Hi All

I have only recently joined here; I come from a lower-middle class background, self-taught machine language engineer, who inevitably got involved with Linux and could use that skill to build a network - and I have learned about money, organization, government, the economy, business, strategy, marketing, poverty, and work-social life balance, through the act of building a small wireless ISP - which has now grown up, and has served more than 15 000 customers (ARPU <$10) while providing employment and stable incomes to more than 25 people, over the course of 10 years. We grew organically, solely from our own profits, and only very recently qualified for our first investment. 

I now find myself with some time on my hands, and after staying in a township in South Africa for a few days, I realized that this great need of providing better access to resources and information to economically empower the poor, is now, 10 years later, despite many "bold things", barely even been touched. 

Besides national operators literally raking in $100k+/monthly from even some of the smallest township areas (and larger rural areas), in exchange for a handful of barely usable MB of data or minutes of airtime, literally all is see is a handful of tiny specious, some expensive, tax-paid installations, miniscqule fractions of marketing budgets - all for a picture to be shown during a regulatory hearing or conference, with an accompanying singular good story that completely misrepresents anything capable of yielding long-term results on the ground.  

Yet, I have, like I'm sure many of you have - during the run of things, learned a lot of lessons - and have seen many great - but isolated - sucess stories - few of them linked to government or corporate funding efforts, and most of them running in isolation. 

I have just started reading this draft (https://pad.codigosur.org/GuadalajaraDeclaration), and I have to say that I strongly disagree with the wording of this sentence in the opening paragraph:

There is no business case for extending coverage based on the current operational models of traditional network operators and alternative strategies may face nearly-insurmountable regulatory hurdles. There is no business case for extending coverage based on the current operational models of traditional network operators and alternative strategies may face nearly-insurmountable regulatory hurdles. 

Perhaps it's just the order of the words, because there are several business cases that I've seen work wonders, one on which I'm working on right now, and in which I have found my new calling and "one thing" for the forseeable future. 

Or perhaps there really is no business case in the "current operational models of traditional network operators" - (does not seem to hold in areas of Mozambique - but this demands more research) - but if there is any business case whatsoever, surely there can be - and before a bold statement such as this is made, should it not perhaps be properly researched and backed - before we shut ourselves out of the mainstream economy by chasing them away up-front?

You have to ask yourselves who it is you want to attract, and align with, in this forum - and who you stand to gain the most from? I don't think any progress can be made thrugh sowing conflict or fragmentation - our whole goal should be to bring people together - all people from all facets. 

Personally, I think the crux of the matter is in educating the public about the nature and role of government, as well as that of competition, and how money interacts with these two in the face of scarce resources - not through words or metaphors or stories, or by focusing on how the internet came about as a giant collaboration, even held together by software that was build in a similar fashion, necessarily, but through practical illustration and first hand experience that will lead them to draw their own, more accurate conclusions, on the limits of government, its mandate to measure way before even trying to control, and how they can use their wallet to feed- and hold companies accountable and promote the better ones over the rest. 

Then, when we get to your "Community Network" points - something is missing - reliable transit capacity might quickly become a scarce resource - or lend itself to abuse - how will its allocation and use be decided and monitored? What is the meaning of the word "free" in this context? Free as in "gratis" or free as in neutral? Should it apply to everything, or to only a portion - and how big a portion? Should it apply all the time, or only within certai limits - and if so, when and how and why?

Improving capacity and reliability will cost money and resources - and that cost should be recovarable proportionally to how it's used. 

Sure, confining it solely to monetary cost might not be fair, considering the unequal distribution of money, especially in these areas - which is why more careful work needs to be done around the wording here. 

A good functioning community network model is a perfect opportunity to teach people about markets, money and economies - yet it should not exclude the "have-nots" - while it should be able to draw from the benefit of the "haves".

Perhaps mobile operators can solve this problem rather quickly, with a simple "future tax exemption" incentive - but would that deprive us of a valuable, perhaps needed, learning and teaching opportunity?

Have any of you run any big, shared networks? Let your voice be heard!

Then, on a minor point -  http://blog.oxforddictionaries.com/2016/04/should-you-capitalize-internet/ - it's undecided - but the more you stop capitalizing "internet", the more it looks normal - and indeed, as commonplace as it should be - rather than this insurmountable obstacle hiding behind a tall wall that barely anyone can fathom. 

