Hola Alex:

It is my pleasure to meet you. I think that when it comes to defend  
the public interest, we have to be all together:  individuals/ 
organizations; advocates/academics; Big NGOs,Small NGO;
We need to resolve our own positions in house, come with a consensus  
document, get the support of the general public, and make our voice be  
heard.

Now we need to focus on what is next. We need to send a strong message  
to the Board with all the organizations signatures and explained very  
well our point.
I think that the whole board might not have a good picture of what all  
this signatures means and which are below it. There many strategics  
that we cant follow but now, I think we should focus
all our energy on how to make our voice heard and be effective.

I still think that sending a letter with signatures to the chairman,  
copy the Board could be a first step to make sure that they get our  
own version of the process and positions, without intermediaries.

Hasta Luego,

Katitza



On Aug 7, 2009, at 3:29 PM, Alex Gakuru wrote:

> To illustrate further, I have confidentially obtained the attached
> 'East Africa Internet Governance Forum (EAIGF)' document. Our consumer
> association is excluded from this  "transparent" Internet Governance
> engagement. I suppose "inactive" participation criteria would help
> them locally...or could they be preparing/creating "inactive
> participants" pre-exclusion grounds at ICANN Board meeting in Nairobi
> next year?
>
> I attended last year's IGF where I raised pertinent consumer issues. A
> highly official cautioned me against saying "such bad things when we
> had important [IGF] visitors around" -- proves we are considered as
> "party spoilers"?
>
> Perhaps Adam Peake could shed some more light? - since is listed as a
> facilitator at "Parliamentarian IG luncheon and workshop" session.  We
> suffer terribly opaque and unaccountable leadership at this corner of
> the world. Which I hope Adam assists Kenya change, lighten-up and
> inculcate/strengthen "bottom-up" approach and engagements at IGF and
> ICANN for all local internet stakeholders benefit.
>
> Otherwise, I would be inclined to conclude that the "new" top-down
> approach is now spreading fast around the world.
>
> Below message was posted today to a local mailing list run by persons
> close to Adam.
>
> But following this story
> http://www.businessdailyafrica.com/Company%20Industry/-/539550/618420/-/u9jiulz/-/index.html 
> ,
> our local .ke registry management apparently resolved to cease all
> informational postings to our consumers mailing list.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Alex
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>
> From: Vincent Ngundi <[log in to unmask]>
>
> Date: Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 8:45 AM
>
> Subject: [kictanet] Invitation to the 2009 Kenya Internet Governance
> Forum (Kenya IGF); 19th August 2009
>
> To: [log in to unmask]
>
> Cc: KICTAnet ICT Policy Discussions <[log in to unmask]>
>
> RE: Invitation to the 2009 Kenya Internet Governance Forum (Kenya
> IGF): Advancing the Internet Governance Debate in Kenya: Thinking
> Globally; Acting Locally
>
> The Kenya Network Information Centre (KENIC), the Kenya ICT Action
> Network (KICTANet) and other participating organisations wish to
> invite you to the 2009 Kenya IGF to be held at the Jacaranda hotel in
> Nairobi, on the 19th of August 2009.
>
> The 2009 Kenya IGF is a follow up to the 2008 EAIGF review workshop
> and the 2009 Internet Governance national mailing list discussions.
>
> With the increased access to broadband infrastructure in Kenya and in
> the East Africa region and the continued spread of sophisticated
> mobile services, understanding and addressing Internet policy issues
> has become a priority. The Kenya IGF will help prepare Kenyan Internet
> stakeholders to address the opportunities, strength and challenges, as
> well as ensuring that they have a voice in shaping Internet policy
> decisions at the global level.
>
> The Kenya IGF will therefore provide an opportunity to increase
> awareness and understanding of Internet governance policy issues and
> the links with socio-economic, political and cultural development.
