some reasons for lack of participation
Estimados colegas, Jacqueline's comment and call for more participation provokes me to reflect on some reasons for our list passivity and lack of substantive discussion. El comentario de Jacquelina referente a la ausencia de una participación activa y sustantiva en esta lista me provoca algunas reflexiones sobre las posibles causas de esta situación. Methinks it boils down to a power divide, if you will, between national level Ministry, commericial ISPs or even NAP senior staff or tech executives whose skills and understanding of the complex ICANN-related issues have evolved over the past 15 plus years, AND those few of us in the budding RALO network who come from the IT activist communities in our diverse set of countries. Pienso que vivimos una brecha del poder, si me permiten, entre los colegas hoy día funcionarios de jerarquía en Ministerios, ISPs comerciales, hasta NAPs, cuyo oficio o amplia experiencia es fruto de 15 años administrando redes, Y LOS DEMÁS, que somos pocos, quienes procedemos de ONGs y un activismo a favor de la inclusión digital. And in most of our countries, IT-related public policies were NOT THE RESULT OF BOTTOM UP, amply discussed initiatives, such as national telecenter programs with non proprietary tools, but rather sweetheart contracts between public officials and the mega consortia bent on expanding market share, reinforcing branding and general profiting from the digital divide narrative. Our respective lower cost more community anchored initiatives (with vanguard IT tools and open source software) were largely ignored while small mom and pop cybercafés filled village and town squares offering few incentives for the brilliant young women and men denied higher educations for diverse reasons. Our vision of digital inclusion was largely unacceptable to national elites nervous about an well-informed public demanding services and accountability. En la mayoría de nuestros países, las políticas públicas relacionadas con TICs NO FUERON producto de consultas públicas o la apropiación de pilotos e herramientas de vanguardia, sino el producto de contratos frutos de un capitalismo de compadres donde los consorcios conocidos ampliaron sus mercados, reforzaron sus marcas y logos, y lucraron con la narrativa de la dichosa "brecha digital". Nuestra propuestas más baratas, con tecnologías de punta y software de código abierto, fueron ignoradas mientras las plazas se llenaron de cibercafés, micronegocios sin subsidios, que ofrecen pocos incentivos para las y los jóvenes brillantes, frustrados ante las pocas opciones para seguir estudiando. Nuestras propuestas no cuajaron, fueron inaceptables para las respectivas elites nacionales nerviosos ante la posibilidad de un pueblo bien informado y exigente de cuentas claras. Thus, it should not surprise us that our list and RALO reflects the polarity of this decision making process in most if not all of our countries. I suggest the more technically proficient have a responsibility to parse the social, user freedom and intellectual property implications of the several ICANN reforms... Entonces, no debe de sorprendernos que nuestra lista y RALO es un fiel reflejo de la actual polaridad en el actual proceso de la toma de decisiones hoy en casi todo sino todos nuestros países. Sugiero que los participantes con mayor oficio técnico comparten una responsabilidad para desglosar las implicaciones sociales, derechos de los usuarios y de propiedad intelectual inherentes a las muchas reformas presentadas al ICANN. Saludos, Scott S. Robinson www.vinculart.org.mx www.uam-antropologia.info México
Thanks Scott So basically, if there's a small sub-group that takes a policy document, such as RAA, and looks at it in terms of "What does it mean to users in LAC" and they post that document as an adjunct to the translated document and the online briefing, that more people, like yourself, for example, would be able to and would comment on the policy issue? In that case - LACRALO needs to create such working groups... it's a good idea. Jacqueline Scott S Robinson wrote:
Estimados colegas,
Jacqueline's comment and call for more participation provokes me to reflect on some reasons for our list passivity and lack of substantive discussion.
El comentario de Jacquelina referente a la ausencia de una participación activa y sustantiva en esta lista me provoca algunas reflexiones sobre las posibles causas de esta situación.
Methinks it boils down to a power divide, if you will, between national level Ministry, commericial ISPs or even NAP senior staff or tech executives whose skills and understanding of the complex ICANN-related issues have evolved over the past 15 plus years, AND those few of us in the budding RALO network who come from the IT activist communities in our diverse set of countries.