Just my thoughts. Interact with me anytime, or on twitter @dagelf

Coenraad Loubser

Wireless Internet Services & Hardware (Pty) Ltd.
210 Long Street, Cape Town, 8001, ZA

Office: +27 21 481 1824
Skype: Coenraad_Loubser
Email: coenraad@wish.org.za
Cell: +27 73 772 1223
Web: http://wish.org.za

-- Spending Money is like watering a plant.

On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 11:12 AM, <dc3-request@listas.altermundi.net> wrote:
Send DC3 mailing list submissions to
        dc3@listas.altermundi.net

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
        https://listas.altermundi.net/mailman/listinfo/dc3
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
        dc3-request@listas.altermundi.net

You can reach the person managing the list at
        dc3-owner@listas.altermundi.net

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of DC3 digest..."


Today's Topics:

   1. Re: Declaration on Community Connectivity v.0 (Nicol?s Ech?niz)
   2. RES:  Declaration on Community Connectivity v.0
      (Instituto Bem Estar Brasil)


----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message: 1
Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2016 01:09:44 -0300
From: Nicol?s Ech?niz <nicoechaniz@altermundi.net>
To: Dynamic Coalition on Community Connectivity
        <dc3@listas.altermundi.net>
Subject: Re: [DC3] Declaration on Community Connectivity v.0
Message-ID: <57EDE588.4070705@altermundi.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252

I like this first draft. Thanks Luca for the systematizing effort!


I edited the pad a bit.

changed "last mile" for "first square mile" (Bob and I agree on this,
but if the majority is against we can reverse it).

Also added points e) and f) regarding peering and transit which we
(AlterMundi) consider basic principles. Point f) is a "viral" clause.

Of course open to discussion.


Cheers!
Nico


On 09/29/2016 09:52 AM, Luca Belli wrote:
> Hi all,
>
>
>
> I have tried to consolidate the ideas put forward in this list regarding
> a Declaration to be presented at the IGF.
>
> I have added the draft to the pad created by Nico to collect our ideas
> https://pad.codigosur.org/GuadalajaraDeclaration
>
> You can also find this ?Draft Zero? in attachment.
>
> Please, do not hesitate to share your comments on the draft or to modify
> the text using the pad.
>
>
>
> I suggest we submit this first draft to the IGF Secretariat, to signify
> that we want it to be discussed during the IGF Main Session on Dynamic
> Coalitions (see the Secretariat?s email below). Then, we will have the
> next month to discuss and modify/refine the text of the Declaration and
> submit a second draft by 1 November (see email below). Lastly, we can
> discuss the Declaration at our pre-IGF event, on 5 December. What do you
> think?
>
>
>
> Please share your thoughts on this by *15 October*, so that we have time
> to elaborate a second draft and discuss it on the list.
>
> All the best
>
> Luca
>
> FGV Direito Rio
>
>
>
> *Luca Belli, PhD*
> /Senior Researcher/
> /Head of /*/Internet Governance @ FGV
> <http://internet-governance.fgv.br/>/*//luca.belli@fgv.br
> +55 21 3799 *5763*//
>
> http://www.fgv.br/mailing/Direito_Rio/assinatura_email/Ondas.png
>
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: *Eleonora Anna MAZZUCCHI* <EMAZZUCCHI@unog.ch
> <mailto:EMAZZUCCHI@unog.ch>>
> Date: 5 September 2016 at 20:33
> Subject: [DC3] IGF 2016 Main Session: Papers from DCs
> To: dc@intgovforum.org <mailto:dc@intgovforum.org>
> Cc: Markus Kummer <kummer.markus@gmail.com
> <mailto:kummer.markus@gmail.com>>, Avri Doria <avri@acm.org
> <mailto:avri@acm.org>>
>
>
> Dear All,
>
> Thank you for continuing to contribute to the planning for Dynamic
> Coalitions' main session at IGF 2016!
>
> With apologies for cross-posting (!),  as we move closer to the meeting
> and begin to refine the content of the session, all DCs should kindly
> note the *requirement to produce individual substantive papers. *As
> agreed during DC Coordination meetings, submission of the paper will be
> necessary for the DC to participate in the main session. The deadline
> for a first draft is *30 September 2016.*
>
> Further details on the paper are included below this message and as an
> attachment. The information is also available on the DCs Coordination
> page
> <https://www.intgovforum.org/cms/dynamiccoalitions/dc-coordination>,
> together with any other documents pertaining to main session planning.
>
> Please do not hesitate to reach out to the Secretariat for any questions
> or feedback on this! We would be happy to help.
>
>
> Very best,
>
> Eleonora
> IGF Secretariat
>
>
>
>
>
>  *IGF 2016 DCs Main Session: Substantive Paper *
>
> During discussions in DC coordination meetings, it was agreed each DC
> would produce a substantive paper by deadline in order to participate in
> the DCs Main Session this year.
> The papers will serve as collective background material for the session
> and be put forward individually for feedback, both in advance of the IGF
> and during the IGF itself. It was proposed and agreed that feedback be
> collected through online and hard-copy DC issue surveys (or ?Idea Rating
> Sheets?), piloted at IGF 2015.
>
> Bearing in mind many DCs have produced substantive papers in years past,
> or do so on a regular basis and introduce their work into other fora,
> *the paper for the main session can build on or be an updated version of
> any of this previous work. *It is only essential that the DC be able to
> cull from the paper *key ideas * for discussion in the main session and
> for receiving feedback before and during the meeting.
>
> *_Timeline & Process for Main Session Paper _*
>
> -The *initial draft * should be emailed to the Secretariat
> (emazzucchi@unog.ch <mailto:emazzucchi@unog.ch>) by *Friday, 30
> September 2016, midnight UTC, *for the DC to qualify for main session
> participation.
>
> -A *second draft*, as well as the extraction of *five key points for
> aligning with the DC issue surveys, *should be completed on/ about *1
> November. *This also conforms with the deadline for the IGF Best
> Practice Forum (BPF) outputs and with the general practice of submitting
> papers 6 weeks ahead of a meeting.
>
> -An email to the IGF community promoting the papers and the online
> version of the DC issue surveys is sent on/ about *1 November. *
>
> -The DCs? shared IGF booth opens with the hard-copy version of the
> papers, as well as DC issue surveys, from *6 December. *
>
> *_General Paper Guidelines_***
>
> - The paper should not exceed 5 pages.
>
> - Should not read as an ?activities report? and should contain a few
> thought-provoking issues/questions that can be put to IGF participants.
>
> -Should be as inclusive as possible of the views and ideas of the DC?s
> constituent members .
>
>
> */For any questions/feedback please feel free to reach out to the
> Secretariat at /**/emazzucchi@unog.ch/* <mailto:emazzucchi@unog.ch>*/! /*
> _______________________________________________
> DC3 mailing list
> DC3@listas.altermundi.net <mailto:DC3@listas.altermundi.net>
> https://listas.altermundi.net/mailman/listinfo/dc3
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> This body part will be downloaded on demand.
>



