[WSIS CS-Plenary] authors of issue papers [clarification]

[Federico Heinz]

On Sun, 2005-02-06 at 13:57 +0100, William Drake wrote:
> [...] All the messages implying that WGIG is somehow committed to
> side-stepping the definitional question are misplaced conjecture

Have I missed these messages? I haven't seen any. I have seen (and
written) some criticism of WGIG for attempting to write papers on
Internet Governance without defining first what it is, because it seems
a rather odd order to do things. It's not the intent that some people
are questioning, but rather the methodology.

I've been going through the "cybercrime" document, for instance, and the
fact that IG is not defined makes it quite difficult to establish
whether the topic has been approached in a relevant way. The further
fact that the definition of "cybercrime" itself in the paper is
questionable makes it even more difficult, of course :-(
 
	Fede

-- 
GnuPG Public Key: gpg --keyserver wwwkeys.eu.pgp.net --recv-key BD02C6E0
Key Fingerprint: 04F4 08C5 14B7 2C3D DB21  ACF8 6CF5 0B0C BD02 C6E0
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://mailman-new.greennet.org.uk/pipermail/plenary/attachments/20050206/1739fc0f/attachment.pgp