[discuss] discuss Digest, Vol 4, Issue 29
Phil Corwin
psc at vlaw-dc.com
Tue Mar 4 17:04:49 UTC 2014
I agree with George Sadowsky's excellent analysis and will not be personally filling out the survey.
Philip S. Corwin, Founding Principal
Virtualaw LLC
1155 F Street, NW
Suite 1050
Washington, DC 20004
202-559-8597/Direct
202-559-8750/Fax
202-255-6172/cell
Twitter: @VlawDC
"Luck is the residue of design" -- Branch Rickey
-----Original Message-----
From: discuss-bounces at 1net.org [mailto:discuss-bounces at 1net.org] On Behalf Of discuss-request at 1net.org
Sent: Tuesday, March 04, 2014 11:43 AM
To: discuss at 1net.org
Subject: discuss Digest, Vol 4, Issue 29
Send discuss mailing list submissions to
discuss at 1net.org
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://1net-mail.1net.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
discuss-request at 1net.org
You can reach the person managing the list at
discuss-owner at 1net.org
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of discuss digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Re: [/1net Forums] Forum Activity for 03-04-2014 (George Sadowsky)
2. Re: Survey (nathalie coupet)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Tue, 4 Mar 2014 11:40:25 -0500
From: George Sadowsky <george.sadowsky at gmail.com>
To: /1net Forums digest <info at 1net.org>
Cc: discuss at 1net.org
Subject: Re: [discuss] [/1net Forums] Forum Activity for 03-04-2014
Message-ID: <F53E95F4-D3E5-44FA-8C83-EC2DB691C970 at gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
All,
This is a complete surprise.
First, unless I have amnesia or been asleep during the past week, this is NOT a summary of discussions in this Forum.
Second, please point to evidence of a common feeling that 1net should provide formal input to NetMundial, or to any of the foundation documents for this list that suggest such an outcome.
Third, who are the ?we ? referred to in the text below. This is an anonymous document claiming a distinct turn in the conduct of this form which I claim does not exist. Who are you?
Fourth, it encourages convergence on a statement across all participants, from multiple sectors, within the next 4 days. This is an impossible task, even if it were the right thing to do. (We?ve been trying to do this for years.) It will be a motherhood document, a ?lower that the lowest possible common denominator? document. It will prove that 1net exists, but not a lot more.
Fifth, I thought that the purpose of this list was NOT to reach any kind of forced agreement in a short time frame. I thought that: (1) is was meant to discuss Internet governance issues, and if possible (2) inform NetMundial with a range of opinions and possible assistance.
Sixth, a stated goal seems to be what to ?put forward to the NetMundial meeting as representative of /1net?s view.? I didn?t know that 1net had to have a point of view. We have had discussions, some fruitful, some in the realm of science fiction, and there have been some discussions that have provided decent and interesting material for 1net.
Seventh, whoever is proposing this is suggesting that a survey, announced by e-mail 16 hours before its close (!!) to the ?1net community,? a list of 600-1000 members, maybe 40-50 of who have actually participated in this list, is going to provide any useful information whatsoever? Even if this were a worthwhile captivity, which it is not, such a process could not be expected to yield any meaningful result.
Eighth, the expectation that ?the statement should be viewed as the broad perspective on Internet governance issues from the /1net community,? is unrealistic. Rather it is high likely to be a significant misrepresentation of what the opinions of the community are, given the faulty process and the tight time frame of the proposal. Those who are rabid in their opinions will participate.
In summary:
- this is a bad idea
- it states that the ?community enjoyed? a discussion that I believe never really happened
- it is based on a feeling that we should provide formal input that AFAIK was not felt
- it specifies a tight deadline for a previously unannounced objective
- it significantly distorts the stated purpose of the 1net list
- it will yield results of little value; the sample frame will consist of those who (1) read their e-mail promptly (2) have the time to respond (3)
- it has been imposed from an anonymous ?above?
Perhaps the anonymous ?we? can respond to the above points.
George
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
On Mar 4, 2014, at 1:32 AM, /1net Forums digest <info at 1net.org> wrote:
>
>
> Here's a brief summary of the discussion on /1net Forums since we last saw you on 02-28-2014.
> Recent posts the community enjoyed:
>
> Help to create a /1net statement for NetMundial Based on the feeling
> and importance that /1net should provide some kind of formal input to the NetMundial meeting in April, we have specifically developed a statement and process to meet the tight deadline for submitting input (Saturday 8 March).
>
> The statement is built from the Montevideo Statement, and split up into the two themes of the NetMundial meeting. There shouldn't be anything in this statement that is controversial or surprising if you have been following Internet governance discussions over the past four months.
>
> A few quick things to note:
>
> Having a /1net statement should not in any way preclude people from
> sending their own input to the NetMundial meeting The statement should
> be viewed as the broad perspective on Internet governance issues from
> the /1net community. There is plenty of opportunity for more in-depth discussions outside this singular event Given the tight deadline, we should as much as possible avoid suggestions that others will disagree with Process of converging on the content of the statement:
>
> An online survey gives everyone the opportunity to review each sentence within the draft statement. You can simply agree with it (obviously the preferred response), you can "Agree but?" and provide some brief feedback, or you can disagree and explain why you feel would need to change to the wording in order for you to agree.