------------------------------

Message: 2
Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2016 06:11:57 -0300
From: "Instituto Bem Estar Brasil" <instituto@bemestarbrasil.org.br>
To: "'Dynamic Coalition on Community Connectivity'"
        <dc3@listas.altermundi.net>
Subject: [DC3] RES:  Declaration on Community Connectivity v.0
Message-ID:
        <!&!AAAAAAAAAAAYAAAAAAAAAKDlfaSMukZArgTZ5g+ZrkTCgAAAEAAAAIg7JCkIutxCrb8QBGNNT70BAAAAAA==@bemestarbrasil.org.br>

Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Hi all, i put some inputs in the pad for consideration or discards.



Very good the declaration.



I just have a doubt about the principles and design of the community
network.  One thing is to create QoS based on a comercial interests and
another is a democratically decision by the community to guarantee the best
quality of the net.  In mesh networks could be included best practices when
nodes operates P2P for example and in decentralized networks with servers
controlling the flow maybe the vote for democratic rules of QoS. I know I
know I know, this is a run out of the net neutrality, but some mechanism
social ou technical needs to be created when some users are causing heavy
traffic and damaging the hole network.



How to prevent this in wifi networks without democratic QoS rules or
indication of good practices?







De: dc3-bounces@listas.altermundi.net
[mailto:dc3-bounces@listas.altermundi.net] Em nome de Luca Belli
Enviada em: quinta-feira, 29 de setembro de 2016 09:53
Para: Dynamic Coalition on Community Connectivity
Assunto: [DC3] Declaration on Community Connectivity v.0



Hi all,



I have tried to consolidate the ideas put forward in this list regarding a
Declaration to be presented at the IGF.

I have added the draft to the pad created by Nico to collect our ideas
https://pad.codigosur.org/GuadalajaraDeclaration

You can also find this "Draft Zero" in attachment.

Please, do not hesitate to share your comments on the draft or to modify the
text using the pad.



I suggest we submit this first draft to the IGF Secretariat, to signify that
we want it to be discussed during the IGF Main Session on Dynamic Coalitions
(see the Secretariat's email below). Then, we will have the next month to
discuss and modify/refine the text of the Declaration and submit a second
draft by 1 November (see email below). Lastly, we can discuss the
Declaration at our pre-IGF event, on 5 December. What do you think?