Pienso que vivimos una brecha del poder, si me permiten, entre los colegas hoy día funcionarios de jerarquía en Ministerios, ISPs comerciales, hasta NAPs, cuyo oficio o amplia experiencia es fruto de 15 años administrando redes, Y LOS DEMÁS, que somos pocos, quienes procedemos de ONGs y un activismo a favor de la inclusión digital.
And in most of our countries, IT-related public policies were NOT THE RESULT OF BOTTOM UP, amply discussed initiatives, such as national telecenter programs with non proprietary tools, but rather sweetheart contracts between public officials and the mega consortia bent on expanding market share, reinforcing branding and general profiting from the digital divide narrative. Our respective lower cost more community anchored initiatives (with vanguard IT tools and open source software) were largely ignored while small mom and pop cybercafés filled village and town squares offering few incentives for the brilliant young women and men denied higher educations for diverse reasons. Our vision of digital inclusion was largely unacceptable to national elites nervous about an well-informed public demanding services and accountability.
En la mayoría de nuestros países, las políticas públicas relacionadas con TICs NO FUERON producto de consultas públicas o la apropiación de pilotos e herramientas de vanguardia, sino el producto de contratos frutos de un capitalismo de compadres donde los consorcios conocidos ampliaron sus mercados, reforzaron sus marcas y logos, y lucraron con la narrativa de la dichosa "brecha digital". Nuestra propuestas más baratas, con tecnologías de punta y software de código abierto, fueron ignoradas mientras las plazas se llenaron de cibercafés, micronegocios sin subsidios, que ofrecen pocos incentivos para las y los jóvenes brillantes, frustrados ante las pocas opciones para seguir estudiando. Nuestras propuestas no cuajaron, fueron inaceptables para las respectivas elites nacionales nerviosos ante la posibilidad de un pueblo bien informado y exigente de cuentas claras.
Thus, it should not surprise us that our list and RALO reflects the polarity of this decision making process in most if not all of our countries. I suggest the more technically proficient have a responsibility to parse the social, user freedom and intellectual property implications of the several ICANN reforms...
Entonces, no debe de sorprendernos que nuestra lista y RALO es un fiel reflejo de la actual polaridad en el actual proceso de la toma de decisiones hoy en casi todo sino todos nuestros países. Sugiero que los participantes con mayor oficio técnico comparten una responsabilidad para desglosar las implicaciones sociales, derechos de los usuarios y de propiedad intelectual inherentes a las muchas reformas presentadas al ICANN.
Saludos,
Scott S. Robinson www.vinculart.org.mx www.uam-antropologia.info México
_______________________________________________ lac-discuss-en mailing list lac-discuss-en@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-discuss-en_atlarge-lists...
Jackie, Scott I agree with this approach as well but I rather suspect that the first stage of distillation would have to be done at the level of ALAC. All policy should first have specific reference and/or implications to the at-large then we drill down to the RALOs. My two cents Lance -----Original Message----- From: lac-discuss-en-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org [mailto:lac-discuss-en-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] On Behalf Of Jacqueline A. Morris Sent: Tuesday, November 04, 2008 9:05 PM Cc: lac-discuss-en@atlarge-lists.icann.org Subject: Re: [lac-discuss-en] some reasons for lack of participation Thanks Scott So basically, if there's a small sub-group that takes a policy document, such as RAA, and looks at it in terms of "What does it mean to users in LAC" and they post that document as an adjunct to the translated document and the online briefing, that more people, like yourself, for example, would be able to and would comment on the policy issue? In that case - LACRALO needs to create such working groups... it's a good idea. Jacqueline Scott S Robinson wrote:
Estimados colegas,
Jacqueline's comment and call for more participation provokes me to reflect on some reasons for our list passivity and lack of substantive discussion.
El comentario de Jacquelina referente a la ausencia de una participación activa y sustantiva en esta lista me provoca algunas reflexiones sobre las posibles causas de esta situación.
Methinks it boils down to a power divide, if you will, between national level Ministry, commericial ISPs or even NAP senior staff or tech executives whose skills and understanding of the complex ICANN-related issues have evolved over the past 15 plus years, AND those few of us in the budding RALO network who come from the IT activist communities in our diverse set of countries.
