[Icann-see] Web site seedig.net

Dusan Stojicevic dusan at dukes.in.rs
Wed Jan 13 14:57:42 CET 2016


Dear all,

Personally, I am thrilled with all discussions here. Thank You all!
Especially with the "clashes" on the border between bottom-up
(transaprency, IG initiatives, MSH) and top-down world (legislation,
laws, jurisdiction...).

There is a need for small explanation about simple technical issue on
new website, in previous mails called "unequal treatment to all proposals".

ALL proposals have "leave a comment" option, and You need just to click
on the headline. The only difference is in "continue reading" - and this
is second place, besides headline, where You can click and open page
with place for comment. Naturally, "continue reading" appears along with
long proposals.

Cheers,
Dusan


On 12.1.2016 16:17, Lorena Jaume-Palasi wrote:
> Dear Narine, dear Michael,
> 
> it is not as simple. According to all data protection regulations from
> all the jurisdictions applying to this case, the *transferring of
> personal data for automatic processing to a third country (Serbia) which
> is considered by ALL those jurisdictions as* "*not providing adequate
> protection*"*is prohibited* (moreover without previous, explicit and
> informed consent - in this case you would even need a double consent
> from SEE members who are also EU members). Please note that data
> protection regulation does not differ between private and public
> personal data. It simply protects the automatic processing of personal
> data. *The fines are btw. pretty high and you don't need someone
> complaining to a data protection officer to get under an investigation.*
> A data protection officer can proactively decide to check on the
> website. So independently of the sense and rationality of data
> protection regulation, the decision of the excom is right and in
> accordance with the law. Conceding to your requirements would definitely
> demand from some of the members of the excom to break the law and risk
> costly sanctions. 
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Lorena
> 
>> Narine Khachatryan <ms.narine.khachatryan at gmail.com> hat am 12. Januar
>> 2016 um 14:17 geschrieben:
>>
>> Dear Dusan, Michael and all, 
>>
>> One more comment on the topic of publishing proposals with or without
>> names of submitters.   
>>
>> Dusan, I respect your opinion highly. You understand very well, what
>> may people from SEE feel regarding anonimity. I fully share those
>> concerns.
>>
>> Nevertheless, I support the approach, adopted by EuroDIG for the last
>> 7 years regarding transparency of submitters' names. 
>>
>> Like you, I do value anonimity, but in this case anonimity may leave a
>> room for unequal treatment amont SEEDIG participants. Since if not
>> published the data become exclusively available to SEEDIG admins -
>> 5-member exec. committee, as an exceptional priviledge. 
>>
>> During the SEE session at ICANN 54 meeting in Dublin participants
>> shared a common attitude about the importance of bringing IG
>> initiatives in SEE region to the best example of EuroDIG.  
>>
>> EuroDIG processes (submission of proposals, formation of orgteams and
>> working groups, formulation of workshops, choice of speakers and
>> reporters)  have been organized in a transparent and open
>> manner. Thank you, Wolf, Sandra, Lorena and all, who helped to keep
>> those standards high. 
>>
>> Perhaps, transparency of the names is a small issue, but it reflects
>> our attitude (sometimes hidden) towards the fundamental principle of
>> openness. Should we only speak about transparency, openness,
>> bottom-up, but not _act_?  
>>  
>> Therefore, I summarize suggestions, as to keep the process transparent
>> and open, provide equal opportunities to all and ensure diversity of
>> interests: 
>>
>> *1.* Keeping names of proposers public, thus trying_to act_ in a
>> transparent way
>>
>> *2.* 'Leave a Reply' feature keep available either to all proposals,
>> or none of them, thus avoid giving a 'special treatment' to any of the
>> proposals; 
>>
>> *3.* Formulate framework / rules on appropriate stakeholder
>> representation thus ensuring that diverse groups are represented
>> through multistakeholder mechanism and efforts are made not to miss
>> underrepresented voices. 
>>
>> Thank you again, Dusan and all, for the good web site and work done so
>> far, 
>>   
>> Best regards,
>>
>> Narine 
>>
>>>>>> Narine Khachatryan
>> Safer Internet Armenia <http://www.safe.am/> Media Education Center
