[Chapter-delegates] What chapters are saying (Was Re: [Internet Policy] Moderation of list)

[Andrew Sullivan]

Hi,

On Thu, Jul 08, 2021 at 04:22:21PM -0400, Veni Markovski via InternetPolicy wrote:
>
>I might have written this wrong, I guess;-( I was asking if ISOC is
>following the statements, made by member states (at different
>international, regional and national gatherings), who say that they
>believe the current multistakeholder model (MSM) of Internet governance
>is not working and should be replaced with a multilateral one.

Yes, of course we have.  That's _why_ the Internet Way of Networking project has been running.

> The way
>to make sure the member states are well informed, is if ISOC chapters
>reach out to their national telecom administration and brief them with
>details about the MSM.

I don't think the MSM _itself_ ought to be the focus, to be honest.  I think (and this part of why we set our objectives for 2025 around building, promoting, and defending the Internet) that people have started to treat the MSM of governance as some sort of political settlement related to how the Internet is governed, and have come to imagine that something like a multilateral approach could work.

This stems from a deep error in understanding what the Internet is.  To get people to believe again in the multistakeholder approach requires that they understand that for the Internet to function _at all_ you need all the voluntary interoperation to work.  Because of the technical facts of the architecture of the Internet, there are far too many independent actors to do this simply by government fiat (which is really what treaties are).  In other words, MSM is not merely a way to govern the Internet, but literally _the_ way to do it.  It's a non-optional feature.

That's what the critical properties from the Internet Way of Networking are supposed to show.

(Of course, another part of that is to have multistakeholder mechanisms that continue to work well.  I think it is important to admit that some of the institutions that are supposed to be carrying this weight are not always doing so terribly well, and that may tend to cause governments to want to take control.  But this isn't something the Internet Society can actually do anything about, since we are not one of those institutions.)

>True (that's a change, I have to add, compared to some aspects of the
>chapter policies before you), but ISOC could not only listen, but also
>hear what the chapters are saying.

I hope that this response shows that I think I understand what you are arguing, and that we agree with your concern but think the source of the problem is still deeper.  But I want to be clear that I am of the view that this is the Internet _Society_, not the Internet Staff In Charge, and so we continue to work to keep our shared mission in sight.

Best regards,

A

-- 
Andrew Sullivan
President & CEO, Internet Society
sullivan at isoc.org
+1 416 731 1261