This mailing list is no longer active and has been transitioned to discuss@1net.org.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] Nominations to /1Net Steering committee & Brazil Meeting Organising commitees

Fouad Bajwa fouadbajwa at gmail.com
Sat Dec 7 12:27:48 CET 2013


> Nigel wrote:
> Some trust has been lost in the Internet Governance model and it falls on all of us to do what we
> can to preserve the model we believe in.

Nigel, thats a very big statement and claim. I don't see where the
trust factor has been lost by nations, cs, ac, tc and ps in the IGF.
We saw the ps struggling to make the IGF in Bali a success and even
have ends meet for its organization through funding. The trust is not
lost, the effort now appears to assert power as if this power was very
equal to governments. This is wishful dreaming.

Fadi being right or wrong is a legitimacy being speculated by this
group. How can Fadi be right without participating in the WSIS
process, not attending IGFs before his appointment as ICANN
CEO/President? Its the legitimacy Fadi gets through his position in
ICANN and being a representative of one of the stakeholders in the IG
process. So lets not make such statements that who is right and who is
wrong????

On Sat, Dec 7, 2013 at 3:22 PM, Nigel Hickson <nigel.hickson at icann.org> wrote:
> Good morning
>
> I agree with Nick; let us stay positive; Fadi made it very clear (in
> numerous public sessions at IG and at ICANN 48) that we are all in this
> together.  Some trust has been lost in the Internet Governance model and it
> falls on all of us to do what we can to preserve the model we believe in.
> ICANN's mission is very much tied to a single, open, secure and
> interoperable Internet and it is not, therefore, sup rising that we should
> be involved in a desire to preserve such.
>
> Best
>
> Nigel
>
> From: Nick Ashton-Hart <nashton at ccianet.org>
> Date: Saturday, December 7, 2013 2:34 AM
> To: John Curran <jcurran at arin.net>, Fouad Bajwa <fouadbajwa at gmail.com>
> Cc: "i-coordination at nro.net" <i-coordination at nro.net>
>
> Subject: Re: [I-coordination] Nominations to /1Net Steering committee &
> Brazil Meeting Organising commitees
>
> +1. Do we really need more suspicions of one another - when it is easy to
> just ask a question?
>
>
>
> John Curran <jcurran at arin.net> wrote:
>>
>> On Dec 7, 2013, at 3:47 AM, Fouad Bajwa <fouadbajwa at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>  I wonder how and when did Fadi receive a mandate to move out beyond
>>>  ICANN and step into the political economy space of Internet Governance
>>>  and multilateral activities which led to interventions with a
>>>  government that was actually also a signatory of the WCIT outcome
>>>  document? Does this also assert that ICANN is trying to move beyond
>>>  its mandate into an ITU attempted take over of the Internet Governance
>>>  space that was attempted at the WCIT?
>>
>>
>> If you wish to know about ICANN's "mandate" or plans in this area,
>> have you considered asking Fadi?
>>
>>>  If 1Net is a completely
>>> different and separate space from the
>>>  Montevideo assertion then I would like to learn how did this gap
>>>  evolve in the first place where the need for such a coalition was
>>>  felt?
>>
>>
>> 1net is not a completely different and separate space from the
>> Montevideo Statement.  1net trying to further those goals, and
>> its formation was discussed in Montevideo and further discussed
>> at several sessions at the Bali IGF. The Brazil meeting was not
>> discussed at the Montevideo meeting, nor was it part of the
>> statement released afterward.
>>
>>>  My interest comes from the fact that about 90% of the people
>>>  involved in this group's mailing list in the first month of its
>>>  creation are all either IGF MAG members or ICANN community
>>>  members....and if they have felt that the IGF or ICANN settings a!
>>>  nd
>>>
>>>
>>> meetings are insufficient to address their prevailing concerns, why
>>>  haven't they resigned and left the IGF MAG or ICANN AC/OC's and taken
>>>  on this quote n quote "movement"?
>>
>>
>> As I see it, 1net does not need to displace or preempt any existing
>> activities in the Internet governance space, and in fact, could be
>> a useful supplement to existing IGF activities.  Many of us are very
>> strong supporters of IGF and don't see that changing - can you explain
>> why you view this as an "either/or" proposition?
>>
>> Thanks!
>> /John
>>
>>
>> ________________________________
>>
>> I-coordination mailing list
>> I-coordination at nro.net
>> https://nro.net/mailman/listinfo/i-coordination
>
>
> --
> Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.



-- 
Regards.
--------------------------
Fouad Bajwa
ICT4D and Internet Governance Advisor
My Blog: Internet's Governance: http://internetsgovernance.blogspot.com/
Follow my Tweets: http://twitter.com/fouadbajwa



More information about the I-coordination mailing list