From muguet at mdpi.net Wed Aug 1 20:51:21 2007 From: muguet at mdpi.net (Dr. Francis MUGUET) Date: Wed, 01 Aug 2007 20:51:21 +0200 Subject: [Wsis-pct] European Commission - Interactive Policy Making - IPM open source Message-ID: <46B0D629.7020204@mdpi.net> Hello While answering to a EU questionnaire, I just stumbled on a piece of software developed by EU, with a license yet unknown to me. IPM (Interactive Policy Making) is a software package aiming at the creation, launch and analysis of replies of online questionnaires. IPM is made of 4 modules: - Administration of users (management of users' accounts) - Form Generator (creation of online questionnaires) - Form Runner (the survey itself) - Form Viewer (collection and analysis of replies) In the European Commission environment, all modules are accessible at the address: http://ec.europa.eu/yourvoice/ipm/forms/dispatch IPM Open Source Interactive Policy Making (IPM) is a customisable web-based application developed by the European Commission that aims to improve governance by using the Internet to collect and analyse reactions of citizens and enterprises across the EU Member States. Recently, the open source software version of IPM has been developed to support the public administrations of the EU Member States. The development of IPM has been done by the Commission?s Directorate General for Informatics under the IDABC programme. Customisable web applications employed either for the collection of spontaneous reactions from across the Member States - Feedback Mechanism - or for consultations of stakeholders - Online Consultation Mechanism - have been developed. A web interface also allows the joint collection of data that can then be disseminated and shared by the Member States and the European Commission. The IPM Feedback Mechanisms also allow for an in-built alert system that highlights problems related to the application of EU policies in the Member States. Validated for Web server Apache Tomcat 4.1 Servlet/JSP Apache ANT 1.6.4, J2SDK 1.4.2 Directory Open LDAP Browser Mozilla Firefox 1 XML facilities JDBC-XML Publishing framework Cocoon 2 Operating System Linux - RedHat Enterprise Linux Application Server release 3 (Taroon), featuring Kernel 2.4.21-4.EL DB MySQL 5.1 IPM can be downloaded under EUPL from following link: http://ec.europa.eu/idabc/en/document/6541/5644 European Union Public Licence v.1.0 EUPL ? the European Community 2007 ?Compatible Licences? according to article 5 EUPL are: - General Public License (GPL) v. 2 - Open Software License (OSL) v. 2.1, v. 3.0 - Common Public License v. 1.0 - Eclipse Public License v. 1.0 - Cecill v. 2.0 The good thing is that it has been validated with Firefox, and not IE. The bad : why yet another license ? Comments ? Have any of you had experience with this software ? May be; it could be used by UNESCO and the IGF, the EU endorsement might reassure those organizations. Best regards Francis -- ------------------------------------------------------ Francis F. MUGUET Ph.D MDPI Foundation Open Access Journals Associate Publisher http://www.mdpi.org http://www.mdpi.net muguet at mdpi.org muguet at mdpi.net ENSTA Paris, France KNIS lab. Director "Knowledge Networks & Information Society" (KNIS) muguet at ensta.fr http://www.ensta.fr/~muguet World Summit On the Information Society (WSIS) Civil Society Working Groups Scientific Information : http://www.wsis-si.org chair Patents & Copyrights : http://www.wsis-pct.org co-chair Financing Mechanismns : http://www.wsis-finance.org web UNMSP project : http://www.unmsp.org WTIS initiative: http://www.wtis.org ------------------------------------------------------ From muguet at mdpi.net Sun Aug 5 03:10:55 2007 From: muguet at mdpi.net (Dr. Francis MUGUET) Date: Sun, 05 Aug 2007 03:10:55 +0200 Subject: [Wsis-pct] List of approuved IGF workshops Message-ID: <46B5239F.4010404@mdpi.net> Hello Please find below the list of the accepted IGF workshops, that has been sent only to workshop submitters so far. This might be understood as everything is still in a state of flux. My only "political" but somewhat humorous remark is that it should be time that the theme "Governance" be added to the five existing thematic categories at IGF.... :-7 In fact most of the proposals of the "Other" category, and rejected for this reason !!! ;-( were covering the very theme of "Governance", which cannot be but multi-stakeholder... The "Other" category included even an (interesting) ICANN workshop proposal... Is it that ironic ? Are the smokescreen tactics of some over-zealous ICANN proxies starting to backfire ? It is my personal conjecture that many good proposals have not been accepted because they might find room in the 90 minutes slots that are automatically affected to the recognized Dynamic Coalitions that made the request for room in due time. In this regards, the list of the current recognized coalitions is listed there : # StopSpamAlliance # Dynamic Coalition on Privacy ( Contacts : Ralf Bendrath & Gus Hosein ) # IGF Dynamic Coalition on Open Standards (DCOS) ( CS representatives at the steering committee : Jamie Love , Robin Gross ) # The Internet Bill of Rights ( AKA Tunis Mon Amour ! ; Contacts : Robin Gross & Vitorio Bertola ) # A2K at IGF Dynamic Coalition ( Contact: Robin Gross ) # Dynamic Coalition on Freedom of Expression and Freedom of the Media on the Internet ( Contacts: Robin Gross & Christian Moller ( The Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe ) ) # The Online Collaboration Dynamic Coalition # Dynamic Coalition on Access and Connectivity for Rural, Remote and Dispersed Communities ( Contact : Rajnesh Singh ) # Dynamic Coalition on Linguistic Diversity ( Contacts : Viola Krebs, Francis Muguet ) as for the latest ( in fact a recent addition... ) coalition, if you have interesting presentations or proposals in relationship to Free Software and Linguistic Diversity, please contact me, I would be glad to support them since the diversity coalition schedule is yet open. Concerning proposals related to other coalitions, it appears that the most efficient way for proponents, would be to contact Robin ( on this list ) that has managed to be involved with no less that four coalitions... not withstanding the fact that as member of the GNSO council of ICANN, she might participate also in ICANN or ISOC organized meetings. very, very impressive !!! :-X You might also contact Vitorio ( Tunis Mon Amour ! ) who is also on this list. Have nice dreams for this mid-summer night Francis ------------------------------------------------------------ Dear workshop proponents, During the stock-taking phase after the Athens meeting it was generally felt that organizers need to be given more time than last year to prepare their workshops. At the consultations in May we agreed therefore to notify them by 31 July whether or not to go ahead with their projects. We received many excellent proposals , by far exceeding the available slots. Any selection will not, therefore, be satisfactory to eveyone, as it is not possible to accommodate all proposals. Please find attached a list of workshop proposals that in our view reflect the basic IGF principles. We applied common selection criteria to all proposals. The criteria we used are based on the concept we have been developing in our consultations and Web based discussions since the inception of the IGF. These criteria are the following: o relevance to the agenda of the meeting; o multi-stakeholder approach in planning and carrying out the workshop; o approaching a subject from multiple perspectives (and thus avoiding advocacy positions); o geographical diversity in general and the involvement of experts from developing countries in particular; o the relevance with regard to the cross cutting priorities of development and capacity building. We stated at the outset that the readiness to cooperate with others was a prerequisite. We therefore also took into account the outreach activities of the various workshop proponents and their responsiveness to cooperation initiatives. While the workshop proposals contained in the list are solid, most of them could gain from increased geographical diversity, in particular by including more developing country panellists. We therefore appeal to all organizers to make an additional effort and look out for voices from developing countries, or, if approached, to be open and inclusive and give them a say. We have been appealing to all workshop proponents to consider merging their proposals with similar ones. Some mergers have taken place - some of them at the very last moment - while discussions on other mergers continue. They will be included in the list once they come to an agreement. Others may wish to approach the workshops that deal with similar issues. We would like to encourage the workshop organizers who have been given the green light to be open to any such initiative. We have also been in touch with the proponents of some proposals to discuss the possibility of shifting them into the Best Practice or Open Forum sections. Some have already agreed to this while discussions with others are still under way. The list is a 'positive list' of workshop proposals which offer solid prospects for staging interesting and successful events. We have not drawn up a 'negative list' of proposals we are rejecting. Other workshops still stand a chance of being chosen, as the selection process will be finalized after taking into account the number of applications we receive for Best Practice and Open Forums. Best regards The IGF Secretariat ------------------- > > List of workshops > > Critical Internet Resources > > The functioning of the Domain Name System > > IPv4 and IPv6 > ***Merged workshops*** > > The root server system > > Legal aspects of managing critical Internet resources > ***Merging with ?Governance of Critical Internet Resources - Exploring Commons and Public Interest Based Frameworks?*** > > The Communications Infrastructure of the Internet > > Access > > Internet Traffic Exchange In Less Developed Internet Markets > > Access: the local challenge > > Qualifying, Quantifying, and Meeting the Challenge of Internet Access Costs. > ***Merged with International peering and transit agreements*** > > Diversity > > Accessibility needs for people with special requirements > > Accessibility guidelines and standards for persons with disabilities > > Establishing standards for a multi-lingual global Internet > > Interoperable multilingual directories and solutions provided by the semantic web > ***Merging with Research and Cultural Diversity: The State of art and perspectives*** > > Openness > > 'Quality' And The Internet: Using And Trusting Internet Web Content > > Freedom of Expression as a Security Issue > > Fundamental Freedoms in the Internet Governance Forum: Protecting and Promoting Freedom of Expression, Freedom of Assembly and Association, and Privacy in the Information Society - formerly Securing Human Rights Online: Protecting and Promoting Freedom > > Upholding Human Rights on the Global Internet - Toward a Unified Industry Solution > > Security > > Protecting children from sexual exploitation through ICTs > > Legislative responses to current and future cyber-threats > > The global culture for cyber-security > > Managing security issues: authentication at the transaction level > > International Cooperation on the Capacity Building of Information Security > *** merged with ?Computer Emergency Response Teams and their contribution to national 'cultures of cyber security'?*** > > Development / Capacity Building > > Toward a Development Agenda for Internet Governance > > Worldwide NIC's co-development : "Joint initiative for an automated management" > > The Digital Education and Information Policy Initiative: Towards the Development of Effective Exceptions to and Limitations on Copyright in the Realm of Digital Education > > Other > > Fulfilling the mandate of IGF > > 31 July 2007 -- ------------------------------------------------------ Francis F. MUGUET Ph.D MDPI Foundation Open Access Journals Associate Publisher http://www.mdpi.org http://www.mdpi.net muguet at mdpi.org muguet at mdpi.net ENSTA Paris, France KNIS lab. Director "Knowledge Networks & Information Society" (KNIS) muguet at ensta.fr http://www.ensta.fr/~muguet World Summit On the Information Society (WSIS) Civil Society Working Groups Scientific Information : http://www.wsis-si.org chair Patents & Copyrights : http://www.wsis-pct.org co-chair Financing Mechanismns : http://www.wsis-finance.org web UNMSP project : http://www.unmsp.org WTIS initiative: http://www.wtis.org ------------------------------------------------------ From muguet at mdpi.net Mon Aug 13 01:54:39 2007 From: muguet at mdpi.net (Dr. Francis MUGUET) Date: Mon, 13 Aug 2007 01:54:39 +0200 Subject: [Wsis-pct] Microsoft fast track rejected by the US Message-ID: <46BF9DBF.1090106@mdpi.net> Hello Good news for interoperability and truly open standards. There is already one open standard ODF http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenDocument, but Microsoft wants to propose its own : OOXML with an hidden agenda. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ooxml The "fast track" procedure for Microsoft proposed standard has been rejected by the US delegation at ISO., even if it was by a slim margin, Canada, UK and Germany are against the fast track. China has already no to http://www.noooxml.org/forum/t-15827/china-says-ciao-ciao-to-ooxml-one-more-no and now it is the turn of the US It is very likely that many countries that ware still wavering are going to reject the "fast track" procedure. There were tremendous efforts by many activists, and by Free Software organizations, against OOXML that must be acknowledged : http://www.noooxml.org http://www.france.fsfeurope.org/documents/msooxml-questions http://www.april.org and many others ------------------------- http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20070811-microsoft-one-vote-short-of-fast-track-ooxml-iso-standardization.html Microsoft one vote short of fast-track OOXML ISO standardization By Ryan Paul | Published: August 11, 2007 - 02:19PM CT Executive board members of the International Committee for Information Technology Standards (INCITS), the organization that represents the United States in ISO standardization deliberations, recently held an internal poll to determine the position that the United States should take on Microsoft's request for Office Open XML (OOXML) approval. With eight votes in favor, seven against, and one abstention, the group was one vote short of the nine votes required for approving OOXML ISO standardization. This does not mean that OOXML is dead in the water, however. Related Stories * Open Document Format published as ISO standard As we have previously reported , many ISO member nations are similarly rejecting the OOXML fast-track proposal. Although this is a considerable setback for Microsoft, it merely slows down the ISO standardization process for OOXML; it does not halt it completely. Now we are in for a protracted debate as standards organizations around the world engage in broad discussion and conduct analysis of the controversial document format. Of the organizations that participated in the poll, Apple, the Department of Homeland Security, EIA, EMC, HP, Intel, Microsoft, and Sony all voted in favor of OOXML fast-track approval. Votes opposing approval came from Farance, GS1 US, IBM, Lexmark, NIST, Oracle, and the US Department of Defense. IEEE---which is comprised of numerous organizations including the companies that are on the INCITS executive board---abstained, citing internal disagreement. NIST's vote opposing OOXML fast-track approval may seem peculiar in light of a statement issued by the organization affirming "conditional" support for the OOXML format. We contacted NIST for clarification on the organization's position. NIST representative Ben Stein responded by drawing our attention to section 9.8 of the ISO/IEC JTC 1 procedural documentation , which notes that "conditional approval should be submitted as a disapproval vote." Standards expert Andy Updegrove provides more insight into NIST's position in a blog entry . As Updegrove explains, a vote of approval with comments is procedurally equivalent to unconditional approval, because it doesn't necessitate evaluation of comments and criticisms. Organizations that wish to make approval contingent on fulfillment of specific criteria necessarily have to vote against fast-track approval. Looking at the comments issued with the votes, it appears as though several other organizations that voted against fast-track approval share NIST's position. Oracle's official comment, for instance, states that INCITS should "make approval of the [OOXML] specification conditional upon the satisfactory resolution of the large number of issues identified during the public review period." Likewise, the US Department of Defense---which also voted against fast-track approval---states that its position "is based on the requirement to first resolve existing comments and further develop/mature the present state of the standard." The Department of Defense cites several potential problems with the OOXML standard, including the use of binary information that "would lead to security concerns," references to undocumented backward compatibility formatting features that some have argued could potentially impede third-party implementation of the standard, and "the use of proprietary file formats within the open standard [that] appear to cause potential intellectual property ownership concerns." Given the controversial nature, relative complexity, and significant importance of the standard, the results of INCIT's vote is unsurprising. An INCITS technical committee also voted against fast-track OOXML approval last month prior to the executive board's vote. Further deliberation is clearly needed as well as further refinement of the format. It seems as though many of the organizations participating in the approval process are generally supportive of the standard itself, but are unwilling to voice unconditional support until their concerns are resolved. OOXML may be down, but it's certainly not out http://ballot.itic.org/itic/tallyvote.taf?function=vote&committee=INCITS&ballot_id=2212 Below is the vote tally for Letter Ballot INCITSLB2212. To view an individual organization's response, along with any comments or reason for abstention, click on the organization name below. Date Organization Yes No Abstain Not Yet *TOTAL* 8 7 1 0 07/27/2007 00:00:00 Apple Inc X 08/10/2007 00:00:00 Department of Homeland Security X Comments 08/09/2007 00:00:00 Electronic Industries Alliance X 07/20/2007 00:00:00 EMC X 08/10/2007 00:00:00 Farance, Incorporated X Comments 08/10/2007 00:00:00 GS1 US X Comments 08/08/2007 00:00:00 Hewlett Packard Co X Comments 08/06/2007 00:00:00 IBM Corp X Comments 08/09/2007 00:00:00 IEEE X Comments 08/09/2007 00:00:00 Intel X 08/08/2007 00:00:00 Lexmark International X Comments 08/08/2007 00:00:00 Microsoft X Comments 08/09/2007 00:00:00 NIST X Comments 08/10/2007 00:00:00 Oracle X Comments 07/24/2007 00:00:00 Sony Electronics X 08/09/2007 00:00:00 US Department of Defense X Comments -- ------------------------------------------------------ Francis F. MUGUET Ph.D MDPI Foundation Open Access Journals Associate Publisher http://www.mdpi.org http://www.mdpi.net muguet at mdpi.org muguet at mdpi.net ENSTA Paris, France KNIS lab. Director "Knowledge Networks & Information Society" (KNIS) muguet at ensta.fr http://www.ensta.fr/~muguet World Summit On the Information Society (WSIS) Civil Society Working Groups Scientific Information : http://www.wsis-si.org chair Patents & Copyrights : http://www.wsis-pct.org co-chair Financing Mechanismns : http://www.wsis-finance.org web UNMSP project : http://www.unmsp.org WTIS initiative: http://www.wtis.org ------------------------------------------------------ -- ------------------------------------------------------ Francis F. MUGUET Ph.D MDPI Foundation Open Access Journals Associate Publisher http://www.mdpi.org http://www.mdpi.net muguet at mdpi.org muguet at mdpi.net ENSTA Paris, France KNIS lab. Director "Knowledge Networks & Information Society" (KNIS) muguet at ensta.fr http://www.ensta.fr/~muguet World Summit On the Information Society (WSIS) Civil Society Working Groups Scientific Information : http://www.wsis-si.org chair Patents & Copyrights : http://www.wsis-pct.org co-chair Financing Mechanismns : http://www.wsis-finance.org web UNMSP project : http://www.unmsp.org WTIS initiative: http://www.wtis.org ------------------------------------------------------ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mail.fsfeurope.org/pipermail/wsis-pct/attachments/20070813/d58ee5ea/attachment-0001.htm From muguet at mdpi.net Mon Aug 13 18:36:49 2007 From: muguet at mdpi.net (Dr. Francis MUGUET) Date: Mon, 13 Aug 2007 18:36:49 +0200 Subject: [Wsis-pct] =?windows-1252?q?Ethique_/_Ethics__=26_Droits_de_l=92h?= =?windows-1252?q?omme/__human_rights?= Message-ID: <46C088A1.4030003@mdpi.net> Bonjour/ Hello Pour votre information * Ethique et droits de l?homme dans la soci?t? de l?information ( 13-14 Septembre 2007, Strasbourg, France ) R?union de la r?gion Europe sur ?les dimensions ?thiques de la soci?t? de l?information? organis?e par la Commission fran?aise pour l?UNESCO, en coop?ration avec l?UNESCO et le Conseil de l?Europe Cette rencontre europ?enne est la troisi?me r?union(1) du cycle de conf?rences r?gionales lanc? par l?UNESCO sur le th?me des dimensions ?thiques de la soci?t? de l?information. Cette initiative est une contribution ? la mise en ?uvre de la Grande orientation C10(2)du Plan d?action du Sommet mondial sur la soci?t? de l?information de Gen?ve ainsi qu?aux travaux poursuivis dans le cadre du Forum de la gouvernance de l?internet. For your information * Ethics and human rights in information society ( 13-14 September 2007, Strasbourg ) European regional meeting on the ? ethical dimensions of the information society? Organized by the French Commission for UNESCO in cooperation with UNESCO and the Council of Europe This European meeting is the third(1) of a cycle of regional conferences by UNESCO on the ethical dimensions of the information society(2). This initiative is a contribution to the implementation of the World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS) on the ethical dimension of the information society as well as to the Internet Governance Forum. Coridalement / Best Francis -- ------------------------------------------------------ Francis F. MUGUET Ph.D MDPI Foundation Open Access Journals Associate Publisher http://www.mdpi.org http://www.mdpi.net muguet at mdpi.org muguet at mdpi.net ENSTA Paris, France KNIS lab. Director "Knowledge Networks & Information Society" (KNIS) muguet at ensta.fr http://www.ensta.fr/~muguet World Summit On the Information Society (WSIS) Civil Society Working Groups Scientific Information : http://www.wsis-si.org chair Patents & Copyrights : http://www.wsis-pct.org co-chair Financing Mechanismns : http://www.wsis-finance.org web UNMSP project : http://www.unmsp.org WTIS initiative: http://www.wtis.org ------------------------------------------------------ -- ------------------------------------------------------ Francis F. MUGUET Ph.D MDPI Foundation Open Access Journals Associate Publisher http://www.mdpi.org http://www.mdpi.net muguet at mdpi.org muguet at mdpi.net ENSTA Paris, France KNIS lab. Director "Knowledge Networks & Information Society" (KNIS) muguet at ensta.fr http://www.ensta.fr/~muguet World Summit On the Information Society (WSIS) Civil Society Working Groups Scientific Information : http://www.wsis-si.org chair Patents & Copyrights : http://www.wsis-pct.org co-chair Financing Mechanismns : http://www.wsis-finance.org web UNMSP project : http://www.unmsp.org WTIS initiative: http://www.wtis.org ------------------------------------------------------ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mail.fsfeurope.org/pipermail/wsis-pct/attachments/20070813/b7e11a4c/attachment.htm From muguet at mdpi.net Sat Aug 18 04:20:06 2007 From: muguet at mdpi.net (Dr. Francis MUGUET) Date: Sat, 18 Aug 2007 04:20:06 +0200 Subject: [Wsis-pct] Fun Wikipedia scanner results for ICANN Message-ID: <46C65756.90205@mdpi.net> Hello After reading this news : CIA, FBI computers used for Wikipedia edits http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&articleId=9031200&source=NLT_PM&nlid=8 I just used : http://wikiscanner.virgil.gr/ with ICANN I did not have time to make an extensive search, but I found this one which is quite interesting : Suppressing voices of dissent on WikiPedia, Legal note : this only indicates an edit from a computer located in an ICANN office. It does not necessarily means this was done under the instruction of the organization ICANN holds periodic public meetings rotated between continents for the expressed purpose of encouraging global participation in its processes. Critics argue that the locations of these meetings are often in countries with lower Internet usage and far away from locations that the majority of the Internet-using public can afford to reach, thus making public input or participation from traditional Internet users less likely. Supporters reply that ICANN has a worldwide remit and a key part of its mission is to build Internet use where it is weak after edit originating from an ICANN IP ICANN holds periodic public meetings rotated between continents for the expressed purpose of encouraging global participation in its processes. The June 2007 Meeting is scheduled in San Juan, Puerto Rico. The October 2007 ICANN Meeting is scheduled to be held in Los Angeles, California, in close proxmity to the ICANN Headquarters Have fun with wikiscanner ! Francis -- ------------------------------------------------------ Francis F. MUGUET Ph.D MDPI Foundation Open Access Journals Associate Publisher http://www.mdpi.org http://www.mdpi.net muguet at mdpi.org muguet at mdpi.net ENSTA Paris, France KNIS lab. Director "Knowledge Networks & Information Society" (KNIS) muguet at ensta.fr http://www.ensta.fr/~muguet World Summit On the Information Society (WSIS) Civil Society Working Groups Scientific Information : http://www.wsis-si.org chair Patents & Copyrights : http://www.wsis-pct.org co-chair Financing Mechanismns : http://www.wsis-finance.org web UNMSP project : http://www.unmsp.org WTIS initiative: http://www.wtis.org ------------------------------------------------------ From rms at gnu.org Sun Aug 19 02:45:35 2007 From: rms at gnu.org (Richard Stallman) Date: Sat, 18 Aug 2007 20:45:35 -0400 Subject: [Wsis-pct] Fun Wikipedia scanner results for ICANN In-Reply-To: <46C65756.90205@mdpi.net> (muguet@mdpi.net) References: <46C65756.90205@mdpi.net> Message-ID: ICANN holds periodic public meetings rotated between continents for the expressed purpose of encouraging global participation in its processes. The June 2007 Meeting is scheduled in San Juan, Puerto Rico. The October 2007 ICANN Meeting is scheduled to be held in Los Angeles, California, in close proxmity to the ICANN Headquarters Los Angeles is a large metropolitan area. A meeting held there is clearly not being made geographically inaccessible. It may nonetheless be true that MOST meetings are held in inaccessible areas. Supporters reply that ICANN has a worldwide remit and a key part of its mission is to build Internet use where it is weak That argument seems absurd on its face: holding an ICANN meeting in a city or region will do little to boost Internet use or support in that city or region. I suggest adding a list of the locations of all ICANN meetings since 2005. That will give people an objective basis to judge how much ICANN activity is geographically accessible to large numbers of Internet users. From knowprose at gmail.com Sun Aug 19 03:17:37 2007 From: knowprose at gmail.com (Taran Rampersad) Date: Sat, 18 Aug 2007 21:17:37 -0400 Subject: [Wsis-pct] Fun Wikipedia scanner results for ICANN In-Reply-To: References: <46C65756.90205@mdpi.net> Message-ID: <46C79A31.4020609@knowprose.com> Richard Stallman wrote: > ICANN holds periodic public meetings rotated between continents for the > expressed purpose of encouraging global participation in its processes. > The June 2007 Meeting is scheduled in San Juan, Puerto Rico. The October > 2007 ICANN Meeting is scheduled to be held in Los Angeles, California, > in close proxmity to the ICANN Headquarters > > Los Angeles is a large metropolitan area. A meeting held there is > clearly not being made geographically inaccessible. > Yes. Travelling to Los Angeles is free for everyone! From Antarctica to Utah, the prices are the same! Oh. Wait. I just checked. It isn't so free. Maybe it isn't so accessible. > That argument seems absurd on its face: holding an ICANN meeting in a > city or region will do little to boost Internet use or support in that > city or region. False. It makes issues more easy to discuss for people who don't travel to Los Angeles all the time. The Puerto Rico meeting was a success for the region in that regard, and I had the pleasure of meeting with ICANN folks in 2005 in Guyana, where there were regional discussions about internet governance. Absurd on its face? Maybe. I haven't seen a FSF meeting in the Caribbean. How's membership from the region? Probably not too good. -- Taran Rampersad Presently in: San Fernando, Trinidad and Tobago cnd at knowprose.com http://www.knowprose.com Pictures: http://www.flickr.com/photos/knowprose/ "Criticize by creating." ? Michelangelo "The present is theirs; the future, for which I really worked, is mine." - Nikola Tesla From muguet at mdpi.net Sun Aug 