I can't argue with the fact that ICANN's scope at the moment is narrower and is supposed to limit it to the technical matter of naming and numbering, but perhaps there is a role for ICANN to play that could, over time, see it absorb broader governance capabilities? What I like about the NMI is that it brings non-state actors into internet governance processes, and lends, at least in theory, voice to a more balanced representation of concerns and constituencies than an intergovernmental approach to internet governance would. I appreciate this is not a universally held view and the evidence for a few of my statements is lacking. What I do think is good for the wider internet governance ecosystem, however, is cooperation from academia, civil society, end-users, government, and industry. It's for that reason that I think it would be unfortunate if ICANN was to abandon the NMI. Ayden On Mon, Feb 29, 2016 at 3:06 AM, Mueller, Milton L <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
Ayden Férdeline |