[discuss] Internet Governance PDPs and Audits

Jefsey jefsey at jefsey.com
Fri Feb 21 23:42:53 UTC 2014

At 00:24 22/02/2014, Jefsey wrote:
>On Feb 21, 2014, at 1:14 PM, Jefsey <jefsey at jefsey.com> wrote:
> >> ..
> >>   Who is _everyone_ in the above remark, and again, can your 
> provide a pointer
> >>   to this statement of an "economic vision of IG" that was 
> agreed to?  The only
> >>   outcome that I am aware of is Montevideo Statement on the 
> Future of Internet
> >>   Cooperation - is this the statement of "economic vision" that 
> you refer to?
> >
> > Every signatoree and endorser of OpenStand.

??? How can that be incorrect. You was me who are the people I refer 
to as _everyone. I answer?

>and therefore so is your earlier assertion that "everyone but ICANN agreed
>upon an economic vision of IG".

You keep repeating this when I keep repeating ""economic vision of IG 
in order to define the technology development paradigm". We do not 
speak of the same thing. This is why I detailed.

>Even if all parties were signatories of OpenStand, that does not 
>equate to a specific position on Internet Governance (which is a 
>broader topic)

Yes this is why I specify which part. However, since this part is a 
key part, choices made in that area (code is law) determine a lot of 
the whole topic.

>although you do seem to repeated conflate the two topics.

I "conflate" the two faces of a same topic (technical and political 
sides as they build the same societal issue) because I expect their 
technical part which also are aware of their over all societal 
responsibilities (ISOC, but also IEEE and IETF) to have a consistent ethic.

I am fully aware that ARIN did not endorse OpenStand and has no 
political and social responsibilities. I have no reason not to trust 
Lynn, Russ, Jari or Fadi's, to suspect their ethic not to be 
consistent nor to totally separate their internet political 
governance vision from their vision of the internet technical 
governance. So, I must say I do not really understand you worry?


More information about the discuss mailing list