Re: [At-Large] [Chapter-delegates] The Future of the Internet Governance Forum
Reposting what I posted in the Governance list here: Is there a possibility that a few powerful Governments instructed their CSTD representatives to cause this sudden shift in thinking across the CSTD and move away from mutli-stakeholder Governance model to an unilateral Governance model whereby Governments take the seats leaving Civil Society out there on the street to hold placards that are ignored? Such instructions could be part of the abrupt reactions on the wake of the Wiki-Leaks issue. Perhaps the Governments want to take total and complete charge of the Internet, to be in a position to wield totalitarian control over what is and what is not on the Internet. Sivasubramanian M On Sat, Dec 11, 2010 at 12:23 AM, Sivasubramanian M <isolatedn@gmail.com>wrote:
On Sat, Dec 11, 2010 at 12:22 AM, Sivasubramanian M <isolatedn@gmail.com>wrote:
I have signed with this comment (not verbatim)
Internet evolved largely by community participation and it works because of its participative and user centric model. A multi-stakeholder approach suits Internet Governance for this reason. The idea of reversing this approach to an unilateral approach amounts to reversing progress.
and posted Jon McNerney's message with the joint statement in the blog http://isocmadras.blogspot.com/
Sivasubramanian M
http://www.isocmadras.com facebook: http://is.gd/x8Sh LinkedIn: http://is.gd/x8U6 Twitter: http://is.gd/x8Vz
On Fri, Dec 10, 2010 at 11:59 PM, Zaid Ali <zaid@sfbayisoc.org> wrote:
Signed and supported on behalf of San Francisco Bay area chapter.
Zaid
Sent from my iPhone
On Dec 10, 2010, at 3:22 AM, Jon McNerney <mcnerney@isoc.org> wrote:
Dear Colleagues,
In an extraordinary meeting on 6 December the United Nation's
Commission on Science and Technology for Development (CSTD) decided to create a Working Group on Improvements to the Internet Governance Forum (IGF) (http://www.intgovforum.org/) with a membership made up only of governments.
We believe this decision sets back the model of multistakeholder
cooperation under which the IGF was established, and contradicts the instructions given to the CSTD for the establishment of the Working Group
The Internet Society has joined the International Chamber of Commerce -
Business Action to Support the Information Society, the Internet Governance Caucus, and many other Internet, business, and civil society organizations in sending a letter to the CSTD, asking them to retract their previous decision and to establish an appropriately constituted Working Group that ensures the full and active participation of governments, the private sector and civil society from both developing and developed countries, involving relevant intergovernmental and international organizations and forums.
Like the Internet, a multistakeholder approach has been at the core of
the Internet Governance Forum's formation and success. We hope that Internet Society Chapters and Members, as well as other organizations, will join us in signing the letter.
You may read the full letter, and see the growing list of signatories,
and indicated your own support here:
http://isoc.org/wp/newsletter/?p=2710
Sincerely,
Jon McNerney Chief Operating Officer Internet Society www.isoc.org _______________________________________________ Chapter-delegates mailing list Chapter-delegates@elists.isoc.org https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/listinfo/chapter-delegates
_______________________________________________ Chapter-delegates mailing list Chapter-delegates@elists.isoc.org https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/listinfo/chapter-delegates
All, There are governments that like and defend the multistakeholder approach and those who rather would do without it. As far as I understand, the outcome of CSTD meeting resulted from a temporary majority of the latter. Many of the representatives of the former were unfortunately absent, no doubt partly because the meeting had been arranged at a short notice. Yrjö
Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2010 00:37:15 +0530 From: isolatedn@gmail.com To: zaid@sfbayisoc.org CC: mcnerney@isoc.org; chapter-delegates@elists.isoc.org; at-large@atlarge-lists.icann.org Subject: Re: [At-Large] [Chapter-delegates] The Future of the Internet Governance Forum
Reposting what I posted in the Governance list here:
Is there a possibility that a few powerful Governments instructed their CSTD representatives to cause this sudden shift in thinking across the CSTD and move away from mutli-stakeholder Governance model to an unilateral Governance model whereby Governments take the seats leaving Civil Society out there on the street to hold placards that are ignored? Such instructions could be part of the abrupt reactions on the wake of the Wiki-Leaks issue.
Perhaps the Governments want to take total and complete charge of the Internet, to be in a position to wield totalitarian control over what is and what is not on the Internet.
