill.bollow.ch>, at 12:44:18 on Mon, 28 Jan 2013, Norbert Bollow writes >In any case I'd like the default to be that if something is not >explicitly marked as being part of the Coordinator role, I'd like it >to be taken as not more than a personal opinion that (beyond what >whatever arguments I may have presented to support it) does not >claim to have any more weight than the opinion of any other member of >the Caucus. I'd prefer it if the understanding was that the co-ordinators abstained from any policy debate during their tenure. Just like the recent appeals committee refrained from discussing the matter under review on the public list, even with a "hat-off" disclaimer. In other words, parking one's personal views for the duration goes with the territory. -- Roland Perry -------------- 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 From vinsolo15 at yahoo.co.uk Mon Jan 28 07:32:06 2013 From: vinsolo15 at yahoo.co.uk (vincent solomon) Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2013 12:32:06 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [governance] How to protect your Identity Message-ID: <1359376326.32528.YahooMailNeo@web172504.mail.ir2.yahoo.com> Watch how you can protect your identity online. http://www.internetsociety.org/manage-your-identity   “Limitations live only in our minds. But if we use our imaginations, our possibilities become limitless” NAME: VINCENT SOLOMON ALIAMA CONTACT: +256 773307045 / +256 713307045 / +256 753307045 EMAIL:aliama.vincent at cit.mak.ac.ug / vinsolo15 at yahoo.co.uk /vinsoloster at gmail.com Skype : vinsolo2 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From parminder at itforchange.net Mon Jan 28 07:37:02 2013 From: parminder at itforchange.net (parminder) Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2013 18:07:02 +0530 Subject: [governance] Norbert's hat In-Reply-To: References: <20130127120551.1db0b299@quill.bollow.ch> <20130127170101.4c2cfce2@quill.bollow.ch> <20130128124418.2efb1a52@quill.bollow.ch> Message-ID: <510670EE.7030404@itforchange.net> On Monday 28 January 2013 05:39 PM, Roland Perry wrote: > In message <20130128124418.2efb1a52 at quill.bollow.ch>, at 12:44:18 on > Mon, 28 Jan 2013, Norbert Bollow writes >> > > I'd prefer it if the understanding was that the co-ordinators > abstained from any policy debate during their tenure. Just like the > recent appeals committee refrained from discussing the matter under > review on the public list, even with a "hat-off" disclaimer. This has not been the practice in this group and a new practice cannot unilaterally be imposed post facto on a new co- coordinator. The practice has been for the co-coordinators to act as regular members, and when needed announce their official status for specific acts. However, your preference is duly noted. parminder > > In other words, parking one's personal views for the duration goes > with the territory. -------------- 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 From avri at acm.org Mon Jan 28 07:47:26 2013 From: avri at acm.org (Avri Doria) Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2013 07:47:26 -0500 Subject: [governance] Norbert's hat In-Reply-To: <510670EE.7030404@itforchange.net> References: <20130127120551.1db0b299@quill.bollow.ch> <20130127170101.4c2cfce2@quill.bollow.ch> <20130128124418.2efb1a52@quill.bollow.ch> <510670EE.7030404@itforchange.net> Message-ID: <8BDA5C2D-24C8-49D4-BA87-279715157C4F@acm.org> Hi, I tend to prefer the current practice and very much appreciate Norbert's use of hat markers. I also beleive that to change it now, just because someone is doing a good job of demarcating, would be the wrong the thing to do. This is something that would need to be spelled out in the Charter if this is something that the IGC wanted to require of it coordinators. It is an amendment I would not support. avri On 28 Jan 2013, at 07:37, parminder wrote: > > On Monday 28 January 2013 05:39 PM, Roland Perry wrote: >> In message <20130128124418.2efb1a52 at quill.bollow.ch>, at 12:44:18 on Mon, 28 Jan 2013, Norbert Bollow writes >>> >> >> I'd prefer it if the understanding was that the co-ordinators abstained from any policy debate during their tenure. Just like the recent appeals committee refrained from discussing the matter under review on the public list, even with a "hat-off" disclaimer. > > This has not been the practice in this group and a new practice cannot unilaterally be imposed post facto on a new co- coordinator. > > The practice has been for the co-coordinators to act as regular members, and when needed announce their official status for specific acts. > > However, your preference is duly noted. > > parminder >> >> In other words, parking one's personal views for the duration goes with the territory. > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From suresh at hserus.net Mon Jan 28 07:52:13 2013 From: suresh at hserus.net (Suresh Ramasubramanian) Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2013 18:22:13 +0530 Subject: [governance] Norbert's hat In-Reply-To: <510670EE.7030404@itforchange.net> References: <20130127120551.1db0b299@quill.bollow.ch> <20130127170101.4c2cfce2@quill.bollow.ch> <20130128124418.2efb1a52@quill.bollow.ch> <510670EE.7030404@itforchange.net> Message-ID: <13c8136452a.2728.4f968dcf8ecd56c9cb8acab6370fcfe0@hserus.net> For a change I completely agree with parminder here. As a further data point, It has not been a practice on the one technical and one civil society list that I have helped moderate for the past decade or so. This is not the sort of forum where a moderator or coordinator has to appear in an administrative role all that often and meanwhile we could do with norberts perspective on discussions. --srs (htc one x) On 28 January 2013 6:07:02 PM parminder wrote: > > On Monday 28 January 2013 05:39 PM, Roland Perry wrote: > > In message <20130128124418.2efb1a52 at quill.bollow.ch>, at 12:44:18 on > > Mon, 28 Jan 2013, Norbert Bollow writes > >> > > > > I'd prefer it if the understanding was that the co-ordinators > > abstained from any policy debate during their tenure. Just like the > > recent appeals committee refrained from discussing the matter under > > review on the public list, even with a "hat-off" disclaimer. > > This has not been the practice in this group and a new practice cannot > unilaterally be imposed post facto on a new co- coordinator. > > The practice has been for the co-coordinators to act as regular members, > and when needed announce their official status for specific acts. > > However, your preference is duly noted. > > parminder > > > > In other words, parking one's personal views for the duration goes > > with the territory. > > -------------- 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 From suresh at hserus.net Mon Jan 28 08:04:21 2013 From: suresh at hserus.net (Suresh Ramasubramanian) Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2013 18:34:21 +0530 Subject: [governance] Towards an IGC Statement on RFC 6852 "Affirmation of the Modern Paradigm for Standards" In-Reply-To: <036201cdfd4d$aa0b7880$fe226980$@gmail.com> References: <20130126141234.GA21789@sources.org> <20130126224714.GA21920@sources.org> <20130127091003.2e5d7640@quill.bollow.ch> <20130127123308.689639f3@quill.bollow.ch> <61E2D1C7-09E5-4358-B5BD-B362A084EDF5@uzh.ch> <02a801cdfd1d$5ce43130$16ac9390$@gmail.com> <20130128111003.18a48260@quill.bollow.ch> <034801cdfd49$5f76e600$1e64b200$@gmail.com> <036201cdfd4d$aa0b7880$fe226980$@gmail.com> Message-ID: <13c8142128d.2728.4f968dcf8ecd56c9cb8acab6370fcfe0@hserus.net> Is this really the dna of the internet? You can find RFCs for tcp over carrier pigeons too and more seriously for a wide variety of other reasons (best practice, to document some known behavior or arrangement etc). And quite commonly such agreements as described in this rfc are worked out bilaterally and/or multilaterally between different stakeholder groups that already work together. As long as this is seen as a attempt to engage the larger community rather than impose a standard, it becomes much more feasible if civil society groups already engaged in this space, like say isoc, join and contribute to the initiative. If this actually turns out to be something more insidious, it will find little or no adoption beyond the original community that it began with. --srs (htc one x) On 28 January 2013 5:20:25 PM "michael gurstein" wrote: > Hmmm... an attempt to unilaterally hardwire a deeply flawed and highly > questionable ideological position into the DNA of the Internet and in the > process raising serious issues about the nature of multi-stakeholderism and > and the future of Internet governance overall doesn't warrant "a stand alone > session given other priorities"... > > What other priority could possibly be higher? > > M > > -----Original Message----- > From: apeake at gmail.com [mailto:apeake at gmail.com] On Behalf Of Adam Peake > Sent: Monday, January 28, 2013 3:38 AM > To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org > Subject: Re: [governance] Towards an IGC Statement on RFC 6852 "Affirmation > of the Modern Paradigm for Standards" > > It would be a good subject for a workshop. And can imagine it might be a > topic raised in both sessions on enhanced cooperation and Internet > principles. But not a stand alone session given the other priorities. > > Adam > > > On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 8:19 PM, michael gurstein > wrote: > > Hi Norbert, > > > > I think that the issue warrants both--a session at the IGF and a sign > > on letter from the IGC (which I've agreed to co-draft with you... > > > > M > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Norbert Bollow [mailto:nb at bollow.ch] > > Sent: Monday, January 28, 2013 2:10 AM > > To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; michael gurstein > > Cc: 'William Drake'; 'Adam Peake'; Alejandro Pisanty > > Subject: Re: [governance] Towards an IGC Statement on RFC 6852 > > "Affirmation of the Modern Paradigm for Standards" > > > > Hi Michael > > Thanks for your comments! Right now I'm focusing (for the same kind of > > reasons as Bill has mentioned) on our need as a Caucus to respond to > > the "Stakeholders are invited to submit written contributions taking > > stock of the Baku 2012 IGF meeting and looking forward - suggestions > > on themes and format, for the IGF 2013 meeting." call for > > contributions with a deadline of February 14. Do you think that the RFC > 6852 issue should be mentioned there? > > Or would it be sufficient to develop a separate IGC statement on RFC > > 6852 (after we've finished the IGF taking stock and looking forward > > statement), possibly supplemented with a workshop proposal when the time > for that comes? > > Greetings, > > Norbert > > > > > > Am Sun, 27 Jan 2013 22:04:29 -0800 > > schrieb "michael gurstein" : > > > >> Hmmm I must admit to finding the document RFC 6852 astonishing and > >> (now that I've been made aware of some of the background) quite > >> shameful. > >> > >> Not only does it completely ignore the public interest background and > >> continued value and significance of the Internet, omit any mention of > >> inclusion as a consideration at all levels of Internet design and > >> development, but it overall ignores the WSIS declaration even when > >> there is urging on the part of various interlocutors in the various > >> signatory organizations to address these range of issues. > >> > >> That civil society was not consulted was clearly not an accident nor > >> an oversight but an attempt to create a fact on the ground leaving > >> those with concerns to, as Alejandro so blithely suggests, see about > >> achieving some sort of modifications after the fact and within an > >> already determined framework during downstream implementations (which > >> I'm assuming he knows as well as I do makes little if any sense if > >> the issues are significant and central such as for example issues > >> concerning design for inclusion)--take it or leave it. This > >> behaviour goes to the very core of what might be meant by > >> "multi-stakeholderism", who precisely are the "stakeholders" and what > >> (and on whose behalf) are these stakeholders "holding" the "stakes". > >> > >> And further, this puts into significant question the necessary trust > >> which would be a fundamental pre-condition of the kind of global > >> Internet governance regime which advocates of multi-stakeholderism > >> have been so vociferously advocating. > >> > >> Finally, following on from Bill and Adam's suggestions I can think of > >> no more important topic to be considered at the next IGF than a > >> consideration of the significance of RFC 6852 in the context of the > >> WSIS declaration and overall Internet governance in the global public > >> interest. > >> > >> Mike > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org > >> [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of William > >> Drake Sent: Sunday, January 27, 2013 2:38 PM > >> To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Adam Peake > >> Subject: Re: [governance] Towards an IGC Statement on RFC 6852 > >> "Affirmation of the Modern Paradigm for Standards" > >> > >> Hi > >> > >> I agree with Adam. The IGC was created to provide input into the > >> WSIS and then the IGF. If it runs off and chases other agendas of > >> interest to co-cos or others (cybersecurity, IETF etc.) while > >> neglecting its original reason for being, isn't that sort of doing a > >> disservice to all those who've put a lot of time and energy in over > >> the years trying to get the IGF to work and bake in civil society > >> participation? And if the IGC doesn't consistently provide solid > >> inputs to the IGF consultations, why should governments and other > >> stakeholder groups think it's a player they need to work with when > >> making deals, including in the MAG? In fact, why shouldn't the UN > >> look to other organizations and networks to provide more civil society > nominees etc. > >> If the IGC makes itself look irrelevant to the IGF, it will > >> increasingly be treated as such. > >> > >> Bill > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> On Jan 27, 2013, at 4:01 AM, Adam Peake wrote: > >> > >> > Please, just focus. There's a hard deadline for a contribution to > >> > the IGF (which we missed last year). Meet that and come back to > >> > the RFC. > >> > > >> > Adam > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > On Sun, Jan 27, 2013 at 8:33 PM, Norbert Bollow > >> > wrote: > >> >> [with IGC coordinator hat on] > >> >> > >> >> Adam Peake wrote: > >> >> > >> >>> Norbert, thanks for trying, but to be frank, why bother? > >> >> > >> >> Because standards development is very much at the core of Internet > >> >> governance, and it is important for IGC to engage, to the extent > >> >> that consensus is possible, also on such core issues, and not just > >> >> on more peripheral questions like e.g. the choice of discussion > >> >> topics for the next Internet Governance Forum. > >> >> > >> >>> In the couple of days since RFC 6852 was mentioned we've seen > >> >>> almost equal support/opposition for statement. > >> >> > >> >> That is not accurate. We have seen praise for RFC 6852 as well as > >> >> criticism. This is no reason to not at least try to incorporate > >> >> both in a statement. > >> >> > >> >>> And if the caucus does produce something will it make any > >> >>> difference? > >> >> > >> >> That will depend on the actual content of the statement, and on > >> >> how convincing it is written, and on whether it will get promoted > >> >> in contexts where it can make a difference. The Caucus has several > >> >> members who have the right kind of contacts. > >> >> > >> >>> Could we please focus on core issues. > >> >> > >> >> This is a core issue. > >> >> > >> >> Greetings, > >> >> Norbert > >> >> > >> >>> On Sun, Jan 27, 2013 at 5:10 PM, Norbert Bollow > >> >>> wrote: > >> >>>> [with IGC Coordinator hat on] > >> >>>> > >> >>>> Let's develop an IGC Statement on this RFC 6852 "Affirmation of > >> >>>> the Modern Paradigm for Standards" [1]. > >> >>>> [1] http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6852 > >> >>>> > >> >>>> I'll be willing to serve as editor if no-one else volunteers, > >> >>>> but I'd prefer for someone else to take on this role. > >> >>>> > >> >>>> Who would like to volunteer? > >> >>>> > >> >>>> Greetings, > >> >>>> Norbert > >> >>>> > >> >>>> > >> >>>> Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote: > >> >>>> > >> >>>>>> It is a good document. > >> >>>>> > >> >>>>> No, it's not. > >> >>>>> > >> >>>>> It refers only to business uses of the Internet, as if the > >> >>>>> Internet were not used for many other things. It was recorded > >> >>>>> as a comment by some IETF members > >> >>>>> but was > >> >>>>> ignored. > >> >>>>> > >> >>>>> It calls for access to the standard documents but it is > >> >>>>> hypocritical since one of the signers, IEEE, does not allow it > >> >>>>> (ITU, > >> >>>>> the main target of this RFC, does distribute its standards > >> >>>>> online for a few years.) > >> >>>>> > >> >>>>> It refers to open and transparent processes but the IETF > >> >>>>> members discovered this document when it was already signed, > >> >>>>> and impossible to modify. > >> >>>>> > >> >>>>> > >> >>>>> > >> >>>>> > >> >>>> > >> >>>> > >> >>>> > >> >>>> ____________________________________________________________ > >> >>>> 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 > >> >>>> > >> >>> > >> >> > >> > > >> > ____________________________________________________________ > >> > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From nb at bollow.ch Mon Jan 28 08:28:57 2013 From: nb at bollow.ch (Norbert Bollow) Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2013 14:28:57 +0100 Subject: [governance] Norbert's hat In-Reply-To: <510670EE.7030404@itforchange.net> References: <20130127120551.1db0b299@quill.bollow.ch> <20130127170101.4c2cfce2@quill.bollow.ch> <20130128124418.2efb1a52@quill.bollow.ch> <510670EE.7030404@itforchange.net> Message-ID: <20130128142857.50056c86@quill.bollow.ch> Parminder wrote: > On Monday 28 January 2013 05:39 PM, Roland Perry wrote: > > In message <20130128124418.2efb1a52 at quill.bollow.ch>, at 12:44:18 > > on Mon, 28 Jan 2013, Norbert Bollow writes > >> > > > > I'd prefer it if the understanding was that the co-ordinators > > abstained from any policy debate during their tenure. Just like the > > recent appeals committee refrained from discussing the matter under > > review on the public list, even with a "hat-off" disclaimer. > > This has not been the practice in this group and a new practice > cannot unilaterally be imposed post facto on a new co- coordinator. Well in principle I suppose the rules associated with the coordinator position can be changed at any time, by means of a charter amendment, if ten "voting members" propose such an amendment and it is then approved with a 2/3 majority. But seriously - abstaining from any policy debate for two years??? I can't imagine any competent civil society person being willing to agree to that! Greetings, Norbert -------------- 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 From ca at cafonso.ca Mon Jan 28 09:39:07 2013 From: ca at cafonso.ca (Carlos A. Afonso) Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2013 12:39:07 -0200 Subject: [governance] Norbert's hat In-Reply-To: <20130128142857.50056c86@quill.bollow.ch> References: <20130127120551.1db0b299@quill.bollow.ch> <20130127170101.4c2cfce2@quill.bollow.ch> <20130128124418.2efb1a52@quill.bollow.ch> <510670EE.7030404@itforchange.net> <20130128142857.50056c86@quill.bollow.ch> Message-ID: <51068D8B.3080501@cafonso.ca> On 01/28/2013 11:28 AM, Norbert Bollow wrote: [...] > Well in principle I suppose the rules associated with the coordinator > position can be changed at any time, by means of a charter amendment, > if ten "voting members" propose such an amendment and it is then > approved with a 2/3 majority. > > But seriously - abstaining from any policy debate for two years??? > > I can't imagine any competent civil society person being willing to > agree to that! Maybe a competent CS person too tired of policy debates like the relationship between hats and governance... :) Seriously, I agree with Avri. Norbert (we have three of them here!), our coord, is doing fine. frt rgds --c.a. > > Greetings, > Norbert > -------------- 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 From nb at bollow.ch Mon Jan 28 10:05:54 2013 From: nb at bollow.ch (Norbert Bollow) Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2013 16:05:54 +0100 Subject: [governance] caucus contribution, consultation and MAG meeting In-Reply-To: References: <20130127120551.1db0b299@quill.bollow.ch> <51051017.80103@itforchange.net> Message-ID: <20130128160554.50c4cfa4@quill.bollow.ch> Robert Guerra wrote: > Quick thoughts: > > - Call for proposals: Should be done in an open and transparent > fashion. I am of the opinion that the call should be done after the > open consultation/MAG meeting in Feb. That's been how it has been > done in the past, and works well. > > To not do so, would give the appearance that the MAG has already > decided on issues/topics and is trying to impose them. That, is not > acceptable. Ok, I've deleted for now the demand for an early call for proposals. > - We seem to be still stuck on the same nomenclature for overall > themes that were developed years ago. As I proposed at last year's > IGF MAG consultations, we might want to see if the frame of > "Stewardship" that is used in international relations discussions > might be helpful > > - In the proposed schedule below I don't see where issues such as > Cyber Security, Openness, Surveillance, Rights & privacy would feed > into. Yes, they have been part of IGF's in the past, but they are > still key issues of concern for all stakeholders. > > - If we want experiment with different formats for discussion and > dialogue at the IGF, I would highly suggest we borrow approaches > taken at other highly successful meetings. > > Let's borrow from the success of a variety of > informal/ad-hoc/Discussion Presentation formats (such as TED, "Davos > Style" , unconfererence, lightning talks, BOF's) are used > successfully at other conferences such as the IETF, Davos, Tech at State > and TEDx. > > More informal styles of engagement might prove to be a bit > challenging to some stakeholder groups - such as governments - who > aren't accustomed to them. Success will require an experienced > moderator/facilitator. I'm not sure what to do with these thoughts - can you (or someone else) suggest concrete text? Greetings, Norbert -------------- 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 From nb at bollow.ch Mon Jan 28 10:12:45 2013 From: nb at bollow.ch (Norbert Bollow) Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2013 16:12:45 +0100 Subject: [governance] caucus contribution, consultation and MAG meeting In-Reply-To: <010701cdfcbd$8a697d00$9f3c7700$@gmail.com> References: <20130127120551.1db0b299@quill.bollow.ch> <51051017.80103@itforchange.net> <010701cdfcbd$8a697d00$9f3c7700$@gmail.com> Message-ID: <20130128161245.7a2d2a0f@quill.bollow.ch> Michael, could you put these suggestions into the form of concrete textual changes relative to the draft document http://www.igcaucus.org/digressit/archives/79 ? Thanks, greetings, Norbert Am Sun, 27 Jan 2013 10:38:25 -0800 schrieb "michael gurstein" : > In addition to a focus on Internet Rights and Principles (R&P) for > IGF-Bali, there should also I believe, be a focus on WSIS +10 > (upcoming in 2015) and rather than de-emphasizing Internet Governance > for Development (IG4D) it should be re-oriented and revivified (if > for no other reason than a natural association with the LDC location > of IGF-Bali) with an emphasis on the WSIS declaration and how it > might be updated in light of rapidly changing circumstances. > > The admittedly stale IG4D plenary sessions could be replaced by > bringing to the fore some of the emerging experiences (and new > actors) in IG4D (in mobiles and broadband for example) and then > reflecting on the IG issues/opportunities/gaps that are emerging. > > And of course, there is a link between the R&P issue and WSIS +10 at > least through the WSIS Declaration's concern for an "inclusive > Information Society" (one of the reasons why it is so astonishing and > disappointing that the ISOC, IETF, IAB statement on standards > recently noted on this list omitted any mention or concern for > "inclusion" as one of the principles on which standards should be > assessed). > > M > > > -----Original Message----- > From: apeake at gmail.com [mailto:apeake at gmail.com] On Behalf Of Adam > Peake Sent: Sunday, January 27, 2013 9:27 AM > To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Robert Guerra > Subject: Re: [governance] caucus contribution, consultation and MAG > meeting > > On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 1:20 AM, Robert Guerra > wrote: > > Quick thoughts: > > > > - Call for proposals: Should be done in an open and transparent > > fashion. I > am of the opinion that the call should be done after the open > consultation/MAG meeting in Feb. That's been how it has been done in > the past, and works well. > > > > Think you're wrong. The first meeting typically proposes themes for > the year. IGF website now says: > > "Call for Contributions > Stakeholders are invited to submit written contributions taking stock > of the Baku 2012 IGF meeting and looking forward - suggestions on > themes and format, for the IGF 2013 meeting. Contributions should be > emailed to igf at unog.ch before 14 February 2013." > > Nothing new about this. The MAG should respond to contributions from > stakeholders. The first program paper will come soon after the > Feb/March meeting. It will layout themes for the year. > > For the main themes, my suggestion is all five should remain as > guides for workshops, but security openness privacy, access, Internet > governance for development were poor in Baku and should be dropped as > main sessions. Taking stock and emerging issues should merge as a > single session so that a review of the week tells us which issues > have 'emerged' as important and provide pointers for themes for the > next year (it makes little sense to have emerging issues as anything > other than a response to what we've learned over the previous 3 > days). Such a session might also help inform > recommendations/suggestions from the IGF. > > Adam > > > > > To not do so, would give the appearance that the MAG has already > > decided > on issues/topics and is trying to impose them. That, is not > acceptable. > > > > - We seem to be still stuck on the same nomenclature for overall > > themes that were developed years ago. As I proposed at last year's > > IGF MAG consultations, we might want to see if the frame of > > "Stewardship" that is used in international relations discussions > > might be helpful > > > > - In the proposed schedule below I don't see where issues such as > > Cyber > Security, Openness, Surveillance, Rights & privacy would feed into. > Yes, they have been part of IGF's in the past, but they are still key > issues of concern for all stakeholders. > > > > - If we want experiment with different formats for discussion and > > dialogue > at the IGF, I would highly suggest we borrow approaches taken at other > highly successful meetings. > > > > Let's borrow from the success of a variety of > > informal/ad-hoc/Discussion > Presentation formats (such as TED, "Davos Style" , unconfererence, > lightning talks, BOF's) are used successfully at other conferences > such as the IETF, Davos, Tech at State and TEDx. > > > > More informal styles of engagement might prove to be a bit > > challenging to > some stakeholder groups - such as governments - who aren't accustomed > to them. Success will require an experienced moderator/facilitator. > > > > > > Refs: > > > > > > Unconference Format > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unconference > > > > TEDx > > http://www.ted.com/tedx > > > > NTEN - Nonprofit Tech Conference > > http://www.nten.org/ntc > > > > Robert > > > > -- > > R. Guerra > > Phone/Cell: +1 202-905-2081 > > Twitter: twitter.com/netfreedom > > Email: rguerra at privaterra.org > > > > On 2013-01-27, at 6:59 AM, Adam Peake wrote: > > > >> I don't agree with Internet principles as the overall theme, but > >> do agree it's a topic that needs significant focus. I think it's > >> clear after 7 IGFs that a session of 2 or 3 hours and a few > >> scattered workshops doesn't begin to scratch the surface of an > >> issue. So how could we use a day? Would more depth of discussion > >> be more likely to lead to some form of outcome? > >> > >> Just a thought: > >> Structured discussion on the morning (might be a panel or a round > >> table in a plenary setting). > >> Free, small group discussion middle of the day (working in small > >> ad-hoc groups to address issues and or questions identified during > >> the > >> morning) > >> Back to "plenary" for shared discussion? (use moderators to > >> manage the flow: some are getting very good at this role. For > >> example, I think Bill Drake and Jeanette Hofmann have been > >> excellent. Better than the "professionals".) > >> > >> But just a thought, how else might a full day be used to develop a > >> useful dialogue about one topic? > >> > >> Schedule might look like: > >> > >> Day 1. AM: Opening ceremony. > >> Day 1. PM: Critical Internet Resources (3 hours) Day 2. Enhanced > >> Cooperation (2 hours sessions, work over "lunch") Day 3. Internet > >> Principles (2 hours sessions, work over "lunch") Day 4. AM: > >> Taking Stock and Emerging Issues (3 hours) Day 4. PM: Outcomes > >> (1 hour). Closing Ceremony > >> > >> My opinion, 3 hours is a long time and takes a good subject or it > >> drags. Only CIR from Baku worked the 3 hours well. (IMHO etc etc) > >> > >> Adam > >> > >> > >> > >> On Sun, Jan 27, 2013 at 8:31 PM, parminder > >> > wrote: > >>> > >>> I may also remind that I had proposed that IGC supports the > >>> Internet Rights and Principles (IRP) Group which is likely to > >>> propose that > >>> > >>> (1) Internet principles in some form be the overall theme of the > >>> next IGF - Maybe something more descriptive as - 'public interest > >>> principles for the Internet' or 'Shaping global principles for the > Internet' > >>> > >>> (2) A round table on Internet Principles be held at the next IGF. > >>> > >>> I am developing a first draft for the IRP Group, if IGC so wants > >>> I can share it with IGC as well. > >>> > >>> parminder > >>> > >>> > >>> On Sunday 27 January 2013 04:46 PM, Adam Peake wrote: > >>> > >>> Hi Norbert, > >>> > >>> No, sorry, no time to work on a draft. But look forward to > >>> discussion and hopefully some consensus. > >>> > >>> Adam > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> On Sun, Jan 27, 2013 at 8:05 PM, Norbert Bollow > >>> wrote: > >>> > >>> [with IGC Coordinator hat on] > >>> > >>> Adam Peake wrote: > >>> > >>> Resending email sent to the list on Jan 10. Deadline for > >>> contributions is Feb 14. > >>> > >>> Just over two weeks to agree any contribution. > >>> > >>> Thanks for reminding us! This is urgent and imporant. > >>> > >>> Adam, are you willing and able to take the time to quickly > >>> produce a first draft? > >>> > >>> Greetings, > >>> Norbert > >>> > >>> > >>> A few comments for the February/March consultation. > >>> > >>> Public archive of MAG mailing list needed, not been updated for a > >>> year. > >>> > >>> Workshops: too many. Cut to between 80 and 100. Make this > >>> target number known when the call for applications is published, > >>> might be the first time quite a large number of proposals are > >>> rejected (might think about implications of this for the IGF), > >>> people should expect to be disappointed. > >>> > >>> Minimum of 50% of MAG members must complete assessment of all > >>> workshops. > >>> > >>> Clarify rules for other sessions (open forums, dynamic coalition, > >>> etc.) > >>> > >>> No reason an initial call to prepare proposals can't be made > >>> before the Feb meeting (more time better and the meetings a > >>> little later than usual). A reminder to MAG members to ready > >>> their stakeholders. > >>> > >>> For workshops, keep the current themes (access, SOP > >>> [security/openness/privacy], IG4D [Internet governance for > >>> development], CIR [critical Internet resources], emerging issues). > >>> Have the MAG better define Internet Governance, how it must be > >>> considered in workshop proposals (there are other spaces in WSIS > >>> follow-up for non-IG issues). Use an evaluation form for > >>> workshops (at the moment don't even know if a room was empty or > >>> overflowing, simple count a good idea.) However, indications are > >>> that while there were too many workshops in Baku many were strong > >>> in content, well received. MAG should not cut what looks like a > >>> success to favor the floundering main sessions. > >>> > >>> Merging not the always the solution, it's too easy an answer for > >>> MAG in their evaluation to say merge simply because proposals > >>> have similar words in the title. If merging proposed then the > >>> new workshop needs support or tendency to end up with 2 workshops > >>> in the same space (merge in name only). > >>> > >>> Overall theme for 2013: "enhanced cooperation -- meaningful > >>> participation of developing countries in Internet governance". > >>> > >>> Main sessions. Mix up the formats, 3 hours generally too long, > >>> some poorly attended in Baku and many grumbled complaints about > >>> poor content, poor preparation, repeating issues from previous > >>> years, etc. Some main sessions need better preparation (and some > >>> were good - transcripts illustrate the differences, MAG needs to > >>> be aware they have a role to complete, not last minute for a > >>> meeting of the IGF's importance.) Invite speakers early. Use > >>> (look for) funds to support speakers. > >>> > >>> Taking stock and emerging issues: mix the two sessions, then > >>> justifies 3 hours. Probably best held on the final morning (i.e. > >>> emerging issues become issues the IGF thinks emerging as > >>> important for the coming year(s)). > >>> > >>> Final afternoon: session on outcomes (1 hour), followed by > >>> closing. > >>> > >>> Critical Internet Resources (strong session in Baku, justifies 3 > >>> hours). Keep as before. > >>> > >>> New theme: Enhanced Cooperation. Sessions in mixed formats over 1 > >>> day, e.g. Morning expert panel session 2 hours. Follow by a long > >>> break where people encouraged to join self-organizing small > >>> groups to discuss a few set questions and ideas from the morning > >>> panel. Afternoon, 2 hour moderated session with audience only, no > >>> panel/experts etc. Bring back comments from the small groups. > >>> > >>> New theme: Internet principles. One day, perhaps same format as > >>> suggested for enhanced cooperation. Try something different. > >>> > >>> Development aspect of IG always overlooked and too often > >>> "governance" lost as discussion focuses on IT for development. > >>> Open specific public comment on design/scope of IG4D session. > >>> Bring back to the May meeting to decide on topics and format. > >>> > >>> Time to drop access and SOP as main sessions, but keep as > >>> workshops and perhaps round-tables. > >>> > >>> Adam > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> ____________________________________________________________ > >>> 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 > >>> > >> > >> ____________________________________________________________ > >> 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 > > > > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From suresh at hserus.net Mon Jan 28 10:25:53 2013 From: suresh at hserus.net (Suresh Ramasubramanian) Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2013 07:25:53 -0800 Subject: [governance] caucus contribution, consultation and MAG meeting In-Reply-To: <20130128160554.50c4cfa4@quill.bollow.ch> References: <20130127120551.1db0b299@quill.bollow.ch> <51051017.80103@itforchange.net> <20130128160554.50c4cfa4@quill.bollow.ch> Message-ID: <20130128152553.GA22217@hserus.net> Norbert Bollow [28/01/13 16:05 +0100]: >Robert Guerra wrote: >> - In the proposed schedule below I don't see where issues such as >> Cyber Security, Openness, Surveillance, Rights & privacy would feed >> into. Yes, they have been part of IGF's in the past, but they are >> still key issues of concern for all stakeholders. These are already