I want to bring more focus to my Food for Though comments about the Forum NETmundial Initiative. There are two dimensions to civil society participation in Internet issues. One dimension, to be applauded, is the dedicated volunteer effort at influencing policy and implementation, and pushing for multistakeholder processes in policy development and implementation. Warts, challenges and all, ICANN is the poster child organization here. The other dimension, of concern, is the pressing need to broadening and deepening civil society stakeholder awareness and engagement in the issues surrounding the Internet. This is crucial and it is where civil society efforts have been weak. [/The current NCSG voters roll problem is current exhibit #1/] The occasion of the Initiative’s consultative dialogue can be used to advance awareness and engagement in the broader issues surrounding governance. My comment about the Forum NETmundial initiative was to prompt thought. It comes from neither a hope about, nor an endorsement of, the initiative. The first part of the comment was background; a concise overview of the intent of the initiative without editorial comment other than to suggest that yet another 900 pound governance gorilla is being considered here. I personally fear the risk that this might result in an inadequate multistakeholder entity, with inadequate stakeholder accountability. The second part was to prompt a stronger civil society strategy for the ensuing dialogue. Whether the initiative produces a 900 pound gorilla, or a 90 pound scarecrow, the interim dialogue and consultation are an opportunity to broaden awareness and engagement across stakeholder constituencies. Without that, civil society multistakeholder involvement will remain thin and suffer its own top-down, accountability, and legitimacy challenges. The Initiative is one more opportunity for civil society activists to turn around 180 degrees and do some housekeeping and homework with their own constituencies, work that is long overdue. Sam L.