<html>
  <head>
    <meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
      http-equiv="Content-Type">
  </head>
  <body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
    I wanted to write to echo many of Anriette's sentiments.&nbsp; I too am
    writing in my personal capacity as we are canvassing the ICC-BASIS
    membership on their views.<br>
    <br>
    First, let me clarify that while business actively engaged in the
    Net Mundial meeting and supported it's outcomes, there were
    significant process and other shortcomings in the runup and
    operation of Net Mundial.&nbsp; Business has not focused on these issues
    as we believed that it was more important to focus on achievements
    rather than shortcomings, but if there are attempts to
    institutionalize the concept of Net Mundial, then this line of
    inquiry will need to be explored in detail.<br>
    <br>
    Second, Net Mundial played an important role at a point in time,
    where reflection and inflection was needed; it served that purpose
    well.&nbsp; It is unclear to me that there is any permanent need for such
    and event.<br>
    <br>
    Third, I would respectfully disagree with those most recent posts
    that justify the WEF initiative by the fumbling of IGF.&nbsp; Can and
    should IGF be improved?&nbsp; Yes, absolutely.&nbsp; Does IGF play a useful
    role, even in its present role, I believe it does.&nbsp; After these
    years of IGF we have begun to take the conversation it engenders for
    granted.&nbsp; While these multistakeholder conversations don't yield
    immediate results they are the stepping stones to understanding and
    a foundation of consensus.&nbsp; IGF remains one of the few places if not
    <b><i>the</i></b> place for such conversation to occur.&nbsp; The
    frustration is that we don't build on the small victories in
    consensus, we don't properly capture the capacity building and we
    are not sufficiently innovative in considering how to approach these
    issues.&nbsp; Net Mundial and the prep for this IGF has increased the
    focus on these topis and has generated some hope and anticipation
    for real improvements to be considered. These improvements&nbsp; should
    not be made at the expense of the unique DNA of the organization -
    the avoidance of positions around negotiated text.&nbsp; We have
    alphabets of three and four letter organizations already engaged in
    that trade and we need no more of those.<br>
    <br>
    Fourth, The WEF NMI.&nbsp; I would concur that this is an inauspicious
    way to launch a multistakeholder initiative.&nbsp; The process we are all
    engaged in now, rooting out facts and chasing down rumors, is
    somewhat reminiscent of what we were doing in Bali related to what
    would become Net Mundial. While there may be some beneficial need
    for positive engagement from the top, mutlistakeholder must also
    have bottom up roots.&nbsp; WEF may have a role to play, but to do so
    they must be more transparent as to motivation, outcomes, process
    and participation.&nbsp; It is also important for the WEF NMI to
    reinforce, as Net Mundial did, the important role of IGF and
    highlight how they will support that role and function.&nbsp; <br>
    <br>
    I would also like to point out that this fact clearing-house
    function may do more to return active participation to the 1net
    discuss list than any topic since Net Mundial.<br>
    <br>
    Joe<br>
    <br>
    <br>
    <br>
    <br>
    n 8/14/2014 11:10 AM, Stephanie Perrin wrote
    <blockquote cite="mid:53ECD181.8040704@mail.utoronto.ca" type="cite">Thanks
      for this excellent post Anriette.&nbsp; Obviously, I agree
      whole-heartedly.&nbsp; I am very glad you are going, and I wish you all
      the luck in the world.&nbsp; You will likely need it.<br>
      Best wishes.<br>
      Stephanie Perrin<br>
      <div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 14-08-14 8:00 AM, Anriette
        Esterhuysen wrote:<br>
      </div>
      <blockquote cite="mid:53ECA4FB.5010900@apc.org" type="cite">
        <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;
          charset=ISO-8859-1">
        <font size="+1"><font size="+1">Dear all<br>
            <br>
            Writing this in my personal capacity. My organisation, the
            Association for Progressive Communications, has not yet
            finalised its reaction to this discussion.<br>
            <br>
            I have not been involved in the NETmundial initiative, but
            have been aware of it since ICANN 50 in London. I have been
            invited to the 28 August event.<br>
            <br>
            Aside from those concerns already stated on this list, which
            I share, I want to add I am not convinced that this
            initiative, based at the WEF, and adopting a 'get all the
            great leaders into the room' approach is what is really
            needed to build on the substantial achievements of the
            NETmundial.<br>
            <br>
            I have always been an admirer of initiative and risk taking
            in the service of the 'greater good' and I don't want to
            condemn the NETmundial initiative or its initiators.&nbsp; I do
            believe it should be viewed critically however, as a lot is
            at stake.<br>
            <br>
            Getting process right is never easy, but it is important to
            try hard to do so, particularly when building something that
            is intended to be long term.<br>
            <br>
            The NETmundial process was not perfect, but it made a HUGE
