[NCUC-DISCUSS] NCUC Event News

joy joy at apc.org
Tue May 28 07:48:23 CEST 2013 

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
 
Hi Bill and all
I think the idea of a policy workshop is a good one.
Ed, there is still plenty of time in constituency meetings to organise
on policy positions. I think a public workshop among those of us with
some quite strongly held differing views about a topic would be a good
thing to do and a sign of our constituency openness.
Cheers
Joy


On 28/05/2013 9:52 a.m., Edward Morris wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, May 27, 2013 at 9:41 PM, Avri Doria <avri at acm.org
<mailto:avri at acm.org>> wrote:
>
>     hi,
>
>     sorry it took my so long to read the whole thing.
>     I had only read the first paragraph and said what do i care about
an NCUC workshop.
>
>     But after all the controversy etc, i decided to actually go back
and read it.
>     Biil, its brilliant.
>     Really, i think a good debate that edifies on a topic everyone is
buzzing about is just the ticket.
>
>
> Hi Avri,
>
> Thanks for responding. I wish we could get some more input on the isssue.
>
> I like Bill, I respect Bill, on this question I disagree with Bill.
>
> We are not an educational organisation. We are an advocacy group. Open
/ closed is a question we're divided on. I think it's a great issue for
the Internet Governance Forum and I'm sure it will be a blockbuster
session in Bali that will keep people awake and talking. I came close to
sleeping often in Baku during some of the sessions and the fact that
under Bill's leadership we'll be doing interesting and vibrant
programming in Bali is a great plus. But...
>
> ICANN is a different matter. There we should be using programming to
push our positions, purposeful education if you will. We're pretty
unified on the problems with the GAC, staff rule, privacy in WHOIS...we
have the Recon, the whole policy/ implementation thing...and we're going
to give a balanced program on an issue we're divided on? Why? As a group
it doesn't matter which way the Board goes. Some of us will be happy,
some of us will be sad, many of us will be conflicted or don't care.
>
> To justify this by saying it's linked to our IGF presentation,,,that's
the tail wagging the dog. Our first priority, the reason we exist, is
ICANN. I see no necessary connection between communication output at
both events.
>
> I would rather use the opportunity on site programming offers to kick
start a dead issue like UDRP Review than to highlight an issue we're
divided on. Even better let's get people talking about the MS issues you
(Avri) are highlighting in your great petition. Heck, we could use the
programming to kick off the petition drive.
>
> I would be interested in hearing what others think.
>
> Ed
>
>
>
>
> 
>
>     cheers,
>
>     avri
>
>     On 25 May 2013, at 12:20, William Drake wrote:
>
>     > Hello
>     >
>     > The IGF's Multistakeholder Advisory Group met here in Geneva
over the past few days, and we approved the main lines of the IGF
meeting in Bali 22-25 October.  The workshop proposals put forth by NCUC
and its members fared well in the review process and should all go
forward.  Official confirmation is pending, needed first are some last
looks at the approved workshops as a group and efforts to prompt mergers
between related sessions etc.
>     >
>     > On another front, we have several events under consideration for
the ICANN Duban meeting 14-18 July.  First, it appears that NCUC member
the Association for Progressive Communication will be organizing a
capacity building 'winter school' on Internet governance for some
government and stakeholder attendees just prior to the ICANN meeting,
i.e. 10-12 (Wed. - Friday) July.  This will likely be held off site at a
university campus.   The last session on Friday will be a joint event
organized by NCUC on how we work in GNSO and how to get involved etc. 
This could be sort of a prequel to broader workshop I proposed for Bali,
Civil Society in ICANN?s Multistakeholderism: The GNSO Case
http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/wks2013/workshop_2013_list_view.php?xpsltipq_je=249. 
Basically, it'd be an outreach effort geared toward African civil
society in particular.  Afterwards, NCUC will sponsor a reception for
attendees?nothing swank obviously, but a good bridge building opportunity.
>     >
>     > I am also talking with staff about securing a space within the
main ICANN Durban program for an NCUC workshop.  A priori, on both
substantive and effort optimization grounds I'm inclined to do another
prequel, this one to our IGF Bali workshop, The Debate on ?Closed?
Generic Top Level Domains 
http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/wks2013/workshop_2013_list_view.php?xpsltipq_je=253. 
After all, it'd be nice to sponsor a debate on a hot topic in front of a
full ICANN crowd a couple of days before the Board may take action one
way or another on the matter (although that expectation could mean some
push back from ICANN on the topic, we'll see).  This seems like a useful
contribution we can make, and we have members and other colleagues
who'll be in Durban who have strong views on the various sides of the
matter who could serve as speakers.  The other option I thought about
was to broaden the focus and do a workshop on the GAC's Beijing
Communique, and the community responses to it.  But this might be seen
in a less favorable light in some quarters, plus we can get into that
via the closed topic anyway.
>     >
>     > Staff are asking for me to submit the workshop request within a
few days, so time's a bit pressed.  I'd be interested to hear from
members if the above sounds ok, or if there's another workshop topic we
ought to be considering.  Needless to say, if we were to strike out in a
new direction rather than take the path of least resistance with a
closed generic prequel, there'd have to be a group effort to organize
it, starting fairly soon.
>     >
>     > Thanks,
>     >
>     > Bill
>     >
>     >
>     > **********************************************************
>     > William J. Drake
>     > International Fellow & Lecturer
>     > Media Change & Innovation Division, IPMZ
>     > University of Zurich, Switzerland
>     > Chair, Noncommercial Users Constituency,
>     > ICANN, www.ncuc.org <http://www.ncuc.org>
>     > william.drake at uzh.ch <mailto:william.drake at uzh.ch>
>     > www.williamdrake.org <http://www.williamdrake.org>
>     > ***********************************************************
>     >
>     >
>     >
>     > _______________________________________________
>     > Ncuc-discuss mailing list
>     > Ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org <mailto:Ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org>
>     > http://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-discuss
>     >
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     Ncuc-discuss mailing list
>     Ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org <mailto:Ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org>
>     http://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-discuss
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ncuc-discuss mailing list
> Ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org
> http://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-discuss

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/
 
iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJRpEUnAAoJEA9zUGgfM+bqYCIH/ieIUnt+GeQDbHzpJwddqHcj
Opt1Xc0F8c0dEUgVQ+i99HIibT5WZHxRLidB140DwDEWZ24t9gpEZA4Ywx/ZAY4n
aIbwyjp6xGCZbCL5IdvkiE7hJJM0YEYQojrZlnVRUInpiogNuapiIXQ96qc0Tqon
uDhS5etSUJqaope+fYFMppLK1+CsTw4HBFpPuLJ/us3gsBPiLYNlgs7VhBwdpU4H
ZweHDTMmSjIWLxlH9lkF0NXaR8K1/2A25R7hgVntNZtfzgTXyPFaCkdZGRHRmY2z
3ZvBR+IrBQ8+C/trSaOCGn96aIeyecHRRfkFPz17FzXpe1QIkItp0pO55v0sZn8=
=+SDo
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-discuss/attachments/20130528/dca1d267/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
Ncuc-discuss mailing list
Ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org
http://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-discuss

More information about the Ncuc-discuss mailing list