[governance] Is 'tit for tat' all that can be accomplished?

[McTim]

Hi Jeremy,

On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 7:00 AM, Jeremy Malcolm <jeremy at ciroap.org> wrote:
> On 11/06/13 18:35, michael gurstein wrote:
>
> Unfortunately there doesn`t seem to be even the most minimal agreement on
> this list concerning the nature of the public interest with respect to the
> Internet and Internet Governance (or even if there is a public interest with
> respect to Internet Governance). It has thus proven to be fundamentally
> impossible to ``do something productive``.
>
>
> There is some guidance in the IGC Charter about what members are expected to
> be signing up for when self-asserting their membership of the IGC.  The
> IGC's Vision, for example:
>
> The policies that shape the Internet impact not only the development of the
> technologies themselves, but also the realization of internationally agreed
> human rights, social equity and interdependence, cultural concerns, and both
> social and economic development. Our vision is that Internet governance
> should be inclusive, people centered....

I have always taken this to mean that people are the atomic units of
IG, that IG
processes are inclusive of all, not limited to "accredited" folk or
"representatives".

This may be the 'first principle" difference which causes so much friction.
-- 
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