            effort to be inclusive and transparent. The degree to which
            it succeeded contributed to its legitimacy and success.&nbsp; The
            NETmundial Initiative needs to consider this very
            carefully.&nbsp; Of course it makes sense to work with smaller
            groups of people to get any initiative going, but in the
            internet world, and probably in the world everywhere these
            days, not being transparent about how these smaller groups
            are constituted and how they operate is 1) a lost cause as
            leaking can be assumed, 2) not necessary and 3) probably
            somewhat foolish.<br>
            <br>
            But assuming that the NETmundial Initiative process will
            become more transparent and inclusive in the next few weeks,
            I still have a fundamental concern about its format and
            location.&nbsp; I am not convinced that it is tactically what is
            really needed to build on the substantial achievements of
            the NETmundial, the IGF before it, and the many people who
            have tried to make multi-stakeholder internet policy
            processes work in the real world over the last decade.<br>
            <br>
            My reasons are (mostly) as follows:<br>
            <br>
            <b>1) Choice of 'location' in the context of power and
              politics in multi-stakeholder internet governance</b><br>
            <br>
            Most of us consider the NETmundial a success and the
            NETmundial statement a strong, positive document that avoids
            the traps of 'cheap' consensus. <br>
            <br>
            By that I mean that the final statement reflects consensus,
            disagreement, and issues that need follow-up and further
            elaboration. That not all agreed on the pre-final draft
            (there were some last minute disagreements about text
            related to&nbsp; intermediary liability and surveillance) with
            the final version reflecting these negotiations actually
            makes it an even stronger document, in my view, even if some
            of the text I would have liked to see in it was excluded. To
            me this represents that the stakeholders involved in the
            development of the text were able to work together, and
            disagree. The disagreement was resolved in favour of the
            more power and influential - not civil society of course. I
            don't mind this. It reflects reality. And I know that civil
            society did also gain hugely with most of our demands making
            it through. Over time these power arrangements might change,
            and those of us working for the public interested in these
            processes have to keep on contesting, and negotiating.
            Multi-stakeholder processes where this does not happen are
            not worth the time we spend on them.<br>
            <br>
            Power and influence matters, and will continue to do so. In
            choosing a site for taking the NETmundial forward attention
            has to be given to ensuring that it is a platform where
            dynamics related to power and influence among stakeholders
            in IG is able to play themselves out on a relatively equal
            playing field, with that playing field becoming more equal
            as time goes on.<br>
            <br>
            WEF does not provide this.&nbsp; Yes, certain big name civil
            society leaders attend WEF meetings. Others are present.
            Developing country leaders also attend, and it is seen as a
            powerful pro-business, pro US and Europe forum for reaching
            business leaders, and facilitating networking among the
            prominent and powerful (with some being both).<br>
            <br>
            But is it the right space to establish something sustained,
            inclusive and bottom up that can gradually lead the way in
            building the legitimacy and inclusiveness needed to
            operationalise the NETmundial outcomes at global, regional,
            and national levels? I don't think so.<br>
            <br>
            I say this not to disrespect the staff of the WEF or people
            who participate in WEF forums, or of ICANN, or anyone else
            involved in the NETmundial initiative. But first and
            foremost as someone from a developing country who has
            experienced the ups and downs and highs and lows of
            multistakeholder IG for a long time and secondly as a member
            of civil society. To me WEF simply does not feel like a
            space where developing country people and civil society will
            ever have a equal power with powerful "northern" governments
            and global business.<br>
            &nbsp;<br>
            <b>2) What do we really need to </b><b>operationalise and
              consolidate the NETmundial outcomes? <br>
              <br>
            </b>Glamorous gatherings of the powerful and prominent in IG
            (be they government, from the north and the south, tech
            community, business or civil society) will help to keep
            networking going, create the opportunity for
            self-congratulation for those of us who were part of the
            NETmundial in some way (and I had the privilege to make
            submissions online, and to be involved in the co-chairing
            some of the drafting on site in Sao Paulo).<br>
            <br>
