Don't know how many of you guys have ever stumbled upon this map: <http://utangente.free.fr/2003/governingbynetworks.pdf> In 2005 or about I thought it was unlocking the secrets to the universe, but those are obviously the sole province of the Hichhicker's Guide. I agree with your assessment about the map down at icann.org Nicolas On 3/19/2013 11:45 AM, William Drake wrote: > Hi Nicolas > > On Mar 19, 2013, at 4:28 PM, Nicolas Adam <[log in to unmask] > <mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote: > >> Which front page? > > ICANN's >> >> Is it the one from "tangente university" or something like that? >> Sorry to still be missing it. > > Scroll down icann.org <http://icann.org> > > Cheers > > BD >> >> Nicolas >> >> On 13/03/2013 6:16 AM, William Drake wrote: >>> One thing I'd be eager to express a group view on is that abysmal >>> map of the Internet governance ecosystem Fadi's put on the front >>> page. I told him I thought it lame and he was genuinely taken >>> aback, he's been persuaded it unlocks the secrets of the universe… >>> >>> >>> On Mar 13, 2013, at 10:56 AM, William Drake <[log in to unmask] >>> <mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote: >>> >>>> Hi >>>> >>>> Thanks Robin, good notes, one addendum since you didn't have a >>>> access to the Adobe: there was a small bit of discussion about the >>>> one-page "cheat sheets" we agreed in LA to produce summarizing our >>>> positions on key issues for Fadi and his team, so they have some >>>> organized and accessible idea where we're coming from on a range of >>>> issues. There was some back and forth about just how we would do >>>> this and then the discussion got side tracked, but I think the most >>>> popular view was that it should be done at the SG level and >>>> coordinated through the PC >>>> https://community.icann.org/display/gnsononcomstake/Policy+Issue+Summaries. >>>> From my perspective anyway, one would think this should be >>>> antecedent to and more important than some of the other items >>>> mentioned yesterday. Yes we could try to help others and broader >>>> processes by focusing the RAA discussion, supporting EWG, helping >>>> to define "public interest" for ICANN and all the rest, but >>>> shouldn't we first concentrate on getting out our own statements >>>> about our own views as a community, lay down some markers, make it >>>> less easy for ICANN leadership and staff to characterize community >>>> sentiments on a given issue in ways that ignore our views, etc. >>>> >>>> We have three and half weeks until Beijing. Shouldn't we be able >>>> to pull together teams to do concise and spiffy statements on say 6 >>>> topics, e.g. maybe a couple cross-cutting institutional >>>> (transparency, inclusion in the new extra-meeting meetings, >>>> outreach, policy/implementation) and a couple substantive policy >>>> (RAA, registrant right,s INGO, WHOIS, closed generics—both sides—etc). >>>> >>>> If there's sufficient juice to do this, I'd volunteer to help with >>>> the institutional bits, as these synch better with the UC EC work >>>> underway... >>>> >>>> Best, >>>> >>>> Bill >>>> >>>> >>>> On Mar 13, 2013, at 2:51 AM, Robin Gross <[log in to unmask] >>>> <mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> A few notes in advance of receiving the transcript and recording >>>>> from today's NCSG Open Policy Meeting. >>>>> >>>>> Proposal to organize a couple briefing sessions with ICANN staff >>>>> and Registrar negotiators regarding the recent debacle over the >>>>> Registrar Agreement Amendment (RAA) and ICANN unilateralism. >>>>> >>>>> Proposal to organize a briefing session with privacy-concerned >>>>> members of the WHOIS Expert Working Group about how NCSG can >>>>> contribute to the EWG discussions and possible outcomes of EWG. >>>>> >>>>> Proposal that NCSG help define "public interest" discussion at >>>>> ICANN by preparing a list of criteria to consider in the >>>>> evaluation (Wendy holds drafting pen - looking for input). >>>>> >>>>> Below is the list of discussion topics suggested by NCSG members >>>>> for NCSG GNSO Representatives to propose at Thursday's GNSO >>>>> Council Meeting on the topic of Beijing planning. >>>>> >>>>> GNSO & Board Discussion: >>>>> 1. Bottom-up multi-stakeholderism v. ICANN unilateralism >>>>> 2. Definition of "public interest" at ICANN >>>>> 3. ICANN engagement & outreach plans >>>>> 4. New constituencies >>>>> >>>>> GNSO & GAC Discussion: >>>>> 1. Policy vs. Implementation - Roles of GAC & GNSO >>>>> 2. Definition of "public interest" at ICANN >>>>> >>>>> CCnso & GNSO Discussion: >>>>> 1. Rights & Responsibilities document in relation to RAA >>>>> 2. ICANN engagement & outreach plans >>>>> 3. Regulation of CCtlds that look like Gtlds >>>>> >>>>> I apologize if I've mischaracterized anyone's suggested topic >>>>> above. Please correct me. And also if there are other >>>>> suggestions to add to this list, please do. >>>>> >>>>> Thanks, >>>>> Robin >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> 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 <http://www.ipjustice.org/> e: >>>>> [log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >> >