[governance] The proposal for closing Bestbits and merging with IGC + next steps (was "Follow-on from survey on the future of Bestbits: next steps")

Wed Aug 7 10:55:14 EDT 2019

Dear Sheetal,
Thanks for these notes and my apologies for not joining the call yesterday.
I think it was a great conversation and I do agree with the outcomes.
Regards,
Arsene

2019-08-07 15:07 UTC+02:00, Sheetal Kumar <sheetal at gp-digital.org>:
> Dear all,
>
> Thanks to those who attended the call yesterday, it was great to speak to
> you and hope you find it as productive as I did.
>
> Please find the notes and recording of the call at the top of the pad:
> https://etherpad.wikimedia.org/p/Bestbitscallfuture
>
> Best
> Sheetal.
>
> On Mon, 5 Aug 2019 at 14:49, Imran Ahmed Shah <ias_pk at yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> Dear Sheetal,
>> Thanks for reminder.
>>
>> I will also join the meeting.
>>
>> Best Regards
>>
>> Imran Ahmed Shah
>>
>> On Monday, 5 August 2019, 16:52:08 GMT+5, Sheetal Kumar <
>> sheetal at gp-digital.org> wrote:
>>
>>
>> Dear all,
>>
>> This is just a polite reminder that we'll be having our call tomorrow, 06
>> August at 2 PM UTC. Please find the details below, I look forward to
>> speaking to you then!
>>
>> Best
>> Sheetal
>>
>> *Date and time:* 06 August, 2 PM UTC
>>
>> To join the call online, please click the green "join" button below and
>> follow the on-screen prompts. To connect to audio, please click the "call
>> using computer" button on the left hand side of the webex window.
>>
>>
>> Bestbits closure and revived IGC: Next steps
>> <https://meetings.webex.com/collabs/meetings/view?uuid=MDCCYAEK5DKYWUGH875ZS20WQ5-OY93&ucs=email>
>>
>> *6 Aug, 15:00* | 1 hr 30 min
>>
>> London (Western European Summer Time, GMT+01:00)
>>
>> Host: Global Partners Digital
>>
>>
>> Join
>> <https://meetings.webex.com/collabs/meetings/join?uuid=MDCCYAEK5DKYWUGH875ZS20WQ5-OY93>
>>
>>
>> *Agenda:*
>> 1) Closure of Bestbits: agreement on date and process
>> 2) Moving to IGC: what is the current status? What is happening/what to
>> expect?
>> 3) Organisation of civil society day 0 event: discussion of timeline
>> 4) AOB
>>
>>
>> On Sat, 20 Jul 2019 at 00:55, Remmy Nweke <remmyn at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Thanks Sheetal and all
>> As much as I agree with bulk of the outlined summarised by you, there is
>> need for IGC charter review and left for me to accommodate and harmonise
>> thoughts on the new dispensation and could actually be a major task for
>> new
>> coordinators once after their election
>> I wish us well in this efforts.
>> Regards
>>
>> On Fri, Jul 19, 2019, 12:11 PM Sheetal Kumar <sheetal at gp-digital.org>
>> wrote:
>>
>> Dear all
>>
>> Apologies for the delay in responding - I've been away for a week and I
>> trust you received my OOO. Reading through the comments, it seems to me
>> there is more or less agreement on some things but less on others. In
>> essence:
>>
>>    - There seems to be agreement that reviving IGC is a good thing
>>    because there's a lot of work to be done by CS on important IG issues
>> on
>>    the global agenda/at global forums
>>    - There's some agreement that merging BB with IGC would be a good way
>>    forward to accomplish that but concern that the appropriate process
>> hasn't
>>    been followed within IGC, albeit there is disagreement about what that
>>    process would/could be
>>    - There's agreement that all documents, from both lists, should be
>>    preserved and centralised for easy access by all members
>>    - There support for organising a day 0 event at the IGF in Berlin
>>    - There's less agreement that there's a need to review the IGC
>>    Charter
>>
>> Hopefully this captures the conversation so far?
>>
>> I've also read the responses on the thread which includes Bestbits and
>> although there are only a few responses there, combined with the views of
>> those who attended the meeting at RightsCon, I think we can say that
>> there
>> is general support from the Bestbits list members for merging so far.