            But is that what is really needed to integrate what the
            NETmundial stands for (public interested, democratic
            multistakeholder and human rights oriented internet
            governance) into the day to day running of the internet in
            ways that will be felt by existing and future users?<br>
            <br>
            I don't think so.&nbsp; <br>
            <br>
            I think that what is needed is&nbsp; building lasting (and they
            have to be very strong because they will be attacked)
            bridges between a process such as NETmundial, and its
            outcomes, and institutions and people that make governance
            and regulatory decisions on a day to day basis. I want to
            see, for example, freedom of expression online enshrined in
            the contitutions of very government of the world. I want
            governments (and where relevant, businesses) to be held
            accountable for making sure that all people everywhere can
            access the internet.<br>
            <br>
            This means engaging those that are not yet part of the
            multi-stakeholder internet governance 'in-crowd'.&nbsp; It
            requires working with national governments. Regional
            intergovernmental bodies as well as international onces,
            including those in the UN system. <br>
            <br>
            Will a NETmundial Initiative based at the WEF prevent the
            rejection of multi-stakeholder processes (and of women's
            rights for that matter) that was evident in the CSTD Working
            Group on Enhanced Cooperation?&nbsp; Or efforts among ITU member
            states to increase governmental oversight over internet
            governance? Or tension between blocks of states with divides
            between the developed and the developing world?<br>
            <br>
            I think that is the test it will need to pass with flying
            colours if it were to make the gains that are needed, and
            that are not already being made through processes such as
            the IGF, even if only in part. And a good starting point
            would be to identify how those governments that were at the
            NETmundial, but whom did not support the final statement
            publicly (some said publicly they did not support it, and
            others failed to show support simply by staying silent).&nbsp; <br>
            <br>
            How do they feel about this WEF-based NETmundial initiative?
            I see some of them are invited. I know of at least one,
            present in Sao Paulo and invited to the NETmundial
            Initiative, who does not support either.<br>
            <br>
            Apologies for ranting and raving somewhat. The point I am
            trying to make is that for internet regulation across the
            ecosystem to comply with the principles in the NETmundial
            statement and get get the NETmundial roadmap used as a guide
            we don't need more expensive global gatherings.&nbsp; We need
            existing governance institutions and processes, including
            those not yet on the multi-stakeholder bandwagon, to
            consider and adopt NETmundial principles and integrate those
            into their governance decisions and processes. And I am not
            convinced that a WEF based forum constituted in the way the
            NETmundial Initiative has been, is up to that task.<br>
            <br>
            <b>3) NETmundial </b><b>Initiative and the IGF and the
              broader internet community</b><br>
            <br>
            The NETmundial outcome documents mentions the IGF
            repeatedly. It recommends strengthening of the IGF, and asks
            the IGF to take the discussion of complex IG issues forward.
            This reflects both the inputs received prior to the Sao
            Paulo meeting, as well as deliberations in Sao Paulo.&nbsp; It
            reflects the will of those from ALL stakeholder groups who
            participated in the NETmundial.<br>
            <br>
            I therefore find completely inappropriate that an initiative
            which takes the name of the NETmundial, and which sets out
            to take the NETmundial outcomes forward, does not have a
            closer link to the IGF.&nbsp; <br>
            <br>
            In fact, at the very least it should have used the IGF as a
            platform for presenting itself and getting feedback from the
            broader community active in the internet governance
            ecosystem which has been using the IGF as its primary
            discussion space.<br>
            <br>
            The IGF is an existing forum that is still linked to the UN
            system, and through that, to those parts of the internet
            governance ecosystem populated by governments. It is a
            bridge. It needs to be stronger, and used more, but it
            exists and many of us has put a lot of work into it over the
            last 8 years.<br>
            <br>
            Without much capacity and resources, the IGF continues year
            after year, overwhelmed with a demand from the internet
            community it cannot come close to meet (e.g. no of workshop
            proposals that cannot be accommodated). Regional and
            national IGFs have their own trajectory too.. ups and downs
            there too.. but overall becoming more inclusive.&nbsp; The IGF
            process has not even begun to fulfill its potential.
