Request For Balance
draft-bollow-wisdomtaskforce-09.txt

For changes since the previous version see here.



WisdomTaskForce.org                                            N. Bollow
Internet-Draft                                       GoalTree Consulting
Intended status: Informational                             March 1, 2014
Expires: September 2, 2014


                 Plan to Establish a Wisdom Task Force
                    draft-bollow-wisdomtaskforce-09

Abstract

   This memo calls for the creation of a new governance forum named
   "Wisdom Task Force" (WisdomTF).  The main purpose of the WisdomTF is
   to facilitate consensus-seeking strategy-oriented discussions
   regarding governance actions that may be decided by national
   parliaments.











{Internet-Draft boilerplate removed because it was causing misunderstandings.
Even if the Internet-Drafts publication mechanism is used to solicit feedback
from the technical community among others, it is not intended for WisdomTF to
be in some way part of IETF or an expansion of the scope of IETF.  That said,
WisdomTF's objectives (to make good recommendations that will work in practice)
can only be achieved if, besides people who focus on the public policy
objectives, there is significant participation of persons who understand how
things work at the technical level, as well as the socioeconomic dynamics
among the people and organizations who make things work.}









.






Bollow                  Expires September 2, 2014               [Page 1]





Internet-Draft              Wisdom Task Force                 March 2014


Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  4
     1.1.  Avoidance of Requirements Language . . . . . . . . . . . .  7
   2.  Start-up process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  7
   3.  Draft Scope Statement for WisdomTF . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  7
   4.  Draft Working Directives for WisdomTF  . . . . . . . . . . . .  7
     4.1.  Fundamental Values . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  8
     4.2.  WG Working Procedures  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  8
     4.3.  "E-gathering" electronic communication infrastructure  . . 10
       4.3.1.  Software freedom requirements  . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
       4.3.2.  Accessibility and compatibility requirements . . . . . 11
     4.4.  Request For Action (RFA) Publication Procedures  . . . . . 11
     4.5.  Overall Rough Consensus Endorsement  . . . . . . . . . . . 11
     4.6.  WG Creation  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
       4.6.1.  Initial Informal Discussion  . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
       4.6.2.  Terms of Reference Endorsement . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
       4.6.3.  Secretariat Actions  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
     4.7.  WG Termination . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
       4.7.1.  WG Dissolution by Rough Consensus  . . . . . . . . . . 13
       4.7.2.  WG Dissolution due to Disendorsement . . . . . . . . . 13
       4.7.3.  WG Dissolution due to Dysfunction  . . . . . . . . . . 14
     4.8.  Sustaining Members and the Secretariat . . . . . . . . . . 14
       4.8.1.  Categories of Sustaining Membership  . . . . . . . . . 14
         4.8.1.1.  Country Members  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
         4.8.1.2.  International Organization Members . . . . . . . . 15
         4.8.1.3.  Sustaining Civil Society Members . . . . . . . . . 15
       4.8.2.  Committee of Sustaining Members  . . . . . . . . . . . 15
       4.8.3.  Secretariat Funding  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
       4.8.4.  Start-up phase . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
       4.8.5.  Sustained operations phase . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
       4.8.6.  Transition from start-up phase to sustained
               operations phase . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
       4.8.7.  Funding commitments  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
       4.8.8.  Changes to the WisdomTF Working Directives . . . . . . 17
       4.8.9.  Further Responsibilities of the Secretariat  . . . . . 18
   5.  Draft Terms of Reference for Some Initial Working-Groups . . . 18
     5.1.  WG on limiting greenhouse gas emissions  . . . . . . . . . 19
     5.2.  WG on privacy protection in the context of information
           and communication technologies.  . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
     5.3.  WG on the eradication of mass poverty  . . . . . . . . . . 19
     5.4.  WG on standing documents on the deliberative process . . . 19
     5.5.  WG on framework for democratic governance of global
           matters  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
     5.6.  WG on Government Activities to Further Sustainable
           Digital Culture  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
     5.7.  WG on a framework for regulation of online identity
           systems  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20



Bollow                  Expires September 2, 2014               [Page 2]





Internet-Draft              Wisdom Task Force                 March 2014


     5.8.  WG on a framework for regulation of online payment
           systems  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
     5.9.  WG on a framework for regulation of DRM systems  . . . . . 20
     5.10. WG on a framework for guarantee systems  . . . . . . . . . 21
     5.11. WG on a framework for addressing the problem of spam . . . 21
     5.12. WG on a framework for addressing the problem of
           illegal content  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
     5.13. WG on a framework for addressing the problem of
           indecent online content  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
     5.14. Directives WG  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
   6.  Security Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
     6.1.  Inappropriate Usage  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
     6.2.  Denial of Service  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
     6.3.  Bullying . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
     6.4.  Human Rights . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
   7.  IANA Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
   8.  Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
   9.  Endorsements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
   10. Request For Comments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
   11. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
   Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24






























Bollow                  Expires September 2, 2014               [Page 3]





Internet-Draft              Wisdom Task Force                 March 2014


1.  Introduction

   While local and national political challenges remain important,
   global challenges of humanity are now increasingly recognized as
   being at least equally important.

   These include:

   o  The need to limit the emission of greenhouse gases in an effective
      manner.

   o  Privacy protection in the context of information and communication
      technologies.

   o  Ensuring international fairness in regard to economic development,
      especially concerning poor communities and empowerment to overcome
      poverty.

   o  Shaping information societies according to human needs, see
      [WSIS-CS] and the Internet-related working group topics in section
      Section 5.

