Re: IGF Mandate Renewl

[Owen DeLong <owen () delong com>]

> On Dec 7, 2015, at 11:08 , Christopher Morrow <morrowc.lists () gmail com> wrote:
>
> but the ITU is a larger conference over more time, so that's a plus, right?

Not necessarily.

The ITU is much less democratic and fails to incorporate a wide variety of stakeholders.

The IGF isn’t a whole lot better in this regard, but the IGF has the advantage of being a non-binding cooperative 
process
where the ITU can fall back on certain treaty obligations to inflict its will.


> also, it's international, and telephone, so really .. .they are super
> qualified to talk about internet governance stuff.

Sarcasm, right?

Owen


> On Mon, Dec 7, 2015 at 1:52 PM, Owen DeLong <owen () delong com> wrote:
> > The IGF is certainly preferable to moving this role into the ITU.
> >
> > Owen
> >
> > > On Dec 7, 2015, at 07:37 , Steve Mikulasik <Steve.Mikulasik () civeo com> wrote:
> > >
> > > The UN's Internet Governance Forum is up for renewal at the end of 2015, without UN approval they will be shutdown. 
> > > I am relatively new here and haven't seen much discussion about IGF and UN (attempted) involvement in the internet. 
> > > How do people feel about the IGF and should it be renewed by the UN? I can't really figure out what gap they fill 
> > > other than being big conference.
> > >
> > >
> > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_Governance_Forum#2015_mandate_renewal