[discuss] IPv6 Deployment and IG

[Carlos Raúl G.]

Let's then start again and ask the political scientist among us how far are we from the truth: 

1/ aren't Governments INSTITUTIONS?
2/ isn't Governance the exercise of some type  of oversight over attributed responsibilities
Institutions have gotten from somebody? Like developing policy in a bottom-up model?
3/ doesn't ICANN, as an operative entity distributing resources, have a vey explicit and formally agreed governance framework in the AoC? As compared to many other I* members? ICANN s governance can be certainly improved, but so also the RIRs and other technical standard setting ones.

Maybe we can have it sorted out for Brazil.
 In my personal view IG does not lack in novel and innovative democratic procedures that promote technological progress , but as long as its (narrow technical ) community lacks a shared common view of the type of institution (s), it's responsibilities (universal access) and legitimacy. Just drawing a few charts is not enough.

And as long as there is disagreement, it will be difficult to convince all Governments all the time.


Carlos Raul
ISOC Costa Rica

Enviado desde mi iPhone

El 28/12/2013, a las 08:48, Jorge Amodio <jmamodio at gmail.com> escribió:

> 
> Hi Bill,
> 
> comments below ...
> 
>>>> 
>>>> Governance is social steering.  Governance is not government.  Governance is not necessarily top down.  Governance takes many forms and is arrived at through many paths, collective action—e.g. coordination and collaboration---being one of them.  etc etc etc.
>>> 
>>> That is not the interpretation on the Spanish speaking part of the world
>> We sorted this linguistic problem with the governments from Spanish speaking countries in 2005.  Raul, Carlos, others can recount…but who knows, people cycle in and out, nobody reads through the institutional memory…maybe we will have to start over.
> 
> I know, but as you may also know many heads of state have changed since 2005 and as it is not uncommon in some developing countries, the new administration brings their own people and throw through the window whatever the previous administration did and institutional memory is an illusion where some governments even change history to benefit their present.
> 
>>> And it is not just social steering, corporate governance in many cases turn not to be very social :-)
>>> 
>>> I really like the definition in Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Governance, that if used on Internet Governance translates into the act of Governing the Internet…
>> 
>> Really?  I think the wikipedia piece on governance is as horrible as the one on Internet governance.   Sometimes the wisdom of crowds doesn’t quite manage to reveal itself.
> 
> Bingo !!! you took the bait :-), absolutely correct, that is a terrible definition but helps to show what the "crowd" interpret as "governance." In our little ecosystem after many years of chewing on definitions and acronyms we more or less settled on a set of acceptable and working definitions (such as the WISIS def for IG.) But for the general public (the crowd) and for those that don't give a squat or care what I* is, Governance by default equates to Government, ugggghhhh ...
> 
> Problem is, that despite the countless hours of discussions, meetings, flying circus, conference calls, and so on, for many governments, Governance is their turf, and the perception is that they need to be in control of it whatever it means, and when there is no choice and must coordinate/cooperate with other governments, it is a bilateral or multilateral relationship. And that is the freaky word **multilateral** ... Dilma dixit.
>>> Now we can talk about governance of different entities such as ICANN, ISOC, etc, but that is more in line with corporate governance than the overall Internet Governance idea, and that many (surprisingly some of them call themselves experts) point to ICANN as the Mecca of Internet Governance.
>> 
>> Wow, if ICANN’s mecca, I must be facing the wrong direction…:-)
> 
> I'll search for it and re-post the link to a paper/document mentioned here that on its first paragraph points as ICANN being such thing, not the exact words.
> 
> Regards
> Jorge
> 
> _______________________________________________
> discuss mailing list
> discuss at 1net.org
> http://1net.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://1net-mail.1net.org/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20131228/893726a5/attachment-0001.html>