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

[Norbert Bollow]

Michael Gurstein <gurstein at gmail.com> 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

I agree with this assessment.

> It has thus proven to be fundamentally impossible to ``do something
> productive``.

We need to find a way to transform the great diversity from a hindrance
into a strength of the IGC.

IMO the key to this is the concept of a “forum for discussion,
advocacy, action” contained in the IGC mission statement. Here “forum”
does not imply homogenity, but rather that the greatest possible
diversity of viewpoints should be welcome, and that alliances and
other forms of win-win cooperation can be established on an issue by
issue basis.

We will need to set up appropriate infrastructure and then develop an
appropriate, productive culture of discussion and collaboration in which
good use is made of that infrastructure.

You may expect a posting soon with thoughts from Sala and myself in
regard to more concrete ideas for this...

Greetings,
Norbert

-- 
Recommendations for effective and constructive participation in IGC:
1. Respond to the content of assertions and arguments, not to the person
2. Be conservative in what you send, be liberal in what you accept

-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t