[governance] Debunking eight myths about multi-stakeholderism

[Barry Shein]

(out of town, catching up...)

I was thinking of something much broader than ICANN. Something more
like global internet governance. To me ICANN is important, they manage
names and numbers, in much the same way the public works dept is
important. If the latter doesn't function properly millions die of
cholera. That's very important but doesn't quite put one at the center
of authority.

ICANN does have a multi-stakeholder structure of sorts but its flaws
are well-documented. I don't think we would want to model a more
general internet governance on their experience. It wasn't a failure
by any means, but its processes are...well...work well enough I
suppose for its relatively narrow focus (running names and numbers.)
One needn't develop an electoral college or internal parliamentary to
bid contracts on sewer pipes either. The work is largely
administrative and should merely bear up to transparency and
accountability.

So to restate, in a larger internet governance context would EFF -- or
someone very like EFF if that's more comfortable, FGG -- be an
enfranchised stakeholder?

If so how did that happen? Who are its peers?

  -b

On April 30, 2015 at 15:06 jmalcolm at eff.org (Jeremy Malcolm) wrote:
 > On Apr 29, 2015, at 10:23 AM, Barry Shein <bzs at world.std.com> wrote:
 > > 
 > > 
 > > Ok, let's try this then:
 > > 
 > > Is EFF a stakeholder?
 > > 
 > > I don't mean in some hand-wavey feel-good "EVERYBODY is a
 > > STAKEHOLDER!" way.
 > > 
 > > I mean are they enfranchisable?
 > > 
 > > Say the ICANN proposal for the IANA transition is in its final form
 > > and looking for a formal vote of confidence.
 > > 
 > > A yes vote would make it happen, a no vote would likely send it back
 > > for several months of re-write. This is not just a feel-good poll.
 > > 
 > > The stakeholders are assembled and ready to be counted.
 > > 
 > > Is EFF one of them?
 > 
 > If EFF chooses to participate at ICANN (which it generally doesn't, though I realize this is a hypothetical), then it is going to be through the stakeholder structures that have been developed for doing that, such as the NPOC within the NCSG of the GNSO.[0]  I make no claims here about how legitimate or effective those particular structures are.
 > 
 > [0] Not-for-Profit Operational Concerns Constituency within the Non-Commercial Stakeholder Group of the Generic Names Supporting Organization
 > 
 > -- 
 > 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 ::
 > 
 > Public key: https://www.eff.org/files/2014/10/09/key_jmalcolm.txt
 > 
 > PGP fingerprint: FF13 C2E9 F9C3 DF54 7C4F EAC1 F675 AAE2 D2AB 2220
 > OTR fingerprint: 26EE FD85 3740 8228 9460 49A8 536F BCD2 536F A5BD
 > 
 > Learn how to encrypt your email with the Email Self Defense guide:
 > https://emailselfdefense.fsf.org/en
 > 

-------------- 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