[governance] [bestbits] Nominations for IGF closing and opening speakers

[Seth Johnson]

I was just redirecting Nick on his characterization.  Especially many
of these issues can't really be characterized that way.  It's true (as
Nick pretty much observes) that debates often go in those absurd
directions -- but that's not a policy discussion; it's a frame for
public discourse that doesn't actually engage in real practical terms.
Like there might be a public forum with talking heads on one of these
issues framed that way, but one knows it's not going anywhere as soon
as that framing arises.


Seth

On Thu, Oct 29, 2015 at 12:13 PM, Suresh Ramasubramanian
<suresh at hserus.net> wrote:
> All I’m saying is that especially in a privacy or security related discussion - it’d entirely depend on the context, and “commensurate” might actually be a good thing, from an engineering / usability etc standpoint.
>
>> On 29-Oct-2015, at 9:35 PM, Seth Johnson <seth.p.johnson at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Rather,
>> they'll say x needs to be balanced by our side getting something
>> "commensurate" y.  Typically making a point of contrast in one of a
>> manifold of ways to characterize relations in a policy discussion.
>>
>> Suresh: A little lost on what you're saying and what not, but
>> appreciate that you are playing a diplomatic function.
>

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