[governance] Civil society participation in NMI Coordination committee

[Carlos A. Afonso]

Hi MM, my personal comments on your article in IGP regarding NMI. (*)

First, "inheritance" of the legacy of NM is open -- the decision makers,
the participants in the IG forums and entities, in summa, the
communities involved in the processes of developing IG who may want to
advance on the roadmap or principles would be the "inheritors", I guess.
The legacy is a proposal for worldwide principles and guidelines for a
roadmap for these processes. The "inheritors" are not this or that
initiative or group or stakeholder in particular. We are all free to
have as many initiatives as we wish (as you actually mention later on in
your article), and of course be against any of them.

Regarding your "mocking", which you are free to do as well of course :),
I guess it takes more than IGP mocking anything to abort it... although
of course we do need to consider it seriously.

Sorry, but the fact that a initiative proposes to form a facilitating
group does not automatically imply it being or staying top-down.
Actually, I wonder how to you imagine all the entities and forums we
have involved with IG today were born? IETF, ICANN, EuroDIG just to name
a few just came to be?

The actual practice of how the different stakeholders will decide to get
involved (if they do) and actually do it will define it -- and may even
change its purpose. So far not a single CS name has been nominated by
anyone pertaining to the initial group of organizations, and we at
CGI.br insist this will not happen, despite gossips to the contrary.

I hope you are aware ISOC decided to publish its board declaration
without proper bottom-up consultation with its chapters -- which is odd,
given that ISOC supposedly tries to do everything in a transparent,
bottom-up, multistakeholder fashion. Since then and after criticism from
a number of members the CEO has written the ISOC community to say "all
doors are open" to rediscuss the issue.

Finally, we all know how it started, but it seems not everyone is aware
that we (CGI.br) tried hard to reformulate it to make sure we have a
chance to build a multistakeholder process much along the way we built
it for NETmundial. We consider it to be clearly in a formative stage. If
we do not get real multistakeholder support, the initiative as it is
proposed today may fail, and we (CGI.br) are clearly prepared to
recognize its failure if it comes to this, and maybe end our
participation or try to reorient its purpose.

fraternal regards

--c.a.

===========
(*)
http://www.internetgovernance.org/2014/11/20/nyet-mundial-taming-the-ambitions-of-the-weficanncgi-alliance/


On 11/20/2014 06:31 PM, Milton L Mueller wrote:
> IGP has just published a blog post on the topic referenced above (NMI)
> http://www.internetgovernance.org/2014/11/20/nyet-mundial-taming-the-ambitions-of-the-weficanncgi-alliance/  
> 
> Milton L. Mueller
> Laura J. and L. Douglas Meredith Professor
> Syracuse University School of Information Studies
> http://faculty.ischool.syr.edu/mueller/mueller/Home.html 
> 
> 

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

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

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