<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
</head>
<body dir="auto" style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode:
space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;" bgcolor="#FFFFFF"
text="#000000">
On Apr 6, 2015, at 11:42 PM, William Drake <a
class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:wjdrake@gmail.com"><wjdrake@gmail.com></a>
wrote:<br class="Apple-interchange-newline">
<div class="AppleOriginalContents" style="direction: ltr;">
<blockquote type="cite">
<div>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;
charset=utf-8" class="">
<div style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space;
-webkit-line-break: after-white-space;" class="">
<div class="">
<div class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">
<div class="">
<div style="word-wrap: break-word;
-webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break:
after-white-space;" class="">
<div class="">So, where do we go to develop
solutions - policy proposals, draft laws and
regulations, etc? Still not the IGF, evidently.</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
Valid question with no answer. This was something we
kind of disagreed on back at the aborted launch meeting
at WEF last August when you were saying, if I recall
correctly, that NMI should indeed have some normative
role e.g. with respect to elaborating and specifying the
NM principles. I understand the concern about the lack
of a mechanism for such work, but felt from the start
that the errors in roll out and framing of NMI and the
decision to link in WEF were inevitably going to
generate a lot of backlash, lack of buy in and end of
the world hysteria from key actors, so any effort to
arrogate to NMI such a role was going to be radioactive
and sink the thing before it left port.</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div class="AppleOriginalContents" style="direction: ltr;"><br>
</div>
<div class="AppleOriginalContents" style="direction: ltr;">(Sorry
for the long delayed reply. Vacation last week.) I accept all
of what you say above.</div>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space;
-webkit-line-break: after-white-space;" class="">
<div class="">
<div class="">Maybe we’ll end up having to live with an
UNCTAD/CSTD program that can study and make recs; they’re
already increasingly active on global e-commerce anyway.
Wouldn’t be the worst thing, given the old saw that the
acronym means Under No Circumstances Take Any Decisions.
It’d be great if the IGF could evolve to provide a
convincing alternative, as you argued for in your book
chapter, but I don’t see it either. The whole discussion
of intersessional work has been redirected to best
practice forums</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div class="AppleOriginalContents" style="direction: ltr;"><br>
</div>
<div class="AppleOriginalContents" style="direction: ltr;">Yes
this is why I've been a little reticent to pour my time into
those. But I'm feeling a little more optimistic about the
incipient plans for a deliberative poll ahead of the next IGF
(DP@IGF), which I'm hoping will be a proof of concept of
something that the IGF could easily have done on its own
account... and maybe, in future, will. Even so, it's
increasingly wearying to continue incanting "next year, next
year" which is why, although I really disliked the execution of
the NETmundial Initiative, I was glad of a proposal—any
proposal—to fill some of the remaining gaps in the IG ecosystem.<br>
</div>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space;
-webkit-line-break: after-white-space;" class="">
<div class="">
<div class="">Which could be a start, but obviously short of
what you’d like. It’d have been good if we could have
gotten more CS engagement on the intersessional stuff at
the foundational moment, but messages to Best Bits etc.
generated little interest. CS remains all over the place
and hence nowhere on this, methinks; I see no organized
desire to take the IGF seriously as a policy platform
consistent with the TA mandate. People have moved on.</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div class="AppleOriginalContents" style="direction: ltr;"><br>
</div>
<div class="AppleOriginalContents" style="direction: ltr;">Unfortunately
"multi-stakeholderism" has become toxic for a significant
segment of civil society over a relatively short space of time,
and JNC have played a significant part in that, damaging both
the IGF and other civil society initiatives along the way (which
is why Best Bits has been regrouping lately rather than taking a
lead as before). I predict however that once the Internet
Social Forum fails to change their world, multi-stakeholder
processes may swing back into favour.<br>
</div>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space;
-webkit-line-break: after-white-space;" class="">
<div class="">Sure, and if you’d like to comment on the ToR to
the effect that it lacks suitable ambition and a needed
policy role, have at it. Fadi might pleased that someone
finally ‘gets it.’</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
</div>
<div class="AppleOriginalContents" style="direction: ltr;">I had
already submitted something along those lines, just suggesting
that the ToR should not completely close the door to its
incubation of projects for the development of policy proposals -
of which DP@IGF project is arguably one.<br>
</div>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">--
Jeremy Malcolm PhD LLB (Hons) B Com
Internet lawyer, ICT policy advocate, geek
echo "9EEAi^^;6C6]>J^=^>6"|tr '\!-~' 'P-~\!-O'|wget -q -i - -O -</pre>
</body>
</html>