19 19:06:01 2007 From: muguet at mdpi.net (Dr. Francis MUGUET) Date: Sun, 19 Aug 2007 19:06:01 +0200 Subject: [Wsis-pct] Fun Wikipedia scanner results for ICANN In-Reply-To: <46C79A31.4020609@knowprose.com> References: <46C65756.90205@mdpi.net> <46C79A31.4020609@knowprose.com> Message-ID: <46C87879.7050608@mdpi.net> Dear Taran, dear Richard The first thing that everybody can only condemn vigorously is that somebody within the ICANN staff took the initiative to DELETE a criticism. This a Human Right issue. Adding a response to the criticism would have been fine, to censor it, it is very WRONG, and tends to show that that the criticism was indeed valid, and this concerns an essential component of the control strategy of ICANN. It was like censorship in communist countries, only censored information got credibility within the democratic resistance. I stumble by chance on this ICANN wikipedia edit, may be there are many more that are of interest. Now back to another issue which is ICANN meeting locations : >> >> I suggest adding a list of the locations of all ICANN meetings since 2005. >> That will give people an objective basis to judge how much ICANN activity >> is geographically accessible to large numbers of Internet users . http://www.icann.org/meetings/ 2008 ICANN Meeting Schedule 2-7 November 2008 Africa 22-27 June 2008 Paris, France 10-15 February 2008 Asia Pacific 2007 ICANN Meeting Schedule 29 October - 2 Nov 2007 Los Angeles, California, USA 25-29 June 2007 San Juan, Puerto Rico 26-30 March 2007 Lisbon, Portugal 2006 ICANN Meeting Schedule 2-8 December 2006 S?o Paulo, Brazil 26-30 June 2006 Marrakech, Morocco 25-31 March 2006 Wellington, New Zealand 2005 ICANN Meeting Schedule 30 November - 4 December 2005 Vancouver, Canada 11-15 July 2005 Luxembourg City, Luxembourg 4-8 April 2005 Mar del Plata, Argentina 2004 ICANN Meeting Schedule 1-5 December 2004 (Sixth Annual Meeting) Cape Town, South Africa 19-23 July 2004 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia 2-6 March 2004 Rome, Italy 2003 ICANN Meeting Schedule 27-31 October 2003 (Fifth Annual Meeting) Carthage, Tunisia 22-26 June 2003 Montreal, Canada 23-27 March 2003 Rio de Janeiro, Brazil 2002 ICANN Meeting Schedule 14-15 December 2002 (Fourth Annual Meeting) Amsterdam, Netherlands 27-31 October 2002 Shanghai, China 24-28 June 2002 Bucharest, Romania 10-14 March 2002 Accra, Ghana 2001 ICANN Meeting Schedule 12-15 November 2001 (Third Annual Meeting) Marina del Rey, California, USA 7-10 September 2001 Montevideo, Uruguay 1-4 June 2001 Stockholm, Sweden 9-13 March 2001 Melbourne, Australia 2000 ICANN Meeting Schedule 13-16 November 2000 (Second Annual Meeting) Marina del Rey, California, USA 13-17 July 2000 Yokohama, Japan 7-10 March 2000 Cairo, Egypt 1999 ICANN Meeting Schedule 1-4 November 1999 (First Annual Meeting) Los Angeles, California, USA 23-26 August 1999 Santiago, Chile 25-27 May 1999 Berlin, Germany 2-4 March 1999 Singapore > False. It makes issues more easy to discuss for people who don't travel > to Los Angeles all the time. The Puerto Rico meeting was a success for > the region in that regard, Now, I understand that people living in the Carribean were happy that ICANN had a meeting there, last June. Nice place and quite accessible location indeed : Caribe Hilton http://sanjuan2007.icann.org/venue-and-events My question to you Taran : Did you attend this meeting in Puerto Rico ? Is there was a large number of locals or neighbours attending the meeting ? Were they listened to ? Did they had any impact ? Did you enjoy the dance at the Salsa Night sponsored by .US. ? Was the food good at the Gala Dinner sponsored by .Org and VeriSign ? I hope it was not a jet-fresh import of GM food... I find personally that the non-commercial constituency ( .org ) would have better spent their money on helping Puerto-Rican people that are in dire need. > and I had the pleasure of meeting with ICANN > folks in 2005 in Guyana, where there were regional discussions about > internet governance. Did any breakthrough resulted from this Guyanese encounter ? Be careful not to get 'instrumentalized". I have been only once in an ICANN meeting, simply because I was invited at another meeting in the same location that was beginning just after ICANN meeting. It was 1-5 December 2004 (Sixth Annual Meeting) Cape Town, South Africa Local people were very few and had no noticeable impact on any discussion I went. It was the same familiar faces, and the same exclusive jet set members that were making the calls. But the censored criticism was poorly phrased : in fact one needs to go to ALL the meetings to have any impact. Following my personal analysis, there are about 5 classes of people attending those meetings : 1/ The puppet masters 2/ The crowd, composed of international and local puppets, the latter bringing an exotic flavor to the circus 3/ tourists including most of the press and quite a few GAC members 4/ cynics ( interesting species in stealth mode, alternating equivocally between collaboration and sabotage ), 5/ a few circus-aware observers ( I put myself in this latter category ) In this circus, in order to reach the level of awareness, not to mention the level of puppet master ( nom com, etc.. ) or even puppet grand master ( various boards of ICANN ) then you need to be able to attend ALL those meetings, being hosted in very "accessible" (by taxi or from the beach ) and "unaccessible" ( for the purse ) hotels. In practice, in order to be part of this game, you need to be able to afford to attend 3 or 4 meetings a year at very different locations on the planet, in very exclusive places or areas. The "selection" operates at the plutocratic level which includes representatives or employee of big companies and registrars. Vint Cerf is supposed to be an employee of Google, but not a representative of Google. The censored critics paragraph should be re-inserted in WikiPedia with that observation in mind : "Critics argue that in order to have any significant impact, it is required in practice to attend all ICANN meetings which amounts to attend 3 or 4 meetings a year in locations very far away from one another, a financial burden that the majority of the Internet-using public cannot afford te bear, thus making public input or participation from all Information Society stakeholders less likely." Comments on this proposed draft ? After comments, improvements, and if there is no objection, I propose to re-insert this modified censored paragraph on WikiPedia. A place may be classified as accessible when 1/ it is possible to get there at a "relatively" affordable rate from most locations on the planet 2/ it is cheap to stay there. Therefore geographical location is not all that matters. Paris, in this regards is "relatively" OK, because there are many cheap hotel and hostels, and it is a big airport hub. There is an ICANN meeting in Paris, 22-27 June 2008, and I am ready to help hell raisers to find cheap hotels and hostels, and even to host ( pre or // or post ) satellite meetings at my institution ( for free, as I guess you cannot afford the price range of the Caribe Hilton... ) Best Francis -- ------------------------------------------------------ Francis F. MUGUET Ph.D MDPI Foundation Open Access Journals Associate Publisher http://www.mdpi.org http://www.mdpi.net muguet at mdpi.org muguet at mdpi.net ENSTA Paris, France KNIS lab. Director "Knowledge Networks & Information Society" (KNIS) muguet at ensta.fr http://www.ensta.fr/~muguet World Summit On the Information Society (WSIS) Civil Society Working Groups Scientific Information : http://www.wsis-si.org chair Patents & Copyrights : http://www.wsis-pct.org co-chair Financing Mechanismns : http://www.wsis-finance.org web UNMSP project : http://www.unmsp.org WTIS initiative: http://www.wtis.org ------------------------------------------------------ From knowprose at gmail.com Sun Aug 19 20:11:38 2007 From: knowprose at gmail.com (Taran Rampersad) Date: Sun, 19 Aug 2007 14:11:38 -0400 Subject: [Wsis-pct] Fun Wikipedia scanner results for ICANN In-Reply-To: <46C87879.7050608@mdpi.net> References: <46C65756.90205@mdpi.net> <46C79A31.4020609@knowprose.com> <46C87879.7050608@mdpi.net> Message-ID: <46C887DA.1060206@knowprose.com> Dr. Francis MUGUET wrote: > Now, I understand that people living in the Carribean were > happy that ICANN had a meeting there, last June. > > Nice place and quite accessible location indeed : > Caribe Hilton > http://sanjuan2007.icann.org/venue-and-events > > My question to you Taran : > Did you attend this meeting in Puerto Rico ? > Not that time. I was tied up with real work, a fascinating topic unto itself. > Is there was a large number of locals or neighbours > attending the meeting ? > Yes. > Were they listened to ? > Yes. In fact, I have very open communication with ICANN. > Did they had any impact ? > Yes, on various levels. Computer societies which otherwise would not have attended did, in doing a local meeting > > Did you enjoy the dance at the Salsa Night sponsored by .US. ? > No, I did not. Do you enjoy travelling around on someone else's dime? I'm self funded. > Was the food good at the Gala Dinner > sponsored by .Org and VeriSign ? > No idea. > I hope it was not a jet-fresh import of GM food... > No idea. > > You should work on your humor, as I did not find these questions humorous. > I find personally that the non-commercial constituency > ( .org ) would have better spent their money on helping > Puerto-Rican people that are in dire need. > Your knowledge of the region does your personal opinion justice. >> and I had the pleasure of meeting with ICANN >> folks in 2005 in Guyana, where there were regional discussions about >> internet governance. >> > Did any breakthrough resulted from this Guyanese encounter ? > The lack of breakthrough, per se, was not an ICANN issue. Rather, it remains a CARICOM region. However, your lack of knowledge along these lines is excusable given your > Be careful not to get 'instrumentalized". > What an odd thing for you to say, Francis. I would suggest the same of you, actually. > It was > 1-5 December 2004 (Sixth Annual Meeting) Cape Town, South Africa > Local people were very few and had no noticeable impact > on any discussion I went. > It was the same familiar faces, and the same > exclusive jet set members that were making the calls. > That could be said of the entire WSIS process, among others. > But the censored criticism was poorly phrased : > in fact one needs to > go to ALL the meetings to have any impact. > Which is why working groups for different regions exist; if you're not satisfied with your representation perhaps you should find a replacement for your particular region. For the Caribbean region, Jacqueline Morris has shared information and worked hard to get feedback from diverse sections of the Caribbean community. > Following my personal analysis, > there are about 5 classes of people attending those meetings : > 1/ The puppet masters > 2/ The crowd, composed of international and local puppets, > the latter bringing an exotic flavor to the circus > 3/ tourists including most of the press and quite a few GAC members > 4/ cynics ( interesting species in stealth mode, alternating > equivocally between collaboration and sabotage ), > 5/ a few circus-aware observers > ( I put myself in this latter category ) > Oddly, your personal analysis leans more heavily toward 4 than 5. The tone is what does that. If there is so much ado about the Wikipedia entry, stop discussing it and change the entry to suit your perspective. If your perspective is not pleasing to others and cannot be substantiated, I expect that you will not find satisfaction in that regard. Of course, that is a process which is as imperfect as the people who use it - and as a Free Software/Open Source derived community, I would think you would have more faith in the processes of the Wikipedia. Oh, and as a sidenote, if you read a Wikipedia entry backwards you may hear the Beatles singing. You also may not. More than one mistake has been made by referencing the Wikipedia. Personally, I've had much more fulfilling discussions with ICANN representatives than I have had with other people who feel they should represent the region by default; at least ICANN representatives have *been* to the region and have participated in discussion. At least ICANN recognizes that the people in the Caribbean region are worth talking to in person. Some organizations could learn from that. I'm still trying to figure out how this is a PCT related issue, btw. Would someone care to enlighten me on how this is a PCT issue? -- Taran Rampersad Presently in: San Fernando, Trinidad and Tobago cnd at knowprose.com http://www.knowprose.com Pictures: http://www.flickr.com/photos/knowprose/ "Criticize by creating." ? Michelangelo "The present is theirs; the future, for which I really worked, is mine." - Nikola Tesla From muguet at mdpi.net Sun Aug 19 22:10:06 2007 From: muguet at mdpi.net (Dr. Francis MUGUET) Date: Sun, 19 Aug 2007 22:10:06 +0200 Subject: [Wsis-pct] Fun Wikipedia scanner results for ICANN In-Reply-To: <46C887DA.1060206@knowprose.com> References: <46C65756.90205@mdpi.net> <46C79A31.4020609@knowprose.com> <46C87879.7050608@mdpi.net> <46C887DA.1060206@knowprose.com> Message-ID: <46C8A39E.6060005@mdpi.net> Dear Taran > Yes. In fact, I have very open communication with ICANN. >> Did they had any impact ? >> > Yes, on various levels. Computer societies which otherwise would not > have attended did, in doing a local meeting For example ? >> >> Did you enjoy the dance at the Salsa Night sponsored by .US. ? >> > No, I did not. Do you enjoy travelling around on someone else's dime? > I'm self funded. This answer is out of the target.. this was a party at the ICANN meeting... You did not understand my sense of humor, but that's fine... > You should work on your humor, as I did not find these questions humorous. question of culture, I guess... >> Be careful not to get 'instrumentalized". >> > What an odd thing for you to say, Francis. I would suggest the same of > you, actually. of course .. >> > Which is why working groups for different regions exist; if you're not > satisfied with your representation perhaps you should find a replacement > for your particular region. Yes indeed, I am a member of ISOC-France and there is absolutely no real feedback and consultation in this country... Many of my friends have reached the same conclusion as yours. For the Caribbean region, Jacqueline Morris http://www.jacquelinemorris.com/ indeed >> > Oddly, your personal analysis leans more heavily toward 4 than 5. The > tone is what does that. Well, this is because I am a joking mode this afternoon, ...making marmelades with prunes just collected from the trees ...... the mode is exactly "satirist" ... and there is a tiny satirist press in France ( Le Canard