This mailing list is no longer active and has been transitioned to discuss@1net.org. Members of the I-coordination mailing list have been moved to the new mailing list. To learn more, visit 1net.org.

[I-coordination] What is 1net to me?

Milton L Mueller mueller at syr.edu
Mon Dec 2 16:21:13 CET 2013


I think Brian asks excellent questions and I don't think I've seen adequate answers to them. 
I have a much more limited, and entirely utilitarian explanation for what 1net "means to me" and what it should do. 

To my mind, the only justification for this initiative comes from the need to prepare for the Brazil meeting in April. The Brazilian government will be in charge of organizing and coordinating participation by governments. Non-state actors lack a similar unified platform for coordinating their efforts. 

Because there are so many different communities out there having segregated discussions on separate lists (NCSG, CSG, IETF, ISOC, BestBits, IGC, etc), it was my hope that 1net could be seen as a neutral platform for bringing participants and leaders from all these civil society and business groups into the same space. 

I would never call 1net a "movement" and I would not want it to duplicate, or replace, what IGF is supposed to be doing, nor should it duplicate or attempt to recreate what ISOC is doing. It is, or should be, a coordination platform for the Brazil meeting, full stop.

By thrashing about for three weeks with no clear mission or activities, it may be that the opportunity for 1net to fulfill the role I have described above may have already passed. In that case, the various entities involved in the Brazil meeting will forge direct connections with CGI.BR and the Brazilian government and 1net will become "just another mailing list."  It is not clear to me that I need to be on another mailing list discussing Internet governance ;-)

Milton Mueller
Professor, Syracuse University School of Information Studies
http://faculty.ischool.syr.edu/mueller/




-----Original Message-----
I have say I remain puzzled about the concrete objectives. You say:

"The IGF should be strengthened as the recognized global forum in which Internet Governance issues can be addressed among a truly multistakeholder community; it must continue for the foreseeable future but also keep evolving to meet current and emerging needs;"

Why? What bad things will happen if the IGF is not strengthened? And what bad things might happen if it is strengthened?

"The 1net initiative should encompass the widest possible stakeholder community,..."

How is this different from the community that's been invited to join ISOC since 1992?

"...like the IGF itself, but without being duplicative of the IGF in any respect."

How can it encompass the same community without being, by definition, the same people and therefore automatically duplicative?

"If successful, it should function in some way as an "inter-sessional"
IGF process."

In order to achieve what? I remain unclear about the *new* objectives that all this talking is aimed at. What aren't we doing already that actually needs doing?

    Brian

_______________________________________________
I-coordination mailing list
I-coordination at nro.net
https://nro.net/mailman/listinfo/i-coordination



More information about the I-coordination mailing list