[Chapter-delegates] How do we incorporate China and other countries that are different?

[Carlos Vera Quintana]

Dave has a point here. Maybe we all are talking about the same thing using different words or different approach.

We can not be independent or autonomous of those from who we ask for funding direct or indirect. 

Carlos Vera
Carlos Vera Quintana
0988141143
Sígueme @cveraq

> El 22 feb 2016, a las 8:50 a.m., Dave Burstein <daveb at dslprime.com> escribió:
> 
> Alejandro and people
>> 
>> ​I respectfully disagree that 
>  
>> ​"this​ discussion is about allowing an organization to take, or fake, the representation of all the people​."
> 
> ​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? 
> 
> 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 external 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. 
> 
> 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. 
> 
> 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. 
> 
> T​he solutions to problems like this​​​ 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. 
> 
> 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.​
> 
> These are real issues that are far more important than whether a .com registration​ cost $11 or $15, the knid of thing that ICANN controls.​
> 
> --------------
> 
> 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 I​ also know several examples of players in the ICANN/IGF/etc. ecosystem ​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. 
> 
> 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.
> 
> Let's start reforming ISOC by letting the members decide whether we should oppose Net Neutrality.  The WSJ 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 WSJ 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." 
> 
> 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." 
> ​
> ​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. 
> 
> ---------
> 
> I'm going to shut up now and go back to earning my living as a tech writer. 
> 
> Dave Burstein
> ​
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20160223/9671112a/attachment.htm>