>
> The outcomes of the forum will be submitted to the 2009 East Africa
> Internet Governance Forum (EA-IGF) to be held in Nairobi from the 7th
> to the 9th of September 2009 and subsequently to the global Internet
> Governance Forum (IGF) meeting to be held in Sharm El Sheikh, Egypt,
> in November 2009. The Kenya IGF will also contribute towards setting
> the stage for the 37th Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and
> Numbers (ICANN) meeting to be held in Nairobi, Kenya, in March 2010.
>
> As a key player in the Internet industry, it is my pleasure to invite
> you to the 2009 Kenya IGF. A detailed programme for the event is
> attached.
>
> For planning purposes, please register for the meeting by sending an
> email to [log in to unmask] confirming your attendance.
>
> Kind Regards,
>
> -----------
>
> Vincent Ngundi
>
> Administrative Manager
>
> KENIC - The Kenya Network Information Centre
>
> http://www.kenic.or.ke
>
> [log in to unmask]
>
> [T] +254 20 4450057/8
>
> [C] +254 20 2398036
>
> [M] +254 733 790073
>
> [F] +254 20 4450087
>
> --ends--
>
>
> Alex
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Vincent Ngundi <[log in to unmask]>
> Date: Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 8:45 AM
> Subject: [kictanet] Invitation to the 2009 Kenya Internet Governance
> Forum (Kenya IGF); 19th August 2009
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Cc: KICTAnet ICT Policy Discussions <[log in to unmask]>
>
> RE: Invitation to the 2009 Kenya Internet Governance Forum (Kenya
> IGF): Advancing the Internet Governance Debate in Kenya: Thinking
> Globally; Acting Locally
> The Kenya Network Information Centre (KENIC), the Kenya ICT Action
> Network (KICTANet) and other participating organisations wish to
> invite you to the 2009 Kenya IGF to be held at the Jacaranda hotel in
> Nairobi, on the 19th of August 2009.
>
> The 2009 Kenya IGF is a follow up to the 2008 EAIGF review workshop
> and the 2009 Internet Governance national mailing list discussions.
>
> With the increased access to broadband infrastructure in Kenya and in
> the East Africa region and the continued spread of sophisticated
> mobile services, understanding and addressing Internet policy issues
> has become a priority. The Kenya IGF will help prepare Kenyan Internet
> stakeholders to address the opportunities, strength and challenges, as
> well as ensuring that they have a voice in shaping Internet policy
> decisions at the global level.
>
> The Kenya IGF will therefore provide an opportunity to increase
> awareness and understanding of Internet governance policy issues and
> the links with socio-economic, political and cultural development.
>
> The outcomes of the forum will be submitted to the 2009 East Africa
> Internet Governance Forum (EA-IGF) to be held in Nairobi from the 7th
> to the 9th of September 2009 and subsequently to the global Internet
> Governance Forum (IGF) meeting to be held in Sharm El Sheikh, Egypt,
> in November 2009. The Kenya IGF will also contribute towards setting
> the stage for the 37th Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and
> Numbers (ICANN) meeting to be held in Nairobi, Kenya, in March 2010.
>
> As a key player in the Internet industry, it is my pleasure to invite
> you to the 2009 Kenya IGF. A detailed programme for the event is
> attached.
>
> For planning purposes, please register for the meeting by sending an
> email to [log in to unmask] confirming your attendance.
> Kind Regards,
> -----------
> Vincent Ngundi
> Administrative Manager
> KENIC - The Kenya Network Information Centre
> http://www.kenic.or.ke
> [log in to unmask]
> [T] +254 20 4450057/8
> [C] +254 20 2398036
> [M] +254 733 790073
> [F] +254 20 4450087
> --ends--
> We are
>
>
> Adam,
>
> Would you mind assisting me
>
> On Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 4:35 PM, Milton L Mueller <[log in to unmask]>  
> wrote:
>>
>>> In Kenya, we have a rich history of government-business  
>>> 'steakholders'
>>> denial that we even exist.. How are we meant to be financially  
>>> endowed
>>> to pull clout like them telecoms-government affiliates?
>>>
>>> Should consumers be part ICANN's ever-praised politico-business  