>>
>> As such, I'd suggest the following as a way forward, interested to hear
>> what others think if you don't agree:
>>
>>    - If there isn't agreement on the diagnosis of the problem, we can
>>    start the discussion anew. It's important we all agree on the premise
>> we're
>>    working on, otherwise we'll move forward leaving people behind and
>> just
>>    recreate the current situation again. Currently the diagnosis of those
>>    engaged, and the basis of those who attended the meeting at RightsCon,
>> is
>>    that civil society working on IG issues is split/fragmented and
>> therefore
>>    less effective than it could be. If anyone disagrees with this
>> diagnosis, I
>>    think they should express this on the thread with Bestbits included
>>    - If anyone is against the merger as a way of addressing this issue
>>    (i.e split/fragmentation as a key factor which explains our
>>    ineffectiveness) I think this should be expressed on the Bestbits
>> thread
>>    too - mainly because of the general support for the idea of merging
>> among
>>    members of both lists, and the main concern currently expressed about
>> the
>>    merger being about process. Otherwise, the conversations will continue
>> to
>>    be split and the current situation will be perpetuated.
>>    - If anyone is against the idea of reforming the Charter *in
>> principle*
>>    they make that clear in the thread with Bestbits too - as there maybe
>>    Bestbits members who have opinions on that as well. This is just a
>>    conversation so if there is strong disagreement about reforming the
>> Charter
>>    among anyone in either list, we could potentially agree not to reform
>> it
>>    and revisit the idea in a year, for example.
>>
>> Unless there's disagreement, I'll send a reminder to the thread which
>> includes Bestbits at the end of this week, and hopefully we can weave
>> ourselves back together there?
>>
>> Best
>> Sheetal
>>
>> On Mon, 17 Jun 2019 at 22:45, Anriette Esterhuysen <anriette at apc.org>
>> wrote:
>>
>> Agree completely with you on this Milton. And as Farzi pointed out, of
>> course we should preserve the documents on the Best Bits site, and the
>> list
>> archives.
>>
>> By the way, if anyone wants the archives of the IGC lists I have pretty
>> complete records for 2009-2016. Probably earlier too but on a back-up
>> drive
>> somewhere. I also think that the list archive of the list when it was
>> still
>> hosted by APC is still available somewhere too.
>>
>> Anriette
>>
>>
>> -----------------------------
>> Anriette Esterhuysen
>> Senior advisor on internet governance, policy advocacy and strategic
>> planning
>> Association for Progressive
>> Communicationsapc.orgafrisig.organriette at apc.org
>>
>> On 2019/06/17 23:08, Mueller, Milton L wrote:
>>
>> Really good point, Sheetal.
>>
>> But it is actually a substantive one. You have pointed out that there are
>> divergent perceptions of the discussion, and this is happening because
>> the
>> lists are not integrated.
>>
>>
>>
>> So how can anyone seriously suggest that we do not need to merge these
>> lists? How can anyone truly concerned with civil society influence favor
>> maintaining this stupid barrier between the groups involved?
>>
>>
>>
>> --MM
>>
>>
>>
>> Dear all,
>>
>>
>>
>> Without wanting to weigh in on the substantive discussion being had here,
>> I was just wondering if it was a purposeful decision to drop Bestbits in
>> some of these replies. It seems there are two divergent perceptions of
>> the
>> discussion happening. Happy for IGC to have its discussion but at some
>> point, those on Bestbits who are not on IGC will need to be updated as I
>> believe there are some Bestbits members who have only seen one side of
>> the
>> conversation. Otherwise, I'm happy to loop Bestbits back in, and share
>> the
>> conversation that has already happened?
>>
>>
>>
>> Best
>>
>> Sheetal.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, 14 Jun 2019 at 11:03, Carolina Rossini
>> <carolina.rossini at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> I did not say anybody was suggesting anything.  It was just a reminder.
>>
>> Tks
>>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Jun 14, 2019 at 9:42 AM farzaneh badii <farzaneh.badii at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> @Carolina (Hello!) I don't think anyone here is suggesting that BestBits
>> documents, materials etc will not be preserved. It is only a matter of
>> how
>> we should preserve them when we carry out the merge. (Jeremy has been
>> wanting to transfer the domain name for the past  I think around 3 years,
>> no one wants to take over, so we definitely need a plan), we can for
>> example decide on having the materials stored on future IGC website.
>>
>>
>>
>> As to changes to the IGC charter, as Sheetal explained and it is in the
>> proposal, the changes are going to be lightweight but if IGC charter
>> recommends a process for amendment, then we should follow that. I still
>> support forming a small group to look into these issues and let us know
>> how
>> we should proceed. Even if we don't agree to change the charter, we can
>> consider what new features IGC should possess in order to address the
>> needs
>> of its members and those members that are migrating from BestBits and
>> generally more engagement with IG processes.
