<html>
<body>
At 02:31 03/01/2014, Seun Ojedeji wrote:<br><br>
<blockquote type=cite class=cite cite="">sent from Google nexus 4<br>
On 2 Jan 2014 19:00, "Nick Ashton-Hart"
<<a href="mailto:nashton@ccianet.org">nashton@ccianet.org</a>>
wrote:<br>
><br>
> Dear Adiel and colleagues,<br>
><br>
> There are a proliferating number of such calendars. BestBits has a
good combined view of many of them at
<a href="http://bestbits.net/events/">http://bestbits.net/events/</a> -
you can subscribe to it in any iCal-based calendar too.<br>
> <br>
The url below contains some of the information required:<br><br>
<a href="http://ws.edu.isoc.org/calendar/">
http://ws.edu.isoc.org/calendar/</a></blockquote><br>
Thank you!<br>
The interest was to keep it together with the analysis of Wolfgang and
those which can be added. I will see if I can put it on the IUCG or the
IUTF wiki.<br><br>
The problem is the dichotomy between the Internet Governance and the Open
and Interlligent Use; in particular with the FLOSS community.<br>
What Brian calls the "technical community" is only a
proprietary open-standard group
(<a href="http://open-stand.org/" eudora="autourl">
http://open-stand.org</a>) group of which the MSism is discussed on this
1NET list.<br>
The IUCG is an attempt to get non-propritary inputs in that technical
community. <br><br>
The question is when the network-open-code wakes-up, will it join
IUCG-like efforts or will it prefer to build a separated/conflicting
community as the IETF did with the ITU?<br>
Best<br>
jfc<br>
</body>
</html>