<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40"><head><meta http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=utf-8"><meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 12 (filtered medium)"><style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Tahoma;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Verdana;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0cm;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
span.EmailStyle17
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;}
@page WordSection1
{size:612.0pt 792.0pt;
margin:72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]--></head><body lang=EN-US link=blue vlink=purple><div class=WordSection1><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>Am I the only other person on this list who relates to many of Dave’s comments below? Or would it be politically incorrect to relate to those comment?<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>Best,<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>Richard<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><div style='border:none;border-left:solid blue 1.5pt;padding:0cm 0cm 0cm 4.0pt'><div><div style='border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0cm 0cm 0cm'><p class=MsoNormal><b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'>From:</span></b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'> Chapter-delegates [mailto:chapter-delegates-bounces@elists.isoc.org] <b>On Behalf Of </b>Dave Burstein<br><b>Sent:</b> lundi, 22. février 2016 14:50<br><b>To:</b> Alejandro Pisanty<br><b>Cc:</b> ISOC Chapter Delegates<br><b>Subject:</b> Re: [Chapter-delegates] How do we incorporate China and other countries that are different?<o:p></o:p></span></p></div></div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif"'>Alejandro and people<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><div><blockquote style='border:none;border-left:solid #CCCCCC 1.0pt;padding:0cm 0cm 0cm 6.0pt;margin-left:4.8pt;margin-right:0cm'><div><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-family:"Cambria Math","serif"'></span><span style='font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif"'>I respectfully disagree that <o:p></o:p></span></p></div></div></div></blockquote><div><p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p></div><blockquote style='border:none;border-left:solid #CCCCCC 1.0pt;padding:0cm 0cm 0cm 6.0pt;margin-left:4.8pt;margin-right:0cm'><div><div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-family:"Cambria Math","serif"'></span><span style='font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif"'>"this</span><span style='font-family:"Cambria Math","serif"'></span><span style='font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif"'><o:p></o:p></span></p></div><p class=MsoNormal> discussion is about allowing an organization to take, or fake, the representation of all the people<o:p></o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-family:"Cambria Math","serif"'></span><span style='font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif"'>."<o:p></o:p></span></p></div></div></div></blockquote><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-family:"Cambria Math","serif"'></span><span style='font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif"'>While you and others I respect are fighting an honorable battle for representation of users, the emotional tone of the responses points to the larger issue, who makes the decisions? <o:p></o:p></span></p></div></div><div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif"'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div></div><div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif"'>Most of the major issues that affect the affordability of the Internet are cast aside in the current system. For example, in 2012 the Africans raised the issues of cartel pricing on international backhaul and transit. That turns out to be the largest <u>external</u> cost factor in delivering the Internet in Africa. That was thrown out of the discussion under pressure from the U.S., backed by ISOC. They also raised the issue of multi-nationals not paying taxes. Again, the main country of the multinationals forced that off the table. <o:p></o:p></span></p></div></div><div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif"'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div></div><div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif"'>Inexpensive smartphones are connecting two billion people, a most wonderful thing. That's being threatened by claims for "reasonable" royalties that are more than the total price of manufacturing the phone. When that issue came up in the ITU, the U.S. and allies again blocked discussion. <o:p></o:p></span></p></div></div><div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif"'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div></div><div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif"'>Many of us want the international community, including the Internet groups, to do everything we can to prevent surveillance of what we do on the net. At the moment, the U.S. with a $40B+ surveillance operation seems to do it most pervasively. I have no doubt the Russians, Chinese and French would match that effort if they could and soon will. All international efforts on this have been blocked by guess who. <o:p></o:p></span></p></div></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif"'>T<o:p></o:p></span></p><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-family:"Cambria Math","serif"'></span><span style='font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif"'>he solutions to problems like this</span><span style='font-family:"Cambria Math","serif"'></span><span style='font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif"'><o:p></o:p></span></p></div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-family:"Cambria Math","serif"'></span><span style='font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif"'><o:p></o:p></span></p><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-family:"Cambria Math","serif"'></span><span style='font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif"'> will not be easy. Some perhaps should continue to be ignored because the cure would be worse than the disease. But they currently are being swept off the table by the countries who benefit. <o:p></o:p></span></p></div></div><div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif"'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div></div><div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif"'>South Africa, India, Brazil and nearly all the African, Latin American and Arab nations tried to change who controlled the system in 2012. It wasn't because they are on the Chinese and Russian side of a renewed cold war.</span><span style='font-family:"Cambria Math","serif"'></span><span style='font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif"'><o:p></o:p></span></p></div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif"'>These are real issues that are far more important than whether a .com registration<o:p></o:p></span></p><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-family:"Cambria Math","serif"'></span><span style='font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif"'> cost $11 or $15, the knid of thing that ICANN controls.</span><span style='font-family:"Cambria Math","serif"'></span><span style='font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif"'><o:p></o:p></span></p></div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif"'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div></div><div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif"'>--------------<o:p></o:p></span></p></div></div><div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif"'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div></div><div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif"'>I'm happy to believe that you, Vint and many others in this discussion are speaking up because of your belief in better representation of Internet users. But <o:p></o:p></span></p></div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif"'>I<o:p></o:p></span></p><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-family:"Cambria Math","serif"'></span><span style='font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif"'> also know<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif"'> several examples of players in the ICANN/IGF/etc. ecosystem <o:p></o:p></span></p><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-family:"Cambria Math","serif"'></span><span style='font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif"'>whose abuses have been ignored by the powers that be because they are on the same side of the divide, whatever you want to name it. <o:p></o:p></span></p></div></div><div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif"'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div></div><div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif"'>Frankly, neither ISOC nor my country's system are effectively bottom-up. We all can name examples. Let's fix that before we criticize the connection between a Chinese group and the Chinese government. I can tell some dirty stories about the U.S. connections here but let's not.<o:p></o:p></span></p></div></div><div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif"'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div></div><div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif"'>Let's start reforming ISOC by letting the members decide whether we should oppose Net Neutrality. The <i>WSJ</i> reported the Internet Society opposed neutrality, apparently because that was the opinion of several people who represent the Internet Society in policy circles. I didn't hear the head of ISOC say <i>WSJ </i>misrepresented our position on Neutrality. A senior ISOC official wanted to rule out any discussion of neutrality in the 2014 IGF. It was "too controversial." <o:p></o:p></span></p></div></div><div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif"'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div></div><div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif"'>Also, let's not hire so many $200,000-$400,000 lobbyists and communications experts so that we can live within the (?$30M) budget from our .org and individual fundraising. We shouldn't be begging the multinationals and other interested parties for money. I've already been told by a lesser ISOC official, "I support your idea but we can't do anything about it. We're trying to get Verizon to fund our next event." <o:p></o:p></span></p></div></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-family:"Cambria Math","serif"'></span><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-family:"Cambria Math","serif"'></span><span style='font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif"'>Let's put our own house in order first, proving we can build a bollom up multi-stakeholder organization. I'd suggest we begin by delegating more authority to the chapter committee, which is more representative than the policy staff. <o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif"'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif"'>---------<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif"'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif"'>I'm going to shut up now and go back to earning my living as a tech writer. <o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif"'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif"'>Dave Burstein<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-family:"Cambria Math","serif"'></span><span style='font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif"'><o:p></o:p></span></p></div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div></div></div></div></div></div></body></html>