Enchain?, Charlie Hebdo ) this is not the same as being cynical, and you may be cynical without any humorous tone, true cynics are cold fishes. > > If there is so much ado about the Wikipedia entry, stop discussing it > and change the entry to suit your perspective. If your perspective is > not pleasing to others and cannot be substantiated, I expect that you > will not find satisfaction in that regard. Of course, that is a process > which is as imperfect as the people who use it - and as a Free > Software/Open Source derived community, I would think you would have > more faith in the processes of the Wikipedia. I am an enthusiastic supporter of Wikipedia, this is great, and this episode proves it ! > > Oh, and as a sidenote, if you read a Wikipedia entry backwards you may > hear the Beatles singing. You also may not. I find your sense of humor amusing. ! really > > More than one mistake has been made by referencing the Wikipedia. indeed > > Personally, I've had much more fulfilling discussions with ICANN > representatives than I have had with other people who feel they should > represent the region by default; at least ICANN representatives have > *been* to the region and have participated in discussion. At least ICANN > recognizes that the people in the Caribbean region are worth talking to > in person. The thing is that ICANN has the money to do it. > > Some organizations could learn from that. I know to what you are alluding to. This is outside my sphere of decision or influence, but I would morally support the idea of a FSF meeting in your region > > I'm still trying to figure out how this is a PCT related issue, btw. > Would someone care to enlighten me on how this is a PCT issue? > This is related to the WikiPedia edit, which is related to copyright issues and which is related as you say nicely yourself : Wikipedia is related to the "Free Software/Open Source derived community". By the way, my suggestion of help in Paris, was not humourous, it is real. Hasta la vista en Paris Francis -- ------------------------------------------------------ Francis F. MUGUET Ph.D MDPI Foundation Open Access Journals Associate Publisher http://www.mdpi.org http://www.mdpi.net muguet at mdpi.org muguet at mdpi.net ENSTA Paris, France KNIS lab. Director "Knowledge Networks & Information Society" (KNIS) muguet at ensta.fr http://www.ensta.fr/~muguet World Summit On the Information Society (WSIS) Civil Society Working Groups Scientific Information : http://www.wsis-si.org chair Patents & Copyrights : http://www.wsis-pct.org co-chair Financing Mechanismns : http://www.wsis-finance.org web UNMSP project : http://www.unmsp.org WTIS initiative: http://www.wtis.org ------------------------------------------------------ From knowprose at gmail.com Mon Aug 20 00:05:48 2007 From: knowprose at gmail.com (Taran Rampersad) Date: Sun, 19 Aug 2007 18:05:48 -0400 Subject: [Wsis-pct] Fun Wikipedia scanner results for ICANN In-Reply-To: <46C8A39E.6060005@mdpi.net> References: <46C65756.90205@mdpi.net> <46C79A31.4020609@knowprose.com> <46C87879.7050608@mdpi.net> <46C887DA.1060206@knowprose.com> <46C8A39E.6060005@mdpi.net> Message-ID: <46C8BEBC.3050005@knowprose.com> Dr. Francis MUGUET wrote: > Dear Taran > > >> Yes. In fact, I have very open communication with ICANN. >> >>> Did they had any impact ? >>> >>> >> Yes, on various levels. Computer societies which otherwise would not >> have attended did, in doing a local meeting >> > For example ? > Are you actually familiar with any of the computer related societies in the region? Probably not. So asking me this is senseless; you will then ask me for verification that they do exist and I do not feel the need to do your homework. If what I write is not good enough, so be it. > >>> >>> Did you enjoy the dance at the Salsa Night sponsored by .US. ? >>> >>> >> No, I did not. Do you enjoy travelling around on someone else's dime? >> I'm self funded. >> > This answer is out of the target.. > You mean, this was not the response you were expecting. It is, however, a valid response. > this was a party at the ICANN meeting... > You did not understand my sense of humor, but that's fine... > I don't appreciate your sense of humor in this regard. The fact that ICANN takes the region seriously whereas other organizations has not does not make your apparent dismissal of the region very humorous. >> You should work on your humor, as I did not find these questions humorous. >> > question of culture, I guess... > Question of context and knowing the context. Culture is a part of that. >> Which is why working groups for different regions exist; if you're not >> satisfied with your representation perhaps you should find a replacement >> for your particular region. >> > Yes indeed, I am a member of ISOC-France and there is absolutely > no real feedback and consultation in this country... > Many of my friends have reached > the same conclusion as yours. > Then why lambast ICANN alone? If you wish to swing a whip, then by all means whip everyone equally. Singling out one institution to make a case against them when everyone is guilty doesn't make much sense. An esteemed Frenchman, Alexis de Tocqueville, wrote of the power of the jury in American democracy; if there were to be a jury of ICANN peers - would ICANN be guilty? Only if they all wanted to get rid of ICANN, but that enters politics - and politics should never be confused with democracy. > For the Caribbean region, Jacqueline Morris > http://www.jacquelinemorris.com/ > indeed > That is her private site. She has been actively asking for information from the *community* on community email lists. I say this as someone who has been cynical in the past, but Jacqueline has done an amazing job of trying to get feedback. >> If there is so much ado about the Wikipedia entry, stop discussing it >> and change the entry to suit your perspective. If your perspective is >> not pleasing to others and cannot be substantiated, I expect that you >> will not find satisfaction in that regard. Of course, that is a process >> which is as imperfect as the people who use it - and as a Free >> Software/Open Source derived community, I would think you would have >> more faith in the processes of the Wikipedia. >> > I am an enthusiastic supporter of Wikipedia, this is great, > and this episode proves it ! > I used to be a supporter of the Wikipedia, but have issues with administrative policies which have done the electronic equivalent of burning books in my eyes. The process, any process, is only as good as the people involved - and where there is power, there is corruption. I reference the Wikipedia, but judge an article based on references and *other* resources I find. >> Oh, and as a sidenote, if you read a Wikipedia entry backwards you may >> hear the Beatles singing. You also may not. >> > I find your sense of humor amusing. ! really > It was a reference to looking at the history of Wikipedia entries. Some rollbacks and deletions make as much as the Beatles reference above. >> Personally, I've had much more fulfilling discussions with ICANN >> representatives than I have had with other people who feel they should >> represent the region by default; at least ICANN representatives have >> *been* to the region and have participated in discussion. At least ICANN >> recognizes that the people in the Caribbean region are worth talking to >> in person. >> > The thing is that ICANN has the money to do it. > Is that the crux of this discussion? That they have money and are using it to good ends in this regard? I often call upon the US contracts of ICANN as a conflict of interest, ICANN itself is technical only. What the working groups have come up with related to policy has been disturbing here and there, but ICANN has never really tried to affect policy. There are enough organizations being ineffective there, I suppose recognizing one's limits is a good thing. >> Some organizations could learn from that. >> > I know to what you are alluding to. > This is outside my sphere of decision or influence, > but I would morally support the idea of a FSF meeting > in your region > What I am referencing ANY organization who claims to be global in representation. You draw a single conclusion; perhaps that stands on its own merit. There are many more conclusions. > >> I'm still trying to figure out how this is a PCT related issue, btw. >> Would someone care to enlighten me on how this is a PCT issue? >> >> > This is related to the WikiPedia edit, which is related to > copyright issues and which is related as you say nicely yourself : > Wikipedia is related to the "Free Software/Open Source derived community". > I'd be careful in assuming that it is presently a good thing. Deletionism runs rampant, as do editorial opinions affecting content. In fact, edits which you may see may well have been implicitly blessed by administrators. > By the way, my suggestion of help in Paris, was not > humourous, it is real. > > Hasta la vista en Paris > Vaya con Libertad. -- Taran Rampersad Presently in: San Fernando, Trinidad and Tobago cnd at knowprose.com http://www.knowprose.com Pictures: http://www.flickr.com/photos/knowprose/ "Criticize by creating." ? Michelangelo "The present is theirs; the future, for which I really worked, is mine." - Nikola Tesla From rms at gnu.org Mon Aug 20 00:31:10 2007 From: rms at gnu.org (Richard Stallman) Date: Sun, 19 Aug 2007 18:31:10 -0400 Subject: [Wsis-pct] Fun Wikipedia scanner results for ICANN In-Reply-To: <46C79A31.4020609@knowprose.com> (message from Taran Rampersad on Sat, 18 Aug 2007 21:17:37 -0400) References: <46C65756.90205@mdpi.net> <46C79A31.4020609@knowprose.com> Message-ID: > Los Angeles is a large metropolitan area. A meeting held there is > clearly not being made geographically inaccessible. > Yes. Travelling to Los Angeles is free for everyone! From Antarctica to Utah, the prices are the same! Every place on Earth is far from somewhere. So what? Please remember what the issue is. The text deleted from the article made the accusation that ICANN deliberately avoids holding meetings in where many internet users could get to them. I am not defending that accusation, so why argue with me? > That argument seems absurd on its face: holding an ICANN meeting in a > city or region will do little to boost Internet use or support in that > city or region. False. It makes issues more easy to discuss for people who don't travel to Los Angeles all the time. You are mixing up two different issues: participation in ICANN discussions and use of the internet. I haven't seen a FSF meeting in the Caribbean. And so? From knowprose at gmail.com Mon Aug 20 01:05:57 2007 From: knowprose at gmail.com (Taran Rampersad) Date: Sun, 19 Aug 2007 19:05:57 -0400 Subject: [Wsis-pct] =?windows-1252?q?OT=A8=3A_joke=3F_=28was__Fun_Wikipedi?= =?windows-1252?q?a_scanner_results_for_ICANN=29?= In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <46C8CCD5.7060709@knowprose.com> No joke, Enrique. What I have seen in the Caribbean and Latin America is that people bring policy issues to ICANN and ICANN says, "We don't do that". This leads to frustration which tends to be vented as, "ICANN is blocking the process". What process? ICANN has no such processes. It never has, and it never should. That is not the role of ICANN - the fact that a bunch of people eating expensive food in exotic parts of the world couldn't come up with an answer related to policies does not mean ICANN is responsible for policy. If you have evidence to the contrary, feel free to bring it to light. Show me an ICANN process for handling policy. Where the frustration should probably be focused is in creating channels which allow policy to be discussed. ICANN was never designed to do that, should never do that, and as far as I know has never done that. Enrique Chaparro wrote: > On 8/19/07, Taran Rampersad wrote:` > [...snip...] > >> it to good ends in this regard? I often call upon the US contracts of >> ICANN as a conflict of interest, ICANN itself is technical only. What >> the working groups have come up with related to policy has been >> disturbing here and there, but ICANN has never really tried to affect >> policy. There are enough organizations being ineffective there, I >> suppose recognizing one's limits is a good thing. >> > > ICANN a _technical_ body?? Perhaps the language barriers are > bringing noise into this talk. Perhaps I cannot understand your sense > of humor. But I sincerely hope you are joking about that. ICANN is > a political entity, with very little or none technical issues on hand, > and such has been its role since its inception. > > Anyways, this is an off-topic issue, so if you want to discuss it > I would suggest going off-list. > > Regards from the Far (and Cold) South, > > Enrique > > -- Taran Rampersad Presently in: San Fernando, Trinidad and Tobago cnd at knowprose.com http://www.knowprose.com Pictures: http://www.flickr.com/photos/knowprose/ "Criticize by creating." ? Michelangelo "The present is theirs; the future, for which I really worked, is mine." - Nikola Tesla From knowprose at gmail.com Mon Aug 20 01:08:39 2007 From: knowprose at gmail.com (Taran Rampersad) Date: Sun, 19 Aug 2007 19:08:39 -0400 Subject: [Wsis-pct] Fun Wikipedia scanner results for ICANN In-Reply-To: References: <46C65756.90205@mdpi.net> <46C79A31.4020609@knowprose.com> Message-ID: <46C8CD77.5040004@knowprose.com> Richard Stallman wrote: > > Los Angeles is a large metropolitan area. A meeting held there is > > clearly not being made geographically inaccessible. > > > Yes. Travelling to Los Angeles is free for everyone! From Antarctica to > Utah, the prices are the same! > > Every place on Earth is far from somewhere. So what? Please remember > what the issue is. The text deleted from the article made the > accusation that ICANN deliberately avoids holding meetings in where > many internet users could get to them. > > I am not defending that accusation, so why argue with me? > I'm not arguing with you. I simply pointed out, caustically, that geographical accessibility is not as simple as you made it out to be - which is of interest related to this discussion. > > That argument seems absurd on its face: holding an ICANN meeting in a > > city or region will do little to boost Internet use or support in that > > city or region. > False. It makes issues more easy to discuss for people who don't travel > to Los Angeles all the time. > > You are mixing up two different issues: participation in ICANN > discussions and use of the internet. > Actually, I was reacting to your words which did the same that you accused me of. > I haven't seen a FSF meeting in the > Caribbean. > > And so? > You make my point. Thank you. :-) -- Taran Rampersad Presently in: San Fernando, Trinidad and Tobago cnd at knowprose.com http://www.knowprose.com Pictures: http://www.flickr.com/photos/knowprose/ "Criticize by