areas where multistakeholder organizations bring together industry, independent experts (civil society), some civil society volunteer groups in this space, and some selected government people .. and these are already active for years. Rather than reinvent the wheel, invite them over and then look at how CS can engage with them at their venues. Especially cybersecurity - where there is the added concern that the vetting model fo some of the most effective groups and the sensitive nature of the content discussed mean that cooperation isn't very easy. Some organizations such as M3AAWG (www.maawg.org) do bridge the gap to a large extent, in outreach to a larger audience including ISOC, the RIRs etc. -------------- 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 From toml at communisphere.com Mon Jan 28 10:28:02 2013 From: toml at communisphere.com (Thomas Lowenhaupt) Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2013 10:28:02 -0500 Subject: [governance] Wikipedia Article on the IGF Needs Updating [and Multistakeholder Model] In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <51069902.6030100@communisphere.com> Also, Wikipedia's Multistakeholder Model entry is inadequate and perhaps somewhat simpler to mend. I created the space some weeks ago and after seeing it, that it sounded like an x-rated video. I thought that perhaps "Multistakeholder Governance Model" was a more appropriate heading. And then my attention was drawn away. But I intend on getting back to fix things up. Thoughts on the proper heading are appreciated, as well as some descriptive material that can explain this concept to the public. My plan is to link it into some of the politics and democracy portals that exist there. Best, Tom Lowenhaupt On 1/28/2013 3:04 AM, Paul M wrote: > Hope this is the right forum to discuss this matter. The Wikipedia > article on the Internet Governance Forum (IGF > ), is wanting > and in dire need of updating. A lot has happened since Vilnius 2010 > but the article has little to show for it. I would be delighted to > work with anyone who cares to spruce up the wiki page. > > > -- > :-) Paul M -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From nb at bollow.ch Mon Jan 28 10:29:06 2013 From: nb at bollow.ch (Norbert Bollow) Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2013 16:29:06 +0100 Subject: [governance] Formal discussion period on charter amendment proposals Message-ID: <20130128162906.3e3cd5b7@quill.bollow.ch> [IGC Coordinator hat on] As previously announced, we're going to have a formal discussion period of five days, until Saturday February 2, on the proposed charter amendments: http://igcaucus.org/formally-proposed-charter-amendments This discussion period will be then followed by the actual voting phase of ten days, starting on February 3 or February 4. (One side benefit of the discussion period, regardless of whether it will actually be used for discussions, is that it gives us a bit of time to set up and test the technical aspects of the voting process.) Greetings, Norbert -------------- 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 From roland at internetpolicyagency.com Mon Jan 28 10:29:05 2013 From: roland at internetpolicyagency.com (Roland Perry) Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2013 15:29:05 +0000 Subject: [governance] Norbert's hat In-Reply-To: <51068D8B.3080501@cafonso.ca> References: <20130127120551.1db0b299@quill.bollow.ch> <20130127170101.4c2cfce2@quill.bollow.ch> <20130128124418.2efb1a52@quill.bollow.ch> <510670EE.7030404@itforchange.net> <20130128142857.50056c86@quill.bollow.ch> <51068D8B.3080501@cafonso.ca> Message-ID: <31akvzWBlpBRFAzA@internetpolicyagency.com> In message <51068D8B.3080501 at cafonso.ca>, at 12:39:07 on Mon, 28 Jan 2013, Carlos A. Afonso writes >Seriously, I agree with Avri. Norbert (we have three of them here!), >our coord, is doing fine. I'm not suggesting the co-ords are doing anything wrong. It's the repetitious tagging I was tiring of. But I seem to be in the minority, so like the co-ords in their official role will accept the consensus view. -- Roland Perry -------------- 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 From nb at bollow.ch Mon Jan 28 11:09:18 2013 From: nb at bollow.ch (Norbert Bollow) Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2013 17:09:18 +0100 Subject: [governance] caucus contribution, consultation and MAG meeting In-Reply-To: <20130128152553.GA22217@hserus.net> References: <20130127120551.1db0b299@quill.bollow.ch> <51051017.80103@itforchange.net> <20130128160554.50c4cfa4@quill.bollow.ch> <20130128152553.GA22217@hserus.net> Message-ID: <20130128170918.580f9cf3@quill.bollow.ch> Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote: > Norbert Bollow [28/01/13 16:05 +0100]: > >Robert Guerra wrote: > >> - In the proposed schedule below I don't see where issues such as > >> Cyber Security, Openness, Surveillance, Rights & privacy would feed > >> into. Yes, they have been part of IGF's in the past, but they are > >> still key issues of concern for all stakeholders. > > These are already areas where multistakeholder organizations bring > together industry, independent experts (civil society), some civil > society volunteer groups in this space, and some selected government > people .. and these are already active for years. Rather than > reinvent the wheel, invite them over and then look at how CS can > engage with them at their venues. > > Especially cybersecurity - where there is the added concern that the > vetting model fo some of the most effective groups and the sensitive > nature of the content discussed mean that cooperation isn't very > easy. Some organizations such as M3AAWG (www.maawg.org) do bridge the > gap to a large extent, in outreach to a larger audience including > ISOC, the RIRs etc. How would this "invite them over and then look at how CS can engage with them at their venues" process work practically in the IGF context? Would this be a workshop? Greetings, Norbert -------------- 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 From suresh at hserus.net Mon Jan 28 11:12:51 2013 From: suresh at hserus.net (Suresh Ramasubramanian) Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2013 08:12:51 -0800 Subject: [governance] caucus contribution, consultation and MAG meeting In-Reply-To: <20130128170918.580f9cf3@quill.bollow.ch> References: <20130127120551.1db0b299@quill.bollow.ch> <51051017.80103@itforchange.net> <20130128160554.50c4cfa4@quill.bollow.ch> <20130128152553.GA22217@hserus.net> <20130128170918.580f9cf3@quill.bollow.ch> Message-ID: <20130128161251.GB22831@hserus.net> Norbert Bollow [28/01/13 17:09 +0100]: >How would this "invite them over and then look at how CS can >engage with them at their venues" process work practically in the IGF >context? Would this be a workshop? 1. panel for public consumption 2. bash out the details of further cooperation over a drink at the venue / in email etc, once interested and appropriate parties are identified -------------- 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 From drc at virtualized.org Mon Jan 28 11:32:07 2013 From: drc at virtualized.org (David Conrad) Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2013 11:32:07 -0500 Subject: [governance] today's Wash Post editorial In-Reply-To: <5104D63D.70809@itforchange.net> References: <50FEA64A.4090805@itforchange.net> <51029240.5020209@itforchange.net> <5102A9D4.3070704@itforchange.net> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD2322F6F@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> <5104D63D.70809@itforchange.net> Message-ID: <4FC09B3A-92DB-4FC9-B811-C0146219E6D4@virtualized.org> Parminder, On Jan 27, 2013, at 2:24 AM, parminder wrote: ... > 2. They all (or, at least most of them) prefer a free float ICANN model whereby ICANN does not have to take anyone's permission to effect root changes. Nope. > ... > 3. If US ever does any hanky panky business with the "authoritative" root zone, the non US gov owned root operators (10 of them) can be trusted simply not to follow suit. They were credited with such a keen global public interest minded-ness. Nope. > ... > David who stone-walled any earlier discussion on this list LOL. As numerous pointed have pointed out privately, it is obvious that continued attempts to explain things to you are beyond pointless. Apologies for being slow to realize this. Since it seems there is more interest on this list in internal issues and position statements on subjects that I personally think are only superficially related to the Internet, I think it best I follow Mr. Curran and go into lurk mode (with junk filters for a few individuals so I avoid http://xkcd.com/386/ syndrome :)). Regards, -drc -------------- 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 From gurstein at gmail.com Mon Jan 28 11:55:22 2013 From: gurstein at gmail.com (michael gurstein) Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2013 08:55:22 -0800 Subject: [governance] Towards an IGC Statement on RFC 6852 "Affirmation of the Modern Paradigm for Standards" In-Reply-To: <13c8142128d.2728.4f968dcf8ecd56c9cb8acab6370fcfe0@hserus.net> References: <20130126141234.GA21789@sources.org> <20130126224714.GA21920@sources.org> <20130127091003.2e5d7640@quill.bollow.ch> <20130127123308.689639f3@quill.bollow.ch> <61E2D1C7-09E5-4358-B5BD-B362A084EDF5@uzh.ch> <02a801cdfd1d$5ce43130$16ac9390$@gmail.com> <20130128111003.18a48260@quill.bollow.ch> <034801cdfd49$5f76e600$1e64b200$@gmail.com> <036201cdfd4d$aa0b7880$fe226980$@gmail.com> <13c8142128d.2728.4f968dcf8ecd56c9cb8acab6370fcfe0@hserus.net> Message-ID: <049101cdfd78$4b4cf550$e1e6dff0$@gmail.com> http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/84/minutes/minutes-84-iesg-opsplenary Russ Housley, the Chair of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) at the IETF 84 Administrative Plenary in Vancouver, when introducing RFC 6852 described them as representing "our core values and our principles. We will ask other SDO's (Standards Development Organizations) to follow along... Signatories will be standards development organizations, as well as organizations that believe standards should be developed according to these principles." And to place these further into their broader context: Plenary participant (Rob Hinden): There is this activity going on in the world with the ITU, and I think it is really good to state that the issues that we, the IEEE, and WC3 have with the ITU are problems that we are all having. It is not just the IETF whining. And this statement is a very good thing in that regard. Russ: Thank you. M -----Original Message----- From: Suresh Ramasubramanian [mailto:suresh at hserus.net] Sent: Monday, January 28, 2013 5:04 AM To: michael gurstein; governance at lists.igcaucus.org; 'Adam Peake' Subject: RE: [governance] Towards an IGC Statement on RFC 6852 "Affirmation of the Modern Paradigm for Standards" Is this really the dna of the internet? You can find RFCs for tcp over carrier pigeons too and more seriously for a wide variety of other reasons (best practice, to document some known behavior or arrangement etc). And quite commonly such agreements as described in this rfc are worked out bilaterally and/or multilaterally between different stakeholder groups that already work together. As long as this is seen as a attempt to engage the larger community rather than impose a standard, it becomes much more feasible if civil society groups already engaged in this space, like say isoc, join and contribute to the initiative. If this actually turns out to be something more insidious, it will find little or no adoption beyond the original community that it began with. --srs (htc one x) On 28 January 2013 5:20:25 PM "michael gurstein" < gurstein at gmail.com> wrote: > Hmmm... an attempt to unilaterally hardwire a deeply flawed and highly > questionable ideological position into the DNA of the Internet and in > the process raising serious issues about the nature of > multi-stakeholderism and and the future of Internet governance overall > doesn't warrant "a stand alone session given other priorities"... > > What other priority could possibly be higher? > > M > > -----Original Message----- > From: apeake at gmail.com [ mailto:apeake at gmail.com] On Behalf Of Adam > Peake > Sent: Monday, January 28, 2013 3:38 AM > To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org > Subject: Re: [governance] Towards an IGC Statement on RFC 6852 > "Affirmation of the Modern Paradigm for Standards" > > It would be a good subject for a workshop. And can imagine it might > be a topic raised in both sessions on enhanced cooperation and > Internet principles. But not a stand alone session given the other priorities. > > Adam > > > On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 8:19 PM, michael gurstein < gurstein at gmail.com> > wrote: > > Hi Norbert, > > > > I think that the issue warrants both--a session at the IGF and a > > sign on letter from the IGC (which I've agreed to co-draft with you... > > > > M > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Norbert Bollow [ mailto:nb at bollow.ch] > > Sent: Monday, January 28, 2013 2:10 AM > > To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; michael gurstein > > Cc: 'William Drake'; 'Adam Peake'; Alejandro Pisanty > > Subject: Re: [governance] Towards an IGC Statement on RFC 6852 > > "Affirmation of the Modern Paradigm for Standards" > > > > Hi Michael > > Thanks for your comments! Right now I'm focusing (for the same kind > > of reasons as Bill has mentioned) on our need as a Caucus to respond > > to the "Stakeholders are invited to submit written contributions > > taking stock of the Baku 2012 IGF meeting and looking forward - > > suggestions on themes and format, for the IGF 2013 meeting." call > > for contributions with a deadline of February 14. Do you think that > > the RFC > 6852 issue should be mentioned there? > > Or would it be sufficient to develop a separate IGC statement on RFC > > 6852 (after we've finished the IGF taking stock and looking forward > > statement), possibly supplemented with a workshop proposal when the > > time > for that comes? > > Greetings, > > Norbert > > > > > > Am Sun, 27 Jan 2013 22:04:29 -0800 > > schrieb "michael gurstein" < gurstein at gmail.com>: > > > >> Hmmm I must admit to finding the document RFC 6852 astonishing and > >> (now that I've been made aware of some of the background) quite > >> shameful. > >> > >> Not only does it completely ignore the public interest background > >> and continued value and significance of the Internet, omit any > >> mention of inclusion as a consideration at all levels of Internet > >> design and development, but it overall ignores the WSIS declaration > >> even when there is urging on the part of various interlocutors in > >> the various signatory organizations to address these range of issues. > >> > >> That civil society was not consulted was clearly not an accident > >> nor an oversight but an attempt to create a fact on the ground > >> leaving those with concerns to, as Alejandro so blithely suggests, > >> see about achieving some sort of modifications after the fact and > >> within an already determined framework during downstream > >> implementations (which I'm assuming he knows as well as I do makes > >> little if any sense if the issues are significant and central such > >> as for example issues concerning design for inclusion)--take it or > >> leave it. This behaviour goes to the very core of what might be > >> meant by "multi-stakeholderism", who precisely are the > >> "stakeholders" and what (and on whose behalf) are these stakeholders "holding" the "stakes". > >> > >> And further, this puts into significant question the necessary > >> trust which would be a fundamental pre-condition of the kind of > >> global Internet governance regime which advocates of > >> multi-stakeholderism have been so vociferously advocating. > >> > >> Finally, following on from Bill and Adam's suggestions I can think > >> of no more important topic to be considered at the next IGF than a > >> consideration of the significance of RFC 6852 in the context of the > >> WSIS declaration and overall Internet governance in the global > >> public interest. > >> > >> Mike > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org > >> [ mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of William > >> Drake Sent: Sunday, January 27, 2013 2:38 PM > >> To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Adam Peake > >> Subject: Re: [governance] Towards an IGC Statement on RFC 6852 > >> "Affirmation of the Modern Paradigm for Standards" > >> > >> Hi > >> > >> I agree with Adam. The IGC was created to provide input into the > >> WSIS and then the IGF. If it runs off and chases other agendas of > >> interest to co-cos or others (cybersecurity, IETF etc.) while > >> neglecting its original reason for being, isn't that sort of doing > >> a disservice to all those who've put a lot of time and energy in > >> over the years trying to get the IGF to work and bake in civil > >> society participation? And if the IGC doesn't consistently provide > >> solid inputs to the IGF consultations, why should governments and > >> other stakeholder groups think it's a player they need to work with > >> when making deals, including in the MAG? In fact, why shouldn't > >> the UN look to other organizations and networks to provide more > >> civil society > nominees etc. > >> If the IGC makes itself look irrelevant to the IGF, it will > >> increasingly be treated as such. > >> > >> Bill > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> On Jan 27, 2013, at 4:01 AM, Adam Peake < ajp at glocom.ac.jp> wrote: > >> > >> > Please, just focus. There's a hard deadline for a contribution to > >> > the IGF (which we missed last year). Meet that and come back to > >> > the RFC. > >> > > >> > Adam > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > On Sun, Jan 27, 2013 at 8:33 PM, Norbert Bollow < nb at bollow.ch> > >> > wrote: > >> >> [with IGC coordinator hat on] > >> >> > >> >> Adam Peake < ajp at glocom.ac.jp> wrote: > >> >> > >> >>> Norbert, thanks for trying, but to be frank, why bother? > >> >> > >> >> Because standards development is very much at the core of > >> >> Internet governance, and it is important for IGC to engage, to > >> >> the extent that consensus is possible, also on such core issues, > >> >> and not just on more peripheral questions like e.g. the choice > >> >> of discussion topics for the next Internet Governance Forum. > >> >> > >> >>> In the couple of days since RFC 6852 was mentioned we've seen > >> >>> almost equal support/opposition for statement. > >> >> > >> >> That is not accurate. We have seen praise for RFC 6852 as well > >> >> as criticism. This is no reason to not at least try to > >> >> incorporate both in a statement. > >> >> > >> >>> And if the caucus does produce something will it make any > >> >>> difference? > >> >> > >> >> That will depend on the actual content of the statement, and on > >> >> how convincing it is written, and on whether it will get > >> >> promoted in contexts where it can make a difference. The Caucus > >> >> has several members who have the right kind of contacts. > >> >> > >> >>> Could we please focus on core issues. > >> >> > >> >> This is a core issue. > >> >> > >> >> Greetings, > >> >> Norbert > >> >> > >> >>> On Sun, Jan 27, 2013 at 5:10 PM, Norbert Bollow < nb at bollow.ch> > >> >>> wrote: > >> >>>> [with IGC Coordinator hat on] > >> >>>> > >> >>>> Let's develop an IGC Statement on this RFC 6852 "Affirmation > >> >>>> of the Modern Paradigm for Standards" [1]. > >> >>>> [1] http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6852 > >> >>>> > >> >>>> I'll be willing to serve as editor if no-one else volunteers, > >> >>>> but I'd prefer for someone else to take on this role. > >> >>>> > >> >>>> Who would like to volunteer? > >> >>>> > >> >>>> Greetings, > >> >>>> Norbert > >> >>>> > >> >>>> > >> >>>> Stephane Bortzmeyer < bortzmeyer at internatif.org> wrote: > >> >>>> > >> >>>>>> It is a good document. > >> >>>>> > >> >>>>> No, it's not. > >> >>>>> > >> >>>>> It refers only to business uses of the Internet, as if the > >> >>>>> Internet were not used for many other things. It was recorded > >> >>>>> as a comment by some IETF members > >> >>>>> < http://trac.tools.ietf.org/group/iab/trac/ticket/193> but > >> >>>>> was ignored. > >> >>>>> > >> >>>>> It calls for access to the standard documents but it is > >> >>>>> hypocritical since one of the signers, IEEE, does not allow > >> >>>>> it < http://trac.tools.ietf.org/group/iab/trac/ticket/213> > >> >>>>> (ITU, the main target of this RFC, does distribute its > >> >>>>> standards online for a few years.) > >> >>>>> > >> >>>>> It refers to open and transparent processes but the IETF > >> >>>>> members discovered this document when it was already signed, > >> >>>>> and impossible to modify. > >> >>>>> > >> >>>>> > >> >>>>> > >> >>>>> > >> >>>> > >> >>>> > >> >>>> > >> >>>> ____________________________________________________________ > >> >>>> 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 > >> >>>> > >> >>> > >> >> > >> > > >> > ____________________________________________________________ > >> > 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: -------------- 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 From suresh at hserus.net Mon Jan 28 12:05:33 2013 From: suresh at hserus.net (Suresh Ramasubramanian) Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2013 09:05:33 -0800 Subject: [governance] Towards an IGC Statement on RFC 6852 "Affirmation of the Modern Paradigm for Standards" In-Reply-To: <049101cdfd78$4b4cf550$e1e6dff0$@gmail.com> References: <20130127123308.689639f3@quill.bollow.ch> <61E2D1C7-09E5-4358-B5BD-B362A084EDF5@uzh.ch> <02a801cdfd1d$5ce43130$16ac9390$@gmail.com> <20130128111003.18a48260@quill.bollow.ch> <034801cdfd49$5f76e600$1e64b200$@gmail.com> <036201cdfd4d$aa0b7880$fe226980$@gmail.com> <13c8142128d.2728.4f968dcf8ecd56c9cb8acab6370fcfe0@hserus.net> <049101cdfd78$4b4cf550$e1e6dff0$@gmail.com> Message-ID: <20130128170533.GB23557@hserus.net> michael gurstein [28/01/13 08:55 -0800]: >Russ Housley, the Chair of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) at the >IETF 84 Administrative Plenary in Vancouver, when introducing RFC 6852 >described them as representing "our core values and our principles. We will To be fair, standards development organizations do have a substantial cross section of civil society membership. The IETF for example is an organized activity of ISOC. Independent technical experts (who are also civil society, though some NGO members tend to discount that) are quite active in IETF, and as members of the IEEE more often than not. So - what was that again about not seeking out civil society partnership? -------------- 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 From gurstein at gmail.com Mon Jan 28 12:24:31 2013 From: gurstein at gmail.com (michael gurstein) Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2013 09:24:31 -0800 Subject: [governance] Towards an IGC Statement on RFC 6852 "Affirmation of the Modern Paradigm for Standards" In-Reply-To: <20130128170533.GB23557@hserus.net> References: <20130127123308.689639f3@quill.bollow.ch> <61E2D1C7-09E5-4358-B5BD-B362A084EDF5@uzh.ch> <02a801cdfd1d$5ce43130$16ac9390$@gmail.com> <20130128111003.18a48260@quill.bollow.ch> <034801cdfd49$5f76e600$1e64b200$@gmail.com> <036201cdfd4d$aa0b7880$fe226980$@gmail.com> <13c8142128d.2728.4f968dcf8ecd56c9cb8acab6370fcfe0@hserus.net> <049101cdfd78$4b4cf550$e1e6dff0$@gmail.com> <20130128170533.GB23557@hserus.net> Message-ID: <04c901cdfd7c$56232bd0$02698370$@gmail.com> Since the intent is the articulation and propagation of "core values and principles" for the design of standards for the Internet presumably there is a requirement to ensure the broadest base of participation and consultation which to my mind includes something other than simply talking to the tech choir whether or not they might be identified as "civil society". Note also, and quite astonishingly that included in the passage I quoted was an acknowledgement that these standards are specifically directed to exclude what has turned out to be the some 2/3rds or so of the world's population whose governments supported the ITU position at WCIT. M -----Original Message----- From: Suresh Ramasubramanian [mailto:suresh at hserus.net] Sent: Monday, January 28, 2013 9:06 AM To: michael gurstein Cc: governance at lists.igcaucus.org Subject: Re: [governance] Towards an IGC Statement on RFC 6852 "Affirmation of the Modern Paradigm for Standards" michael gurstein [28/01/13 08:55 -0800]: >Russ Housley, the Chair of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) >at the IETF 84 Administrative Plenary in Vancouver, when introducing >RFC 6852 described them as representing "our core values and our >principles. We will To be fair, standards development organizations do have a substantial cross section of civil society membership. The IETF for example is an organized activity of ISOC. Independent technical experts (who are also civil society, though some NGO members tend to discount that) are quite active in IETF, and as members of the IEEE more often than not. So - what was that again about not seeking out civil society partnership? -------------- 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 From dogwallah at gmail.com Mon Jan 28 12:43:20 2013 From: dogwallah at gmail.com (McTim) Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2013 12:43:20 -0500 Subject: [governance] Towards an IGC Statement on RFC 6852 "Affirmation of the Modern Paradigm for Standards" In-Reply-To: <04c901cdfd7c$56232bd0$02698370$@gmail.com> References: <20130127123308.689639f3@quill.bollow.ch> <61E2D1C7-09E5-4358-B5BD-B362A084EDF5@uzh.ch> <02a801cdfd1d$5ce43130$16ac9390$@gmail.com> <20130128111003.18a48260@quill.bollow.ch> <034801cdfd49$5f76e600$1e64b200$@gmail.com> <036201cdfd4d$aa0b7880$fe226980$@gmail.com> <13c8142128d.2728.4f968dcf8ecd56c9cb8acab6370fcfe0@hserus.net> <049101cdfd78$4b4cf550$e1e6dff0$@gmail.com> <20130128170533.GB23557@hserus.net> <04c901cdfd7c$56232bd0$02698370$@gmail.com> Message-ID: Did you miss this bit: * contribute to the creation of global communities, benefiting humanity. or 2. Adherence to principles. Adherence to the five fundamental principles of standards development: * Due process. Decisions are made with equity and fairness among participants. No one party dominates or guides standards development. Standards processes are transparent and opportunities exist to appeal decisions. Processes for periodic standards review and updating are well defined. * Broad consensus. Processes allow for all views to be considered and addressed, such that agreement can be found across a range of interests. * Transparency. Standards organizations provide advance public notice of proposed standards development activities, the scope of work to be undertaken, and conditions for participation. Easily accessible records of decisions and the materials used in reaching those decisions are provided. Public comment periods are provided before final standards approval and adoption. * Balance. Standards activities are not exclusively dominated by any particular person, company or interest group. * Openness. Standards processes are open to all interested and informed parties. ?? On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 12:24 PM, michael gurstein wrote: > Since the intent is the articulation and propagation of "core values and > principles" for the design of standards for the Internet presumably there is > a requirement to ensure the broadest base of participation and consultation > which to my mind includes something other than simply talking to the tech > choir whether or not they might be identified as "civil society". > > Note also, and quite astonishingly that included in the passage I quoted was > an acknowledgement that these standards are specifically directed to exclude > what has turned out to be the some 2/3rds or so of the world's population > whose governments supported the ITU position at WCIT. > > M > > -----Original Message----- > From: Suresh Ramasubramanian [mailto:suresh at hserus.net] > Sent: Monday, January 28, 2013 9:06 AM > To: michael gurstein > Cc: governance at lists.igcaucus.org > Subject: Re: [governance] Towards an IGC Statement on RFC 6852 "Affirmation > of the Modern Paradigm for Standards" > > michael gurstein [28/01/13 08:55 -0800]: >>Russ Housley, the Chair of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) >>at the IETF 84 Administrative Plenary in Vancouver, when introducing >>RFC 6852 described them as representing "our core values and our >>principles. We will > > To be fair, standards development organizations do have a substantial cross > section of civil society membership. > > The IETF for example is an organized activity of ISOC. > > Independent technical experts (who are also civil society, though some NGO > members tend to discount that) are quite active in IETF, and as members of > the IEEE more often than not. > > So - what was that again about not seeking out civil society partnership? > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > -- 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 From gurstein at gmail.com Mon Jan 28 12:59:05 2013 From: gurstein at gmail.com (michael gurstein) Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2013 09:59:05 -0800 Subject: [governance] Towards an IGC Statement on RFC 6852 "Affirmation of the Modern Paradigm for Standards" In-Reply-To: References: <20130127123308.689639f3@quill.bollow.ch> <61E2D1C7-09E5-4358-B5BD-B362A084EDF5@uzh.ch> <02a801cdfd1d$5ce43130$16ac9390$@gmail.com> <20130128111003.18a48260@quill.bollow.ch> <034801cdfd49$5f76e600$1e64b200$@gmail.com> <036201cdfd4d$aa0b7880$fe226980$@gmail.com> <13c8142128d.2728.4f968dcf8ecd56c9cb8acab6370fcfe0@hserus.net> <049101cdfd78$4b4cf550$e1e6dff0$@gmail.com> <20130128170533.GB23557@hserus.net> <04c901cdfd7c$56232bd0$02698370$@gmail.com> Message-ID: <050201cdfd81$2a3fdf90$7ebf9eb0$@gmail.com> No, if you look at the email where I provided my comments (attached) I acknowledged and agreed with these... As I said, I generally agree with the statements made but since this is meant to be a statement of "core values and principles" it is equally important to note what isn't included--a commitment to inclusiveness, a commitment to collaboration as well as competition, a commitment to the public interest beyond the interests of the market! This is a shameful and shamefully partisan and narrow document and should be disavowed by any right thinking individual or group with a commitment to the future of the Internet as a basis for the well-being of humanity. M -----Original Message----- From: McTim [mailto:dogwallah at gmail.com] Sent: Monday, January 28, 2013 9:43 AM To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; michael gurstein Cc: Suresh Ramasubramanian Subject: Re: [governance] Towards an IGC Statement on RFC 6852 "Affirmation of the Modern Paradigm for Standards" Did you miss this bit: * contribute to the creation of global communities, benefiting humanity. or 2. Adherence to principles. Adherence to the five fundamental principles of standards development: * Due process. Decisions are made with equity and fairness among participants. No one party dominates or guides standards development. Standards processes are transparent and opportunities exist to appeal decisions. Processes for periodic standards review and updating are well defined. * Broad consensus. Processes allow for all views to be considered and addressed, such that agreement can be found across a range of interests. * Transparency. Standards organizations provide advance public notice of proposed standards development activities, the scope of work to be undertaken, and conditions for participation. Easily accessible records of decisions and the materials used in reaching those decisions are provided. Public comment periods are provided before final standards approval and adoption. * Balance. Standards activities are not exclusively dominated by any particular person, company or interest group. * Openness. Standards processes are open to all interested and informed parties. ?? On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 12:24 PM, michael gurstein wrote: > Since the intent is the articulation and propagation of "core values > and principles" for the design of standards for the Internet > presumably there is a requirement to ensure the broadest base of > participation and consultation which to my mind includes something > other than simply talking to the tech choir whether or not they might be identified as "civil society". > > Note also, and quite astonishingly that included in the passage I > quoted was an acknowledgement that these standards are specifically > directed to exclude what has turned out to be the some 2/3rds or so of > the world's population whose governments supported the ITU position at WCIT. > > M > > -----Original Message----- > From: Suresh Ramasubramanian [mailto:suresh at hserus.net] > Sent: Monday, January 28, 2013 9:06 AM > To: michael gurstein > Cc: governance at lists.igcaucus.org > Subject: Re: [governance] Towards an IGC Statement on RFC 6852 > "Affirmation of the Modern Paradigm for Standards" > > michael gurstein [28/01/13 08:55 -0800]: >>Russ Housley, the Chair of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) >>at the IETF 84 Administrative Plenary in Vancouver, when introducing >>RFC 6852 described them as representing "our core values and our >>principles. We will > > To be fair, standards development organizations do have a substantial > cross section of civil society membership. > > The IETF for example is an organized activity of ISOC. > > Independent technical experts (who are also civil society, though some > NGO members tend to discount that) are quite active in IETF, and as > members of the IEEE more often than not. > > So - what was that again about not seeking out civil society partnership? > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > -- 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 -------------- An embedded message was scrubbed... From: "michael gurstein" Subject: RE: [governance] RFC 6852: Affirmation of the Modern Paradigm for Standards--Some Comments Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2013 09:34:52 -0800 Size: 42660 URL: -------------- 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 From avri at acm.org Mon Jan 28 15:07:22 2013 From: avri at acm.org (Avri Doria) Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2013 15:07:22 -0500 Subject: [governance] Towards an IGC Statement on RFC 6852 "Affirmation of the Modern Paradigm for Standards" In-Reply-To: <050201cdfd81$2a3fdf90$7ebf9eb0$@gmail.com> References: <20130127123308.689639f3@quill.bollow.ch> <61E2D1C7-09E5-4358-B5BD-B362A084EDF5@uzh.ch> <02a801cdfd1d$5ce43130$16ac9390$@gmail.com> <20130128111003.18a48260@quill.bollow.ch> <034801cdfd49$5f76e600$1e64b200$@gmail.com> <036201cdfd4d$aa0b7880$fe226980$@gmail.com> <13c8142128d.2728.4f968dcf8ecd56c9cb8acab6370fcfe0@hserus.net> <049101cdfd78$4b4cf550$e1e6dff0$@gmail.com> <20130128170533.GB23557@hserus.net> <04c901cdfd7c$56232bd0$02698370$@gmail.com> <050201cdfd81$2a3fdf90$7ebf9eb0$@gmail.com> Message-ID: On 28 Jan 2013, at 12:59, michael gurstein wrote: > This is a shameful and shamefully partisan and narrow document and should be > disavowed by any right thinking individual or group with a commitment to the > future of the Internet as a basis for the well-being of humanity. wow! so anyone who does not agree that the document should be disavowed, but who rather thinks we should work with them to expand their viewpoint to include civil society is not a right thinking individual. yes as s civil society member who is a member of ISOC and who participates in IETF (though never having gotten to close to the IAB, though some friends serve and have served) I was disappointed in its purely business view. but in general I think the sentiment about technopolicy and its independence from government oversight was essentially correct. Your absolute condemnations of all who do not agree with you seems akin to name calling. As i praised RFC6852 for what it tried to do, though commented on a few flaws, i proudly count myself among those who you beleive are not right thinking individuals. avri -------------- 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 From dogwallah at gmail.com Mon Jan 28 15:57:51 2013 From: dogwallah at gmail.com (McTim) Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2013 