Pienso que vivimos una brecha del poder, si me permiten, entre los colegas hoy día funcionarios de jerarquía en Ministerios, ISPs comerciales, hasta NAPs, cuyo oficio o amplia experiencia es fruto de 15 años administrando redes, Y LOS DEMÁS, que somos pocos, quienes procedemos de ONGs y un activismo a favor de la inclusión digital.
And in most of our countries, IT-related public policies were NOT THE RESULT OF BOTTOM UP, amply discussed initiatives, such as national telecenter programs with non proprietary tools, but rather sweetheart contracts between public officials and the mega consortia bent on expanding market share, reinforcing branding and general profiting from the digital divide narrative. Our respective lower cost more community anchored initiatives (with vanguard IT tools and open source software) were largely ignored while small mom and pop cybercafés filled village and town squares offering few incentives for the brilliant young women and men denied higher educations for diverse reasons. Our vision of digital inclusion was largely unacceptable to national elites nervous about an well-informed public demanding services and accountability.
En la mayoría de nuestros países, las políticas públicas relacionadas con TICs NO FUERON producto de consultas públicas o la apropiación de pilotos e herramientas de vanguardia, sino el producto de contratos frutos de un capitalismo de compadres donde los consorcios conocidos ampliaron sus mercados, reforzaron sus marcas y logos, y lucraron con la narrativa de la dichosa "brecha digital". Nuestra propuestas más baratas, con tecnologías de punta y software de código abierto, fueron ignoradas mientras las plazas se llenaron de cibercafés, micronegocios sin subsidios, que ofrecen pocos incentivos para las y los jóvenes brillantes, frustrados ante las pocas opciones para seguir estudiando. Nuestras propuestas no cuajaron, fueron inaceptables para las respectivas elites nacionales nerviosos ante la posibilidad de un pueblo bien informado y exigente de cuentas claras.
Thus, it should not surprise us that our list and RALO reflects the polarity of this decision making process in most if not all of our countries. I suggest the more technically proficient have a responsibility to parse the social, user freedom and intellectual property implications of the several ICANN reforms...
Entonces, no debe de sorprendernos que nuestra lista y RALO es un fiel reflejo de la actual polaridad en el actual proceso de la toma de decisiones hoy en casi todo sino todos nuestros países. Sugiero que los participantes con mayor oficio técnico comparten una responsabilidad para desglosar las implicaciones sociales, derechos de los usuarios y de propiedad intelectual inherentes a las muchas reformas presentadas al ICANN.
Saludos,
Scott S. Robinson www.vinculart.org.mx www.uam-antropologia.info México
_______________________________________________ lac-discuss-en mailing list lac-discuss-en@atlarge-lists.icann.org
http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-discuss-en_atlarge-lists .icann.org
_______________________________________________ lac-discuss-en mailing list lac-discuss-en@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-discuss-en_atlarge-lists .icann.org
Actually Lance, I think exactly the opposite. When the RALOs were formed, the idea was that it be a 2 way street - not that ALAC sends stuff down for comment and that's it. The regions need to look at the issues themselves, at the relevance and impact in their communities and tell ALAC what they want ALAC to say on behalf of internet users. Remember that the 15 members of ALAC are not able to see all the issues and repercussions of something in the LAC regions, for example. and as there are no Caribbean reps in the ALAC at all, the Caribbean at the very least needs to be very proactive with regard to this otherwise we risk having no input into policy. Also from a practical point of view, if we wait for the ALAC WG to come up with something first, we run the risk of having very little time to digest and comment. We need to have LACRALO participation in the ALAC working groups, and with regard to our own capacity building, we can make shift for ourselves and form groups to 1) Consider issues in the context of our communities 2) Educate ourselves on the policy issues and the technical issues (the more experienced in the region working with colleagues to raise the capacity of all) Jacqueline Lance Hinds wrote:
Jackie, Scott
I agree with this approach as well but I rather suspect that the first stage of distillation would have to be done at the level of ALAC. All policy should first have specific reference and/or implications to the at-large then we drill down to the RALOs.