   The present proposal provides a practical mechanism that is designed
   for effectively addressing such global challenges.  The fundamental
   idea is to enhance the existing decision-making processes of
   democratic parliaments by means of developing relevant information
   and strategy documents.  The mechanism for developing these documents
   is inspired by how solutions to global technical challenges related
   to the Internet are developed in the Internet Engineering Task Force
   (IETF, see http://ietf.org/), and by the practices and philosophy of
   the Free Software and Open Source movements.

   Analogous to the name "Internet Engineering Task Force", but
   reflecting the different area of subject matter (policy topics as
   opposed to topics of technical engineering related to the Internet),
   the name "Wisdom Task Force", or "WisdomTF" for short, can be used by
   the group of people developing these information and strategy
   documents.

   Naturally, for any policy question there are different ways in which
   it can be framed.  Such different framings correspond to different
   perspectives on how the question should be addressed, and in many
   cases people's views on what is a reasonable answer to a question
   depend very much on this framing.  Furthermore, there are always
   difficult questions in regard to how the interests and unrealized
   human rights of those who are disadvantaged by the status quo should
   be balanced relative to the interests and economic and human rights
   of those who benefit from the status quo.  The Wisdom Task Force will



Bollow                  Expires September 2, 2014               [Page 4]





Internet-Draft              Wisdom Task Force                 March 2014


   not attempt to be the decision-making forum for these questions.
   Rather, the goal of the Wisdom Task Force is to work out policy
   options and supporting documentation, in order to empower national
   parliaments to make good, well-informed decisions on what is a
   reasonable balance between the various legitimate interests.

   As practiced by the Internet Engineering Task Force, everyone is
   welcome to join the Wisdom Task Force, without any formalities
   whatsoever.  It is a key goal to enable effective participation of
   all stakeholders, including interested citizens who are not subject
   matter experts.  At the same time, it is also a key goal to structure
   the deliberative processes so that at least a significant percentage
   of subject matter experts consider participation a reasonably good
   use of their time.

   One significant difference to the practices of the Internet
   Engineering Task Force is that in the Wisdom Task Force, all
   substantive work is conducted electronically via the Internet.  This
   is important to ensure that all participants, including those who do
   not have the financial means to travel to in-person meetings, are
   able to participate fully effectively.

   Furthermore, "machine translation" technologies are used to support
   inter-language inter-comprehension, in order to facilitate the
   effective participation of people who do not have strong skills in a
   working-group's primary language, see section Section 4.3.

   Like in the Internet Engineering Task Force and in the Free Software
   and Open Source movements, the key success factor for work in the
   Wisdom Task Force is to work by means of genuine deliberative
   processes rather than by means of some kind of power politics.

   Such deliberative processes can make use of techniques for strategy
   development and reasoning in complex systemic contexts by means of
   logic trees, as described e.g. in [Dettmer].

   An important strength of these logic tree techniques is that they
   allow to deal with emotions such as fear and hope in a logical
   manner: They allow fears to be acknowledged and treated as a signal
   that there is a need to do careful systemic analysis and that there
   is a need for hope-inspiring solution proposals.  Although explicitly
   addressing fear and hope is not part of classical logics, an
   effective technique for doing that is probably necessary for creating
   constructive discourse processes in which all stakeholders are
   welcome to participate and where the needs, views and concerns
   expressed by every participant will be taken appropriately seriously.
   See also the UN Secretary-General's recent remarks on "the way to
   build societies founded on hope instead of fueled by fear", [Ban



Bollow                  Expires September 2, 2014               [Page 5]





Internet-Draft              Wisdom Task Force                 March 2014


   2013-08-28].

   Also critically important is that all working-groups which develop
   one or more documents need good chairpersons or coordinators who
   facilitate the deliberative and consensus and (where applicable)
   rough consensus processes.  In this context, "consensus" does not
   mean a requirement for full and absolute agreement of every
   participant in the working-group.  Rather, the definition of
   consensus which is applicable here is "absence of sustained
   opposition", where the only kind of opposition that matters is
   opposition which is sustained by means of valid and legitimate
   arguments.  When necessary, the criteria for accepting text can be
   further relaxed to "rough consensus".

   Similarly to how in the Free Software and Open Source movements, the
   power of the maintainers of software is balanced by everyone having
   the right to "fork" (which means to change the name of a copy of the
   software and then to start publicly maintaining that "forked" version
   of the software), in the Wisdom Task Force it is allowed and
   reasonably easy to "fork" a working-group and the documents which it
   develops.

   In this way, it is possible for different substantive viewpoints to
   lead to competing policy recommendation documents, each of which will
   be published in the same way by the Wisdom Task Force, provided that
   a minimal threshold of interest among the so-called "sustaining
   members" of the Wisdom Task Force is satisfied.  This rule about the
   minimal threshold of interest is designed to minimize the risk of
   damaging the reputation of the body of documents of the Wisdom Task
   Force as a whole, which would happen in the absence of a mechanism to
   prevent the publication of documents of poor quality.

   Also, working-groups may develop recommendation documents that
   describe several possible policy choices and the respective
   advantages and disadvantages.

   In any case, it is ultimately the responsibility of parliaments to
   make the hard decisions that choose between policy options.

   What the Wisdom Task Force can provide is:

   o  An international perspective, based on a broad logic-based
      deliberative process, to help ensure that those decisions will be
      well-informed.

   o  International coordination to the extent possible while
      maintaining the freedom of each national parliament to make
      substantive policy choices.



Bollow                  Expires September 2, 2014               [Page 6]





Internet-Draft              Wisdom Task Force                 March 2014


   While it may appear audacious to attempt a reform of international
   cooperation by means of a private initiative, this is justified by
   the urgent need for an effective process to develop solutions for the
   important global challenges.  International treaty-making processes
   are not only too slow, but they are also not likely to succeed in
   developing solutions that differ significantly from the status quo of
   current practice.