>> <http://www.mediaeducation.am/>  Youth IGF - Armenia 
>> <https://www.facebook.com/igf.armenia> 
>> ​ <https://www.facebook.com/groups/safe.am> 
>>>>
>> On Tue, Jan 12, 2016 at 11:44 AM, Michael Oghia <mike.oghia at gmail.com
>> <mailto:mike.oghia at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>
>>     Dear Dusan,
>>
>>     Thank you for your very informative response. I think you and the
>>     executive team made the right decision regarding the inclusion of
>>     names, though the EuroDIG website lists the names (so, it would be
>>     possible to figure out who proposed what if they are cross-listed).
>>
>>     Regardless, though, great job again (to the whole committee)! 
>>
>>     Best,
>>     -Michael
>>     __________________
>>
>>     Michael J. Oghia
>>     Istanbul, Turkey
>>     2015 ISOC IGF Ambassador
>>     #TCKchat
>>     <http://www.bateconsult.com/category/tck-chat/> co-host, 1st session
>>     Skype: mikeoghia
>>     Twitter <https://www.twitter.com/MikeOghia> *|* LinkedIn
>>     <https://www.linkedin.com/in/mikeoghia>
>>
>>     On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 5:54 PM, Dusan Stojicevic
>>     <dusan at dukes.in.rs <mailto:dusan at dukes.in.rs>> wrote:
>>
>>         Dear all,
>>
>>         Thanks, all your kudos for the site should go to the whole
>>         executive
>>         committee.
>>
>>         Also, thanks for all your suggestions and opinions.
>>
>>         I would like to answer to two of them, especially about dislikes.
>>
>>         Some facts:
>>         During the "call for issues" we didn't ask anybody about going
>>         into
>>         public with personal data (as they were submitted together
>>         with the
>>         proposals). According to most of our laws on that subject, it
>>         would be
>>         tricky to publish the names of authors for proposals without prior
>>         consent (which we have not asked for). So, the executive
>>         committee made
>>         the consensual decision that proposals are to be published
>>         without names.
>>         On the other hand, when you have the proposal and the name of the
>>         proponent together, you almost naturally check WHO is the
>>         author. Even
>>         if you are not aware, you can ask yourself: do you like the
>>         proposal as
>>         such, or you like the proposal because of the person who
>>         proposed it?
>>         At SEEDIG, we discussed about this inside the executive
>>         committee, and,
>>         considering also the data protection issues underlined above, we
>>         considered that, at least in this phase of the planning
>>         process, we
>>         should talk only about the proposals itself (disregarding the
>>         authors).
>>         And here the dislike is coming naturally. Dislike (without
>>         using names,
>>         only proposals) is rather common in our region. It can be
>>         considered as
>>         part of our culture. And it's not natural for us, in real
>>         life, never to
>>         say ‘I don't like this’, only ignore. Leaving aside any cultural
>>         difference, to dislike something is not necessarily a bad or
>>         discouraging thing, especially when you don’t have the name of the
>>         proponent publicly displayed. And in this part of the world,
>>         when we
>>         have to make decision, we often say: "say now what you think
>>         or don't
>>         speak about that, ever". In our specific case, ‘dislike’ is
>>         mainly meant
>>         to say that ‘I don’t think this issue should be discussed at
>>         SEEDIG’.
>>         Beyond these points, and as we have already underlined before,
>>         please
>>         note that we are talking about something in early test phase.
>>         We are
>>         taking in all your comments, and, based on them, we will
>>         consider how to
>>         move forward for next year, when it comes to the online
>>         evaluation of
>>         proposals. So, again, thank you all for sharing your opinions
>>         on this
>>         beta tool.
>>
>>         Secondly, about SEEDIG as a process and about linkages between
>>         SEEDIG
>>         and EuroDIG: SEEDIG as a process is well explained on the
>>         website, we
>>         think. And there is already text available which underlines
>>         the linkages
>>         between SEEDIG and EuroDIG: http://www.seedig.net/about/ .
>>         Beyond that,
