[discuss] [IANAtransition] VGN dynamic coalition and enhanced cooperation

Sat Apr 19 19:15:34 UTC 2014

At 19:26 19/04/2014, Seun Ojedeji wrote:
>I am quite puzzled here, how can a call to be transparent results to 
>voluntary withdrawal, is that confirmation of the perceived?.

You are welcome to participate to our work, for example in 
introducing a netiquette proposition for the NTIA distenciation mailing lists.

You may have noted that the exchanges on these two lists have 
significantly dropped to the point they are improductive. We have 
collected enough inputs that confirm the need for the IUsers of 
solutions not depending on ICANN. This is now the priority for them 
to dispose of a working VGNIC before January 17, 2015.

>Perhaps it may be good to know the composition of the "we", what are 
>the attitude referred and who are members of the Multitude?

The Multitude has a well defined legal and diplomatic meaning. We 
apply it, in the Internet Governance area, to the individual Informed 
Users and public and private bodies wishing to stay independant from 
every non-legally binding digital sovereignty prentence and exclusive 
influence, and their own master of their multitechnology VGN.

If your question is to know who is each of them: we demand 
intellectual and economical transparency from the people we pay, we 
also expect from them to respect our personal privacy as we respect 
their. In an MS processes we treated them as partners, they did not, 
showing that they have not yet scaled to that geometric level. As 
everything concerning them: they decide what the want to do or disclose.

Sincerely,
FSP4NET 