I have many things that I would like to discuss, and little time as all
of you :-)
So, I thought to start from this question: What happened at the IGF?
From my side, one was the main issue raised in all public and private
discussions: what is a community network? what is included in the
concept and what is not?
Given that one of our most important forthcoming tasks is the Global
Community Networks Summit, I think we need to further discuss this issue
both through e-mail and in the next confcall (I am preparing the doodle
Going back to the IGF, I gave a talk at WS279 "Scaling community
networks: exploring blockchain and efficient investment strategies",
which I have now transformed to a blog entry here:
What is interesting is that after this intervention I received threats
and personal attacks by the CEO of Ammbr research labs. E.g.,
Recently, the same person proudly announced collaboration of Ammbr with
the US army:
Yet this company is still openly supported by guifi.net
Tupanada, as you can see at http://ammbr.com
, which makes me feel rather
uncomfortable and I am really thinking if I actually belong to this
Anyway, if the majority here agrees that projects like Ammbr fall
outside even the most loose borders of what could be considered a
Community Network, I propose to produce a definition or a set of
principles that makes this incompatibility as explicit and obvious as
For example, the questions of "profit" is rather complicated and it has
been already pointed out that it is different to follow a "cost-based"
policy toward the sustainability of a CN compared to a "growth-based" or
"speculation-based" one toward "fortune-making".
But I think the question of "money" should be brought not only in terms
of profit but also in terms of locality.
For example, imho it is perfectly fine that guifi.net
provides a common
infrastructure for supporting local businesses but not at all that it
supports a company who wishes to extract value abroad as argued in my
(Btw, I really hope that this decision by guifi.net
et al. is retracted
soon otherwise I will have to quit all networks and organizations
including Ammbr supporters since I don't want to have any relationship
with Ammbr, not even a "two hop away" one.)
Of course, there is always some extraction of value since the equipment
is manufactured abroad anyway. And the liberouter is not an exception.
But there is a difference between "just" equipment (even "closed" one
like ubiquiti's routers) and equipment that includes a "speculation
engine" like the Ammbr router (not to mention the support of military
Anyway. Just some first thoughts to advance the discussion with some
concrete examples of what is "in" and what is "out".
In any case, I am afraid that the game for the "Community Networks"
brand is lost already and the only hope (for me) is if we come up with
(and try to defend better) a "subcategory" of CNs, perhaps "libre
networks" or something like this :-)
On 01.12.18 03:29, mai(a)peoplesopen.net wrote:
How did this meeting go? I'd love to see any notes from it or maybe we can organize
an online video chat for anyone to hear about how the discussions went. Would anyone else
be interested in that?
October 21, 2018 4:54 PM, mai(a)peoplesopen.net wrote:
Great topics to tackle during our meeting, Nico.
If we need to, we can prioritize a few of them for
deeper discussions and talk about how we want to progress on the others asynchronously,
I agree with panayotis that we should meet during the IGF, if not in addition to a
afterwards. I'd like to be able to attend a meeting after the IGF but I will be
the days on 15 and 16 Nov as I have other all-day commitments. If it's during the
IGF then maybe we
could have a meeting room for a morning or afternoon at the venue and save on that cost.
October 21, 2018 3:46 AM, "panayotis antoniadis" <panayotis(a)nethood.org>
> Hi all,
> I added my info at the pad, and I propose to include all CNSIG-related
> events to have an idea of available slots for a meeting.
> I think it would be nice to organize a CNSIG-only meeting anyway in the
> "middle" of the event, e.g., on the 13th after the GISWatch book launch
> or later.
> (For the 15th there are discussions for a wider meeting and some people
> might not be there or leaving that day, and in any case having a 2nd
> CNSIG meeting would be also nice :-)
> Looking forward!
> On 21.10.18 08:33, Vasilis Chryssos wrote:
>> I would also like to add a question about the update of the work that
>> we have done until now. It would be useful to know where we stand,
>> when planning for where we want to go.
>> btw: I created the following pad to put down information about our
>> arrival / departure, so that we don't clutter this thread. If you
>> think it is a good idea, please go ahead and use it!!
>> On Sun, Oct 21, 2018, 1:27 AM Nicolás Echániz
>> <nicoechaniz(a)altermundi.net <mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org>>
>> On 10/17/2018 03:05 PM, mai(a)peoplesopen.net
>> <mailto:email@example.com> wrote:
> Hi there,
> Thanks for starting this thread, Nico.
> There's a strong chance that I will be at the IGF next month (for my
> other digital policy job) and can be there to represent Sudo
> Mesh/People's Open Network from Oakland, U.S. So I guess that
>> brings us
> up to 11 of 14 CNSIG members who will be there? : ]
>> More reason to have a meeting there :)
>> Regarding a possible agenda for our meeting.
>> There are a couple of things I would like to discuss
>> 1) what is the role of our Trusted Advisors, how do we invite them to
>> get more involved in the CNSIG?
>> 2) LAC Summit document. Does the global CNSIG wish to discuss
>> support the document?
>> 3) Regional CNSIG groups. We have created the LAC CNSIG group, Sol is
>> working on the African group. Does it make sense to create similar
>> initiatives for other regions? How do regional groups integrate
>> with the
>> global CNSIG.
>> 4) Global Community Networks summit. Do we want to be in charge of
>> an event? Who can help make it happen? ISOC will very probably provide
>> funding during 2019.
>> 5) Why have we created the CNSIG and what do we want to do with it?
>> These are not in order of importance, but they are matters I'd like to
>> exchange views about.
>> Those of you who are attending the IGF, are you planning to stay until
>> the 15th ? (the day after) or are you leaving on the 14th?
>> Should we plan for a meeting during an afternoon after IGF activities?
>> Or is it better to do it on the 15th?
>>  http://cnsig.info/assets/final-document_CLRC-2018.pdf
>> Council mailing list
>> Council(a)lists.cnsig.info <mailto:Council@lists.cnsig.info>
>> Council mailing list
> Council mailing list
Council mailing list