15:57:51 -0500 Subject: [governance] Towards an IGC Statement on RFC 6852 "Affirmation of the Modern Paradigm for Standards" In-Reply-To: References: <20130127123308.689639f3@quill.bollow.ch> <61E2D1C7-09E5-4358-B5BD-B362A084EDF5@uzh.ch> <02a801cdfd1d$5ce43130$16ac9390$@gmail.com> <20130128111003.18a48260@quill.bollow.ch> <034801cdfd49$5f76e600$1e64b200$@gmail.com> <036201cdfd4d$aa0b7880$fe226980$@gmail.com> <13c8142128d.2728.4f968dcf8ecd56c9cb8acab6370fcfe0@hserus.net> <049101cdfd78$4b4cf550$e1e6dff0$@gmail.com> <20130128170533.GB23557@hserus.net> <04c901cdfd7c$56232bd0$02698370$@gmail.com> <050201cdfd81$2a3fdf90$7ebf9eb0$@gmail.com> Message-ID: On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 3:07 PM, Avri Doria wrote: > > On 28 Jan 2013, at 12:59, michael gurstein wrote: > >> This is a shameful and shamefully partisan and narrow document and should be >> disavowed by any right thinking individual or group with a commitment to the >> future of the Internet as a basis for the well-being of humanity. > > wow! > > so anyone who does not agree that the document should be disavowed, but who rather thinks we should work with them to expand their viewpoint to include civil society is not a right thinking individual. yes as s civil society member who is a member of ISOC and who participates in IETF (though never having gotten to close to the IAB, though some friends serve and have served) I was disappointed in its purely business view. but in general I think the sentiment about technopolicy and its independence from government oversight was essentially correct. > > Your absolute condemnations of all who do not agree with you seems akin to name calling. I have to agree with Avri here. I think the market referred to in the RFC is the one whereby Standards are either taken up or not. It's not just about people making money, it's about which Standards people use, regardless of money being made. I propose that IGC sign on to it. -- 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 From mueller at syr.edu Mon Jan 28 17:32:08 2013 From: mueller at syr.edu (Milton L Mueller) Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2013 22:32:08 +0000 Subject: [governance] is the ITU a dead horse? Message-ID: <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD232509E@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> http://www.internetgovernance.org/2013/01/28/lets-keep-this-dead-horse-alive-so-we-can-beat-it-some-more/ Milton L. Mueller Professor, Syracuse University School of Information Studies Internet Governance Project http://blog.internetgovernance.org -------------- 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 From mueller at syr.edu Mon Jan 28 17:48:12 2013 From: mueller at syr.edu (Milton L Mueller) Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2013 22:48:12 +0000 Subject: [governance] Re: RFC 6852: Affirmation of the Modern Paradigm for Standards In-Reply-To: <20130126224714.GA21920@sources.org> References: <20130126141234.GA21789@sources.org> <20130126224714.GA21920@sources.org> Message-ID: <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD23250CB@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> I agree with some of Stephane's caveats; we have to be careful not to be drawn into the IETF culture's paranoia about ITU as that is irrelevant to the future of Internet governance. I also agree with Stephane that IAB often acts unilaterally to make policy pronouncements while at the same time wrapping itself in the mantle of open and bottom up standards making. Nevertheless I can't find anything in the document to disagree with. Since standardization is an essential, if not central aspect of internet governance, I also can't agree with those who say this is out of scope. The idea that calling attention to the way forces of supply and demand shape ICT products and services somehow disses civil society strikes me as the kind of insularity that keeps civil society marginalized. In particular, look at the principles enumerated in section 2: it speaks of participation, fairness, due process, transparency, balance. Why anti-market ideologues can make this problematic is beyond me. > -----Original Message----- > From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance- > request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Stephane Bortzmeyer > Sent: Saturday, January 26, 2013 5:47 PM > To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org > Subject: [governance] Re: RFC 6852: Affirmation of the Modern Paradigm > for Standards > > On Sat, Jan 26, 2013 at 11:49:30AM -0500, Avri Doria > wrote a message of 62 lines which said: > > > It is a good document. > > No, it's not. > > It refers only to business uses of the Internet, as if the Internet were > not used for many other things. It was recorded as a comment by some > IETF members but > was ignored. > > It calls for access to the standard documents but it is hypocritical > since one of the signers, IEEE, does not allow it > (ITU, the main > target of this RFC, does distribute its standards online for a few > > years.) > > It refers to open and transparent processes but the IETF members > discovered this document when it was already signed, and impossible to > modify. > > > -------------- 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 From mueller at syr.edu Mon Jan 28 17:52:12 2013 From: mueller at syr.edu (Milton L Mueller) Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2013 22:52:12 +0000 Subject: [governance] Towards an IGC Statement on RFC 6852 "Affirmation of the Modern Paradigm for Standards" In-Reply-To: <61E2D1C7-09E5-4358-B5BD-B362A084EDF5@uzh.ch> References: <20130126141234.GA21789@sources.org> <20130126224714.GA21920@sources.org> <20130127091003.2e5d7640@quill.bollow.ch> <20130127123308.689639f3@quill.bollow.ch> <61E2D1C7-09E5-4358-B5BD-B362A084EDF5@uzh.ch> Message-ID: <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD23250DF@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> How are standardization processes irrelevant to IGF? My organization has sponsored workshops on DNSSEC and RPKI/BGPSEC, both of which involve IETF standards. Many other organizations, including EFF and CDT, have highlighted the nexus between standards and governance. Either we endorse the statement or we don’t. IF we endorse it and submit it to the consultation, it’s relevant. From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of William Drake Sent: Sunday, January 27, 2013 5:38 PM To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Adam Peake Subject: Re: [governance] Towards an IGC Statement on RFC 6852 "Affirmation of the Modern Paradigm for Standards" Hi I agree with Adam. The IGC was created to provide input into the WSIS and then the IGF. If it runs off and chases other agendas of interest to co-cos or others (cybersecurity, IETF etc.) while neglecting its original reason for being, isn't that sort of doing a disservice to all those who've put a lot of time and energy in over the years trying to get the IGF to work and bake in civil society participation? And if the IGC doesn't consistently provide solid inputs to the IGF consultations, why should governments and other stakeholder groups think it's a player they need to work with when making deals, including in the MAG? In fact, why shouldn't the UN look to other organizations and networks to provide more civil society nominees etc. If the IGC makes itself look irrelevant to the IGF, it will increasingly be treated as such. Bill On Jan 27, 2013, at 4:01 AM, Adam Peake > wrote: > Please, just focus. There's a hard deadline for a contribution to the > IGF (which we missed last year). Meet that and come back to the RFC. > > Adam > > > > On Sun, Jan 27, 2013 at 8:33 PM, Norbert Bollow > wrote: >> [with IGC coordinator hat on] >> >> Adam Peake > wrote: >> >>> Norbert, thanks for trying, but to be frank, why bother? >> >> Because standards development is very much at the core of Internet >> governance, and it is important for IGC to engage, to the extent that >> consensus is possible, also on such core issues, and not just on more >> peripheral questions like e.g. the choice of discussion topics for the >> next Internet Governance Forum. >> >>> In the couple of days since RFC 6852 was mentioned we've seen almost >>> equal support/opposition for statement. >> >> That is not accurate. We have seen praise for RFC 6852 as well as >> criticism. This is no reason to not at least try to incorporate both in >> a statement. >> >>> And if the caucus does produce something will it make any difference? >> >> That will depend on the actual content of the statement, and on how >> convincing it is written, and on whether it will get promoted in >> contexts where it can make a difference. The Caucus has several members >> who have the right kind of contacts. >> >>> Could we please focus on core issues. >> >> This is a core issue. >> >> Greetings, >> Norbert >> >>> On Sun, Jan 27, 2013 at 5:10 PM, Norbert Bollow > wrote: >>>> [with IGC Coordinator hat on] >>>> >>>> Let's develop an IGC Statement on this RFC 6852 "Affirmation of the >>>> Modern Paradigm for Standards" [1]. >>>> [1] http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6852 >>>> >>>> I'll be willing to serve as editor if no-one else volunteers, but >>>> I'd prefer for someone else to take on this role. >>>> >>>> Who would like to volunteer? >>>> >>>> Greetings, >>>> Norbert >>>> >>>> >>>> Stephane Bortzmeyer > wrote: >>>> >>>>>> It is a good document. >>>>> >>>>> No, it's not. >>>>> >>>>> It refers only to business uses of the Internet, as if the Internet >>>>> were not used for many other things. It was recorded as a comment >>>>> by some IETF members >>>>> but was >>>>> ignored. >>>>> >>>>> It calls for access to the standard documents but it is >>>>> hypocritical since one of the signers, IEEE, does not allow it >>>>> (ITU, the >>>>> main target of this RFC, does distribute its standards online for >>>>> a few years.) >>>>> >>>>> It refers to open and transparent processes but the IETF members >>>>> discovered this document when it was already signed, and >>>>> impossible to modify. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> ____________________________________________________________ >>>> 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 >>>> >>> >> > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 ____________________________________________________________ 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: -------------- 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 From ca at cafonso.ca Mon Jan 28 17:53:02 2013 From: ca at cafonso.ca (Carlos A. Afonso) Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2013 20:53:02 -0200 Subject: [governance] Towards an IGC Statement on RFC 6852 "Affirmation of the Modern Paradigm for Standards" In-Reply-To: References: <20130127123308.689639f3@quill.bollow.ch> <61E2D1C7-09E5-4358-B5BD-B362A084EDF5@uzh.ch> <02a801cdfd1d$5ce43130$16ac9390$@gmail.com> <20130128111003.18a48260@quill.bollow.ch> <034801cdfd49$5f76e600$1e64b200$@gmail.com> <036201cdfd4d$aa0b7880$fe226980$@gmail.com> <13c8142128d.2728.4f968dcf8ecd56c9cb8acab6370fcfe0@hserus.net> <049101cdfd78$4b4cf550$e1e6dff0$@gmail.com> <20130128170533.GB23557@hserus.net> <04c901cdfd7c$56232bd0$02698370$@gmail.com> <050201cdfd81$2a3fdf90$7ebf9eb0$@gmail.com> Message-ID: <5107014E.3000302@cafonso.ca> On this new "hot track", I found this interesting RFC6852 review by Stéphane Bortzmeyer in his blog (en français seulement) at www.bortzmeyer.org. frt rgds --c.a. RFC 6852: Affirmation of the Modern Paradigm for Standards Date de publication du RFC : Janvier 2013 Auteur(s) du RFC : R. Housley (IETF Chair), S. Mills (IEEE-SA President), J. Jaffe (W3C CEO), B. Aboba (IAB Chair), L. St.Amour (ISOC President and CEO) Pour information Première rédaction de cet article le 26 Janvier 2013 Au cours des préparatifs de la réunion WCIT, organisée par l'UIT à Dubaï en décembre 2012, une des propositions faites au sein de la bureaucratie UIT était de rendre obligatoires, d'une manière ou d'une autre, les normes techniques émises par l'UIT. Ce projet n'a finalement apparemment pas été adopté mais il avait déclenché une réaction des autres SDO, qui ne voyaient pas pourquoi l'UIT aurait un tel privilège. Trois de ces SDO, l'IEEE, l'IETF et le W3C ont signé en commun une déclaration, dite OpenStand, dont ce RFC reprend le texte. On comprend l'UIT : ses normes techniques (comme X.25 ou X.400) sont aujourd'hui bien oubliées et, dans l'Internet d'aujourd'hui, il ne reste guère de normes UIT qui soient utilisées (X.509 et ASN.1 doivent être parmi les rares exceptions, et encore, X.509 est menacé par le RFC 6698). Obtenir par un traité international, puis par la loi, ce que les acteurs du réseau lui ont refusé est donc tentant. L'un des principaux points de la déclaration tripartite des autres SDO est donc que l'adoption des normes doit rester fondée sur le volontariat : on déploie sur le réseau réel les normes qui ont un sens, et pas n'importe quel délire issu des comités Théodule de l'UIT, déconnectés de la réalité depuis longtemps. La déclaration tripartite OpenStand a été signée le 29 août 2012, sans discussion à l'intérieur de l'IETF, dont les membres ont découvert le texte a posteriori. Comme la déclaration était le résultat d'un accord multilatéral, il ne pouvait plus être modifié par la suite. Le RFC reprend son texte littéralement, et tout le processus normal de discussion d'un RFC a donc été court-circuité : il y a bien eu des appels à commentaires mais les commentaires ont été complètement ignorés. D'autres organisations ont signé depuis cette déclaration, on peut en trouver la liste sur le site officiel d'OpenStand. Que dit cette déclaration (section 2) ? Après un préambule où n'est mentionné que le business (comme si l'Internet ne servait pas à une myriade d'autres activités, comme le notait le commentaire #193), les global markets et la concurrence, la déclaration affirme cinq points. Le premier est une sorte de clause de « non-ingérence dans les affaires des autres SDO », où chaque signataire s'engage à respecter les règles des autres. Le deuxième est l'adhésion à cinq principes : Un processus de développement des normes qui repose sur des processus clairs et documentés, sans arbitraire, La recherche d'un accord aussi large que possible, prenant en compte l'intérêt de tous, La visibilité publique des travaux en cours, avec par exemple des appels à commentaires qui soient publics (on notera que le développement de la déclaration OpenStand n'a pas suivi cet excellent principe), Un équilibre entre les parties prenantes, de manière à éviter le poids excessif d'un groupe précis (l'UIT est dominée par les États, alliés aux opérateurs telco traditionnels, mais les autres SDO ont en commun qu'elles sont réservées aux professionnels, le simple utilisateur n'est pas représenté), Une ouverture à tous les volontaires qui veulent participer. Le troisième point de la déclaration est un pot-pourri de points souhaitables dans les normes techniques produites (par exemple qu'elles permettent l'interopérabilité, la résilience, le passage à l'échelle, etc). Le quatrième est le plus hypocrite : la disponibilité des normes techniques. Or, si des dinosaures comme l'ISO ou l'AFNOR ne publient toujours pas leurs normes sur l'Internet, si des organisations comme l'ETSI imposent des restrictions ridicules (enregistrement préalable, limite à trois normes accessibles), l'UIT, après de très longues hésitations, a fini par passer au vingt-et-unième siècle et ses normes sont désormais gratuitement accessibles. Par contre, un des signataires d'OpenStand, l'IEEE, ne le fait toujours pas... Il avait été question de mettre dans la déclaration tripartite une phrase comme « The text of standards is made accessible to all, free of charge or at low cost », voire, plus flou, un mot sur l'importance d'une distribution free des normes (avec la délicieuse ambiguité de l'anglais sur le mot free) mais cela a été écarté, sinon l'IEEE ne signait pas. C'est sur ce point que le caractère politicien d'OpenStand est le plus clair. Le même point mentionne la délicate question de l'appropriation intellectuelle, qui affecte tant de normes. Les différences de politique entre les trois signataires (et même à l'intérieur de chaque signataire, notamment l'IETF), font que la déclaration reste très vague, acceptant aussi bien les techniques complètement libres que celles plombées par un brevet, à la seule condition, très générale, que les licences soient FRAND. Enfin, le cinquième point de la déclaration est l'importance d'une adoption volontaire des normes, fondée sur leur mérite technique et pas sur une décision autoritaire, comme indiqué au début de cet article. On 01/28/2013 06:57 PM, McTim wrote: > On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 3:07 PM, Avri Doria wrote: >> >> On 28 Jan 2013, at 12:59, michael gurstein wrote: >> >>> This is a shameful and shamefully partisan and narrow document and should be >>> disavowed by any right thinking individual or group with a commitment to the >>> future of the Internet as a basis for the well-being of humanity. >> >> wow! >> >> so anyone who does not agree that the document should be disavowed, but who rather thinks we should work with them to expand their viewpoint to include civil society is not a right thinking individual. yes as s civil society member who is a member of ISOC and who participates in IETF (though never having gotten to close to the IAB, though some friends serve and have served) I was disappointed in its purely business view. but in general I think the sentiment about technopolicy and its independence from government oversight was essentially correct. >> >> Your absolute condemnations of all who do not agree with you seems akin to name calling. > > I have to agree with Avri here. > > I think the market referred to in the RFC is the one whereby Standards > are either taken up or not. It's not just about people making money, > it's about which Standards people use, regardless of money being made. > > I propose that IGC sign on to it. > -------------- 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 From gurstein at gmail.com Mon Jan 28 19:58:32 2013 From: gurstein at gmail.com (michael gurstein) Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2013 16:58:32 -0800 Subject: [governance] Towards an IGC Statement on RFC 6852 "Affirmation of the Modern Paradigm for Standards" In-Reply-To: <5107014E.3000302@cafonso.ca> References: <20130127123308.689639f3@quill.bollow.ch> <61E2D1C7-09E5-4358-B5BD-B362A084EDF5@uzh.ch> <02a801cdfd1d$5ce43130$16ac9390$@gmail.com> <20130128111003.18a48260@quill.bollow.ch> <034801cdfd49$5f76e600$1e64b200$@gmail.com> <036201cdfd4d$aa0b7880$fe226980$@gmail.com> <13c8142128d.2728.4f968dcf8ecd56c9cb8acab6370fcfe0@hserus.net> <049101cdfd78$4b4cf550$e1e6dff0$@gmail.com> <20130128170533.GB23557@hserus.net> <04c901cdfd7c$56232bd0$02698370$@gmail.com> <050201cdfd81$2a3fdf90$7ebf9eb0$@gmail.com> <5107014E.3000302@cafonso.ca> Message-ID: <070d01cdfdbb$cea23120$6be69360$@gmail.com> The Google translation of Bortzmeyer's blog (below) presents some very interesting points including that OpenStand Tripartite Declaration (RFC 6852) was signed August 29, 2012, without discussion within the IETF, whose members have discovered the subsequent text. As the statement was the result of a multilateral agreement, it could not be changed thereafter. RFC takes its text literally, and all the normal discussion of an RFC has been short-circuited: there's been calls for comment, but the comments were completely ignored. Is this the type of multi-stakeholder global Internet governance regime as facilitated by the "Internet community" that the USG, ISOC and their allies on this list and elsewhere have been promoting so strenuously as a model of bottom-up democracy? M RFC 6852: Affirmation of the Modern Paradigm for Standards Date of publication of RFC: January 2013 Author (s) RFC: R. Housley (IETF Chair), S. Mills (IEEE-SA President), J. Jaffe (W3C CEO), B. Aboba (IAB Chair), L. St.Amour (ISOC President and CEO) For information first writing this article January 26, 2013 During the preparations for the WCIT, organized by ITU in Dubai in December 2012, one of the proposals made in the ITU bureaucracy was made mandatory, in one way or another, the technical standards issued by ITU. This project has apparently not been finally adopted, but it sparked a reaction from other SDO, which saw no reason why the ITU have such a privilege. Three of the SDO, IEEE, IETF and the W3C have signed a common declaration, called OpenStand which this RFC reproduces the text. It includes the ITU's technical standards (such as X.25 or X.400) are now quite forgotten, and in the Internet today, there remains hardly ITU standards are used (X. ASN.1 509 and must be one of the few exceptions, and again, X.509 is threatened by RFC 6698). Get an international treaty and by law, that network actors have refused is tempting. One of the main points of the Tripartite Declaration of other SDO is the adoption of standards must continue to be based on voluntary: it deploys on the real network standards that make sense, and not from any of delirium Theodule committees of the ITU, disconnected from reality for a long time. RFC 6852: Affirmation of the Modern Paradigm for Standards Date of publication of RFC: January 2013 Author (s) RFC: R. Housley (IETF Chair), S. Mills (IEEE-SA President), J. Jaffe (W3C CEO), B. Aboba (IAB Chair), L. St.Amour (ISOC President and CEO) For information first writing this article January 26, 2013 During the preparations for the WCIT, organized by ITU in Dubai in December 2012, one of the proposals made in the ITU bureaucracy was made mandatory, in one way or another, the technical standards issued by ITU. This project has apparently not been finally adopted, but it sparked a reaction from other SDO, which saw no reason why the ITU have such a privilege. Three of the SDO, IEEE, IETF and the W3C have signed a common declaration, called OpenStand which this RFC reproduces the text. It includes the ITU's technical standards (such as X.25 or X.400) are now quite forgotten, and in the Internet today, there remains hardly ITU standards are used (X. ASN.1 509 and must be one of the few exceptions, and again, X.509 is threatened by RFC 6698). Get an international treaty and by law, that network actors have refused is tempting. One of the main points of the Tripartite Declaration of other SDO is the adoption of standards must continue to be based on voluntary: it deploys on the real network standards that make sense, and not from any of delirium Theodule committees of the ITU, disconnected from reality for a long time. OpenStand Tripartite Declaration was signed August 29, 2012, without discussion within the IETF, whose members have discovered the subsequent text. As the statement was the result of a multilateral agreement, it could not be changed thereafter. RFC takes its text literally, and all the normal discussion of an RFC has been short-circuited: there's been calls for comment, but the comments were completely ignored. Other organizations have since signed this statement, one can find the list on the official website OpenStand. What does this statement (Section 2)? After a preamble is mentioned that the business (as if the Internet was not used in a myriad of other activities, as noted in comment # 193), the global markets and competition, the statement said five points. The first clause is a kind of "non-interference in the internal affairs of other SDOs," where each signatory agrees to abide by the rules of others. The second is adherence to five principles: Process of developing standards based on clear and documented processes, without arbitrary Looking for as broad an agreement as possible, taking into account the interests of all Public visibility of ongoing work, eg with calls for comments that are public (note that the development of OpenStand statement did not follow this excellent principle) A balance between stakeholders, so as to avoid excessive weight of a specific group (ITU is dominated by states allied with traditional telco operators, but other SDOs have in common that they are reserved for professional the single user is not shown) Openness to all the volunteers who want to participate. The third point of the statement is a potpourri of points desirable in technical standards produced (eg they enable interoperability, resilience, scalability, etc). The fourth is the most hypocritical: the availability of technical standards. But if dinosaurs such as ISO or AFNOR do not always publish their standards on the Internet, if organizations like ETSI impose ridiculous restrictions (pre-registration only three standards available), ITU, after long hesitation, finally move to the twenty-first century and its standards are now freely available. By cons, a signatory of OpenStand, the IEEE does not always ... There was talk to the Tripartite Declaration a sentence like "The text is made available standards of to all, free of charge or at low cost," or, more blurred, a word about the importance of a free distribution of standards (with the delicious ambiguity of the English language the word free) but it was rejected, otherwise the IEEE did not sign. It is on this point that the character OpenStand politician is clearer. The same point refers to the delicate issue of intellectual appropriation, which affects both standards. Policy differences between the three signatories (and even within each signatory, including the IETF), makes the statement is very vague, accepting both the technology completely free as sealed by a patent, the only condition, very general, the licenses are FRAND. Finally, the fifth point of the statement is the importance of voluntary adoption of standards based on technical merit and not on a fiat, as indicated at the beginning of this article. Other organizations have since signed this statement, one can find the list on the official website OpenStand. What does this statement (Section 2)? After a preamble is mentioned that the business (as if the Internet was not used in a myriad of other activities, as noted in comment # 193), the global markets and competition, the statement said five points. The first clause is a kind of "non-interference in the internal affairs of other SDOs," where each signatory agrees to abide by the rules of others. The second is adherence to five principles: Process of developing standards based on clear and documented processes, without arbitrary Looking for as broad an agreement as possible, taking into account the interests of all Public visibility of ongoing work, eg with calls for comments that are public (note that the development of OpenStand statement did not follow this excellent principle) A balance between stakeholders, so as to avoid excessive weight of a specific group (ITU is dominated by states allied with traditional telco operators, but other SDOs have in common that they are reserved for professional the single user is not shown) Openness to all the volunteers who want to participate. The third point of the statement is a potpourri of points desirable in technical standards produced (eg they enable interoperability, resilience, scalability, etc). The fourth is the most hypocritical: the availability of technical standards. But if dinosaurs such as ISO or AFNOR do not always publish their standards on the Internet, if organizations like ETSI impose ridiculous restrictions (pre-registration only three standards available), ITU, after long hesitation, finally move to the twenty-first century and its standards are now freely available. By cons, a signatory of OpenStand, the IEEE does not always ... There was talk to the Tripartite Declaration a sentence like "The text is made available standards of to all, free of charge or at low cost," or, more blurred, a word about the importance of a free distribution of standards (with the delicious ambiguity of the English language the word free) but it was rejected, otherwise the IEEE did not sign. It is on this point that the character OpenStand politician is clearer. The same point refers to the delicate issue of intellectual appropriation, which affects both standards. Policy differences between the three signatories (and even within each signatory, including the IETF), makes the statement is very vague, accepting both the technology completely free as sealed by a patent, the only condition, very general, the licenses are FRAND. Finally, the fifth point of the statement is the importance of voluntary adoption of standards based on technical merit and not on a fiat, as indicated at the beginning of this article. -----Original Message----- From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Carlos A. Afonso Sent: Monday, January 28, 2013 2:53 PM To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; McTim Cc: Avri Doria Subject: Re: [governance] Towards an IGC Statement on RFC 6852 "Affirmation of the Modern Paradigm for Standards" On this new "hot track", I found this interesting RFC6852 review by Stéphane Bortzmeyer in his blog (en français seulement) at www.bortzmeyer.org. frt rgds --c.a. RFC 6852: Affirmation of the Modern Paradigm for Standards Date de publication du RFC : Janvier 2013 Auteur(s) du RFC : R. Housley (IETF Chair), S. Mills (IEEE-SA President), J. Jaffe (W3C CEO), B. Aboba (IAB Chair), L. St.Amour (ISOC President and CEO) Pour information Première rédaction de cet article le 26 Janvier 2013 Au cours des préparatifs de la réunion WCIT, organisée par l'UIT à Dubaï en décembre 2012, une des propositions faites au sein de la bureaucratie UIT était de rendre obligatoires, d'une manière ou d'une autre, les normes techniques émises par l'UIT. Ce projet n'a finalement apparemment pas été adopté mais il avait déclenché une réaction des autres SDO, qui ne voyaient pas pourquoi l'UIT aurait un tel privilège. Trois de ces SDO, l'IEEE, l'IETF et le W3C ont signé en commun une déclaration, dite OpenStand, dont ce RFC reprend le texte. On comprend l'UIT : ses normes techniques (comme X.25 ou X.400) sont aujourd'hui bien oubliées et, dans l'Internet d'aujourd'hui, il ne reste guère de normes UIT qui soient utilisées (X.509 et ASN.1 doivent être parmi les rares exceptions, et encore, X.509 est menacé par le RFC 6698). Obtenir par un traité international, puis par la loi, ce que les acteurs du réseau lui ont refusé est donc tentant. L'un des principaux points de la déclaration tripartite des autres SDO est donc que l'adoption des normes doit rester fondée sur le volontariat : on déploie sur le réseau réel les normes qui ont un sens, et pas n'importe quel délire issu des comités Théodule de l'UIT, déconnectés de la réalité depuis longtemps. La déclaration tripartite OpenStand a été signée le 29 août 2012, sans discussion à l'intérieur de l'IETF, dont les membres ont découvert le texte a posteriori. Comme la déclaration était le résultat d'un accord multilatéral, il ne pouvait plus être modifié par la suite. Le RFC reprend son texte littéralement, et tout le processus normal de discussion d'un RFC a donc été court-circuité : il y a bien eu des appels à commentaires mais les commentaires ont été complètement ignorés. D'autres organisations ont signé depuis cette déclaration, on peut en trouver la liste sur le site officiel d'OpenStand. Que dit cette déclaration (section 2) ? Après un préambule où n'est mentionné que le business (comme si l'Internet ne servait pas à une myriade d'autres activités, comme le notait le commentaire #193), les global markets et la concurrence, la déclaration affirme cinq points. Le premier est une sorte de clause de « non-ingérence dans les affaires des autres SDO », où chaque signataire s'engage à respecter les règles des autres. Le deuxième est l'adhésion à cinq principes : Un processus de développement des normes qui repose sur des processus clairs et documentés, sans arbitraire, La recherche d'un accord aussi large que possible, prenant en compte l'intérêt de tous, La visibilité publique des travaux en cours, avec par exemple des appels à commentaires qui soient publics (on notera que le développement de la déclaration OpenStand n'a pas suivi cet excellent principe), Un équilibre entre les parties prenantes, de manière à éviter le poids excessif d'un groupe précis (l'UIT est dominée par les États, alliés aux opérateurs telco traditionnels, mais les autres SDO ont en commun qu'elles sont réservées aux professionnels, le simple utilisateur n'est pas représenté), Une ouverture à tous les volontaires qui veulent participer. Le troisième point de la déclaration est un pot-pourri de points souhaitables dans les normes techniques produites (par exemple qu'elles permettent l'interopérabilité, la résilience, le passage à l'échelle, etc). Le quatrième est le plus hypocrite : la disponibilité des normes techniques. Or, si des dinosaures comme l'ISO ou l'AFNOR ne publient toujours pas leurs normes sur l'Internet, si des organisations comme l'ETSI imposent des restrictions ridicules (enregistrement préalable, limite à trois normes accessibles), l'UIT, après de très longues hésitations, a fini par passer au vingt-et-unième siècle et ses normes sont désormais gratuitement accessibles. Par contre, un des signataires d'OpenStand, l'IEEE, ne le fait toujours pas... Il avait été question de mettre dans la déclaration tripartite une phrase comme « The text of standards is made accessible to all, free of charge or at low cost », voire, plus flou, un mot sur l'importance d'une distribution free des normes (avec la délicieuse ambiguité de l'anglais sur le mot free) mais cela a été écarté, sinon l'IEEE ne signait pas. C'est sur ce point que le caractère politicien d'OpenStand est le plus clair. Le même point mentionne la délicate question de l'appropriation intellectuelle, qui affecte tant de normes. Les différences de politique entre les trois signataires (et même à l'intérieur de chaque signataire, notamment l'IETF), font que la déclaration reste très vague, acceptant aussi bien les techniques complètement libres que celles plombées par un brevet, à la seule condition, très générale, que les licences soient FRAND. Enfin, le cinquième point de la déclaration est l'importance d'une adoption volontaire des normes, fondée sur leur mérite technique et pas sur une décision autoritaire, comme indiqué au début de cet article. On 01/28/2013 06:57 PM, McTim wrote: > On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 3:07 PM, Avri Doria < avri at acm.org> wrote: >> >> On 28 Jan 2013, at 12:59, michael gurstein wrote: >> >>> This is a shameful and shamefully partisan and narrow document and >>> should be disavowed by any right thinking individual or group with a >>> commitment to the future of the Internet as a basis for the well-being of humanity. >> >> wow! >> >> so anyone who does not agree that the document should be disavowed, but who rather thinks we should work with them to expand their viewpoint to include civil society is not a right thinking individual. yes as s civil society member who is a member of ISOC and who participates in IETF (though never having gotten to close to the IAB, though some friends serve and have served) I was disappointed in its purely business view. but in general I think the sentiment about technopolicy and its independence from government oversight was essentially correct. >> >> Your absolute condemnations of all who do not agree with you seems akin to name calling. > > I have to agree with Avri here. > > I think the market referred to in the RFC is the one whereby Standards > are either taken up or not. It's not just about people making money, > it's about which Standards people use, regardless of money being made. > > I propose that IGC sign on to it. > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From william.drake at uzh.ch Mon Jan 28 20:11:14 2013 From: william.drake at uzh.ch (William Drake) Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2013 17:11:14 -0800 Subject: [governance] Towards an IGC Statement on RFC 6852 "Affirmation of the Modern Paradigm for Standards" In-Reply-To: <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD23250DF@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> References: <20130126141234.GA21789@sources.org> <20130126224714.GA21920@sources.org> <20130127091003.2e5d7640@quill.bollow.ch> <20130127123308.689639f3@quill.bollow.ch> <61E2D1C7-09E5-4358-B5BD-B362A084EDF5@uzh.ch> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD23250DF@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> Message-ID: <4917D63D-9DC5-425F-B6E1-AA844DC345C2@uzh.ch> Milton On Jan 28, 2013, at 2:52 PM, Milton L Mueller wrote: > How are standardization processes irrelevant to IGF? > My organization has sponsored workshops on DNSSEC and RPKI/BGPSEC, both of which involve IETF standards. Many other organizations, including EFF and CDT, have highlighted the nexus between standards and governance. Nobody is contending standards are not relevant to governance or the IGF. (?!) Some of us think the IGC should focus first on contributing to the IGF consultation process, which it has not always managed to do. It's a bandwidth issue. > > Either we endorse the statement or we don’t. IF we endorse it and submit it to the consultation, it’s relevant. The consultation is about the Bali agenda. If we want to make a contribution saying standards should feature prominently on the Bali agenda and attach a statement about the IETF as an illustration of why then that would be relevant, yes. However, it's not obvious from the conversation thus far that assembling a consensual statement on IETF will be easy to do. BD > > From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of William Drake > Sent: Sunday, January 27, 2013 5:38 PM > To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Adam Peake > Subject: Re: [governance] Towards an IGC Statement on RFC 6852 "Affirmation of the Modern Paradigm for Standards" > > Hi > > I agree with Adam. The IGC was created to provide input into the WSIS and then the IGF. If it runs off and chases other agendas of interest to co-cos or others (cybersecurity, IETF etc.) while neglecting its original reason for being, isn't that sort of doing a disservice to all those who've put a lot of time and energy in over the years trying to get the IGF to work and bake in civil society participation? And if the IGC doesn't consistently provide solid inputs to the IGF consultations, why should governments and other stakeholder groups think it's a player they need to work with when making deals, including in the MAG? In fact, why shouldn't the UN look to other organizations and networks to provide more civil society nominees etc. If the IGC makes itself look irrelevant to the IGF, it will increasingly be treated as such. > > Bill > > > > > On Jan 27, 2013, at 4:01 AM, Adam Peake wrote: > > > Please, just focus. There's a hard deadline for a contribution to the > > IGF (which we missed last year). Meet that and come back to the RFC. > > > > Adam > > > > > > > > On Sun, Jan 27, 2013 at 8:33 PM, Norbert Bollow wrote: > >> [with IGC coordinator hat on] > >> > >> Adam Peake wrote: > >> > >>> Norbert, thanks for trying, but to be frank, why bother? > >> > >> Because standards development is very much at the core of Internet > >> governance, and it is important for IGC to engage, to the extent that > >> consensus is possible, also on such core issues, and not just on more > >> peripheral questions like e.g. the choice of discussion topics for the > >> next Internet Governance Forum. > >> > >>> In the couple of days since RFC 6852 was mentioned we've seen almost > >>> equal support/opposition for statement. > >> > >> That is not accurate. We have seen praise for RFC 6852 as well as > >> criticism. This is no reason to not at least try to incorporate both in > >> a statement. > >> > >>> And if the caucus does produce something will it make any difference? > >> > >> That will depend on the actual content of the statement, and on how > >> convincing it is written, and on whether it will get promoted in > >> contexts where it can make a difference. The Caucus has several members > >> who have the right kind of contacts. > >> > >>> Could we please focus on core issues. > >> > >> This is a core issue. > >> > >> Greetings, > >> Norbert > >> > >>> On Sun, Jan 27, 2013 at 5:10 PM, Norbert Bollow wrote: > >>>> [with IGC Coordinator hat on] > >>>> > >>>> Let's develop an IGC Statement on this RFC 6852 "Affirmation of the > >>>> Modern Paradigm for Standards" [1]. > >>>> [1] http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6852 > >>>> > >>>> I'll be willing to serve as editor if no-one else volunteers, but > >>>> I'd prefer for someone else to take on this role. > >>>> > >>>> Who would like to volunteer? > >>>> > >>>> Greetings, > >>>> Norbert > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote: > >>>> > >>>>>> It is a good document. > >>>>> > >>>>> No, it's not. > >>>>> > >>>>> It refers only to business uses of the Internet, as if the Internet > >>>>> were not used for many other things. It was recorded as a comment > >>>>> by some IETF members > >>>>> but was > >>>>> ignored. > >>>>> > >>>>> It calls for access to the standard documents but it is > >>>>> hypocritical since one of the signers, IEEE, does not allow it > >>>>> (ITU, the > >>>>> main target of this RFC, does distribute its standards online for > >>>>> a few years.) > >>>>> > >>>>> It refers to open and transparent processes but the IETF members > >>>>> discovered this document when it was already signed, and > >>>>> impossible to modify. > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> ____________________________________________________________ > >>>> 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 > >>>> > >>> > >> > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > > 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 > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From rguerra at privaterra.org Mon Jan 28 20:12:17 2013 From: rguerra at privaterra.org (Robert Guerra) Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2013 20:12:17 -0500 Subject: [governance] Towards an IGC Statement on RFC 6852 "Affirmation of the Modern Paradigm for Standards" In-Reply-To: References: <20130127123308.689639f3@quill.bollow.ch> <61E2D1C7-09E5-4358-B5BD-B362A084EDF5@uzh.ch> <02a801cdfd1d$5ce43130$16ac9390$@gmail.com> <20130128111003.18a48260@quill.bollow.ch> <034801cdfd49$5f76e600$1e64b200$@gmail.com> <036201cdfd4d$aa0b7880$fe226980$@gmail.com> <13c8142128d.2728.4f968dcf8ecd56c9cb8acab6370fcfe0@hserus.net> <049101cdfd78$4b4cf550$e1e6dff0$@gmail.com> <20130128170533.GB23557@hserus.net> <04c901cdfd7c$56232bd0$02698370$@gmail.com> <050201cdfd81$2a3fdf90$7ebf9eb0$@gmail.com> Message-ID: +1 -- R. Guerra Phone/Cell: +1 202-905-2081 Twitter: twitter.com/netfreedom Email: rguerra at privaterra.org On 2013-01-28, at 3:57 PM, McTim wrote: > On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 3:07 PM, Avri Doria wrote: >> >> > > I propose that IGC sign on to it. > -------------- 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 From pouzin at well.com Mon Jan 28 21:42:00 2013 From: pouzin at well.com (Louis Pouzin (well)) Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2013 03:42:00 +0100 Subject: [governance] Re: RFC 6852: Affirmation of the Modern Paradigm for Standards In-Reply-To: <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD23250CB@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> References: <20130126141234.GA21789@sources.org> <20130126224714.GA21920@sources.org> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD23250CB@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> Message-ID: About 80% of RFCs are written by US firms employees. Approval based on decibels guarantees a majority for the more numerous US delegation. Internet draft standards are not exchanged with international standard bodies for comments. The real process is driven by US industry, and does not conform to the well wishing statements of the document. Even though the wording smacks of "the flag and motherhood", I don't feel it's worth signing on it. Louis - - - On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 11:48 PM, Milton L Mueller wrote: > I agree with some of Stephane's caveats; we have to be careful not to be > drawn into the IETF culture's paranoia about ITU as that is irrelevant to > the future of Internet governance. I also agree with Stephane that IAB > often acts unilaterally to make policy pronouncements while at the same > time wrapping itself in the mantle of open and bottom up standards making. > > Nevertheless I can't find anything in the document to disagree with. Since > standardization is an essential, if not central aspect of internet > governance, I also can't agree with those who say this is out of scope. The > idea that calling attention to the way forces of supply and demand shape > ICT products and services somehow disses civil society strikes me as the > kind of insularity that keeps civil society marginalized. In particular, > look at the principles enumerated in section 2: it speaks of participation, > fairness, due process, transparency, balance. Why anti-market ideologues > can make this problematic is beyond me. > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From jeremy at ciroap.org Tue Jan 29 03:01:56 2013 From: jeremy at ciroap.org (Jeremy Malcolm) Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2013 16:01:56 +0800 Subject: AW: [governance] caucus contribution, consultation and MAG meeting In-Reply-To: <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A801331538@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> References: <20130127120551.1db0b299@quill.bollow.ch> <51051017.80103@itforchange.net> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A801331538@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> Message-ID: <510781F4.5060106@ciroap.org> On 28/01/13 03:04, "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang" wrote: > One key issue should be "principles". There was a proposal in Baku to summarize all (national/regional/sectoral) "IG Declarations on Principles" (25+) of the last three years and to produce a "compendium" as a first step towards somethink like a multistakeholder framework of commitments on Internet Governance Principles. Bali has to take the next step and the MAG should pave the way for a more comprehensive and analytical approach. +1 Also I would like to see one main session with a completely different outcome-oriented format that is more actively facilitated. In the past the MAG discussed proposals for a more deliberative format, such as speed dialogues (Rio), moderated debates (Hyderabad) and round tables (Sharm). Since all of these were shot down, we seem to have given up trying. Amongst the most important foundations for this sort of format is that the participants need to be empowered (ie. they will produce something at the end), and that the power imbalances between them are eliminated for the duration of the exercise (through the way in which the process is facilitated). So this means the session should be oriented towards producing a specific outcome that addresses a specific problem, through a process of informed deliberation. The speed dialogue idea embodied this very well, and the successive proposals went downhill from there. The point is, that if we do not *try* something innovative like this, then we are accepting the line that the IGF could never possibly come up with any form of recommendations on policy issues, because to do so would inevitably result in ITU-style intergovernmental decision-making gridlock. This is, excuse my French, bullshit. It would in fact be *trivially simple* for us to adopt any number of processes that would result in tangible messages from the IGF. Just to give one easy example, a session, with background materials very quickly summarised up front, could lead into brainstorming "What are the two most important questions to be answered about XYZ issue", then "What are a range of possible answers to those two questions". This may result in, say, six propositions. Then we could have six facilitators who could break the room into small groups to compare and contrast the alternatives, and the groups would report back to the plenary session, ending up with a straw poll. Alternatively, you can just pin up paper charts with each question, for people to record their agreement: see http://www.dotmocracy.org/. This could be a trial run for the use of a similar process, ultimately, to narrow down the areas of consensus and disagreement around the compendium of Internet principles that Wolfgang refers to. I have posted more comments, on the other issues, at http://www.igcaucus.org/digressit/archives/79. -- *Dr Jeremy Malcolm Senior Policy Officer Consumers International | the global campaigning voice for consumers* Office for Asia-Pacific and the Middle East Lot 5-1 Wisma WIM, 7 Jalan Abang Haji Openg, TTDI, 60000 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia Tel: +60 3 7726 1599 *Your rights, our mission – download CI's Strategy 2015:* http://consint.info/RightsMission @Consumers_Int | www.consumersinternational.org | www.facebook.com/consumersinternational Read our email confidentiality notice . Don't print this email unless necessary. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From ajp at glocom.ac.jp Tue Jan 29 03:33:28 2013 From: ajp at glocom.ac.jp (Adam Peake) Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2013 17:33:28 +0900 Subject: AW: [governance] caucus contribution, consultation and MAG meeting In-Reply-To: <510781F4.5060106@ciroap.org> References: <20130127120551.1db0b299@quill.bollow.ch> <51051017.80103@itforchange.net> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A801331538@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> <510781F4.5060106@ciroap.org> Message-ID: How do you feel about devoting a day to a single subject and using mixed formats? For example: Morning: 2 hours of panel or round table ("experts" + a listening audience) Mid-day: Morning session closes with set of questions, challenges. Audience encouraged (as they wish) to join in small groups (self-organize) to discuss any/all issues raised. Use social media to say where a group is, topics selected, language used, provide updates, etc etc. 4 hours including lunch. Afternoon: 2 hour plenary. Groups come back to main hall and share/discuss (moderator act as facilitators,) Rapporteurs might attempt to identify outcomes, report in to a session on the last afternoon. Rapporteurs might be a small multi-stakeholder team, or an individual. Not wedded to any of above, but I think enhanced cooperation and Internet principles both merit much more time than a single typical format session can offer. Adam On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 5:01 PM, Jeremy Malcolm wrote: > On 28/01/13 03:04, "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang" wrote: > > One key issue should be "principles". There was a proposal in Baku to > summarize all (national/regional/sectoral) "IG Declarations on Principles" > (25+) of the last three years and to produce a "compendium" as a first step > towards somethink like a multistakeholder framework of commitments on > Internet Governance Principles. Bali has to take the next step and the MAG > should pave the way for a more comprehensive and analytical approach. > > > +1 > > Also I would like to see one main session with a completely different > outcome-oriented format that is more actively facilitated. In the past the > MAG discussed proposals for a more deliberative format, such as speed > dialogues (Rio), moderated debates (Hyderabad) and round tables (Sharm). > Since all of these were shot down, we seem to have given up trying. > > Amongst the most important foundations for this sort of format is that the > participants need to be empowered (ie. they will produce something at the > end), and that the power imbalances between them are eliminated for the > duration of the exercise (through the way in which the process is > facilitated). > > So this means the session should be oriented towards producing a specific > outcome that addresses a specific problem, through a process of informed > deliberation. The speed dialogue idea embodied this very well, and the > successive proposals went downhill from there. > > The point is, that if we do not *try* something innovative like this, then > we are accepting the line that the IGF could never possibly come up with any > form of recommendations on policy issues, because to do so would inevitably > result in ITU-style intergovernmental decision-making gridlock. This is, > excuse my French, bullshit. > > It would in fact be *trivially simple* for us to adopt any number of > processes that would result in tangible messages from the IGF. Just to give > one easy example, a session, with background materials very quickly > summarised up front, could lead into brainstorming "What are the two most > important questions to be answered about XYZ issue", then "What are a range > of possible answers to those two questions". > > This may result in, say, six propositions. Then we could have six > facilitators who could break the room into small groups to compare and > contrast the alternatives, and the groups would report back to the plenary > session, ending up with a straw poll. Alternatively, you can just pin up > paper charts with each question, for people to record their agreement: see > http://www.dotmocracy.org/. > > This could be a trial run for the use of a similar process, ultimately, to > narrow down the areas of consensus and disagreement around the compendium of > Internet principles that Wolfgang refers to. > > I have posted more comments, on the other issues, at > http://www.igcaucus.org/digressit/archives/79. > > -- > > Dr Jeremy Malcolm > Senior Policy Officer > Consumers International | the global campaigning voice for consumers > Office for Asia-Pacific and the Middle East > Lot 5-1 Wisma WIM, 7 Jalan Abang Haji Openg, TTDI, 60000 Kuala Lumpur, > Malaysia > Tel: +60 3 7726 1599 > > Your rights, our mission – download CI's Strategy 2015: > http://consint.info/RightsMission > > @Consumers_Int | www.consumersinternational.org | > www.facebook.com/consumersinternational > > Read our email confidentiality notice. Don't print this email unless > necessary. > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From jeremy at ciroap.org Tue Jan 29 03:45:31 2013 From: jeremy at ciroap.org (Jeremy Malcolm) Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2013 16:45:31 +0800 Subject: AW: [governance] caucus contribution, consultation and MAG meeting In-Reply-To: References: <20130127120551.1db0b299@quill.bollow.ch> <51051017.80103@itforchange.net> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A801331538@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> <510781F4.5060106@ciroap.org> Message-ID: <51078C2B.7040901@ciroap.org> On 29/01/13 16:33, Adam Peake wrote: > Morning: 2 hours of panel or round table ("experts" + a listening audience) > Mid-day: Morning session closes with set of questions, challenges. > Audience encouraged (as they wish) to join in small groups > (self-organize) to discuss any/all issues raised. Use social media to > say where a group is, topics selected, language used, provide updates, > etc etc. 4 hours including lunch. > Afternoon: 2 hour plenary. Groups come back to main hall and > share/discuss (moderator act as facilitators,) > > Rapporteurs might attempt to identify outcomes, report in to a session > on the last afternoon. Rapporteurs might be a small multi-stakeholder > team, or an individual. I responded to this on the workspace at http://www.igcaucus.org/digressit/archives/79 where I said that I was not sure that relying on small groups to spontaneously self-organise will work. Experience shows that more active facilitation of the process is required. If it happens at all, then it may end up as all the ISOC people together, all the Diplo people together, all the Google people together... It is sometimes better to force people to engage with each other so that they are exposed to viewpoints that are outside of their comfort zones. This is one reason why the Best Bits meeting worked well. -- *Dr Jeremy Malcolm Senior Policy Officer Consumers International | the global campaigning voice for consumers* Office for Asia-Pacific and the Middle East Lot 5-1 Wisma WIM, 7 Jalan Abang Haji Openg, TTDI, 60000 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia Tel: +60 3 7726 1599 *Your rights, our mission – download CI's Strategy 2015:* http://consint.info/RightsMission @Consumers_Int | www.consumersinternational.org | www.facebook.com/consumersinternational Read our email confidentiality notice . Don't print this email unless necessary. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From riaz.tayob at gmail.com Tue Jan 29 03:58:56 2013 From: riaz.tayob at gmail.com (Riaz K Tayob) Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2013 10:58:56 +0200 Subject: [governance] today's Wash Post editorial In-Reply-To: <4FC09B3A-92DB-4FC9-B811-C0146219E6D4@virtualized.org> References: <50FEA64A.4090805@itforchange.net> <51029240.5020209@itforchange.net> <5102A9D4.3070704@itforchange.net> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD2322F6F@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> <5104D63D.70809@itforchange.net> <4FC09B3A-92DB-4FC9-B811-C0146219E6D4@virtualized.org> Message-ID: <51078F50.8050000@gmail.com> Norbert, This for me a is a worrying development. While we disagree, and perhaps I was to rash with Curran who has always been pleasant, Curran and Conrad do provide inputs that are valuable. Is it possible for you to categorise some of the differences as you did previously so that we do not loose these important interactions on the list. At times I share Conrads sentiments - as I am sure also Parminder would: having to explain and refine his submissions of CIR repeatedly etc, as Conrad feels - and this is an important divergence that needs to be "cultivated" without taking hostages... Please feel free (without your coord hat on) to guide me if you feel this is inappropriate. For me there are a number of reasons that stand in the way of Parminder-type proposals that may aid categorisation, that I hope you can "neutralise": 1. Lack or no technical details 2. Political feasibility 3. Policy targetted at wrong political/policy entity 4. Perversity 5. Jeopardy 6. Futility (often referred to as political realism - or it will not fly) I say this in the spirit of those who cared to comment on IT4C submission of TLDs, who were frank and open, even if we could not agree. Hope you can ride this wave... Riaz On 2013/01/28 06:32 PM, David Conrad wrote: > As numerous pointed have pointed out privately, it is obvious that continued attempts to explain things to you are beyond pointless. Apologies for being slow to realize this. > > Since it seems there is more interest on this list in internal issues and position statements on subjects that I personally think are only superficially related to the Internet, I think it best I follow Mr. Curran and go into lurk mode (with junk filters for a few individuals so I avoidhttp://xkcd.com/386/ syndrome :)). -------------- 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 From kabani.asif at gmail.com Tue Jan 29 05:18:46 2013 From: kabani.asif at gmail.com (Kabani) Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2013 15:18:46 +0500 Subject: [governance] caucus contribution, consultation and MAG meeting In-Reply-To: <20130128160554.50c4cfa4@quill.bollow.ch> References: <20130127120551.1db0b299@quill.bollow.ch> <51051017.80103@itforchange.net> <20130128160554.50c4cfa4@quill.bollow.ch> Message-ID: +1 On 28 January 2013 20:05, Norbert Bollow wrote: > Robert Guerra wrote: > > > Quick thoughts: > > > > - Call for proposals: Should be done in an open and transparent > > fashion. I am of the opinion that the call should be done after the > > open consultation/MAG meeting in Feb. That's been how it has been > > done in the past, and works well. > > > > To not do so, would give the appearance that the MAG has already > > decided on issues/topics and is trying to impose them. That, is not > > acceptable. > > Ok, I've deleted for now the demand for an early call for proposals. > > > - We seem to be still stuck on the same nomenclature for overall > > themes that were developed years ago. As I proposed at last year's > > IGF MAG consultations, we might want to see if the frame of > > "Stewardship" that is used in international relations discussions > > might be helpful > > > > - In the proposed schedule below I don't see where issues such as > > Cyber Security, Openness, Surveillance, Rights & privacy would feed > > into. Yes, they have been part of IGF's in the past, but they are > > still key issues of concern for all stakeholders. > > > > - If we want experiment with different formats for discussion and > > dialogue at the IGF, I would highly suggest we borrow approaches > > taken at other highly successful meetings. > > > > Let's borrow from the success of a variety of > > informal/ad-hoc/Discussion Presentation formats (such as TED, "Davos > > Style" , unconfererence, lightning talks, BOF's) are used > > successfully at other conferences such as the IETF, Davos, Tech at State > > and TEDx. > > > > More informal styles of engagement might prove to be a bit > > challenging to some stakeholder groups - such as governments - who > > aren't accustomed to them. Success will require an experienced > > moderator/facilitator. > > I'm not sure what to do with these thoughts - can you (or someone > else) suggest concrete text? > > Greetings, > Norbert > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From dogwallah at gmail.com Tue Jan 29 07:29:06 2013 From: dogwallah at gmail.com (McTim) Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2013 07:29:06 -0500 Subject: [governance] Re: RFC 6852: Affirmation of the Modern Paradigm for Standards In-Reply-To: References: <20130126141234.GA21789@sources.org> <20130126224714.GA21920@sources.org> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD23250CB@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> Message-ID: Hi, On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 9:42 PM, Louis Pouzin (well) wrote: > About 80% of RFCs are written by US firms employees. I think that may be in the ballpark, although I would be curious to know where that number came from. Even if spot on however, it doesn't mean that RFCs are written by US companies. These people volunteer their time and knowledge to develop Standards. Rarely are they done at the direction of corporates. Approval based on > decibels guarantees a majority for the more numerous US delegation. There isn't a US delegation. This is not an intergovernmental process. Internet > draft standards are not exchanged with international standard bodies for > comments. They are published online for all to see. Should they be exchanged with other standards bodies? >The real process is driven by US industry I would dispute this statement. , and does not conform to > the well wishing statements of the document. > > Even though the wording smacks of "the flag and motherhood", I don't feel > it's worth signing on it. It comes from the USA, therefore it is "bad" ? What specifically do you object to? -- 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 From suresh at hserus.net Tue Jan 29 07:42:58 2013 From: suresh at hserus.net (Suresh Ramasubramanian) Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2013 18:12:58 +0530 Subject: [governance] Re: RFC 6852: Affirmation of the Modern Paradigm for Standards In-Reply-To: References: <20130126141234.GA21789@sources.org> <20130126224714.GA21920@sources.org> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD23250CB@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> Message-ID: <8F894B86-78F7-426A-9B3B-351223ADAA84@hserus.net> Not to mention that, by a simple extrapolation of M.Pouzin's logic, you would find 80% of the US participants (all the same delegation, right?) at IETF in full agreement with each other. Which doesn't quite describe the IETF process all that well :) --srs (iPad) On 29-Jan-2013, at 17:59, McTim wrote: > Hi, > > On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 9:42 PM, Louis Pouzin (well) wrote: >> About 80% of RFCs are written by US firms employees. > > I think that may be in the ballpark, although I would be curious to > know where that number came from. > > Even if spot on however, it doesn't mean that RFCs are written by US > companies. These people volunteer their time and knowledge to develop > Standards. Rarely are they done at the direction of corporates. > > > Approval based on >> decibels guarantees a majority for the more numerous US delegation. > > There isn't a US delegation. This is not an intergovernmental process. > > Internet >> draft standards are not exchanged with international standard bodies for >> comments. > > They are published online for all to see. Should they be exchanged > with other standards bodies? > >> The real process is driven by US industry > > I would dispute this statement. > > , and does not conform to >> the well wishing statements of the document. >> >> Even though the wording smacks of "the flag and motherhood", I don't feel >> it's worth signing on it. > > It comes from the USA, therefore it is "bad" ? > > What specifically do you object to? > > -- > Cheers, > > McTim > "A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A > route indicates how we get there." Jon Postel > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From ajp at glocom.ac.jp Tue Jan 29 07:59:23 2013 From: ajp at glocom.ac.jp (Adam Peake) Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2013 21:59:23 +0900 Subject: [governance] Re: RFC 6852: Affirmation of the Modern Paradigm for Standards In-Reply-To: <8F894B86-78F7-426A-9B3B-351223ADAA84@hserus.net> References: <20130126141234.GA21789@sources.org> <20130126224714.GA21920@sources.org> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD23250CB@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> <8F894B86-78F7-426A-9B3B-351223ADAA84@hserus.net> Message-ID: No, I don't think so. Louis' making a valid point. IETF is dominated by US participants/contributors. It's also dominated by certain types of firm, and it's working methods seem to suit a certain type of firm. And that's led to some, notably Telcos to seek other standards processes or to create their own. Adam On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 9:42 PM, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote: > Not to mention that, by a simple extrapolation of M.Pouzin's logic, you would find 80% of the US participants (all the same delegation, right?) at IETF in full agreement with each other. > > Which doesn't quite describe the IETF process all that well :) > > --srs (iPad) > > On 29-Jan-2013, at 17:59, McTim wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 9:42 PM, Louis Pouzin (well) wrote: >>> About 80% of RFCs are written by US firms employees. >> >> I think that may be in the ballpark, although I would be curious to >> know where that number came from. >> >> Even if spot on however, it doesn't mean that RFCs are written by US >> companies. These people volunteer their time and knowledge to develop >> Standards. Rarely are they done at the direction of corporates. >> >> >> Approval based on >>> decibels guarantees a majority for the more numerous US delegation. >> >> There isn't a US delegation. This is not an intergovernmental process. >> >> Internet >>> draft standards are not exchanged with international standard bodies for >>> comments. >> >> They are published online for all to see. Should they be exchanged >> with other standards bodies? >> >>> The real process is driven by US industry >> >> I would dispute this statement. >> >> , and does not conform to >>> the well wishing statements of the document. >>> >>> Even though the wording smacks of "the flag and motherhood", I don't feel >>> it's worth signing on it. >> >> It comes from the USA, therefore it is "bad" ? >> >> What specifically do you object to? >> >> -- >> Cheers, >> >> McTim >> "A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A >> route indicates how we get there." Jon Postel >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From lmcknigh at syr.edu Tue Jan 29 09:04:13 2013 From: lmcknigh at syr.edu (Lee W McKnight) Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2013 14:04:13 +0000 Subject: [governance] today's Wash Post editorial In-Reply-To: <51078F50.8050000@gmail.com> References: <50FEA64A.4090805@itforchange.net> <51029240.5020209@itforchange.net> <5102A9D4.3070704@itforchange.net> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD2322F6F@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> <5104D63D.70809@itforchange.net> <4FC09B3A-92DB-4FC9-B811-C0146219E6D4@virtualized.org>,<51078F50.8050000@gmail.com> Message-ID: <77A59FC9477004489D44DE7FC6840E7B1B3733@SUEX10-mbx-08.ad.syr.edu> There was a practical step encouraged/offered by Alejandro; which was his arranging a meeting for Parminder/IGCers with root zone operators. That could possibly be fruitful. Lee ________________________________________ From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] on behalf of Riaz K Tayob [riaz.tayob at gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2013 3:58 AM To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Norbert Bollow Subject: Re: [governance] today's Wash Post editorial Norbert, This for me a is a worrying development. While we disagree, and perhaps I was to rash with Curran who has always been pleasant, Curran and Conrad do provide inputs that are valuable. Is it possible for you to categorise some of the differences as you did previously so that we do not loose these important interactions on the list. At times I share Conrads sentiments - as I am sure also Parminder would: having to explain and refine his submissions of CIR repeatedly etc, as Conrad feels - and this is an important divergence that needs to be "cultivated" without taking hostages... Please feel free (without your coord hat on) to guide me if you feel this is inappropriate. For me there are a number of reasons that stand in the way of Parminder-type proposals that may aid categorisation, that I hope you can "neutralise": 1. Lack or no technical details 2. Political feasibility 3. Policy targetted at wrong political/policy entity 4. Perversity 5. Jeopardy 6. Futility (often referred to as political realism - or it will not fly) I say this in the spirit of those who cared to comment on IT4C submission of TLDs, who were frank and open, even if we could not agree. Hope you can ride this wave... Riaz On 2013/01/28 06:32 PM, David Conrad wrote: > As numerous pointed have pointed out privately, it is obvious that continued attempts to explain things to you are beyond pointless. Apologies for being slow to realize this. > > Since it seems there is more interest on this list in internal issues and position statements on subjects that I personally think are only superficially related to the Internet, I think it best I follow Mr. Curran and go into lurk mode (with junk filters for a few individuals so I avoidhttp://xkcd.com/386/ syndrome :)). -------------- 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 From lmcknigh at syr.edu Tue Jan 29 09:35:12 2013 From: lmcknigh at syr.edu (Lee W McKnight) Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2013 14:35:12 +0000 Subject: [governance] Re: RFC 6852: Affirmation of the Modern Paradigm for Standards In-Reply-To: References: <20130126141234.GA21789@sources.org> <20130126224714.GA21920@sources.org> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD23250CB@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> <8F894B86-78F7-426A-9B3B-351223ADAA84@hserus.net>, Message-ID: <77A59FC9477004489D44DE7FC6840E7B1B378D@SUEX10-mbx-08.ad.syr.edu> There are a thousand (ok probably more than that - I don't have statistics to back up my figurative number) standards fora; most these days spring up around a specific technology and the companies that hope to profit/have IP (intellectual property) they hope to throw in the pot/capture future royalties from. IETF is far better than most in terms of transparency and openness/non-proprietaryness/global public good-ness, with a narrow purview around - IP (Internet Protocol) - ie internetworking. Things above and below that are someone else's problem/opportunity generally. That telcos hang in 3GPP for mobile broadband specs and then stuff things through ITU when cooked e.g. for an official definition of what 4G is - is I am sure fine by most IETFers. But I thought we mainly cared about - the Internet here? Anyway, with all due due respect to Louis, that more individuals and companies from elsewhere than US are not active at - IETF- layer; is I agree a problem, but not one solved by discouraging participation from others in IETF. Lee ________________________________________ From: apeake at gmail.com [apeake at