creating." ? Michelangelo "The present is theirs; the future, for which I really worked, is mine." - Nikola Tesla From rms at gnu.org Mon Aug 20 17:17:00 2007 From: rms at gnu.org (Richard Stallman) Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2007 11:17:00 -0400 Subject: [Wsis-pct] Fun Wikipedia scanner results for ICANN In-Reply-To: <46C87879.7050608@mdpi.net> (muguet@mdpi.net) References: <46C65756.90205@mdpi.net> <46C79A31.4020609@knowprose.com> <46C87879.7050608@mdpi.net> Message-ID: Based on your list, it seems that ICANN meetings are slightly skewed away from main Internet use centers, but about half are in major use centers or near them. There have been several in various parts of North America, and several in Europe, and also in important parts of Asia. They had meetings in the biggest cities of Brazil. Whether many local people actually come to these meetings is a different question. Also, whether it is of any use to go to one meeting is another question. Whether it was proper for ICANN to delete the accusation, rather than add evidence to deny it, is another question. From rms at gnu.org Mon Aug 20 20:31:22 2007 From: rms at gnu.org (Richard Stallman) Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2007 14:31:22 -0400 Subject: [Wsis-pct] Fun Wikipedia scanner results for ICANN In-Reply-To: <46C8CD77.5040004@knowprose.com> (message from Taran Rampersad on Sun, 19 Aug 2007 19:08:39 -0400) References: <46C65756.90205@mdpi.net> <46C79A31.4020609@knowprose.com> <46C8CD77.5040004@knowprose.com> Message-ID: I'm not arguing with you. I simply pointed out, caustically, that geographical accessibility is not as simple as you made it out to be - It was the Wikipedia page, not I, who raised that issue about geographical accessibility. If you don't like it, blame the author of the accusation, not me. > I haven't seen a FSF meeting in the > Caribbean. > > And so? > You make my point. Thank you. :-) And what point might that be? From muguet at mdpi.net Tue Aug 21 06:09:26 2007 From: muguet at mdpi.net (Dr. Francis MUGUET) Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2007 06:09:26 +0200 Subject: [Wsis-pct] India : IT industry divided over open source Message-ID: <46CA6576.2030408@mdpi.net> Dear supporters of freedom Since this article below is quoted by the UNDP's ICT for Development (ICTD) Observatory that keeps an eye on related critical issues for developing countries : http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/Infotech/IT_industry_divided_over_open_source/articleshow/2286529.cms"> IT industry divided over open source ICTD News for 20 August 2007 IT industry divided over open source 17 Aug, 2007, 0230 hrs IST,Harsimran Singh, TNN NEW DELHI: The debate between standards for electronic documents, Open Office Extensible Mark-up Language (OOXML) and Open Document Format (ODF), has reached its peak. The Indian IT industry is completely divided on the issue. Companies like HCL, PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC), Sonata Software, Sify, Skelta have come out openly in support of Microsoft. On the other hand, the ODF Alliance is being supported by Sun Microsystems, IBM, Google and Red Hat. The debate has also divided the Indian academic community. HCL Infosystems executive vice-president marketing George Paul said: ?We support document formats based on Open XML. Open XML formats will simplify the creation and management of documents, and improve interoperability between documents, systems and tools. We support the ISO standardisation of Open XML because of its importance for enhancing interoperability giving users the benefit of backward compatibility.? On the other hand, IBM counters HCL on the argument. ?Microsoft?s Open XML does not support Firefox and Opera (web browsers) despite firefox having a 34% market share. It only supports Internet Explorer. Also, OOXML does not support documents dated before 1900 but India has land records dating back to 1600 A.D. since the era of King Todar Mal. (The problems is that OOXML does not recognise dates prior to 1900 AD). Also, there is no provision for backward compatibility as it does not provide access to binary codes,? says Ashish Gautam, country leader at IBM for open standards. Companies have to submit their comments on technical issues by August 17. BIS has to take a decision on the issue by August 23. ?An open standard must include all details necessary for interoperable implementation. The standard must be freely and publicly available (e.g., from a table web site) under royalty-free terms,? said Red Hat head (open source) Venkatesh Hariharan. Supporting Microsoft?s OOXML, Sify?s EVP Naresh Ajwani said: ?Plurality of choice of standards puts the customers in charge. Considering this underlying principle, we welcome OpenXML as a standard. This would also go a long way in India?s leadership in creating world-class IT solutions.? PwC also supports Microsoft?s OOXML. ?Open XML will enable new integration and business scenarios, allowing users and organisations to interact with their systems in a more efficient and cost effective manner. Open XML provides users the choice to adopt the format that best meets their needs. -- ------------------------------------------------------ Francis F. MUGUET Ph.D MDPI Foundation Open Access Journals Associate Publisher http://www.mdpi.org http://www.mdpi.net muguet at mdpi.org muguet at mdpi.net ENSTA Paris, France KNIS lab. Director "Knowledge Networks & Information Society" (KNIS) muguet at ensta.fr http://www.ensta.fr/~muguet World Summit On the Information Society (WSIS) Civil Society Working Groups Scientific Information : http://www.wsis-si.org chair Patents & Copyrights : http://www.wsis-pct.org co-chair Financing Mechanismns : http://www.wsis-finance.org web UNMSP project : http://www.unmsp.org WTIS initiative: http://www.wtis.org ------------------------------------------------------ From muguet at mdpi.net Tue Aug 21 06:19:20 2007 From: muguet at mdpi.net (Dr. Francis MUGUET) Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2007 06:19:20 +0200 Subject: [Wsis-pct] IGF/MAG renewal an opaque and non-incluse process / un processus opague et non-inclusif Message-ID: <46CA67C8.3060506@mdpi.net> English / Fran?ais ( plus bas ) Hello / Bonjour In what appears to be, I guess to many stakeholders, a completely non-transparent, non-inclusive process, in contradiction with the statements of the chair during the first consultation meetings in 2006, the IGF MAG has been renewed. It is a pyrrhic, last minute, victory for the lobbies, since they cannot be proud of the process, and would certainly weaken the moral authority and the political legitimacy of the MAG, not to mention the lack of legal support, For the long run, it is a defeat for the lobbies of the internet "industry"; including those who supposedly are dealing only with "technical issues". The only thing that seems new ( so far ) is that the host country now co-chairs the advisory group. 20 August 2007 Press Release PI/1791 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ *Department of Public Information . News and Media Division . New York* ADVISORY GROUP for INTERNET GOVERNANCE FORUM MEETING IN RIO DE JANEIRO The mandate of the Advisory Group for the Internet Governance Forum has been renewed in order to assist in preparations for the next meeting of the Internet Governance Forum, to be held in Rio de Janeiro from 12 to 15 November 2007. The Secretary-General is very appreciative of the work carried out by the Advisory Group in the past and welcomes the renewal of its mandate in preparation of the November Forum. The Group is to be chaired by Nitin Desai, the Secretary-General's Special Adviser for Internet Governance, and Hadil da Rocha Vianna, Director for Scientific and Technological Affairs in Brazil's Ministry of External Relations, representing the Host Country. The 47 Advisory Group members will serve in their personal capacity. They have been chosen from Governments, the private sector and civil society, including the academic and technical communities, representing all regions. As part of its mandate, the Advisory Group has been asked to enhance the transparency of the preparatory process by ensuring a continuous flow of information between its members and the various interested groups. It has also been requested to make proposals on a suitable rotation among its members, based on recommendations from the various interested groups. Any decision on how to prepare subsequent meetings will be taken after the Rio de Janeiro meeting in an open, inclusive and transparent consultative process, taking into account the proposals of the Advisory Group. The co-chairmen may also select special advisers to assist them. The Internet Governance Forum is an outcome of the Tunis phase of the World Summit on the Information Society, which took place in 2005. In the Tunis Agenda for the Information Society, Governments asked the Secretary-General to convene a "new forum for policy dialogue" to discuss issues related to key elements of Internet governance and set out the Forum's mandate. The Forum's inaugural meeting took place in Athens in November 2006. It was attended by 1,350 registered participants, including 397 delegates from 97 Member States and 152 accredited journalists. "The meeting brought people together who would not normally meet under the same roof," said Markus Kummer, the Executive Coordinator of the Forum's Secretariat. "It encouraged dialogue on issues of common interest among people who would not normally interact." A stock-taking session in Geneva last February showed broad support for the multi-stakeholder format of the Athens meeting, which should be maintained in the preparations for the Rio de Janeiro meeting. A round of open consultations held in Geneva in May showed broad support for keeping the four themes discussed at the inaugural meeting -- access, diversity, openness and security. In addition, there was widespread support for adding a new theme -- critical internet resources -- to the agenda of the Rio de Janeiro meeting. For further information, please visit www.intgovforum.org or contact Markus Kummer, Executive Coordinator, Secretariat of the Internet Governance Forum, tel.: +41 0 22 917 54 88, e-mail: mkummer at unog.ch --------------------------------------- A la suite d'un processus qui, ? mon avis semble non transparent et non-inclusif pour beaucoup d'acteurs, et en tout cas, en contradiction avec les propos de N. Desai lors des premi?res r?unions consultatives en 2006. La seule chose qui change est que le pays hote est maintenant co-pr?sident du groupe consultatif. *_LE GROUPE CONSULTATIF DU FORUM SUR LA GOUVERNANCE D'INTERNET_* *_SE LANCE DANS LES PR?PARATIFS DE LA R?UNION DE RIO_* (Adapt? de l'anglais) Dot? d'un mandat qui vient d'?tre renouvel?, le Groupe consultatif du Forum sur la gouvernance d'Internet est d?sormais en mesure de participer aux pr?paratifs de la prochaine r?union du Forum, pr?vue ? Rio de Janeiro, du 12 au 15 novembre 2007. Conform?ment ? la d?cision prise en mai dernier ? Gen?ve, les participants poursuivront les discussions qu'ils ont entam?es en novembre 2006 ? Ath?nes, sur l'acc?s, la diversit?, l'ouverture et la s?curit? d'Internet. Le Groupe consultatif est charg? de renforcer la transparence dans le processus pr?paratoire de cette deuxi?me ?dition du Forum, en assurant un flux continu d'informations entre ses membres et les divers groupes concern?s. Le Groupe doit ?galement faire des propositions sur la rotation de ses membres, en tenant compte des recommandations faites par les diff?rentes parties prenantes. Les propositions du Groupe concerneront aussi le calendrier des prochaines r?unions du Forum. Ce Forum est une cr?ation de la deuxi?me phase du Sommet mondial de la soci?t? de l'information qui s'?tait tenue ? Tunis en 2005. Quelque 1 350 personnes dont des repr?sentants d'?tats Membres et des journalistes avaient particip? ? la r?union d'Ath?nes. En f?vrier dernier ? Gen?ve, ce format ? diversifi? ? a ?t? salu? lors d'une session-bilan. Le Groupe consultatif est pr?sid? par Nitin Desai, Conseiller sp?cial du Secr?taire g?n?ral pour la gouvernance d'Internet, et par Hadil da Rocha Vianna, Directeur des affaires scientifiques et technologiques au Minist?re des relations ext?rieures du Br?sil, qui repr?sentera ainsi le pays h?te. Choisis par les gouvernements, le secteur priv? et la soci?t? civile de toutes les r?gions du monde, les 47 membres du Groupe si?gent en leur capacit? personnelle. Pour plus d'informations, pri?re de visiter le site http://www.intgovforum.org . Vous pouvez aussi contacter Markus Kummer, Coordonnateur ex?cutif, Secr?tariat du Forum sur la gouvernance d'Internet au 41 0 22 917 54 88 ou ? l'adresse ?lectronique suivante: mkummer at unog.ch . -- -- ------------------------------------------------------ Francis F. MUGUET Ph.D MDPI Foundation Open Access Journals Associate Publisher http://www.mdpi.org http://www.mdpi.net muguet at mdpi.org muguet at mdpi.net ENSTA Paris, France KNIS lab. Director "Knowledge Networks & Information Society" (KNIS) muguet at ensta.fr http://www.ensta.fr/~muguet World Summit On the Information Society (WSIS) Civil Society Working Groups Scientific Information : http://www.wsis-si.org chair Patents & Copyrights : http://www.wsis-pct.org co-chair Financing Mechanismns : http://www.wsis-finance.org web UNMSP project : http://www.unmsp.org WTIS initiative: http://www.wtis.org ------------------------------------------------------ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mail.fsfeurope.org/pipermail/wsis-pct/attachments/20070821/1d565c81/attachment-0001.htm -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/jpeg Size: 31065 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://mail.fsfeurope.org/pipermail/wsis-pct/attachments/20070821/1d565c81/attachment-0001.jpeg From muguet at mdpi.net Wed Aug 22 03:11:56 2007 From: muguet at mdpi.net (Dr. Francis MUGUET) Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2007 03:11:56 +0200 Subject: [Wsis-pct] [governance] [Fwd: [WSIS CS-Plenary] IGF/MAG renewal an opaque and non-incluse process / un processus opague et non-inclusif] In-Reply-To: <20070821074343.7B5A8A6CC7@smtp2.electricembers.net> References: <20070821074343.7B5A8A6CC7@smtp2.electricembers.net> Message-ID: <46CB8D5C.6020200@mdpi.net> Hello The IGF MAG reconduction announcement that I posted on the WSIS plenary has been forwarded to the list of Internet Governance Caucus, where I am just an observer, and hardly post anything. But this is a special case I thought that you might be interested by some answers Best Francis ------------ Dear Parminder et al. > > Thanks Francis and Jeremy. > Since I am referenced by name, since I have the highest esteem for your intellectual integrity, I am going to answer to your comments although this does