[governance] [bestbits] Why?

[George Sadowsky]

Having an open discussion about what you call fundamentals is OK, although I wouldn't characterize the current discussions as respectful or progressive.  But let's not confuse that goal with the goal of advancing broader civil society agenda, as Anriette has mentioned in her recent post.

Perhaps the overall purpose of these list(s) should be discussed, decided and stated.  That way people won't enter into discussions that they consider not in their interest.

George

On May 19, 2015, at 3:20 PM, willi uebelherr <willi.uebelherr at gmail.com> wrote:

> Dear Wolfgang,
> 
> i think, i understand, what you mean. But, if you quote Jon Postel with:
> "Be conservative in what you send, be liberal in what you accept"
> then you should try to use it.
> 
> The form of intervening of you, George, Nick can also create a pressure against an open discussion about our funamentals. Therefore, we have to be liberal and create an open space. But for our self, we try to be strictly.
> 
> In every discussion we find good things, good ideas, good description of relations. But i will repeat. The reality in the "Internet" is defined from other groups and people. Our friends want to go in, more deeper in the space of creation. But in fact, all activ people in this IGF groups and instituions are observers.
> 
> And the reflection of this feeling and realization we can read nearly in all discussions.
> 
> many greetings, willi
> Cordoba, Argentina
> 
> 
> Am 19-May-15 um 11:01 schrieb "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang":
>> Sorry for intervening: It is really a pitty that the discussion on this list is occupied by hairsplitting, "I told you but you do not listen" and "I am right and you are wrong". Why this civil society network, which once played an important role in policy development in the WSIS process, is unable to look forward where the real challenges are with the forthcoming WSIS 10+ processes and concentrate on substance and how to reach rough consensus? Why people do not respect anymore what Jon Postel has told us a quarter of a century ago in his robustness princple: "Be conservative in what you send, be liberal in what you accept". Why they do not remember the language of the CS WSIS Geneva Declaration from 2003?
>> 
>> The Bali split (2013) has obviously long shadows and old warriors have overtaken the discussion.
>> 
>> My hope is that the WSIS 10++ perspective will encourage a new generation of younger civil society people who feel more committed to the substance of real civil society activities and do not waste the limited resources and energies for infighting. And do not forget: The WGIG proposal for a multistakeholder approach in Internet Governance (2005) was a compromise between "governmental leadership" (China) and private sector leadership (USA)and it opened the door for civil society to become an inclusive part of the process. This was a boig achievement of that time and an opportunity. It is now up to the next generation of civil society activists to build on this oppportunity. It would be a big shame if this would be destroyed.
>> 
>> Wolfgang
>> 
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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


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