            Particularly not at the level of interacting with other
            institutions and capturing and communicating the outcomes
            from IGF discussions effectively.<br>
            <br>
            1000s of people have been working in this IGF processes,
            people who are trying to create change on the ground by
            getting different stakeholder groups to listen to one
            another and work towards a more inclusive and fair internet.
            People who are trying to find constructive ways of
            challenging practices (be they driven by governments or
            business) that, for example. blocks affordable access, or
            free expression on the internet.&nbsp; If you count all the IGFs
            around the world we are talking about 10s of thousands of
            people.&nbsp; The lack of respect shown to all these people and
            organisations by NETmundial Initiative rings loud alarm
            bells in my ears. <br>
            <br>
            I might be overly sensitive.&nbsp; I will really happy if my
            skepticism proves to be unfounded as I really do believe
            that we need democratic multi-stakeholder governance of the
            internet, and I believe that the NETmundial principles can
            help us get there.<br>
            <br>
            I guess I am also somewhat saddened.. having invested so
            much in th NETmundial, that this, the first initiative after
            April 2014 to take its name, is doing such a bad job at
            living up to what the NETmundial process principles
            advocate.<br>
            <br>
            Anriette</font><br>
          <br>
          <br>
          <br>
        </font>
        <div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 14/08/2014 09:52, Chris Disspain
          wrote:m<br>
        </div>
        <blockquote
          cite="mid:379B61FE-82C1-4F7B-BEE2-915DB0525218@auda.org.au"
          type="cite"> <span style="font-family: 'Verdana'; font-size:
            13px; color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">
            <blockquote type="cite">
              <div dir="ltr">I was told that the initiative is geared
                towards bringing to attention of the industry leaders
                and key government representatives Internet governance
                issues, emphasising the need of preservation and
                promotion of the multi-stakeholder model, as well as
                supporting the&nbsp;<span tabindex="-1" id=":35x.6">IGF</span>&nbsp;as
                a multi-stakeholder discussion platform by enlarging
                participation in its work of those companies and
                governments that haven't been involved until kn</div>
            </blockquote>
            <div>(l<br>
            </div>
            Yes, that is also my understanding. A particular emphasis
            was made of supporting the IGF but,&nbsp;I guess, time will tell.<br>
            <div>
              <style type="text/css">
    p.p1 {margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; font: 12.0px Helvetica; min-height: 14.0px}
    p.p2 {margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; font: 13.0px Verdana; color: #9443fb}
    p.p3 {margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; font: 13.0px Verdana; color: #9443fb; min-height: 16.0px}
  </style>
              <p class="p1"><br>
              </p>
              <p class="p1"><br>
              </p>
              <p class="p2">Cheers, wha<br>
              </p>
              <p class="p3">&nbsp;<br>
              </p>
              <p class="p2">Chri <br>
              </p>
            </div>
            <br>
            <div>
              <div>On 14 Aug 2014, at 17:39 , Janis Karklins &lt;<a
                  moz-do-not-send="true"
                  href="mailto:karklinsj@gmail.com">karklinsj@gmail.com</a>&gt;


                wrote:</div>
              <br class="Apple-interchange-newline">
              <blockquote type="cite">
                <div dir="ltr">
                  <div>As being one of invited to the launch event of
                    the <span tabindex="-1" id=":35x.1"
                      style="background:yellow"><span tabindex="-1"
                        id=":35x.1">WEF</span></span> initiative I would
                    like to share information that I possess.</div>
                  <div>&nbsp;</div>
                  <div>The World Economic Forum is an international
                    institution committed to improving the state of the
                    world through public-private cooperation (statement
                    on the website). <span tabindex="-1" id=":35x.2">WEF</span>
                    communities are various and more can be seen at <a
                      moz-do-not-send="true" href="http://www/">http://www</a>.<span
                      tabindex="-1" id=":35x.3">weforum</span>.org/communities.


