[discuss] Will there be life on 1net after IANA is globalized? (:-)
Shatan, Gregory S.
GShatan at ReedSmith.com
Fri Mar 14 20:00:08 UTC 2014
You originally cited “the best of my experience,” yet when asked to elaborate on that experience you point instead to NETmundial contributions. That’s not an answer (unless your personal experiences are in a particular paper, in which case a page-specific cite would be appreciated). Again, when you talk about the best of your experience, what are you referring to? And in your experience of multistakeholder governance, which were the “sensitive issues” you refer to where the spirit was lacking, and when did this occur?
Also, I see “engagement” and “outreach” being used essentially synonymously in the discussion of expanding participation. “Engagement” is not trivial. Wrapping a non-answer in a semantic game, however, is trivial.
I, and others, have attempted to engage with you substantively and in good faith. I don’t believe that responses like this, which appear evasive and add nothing of substance, are in the “spirit” of such substantive good faith discussion. I hope you will consider providing substantive responses.
From: Naresh Ajwani [mailto:ajwaninaresh at gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, March 14, 2014 12:03 PM
Cc: Shatan, Gregory S.; discuss at 1net.org
Subject: Re: [discuss] Will there be life on 1net after IANA is globalized? (:-)
.."Can you elaborate on your experience, especially on which issues are "sensitive"?
Here my submission is that it wud be apt to refer to contributions/papers posted at NETmundial website, especially the ones advocating multilateralism and the ones saying need for all inclusive stakeholderism. These papers are covering sensitivities too besides reasonings.
"... In addition, to echo what Dr. Pisanty says downthread, there is a great deal of outreach going on. I recall that in the AFRINIC region, they have built a new WG to engage government folks and to help bring them into the PDP. The RIPE region also has a similar outreach program for governments specifically."
First of all, my submissions are in my personal capacity and discussions are not on trivial issues like engagements. When I am referring to outreach programs, it is for expanding stakholderism or costituencies with rights.
Regards & best wishes
On 13 Mar 2014 16:16, "McTim" <mctimconsulting at gmail.com<mailto:mctimconsulting at gmail.com>> wrote:
On Wed, Mar 12, 2014 at 10:24 PM, Naresh Ajwani <ajwaninaresh at gmail.com<mailto:ajwaninaresh at gmail.com>> wrote:
Thanks Greg for the elaborative response. Frankly, it has raised yet more queries, may be because of my firm belief in all inclusiveness and no spiritless processes.
"..... In a sense, the best protection for a potential “minority view” is not to end up as a minority view, but rather to end up influencing the consensus so that it resembles that view to the extent possible, with the result that the consensus is thus acceptable to the group holding what might otherwise have been a minority view....."
To the best of my experience, especially in case of sensitive issues, such spirit is lacking. Be that as it may, you would appreciate that even in your explained ideal environment, the processes are at the most blending minorty views but not protecting them and that itself, in my view is against multistakeholderism. It is a known fact that every stakeholder isn't entitled to same equity and justifiably because internet commenced from one corner of the world.
Can you elaborate on your experience, especially on which issues are "sensitive"?
My experience is the opposite of yours. I have always found the Technical Community processes to be very accommodating of minority views. As a former WG Chair in the RIR system I actually have experience finding consensus among a disparate community of policy volunteers.
In addition, to echo what Dr. Pisanty says downthread, there is a great deal of outreach going on. I recall that in the AFRINIC region, they have built a new WG to engage government folks and to help bring them into the PDP. The RIPE region also has a similar outreach program for governments specifically.
* * *
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
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the discuss