Please share your thoughts on this by 15 October, so that we have time to
elaborate a second draft and discuss it on the list.

All the best

Luca


 FGV Direito Rio
<http://www.fgv.br/mailing/Direito_Rio/assinatura_email/Marca_FGV_Direito_Ri
o.png>

Luca Belli, PhD
Senior Researcher
Head of  <http://internet-governance.fgv.br/> Internet Governance @ FGV
luca.belli@fgv.br
+55 21 3799 5763


 http://www.fgv.br/mailing/Direito_Rio/assinatura_email/Ondas.png



---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Eleonora Anna MAZZUCCHI < <mailto:EMAZZUCCHI@unog.ch>
EMAZZUCCHI@unog.ch>
Date: 5 September 2016 at 20:33
Subject: [DC3] IGF 2016 Main Session: Papers from DCs
To:  <mailto:dc@intgovforum.org> dc@intgovforum.org
Cc: Markus Kummer < <mailto:kummer.markus@gmail.com>
kummer.markus@gmail.com>, Avri Doria < <mailto:avri@acm.org> avri@acm.org>


Dear All,

Thank you for continuing to contribute to the planning for Dynamic
Coalitions' main session at IGF 2016!

With apologies for cross-posting (!),  as we move closer to the meeting and
begin to refine the content of the session, all DCs should kindly note the
requirement to produce individual substantive papers. As agreed during DC
Coordination meetings, submission of the paper will be necessary for the DC
to participate in the main session. The deadline for a first draft is 30
September 2016.

Further details on the paper are included below this message and as an
attachment. The information is also available on the
<https://www.intgovforum.org/cms/dynamiccoalitions/dc-coordination> DCs
Coordination page, together with any other documents pertaining to main
session planning.

Please do not hesitate to reach out to the Secretariat for any questions or
feedback on this! We would be happy to help.


Very best,

Eleonora
IGF Secretariat





 IGF 2016 DCs Main Session: Substantive Paper

During discussions in DC coordination meetings, it was agreed each DC would
produce a substantive paper by deadline in order to participate in the DCs
Main Session this year.
The papers will serve as collective background material for the session and
be put forward individually for feedback, both in advance of the IGF and
during the IGF itself. It was proposed and agreed that feedback be collected
through online and hard-copy DC issue surveys (or 'Idea Rating Sheets'),
piloted at IGF 2015.

Bearing in mind many DCs have produced substantive papers in years past, or
do so on a regular basis and introduce their work into other fora, the paper
for the main session can build on or be an updated version of any of this
previous work. It is only essential that the DC be able to cull from the
paper key ideas for discussion in the main session and for receiving
feedback before and during the meeting.

Timeline & Process for Main Session Paper

-The initial draft should be emailed to the Secretariat (
<mailto:emazzucchi@unog.ch> emazzucchi@unog.ch) by Friday, 30 September
2016, midnight UTC, for the DC to qualify for main session participation.

-A second draft, as well as the extraction of five key points for aligning
with the DC issue surveys, should be completed on/ about 1 November. This
also conforms with the deadline for the IGF Best Practice Forum (BPF)
outputs and with the general practice of submitting papers 6 weeks ahead of
a meeting.

-An email to the IGF community promoting the papers and the online version
of the DC issue surveys is sent on/ about 1 November.

-The DCs' shared IGF booth opens with the hard-copy version of the papers,
as well as DC issue surveys, from 6 December.

General Paper Guidelines

- The paper should not exceed 5 pages.

- Should not read as an "activities report" and should contain a few
thought-provoking issues/questions that can be put to IGF participants.

-Should be as inclusive as possible of the views and ideas of the DC's
constituent members .


For any questions/feedback please feel free to reach out to the Secretariat
at  <mailto:emazzucchi@unog.ch> emazzucchi@unog.ch !
_______________________________________________
DC3 mailing list
 <mailto:DC3@listas.altermundi.net> DC3@listas.altermundi.net
 <https://listas.altermundi.net/mailman/listinfo/dc3>
https://listas.altermundi.net/mailman/listinfo/dc3





-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listas.altermundi.net/pipermail/dc3/attachments/20160930/a26ee873/attachment.html>

------------------------------

_______________________________________________
DC3 mailing list
DC3@listas.altermundi.net
https://listas.altermundi.net/mailman/listinfo/dc3


End of DC3 Digest, Vol 11, Issue 27
***********************************