                    Organizationally the <span tabindex="-1"
                      id=":35x.4">WEF</span> is membership organization
                    where big multinationals from all over the world are
                    widely represented. The <span tabindex="-1"
                      id=":35x.5">WEF</span> invites representatives of
                    governments, academia, civil society, world of arts
                    participate in their meetings and engage with key
                    industry leaders. This explains why the invitees
                    list is one you see.</div>
                  <div>&nbsp;</div>
                  <div>I was told that the initiative is geared towards
                    bringing to attention of the industry leaders and
                    key government representatives Internet governance
                    issues, emphasising the need of preservation and
                    promotion of the multi-stakeholder model, as well as
                    supporting the <span tabindex="-1" id=":35x.6">IGF</span>
                    as a multi-stakeholder discussion platform by
                    enlarging participation in its work of those
                    companies and governments that haven't been involved
                    until know.</div>
                  <div>&nbsp;</div>
                  <div>I know that Alan Markus intends to present and
                    discuss the initiative at the 2014 <span
                      tabindex="-1" id=":35x.7">IGF</span> meeting and
                    there will be ample opportunity for the <span
                      tabindex="-1" id=":35x.8">IG</span> community to
                    clarify details.</div>
                  <div>&nbsp;</div>
                  <div>I hope that this information is useful.</div>
                  <div><span tabindex="-1" id=":35x.9">JK</span></div>
                  <div>&nbsp;</div>
                  <div>&nbsp;</div>
                  <div>&nbsp;</div>
                  <div>&nbsp;</div>
                </div>
                <div class="gmail_extra"><br>
                  <br>
                  <div class="gmail_quote"> On Thu, Aug 14, 2014 at
                    10:11 AM, Joana Varon <span dir="ltr">&lt;<a
                        moz-do-not-send="true"
                        href="mailto:joana@varonferraz.com"
                        target="_blank">joana@varonferraz.com</a>&gt;</span>
                    wrote:<br>
                    <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
                      .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
                      <div dir="ltr"><b>Current status of IG debate:</b>
                        we need leaks to know what is going on! Pretty
                        bad for a start.&nbsp;
                        <div><br>
                        </div>
                        <div>@jordan carter: "<span
                            style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.33px">why


                            a noted business centred forum is the place
                            to launch an Internet governance
                            initiative?" - a question to be echoed
                            indeed.</span></div>
                        <div><span
                            style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.33px"><br>
                          </span></div>
                        <div><font face="arial, sans-serif">It is a
                            shame after the whole attempt of NETMudial
                            to innovate in a meeting process, seeking
                            some transparency,&nbsp;openness&nbsp;and inclusion,
                            something like this comes up under the same
                            "brand". Hello Brazil?!</font></div>
                        <div><br>
                        </div>
                        <div>@jeremy and members of the so called "evil
                          cabal", if you go, you have an important role
                          to feed people with the most important asset:
                          information. I bet we will be always prompt
                          for feedback.&nbsp;<br>
                        </div>
                        <div><br>
                        </div>
                        <div>hoping for the best, though looking at...
                          the worst?</div>
                        <div><br>
                        </div>
                        <div>regards</div>
                        <span class="HOEnZb"><font color="#888888">
                            <div><br>
                            </div>
                            <div>joana</div>
                          </font></span>
                        <div><br>
                          --&nbsp;<br>
                          --&nbsp;<br>
                          <br>
                          Joana Varon Ferraz<br>
                          @joana_varon<br>
                          PGP 0x016B8E73<br>
                        </div>
                        <div>
                          <div class="h5">
                            <div class="gmail_extra"><br>
                              <br>
                              <div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, Aug 14,
                                2014 at 1:30 AM, Seth Johnson <span
                                  dir="ltr">&lt;<a
                                    moz-do-not-send="true"
                                    href="mailto:seth.p.johnson@gmail.com"
                                    target="_blank">seth.p.johnson@gmail.com</a>&gt;</span>
                                wrote:<br>
                                <blockquote class="gmail_quote"
                                  style="margin:0px 0px 0px
0.8ex;padding-left:1ex;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-width:1px;border-left-style:solid">More


                                  that the IGF phase wasn't going to
                                  work. &nbsp;IGF has always been in<br>
                                  a tough spot, not so much fumbling the
                                  ball -- as if that's anything<br>
                                  other than an endemic feature of any
                                  organization of a similar<br>
                                  institutional nature -- but not
                                  empowered and pining for standing.<br>
                                  But Netmundial wasn't executed well in
                                  that regard (they announced<br>
                                  sponsorship of IGF, but they also
                                  weren't quite able to make things<br>
                                  stick), so they need to patch he
                                  information society process up by a<br>
                                  more blunt move that steps past IGF
                                  rather than going through a<br>