1.1.  Avoidance of Requirements Language

   This memo requests and recommends actions, but it does not define
   requirements.  The use of the keywords of [RFC2119] describing
   requirement levels is therefore deliberately avoided.

   The participants in the start-up process Section 2 should not
   consider themselves bound by any of the text in this memo, but rather
   they should feel free to reconsider and revise all of these
   recommendations.


2.  Start-up process

   The Wisdom Task Force will be initiated by means of a relatively
   informal process in which the draft rules as described below are
   tried out and potentially modified before they are formally adopted.

   One possible start-up strategy is to start with just three
   substantive working groups on the topics "limiting greenhouse gas
   emissions", "privacy protection in the context of information and
   communication technologies", and "eradication of mass poverty",
   together with supporting working-groups developing and maintaining
   the needed standing documents as well as the directives.

   It will be necessary to work on movement-building in parallel to the
   work on establishing WisdomTF as an institutional framework.


3.  Draft Scope Statement for WisdomTF

   WisdomTF's scope of work shall be to empower national parliaments to
   make good, well-informed decisions on information society issues, and
   on global issues of any kind.


4.  Draft Working Directives for WisdomTF

   This section provides a draft set of rules that should be carefully
   considered and revised during the start-up process, with the goal of



Bollow                  Expires September 2, 2014               [Page 7]





Internet-Draft              Wisdom Task Force                 March 2014


   creating a good initial Working Directives document for WisdomTF.
   During the start-up process, the draft working directives are not
   formally in force, but when they are not not followed, the reasons
   for acting differently should be carefully documented, and the
   discrepancy between the draft working directives and actual practice
   should be resolved as quickly as reasonably possible.  In this way,
   the start-up process provides an initial test of how the draft
   directives work in practice, and any unreasonably burdensome rules
   can be recognized and fixed quickly.

4.1.  Fundamental Values

   The fundamental values of the WisdomTF are the vision for shaping
   information societies for human needs [WSIS-CS] and that the human
   rights, as defined in the various international human rights
   treaties, shall be upheld and implemented in every way possible.

   Evidence-based arguments on how these objectives can be best achieved
   shall be given precedence over more speculative arguments.  WisdomTF
   has a number of Standing Documents providing guidance for the
   deliberative process; these shall be treated as incorporated by
   reference into these Directives.

   WisdomTF Working-Groups shall seek to provide, by means of the
   Request For Action documents that they publish, the best possible
   information input to the decision-making processes of national
   parliaments.  The Working-Groups shall seek to collect, by means of a
   balanced multistakeholder process, information about needs, concerns,
   cause-effect relationships, and available evidence, and to process
   all this to the extent possible into recommendations.  The Working-
   Groups shall particularly pay attention to any relevant proceedings
   at existing fora for global policy dialogue, such as the Internet
   Governance Forum (IGF) for Internet governance topics.  At the very
   least, every Working-Group should be able to reach rough consensus on
   recommendations of the form "Public policy regarding topic X should
   take into consideration the following needs and concerns... ."
   Ideally (but with greater difficulty of reaching rough consensus)
   specific proposals for laws and others kinds of public policy
   decisions should be developed in a form that explicitly suggests a
   choice of options for possible choices of the balance between
   conflicting legitimate interests, together with information on what
   is known about the advantages and disadvantages (from the public
   interest perspective) of the different options.

4.2.  WG Working Procedures

   WisdomTF Working-Groups are generally free to define their own
   working procedures subject to the constraints that everyone without



Bollow                  Expires September 2, 2014               [Page 8]





Internet-Draft              Wisdom Task Force                 March 2014


   restriction must be welcome to participate as long as they
   participate constructively, and that disagreements must be addressed
   by means of consensus-seeking deliberative processes.

   Unless foreseen differently in the Terms of Reference of a Working
   Group, or the Working-Group decides otherwise, the WisdomTF
   Secretariat (see Section 4.8) shall use its discretion in setting up
   electronic communication infrastructure for the Working-Group (see
   section Section 4.3 below), and in reminding participants, when this
   may be necessary, of the principles of professionally respectful
   conduct, or of international human rights law, or of the section on
   fundamental values in these directives (section Section 4.1), or of
   the Terms of Reference of the particular Working-Group.

   If and only if such reminders prove ineffective, the Secretariat
   shall request the Committee (see Section 4.8.2) to decide an
   appropriate sanction which may take the form of barring specific
   persons from participation in WisdomTF for a specific amount of time.
   The Committee can decide to impose such sanctions only by consensus
   or rough consensus but not by majority voting.

   In regard to enforcing the principles of professionally respectful
   conduct, it is possible that policies which differ from the above may
   be included in the terms of reference of a WG, or may be decided by
   the WG.  Possible measures include for example the appointment of a
   team of "moderators" who could issue warnings about violations of the
   rules of conduct, and who might in cases where warnings prove
   ineffective have the authority to put specific participants "on
   moderation" in the sense that their contributions to the deliberative
   processes will be distributed to the other participants only after
   one of the moderators has reviewed the message for conformance to the
   rules of conduct and approved it.  Such measures can be used only if
   an appeals process, whereby decisions of the moderators are reviewed
   independently and potentially reversed, is available.

   Regardless of whether a WG's terms of reference assign any
   responsibility to the Secretariat in regard to enforcement of rules
   of conduct in general, bullying in any form (including mobbing, which
   is defined as an individual or a small group being subjected to
   bullying by a larger group) may be brought to the attention of the
   Secretariat.  Provided that the resources to evaluate claims of
   bullying are available, the Secretariat shall do so.  In doing so,
   the Secretariat shall be extremely careful to ensure that accusations
   of bullying can not be used as a means of bullying.  If claims of
   bullying are found to be verifiably true, the Secretariat shall
   immediately suspend the bully or bullies (in the sense of barring
   from participation in WisdomTF), with the duration of the suspension
   to be decided by the Committee by consensus or rough consensus or if



Bollow                  Expires September 2, 2014               [Page 9]





Internet-Draft              Wisdom Task Force                 March 2014


   necessary by majority voting.  The decision about the duration of a
   suspension on grounds of bullying shall be made within one month of
   the Secretariat's decision to suspend the bully or bullies.  If, in
   the case of mobbing, a clear ring-leader of the group of bullies has
   been identified, the term of suspension of the ring-leader shall not
   be less than three years.