> That survey will run from now until the end of Tuesday (23:45 UTC), at
> which point it will close.
> The results from the survey will be analyzed to see what changes could
> be made to accommodate different views - and statistics released to
> show what the feedback was (comments will be published but not
> attributed).
> On Thursday, a reformed statement will be put to a second survey sent
> to Steering Committee members who will act as representatives of their
> stakeholder groups in deciding yes or no to specific statements.
> That survey will close Friday and /1net coordinator Adiel Akplogan
> will review the results and decide what can be put forward to the
> NetMundial meeting as representative of /1net's view.
> It is far more rushed than is ideal but given the fact that there is only this week to reach agreement, hopefully you will all see the value in responding quickly and constructively.
>
> You can find the survey and the statements at:
> https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/1net-netmundial
>
> Please note that the survey will automatically close at 23.45 UTC on Tuesday 4 March.
>
> Thank you for your input in advance.
>
> This summary email is sent as a courtesy notification from /1net Forums when we haven't seen you in a while. To unsubscribe click here.
> _______________________________________________
> discuss mailing list
> discuss at 1net.org
> http://1net-mail.1net.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://1net-mail.1net.org/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20140304/b30f9f38/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Tue, 4 Mar 2014 08:42:25 -0800 (PST)
From: nathalie coupet <nathaliecoupet at yahoo.com>
To: "Shatan, Gregory S." <GShatan at ReedSmith.com>
Cc: 1 Net List <discuss at 1net.org>
Subject: Re: [discuss] Survey
Message-ID:
<1393951345.62755.YahooMailNeo at web121005.mail.ne1.yahoo.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
+1
I decided not to take the survey, out of caution, since the questions seemed to be aligned with a particular position. I agree with Gregory that this is a non-starter.?
It would take more time to understand and evaluate all the implications of any response given to each question.?
It is better to do nothing rather than to add to a general feeling of mistrust that could sip into the \1net initiative. ?How could we avoid adding to the confusion in the future? Could the SG consult with members on this list (a few sample questions of the survey presented for approval) before publishing the entire survey on the site?
?
Nathalie
________________________________
From: "Shatan, Gregory S." <GShatan at ReedSmith.com>
To: 'Ian Peter' <ian.peter at ianpeter.com>; Nick Ashton-Hart <nashton at ccianet.org>; "discuss at 1net.org" <discuss at 1net.org>
Cc: Ross Schulman <RSchulman at ccianet.org>
Sent: Tuesday, March 4, 2014 11:16 AM
Subject: Re: [discuss] Proposal for a 1net statement to NetMundial
I just took the ?survey?.? I found it to be quite slanted and full of leading/loaded questions/statements.? Many of the questions/statements have hidden agendas and previously staked-out positions attached to them, which are not identified.? In that vein, many of the statements tend to be ?battle slogans,? while others sound like idealistic, ?milk and apple pie? statements but are really aligned with a particular position.?? The ?spin? on these questions/statement makes me dizzy.? Where are the questions stating the opposite positions in the affirmative (which would be consistent with good survey design, as I understand it)?
?
Even the answer protocol is suspect, in that it is intended to herd respondents toward affirmative responses to the statements, most if not all of which are aligned with a particular worldview.
?
As a draft manifesto, it is probably a good start.? As a neutral survey, it is a non-starter.
?
(I was a Sociology/Psychology major in college, and I have worked with survey experts from time to time, so I?ve had some exposure to survey design issues, but I am no expert.? If I were one, I probably would be even more concerned/dismayed.) ?
That aside, these statements and the concepts underlying them would need to be fleshed out over some time through debate and drafting (and with reference to constituent organizations where needed) before any kind of statement could be made.? Accommodations for a minority view would probably need to be made as well?. ?The discussions up to this point have laid much groundwork, of course, but they certainly haven?t resulted in any kind of /1net position on any issue (nor have they been intended to).
?
Greg Shatan
?
?
?
From:discuss-bounces at 1net.org [mailto:discuss-bounces at 1net.org] On Behalf Of Ian Peter
Sent: Tuesday, March 04, 2014 5:20 AM
To: Nick Ashton-Hart; discuss at 1net.org
Cc: Ross Schulman
Subject: Re: [discuss] Proposal for a 1net statement to NetMundial ?
Nick wrote?
?
> While this is a constructive process, it comes far, far too late:
?
Have to agree unfortunately.
?
I think there is no way civil society could agree to this in time for a March 8 deadline even if it were final and totally agreeable now (which it isn?t). Some individuals might like to sign on to a revised version, but I don?t think it can be called a 1net statement. A statement by participants of 1net who care to sign, perhaps.
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
Ian Peter
?
From:Nick Ashton-Hart
Sent:Tuesday, March 04, 2014 7:38 PM
To:mailto:discuss at 1net.org
Cc:Ross Schulman
Subject:[discuss] Proposal for a 1net statement to NetMundial ?
