[discuss] [Ext] Antw: Re: We have had four years since the Netmundial statement and the online world is getting worse

Nigel Hickson nigel.hickson at icann.org
Thu Apr 26 23:35:05 UTC 2018

Good evening 


I am glad we are discussing this; thanks Ian.  Agree with Wolfgang, IGF 2019 would be an ideal opportunity to both take stock of what has been achieved since NETMundial and to look forward.  This could be a real focus of the Event; should the MAG buy into it.  It could also be a real opportunity to show (perhaps through an updating of principles) that IGF can deliver positive outcomes; 






From: <discuss-bounces at 1net.org> on behalf of Wolfgang Kleinwächter <wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
Date: Thursday, 26 April 2018 at 22:08
To: "nicocamarao at gmail.com" <nicocamarao at gmail.com>, "nnenna75 at gmail.com" <nnenna75 at gmail.com>
Cc: "discuss at 1net.org" <discuss at 1net.org>
Subject: [Ext] [discuss] Antw: Re: We have had four years since the Netmundial statement and the online world is getting worse


I did propose already three years ago to start planning for a NetMundial+5. The IGF 2019 is hosted by Germany. The dates or November 2019, the venue is Berlin. Shouldn´t we start a bottom up process for a review of the Principles and the Roadmap?






>>> Nicolas Fiumarelli <nicocamarao at gmail.com> 26.04.18 19.34 Uhr >>>

Hello everyone. Nicolas Fiumarelli from Youth IGF Uruguay.

Like Ian, I think the fact that 4 years have passed from this activity makes me reflect and think, since then there has been no activity that has a multistakeholder mechanism as strong as it was when the call for comments on the statement happened. If there is any way to rescue that technology, which allowed comments on the paragraphs online. I think it was a very good moment, in fact I can say with certainty that that was the boom of the technology applied to multistakeholder modeling for creating agreements between hundreds of interested parties .. And as Ian said, I do not like the idea of waiting for things to be in resolved nation states acting unilaterally when we already have experience of these digital and dynamic multistakeholder ways of resolving things. My advice is to return to these practices where technology takes a particular role in making decisions or "agreements." I repeat, I have not seen an activity as transparent and open as it was the setting of that statement in NETMundial.

Nico Fiumarelli.


2018-04-25 20:16 GMT-03:00 Nnenna Nwakanma <nnenna75 at gmail.com>:

I am interested in this conversation



On Wed, Apr 25, 2018 at 9:45 PM, ian.peter at ianpeter.com <ian.peter at ianpeter.com> wrote:

Just noticed that we have reached 4 years since this statement - and reading it again, it still has a lot of valid things to say.




Sadly, however, there seems to be no current initiative or any on the horizon capable of addressing the global problems raised then, which are getting worse and taking on new dimensions.


Do we just give up? Or just rely on nation states acting unilaterally to somehow resolve these problems when unilateral action is not sufficient and in some cases it isn't in their perceived interests to take any action whatsoever?




Ian Peter


discuss mailing list
discuss at 1net.org


discuss mailing list
discuss at 1net.org


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://1net-mail.1net.org/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20180426/29f34873/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 4587 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://1net-mail.1net.org/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20180426/29f34873/smime-0001.p7s>

More information about the discuss mailing list