   All substantive discussion and decision-making of the Working-Groups
   shall be conducted exclusively via the Internet, in order to ensure
   fairness of participation also of people who do not have funding for
   international travel.

   All WisdomTF Working-Groups shall seek to interact with the broader
   professional community for the respective governance topics by active
   participation in the relevant global policy fora, such as the
   Internet Governance Forum (IGF) for Internet governance topics.

   All WG documents and draft documents shall be licensed under a
   Creative Commons license with a note that a link to
   http://wisdomtaskforce.org/ suffices as attribution.  Textual
   components which are developed as a joint effort by WisdomTF
   participants using the consensus-seeking processes of WisdomTF
   working-groups are licensed under a simple Creative Commons
   Attribution license, while WisdomTF documents may also include
   textual components from external sources which are licensed under a
   more restrictive Creative Commons license.  (In that case, the
   compound document as a whole will also be under the more restrictive
   Creative Commons license.)

4.3.  "E-gathering" electronic communication infrastructure

   The Secretariat shall provide WisdomTF working-groups with electronic
   communication infrastructure which provides functionality similar to
   that of a an email mailing list, but with added functionality to make
   use of "machine translation" technologies to support inter-language
   inter-comprehension, in order to facilitate the effective
   participation of people who do not have strong skills in a working-
   group's primary language.

   This kind of an enhanced variants of an email mailing lists is
   referred to as an "e-gathering".

4.3.1.  Software freedom requirements

   With the possible exception of "machine translation" technologies
   sourced from outside providers, the software for the "e-gathering"
   electronic communication infrastructure shall be publicly available
   for download free of charge under a license which makes it Free and



Bollow                  Expires September 2, 2014              [Page 10]





Internet-Draft              Wisdom Task Force                 March 2014


   Open Source Software (FOSS).

4.3.2.  Accessibility and compatibility requirements

   All electronic communication infrastructure used in WisdomTF shall
   fulfill all of the following requirements:

   o  It shall be fully accessible using a variety of computer operating
      systems.

   o  It shall be fully accessible using Free and Open Source Software
      (FOSS).

   o  It shall be fully accessible using assistive technologies for
      persons with disabilities.

4.4.  Request For Action (RFA) Publication Procedures

   The Secretariat shall process requests for publication of draft
   documents as Request For Action documents as follows:

   o  Unless the Working-Group made the decision to publish the draft as
      a Request For Action documents in the presence of a representative
      of the Secretariat, the Secretariat shall make reasonable
      inquiries to ensure that this decision has indeed been made by
      consensus or rough consensus and in accordance with the Terms of
      Reference of the Working-Group.

   o  The Secretariat shall verify that the Working-Group which made the
      request has Active status.  (All Working-Groups have Active status
      initially, this status can change to Inactive in case of
      Sustaining Member disendorsements, see Section 4.7.2.)

4.5.  Overall Rough Consensus Endorsement

   The Working-Group which has made the decision to publish a Request
   For Action document may instruct the Secretariat to issue a Consensus
   Call for Overall Rough Consensus Endorsement by WisdomTF.

   In this case the Secretariat shall communicate to all WisdomTF
   participants a request to review that Request For Action document and
   communicate any objections within 90 days.

   If any objections are received, the Working-Group shall review the
   objections and decide whether it wants to revise the Request For
   Action document.

   If no objections are received, or if the Working-Group otherwise



Bollow                  Expires September 2, 2014              [Page 11]





Internet-Draft              Wisdom Task Force                 March 2014


   decides not to revise the Request For Action document, it may ask for
   a determination whether there is Overall Rough Consensus of WisdomTF.
   Overall Rough Consensus means that there must be rough consensus
   among each of the major stakeholder categories: Governments, civil
   society and industry.  The determination of Overall Rough Consensus
   is made by the Committee of Sustaining Members, see Section 4.8.2
   below.

   If it is determined that there is overall Overall Rough Consensus,
   the Secretariat shall add information to this effect to the concerned
   Request For Action document.  Furthermore, the Secretariat shall in
   this case issue a press release.

4.6.  WG Creation

   This section outlines the process for the formation of new WisdomTF
   Working-Groups.  The objective of these rules is to make it as easy
   as reasonably possible to create such Working-Groups as soon as there
   is sufficient interest, while avoiding the creation of Working-Groups
   that would violate WisdomTF's fundamental values (see Section 4.1) or
   that would not attract a sufficient number and variety of
   participants that output documents of high quality can be achieved.

4.6.1.  Initial Informal Discussion

   The WisdomTF Secretariat (see Section 4.8) shall make "e-gathering"
   electronic communication infrastructure (see Section 4.3) available
   for the purpose of informal discussion of ideas for new WisdomTF
   Working-Groups.

   The Secretariat shall use its discretion in reminding participants,
   when this may be necessary, of the values of WisdomTF including the
   principles of professionally respectful conduct and international
   human rights law.

   If such reminders prove insufficient for achieving a reasonably
   pleasant working atmosphere, the Secretariat shall request the
   Committee (see Section 4.8.2) to decide an appropriate sanction which
   may take the form of barring specific persons from participation in
   WisdomTF for a specific amount of time.  The Committee can decide to
   impose such sanctions only by consensus or rough consensus but not by
   majority voting.