Sivasubramanian M
On Sat, Dec 11, 2010 at 12:23 AM, Sivasubramanian M <isolatedn@gmail.com>wrote:
On Sat, Dec 11, 2010 at 12:22 AM, Sivasubramanian M <isolatedn@gmail.com>wrote:
I have signed with this comment (not verbatim)
Internet evolved largely by community participation and it works because of its participative and user centric model. A multi-stakeholder approach suits Internet Governance for this reason. The idea of reversing this approach to an unilateral approach amounts to reversing progress.
and posted Jon McNerney's message with the joint statement in the blog http://isocmadras.blogspot.com/
Sivasubramanian M
http://www.isocmadras.com facebook: http://is.gd/x8Sh LinkedIn: http://is.gd/x8U6 Twitter: http://is.gd/x8Vz
On Fri, Dec 10, 2010 at 11:59 PM, Zaid Ali <zaid@sfbayisoc.org> wrote:
Signed and supported on behalf of San Francisco Bay area chapter.
Zaid
Sent from my iPhone
On Dec 10, 2010, at 3:22 AM, Jon McNerney <mcnerney@isoc.org> wrote:
Dear Colleagues,
In an extraordinary meeting on 6 December the United Nation's
Commission on Science and Technology for Development (CSTD) decided to create a Working Group on Improvements to the Internet Governance Forum (IGF) (http://www.intgovforum.org/) with a membership made up only of governments.
We believe this decision sets back the model of multistakeholder
cooperation under which the IGF was established, and contradicts the instructions given to the CSTD for the establishment of the Working Group
The Internet Society has joined the International Chamber of Commerce -
Business Action to Support the Information Society, the Internet Governance Caucus, and many other Internet, business, and civil society organizations in sending a letter to the CSTD, asking them to retract their previous decision and to establish an appropriately constituted Working Group that ensures the full and active participation of governments, the private sector and civil society from both developing and developed countries, involving relevant intergovernmental and international organizations and forums.
Like the Internet, a multistakeholder approach has been at the core of
the Internet Governance Forum's formation and success. We hope that Internet Society Chapters and Members, as well as other organizations, will join us in signing the letter.
You may read the full letter, and see the growing list of signatories,
and indicated your own support here:
http://isoc.org/wp/newsletter/?p=2710
Sincerely,
Jon McNerney Chief Operating Officer Internet Society www.isoc.org _______________________________________________ Chapter-delegates mailing list Chapter-delegates@elists.isoc.org https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/listinfo/chapter-delegates
_______________________________________________ Chapter-delegates mailing list Chapter-delegates@elists.isoc.org https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/listinfo/chapter-delegates
_______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
On Sat, Dec 11, 2010 at 1:13 AM, Yrjö Länsipuro <yrjo_lansipuro@hotmail.com>wrote:
All,
There are governments that like and defend the multistakeholder approach and those who rather would do without it. As far as I understand, the outcome of CSTD meeting resulted from a temporary majority of the latter.
Many of the representatives of the former were unfortunately absent, no doubt partly because the meeting had been arranged at a short notice. Yrjö
Dear Yrjo, Is there a possibility that those who were absent would challenge (or by any process seek to reverse) this extraordinary decision?
Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2010 00:37:15 +0530 From: isolatedn@gmail.com To: zaid@sfbayisoc.org CC: mcnerney@isoc.org; chapter-delegates@elists.isoc.org; at-large@atlarge-lists.icann.org Subject: Re: [At-Large] [Chapter-delegates] The Future of the Internet Governance Forum
Reposting what I posted in the Governance list here:
Is there a possibility that a few powerful Governments instructed their CSTD representatives to cause this sudden shift in thinking across the CSTD and move away from mutli-stakeholder Governance model to an unilateral Governance model whereby Governments take the seats leaving Civil Society out there on the street to hold placards that are ignored? Such instructions could be part of the abrupt reactions on the wake of the Wiki-Leaks issue.
Perhaps the Governments want to take total and complete charge of the Internet, to be in a position to wield totalitarian control over what is and what is not on the Internet.
