Thank you for sharing this Constanze! Indeed, the more we work together, the more we will accomplish things. I am sure of that. Collaboration is how we built the Internet, and and I firmly believe collaboration and openness is how we will continue to ensure it evolves in a way that is advantageous and beneficial to humanity.
-Michael On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 6:39 PM, <[email protected]> wrote: > We should go on and make them aware from what we learned: > > For all politicians there is the aim to bring in content – we have the > process. J > > > > For you interest our bp from the last 6 months: > > New role of public administration and governments > > > > The world of Internet is growing. In this global Internet world not only > ISPs are the legitimate users and stakeholders but also citizens at home > with upcoming smart home solutions, companies with industry 4.0 solutions, > worldwide located enterprises or governments and public administrations. > The deployment of IPv6 is the main issue to keep the internet running and > we have to ensure requirements of all new stakeholders into account. About > this communication way and the role of public administration in the > community I told you last year. > > But now we furthermore see a change in hierarchic organizations as well. > > The work of multistakeholder groups is based on maillinglists. These are > driven by events , have topics for specialists and need fast decisions. In > hierarchical organizations we can join these lists on working level, but we > have to use the decissionmaking process to continue. And this is a problem > because this structure is to slow to work with multistakeholder groups. > > So we need more longterm strategies on high levels and concrete concepts > and the mandate to bring in decissions on working levels . > > . To reflect more security, technical, organizational, economic, social > and political constraints and to ensure the internet rules, we have to > figure out a new “Thinking” and new “Cooperation Forms”. > > Regards > > Constanze > > > > > > > > > > > > *Von:* cooperation-wg [mailto:[email protected]] *Im > Auftrag von *Michael Oghia > *Gesendet:* Donnerstag, 23. Juni 2016 16:12 > *An:* Gordon Lennox > *Cc:* Cooperation WG > *Betreff:* [BMI-SPAM-Verdacht] Re: [cooperation-wg] cooperation-wg > Digest, Vol 53, Issue 16 > > > > I completely agree with you Gordon, good points. > > > > My strategy that I've really learned from others is to positively impact > decisions through relationship building. I find it an effective one, and > once a decision maker understands that the community's intentions are > positive (or at least non-threatening), then perhaps they are more keen to > listen. With that said, DiploFoundation, for instance, does a lot of work > with diplomats and a lot of training with government. > > > > In the end I think it's important to remember that, regardless of politics > and power, the people making decisions -- the politicians, bureaucrats, > etc. -- are still people. Just people. > > > -Michael > > > > > > On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 5:01 PM, Gordon Lennox <[email protected]> > wrote: > > I agree. > > One of the nice things about this community is that you ask a question and > you get a response. > > But when it comes to governments, both politicians and officials, it is > not always about a lack of understanding. It can be about a very strong > disagreement about values. > > I would add though that often it is not even just about “governments”. > Even in a government from a particular culture and of a certain flavour > there can be very strong internal / inter-departmental disagreements. And > it is not always the “good guys” who have clue. > > Gordon > > > > > On 23 Jun 2016, at 15:37, Johan Helsingius <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > The tricky ones are the ones where the views of the community > > and the views of (some) governments are in conflict, and > > activism, rather than education, is what is needed. In that > > case we need to be very clear about who represents whom. > > >