4.6.2.  Terms of Reference Endorsement

   After at least one month has elapsed since an idea has been initially
   proposed for information discussion, a WisdomTF Working-Group can be
   formed by three or more Sustaining Members endorsing Terms of



Bollow                  Expires September 2, 2014              [Page 12]





Internet-Draft              Wisdom Task Force                 March 2014


   Reference for the new Working-Group.  The Terms of Reference shall
   specify objectives and guiding principles for the Working-Group.

4.6.3.  Secretariat Actions

   The Secretariat shall verify that the Terms of Reference for the new
   Working-Group do not violate WisdomTF's fundamental values (see
   Section 4.1), and that the Terms of Reference uphold these values at
   least as well as any other Working-Group addressing a very similar
   topic area for which the required Endorsement has been received
   earlier or up to two days later.  For any Terms of Reference document
   which fails this test, the corresponding Working-Group shall not be
   created.  The purpose of this rule is to ensure that if different
   groups of Sustaining Members propose different frameworks to address
   the same problem, so that one of them is clearly better from a human
   rights perspective, then precedence is appropriately given to the
   better framework.

   When it has been decided that establishment of the Working-Group is
   appropriate, the Secretariat shall set up the "e-gathering"
   communication infrastructure (see Section 4.3) and add the new
   Working-Group to the list of WisdomTF Working-Groups, with Active
   status.  Furthermore, the Secretariat shall inform about the new
   Working-Group all registered participants including the sustaining
   members, as well as the general public, and all known civil society
   organizations with relevant expertise.

4.7.  WG Termination

   This section outlines the procedures for closing down a Working-
   Group.  These procedures are intended to be used not only when the
   tasks of a Working-Group have been completed, but also if it becomes
   clear that progress is only possible by creating a new Working-Group
   on essentially the same topic but with Terms of Reference that
   provide more specific guidance which makes it easier to reach rough
   consensus.

4.7.1.  WG Dissolution by Rough Consensus

   A Working-Group has the power of making the decision to dissolve
   itself.

4.7.2.  WG Dissolution due to Disendorsement

   Sustaining Members which have endorsed a Working-Group can at any
   time withdraw their endorsement.  If this causes the number of
   Sustaining Members which endorse a particular Working-Group to drop
   below three, the status of the Working-Group changes to Inactive; as



Bollow                  Expires September 2, 2014              [Page 13]





Internet-Draft              Wisdom Task Force                 March 2014


   long as a Working-Group has Inactive status, it cannot decide to
   publish Request For Action documents.  The status changes to Active
   again if the number of endorsing Sustaining Members again increases
   to three or more.

   A Working-Group which has Inactive status for a continuous period of
   six months or more is dissolved.

4.7.3.  WG Dissolution due to Dysfunction

   As outlined in Section 4.8.9, the Secretariat will if necessary take
   corrective action if a Working-Groups fails to function.  In such a
   situation, a Working-Group may be dissolved if no-one is willing to
   serve as chairperson.

4.8.  Sustaining Members and the Secretariat

   A Secretariat for the WisdomTF shall be established with seat in the
   Canton of Zurich, Switzerland.  A host country agreement shall be
   sought with the country of Switzerland which ensures that if the
   Secretariat should not act fairly and diligently according to its
   various responsibilities, injunctions to correct the behavior of the
   Secretariat can be obtained from Swiss courts of law.  Any natural or
   legal person, internationally, without restriction, shall have
   standing to sue for an injunction for correction of the behavior of
   the Secretariat.

   The WisdomTF Secretariat shall be funded, and decisions of budget and
   staffing of the WisdomTF Secretariat shall be made by a Committee of
   Sustaining Members, as described in Section 4.8.2 below.  In
   addition, Sustaining Members have a special role in regard to
   Working-Group formation (see Section 4.6.2) and dissolution (see
   Section 4.7.2).

4.8.1.  Categories of Sustaining Membership

   This section defines three categories of Sustaining Membership and
   corresponding eligibility criteria.  All Sustaining Members have
   equal rights in regard to the endorsement of Working-Groups (see
   Section 4.6.2).

   Note that while representatives of the particular interests of
   companies and industry organizations are welcome to participate in
   the discourses of the Wisdom Task Force, they are not qualified to be
   recognized as Sustaining Members.






Bollow                  Expires September 2, 2014              [Page 14]





Internet-Draft              Wisdom Task Force                 March 2014


4.8.1.1.  Country Members

   Any country which is recognized by the UN as a country may become a
   Country Member of the WisdomTF.

4.8.1.2.  International Organization Members

   Any membership organization of which at least three members are
   recognized by the UN as countries may become an International
   Organization Member of the WisdomTF.  Alternatively, any organ or
   other subentity of such an international organization may become an
   International Organization Member of the WisdomTF.

4.8.1.3.  Sustaining Civil Society Members

   Individuals and civil society organizations will upon request be
   recognized as Sustaining Civil Society Members if they fulfill all of
   the following three conditions:

   o  They provide proof of their identity.

   o  They provide a credible assurance of seeking to promote the public
      interest.

   o  They have participated constructively in the WisdomTF since its
      beginning or for the past two years.

   The Secretariat checks whether these conditions are satisfied.

4.8.2.  Committee of Sustaining Members

   Decisions of budget and staffing of the WisdomTF Secretariat shall be
   made by a Committee of Sustaining Members, as follows: From each of
   the three categories of Sustaining Members, up to five
   representatives may be delegated to the Committee, so that in total
   the committee consists of up to fifteen persons.

   When in any category of Sustaining Members there are five or less
   Sustaining Members in the category, they shall each be invited to
   delegate a person to the Committee.