Sivasubramanian M
On Sat, Dec 11, 2010 at 12:23 AM, Sivasubramanian M <isolatedn@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Dec 11, 2010 at 12:22 AM, Sivasubramanian M < isolatedn@gmail.com>wrote:
I have signed with this comment (not verbatim)
Internet evolved largely by community participation and it works because of its participative and user centric model. A multi-stakeholder approach suits Internet Governance for this reason. The idea of reversing this approach to an unilateral approach amounts to reversing progress.
and posted Jon McNerney's message with the joint statement in the blog http://isocmadras.blogspot.com/
Sivasubramanian M
http://www.isocmadras.com facebook: http://is.gd/x8Sh LinkedIn: http://is.gd/x8U6 Twitter: http://is.gd/x8Vz
On Fri, Dec 10, 2010 at 11:59 PM, Zaid Ali <zaid@sfbayisoc.org>
wrote:
Signed and supported on behalf of San Francisco Bay area chapter.
Zaid
Sent from my iPhone
On Dec 10, 2010, at 3:22 AM, Jon McNerney <mcnerney@isoc.org> wrote:
Dear Colleagues,
In an extraordinary meeting on 6 December the United Nation's
Commission on Science and Technology for Development (CSTD) decided
to
create a Working Group on Improvements to the Internet Governance Forum (IGF) (http://www.intgovforum.org/) with a membership made up only of governments.
We believe this decision sets back the model of multistakeholder
cooperation under which the IGF was established, and contradicts the instructions given to the CSTD for the establishment of the Working Group
The Internet Society has joined the International Chamber of
Commerce - Business Action to Support the Information Society, the Internet Governance Caucus, and many other Internet, business, and civil society organizations in sending a letter to the CSTD, asking them to retract their previous decision and to establish an appropriately constituted Working Group that ensures the full and active participation of governments, the private sector and civil society from both developing and developed countries, involving relevant intergovernmental and international organizations and forums.
Like the Internet, a multistakeholder approach has been at the core
of the Internet Governance Forum's formation and success. We hope that Internet Society Chapters and Members, as well as other organizations, will join us in signing the letter.
You may read the full letter, and see the growing list of
signatories, and indicated your own support here:
http://isoc.org/wp/newsletter/?p=2710
Sincerely,
Jon McNerney Chief Operating Officer Internet Society www.isoc.org _______________________________________________ Chapter-delegates mailing list Chapter-delegates@elists.isoc.org https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/listinfo/chapter-delegates
_______________________________________________ Chapter-delegates mailing list Chapter-delegates@elists.isoc.org https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/listinfo/chapter-delegates
_______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
_______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
Dear Siva, That's exactly what I expect to happen Best, Yrjö
Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2010 05:59:08 +0530 From: isolatedn@gmail.com To: at-large@atlarge-lists.icann.org Subject: Re: [At-Large] [Chapter-delegates] The Future of the Internet Governance Forum
On Sat, Dec 11, 2010 at 1:13 AM, Yrjö Länsipuro <yrjo_lansipuro@hotmail.com>wrote:
All,
There are governments that like and defend the multistakeholder approach and those who rather would do without it. As far as I understand, the outcome of CSTD meeting resulted from a temporary majority of the latter.
Many of the representatives of the former were unfortunately absent, no doubt partly because the meeting had been arranged at a short notice. Yrjö
Dear Yrjo,
Is there a possibility that those who were absent would challenge (or by any process seek to reverse) this extraordinary decision?
Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2010 00:37:15 +0530 From: isolatedn@gmail.com To: zaid@sfbayisoc.org CC: mcnerney@isoc.org; chapter-delegates@elists.isoc.org; at-large@atlarge-lists.icann.org Subject: Re: [At-Large] [Chapter-delegates] The Future of the Internet Governance Forum
Reposting what I posted in the Governance list here:
Is there a possibility that a few powerful Governments instructed their CSTD representatives to cause this sudden shift in thinking across the CSTD and move away from mutli-stakeholder Governance model to an unilateral Governance model whereby Governments take the seats leaving Civil Society out there on the street to hold placards that are ignored? Such instructions could be part of the abrupt reactions on the wake of the Wiki-Leaks issue.
Perhaps the Governments want to take total and complete charge of the Internet, to be in a position to wield totalitarian control over what is and what is not on the Internet.
