<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#330033">
<br>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- <br>
Hash: SHA1 <br>
<br>
Hi,<br>
<br>
I find the arguments for Involvement more convincing than the ones
against.<br>
<br>
And I add one more, what NMI, WEF, ITU and all the others need is to
be persistently 'infected' with multistakeholder principles and
actuality s well as the diversity on civil society. Our
participation, no matter how hard it is condemned or ridiculed by
some of the purists, is just that infection. We cannot spread the
ideas of inclusion and transparency by staying home as holier than
all the rest until conditions are perfect.<br>
<br>
I do think we should demand as much as we can to remediate the
negatives, and whatever we don't get now, keep demanding until we
wear them down.<br>
<br>
I repsect the Interent Society and value my membership and
participation in the Internet Society, but they have a different
relationship to the power structures than we do, and they have
different Fadi problems that we have and play in a different game.
And I predict that in the end, they will participate. Besides, just
try to imagine ISOC not participating because NCSG was against it.<br>
<br>
<br>
avri<br>
<br>
On 18-Nov-14 19:15, Robin Gross wrote:<br>
<span style="white-space: pre;">> FOR INVOLVEMENT<br>
><br>
> With ITU a governments only forum and no real will to change,
and IGF as a forum with no power to make recommendations or take
decisions and again no will to change, there is no credible venue
to initiate action on non technical issues or issues not within
the remit of Istar organisations These would include surveillance
issues, human rights issues, net neutrality issues, to name a few.<br>
><br>
> The solid commitment to NetMundial principles promised, if
carried out in practice, would create a credible and open
initiative<br>
><br>
> There is a need for a representative forum capable of moving
us forward on a range of issues not covered by existing
institutions<br>
><br>
> Participation is strongly supported by some sections of civil
society<br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> AGAINST INVOLVEMENT<br>
><br>
> The last thing we need is a corporate takeover of internet
governance and this could become that<br>
><br>
> ISOC has withdrawn<br>
><br>
> Participation is strongly opposed by some sections of civil
society<br>
><br>
> This initiative has a track record of poor communication<br>
><br>
> Not bottom-up or transparent so far<br>
></span><br>
<br>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
<br>
Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (MingW32)
<br>
<br>
iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJUbLx3AAoJEOo+L8tCe36HCx4H/26AkO1Xn7FlTgGiWqpmZGcT
<br>
lTW0g9CpW0YFjUylW7dgVRcdaRXKfAVgQQG2SgIZxdG4X/D3Ed7MnJJlaaxUySHt
<br>
TSwBJTkVC+Si8WHU/NzINUUcAxrHgSWaezKODRM9VFaMXyUo9z8vkMXWeAHEe5t7
<br>
APFlvdxMm2jLG+tLQ6aJyY+rFOkgM95tVzT5SobbIIQcrEKHiteMgH6bRdsUEv74
<br>
Q7QZthivBz6j7RSCZhN+VzA61ynUCuKhKYDYtGXiJqQcPabonojhQnobU0RIwvya
<br>
zx1YnPKJY80iRaPGXtCwEAWSgqyXtRpyw+CkdaiYA9eKOcFT3LrK9dYqKxqapOM=
<br>
=aKkl
<br>
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
<br>
<br>
</body>
</html>