[PC-NCSG] Civil Society Roundtables
Robin Gross
robin
Wed Feb 20 00:19:35 EET 2013
Thanks, Avri. I've written to Klaus separately after hearing he
volunteered to make the first draft of this letter on NCSG's call
last week. (Thanks, Klaus!)
So I will work with Klaus and the EC to get this letter started.
Best,
Robin
On Feb 18, 2013, at 12:24 PM, Avri Doria wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Such a letter would probably have the most punch coming form the
> NCSG-EC + Chair.
>
> Vetting on NCSG-Discuss might be good too.
>
> In the meantime, I will keep working on my meager personal efforts.
>
> avri
>
>
> On 18 Feb 2013, at 15:04, Robin Gross wrote:
>
>> I share the concerns that ICANN's civil society engagement/
>> outreach efforts seem to be:
>> a) PR for ICANN, and
>> b) attempts to manage civil society by encouraging as others
>> have said "the 'right' kind of civil society groups' at ICANN
>> (i.e. those who will not criticize ICANN and share *staff's* goals
>> for the type of NGO's to become engaged or to listen to (see (a)
>> above).
>>
>> All of ICANN's 'outreach/engagement' efforts are top-down, and we
>> hear about them in a press release after ICANN has made all
>> invitations and arrangements.
>>
>> We need a strategy to encourage ICANN to start including non-
>> commercial users who have been thinking about these issues (many
>> are in NCSG) and have contacts with these new groups in their
>> plans for civil society outreach and engagement.
>>
>> A formal (but friendly) letter to ICANN from NCSG is in order on
>> this issue in my view.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Robin
>>
>> On Feb 18, 2013, at 11:18 AM, William Drake wrote:
>>
>>> Hi
>>>
>>> On Feb 18, 2013, at 11:07 AM, Rafik Dammak
>>> <rafik.dammak at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> 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.
>>>
>>> It's just so refreshing to have the Vice President of Business
>>> Engagement in charge of defining civil society and which players
>>> merit what kinds of inclusion. So I guess "NGOs" means the paid
>>> staff of NGOs, not their members and fellow travelers, who might
>>> include (gasp) academics.
>>>>
>>>> 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
>>>
>>> So the real interest is probably not "NGOs" generally, but rather
>>> the "right kind of NGOs" that some ICANN vets have said were
>>> supposed to have been the CS contingent all along?When oh when
>>> are Oxfam et al going to call and say domain names are their
>>> priority now?
>>>
>>>>
>>>> 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.
>>>
>>> Ditto
>>>>
>>>> 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.
>>>
>>> or NGO staff??
>>>>
>>>> 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.
>>>
>>> Maybe he could lurk around outside Security Council and Human
>>> Rights Council meetings with some 'join the new gTLD program'
>>> pamphlets...
>>>
>>>> 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.
>>>
>>> Oh the irony
>>>>
>>>> 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.
>>>
>>> Perhaps we could organize a close encounter at the IGF?
>>>>
>>>> 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.
>>>
>>> We've been raising these in NCSG meetings with the board etc. for
>>> years and no traction. Something written would really help.
>>>>
>>>> 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 :)
>>>
>>> Si
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> * 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,
>>>
>>> +2 BD
>>>>
>>>> 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
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> PC-NCSG mailing list
>>>> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org
>>>> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> PC-NCSG mailing list
>>> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org
>>> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> IP JUSTICE
>> Robin Gross, Executive Director
>> 1192 Haight Street, San Francisco, CA 94117 USA
>> p: +1-415-553-6261 f: +1-415-462-6451
>> w: http://www.ipjustice.org e: robin at ipjustice.org
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> PC-NCSG mailing list
>> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org
>> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> PC-NCSG mailing list
> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org
> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg
>
IP JUSTICE
Robin Gross, Executive Director
1192 Haight Street, San Francisco, CA 94117 USA
p: +1-415-553-6261 f: +1-415-462-6451
w: http://www.ipjustice.org e: robin at ipjustice.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.ipjustice.org/pipermail/pc-ncsg/attachments/20130219/69209b89/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the NCSG-PC
mailing list