Sivasubramanian M
On Sat, Dec 11, 2010 at 12:23 AM, Sivasubramanian M <isolatedn@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Dec 11, 2010 at 12:22 AM, Sivasubramanian M < isolatedn@gmail.com>wrote:
I have signed with this comment (not verbatim)
Internet evolved largely by community participation and it works because of its participative and user centric model. A multi-stakeholder approach suits Internet Governance for this reason. The idea of reversing this approach to an unilateral approach amounts to reversing progress.
and posted Jon McNerney's message with the joint statement in the blog http://isocmadras.blogspot.com/
Sivasubramanian M
http://www.isocmadras.com facebook: http://is.gd/x8Sh LinkedIn: http://is.gd/x8U6 Twitter: http://is.gd/x8Vz
On Fri, Dec 10, 2010 at 11:59 PM, Zaid Ali <zaid@sfbayisoc.org>
wrote:
Signed and supported on behalf of San Francisco Bay area chapter.
Zaid
Sent from my iPhone
On Dec 10, 2010, at 3:22 AM, Jon McNerney <mcnerney@isoc.org> wrote:
> > Dear Colleagues, > > In an extraordinary meeting on 6 December the United Nation's Commission on Science and Technology for Development (CSTD) decided
to
create a Working Group on Improvements to the Internet Governance Forum (IGF) (http://www.intgovforum.org/) with a membership made up only of governments. > > We believe this decision sets back the model of multistakeholder cooperation under which the IGF was established, and contradicts the instructions given to the CSTD for the establishment of the Working Group > > The Internet Society has joined the International Chamber of Commerce - Business Action to Support the Information Society, the Internet Governance Caucus, and many other Internet, business, and civil society organizations in sending a letter to the CSTD, asking them to retract their previous decision and to establish an appropriately constituted Working Group that ensures the full and active participation of governments, the private sector and civil society from both developing and developed countries, involving relevant intergovernmental and international organizations and forums. > > Like the Internet, a multistakeholder approach has been at the core of the Internet Governance Forum's formation and success. We hope that Internet Society Chapters and Members, as well as other organizations, will join us in signing the letter. > > You may read the full letter, and see the growing list of signatories, and indicated your own support here: > > http://isoc.org/wp/newsletter/?p=2710 > > > Sincerely, > > Jon McNerney > Chief Operating Officer > Internet Society > www.isoc.org > _______________________________________________ > Chapter-delegates mailing list > Chapter-delegates@elists.isoc.org > https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/listinfo/chapter-delegates _______________________________________________ Chapter-delegates mailing list Chapter-delegates@elists.isoc.org https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/listinfo/chapter-delegates
_______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
_______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
_______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
Dear Yjro, Feels good to know that the rest of the world will not allow this threatening situation to prevail. :) On Sat, Dec 11, 2010 at 10:00 AM, Yrjö Länsipuro <yrjo_lansipuro@hotmail.com
wrote:
Dear Siva, That's exactly what I expect to happen Best, Yrjö
Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2010 05:59:08 +0530 From: isolatedn@gmail.com To: at-large@atlarge-lists.icann.org Subject: Re: [At-Large] [Chapter-delegates] The Future of the Internet Governance Forum
On Sat, Dec 11, 2010 at 1:13 AM, Yrjö Länsipuro <yrjo_lansipuro@hotmail.com>wrote:
All,
There are governments that like and defend the multistakeholder
approach
and those who rather would do without it. As far as I understand, the outcome of CSTD meeting resulted from a temporary majority of the latter.
Many of the representatives of the former were unfortunately absent, no doubt partly because the meeting had been arranged at a short notice. Yrjö
Dear Yrjo,
Is there a possibility that those who were absent would challenge (or by any process seek to reverse) this extraordinary decision?
Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2010 00:37:15 +0530 From: isolatedn@gmail.com To: zaid@sfbayisoc.org CC: mcnerney@isoc.org; chapter-delegates@elists.isoc.org; at-large@atlarge-lists.icann.org Subject: Re: [At-Large] [Chapter-delegates] The Future of the
Internet
Governance Forum
Reposting what I posted in the Governance list here:
Is there a possibility that a few powerful Governments instructed
their
CSTD
representatives to cause this sudden shift in thinking across the CSTD and move away from mutli-stakeholder Governance model to an unilateral Governance model whereby Governments take the seats leaving Civil Society out there on the street to hold placards that are ignored? Such instructions could be part of the abrupt reactions on the wake of the Wiki-Leaks issue.
