Thanks, Robin, for consulting us and setting out the pros and cons. I share Ed's and Sam's allergy to the WEF conception of the world and its inability to accommodate a genuinely bottom-up process. I also worry about us sharing our legitimacy with a flawed initiative - however hard CGI works to make it bottom-up. We can already see how a letter of interest can be used to co-opt us into something that serves others' agenda, without us having any meaningful or positive impact. However, I agree with Matthew that we should see what concessions or agreements we could extract that might reduce our political exposure and allow us to make a positive impact. So my take is a 'yes, but only if we pick our own 'reps', they understand we are not a corporation - i.e. participation doesn't necessarily deliver agreement with all possible outcomes - and proper input into the project's outputs. But those are a lot of ifs, and I leave it to people more informed/involved to figure out if they can be delivered. Maria On 19 November 2014 11:05, Wisdom Donkor <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > Hello all, > > Haven followed the processing leading to this very initiative, The propose > revised documents lack openness accountability and transparency. The > question is, is the mission and vision of this very suppose initiative > enure to the benefits of all stakeholders? the an answer to me is a BIG NO. > I think to save the interest of all stakeholders the NMI should be taken > back to the drawing board for a thorough review. > > Regards, > > WISDOM DONKOR > Sosftware / Network Engineer > Web/Open Government Platform Portal Specialist > Post Office Box CT. 2439, Cantonments, Accra, Ghana > Tel; +233 20 812881 > Email: [log in to unmask] > [log in to unmask] > [log in to unmask] > Skype: wisdom_dk > facebook: facebook@wisdom_dk > Website: www.nita.gov.gh / www.data.gov.gh > www.isoc.gh / www.itag.org.gh > > > On Tue, Nov 18, 2014 at 6:15 PM, Robin Gross <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > >> Folks, >> >> Should NCSG participate in the NetMundial Initiative? We are still >> waiting for confirmation from its secretariat as to whether or not civil >> society will be allowed to select all of its own representatives to the >> "coordination council" or if the secretariat will reserve the right to >> select some of civil society's representatives for us. (The NMI >> secretariat have civil society orgs in mind who will be bring publicity and >> good PR to their project, but don't actually engage on these issues). >> >> In my mind this is a critical question, and since the secretariat has >> been unwilling to confirm this yet, I remain skeptical of the initiative >> and our "legitimization" of it; however if the response from the >> secretariat is that they will play a "hands off" role in terms of civil >> society representatives, I'll be happy to change my mind. >> >> It is important that this initiative, in practice, live up the Netmundial >> principles (including stakeholders select their own representatives). If >> the NMI organizers cannot confirm that much, then it is just an >> appropriation of the NetMundial label without the principles that we worked >> very hard in Sao Paulo to achieve. >> >> At this point, while we wait for clarification from NMI's secretariat, >> each of the groups in the CSCG are asked to consider if they believe they >> should participate in the initiative. So I ask this of NCSG. JustNet >> Coalition has already decided against it. Importantly, ISOC has said it >> will not participate in the initiative or its coordination council because >> it lacks openness, bottom-up orientation, accountability, and transparency >> in its structure and operations. >> >> We've heard that Fadi is touting CSCG's letter to the secretariat asking >> to select the civil society representatives as evidence of civil society's >> support for his initiative and as "legitimizing" the NMI. What Fadi >> doesn't understand yet, however, is that our sending the letter requesting >> to be involved is not what "legitimizes" NMI. It is whether NMI actually >> "walks the talk" and permits civil society to, in fact, make our own >> determinations for who should represent us - and *in practice* - not >> just words - live up the NetMundial principles of bottom-up governance, >> openness, transparency, accountability, etc. >> >> A few Pro & Con arguments below. Please send your thoughts. I'll update >> as soon as we have some news one way or the other from the NMI secretariat. >> >> Thanks, >> Robin >> >> >> FOR INVOLVEMENT >> >> With ITU a governments only forum and no real will to change, and IGF as >> a forum with no power to make recommendations or take decisions and again >> no will to change, there is no credible venue to initiate action on non >> technical issues or issues not within the remit of Istar organisations >> These would include surveillance issues, human rights issues, net >> neutrality issues, to name a few. >> >> The solid commitment to NetMundial principles promised, if carried out in >> practice, would create a credible and open initiative >> >> There is a need for a representative forum capable of moving us forward >> on a range of issues not covered by existing institutions >> >> Participation is strongly supported by some sections of civil society >> >> >> >> AGAINST INVOLVEMENT >> >> The last thing we need is a corporate takeover of internet governance and >> this could become that >> >> ISOC has withdrawn >> >> Participation is strongly opposed by some sections of civil society >> >> This initiative has a track record of poor communication >> >> Not bottom-up or transparent so far >> >> >> >> On Nov 17, 2014, at 3:22 PM, Robin Gross wrote: >> >> Statement from the Civil Society Coordination Group (CSCG) from today. CSCG >> is comprised of the Internet Governance civil society networks of NCSG, >> APC, Best Bits, JustNet, Diplo Foundation, Internet Governance Caucus, and >> Civicus. - Robin >> >> *UPDATE ON CIVIL SOCIETY PARTICIPATION IN NET MUNDIAL INITIATIVE.* >> >> Please note that Internet Governance Civil Society Coordination Group >> (CSCG) participation in the new Net Mundial initiative is still under >> consideration. CSCG has written to the NMI Secretariat and Transitional >> Council suggesting that it play a co-ordinating role in the selection of >> civil society representatives in a coordinated bottom up manner, rather >> than these decisions being made by the Transitional Council (which has no >> civil society representation). This is still under discussion; however, we >> do not yet have a proposal with sufficient clarity for member coalitions to >> be able to decide on participation or not. While Just Net Coalition (JNC) >> has already determined it will not participate, other members are waiting >> for clarity on our proposal for a bottom up and inclusive procedure for >> determining civil society representatives before making any final decisions >> on participation. >> >> Our letter to the NMI Secretariat and Transitional Council in no way >> signifies that any or all CS organisations have made a final decision on >> whether to engage with the NMI in a formal selection process or to >> participate in the NMI process. >> >> >> >> >