[IGFmaglist] Online attack launched against work of BPF countering online abuse and violence

Tue Oct 13 06:48:47 EDT 2015

Dear Janis, Jac et all,

A few ideas regarding the blog post from the MAG chair:

  *   Take advantage of the opportunity to issue a post on the overall IGF Best Practices effort (the 6 tracks).
  *   Emphasize that the process<http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/best-practice-forums#what-are-bpfs> is entirely open (discussion lists, webinars, etc.) and that any comments should be made through these open and transparent channels vs. unjustified anonymous attacks like the ones that unfortunately just occurred (and point to the IGF's Code of Conduct<http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/aboutigf/igf-code-of-conduct>).
  *   Emphasize that the value of the IGF outputs is intimately linked to the bottom-up and open nature of the process. Discussions on the various topics are healthy, but should be led in a constructive fashion.
  *   Remind the public that draft Best Practices are now open for comments and that we look forward to the discussion in Brazil (include short summary of where the work stands).

Best regards,

Constance

________________________________
From: Igfmaglist <igfmaglist-bounces at intgovforum.org> on behalf of Shita Laksmi <slaksmi at hivos.org>
Sent: Tuesday, October 13, 2015 12:46 PM
To: cmasango
Cc: Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org
Subject: Re: [IGFmaglist] Online attack launched against work of BPF countering online abuse and violence

Dear Jac,

Viewing the video, especially those which counters the BPF, I do think that the transparency being done by this BPF is one of the ways to counter arguments. I saw several hashtag war in twitter and those experiences showed that once it's viral, there is not much we can do about it. But by being accountable on what we are and trying to give more comprehensive feedback in the discussion, can be deemed strategic.

What we might be able to do is to answers some of their key questions (e.g. take back from who? and why this is important, what makes this different from censoring the Internet). There is a possibility that they will only take sentences which can only support their arguments, but with being accountable in the process, will open access to those who are interested to understand better and more comprehensive, easier. We can spread this information within our network and some key prominent people can help retweet this as well.

This is so unfortunate, Jac. :(

Kind regards,
SL

--
Shita Laksmi
Program Development Manager
OPEN | Transparency and Accountability - Freedom of Expression

Hivos Regional Office Southeast Asia
Jl. Kemang Selatan XII/No. 1 Jakarta Selatan 12560, Indonesia, Tel. +62-21 78837577/ 7892489, Fax. +62-21 7808115
E-mail: slaksmi at hivos.org, twitter: @slaksmi, skype: slaksmi, www.hivos.org

________________________________
From: "cmasango" <cmasango at unog.ch>
To: "Jac sm Kee" <jac at apcwomen.org>
Cc: Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org
Sent: Tuesday, October 13, 2015 4:17:01 AM
Subject: Re: [IGFmaglist] Online attack launched against work of BPF        countering online abuse and violence

Dear Jac and members of the BPF on Countering the abuse of women online,

It is truly unfortunate that this type of behavior goes on and it reinforces the need for this BPF.

>From the Secretariat’s side we are doing all we can to to mitigate this type of behavior on our hosted services (mailing lists, review platform and Webex).  To this extent we have instituted the moderation of all comments on the the review platform and the Countering the abuse of women online mailing list.

We will block or expel anyone that does not adhere to the general principles of engagement outlined in our Code of conduct<http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/aboutigf/igf-code-of-conduct>.
IGF Code of Conduct
IGF - Internet Governance Forum
Read more...<http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/aboutigf/igf-code-of-conduct>

We hope this malicious behavior does not deter but strengthens the resolve of the group which has been doing excellent work on a very important topic.

Best regards,

Chengetai

On Oct 13, 2015, at 4:10 AM, Subi Chaturvedi <subichaturvedi at gmail.com<mailto:subichaturvedi at gmail.com>> wrote:

Dear Jac,

Thanks for posting this here. When we participated in the twitter driven engagement on the session, I personally received several positive as well as abusive tweets, posts on multiple pages and twitter accounts, that I run as well as the IGF BPF page that I had initiated. The Hashtag used was indeed #GamerGate

The threats included

1. An assurance to leak personal data
2. Abuse
3. An all pervasive threat to own and control all my online identities and a general sullying of the pages, I run in support for feminist voices and to document online and offline abuse.
4. I was also assured that we can't take back what was never ours
5. There was a specific critique of some of the twitter handles we asked people tweet at, as quite abusive.

