19 Nov
2015
19 Nov
'15
5:23 p.m.
Luca
If by asking whether I can live with it you mean would i leave the group
if this name is retained then, no, i wont.... But I remain very
uncomfortable with this name, maybe because we also actually work in the
area that the term 'connected communities' literally describes. And as
now I learn this term is actually used by an existing large scale
project and community in this literal meaning. What I cant understand
is that when both the literal meaning and current in practice meaning of
this term is so different why do we insist on using it. Also, as I read
the text on the etherpad that you have set up it is all about 'community
networks'. So why would be want to create such a obvious and visible
discrepancy in the name of the group, under which we want to work in
this very important area.
parminder
On Thursday 19 November 2015 10:27 PM, Luca Belli wrote:
I tend to agree with Nico. It is indeed the action
plan that will define what this coalition will do rather than the acronym we choose.
Parminder, your point is clear but it seems to me that all other participants would agree
with the name DC on Conncected Communities, while clearly explaining our focus within the
action plan. If you can live with the proposed name, I would ask everyone to check the
action plan to propose final tweaks and modifications, so that I can send the request yo
the IGF Secretariat by the end of the week.
Here is the pad https://public.etherpad-mozilla.org/p/dc_on_connected_communities
Best
Luca
________________________________________
De: dc3-bounces(a)listas.altermundi.net [dc3-bounces(a)listas.altermundi.net] em nome de
Nicolás Echániz [nicoechaniz(a)altermundi.net]
Enviado: quinta-feira, 19 de novembro de 2015 13:26
Para: dc3(a)listas.altermundi.net
Assunto: Re: [DC3] RES: Re: Future IGF Dynamic Coalition on Connected Communities
Parminder,
I get your point and it's an important one.
Maybe: Dynamic Coalition on Community Connectivity would be better?
(and we can keep the DC3 acronym)
At first we talked about calling it Dynamic Coalition on Community
Networks, but this poses the problem of maybe being too narrow. Some
interesting solutions for community connectivity are not exactly
community networks but we still share most of our needs and goals
regarding policy, etc. so a broader name was necessary.
I'd like to propose that we close this discussion soon, not because it
is not interesting, but because I've seen many community networks
coalition attempts get entangled in the naming discussion for weeks, and
get to no solution that would satisfy everyone. Let's make this
Coalition be defined by the work we do, regardless of the name we end up
choosing.
Cheers,
Nico
_______________________________________________
DC3 mailing list
DC3(a)listas.altermundi.net
https://listas.altermundi.net/mailman/listinfo/dc3