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

ian.peter at ianpeter.com ian.peter at ianpeter.com
Fri Jun 14 00:18:57 EDT 2019

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.


------ 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.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20190614/f03af868/attachment.htm>

More information about the Governance mailing list