not mean I am part of this caucus. In fact, I feel more than ever the need of a separate representation of Civil Society and the "Internet Community", this would partially ends the need for the Internet Community to have proxies within the Civil Society to represent the technico-industrial complex that has become the "Internet Community or Industry"; > Renewal of the mandate the MAG was I think necessary given that little time > is left for Rio. If you read the transcript of the 23 may meeting : >>CHAIRMAN DESAI: ../.. I would like to clarify one thing, which is that the Advisory Group has been constituted by the Secretary-General simply to advise him. It does not really have any other legislative basis than that. We could have done everything that we did without a formally constituted Advisory Group, simply by consulting those individuals individually as a U.N. secretariat.... not a necessity, merely a convenience for some, and a non-transparent, non inclusive convenience or .. annoyance And the role of the advisory group was more the fine tuning, the actual scheduling and this and that and trying to shape it into some coherent plan. ../.. The role of the group is --because moving from a discussion like this to actually putting down for or five pages of paper with a schedule, with titles for the themes and things like that is where the group starts coming in. Well this was done by the Secretariat up to now, for Rio, based on the Consultation meetings, as it was underlined by the UN SG invitation 24 July. I see no absolute operational need for a MAG. And then the group helps in the actual running of the meeting. Because you need -- you just need bodies, basically. You just need bodies. So please, somebody has to manage all of the events which are taking place in that hall. Markus can't be around all over the place. So the MAG other role should be "bodies" constituting conference volunteers force... running down the hallways... give me a break... who is going to design the T-shirt for the force... as one of the few Civil Society WSIS T-shirt designer I am ready to give an helping hand and a pair of rollers ... However, a governmental co-chair is not at all good news > for the CS, and this, in practice, can be expected to mean that governmental > inputs will get more value than even before. I don't understand the need and > purpose of a co-chair. > We can think of writing a line of protest. I believe energy should first better spent in writing a line of protest concerning the political behaviour of the "unique" chair that we got until now. I have been ( and I would say most of the french civil society ) baffled by the lack of enthusiasm of the current chair. In normal circumstances, the chair of a committee or whatever grouping is pushing for the full implementation of the mandate of the grouping, while other stakeholders are dragging their feet. This is the normal scenario. But here, it is totally the reverse that happens, the chair actually willfully and craftfully slows down the process. I have to give him the credit that he felt the need to gain the confidence of the 'Internet Industry" and its proxies so that they participate to the process. My feeling is that they would have participated anyway, but I am ready to concede that he might have a point. But now, this strategy is no longer required. Quite a few stakeholders have came to the conclusion that the problem was the chair's slowing down process. Therefore I am very happy to see a co-chair, coming from the LAC region that is unanimously in favor of the full implementation of the IGF mandate. > This move > is a pull-back from the promised multi-stakeholder character of the IGF. Sharing power is the essence of multi-stakeholderism, having two co-chairs is better than one... I would rather support a collective board. We would need an extra co-chair coming the internet community, one from business and yet another one from the Civil Society... Nitin Desai has been partly disawoved, and he should no longer be able to play his tricks unchecked. The next consultation meeting is going to be fun. He is a very clever and talented man, under his grand-daddy guise, he might have the upper hand.... Nothing may surprise me now anymore at the IGF. > (I > know powers-that-be will justify this by saying that MAG is after all a > program committee, and host country's co-chairman-ship has practical uses. I > think MAG has more powers than that of a program committee, it shapes the > IGF, and therefore wields much of whatever power IGF has.) Well, it seems that you are opening doors to a closet that I would not dare to open .. you did it... so far; since it was non-existant, the MAG should have not play any role... of course, this is the question of the real influence of the shadow MAG, has the shadow MAG, during the time of its non-existence has been illegally consulted by the secretariat in a non-transparent fashion. ? I have not noticed the representatives of this caucus to the MAG having reported anything on the caucus list. As chair of this caucus, it is up to you to investigate the relationship with the live MAG or the zombie MAG.... Anyway, everybody has made his/her own opinion. > > Against such dilution of equality and power the greatest weapon for the CS > is of putting renewed energy into promoting all process of transparency and > accountability in IG on which it has any control. I fully agree... transparency and acountablity at all levels, including financial resources of the secretariat, its staff, and consultants > I find some parts of the proclamation quite useful.. especially > > " As part of its mandate, the Advisory Group has been asked to enhance the > transparency of the preparatory process by ensuring a continuous flow of > information between its members and the various interested groups." > Is it that strange that this HAS to be put in writing ?!... should it not had to be obvious and natural ?... > Such transparency and 'continuous flow of information' will greatly obviate > the need for email leaks, well observed > on an recent instance of which some people within > CS reacted with almost a choking reaction, the lack of reaction, the law of silence of the IGC members of the MAG was even more choking... the "Dispaingate" was more troubling by the ensuing coverup and minimzation attempts than by the act itself of this member of the "internet industry" that has not shown any intent of remorse, apologies, or excuses. We could analyze things in a conflictual manner and say that this episode has discredited the IGC MAG members, but we would remain at the surface of things and it would not solve things. Actions of individuals ( and in a sense, it somewhat absolved them ) are the result of a structural conflict. What it really show that we are not in a sane situation, that individuals under the flag of the Civil Society, feel a strong loyalty to their true constituency : the "Internet Community" that they feel is under attack. Recognition of the "Internet Community" as the fourth class of stakeholder would ease up dramatically the tensions, and would avoid the use of proxies. This was the reason of the 4-component bureau that Eurolinc proposed. > that made one wonder whether we > were the CS, of which the watchdog function ?who will watch the watchers themselves?? (quis custodiet ipsos custodes as Juvenal wrote ) > is perhaps the most primary. I > think we need to go back to our CS strengths - and methods, and tools - > rather than strategizing to side with - including hush-hushing things- some > strongly entrenched vested interests (you know who!) to make sure other > entrenched interests (governments) do not usurp more power. > exactly, fully agreed ( I am answering as I am reading you ) it is a battle between between two entrenched powers, the Civil Society must stay neutral and keeps its core value > The above quote from the proclamation also points to another important point > - of reaching out to 'various interested groups'(as also envisioned in the > IGC charter). Our strength and legitimacy will be built over reaching out to > more CS groups outside the current charmed circles and supporting/triggering > a progressive movement in IG and IS polices generally, worldwide. This > legitimacy can't be built over tactical closed arrangements with vested > interests whose 'progressive-ness' is itself under challenge, and needs to > be challenged vide the watchdog function of the CS... > fully agree Best Francis > Parminder > > ________________________________________________ > Parminder Jeet Singh > IT for Change, Bangalore > Bridging Development Realities and Technological Possibilities > Tel: (+91-80) 2665 4134, 2653 6890 > Fax: (+91-80) 4146 1055 > www.ITforChange.net > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Jeremy Malcolm [mailto:Jeremy at Malcolm.id.au] >> Sent: Tuesday, August 21, 2007 9:19 AM >> To: governance at lists.cpsr.org >> Subject: [governance] [Fwd: [WSIS CS-Plenary] IGF/MAG renewal an opaque >> and non-incluse process / un processus opague et non-inclusif] >> >> For those who are not also on the WSIS Plenary mailing list... >> >> -- >> Jeremy Malcolm LLB (Hons) B Com >> Internet and Open Source lawyer, IT consultant, actor >> host -t NAPTR 1.0.8.0.3.1.2.9.8.1.6.e164.org|awk -F! '{print $3}' >> ____________________________________________________________ >> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >> governance at lists.cpsr.org >> To be removed from the list, send any message to: >> governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org >> >> For all list information and functions, see: >> http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance > ____________________________________________________________ > You received this message as a subscriber on the list: > governance at lists.cpsr.org > To be removed from the list, send any message to: > governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org > > For all list information and functions, see: > http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Subject: > [WSIS CS-Plenary] IGF/MAG renewal an opaque and non-incluse process / un > processus opague et non-inclusif > From: > "Dr. Francis MUGUET" > Date: > Tue, 21 Aug 2007 09:16:58 +0530 > To: > "WSIS Plenary" > > To: > "WSIS Plenary" > > > English / Fran?ais ( plus bas ) > > Hello / Bonjour > > In what appears to be, I guess to many stakeholders, a completely > non-transparent, non-inclusive process, > in contradiction with the statements of the chair during the first > consultation meetings in 2006, the IGF MAG has been renewed. > The only thing that seems new ( so far ) is that the host country now > co-chairs the advisory group. > > > 20 August 2007 > > Press Release > PI/1791 > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > *Department of Public Information ? News and Media Division ? New York* > > > ADVISORY GROUP for INTERNET GOVERNANCE FORUM MEETING IN RIO DE JANEIRO > > > The mandate of the Advisory Group for the Internet Governance Forum has > been renewed in order to assist in preparations for the next meeting of > the Internet Governance Forum, to be held in Rio de Janeiro from 12 to > 15 November 2007. The Secretary-General is very appreciative of the > work carried out by the Advisory Group in the past and welcomes the > renewal of its mandate in preparation of the November Forum. > > > The Group is to be chaired by Nitin Desai, the Secretary-General?s > Special Adviser for Internet Governance, and Hadil da Rocha Vianna, > Director for Scientific and Technological Affairs in Brazil?s Ministry > of External Relations, representing the Host Country. The 47 Advisory > Group members will serve in their personal capacity. They have been > chosen from Governments, the private sector and civil society, including > the academic and technical communities, representing all regions. > > > As part of its mandate, the Advisory Group has been asked to enhance the > transparency of the preparatory process by ensuring a continuous flow of > information between its members and the various interested groups. It > has also been requested to make proposals on a suitable rotation among > its members, based on recommendations from the various interested > groups. Any decision on how to prepare subsequent meetings will be > taken after the Rio de Janeiro meeting in an open, inclusive and > transparent consultative process, taking into account the proposals of > the Advisory Group. > > > The co-chairmen may also select special advisers to assist them. > > > The Internet Governance Forum is an outcome of the Tunis phase of the > World Summit on the Information Society, which took place in 2005. In > the Tunis Agenda for the Information Society, Governments asked the > Secretary-General to convene a ?new forum for policy dialogue? to > discuss issues related to key elements of Internet governance and set > out the Forum?s mandate. > > > The Forum?s inaugural meeting took place in Athens in November 2006. It > was attended by 1,350 registered participants, including 397 delegates > from 97 Member States and 152 accredited journalists. ?The meeting > brought people together who would not normally meet under the same > roof,? said Markus Kummer, the Executive Coordinator of the Forum?s > Secretariat. ?It encouraged dialogue on issues of common interest among > people who would not normally interact.? > > > A stock-taking session in Geneva last February showed broad support for > the multi-stakeholder format of the Athens meeting, which should be > maintained in the preparations for the Rio de Janeiro meeting. A round > of open consultations held in Geneva in May showed broad support for > keeping the four themes discussed at the inaugural meeting -- access, > diversity, openness and security. In addition, there was widespread > support for adding a new theme -- critical internet resources -- to the > agenda of the Rio de Janeiro meeting. > > > For further information, please visit www.intgovforum.org > or contact Markus Kummer, Executive > Coordinator, Secretariat of the Internet Governance Forum, tel.: > +41 0 22 917 54 88, e-mail: mkummer at unog.ch > > > --------------------------------------- > > A la suite d'un processus qui, ? mon avis semble non transparent et > non-inclusif pour beaucoup d'acteurs, > et en tout cas, en contradiction avec les propos de N. Desai lors > des premi?res r?unions consultatives en 2006. > La seule chose qui change est que le pays hote est maintenant > co-pr?sident du groupe consultatif. > > > *_LE GROUPE CONSULTATIF DU FORUM SUR LA GOUVERNANCE D?INTERNET_* > > *_SE LANCE DANS LES PR?PARATIFS DE LA R?UNION DE RIO_* > > > (Adapt? de l?anglais) > > > Dot? d?un mandat qui vient d??tre renouvel?, le Groupe consultatif du > Forum sur la gouvernance d?Internet est d?sormais en mesure de > participer aux pr?paratifs