>>         if there are concrete suggestions about what is missing/should
>>         be added,
>>         please let us know and we’d be happy to discuss this further.
>>
>>         Furthermore, how to implement SEEDIG-EuroDIG linkages is
>>         subject to
>>         further discussion, both at the SEEDIG virtual planning
>>         meetings (later
>>         this week) and at the EuroDIG planning meeting (later this
>>         month). We
>>         are, again, taking note of all your comments and suggestions and
>>         encourage you to further engage in this discussion, either by
>>         participating in the afore-mentioned meetings or by writing on the
>>         mailing list.
>>
>>         Again, I want to thank you for all your inputs about SEEDIG,
>>         it was very
>>         helpful! Further thoughts are also welcome.
>>
>>
>>         Regards,
>>         Dusan
>>
>>         On 11.1.2016 14:58, Michael Oghia wrote:
>>         > Dear Narine, all:
>>         >
>>         > Those are all good points as well, thank you. I'd also add it's
>>         > important to consider how we can leverage the experience and
>>         perspective
>>         > we have in the SEE region, especially how it relates to
>>         different
>>         > variations in issues experienced by the larger European region
>>         > (censorship and restriction of free expression particularly
>>         come to mind).
>>         >
>>         > On another note, something I apologize for not reiterating
>>         before is
>>         > that the website is very well-designed and intuitive. Dusan,
>>         you and the
>>         > team did a great job at designing and programming it. Kudos!
>>         >
>>         > Best,
>>         > -Michael
>>         > __________________
>>         >
>>         > Michael J. Oghia
>>         > Istanbul, Turkey
>>         > 2015 ISOC IGF Ambassador
>>         > #TCKchat <http://www.bateconsult.com/category/tck-chat/>
>>         co-host, 1st
>>         > session
>>         > Skype: mikeoghia
>>         > Twitter <https://www.twitter.com/MikeOghia> *|* LinkedIn
>>         > <https://www.linkedin.com/in/mikeoghia>
>>         >
>>         > On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 3:22 PM, Narine Khachatryan
>>         > <ms.narine.khachatryan at gmail.com
>>         <mailto:ms.narine.khachatryan at gmail.com>
>>         > <mailto:ms.narine.khachatryan at gmail.com
>>         <mailto:ms.narine.khachatryan at gmail.com>>> wrote:
>>         >
>>         >     Dear all,
>>         >
>>         >
>>         >     I join my voice to Sandra, congratulations with the
>>         SEEDIG new web
>>         >     site, marking the beginning of this year! Thank you,
>>         Dusan, and all
>>         >     who worked on it. Its navigation, usability, and
>>         features are very good.
>>         >
>>         >
>>         >     An observation and suggestion regarding the linkage of
>>         SEEDIG, as an
>>         >     independent initiative, and EuroDIG, as a panEuropean
>>         initiative.
>>         >
>>         >
>>         >     Participants of SEEDIG and this list, have mentioned
>>         repeatedly that
>>         >     processes in SEE in contrast to Central and Western
>>         Europe, related
>>         >     to governance and participation, awareness and democratic
>>         >     engagement, transparency and accountability are either
>>         not the same
>>         >     or perceived in multiple-valued ways.
>>         >
>>         >
>>         >     When aligning those processes (up to incorporating the
>>         results of
>>         >     SEEDIG into EuroDIG and the global IGF) we need to
>>         ensure, that we
>>         >     are not losing important voices of parts of the public
>>         who are
>>         >     unable to deliver their voices effectively. Due to a
>>         variety of
>>         >     reasons, including the lack of democratic institutions,
>>         lack of
>>         >     resources, due to polysemantic perceptions of
>>         multistakeholderism
>>         >     and bottom-up and top-down processes, etc.
>>         >
>>         >
>>         >     In the process of setting up the good practices we need
>>         to be sure
>>         >     that we are not throwing the baby out with the bathwater.
>>         >
>>         >
>>         >     Wishing you all a peaceful, safe and happy New Year!
>>         >
>>         >
>>         >     Best regards,
>>         >
