19 Nov
2015
19 Nov
'15
3:59 p.m.
Sometimes words do make a difference. I'm fine with "Connected
Communities"
or "community connectivity".
I just want to avoid semantic loading. The term "broadband" is a technical
term that has come to be associated with a business model in which a piper
owner controls connectivity. And the term "network" is associated with
networking as a service and the physical gear as opposed to common
infrastructure we happen to use to communicate and relate. We also need to
be careful that "ownership" is often associated with the ability to exclude.
While we're at it First/last mile are also words associated with "pipes".
I
prefer first square km/mile to emphasize the local community.
Bob Frankston
http://Frankston.com
@BobFrankston
-----Original Message-----
From: dc3-bounces(a)listas.altermundi.net
[mailto:dc3-bounces@listas.altermundi.net] On Behalf Of Nicolás Echániz
Sent: Thursday, November 19, 2015 10:26
To: dc3(a)listas.altermundi.net
Subject: 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
On 11/19/2015 03:12 AM, parminder wrote:
_______________________________________________
DC3 mailing list
DC3(a)listas.altermundi.net
https://listas.altermundi.net/mailman/listinfo/dc3
_______________________________________________
DC3 mailing list
DC3(a)listas.altermundi.net
https://listas.altermundi.net/mailman/listinfo/dc3
_______________________________________________
DC3 mailing list
DC3(a)listas.altermundi.net
https://listas.altermundi.net/mailman/listinfo/dc3
On Thursday 19 November 2015 12:27 AM, Leandro Navarro wrote:
<https://connected-communities.org/index.php/cluster/health-well-being/>;
Hi all,
On 18/11/15 19:08, Luca Belli wrote:
(Sorry, Is aid my last email, but saw this just now.)
Yes, but is that what this DC is going to focus on ... The issue then
shifts from using an appropriate name to what exactly is focus of this
DC... Is it similar to that of the mentioned 'connected communities'
project and I quote from its website
".....research programme designed to help us understand the changing
nature of communities in their historical and cultural contexts and
the role of communities in sustaining and enhancing our quality of
life. "
"The programme addresses a number of core themes including: health
and wellbeing
Hi all,
It seems that I missed Ritus and Parminders emails. My apologies.
So, we now have 4 co-coordinators including Nico, myself, Ritu and
Parminder. This is excellent, as we also diversify georgapgically.
Also, Parminder raised the issue of the name of the DC. So far, the
proposal was DC on Connected Communities but Parminder proposes DC on
Community Broadband.
My preference would be to keep the original proposal precisely
because it is more comprehensive. Broadband is an option of
connectivity (broad bandwidth) and the very definition of what may be
considered as broad is not universal. It rather depends on national
standards. Also, I think that DC on Connected Communities has the
merit on focusing on people and stressing the importance/role of
communities.
What do others think?
I agree with your point. The EC has also a program on connected
communities as it focuses on people, their local communities, and
socio-economic factors. creative and digital communities
<https://connected-communities.org/index.php/cluster/creative-digital/>;
civil society and social innovation
<https://connected-communities.org/index.php/cluster/civil/>;
environment and sustainability
<https://connected-communities.org/index.php/cluster/environment-sustainabil
ity/>:
heritage
<https://connected-communities.org/index.php/cluster/culture-heritage/>;
diversity and dissent
<https://connected-communities.org/index.php/cluster/diversity-dissent/>;
participatory arts
<https://connected-communities.org/index.php/cluster/participatory-arts-2/>.
"
" It aims to achieve: new insights into community and new ways of
researching community that put arts and humanities at the heart of
research and connect academic and community expertise."
This substantiates the point I had made earlier about how a 'connected
communities' label sounds to me... Is this what is going to be our area
of work?
I thought we were to focus plain and simple on community ownership of
connectivity infrastructure and nothing else , though of course
connected facts always remain relevant. just a matter of clear focus.
But then I may be wrong about what other people may have in mind as the
primary focus of this group.
parminder
>
> Broadband sounds to me quite techie old/traditional/engineering term,
> hard to explain to my daughter (not succeeded yet). Instead of simply
> connectivity, it resonates with radio and frequency and spectrum,
> speed or other measures of quality of access, QoE. In Europe we start
> to discuss about what is the criteria to qualify for broadband
> (>30Mbps, symmetric?, latency, etc).
>
> Best regards, Leandro.
>>
>> All the best
>>
>> Luca
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> *De:* parminder [parminder.js(a)gmail.com]
>> *Enviado:* quarta-feira, 18 de novembro de 2015 15:13
>> *Para:* Luca Belli
>> *Assunto:* Fwd: Re: Future IGF Dynamic Coalition on Connected
Communities
>>
>> Luca
>>
>> It seems you did not receive this expression of interest and a few
>> questions.... So resending from gmail id... parminder
>>
>>
>> -------- Forwarded Message --------
>> Subject: Re: Future IGF Dynamic Coalition on Connected Communities
>> Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2015 10:15:39 +0530
>> From: parminder <parminder(a)itforchange.net>
>> To: Luca Belli <luca.belli(a)fgv.br>br>, dc3(a)listas.altermundi.net
>> <dc3(a)listas.altermundi.net>et>, bob19-0501(a)bobf.frankston.com
>> <bob19-0501(a)bobf.frankston.com>om>, lee.hibbard(a)coe.int
>> <lee.hibbard(a)coe.int>nt>, Jamila Rodrigues Venturini
>> <jamila.venturini(a)fgv.br>br>, ritu.sri(a)defindia.net
>> <ritu.sri(a)defindia.net>et>, otavio.vinhas(a)gmail.com
>> <otavio.vinhas(a)gmail.com>om>, catherine.middleton(a)ryerson.ca
>> <catherine.middleton(a)ryerson.ca>ca>, janara.sousa(a)gmail.com
>> <janara.sousa(a)gmail.com>om>, edliano(a)hotmail.com <edliano(a)hotmail.com>om>,
>> plommer(a)gmail.com <plommer(a)gmail.com>om>, donck(a)isoc.org
>> <donck(a)isoc.org>rg>, vicentin(a)riseup.net <vicentin(a)riseup.net>et>,
>> yzdrrr(a)riseup.net <yzdrrr(a)riseup.net>et>, bankston(a)newamerica.org
>> <bankston(a)newamerica.org>rg>, foditsch(a)gmail.com <foditsch(a)gmail.com>
>> CC: nicoechaniz(a)altermundi.net <nicoechaniz(a)altermundi.net>
>>
>>
>>
>> Luca
>>
>> I am happy to work with you on this, including if required with
>> co-coordination.... In fact as a part of our current work on
>> community braodband in India we have been proposing a coalition on
>> community broadband and developing countries.... But this could be
>> that space.