gmail.com] on behalf of Adam Peake [ajp at glocom.ac.jp] Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2013 7:59 AM To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org Subject: Re: [governance] Re: RFC 6852: Affirmation of the Modern Paradigm for Standards No, I don't think so. Louis' making a valid point. IETF is dominated by US participants/contributors. It's also dominated by certain types of firm, and it's working methods seem to suit a certain type of firm. And that's led to some, notably Telcos to seek other standards processes or to create their own. Adam On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 9:42 PM, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote: > Not to mention that, by a simple extrapolation of M.Pouzin's logic, you would find 80% of the US participants (all the same delegation, right?) at IETF in full agreement with each other. > > Which doesn't quite describe the IETF process all that well :) > > --srs (iPad) > > On 29-Jan-2013, at 17:59, McTim wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 9:42 PM, Louis Pouzin (well) wrote: >>> About 80% of RFCs are written by US firms employees. >> >> I think that may be in the ballpark, although I would be curious to >> know where that number came from. >> >> Even if spot on however, it doesn't mean that RFCs are written by US >> companies. These people volunteer their time and knowledge to develop >> Standards. Rarely are they done at the direction of corporates. >> >> >> Approval based on >>> decibels guarantees a majority for the more numerous US delegation. >> >> There isn't a US delegation. This is not an intergovernmental process. >> >> Internet >>> draft standards are not exchanged with international standard bodies for >>> comments. >> >> They are published online for all to see. Should they be exchanged >> with other standards bodies? >> >>> The real process is driven by US industry >> >> I would dispute this statement. >> >> , and does not conform to >>> the well wishing statements of the document. >>> >>> Even though the wording smacks of "the flag and motherhood", I don't feel >>> it's worth signing on it. >> >> It comes from the USA, therefore it is "bad" ? >> >> What specifically do you object to? >> >> -- >> Cheers, >> >> McTim >> "A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A >> route indicates how we get there." Jon Postel >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From mueller at syr.edu Tue Jan 29 10:06:48 2013 From: mueller at syr.edu (Milton L Mueller) Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2013 15:06:48 +0000 Subject: [governance] Towards an IGC Statement on RFC 6852 "Affirmation of the Modern Paradigm for Standards" In-Reply-To: <4917D63D-9DC5-425F-B6E1-AA844DC345C2@uzh.ch> References: <20130126141234.GA21789@sources.org> <20130126224714.GA21920@sources.org> <20130127091003.2e5d7640@quill.bollow.ch> <20130127123308.689639f3@quill.bollow.ch> <61E2D1C7-09E5-4358-B5BD-B362A084EDF5@uzh.ch> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD23250DF@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> <4917D63D-9DC5-425F-B6E1-AA844DC345C2@uzh.ch> Message-ID: <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD23258F9@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> I stand corrected. I thought we were debating a more general endorsement capability and not more narrowly focused on the IGF consultation process for the Bali agenda. In that case, insofar as we are concerned exclusively with " bandwidth " or our ability to do things, we should indeed focus on the Bali agenda. From: William Drake [mailto:william.drake at uzh.ch] Sent: Monday, January 28, 2013 8:11 PM To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Milton L Mueller Subject: Re: [governance] Towards an IGC Statement on RFC 6852 "Affirmation of the Modern Paradigm for Standards" Milton On Jan 28, 2013, at 2:52 PM, Milton L Mueller > wrote: How are standardization processes irrelevant to IGF? My organization has sponsored workshops on DNSSEC and RPKI/BGPSEC, both of which involve IETF standards. Many other organizations, including EFF and CDT, have highlighted the nexus between standards and governance. Nobody is contending standards are not relevant to governance or the IGF. (?!) Some of us think the IGC should focus first on contributing to the IGF consultation process, which it has not always managed to do. It's a bandwidth issue. Either we endorse the statement or we don't. IF we endorse it and submit it to the consultation, it's relevant. The consultation is about the Bali agenda. If we want to make a contribution saying standards should feature prominently on the Bali agenda and attach a statement about the IETF as an illustration of why then that would be relevant, yes. However, it's not obvious from the conversation thus far that assembling a consensual statement on IETF will be easy to do. BD From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of William Drake Sent: Sunday, January 27, 2013 5:38 PM To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Adam Peake Subject: Re: [governance] Towards an IGC Statement on RFC 6852 "Affirmation of the Modern Paradigm for Standards" Hi I agree with Adam. The IGC was created to provide input into the WSIS and then the IGF. If it runs off and chases other agendas of interest to co-cos or others (cybersecurity, IETF etc.) while neglecting its original reason for being, isn't that sort of doing a disservice to all those who've put a lot of time and energy in over the years trying to get the IGF to work and bake in civil society participation? And if the IGC doesn't consistently provide solid inputs to the IGF consultations, why should governments and other stakeholder groups think it's a player they need to work with when making deals, including in the MAG? In fact, why shouldn't the UN look to other organizations and networks to provide more civil society nominees etc. If the IGC makes itself look irrelevant to the IGF, it will increasingly be treated as such. Bill On Jan 27, 2013, at 4:01 AM, Adam Peake > wrote: > Please, just focus. There's a hard deadline for a contribution to the > IGF (which we missed last year). Meet that and come back to the RFC. > > Adam > > > > On Sun, Jan 27, 2013 at 8:33 PM, Norbert Bollow > wrote: >> [with IGC coordinator hat on] >> >> Adam Peake > wrote: >> >>> Norbert, thanks for trying, but to be frank, why bother? >> >> Because standards development is very much at the core of Internet >> governance, and it is important for IGC to engage, to the extent that >> consensus is possible, also on such core issues, and not just on more >> peripheral questions like e.g. the choice of discussion topics for the >> next Internet Governance Forum. >> >>> In the couple of days since RFC 6852 was mentioned we've seen almost >>> equal support/opposition for statement. >> >> That is not accurate. We have seen praise for RFC 6852 as well as >> criticism. This is no reason to not at least try to incorporate both in >> a statement. >> >>> And if the caucus does produce something will it make any difference? >> >> That will depend on the actual content of the statement, and on how >> convincing it is written, and on whether it will get promoted in >> contexts where it can make a difference. The Caucus has several members >> who have the right kind of contacts. >> >>> Could we please focus on core issues. >> >> This is a core issue. >> >> Greetings, >> Norbert >> >>> On Sun, Jan 27, 2013 at 5:10 PM, Norbert Bollow > wrote: >>>> [with IGC Coordinator hat on] >>>> >>>> Let's develop an IGC Statement on this RFC 6852 "Affirmation of the >>>> Modern Paradigm for Standards" [1]. >>>> [1] http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6852 >>>> >>>> I'll be willing to serve as editor if no-one else volunteers, but >>>> I'd prefer for someone else to take on this role. >>>> >>>> Who would like to volunteer? >>>> >>>> Greetings, >>>> Norbert >>>> >>>> >>>> Stephane Bortzmeyer > wrote: >>>> >>>>>> It is a good document. >>>>> >>>>> No, it's not. >>>>> >>>>> It refers only to business uses of the Internet, as if the Internet >>>>> were not used for many other things. It was recorded as a comment >>>>> by some IETF members >>>>> but was >>>>> ignored. >>>>> >>>>> It calls for access to the standard documents but it is >>>>> hypocritical since one of the signers, IEEE, does not allow it >>>>> (ITU, the >>>>> main target of this RFC, does distribute its standards online for >>>>> a few years.) >>>>> >>>>> It refers to open and transparent processes but the IETF members >>>>> discovered this document when it was already signed, and >>>>> impossible to modify. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> ____________________________________________________________ >>>> 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 >>>> >>> >> > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 ____________________________________________________________ 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 ____________________________________________________________ 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: -------------- 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 From fulvio.frati at unimi.it Tue Jan 29 11:26:23 2013 From: fulvio.frati at unimi.it (Fulvio Frati) Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2013 17:26:23 +0100 Subject: [governance] IEEE TSC special issue on "Processes meet Big Data" Message-ID: <035001cdfe3d$60f15020$22d3f060$@unimi.it> Apologies if you have received multiple copies of this announcement ====================================================================== Call for Papers IEEE Transactions on Services Computing SPECIAL ISSUE "PROCESSES MEET BIG DATA" Website: CFP in PDF: ====================================================================== *AIMS AND SCOPE* The aim of process mining is to discover, monitor and improve business processes by extracting knowledge from event logs readily available in today's information systems. When large-scale processes are executed, e.g., on (cloud-based) service-oriented environments, process logs increasingly exhibit all typical properties of "big data": wide physical distribution, diversity of formats, non-standard data models, heterogeneous semantics. Computing metrics over such "big logs" also requires to handle security and privacy concerns of many participants, and even to deal with non-uniform trustworthiness of log entries. New techniques are therefore required for designing, validating and deploying process metrics in this scenario, as well as for effectively dash-boarding the processes' performance indicators. This special issue of IEEE Transaction on Service-Oriented Computing is intended to create an international forum for presenting innovative developments of process monitoring and analysis over service-oriented architectures, aimed at handling "big logs" and use them effectively for discovery, dash-boarding and mining. The ultimate objective is to identify the promising research avenues, report the main results and promote the visibility and relevance of this new area. The special issue is related to two Dagstuhl Seminars happening in 2013: - Unleashing Operational Process Mining - Verifiably Secure Process-Aware Information Systems *TOPICS COVERED* - Process monitoring on SOA and clouds - Validation and benchmarking of process monitoring - Efficiently mining rare patterns in "big logs" - Scalable techniques for distributed process monitoring - Monitoring and analysis of cloud-based processes - Architectures and data models for synthesizing and handling "big logs" - Privacy-aware computation of process metrics - Securing log data - Log obfuscation and access control - Practical systems and tools for big log analysis and log dashboards - Applications combining process management and big data, e.g. audit *IMPORTANT DATES* Aug. 1, 2013: Submission deadline Nov. 1, 2013: Notification of the first-round review Jan. 10, 2014: Revised submission due Mar. 1, 2014: Final notice of acceptance/reject *SUBMISSION GUIDELINES* Manuscripts should be prepared according to the instruction of the "Information for Authors" section of the journal. Submissions should be done through the IEEE TSC journal website: . Submitted manuscripts will be thoroughly reviewed using the standard procedure that is followed for regular IEEE TSC submissions. *GUEST EDITORS* - Wil M.P. van der Aalst (TU Eindhoven, NL) - Rafael Accorsi (U of Freiburg, DE) - Ernesto Damiani (U of Milan, IT) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From gurstein at gmail.com Tue Jan 29 13:58:30 2013 From: gurstein at gmail.com (michael gurstein) Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2013 10:58:30 -0800 Subject: [governance] Towards an IGC Statement on RFC 6852 "Affirmation of the Modern Paradigm for Standards" In-Reply-To: References: <20130127123308.689639f3@quill.bollow.ch> <61E2D1C7-09E5-4358-B5BD-B362A084EDF5@uzh.ch> <02a801cdfd1d$5ce43130$16ac9390$@gmail.com> <20130128111003.18a48260@quill.bollow.ch> <034801cdfd49$5f76e600$1e64b200$@gmail.com> <036201cdfd4d$aa0b7880$fe226980$@gmail.com> <13c8142128d.2728.4f968dcf8ecd56c9cb8acab6370fcfe0@hserus.net> <049101cdfd78$4b4cf550$e1e6dff0$@gmail.com> <20130128170533.GB23557@hserus.net> <04c901cdfd7c$56232bd0$02698370$@gmail.com> <050201cdfd81$2a3fdf90$7ebf9eb0$@gmail.com> Message-ID: <0ab301cdfe52$abdeef60$039cce20$@gmail.com> I want to be clear... Do I take it that you (and others who want to sign on to RFC 6852) agree with a statement of Internet standard setting "core values and principles" which . does not make provision for "inclusion"; . appears to take as its sole measure of assessment "market success"; . does not include as a core element, the Internet's role in supporting the "public interest"; and . makes provision for "competition" on and through the Internet but not for example, for "collaboration"? Mike -----Original Message----- From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Avri Doria Sent: Monday, January 28, 2013 12:07 PM To: IGC Subject: Re: [governance] Towards an IGC Statement on RFC 6852 "Affirmation of the Modern Paradigm for Standards" On 28 Jan 2013, at 12:59, michael gurstein wrote: > This is a shameful and shamefully partisan and narrow document and > should be disavowed by any right thinking individual or group with a > commitment to the future of the Internet as a basis for the well-being of humanity. wow! so anyone who does not agree that the document should be disavowed, but who rather thinks we should work with them to expand their viewpoint to include civil society is not a right thinking individual. yes as s civil society member who is a member of ISOC and who participates in IETF (though never having gotten to close to the IAB, though some friends serve and have served) I was disappointed in its purely business view. but in general I think the sentiment about technopolicy and its independence from government oversight was essentially correct. Your absolute condemnations of all who do not agree with you seems akin to name calling. As i praised RFC6852 for what it tried to do, though commented on a few flaws, i proudly count myself among those who you beleive are not right thinking individuals. avri -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From dogwallah at gmail.com Tue Jan 29 14:15:02 2013 From: dogwallah at gmail.com (McTim) Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2013 14:15:02 -0500 Subject: [governance] Towards an IGC Statement on RFC 6852 "Affirmation of the Modern Paradigm for Standards" In-Reply-To: <0ab301cdfe52$abdeef60$039cce20$@gmail.com> References: <20130127123308.689639f3@quill.bollow.ch> <61E2D1C7-09E5-4358-B5BD-B362A084EDF5@uzh.ch> <02a801cdfd1d$5ce43130$16ac9390$@gmail.com> <20130128111003.18a48260@quill.bollow.ch> <034801cdfd49$5f76e600$1e64b200$@gmail.com> <036201cdfd4d$aa0b7880$fe226980$@gmail.com> <13c8142128d.2728.4f968dcf8ecd56c9cb8acab6370fcfe0@hserus.net> <049101cdfd78$4b4cf550$e1e6dff0$@gmail.com> <20130128170533.GB23557@hserus.net> <04c901cdfd7c$56232bd0$02698370$@gmail.com> <050201cdfd81$2a3fdf90$7ebf9eb0$@gmail.com> <0ab301cdfe52$abdeef60$039cce20$@gmail.com> Message-ID: On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 1:58 PM, michael gurstein wrote: > I want to be clear... > > > > Do I take it that you (and others who want to sign on to RFC 6852) agree > with a statement of Internet standard setting "core values and principles" > which > > · does not make provision for "inclusion"; it does > > · appears to take as its sole measure of assessment "market > success"; it does not > > · does not include as a core element, the Internet's role in > supporting the "public interest"; and which is epiphenomenal IMHO. > > · makes provision for "competition" on and through the Internet but > not for example, for "collaboration"? collaboration is the hallmark of the RFC series, but that word is not used in this one. -- 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 From dl at panamo.eu Tue Jan 29 14:19:38 2013 From: dl at panamo.eu (Dominique Lacroix) Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2013 20:19:38 +0100 Subject: [governance] Towards an IGC Statement on RFC 6852 "Affirmation of the Modern Paradigm for Standards" In-Reply-To: <0ab301cdfe52$abdeef60$039cce20$@gmail.com> References: <20130127123308.689639f3@quill.bollow.ch> <61E2D1C7-09E5-4358-B5BD-B362A084EDF5@uzh.ch> <02a801cdfd1d$5ce43130$16ac9390$@gmail.com> <20130128111003.18a48260@quill.bollow.ch> <034801cdfd49$5f76e600$1e64b200$@gmail.com> <036201cdfd4d$aa0b7880$fe226980$@gmail.com> <13c8142128d.2728.4f968dcf8ecd56c9cb8acab6370fcfe0@hserus.net> <049101cdfd78$4b4cf550$e1e6dff0$@gmail.com> <20130128170533.GB23557@hserus.net> <04c901cdfd7c$56232bd0$02698370$@gmail.com> <050201cdfd81$2a3fdf90$7ebf9eb0$@gmail.com> <0ab301cdfe52$abdeef60$039cce20$@gmail.com> Message-ID: <510820CA.3030509@panamo.eu> Hi all friends, This so called RFC belongs to a war machine against ITU and really international organizations. Even inside ISOC some voices are claiming that we absolutely need the ITU's good work in Development, Spectrum and Standards. Neither ITU, nor ICANN, nor IEEE, nor ISOC are perfect. Let's aim to get better from all of them. And first, that's clear, a consideration of the "no business - no competition" part of Internet. That's a minimum requirement from civil society. And a consideration of worldwide cultural diversity. @+, best regards, -- Dominique Lacroix http://reseaux.blog.lemonde.fr Société européenne de l'Internet http://www.ies-france.eu +33 (0)6 63 24 39 14 Le 29/01/13 19:58, michael gurstein a écrit : > > I want to be clear... > > Do I take it that you (and others who want to sign on to RFC 6852) > agree with a statement of Internet standard setting "core values and > principles" which > > ·does not make provision for "inclusion"; > > ·appears to take as its sole measure of assessment "market success"; > > ·does not include as a core element, the Internet's role in supporting > the "public interest"; and > > ·makes provision for "competition" on and through the Internet but not > for example, for "collaboration"? > > Mike > > -----Original Message----- > From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org > [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Avri Doria > Sent: Monday, January 28, 2013 12:07 PM > To: IGC > Subject: Re: [governance] Towards an IGC Statement on RFC 6852 > "Affirmation of the Modern Paradigm for Standards" > > On 28 Jan 2013, at 12:59, michael gurstein wrote: > > > This is a shameful and shamefully partisan and narrow document and > > > should be disavowed by any right thinking individual or group with a > > > commitment to the future of the Internet as a basis for the > well-being of humanity. > > wow! > > so anyone who does not agree that the document should be disavowed, > but who rather thinks we should work with them to expand their > viewpoint to include civil society is not a right thinking > individual. yes as s civil society member who is a member of ISOC and > who participates in IETF (though never having gotten to close to the > IAB, though some friends serve and have served) I was disappointed in > its purely business view. but in general I think the sentiment about > technopolicy and its independence from government oversight was > essentially correct. > > Your absolute condemnations of all who do not agree with you seems > akin to name calling. > > As i praised RFC6852 for what it tried to do, though commented on a > few flaws, i proudly count myself among those who you beleive are not > right thinking individuals. > > avri > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From gurstein at gmail.com Tue Jan 29 14:47:49 2013 From: gurstein at gmail.com (michael gurstein) Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2013 11:47:49 -0800 Subject: [governance] Towards an IGC Statement on RFC 6852 "Affirmation of the Modern Paradigm for Standards" In-Reply-To: References: <20130127123308.689639f3@quill.bollow.ch> <61E2D1C7-09E5-4358-B5BD-B362A084EDF5@uzh.ch> <02a801cdfd1d$5ce43130$16ac9390$@gmail.com> <20130128111003.18a48260@quill.bollow.ch> <034801cdfd49$5f76e600$1e64b200$@gmail.com> <036201cdfd4d$aa0b7880$fe226980$@gmail.com> <13c8142128d.2728.4f968dcf8ecd56c9cb8acab6370fcfe0@hserus.net> <049101cdfd78$4b4cf550$e1e6dff0$@gmail.com> <20130128170533.GB23557@hserus.net> <04c901cdfd7c$56232bd0$02698370$@gmail.com> <050201cdfd81$2a3fdf90$7ebf9eb0$@gmail.com> <0ab301cdfe52$abdeef60$039cce20$@gmail.com> Message-ID: <0b2301cdfe59$8f99faf0$aecdf0d0$@gmail.com> That's great McTim, glad to hear it, but perhaps you could point me to where I've gone wrong in my reading of the text... (and also an explanation of how assessment in terms of "the public interest" is "epiphenomal" and "market" assessment is not... I'll take your word (difficult though it may be given what we now know about the process of "approval process" of this document within the IETF) that "collaboration is the hallmark of the RFC series" but it is curious that they would make specific reference to one and not at least equal reference to the other... Tks, M -----Original Message----- From: McTim [mailto:dogwallah at gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2013 11:15 AM To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; michael gurstein Cc: Avri Doria Subject: Re: [governance] Towards an IGC Statement on RFC 6852 "Affirmation of the Modern Paradigm for Standards" On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 1:58 PM, michael gurstein wrote: > I want to be clear... > > > > Do I take it that you (and others who want to sign on to RFC 6852) > agree with a statement of Internet standard setting "core values and principles" > which > > . does not make provision for "inclusion"; it does > > . appears to take as its sole measure of assessment "market > success"; it does not > > . does not include as a core element, the Internet's role in > supporting the "public interest"; and which is epiphenomenal IMHO. > > . makes provision for "competition" on and through the Internet but > not for example, for "collaboration"? collaboration is the hallmark of the RFC series, but that word is not used in this one. -- 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 From nb at bollow.ch Tue Jan 29 15:09:00 2013 From: nb at bollow.ch (Norbert Bollow) Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2013 21:09:00 +0100 Subject: [governance] caucus contribution, consultation and MAG meeting In-Reply-To: <510781F4.5060106@ciroap.org> References: <20130127120551.1db0b299@quill.bollow.ch> <51051017.80103@itforchange.net> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A801331538@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> <510781F4.5060106@ciroap.org> Message-ID: <20130129210900.72681bab@quill.bollow.ch> Jeremy Malcolm wrote: > Also I would like to see one main session with a completely different > outcome-oriented format that is more actively facilitated. In the > past the MAG discussed proposals for a more deliberative format, such > as speed dialogues (Rio), moderated debates (Hyderabad) and round > tables (Sharm). Since all of these were shot down, we seem to have > given up trying. > > Amongst the most important foundations for this sort of format is that > the participants need to be empowered (ie. they will produce something > at the end), and that the power imbalances between them are eliminated > for the duration of the exercise (through the way in which the process > is facilitated). I've for now added to the draft text added a paragraph that's a cut down version of the above two. > The point is, that if we do not *try* something innovative like this, > then we are accepting the line that the IGF could never possibly come > up with any form of recommendations on policy issues, because to do so > would inevitably result in ITU-style intergovernmental decision-making > gridlock. This is, excuse my French, bullshit. If we want this kind of thing to be tried, and the MAG doesn't have the courage to give it a try, I suppose that it would still be possible to organize a pre-event that implements such a format. Greetings, Norbert -------------- 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 From nb at bollow.ch Tue Jan 29 15:19:58 2013 From: nb at bollow.ch (Norbert Bollow) Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2013 21:19:58 +0100 Subject: [governance] caucus contribution, consultation and MAG meeting In-Reply-To: <510781F4.5060106@ciroap.org> References: <20130127120551.1db0b299@quill.bollow.ch> <51051017.80103@itforchange.net> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A801331538@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> <510781F4.5060106@ciroap.org> Message-ID: <20130129211958.243d1453@quill.bollow.ch> [IGC Coordinator hat on] I'm not at all sure what might be a good process for developing a caucus statement using the online tools that we have available. If anyone has a good idea on how to do this well, please jump in and volunteer as editor. Otherwise I'll muddle on (with hat off) trying to somehow get the various thoughts reflected in the online document at http://www.igcaucus.org/digressit/archives/79 Maybe it would be helpful to use that online comments facility more. (I'll avoid adding further paragraph breaks to keep comments and paragraphs aligned from now on.) Greetings, Norbert -------------- 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 From nb at bollow.ch Tue Jan 29 15:23:35 2013 From: nb at bollow.ch (Norbert Bollow) Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2013 21:23:35 +0100 Subject: [governance] caucus contribution, consultation and MAG meeting In-Reply-To: References: <20130127120551.1db0b299@quill.bollow.ch> <51051017.80103@itforchange.net> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A801331538@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> <510781F4.5060106@ciroap.org> Message-ID: <20130129212335.24ca64e0@quill.bollow.ch> Adam Peake wrote: > How do you feel about devoting a day to a single subject and using > mixed formats? > > For example: > > Morning: 2 hours of panel or round table ("experts" + a listening > audience) Mid-day: Morning session closes with set of questions, > challenges. Audience encouraged (as they wish) to join in small groups > (self-organize) to discuss any/all issues raised. Use social media to > say where a group is, topics selected, language used, provide updates, > etc etc. 4 hours including lunch. > Afternoon: 2 hour plenary. Groups come back to main hall and > share/discuss (moderator act as facilitators,) > > Rapporteurs might attempt to identify outcomes, report in to a session > on the last afternoon. Rapporteurs might be a small multi-stakeholder > team, or an individual. > > Not wedded to any of above, but I think enhanced cooperation and > Internet principles both merit much more time than a single typical > format session can offer. Is the text in paragraphs 6, 10 and 11 on http://www.igcaucus.org/digressit/archives/79 adequate? If not, how should it be changed? Greetings, Norbert -------------- 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 From nb at bollow.ch Tue Jan 29 15:27:22 2013 From: nb at bollow.ch (Norbert Bollow) Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2013 21:27:22 +0100 Subject: [governance] caucus contribution, consultation and MAG meeting In-Reply-To: <51078C2B.7040901@ciroap.org> References: <20130127120551.1db0b299@quill.bollow.ch> <51051017.80103@itforchange.net> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A801331538@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> <510781F4.5060106@ciroap.org> <51078C2B.7040901@ciroap.org> Message-ID: <20130129212722.6dd7d87c@quill.bollow.ch> Jeremy Malcolm wrote: > I responded to this on the workspace at > http://www.igcaucus.org/digressit/archives/79 where I said that I was > not sure that relying on small groups to spontaneously self-organise > will work. Experience shows that more active facilitation of the > process is required. If it happens at all, then it may end up as all > the ISOC people together, all the Diplo people together, all the > Google people together... It is sometimes better to force people to > engage with each other so that they are exposed to viewpoints that > are outside of their comfort zones. This is one reason why the Best > Bits meeting worked well. Good point. I've added "(there probably needs to be active facilitation of the process to encourage small groups to form with a good mix of stakeholder categories)" to the draft text. Greetings, Norbert. -------------- 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 From nb at bollow.ch Tue Jan 29 17:57:57 2013 From: nb at bollow.ch (Norbert Bollow) Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2013 23:57:57 +0100 Subject: [governance] News on Enhanced Cooperation WG Message-ID: <20130129235757.74ecfe6c@quill.bollow.ch> Newly posted on http://unctad.org/en/Pages/CSTD.aspx : """ The Chairman of the UN Commission on Science and Technology for Development (CSTD), Mr. Miguel Palomino de la Gala, invites members of the CSTD to provide feedback on the establishment of a Working Group on Enhanced Cooperation to examine the mandate of the World Summit on the Information Society regarding enhanced cooperation as contained in the Tunis Agenda. Download: - UN General Assembly resolution 67/195 - Note: Composition of the Working Group on Enhanced Cooperation Dear members of the CSTD, The General Assembly, at its 67th session, adopted resolution 67/195. This resolution invited me, as the Chair of the CSTD, to establish a working group on enhanced cooperation to examine the mandate of the World Summit on the Information Society regarding enhanced cooperation as contained in the Tunis Agenda. In this connection, I would like to share with you the attached note that I prepared on the composition of this working group, drawing on the experiences of the CSTD Working Group on Improvements to the Internet Governance Forum. It would be very much appreciated, if you could you provide me with your feedback before 8 February 2013. Please address your replies to the following address: crossi at onuperu.org with a copy to the UNCTAD secretariat at stdev at unctad.org and anne.miroux at unctad.org. On this basis, I will share with you the group composition of the Working Group. My intention is to do so by 15 February. I will also communicate to you the calendar for the next steps (including as regards group representative nominations, final composition, etc.) I thank you very much in advance. Sincerely yours, Miguel Palomino de la Gala Chairman, the UN Commission on Science and Technology for Development """ -------------- 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 From dogwallah at gmail.com Tue Jan 29 20:52:18 2013 From: dogwallah at gmail.com (McTim) Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2013 20:52:18 -0500 Subject: [governance] Towards an IGC Statement on RFC 6852 "Affirmation of the Modern Paradigm for Standards" In-Reply-To: <0b2301cdfe59$8f99faf0$aecdf0d0$@gmail.com> References: <20130127123308.689639f3@quill.bollow.ch> <61E2D1C7-09E5-4358-B5BD-B362A084EDF5@uzh.ch> <02a801cdfd1d$5ce43130$16ac9390$@gmail.com> <20130128111003.18a48260@quill.bollow.ch> <034801cdfd49$5f76e600$1e64b200$@gmail.com> <036201cdfd4d$aa0b7880$fe226980$@gmail.com> <13c8142128d.2728.4f968dcf8ecd56c9cb8acab6370fcfe0@hserus.net> <049101cdfd78$4b4cf550$e1e6dff0$@gmail.com> <20130128170533.GB23557@hserus.net> <04c901cdfd7c$56232bd0$02698370$@gmail.com> <050201cdfd81$2a3fdf90$7ebf9eb0$@gmail.com> <0ab301cdfe52$abdeef60$039cce20$@gmail.com> <0b2301cdfe59$8f99faf0$aecdf0d0$@gmail.com> Message-ID: I see we are back on list now, whereas before we were off, but never mind... On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 2:47 PM, michael gurstein wrote: > That's great McTim, glad to hear it, but perhaps you could point me to where > I've gone wrong in my reading of the text see MM and Avri's mails. ... (and also an explanation of how > assessment in terms of "the public interest" is "epiphenomal" We endow the Internet with a great deal of baggage. This baggage is epiphenomenal. At the heart of Internetworking is the TCP/IP suite of protocols, which do a remarkable job of passing bits from point A to Point Z, oftentimes passing the bits via many other points in between. and "market" > assessment is not... Some protocols are useful and widely used, some are not, and aren't widely used. Some are useful and not widely used. This is the "market" being discussed. > > I'll take your word (difficult though it may be given what we now know about > the process of "approval process" of this document within the IETF) As others have said, this is an IAB document, not developed by an IETF WG. that > "collaboration is the hallmark of the RFC series" but it is curious that > they would make specific reference to one and not at least equal reference > to the other... I don't see how that follows logically. -- 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 From gurstein at gmail.com Tue Jan 29 23:29:39 2013 From: gurstein at gmail.com (michael gurstein) Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2013 20:29:39 -0800 Subject: [governance] NomCom selection process; request for advice In-Reply-To: <20130127003621.66061f79@quill.bollow.ch> References: <20130127003621.66061f79@quill.bollow.ch> Message-ID: <0da201cdfea2$7760c4c0$66224e40$@gmail.com> Hi Norbert, As per the below I'ld like to nominate Guru Kwasinathan as non-voting Non-com chair... I believe he is qualifed as per the below having already chaired two (?) previous Nom-coms. M -----Original Message----- From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Norbert Bollow Sent: Saturday, January 26, 2013 3:36 PM To: IGC Subject: [governance] NomCom selection process; request for advice [IGC Coordinator hat on] ... In addition, the NomCom needs a non-voting chairperson. The charter says about this: “A non voting chair will be appointed by the coordinators for each nomcom with the advice of the IGC membership. In order to serve as a chair, it is recommended that a person has served in at least one nomcom previously.” Consequently, we hereby invite the Internet Governance Caucus membership to give advice on who would be a good chairperson for the NomCom. Please give your advice by Wednesday January 30. The remainder of this message announces the details of the random selection process that will be used, so that it will be possible to verify afterwards that this process was not manipulated. The selection will be carried out by means of the reference program code "Publicly Verifiable Random Selection" from RFC 3797 [4], as downloaded from [5]. The file pvrs-0.3.tgz has SHA-1 hash [6] bf68909204174dbb3a9b76b3fc6392b6576fb5f1. The random seed will consist of the seven numbers of the Wednesday January 30 Lotto draw of the UK National Lottery [7] (the six "ball numbers" followed by the number of the "bonus ball"). [4] http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3797.txt [5] http://www.malcolm.id.au/files/software/unix/pvrs/pvrs-0.3.tgz [6] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SHA-1 [7] https://www.national-lottery.co.uk/player/p/drawHistory.do For the sake of completeness, here is again the numbered list of NomCom volunteers (this had been announced before.) 