[governance] Re: [bestbits] Whether to participate in NETmundial Initiative - RFC

Tue Nov 18 04:57:51 EST 2014

Hello Jean Christophe

Compared to the questions proposed to BB, what is the deadline? In my case,
I have to consult colleagues and collect their opinions.

2014-11-18 8:49 GMT+01:00 Jean-Christophe NOTHIAS I The Global Journal <
jc.nothias at theglobaljournal.net>:

> Jeremy,
>
> I leave to Norbert co-convenor at JNC to answer your first email. On a
> personal note, I would appreciate you to elaborate about the "dumping on
> civil society colleagues" you are referring to, as I see no such thing in
> the JNC statement - and would feel most uncomfortable would it be so. I
> would say JNC brings some interesting and documented facts and thoughtful
> perspective, even though the BestBits is never either quoted or named in
> this statement. As per your email recommendation having not yet shared my
> views on this WEF/ICANN/CGIbr topic, here are some thoughts.
>
> The WEF/ICANN/CGIbr project is not in lack of clarity. If I do listen to
> non JNC members:
> - Wall Street Journal reporter: "The NetMundial wants to spread Internet
> Governance more evenly across the developing world". (Ask Drew Fitzgerald
> about the source for that understanding of what is the WIB Initiative)
> - McCarthy at The Register: "ISOC has blasted efforts from some quarters
> to create a "UN Security Council"
> - Eileen Donahoe, former US Ambassador at the Human Rights Council, now at
> HRW: "There is an urgent need for new thinking about distributed,
> multistakeholder governance"
> - Virgilio Almeida, CGIbr, National Secretary for IT policies, Brazil:
> "... A platform that is going to be oriented to solve Internet Governance
> Issues..."
> - Richard Samans, Managing Director, WEF: "Internet Governance issues are
> at the top in our industry community conversations, and this is no surprise
> as it has become one of the hottest political issues of our times... well
> beyond the technical issues our partner, ICANN, has been dealing for many
> many years."
> - Fadi Chehadé: "For the first time in Sao Paulo, the Internet community
> agreed on a set of common principles and a roadmap in order to energize our
> work together, addressing the technical, and more important now, non
> technical issues".
>
> So the WEF/ICANN/CGIbr initiative seems to be a place where every one can
> have his own impression of achieving his own dream. Cool. More seriously,
> the 750 or so corporations members of the WEF are not jumping in the Sao
> Paulo legacy for nothing - their membership fees are expensive enough to
> get a return on investment. It would be naive to think they come to the
> beauty of discussing trends and fashion in IG conversation. Of course, a
> few cynics might enjoy playing poker, even though, and I appreciate Lee's
> questioning on that, there is little doubt that nobody will ever jump out
> of that elitist club once onboard.
>
> Based on these official and public statement, I can only read JNC
> statement as an interesting analysis and agree with JNC reluctance to
> participate or endorse such following-up (hijacking might be to blunt) of
> the NetMundial meeting. Nor the WEF, ICANN, or CGIbr are owners of what was
> stated ultimately in Sao Paulo, with all due reserves by different
> participants. So instead of trying to grab a comfortable seat in that
> convoy (overlooking the Leman Lake and located in the most wealthy
> suburbs of Geneva), should for once, Civil Society shows some unity,
> strength and courage assuming its best bets are ethical values, if not
> pragmatic democratic values - and in that regard, acknowledges the serious
> concerns seen in the making of, and in the diverse objectives presented by
> the WEF, ICANN and CGIbr.
>
> By the way, could you explain us (subscribers of the BestBits list):
> - what are the concrete points you do not feel comfortable with regarding
> the initiative - reference to your own critic and personal deeply
> conflicted approach of it. It would be fair to remind us on that.
> - how will the BB list will proceed to come to a conclusion between pro
> and cons?
> - what is your understanding of what is the WEF/ICANN/CGIbr initiative
> about to concretely be? A venture to fund specific programs or projects? A
> coordination office for existing IG related institutions or entities? A
> driver for what Chehahé sees as a Sao Paulo roadmap? Do you have a link for
> this roadmap to share with us?
> - which other civil society representatives have endorsed the initiative
> according to your knowledge apart from CGIbr and HRW? Not sure Afilias and
