[governance] IGC Statement in response to NTIA's announced intent to relinquish role in IANA functions

Fri Mar 21 04:38:51 EDT 2014

Agree with Mawaki. Such a statement's ambition is not to define a so-called MS model. I think it would be fair to restrain any overplay on this now.
Welcoming what the fact USG gives way to ICANN is what IGC tries to say, right now. So let's wait for the ICANN process to be seen before entering discussing a difficult topic such a Internet Governance in such a statement.

JC

Le 21 mars 2014 à 08:38, Mawaki Chango a écrit :

> My last word in this process and I let you guys wrap up with whatever you wish. Promised! (It just happens that as I was at the hotel yesterdays and still am this early before I hit the road, I'm reading your discussions and try to respond as I can. But I will be starting the actual fieldwork in a couple of hours and will no longer bother you.)
> 
> That sentence is obviously (at least it should be obvious to any attentive reader that it is) a theoretical construction, one that is based (at least in part) on hypotheticals in order to say, as Sala pointed out, what multi-stakeholder(ism) (M/S) is NOT.
> 
> Has M/S ever been inter-governmental? Not even a chance! Yet, we also say "We understand the M/S as distinct from the intergovernmental model" etc. I do understand the intergovernmental model exists, even if it anything but M/S. And you're saying On the other hand, beyond referring to and supporting M/S, the NTIA's announcement explicitly lists a number of I* organizations for ICANN to work with while it doesn't mention "civil society" not even once and anything "governmental" is only mentioned to be excluded. So yes, some may say there is a risk to have a governance model led or dominated by such technical standards bodies, etc. BTW, when IETF develops standards (and we understand one has to have some technical expertise and ideas win based on..., well, technical merit, but) is there ever a point where there is a debate about societal implications of those standards? If there ever was, are there other stakeholders involved than the same people who are conversant in technical standards development/specification and who actually developed the said standards? And isn't there a form of governance that comes with the standards thus developed?
> 
> Anyway, that's the context --although, again, we may admit that that case is just a hypothetical here and doesn't need to be necessarily more than that, as the sentence is theoretical (and a negative.)
> 
> Thanks, and I bow out --this time for sure.
> 
> Mawaki
> P.S. If you could, please read the version I posted yesterday and see if there's anything that may be useful to carry over in yours, as I wrote it trying to address all the questions raised in this cycle, with more context than anyone else having been the main drafter. I now leave it in your hands, thanks.
> 
> 
> 
> On Fri, Mar 21, 2014 at 2:32 AM, Suresh Ramasubramanian <suresh at hserus.net> wrote:
> More inclusive and catchall. Fine with me.
> 
> On 21 March 2014 7:50:45 am McTim <dogwallah at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> I would prefer my formulation below.
>> 
>> It doesn't restrict us to CS, PS and governments.
>> 
>> I have used html formatting, apologies for that.
>> 
>> 
>> On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 9:52 PM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro <salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Dear All,
>> 
>> 
>>  
>> 
>>  The IGC supports the multi-stakeholder policy making model as an all inclusive, bottom-up, consensus driven model that enhances democracy by its inclusiveness of all people from around the world who might be affected by its policy decision processes and outcomes. The need to enhance meaningful engagement globally is critical for the processes to be authentic and in the global public interest.
>> 
>> The multistakeholder governance model should include all sectors of the Internet ecosystem.  In the inclusive spirit of an authentic Multistakeholder model, we stand ready to work with all stakeholders and make sure effective consideration is given to the concerns and views of Internet users, citizens and civil society organizations across the world.
>> 
>> 
>> -- 
>> 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 --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20140321/54354371/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

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

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