   When in any category of Sustaining Members there are more than five
   Sustaining Members, they shall attempt to agree among themselves on a
   way of selecting five representatives (for example by adopting a
   system of rotation).  If they cannot agree and more than five want to
   be on the Committee, the Secretariat shall randomly choose, for a
   two-year term, five from among those who want to be on the Committee.




Bollow                  Expires September 2, 2014              [Page 15]





Internet-Draft              Wisdom Task Force                 March 2014


   The Committee shall attempt to make decisions by consensus or rough
   consensus.  If this fails, decisions regarding the Secretariat may be
   taken at a meeting at which decision making by majority vote is
   allowed, which may be convened no earlier than 16 hours after the
   rough consensus process has failed.

   The Committee shall review any proposed changes to the WisdomTF
   Working Directives before publication as a Request For Action
   document.  It shall communicate any concerns to the Working-Group
   which is proposing changes to the Working Directives.

   The Committee is also responsible for the determination of Overall
   Rough Consensus, see Section 4.5.  The decision of determination of
   Overall Rough Consensus needs to be reached by rough consensus of the
   Committee; if the Committee fails to reach rough consensus, the
   Request For Action document in question shall not be considered to
   have attained Overall Rough Consensus.  This applies also to the
   Consensus Call in the context of changes to the WisdomTF Working
   Directives (see Section 4.8.8 the difference being only that that
   Consensus Call involves only the Sustaining Members.

4.8.3.  Secretariat Funding

   The founder of WisdomTF is also creating a company "GoalTree
   Consulting" which has, as a principal objective, the aim of allowing
   him to create and build up WisdomTF.

   Ultimately, WisdomTF should however be funded by the country members.

   As soon as the country members have established a mechanism for
   funding the WisdomTF Secretariat, the special role of the company
   "GoalTree Consulting" will end.  This special role which ends at that
   point has two aspects: On one hand a role in funding the Secretariat,
   and on the other hand a role in making informative documents about
   logic tree reasoning available on the GoalTree.ch website, which
   WisdomTF links to (which constitutes a business benefit to the
   company "GoalTree Consulting").  At the time of the transition to
   funding by country members, the company "GoalTree Consulting" will
   make copies of all the linked documents available to WisdomTF under a
   Creative Commons license chosen by the Committee of Sustaining
   Members.

4.8.4.  Start-up phase

   During the start-up phase, founder of WisdomTF seeks to adequately
   fund the WisdomTF Secretariat through funds earned by the company
   "GoalTree Consulting".




Bollow                  Expires September 2, 2014              [Page 16]





Internet-Draft              Wisdom Task Force                 March 2014


   If the company "GoalTree Consulting" is insufficiently profitable to
   be able to meet these needs, the founder will seek to find a way for
   the shortfall to be covered through voluntary contributions or grants
   from foundations and/or other grant-giving institutions.  If a
   Secretariat and/or Committee of Sustaining Members have been
   established already, founder will request them to provide advice and
   otherwise assist in this task as they are able.

4.8.5.  Sustained operations phase

   In the sustained operations phase, the WisdomTF Secretariat is funded
   by the country members through a well-defined and sustainable
   mechanism.

4.8.6.  Transition from start-up phase to sustained operations phase

   In order to transition WisdomTF to the sustained operations phase,
   the country members of WisdomTF may at any time propose a contract to
   the founder of WisdomTF or his legal successor in this role, in which
   the country members promise to jointly take care of the reasonable
   needs of the WisdomTF Secretariat in a sustainable manner, and which
   shall not impose any obligation on the founder of WisdomTF or his
   legal successor besides licensing informative documents about logic
   tree reasoning under a Creative Commons license chosen by the
   Committee of Sustaining Members.  If these conditions are met, the
   founder of WisdomTF or his legal successor shall accept the offered
   contract and execute it promptly.

4.8.7.  Funding commitments

   If the Committee intends to increase the budget of the Secretariat,
   the Committee shall, before making the decision to do so, secure
   commitments that sufficient funding will be made available.
   Furthermore, the Committee shall regularly assess the risk of
   available funding potentially dropping below the level of the current
   budget, and appropriate contingency plans shall be made.

4.8.8.  Changes to the WisdomTF Working Directives

   If a WisdomTF Working-Group proposes a new version of the Directives,
   the Secretariat shall organize a Consensus Call among all Sustaining
   Members.  If and only if there is rough consensus among each category
   of Sustaining Members for adoption of the revised Directives (as
   determined by the Committee, see Section 4.8.2), the Secretariat
   shall put them in force by publishing a Request For Action document
   that gives the details about how the new version was adopted, and
   requests the new version of the Directives to be followed from now
   on.



Bollow                  Expires September 2, 2014              [Page 17]





Internet-Draft              Wisdom Task Force                 March 2014


   As WisdomTF Standing Documents are treated as incorporated by
   reference into these Directives, see Section 4.1, the same
   requirement for a Consensus Call among all Sustaining Members applies
   also any changes to the set of Standing Documents.

   Country Members or International Organization Members may propose to
   make WisdomTF part of the UN or another existing or new treaty-based
   international organization.  Such a proposal needs to be approved in
   the same way by rough consensus of all sustaining members of
   WisdomTF, in addition to whatever other steps may be required to
   create a new umbrella organization for WisdomTF.

4.8.9.  Further Responsibilities of the Secretariat

   The Secretariat shall seek to ensure an official presence at the
   Internet Governance Forum (IGF), for example by means of a booth.

   The Secretariat shall provide guidance to WisdomTF Working-Groups on
   how to self-organize on the basis of the principle of rough consensus
   decision-making.

