This mailing list is no longer active and has been transitioned to firstname.lastname@example.org. Members of the I-coordination mailing list have been moved to the new mailing list. To learn more, visit 1net.org.
[I-coordination] New: How do we dissect Internet governance? [Was: Europe at a tipping point?]
george.sadowsky at gmail.com
Tue Dec 17 01:25:48 CET 2013
Well said, Ben and Jorge. How do we go further into a rough taxonomy of the issues under both of the IG subdivisions that you have identified well? in particular, how do we define the issue space in a manner that could lead to productive dialogue and results to feed into clarifying the IG discussion? I would give the internal technical organizational issues priority, but I would not want to neglect the social and legal issues that are impacted by the Internet.
Jorge, you seen rather involved in this activity. Why not give it a shot? How would you delineate the issues that we should be concentrating on to make some progress here? Do you have suggestions regarding the technical tools to make discussion with respect to those issues more productive?
Ben, by the above, I do not mean to exclude you at all from the discussion.
> Message: 4
> Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2013 14:26:58 -0600
> From: Jorge Amodio <jmamodio at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [I-coordination] Europe at a tipping point?
> To: "Dr. Ben Fuller" <ben at fuller.na>
> Cc: "i-coordination at nro.net" <i-coordination at nro.net>
> Message-ID: <0E4FCB18-AE49-42B9-8C4F-66DB4F74A8A1 at gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>> On Dec 16, 2013, at 1:08 PM, "Dr. Ben Fuller" <ben at fuller.na> wrote:
>> The comments here are quite appropriate. The Internet is both a massive network of networks that requires rigorous technical standards to operate effectively and a phenomenon of massive socioeconomic impact that touches on many social and legal issues at global, national and local levels. These two 'realms' are distinct and at the same time connected to where they have the potential to impact each other. Each may require a different way of governing as well as strategies to get its decisions implemented. Each may require its own set of stakeholders for a multi stakeholder approach.
> This is IHMO absolutely correct and the main driver of my previous comments about the need to split the discussions and focus on the specific issues we know exist today, at the macro not micro level, so a viable framework can be developed. There are issues that can and must be regulated, others that require just coordination and cooperation, but one size fits all under the "Governance" word will never work, will never happen.
> It is like we are trying to make a wall picture of Internet Governance using the pieces of multiple puzzles that we put and mixed together in a common bowl. We may have an idea on how the final picture has to look like but unless we separate the pieces of each puzzle and we put skilled hands to work with them we will get nowhere.
> Meanwhile the shows goes on and we keep finding creative ways on how to milk from the I* and other organizations coffers.
More information about the I-coordination