                                  process of engaging folks in issues
                                  via IGF as per plan. &nbsp;I think<br>
                                  they're figuring they'll be able to
                                  just brazen it out.<br>
                                  <div><br>
                                    <br>
                                    On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 10:39 PM,
                                    Jeremy Malcolm &lt;<a
                                      moz-do-not-send="true"
                                      href="mailto:jmalcolm@eff.org"
                                      target="_blank">jmalcolm@eff.org</a>&gt;


                                    wrote:<br>
                                    &gt; I think it's more the case that
                                    the IGF has so badly fumbled the
                                    ball that<br>
                                    &gt; it falls to someone - anyone -
                                    else to pick it up. But that is not
                                    to<br>
                                    &gt; discount the valid criticisms
                                    that others have expressed and that
                                    I agree<br>
                                    &gt; with.<br>
                                    &gt;<br>
                                    &gt; Disclaimer: I'm a member of the
                                    evil cabal.<br>
                                    &gt;<br>
                                    &gt; --<br>
                                    &gt; Jeremy Malcolm<br>
                                    &gt; Senior Global Policy Analyst<br>
                                    &gt; Electronic Frontier Foundation<br>
                                    &gt; <a moz-do-not-send="true"
                                      href="https://eff.org/"
                                      target="_blank">https://eff.org</a><br>
                                    &gt; <a moz-do-not-send="true"
                                      href="mailto:jmalcolm@eff.org"
                                      target="_blank">jmalcolm@eff.org</a><br>
                                    &gt;<br>
                                    &gt; Tel: <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="tel:415.436.9333%20ext%20161" target="_blank" value="+14154369333">415.436.9333


                                      ext 161</a><br>
                                    &gt;<br>
                                    &gt; :: Defending Your Rights in the
                                    Digital World ::<br>
                                    &gt;<br>
                                    &gt; On Aug 13, 2014, at 6:57 PM,
                                    Jordan Carter &lt;<a
                                      moz-do-not-send="true"
                                      href="mailto:jordan@internetnz.net.nz"
                                      target="_blank">jordan@internetnz.net.nz</a>&gt;


                                    wrote:<br>
                                    &gt;<br>
                                    &gt; Can someone explain why a noted
                                    business centred forum is the place
                                    to<br>
                                    &gt; launch an Internet governance
                                    initiative?<br>
                                    &gt;<br>
                                    &gt; I genuinely don't understand
                                    that.<br>
                                    &gt;<br>
                                    &gt; I thought the whole lesson of
                                    netmundial was that genuine multi
                                    stakeholder<br>
                                    &gt; approaches work well, not that
                                    it was a nice experiment to be
                                    ignored.<br>
                                    &gt;<br>
                                    &gt; It would be helpful if those
                                    who rule us, as it were, would
                                    rapidly disclose<br>
                                    &gt; some authoritative information.<br>
                                    &gt;<br>
                                    &gt; Jordan<br>
                                    &gt;<br>
                                    &gt; On Thursday, 14 August 2014,
                                    Stephen Farrell &lt;<a
                                      moz-do-not-send="true"
                                      href="mailto:stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie"
                                      target="_blank">stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie</a>&gt;<br>
                                    &gt; wrote:<br>
                                    &gt;&gt;<br>
                                    &gt;&gt;<br>
                                    &gt;&gt; Gotta say... seems like
                                    elitist nonsense to me having looked<br>
                                    &gt;&gt; at the invite list and
                                    other docs. The elitist part should
                                    be<br>
                                    &gt;&gt; obvious. The nonsense part
                                    is due to &nbsp;almost none of the list<br>
                                    &gt;&gt; of invitees being known for
                                    knowing about the Internet. It<br>
                                    &gt;&gt; seems much more an elite
                                    than an Internet-savvy list of folks<br>
                                    &gt;&gt; being asked to form a new
                                    cabal. That said, cabals aren't all<br>
                                    &gt;&gt; bad, and I've no reason to
                                    think very badly of this particular<br>
                                    &gt;&gt; subset of the elite and its
                                    I guess just more meaningless policy<br>
                                    &gt;&gt; stuff so I don't need to
                                    care very much.<br>
                                    &gt;&gt;<br>
                                    &gt;&gt; That said, it seems a pity
                                    for this to be the next step after<br>
                                    &gt;&gt; the Brazil gig which seemed
                                    relatively open.<br>
                                    &gt;&gt;<br>
                                    &gt;&gt; S.<br>
                                    &gt;&gt;<br>
                                    &gt;&gt;<br>
                                    &gt;&gt; On 14/08/14 02:36, William
                                    Drake wrote:<br>
                                    &gt;&gt; &gt; Hi<br>
