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

Fri Jun 14 03:42:02 EDT 2019

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
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20190614/e9ec9db9/attachment.htm>