1. Kerry Brown 2. Mawaki Chango 3. Jeremy Malcolm 4. Tapani Tarvainen 5. Fouad Bajwa 6. Gideon Rop 7. Vincent Solomon Aliama 8. Mohamed Samir Zahran 9. Clement Martial Aboudem Bavou 10. Carlos Vera Quintana 11. Mwendwa Kivuva 12. Norbert Komlan Glakpe 13. Julián Casasbuenas G 14. Antonio Medina Gómez 15. José F. Callo Romero 16. Devon Blake 17. Tracey Naughton 18. Michel Tchonang Linze 19. Izumi Aizu 20. Carlos Watson 21. Jose Felix Arias Ynche 22. Sarah Kiden 23. Lillian Nalwoga 24. Asama Abel Excel 25. Philip Fomba Johnson 26. Joao Carlos Caribe 27. Abdul Jaleel Shittu Greetings, Norbert -------------- 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 From charityg at diplomacy.edu Wed Jan 30 02:37:17 2013 From: charityg at diplomacy.edu (Charity Gamboa) Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2013 01:37:17 -0600 Subject: [governance] Wikipedia Article on the IGF Needs Updating [and Multistakeholder Model] In-Reply-To: <51069902.6030100@communisphere.com> References: <51069902.6030100@communisphere.com> Message-ID: Dear IGC List members, I did a lot of work on the IGF Wikipedia page but I have not updated it since then. I am not making a federal case as to what I did because it's been more than 2 years. As far as I know I spend some quality time filling up that page because that includes learning how to use/edit a wiki with the headings and references. There was a lack of volunteers and one person cannot do everything. Just to let you all know how the updates started - a group of us from Diplo started on brainstorming on an email list. But mostly what happened was the effort died down for a bit. After I arrived from Sharm from the IGF, I added some updates. After that I just got too busy with work to be able to maintain the most recent updates. I had to do a lot of grammar and typo corrections because before I started "sprucing it up" there wasn't much in there. I did write some info on it, too, and even translated the wiki to Filipino. I believe some volunteers also translated it into different languages. I suggest that we start with a call of volunteers and have a specific list dedicated to updating that continually. I am not sure if anyone had taken the reigns for it but whoever can, then go for it. I just took the role before because pretty much it was on my lap and I just went ahead. So if everyone feels the info needs to be changed please go ahead and change. If you have anything to add or edit and you don't want to go through the hassles of editing straight from the wiki, you can send the info to me and I will just directly edit the wiki. You may also volunteer pictures you took. I don't have a lot of time to write from scratch because of my my day job that requires a lot of my attention but if you got something for me to just directly add in the wiki, I can go ahead and add it for you. I would appreciate that. I do not check this email all the time but if you got something for me, you can send it via email directly in this address: *charity.g.embley at ttu.edu* Thanks! Charity Gamboa-Embley Texas Tech University On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 9:28 AM, Thomas Lowenhaupt wrote: > Also, Wikipedia's Multistakeholder Modelentry is inadequate and perhaps somewhat simpler to mend. I created the > space some weeks ago and after seeing it, that it sounded like an x-rated > video. I thought that perhaps "Multistakeholder Governance Model" was a > more appropriate heading. And then my attention was drawn away. > > But I intend on getting back to fix things up. Thoughts on the proper > heading are appreciated, as well as some descriptive material that can > explain this concept to the public. > > My plan is to link it into some of the politics and democracy portals that > exist there. > > Best, > > Tom Lowenhaupt > > > > On 1/28/2013 3:04 AM, Paul M wrote: > > Hope this is the right forum to discuss this matter. The Wikipedia > article on the Internet Governance Forum (IGF), is > wanting and in dire need of updating. A lot has happened since Vilnius 2010 > but the article has little to show for it. I would be delighted to work > with anyone who cares to spruce up the wiki page. > > > -- > :-) Paul M > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From iza at anr.org Wed Jan 30 02:37:50 2013 From: iza at anr.org (Izumi AIZU) Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2013 16:37:50 +0900 Subject: [governance] Norbert's hat In-Reply-To: <31akvzWBlpBRFAzA@internetpolicyagency.com> References: <20130127120551.1db0b299@quill.bollow.ch> <20130127170101.4c2cfce2@quill.bollow.ch> <20130128124418.2efb1a52@quill.bollow.ch> <510670EE.7030404@itforchange.net> <20130128142857.50056c86@quill.bollow.ch> <51068D8B.3080501@cafonso.ca> <31akvzWBlpBRFAzA@internetpolicyagency.com> Message-ID: As the one co-co just retired, I also support that co-co could be same as other IGC members in terms of making his or her opinion on the list. However, and I assume it is our understanding, that co-cos are also expected to help the IGC reach consensus on issues of importance. So, in practice, there needs to be some good balance between the two, and making distinction when s/he wares the co-co hat or not could be a better practice (which I did not do in practice). Which one to set as default is, I think, up to the co-co, but in any case, please make it clear. izumi 2013/1/29 Roland Perry : > In message <51068D8B.3080501 at cafonso.ca>, at 12:39:07 on Mon, 28 Jan 2013, > Carlos A. Afonso writes > >> Seriously, I agree with Avri. Norbert (we have three of them here!), our >> coord, is doing fine. > > > I'm not suggesting the co-ords are doing anything wrong. It's the > repetitious tagging I was tiring of. > > But I seem to be in the minority, so like the co-ords in their official role > will accept the consensus view. > -- > Roland Perry > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > -- >> Izumi Aizu << Institute for InfoSocionomics, Tama University, Tokyo Institute for HyperNetwork Society, Oita, Japan www.anr.org -------------- 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 From charityg at diplomacy.edu Wed Jan 30 02:43:49 2013 From: charityg at diplomacy.edu (Charity Gamboa) Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2013 01:43:49 -0600 Subject: [governance] Wikipedia Article on the IGF Needs Updating In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Sorry I missed this thread earlier before I sent my response. But thanks that some of you have really taken the reigns. I would suggest to sticking to facts instead of opinions when writing about the sessions. The wiki can definitely need some sprucing up from people who were really there. I also sent an explanation of what happened to the development of the IGF wiki in a separate email. Thanks. Charity On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 5:27 AM, Paul M wrote: > Thanks Fouad and Tracy. We could start by updating and writing articles > from Vilnius to Baku. > I can give input on both the Nairobi and Baku IGF meetings. Indeed Fouad I > agree a peer review will be needed once any changes are made any > suggestions on who to bring on board? > > > On 28/01/2013, at 12:41 PM, Fouad Bajwa wrote: > > > One the wikipedia resource pages that I have requested people to > > regularly contribute to. Needs a bit of peer review every now and > > then. > > > > Best > > > > Fouad > > > > On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 1:48 PM, Tracy F. Hackshaw @ Google > > wrote: > >> Hi Paul, > >> > >> I can volunteer to assist. > >> > >> Rgds, > >> > >> Tracy > >> > >> On Jan 28, 2013 4:05 AM, "Paul M" wrote: > >>> > >>> Hope this is the right forum to discuss this matter. The Wikipedia > article > >>> on the Internet Governance Forum (IGF), is wanting and in dire need of > >>> updating. A lot has happened since Vilnius 2010 but the article has > little > >>> to show for it. I would be delighted to work with anyone who cares to > spruce > >>> up the wiki page. > >>> > >>> > >>> -- > >>> :-) Paul M > >>> > >>> ____________________________________________________________ > >>> 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 > >>> > >> > >> ____________________________________________________________ > >> 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 > >> > > > > > > > > -- > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > > 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 > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From pouzin at well.com Wed Jan 30 05:27:29 2013 From: pouzin at well.com (Louis Pouzin (well)) Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2013 11:27:29 +0100 Subject: [governance] caucus contribution, consultation and MAG meeting In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: re Main sessions. *Only two *90min main sessions. One on the 1st day, the other on the last day. Interpretation only in english. Reallocate interpreters to most popular workshops - - - On Sun, Jan 27, 2013 at 11:43 AM, Adam Peake wrote: > Resending email sent to the list on Jan 10. Deadline for > contributions is Feb 14. > > Just over two weeks to agree any contribution. > > Adam > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From gideonrop at gmail.com Wed Jan 30 05:33:13 2013 From: gideonrop at gmail.com (Gideon) Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2013 13:33:13 +0300 Subject: [governance] Wikipedia Article on the IGF Needs Updating In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Will be glad to contribute or assist where possible to update the page. Best, Gideon On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 2:27 PM, Paul M wrote: > Thanks Fouad and Tracy. We could start by updating and writing articles > from Vilnius to Baku. > I can give input on both the Nairobi and Baku IGF meetings. Indeed Fouad I > agree a peer review will be needed once any changes are made any > suggestions on who to bring on board? > > > On 28/01/2013, at 12:41 PM, Fouad Bajwa wrote: > > > One the wikipedia resource pages that I have requested people to > > regularly contribute to. Needs a bit of peer review every now and > > then. > > > > Best > > > > Fouad > > > > On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 1:48 PM, Tracy F. Hackshaw @ Google > > wrote: > >> Hi Paul, > >> > >> I can volunteer to assist. > >> > >> Rgds, > >> > >> Tracy > >> > >> On Jan 28, 2013 4:05 AM, "Paul M" wrote: > >>> > >>> Hope this is the right forum to discuss this matter. The Wikipedia > article > >>> on the Internet Governance Forum (IGF), is wanting and in dire need of > >>> updating. A lot has happened since Vilnius 2010 but the article has > little > >>> to show for it. I would be delighted to work with anyone who cares to > spruce > >>> up the wiki page. > >>> > >>> > >>> -- > >>> :-) Paul M > >>> > >>> ____________________________________________________________ > >>> 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 > >>> > >> > >> ____________________________________________________________ > >> 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 > >> > > > > > > > > -- > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > > 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 > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From shailam at yahoo.com Wed Jan 30 07:01:19 2013 From: shailam at yahoo.com (shaila mistry) Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2013 04:01:19 -0800 (PST) Subject: [governance] Wikipedia Article on the IGF Needs Updating Message-ID: <1359547279.92506.YahooMailMobile@web160503.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> I'll be glad to assist as well Shaila -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From ajp at glocom.ac.jp Wed Jan 30 08:53:19 2013 From: ajp at glocom.ac.jp (Adam Peake) Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2013 22:53:19 +0900 Subject: AW: [governance] caucus contribution, consultation and MAG meeting In-Reply-To: <51078C2B.7040901@ciroap.org> References: <20130127120551.1db0b299@quill.bollow.ch> <51051017.80103@itforchange.net> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A801331538@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> <510781F4.5060106@ciroap.org> <51078C2B.7040901@ciroap.org> Message-ID: Hi Jeremy, On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 5:45 PM, Jeremy Malcolm wrote: > On 29/01/13 16:33, Adam Peake wrote: > snip > > I responded to this on the workspace at > http://www.igcaucus.org/digressit/archives/79 where I said that I was not > sure that relying on small groups to spontaneously self-organise will work. > Experience shows that more active facilitation of the process is required. > If it happens at all, then it may end up as all the ISOC people together, > all the Diplo people together, all the Google people together... It is > sometimes better to force people to engage with each other so that they are > exposed to viewpoints that are outside of their comfort zones. This is one > reason why the Best Bits meeting worked well. > Thank you. Yes, could see that happening: diplo might get its people together, or ISOC's "ambassadors", or ICC-BASIS. But what I'm suggesting now is more the concept: That there's a session in typical format so everyone gets some general introduction to the issues, hears some "expert" comment. Then an opportunity (time/space) for stakeholders to discuss freely. Lastly all come back to plenary, hear/learn from others, discuss their ideas, and perhaps this leads towards some conclusion (or Rapporteurs try to distill ideas for taking stock, etc. I think we know there will be resistance to "outcomes" ... and compromise might be the only way to achieve progress.) If the general concept's accepted then all kinds of things might happen over that middle "free" period. Might be structured, or might not. Some might pre-organize a workshop, might be your speed dialogue, might be just people sitting around a table at lunch and picking up on a question from the morning an running with it, might be structured breakout groups. We've a lot of time to think about how to use the time and to warn about potential problems such as mono-stakeholder discussion, I just hope the IGC and then the upcoming consultation agrees that trying something different is worthwhile. Adam > > -- > > Dr Jeremy Malcolm > Senior Policy Officer > Consumers International | the global campaigning voice for consumers > Office for Asia-Pacific and the Middle East > Lot 5-1 Wisma WIM, 7 Jalan Abang Haji Openg, TTDI, 60000 Kuala Lumpur, > Malaysia > Tel: +60 3 7726 1599 > > Your rights, our mission – download CI's Strategy 2015: > http://consint.info/RightsMission > > @Consumers_Int | www.consumersinternational.org | > www.facebook.com/consumersinternational > > Read our email confidentiality notice. Don't print this email unless > necessary. > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From Kivuva at transworldafrica.com Wed Jan 30 09:18:16 2013 From: Kivuva at transworldafrica.com (Kivuva) Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2013 17:18:16 +0300 Subject: [governance] Wikipedia Article on the IGF Needs Updating In-Reply-To: <1359547279.92506.YahooMailMobile@web160503.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> References: <1359547279.92506.YahooMailMobile@web160503.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: Volunteering here on the list might not help much. We should be already on the IGF wikipedia talkpage discussing any objections and coming with concurrence on what is fact, then updating the page http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_Governance_Forum On 30/01/2013, shaila mistry wrote: > I'll be glad to assist as well > Shaila -- ______________________ Mwendwa Kivuva For Business Development Transworld Computer Channels Cel: 0722402248 twitter.com/lordmwesh transworldAfrica.com | Fluent in computing kenya.or.ke | The Kenya we know -------------- 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 From william.drake at uzh.ch Wed Jan 30 09:42:23 2013 From: william.drake at uzh.ch (William Drake) Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2013 06:42:23 -0800 Subject: [governance] Wikipedia Article on the IGF Needs Updating In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <41D4AA49-1A6E-4EB7-B4BD-3E71A9717BE7@uzh.ch> Hi The Wikipedia entries on Internet governance and related issues could really use some work. I've had both undergrad and grad students draw on these and come in with misunderstandings of core concepts, events and outcomes that many of us here experienced first hand and could help to clean up. Given variations in ideological dispositions and views it might require a lot of "some people argue" and "others maintain instead that" ping pong, but if done right it would still be a helpful improvement at time when IG issues are moving up agendas around the world. Probably a lot of folks looking at these and coming away confused at a higher level of complexity. Improving this material might be a good collaborative opportunity for interested folks not only from the IGC, but also GigaNet. Teams could be formed around different topics etc…just a thought, obviously would depend on bandwidth etc. In the case of the IGF entry Charity mentions, there's a lot of good stuff people have put effort into, but also some eye openers. For example, the front end claim that "The formation of the Internet Governance Forum was first recommended in the report of the Working Group on Internet Governance following a series of open consultations" is just wrong, it ignores what happened the year prior in the UNICT Task Force meetings. And it's sort of black box, doesn't capture at all the intense debates and disagreements about what it should be, the mandate, etc. Ditto the debates about the forum itself as it got underway, the mandate renewal battle, etc. There's also not much thematic integration in describing what went on in IGFs. Here one would think a look might be merited at the chapters included in the Sharm book that I edited, which included paper by folks here that attempted to synthesize how different topics had been handle to what effect across the meetings to date. These included Critical Internet Resources: Coping with the Elephant in the Room Jeanette Hofmann.............................................................................. 1 Openness: Protecting Internet Freedoms Olga Cavalli.................................................................................... 15 Diversity: Achieving an Internet that is Really for All Hong Xue....................................................................................... 25 Access: The First and Final Frontier Willie Currie and Anriette Esterhuysen................................................ 34 Security: The Key to Trust and Growth of the Internet Alejandro Pisanty............................................................................. 46 IG4D: Toward a Development Agenda for Internet Governance William J. Drake.............................................................................. 57 Multistakeholderism and the IGF: Laboratory, Clearinghouse, Watchdog Wolfgang Kleinwächter..................................................................... 76 Towards an Internet Governance Network: Why the Format of the IGF is One of its Major Outcomes Bertrand de La Chapelle.................................................................... 92 That's a hundred pages of deep dive on what have IGFs actually talked about in the main sessions; surely something of relevance could be extracted from these. Anyway, just a thought…one would think this would be a nice change to actually construct global public goods that could be of value to a lot of folks going forward… Bill On Jan 29, 2013, at 11:43 PM, Charity Gamboa wrote: > Sorry I missed this thread earlier before I sent my response. But thanks that some of you have really taken the reigns. I would suggest to sticking to facts instead of opinions when writing about the sessions. The wiki can definitely need some sprucing up from people who were really there. I also sent an explanation of what happened to the development of the IGF wiki in a separate email. Thanks. > > Charity > > On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 5:27 AM, Paul M wrote: > Thanks Fouad and Tracy. We could start by updating and writing articles from Vilnius to Baku. > I can give input on both the Nairobi and Baku IGF meetings. Indeed Fouad I agree a peer review will be needed once any changes are made any suggestions on who to bring on board? > > > On 28/01/2013, at 12:41 PM, Fouad Bajwa wrote: > > > One the wikipedia resource pages that I have requested people to > > regularly contribute to. Needs a bit of peer review every now and > > then. > > > > Best > > > > Fouad > > > > On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 1:48 PM, Tracy F. Hackshaw @ Google > > wrote: > >> Hi Paul, > >> > >> I can volunteer to assist. > >> > >> Rgds, > >> > >> Tracy > >> > >> On Jan 28, 2013 4:05 AM, "Paul M" wrote: > >>> > >>> Hope this is the right forum to discuss this matter. The Wikipedia article > >>> on the Internet Governance Forum (IGF), is wanting and in dire need of > >>> updating. A lot has happened since Vilnius 2010 but the article has little > >>> to show for it. I would be delighted to work with anyone who cares to spruce > >>> up the wiki page. > >>> > >>> > >>> -- > >>> :-) Paul M > >>> > >>> ____________________________________________________________ > >>> 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 > >>> > >> > >> ____________________________________________________________ > >> 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 > >> > > > > > > > > -- > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > > 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 > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From avri at acm.org Wed Jan 30 12:27:11 2013 From: avri at acm.org (Avri Doria) Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2013 09:27:11 -0800 Subject: [governance] Fwd: Call for Comment: 'Privacy Considerations for Internet Protocols' References: <669123F2-8F12-4C46-956D-C4A12B5363D4@iab.org> Message-ID: <1303607A-5EF3-439C-ACE2-9F0B86B57DD2@acm.org> for the list's information. and in the hope that there won't be claims in a few years of it not having been made public. this is not a call for endorsement, just an opportunity for review. avri Begin forwarded message: > From: IAB Chair > Subject: Call for Comment: 'Privacy Considerations for Internet Protocols' > Date: 16 January 2013 14:30:34 PST > To: "ietf-announce at ietf.org" > > This is an announcement of an IETF-wide Call for Comment on 'Privacy Considerations for Internet Protocols'. > > The document is being considered for publication as an Informational RFC within the IAB stream, and is available for inspection here: > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-iab-privacy-considerations > > The Call for Comment will last until February 18, 2013. Please send comments to iab at iab.org or submit them via TRAC (see below). > =============================================================== > Submitting Comments via TRAC > 1. To submit an issue in TRAC, you first need to login to the IAB site on the tools server: > http://tools.ietf.org/wg/iab/trac/login > > 2. If you don't already have a login ID, you can obtain one by navigating to this site: > http://trac.tools.ietf.org/newlogin > > 3. Once you have obtained an account, and have logged in, you can file an issue by navigating to the ticket entry form: > http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/iab/trac/newticket > > 4. When opening an issue: > a. The Type: field should be set to "defect" for an issue with the current document text, or "enhancement" for a proposed addition of functionality (such as an additional requirement). > b. The Priority: field is set based on the severity of the Issue. For example, editorial issues are typically "minor" or "trivial". > c. The Milestone: field should be set to milestone1 (useless, I know). > d. The Component: field should be set to the document you are filing the issue on. > e. The Version: field should be set to "1.0". > f. The Severity: field should be set to based on the status of the document (e.g. "In WG Last Call" for a document in IAB last call) > g. The Keywords: and CC: fields can be left blank unless inspiration seizes you. > h. The Assign To: field is generally filled in with the email address of the editor. > > 5. Typically it won't be necessary to enclose a file with the ticket, but if you need to, select "I have files to attach to this ticket". > > 6. If you want to preview your Issue, click on the "Preview" button. When you're ready to submit the issue, click on the "Create Ticket" button. > > 7. If you want to update an issue, go to the "View Tickets" page: > http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/iab/trac/report/1 > > Click on the ticket # you want to update, and then modify the ticket fields as required. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From nb at bollow.ch Wed Jan 30 13:09:52 2013 From: nb at bollow.ch (Norbert Bollow) Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2013 19:09:52 +0100 Subject: [governance] caucus contribution, consultation and MAG meeting In-Reply-To: References: <20130127120551.1db0b299@quill.bollow.ch> <51051017.80103@itforchange.net> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A801331538@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> <510781F4.5060106@ciroap.org> <51078C2B.7040901@ciroap.org> Message-ID: <20130130190952.2023f437@quill.bollow.ch> Adam Peake wrote: > If the general concept's accepted then all kinds of things might > happen over that middle "free" period. Might be structured, or might > not. Some might pre-organize a workshop, might be your speed > dialogue, might be just people sitting around a table at lunch and > picking up on a question from the morning an running with it, might be > structured breakout groups. We've a lot of time to think about how to > use the time and to warn about potential problems such as > mono-stakeholder discussion, I just hope the IGC and then the > upcoming consultation agrees that trying something different is > worthwhile. Is the current draft text on http://www.igcaucus.org/digressit/archives/79 acceptable from your perspective? Greetings, Norbert -------------- 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 From nb at bollow.ch Wed Jan 30 13:13:03 2013 From: nb at bollow.ch (Norbert Bollow) Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2013 19:13:03 +0100 Subject: [governance] caucus contribution, consultation and MAG meeting In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20130130191303.24b6ee31@quill.bollow.ch> Louis Pouzin wrote: > re Main sessions. > *Only two *90min main sessions. > One on the 1st day, the other on the last day. > Interpretation only in english. > Reallocate interpreters to most popular workshops Do you think that severely reducing the weight of the main sessions like this is preferable to the suggestion of innovation in main session format (as currently in the draft submission [1])? [1] http://www.igcaucus.org/digressit/archives/79 If so, why? Greetings, Norbert -------------- 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 From nb at bollow.ch Wed Jan 30 13:26:23 2013 From: nb at bollow.ch (Norbert Bollow) Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2013 19:26:23 +0100 Subject: [governance] caucus contribution, consultation and MAG meeting In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20130130192623.2deba84a@quill.bollow.ch> Regarding the suggestion for an overall IGF theme: Adam had originally suggested: “enhanced cooperation — meaningful participation of developing countries in Internet governance”. Jeremy commented: “I don’t really like the subtitle because it is too government-centric. I would prefer ‘meaningful participation of all stakeholders in Internet governance’.” On the basis of Jeremy’s comment, I changed the suggestion for the overall theme to “Meaningful participation of all stakeholders in Internet governance”. I don’t think that “enhanced cooperation — meaningful participation of all stakeholders in Internet governance” would fly, as that seems to me to be at odds with the interpretation of “enhanced cooperation” in the recent resolution of the UN General Assembly. Now Baudounin Schombe has commented: “Meaningful participation of all stakeholders in Internet governance.” This idea is already interesting because the theme is inclusive and involves all stakeholders from all member countries of the UN. I propose this idea accentuated by offering the following, “The need for effective participation of all stakeholders in Internet governance.” This is to emphasize the importance of the active presence of national actors in the process of decision making on all matters relating to the management of the Internet at the local level. In some African countries, this approach is applied and well oiled. But many African countries are not yet in this logic. And this is where there is reason to believe the strengthening of cooperation. What do the others think? “Meaningful participation of all stakeholders in Internet governance” or “The need for effective participation of all stakeholders in Internet governance.” or something else? Greetings, Norbert -------------- 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 From gurstein at gmail.com Wed Jan 30 13:35:23 2013 From: gurstein at gmail.com (michael gurstein) Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2013 10:35:23 -0800 Subject: [governance] caucus contribution, consultation and MAG meeting In-Reply-To: <20130130192623.2deba84a@quill.bollow.ch> References: <20130130192623.2deba84a@quill.bollow.ch> Message-ID: <10e101cdff18$977975b0$c66c6110$@gmail.com> +1 “Meaningful participation of all stakeholders in Internet governance” M -----Original Message----- From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Norbert Bollow Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2013 10:26 AM To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org Subject: Re: [governance] caucus contribution, consultation and MAG meeting Regarding the suggestion for an overall IGF theme: Adam had originally suggested: “enhanced cooperation — meaningful participation of developing countries in Internet governance”. Jeremy commented: “I don’t really like the subtitle because it is too government-centric. I would prefer ‘meaningful participation of all stakeholders in Internet governance’.” On the basis of Jeremy’s comment, I changed the suggestion for the overall theme to “Meaningful participation of all stakeholders in Internet governance”. I don’t think that “enhanced cooperation — meaningful participation of all stakeholders in Internet governance” would fly, as that seems to me to be at odds with the interpretation of “enhanced cooperation” in the recent resolution of the UN General Assembly. Now Baudounin Schombe has commented: “Meaningful participation of all stakeholders in Internet governance.” This idea is already interesting because the theme is inclusive and involves all stakeholders from all member countries of the UN. I propose this idea accentuated by offering the following, “The need for effective participation of all stakeholders in Internet governance.” This is to emphasize the importance of the active presence of national actors in the process of decision making on all matters relating to the management of the Internet at the local level. In some African countries, this approach is applied and well oiled. But many African countries are not yet in this logic. And this is where there is reason to believe the strengthening of cooperation. What do the others think? “Meaningful participation of all stakeholders in Internet governance” or “The need for effective participation of all stakeholders in Internet governance.” or something else? Greetings, Norbert -------------- 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 From genekimmelman at gmail.com Wed Jan 30 13:42:24 2013 From: genekimmelman at gmail.com (Gene Kimmelman) Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2013 13:42:24 -0500 Subject: [governance] caucus contribution, consultation and MAG meeting Message-ID: +1 -------- Original message -------- From: michael gurstein Date: To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org,'Norbert Bollow' Subject: RE: [governance] caucus contribution, consultation and MAG meeting +1 “Meaningful participation of all stakeholders in Internet governance” M -----Original Message----- From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Norbert Bollow Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2013 10:26 AM To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org Subject: Re: [governance] caucus contribution, consultation and MAG meeting Regarding the suggestion for an overall IGF theme: Adam had originally suggested: “enhanced cooperation — meaningful participation of developing countries in Internet governance”. Jeremy commented: “I don’t really like the subtitle because it is too government-centric. I would prefer ‘meaningful participation of all stakeholders in Internet governance’.” On the basis of Jeremy’s comment, I changed the suggestion for the overall theme to “Meaningful participation of all stakeholders in Internet governance”. I don’t think that “enhanced cooperation — meaningful participation of all stakeholders in Internet governance” would fly, as that seems to me to be at odds with the interpretation of “enhanced cooperation” in the recent resolution of the UN General Assembly. Now Baudounin Schombe has commented:   “Meaningful participation of all stakeholders in Internet governance.”   This idea is already interesting because the theme is inclusive and   involves all stakeholders from all member countries of the UN. I   propose this idea accentuated by offering the following, “The need for   effective participation of all stakeholders in Internet governance.”   