>>
>>
>>
>> As to the poll among BestBits members, that is something you need to
>> discuss with BestBits. Just a reminder that both groups have been in my
>> opinion briefed and engaged with the conversation. We did not just have a
>> meeting with 11 members. Since December 2018, IGC and BestBits held
>> meetings about this, a survey was taken to see what BestBits members
>> think
>> (the average attendance in those meetings was something like 15 members,
>> Sheetal shared a comprehensive result of the survey).
>>
>>
>>
>> @Sala thank you for your kind words. I believe in collective action and
>> am
>> glad that you found the briefings and reports useful. InternetNZ's help
>> was
>> crucial in making that happen.
>>
>>
>>
>> Christchurch call was one instance when the civil society got together
>> and
>> showed its depth of expertise and knowledge about Internet governance
>> issues. So we definitely can get it together and act collectively. It's
>> just a matter of how, which I am sure we solve if we keep at it and have
>> these conversations.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Farzaneh
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Jun 14, 2019 at 3:42 AM Carolina Rossini <
>> governance at lists.riseup.net> wrote:
>>
>> I disagree with you Ian. A pool is needed among the BB members. There are
>> more than 11.
>>
>>
>>
>> And for the BB folks, and it’s is not only the mailing list. BB site has
>> a
>> lot of good material and statements that should be captured and saved.
>>
>>
>>
>> Sorry I could not make to the meeting. You can only imagine how busy I
>> am.
>>
>>
>>
>> Tks Sheetal for moving this forward with all the delicate and sensitive
>> touch it does deserve.
>>
>>
>>
>> C
>>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Jun 14, 2019 at 5:20 AM ian.peter at ianpeter.com <
>> ian.peter at ianpeter.com> wrote:
>>
>> No poll needed. Best Bits closes down (their call). Former members join
>> IGC individually. End of story.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> But fixing the IGC constitution (a later step) is more complex as Sala
>> points out.
>>
>>
>>
>> Ian.
>>
>>
>>
>> ------ Original Message ------
>>
>> From: "Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro" <governance at lists.riseup.net>
>>
>> To: "Sheetal Kumar" <sheetal at gp-digital.org>
>>
>> Cc: "Bakhtiyor Avezdjanov" <ba2482 at columbia.edu>; "Lee W McKnight" <
>> lmcknigh at syr.edu>; "Tapani Tarvainen" <tapani.tarvainen at effi.org>;
>> "Sivasubramanian M" <6.Internet at gmail.com>; "Akinremi Peter Taiwo" <
>> compsoftnet at gmail.com>; "governance" <governance at lists.riseup.net>
>>
>> Sent: 14/06/2019 11:40:49 AM
>>
>> Subject: Re: [governance] The proposal for closing Bestbits and merging
>> with IGC + next steps (was "Follow-on from survey on the future of
>> Bestbits: next steps")
>>
>>
>>
>> The IGC usually takes a poll led by elected co-coordinators to determine
>> consensus. If post discussion and debate, consensusnis reached to merge
>> then by all means.
>>
>>
>>
>> Nobody speaks for the IGC unless there is consensus, if you want to
>> change
>> the Charter, then there is a process to follow. It is meant to protect
>> us.
>> Members of Best Bits are members of the IGC anyway unless they left or
>> unsubscribed.
>>
>>
>>
>> One of the challenges, I have seen is the loss of important IGC data from
>> the old servers. Every organsiation has to evolve, advance but this has
>> to
>> be based on consensus, and papers for and against, proper discussion and
>> debate. From the outset, all I have seen is a presumption where the IGC
>> has
>> been forcibly roped into discussing mergers without the consensus.
>>
>>
>>
>> The co-coordinators have not set a strategic pathway for engagement in
>> key
>> international fora as the IGC in the HLP session although I was to see
>> great geographical representation by some members of the IGC in the.forum
>> in their individual capacity.
>>
>>
>>
>> I would also like to see the IGC working with the World Economic Forum
>> etc
>> and participating in the UN New York meetings, although some members
>> participate in their organisational capacity. It is also significant that
>> UNDESA reviews the global SDG projects and has a
>> monitoring/evaluation/audit type role which it uses to review and report
>> back to the UNGA.
>>
>>
>>
>> On another separate, note, whilst Arden (bless her heart), and others
>> have
>> been royally pissed about making a dent in how global MNCs like Facebook
>> behave in crisis, these are not new issues as they are.similar to
>> historical discussion on the list about Brits imposing a temporary ban
>> over
>> a certain radius of the London bombing just as the Egyptians and others
>> have done during times of national security. The Tech Accord which
>> represents the committment and negotiations between MNCs, Tech Giants and
>> some government reps as was shared by the former French Ambassador on
>> Cyber
>> affairs and others, it is on a transcript at a main session from last
>> year.