                                    &gt;&gt; &gt;<br>
                                    &gt;&gt; &gt; I proposed several
                                    times to the 1NET Co Com that 1NET
                                    explore serving as<br>
                                    &gt;&gt; &gt; a more open
                                    multistakeholder vehicle for
                                    connecting people to the NETmundial<br>
                                    &gt;&gt; &gt; Initiative. &nbsp;Several
                                    members expressed support for that,
                                    but since how the<br>
                                    &gt;&gt; &gt; NMI will evolve
                                    remains very unclear it&#8217;s hard to
                                    know ex ante how this<br>
                                    &gt;&gt; &gt; could work. &nbsp;I made
                                    the same suggestion to Fadi in
                                    London, didn&#8217;t get much<br>
                                    &gt;&gt; &gt; reaction.<br>
                                    &gt;&gt; &gt;<br>
                                    &gt;&gt; &gt; As I understand the
                                    basic idea, NMI will have a six
                                    month launch managed<br>
                                    &gt;&gt; &gt; by WEF but the hope
                                    would be that this leads to
                                    something broader and more<br>
                                    &gt;&gt; &gt; inclusive in a second
                                    phase. &nbsp;Not how I would have done
                                    it, but that said I<br>
                                    &gt;&gt; &gt; wouldn&#8217;t assume before
                                    the fact that the second phase will
                                    not come. &nbsp;We<br>
                                    &gt;&gt; &gt; have to see for
                                    starters how the conversation goes
                                    28 August and what is<br>
                                    &gt;&gt; &gt; possible&#8230;<br>
                                    &gt;&gt; &gt;<br>
                                    &gt;&gt; &gt; Bill<br>
                                    &gt;&gt; &gt;<br>
                                    &gt;&gt; &gt; On Aug 13, 2014, at
                                    10:00 PM, Avri Doria &lt;<a
                                      moz-do-not-send="true"
                                      href="mailto:avri@ACM.ORG"
                                      target="_blank">avri@ACM.ORG</a>&gt;

                                    wrote:<br>
                                    &gt;&gt; &gt;<br>
                                    &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; Hi,<br>
                                    &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt;<br>
                                    &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; Just wondering, is
                                    this a proper list for those who
                                    have been catching<br>
                                    &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; bits and pieces of
                                    the ICANN/WEF 'NetMundial
                                    Initiaitve' to be<br>
                                    &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; discussed.<br>
                                    &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt;<br>
                                    &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; I think it might
                                    be, and have even suggested it to
                                    others, but figured<br>
                                    &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; I<br>
                                    &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; better check
                                    first.<br>
                                    &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt;<br>
                                    &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt;<br>
                                    &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; avri<br>
                                    &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt;<br>
                                    &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt;
                                    _______________________________________________<br>
                                    &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; discuss mailing
                                    list<br>
                                    &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; <a
                                      moz-do-not-send="true"
                                      href="mailto:discuss@1net.org"
                                      target="_blank">discuss@1net.org</a><br>
                                    &gt;&gt; &gt;&gt; <a
                                      moz-do-not-send="true"
                                      href="http://1net-mail.1net.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss"
                                      target="_blank">http://1net-mail.1net.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss</a><br>
                                    &gt;&gt; &gt;<br>
                                    &gt;&gt; &gt;<br>
                                    &gt;&gt; &gt;
                                    _______________________________________________<br>
                                    &gt;&gt; &gt; discuss mailing list<br>
                                    &gt;&gt; &gt; <a
                                      moz-do-not-send="true"
                                      href="mailto:discuss@1net.org"
                                      target="_blank">discuss@1net.org</a><br>
                                    &gt;&gt; &gt; <a
                                      moz-do-not-send="true"
                                      href="http://1net-mail.1net.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss"
                                      target="_blank">http://1net-mail.1net.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss</a><br>
                                    &gt;&gt; &gt;<br>
                                    &gt;&gt;<br>
                                    &gt;&gt;
                                    _______________________________________________<br>
                                    &gt;&gt; discuss mailing list<br>
                                    &gt;&gt; <a moz-do-not-send="true"
                                      href="mailto:discuss@1net.org"
                                      target="_blank">discuss@1net.org</a><br>
