[At-Large] [discuss] cgi.br release regarding Brazil Global MSM on Internet Governance

McTim dogwallah at gmail.com
Mon Jan 13 17:33:31 UTC 2014

Hi Bill,

On Mon, Jan 13, 2014 at 3:36 AM, William Drake <wjdrake at gmail.com> wrote:
> jfc
> If you’re going to cross-post things said on one list to another with a different audience and discussion going on, it would be better form to not cherry pick what you're quoting.  For context, the comment below was in reply to Fadi’s statement in the interview,
>> "The world is seeking and growing ever more anxious to see an independent,
>> globally-accountable ICANN where no one government, no one organization, no
>> one individual has oversight or rights higher than the others,” Chehade
>> says. “I believe this is fundamental to the spirit of the Internet as well.
>> Equal footing for all stakeholders engaged in the management and governance
>> of this global resource.”
>> http://siliconangle.com/blog/2014/01/10/icanns-fadi-chehade-says-we-have-18-months-to-find-new-governance-for-a-single-internet-or-else/?angle=silicon
> On might have thought that statements like this and related moves, along with the Montevideo declaration language on globalization, would lead certain CS people to pause and reconsider a little the narrative they're spinning about the supposed strategies of imperialist forces and the false consciousness and culpability of civil society collaborationists who would like an actual multistakeholder platform to work.  After all, the direction being pushed in addresses their central long-standing complaint, and the resistance to it now comes from other directions where folks are not convinced of the need or comfortable with the possible pace—another MS dialogue that needs to happen.  Nevertheless, some CS folks refuse to take yes for an answer when there’s other agendas in play, so singing the same old song they’ve been stuck on since 2003 is preferred. I guess there’s a whole structure of incentives that remains powerful.  This is frustrating and may help to preclude the very outcome they claim to favor, but who’s got the bandwidth to spend all day every day responding to this stuff.  It’d be easier to convince creationists to consider the evidence for evolution. I’m reluctantly coming to the conclusion that nothing can be done about it so the reality-based community just needs to go forward regardless and live with the catcalls etc.

Can I cross post this to other CS lists?  ;-)


"A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A
route indicates how we get there."  Jon Postel

More information about the At-Large mailing list