>>         >
>>         >     Narine
>>         >
>>         >
>>         >     On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 2:20 PM, Michael Oghia
>>         <mike.oghia at gmail.com <mailto:mike.oghia at gmail.com>
>>         >     <mailto:mike.oghia at gmail.com
>>         <mailto:mike.oghia at gmail.com>>> wrote:
>>         >
>>         >         I agree with Sandra's points. I also found the
>>         inclusion of a
>>         >         dislike option discouraging and unnecessary.
>>         >
>>         >         -Michael
>>         >         __________________
>>         >
>>         >         Michael J. Oghia
>>         >         Istanbul, Turkey
>>         >         2015 ISOC IGF Ambassador
>>         >         #TCKchat
>>         >         <http://www.bateconsult.com/category/tck-chat/>
>>         co-host, 1st session
>>         >         Skype: mikeoghia
>>         >         Twitter <https://www.twitter.com/MikeOghia> *|* LinkedIn
>>         >         <https://www.linkedin.com/in/mikeoghia>
>>         >
>>         >         On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 12:17 PM,
>>         <sandra at eurodig.org <mailto:sandra at eurodig.org>
>>         >         <mailto:sandra at eurodig.org
>>         <mailto:sandra at eurodig.org>>> wrote:
>>         >
>>         >             Dear all, first of all let me wish you a happy
>>         and peaceful
>>         >             new year, I guess it is not too late to do so.
>>         >
>>         >             Congratulations for this website, it is really
>>         enjoyable to
>>         >             see how SEEDIG is evolving, I am sure these
>>         efforts will
>>         >             lead to a successful 2nd edition in Belgrade.
>>         >
>>         >             I have two comments:
>>         >
>>         >             1. I would like to share some thoughts we had
>>         when we
>>         >             introduced the online evaluation system back in
>>         2014. The
>>         >             first tool was programmed by young Dutch people
>>         and it was
>>         >             agreed that we invite the community to express
>>         support for a
>>         >             proposal, but do not introduce a dislike option.
>>         We found it
>>         >             might be discouraging for the submitter and can
>>         lead to
>>         >             tensions, even if you not include the name of
>>         the submitter.
>>         >             We also learned in the process that the word
>>         "voting", leads
>>         >             the community to take the results too literally when
>>         >             interpreting the results. This means they
>>         expected that the
>>         >             one with the highest rank becomes the most
>>         prominent session
>>         >             and so on. We tried to make it always clear that
>>         the online
>>         >             review is "only" an additional tool to gain
>>         feedback from
>>         >             the community besides the planning meeting, but
>>         still it is
>>         >             misunderstood by some and we keep on explain it ...
>>         >             something to consider for the test phase.
>>         >
>>         >             2. I would like to encourage you to highlight a
>>         bit more
>>         >             SEEDIG as an independent initiative being part
>>         of a global
>>         >             process. The linkage between SEEDIG and EuroDIG
>>         was very
>>         >             well received during the IGF in Joao Pessoa and
>>         I would like
>>         >             to build upon that. By underlining for instance the
>>         >             alignment of the processes, the joint call for
>>         proposals and
>>         >             the way results of SEEDIG should feed into
>>         EuroDIG (and
>>         >             thereafter into the IGF) we could set some good
>>         practises
>>         >             for other regions and I am confident that this will
>>         >             strengthen the global IG process.
>>         >
>>         >             During the planning meeting on 26. January in
>>         Brussels we
>>         >             should come up with some concrete ideas on how
>>         to include
>>         >             SEEDIG results in EuroDIG meaningful and then
>>         deliver the
>>         >             message to the global IGF. Looking forward to