My two cents
Lance
-----Original Message----- From: lac-discuss-en-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org [mailto:lac-discuss-en-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] On Behalf Of Jacqueline A. Morris Sent: Tuesday, November 04, 2008 9:05 PM Cc: lac-discuss-en@atlarge-lists.icann.org Subject: Re: [lac-discuss-en] some reasons for lack of participation
Thanks Scott So basically, if there's a small sub-group that takes a policy document, such as RAA, and looks at it in terms of "What does it mean to users in LAC" and they post that document as an adjunct to the translated document and the online briefing, that more people, like yourself, for example, would be able to and would comment on the policy issue? In that case - LACRALO needs to create such working groups... it's a good idea. Jacqueline Scott S Robinson wrote:
Estimados colegas,
Jacqueline's comment and call for more participation provokes me to reflect on some reasons for our list passivity and lack of substantive discussion.
El comentario de Jacquelina referente a la ausencia de una participación activa y sustantiva en esta lista me provoca algunas reflexiones sobre las posibles causas de esta situación.
Methinks it boils down to a power divide, if you will, between national level Ministry, commericial ISPs or even NAP senior staff or tech executives whose skills and understanding of the complex ICANN-related issues have evolved over the past 15 plus years, AND those few of us in the budding RALO network who come from the IT activist communities in our diverse set of countries.
Pienso que vivimos una brecha del poder, si me permiten, entre los colegas hoy día funcionarios de jerarquía en Ministerios, ISPs comerciales, hasta NAPs, cuyo oficio o amplia experiencia es fruto de 15 años administrando redes, Y LOS DEMÁS, que somos pocos, quienes procedemos de ONGs y un activismo a favor de la inclusión digital.
And in most of our countries, IT-related public policies were NOT THE RESULT OF BOTTOM UP, amply discussed initiatives, such as national telecenter programs with non proprietary tools, but rather sweetheart contracts between public officials and the mega consortia bent on expanding market share, reinforcing branding and general profiting from the digital divide narrative. Our respective lower cost more community anchored initiatives (with vanguard IT tools and open source software) were largely ignored while small mom and pop cybercafés filled village and town squares offering few incentives for the brilliant young women and men denied higher educations for diverse reasons. Our vision of digital inclusion was largely unacceptable to national elites nervous about an well-informed public demanding services and accountability.
En la mayoría de nuestros países, las políticas públicas relacionadas con TICs NO FUERON producto de consultas públicas o la apropiación de pilotos e herramientas de vanguardia, sino el producto de contratos frutos de un capitalismo de compadres donde los consorcios conocidos ampliaron sus mercados, reforzaron sus marcas y logos, y lucraron con la narrativa de la dichosa "brecha digital". Nuestra propuestas más baratas, con tecnologías de punta y software de código abierto, fueron ignoradas mientras las plazas se llenaron de cibercafés, micronegocios sin subsidios, que ofrecen pocos incentivos para las y los jóvenes brillantes, frustrados ante las pocas opciones para seguir estudiando. Nuestras propuestas no cuajaron, fueron inaceptables para las respectivas elites nacionales nerviosos ante la posibilidad de un pueblo bien informado y exigente de cuentas claras.
Thus, it should not surprise us that our list and RALO reflects the polarity of this decision making process in most if not all of our countries. I suggest the more technically proficient have a responsibility to parse the social, user freedom and intellectual property implications of the several ICANN reforms...
Entonces, no debe de sorprendernos que nuestra lista y RALO es un fiel reflejo de la actual polaridad en el actual proceso de la toma de decisiones hoy en casi todo sino todos nuestros países. Sugiero que los participantes con mayor oficio técnico comparten una responsabilidad para desglosar las implicaciones sociales, derechos de los usuarios y de propiedad intelectual inherentes a las muchas reformas presentadas al ICANN.
Saludos,
Scott S. Robinson www.vinculart.org.mx www.uam-antropologia.info México
_______________________________________________ lac-discuss-en mailing list lac-discuss-en@atlarge-lists.icann.org
http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-discuss-en_atlarge-lists .icann.org
_______________________________________________ lac-discuss-en mailing list lac-discuss-en@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-discuss-en_atlarge-lists .icann.org
participants (3)
-
Jacqueline A. Morris -
Lance Hinds -
Scott S Robinson