This mailing list is no longer active and has been transitioned to Members of the I-coordination mailing list have been moved to the new mailing list.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?]

Hossam Elgamal hossam.el-gamal at
Tue Dec 17 08:40:36 CET 2013

Can we please just go back/forward to highlight sharper the purpose of 1net as conceived by the initiators, and try to agree on framing its mission... Many are new here coming from business, BA, civil society or Academia, so if we are able to reduce the high level divergence in expectations this would certainly help having a more forward-thinking discussion and constructive outcomes.

I hope this would sound reasonable.


Sent from my iPad

On Dec 17, 2013, at 7:51 AM, Jeremy Malcolm <jeremy at> wrote:

> On 17/12/13 08:45, 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?
> The wording of the WGIG definition of Internet governance is almost identical to a widely cited definition of an international regime that has a considerable body of theory behind it.  So I would     hesitate to throw it out because it is unfamiliar or threatening to those who are more familiar with technical aspects of Internet governance.
> I also don't think that redefining the terms of the debate now, when governments and other stakeholders have already become comfortable with those terms and have been operating under them for years, is going to bring the stakeholders any closer together, if that is something that 1net is aiming to do.
> If the terminology does not fit well with the technical community's self-defined problem-space, or seems to extend to issues that you think are not "real issues", then maybe it is that that problem     space is too narrow, rather than that the terminology is inappropriate or that those broader issues are not real.
> -- 
> Dr Jeremy Malcolm
> Senior Policy Officer
> Consumers International | the global campaigning voice for consumers
> Office for Asia-Pacific and the Middle East
> Lot 5-1 Wisma WIM, 7 Jalan Abang Haji Openg, TTDI, 60000 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
> Tel: +60 3 7726 1599
> Explore our new Resource Zone - the global consumer movement knowledge hub |
> @Consumers_Int | |
> Read our email confidentiality notice. Don't print this email unless necessary.
> WARNING: This email has not been encrypted. You are strongly recommended to enable PGP or S/MIME encryption at your end. For instructions, see
> _______________________________________________
> I-coordination mailing list
> I-coordination at
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...

More information about the I-coordination mailing list