>>> class
>>> they apparently ever seeks for? Who is a consumer? The little guy
>>
>> Alex,
>> You have hit the nail on the head! From China and Hong Kong, I too  
>> am familiar with this game of "official" representation, where the  
>> "representatives" are singled out by the powerful precisely because  
>> they are the ones who are careful and cozy to the ones in power and  
>> unwilling to rock the boat.
>>
>> As for your letter, yes, please do it. I'll be glad to help you  
>> polish it. Unfortunately, the US government (at least the  
>> Congressional Democrats) seem more interested in U.S. stakeholders  
>> these days but it can't hurt to go over their heads.
>>
>> --MM
>>
>>
>> ________________________________________
>>
>> without a voice in a corporate-government interests dominated world
>> internet network-both claiming to act in the "best interests of the
>> consumer" (or public interest)? At the core are vested interests that
>> want to make the Internet for big bigs and that's not right.
>>
>> Vint Cerf built and handed over a consumer-receptive ICANN - one  
>> whose
>> current leadership cannot help but rubbish the little guy's voice on
>> the internet? A "bottom-up" ICANN is all I knew and cared about.
>>
>> I am tempted to write an email from Nairobi to President Obama
>> complaining about NCUC mistreatment by ICANN. Would it be  
>> appropriate?
>>  I need your advice. Would you like me to send my draft on-list for
>> the NCUC Editor to polish it up?
>>
>> Alex
>>
>> On Thu, Aug 6, 2009 at 7:37 PM, Robin Gross<[log in to unmask]>  
>> wrote:
>>> What is also troubling is that our existing membership already  
>>> includes many
>>> members from these categories.   We have at least dozen consumer
>>> organizations - many members of the Trans Atlantic Consumer  
>>> Dialogue and
>>> several new African consumer groups, so they are here.  Many just  
>>> don't have
>>> the budgets internally to make ICANN a priority - it is expensive  
>>> to fly
>>> around the world every few months and pay for $20 club sandwiches  
>>> at the
>>> Hilton.
>>> What ICANN is looking for are "consumer groups" who are in fact  
>>> funded by
>>> business - and not true noncommercial organizations, but this will  
>>> take away
>>> a noncommercial council seat.  Another chip away from  
>>> noncommercial users
>>> rights.
>>> The comment about libraries - we have libraries too.  We are proud  
>>> that
>>> Egypt's Library of Alexandria is a new member of NCUC - one of the  
>>> members
>>> that ICANN doesn't think deserves a vote for lack of  
>>> "representation" and
>>> "diversity".   The irony of this barely 10-yr old Internet  
>>> organization
>>> telling the ancient Library of Alexandria it doesn't deserve a  
>>> vote on
>>> Internet policy is beyond arrogance.  It is dangerous.    ICANN  
>>> staff would
>>> drive the Internet into the ground if that is what it took to  
>>> control it.
>>> Robin
>>>
>>> On Aug 6, 2009, at 3:16 AM, Adam Peake wrote:
>>>
>>> At 11:17 AM +0200 8/6/09, William Drake wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Adam,
>>> I'm fine with restating openness to dialogue etc as you suggest.   
>>> Not that
>>> we haven't before.
>>> Would like to pick up on one specific bit:
>>> On Aug 6, 2009, at 9:37 AM, Adam Peake wrote:
>>>
>>> The NCUC does not have membership (or significant membership) from
>>> international consumer organizations (noted in many recent  
>>> comments from the
>>> board and others as a missing constituent in all of ICANN), nor  
>>> for the
>>> largest academic communities, libraries, R&D, etc.
>>>
>>> This may well be "noted" by the board and others but it is  
>>> patently untrue
>>> http://ncuc.syr.edu/members.htm.   Just more disinformation.
>>> (BTW I also noted some on the transcript of the ALAC call, e.g.  
>>> Nick saying
>>> that the NCUC proposal does not allow board approval of
>>> constituencies...facts don't matter if one can't be bothered to  
>>> learn them).
>>> Which is not to say that it wouldn't be great to have more groups  
>>> with
>>> "consumer" in their title etc.
>>>
>>> Bill, I know the NCUC membership has been growing, both  
>>> organizations and
