This mailing list is no longer active and has been transitioned to Members of the I-coordination mailing list have been moved to the new mailing list.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

[I-coordination] Nominations to /1Net Steering committee & Brazil Meeting Organising commitees

Fouad Bajwa fouadbajwa at
Fri Dec 6 13:55:59 CET 2013

I believe this is getting more confusing. We have somehow brought in
our CS direct intervention with the organizers of the Brazil meeting
where we already have suggested our liaisons that are separate from
this 1Net discussion and organizing activity.

To me this appears as an attempt to create a one unified
multistakeholder body that collectively advises the Brazil meeting.
This actually makes everything confusing because all the groups have
different competing/non-competing interests and there cannot be a
unified understanding.

The I* meeting that happened in Montevideo is identified as the basis
for the formation of the 1Net so its possible that the 1Net was an
intended unification of all the I* organizations to form a unified a
lobbying group that would also highly influence the organization and
outcome of the Brazilian meeting. It also appears that the original
intention may have been to include all stakeholder groups and somehow
convince them to move as a unified strength of an international
community or in the form of multistakeholder groups where the term
multistakeholder is as ambiguous as it can be. From the
announcement, there are four organizing committees that have a bit of
similarity to ICANN GAC and multiple MAGs for the meeting:

1. High-Level Multistakeholder Committee: Responsible for conducting
the political articulation and fostering the involvement of the
international community.
2. Executive Multistakeholder Committee: Responsible for organizing
the event, including the agenda discussion and execution, and for the
treatment of the proposals from participants and different
3. Logistics and Organizational Committee: Responsible for overseeing
every logistic aspect of the meeting;
4. Governmental Advisory Committee: Will stay open to all governments
which want to contribute to the meeting.

Frankly speaking, this appears like some really twisted planing
activity. IF this was a serious meeting on an issue of great global
importance, the meeting would have sought inputs from the actors and
that would have been the basis for shaping the agenda where each
stakeholder group would share its concerns and wishlist, frankly
speaking, that is very much covered by the IGF.

More information about the I-coordination mailing list