>>
>>
>>
>> The most New Zealand can do is impose a law in New Zealand against these
>> giants.  Facebook's Mia in NZ who is based in the Sydney officer and
>> global
>> public policy counterparts have alot of work on their hands.
>>
>>
>>
>> One view is that the threat to freedom of expression (which the IGC has
>> always talked about is no respecter of whether you are from the East,
>> West,
>> South, North. The principles are well established in International law
>> and
>> Frank La Rue's report to the UN General Assembly which was endorsed is
>> relevant. On the other hand, threats that Jeremy Malcolm and others have
>> been raising on wordings and semantics on child pornography by a UN
>> Drafting.committee show an example of new and emergent threats.
>>
>>
>>
>> Personally, even if Arden takes it to the UN, the UN is obliged and
>> mandated not to duplicate work that is already done and to this end, the
>> UN
>> Secretary General's foresight in appointing the HLP and launching the
>> report is key as geopolitical tensions are further heightened. I have yet
>> to read the full HLP report, but if it is missing a FoX compoment, then a
>> letter to the Co-Chairs, the UN Secretary General.may the faster non
>> bureaucratic way to get traction.
>>
>>
>>
>> What giants like Facebook would fear is being broken up for regulation!
>> Frankly Macron is hated in France just as Trump is hated in the US for
>> imposing taxes.
>>
>>
>>
>> It would be great for the IGC to host and convene a panel to explore
>> this.
>> I would recommend Bertrand from Internet Jurisdiction to co facilitate
>> and
>> moderate a geographically diverse panel and a representative from the
>> Geneva Internet Platform. I know Bertrand is speaking at a European Court
>> of Human Rights with others.
>>
>>
>>
>> We need to take a step back and reflect as a community how we want to
>> engage. We cannot be reactive and we have to stay ahead of the curve.
>>
>>
>>
>> 2.36am so best be getting back to bed.
>>
>>
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Sala
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ---
>> To unsubscribe: <mailto:igc-unsubscribe at lists.riseup.net>
>> List help: <https://riseup.net/lists>
>>
>> --
>>
>>
>>
>> *Carolina Rossini *
>>
>> + 1 (617) 697 9389 | skype: carolrossini | @carolinarossini
>>
>> PGP ID:  0xEC81015C
>>
>> ---
>> To unsubscribe: <mailto:igc-unsubscribe at lists.riseup.net>
>> List help: <https://riseup.net/lists>
>>
>> --
>>
>>
>>
>> *Carolina Rossini *
>>
>> + 1 (617) 697 9389 | skype: carolrossini | @carolinarossini
>>
>> PGP ID:  0xEC81015C
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> *Sheetal Kumar*
>>
>> Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL
>>
>> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL
>>
>> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514  |
>> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31  | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B E9E2 0603
>> DD7F
>> E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31|
>>
>> ---
>> To unsubscribe: <mailto:igc-unsubscribe at lists.riseup.net>
>> <igc-unsubscribe at lists.riseup.net>
>> List help: <https://riseup.net/lists> <https://riseup.net/lists>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>>
>> *Sheetal Kumar*
>> Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL
>> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL
>> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514  |
>> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31  | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B E9E2 0603
>> DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31|
>>
>> ---
>> To unsubscribe: <mailto:igc-unsubscribe at lists.riseup.net>
>> List help: <https://riseup.net/lists>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>>
>> *Sheetal Kumar*
>> Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL
>> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL
>> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514  |
>> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31  | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B E9E2 0603
>> DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31|
>>
>> ---
>> To unsubscribe: <mailto:igc-unsubscribe at lists.riseup.net>
>> List help: <https://riseup.net/lists>
>>
>
>
> --
>
>
> *Sheetal Kumar*
> Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL
> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL
> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514  |
> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31  | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B E9E2 0603 DD7F
> E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31|
>

-- 
------------------------
**Arsène Tungali* <http://about.me/ArseneTungali>*
Co-Founder & Executive Director, *Rudi international
<http://www.rudiinternational.org>*,
CEO,* Smart Services Sarl <https://www.smart-kitoko.com/>*,
Tel: +243 993810967 (DRC)
GPG: 523644A0

2015 Mandela Washington Fellow
<
http://tungali.blogspot.com/2015/06/selected-for-2015-mandela-washington.html>

(YALI) - ICANN GNSO Council Member
<https://gnso.icann.org/en/about/gnso-council.htm> Member. UN IGF MAG
<https://www.un.org/press/en/2018/pi2247.doc.htm> Member