This is to emphasize the importance of the active presence of national   actors in the process of decision making on all matters relating to   the management of the Internet at the local level. In some African   countries, this approach is applied and well oiled. But many African   countries are not yet in this logic. And this is where there is reason   to believe the strengthening of cooperation. What do the others think? “Meaningful participation of all stakeholders in Internet governance” or “The need for effective participation of all stakeholders in Internet governance.” or something else? Greetings, Norbert -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From nashton at ccianet.org Wed Jan 30 13:53:37 2013 From: nashton at ccianet.org (Nick Ashton-Hart) Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2013 19:53:37 +0100 Subject: [governance] caucus contribution, consultation and MAG meeting In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <9037149131406025485@unknownmsgid> FWIW, this is a very process-oriented sounding theme - and candidly rather dry. Imagine if you were new to the subject and thinking about attending the conference for the first time. Would that theme excite you? Here are a few thoughts: "Envisioning People-Centric Internet Development" "Meeting the Social and Economic Opportunity of the Information Age" "Driving Opportunity and Development for All" These may not be wonderful, but perhaps they illustrate the concept I'm getting at: a theme should be interesting, exciting, and provoke the reader to 'think different' or 'think big' and be curious about what the conference will hold for them. IMHO -- Regards, Nick Sent from my one of my handheld thingies, please excuse linguistic mangling. On 30 Jan 2013, at 19:43, Gene Kimmelman wrote: > +1 > > > -------- Original message -------- > From: michael gurstein > Date: > To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org,'Norbert Bollow' > Subject: RE: [governance] caucus contribution, consultation and MAG meeting > > > +1 “Meaningful participation of all stakeholders in Internet governance” > > M > > -----Original Message----- > From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Norbert Bollow > Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2013 10:26 AM > To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org > Subject: Re: [governance] caucus contribution, consultation and MAG meeting > > Regarding the suggestion for an overall IGF theme: > > Adam had originally suggested: “enhanced cooperation — meaningful participation of developing countries in Internet governance”. > > Jeremy commented: “I don’t really like the subtitle because it is too government-centric. I would prefer ‘meaningful participation of all stakeholders in Internet governance’.” > > On the basis of Jeremy’s comment, I changed the suggestion for the overall theme to “Meaningful participation of all stakeholders in Internet governance”. I don’t think that “enhanced cooperation — meaningful participation of all stakeholders in Internet governance” > would fly, as that seems to me to be at odds with the interpretation of “enhanced cooperation” in the recent resolution of the UN General Assembly. > > Now Baudounin Schombe has commented: > “Meaningful participation of all stakeholders in Internet governance.” > This idea is already interesting because the theme is inclusive and > involves all stakeholders from all member countries of the UN. I > propose this idea accentuated by offering the following, “The need for > effective participation of all stakeholders in Internet governance.” > This is to emphasize the importance of the active presence of national > actors in the process of decision making on all matters relating to > the management of the Internet at the local level. In some African > countries, this approach is applied and well oiled. But many African > countries are not yet in this logic. And this is where there is reason > to believe the strengthening of cooperation. > > What do the others think? > > “Meaningful participation of all stakeholders in Internet governance” > > or > > “The need for effective participation of all stakeholders in Internet governance.” > > or something else? > > Greetings, > Norbert > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From william.drake at uzh.ch Wed Jan 30 14:36:37 2013 From: william.drake at uzh.ch (William Drake) Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2013 11:36:37 -0800 Subject: [governance] caucus contribution, consultation and MAG meeting In-Reply-To: <510781F4.5060106@ciroap.org> References: <20130127120551.1db0b299@quill.bollow.ch> <51051017.80103@itforchange.net> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A801331538@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> <510781F4.5060106@ciroap.org> Message-ID: <98529DD8-0A73-4958-9A34-F2F4B7AE6FBA@uzh.ch> Hi Like Wolfgang, Avri and other fellow travelers, I am locked up in an intensive meeting at ICANN HQ for non-conctracted parties house [all with remote participation if anyone cares, https://community.icann.org/display/ncph/InterSessional+-+January+2013 ] and so behind on this thread, but glad to see discussion with an eye to a caucus contribution to the consultation. Inter alia, something solid would put the MAG CS contingent on stronger grounds for pushing much needed changes at the Paris meetings. I hope a common platform can be that it is finally time to put to bed some of the old main session themes. At the February 2012 MAG I proposed doing so and trying to organize MS around current "hot topics" that are on everyone's lips. Argued for starting with a MS on human rights and was shot down by other SGs who felt that change would be risky, premature, etc. But things have moved on since then, and I think there is growing recognition that marching through generic sessions on, e.g. security openness privacy and access and diversity is, together with the multiplication of workshop tracks, draining the MS of energy and relevance. So we might be able to get a lot further this time if there's a concerted effort that enjoys strong backing. Three suggestions echoing Adam: On Jan 29, 2013, at 12:33 AM, Adam Peake wrote: > How do you feel about devoting a day to a single subject and using > mixed formats? 1. I like this, and suggested in Vilnius that a full day on IG4D and developing country concerns that drilled down into concrete challenges rather than floating around generalities with an eye to outlining alternative solutions would be useful. No takers on that idea, but I still like having a focused bit. How about a somewhat orthogonal focus: regional, rather than single issue. We go around the world without really frontally engaging the range of challenges present in particular regions, or using the event to do serious outreach to stakeholders, mobilizing them to engage in IGF. So why not a day on IG in Asia in Bali? Encourage MAG et al to make a serious effort to draw in people from the host country and surrounding to talk about some of the fast moving and often conflictual developments going on there? Mixed formats—informational bits, SG views, debates, etc. > > Not wedded to any of above, but I think enhanced cooperation and > Internet principles both merit much more time than a single typical > format session can offer. 2. Enhanced cooperation seems like a must given the debates around it in CSTD and Baku; does anyone believe we should not be pushing for a MS on this? 3. Principles is certainly a possibility, but it would need to be a lot stronger than the first crack at it Baku. Bill -------------- 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 From pouzin at well.com Wed Jan 30 14:45:51 2013 From: pouzin at well.com (Louis Pouzin (well)) Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2013 20:45:51 +0100 Subject: [governance] A 2008 manifesto penned by Aaron Swartz In-Reply-To: <50F95A03.6090602@gmail.com> References: <50F95A03.6090602@gmail.com> Message-ID: On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 3:19 PM, Riaz K Tayob wrote: > > http://archive.org/stream/GuerillaOpenAccessManifesto/Goamjuly2008_djvu.txt > - - - Aaron is dead right. I have to pay ACM digital library $15 to get a copy of my own article published in AFIPS '76 NCC. How come the author gets naught ? This is sheer scam, protected by US IP laws. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From nne75 at yahoo.com Wed Jan 30 15:28:19 2013 From: nne75 at yahoo.com (Nnenna) Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2013 12:28:19 -0800 (PST) Subject: [governance] caucus contribution, consultation and MAG meeting In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1359577699.47017.YahooMailNeo@web120106.mail.ne1.yahoo.com>  I will +1"Meaningful participation of all stakeholders in Internet governance" but asking myself if "engagement" is not a better expected result than "participation".. Hence preference for "Meaningful engagement of all stakeholders in Internet governance" Best N Nnenna  Nwakanma |  Founder and CEO, NNENNA.ORG  |  Consultants Information | Communications | Technology and Events | for Development Cote d'Ivoire (+225)| Tel: 225 27144 | Fax  224 26471 |Mob. 07416820 Ghana: +233 249561345| Nigeria: +234 8101887065| http://www.nnenna.org nnenna at nnenna.org| @nnenna | Skype - nnenna75 | nnennaorg.blogspot.com ________________________________ From: Gene Kimmelman To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; gurstein at gmail.com; nb at bollow.ch Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2013 6:42 PM Subject: RE: [governance] caucus contribution, consultation and MAG meeting +1 -------- Original message -------- From: michael gurstein Date: To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org,'Norbert Bollow' Subject: RE: [governance] caucus contribution, consultation and MAG meeting +1 “Meaningful participation of all stakeholders in Internet governance” M -----Original Message----- From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Norbert Bollow Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2013 10:26 AM To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org Subject: Re: [governance] caucus contribution, consultation and MAG meeting Regarding the suggestion for an overall IGF theme: Adam had originally suggested: “enhanced cooperation — meaningful participation of developing countries in Internet governance”. Jeremy commented: “I don’t really like the subtitle because it is too government-centric. I would prefer ‘meaningful participation of all stakeholders in Internet governance’.” On the basis of Jeremy’s comment, I changed the suggestion for the overall theme to “Meaningful participation of all stakeholders in Internet governance”. I don’t think that “enhanced cooperation — meaningful participation of all stakeholders in Internet governance” would fly, as that seems to me to be at odds with the interpretation of “enhanced cooperation” in the recent resolution of the UN General Assembly. Now Baudounin Schombe has commented:   “Meaningful participation of all stakeholders in Internet governance.”   This idea is already interesting because the theme is inclusive and   involves all stakeholders from all member countries of the UN. I   propose this idea accentuated by offering the following, “The need for   effective participation of all stakeholders in Internet governance.”   This is to emphasize the importance of the active presence of national   actors in the process of decision making on all matters relating to   the management of the Internet at the local level. In some African   countries, this approach is applied and well oiled. But many African   countries are not yet in this logic. And this is where there is reason   to believe the strengthening of cooperation. What do the others think? “Meaningful participation of all stakeholders in Internet governance” or “The need for effective participation of all stakeholders in Internet governance.” or something else? Greetings, Norbert ____________________________________________________________ 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: -------------- 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 From joana at varonferraz.com Wed Jan 30 16:15:55 2013 From: joana at varonferraz.com (Joana Varon) Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2013 19:15:55 -0200 Subject: [bestbits] [governance] Multistakeholder Roles and Responsibilities In-Reply-To: <50FCEFC5.8010008@ciroap.org> References: <01c801cdf457$f76a3fc0$e63ebf40$@gmail.com> <50F763C0.5070907@ciroap.org> <50F8D10B.3010109@ciroap.org> <20130118224941.556b0653@quill.bollow.ch> <50FCEFC5.8010008@ciroap.org> Message-ID: Dear Wolfgang, Anriette, Deborah, Jeremy and all, Sorry for the late reply after the sympathy some have expressed on drafting a letter highlighting the promises of Dr Touré at the WCIT SC meeting. I was approaching the Brazilian government for support on our demand for space and participation of civil society organizations on ITU processes. Though showing solidarity with the cause, Brazilian government (or our telecom regulatory agency responsible for representing the country at ITU) has signaled that WTPF is not the proper sphere to submit extensive contribution regarding CS participation, the plenipotentiary would be so. So, as far as I know, Brazil will submit a contribution to WTPF only generally speaking about openness and transparency, but not presenting a particular proposal for change in the mechanisms for civil society participation. In that sense, they have also addressed the existence of Informal Experts Group for WTPF, highlighting that: "At its session in 2012, the Council agreed that all relevant stakeholders should participate in the work of the IEG so as to contribute their unique perspective to the preparatory process, based on the roles and responsibilities that the stakeholders may have under Paragraph 35 of the Tunis Agenda (2005). Consequently, participation in the work of the IEG will be open to stakeholders in accordance with Council decision, taking into account Decision 562 and the need to maintain a balanced group of experts, and also room and seating capacity for IEG meetings at ITU headquarters in Geneva. Relevant stakeholders are invited to express their interest in participating in the work of the IEG by completing a *request form. "* http://www.itu.int/en/wtpf-13/Pages/ieg.aspx http://www.itu.int/en/wtpf-13/Documents/request%20form.docx Well, this is surely not satisfactory, so, with that in mind, I wonder if we should go for that joined CS letter focusing on WTPF and stressing previous commitments from the Secretary General, do we still have time? Or, for the ones how are more aware of UN bodies internal procedures, do we have to wait the loooong time for the plenipot? What could we grasp right now? Kind regards, Joana Joana Varon Ferraz Centro de Tecnologia e Sociedade (CTS-FGV) http://direitorio.fgv.br/cts/ www.freenetfilm.org @joana_varon On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 4:35 AM, Jeremy Malcolm wrote: > On 19/01/13 05:49, Norbert Bollow wrote: > > Jeremy Malcolm wrote: > > Actually I put together a system that is meant to achieve that: > http://a2knetwork.org/meetings/ > > Anyone who registers can list a meeting there and say whether they are > attending, and can post a short report there. It supports multiple > reports, too, in the case that more than one delegation is attending. > The main purpose is to identify where there are gaps - important > meetings that nobody is covering. But it only works if enough people > use it, so please do. > > So this is intended for all of civil society, rather than just the > Consumer Movement, to use? > > If yes, then I would suggest that that should be made clearer on the > website. > > > It was originally mainly for CI's consumer group members, but it is clear > that it won't be useful unless it is open to others. In the longer term I > need to look at spinning it off to a more broadly based network, and making > it much nicer like the infojustice-calendar one. I already put in place a > simple Internet governance calendar system for the IGC ( > http://www.igcaucus.org/calendar), but it hasn't been much used and could > also be wrapped into the above. I am trying to get funding to support the > Best Bits network, mainly as a travel fund for events, but some Web > development work such as this will also be included. > > > -- > > *Dr Jeremy Malcolm > Senior Policy Officer > Consumers International | the global campaigning voice for consumers* > Office for Asia-Pacific and the Middle East > Lot 5-1 Wisma WIM, 7 Jalan Abang Haji Openg, TTDI, 60000 Kuala Lumpur, > Malaysia > Tel: +60 3 7726 1599 > > *Your rights, our mission – download CI's Strategy 2015:* > http://consint.info/RightsMission > > @Consumers_Int | www.consumersinternational.org | > www.facebook.com/consumersinternational > > Read our email confidentiality notice. > Don't print this email unless necessary. > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From gurstein at gmail.com Wed Jan 30 16:22:28 2013 From: gurstein at gmail.com (michael gurstein) Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2013 13:22:28 -0800 Subject: [governance] Are Techies from Venus and Non-techies from Mars :) Message-ID: <119d01cdff2f$f1bf3c00$d53db400$@gmail.com> In the course of some private discussions with techie colleagues concerning my comments on RFC 6852 it fairly quickly became clear that we were using the terminology around "competition"and "collaboration" in quite different--in fact, diametrically opposite, ways. For me "competition" evokes market based relationships and in fact, in most policy discourses "competition" is generally used as a code word for the pursuit of private interests and "free markets" a la the Washington Consensus actively promoting the opening up of telecom markets globally (as Milton quite correctly, if disparagingly, understood in his reply to my original comments). Similarly for me "collaboration" refers to the joint puruit of common goals (as for example, social collaboration in support of the public interest, or p2p relationships, social solidarity and so on) and in a policy context would be appropriate to interpose as a balance to a position supporting "competition". For my tech colleagues the understanding, at least according to two non-communicating tech folks was that "competition" is seen as being the means by which to "limit the power of otherwise overly powerful corporations and cartels". While on the other hand "collaboration" needs to be controlled "otherwise it will lead to the formation of harmful cartels". (While these latter uses of the terms are clearly correct they would never have occurred to me, at least, as being primary definitions that might be used in a document such as RFC 6852.) (As an aside, I'm wondering whether at least some of the disputes that have been recurrent themes of the IGC discussions might not have similar origins in rather profound domain centric mutual misunderstandings as to the use of quite common terms.) M -------------- 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 From nb at bollow.ch Wed Jan 30 16:35:33 2013 From: nb at bollow.ch (Norbert Bollow) Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2013 22:35:33 +0100 Subject: [governance] NomCom update Message-ID: <20130130223533.077cea48@quill.bollow.ch> [IGC Coordinator hat on] Dear all Today's lotto numbers from the UK National Lottery are in: 9 10 24 43 47 48 5 This results in the following random selection of members for the NomCom for the Enhanced Cooperation WG: 17) Tracey Naughton 16) Devon Blake 21) Jose Felix Arias Ynche 23) Lillian Nalwoga 14) Antonio Medina Gómez The reserves are: 22) Sarah Kiden (first reserve) 20) Carlos Watson (second reserve) According to the Charter, appointing the Non-Voting Chair is a responsibility of the coordinators, with the advice of the IGC membership. (The deadline for such advice is the end of today January 30.) I hope that we will be able to announce an appointment soon. Thereafter the NomCom will be able to start working on determining the selection criteria for IGC nominees for the Enhanced Cooperation WG. I expect that the NomCom will also in due course announce how persons interested in being recommended by the IGC for the Enhanced Cooperation WG can express their interest, and what supporting documentation should be submitted to the NomCom. (I'd expect the specification of the supporting documentation to depend on the NomCom's choice of selection criteria, so let's not be too impatient in regard to that announcement.) Greetings, Norbert -------------- 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 From nb at bollow.ch Wed Jan 30 17:12:03 2013 From: nb at bollow.ch (Norbert Bollow) Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2013 23:12:03 +0100 Subject: [governance] RFC 6852: Affirmation of the Modern Paradigm for Standards--Some Comments In-Reply-To: <77A59FC9477004489D44DE7FC6840E7B1B2F58@SUEX10-mbx-08.ad.syr.edu> References: <02cf01cdfbeb$73fed7e0$5bfc87a0$@gmail.com> <77A59FC9477004489D44DE7FC6840E7B1B2F58@SUEX10-mbx-08.ad.syr.edu> Message-ID: <20130130231203.4769093f@quill.bollow.ch> Lee W McKnight wrote: > An offer of a quote from a standards-knowledgable co-coordinator like > Norbert on behalf of IGC might be well-received, eve if it includes > some form of 'but...' along the lines of Michael's additions. I'd like to credit Michael for pointing out that RFC 6852 may be revealing some fundamentally flawed ideology that may be underlying much of what we (the tech community) have been doing. I think that this problem is much bigger than just standardization processes, and it seems to me that in IETF in practice these problems are less pronounced than almost anywhere else. So definitely I wouldn't want to point a critical finger at IETF here. But where there are problems there is a need for developing a strategy to address them. In addition to the points of concern already mentioned by Michael and Stephane, in reading RFC 6852 I find myself seriously concerned about the following: 1. “Standards activities are not exclusively dominated by any particular person, company or interest group” is a very weak definition of “Balance”. Compare for a contrast the following passage from ISO: It is ISO’s aim and expectation that each of its International Standards represents a worldwide consensus and responds to global market needs. In order to achieve this aim, it has been recognized that special measures are needed in particular to ensure that the needs of developing countries are taken into account in ISO’s technical work. One such measure is the inclusion of specific provisions for "twinning", i.e. partnerships between developed and developing countries. http://www.iso.org/sites/directives/directives.html#toc_marker-1 ISO may not be fully succeeding in realizing the objective of a true worldwide consensus, but at least the problem is acknowledged and measures are taken to address it. 2. The document declares the development of standards under so-called “fair, reasonable, and non-discriminatory terms (FRAND)” acceptable. What FRAND actually means is that patent holders are allowed to introduce patented concepts into the standard and then (within the limits of what courts of law judge to be “fair”, “reasonable” and “non-discriminatory”) collect royalties whenever a product conforms to the standard. Furthermore, in spite of using the words “non-discriminatory”, this type of intellectual property rules seriously discriminates against Free and Open Source Software (FOSS) implementations. 3. Voluntary adoption and “success is determined by the market” is declared to be the ultimate decision making authority on adoption of standards. That ideology leaves no room for government decisions to make some standards compulsory which are important even if the adoption is not effectively driven by market forces, e.g. standards to ensure accessibility by persons with disabilities. It also leaves no room for allowing market failures, such as when companies with dominant market position refuse to participate in standardization of important interoperability interfaces, to be addressed by decisions of competition authorities to make standards compulsory for such companies. 4. In view of the above concerns, I find it worrying that the document is titled “Affirmation of the Modern Paradigm for Standards”, implying that no improvements should be expected anytime soon. Greetings, Norbert -------------- 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 From kerry at kdbsystems.com Wed Jan 30 17:42:37 2013 From: kerry at kdbsystems.com (Kerry Brown) Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2013 22:42:37 +0000 Subject: [governance] Are Techies from Venus and Non-techies from Mars :) In-Reply-To: <119d01cdff2f$f1bf3c00$d53db400$@gmail.com> References: <119d01cdff2f$f1bf3c00$d53db400$@gmail.com> Message-ID: I think you have hit on something here. I don't know if the divide is techie and non-techie but it certainly seems to me that not everyone on this list or even in the greater context of other Internet governance forums thinks of key words like competition or collaboration in the same way. I find I am often at a loss to understand where someone is coming from until we start defining the terms we are using. Then as often as not we find ourselves in agreement where before we weren't. In the case of competition and collaboration I find myself very much on the techie side of your definitions. I was somewhat baffled at some of the conversation. Now that you have defined how you understand the terms it begins to make sense. Kerry Brown > -----Original Message----- > From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance- > request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of michael gurstein > Sent: January-30-13 1:22 PM > To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org > Subject: [governance] Are Techies from Venus and Non-techies from Mars :) > > In the course of some private discussions with techie colleagues concerning > my comments on RFC 6852 it fairly quickly became clear that we were using > the terminology around "competition"and "collaboration" in quite different-- > in fact, diametrically opposite, ways. > > For me "competition" evokes market based relationships and in fact, in most > policy discourses "competition" is generally used as a code word for the > pursuit of private interests and "free markets" a la the Washington > Consensus actively promoting the opening up of telecom markets globally (as > Milton quite correctly, if disparagingly, understood in his reply to my original > comments). Similarly for me "collaboration" refers to the joint puruit of > common goals (as for example, social collaboration in support of the public > interest, or p2p relationships, social solidarity and so on) and in a policy > context would be appropriate to interpose as a balance to a position > supporting "competition". > > For my tech colleagues the understanding, at least according to two non- > communicating tech folks was that "competition" is seen as being the means > by which to "limit the power of otherwise overly powerful corporations and > cartels". While on the other hand "collaboration" needs to be controlled > "otherwise it will lead to the formation of harmful cartels". (While these > latter uses of the terms are clearly correct they would never have occurred > to me, at least, as being primary definitions that might be used in a document > such as RFC 6852.) > > (As an aside, I'm wondering whether at least some of the disputes that have > been recurrent themes of the IGC discussions might not have similar origins > in rather profound domain centric mutual misunderstandings as to the use of > quite common terms.) > > M > -------------- 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 From suresh at hserus.net Wed Jan 30 18:58:50 2013 From: suresh at hserus.net (Suresh Ramasubramanian) Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2013 05:28:50 +0530 Subject: [governance] Are Techies from Venus and Non-techies from Mars :) In-Reply-To: References: <119d01cdff2f$f1bf3c00$d53db400$@gmail.com> Message-ID: <31212067-0D03-4FBD-A6B1-D1A1C014CCB4@hserus.net> I am afraid I have to call myself a techie of sorts, but I have never seen competition policy as being solely about limiting cartels. Though, monopolies of one kind or the other, especially state sanctioned ones, are current or past significant drivers of competition policy in telecom in some countries so I can see where that narrow view might originate, The divide at least here seems to be leftist ideology (with perhaps some marked hostility to the current system) supposedly espousing the causes of "the south" among some commentators versus what I would describe as a more centrist plank (which has been described as right wing on occasion) among others that is focused on hands on development. The key word I keep seeing differentiated is "policy" which seems to be taken to mean "politics" by some and not by others, and by extension, best practices and administration on one side, and an effort to gain control on the other. --srs (iPad) On 31-Jan-2013, at 4:12, Kerry Brown wrote: > I think you have hit on something here. I don't know if the divide is techie and non-techie but it certainly seems to me that not everyone on this list or even in the greater context of other Internet governance forums thinks of key words like competition or collaboration in the same way. I find I am often at a loss to understand where someone is coming from until we start defining the terms we are using. Then as often as not we find ourselves in agreement where before we weren't. In the case of competition and collaboration I find myself very much on the techie side of your definitions. I was somewhat baffled at some of the conversation. Now that you have defined how you understand the terms it begins to make sense. > > Kerry Brown > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance- >> request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of michael gurstein >> Sent: January-30-13 1:22 PM >> To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org >> Subject: [governance] Are Techies from Venus and Non-techies from Mars :) >> >> In the course of some private discussions with techie colleagues concerning >> my comments on RFC 6852 it fairly quickly became clear that we were using >> the terminology around "competition"and "collaboration" in quite different-- >> in fact, diametrically opposite, ways. >> >> For me "competition" evokes market based relationships and in fact, in most >> policy discourses "competition" is generally used as a code word for the >> pursuit of private interests and "free markets" a la the Washington >> Consensus actively promoting the opening up of telecom markets globally (as >> Milton quite correctly, if disparagingly, understood in his reply to my original >> comments). Similarly for me "collaboration" refers to the joint puruit of >> common goals (as for example, social collaboration in support of the public >> interest, or p2p relationships, social solidarity and so on) and in a policy >> context would be appropriate to interpose as a balance to a position >> supporting "competition". >> >> For my tech colleagues the understanding, at least according to two non- >> communicating tech folks was that "competition" is seen as being the means >> by which to "limit the power of otherwise overly powerful corporations and >> cartels". While on the other hand "collaboration" needs to be controlled >> "otherwise it will lead to the formation of harmful cartels". (While these >> latter uses of the terms are clearly correct they would never have occurred >> to me, at least, as being primary definitions that might be used in a document >> such as RFC 6852.) >> >> (As an aside, I'm wondering whether at least some of the disputes that have >> been recurrent themes of the IGC discussions might not have similar origins >> in rather profound domain centric mutual misunderstandings as to the use of >> quite common terms.) >> >> M > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From lmcknigh at syr.edu Wed Jan 30 20:22:25 2013 From: lmcknigh at syr.edu (Lee W McKnight) Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2013 01:22:25 +0000 Subject: [governance] RE: Post-Modern Paradigm for Standards--Some Comments Message-ID: <77A59FC9477004489D44DE7FC6840E7B1B3DDB@SUEX10-mbx-08.ad.syr.edu> Well.... Even if fundamentally flawed is it better than the default, which is more and more proprietary ' standards;' none of which pretend to do anything other than promote particular private interests in one market or another? But I defer to the general IGC sentiment not to sign on. As I previously noted, for the WiGiT open specs v0.2 which we are just wrapping up, we have incorporated the new and improved by Michael and Norbert edition of the -not so - rfc. Which to be cute I am dubbing the 'Post-Modern Paradigm for Standards' ; ) Along with 10 Internet Rights and Principles, and 14 accessibility guidelines. We'll pass a link to WiGiT v0.2 by the list next week; more tweakers and editors for v0.3 are welcome.* (One way of thinking about what we are doing is extending Internet governance principles to - things - as in Internet of Things; from Clouds. All clear now? ; ) Lee * The fine print: WiGiT v0.2 has been developed in cooperation with the Enterprise Cloud Leadership Council of the TM Forum, an industry standards group; WiGiT v0.3 will be developed in cooperation with the IEEE 2030.4 smart grid interoperability working group. ________________________________________ From: Norbert Bollow [nb at bollow.ch] Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2013 5:12 PM To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org Cc: Lee W McKnight Subject: Re: [governance] RFC 6852: Affirmation of the Modern Paradigm for Standards--Some Comments Lee W McKnight wrote: > An offer of a quote from a standards-knowledgable co-coordinator like > Norbert on behalf of IGC might be well-received, eve if it includes > some form of 'but...' along the lines of Michael's additions. I'd like to credit Michael for pointing out that RFC 6852 may be revealing some fundamentally flawed ideology that may be underlying much of what we (the tech community) have been doing. I think that this problem is much bigger than just standardization processes, and it seems to me that in IETF in practice these problems are less pronounced than almost anywhere else. So definitely I wouldn't want to point a critical finger at IETF here. But where there are problems there is a need for developing a strategy to address them. In addition to the points of concern already mentioned by Michael and Stephane, in reading RFC 6852 I find myself seriously concerned about the following: 1. “Standards activities are not exclusively dominated by any particular person, company or interest group” is a very weak definition of “Balance”. Compare for a contrast the following passage from ISO: It is ISO’s aim and expectation that each of its International Standards represents a worldwide consensus and responds to global market needs. In order to achieve this aim, it has been recognized that special measures are needed in particular to ensure that the needs of developing countries are taken into account in ISO’s technical work. One such measure is the inclusion of specific provisions for "twinning", i.e. partnerships between developed and developing countries. http://www.iso.org/sites/directives/directives.html#toc_marker-1 ISO may not be fully succeeding in realizing the objective of a true worldwide consensus, but at least the problem is acknowledged and measures are taken to address it. 2. The document declares the development of standards under so-called “fair, reasonable, and non-discriminatory terms (FRAND)” acceptable. What FRAND actually means is that patent holders are allowed to introduce patented concepts into the standard and then (within the limits of what courts of law judge to be “fair”, “reasonable” and “non-discriminatory”) collect royalties whenever a product conforms to the standard. Furthermore, in spite of using the words “non-discriminatory”, this type of intellectual property rules seriously discriminates against Free and Open Source Software (FOSS) implementations. 3. Voluntary adoption and “success is determined by the market” is declared to be the ultimate decision making authority on adoption of standards. That ideology leaves no room for government decisions to make some standards compulsory which are important even if the adoption is not effectively driven by market forces, e.g. standards to ensure accessibility by persons with disabilities. It also leaves no room for allowing market failures, such as when companies with dominant market position refuse to participate in standardization of important interoperability interfaces, to be addressed by decisions of competition authorities to make standards compulsory for such companies. 4. In view of the above concerns, I find it worrying that the document is titled “Affirmation of the Modern Paradigm for Standards”, implying that no improvements should be expected anytime soon. Greetings, Norbert -------------- 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 From pouzin at well.com Wed Jan 30 20:46:51 2013 From: pouzin at well.com (Louis Pouzin (well)) Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2013 02:46:51 +0100 Subject: [governance] Dispute settlement Far West style Message-ID: Is online gambling an issue in internet governance ? Whatever the answer, for some countries it could open new ways to break the USG blockade on burning IG issues. Read on. - - - January 28, 2013. WTO: Antigua To Retaliate Against US By Suspending IP Rights Protection After years of unsuccessful negotiations between nations, the World Trade Organization Dispute Settlement Body today gave Antigua and Barbuda the right to impose sanctions against the United States for blocking online gambling. The US was found in violation of WTO rules in 2007 and has failed to resolve the issue, so the Caribbean nation was given the right to retaliate in an area that is likely to force a US response - lifting US intellectual property rights. http://www.ip-watch.org/?p=25928&utm_source=daily&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=alerts -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From suresh at hserus.net Wed Jan 30 21:20:14 2013 From: suresh at hserus.net (Suresh Ramasubramanian) Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2013 07:50:14 +0530 Subject: [governance] Dispute settlement Far West style In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: It is a cross border trade issue rather than an internet governance issue and as such the WTO is the right place for this game to play out. This promises to be interesting. --srs (iPad) On 31-Jan-2013, at 7:16, "Louis Pouzin (well)" wrote: > Is online gambling an issue in internet governance ? > Whatever the answer, for some countries it could open new ways to break the USG blockade on burning IG issues. > Read on. > - - - > > January 28, 2013. WTO: Antigua To Retaliate Against US By Suspending IP Rights Protection > > After years of unsuccessful negotiations between nations, the World Trade Organization Dispute Settlement Body today gave Antigua and Barbuda the right to impose sanctions against the United States for blocking online gambling. The US was found in violation of WTO rules in 2007 and has failed to resolve the issue, so the Caribbean nation was given the right to retaliate in an area that is likely to force a US response - lifting US intellectual property rights. > > http://www.ip-watch.org/?p=25928&utm_source=daily&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=alerts > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From jeremy at ciroap.org Thu Jan 31 00:41:11 2013 From: jeremy at ciroap.org (Jeremy Malcolm) Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2013 13:41:11 +0800 Subject: [governance] caucus contribution, consultation and MAG meeting In-Reply-To: <1359577699.47017.YahooMailNeo@web120106.