[PC-NCSG] Civil Society Roundtables

[Rafik Dammak]

Hi Avri,

Thanks for the udpate,


>
> I had a 30 minute phone call with Chris Mondini*.  Still waiting for the
> write up, which he was going to do for Fadi and send me.  So I had not yet
> gotten to writing anything up.  But since you ask.
>

maybe allowing comment to draft  something online through etherpad?

>
> - 'doubling down on splintering'
>
> First things first, I brought up the fact that some of my co-volunteers
> objected to the split between NGO and Academia that I had proposed.  He not
> only wanted to keep those separate, he wanted to separate the discussion
> with NGOs into two groups:
>

I see it as "divide and conquer strategy" and because what is happening
already in his visit to Asia and in japan in particular (I think you
already saw the message from Izumi in At-large list), the meeting are seen
as PR and communication more than real engagement IMHO, but I will be glad
to see my assumption contradicted in the ground. I am also recalling the
content of blog post about LA meeting.

for example, where are NC people at the MIG events planned in dubai and
adis abeba?
the other question why not meeting everybody like the registries-registrars
meeting in amsterdam?
also the idea of DNS industry summit , why not a DNS users summit where
they will all non-commercials without distinction.


> - Those who concerned themselves with Internet Governance - mostly smaller
> organizations

- Those who have developed methods by which they run gigantic operations in
> the global public interest - the big organizations
>

yes the PR toward those big organizations and that is why inviting
"leaders".

>
> - As for 'leaders.'
>
> I use the word because they use the word, I am sure you know my innate
> disdain for the notion of Leaders, but I was wearing my pragmatic attitude
> in this conversation.


I know that you abhor that word and I don't see any reason to encourage its
usage. we should'nt support the CEO in bringing such corporate culture to
ICANN , that will be self-defeating.


 These things are designed as discussions between Fadi and a few other
> leaders.  So while I think ICANN should be having lots of conversations
> with lots of Non Commercials and other civil society, in this case, I was
> presenting an argument for why his roundtable series should extend to Non
> Commercial leaders.  If we want to present ideas for other events with
> other kinds of voices, we should develop specific proposals.


ok, I am happy to help, while I am not in favor of division.


>  In this case, I am not trying to boil the ocean, just get something
> opened up.  So yes, I am "encouraging a kind of high level event".  My
> personal suggestion that started the discussions was the simple proposition
> that he needed to do with Civil Society, and NGOs especially, same kind of
> leadership roundtable he is having with Business.


yes for fairness, but he met will all registries and then registrars, and
probably with business but he dont divide them in sub-categories.


> I would prefer to not turn this into another kind of campaign, though I do
> support the idea of other types of campaign.
>
not a campaign but keep a certain pressure to avoid backward move.


>
> - On individuals not institutions.
>
> His primary interest at this point seems to be meeting the heads of other
> organizations, so that is what I am suggesting.  Perhaps if/when we get to
> academic, that can be expanded to other prominent members of Civil society
> who are not academic.


back again to corporate culture and ignoring critics.


>  Don't know.  This particular round of discussions is not about
> individuals - to be honest I don't know how one picks the 5-10 individuals
> he should invite to a roundtable.  I think a meeting with the some of the
> individual people who hate ICANN would be a different sort of beast.  and
> perhaps this is what NCSG should work up a proposal on - something similar
> to what is done at ICANn meeting for the business community should be done
> for the civil society.  It would be good to have an event like we had in
> Nairobi at more meeting.  Maybe we should be suggesting  one for Durban.
>  But that is something different than this, and for now, I am working on
> this.  But if we develop a coherent proposal, I think we should present it.
>
> OK for the last sentence.


> - When and Where
>
> Mondini wants to try and plan these meetings for times and places where
> these leaders may already be.  He is worried about the ability to actually
> pull these leaders to LA or other ICANN offices.  He asked me to suggest
> possible events.  Obviously I know about Ig events and suggested a Geneva
> consultation for IGF or Bali would be one of the best opportunities for
> co-scheduling.  I am looking into other opportunities for the non-Ig NGO
> leaders.  Suggestions Welcome.  We have not gotten down to specific
> invitees yet.
>
> - Topics
>
> As for the topics that would be subjected to his Venn analysis (not at all
> a new term, though perhaps a new use - i am guessing it is a Biz thing),
> the topics we discussed:
>
> 1. reputation analysis - but turned on its head.  In the roundtables with
> Fadi, this was the Ry & Rr reputations being talked about.  In terms of
> discussions with civil society organizations and academic, it would be
> ICANN's reputation.


well, ICANN reputation should be done through respect of processes ,
respect of volunteers and  bottom-up model :) it is not PR exercise because
outsiders have really little trust on ICANN, we are the few believers and
somehow trasher by ICANN itself.

 I think it is important that ICANN get a clear view of ICANN's reputation
> especially among Civil society, I really do not think they know.  I think
> many think that what they do for ALAC is enough to make civil society
> happy.  I started my work on disabusing them of this notion.
>
> indeed, we need to debunk such myths and avoid thinking that "minimal
service" is enough.


> 2. how to serve the public interest and yet meet large scale operational
> requirements
>
> 3. multistakeholder participation - where civil society fits in the
> various ongoing ICANN experiment and how their participation can be
> facilitated
>
> Other topics I wanted to get in based on conversations with APC where I
> volunteer, but did not yet, are the Internationalization efforts and issue
> of institutional capture.
>

I am also APC affiliate too, it will be great to have a debate there too.

>
> That is about what comes to mind, I have not had my first coffee yet, but
> wanted to get a quick note off.  When I have a more formal report of the
> meeting, I will share it.
>
> Note, I have not been suggesting this expansion of roundtables as a
> representative of any group.  It was my own idea to presume to tell him
> what he ought to do.  And it was my own tactical decision to try and do it
> by semi-private email instead of public assault. Sometimes I think public
> assault in the blogosphere etc is the way to go; in this case, I decided to
> try to quiet way.
>
>
that is nuke to be used wisely and carefully :)



>
> *  He is Vice President, Business Engagement, ICANN does not have a Vice
> President, Civil Society Engagement. I have been encouraging Fadi to think
> about this.  We also discussed this gap during the phone call - I mentioned
> some of  our disappointment at the way Civil Society / Non Commercials etc
> were totally ignored in their engagement plans.
>

+1 and we need to keep pressure in that side,

Thanks again Avri,

Rafik

>
> On 17 Feb 2013, at 07:48, Rafik Dammak wrote:
>
> > any update about this discussion with ICANN staff?
> > for civil society it is diverse, and I am surprised that you used the
> term "leaders" , are we really encouraging a kind of high level event? I am
> not sure that only institutions and organizations are only the
> representative of civil society. I do think that you agree with me that
> many individuals  highly involved and being part of many communities like
> free software, FoE etc are no member of any structure, some of those
> individuals are really doubtful about ICANN and the "centralisation" of DNS
> for example, that is probably totally different from the perspective of big
> non-commercial organisations or associations involved in developing world.
> >
> >
> > Rafik
> >
> > ps at least I learned that there is yet another diagram for some purpose
> called vena diagram :)
> >
> >
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> PC-NCSG mailing list
> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org
> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.ipjustice.org/pipermail/pc-ncsg/attachments/20130218/7ac54001/attachment.html>