[discuss] Internet governance recommended reading

Sat Jan 4 17:08:28 UTC 2014

Hi,

I have always written it that way.  Think I even used that 
capitalization in some of the early IGF (i wish it was IgF) documents 
when I was on the secretariat, though I am not sure whether they got 
'corrected' by the powers that be who did the final edits for UNDESA.

I think it is an important signifier as it indicates that the governance 
is subordinate to the Internet and its realities.  Just like Internet 
protocols or Internet architecture.

avri
1/4 EST

On 04-Jan-14 09:41, Mawaki Chango wrote:
> Oh, I see... In fact, I thought many of us have been also writing the
> phrase that way. But maybe she conceptualizes that choice more clearly
> (I haven't read the book... yet) or maybe in some quarters they
> systematically write it with capital "G" for the reasons you perceive,
> suspect and state. Anyway, thanks for the clarification.
>
> -mc
>
>
> On Sat, Jan 4, 2014 at 2:25 PM, Jorge Amodio <jmamodio at gmail.com
> <mailto:jmamodio at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>
>     The capital G, IMHO it helps to disassociate the direct relationship
>     with "G"overnment as it is UN common practice to refer to with a
>     capital G.
>
>     -J
>
>
>     On Sat, Jan 4, 2014 at 8:21 AM, Mawaki Chango <kichango at gmail.com
>     <mailto:kichango at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>         On Sat, Jan 4, 2014 at 9:00 AM, Jorge Amodio <jmamodio at gmail.com
>         <mailto:jmamodio at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>
>
>             First thing I liked, she talks about "Internet governance"
>             not "Governance"
>
>
>         Sorry, I'm missing the news or the point here: is it the
>         deletion of the word "Internet" from the phrase or the use of
>         capital G which is less likable in your view?
>
>         mawaki
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> discuss mailing list
> discuss at 1net.org
> http://1net.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>