>>
>> Is there scope for discussing the name of proposed DC... I find
>> connected communities a bit vague, and I think community broadband is
>> rather more to the point. Connected communities connotes a much
>> larger scop area, the kind of work for instance that we do in
>> community informatics, and I am not sure we want the DC to spread
>> itself that thin. In doing so it will lose focus form what
>> independently is a very distinct and extremely important area of
>> practise and policy right now.
>>
>> Other issue also is the role of private sector in this DC, hich
>> unfortunately in the IGF space means big business and who are of
>> course not at all well inclined to the very idea of community
>> ownership of networks. In my conceptions of such ownership there is
>> scope for private businesses working at the local level for actual
>> implementations, although not necessarily. It depends on what model
>> of community ownership different communities chose. But then in any
>> case that private sector is never going to be able to reach the IGF
>> spaces...
>>
>> Look forward to hear yours and other people's comments on this.
>>
>> parminder
>>
>> On Tuesday 17 November 2015 02:08 AM, Luca Belli wrote:
>>>
>>> Dear all,
>>>
>>>
>>> I hope you had nice trips back home after the IGF. (apologies for
>>> the long email)
>>>
>>>
>>> This is the first email to organise the future work of the IGF
>>> Dynamic Coalition on Connected Communities.
>>>
>>>
>>> First of all a couple of words on what are IGF Dynamic Coalitions
(DCs).
>>>
>>> Along workshops, DCs represent the structural elements of the IGF:
>>> they are self-organised, issue-specific groups comprising members of
>>> various stakeholder groups.
>>>
>>> The requirements for formulating a Dynamic Coalition:
>>>
>>> · An Action Plan
>>>
>>> · A mailing list
>>>
>>> · The contact person
>>>
>>> · Representatives from at least three
>>> stakeholder groups (i.e. Civil society; Private sector; Technical
>>> community; Academic community; Governments; Intergovernmental
>>> organisations)
>>>
>>> · Setting up a webpage or a blog is highly
>>> recommended.
>>>
>>>
>>> After the IGF workshop on Community Networks, you expressed your
>>> interest for the initiative. This email is to start discussing
>>> together how to shape our action plan.
>>>
>>>
>>> I have prepared this pad, so that everyone can make suggestions on
>>> what points should we focus
>>> on
https://public.etherpad-mozilla.org/p/dc_on_connected_communitieshttps://pub
lic.etherpad-mozilla.org/p/dc_on_connected_communities
Our goals could be the following (please do not hesitate to modify
using the pad):
* Identify good open-access readings that may be useful to
communicate to non-techies what CN are and how do they work;
* Mapping existing CN and try to foster communication amongst them;
* Identify models of CN (e.g. rural CN, urban CN, etc.) and best
practices that can make them particularly efficient and
resilient both from a technical and organisational perspective;
* Identify best practices and worst practices as regards national
policies that facilitate or hinder the deployment of community
networks.
* Consolidate and publish all this ideas into some Community
Network Guidelines/Best practices to be presented at the next
IGF and divulgated on the future DC3 website.
Thanks to Nicolas, we already have a mailing-list! (many thanks
Nicolas!!!)
https://listas.altermundi.net/mailman/listinfo/dc3
Besides English, I think it would be fair to allow people to
communicate in Spanish or Portuguese in order to be as inclusive as
possible. What do you think?
The following persons expressed their interest in the DC3 (feel free
to state to which IGF stakeholder group you would like to be
associated):
· Bob Frankston
· Nicolás Echániz
· Ritu Srivastava
· Janara Sousa
· Otavio Vinhas
· Catherine Middleton
· plommer(a)gmail.com please state your name J
· edliano(a)hotmail.com please state your name J
· Lee Hibbard
· Frédéric Donck
· Diego Vicentin
· Nathalia Foditsch
· yzdrrr(a)riseup.net also please state your name J
· Luca Belli
· Jamila Venturini
· Kevin Bankston
I would be honoured to act as contact person/coordinator and I would
love if anyone else wanted to share this task with me as
co-coordinator(s).
Just to provide some info regarding myself, I have been
participating to the IGF over the past 5 years, I have worked for
the IGF Secretariat and I have funded/coordinated two DCs (DC on Net
Neutrality and on Platform Responsibility). I was previously working
for the Council of Europe Internet Governance Unit and I am now
researcher at Center for Technology and Society at FGV, Rio de
Janeiro. My work is to produce research advising policy people on
how to take sustainable decisions.
I look forward to hearing from you and feel free to share this email.
All the best,
Luca
_______________________________________________
DC3 mailing list
DC3(a)listas.altermundi.net
https://listas.altermundi.net/mailman/listinfo/dc3