> On Dec 7, 2015, at 11:08 , Christopher Morrow <morrowc.li...@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 <o...@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.mikula...@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 >>> >>> >>