                                    &gt;&gt; <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://1net-mail.1net.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss"
                                      target="_blank">http://1net-mail.1net.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss</a><br>
                                    &gt;<br>
                                    &gt;<br>
                                    &gt;<br>
                                    &gt; --<br>
                                    &gt; --<br>
                                    &gt; Jordan Carter<br>
                                    &gt; Chief Executive, InternetNZ<br>
                                    &gt;<br>
                                    &gt; <a moz-do-not-send="true"
                                      href="tel:%2B64-21-442-649"
                                      target="_blank"
                                      value="+6421442649">+64-21-442-649</a>
                                    | <a moz-do-not-send="true"
                                      href="mailto:jordan@internetnz.net.nz"
                                      target="_blank">jordan@internetnz.net.nz</a><br>
                                    &gt;<br>
                                    &gt; Sent on the run, apologies for
                                    brevity<br>
                                    &gt;<br>
                                    &gt;
                                    _______________________________________________<br>
                                    &gt; discuss mailing list<br>
                                    &gt; <a moz-do-not-send="true"
                                      href="mailto:discuss@1net.org"
                                      target="_blank">discuss@1net.org</a><br>
                                    &gt; <a moz-do-not-send="true"
                                      href="http://1net-mail.1net.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss"
                                      target="_blank">http://1net-mail.1net.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss</a><br>
                                    &gt;<br>
                                    &gt;<br>
                                    &gt;
                                    _______________________________________________<br>
                                    &gt; discuss mailing list<br>
                                    &gt; <a moz-do-not-send="true"
                                      href="mailto:discuss@1net.org"
                                      target="_blank">discuss@1net.org</a><br>
                                    &gt; <a moz-do-not-send="true"
                                      href="http://1net-mail.1net.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss"
                                      target="_blank">http://1net-mail.1net.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss</a><br>
                                    <br>
_______________________________________________<br>
                                    discuss mailing list<br>
                                    <a moz-do-not-send="true"
                                      href="mailto:discuss@1net.org"
                                      target="_blank">discuss@1net.org</a><br>
                                    <a moz-do-not-send="true"
                                      href="http://1net-mail.1net.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss"
                                      target="_blank">http://1net-mail.1net.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss</a></div>
                                </blockquote>
                              </div>
                              <br>
                              <br clear="all">
                              <div><br>
                              </div>
                              <br>
                            </div>
                          </div>
                        </div>
                      </div>
                      <br>
                      _______________________________________________<br>
                      discuss mailing list<br>
                      <a moz-do-not-send="true"
                        href="mailto:discuss@1net.org">discuss@1net.org</a><br>
                      <a moz-do-not-send="true"
                        href="http://1net-mail.1net.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss"
                        target="_blank">http://1net-mail.1net.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss</a><br>
                    </blockquote>
                  </div>
                  <br>
                </div>
                _______________________________________________<br>
                discuss mailing list<br>
                <a moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:discuss@1net.org">discuss@1net.org</a><br>
                <a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="http://1net-mail.1net.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss">http://1net-mail.1net.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss</a></blockquote>
            </div>
            <br>
          </span> <br>
          <fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
          <br>
          <pre wrap="">_______________________________________________
discuss mailing list
<a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:discuss@1net.org">discuss@1net.org</a>
<a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://1net-mail.1net.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss">http://1net-mail.1net.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss</a></pre>
        </blockquote>
        <br>
        <pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">-- 
`````````````````````````````````
anriette esterhuysen
executive director
association for progressive communications
po box 29755, melville, 2109, south africa
<a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:anriette@apc.org">anriette@apc.org</a>
<a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="http://www.apc.org">www.apc.org</a></pre>
        <br>
        <fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
        <br>
        <pre wrap="">_______________________________________________
discuss mailing list
<a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:discuss@1net.org">discuss@1net.org</a>
<a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://1net-mail.1net.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss">http://1net-mail.1net.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss</a></pre>
      </blockquote>
      <br>
      <br>
      <fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
      <br>
      <pre wrap="">_______________________________________________
discuss mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:discuss@1net.org">discuss@1net.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://1net-mail.1net.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss">http://1net-mail.1net.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss</a></pre>
    </blockquote>
    <br>
  </body>
</html>