Dear 1net:
?
While this is a constructive process, it comes far, far too late:
?
* Many of us have said repeatedly that we need time in order to go back to our organisations to authorise statements before we can be associated with them. There is no possibility we will be able to do that in the time available.
* As the industry participants on the steering committee have repeatedly said, they are not representatives but liaisons and need to be able to go back to their community before major decisions are taken. Whilst CCIA is in the perhaps unique position that three of our members are represented on the steering committee, I?m sure that?s not the case for the vast majority of industry here and I?m sure that even for us, it is necessary for us to go back to the whole membership before signing on to something as high-profile as this is. So, suggesting that the steering committee can commit on behalf of all stakeholders everywhere is simply a non-starter (and I don?t believe industry?s situation is unique, either).
?
If this had started two weeks ago, it would perhaps have been just enough time - barely - to get the process done. A month ago would have been much better. A matter of days doesn?t begin to be possible. I?ve provided comments to the survey but only in an individual capacity.
?
I would like to know if there was any advance notice of this? I don?t recall seeing anything on this list (but I do not follow it closely anymore so I might have missed it).
?
Regards, Nick
On 4 Mar 2014, at 07:32, /1net Forums digest <info at 1net.org> wrote:
Here's a brief summary of the discussion on /1net Forums since we last saw you on 02-28-2014.
Recent posts the community enjoyed:
Help to create a /1net statement for NetMundial Based on the feeling and importance that /1net should provide some kind of formal input to the NetMundial meeting in April, we have specifically developed a statement and process to meet the tight deadline for submitting input (Saturday 8 March).
The statement is built from the Montevideo Statement, and split up into the two themes of the NetMundial meeting. There shouldn't be anything in this statement that is controversial or surprising if you have been following Internet governance discussions over the past four months.
A few quick things to note:
????????? Having a /1net statement should not in any way preclude people from sending their own input to the NetMundial meeting ????????? The statement should be viewed as the broad perspective on Internet governance issues from the /1net community. There is plenty of opportunity for more in-depth discussions outside this singular event ????????? Given the tight deadline, we should as much as possible avoid suggestions that others will disagree with Process of converging on the content of the statement:
????????? An online survey gives everyone the opportunity to review each sentence within the draft statement. You can simply agree with it (obviously the preferred response), you can "Agree but?" and provide some brief feedback, or you can disagree and explain why you feel would need to change to the wording in order for you to agree.
????????? That survey will run from now until the end of Tuesday (23:45 UTC), at which point it will close.
????????? The results from the survey will be analyzed to see what changes could be made to accommodate different views - and statistics released to show what the feedback was (comments will be published but not attributed).
????????? On Thursday, a reformed statement will be put to a second survey sent to Steering Committee members who will act as representatives of their stakeholder groups in deciding yes or no to specific statements.
????????? That survey will close Friday and /1net coordinator Adiel Akplogan will review the results and decide what can be put forward to the NetMundial meeting as representative of /1net's view.
It is far more rushed than is ideal but given the fact that there is only this week to reach agreement, hopefully you will all see the value in responding quickly and constructively.
You can find the survey and the statements at: https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/1net-netmundial
Please note that the survey will automatically close at 23.45 UTC on Tuesday 4 March.
Thank you for your input in advance.
This summary email is sent as a courtesy notification from /1net Forums when we haven't seen you in a while. To unsubscribe click here.
_______________________________________________
discuss mailing list
discuss at 1net.org
http://1net-mail.1net.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
?
________________________________
_______________________________________________
discuss mailing list
discuss at 1net.org
http://1net-mail.1net.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
?
* * *
This E-mail, along with any attachments,?is considered confidential and may well be legally privileged. If you have received it in error, you are on notice of its status. Please notify us immediately by reply e-mail and then delete this message from your system. Please do not copy it or use it for any purposes, or disclose its contents to any other person.?Thank you for your cooperation.
* * *
To ensure compliance with Treasury Department regulations,?we inform you that, unless otherwise indicated in writing, any U.S. Federal tax advice contained in this communication? (including any attachments) is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (1) avoiding penalties under the?Internal Revenue Code?or applicable state and local provisions or (2) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any tax-related matters addressed herein.Disclaimer Version RS.US.20.10.00 _______________________________________________
discuss mailing list
discuss at 1net.org
http://1net-mail.1net.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://1net-mail.1net.org/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20140304/66795528/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: ~WRD000.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 823 bytes
Desc: ~WRD000.jpg
URL: <http://1net-mail.1net.org/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20140304/66795528/WRD000.jpg>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 332 bytes
Desc: image001.jpg
URL: <http://1net-mail.1net.org/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20140304/66795528/image001.jpg>
------------------------------
_______________________________________________
discuss mailing list
discuss at 1net.org
http://1net-mail1net.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
End of discuss Digest, Vol 4, Issue 29
**************************************
-----
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2013.0.3462 / Virus Database: 3705/7138 - Release Date: 03/01/14
More information about the discuss
mailing list