Here's what I did to counter specific handles
1. Engaged with them publicly
2. Asked them specific questions
3. Explained to them the nature of the IGF and the existing relationship with the UN
4. Invited them to register and participate at the IGF
5. Shared previous material on what the IGF is and the how it promotes a multistakeholder bottom up model for IG
6. Also elaborated on where there are meetings points between ITU and IGF

However concerns have been raised about the legitimacy of the process and the outcome.
About the choice of handles in the list circulates, the hashtag #TakeBackTheTech

There were even suggestions that it could have been something non- threatening and generally more positive. (We've heard that one before.)

But this does lead us to more important questions on the way forward about roles and actors.

1. There's a lot of work which has gone into bringing this where we are. It just didn't happen overnight.
2. I think two paragraphs can be added as a preface on how we got here.
3.It is difficult to navigate the online page and make sense of specific calls.
4. Also the online campaign should continue. I have decided to inform all my networks to continue pushing out more information about the BPF and the IGF. We need that.
5. This initial round also suggests that keeping a more specific hash tag like
6. Also tweeting ways of recourse is helpful. Then people find the information useful and continue to mobilise other networks

#StopOVAW is better to run with then #TakeBackTheTech

Also it wasn't all bad. We got some leading news channel editors and sr. journalists here to retweet and share the information and capture the effort.

Regards

Subi

On 13 October 2015 at 04:11, Jac sm Kee <jac at apcwomen.org<mailto:jac at apcwomen.org>> wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Dear MAG members,

As some of you may be aware of, an online attack was launched against
a Twitter conversation that the BPF on countering online abuse and
violence against women was planning, on Friday, 9 October. The attacks
seem to come from persons affiliated to the #GamerGate hashtag, and
centred on the premise that this is yet another attempt of the UN to
"control and censor the internet". The attack is still on-going, and
has now extended to IGF's BPF platform where the draft document is
being hosted for public comments. If you view the comments, you can
get a sense of the motivations.

A video was also created as "proof" of the UN's attempt to censor the
internet, which basically misrepresents the transparency and openness
of the BPF process as a vulnerability that was exploited. We have
reasons to believe that the instigator, or at least one of them,
participated in the last BPF planning meeting and has subscribed to
the mailing list.

Since Friday, more than 20,000 tweets that contains abusive,
anti-feminist, violent and sexist content have been targetted at the
hashtag. The conversation's hashtag, #TakeBacktheTech - which was used
as an effort to engage the broader Twitter community already aware of
and working on the topic of online abuse and VAW - is associated with
a campaign that APC has run since 2006 on the issue. As such, APC is
also a subject of the attack. It appears to be a campaign of
misinformation and intimidation. The volunteer who coordinated the
Twitter conversation received several threatening personal emails.

This clearly has an impact on the continued work of the BPF, and we
would appreciate a discussion around how to move forward on this.

Best,
jac

- --

- ---------------------------------
Jac sm Kee
Manager, Women's Rights Programme
Association for Progressive Communications
www.apc.org<http://www.apc.org/> | www.takebackthetech.net<http://www.takebackthetech.net/> | erotics.apc.org<http://erotics.apc.org/>
Jitsi: jacsmk | Skype: jacsmk | Twitter: @jhybe
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.14 (Darwin)
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=0q0z
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

_______________________________________________
Igfmaglist mailing list
Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org<mailto:Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org>
http://intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/igfmaglist_intgovforum.org

_______________________________________________
Igfmaglist mailing list
Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org<mailto:Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org>
http://intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/igfmaglist_intgovforum.org

_______________________________________________
Igfmaglist mailing list
Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org
http://intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/igfmaglist_intgovforum.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://intgovforum.org/pipermail/igfmaglist_intgovforum.org/attachments/20151013/39ec060a/attachment.html>