[cooperation-wg] [BMI-SPAM-Verdacht] Re: cooperation-wg Digest, Vol 53, Issue 16

We should go on and make them aware from what we learned:
For all politicians there is the aim to bring in content – we have the process. ☺

For you interest our bp from the last 6 months:
New  role of public administration and governments

The world of Internet is growing. In this global Internet world  not only ISPs are the legitimate users and stakeholders but also citizens at home with upcoming smart home solutions, companies with industry 4.0 solutions, worldwide located enterprises or governments and public administrations. The deployment of IPv6 is the  main issue to keep the internet running and we have to ensure requirements of all new stakeholders into account. About this communication way and the role of public administration in the community I told you last year.
But now we furthermore see a change in hierarchic organizations as well.
The work of multistakeholder groups is  based on maillinglists. These are driven by events , have topics for specialists and need fast decisions. In hierarchical organizations we can join these lists on working level, but we have to use the decissionmaking process to continue. And this is a problem because this structure is to slow to  work with multistakeholder groups.
So we need more longterm strategies on high levels and concrete concepts and the mandate to bring in decissions on working levels .
. To reflect more security, technical, organizational, economic, social and political constraints and to ensure the internet rules, we have to figure out a new “Thinking” and new “Cooperation Forms”.
Regards
Constanze





Von: cooperation-wg [mailto:cooperation-wg-bounces at ripe.net] Im Auftrag von Michael Oghia
Gesendet: Donnerstag, 23. Juni 2016 16:12
An: Gordon Lennox
Cc: Cooperation WG
Betreff: [BMI-SPAM-Verdacht] Re: [cooperation-wg] cooperation-wg Digest, Vol 53, Issue 16

I completely agree with you Gordon, good points.

My strategy that I've really learned from others is to positively impact decisions through relationship building. I find it an effective one, and once a decision maker understands that the community's intentions are positive (or at least non-threatening), then perhaps they are more keen to listen. With that said, DiploFoundation, for instance, does a lot of work with diplomats and a lot of training with government.

In the end I think it's important to remember that, regardless of politics and power, the people making decisions -- the politicians, bureaucrats, etc. -- are still people. Just people.

-Michael


On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 5:01 PM, Gordon Lennox <gordon.lennox.13 at gmail.com<mailto:gordon.lennox.13 at gmail.com>> wrote:
I agree.

One of the nice things about this community is that you ask a question and you get a response.

But when it comes to governments, both politicians and officials, it is not always about a lack of understanding. It can be about a very strong disagreement about values.

I would add though that often it is not even just about “governments”. Even in a government from a particular culture and of a certain flavour there can be very strong internal / inter-departmental disagreements. And it is not always the “good guys” who have clue.

Gordon


> On 23 Jun 2016, at 15:37, Johan Helsingius <julf at julf.com<mailto:julf at julf.com>> wrote:
>
> The tricky ones are the ones where the views of the community
> and the views of (some) governments are in conflict, and
> activism, rather than education, is what is needed. In that
> case we need to be very clear about who represents whom.


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: </ripe/mail/archives/cooperation-wg/attachments/20160623/06ec5b20/attachment.html>