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> References: <1359577699.47017.YahooMailNeo@web120106.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <510A03F7.8060703@ciroap.org> On 31/01/13 04:28, Nnenna wrote: > > I will +1"Meaningful participation of all stakeholders in Internet > governance" but asking myself if "engagement" is not a better expected > result than "participation".. > > Hence preference for "Meaningful engagement of all stakeholders in > Internet governance" The word "participation" is used more often than "engagement" in the Tunis Agenda with reference to stakeholders, and I tend to like to stay close to the TA so that there is no room for argument. Having said that, "engagement of stakeholders" is indeed used once, so I make this point only weakly. -- *Dr Jeremy Malcolm Senior Policy Officer Consumers International | the global campaigning voice for consumers* Office for Asia-Pacific and the Middle East Lot 5-1 Wisma WIM, 7 Jalan Abang Haji Openg, TTDI, 60000 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia Tel: +60 3 7726 1599 *Your rights, our mission – download CI's Strategy 2015:* http://consint.info/RightsMission @Consumers_Int | www.consumersinternational.org | www.facebook.com/consumersinternational Read our email confidentiality notice . Don't print this email unless necessary. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From jeremy at ciroap.org Thu Jan 31 00:45:13 2013 From: jeremy at ciroap.org (Jeremy Malcolm) Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2013 13:45:13 +0800 Subject: [governance] NomCom update In-Reply-To: <20130130223533.077cea48@quill.bollow.ch> References: <20130130223533.077cea48@quill.bollow.ch> Message-ID: <510A04E9.6080000@ciroap.org> On 31/01/13 05:35, Norbert Bollow wrote: > [IGC Coordinator hat on] > > Dear all > > Today's lotto numbers from the UK National Lottery are in: > 9 10 24 43 47 48 5 A quibble: was the numbered list of members, and that the UK National Lottery results would be used as the random seed, circulated ahead of time? If not, we have no way to verify the draw. If it was so announced, please ignore. :-) -- *Dr Jeremy Malcolm Senior Policy Officer Consumers International | the global campaigning voice for consumers* Office for Asia-Pacific and the Middle East Lot 5-1 Wisma WIM, 7 Jalan Abang Haji Openg, TTDI, 60000 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia Tel: +60 3 7726 1599 *Your rights, our mission – download CI's Strategy 2015:* http://consint.info/RightsMission @Consumers_Int | www.consumersinternational.org | www.facebook.com/consumersinternational Read our email confidentiality notice . Don't print this email unless necessary. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From nb at bollow.ch Thu Jan 31 00:59:22 2013 From: nb at bollow.ch (Norbert Bollow) Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2013 06:59:22 +0100 Subject: [governance] caucus contribution, consultation and MAG meeting In-Reply-To: <510A03F7.8060703@ciroap.org> References: <1359577699.47017.YahooMailNeo@web120106.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <510A03F7.8060703@ciroap.org> Message-ID: <20130131065922.79810043@quill.bollow.ch> Jeremy Malcolm wrote: > On 31/01/13 04:28, Nnenna wrote: > > > > I will +1"Meaningful participation of all stakeholders in Internet > > governance" but asking myself if "engagement" is not a better > > expected result than "participation".. > > > > Hence preference for "Meaningful engagement of all stakeholders in > > Internet governance" > > The word "participation" is used more often than "engagement" in the > Tunis Agenda with reference to stakeholders, and I tend to like to > stay close to the TA so that there is no room for argument. Having > said that, "engagement of stakeholders" is indeed used once, so I > make this point only weakly. My understanding of the words is that "participation in governance" is stronger than "engagement in governance". If you engage but your viewpoint and perspective gets ignored, possibly because it has not been communicated successfully, you have engaged but not participated in governance. You may have participated in a discussion but not participated in governance. When now the word "meaningful" is added to the picture, the above analysis becomes less convincing. Still I think that "meaningful participation in governance" is a better, more powerful concept than "meaningful engagement in governance". Greetings, Norbert -------------- 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 From nb at bollow.ch Thu Jan 31 02:34:13 2013 From: nb at bollow.ch (Norbert Bollow) Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2013 08:34:13 +0100 Subject: [governance] NomCom update In-Reply-To: <510A04E9.6080000@ciroap.org> References: <20130130223533.077cea48@quill.bollow.ch> <510A04E9.6080000@ciroap.org> Message-ID: <20130131083413.74c84db3@quill.bollow.ch> [IGC Coordinator hat on] Jeremy Malcolm wrote: > A quibble: was the numbered list of members, and that the UK National > Lottery results would be used as the random seed, circulated ahead of > time? Yes, it was: In the message titled "NomCom selection process; request for advice", Message-ID: <20130127003621.66061f79 at quill.bollow.ch>, Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2013 00:36:21 +0100, I had written: "The random seed will consist of the seven numbers of the Wednesday January 30 Lotto draw of the UK National Lottery", and I had also repeated, explicitly for the sake of completeness, the numbered list of volunteers that Sala had already previously posted. Greetings, Norbert -------------- 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 From gurstein at gmail.com Thu Jan 31 02:50:42 2013 From: gurstein at gmail.com (michael gurstein) Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2013 23:50:42 -0800 Subject: [governance] Speech by ITU Secretary-General to ITU Council Working Group : International Internet-Related Public Policy : Opening Remarks Message-ID: <135001cdff87$ac835b50$058a11f0$@gmail.com> ITU S.G. Toure's speech to the ITU Council Working Group on International Internet-related public policy issues in Geneva http://www.itu.int/en/osg/speeches/Pages/2013-01-30.aspx Worth a read. M -------------- 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 From daniel at digsys.bg Thu Jan 31 02:53:44 2013 From: daniel at digsys.bg (Daniel Kalchev) Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2013 09:53:44 +0200 Subject: [governance] Are Techies from Venus and Non-techies from Mars :) In-Reply-To: <119d01cdff2f$f1bf3c00$d53db400$@gmail.com> References: <119d01cdff2f$f1bf3c00$d53db400$@gmail.com> Message-ID: <510A2308.9050708@digsys.bg> This is an observation we all make at some point of time (I hope). But you summarized it well. However, my take on the techie/non-techie part is different. Here is my opinion why you observe these things. The people who know the system and are not "innocent" enough (have seen the bad usage of others' ideals) is who you call the "policy" people. These people know, that using tools like "competition" to fight increasing power of one entity is futile if done as a policy. Therefore, they advocate the promotion of true competition (free market), because then many non-ecumbered by policy (and politics, let's not forget) entities will fight with the powers-that-are in the market, making them behave. Same about "collaboration". When you have competition, there is no problem with collaboration forming any cartels. Plus, competitors will often be forced by the market to cooperate... or leave the market. The "techie" people are unfortunately pretty much innocent in these things. They believe in what they are told: corporations are bad, cartels is what happen when corporations sit together. As idealistic (and deluded) as they are, techies will happily support "somebody else" to "make sure corporations are not way too powerful". In the end, just as with humans, every corporation becomes weak and dies, no matter how powerful or influential it once was. Such is life. Come to think, myself, being labeled by many as an "techie", apparently I lost my innocence a while ago. I don't believe either model alone, so in my opinion, I must be from Earth. Although ... I have always suspected my origins are out of this world. ;-) Daniel On 30.01.13 23:22, michael gurstein wrote: > In the course of some private discussions with techie colleagues concerning > my comments on RFC 6852 it fairly quickly became clear that we were using > the terminology around "competition"and "collaboration" in quite > different--in fact, diametrically opposite, ways. > > For me "competition" evokes market based relationships and in fact, in most > policy discourses "competition" is generally used as a code word for the > pursuit of private interests and "free markets" a la the Washington > Consensus actively promoting the opening up of telecom markets globally (as > Milton quite correctly, if disparagingly, understood in his reply to my > original comments). Similarly for me "collaboration" refers to the joint > puruit of common goals (as for example, social collaboration in support of > the public interest, or p2p relationships, social solidarity and so on) and > in a policy context would be appropriate to interpose as a balance to a > position supporting "competition". > > For my tech colleagues the understanding, at least according to two > non-communicating tech folks was that "competition" is seen as being the > means by which to "limit the power of otherwise overly powerful corporations > and cartels". While on the other hand "collaboration" needs to be controlled > "otherwise it will lead to the formation of harmful cartels". (While these > latter uses of the terms are clearly correct they would never have occurred > to me, at least, as being primary definitions that might be used in a > document such as RFC 6852.) > > (As an aside, I'm wondering whether at least some of the disputes that have > been recurrent themes of the IGC discussions might not have similar origins > in rather profound domain centric mutual misunderstandings as to the use of > quite common terms.) > > M > > -------------- 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 From jeremy at ciroap.org Thu Jan 31 04:01:15 2013 From: jeremy at ciroap.org (Jeremy Malcolm) Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2013 17:01:15 +0800 Subject: [bestbits] [governance] Multistakeholder Roles and Responsibilities In-Reply-To: References: <01c801cdf457$f76a3fc0$e63ebf40$@gmail.com> <50F763C0.5070907@ciroap.org> <50F8D10B.3010109@ciroap.org> <20130118224941.556b0653@quill.bollow.ch> <50FCEFC5.8010008@ciroap.org> Message-ID: <510A32DB.9020508@ciroap.org> On 31/01/13 05:15, Joana Varon wrote: > Sorry for the late reply after the sympathy some have expressed on > drafting a letter highlighting the promises of Dr Touré at the WCIT SC > meeting. I was approaching the Brazilian government for support on our > demand for space and participation of civil society organizations on > ITU processes. > > Though showing solidarity with the cause, Brazilian government (or our > telecom regulatory agency responsible for representing the country at > ITU) has signaled that WTPF is not the proper sphere to submit > extensive contribution regarding CS participation, the plenipotentiary > would be so. So, as far as I know, Brazil will submit a contribution > to WTPF only generally speaking about openness and transparency, but > not presenting a particular proposal for change in the mechanisms for > civil society participation. > > In that sense, they have also addressed the existence of Informal > Experts Group for WTPF, highlighting that: > ... > > Well, this is surely not satisfactory, so, with that in mind, I wonder > if we should go for that joined CS letter focusing on WTPF and > stressing previous commitments from the Secretary General, do we still > have time? Or, for the ones how are more aware of UN bodies internal > procedures, do we have to wait the loooong time for the plenipot? What > could we grasp right now? > (I'm quoting almost your whole message because I intend on forwarding my reply to the wcit12 list too, as an almost identical discussion is going on there.) The deadline for comments on the Secretary General's report is tomorrow, so we may be hard pressed to do anything by then! Having said that, we could ask for special dispensation to contribute a belated submission, as was granted for the Best Bits statement to WCIT. Personally I am unlikely to have time to take the lead on a letter but I am supportive of the idea and would have comments to give on a draft if say you or Emma from CDT were to send some draft text. The IGC has not successfully done a statement for a while, and Best Bits is in transition (watch this space), so probably it would probably not be under either of those umbrellas, but rather a generic civil society letter to which groups could sign on. I agree that the invitation to participate in the IEG is no substitute, though for those who can, good on them. Avri said she is on the group and there is CDT, but unless you count ISOC (I don't), there is no other civil society that I know of. Doubtless largely due to the lack of funding, as always (that's why I won't be there). -- *Dr Jeremy Malcolm Senior Policy Officer Consumers International | the global campaigning voice for consumers* Office for Asia-Pacific and the Middle East Lot 5-1 Wisma WIM, 7 Jalan Abang Haji Openg, TTDI, 60000 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia Tel: +60 3 7726 1599 *Your rights, our mission – download CI's Strategy 2015:* http://consint.info/RightsMission @Consumers_Int | www.consumersinternational.org | www.facebook.com/consumersinternational Read our email confidentiality notice . Don't print this email unless necessary. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From riaz.tayob at gmail.com Thu Jan 31 05:11:29 2013 From: riaz.tayob at gmail.com (Riaz K Tayob) Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2013 12:11:29 +0200 Subject: [governance] Are Techies from Venus and Non-techies from Mars :) In-Reply-To: <119d01cdff2f$f1bf3c00$d53db400$@gmail.com> References: <119d01cdff2f$f1bf3c00$d53db400$@gmail.com> Message-ID: <510A4351.6030201@gmail.com> My non-techie view is that we differ at rather fundamental levels (meta or theoretical or ethical) and that other disputes are merely symptoms of same... On 2013/01/30 11:22 PM, michael gurstein wrote: > I'm wondering whether at least some of the disputes that have > been recurrent themes of the IGC discussions might not have similar origins > in rather profound domain centric mutual misunderstandings as to the use of > quite common terms. -------------- 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 From riaz.tayob at gmail.com Thu Jan 31 05:46:59 2013 From: riaz.tayob at gmail.com (Riaz K Tayob) Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2013 12:46:59 +0200 Subject: [governance] Dispute settlement Far West style In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <510A4BA3.6040806@gmail.com> See this for a critical US perspective on this case: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/lori-wallach/internet-pirates-of-the-c_b_2576198.html Of course for the US and its corporations it DID NOT MATTER that South Africa was prevented from using perfectly legal rights to legally copy patented HIV medicines to people who were literally dying... and so it is with Antigua... perhaps the lesson for USers (especially teh 40 million without health insurance, or those who pay fortunes for prescription medications) is that chickens do come home to roost... Riaz On 2013/01/31 03:46 AM, Louis Pouzin (well) wrote: > Is online gambling an issue in internet governance ? > Whatever the answer, for some countries it could open new ways to > break the USG blockade on burning IG issues. > Read on. > - - - > > January 28, 2013. WTO: Antigua To Retaliate Against US By Suspending > IP Rights Protection > > After years of unsuccessful negotiations between nations, the World > Trade Organization Dispute Settlement Body today gave Antigua and > Barbuda the right to impose sanctions against the United States for > blocking online gambling. The US was found in violation of WTO rules > in 2007 and has failed to resolve the issue, so the Caribbean nation > was given the right to retaliate in an area that is likely to force a > US response - lifting US intellectual property rights. > > http://www.ip-watch.org/?p=25928&utm_source=daily&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=alerts > > -------------- 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 From fulvio.frati at unimi.it Thu Jan 31 06:45:44 2013 From: fulvio.frati at unimi.it (Fulvio Frati) Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2013 12:45:44 +0100 Subject: [governance] IEEE DEST 2013 (Digital Ecosystem Technologies), July 24-26, 2013, Palo Alto (USA) Message-ID: <012701cdffa8$81037b10$830a7130$@unimi.it> Dear Researcher, It´s our pleasure to inform you about the upcoming 7th IEEE International Conference on Digital Ecosystem Technologies – Complex Environment Engineering (IEEE DEST-CEE 2013) to be held in Palo Alto, USA from 24 to 26 July 2013. We take this opportunity to seek your participation in this conference as a speaker / attendee. The IEEE DEST-CEE 2013 website outlines the complete details of the conference: http://dest2013.digital-ecology.org/ IEEE DEST-CEE 2013 is organized in cooperation with Berkeley University and will be situated in the heart of the Silicon Valley, and thus right in the epicenter of the Digital Ecosystem revolution. We look forward to a strong involvement from both, academia and global players for innovation adoption. I am also attaching the latest Call for Papers with this email for your reference. Please feel free to circulate it amongst your contacts as well. On behalf of the General Chairs and the Organization Committee, we look forward to your involvement at IEEE DEST-CEE 2013. Warm Regards Gaurangi Potdar Conference Secretary IEEE DEST-CEE 2013 http://dest2013.digital-ecology.org/ General Chairs Message http://dest2013.digital-ecology.org/index.php/general-chairs-message -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: IEEEDEST-CEE2013-CFP.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 694383 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- 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 From nb at bollow.ch Thu Jan 31 06:58:41 2013 From: nb at bollow.ch (Norbert Bollow) Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2013 12:58:41 +0100 Subject: [governance] caucus contribution, consultation and MAG meeting In-Reply-To: <20130128170918.580f9cf3@quill.bollow.ch> References: <20130127120551.1db0b299@quill.bollow.ch> <51051017.80103@itforchange.net> <20130128160554.50c4cfa4@quill.bollow.ch> <20130128152553.GA22217@hserus.net> <20130128170918.580f9cf3@quill.bollow.ch> Message-ID: <20130131125841.3dde960c@quill.bollow.ch> Dear all Could you please have a look at Baudouin Schombe's comments on paragraphs 4 and 5 of the draft text at http://www.igcaucus.org/digressit/archives/79 Maybe someone is able to make a good specific suggestion on how to improve our draft text on the basis of these comments? Greetings, Norbert -------------- 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 From pouzin at well.com Thu Jan 31 08:55:38 2013 From: pouzin at well.com (Louis Pouzin (well)) Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2013 14:55:38 +0100 Subject: [governance] caucus contribution, consultation and MAG meeting In-Reply-To: <20130130191303.24b6ee31@quill.bollow.ch> References: <20130130191303.24b6ee31@quill.bollow.ch> Message-ID: On Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 7:13 PM, Norbert Bollow wrote: > Louis Pouzin wrote: > > > re Main sessions. > > *Only two *90min main sessions. > > One on the 1st day, the other on the last day. > > Interpretation only in english. > > Reallocate interpreters to most popular workshops > > Do you think that severely reducing the weight of the main sessions > like this is preferable to the suggestion of innovation in main session > format (as currently in the draft submission [1])? > [1] http://www.igcaucus.org/digressit/archives/79 > > If so, why? > > Greetings, > Norbert > - - - Yes Norbert. Main sessions are customarily preempted as show business for local celebrities and IGF nomenklatura. That produces repetitious hackneyed truisms inducing boredom and sleep. A fair number of attendees come because there is interpretation in several languages. Two sessions of that sort are enough for speakers' ego satisfaction. One more main session could be tried as innovation, whatever that means. Result will tell. Workshops are more effective because: - there is much more choice, one can move from a poor one to a good one, - speakers use spontaneous language, - there are more interactions with the attendees, - specific topics fit better with a small room, - it's easier to identify who is there. On the minus side, there is no interpretation, or rarely. Speakers' english is more or less understandable, depending on the room. This could be corrected by "repeaters", that is people trained to decode various english accents, and repeat verbatim in well spoken american (Chicagoan). Louis -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From suresh at hserus.net Thu Jan 31 10:45:07 2013 From: suresh at hserus.net (Suresh Ramasubramanian) Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2013 21:15:07 +0530 Subject: [governance] Are Techies from Venus and Non-techies from Mars :) In-Reply-To: <510A4351.6030201@gmail.com> References: <119d01cdff2f$f1bf3c00$d53db400$@gmail.com> <510A4351.6030201@gmail.com> Message-ID: <596C85D3-BE98-42BC-A6C8-179E10CB5A61@hserus.net> Using loaded language doesnt help. So, for example, by including ethical differences here, does that mean people disagreeing / diametrically opposed to various of, say, your views are unethical? --srs (iPad) On 31-Jan-2013, at 15:41, Riaz K Tayob wrote: > My non-techie view is that we differ at rather fundamental levels (meta or theoretical or ethical) and that other disputes are merely symptoms of same... > > > On 2013/01/30 11:22 PM, michael gurstein wrote: >> I'm wondering whether at least some of the disputes that have >> been recurrent themes of the IGC discussions might not have similar origins >> in rather profound domain centric mutual misunderstandings as to the use of >> quite common terms. > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From gurstein at gmail.com Thu Jan 31 12:26:11 2013 From: gurstein at gmail.com (michael gurstein) Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2013 09:26:11 -0800 Subject: [governance] Are Techies from Venus and Non-techies from Mars :) In-Reply-To: <596C85D3-BE98-42BC-A6C8-179E10CB5A61@hserus.net> References: <119d01cdff2f$f1bf3c00$d53db400$@gmail.com> <510A4351.6030201@gmail.com> <596C85D3-BE98-42BC-A6C8-179E10CB5A61@hserus.net> Message-ID: <156601cdffd8$1d5dd580$58198080$@gmail.com> "Ethical" in a context such as this one would normally refer to "ethical frameworks" (differing frameworks of fundamental beliefs) not the specifics of particular behaviours being ethical (or not). M -----Original Message----- From: Suresh Ramasubramanian [mailto:suresh at hserus.net] Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2013 7:45 AM To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Riaz K Tayob Cc: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; michael gurstein Subject: Re: [governance] Are Techies from Venus and Non-techies from Mars :) Using loaded language doesnt help. So, for example, by including ethical differences here, does that mean people disagreeing / diametrically opposed to various of, say, your views are unethical? --srs (iPad) On 31-Jan-2013, at 15:41, Riaz K Tayob wrote: > My non-techie view is that we differ at rather fundamental levels (meta or theoretical or ethical) and that other disputes are merely symptoms of same... > > > On 2013/01/30 11:22 PM, michael gurstein wrote: >> I'm wondering whether at least some of the disputes that have been >> recurrent themes of the IGC discussions might not have similar >> origins in rather profound domain centric mutual misunderstandings as >> to the use of quite common terms. > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From riaz.tayob at gmail.com Thu Jan 31 12:36:56 2013 From: riaz.tayob at gmail.com (Riaz K Tayob) Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2013 19:36:56 +0200 Subject: [governance] CETA threatens Internet, health and democracy In-Reply-To: <20130131094145.GC1969@t> References: <20130131094145.GC1969@t> Message-ID: <510AABB8.4050700@gmail.com> [ CETA / Economy / Innovation ] ===================================================================== CETA threatens Internet, health and democracy ===================================================================== Brussels, 31 January 2013 -- A draft trade agreement between the European Union and Canada (CETA) threatens the Internet, health and democracy, according to the Foundation for a Free Information Infrastructure (FFII). The agreement contains an investor-state arbitration clause, which gives multinational companies the right to directly sue states in international tribunals. CETA places these arbitration tribunals above the high courts of Europe and Canada. Bypass democracy Investor-state arbitration clauses give multinationals the right to sue countries if they dislike legislative changes. Tobacco company Philip Morris sued Australia over the Tobacco Plain Packaging Bill, which introduced restrictions on the use of cigarette company's logos on cigarette packets and allow for more space for health warnings. After Australia’s High Court dismissed the legal challenge, Philip Morris launched an investor-state case. As a result, Australia decided not to sign treaties with investor-state arbitration clauses any more. The EU and Canada have been negotiating the Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA) since 2009. Negotiations took place behind closed doors, and the draft texts are still secret. The website bilaterals.org and Kriton Arsenis, a member of the European Parliament Committee on Environment, Public Health and Food Safety, revealed the existence of the investor-state arbitration clause. Arsenis criticizes the arbitration clause as an easy way to bypass democracy. Conflicts of Interest Multinationals see reform of legislation that could reduce their profits as expropriation and demand high damages. FFII analyst Ante Wessels: "In recent years, arbitration tribunals increasingly stretched the concept of expropriation. Lawyers advise multinationals in setting up investment structures, and these same attorneys and their office colleagues also act as arbitrators in tribunals. This gives rise to conflicts of interest." Block Reforms The FFII notes the negative impact on innovation and the Internet. The trade agreement with Canada will allow multinational companies to attack legislative reforms and protect old business models. This endangers reform of copyright and patent law. Ante Wessels: "The Internet suffers from an excessive enforcement of an outdated copyright. Filtering, blocking and banning links hamper the functioning of the Internet. CETA will give multinationals the possibility to thwart necessary reforms." ===================================================================== Agenda ===================================================================== EU trade commissioner Karel De Gucht will visit Canada on 6 February 2013 in the hope of concluding the trade talks. A day earlier, he will visit the US to prepare trade talks with the US. On 7-8 February, the EU's 27 heads of state and government will meet in Brussels to discuss trade and foreign affairs. http://www.europolitics.info/external-policies/de-gucht-aims-to-wrap-up-transatlantic-trade-talks-before-summit-art347575-46.html ===================================================================== Links ===================================================================== Arbitration clause in EU-Canada trade agreement, an easy way to bypass democracy Kriton Arsenis MEP http://www.neurope.eu/blog/arbitration-clause-eu-canada-trade-agreement Canada, EU in final push for trade deal; latest investment chapter shows blatant pro-investor bias http://www.bilaterals.org/spip.php?article22593 FFII blog on IP, innovation and trade: http://acta.ffii.org/ General information: Brewing Storm over ISDR Clouds: Trans-Pacific Partnership Talks - Part I http://kluwerarbitrationblog.com/blog/2013/01/07/brewing-storm-over-isdr-clouds-trans-pacific-partnership-talks-part-i/ Part II http://kluwerarbitrationblog.com/blog/2013/01/14/brewing-storm-over-isdr-clouds-trans-pacific-partnership-talks-part-ii/ Permanent link to this press release: http://press.ffii.org/Press%20releases/CETA%20threatens%20Internet%2C%20health%20and%20democracy ===================================================================== Contact ===================================================================== Ante Wessels ante (at) ffii.org +31 6 100 99 063 FFII Office Berlin Malmöer Str. 6 D-10439 Berlin Fon: +49-30-41722597 Fax Service: +49-721-509663769 Email: office (at) ffii.org http://www.ffii.org/ ===================================================================== About FFII ===================================================================== The FFII is a not-for-profit association active in twenty European countries, dedicated to the development of information goods for the public benefit, based on copyright, free competition, open standards. More than 1000 members, 3,500 companies and 100,000 supporters have entrusted the FFII to act as their voice in public policy questions concerning exclusion rights (intellectual property) in data processing. _______________________________________________ A2k mailing list A2k at lists.keionline.org http://lists.keionline.org/mailman/listinfo/a2k_lists.keionline.org -------------- 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 From mueller at syr.edu Thu Jan 31 13:53:33 2013 From: mueller at syr.edu (Milton L Mueller) Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2013 18:53:33 +0000 Subject: [governance] Dispute settlement Far West style In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD2326867@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> Cool! From: pouzin at gmail.com [mailto:pouzin at gmail.com] On Behalf Of Louis Pouzin (well) Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2013 8:47 PM To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org Subject: [governance] Dispute settlement Far West style Is online gambling an issue in internet governance ? Whatever the answer, for some countries it could open new ways to break the USG blockade on burning IG issues. Read on. - - - January 28, 2013. WTO: Antigua To Retaliate Against US By Suspending IP Rights Protection After years of unsuccessful negotiations between nations, the World Trade Organization Dispute Settlement Body today gave Antigua and Barbuda the right to impose sanctions against the United States for blocking online gambling. The US was found in violation of WTO rules in 2007 and has failed to resolve the issue, so the Caribbean nation was given the right to retaliate in an area that is likely to force a US response - lifting US intellectual property rights. http://www.ip-watch.org/?p=25928&utm_source=daily&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=alerts -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From ca at cafonso.ca Thu Jan 31 14:53:42 2013 From: ca at cafonso.ca (Carlos A. Afonso) Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2013 17:53:42 -0200 Subject: [governance] Dispute settlement Far West style Message-ID: Very cool !! --c.a. ------------ C. A. AfonsoMilton L Mueller wrote:Cool!     From: pouzin at gmail.com [mailto:pouzin at gmail.com] On Behalf Of Louis Pouzin (well) Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2013 8:47 PM To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org Subject: [governance] Dispute settlement Far West style   Is online gambling an issue in internet governance ? Whatever the answer, for some countries it could open new ways to break the USG blockade on burning IG issues. Read on. - - - January 28, 2013. WTO: Antigua To Retaliate Against US By Suspending IP Rights Protection After years of unsuccessful negotiations between nations, the World Trade Organization Dispute Settlement Body today gave Antigua and Barbuda the right to impose sanctions against the United States for blocking online gambling. The US was found in violation of WTO rules in 2007 and has failed to resolve the issue, so the Caribbean nation was given the right to retaliate in an area that is likely to force a US response - lifting US intellectual property rights. http://www.ip-watch.org/?p=25928&utm_source=daily&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=alerts -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From suresh at hserus.net Thu Jan 31 16:58:33 2013 From: suresh at hserus.net (Suresh Ramasubramanian) Date: Fri, 1 Feb 2013 03:28:33 +0530 Subject: [governance] Are Techies from Venus and Non-techies from Mars :) In-Reply-To: <156601cdffd8$1d5dd580$58198080$@gmail.com> References: <119d01cdff2f$f1bf3c00$d53db400$@gmail.com> <510A4351.6030201@gmail.com> <596C85D3-BE98-42BC-A6C8-179E10CB5A61@hserus.net> <156601cdffd8$1d5dd580$58198080$@gmail.com> Message-ID: <65C6AC79-0CEE-422E-A3B4-EDA837DF930D@hserus.net> Ah. Thank you. I am glad to hear that. One sad part of loaded language among several commentators in say network neutrality is the automatic assumption of malicious intent in any step at all taken by whoever they are in opposition to. Thus I have seen deep packet inspection .. even if deployed for network security .. called "eavesdropping" and spam filtering equated to blackmail and a shakedown. This, by rather respected commentators, which has caused me to be rather vocal about the issue in the past. --srs (iPad) On 31-Jan-2013, at 22:56, "michael gurstein" wrote: > "Ethical" in a context such as this one would normally refer to "ethical > frameworks" (differing frameworks of fundamental beliefs) not the specifics > of particular behaviours being ethical (or not). > > M > > -----Original Message----- > From: Suresh Ramasubramanian [mailto:suresh at hserus.net] > Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2013 7:45 AM > To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Riaz K Tayob > Cc: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; michael gurstein > Subject: Re: [governance] Are Techies from Venus and Non-techies from Mars > :) > > Using loaded language doesnt help. So, for example, by including ethical > differences here, does that mean people disagreeing / diametrically opposed > to various of, say, your views are unethical? > > --srs (iPad) > > On 31-Jan-2013, at 15:41, Riaz K Tayob wrote: > >> My non-techie view is that we differ at rather fundamental levels (meta or > theoretical or ethical) and that other disputes are merely symptoms of > same... >> >> >> On 2013/01/30 11:22 PM, michael gurstein wrote: >>> I'm wondering whether at least some of the disputes that have been >>> recurrent themes of the IGC discussions might not have similar >>> origins in rather profound domain centric mutual misunderstandings as >>> to the use of quite common terms. >> >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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