de la prochaine r?union du Forum, pr?vue ? > Rio de Janeiro, du 12 au 15 novembre 2007. Conform?ment ? la d?cision > prise en mai dernier ? Gen?ve, les participants poursuivront les > discussions qu?ils ont entam?es en novembre 2006 ? Ath?nes, sur l?acc?s, > la diversit?, l?ouverture et la s?curit? d?Internet. > > > Le Groupe consultatif est charg? de renforcer la transparence dans le > processus pr?paratoire de cette deuxi?me ?dition du Forum, en assurant > un flux continu d?informations entre ses membres et les divers groupes > concern?s. Le Groupe doit ?galement faire des propositions sur la > rotation de ses membres, en tenant compte des recommandations faites par > les diff?rentes parties prenantes. Les propositions du Groupe > concerneront aussi le calendrier des prochaines r?unions du Forum. > > > Ce Forum est une cr?ation de la deuxi?me phase du Sommet mondial de la > soci?t? de l?information qui s??tait tenue ? Tunis en 2005. Quelque 1 > 350 personnes dont des repr?sentants d??tats Membres et des journalistes > avaient particip? ? la r?union d?Ath?nes. En f?vrier dernier ? Gen?ve, > ce format ? diversifi? ? a ?t? salu? lors d?une session-bilan. > > > Le Groupe consultatif est pr?sid? par Nitin Desai, Conseiller sp?cial du > Secr?taire g?n?ral pour la gouvernance d?Internet, et par Hadil da Rocha > Vianna, Directeur des affaires scientifiques et technologiques au > Minist?re des relations ext?rieures du Br?sil, qui repr?sentera ainsi le > pays h?te. Choisis par les gouvernements, le secteur priv? et la > soci?t? civile de toutes les r?gions du monde, les 47 membres du Groupe > si?gent en leur capacit? personnelle. > > > Pour plus d?informations, pri?re de visiter le site > http://www.intgovforum.org . Vous pouvez > aussi contacter Markus Kummer, Coordonnateur ex?cutif, Secr?tariat du > Forum sur la gouvernance d?Internet au 41 0 22 917 54 88 ou ? l?adresse > ?lectronique suivante: mkummer at unog.ch . > > -- > > ------------------------------------------------------ > Francis F. MUGUET Ph.D > > MDPI Foundation Open Access Journals > Associate Publisher > http://www.mdpi.org http://www.mdpi.net > muguet at mdpi.org muguet at mdpi.net > > ENSTA Paris, France > KNIS lab. Director > "Knowledge Networks & Information Society" (KNIS) > muguet at ensta.fr http://www.ensta.fr/~muguet > > World Summit On the Information Society (WSIS) > Civil Society Working Groups > Scientific Information : http://www.wsis-si.org chair > Patents & Copyrights : http://www.wsis-pct.org co-chair > Financing Mechanismns : http://www.wsis-finance.org web > > UNMSP project : http://www.unmsp.org > WTIS initiative: http://www.wtis.org > ------------------------------------------------------ > -- ------------------------------------------------------ Francis F. MUGUET Ph.D MDPI Foundation Open Access Journals Associate Publisher http://www.mdpi.org http://www.mdpi.net muguet at mdpi.org muguet at mdpi.net ENSTA Paris, France KNIS lab. Director "Knowledge Networks & Information Society" (KNIS) muguet at ensta.fr http://www.ensta.fr/~muguet World Summit On the Information Society (WSIS) Civil Society Working Groups Scientific Information : http://www.wsis-si.org chair Patents & Copyrights : http://www.wsis-pct.org co-chair Financing Mechanismns : http://www.wsis-finance.org web UNMSP project : http://www.unmsp.org WTIS initiative: http://www.wtis.org ------------------------------------------------------ From muguet at mdpi.net Wed Aug 22 03:13:00 2007 From: muguet at mdpi.net (Dr. Francis MUGUET) Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2007 03:13:00 +0200 Subject: [Wsis-pct] [governance] [Fwd: [WSIS CS-Plenary] IGF/MAG renewal an opaque and non-incluse process / un processus opague et non-inclusif] In-Reply-To: <46CA9E10.1050008@Malcolm.id.au> References: <46CA9E10.1050008@Malcolm.id.au> Message-ID: <46CB8D9C.4060101@mdpi.net> same thing ----------- Dear Jeremy > Parminder wrote: >> I don't understand the need and purpose of a co-chair. > > I think that the idea of a co-chair is an excellent one, except for the > fact that, as you have noted, it is another governmental stakeholder > representative. In fact I recently wrote in my PhD thesis on the IGF: Your scholarly work is quite interesting. > > "* Rather than being appointed by the UN Secretary-General, the chair > should be selected by democratic or consensual means by the [Advisory > Group] itself. ... > > * The rotation of the candidates for chair among the stakeholder groups > is necessary to ensure the bureau?s legitimacy as the peak body of a > multi-stakeholder governance network. ... > > * The election of co-chairs, as well as supporting the bureau?s > multi-stakeholder legitimacy, adds a layer of accountability to the > [Advisory Group] ..." > I agree with the intent of your proposal but I respecfully think that it should be reframed in a proper legal framework using exact words. Election of an advisory group as a group of personal advisers to the UN SG seems a contradiction in terms : >>CHAIRMAN DESAI: ../.. I would like to clarify one thing, which is that the Advisory Group has been constituted by the Secretary-General simply to advise him. It does not really have any other legislative basis than that. So it is very DIFFERENT, legally speaking from the WGIG, constituted by a decision of the WSIS. When a monarch or a president choose advisers he/she does not rely on elections, it is the "will of the prince". You have to "please" the prince or his/her closest "advisers" ( a pyramid of advisers... with all the intrigues and non-transparency that its implies ) The status of an adviser is a top-down process from the "fountain of power". Of course the selection by the Prince could be better, if the advisers to the Prince are making the widest as possible "consultations", or if each constituency presents a list ( a self-nonimation process, this happened for the WGIG, but it was done properly unfortunately, for lack of procedural oversight ) but you can see that this process, per se, belongs to an autocratic system. What you are really advocating here is a Bureau and more, where some form of autonomous representation is recognized, de jure. A Bureau may be formed of elected persons when the form of the constituency allows it (States ) or at least some form of self-determination by the constituency. It is a bottom-up process and this is new at the UN. It is the form of structure that the internet community is proud of. It was initiated during the WSIS by the formation of representation for procedural matters only however, for the CCBI and the CSB. It does mean it is perfect, both in the internet community or at the CSB, but I believe it is better than an autocratic selection of courtiers. Since a Bureau in UN terms is for procedural issues only, it should be supplemented by a Program Board or Committee, where a transparent self-nomination process should be implemented. Of course this implies, consensus and therefore it implies having constituencies that are well defined to allow such consensus to occur. In short, do we want to have an IGF "privy council" or some sort of a parliament ? This is the first thing that must be reflected upon. I would encourage social science, political science researchers, ethnologists to investigate this point and also to study current sociology and political mechanisms of the "Internet Community" >> (I know powers-that-be will justify this by saying that MAG is after >> all a >> program committee, and host country's co-chairman-ship has practical >> uses. I >> think MAG has more powers than that of a program committee, it shapes the >> IGF, and therefore wields much of whatever power IGF has.) > > Absolutely. This is also why it is unconscionable that the Advisory > Group's members have been appointed without any open call for > candidates, or any published criteria for their selection, or any > transparency in the process of their selection - exactly... I mean, we don't even > have a list of their names yet! They are apparently not all the same as > the original Advisory Group. My understanding is they are going to be same folks, >>GERMANY (European union) : ../.. we support the reconduction of the existing multistakeholder Advisory Group for the Rio meeting for the sake of efficiency. it is possible that they might some new people as special advisors to the new co-chair. > >> I find some parts of the proclamation quite useful.. especially >> >> " As part of its mandate, the Advisory Group has been asked to enhance >> the >> transparency of the preparatory process by ensuring a continuous flow of >> information between its members and the various interested groups." > > I also took note of the statement that "Any decision on how to prepare > subsequent meetings will be taken after the Rio de Janeiro meeting in an > open, inclusive and transparent consultative process, taking into > account the proposals of the Advisory Group." This suggests to me that > we are being promised greater input into the selection of the third > Advisory Group (or bureau, or whatever it becomes). But why couldn't > that have been the case for this year? This statement seems dangerous if only the proposal of the Advisory Group are taken into account, because it is going to have a strong tendency for survival.... Concerning Business and Governments, they seem to be happy with their representation, the Internet Community over-happy with their over-representation... so you can see where the proposal of the overall Advisory Group is going to lead to... In his July invitation letter, the UN SG indicated that he will take into account preparatory meetings and online consultations. The only fair and constructive thing is to do is to separate out Civil Society from the Internet Community otherwise CS is going to get crushed, and I think this is also in the best long term interest of the "Internet Community" if they want to reach, as they are dreaming of, the status of an "International Organization" enjoying the same diplomatic privileges as an Intergovernmental Organization. To reach this goal, they should first adopt decent modes of lobbying in order to gain better consideration and reputation. Lets see Francis > -- ------------------------------------------------------ Francis F. MUGUET Ph.D MDPI Foundation Open Access Journals Associate Publisher http://www.mdpi.org http://www.mdpi.net muguet at mdpi.org muguet at mdpi.net ENSTA Paris, France KNIS lab. Director "Knowledge Networks & Information Society" (KNIS) muguet at ensta.fr http://www.ensta.fr/~muguet World Summit On the Information Society (WSIS) Civil Society Working Groups Scientific Information : http://www.wsis-si.org chair Patents & Copyrights : http://www.wsis-pct.org co-chair Financing Mechanismns : http://www.wsis-finance.org web UNMSP project : http://www.unmsp.org WTIS initiative: http://www.wtis.org ------------------------------------------------------ From bea at vialibre.org.ar Wed Aug 22 22:56:04 2007 From: bea at vialibre.org.ar (Beatriz Busaniche) Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2007 17:56:04 -0300 Subject: [Wsis-pct] CaFeCONF 2007: Call for papers Message-ID: <46CCA2E4.7000809@vialibre.org.ar> *Call For ``Papers?? (CFCh)* CaFeConf - www.cafeconf.org 6th GNU/Linux and Free Software Conference Buenos Aires - Argentina - 5th and 6th October 2007 CaFeLUG (www.cafelug.org.ar) CaFeLUG - Free Software User Group of Capital Federal, calls for the participation of the Free Software community to it's open GNU/Linux and Free Software Conference (CaFeConf). The event will take place the 5th and 6th of October 2007 at the "Universidad Argentina de la Empresa" - UADE - Lima 717 (Buenos Aires City - Argentina). The theme of the event is Free Software's technology applied towards education and to the "third sector" (Non-governmental Organizations), and of course, there will also be many other themes related to Free Software, although those will be the main ones. The author of each chosen talk will be able to participate both by speaking and attending at the event. In the case where there are multiple authors for a specific talk, only 3 speakers will be allowed. Note: Due to budget reasons, CaFeLUG will only be able to pay for a few travel expenses, total or partially, for the speakers selected who reside outside of Capital Federal or Gran Buenos Aires. *Where to send the Papers* The papers must be sent in plain text or as an attachment (in some free/open format [1]) to the following email address: charlas at cafeconf.org The talks will be received until September 2nd included. *How to send the Papers* The papers sent must have the following information: * Title: * Author(s): First and last name, brief description of each one, picture, place of residence, association, LUG or company to which he belongs, if applies. * Type: It can be a traditional talk or a workshop (with a PC) * Estimated duration: The talks are generally 45min, and the workshops 1h 45min. In case you need more (or less) time, please express why/ * Brief description of the talk: One or two paragraph(s) that explain -not too briefly- the content of the presentation. * Target level of the talk: Classify within: newbie/intermediate/ advanced/expert. * Type of target audience: General interest, Free Software advocates, high school students, higher education students, high school teachers, teachers in general and trainers. * Previous knowledge: Please specify what previous knowledge the audience must have. * Theme: General theme the talk belongs in (education, kernel, programming, multimedia, communication, workstations, network services, interoperability, etc.) * Educational Theme: Tools to manage educational establishments, tools for teachers, teacher experiences, management experiences, success stories in education establishments, study plan proposals, etc. * Phone number(s) of the author(s): To be able to get in touch with you * Place of Residence of the author(s). [1] *What format may the presentations be in* The presentations sent in must have one of the following formats: * Open document presentation * HTML standard * Postscript * PDF * Plain Text *License* You must specify a license that allows CaFeLUG to distribute the material in a LiveCD or documentation, and that allows it to be downloaded from CaFeLUG's website. From muguet at mdpi.net Thu Aug 23 01:44:14 2007 From: muguet at mdpi.net (Dr. Francis MUGUET) Date: Thu, 23 Aug 2007 01:44:14 +0200 Subject: [Wsis-pct] BitTorrent Admin Monitored by US Government, Forced to Dump Linux Message-ID: <46CCCA4E.3030709@mdpi.net> ... the shackles are ready.... ---------------------- BitTorrent Admin Monitored by US Government, Forced to Dump Linux Written by enigmax on August 22, 2007 Sk0t, an ex-administrator of the EliteTorrents BitTorrent tracker is to have his internet connection forcibly monitored by the US Government. If