[Chapter-delegates] Does your Chapter want to be a remote hub for the Global INET?

[Veni Markovski]

Joly,
I don't believe anyone has suggested that ISOC China (and you may call 
it ISC, or Internet Society of China, but we are all used to the 
abbreviation ISOC meaning Internet Society) be denied their place. 
Correct me, if I am wrong, but what some people have expressed as 
concerns is:
a) that participants at INET, and just visitors of the web site may 
consider ISC as an ISOC chapter;
b) that the round table consists of governmental, quasi-governmental or 
intergovernmental organizations. The fact what one or another has 
advocated for does not change the fact that they do not represent users;
c) that even ISOC itself is missing from this round table. Certainly 
ISOC could have come with one name to be on the panel, and this name 
could have confirmed her or his participation by now.

I agree with you - it is good to have all stakeholders, but at the 
moment this round table seems very, very one-sided.

veni

On 2/23/2012 18:18, Joly MacFie wrote:
> Just to address your exact point. The Internet Society of China has 
> never, to my knowledge represented itself as ISOC China, it is known 
> by the acronym ISC. It is the representative association of the 
> mainland Chinese Internet community both organizational and 
> individual. http://www.isc.org.cn/english/About_Us/Bylaw/
>
> According to published figures, as such, they thus represent just over 
> 25% of the Internet's 2 Billion users.
>
> Similarly, going to Veni's point, I think we can recognize that the 
> ITU is a legitimate representative of global telecommunications 
> interests, both governmental and industry. And also that the NTIA, by 
> virtue of its geographic and historical role, is also a major 
> stakeholder. Both less independent perhaps than the the ISC.
>
> I remember how much wailing and gnashing there was when the ITU failed 
> to accord the Internet Society, ICANN etc the equivalent respect. 
> Well, perhaps somewhat reluctantly, they have come around. Both the 
> NTIA and ISC have vocally advocated for the multistakeholder model 
> (despite, in the latter case, what they actually mean being up to 
> interpretation).
>
> The role of the Internet Society has ever been to promote intercourse 
> between the all stakeholders. "the Internet is for everyone." As we 
> reach this major landmark  it only makes sense to gather those 
> stakeholders together and make clear from the outset that we mean to 
> involve all as we reflect on the past and move forward.
>
> It's shockingly small minded that some here might suggest the ISC be 
> denied their place just because of the organization's name is 
> confusing, or that their operational standards are at odds with our own.
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/private/chapter-delegates/attachments/20120223/d7b7e423/attachment.htm>