[chapter-delegates] Re: ISOC Annual Report 2003

[Mike Todd]

Alejandro,

If the participants are the same or similar on both lists, I would just as
soon keep the discussion here.  Just my own preference and trying to keep
the number of lists I follow down to a manageable level...

Mike Todd
President, Mike Todd Associates - www.MikeTodd.com
Supporting the Digital Coast

President, Internet Society Los Angeles Chapter - www.ISOC-LA.org

Center for Entrepreneurship and Technology Law
Pepperdine University School of Law - mltodd at pepperdine.edu

Technology Expert Witness - ExpertWitness at miketodd.com

  310-321-5706  Office Phone
  310-321-5701  Office FAX
  714-893-6684  After Hours Voice
  714-893-6866  After Hours FAX
  714-222-3700  Cell


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Alejandro Pisanty" <apisan at servidor.unam.mx>
To: "Franck Martin" <franck at sopac.org>
Cc: "Fred Baker" <fred at cisco.com>; <chapter-delegates at lists.isoc.org>
Sent: Sunday, June 05, 2005 8:56 AM
Subject: Re: [chapter-delegates] Re: ISOC Annual Report 2003


Franck,

while we discuss the way forward, the reference for the report on
responses to the WGIG questionnaire is in
http://www.wgig.org/docs/IG-questionnaire-response.pdf.

Patrick Vande Walle has suggested that the discussion about this summary
is better suited for the Members PubPol list and in fact he already made
a contribution there. What do others think?

Alejandro Pisanty

.  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .
     Dr. Alejandro Pisanty
Director General de Servicios de Computo Academico
UNAM, Universidad Nacional Autonoma de Mexico
Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico
Tel. (+52-55) 5622-8541, 5622-8542 Fax 5622-8540
http://www.dgsca.unam.mx
*
---->> Unete a ISOC Mexico, www.isoc.org
 Participa en ICANN, www.icann.org
.  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .



On Sun, 5 Jun 2005, Franck Martin wrote:

> Date: Sun, 05 Jun 2005 20:52:36 +1200
> From: Franck Martin <franck at sopac.org>
> To: Alejandro Pisanty <apisan at servidor.unam.mx>
> Cc: Fred Baker <fred at cisco.com>, chapter-delegates at lists.isoc.org
> Subject: Re: [chapter-delegates] Re: ISOC Annual Report 2003
>
>
>
> Alejandro Pisanty wrote:
>
> >Hi,
> >
> >let's try to start with a step forward (not forgetting the past, just
> >trying to discuss forward instead of backward.)
> >
> >I've sent out the present-day summary of responses to the WGIG
> >questionnaire in order to spark a discussion among chapters, and in the
> >pubpol list, to see if it can in turn lead to an expression of the
> >chapters that can be taken to the WGIG in at least two ways, one of them
> >through the formal ISOC representation and another through several of us
> >who are WGIG members (I recall at least Vittorio Bertola is in all three
> >universes, probably Carlos Afonso too?)
> >
> >
> Where did you sent it? Cannot find it on the chapter-delegates list...
>
> >For the formal representation we would have to have a quite finished
> >statement, and to be able to assess the level of consensus behind it.
> >
> >For the direct route into WGIG we members will make good use of whatever
> >feedback we can get from this community.
> >
> >I'll be glad to help clarify as much as materially possible the
background
> >and other questions that may appear.
> >
> >This could be an opportunity for us to help shape what we want ISOC to do
> >in the future by concrete, though strategically broad, views and
> >proposals.
> >
> >Certainly when we read again and again the statements that express the
> >"need" for a "new body" to discuss Internet governance, I see recurrently
> >a vacuum that should have not existed, that should or could have been
> >filled by ISOC, and that a number of reasons caused for it not to be
> >filled by ISOC. If ISOC is to be one of the primary forces to shape the
> >future of the Internet, especially given the WSIS/WGIG framework, now's
> >the time, but we still have to actually do it.
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
> I have read ISOC comment to the WGIG, while I agree with it, it does not
> provide a solution. ISOC has the right to be critical, but this comment
> is likely to be rejected if it is not supported by a show of power. Will
> any government will ask WGIG to answer to ISOC comments? This would be
> something.
>
> In the other hand, ISOC can be part of the solution and highlights
> everything it is doing today and request people to join ISOC and its
> chapter for better Internet Governance. The best way is to monitor WGIG
> but to not let their actions and statements stir away ISOC from its
> mission. Remember the UN system is based on public servants who prime
> goals is to get the UN retirment package after doing 5 years there,
> while not upsetting anybody. They do that by recommending that
> consultants do the work on the ground and report back to them.
>
> In the ISOC answer, I would have said that the liberalisation of Telecom
> did not generate the growth of the Internet, but that the growth of
> Internet generated the liberalisation of the telecommunication industry.
> As soon as you touch the Internet, and see its potential you want to be
> able to contact anybody anywhere at the cheapest price talking about
> anything. Before you wanted to contact only the close people to you in a
> reliable fashion.
>
> Where do we go from now?
>
> Cheers
>
>
> -- 
> -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
> Franck Martin
> franck at sopac.org
> "Toute connaissance est une réponse à une question"
> G. Bachelard
>
>