Report from Global Commission on Internet Governance (GCIG)
Kieren’s write-up - where you will also find pointers - is here: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/06/21/how_to_save_the_open_internet/ Nibbles: << The internet could go one of three paths in the next decade, according to an elite group of policymakers: open and global; unequal and uneven; or dangerous and broken. And the path to righteousness? It's contained in the recommendations of the 140-page report that the grandly named Global Commission on Internet Governance (GCIG) has spent two years working on and released Tuesday. >> << There are "significant barriers" to real engagement that "discourage" people. And the report suggests that "seasoned participants from the technical community may need to adjust their usual blunt approach" in order to bring in others. It even goes so far as to suggest that the current approach taken by such groups as the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF), World Wide Web Consortium (W3C), Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN), Internet Society (ISOC) and so on "may not always be sustainable, particularly as the pioneers who established and remain key supporters of these bodies disappear from the scene." Which is a polite way of saying that the old boys network in many of the internet organizations is slowly killing them. >>
This is an interesting document. I’ve only skimmed through and not yet read it in detail. Does anyone know what happens now? Will it be up for discussion/consultation at some governance forum like WSIS or ICANN? How can people and organisations comment on the report? The motherhood and apple pie statements on page viii ("What Happens Next?”) are rather vague about next steps. In particular, what does “... conceive of a new model that embraces greater involvement of those whose lives are affected by decisions that govern their ability to use the network and to exercise their fundamental rights online. This new vision of “multi-stakeholderism” requires a more collaborative, global and decentralized model of decision making; enhanced coordination and cooperation across institutions and actors; increased interoperability in terms of identifying and describing issues and approaches for resolution throughout the ecosystem; open information sharing and evidence- based decision making; and expertise- or issue-based organization to allow for both localization and scale in problem solving. ... To continue to be effective, Internet governance will need to be more inclusive and more distributed.” actually mean in practice and where is this new vision/model to be developed?
On 21-06-16 22:27, Gordon Lennox wrote:
Which is a polite way of saying that the old boys network in many of the internet organizations is slowly killing them.
I think that is your personal interpretation of what the document actually says. Julf
That was Kieren and not me. ;-) I pointed to the article by Kieren which in turn points to the report. In order to encourage people to at least go and read what Kieren said I supplied a couple of tasty “nibbles” from his article. I had hoped that some people would then go on, as Jim has done, and look at the actual report. :-) Gordon
On 22 Jun 2016, at 20:29, Johan Helsingius <julf@julf.com> wrote:
On 21-06-16 22:27, Gordon Lennox wrote:
Which is a polite way of saying that the old boys network in many of the internet organizations is slowly killing them.
I think that is your personal interpretation of what the document actually says.
Julf
That was Kieren and not me. ;-)
Ah, my apologies - I have been reading the original report, but not Kieren's article, so I didn't realize you were quoting him. Julf
participants (3)
-
Gordon Lennox -
Jim Reid -
Johan Helsingius