that wasn?t bad enough, the monitoring software is Windows based - which means he is being forced to ditch Linux - or face being barred from the internet. Scott McCausland (sk0t), the ex-administrator of the EliteTorrents BitTorrent tracker isn?t having much luck lately. Back in September 2006, he pleaded guilty to two charges - ?conspiracy to commit copyright infringement? and ?criminal copyright infringement?. Both charges relate to him uploading ?Star Wars: Episode III? onto the internet hours before the theatrical release, earning him 5 months in jail and 5 months home confinement. Sk0t has now been released from jail but this doesn?t mean that everything is back to normal. Back on 17 July, sk0t had to see his Probation Officer for the first time and two days later he had to have a special ankle bracelet attached. This monitoring device is there to enforce the terms of his release: Monday to Friday 08:30 to 21:00 he is free to do as he pleases. Weekends are more restrictive - freedom is allocated between 08:30 to 17:00. The one good thing about this device is that it will be removed before Christmas (Dec 19th). According to a post on his blog, following another meeting with his Probation Officer, it seems sk0t is having more trouble: So, I am getting shafted by the Justice Department again?? sk0t was informed by his Probation Officer that he has to have special software installed on his PC so that the government can monitor his online activities. However, what is a more bitter pill to swallow for him is that the monitoring software is Windows only and as sk0t is an Ubuntu user, the Justice Department is forcing him to switch operating systems. I had a meeting with my probation officer today, and he told me that he has to install monitoring software onto my PC. No big deal to me, that is part of my sentence. However, their software doesnt support GNU/Linux (Which is what I use). So, he told me that if I want to use a computer, I would have to use an OS that the software can be installed on. Sk0t is left with a tough choice. Give in to the evils of the monitoring software, format his hard drive and install Windows - or be barred from using a PC completely. Sk0t told TorrentFreak: ?I think that this whole situation is just one more way that they can impose their will onto me. I have contacted my attorney, and we are going to fight this. It isn?t the fact that I have to be monitored that bothers me, it is the fact that I have restructure my life (different OS, different software on that OS) and that they would require (force) me to purchase software while I a currently unemployed and relatively unemployable with the 2 felonies that they gave me. It is just a ridiculous situation. Why should I conform to them when I am consenting to the software? they should have software that conforms to me.? Unfortunately, thanks to the Family Entertainment and Copyright Act, some BitTorrent users are considered criminals these days, which means these unusual measures can be forced upon them. In a society where ?the punishment should fit the crime?, you can?t help but think that somewhere along the line there?s been a big miscalculation when regular citizens are turned into criminals for sharing files. -- ------------------------------------------------------ Francis F. MUGUET Ph.D MDPI Foundation Open Access Journals Associate Publisher http://www.mdpi.org http://www.mdpi.net muguet at mdpi.org muguet at mdpi.net ENSTA Paris, France KNIS lab. Director "Knowledge Networks & Information Society" (KNIS) muguet at ensta.fr http://www.ensta.fr/~muguet World Summit On the Information Society (WSIS) Civil Society Working Groups Scientific Information : http://www.wsis-si.org chair Patents & Copyrights : http://www.wsis-pct.org co-chair Financing Mechanismns : http://www.wsis-finance.org web UNMSP project : http://www.unmsp.org WTIS initiative: http://www.wtis.org ------------------------------------------------------ From muguet at mdpi.net Fri Aug 24 18:54:51 2007 From: muguet at mdpi.net (Dr. Francis MUGUET) Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2007 18:54:51 +0200 Subject: [Wsis-pct] ooXML Effect of Microsoft lobbying Message-ID: <46CF0D5B.8080106@mdpi.net> Hello Microsoft has managed to get another vote in the US. The disgusting effect of Microsoft lobbying can be noticed. Were been corrupted or intimidated : The DoD ( upon orders of you know who ...) GS1 Lexmark NIST ( very disappointing ) interestingly, none of those who switched vote offered any comments... this is the tell tale mark of shame... More than interoperability is the control of a norm that is at stake. Even if ooXML were to be trustfully interoperable, this norm should be rejected, because Microsoft is going to abuse the leadership of *its *norm to implement/reject features as it see fit to its worldwide domination agenda. Interoperable is not enough, truly open norms should be open to public feature determination. Date Organization Yes No Abstain Not Yet *TOTAL* 12 3 1 0 08/16/2007 00:00:00 Apple Inc X 08/23/2007 00:00:00 Department of Homeland Security X Comments 08/16/2007 00:00:00 Electronic Industries Alliance X 08/16/2007 00:00:00 EMC X 08/23/2007 00:00:00 Farance, Incorporated X Comments 08/16/2007 00:00:00 GS1 US X 08/20/2007 00:00:00 Hewlett Packard Co X 08/23/2007 00:00:00 IBM Corp X Comments 08/23/2007 00:00:00 IEEE X Comments 08/21/2007 00:00:00 Intel X 08/16/2007 00:00:00 Lexmark International X 08/17/2007 00:00:00 Microsoft X 08/20/2007 00:00:00 NIST X 08/23/2007 00:00:00 Oracle X Comments 08/22/2007 00:00:00 Sony Electronics X Comments 08/16/2007 00:00:00 US Department of Defense X Date Organization Yes No Abstain Not Yet *TOTAL* 8 7 1 0 07/27/2007 00:00:00 Apple Inc X 08/10/2007 00:00:00 Department of Homeland Security X Comments 08/09/2007 00:00:00 Electronic Industries Alliance X 07/20/2007 00:00:00 EMC X 08/10/2007 00:00:00 Farance, Incorporated X Comments 08/10/2007 00:00:00 GS1 US X Comments 08/08/2007 00:00:00 Hewlett Packard Co X Comments 08/06/2007 00:00:00 IBM Corp X Comments 08/09/2007 00:00:00 IEEE X Comments 08/09/2007 00:00:00 Intel X 08/08/2007 00:00:00 Lexmark International X Comments 08/08/2007 00:00:00 Microsoft X Comments 08/09/2007 00:00:00 NIST X Comments 08/10/2007 00:00:00 Oracle X Comments 07/24/2007 00:00:00 Sony Electronics X 08/09/2007 00:00:00 US Department of Defense X Comments I hope that people in the Civil Society that are still using Word are becoming aware that they are passive, but real accomplice of corruption -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mail.fsfeurope.org/pipermail/wsis-pct/attachments/20070824/8436603b/attachment.htm From muguet at mdpi.net Thu Aug 30 11:27:44 2007 From: muguet at mdpi.net (Dr. Francis MUGUET) Date: Thu, 30 Aug 2007 11:27:44 +0200 Subject: [Wsis-pct] [governance] MAG future In-Reply-To: <20070829165734.BD7AA67A35@smtp1.electricembers.net> References: <20070829165734.BD7AA67A35@smtp1.electricembers.net> Message-ID: <46D68D90.6010608@mdpi.net> Dear Parminder and all stakeholders of good faith > Meanwhile, I happen to be in Europe the next week, and will be able to drop > in at the open IGF consultations on 3rd. Let me know who all will be there. > Karen I know will be there, Bill is based in Geneva ... Anyone else who will > be attending? We can plan to meet. It happens that the MAG has less and less future... I learned from a governmental stakeholder that the reconducted MAG will reconvene on Tuesday 5 and Wednesday 6 September. IF this information is correct, it would mean that the law of silence and opacity continues.... Non-governmental stakeholders that belongs to the IGC would have completely lost credibility. As for the IGF secratariat and the transparency of the IGF web site, the facts speak for themselves. When one reads the last SG statement : ---------- As part of its mandate, the Advisory Group has been asked to enhance the transparency of the preparatory process by ensuring a continuous flow of information between its members and the various interested groups. It has also been requested to make proposals on a suitable rotation among its members, based on recommendations from the various interested groups. --------- It would be clear that non-governmental MAG members are really lacking enthusiasm in enforcing the SG statement, except when they are nominated. I guess that the rotation would be really needed Best Francis > > Please also let us know what issues any of the members may want raised at > the consultations. I have looked the new draft program and things look quite > fine at this stage. > > Along with our workshop on fulfilling the mandate of the IGF, three > workshops organized by IGC members seem to be covering all the four agenda > items that we proposed for the Rio meeting, which is quite good. > > These workshops are > > Public policy on the Internet (http://info.intgovforum.org/yoppy.php?poj=5 ) > > Towards a development Agenda for IG > http://info.intgovforum.org/yoppy.php?poj=56 > > And > > Governance frameworks for CIRs http://info.intgovforum.org/yoppy.php?poj=37 > > Parminder > > ________________________________________________ > Parminder Jeet Singh > IT for Change, Bangalore > Bridging Development Realities and Technological Possibilities > Tel: (+91-80) 2665 4134, 2653 6890 > Fax: (+91-80) 4146 1055 > www.ITforChange.net > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Jeremy Malcolm [mailto:Jeremy at Malcolm.id.au] >> Sent: Tuesday, August 28, 2007 7:35 AM >> To: governance at lists.cpsr.org >> Subject: Re: [governance] MAG future >> >> Taran Rampersad wrote: >>> Vittorio Bertola wrote: >>>> The real problem is that the IGF was born with high hopes, but was >>>> quickly dragged downwards by power struggles, short-sightedness and >>>> crossed fears. >>>> >>>> I agree with Bertrand, civil society should focus on preparing and >>>> presenting a proposal for the post-Rio IGF that restores the initial >>>> hopes, finding a way to implement the mandate that is not threatening >>>> to the Internet community, and ensuring some clarity, transparency and >>>> democracy in the internal procedures of the IGF. >>> Concur. >> I also concur. Maybe you would be interested in reading chapter 6 of my >> PhD thesis (now complete in draft) which aims to present just such a >> proposal in detail. Browse or download it from >> http://www.malcolm.id.au/thesis. >> >> -- >> Jeremy Malcolm LLB (Hons) B Com >> Internet and Open Source lawyer, IT consultant, actor >> host -t NAPTR 1.0.8.0.3.1.2.9.8.1.6.e164.org|awk -F! '{print $3}' >> ____________________________________________________________ >> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >> governance at lists.cpsr.org >> To be removed from the list, send any message to: >> governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org >> >> For all list information and functions, see: >> http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance > > ____________________________________________________________ > You received this message as a subscriber on the list: > governance at lists.cpsr.org > To be removed from the list, send any message to: > governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org > > For all list information and functions, see: > http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance > -- ------------------------------------------------------ Francis F. MUGUET Ph.D MDPI Foundation Open Access Journals Associate Publisher http://www.mdpi.org http://www.mdpi.net muguet at mdpi.org muguet at mdpi.net ENSTA Paris, France KNIS lab. Director "Knowledge Networks & Information Society" (KNIS) muguet at ensta.fr http://www.ensta.fr/~muguet World Summit On the Information Society (WSIS) Civil Society Working Groups Scientific Information : http://www.wsis-si.org chair Patents & Copyrights : http://www.wsis-pct.org co-chair Financing Mechanismns : http://www.wsis-finance.org web UNMSP project : http://www.unmsp.org WTIS initiative: http://www.wtis.org ------------------------------------------------------ From muguet at mdpi.net Fri Aug 31 15:26:50 2007 From: muguet at mdpi.net (Dr. Francis MUGUET) Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2007 15:26:50 +0200 Subject: [Wsis-pct] [governance] MAG future In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <46D8171A.1060301@mdpi.net> Dear Lee > Francis, > > Your concern about MAG sounds a bit overwrought to me, frankly. > > "Non-governmental stakeholders that belongs to the IGC would have > completely lost credibility?" Because? There's lots of meeting I'm not > invited to, most of which I am happy to stay out of. > I am somewhat surprised by your comment which is not relevant It is not about being invited to a meeting or to a club or a committee. Do not put aside the issue, and try to lead the discussion diverge away. So lets put the dot on the i, as we say in French. It is all about MANDATE : the Advisory Group has been asked to enhance the transparency of the preparatory process by ensuring a continuous flow of information between its members and the various interested groups. The MAG should have been announced publicly and IGC MAG members should have informed continuously the IGC. People that are not fulfilling the mandate that goes along with their nominiation have lost credibility. I would add that a few governmental MAG members are quite surprised by this lack of the transparency in the "civil society" as "represented" by the IGC. > Perhaps there are bigger deals for IGC to worry about like making IGF > II a success? > A success for who ? for those who do not respect any mandate, the one from the SG to start with, and then from the Tunis agenda ? This is a question of good faith... Nitin Desai, the "trusted chair" have spoken repeatedly about "good faith"... . Best Francis > Lee > > Prof. Lee W. McKnight > School of Information Studies > Syracuse University > +1-315-443-6891office > +1-315-278-4392 mobile > > >>>> muguet at mdpi.net 8/30/2007 5:27 AM >>> >>>> > Dear Parminder and all stakeholders of good faith > > >> Meanwhile, I happen to be in Europe the next week, and will be able >> > to drop > >> in at the open IGF consultations on 3rd. Let me know who all will be >> > there. > >> Karen I know will be there, Bill is based in Geneva ... Anyone else >> > who will > >> be attending? We can plan to meet. >> > > It happens that the MAG has less and less future... > > I learned from a governmental stakeholder that the reconducted MAG > will reconvene on Tuesday 5 and Wednesday 6 September. > > IF this information is correct, > it would mean that the law of silence and opacity continues.... > Non-governmental stakeholders that belongs to the IGC would have > completely lost credibility. > > As for the IGF secratariat and the transparency of the IGF web site, > the facts speak for themselves. > > When one reads the last SG statement