Welcome to NETmundial public comments page
After an open call for content contribution, NETmundial – the Global Multistakeholder Meeting on the Future of Internet Governance – received 188 documents from 46 different countries. These documents were sent by representatives of Civil Society, Private Sector, Academy, Governments and Technical Community.
¶ 2 Leave a comment on paragraph 2 1
Based on these broad set of inputs, NETmundial’s Executive Multistakeholder Committee (EMC) prepared a Draft Outcome Document and submitted it for consultation with NETmundial’s High-level Multistakeholder Committee (HLMC) on April 3rd, 2014. After incorporating the inputs from the HLMC, under the guidance of NETmundial’s Chair and Co-Chairs, a final version of the document is released here for public comments. The public consultation will be open for comments on NETmundial’s Executive Committee Output Document from April 14th until April 21th, 12:00 UTC.
¶ 4 Leave a comment on paragraph 4 0
For this public consultation a commenting tool is available online at https://document.netmundial.br/ with the purpose of receiving public comments on specific points of the document. It is not necessary to create an account in order to post your comment to the document. You’ll be able to immediately start reading the document and whenever you have something to say, you’ll just have to provide a full name and contact email address alongside your comment.
¶ 6 Leave a comment on paragraph 6 0
By clicking on any paragraph of the document, you’ll be able to see all the comments other people have already made pertaining to that portion of the text; as referred above, you are also granted the possibility to register your own observations. Maybe your concern was already addressed in someone else’s comment, so please be sure to take a look at the previous comments before making yours.
¶ 8 Leave a comment on paragraph 8 0
This public consultation closes the loop that started by collecting public content contributions. Such contributions were compiled and merged into the Outcome Document by the NETmundial EMC and HLMC committees in the spirit of trying to represent the overall context of the current Internet Governance debate. It is very important to receive further public input in this final stage, so that the outcome is true to the issues and concerns presented by all stakeholders.
¶ 10 Leave a comment on paragraph 10 0
Go to:
Brian Beaton - Civil Society
They think how do they have gained such weights and later how to
reduce it. Whereas the PM formula controls nighttime cravings, increases resting metabolism as you sleep
and greatly improves healthy sleep patterns, which is clinically proven
to decrease fat storage. If you are currently taking medications for depression or anxiety, 5HTP is not a safe diet
pill ingredient.
Once you have got all the data, you will have to see that the total calorie intake is not more than the
total calorie expenditure of the body, otherwise you will gain weight through the diet pills, which is definitely
an undesirable effect of these pills. It dilates the bronchial muscles, contacts the nasal mucosa, raises the blood pressure and is
a cardiac stimulant. You do not want to eat a higher
body fat meal if you are out in community.
The Internet Society offers the following general comments, with a view to more in-depth discussions regarding the text in Brazil. In general, we believe these documents covey important messages, affirm key principles, and that they offer a valuable contribution to the ongoing global dialogue on the evolution of multistakeholder Internet governance.
At this stage, ISOC comments address five key issues:
- We are pleased that the concepts of openness and transparency of Internet policy and technical development processes are reflected in the text. These were core elements of the Internet technical community’s submission to NETmundial.
- The documents would benefit from a clarification on the scope of “Internet governance”. Grounding this text in the WSIS Tunis Agenda, particularly in reference to the definition of Internet governance, is important. In the absence of such clarification, the intent of the documents is unclear and there is a persistent confusion throughout the sections between the governance of public policy issues and the technical development processes of the Internet.
- The Multistakeholder model of Internet governance should advance the public interest, support the openness of the Internet, and enable the free flow of information. Those concepts should be reintroduced into the text.
- The concepts of openness, meaningful participation, transparency, accountability and inclusiveness are critical for Internet governance. It is important, however, to recognize the diversity of processes within the current Internet governance ecosystem and that the mechanisms for achieving these principles may differ among organizations.
- The references to strengthening the IGF are very helpful and positive. The IGF is an indispensable element of the ecosystem that can address emerging issues while coordinating dialogues at international, regional and local levels. We need to fully take the work of these groups into account, recognize the progress made and learn from the collective multistakeholder dialogue that groups like the IGF have fostered. As such, this document should focus on the need to strengthen and improve existing Internet governance arrangements rather than calling for the creation of new and possibly duplicative mechanisms. Efforts devoted to developing new mechanisms would take valuable expertise and resources away from strengthening existing arrangements like the IGF and could thus, ultimately, be counterproductive.