This mailing list is no longer active and has been transitioned to Members of the I-coordination mailing list have been moved to the new mailing list.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] New: How do we dissect Internet governance? [Was: Europe at a tipping point?]

George Sadowsky george.sadowsky at
Tue Dec 17 02:18:34 CET 2013

I'm suggesting that the WGIG definition conflates too many disparate things, and that interferes with delineating issues and making progress on resolving them.  A more complete and more precise definition, or better, a crisp taxonomy of dimensions of that definition, would seem to help us more.


On Dec 16, 2013, at 8:03 PM, Carlos A. Afonso wrote:

> Just recalling that WGIG definition: "Internet governance is the
> development and application by Governments, the private sector and civil
> society, in their respective roles, of shared principles, norms, rules,
> decision-making procedures, and programmes that shape the evolution and
> use of the Internet."
> Every new definition will involve compromises. Are you suggesting one
> should restart from zero?
> --c.a.
> On 12/16/2013 10:45 PM, George Sadowsky wrote:
>> The WGIG definition of Internet governance, the result of meetings in 2004-5, was the result of political compromise.  I think that it is not helping us here.  AS Brian says below, the notion of Internet governance mixes up too many things, and does not seem to be useful for addressing real issues.
>> Can we come up with a different vocabulary and a somewhat different structure that is much more consistent with our problem space, so that these different issues don't get confused (and yes, I understand that there may well be overlap between them)?
>> Brian, can you suggest some appropriate vocabulary and/or taxonomy?
>> George


More information about the I-coordination mailing list