[NCUC-DISCUSS] IGF Workshop Discussion List

[Elsa S]

I would actually suggest we go further into some of our WG work for those
in the IGF and interested. Do you think we would have a good turn out if we
do?

I understand that our material is heavy and needs a lot of preparation, but
we could potentially dissect a specific WG topic and discuss its complexity
and pillars, eventually understanding the Multistakeholder model through
that lense?

Best,

Elsa
—

On Mon, May 21, 2018 at 4:58 PM Nick Shorey <lists at nickshorey.com> wrote:

> Hi everyone,
>
> +1 to Ayden’s observation, however I think Bruna’s idea is a really good
> one, and could include an NCUC / NCSG panelist to provide an ICANN context
> or something, but I think such a topic is maybe outside of NCUC’s / NCSG's
> specific remit with regards to ICANN, so possibly shouldn't have the banner
> of being an NCUC / NCSG directed workshop.
>
> I was similarly thinking of a couple of ideas around: 1) Impact of and
> solutions to digital technology waste and the environmental impact of
> things like massive data centres; 2) The importance and challenges of
> Internet access in remote communities; 3) IoT obsolescence - what are the
> risks, and how do we mitigate them?
>
> Again I don’t think these are specifically NCUC / NCSG topics, and sadly I
> don’t have the time to work these up fully - but if anyone has been
> thinking along the same lines, I’ll happily collaborate, like Lennon and
> McCartney, or Elton John and Tim Rice.
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Nick
>
> Nick Shorey
> Phone: +44 (0) 7552 455 988
> Email: lists at nickshorey.com <lists at nickshorey.com>
> Skype: nick.shorey
> Twitter: @nickshorey
> LinkedIn: www.linkedin.com/in/nicklinkedin
> Web: www.nickshorey.com
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On 21 May 2018, at 04:17, Ayden Férdeline <icann at ferdeline.com> wrote:
>
> Thanks for sharing these proposals. I just had one quick comment; I think
> any workshop that the NCUC (or the NCSG) proposes should be related in some
> way to the Domain Name System, as it is our mission to amplify the voice of
> individuals and civil society organisations in the development of the
> Domain Name System and this area of the Internet’s infrastructure. We do
> have a limited mission. I do appreciate that the larger Internet ecosystem
> has risks to the Domain Name System and ICANN’s mission and activities,
> however I worry that looking at the outcomes from Plenipot, as interesting
> as this would be, might lead us a little bit away from our narrow area of
> expertise. But it's great to get ideas rolling in, so thanks for starting
> this conversation!
>
> Best wishes,
> Ayden Férdeline
>
>
> ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
> On 20 May 2018 11:42 PM, Bruna Martins dos Santos <bruna.mrtns at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> Proposal 1 could focus on the outcomes of the upcoming ITU Plenipotenciary
> 2018 meeting and its effects (if any new one comes) on the Internet
> Governance discussions and also talk a little bit about these discussions
> not being exclusively related to Governmental Public Policies, what would
> justify bringing these issues to ITU for some countries, and preaching the
> MS model for its democratic values.
>
> Thanks for sending ideas here, Michael! If anyone else wants to chime in,
> you're all welcome.
>
>
> Best,
> Bruna
>
> 2018-05-20 16:06 GMT-03:00 Michael Karanicolas <mkaranicolas at gmail.com>:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Thanks to all those who volunteered to help take this discussion forward.
>> I would suggest two possible topics for our session proposal:
>>
>> 1. Multistakeholderism: Rights, domain names, and governmental impacts on
>> Internet governance. The challenge to doing this would be to craft a
>> proposal which is sufficiently different from the NCSG proposal which Ayden
>> circulated. Still - I think there is potentially space to do this, for
>> example by focusing on how this has been evolving at ITU, with their recent
>> resolution (Res 102 ITU-D) on internet resources.
>>
>> 2. "Whither WHOIS - Accreditation and the Path Forward for the Global
>> WHOIS" - By IGF 2018, we'll be six months out from the GDPR's "Judgment
>> Day", and potentially around six months in to the proposed expedited PDP to
>> develop an accreditation model for access, so a good time to check in on
>> progress, and how the sky didn't actually fall on May 26, and the future of
>> the WHOIS.
>>
>> So - do we want option 1 or option 2 (or a third option)? Thoughts?
>>
>> Michael
>>
>>  NCUC IGF WS Proposal
>> <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1kgxchiYlh56OCQYblbxl-yO_BzsXQeOYVxoPXgwcaos/edit?usp=drive_web>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Ncuc-discuss mailing list
>> Ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org
>> https://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-discuss
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> *Bruna Martins dos Santos *
>
> +55 61 99252-6512
> Skype ID: bruna.martinsantos
> @boomartins
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ncuc-discuss mailing list
> Ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org
> https://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-discuss
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ncuc-discuss mailing list
> Ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org
> https://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-discuss
>
-- 
--

Elsa Saade
Consultant
Gulf Centre for Human Rights
Twitter: @Elsa_Saade
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-discuss/attachments/20180522/db2b5d81/attachment.html>