Perhaps the Governments want to take total and complete charge of the Internet, to be in a position to wield totalitarian control over what is and what is not on the Internet.
Sivasubramanian M
On Sat, Dec 11, 2010 at 12:23 AM, Sivasubramanian M < isolatedn@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Dec 11, 2010 at 12:22 AM, Sivasubramanian M < isolatedn@gmail.com>wrote:
I have signed with this comment (not verbatim)
Internet evolved largely by community participation and it works because of its participative and user centric model. A multi-stakeholder approach suits Internet Governance for this reason. The idea of reversing this approach to an unilateral approach amounts to reversing progress.
and posted Jon McNerney's message with the joint statement in the blog http://isocmadras.blogspot.com/
Sivasubramanian M
http://www.isocmadras.com facebook: http://is.gd/x8Sh LinkedIn: http://is.gd/x8U6 Twitter: http://is.gd/x8Vz
On Fri, Dec 10, 2010 at 11:59 PM, Zaid Ali <zaid@sfbayisoc.org>
wrote:
> Signed and supported on behalf of San Francisco Bay area chapter. > > Zaid > > Sent from my iPhone > > On Dec 10, 2010, at 3:22 AM, Jon McNerney <mcnerney@isoc.org>
wrote:
> > > > > Dear Colleagues, > > > > In an extraordinary meeting on 6 December the United Nation's > Commission on Science and Technology for Development (CSTD) decided to > create a Working Group on Improvements to the Internet Governance Forum > (IGF) (http://www.intgovforum.org/) with a membership made up only of > governments. > > > > We believe this decision sets back the model of multistakeholder > cooperation under which the IGF was established, and contradicts the > instructions given to the CSTD for the establishment of the Working Group > > > > The Internet Society has joined the International Chamber of Commerce - > Business Action to Support the Information Society, the Internet Governance > Caucus, and many other Internet, business, and civil society organizations > in sending a letter to the CSTD, asking them to retract their previous > decision and to establish an appropriately constituted Working Group that > ensures the full and active participation of governments, the private sector > and civil society from both developing and developed countries, involving > relevant intergovernmental and international organizations and forums. > > > > Like the Internet, a multistakeholder approach has been at the core of > the Internet Governance Forum's formation and success. We hope that Internet > Society Chapters and Members, as well as other organizations, will join us > in signing the letter. > > > > You may read the full letter, and see the growing list of signatories, > and indicated your own support here: > > > > http://isoc.org/wp/newsletter/?p=2710 > > > > > > Sincerely, > > > > Jon McNerney > > Chief Operating Officer > > Internet Society > > www.isoc.org > > _______________________________________________ > > Chapter-delegates mailing list > > Chapter-delegates@elists.isoc.org > > https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/listinfo/chapter-delegates > _______________________________________________ > Chapter-delegates mailing list > Chapter-delegates@elists.isoc.org > https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/listinfo/chapter-delegates >
_______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
_______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
_______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
_______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
Hi, as the new co-coordinator of the Civil Society Internet Governance Caucus (IGC), and the long time member of AtLarge community, I urge you to pay attention, sign the petition, in whichever capacity you like to. We made our own statement on his and sent to CSTD. Please see here: http://www.igcaucus.org/statements Yes, the CSTD meeting was arranged in a very extraordinary way, though the Chair maintained thate there was "clear majority" when they made that bad decision. There were about 18 members of CSTD, out of 43. Only USA made the reservation, but others followed. Well, almost all of these guys were the permanent mission reps stationed in Geneva, have little clue on Internet Governance, less on WSIS, and didn't understand the consequence of the decision. On Friday, Dec 17, there will be this CSTD WG open consultation meeting, and I will join there. It will be great, still, if ICANN AtLarge community, or ALAC express or join the protest. Essentially, end-users interests will or should not be represented by government folks, and that is exactly what this decision may lead to. izumi 2010/12/11 Sivasubramanian M <isolatedn@gmail.com>:
Dear Yjro,
Feels good to know that the rest of the world will not allow this threatening situation to prevail.