> CIRA are to be considered as civil society as they are in the registry
> business.
> - how can we make a difference between an exaggerated critic and not an
> exaggerated critic? In other words, how far can we be critical of that
> initiative? How can one critic of the initiative not be considered as
> specious, as so far ISOC and JNC have failed in your eyes to express "fair"
> critics.
> - are you in agreement with the naming of the WEF/ICANN/CIGbr initiative:
> The NetMundial Initiative, a "continuation of Sao Paulo to implement the
> roadmap with CGIbr in the leadership position, ICANN being a partner on a *lower
> level*, and the WEF a *collaborator*" according to Wolfgang Keinwächter
> (ICANN) see email Nov 4 *.
>
> Answers would certainly be helpful in order to have a fruitful
> conversation in this thread.
>
> Thanks
> JC
>
>
> * WK Full quote : "My understanding is that the NMI is now a
> "continuation" of Sao Paulo´s NetMundial (to implement the Roadmap as the
> main mandate) with cgi.br in the leadership position (easier after
> Rousseff won the election and Virgilio remains the key leader). ICANN will
> continue - on a lower level - to be a partner and the WEF will
> "collaborate" with the NMI (having its own projects independent from NMI).
> But lets wait for the Webinar. Virgilio will explain the outcome from the
> various consultations in and aftrer LA."
>
> Wolfgang
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Le 18 nov. 2014 à 04:53, Jeremy Malcolm a écrit :
>
> By now everyone will have read from previous threads that ISOC and the
> Just Net Coalition (JNC) have both decided not to participate in the
> NETmundial Initiative, and you may have also have read some false
> information that Best Bits and other networks represented on the Civil
> Society Coordination Group (CSCG) *have* decided to participate.  As Ian
> Peter's clarifying message setting out the truth of the matter should have
> made clear, that is *not* the case.  All that has happened is that the we
> have obtained as much assurance as we can that *if* we decide to
> participate, then the Secretariat (ICANN, WEF and CGI.br) will accept our
> self-nomination process rather than choosing civil society representatives
> independently.
>
> Now we turn to you, our communities, to provide us with guidance about
> whether to proceed further or not.  Some views have already been expressed
> pro and con.  I have been (and remain) publicly critical about the
> NETmundial Initiative, but on the other hand the reasoning ISOC and JNC
> give for boycotting it is rather specious, because they characterise the
> initiative as being something that it doesn't purport to be - ie. a single
> central policy-making body for Internet governance. This is an alarmist
> critique that turns the NETmundial Initiative into an exaggerated ITU-style
> bogeyman.
>
> So whilst there is certainly room for disagreement about whether we should
> bestow the benefit of our participation on the Initiative (I remain deeply
> conflicted about this), let's decide on the basis of factual pro and con
> arguments rather than oversimplifications about the 1% taking over the
> Internet.  Also note that a few civil society representatives, including
> Human Rights Watch, have endorsed it already and are featured on the
> carousel message on the front page of netmundial.org.
>
> So what do people think?  If you haven't already shared your views, please
> do so on this thread, within the next few days if possible.
>
> --
> Jeremy Malcolm
> Senior Global Policy Analyst
> Electronic Frontier Foundation
> https://eff.org
> jmalcolm at eff.org
>
> Tel: 415.436.9333 ext 161
>
> :: Defending Your Rights in the Digital World ::
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>     bestbits at lists.bestbits.net.
> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit:
>     http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits
>
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>      governance at lists.igcaucus.org
> To be removed from the list, visit:
>      http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
>
> For all other list information and functions, see:
>      http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
> To 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*

*COORDINATION NATIONALE CAFEC*

*ICANN/AFRALO Member*
*ISOC Member*
Téléphone mobile:+243998983491/+243813684512
email                  : b.schombe at gmail.com
skype                 : b.schombe
blog                    : http://akimambo.unblog.fr
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20141118/7965729f/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