   If it is brought to the attention of the Secretariat that a WisdomTF
   Working-Group has, for an continuous period of three or more months,
   failed to self-organize or otherwise failed to make any substantive
   progress towards its objectives, the Secretariat shall take the
   following steps: First the Secretariat shall verify that this is
   indeed the case.  If yes, the Secretariat shall solicit nominations
   and self-nominations from among the Working-Group members of
   potential chairpersons who could organize the work of the Working-
   Group.  If at least one person is nominated, the Secretariat shall
   appoint a chairperson.  If no-one is nominated, the Secretariat shall
   dissolve the Working-Group.

   Working-Groups may also by means of a rough consensus decision
   request and empower the Secretariat to execute this process of
   chairperson appointment.  The Secretariat shall honor such requests.

   Provided that the resources to do so are available, the Secretariat
   shall organize the appointment of an independent appeals team that
   will be available to address disputes within Working-groups,
   including in particular disputes in regard to actions of moderators,
   see section Section 4.2.


5.  Draft Terms of Reference for Some Initial Working-Groups

   This section provides draft Terms of Reference statements for some
   possible WisdomTF Working-Groups (WGs).



Bollow                  Expires September 2, 2014              [Page 18]





Internet-Draft              Wisdom Task Force                 March 2014


5.1.  WG on limiting greenhouse gas emissions

   This WG shall develop strategy and information documents that empower
   national parliaments to make decisions which create appropriate
   global incentives to avoid greenhouse gas emissions.

5.2.  WG on privacy protection in the context of information and
      communication technologies.

   This WG shall develop strategy and information documents that empower
   national parliaments to make decisions which will, in synergy with
   the actions of other countries that make similar decisions, result in
   effective action to ensure privacy protection in the context of
   information and communication technologies.

5.3.  WG on the eradication of mass poverty

   The WSIS Declaration of Principles, "Building the Information Society
   - a Global Challenge in the New Millennium" [WSIS-2003], states that
   "under favorable conditions", ICTs can "be a powerful instrument,
   increasing productivity, generating economic growth, job creation and
   employability and improving the quality of life of all."  That is
   especially important in the context of economic development of poor
   communities, where the goal is empowerment to overcome poverty.

   This WG shall develop strategy and information documents addressing
   the following questions:

   o  What roles can the Internet play in anti-poverty strategies?

   o  What are the relevant "favorable conditions" under which Internet-
      based technologies, services and/or community tools provide
      significant empowerment to overcome poverty?

   o  What further measures are needed to achieve the objective to
      completely eradicate mass poverty?

5.4.  WG on standing documents on the deliberative process

   This WG shall maintain the standing documents which explain the
   deliberative processes used in WisdomTF, including in particular
   logic trees and consensus and rough consensus processes.

   During the start-up phase of WisdomTF as defined in section
   Section 4.8.3 on funding, these standing documents shall heavily
   reference and link to informative documents about logic trees
   published on GoalTree.ch; this requirement ends when the start-up
   phase of WisdomTF ends.



Bollow                  Expires September 2, 2014              [Page 19]





Internet-Draft              Wisdom Task Force                 March 2014


5.5.  WG on framework for democratic governance of global matters

   This WG shall maintain an explanatory document about how, together
   with what national parliaments can do, WisdomTF provides a framework
   for democratic governance of global matters.

5.6.  WG on Government Activities to Further Sustainable Digital Culture

   This WG shall follow up on the Workshop on Standards for Sustainable
   Digital Culture taking place at the 2012 IGF in Baku, see [Culture].
   The WG shall publish, in the form of one or more Request For Action
   documents, appropriate recommendations regarding government
   activities aimed at the furtherance of culture.

   Rationale: As outlined in the Background Paper for that workshop, see
   [Bollow], this is important in regard to the human rights of artists
   and the general public.

5.7.  WG on a framework for regulation of online identity systems

   Online identity systems are expected to become increasingly
   important, for example as a foundation for online payment systems
   (see below).  There may be a need for regulation.  This WG will
   develop a framework document on which national legislatures and
   regulatory agencies can draw in order to minimize incompatibilities
   between regulation in various countries.

5.8.  WG on a framework for regulation of online payment systems

   Online payment systems are expected to become increasingly important.
   There may be a need for regulation.  This WG will develop a framework
   document on which national legislatures and regulatory agencies can
   draw in order to minimize incompatibilities between regulation in
   various countries.

5.9.  WG on a framework for regulation of DRM systems

   If DRM (Digital Rights Management / Digital Restrictions Management)
   systems become more widely used, there may be a need for regulation
   in order to prohibit the use of such systems in ways that have
   negative social effects.  This WG will develop a framework document
   on which national legislatures and regulatory agencies can draw in
   order to minimize incompatibilities between regulation in various
   countries.







Bollow                  Expires September 2, 2014              [Page 20]





Internet-Draft              Wisdom Task Force                 March 2014


5.10.  WG on a framework for guarantee systems

   Guarantee systems could provide a viable basis for addressing
   problems like spam, illegal online content and indecent online
   content (see below).  There may be a need for regulation.  This WG
   will develop a framework document which can help inform technical
   standardization work about various policy concerns, and on which
   national legislatures and regulatory agencies can draw in order to
   minimize incompatibilities between regulation in various countries.

5.11.  WG on a framework for addressing the problem of spam

   This WG will develop a framework document which can help inform
   technical standardization work about various policy concerns in
   relation to addressing the problem of spam on the basis of a
   guarantee system, and which also serves to inform governmental
   stakeholders who are concerned about the problem of spam.

5.12.  WG on a framework for addressing the problem of illegal content

   This WG will develop a framework document which can help inform
   technical standardization work about various policy concerns in
   relation to addressing the problem of illegal content on the basis of
   a guarantee system together with an appropriate legal system, and on
   which national legislatures and regulatory agencies can draw in order
   to minimize incompatibilities between regulation in various
   countries.

