<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8"></head><body >Excellent approach, thanks. <br><br><br>-------- Original message --------<br>From: Joana Varon <joana@varonferraz.com> <br>Date: <br>To: "<,bestbits@lists.bestbits.net>," <bestbits@lists.bestbits.net> <br>Subject: [bestbits] [Meeting Report]: friday meeting with fadi et all <br> <br><br><div dir="ltr"><div>Dear people, </div><div><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif"><br></span></div><div><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif">Please,
find attached the report that Laura and I have prepared about the
meeting of the “coalition/dialogue” (it doesnt has a name yet) that happened last friday, as a result
of the meeting with civil society and Fadi on Thursday. Dear Carlos, please, feel free to add any further consideration. </span><br></div><div>
<p style="margin-bottom:0in"><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif">Sorry
for being late with this, but since Bestbits server was down, in
debates with BestBits steering committee and others colleagues, we have been trying to sort out what is the best
way to report about that meeting and the one with the Brazilian
delegation. </span></p><p style="margin-bottom:0in"><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif">As there is some time sensitiveness,</span><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif"> </span><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif">the report of the meeting with Fadi et all will be posted here, but this is what we found more suitable and will be important for the next reports and steps:</span><br>
</p><p style="margin-bottom:0in"></p><ul><li>We need to come to an arrangement that strikes the right balance between being inclusive and strategic as civil society, for example reporting back on the main list, but strategizing on closed lists or offlist. D<span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">raft working procedures on the wiki reflect your concerns relatively well. But will attempt to integrate specific comments on those procedures once the server is back up.</span></li>
</ul><font face="arial, sans-serif">My view, and this is my personal view trying to address the concerns raised during BB meeting, is that the closed
list for civil society will use the widest concept of civil society, or a definition by exclusion, meaning that all the people in bestbits list that are not strictly government or private
sector will be included. Problems that might come out will be addressed as they show up, taking into account the goals of besbits. I do think it will be the only way forward to coordinate all the work we will have in the next months in a strategic manner concerning both the Brazilian Summit and our engagement with the coalition/dialogue. If any one have a major opposition to it, please, let us know. </font><p>
</p><p style="margin-bottom:0in">Otherwise, let's start debating the engagement with this coalition/dialogue in a closed list?</p><p style="margin-bottom:0in"><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif">All the best, </span></p>
<p style="margin-bottom:0in"><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif">Joana </span><br></p></div><div>
<p style="margin-bottom:0in"><br>
</p></div><div><br></div><div>
<p style="margin-bottom:0in"><br></p><p style="margin-bottom:0in"><br></p><p style="margin-bottom:0in"><br>
</p></div><div><br></div><br clear="all"><div><div><br></div><div><br></div></div>-- <br><br>Joana Varon Ferraz<br>@joana_varon<br>PGP 0x016B8E73<br><br><br>
</div>
</body>