[Chapter-delegates] Chapter Leaders Community : Further dialogue on the NMI and Internet Governance issues

Wed Nov 19 21:00:27 PST 2014

Thank you very much
See my comments below

Carlos Raúl Gutiérrez
Chair ISOC Costa Rica
http://www.isoc-cr.org
_____________________

email: carlosraulg at gmail.com
Skype: carlos.raulg
+506 8335 2487 (cel)

> El 19/11/2014, a las 16:36, Raul Echeberria <echeberria at isoc.org> escribió:
> 
> 
> Just to be sure you saw this message sent by Kathy Brown, 
> While the message is in Connect, feel free to send your comments on this list if you feel more comfortable. 
> 
> Best, 
> 
> Raúl 
> 
> 
> 
> Inicio del mensaje reenviado:
> 
>> De: "Kathryn Brown via Internet Society" <Mail at ConnectedCommunity.org <mailto:Mail at ConnectedCommunity.org>>
>> Asunto: Chapter Leaders Community : Further dialogue on the NMI and Internet Governance issues
>> Fecha: 19 de noviembre de 2014 16:17:35 GMT-2
>> Para: echeberria at isoc.org <mailto:echeberria at isoc.org>
>> Responder a: internetsociety_chapterleaderscommunityne at ConnectedCommunity.org <mailto:internetsociety_chapterleaderscommunityne at ConnectedCommunity.org>
>> 
>> == Please, write your reply ABOVE THIS LINE ==
>> 
>> This message has been cross posted to the following Discussions: Chapter Leaders Community and Advisory Council .
>> -------------------------------------------
>> Colleagues,
>> 
>> Thank you for your advice and counsel regarding the NETmundial Initiative announced by CGI, ICANN and WEF.  Your response to my request on November 11, 2014 for comments on the NMI helped inform the Board's deliberation with respect to the Internet Society's participation.

It is my understanding that cgi.br <http://cgi.br/> is looking for a wider global space for further, and border based development of the April 14th, 2014 NetMundial MS Statement. What some have called the first formal, truly Multistakeholder bottom up constitutional moment in terms of internet principles (or netmundial principles)
>> 
>> I also appreciate very much the support you have offered, and the diversity of views put forth, since the Board Statement. I note the concern of some that we not "close any doors." As requested by the Board, I am asking for a further dialogue on both NMI and on the wider issues concerning Internet Governance.
>> 
>> In the Statement, the Board asked me to engage with the wider community with respect to the following:
>> 
>> "The dialogue should consider whether any new initiatives or groups are needed at the current time and, if so, to define the objectives for any such effort.”

I believe that NetMundial MS Statement made a big step on the definition of a roadmap. I’m not sure if any of the existing groups has developed a baseline and set some milestones on the roadmap. So I assume that if cgi.br <http://cgi.br/> is proposing this new platform, at least the roadmap and its development will be followed up, measured and some projects will be developed to advance on the targets it sets out from a single space. Particular the section of institutional improvements should be done from a perspective external to them.

Furthermore, the human rights aspects of the Statement should also be analyzed from a neutral perspective, with participation of both the Internet Technical Community and the much older, wider and internationally based Human Rights Institutions. Maybe particular for this instance a new initiative, space or group would evolve from this area. 

>> 
>> There is already a robust conversation emerging that is very helpful. It seems to me that others might be more inclined to contribute if they could respond anonymously to a set of questions. To that end, I would like to propose, and get your immediate feedback on, whether we should use a survey to solicit the views of a greater number of participants on the NMI as well as on the more general question proposed by our Board.

I don’t know who would develop the questionnaire, but i would certainly expect questions to be centered on the NetMundial MS Statement
>> 
>> Of course, more discursive comments are always welcomed. Perhaps we should also open a "room" in the Community Forum on Connect to organize longer threads and encourage a dialogue among all our members.

much harder to pin down and come to effectively delimited results early.
>> 
>> Questions that appear to be relevant to the issues may include the following:
>> 
>> With respect to the specific issues regarding the NMI, the Board expressed its concerns with the way the NMI is being formed and reiterated ISOC's long standing principles with respect to centralized governance. Is there support for addressing these concerns?

The way its being formed seems to me a procedural question. If the committee is rightly formed, it should be the committees responsibility to keep work/output inside of the generally agreed principles, like submitting all issues to public comment, etc.. I also think is also relevant in terms of procedure to define the boundaries of the project.

>> 
>> Further, an innovative idea has been advanced by the proponents of the NMI of a crowd-sourced, interactive website for the dissemination of best practices and support for decentralized, local initiatives adopting and adapting the NETmundial principles throughout the world.  Such a website could enhance the work of the many initiatives already underway to address issues of Internet Governance. Is there support for this idea?
I think is good idea.

>> How should it be managed?

By measuring the number of visits, to see if its being really used and read and developed.
>> 
>> It might be useful to ask a few broader questions about how we can make the principles of Internet Governance, such as the ones from the NETmundial meeting, more tangible at the local, regional and global level?  

Exactly! We should be able to go out in any particular market, and be able to recognize if the principles are valid and being applied correctly at the local and regional levels. What effect do have those principles form THE POINT OF VIEW OF THE FINAL USER? Do they understand the relationship? Do they care?

>> Are new mechanisms needed?

For the size of the pool of users, I do think that new mechanisms are needed, well beyond simple surveys.

>> Do the current mechanisms and structures need rejuvenation?

Any mechanism and/or structure that does not reflect at least a fair sample of the present and evolving pool of users, should be seriously reviewed.

>> How should preparation for the Brazil IGF be incorporated into our thinking?

IGF should come down to terms with the question of its deliverables. IGF may choose to follow the path of the NetMundial MS Statement or a different one. But they will to have find one way or another a recognized for of deliverables that goes well beyond in terms o impact from the present pool of direct participants.
>> 
>> We would summarize all responses and report back to the Community for further comment on what action, if any, should be taken.
>> 
>> Is there support for this direction?

I certainly support a proactive action plan. I believe that the initiative has been put forward because a) ICANN Board has taken steps to focus back on its narrow technical DNS mission, and b) cgi.br <http://cgi.br/> has not the global outreach to do it from their own limited resources. And it is the responsibility of the community to keep the chosen space in check, in terms of the principles. But pro-actively.

>> Please provide comments on this preliminary question by Friday: Put out a survey? Open a room in the Community Forum?

Don’t like forums

>> We will proceed to develop a tool to undertake the survey asap in the event there is sufficient support for this approach.

i have done my feedback twice already and don’t have much more to add.
>> 
>> Thank you, as always, for your engagement and for your commitment to the Internet Society.
>> 
>> Kathy
>> 
>> ------------------------------
>> brown at isoc.org <mailto:brown at isoc.org>
>> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> As an Internet Society Chapter Officer you are automatically subscribed
> to this list, which is regularly synchronized with the Internet Society
> Chapter Portal (AMS): https://portal.isoc.org

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/private/chapter-delegates/attachments/20141120/657899b6/attachment.htm>