<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On Wednesday 13 November 2013 08:55 PM,
Joana Varon wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CALTAiToiXNYEX=cxPszWUShQqOJztJ=r5Vd_5rpUwA1NYb3VZQ@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div>Dear all, <br>
<br>
More from the field:<br>
<br>
Brazilian government (or the national steering committee
coordinating the summit) have a meeting today afternoon with
the technical community (Icann and Isoc at least) to
coordinate 0.o and shall release more info about the Summit
soon. I've just written an email to the national steering
committee requesting more info and inclusiveness for the
liasons. From civil society, only Glaser (<a
moz-do-not-send="true" href="http://cgi.br">cgi.br</a>), and
maybe Carlos (?), will be there. <br>
<br>
</div>
<div>
<div>Also, Minister of Communications, Paulo Bernardo is going
for the first time to Icann and have a 45min slot in the
program (attached). <br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Once again, as suggested by Matthew, I do believe a
formal letter nominating and explaining our role as liasons,
and not representatives, for International Civil Society for
information regarding the Summit will be good to legitimate
and help our job here. <br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
<br>
A formal letter naming our liaisons and making it clear that global
civil society would want to use this mechanism to coordinate its
role in the proposed Brazil meeting and not go through 1net or any
other tehcnical community led interface is of the highest priority
at this stage. Dont want to get into I-told-you-so mode, but I have
been insisting that we did that first and in clear terms since our
earliest meetings in Bali. If we have got such a communication
through in clear terms, maybe our four reps would have been there at
the above meeting. At least if they werent invited we could have
protested...<br>
<br>
It is apparent that in some way Brazil gov is going into this in a
kind of bilateral mode with the technical community. <br>
<br>
Let various coordinators. form IGC, BB, IRP and if needed NCUC
simply write out a letter to the above intent and purpose. Dont even
need to share it with the whole group and take its acceptance it we
are only mentioning these two things (1) fact that CS wants
independent presence and role, and (2) names of the 4 liasons.
Preferably the letter shd go *today*. <br>
<br>
(I remember that when the letter was being drafted the last time, we
got into this argument of what does 'independent' means for a CS
role... and the needed text could not go in. Need to keep things
within contexts in our discussions I think )<br>
<br>
parminder <br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CALTAiToiXNYEX=cxPszWUShQqOJztJ=r5Vd_5rpUwA1NYb3VZQ@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div>
<div>
<br>
</div>
<div>best<br>
<br>
joana<br>
</div>
<div><br>
-- <br>
-- <br>
<br>
Joana Varon Ferraz<br>
@joana_varon<br>
PGP 0x016B8E73<br>
<br>
<br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>