<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
I defer to others on this list who are regulars at IGF to answer
your questions in detail, but I think you would have takers on that
bet. I think the idea is to push for long term (not permanent,
noone can ask for permanent these days) so that funding can be
secured, and better long range planning assured. We should be out
of ad hoc land by now, and it certainly does not look like we are,
to newbies such as myself ( I should mention that the last time I
came to IGF in person was in 2006). Why now? sadly the time to get
collective action is often when folks are gathered together.
Believe me, I have been missing sessions for two days to draft this
thing and collaborate so I heartily agree that there are other
wonderful things to be doing here. :-)<br>
Latest changes are now back up on the mozilla pad at
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://etherpad.mozilla.org/LQO468JD1K">https://etherpad.mozilla.org/LQO468JD1K</a><br>
Stephanie<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 2014-09-03, 18:48, parminder wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote cite="mid:54079AB3.4020207@itforchange.net" type="cite">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;
charset=ISO-8859-1">
<br>
<font face="Verdana">I have really not been able to fully follow
this thread, but I would soon. <br>
<br>
But just out of curiosity: what really is the context and
urgency to suddenly seek making the IGF permanent. (Before I go
further, I will clearly state that I would indeed like to have
the IGF made permanent. )<br>
<br>
The IGF extension review will only take place next year as a
part of WSIS plus 10 review, which is really quite some time
off, plus there are other very important issues for WSIS plus
10, and we have not quite got into that discussion. So, I am not
sure what has happened suddenly to which we are responding. I
will be obliged if those pushing this initiative can help me
understand this. I may have missed something here. <br>
<br>
Apart from wondering about what really precipitated this issue,
and the urgency if it, I dont think the IGF is at all under any
kind of threat of being discontinued. So, why is this threat
being invented, especially when even the review is not around?<br>
<br>
I have never found any substantial opposition to continuation of
the IGF, for it to constitute any real threat. (I remember one
weak and vague statement of China once that IGF has served its
purpose and can be closed down, but not much else really.) So,
why in the middle of the intense activities of an ongoing IGF,
where in fact there are some other important issues to discuss,
have we gone into this fit of asserting the need to continue the
IGF is something I am unable to understand. <br>
<br>
BTW, I am ready to take one to ten odds bet with anyone that the
IGF will be renewed, Any takers?<br>
<br>
parminder <br>
<br>
</font>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On Monday 01 September 2014 09:12 PM,
Matthew Shears wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote cite="mid:540493E4.7030806@cdt.org" type="cite">
Jeanette, Stephanie<br>
<br>
Great initiative. Would be wonderful if we could turn this
around, get signatures and announce during the open mic/closing
session.<br>
<br>
Can we try and get comments by end of Wednesday, sign-ons by end
of day Thurs?<br>
<br>
Letter may be a little long and overly full of UN text
references - but that may be a matter of tweaking.<br>
<br>
Best.<br>
<br>
Matthew<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 9/1/2014 5:46 PM, Jeanette
Hofmann wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote cite="mid:540486BE.8020007@wzb.eu" type="cite">Hi
all, <br>
<br>
Stephanie Perrin and I have drafted a statement that asks the
UN Secretary to consider renewing the mandate of the IGF on a
permanent basis. <br>
<br>
About 90% of the text are quotes from UN documents referring
to the IGF and from the NetMundial Statement. <br>
<br>
Our draft is intended to reflect the views of all stakeholders
and perhaps get a broad endorsement at the end of the IGF. <br>
<br>
Right now, it is just a draft. Changes are welcome. <br>
<br>
We have set up a pad for editing: <br>
<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://etherpad.mozilla.org/LQO468JD1K">https://etherpad.mozilla.org/LQO468JD1K</a>
<br>
<br>
For convenience we also paste the text into this email below.
<br>
<br>
The goal is to complete the editing before the end of the IGF.
<br>
<br>
Stephanie and Jeanette <br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
Request for consideration to the UN Secretary General on
permanence of the IGF <br>
<br>
<br>
In 2005, the UN Member states asked the UN Secretary-General
in the Tunis Agenda, to convene a meeting of the new forum for
multi-stakeholder policy dialogue—called the Internet
Governance Forum (IGF). (Footnote: paragraph 72, Tunis Agenda)
<br>
The mandate of the Forum was to discuss public policy issues
relating to key elements of Internet governance, such as those
enumerated in <br>
the Tunis Agenda, in order to foster the sustainability,
robustness, security, stability and development of the
Internet in developed and developing countries. The Forum was
not to replace existing arrangements, mechanisms, institutions
or organizations. It was intended to constitute a neutral,
non-duplicative and non-binding process, and have no
involvement in day-to-day or technical operations of the
Internet. <br>
The Tunis Agenda also asked the UN Secretary-General to
examine the desirability of the continuation of the Forum, in
formal consultation with Forum participants, within five years
of its creation, and to make recommendations to the UN
Membership in this regard. At its sixty-fifth session, the
General Assembly decided to extend the mandate of the IGF,
underlining the need to improve the IGF “with a view to
linking it to the broader dialogue on global Internet
governance”. <br>
In his note on the continuation of the Internet Governance
Forum, the UN Secretary General confirmed that the IGF was
unique and valuable. It is a place where Governments, civil
society, the private sector and international organizations
discuss important questions of economic and social
development. They share their insights and achievements and
build a common understanding of the Internet’s great
potential. <br>
<br>
<br>
The Secretary-General recommended that <br>
(a) That the mandate of the Internet Governance Forum be
extended for a further five years; <br>
(b) That the desirability of continuation be considered again
by Member <br>
States within the context of a 10-year review of
implementation of the outcome of the World Summit on the
Information Society in 2015; <br>
<br>
Footnote: (General Assembly, Sixty-fifth session, Item 17 of
the preliminary list*, Information and communications
technologies for development, Economic and Social Council,
Substantive session of 2010 New York, 28 June-23 July 2010,
Agenda item 13 (b)**) <br>
The NetMundial Meeting, convened by the Government of Brazil,
stated in the NetMundial Multistakeholder Statement on April
24th, 2014, that there is a need for a strengthened Internet
Governance Forum (IGF). Important recommendations to that end
had already been made by the UN CSTD working group on IGF
improvements. The NetMundial Statement also stated that “a
strengthened IGF could better serve as a platform for
discussing both long standing and emerging issues with a view
to contributing to the identification of possible ways to
address them.” <br>
<br>
Given the significance of the Internet Governance Forum for
the continuing development of Internet governance, we request
the UN Secretary General to establish the IGF as a permanent
multistakeholder forum. We also request that the UN Secretary
General work with the IGF and its stakeholders to strengthen
its structure and processes. <br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<br>
<pre wrap="">____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
<a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:bestbits@lists.bestbits.net">bestbits@lists.bestbits.net</a>.
To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit:
<a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits">http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits</a></pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">--
Matthew Shears
Director - Global Internet Policy and Human Rights
Center for Democracy & Technology (CDT)
<a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:mshears@cdt.org">mshears@cdt.org</a>
+ 44 771 247 2987</pre>
<br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<br>
<pre wrap="">____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
<a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:bestbits@lists.bestbits.net">bestbits@lists.bestbits.net</a>.
To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit:
<a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits">http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits</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>