Re: [CNSIG-Council] .ORG and CN

Many EU Chapters are doing so: https://www.isoc.ch/archives/3859 https://www.isoc.fr/vente-du-point-org/ https://www.isoc.cat/isoc/pir-org-internet-society-ethos-capital-isoc-cat-p…

And exactly because CNs are used as an excuse in this debate, I think it is a matter of credibility for CNSIG to act as representative for CNs all over the world to take a position based on values and not financial returns.

But if the majority here thinks that "real politiks" is the best strategy, I understand and I would simply exclude myself from this group.

So, I really understand that people are afraid to loose critical support for their projects and it is not a coincidence that it is mostly EU chapters that have publicly opposed the .ORG sale.

But life is full of hard choices, and I have made mine even if in a more "comfortable" position than others (but not sure for how long): Dignity is more important, and more healthy, than dirty money :-)

On 07.12.19 20:40, novaes(a)riseup.net wrote: > Hi Panos, all > > Great to hear from you! > > Personally, I think this decision is a disaster for the Internet in > general, not only for the "reputation" of ISOC. > > If CNSIG would like to take a position, maybe it's time to do it now > (even though it would mean not really much in the process in my > opinion). I vote against selling a common good to Ethos Capital. > > My aim was to advise that ISOC is using CN as an excuse, and we should > be aware of it. Besides the advice, as a SIG inside ISOC, real politiks > could be useful for the development of CN; if not now, in the near > future, CNSIG could play an important role in demanding programs and > funds based on ISOC own public discourse, that's all. > > On 2019-12-07 15:28, panayotis antoniadis wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> Just to say that I am involved in this debate through the ISOC >> Switzerland Chapter, which has joined the "opposition" to this decision >> together with a few other chapters, especially because of the >> non-transparent way that this was made. >> >> My opinion is that independently from the decision making process, this >> is a bad development that can harm significantly the reputation of ISOC. >> I am not sure if it is still possible to stop it, but I don't feel like >> "building on it", at least not at this stage. >> >> For now I would ask if the CNSIG would be willing to take actually a >> position on the selling of .org to a private firm. >> >> Btw, the Swiss chapter recently received the news that we got a Beyond >> the Net Grant to run a platform (a monthly gathering in NetHood's new >> space in Zurich, http://langstrasse200.ch/) for "digital self-defense" >> in collaboration with different organizations including the >> pep.foundation, CCC Switzerland, the University of Zurich and more. >> >> Best, >> >> Panos. >> >> >> >> On 05.12.19 23:20, novaes(a)riseup.net wrote: >>> Dear Colleagues, >>> >>> You're probably aware of the fact that ISOC sold .org to Ethos Capital >>> (I was just reading the transcript): >>> >>> https://higherlogicdownload.s3.amazonaws.com/INTERNETSOCIETY/9326b863-2164-…) >>> >>> What seems relevant for CNSIG is that one of the arguments used to >>> justify the transaction was "connecting the unconnected": >>> >>> "Gonzalo Camarillo: So this actually allows us to fulfill the mission, >>> which I think has been stated several times. It's very wide and when it >>> comes, for example, with connecting the unconnected, we are talking >>> about like 4 billion people that could be basically positively affected >>> with this". (p.26) >>> >>> Maybe it would be opportune for the CNSIG to organize it better in order >>> to demand funds/programs more specifically designed to CN goals (I take >>> this moment to congratulate Sarantaporo!). What do you think? >>> >>> all best, >>> >>> Thiago