>>> individuals.  But I got the impression ICANN was hoping (expecting)
>>> participation from groups representing new non-commercial players,  
>>> and also
>>> larger national and international representative organizations. I  
>>> think the
>>> commercial side of the user house was expecting this too, at least  
>>> that's
>>> how I read some of the emails.
>>> Example in the library space, ALA has been a member for many  
>>> years, but
>>> there are hundreds of similar organizations around the world, and  
>>> then
>>> there's IFLA <http://www.ifla.org/>
>>> There's been a lot of talk about consumer organizations: most  
>>> countries have
>>> a national consumer organization, or many industry/sector related  
>>> groups,
>>> and there are regional and international bodies (Consumers  
>>> International,
>>> Jeremy Malcolm now works for).  These organizations are being  
>>> encouraged to
>>> form a constituency in their own right, but that shouldn't stop them
>>> transitioning from the NCUC, or NCUC trying to help that  
>>> constituency to
>>> form.
>>> Each year the board selects a member of the NomCom to represent  
>>> "Academia &
>>> Research" (you'd think an NCUC related group).  They just selected  
>>> a guy
>>> called Jan Gruntorád, CEO of CESNET, the Academic research network  
>>> for the
>>> Czech Republic. Past selections have been people with similar  
>>> backgrounds,
>>> large academic R&D networks (NRENs). Board obviously feels that  
>>> it's a
>>> non-commercial community not represented in the NCUC (except for  
>>> KAIST.)
>>> Very difficult to sell ICANN to these types of organization, I  
>>> don't see the
>>> board being able to do a good job of this without help, and the  
>>> NCUC could
>>> do well by offering to help.  It'll take outreach and money.
>>> About Nick's comment.  Perhaps an example of people forgetting  
>>> what was
>>> actually in the NCUC proposal because we've not been asked to  
>>> discuss it,
>>> just concentrating on the SIC.
>>> Adam
>>>
>>> Perhaps this needs to be a larger, more focused discussion  
>>> sometime, but
>>> while I think of it it's worth mentioning that there is also a  
>>> claim in said
>>> circles that our members are not all sufficiently active and hence  
>>> our
>>> diversity is just on paper, which in turn is supposed to allow for  
>>> "capture"
>>> by a small cabal.  This of course is held against us as well, and  
>>> will be
>>> relevant in the NCSG.  As you know, the staff's "Suggested  
>>> Additional
>>> Stakeholder Group Charter Elements to Ensure Transparency, Openness,
>>> Fairness and Representativeness Principles" hold, inter alia, that  
>>> "It is
>>> important that the Board and the community have the ability to  
>>> determine
>>> what parties comprise a particular GNSO structure and who  
>>> participates in an
>>> active way....[hence] Each GNSO structure should collect,  
>>> maintain, and
>>> publish active and inactive member names identified by membership  
>>> category
>>> (if applicable)"
>>> I raised concerns about the reasoning and operational implications  
>>> of this
>>> on the last GNSO call, but they were pretty much brushed aside.
>>> So I guess in some unknown manner members will have to show  
>>> sufficient signs
>>> of life on a frequent enough basis for staff to deem them active and
>>> consider their views to "count" when constituencies state  
>>> positions.  Oh,
>>> and meeting attendance lists must be published and will be  
>>> considered too.
>>> At least, all this undoubtedly will apply to nomcomm constituencies,
>>> business ones may get the usual pass from the standards to which  
>>> we're held.
>>> And now I have to reply to the council list about this claim in  
>>> the SOI that
>>> we are "not yet sufficiently diverse or robust to select all  
>>> six"...sigh.
>>> Pushing back on relentless disinfo does get tiring...
>>> Bill
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> IP JUSTICE
>>> Robin Gross, Executive Director
>>> 1192 Haight Street, San Francisco, CA  94117  USA
>>> p: +1-415-553-6261    f: +1-415-462-6451
>>> w: http://www.ipjustice.org     e: [log in to unmask]
>>>
>>>
>>>
> <EA-IGF 2009 Tentative Program.pdf>