5.13.  WG on a framework for addressing the problem of indecent online
       content

   This WG will develop a framework document which can help inform
   technical standardization work about various policy concerns in
   relation to addressing the problem of indecent online content on the
   basis of a guarantee system, and which also serves to inform
   governmental stakeholders who are concerned about the problem of
   indecent online content.

5.14.  Directives WG

   This WG shall continually observe the progress of the work of
   WisdomTF, in particular in view of the need for progress in regard to
   practical realization of human rights, and discuss any suggestions
   for changes to the Working Directives.  Whenever the WG has rough
   consensus that a change to the Working Directives may be desirable,
   the WG shall publish a Request For Action document with revised
   Working Directives and an appendix that explains the rationale for
   the changes.  This document shall not be phrased as definitely



Bollow                  Expires September 2, 2014              [Page 21]





Internet-Draft              Wisdom Task Force                 March 2014


   containing the new Working Directives, but rather as a request to the
   body of Sustaining Members of WisdomTF to adopt the proposed new
   Working Directives.  (Adoption of such a revised Working Directives
   document is done by rough consensus among the Sustaining Members of
   WisdomTF.)

   Rationale: Every organization needs to observe its own performance,
   and to take corrective action when necessary.


6.  Security Considerations

   Similarly to security considerations for technical systems (see
   RFC 3552 [RFC3552]), governance fora and processes need to be
   designed for robustness against attempts of "inappropriate usage" and
   "denial of service".  In addition, the integrity of WisdomTF work
   with regard to human rights needs to be safeguarded.

6.1.  Inappropriate Usage

   Clearly WisdomTF needs rules governing the interaction between
   participants.  In the absence of appropriate rules, participation in
   WisdomTF cannot be expected to be effective, time-efficient and a
   pleasant experience.

   These rules need to be designed so that bona fide well-intentioned
   newcomers with reasonably good communication skills will be able to
   quickly learn how to participate effectively, while on the other hand
   there need to be effective disincentives that discourage and penalize
   disruptive and non-constructive behavior.

6.2.  Denial of Service

   It is particularly important to avoid vulnerability of WisdomTF and
   its working-groups to the political equivalent of what is called
   "denial of service" attacks in the technical realm: It must not be
   possible for beneficiaries of the status quo (who may fear a
   potential loss of power) to disrupt discussions that could against
   their specific particular interests.

6.3.  Bullying

   It is especially important to ensure that WisdomTF participants are
   not regularly subjected to bullying by those who (for reasons of
   specific particular interests) might wish to prevent the effective
   participation of their political opponents or competitors.





Bollow                  Expires September 2, 2014              [Page 22]





Internet-Draft              Wisdom Task Force                 March 2014


6.4.  Human Rights

   The rules of WisdomTF need to ensure that all recommendations
   published by its working-groups are designed to uphold the
   fundamental principles which are internationally recognized as human
   rights, and to improve as much as possible the practical ability of
   people everywhere to enjoy their human rights.


7.  IANA Considerations

   This memo includes no request to IANA.


8.  Acknowledgements

   This memo has been inspired significantly by postings on the mailing
   list of the Civil Society Internet Governance Caucus [IGC] from
   various participants, including Bertrand de La Chapelle, Avri Doria,
   William Drake, Anriette Esterhuysen, Andrea Glorioso, Michael
   Gurstein, Wolfgang Kleinwaechter, Jeremy Malcolm, Lee W McKnight,
   Parminder Jeet Singh, and Roland Perry.  This acknowledgment of
   inspiration is not intended to imply that any of the named persons
   endorse the contents of this memo.


9.  Endorsements

   Endorsements will be solicited at a later stage.


10.  Request For Comments

   Comments and other feedback of any kind regarding this Internet-Draft
   are requested in the form of personal communications to the author.


11.  Informative References

   [Ban 2013-08-28]
              Ban Ki-moon, "Secretary-General's Freedom Lecture at
              Leiden University", 2013,
              <http://www.un.org/sg/statements/index.asp?nid=7046>.

   [Bollow]   Bollow, N., "Standards for Sustainable Digital Culture
              (Background Paper)", 2012,
              <http://bollow.ch/papers/SustainableDigitalCulture.pdf>.




Bollow                  Expires September 2, 2014              [Page 23]





Internet-Draft              Wisdom Task Force                 March 2014


   [Culture]  Bollow, N., "IGF Workshop: Standards for Sustainable
              Digital Culture", 2012,
              <http://wsms1.intgovforum.org/node/21>.

   [Dettmer]  Dettmer, H W., "The Logical Thinking Process", ISBN 978-0-
              87389-723-5, 2008.

   [IGC]      Civil Society Internet Governance Caucus, "Mailing list",
              <http://igcaucus.org/membership>.

   [RFC2119]  Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
              Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.

   [RFC3552]  Rescorla, E. and B. Korver, "Guidelines for Writing RFC
              Text on Security Considerations", BCP 72, RFC 3552,
              July 2003.

   [WSIS-2003]
              UN World Summit on the Information Society, "Declaration
              of Principles. Building the Information Society: a global
              challenge in the new Millennium.", 2003,
              <http://www.itu.int/wsis/docs/geneva/official/dop.html>.

   [WSIS-CS]  Civil Society, "Declaration to the World Summit on the
              Information Society", 2003, <http://www.itu.int/wsis/docs/
              geneva/civil-society-declaration.pdf>.


Author's Address

   Norbert Bollow
   GoalTree Consulting
   Weidlistrasse 18
   CH-8624 Gruet,
   Switzerland

   Phone: +41 44 972 20 59
   Email: nb@bollow.ch
   URI:   http://GoalTree.ch/












Bollow                  Expires September 2, 2014              [Page 24]

Home

RFA 1

Contact