:)
On Sat, Dec 11, 2010 at 10:00 AM, Yrjö Länsipuro <yrjo_lansipuro@hotmail.com
wrote:
Dear Siva, That's exactly what I expect to happen Best, Yrjö
Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2010 05:59:08 +0530 From: isolatedn@gmail.com To: at-large@atlarge-lists.icann.org Subject: Re: [At-Large] [Chapter-delegates] The Future of the Internet Governance Forum
On Sat, Dec 11, 2010 at 1:13 AM, Yrjö Länsipuro <yrjo_lansipuro@hotmail.com>wrote:
All,
There are governments that like and defend the multistakeholder
approach
and those who rather would do without it. As far as I understand, the outcome of CSTD meeting resulted from a temporary majority of the latter.
Dear Izumi, Thank you for relaying the information about the future of the Internet Governance Forum. On 14/12/2010 15:27, Izumi AIZU wrote :
It will be great, still, if ICANN AtLarge community, or ALAC express or join the protest. Essentially, end-users interests will or should not be represented by government folks, and that is exactly what this decision may lead to.
I personally completely agree and this is why I have relayed Wolf's calls for petition. Should the At-Large Community join the protest? I hope they will. Should the ALAC join the protest and express its opinion in an official communiqué? I am unsure whether this falls in its mandate. I am already told that some RALO Operation Principles limit its activities under the ICANN ambit. This is why I would urge members and the community to sign the petitions and to voice their concerns, but am unsure about having an official ICANN At-Large statement. Kind regards, Olivier -- Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond, PhD http://www.gih.com/ocl.html
Are you folks listening ? http://www.unmultimedia.org/tv/webcast/index.html Channel 6 -J
Second screening just starting. I've embedded it at http://www.isoc-ny.org/p2/?p=1637 <http://www.isoc-ny.org/p2/?p=1637>j On Tue, Dec 14, 2010 at 12:44 PM, Jorge Amodio <jmamodio@gmail.com> wrote:
Are you folks listening ?
http://www.unmultimedia.org/tv/webcast/index.html
Channel 6
-J _______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
-- --------------------------------------------------------------- Joly MacFie 218 565 9365 Skype:punkcast WWWhatsup NYC - http://wwwhatsup.com http://pinstand.com - http://punkcast.com VP (Admin) - ISOC-NY - http://isoc-ny.org ---------------------------------------------------------------
I personally completely agree and this is why I have relayed Wolf's
calls for petition.
+1
Should the At-Large Community join the protest? I hope they will. Should the ALAC join the protest and express its opinion in an official communiqué? I am unsure whether this falls in its mandate. I am already told that some RALO Operation Principles limit its activities under the ICANN ambit.
Right, but individual ALSes in any RALO may well join the petition. Hong -- Dr. Hong Xue Professor of Law Director of Institute for the Internet Policy & Law (IIPL) Beijing Normal University http://www.iipl.org.cn/ <http://iipl.org.cn/> 19 Xin Jie Kou Wai Street Beijing 100875 China
As always, when we give space government gets it. Get the space back is another problem. Hope we can get it. Vanda Scartezini Polo Consultores Associados IT Trend Alameda Santos 1470 1407,8 01418-903 São Paulo,SP, Brasil Tel + 5511 3266.6253 Mob + 55118181.1464 -----Mensagem original----- De: at-large-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org [mailto:at-large-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] Em nome de Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond Enviada em: terça-feira, 14 de dezembro de 2010 15:35 Para: At-Large Worldwide Cc: ALAC Working List Assunto: Re: [At-Large] [Chapter-delegates] The Future of the Internet Governance Forum Dear Izumi, Thank you for relaying the information about the future of the Internet Governance Forum. On 14/12/2010 15:27, Izumi AIZU wrote :
It will be great, still, if ICANN AtLarge community, or ALAC express or join the protest. Essentially, end-users interests will or should not be represented by government folks, and that is exactly what this decision may lead to.
I personally completely agree and this is why I have relayed Wolf's calls for petition. Should the At-Large Community join the protest? I hope they will. Should the ALAC join the protest and express its opinion in an official communiqué? I am unsure whether this falls in its mandate. I am already told that some RALO Operation Principles limit its activities under the ICANN ambit. This is why I would urge members and the community to sign the petitions and to voice their concerns, but am unsure about having an official ICANN At-Large statement. Kind regards, Olivier -- Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond, PhD http://www.gih.com/ocl.html _______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
participants (8)
-
Hong Xue -
Izumi AIZU -
Joly MacFie -
Jorge Amodio -
Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond -
Sivasubramanian M -
Vanda UOL -
Yrjö Länsipuro