Enviado: sexta-feira, 26 de fevereiro de 2016 13:36
Para: dc3@listas.altermundi.net
Assunto: Re: [DC3] RES: RES: Habemus Domain Name!
Thanks for doing all this very important and laborious work.
Hi Bob and all,
I agree it would be wise to be careful about terminology but I think one of the added value of this coalition would be to help fostering a common vision of what are community networks.
Yes, that is very important, and best done as early as possible, preferably right away so that people know what are they working together for,
Perhaps it would be better to provide a working definition of connectivity and to define community networks as an enabler of connectivity, building on the definition provided by Parminder. What do you think?
I beg to differ. The key word here is 'community' and not connectivity - even if the former - as a model of providing connectivity, in merely instrumental towards the latter, being connected. I dont think there are any contestation anywhere about what is connectivity (if there are, like the Free Basics debate that belongs to the NN discourse). we all know what connectivity is, the focus of this group IMHO is a particular model of providing universal connectivity. And this model is of direct or mediated community ownership. That is central, We are not about connectivity, as for instance Airtel in India or Telemar in Brazil is about connectivity. That is what a telco is.
Also, I think we could try to collect papers (perhaps sharing a call for papers) on community networks and connectivity in general, to elaborate a report to be presented at the next IGF.
Agree, we should go down this path.
Such an exercise has worked quite well with DC on network neutrality, providing usefull info to the IGF community. We could try to elaborate a report on 'sustainable connectivity' or something along these lines.
This illustrates what I posited was the problem in the earlier part of my email - if we begin to take focus away from 'community' and beginning to talk about connectivity generally. I simply dont think, that may just be my view right now, that this DC is about that. I am not saying that private models are not ok or do not work... IN many places they may work perfectly well, so well, and such is the demographics there that there may simple be no need or place for community networks .
Sustainable connectivity firstly right now does not mean anything to me, and even if we begin to work on producing a meaning for it , it does not seem to stay in the remit for which I think the group came together..
regards, parminder
We have several months and many amongst us have already material ready to be (re)published.
Best
Luca
De: dc3-bounces@listas.altermundi.net [dc3-bounces@listas.altermundi.net] em nome de dc3@bob.ma [dc3@bob.ma]
Enviado: sexta-feira, 19 de fevereiro de 2016 15:11
Para: 'Dynamic Coalition on Community Connectivity'
Assunto: Re: [DC3] RES: Habemus Domain Name!
We need to be careful about terminology here. One can say sidewalks are provided because we generally understand they are free to use. Given that that is not the norm for connectivity we need to be careful about terminology.
The word “networks” is typically associated with a physical thing – like saying provide a trolley service rather than simply roads and sidewalks we can choose how to use. Rather than providing connectivity the community would facilitate connectivity just like sidewalks are not necessary for getting between two points but facilitate it.
The other fine point is that we want to connect devices not just people. People can get past various barriers but connected devices can’t press “agree” nor read ads.
I see “community connectivity” as being infrastructure paid for as a common facility like sidewalks rather than server like traditional telecommunications. This allows the facilities to be “free-to-use”. It also means that users providing additional capacity are not competing with a provider but contributing to the community.
There is more technical background but that’s a deeper topic.
From: dc3-bounces@listas.altermundi.net [mailto:dc3-bounces@listas.altermundi.net] On Behalf Of Luca Belli
Sent: Thursday, February 18, 2016 08:07
To: Dynamic Coalition on Community Connectivity <dc3@listas.altermundi.net>
Subject: [DC3] RES: Habemus Domain Name!
Excellent Raoul!
Many thanks!
Luca
De: dc3-bounces@listas.altermundi.net [mailto:dc3-bounces@listas.altermundi.net] Em nome de Raoul Plommer
Enviada em: terça-feira, 16 de fevereiro de 2016 07:02
Para: Dynamic Coalition on Community Connectivity <dc3@listas.altermundi.net>
Assunto: Re: [DC3] Habemus Domain Name!
That's great, I made the page on https://comconnectivity.wordpress.com/ and will start building it soon. Maureen, send me an email and I will answer with credentials. :)
-Raoul
On 16 February 2016 at 07:53, parminder <parminder@itforchange.net> wrote:
Thanks Luca for this excellent work...
I wonder if we should have at least a basic definition of what is a community network, something like "Community networks are connectivity infrastructure that are owned by the community, whether or not such an ownership is operationalised, wholly or partly, through local private sector entities." Just a rough, quickly done one. We should of course arrive at a commonly agreed definition here.
And then put the key objective of the DC to be something like "To explore and develop community networks models, and present them as a key way to provide connectivity to people"
And then, in the 'membership section', add something to the effect that, to get the membership of the DC, while any stakeholder group can do it, the applicant must state agreement with the basic objectives of the DC.
parminder
On Monday 15 February 2016 08:11 PM, Luca Belli wrote:
Dear all,
Thanks for your inputs regarding the DC3 domain name. The most voted one is comconnectivity.org
I have just purchased the domain name so that when Raoul and Maureen will have a draft DC3 website (that you are going to develop with Wordpress if I recollect well), we can redirect the Wordpress URL to comconnectivity.org
The basic webpages we need are: About, Members, Sources, News&Ideas. I have just compiled the material we already have as follows https://public.etherpad-mozilla.org/p/dc_on_connected_communities
This is just a suggestion. Feel free to develop the webpages content as you prefer.
Also, here are the Draft Rules of Procedure https://public.etherpad-mozilla.org/p/DC3_Rules_of_Procedure
If there is no opposition to this text, we can considered the Rules as adopted. If you have any final remarks or objections, please modify the pad or share an email by 21 February.
All the bestLuca
Luca Belli, PhD
Pesquisador | Researcher
Lead of Internet Governance @ FGV luca.belli@fgv.br
+55 21 3799 5763
_______________________________________________DC3 mailing listDC3@listas.altermundi.nethttps://listas.altermundi.net/mailman/listinfo/dc3
_______________________________________________
DC3 mailing list
DC3@listas.altermundi.net
https://listas.altermundi.net/mailman/listinfo/dc3
_______________________________________________ DC3 mailing list DC3@listas.altermundi.net https://listas.altermundi.net/mailman/listinfo/dc3