>>         your input here!
>>         >
>>         >             Best Sandra
>>         >
>>         >             -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
>>         >             Von: icann-see-bounces at rnids.rs
>>         <mailto:icann-see-bounces at rnids.rs>
>>         >             <mailto:icann-see-bounces at rnids.rs
>>         <mailto:icann-see-bounces at rnids.rs>>
>>         >             [mailto:icann-see-bounces at rnids.rs
>>         <mailto:icann-see-bounces at rnids.rs>
>>         >             <mailto:icann-see-bounces at rnids.rs
>>         <mailto:icann-see-bounces at rnids.rs>>] Im Auftrag von Dusan
>>         >             Stojicevic
>>         >             Gesendet: Samstag, 9. Januar 2016 16:25
>>         >             An: icann-see at rnids.rs
>>         <mailto:icann-see at rnids.rs> <mailto:icann-see at rnids.rs
>>         <mailto:icann-see at rnids.rs>>
>>         >             Betreff: [Icann-see] Web site seedig.net
>>         <http://seedig.net> <http://seedig.net>
>>         >
>>         >             Dear all,
>>         >
>>         >             Let me introduce to you SEEDIG’s website - check
>>         >             www.seedig.net <http://www.seedig.net>
>>         <http://www.seedig.net>.
>>         >             Still fresh and new and still in beta testing,
>>         but fully
>>         >             operational.
>>         >             If You have any comments or proposals, please do not
>>         >             hesitate to give us
>>         >             feedback.
>>         >
>>         >             Also, all proposals submitted for the April
>>         SEEDIG meeting
>>         >             can be found
>>         >             here http://www.seedig.net/category/proposals/.
>>         >             [16:22:40] Sorina Teleanu: You can like or
>>         dislike any of
>>         >             them, but
>>         >             please note that likes and dislikes are part of
>>         a testing
>>         >             exercise for
>>         >             next year’s event. Because of the short
>>         time-frame, online
>>         >             evaluation is
>>         >             not planned for this year, but this is something
>>         we will
>>         >             improve for
>>         >             next year.
>>         >
>>         >             e-SEE you all on the virtual meeting
>>         >           
>>          http://www.seedig.net/2016/01/08/two-virtual-planning-meetings-on-14-and-15-january/
>>         >
>>         >             and please don’t forget to register in advance.
>>         >
>>         >             Cheers,
>>         >             Dusan
>>         >
>>         >             ---
>>         >             Ova e-pošta je provjerena na viruse Avast
>>         protuvirusnim
>>         >             programom.
>>         >             https://www.avast.com/antivirus
>>         >
>>         > 
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>  
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>>
>> Ova e-mail poruka je poverljiva i namenjena iskljucivo primaocu.
>> Neovlascena distribucija, prepravka ili objavljivanje njenog sadrzaja
>> je zabranjena. Ako ste ovaj e-mail primili greskom, molimo vas da
>> obavestite administratora liste putem telefona +381 11 7281281.
>>
>> This e-mail is confidential and intended only for the recipient.
>> Unauthorized distribution, modification or disclosure of its contents
>> is prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please
>> notify the mailing list administrator by telephone +381 11 7281281.
>>
>> -----
>>
>> Icann-see mailing lista
>> Icann-see at rnids.rs
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 
> Ova e-mail poruka je poverljiva i namenjena iskljucivo primaocu.  Neovlascena distribucija, prepravka ili objavljivanje njenog sadrzaja je zabranjena. Ako ste ovaj e-mail primili greskom, molimo vas da obavestite administratora liste putem telefona +381 11 7281281.
> 
> This e-mail is confidential and intended only for the recipient.  Unauthorized distribution, modification or disclosure of its contents is prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the mailing list administrator by telephone +381 11 7281281.
> 
> -----
>  
> Icann-see mailing lista
> Icann-see at rnids.rs
> 

---
Ova e-pošta je provjerena na viruse Avast protuvirusnim programom.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus




More information about the seedig mailing list